DOCSLIB.ORG

THE BAY INSTITUTE Ecological Scorecard SAN FRANCISCO BAY INDEX 2003 © 2003 the Bay Institute of San Francisco

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
THE BAY INSTITUTE Ecological Scorecard SAN FRANCISCO BAY INDEX 2003 © 2003 the Bay Institute of San Francisco THE BAY INSTITUTE Ecological Scorecard SAN FRANCISCO BAY INDEX 2003 © 2003 The Bay Institute of San Francisco The Bay Institute (TBI) is a non-profit research, education and advocacy organization dedicated to protecting and restoring the ecosystems of San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and the estuary’s tributary rivers, streams, and watersheds. Since 1981, TBI’s policy and scientific experts have worked to secure stronger protections for endangered species and habitats; improve water quality; reform how California manages its water resources; and promote comprehensive ecological restoration from the Sierra to the sea. To order copies of the 2003 Bay Index, or a CD of the report and the Technical Appendix, contact: The Bay Institute 500 Palm Drive, Suite 200 Novato, CA 94949 Phone: (415) 506-0150 Fax: (415) 506-0155 www.bay.org The entire 2003 Bay Index report and Technical Appendix can also be downloaded from our website at www.bay.org. The 2003 San Francisco Bay Index, and the Bay-Delta Ecological Scorecard Project of which it is a part, were made possible by the generous financial support of the Compton Foundation, Inc.; the Mary A. Crocker Trust; the Fred Gellert Family Foundation; the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund; the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation; the Marin Community Foundation; the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment; the San Francisco Foundation (Switzer Environmental Leadership Program); the San Francisco Estuary Project; the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; the Weeden Foundation; and the Dean Witter Foundation, as well as individual supporters of the Bay Institute. Cover photo: Napa Slough, by David Sanger. Ecological Scorecard San Francisco Bay Index Habitat long- Bay habitat loss is slowly being ↓ term D+ reversed, but it could take nearly 200 years to reach the tidal marsh short- Score = 32 restoration goal. term ↑ Freshwater Inflow long- Reduced inflows are still degrading ↓ term D the Bay ecosystem, and recent gains from wetter years and new standards short- Score = 29 are being eroded term ↓ Water Quality long- Open waters are cleaner, but ↑ term C standards are not met in parts of the Bay. Toxic sediments and short- Score = 55 storm runoff are a major problem. term ↔ Food Web long- Plankton levels in the upper Bay ↓ term F have crashed, reducing food sources for fish and birds. Alien species are short- Score = 10 locally dominant. term ↔ Grades based on data Shellfish long- from 2000-2003 period Crab and shrimp numbers are ↓ term B- increasing, but commercial harvest is short- A Excellent still down from previous high levels. Score = 63 term ↑ B Good Fish ↓ long- C Fair After a long decline, fish popula- term C- tions are stable at low levels, but short- Poor some species are still endangered. D Score = 39 term ↔ F Critical Fishable-Swimmable-Drinkable long- ↓ term Trends over time Fish are harder to catch, and D+ unsafe to eat. Beach closures are up, Long term= past 25 years or more short- Score = 31 drinking water violations are down. ↔ Short term = past five years term Stewardship long- improving ↑ Water conservation, pollution ↓ term - limits, monitoring, and restoration ↓ declining C short- Score = 43 efforts are finally underway, but ↔ progress is slow. term ↔ stable i ii • ECOLOGICAL SCORECARD • BAY INDEX San Francisco Bay Index Executive Summary an Francisco Bay is a unique national Many efforts are underway to Streasure. The largest estuary—where improve the Bay’s health. The Bay Institute’s ocean and fresh water meet—on the west Ecological Scorecard is intended to improve coast of the United States provides habitat for our understanding of how the entire Bay hundreds of plant and animal species, many watershed is doing, to monitor how effective found nowhere else in the world. The Bay our stewardship of this vital resource is, and supplies seafood for businesses and anglers. to identify future directions for management, Its watershed is a major source of water for monitoring, and research. The 2003 Bay cities and agriculture. Residents and tourists Index focuses on the Bay itself, which is the sail and swim in its waters, play along its first of four major ecological regions of the shoreline and tributary creeks, and value its estuary—Bay, Delta, San Joaquin River and wildlife and scenic qualities. Sacramento River—to