Calibration of the Multivariate AZTI Marine Biotic Index (M-AMBI) for Potential Inclusion into California Sediment Quality Objective Assessments in San Francisco Bay

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) | April 30th, 2019

Benthic infauna are the most common faunal assemblage used to assess habitat quality across the globe as they demonstrate relatively predictable community-scale changes i

Benthic infauna are the most common faunal assemblage used to assess habitat quality across the globe as they demonstrate relatively predictable community-scale changes in both structure and function when exposed to stress. Due to these characteristics, benthic infauna are used as one of three lines of evidence in California’s Sediment Quality Objectives (CASQO) to assess the impact of toxic chemicals to biotic resources in the State’s enclosed bays and estuaries. The changes in benthic community composition related to disturbance are quantified using benthic assessment indices. 

California Bay - Delta Authority Fish Mercury Project: The Relationship between Landscape Features and Sport Fish Mercury in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Watershed

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) | November 2nd, 2007

The goal of this study was to quantify the relationship between landscape features and mercury in sport fish. We hypothesized that spatial variation in sport fish mercury

The goal of this study was to quantify the relationship between landscape features and mercury in sport fish. We hypothesized that spatial variation in sport fish mercury would most strongly relate to major point sources associated with mining activity, habitat features (e.g., abundance of wetlands), and watershed-scale patterns in mercury deposition from the atmosphere. Geographic information system (GIS) techniques were used to evaluate the influence of these features on the bioaccumulation of mercury in sport fish. In addition, we attempted to determine the most appropriate spatial scale for analysis of these influences. Fish mercury data were selected from a state-wide historical bioaccumulation database, which also included data collected by the Fish Mercury Project (FMP) in 2005. Based on the geographic distribution of the sampling locations, three species common across the study area were chosen for analysis: largemouth bass, channel catfish, and white catfish. For the time interval examined (1990 – 2005), the mean wet weight concentration for each species at a given location was calculated. By superimposing hydrologic flow paths with watershed delineations, we were able to determine flow direction and pathways from upstream sources to downstream habitats. “Fish watersheds” (watershed areas upstream of fish sampling locations) were created for a subset of locations in the CalFed Ecosystem Restoration Program Geographic Scope. Regions heavily influenced by mining within each watershed were also delineated. We examined landscape features in fish watersheds and within close proximity (circular buffers) of fish locations. Using a GIS database, several statistics were derived for each fish watershed area and buffer, including the percent covered by habitat features (vegetated vs. non-vegetated wetlands, permanent vs. temporary inundation), number of gold and mercury mines, total land area (km2), and total length (km) of all streams and rivers. The work presented in this report is the first attempt the authors are aware of to relate landscape features to fish mercury concentrations using GIS on a large regional scale. Fish mercury concentrations appeared to be influenced by many complex and interacting factors that obscured any obvious correlations with atmospheric deposition, historic mining districts, and wetlands at the watershed scale. Some features seemed to have an influence at the proximal-scale (buffer) analyses, namely vegetated wetland and temporarily inundated aquatic habitat. Though these tentative conclusions were based on small sample sizes, they contradicted the prevailing notion that wetlands generally increase methylmercury accumulation in the food web. The lack of clear relationships in the dataset analyzed is probably due to shortcomings in the available data, rather than a true absence of influence of atmospheric deposition, mining, or wetlands on spatial patterns in mercury bioaccumulation. Future attempts to relate landscape features with mercury in the food web at the watershed scale should focus on watersheds with a stronger linkage between landscape features and mercury in fish and fewer confounding factors. Statewide monitoring of sport fish is currently being planned that should provide a better basis for conducting this type of analysis in the future.

California Environmental Flows Framework

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | March 31st, 2021

Multiple local, regional, and State agencies share responsibility for managing environmental flows, defined as the water required to protect the ecological health of Cali

Multiple local, regional, and State agencies share responsibility for managing environmental flows, defined as the water required to protect the ecological health of California streams while balancing human uses and other water management objectives. The process of developing environmental flow recommendations is complex, often involving multi-component technical studies and lengthy public discussions that can take years to complete. Although many environmental flow assessment tools exist, managers are often constrained to using either time-intensive, site-specific studies or a limited set of rapid desktop and regional approaches that have not been tailored to California. Furthermore, environmental flow assessments have not always been consistently designed and implemented in a way that allows data to be aggregated and shared, making it difficult to accelerate learning and improve the effectiveness of environmental flows in supporting the ecological health of California’s rivers and streams. Water managers need a consistent statewide approach that can help transform complex environmental data into scientifically defensible, easy-to-understand environmental flow recommendations that support a broad range of ecosystem functions1 and preserve the multitude of benefits provided by healthy rivers and streams. Having a consistent statewide approach would also improve statewide data compatibility and promote coordinated regional flow assessments that would benefit multiple agency programs working to improve the scale and pacing at which environmental flow protections can be extended to rivers and streams across the state.

