EXHIBIT
8-A
2012-2013 ANNUAL REPORT
(July 1, 2012 -
June 30, 2013)
MPWMD MITIGATION PROGRAM
WATER ALLOCATION
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
MONTEREY PENINSULA
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
Prepared May 2014
I.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND:
In April 1990, the Water Allocation Program Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD or District) by J.L. Mintier and Associates. The Final EIR analyzed the effects of five levels of annual California American Water (CAW or Cal-Am) production, ranging from 16,744 acre-feet per year (AFY) to 20,500 AFY. On November 5, 1990, the MPWMD Board certified the Final EIR, adopted findings, and passed a resolution that set Option V as the new water allocation limit. Option V resulted in an annual limit of 16,744 AFY for Cal-Am production, and 3,137 AFY for non-Cal-Am production, with a total allocation of 19,881 AFY for the Monterey Peninsula Water Resource System (MPWRS).
Even though Option V was the least damaging alternative of the five options analyzed in the Water Allocation Program EIR, production at this level still resulted in significant, adverse environmental impacts that must be mitigated. Thus, the findings adopted by the Board included a "Five-Year Mitigation Program for Option V" and associated mitigation measures.
In June 1993, Ordinance No. 70
was passed, which amended the annual Cal-Am production limit from 16,744 AF to
17,619 AF, and the non-Cal-Am limit from 3,137 AF to 3,054 AF; the total
production limit was increased from 19,881 AF to 20,673 AF per year due to new
supply from the Paralta Well in Seaside.
In April 1996, Ordinance No. 83 slightly changed the Cal-Am and non-Cal-Am
annual limits to 17,621 AF and 3,046 AF, respectively, resulting in a total
limit of 20,667 AFY. In February 1997,
Ordinance No. 87 was adopted to provide a special water allocation for the
planned expansion of the
The Five-Year Mitigation Program formally began in July 1991 with the new fiscal year (FY) and was slated to run until June 30, 1996. Following public hearings in May 1996 and District Board review of draft reports through September 1996, the Five-Year Evaluation Report for the 1991-1996 comprehensive program, as well as an Implementation Plan for FY 1996-1997 through FY 2000-2001, were finalized in October 1996. In its July 1995 Order WR 95-10, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) directed Cal-Am to carry out any aspect of the Five-Year Mitigation Program that the District does not continue after June 1996. To date, as part of the annual budget approval process, the District Board has voted to continue the program. The Mitigation Program has accounted for a significant portion of the District’s annual budgets in terms of revenue (derived primarily from a portion of the MPWMD user fee on the Cal-Am bill) and expenditures. It should be noted that this fee was removed from Cal-Am’s bill in July 2009, resulting from actions subsequent to a California Public Utilities Commission ruling regarding a Cal-Am rate request. Cal-Am continued to pay the fee amount (8.325%) under a separate reinvestment agreement with MPWMD through June 2010. The District and Cal-Am have negotiated an annual funding agreement that funded part of the 2013 mitigation program. The District’s other revenue sources were used to fund the remainder of the program.
The
This 2012-2013 Annual Report first addresses general mitigation measures relating to water supply and demand (Sections II through XI), followed by monitoring related to compliance with production limits, drought reserve and supply augmentation (Sections XII through XV), followed by mitigations relating to specific environmental resources (Sections XVI through XIX). Section XX provides a summary of costs for the biological mitigation programs as well as related hydrologic monitoring, water augmentation and administrative costs. Section XXI presents selected references.
Table I-1 summarizes the mitigation measures described in this report. In subsequent chapters, for each topic, the mitigation measure adopted as part of the Final EIR is briefly described, followed by a summary of activities relating to the topic in FY 2012-2013 (July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2013, unless otherwise noted). Monitoring results, where applicable, are also presented. Tables and figures that support the text are found at the end of each section in the order they are mentioned in the text.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS:
Many activities are carried out
as part of the MPWMD Mitigation Program to address the environmental effects
that community water use has upon the
OBSERVED TRENDS, CONCLUSIONS AND/OR RECOMMENDATIONS:
The following paragraphs describe observed trends (primarily qualitative), conclusions and/or recommendations for the mitigation program. General conclusions are followed by a summary of selected Mitigation Program categories.
