DOCSLIB.ORG

Literature Cited

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Literature Cited San Lorenzo Valley Water District Watershed Management Plan, Final Version Part I: Existing Conditions Report LITERATURE CITED Agee, James. K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests. Island Press, Covelo, Calif. Aber, J., N. Christensen, I. Fernandez, J. Franklin, L. Hidinger, M. Hunter, J. MacMahon, D Mladenoff, J. Pastor, D. Perry, R. Slangen, and H. van Miegroet. 2000. Applying ecological principles to management of the U.S. National Forests. Issues in Ecology. No. 6. Ecological Society of America, Washington D.C. Alley, D. W. 1993. Upper San Lorenzo River Watershed Reservoir Projects - Reconnaissance Level Study of Fishery Resources. Prepared for Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc. ___________1995. Comparison of Juvenile Steelhead Densities in 1981 and 1994 with Estimates of Total Numbers of Mainstem Juveniles and Expected Numbers of Adults Returning to the San Lorenzo River, Soquel Creek and Corralitos Creek, Santa Cruz County, California. ____________1997. Comparison of Juvenile Steelhead Densities in 1981 and 1994-96 in the San Lorenzo River and Tributaries, with an Estimate of Juvenile Population Size in the Mainstem River and Expected Adult Returns from that Production, Santa Cruz County, California. ___________2002. Comparison of Juvenile Steelhead Densities, 1997-2001, in the San Lorenzo River and Tributaries, Santa Cruz County, California; With an Estimate of Juvenile Population Size and an Index of Adult Returns. Prepared by D.W. Alley & Associates, Aquatic Biology for the San Lorenzo Valley Water District and the County of Santa Cruz. ____________2004a. Comparisons of juvenile steelhead densities, 1997 through 2001, in the San Lorenzo River and tributaries, Santa Cruz County, California; with an estimate of juvenile population size and an index of adult returns. ____________2004b. Soquel Creek Lagoon Management and Enhancement Plan Update. Alley, D.W., K. Lyons and S. Chartrand. Prepared for the City of Capitola. ____________2005. Comparison of juvenile steelhead densities, 1997-2001 and 2003-2004 in the middle and upper San Lorenzo River and tributaries, Santa Cruz County California; with an estimate of juvenile population size and an index of adult returns. ____________2006. Comparison of Juvenile Steelhead Densities, 1997-2001 and 2003-2005, in the Middle and Upper San Lorenzo River and 5 Tributaries, Santa Cruz County, California; With an Index of Juvenile Population Size and Adult Returns. ____________2007. Juvenile steelhead densities in the San Lorenzo, Soquel, Aptos and Corralitos Watersheds, Santa Cruz County, California. ____________2008. Personal communication. Peer-review comments, SLVWD. Alley, D.W., J.J. Smith and C. Steiner. 2007. Comparison of 2006 Juvenile Steelhead Densities in Drainages of the San Lorenzo, Soquel, Aptos and Corralitos Watersheds in Santa Cruz County, California. Prepared for Santa Cruz County Department of Environmental Health. Literature cited L-1 5/11/2009 San Lorenzo Valley Water District Watershed Management Plan, Final Version Part I: Existing Conditions Report Alley, Donald; Dvorsky, John; Swanson Hydrology & Geomorphology; and Smith, Jerry. 2004. San Lorenzo River Salmonid Enhancement Plan: Fisheries Enhancement Strategy for the San Lorenzo River. Submitted to Santa Cruz County Environmental Health and Planning Departments. American Water Works Association. 2007. Global Climate Change. Webcast. March 14, 2007. Anderson, H. W.; Hoover, M. D. and Reinhart, K. G. 1976. Forests and water: Effects of forest management on floods, sedimentation and water supply. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-18. Arvola, T. F. 1976. Regulation of Logging in California 1945-1975. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Conservation. Division of Forestry. Sacramento. Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 2007. Watershed Sanitary Survey for the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds. An Update to the San Lorenzo Valley and Watershed and North Coast Watersheds Sanitary Survey (Camp, Dresser & McKee, 1996). Prepared for City of Santa Cruz Water Department. Baron, Sandy, and Gibson, Rachael. 1999. Restoring a sandhills ecosystem: The Quail Hollow quarry revegetation. A presentation to Dr. R. O’Malley and the Env.S.187 class, San Jose State University. Bell, J.L. and L.C. Sloan, CO2 Sensitivity of Extreme Climate Events in the Western United States, Earth Interactions, Vol. 10, Paper 15, 2006. Benda, L. and T. Dunne. 1997. Stochastic forcing of sediment supply to channel networks from landsliding and debris flow. Water Resources Research, Vol. 33, No. 12. Benda, Lee E.; Miller, Daniel J.; Dunne, Thomas; Reeves, Gordon H. and Agee, James K. 1998. Dynamic Landscape Systems. Chapter 12 In Naiman, R. and Bilby, R. eds. River Ecology and Management: Lessons from the Pacific Coastal Ecoregion. Springer-Verlag. Benda, Lee E., and Sias, Joan C. 2002. A quantitative framework for evaluating the mass balance of in-stream organic debris. Forest Ecology and Management. 5626:1-16 Benda, Lee E.; Bigelow, Paul and Worsley, Thomas M. 2002. Recruitment of wood to streams in old-growth and second-growth redwood forests, northern California, U.S.A. Canadian. J. For. Res. 32: 1460-1477. Benkman, Bryan. 1976. Report on the Fishery of the San Lorenzo River. Office of Watershed Management, Santa Cruz County. Ben Lomond Station 040673. 2003. Period of Record Daily Climate Summary. From [http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliRECt.pl?cabenl] Literature cited L-2 5/11/2009 San Lorenzo Valley Water District Watershed Management Plan, Final Version Part I: Existing Conditions Report Berry, Chris. City of Santa Cruz Water Department. 2001. Watershed Sanitary Survey for the San Lorenzo and North Coast Watersheds, January 2001; An Update of the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Sanitary Survey, July 1996. Berry, Chris. City of Santa Cruz Water Department. 2008. Personal communication. Big Creek Lumber Company v. County of Santa Cruz. 2000-2006.California Supreme Court No. S123659; Sixth District Court of Appeal No. H023778; Santa Cruz County Superior Court Nos. 134816 and 137992 Bilby, R. E.; Frauson, B. R. and Bisson, P. A. 1996. Incorporation of nitrogen and carbon from spawning coho into the trophic system of small streams: Evidence from stable isotopes. Can. J. Fish. Aq. Sci. 50:164-173. Binford, L. C., Elliott, B. G., Singer, S. W. 1975. Discovery of a nest and the downy young of the Marbled Murrelet. Wilson Bulletin. 87:303-319. BirdLife International. 2003. BirdLife’s online world bird database: The site for bird conservation. Version 2.0. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International. [http://www.birdlife.org] accessed 19/10/2004. Bisson, P.A., J.L. Nielsen, R.A. Palmason and L.E. Grove. 1981. A system of naming habitat in small streams, with examples of habitat utilization by salmonids during low streamflow. In N.B. Armantrout ed. Acquisition and Utilization of Aquatic Habitat Inventory Information. Proceedings of a symposium, Oct. 28-30, 1981, Portland, Oregon. Hagen Publishing Co., Billings, Montana. pp. 62-73. Boulder Creek Historical Society. 2007. [http://www.slvmuseum.com/bchs.html] accessed 8/06/07. Brand, L. A., and George, T. L. 2000. Predation risk of nesting birds in coast redwood forest fragments. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:4251. Brown, G.W. 1991. Forestry and Water Quality. Published by O.S.U Book Stores, Inc. Corvallis Oregon. Second Edition. Brown, Larry R.; Moyle, Peter B. and Yoshiyama, Ronald M. 1994. Historical decline and current status of coho salmon in California. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. 