[file:bddoc.html  12.11.98 copied to host server DNS ***]

This document was delivered to the Supervisors as part of the operators' presentation Oct. 6th 1998 in support of extraction in the lower Mad River

Summary of PEIR for Humboldt County Board of Supervisors

Appeal of the Scientific Design and Review Committee - County of Humboldt Extraction Review Team 1998 Mad River Gravel Extraction Recommendations, Oct. 6 - 7, 1998

This summary is presented to show that the request for additional volume is in conformance with the PEIR. There have been suggestions or allegations that the proposed extraction is not consistent with the PEIR. That is not true. The PEIR was to be an adaptive management program which would provide flexibility in the design and implementation of extraction on an annual basis. The extraction prescriptions were to be prepared by the SDRC, as an agent of the County, subject to the final and review authority by the Board of Supervisors. The program was described in the PEIR.

The operators never agreed to the description of the Mad River as a "severely degraded" river in the PEIR.  [See page 35 of the PEIR; the PEIR was a preliminary document and the conclusions were tentative, subject to modification and correction when the PEIR was to be reviewed pursuant to its own provisions 5 years later.]

They [the operators] agreed to go along with the PEIR program while data was collected and evaluated in the belief that it would be proved that gravel extraction had not caused severe degradation in the bed of the Mad River. In good faith the operators pursued and implemented the PEIR program, spending millions of dollars and using all of their available resources. The request for the additional 60,000+ yards is based on the data they have collected and the analyses provided to the operators by their consultants. It is only a few thousand more yards than was approved by the SDRC in 1997. The SDRC has never previously pursued implementation of a "fixed formula" "sustained yield" method -- and such a method can be contrary to the PEIR's approved methodologies and findings.

The request [for an increased extraction volume] is based on the belief that the increased extraction volume will not have a detrimental effect, immediate or cumulative, on the bed of the river and that it will reduce other adverse impacts; including increased truck transport of material from the Eel River and bank erosion on the Mad River. The operators' consultants will present evidence and analyses at the hearing supporting their claim that the river is not severely degraded as described in the PEIR and that there are not any potential significant adverse cumulative or immediate impacts from the proposed extraction.

The requested additional extraction volume is, therefore, consistent with the PEIR and to refuse to allow the additional extraction would be arbitrary and unreasonable on the part of the County. I believe the following provisions of the PEIR and the references to the state law are largely self explanatory. Thank you.

William O. Davis, Attorney

PART II  -  Summary of the PEIR

I. The PEIR was to be a "flexible and adaptive" program. The Board of Supervisors was to oversee the program and set site specific goals and policies. The approval of the additional 61,000 cubic yards is consistent with a flexible and adaptive approach and is supported by the data and analyses provided by the operators.

The preferred project alternative is the development and implementation of a flexible Mad River aggregate management program, monitoring program, and reclamation plan that will use coordinated extraction prescriptions and reclamation standards which will allow a moderate rate of recovery (aggradation) at critical sites while protecting or enhancing other river resource values." P. 3, [all page references are to the Final PEIR unless otherwise stated].

The term river resources is understood to include related community infrastructure as well as related physical and biological resources. P. 7

The combined monitoring, and annual evaluations will lead to appropriate, coordinated, annual, flexible, environmentally-sound, adaptive mining and reclamation strategies which may vary from year to year and site to site. P. 4

The combined regulation, monitoring, and annual evaluations will result in appropriate, flexible, environmentally-sound mining strategies which may vary form year to year and site to site. P. 195

As river conditions and technology change, alternative methods or standards of extraction may be developed and recommended by other public agencies, the operators, or the public. P. 202

In short, the preferred alternative will ensure that gravel extraction on the Mad River conforms with the intent and purpose of the established goals and policies of the local coastal and general plans. In addition, as a result of this PEIR it is expected that the Board of Supervisors will set site specific goals and policies for surface mining activities within the geographic scope of this PEIR.

II. The program was to be flexible and adaptive because (1) the river is constantly changing, (2) there are a number of factors and projects that influence the changes in the river, besides gravel extraction, and (3) river science is not precise. Mitch Swanson and the operators proposal for an additional 61,000 cubic yards is consistent with the methods, program and goals of the PEIR.

