Watershed Information
Photos:

SAN GREGORIO BEACH SANDBAR - 2004

July 28th ------------------------- October 22nd ------------------------ October 31st
Estuary already closed ------------------ After First Rain ------------------ Open after Second Rain


photos by Neil Panton
Maps:
San Gregorio Creek Watershed


Drawing courtesy of Nicole Salgado


Graphic courtesy of San Francisco Estuary Institute
Endangered Species:

The California Red Legged Frog

The red-legged frog (Rana aurora) populations used to occur with great frequency throughout the state. The jumping frogs of Calavaras County (made famous by Mark Twain) were red-legged frogs. Early in the 20th century zoologists walking around Yosemite found three populations of red-legged frog. Today those populations cannot be found, and in fact the red-legged frog has suffered a catastrophic collapse in the Sierras and other areas of the state. As a result of these declines, the red-legged frog is now on the list of endangered species.

The last remaining substantial populations of the frog occur in Monterey County, Santa Barbara County, and San Luis Obispo County. Isolated populations of the frog still exist along the California coastline in places like Point Reyes, Suisun marsh, San Pedro Creek, Pescadero marsh, and other areas in San Mateo county.

One of the roles of the red-legged frog is as prey for the San Francisco Garter Snake (SFGS). Adult snakes feed primarily on the red-legged frog. So if a frog population collapses, any local SFGS populations will be affected, most likely negatively. Some research has shown that the SFGS cannot eat bullfrogs as easily as red-legged frogs.

How to identify: the red-legged frog grows up to five inches long, and has red on the underside of the back legs, as well as lower abdomen. The frog's back has splotches of brown or olive punctuated by black specks, often on skin which is loose and wrinkled. Immature frogs may have yellow instead of red.

Ironically one of the threats to the red-legged frog is the bullfrog, which was introduced in order to supply frog legs for local restaurants. The bullfrog eats the reg-legged frog's eggs, and usually takes over the red-legged frog's habitat. Development's impact on watersheds also negatively affects frogs.


Photos by Scott Woodruff
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for San Gregorio Water Quality Monitoring

Approved September 2009

To download QAPP pdf document Press Here

San Gregorio Watershed Assessment & Plan:

PROBLEM STATEMENT
Here are some examples of how our watershed is viewed by others:
- The State Water Board has listed San Gregorio as impaired by sediment (SWRCB 303(d) listing, 2003).
- California Fish and Game found that Coho salmon have virtually disappeared from our watershed and has slated San Gregorio for Coho salmon re-introduction (CDFG Recovery Strategies, 2003).
- San Gregorio Creek experiences critical low flows during the late summer and fall as measured by the USGS gaging station at Stage Rd and defined by the State Water Board.
- The California Coastal Commission considers San Gregorio Creek a Critical Coastal Area that drains into a marine protected preserve, one of ten highest priority in the state (State of the CCA's, 2006).
- Measurements by our County and the State have detected at least low and in some cases high levels of coliform bacteria at several sites. (County Environmental Health and SWAMP, 2007).

OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSESSMENT AND PLAN
- Scientifically assess watershed conditions; identify areas with little or no study and determine factors limiting a healthy waterway - ie: sediment, high water temperature.
- Prioritize management and restoration strategies - achievable goals, those having the largest value.
- Develop a Watershed Plan that will guide future projects.

This Plan is designed to be a “living document”. That means it can change and adapt over time. Several elements ensure that the plan will be used and updated:
- A Watershed Working Group will respond to changes based on studies or monitoring.
- An integrated database of watershed studies (Watershed Information System) will be kept current.
- SGERC, a local community watershed group, will oversee implementation of the plan.

