Team Arundo del Norte meeting minutes plus some post-meeting notes.
6/7/99
Attendees:
Deanne DiPietro CERES/SEC deanne@ceres.ca.gov
Jim Robins UCB jdrobin@nature.berkeley.edu
David Spencer USDA-ARS dfspencer@ucdavis.edu
Valerie Van Way Nat'l Guard vanway@calguard.ca.gov
Paula Urtecho DFG polinita88@hotmail.com
Mike Dannenberg Napa Ag. Comm odannenberg@interx.net
Julie Cunningham DWR-Red Bluff cunning@water.ca.gov
Kent Nelson DWR knelson@water.ca.gov
Kristen Cooper-Carter Chico State kcooper-carter@csuchico.edu
Rich Holman Chico State rholman@csuchico.edu
Lois Battuello Napa River batt@napanet.net
Chris Sauer CCC, Napa (707) 253-1421
Gary Nolan Santa Clara Co. gary_nolan@qmgate.pln.scl.ca.us
(408) 441-1195
Richard Dale Sonoma Ecology Center sec@vom.com; (707) 996-9744
Caitlin Cornwall " sec-cornwall@vom.com; "
Mark Newhouser " mnewhouser@vom.com; (707) 939-0329
Note: There was a huge traffic jam on Hwy 80 and some of the attendees
didn't make it until the meeting was almost done or had adjourned. Much
networking and conversing occurred afterwards, however.
CALFED proposals:
Julie C. on Sac River proposals-
Birch Creek, close to 100% Arundo, asked for $390,000. Also Discovery
Center, nonprofit educational center in Tehama Co, planning to do mapping,
12 mile stretch on Sac from Red Bluff south. Using areal photos.
Reconnaisance and landowner education. They don't want to do herbicides
with the volunteer high school students. Amount requested unknown.
Cache Creek Conservancy submitted a proposal for work on that creek; they
will be testing methods for their effectiveness and want to share the
information with other efforts.
Team Arundo wrote letters of recommendation, and we got reciprocal letters
from both, hopefully giving CALFED the impressive fact that there is an
environment of support among these project rather than competition.
Team Arundo submitted a proposal that may be seen in its entirety on the
TAdN website (http://ceres.ca.gov/tadn). Summary: three levels of funding
were proposed, 1) A half-time coordinator for assisting eradication
projects that have been identified as ready to go in 26 sites in 6
watersheds; 2) #1 plus another half-time coordinator (or 50% more of the
same person more likely) to identify, prioritize, and evaluate the next
wave of at least 20 eradication projects in the region, including funding
and eradication planning, 3) all of the above plus an online Arundo
information system that coordinates the data and information coming from
these and partner projects into an electronic archive accessible via the
WWW. We asked for $499,445, $609,245, and $818,045, respectively.
DFG project update:
DFG is looking at the effectiveness of three kinds of eradication methods
-no cut with spray, cut & spray, cut-stump. Applications happened last
Oct., everything looking good and dead- going to be doing regrowth
assessment tomorrow. All methods seemed to work real well, getting very
good kill rates.
Took water samples to assess persistence of glyphosate and surfactant.
57-155 ppb (parts per billion) found on the same day. LC50 was 11 ppm for
Rana, 25 ppm for fathead minnow, putting it in the "slightly toxic" range.
Samples collected 2 days later was down to extremely low levels. Surfactant
R-11 is the most toxic component, with a LC50 on bluegill of 4.2 ppt,
making it "moderately toxic". Doing more trials with Dept. of Boating and
Waterways, who use the same mix. Report will be made available when ready.
Discussion:
Other surfactants might be considered that may be less toxic. FlA uses
D-liminate with good effect but it's not registered in California.
There are four Glyphosate products. Old one has a surfactant that is
unknown and comes with a warning about eye damage. Ultra and Pro have
buffers and surfactants, Ultra is restricted for agriculture. Rodeo
requires surfactant to be added and is the only one registered for aquatic
use (and this is why it costs a lot more). Must be used if there is any
chance of overspray into water, but a lot of money can be saved by spraying
when the water level is way down and using the cheaper product where the
banks are dry.
