DOCSLIB.ORG

Upper San Joaquin River Stewardship Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Upper San Joaquin River Stewardship Program Upper San Joaquin River Stewardship Program Assessment Presentation to Central Sierra Watershed Committee Steve Haze / Jeannie Habben / Brandi Miller Oakhurst, Madera County May 26, 2010 SIERRA RESOURCE Funding for this project has been provided from the California Department of Water Resources under Proposition 50 as a part of the CALFED Bay-Delta Watershed Program CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1 2 Agenda •• Program Overview •• Assessment Highlights –– Hydrology –– Geology and Soils –– Ecology –– Climate –– Hazards –– Water Resources –– LandLand--UseUse and Water Use –– Vegetation Management and Fire Safety –– --InvasivesInvasives and Pest Management –– Air Quality •• Watershed Condition Summary •• Watershed Protection Plan Recommendations •• Q & A 3 Upper San Joaquin River Project Area Headwaters And Upper Basin Inyo NF Project Upper San Joaquin Mountain Communities Millerton Area Watershed 4 Upper San Joaquin River Watershed Communities and Project Focus 5 Mission of the Stewardship Council The Council will be the established forum that conducts the Upper San Joaquin River Watershed Assessment and creates the ability for greater public awareness, involvement, and understanding of the river’s importance to the region, Bay -Delta, and to the state of California. 6 Stakeholder Involvement Stakeholder Involvement 7 Upper San Joaquin River Stewardship Council Organization Chart Partners/Sponsors Gary Temple, CoCo--ChairChair ––FresnoFresno County Ernie Beck, CoCo--ChairChair ––MaderaMadera County Central Sierra Watershed Committee TAC California Water Institute CSU, Fresno STAFF: Council Representatives: Inyo National Forest USJR Watershed Project Steve Haze Kings River Experimental Program Manager Watershed Terry Sandridge - SRCD Fresno County Office Larry Ballew - CRCD Assessment Team of Education Rich Sloan - SC/RTV Jeannie Habben Chris Acree - RSJ Revive the San Joaquin Assistant Program Christi Hansard – NFMR Chris Acree, Chair San Joaquin Valley Air Manager I Steve Ottemoeller - FWA Pollution Control District Joanne Freemire – NF-CDC/CLA Sierra Nevada Adaptive Jean Kilpatrick – Landowner Management Project Pine Ridge Property Owners Fresno River Watershed Brandi Miller Highway 168 FireSafe Council Assessment Program Assistant Project Sierra-San Joaquin Noxious Weed Alliance Manager II 8 Upper San Joaquin River Stewardship Council Assessment Team Other Initiatives / Chris Acree, Chair Data Sources SJR Health Assessment Initiative US Geological Survey Natural Resources Conservation Assessment Area Leads Services CA Data Exchange Center Larry Steve Gary Ron Eng Andy Joanne Ballew Roland Brady Jean Ottemoeller Temple Christi Invasives and McMillan Freemire Vegetation Geology and Kilpatrick Water Land Use and Hansard Pest Hydrology Ecology Management Soils Hazards Resources Water Use Management / Fire Safety Air Pollution 9 Upper San Joaquin River Stewardship Council Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Other TAC Resource Central Sierra Watershed Committee Groups Lynn Gorman, Fresno Co. Land Use NRCS – GIS Data and Analysis TAC Area Leads Geoff Don Nielson Joanna Clines Open Open Anderson Andy Stone Andy Gordus Vegetation Jay Seslowe Sharon Wedro Invasives and Open Land Use and Geology and Water Hydrology Ecology Management Hazards Air Pollution Pest Climate Water Use Soils Resources / Fire Safety Management 10 USJR Watershed Assessment California Water Institute --CSUFCSUF John Suen – Program Manager Sarge Green – Program Facilitator TBD? Steve John Suen Luke Wang Sarge Green Air Quality Blumenshine Climate Water Policy and Geology Resources Management Ecology Issues Soils Zili He Sarah Rutherford 11 USJR Watershed Assessment Program Resources California Water USJR Institute Inyo National Forest Data Collection, Upper San Joaquin Analysis & GIS Watershed River Meadow Assessment Assessment Tehama Co. Resource Conservation District GIS Services Southern California Wolf and Associates Edison Revive the San Joaquin Watershed Portal Hydro & Forestry (Program Information River Health GIS Operations & and Data Structure & Assessment Repository) FERC Relicensing 12 USJR Watershed Assessment Structure and Attributes Projects Southern Sierra Catalog California Integrated Watershed Regional Water Assessment Management Plan Manual Standards Bulletin 118 Findings California Groundwater Report Assessment California Water Plan 2009 Update Core Components Project Phases of Activities Collect Organize Assess Recommend Plan Data 2/08 ––5/085/08 5/08 ––5/095/09 5/09 – 8/09 9/09 ––11/0911/09 Protection Plan Summary Proposals 1. Outreach 1. Study Team formed 1. Findings 1. Identify 2. Info Meetings 2. Study Designed 2. Recommendations 2. Prioritize 3. Org/Plan. Workshops 3. Data Collection 3. Publish Report 3. Publish 4. Council formed 4. Analysis and Synthesis 5. Leadership 6. Monthly Meetings 7. Programs 14 Watershed Assessment Elements • Water resources (quantity, quality, surface water, ground