DOCSLIB.ORG

Suisun Marsh Plan-Chap 5

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Suisun Marsh Plan-Chap 5 Chapter 5 Physical Environment This chapter provides environmental analyses relative to physical parameters of the project area. Components of this study include a setting discussion, impact analysis criteria, project effects and significance, and applicable mitigation measures. This chapter is organized as follows: Section 5.1, “Water Supply, Hydrology, and Delta Water Management”; Section 5.2, “Water Quality”; Section 5.3, “Geology and Groundwater”; Section 5.4, “Flood Control and Levee Stability”; Section 5.5, “Sediment Transport”; Section 5.6, “Transportation and Navigation”; Section 5.7, “Air Quality”; Section 5.8, “Noise”; and Section 5.9; “Climate Change.” Suisun Marsh Habitat Management, November 2011 Preservation, and Restoration Plan 5-1 Final EIS/EIR ICF 06888.06 Section 5.1 Water Supply, Hydrology, and Delta Water Management Introduction This section describes the existing environmental conditions and the consequences of implementing the SMP alternatives on water supply, hydrology, and Delta water management. Delta water management for agriculture, water supply diversions, and exports and the salinity of water diverted for waterfowl habitat in the managed wetlands of the Marsh officially became linked in the 1978 State Water Board Delta Water Control Plan and the water right decision (D-1485) Suisun Marsh salinity standards (objectives). D-1485 required DWR and Reclamation to prepare a plan to protect the beneficial use of water for fish and wildlife and meet salinity standards for the Marsh. Initial facilities included improved RRDS facilities to supply approximately 5,000 acres on Simmons, Hammond, Van Sickle, Wheeler, and Grizzly Islands with lower salinity water from Montezuma Slough, and the MIDS and Goodyear Slough outfall to improve supply of lower salinity water for the southwestern Marsh. These initial facilities were constructed in 1979 and 1980; the required Suisun Marsh Plan of Protection was prepared and approved in 1984. This section describes the impacts of the SMP alternatives on water supply in Suisun Marsh. The impacts on hydrodynamics (water flows and tidal elevations) also are described in this section; water quality effects (i.e., salinity and contaminants) are described in the next section (Section 5.2). SWP and CVP projects affect Suisun Marsh salinity by regulating Delta outflow through upstream reservoir storage and releases and Delta exports. D-1485 (since 1978) and the currently applicable D-1641 (since 1995) require DWR and Reclamation to meet various Delta outflow and salinity objectives in the Delta and in the Marsh. These objectives limit the allowable exports during some periods of relatively low Delta inflows. The State Water Board suggested in D- 1485 that “Full protection of Suisun Marsh now could be accomplished only by requiring up to 2 million acre-feet (maf) of freshwater outflow in dry and critical years in addition to that required to meet other standards.” This was strong motivation for DWR and Reclamation to prepare a plan of protection for Suisun Marsh that would use other facilities or management actions to provide appropriate salinity in the Marsh. The SMSCG on Montezuma Slough near Collinsville, which began operating in October 1988, were constructed by DWR Suisun Marsh Habitat Management, November 2011 Preservation, and Restoration Plan 5.1-1 Final EIS/EIR ICF 06888.06 California Department of Fish and Game, 5.1 Water Supply, Hydrology, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Reclamation Delta Water Management and Reclamation to improve the salinity in the Marsh channels without requiring the additional Delta outflow that the State Water Board had anticipated. Summary of Impacts Table 5.1-1 summarizes impacts from implementing the SMP alternatives on water supply, hydrology, and Delta water management. There are no significant impacts on water supply or Delta water management from implementing the SMP alternatives. Table 5.1-1. Summary of Water Supply, Hydrology, and Delta Water Management Impacts Significance Significance Impact Alternative before Mitigation Mitigation Measures after Mitigation Restoration Impacts WTR-1: Reduction in Water A, B, C Less