CLIPA White Paper

The Capitol Lake Adaptive Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) of May 20, 1999, prepared by GA on behalf of the State, identified six alternatives for the long-term management of Capitol Lake. The FEIS referred to adoption of the 2003-2013 Capitol Lake Adaptive Management Plan, a portion of which calls for interim dredging to address current problems and develop a longer-term lake management program.³

 

The science is understood in this area, and the need for an active and ongoing sediment management maintenance program is defined and should proceed by fiscal year 2013 to avoid further damage caused by the lack of maintenance dredging. This recommendation was included in the 1999 FEIS and could proceed under the immediate authorization of the State Legislature and the filing for the Corps of Engineers dredging permit by GA.  

 The Panel’s recommendations include immediate steps during the next biennium (2011-2013) to complete predesign studies, design, and implementation of a maintenance dredge of the North basin of Capitol Lake. The dredge would begin to partially reverse the damages to both public and private investments stemming from the current “do nothing” approach.

 

CLIPA estimates the first two-year pre-design, dredging, and damage control project would cost about $4.5 million. We note that this dredging and damage control project would be required regardless of which long-term management program for the Capitol Lake and lower Budd Inlet is advanced.⁴ This first phase of activity also would include dredging of the lower Budd Inlet in the third year of the project (in the 2013-2015 biennium).

 

CLIPA’s vision of the Deschutes Watershed and Capitol Lake continues to advocate for the three-basin area known as Capitol Lake to be restored and maintained. However, at least in the short-term, CLIPA acknowledges that a more feasible solution of restoring and maintaining the North basin, with the possibility of some or all of the Middle basin being restored at a later date, may be a more cost-effective and viable solution.

 

CLIPA offers these thoughts on what this plan might look like with the caveat that additional information produced during the predesign phase may indicate options in favor of a greater percentage of Capitol Lake being restored and maintained.⁵ For example, the three basins may be necessary if a comprehensive management plan is not developed, funded, and implemented for the Deschutes Watershed. Lack of such a plan would allow the continuation of 35,000 cubic yards of sediment to flow annually to Capitol Lake and lower Budd Inlet.

 

Alternatively, some freshwater wetlands in the South basin and a portion of the Middle basin could be part of the final community strategy along with an extensive educational trails system within this urban environment (see the Lake Maintenance Plan, attached, for further details). If the upper Deschutes Watershed is managed to minimize sediment transfer and to improve water quality, the possibility of cost savings may translate into opportunities to develop such a mixed landscape. We support inclusion of an extensive environmental education and urban trails system in this program.