IRWMP Meeting, Mariposa – March 26, 2009The goal of this meeting is to begin to build a successful regional group in order to apply for the DWR regional acceptance process.  Everyone received the guidelines prior to the meeting and was asked to read these prior to the meeting and to bring their concerns/input to the table.According to the state of CA water code, all of Madera, Mariposa and Merced counties are considered disadvantaged.  This is the region that is ensured environmental stewardship – the main purpose of developing a regional IRWMP is to develop a region’s capacity through partnership and communication and to manage water with long-ranged (50 years plus) consideration.  DWR will be able to supply funding from prop 84 to accomplish these goals.A roundtable discussion took place, elucidating what was covered in the reading material provided prior to the meeting:Ø      An undesirable characteristic is a region that is solely considered based upon a political boundaryØ      Deadline for application to the RAP process is April 29, Ø      Multiple characteristic is same people grappling over the same watershed (?)Ø      IRWMP region is inclusive and should demonstrate a watershed  approach to water management issuesØ      Do not encourage a region that excludes counties or stakeholdersØ      The state of CA changes their mind every few yearsØ      A region that is project driven only is an undesirable characteristicØ      Summary point is the idea to look at the region as a whole and see what is best for the watersheds, looking at the big picture instead of political reasonsØ      Consideration of location of water resources and infrastructure.  Ø      Collaboration is the new way to look at this project. This is an annual process.  We are motivated to meet the April 29 deadline because we’ll have to wait a year to apply again.  You can lose an area by being inactive, or by adding signatories who were not on the original RAP.  Question:  Once the RAP process is done, what do we have to do to maintain it?Question:  What is expected for the establishment of a regional water group and management structure?Question: Regarding requirement for the three agencies – would like more explanation of what is required.The broader area will be more successfulQuestion:  How did the state come in and create this idea?Response:  The state says each region must have stakeholders which speak for each area.  The state passed the act at the end of August 2008 and put out the guidelines in January 2009 for public review. In March 2009, they  adopted the requirements.ôôôôôôôôôôôôôôôôôôôôôôôôWe just summarized together the RAP requirements.  The process included everyone as we collectively and collaborately briefed each other.  While Brenda is acting as the facilitator, this is a stakeholder group driven process.The RAP guidelines are being given because previous meetings seemed like a book club where people haven’t read the book.  Discussions surrounded several ideas and it became apparent that the decision makers hadn’t read the 12 page document describing the RAP application process.  Brenda feels that a different approach would have been discussed if all involved had a complete understanding of the document and its requirements.Introductions (listening exercise):Brenda Ostrom                      Consultant RSCP - Hired to put together this application. She loves this landscape – water, soil, people – all are resources that need to be improvedJoe Meyer                 Landscape ecology – National Resources for the Park – concerned about water quality, fire, water issues in MariposaWendy Vittands                     Consultant working with Brenda - Member of Mariposa community and has both professional and personal interests.  She sees Mariposa as being behind in the process.  This water plan needs to keep up with the rest of the stateLaura Phillips                       Public Outreach Coordinator -            Interested in seeing how many people she can get interested in this process.Cindy Lashbrook                 Merced            -Would like to see the upper and lower watersheds work together.  Here to see what’s going on.  One of her County  Supervisors has a different view than the people in yesterday’s meeting. Marilyn Lidyoff                     Mariposa County Dev Office -            apply for grants – would like more grant funding to ensure that we have better water quality. Likes responsible ideas which address overall quality.Leona Montalvo                 Madera - Working with Brenda on the RAP - Redoing it for prop 84 requirements. The Madera IRWMP was based upon the county boundaries  and now Madera is trying to include the watershed lines to make the region larger.Glenn Franklin                     Chair stewardship committee, state water resource – Concerns are the economic health of Mariposa county, fuel load as it relates to water quality and working landscapes that enhance wildlife and protect the watershed.Kevin Cann               Mariposa County Board of Supervisors, chairman of Mariposa water agency – Concerned with the economic health of Mariposa county.            Watersheds are not respectful of political counties.  What we do has a dramatic impact of what happens down steam.  Agrees with the idea of regions working together since there is an overlap which needs to be addressed.  Mariposa got into the process late, but that situation seems to be working since additional effort was not put out prior to the rule changes – and they are not attached to results of previous discussions.  