Minutes
July 20, 2005
Members Present: Laura Arnold, Michael Durland, David Loyd, Mary Masters, Victoria Parker,
Kit Rawson, Jim Slocomb
Staff: Jody Kennedy, Barbara Rosenkotter, Helen Venada
Absent: Mike Bertrand, Brian Calvert, Terrie Klinger, (Alan) Skeet Lowe, Joy Sevier, Tina Whitman, Dennis Willows
Guests: Joel Breems, Shannon Davis, Marc Duboiski, Kirsten Evans, Rachelle Gould, Phil Green, Kevin Ranker, Rowann Tallmon
Chair Kit Rawson called the non-quorum meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. in the Community Room at Islanders Bank Annex, Friday Harbor. Kit introduced Barbara Rosenkotter as the new Lead Entity Coordinator; he said that he and Barbara attended the SRF Board meeting earlier this week.
Minutes:
Following discussion of quorum (i.e. voting) requirements in Roberts Rules of Order and MRC By-laws, it was decided to postpone approval of the minutes of the 06/15/05 meeting to the next full-quorum meeting. (Jody will send a copy of the By-laws to members.) Minutes of the non-quorum 7/6/05 meeting were discussed and will be posted on the MRC webpage.
MRC vacancy:
Kit said that with David Hoopes’ resignation from the MRC, he received a letter from BOCC staff asking if the MRC would be recommending persons to fill that position; David’s position expires in June of 2007. At the last meeting there was discussion of the MRC guiding documents that state that the Planning Director shall be one of the MRC members. Jody said that the outcome of the meeting she and Barbara had with the acting Director of the SJC Community Planning and Development Department (CP&D, Matt Zybas, was the proposal that, at least for now, given the Department’s current organizational changes, Barbara would serve as the liaison to the MRC. Jody added that CP&D will be doing critical areas’ updates starting next year and the MRC may need to rethink how it can be more involved in the process at that time. Laura asked if Barbara could serve as Matt’s designee as a voting member; Jim reiterated Laura’s concern that it is important to cement the association between the MRC and the CP&D by having the Director be a member. Commissioner Kevin Ranker said that there is a commitment from the BOCC to ensure a formal relationship between the CP&D and the MRC (which is now formally serving as a Shared Salmon Strategy citizens’ committee, as well as an advisory committee to the BOCC; he added that, until the CP&D organization is rebuilt, Barbara will be the shoreline and marine expert in the Department, which was the intent of assigning the new position of Lead Entity Coordinator. Mary suggested that this membership slot be kept open; Laura and Kit agreed that it is structurally important for the committee to do so. Kevin suggested that discussion of whether the CP&D Director should be an active voting MRC member should be revisited after the Department catches up (in 6 months or so).
David Loyd reminded everyone that there have been several non-quorum meetings of late so that active participation and attendance by members is an ongoing critical issue; Kit pointed out that all members have other demands on their time. Kit said the By-laws state that a member can be dismissed after missing three consecutive meetings, allowing for special circumstances. Kit will review past minutes for attendance records. Laura suggested that the By-laws be modified to allow for 15 members plus the Director of CP&D (now says “no more than 15”).
There was discussion of the committee’s policy to attempt to have representative membership by selecting members from identified targeted areas (such as commercial interests and a distribution of representation from the different Islands). Jim pointed out that there are at least four self-employed members sitting at the table now so that business interests seem to be adequately represented at this time. The issue of Usual and Accustomed (U&A) requirements for tribal participation was discussed; Kit noted that the Murray-Metcalfe report stated that each tribe with a reservation within a county must be offered a chance to appoint a representative to its county’s MRC; this does not apply to the San Juans because there are no reservations in the county. He added that new language being proposed for reauthorization of the NWSC says that each tribe with a reservation or U&A fishing areas in a county will be offered the opportunity to designate a representative to have a seat on the county’s MRC. There are 8 tribes with U&A fishing areas in San Juan County and one current MRC member was designated by a tribe. Kevin said that federal language is that U&A tribes be given a seat at the table. David suggested that the tribal fisheries be asked for their input on the issue of representation. Kevin noted that several tribes have stated their satisfaction with Kit’s active participation.
