NOAA’s Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary is celebrating 15 years of ocean protection through its Beach Watch volunteer shoreline monitoring program. Developed and launched by the sanctuary in 1993, Beach Watch is the flagship volunteer program of the NOAA Office of National Marine Sanctuaries.

The Beach Watch program uses highly trained “citizen scientists” from all walks of life to conduct regular shoreline surveys spanning 150 miles of coastline, from Point Año Nuevo south of San Francisco north to Bodega Head. The volunteers have also conducted special wildlife surveys during several oil spills, most recently the Cosco Busan spill in San Francisco Bay in November. Since 1996, the nonprofit Farallones Marine Sanctuary Association has managed Beach Watch data and volunteers.

Beach Watch surveyors identify wildlife, notify the sanctuary of the condition of streams and lagoons, document visitor use patterns and violations, and retrieve oil samples as evidence of spills to help pinpoint the source of oil on beaches. Information collected by Beach Watch volunteers has helped secure several multimillion-dollar settlements from responsible parties to restore affected wildlife and habitats.

Has anybody else seen the whales playing in the water at the end of Fourteenth Street?  I first spotted them Sunday afternoon, and they were there again Monday afternoon. I’m no expert, but shouldn’t they already have migrated?  They looked to be gray whale size and were swimming in circles.  Any info is greatly appreciated.

Jeani Kessler

Chet Bardo, the new superintendent of State Parks for the 30 parks from San Mateo County to the Pajaro Valley, is a resident of Montara.  Bardo’s responsibility includes more than 64,000 acres of parklands and 40 miles of coastline. There’s in interview with Bardo in the Santa Cruz Sentinel.

Q What do you see as the biggest issues facing local parks?

A Funding. ... If things were to really go south, it would be difficult. We’re charged in this district with just an incredible amount of historical structures and culturally sensitive areas. To look at that and try to figure out where to focus funding is a challenge. That’s probably one of the biggest challenges, and hence why we have a deferred [maintenance] backlog statewide.

Staff is doing a great job of keeping things up and running and dry, but it’s a constant thing. And as you know, when you work on a historic structure it takes a whole different level of repair. You just don’t go put something on it that’s not supposed to be there and call it a fix.

...

Q What is your background and how do expect to put that to work here?

A I’ve been with the department for about 26 years, going on 27 in August. I’ve done the full range of duties from a seasonal park aide at an entrance station to a field ranger to a supervising ranger to most recently a sector superintendent. My background is in wildlife biology.

And I love teaching. When I was a field ranger, I was very active in local schools. I always had a lot of fun doing that.

Q What is your favorite park?

A The coastal parks are great. I was pretty much born and raised in Half Moon Bay. I tell people before I had to get responsible and get a job, I used to spend my days at the beach all summer, swimming and fishing—I never took up surfing—mostly fishing and just dinking around. I haven’t spent a lot of time in the redwoods. Big Basin is new to me. Henry Cowell is new to me. And I’m sure I’ll love them just the same.

The deputy director of the Coastal Commission writes to Capitol Weekly that the commission’s policy of protecting maritime chaparral from clearing and development is not the problem in Big Sur. He says the commission’s critics are trying to focus attention onto the commission’s policies, rather than the problem of building homes in hazardous areas where it is not possible to clear enough brush to create a zone of safety.

He notes that maritime chaparral has evolved a need for periodic fires to compete with other plant communities.

Given its limited distribution, we estimate that less than 0.1 percent of the more than 200,000 acres in the Big Sur Coast area could potentially involve conflicts between this sensitive habitat and developable residential building sites. But protecting this habitat doesn’t prevent us from taking reasonable measures to reduce the risk of fire.

The Coastal Commission does not require permits for necessary brush clearance around existing buildings in Big Sur; nor has it interfered with brush clearance that may be ordered by fire officials. In fact, Commission staff worked closely with Monterey County and Cal Fire on an emergency approval for clearing dead oaks from Big Sur last year to reduce the risk of catastrophic fire.

