Fundamentals of estimating the net benefits of ecosystem preservation: The case of the Salton Sea

Hydrobiologia (Springer) | July 15th, 2008

This article, both theoretical and methodological in nature, argues the potential merits of using a net benefits’ framework as a tool to aid policy-makers in their eff

This article, both theoretical and methodological in nature, argues the potential merits of using a net benefits’ framework as a tool to aid policy-makers in their efforts to compare Salton Sea restoration alternatives and inform the public as to the potential magnitude and distribution of trade-offs associated with each alternative. A net benefits approach can provide a more accurate comparison and evaluation of the potential net returns from public spending on Salton Sea restoration than what wouldbe provided under the suggested criteria of current legislative mandates. Furthermore, a net benefits framework provides a more lucid and systematic accounting framework by which to enumerate the full array of benefits and costs of each alternative for policy analysis. Finally, net benefits’ analysis serves to add transparency to the decision-making process sothat the public gains an understanding of how its scarce resources, including both financial and natural capital, are being appropriated. Additionally, we illustrate and emphasize the importance of estimating the non-market values associated with many of the ecosystem services provided by the Salton Sea and describe the major techniques that do so.

Funding Water in Times of Financial Uncertainty: The Case for a Public Goods Charge in California

Stanford University | January 15th, 2015

Funding for water-related public purpose projects has become increasingly scarce in California. Utilities are facing new challenges that require additional capital while

Funding for water-related public purpose projects has become increasingly scarce in California. Utilities are facing new challenges that require additional capital while the state’s legal system has restricted the ability of local governments to raise funds. This fiscal landscape requires the water sector to find new ways to finance water-related public interest projects, including conservation and efficiency programs, monitoring and evaluation, and infrastructure maintenance and modernization. California must also generate supplementary funds for new water technology research, development, and dissemination if the state is to continue to grow despite dwindling water supplies. In recent decades, California has relied heavily on general obligation (GO) bonds to finance a variety of water-related projects. GO bonds, however, are unreliable funding mechanisms as they require voter approval if they survive the legislative process, and they can be costly in the long run as they are repaid with interest. Additionally, GO bonds violate the beneficiary-pays principle as the entire state repays a debt that benefits taxpayers in certain regions more than others. This research paper looks at a supplemental funding mechanism, a Public Goods Charge (PGC), as an additional way for California to provide for water investment in the future. In a PGC scheme, ratepayers are charged a small, usage-related fee, and the funds are subsequently allocated to public interest projects at the local, utility, state, and broader scales. This method was used to fund electricity public purpose programs in California from 1998-2011, resulting in over $5.8 billion collected by the state’s three main Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs), with additional funds collected by local Publicly Owned Utilities (POUs), for energy innovation over 14 years. Utilities and the state as a whole benefitted economically and environmentally from the increased funding for energy efficiency, renewables, and research and development. The electricity PGC helped to transform California’s energy landscape into one that includes more modern and sustainable infrastructure systems. Significant energy savings were also achieved during the PGC era.

Future Changes in Global Atmospheric Rivers Projected by CMIP6 Models

American Geophysical Union (AGU) | January 31st, 2024

Future land-use related water demand in California

Environmental Research Letters (IOP) | May 18th, 2019

Water shortages in California are a growing concern amidst ongoing drought, earlier spring snowmelt, projected future climate warming, and currently mandated water use r

Water shortages in California are a growing concern amidst ongoing drought, earlier spring snowmelt, projected future climate warming, and currently mandated water use restrictions. Increases in population and land use in coming decades will place additional pressure on already limited available water supplies. We used a state-and-transition simulation model to project future changes in developed (municipal and industrial) and agricultural land use to estimate associated water use demand from 2012 to 2062. Under current efficiency rates, total water use was projected to increase 1.8 billion cubic meters (+4.1%) driven primarily by urbanization and shifts to more water intensive crops. Only if currently mandated 25% reductions in municipal water use are continuously implemented would water demand in 2062 balance to water use levels in 2012. This is the first modeling effort of its kind to examine regional land-use related water demand incorporating historical trends of both developed and agricultural land uses.

