COYOTE CREEK Watershed HISTORICAL ECOLOGY STUDY Historical Condition, Landscape Change, and Restoration Potential in the Eastern Santa Clara Valley, California

Home , Fisher Creek, Lake Cunningham, Santa Clara Valley

f i n a l r e p o r t COYOTE CREEK watershed HISTORICAL ECOLOGY STUDY Historical Condition, Landscape Change, and Restoration potential in the Eastern Santa Clara Valley, California

san francisco estuary institute

P repared for t h e S anta clara v alley water district may 2006 map legend Map Graphics

Shallow Bay/Channel To coordinate the presentation of information at different scales, we Tidal Flat use 3 standard map scales.

Tidal Marshland with 1) The overview maps showing the full Channels and Pannes Coyote Creek valley floor area are made Saltgrass-Alkali Meadow | Salitroso at 1: 200,000 scale, or 1 inch equals approximately 3 miles. ➊ ➋ Wet Meadow ca. 1800 ca. 1800 2) Each section in Part III begins with ▸ A B Seasonal Lake | Laguna Seca and a six-page 1: 40,000 (1” = 3333’) Perennial Freshwater Wetland | Tular map series showing the area circa 1800 (using the project GIS), in 1939 (using ➌ ➍ Perennial Freshwater Pond | Laguna the georectified aerial photomosaic), 1939 2002 and in 2002 (using a true color A A Willow Grove | Sausal photomosaic by AirPhotoUSA).

Sycamore Grove | Alisal 3) About 20 “zoom-ins” distributed ➎ ➏ throughout the text focus on half-mile Bars, Islands, and Inset 1939 2002 squares at 1: 10,000 (1” = 833’). Benches - Sycamore Alluvial B B Features are thus enlarged fivefold Woodland and Riparian Scrub and fourfold, sequentially.

Valley Oak Savanna | Roblar

Dry Grassland

Stream

Cover map from U.S. District Court, Northern District [184-?]b. Land Case Map E-900. courtesy the Bancroft Library, UC berkeley. f i n a l r e P o r T m a y 2 0 0 6

COYOTE CREEK watershed HISTORICAL ECOLOGY STUDY //

Historical Condition, Landscape Change, and Restoration potential in the Eastern Santa Clara Valley, California

Prepared by: S a n F r a n c i sc o e st u a r y I n st i t u t e Robin Grossinger Ruth Askevold Chuck Striplen Elise Brewster Sarah Pearce Kristen Larned Lester McKee Josh Collins Design and layout by Linda Wanczyk

Prepared for:

The Santa Clara Water District

5750 Almaden Expressway

San José, CA 95118

S a n t a c l a r a v a l l e y w a t e r d i st r i ct board of dire ct o r s

Rosemary C. Kamei district 1 Gregory A. Zlotnick district 5 Joe Judge district 2 Tony Estremera, Vice Chair at Large Richard P. Santos district 3 Sig Sanchez at Large Larry Wilson, Chair district 4 This report should be cited as:

Grossinger, RM, RA Askevold, CJ Striplen, E Brewster, S Pearce, KN Larned, LJ McKee, and JN Collins, 2006. Coyote Creek Watershed Historical Ecology Study: Historical Condition, Landscape Change, and Restoration Potential in the Eastern Santa Clara Valley, California. Prepared for the Santa Clara Valley Water District. A Report of SFEI’s Historical Ecology, Watersheds, and Wetlands Science Pro- grams, SFEI Publication 426, San Francisco Estuary Institute, Oakland, CA.

// e x e c utive summary

ES-1 Courtesy Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division. Map and Geography Congress, of Library Courtesy Y D STU

contents Coyote Creek: 1869 Birdseye View y ECOLOGY ar

mm CAL I su

, , STOR HI ecutive x Study and Historical Overviews Historical and Study Managing Watershed Functions and Processes and Functions Watershed Managing Restoration Habitat for Opportunities Identifying Protection Flood Natural for Tools Developing d Understanding Landscape Change Landscape Understanding e • • • • • e hange h C ondition

potential estoration C

R waters and andscape L istorical anta Clara Valley, California S Prepared for the H CREEK

OVERVIEW astern E By the San Francisco Estuary Institute y OVERVIEW COYOTE in the Santa Clara Valley Water District

istorical y r a m m u s e v i t u c e x e Coyote Creek’s naturally wide footprint has led to an unusual amount of publicly owned lands along the stream. naturally wide footprint has led to an unusual amount of publicly Coyote Creek’s and long, dynamic braided reaches This imposing morphology — including broad, flood-prone stream benches high proportion of city and county — tended to restrict streamside development. As a result, there is a relatively parkland that could contribute to stream health, through coordinated stream restoration and natural system-based flood protection activities. Additionally, while modified in many ways, Coyote Creek has escaped major straightening. Unlike most Bay Area streams, the channel tends to follow its historical route. These basic aspects of the stream’s history contribute to significant present- day restoration potential. h In recent years, a number of environmental research and management efforts in the Santa Clara Valley (“Valley”) have have (“Valley”) Valley Clara stud Santa the in efforts management and research environmental of number appropriate a years, locally recent In developing for basis a as conditions historical of understanding better a physical for need the controlling their recognized and patterns habitat how Understanding design. restoration to for measures guidelines and appropriate goals habitat suggests and recovery, for potential relative the determine helps untapped an altered been have represents which processes information historical of wealth a has Valley Clara Santa the Fortunately, implement. landscape. today’s of potential and origins the understanding for resource This report synthesizes historical evidence into a picture of how Coyote Creek looked and functioned into a picture of how Coyote Creek looked and functioned This report synthesizes historical evidence new view shows how the contemporary landscape was shaped and before intensive modification. This restoration of watershed functions, natural flood protection, and provides an array of tools for the integrated water management. d e h s r e t a w k e e r C e t o y o C

In this study, we mapped historical landscape patterns for the valley floor draining to Coyote Creek – an approximately 100-square-mile area on the eastern side of the Santa Clara Valley. This portion of Santa Clara County includes parts of the cities of San Jose, Milpitas, and Morgan Hill. The aerial photograph below shows the study area in 2002. A sampling of early images illustrates historical habitats mapped on the facing page.

STUDY AREA H

i r o t s i Calera Creek

c Tularcitos Creek l a Los Coches Creek C e y g o l o Berryessa Creek S

y d u t Lower Penitencia Creek Upper Penitencia Creek Coyote Creek Miguelita Creek Low gradient, perennial reach.

South Babb Creek

Lake Norwood Creek Cunningham

Coyote Creek Evergreen Creek

Narrow reach with perennial water and gravel bars.

Thompson Creek Upper Silver Creek

San Coyote Creek Francisco Fisher Creek

Bay Broad, gravelly, Project Area intermittent Coyote stream bed.

Coyote Watershed

Fisher Creek

0 1 2 4 6 8 Miles Laguna Seca: 1:200,000 scale tules and ponds.

// e x e c utive summary ES- ES-3 - Miles 8 These These Coyote Creek lagunas. 6 Laguna Seca 4 Thompson Creek ter wetlands, or or wetlands, ter were blue, and green in areas, been have and farm to difficult slowly. more developed Lower-lying basin areas with with areas basin Lower-lying of mosaics supported soils clay meadows, wet habitats: wetland willow meadows, saltgrass-alkali freshwa perennial and groves, Upper Silver Creek Hill Fisher Creek Coyote Creek Tulare 2 Norwood Creek Laguna Socayre 1 South Babb Creek 1:200,000 scale 0 Upper Penitencia Creek Arroyo de los Coches Calera Creek

Coyote Creek Creek Shallow Bay/Channel Flat Tidal Marshland with Tidal Channels and Pannes Saltgrass-Alkali Meadow | Salitroso Meadow Wet | Laguna Seca and Seasonal Lake | Tular Wetland Freshwater Perennial | Laguna Pond Freshwater Perennial Willow Grove | Sausal Sycamore Grove | Alisal Benches Inset and Islands, Bars, Scrub Riparian and Woodland Alluvial Sycamore | Roblar Oak Savanna Valley Dry Grassland Stream CIRCA 1800 Lower Penitencia

Before the modifications of the 19th and 20th centuries, the lands along Coyote Creek supported a remarkably remarkably a supported Creek Coyote along lands the centuries, 20th and 19th the well-drained of the occupied modifications the savannas Before oak valley celebrated the and grasslands the Native became map) habitats. the of on mosaic orange and diverse yellow (in areas These Creek. Coyote along levees natural and fans alluvial orchards. fruit primarily lands, agricultural productive most

Courtesy the Santa Clara Valley Water District. District. Water Valley Clara Santa the Courtesy Courtesy Cooper Ornithological Society. Society. Ornithological Cooper Courtesy Courtesy History San José. José. San History Courtesy Courtesy The Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley. Berkeley. UC Library, Bancroft The Courtesy 1916 1935 1896 ca. 1905 In this this In

ERY V unconfined groundwater basin unconfined groundwater basin RECO

ca. 2006 ca. 1800 AN I

PAR I -

set of aerial photographs, riparian riparian photographs, aerial of set Creek Penitencia Upper along forest in agriculture by impacted heavily – expanded significantly has – 1930s the land protective a of creation the with buffer. use R Imagery Copyright 2005 AirPhoto USA, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Rights All LLC, USA, AirPhoto 2005 Copyright Imagery patial variability While riparian forest has been lost along many creeks, a few reaches have shown notable improvement during the past while others few decades. Some streams have incised greatly, can look show almost no change over the past 150 years. We to these sites that have beneficial, positive trajectories as contemporary models for watershed protection and recovery. S ANGE H