be assessed as part of But the Bay’s vital signs are not the Ecological Scorecard project. good. Over the last century, once abundant The Scorecard’s Bay Index uses sci- native fish and wildlife populations have ence-based indicators to grade the condition declined drastically, while harmful alien of the Bay region: how well its ecological re- species have invaded the Bay. The amounts sources are faring, how much human activi- of wetland habitat and freshwater flows into ties are harming or helping the Bay, and how the Bay have decreased dramatically, while human uses of the Bay’s resources are af- pollution levels have risen. Commercial and fected by the Bay’s health. These indicators recreational fisheries have collapsed, and are combined into eight Indexes that track the those fish that are caught in the Bay are not Bay’s environment (Habitat, Freshwater In- safe to eat. The fair to poor grades reported in flow, Water Quality), its fish and wildlife the 2003 Bay Index reflect this long-term (Food Web, Shellfish, Fish), our management decline in the Bay region’s ecological of its resources (Stewardship), and its direct health—but the current situation is not all value to the people who use it (Fishable- bleak. In most cases, the decline has been Swimmable-Drinkable). The grading system halted and short-term conditions are compares current conditions in the Bay and relatively stable. In some cases, such as its watershed to historical conditions, envi- habitat and shellfish populations, there have ronmental and public health standards, and been small but noticeable improvements. restoration targets. iii iv • ECOLOGICAL SCORECARD • BAY INDEX Long-term Short-term Grade Score Trend Trend D+ 32 ↓ ↑ San Francisco Bay Index Habitat Wetlands, mudflats, and riparian • Tidal marsh area decreased by • The recent acquisition of South areas are rich sources of food and 78% during the last 150 years, Bay salt ponds, following nutrients, and provide critical from 190,000 acres to just similar efforts in the North spawning, nesting, and rearing 40,000 acres. Bay, created a unique habitat for the Bay’s fish and opportunity to restore up • Tidal mudflats decreased by wildlife species. These habitats to 23,000 acres of tidal marsh 42% in the same period. also improve water quality and around the Bay. Wetland flood control, and support birding, • Seasonal wetlands decreased acquisitions since 1997 total fishing, hunting, and other by nearly 75% over the 150- 40,000 acres, and at least recreational activities. Converting year period. two-thirds of these acres are these areas for agriculture, salt slated for restoration in the • Riparian habitat decreased production, and urban develop- next 30 years. 95% along the Bay margins, ment has reduced the Bay’s and 84% throughout the entire •During the past 5 years, almost productivity and restricted the Bay region’s watershed, from 500 acres of non-tidal diked amount of habitat available for use its full extent 150 years ago. wetlands have been created or by endangered plants and animals. enhanced, nearly 3% of the • Since 1998, restoration of 1,700 target for this habitat type. acres increased tidal marsh habitat by more than 4%. At this rate, it will take nearly 200 years to achieve the 50-100 year targets set for Bay tidal marsh restoration by the Baylands Habitat Goals Project. Habitat Index The Habitat Index aggregates the results of the tidal marsh, tidal mudflat, seasonal wetland, and riparian habitat indicators. v Long-term Short-term Grade Score Trend Trend D29 ↓ ↓ San Francisco Bay Index Freshwater Inflow The amount and timing of • In 2002, a “below normal” year • Seasonal variation in fresh freshwater inflow to San Francisco in the Bay’s watershed, the Bay water inflow—high flows in Bay defines the quality and received only the amount of spring and lower flows later quantity of its estuarine habitat. freshwater as expected in a in the year—are an important Flows transport organisms and “critically dry” year. environmental signal for many nutrients, improve water quality, Bay species. This variation was • Freshwater flow during the and provide the low salinity reduced by 46% in 2002, com- ecologically sensitive spring habitat on which many Bay species pared to historic conditions. period decreased by as much depend. Irrigating the Central as 75% since 1940. In 2002, • Peak flows, which periodically Valley, constructing a massive only 32% of the spring runoff freshen Bay waters, occurred system of reservoirs and canals, reached the Bay, still an for only eleven days in 2002, and exporting water directly from improvement compared to compared to the expected 58 the rivers and Delta have reduced spring inflows