The Rebirth of California Fish & Game Code Section 5937: Water for Fish

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | July 1st, 2012

Swarms of living creatures will live wherever the river flows. There will be large numbers of fish, because this water flows there and makes the salt water fresh; so wh

Swarms of living creatures will live wherever the river flows. There will be large numbers of fish, because this water flows there and makes the salt water fresh; so where the river flows everything will live. Fishermen will stand along the shore; from En Gedi to En Eglaim there will be places for spreading nets. In an average year, California receives inflows and imports of water totaling around 200 million acre-feet,2 enough water to cover the entire state twenty-three inches deep. But California is a state of spatial and temporal water extremes. Spatially, precipitation varies wildly: Death Valley in the Southeast averages less than three inches per year, yet the northwestern corner of the state averages over 140 inches per year. More than 70% of California’s stream flow originates north of Sacramento, but more than 80% of the water is used south of Sacramento. Temporally, precipitation varies both seasonally and annually. California’s wet season typically runs from October or November to April or May, with little or no precipitation during the growing season, from May to September.7 Annual rainfalls of 40% or more below average and 36% or more above average each typically occur once every six to seven years.  To balance these extremes, over 1,300 dams store water across the state, supplying water for urban, industrial, and agricultural uses. While these uses sustain a tremendous part of California’s economy, they also come at high, often unappreciated costs. Fish also need water, so dams that alter water flows for human benefits may also have marked negative impacts on fish.

The Science Charade in Species Conservation

Supreme Court Economic Review | September 2nd, 2017

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is among the nation’s most important and powerful environmental laws. It is also a source of great conflict and controversy.  The list

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is among the nation’s most important and powerful environmental laws. It is also a source of great conflict and controversy.  The listing of individual species, the designation of critical habitat and the implementation of conservation measures often prompt fierce legal and political battles. In these conflicts, activists on all sides claim that “sound science” supports their respective positions, and scoff at the “junk science” relied upon by the other side. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service fails to rely upon the best science, critics claim.  If it did, they charge, it would adopt policies more to their liking.  The debate over the use of science under the ESA is part of the “science charade” that clouds substantive policy debate about species conservation.3 What typically divides competing interest groups is not a devotion to science, but sharply divergent policy preferences dressed up in scientific garb. The political debate over the use of science under the ESA tends to obscure the dividing line between science and policy and undermines the development of more effective and equitable conservation strategies. Further, efforts to reform the ESA by mandating additional scientific procedures or increasing judicial scrutiny of the use of science by federal agencies will do little to address the ESA’s underlying problems or make species conservation efforts more effective.  Scientific research is necessary to inform species conservation decisions. But species conservation is not – and cannot be – a wholly scientific exercise. Judgments about what constitutes a distinct species or how to evaluate incomplete scientific data necessarily draw upon normative premises. More significantly, policy decisions about what sorts of conservation measures should be adopted are not scientific at all. Whether habitat loss will reduce the likelihood that a given species or population will survive in the wild may be a scientific question, but what measures should be adopted to conserve such habitat, and at what cost, is a normative policy judgment. Science can – indeed, must – inform such inquiries, but science cannot tell us what to do. Engaging in the “science charade,” either by pretending that ESA implementation may be guided by scientific judgment alone or by claiming that reforms of how science is used is unlikely to improve species conservation. To the contrary, efforts to constrain or control the use of science in ESA listing decisions or enhance judicial review of agency scientific determinations will undermine the quality and reliability of ESA science and lead to less effective conservation policy.  Whatever ails the ESA, a failure to incorporate adequate science is not the cause of the disease. As this Article explains, efforts to augment the amount or type of science used in ESA decision-making, whether through additional procedural mandates or altered standards of judicial review, will not address the conflicts that afflict species conservation policy. In some cases, such measures could further undermine the ESA’s ability to conserve species.  Part I of the Article gives a brief overview of the ESA, its operation, and the scientific requirements written into the Act. Part II describes the “science charade,” through which policymakers and others pretend that policy judgments are purely scientific questions, and the legal and political incentives that ensure this artifice persists. Part III details how the ESA’s structure generates political pressure on the use of science and encourages the science charade in species conservation. Part IV explains why various “sound science” reforms will not address these problems, and Part V outlines alternative policy reforms. 

The Seasonal Cycle of Surface Soil Moisture

American Meteorological Society (AMS) | June 29th, 2022

The seasonal cycle contributes substantially to soil moisture temporal variability in many parts of the world, with important implications for seasonal forecasting releva

The seasonal cycle contributes substantially to soil moisture temporal variability in many parts of the world, with important implications for seasonal forecasting relevant to agriculture and the health of humans and ecosystems. There is considerable spatial variability in the seasonal cycle of soil moisture, yet a lack of global observations has hindered the development of parsimonious theories explaining that variability. Here, we use 6 years of global satellite observations to describe and explain the seasonal cycle of surface soil moisture globally. An unsupervised clustering algorithm is used to identify five distinct seasonal cycle regimes. Each seasonal cycle regime typically arises in both hemispheres, on multiple continents, and across substantially different local climates. To explain this spatial variability, we then show that the observed seasonal cycle regimes are reproduced very well by a simple but physically based water balance model, which only uses precipitation and downwelling surface shortwave radiation as inputs, and includes no free parameters. Surprisingly, no information on vegetation or land cover is required. To our knowledge, this is the first characterization of the seasonal cycle of surface soil moisture based on global observations.

The State Water Resources Control Board's Role in Implementing the Delta Plan

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | April 5th, 2011

The Delta Plan should identify the authorities of the State Water Board that may be employed to implement its goals, subgoals, and strategies. The State Water Board’s B

The Delta Plan should identify the authorities of the State Water Board that may be employed to implement its goals, subgoals, and strategies. The State Water Board’s Bay Delta Plan and Delta Strategic Workplan should be incorporated into the Delta Plan.