Merced feels that the rug was pulled out from under their feet.  All the respective agencies need to maintain their identity.Elexis Mayer             Yosemite National Park - Works in Yosemite doing outreach – very thrilled that this process is transcending political boundaries.  Wants to maintain consistently in communication and be a liaison for the Yosemite part of the process to communicate with stake holders.  She is interested in connecting residents in the central valley and maintaining water quantity and quality – believes it’s important to be good stewards.  Lyle Turpin             Mariposa County Board of Supervisor, chair person of BOS, District 2, northern part - We have three different communities that are lacking and would like to see how we can find dollars to address that.  Infrastructure is aging – must address the future needs of the community.  We have challenges with the irrigation district such as Lake McCure, as long as it’s available.  In Coulterville, the automatic system did not function automatically and the lake got down to 4 inches.  They had to work hard to fix the problems.  Public works, additional water source and storage is needed there. (fire, etc). They had to use water trucks to address the Telegraph fire because of limited resources. Dawn Afman          Natural Resources Conservation Service, US dept of agriculture, Farmville funding - Water quality, quantity, soil – farming is her passion.  Loves the soil, food, but has had to buy water since she moved here.  In the short time she’s been here, water supply has become more of a concern.  60% of her neighborhood has to buy water and no one talks about it.  The water report shows that salt water is being used on plants, etc and is coming out of the ground.  We need to think about what we’re doing.  Where is the water going to come from?Jan Hamilton – perennial chair of Mariposa Firesafe Council.  Shocked to hear what Dawn had to say.  She still has good quality water.  Her main focus is the education of the public regarding the dangers of wildfire.  People love to move here and she enjoys teaching how to create defensible space. Write grants in collaboration with fire agencies - they say what they would like to see done in various areas of the counties and what the public would like done, and her group worked to write grants that benefit both.Don Fox – chair of Midpines Planning Committee, Upper Merced River Watershed Council.  Role is to start planning process for Midpines area.  Because of proximity to Telegraph fire – they experienced a wake-up call.  It’s important to look at hazardous fuel production.  He lives in an area where there are many large parcels of land which are unoccupied and the landowners do not take responsibility to maintain the land, hazardous fuels build up, and the roads are without permits. Water quality runs in the red after major storm events.  Wants to incorporate.Jeannie Habben – Watershed Coordinator for Chowchilla, Redtop,.  She is the sole survivor of the Madera process from the inception of the original plan. When Mariposa began work, she decided to participate because the watersheds (from all three counties) affect her.  The assessments will continue at some point. Worked with the resource conservation district for several districts – Fresno, Mariposa and Madera.  Main concern is her interest In the process because she’s involved in all the areas, groups and would like to bring people together, seeing everyone’s interests addressed equally.  Some people feel their feet are being stepped on and they are being forgotten. Bringing everyone together can increase the communication between all the regions involved – we can apply for implementation grants as opposed to project grants.Doug Welch – general manager of Chowchilla water district – manages Madera water and power authority. 90% of the projects of Chowchilla are not paid for by grants.  He feels that relying on grants is not enough to solve the problem.  Prop 218 raised assessments by 15%.  He has worked collaboratively with over 100 stakeholders on the Madera county management plan, which covers a major portion of the watersheds in Chowchilla, Mariposa and Madera, does not follow political boundaries. In the process, has joined powers of authority in Chowchilla districts – not an easy process.  There is distrust and concern because people have not worked together in the past.  He has seen people from Fresno, Merced, Madera and Mariposa and has seen people trying to see what they have in common and how they can work together – not an easy process. Concerned that the regions are getting bigger and bigger, but feels that it’s too difficult to address a regional water management group. They work with 80% of the service water.Greg Farley – county engineer for Madera county for less than 2 years.  First meeting was jumping in the IRWMP.  Went through the IRWMP process. Has spent most of his life in Madera county. This process offered two big challenges – flood control & IRWMP.  State has changed the rules and we’re getting another shot.  It’s beneficial for us because we focused on domestic needs instead of flood control.  Our outreach included Mariposa and Merced counties – discussion of whether we share the Chowchilla river. We need to really work on water sheds.  