Wednesday, July 30, 2014

County not in market for mitigation lands

From page A5 | June 24, 2011 |

El Dorado County supervisors backed each other up Tuesday afternoon to reject any notion that the county should acquire more land in order to mitigate environmental losses due to future development.

The issue was raised during a presentation by Development Services Director Roger Trout. On the agenda to ask the board to approve a request for proposals for Phase 2 of the Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan, Trout attempted to clarify options for mitigating loss of habitat or resources that will occur as the county develops. Under the California Environmental Quality Act, counties are required to develop comprehensive “mitigation plans.” The INRMP will eventually become an element of the county’s General Plan.

Mitigation 101 is generated when a particular project is expected to cause significant loss or disruption of wildlife or environmental degradation. The law requires the county to address the issue and find a substitute for the loss. Typically, plans for development include some additional measures for mitigating “significant impact.”

In a recent example, highway work south of the town of El Dorado called for the removal of several hundred oak trees. Caltrans and the contractor were required to mitigate the effect by planting many more than that number within the same area. Whether a particular mitigation plan is accepted and approved can be determined on a case-by-case basis. Whether the mitigation satisfies all stakeholders or interested parties is also a subjective determination.

Trout offered a list of 11 policy issues that he recommended the board consider as it solicits consultants and contractors to develop a “draft plan” that can be incorporated into the General Plan. The first item clarifies that the INRMP “is not a habitat conservation plan nor a restoration plan for past practices.” Rather, he said, it is “a plan to mitigate impacts to habitat loss and fragmentation by development allowed in the General Plan.”

His second point, titled “County ownership of fee title lands,” suggests that “it is unlikely the county wishes to acquire land for mitigation purposes” and that “management of lands is not a core function of the county.”

Fee title or fee simple property is basically private property over which the owner has significant control and has many rights to do with as he chooses.

Supervisors John Knight and Jack Sweeney went a step further than Trout.

“I don’t want the county to own any more land than is necessary,” Knight said, and the matter was refined by other supervisors concerned about not taking more land off  the county’s tax rolls.

Supervisor Ron Briggs asked Trout directly, “Is there an assumption that we need more land for mitigation?” to which Trout replied that there are a number of other options such as easements that would keep the county out of the land management business.

Briggs further noted that only about 4,600 acres out of more than 1.1 million are currently under agricultural production and that “ag land should be left out of this. I don’t like messing with ag land,” he said. “And I don’t want to do more mitigation fees. People are already burdened by water and other fees.”

He urged the board to “give ourselves a little dexterity when it comes to mitigation plans.”

He also reminded the board that about “fifty percent of our land mass is publicly owned.” The U.S. Forest Service controls a significant portion of the undeveloped land in the county, and the county has little or no authority over what can be done on those lands.

The first phase of the INRMP project involved extensive research and compilation of past studies to gather data on wildlife habitat, deer migration patterns, movement corridors through or around barriers such as Highway 50, riparian and wetland issues, native and rare plants.

Board Chairman Ray Nutting explained that the issues driving the INRMP are primarily concentrated on the Western Slope of the county.

“From the top of the Sierra down to the snow line at about 4,000 feet, we’re OK,” Nutting said. “But below that are the migratory animals and the predators. There’s more wildlife now than when I was a little boy. I’ve seen more mountain lion and bear recently than I ever saw when I was younger. We need to get better information and see how it fits with the General Plan. We need to know what we’re doing out there.”

Trout reminded the board that the General Plan’s mitigation requirements are mostly aimed at the areas zoned as community regions, “not the 5-acre parcels, but we still need to make some mitigation.”

Toward that end, the board directed Trout to form a small committee of local experts to hash out the specifics of how to comply with the demands of the law while allowing landowners as much latitude as possible to develop their property. That committee is expected to bring a draft plan for the board to review within the next several weeks.

E-mail Chris Daley at or call 530-344-5063.





District 2 candidate statements tell of goals

By Dawn Hodson | From Page: A1

Sand Fire nears containment: 66 structures destroyed

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1 | Gallery

Schedule for Highway 50 blasting closures

By News Release | From Page: A3

Tails wagging over dog park approval

By Julie Samrick | From Page: A3

Quarter-acre fire in Kelsey

By Rebecca Murphy | From Page: A3



My Turn: Privatization of public services

By Mark Belden | From Page: A4

Policy book

By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A4



Piano replaced

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5

Comments sign-in policy

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 1 Comment

Save the Guinea Worm

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 1 Comment

Large bangs

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 2 Comments

Private property gets no respect

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 1 Comment

GDPUD management report

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5

District 2 supervisorial special election

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 3 Comments



Ex-Bruin lends a helping hand

By Steven Shaff | From Page: A8 | Gallery

Sierra Sharks finish middle of the pack

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A8

Roundup: July 29, 2014

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A8

Taz pull through for SSL trophy

By Patty Pope | From Page: A8



Nuns discover a pleasant place

By Lexi Boeger | From Page: B1 | Gallery

Bargains can be found everywhere

By Democrat Staff | From Page: B2 | Gallery

At a glance: Game time

By Mimi Escabar | From Page: B2

Barbecue dinner to benefit Blue Star Moms

By Mount Aukum Winery | From Page: B2

Stagecoach story takes riders on a trip

By Wendy Schultz | From Page: B3

Help needed to make cool ties

By Sew 4 | From Page: B3

Stroke and osteoporosis screenings planned

By Life Line Screening | From Page: B3

Gold Rush Days activities cancelled this year

By Sacramento Convention And Visitors Center | From Page: B4

Master Food Preservers: Tomato time

By Monique Wilber | From Page: B4

Sacramento area museums offer summer fun

By Sacramento Association Of Museums | From Page: B5

Build an author platform at the Library

By El Dorado | From Page: B5



Weather stats 7-29-14

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2

Building permits 6/2-6/2014

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2Comments are off for this post

Crime Log: July 17

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A2



Merlyn Wilbur Adams

By Contributor | From Page: A2

Lisa Oliver Rose

By Contributor | From Page: A2

Wallace Murrel Thomas

By Contributor | From Page: A2


Real Estate




Women’s Health

Love the skin you’re in

By Noel Stack | From Page: WH4

Dump stress and improve your health, productivity

By Wendy Schultz | From Page: WH7Comments are off for this post

Women’s Health Expo

By Marshall Medical | From Page: WH8

Find the confidence you need to fight back

By Special to the Democrat | From Page: WH12

Our choices directly affect our health

By Special to the Democrat | From Page: WH14

They’re NOT your mother’s hearing devices!

By Marshall Medical | From Page: WH17