DOCSLIB.ORG

A California Challenge—Flooding in the Central Valley October 15, 2007

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A California Challenge—Flooding in the Central Valley October 15, 2007 A Report from an Independent Review Panel to the Department of Water Resources, State of California October 15, 2007 09164 | LD 07 Cover image note: the image showing floodwaters surrounding the Arco Arena in Sacramento, California on the cover of this document has been edited and is not authentic. It was made to illustrate the depth of flooding predicted if that area of Sacramento were to experience levee failure or overtopping and thus be subjected to deep flooding. Used by permission from the California Department of Water Resources. A California Challenge— Flooding in the Central Valley A Report to the Department of Water Resources, State of California Independent Review Panel Dr. Gerald E. Galloway Jr., PE, University of Maryland, Chair Dr. John J. Boland, PE, Johns Hopkins University Dr. Raymond J. Burby, FAICP, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Christopher B. Groves, PE, Shannon & Wilson Inc., St. Louis, MO Susan Lien Longville, Water Resources Institute, California State University, San Bernardino Dr. Lewis E. Link, Jr., University of Maryland Dr. Jeffrey F. Mount, University of California, Davis Dr. Jeff Opperman, The Nature Conservancy Dr. Raymond B. Seed, University of California, Berkeley George L. Sills, PE, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center James J. Smyth, PE, Smyth Water Planning Solutions, Raleigh, NC Ronald Stork, Friends of the River, Sacramento, CA Edward A. Thomas, Esq., Association of State Floodplain Managers Consultants to the Panel Joseph D. Countryman, PE, MBK Engineers, Sacramento, CA Peter C. Wijsman, MSC, The Netherlands Water Partnership, Rotterdam, Netherlands Panel Associates Larry Larson, PE, CFM, Association of state Floodplain Managers1 Doug Plasencia, PE, CFM, Association of State Floodplain Managers1 Piet T.M. Dircke Msc, University of Rotterdam2 PBS&J—Technical Support: Jennifer Marcy, CFM, Senior Scientist Michael DePue, PE, CFM, D. WRE, Senior Program Manager William Hinsley, Associate Vice President, Senior Project Director October 15, 2007 1Mr. Plasencia and Mr. Larson assisted Mr. Thomas in this endeavor. 2Mr. Dircke assisted Mr. Wijsman in this endeavor. i Acknowledgements The Panel would like to express its appreciation to the staffs of the California Department of Water Resources, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the U.S. Geological Survey for their assistance in locating and providing data to support this report and to the members of the California Floodplain Management Task Force, who in 2002, developed a forward-looking framework for dealing with floods in California. The Panel would also like to acknowledge the excellent support of the Sacramento office of PBS&J, and the editorial assistance of Lillian L. McAnally, Senior Technical Editor, and Gary Guhl, PE, PBS&J. ii Meeting the Challenge: An Executive Summary California’s Central Valley faces significant flood risks.3 Many The current flood experts feel that the Central Valley is the next big disaster waiting control system of to happen. This fast-growing region in the country’s most populous the Central Valley state, the Central Valley encompasses the floodplains of two major rivers—the Sacramento and the San Joaquin—as well as additional is incapable of rivers and tributaries that drain the Sierra Nevada mountains. dealing with the Expanding urban centers lie in floodplains where flooding could threat of severe result in extensive loss of life and billions in damages. Recent flood events, inspections have raised serious questions as to the integrity of placing its urban many levees that protect communities and property in the Central centers at Valley. Conservative estimates of potential direct flood damages in the Sacramento area alone exceed $25 billion. In some areas of considerable risk the Central Valley, communities would experience flood depths of while incurring twenty feet or more when the levees fail. A flood of such magnitude significant and depth not only poses a serious risk to public health and safety environmental but it would cripple the state’s economy, and the consequences of costs. such an event would have far-reaching and long-term effects on the nation as well. To deal with the challenge of managing Central Valley flooding, over the past 150 years, the federal government, in cooperation with the State, has constructed a system of levees, backed by dams, floodways, and flood channels, designed to control flooding on both urban and rural landscapes. Unfortunately, this aging flood- control system provides only limited protection. Many of the system’s levees were poorly built or placed on top of inadequate foundations; others have been inadequately or intermittently maintained. In addition, efforts to protect the Central Valley from flooding have also significantly degraded the natural and beneficial functions of the rivers and their floodplains, threatening the loss of species, destroying habitat, and failing to take advantage of the 3 There are two sides to this risk: the probability of flooding, and the consequences that would follow. An area could have a high probability of flooding but minimal consequences because the area subject to flooding is forested and contains no infrastructure or people, so the risk is low. Conversely, a highly urbanized community that has a moderate or low probability of flooding would be considered high risk, because the consequences of a flood in that location (loss of life, livelihood, property, health and human suffering) would be very high. We manage the probability side of risk with levees and other structures to control flooding. We manage the consequences side by making land-use decisions that keep infrastructure out of harm’s way, or by