4 D Rules Comments

I am a member of the board of directors of the Carmel River Steelhead Association & a Steering Committee member of the Carmel River Watershed Council and am addressing you as an individual.

Special provisions for HCP’s filed by Central Coast stakeholders

Much of the examples of HCP’s & special “take” permits are derived from experience in Oregon and Washington. Both the natural environment and the socio-economic context in central California are very different from those of the Northwest.The climate in Central California is Mediterranean, in sharp contrast to the NW, as is the underlying rock substrate. Mediterranean climate yields highly variable stream flows. Climate and substrate together yield different assemblages of flora and fauna, different soils, and different kinds of slope (erosional) processes. The timber industry, which is so important in the NW, is virtually) non-existent in the Carmel River watershed.

It should be expected that, as we become more familiar with facts and issues on the ground, we might find that some variations on rules and guidelines developed for the NW may work more effectively and efficiently in our locale. Some aspects of guidelines and rules developed for a very different natural and socio-economic environment in the NW could prove to be counterproductive in this area. For that reason, we urge that the 4D rules explicitly provide clear opportunity for learning from experience on the ground in this very different environment and that the rules provide for amendment at local and state level as experience is acquired.

At the same time we believe that the whole process has to be simplified as to application content, processing time & approval. NMFS has indicated that approval of HCP applications can take up to 3 years. In the meantime the process of restoration is delayed, to the detriment of the threatened species. We also believe that the ESU will suffer more from neglect than an overabundance of restoration enthusiasm. Dedicated citizens trying to protect the environment in a balanced manner form watershed Councils like the Carmel River Watershed Council. Let them police themselves to a greater extent than the current 4 D Rules appear to permit.

Decision to exclude provisions of Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

NMFS is required to prepare & make available for public comment an IRFA that describes the impact of the proposed rule on small businesses, non-profit enterprises, local governments, and other small entities, unless the agency is able to certify that the action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. I do not see the validity of NMFS withholding the rights of the RFA from citizens of Central California that has both endangered and threatened species merely because NMFS does not consider any record-keeping is necessary. The Federal Register does not indicate what reporting is required but it seems to me that in view of the magnitude of the fines & penalties that one could be subjected to that it would be prudent to maintain accurate records of the restoration work undertaken. I challenge the propriety of NFMS action in making this decision on such a basis. What information is available to them in the NW that ensures that conditions here on the Central coast are similar & that there will not be an economic impact on small entities? Because the Central Coast watersheds are so different from the northwest and in particular include a great number of small businesses & riparian property owners we believe that stakeholders should be regarded & treated differently than corporate entities.

Ocean driftnet fishing & ocean predators a probable cause of steep drops in population levels. Populations of smolts migrating to the ocean a better measure.Based on information emanating from NMFS there is considerable doubt in some segments of the Central coast activists that the scientific evidence being used to evaluate the ESU is close to reality. Numbers of adult steelhead returning to their native waters have fallen drastically and the cause is regarded as more generic than factual.

The assumption is that the condition of the rivers is the cause. This may be true of most of the NW but is not true for the San Lorenz & Carmel watersheds. Based on a recovery of returning adults since the last major drought period have led to the re-opening of the Carmel River for catch & release fishing Interim figures for 1999/2000 season indicate a record year. What is significant is that a large number of steelhead bear the scars of encounters with sea lions & seals. There are other predators on land and ocean that have an impact on the fish. How much of the lower number of returning adults that can be laid at the feet of the river conditions and other causes are not well documented by NMFS. This needs to be rectified.

We would recommend that NMFS re-look the whole question and research the scientific records that exist over many years of the estimates of adults and smolts that make it too the ocean at the end of the spawning season. The numbers of fish rescued from the creeks and the lower reaches of the Carmel River that increase each year & the major rescues of young steelhead trapped in the lagoon by high spring tides closing the river entrance are a much better indication of the health of the river than the absolute numbers of adults that get counted at the ladders.

There is still the need to ensure that dewatering does not occur and that riparian habitat is improved and restored where it is gone from flood control work or negligence of government agencies and the owners of this public trust. Treating all rivers with the same set of rules will prove detrimental to the objective of this exercise. One size does not fit all and responsible stakeholders should be permitted to carry on restoration work without too much interference.

I appreciate the opportunity to submit my comments and trust that they will be viewed not as criticisms of what you propose but as constructive suggestions to improve the process of restoration of the threatened species with which charge your agency has been entrusted.

Congressman Sam Farr at the first “outreach meeting” in Carmel Valley over a year ago stated at the outset that he did not believe that Congress intended to put any spokes in the wheels of progress towards improvement of the habitat and steelhead. The 4 D rules and the process outlined in the 24 pages of the Federal Register does not appear to be user friendly at all.

I sincerely believe that a more open handed approach to the permit process, properly monitored by CDFG or NMFS will achieve more in restoring the Carmel River Watershed than the limited enforcement capability that appears to be available at the present time.

Yours truly,

Clive R. Sanders

Hon. Sam Farr, US Congressman CC.