during the days of peak flows under the amount of freshwater reaching 1987-1992 drought. historic conditions. the Bay, and changed its timing. • Spring inflows are extremely • The 1940-94 downward trend • In 2002, just over 50% of total important to Bay fish. In 2002, in the Freshwater Inflow Index annual runoff from the reduced spring inflows shifted reflected increases in upstream Sacramento-San Joaquin low salinity habitat upstream water diversions. Wetter watersheds reached the Bay. by nearly 15 kilometers hydrologic conditions and • In recent years, reduced (9 miles) compared to historic increased flow requirements freshwater inflow cut the conditions, corresponding to a after 1994 temporarily frequency of “wet” years for predicted three-fold decrease improved Bay flow condi- the Bay by 50% and imposed in the abundance of several tions, but the trend has been drought conditions more Bay fish species.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • LONGFIN SMELT Spirinchus Thaleichthys USFWS: None CDFG: Threatened
    LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. PUBLIC DRAFT SOLANO HCP JULY 2012 SOLANO COUNTY WATER AGENCY NATURAL COMMUNITY AND SPECIES ACCOUNTS LONGFIN SMELT Spirinchus thaleichthys USFWS: None CDFG: Threatened Species Account Status and Description. The longfin smelt is listed as a threatened species by the California Fish and Game Commission. Abundance of the longfin smelt has reached record lows in the San Francisco-Delta population, and the species may already be extinct in some northern California estuarine populations, resulting in an overall threat of extinction to the species within California (Federal Register 2008). The longfin smelt was also proposed for federal listing, but on April 8, 2009 the USFWS determined that the San Francisco Bay Estuary population does not qualify for listing as a distinct population segment under federal regulations. Further assessment of the entire population is being conducted, however, and future listing may be considered. Photo courtesy of California Department of Fish and Game Longfin smelt, once mature, are slim, silver fish in the family Osmeridae (true smelts). Moyle (2002) describes the species as being 90-110 mm (standard length) at maturity, with a translucent silver appearance along the sides of the body, and an olive to iridescent pinkish hue on the back. Mature males are often darker than females, with enlarged and stiffened dorsal and anal fins, a dilated lateral line region, and breeding tubercles on paired fins and scares. Longfin smelt can be distinguished from other California smelt by their long pectoral fins (which reach or nearly reach the bases of the pelvic fins), incomplete lateral line, weak or absent striations on the opercular bones, low number of scales in the lateral line (54-65) and long maxillary bones (which in adults extent just short of the posterior margin of the eye).
    [Show full text]
  • About Aquarium of the Bay
    Aquarium of the Bay Bay Ecotarium Press Kit Aquarium of the Bay Press Kit About Aquarium of the Bay Aquarium of the Bay Exhibit Highlights Aquarium of the Bay Fact Sheet Aquarium of the Bay Fun Facts Sustainability at Aquarium of the Bay About Bay Ecotarium Contact About Aquarium of the Bay i and indigenous - offering — Bay Ecotarium has a shared mission Sierra to the Sea™ Exhibit Highlights DISCOVER THE BAY UNDER THE BAY in length Go With The Flow jellies Nearshore Tunnel 0 15 Octopus and Friends Gallery This gallery features the newest aquatic additions to the Aquarium— the Pacific spiny lumpsuckers. Other animals that can be found in this gallery include a giant Pacific octopus, Dungeness crabs, and abalone. Offshore Tunnel (Sharks of Alcatraz) (Sharks of Alcatraz) Exhibit Highlights TOUCH THE BAY Touchpools touch Bay Lab RIVER OTTERS: WATERSHED AMBASSADORS : San Francisco Aquarium of the Bay Fact Sheet Overview: Aquarium of the Bay, located at the world-famous PIER 39, is the only aquarium dedicated to the diverse marine life and distinctive ecosystems of San Francisco Bay. Aquarium of the Bay is home to over 20,000+ marine and indigenous animals that can be found in San Francisco Bay and along the California coast. With more than 500,000 visitors annually, Aquarium of the Bay provides an unmatched window through which to view local marine life. Mission: Aquarium of the Bay is an institution of Bay.org DBA Bay Ecotarium, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization with a mission to enable conversations on climate resilience and ocean conservation globally, while inspiring actionable change locally by protection and preservation of the San Francisco Bay and its ecosystems, from Sierra to the Sea™.