2002 resulting in reduced infiltration and more resulting in reduced infiltration ation c Drainage density has increased dramatically… Drainage density has increased to Coyote Creek. rapid delivery of stormwater Before modification, most stream channels were most stream channels Before modification, place to place… discontinuous…they spread out on the valley floor. spread out on the valley discontinuous…they substantially from positive examples. ntensifi and there are some I Trajectories of change vary Trajectories utive summary c rainage 1939 more, the expansion of the underground storm drain network has resulted in nearly more, the expansion of the underground Over 20 miles of artificial channel and 120 a tenfold increase in drainage density. now convey water from the unconfined miles of large, concrete storm drains contribute to recharge. groundwater zone that would otherwise The construction of drainage ditches and channels, which took place largely prior to drainage ditches and channels, which The construction of to Coyote Creek by about 40%. Further 1900, has increased the density of drainage D nearlyToday 50% of the valley floor water courses draining into Coyote Creek are constructed channels. These channels convey runoff across areas that previously had no surface drainage. The natural drainage network was highly discontinuous, supporting groundwater recharge on the coarse alluvial fans and wetlands in the valley bottomlands. UNDERSTANDING LANDSCAPE ramifications. present-day significant have yet overlooked, easily are changes Many C e x e

Coyote Creek watershed H i s t o r i c a l e C o l o g y S t u d y ES-4

// e x e c utive summary

ES-5

in the vicinity of Cottonwood Lake. y woodland

of on

i reac y ore ers v m abitat ca alle h V necessaril Sy tat con

i preservation

ab ote h y not

o an C and Creek’s Coyote of examples existing best the of Some in found be can habitat riparian pre-modification Highway and Avenue Sycamore between Valley Coyote a with assemblages fish maintains reach This 101. has and species native of proportion high relatively Central of remnant significant a as recognized been the for Plans Woodland. Alluvial Sycamore Coast consider should community this of viability long-term with associated impacts negative potential the high of benefits potential the and flows summertime Ponds Ogier at Restoration winter. the in pulses flow reach. important this to significantly contribute could i processes is .

replaces par

1939 Ri ALL

aracteristic and

h ittent FIT c

- m

forest

T e

’ h t : inter : s DOESN k

E functions

aw Z ottonwood h d oodland SI t

E : C h W (in Carroll 1903: 185) H Under natural conditions, most of Coyote Creek was seasonally dry (see center spread). most of Coyote Creek was seasonally Under natural conditions, reaches (which were limited to intermittent reaches and perennial The combination of of native species, including of the valley), supported a wide range the top and bottom creek beds but is no longer a which once nested in the gravelly the Lesser Nighthawk, breeding resident species. ig Coyote Creek circa 1850 ONE …whose course is marked with groups of giant sycamores, their trunks gleaming like silver through masses of glossy foliage…” N Bayard Taylor, describing - Bayard Taylor, : “ lluvial and

A conversion WATERS

ore ores HABITAT

m m ca ca iparian R Sy Sy anaging ing unvegetated bars and open riparian habitat, and and habitat, riparian open and bars unvegetated ing While another. to type habitat riparian one converting habitats new these value, riparian possessing clearly and viability long-term for assessed be probably should function. ecological Since the construction of Coyote Dam in 1936, peak peak 1936, in Dam Coyote of construction the Since been have watershed upper the of most from flows result, a As increased. have flows summer while reduced, eliminat largely channel, active the invaded have trees Historical evidence indicates that Coyote Creek’s dominant riparian habitat was Sycamore alluvial woodland. Now mostly mostly Now woodland. alluvial Sycamore was habitat riparian had streams dominant Coast Creek’s Central Coyote that gravel-dominated indicates episodic, evidence of habitat Historical this conditions. state), the contemporary throughout wooded (and creek densely the the to along contrast in eliminated — sycamores widely-spaced with canopy tree open relatively a RIPARIAN on type riparian dominant the not was this forest, canopy closed dense, a as habitat riparian of think to tend we While important all were bars gravel unvegetated large, and scrub, riparian savanna/woodland, open where Creek, Coyote efforts management watershed lost, disproportionately been have types habitat these that Given components. riparian sites. appropriate at restoration their consider should m goals. local appropriate setting point for a starting provides information Historical Perennial 75 - 250 ft oak dominance Burnett Rd from sycamore to to sycamore from canopy, transition transition canopy, Increasingly dense Increasingly channel with some secondary channels Sinuous, meandering Sinuous, outer channel banks/valley floor banks/valley channel outer Fisher Ck Fisher Metcalf Rd Coyote Narrows Coyote Intermittent 250 - 1500 ft Open riparian woodland/savanna: Open riparian woodland/savanna: 5 - 15 ft Ford RdFord Rd Tennant CONCEPTUAL CROSS SECTION (2x vertical exaggeration) sycamore alluvial woodland, riparian scrub, and unvegetated gravel bars gravel and unvegetated riparian scrub, alluvial woodland, sycamore interspersed with short narrow, single-thread reaches single-thread with shortinterspersed narrow, Broad braided channel system, with adjacent benches/terraces with adjacent channel system, braided Broad Occasional on one or both short riparian forest of continous reaches 0.1 ft 0.5 ft2 ft4 ft6 ft8 ft ft8 ft6 ft4 0.5 ft2 15 - 25 ft 50 - 150 ft floor Valley orphology M Highway 280Highway Rd Tully Inset terrace 8 ft6 ft 8 ft6 Intermittent 5 - 15 ft Bench Lower Silver Ck Silver Lower benches and terraces and benches and terraces 100 - 1500 ft channel Channel area Channel Secondary occasional secondary channels), occasional secondary channels), Broad, deep system (with wide inset (with wide inset deep system Broad, Island or bar Berryessa Rd 4 ft interspersed with shorterinterspersed reaches narrow few or no riparian trees on outer banks/valley floor banks/valley or no riparian on outer trees few 5 - 10 ft Main channel dense, narrow patches of riparian forest along main channel; of riparian forest patches narrow dense, Sycamore alluvial woodland and riparian scrub on adjacent benches; and riparian on adjacent alluvial woodland scrub Sycamore Upper Penitencia Ck Penitencia Upper 15 - 25 ft max.) (33 ft High bank outer al hydrology, habitat, and c Natural levee Natural <10 ft istori 20 - 50 ft 50 - 200 ft H 3 ft2 ft 3 ft2 CONCEPTUAL CROSS SECTION (2x vertical exaggeration) abandoned channels associated with overflow and associated Perennial Dense, narrow, continous riparian continous narrow, Dense, (riparian forest, freshwater marsh) freshwater (riparian forest, canopy forest. Off-channel habitat forest. canopy Highway 237Highway Montague/Trimble low gradient channel, with channel, gradient low overflow/secondary channels Shallow, sinuous, meandering, sinuous, Shallow, <10 ft 20 - 50 ft 50 - 200 ft Tidal vegetation; vegetation; Gradient from from Gradient tidally exposed tidally exposed Lower Penitencia Ck Penitencia Lower saline tidal marsh 2002 flats within channel flats fresh to brackish to to fresh ca. 1800 ca. Coyote Creek’s Historical Channel Morphology Channel Historical Historical RiparianHistorical Habitat Historical Channel Hydrology Channel Historical Confluences Crossings Maximum Subsidence (1934 to 1967) to Maximum (1934 Subsidence This diagram shows how key attributes of the creek varied naturally by reach. The close relationships between morphology, habitat, and and habitat, morphology, between relationships close The reach. by naturally varied creek the of attributes key how shows through diagram This varied and gradual were reaches between Transitions interrelated. are processes ecological and physical how indicate hydrology Reserved). Rights All LLC, AirPhotoUSA, 2005 Copyright Imagery (2002 data historical upon based reaches illustrate Cross-sections time. utive summary c e x e

Coyote Creek watershed H i s t o r i c a l e C o l o g y S t u d y ES-6

// e x e c utive summary ES-7 Perennial 75 - 250 ft oak dominance Burnett Rd from sycamore to to sycamore from canopy, transition transition canopy, Increasingly dense Increasingly channel with some secondary channels Sinuous, meandering Sinuous, outer channel banks/valley floor banks/valley channel outer Fisher Ck Fisher Metcalf Rd Coyote Narrows Coyote Intermittent 250 - 1500 ft Open riparian woodland/savanna: Open riparian woodland/savanna: 5 - 15 ft Ford RdFord Rd Tennant CONCEPTUAL CROSS SECTION (2x vertical exaggeration) sycamore alluvial woodland, riparian scrub, and unvegetated gravel bars gravel and unvegetated riparian scrub, alluvial woodland, sycamore interspersed with short narrow, single-thread reaches single-thread with shortinterspersed narrow, Broad braided channel system, with adjacent benches/terraces with adjacent channel system, braided Broad

Occasional on one or both short riparian forest of continous reaches

0.1 ft 0.5 ft2 ft4 ft6 ft8 ft ft8 ft6 ft4 0.5 ft2 15 - 25 ft 50 - 150 ft floor Valley Highway 280Highway Rd Tully Inset terrace 8 ft6 ft 8 ft6 Intermittent 5 - 15 ft Bench Lower Silver Ck Silver Lower benches and terraces and benches and terraces 100 - 1500 ft channel Channel area Channel Secondary occasional secondary channels), occasional secondary channels), Broad, deep system (with wide inset (with wide inset deep system Broad, Island or bar Berryessa Rd 4 ft interspersed with shorterinterspersed reaches narrow few or no riparian trees on outer banks/valley floor banks/valley or no riparian on outer trees few 5 - 10 ft Main channel dense, narrow patches of riparian forest along main channel; of riparian forest patches narrow dense, Sycamore alluvial woodland and riparian scrub on adjacent benches; and riparian on adjacent alluvial woodland scrub Sycamore Upper Penitencia Ck Penitencia Upper 15 - 25 ft max.) (33 ft High bank outer Natural levee Natural <10 ft 20 - 50 ft 50 - 200 ft 3 ft2 ft 3 ft2 CONCEPTUAL CROSS SECTION (2x vertical exaggeration) abandoned channels associated with overflow and associated Perennial Dense, narrow, continous riparian continous narrow, Dense, (riparian forest, freshwater marsh) freshwater (riparian forest, canopy forest. Off-channel habitat forest. canopy Highway 237Highway Montague/Trimble low gradient channel, with channel, gradient low overflow/secondary channels Shallow, sinuous, meandering, sinuous, Shallow, <10 ft 20 - 50 ft 50 - 200 ft Tidal vegetation; vegetation; Gradient from from Gradient tidally exposed tidally exposed Lower Penitencia Ck Penitencia Lower saline tidal marsh 2002 flats within channel flats fresh to brackish to to fresh ca. 1800 ca. Historical Channel Morphology Channel Historical Historical RiparianHistorical Habitat Historical Channel Hydrology Channel Historical Confluences Crossings Maximum Subsidence (1934 to 1967) to Maximum (1934 Subsidence - h - ca. 1800 mars h s 1907-1935 1936-1987 i tidal sloughs and pannes. and sloughs tidal Month cal (ca. 1800) brack i

