DOCSLIB.ORG

Scott Valley Community Groundwater Study Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Scott Valley Community Groundwater Study Plan SCOTT VALLEY COMMUNITY GROUNDWATER STUDY PLAN Prepared by Thomas Harter, Ph.D., and Ryan Hines Groundwater Cooperative Extension Program University of California, Davis With the Assistance of: Scott River Watershed Council Water Committee Siskiyou Resource Conservation District Staff North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Staff Prepared for: North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Siskiyou County Resource Conservation District Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors With funding by: State Water Resources Control Board FINAL REPORT Version H, February 11, 2008 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Preparation of this Draft Study Plan was assisted by the following people: Scott River Watershed Council Water Committee members Jim De Pree, Siskiyou County, Natural Resource Policy Specialist Marc Horney, Ph.D., Natural Resource Conservation Service Steve Orloff, UC Cooperative Extension – Yreka Office Sari Sommarstrom, Ph.D., watershed management consultant, Etna Siskiyou Resource Conservation District Staff Danielle Quigley (former staff) Erich Yokel North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board staff Bryan McFadin, P.E., Scott River TMDL Coordinator This is the Scott Valley Community Groundwater Study Plan. An electronic copy of this Plan can be obtained from the following website: http://groundwater.ucdavis.edu/ScottValley.htm For further inquiries, please contact Ryan Hines, [email protected] or Thomas Harter, [email protected] . Thomas Harter, Ph.D. 125 Veihmeyer Hall University of California Davis, CA 95616-8628 Phone: 530-752-2709 ii Table of Content 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Format of the Groundwater Study Plan .............................................................. 2 1.3 Role of Water Quality Planning.......................................................................... 2 2 GOALS & OBJECTIVES........................................................................................... 4 2.1 Community-Identified Goals.............................................................................. 4 2.2 Stakeholder Expectations.................................................................................... 5 2.3 Hypotheses / Study Elements.............................................................................. 7 2.3.1 Scott Valley Water Balance........................................................................ 8 2.3.2 Groundwater Levels.................................................................................... 8 2.3.3 Groundwater-Surface Water Connection.................................................... 8 2.3.4 Vegetation-Hydrology ................................................................................ 9 2.3.5 Stream Temperature and Its Controls ....................................................... 10 2.3.6 Additional Research Questions................................................................. 10 3 BACKGROUND: CURRENT SCOTT VALLEY CONDITIONS ......................... 11 3.1 Physical Setting................................................................................................. 12 3.1.1 Geography of the Scott Valley.................................................................. 12 3.1.2 Climate, Temperature, and Precipitation .................................................. 12 3.1.3 Geologic Setting........................................................................................ 13 3.1.4 Soil Characteristics................................................................................... 15 3.1.5 Watershed Characteristics......................................................................... 16 3.2 Hydrology and Water Balance of the Scott Valley........................................... 18 3.2.1 Surface Water Resources: Streams, Lakes, Diversions ............................ 18 3.2.2 Stream Channel Characteristics of the Scott River Mainstem.................. 20 3.2.3 Groundwater Aquifers.............................................................................. 22 3.2.4 Groundwater Storage................................................................................ 23 3.2.5 Historic Groundwater Levels and Fluctuations ........................................ 24 3.2.6 Water Quality............................................................................................ 28 3.2.7 Water Balance........................................................................................... 31 3.3 Biological Setting..............................................................................................33 3.3.1 Adult spawning of Chinook and coho salmon in Scott River................... 37 3.4 Water Use Setting ............................................................................................. 37 3.5 Water Management in the Scott Valley............................................................ 41 3.5.1 Scott River Water Rights and Adjudication.............................................. 42 3.5.2 Scott River Dry and Critically-Dry Year Plan.......................................... 43 3.5.3 Scott River Water Trust ............................................................................ 44 4 GROUNDWATER DYNAMICS IN THE SCOTT VALLEY ................................ 44 4.1 The Scott River as Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE): Basic Concepts of Groundwater – Surface Water Interactions and their Ecological Importance .................................................................................................................... 