than None required – Availability for Riparian Water significant Diversions to Managed Wetlands Upstream or Downstream of Restoration Areas WTR-2: Increased Tidal Velocities A, B, C Less than None required – from Breaching of Managed significant Wetlands Levees Managed Wetland Activities Impacts WTR-3: Improved Water Supply A, B, C Beneficial – – as a Result of Improved Flooding and Draining of Managed Wetlands WTR-4: Increased Tidal Flows and A, B, C Beneficial – – Improved Water Supply as a Result of Dredging Affected Environment Sources of Information The following key sources of information were used in the preparation of this section to describe the conceptual linkage between Marsh management alternatives and Delta water management: Comprehensive Review of Suisun Marsh Monitoring Data 1985–1995 (California Department of Water Resources 2001). Suisun Marsh Ecological Workgroup Final Report (California Department of Water Resources 2001). Suisun Marsh Habitat Management, November 2011 Preservation, and Restoration Plan 5.1-2 Final EIS/EIR ICF 06888.06 California Department of Fish and Game, 5.1 Water Supply, Hydrology, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Reclamation Delta Water Management Conceptual Model for Managed Wetlands in Suisun Marsh (California Department of Fish and Game 2007). RMA modeling of the Marsh and tidal restoration alternatives (Appendix A, “Numerical Modeling in Support of Suisun Marsh PEIR/EIS Technical Memorandum, March 2008”). Draft Suisun Marsh Tidal Marsh and Aquatic Habitats Conceptual Model (Conceptual Model 2010). Design Guidelines for Tidal Wetland Restoration in San Francisco Bay (PWA and Phyllis Faber 2004). Regulatory Setting Tidal hydraulic conditions and potential impacts are of concern to several federal and state agencies. Actual regulations, however, are limited and indirect. Several federal agencies such as National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the Corps participate in the monitoring and analysis of tidal conditions in the San Francisco Estuary. FEMA regulates (i.e., evaluates) the 100-year flood frequency tidal elevation, which is determined to be about 7 feet above mean sea level (msl) (National Geodetic Vertical Datum [NGVD] 1929 datum) or 10 feet NAVD 1988 datum. Several state agencies such as the State Water Board, DWR, and DFG have interests, jurisdictions, and regulatory authority within the Marsh, as generally described in Chapter 1. No specific regulations, however, govern tidal elevations, tidal flows, or tidal velocities in the Marsh channels. Several local agencies such as Solano County have interests, jurisdictions, and regulatory authority within the Marsh. The following sections describe the regulations applicable to water supply and Delta water management, including tidal hydraulic processes. Federal Many federal regulations intended to protect sensitive species are in place that affect water supply operations in Suisun Marsh and throughout the Delta. In the Marsh, NMFS and USFWS have implemented some restrictions on the unscreened diversions for the protection of winter-run Chinook salmon and delta smelt, respectively. The winter-run restriction applies from November–January for unscreened diversions, and limits each diversion to 25% of each diversion’s capacity. Diversions are also not allowed from February 21 to March 31 on diversions without fish screens. The delta smelt restriction applies in April and May when unscreened diversions are restricted to 20% or 35% of each diversion’s capacity, depending upon the presence of delta smelt in the Marsh. These protective measures require more skillful water management to provide Suisun Marsh Habitat Management, November 2011 Preservation, and Restoration Plan 5.1-3 Final EIS/EIR ICF 06888.06 California Department of Fish and Game, 5.1 Water Supply, Hydrology, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Reclamation Delta Water Management sufficient soil leaching, soil moisture, and water depth in ponded areas during the winter and spring months. In addition to the Suisun Marsh specific water supply restrictions, the 2008 USFWS and 2009 NMFS BOs for the Coordinated Operation of the CVP and SWP (Operations BOs) dictate some water supply operations in the Marsh (operation of the SMSCG). State The