14(2):237-261. Brown, Randall. 2006. Felton Water Co., Felton, California. A Local History. Felton. Self- published. Buhl, K. J., and S. J. Hamilton. 1998. Acute toxicity of fire-retardant and foam-suppressant chemicals to early life stages of chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 17:1589-1599. Literature cited L-3 5/11/2009 San Lorenzo Valley Water District Watershed Management Plan, Final Version Part I: Existing Conditions Report Bull, E.L. and J.E. Jackson. 1995. Pileated Woodpecker (Drycocopus pileatus), in, "The Birds of North America, No. 148". (AQ.Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA., and the American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. Bull, Evelyn L.; Parks, Catherine G.; and Torgersen, Torolf R. 1997. Trees and logs important to wildlife in the interior Columbia River basin. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-391. Portland, OR: USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 55p. Busa, Joel. 2008. San Lorenzo Valley Water District. Personal communication. Busby, P.J., T.C. Wainwright, G.J. Bryant, L.J. Lierheimer, R.S. Waples, F.W. Waknitz, I.L. Lagomarsino. 1996. Status review of west coast steelhead from Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and California. National Marine Fisheries Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-27. Seattle WA. Butler, Terry and the Santa Cruz County watershed staff. 1981. Inventory of erosion problems in Santa Cruz County. Santa Cruz County Planning Department. Cafferata, P.W. and T.F. Spittler. 1998. Logging Impacts of the 1970’s versus the 1990’s in the Casper Creek Watershed. USDA Forest Service. Gen.Tech.Rep. PSW-6TR-168. p. 103-114. CalFire. 2007. Living and Building in the Wildland. [http://www.fire.ca.gov.wildland.php] accessed 8/14/07. CalFire. 2007. Forest Practice website: California Forest Practice Rules. Title 22 CCR Chapters 4 and 4.5. Barclay Law Publishers South San Francisco. CalFire. 2008. Personal communication, Richard Sampson
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Flood Insurance?
    Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program The passage of the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program in 2012 has made the community’s long term goals for protecting the future of the Santa Clara Valley possible, including: • Supplying safe, healthy water • Retrofitting dams and critical infrastructure for earthquakes • Reducing toxins, hazards and contaminants • Restoring wildlife habitat in our waterways • Providing natural flood protection Even though we are in a drought, flooding can happen. Santa Clara County has had several damaging floods over the years, Extreme dry conditions can harden the ground. Within the first few most notably in 1995 and 1997 along the Guadalupe River and 1998 days of heavy rain, the ground can deflect water into streams and along Coyote and San Francisquito creeks. Call your city’s floodplain creeks, increasing the chances of flash flooding. It can strike quickly manager or the Santa Clara Valley Water District’s Community with little or no warning. Projects Unit at 408.630.2650 to determine if you are in a floodplain. Floodwater can flow swiftly through neighborhoods and away from The water district’s flood prevention and flood awareness outreach streams when creeks “overbank” or flood. Dangerously fast-moving efforts reduce flood insurance rates by as much as 10 percent. FEMA’s floodwaters can flow thousands of feet away from the flooded creek National Flood Insurance Program Community Rating System (CRS) within minutes. evaluates the flood protection efforts that CRS communities make and provides a rating. While the chances may seem slim for a 1 percent flood* to occur, the real odds of a 1 percent flood are greater than one in four during the In our area, *participating CRS communities (noted on the magnet) earn length of a 30-year mortgage.
