California Water Fix/BDCP/Delta Conveyance

Page

Showing
41-51 of 89

Per Page

Sort By

DISB Review of Bay Delta Conservation Plan/California WaterFix Partially Recirculated Draft EIR/EIS

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | October 1st, 2015

Summary

We have reviewed the partially Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report/ Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan/Calif

We have reviewed the partially Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report/ Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan/California WaterFix (herein, "the Current Draft"). We focused on how fully and effectively it considers and communicates the scientific foundations for assessing the environmental impacts of water conveyance alternatives. The review is attached and is summarized below. The Current Draft contains a wealth of information but lacks completeness and clarity in applying science to far-reaching policy decisions. It defers essential material to the Final EIR/EIS and retains a number of deficiencies from the Bay Delta Conservation Plan Draft EIR/EIS. The missing content includes: 1. Details about the adaptive-management process, collaborative science, monitoring, and the resources that these efforts will require; 2. Due regard for several aspects of habitat restoration: landscape scale, timing, long-term monitoring, and the strategy of avoiding damage to existing wetlands; 3. Analyses of how levee failures would affect water operations and how the implemented project would affect the economics of levee maintenance; 4. Sufficient attention to linkages among species, landscapes, and management actions; effects of climate change on water resources; effects of the proposed project on San Joaquin Valley agriculture; and uncertainties and their consequences; 5. Informative summaries, in words, tables, and graphs, that compare the proposed alternatives and their principal environmental and economic impacts. The effects of California WaterFix extend beyond water conveyance to habitat restoration and levee maintenance. These interdependent issues of statewide importance warrant an environmental impact assessment that is more complete, comprehensive, and comprehensible than the Current Draft.

View Document Download Now Email

DISB Review of the Draft EIR/EIS for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | May 15th, 2014

Summary

The Delta Reform Act of 2009 (§85320(c)) instructs the Delta Independent Science Board to review the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) Draft Environmental Impact Report

The Delta Reform Act of 2009 (§85320(c)) instructs the Delta Independent Science Board to review the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (DEIR/DEIS) and to submit our comments to the Delta Stewardship Council and the California Department of Fish and Game. We have focused our review on the adequacy of the science and the validity of the conclusions drawn from that science. The accompanying document constitutes our legislatively mandated review. We commend the preparers of the Draft BDCP documents for assembling and analyzing mountains of scientific information, and for exploring environmental impacts of many proposed BDCP actions. The preparers faced a bewildering array of regulatory requirements and economic, social, and political pressures. We find, however, that the science in this BDCP effort falls short of what the project requires. We highlight our concerns in the attached report. The report, in turn, draws on our detailed responses to charge questions from the Delta Stewardship Council (Appendix A) and on our reviews of individual chapters in the DEIR/DEIS (Appendix B). Our concerns raise issues that, if not addressed, may undermine the contributions of BDCP to meeting the co-equal goals for the Delta.

View Document Download Now Email

DISB Review of the Final EIR/EIS for California WaterFix

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | June 19th, 2017

Summary

The Delta Reform Act of 2009 directs the Delta Independent Science Board to review environmental impact assessments of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (now California Wat

The Delta Reform Act of 2009 directs the Delta Independent Science Board to review environmental impact assessments of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (now California WaterFix). Here, in our fifth such review, we focus on the adequacy of the scientific information presented in the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR)/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the California WaterFix by revisiting the six main concerns we raised in our September 2015 review of the Recirculated Draft EIR/Supplemental EIS. We discuss improvements and shortcomings. We also comment on the need to improve impact assessments for scientific evaluation and effective stakeholder engagement. The Final EIR/EIS contains a wealth of detail and considerable insight. This version improves on its predecessors but retains some persistent shortcomings. Improved content on adaptive management is still short on detail about how adaptive management would be implemented under changing and uncertain conditions. Summaries and comparisons, more abundant than before, lack insightful syntheses and graphics that ease comprehension of the vast amount of material presented. Expanded discussion of Delta levees stops short of evaluating interactions with water supply reliability and neglects changing views of earthquake hazards. Long-term effects are better addressed in several ways, but with insufficient attention to uncertainties in defining the No Action Alternative and to the interplay between California groundwater sustainability and Delta water supplies. Other content missing includes evaluation of environmental effects of water use south of the Delta. Evaluation of ecosystem impacts, though extensive, retains gaps on using restoration as mitigation. The completion of our reviews of the Final EIR/EIS and its predecessors prompt us to reflect more broadly on the use and communication of science in the Delta and more specifically on the false trade off between thoroughness and intelligibility that has become common in environmental impact assessments. Overwhelming readers with content that addresses the many scientific issues related to a proposed project and its alternatives, while neglecting the thoughtful presentation and synthesis of insights and performance trade offs among alternatives, diminishes the value of this important document as a comparative guide to the expected environmental effects of the alternatives considered.