Geohydrological Characterization, Water-Chemistry, and Ground-Water Flow Simulation Model of the Sonoma Valley Area, Sonoma County, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | December 14th, 2006

Sonoma County is in the northern part of the greater San Francisco Bay region, an area of Northern California that has experienced rapid population growth and accelerated

Sonoma County is in the northern part of the greater San Francisco Bay region, an area of Northern California that has experienced rapid population growth and accelerated urbanization in response to economic expansion over the past few decades. The large increase in population and concomitant changes in land use within Sonoma County require reassessment of the water resources and how best to manage them for optimal utilization over the next few decades. Most basins in the county currently rely on a combination of Russian River water and native ground water to meet demand. Recycled water is used on a limited basis. In addition, water conservation programs have been implemented and are being expanded. The Sonoma Valley is a well-defined hydrologic basin in southeastern Sonoma County. The basin has some areas of declining ground-water levels, potential water-quality problems from seawater intrusion and upwelling of geothermal waters, and ground-water/surface-water interaction. Location of the Study Area The study area is located approximately 30 miles (mi) northeast of San Francisco and includes the entire Sonoma Creek watershed in southeastern Sonoma County, California (fig. 1). The study focused on the area of the valley floor and the adjacent hills where most of the urban development and irrigated agriculture have been occurring. The watershed includes approximately 166 square miles (mi2) of land that drains by way of Sonoma Creek and its tributaries to San Pablo Bay (fig. 2), which is the northern arm of the San Francisco Bay. The Sonoma Mountains form the southwestern side of the watershed and the Mayacmas Mountains form the northeastern side. Between these two mountain ranges lies the northwest trending elongate depression of Sonoma Valley, which extends roughly 20 mi from the shore of San Pablo Bay to near Kenwood (fig. 2). Purpose and Scope: The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA), undertook this study to evaluate the ground-water resources of Sonoma Valley and to develop a tool to better understand and manage the ground-water system. The goals of the study were to update the geohydrologic characterization of the study area; to provide a current assessment of hydrologic conditions, including a description of historical ground-water level and waterquality changes; and to provide water-supply agencies with a ground-water flow model that can be used as a planning tool for water-resources assessment and management. To meet the objectives of this study, four principal tasks were identified: (1) evaluation of existing geohydrologic, geophysical, and geochemical data; (2) collection and analysis of new geohydrologic data, including subsurface lithologic data, gravity measurements, ground-water levels, and streamflow gains and losses; (3) collection and analysis of new water chemistry, temperature, and isotopic data; and (4) development a ground-water flow model. This report provides a geologic and hydrologic description of the area, presents selected hydrologic data collected from the 1970s to 2004, quantifies historical changes in the ground-water system, documents a ground-water flow simulation model, and presents an interpretation of surface geophysical data that help define the geometry of the ground-water reservoir.

Geohydrology and Simulated Response to Ground-Water Pumpage in Carson Valley, A River-Dominated Basin in Douglas County, Nevada, and Alpine County, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | May 2nd, 1986

This investigation of the ground-water hydrology in Carson Valley was conducted from 1980 through 1985 by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Douglas County.

This investigation of the ground-water hydrology in Carson Valley was conducted from 1980 through 1985 by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Douglas County. The purpose of the study was to: (1) collect, compile, and analyze hydrologic data to quantify the hydrology of the valley and to enhance the understanding of the valley's geohydrologic system; and (2) develop a ground-water model that would simulate the response of the hydrologic system to applied stresses and that could be used to estimate the probable hydrologic effects of various development alternatives. This report presents the results of the investigation. Work began with a gravity survey in 1980 to determine the depth to bedrock in Carson Valley; the results are discussed in detail in a separate publication (Maurer, 1986). From 1981 to 1983, work included: (1) measurement of water-level fluctuations and surface-water runoff, (2) drilling of additional observation wells, (3) collection of ground-water pumpage data and measurement of pump efficiencies, and (4) compilation of existing data reports and drillers 1 logs to obtain estimates of geohydrologic characteristics of the ground-water reservoir. Development of a water budget and initial estimates of hydraulic conductivities and specific yield were accomplished in 1983. From 1983 to 1985, the ground-water model was developed and calibrated, and simulations of possible ground-water development were made. The model, which represents a compilation of all available data, was used to (1) test estimates of the geohydrologic characteristics of the ground-water reservoir, (2) evaluate the components of the water budget for the basin, (3) enhance the understanding of the hydrologic flow system in the basin, and (4) simulate the effect of various possible developmental alternatives on Carson River outflow, evapotranspiration, ground-water levels, and ground-water storage in the valley.