reducing the consequences to existing infrastructure using a multitude of floodplain management methods. iii The Panel floodplain’s natural capacity to store flood waters and to recharge recommends that aquifers below them. The current flood control system of the Central Valley is incapable of dealing with the threat of severe flood California officials events, placing its urban centers at considerable risk while incurring at the state and significant environmental costs. local levels While there is great concern for the current condition of the Central develop and Valley flood control system, the outlook for the future under rapidly act on a business-as-usual is grim. Climate change may be increasing the comprehensive magnitude and frequency of large storms; new understanding of approach to flood- threats, such as those caused by seismicity are emerging; risk reduction that communities aggressively promote new development on the floodplains; and the flood control infrastructure continues to age. includes The magnitude of the risk to the Central Valley, to California, and to integration with the nation appears to grow for the foreseeable future. other basin water This paper was prepared at the request of the Department of Water management Resources by an independent Panel of flood and floodplain activities and, of management experts from across the nation to provide insights and great importance, recommendations on how California should deal with the special with land-use circumstances of deep floodplains in the Central Valley4 (see Panel planning. biographies in Appendix A). The Panel believes that California state and local governments, with support of relevant federal programs, must develop and rapidly act on a comprehensive approach to flood risk reduction in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins, integrating this effort with other basin water management activities and, of great importance, with land-use planning. It is this latter element—land-use planning that connects local land use decision-making with regional flood management—that is critical to reducing future flood risk in the Central Valley. Levees and other flood damage reduction structures only reduce the dangers of flooding; they do not eliminate them. Indeed, the most extreme and dangerous events are those that are not eliminated. As the state and nation have learned in the last two decades, levees can fail and when they fail, the failure brings catastrophic consequences to those who depend upon them for flood protection. The challenge then is for California to provide comprehensive protection to those now living behind levees, manage risk by mitigating adverse consequences when flooding occurs, and restrict future development in hazardous areas. This will require the state to take the steps necessary to ensure that the 4 The Panel defines deep floodplains as floodplains where the level of flooding is three feet or higher. In deep floodplains, the ability to evacuate is limited or non-existent, creating significant life-safety threats and the damage to property is extensive. iv flood damage reduction system that it puts into place provides a The Level of level of protection to those already behind levees that is Protection for commensurate with the consequences of failure or overtopping. California also has to take steps, through General Plans, zoning urban areas codes, building codes, floodproofing, and evacuation planning, to should be minimize flood damages and mitigate losses when they occur.5 The equivalent to state must also take action to restrict development in high-hazard protection against areas where current population densities are low. Additional the Standard development in these areas will simply put more people at risk and Project Flood. create an ever-escalating demand
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Policy Response to the Water Supply and Flood Control in Changing Climate
    Capstone Project A Policy Response to the Water Supply and Flood Control in Changing Climate Nataliia Zadorkina Scripps Institution of Oceanography University of California San Diego June, 2016 1 Table of Contents: Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………… 3 Policy Brief………………………………………………………………………………. 5 References………………………………………………………………………………… 16 Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………. 19 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CAPSTONE SUBJECT: The Policy Response to Water Supply and Flood Control in Changing Climate CAPSTONE DELIVERABLE: Policy Brief “Recommendations on executive actions on the water supply and flood control” AUDIENCE: California Department of Water Resources ALIGNMENT WITH CLIMATE SCEINCE & POLICY: climate science – the link between climate change and extreme weather events, the role of atmospheric rivers in water supply and flood control; policy – recommendations on supporting scientific research targeting fulfilling informational gaps which will foster more reliable weather forecasting with an ultimate goal to be prepared for uncertainties associated with climate change effect on water availability and, subsequently, on reservoir operations. APPLICATION: The project has a direct effect on policy associated with climate change adaptation. The findings to be presented on the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) meeting on June 16, 2016 in Santa Rosa, CA as well as on the Sonoma County Grape Growers board meeting in Petaluma, CA. In hindsight, what used to be a highly polarized topic within the scientific community, the consensus behind man-made climate change has become increasingly uniform. In 2014, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a ‘Fifth Assessment’ report citing “unequivocal” evidence of rising average air and ocean temperatures (Graphic 1). Graphic 1: Temperature and Precipitation at Santa Rosa, CA, from 1890 to 2014 (Data source: National Climatic Data Center, NOAA).