44 4.2 Groundwater Flow and Heat Transport – A Preliminary Conceptual Outline . 49 4.3 Flow and Heat Transport at the Groundwater-Stream Interface....................... 51 5 STUDY PLAN ELEMENTS (RESEARCH METHODS)....................................... 52 Scott Valley Groundwater Study Plan iii 2/11/2008 5.1 Field Data Collections and Field Data Analysis............................................... 52 5.1.1 Groundwater Level Observations ............................................................. 52 5.1.2 Surface Water Discharge Monitoring ....................................................... 54 5.1.3 Mapping Stream Topography and Morphology ....................................... 55 5.1.4 Near- and In-Stream Monitoring Well- / Piezometer Nest-Network........ 56 5.1.5 Tracer and Isotope Studies to Quantify Groundwater-Surface Water Interactions................................................................................................................ 57 5.1.6 Monitoring Groundwater Temperature in/near Streams........................... 58 5.1.7 Monitoring Stream Temperature............................................................... 60 5.1.8 Monitoring Groundwater Pumping........................................................... 61 5.1.9 Hydraulic Groundwater Tests: Pumping Tests and Slug Tests ................ 63 5.1.10 Geophysical Surveys................................................................................. 63 5.1.11 Groundwater Recharge............................................................................. 64 5.1.12 Valley Water Balance: Groundwater and Surface Water Use.................. 65 5.1.13 Spatio-temporal Distribution of Up-/Downward Seepage in Streambeds 66 5.2 Groundwater Modeling Approaches................................................................. 67 5.2.1 Model Design and Objectives................................................................... 67 5.2.2 Phase I Groundwater Flow Model ............................................................ 69 5.2.3 Thermal Fluxes and Linkage to Flow Models .......................................... 72 5.3 Assessment of the Impact of Various BMPs to Beneficial Uses...................... 73 5.3.1 Definition of BMPs and Management Approaches.................................. 73 5.3.2 Evaluating Water Management: Dealing with Data Paucity and Uncertainty................................................................................................................ 73 6 ROAD MAP and COST ESTIMATES..................................................................... 76 7 SCOTT VALLEY ENVIRONMENT: LIST OF AVAILABLE RESOURCES...... 80 7.1 Scott River Plans............................................................................................... 80 7.2 Groundwater ..................................................................................................... 81 7.3 Temperature ...................................................................................................... 81 7.4 Fish.................................................................................................................... 81 7.5 Water Balance................................................................................................... 82 7.6 Water Use.......................................................................................................... 82 7.7 Water Rights Adjudications.............................................................................. 83 7.8 Riparian Vegetation.......................................................................................... 83 7.9 Sediment and Geomorphology ........................................................................ 84 7.10 Natural Resources ............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Scott River Watershed Council, Scott
    NORTH COAST RESOURCE PARTNERSHIP 2018/19 IRWM Project Application The North Coast Resource Partnership (NCRP) 2018/19 Project Application Instructions and additional information can be found at the NCRP 2018/19 Project Solicitation webpage (https://northcoastresourcepartnership.org/proposition‐1‐irwm‐round‐1‐implementation‐funding‐solicitation/). Please fill out grey text boxes and select all the check boxes that apply to the project. Application responses should be clear, brief and succinct. Project Applications will be accepted until 5:00 pm, March 8, 2019 March 15, 2019. It is important to save the application file with a distinct file name that references the project name. When the application is complete, please email to [email protected] If you have questions, need additional information or proposal development assistance please contact: Katherine Gledhill at [email protected] or 707.795.1235 Tribal Projects: Sherri Norris, NCRP Tribal Coordinator at [email protected] or 510.848.2043 Project Name: A. ORGANIZATION INFORMATION 1. Organization Name: Scott River Watershed Council 2. Contact Name/Title Name: Betsy Stapleton Title: Board Chair Email: [email protected] Phone Number (include area code): 707‐499‐7082 3. Organization Address (City, County, State, Zip Code): 514 N Highway 3, Etna Ca. 96027 Mailing: PO Box 355, Etna, Ca. 96027 4. Organization Type Public agency North Coast Resource Partnership 2018/19 Project Application 1 Non‐profit organization Public utility Federally recognized Indian Tribe California State Indian Tribe listed on the Native American Heritage Commission’s California Tribal Consultation List Mutual water company Other: 5. Authorized Representative (if different from the contact name) Name: Charnna Gilmore Title: Execuative Director Email: [email protected] Phone Number (include area code): 530‐598‐2733 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Happy Camp and Oak Knoll 2018 120318