    [Show full text]
  • D.W. ALLEY & Associates Aquatic Biology
    D.W. ALLEY & Associates Aquatic Biology -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2006 Juvenile Steelhead Densities in the San Lorenzo, Soquel, Aptos and Corralitos Watersheds, Santa Cruz County, California Coastrange Sculpin Photographed by Jessica Wheeler D.W. ALLEY & Associates, Aquatic Biology Don Alley, Chad Steiner and Jerry Smith, Fishery Biologists With Field Assistance from Kristen Kittleson, Dawn Reis and Jessica Wheeler Prepared For the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department Government Center, 701 Ocean Street, Room 312, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Funding From the San Lorenzo Valley Water District, Soquel Creek Water District, Lompico County Water District, Cities of Santa Cruz and Watsonville and the County of Santa Cruz May 2007 Project # 200-04 340 Old River Lane • P.O. Box 200 • Brookdale, California 95007 • (831) 338-7971 TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORT SUMMARY...................................................................................10 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................31 I-1. Steelhead and Coho Salmon Ecology...................................................... 31 I-3. Project Purpose and General Study Approach ........................................ 34 METHODS ....................................................................................................35 M-1. Choice of Reaches and Vicinity of Sites to be Sampled- Methods........... 35 M-2. Classification of Habitat Types and Measurement of Habitat Characteristics.............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • San Lorenzo Urban River Plan
    San Lorenzo Urban River Plan A Plan for the San Lorenzo River, Branciforte Creek and Jessie Street Marsh Prepared by: City of Santa Cruz San Lorenzo Urban River Plan Task Force with assistance from Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program of the National Park Service Adopted June 24, 2003 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 3 Executive Summary 5 Chapter 19 Purpose, Context and Goals 1.1 Purpose of the San Lorenzo Urban River Plan 9 1.2 Goals and Benefits of the Plan 10 1.3 The Planning Area and River Reach Descriptions 10 1.4 Relationship to Existing City Plans 13 1.5 Plan Organization 13 Chapter 2 15 Plan Setting and Background 2.1 Physical Setting 15 2.2 Social Setting: Development of the City of Santa Cruz 17 2.3 The History of Flooding in Santa Cruz 18 2.4 Current Planning and the San Lorenzo Urban River Plan Task Force 19 Chapter 3 21 Riverwide Concepts and Programs 3.1 The San Lorenzo Riverway 21 3.2 Defining the Riverway: System-wide Recommendations 22 Chapter 4 23 Reach Specific Recommendations 4.1 Design Improvements 25 4.2 Site Specific Recommendations in River Reaches 29 Estuarine Reach 29 Transitional Reach 39 Riverine Reach 49 Chapter 5 55 Branciforte Creek 5.1 Area Description and Current Conditions 55 5.2 Reach Specific Recommendations for Branciforte Creek 58 Chapter 6 61 Significant Riverfront Areas 6.1 Front Street Riverfront Area 61 6.2 Salz Tannery to 64 Sycamore Grove Riverfront Area 6.3 Beach Flats Riverfront Area 71 Chapter 7 73 Plan Implementation 7.1 San Lorenzo River Committee 73 Recommendations 74 7.2 Project Phasing and Projected Costs 75 7.3 Funding Opportunities 75 Chapter 8 79 References Appendix A Lower San Lorenzo River and Lagoon Enhancement Plan Appendix B Jessie Street Marsh Management Plan PB SAN LORENZO URBAN RIVER PLAN The San Lorenzo Urban River Plan could Acknowledgements not have been developed without the dedication of the San Lorenzo Urban River Plan Task Force, City staff and the community.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Coast
    Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Consultation History......................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Proposed Action ............................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Action Area ..................................................................................................................... 32 2. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: BIOLOGICAL OPINION AND INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT ......................................................................................................... 34 2.1 Analytical Approach ....................................................................................................... 34 2.2 Life History and Range-wide Status of the Species and Critical Habitat ...................... 35 2.3 Environmental Baseline .................................................................................................. 48 2.4 Effects of the Action ........................................................................................................ 62 2.5 Cumulative Effects .......................................................................................................... 76 2.6 Integration and Synthesis ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Status of Coho Salmon in Streams of the Urbanized San Francisco Estuary, California
    CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME California Fish and Game 91(4):219-254 2005 HISTORICAL STATUS OF COHO SALMON IN STREAMS OF THE URBANIZED SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY, CALIFORNIA ROBERT A. LEIDY1 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105 [email protected] and GORDON BECKER Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration 4179 Piedmont Avenue, Suite 325 Oakland, CA 94611 [email protected] and BRETT N. HARVEY Graduate Group in Ecology University of California Davis, CA 95616 1Corresponding author ABSTRACT The historical status of coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch, was assessed in 65 watersheds surrounding the San Francisco Estuary, California. We reviewed published literature, unpublished reports, field notes, and specimens housed at museum and university collections and public agency files. In watersheds for which we found historical information for the occurrence of coho salmon, we developed a matrix of five environmental indicators to assess the probability that a stream supported habitat suitable for coho salmon. We found evidence that at least 4 of 65 Estuary watersheds (6%) historically supported coho salmon. A minimum of an additional 11 watersheds (17%) may also have supported coho salmon, but evidence is inconclusive. Coho salmon were last documented from an Estuary stream in the early-to-mid 1980s. Although broadly distributed, the environmental characteristics of streams known historically to contain coho salmon shared several characteristics. In the Estuary, coho salmon typically were members of three-to-six species assemblages of native fishes, including Pacific lamprey, Lampetra tridentata, steelhead, Oncorhynchus mykiss, California roach, Lavinia symmetricus, juvenile Sacramento sucker, Catostomus occidentalis, threespine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus, riffle sculpin, Cottus gulosus, prickly sculpin, Cottus asper, and/or tidewater goby, Eucyclogobius newberryi.
