Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 153
4
Environmental Change:
Challenges and Opportunities
INTRODUCTION
Anthropogenic influences have rapidly and radically altered the bay-
delta ecosystem over the past 150 years. Major changes such as land sub-
sidence, climate change, habit alteration, water quality, population growth,
water exports, invasion by nonnative species, and in-delta physical changes
will continue to change the delta during the current century and beyond.
Consequently, delta planning must envision a system that may be very dif-
ferent from what exists today, both physically and functionally. Rehabilita-
tion planning in such a setting is extremely challenging as it is confounded
by numerous uncertainties in the drivers of change. However, the projec-
tions of anticipated changes will allow many opportunities to tailor the res-
toration strategies to steer the future delta to a desirable state (Lund et al.
2010) and to include flexibility and wide tolerances in the design of water
infrastructure and ecosystem rehabilitation. Some of the primary challenges
include, but are not limited to, habitat loss, climate change including sea
level rise, and levee stability. In this chapter, we discuss the details and the
potential implications of these challenges and opportunities.
HABITAT LOSS
Habitat loss has been implicated as a major factor in species extinctions
(e.g., NRC 1995, 1996, Seabloom et al. 2002). This relationship has been
established over a very wide range of habitats and species, and there is no
reason to conclude that it is any less important in the delta than elsewhere.
153
OCR for page 154
154 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
Indeed, the extent of changes in the delta (e.g., Lund et al. 2010; see discus-
sion of changing delta environments below) compound the effects of the
many dams on major delta tributaries that remove habitat for migratory
species whose passage is blocked by the dams (e.g., NMFS 2009).
Habitat is the physical and biological setting in which organisms live
and in which other components of the environment are encountered (Krebs
1985, NRC 1995). Thus, all aspects of the delta, past and present, serve
as habitat and all the environmental changes described in Chapters 1 and
3 affect habitat and the species that depend on it. Many efforts have been
made and are ongoing to measure and assess habitats in terms of their
suitability for organisms (e.g., NRC 2008a). The habitats of the delta are
diverse in character and include the water column; submerged substrates;
adjacent intertidal, wetland, and upland areas; agricultural fields; levees;
rivers and streams; the estuary; and so on. All of them have changed mark-
edly in the past 150 years. Based on the complexity of delta habitats and
the modifications to them, the interactions between stressors (for example,
the interactions among temperature, salinity, and invasive cyanobacteria)
must be considered.
In many cases, substantial knowledge exists around habitat needs for
individual species. For example, much is known about what salmon need
with respect to temperature, water flows and velocities, turbidity, water
depths, substrate and gravel types, seasonality of many of the preceding
factors, riparian vegetation, and especially access (e.g., see Williams 2006,
McLain and Castillo 2010, NMFS 2009). For delta smelt, important habi-
tat factors include open water, semienclosed bays, flow rates and volumes,
temperature, turbidity, and salinity. The list of factors increases when habi-
tat for their prey is also considered. Changes in pelagic fish habitat have
been described (e.g., Nobriga et al. 2008). One key aspect for pelagic
organisms is that, unlike species that require specific substrate conditions,
high-quaity habitat (and, similarly, low-quality habitat) for these species
shifts location with changes in water conditions, especially in tidal areas.
Thus, management of the salinity gradient, for example, in the estuary has
important implications for delta smelt and other pelagic species.
The delta ecosystem will never return to its predisturbance state.
Changes in the template combined with changes in community composition
provide a context for efforts to "restore" the delta. The changes in delta
geometry in the past 150 years, in both vertical and horizontal planes, have
resulted in a system dominated by subsided islands and deep, levee-bound
channels. The continued loss of peat from the islands combined with rising
sea level continues to lead the system away from its former topography and
bathymetry (Mount and Twiss 2005). Recent studies (Brooks et al. 2012)
point to subsidence of 3 to 20 mm per year associated with compaction of
underlying Quaternary sediments. Brooks et al. conclude that "[b]y 2100,
OCR for page 155
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 155
all scenarios except the lowest rate [of sea-level rise] combined with the
lowest reference frame bias project that at least ~38 percent and likely
closer to ~97 percent of all levees" will subside by at least 0.5 m below
their current elevations. In addition, the changes in water chemistry, nutri-
ent concentrations, altered residence times, and their consequences chal-
lenge the re-creation of habitat. As an example, one of the challenges in
rehabilitating the Everglades in Florida is that nonnative species, increased
phosphorus loads, and changed hydrology mean that simply restoring water
flow without other actions will not lead to a recovery of the former com-
munity structure and composition (e.g., NRC 2010).
Even if tidal water and dredged material were reintroduced to flooded
islands to return them to an intertidal or shallow subtidal elevation, con-
tinued maintenance of such elevations in the face of sea level rise will be
necessary to maintain native wetland plant communities within their hydro-
logic tolerance limits and will require the accumulation of organic matter
and sediment. Reed (2002) showed that even though delta wetland soils are
frequently described as peats, the proportion of minerals in wetland soils
even in the sediment-starved central delta was more than 75 percent on a
dry-weight basis. Periodic inputs of sediments to the delta and redistribu-
tion of erodible material by tidal and flood flows were likely important in
maintaining historic marsh elevations given underlying subsidence and sea
level. However, Wright and Schoellhamer (2004) show that "the delivery
of suspended sediment from the Sacramento River to San Francisco Bay
has decreased by about one-half during the period 1957 to 2001." They
attribute this decline to many factors, "including the depletion of erodible
sediment from factors that affect sediment load, including hydraulic mining
in the late 1800s, trapping of sediment in reservoirs, riverbank protection,
altered land-uses (such as agriculture, grazing, urbanization, and logging),
and levees."
Even if the historic mosaic of wetlands, mudflats, and shallow tidal
channels could be re-created, changes in delta biological communities mean
these habitats would likely be used by a different suite of species. Grimaldo
et al. (2012) compared fishes caught in shallow subtidal areas in a remnant
natural wetland with several areas returned to tidal action by inadvertent
levee breaches. They conclude that physical habitat modifications and bio-
logical introductions have had irreversible effects on native fish assemblages
and their habitats. Even in areas that had not undergone any physical
modification to its historic marsh area, the subtidal mudflats surrounding
the marsh were entirely colonized by invasive submerged aquatic vegeta-
tion (SAV) to the extent that it "choked out" any transitional open-water
habitat between the shallow shoals and the marsh. The fish assemblage at
the unaltered site in Grimaldo et al.'s study was dominated by introduced
fishes, such as centrarchids, which are well adapted to SAV.
OCR for page 156
156 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
Recreating wetland-mudflat-channel configurations with land sculp-
turing may be possible, and reintroducing tidal flows to formerly isolated
areas is a well-established restoration technique. However, a restored geo-
morphic-hydrologic condition would not support the same assemblage of
species in the same numbers as were present before the delta was altered,
although it might be possible to approach previous community composi-
tions in some places.
CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE DELTA ECOSYSTEM
Climate change is a challenge confronting the management and res-
toration of the Central Valley and bay-delta ecosystem. Future changes in
the mean climate and its variability are expected to profoundly affect the
physical and ecological structure of the ecosystem as well as the nature of
water issues in California. The cascading effects of climate change begin
with increasing temperature, which over the 50-year planning horizon of
the delta is predicted to increase between 1°C and 3°C (Cayan et al. 2009).