75 miles of levees affected by Chowchilla river. Most of his career was spent in Fresno county and they did address the levee issues and put water to beneficial use.  There is a big opportunity for implementation grants. We need to move forward and take care of flood control and emphasize continued water quality.John Slater – senior county engineer of Madera- assists Greg.  Has more experience with urban development and is new to watershed development.  We have problems in little districts throughout the county especially with new developments who bypass the process and cut corners.Andy Stone – district manager for US forest service.  Wants to know what specifically is meant for people by quality and quantity of water.  Has no funding to fix the several areas needed for watershed improvement for the forest.  The water is taken by the fire county to address the greater amount of fires due to global warming.  Wants to fix the meadows, stabilize stead banks.  Where the water starts needs to be functioning appropriately.  Mark Rowney – Mariposa Public Utilities District - water treatment plant provides water to Mariposa and plans to expand to TPA development and money will be the driving issues.  He has interests in management planning – Stockton creek rights, Merced River pump station.  Uses Merced’s water there but they have no rights there.  There is an agreement. Don’t ever believe that Mariposa sold rights to TPA district.  All projects, permits and applications contain the question, “Is your project consistent with existing water management plans?”  The permit needs to be analyzed to see if it is consistent. Concerned with boundariesSarah Windsor – lives on Mariposa creek – concerned with water quality.  Her passion – water is gold in gold county.  Would like to see community move into more consideration of how water issues are critical to our community as well as downstream.  Abandoned gold mines affect the water quality – the toxin affect the watersheds, can’t pretend they are not there.  Need to be addressed in our plan.Mandy Vance – Sierra Nevada Conservancy.  Homeowner in Midpines, excited about this activity, used to be an environmental teacher.  Seek first to understand and then to be understood.  Glad to see so many people representing so many different areas.  Here to look at this area and plan and allow look at the Sierra as a whole.  We rely on each other and are sitting on a gold mine in terms of water resources.  Want to make sure everyone is comfortable working together on these plans so that everyone benefits.Steve Haze – Sierra Resource Conservation District, project manager of stewardship conservation, Sierra Nevada Conservancy, water planning, etc. One of the challenges was the outreach – was not aware that Madera county looked at this as Madera County and the upper San Joaquin river, not realizing they have a liaison representative to write the planning proposal.  What we hope is that the Sierra Nevada Conservancy has given significant grants for outreach already.  The map of Mariposa county is an interesting map.  Found out that Mariposa county was looking at the San Joaquin River to be part of their area.  Would like to resolve that and keep everyone whole – the agreements that have been made need to be changed/adjusted to match the needs of situation. We have a role with southern sierra water conservation process.  Wants to preserve the work which has been done as we move forward and shift boundaries.  Need to look at where the water flows – historical and legal.Terry McLaughlin – education director for Upper Merced River Watershed Council.  Loves the Merced river.  She has walked and explored every inch of the river and wants to build this community.  Looking around the table she feels that it’s happening already.  Everyone would benefit from the knowledge of where the water comes from, where it goes and how it is affected by our actions.  Water is a shared resource – new paradigm which needs to come to our awareness.Len McKenzie – represents Mariposa County RCD and is a board member on several local organizations. Having interest that goes back to when she prepared watch grant application and the grant funds got frozen.  Approached county for cash match to go through grant  phase.  Has a strong interest in the process and asks that we be faithful to the process to meet all the requirements, consensus, ensuring that it remains stake holder driven. It’s crucial to our success to collaborate. The Sierra local land trust serves several counties, has an interest in land use planning and resource conservation.  Worked in Yosemite and is interested in everything that an integrated water plan will bring to light. Such as clean water, use, supply and quality and conservation of natural resources - the RCD supports all the nature resources. We are here because the county board of supervisors approved the cash match so that we can move forward.Kris Randal – YosemiteArea Audobon.  Desires to maintain a healthy ecosystem that will support all that is here. Fire safely and wildlife enhancement – important to have both.  Plants need to be cleared and managed properly to have diversity.  Native plants are water conserving – teach people how to utilize these plants to continue diversity and utilize resources to conserve water.Rita Kidd – has lived in Cathays Valley for 30 years – drilled 11 wells, 6 in the first year.  This issue Impacts the experience of living in the foothills when there is no water when you turn on the tap.  