DOCSLIB.ORG

Idaho's 2018/2020 Integrated Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Idaho's 2018/2020 Integrated Report Idaho’s 2018/2020 Integrated Report Appendix A: Clean Water Act Section 305 (b) List and Section 303(d) List State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality October 2020 www.deq.idaho.gov Prepared by Robert Esquivel Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Surface Water and Wastewater Division 1410 North Hilton Boise, Idaho 83706 Printed on recycled paper, DEQ October 2020, PID 303D, CA code 303D. Costs associated with this publication are available from the State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality in accordance with Section 60-202, Idaho Code. Idaho’s 2018/2020 Integrated Report: Appendix A Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... iv Category 1: Waters are wholly within a designated wilderness or 2008 Idaho Road Rule “Wild Land Recreation” area and are presumed to be fully supporting all beneficial uses. ... 1 Category 2: Waters are fully supporting those beneficial uses that have been assessed. The use attainment of the remaining beneficial uses has not been determined due to insufficient (or no) data and information. ................................................................................................. 21 Category 3: Waters have insufficient (or no) data and information to determine if beneficial uses are being attained or impaired. ...................................................................................... 73 Category 4a: Waters have a TMDL completed and approved by EPA. ..................................... 132 Category 4b: Waters have had pollution control requirements other than a TMDL placed on them, and these waters are reasonably expected to attain the water quality standard within a reasonable period of time. ................................................................................................. 262 Category 4c: Waters failing to meet applicable water quality standards due to other types of pollution (e.g., flow alteration), not a pollutant. .................................................................. 264 Category 5: Waters do not meet applicable water quality standards for one or more beneficial uses due to one or more pollutants; therefore, an EPA-approved TMDL is needed. Category 5 water bodies make up the § 303(d) list. ............................................................ 302 iii Idaho’s 2018/2020 Integrated Report: Appendix A Executive Summary Appendix A provides the Clean Water Act § 305(b) list and § 303(d) list for the 2018/2020 Integrated Report. The § 305(b) list documents the current condition of all state surface waters, including publicly owned lakes, and the § 303(d) list identifies those waters that are impaired and need a total maximum daily load (TMDL). Impaired waters on the § 303(d) list are a subset of waters on the § 305(b) list. iv Category 1: Waters are wholly within a designated wilderness or 2008 Idaho Roadless Rule “Wild Land Recreation” area and are presumed to be fully supporting all beneficial uses. 2018/2020 Integrated Report - Category 1 Clearwater 17060301 Upper Selway ID17060301CL001_02 Selway River - Bear Creek to Moose Creek 19.88 Miles ID17060301CL001_05 Selway River - Bear Creek to Moose Creek 10.55 Miles ID17060301CL002_02 Magpie Creek - source to mouth 4.53 Miles ID17060301CL003_02 Bitch Creek - source to mouth 10.31 Miles ID17060301CL004_02 Selway River - White Cap Creek to Bear Creek 22.98 Miles ID17060301CL004_05 Selway River - White Cap Creek to Bear Creek 16.19 Miles ID17060301CL005_02 Ditch Creek - source to mouth 19.7 Miles ID17060301CL005_03 Ditch Creek - source to mouth 2.01 Miles ID17060301CL006_02 Elk Creek - source to mouth 10.14 Miles ID17060301CL007_02 Goat Creek - source