DOCSLIB.ORG

Pajaro River Watershed Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pajaro River Watershed Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Pajaro River Watershed Integrated Regional Water Management Plan October 2019 Pajaro River Watershed Integrated Regional Water Management Plan October 2019 Table of Contents 1 Governance ................................................................................................ 9 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................................... 9 1.2 Governance Structure ........................................................................................................................ 9 1.2.1 Regional Water Management Group ...................................................................................... 10 1.2.2 Stakeholder Steering Committee ............................................................................................ 12 1.2.3 Project Sponsors ...................................................................................................................... 16 1.2.4 General Stakeholders .............................................................................................................. 16 1.3 Benefits of IRWM Governance Structure ....................................................................................... 22 1.3.1 Public Outreach and Involvement Processes .......................................................................... 23 1.3.2 Balanced Access and Opportunity for IRWM Process Participation ...................................... 23 1.3.3 Effective Communication ....................................................................................................... 23 1.3.4 Coordination with Neighboring IRWM Efforts and Agencies ............................................... 26 1.3.5 Effective Decision Making ..................................................................................................... 27 1.3.6 Long-Term Implementation of the IRWM Plan ..................................................................... 27 1.4 IRWM Plan Adoption and Maintenance ......................................................................................... 28 1.5 Collaborative Process Used to Establish Plan Objectives ............................................................... 28 2 Region Description .................................................................................. 29 2.1 Pajaro River Watershed Relevance as an IRWM Plan ................................................................... 29 2.1.1 Water Supply .......................................................................................................................... 30 2.1.2 Water Quality .......................................................................................................................... 31 2.1.3 Flood Management ................................................................................................................. 31 2.1.4 Environmental Enhancement .................................................................................................. 32 2.1.5 Relationship of Other IRWM Plan Efforts .............................................................................. 32 2.2 Internal Boundaries ......................................................................................................................... 33 2.2.1 Counties .................................................................................................................................. 33 2.2.2 Cities ....................................................................................................................................... 34 2.2.3 Special Districts ...................................................................................................................... 35 2.3 Land Use ......................................................................................................................................... 36 2.3.1 PV Water Land Use ................................................................................................................ 37 2.3.2 San Benito County Land Use .................................................................................................. 38 2.3.3 Valley Water South County Land Use .................................................................................... 39 2.4 Water Demand ................................................................................................................................ 40 2.5 Water Quality and Quantity ............................................................................................................ 41 2.5.1 Groundwater Supply ............................................................................................................... 41 2.5.2 Local Surface Water................................................................................................................ 48 2.5.3 Imported Water Supply ........................................................................................................... 64 2.5.4 Recycled Water ....................................................................................................................... 67 2.5.5 Water Conservation................................................................................................................. 68 2.5.6 Desalted Water ........................................................................................................................ 68 2.5.7 Future Water Supply Versus Demand..................................................................................... 69 Table of Contents Page 1 Pajaro River Watershed Integrated Regional Water Management Plan October 2019 2.6 Ecological Processes/Environmental Resources ............................................................................. 69 2.7 Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................................... 72 2.7.1 Cultural Resources in Soap Lake ............................................................................................ 72 2.7.2 Cultural Resources in Valley Water and PV Water Service Area .......................................... 73 2.8 Social/Cultural/Economic State ...................................................................................................... 74 2.9 Disadvantaged Communities .......................................................................................................... 74 2.10 Climate Change ............................................................................................................................... 76 3 IRWM Plan Objectives ............................................................................. 78 3.1 Mission, Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................................ 78 3.1.1 Water Supply Objectives ........................................................................................................ 80 3.1.2 Water Quality Objectives ........................................................................................................ 82 3.1.3 Flood Management Objectives ............................................................................................... 82 3.1.4 Environmental Protection and Enhancement Objectives ........................................................ 83 3.1.5 Focused Studies Objectives .................................................................................................... 84 3.2 Prioritization of the Goals and Objectives ...................................................................................... 84 3.2.1 Water Supply Prioritization .................................................................................................... 84 3.2.2 Water Quality Prioritization .................................................................................................... 85 3.2.3 Flood Management Prioritization ........................................................................................... 85 3.2.4 Environmental Protection and Enhancement Prioritization .................................................... 85 3.3 Objective Measures ......................................................................................................................... 86 4 Resource Management Strategies ........................................................... 89 4.1 Agricultural Water Use Efficiency ................................................................................................. 90 4.2 Urban Water Use Efficiency ........................................................................................................... 91 4.3 Crop Idling for Water Transfers ...................................................................................................... 91 4.4 Irrigated Land Retirement ............................................................................................................... 91 4.5 Conveyance – Delta ........................................................................................................................ 91 4.6 Conveyance – Regional/Local ........................................................................................................ 92 4.7 System Reoperation ........................................................................................................................ 92 4.8 Water Transfers ..............................................................................................................................
