Wetland Restoration Grant Technical Advisory Committee OCTOBER 26, 2017

OCTOBER 26, 2017

Wetland Restoration Grant

Technical Advisory Committee

Project Background

Goal: Conserve and Protect Tahoe Basin Wetland (SEZ) Desired Conditions and Functions

TRPA Regional Plan Update Goals and Policies for SEZ

(Includes updating TRPA SEZ program to include the four core EPA Wetland Program Elements)

SEZ Classification System:

Provides updated SEZ delineation criteria for identifying different wetland functions and types using existing data and

classification systems Status: Technical Report complete

SEZ Assessment:

Provides standardized approach for assessing the functional condition of different wetland classes

Status: California Rapid Assessment Method tested and applicability to Lake Tahoe Basin established.

Basin-wide SEZ Inventory and Map:

Provides a map showing location, type and condition of basin wetlands for use in determining EIP SEZ restoration priorities and

the status of SEZ threshold. Status: Technical Report complete.

Monitoring and Assessment

Needs:

1.SEZ Classification System 2.SEZ Assessment 3.Basin-wide SEZ Inventory Map

4.Definitions for Restoration, Enhancement, and Creation

Restoration and Protection

Needs:

1.SEZ Classification System 2.SEZ Assessment

3.Basin-wide SEZ Inventory Map

4.Definitions for Restoration, Enhancement and Creation

Regulation and Permitting

Needs:

1.SEZ Classification System 2.SEZ Assessment 3.Basin-wide SEZ Inventory

Four Core EPA Wetland Program Elements

Roadmap steps and status

1. Desired Functions

2. SEZ definition and delineation criteria 3. SEZ mapping

4. CRAM evaluation

5. CRAM appropriateness 6. Secure funding

7. Prioritize restoration and enhancement 8. Revise permitting

9. Funding for ER for threshold/policy change 10. TRPA board adoption

4

X

X

X

X

X

Outside scope

SEZ data management: Tahoe Area Resource Inventory/CARI for Level 2 ambient and project monitoring data and tracking (describing EcoAtlas and EIP Tracker integration);

Ongoing reporting on SEZ program status, including Roadmap implementation?

Grant Overview

Grant Outputs

Output 1: Wetland monitoring plan Develop and implement a Basin

-wide wetland monitoring and evaluation plan for the Tahoe Basin.

Output 2: Performance metrics for wetland restoration and mitigation

-Develop quantitative performance metrics for commonly used terms related to wetland restoration

Output 3: A Tahoe Basin wetland restoration plan - Develop a

Survey response overview

Primary Challenges

• Acres as an indictor vs. tracking SEZ function and value. (BL,SR,RS)

• Difference between enhancement and restoration (LK)

• No basin-wide workgroup (RS)

• Not all SEZs are created equally, yet all SEZ is managed in similar ways. (BL)

• Lack of resources (JL,BL, SR)

• Insufficient monitoring, lack of baseline data (SY)

• Political and procedural challenges (JL)

What do you see as the primary challenges or deficiencies for SEZ program management in the region?

Barriers

12

• Funding (JL,BL,SR)

• Land acquisition / Incentivize the transfer ownership (BL, LK)

• Challenges of private property restoration, e.g. floods lands (JL, LK)

• Lack of TMDL incentives (RS)

• Basin wide prioritization of projects (JL,)

• Current development pattern (SR)

Project Issues

• Enhancement vs restoration (LK, SR)

• Function not captured (SR)

• Programmatic agreement to facilitate restoration / Regulatory challenges (RS)

• Benefits not maximized by projects selected (JL)

Are there SEZ restoration projects (current or past) that you believe do not meet the

standards for what SEZ restoration should be? If so, what can this grant do to address the issue?

Prioritization needs

14

• Current vs. historic distribution of SEZ in the Basin (JL)

• Cost/Benefit or Cost/feasibility analysis for development removal from SEZ (JL)

• SEZ valuation tools (SR,RS)

• Climate change vulnerability assessment (SY)

• Project one-pages (RS)

• Clear targets for SEZ by type or benefit (LK)

Monitoring needs

• Consistent with the L1/L2/L3 approach (JL)

• Needs clear objectives (BL)

• Capture what’s important (BL, SR, LK)

• Utilize remote sensing (SR)

• Effectiveness evaluation for SEZ restoration design elements (LK)

• Needs to establish a basin-wide baseline (SY)

What do you think are the most important components of a basin-wide SEZ monitoring program? What specific questions should the monitoring plan be designed to answer? Are there any monitoring methods you think should be considered?