View Document Download Now Email

Ecological Studies of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, A Decennial Report 1961-1971

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) | June 15th, 1972

Summary

View Document Download Now Email

Economic Analysis of Stage I of the California WaterFix Costs and Benefits to Urban and Agricultural Participants

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | February 12th, 2018

Summary

The California WaterFix, considered initially as part of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, is a foundational component of the state’s Water Action Plan. It add

The California WaterFix, considered initially as part of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, is a foundational component of the state’s Water Action Plan. It addresses environmental, seismic, water quality and climate change threats to the existing water conveyance infrastructure in the Delta and complements efforts to improve ecological functions being advanced by the state’s California EcoRestore program. During this planning process that now spans more than 11 years, economic principles for measuring costs and benefits have been applied over time in various reports to review the values of water system and ecosystem improvements and to help advance public discussion and debate. Such cost-benefit analyses have gone beyond what is legally required because of the statewide significance of the project. This most recent analysis is intended to help examine the evolved project and the related costs and benefits of the potenti al participants in both the urban and agricultural sectors. After several years of analysis, the California Department of Water Resources is considering an option to implement the California WaterFix project in two Stage s. Stage I would consist of two 3,000-cfs intakes connected to one 40-ft diameter tunnel. From the intakes, water would be conveyed by gravity flow to a 6,000-c fs pumping plant that lifts it into Clifton Court Forebay. Stage II of the California WaterFix would consist of an additional 3,000-cfs intake connected to a second tunnel. Because not all aspects of financing and project participation have been decided at present, this report considers Stage I costs and benefits in multiple alternative scenarios. These scenarios include whether i) low - interest federal financing will be available to cover a share of project costs, ii) revenues will be collected for federal contractors’ use of up to 1,000-cfs of the Stage I project or whether the State Water Contractors will make use of the entire capa city , and iii) trading of project capacity will be allowed among t he State Water Contractors . Participants in Stage II of the California WaterFix are not currently known. Depending on the evolution of environmental regulations, water demands and climate, state and federal water agencies may decide to implement Stage II at some point in the future. At that time, a detailed cost - benefit analysis of Stage II can be completed. The analysis described in this report concludes that Stage I of the California WaterFix passes a cost - benefit test for SWP urban and agricultural agencies under all scenarios analyzed . T he ability of project participants to trade their shares in the project is highly beneficial to SWP agricultural agencies, as is the availability of federal low - interest financing . The analysis also indicates that federal contractors south of the Delta receive benefits in excess of costs from the use of up to 1,000-cfs of Stage 1 project capacity. The State Water Project contractors would also receive positive net benefits were they to use all 6,000-cfs of capacity.

View Document Download Now Email

Economic Sustainability Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta

Delta Protection Commission (DPC) | July 19th, 2012

Summary

The Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta is a unique place of economic, environmental, historic, and cultural significance. The land and water resources of the Delta suppor

The Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta is a unique place of economic, environmental, historic, and cultural significance. The land and water resources of the Delta support significant agricultural and recreation economies, and the Delta also has an important role as an infrastructure hub for water, energy, and transportation. The region’s rich history boasts of bustling, river-based commerce before the automobile age, and its cultural uniqueness includes the only rural town in America build by early Chinese immigrants. As the largest estuary on the west coast of the Americas, the Delta also is a place of striking natural beauty and ecological significance that is struggling with serious environmental degradation problems. Although surrounded by growing cities, the Delta remains a highly-productive agricultural area with rural charms, landscapes, and waterscapes not found elsewhere in California. In recent years, there has been great concern over increasing environmental degradation in the Delta and over court decisions that reduced the quantity of water delivered to southern California through the state and federal water project intakes in the south Delta to protect endangered fish. Combined with additional concerns about the stability of the Delta’s levee system, these concerns led the California legislature to pass the Delta Reform Act of 2009. The Act created the Delta Stewardship Council and charged it with developing a Delta Plan to achieve the coequal goals of “providing a more reliable water supply for California and protecting, restoring, and enhancing the Delta ecosystem.” Recognizing the potential impact of the Delta Plan on the people and economy of the Delta, the Delta Reform Act stated that the coequal goals of water supply reliability and restoring the Delta ecosystem “shall be achieved in a manner that protects and enhances the unique cultural, recreational, natural resource, and agricultural values of the Delta as an evolving place.” Among the measures to address this goal, the Delta Protection Commission was tasked with developing this Economic Sustainability Plan to inform the Delta Stewardship Council’s development of the Delta Plan. The Legislature established the following guidelines for the Economic Sustainability Plan in the Delta Reform Act of 2009: "The economic sustainability plan shall include information and recommendations that inform the Delta Stewardship Council’s policies regarding the socioeconomic sustainability of the Delta region. (b) The economic sustainability plan shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following: 1) Public safety recommendations, such as flood protection recommendations. 2) The economic goals, policies, and objectives in local general plans and other local economic efforts, including recommendations on continued socioeconomic sustainability of agriculture and its infrastructure and legacy communities in the Delta. 3) Comments and recommendations to the Department of Water Resources concerning its periodic update of the flood management plan for the Delta. 4) Identification of ways to encourage recreational investment along the key river corridors, as appropriate. Since a key purpose of this Economic Sustainability Plan is to inform the Delta Plan under development by the Delta Stewardship Council, this report analyzes the impact of key policies being considered for the plan on the economic sustainability of the Delta. Many of the most significant proposals for the Delta are being developed in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). The policy proposals can be grouped into four categories: 1) water conveyance, 2) habitat creation, 3) levees, and 4) land use regulation. The report also considers many aspects of economic sustainability in the Delta that are unrelated to these water policy proposals including economic development recommendations in the 2008 Delta Vision Strategic Plan.

View Document Download Now Email

Fish Bulletin 133. Ecological Studies of The Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary Part 1: Zooplankton, Zoobenthos, and Fishes of San Pablo and Suisun Bays, Zooplankton and Zoobenthos of the Delta

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) | September 9th, 1965

Summary

The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers have a common estuary. These two streams meet in the center of California's central valley to form the Delta (Figure 1). A hundred y

The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers have a common estuary. These two streams meet in the center of California's central valley to form the Delta (Figure 1). A hundred years ago the Delta was an extensive tidal marsh, but it has been almost entirely reclaimed for agriculture. The Delta now includes about 738,000 acres of land and water, 700 miles of navigable channels, and 30 large, below sea level islands. About 39,000 acres are covered by water. Some Delta channels are edged with narrow stretches of intertidal marsh but most of them have steep banks of mud or are covered with large cobbles to prevent erosion. They vary in width from a few hundred feet to a mile and are seldom more than 30 to 40 feet deep. In some areas there are small "waste" islands that flood during high tides. These waste islands and levees that surround all Delta channels are covered with an assortment of emergent aquatic plants, grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees. Water heading toward the sea from the Delta passes through Suisun Bay, which is merely the wide combination of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers below the Delta. Thirty-six percent of Suisun Bay is flooded by less than 3 feet of water at mean lower-low tide, and at this stage about 3,000 acres of intertidal zone is exposed. Richard Painter (see p. 40) has included a map of the 6-foot contour. From Suisun Bay the water flows through the 6-mile long and up to 100 feet deep Carquinez Strait into San Pablo Bay. Almost 60 percent of San Pablo Bay's 73,000 acres is less than 6 feet deep at mean lower-low tide. San Pablo Bay has a much more extensive intertidal area than Suisun Bay. San Pablo Bay water flows into San Francisco Bay and then through the narrow Golden Gate into the Pacific Ocean. The investigations reported on in this bulletin were geographically limited to the upper and middle portions of the estuary—from the Delta through San Pablo Bay. We have not investigated below San Pablo Bay. McCarty et al (1962) described south San Francisco Bay, and Storrs, Selleck, and Pearson (1964) described north San Francisco Bay. Gillian (1957) wrote an interesting and useful popular account of the entire bay.

View Document Download Now Email

Friends of the Earth v. Coleman

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit | March 10th, 1975

Summary

View Document Download Now Email

History of Water Project Conveyance in the Delta

California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) | January 6th, 2016

Summary

A fact sheet on the history of conveyance in the Delta; includes a timeline from the 1950s to present. Prepared by the Department of Water Resources.