State Water Resource Control Board Water Right Decisions and Water Quality Control Plans (WQCPs or Basin Plans) provide the framework for water supply in the Delta and for salinity standards for the water applied to managed wetlands in the Marsh. The 1978 Bay-Delta WQCP and D-1485 in 1978 introduced the initial salinity objectives in the Marsh to protect the beneficial uses of water for fish and wildlife in the Marsh. The State Water Board directed DWR and Reclamation to prepare a plan of protection for Suisun Marsh. This provision initiated the development of facilities and management assistance within the Marsh. The 1995 Bay-Delta WQCP (State Water Resources Control Board 1995) and D-1641 (State Water Resources Control Board 1999) generally renewed the salinity objectives and management guidelines to protect the beneficial uses of water for fish and wildlife in the Marsh. State permits and authorizations from DFG intended to protect state listed species including longfin smelt, delta smelt and Chinook salmon, are in place
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 0 5 10 15 20 Miles Μ and Statewide Resources Office
    Woodland RD Name RD Number Atlas Tract 2126 5 !"#$ Bacon Island 2028 !"#$80 Bethel Island BIMID Bishop Tract 2042 16 ·|}þ Bixler Tract 2121 Lovdal Boggs Tract 0404 ·|}þ113 District Sacramento River at I Street Bridge Bouldin Island 0756 80 Gaging Station )*+,- Brack Tract 2033 Bradford Island 2059 ·|}þ160 Brannan-Andrus BALMD Lovdal 50 Byron Tract 0800 Sacramento Weir District ¤£ r Cache Haas Area 2098 Y o l o ive Canal Ranch 2086 R Mather Can-Can/Greenhead 2139 Sacramento ican mer Air Force Chadbourne 2034 A Base Coney Island 2117 Port of Dead Horse Island 2111 Sacramento ¤£50 Davis !"#$80 Denverton Slough 2134 West Sacramento Drexler Tract Drexler Dutch Slough 2137 West Egbert Tract 0536 Winters Sacramento Ehrheardt Club 0813 Putah Creek ·|}þ160 ·|}þ16 Empire Tract 2029 ·|}þ84 Fabian Tract 0773 Sacramento Fay Island 2113 ·|}þ128 South Fork Putah Creek Executive Airport Frost Lake 2129 haven s Lake Green d n Glanville 1002 a l r Florin e h Glide District 0765 t S a c r a m e n t o e N Glide EBMUD Grand Island 0003 District Pocket Freeport Grizzly West 2136 Lake Intake Hastings Tract 2060 l Holland Tract 2025 Berryessa e n Holt Station 2116 n Freeport 505 h Honker Bay 2130 %&'( a g strict Elk Grove u Lisbon Di Hotchkiss Tract 0799 h lo S C Jersey Island 0830 Babe l Dixon p s i Kasson District 2085 s h a King Island 2044 S p Libby Mcneil 0369 y r !"#$5 ·|}þ99 B e !"#$80 t Liberty Island 2093 o l a Lisbon District 0307 o Clarksburg Y W l a Little Egbert Tract 2084 S o l a n o n p a r C Little Holland Tract 2120 e in e a e M Little Mandeville
    [Show full text]
  • Desilva Island
    SUISUN BAY 139 SUISUN BAY 140 SUISUN BAY SUISUN BAY Located immediately downstream of the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, Suisun Bay is the largest contiguous wetland area in the San Francisco Bay region. Suisun Bay is a dynamic, transitional zone between the freshwater input of the Central Valley rivers and the tidal influence of the upper San Francisco Estuary. This area supports a substantial number of nesting herons and egrets, including three of the largest colonies in the region. Although suburban development is rampant along the nearby Interstate 80 corridor to the north, most of the Suisun Bay area is protected from heavy development by the California Department of Fish and Game and a number of private duck clubs. Black- Active Great crowned or year Site Blue Great Snowy Night- Cattle last # Colony Site Heron Egret Egret Heron Egret County active Page 501 Bohannon Solano Active 142 502 Campbell Ranch Solano Active 143 503 Cordelia Road Solano 1998 145 504 Gold Hill Solano Active 146 505 Green Valley Road Solano Active 148 506 Hidden Cove Solano Active 149 507 Joice Island Solano 1994 150 508 Joice Island Annex Solano Active 151 509 Sherman Lake Sacramento Active 152 510 Simmons Island Solano 1994 153 511 Spoonbill Solano Active 154 512 Tree Slough Solano Active 155 513 Volanti Solano Active 156 514 Wheeler Island Solano Active 157 SUISUN BAY 141 142 SUISUN BAY Bohannon Great Blue Herons and Great Egrets nest in a grove of eucalyptus trees on a levee in Cross Slough, about 1.8 km east of Beldons Landing.
