ACTION ITEM:Agenda approved.
ACTION ITEM:Minutes of last meeting reviewed, approved with corrections.
ACTION ITEM:the project element of the Strategic Plan Draft was edited to include objectives for the Projects Workgroup. These edits have been incorporated into the revised Strategic Plan Draft, to be reviewed by the Planning Committee. In the 1 year time-frame, quantitative objectives are determined by the NFWF project deliverables. These include 5-10 miles of roadside and some number of acres treated. It is not necessary that these be from projects inititiated by the MCWMA. In the 2-3 year timeframe, one additional demonstration project is contemplated. This would most likely arise from the Noyo/Big River Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan project, but Prop. 50 implementation funds would need to be obtained, as the Planning Grant does not contain funds for any on-the-ground work. In the 3-5 year timeframe, the objectives are to expand on the pilot projects and transfer the experience from these demonstration sites to other high priority sites within the MCWMA.
Discussion Item: Bob Melendez (Caltrans) brought examples of the roadside vegetation control plans, including the project by Chuck Williams of CNPS-Sanhedrin to control broom along Highway 101 from Cloverdale to Willits. Peter Warner is considering a similar project for Highway 1 from Gualala to Westport. Adopt-A-Highway forms include an application for encroachment permit, waiver of indemnity and safety requirements. Blank forms are available from the Caltrans website.
Task 1 (March 9)- Lynn will research these forms and send links to Tara.
Discussion Item: Bob Melendez (Caltrans) discussed the use of CCC crews for roadside vegetation removal. The fee is $13/hr, which can become quite costly. Alternatives are the Parlin Forks Crew, where it is only necessary to pay for gas. Lynn commented that their time was in high demand.
Discussion Item: Bob Melendez (Caltrans) described an informational video on best management practices for reducting weed dispersal. One item that will be taken under consideration is washing vehicles to prevent seed dispersal in mud or soil. There are some difficulties in carrying this out at sites with no water. The use of car wash facilities, where the water is filtered so that seeds are not further dispersed, was recommended. However, the vehicle would still have to drive from the site to the car wash. This would be considered an improvement to not washing at all.
Discussion Item: Bob Melendez (Caltrans) mentioned that there are other Adopt-A-Highway locations under development along Highway 1.
Discussion Item: Tara Athan (MCWMA Coordinator) described the Mendocino County Adopt-A-Road program. An application packet has been obtained from the Mendocino County Transportation Department, and copies were distributed. The form does not specifically mention weed control, however the Transportation Department is agreeable to adoptions with weed control as their sole purpose. The Adopt-A-Road guidelines requests notification of the Department before a work event. However, prior notification is not necessary for spontaneous work, such as spotting a weed while driving and stopping to pull it out. The Department should be notified afterwards for record-keeping purposes. This policy also holds for Caltrans Adopt-A-Highway. However, an encroachment permit is still required. Advertised volunteer events required prior notification to ensure that Departmental work crews will not be in the same location at the same time.
Discussion Item: Appropriate methods of disposal for the debris from weed removal along roadsides was discussed. Minimization of dispersal of propagules (seeds or viable fragments) of invasive weeds is a high priority. Ray Harrie (Mendo. Co. Ag.) stated that A-rated weeds should be contained in a plastic bag and then incinerated. If debris is bagged and picked up by Departmental crews, then the pickup crew needs to be knowledgable about disposal. In some cases, weed debris may be left onsite to decompose naturally, if resprouting is not a concern. The best method of disposal will be site-dependent. The need for a service to advise new adoption projects about proper disposal procedure was discussed. Other concerns include the use of removal methods that do not increase dispersal or invasibility, and damage to non-target organisms, especially sensitive species through site disturbance. Ray agreed to be available to make a site visit to new adoption sites in order to make recommendations for removal and disposal. MCWMA partners that are near new adoption sites wish to be notified. Caltrans has offered their safety materials for use by County Adopt-A-Road groups. Bob suggests creating a form for collecting data on amount of debris.
Task 2. (due April 6) Tara will synthesize a procedure, from today's discussion, for advising new Mendocino County Adopt-A-Road weed removal groups about minimizing dispersal, appropriate disposal of debris and minimizing effects to non-target organisms, including sensitive species.
Discussion Item: Ray Harrie (Mendocino County Ag.) stated the results of investigation into the use do Agricultural Burn Permits for the disposal of invasive weed debris. This is an acceptable use of these permits, and this can create more flexibility in the use of burning for our projects. Fire and Air Quality Departments would work with the permittee to set up the burn to minimize risks. It was determined that this information would not be posted on the website, as those parties who would be in a position to use this approach would already know about it through MCWMA meetings.
Discussion Item: Ray Harrie (Mendocino County Ag.) reports that the biddy-biddy site that was treated last year has been monitored and retreated by Robin Breckenridge of CDFA. It is not surprising that retreatment was necessary, due to the deep root system of this species, often 20 ft deep.
ACTION ITEM: approach for selection of demonstration project. Tara Athan (MCWMA Coordinator) presented a procedure for selecting the site for the demonstration project to be conducted for the NFWF project. The procedure, summarized below in Task 3, was approved by the Projects Workgroup for recommendation to the Planning Committee.
Task 3- Preparation of a checklist for review of proposed MCWMA demonstration project sites.ACTION ITEM: The person presenting the brief report for the Projects Workgroup at the next Planning Committee meeting on 04/27/06 is Walt.
ACTION ITEM: Next Projects Workgroup Meeting set for Thursday April 6, 2006, 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm, College of the Redwoods Agenda items for the next meeting include