View Document Download Now Email

Independent Panel Review of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan prepared for The Nature Conservancy and American Rivers

Nature Conservancy | September 19th, 2013

Summary

Two non-governmental organizations, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and American Rivers (AR), are evaluating their options for engagement with the Bay Delta Conservation P

Two non-governmental organizations, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and American Rivers (AR), are evaluating their options for engagement with the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). If approved, the Plan would become a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) under the federal Endangered Species Act and a Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) under California law. The purpose of the Plan is to allow for construction of new water diversion facilities in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta while also protecting aquatic and terrestrial species that may be adversely affected by the project and accompanying changes in the State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP) operations. The Plan also includes habitat restoration and a commitment to assist in the conservation and recovery of species that are listed for protection under the federal and state Endangered Species Acts. With financial support from the S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation, Saracino and Mount, LLC, convened an independent panel of experts, with technical support from NewFields, Inc., to evaluate portions of the Plan. The panel, working jointly with TNC and AR, developed a series of technical and legal questions about the Plan. This report provides answers to these questions, along with limited recommendations on how to improve BDCP. To simplify analysis, this review focuses on conditions for federally listed fishes during the Early Long Term (ELT), a decade after a permit would be issued (approximately year 2025). These are described in detail in the BDCP Effects Analysis and accompanying Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report. We compared the performance of three different scenarios: a No Action Alternative (NAA) where no new North Delta diversion facility is constructed, a High Outflow Scenario (HOS) where the facilities are operated in a way that allows for occasional high spring and fall outflows, and a Low Outflow Scenario (LOS) with lower spring and fall outflows. The review also emphasizes in-Delta and Sacramento River watershed conditions during the ELT, with less attention to San Joaquin River conditions and fishes. Although multiple data sources were used in this analysis, most hydrologic data came from CALSIM simulations conducted by BDCP consultants. The Panel strongly cautions about the conclusions drawn from these simulations. Flow simulations have three compounding uncertainties that can lead to significant error: (1) uncertainty in system understanding and future conditions, (2) model uncertainties (particularly the relationships between 1-, 2-, and 3-dimensional models), and (3) behavioral/regulatory uncertainty where the models cannot capture the scope of human behavior in operating the projects under various conditions. These uncertainties, which are not described in BDCP documents well, makes all of our conclusions contingent on the projects actually being operated as simulated.

View Document Download Now Email

← Prev

Page : 5

Type

Biological Opinion (3)
Bulletin (2)
California Water Plan (2)
Conference proceedings (1)
Environmental Documents (13)
Fact sheet (4)
Issue Paper (1)
Journal Article (3)
Legal document (5)
Legislation (1)
Letter (1)
Memo (4)
Model (1)
NGO Position Paper (5)
Plan (8)
Policy (1)
Report (26)
Research Brief (1)
Science Panel Report (13)
Strategy (1)
Technical Report (3)
Water Right Decision (2)
White Paper (4)

Topic

Adaptive Management (5)
Agriculture (8)
California Water Fix/BDCP/Delta Conveyance (89)
Climate Change (9)
Drinking Water (3)
Ecosystem & Species Management (19)
Ecosystem Restoration (2)
Environmental Justice (3)
Federal Water Quality (2)
Fisheries (10)
Flood Management (7)
Geochemistry (1)
Groundwater (2)
History (2)
Human Right to Water (1)
Infrastructure (6)
Integrated Regional Water Management (4)
Levees (4)
Modeling (1)
People & Water (5)
Planning & Management (16)
Policy (1)
Pollutants (1)
Recycled Water (1)
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (58)
Salinity (14)
Science Management (5)
State Water Quality (3)
Storage (1)
Upper Watershed Management (1)
Water & Energy (1)
Water Project Operations (11)
Water Quality (18)
Water Quality Monitoring (1)
Water Rights, Water Law (4)
Water Supply (14)
Water Use & Efficiency (2)