water, rivers, streams, snow packs, cumulative watershed effects , and climate change) • Ecology (forest, aquatic habitat, biodiversity, groundwater dependent ecosystems, and climate change) • Geology & Soils (topography, physical aspects of the watershed) • Hydrology (hydrologic cycle, water storage, precipitation, evapo - transpiration) • Land Use & Water Use (current and projected, carrying capacity, human pressures, population, projected development, and quality of life) • Vegetation Management / Fire Safety • Hazards (fire, landslides, earthquakes, flooding) • Air Pollution • Invasive Species & Pest Management 15 16 Research Areas of Significance NEON (NationalNEON (National Ecological Ecological Observatory Network)Observatory- San Joaquin Network) Experimental- SJER Range KREW (Kings River Experimental Watershed) USJR Meadows Research - USFS 17 Evapotranspiration 18 19 20 21 22 23 WIN (Watershed Inventory Needs) Projects - USFS 24 25 26 27 Potential Effects of Climate Change 28 Potential Effect to Run-off (Snow / Rainfall Transition) 30% Potential Reduction of run-off 29 30 31 32 33 34 Total Well Logs – 5,255 Unique Wells – 4,406 Wells w/ Section ID 1-36 – 3,991 35 36 Well Count by Sections in Populated Areas 37 38 Regional Forum Land Use and Water Use 39 40 41 42 43 The Potential Effects of Air Quality on Public Health and the Ecology Ozone (O3) Threshold for Impacting Forest Health 17 – 19 PPB (Parts Per Billion) USJR – Measurements up to 5 times greater 44 Watershed Condition Summary The challenges facing the Upper San Joaquin River watershed basin can be viewed at a high level in which the effects of climate change and air quality can have over time on water quality/quantity – and ecology. Major research initiatives identified, point towards influences on the watershed basin that are regional and global in nature. Yes, there are specific areas of the watershed that may be – or become impaired by intensive land -use activities over time. Yet, remediation, restoration, conservation – and the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) may improve localized watershed conditions. However, these studies are starting to demonstrate that climate change – or air quality in themselves can contribute rather significantly in adversely impacting the overall health of a complex hydrological and ecological system. Add to these global implications the increased demand for resources within the watershed – in particular ground water. 45 Protection Plan Recommendations Section 1 – Assessment Overview As a part of any future undertakings, coordinate and collaborate with the Madera County Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) and South Sierra IRWM Planning Groups; as well as the San Joaquin Experimental Range (SJER) and Kings River Experimental Watershed (KREW) under the U.S. Forest Service. Continue as appropriate to provide and expand the coordination and integration of watershed investigations, planning, education, remediation and other activities related within the following areas: • Surface and Ground water quality/quantity and sustainability • Effects of Climate Change • Erosion, Sediment and Soils • Fuels Management • Noxious Weeds • Biodiversity and Habitat • Air Quality impacts on water quality and ecological health 46 Recommendations (Continued) Section 2 – Hydrology Continue to develop collaborative arrangements with groups focused on ground water such as County Water Advisory Committees, Resource Conservation Districts, citizen groups and others within the watershed to share information and resources to determine what the future impacts may be for increased water demand within the watershed basin – and potential supply challenges. Section 3 – Geology and Soils As feasible, continue data collection to determine relevant investigations that can assist in determining what role surface soils, their composition, structure and condition may contribute towards moisture collection, retention, percolation and ground water recharge within the watershed 47 Recommendations (Continued) Section 4 – Ecology Continue to identify research being performed that promotes adaptive management practices compatible with the ecological assets and natural resources within the watershed Section 5 – Climate Continue efforts through collaborative arrangements with the Kings River Experimental Watershed (KREW) and the San Joaquin Experimental Range (SJER) to understand the implications of climate change affecting the hydrology and ecology of the watershed. Section 6 – Hazards Determine the extent of potential hazards such as mining operations in the upper watershed. 48
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fresno River Watershed Assessment Project Draft Final Report
