Sacramento River Temperature Task Group Annual Report of Activities, October 1, 2015 through September 30, 2016

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | October 31st, 2016

Sacramento Valley Salmon Resiliency Strategy June 2017

California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) | June 2nd, 2017

The Sacramento Valley Salmon Resiliency Strategy (Strategy) is a science-based document that has been prepared by the State of California (State) to address specific near

The Sacramento Valley Salmon Resiliency Strategy (Strategy) is a science-based document that has been prepared by the State of California (State) to address specific near- and long-term needs of Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon (winter-run), Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon (spring-run), and California Central Valley steelhead (steelhead). The Strategy mirrors the approach taken with the Delta Smelt Resiliency Strategy developed by the State in 2016: science-driven, focused, and designed to provide resource agencies, the public, Congress, and the California State Legislature with information critical to collaborative approaches to species resiliency. The Strategy relies heavily on the National Marine Fisheries Service Final Recovery Plan for winter-run, spring-run, and steelhead (NMFS 2014), and is guided by conceptual models of factors driving winter-run population dynamics at key life stages developed by the salmon and sturgeon assessment of indicators by life-stage (SAIL) teams (Johnson et al. 2016; Heublein et al. 2017). The actions are also supported, where indicated, by other salmonid recovery planning documents and efforts. The Strategy is an aggressive approach to improving species viability and resiliency by implementing specific habitat restoration actions. The State will take leadership roles in each action, although in all cases federal and local agency leadership, coordination, and partnerships are required for success. Recent successful restoration efforts led by local agencies and landowners demonstrate the importance and value of these collaborative partnerships. State agencies that could implement this Strategy include the California Natural Resources Agency, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW). The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) will be a primary partner in many of the actions. In many cases, included actions will benefit an array of aquatic and terrestrial species. Coordination and alignment across various resource management agencies will ensure achievement of maximum public benefit. All of the actions will comply with applicable laws including the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA), California Endangered Species Act, California Environmental Quality Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and the federal Clean Water Act.

San Francisco Bay: A Freshwater Starved Estuary

Bay Institute | September 1st, 2016

How Reducing Flows Harms the Ecosystems of San Francisco Bay and Coastal Waters The Bay Institute’s major new study, San Francisco Bay: The Freshwater – Starved Estu

How Reducing Flows Harms the Ecosystems of San Francisco Bay and Coastal Waters The Bay Institute’s major new study, San Francisco Bay: The Freshwater – Starved Estuary, documents how the ecological health of San Francisco Bay and the nearby ocean is at high risk because large-scale water diversion in the Bay’s watershed severely limits the amount of fresh water that reaches the Bay and alters the timing of that flow. Inflow to the Bay from its Central Valley watershed now averages less than half of what it would be without diversions; in some years just one-third of the runoff makes it to the Bay. The result is a nearly permanent drought for the Bay’s fish, wildlife, and their habitats. This radical alteration creates severe consequences for the Bay and marine ecosystems – and Bay Area residents pay the price. The study shows how unsustainable diversion of the Bay’s freshwater inflow: Dramatically cuts production of fish and shrimp that are the food source for marine mammals, like Orca Whales, and birds; Allows pollutants to accumulate to dangerous levels and encourages blooms of toxic algae; Reduces sediment supply to Bay Area wetlands and beaches; Makes it easier for undesirable non-native species to successfully invade the Bay Estuary. The San Francisco Bay Estuary is created by the mixing of fresh water from the Central Valley’s rivers with salt water from the Pacific Ocean. Dramatically reducing the inflow of fresh water generates cascading effects in the Bay’s watershed, the Bay itself, and coastal ocean waters. The report’s major findings include: On average, since 1975 more than half (53%) of runoff from the Central Valley watershed has been diverted, stored, or exported before it can reach the Bay – and in many years two-thirds or more of the Bay’s inflow is captured; As a result of intensive water diversions, the Bay experiences catastrophically dry years almost half the time (only one “supercritically dry” year occurred naturally between 1975-2014, but the Bay experienced nineteen supercritical years during that period); Numerous unrelated fish species – from sharks to salmon, from sturgeon to smelt – show strong positive correlations with Bay Inflow; many of these species are now endangered, and even commercially viable fisheries are in decline; Predators that feed on flow-dependent fish and shrimp are feeling the pinch – for example, dwindling supplies of Central Valley Chinook salmon may restrict the recovery of the local Orca whale population; Blooms of toxic “algae” (cyanobacteria) are becoming more frequent, and other pollutants are becoming more concentrated, as a result of reductions in freshwater flows from the Bay’s watershed; Bay Area beaches and tidal wetlands are deprived of sediment that was once transported by high river flows. The study reports that local businesses are likely to suffer from the Bay’s continued decline, including those related to commercial fishing and tourism. As our Bay, beaches, wetlands, and fish and wildlife populations deteriorate, the quality of life for many Bay Area residents will also be severely – and perhaps permanently – damaged. The study identifies four important approaches to improving Bay inflows: Update the State’s 21 year old water quality standards for the Bay Estuary to ensure adequate inflow Require all those who divert water destined for the Bay, not just a subset, to contribute their fair share of fresh water to support benefits enjoyed by all Californians Invest in local water supplies around the state including conservation, and recycling, that can generate millions of acre-feet of water and reduce reliance on water diverted from the Estuary and its watershed Coordinate management of flows with wetland and beach restoration to more effectively protect shorelines The study was prepared for the San Francisco Estuary Partnership, a coalition of resource agencies, non-profits, citizens, and scientists working to protect, restore, and enhance water quality and fish and wildlife habitat in and around the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary, which also provided the majority of funding for the project.