This equates to the mean annual air temperature in Sacramento increasing
from the current 16°C (~61°F) to somewhere between 17°C (~63°F) and
19°C (~66°F). At first glance, this does not seem especially significant, since
the average low temperature in Sacramento in December is 4°C and the
average high in July and August is 34°C. However, accompanying a rising
temperature, the pattern of precipitation and runoff is expected to change
significantly and the sea level is projected to rise (USBR 2011). These fac-
tors will affect the bay-delta ecosystem, its tributary watersheds, and the
water supply critical to both urban and agricultural users (Chung et al.
2009; USBR 2011).
Physical impacts of climate change in the bay-delta region have been
well studied (e.g., Field et al. 1999, Cayan et al. 2008, Franco et al. 2008,
CDWR, 2010, CAT 2010, USBR 2011). The work to date includes a
systems approach for understanding the natural variability including the
potential global teleconnections to the region's climate (Redmond and
Koch 1991, Greshunov et al. 2000), detection and attribution of historical
changes in climate (Bonfils et al. 2008), quantification of potential changes
in primary stressors of climate through analyses of the General Circulation
Model (GCM) predictions (Cayan et al. 2009) and downscaling (Hidalgo
et al. 2008. Maurer and Hidalgo 2008), impacts of projected sea level
rise (Knowles 2009), and the sensitivity of the water resources system to
climate change and sea level rise (USBR 2008, 2011). However, only a few
projections have quantified the impacts of warming, consequent changes in
hydrology, and the sea level rise on the ecology of the Central Valleybay-
delta region. Some initial work is under way to integrate links between
climate, hydrology, and ecology in the bay-delta system and its watersheds
OCR for page 157
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 157
(CASCaDE 2010, Cloern et al. 2011), which should prove to be beneficial
information for planners in the future.
In considering climate impacts on the ecosystem, the change and es-
pecially the variability in the seasonal patterns of precipitation, flows, and
temperature are probably most important in disrupting the life history pat-
terns of delta species. The delta is changing continuously and natural but
extreme variations could pose significant threats to the sustainability of its
desirable ecological functions.
A conceptual framework for addressing climate change effects in the
bay-delta system includes the linkages between global drivers, both natural
and anthropogenic, the regional and local stressors, and the corresponding
effects. Warming due to anthropogenic greenhouse gases, as highlighted
recently by the recent report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC 2007), is the primary change in climate and the cause of sea
level rise in the Central Valley. The other primary driver, natural variability,
is manifested in multidecadal changes in precipitation and temperature pat-
terns (Pagano and Garen 2005) and intradecadal variations associated with
such phenomena as the El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) (Redmond
and Koch 1991), the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (Francis and Hare 1994),
and the North Pacific Oscillation (Pierce 2005). For example, Pagano and
Garen (2005), who studied streamflows from 1901 to 2002 in California,
showed that the period from 1980 to 2002 had the greatest variability and
persistence in streamflows. This means that there were periods of wet years
along with multiyear extreme droughts. El Niño winters result in wetter
winters, particularly in South California, but have had a lesser impact on
northern regions of the state (Redmond and Koch 1991, Cayan et al. 2009).
Ocean-atmospheric patterns will also elevate the sea levels along the west
coast during the El Niño years (Cayan et al. 2008).
In the ensuing sections, we begin with a review of the magnitude of cli-
mate change and sea level rise and large-scale hydrologic effects of climate
change, scale down to how changes may disrupt the life cycles of listed delta
species, assess how these effects might impact restoration planning efforts,
and finally provide suggestions for dealing with climate change.
Estimates of Climate Change
Temperature and Precipitation
Results of climate modeling are not necessarily accurate predictions of
the magnitude of warming. However, model projections consistently show
that the gradual warming in California during the earlier part of the 21st
century is very similar for various emission scenarios, but they may differ
in the later decades. Projection estimates vary but the midcentury warm-
OCR for page 158
158 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
ing is in the range of 1°C to 3°C, which will increase to 2°C to 6°C by the
end of the 21st century (Cayan et al. 2009). Climate models also predict
substantial variability in warming across the Central Valley (USBR 2011).
This asymmetry in temporal (both seasonal and decadal-scale) and spatial
warming will substantially affect precipitation patterns (snow versus rain),
snowpack, and the snowmelt in the tributary watersheds of the bay delta.
Compared to the historical period, spring temperatures are projected to
be warmer, particularly during the second half of the century, and reduce
April 1 snowpack, a key indicator of water supply for the following sum-
mer and fall. The duration of extreme warm temperatures grows from 2
months (July-August) to 4 months (June to September) (Climate Action
Team Report 2010). Heat waves are also projected to increase in frequency
and magnitude.
Projections indicate that precipitation may decline in some regions of
the Central Valley, particularly during the mid- to late 21st century (Cayan
2009, USBR 2011). They also show that precipitation may increase slightly
until the middle of the century, which may be followed by a decline during
the later part of the century. Although precipitation predictions are highly
uncertain (Chung et al. 2009), projections of increases in temperature,
predicted by all models, are more certain. The effect on snowpack and
snowmelt of these projected temperature increases would be a significant
change in the timing and magnitude of flows in the tributary rivers of the
bay-delta system (USBR 2011).
Sea Level Rise
Sea level rise driven by global-scale climate change will affect, perhaps
irreversibly, the bay-delta hydrodynamics, levee stability, and salinity con-
ditions (Mount 2007, Lund et al. 2010). Higher ocean levels, particularly
in the presence of tides, and storms, which may be exacerbated by ENSO
conditions, will increase water depths and push salty water further inland,
affecting vertical mixing. The exact effect of sea level rise depends on
its magnitude. The historical rate of sea level rise at the Golden Gate is
estimated to be about 2 mm/yr (equivalent to about 0.2 m over the 20th
century).
During the 20th century, the global mean sea level rise has been es-
timated to be about 1.7 mm/yr (Church and White 2011). IPCC (2007)
projected the sea level rise by 2100 to be in the range of 0.18 to 0.59 m but
it did not include possible rapid changes in ice sheet dynamics. The current
research suggests that, during the 21st century and beyond, sea level rise
may accelerate, but the estimates of the rate of acceleration vary as indi-
cated by the wide range of sea level rise suggested for 2100 in the literature.
The uncertainties in projections have been attributed to the difficulties in
OCR for page 159
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 159
projecting the melt rate of land-based ice, particularly in Greenland and
Antarctica. Temperature-based projections (Rahmstorf 2007) suggest that
the global mean sea level rise may be as much as 1.4 m or more (Pfeffer
et al. 2008, Vermeer and Rahmstorf 2009). Clearly the magnitude of the
future global sea level rise is uncertain but the range 0.18-1.4 m or the sea
level rise that has been suggested by USACE (2011) should be useful for
scenario planning in restoration efforts (e.g., Heberger et al. 2009, 2011).
Effects of Climate Change on Delta Hydrology
Climate change could have a variety of impacts on both natural and
human systems in the bay-delta region. In terms of hydrologic changes, one
of the key outcomes of warming will be to alter the temporal patterns of
precipitation and tributary runoff. Under warmer conditions, precipitation
during the winter will occur more as rain instead of snow and, as a conse-
quence, the April 1 snowpack will decline (Mote et al. 2005, Knowles et
al. 2006, Chung et al. 2009, USBR 2011), which will reduce the summer
low flows (Maurer 2007). The modeling results indicate that the runoff re-
sulting from increased rain during the winter months of December through
March will increase during the 21st century (USBR 2011). However, the
snowmelt runoff from tributaries during the April-July period will decrease
with larger magnitudes expected during the later part of the 21st century.
Such significant changes in the magnitude and timing of runoff into major
reservoirs in the Central Valley could have important impacts in terms of
reduced storage opportunities, less year-to-year carryover storage, and less
water for cold-water releases during the hot summer months (USBR 2011).
