September 19, 2006
Arizona Water Protection Fund Commission
FY2007 Applicant/Staff Presentation –September 19, 2006
Location: Arizona Department of Water Resources – 3550 North Central Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85012.
Attendance
Commission Members Present
/ Arizona Dept. of Water Resources StaffPaul Brick
Kathryn Campana
John Keane
David Kirchner
Marie Light
John Munderloh
John Newman
Steve Olson
Kristine Uhlman
Commission Members Absent
Robert Howard, Sr.
Tom Rankin / Michelle Garcia
Alisa Schiebler
Reuben Terán
Stephen Tighe
Public
Charles A.
Kristine Bentz
Steve Buckley
Rob Burton
Jeffrey Cooper
John Dance
David Dorum
Kevin Eatherly
Trevor Hare
Gabrielle Katz – via telephone
Heidi Kloeppel
Dennis Moroney
Fred Phillips
Jim Rosabaugh
Jack Selleow
Julie Stromberg
Garrit Voggesser
Call to Order
Chairman John Newman called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m.
Call to the Public
Chairman Newman announced the first call to the public. There was no response.
Applicant Presentations
WPF0340 – The Effects of Restoration on Wildlife Recovery at the Yuma East Wetlands Restoration Project (Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area) – Presenters, Kevin Eatherly & Heidi Kloeppel:
Mr. Eatherly and Ms. Kloeppel provided a presentation to the Commission regarding the above referenced grant application.
Commissioner Paul Brick inquired aboutwhat invertebrates would be sampled and how?
Ms. Kloeppel responded that they will be collecting a whole community of invertebrates and there is not one best way for completing this task, which is why they have to use multiple techniques. Amalaise trap will be set up, which is a tent like structure that is best suited for collecting aerial invertebrates. They also will be completing timed aerial searches as well, which involves the use of a sweep net for terrestrial invertebrates. Aquatic invertebrates we will be collected using spot sampling techniques, because it will occur in wetland habitat rather than flowing water. In addition, they will complete scraping of rocks and dip netting through vegetation.
Commissioner Brick asked what species they would be sampling?
Ms. Kloeppel responded that they are not focusing on any species in particular. Although it would be great to look at and concentrate on one species, they are trying to take a community approach and identify as well as possible all of the invertebrates that they collect.
Commissioner John Keane asked if they would be comparing a couple of different stages of restoration with reference sites? Commission Keane added that being outside of a laboratory environment does not allow for all of the variables to be controlled and he asked how this would be accounted for?
Ms. Kloeppel responded that they would have some data on that from other studies they have done in the area. They have a lot of soil data and will be measuring temperature at each different site. They will need to make some assumptions and weed out uncontrolled variables.
Mr. Kevin Eatherly added that in the East Wetlands project, they do have depth to groundwater maps for the whole area.
Commissioner Steve Olson asked for clarification about who would be doing the work.
Mr. Eatherly responded that the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area is a private non-profit organization that has a managing board. They will serve as the project lead and also are the permit holder. Their consultant to complete work would be Fred Phillips Consulting. It is importantto have very qualified people completing the necessary work. In addition to Fred Phillips Consulting, they try to interface with the local universities. Mr. Eartherly added that it is important for them to have this control information and solid scientific data so that they can determine the success of the project in comparison with the reference site; and also if there are any impacts resulting from the project.
Commissioner David Kirchner asked if they had any preconceived ideas of restoration modifications?
Ms. Kloeppel responded that the things she thought might play a factor would be density of planting, standing water and being able to flood.
Mr. Eatherly responded that other thing they are completing in the East Wetlands as compared to the higher density planting of trees seen in the MSCP plan, is the planting of native grasses and underscoring to show success. They want that to become part of future models.
WPF0341 – South Channel Phase II Restoration Project (Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area) – Presenter, Kevin Eatherly & Fred Phillips:
Mr. Eatherly and Mr. Phillips provided a presentation to the Commission regarding the above referenced grant application.
Commissioner Kirchner inquired about what they attributed the high degree of stakeholder consensus to?
Mr. Phillips responded that there was a lot of outreach by the City of Yuma, the Heritage Area and the team. They held a lot of meetings and listening sessions upfront, especially with the tribe, the City and farmers. Their concerns were never trivialized and were addressed. As issues have come up, such as impacts from restoring endangered species on farmers within the heritage area boundaries, assurances have been that current farming practices will not be impacted. In addition, the entire heritage area is on a volunteer basis. The Heritage Area and the City went back to Washington and had those that wanted to be out of the plan removed. The Tribe was given assurances that their water rights would not be impacted. In addition, assurance was provided through a resolution that the City would provide water rights for certain projects happening on their land.