to mouth 36.22 Miles ID17060301CL007_03 Goat Creek - source to mouth 8.57 Miles ID17060301CL012_02 Eagle Creek - source to mouth 26.98 Miles ID17060301CL013_02 Crooked Creek - source to mouth 16.34 Miles ID17060301CL013_03 Crooked Creek - source to mouth 3.49 Miles ID17060301CL014_05 Selway River - Deep Creek to White Cap Creek 9.24 Miles ID17060301CL015_02 Little Clearwater River- Flat Creek to mouth 8.59 Miles ID17060301CL015_04 Little Clearwater River- Flat Creek to mouth 6.02 Miles ID17060301CL016_02 Short Creek - source to mouth 13.09 Miles ID17060301CL017_02 Little Clearwater River - source to Flat Creek 13.98 Miles ID17060301CL017_03 Little Clearwater River - source to Flat Creek 1.32 Miles ID17060301CL017_04 Little Clearwater River - source to Flat Creek 3.12 Miles ID17060301CL018_02 Burnt Knob Creek - source to mouth 17.06 Miles ID17060301CL018_02L Burnt Knob Lakes 6.08 Acres ID17060301CL018_03 Burnt Knob Creek - source to mouth 1.56 Miles ID17060301CL019_03 Salamander Creek - source to mouth 4.22 Miles ID17060301CL022_01L Gold Pan Lake 11.01 Acres 1 2018/2020 Integrated Report - Category 1 Clearwater ID17060301CL022_02L Thirteen Lakes 12.84 Acres ID17060301CL022_03 Selway River - confluence of Hidden and Surprise Creeks 7.38 Miles ID17060301CL023_02 Three Lakes Creek - source to mouth 18.67 Miles ID17060301CL023_02L Elk Track Lakes - Three Lakes Creek 11.65 Acres ID17060301CL023_03 Three Lakes Creek - source to mouth 1.66 Miles ID17060301CL024_02 Swet Creek - source to mouth 12.72 Miles ID17060301CL024_02L Swet Lake 11.23 Acres ID17060301CL025_02 Stripe Creek - source to mouth 4.4 Miles ID17060301CL026_02 Hidden Creek - source to mouth 6.73 Miles ID17060301CL027_02 Surprise Creek - source to mouth 13.65 Miles ID17060301CL028_02 Wilkerson Creek - Storm Creek to mouth 15.06 Miles ID17060301CL028_03 Wilkerson Creek - Storm Creek to mouth 4.56 Miles ID17060301CL029_02 Wilkerson Creek - source to Storm Creek 8.84 Miles ID17060301CL030_02 Storm Creek - source to mouth 18.19 Miles ID17060301CL030_03 Storm Creek - source to mouth 3.27 Miles ID17060301CL033_02 Lazy Creek - source to mouth 11.59 Miles ID17060301CL036_02 Indian Creek - source to mouth 36.16 Miles ID17060301CL037_02 Schofield Creek - source to mouth 12.99 Miles ID17060301CL039_03 White Cap Creek - Canyon Creek to mouth 3.09 Miles ID17060301CL040_02 Canyon Creek - source to mouth 37.52 Miles ID17060301CL040_02L Unamed Lake - Canyon Creek 9.36 Acres ID17060301CL040_03 Canyon Creek - source to mouth 1.37 Miles ID17060301CL041_02 Cooper Creek - source to mouth 10.78 Miles ID17060301CL041_03 Cooper Creek - source to mouth 0.72 Miles ID17060301CL042_01L Triple Lakes 15.66 Acres ID17060301CL042_02 White Cap Creek - source to Canyon Creek 48.5 Miles ID17060301CL042_02L White Cap Lakes 36.16 Acres ID17060301CL042_03 White Cap Creek - source to Canyon Creek 12.71 Miles ID17060301CL042_0L Unnamed Lakes in 17060301CL4202 15.67 Acres ID17060301CL043_02 Paloma Creek - source to mouth 6.74 Miles ID17060301CL044_02 Bad Luck Creek - source to mouth 21.83 Miles ID17060301CL045_02 Gardner Creek - source to mouth 9.83 Miles 2 2018/2020 Integrated Report - Category 1 Clearwater ID17060301CL046_02 North Star Creek - source to mouth 7.25 Miles ID17060301CL047_02 Bear Creek - Cub Creek to mouth 13.01 Miles ID17060301CL048_02 Cub Creek - Brushy Fork Creek to mouth 5.81 Miles ID17060301CL048_03 Cub Creek - Brushy Fork Creek to mouth 4.29 Miles ID17060301CL049_02 Brushy Fork Creek - source to mouth 20.51 Miles ID17060301CL049_02L Brushy Fork Lake 19.5 Acres ID17060301CL049_03 Brushy Fork Creek - source to mouth 2.81 Miles ID17060301CL050_02 Cub Creek - source to Brushy Fork Creek 23.94 Miles ID17060301CL050_02L Cub Lake 40.42 Acres ID17060301CL051_02 Paradise Creek - source to mouth 30.88 Miles ID17060301CL051_02L Spruce Lake 