The Status of Perennial Estuarine Wetlands in the State of California

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | September 13th, 2008

The statewide initiative to monitor the condition of wetlands has produced a report on the status of wetlands in California’s estuaries. The report is the mos

The statewide initiative to monitor the condition of wetlands has produced a report on the status of wetlands in California’s estuaries. The report is the most comprehensive evaluation ever conducted on the overall health of any class of wetlands in California. It provides an estimate of how much estuarine wetland exists in California and the health of those wetlands. Benefits of the Report The report offers multiple benefits to wetland managers and policy-makers: It establishes a baseline of data in estuaries against which to measure future progress toward the state’s “No Net Loss of Wetlands” policy. Legislators and other policy makers can use the data to determine if wetland protection policies and programs are working and if the public is getting a return for its investment in wetlands. It helps local wetland managers compare the condition of their estuarine wetland or restoration project against the baseline for their region. It satisfies some important legal requirements, including a federal requirement that the state report on the status of wetlands to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) every two years. The Basics The report studied four questions: Where are the state’s estuarine wetlands, and how much do we have? What is the condition of existing estuarine wetlands statewide, and how does their condition vary by region? What are the primary causes of stress to wetland health, and do those causes vary among different coastal regions? How does the overall health of estuarine wetland restoration projects compare with similar wetlands in their region?

The Status of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in the Stanislaus River Summary report of 2015 snorkel surveys

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | August 1st, 2016

The Use of Smolt Survival Estimates to Quantify the Effects of Habitat Changes on Salmonid Stocks in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers, California

Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) | July 1st, 1989

The value of ecosystem services in global marine kelp forests

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | April 18th, 2023

While marine kelp forests have provided valuable ecosystem services for millennia, the global ecological and economic value of those services is largely unresolved. Kelp

While marine kelp forests have provided valuable ecosystem services for millennia, the global ecological and economic value of those services is largely unresolved. Kelp forests are diminishing in many regions worldwide, and efforts to manage these ecosystems are hindered without accurate estimates of the value of the services that kelp forests provide to human societies. Here, we present a global estimate of the ecological and economic potential of three key ecosystem services - fisheries production, nutrient cycling, and carbon removal provided by six major forest forming kelp genera (Ecklonia, Laminaria, Lessonia, Macrocystis, Nereocystis, and Saccharina). Each of these genera creates a potential value of between $64,400 and $147,100/hectare each year. Collectively, they generate between $465 and $562 billion/year worldwide, with an average of $500 billion. These values are primarily driven by fisheries production (mean $29,900, 904 Kg/Ha/year) and nitrogen removal ($73,800, 657 Kg N/Ha/year), though kelp forests are also estimated to sequester 4.91 megatons of carbon from the atmosphere/year highlighting their potential as blue carbon systems for climate change mitigation. These findings highlight the ecological and economic value of kelp forests to society and will facilitate better informed marine management and conservation decisions.

Thermal performance in juvenile hatchery Oncorhynchus tshawytscha: aerobic scope tests over a range of environmental temperatures

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) | March 15th, 2016

In heavily-altered ecosystems, anthropogenic factors coupled with global climate change have drastically changed available habitats for many native fishes (Cloe

In heavily-altered ecosystems, anthropogenic factors coupled with global climate change have drastically changed available habitats for many native fishes (Cloern and Jassby 2012, Moyle et al. 2013). Water projects such as large hydropower dams have altered flow and temperature regimes (Poff et al. 1997, Bunn and Arthington 2002, Marchetti and Moyle 2001), and reduced or degraded native spawning and rearing habitats (Sheer and Steel 2006, Pelicice and Agostinho 2008), while global climate change has resulted in warmer overall river temperatures (Cloern and Jassby, 2012). As ecologically relevant environmental variables like temperature have shifted, fish populations have subsequently declined (Cloern and Jassby, 2012; Hanak et al., 2015). Native California fishes have been disproportionately affected by these changes, and precipitous population declines have been observed for several species, some of which are listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (Moyle et al. 2013). Despite documented correlations between fish declines and changes in environmental variables such as temperatur e (Moyle and Leidy, 1992; Moyle et al. 2010; Quiñones and Moyle 2014), there has been a profound lack of data available on the actual physiological and/or behavioral mechanisms driving fish population declines. Physiological performance data, such as information on aerobic scope, may help provide mechanistic explanations for both how and why fish population declines are occurring. Furthermore, as populations decline and management becomes more crucial for population persistence, thermal limits, optimal thermal ranges, and data on how key physiological processes, such as metabolic rate, change in response to environmental variables becomes more important. Therefore, the objectives of our study were to quantify the aerobic scope of juvenile Chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) acclimated to two different rearing temperatures (14 or 20 °C) and tested over a temperature range of 12-26°C.

Tijuana River Valley Historical Ecology Investigation

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) | January 2nd, 2017

The Tijuana River Valley Historical Ecology Investigation addresses a regional data gap by reconstructing the landscape and ecosystem characteristics of the river valley

The Tijuana River Valley Historical Ecology Investigation addresses a regional data gap by reconstructing the landscape and ecosystem characteristics of the river valley prior to the major modifications of the late 19th and 20th centuries. The research presented here, funded by the California State Coastal Conservancy, supplies foundational information at the regional and system scale about how the Tijuana Estuary, River, and valley looked and functioned in the recent past, as well as how they have changed over time. The ultimate goal of this study is to provide a new tool and framework that, in combination with contemporary research and future projections, can support and guide ongoing restoration design, planning, and management efforts in the valley.