San Francisco Bay Plan

San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission | May 1st, 2012

The San Francisco Bay is an irreplaceable gift of nature that man can either abuse and ultimately destroy-or improve and protect for future generations. The Bay Plan p

The San Francisco Bay is an irreplaceable gift of nature that man can either abuse and ultimately destroy-or improve and protect for future generations. The Bay Plan presented in this report recognizes that the Bay is a single body of water, in which changes affecting one part may also affect other parts, and that only on a regional basis can the Bay be protected and enhanced. Protection of the Bay and enhancement of its shoreline are inseparable parts of the Bay Plan. Clearly what happens to the shoreline helps determine what happens to the Bay; if, for example, the relatively few shoreline areas suitable for water-oriented industry are used for housing, pressures will develop to provide new industrial land by filling the Bay. Therefore, in the public interest, the Commission is authorized to control both: (1) Bay filling and dredging, and (2) Bay-related shoreline development.  

San Luis National Wildlife Refuge Complex Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) | July 31st, 2024

This Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) will guide the management of the Merced National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), San Luis NWR and Grasslands Wildlife Management Area (W

This Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) will guide the management of the Merced National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), San Luis NWR and Grasslands Wildlife Management Area (WMA) for the next 15 years. Located in Merced County, California (Figure 1-1), these three units are managed and administered by the San Luis National Wildlife Refuge Complex (the Complex). A fourth unit, the San Joaquin River NWR, is also managed and administered by the Complex but already has a CCP for its management, which was completed in 2006 and amended in 2022. For the sake of this document, the term Complex refers to the San Luis NWR, Merced NWR and Grasslands WMA only. The Complex comprises just four of the 568 refuges that currently make up the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS or the Service) National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS or Refuge System). The mission of the NWRS is to conserve a network of lands and water for the conservation and management of fish, wildlife and plant resources of the United States for the benefit of present and future generations. As part of the Refuge System, the three units—Merced NWR, San Luis NWR and Grasslands WMA—addressed in this CCP provide important habitat for a unique assemblage of both wetland- (particularly waterfowl and other waterbirds) and upland-dependent wildlife species of California’s Central Valley. This CCP is divided into five chapters: Chapter 1, Introduction and Background; Chapter 2, Comprehensive Conservation Planning Process; Chapter 3, Refuge Resources; Chapter 4, Refuge Management Direction; and Chapter 5, Implementation. Click here for full appendices.

Scenarios of climate adaptation potential on protected working lands from management of soils

Environmental Research Letters (IOP) | September 30th, 2019

Management of protected lands may enhance ecosystem services that conservation programs were designed to protect. Practices that build soil organic matter on agri

Management of protected lands may enhance ecosystem services that conservation programs were designed to protect. Practices that build soil organic matter on agricultural lands also increase soil water holding capacity, potentially reducing climatic water deficit (CWD), increasing actual evapotranspiration (AET) and increasing groundwater recharge (RCH). We developed nine spatially-explicit land use and conservation scenarios (2001–2100) in the LUCAS land use change model to address two questions for California working lands (cropland and rangeland): How does land use change limit opportunities to manage soils for hydrologic climate adaptation benefits? To what extent and where can soil management practices increase climate adaptation on protected working lands? Hydrologic benefits [Σ(ΔCWD, ΔAET, ΔRCH)] due to soil management were simulated in the Basin Characterization Model (a state-wide water balance model) for two Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 climate models. LUCAS simulated land conversion and new conservation easements with potential for maximum hydrologic benefits. Climate drove differences in lost potential for water benefits due to urbanization (33.9–87.6 m3 × 106) in 2050. Conflict between development pressure and potential hydrologic benefits occurred most in Santa Clara County in the San Francisco Bay Area and Shasta County in Northern Sacramento Valley. Hydrologic benefits on easements were similar in magnitude to losses from development. Water savings from management of California Land Conservation (a.k.a. Williamson) Act contract lands were an order of magnitude greater, totaling over 460 m3 × 106 annually in a drier climate by 2050. Few counties provide most benefits because of soil properties, climate and land area protected. The increase in hydrologic benefits varies by agricultural practice and adoption rate, land use type and configuration, and terms of conservation agreements. The effectiveness of programs designed to improve climate adaptation at county to state scales will likely increase by taking this variability into consideration.