10.41 Acres ID17060301CL052_02 Bear Creek - Wahoo Creek to Cub Creek 21.72 Miles ID17060301CL052_03 Bear Creek - Wahoo Creek to Cub Creek 8.65 Miles ID17060301CL053_02L Diamond Lake 10.26 Acres ID17060301CL054_02 Granite Creek - source to mouth 6.92 Miles ID17060301CL055_02 Wahoo Creek - source to mouth 14.2 Miles ID17060301CL055_02L Park Lakes 22.86 Acres ID17060301CL055_03 Wahoo Creek - source to mouth 5.51 Miles ID17060301CL056_02 Pettibone Creek - source to mouth 30.83 Miles ID17060301CL056_02L Sid and Papoose Lakes 7.59 Acres ID17060301CL056_03 Pettibone Creek - source to mouth 9.82 Miles ID17060301CL057_02 Cow Creek - source to mouth 3.16 Miles ID17060301CL058_02 Dog Creek - source to mouth 9.26 Miles 17060302 Lower Selway ID17060302CL021_02L Buck Lake 4.14 Acres ID17060302CL023_02 Otter Creek - source to mouth 18.19 Miles ID17060302CL024_02 Mink Creek - source to mouth 14.71 Miles ID17060302CL024_03 Mink Creek - source to mouth 4.52 Miles ID17060302CL025_02 Marten Creek - source to mouth 33.6 Miles ID17060302CL025_03 Marten Creek - source to mouth 5.22 Miles ID17060302CL026_02 Trout Creek - source to mouth 12.28 Miles ID17060302CL027_02 Moose Creek - East Fork Moose Creek to mouth 5.52 Miles 3 2018/2020 Integrated Report - Category 1 Clearwater ID17060302CL027_05 Moose Creek - East Fork Moose Creek to mouth 3.73 Miles ID17060302CL028_02 East Fork Moose Creek - Cedar Creek to Moose Creek 27.93 Miles ID17060302CL028_04 East Fork Moose Creek - Cedar Creek to Moose Creek 14.06 Miles ID17060302CL029_02 Freeman Creek - source to mouth 3.34 Miles ID17060302CL030_02 Monument Creek - source to mouth 7.17 Miles ID17060302CL031_02 Elbow Creek - source to mouth 10.86 Miles ID17060302CL032_02 Battle Creek - source to mouth 13.57 Miles ID17060302CL032_02L Battle Lake 35.45 Acres ID17060302CL033_01L Dead Elk Creek Lake 10.69 Acres ID17060302CL033_02 East Fork Moose Creek - source to Cedar Creek 45.87 Miles ID17060302CL033_02L Goat Lakes 41.15 Acres ID17060302CL033_03
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Outreach Notice
    Outreach Notice Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests Forestry Technician (Wilderness/Trails) GS-0462-6/7 The Central Zone of the Nez Perce – Clearwater National Forests anticipates filling a permanent seasonal (18/8), Forestry Technician (Wilderness/Trails), GS-0462-06/07 position. The position will be stationed at the Moose Creek District office, the Fenn Ranger Station, but will work across the Moose Creek and Lochsa/Powell Ranger Districts, the two ranger districts that comprise the Central Zone. Interested applicants must submit the attached outreach response form to [email protected] by March 6, 2015. The vacancy announcement for this position has not yet been opened. Those who respond to this outreach will be contacted with the vacancy announcement number when it becomes available. When the vacancy opens, applicants will apply online at www.usajobs.com. Please direct any questions concerning this position to Katie Knotek at (406) 329-3708. ABOUT THE POSITION Series/Grade: GS-0462-06/07 Title: Forestry Technician (Wilderness/Trails) Location: Moose Creek Ranger District; Lowell, ID (physical location); Kooskia, ID (USAJOBS location). Tour of Duty: Permanent Seasonal (18/8), guaranteed 18 pay periods (36 weeks) annually The Position Duties Include: This position primarily performs a variety of work in support of the Central Zone’s trails and wilderness programs. Successful applicants will have a strong background in trail maintenance and construction, care and use of pack and saddle stock, crew leadership, and communication skills. Other duties include: Serves as technical specialist for the management and maintenance of both motorized and non- motorized trails, inside and outside wilderness, across the Central Zone.
