About Cambria

Part One in a Series

San Luis Obispo County has no polar bears stranded on mini icebergs, no melting glaciers, no sinking island nations, no dissolving coral reefs – all effects caused by the growing  instability of our climate. This doesn’t mean San Luis Obispo County will escape the effects of climate change. Although most of the more drastic effects are being seen and felt at the poles and the equator, environmental changes in the more temperate zones of the planet are becoming more noticeable.

Last Wednesday I attended an very intriguing workshop hosted by the Local Government Commission (LGC) in San Luis Obispo: SLO Climate Change Adaptation Workshop. LGC partnered with the National Center for Conservation Science & Policy (NCCSP) and Susanne Moser Research & Consulting in collaboration with the City and County of San Luis Obispo to develop and implement climate change adaptation strategies for the region through a grant from the Kresge Foundation. The strategies will help local leaders, decision-makers, and governments prepare for the impacts of climate change in a way that provides benefits across multiple sectors and systems. Our goal is to develop strategies that cohesively consider economics, health, culture, social needs, infrastructure, ecosystem services, and natural resources.

Last week’s daylong event included presentations on the effects and potential needs for adaptation to changes in San Luis Obispo County and breakout sessions where participants discussed the priorities for our county as we plan for the future.  An abbreviated list of some of those in attendance:

David Church, Executive Officer, SLO LAFCO

Judy Corbett, Executive Director, Local Government Commission

Adam Hill, SLO County Supervisor

Ellen Carroll, Environmental Coordinator, SLO County Planning

Larry Allen, Air Pollution Control Officer, APCD

Ron De Carli, Executive Director, SLOCOG

Joy Fitzhugh, Legislative Analyst, SLO Farm Bureau

Marni Koopman, Ph.D., Climate Change Scientist, National Center for Conservation Science and Policy

Andrew Christie, Chapter Director, Sierra Club

Jan Marx, Council Member, SLO City Council

Chuck Stevenson, AICP, Long Range Planning for SLO County

Ray Weymann, Retired Astronomer

Michael Winn, Chair, WRAC and board member of Nipomo CSD

Paavo Ogren, Director, SLO County Public Works

Don Maruska, Strategy & Fisheries Policy Advisor, SLOSEA

Jerry Bunin, Government Affairs Director, Home Builders Association Central Coast

Maggie Macro, Initiating Team, Transition Paso Robles (one of about half a dozen Transitions members who were there)

Among the many others were residents of a number of communities and green business/energy folks. I was encouraged to see so many staff from many local non profit organizations and government agencies like SWAP, SLO County Housing Trust Fund, Caltrans, Creston Area Advisory Body, Los Osos CSD, Economic Vitality Corporation, ECOSLO, Central Coast Salmon Enhancement, Cal Poly, Cuesta, CA fish and Game, and planners from the cities of Atascadero, Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo, Paso Robles and Morro Bay.

The morning presentations set the stage and helped build a shared foundation of information about changes that are predicted for this county and what adaptations might be required. Starting with the Importance of Adaptation, a look at adaptation and the connection to City and County mitigation work, SLO Climate Change Projections, Climate Change Impacts on SLO Socioeconomic Systems and a review of the Top Socioeconomic Issues and Strategies.

Briefly, the top 10 concerns for species and ecosystems under climate change:

