Biological Opinion for the Reinitiation of Consultation on the Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) | December 6th, 2024

Biological Opinion on Long-term Operation of the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) | October 21st, 2019

Biological sensitivities to high-resolution climate change projections in the California current marine ecosystem

Wiley | July 28th, 2022

Blurred lines: Multiple freshwater and marine algal toxins at the land-sea interface of San Francisco Bay, California

Harmful Algae (Elsevier) | March 10th, 2018

San Francisco Bay (SFB) is a eutrophic estuary that harbors both freshwater and marine toxigenic organisms that are responsible for harmful algal blooms. While there are

San Francisco Bay (SFB) is a eutrophic estuary that harbors both freshwater and marine toxigenic organisms that are responsible for harmful algal blooms. While there are few commercial fishery harvests within SFB, recreational and subsistence harvesting for shellfish is common. Coastal shellfish are monitored for domoic acid and paralytic shellfish toxins (PSTs), but within SFB there is no routine monitoring for either toxin. Dinophysis shellfish toxins (DSTs) and freshwater microcystins are also present within SFB, but not routinely monitored. Acute exposure to any of these toxin groups has severe consequences for marine organisms and humans, but chronic exposure to sub-lethal doses, or synergistic effects from multiple toxins, are poorly understood and rarely addressed. This study documents the occurrence of domoic acid and microcystins in SFB from 2011 to 2016, and identifies domoic acid, microcystins, DSTs, and PSTs in marine mussels within SFB in 2012, 2014, and 2015. At least one toxin was detected in 99% of mussel samples, and all four toxin suites were identified in 37% of mussels. The presence of these toxins in marine mussels indicates that wildlife and humans who consume them are exposed to toxins at both sub-lethal and acute levels. As such, there are potential deleterious impacts for marine organisms and humans and these effects are unlikely to be documented. These results demonstrate the need for regular monitoring of marine and freshwater toxins in SFB, and suggest that co-occurrence of multiple toxins is a potential threat in other ecosystems where freshwater and seawater mix.

Bring Back the Kern et al vs. the City of Bakersfield

Superior Court of California, County of Kern | February 5th, 2024

Bulletin 250: Fish Passage Improvement: An Element of CALFED’s Ecosystem Restoration Program

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | June 16th, 2005

Since the 1800s, salmon and steelhead spawning habitat in California has declined 95 percent, from 6,000 miles of rivers and streams to 300 miles. With this decline in sp

Since the 1800s, salmon and steelhead spawning habitat in California has declined 95 percent, from 6,000 miles of rivers and streams to 300 miles. With this decline in spawning habitat, there has been a decrease in salmon and steelhead fish populations. Recognizing the importance of saving and restoring the populations of salmon and steelhead, many government and private organizations have responded, working to reopen streams and  rivers to anadromous fish. Initiated by the California Bay-Delta Program agencies in 1999, the Fish Passage Improvement Program, an element of the Ecosystem Restoration Program1 is a partnership-building effort to improve and enhance fish passage in Central Valley and Bay Area rivers and streams. We work under the guidance of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and the Department of Fish and Game through an interagency team that provides oversight for the program. In addition, we work with other local, state, and federal agencies and stakeholders to plan and implement projects to remove barriers that impede migration and spawning of anadromous fish. One purpose of the Fish Passage Improvement Program is to identify potential fish passage projects for implementation by the California Bay-Delta agencies and local interests. In order to do that, it is necessary to determine where fish passage impediments exist and to determine what fish passage improvement projects are already in motion. The inaugural issue of Bulletin 250 identifies potential fish passage impediments and ongoing activities that are addressing fish passage barriers within the Fish Passage Improvement Program geographic scope and beyond (Figure ES-1). Chapter 1 gives a historical perspective of fish passage improvement in California, describing the Fish Passage Improvement Program and the efforts to solve the problem outlined in Chapter 2. Chapter 2 describes the historical and current distribution of salmon and steelhead listed as threatened or endangered and their critical habitat in the Central Valley and Bay Area. It also describes how man-made structures in rivers and streams cause problems for fish passage. Chapter 3 describes fish populations and their habitat in Central Valley and Bay Area streams and rivers where the Fish Passage Improvement Program supports projects. Chapter 4 describes projects supported by the Fish Passage Improvement Program or other agencies on streams listed in Chapter 3.

California Department of Fish and Game Biennial Report 1870-1873

California Fish and Game Commission | April 1st, 1933

California Endangered Species Act Incidental Take Permit No. 2081-2023-054-00

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | November 4th, 2024

California Fish and Game, Volume 15

California Fish and Game Commission | January 1st, 1929

California Fish and Game, Volume 16

California Fish and Game Commission | April 2nd, 1930