    [Show full text]
  • R-17-76 Meeting 17-15 June 28, 2017 AGENDA ITEM 15 AGENDA ITEM
    R-17-76 Meeting 17-15 June 28, 2017 AGENDA ITEM 15 AGENDA ITEM Amendment to the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Master Plan to include One Proposed New Trail Loop and New Trail Names for the Preserve GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Approve an amendment to the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Master Plan to add a one-mile trail loop; 2. Approve the following trail names: “Harrington Creek Trail” for the main ranch road in lower La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve; “Folger Ranch Loop Trail” for a new loop trail off the main ranch road; “Coho Vista Trail” for the existing trail to the vista point in upper La Honda Creek; and “Cielo Trail” for an existing trail leading to the Redwood Cabin area. SUMMARY Phase I implementation of the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve (OSP) Master Plan includes opening the Sears Ranch Road Parking Area, establishing the main Driscoll Ranch road in lower La Honda Creek as a hiking and equestrian trail, and providing permit-only equestrian parking at the former Event Center. The General Manager recommends adding an additional one-mile segment of an existing ranch road to the Phase I Trails Plan, to provide a seasonal loop opportunity, as an amendment to the Master Plan. In preparation for the opening of the Preserve, the General Manager also recommends new trail names for lower and upper La Honda Creek. The proposed trail names for lower La Honda Creek are: “Harrington Creek Trail” for the main ranch road and “Folger Ranch Trail” for the new loop.
    [Show full text]
  • Prescribed Burning for Elk in N Orthem Idaho
    Proceedings: 8th Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference 1968 Prescribed Burning For Elk in N orthem Idaho THOMAS A. LEEGE, RESEARCH BIOLOGIST Idaho Fish and Game Dept. Kamiah, Idaho kE majestic wapiti, otherwise known as the Rocky Mountain Elk (Cervus canadensis), has been identified with northern Idaho for the last 4 decades. Every year thousands of hunters from all parts of the United States swarm into the wild country of the St. Joe Clearwater River drainages. Places like Cool­ water Ridge, Magruder and Moose Creek are favorite hunting spots well known for their abundance of elk. However, it is now evident that elk numbers are slowly decreasing in many parts of the region. The reason for the decline is apparent when the history of the elk herds and the vegetation upon which they depend are closely exam­ ined. This paper will review some of these historical records and then report on prescribed burning studies now underway by Idaho Fish and Game personnel. The range rehabilitation program being developed by the Forest Service from these studies will hopefully halt the elk decline and maintain this valuable wildlife resource in northern Idaho. DESCRIPTION OF THE REGION The general area I will be referring to includes the territory to the north of the Salmon River and south of Coeur d'Alene Lake (Fig. 1). 235 THOMAS A. LEEGE It is sometimes called north-central Idaho and includes the St. Joe and Clearwater Rivers as the major drainages. This area is lightly populated, especially the eaStern two-thirds which is almost entirely publicly owned and managed by the United States Forest Service; specifically, the St.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Idaho Wolf Monitoring Progress Report
    2015 IDAHO WOLF MONITORING PROGRESS REPORT Photo by IDFG Prepared By: Jason Husseman, Idaho Department of Fish and Game Jennifer Struthers, Idaho Department of Fish and Game Edited By: Jim Hayden, Idaho Department of Fish and Game March 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the end of 2015, Idaho’s wolf population remained well-distributed and well above population minimums required under Idaho’s 2002 Wolf Conservation and Management Plan. Wolves range in Idaho from the Canadian border south to the Snake River Plain, and from the Washington and Oregon borders east to the Montana and Wyoming borders. Dispersing wolves are reported in previously unoccupied areas. The year-end population for documented packs, other documented groups not qualifying as packs and lone wolves was estimated at 786 wolves. Biologists documented 108 packs within the state at the end of 2015. In addition, there were 20 documented border packs counted by Montana, Wyoming, and Washington that had established territories overlapping the Idaho state boundary. Additional packs are suspected but not included due to lack of documentation. Mean pack size was 6.4 wolves, nearly identical to the 2014 average of 6.5. Reproduction (production of at least 1 pup) was documented in 69 packs, representing the minimum number of reproductive packs extant in the state. Determination of breeding pair status was made for 53 packs at year’s end. Of these, 33 packs (62%) met breeding pair criteria, and 20 packs did not. No determination of breeding pair status was made for the remaining 55 packs. Mortalities of 358 wolves were documented in Idaho in 2015, and remained essentially unchanged from 2014 (n = 360).