Sea Level Rise in California

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | February 29th, 2024

Shifting landscapes: decoupled urban irrigation and greenness patterns during severe drought

Environmental Research Letters (IOP) | June 7th, 2019

Urban outdoor water conservation and efficiency offer high potential for demand-side management, but irrigation, greenness, and climate interlinks must be better underst

Urban outdoor water conservation and efficiency offer high potential for demand-side management, but irrigation, greenness, and climate interlinks must be better understood to design optimal policies. To identify paired transitions during drought, we matched parcel-level water use data from smart, dedicated irrigation meters with high-spatial resolution, multispectral aerial imagery. We examined changes across 72 non-residential parcels using potable or recycled water for large landscape irrigation over four biennial summers (2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016) that encompassed a historic drought in California. We found that despite little change in irrigation levels during the first few years of the drought, parcel greenness deteriorated. Between summers 2010 and 2014, average parcel greenness decreased−61% for potable water irrigators and−56% for recycled water irrigators, providing evidence that vegetation could not reach its vigor from wetter, cooler years as the drought intensified with abnormally high temperatures. Between summers 2014–2016 as drought severity lessened, irrigation rates decreased significantly in line with high drought saliency, but greenness rebounded ubiquitously, on average+110% for potable water irrigators and+62% for recycled water irrigators, demonstrating climate-driven vegetation recovery as evaporation and plant evapotranspiration rates decreased. Transitions were similar for customers with both potable and recycled water; vegetation changes were dominated by the overarching climatic regime. As irrigation cannot always overcome drought conditions, which will become more severe under climate change, to maintain vegetation health, utilities and urban planners should consider the tradeoffs between providing green spaces and water scarcity. This includes evaluating the roles of climate-appropriate landscaping and adaptive reallocation of potable and recycled water resources to enhance water security. By addressing emerging themes in urban water management through analysis of data from forthcoming water metering and aerial imagery technologies, this research provides a unique perspective on water use, greenness, and drought linkages.

Show Me the Water Plan: Urban Water Management Plans and California’s Water Supply Adequacy Laws

Golden Gate University (GSU) | October 11th, 2010

In 2001, California adopted two landmark pieces of legislation – Senate Bills (SB) 221 and 610 – that require local land use authorities to demonstrate long-t

In 2001, California adopted two landmark pieces of legislation – Senate Bills (SB) 221 and 610 – that require local land use authorities to demonstrate long-term water supply availability before approving new, large development projects. The details of these bills, which quickly became known as the “show me the water” laws, are distinct: SB 610 requires a “water supply assessment” at the relatively early stage of environmental review and covers residential, commercial, and industrial projects (a “project” is typically a development of more than 500 residential units, or a similarly large commercial or industrial development), while SB 221 requires a final check on water availability (a “written verification”) for residential projects of this same size threshold at the later stage of subdivision map approval. Despite these differences, the intent behind both laws is similar: they aim to forge an often missing link in California’s local planning process. Under these laws, cities and counties generally cannot make the determination of adequate water supplies on their own, but must instead obtain this documentation from the local water utility that would be serving the project. SB 221 and 610 are part of a broader state effort to impose water supply planning safeguards on a highly decentralized planning system. The proximate targets were the state’s fifty-eight counties and more than 475 incorporated municipalities that have local land use authority – forcing them to coordinate with the local water utilities to ascertain whether adequate supplies are available to support new development.4However, California’s urban water supply is also highly decentralized, with hundreds of utilities serving these diverse communities. The effectiveness of SB 221 and 610 depends on the quality of the planning efforts of these utilities. State efforts to impose some planning norms on water utilities began with the passage of the Urban Water Management Planning Act in 1983. The Act required all large urban utilities (defined as those serving at least 3,000 retail connections or supplying at least 3,000 acre-feet of water per year) to develop long-term plans for water supply and demand in their service areas, to be updated at least every five years, in years ending in zeros and fives. The list of required elements in these Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) has been updated numerous times, reinforcing the core purpose: to provide an assessment of the extent to which current and future water supply sources will be adequate to meet water demand at an appropriate level of reliability in normal years as well as during single or multi-year droughts. By and large, SB 221 and 610 were crafted to be in sync with the law governing utility planning. Water supply adequacy to support new development needs to be demonstrated over a twenty-year horizon, the minimum planning horizon for a UWMP.8 A utility’s UWMP can be used to demonstrate water availability under both SB 221 and 610, as long as the plan accounts for the increased water demand associated with the proposed development project. In keeping with California’s strong “home rule” tradition, these planning laws rely largely on citizen enforcement rather than direct regulatory oversight by the state. Thus, the laws provide the opportunity for citizens to challenge the responsible local agencies in civil suits.10Courts can invalidate the planning documents (UWMPs, water supply assessments, or written verifications), thereby holding up development approvals. SB 610 also introduced financial incentives to water utilities to submit UWMPs. Since 2002, only agencies with “complete” plans are eligible for state financial support for local projects. This change gave the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) the mandate to assess the plans for completeness but not for quality. In sharp contrast to climate change policy, where the California Attorney General has pressured local governments to bring their plans into compliance with state laws aimed at limiting greenhouse-gas emissions, the state has not actively sought to enforce the water supply adequacy laws though the judicial process. This Article reviews the effectiveness of California’s strategy of using enabling legislation and passive enforcement to encourage more integrated local water and land use planning. To shed light on the effectiveness of the current policy framework, the Article begins with a critical overview of the Urban Water Management Planning process, drawing on a detailed analysis of plans submitted in the early 2000s.13 It then evaluates how water supply assessments are proceeding, with a particular emphasis on steps used to identify adequacy, drawing on telephone surveys of land use authorities and water utilities conducted by the author in 2004 and 2009. A concluding section highlights shortcomings in the current system and suggests steps that could improve California’s planning process.