Keywords

adaptive management (6)
agriculture (2)
anadromous fish (1)
biological opinion (BiOp) (3)
California Water Plan (2)
Central Valley (1)
Central Valley Project (CVP) (5)
climate change (6)
Delta conveyance (58)
drinking water (1)
economic analysis (13)
ecosystem management (13)
ecosystem restoration (1)
endangered species (9)
environmental justice (1)
fisheries (11)
flood management (2)
flows (1)
groundwater contamination (1)
Groundwater Exchange (2)
history (2)
infrastructure (10)
invasive species (1)
irrigation (1)
levees (2)
modeling (2)
native fish (5)
nitrates (1)
outreach and engagement (2)
planning and management (11)
risk assessment (1)
Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (69)
salinity (9)
science management (2)
sea level rise (4)
State Water Project (SWP) (8)
storage (1)
urban water conservation (1)
water management - see planning and management (1)
water project operations (9)
water quality (11)
water rights (2)
water supply (12)

Publisher

American Fisheries Society (AFS) (1)
Berkeley Research Group (BRG) (1)
Bob Pyke (1)
CALFED (2)
California Agriculture (UCANR) (1)
California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission (CDIAC) (1)
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) (3)
California Department of Water Resources (DWR) (20)
California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) (1)
California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) (4)
California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) (3)
Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) (1)
Christian Science Monitor (1)
Court of Appeals of California, First Appellate District (1)
Delta Protection Commission (DPC) (1)
Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) (10)
Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force (Delta Vision) (1)
Department of Justice (DOJ) (1)
Environmental Science & Policy (Elsevier) (1)
Food and Water Watch (FWW) (1)
Interagency Delta Committee (IDC) (1)
LA Law Library (LALaw) (1)
Little Hoover Commission (1)
Los Angeles Times (1)
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) (4)
National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (4)
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (1)
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) (4)
Nature Conservancy (1)
New York Times (1)
Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) (2)
San Francisco Baykeeper (1)
San Francisco Estuary Project (1)
State of California (2)
Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento (1)
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (1)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) (1)
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (1)
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit (1)
University of the Pacific (1)
University of the Pacific, Center for Business and Policy Research (2)

Basin

Hydrological Region

Central Coast (3)
Colorado River (1)
Lower Basin States and Mexico - Colorado River (3)
North Coast (1)
North Lahontan (1)
Sacramento River (71)
San Francisco Bay (66)
San Joaquin River (68)
South Coast (4)
South Lahontan (1)
Tulare Lake (4)

Reset

Search for:

CONTACT

Search the California Water Library

Type

Best Management Practice
Biological Opinion
Book/Textbook
Bulletin
Bulletin 118
California Water Plan
Case study
Conference proceedings
Congressional Testimony
Environmental Documents
Essay
Fact sheet
Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) review findings
Guidance Document
Handbook/Guide
Issue Paper
Journal Article
Legal document
Legislation
Letter
Manual
Memo
Model
NGO Position Paper
Plan
Policy
Policy - state
Policy Brief
Report
Research Article
Research Brief
Science Panel Report
Strategy
Technical Report
Template
Textbook
Thesis
Water Right Decision
White Paper

Topic

Adaptive Management
Agriculture
Basic Information
California Water Fix/BDCP/Delta Conveyance
Cannabis
Climate Change
Drinking Water
Drought & Hydrology
Desalination
Ecosystem & Species Mgt
Ecosystem Restoration
Invasive Species
Wetland Mitigation
Environmental Justice
Fisheries
Flood Management
Fracking
Geochemistry
Geohydrology
Groundwater
Geochemistry
Geohydrology
History
Human Right to Water
Infrastructure
Integrated Regional Water Management
Landscape Reform
Levees
Modeling
People & Water
Policy
Planning & Management
Recycled Water
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
Sanitation
Science Management
Storage
Stormwater
Transfers & Markets
Tribal Water Issues
Upper Watershed Management
Water & Energy
Water Project Operations
Water Rights, Water Law
Water Supply
Water Quality
Federal Water Quality
Non Point Pollution Sources
Point Pollution Sources
Pollutants
Salinity
State Water Quality
Water Quality Monitoring
Water Use & Efficiency
Uncategorized

