The Salton Sea: A Status Update

Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) | August 29th, 2018

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 Stakes are Rising: Lessons on Engaging Coastal Communities on Climate Adaptation in Southern California

Cities and the Environment | November 16th, 2017

Preparing for climate change is rising as a priority for many public policy agendas, driving a demand for information that allows communities to identify both cur

Preparing for climate change is rising as a priority for many public policy agendas, driving a demand for information that allows communities to identify both current and projected vulnerabilities to climate change at local and regional levels. In response, a developing climate change adaptation service sector is bringing science and technical training to policy-makers. Approaching adaptation planning through a regional lens is critical, due to the large number of stakeholders and the intensely interconnected nature of geographies, communities, and economies. Decisions made in one jurisdiction will undoubtedly affect its neighbors. In this emerging field, boundary organizations play a unique role in building capacity across jurisdictions and bridging the gaps among various community, science and government stakeholders. The University of Southern California (USC) Sea Grant Program, located in Los Angeles, has developed a robust stakeholder engagement process to help communities plan for the impacts of climate change along the urbanized coastline. In 2016, USC Sea Grant analyzed its climate change adaptation outreach program to gain insights about its effectiveness. Drawing from this analysis, this paper explores: 1) stakeholder processes; 2) communications methods, particularly the challenges of communicating scientific information; 3) barriers to planning and implementation; 4) how to identify community needs; and, 5) what kinds of investments have been made to meet those needs. Four primary lessons are identified: 1) place-based boundary organizations can be an effective broker in establishing trust among stakeholders; 2) the ever-evolving and complex nature of climate science can overwhelm stakeholders and stall progress, so it is important to emphasize key messages provided by the scientific information, rather than dive deep into technical details and methods; 3) adaptive management is a promising approach to help communities move forward; and, 4) lack of significant and sustained funding for adaptation will continue to limit progress, however, even modest investments made at the right time can be impactful. Finally, the paper discusses the challenges USC Sea Grant faced in the first six years of its climate adaptation outreach program, and provides thoughts on how to help communities continue to advance their adaptation planning goals in the years to come.

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 Sustainability Outlook: A Summary

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | December 13th, 2018

Whether making water resource decisions or taking action, aligning desirable outcomes with four societal values — public health and safety, healthy economy, ecosystem v

Whether making water resource decisions or taking action, aligning desirable outcomes with four societal values — public health and safety, healthy economy, ecosystem vitality, and enriching experiences — is critical to managing water for sustainability. It can be as simple as being mindful of not wasting water, and as complex as predicting and planning for the next drought or flood. Daily, every Californian is responsible for doing their part. But how will Californians know whether their actions are moving the state in the right direction?  One basic long-standing challenge to water resource resilience and reliability in California is the lack of a consistent and practical method for assessing current and future sustainability (California Department of Water Resources, in prep.). Productive planning and the setting of policy priorities require a mutual understanding of challenges, resource limitations, management deficiencies, and shared intent. Managing for sustainability must be rooted in what Californians value, as expressed by stakeholders and corroborated by extensive outreach. Accordingly, there is a need to identify, through the lens of the four societal values, desirable water management outcomes (intended outcomes) and indicators to track status and progress toward sustainability.  The Sustainability Outlook, described in this document, provides a well-organized and consistent approach for tracking local, regional, and State actions and investments. It will also assist in setting future water management priorities. When applied at a watershed scale, the Sustainability Outlook can increase the effectiveness of State water policies and return on investments. Conducting and reporting watershed conditions will more clearly reveal trends, progress, and return on investment that would be difficult to discern at a statewide scale. Watershed evaluations will also allow for the introduction of additional indicators important to specific regions of the state. Through progressive application of the Sustainability Outlook, decision-makers will be able to identify needed analytical tools and data gaps, expand on the information available to make decisions, and build a common understanding of how individual and collective actions have affected the management of water resources for sustainability.  Because sustainability is not something achieved once and forever, the Sustainability Outlook will help water resource managers adapt to changing circumstances and lessons learned. This document underscores the urgency and rationale for the recommended actions in California Water Plan Update 2018 (Update 2018), Chapter 3, “Actions for Sustainability,” as well as the importance of follow-through by those who would implement those actions.” 

The Water Districts of California

Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) | April 1st, 1979

The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins Fifth Edition

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) | May 31st, 2018

The preparation and adoption of water quality control plans (Basin Plans) is required by the California Water Code (Section 13240) and supported by the Federal Clean Wat