Geohydrology and Water Chemistry of the Alexander Valley, Sonoma County, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 12th, 2006

This study of the geohydrology and water chemistry of the Alexander Valley, California, was done to provide an improved scientific basis for addressing emerging wate

This study of the geohydrology and water chemistry of the Alexander Valley, California, was done to provide an improved scientific basis for addressing emerging water-management issues, including potential increases in water demand and changes in flows in the Russian River. The study tasks included (1) evaluation of existing geohydrological, geophysi- cal, and geochemical data; (2) collection and analysis of new geohydrologic data, including subsurface lithologic data, ground-water levels, and streamflow records; and (3) collection and analysis of new water-chemistry data. The estimated total water use for the Alexander Valley for 1999 was approximately 15,800 acre-feet. About 13,500 acre-feet of this amount was for agricultural use, primarily vineyards, and about 2,300 acre-feet was for municipal/industrial use. Ground water is the main source of water supply for this area. The main sources of ground water in the Alexander Valley are the Quaternary alluvial deposits, the Glen Ellen Formation, and the Sonoma Volcanics. The alluvial units, where sufficiently thick and saturated, comprise the best aquifer in the study area. Average recharge to the Alexander Valley is estimated from a simple, basinwide water budget. On the basis of an estimated annual average of 298,000 acre-feet of precipitation, 160,000 acre-feet of runoff, and 113,000 to 133,000 acre-feet of evapotranspiration, about 5,000 to 25,000 acre-feet per year is available for ground-water recharge. Because this estimate is based on differences between large numbers, there is significant uncertainty in this recharge estimate. Long-term changes in ground-water levels are evident in parts of the study area, but because of the sparse network and lack of data on well construction and lithology, it is uncertain if any significant changes have occurred in the northern part of the study area since 1980. In the southern half of the study area, ground-water levels generally were lower at the end of the 2002 irrigation season than at the end of the 1980 season, which suggests that a greater amount of ground water is being pumped in the southern half of the study area in recent years compared with that pumped in the early 1980s. Water-chemistry data for samples collected from 11 wells during 2002–04 indicate that water quality in the study area generally is acceptable for potable use. Two wells, however, each contained one constituent (241 μg/L of manganese and 1,350 μg/L of boron) in excess of the recommended standards for drinking water (50 μg/L and 1,000 μg/L, respectively). The chemical composition of water from most of the wells sampled for major ions plot as a mixed cation-bicarbon- ate, magnesium-bicarbonate, or calcium-bicarbonate type water. The ionic composition of the historical and recent samples from wells in the Alexander Valley is similar to that of the historical surface-water samples collected from the Russian River near Healdsburg. This suggests a similar source of water, particularly for wells that are less than 200 feet total depth and perforated in Quaternary alluvial deposits. Water from deeper, non-alluvial wells may contain slightly higher concentrations of sodium as a result of cation exchange. Water samples collected from several wells over an approximately 30–year period suggest a progressive change in water chemistry over time. Samples from the southern part of the valley show a trend towards higher ionic concentrations and increasing concentrations of particular constituents such as sulfate.