Unless changes to the operational rules are made, the increased runoff
into major reservoirs in the tributary watersheds during winter months may
have to be released earlier for flood protection. This would in turn reduce
the amount of storage available to meet the demands during the follow-
ing summer and fall. The recent records already show changes in timing
of flows from the headwaters of the Sierra Nevada region (Dettinger et al.
2004, Knowles and Cayan 2004, Stewart et al. 2004, Vicuna and Dracup
2007, Kapnick and Hall 2009). With high confidence, it can be concluded
that the future temperature increases will continue to cause changes in
streamflow timing and such projected changes will exceed those from
natural variability (Knowles and Cayan 2002, Maurer et al. 2007). For
example, Chung et al. (2009) have shown that in case of a 4°C warming
scenario, the average day by which Lake Oroville receives half its annual
inflow shifts from mid-March to mid-February (about 36 days) and that the
annual runoff fraction during the snowmelt period of April through July
will decrease from about 35 percent to about 15 percent.
Warming has the potential to increase evaporative losses from both
OCR for page 160
160 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
soils and water bodies and as a consequence increase water demands of
both agriculture and landscape irrigation. Increased CO2 will have complex
interactions among processes affecting evapotranspiration from plants.
Baldocchi and Wong (2006) have suggested that warming effects on agricul-
ture may include the lengthening of the growing and transpiration seasons
of the crops and a reduction of winter cold affecting fruit species. Groves et
al. (2008) determined that climate change could increase the outdoor water
demand by up to 10 percent by 2040 and decrease local water supply by up
to 40 percent. With a decrease in spring and summer runoff, the difference
between supply and demand will grow at a faster pace. Climate change
will require a change in future operation and planning of water resources
systems and the current regulatory policies (Willis et al. 2011).
In a widely quoted paper, Milly et al. (2008) claimed that the tradi-
tional "stationarity" assumption used in planning of water resources proj-
ects was no longer viable or prudent. The changes in hydrology described
above would pose significant challenges for the management of the water
resources systems such as the Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State
Water Project (SWP). Willis et al. (2011) suggested that the "static" rules
curves that exist today may perform poorly under the climate change
scenario and that more flexible dynamic operating rules may be needed
in the future (see Trimble et al. [2005] for an example of such rules). The
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in its 2008 Biological Assessment analyzed the
sensitivity of future state and federal projects in the bay-delta region to
potential climate change and associated sea level rise (USBR 2008), finding
that CVP/SWP deliveries and carryover storages were sensitive to precipita-
tion changes and sea level rise would lead to great salinity intrusion into
the delta. Increased air temperature would reduce the cold-water storage
of the reservoirs and increase temperature regimes of the major tributaries
of the delta, which in turn would affect the survival of both delta smelt
and salmon. The study also indicated that the negative flows in the Old
and Middle rivers will increase under climate change scenarios, primarily
during the winter, exacerbating fish entrainment at the CVP/SWP pumps.
However, the study also found that uncertainty in precipitation projections
makes it difficult to assess the level of impacts, as a potential increase in
precipitation may offset the warming impacts.
The Department of Water Resources conducted a separate modeling
study to investigate the effects of climate change on both the federal and
state water projects (Chung et al. 2009). The results (Table 4-1) suggest
that the SWP/CVP water supply reliability would be affected significantly
under the projected climate change scenarios. Reduction in delta exports to
the Central Valley was predicted to be in the range of 7 to 21 percent and
the water supply deficit in the south, resulting from such conditions, would
likely be met by increased groundwater mining, exacerbating the current
OCR for page 161
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 161
TABLE 4-1 Summary of Water Resources Impacts Considering 12 Future
Climate Scenarios
Midcentury: End of Century:
Some Uncertainty More Uncertainty
Lower to Higher Lower to Higher
GHG Emissions GHG Emissions
Delta Exports 7 to 10% 21 to 25%
Reservoir Carryover Storage 15 to 19% 33 to 38%
Sacramento Valley Groundwater +5 to +9% +13 to +17%
Pumping
CVP Generation 4 to 11% 12 to 13%
CVP Use 9 to 14% 24 to 28%
SWP Generation 5 to 12% 15 to -16%
SWP Use 5 to 10% 16%
X2 Delta Salinity Standard Expected to be met Expected to be met
System Vulnerability to 1 in 6 to 8 years 1 in 3 to 4 years
Interruptiona
Additional Water Needed to 750 to 575 TAF/yr 850 to 750 TAF/yr
Meet Regulations and Maintain
Operationsb
NOTE: CVP, Central Valley Project; GHG, greenhouse gas; SWP, State Water Project; TAF,
thousand acre-feet.
a The SWP-CVP system is considered vulnerable to operational interruption during a year if
the water level in one or more of the major supply reservoirs (Shasta, Oroville, Folsom, and
Trinity) is too low to release water from the reservoir. For current conditions, the SWP-CVP
system is not considered vulnerable to operational interruption.
b Additional water is needed only in years when reservoir levels fall below the reservoir outlets.
SOURCE: Chung et al. (2009).
problem of declining groundwater levels in the Central Valley (Famiglietti
et al. 2011). Reservoir carryover storage, the quantity of water available
on September 1 for improving water-supply reliability during the ensuing
year, is expected to decline by 15 to 38 percent depending on the climate
change scenario. Significantly, the study indicated that in some years the
water levels in reservoirs may fall below the lowest release outlets leading
to operational interruptions, which may occur as frequently as once every 3
years (Table 4-1). In spite of the water shortages, the CVP/SWP system was
expected to meet the delta salinity standard related to the position of X2
("delta salinity standard"). Other modeling suggests that there is consider-
able physical and economic flexibility in the system, although at some cost
(Tanaka et al. 2006, Harou et al. 2010, Buck et al. 2011). This flexibility
likely will be needed to adapt to future conditions.
OCR for page 162
162 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
Effects of Sea Level Rise
Ecosystems physically connected to the ocean, such as the California
bay-delta system, will have compounding effects of climate change due to
accompanying sea level rise on both global and regional scales. Increases
in ocean levels at the mouth of the San Francisco Bay will have significant
impact on the upstream regions of the bay as well as the delta. A larger
concern is the changes in the sea level extremes, which are exacerbated
not only by the mean sea level, but also by astronomical tides, winter
storms, and the presence of large-scale ocean phenomena such as El Niño.
Predictions of the changes related to additional factors are uncertain but
it is likely that today's extremes experienced by the bay-delta system will
become more frequent.
As discussed in the next section, the projected changes in both the aver-
age and extreme sea levels in the interior of the delta may significantly af-
fect the structural integrity of levees protecting delta islands. In view of the
changes in the tidal fluctuations, particularly during storms, the frequency
of levee failures and the flooding of delta islands are likely to increase.
Historical efforts to control floods do not appear to have reduced the levee
failure frequency (Florsheim and Dettinger 2007). The frequency of levee
failure is likely to increase in the future with potential increases of flood
flows from the upstream reservoirs as a result of timing change in runoff
and increased water levels in the delta conveyance canals due to sea level
rise. The dual effect of sea level rise and the increased flood flows will be
largest when the astronomical and weather factors (e.g., high tides and sea
level increases due to storms and teleconnections such as El Niño) and the
peak discharges from the upstream coincide to create a rare combination
of factors affecting the water levels in the bay and delta. Levee failures will
flood delta islands, either permanently changing the geomorphology and the
habitats of the delta system or requiring massive investment to reestablish
the status quo. It has been suggested that restructuring of bay-delta habitats
as a result of levee failure could increase habitat diversity, expand flood-
plain area, and increase extent of open-water habitats. Such changes could
improve conditions for some desirable delta fish species (Moyle et al. 2010).