In 2005, people came to the board of supervisors to say that agriculture is not the best use of water for  her area.  They wanted to create more lots and parcels.  They asked for water studies to see if development could be sustained and were not given the moratorium.  In 2006 they joined with Mariposians for environmental and responsible government.  Brought people in to expose flaws in water studys. We had the Sierra Nevada Alliance conference in 2007 to review IRWMP planning areas and funding and realized that we were approaching the possibility of becoming a donut hole.  Pleased to meet with Sierra Nevada Conservancy in 2008 on this issue to establish an IRWMP with Mariposa which resulted in the alliance last year. It’s a hard sell in the mountain areas – we spend most of our time fighting over water instead of managing it.  “IRWMP is the method of funding water projects into the future for the next 15-20 years”  We need to be one of the players or we will be left out in the cold.  During the MAGPI meeting, an appeal was made that this become a larger planning area.  The three counties considered do not have the plans or ability to make this larger broader region work - we need to seek funding that will serve the entire region into the future.Tony Kidd – has drilled several wells, and many came up dry.  Concern led him to become involved.  He brought in speakers to educate at local meetings.  i.e. the fractured rock issue – Ken Smidge was a great addition to education. Found out that this is the wave of the future.  We’ve done a lot to try to get water in the area.  Water needs to be understood – where it’s located, how much is there, quality.  Use as a precursor when considering land use issues.John Flaherty – chair in fresno – lives in Midpines.  Love to swim in bear creek.  Here to integrate the Sierra Club into what is being done here.Vong Her – from Sanger – works for Picking Rancheria.  Works with surface water in an underground lab, dealing with water issues.Charise Reeves. Financial administrator and treasurer at ???.  Learning about water issues and how varied they are.  Wants to make sure that her area is represented because it gets forgotten and wants to participate.  Presented IRWPM to the board and received a varied and interesting response.  They are split.  She is pushing them to allow her to participate and also in Tuolumne/Stanislaus.  Facing troubled financial times, wants to help.Bart Brown – Chairman of MERGE (Mariposans for Responsible Government).  Trying to obtain water information to dispel the urban myth that you cannot use well logs to base information on the baseline to see what our future holds.Brenda:  We have assembled stakeholders, discussed diverse issues, and demonstrated that we understand each other.  We need to be mindful of who is not here – those who couldn’t make it.  We need to reach out.  This is a collaborative and cooperative process.  Everyone here is responsible to reach out and provide information to those in need.  We need to be advocates for the public as well and be mindful of how we can include them in the process.  Do not leave out smaller communities.  Specifically mentioned the need to concern younger stakeholders.  Came from AZ and watched the water disappear and couldn’t do anything about it because she was a child in school.  We need to keep the children and future generations in mind with all of these decisions.RAP ScheduleAlso located on the website at www.irwmp.orgThe little red hen story …RAP Schedule – here are the thoughts behind this schedule.  We need your assistance.  Items need to be reviewed.  Brenda will prepare a rough draft application by April 1.  DWR training workshop in Sacramento on April 2 and she can bring specific issues to address with the representatives.Need to have a draft of the “initial government structure”. As of now, we can only describe our group, our interests and our intent to be a group/region and create a plan together.  Three paragraphs are included on page 9 of the agenda for reference.We need to assemble a regional water management group for the RAP – application cannot be submitted without a group of people with signatory authority.  Brenda needs assistance in getting this done. We need to reach out and bring all the players together.  While Brenda has been doing the legwork, she understands that many of these groups meet infrequently.Inter Regional Coordination – there are ongoing talks between the various regions.  Need to address ‘nesting’ and overlaps.Rough draft as stake holder driven process needs to have public review and comments.  The public needs time to review the application, agree or offer changes and suggestions to strengthen the application.Signatures for the region will be obtained while the drafting of the RAP application / proposal is in process so they can quickly review. Everyone in the room is needed to make this happen.Brenda will allow comments through the 16^th of April and then will complete the final draft by April 20^th.  That cut-off date is the date by which you will need to decide if your agency or organization will participate in this process – the signatures of those who have joined the group will be needed.Brenda is protective of her job as a grant writer.  She’ll use the words of those here to be persuasive and tell a great story of what we need.  The outline is simply the rough draft.  The final RAP will be available online for all those who participate by the 21st.  