1. Water withdrawals from groundwater basins and rivers are an urgent issue, regardless of climate change, but will become much more
   severe of a challenge under climate change. Workshop participants identified monitoring and regulation of water withdrawals as necessary. Changes in pricing, types of crops, and residual dry matter from land use practices were all recommended. Water conservation measures are urgently needed to reduce competition for water and retain supplies for protected species and important natural processes.
2. Connectivity of fish and wildlife habitat is vital under climate change, yet development is quickly reducing opportunities for connectivity. Longterm region-wide planning is non-existent. Planning for connectivity will require communication and collaboration across land ownership boundaries, incentives for climate change easements on private property, regional analysis of potential buffers and corridors, regional scale climate change consideration in all development decisions, and a better understanding of how and where species will move.
3. Sedimentation in rivers, streams, and estuaries is problematic and likely to get worse with more fires, increased storm intensity, and continued land use practices that lead to erosion. Sedimentation will have negative impacts on riparian and water delivery systems, both of which are already stressed by general drought and overdraft. Land use controls, incentives, newly developed best practices, and prescribed fire were all recommended to reduce sedimentation. Monitoring and adaptive management should be implemented to keep sedimentation rates within historical bounds, if possible.
4. Loss of riparian, wetland, and marsh ecosystems greatly reduces the resilience of the landscape to climate change. These ecosystems are disproportionately important as breeding grounds for fish and wildlife, habitat for rare species, flood abatement that protects nearby infrastructure, water filtration, water infiltration to groundwater storage, and oases during drought. These ecosystems should be protected, restored, and created across the County ASAP.
5. Sea level rise is a huge concern due to its potential to impact marine and terrestrial ecosystems, coastal development, tourism, recreation, and agriculture. Rather than armoring the coast, the coastline should be allowed to be dynamic in state. One suggested approach was rolling easements. Relocating some developments would be necessary, thereby allowing the sandy beaches, dunes, rocky intertidal zone, estuaries, and bluffs to shift over time but still persist. Persistence of these features is vital to tourism, fish and wildlife populations, local fisheries, recreational opportunities, public safety, and quality-of-life for residents. A statewide or regional policy will need to be developed specific to sea level rise and coastal armoring.
6. Loss of oak woodlands from increased fire, drought, and invasive species is of great concern. Reducing current stressors to oak woodlands, such as overgrazing and frequent fire, may allow this important vegetation type to be more resilient to climate change. Educating private landowners about climate change projections and best management practices in oak woodlands, as well as providing them with incentives to retain healthy oak woodlands on their property, would help. Propagating more drought tolerant varieties of oak may also be an option.
7. Many important strongholds for threatened and endangered species are not protected and are not included in critical habitat designations. Critical habitat needs to be revisited and revised to include these areas as well as buffers for climate change range shifts. Some species are already in perilous condition and climate change is likely to cause extinction. It will be important to identify which species can be managed for persistence and which ones are too costly to maintain. Revisiting critical habitat will assist in this determination.
8. Planning should be carried out on a watershed scale, with all major land use players brought to the table, including ranchers, agricultural producers, county planners, the Forest Service, BLM, USFWS, conservation organizations, and others. Planning is currently done in a piecemeal fashion, and regulation is insufficient and unenforced. Planning for development, agriculture, natural ecosystems, and other interests needs to be done collaboratively and through a long-term, climate change lense. Enforcing current laws and regulations (CWA, ESA, local regulations) that affect land and water management is an important first step towards increasing the resilience of species and ecosystems to climate change.
9. Monitoring of species and ecosystems needs to be increased to detect trends early on and adjust management quickly in an adaptive  management approach. Careful planning and thought will need to go into designing monitoring strategies. A central clearinghouse that makes data available from all monitoring and surveying efforts, would be especially useful and could lead to more informed, timely, and sophisticated management efforts.
10. Keeping options open and taking advantage of opportunities. San Luis Obispo County has more options than other areas. Much of the coastline is undeveloped, thereby making marsh and wetland migration possible. Climate change may make marginal farmland available for conversion to coastal wetlands or native grasslands. Topographic complexity provides climate change refuges for species across the County as they shift to new areas. Many areas are currently available for providing buffers and connectivity for natural ecosystems (primarily on private land), but these areas could be lost to development if new policies and approaches are not quickly instituted with climate change in mind.

Upcoming posts will summarize the presentations (and have the MP3s available for download) and the results of the afternoon discussions on priorities. Most of the research is in documents available on the Local Government Commission website.

