Status of Perennial Estuarine Wetlands in the State of California

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | November 1st, 2008

Section 305(b) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires each state submit biennial reports describing the health of its surface water, including wetlands, to the USE

Section 305(b) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires each state submit biennial reports describing the health of its surface water, including wetlands, to the USEPA. This document reports on the health of California’s perennial, saline estuarine wetlands. Estuaries are partially enclosed bodies of water along the coast where freshwater runoff meets and mixes with salt water from the ocean. Based on the draft definition of wetlands for California, an estuarine wetland is an area within an estuary that is exposed at low tide and covered with rooted vegetation. The health of the state’s estuarine wetlands is estimated from a statewide survey of the distribution, abundance, and ambient condition of estuarine wetlands. The survey had three components: 1) landscape profile; 2) probability-based assessment of ambient condition; and 3) assessment of selected estuarine wetland restoration and mitigation projects. The results help answer four fundamental management questions: 1) where are the State’s estuarine wetlands and how abundant are they; 2) what is the ambient condition of estuarine wetlands statewide and how does their condition vary by region; 3) what are the major stressors and how do they vary among coastal regions; and 4) what is the condition of permitted restoration projects relative to ambient condition. This fourth question demonstrates how data could be used to evaluate policies and programs affecting the distribution, abundance, and condition of estuarine wetlands. The landscape profile described the distribution and abundance of the State’s estuarine wetlands relative to other estuarine habitats and explored the underlying causes through a detailed examination of trends in San Francisco Estuary. A probability-based survey was used to assess the ambient condition of saline, perennial estuarine wetlands. The statewide ambient survey involved 120 sites allocated equally among four regions: North Coast, San Francisco Estuary, Central Coast, and South Coast. An additional 30 sites were allocated to South Coast to test for a difference between large and small estuaries. The field survey was conducted in the Fall of 2007. The statewide ambient survey in turn served as a regional frame of reference for project assessments. Both the ambient survey and the project assessments utilized the California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM; Version 5.0.2). CRAM is a field-based method to assess wetland condition based on visible indicators of four wetland attributes: Landscape Context, Hydrology, Physical Structure, and Biological Structure. Results were reported as the percent of the total area of estuarine wetland in California likely to fall within four categories equally-spaced categories of possible CRAM index or attribute scores, which range from 25-100: Scores greater than 82 = Category 1; scores between 63 and 82 = Category 2; scores between 44 and 63 = Category 3; and scores less than 44 = Category 4. Landscape Profile. Approximately 91% of the historical amount acreage of California wetlands has been lost due to reclamation and land use. Accurate estimates of estuarine wetland loss in particular are only available for the San Francisco Estuary. In spite of losing approximately 85% of its saline wetlands and almost 92% of its freshwater tidal wetlands, the SF Estuary has almost 44,500 acres of estuarine wetlands at this time, about 77% of all the estuarine wetlands in the state. Although land use varies among the estuaries of California, it has affected the distribution, abundance, size, and shape of estuarine wetlands in consistently deleterious ways. It has decreased the amount of estuarine wetland and increased the number of small wetlands, thus increasing the distance between wetlands. In the more urbanized estuaries of the South Coast, Central Coast, and SF Estuary, many wetlands are embedded in intensive land uses and bounded by levees. These conditions diminish the hydrological and ecological connectivity among the wetlands, increase their susceptibility to invasion and local catastrophic events, and reduce their overall capacity to serve society.

Status of Water Quality in Groundwater Resources Used for Drinking-Water Supply in the Southeastern San Joaquin Valley, 2013–15: California GAMA Priority Basin Project

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | April 25th, 2024

The California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project (GAMA-PBP) investigated water quality of groundwater resources used for drinki

The California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project (GAMA-PBP) investigated water quality of groundwater resources used for drinking-water supplies in the Madera-Chowchilla, Kings, Kaweah, Tule, and Tulare Lake groundwater subbasins of the southeastern San Joaquin Valley during 2013–15. The study focused primarily on groundwater resources used for domestic-supply wells in the southeastern San Joaquin Valley (SESJV-D), which correspond mostly to shallower parts of aquifer systems, compared to the groundwater resources used for public-supply wells in the southeastern San Joaquin Valley (SESJV-P). The investigation had three components: (1) characterization of the status of water quality in the SESJV-D, (2) comparison between water quality in the SESJV-D and SESJV-P, and (3) identification of natural and anthropogenic factors that potentially could affect water quality in these resources.