Spraying in the Fall is better for this reason as well as the fact that
there are no larval amphibians. This is the recommended time for best
translocation.
Surfactants have to be registered as a pesticide in California with DPR,
and California is more restrictive so there are fewer choices.
Mapping Projects:
Jim Robins reports that there are two main efforts being worked on by
Berkeley and SFEI:
1) Bay Area windshield surveys- there is a protocol and lots of data has
been collected. Many different ways of inputting data, now need to look at
assembling it. Want to do two pilot projects with the Eco-Atlas (SFEI):
Arundo locations, native fish habitat. Working with ICE and SFEI to ensure
an openly shareable dataset is produced and there is useful context. Would
like it to be updateable- point data with associated attributes.
2) A statewide survey. Collected info from Southern Calif. up, but spotty.
Want to set up the database so it could handle multiple scales. There is a
fair amount of data, need a lot more.
Then there are regional efforts underway- Russian River, Cache Creek,
Sac/Tehama, Chico, Napa... some with remore sensing imagery being used,
many different techniques.
SFEI is helping with planning the regional pilot. This should help with the
development of the statewide dataset.
Arundo survey data collection:
Jim Robins, jdrobins@nature.berkeley.edu, is the contact for people wanting
to provide Arundo location information. Also for broad-based info about the
entire stream for the Statewide Database. Jim will send the excel file with
the info he has so far from the windshield survey to post on the website
for people to see, and so they can use that format for providing data. This
way at least we can have an overview of where Arundo is- we all know so
much among us. There are also eradication projects going on that we don't
know about- like on the Navarro- and we should try and inventory them and
contact them for their surveys.
Discussion:
We want...
1) detailed regional data made available for sharing, and
2) a statewide aggregate map display that has helpful information on a
broader scale.
Since it seems that watershed groups and individuals will most likely
develop their data their own way for their particular project, it may be
best to catalog the this existing and developing data to enable sharing
among groups simply by providing contact information.
Also need a base map onto which people's project and survey information can
be hung. Could link the the windshield survey to stream reaches on a map
and change the display (red if Arundo is dense in that reach, for example).
Suggested that we make mapping a major topic for the next meeting and ask
people to bring their stuff so we can see the various products. Watershed
conservancies up north are looking at logging sitings and protocols would
be helpful. The Chico folks are involved with the Yuba and everybody north,
and most of them are generating data for Existing Conditions Reports.
Kristen thinks they would be interested in implementing a recommended
standard if there is one. Jim and the mapping project people will be
meeting soon as well.
Rich- We would want to ID locations of Arundo, projects, eradication that's
been successful. Val- would like to see acres found and acres eradicated.
Discussion of using NRPI to log the projects and link to windshield
spreadsheets.
Agreed that we need one framework system for the statewide aggregate data,
whatever that turns out to be.
Val- Integrated data about Arundo and other non-native species removal and
native species would be helpful for watershed planning. (This could be done
by anyone with that data if the Arundo location coverage can be imported).
Julie- Hydrologic Engeneering Center (HEC) modeling would make a good
demonstration to show how Arundo effects flooding. Julie points out that we
need a range of Manning's n coefficient for riparian veg, with a special
one for Arundo. Rich- Arundo may not be factored in if it gets skipped in a
100 ft sampling regime.
Ideas for advertising for collection of mapping data- 1) post invitation
and instructions on website with Jim as contact, and 2) in Estuary
Newsletter. Maybe the IEP newsletter- Kent will talk to them about using
the newletter as a venue to reach people who are interested in monitoring
biological elements.
Chico State is involved in watershed projects from Butte north.
Environmental Resource Program is the umbrella under which the projects are
coordinated- Kristen Cooper-Carter is the contact for that. Rich Holman is
doing Arundo eradication.
Landowner Handbook-
Very informative, already useful to the Chico projects. DFG permits? Need
to include info about Stream Alteration permit. Also information about
consulting with the USFWC if there are federally listed species. Edits were
provided to Caitlin.
Next meeting will be early- mid August and I promise to give more lead-time!