WHAT GOALS HAVE ALREADY BEEN ACHIEVED?
- Sub-contracts are signed with all our partners.
- A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) has been formed and begun to meet.
- The USGS gaging station at Stage Rd. has been re-activated.
- Continuous monitoring equipment has been acquired to measure temperature, flow and sediment.
- Equipment has been purchased for water quality monitoring, and volunteers trained in its use.
- Past watershed studies, reports and aerial photographs have been compiled and scanned.
- An online database of these studies and reports has been created (Watershed Information System).
- Analysis of this data has begun and hypotheses formed for creation of the Plan.

WHAT IS LEFT TO DO?
- Form a Watershed Working Group from the community to oversee and advise the project.
- Conduct field studies and compile and analyze new data.
- Create a River Planning model to help understand water availability and use in the watershed.
- Develop a Watershed Management Plan.
- Plan for implementation of the highest priority actions.

Our Partners
- Natural Heritage Institute (NHI)
- Cuesta La Honda Guild
- Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD)
- San Mateo County Resource Conservation District (RCD)
- California Water Science Center (USGS)
- Stillwater Sciences
- Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI)
- Robert Zatkin
PUBLIC COMMENTS, QUESTIONS & CONCERNS
SAN GREGORIO WATERSHED ASSESSMENT AND PLAN
COMMUNITY MEETING - APRIL 17TH 2008
CUESTA LA HONDA CLUBHOUSE

Approximately 40 people in attendance

1) Doesn't standing in the creek disrupt the salmon?
2) Do you need permits from DFG to plant trees?
3) Is a representative from F&G present?
4) I've heard it's difficult to get a permit from F&G.
5) Has anyone here gotten permits? (Yes, 2-3 people answered).
6) How long did it take? (Approx. 60 days in one case).
7) How far from the creek are we going to study?
8) Would the grant money be better spent acquiring land above La Honda and building a dam?
9) La Honda has a reservoir and is dealing with its water and slide issues.
10) F&G contacted a landowner re: restocking, then budget disappeared for the project.
11) Where can we find the SWAMP report?
12) Studies are meaningless if they don't accomplish anything.
13) (Answer from audience) The SWAMP study had a purpose, to list or not list a waterbody as impaired. It was used for that purpose.
14) Will we have the Watershed Information System on our website?
15) What is GIS? Will the GIS layers be on our website?
16) Allan Richards identifies himself as watermaster, answers several questions (following) and voices support for the project.
17) What are the Watermaster duties? Do you do the same monitoring as SGERC? Do you check use of water, that allotments are not exceeded? Is this related to the Adjudication?
18) Data from SGERC's monitoring is available on our website (from one of our monitors).
19) Do any governmental agencies have budget for the USGS gaging station?
20) Is there anything not public in our workplan? Can we email workplan on request?
21) Concern about MROSD owning so much land in the watershed. Didn't get to vote, don't want to be taken over by open space.
22) How is SEI (Stockholm Environment Institute) a part of the Assessment & Plan?
23) Some of the partners are contractors or paid consultants.
24) What is the SWRCB's timeline for TMDL studies?
25) Sediment is an issue for our assessment? Isn't sediment a natural occurrence?
26) How are you going to dig it out? How do you deal with it?
27) Are there more people living in the area? More livestock?
28) This creates a workload for people to do. Land is controlled as to how much you can build.
29) (Answer from audience) Causes of sediment include: roads built in the last 50 years, an increase in building formations particularly in the lower watershed and major events like landslides. Assess where these loads are and trap them with restoration (like willows) so natural forces can heal the watershed.
30) An example of road cuts and erosion issues was cited near the Optimist Youth Camp.
31) The state built these roads, they should be responsible.
32) An example of why sediment matters; fish lay eggs in gravel beds. If sediment fills in gravels, flow can't go through and you lose the fish.
33) There have to be people. (We wouldn't exist without them - editor's comment).
34) Following the meeting: another comment in support of a dam or dams in the upper watershed to control the flow of water. Another resident feels that cattle/grazing is bad for the land - would prefer to see silviculture.

Next meeting - beginning of September