    [Show full text]
  • Status and Trends of Indicators of Ecosystem Health
    STATUS AND TRENDS OF INDICATORS OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH THE ESTUARY SAN FRANCISCO BAY AND SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN RIVER DELTA The San Francisco Estuary Partnership collaborates with partners throughout the Bay and Delta on regional, science-based programs to increase the health and resilience of the San Francisco Estuary. Established as part of the National Estuary Program over 25 years ago by the State of California and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Partnership manages multi-benefit projects that improve the well-being of wildlife and human communities from the inland rivers to the Golden Gate. More information can be found at sfestuary.org SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY PARTNERSHIP 375 Beale Street, Suite 700, San Francisco, CA 94105 © 2019 San Francisco Estuary Partnership. All rights reserved. Please cite as The State of the Estuary 2019, San Francisco Estuary Partnership. The Delta Stewardship Council was created in 2009 by the California Legislature to advance the state’s coequal goals for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta through the development and enforcement of a long-term sustainable management plan. Informed by the Delta Science Program and Delta Independent Science Board, the Council oversees implementation of this plan through coordination and oversight of state and local agencies proposing to fund, carry out, and approve Delta-related activities. More information can be found at deltacouncil.ca.gov STATUS AND TRENDS OF INDICATORS OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH THE ESTUARY SAN FRANCISCO BAY AND SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN RIVER DELTA SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY A NORTHERN CALIFORNIA ESTUARY THAT INCLUDES THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, SUISUN BAY, SAN PABLO BAY, AND SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .
    [Show full text]
  • The Estuary Project'snon-Profit Partner
    PublicationsPublications TheThe EstuaryEstuary Project’sProject’s Non-ProfitNon-Profit PartnerPartner (PRINT AND ON-LINE) ESTUARY, an eight-page, bi-monthly newsletter that includes fre- The Friends of the San The San Francisco quent, comprehensive inserts about CALFED’s Science Program and the Regional Monitoring Program led by the San Francisco Francisco Estuary is a 501(c)(3) Estuary Project is a federal-state- Estuary Institute non-profit organization associated with local partnership working to restore water Courtesty Delta In-Channel Island Work Group. Bay-Delta Environmental Report Card, March 1999 the Estuary Project. Its goal is to quality and manage the natural resources of Bay-Delta Environmental Report Card, September 2001 increase public awareness of the the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary while Baylands Ecosystem Habitat Goals Estuary and to encourage Baylands Ecosystem Species and Community Profiles maintaining the region’s economic vitality. Boater’s Pumpout Map & Guides for San Francisco Bay and the San public involvement in The Estuary Project oversees and tracks Joaquin & Sacramento River Delta decision-making processes implementation of a Comprehensive CCMP Workbook, October 1996 about the Estuary. Conservation and Management Plan— Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual and Guidebook for Construction Projects and videos:“Keep it Clean”;“Hold On To The Friends support the the “CCMP”—for preserving, restoring, and Your Dirt” education programs begun enhancing the Bay-Delta Estuary.The Estuary Introduction to the Ecology of the San Francisco Bay by the Estuary Project by Project disseminates newsletters, fact sheets, SFEP web site: http://sfep.abag.ca.gov sponsoring workshops for videos, and other materials to educate the public SFEP Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan State of the Estuary 2002: Science and Strategies for Restoration students and teachers and about Bay-Delta wetlands, wildlife, aquatic State of the Estuary 2000: Restoration Primer by helping community groups conduct resources, and land use issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Programmatic Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Assessment for the Long-Term Management Strategy for the Placement of Dredged Material in the San Francisco Bay Region