Kit summarized MRC options for responding to the BOCC’s request: 1) ask that the vacant position be kept open for now until the CP&D Director is able to fill it, noting that this slot cannot be filled at this time; 2) re-advertise and re-interview to develop a membership pool for the current vacancy as well as for the several anticipated vacancies coming up; 3) recommend the appointment of one of the two people who expressed interest, were interviewed, and recommended to the BOCC by the MRC to fill vacancies this past spring;
4) some combination of the above. There was informal consensus to recommend that Kit draft the letter to the BOCC expressing the MRC’s strong feeling that the Director of CP&D become a voting member of the committee as soon as possible, stating the MRC’s intent to advertise and interview potential MRC members later this year, and putting forward the names of Phil Green and Jonathan White as people who have already been interviewed and recommended by the MRC to the BOCC should they wish to fill the vacancy immediately.
Work Session: 5-S Draft Targets Review
Copies were distributed of the 7/15/05 memo to the MRC from Jody, Kirsten and Rachelle and of the follow-up “MSA Area Plan Proposed Focal Targets.” Kit noted that this represents a lot of work by the core team and that the 5-S process will be used to develop the basis for future MSA planning. He said that targets identified at the 6/14 workshop of the Technical Advisory Group represent aspects of the marine ecosystem that account for the functioning of the whole system...habitat, specific species, groups of species, communities, human use. The idea, Kit added, is that taken together work on these targets will bring along all the other parts of the ecosystem. Steps beyond this are to look at how to measure the status of targets, to identify stressors, to assess impacts of the stressors, and to make recommendations on how to affect the stressors (e.g. by changes in human behavior) and, therefore, the targets in a positive way.
Kit said that the proposed targets represent topics that can be discussed on the docks, for instance, and that people can relate to and care about. It is important, he said, that this is the right list to put forth. Jim pointed out that the pelagic zone (MSA link to salmon) seems to have fallen out of the matrix. Laura remarked that this piece is also missing in the Shared Salmon Strategy report. Rowann noted that whales (Cetaceans) are not included in the #3 proposed target, “Marine Mammals;” she said they are pelagic and connect very well to salmon.
Kirsten said that some of the targets capture the pelagic zone and attributes of pelagic habitat are represented throughout. Phil said that the issue of whales is politically charged here and was considered significant by biologists at the workshop, but not necessarily by managers. Mary added that, with respect to seals, haulouts need protection. Kit said that species abundance is sometimes indicative of ecosystem health and sometimes not. Barbara suggested that it would be beneficial for salmon to be stated as a new target. David said that herring is a popular issue of discussion at public meetings.
Ecological attributes, Kirsten said, are those which allow a population to exist (e.g. water quality, current zones, population size, prey availability, etc.). Kirsten discussed the key areas of prey availability, larval survival, refuge, and adult population size...noting that conservation strategies for these areas, for instance, are developed around stressors to these attributes. Kit suggested broadening the definition of marine mammals to any that depend on the marine environment; nested targets then are representative. By general consensus, suggested changes were made to page one of the Proposed Focal Targets: that, for consistency, #3 should include terminology rather than a list; that Salmon should be added as a new #7; that #5 and #5-1/2 be combined under the category of Nearshore, Mud, Sand and Gravel Communities (it was agreed that it is
important to include clams); that a new #8 be added for upland sources (titled Freshwater Input or Fish Assemblages)...Kit said that data exists and impacts of upland sources are measurable.
Kit announced that Rachelle will be attending graduate school this year and he thanked her for all her work.
Salmon Recovery Funding Board Proposals:
Barbara said that 3 or 4 proposals are expected to be submitted this Friday; the technical advisory group (which is forming) will revue them for scientific validity and technical analysis; the MRC, as a citizens’ committee for SRFBoard funding, will then review and rank the proposals on September 22nd. The funding decision will be made in the first week of January 2006.