San Joaquin River Restoration Program

San Joaquin River Restoration Program | December 13th, 2007

San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement

Congressional Research Service (CRS) | November 9th, 2007

Historically, Central California’s San Joaquin River supported large Chinook salmon populations. Since the Bureau of Reclamation’s Friant Dam on the San Joaquin River

Historically, Central California’s San Joaquin River supported large Chinook salmon populations. Since the Bureau of Reclamation’s Friant Dam on the San Joaquin River became fully operational in the 1940s, much of the river’s water has been diverted for off-stream agricultural uses. As a result, approximately 60 miles of the river bed is dry in most years. Thus, the river no longer supports Chinook salmon populations in its upper reaches. In 1988, a coalition of conservation and fishing groups sued Reclamation (Natural Resources Defense Council v. Rodgers). A U.S. District Court judge has ruled that operation of Friant Dam violates state law because of its destruction of downstream fisheries. Faced with mounting legal fees, uncertainty, and the possibility of dramatic cuts to water diversions, parties negotiated a settlement instead of proceeding to trial. In September 2006, an agreement, commonly called the Settlement, was reached. It calls for new releases of water from Friant Dam to restore fisheries, as well as for efforts to mitigate reductions in off-stream deliveries lost to restoration flows. Congressional authorization and appropriations are required for full Settlement implementation. Legislation based on the Settlement (H.R. 4074, H.R. 24 and S. 27) is pending. Related bills have also been introduced. A key legislative issue is how to finance the Settlement, specifically how to resolve congressional pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) issues. Other challenges are how to achieve the Settlement’s dual goals of fisheries restoration and water management, and how to address concerns of stakeholders not party to the Settlement, without disrupting the negotiated agreement. The amount of water projected for restoration flows and the volume of reduced Friant water deliveries are related, but the relationship would not necessarily be one-for-one. Available estimates for total annual Friant water supplies (including both contract and temporary water) are, on average, 15% to 16% less under the Settlement than under current operations; but such estimates do not account for improvements in water management that might reduce the impact on water users. For three-quarters of water contractors, the reduction would represent a reduction in one of their available sources of water. The impacts of such reductions will vary by contractor depending on the firmness of existing surface water supplies and the reliability of groundwater supplies. How to offset the decrease and who would pay for investments in other water sources and improved efficiency has not been determined. Although the region may benefit from increased recreational expenditures and investment in river restoration activities under the Settlement, studies suggest its largest and mostly negative economic impact would be on the agriculture industry, at least in the short term. In addition, downsteam interests not party to the Settlement have been concerned about increased flooding, groundwater infiltration, and competition with existing federal financial commitments. Nearby communities fear harm to groundwater quantity and quality. Some of these concerns have been addressed in the legislation, but some remain. On the other hand, some communities and interests believe restoration will bring other benefits to the river, such as improved surface water quality in lower San Joaquin River reaches. Ultimate Settlement costs and benefits are very difficult to predict.

San Luis Obispo Coastkeeper v. Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District

United States District Court, Central District of California | September 23rd, 2022

San Luis Rey Flood Control Project Whelan Mitigation Site Habitat Restoration Action

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) | January 15th, 2014

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District (Corps or Los Angeles District) and City of Oceanside (City) propose to restore southwestern willow flycatc

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District (Corps or Los Angeles District) and City of Oceanside (City) propose to restore southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus, flycatcher) habitat along the San Luis Rey River, within the San Luis Rey River Flood Risk Management Project Area, to meet environmental commitments and permit requirements consistent with the Record of Decision signed by the South Pacific Division Commander, February 21, 2008, for the Final Integrated Post Authorization Decision Document/ Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report/Post Authorization Change Report for the San Luis Rey Flood Control Project from College Blvd. to the Pacific Ocean, San Diego, California (SLR PADD/FEIS/FEIR/PAC), July 2007. The proposed action would include active restoration of riparian habitat and floodplain. The proposed site, located along the San Luis Rey River within the existing flood risk management project site, is owned by the City of Oceanside, the project’s non-Federal sponsor, and is herein referred to as the Whelan Mitigation Site.

Secretarial Order #3206: American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act

U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) | January 24th, 2006

This Order is issued by the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce (Secretaries) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. 1531, as amend

This Order is issued by the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce (Secretaries) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. 1531, as amended (the Act), the federal-tribal trust relationship, and other federal law. Specifically, this Order clarifies the responsibilities of the component agencies, bureaus and offices of the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce (Departments), when actions taken under authority of the Act and associated implementing regulations affect, or may affect, Indian lands, tribal trust resources, or the exercise of American Indian tribal rights, as defined in this Order. This Order further acknowledges the trust responsibility and treaty obligations of the United States toward Indian tribes and tribal members and its government-to-government relationship in dealing with tribes. Accordingly, the Departments will carry out their responsibilities under the Act in a manner that harmonizes the Federal trust responsibility to tribes, tribal sovereignty, and statutory missions of the Departments, and that strives to ensure that Indian tribes do not bear a disproportionate burden for the conservation of listed species, so as to avoid or minimize the potential for conflict and confrontation.

Selenium in White Sturgeon from North San Francisco Bay: The 2015-2017 Sturgeon Derby Study

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

This report presents the findings from a study evaluating selenium concentrations in white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus) tissues collected during the 2015-2017 Sturg

This report presents the findings from a study evaluating selenium concentrations in white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus) tissues collected during the 2015-2017 Sturgeon Derby events in North San Francisco Bay. The goal of this study was to investigate the distribution of selenium among sturgeon tissues to inform the toxicological and regulatory interpretation of selenium measured in non-lethally collected tissues, including muscle plugs and fin rays. This technical report provides documentation of the study and presents its major findings. 

Shasta Dam Fish Passage Evaluation – Pilot Implementation Plan – U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | September 1st, 2015