CDFW Introduces New Regulation Proposal: To Safeguard Fish and Wildlife Through Enhanced Lake and Streambed Agreement Compliance
Press release from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Department:
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) has published the Notice of Proposed Action to add Section 723 to Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR) (OAL Z#2024-0423-04, California Regulatory Notice Register Online | OAL(opens in new tab)). Fish and Game Code Section 1612 authorizes the Department to suspend or revoke a permit , referred to as a “lake or streambed alteration agreement” (agreement), if the Department determines the permittee is not in compliance with its terms or has failed to provide the Department timely status reports where such reports are required. The purpose of an agreement is to protect fish and wildlife resources that could be adversely affected by the project or activities the agreement authorizes. (Fish & G. Code, § 1603, subd. (a).)
The purpose of the agreement is to protect fish and wildlife resources that may be substantially adversely affected by the project or activities the agreement authorizes. The purpose of a status report for a long-term agreement is for the Department to evaluate the efficacy of these measures. By allowing the Department to suspend or revoke an agreement when a permittee is not in compliance with the terms of an agreement, which includes resource protection measures, or fails to provide timely status reports, the proposed regulation benefits the state’s fish and wildlife resources.
In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, the Department provided notice of the proposed regulatory action with the Office of Administrative Law for publication in the California Regulatory Notice Register on May 3rd, 2024.
Written Comment Period
Any interested person, or his or her authorized representative, may submit written comments on the proposed action to the Department. All written comments must be received by the Department via mail or email no later than Tuesday, June 18, 2024, to the contact as follows:
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Regulations Unit
Attn: Mike Randall, Analyst
P.O. Box 944209
Sacramento, CA 94244-2090Email: [email protected]
Public Hearing
A virtual public hearing is scheduled by as follows:
Date: Tuesday, June 18, 2024
Time: 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
Meeting details will be made available on this webpage at least seven days in advance of the meeting.
Location: Teleconference and WebinarThe current rulemaking file for this proposal consists of the following documents:
- Notice of Proposed Action(opens in new tab): Add Section 723, Title 14, CCR
- Initial Statement of Reasons (ISOR)(opens in new tab): Add Section 723, Title 14, CCR
- Proposed Regulatory Language: Add Section 723, Title 14, CCR (opens in new tab)
- STD 399: Economic and Fiscal Impact Statement (available by request by sending an email to [email protected] with the subject line, “STD 399 Request – LSA 723 Regulation”)
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
“Some men were born to be slaves” -Aristotle (maybe..)
“None are fit to be masters” -CS Lewis (absolutely.)
The idea that there exists humans equipped to guide the actions of other humans is almost as ludicrous as how accepted the practice is. Everybody’s in it for their own gain- and still coming up short. Most of what’s gets made is heartache and mess.
I like what you wrote. I’m trying to get by with no help from anyone. Our country is going down and Americans are fighting Americans!!!
CDFW does not need any more authority. They are on a power trip already.
Any revocation of an LSAA should be after due notice is given to the land owner, and time to remedy any issue is allowed. And, If they pass this (it seems they always get what they want; ‘damn public opinion!’) they should use it on land and in areas that do not have cannabis! Enough with the disproportionate enforcement in the Emerald Triangle, etc.
I’ll believe CDFW is serious about protecting the environment when they start cleaning up the homeless camps fouling our streams and forests.
Imagine what would happen to any landowner dumping trash, human waste and needles into a stream?
Meanwhile, homeless drug addicts and alcoholics trespassing on public and private lands are given a pass.
I wholeheartedly agree. CDFW mostly serves as a rubber stamp and PR agency for the big boys in California-big ag/timber, big energy, developers and tech interests. Cdfw is synonymous with mismanagement. They say every fishery in california is red-lining in spite of all their regulation.
The data collection technicians at cdfw receive no benefits and are paid less than fast food workers for a reason. Draw your own conclusions from that fact.
