< Back to Meeting Archives

Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership
Steering Committee Meeting
November 16, 2005

Attendees:

Debby Hyde, Paula Del Giudice, Bernie Hargrave, John Dohrmann, Jacques White, Curtis Tanner, Fred Goetz, Michael Rylko, Gary Voerman, Jennifer Steger, Jonathan Freedman, Dick Ecker, Tim Smith

The minutes from previous meeting were approved.

Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project Federal Project Manager’s Report - Bernie

Bernie reported that the House and Senate passed through the energy/water bills to the President who has ten days to sign. Good news is there will not be savings and slippages to the $750,000, but a two percent cut across.

Puget Sound and Adjacent Waters Restoration Program has been awarded 1.5 million. Two projects have been successfully built with PSAWR money: Skokomish Dike Removal and the Lake Washington Gravel.

Curtis suggested a “Ready to Go” checklist of projects for PSAWR.

Tim – There are sophisticated watershed plans already developed which should provide substantial project planning. PSAWR should acknowledge those efforts, which should inform decisions of PSAWR.

Debby – Would like to see PSAWR criteria in writing and have review of proposals for projects based on the criteria.

Action: Bernie needs the PSAWR Program Team who helped last Jan. with criteria to consult on possible FY07 projects.

Under the Continuing Resolution, the Corps has awarded Jim Brennen and Jim Johannessen funding to prepare VEC White papers; Washington SeaGrant funds for the next three technical document publications, and CommEnSpace for the WRIA 9 project.

Local Project Manager’s Report - Curtis

Curtis provided his report in writing as a read-ahead. In summary, Curtis reported on the following:

* Migration of Potential Nearshore Restoration Project Database to PRISM
Curtis and Melissa Paulson, WDFW, have been attending weekly design team meetings to establish “business rules,” developing schema of goals and objectives, merging nearshore ecosystem process list with Management Measure list. An example of this approach: Goal: Restore nearshore ecosystem processes; Objective: Restore beach
sediment supply processes; Management Measure: Bulkhead removal.

There is still work to prepare the Access database for migration to PRISM, i.e., data verification by contributing entity, project location coordinates, and other “housecleaning” (unique project names and project contact information)

The contract with IAC extended will be extended for six months (Nov. 30, 2005 to May 30, 2006) with a target date for migration: mid-February 2006.

* Changes to Program Website www.pugetsoundnearshore.org
By moving website from Puget Sound Action Team server to WDFW server this will allows Deb Rick easier access to website content for updates/re-freshening at no extra cost. With additional development support available (at cost), the Partnership may enhance the website with a secure internal program work site, a calendar of Program meetings and events, meeting minute archive, document exchange, improved content “freshness”, a Nearshore photo gallery pictures the Partnership has right to.

Other Steering Committee of Implementation Team needs:

  • Hosting historic conditions?
  • Faces. Purchase a digital camera
  • “Hit” Counter
  • Current Products on the front page
  • Progress bar
  • Fact Sheet accessible
  • Utilize the one-pager just developed
  • Refresh links (URL)
  • Repository for documents

* Local Project Team
Randy Carman, WDFW Habitat Program, will be joining the Implementation Team. Randy will specifically be advancing the BNRR assessment and restoration approach. He will also be coordinating with the Watershed Stewards.

Nearshore Science Team Co – Lead Report – Fred

The attached notes were provided at Steering Committee meeting and not as a read-ahead.

Nearshore Implementation Team Co – Lead Report – Beth Coffey

Absent. Report not provided.

Action: Repeat action request for the Implementation Team to review proposed project list from September’s meeting and assess readiness to proceed.

NOTE: Science Team and Implementation Team representation needs more
commitment to attendance and detail. The Partnership built up the capacity of
the teams with the expectation that we would receive information on status,
progress, etc.

Presentation and Discussion of Change Analysis Methodology – Curtis and Fred

Curtis’s presentation will be attached.

Action: Deb R. to send it out .PDF version to John Dohrmann (cc: rest of the SC). John will compile feedback from the SC to the NST in memo format.

Distribution, Presentation and Discussion on VEC White Papers – Fred

The Steering Committee had a discussion about the VEC White paper that was submitted (Megan Dethier’s Shellfish paper). The SC members liked the use of citations within the text of the white paper and suggested use on all white papers.

The question arose again about the “Executive Summary” as the white papers can be rather lengthy. SC identified the need for a version of the VEC White papers for non-technical audience use.

The VECs are the tangibles that the public will recognize as value to a healthy Puget Sound. Tom Leschine and the Steering Committee should address this valuation for the Executive Committee’s concern in both a major report on social science issues surrounding the VECs and as individual stand-alones for each of the nine VEC White Papers. Tom’s piece would preface each White Paper stressing the “value to humans” and why humans “value” the component as an indicator of a healthy Puget Sound.