Keywords

adaptive management
adjudicated basins
agricultural drainage
agriculture
agriculture water use and efficiency
allocations
anadromous fish
atmospheric rivers
basic information
basin characterization
benthic macroinvertebrates
best management practices (BMPs)
bioassessment
biological opinion (BiOp)
brine management
California Water Plan
cannabis
Central Valley
Central Valley Project (CVP)
climate change
cloud seeding
coastal aquifers
Colorado River
compaction
conjunctive use
debris flow
Delta conveyance
Delta Stewardship Council (DSC)
desalination
direct potable reuse
disadvantaged communities (DACs)
drinking water
drought
earthquake
economic analysis
ecosystem management
ecosystem restoration
endangered species
environmental justice
fisheries
flood management
floodplain restoration
flows
forest management
fracking
fugitive dust
funding
Glen Canyon Dam
Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE)
Great Basin Aquifer
groundwater
Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program
groundwater contamination
groundwater dependent ecosystems
Groundwater Exchange
groundwater pumping impacts
groundwater recharge
Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP)
groundwater-surface water interaction
habitat restoration
history
human right to water
hydraulic fracturing
hydropower
infrastructure
Integrated Regional Water Management
interbasin flow
invasive species
irrigation
land use
levees
managed aquifer recharge (MAR) - also see Groundwater Recharge
mercury
microplastics
mitigation
modeling
monitoring
Monterey amendments
native fish
nitrates
nutrients
ocean acidification
oil and gas
outreach and engagement
pesticides
planning and management
pollutants
privatization
public trust doctrine
Quantification Settlement Agreement
reasonable use doctrine
recreation
recycled water
Regional Water Quality Control Plan
risk assessment
Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta
salinity
Salton Sea
science management
sea level rise
seawater intrusion
sediment
SGMA
snowpack
State Water Project (SWP)
storage
stormwater
streams
Subscription/Donation
subsidence
Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP)
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)
Trading - See Water Markets
transboundary aquifers
Transfers - See Water Markets
tribal water issues
uncategorized
upper watershed management
urban water conservation
vernal ponds
wastewater
water and energy
water budget
water management - see planning and management
water markets
water pricing
water project operations
water quality
water rights
water supply
water supply forecasting
water transfers
water use efficiency
wetlands

Hydrological Region

Central Coast
Colorado River
Lower Basin States and Mexico - Colorado River
National
North Coast
North Lahontan
Sacramento River
San Francisco Bay
San Joaquin River
South Coast
South Lahontan
Tulare Lake
Upper Basin States - Colorado River