patterns: d stor i H lan This portion of the stream has been lub have probably maintained their their maintained probably have lub - - - C ontext: anal. C c olf olf G processes ONDJFMAMJJAS The conversion of most of the stream to peren- The conversion of most of the stream

reek reek 0 C 50 300 250 200 150 100 and Preservation of of Preservation

oyote oyote oyote Diversion Diversion oyote C Modest but significant pulse flows, particularly with some Modest but significant pulse flows, lant. C P on i but i ontrol ontrol C str di functions

ollution ollution d P E H ly runoff These sites, and their dependent native species, are more likely to persist than areas areas than persist to likely more are species, native dependent their and sites, These ater ater Since the construction of Coy- Since the construction of h W lara lara reek. C C n mont i anta anta WATERS Dam and 1 mi. upstream of Hwy 101 crossing.) Dam and 1 mi. upstream S oyote ange C location approx. 1.2 mi. downstream of Anderson location approx. 1.2 mi. Ch ote Dam in 1936, the creek has received reduced win- ote Dam in 1936, the creek ter flows and greatly increased summer flows. (Gauge ter flows and greatly increased for an Jose- an S ugmentation of stream flows may have unintended effects. effects. unintended have may flows stream of ugmentation ontrolled high flow releases could have benefits. have could releases flow high ontrolled he braided channel habitats in the vicinity of the the of vicinity the in habitats channel braided he utive summary requiring supplemental water, particularly during extended drought and/or limited summer water supply peri supply water summer limited and/or drought extended during particularly water, supplemental requiring Historical sites of perennial stream flow and groundwater discharge may be particularly important given given important particularly be may discharge groundwater and flow stream perennial of sites Historical uncertainty. climate future ods. This information can help better direct the use of water for environmental needs. environmental for water of use the direct better help can information This ods. C A T the of because partly character natural relatively augmented sediment and gravel supply, could have geomorphic benefit and select for native fishes over augmented sediment and gravel supply, non-native species. nial flow has significantly altered riparian and aquatic habitats. nial flow has significantly altered riparian excluded from strong summertime flow increases and has not converted to dense riparian forest. Future excluded from strong summertime flow a temporal context. within consider potential ecological effects alterations to the flow regime should c anaging • • • • • • • Greater variability could be important to stream health: Greater variability could be trategically modifying regulated flows to more closely closely more to flows regulated modifying trategically hese habitats could be linked to other restoration opportunities in the vicin the in opportunities restoration other to linked be could habitats hese mimic natural patterns could benefit native fishes and fishes native benefit could patterns natural mimic conservation. water summer help also could It habitats. S m Considering regulated flows in a natural tools for integrated water management e x e T the of ity A century ago the tidal and lower reaches of Coyote Creek supported supported Creek Coyote of reaches lower and tidal the ago century A largely assemblage fish a with marshlands tidal brackish and fresh natural efflu Treated Delta. Joaquin Sacramento-San the in found those to similar a gradients—now wetland these reestablish to used be could inputs ent their and habitats these of some of Restoration type. habitat rare regionally significance. regional of be delta—could miniature populations—a fish Could the Coyote Creek delta be restored? local agriculture by the City of San Jose has maintained relatively high habitat habitat high relatively maintained has Jose San of City the by agriculture mead local saltgrass-alkali and meadows Wet edge. Baylands the at here an potential of part be could Template” Habitat Slough “Artesian the of part as ows watershed. the of part lowest this for plan restoration integrated

Coyote Creek watershed H i s t o r i c a l e C o l o g y S t u d y ES-8

// e x e c utive summary

ES- Courtesy History San José. San History Courtesy eca, S This grand e. lara Valley. Valley. lara iv C aguna L ll Dr ? i anta anta of S h lossom H B anna sout v alms, P FRAMEWORK

ak among O URBAN

E Shortridge 1896, courtesy History San José). e great Valley oak sa H h ut they will need stewardship to survive into the future. the into survive to stewardship need will they ut T The naturally “scattered” distribution of valley oaks means distribution of valley oaks means The naturally “scattered” B

ual Valley N id rca 1896 ( es i HI art of t Valley oak savanna—grand, widely spaced trees with a grassland grassland a with trees spaced widely savanna—grand, oak Valley the of habitat signature the understory—was survived, have trees of number surprising a loss, general Despite and beauty their for recognized been always have they because partly shade. local coordinated through elements in restored be could oaks Valley efforts. the urban successfully integrated within that they can be relatively need to be established to maintain this trees framework. Young local habitat into the future. tree has been preserved as a landscape centerpiece. R P c T restoration

Courtesy The Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley. Berkeley. UC Library, Bancroft The Courtesy W

. d ST I oa R abitat showing a h PERS oyote anna

C for

OAKS

alley oak sav v Valley oak along ALLEY on of i V ct i courtesy The Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley). 1859, courtesy The Bancroft Library, grove along Monterey Road (Healy, U.S. Dist. Court grove along Monterey Road (Healy, Dep CAN opportunities ocayre complex, S aguna L e h of t d al pon i (Thompson and West 1876, courtesy David Rumsey, Cartography Cartography 1876, courtesy David Rumsey, (Thompson and West mall perenn

S 1876 Associates). Courtesy David Rumsey, Cartography Associates. Cartography Rumsey, David Courtesy - - tall tules, open water ponds, Tulare Hill at left (letters on photographs photographs on (letters left at Hill Tulare ponds, water open tules, tall laguna: CONCERT

N I restoration CS

I es MOSA abitat D h for PROCESS

WETLAN Looking southeast across the northern end of the the of end northern the across southeast Looking

NG I NATURAL H utive summary c T I he map of historical landscape patterns reveals sites where topogra where sites reveals patterns landscape historical of map he refer to photographer’s notes; red circle at extreme left in Laguna Seca map series above shows photographer location). location). photographer shows above series map Seca Laguna in left extreme at circle red notes; photographer’s to refer lagunaseca, 1916. Identifying and preserving habitat remnants. Strategic preservation habitat remnants. Identifying and preserving of the saltgrass meadows at Lake Cunning- and enhancement efforts while coexisting with sur ham Park could improve this rare habitat eca offers a rare opportunity to restore opportunity to restore a rare Laguna Seca offers In Coyote Valley, mosaic. and a diverse wetland habitat natural wetland functions and have would link to existing buffers Laguna Seca restoration Suc- as a large, natural, valley floor wetland. regional significance a wide at Laguna Seca could support cessful wetland restoration and including rare plants, amphibians, range of valued species, water birds. are likely other opportunities rounding recreational activities. There Laguna Socayre. for restoration in the vicinity of the historical T RESTOR W opportunities e x e phy, soils, and hydrology are likely to support sustainable wetlands. sustainable support to likely are hydrology and soils, phy,

Coyote Creek watershed H i s t o r i c a l e C o l o g y S t u d y ES-10 L a g u n a S e c a t h r o u g h t i m e In the center and deepest part tall

tules rise many feet above one’s

head, and in these numbers of Tule

Wrens build their deceptive nests. A

great many Coots breed here, and I

am told our Bitterns also nest in the

dense tules…

1847 UC Berkeley. Courtesy The Bancroft Library, 1915-16 Along the shore in many places…

marsh grass grows and along the

edges of this thick clusters of clover

thrive, which offer favorable sites for

Ducks’ nests...

- Fred Schneider 1893

// e x e c y r a m m u s e v i t u

ES-11 Imagery Copyright 2005 AirPhoto USA, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Rights All LLC, USA, AirPhoto 2005 Copyright Imagery ng i es. h annel ne i reach h narrow narrow l c d d Vice Chair • Sig Sanchez es areas occupy i f with wide inset stream i once-broa ent elow) Dotte A area benches becomes a city landfill Park. and then Watson B ( id former stream benc ony Estremera, broad broad T 880 bench/terrace 2002

101

atson ilson, Chair • Gregory Zlotnick • Park W W 1939 . . Santos • Larry alley The Santa claravalley water district

e way water moves water he way designing t Drainage—re ion Versus Infiltrat through the v decrease groundwater in constructed drainage tends to The dramatic increase drainage connectivity flood peaks downstream. Reducing recharge while increasing projects will and neighborhood-scale infiltration storage, swales, through off-site especially given predicted flood protection and water supply, be important to both increased impervious surfaces. climatic changes and TOOLS FOR NATURAL FLOOD can be used to reduce natural approaches places where data help identify Historical PROTECTION flood risk.

Courtesy David Rumsey, Cartography Associates. Cartography Rumsey, David Courtesy Courtesy The Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley. Berkeley. UC Library, Bancroft The Courtesy s This reportwas preparedboard for of directors: Rosemary Kamei • Joe Judge • Richard P d 1876 e, v reek sprea U.S. District Court C A number of these areas remain in public ownership, some llow gro . i utive summary c This publication is the Executive Summary from the report: Restoration Potential in the Historical Ecology Study: Historical Condition, Landscape Change, and Coyote Creek Watershed California. Grossinger et al. 2006. Contribution No. 426, San Francisco Estuary Institute, Oakland, Eastern Santa Clara Valley, California. District. Water or from the Santa Clara Valley For more information please see the full report, available at www.sfei.org rca 1840. i erryessa nto a w of which could be designed to support and benefit from occasional flooding. Restoration of natural hydrogeomorphology of Laguna Seca and the Fisher Creek drainage network could provide network drainage Creek Fisher the and Seca hydrogeomorphology of Laguna Restoration of natural wetland habitat for a range of native species. as well as attenuation peak flood off-site significant In the Existing flood-prone benches provide potential flood capacity. Mid-Coyote reach, there are many broad stream benches still subject to flooding reek’s natural morphology Stream benches—Coyote Creek’s natural ities reveals flood protection opportun Coyote Creek displayed a natural pattern of long, broad reaches with Coyote Creek displayed a natural pattern more with narrow, adjacent inset benches and terraces interspersed appropriate places for flood- confined reaches. This pattern suggests flood capacity. plain restoration projects to increase es—naturally wide versus narrow reaches ities—naturally ion opportun Identifying floodplain restorat c B i e x e 1870 [Land Case Map D-494], courtesy The Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley.