General Overview
In general, the Carmel River environment is in better condition today than it was in 1990 when the Allocation Program EIR was prepared. This improvement is evidenced by biological/hydrologic indicators such as consistent steelhead adult spawner counts of several hundred fish in recent years as compared to zero to five fish per year when the Mitigation Program began in 1991; improved densities of juvenile steelhead in quantities that reflect a healthy seeded stream; consistently balanced bird diversity in MPWMD restoration project areas compared to control areas; fewer miles of dry river in summer and fall than in the past; and higher water tables in the Carmel Valley alluvial aquifer at the end of each water year.
The comprehensive MPWMD Mitigation Program is an important factor responsible for this improvement. Direct actions such as fish rescues and rearing, and riparian habitat restoration literally enable species to survive and reproduce. Indirect action such as conservation programs, water augmentation, ordinances/regulations and cooperative development of Cal-Am operation strategies result in less environmental impact from human water needs than would occur otherwise. The District’s comprehensive monitoring program provides a solid scientific data baseline, and enables better understanding of the relationships between weather, hydrology, human activities and the environment. Better understanding of the MPWRS enables informed decision-making that achieves the District’s mission of benefiting the community and the environment.
It is acknowledged that there are other important factors responsible for this improved situation. For example, since Water Year (WY) 1991, the Carmel River has received normal or better runoff in 16 out of 22 years. Actions by federal resource agencies under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) or the SWRCB under its Order WR 95-10 and follow-up orders have provided strong incentive for Cal-Am and other local water producers to examine and amend water production practices to the degree feasible, and for the community to reduce water use. Except for one year in 1997, the community has complied with the production limits imposed on Cal-Am by the SWRCB since Order 95-10 became effective in July 1995.
Despite these improvements, challenges still remain due to human influence on the river. The steelhead and red-legged frog remain listed as threatened species under the ESA. At least several miles of the river still dry up each year, harming habitat for fish and frogs. The presence of the two existing dams, flood plain development and water diversions to meet community and local user needs continue to alter the natural dynamics of the river. Stream bank restoration projects may be significantly damaged in large winter storm events, and some people continue to illegally dump refuse into the river or alter their property without the proper permits. Thus, the Mitigation Program (or a comprehensive effort similar to it) will be needed as long as significant quantities of water are diverted from the Carmel River and people live in close proximity to it.
Water Resources Monitoring Program
Streamflow and precipitation data continue to provide a scientific basis for management of the water resources within the District. These data continue to be useful in Carmel River Basin planning studies, reservoir management operations, water supply forecast and budgeting, and defining the baseline hydrologic conditions of the Carmel River Basin. Also, the District’s streamflow monitoring program continues to produce high quality and cost-effective data.
There is limited storage of surface water by dams on the Carmel River. Los Padres Reservoir, completed in 1948, holds 1,626 AF of usable storage, based on 2008 survey data. Usable storage in San Clemente Reservoir, completed in 1921, has been essentially eliminated by order of the Department of Water Resources (DWR) due to seismic safety concerns. As an interim safety measure, which remained in effect through WY 2013, DWR has seasonally required Cal-Am to lower the water level in San Clemente Reservoir from 525 feet to 515 feet elevation, which is too low for water-supply use. Cal-Am had proposed a dam seismic strengthening program. State and federal environmental agencies urged Cal-Am to reconsider their position and support the dam removal and river reroute option. In July 2009, Cal-Am changed its position and subsequently supports the dam removal option, as memorialized in the January 2010 multi-agency collaboration statement. District staff continues to participate in technical advisory role. In 2011, Cal-Am circulated a request for bids to complete the removal of the Dam and a contractor was selected for this work in 2013. The first phase of this project began in 2013 with construction of a new access road and placement of the river diversion facilities.
Groundwater levels, and consequently groundwater storage conditions, in the Carmel Valley Alluvial Aquifer have maintained a relatively normal pattern in recent years, in contrast to the dramatic storage declines that were observed during the prolonged 1987-1991 drought period. The relatively stable storage in the Carmel Valley alluvial aquifer in recent years is attributable to a combination of a period of more favorable hydrologic conditions and the adoption of improved water management practices that have tended to preserve higher storage conditions in the aquifer. In WY 2013, Carmel Valley alluvial aquifer storage declined slightly as this year marked the second consecutive dry hydrologic year.