Coastal America Program http://www.coastalamerica.gov/text/moreinfo.html

Michael Rylko brought Garrett (Gary) Voerman, and Jonathan Freedman, from the US EPA to talk to the Steering Committee about the Coastal America program.

Coastal America is a unique partnership of federal agencies, state and local governments, and private organizations. The partners work together to protect, preserve, and restore our nation's coasts.

The (Coastal America) partnership can promptly identify and implement local projects to protect the coast. Examples of Coastal America projects are:

  • Dam removal to allow upstream migration and spawning of anadromous fish
  • Wetland restoration using dredged material to return destroyed habitats to their natural conditions
  • Whale-sighting alert system to protect endangered right whales from ship strikes
  • Erosion controls in river banks and dune areas
  • Non-point source pollution control programs on farms to reduce nutrient runoff

A key purpose of Coastal America is to identify and remove unnecessary policy or regulatory barriers to coastal restoration and protection. Coastal America contributes to local projects, i.e., funding, equipment, resources. Regional teams identify issues of concern as they implement projects locally; if necessary, these issues are brought to a national senior-level Coastal America team for review. They are able to find corporate sponsors to recommend funding through Coastal America. This team makes recommendations to the Coastal America Principals Group, comprised of sub cabinet-level representatives from each federal partner agency to procure funding the Grant Programs. With this organizational structure, large and small projects are accomplished in a timely and cost-effective manner.

  • The nature of the Coastal America partnership is collaboration.
  • The aim is to quickly and efficiently protect and restore the coastal environment.

(Coastal America) Federal Partners:

Department of Agriculture/ Department of the Air Force
Department of the Army
Department of Commerce (NOAA Fisheries)
Department of Defense
Department of Energy/ Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
Department of the Navy
Department of State
Department of Transportation
Environmental Protection Agency
Executive Office of the President

Gary and Michael - The Coastal America partnership, of which CEQ is lead, has agreed to a Regional Principles (heads of Federal agencies) meeting on January 27, 2006, to re-invigorate the Northwest Region. The purpose of the meeting is to inform the Regional Principles of what the (Coastal America) Partnership is and what it can do, how they can use their authority, and identify projects that could be Coastal America projects.

Gary envisioned using the Coastal America partnership as an avenue to align the federal agencies with the Puget Sound Initiative as well as an opportunity for collaboration with the Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership. Nearshore Partnership projects could be identified as placeholders for this event and earmarked for implementation under this partnership.

The compelling importance of this approach is that it aligns federal, local, and national governments into collaborative funding approach. This funding approach translates to the federal level and congressional delegation to reconnect pieces back here (Washington State). Proves that we are not competing for the same dollars but cooperatively and collaboratively seeking funding for Nearshore Projects. Coastal America’s federal partners flavor budget initiatives, and the Nearshore Partnership could benefit as PSNERP represents the model of intergovernmental collaboration that Coastal America wants and likes.

Action: Develop a one-page partner paper with a list of projects, ready to go, with appropriate level of funding identified. PMT assignment.

Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership

FY07 Requests – Tim

Corps PSNERP GI $1,900,000
Corps PSAW $4,000,000
USGS CHIPS $2,000,000
EPA NEP/PS $2,000,000
NOAA Science/Restoration ?
USFWS HWS $1,200,000
Energy PNWL ?

Action: Hold a work session in December to identify federal funds for completion of Stage 2:

1) Money needed for GI;

2) Other science wish list;

3) Restoration Projects NOW! SC members: Jen Steger, Curtis, Tim, Bernie, Debby. Add Terry Wright and Jacques White.

PSI/PS Science Consortium – Tim

Handout attached.

The Governor likely will make an announcement between Thanksgiving and Christmas. Her initiative currently envisions:

1) Appointing a regional leaders group: Bill Ruckelshaus, Representative Norm Dicks, and Billy Frank to a) solicit views on structure of the PS Initiative; b) confer with other restoration experts in the country; c) develop collaborative science; d) identify multiple funding sources; e) identify the role of the Action Team and staff.

2) Early Action Projects – WDFW has submitted a supplemental budget request to implement an account to use to match PSAWR to implement projects.

Puget Sound Conservation Trust – Tim

Handout attached.

WDFW submitted a grant proposal to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation with Dennis Canty (Evergreen Funding Consultants), Shared Strategy, King County, and others, to develop a funding mechanism, Puget Sound Conservation Trust, where funds from multiple sources can be mixed and matched to implement large scale restoration projects.

Other Business

Date for Executive Committee – February 9, 2006, Sawyer Hall, Lacey, Washington
Holiday get-together – Falls Terrace Restaurant – 4:00 – 6:00 p.m. December 21

December Agenda Items

  • Research Plan
  • FY06 Budget Work Pla
  • Executive Committee draft agenda
  • Nearshore Chapter
  • Select Forum Follow-up
  • SRFB Project Review
  • Deschutes Feasibility Study
  • Nearshore Habitat Restoration Account
  • Habitat Work Schedule