Marc Duboiski said that SRF Board is close to midway through its grant cycle and that the MRC’s timeline needs to fit in as smoothly as possible. The key date is September 30th when the MRC ranked list needs to be entered into the database; state level review will follow and, in late November, the Lead Entity Coordinator will make a presentation to the state review panel to discuss strategy and to answer questions. Heather Balcomb is the contact in SRFBoard’s office for scheduling a visit by a team of two state review panel members to proposed restoration, acquisition or assessment sites. Marc recommended that early interaction with the review panel is helpful, particularly to assure a good match (marine nearshore expert) with the project types.
Jim asked about the current status of the San Juan chapter of Shared Salmon Strategy. Marc said this is the first year for using recovery plan chapters by different watersheds; historically, the locally-developed salmon habitat strategy was used. There are two evaluation processes so that different criteria need to be set. Marc said the salmon recovery plan chapter could be submitted to substitute for the salmon habitat strategy or both could be submitted. Kit said that San Juan County’s use of its Shared Salmon Strategy chapter as its directive document was heavily supported by the SRF Board at its last meeting. Marc said that some Lead Entities have set up meetings in Olympia to discuss strategy.
Marc noted that all 26 Lead Entities are different; some have combined citizens’ committees and technical groups and some have the technical group do the ranking and the citizens’ group adjust. Marc advised that if roles are moved around this needs to be clearly described and the reasons need to be transparent. Barbara said that members will be given advance notice of site visits by the state panel to allow participation.
Jim noted that a recent GMA Hearing Board decision ruled that, under GMA, salmon habitat is part of critical areas...so that assessment directly leads to protection. Laura said that she will read the decision for confirmation. Marc said that the Interagency Commission, where he works, protects by acquiring habitat; regulations are great, he added, but IAC’s mandate is to fund projects and the primary objective is either to identify future sites for new restoration projects or do acquisitions. For acquisition potential and leveraging, Kit said that private landowners and groups like the Land Bank that are able to purchase land need to be informed about what salmon need so that they will put salmon high on their radar screens. Marc affirmed that it is appropriate to purchase specifically-identified uplands adjacent to shoreline for habitat protection. He suggested that to fully fund projects, the IAC has co-funded with the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program (WWRP) and the Aquatic Land Enhancement Act group (i.e. representing both the
salmon and recreation factions). Kit said that the 5-S process will document the connections.
David asked about cross-border species protection; Marc said there are 4 control areas in the state that are being monitored by the state but he had no information on funding for Canadian salmon. Barbara said that there is documentation that the 22 species of Chinook salmon use San Juan County for their in and out migration so it is implied that Canadian species will obviously be helped by projects here, although the primary concern for this funding are species from regional rivers in the state. Marc noted that the San Juan recovery chapter includes coded-wire tag data that demonstrates that Chinook salmon harvested in the Islands come from a large area extending as far north as northern British Columbia and as far south as the Columbia River. These data also show that Chinook salmon from all parts of Puget Sound spend time in the Islands.
Kit added that many stocks of salmon that spawn across the border spend a lot of their lives and are fished in the San Juans. Some of these stocks are depressed or threatened.
Marc said that, in terms of SRF Board longevity, the $20-24 million in this round of state-wide funding is the lowest since late 2000. Therefore, lead entity areas are encouraged to submit only their highest priority proposals.
Coordinator’s Report:
Jody said that the NWSC will hold its monthly meeting August 26th on Lopez Island. She said this will be a great opportunity for members to experience the workings of NWSC meetings and to promote the MSA. She will send the schedule and details.
The NWSC will hold its annual conference on the first weekend in November.
Tentative dates have been set for the 5-S workshops: October 7th for marine users and October 21st or 28th for stressors. Kit said that tribal participation in these workshops in their role as managers is important.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 a.m.
Submitted by Helen Venada