Geohydrology, Simulation of Regional Groundwater Flow, and Assessment of Water-Management Strategies, Twentynine Palms Area, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | June 28th, 2011

The Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (MCAGCC) Twentynine Palms, California, overlies the Surprise Spring, Deadman, Mesquite, and Mainside subbasins of the Morongo gr

The Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (MCAGCC) Twentynine Palms, California, overlies the Surprise Spring, Deadman, Mesquite, and Mainside subbasins of the Morongo groundwater basin in the southern Mojave Desert. Historically, the MCAGCC has relied on groundwater pumped from the Surprise Spring subbasin to provide all of its potable water supply. Groundwater pumpage in the Surprise Spring subbasin has caused groundwater levels in the subbasin to decline by as much as 190 feet (ft) from 1953 through 2007. Groundwater from the other subbasins contains relatively high concentrations of fluoride, arsenic, and (or) dissolved solids, making it unsuitable for potable uses without treatment. The potable groundwater supply in Surprise Spring subbasin is diminishing because of pumping-induced overdraft and because of more restrictive Federal drinking-water standards on arsenic concentrations. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the MCAGCC, completed this study to better understand groundwater resources in the area and to help establish a long-term strategy for regional water-resource development. The Surprise Spring, Deadman, Mesquite, and Mainside subbasins are filled with sedimentary deposits of Tertiary age, alluvial fan deposits of Quaternary-Tertiary age, and younger alluvial and playa deposits of Quaternary age. Combined, this sedimentary sequence reaches a maximum thickness of more than 16,000 ft in the Deadman and Mesquite subbasins. The sedimentary deposits of Tertiary age yield a small amount of water to wells, and this water commonly contains high concentrations of fluoride, arsenic, and dissolved solids. The alluvial fan deposits form the principal water-bearing unit in the study area and have a combined thickness of 250 to more than 1,000 ft. The younger alluvial and playa deposits are unsaturated throughout most of the study area. Lithologic and downhole geophysical logs were used to divide the Quaternary/ Tertiary alluvial fan deposits into two aquifers (referred to as the upper and the middle aquifers) and the Tertiary sedimentary deposits into a single aquifer (referred to as the lower aquifer). In general, wells perforated in the upper aquifer yield more water than wells perforated in the middle and lower aquifers. The study area is dominated by extensive faulting and moderate to intense folding that has displaced or deformed the pre-Tertiary basement complex as well as the overlying Tertiary and Quaternary deposits. Many of these faults act as barriers to the lateral movement of groundwater flow and form many of the boundaries of the groundwater subbasins. The principal recharge to the study area is groundwater underflow across the western and southern boundaries that originates as runoff in the surrounding mountains. Groundwater discharges naturally from the study area as spring flow, as groundwater underflow to downstream basins, and as water vapor to the atmosphere by transpiration of phreatophytes and direct evaporation from moist soil. The annual volume of water that naturally recharged to or discharged from the groundwater flow system in the study area during predevelopment conditions was estimated to be 1,010 acre-feet per year (acre-ft/yr). About 90 percent of this recharge originated as runoff from the Little San Bernardino and the Pinto Mountains to the south, and the remainder originated as runoff from the San Bernardino Mountains to the west. Evapotranspiration by phreatophytes near Mesquite Lake (dry) was the primary form of predevelopment groundwater discharge. From 1953 through 2007, approximately 139,400 acre-feet (acre-ft) of groundwater was pumped by the MCAGCC from the Surprise Spring subbasin. A regional-scale numerical groundwater flow model was developed using MODFLOW–2000 for the Surprise Spring, Deadman, Mesquite, and Mainside subbasins. The aquifer system was simulated by using three model layers representing the upper, middle, and lower aquifers. Measured groundwater levels for predevelopment conditions (before 1953) and for the period 1953 through 2007 were used to calibrate the groundwater- flow model. The simulated steady-state (predevelopment) recharge was about 980 acre-ft/yr; about 90 percent of the recharge was in the Mesquite subbasin. Most of the simulated steady-state discharge occurred as evapotranspiration at the Mesquite Lake (dry). A total of about 145,450 acre-ft of groundwater was simulated as being pumped from the model domain during the transient simulation period (1953–2007); about 139,400 acre-ft of the total was extracted from the Surprise Spring subbasin. The transient simulation indicates that almost all of the groundwater pumped in the Surprise Spring subbasin comes from groundwater storage, which is consistent with the measured long-term declines in groundwater levels. The calibrated groundwater model was used to evaluate the potential effects on water levels and aquifer conditions in the Surprise Spring, Deadman, Mesquite, and Mainside subbasins for water-management strategies being considered by the MCAGCC to meet the projected water demand at the base for 2008–2017. One of the main objectives of the water-management strategies is to reduce pumpage from the Surprise Spring subbasin. Reducing groundwater pumpage in the Surprise Spring subbasin by about 38 percent (about 1,345 acre-ft/yr) substantially decreased or reversed simulated hydraulic-head declines in the subbasin. Redistributing about 15 percent of the 2007 groundwater pumpage (about 550 acre-ft/yr) from the Surprise Spring to the Mainside subbasin resulted in more than 60 ft of simulated declines in hydraulic head in the Mainside subbasin by 2017; however, redistributing about 22 percent of the 2007 pumpage (about 800 acre-ft/yr) from the Surprise Spring subbasin to the Deadman subbasin resulted in 5–10 ft of simulated hydraulic-head decline in the Deadman subbasin. The water-management scenarios simulated for this study demonstrate how the calibrated regional model can be utilized to evaluate the hydrologic effects of a water-management strategy.