    Fresno River Watershed Assessment Project Draft Final Report Prepared for California State Department of Water Resources County of Madera By California State University, Fresno March 2010 This project was funded in part by a grant from the California Department of Water Resources and the County of Madera, California Acknowledgements Special thanks to the Central Sierra Watershed Committee for their support and feedback, which would not be possible without the leadership of Jeannie Habben. Larry Bellew, Tom Wheeler, and Jack Fry provided valuable support and local wisdom. Project director Elissa Brown navigated a diverse interests through logistics including a project freeze. The Madera County Departments of Environmental Health provided critical information and support for GIS-based data and tools. At CSU-Fresno, we thank Dr. Alice Wright and Darrin Alexander who processed all of the bacterial samples. Student Research Assistants Brett Moore, Jorge Baca, Zili He, Steven Gong, Sarah Rutherford, Thomas Gromis, Eddie Alves made the project possible. We also thank the College of Science & Mathematics and Dean Rogerson for support. Finally, thanks to the various landowners in the watershed for your generous property access and concern about your watershed. Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION Project Objectives and Tasks 2. MONITORING PLAN Background Selection of Sample Locations and Frequency General Field Measurements and Sample Collection 3. HYDROLOGY, WATER QUALITY AND FIRST FLUSH STUDY 4. SEDIMENTATION STUDY TO QUANTIFY SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT TRANSPORT 5. BIOASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENTATION & WATER QUALITY 6. SEPTIC INFLUENCES ON FECAL INDICATOR BACTERIA 7. IMPLICATIONS, DATA GAPS, AND FURTHER STUDIES REFERENCES Appendicies Literature review: Septic influences 1. INTRODUCTION The Fresno River is located in Madera County, California and is the most southerly of major east-side tributaries of the San Joaquin River (Figure 1.1).
    [Show full text]
  • River West-Madera Master Plan
    River West-Madera Master Plan APPENDICES Appendix A – River West-Madera Resource Assessment 39 | Page River West-Madera Master Plan River West- Madera Master Plan June 5, 2012 Resource Assessment The River West-Madera area consists of 795 acres of publicly owned land located in Madera County along the northern side of the San Joaquin River between Highway 41 and Scout Island. The Resource Assessment presents the area’s existing characteristics, as well as constraints and opportunities to future planning efforts. River West-Madera Master Plan River West-Madera Master Plan RESOURCE ASSESSMENT FIGURES ............................................................................................................................... 3 TABLES ................................................................................................................................. 4 EXISTING CHARACTERISITICS ............................................................................................. 5 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Land Use and History .............................................................................................................................. 7 Cultural History ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Sycamore Island ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Findings of Violation and Order of Compliance: Patrick V
    Certified Mail: 7001 0320 0002 4541 0922 Return Receipt Requested Patrick Richiutti 1970 E. Birkhead Avenue Fresno, CA 93720 Re: Findings of Violation and Order for Compliance under sections 308 and 309(a) of the Clean Water Act, EPA Docket No. CWA-404-309(a)-09-005 Dear Mr. Richiutti, The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 (“EPA”) has information that, between at least January 2006 and January 2009, you or persons at your direction discharged dredged and/or fill material into the reach of the Fresno River that forms the southern boundary of your property, shown on the Assessor’s Parcel Map as Assessor’s Parcel Nos. 033-160-001 and 033-160-002, without authorization under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This reach of the Fresno River is an integral part the Federal Flood Control Project designated as the Hidden Lake and Fresno River Project. EPA issues the enclosed Findings of Violation and Order for Compliance (“Order”) pursuant to sections 308 and 309(a) of the Clean Water Act. The Findings describe the nature of the violations and the Order requires you to implement a removal and restoration plan (“R/R Plan”) to remove and legally dispose of the unauthorized material and restore the affected area of the Fresno River to its previous channel dimensions and configuration. The R/R Plan must be submitted to EPA for approval and must, at the minimum, include the following components: • Removal of all unauthorized dredged and fill material from the Fresno River; • Disposal of all removed material at appropriate upland locations,
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Adjudication Plan of Administration for the Fresno River