    [Show full text]
  • 1982 Flood Report
    GB 1399.4 S383 R4 1982 I ; CLARA VAltEY WATER DISlRIDl LIBRARY 5750 ALMADEN EXPRESSYIAY SAN JOSE. CAUFORN!A 9Sll8 REPORT ON FLOODING AND FLOOD RELATED DAMAGES IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY January 1 to April 30, 1982 Prepared by John H. Sutcliffe Acting Division Engineer Operations Division With Contributions From Michael McNeely Division Engineer Design Division and Jeanette Scanlon Assistant Civil Engineer Design Division Under the Direction of Leo F. Cournoyer Assistant Operations and Maintenance Manager and Daniel F. Kriege Operations and Maintenance Manager August 24, 1982 DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Arthur T. Pfeiffer, Chairman District 1 James J. Lenihan District 5 Patrick T. Ferraro District 2 Sio Sanchez. Vice Chairman At Large Robert W. Gross District 3 Audrey H. Fisher At large Maurice E. Dullea District 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCrfION .......................... a ••••••••••••••••••• 4 •• Ill • 1 STORM OF JANUARY 3-5, 1982 .•.•.•.•.•••••••.••••••••.••.••.••.••••. 3 STORMS OF MARCH 31 THROUGH APRIL 13, 1982 ••.....••••••.•••••••••••• 7 SUMMARY e • • • • • • • • • : • 111 • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1111 o e • e • • o • e • e o e • e 1111 • • • • • e • e 12 TABLES I Storm Rainfall Summary •••••••••.••••.•••••••.••••••••••••• 14 II Historical Rainfall Data •••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••• 15 III Channel Flood Flow Summary •••••.•••••.•••••••••••••••••••• 16 IV Historical Stream flow Data •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 17 V January 3-5, 1982 Damage Assessment Summary •••••••••••••••••• 18 VI March 31 - April 13, 1982 Damage
    [Show full text]
  • 4.7 Hydrology and Water Quality
    Scotts Valley Town Center Specific Plan EIR Section 4.7 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.7 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section is based on information from the following documents: • Gateway South Office Building and Fire Station Draft Supplemental EIR, City of Scotts Valley, January 2004 • Gateway South Office Building and Fire Station Hydrology Technical Report, City of Scotts Valley , January 2004 • Polo Ranch Draft Recirculated EIR, City of Scotts Valley, December 2005 • 2005 Urban Water Management Plan. Scotts Valley Water District. • Groundwater Modeling Study of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin • 2007 Annual Report. Scotts Valley Water District. Groundwater Management Program. May 2008. 4.7.1 Setting a. Physical Setting. Drainage. The City of Scotts Valley occupies the valley of Carbonera Creek and its main tributary to the north, Bean Creek. The project site is located within both the watershed of Carbonera Creek and Bean Creek (see Figure 4.7-1). Carbonera Creek is a tributary of the San Lorenzo River system, which drains south from the Santa Cruz Mountains into the Monterey Bay at the City of Santa Cruz. The San Lorenzo River watershed drains approximately 137 square miles, and its principal tributaries include Boulder Creek, Kings Creek, Bear Creek, Newell Creek, Zayante Creek, Bean Creek, and Branciforte Creek. The Carbonera Creek watershed drains 3.6 square miles at United States Geological Survey (USGS) gauge near the Scotts Valley Water District (SVWD) southern boundary. Unlike Bean Creek, Carbonera Creek typically becomes dry or near dry during the summer months. The creek flows generally southwest from its headwaters in the Santa Cruz Mountains, and discharges to Branciforte Creek in the City of Santa Cruz.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the San Lorenzo River Watershed by Lee Summers