Mr. Eatherly added that the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area has a locally controlled boardwith a diverse cross section of the community serving. The main concern from the farmers when they started the channels wasregarding affects to groundwater outside of the levy. A few of the activities being completed are actually reducing some of the problems occurring outside of the levy.
Commissioner Marie Light asked what had been growing in the area before?
Mr. Phillips responded that it was salt cedar and in some of the areas nothing. Some were salt flats; however through their research, plants were found that growfairly well in areas where there wasn’t anything growing.
Chairman Newman stated that his question related to the previous research grant application as well as the current one. Doing research on the effects of restoration on wildlife is something that logically would precede restoration so you know what to do; however you can’t do an evaluation on wildlife until you have done some restoration. This seems to be a bit of a chicken and an egg kind of thing. Chairman Newman asked if any of the research would be able to be used on this project or future projects?
Mr. Phillips responded in the affirmative. A lot of what Ms. Kloeppel and he were looking at was related to MSCP protocols and all the other regional research going on. The activities they are completing, their data collection and their perspective meshes with all of the money being sunk into MSCP as far as research goes.
Ms. Kloeppel added that there are two ways they are looking at restoration. Population changes over time, but this project will provide a baseline for a lot of unrestored sites. In addition, they will seek money for five years down the line and compare to the reference site.
Mr. Eatherly stated thatthere is still over 1,000 acres of restoration left to do in the project thatthey want to build on and documentation will help them do that.
WPF0331 – Reduction of Erosion & Sediment along the Lower SanPedroRiver through Hydrologic Restoration of Modified Ephemeral Washes (The Nature Conservancy) – Presenter, Robert Burton:
Mr. Burton provided a presentation to the Commission regarding the above referenced grant application.
Commissioner Uhlman asked for clarification about invasive exotic species maintenance.
Mr. Burton responded that the area is predominantly non-native species. It was agriculture for a number of years with some livestock, which is another project. There are about 300-acres of exotics. There are a number of projects being worked on. One of them is with a local rancher who has done some very impressive work using cattle for native grassland conversion. Others are 5, 6, 7-year projects that are basically demonstration projects that will combine economically viable ranching conservation and restoration of native grasses.
Commissioner Keane stated that something that was not clear to him was with respect to water that is coming down the two washes being captured by the poorly functioning ditch system and dumped into the river with a lot of sediment. Instead, the plan is to start re-excavation of the washes that were there presumably before and allow future flows to continue the excavation. Commission Keane asked how big of a berm would be necessary to stop the sediment?
Mr. Burton responded that during high flows they are planning to design the system so it does reach the river, but in a way that minimizes the amount of material it takes with it. During low flows they expect it not to reach the river at all, which is part of the idea of spreading that water out. The big thing they are trying to avoid is water coming down, taking a sharp right turn and getting out of that berm. They can see it is eating the berm back, which is now several hundred yards long and they want to get that out of the way.
Commissioner John Munderloh stated that keeping low – moderate flows from reaching the river sounds like asurface water diversion. Commissioner Munderloh asked what measures have been taken to address permitting and downstream right holders?
Mr. Burton responded that it is part of the project. Flow probably won’t be affected as low flows don’t go there now or reach the river. The flows basically go across the field. It could be argued that low flows would not be modified; however big flows most likely would be. It is a non functioning system now that needs lots of maintenance and is dangerous for the neighbors. In addition, there is a lot of complexity with the project and they are aware of that.
Commissioner Light asked if low – medium flows will spread out and stay where they are, then how will large flows move through?
Mr. Burton responded that the flows are moving through the system and taking those two turns, then going out across the field and clearly reaching the river. What is being proposed is to take out the turns so that the flows don’t erode all of the materials.
Commissioner Light stated that what was being proposed doesn’t seem much different from what is there now. The only difference is instead of coming out parallel to the north wash, there would be two places where the high flows would come out. Commissioner Light asked for clarification.
Mr. Burton responded that there are big flows coming in and emptying out on the field, which is fine, except the berm is eroding along with other materials. The system is going to reach equilibrium at some point, either with help or by itself. The flows can erode all of that material and then excavate its own channel on that bench at some point in the future, or preferably some other way so that materials do not get moved into the river.
Commissioner Uhlman asked if the property where north wash enters the riveris under the Applicant’s management?
Mr. Burton responded in the affirmative and said that the piece of property is about 500-acres.