    MADERA IRRIGATION DISTRICT PRE-ADJUDICATION PLAN OF ADMINISTRATION FOR THE FRESNO RIVER As a condition of its State Water Resources Control Board (the “SWRCB”) License No. 13836, Madera Irrigation District (“MID” or the “District”) is obligated to make releases from Hidden Dam to satisfy downstream rights to the waters of the Fresno River, pursuant to the Fresno River Operations Protocols (the “FROP”) and the Fresno River Allocation Model (the “FRAM”). On October 18, 2018, MID filed a Petition for Adjudication of the Fresno River (the “Petition”) with the SWRCB. The Petition was granted at the SWRCB’s October 20, 2020, meeting (the “Effective Date”). MID expects it will take several years for the issues in the Petition to be fully and finally resolved. As a result, to comply with its obligations under the License, MID anticipates the need to manage releases pursuant to the FROP and the FRAM during this time. Over the past several years, MID has received communications from landowners along the Fresno River concerning MID’s implementation of the FROP and the FRAM pending the SWRCB’s resolution of the Petition. Those communications, among other things, request inclusion of various properties, points of diversion, and diversion capacities within the FRAM for future water years pending the resolution of the Petition. To resolve such requests pending the Petition, the District has prepared this Pre-Adjudication Plan of Administration for the Fresno River (the “PAPA”), which provides the guidelines pursuant to which the District intends to resolve such requests pending adjudication. The guidelines identified in the PAPA are based on two primary considerations.
    [Show full text]
  • Gazetteer of Surface Waters of California
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTI8 SMITH, DIEECTOE WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 296 GAZETTEER OF SURFACE WATERS OF CALIFORNIA PART II. SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OP JOHN C. HOYT BY B. D. WOOD In cooperation with the State Water Commission and the Conservation Commission of the State of California WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1912 NOTE. A complete list of the gaging stations maintained in the San Joaquin River basin from 1888 to July 1, 1912, is presented on pages 100-102. 2 GAZETTEER OF SURFACE WATERS IN SAN JOAQUIN RIYER BASIN, CALIFORNIA. By B. D. WOOD. INTRODUCTION. This gazetteer is the second of a series of reports on the* surf ace waters of California prepared by the United States Geological Survey under cooperative agreement with the State of California as repre­ sented by the State Conservation Commission, George C. Pardee, chairman; Francis Cuttle; and J. P. Baumgartner, and by the State Water Commission, Hiram W. Johnson, governor; Charles D. Marx, chairman; S. C. Graham; Harold T. Powers; and W. F. McClure. Louis R. Glavis is secretary of both commissions. The reports are to be published as Water-Supply Papers 295 to 300 and will bear the fol­ lowing titles: 295. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part I, Sacramento River basin. 296. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part II, San Joaquin River basin. 297. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part III, Great Basin and Pacific coast streams. 298. Water resources of California, Part I, Stream measurements in the Sacramento River basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation Draft
    Chapter 11 Geology and Soils This chapter describes the affected environment for geology and soils, as well as potential environmental consequences and associated mitigation measures, as they pertain to implementing the alternatives. This chapter presents information on the primary study area (area of project features, the Temperance Flat Reservoir Area, and Millerton Lake below RM 274). It also discusses the extended study area (San Joaquin River from Friant Dam to the Merced River, the San Joaquin River from the Merced River to the Delta, the Delta, and the CVP and SWP water service areas). Affected Environment This section describes the affected environment related to geology, geologic hazards, erosion and sedimentation, geomorphology, mineral resources, soils, and salts. Where appropriate, geology and soils characteristics are described in a regional context, including geologic provinces, physiographic regions, or other large-scale areas, with some area-specific geologic maps and descriptions of specific soil associations. Geology This section describes the geology of the primary and extended study areas. Primary Study Area A description of the surficial geologic units encountered in the primary study area is presented in Table 11-1. Geologic maps of the primary study area and the area of project features are presented in Figure 11-1 and Figure 11-2, respectively. Draft – August 2014 – 11-1 Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation Environmental Impact Statement Table 11-1. Description of Surficial Geologic Units of the Primary Study Area Geologic Map of Millerton Lake Quadrangle, West-Central Sierra Nevada, California1 Formation Surficial Deposits General Features Abbreviation Plutonic rocks characterized by undeformed blocky hornblende prisms as long as 1 cm and by biotite books as Tonalite of Blue Canyon much as 5 mm across.