In contrast, storage conditions in the coastal portion of the Seaside Groundwater Basin have not been stable in recent years, in particular with respect to the deeper Santa Margarita aquifer, from which over 80 percent of the Cal-Am production in the Seaside Basin is derived. This downward trend in water levels reflects the changed production operations in the Seaside Basin stemming primarily from changed practices after SWRCB Order 95-10. The increased annual reliance on production from Cal-Am’s major production wells in Seaside, along with significant increases in non-Cal-Am use, have dramatically lowered water levels in this aquifer, and seasonal recoveries have not been sufficient to reverse this trend.
To address this storage depletion trend, the District initiated efforts in the 2000-2001 timeframe to prepare a Seaside Basin Groundwater Management Plan in compliance with protocols set by the State of California (AB 3030, as amended by SB 1938). This process was superseded by litigation filed by Cal-Am in August 2003, requesting a court adjudication of water production and storage rights in the Seaside Basin. The District participated in all litigation proceedings as an intervening “interested party”. The Superior Court held hearings in December 2005 and issued a final adjudication decision in March 2006, which was amended through an additional court filing in February 2007. The final decision established a new, lower “natural safe yield” for the Basin of 3,000 AFY, and an initial Basin “operating safe yield” of 5,600 AFY. Under the decision, the operating safe yield would be reduced by 10% every three years until the operating safe yield matches the natural safe yield of the Basin in 2021. The Court also created a nine-member Watermaster Board (of which the District is a member) to implement the Court’s decision. With the triennial reductions in operational yield required by the Seaside Basin Adjudication Decision, water levels have not been declining as fast as previously observed.
One of the means that could potentially mitigate this observed storage depletion trend is a program that the District has been actively pursuing since 1996 -- the Seaside Basin groundwater injection program (also known as aquifer storage and recovery, or ASR). ASR entails diverting excess water flows (typically in Winter/Spring) from the Carmel Valley Alluvial Aquifer through existing Cal-Am facilities and injecting the water into the Seaside Groundwater Basin for later recovery in dry periods.
The primary goal of the MPWMD Phase 1 and 2 ASR Projects is better management of existing water resources and production facilities to help reduce impacts to the Carmel River, especially during the dry season. The projects are viewed as being complementary to other larger, long-term water augmentation projects that are currently being pursued for the Monterey Peninsula. These projects, also known as Water Projects 1 and 2, entail a maximum diversion of 2,426 AFY, and 2,900 AFY respectively from the Carmel River for injection. The combined average yield for both projects is estimated at 2,000 AFY. The operation of the Phase 1 and 2 ASR Projects result in reduced unauthorized pumping of the Carmel River in Summer/Fall and increased storage in the Seaside Basin, which are both considered to be environmentally beneficial.
The
ASR water supply efforts in 2012-2013 included: (1) continued work with regulatory and land
use agencies on expansion of the Phase 1 Santa Margarita ASR site; (2) completion
of the electrical facilities for the Phase 2 ASR Project at the Seaside Middle
School site; (3) Completion and testing of the second ASR well at the Phase 2
ASR site; (4) diverting under water right 20808C for Phase 2 of the ASR
project; (5) coordination with Cal-Am, federal, and state agencies to construct
the necessary infrastructure for the ASR project; (6) coordination with Cal-Am
on necessary actions and delivery system facilities to enable expanded ASR; and
(7) continued implementation of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Cal-Am
to operate the ASR facilities.
Groundwater quality conditions in both the Carmel Valley Alluvial Aquifer and Seaside Basin have remained acceptable in terms of potential indicators of contamination from shallow sources such as septic systems. There have been no identifiable trends indicative of seawater intrusion into the principal supply sources the coastal areas of these two aquifer systems to date.