The intent is to overnight delivery to Sacramento so that it’s received a day early.Question:  How many signatures do you need?Response:  No specific amount but we need at least three water agencies  two which have signatory authority. In the RAP, she will have to say who is participating, and also provide information regarding the planned outreach to those who have not joined and steps as to how to include people.Question:  What are the expectations of participation?Response: Signatories agree to participate in planning and work together.Question: Are funds required from the signatory agencies and stakeholders?Response:  No – just participation.  If you’re given authority, you can be the authorized person/representative.  All will be done over the internet.  Need a matrix, a chart and contact info. There can be groups within groups to create the plan which include different entities etc.  The internet site allows the flow of information to be transparent and available.Question:  As we get signature changes, will that affect the planning process?Response:  It’s going to take an effort to get the plan together.  As long as your organization is involved and we have a list of contacts, we’ll update the information as needed.MAP – Mariposa County, Madera County, Merced County,  part of Fresno County, part of Stanislaus CountyLarger Region – between Tuolumne and Mariposa, there is a ridgeline.  It’s a clear boundary between the two watersheds.  The east boundary is the Sierra Crest.  There are 3 significant rationale:·         Within a hydrological region (San Joaquin river) set by the southeast corner·         State of water quality board 5S (south region)·         Two areas of interest spelled out – mountain counties San Joaquin and Sacramento areaRelationships with the valley floor – the water that flows through the mountain counties flows into the San Joaquin River.Water Portal – state divides the various regions – colors on the map are meaningful in that they represent the different watersheds.Madera Basin – Chowchilla Basin – San Joaquin River – area west of river, San Luis delta mendoto – recognized by DWR as being in massive crises with salinization problems. Region got 25 million dollars and will get 40 million more to address the issues.  The problems on different sides of the river are different. The state would like to see everyone get along and see a map with no gaps in water management.Proposal – include the larger region.  Madera and Mariposa are easier to separate than the watershed shared by Mariposa and Merced – difficult to draw a logical line.Question:  what was the process that generated this map?Response: there was an initial meeting which started with an idea to be divisionary.  The initial meetings included various counties and stakeholders Question:  Where were the meetings in Fresno?Response:  Fresno County was not included in those original meetings – this is a proposal and we do need to reach out as we move forward.  Right now we are trying to establish a region so we know who to reach out to.Question:  Southern Sierra integrated regional water planning group has also done the outreach and shows the San Joaquin on their map as well. Why is the map named Madera Water Plan if we’re including various counties?  Why haven’t you gotten together with your counterparts to discuss their thoughts on the dividing lines?Response:  The name Madera in the title is simply because Madera County created this map for a planning meeting… should not be included on the map.  Those who are handling the other areas have been unavailable for discussion or meetings, though we’ve attempted to make contact.Question:  Fresno – does that touch our proposed boundary for our area?Response:  It touches the upper San Joaquin.  Upper Tulare and San Joaquin are connected.  Tulare is historically connected.  Fresno Slough is more complex hydrologically.  Concerned about the water users authority – Madera canal – 80% of the water goes all the way down to Kern County.  The infrastructure makes this very complex.Question: Water Rights / Water Use – does that relate?Response:  There are hydrological relationships between the two regions.  During certain conditions, the Kings River overflows.  80% of the water is impounded and heads south.Comment:  There is a tributary in lower water basin which parallels the Merced County jurisdiction.  Question: What happens east of the crest?Response:  It is handled by the Inyo Mono group – they worked with a professional DWR facilitator who helped with their governing structure and they have created a successful process. The Devils Post Pile is a good example of a shared area.  It is part of the San Juaquin watershed, but it  is unique because it is only accessible from the east side, especially during the snow season. The two groups have been coordinating and speaking to one another.  Devil’s PostPile is the middle fork of San Joaquin River.  Thousand Island Lake is the head waters for Middle Fork, Martha Lake is the head waters for South Fork, ??? for North Fork.Land masses can be included or excluded in RAPs, but people cannot be excluded.Madera Situation- they have an adopted IRWMP within this region and do not want it jeopardized. We need to be mindful and create ties to their process – they need to be in an accepted region in order to get the grant money.  This is a nesting issue – we need to accommodate that in our grant applicationQuestion: Regarding Congress and CA partnership for San Joaquin – there is an excellent resource for these initiatives.  