Another effect of sea level rise will be increased saltwater intrusion into
freshwater parts of the delta system. When saltwater intrusion occurs in the
interior parts of the delta, quality of water that is exported will degrade
significantly and aquatic habitats will shift or may be eliminated entirely.
Frequent interruptions of water supply to the south via the export pumps
will clearly pose problems for providing adequate water supply for farmers
and the urban users in Southern California (Medellin-Azuara et al. 2008,
Chen et al. 2010). The ultimate result will be for the users south of the
delta to depend on more and more groundwater supplies in the regions
OCR for page 163
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 163
to the south, which have already been mined through excessive pumping
(Famiglietti et al. 2011). Permanent changes to the salinity levels in delta
channels will also degrade the quality of water that is used for agriculture
and other uses within the delta islands.
Climate Change Effects on Water Temperature
The water temperature in the delta and upper San Francisco Bay var-
ies considerably through the year with a range of 7ºC to 30ºC (see Figure
4-1). While temperatures primarily vary seasonally, as seen in Figure 4-2B
below, temperatures on any given day can be several degrees warmer or
colder than the seasonal average.
At any point in the system this temperature reflects the combined ef-
fects of solar insolation, surface heat exchanges, river flow, and dispersion,
as well as the temperatures in the rivers upstream and ocean downstream
(Monismith et al. 2009). To examine the potential effects of climate change
on delta temperatures, Wagner et al. (2011) created a statistical model
based on fitting 10 years of data using an autoregressive model for daily
water temperature as a function of air temperature and solar insolation.
On the basis of this model, Wagner et al. argue that the effects of flow are
generally small and are confined to shorter time scales, and so could be ne-
FIGURE 4-1 Suisun Bay delta water temperature for the period 2000-2006.
SOURCE: Data from California Data Exchange Center.
R02208
Figure 4-1
bitmapped raster image
scaled for portait above, landscape below
OCR for page 180
180 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
heavily on a workable governance system (see, e.g., recent NRC reviews
of the Everglades restoration efforts cited above, and especially Chapter 5
of this report).
CONCLUSIONS
Habitat loss and alterations, climate change, and unpredictable levee
failure pose significant challenges in the formulation of sustainable plans for
the bay-delta ecosystem. There are many opportunities to steer the future
evolution of the ecosystem by addressing future challenges.
Extensive physical changes in the delta ecosystem and the tributary
watersheds, and continuously evolving changes such as land subsidence in
the delta islands, will not allow the recreation of habitat as it once existed
in the predisturbance state. Delta restoration programs will need to balance
consideration of an ecosystem approach with the Endangered Species Acts's
(ESA's) and other factors' emphasis on individual species (e.g., NRC 1995).
Programs will need to focus on the interaction of biological, structural, and
physical aspects of habitats and how they may change in the future. Even
without ESA-listed species, there still would be a need to guide the ecosys-
tem toward desirable states.
Climate change assessment provides a reasonable picture of what the
delta may experience in the future and that picture needs to be incorporated
into restoration planning. Such an outlook includes a larger fraction of
winter precipitation occurring as rain in tributary watersheds in the Sierra
Nevada, reduction in snowpack and correspondingly of water supply dur-
ing late spring and summer, reduction in water-storage opportunities with a
corresponding reduction in the ability to mitigate floods and meet minimum
flow targets, challenges in managing the cold-water pools of the upstream
reservoirs, and increased probability of water temperatures exceeding lethal
limits for delta smelt, salmon, and other species. Many of these changes
are already being observed. Projected increases in the mean sea level and
the extremes have the potential to increase the frequency of levee failures
and inundation of islands, particularly if upstream floods, astronomical
tides, and winter storms coincide in the future when the mean sea level has
increased due to warming. Sea level rise also has the potential to increase
saltwater intrusion and degrade water quality with a significant impact on
water exports.
Dealing with climate change implications will require a nonstation-
ary viewpoint that recognizes changes in hydrology, rising sea level, and
increased temperature. Planning and evaluation of future scenarios will
need to address the uncertainties in projections, integrated analysis, and the
development of risk management strategies (e.g., adaptive management).
Climate change implications and the continued increase in water demands
OCR for page 181
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 181
in the bay-delta system and beyond will exacerbate the competition for
water and limit the ability to meet the co-equal goals.
Future planning should include the development of a climate change
based risk model and analysis that incorporates data on the actual changes
in delta conditions as well as alternative future scenarios and their prob-
ability. The objective should be to develop the basis for priorities for future
investments in water-management programs. The real challenge is deciding
how to adapt to a new environment. The uncertainties are higher about
the environmental aspects of operations than about the reliability aspects of
water deliveries. For example, expected environmental and other changes
will force policy choices related to replacing water storage currently pro-
vided by snow on the ground. Strategies to deal with the expected and un-
precedented changes will need to consider many factors, including targeted
demand management, increased surface-water and groundwater storage
consistent with minimizing environmental impacts, enhanced flexibility in
the water-management system through operational optimization and maxi-
mum flexibility for moving water, and developing an understanding of and
establishing environmental flows for the ecosystem. As described in more
detail in Chapter 5, comprehensive strategies would include development of
a planning and regulatory framework that incorporates concepts of shared
adversity during times of water shortage. They also would include adop-
tion of measures designed to mitigate water temperature increases that are
harmful to fish species.
The instability and interdependence of levees are likely to be major
issues for achieving any measure of water-supply reliability or ecosystem
rehabilitation. Continuing the status quo of improving levees will not al-
ways be the most environmentally sustainable or economically defensible
response in the years ahead. Indeed, changes in the levee system, and even
removal or modification of some levees, could be good for at least parts
of the ecosystem. Levee failures are inevitable over the long term and it is
essential to plan for either the major investment needed to repair and main-
tain the levees or the prospect of fundamental change. When considering
repair of unstable (and breached) levees in the delta, a transparent and vet-
ted prioritization system is needed. Future delta planning efforts should give
full consideration to a wide range of alternatives for vulnerability reduction,
including permanent evacuation of flood-prone areas and flood warning.
Restoration projects should be designed with flexibility to accommodate
potential changes in hydrology due to levee failure.
Resource managers dealing with the delta will need to determine the
degree of "restoration" achievable through intervention and adaptation.
There is agreement that the delta as it existed before large-scale alteration
by humans cannot be re-created. With respect to species, habitats, produc-
tivity, and other aspects, the future delta will still be a functioning ecosystem
OCR for page 182
182 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
but different from the one that exists today. Furthermore, ecosystems--even
those with minimal human impacts--are not constant in space and time.
They evolve. But they can retain salient features for long periods, and
despite significant changes in both biotic and abiotic conditions that have
occurred during the last 150 years, there is a considerable capacity to guide
the direction of the delta toward a more desirable future by focusing on
a functioning resilient ecosystem without abandoning individual efforts to
protect native species. Our experience with other ecosystems suggests that
to achieve success, clear goals and a workable governance system will be
needed.
Achieving the above will require extensive, thoughtful, and transpar-
ent planning. That planning will need to include finding ways to reconcile
diverse interests without pretending that everybody can have what they
want. The next chapter considers approaches for such planning, as well as
constraints on it.
REFERENCES
Baker, P. F., F. K. Ligon, and T. P. Speed. 1995. Estimating the influence of temperature on the
survival of chinook salmon smolts (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) migrating through the
SacramentoSan Joaquin River Delta of California. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and
Aquatic Sciences 52(4):855-863.