Basin

Acton Valley 4-005
Adobe Lake Valley 6-010
Ames Valley 7-016
Amos Valley 7-034
Antelope Valley 6-044
Arroyo Santa Rosa Valley 4-007
Arroyo Seco Valley 7-037
Avawatz Valley 6-026
Batiquitos Lagoon Valley 9-022
Bear Valley 8-009
Bessemer Valley 7-015
Bicycle Valley 6-025
Big Meadows Valley 8-007
Big Valley (Lake) 5-015
Borrego Valley - Ocotillo Wells 7-024.02
Bristol Valley 7-008
Broadwell Valley 6-032
Buck Ridge Fault Valley 7-054
Butte Valley 1-003
Cadiz Valley 7-007
Cady Fault Area 6-090
Cahuilla Valley 9-006
Calzona Valley 7-041
Campo Valley 9-028
Canebrake Valley 7-046
Carpinteria 3-018
Carrizo Plain 3-019
Carson Valley 6-006
Castac Lake Valley 5-029
Caves Canyon Valley 6-038
Chemehuevi Valley 7-043
Chocolate Valley 7-032
Cholame Valley 3-005
Chuckwalla Valley 7-005
Coachella Valley - Desert Hot Springs 7-021.04
Coachella Valley - Indio 7-021.01
Coachella Valley - Mission Creek 7-021.02
Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass 7-021.04
Coastal Plain of Los Angeles - Central 4-011.04
Coastal Plain of Los Angeles - Hollywood 4-011.02
Coastal Plain of Los Angeles - Santa Monica 4-011.01
Coastal Plain of Los Angeles - West Coast 4-011.03
Coastal Plain of Orange County 8-001
Coastal Plain of San Diego 9-033
Collins Valley 7-055
Conejo 4-010
Copper Mountain Valley 7-011
Corralitos - Pajaro Valley 3-002.01
Cottonwood Valley 9-027
Coyote Lake Valley 6-037
Coyote Wells Valley 7-029
Cronise Valley 6-035
Cuddeback Valley 6-050
Cuyama Valley 3-013
Dale Valley 7-009
Darwin Valley 6-057
Davies Valley 7-061
Deadman Valley - Deadman Lake 7-013.01
Deadman Valley - Surprise Spring 7-013.02
Death Valley 6-018
Deep Springs Valley 6-015
Denning Spring Valley 6-078
Downtown 2-040
East Salton Sea 7-033
Eel River Valley 1-010
El Cajon Valley 9-016
El Mirage Valley 6-043
Elsinore - Bedfored-Coldwater 8-004.02
Elsinore - Elsinore Valley 8-004.01
Escondido Valley 9-009
Fenner Valley 7-002
Fish Lake Valley 6-014
Fremont Valley 6-046
Gilroy-Hollister Valley - Llagas Area 3-003.01
Goldstone Valley 6-048
Goleta 3-016
Harper Valley 6-047
Helendale Fault Valley 7-048
Hemet Lake Valley 8-006
Hidden Valley 4-016
Imperial Valley 7-030
Indian Wells Valley - 6-054
Iron Ridge Area 7-050
Ivanpah Valley 6-030
Jacumba Valley 7-047
Johnson Valley - Soggy Lake 7-018.01
Johnson Valley - Upper Johnson Valley 7-018.02
Joshua Tree 7-062
Kane Wash Area 6-089
Kelso Valley 6-031
Lanfair Valley 7-001
Langford Valley - Irwin 6036.02
Langford Valley - Langford Well Lake 6-036.01
Langford Valley 6-036.02
Las Posas Valley 4-008
Lavic Valley 7-014
Leach Valley 6-027
Lockwood Valley 4-017
Long Valley 6-011
Los Osos Valley - Los Osos 3-008.01
Los Osos Valley - Warden Creek 3-008.02
Lost Horse Valley 7-051
Lower Kingston Valley 6-021
Lower Mojave River Valley 6-040
Lucerne Valley 7-019
Malibu Valley 4-022
Means Valley 7-017
Mesquite Valley 6-029
Middle Amargosa Valley - 6-020
Middle Mojave River Valley 6-041
Mission Valley 9-014
Modoc) 5-004
Morongo Valley 7-020
Morro Valley 3-041
Napa-Sonoma Valley - Napa-Sonoma Lowlands 2-002.03
Needles Valley 7-044
Ocotillo-Clark Valley 7-025
Ogilby Valley 7-035
Ojai Valley 4-002
Orocopia Valley - 7-031
Owens Valley - Fish Slough 6-012.02
Owens Valley 6-012.01
Owl Lake Valley 6-088
Pahrump Valley 6-028
Palo Verde Mesa 7-039
Palo Verde Valley 7-038
Pamo Valley 9-024
Panamint Valley 6-058
Peach Tree Valley 3-032
Petaluma Valley 2-001
Pilot Knob Valley 6-051
Pinto Valley 7-006
Pipes Canyon Fault Valley 7-049
Pittsburgh Plain 2-004
Piute Valley 7-045
Pleasant Valley 4-006
Potrero Valley 9-029
Poway Valley 9-013
Raymond 4-023
Red Pass Valley 6-024
Redding Area - Anderson 5-006.03
Redding Area - Bowman 5-006.01
Redding Area - Enterprise 5-006.04
Redding Area - Millville 5-006.05
Redding Area - South Battle Creek 5-006.06
Rice Valley 7-004
Riggs Valley 6-023
Russell Valley 4-020
Sacramento Valley - Antelope 5-021.54
Sacramento Valley - Bend 5-021.53
Sacramento Valley - Butte 5-021.70
Sacramento Valley - Colusa 5-021.52
Sacramento Valley - Corning 5-021.51