South Sierra, Tulare basin, the valley floor – Sarge Reed is working with this areas already under the partnership but it still needs to be signed by the president for 1 million to facilitate this issue.  During the water forum in Madera Ranchos – Sarge was a speaker and discussed that currently the portion of the San Joaquin river in Madera county is an MOU that this area shares.  It’s also part of our adopted watershed and could be shared by the whole group.The expanded Madera IRWMP proposal covers the entire area including the Chowchilla watershed which goes into Mariposa county.  This began discussions of possible ways to participate and combine.  Farm Bureau interests would like to see it part of a larger area.Question:  Is the MOU process acceptable to DWR?Response:  We’re meeting on April 6 to discuss options, nesting. (The Sierra Nevada Conservancy set up a meeting between key stakeholders on April 6 to discuss some of the boundary issues in order to bring resolution suggestions to the various stakeholder groups.  Representatives from Merced, Mariposa, and Madera Counties will participate in this facilitated meeting.)One idea is to represent the public in the area (because MOU’s take a long time to establish).  Split the division of responsibility in the covered area – fire & water.  How is the public supposed to understand how to participate in what group?We need to determine how to put forth a clear public process because the information can get complicated with the minor watersheds.  The two major rivers – Merced and San Joaquin hold Fresno and Chowchilla between them.  We will invite stake holders to participate.Counties were not created hydrologically.  Tuolumne County has been connected by the National Park Service (Yosemite National Park is home to the Merced and the Tuolume River watersheds).  Tuolumne County came to share information a month ago.  Question:  Are the counties north of Mariposa such as Stanislaus and Tuolumne part of an IRWMP?  Response: The political and watershed boundary between Tuolumne and Mariposa County are one and the same because the county line follows the ridge line dividing the watersheds.Question:  So, this group would be a portion of a larger region?  And what will that larger region incorporate?Response:  As we worked through these meetings, the dividing lines where challenging to draw and we weren’t comfortable with the smaller regions and how they should be split. Information was sent via email with the minutes from the last meeting.  Responses showed no desire to split.  Everyone who responded seemed to feel the larger region would be stronger.Question: Is it a possibility to combine with the South Sierra IRWMP?Response: That’s part of the discussion today. We can propose a region and plan and may want to discuss a larger area.  Good rationale is the connectivity between communities – Mariposa, Merced and Madera are only an hour apart and not divided by winter weather.  We are looking for areas that can provide interaction without a great degree of difficulty.Question: Talking about the separation or merging or boundaries – principal consideration is the source and users of the water.  I didn’t realize that 80% of the water was going south.  This may be a critical differentiation when planning water projects and working for quantity.  The usage is so diverse that anyone looking at the Merced River, seeing it almost empty and driving toward LA seeing Pyramid Lake almost totally full (in contrast) cannot help but notice the difference.  Who are the beneficial users, what is the source, what is the purpose? The protection of water for the production of food and rural communities is something we need to be thoughtful of.If we make this too large, people will be excluded because the travel to attend meetings will be too great and not everyone will be able to participate and represent their community.There is a model for this – Yosemite/Sequoia Resource Conservation and Development.  You’re right about the logistical issues.  There is logic which extends beyond counties.  That model has been working for 8 years.  That may give value to looking at the South Sierra IRWMP.Another thing to consider regarding the Southern Sierra:  The funding allocation is by region. 57 million to San Joaquin, and if incorporated, we can apply competitively for state funds. MAGPI: in Merced, MAGPI (MercedAarea Groundwater Pool Interests) was invited to join the process. They want to do their own.  Statement:  the MAGPI board feels that they are unable to cooperate and collaborate with a larger board. There are stake holders in that board who disagree with the official statement. They deal with groundwater only; whereas this project looks at the management of water overall.Comment:  The meadow has become so bad that it has no longer become a recharge area for the water below. By restoring the meadow (thinking of water in its two parts) it helped with the problems and water again became recharged.  The MAGPI group may have difficulty seeing the bigger picture.  We are charged with management of the water flow as a whole.Question: Clearly it’s been an arduous process for MAGPI for the last 10 years.  They are particular about their boundaries.  They cannot become an IRWMP on their own and may become a hole in the donut.  