Upper Pit River Watershed

2. Upper Pit River Watershed The Upper Pit River Watershed is located in northeastern California at the eastern edge of the Great Basin Province. The north and south forks of the Pit River drain the northern portion of the watershed. The North Fork of the Pit River originates at Goose Lake, an enclosed basin except during rare events when it spills over into the Pit River. The North Fork headwaters include a number of tributaries in the Warner Mountains. The South Fork of the Pit River originates in the south Warner Mountains at Moon Lake in Lassen County. The north and south forks of the Pit River converge in the town of Alturas flows in a southwesterly direction into Shasta Lake in Shasta County and into the Sacramento River. The southern limit of the Upper Pit River is marked by the confluence of the Pit River and Fall River in eastern Shasta County. The Upper Pit River Watershed includes approximately 3, 415 square miles or 2, 767,000 acres, 21 named tributaries totaling about 1,050 miles of perennial stream, and 4,054 river miles. The Upper Pit River Watershed, from the headwaters to the historical confluence with Fall River, is within the Modoc Plateau Geomorphic Province. The Modoc Plateau is bordered on the west by the Cascade Range, to the south by the Sierra Nevada, and the east by the Basin and Range geomorphic provinces. The Upper Pit River is a run off dominated river with substantial snowmelt from the Warner Mountains. Flows are augmented by spring discharge in some reaches. As the Upper Pit River crosses the Modoc Plateau, it loses water through its stream channel to the underlying groundwater. According to Norris and Webb (1990), they concluded that the Upper Pit River and its tributaries lose water to groundwater from Goose Lake to Fall River. Springs associated with the Fall River system collectively produce a nearly constant discharge of approximately 1,100 to 1,200 cubic feet per second (USDA, 2002). This system is among the largest freshwater spring systems in the United States (Meinzer, 1972).

3. Sierra Water Workgroup Summit Community Collaboration

4. Collaboration Leader • Ability to guide the group towards the collaborations goals while seeking to include and explore all points of view • Comfort with consensus building, and small group process • Respect in the community and knowledge about the issues the collaboration will address • Skill in negotiating turf issues • Belief in process of collaboration

5. Collaboration Leader cont. • Knowledge about the community and organizations in the community • Skill and persuasiveness in oral and written communication • Time to commit to leadership

6. Collaboration • Shared Vision • Skilled Leadership • Process Orientation • Diversity • Member Driven Agenda • Multiple Sectors • Accountability

7. Collaboration cont. • This is a style of work that builds a sense of community with stakeholders as participating members • The process includes a shared vision, mission, operating procedures, protocols and strategies • Identify stakeholder roles and responsibilities including communications system. Strive to gain a sense of “common ground”.

8. Collaboration cont. • A collaborative will decide what they will provide, who needs to be “at the table” the structure, focus and resources available • This entity will take on a life of it’s own and will accomplish the vision, mission and project within a timeline and budget

9. Community Mobilization • Identify Issue • Community Collaboration: • Identify Coordination and Collaboration of human and financial resources • Community Action: • Identify plan, project, team, workplan, timeline and budget. Task team into “ground operations”.

10. Components of Collaboration • Agency level involvement • Practice level involvement • Program/Project level involvement • Coordination/Collaboration and Integration

11. Supportive Environment • Culturally/linguistically appropriate • Engaging • High standards/expectations • Appropriate educational material • Opportunities to learn (realistic) • Support for education/participation

12. Characteristics of Effectiveness • Problem solve openly • Broad agreement on values (common ground) • High expectations • Respect • Interdependence • Leadership is dispersed • Continuous learning and opportunities

13. Characteristics of Community Collaboration • Shared ownership and accountability • Member driven • Strategic • Data driven • Culturally competent • Built capacity, sustainability • Combined goals • Supportive infrastructure • Problem solving approach

14. Community Collaboration cont. • Clear , consistent guidelines/expectations • Realistic integration, including shared power, money, resources etc. • Memorandum of Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding documents drafted when appropriate.

15. Characteristics of State LevelCollaborations • Active role of member • Sustained over time • Strategic and data driven • Individual and collective accountability • Institutionalized through policy, leadership management, protocols, procedures, practices, monitoring and evaluation

16. Effective Collaboration • Talking the talk • Walking the talk • Walking the walk

17. Happy Collaborating! • It is a rewarding process for getting things done the old fashioned way, with good hearted people and a lot of “elbow grease” and hard work. • Thought: Be the change you want to see in the world. -Gandhi