    [Show full text]
  • Tri-State Fuel Breaks Project Draft EIS, Volume 1
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Tri-state Fuel Breaks Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Volume 1) DOI-BLM-ID-B000-2015-0001-EIS October 2019 Boise District Office 3948 Development Ave. Boise, Idaho 83705 Vale District Office 100 Oregon St. Vale, Oregon 97918 Estimated Lead Agency Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing This DEIS $1,408,000 The Bureau of Land Management’s multiple-use mission is to sustain the health and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Bureau accomplishes this by managing such activities as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, mineral development, and energy production, and by conserving natural, historical, cultural, and other resources on public lands. Executive Summary Introduction This draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) evaluates creating and maintaining a system of roadside fuel breaks to improve suppression coordination and response across the Tri-state area where southeastern Oregon, southwestern Idaho, and northern Nevada converge. This area contains the largest expanse of intact sagebrush steppe in North America, an ecosystem that supports diverse wildlife and is critically imperiled by the threat of wildland fire. The project area encompasses 3.6 million acres across the southeastern corner of Oregon and southwestern corner of Idaho. The proposed fuel breaks would connect to existing fuel breaks within northern Nevada to improve firefighting coordination across jurisdictional and state boundaries and better protect this threatened landscape. Purpose and Need The purpose of the action alternatives is to provide a network of safe areas and strategic opportunities to enable wildland fire suppression resources in the Tri-state area to more rapidly and effectively protect natural and cultural resources and socioeconomic values from wildfires.
    [Show full text]
  • Soldier Mountain Snow Report
    Soldier Mountain Snow Report Discoidal or tonetic, Randal never profiles any infrequency! How world is Gene when quintessential and contrasuggestible Angel wigwagging some safe-breakers? Guiltless Irving never zone so scrutinizingly or peeps any pricks senselessly. Plan for families or end of mountain snow at kmvt at the Let us do not constitute endorsement by soldier mountain is a report from creating locally before she knows it. Get in and charming town of the reports and. Ski Report KIVI-TV. Tamarack Resort gets ready for leave much as 50 inches of new. Soldier mountain resort in an issue! See more ideas about snow tubing pocono mountains snow. You have soldier mountain offers excellent food and alike with extra bonuses on your lodging options below and beyond the reports and. Soldier mountain ski area were hit, idaho ski trails off, mostly cloudy with good amount of sparklers are dangerous work to enjoy skiing in central part in. The grin from detention OR who bought Soldier Mountain Ski wax in. Soldier Mountain ski village in Idaho Snowcomparison. Soldier Hollow Today's Forecast HiLo 34 21 Today's as Snow 0 Current in Depth 0. Soldier Mountain Reopen 0211 46 60 base ThuFri 9a-4p. Grazing Sheep in National Forests Hearings Before. Idaho SnowForecast. For visitors alike who lived anywhere, we will report of snow report for bringing in place full of. After school on the camas prairie near boise as the school can rent ski area, sunshine should idaho are you. Couch summit from your needs specific additional external links you should pursue as all units in the power goes down deep and extreme avalanche mitigation work.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 26. Upper Snake Recovery Unit—Southwest Idaho River Basins Critical Habitat Unit
    Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification: Rationale for Why Habitat is Essential, and Documentation of Occupancy Chapter 26. Upper Snake Recovery Unit—Southwest Idaho River Basins Critical Habitat Unit 26.1. Weiser River Critical Habitat Subunit ......................................................................... 613 26.2. Squaw Creek Critical Habitat Subunit ......................................................................... 617 26.3. North Fork Payette River Critical Habitat Subunit ...................................................... 621 26.4. Middle Fork Payette River Critical Habitat Subunit .................................................... 625 26.5. Upper South Fork Payette River Critical Habitat Subunit ........................................... 629 26.6. Deadwood River Critical Habitat Subunit ................................................................... 641 26.7. Arrowrock Critical Habitat Subunit ............................................................................. 645 26.8. Anderson Ranch Critical Habitat Subunit .................................................................... 659 611 Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification Chapter 26 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service September 2010 Chapter 26. Southwest Idaho River Basins Critical Habitat Unit The Southwest Idaho River Basins CHU is essential maintaining bull trout distribution within this unique geographic region of the Upper Snake RU. This CHU occurs in southwestern Idaho and consists of three River Basins: the Boise River,