Baldocchi, D., and S. Wong. 2006. An Assessment of the Impacts of Future CO2 and Cli-
mate on California Agriculture. California Climate Change Center, Project Report
CEC-500-2005-187-SF.
Bennett, W. A. 2005. Critical assessment of the Delta smelt population. San Francisco Estuary
and Watershed Science 3(2):Article 1.
Bonfils, C., B. D. Santer, D. W. Pierce, H. G. Hidalgo, G. Bala, T. Das, T. P. Barnett, D. R.
Cayan, C. Doutriaux, A. W. Wood, A. Mirin, and T. Nozawa. 2008. Detection and at-
tribution of temperature changes in the mountainous western United States. Journal of
Climate 21:6404-6424, doi:10.1175/2008JCLI2397.1.
Brett, J. R., W. C. Clarke, and J. E. Shelbourn. 1982. Experiments on thermal requirements
for growth and food conversion efficiency of juvenile chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha. Canadian technical Reports in Fisheries and Aquatic Science 1127:1-29.
Brooks, B. A, G. Bawden, D. Manjunath, C. Werner, N. Knowles, J. Foster, J. Dudas, and
D. R. Cayan. 2012. Contemporaneous Subsidence and Levee Overtopping Potential,
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science
10(1). Available at http://escholarship.org/uc/item/15g1b9tm. Accessed July 17, 2012.
Buck, C. R., J. Medellín-Azuara, J. R. Lund, and K. Madani. 2011. Adapting California's
water system to warm vs. warm-dry climates. Climatic Change 109(S1):S133-S149,
doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0302-7. Burton, C., and S. L. Cutter. 2008. Levee failures and
social vulnerability in the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta area, California. Natural Haz-
ards Review 9(3):136-149. Available at http://www.scopus.com/record/display.url?eid=2-
s2.0-47849090401&origin=inward&txGid=SleS4vmiYjni_PQv2HK_7EU%3a5.
Accessed June 4, 2012.
Burton, C., and S. L. Cutter. 2008. Levee Failures and Social Vulnerability in the Sacramento-
San Joaquin delta area, California. Natural Hazards Review 9(3):136-149.
OCR for page 183
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 183
Cain, J. R., R. P. Walkling, S. Beamish, E. Cheng, E. Cutter, and M. Wickland. 2003. San
Joaquin Basin Ecological Flow Analysis. Prepared for the Bay Delta Program by the
Natural Heritage Institute.
CALFED. 2007. Delta Flood Risk. Available at http://calwater.ca.gov/calfed/newsroom/Delta_
Flood_Risk.html. Accessed December 2011.
CASCaDE(Computational Assessments of Scenarios of Change for the Delta Ecosystem).
2010. http://cascade.wr.usgs.gov/index.shtm.
CAT (Climate Action Team). 2010. Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger
and the California Legislature. California Environmental Protection Agency. April 2010.
Available at http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/climate_action_team/reports/index.html.
Accessed July 17, 2012.
Cayan, D. R., P. D. Bromirski, K. Hayhoe, M. Tyree, M. D. Dettinger, and R. E. Flick. 2008.
Climate change projections of sea level extremes along the California coast. Climatic
Change 87(Suppl 1):S57-S73, doi:10.1007/s10584-007-9376-7.
Cayan, D., M. Tyree, M. Dettinger, H. Hidalgo, T. Das, E. Maurer, P. Bromirski, N. Graham,
and R. Flick. 2009. Climate Change Scenarios and Sea Level Rise Estimates forthe
California 2009 Climate Change Scenarios Assessment. California Energy Commission.
CEC-500-2009-014-F.
CCSP (U.S. Climate Change Science Program). 2008. The Effects of Climate Change on Agri-
culture, Land Resources, Water Resources, and Biodiversity in the United States. A Report
by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change
Research. P. Backlund, A. Janetos, D. Schimel, J. Hatfield, K. Boote, P. Fay, L. Hahn,
C. Izaurralde, B. A. Kimball, T. Mader, J. Morgan, D. Ort, W. Polley, A. Thomson, D.
Wolfe, M. G. Ryan, S. R. Archer, R. Birdsey, C. Dahm, L. Heath, J. Hicke, D. Hollinger,
T. Huxman, G. Okin, R. Oren, J. Randerson, W. Schlesinger, D. Lettenmaier, D. Major,
L. Poff, S. Running, L. Hansen, D. Inouye, B. P. Kelly, L. Meyerson, B. Peterson, and R.
Shaw. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 362 pp.
CDWR (California Department of Water Resources). 1995. Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
atlas. Sacramento, CA: CDWR. 121 pp.
CDWR. 2009. Delta Risk Management Strategy. Sacramento, CA: CDWR.
CDWR. 2010. Climate Change Characterization and Analysis in California Water Resources
Planning Studies, Final Report. Sacramento, CA: CDWR.
Chavez, F. P., J. Ryan, S. E. Lluch-Cota, and M. Niquen. 2003. From anchovies to sardines
and back: Multidecadal change in the Pacific Ocean. Science 299:217-221.
Chen, W.-H., K. Haunschild, J. R. Lund, and W. Fleenor. 2010. Current and long-term effects
of delta water quality on drinking water treatment costs from disinfection byproduct
formation. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science 8(3).
Choi, Y. D. 2007. Restoration ecology to the future: A call for new paradigm. Restoration
Ecology 15:351-353.
Chung, F., J. Anderson, S. Arora, M. Ejeta, J. Galef, T. Kadir, K. Kao, A. Olson, C. Quan, E.
Reyes, M. Roos, S. Seneviratne, J. Wang, and H. Yin. 2009. Using Future Climate Pro-
jections to Support Water Resources Decision Making in California. California Energy
Commission. CEC-500-2009-052-F.
Church, J. A., and N. J. White. 2011. Sea-level rise from the late 19th to the early 21st century.
Surveys in Geophysics 32(4-5):585-602, doi:10.1007/s10712-011-9119-1.
Climate Action Team. 2010. Biennial Report, April. http://www.energy.ca.gov/2010
publications/CAT-1000-2010-004/CAT-1000-2010-004.PDF. Accessed July 17, 2012.
Cloern, J. E., N. Knowles, L. R. Brown, D. Cayan, M. D. Dettinger, T. L. Morgan, D. H.
Schoellhamer, M. T. Stacey, M. van der Wegen, R. W. Wagner, and A. D. Jassby. 2011.
Projected evolution of California's San Francisco Bay-Delta-river system in a century of
climate change. PLoS ONE 6(9).
OCR for page 184
184 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
Crozier, L. G., A. P. Hendry, P. W. Lawson, T. P. Quinn, N. J. Mantua, J. Battin, R. G. Shaw,
and R. B. Huey. 2008. Potential responses to climate change in organisms with com-
plex life histories: Evolution and plasticity in Pacific salmon. Evolutionary Applications
1(2):252-270.
Deas, M. L., and C. L. Lowney. 2000. Water Temperature Modeling Review. Technical Report
to Bay Delta Modeling Forum, 113 pp.
Deas, M. L., G. K. Meyer, C. L. Lowney, G. T. Orlob, and I. P. King. 1997. Sacramento River
Temperature Modeling Project Report. Center for Environmental and Water Resources
Engineering University of California, Davis. Report No. 97-01.
Dettinger, M. D., D. R. Cayan, M. K. Meyer, and A. E. Jeton. 2004. Simulated hydrologic
responses to climate variations and change in the Merced, Carson, and American River
basins, Sierra Nevada, California, 1900-2099. Climatic Change 62:283-317.