    Understanding the San Lorenzo River Watershed By Lee Summers Water is the drink of life that pours through our veins, cradles us as babes in the womb, carves valleys and mountains, cleans our air and keeps our planet green and growing. About 71 percent of the earth’s surface is covered with water. Of that, about 2½ percent is fresh water and only about 1.2 percent of fresh water can we easily access, treat, and drink.1 What’s more, about 60 percent of the human body is water. It comes in quite handy as cellular building material; to regulate our temperature; transport food; flush waste; absorb shock to the brain, spine, and fetus; and lubricate joints.2 We can find water as a liquid, gas and solid. Its solid form is less dense than liquid, which allows lakes to freeze from the top down. It dissolves substances better than any other liquid, which means it easily transports nutrients through a body. It absorbs a lot of heat before it gets hot, so it keeps the air temperature more constant, especially near the coast. It sticks to itself, which allows it to ball into drops as well as get pulled up the tallest redwood trees. In fact, if we weren’t surrounded by it our entire lives, it would amaze us. Water is essential for life on this planet, yet most people have no idea where their water comes from when they turn on the faucet. If they really understood, they would likely never take water for granted again.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of Water Quality Monitoring for Bacteria Indicators in the Lower San Lorenzo River Watershed, 2014 and 2016
    Report of Water Quality Monitoring for Bacteria Indicators in the Lower San Lorenzo River Watershed, 2014 and 2016 Prepared for the San Lorenzo River Alliance, Water Quality Working Group, with participants from: City of Santa Cruz Public Works Department City of Santa Cruz Water Department County of Santa Cruz Department of Public Works County of Santa Cruz Department of Environmental Health Services Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Coastal Watershed Council Surfrider Foundation Prepared by: Armand Ruby, Technical Director, Coastal Watershed Council Alev Bilginsoy, River Scientist, Coastal Watershed Council December 29, 2017 INTRODUCTION The Water Quality Working Group of the San Lorenzo River Alliance (SLRA) was first assembled in 2013 to help address water quality issues in the San Lorenzo River and its tributaries. Working Group participants include personnel with water quality expertise from: City of Santa Cruz Public Works and Water Departments, County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health Services and Public Works, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, and Nonprofit organizations Surfrider Foundation and Coastal Watershed Council. The Working Group has taken a collaborative approach to improving water quality in the San Lorenzo River watershed. The initial focus of the Working Group’s activity has been to address impairment of river water quality by fecal indicator bacteria. The reasons for this focus are: 1. The SLRA wishes to improve the general quality and beneficial uses in the San Lorenzo River, and 2. The SLRA seeks to participate with other stakeholders and help municipalities in response to the impairment of beneficial uses of the river, as described in the San Lorenzo River Watershed Pathogen Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) regulation (Central Coast Water Board Resolution R3-2009-0023).