Sacramento Valley - Los Molinos 5-021.56
Sacramento Valley - North American (5-021.64)
Sacramento Valley - North Yuba 5-021.60
Sacramento Valley - Red Bluff 5-021.50
Sacramento Valley - Solano 5-021.66
Sacramento Valley - South American 5-021.65
Sacramento Valley - South Yuba 5-021.61
Sacramento Valley - Sutter 5-021.62
Sacramento Valley - Vina 5-021.57
Sacramento Valley - Wyandotte Creek 5-021.69
Sacramento Valley - Yolo 5021.67
Salinas Valley - 180/400 Foot Aquifer 3-004.01
Salinas Valley - Atascadero Area 3-004.11
Salinas Valley - East Side Aquifer 3-004.02
Salinas Valley - Forebay Aquifer 3-004.04
Salinas Valley - Langley Area 3-004.09
Salinas Valley - Monterey 3-004.10
Salinas Valley - Paso Robles Area 3-004.06
Salinas Valley - Upper Valley Aquifer 3-004.05
Saline Valley 6-017
Salt Wells Valley 6-053
San Antonio Creek Valley 3-014
San Dieguito Creek 9-012
San Elijo Valley 9-023
San Felipe Valley 7-027
San Fernando Valley 4-012
San Gabriel Valley 4-013
San Jacinto 8-005
San Joaquin Valley - Chowchilla 5-022.05
San Joaquin Valley - Cosumnes (5-022.16)
San Joaquin Valley - Delta-Mendota 5-022.07
San Joaquin Valley - East Contra Costa 5-022.19
San Joaquin Valley - Eastern San Joaquin 5-022.01
San Joaquin Valley - Kaweah 5-022.11
San Joaquin Valley - Kern 5-022.14
San Joaquin Valley - Kings 5-022.08
San Joaquin Valley - Madera 5-022.06
San Joaquin Valley - Merced 5-022.04
San Joaquin Valley - Modesto 5-022.02
San Joaquin Valley - Pleasant Valley 5-022.10
San Joaquin Valley - Tracy 5-022.15
San Joaquin Valley - Tulare Lake 5-022.12
San Joaquin Valley - Tule 5-022.13
San Joaquin Valley - Turlock 5-022.03
San Joaquin Valley - Westside 5-022.09
San Joaquin Valley - White Wolf 5-022.18
San Juan Valley 9-001
San Luis Obispo Valley 3-009
San Luis Rey Valley - Lower San Luis Rey Valley 9-007.02
San Luis Rey Valley - Upper San Luis Rey Valley 9-007.01
San Marcos Area 9-032
San Mateo Valley 9-002
San Onofre Valley 9-003
San Pasqual Valley 9-010
Santa Barbara 3-017
Santa Clara River Valley - Fillmore 4-004.05
Santa Clara River Valley - Mound 4-004.03
Santa Clara River Valley - Oxnard 4-004.02
Santa Clara River Valley - Piru 4-004.06
Santa Clara River Valley - Santa Clara River Valley East 4-004.07
Santa Clara River Valley - Santa Paula 4-004.04
Santa Clara Valley - East Bay Plain 2-009.04
Santa Clara Valley - Niles Cone 2-009.01
Santa Clara Valley - San Mateo Plain 2-009.03
Santa Clara Valley - Santa Clara 2-009.02
Santa Cruz Mid-County 3-001
Santa Margarita 3-027
Santa Maria River Valley - Arroyo Grande 3-012.02
Santa Maria River Valley - Santa Maria 3-012.01
Santa Maria River Valley 3-012.02
Santa Maria Valley 9-011
Santa Rosa Valley - Santa Rosa Plain 1-055.01
Santa Ynez River Valley 3-015
Scott River Valley 1-005
Searles Valley 6-052
Seven Oaks Valley 8-008
Shasta Valley 1-004
Sierra Valley 5-012.01
Silver Lake Valley 6-034
Simi Valley 4-009
Soda Lake Valley 6-033
South San Diego River Valley 9-015
Superior Valley 6-049
Temecula Valley 9-005
Terwilliger Valley 7-026
Thousand Oaks Area 4-019
Tule Lake 1-002-01
Twentynine Palms Valley 7-010
Ukiah Valley 1-052
Upper Kingston Valley 6-022
Upper Mojave River Valley 6-042
Upper Ojai Valley 4-001
Upper Santa Ana Valley - Chino 8-002.01
Upper Santa Ana Valley - Cucamonga 8-002.02
Upper Santa Ana Valley - Rialto-Colton 8-002.04
Upper Santa Ana Valley - Riverside-Arlington 8-002.03
Upper Santa Ana Valley - San Bernardino 8-002.06
Upper Santa Ana Valley - San Timoteo 8-002.08
Upper Santa Ana Valley - Temescal 8-002.09
Upper Santa Ana Valley - Yucaipa 8-002.07
Vallecito-Carrizo Valley 7-028
Ventura River Valley - Lower Ventura River 4-003.02
Ventura River Valley - Upper Ventura River 4-003.01
Vidal Valley 7-042
Ward Valley 7-003
Warren Valley 7-012
West Salton Sea
Wingate Valley 6-019
Yuma Valley 7-036

Delta Documents Primers on Cal Water Infrastructure, Water Rights and Government

Filter Results

Type

Topic

Keywords

Publisher

Basin

Hydrological Region

Search for:

Search the California Water Library

Type

Topic

Keywords

Hydrological Region

Basin