Dettinger, M., J. Lundquist, D. Cayan, and J. Meyer. 2006. The 16 May 2005 Flood in
Yosemite National Park--A Glimpse into High-Country Flood Generation in the Sierra
Nevada. Presentation at the American Geophysical Union Annual Meeting, San Fran-
cisco. Available at http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/cirmount/meetings/agu/pdf2006/dettinger_
etal_poster_AGU2006.pdf. Accessed July 17, 2012.
Duarte, C. M., D. J. Conley, J. Carstensen, and M. Sanchez-Camacho. 2009. Return to Nev-
erland: Shifting baselines affect eutrophication restoration targets. Estuaries and Coasts
32:29-36.
Famiglietti, J. S., M. Lo, S. L. Ho, J. Bethune, K. J. Anderson, T. H. Syed, S. C. Swenson,
C. R. de Linage, and M. Rodell. 2011. Satellites measure recent rates of groundwa-
ter depletion in California's Central Valley. Geophysical Research Letters 38:L03403,
doi:10.1029/2010GL046442.
Field, C. B., G. C. Daily, F. W. Davis, S. Gaines, P. A. Matson, J. Melack, and N. L. Miller.
1999. Confronting Climate Change in California: Ecological Impacts on the Golden
State. Cambridge, MA: Union of Concerned Scientists; Washington, DC: Ecological
Society of America.
Florsheim, J. L., and M. D. Dettinger. 2007. Climate and floods still govern California levee
breaks. Geophysical Research Letters 34:L22403, doi:10.1029/2007GL031702.
Fogarty, M. J., and S. A. Murawski. 1998. Large-scale disturbance and the structure of marine
systems: Fishery impacts on Georges Bank. Ecological Applications 8:s6-s22.
Francis, R. C., and S. R. Hare. 1994. Decadal-scale regime shifts in the large marine eco-
systems of the Northeast Pacific: A case for historical science. Fisheries Oceanography
3:279-291.
Franco, G., D. Cayan, A. Luers, M. Hanemann, and B. Croes. 2008. Linking climate change
science with policy in California. Climatic Change 87(Suppl 1):S7-S20, doi:10.1007/
s10584-007-9359-8.
Frisk, M. G., T. J. Miller, S. J. D. Martell, and K. Sosebee. 2008. New hypothesis helps ex-
plain elasmobranch "outburst" on Georges Bank in the 1980s. Ecological Applications
18:234-245.
Gargett, A. E. 1997. The optimal stability `window': A mechanism underyling decadal fluctua-
tions in North Pacific salmon stocks. Fisheries Oceanography 6:109-117.
Gershunov, A., T. P. Barnett, D. R. Cayan, T. Tubbs, and L. Goddard. 2000. Predicting and
Downscaling ENSO Impacts on Intraseasonal Precipitation Statistics in California: The
1997/98 Event. Journal of Hydrometeorology 1:201-210.
Grimaldo, L. F., R. E. Miller, C. M. Peregrin, and Z. Hymanson. 2012. Fish assemblages in
reference and restored tidal freshwater marshes of the San Francisco Estuary. San Fran-
cisco Estuary and Watershed Science.
OCR for page 185
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 185
Groves, D. G., D. Yates, and C. Tebaldi. 2008. Developing and applying uncertain global
climate change projections for regional water management planning. Water Resources
Research 44:W12413, doi:10.1029/2008WR006964.
Hanak, E., J. Lund, A. Dinar, B. Gray, R. Howitt, J. Mount, P. Moyle, and B. Thompson.
2011. Managing California's Water: From Conflict to Reconciliation, Public Policy
Institute of California, San Francisco, CA, 500 pp., www.ppic.org/main/publication.
asp?i=944. Accessed July 17, 2012.
Harou, J. J., J. Medellin-Azuara, T. Zhu, S. K. Tanaka, J. R. Lund, S. Stine, M. A. Olivares,
and M. W. Jenkins. 2010. Economic consequences of optimized water management
for a prolonged, severe drought in California. Water Resources Research 46:W05522,
doi:10.1029/2008WR007681.
Harris, J. A., R. J. Hobbs, E. Higgs, and J. Aronson. 2006. Ecological restoration and global
climate change. Restoration Ecology 14:170-176.
Heberger, M., H. Cooley, P. Herrera, P. H. Gleick, and E. Moore. 2009. The Impacts of
Sea-Level Rise on the California Coast. California Energy Commission, CEC-500-2009-
024-F. Sacramento, CA.
Heberger, M., H. Cooley, P. Herrera, P. H. Gleick, and E. Moore. 2011. Potential impacts of
increased coastal flooding in California due to sea-level rise. Climatic Change 109(Suppl
1):229-249, doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0308-1.
Hidalgo, H. G., M. D. Dettinger, and D. R. Cayan. 2008. Downscaling with constructed
analogues: Daily precipitation and temperature fields over the United States. California
Energy Commission. CEC-500- 2007-123. Available at http://meteora.ucsd.edu/cap/pdf
files/analog_pier_report.pdf. Accessed July 17, 2012.
Hinrichsen, R. A. 2002. The accuracy of alternative stochastic growth rate estimates for salmon
populations. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 59(6):1014-1023.
Hinrichsen, R. A. 2009. Population viability analysis for several populations using multivariate
state-space models. Ecological Modelling 220(9-10):1197-1202.
Hobbs, R. J., E. Higgs, and J. A. Harris. 2009. Novel ecosystems: Implications for conserva-
tion and restoration. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 24:599-605.
Holmes, E. E. 2001. Estimating risks in declining populations with poor data. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 98(9):5072-5077.
Hulme, P. E. 2005. Adapting to climate change: Is there scope for ecological management in
the face of a global threat? Journal of Applied Ecology 42(5):784-794.
Interagency Floodplain Management Review Committee. 1994. Sharing the Challenge: Flood-
plain Management into the 21st Century. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office. Available at www.floods.org/PDF/Sharing_the_Challenge.pdf. Accessed July 16,
2012.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2007. Climate Change 2007--The Physi-
cal Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of
the IPCC. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jackson, S. T., J. L. Betancourt, R. T. Booth, and S. T. Gray. 2009. Ecology and the ratchet
of events: Climate variability, niche dimensions, and species distributions. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106:19685-19692.
Kapnick, S., and A. Hall. 2009. Observed Changes in the Sierra Nevada Snowpack: Potential
Causes and Concerns. California Energy Commission. CEC-500-2009-016-F.
Kjelson, M. A., P. F. Raquel, and F. W. Fisher. 1982. Life History of fall-run juvenile Chinook
salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, Califronia.
Pp. 393-411 in V. S. Kennedy, ed. Estuarine Comparisons. New York: Academic Press.
OCR for page 186
186 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
Knowles, N. 2009. Potential Inundation Due to Rising Sea Levels in the San Francisco Bay
Region. California Climate Change Center. CEC-500-2009-023-F, California Energy
Commission, PIER Energy-Related Environmental Research. Available at http://www.
energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CEC-500-2009-023/CEC-500-2009-023-D.PDF. Ac-
cessed July 17, 2012.
Knowles, N., and D. Cayan. 2002. Potential effects of global warming on the Sacramento/
San Joaquin watershed and the San Francisco estuary. Geophysical Research Letters
29:18-21.
Knowles, N., and D. Cayan. 2004. Elevational dependence of projected hydrologic changes in
the San Francisco Estuary and Watershed. Climatic Change 62:319-336.
Knowles, N., M. Dettinger, and D. Cayan. 2006. Trends in snowfall versus rainfall for the
Western United States. Journal of Climate 19(18):4545-4559.
