Inclusion of Pesticide Transformation Products Is Key to Estimating Pesticide Exposures and Effects in Small U.S. Streams

American Chemical Society (ACS) | March 10th, 2021

Improved analytical methods can quantify hundreds of pesticide transformation products (TPs), but understanding of TP occurrence and potential toxicity in aquatic ecosyst

Improved analytical methods can quantify hundreds of pesticide transformation products (TPs), but understanding of TP occurrence and potential toxicity in aquatic ecosystems remains limited. We quantified 108 parent pesticides and 116 TPs in more than 3 700 samples from 442 small streams in mostly urban basins across five major regions of the United States. TPs were detected nearly as frequently as parents (90 and 95% of streams, respectively); 102 TPs were detected at least once and 28 were detected in >20% samples in at least one region—TPs of 9 herbicides, 2 fungicides (chlorothalonil and thiophanate-methyl), and 1 insecticide (fipronil) were the most frequently detected. TPs occurred commonly during baseflow conditions, indicating chronic environmental TP exposures to aquatic organisms and the likely importance of groundwater as a TP source. Hazard quotients based on acute aquatic-life benchmarks for invertebrates and nonvascular plants and vertebrate-centric molecular endpoints (sublethal effects) quantify the range of the potential contribution of TPs to environmental risk and highlight several TP exposure–response data gaps. A precautionary approach using equimolar substitution of parent benchmarks or endpoints for missing TP benchmarks indicates that potential aquatic effects of pesticide TPs could be underestimated by an order of magnitude or more.

Increasing elevation of fire in the Sierra Nevada and implications for forest change

Ecological Society of America (ESA) | July 23rd, 2015

Fire in high‐elevation forest ecosystems can have severe impacts on forest structure, function and biodiversity. Using a 105‐year data set, we found increasing elevat

Fire in high‐elevation forest ecosystems can have severe impacts on forest structure, function and biodiversity. Using a 105‐year data set, we found increasing elevation extent of fires in the Sierra Nevada, and pose five hypotheses to explain this pattern. Beyond the recognized pattern of increasing fire frequency in the Sierra Nevada since the late 20th century, we find that the upper elevation extent of those fires has also been increasing. Factors such as fire season climate and fuel build up are recognized potential drivers of changes in fire regimes. Patterns of warming climate and increasing stand density are consistent with both the direction and magnitude of increasing elevation of wildfire. Reduction in high elevation wildfire suppression and increasing ignition frequencies may also contribute to the observed pattern. Historical biases in fire reporting are recognized, but not likely to explain the observed patterns. The four plausible mechanistic hypotheses (changes in fire management, climate, fuels, ignitions) are not mutually exclusive, and likely have synergistic interactions that may explain the observed changes. Irrespective of mechanism, the observed pattern of increasing occurrence of fire in these subalpine forests may have significant impacts on their resilience to changing climatic conditions.

Independent Panel Review of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan prepared for The Nature Conservancy and American Rivers

Nature Conservancy | September 19th, 2013

Two non-­governmental organizations, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and American Rivers (AR), are evaluating their options for engagement with the Bay Delta Conservation P