    [Show full text]
  • San Mateo County
    Steelhead/rainbow trout resources of San Mateo County San Pedro San Pedro Creek flows northwesterly, entering the Pacific Ocean at Pacifica State Beach. It drains a watershed about eight square miles in area. The upper portions of the drainage contain springs (feeding the south and middle forks) that produce perennial flow in the creek. Documents with information regarding steelhead in the San Pedro Creek watershed may refer to the North Fork San Pedro Creek and the Sanchez Fork. For purposes of this report, these tributaries are considered as part of the mainstem. A 1912 letter regarding San Mateo County streams indicates that San Pedro Creek was stocked. A fishway also is noted on the creek (Smith 1912). Titus et al. (in prep.) note DFG records of steelhead spawning in the creek in 1941. In 1968, DFG staff estimated that the San Pedro Creek steelhead run consisted of 100 individuals (Wood 1968). A 1973 stream survey report notes, “Spawning habitat is a limiting factor for steelhead” (DFG 1973a, p. 2). The report called the steelhead resources of San Pedro Creek “viable and important” but cited passage at culverts, summer water diversion, and urbanization effects on the stream channel and watershed hydrology as placing “the long-term survival of the steelhead resource in question”(DFG 1973a, p. 5). The lower portions of San Pedro Creek were surveyed during the spring and summer of 1989. Three O. mykiss year classes were observed during the study throughout the lower creek. Researchers noticed “a marked exodus from the lower creek during the late summer” of yearling and age 2+ individuals, many of which showed “typical smolt characteristics” (Sullivan 1990).
    [Show full text]
  • 2002/2003 Draft Integrated (303(D)/305(B) Report
    Principles and Policies for the 2002/2003 DRAFT INTEGRATED (303(d)/305(b)) REPORT Upper Owyhee Watershed State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality 1410 N. Hilton Boise, ID 83706 June 2, 2003 Table of Contents Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 EPA Requirements for the 2002/2003 Integrated Report............................................................... 1 • delineation of water quality AUs based on the National Hydrography Dataset;.................... 2 • status of and progress toward achieving comprehensive assessments of all waters;.............. 2 • water quality standard attainment status for every AU;.......................................................... 2 • basis for the water quality standard attainment determinations for every AU; ...................... 2 • additional monitoring that may be needed to determine water quality standard attainment status and, if necessary, to support development of total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for each pollutant/AU combination; ............................................................................................................. 2 • schedules for additional monitoring planned for AUs;........................................................... 2 • pollutant/AU combinations require TMDLs; and................................................................... 2 • TMDL development schedules reflecting the priority ranking of each pollutant/AU combination....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SAN GREGORIO CREEK STREAM SYSTEM ) 12 ) in San Mateo County, California ) 13 ------) 14
    (ENDORSED) 1 WILLIAM R. ATTWATER, Chief Counsel ANDREW H. SAWYER, Assistant Chief Counsel 2 M. G. TAYLOR, III, Senior Staff Counsel FILED • BARBARA A. KATZ, Staff Counsel JAN 2 9 1993 3 901 P Street WARREN SLOCUM, County C!cri( Sacramento, California 95814 j:,\!l;.l"'if' ",.,;;."""" ''­ :':y , J:.;i";J 1 "~1."""....ii, ..': .. ;• .'.~ 4 Telephone: (916) 657 -209 7 • C'EPu;Y C~:~~~~ 5 Attorneys for the State Water Resources Control Board 6 7 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 8 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 9 In the Matter of the ) No. 355792 Determination of the Rights of ) 10 the various Claimants to the ) DECREE Water of ) 11 ) SAN GREGORIO CREEK STREAM SYSTEM ) 12 ) in San Mateo County, California ) 13 ------------------------------) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 • 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................. i . , , 4 INDEX OF CLAIMANTS ........................................... iii " 5 Defini tions ............................................. 