Krebs, C. J. 1985. Ecology: The Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance, 3rd
Edition. New York: Harper and Row, 800 pp.
Lawson, P. W., E. A. Logerwell, N. J. Mantua, R. C. Francis, and V. N. Agostini. 2004.
Environmental factors influencing freshwater survival and smolt production in Pacific
Northwest coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and
Aquatic Sciences 61(3):360-373.
Lehman, P. W. and R. W. Smith. 1991. Environmental factors associated with phytoplankton
succession for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Bay estuary. Estuarine,
Coastal and Shelf Science 32(2):105-128.
Lehman, P. W., G. Boyer, C. Hall, S. Waller, and K. Gehrts. 2005. Distribution and toxicity of a
new colonial Microcystis aeruginosa bloom in the San Francisco Bay Estuary, California.
Hydrobiologia 541:87-99.
Lehman, P. W., G. Boyer, M. Satchwell, and S. Waller. 2008. The influence of environmental
conditions on the seasonal variation of Microcystis cell density and microcystins concen-
tration in San Francisco Estuary. Hydrobiologia 600(1):187-204.
Lessard, R. B., N. Hendrix, and R. Hilborn. 2010. Environmental factors influencing the
population viability of Sacramento River Winter Run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha). University of Washington. Available at http://archive.deltacouncil.ca.gov/
delta_science_program/pdf/workshops/workshop_salmonid_ILCM_OBAN_Winter_
Chinook_max_likelihood_draft_abstract.pdf. Accessed July 26, 2012.
Lindley, S. T., R. S. Schick, A. Agrawal, M. Goslin, T. E. Pearson, E. Mora, J. J. Anderson, B.
May, S. Greene, C. Hanson, A. Low, D. McEwan, R. B. MacFarlane, C. Swanson, and
J. G. Williams. 2006. Historical population structure of Central Valley steelhead and its
alteration by dams. Estuary Watershed Science 4(1):Article 3, 21 pp.
Lindley, S. T., C. B. Grimes, M. S. Mohr, W. Peterson, J. Stein, J. T. Anderson, L. W. Botsford,
D. L. Bottom, C. A. Busack, T. K. Collier, J. Ferguson, J. C. Garza, A. M. Grover, D. G.
Hankin, R. G. Kope, P. W. Lawson, A. Low, R. B. MacFarlane, K. Moore, M. Palmer-
Zwahlen, F. B. Schwing, J. Smith, C. Tracy, R. Webb, B. K. Wells, and T. H. Williams.
2009. What caused the Sacramento River fall Chinook stock collapse? NOAA Technical
Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-447. 121 pp.
Linkov, I., F. K. Satterstrom, G. Kiker, C. Batchelor, T. Bridges, and E. Ferguson. 2006. From
comparative risk assessment to multi-criteria decision analysis and adaptive management:
Recent developments and applications. Environment International 32:1072-1093.
Lund, J., E. Hanak, W. Fleenor, W. Bennett, R. Howitt, J. Mount, and P. Moyle. 2010.
Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press. Pp. 1-229.
Maurer, E. P. 2007. Uncertainty in hydrologic impacts of climate change in the Sierra Ne-
vada, California under two emissions scenarios. Climatic Change 82(3-4):309-325,
doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9180-9.
OCR for page 187
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 187
Maurer, E. P., and H. G. Hidalgo. 2008. Utility of daily vs. monthly large-scale climate data:
An intercomparison of two statistical downscaling methods. Hydrology and Earth System
Sciences 12:551-563.
Maurer, E. P., I. T. Stewart, C. Bonfils, P. B. Duffy, and D. Cayan. 2007. Detection, attribu-
tion, and sensitivity of trends toward earlier streamflow in the Sierra Nevada. Journal of
Geophysical Research 112:D11118, doi:10.1029/2006JD008088.1.
McLain, J., and G. Castillo. 2010. Nearshore areas used by fry Chinook salmon, Oncorhyn-
chus tshawytscha, in the northwestern Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California. San
Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science 7(2).
Medellin-Azuara, J., J. J. Harou, M. A. Olivares, K. Madani-Laijani, J. R. Lund, R. E. Howitt,
S. K. Tanaka, M. W. Jenkins, and T. Zhu. 2008. Adaptability and Adaptations of Cali-
fornia's Water Supply Sytem to Dry Climate Warming. Climae Change 87(1): S75-S-90.
Milly, P. C. D, J. Betancourt, M. Falkenmark, R. M. Hirsch, Z. W. Kundzewicz, D. P. Letten-
maier, and R. J. Stouffer. 2008. Stationarity Is dead: Whither water management? Science
319(5863):573-574, doi:10.1126/science.1151915.
Min, S.-K., X. Zhang, F. W. Zwiers, and G. C. Hegerl. 2011. Human contribution to more-
intense precipitation extremes. Nature 470(7334):378-381.
Mohseni, O., T. R. Erickson, and H. G. Stefan. 1999. Sensitivity of stream temperatures in
the United States to air temperatures projected under a global warming scenario. Water
Resources Research 35(12):3723-3733.
Monismith, S. G., J. L. Hench, D. A. Fong, N. J. Nidzieko, W. E. Fleenor, L. Doyle, and S. G.
Schladow. 2009. Thermal variability in a tidal river. Estuaries and Coasts 32(1):100-110,
doi:10.1007/s12237-008-9109-9.
Moss, R. E. S., and J. M. Eller. 2007. Estimating the probability of failure and associated risk
of the California Bay Delta Levee system. Geotechnical Special Publication 170.
Mote, P. W., A. F. Hamlet, M. P. Clark, and D. P. Lettenmaier. 2005. Declining mountain
snowpack in western North America. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
86(1):39-49.
Mount, J. 2007. Sea Level Rise and Delta Planning, Memo from the CALFED Independent
Science Board to Mike Healey, CALFED Lead Scientists, dated September 6, 2007,
Available at http://calwater.ca.gov/science/pdf/isb/meeting_082807/ISB_response_to_ls_
sea_level_090707.pdf. Accessed July 17, 2012.
Mount, J., and R. Twiss. 2005. Subsidence, sea level rise, and seismicity in the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science 3(1).
Moyle, P. B., W. A. Bennett, W. E. Fleenor, and J. R. Lund. 2010. Habitat variability and
complexity in the upper San Francisco Estuary. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed
Science 8(3):1-24.
Newman, K. B., and J. Rice. 2002. Modeling the survival of Chinook salmon smolts outmi-
grating through the lower Sacramento River system. Journal of the American Statistical
Association 97:983-993.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2009. Biological Opinion on the Long-Term
Central Valley Project and State Water Project Operations Criteria and Plan. Available
at http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/ocap.htm. Accessed July 17, 2012.
Nobriga, M., T. Sommer, F. Feyrer, and K. Fleming. 2008. Long-term trends in summertime
habitat suitability for delta smelt, Hypomesus transpacificus. San Francisco Estuary and
Watershed Science 6(1).
NRC (National Research Council). 1995. Science and the Endangered Species Act. Washing-
ton, DC: National Academy Press.
NRC. 1996. Upstream: Salmon and Society in the Pacific Northwest. Washington, DC: Na-
tional Academy Press.
OCR for page 188
188 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
NRC. 2004. Endangered and Threatened Fishes in the Klamath River Basin: Causes of Decline
and Strategies for Recovery. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NRC. 2007. Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The First Biennial Review--2006.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NRC. 2008a. Hydrology, Ecology and Fishes of the Klamath River Basin. Washington, DC:
The National Academies Press.