Commissioner Uhlman asked if water from the north wash would be directed into the cottonwood stand?
Mr. Burton responded in the affirmative.
Commissioner Uhlman asked if the current combined flow has been causing any damage to the cottonwoods?
Mr. Burton responded in the negative.
Commissioner Uhlman asked if this project isn’t funded, would the cottonwoods be negatively affected?
Mr. Burton responded that it was a very difficult question to answer; however he felt that they would be.
WPF0330 – HayMountain Watershed Restoration Project (Coronado Resource Conservation Area, Inc.) – Presenters, Ty Rising-Foster & Dennis Moroney:
Ms. Rising-Foster and Mr. Moroney provided a presentation to the Commission regarding the above referenced grant application.
Commissioner Keane asked what specific tactics would be used to help the watershed?
Mr. Moroney responded that they would complete cleaningof six stockpond tanks and install some spreader dams to distribute water out over the landscape. There are 700 rock check dams planned for placement in specific channels in the watershed. Experiments have shown that these structures can trap silt and organic matter and provide an area with increased soil moisture where native grass is able to reestablish over time. The water will spread out over the land and increase cover instead of running straight down the watershed through a gully. Part of what has been proposed involves some brush treatment, which would eliminate competition from woody brush and allow grasses to be reestablished on the site. All of these practices have been previously demonstrated in work that is in place on the ranch. There would be some mechanical brush treatment in areas with heavy stands of shrubby mesquite. Trees with some size to them would be left in place for wildlife habitat. These efforts would restore what had been a savanna aspect to the landscape.
Commissioner Brick stated that his Conservation District has completed similar projects with the effect of stopping tons of siltfrom entering the San Pedro and slowly bringing up the water table.
Mr. Moroney responded that another portion of the project involves a biological brush experiment, which has been a small scale success. A small group of goats have been used in a concentrated form. They will strip the mesquite and balance out the grazing pressure by cattle.
Commissioner Uhlman asked what happens with sediment that is cleaned outof the stock ponds?
Mr. Moroney responded that typically it can be moved off the site and used for fill in other areas. Another typical option is to pour it over the front edge of the tank dam.
Commissioner Uhlman asked if any rock check dams would be constructed in existing natural channels?
Mr. Moroney responded that he considers all of the channels to be natural. They are all natural gullies and arroyos that are draining through the bajada or as outwash from the mountains. The effect of these check dams is to trap silt and organic debris instead of water and as the water is slowed down,silt settles out creating a kind of delta effect behind each check dam. Ultimately the channel becomes a series of terraces with water flowing down rather than being funneled in a very narrow channel. Ms. Ruth Cowan has some check dams that have been in place on her ranch for four years and in many cases it is hard to find the check dams anymore, because the silt and soil material has completely obscured them. The flood pattern now is a sheet across and it is being slowed by the grasses and vegetation.
Chairman Newman asked for an explanation of the monitoring program and how it will allow them to gauge the effects of this project on Whitewater Draw?
Mr. Moroney responded that all four ranches have an ongoing conservation plan through the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), which means that monitoring occurs on every project in conjunction with them. In addition, they are working with a researcher from USDA to complete soil moisture and rainfall monitoring. They are gathering very good data.
WPF0334 – Sonoita Creek Tributary Waters Restoration Project, La Semilla Community Stewardship Organization – Presenter, Jeffrey Cooper:
Mr. Cooper provided a presentation to the Commission regarding the above referenced grant application.
Commissioner Uhlman asked if there were private homes in areas on the map marked with white dots?
Mr. Cooper responded that there would be in the future; however currently there are none.
Commissioner Uhlman asked who would be physically installing the check dams?
Mr. Cooper responded that skilled laborers would complete the installations.
Commissioner Uhlman asked if they would be volunteers from the community?
Mr. Cooper responded in the negative. They will probably be a mixture of graduate students and other knowledgeable localsfrom the areas of Patagonia andTucson. The team leader will be someone well versed in restoration ecology who will work under the direction of himself, the project manager.
Commissioner Light asked if the application identified those skilled laborers who would be monitoring technical ability and information and for clarification that they will know about soil moisture, channel geomorphology and bird species?
Mr. Cooper responded that with respect to skilled labor, he meant people who are accomplished naturalistsand understand what soil moisture is and how to use the equipment. In addition, Mr. Mark Briggs, a restoration ecologist in southernArizona,will be serving as a technical collaborator. Mr. Briggs will be very instrumental in training the skilled laborers and overseeing all of the technical aspects of this project.