But no amount of brush management can save rural, inaccessible homes when massive wildfires rage out of control. That is why the Commission is focusing more on approaches that require new development to avoid hazardous areas. Unfortunately, many property owners are reluctant to fully acknowledge the severe dangers of building in high fire risk areas. Rather than locating a new home in a less hazardous place, they attempt to create a defensible space around their new buildings within the hazardous area. In these circumstances, the Commission has requested that applicants record a legal document acknowledging that they are locating their new house within a known hazardous area and that they assume this known risk.

The disease known as “sudden oak death” has hit trees near the Coastside particularly hard, reports Julia Scott in the San Mateo Daily News.

For reasons nobody quite understands, the disease known as sudden oak death has colonized the forests surrounding Crystal Springs Reservoir with greater brutality than other areas of the county that also contain trees susceptible to the disease, such as Woodside, Portola Valley, or the county parks in the hills above Pescadero. Biologists have detected only a handful of affected trees in those areas, whereas hundreds of trees are visibly affected throughout the Crystal Springs watershed - and absent a cure, the number continues to increase.

Experts have noticed the problem gaining momentum in San Mateo County this year in particular, Moore said. The results are there for all to see.

“When you’re in there on the trail and you see a dead tree, that’s one thing. But if you’re on Highway 280 and you’re looking at the watershed, you see pockets, patches of dead trees. It’s summer - it’s not like they’re supposed to be dropping their leaves,” he said.

Coastsiders will get to vote this year for the member of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District who represents the Coastside from Half Moon Bay to Monatara.

The November election will include Wards 3 and 4 (both in Santa Clara County,) and Ward 7 in San Mateo County.  Ward 7 covers portions of Redwood City, Woodside and San Carlos, as well as El Granada, Half Moon Bay, Montara, Moss Beach, and Princeton. Ward 7 is currently represented by Ken Nitz.

Individuals interested in running for seats on the Board of Directors can pick-up nomination papers at the District Clerk’s office beginning on Monday, July 14 and must file with the District Clerk by 5:00 p.m., August 8, 2008. The deadline will be extended for five days to Wednesday, August 13, if an eligible incumbent does not file or fails to qualify by August 8, 5:00 p.m.  Candidates must be at least 18 years of age by the election date and must be residents and registered voters in the ward in which they seek nomination. Nomination forms and other necessary documents are available at the District office. Interested individuals should contact the District Clerk for more information. Candidates elected in November will serve four-year terms beginning in January 2009.

Created by voters more than 35 years ago, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has successfully protected and managed more than 57,000 acres of open space. The public enjoys the District’s diverse and beautiful preserves 365 days a year. The District is an independent, non-enterprise, California special district whose mission is to acquire and preserve a regional greenbelt of open space land in perpetuity, protect and restore the natural environment, and provide opportunities for ecologically sensitive public enjoyment and education.

Recycle your old electronics on Saturday, July 19, from 9am to 1pm at the Pescadero Transfer Station on Bean Hollow Rd.

In an effort to get green, and because grants have been made available, San Mateo County has hired a permitted hauler/recycler to take unwanted tires of any size, with or without rims.  At the last event, they took over 800 tires from the Coastside, and I’m sure there’s more out there...ask a friend. 

There’s a lot happening in Pescadero lately, visit us on the web to find out about the details...http://PescaderoCouncil.org

Thanks,

Jackson Robertson

Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST) announced Thursday that it has surpassed its fund-raising goal of $6.9 million to save Mindego Hill, 1,047 acres of open ranchland near La Honda on the San Francisco Peninsula. More than 1,300 people contributed $7.2 million to POST’s GoMindego campaign, launched in October 2007 when POST purchased Mindego Ranch from private owners.

POST transferred the land Thursday to the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) for permanent protection. The property, which provides extraordinary recreational opportunities and wildlife habitat, is poised to become part of MROSD’s Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve.

POST originally bought the land for $28.5 million and has now sold it to MROSD for $22.5 million. Of this amount, MROSD paid $15 million plus $7.5 million it received from the California Coastal Conservancy towards this purchase. The $7.2 million raised by POST’s campaign covers the remaining balance and provides additional funds to expedite public access to the land, for a total of $29,755,766 for the protection of Mindego Hill.

The fires in Big Sur have reignited a battle over whether the Coastal Commission should protect “maritime chaparral”, reports the Capitol Weekly.