If you missed the forum on water alternatives on March 16, 2010, you can now view it here on aboutcambria.com (in four parts). Use this link or the link in the header menu. If you were there, watch it again! Thanks to Steve Figler for the video.

93428, cambria

Water is the hub of Cambria issues. Essential for living things, possessing qualities unique to itself, water is a critical part of the complex systems all over the planet. Tonight’s event will be at Rabobank from 6-8pm. It is billed as an educational and informational evening for Cambrians that will cover a number of topics related to alternative water sources. With so much to know about  the complexity of water management (assuring a reliable supply) and education in short supply, this may become the first of many such events. Tonight’s agenda includes talks from experts on clean water & conservation, greywater systems, storage ponds, and water supply. See the flyer below.

See you there!

At this Tuesday’s Cambria Healthcare District meeting (Jan 26, 2010,   6:30pm, Rabobank), Administrator Melendy will present estimated cost provided by San Luis Ambulance Service to provide 2 paramedic ambulances to the Cambria area. Administrator Melendy will recommend that the CCHD members of the ad hoc committee be instructed to study the information and present recommendations to the full board as to the direction to proceed.Most of you will remember a similar presentation at the CCSD provided by CalFire. This is part of the ongoing struggles to locate the ambulances at the CCSD fire station.

Also on the agenda is a  presentation on the 2010-2011 Fiscal Year Budget – Administrator Melendy will provide the Trustees with preliminary information regarding the budget preparation. The CCHD gets its funding through our property taxes and by charging those folks (or their insurance) they transport.
6. Action Items
A. Monterey County Contract – Administrator Melendy will present the Trustees with a proposed contract with American Medical Response (AMR) to provide ambulance coverage to the Monterey County South Valley Zone.

Download the complete agenda here.

93428

You may have missed the presentation at the December 14, 2009 Cambria Community Services District meeting by the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) on our desalination project. If you don’t have Charter Cable TV,  you aren’t able to watch the meeting on Channel 21 and are limited to the audio download from slo-span.org. Since Gordon and I recently cut our internet/phone/TV expenses by getting the full Charter package, I recorded the December meeting when it ran tonight so more Cambrians can see for themselves what ACE has planned. This is especially good timing considering the “emergency ” meeting that was just called by President Sanders for this coming Tuesday (January 5, 2010).

The Cambria CSD did post Colonel Magness’  PowerPoint presentation on their website. Download by clicking here.

Watch the Army Corps of Engineers presentation from December on You Tube.

The presentation is split into 8 segments because youtube has a maximum limit of 10 minutes for the videos you can upload for free.

At the November 2009 Cambria Community Services District Meeting, two speakers raised concern that San Simeon is in talks with the CCSD about buying some of the desalinated water from Cambria’s plant – once it is producing water.

In November 2006, 78% of Cambrians approved Measure P-06. Below is the exact language from the League of Women Voters site:

Shall the ordinance requiring a majority vote of the electorate of the Cambria Community Services District to provide potable water service outside the 2006 District boundaries be adopted? The Board of Directors shall not authorize the extension of water service except non potable water for agricultural and irrigation purposes for outside of the District boundaries, as the boundaries exist at the enactment of this ordinance, for residential, industrial, or commercial purposes without first completing environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act or its successor statute, amending the Water Master Plan, and then submitting the question for approval to the voters of the District. The property owner seeking water service will pay the costs of the application and election in advance.

A few thoughts occur as I’ve thought about how possessive some people seem to be about “our” water.

1. It is premature to be concerned about this at this point. It hasn’t even been shown that desalination is even feasible here.
2. Second, Measure P-06 does not forbid selling water outside the boundaries of the CCSD, just providing water service (except non potable…)
3. As a federally-funded project with the Army Corps of Engineers as the lead agency, the project funding could hinge on whether or not we will sell water to San Simeon, a water-short community less than 7 miles from a major federal project.
4. San Simeon may decide it is worth the money and effort to apply for water service and fund the election required.
5. CCSD wouldn’t be giving the water away for free. They would be selling it. If CCSD charges the amount it costs to create the potable water, it will not cost Cambrians anything.
6. By getting the San Simeon Community Services District in talks this early, we are more likely to be able to strike a deal that includes having San Simeon paying a share of the construction costs, which reduces the burden on Cambrians (and could increase the likelihood that we will get all the funding we need from the Federal Government.)