    KLAMATH NATIONAL FOREST RANGER DISTRICT SPECIFIC CUTTING CONDITIONS For woodcutting in Happy Camp, Oak Knoll, Salmon River, and Scott River listen to the West Zone KLAMATH NATIONAL FOREST OFFICES PERSONAL USE FIREWOOD CONDITIONS danger rating. For the Goosenest, listen to the East Zone. In addition to the Forest-Wide Personal Use Firewood Conditions, the following applies to woodcut- Ranger District and Supervisors Office hours are 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM. United States Department of Agriculture This map, together with the Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM), and fuelwood tags are ting on specific Districts of the Klamath National Forest. Woodcutters shall have an USDA, Forest Service approved spark arrester on the chainsaw and fire Forest Service a part of your woodcutting permit and must be in your possession while cutting, HAPPY CAMP extinguisher or a serviceable shovel not less than 46 inches in length within 25 feet of woodcutting area. Forest Supervisor's Office Happy Camp Ranger District gathering, and transporting your wood. 1711 South Main St. 63822 Highway 96 A. Within areas designated for General Firewood Cutting: Check woodcutting site for any smoldering fire and extinguish before leaving. Yreka, CA 96097 Happy Camp, CA 96039 In order to get the most out of your woodcutting trip, it is important that you review 1. Standing dead hardwoods and conifers may be cut. and become familiar with the terms of your Permit prior to cutting. If you have ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS: (530) 842-6131 (530) 493-2243 2. Standing live hardwoods may be cut. (TDD) (530) 841-4573 (TDD) (530) 493-1777 questions about any terms or conditions, please contact the District you plan to visit.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Distribution of Beavers in California: Implications for Salmonids
    Current Distribution of Beavers in California: Implications for Salmonids Eli Asarian Riverbend Sciences Presented at: Salmon Restoration Federation Conference Riverbend Sciences 3/19/2014 Presentation Outline • Beaver Mapper • Current beaver distribution – Interactions with salmonids – Recent expansion Eli Asarian Cheryl Reynolds / Worth A Dam What is the Beaver Mapper? • Web-based map system for entering, displaying, and sharing information on beaver distribution Live Demo http://www.riverbendsci.com/projects/beavers How Can You Help? • Contribute data – Via website – Contact me: • [email protected] • 707.832.4206 • Bulk update for large datasets • Funding – New data – System improvements Current and Historic Beaver Distribution in California Beaver Range Current range Historic range Outside confirmed historic range Drainage divide of Sacramento/San Joaquin and South Coast Rivers Lakes Lanman et al. 2013 County Boundaries Current Beaver Distribution in CA Smith River Beaver Range Current range Historic range Outside confirmed historic range Drainage divide of Sacramento/San Joaquin and South Coast Rivers Lakes County Boundaries Beaver Bank Lodge Smith River Marisa Parish, (Humboldt State Univ. MS thesis) Lower Klamath River Middle Beaver Range Klamath Current range River Historic range Outside confirmed historic range Drainage divide of Sacramento/San Joaquin and South Coast Rivers Lakes County Boundaries Beaver Pond on W.F. McGarvey Creek (Trib to Lower Klamath River) from: Sarah Beesley & Scott Silloway, (Yurok Tribe Fisheries
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Mobilization and Flow History in Klamath River Below Iron Gate Dam DATE: September 29, 2016
    Technical Memorandum TO: Dave Hillemeier, Yurok Tribal Fisheries, and Craig Tucker, Karuk Department of Natural Resources FROM: Conor Shea, Nicholas J. Hetrick, and Nicholas A. Som, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office SUBJECT: Response to Request for Technical Assistance – Sediment Mobilization and Flow History in Klamath River below Iron Gate Dam DATE: September 29, 2016 Purpose. The Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (AFWO) Fisheries Program is working with its scientific co-investigators to develop a series of four technical memorandums that summarize recent findings of studies that contribute to our current understanding of Ceratanova shasta (syn Ceratomyxa shasta) infections in the Klamath River, in response to requests for technical assistance from the Yurok and Karuk tribes. Each of the topics addressed in the four technical memorandums: 1) sediment mobilization review and streamflow history for the Klamath River below Iron Gate Dam, 2) polychaete distribution and infections, 3) actinospore and myxospore concentrations, and 4) prevalence of C. shasta infections in juvenile and adult salmonids, are identified in a conceptual model diagram (Figure 1) taken from Foott et al. (2011) and as discussed with the requesting tribes. The intent of the technical memorandums is to provide managers with a contemporary understanding of the state of the science with regard to the C. shasta in the Klamath River, and to provide a scientific basis to inform and support resource management decisions. The focus of this technical memorandum is to summarize the state of knowledge regarding environmental flow releases from the Iron Gate Dam to achieve specific objectives for channel form and ecological function. Other memorandums in this series will address how achieving these objectives will potentially influence various aspects of the C.