Status of Water-Quality Conditions in the United States, 2010–20, Chapter C of U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Availability Assessment—2010–20

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 15th, 2025

Key findings related to groundwater and surface water quality problems that affect water availability include the following: Drinking-water use is affected by geogen

Key findings related to groundwater and surface water quality problems that affect water availability include the following: Drinking-water use is affected by geogenic and anthropogenic contaminants. Elevated concentrations of arsenic, manganese, strontium, radium, adjusted gross alpha, and nitrate are common in drinking water aquifers serving more than 30 million people in the United States. About one-third of stream miles assessed as surface-water sourced drinking-water supply are impaired with respect to drinking-water use, most commonly because of non-mercury metals and salinity. Health-based drinking-water violations at public water systems may disproportionately affect socially vulnerable communities. People with domestic wells as their drinking-water source are more prone to exposure to contaminants compared to people served by public water systems. Ecological water uses are predominantly limited by nutrients, sediment, temperature, pathogens, salinity, and pesticides. Contaminants without or historically without regulatory thresholds (for example, polyfluoroalkyl substances [PFAS]) have been underrepresented in previous assessments and also likely contribute to ecological degradation and human exposure. Water availability for human and ecological use is limited by elevated constituent concentrations in surface water and groundwater because of human activities. Human activities include sources (for example, inorganic and organic chemicals), processes (for example, dredging), or permanent landscape modifications (for example, dams, urbanization). Interactions between groundwater and surface water can influence water quality. Surface-water recharge can be a source of contaminants to aquifers, whereas groundwater discharge, with slow transport times, results in long-term, lagged delivery of pollutants to surface waters (especially nitrate, chloride, PFAS, and other constituents). Little information exists regarding human-health exposure risks from mixtures of geogenic and anthropogenic drinking-water contaminants. Co-occurrence and mixtures of multiple water-quality constituents, taken together, can cause compounding negative effects on water availability but mixtures are rarely measured in standard monitoring protocols. Alternative water resources could increase water availability by providing additional supply from non-traditional sources such as reclaimed wastewater, brackish and saline water, and produced water from oil and gas development. Companion chapters: U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Availability Assessment—2010–20, Chapter A Water Supply in the Conterminous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico, Water Years 2010–20, Chapter B Water Use Across the Conterminous United States, Water Years 2010–20, Chapter D  Climate Change and Future Water Availability in the United States, Chapter E  Integrated Water Availability in the Conterminous United States, 2010–20, Chapter F 

Statutory Water Rights Law And Related California Code Sections (As amended, including Statutes 2016)

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | March 30th, 2017

The State Water Resources Control Board publishes this collection of California statutes pertaining to the law of water rights as part of its public information program.

The State Water Resources Control Board publishes this collection of California statutes pertaining to the law of water rights as part of its public information program. This booklet contains sections from the California Constitution, the California Water Code, and other related codes which affect water rights decisions. This booklet is provided as a public service. It contains only excerpts of the Water Code. While every effort is made to assure accuracy, persons should consult the official version of the California Code when making legal decisions. The California Legislative Counsel maintains the official code, which is accessible on the Internet at: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes.xhtml. In addition to the statutes contained in this booklet, decisions of the State Water Resources Control Board are guided by case law. A listing of major recent decisions is included. In general, the statutes contained in this booklet govern the acquisition and exercise of rights to reasonable and beneficial use of surface waters (and of groundwater flowing in known and definite channels) by priority of appropriation initiated on or after December 19, 1914. That is the effective date of the Water Commission Act, which is the origin of many of the water right provisions of today’s Water Code.