DD
-----------------------------------------------------
Deanne DiPietro
CERES Technical Projects Coordinator
California Resources Agency (916) 653-8614
-----------------------------------------------------
Deanne DiPietro
CERES Technical Projects Coordinator
California Resources Agency (916) 653-8614
--============_-1283314877==_ma============
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii"
Team Arundo del Norte meeting minutes plus some post-meeting notes.
6/7/99
Attendees:
Deanne DiPietro CERES/SEC deanne@ceres.ca.gov
Jim Robins UCB jdrobin@nature.berkeley.edu
David Spencer USDA-ARS dfspencer@ucdavis.edu
Valerie Van Way Nat'l Guard vanway@calguard.ca.gov
Paula Urtecho DFG polinita88@hotmail.com
Mike Dannenberg Napa Ag. Comm odannenberg@interx.net
Julie Cunningham DWR-Red Bluff cunning@water.ca.gov
Kent Nelson DWR knelson@water.ca.gov
Kristen Cooper-Carter Chico State kcooper-carter@csuchico.edu
Rich Holman Chico State rholman@csuchico.edu
Lois Battuello Napa River batt@napanet.net
Chris Sauer CCC, Napa (707) 253-1421
Gary Nolan Santa Clara Co. gary_nolan@qmgate.pln.scl.ca.us
(408) 441-1195
Richard Dale Sonoma Ecology Center sec@vom.com; (707) 996-9744
Caitlin Cornwall " sec-cornwall@vom.com; "
Mark Newhouser " mnewhouser@vom.com; (707) 939-0329
Note: There was a huge traffic jam on Hwy 80 and some of the attendees
didn't make it until the meeting was almost done or had adjourned. Much
networking and conversing occurred afterwards, however.
CALFED proposals:
Julie C. on Sac River proposals-
Birch Creek, close to 100% Arundo, asked for $390,000. Also Discovery
Center, nonprofit educational center in Tehama Co, planning to do
mapping, 12 mile stretch on Sac from Red Bluff south. Using areal
photos. Reconnaisance and landowner education. They don't want to do
herbicides with the volunteer high school students. Amount requested
unknown.
Cache Creek Conservancy submitted a proposal for work on that creek;
they will be testing methods for their effectiveness and want to share
the information with other efforts.
Team Arundo wrote letters of recommendation, and we got reciprocal
letters from both, hopefully giving CALFED the impressive fact that
there is an environment of support among these project rather than
competition.
Team Arundo submitted a proposal that may be seen in its entirety on
the TAdN website (http://ceres.ca.gov/tadn). Summary: three levels of
funding were proposed, 1) A half-time coordinator for assisting
eradication projects that have been identified as ready to go in 26
sites in 6 watersheds; 2) #1 plus another half-time coordinator (or 50%
more of the same person more likely) to identify, prioritize, and
evaluate the next wave of at least 20 eradication projects in the
region, including funding and eradication planning, 3) all of the above
plus an online Arundo information system that coordinates the data and
information coming from these and partner projects into an electronic
archive accessible via the WWW. We asked for $499,445, $609,245, and
$818,045, respectively.
DFG project update:
DFG is looking at the effectiveness of three kinds of eradication
methods
-no cut with spray, cut & spray, cut-stump. Applications happened last
Oct., everything looking good and dead- going to be doing regrowth
assessment tomorrow. All methods seemed to work real well, getting very
good kill rates.
Took water samples to assess persistence of glyphosate and surfactant.
57-155 ppb (parts per billion) found on the same day. LC50 was 11 ppm
for Rana, 25 ppm for fathead minnow, putting it in the "slightly toxic"
range. Samples collected 2 days later was down to extremely low levels.
Surfactant R-11 is the most toxic component, with a LC50 on bluegill of
4.2 ppt, making it "moderately toxic". Doing more trials with Dept. of
Boating and Waterways, who use the same mix. Report will be made
available when ready.
Discussion:
Other surfactants might be considered that may be less toxic. FlA uses
D-liminate with good effect but it's not registered in California.
There are four Glyphosate products. Old one has a surfactant that is
unknown and comes with a warning about eye damage. Ultra and Pro have
buffers and surfactants, Ultra is restricted for agriculture. Rodeo
requires surfactant to be added and is the only one registered for
aquatic use (and this is why it costs a lot more). Must be used if
there is any chance of overspray into water, but a lot of money can be
saved by spraying when the water level is way down and using the
cheaper product where the banks are dry.