Coyote Creek watershed H i s t o r i c a l e C o l o g y S t u d y ES-1 A Note about Using Historical Information //

A historical landscape perspective is important not for sentimental or idealistic reasons, but because it helps us understand the contemporary landscape and its future potential.

Historical information is not directly predictive of the future. Controlling factors, including land use and climate, can change. Historical analysis helps recognize the controlling factors affecting local habitats and how they have changed, or stayed the same.

Reaching the past through restoration is not practical in all places. The past does not inherently represent what is needed now or in the future. It helps identify restoration and management options — ones well-calibrated to local landscape processes and history. It can reveal the resiliency and potential of the landscape. It shows how the pieces fit together.

What has been changed by the hands of people is not necessarily wrong. Landscapes need to be modified to meet the needs of people. But priorities are always changing. The landscape 100 years from now will be very different from today, based on our decisions.

Knowing the past helps us know how the present has evolved — the roles of human and natural history in shaping the present landscape. It helps identify where sustainable natural processes still persist and how to support them. It helps recognize both opportunities and constraints.

This knowledge yields options about how to move forward. It provides a basis for making informed decisions to maintain and improve the health of the local landscape. acknowledgements //

This project builds upon previous and related efforts by a number of local institutions, several of which we would like to mention specifically. Many staff of theS anta Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) contributed their time, expertise, archives, and previous research on Coyote Creek. Mike Rigney and other staff of the former Coyote Creek Riparian Station were involved in early research efforts. Staff of the Environmental Services Department of the City of San José have also contributed to local historical landscape mapping efforts. The Santa Clara University Environmental Studies Institute, including Amy Shachter, Lisa Kealhofer, Russ Skowronek, Elianna Strode, and Shana Weber, has been an indispensable partner in reestablishing local historical ecology studies. We would also like to recognize the pioneer- ing research done by Dr. Alan K. Brown, which has been inspirational.

As described below, the Coyote Creek Watershed Historical Ecology Study is part of a coordinated effort by a number of organizations and individuals to establish a founda- tion of historical landscape understanding for local environmental management. This effort has been funded through several related but distinct projects. We would like to thank those project managers for their help in producing a seamless set of products with long-term value: Rick Morat of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service San Francisco Bay Program, Christopher Richard of the Oakland Museum of California, Sarah Young of the SCVWD, and Luisa Valiela of the US Environmental Protection Agency Region IX. The project has also benefited from interactions with our partners on the SCVWD Watershed Stewardship Project, including Andy Collison of Philip Williams and Associates, Lucy Bu- chan of Eisenberg, Oliveri, and Associates (EOA), David Early and Isabelle Minn of Design, Community, and Environment, and team leader Clayton Creager of Tetra Tech.

This project owes great thanks to the Board members of the Silicon Valley Pollution Prevention Center, who made the overall historical ecology effort possible with a donation to SFEI: Andrew Gere, Bill Whitmer (President), Gail Brownell, Linda LeZotte, Margaret Bruce, Michael Stanley- Jones, Robin Brack, Robin Saunders, Rosemary Kamei, Tim Chow, and Trish Mulvey.

Historical research depends upon the careful preservation, stewardship and knowledge of original data sources by numerous experts working in diverse institutions. We are particularly grateful to the many archivists and researchers who generously assisted this project:

Virgil Bella, Loni Spin, Ramona Ramstead, and Matthew Booker, North Carolina State University Jim Wang, Records Management Division, Santa Bill Bousman, Santa Clara Valley Audubon Clara Valley Water District Society Michael Bhargava (formerly Friedly), Berkeley, Alan K. Brown, University of Ohio [Ret.] CA Lisa Christensen, California History Center, Dave Black, Moffett Field Museum De Anza College Clayton Creager and Megan Walsh, Cary Mock, University of South Carolina Tetra Tech, Inc. Nancy Novitski, Water Resources Archive, UC John Creaser and Fatemah Van Buren, Berkeley Earth Sciences and Map Library, UC Berkeley Eric Olson, Jill Bernhard, Tom Mohr, and Ray Charlene Duval, Sourisseau Academy, Fields, Santa Clara Valley Water District San José State University William Reed, Natural Resources Conservation Gwen Gee, Office of the County Surveyor, Santa Service Clara County Kenn Reiller, Santa Clara Valley Water District [Ret.] Lynn Huntsinger, Department of Environmental Paul Rogers, San José Mercury News Science, Policy, and Management, UC Berkeley David Ruiz, Pacific Aerial Surveys, Oakland, CA Eric Jacobsen, Coyote Creek Golf Club David Rumsey, San Francisco, CA Cynthia Jahns and Laura Campbell, Map Room, Science & Engineering Library, Wayne Sheldon, U.S. Department of Agriculture UC Santa Cruz Susan Snyder, James Eason, David Kessler, and Bob Johnston, California Room, Jack Von Euw, Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley San José Public Library Janet Sowers, William Lettis & Associates Carolyn Jones, Map and Imagery Laboratory, David Stahle, University of Arkansas Davidson Library, UC Santa Barbara Diana Stickler, San José Mercury News Kent Lightfoot, Archaeological Research Facility, UC Berkeley Elianna Strode, Shana Weber, Lisa Kealhoffer, and Amy Shachter, Santa Clara University Envi- Ed Luby and Clayton Drescher, Museum Studies ronmental Studies Institute Program, San Francisco State University Karla Tanner, San Francisco Bay National Beatrice Misa, Manila, Philippines Wildlife Refuge

Robert Leidy contributed to the fish assemblages section in Part IV. Invaluable guidance was provided by the members of the Technical Advisory Group – Todd Keeler-Wolf, Rob Leidy, Laurel Collins, Ken Lajoie, Josh Collins, Andy Collison, Lester McKee, and Charlene Duval – who generously contributed time and expertise to the project, and comment on the draft report. Helpful comments on the draft report were also provided by Paul Amato of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, Trish Mulvey, EOA staff, Rainer Hoenicke of SFEI, Christopher Richard, and Marc Klemencic, George Fowler, Zhen Shao, Kevin Sibley, Sarah Young, and Melissa Moore of SCVWD.

We would like to extend particular appreciation to the insightful, committed Mid-Coyote project team at the Santa Clara Valley Water District, who helped make this project hap- pen: Kevin Sibley, Zhen Shao, George Fowler, and Marc Klemencic. Project Manager Kevin Sibley went out of his way to make useful information available and provided a remark- able amount of expertise about Coyote Creek. Marc Klemencic contributed extensive and valuable comment on the draft report. Finally, Trish Mulvey catalyzed the initiation of a Historical Ecology Project for the Santa Clara Valley and has been an indispensable source of advice, comment, and guidance every step of the way. table of contents //

part I The Bottomlands II-13 introductions and methods The Alluvial Fans and natural levees II-14

Introduction I-2 The Hills II-14

Methodology I-3 Precedents for landscape types II-14

Data Collection I-3 HABITAT TYPES II-16 Historical Reference Database 1-11 HABITATS OF THE BAYLANDS II-16 Mapping methodology 1-11 HABITATS OF THE BOTTOMLANDS II-18

HABITATS OF THE alluvial fans part II and levees II-18 HISTORICAL LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS AT THE WATERSHED SCALE part III HISTORICAL CONDITIONS summary II-4 HISTORICAL LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS AT THE LOCAL SCALE Coyote Creek morphology II-4

Coyote Creek riparian habitat II-4 Geographic Division III-2

Lower Coyote II-5 Map Graphics III-4 The marshlands II-5 Lower Coyote Creek Discontinuous creeks II-5 and Adjacent Areas III-5

Groundwater re-emergence II-5 Lower Coyote Creek III-12

Wetlands and dry lands II-8 Overflow Channels III-14

Roblars II-8 Fresh-Brackish Tidal Marsh Zones III-15 Bottomlands II-8 Tidal Marshland III-16 Freshwater wetlands II-8 Lower Penitencia Creek Sausals II-9 and Penitencia Pond III-17 Lagunas II-9 The Tidal Marsh-Alkali Habitat controls II-9 Meadow Ecotone III-18

Penitencia Pond III-18 LANDSCAPE TYPES II-9 Lower Penitencia Creek III-19 The Bay II-12 Distributary Creeks and sausals III-20 The Baylands II-12 Mid-Coyote Creek Ways to Use the and Adjacent Areas III-23 Historical Ecology Study IV-55

Wetlands at the Base Restoration Opportunities IV-58 of the Penitencia Creek Fan III-32

Laguna Socayre III-33 Summary of Key Findings IV-67 historical ecology tools IV-67 Sycamore Grove III-34 Pre-modification ConditionS iV-67 Distributary Creeks III-36 Natural Flood Protection IV-68 Coyote Creek/South San José III-37 Channel Stability IV-69

Coyote Creek/Coyote Valley III-29 Stream Restoration IV-70

Braided Channel III-54 Riparian Habitat Restoration iV-70

Laguna Seca III-55 flow IV-71

Alvirez Canal III-56 Restoration of Wetland Habitats IV-71 Connection to Coyote Creek III-60 Restoration of distributed trees Sausal III-60 in Parks and NeighborhoodS iV-71 part IV LANDscaPe change bibliography and land use chronology IV-2 references