    [Show full text]
  • 255 Subpart B—First Coast Guard District
    SUBCHAPTER G—REGATTAS AND MARINE PARADES PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON 100.703 Special Local Regulations; Recur- ring Marine Events, Sector St. Peters- NAVIGABLE WATERS burg. 100.704 Special Local Regulations; Marine Subpart A—General Events within the Captain of the Port Charleston. Sec. 100.01 Purpose and intent. 100.713 Annual Harborwalk Boat Race; 100.05 Definition of terms used in this part. Sampit River, Georgetown, SC. 100.10 Coast Guard-State agreements. 100.721 Special Local Regulations; Clear- 100.15 Submission of application. water Super Boat National Champion- 100.20 Action on application for event as- ship, Gulf of Mexico; Clearwater Beach, signed to State regulation by Coast FL. Guard-State agreement. 100.724 Annual Augusta Invitational Rowing 100.25 Action on application for event not Regatta; Savannah River, Augusta, GA. assigned to State regulation by Coast 100.732 Annual River Race Augusta; Savan- Guard-State agreement. nah River, Augusta, GA. 100.30 Approval required for holding event. 100.750–100.799 [Reserved] 100.35 Special local regulations. 100.40 Patrol of the regatta or marine pa- Subpart E—Eighth Coast Guard District rade. 100.45 Establishment of aids to navigation. 100.800 [Reserved] 100.50–100.99 [Reserved] 100.801 Annual Marine Events in the Eighth Coast Guard District. Subpart B—First Coast Guard District 100.850–100.899 [Reserved] 100.100 Special Local Regulations; Regattas and Boat Races in the Coast Guard Sec- Subpart F—Ninth Coast Guard District tor Long Island Sound Captain of the 100.900 [Reserved] Port Zone. 100.901 Great Lakes annual marine events.
    [Show full text]
  • Tidal Marsh Recovery Plan Habitat Creation Or Enhancement Project Within 5 Miles of OAK
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California California clapper rail Suaeda californica Cirsium hydrophilum Chloropyron molle Salt marsh harvest mouse (Rallus longirostris (California sea-blite) var. hydrophilum ssp. molle (Reithrodontomys obsoletus) (Suisun thistle) (soft bird’s-beak) raviventris) Volume II Appendices Tidal marsh at China Camp State Park. VII. APPENDICES Appendix A Species referred to in this recovery plan……………....…………………….3 Appendix B Recovery Priority Ranking System for Endangered and Threatened Species..........................................................................................................11 Appendix C Species of Concern or Regional Conservation Significance in Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California….......................................13 Appendix D Agencies, organizations, and websites involved with tidal marsh Recovery.................................................................................................... 189 Appendix E Environmental contaminants in San Francisco Bay...................................193 Appendix F Population Persistence Modeling for Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California with Intial Application to California clapper rail …............................................................................209 Appendix G Glossary……………......................................................................………229 Appendix H Summary of Major Public Comments and Service
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Plan
    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 34 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 68 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 59 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 50 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2600 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111 PHONE: (415) 352-3600 January 2008 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed and adopted by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission in 1968 and submitted to the California Legislature and Governor in January 1969. The Bay Plan was prepared by the Commission over a three-year period pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965 which established the Commission as a temporary agency to prepare an enforceable plan to guide the future protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline. In 1969, the Legislature acted upon the Commission’s recommendations in the Bay Plan and revised the McAteer-Petris Act by designating the Commission as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the Act and the Bay Plan for the protection of the Bay and its great natural resources and the development of the Bay and shore- line to their highest potential with a minimum of Bay fill.
    [Show full text]
  • (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California
    Historical Distribution and Current Status of Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California Robert A. Leidy, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA Gordon S. Becker, Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA Brett N. Harvey, John Muir Institute of the Environment, University of California, Davis, CA This report should be cited as: Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical distribution and current status of steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration TABLE OF CONTENTS Forward p. 3 Introduction p. 5 Methods p. 7 Determining Historical Distribution and Current Status; Information Presented in the Report; Table Headings and Terms Defined; Mapping Methods Contra Costa County p. 13 Marsh Creek Watershed; Mt. Diablo Creek Watershed; Walnut Creek Watershed; Rodeo Creek Watershed; Refugio Creek Watershed; Pinole Creek Watershed; Garrity Creek Watershed; San Pablo Creek Watershed; Wildcat Creek Watershed; Cerrito Creek Watershed Contra Costa County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p. 39 Alameda County p. 45 Codornices Creek Watershed; Strawberry Creek Watershed; Temescal Creek Watershed; Glen Echo Creek Watershed; Sausal Creek Watershed; Peralta Creek Watershed; Lion Creek Watershed; Arroyo Viejo Watershed; San Leandro Creek Watershed; San Lorenzo Creek Watershed; Alameda Creek Watershed; Laguna Creek (Arroyo de la Laguna) Watershed Alameda County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p. 91 Santa Clara County p. 97 Coyote Creek Watershed; Guadalupe River Watershed; San Tomas Aquino Creek/Saratoga Creek Watershed; Calabazas Creek Watershed; Stevens Creek Watershed; Permanente Creek Watershed; Adobe Creek Watershed; Matadero Creek/Barron Creek Watershed Santa Clara County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
