Estuary News, June 2021

Publisher not available | June 15th, 2021

Estuary News, November 1992

San Francisco Estuary Partnership (SFEP) | November 15th, 1992

Estuary News, October 2001

San Francisco Estuary Partnership (SFEP) | October 15th, 2001

Estuary News, September 2019

San Francisco Estuary Partnership (SFEP) | September 15th, 2019

Existing Accessible Modeling Tools Offer Limited Support to Evaluation of Impact Investment in Rangeland Ecosystem Services

Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems (Frontiers) | September 24th, 2019

Privately owned rangelands in the western US support many ecosystem services and are threatened by financial incentives favoring conversion to housing development and m

Privately owned rangelands in the western US support many ecosystem services and are threatened by financial incentives favoring conversion to housing development and more intensive forms of agriculture. Recognizing this threat, the impact investment community has identified rangeland management as a potential investing strategy to produce financial returns while preserving or enhancing the ecosystem services provided by intact rangelands. This strategy is based primarily on the notion that a capital-intensive conversion from continuous to rotational grazing can financially sustain rangelands through a combination of increased productivity and potentially monetized ecosystem service flows. The potential for these gains is supported by compelling anecdotal evidence, yet a robust body of scientific literature based on rigorous field experiments has not supported those claims, nor produced transferrable estimates of the benefits provided by rotational grazing of livestock (particularly cattle in the western US). Therefore, to demonstrate investment viability and measure investment success, impact investors will likely need to address these well-documented disconnects through some combination of monitoring and process-based modeling. This study examines the extent to which existing modeling tools are up to this task, by assessing the ability of two process-based models to represent four specific rotational grazing benefits put forth by impact investors, using a ranch in northeastern Wyoming as a case study. Using the Soil Water Assessment Tool, we simulated high magnitude changes in the water balance from surface runoff to evapotranspiration, which may be a benefit or negative impact depending on context (Benefit 1). We simulated a decrease in soil water storage under rotational grazing, which directly contradicts the outcome assumed in investment literature (Benefit 2). Using the InVEST beta Rangeland Production Model (based on the Century ecosystem model), we simulated increased biomass productivity (Benefit 3) under rotational grazing, which enhanced animal performance under some management parameters but negatively impacted it in others (Benefit 4). We conclude that the impact investing community will likely find greater success through a shift to objective-oriented ranch management, rather than a specific focus on rotation, and will also need additional investment in science and monitoring to demonstrate benefits.

Federal Land Management Agencies: Background on Land and Resources Management

Congressional Research Service (CRS) | February 9th, 2009

The federal government owns about 650 million acres (29%) of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United States. Four agencies administer 617.5 million acres of the fede

The federal government owns about 650 million acres (29%) of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United States. Four agencies administer 617.5 million acres of the federal land: the Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture, and the Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Park Service, all in the Department of the Interior.  Most of these lands are in the West, including Alaska. They generate revenues for the U.S. Treasury, some of which are shared with states and localities. The agencies receive funding through the annual Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations laws, as well as in various trust funds and special accounts. The lands administered by the four agencies are managed for a variety of purposes, primarily related to preservation, recreation, and development of natural resources. Yet each of these agencies has distinct responsibilities for the lands and resources it administers. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages 255.8 million acres and is responsible for 700 million acres of subsurface mineral resources. The BLM has a multiple-use, sustained-yield mandate that supports a variety of uses and programs, including energy development, recreation, grazing and wild horses and burros, and conservation. The Forest Service (FS) manages 192.8 million acres also for multiple uses and sustained yields of various products and services, including timber harvesting, recreation, grazing, watershed protection, and fish and wildlife habitats. Most of the lands are designated national forests, but there are national grasslands and other designations. Wildfire protection is an increasingly important activity for both agencies. The BLM and FS have several authorities to acquire and dispose of lands. The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) manages 90.8 million acres of federal land, primarily to conserve and protect animals and plants. The National Wildlife Refuge System includes wildlife refuges, waterfowl production areas, and wildlife coordination units. Units can be created by an act of Congress or executive order, and the FWS also may acquire lands for migratory birds. The National Park Service (NPS) manages 78.1 million acres of federal land to conserve lands and resources and make them available for public use. Activities that harvest or remove resources generally are prohibited. The National Park System has diverse units ranging from historical structures to cultural and natural areas. Units are created by an act of Congress, but the President may proclaim national monuments. There also are three special management systems that include lands from more than one agency. The National Wilderness Preservation System consists of 107.6 million acres of protected wilderness areas designated by Congress. The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System contains 11,944 miles of wild, scenic, and recreational rivers, primarily designated by Congress and managed to preserve their free-flowing condition. The National Trails System contains four classes of trails managed to provide recreation and access to outdoor areas and historic resources.