Solar Energy and Groundwater in the San Joaquin Valley

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | October 26th, 2022

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires groundwater users to bring their basins into balance over the next two decades. In the San Joaquin Valley, this

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires groundwater users to bring their basins into balance over the next two decades. In the San Joaquin Valley, this will likely mean taking more than 500,000 acres of agricultural land out of intensive irrigated production. Local and regional economies could be stressed as a result, with some regular employment opportunities in agriculture disappearing and public revenues declining if lands are not put to new uses. As landowners and newly formed groundwater agencies tackle the groundwater deficits in their areas, utility-scale solar development—already an attractive option for landowners owning property with or without water rights—could offer an opportunity to keep lands that exit irrigated production economically productive. Moreover, development could provide multiple benefits by helping to supplement habitat and mitigate dust generation on transitioning lands. However, the expansion of solar hinges on whether state-level energy system planning processes—in conjunction with local land use planning—can address the transmission challenges that threaten the region’s promise as a solar power hub.

Solar-power replacement as a solution for hydropower foregone in US dam removals

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | August 26th, 2019

There is a growing dam removal movement in the United States, driven in part by environmental, safety and cost considerations. These include electricity-producing hydro-d

There is a growing dam removal movement in the United States, driven in part by environmental, safety and cost considerations. These include electricity-producing hydro-dams, many of which are ageing and will require substantial maintenance or removal over the coming decades. However, hydropower has been and remains an important source of energy for the development of the United States, presently generating about 6% of the nation’s electricity while providing essential grid services. As a potential solution to the conflict between these imperatives, industrial-scale photovoltaics (PVs) could be used for replacement of the energy foregone from hydro-dam removals either by installing the PV infrastructure in the area formerly inundated by the dam reservoir or through offsite replacement. Presently, the total PV generation in the conterminous United States is 35,919 GWh yr−1, or approximately 13% of hydropower generation. On the basis of actual hydropower generation in the conterminous United States in 2016 (that is, 274,868 GWh yr−1), we estimated that 529,885 ha of PVs would be needed to replace the generation of all 2,603 hydro-dams—an area approximately equal to the land size of Delaware. PVs could replace the total annual energy produced from these dams while requiring only 13% of their existing reservoir area. If all the hydro-dams in the United States were removed and only 50% of the emergent land was used for PVs, 945,062 GWh yr−1 power could be generated, which is 3.44 times the current hydropower generation. These analyses are theoretical and do not consider costs, which would be highly site specific. Replacement by PVs without energy storage could not replicate the dispatchability and grid services provisions of existing hydropower facilities; however, improving battery storage capabilities may ameliorate this shortcoming. We suggest that PVs could replace much of the annual electricity output of hydro-dams in the United States while using substantially less land area and providing considerable environmental and ecological benefits.

Special Report on Climate Change and Land

UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) | August 7th, 2019

This Special Report on Climate Change and Land1 responds to the Panel decision in 2016 to prepare three Special Reports during the Sixth Assessment cycle, taking

This Special Report on Climate Change and Land1 responds to the Panel decision in 2016 to prepare three Special Reports during the Sixth Assessment cycle, taking account of proposals from governments and observer organizations. This report addresses greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes in land-based ecosystems , land use and sustainable land management in relation to climate change adaptation and mitigation, desertification, land degradation and food security. This report follows the publication of other recent reports, including the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR15), the thematic assessment of the Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) on Land Degradation and Restoration, the IPBES Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, and the Global Land Outlook of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). This report provides an updated assessment of the current state of knowledge while striving for coherence and complementarity with other recent reports. This Summary for Policymakers (SPM) is structured in four parts: A) People, land and climate in a warming world; B) Adaptation and mitigation response options; C) Enabling response options; and D) Action in the near-term. Index and Links to Full Report

State of California Sea Level Guidance

California Ocean Protection Council (COPC) | May 31st, 2024

This report updates and replaces the previous 2018 ‘State of California Sea Level Rise Guidance’ and marks the fourth iteration of statewide guidance since 2010 for s

This report updates and replaces the previous 2018 ‘State of California Sea Level Rise Guidance’ and marks the fourth iteration of statewide guidance since 2010 for state and local decision-makers to incorporate best available science on sea level rise into planning, design, permitting, investments, and other decisions.