    comparing futures for the sacramento–san joaquin delta jay lund | ellen hanak | william fleenor william bennett | richard howitt jeffrey mount | peter moyle 2008 Public Policy Institute of California Supported with funding from Stephen D. Bechtel Jr. and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation ISBN: 978-1-58213-130-6 Copyright © 2008 by Public Policy Institute of California All rights reserved San Francisco, CA Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provided that full attribution is given to the source and the above copyright notice is included. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, officers, or Board of Directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. Summary “Once a landscape has been established, its origins are repressed from memory. It takes on the appearance of an ‘object’ which has been there, outside us, from the start.” Karatani Kojin (1993), Origins of Japanese Literature The Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta is the hub of California’s water supply system and the home of numerous native fish species, five of which already are listed as threatened or endangered. The recent rapid decline of populations of many of these fish species has been followed by court rulings restricting water exports from the Delta, focusing public and political attention on one of California’s most important and iconic water controversies.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic, Recent, and Future Subsidence, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, USA
    UC Davis San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science Title Historic, Recent, and Future Subsidence, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, USA Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7xd4x0xw Journal San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 8(2) ISSN 1546-2366 Authors Deverel, Steven J Leighton, David A Publication Date 2010 DOI https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2010v8iss2art1 Supplemental Material https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7xd4x0xw#supplemental License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California august 2010 Historic, Recent, and Future Subsidence, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California, USA Steven J. Deverel1 and David A. Leighton Hydrofocus, Inc., 2827 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 AbStRACt will range from a few cm to over 1.3 m (4.3 ft). The largest elevation declines will occur in the central To estimate and understand recent subsidence, we col- Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. From 2007 to 2050, lected elevation and soils data on Bacon and Sherman the most probable estimated increase in volume below islands in 2006 at locations of previous elevation sea level is 346,956,000 million m3 (281,300 ac-ft). measurements. Measured subsidence rates on Sherman Consequences of this continuing subsidence include Island from 1988 to 2006 averaged 1.23 cm year-1 increased drainage loads of water quality constitu- (0.5 in yr-1) and ranged from 0.7 to 1.7 cm year-1 (0.3 ents of concern, seepage onto islands, and decreased to 0.7 in yr-1). Subsidence rates on Bacon Island from arability.
    [Show full text]
  • A Revision of the Marsh Wrens of California. 1
    308 Swarth, Marsh Wrens of California. \ia\y October 16. White-throated Sparrow, Ruby-crowned Kinglet. 17. Cowbird, Myrtle Warbler. 18. Bewick's Wren. 20. Vesper Sparrow. 21. Swamp Sparrow. 24. Pipit. 2ti. Wilson's Snipe. 28. Rusty Blackbird. 31. Slate-colored Junco. November 2. Purple Grackle. 4. Purple Finch. 10. Mallard. 15. Fox Sparrow. 21. Pine Siskin. 23. Short-eared Owl. A REVISION OF THE MARSH WRENS OF CALIFORNIA. 1 BY HARRY S. SWARTH. An extensive series of marsh wrens from the delta region east of San Francisco Bay has been accumulated in the California Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, chiefly through the personal efforts of Misses Annie M. Alexander and Louise Kellogg. The appear- ance of these birds contrasts so strongly with specimens avail- able from other parts of California that it has seemed desirable to make a careful study of their systematic status. With this object in view, as many specimens as possible have been assembled illustrative of the Long-billed Marsh Wren (Tclmatodytcs palustris) upon the Pacific Coast, especially in ( alifornia. Although each of the several collections examined or appealed to contained but a meager representation of the species, still, by assembling material 1 Contribution from the University of California Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. Vol. VWIVl Swarth, Marsh 1917 J Wrens of California, 309 from many sources, and for the use of which specific acknowledg- ment is made beyond, a total of 2)59 skins became available. This series, while still leaving gaps to be filled before any precise plotting of breeding ranges can be made, is more than any previous student Points from which specimens were ex- amined: D Telmatodyles p.