The Mad River and its environs are a dynamic system, constantly changing. Changes in the river ecosystem will continue and the processes of aggradation and degradation will continue to occur and reoccur whether gravel extraction continues or not. Because of the dynamic nature of the river system, it is not possible to forecast with precision how the river environment will change. This precludes the possibility of a fixed formula-based management and monitoring program. An objective of this preferred alternative management plan is to develop over time a dynamic set of adaptive mining and reclamation strategies that will respond to changes in the environment and in our understanding of the environment, and to changes in technology. P. 5

River bed morphology is constantly changing regardless of gravel extraction. A goal of the adaptive management plan is to maintain a degree of dynamic equilibrium in structure and diversity, while the channel adjusts to natural and man-induced changes in stream power and sediment supply. P. 56

The lower Mad River is a complex dynamic ecosystem. In addition to gravel extraction and processing, there are a variety of other projects and related factors influencing the resources of the lower Mad River area. ... The PEIR recognizes that the impacts of these projects and factors continue and that they are varied and cumulative. P. 12

... it is important to recognize that changes in channel aggradation and degradation will naturally occur in the absence of gravel extraction. P. 57

The science of river management is not so well advanced to allow rigid formula-driven decision making to dominate the planning and monitoring process in such a destabilized river system. P. 196

Because rivers are dynamic ecosystems and river management is not a precisely predictive science, the preferred project is a flexible adaptive monitoring and management program that will be administered by a team of scientists [as opposed to County administrative staff]. The project design is flexible so the project can respond to changing river conditions. P. 205

III. The Board and County were to be the oversight agency. The SDRC was not to have a unilateral power to prescribe extraction volumes or to set County policy.

The PEIR will review and evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the preferred alternative project which includes: .... 6. The development of a procedure to review and guide the management program and the activities of the SDRC. P. 3

A mechanism for review of the SDRC management prescriptions and activities by responsible state and federal trustee agencies and the public is included [in the PEIR program]. P. 4, 196

In the absence of a special review process developed by the Board of Supervisors the following public review process will be available ...[process is described at pages 200 - 201].

IV. The 'Preferred Project Alternative' was for "low" or "moderate" recovery of the bed, not "rapid" recovery. The proposal for additional material is consistent with this goal.

[At Chapter 7, p. 209, of the PEIR the first alternative is for "rapid" recovery. The second is for "low" or "moderate" recovery. The Board approved the second alternative, as reflected throughout the text of the Final PEIR.]

In alternative two the Board of Supervisors provides the same instructions [as in alternative one] except they will accept a slow rate of recovery and a reasonable interpretation of same. It is expected that the SDRC would then increase extraction levels (from the preferred alternative level) in order to encourage a gradual rate of channel aggradation rather than a moderate rate of channel aggradation at selected critical sites. P. 209

V. The goal of the PEIR was to protect the river resource and "maximize potential favorable impacts, like reducing bank erosion. The proposed additional material may in part reduce bank erosion at specific sites as a secondary benefit. The goal was not to cause bed aggradation, regardless of consequences to structures or other factors. The operators proposal is consistent with this objective of the PEIR

The primary objective to be considered when selecting site specific methods will be to ensure reclamation, extract gravel economically, minimize potential adverse environmental impacts, and maximize favorable impacts. P. 201 [such as reducing bank erosion; see the definition of river resources above.]

Reclamation, as defined in SMARA 2733, "means the combined process of land treatment that minimizes water degradation, air pollution, damage to aquatic or wildlife habitat, flooding, erosion, and other adverse effects from surface mining operations ...." P. 194

[also see the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 2, Chapter 8, Subchapter 1, Article 9 "Reclamation Standards," Section 3710 "Performance Standards for Stream Protection, Including Surface and Groundwater," subsection (c) "Extractions of sand and gravel from river channels shall be regulated to control channel degradation in order to prevent ... increased bank erosion ... Changes in channel elevations and bank erosion shall be evaluated annually using records of annual extraction quantities and benchmarked annual cross sections and/or sequential aerial photographs to determine appropriate extraction location and rates."]

According to the Department of Water Resources 1982 investigation on Mad River Erosion: "Aggradation of the riverbed has caused historical changes in the channel, raising the height of peak stormflows and resulting in damage to roads, bridges, agricultural land, fisheries, and dam diversion facilities." PEIR citing DWR, 1982, P. 57

The SDRC must recognize that river conditions can change and that the potential exists for aggradation problems to reoccur in the future. If aggradation becomes a problem it may be necessary to temporarily raise extraction levels to equal or exceed net recruitment. P. 59

VI. The SDRC's annual extraction volume recommendation is not to be solely based on a "net" or "average" annual recruitment model and volume prescriptions may increase when conditions are improving.

The actual amount to be extracted will be dependent upon reclamation, net recruitment, individual bar replenishment, individual bar morphology, as well as other river resource conditions and trends - all of which will be determined by a flexible monitoring program. P. 198

If conditions are improving, the SDRC will so note and may begin making incremental prudent alterations in extraction prescriptions. P. 205

[See P. 206 for list of methods for establishing annual extraction total volumes.]

VII. The operators never agreed with the conclusions of the PEIR that the river was severely degraded. P. 35

VIII. The PEIR and the Mad River program are in conformance with the County general plans and housing elements. P. 52 - 55, 217

Prepared by William Davis,  Legal Counselor