-----Original Message-----
From: mdf@csus.edu <mdf@csus.edu>
To: bergstrom@caltrout.org <bergstrom@caltrout.org>
Date: Thursday, November 18, 1999 8:30 AM
Subject: Bear Creek Meadow Project Funding

>November 18, 1999
>
>Dear Mark,
>
>Thank you for directing my attention to CalTrout's webpage for your
>report on the Bear Creek Meadow restoration project on Fall River.
>
>I have some questions regarding the structure of the funding of this
>project as outlined on your webpage in the last paragraph of the
>first report (prior to the three updates) as follows:
>
>"The purpose of the restoration plan is to restore the Bear Creek
>Meadow to its pre-1960 condition. Over $1.5 million in funding has
>been secured for this project. We are working to raise an additional
>$963,000 to complete the project and pay for monitoring over a
>ten-year period."
>
>Is this accurate? Is the Bear Creek Meadow Restoration Project going
>to cost a total of approximately $2.5 million as stated above?
>
>I am also curious as to the source of the $1.5 million in funding for
>the Bear Creek Meadow Project that had been secured as of the time
>your first report was posted announcing completion of the first
>phase of the construction project (which I am assuming was sometime
>in the early summer).
>
>Also, as stated in your first report, an additional $963,000 was
>needed to complete the project and pay for monitoring. Does this
>mean that the $1.5 milliion was spent on the first phase of the
>project? And if so, now that the project has been completed, was
>additional funding secured to accomplish this?
>
>In the past I have tried to get information from DFG and the Fall
>River RCD regarding the source(s) of public funding for this project
>and have been stonewalled. I greatly appreciate whatever information
>you can provide in this regard. Thank you for helping to clarify
>these very muddy waters regarding the funding of the Bear Creek
>Meadow restoration project.
>
>Mike Fitzwater, Secretary
>Fall River Wild Trout Foundation
==========================

Mark Bergstrom, CAL TROUT, Replies
From: "Mark Bergstrom" <bergstrom@caltrout.org>
To: <mdf@csus.edu>
Subject: Re: Bear Creek Meadow Project Funding
Date sent: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 16:18:28 -0800

Dear Mike:

Thanks for the feedback on the CalTrout webpage. Hopefully I can provide
some clarification to your questions.

Last paragraph of the first report states: "The purpose of the restoration
plan is to restore the Bear Creek
Meadow to its pre-1960 condition. Over $1.5 million in funding has
been secured for this project. We are working to raise an additional
$963,000 to complete the project and pay for monitoring over a
ten-year period." This statement refers to the complete restoration of
the Upper Fall River Watershed Restoration as articulated on page 24 of
CalTrout's recently completed Conservation Plan. The Conservation Plan can
also be accessed on CalTrout's webpage at www.caltrout.org. I have copied
it at the end of this message in case you are unable to download it.

In summary, the financials for the entire watershed restoration effort are
noted below.

Project Components/Estimated Costs

1) High priority watershed stream restoration and protection -- $807,000
2) Fall River bank erosion control -- $331,000
3) Bear Creek Meadow restoration -- $850,000
4) Selective dredging combined BD scenario -- $237,000
5) Monitoring for 10 years -- $258,000

Total -- $2,483,000 over a 10 year period

As shown above the estimated cost of the Bear Creek Meadow restoration
project approaches $850,000. Roughly $300,000 of this money has been funded
by the Wildlife Conservation Board ($161,000), anonymous donor ($50,000),
Partners in Wildlife in Wildlife ($45,000), and the Cantara Trustee Council
($40,000). The balance of funding has come from the owner of the meadow.

Another $600,000 has been secured by the Fall River Regional Conservation
District for restoration of the Upper Fall River watershed. That brings the
total funding secured to date to around $1.5 million leaving another
$950,000+ to fund the remaining project components noted above. CalTrout is
attempting to raise these funds to complete the restoration as shown on page
24 of our conservation plan.