    Programmatic Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Assessment for the Long-Term Management Strategy for the Placement of Dredged Material in the San Francisco Bay Region July 2009 Executive Summary Programmatic Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Assessment for the Long-Term Management Strategy for the Placement of Dredged Material in the San Francisco Bay Region Pursuant to section 305(b)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. §1855(b)), the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), as the federal lead and co-lead agencies, respectively, submit this Programmatic Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Assessment for the Long-Term Management Strategy for the Placement of Dredged Material in the San Francisco Bay Region. This document provides an assessment of the potential effects of the on-going dredging and dredged material placement activities of all federal and non-federal maintenance dredging projects in the action area (see Figure 1.1 located on page 3). The SF Bay LTMS program area spans 11 counties, including: Marin, Sonoma, Napa, Solano, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo and San Francisco counties. It does not include the mountainous or inland areas far removed from navigable waters. The geographic scope of potential impacts included in this consultation (action area) comprises the estuarine waters of the San Francisco Bay region, portions of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) west of Sherman Island and the western portion of the Port of Sacramento and Port of Stockton deep water ship channels. It also includes the wetlands and shallow intertidal areas that form a margin around the Estuary and the tidal portions of its tributaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change Adaptation Study APPENDIX
    City of Richmond Climate Change Adaptation Study APPENDIX City of Richmond Climate Action Plan Appendix F: Climate Change Adaptation Study Acknowledgements The City of Richmond has been an active participant in the Contra Costa County Adapting to Rising Tides Project, led by the Bay Conservation Development Commission (BCDC) in partnership with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the State Coastal Conservancy, the San Francisco Estuary Partnership, the San Francisco Estuary Institute, Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, and consulting firm AECOM. Environmental Science Associates (ESA) completed this Adaptation Study in coordination with BCDC, relying in part on reports and maps developed for the Adapting to Rising Tides project to assess the City of Richmond’s vulnerabilities with respect to sea level rise and coastal flooding. City of Richmond Climate Action Plan F-i Appendix F: Climate Change Adaptation Study This page intentionally left blank F-ii City of Richmond Climate Action Plan Appendix F: Climate Change Adaptation Study Table of Contents Acknowledgements i 1. Executive Summary 1 1.1 Coastal Flooding 2 1.2 Water Supply 2 1.3 Critical Transportation Assets 3 1.4 Vulnerable Populations 3 1.5 Summary 3 2. Study Methodology 4 2.1 Scope and Organize 4 2.2 Assess 4 2.3 Define 4 2.4 Plan 5 2.5 Implement and Monitor 5 3. Setting 6 3.1 Statewide Climate Change Projections 6 3.2 Bay Area Region Climate Change Projections 7 3.3 Community Assets 8 3.4 Relevant Local Planning Initiatives 9 3.5 Relevant State and Regional Planning Initiatives 10 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Oral History Off Ice University of California the Bancroft Library Berkeley, California
    Regional Oral History Off ice University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California California Land-Use Planning Series SAVE SAN FRANCISCO BAY ASSOCIATION, 1961-1986 with an Introduction by Harold Gilliam and an Afterword by Me1 Scott Interviews with Barry Bunshoft Esther Gulick Catherine Kerr Sylvia McLaughlin Interviews conducted by Malca Chall 1985 and 1986 Copyright @ 1987 by The Regents of the University of California This manuscript is made available for research purposes. No part of the manuscript may be quoted for publication without the written permission of the Director of The Bancroft Library of the Univer- sity of California at Berkeley. Requests for permission to quote for publication should be addressed to the Regional Oral History Office, 486 Library, and should include identification of the specific passages to be quoted, anticipated use of the passages, and identification of the user. It is recommended that this oral history be cited as follows: To cite the volume: Save San Francisco Bay Association, 1961-1986, an oral history conducted in 1985 and 1986 by Malca Chall, Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft ~ibrar~, University bf calif ornia, Berkeley, 1987. To cite individual interview: Barry Bunshoft, "Save San Francisco Bay Association and the Courts," an oral history conducted in 1986 by Malca.Chal1, Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, 1987. Copy No. DEDICATION THE SAVE SAN FRANCISCO BAY ASSOCIATION DEDICATES THIS ORAL HISTORY TO THE MEMORY OF DOROTHY
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Fresh Water and Salinity Conditions in the Western Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Bay
