Sediment Supply to San Francisco Bay, Water Years 1995 through 2016: Data, trends, and monitoring recommendations to support decisions about water quality, tidal wetlands, and resilience to sea level rise

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) | June 11th, 2018

Knowledge of the status and trends of sediment supply to San Francisco Bay is critically important for management decisions about dredging, marsh restoration, flood contr

Knowledge of the status and trends of sediment supply to San Francisco Bay is critically important for management decisions about dredging, marsh restoration, flood control, contaminants, water clarity (in relation to primary production), and sea level rise. Several site-specific studies of sediment supply to San Francisco Bay have been conducted, but no synthesis of recent studies is available. The purpose of this report is to synthesize the best available data and knowledge to answer a few of the key study questions related to sediment supply to the Bay.  This synthesis report was prepared jointly by the Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in San Francisco Bay (RMP) and the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) with funding from both organizations. The project is meant to be a step in the development of a more comprehensive sediment management and monitoring strategy for the Bay. 

Selected Federal Water Activities: Agencies, Authorities, and Congressional Committees

Congressional Research Service (CRS) | ?

More than two centuries of federal water resource activity have resulted in a complex web of federal involvement in water resource development, management, protection, an

More than two centuries of federal water resource activity have resulted in a complex web of federal involvement in water resource development, management, protection, and use. As a result, Congress faces challenges related to overlap and gaps in federal water resource activities and in coordination and consistency among federal programs. Further, many federal authorities are discretionary or funded by discretionary appropriations. Consequently, there can be a significant difference between what federal agencies are authorized to do and what they are actually doing, and no one committee in Congress oversees this dichotomy. Although the responsibility for development, management, protection, and allocation of the nation’s water resources is spread among federal, state, local, tribal, and private interests, this report focuses on federal activities related to water and the congressional committees that authorize and oversee these activities. The report covers multiple topics and individual water-related subtopics ranging from water supply and water quality infrastructure to fisheries management and water rights. The report is not exhaustive; instead, the authors have attempted to cover the major federal activities authorized by Congress that affect water resource development, management, protection, and use in the United States. Similarly, the analysis does not cover every aspect of House and Senate committee jurisdiction affecting water issues. For definitive evaluation of committee jurisdictions related to water, the views of the House and Senate Parliamentarian Offices are official. The report covers four general areas, or themes: (1) “Water Resources Development, Management, and Use”; (2) “Water Quality, Protection, and Restoration”; (3) “Water Rights and Allocation”; and (4) “Research and Planning.” The sections addressing these themes are further divided into tables that list topic areas and individual water-related subtopics. For each subtopic, CRS has identified selected federal agencies and activities related to the subtopic, authorities for such activities, and relevant House and Senate committee jurisdictions, as specified in House and Senate rules. Appendixes address considerations in determining House and Senate committee jurisdictions and present the official language from House Rule X and Senate Rule XXV, respectively, which are indicators of congressional jurisdiction over water resources. The report also includes a glossary of abbreviations for federal agencies and House and Senate committees. The nine tables that make up the body of this report underscore the complexity of federal activities affecting water resource development, management, protection, and use in the United States. As apparent throughout these tables, numerous standing committees in the House and the Senate have jurisdiction over various components of federal water policy. The wide range of federal executive responsibilities for water resources reflects comparably complex congressional legislative responsibilities and directives.

SGMA Best Management Practice: Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | December 23rd, 2016

The objective of this Best Management Practice (BMP) is to assist in the use and development of hydrogeologic conceptual models (HCM). The California Department of Water

The objective of this Best Management Practice (BMP) is to assist in the use and development of hydrogeologic conceptual models (HCM). The California Department of Water Resources (the Department or DWR) has developed this document as part of the obligation in the Technical Assistance Chapter (Chapter 7) of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) to support the long-term sustainability of California’s groundwater basins. Information provided in this BMP is meant to provide support to Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) when developing a HCM in accordance with the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) Emergency Regulations (GSP Regulations). This BMP identifies available resources to support development of HCMs. This BMP includes the following sections: Objective. The objective and brief description of the contents of this BMP. Use and Limitations. A brief description of the use and limitations of this BMP. HCM Fundamentals. A description of HCM fundamental concepts. Relationship of HCM to other BMPs. A description of how the HCM relates to other BMPs and is the basis for development of other GSP requirements. Technical Assistance. A description of technical assistance to support the development of a HCM and potential sources of information and relevant datasets that can be used to further define each component. Key Definitions. Definitions relevant for this BMP as provided in the GSP and Basin Boundary Regulations and in SGMA. Related Materials. References and other materials that provide supporting information related to the development of HCMs.

SGMA Best Management Practices Framework

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | December 22nd, 2017

Chapter 7 of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), in Water Code Section 10729(d), states that, “By January 1, 2017, the department shall publish on its in

Chapter 7 of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), in Water Code Section 10729(d), states that, “By January 1, 2017, the department shall publish on its internet Web site best management practices for the sustainable management of groundwater.” Prior to the completion of a best management practices (BMPs) document, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) was required to adopt regulations for evaluating groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs), the implementation of GSPs, and coordination agreements by June 1, 2016 (GSP Regulations), and Alternatives.