Steelhead Fishery Program
Annual monitoring conducted by the District shows that the Carmel River steelhead population has recovered somewhat from the remnant levels of the last drought (1987 to 1991) and from past water-supply practices. Though overall fish populations have improved since the inception of the Mitigation Program in 1991, there was a period of general decline in the adult run from 2001 to 2011. Between 1992 and 2001, the spawning population recovered from a handful of fish to levels approaching 900 adults per year as counted at San Clemente Dam (SCD). Then the run experienced a six-year downward trend from 804 adults in 2001 to 222 adults in 2007, rebounding somewhat in 2008 to 412 adults. However, in 2009 and 2010, the population underwent a dramatic reduction to 95 and 157 adults respectively. In 2011 and 2012, the population rebounded again with 452 and 470 adults passing over SCD, while in 2013 the number dropped again to 249, well below the 1994-2013 average of 421, due in part to the dry year.
Previous redd surveys below SCD confirm that the spawning habitat in the lower river has improved considerably over the last 20 years and many adults are now spawning there instead of passing the SCD fish counting station. In addition, juvenile steelhead rescued by the District from the lower river that survive to adulthood are more likely to return to the lower river to spawn, rather than migrate upstream past the SCD. In 2011-2012, The District deployed a DIDSON counting station, acquired from CDFW grant funding, in the lower river to help determine whether more adults are in fact spawning downstream of the dam. Staff continued to download and review video data from the 2013 season and will be reporting the preliminary results in the 2014 Mitigation Program report.
At present, the exact reasons for this period of apparent decline in adult returns at SCD are not clear, but are likely the result of a combination of controlling and limiting factors including:
Ř improved spawning conditions in the lower Carmel River, encouraging fish to spawn before they reach the counter at the dam;
Ř spring flow variability such as low flow conditions that could dewater redds prematurely or high flows that could either deposit sediment over redds or completely wash them out;
Ř variable lagoon conditions, caused by artificial manipulation of the sandbar and/or naturally occurring periods of low winter flows;
Ř impediments to adult and smolt migration routes, such as seasonal barriers, inadequate passage facilities, and intermittent periods of low flow creating critical riffles below the Narrows during the normal winter-spring migration season;
Ř low densities of juvenile fish in 2004, 2007, 2009, 2010 and 2011 affecting subsequent adult populations;
Ř variable ocean conditions; and the
Ř ongoing but limited impacts of legal fishing (i.e., approximately 0.5 - 1.5% incidental mortality associated with catch-and-release fishing for adults in the winter season, and fishing for juvenile steelhead from in the upper watershed during the spring/summer trout season may slightly reduce the adult spawning stock or the number of juvenile fish that reach the ocean), as well as illegal poaching activities.
·
Juvenile Steelhead
Monitoring of the juvenile steelhead population at eleven sites along the mainstem Carmel River below Los Padres Dam shows that fish density continues to be quite variable both year to year and site to site from below 0.40 fish per foot [fpf] of stream to levels frequently ranging above 1.00 fpf, values that are typical of well-stocked steelhead streams. In this 2012-2013 reporting period, the average population density nearly matched the long-term average of 0.81 fpf for the Carmel River due primarily to healthy adult returns in 2011-2012 and good habitat conditions in the lower river.
District staff believes the recovery and fluctuation of the juvenile steelhead population in the Carmel River Basin is directly related to the following factors:
Ř improvements in streamflow patterns, due to favorable natural fluctuations, exemplified by relatively high base-flow conditions since 1995;
Ř District and SWRCB rules to actively manage the rate and distribution of groundwater extractions and direct surface diversions within the basin, coupled with changes to CAW’s operations at San Clemente and Los Padres Dams, providing increased streamflow below San Clemente Dam;
Ř restoration and stabilization of the lower Carmel River’s stream banks, providing improved riparian habitat (tree cover/shade along the stream and an increase in woody debris) while preventing erosion of silt/sand from filling gravel beds and pools;
Ř extensive juvenile steelhead rescues by the District over the last 24 years, now totaling 375,032 fish through 2012;
Ř rearing and releases of rescued fish from the MPWMD Sleepy Hollow Steelhead Rearing Facility (SHSRF) of nearly 87,300 juveniles and smolts back into the river and lagoon over the past 17 years (14 years of operation), at sizes generally larger than the river-reared fish, which in theory should enhance their ocean survival;
Ř variable lagoon conditions, including highly variable water-surface elevation changes caused by mechanical breaching, chronic poor water quality (especially in the fall), and predation by birds and striped bass;
Ř barriers or seasonal impediments to juvenile and smolt emigration, such as the lack of juvenile passage facilities at Los Padres Dam and intermittent periods of low flow below the Narrows during the normal spring emigration season;
Ř chronic, and occasionally acute, fall temperature and hydrogen sulfide levels below LPD, and the increase in suspended sediment from the SCD summer drawdown; and the
Ř potential for enhanced predation on smolts and young-of-the-year (YOY) migrating through the sediment fields of Los Padres and San Clemente Reservoirs.