    Historical Fresh Water and Salinity Conditions in the Western Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Bay A summary of historical reviews, reports, analyses and measurements Water Resources Department Contra Costa Water District Concord, California February 2010 Technical Memorandum WR10-001 Acknowledgements CCWD would like to thank the City of Antioch for their contribution towards funding a technical review of CCWD's draft report "Trends in Hydrology and Salinity in Suisun Bay and the Western Delta" (June 2007); their review substantially improved the work and led to the final report "Historical Fresh Water and Salinity Conditions in the Western Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Bay". CCWD is grateful to the many reviewers including Richard Denton, Matthew Emrick, Gopi Goteti, Phil Harrington, E. John List, Susan Paulsen, David Pene, Mat Rogers, and Peter Vorster. We also thank the following for sharing their data and analyses: Roger Byrne, Chris Enright, Spreck Rosekrans, and Scott Starratt, and we thank Ann Spaulding for her contributions. i February 12, 2010 Foreword - Establishing the Historical Baseline The watershed of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta) provides drinking water to more than 23 million Californians as well as irrigation water for millions of acres of agriculture in the Central Valley. The Delta itself is a complex estuarine ecosystem, with populations of many native species now in serious decline. The Delta estuary as we know it began to form about 6,000 years ago, following the end of the last ice age. Because the estuary is connected to the Pacific Ocean through San Francisco Bay, seawater intrusion causes the salinity of Suisun Bay and the Delta to vary depending on hydrological conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Sierra to the Sea the Ecological History of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Watershed
    From the Sierra to the Sea The Ecological History of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Watershed © 1998 The Bay Institute of San Francisco Second printing, July 2003 The Bay Institute of San Francisco is a non-profit research and advocacy organization which works to protect and restore the ecosystem of the San Francisco Bay/Delta estuary and its watershed. Since 1981, the Institute’s policy and technical staff have led programs to protect water quality and endangered species, reform state and federal water management, and promote comprehensive ecological restoration in the Bay/Delta. Copies of this report can be ordered for $40.00 (includes shipping and handling) from: The Bay Institute of San Francisco 500 Palm Drive Novato, CA 94949 Phone: (415) 506-0150 Fax: (415) 506-0155 www.bay.org The cover is taken from an engraving showing the entrance to the middle fork of the Sacramento River near modern-day Steamboat Slough, in C. Ringgold’s 1852 series of navigational charts and sailing directions for San Francisco Bay and Delta. Printed on recycled paper From the Sierra to the Sea The Ecological History of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Watershed July 1998 The Bay Institute FROM THE SIERRA TO THE SEA: THE ECOLOGICAL HISTORY OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY-DELTA WATERSHED Table of Contents Page CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................. vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................... ES-1 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION I. Background.......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Toxic Contaminants in the San Francisco Bay-Delta and Their Possible Biological Effects
    TOXIC CONTAMINANTS IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY-DELTA AND THEIR POSSIBLE BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS DAVID J.H. PHILLIPS AQUATIC HABITAT INSTITUTE 180 Richmond Field Station 1301 South 46th Street Richmond, CA 94804 (415) 231-9539 August 26, 1987 CONTENTS Acknowledgments ................ (i) I . INTRODUCTION ................. 1 I1 . TRACE ELEMENTS IN THE BAY-DELTA . 5 A . Silver .................. 7 B . Copper .................. 40 C . Selenium ................. 68 D . Mercury .................111 E . Cadmium .................133 F . Lead ...................148 G . Zinc ................... 163 H . Chromium .................171 I. Nickel ..................183 J . Tin ...................194 K . Other Trace Elements ...........200 111 . ORGANOCHLORINES IN THE BAY-DELTA .......202 A . Polychlorinated Biphenyls ........205 B . DDT and Metabolites ...........232 C . Other Organochlorines ..........257 IV . HYDROCARBONS IN THE BAY-DELTA ........ 274 A . Introduction ..............274 B . Hydrocarbons in the San Francisco Estuary . 281 C . Summary .................304 V . BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF BAY-DELTA CONTAMINANTS . 306 A . The Benthos of the Bay-Delta ...... 307 B . Fisheries of the Bay-Delta ........ 319 C . Bird Populations ............ 351 D . Mammalian Populations. Including Man . 354 E . Bioassay Data ............. 359 VI . CONCLUSIONS ................. 377 Literature Cited .............. 382 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks are due to a large number of people for their contributions to this document. Staff at the Aquatic Habitat Institute have provided their support, encouragement and talent. These include Andy Gunther, Jay Davis, Susan Prather, Don Baumgartner and Doug Segar. Word processing services were provided by Ginny Goodwind, Emilia Martins, Renee Ragucci, Audi Stunkard, Lori Duncan, and Susan Prather. Tat Cheung and Johnson Tang of the County of Alameda Public Works Agency contributed their time and talent to the preparation of figures. Melissa Blanton copy-edited the text, surviving the requirements of the author in respect of Anglicisation of local terminologies.