Still Imperilled, Still Important: The Little Hoover Commission’s Review of the CALFED Program

Little Hoover Commission | November 17th, 2005

The Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta is a treasured and imperiled resource. And CALFED has been the best hope to restore it. The ambitious state-federal partnership is

The Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta is a treasured and imperiled resource. And CALFED has been the best hope to restore it. The ambitious state-federal partnership is proof that political will and leadership can resolve seemingly intractable conflicts. And yet in recent years, the program also has demonstrated the propensity for rudderless bureaucracies to get caught in inescapable eddies. It is not too late for the Delta, or for CALFED. But restoring the estuary and managing the resource in a sustainable manner will require continuous political support, expert leadership, and smart management.

Stopping the Drain on Household Budgets: Addressing Tap Water Mistrust through Affordable Premise Plumbing Investments

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) | August 7th, 2019

This report focuses on the issue of tap water mistrust in the City of Los Angeles. While recent research into water quality of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power�

This report focuses on the issue of tap water mistrust in the City of Los Angeles. While recent research into water quality of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) indicates that water at the tap for their customers is safe to drink, the Los Angeles metropolitan region has one of the highest rates of household mistrust in tap water in the nation.

Storing and managing water for the environment is more efficient than mimicking natural flows

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | June 27th, 2024

Storing Water for the Environment: Operating Reservoirs to Improve California’s Freshwater Ecosystems

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | August 23rd, 2022

Large reservoirs like those that rim the Central Valley are essential for managing water in California’s highly variable climate. They provide multiple benefits includi

Large reservoirs like those that rim the Central Valley are essential for managing water in California’s highly variable climate. They provide multiple benefits including water supply, hydropower, flood management, and recreation. However, construction and operation of these reservoirs have also imposed significant environmental costs, including native fishes’ loss of access to high-quality habitat above dams and degradation of freshwater ecosystems below them. Moreover, regulatory uncertainty for water users is rising as these ecosystems decline. California needs a new approach for managing environmental water in its large reservoirs, particularly as the climate warms and droughts become more intense.

Stormwater Funding Options Providing Sustainable Water Quality Funding in Los Angeles County

California Contract Cities Association (CCCA) | May 21st, 2014

The Los Angeles region faces critical, very costly, and seriously underfunded stormwater and urban runoff water quality challenges. The Los Angeles County Flood Control D