Two non-­governmental organizations, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and American Rivers (AR), are evaluating their options for engagement with the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). If approved, the Plan would become a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) under the federal Endangered Species Act and a Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) under California law. The purpose of the Plan is to allow for construction of new water diversion facilities in the Sacramento-­San Joaquin Delta while also protecting aquatic and terrestrial species that may be adversely affected by the project and accompanying changes in the State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP) operations. The Plan also includes habitat restoration and a commitment to assist in the conservation and recovery of species that are listed for protection under the federal and state Endangered Species Acts. With financial support from the S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation, Saracino and Mount, LLC, convened an independent panel of experts, with technical support from NewFields, Inc., to evaluate portions of the Plan. The panel, working jointly with TNC and AR, developed a series of technical and legal questions about the Plan. This report provides answers to these questions, along with limited recommendations on how to improve BDCP. To simplify analysis, this review focuses on conditions for federally listed fishes during the Early Long Term (ELT), a decade after a permit would be issued (approximately year 2025). These are described in detail in the BDCP Effects Analysis and accompanying Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report. We compared the performance of three different scenarios: a No Action Alternative (NAA) where no new North Delta diversion facility is constructed, a High Outflow Scenario (HOS) where the facilities are operated in a way that allows for occasional high spring and fall outflows, and a Low Outflow Scenario (LOS) with lower spring and fall outflows. The review also emphasizes in-­Delta and Sacramento River watershed conditions during the ELT, with less attention to San Joaquin River conditions and fishes. Although multiple data sources were used in this analysis, most hydrologic data came from CALSIM simulations conducted by BDCP consultants. The Panel strongly cautions about the conclusions drawn from these simulations. Flow simulations have three compounding uncertainties that can lead to significant error: (1) uncertainty in system understanding and future conditions, (2) model uncertainties (particularly the relationships between 1-­, 2-­, and 3-­dimensional models), and (3) behavioral/regulatory uncertainty where the models cannot capture the scope of human behavior in operating the projects under various conditions. These uncertainties, which are not described in BDCP documents well, makes all of our conclusions contingent on the projects actually being operated as simulated.

Independent Review Panel (IRP) Report for the 2014 Long-Term Operations Biological Opinions (LOBO) Annual Science Review

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | December 1st, 2014

Independent Review Panel (IRP) Report for the 2015 Long-Term Operations Biological Opinions (LOBO) Annual Science Review

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | December 1st, 2015

This report presents findings and opinions of the Independent Review Panel (IRP) assembled by the Delta Science Program to inform the National Marine Fisheries Service (N

This report presents findings and opinions of the Independent Review Panel (IRP) assembled by the Delta Science Program to inform the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) as to the efficacy of water operations and certain regulatory actions prescribed by their respective Long-term Operations Biological Opinions’ (LOBO) Reasonable and Prudent Alternative Actions (RPAs) as applied from October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2015 (Water Year 2015).  This year’s annual review focused primarily on: (1) Shasta Reservoir and Sacramento River temperature monitoring, modeling, and management, (2) the River Assessment for Forecasting Temperature (RAFT) decision support tool (model), (3) an Enhanced Particle Tracking Model (E-PTM), and (4) a USFWS report on past, present, and future approaches to incidental take of Delta Smelt.  After reviewing a required set of written documents (Appendix 1), the IRP convened at a public workshop in Sacramento, CA on 5-6 November 2015. The first day of the 2-day workshop included agency presentations and provided a forum for the IRP to interact and consider information presented on water operations, temperature modeling, monitoring and RPA Actions as implemented in yet another critically dry 2015 water year. On the second day, the IRP deliberated in a private session beginning at 9:00 a.m. in order to prepare and present their initial findings at the public workshop at 2:00 p.m., after which there was an opportunity for agency representatives, members of the public, and the IRP members to comment and otherwise exchange impressions and information. Subsequent IRP communication and deliberations were conducted via email and conference calls in the course of drafting this final report. Click here for federal agency response letter

Independent Review Panel (IRP) Report for the 2017 Long-term Operations Biological Opinions (LOBO) Biennial Science Review (January 24, 2018)

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | January 31st, 2018

Independent Review Panel Report for the 2016 California WaterFix Aquatic Science Peer Review

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | May 12th, 2016

This report presents the findings of the 2016 California WaterFix Aquatic Science Peer Review. An Independent Review Panel was convened by the Delta Science Program to pr

This report presents the findings of the 2016 California WaterFix Aquatic Science Peer Review. An Independent Review Panel was convened by the Delta Science Program to provide the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) with an independent scientific evaluation of the methods and approaches for developing the joint Biological Opinion requirements and analyses prepared for the CDFW 2081(b) Incidental Take Permit application for the California WaterFix. The Panel was charged with reviewing: (1) selected sections of the Biological Assessment (BA) that seeks to predict the effects of the WaterFix project on Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed species and their designated critical habitats, (2) the draft Analytical Approach to developing the joint Biological Opinion (AABO) and (3) the proposed methods for assessing project effects on Longfin Smelt. After reviewing a set of documents (Appendix 1), the Panel participated in a public meeting in Sacramento, CA on April 5-6, 2016. On the first day of this meeting, the Panel interacted with agency representatives following their presentations on the three topics above. On day 2, the Panel communicated and discussed its preliminary findings to agency representatives and the public. This report summarizes the Panel’s findings and recommendations in full detail.