    [Show full text]
  • Bear Creek Watershed Assessment Report
    BEAR CREEK WATERSHED ASSESSMENT PLACER COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Prepared by: PO Box 8568 Truckee, California 96162 February 16, 2018 And Dr. Susan Lindstrom, PhD BEAR CREEK WATERSHED ASSESSMENT – PLACER COUNTY – CALIFORNIA February 16, 2018 A REPORT PREPARED FOR: Truckee River Watershed Council PO Box 8568 Truckee, California 96161 (530) 550-8760 www.truckeeriverwc.org by Brian Hastings Balance Hydrologics Geomorphologist Matt Wacker HT Harvey and Associates Restoration Ecologist Reviewed by: David Shaw Balance Hydrologics Principal Hydrologist © 2018 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Project Assignment: 217121 800 Bancroft Way, Suite 101 ~ Berkeley, California 94710-2251 ~ (510) 704-1000 ~ [email protected] Balance Hydrologics, Inc. i BEAR CREEK WATERSHED ASSESSMENT – PLACER COUNTY – CALIFORNIA < This page intentionally left blank > ii Balance Hydrologics, Inc. BEAR CREEK WATERSHED ASSESSMENT – PLACER COUNTY – CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Project Goals and Objectives 1 1.2 Structure of This Report 4 1.3 Acknowledgments 4 1.4 Work Conducted 5 2 BACKGROUND 6 2.1 Truckee River Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) 6 2.2 Water Resource Regulations Specific to Bear Creek 7 3 WATERSHED SETTING 9 3.1 Watershed Geology 13 3.1.1 Bedrock Geology and Structure 17 3.1.2 Glaciation 18 3.2 Hydrologic Soil Groups 19 3.3 Hydrology and Climate 24 3.3.1 Hydrology 24 3.3.2 Climate 24 3.3.3 Climate Variability: Wet and Dry Periods 24 3.3.4 Climate Change 33 3.4 Bear Creek Water Quality 33 3.4.1 Review of Available Water Quality Data 33 3.5 Sediment Transport 39 3.6 Biological Resources 40 3.6.1 Land Cover and Vegetation Communities 40 3.6.2 Invasive Species 53 3.6.3 Wildfire 53 3.6.4 General Wildlife 57 3.6.5 Special-Status Species 59 3.7 Disturbance History 74 3.7.1 Livestock Grazing 74 3.7.2 Logging 74 3.7.3 Roads and Ski Area Development 76 4 WATERSHED CONDITION 81 4.1 Stream, Riparian, and Meadow Corridor Assessment 81 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Increasing Precipitation Volatility in Twenty-First-Century California
    ARTICLES https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0140-y Increasing precipitation volatility in twenty-first- century California Daniel L. Swain 1,2*, Baird Langenbrunner3,4, J. David Neelin3 and Alex Hall3 Mediterranean climate regimes are particularly susceptible to rapid shifts between drought and flood—of which, California’s rapid transition from record multi-year dryness between 2012 and 2016 to extreme wetness during the 2016–2017 winter pro- vides a dramatic example. Projected future changes in such dry-to-wet events, however, remain inadequately quantified, which we investigate here using the Community Earth System Model Large Ensemble of climate model simulations. Anthropogenic forcing is found to yield large twenty-first-century increases in the frequency of wet extremes, including a more than threefold increase in sub-seasonal events comparable to California’s ‘Great Flood of 1862’. Smaller but statistically robust increases in dry extremes are also apparent. As a consequence, a 25% to 100% increase in extreme dry-to-wet precipitation events is pro- jected, despite only modest changes in mean precipitation. Such hydrological cycle intensification would seriously challenge California’s existing water storage, conveyance and flood control infrastructure. editerranean climate regimes are renowned for their dis- however, has suggested an increased likelihood of wet years20–23 tinctively dry summers and relatively wet winters—a glob- and subsequent flood risk9,24 in California—which is consistent ally unusual combination1. Such climates generally occur with broader theoretical and model-based findings regarding the M 25 near the poleward fringe of descending air in the subtropics, where tendency towards increasing precipitation intensity in a warmer semi-permanent high-pressure systems bring stable conditions dur- (and therefore moister) atmosphere26,27.