    [Show full text]
  • Klamath River (Iron Gate Dam to Seiad Creek) Life Stage Periodicities for Chinook, Coho and Steelhead
    Klamath River (Iron Gate Dam to Seiad Creek) Life Stage Periodicities for Chinook, Coho and Steelhead U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Coastal California Fish and Wildlife Office Arcata, California KLAMATH RIVER (IRON GATE DAM TO SEIAD CREEK) LIFE STAGE PERIODICITIES FOR CHINOOK, COHO, AND STEELHEAD July 1997 Prepared by: Thomas A. Shaw Chris Jackson Dan Nehler Michael Marshall Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Coastal California Fish and Wildlife Office Arcata, California Funded by: U.S. Geological Survey This report was prepared as part of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Quick Response Research Program to conduct a microhabitat study on the mainstem Klamath River. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................................ iv LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................................................................... vii INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 Study Area........................................................................................................................... 1 METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Holding and Migration
    [Show full text]
  • Petition for Emergency Rulemaking
    1222 Preservation Park Way, Suite 200, Oakland, California 94612 · (510) 208-4555 · www.envirolaw.org Nathaniel Kane, Executive Director · [email protected] BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD PETITION FOR EMERGENCY Pursuant to Cal. Const. art. 1, § 3 RULEMAKING TO SET MINIMUM and Gov. Code § 11340.6 FLOWS ON THE SCOTT RIVER This summer presents as great a challenge as the Scott River has ever faced. Historic low precipitation and high temperatures coupled with increasing water extraction will result, again, in a disconnected, dry riverbed with potentially disastrous effects for protected fish populations. Compounding the challenge is the fact that the Scott basin is split in two by an out-of-date adjudication that allows unrestricted groundwater pumping in most of the valley. It is only June and the river is almost dry. The State Board must act and act fast. At the same time, recent court decisions and administrative actions have confirmed that the State Board has the power to address these critically low flows without needing to go through the lengthy and expensive process of readjudicating the Scott River basin. First, the State Board has the power under its waste and unreasonable use authority, Water Code section 1058.5, and a drought proclamation to issue emergency regulations setting minimum instream flows for adjudicated rivers and declaring water use that reduces flows below those minimums to be per se unreasonable. (Stanford Vina Ranch Irrigation Company v. State of California (2020) 50 Cal.App.5th 976 (Stanford Vina).) Second, the State Board has the authority and the duty to regulate groundwater extractions that affect public trust resources.
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 Water Quality Report
    KARUK TRIBE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES P.O. Box 282 * Orleans, California 95556 2007 WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT REPORT KLAMATH RIVER, SALMON RIVER, SCOTT RIVER, SHASTA RIVER, TI-BAR CREEK AND IRVING CREEK Karuk Tribe of California Water Quality Assessment Report 2007 Prepared by Karuk Tribe of California Water Resources June 2007 Technical Staff Susan Corum - Water Resources Coordinator Joe Hostler - Water Quality Biologist Grant Johnson - Water Quality Biologist Luana Hillman - Water Quality Technician II ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................... 5 2 PURPOSE .............................................................................................................................. 5 3 MONITORING METHODS & QA/QC Summary ............................................................... 6 4 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS .................................................................................... 7 4.1 Water Temperature.............................................................................................................................7 4.2 Dissolved Oxygen.................................................................................................................................8 4.3 pH/Alkalinity........................................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • News Release
    United States Department of News KLAMATH NATIONAL FOREST Agriculture 1711 South Main Street, Yreka, CA 96097 (530) 841-6131 Forest Service www.fs.usda.gov/klamath Release Contact: Tom Lavagnino April 11, 2012 For Immediate Release Public Affairs Officer at: (530) 841-4485 [email protected] April 1st Snow Survey Results for the Scott and Trinity River Watersheds Yreka, CA – The April 1st snow survey results for eight snow courses in the Scott and Trinity River Watersheds have been measured and compared to previous years. These measurements are a part of the statewide California Cooperative Snow Survey program managed by the California Department of Water Resources. According to the current measurements, the local snow depth is now 113 percent of normal and the water content is 101 percent. The storms that passed through in March added significantly to the local snowpack. Department of Water Resources hydrologists announced on April 2nd that the water content in all of California's mountain snowpack is at 55 percent of the April 1 full season average. This month’s readings are considered the most important of the year, because early April is when the state's snowpack normally is at its peak. The mountain snowpack usually provides one third of the water for California's households, industry and farms. Thanks to precipitation from recent winter storms, the Scott River Watershed is now reporting above average snow levels and water content values and the Trinity River Watershed is reporting near-normal snow levels as summer approaches. Snow depth and water content are measured by obtaining a core sample of snow with a specially designed and calibrated aluminum tube.