California Fish and Game, Volume 47

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) | July 1st, 1961

California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program Priority Basin Project: Domestic-Supply Assessment

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | March 14th, 2024

California Hydraulic Mining under the Caminetti Act

Scientific American | July 21st, 1900

The gold deposits of California are, for a large part, contained in gravel beds once the channel of rivers which formed the drainage of the west slope of th

The gold deposits of California are, for a large part, contained in gravel beds once the channel of rivers which formed the drainage of the west slope of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. In the course of ages new rivers were formed, leaving the ancient gravel beds elevated often hundreds of feet above the river beds of the present. The depth of the gravel in the old channels is often several hundred feet and the width across them frequently one-half mile, while their courses may be traced for thirty or forty miles in length in detached sections, which are the remnants of once continuous beds. Denudation and the cutting down of the present streams has removed parts of the ancient channels and they often disappear below the surface for several miles underneath coverings of lava which have been spread over them ...  Hydraulic mining became an immense industry. At the time when it had reached its greatest development it was estimated that more than one hundred millions of dollars had been invested in the construction of water supplies, mining plant, tunnels, and flumes, and more than two million dollars have been spent in the equipment of a single mine. Everything was upon an immense scale, and the amounts of gravel removed were in proportion. So large, in fact, that the material washed into the streams caused blockages over spreading agricultural lands in the Sacramento Valley, obstructing and raising the beds of the navigable rivers which enter San Francisco Bay, causing inundations at times of flood, and generally making its influence noticeable 200 miles from the seat of mining. In 1880 it was estimated that in the bed of the Yuba River alone there were stored more than one hundred and forty million cubic yards of accumulations, and the bed of the river had spread over a width of two and one-half miles between the side levees built to confine the spread of the deposits.

California Hydrogeologically Vulnerable Areas Map

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | January 31st, 2012

In response to Executive Order D-5-99, State Water Board staff created a map where published hydrogeologic information indicates soil or rock conditions that may be more

In response to Executive Order D-5-99, State Water Board staff created a map where published hydrogeologic information indicates soil or rock conditions that may be more vulnerable (or susceptible) to groundwater contamination: ”Hydrogeologically Vulnerable Areas.” The map was created due to groundwater concerns over releases of MTBE, primarily from leaking underground storage tank sites. However, areas that are vulnerable to MTBE may also be vulnerable to other contaminants released at the surface. The map was created in 2000 using Department of Water Resources (DWR) and US Geological Survey publications. Data from these publications were used to identify areas where geologic conditions are more likely to allow recharge at rates substantially higher than in lower permeability or confined areas of the same groundwater basin. The identified areas are associated by a metadata table (in the following pages) which identifies (1) DWR basin name and number, (2) published source of information (i.e., title, date, author, and appropriate page, figure, table, or plate number), and (3) specific criteria upon which the vulnerability category is based. Groundwater resources underlying designated (i.e., published) recharge, rapid infiltration, or unconfined areas were considered categorically more vulnerable to potential contaminant releases than groundwater underlying areas of slower recharge, lower infiltration rates, or intervening low permeability deposits (i.e., confining layers).

California Law at the Intersection of Water Use and Land Planning: A Report for the California Office of Planning and Research

University of California College of the Law, San Francisco (UC Law SF) | May 13th, 2015

There are no laws in California that require coordination between land planners and water regulators. A local planning commission may approve a new subdivision ev

There are no laws in California that require coordination between land planners and water regulators. A local planning commission may approve a new subdivision even though there may not be enough water to supply the new development. Moreover, local water authorities and the Water Resources Control Board are under no obligation to provide water to developers if the developers do not hold title to a valid claim to water rights. The following survey and report represents a first comprehensive attempt to surface laws that lie at the intersection of land management and water regulations, offering several recommendations for ways in which existing laws can be used to facilitate better coordination between land planners and water managers. These recommendations, contained in Chapters IV-VI, suggest: Redefining the “coordination” requirement of the conservation element in general plans to facilitate coordination; Applying the Groundwater Sustainability Management Act’s sustainability goals to facilitate coordination; Utilizing well moratoria to facilitate coordination while limiting unsustainable growth. This report also contains a summary of our methodology in Chapter II, a historical overview of the relationship between land use and water law in California in Chapter III, and a survey of existing laws and constitutional provisions that are relevant to both land use and water management in Chapters VII and VIII. We hope that this report will serve as a useful tool for lawmakers and regulators to help achieve water security and sustainability for future generations.

California Non-Point Source Encyclopedia

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | July 20th, 2004

The goal of this guidance document is to provide the best, most relevant information to State agencies, regional boards, local agencies, and nonpoint source (NPS) practit

The goal of this guidance document is to provide the best, most relevant information to State agencies, regional boards, local agencies, and nonpoint source (NPS) practitioners to assist them in identifying and implementing practices to protect high-quality waters and restore impaired waters. This guidance document is not applicable to any facilities that are considered point sources under the Clean Water Act, including confined animal facilities that are Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) as defined by USEPA. The guidance is organized around the six NPS categories identified in the Plan for California's Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program of 2000: agriculture, forestry, urban areas, marinas and recreational boating, hydromodification, and wetlands/riparian areas/vegetated treatment systems. It supports the plan's goal of implementing the 61 NPS management measures by 2013. It also supports the implementation of NPS total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), as well as the development of TMDL implementation plans and watershed plans. A companion set of tools will also be available through the Internet to assist users in identifying potential management practices and estimating the effectiveness of those practices in managing pollution.

California Non-point Source Program Implementation Plan 2014 - 2020

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | August 5th, 2015

The 2014 - 2020 California Nonpoint Source (NPS) Program Implementation Plan (NPS Program Implementation Plan) describes how the State will be using its resources to effe

The 2014 - 2020 California Nonpoint Source (NPS) Program Implementation Plan (NPS Program Implementation Plan) describes how the State will be using its resources to effectively prevent NPS pollution from impacting surface water and groundwater in California. The vision for the CA NPS Program is to restore and protect the beneficial uses of the State’s waters through the reduction of NPS pollution and attaining water quality objectives. This document serves as an update to the CA NPS Program Plan as approved by U.S. EPA and NOAA in 2000. As such, California will continue to implement a comprehensive statewide program working to implement management measures to address NPS pollution consistent with U.S. EPA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration approval.