    [Show full text]
  • Restoring the Estuary
    1 AA FrameworkFramework forfor CollaborativeCollaborative ActionAction onon WetlandsWetlands US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE etlands in the San Francisco Bay Area are range of interests—including resource and regulato- Wamong the most important coastal wintering ry agencies, environmental organizations, business, and migratory stopover areas for millions of water- and agriculture—convened the San Francisco Bay fowl and shorebirds traveling along the Pacific Fly- Joint Venture (SFBJV) in June of 1995. In September way, which stretches from Alaska to South America. 1996, 20 parties representing this diverse wetlands These wetlands also provide economic benefits, constituency signed a working agreement that iden- offer a range of recreational opportunities, and con- tified the goals and objectives of the SFBJV, and the tribute to a higher quality of life for residents in the responsibilities of its board and working commit- densely populated San Francisco Bay Area. They are tees. The agreement also stated that the Implemen- essential aspects of the Bay region’s unique charac- tation Strategy would be developed to guide its par- ter and, along with the creeks that flow into the Bay, ties toward the long-term vision of the restored Bay help to define the vibrant and distinctive identities Estuary. The signatory partners recognized and of communities around the Bay. However, despite endorsed the goals of the North American Waterfowl their value, destruction of these precious natural Management Plan. However, they enlarged the goals assets continues. Today’s wetlands are only a rem- and objectives of the Plan to include benefits not nant, perhaps 20 percent of the vast wetlands seen only for waterfowl, but also for the other wildlife by the first European settlers.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Feedback from End-Users and Resulting Adaptation of Project Design
    Managing for resilience in the face of climate change: a scientific approach to targeted oyster restoration in San Francisco Bay and Elkhorn Slough, CA A project funded by the National Estuarine Research Reserve System Science Collaborative EARLY FEEDBACK FROM END-USERS AND RESULTING ADAPTATION OF PROJECT DESIGN Kerstin Wasson, Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve 4/19/2012 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The goal of our collaborative science project is to provide restoration planning tools to help those engaged in Olympia oyster restoration, policy or strategic planning to choose sites for restoration that will prove sustainable in the face of climate change. Our work will also shed light on likely impacts of selected climate-related stressors, and will determine whether resilience can be enhanced by decreasing exposure to other anthropogenic stressors. Our interdisciplinary team sought early feedback from end-users on the design of project. We sent an electronic survey to people engaged in some aspect of Olympia oyster restoration and presented our project at an oyster working group meeting and in interviews with key participants. We synthesized the results from the 48 survey respondents. Our project team thoroughly reviewed the input, and adapted the project design in response. The feedback and our response to the major components of the survey is summarized below. Focus of new science: All of our proposed focus questions for new scientific inquiry scored as moderately to very important for designing sustainable restoration strategies. The top-scoring focus areas were understanding how climate-related stressors affect oyster growth and survival, and identifying which sites have the lowest stressor levels and thus are most likely to support successful restoration projects.
    [Show full text]