The Department of Fish and Game, the Wildlife Conservation Board, Partners
in Wildlife, the anonymous donor, the Cantara Trustee Council, and the
Regional Conservation District deserve congratulations for making this
project possible. Think about it, 60% of the sediment contributed to the
Fall River will be eliminated as a result of the Bear Creek Meadow
restoration. Mike Dean and Gary Stacey of DFG deserve medals of honor for
making this historic public private partnership possible.

Mike, please feel free to contact me should you have any further questions.
Have a wonderful Thanksgiving. We have much be grateful for.

Regards,

Mark Bergstrom
Executive Director, CalTrout

>From page 24 of CalTrout Conservation Plan

Upper Fall River Watershed Restoration

Significance of the Resource:

The Fall River, part of the Sacramento River Watershed, is a world-renowned
wild trout fishery located in northeastern Shasta County, California. The
Upper Fall River is a low-gradient stream, which meanders through a broad,
flat floodplain. The native rainbow trout population has thrived in the
spring-fed system with nearly constant year-round flows. Bear Creek and Dry
Creek Watersheds provide significant flows to the Upper Fall River during
rainfall and snowmelt periods.

Problem Statement:

The central issue is the recent deposition of sediment in the Upper Fall
River. It is estimated that 213,000 cubic yards of sediment have recently
been deposited between Navigation Barrier and the Spring Creek Confluence.
Between the Spring Creek Confluence and the Island Road Bridge, an
additional 206,000 cubic yards of recent sediment deposition were
identified.

Sediment deposition has been an issue because of the potential impacts on
aquatic vegetation in the Fall River and the wild trout fishery. These two
parts of the system are intertwined since the wild trout fishery relies
heavily on the submerged aquatic vegetation for habitat and the production
of macroinvertebrates.

There have been several events over the past several decades that most
likely increased sediment yield to Fall River. These included large fires in
the Bear Creek Watershed, such as the Ponderosa Burn in August 1977, and the
channelization of the Bear Creek Meadow below Spaulding Bridge, back in the
late 1960's. Additionally, inspections of the upper watersheds reveal
numerous sediment storage functions had been adversely affected. These
features were once an important part of the system that kept sediment
delivery to the Fall River at very low levels and permitted the low energy
Fall River from being overwhelmed by sediment deposition.

The Proposed Fix:

The action plan has been developed that addresses the sedimentation problems
in the Upper Fall River. The components of the action plan include the
following:

? Controlling bank erosion by livestock exclusion fencing, muskrat control,
and boat speed regulations enforcement in the Upper Fall River

? Restoring and protecting high priority stream and meadow systems in Bear
Creek and Dry Creek Watersheds

? Implementing the Bear Creek (Dana) meadow restoration between Spaulding
Bridge and the Fall River Confluence

? Performing selective dredging at two sites between Fletcher's Bridge and
Spring Creek by removing 10,000 to 20,000 cubic yards of sediment

? Performing an ongoing monitoring program that addresses both assessing the
effectiveness of the various components of the action plan and determining
the health of the Fall River

PROJECT COST, SCHEDULE AND COMMITMENTS

Project Components Schedule and Commitments Estimated Costs

High priority watershed stream restoration and protection -- Year 1 through
5 time horizon -- $807,000
Fall River bank erosion control -- Year 1 through 5 time horizon --
$331,000

Bear Creek Meadow restoration -- Year 1 through 5 time horizon -- $850,000
Selective dredging combined BD scenario -- Year 1 through 5 time
orizon -- $237,000
Monitoring for 10 years -- Year 1 through 10 time horizon -- $258,000
Total $2,483,000 for 10 years; $1,520,000 in funding secured; balance of
$963,000 requested

=================

Mike Fitzwater Replies

Subject: Fall River Restoration
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 15:13:56 -800
From: Mike Fitzwater via email

Dear Mark,

Thanks for the clarification to my questions regarding the Bear Creek
Meadow restoration project as described on CalTrout's webpage. I
can see now that my confusion was due to my misunderstanding that
the $2.5 million was not for restoring just the Bear Creek Meadow as
appears on your webpage, but instead it is to cover proposed
restoration work in the whole watershed including the upper Fall
River and the Bear Creek and Dry Creek tributaries. I suspect others
who read your website would have been confused on this point as
well. Perhaps it would be useful to clearly define the various subareas
of the whole drainage basin. As I understand it, and please correct me
if I am in error, the Upper Fall River Watershed Restoration Project as
geographically defined in the action plan developed by the agencies
and in CalTrout's Conservation Plan is subdivided into the following
three units:

1) The tributary Bear Creek and Dry Creek drainage basins extending
downstream as far as the Bear Creek Meadow.