NRC. 2008b. Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Second Biennial Review--2008.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NRC. 2010. Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Third Biennial Review--2010.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NRC. 2011. A Review of the Use of Science and Adaptive Management in California's Draft
Bay Delta Conservation Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Ohio Emergency Management Agency. 2011. State of Ohio Hazard Mitigation Plan 2011,
Chapter 2.6: Dam/levee failure, pp. 149-207.
Pagano, T., and D. Garen. 2005. A recent increase in western U.S. streamflow variability and
persistence. Journal of Hydrometeorology 6:173-179.
Pfeffer, W. T., J. T. Harper, and S. O'Neel. 2008. Kinematic constraints on glacier contributions
to 21st century sea-level rise. Science 321:1340-1343.
Pierce, D. W. 2005. Effects of the North Pacific Oscillation and ENSO on Seasonally Averaged
Temperatures in California, PIER Project Report, CEC-500-2005--02.
Rahmstorf, S. 2007. A semi-empirical approach to projecting future sea-level rise. Science
315(5810):368-370, doi:10.1126/science.1135456.
Redmond, K. T., and R. W. Koch. 1991. Surface climate and streamflow variability in the
western United States and their relationship to large-scale circulation indices. Water
Resources Research 27(9):2381-2399.
Reed, D. J. 2002. Understanding tidal marsh sedimentation in the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta, California. Journal of Coastal Research Special Issue. Proceedings of International
Coastal Symposium 2002 SI36:605-611.
Reed, T. E., D. E. Schindler, and R. S. Waples. 2010. Interacting effects of phenotypic plastic-
ity and evolution on population persistence in a changing climate. Conservation Biology
25:56-63.
Scheffer, M., and S. R. Carpenter. 2003. Catastrophic regime shifts in ecosystems: Linking
theory to observation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18:648-656.
Scheffer, M., S. Carpenter, J. A. Foley, C. Folke, and B. Walker. 2001. Catastrophic shifts in
ecosystems. Nature 413:591-596.
Scott, M., D. Goble, J. Wiens, D. Wilcove, M. Bean, and T. Male. 2005. Recovery of imper-
iled species under the Endagered Species Act: The need for a new approach. Frontiers in
Ecology and the Environment 3(7):383-389.
Seabloom, E. W., A. P. Dobson, and D. M. Stoms. 2002. Extinction rates under nonrandom
habitat loss. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America 99:11229-11234.
Sills, G. L., N. D. Vroman, R. E. Wahl, and N. T. Schwanz. 2008. Overview of New Orleans
levee failures: Lessons learned and their impact on national levee design and assessment.
Journal of Geotechnical and GeoEnvironmental Engineering ASCE May 134(5):556.
SPUR (San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association). 2011. Available at http://
www.spur.org/publications/library/report/sealevelrise_110109. Accessed July 17, 2012.
Stewart, I., D. Cayan, and M. Dettinger. 2004. Changes in snowmelt runoff timing in western
North America under a "business as usual" climate change scenario. Climate Change
62:217-232.
OCR for page 189
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 189
Suddeth, R., J. Mount, and J. Lund. 2010. Levee decisions and sustainability for the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science 8(2).
Available at http://escholarship.org/uc/item/9wr5j84g. Accessed July 17, 2012.
Swanson, C., T. Reid, P. S. Young, and J. J. Cech, Jr. 2000. Comparative environmental toler-
ances of threatened delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) and introduced wakasagi (H.
nipponensis) in an altered California estuary. Oecologia 123:384-390.
Tanaka, S. K., T. Zhu, J. R. Lund, R. E. Howitt, M. W. Jenkins, M. A. Pulido, M. Tauber, R. S.
Ritzema, and I. C. Ferreira. 2006. Climate warming and water management adaptation
for California. Climatic Change 76(3-4):361-387.
Tanaka, S. K., C. R. Connell, K. Madani, J. Lund, E. Hanak, and J. Medellin-Azuara. 2008.
The economic costs and adaptation for alternative Delta regulations. In Comparing Fu-
ture for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, edited by J. Lund, E. Hanak, W. Fleenor, W.
Bennet, R. Howitt, J. Mount, and P. Moyle. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute
of California.
Tett, P., R. Gowen, D. Mills, T. Fernandes, L. Gilpin, M. Huxham, K. Kennington, P. Read,
M. Service, M. Wilkinson, and S. Malcolm. 2007. Defining and detecting undesirable
disturbance in the context of eutrophication. Marine Pollution Bulletin 53.
Thompson, L. C. 2011. Climate change predictions and management options from coupled
watershed and salmon population dynamics models. Journal of Water Resource Planning
and Management doi:10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000194.
Tobin, G. 1995. The Levee love affair: A stormy relationship? Journal of the North American
Water Resources Association 31(2):359-367.
Trimble, P., J. Obeysekera, L. Cadavid, and R. Santee. 2005. Application of climate outlooks for
water management in South Florida. In Climate Variations, Climate Change, and Water
Resources Engineering, edited by J. Garbrecht and T. Piechota. American Society of Civil
Engineers. New York, NY.
USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2011. Sea Level Change Considerations for Civil
Works Programs. EC 1165-2-212. Washington, DC. Available at http://planning.usace.
army.mil/toolbox/library/ECs/EC11652212Nov2011.pdf. Accessed July 25, 2012.
USBR (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation). 2008. Appendix R. Sensitivity of Future Central Valley
Project and State Water Project Operations to Potential Climate Change and Associated
Sea Level Rise, OCAP-BA, July.
USBR. 2011. SECURE Water Act, Section 9503--Reclamation Climate Change and Water
2011.
van Nes, E. H., T. Amaro, M. Scheffer, and G. C. A. Duineveld. 2007. Possible mechanisms
for a marine benthic regime shift in the North Sea. Marine Ecology:Progress Series
330:39-47.
Vander Zanden, M. J., and J. D. Olden. 2008. A management framework for preventing the
secondary spread of aquatic invasive species. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic
Sciences 65:1512-1522.
Vermeer, M., and S. Rahmstorf. 2009. Global sea level linked to global temperature.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
106(51):21527-21532.
Vicuna, S., and J. A. Dracup. 2007. The evolution of climate change impact studies on hydrol-
ogy and water resources in California. Climatic Change 82(3-4):327-350, doi:10.1007/
s10584-006-9207-2.
Wagner, R., M. T. Stacey, L. Brown, and M. Dettinger. 2011. Statistical models of tempera-
ture in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta under climate-change scenarios and ecological
implications. Estuaries and Coasts 34:544-556.
OCR for page 190
190 SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE DELTA
Watson, J., and J. A. Estes. 2011. Stability, resilience and phase shifts in rocky subtidal com-
munities along the west coast of Vancouver Islan, Canada. Ecological Monographs
81:215-239.
Watt, A. S. 1947. Patterns and process in the plant community. Journal of Ecology 35:1-22.
Weber, E. U. 2010. What shapes perceptions of climate change? Wiley Interdisciplinary Re-
views: Climate Change 1(3):332-342.
Williams, J. G. 2006. Central Valley salmon: A perspective on Chinook and steelhead in the
Central Valley of California. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science 4. Available
at http://repositories.cdlib.org/jmie/sfews/vol4/iss3/art2. Accessed July 17, 2012.
Willis, A. D., J. Lund, E. Townsley, and B. Faber. 2011. Climate change and flood operations
in the Sacramento Basin, California. San Franciso Estuary and Watershed Science 9(2).
Wright, S. A., and D. H. Schoellhamer. 2004. Trends in the sediment yield of the Sacramento
River, California, 1957-2001. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science 2(2).