LANDSCAPE TRAJECTORIES Iv-9 literature R-1

Channel Change: Coyote Personal communications r-16 Creek Tributaries IV-9

Channel Change: Coyote Creek IV-17

Hydrology IV-36 appendices

riparian habitat IV-41 glossary of terms A-1

Wetland Habitat IV-49 historical evidence for fish assemblages A-5 Native Species Support Functions IV-49

RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS IV-55 list of figures, maps, tables //

figures & Maps

Figure I-1. Document timing in relation to land use history ...... I-4

Figure I-2. Importance of a large data set and source scholarship ...... I-4

Figure II-1. The Project study area ...... II-2

Figure II-2. Historical Landscape Patterns along Coyote Creek ...... II-3

Figure II-3. Birdseye View of Coyote Creek in 1869 ...... II-6

Figure II-4. Land Use Patterns ...... II-10

Figure II-5. Landscape types ...... II-11

Figure II-6. Torbert’s 1936 Diagram Showing Landscape Types...... II-15

Figure II-7. Dotted lines representing low tide separate tidally-exposed flats ...... II-16

Figure II-8. Conceptual representation of tidal marshland ...... II-18

Figure II-9. Plane table survey of tidal marshland ...... II-21

Figure II-10. “Water stood five feet above ground surface before reclamation”...... II-29

Figure II-11. “laguna seca reclamation”, 1916 ...... II-30

Figure II-12. Depictions of willow groves downstream of Upper Penitencia Creek ...... II-31

Figure II-13. The lowest natural reaches of Norwood Creek, 1939 and 2002 ...... II-34

Figure II-14. Thompson Creek in 1939 and 2002 ...... II-35

Figure II-15. Conceptual diagram of typical historical channel cross- section ...... II-35

Figure II-16. Coyote Creek at Story Road, 1876...... II-36

Figure II-17. “Profile [of] Phelan Avenue from Monterey Rd. to Coyote Creek. March 29, 1907.” ...... II-37

Figure II-18. Independent maps of Coyote Creek, 1850-1904 ...... II-38

Figure II-19. Coyote Creek at Highway 880: 1874 (lower left), 1939 (upper left), and 2002 ...... II-40

Figure II-20. Quimby Creek at the base of the foothills in 1939 and 2002 ...... II-41

Figure II-21. Cattle grazing ...... II-41

Figure II-22. Sycamore bearing tree on a Herrmann survey ...... II-43

Figure II-23. Sycamore on occasionally flooded terrace of Coyote Creek, ...... II-44

Figure II-24. Early Aerial Photographic Evidence for Valley Oak Savanna ...... II-47

Figure II-25. Depictions of valley oak savanna ...... II-48

Figure II-26. “The Valley Was Covered with Big Oaks” ...... II-49

Figure II-27. Blossom Hill Road in 1939 and 2002 ...... II-50

Figure II-28. Residual Valley Oak among Palms, Blossom Hill Drive ...... II-50

FIGURE III-1. Reference map dividing Coyote Creek and its attending valley floor into four major sections...... III-3

Map 1A-ca.1800. Landscape features during initial Euro-American settlement, circa 1769-1850 ...... III-6

Map 1B-ca.1800. Landscape features during initial Euro-American settlement, circa 1769-1850 ...... III-7

Map 1A-1939. Photomosaic of early aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-8 Map 1A-2002. Modern aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-9 map 1b-1939. Photomosaic of early aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-10 map 1b-2002. Modern aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-11

Figure III-2. Seasonal ponding in the bottomlands along lower Coyote Creek, 1896...... III-12

Figure III-3. Sequential images of lower Coyote Creek ...... III-13

Figure III-4. Lower Coyote Creek circa 1905...... III-14

Figure III-5. Lower Coyote Creek 2005...... III-15

Figure III-6. Residual “Spring Run” Morphology...... III-15

Figure III-7. Bottomland-Alluvial Fan Boundary in Milpitas...... III-19

Figure III-8. Calera Creek Sink, 1859...... III-20

Figure III-9. “Sausal at sink of Milpitas Creek” ...... III-21 map 2A-Ca.1800. Landscape features during initial Euro-American settlement, circa 1769-1850 ...... III-24 map 2b-Ca.1800. Landscape features during initial Euro-American settlement, circa 1769-1850 ...... III-25 map 2a-1939. Photomosaic of early aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-26 map 2a-2002. Modern aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay ...... III-27 map 2b-1939. Photomosaic of early aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-28 map 2b-2002. Modern aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay ...... III-29

Figure III-10. Coyote Creek at Oakland Road in 1939 and 2002 ...... III-30

Figure III-11. Photographs of Coyote Creek between the Oakland Road and Southern Pacific Railroad 1896 ...... III-30

Figure III-12. Stream Benches Become Parks...... III-31

Figure III-13. Residual elements of the former lower Penitencia Creek channel...... III-32

Figure III-14. Small perennial pond of the Laguna Socayre complex, 1876...... III-33

Figure III-15. Location of Laguna Socayre and Lake Cunningham in 1939 and 2002 ...... III-34

Figure III-16. Temporary ponding at Historical Laguna Socayre...... III-34

Figure III-17. Saltgrass-alkali meadow at Lake Cunningham Regional Park...... III-35

Figure III-18. California sycamores along Oakland Road...... III-36

Map 3A-ca.1800. Landscape features during initial Euro-American settlement, circa 1769-1850 ...... III-38

Map 3B-ca.1800. Landscape features during initial Euro-American settlement, circa 1769-1850 ...... III-39 map 3a-1939. Photomosaic of early aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-40 map 3a-2002. Modern aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-41 map 3b-1939. Photomosaic of early aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-42 map 3B-2002. Modern aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-43

Figure III-20. Coyote Creek at Cottonwood Lake in 1939 and 2002 ...... III-44

Figure III-19. Valley oak along Coyote Road...... III-44

Figure III-21. Sycamore circle at Cottonwood Lake...... III-45

Figure III-22. Broad, gravelly Coyote creek bed immediately downstream of Coyote narrows, circa 1930...... III-46 Figure III-23. The subtle nest made by a lesser nighthawk in the dry gravelly bed of Coyote Creek...... III-46

Map 4A-ca.1800. Landscape features during initial Euro-American settlement, circa 1769-1850 ...... III-48

Map 4B-ca.1800. Landscape features during initial Euro-American settlement, circa 1769-1850 ...... III-49

Map 4A-1939. Photomosaic of early aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-50

Map 4A-2002. Modern aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-51

Map 4B-1939. Photomosaic of early aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-52

Map 4B-2002. Modern aerial imagery, with historical landscape features overlay...... III-53

Figure III-24. Part of the great Valley oak savanna south of Laguna Seca, circa 1896...... III-54

Figure III-25. Coyote Creek at the Coyote Creek Golf Club in 1939 and 2002 ...... III-55

Figure III-26. Coyote Creek Immediately Downstream of Ogier Ponds in 1939 and 2002 ...... III-56

Figure III-27. Laguna Seca in 1847, 1915-16, 1939, and 2002...... III-57

Figure III-28. Laguna Seca Panorama, December 28, 1916 ...... III-58

Figure III-29. Laguna Seca panorama across a tule pond, December 20, 1916...... III-60

Figure III-30. Groundwater seepage at north end of former Laguna Seca ...... III-60

Figure III-31. Construction of the Laguna Seca Outlet Canal, February 2, 1917...... III-61

Figure III-32. Laguna Seca Willow Grove, 1917...... III-61

Figure IV-1. Climate timeline for Santa Clara Valley...... IV-2

Figure IV-2. LAND USE TIMELINE for coyote creek...... IV-3

Figure IV-3. Mission Era Stocking Levels in the Santa Clara Valley...... IV-4

Figure IV-4. Reported numbers of cattle and sheep in Santa Clara County, 1786-1896...... IV-5

Figure IV-5. Coyote Rock Crusher...... IV-6

Figure IV-6. Timing of Salt Pond Development at the Northern End of Santa Clara Valley...... IV-7

Figure iv-7A. Expansion of the Coyote Creek watershed drainage network with constructed channels ...... IV-10

Figure IV-7b. Origin of modern creeks tributary to Coyote Creek ...... IV-10

Figure IV-8. Relative proportion of natural versus artificial channel by creek...... IV-12

Figure IV-9. Changes in functional watershed area...... IV-14

Figure iv-10. Channel form at South babb Creek just above Clayton Road...... IV-16

Figure IV-11. Stream sediment removal 1977-2004...... IV-17

Figure IV-12. Historical Morphology, Hydrology, and Habitat of Coyote Creek...... IV-18

Figure IV-13. Coyote Creek Crossings in 1895...... IV-21

Figure IV-14. Coyote Creek at Kelley Park, 1939 and 2002 ...... IV-22

Figure IV-15. Stream benches Mid-Coyote Creek...... IV-25

Figure IV-16. Detailed map of lower Coyote Creek, 1874...... IV-26

Figure IV-17. Lower Coyote Creek Historical Overflow Patterns...... IV-28

Figure IV-18. Coyote Creek at william and Olinder Parks in 1850 (lower left), 1939 (upper left), and 2002 ...... IV-30

Figure IV-19. Historical and Modern Longitudinal Profile Data for Coyote Creek...... IV-32 Figure IV-20. Historical and Modern Longitudinal Profile Data for Coyote Creek ...... IV-33

Figure IV-21. Construction Diagram for the “Santa Clara St. Bridge over the Coyote River”...... IV-34

Figure IV-22. Measured cross-sections at the Santa Clara Street bridge...... IV-37

Figure IV-24. Measured cross-sections at the William Street bridge ...... IV-37

Figure IV-23. Measured cross-sections taken upstream from the Santa Clara Street bridge...... IV-37

Figure IV-25. Measured cross-sections taken upstream from the William Street bridge...... IV-37

Figure IV-26. Measured and conceptual cross-sections from the Highway 880/Charcot Ave area...... IV-37