Spraying in the Fall is better for this reason as well as the fact that
there are no larval amphibians. This is the recommended time for best
translocation.
Surfactants have to be registered as a pesticide in California with
DPR, and California is more restrictive so there are fewer choices.
Mapping Projects:
Jim Robins reports that there are two main efforts being worked on by
Berkeley and SFEI:
1) Bay Area windshield surveys- there is a protocol and lots of data
has been collected. Many different ways of inputting data, now need to
look at assembling it. Want to do two pilot projects with the Eco-Atlas
(SFEI): Arundo locations, native fish habitat. Working with ICE and
SFEI to ensure an openly shareable dataset is produced and there is
useful context. Would like it to be updateable- point data with
associated attributes.
2) A statewide survey. Collected info from Southern Calif. up, but
spotty. Want to set up the database so it could handle multiple scales.
There is a fair amount of data, need a lot more.
Then there are regional efforts underway- Russian River, Cache Creek,
Sac/Tehama, Chico, Napa... some with remore sensing imagery being used,
many different techniques.
SFEI is helping with planning the regional pilot. This should help with
the development of the statewide dataset.
Arundo survey data collection:
Jim Robins, jdrobins@nature.berkeley.edu, is the contact for people
wanting to provide Arundo location information. Also for broad-based
info about the entire stream for the Statewide Database. Jim will send
the excel file with the info he has so far from the windshield survey
to post on the website for people to see, and so they can use that
format for providing data. This way at least we can have an overview of
where Arundo is- we all know so much among us. There are also
eradication projects going on that we don't know about- like on the
Navarro- and we should try and inventory them and contact them for
their surveys.
Discussion:
We want...
1) detailed regional data made available for sharing, and
2) a statewide aggregate map display that has helpful information on a
broader scale.
Since it seems that watershed groups and individuals will most likely
develop their data their own way for their particular project, it may
be best to catalog the this existing and developing data to enable
sharing among groups simply by providing contact information.
Also need a base map onto which people's project and survey information
can be hung. Could link the the windshield survey to stream reaches on
a map and change the display (red if Arundo is dense in that reach, for
example).
Suggested that we make mapping a major topic for the next meeting and
ask people to bring their stuff so we can see the various products.
Watershed conservancies up north are looking at logging sitings and
protocols would be helpful. The Chico folks are involved with the Yuba
and everybody north, and most of them are generating data for Existing
Conditions Reports. Kristen thinks they would be interested in
implementing a recommended standard if there is one. Jim and the
mapping project people will be meeting soon as well.
Rich- We would want to ID locations of Arundo, projects, eradication
that's been successful. Val- would like to see acres found and acres
eradicated. Discussion of using NRPI to log the projects and link to
windshield spreadsheets.
Agreed that we need one framework system for the statewide aggregate
data, whatever that turns out to be.
Val- Integrated data about Arundo and other non-native species removal
and native species would be helpful for watershed planning. (This could
be done by anyone with that data if the Arundo location coverage can be
imported).
Julie- Hydrologic Engeneering Center (HEC) modeling would make a good
demonstration to show how Arundo effects flooding. Julie points out
that we need a range of Manning's n coefficient for riparian veg, with
a special one for Arundo. Rich- Arundo may not be factored in if it
gets skipped in a 100 ft sampling regime.
Ideas for advertising for collection of mapping data- 1) post
invitation and instructions on website with Jim as contact, and 2) in
Estuary Newsletter. Maybe the IEP newsletter- Kent will talk to them
about using the newletter as a venue to reach people who are interested
in monitoring biological elements.
Chico State is involved in watershed projects from Butte north.
Environmental Resource Program is the umbrella under which the projects
are coordinated- Kristen Cooper-Carter is the contact for that. Rich
Holman is doing Arundo eradication.
Landowner Handbook-
Very informative, already useful to the Chico projects. DFG permits?
Need to include info about Stream Alteration permit. Also information
about consulting with the USFWC if there are federally listed species.
Edits were provided to Caitlin.
Next meeting will be early- mid August and I promise to give more
lead-time!
DD