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Control Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Amendments to the 1994 Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins The Third Edition of the Basin Plan was adopted by the Central Valley Water Board on 9 December 1994, approved by the State Water Board on 16 February 1995 and approved by the Office of Administrative Law on 9 May 1995. The Fourth Edition of the Basin Plan was the 1998 reprint of the Third Edition incorporating amendments adopted and approved between 1994 and 1998. The Basin Plan is in a loose-leaf format to facilitate the addition of amendments. The Basin Plan can be kept up-to-date by inserting the pages that have been revised to include subsequent amendments. The date subsequent amendments are adopted by the Central Valley Water Board will appear at the bottom of the page. Otherwise, all pages will be dated 1 September 1998. Basin plan amendments adopted by the Regional Central Valley Water Board must be approved by the State Water Board and the Office of Administrative Law. If the amendment involves adopting or revising a standard which relates to surface waters it must also be approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) [40 CFR Section 131(c)].
    [Show full text]
  • Basin Plan Amenment Implementing Control of Salt and Boron
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. AITACHMENT 2 AITACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. RS-2004-0108 AMENDING THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN FOR THE SACRAMENTO RIVER AND SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASINS FOR THE CONTROL OF SALT AND BORON DISCHARGES ~NTO THE LOWER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER Following are excerpts from Basin Plan Chapters I and IV shown similar to how they will appear after the proposed amendment is adopted. Deletions are indicated as strike­ through text (deleted te~) and additions are shown as underlined text (added text). Italicized text (Notation Text) is included to locate where the modifications will be made in the Basin Plan. All other text changes are shown accurately, however, formatting and pagination will change. 1 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. R5-2004-0108 AMENDING THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN FOR THE SACRAMENTO RIVER AND SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASINS FOR THE CONTROL OF SALT AND BORON DISCHARGES INTO THE LOWER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER Under the Chapter I heading: “Basin significant quantities of water to wells or springs, it can Description” on page IV-28, make the be defined as an aquifer (USGS, Water Supply Paper following changes: 1988, 1972). A ground water basin is defined as a hydrogeologic unit containing one large aquifer or several connected and interrelated aquifers (Todd, Groundwater Hydrology, 1980).
    [Show full text]
  • Water Budgets for Major Streams in the Central Valley, California, 1961-77
    WATER BUDGETS FOR MAJOR STREAMS IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, 1961-77 By James R. Mullen and Paul Nady U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 85-401 Regional Aquifer-System Analysis oo i i l o o Sacramento, California 1985 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL HODEL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Services Section Federal Building, Room W-2234 Western Distribution Branch 2800 Cottage Way U.S. Geological Survey Sacramento, California 95825 Box 25424, Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 (Telephone: [303] 236-7476) CONTENTS Page Abstract--------- --------------------------------------------------- i Introduction----- ------------------------------------------ ______ i Method --- --- --- --- --- ------- -- - 4 Base period------------------------------------------------------ 5 Acknowledgments-------------------------------------------------- 5 Selected references--------------------------------------------------- 6 Schematics, explanations, and water-budget tables--------------------- 7 Kern River------------------------------------------------------------ 9 Tule River -- - - --- ------- 13 Kaweah River---------------------------------------------------------- 17 Main stem-------------------------------------------------------- 17 St. Johns River --- ------ 21 Kings River----------------------------------------------------------- 25 San Joaquin River-------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • Subsidence Monitoring and Response in Central California Irrigation District a Local Perspective