Sharing Groundwater: A Robust Framework and Implementation Roadmap for Sustainable Groundwater Management in California

Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment & Sustainability (Duke University) | January 1st, 2017

This working paper offers a framework and roadmap for development of a robust groundwater-sharing system consistent with California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management

This working paper offers a framework and roadmap for development of a robust groundwater-sharing system consistent with California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, which requires communities in priority areas to prepare groundwater sustainability plans. The proposed system draws on global experience. Robustness is its signature feature. Opportunities are maximized by a suite of robust local governance, allocation, and administrative arrangements. Additionally, the proposed system incentivizes innovation, stimulates investment, and facilitates low-cost adjustment to changes in groundwater demand. Among the dynamic components underlying this sharing system are a share register that records ownership and transfers of ownership in the basin’s available shares. These unit shares are fungible; each represents a proportional stake in access to the basin’s groundwater resources. Volumetric allocations are made in proportion to the number of shares held during determined periods throughout the water year. These allocations are recorded in bank-like water accounts, affording account holders an efficient means to manage their resource but also ensuring that they cannot use more than is available. Unused water can be saved for later use. At the start of the transition to the new system, users are given an allocation buffer so that they have flexibility and time to adjust. Those who want to can make quick non-contestable trades at low cost.

Sharpening of cold-season storms over the western United States

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | January 19th, 2023

Winter storms are responsible for billion-dollar economic losses in the western United States. Because storm structures are not well resolved by global climate models, it

Winter storms are responsible for billion-dollar economic losses in the western United States. Because storm structures are not well resolved by global climate models, it is not well established how single events and their structures change with warming. Here we use regional storm-resolving simulations to investigate climate change impact on western US winter storms. Under a high-emissions scenario, precipitation volume from the top 20% of winter storms is projected to increase by up to 40% across the region by mid-century. The average increase in precipitation volume (31%) is contributed by 22% from increasing area coverage and 19% from increasing storm intensity, while a robust storm sharpening with larger increase in storm centre precipitation compared with increase in storm area reduces precipitation volume by 10%. Ignoring storm sharpening could result in overestimation of the changes in design storms currently used in infrastructure planning in the region.

Shifts in the thermal niche of almond under climate change

Climatic Change (Springer) | December 5th, 2017

Delineating geographic shifts in crop cultivation under future climate conditions provides information for land use and water management planning, and insights to meeting

Delineating geographic shifts in crop cultivation under future climate conditions provides information for land use and water management planning, and insights to meeting future demand. A suitability modeling approach was used to map the thermal niche of almond cultivation and phenological development across the Western United States (US) through the mid-21st century. The Central Valley of California remains thermally suitable for almond cultivation through the mid-21st century, and opportunities for expansion appear in the Willamette Valley of western Oregon, which is currently limited by insufficient heat accumulation. Modeled almond phenology shows a compression in reproductive development under future climate. By the mid-21st century, almond phenology in the Central Valley showed ~ 2-week delay in chill accumulation and ~ 1- and ~ 2.5-week advance in the timing of bloom and harvest, respectively. Although other climatic and non-climatic restrictions to almond cultivation may exist, these results highlight opportunities for shifts in the geography of high-value cropping systems, which may influence growers’ long-term land use decisions, and shape regional water and agricultural industry discussions regarding climate change adaptation options.

Shoreline retreat and beach nourishment are projected to increase in Southern California

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | May 22nd, 2024

Sandy beaches in Southern California are experiencing rising coastal erosion due to changes in precipitation patterns and urban growth. As a result, beach nourishment is

Sandy beaches in Southern California are experiencing rising coastal erosion due to changes in precipitation patterns and urban growth. As a result, beach nourishment is necessary for mitigation. In our study, we forecast the rates of shoreline retreat and the required volumes of sand nourishment to mitigate it for the coming decades. We employ photogrammetric multi-decadal shoreline positioning and Digital Shoreline Analysis System methods to measure and predict the coastal evolution of the Gulf of Santa Catalina in Southern California. This region is hypothesized to be globally representative of other semi-arid sandy coasts facing similar hydroclimatic and anthropogenic challenges. Our findings indicate that Southern California’s shoreline retreat rates for sandy beaches will increase from the present average value of ~−1.45 to −2.12 meters per year in 2050 and to −3.18 meters per year in 2100. Consequently, the annual volume of sand required for beach nourishment could triple by 2050, increasing from the present-day amount of ~1223 to ~3669 cubic meters per year per kilometer. However, the associated cost for this nourishment will grow five times, exacerbating several coastal communities’ economic and logistical pressures. Similar trends are emerging globally, with semi-arid developing nations already grappling with coastal hazards and may struggle to manage the escalating costs of curbing beach nourishment.

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.

Significant challenges to the sustainability of the California coast considering climate change

National Academy of Sciences (NAS) | July 29th, 2024