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]
  • Initial Study Appendix B
    Uvas Road at Little Uvas Creek Bridge Replacement Project Biological Assessment Biological Assessment Uvas Road over Little Uvas Creek Bridge Replacement Project (37C-0095/37C-0601 [new]) Near Morgan Hill, Santa Clara County, California 04-SCL-0-CR Federal Project Number BRLO 5937(124) Caltrans District 04 November 2015 Biological Assessment Uvas Road over Little Uvas Creek Bridge Replacement Project (37C-0095/37C-0601 [new]) Near Morgan Hill, Santa Clara County, California 04-SCL-0-CR Federal Project Number BRLO 5937(124) Caltrans District 04 November 2015 STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation and Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department Prepared By: ___________________________________ Date: ____________ Patrick Boursier, Principal (408) 458-3204 H. T. Harvey & Associates Los Gatos, California Approved By: ___________________________________ Date: ____________ Solomon Tegegne, Associate Civil Engineer Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department Highway and Bridge Design 408-573-2495 Concurred By: ___________________________________ Date: ____________ Tom Holstein Environmental Branch Chief Office of Local Assistance Caltrans, District 4 Oakland, California 510-286-5250 For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in Braille, large print, on audiocassette, or computer disk. To obtain a copy in one of these alternate formats, please call or write to the Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department: Solomon Tegegne Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department 101 Skyport Drive San Jose, CA 95110 408-573-2495 Summary of Findings, Conclusions and Determinations Summary of Findings, Conclusions and Determinations The Uvas Road at Little Uvas Creek Bridge Replacement Project (proposed project) is proposed by the County of Santa Clara Roads and Airports Department in cooperation with the Office of Local Assistance of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and this Biological Assessment (BA) has been prepared following Caltrans’ procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • Birding Northern California by Jean Richmond
    BIRDING NORTHERN CALIFORNIA Site Guides to 72 of the Best Birding Spots by Jean Richmond Written for Mt. Diablo Audubon Society 1985 Dedicated to my husband, Rich Cover drawing by Harry Adamson Sketches by Marv Reif Graphics by dk graphics © 1985, 2008 Mt. Diablo Audubon Society All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced in whole or in part by any means without prior permission of MDAS. P.O. Box 53 Walnut Creek, California 94596 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . How To Use This Guide .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Birding Etiquette .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Terminology. Park Information .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 One Last Word. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 Map Symbols Used. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 Acknowledgements .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 Map With Numerical Index To Guides .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 8 The Guides. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 Where The Birds Are. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 158 Recommended References .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 165 Index Of Birding Locations. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 166 5 6 Birding Northern California This book is a guide to many birding areas in northern California, primarily within 100 miles of the San Francisco Bay Area and easily birded on a one-day outing. Also included are several favorite spots which local birders
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Ohlone Culture by Robert Cartier
    An Overview of Ohlone Culture By Robert Cartier In the 16th century, (prior to the arrival of the Spaniards), over 10,000 Indians lived in the central California coastal areas between Big Sur and the Golden Gate of San Francisco Bay. This group of Indians consisted of approximately forty different tribelets ranging in size from 100–250 members, and was scattered throughout the various ecological regions of the greater Bay Area (Kroeber, 1953). They did not consider themselves to be a part of a larger tribe, as did well- known Native American groups such as the Hopi, Navaho, or Cheyenne, but instead functioned independently of one another. Each group had a separate, distinctive name and its own leader, territory, and customs. Some tribelets were affiliated with neighbors, but only through common boundaries, inter-tribal marriage, trade, and general linguistic affinities. (Margolin, 1978). When the Spaniards and other explorers arrived, they were amazed at the variety and diversity of the tribes and languages that covered such a small area. In an attempt to classify these Indians into a large, encompassing group, they referred to the Bay Area Indians as "Costenos," meaning "coastal people." The name eventually changed to "Coastanoan" (Margolin, 1978). The Native American Indians of this area were referred to by this name for hundreds of years until descendants chose to call themselves Ohlones (origination uncertain). Utilizing hunting and gathering technology, the Ohlone relied on the relatively substantial supply of natural plant and animal life in the local environment. With the exception of the dog, we know of no plants or animals domesticated by the Ohlone.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Watsonville Historic Context Statement (2007)