    [Show full text]
  • Floods, Droughts, and Lawsuits: a Brief History of California Water Policy
    1Floods, Droughts, and Lawsuits: A Brief History of California Water Policy MPI/GETTY IMAGES The history of California in the twentieth century is the story of a state inventing itself with water. William L. Kahrl, Water and Power, 1982 California’s water system might have been invented by a Soviet bureaucrat on an LSD trip. Peter Passell, “Economic Scene: Greening California,” New York Times, 1991 California has always faced water management challenges and always will. The state’s arid and semiarid climate, its ambitious and evolving economy, and its continually growing population have combined to make shortages and conflicting demands the norm. Over the past two centuries, California has tried to adapt to these challenges through major changes in water manage- ment. Institutions, laws, and technologies are now radically different from those brought by early settlers coming to California from more humid parts of the United States. These adaptations, and the political, economic, technologic, and social changes that spurred them on, have both alleviated and exacerbated the current conflicts in water management. This chapter summarizes the forces and events that shaped water man- agement in California, leading to today’s complex array of policies, laws, and infrastructure. These legacies form the foundation of California’s contemporary water system and will both guide and constrain the state’s future water choices.1 1. Much of the description in this chapter is derived from Norris Hundley Jr.’s outstanding book, The Great Thirst: Californians and Water: A History (Hundley 2001), Robert Kelley’s seminal history of floods in the Central Valley, Battling the Inland Sea (Kelley 1989), and Donald Pisani’s influential study of the rise of irrigated agriculture in California, From the Family Farm to Agribusiness: The Irrigation Crusade in California (Pisani 1984).
    [Show full text]
  • Design and Quantification of an Extreme Winter Storm Scenario for Emergency Preparedness and Planning Exercises in California
    Nat Hazards (2012) 60:1085–1111 DOI 10.1007/s11069-011-9894-5 ORIGINAL PAPER Design and quantification of an extreme winter storm scenario for emergency preparedness and planning exercises in California Michael D. Dettinger • F. Martin Ralph • Mimi Hughes • Tapash Das • Paul Neiman • Dale Cox • Gary Estes • David Reynolds • Robert Hartman • Daniel Cayan • Lucy Jones Received: 14 March 2011 / Accepted: 1 July 2011 / Published online: 13 July 2011 Ó The Author(s) 2011. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract The USGS Multihazards Project is working with numerous agencies to eval- uate and plan for hazards and damages that could be caused by extreme winter storms impacting California. Atmospheric and hydrological aspects of a hypothetical storm sce- nario have been quantified as a basis for estimation of human, infrastructure, economic, and environmental impacts for emergency-preparedness and flood-planning exercises. In order to ensure scientific defensibility and necessary levels of detail in the scenario description, selected historical storm episodes were concatentated to describe a rapid arrival of several major storms over the state, yielding precipitation totals and runoff rates beyond those occurring during the individual historical storms. This concatenation allowed the scenario designers to avoid arbitrary scalings and is based on historical occasions from the 19th and 20th Centuries when storms have stalled over the state and when extreme M. D. Dettinger (&) Á D. Cayan U.S. Geological Survey, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA, USA e-mail: [email protected] F. Martin Ralph Á M. Hughes Á P. Neiman NOAA/Earth System Research Laboratory/Physical Sciences Division, Boulder, CO, USA T.