Figure IV-27. Change in monthly runoff distribution for Coyote Creek...... IV-41

Figure IV-28. Riparian recovery on Lower Coyote Creek between 1939 and 2002 ...... IV-42

Figure IV-29. Historical Change in Coyote Creek Riparian Area Width...... IV-43

Figure IV-30. Change in monthly rainfall distribution for San José...... IV-44

Figure IV-31. Riparian recovery on Upper Penitencia Creek between 1939 and 2002 ...... IV-45

Figure IV-32. Changes in Coyote Creek riparian habitat along Coyote Road between 1896 and 2005...... IV-46 figure IV-34. Laguna Seca 1919/2005...... IV-60 figure IV-35. Coyote Creek Immediately Downstream of the Coyote Creek Golf Club in 1939 and 2002 ...... IV-62 figure IV-36. Coyote Creek Channel at Highway 880 Crossing circa 1800, 1939, and 2002 ...... IV-66

tables Table I-1. Certainty levels...... I-15

Table I-2. Data recorded in the landscape synthesis GIS ...... I-16

Table I-3. Technical advisory group members ...... II-17 table II-1. Habitat “Crosswalk” to Wetland and Vegetation Classifications...... II-17 table II-2. “Flora of Gravelly Flood Beds” ...... II-45

TABLE IV-1. Changes in the Density of Drainage Serving the Valley Floor along Coyote Creek...... IV-13

Table IV-2. Historical Evidence for Channel Depth...... IV-35

Table IV-4. Estimated historical habitat acreages for the Coyote Creek study area...... IV-49

Table IV-5. Probable historical habitat-fish relationships in the Coyote Creek watershed...... IV-51

Table IV-6. Environmental management opportunities and constraints...... IV-58

Table IV-33. Schematic diagram of the tidal template...... IV-59

Table IV-7. Watershed restoration conceptual framework...... IV-64

san francisco estuary institute // final report I - Herrmann 1874a: Survey Notes of June 24 [Coyote Book 3] Book [Coyote 24 June of Notes Survey 1874a: Herrmann art I, we describe the context for the project and provide P In an overview of the methodologiescompilation, used in and data interpretation. collection, // part I introductions and methods C

e t o y o p a r t I // introductions and methods C d e h s r e t a w k e e r H l a c i r o t s i E y g o l o c Introduction The Study, including this report and the associated S

y d u t In recent years, a number of environmental research Geographic Information System (GIS) database, is and management efforts in the Santa Clara Valley intended to support the development of a more (“the Valley”) have recognized the need for a bet- integrated and synergistic vision for the diverse ter understanding of historical conditions. Historical environmental management activities taking place information is an essential tool for setting specific, in the Coyote Creek Watershed. It is designed to be locally appropriate habitat goals and developing spec- used in the Mid-Coyote Flood Protection Project for ifications for restoration design. Understanding how the identification of restoration opportunities and the the different habitats that comprise the Valley have application of natural flood protection principles. The been altered through sequential modifications helps Study is also made available for use by other stream determine their relative potential for recovery and management and regional planning efforts such as the appropriate measures to take. Fortunately, the Santa Santa Clara County Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Clara Valley has a wealth of historical information, Community Conservation Plan (HCP/NCCP), Coyote representing an untapped resource for understanding Creek Parkway Master Plan project, and others. the origins and restoration potential of the present- This report is structured as follows. In Part I, we day landscape. describe the project context, contributors, sources The Coyote Creek Watershed Historical Ecology of information, and general methodology. Part II Study was designed by Santa Clara Valley Water describes Historical Conditions at the Watershed Scale, District (SCVWD) staff, the San Francisco Estuary summarizing conditions along the Coyote Creek Val- Institute (SFEI), and other interested parties as a ley floor and defines landscape and habitat types. stand-alone yet integrated component of a larger This section establishes a landscape framework for the Santa Clara Valley Historical Ecology Project. This subsequent sections, while explaining how we identified coordinated regional effort includes, in addition to and mapped historical features. Part III, Historical the Coyote Creek Study, work carried out by SFEI as Conditions at the Local Scale, describes early conditions part of the SCVWD Watershed Stewardship Project, in the Coyote Creek watershed in more detail, by divid- the Historical Tidal Marsh Maps Project, the Oak- ing the valley floor portion of the watershed into four land Museum Baylands and Creeks of the South San geographic areas. In Part IV, Landscape Change, we Francisco Bay map, and the Silicon Valley Pollution summarize key aspects of the complex human history Prevention Center-sponsored Santa Clara Valley that has shaped the watershed, assess how different Historical Ecology Project. The work presented here components of the landscape have changed , and discuss benefits directly from these efforts. the implications for restoration and management.

I -

san francisco estuary institute // final report I - - - . To record variations in confi- . To ) -2 . The use of multiple, complemen- ) -1 Figure I ( Figure I Grossinger 2001). tary documents to compare and calibrate historical data tary documents to compare and calibrate allows sources, in combination with source scholarship, from a given the maximum value of data to be acquired data source dence level associated with different mapped features dence level associated with different certainty levels in the project GIS, we used a system of ( While describing the hundreds of historical data sources sources data historical of hundreds the describing While this of scope the beyond is detail in project this in used several review briefly we section following the in report, illustrate examples These sources. important most the of docu early these of some of skills impressive the both of range diverse the and landscape the of mentarians historical a to useful be can that sources information and purposes different the Recognizing study. ecology of likelihood the improves documents historical of origins interpretation. accurate the to report, the in incorporate to attempt also We —both imagery historical of selection a practical, extent of sampling a provide to and landscape the illustrate to on efforts research future to available data graphic the por small a just represent images These topics. related region. the for record historical the of tion we developed substantial background scholarship to we developed substantial This process involved guide accurate interpretation. key aspects of historical document understanding three the social/ context: the technical methods or techniques, the document personal context that determined why relation to timing in was created, and the document’s and Askev- contemporary and prior land use (Grossinger old 2005; - - - - ata Collection & Interpretation ata We collected information about historical conditions collected information about historical conditions We from an array of sources. These included materials produced by federal and local agencies, individuals, Spanish/Mexican-era residents, professional and non- professional cartographers, photographers, writers, and engineers. Since these materials were produced for divergent reasons using a range of techniques, ing the wealth of early information risks erroneous erroneous risks information early of wealth the ing origins the and condition natural about interpretations and (Grossinger issues environmental present-day of dataset historical a strong as develop To 2005). Askevold of variety wide a from materials acquired we possible, as still resources historical additional Inevitably, institutions. relevant and new reveal likely will and found, be to exist documented carefully we reason this For information. poten some note also We GIS. the in used sources the not were we that information of sources valuable tially project. this of course the in assess to able fully able to researchers is actually remarkably extensive. It It extensive. remarkably actually is researchers to able neglect but data, these access to time-consuming be can While many environmental research projects still assess assess still projects research environmental many While relatively few a only using change landscape historical avail potentially dataset the documents, historical recent pretation of specific landscape features and processes is processes and features landscape specific of pretation sections. relevant the in report the throughout presented D This methodology section describes the general methods methods general the describes section methodology This data historical synthesize and interpret, acquire, to used inter the about information More products. technical into Methodology C

e t o y o p a r t I // introductions and methods C d e h s r e t a w k e e r

%0$6.&/55*.*/(*/3&-"5*0/50-"/%64&)*4503: 4"/5"$-"3"7"--&:

H l a c i r o t s i

,FZ -BOE )JTUPSJDBM

E TDBQF y g o l o c %PDVNFOUT QIPUP 64%" 4QBOJTI 64 64$(4 HSBQIT BFSJBM FYQMPSFST .FYJDBO $PBTU BOE CZ"MJDF QIPUP KPVSOBMT EJTF×PT 4VSWFZ 64(4 )BSF HSBQIZ S y d u t

/BUJWFNBOBHFNFOU %JUDIJOHPGWBMMFZnPPS $POUFNQPSBSZ FYUFOTJPOPGEJTDPOUJOV $BQBDJUZMFWFMHSB[JOH PVTTUSFBNDIBOOFMT BOE 5JEBMNBSTISFDMBNBUJPO 1SJPS *OUFOTJWFBHSJDVMUVSF -BOE6TF -BOETVSGBDFTVCTJEFODFEVFUP HSPVOEXBUFSQVNQJOH

Figure I-1. Document timing in relation to land use history. Historical documents should be examined with an understanding of the prior land uses that have shaped a given site (from Grossinger and Askevold 2005).

EFUBJMFEBOBMZTJT 3: 50 NBYJNVNVTFPGEBUB &$ "+ 53 5 $ BCJMJUZUPBTTFTTFSSPST +& 0 3 JOUFSQSFUTVCUMFGFBUVSFT 1 -

" *$ 1 : 5 MJNJUFEVTF HFOFSBMJ[FE JOUFSQSFUBUJPOT

QPUFOUJBM GPS NJTJOUFSQSFUBUJPO %*7&34*5:26"/5*5:0'4063$&4

6/%&345"/%*/(0'%"5"4063$&

Figure I-2. Importance of a large data set and source scholarship to accurate interpretation of historical data. In early stages of a project, there are many new sources and relatively little understanding of them. After an aggressive data collection phase, the number of new available documents diminishes and comparative analysis increases source understanding. I -

san francisco estuary institute // final report I - Courtesy The Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley. US District Court, Northern District [184-?]a. Land Case Map E-900. - ), ), diseños s and 1840 and s can land grant sketches ( Mexican land grant 1830 tion, and varying systems of symbols and styles. Despite tion, and varying systems of symbols they have been their substantial infomation content, rarely used for environmental research. As the Mission system disintegrated, influential Mexican disintegrated, influential Mexican As the Mission system for land citizens submitted claims to the government desired land, grants. The accompanying sketches of men, show generally produced by anonymous, untrained creeks, wetlands, distinctive features of the land such as annota handwritten watercolors, with often woods, and C

e t o y o p a r t I // introductions and methods C d e h s r e t a w k e e r

“The long line followed generally the course of the Sanjon, being a little without it at the southern end, and a little within it at the northern end.” (Day 1852) H l a c i r o t s i E y g o l o c Public land survey transects, 1850s to

1870s S

y d u t Across the country, Public Land Surveys authorized by the U.S. Surveyor General established the ubiquitous pattern of Township quadrants, each divided into 36 “sections” one square mile in size. In Santa Clara Val- ley, as in most of California’s coastal valleys and plains south of the Russian River, the abstract rectangular grid was broken by the landscape-based Mexican land grants. Official surveys attempted to follow the original grant boundaries, meaning they had to find and map the natural landmarks such as creeks, marshlands, and willow groves, in addition to the standard sectional boundaries.