Angry local property owners, who have long chafed at the authority of the California Coastal Commission, contend that state rules protecting maritime chaparral have placed homeowners at risk and exacerbated the fire danger.

The commission flatly rejects that assertion, and notes that property owners sometimes insist on building in high-risk areas with protected habitats. But the dispute has gained momentum as locals were forced to flee the fires that raced across the parched hills.

The familiar chaparral--brushy thickets that thrive along the foggy coast between Santa Barbara and southern Mendocino County--is prime fuel for fires. In fact, experts call the chaparral “fire dependent,” which means the shrubbery requires fire over time to keep the species healthy.

...

Estimates vary wildly as to how much maritime chaparral is really out there. Long-time locals say people literally trip over the ubiquitous shrub that blankets 1.3 million acres across the state, or more. But others, including an expert from the state Department of Fish and Game and those who have analyzed the issue for the Coastal Commission, believe it is closer to 20,000 acres but that it may appear far more widespread because other varieties of plants are mixed in.

...
“The central message here for us is that the maritime chaparral, like the San Diego coast sage shrub, are not just fire-prone, they are fire-dependent. They have evolved over a millenium to require fire to regenerate. They have to burn, they will burn,” said Coast Commission spokeswoman Sarah Christie.

“When people build in those kinds of habitats, you have to expect that there are going to be wildfires. When a wildfire is raging out of control, it’s not reasonable to expect that you would be able to clear enough vegetation from around your house to keep it from harm’s way. People are emotional distressed and they are looking to lash out. Those fires were caused by natural forces. The Coastal Commission can’t control the lightning.”

Paul Perkovic is Board President of the Montara Water and Sanitary District (MWSD), however this article reflects his individual views and does not indicate a position of the District.

Coastside County Water District (CCWD) is at the limits of its ability to serve the needs of its current customers and may have serious problems meeting the demands of planned growth in its service area, even if there is no drought in the foreseeable future.

CCWD's water sources

This chart summarizes the current situation as described by CCWD in a Water Supply Strategic Planning Workshop on Thursday, June 26. CCWD serves water users in Half Moon Bay and El Granada. Moss Beach and Montara are served by the Montara Water and Sanitary District (MWSD). Growth in water demand from 2000 to 2007 has required CCWD to supply 20% more water for its customers, as shown by the yellow line.

CCWD buys 82% of its water from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), shown by the green line. SFPUC water comes from Pilarcitos Lake and the Crystal Springs Reservoir, which is fed from the Hetch Hetchy dam near Yosemite, via a complex system of reservoirs, pump stations, and pipelines.

CCWD's local supply comes from wells near Pilarcitos Creek, which runs through Half Moon Bay, plus wells near and surface diversion from Denniston Creek, just north of El Granada. CCWD's production is shown by the blue line.

CCWD's contract with SFPUC allows it to purchase up to 800 million gallons per year, shown by the solid red line. The dashed red line represents CCWD's drought scenario supply, at 620 million gallons per year.

This planning scenario anticipates a significant cutback in water from SFPUC (all member agencies would share in this cutback during a severe drought) combined with the historic low yield from local sources.

What is CCWD's drought plan?

Comparing the source and quantity of water supplied by CCWD in 2000 and 2007 shows:

• Total water supplied by CCWD is up 20% over just 7 years
• Local water production has plummeted 36% since 2000
• The amount of water purchased from SFPUC is up 47%, nearly to the limit
• CCWD's dependence on SFPUC water rose from 67% to 82% of total supply

These trends are simply not sustainable, even for a few more years. CCWD appears to be on the brink of a water supply disaster, which the current drought situation only magnifies:

• CCWD used 96% of its available SFPUC water in 2007
• CCWD has already sold connections that could add 20% more customers
• Current demand is 50% higher than drought scenario supplies
• CCWD would have to increase its local production by nearly 5% to increase its water supply by 1%.

CCWD has a drought scenario based on expected cutbacks in SFPUC water during a severe drought and the historical low yield from local sources. That planning scenario expects CCWD to have only 620 million gallons available -- to meet current use of 931.68 million gallons. In other words, CCWD customers already use 50% more water than CCWD expects to have available in a severe drought.