FLOOD- MAR Using Flood Water for Managed Aquifer Recharge to Support Sustainable Water Resources

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | June 26th, 2018

The effects of climate change are necessitating wholesale changes in how water is managed in California.  With less water storage from snowpack, California needs to leve

The effects of climate change are necessitating wholesale changes in how water is managed in California.  With less water storage from snowpack, California needs to leverage both the current water system and new opportunities to provide sustainable alternatives that can simultaneously accommodate longer and deeper droughts, and more severe, and frequent, episodic and seasonal flooding. This recent cycle of drought and flood, and the passage of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), provide an enhanced opportunity to modernize State policies related to the nexus between flood management, land use, groundwater management, and ecosystem enhancement. Partnerships, among DWR; other State, federal, tribal, regional, and local entities; and university and private researchers, are actively exploring opportunities to determine how flood and groundwater management can be integrated for multiple benefits. Although integrating flood and groundwater management is not a new concept, the time is ripe to implement an expanded, large-scale integrated program. With the passage and early implementation of SGMA, in combination with climate-induced extreme events, the logic for communities to partner and integrate is evident and imperative. This partnership will help reduce the impacts of future swings between high- and low-flow periods while meeting their communities’ objectives, with the added benefits of improving floodplain ecosystems, preserving working landscapes, and engaging California’s agricultural community in needed solutions, among others. This white paper explores “Flood-MAR”, an integrated and voluntary resource management strategy that uses flood water resulting from, or in anticipation of, rainfall or snowmelt for groundwater recharge on agricultural lands and working landscapes, including but not limited to refuges, floodplains, and flood bypasses. Large-scale implementation of Flood-MAR will fundamentally change how flood and groundwater management are managed. Flood-MAR can be implemented at multiple scales, from individual landowners diverting flood water with existing infrastructure, to using extensive detention/recharge areas and modernizing flood protection infrastructure/operations. Flood-MAR’s potential and value for California is achieved by integrating Flood-MAR with other regional recharge efforts, changing management of California’s water system to better integrate surface water and groundwater, upgrading conveyance, storage, and operations, and considering Flood-MAR’s opportunities as related to water transport and transfers are some of the system integration considerations. This white paper demonstrates the need for Flood-MAR to become an important part of California’s portfolio of water resource management strategies, now and in the future, to help significantly improve water resources sustainability and climate resiliency throughout the state.  Using Flood Water for Managed Aquifer Recharge Can Provide Broad Benefits. There is a clear State interest in encouraging, and participating in, Flood-MAR projects because they can provide broad and multiple public and private benefits for Californians and the ecosystems of the state. Potential public benefits include: - Flood Risk Reduction. - Drought Preparedness. - Aquifer Replenishment. - Ecosystem Enhancement. - Subsidence Mitigation. - Water Quality Improvement. - Working Landscape Preservation and Stewardship.

Flood-MAR Research and Data Development Plan

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | October 31st, 2019

The Research Advisory Committee (RAC) is pleased to make this plan available to the growing network of farmers, researchers, planners, and water and land managers who wan

The Research Advisory Committee (RAC) is pleased to make this plan available to the growing network of farmers, researchers, planners, and water and land managers who want to expand our collective knowledge about using floodwaters for managed aquifer recharge (Flood-MAR). This plan outlines the priority information needed by those making management decisions about the where, when, and how of capturing available flood water to replenish California’s depleted aquifers.

Forest Management (Resource Management Strategy)

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | July 29th, 2016

Forest lands in California, the majority of which are in the middle to high elevation foothills and mountains, produce a diverse array of resources such as water, timber,

Forest lands in California, the majority of which are in the middle to high elevation foothills and mountains, produce a diverse array of resources such as water, timber, native vegetation, fish, wildlife, and livestock, and outdoor recreation. However, the water produced by these forests has economic value that equals or exceeds that of any other forest resource (Krieger 2001; California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2003). Most of California’s major rivers and a substantial portion of its runoff originate in these forests; therefore, most of California’s major water development projects are tied strongly to forested watersheds. Forest management activities can affect water quantity and quality. This strategy focuses on forest management activities, on both public and privately-owned forest lands, whose goals specifically include improvement of the availability and quality of water for downstream users.

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.