I had to pay nearly $11,000 to upgrade a small functional culvert under my driveway to accommodate a 100 year storm. $5000 of that was simply because it was on the property with my cannabis permit. I don’t even use the water from the pond to cultivate. The whole thing was a fucking joke. There’s not even exposed creek bed in this water course. During the few months of the year when there’s water it, it just flows gently through the tall grass in the ditch because there’s hardly any flow at all. The pipe itself was only $250 and my friend and I did the work by hand over two days with Pics and shovels. Meanwhile, The undersize culvert where our dirt Road meets Alderpoint Road is always buried and water and debris flows over the roadway. Meanwhile, damaged roads all over our county are depositing untold volumes of sediment and petroleum impregnated rocks into our water courses and environment. Meanwhile, there are homeless camps all around Eureka and Arcata in sensitive wetland areas. Meanwhile, there are homeless camps surrounding Garberville and Redway that look like literal garbage dumps. I bet that one just north Redway has at least two or 3 tons of debris littering the woods within the setback of a class three water course. Where is the abatement letter or enforcement for those places ? I’m not trying to pick on anybody, I just think that there should be equal application of the law.
And On another note, now there is chronic wasting disease in the state of California. And what that says to me is a drastic increase in the cost for hunting licenses while a bunch of egotistical CDFW wardens and bureaucrats get paid to mismanage another project.
Requiring replacement of functional culverts was one of many travesties imposed on cannabis applicants.
Replacing culverts has often had a greater environmental impact than if they’d left them alone.
Meanwhile CDFW will ignore your non-cannabis neighbor with a failed culvert bleeding sediment into a stream.
Good point
Absolutely!
While CDFW pursues minor water violations of pot growers, they ignore severe wetland losses on the coast.
The photo is of a destroyed coastal wetland, CDFW has yet even to recognize the ongoing tragedy, let alone begin the repair.
I can’t wait for the SCOTUS to throw out Chevron Deference. The administrative state is killing the USA.
CDFW does have a valuable job to do. Its mandate, as I understand it, is important; to protect the natural environment. It’s that they want to have and exert more control that is the issue.
My experience is that you stand strong, push back, and be open to work with them reasonably. I did that for an LSAA and made a better deal than many others.
But if you’re homeless you’re apparently exempt from any regulation or enforcement by CDFW.
The fact is that CDFW has been super busy since legalization occurred, and may not prioritize ‘homeless’ folk’s environment the way you wish. Also, if they engage with those unhoused people / communities, there are multiple agencies that have jurisdiction. That makes the water more murky, if you will, as to authority, etc. I think CDFW is used to, and likes being the Big Dog on the case, especially when it’s cannabis related.
Agree that when homeless people are involved “it makes the water more murky” but only because CDFW shines it on – CDFW prefers going after farmers and ranchers because they can extract money from them.
So true!
See a lot of homeless environmental damage in the areas around California’s rivers and creeks. I wonder if CDFW chooses to ignore this because there is no $$$ in addressing the problems?
Yes, I think that’s a big part of it.
The LSAA is just one more agency aggrandizing overwrought busywork hurdle out of about a dozen. I started an LSAA as a paper application, and by the time it went through five years later it was digital only. The LSAA is meant for large projects like gravel mining, or bridge construction. This was for a 10 gpm pump used for 10 winter days a year, in a location that has had a withdrawal for 100 years. The main challenge was learning their unique upload method in EPIMS. After all the high tech interface, you had to write a cute narrative in letter form and snail mail it to the Eureka office. CDFW, a State agency can’t figure out how to relay the LSAA to the DCC, another State Agency. Non compliance on your LSAA may just be failing to report withdrawals that you already report to three other agencies annually. The biggest issue raised by the biologist was a slab of concrete, not on my property, that came off a County culvert poured in 1952, falling off probably back in ’55, or ’64. She had me write an email to Public Works that they ignored.
Note that these agreements are in place for citizens who have water resources on their own property. A large weed farm exempt from the LSAA in Santa Barbara, or Salinas may be using water from an extinct dry river, that is only different in that it’s already dead, and over allocated.
Many good points. Thank you. Now I will, as a result of the clearer picture of how misguided this all is, excuse myself and throw up.
Meanwhile they let a handful of students shutdown an entire college for a protest that solved nothing. Nice work. ?