Once they are confident they can retain their identity, they may choose to join.Magpi seems to have more comfort in going with Mariposa County. In Madera there is more discomfort.. Brenda will not submit an application with a gap.  Propose that perhaps we reflect the group – important to include MID and farm bureaus and non profits and continue outreach.  The board of Merced County did not agree with the MAGPI decision. The USFS input is that they would like a boundary that includes the intact forest – federal and state do not coincide in two different areas. The Sierra National Forest is the green area on the map.  The ridge lines we’ve been speaking of go to the center of the Kings River.  The northern boundary includes Mariposa and Tuolumne counties and Stanislaus National Forest. Two national forests are included and the area ends at Merced River.  The forest is from Merced River to Kings River.Question:  Can you tell me how excluding the Stanislaus and Tuolumne River address the land masses? Referenced the Vernauls study.  Yosemite has both situations.  Issues in that IRWMP with involvement with major players.Response: There was an example in Ventura County where there was a region within a region and they couldn’t agree for over a year.  If we address this now by area and region we can ensure that we can participate in the process this year.Suggestion: including Tuolumne watershed can strengthen our region because they are being managed to improve the San Joaquin.  How are we going to prioritize projects and structure?  They must be handled one at a time once the region is accepted by DWR.  It’s not valid unless they accept our region.Suggestion:  Get together with others in charge of the IRWMP in their areas to see how it blends together with our area.  Share scenarios and rationale.  Response:  Email was sent to Madera and Merced RAP planners on April 16^th to request a meeting but it hasn’t come together yet.  The meeting on April 6^th will discuss overlaps.Comment: I feel that the cart is being put before the horse and Brenda needs to meet with the other stakeholders and get back to group.Response:  Brenda feels it’s important to write the rough draft first to get discussions started and have some information on which to build.Comment:  You’re looking at major tasks – I’m suggesting that you address sub tasks which are major such as meeting with the other project managers.  Response:  That is on the schedule through April 16^th.  Response: The reason that we’re able to move quickly is that funding was received.  When they are working by volunteer, the response is slower. The April 6^th meeting will address the questions of nesting and overlaps.Question:  Governance –Madera county water advisory commission meets once per month and has discussed this project.  They are not sure what the state is looking for regarding governance.  For instance, the county board of supervisors will decide – but a group will be there to discuss, we’re not sure what level of response we can expect.Response:  This is a non regulatory document.  The group must be assembled and described as indicated in the first part of this application.  We need to describe the stake holders and what type of group.  Step 5 of the RAP application is the governance structure.  We do not have one in place – we can agree to put one in place and are requesting a DWR facilitator to help us put together the governance for the IRWMP.  We are planning to use the same approach as the successful Inyo Mono group.Question: How would you describe the participation of the farm bureau in all three counties in previous meetings?Response:  we had a letter of support from them – the president attended over half the meetings.Statement: We would all benefit from their added participation.·         A region must be designed or configured to strengthen the ????·         Stakeholder driven·         Non-regulatoryWhile thinking of your needs, please consider the needs of the whole as well. I strongly advise you to join smaller groups and combine your thoughts and needs.We are specifically here to get through the regional acceptance process.  We need to get a region and get a group so that we have the opportunity to discuss specific ideas later.Voting areas·         Merced·         Mariposa·         Upper San Joaquin·         Madera – has an adopted IRWMP PlanSouthern Sierra Group – looking at the south area for their IRWMP – includes a portion of Madera County.One comment was received via the website.  Brenda had to go in person to get info from various people and has not had anyone in Mariposa who doesn’t want to be part of the larger area.Overlap – peach area indicated on map – nesting issue.No one in the state has an approved prop 84 IRWMP yet.  Each IRWMP must have an approved region prior to approval.Comment:  Rather than us sorting through this today, you and your counterparts should come together to discuss the boundaries and rationale.  Response: I have been trying to accomplish this; however, I also need to take into account the input from those who have spent the time to come and provide their feedback. Rather than have one planning process for an entire region, it’s ok to have smaller areas creating plans.  We have representatives from all the different groups represented here today.  We have to resolve the nesting and the overlap issues and still have it available to the public for review.  This process offers the chance of submitting two applications prior to the grants being awarded.We are talking about creating a consensus from this group regarding what we feel comfortable to offer something others can react to.  