Geology, Ground-Water Hydrology, Geochemistry, and Ground-Water Simulation of the Beaumont and Banning Storage Units, San Gorgonio Pass Area, Riverside County, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | December 14th, 2006

Ground-water has been the only source of potable water supply for residential, industrial, and agricultural users in the Beaumont and Banning storage units of the San Gor

Ground-water has been the only source of potable water supply for residential, industrial, and agricultural users in the Beaumont and Banning storage units of the San Gorgonio Pass area, Riverside County, California. Ground-water levels in the Beaumont area have declined as much as 100 feet between the early 1920s and early 2000s, and numerous natural springs have stopped flowing. In 1961, the San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency (SGPWA) entered into a contract with the California State Department of Water Resources to receive 17,300 acre-feet per year of water to be delivered by the California State Water Project (SWP) to supplement natural recharge. Currently (2005), a pipeline is delivering SWP water into the area, and the SGPWA is artificially recharging the ground-water system using recharge ponds located along Little San Gorgonio Creek in Cherry Valley with the SWP water. In addition to artificial recharge, SGPWA is considering the direct delivery of SWP water for the irrigation of local golf courses and for agricultural supply in lieu of ground-water pumpage. To better understand the potential hydrologic effects of different water-management alternatives on ground-water levels and movement in the Beaumont and Banning storage units, existing geohydrologic and geochemical data were compiled, new data from a basin-wide ground-water level and water-quality monitoring network were collected, monitoring wells were installed near the Little San Gorgonio Creek recharge ponds, geohydrologic and geochemical analyses were completed, and a ground-water flow simulation model was developed. The San Gorgonio Pass area was divided into several storage units on the basis of mapped or inferred faults. This study addresses primarily the Beaumont and Banning storage units. The geologic units in the study area were generalized into crystalline basement rocks and sedimentary deposits. The younger sedimentary deposits and the surficial deposits are the main water-bearing deposits in the San Gorgonio Pass area. The water-bearing deposits were divided into three aquifers: (1) the perched aquifer, (2) the upper aquifer, and (3) the lower aquifer based on lithologic and downhole geophysical logs. Natural recharge in the San Gorgonio Pass area was estimated using INFILv3, a deterministic distributed- parameter precipitation-runoff model. The INFILv3 model simulated that the potential recharge of precipitation and runoff in the Beaumont and Banning storage units was about 3,710 acre-feet per year and that the potential recharge in 28 sub-drainage basins upstream of the storage units was about 6,180 acre-feet per year. The water supply for the Beaumont and Banning storage units is supplied by pumping ground water from wells in the Canyon (Edgar and Banning Canyons), Banning Bench, Beaumont, and Banning storage units. Total annual pumpage from the Beaumont and Banning storage units ranged from about 1,630 acre-feet in 1936 to about 20,000 acre-feet in 2003. Ground-water levels declined by as much as 100 feet in the Beaumont storage unit from 1926–2003 in response to ground-water pumping of about 450,160 acre-feet during this period. Since ground-water development began in the San Gorgonio Pass area, there have been several sources of artificial recharge to the basin including return flow from applied water on crops, golf courses, and landscape; septic-tank seepage; and infiltration of storm runoff diversions and imported water into recharge ponds. Return flow from applied water and septic-tank seepage was estimated to reach a maximum of about 8,100 acre-feet per year in 2003. Owing to the great depth of water in much of study area (in excess of 150 feet), the return flow and septic-tank seepage takes years to decades to reach the water table. Stable-isotope data indicate that the source of ground-water recharge was precipitation from storms passing through the San Gorgonio Pass as opposed to runoff from the higher altitudes of the San Bernardino Mountains. In addition, these data indicate that little if any of the ground water in the fractured crystalline rocks flows across the Banning Fault into the Beaumont storage unit. Tritium concentrations indicate that little to no recharge has reached the water table since 1952 in most areas of the Beaumont and Banning storage units. In general, the uncorrected carbon-14 ages of ground water sampled from wells in the Beaumont, Banning, and surrounding storage units ranged from about 400 to 17,500 years before present. The older water was sampled in southeastern part of Beaumont storage unit and in the Banning storage unit, and ranged from 1,900 to 17,500 years before present. To better understand the dynamics of ground-water flow and the potential effects of water-level changes resulting from artificial recharge in the San Gorgonio Pass area, a regional-scale, numerical ground-water flow model was developed using MODFLOW-96. This model will be used by water managers to help manage the ground-water resources in the San Gorgonio Pass area. Results of the steady-state simulation indicate that the total inflow rate, or recharge, was about 6,590 acre-feet per year with about 3,710 acre-feet per year from areal recharge, about 2,670 acre-feet per year from mountain-front recharge, and about 210 acre-feet per year from the surrounding older sedimentary deposits. The simulated water budget for 1926–2003 indicates that of the total simulated volume of water pumped from the aquifer (450,160 acre-feet), about 50 percent was derived from depletion of ground-water storage (222,660 acre-feet), about 21 percent was derived from the reduction of underflow to the Cabazon and San Timoteo storage units (about 96,280 acre-feet), about 19 percent was derived from a reduction of ground-water outflow to the stream channels draining the San Timoteo storage unit (about 86,030 acre-feet), about 8 percent was derived from irrigation return flows and septic-tank seepage (about 36,780 acre-feet), and about 2 percent was derived from an increase in ground-water underflow from the surrounding older sedimentary deposits (about 8,410 acre-feet). The calibrated ground-water flow model was used to simulate the effects of four water-management scenarios being considered by SGPWA for the period 2004–13. In general, the results of the water-management scenarios indicate that artificial recharge in the Little San Gorgonio Creek recharge ponds primarily benefits the area north of the Cherry Valley Fault. For the scenario that used SWP water in lieu of ground water for golf course irrigation and for agricultural use, hydraulic heads increased by about 50 feet. None of the water-management scenarios significantly benefited the Banning storage unit.