I favor better management of our current resources, rather than impressive capital expenditures, ongoing operations costs and the  environmental effects of a desal plant. But the CCSD Board is on the desalination path (for the time being).  If we are going to create a project with the environmental effects of a desalination plant, it seems to me that cooperating with San Simeon to help ease their water shortage, while reducing some of the potential costs to Cambrians is a sensible direction to follow.

Quite a few things have to happen before we should need to get all worked up about San Simeon getting “our” water, starting with determining whether we can even have desal.  And then San Simeon will have to decide whether it would be worth it for them to pursue. If the past is any indication, getting a deal in place between the two agencies will be next to impossible anyway.

The bottom line: “Worrying is like a rocking chair, it gives you something to do, but it doesn’t get you anywhere” – Unknown

Since at least the 1950s,  the USGS has done a survey of water use in the U.S. The most recent one was recently released. The report includes some striking numbers and trends in use that might seem counter-intuitive, given that our population growth isn’t slowing down at all. The Pacific Institute, a well-known California-based nonpartisan research institute that works to advance environmental protection, economic development, and social equity reviewed the data and has issued their commentary on the report.

A more straight forward read for the “average joe”, in my opinion, was posted by Gretchen Weber on the website of  KQED, the San Francisco PBS station.  The article starts:

Despite the addition of 81 million people over the period, Americans were using less water in 2005 than they were in 1975.

And goes on:

The per-capita decrease of 30% since 2000, down to 1383 gallons per person per day, is a level not seen since the 1950s.  Of course this doesn’t mean that each person in the United States is using more than a thousand gallons per day at home–that number is somewhere between 54 (if you live in Maine) and 190 (if you live in Nevada).  The USGS number is derived from dividing total water withdrawals by total population.  In 2005, the total withdrawal was 410 billion gallons per day (5% less than in the peak year, 1980) and the total population was approximately 310 million.

The Cambria Community Services District (and some individual staff members) belong to a number of organizations and benefit from the advocacy, training, publications and conferences those associations provide to members.   A review of the expenditure reports over the last couple of years provides an overview of the District’s memberships and various training and conferences attended by staff and Board members.
By encouraging ongoing, professional training and attendance at industry conferences, the District is able to offer better services to the community. The amount we’ve spent on memberships and conferences over the last couple of years, listed below, isn’t meant to be a complete list or argue against or justify the expenditures. I appreciate the fact that CCSD staff and Board value the opportunities that can come our way as a result of spending these dollars. W. Somerset Maugham is credited with putting it this way: “You learn more quickly under the guidance of experienced teachers. You waste a lot of time going down blind alleys if you have no one to lead you.”

Late breaking news: the Cambria Forest Committee  will be meeting in Suite 204 at 6pm tonight. On the agenda:

4.1 CAMBRIA FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN – (HAWLEY-O’KEEFE-BODE)
A – GENERATE A LIST OF THE “BENEFITS OF IMPLEMENTING THE CFMP”
4.2 ANNUAL LOT CLEARING – (MILLER, BULER, BODE, TRASK)
A – REVIEW CURRENT CCSD CONTRACT AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR CONTRACTORS (RATHBUN-BUTLER-TRASK-VALLENS-SCHASSBERGER)
4.3 TREE PLANTING AND EDUCATION – (BUTLER-TRASK-HAWLEY-SCHASSBERGER)
4.4 MEMBERSHIP OUTREACH – (RATHBUN-BOULDIN)

and 5.2 REVISE CFC MISSION STATEMENT

Download the Minutes from the May meeting of the CFC here.