    Historic Context Statement for the City of Watsonville FINAL REPORT Watsonville, California April 2007 Prepared by One Sutter Street Suite 910 San Francisco CA 94104 415.362.7711 ph 415.391.9647 fx Acknowledgements The Historic Context Statement for the City of Watsonville would not have been possible without the coordinated efforts of the City of Watsonville Associate Planner Suzi Aratin, and local historians and volunteers Ann Jenkins and Jane Borg whose vast knowledge and appreciation of Watsonville is paramount. Their work was tireless and dependable, and their company more than pleasant. In addition to hours of research, fact checking and editing their joint effort has become a model for other communities developing a historic context statement. We would like to thank the City of Watsonville Council members and Planning Commission members for supporting the Historic Context Statement project. It is a testimony to their appreciation and protection of local history. Thanks to all of you. Table of Contents Chapter Page 1.0 Background and Objectives 1 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Location and Boundaries of Study 1.3 Context Statement Objective 2.0 Methodology 5 2.1 Context Statement Methodology 2.2 Summary of Resources 3.0 Introduction to Historic Contexts 7 3.1 Summary of Historic Contexts 3.2 Summary of Regional History Before Incorporation 3.3 Summary of regional history from 1868 – 1960 4.0 Historic Context 1 - Municipal Development 17 4.1 Overview 4.2 History 4.2.1 Schools 4.2.2 Civic Institutions 4.2.3 Infrastructure: Water 4.2.4 Infrastructure:
    [Show full text]
  • 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
    Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network Master Plan EIR Section 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 4.9.1 Setting a. Regional Hydrology. Watersheds. The MBSST Network would traverse through nearly every watershed in Santa Cruz County, and be located where the watersheds drain, due to its coastal location. A list of the watersheds within the MBSST Network is provided below. Because several watersheds fall within more than one reach of the MBSST Network, the watersheds are listed in order from north to south, rather than by reach. Waddell Baldwin Wilder Swanton Bluffs San Lorenzo River Scott Creek Arana Gulch – Rodeo Davenport Soquel Creek San Vicente Creek Aptos Creek Liddell Creek Pajaro River Laguna Creek Watsonville Slough Majors San Andreas The watersheds cover almost all of Santa Cruz County, except for the less than 20 acres that are within the Año Nuevo Creek Watershed and the Pescadero Watershed. Each watershed consists of numerous tributaries, with over 50 tributaries combined. All of these watersheds are within the jurisdiction of the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The RWQCB establishes requirements prescribing the quality of point and nonpoint sources of discharge and establishes water quality objectives through the Water Quality Control Plan for the local basin. A point source is defined as waste emanating from a single, identifiable point such as a wastewater treatment plant. A nonpoint source of discharge results from drainage and percolation of activities such as agriculture and stormwater runoff. Groundwater. Groundwater supplies account for approximately 80 percent of the countywide water supply.
    [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]
  • Recovering California Steelhead South of Santa Cruz
    THE OSPREY • ISSUE NO. 75 MAY 2013 15 Recovering California Steelhead South of Santa Cruz By Kurt Zimmerman, Tim Frahm and Sam Davidson — California Trout, Trout Unlimited — Kurt Zimmerman is Southern Steelhead genetics evince unique documents, intended to help achieve California Regional Manager for characteristics region-by-region (and recovery goals by describing strate - California Trout. Tim Frahm and Sam even watershed-by-watershed), as the gies and recommended actions likely Davidson are California Central Coast fish adapted to the particular condi - required to restore viable wild popula - Steelhead Coordinator and California tions and climate factors of coastal tions. Communications Manager for Trout streams from the Baja Peninsula to In early 2012, after years of public Unlimited. Visit their web sites at: Alaska. Today, steelhead south of San and agency input, NMFS released the www.caltrout.org Mateo County in California are catego - Final Southern California Recovery www.tucalifornia.org rized by the National Marine Fisheries Plan for the SCC steelhead. Later that Service (NMFS) into two “Distinct year, the agency released for public any anglers consider Population Segments” (DPS): the comment a Review Draft of the the steelhead trout (O. “South Central California Coastal” Recovery Plan for the South Central mykiss) the “perfect Coastal steelhead. These two Recovery fish.” Steelhead are Plans identify area-wide threats as widely revered for well as threats specific to particular Mtheir power and grace in the water, and watersheds. Common threats are the Steelhead have for the high challenge of actually three “Ds”: Dams, Diversions and catching one. Sport fishing for steel - declined across much Diminished Aquatic and Riparian head is a major contributor to many Habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • South County Stormwater Resource Plan
    2020 South Santa Clara County Stormwater Resource Plan Prepared By: Watershed Stewardship and Planning Division Environmental Planning Unit South Santa Clara County Stormwater Resource Plan January 2020 Prepared by: Valley Water Environmental Planning Unit 247 Elisabeth Wilkinson Contributors: Kirsten Struve James Downing Kylie Kammerer George Cook Neeta Bijoor Brian Mendenhall Tanya Carothers (City of Morgan Hill/City of Gilroy) Sarah Mansergh (City of Gilroy) Vanessa Marcadejas (County of Santa Clara) Julianna Martin (County of Santa Clara) Funding provided by the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program i Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................................................2 1.1 Background and Purpose .................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Previous and Current Planning Efforts ................................................................................................ 3 Chapter 2: South Santa Clara County Watershed Identification ...........................................................5 2.1 Watersheds and Subwatersheds ........................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Internal Boundaries ..........................................................................................................................
    [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]