Current monitoring

16

• State parks is starting a baseline SEZ monitoring program (SY)

• Rosewood Creek project (RS)

• CTC

Grant facilitate restoration

• Establish objectives

• Metrics for tracking SEZ function and value (BL)

• Use of CARI/ TARI maps (SR)

• Agency buy-in collaboration on SEZ (SY)

• Programmatic permit (RS)

Other

18

• Importance of tracking SEZ function and value (BL)

• UTRWAG concerns on CRAM for project monitoring (SR)

• Develop cap and trade credits for SEZ ecosystem services (RS)

Please feel free to provide any additional comments/thoughts on about SEZ restoration and monitoring in the Tahoe Basin

Scope

Inside

Outside

• Objective-driven monitoring plan

• Enhancement vs restoration

• Basin-wide prioritization

• Lack of resources

• Streamlined permitting

Threshold Update Initiative

Thresholds Update Initiative

Challenge:

• The majority of the standards were adopted in 1982, based on science that is now over 40 years old.

• Cost of comprehensive monitoring is beyond the resources of the agency and its partners

Goals:

• Relevant and scientifically rigorous threshold standards

• A cost-efficient, feasible, and informative monitoring and evaluation plan

Assessment Findings

• Room for improvement in all areas

• No standard received a perfect score

• 39% (69 of the 178) were found to be both specific and measurable

• 28% (49 of the 178) were found to be specific, measurable and based on

settled/solid science

SEZ restoration standard

“Preserve existing naturally functioning

SEZ lands in their

natural hydrologic condition, restore all disturbed SEZ lands in

undeveloped, unsubdivided lands, and restore 25 percent of

the SEZ lands that have been identified as disturbed,

developed or subdivided, to attain a 5 percent total increase in

the area of naturally functioning SEZ

lands.”

Stream Environment Zones

1. Preserve existing naturally functioning SEZ lands in their natural hydrologic condition 2. Restore 25% of the SEZ lands

that have been identified as disturbed, developed or

subdivided

3. Restore all disturbed SEZ lands in undeveloped, un-subdivided

lands

24

Regulatory controls and permitting Compliance

No status determination possible

Target: 877 acres

924 acres of SEZ have been restored Target: 1,100 acres

924 acres of SEZ have been restored

Upper Truckee Marsh will restore 592 acres

4. Attain a 5% total increase in the area of naturally

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Acres SEZ Restored

Stream Environment Zones

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Acres SEZ Restored

Reach 5 & 6 Upper Truckee

Upper Truckee Marsh Other Contributions1

• Conservancy and USFS (through Burton-Santini) have acquired 900 acres of SEZ

• LTBMU restored 680 acres between 1984-1987

Standard Origin: Restore 25%

Sources:

(1) TRPA. 1978. Lake Tahoe Basin Water Quality Management Plan: Vol I Water Quality Problems & Management Problems. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, Zephyr Cover, NV.

1978 208 Plan Vol 1

• 4,376 “subdivided or otherwise developed” 1

• Level of development varies

• Slight – streets or pub services installed by little building

• Total – physical characteristics have been destroyed

• 25% of this category is not developed AND critical to surface water treatment and conveyance

• Of the 4,400 acres for which “encroachment is evident or of high potential, about half

Peer Review Comments

• “Using a 40+ year old unreviewed report as the foundation for evaluation and management of soil-related resources in the Tahoe Basin is not,

emphatically, “best available science.””

• “Since Bailey’s 1974 report, well over 4000 articles have been published in the scientific literature on urban development where “impervious” or

“imperviousness” is mentioned in the title or abstract.”

• “In summary, the present approach to evaluating the condition and the

improvement in SEZ’s is an overly blunt instrument with no apparent

scientific basis beyond “more is better.” The science has truly advanced in

the last 40+ years; this Threshold Evaluation should, at minimum,

acknowledge how much work remains to bring the protection of Lake Tahoe into the 21st _century.”

Tahoe Science Advisory Council

28

Members

• University California Davis

• University California system

• University Nevada Reno

• Desert Research Institute

• US Geological Survey

• USFS Pacific Southwest Research Station

• Non-voting NV representative

• Non-voting CA representative

28

Role in Threshold Review/Update

• Recommendations on broad-scale strategic opportunities to

integrate across disciplines and management themes.

• Technical guidance and focused investigations on TRPA key

questions related to Threshold Standards

Tahoe Science Advisory Council

• Is the SEZ construct still an appropriate and scientifically relevant frame upon which to base our SEZ protection and restoration goals?

• Is "area restored" an appropriate surrogate for measuring the benefits of SEZ restoration or and the establishment of a new restoration target?

• Development of a conceptual model based of the benefits from SEZ and the stressors on SEZ.

Technical Advisory Committee Role

Role

•

Strategic direction for the grant

•

Sounding board for ideas

•

Scoping & iterative check-in to ensure scope is on track

•

Provide technical expertise and feedback on contractor work

products

Expectations

• Attend meetings (3-6 meetings/yr for 2 years)

• Review technical products

• Be prepared for meetings

• Nimble and engaged group

• Representative for your organization

• Ensure executives are informed (and hopefully supportive)

• Access necessary technical expertise

Discussion items

Near-term

• Are there any organizations that should be represented but are not?

• Other

Longer-term

• How should the group engage with TIE-SC?

Action Items and Next Steps

Next steps

• Establish monitoring plan goals

• Comment on draft request for proposal for consultant support

Thank You