Title
Parks, a division of the Chief Administrative Office, recommends the Coloma Lotus Advisory Committee:
1) Receive a presentation on River Management Plan Updates; and
2) Discuss and provide input to staff on proposed updates to the Draft 2025 River Management Plan and to El Dorado County Ordinance Chapter 5.48 Streams and Rivers Commercial Boating and Chapter 5.50 Specific Use Regulations for the South Fork of the American River.
Body
DISCUSSION / BACKGROUND
The El Dorado County River Management Plan (RMP) was developed to manage use on the 20.7-mile segment of the South Fork of the American River between Chili Bar Dam and the confluence of the Folsom Lake State Recreation Area. Since the early 1980’s, the County has managed commercial and non-commercial river recreation to enhance public health, safety, welfare of river users and landowners, and to protect the riparian environment.
According to El Dorado County General Plan, Parks and Recreation Element, Policy 9.1.4.1 - The River Management Plan is considered the implementation plan for the South Fork of the American River management policies. The plan monitors and evaluates use within and along the river in order to minimize impacts to the environment and private landowners.
RMP Update Process
As stated in RMP Chapter IV, the RMP is designed to serve as an active, evolving tool that implements the County’s river management goals. Every year, an annual report is prepared on the year’s river management activities, and every five years in December, the annual reports are reviewed and compiled into a summary report.
The five-year summary is intended to provide opportunities for ongoing refinement of the RMP in response to results of annual operations review to ensure public safety, environmental protection, and the most efficient use of County resources. It also provides an opportunity to review the adopted and implemented management actions and impact mitigation measures to ensure that they remain meaningful and responsive to current guidance provided by the Board, the public, advisory committees, and other county departments.
On January 18, 2024 (Legistar item 24-0132), the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) discussed and provided input on the Draft RMP Five-Year Summary for the period of 2019 to 2023. On March 12, 2024 (Legistar item 24-0429), staff provided an update on the Draft RMP Five-Year Summary with staff and PRC recommendations to the Board of Supervisors.
The existing RMP, adopted in 2018 by Resolution 018-2018 (Legistar item 18-0182), has been updated to reflect the text changes recommended by staff and the PRC as provided during the review of the Draft 2025 Five-Year Summary on January 18, 2024 (Legistar item 24-0132). There are a total of fourteen staff and PRC recommendations that have been incorporated into the Draft 2025 RMP Update for review and consideration, as described below.
On June 24, 2025 (Legistar 25-0982), the Board of Supervisors provided conceptual approval, pursuant to Board Policy A-3, to amend County Ordinance Section 5.48, Streams and Rivers Commercial Boating, and directed staff to evaluate the current fee structure and assess possible fee increases. Staff also propose recommended updates to Section 5.48, as well as to Section 5.50 for review and consideration, as described below.
2025 Staff and PRC Recommendations
The following subjects are presented for consideration:
1. Chapter I, South Fork American River Flow Regime, Operation of SMUD’s UARP and PG&E Operation of Chili Bar:
This section needs to be updated to reflect the change in ownership and operation of Chili Bar Dam which is now solely operated by SMUD and no longer has any PG&E involvement.
2. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 1, Educational Programs, 1.8 Guide Education Programs, 1.8.2
The County will no longer host a day long pre-season guide orientation workshops each year. Instead, outfitters will certify their guides have received orientation training including river safety, etiquette, and sensitivity to residents and local merchants.
3. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.1: Annual River Use Permits 6.2.1.1 The term of River Use permit
Annual River Use Permits - The Stream and Rivers Commercial Boating Ordinance Chapter 5.48 governs River Use Permit application procedures and standards. The ordinance requires any entity conducting commercial trips on the South Fork to obtain a River Use Permit and requires that such entity meet and follow applicable insurance requirements; provides authority to the Planning Commission to approve River Use Permits for a three-year term; establishes standards for a River Use Permit application, termed the “river use plan”; and establishes a procedure to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission to the County Board of Supervisors.
Staff recommends eliminating the three-year term. Permits are reviewed annually and keeping track of separate three-year terms for every outfitter can be unnecessarily time consuming with no direct purpose.
4. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.1: Annual River Use Permits, 6.2.1.3 River Use Permit Allocation 6.2.1.3.4 “flex” allocation
Staff recommends updating this section to include language stating that current flex permits will remain, but no new flex permits can be created by lowering permit user days.
5. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.1: Annual River Use Permits, 6.2.1.3 River Use Permit Allocation 6.2.1.3.5 User Days Cannot be loaned or borrowed
Staff recommends that this section is revised to clarify that user days can be transferred (per section 6.2.1.4.2) but cannot be loaned or borrowed.
6. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.1: Annual River Use Permits, 6.2.1.4 River Use Permit Transfers 6.2.1.4.1 For any proposed transfer of a River Use Permit
Staff recommends revising this section to remove the need to go to the Planning Commission and just process the transfer of river use permits ministerially through the Parks Division.
7. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.1: Annual River Use Permits, 6.2.1.4 River Use Permit Transfers 6.2.1.4.2 Consolidation of River Use Permits
Staff recommends that outfitters that hold multiple permits be required to consolidate their permits into a single permit. This would both cut down on staff time to administer permits as well as save outfitters money as there is a $200 renewal fee they pay on a per permit basis annually to cover staff time spent on renewing said permits.
8. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.2: Maximum Group Size
This section regulates boat density on the river. Subsection 6.2.2.1 says, “With the exception of Element 6.2.2.6, the number of boats in each group on the South Fork will be limited to 7 and will not exceed 56 people (passengers, guests, guides) per group. If more than one group is traveling together, each group must have a five-minute period between launches from Chili Bar to below Hospital Bar rapid and when launching trips from other put in’s and lunch stops in between. On the river each group will then stay out of sight of each other (lead boat cannot see last boat from other group).” The commercial outfitters have recently voiced concerns on this rule, especially with regard to large or multiple permits being used simultaneously by a single company. For this issue as well, staff intends to consult the commercial outfitters to clarify practices and possible edit this section of the RMP in order to clarify intent.
9. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.6 County Operating Reports and Fees 6.2.6.1 Enforce the Permit Allocation System 6.2.6.1.4 Fail to deliver an operating report
Staff recommends revising this section to make it clear that payment of user day fees is part of the required monthly operating report and failure to submit payment with the monthly EMOR will result in a class I violation.
10. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.7 Guide Requirements 6.2.7.2 County River Safety and Etiquette Standards
Staff recommends this section be revised to state that outfitters will be required to sign a statement verifying that their guides will comply with County River Safety and Etiquette Standards and will submit the statement with their annual permit application.
11. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.10 Violations, Penalties, and Appeals 6.2.10.3 Penalty Schedule 6.2.10.3.2 outfitter violations
Staff recommends that we revise four violations to three violations as the number of violations required in any one category to result in a recommendation of suspension of the River Use Permit for up to 10 consecutive days.
12. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.10 Violations, Penalties, and Appeals 6.2.10.4 Class I Violation Appeal Procedures
Staff recommends changing Parks and Trails Hearing Officer in this section to Parks Manager. This has been the County’s practice in the past for who an outfitter would submit an appeal of a violation to, this proposed change would just be updating the RMP to reflect that practice.
13. Chapter III, River Management Plan Elements, Element 6, Permits and Requirements, 6.2 Outfitter Requirements: 6.2.10 Violations, Penalties, and Appeals 6.2.10.5 Class II Violation Appeal Procedures
Staff recommends changing Parks and Trails Hearing Officer in this section to Parks Manager. This has been the Counties practice in the past for who an outfitter would submit an appeal of a violation to, this proposed change would just be updating the RMP to reflect that practice.
14. Appendix C, RMP Data and Standards
Pursuant to discussions with the outfitters, staff recommends that updated costs for River Use Application Fees, and the penalty and violation schedules be proposed in the RMP update.
15. Ordinance Chapter 5.48 Streams and Rivers Commercial Boating
Staff recommends changing the river use permits issuance procedure to be conducted by the Parks and Trails Division instead of the Planning Commission.
Staff recommends updating the river use permit term from a three-year term to a one-year term.
Staff recommends updating the staff position from County Hearing Officer to the Parks Manager as the staff position that can revoke a river use permit.
16. Ordinance Chapter 5.50 Specific Use Regulations for the South Fork of the American River
Staff recommends updating the Institutional Group definition to reflect the definition as described in the River Management Plan, which clarifies the meaning of institutional as accredited academic programs and removes the inclusion of nonprofit organizations.
History of the RMP
In response to landowner complaints about noise, trespassing, litter, and inadequate sanitation, the County banned whitewater recreation by ordinance in 1976. This ordinance was later struck down by the State Court of Appeal in the case of People ex rel. Younger v. County of El Dorado (1979) (96 CalApp.3rd 403). Following the Younger decision, the County adopted a Stream and River Rafting ordinance in 1980. In 1981, the County began active management of commercial outfitters on the South Fork.
The Board of Supervisors first designated the section of South Fork of the American River between the Chili Bar Dam and the confluence of the Folsom Lake State Recreation Area as a special use area pursuant to the California Harbors and Navigation Code section 660 in 1984 with the adoption of ordinance 3463 and again most recently in 2002 with the adoption of ordinance 4596.
The County then embarked on the development of survey and factual information to formulate a river management program. This effort consisted of property owner surveys, river user surveys, and coordination with representatives of responsible and interested agencies (County of El Dorado, 1984). An El Dorado County RMP and accompanying Environmental Impact Report (EIR) were prepared in 1984. This plan was adopted by the County in 1984 as a chapter of the General Plan’s Recreational Element (ibid.). The project EIR also was certified in 1984, and the County began the active management of whitewater recreation in and along the South Fork of the American River in that year.
The RMP was amended in March 1988 (Sections III, IV, and V- County Resolution 99-88) and again in May 1992 (Sections 3A, 4A, and 4B-County Resolution 135-92). Many of the 1988 RMP’s (Section IV, Land Use and Facilities) goals have been met, including:
- Special Use Permitting for all river access and camps;
- Acquisition and development of Henningsen Lotus Park;
- Public agency (Bureau of Land Management) acquisition of river area rea lands; and
- Development of a radio communications system by the El Dorado County Sheriff’s Office.
In 1995, Mr. Bernard Carlson sued the County on the grounds that the commercial permitting process in the RMP was a discretionary, rather than a ministerial process, under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mr. Carlson prevailed in this litigation and, as a term of settlement, the County agreed to contract with independent consultants to update the existing RMP and prepare the 2001 RMP.
Five-year summary reports, required by RMP Section 7.2.2, for the 2002 to 2006 time period, and the time period 2007 to 2011 were prepared. The 5-year summary reports provided a “List of Minor Modifications to the El Dorado County River Management Plan.” Some of these modifications have been implemented, but the RMP was not revised to reflect these changes.
The RMP was last updated in 2018 (Legistar 18-0182), with the Board adopting the Initial Study Negative Declaration and Resolution 018-2018 adopting the 2018 River Management Plan. The purpose of that update was to address changes to the context of the river management program over the past 33 years.
CONTACT
Jennifer Franich, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
Zachary Perras, Parks Manager