South Lahontan

Lithologic and ground-water data for monitoring sites in the Mojave River and Morongo ground-water basins, San Bernardino County, California, 1992-98

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 1st, 2002

Lithologic and ground-water data were collected at 85 monitoring sites constructed in the Mojave Water Agency Management area in San Bernardino County, California, as par

Lithologic and ground-water data were collected at 85 monitoring sites constructed in the Mojave Water Agency Management area in San Bernardino County, California, as part of a series of cooperative studies between the U.S. Geological Survey and the Mojave Water Agency. The data are being used to evaluate and address water-supply and water-quality issues. This report presents a compilation of the data collected at these sites from 1992 through 1998, including location and design of the monitoring sites, lithologic data, geophysical logs, ground-water-level measurements, and water-quality analyses. One to five small (generally 2-inch) diameter wells were installed at each of the 85 monitoring sites to collect depth-dependent hydrologic data. Lithologic logs were compiled from descriptions of drill cuttings collected at each site and from observations recorded during the drilling of the borehole. Generalized stratigraphic columns were compiled by grouping similar lithologic units. Geophysical logs provide information on the character of the lithologic units and on the presence of ground water and the chemical characteristics of that water. Water-level and water-quality data were collected periodically from the sites during 1992 through 1998. 

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power response to Mono Lake Committee Request for a Drought Emergency Regulation

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | January 11th, 2023

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 2016 Annual Owens Valley Report

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) | December 1st, 2015

This report includes Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s (LADWP) proposed Owens Valley operations plan for the first six months of the 2016-17 runoff year, an u

This report includes Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s (LADWP) proposed Owens Valley operations plan for the first six months of the 2016-17 runoff year, an update on Owens Valley conditions, the current status of LADWP’s environmental mitigation projects, and the status of other studies, projects, and activities.

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 2018 Annual Owens Valley Report

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) | December 1st, 2017

This report includes Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s (LADWP) proposed Owens Valley Operations Plan for the 2018-2019 Runoff Year, an update on Owens Valley

This report includes Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s (LADWP) proposed Owens Valley Operations Plan for the 2018-2019 Runoff Year, an update on Owens Valley conditions, and the current status of LADWP’s environmental mitigation projects and other legal obligations under the Agreement between the County of Inyo and the City of Los Angeles and its Department of Water and Power on a Long-Term Groundwater Management Plan for Owens Valley and Inyo County (Water Agreement); the 1991 Environmental Impact Report Water from the Owens Valley to Supply the Second Los Angeles Aqueduct, 1970 to 1990, 1990 Onward, Pursuant to a Long Term Groundwater Management Plan (1991 EIR); the Laws Type E transfer; the 1997 Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, County of Inyo, the California Department of Fish and Game, the California State Lands Commission, the Sierra Club, and the Owens Valley Committee (1997 MOU), the August 2004 and March 2010 Amended Stipulations and Orders in Case No. S1CVCV01-29768.

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Geologic Guidebook Los Angeles Aqueduct System

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) | December 1st, 1977

Major carbon-14 anomaly in a regional carbonate aquifer—Possible evidence for megascale channeling, south-central Great Basin

American Geophysical Union (AGU) | December 1st, 1976

The carbon 14 content of groundwater at the center of a 16‐km‐long fault‐controlled spring line at Ash Meadows in south central Nevada is 5 times greater than that

The carbon 14 content of groundwater at the center of a 16‐km‐long fault‐controlled spring line at Ash Meadows in south central Nevada is 5 times greater than that in water from other major springs along the lineament. The difference in carbon 14 stands in marked contrast to the near identity of all springwaters in alkalinity, pH, carbon 13, oxygen 18, deuterium, tritium, and other major and trace ions. Ten possible explanations of this major carbon 14 anomaly are evaluated by using all available chemical and isotopic data from basin‐wide wells and upland springs tapping the regional carbonate aquifer discharging at Ash Meadows. The four most plausible hypotheses require the presence of a major longitudinal heterogeneity in the distal portion of the groundwater basin to explain the anomaly. Flow channeling with an amplitude of at least 11 km is indicated. The simplifying assumption commonly used in simulation of basin‐wide flow through fractured or solution‐riddled aquifers, namely, that the aquifer is ‘homogenous in its heterogeneity,’ is not applicable to the dense fractured Paleozoic carbonate rocks comprising the Nevada aquifer; heterogeneities in this aquifer do not cancel each other areally.

Making Conservation a California Way of Life - Revised

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | March 12th, 2024

Making Nature's City: A science-based framework for building urban biodiversity

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) | July 1st, 2019

Cities will face many challenges over the coming decades, from adapting to a changing climate to accommodating rapid population growth. A related suite of challenges th

Cities will face many challenges over the coming decades, from adapting to a changing climate to accommodating rapid population growth. A related suite of challenges threatens global biodiversity, and many species face potential extinction. While urban planners and conservationists have long treated these issues as distinct, there is growing evidence that cities not only harbor a significant fraction of the world’s biodiversity, but that they can also be made more livable and resilient for people, plants, and animals through nature-friendly urban design. Urban ecological science can provide a powerful tool to guide cities towards more biodiversity-friendly design. However, current research remains scattered across thousands of journal articles and largely inaccessible to practitioners. Making Nature’s City fills this gap, synthesizing global research to develop a science-based approach for supporting nature in cities. We identify seven key elements of urban form and function that work together to maximize biodiversity, and we illustrate these elements through a case study in California’s Silicon Valley. Using the framework developed in this report, urban designers and local residents can work together to link local parks, greenways, green roofs, street trees, stormwater basins, commercial landscaping, and backyards to support biodiversity while making cities better places to live. As we envision the healthier, and more resilient cities, Making Nature’s City provides practical guidance for the many actors who together will shape the nature of cities.

Making the Most of Water for the Environment: A Functional Flows Approach for California’s Rivers

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | August 25th, 2020

In California, water and land management activities have substantially altered river flows and degraded river channels and their floodplains. The result has been a precip

In California, water and land management activities have substantially altered river flows and degraded river channels and their floodplains. The result has been a precipitous decline in native fish populations, including the collapse of valued salmon fisheries, and widespread imperilment of freshwater biodiversity. Environmental flows—flows in rivers and streams necessary to sustain ecosystem health—are essential to reversing these trends. Yet many rivers in California lack environmental flows. And for those rivers with such protections, environmental flows are typically established at static minimum levels, which fail to preserve the natural seasonal and interannual variability of flow that sustains healthy ecosystems. A new approach to managing environmental water is needed. 

Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life: Primer of 2018 Legislation on Water Conservation and Drought Planning Senate Bill 606 (Hertzberg) and Assembly Bill 1668 (Friedman)

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | November 30th, 2018

In 2018, the California State Legislature (Legislature) enacted two policy bills, (Senate Bill (SB) 606 (Hertzberg) and Assembly Bill (AB) 1668 (Friedman)), to establish

In 2018, the California State Legislature (Legislature) enacted two policy bills, (Senate Bill (SB) 606 (Hertzberg) and Assembly Bill (AB) 1668 (Friedman)), to establish a new foundation for long-term improvements in water conservation and drought planning to adapt to climate change and the resulting longer and more intense droughts in California. These two bills amend existing law to provide expanded and new authorities and requirements to enable permanent changes and actions for those purposes, improving the state's water future for generations to come.