Day 1854. Courtesy the Bureau of Land Management.

I -

Rodgers and Kerr 1857, Courtesy National Ocean Services Ocean National Courtesy 1857, Kerr and Rodgers san francisco estuary institute // final report I - s and 1890 s arshlands, the marshlands, ional maps of igat Nav 1850 Shorthanded during the post-Gold Rush Bay Area boom, aid the United States Coast Survey tapped a 24-year-old named David Kerr to lead the original surveys of the reputation He not only upheld the agency’s South Bay. and Askevold (Grossinger and accuracy scientific rigor for 2005), but produced some of the most detailed maps Baylands. ever of the region’s 1857). showing

(Healy

Survey

1857

Coast

year the

the

during

Survey Superintendent

the the

of of

Report

progress

the and placed in charge of Mr. by Sub-Assistant Rodgers, served as aid for several years in the David Kerr, who had and previously in the triangulation topographical party, work on San Francisco bay.” party engaged in the party was organized the season, a second practible within —from in the field-work the largest result order to secure “In C

e t o y o p a r t I // introductions and methods C d e h s r e t a w k e e r H l a c i r o t s i

E Saunders ca. 1875. Courtesy Sourisseau Academy. y g o l o c

A. T. Herrmann, Surveyor and Engineer,

s s

S 1870 to 1920 y d u t A prolific and fastidious professional, Adolph Herr- mann produced maps of the Santa Clara Valley for over half a century. He and his brother Carl immigrated from Germany and established the firm Herrmann Bros. Each served as Santa Clara County Surveyor for several years. A descendent saved his extensive field notes, including survey books on Coyote Creek, from being discarded. His maps and field notes now reside at the County Sur-

veyors Office. Colahan & Pomeroy 1870

Herrmann 1874a: Survey Notes of June 12 [Coyote Book 3] Courtesy Santa Clara County Surveyors Office.

I -

san francisco estuary institute // final report I - U.S. Census 1900 Hare ca. 1905c. Courtesy The Bancroft Library, UC Berkleley. hotographer, circa 1900 Photographer, Alice Iola Hare, A mother of four, Alice Iola Hare produced some of the Alice A mother of four, natural of the Santa Clara Valley’s earliest photographs were photo- landscape features, while most people as a signifi- graphing new buildings. Now recognized her photographs cant turn-of the-century body of work, Photo- Bancroft Library. are stored at the UC Berkeley’s photographers, graphs by Hare and other anonymous expe- especially as part of the extravagant photograph centennial ditions conducted for the San Jose Mercury’s provide a set of publication (Shortridge 1896), together identify chan- early creek images in which we can often habitat. nel depth, riparian vegetation, and fish C

e t o y o p a r t I // introductions and methods C d e h s r e t a w k e e r H l a c i r o t s i E y g o l o c Agricultural Adjustment Administration aerial photography, 1939 S

y d u t Following the Depression, the government turned to aerial photography to develop an organized approach to managing crop production. Hundreds of images taken from 20,000 feet over the Santa Clara Valley in the summer of 1939 created the first comprehensive photography of the region. Details from the photomosaic we created are used throughout the report.

AAA 1939

I - 10

san francisco estuary institute // final report I - 11 - Time Period arget T We use a wide variety of source materials to document use a wide We Euro-American prevailing conditions prior to significant modification. Because landscape modification occurs heterogeneously and over time, information sources from the time of European contact through to the present can provide evidence of “time of contact” conditions. Documents are examined in the context of the relatively identify to climate and activities contemporary evidence in more modified areas, pristine features or, for prior condition. Landscape conditions change through time naturally, even prior to the extreme modifications following colonization. While recognizing that the landscape is dynamic, we aim to map prevailing or average condi Anderson Dam. We used the most recent regional used the most Anderson Dam. We soils contacts to define the mapping of bedrock-alluvial (Knudsen et al. 2000). Since the floor edge of the Valley Coyote Creek modern watershed boundary between catchments, and Guadalupe River follows storm drain boundary between we defined a generalized historical In concert the two streams based upon topography. Marsh Mapping Project, the his- with the Historical Tidal Baylands. In defin- torical picture was extended into the area through ing the Coyote Creek watershed mapping to the the Baylands, tidal sloughs directly connecting but not tidal portion of Coyote Creek were included, areas (which the entire watersheds draining to those and a number of would have included Guadalupe River Alameda County watersheds). - - - - atabase Map Boundary tion of the Coyote Creek watershed, downstream from The study area for this project is the valley floor por Mapping methodology We customized the database software Endnote to fit the the fit to Endnote software database the customized We database the into input were Documents needs. project correspond number record a with labeled physically and D Reference Historical in involved set data historical voluminous the track To methods and software bibliographic study, of type this the of advance in well and carefully chosen be must sources obscure many the Given collection. data of onset not were often formats citation standardized use, we the adapted and formats developed we so available, transparency and consistency maintain to software process This process. gathering data the throughout the reporting only not of goal the with undertaken was making but sources, historical from gleaned materials their recommending existence, their of aware user the manner a in citations our presenting and use, expanded resources. those to easily reader the lead will that ing to the database. With records such as Land Case tes Case Land as such records With database. the to ing becomes report the in to referred witness each timonies, record independent an given was and “reporter” the dupli Case Land the for record entire the with number, with used was approach similar A witness. each for cated Santa from recovered notes survey and maps various the Land of Bureau the and Office Surveyor’s County’s Clara Management. C

e t o y o p a r t I // introductions and methods C d e h s r e t a w k e e r H l a c i r o t s i E y g o l o c tions in the decades surrounding initial Euro-American each side — we were able to ensure that only the most occupation, circa 1769-1850. We map features that accurate part of the photo were used. S

y d u t tend to persist over several centuries or more — such as stream channels, topographically controlled wet- Each photo was processed for georectification using the lands, oak woodlands — controlled by geomorphic and Leica Photogrammetry Suite module of ERDAS Imagine climatic processes that have been relatively stable in 8.7. Both vertical and horizontal reference data were used the western United States for the past several hundred to georectify the photographs. Aerial imagery from 2002 years (e.g. Meko et al. 2001). The mapped condition was used as the horizontal reference to tie the historical reflects the best available evidence for habitat type, photograph to geographic space, and 30-meter digital size, and location prior to significant Euro-American elevation model data was used as the vertical reference to modification. adjust the photographs for vertical displacement.

Development of Early Aerial The aerial photographs were linked to an already Photography Photomosaic georeferenced image by finding corresponding points Relatively early black and white aerial photography between the historical aerial image and the contempo- exists for the entire project area, and most of the rary image. Ten to fifteen points were located for each Coyote Creek watershed is covered by three continuous photo, and these were used by the software to generate flight lines from 1939. For the remaining areas not cov- additional points through an automatic tie point gener- ered by the 1939 flight lines — in the south portion of ating process. These were then used as control points in Coyote Valley — eleven additional aerial photographs the triangulation process, which places each photograph were acquired, including imagery flown in 1940, 1948, in geographic space. and 1950. Digital images of the aerial photographs were acquired from a wide variety of sources, including Locating corresponding points was not always an easy the Santa Clara Valley Water District, the U.S. Geological task given the highly altered landscape. Road intersec- Survey in Menlo Park, and the University of California at tions or railroad crossings were commonly used, though Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, and Berkeley. We used digi- this was tempered by the knowledge that roads on the tal versions when available but otherwise scanned the modern photography have usually been widened or re- images at 600 pixels per inch (ppi) using SFEI’s in-house engineered, possibly changing the absolute location and large format flatbed scanner (Microtek ScanMaker certainly the width of the road. In the undeveloped hills, 9800XL). Because considerable overlap exists between oaks that persisted could be found. Again, these had to each photo — approximately 15% overlap between used carefully, as the tree’s crown shape could change each photo along the flight line and 25% overlap on significantly.

I - 12

san francisco estuary institute // final report I - 13 - - High resolution scans of paper maps were High resolution scans imported into ArcGIS; both Ground control points were located on the historical map and on georeferenced the contemporary aerial photography (called reference data); added Using a georeferencing tool, links were to the to tie the point on the historical map point; reference data for each ground control how well The historical map was evaluated for by mea- it corresponded to the reference data between features that suring the difference sources. occur on both historical and modern the When the best possible fit was obtained, georeferencing was finalized. GIS Development • • • • ArcMap GIS software was used to collect, catalog, analyze, and display the spatial components of the study area. Georeferencing historical maps and early aerial photographs allowed us to compare historical layers to each other and to contemporary aerial photography and maps. We were able to essentially look through time by assembling maps from different time periods, which allowed us to both assess the different data sources and to better understand change. Additionally, the georefer enced maps could be used as means to geographi cally locate textual information gathered from surveyor notes, early explorers’ journals, travelers’ accounts, and newspaper articles. Steps taken to complete this process were as follows: Steps taken to complete - ical Map Georeferencing Histor Each map was evaluated for its suitability for inclusion in the GIS. Factors considered include: the potential georeferenced (i.e. were of the map to be effectively suitable control points available for georeferencing?); the quality of the information available on the map (i.e. does the map contain critical data?); and are the features on the map not available on an already georeferenced source (i.e. would georeferencing duplicate an already captured source?). If the map met these criteria, it was georeferenced. ated for their potential usefulness as georeferenced ated for their potential usefulness as features on sources. Georeferencing a map — linking in an already the historical map to corresponding points georeferenced source — allows the historical map to be used in a GIS. Through the data collection process, we acquired a wide a acquired we process, collection data the Through evalu was maps these of Each maps. historical of variety Once individual photographs were georectified, they Once individual photographs a continuous photomosaic of the were used to create possible, only the center of the study area. Whenever of the various individual photograph was used. Because in tone and occa- sources of the images, differences in the mosaic, sionally in image quality can be seen watershed. Addi- especially at the very south end of the closely corresponds the resulting imagery more tionally, flatter in imagery georectified contemporary to spatially agreement rather than hillier areas. As such, alignment flat areas, to 15 ranges from 0 to 15 meters in relatively to 30 meters in the hilly areas. C