    [Show full text]
  • California's Flood Future
    California’s Flood Future Recommendations for Managing the State’s Flood Risk FINAL November 2013 California’s Flood Future is provided to help inform local, State, and Federal decisions about policies and financial investments to improve public safety, foster environmental stewardship, and support economic stability FINAL California’s Flood Future: Recommendations for Managing the State’s Flood Risk November 2013 STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES PROGRAM Photographs in this text are courtesy of the following agencies: Alluvial Fan Taskforce Factsheet, California Department of Conservation, Daniel Carlson, Dr. George Pararas-Carayannis (http://drgeorgepc.com), Department of Water Resources, Humboldt County Resource Conservation District, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, Nancy Thornburg, Orange County Public Works, Red Clover/ McReynolds Creek Restoration Project, Riverside County Flood Control District, San Diego County, Tulare County Library, and University of California at Berkeley Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations .......................................................................................................... ix Executive Summary (Highlights) .................................................................................................... xi 1.0 Introduction .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Southern California Restore Clean Water Act Protections Rulemaking
    Weakening the Clean Water Act: What it Means for Southern California Across the country, small streams (headwater, intermittent, and ephemeral streams) and wetlands are losing Clean Water Act protections in the wake of two recent Supreme Court decisions and subsequent federal agency directives. In Cali- fornia, at least 66% of streams and more than 77,000 acres of scarce wetlands are at risk of uncontrolled filling and pollution. In the more arid parts of the state the risks are even greater, as up to 100% of streams do not flow year round. In Southern California, the danger runs even to the region’s major rivers — all or portions of the Los Ange- les, Santa Ana, San Mateo, Santa Margarita, San Luis Rey, San Diego and Sweetwater rivers can flow intermittently , especially during drought years. Without intervention from Congress or the Administration to restore Clean Water Act protections for waters that were protected prior to 2001, these waters will continue to be polluted and de- stroyed. Restoring Clean Water Act protections for small streams and wetlands will keep California waters clean. Intact small and seasonal streams and wetlands trap substantial amounts of nutrients, chemicals, and sediments. They are vital for capturing fertilizers and other run-off from California’s cities and 75,000 farms and ranches. In one study, 64% of inorganic nitrogen (one of the main chemicals in agricultural fertilizers) was neutralized after traveling just 1,000 yards in a small stream. Pollutants that are not filtered out will reach down- stream waters, increasing drinking water treatment costs and damaging fish and wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Floods in Northern California, January 1997
    science for a changing world &2CV FLOODS IN NORTHERN fl' CALIFORNIA, JANUARY 1997 Photo by John Trotter, Jan.4, 1997/Sacramento Bee Photo: The community of Olivehurst was inundated with water after a levee failed on the Feather River INTRODUCTION Flooding in California in recent years has been increased evaporation from the warmer surface water. attributed mostly to climate conditions referred to as the The result is an increase in the number and intensity of "El Nino" effect. However, floods in California also have storms. La Nina, characterized by colder than average been associated with other climate conditions (table 1). ocean temperatures, does not entirely prevent storms of The flood of January 1997 occurred during a weak "La sufficient precipitation to cause flooding in California. Nina" or near-normal (average) climate condition (U.S. Precipitation in the Sierra Nevada mountain range Department of Commerce, 1997). These climate produced an above-normal snowpack and saturated conditions are based on sea-surface water temperatures soils during November and December 1996. A series of and trade-wind velocities in the Pacific Ocean. storms from December 29, 1996, through January 4, Precipitation from storms during any climate condition 1997. brought heavy and relatively warm precipitation generally increases with orographic uplift as the storms across much of California. Precipitation totals of up to move easterly across the mountains of California. 24 inches were recorded for the week. Virtually all of During El Nino, trade winds diminish, and upwelling of this precipitation was rain because temperatures were colder water in the ocean is inhibited along the Pacific above freezing at elevations as high as about 9,000 feet.