This is not written in stone.  We can take two positions – we can set up a region and begin the process or sit back and wait for a conversation between the various regions (which hasn’t happened yet, and time is growing short)Question: The overlap looks like the two different watersheds between San Joaquin and Madera.  Do we want to pull back out of respect for the work that has been done by Madera? Is there concern about splitting the county into separate IRWMPs?Response:  That’s a consideration; however, the Chowchilla river and Awahnee watersheds run through the center of ???? these minor watersheds interact in both counties.  The water from the San Joaquin River feeds our county and our region and needs to be included.  The water advisory commission is suggesting three IRWMPs - South Sierra, Mariposa and Madera, The regional agency of Madera is leaning toward the larger region.Comment:  No one has reached out to Fresno County – Fresno County Advisory CommitteeWe are not done with this outreach.  If we can get some baseline consensus from the group, we can have something to take to the table to get feedback.The boundary map was presented to the Madera advisory commission last week. Our boundary is still the boundary we had with our IRWMP, but it won’t be accepted by the state based upon the new rules. We cannot have overlaps.Comments:  I would like to go with the regional approach.The south sierra side appears to work well for itself and the area which includes Madera, Mariposa and Merced appears to work well for itself.The regional approach is trying to approach this issue from a watershed perspective, look at the connection and how the water flows and how it benefits to consider thinking about the San Joaquin portion included with the southern process.If we accept this larger region, Brenda will write a rough draft, continuing to get DWR input, handle the mechanics of nesting and overlap and can review and incorporate the comments as necessary as we move toward the final draft.This is so large.  Realistically, Mariposa County is already very invested in this process.  Should we be more focused on something more realistic for our capabilities?Comment from Brenda:  I speak with DWR every other day and there are many regions that are larger than ours.  I have assistance from other agencies and have help matching my efforts to create the proposal.You are voting on whether you want me to write up the whole region.  If so, we are asking for money from the state for the writing of a plan which incorporates Merced, Madera, Mariposa and a part of Fresno County.DWR will advise us how to handle the mechanics of writing the applicationQuestion:  What are the advantages of combining the larger regions?Response:  This is the most significant region in the state of California.  It’s right in the middle.  The southern San Joaquin has 80% of it’s water flowing south.  We are meeting the needs of everyone downstream to the north but also meeting the needs of the south as well.  The amount of water involved can be utilized by fixing and restoring the meadows up here. By doing so, we will improve the water quality and usage for the entire state. This offers a platform and a great resource for fixing problems.  If there’s a big region that’s approved, it means that Madera has fulfilled their requirements and can apply for funding for their projects. It benefits Madera in that it is the only way to get implementation funds – and becomes parallel processes.  It is possible to have 2 or 3 IRWMPs which can apply for money for projects.If we stay small, the state will choose who gets their projects funded.  How can we get consensus from those from Madera County?  We can propose, but if the stakeholders do not approve, we’ll pull back.Preference/Comments:Regional             ///////////////“Expanded” Madera             ///Abstain  ///No       //Merced-Chowchilla-Fresno Rivers             //             Feels there are significant differences between these and the San Joaquin river – concerned about urban needs of this watershed as compared to the mountain issue. Blue/Green area and address the southern area through the southern sierra process.Would like exact information of where the 80% water which flows south – where it begins.  It’s at the state regional water control – there are three forks.  So the river flows to the north, naturally, but the diverted water is taken elsewhere servicing Fresno, Tulare and Kern counties.Environmental issues re: salmon and water quality is also coming up in the near future.Asked for DWP senior management to meet with us to determine the best way to address the needs of all the different communities and needs. The issues are much stronger than the current state boundaries.Issues discussed today will be presented to the tribe for feedback.  The area in question is in the Fresno watershed, Fresno river drainage.Next Meeting:  April 9^th 8-12 – McKay Hall in Cathey’s Valley                        April 16^th 1-5 – Meeting place to be determined.  But perhaps in LeGrandBrenda will write a proposal based upon the majority vote, but will add comments regarding the issues raised at today’s meeting for additional feedback. There will be one overall document which will include the concerns voiced during this meeting.Madera plan is broken down into Mountain, Foothill, Valley and then incorporated.