Getting Involved in Groundwater: A Guide to California's Groundwater Sustainability Plans

Union of Concerned Scientists | September 1st, 2017

Using this guide and online toolkit, a diverse range of people can equip themselves to effectively participate in shaping the vision and plan for their community around m

Using this guide and online toolkit, a diverse range of people can equip themselves to effectively participate in shaping the vision and plan for their community around maintaining groundwater supplies. While technical expertise is a critical element of developing a successful groundwater sustainability plan, the community, with clarity around its values and goals, must lead the way. Community members and other interested people are needed to actively participate in groundwater sustainability planning. The law specifically calls for the engagement of diverse voices, and your involvement will help produce the strongest plan. This guide explains what’s at stake, shows you several entry points into the process, and suggests important questions to ask your Groundwater Sustainability Agency board members, technical experts, and others as you work toward a groundwater sustainability plan rooted in your community’s values. For Groundwater Sustainability Agency board members and advisory committee members, this document offers guidance for designing groundwater sustainability plans with community participation in mind. Since individual groundwater basins have different needs, this guide does not aim to be a comprehensive manual. Rather, it provides some critical questions to ask other advisory committee members and board members, stakeholders, and the technical experts with whom you’ll likely be collaborating. This guide can also help scientists, technical experts and consultants understand the interplay between technical information, community values, and perceived problems and/or benefits that will guide the definition of sustainability in a groundwater sustainability plan.