    [Show full text]
  • The Occurrence and Distribution of Umbellularia Californica
    THE OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF UMBELLULARIA CALIFORNICA IN THE BIG BASIN AREA, SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAINS, CA A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Hayward In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Geography By Steven D. Guiney October 1990 THE OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF UMBELLULARIA CALIFORNICA IN THE BIG BASIN AREA, SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAINS, CA By Steven D. Guiney Approved: Date: s ~ /?f't1 ~7f~~/W /2 /Vt1Y6H~~ /9?a ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION ·· · · · ·· · · 1 II. AN OVERVIEW ·· · · · ·· · ·· · ·· · · 6 III. BIG BASIN PHYTO-PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY ···· 9 IV. HISTORICAL PLANT GEOGRAPHY · · 44 V. ECOLOGICAL PLANT GEOGRAPHY · · · · 47 VI. PHYSIOGRAPHIC PLANT GEOGRAPHY · · · · · · 52 VII. DISTURBANCE FACTORS · · · 54 VIII. CONCLUSIONS · · · · · ··· · · · · · 58 BIBLIOGRAPHY · · · ·· · ·· · ·· 61 iii '""-<-- LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Figure Page 1 Study Area .. · ·· · ··· . 4 2 Elevations . .. · ···· · 11 3 Climatograph Explanation · · · · · · 17 4 Santa Cruz Climatograph · · · 18 5 Henry Cowell Climatograph ·· · 19 6 Ben Lomond Climatograph ·· ·· · · 20 7 Big Basin Climatograph · · ·· · 21 8 Henry Cowell Transects · 24 9 Portola Transects · ·· 25 10 Big Basin Soils ···· . 26 11 Big Basin Vegetation · · ·· 28 Table 1 Individuals/Species. 34 2 Density 35 3 Coverage . 36 iv LIST OF PHOTOS Photo Page SITE 1 37 SITE 2 38 SITE 3 41 SITE 4 42 SITE 5 43 v INTRODUCTION The coastal redwood forest of Central California is composed principally of four kinds of trees: coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), tan oak (Lithocarpus densiflora) and California bay (Umbellularia californica). All of these are found in Big Basin Redwoods State Park and adjacent areas in the Santa Cruz Mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • Gary Griggs, Our Ocean Backyard, Article No. 333.Docx
    Our Ocean Backyard––Santa Cruz Sentinel columns by Gary Griggs, Distinguished Professor of Earth Sciences, UC Santa Cruz #333 January 30, 2021 Rain and Floods We seem to regularly bounce back and forth between drought and flood on the central coast, and this is the way it always seems to have been. As long as people have lived in the Monterey Bay area, they have experienced both dry and wet years, and sometimes back-to-back. As I am writing this on Thursday for submission tonight, we are in the midst of one of our driest winters in years. As of Tuesday at 2:00 pm, Santa Cruz had received just 3.7 inches of rain for the season (which began October 1, 2020), whereas on average we would have been soaked with 16.1 inches. We were at just 23% of normal. By Wednesday afternoon at 2:00, the first of several major storms had landed on us and raised our yearly total to 4.77 inches, raising us to 29% of normal. And then the next storm hit but no data in yet, but debris flow and flood warnings were still on. 1955 was the biggest flood in recent memory, and it washed right through downtown Santa Cruz. Pacific Avenue became a tributary three feet deep. But this was just one of dozens of local floods. In researching the flood history of the region for a recent book (Between Paradise and Peril – The Natural Disaster History of the Monterey Bay Region), I was fascinating to read how many times the downtown area has been flooded, followed by clearing out mud and starting again.
    [Show full text]
  • Flooding... to Report... Creeks That Flood
    Flooding... Creeks that flood To report... can happen during an intense rainfall, but These Santa Clara County creeks are flood prone: street flooding or blocked storm drains, typically occurs after several days of heavy Adobe Creek Los Gatos Creek or to contact your local floodplain rain. After the ground is saturated flooding can Alamias Creek Lower Penitencia Creek manager call: occur very quickly with little or no warning if a Alamitos Creek Lower Silver Creek Loyola Creek Campbell 408.866.2145 particularly powerful storm burst occurs. While Almendra Creek Arroyo Calero Creek McAbee Creek Cupertino 408.777.3269 the water district’s many reservoirs provide some Barron Creek Pajaro River buffer between rainfall and creekflow, most Berryessa Creek Permanente Creek Gilroy 408.846.0444 creeks do not have a reservoir and water levels Bodfish Creek Purissima Creek Los Altos 650.947.2785 rise quickly during intense rainstorms. Calabazas Creek Quimby Creek Calera Creek Randol Creek Los Altos Hills 650.941.7222 Calero Creek Ross Creek Los Gatos 408.399.5770 When creeks overbank, the floodwater typically San Francisquito Creek Canoas Creek Milpitas 408.586.2400 flows swiftly through neighborhoods and Corralitos Creek San Martin Creek away from streams. Dangerously fast-moving Coyote Creek San Tomas Aquino Creek Monte Sereno 408.354.7635 floodwaters can flow thousands of feet away Crosley Creek Santa Teresa Creek Morgan Hill 408.776.7333 Deer Creek Saratoga Creek from the flooded creek within minutes. Dexter Creek Shannon Creek Mountain View
    [Show full text]