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles County, California and Incorporated Areas
    VOLUME 2 OF 4 LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND INCORPORATED AREAS Community Community Community Community Community Community Community Community Name Number Name Number Name Number Name Number LOS ANGELES COUNTY, UNINCORPORATED 065043 DIAMOND BAR, CITY OF 060741 LAWNDALE, CITY OF* 060134 SAN DIMAS, CITY OF 060154 AREAS SAN FERNANDO, CITY AGOURA HILLS, CITY OF 065072 DOWNEY, CITY OF 060645 LOMITA, CITY OF* 060135 060628 OF* ALHAMBRA, CITY OF* 060095 DUARTE, CITY OF 065026 LONG BEACH, CITY OF 060136 SAN GABRIEL, CITY OF* 065055 ARCADIA, CITY OF 065014 EL MONTE, CITY OF* 060658 LOS ANGELES, CITY OF 060137 SAN MARINO, CITY OF* 065057 ARTESIA, CITY OF* 060097 EL SEGUNDO, CITY OF 060118 LYNWOOD, CITY OF 060635 SANTA CLARITA, CITY OF 060729 SANTA FE SPRINGS, CITY AVALON, CITY OF 060098 GARDENA, CITY OF 060119 MALIBU, CITY OF 060745 060158 OF MANHATTAN BEACH, CITY AZUSA, CITY OF 065015 GLENDALE, CITY OF 065030 060138 SANTA MONICA, CITY OF 060159 OF BALDWIN PARK, CITY OF* 060100 GLENDORA, CITY OF 065031 MAYWOOD, CITY OF* 060651 SIERRA MADRE, CITY OF 065059 HAWAIIAN GARDENS, BELL GARDENS, CITY OF 060656 065032 MONROVIA, CITY OF 065046 SIGNAL HILL, CITY OF* 060161 CITY OF* SOUTH EL MONTE, CITY BELL, CITY OF* 060101 HAWTHORNE, CITY OF* 060123 MONTEBELLO, CITY OF 060141 060162 OF* HERMOSA BEACH, CITY BELLFLOWER, CITY OF 060102 060124 MONTEREY PARK, CITY OF* 065047 SOUTH GATE, CITY OF 060163 OF SOUTH PASADENA, CITY BEVERLY HILLS, CITY OF* 060655 HIDDEN HILLS, CITY OF 060125 NORWALK, CITY OF 060652 065061 OF* HUNTINGTON PARK, CITY BRADBURY, CITY
    [Show full text]
  • Extreme Floods in a Changing Climate
    Report DSO-2013-02 Extreme Floods in a Changing Climate Dam Safety Technology Development Program U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Technical Service Center Denver, Colorado September 2013 The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 1. REPORT DATE 09-30-2013 2. REPORT TYPE Research 3. DATES COVERED (From - To) 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER Extreme Floods in a Changing Climate 5b. GRANT NUMBER 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER Godaire, J., J. Caldwell, N. Novembre, T. Harden, V. Sankovich 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT US Bureau of Reclamation NUMBER P.O. Box 25007 Denver Federal Center DSO-2013-02 Denver, CO 80225 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO Wildfires, Floods, And
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO Wildfires, Floods, and Climate Variability A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Economics by Thomas William Corringham Committee in charge: Richard Carson, Chair Daniel Cayan, Co-Chair Judson Boomhower Mark Jacobsen Craig McIntosh 2018 Copyright Thomas William Corringham, 2018 All rights reserved. ii The Dissertation of Thomas William Corringham is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: Co-Chair Chair University of California San Diego 2018 iii DEDICATION To my parents. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page .......................................................................................................................... iii Dedication.................................................................................................................................. iv Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................ v List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................. vi List of Figures ..........................................................................................................................viii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. ix Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Increases in Flood Magnitudes in California Under Warming Climates
    Journal of Hydrology 501 (2013) 101–110 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Hydrology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhydrol Increases in flood magnitudes in California under warming climates ⇑ Tapash Das a,b, , Edwin P. Maurer c, David W. Pierce b, Michael D. Dettinger d,b, Daniel R. Cayan b,d a CH2M HILL, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA b Division of Climate, Atmospheric Sciences, and Physical Oceanography, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA, USA c Santa Clara University, CA, USA d United States Geological Survey, La Jolla, CA, USA article info summary Article history: Downscaled and hydrologically modeled projections from an ensemble of 16 Global Climate Models sug- Received 28 January 2013 gest that flooding may become more intense on the western slopes of the Sierra Nevada mountains, the Received in revised form 9 June 2013 primary source for California’s managed water system. By the end of the 21st century, all 16 climate Accepted 29 July 2013 projections for the high greenhouse-gas emission SRES A2 scenario yield larger floods with return periods Available online 6 August 2013 ranging 2–50 years for both the Northern Sierra Nevada and Southern Sierra Nevada, regardless of the This manuscript was handled by Andras Bardossy, Editor-in-Chief, with the direction of change in mean precipitation. By end of century, discharges from the Northern Sierra Nevada assistance of Axel Bronstert, Associate with 50-year return periods increase by 30–90% depending on climate model, compared to historical Editor values. Corresponding flood flows from the Southern Sierra increase by 50–100%.
    [Show full text]