The Los Angeles region faces critical, very costly, and seriously underfunded stormwater and urban runoff water quality challenges. The Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) led a multi-year effort to develop a sustainable revenue source for municipalities to manage stormwater programs and implement water quality improvement projects. This effort included special legislation and development of a proposed parcel fee, the “Clean Water, Clean Beaches Measure,” to fund clean water programs. At extended protest hearings on a proposed parcel fee in January and March of 2013, the Board of Supervisors heard concerns about the fee and the fee program from public schools, the business community, other stakeholders and the public. The Board moved to close the public hearing and determined to “not proceed at this time with the Clean Water, Clean Beaches measure as proposed.” In June 2013, the Board adopted a motion requesting collaborative participation with the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (LACSD) and other wastewater management agencies to evaluate methods, assess the a potential model governance structure, and to help identify and secure other sources of funding. In response to the Board’s actions, the City Managers Committees of the California Contract Cities Association (CCCA) and the League of California Cities, Los Angeles County Division (League) convened a City Managers meeting with representatives from public schools, environmental organizations, and the business community on June 27, 2013 to hear stakeholders’ concerns and suggestions directly. The City Managers attending the meeting authorized a Work Group to review stormwater funding options after the County’s proposed Clean Water, Clean Beaches funding initiative failed to move forward. The City Managers Work Group actively sought the input of key stakeholders from the environmental, public education, and business communities, and prepared this report to assist the Board, local decision makers, stakeholders, and the public in reaching a common understanding of the issues at hand and the potential solutions. The Managers found that to fully understand the issues, improved communication and education is necessary. This report describes the stormwater regulatory requirements speci c to the greater Los Angeles area, the complexities of funding stormwater programs, and the LACFCD’s funding initiative. It examines the regulatory framework for stormwater management, including the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) MS4 permit (stormwater permit) and the total maximum daily load (TMDL) programs. The report also summarizes the impacts of the federal TMDL Consent Decree for the Los Angeles Region signed in 1999, which has indirectly regulated the LACFCD, 85 cities, and the unincorporated County since that time. Further, it reviews estimated stormwater program compliance costs, the “pros and cons” of various funding options, and evolving opportunities. The report concludes with a series of recommendations agreed upon by the City Managers. Suggestions from an Elected Officials Committee and individual City Attorneys are also included in this report. The Work Group found that funding urban runoff programs is so complex and dynamic, and the solutions so costly, that the County and the Cities cannot follow a single funding strategy at this time. One option, for example, is to examine institutional roles to determine whether other agencies, such as the County Sanitation Districts, either provide a useful governance model or could play a new or different role in managing stormwater in the future. During the report development process, the Sixth Appellate Court clarified the application of Proposition 218 regarding the imposition of fees for the capture and use of stormwater for groundwater recharge (Griffith v. Pajaro Water Management Agency). This ruling could have major implications on funding options. These are only two examples of the changing nature and complexities in charting a path forward. The City Managers Work Group recommends a “multi-pronged” approach to address urban runoff funding issues, since our communities may encounter several dead-ends. A number of the recommendations require active management and a higher degree of organization by local government. The recommended actions are voluntary. The report is not advocating that any city, group of cities, or the County adopt stormwater fees. The managers are committed to local control; if a regional fee moves forward, each community should make its own decision whether or not to participate in the regional effort. However, there are steps that local governments can take that will assist in funding the new stormwater mandates. For example, cities should organize and be active in the water bond discussions. This report suggests a voluntary framework through Contract Cities and the League to organize those communities that desire to engage in implementing the recommendations found in this report. It should be noted that the recommendations involving California Contract Cities, the Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities, and the State League of Cities have not been of cially endorsed by these organizations at this stage of the process. The City Managers Work Group and the Elected Of cials Committee held detailed discussions with staff from both organizations in order to re ect their input and concerns. Recommendations involving these organizations, such as changes in State legislation, would need to be reviewed and approved by each organization.

Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) Final Phase 1 Report – Identification and Characterization of Existing Salt Accumulation Areas

Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) | December 13th, 2013

The purpose of the Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) is to identify the range of viable Central Valley alternatives for salt disposal to

The purpose of the Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) is to identify the range of viable Central Valley alternatives for salt disposal to provide input for consideration during development of the Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (SNMP) for the region under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB). The findings will be used to guide discussions regarding establishment of regional salt management policies and the need for changes to the existing Central Valley RWQCB Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans) to facilitate salt disposal in a manner that is most beneficial to the region and consistent with the State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) Recycled Water Policy. This work is being conducted under the direction of the Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long- Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) initiative, which is developing the SNMP for the Central Valley. The SSALTS project is being conducted in three phases: Phase 1: Identify and Characterize Existing Salt Accumulation Study Areas–Selection of representative Study Areas to serve as prototype situational examples to facilitate discussions regarding salt accumulation and disposal in the Central Valley. Each of these Study Areas is being characterized to establish baseline information that may be used to support development of salt disposal alternatives in subsequent project phases. Phase 2: Develop Potential Salt Management Strategies–SSALTS will develop potential long- term salt disposal alternatives in three parts: (1) In-Valley alternatives; (2) Out-of-Valley alternatives; and (3) hybrid alternatives that combine In-Valley and Out-of-Valley salt disposal options. Phase 3: Evaluate Potential Salt Disposal Alternatives to Identify Acceptable Alternatives for Implementation – Alternatives developed under Phase 2 will be evaluated using selected feasibility criteria (e.g., regulatory, institutional, economic, technological, etc.). The outcome of this evaluation will be the identification and prioritization of acceptable salt disposal alternatives for potential incorporation into Central Valley SNMP as salt management implementation measures. This draft report represents the findings of Phase 1. Subsequent phases of SSALTS will be implemented following completion of this phase.