e t o y o p a r t I // introductions and methods C d e h s r e t a w k e e r H l a c i r o t s i E y g o l o c accuracy of different parts of the map and identify the The GIS was also used to create a synthesis of the his- original sources. Certainty definitions are described below S

y d u t torical landscape as GIS vector layers. By synthesizing and in Table I-1. A sample from the GIS attribute table is selected data from georeferenced maps and photo- presented as Table I-2. Additional technical specifications graphs combined with narrative sources, we constructed about the GIS are available in the metadata. a composite map representing the historical landscape. Polygons, lines, and point layers were developed to Certainty of Interpretation depict features in the historical landscape. The following certainty level codes are used in the cov- erage attribute “InterpCert”: Polygon features include wet meadow, saltgrass-alkali High (H): Feature definitely representative of condi- meadows (salitroso), seasonal lake (laguna seca), peren- tions circa 1769-1850. nial freshwater ponds and wetlands (lagunas/tular), Medium (M): Feature probably representative of willow grove (sausal), sycamore grove (alisal), valley oak conditions circa 1769-1850. savanna (roblar), and dry grassland. Historical creeks Low (L): Feature possibly representative of conditions and their distributaries were captured as linear features. circa 1769-1850. The Coyote Creek channel was depicted as both a single line and as a wider polygon area. The riparian area Certainty of Size and Shape of Coyote Creek—bars, islands, and regularly flooded The following certainty level codes are used in the cov- inset benches—was created as a polygon feature. The erage attribute “Shape_Cert”: tidal marsh area was developed from detailed maps High (H): Accurate source material that probably created by the U.S. Coast Survey in 1853 and 1897 and closely follows actual shape; estimated to be correct Herrmann (1874c), and shows the many pannes and to within 10% of actual area. complex network of channels and tidal flats. Medium (M): Less accurate source material that probably generally follows actual shape; estimated to be Attribution of Mapped Features correct to within 50% of actual area. To record the variations in source data and confidence level Low (L): Not necessarily representative of actual associated with different features on the map, we devel- shape/size. oped a set of feature attributes used in the project GIS. The use of attributes on a feature-by-feature basis allows the Certainty of Location GIS to serve as a catalogue of information sources and a The following certainty level codes are used in the cov- basis for a range of practical uses in the future (Grossinger erage attribute “Loc_Cert”: 2001). Using this report and the GIS, users can assess the Very High (XH): Expected maximum horizontal dis-

I - 14

san francisco estuary institute // final report I - 15 LOCATION Expected maximum horizontal Expected maximum horizontal Expected maximum horizontal Expected maximum horizontal Expected maximum horizontal displacement less than 50 meters. less than displacement displacement less than 15 meters. less than displacement displacement less than 150 meters. displacement displacement less than 500 meters. displacement displacement less than 2500 meters. displacement – – SIZE Source actual shape/size. The major source materials used to map the feature The major source materials the extent possible, standard textual are listed using, to can be citation form. Full bibliographic information in the biblio- obtained from the corresponding record graphic database and/or report bibliography. within 50% of actual area. within 10% of actual area. Accurate source material that that material source Accurate probably closely follows actual closely follows probably Not necessarily representative of representative Not necessarily shape; estimated to be correct to be correct to to shape; estimated shape; estimated to be correct to be correct to to shape; estimated probably generally follows actual follows generally probably Less accurate source material that that material source accurate Less – – INTERPRETATION conditions circa 1769-1850. circa conditions conditions circa 1769-1850. circa conditions conditions circa 1769-1850. circa conditions for historical landscape synthesis. Standards can vary depending on scale and emphasis. Feature possibly representative of possibly representative Feature Feature probably representative of representative probably Feature Feature definitely representative of representative definitely Feature Expected maximum horizontal dis- nty levels i erta C

LOW HIGH “Definite” “Definite” “Possible” “Possible” MEDIUM -1. “Probable” I EXTRA LOW EXTRA HIGH (Location only) (Location (Location only) (Location Expected maximum horizontal displacement (L): Expected maximum horizontal displacement Low less than 500 meters. placement less than 15 meters. placement less than horizontal displace- High (H): Expected maximum ment less than 50 meters. - Medium (M): Expected maximum horizontal displace ment less than 150 meters. Very Low (XL): Low Very placement less than 2500 meters.

Table

e t o y o p a r t I // introductions and methods C d e h s r e t a w k e e r H l a c i r o t s i E y g o l o c ID Habitat_Type Primary_Source Secondary_Source Interp. Shape Location Certainty Certainty Certainty

1 Sausal SCVWD 1916 photos: 116, 130, 132, 137 USGS Morgan Hill 1917 M M M S y d u t 2 Laguna Seca Lyman 1847 USGS Morgan Hill 1917, USGS Los Gatos 1919, H M H Thompson and West 1876, SCVWD Vault 1917 photos: 104, 105, 108

3 Tular USGS Morgan Hill 1917 Lyman 1847 H M M

4 Laguna SCVWD 1916-18 photos: 64-65, 97, 146 AAA 1939 H M M

5 Laguna Thompson and West Map Sheet Five 1876 H H M

6 Laguna SCVWD Vault 1916-18 photos: 64-65, 97, 146 AAA 1939 H M M

7 Laguna SCVWD Vault 1916-18 photos: 58-59, 64-65, 97, 146 AAA 1939 H M M

8 Sausal Palou 1774 in Bolton 1933 H L M

9 Tular USGS San Jose 1899, Thompson 1866: 511 U.S. District Court 1859a. (Yerba Buena), Thompson M M M and West 1876

10 Laguna Seca USGS San Jose 1899, Thompson 1866: 511 U.S. District Court 1859a. (Yerba Buena), Thompson H M M and West 1876

11 Sausal Westdahl 1897, Houghton 1860, Pico 1860, Pomeroy 1860 L H XH

12 Sausal Westdahl 1897, Houghton 1860, Pico 1860, Pomeroy 1860 L H L

13 Sausal Wallace 1859, Brewster 1999 (Land Case sketches) Healy 1860, Houghton 1860, Pomeroy 1860 H L L

14 Sausal Wallace 1859, Brewster 1999 (Land Case sketches) Healy 1860, Houghton 1860, Pomeroy 1860 H L L

15 Sausal Wallace 1859, Brewster 1999 (Land Case sketches) Healy 1860, Houghton 1860, Pomeroy 1860 H L L

16 Sausal Wallace 1859, Brewster 1999 (Land Case sketches) Healy 1860, Houghton 1860, Pomeroy 1860 H L L

17 Sausal Wallace 1859, Brewster 1999 (Land Case sketches) Healy 1860, Houghton 1860, Pomeroy 1860 H L L

18 Tular Westdahl 1897 AAA 1939 M M XH

19 Tular Westdahl 1897 AAA 1939 M M XH

20 Tular Westdahl 1897 M M XH

21 Tular Gardner et al. 1958, AAA 1939 H H H

22 Sausal Day 1851, U.S. District Court 1870b. (Los Tularcitos) USGS Milpitas 1980 (topography) H M XL

23 Sausal Day 1851, U.S. District Court 1870b. (Los Tularcitos) USGS Milpitas 1980 (topography) H M XL

24 Laguna Seca Day 1854: 507 AAA 1939 H L H

25 Sausal Day 1851, Stratton 1862a: 159, Stratton 1862b (map), U.S. District Court 1870b. (Rancho Tularcitos), U.S. H M H Thompson 1857a: 51, Thompson 1857b (map) District Court [184-?]b. (Pueblo Lands of San Jose)

Table I-2. Data recorded in the landscape synthesis GIS. This sample shows some of the fields used to track source and certainty level, allowing the GIS to serve as a supporting database for future research. See text at left for certainty level definitions, Table II-1 and Glossary for Habitat Type definitions.

I - 16

san francisco estuary institute // final report I - 17 Expertise classification and geomorphology Wetland Fluvial geomorphology Fluvial geomorphology history Santa Clara Valley classification Vegetation Geology Stream fish habitat hydrology Watershed ). Because

-3 I Table Affiliation Wetlands Science Program Director, Science Program Director, Wetlands San Francisco Estuary Institute Principal, Sciences Watershed Associate Principal, Philip Williams and Associates Sourisseau Academy for State and Local San Jose State University History, Ecologist, Senior Vegetation CA Department of Fish and Game US Geological Survey [Ret.] Region IX US Environmental Protection Agency, Science Program Director, Watershed San Francisco Estuary Institute sory group members. i isory Group visory cal adv i Ad echn T

-3. I Advisor Josh Collins, Ph.D. Laurel Collins, B.S. Andrew Collison, Ph.D. Charlene Duval, M.A. Ph.D. Keeler-Wolf, Todd Ken Lajoie, Ph.D. Ph.D. Robert Leidy, Lester McKee, Ph.D. of the diverse areas of expertise represented, we held of the diverse areas of expertise represented, Advisory Group focused meetings between Technical to individual members and the project team dedicated communities, topical areas (e.g. interpretation of plant Advisory Group mem- Technical fluvial geomorphology). report. While the bers also provided review of the draft substantially to Advisory Group contributed Technical are solely the project, technical findings and conclusions the responsibility of the report authors. Table Technical provided advice and guidance about A group of experts and interpretations as specific project methodologies ( well as general comment and review