    Land Subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley Subsidence Monitoring and Response in Central California Irrigation District A Local Perspective Presented by Chris White, General Manager Central California Irrigation District Water Education Foundation August 16, 2017 1 Subsidence Monitoring Document the Signs 2 1960s 3 Subsidence • New vs. Historical 4 6 US Bureau of Reclamation monitoring shows that the subsidence rate in vicinity of Sack Dam from December 2012 to December 2013 was about Sack Dam 0.6 feet. Process to Define Problem, Monitor, Formulate Hypothesis and Develop Solutions • Spring 2012 – CCID contacted by U.S. Bureau of Reclamation of a “potential” subsidence issue which they initially thought was a bust in the survey. • CCID recognized that based on historic knowledge of the area – probably subsidence • Reclamation become concerned that San Joaquin Restoration Program capital improvements could be impacted by subsidence • Additional Land Elevation Surveys Conducted Process to Define Problem, Monitor, Formulate and Develop Solutions • Met with growers in areas that seemed to be sinking to start dialogue as to what might be happening • Growers formed committee, invited Madera County and Merced County • Growers assess themselves to define problem and develop solutions – Both counties and Exchange Contractors contribute funds, monitoring and time. • Measure ground surface changes; regionally, along canals, channels and levees Proactive approach to avoid future cost 10 Land Subsidence • How bad can it get? Approximate location of maximum subsidence in the United States identified by research efforts of Dr. Joseph F. Poland (pictured). Signs on pole show approximate altitude of land surface in 1925, 1955, and 1977. (28 feet in 50 years, .56 feet/year) The site is in the San Joaquin Valley southwest of Mendota, California, 15 miles southwest of Sack Dam.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5. Water-Related Infrastructure and Human Channel Modification
    San Joaquin River Restoration Study CHAPTER 5 Background Report INFRASTRUCTURE AND MODIFICATION CHAPTER 5. WATER-RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE AND HUMAN CHANNEL MODIFICATION 5.1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Since the 19th century, signifi cant levels of agricultural and economic growth have spurred the development of water related infrastructure and modifi cations along the San Joaquin River. In response to the increased irrigation demands from urban and agricultural needs, many large storage dams, small diversion dams, seasonal diversions and pumps, canals, bypasses, and other control structures have been constructed. Additionally, many of the historic sloughs and side channels were used for irrigation water conveyance in the later 1800s and early 1900s, and these channels continue to be used for agricultural conveyance, tailwater conveyance, and/or fl ood control bypasses. Some have been fi lled in and reclaimed for agricultural use. Today, the San Joaquin River is managed primarily with irrigation and fl ood control objectives, leaving the overall ecological health of the San Joaquin River ecosystem in a degraded condition. During this development, the San Joaquin River has been transformed into a system of leveed channels with a highly managed fl ow regime. Floodways have been narrowed, sloughs and side channels have been modifi ed or eliminated, sediment transport processes have been altered, certain reaches have been dewatered, and fi sh passage barriers have been constructed. These factors have imposed substantial constraints on future restoration efforts along the San Joaquin River corridor. The development of the modern San Joaquin River began in the mid 1800’s as the search for gold brought small-scale hydraulic and placer mining to the watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation Draft Feasibility Report
    Chapter 13 Hydrology – Groundwater This chapter describes the affected environment for groundwater, as well as potential environmental consequences and associated mitigation measures, as they pertain to implementing the alternatives. It focuses primarily on identified groundwater basins that occur in the extended study area (San Joaquin River from Friant Dam to the Merced River, the San Joaquin River from the Merced River to the Delta, the Delta, and the CVP and SWP water service areas). Affected Environment This section describes the affected environment related to groundwater resources in the San Joaquin River and Tulare Lake hydrologic regions (see Figure 13-1). Both of these regions have historically relied greatly on groundwater extracted from the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. The San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region consists of surface water basins draining into the San Joaquin River system, from the Cosumnes River Basin on the north through the southern boundary of the San Joaquin River Basin (DWR 2009). In addition to the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, the San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region also includes Yosemite Valley, Los Banos, and Creek Valley groundwater basins (DWR 2009). The Yosemite, Los Banos, and Creek Valley groundwater basins are discrete, peripheral basins, unconnected to the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, and will not be further discussed in this chapter. The Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region is a closed drainage basin at the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley, south of the San Joaquin River Basin, encompassing surface water basins draining to the Kern Lake bed, Tulare Lake bed, and Buena Vista Lake bed (DWR 2009).
    [Show full text]