    [Show full text]
  • 550. Regulations for General Public Use Activities on All State Wildlife Areas Listed
    550. Regulations for General Public Use Activities on All State Wildlife Areas Listed Below. (a) State Wildlife Areas: (1) Antelope Valley Wildlife Area (Sierra County) (Type C); (2) Ash Creek Wildlife Area (Lassen and Modoc counties) (Type B); (3) Bass Hill Wildlife Area (Lassen County), including the Egan Management Unit (Type C); (4) Battle Creek Wildlife Area (Shasta and Tehama counties); (5) Big Lagoon Wildlife Area (Humboldt County) (Type C); (6) Big Sandy Wildlife Area (Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties) (Type C); (7) Biscar Wildlife Area (Lassen County) (Type C); (8) Buttermilk Country Wildlife Area (Inyo County) (Type C); (9) Butte Valley Wildlife Area (Siskiyou County) (Type B); (10) Cache Creek Wildlife Area (Colusa and Lake counties), including the Destanella Flat and Harley Gulch management units (Type C); (11) Camp Cady Wildlife Area (San Bernadino County) (Type C); (12) Cantara/Ney Springs Wildlife Area (Siskiyou County) (Type C); (13) Cedar Roughs Wildlife Area (Napa County) (Type C); (14) Cinder Flats Wildlife Area (Shasta County) (Type C); (15) Collins Eddy Wildlife Area (Sutter and Yolo counties) (Type C); (16) Colusa Bypass Wildlife Area (Colusa County) (Type C); (17) Coon Hollow Wildlife Area (Butte County) (Type C); (18) Cottonwood Creek Wildlife Area (Merced County), including the Upper Cottonwood and Lower Cottonwood management units (Type C); (19) Crescent City Marsh Wildlife Area (Del Norte County); (20) Crocker Meadow Wildlife Area (Plumas County) (Type C); (21) Daugherty Hill Wildlife Area (Yuba County)
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resources
    C ULTURAL R ESOURCES B ACKGROUND R EPORT Cultural and Paleontological Resources In This Background Report Page Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3 Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................... 3 Prehistoric Overview ............................................................................................................... 3 Historic Setting ....................................................................................................................... 6 Paleontological Setting ......................................................................................................... 11 P AGE CUL‐ 1 C ITY OF S UISUN C ITY G ENERAL P LAN Regulatory Context .................................................................................................................. 12 California Environmental Quality Act .................................................................................... 12 Health and Safety Code, Section 7052 and 7050.5 ................................................................. 15 California State Senate Bill 18 ............................................................................................... 15 Local Codes, Ordinances, and Regulations............................................................................ 16 Known Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Subsidence Reversal for Tidal Reconnection
    PERFORMANCE MEASURE 4.12: SUBSIDENCE REVERSAL FOR TIDAL RECONNECTION Performance Measure 4.12: Subsidence Reversal for Tidal Reconnection Performance Measure (PM) Component Attributes Type: Output Performance Measure Description 1 Subsidence reversal 0F activities are located at shallow subtidal elevations to prevent net loss of future opportunities to restore tidal wetlands in the Delta and Suisun Marsh. Expectations Preventing long-term net loss of land at intertidal elevations in the Delta and Suisun Marsh from impacts of sea level rise and land subsidence. Metric 1. Acres of Delta and Suisun Marsh land with subsidence reversal activity located on islands with large areas at shallow subtidal elevations. This metric will be reported annually. 2. Average elevation accretion at each project site presented in centimeters per year. This metric will be reported every five years. Baseline 1. In 2019, zero acres of subsidence reversal on islands with large areas at shallow subtidal elevations. 2. Short-term elevation accretion in the Delta at 4 centimeters per year. 1 Subsidence reversal is a process that halts soil oxidation and accumulates new soil material in order to increase land elevations. Examples of subsidence reversal activities are rice cultivation, managed wetlands, and tidal marsh restoration. DELTA PLAN, AMENDED – PRELIMINARY DRAFT NOVEMBER 2019 1 PERFORMANCE MEASURE 4.12: SUBSIDENCE REVERSAL FOR TIDAL RECONNECTION Target 1. By 2030, 3,500 acres in the Delta and 3,000 acres in Suisun Marsh with subsidence reversal activities on islands, with at least 50 percent of the area or with at least 1,235 acres at shallow subtidal elevations. 2. An average elevation accretion of subsidence reversal is at least 4 centimeters per year up to 2050.
    [Show full text]