2) The Bear Creek Meadow itself, through which Bear Creek and
Dry Creek flow just before entering the upper Fall River.

3) The upper Fall River which corresponds to the wild trout section
extending downstream from 1000 Springs past Spring Creek Bridge
and the Cal Trout access at Island Road to the confluence with the
Tule River.

As you suggested, I reviewed page 24 of CalTrout's Conservation Plan
which cleared up many of my questions regarding the individual
components of the overall Upper Fall River Restoration Plan, their
estimated costs and the source of funding secured to date. Just to be
sure I understand, could you verify my interpretation of the
information on page 24 of your conservation plan as follows:

(1) The $807,000 estimated cost for the first line item described as
"High priority watershed stream restoration and protection" is for work
to be done in the tributary Bear Creek and Dry Creek watersheds
exclusive of the Bear Creek Meadow project which is listed separately
as the 3rd line item "Bear Creek Meadow restoration" and is estimated
to cost $850,000.

(2) Regarding the source of funding for the Bear Creek Meadow
project totaling $850,000, in your November 4, 1999 email to update
interested members of the conservation community on the Bear Creek
Meadow project, you stated that this work (the Bear Creek Meadow
project) could not have been possible without the funding help of the
Wildlife Conservation Board, the Nature Conservancy, Partners for
Fish and Wildlife, Cantara Trust Council and the Fall River Resource
Conservation District. But in your more detailed recent email to me,
only the Wildlife Conservation Board ($161,000), Partners for Fish
and Wildlife ($45,000) and the Cantara Trust Council ($40,000) are
listed with the remainder being paid by an anonymous donor
($50,000) and the landowner, Peter Stent ($600,000). Did the Nature
Conservancy and the Fall River RCD contribute funding indicated in
your earlier email, and were inadvertently left off the contributors list
in your email to me? I am particularly curious about the level of
funding provided by the Fall River RCD which is often praised for
their financial support of this project, but verification of whether they
provided any funding or not is hard to come by. Any clarification
you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

(3) As I understand it, CalTrout received a $40,000 grant from the
Cantara Trust Council for monitoring the Bear Creek Meadow project.
Is this the $40,000 listed above under the Bear Creek Meadow
Project, or is it included as part of the $258,000 line item in
CalTrout's Conservation Plan described as a 10 year monitoring
program to assess the effectiveness of the various upper Fall River
project components? Also, there has been some question as to who
will be doing the monitoring to assess the Bear Creek Meadow
project. Any enlightenment on that?

(4) If the Fall River RCD did not contribute to the Bear Creek
Meadow Project, do you know how the $600,000 they have secured
for restoration of the Upper Fall River watershed has been spent or is
allocated to be spent?

I apologize if my questions sound like an IRS audit, but our attempts
to get this information from the agencies of the Fall River RCD has
been frustratingly unsuccessful. It's public money and should be
public information, I think we would all agree. You have been the
first to candidly share what you know and it is greatly appreciated.

On another subject, you made the comment in your email that 60% of
the sediment contributed to the Fall River will be eliminated as a
result of the Bear Creek Meadow project. I would be interested to
know the source of that information since the supposed benefit of the
project is a constant source of debate. Also, since stating the amount
of sediment reduction as a percentage does not by itself give any
sense of the actual magnitude of the supposed benefit, how does this
60% reduction translate into cubic yards? And, as a measure of
significance, how does that annual reduction of sediment compare to
the volume already in Fall River?

Thanks again for providing clarification as to what is actually going
on in the restoration of the Fall River wild trout fishery.

Mike Fitzwater, Secretary
Fall River Wild Trout Foundation

end

Back to Fall River Wild Trout Foundation Home Page