    [Show full text]
  • Karuk Tribe of California Klamath River, Salmon River, Scott River & Shasta River Water Quality Assesment Report June - October 2006
    KARUK TRIBE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES P.O. Box 282 * Orleans, California 95556 2006 WATER QUALITY ASSESMENT REPORT KLAMATH RIVER, SALMON RIVER, SCOTT RIVER, AND SHASTA RIVER Karuk Tribe of California Water Quality Assessment Report 2006 Prepared by Karuk Tribe of California Water Resources March 2007 Technical Staff Susan Corum - Water Resources Coordinator Joe Hostler - Water Quality Biologist Grant Johnson - Water Quality Biologist Luana Hillman - Water Quality Technician II ............................................................................................................................................................ 1. BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................................5 2. PURPOSE..................................................................................................................................5 3 . MONITORING METHODS & QA/QC Summary ...............................................................6 3.1 Quality Assurance ....................................................................................................................... 6 4. WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS.....................................................................................7 4.1 Water Temperature...................................................................................................................... 7 4.2 Dissolved Oxygen ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Water Quality Report
    KARUK TRIBE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES P.O. Box 282 * Orleans, California 95556 2014 WATER QUALITY ASSESMENT REPORT KLAMATH RIVER, SALMON RIVER, SCOTT RIVER, AND SHASTA RIVER 1 Karuk Tribe Water Quality Assessment Report 2014 Prepared by Karuk Tribe Water Quality January 2014 Technical Staff Susan Corum - Water Quality Coordinator Grant Johnson - Water Quality Biologist Chook Chook Hillman – Water Quality Technician Tammy Lightle – Water Quality Technician Neiko Robinson – Water Quality Technician 2 Table of Contents 1 Background ............................................................................................................... 4 2 Program Purpose ...................................................................................................... 7 3 Collaboration and Coordination ............................................................................. 8 4 Karuk Water Quality Program Design................................................................... 9 5 Data Interpretation and Management .................................................................. 11 6 2013 Water Quality Results ................................................................................... 12 7 References ................................................................................................................ 35 3 List of Tables and Figures Figure 1. Overview of the Karuk Tribe’s water quality monitoring locations along the Klamath River in 2014. ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Performance of Water Temperature Management on the Klamath and Trinity Rivers, 2016
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Arcata Fisheries Technical Report TR 2017-29 Performance of water temperature management on the Klamath and Trinity rivers, 2016 Aaron T. David and Damon H. Goodman U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-7201 November 2017 The Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Fish and Aquatic Habitat Conservation Program provided funding for this study. Disclaimer: The mention of trade names or commercial products in this report does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the Federal Government. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Fisheries Program reports its study findings through two publication series. The Arcata Fisheries Data Series was established to provide timely dissemination of data to local managers and for inclusion in agency databases. The Arcata Fisheries Technical Reports publishes scientific findings from single and multi- year studies that have undergone more extensive peer review and statistical testing. Additionally, some study results are published in a variety of professional fisheries and aquatic habitat conservation journals. To ensure consistency with Service policy relating to its online peer-reviewed journals, Arcata Fisheries Data Series and Technical Reports are distributed electronically and made available in the public domain. Paper copies will no longer be circulated. Key words: Water Temperature; Klamath; Trinity; EPA Criteria; Dam Releases The correct citation for this report is: David, A. T., and D. H.
    [Show full text]
  • Klamath Basin Magnuson-Stevens
    Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act Klamath River Coho Salmon Recovery Plan Prepared by The National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region July 10, 2007 An online version of this report is available at: http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/salmon/MSRA_RecoveryPlan_FINAL.pdf Literature citation should read as: National Marine Fisheries Service. 2007. Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act Klamath River Coho Salmon Recovery Plan. Prepared by Rogers, F. R., I. V. Lagomarsino and J. A. Simondet for the National Marine Fisheries Service, Long Beach, CA. 48 pp. Cover illustration is a work of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, made during the course of an employee’s official duties. As works of the U.S. Federal Government, all NOAA images are in the public domain. Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act Klamath River Coho Salmon Recovery Plan Prepared by The National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region July 10, 2007 NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), a division of the Department of Commerce, is the federal agency responsible for the stewardship of the nation's living marine resources and their habitat. NMFS is responsible for the management, conservation and protection of living marine resources within the United States' Exclusive Economic Zone (coastal water 3 to 200 miles offshore). Using the tools provided by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act (MSRA), NMFS assesses and predicts the status of fish stocks, ensures compliance with federal fisheries regulations and works to reduce wasteful fishing practices. Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act (ESA), NMFS works to conserve protected marine species (i.e., whales, turtles) and protected anadromous species (i.e., salmon) without unnecessarily impeding economic opportunities.
    [Show full text]