The preparation and adoption of water quality control plans (Basin Plans) is required by the California Water Code (Section 13240) and supported by the Federal Clean Water Act. Section 303 of the Clean Water Act requires states to adopt water quality standards which "consist of the designated uses of the navigable waters involved and the water quality criteria for such waters based upon such uses." According to Section 13050 of the California Water Code, Basin Plans consist of a designation or establishment for the waters within a specified area of beneficial uses to be protected, water quality objectives to protect those uses, and a program of implementation needed for achieving the objectives. State law also requires that Basin Plans conform to the policies set forth in the Water Code beginning with Section 13000 and any state policy for water quality control. Since beneficial uses, together with their corresponding water quality objectives, can be defined per federal regulations as water quality standards, the Basin Plans are regulatory references for meeting the state and federal requirements for water quality control (40 CFR 131.20). One significant difference between the state and federal programs is that California's basin plans establish standards for ground waters in addition to surface waters. Basin Plans are adopted and amended by Regional Water Boards under a structured process involving full public participation and state environmental review. Basin Plans and amendments thereto, do not become effective until approved by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board). Regulatory provisions must be approved by the Office of Administrative Law. Adoption or revision of surface water standards are subject to the approval of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Basin Plans complement water quality control plans adopted by the State Water Board, such as the Water Quality Control Plans for Temperature Control and Ocean Waters. It is the intent of the State and Regional Water Boards to maintain the Basin Plans in an updated and readily available edition that reflects the current water quality control program. This Basin Plan covers the entire Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. A separate Basin Plan covers the Tulare Lake Basin. The Basin Plan was first adopted in 1975. In 1989, a second edition was published. The second edition incorporated all the amendments which were adopted and approved since 1975, updated the Basin Plan to include new state policies and programs, restructured and edited the Basin Plan for clarity, and incorporated the results of triennial reviews conducted in 1984 and 1987. The Third Edition - 1994 incorporated all amendments approved between 1989 and 1994, included new state policies and programs, edited and restructured the Basin Plan to make it consistent with other regional and state plans, and substantively amended sections dealing with beneficial uses, objectives, and implementation programs. The current edition (Fourth Edition - 1998) incorporates two new amendments approved since 1994. One amendment deals with compliance schedules in permits and the other addresses agricultural subsurface drainage discharges. In this Basin Plan, "Regional Water Board" refers to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and "State Water Board" refers to the State Water Resources Control Board. Appendix Updates and amendments  are at the State Water Board "Basin Plan" page

The West Wide Drought Tracker: Drought Monitoring at Fine Spatial Scales

American Meteorological Society (AMS) | September 1st, 2017

 The western United States has seen increases in population and water use over the past century. Total water use has remained relatively unchanged over the past several

 The western United States has seen increases in population and water use over the past century. Total water use has remained relatively unchanged over the past several decades due to water conservation efforts. However, water scarcity has become more acute across much of this semiarid region during recent decades due to long-term declines in water storage juxtaposed with the region’s notable hydroclimatic variability. Observed declines in mountain snowpack and increases in atmospheric demands tied to long-term warming trends have further exacerbated water scarcity and increased the importance of monitoring efforts given the array of social, economic, and ecosystem sectors dependent upon the already stressed water supply. The recent severe drought in California and protracted drought across much of the southwestern United States over the past couple decades have prompted demand for accessible drought decision-making information at appropriate spatial scales across the western United States. 

Third Supplement To State Water Resources Board Bulletin No. 11, San Joaquin County Investigation, Basic Data, Calaveras Unit 1956-57

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | January 21st, 1958

Thirty-Five Years of Water Policy: The 1973 National Water Commission and Present Challenges

Congressional Research Service (CRS) | May 11th, 2009

Concern about the availability and use of water to support the nation’s people, economy, and environment has bolstered interest in establishing a national water commiss

Concern about the availability and use of water to support the nation’s people, economy, and environment has bolstered interest in establishing a national water commission. The commission structure proposed in recent legislation (e.g., H.R. 135) is similar to that of the 1968-1973 National Water Commission (NWC or Commission). As proposed in H.R. 135, the commission would assess future water demands, study current management programs, and develop recommendations for a comprehensive water strategy. Questions about a commission as an effective model and which topics a commission might consider have raised interest in assessing what the NWC recommended in its 1973 report, Water Policies for the Future, and how the issues that it identified have evolved. The NWC recommended addressing the interconnection between water development and the natural environment, implementing a “users pay” or “beneficiary pays” approach, accomplishing water quality improvements, and adapting governance and organizations to meet water challenges. Since 1973, progress has been made in some of these areas; however, few actions can be traced directly to the NWC’s recommendations. Nonetheless, the influence of the NWC on the evolution of water policy cannot be dismissed. Many of the problems that the Commission identified remain today, and some actions since 1973 have moved water policy toward alignment with NWC recommendations; others have moved it in the opposite direction of NWC recommendations. Shifts in institutional arrangements in general have reduced coordination of federal water agency activities and in many ways have moved away from NWC-recommended multi-objective or river basin planning. State-federal tensions over proper and respective roles continue to cloud resolution of difficult water resource issues and complicate coordination efforts. While many support better coordination of federal water activities and a clearer national “vision” for water management, Congress has not enacted overarching water policy legislation since the 1965 Water Resources Planning Act. Instead, water policy has largely evolved through executive and judicial actions, in many cases in response to piecemeal legislation. Congress continually modifies federal water projects through amendments to existing projects and programs through Water Resources Development Acts (WRDAs), Reclamation acts, water quality legislation, and appropriations decisions. Incremental and ad hoc evolution of water policy, however, is not surprising. Water management is complicated by past decisions and investments affecting a wide range of stakeholders pursuing different goals. Specifically, federal and state laws and regulations, local ordinances, tribal treaties, contractual obligations, and economies dependent on existing water use patterns and infrastructure all affect water management. Attempts to untangle such complexities involve many constituencies with differing interests, and success is difficult to achieve. Expectations for a commission to achieve change in a complex system resistant to transformation may be unreasonable; instead, the influence of a commission may lie in how its recommendations combine with other drivers to support policy evolution. This CRS report presents the NWC’s recommendations and analyzes how issues targeted by the recommendations have evolved during the intervening years. The report focuses on key federal-level recommendations, thereby targeting what has been accomplished since 1973, what issues remain unresolved, and what additional concerns have developed.