Indicators of Climate Change in California

California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) | May 16th, 2018

From record temperatures to proliferating wildfires and rising seas, climate change poses an immediate and escalating threat to California’s environment, public health,

From record temperatures to proliferating wildfires and rising seas, climate change poses an immediate and escalating threat to California’s environment, public health, and economic vitality. Recent climate-related events – such as the devastating 2017 wildfires and the record-setting 2012-16 drought – have highlighted the challenges that confront the state as its climate continues to evolve.  California has been a pioneer in addressing climate change. This report helps support policy decisions and facilitates communication about climate change by providing, in a single document, indicators characterizing its multiple aspects in California.  Indicators are scientifically-based measurements that track trends in various aspects of climate change. Many indicators reveal discernable evidence that climate change is occurring in California and is having significant, measurable impacts in the state.  The report’s 36 indicators are grouped into four categories, as listed below. The report discusses what these indicators show, why they are important, and the factors that may be influencing them.  * Human-influenced (anthropogenic) drivers of climate change, such as greenhouse gas emissions * Changes in the state’s climate * Impacts of climate change on physical systems, such as oceans, lakes and snowpack * Impacts of climate change on biological systems – humans, vegetation and wildlife

Inhabiting the Delta: A Landscape Approach to Transformative Socio-Ecological Restoration

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | September 19th, 2017

Current legislation and plans for the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta) call for large-scale restoration of aquatic and terrestrial habitats, which will require sign

Current legislation and plans for the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta) call for large-scale restoration of aquatic and terrestrial habitats, which will require significant changes in waterways, land uses, and cultural patterns. These re-made landscapes will be subject to a variety of new human uses, which Delta planning and adaptive management literature has yet to adequately consider. Failing to account for human uses and evolving place values can lead to diminished performance and public support for Delta restoration efforts. Our empirical study examined restored and naturalized Delta landscapes using an integrative landscape approach that seeks to reconcile multiple goals and land-use agendas that span ecological, social, economic, and political domains. The research design consisted of six overlapping methods that included a planning, policy, and law review specific to the Delta; surveys and interviews with approximately 100 land managers, scientists, land-owners, law-enforcement personnel, agency representatives, and Delta residents; nine case studies of restored and naturalized delta landscapes; GIS mapping; and extensive field work. Findings derived from the synthesis of these methods show that human uses of the Delta’s re-wilded landscapes are diverse and pervasive. Given the infrastructural and urbanized context of the region, these environments are subject to multiple and sometimes conflicting uses, perceptions, and place values. Though these myriad uses cannot be fully predicted or controlled (nor should they be), findings showed that more proactive and inclusive planning for human uses can encourage or discourage particular uses while also building constituency, support, and active engagement in ecological restoration efforts. We conclude that reconciling human uses with ecological recovery in the Delta will require a more localized, multi-functional, and creative approach to designing and adaptively managing these emergent landscapes. We recommend that more resources and experimental prototyping be dedicated to such work.

Innovation in Monitoring: The U.S. Geological Survey Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta, California, Flow-Station Network

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 1st, 2016

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) installed the first gage to measure the flow of water into California’s Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta from the Sacramento River

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) installed the first gage to measure the flow of water into California’s Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta from the Sacramento River in the late 1800s. Today, a network of 35 hydro-acoustic meters measure flow throughout the delta. This region is a critical part of California’s freshwater supply and conveyance system. With the data provided by this flow-station network—sampled every 15 minutes and updated to the web every hour—state and federal water managers make daily decisions about how much freshwater can be pumped for human use, at which locations, and when. Fish and wildlife scientists, working with water managers, also use this information to protect fish species affected by pumping and loss of habitat. The data are also used to help determine the success or failure of efforts to restore ecosystem processes in what has been called the “most managed and highly altered” watershed in the country.