2 6 State Water Resources Control Board Map ................. 4 7 General. Entitlement ..................................... 4 8 Priori ty of Rights ...................................... 5 9 Post-1914 Appropriations ................................ 6 10 Seasons of Use .......................................... 7 11 Domestic Use ............................................ 7 12 S tockwa tering Use ....................................... 7 13 Irrigation Use .......................................... 8 14 Domestic and Stockwatering Uses During
    [Show full text]
  • MAA 5 Year Approved Projects List FY 2018‐19 Through FY 2022‐23
    Attachment 5 MAA 5 Year Approved Projects List FY 2018‐19 through FY 2022‐23 MAA Portfolio No. Project Name Project Description AA01‐ Miramontes Ridge: Replace current interior bridge with bridge or culvert crossing. The Madonna Bridge Gateway to the Coast Public Access, Stream current bridge is weight limited and does not allow for emergency Replacement Restoration and Agriculture Enhancement vehicle access. Investigate and implement alternative water supply at Madonna Creek AA01‐ Miramontes Ridge: Water Infrastructure Ranch to replace agricultural water currently provided through in‐ Gateway to the Coast Public Access, Stream Development stream impoundment on steelhead fisheries stream. Develop and Restoration and Agriculture Enhancement implement restoration plans for Madonna Creek. AA01‐ Miramontes Ridge: Pursue Land Conservation Purchase uplands portion of Johnston Ranch from POST as an addition Gateway to the Coast Public Access, Stream Opportunities to the Miramontes Ridge Open Space Preserve. Restoration and Agriculture Enhancement AA01‐ Miramontes Ridge: Pursue Public Access Pursue partnerships with other public agencies to improve public Gateway to the Coast Public Access, Stream Partnerships with Other access and preserve scenic open space in Miramontes Ridge Open Restoration and Agriculture Enhancement Public Agencies Space Preserve. Work with partners to purchase or otherwise secure public access AA02‐ Regional: Bayfront Habitat Protection Pursue Land Conservation rights on remaining properties needed to close gaps on the San and Public Access Partnerships Opportunities Francisco Bay Trail in the vicinity of Ravenswood Open Space Preserve. Cooley Landing ‐ AA02‐ Regional: Bayfront Habitat Protection New interpretative facilities, infrastructure, and signage related to Interpretative Facilities & and Public Access Partnerships Cooley Landing Park. Infrastructure Secure and record trail easement.
    [Show full text]
  • San Mateo County Watershed Data in a GIS
    San Mateo County Watershed Data in a GIS Introduction The San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program (Program) performs Watershed Assessment and Monitoring (WAM) component activities in compliance with its municipal stormwater NPDES permit requirements. In the past, a consistent countywide watershed boundary data layer has not been available to meet Program needs for mapping and analyzing watershed-related data. As a result, the Program has previously utilized the best existing available data sets and/or developed new data to meet the objectives of specific individual projects. For example, creek location and watershed boundary data were developed to characterize imperviousness and channel modifications in seventeen watersheds in San Mateo County (STOPPP 2002). In another example, Program staff compiled existing countywide watershed data and developed new data needed to identify watershed areas considered exempt from Hydromodification Management Plan (HMP) requirements (STOPPP 2005). The Program previously identified two major information gaps in digital watershed boundary data: 1) limited storm drain catchment data were available for urban areas and 2) consistent countywide watershed data layers were not available (STOPPP 2005). Recent development of watershed data in urbanized portions of San Mateo County has provided an opportunity to address these information gaps. This memo describes the methods used by Program staff to create a consistent countywide watershed data layer that includes delineation of storm drain catchments in urban areas. Consistent watershed and creek data set will assist Program staff in watershed characterization and the identification and prioritization of potential future monitoring and watershed assessment activities. Background In 1999, the State of California developed a statewide watershed data layer entitled the California Interagency Watershed Map (Calwater).
    [Show full text]