Mr. Mike Napolitano
SF Bay
Regional Water Quality Control Board
1515 Clay
Oakland, CA
Phone
510-622-2300
Fax:
510-622-2460
17 February 2003
Dear Mike:
I have been following with some interest, your remarks at various Public Hearings regarding the Napa County proposal to increase stream setbacks. On more than one occasion, but certainly on the 28th of January 2003, you testified to the Supervisors, that the increased setbacks were needed to create more shading, and to obtain increased levels of woody debris in the stream and River habitats. You also remarked that you were puzzled as to why there would seemingly not be as much woody debris deposits, as the existing vegetation cover would lead you to anticipate.
Mike, I think I have solved the mystery for you. It would be illuminating for you to read the enclosed articles I photocopied from the local Napa Valley Register, 12 Feb 2003 "Stream bank erosion threatens apartments" and 17 February 2003 Commentary by Barry Martin " Trancas work did not flood Napa"
Both of these articles detail the great Napa City Public Works effort expended to remove as much woody debris as possible. To them, the increased loads of woody debris you seek to recruit upstream, would only mean longer hours and harder work to haul such risky nuisances out of the Flood Channel, which is sometimes also called a migratory fish habitat.
If these two articles don't solve the mystery for you, then please see the following site: www.napaflooddistrict.org/Fcmaintenance.asp This organization's charter is to clear and maintain all 13 miles of waterways within its purview, to minimize seasonal rainfall impacts. Until this group's charter is revoked, or its funding source cut off, your desire to recruit more woody debris into the waterways, by regulating upstream landowners, will not succeed.
I suggest you begin your campaign to increase woody debris loads with these organizations, by halting their channel clearing efforts. If that does not produce sufficient debris loads to suit you, then please be in touch with the Napa Valley Land Stewards Alliance, as well as Phill Blake with the Napa County RCD. Both organizations share the view that partnering Urban and Rural property owners along common watercourses, in a non-regulatory framework, will achieve environmental gains through coordinated stream management strategies. Such gains are suppressed by coercive regulation which pits Rural parcel-holders against the interests of Urban reality just downstream.
Sincerely,
Edward Schulz
CC: NVLSA, RCD, Friends of the Napa River, County Supervisors, via email
back