A recent challenge that may remain for some years is the potential effects of substantive physical and operational changes to SCD required by DWR/DSOD, which has resulted in the initiation of dam removal operations. The most significant issues are the effect of released sediment from the former reservoir on downstream river habitat, proper functioning of the SHSRF, and downstream property owners (i.e., flood elevations). Major changes include:
Ř lowering of the reservoir water level to address seismic safety concerns on an interim basis;
Ř significant changes in the Carmel River sediment regime downstream of San Clemente; and
Ř loss of reservoir storage, which, in the past, has helped maintain adequate river flows and cooler water in the lower Carmel River.
District staff continues to provide technical expertise and scientific data to CAW engineers and environmental consultants, DWR/DSOD, CDFG, NMFS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and others involved in addressing the resource management issues associated with removal of SCD. District staff also continues to provide technical expertise and scientific data to California Department Parks and Recreation, Monterey County Water Resources Agency, Monterey County Public Works Department, California Coastal Commission, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Carmel Area Wastewater District, other regulatory agencies and stakeholders involved in the management of the Carmel River, the Carmel River Lagoon and the barrier beach.
The Carmel River continues to show many signs of recovery and stabilization after a combination of increased groundwater extraction, extreme drought and flood events occurred during the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s that impacted property owners, threatened species and degraded riparian habitat. In many reaches of the river, fine material (silt and sand) that entered the main stem during periods of instability has been washed out of the system leaving behind a more complex channel with improved steelhead spawning substrate, diverse habitat, and a richer riparian community. Areas with perennial or near perennial flow (upstream of Schulte Bridge) or a high groundwater table, such as downstream of Highway 1, have experienced vigorous natural recruitment in the channel bottom, which has helped to stabilize streambanks and diversify aquatic habitat.
In these areas, natural
recruitment has led to vegetation encroachment that, in some areas, may
constrict high flows and threaten bank stability. MPWMD continues to
monitor these areas closely and to develop a management strategy to balance
protection of native habitat with the need to reduce erosion potential. Environmental review of proposed projects and the process
of securing permits is quite complex and requires an exhaustive review of
potential impacts.
In
contrast to areas with perennial flow, recovery of the streamside area between
the Rancho Cańada golf courses and Quail Lodge area has been consistently
impacted by groundwater extraction. In this reach, only irrigated areas
are able to sustain a diversity of plant species. Plant stress in the
late summer and fall is evident in non-irrigated portions of the riparian
zone. In these areas, streambanks exhibit unstable characteristics during
high flows, such as sudden bank collapse, because of the lack of healthy
vegetation that would ordinarily provide stability.
Restoration
project areas sponsored by MPWMD since 1984 continue to mature and exhibit more
features of relatively undisturbed reaches, such as plant diversity and vigor,
complex floodplain topography, and a variety of in-channel features such as
large wood, extensive vegetative cover, pools, riffles, and cut
banks. Areas that were repaired after the 1995 and 1998 floods are
still developing these natural features. In part, the location and
geometry of the projects constrain the rate of progress toward a fully restored
stream channel (i.e., several are located in highly developed, narrow sections
of the river impacted by groundwater extraction). Also, many of these
projects relied heavily on the use of bank hardening (e.g., rip-rap) to
stabilize banks, which can discourage plant vigor and diversity.
As
cited in previous annual reports, the most significant trends continue to
include the following:
Ř
increased oversight of
channel maintenance and restoration activities by Federal agencies,
Ř
groundwater extraction
downstream of Schulte Road,
Ř
vegetation
encroachment into the channel bottom,
Ř
high avian species
diversity values, and
Ř
maturing of previous
restoration projects.
Carmel River Erosion Protection and Restoration
With the exception of the channel area between the Via Mallorca Road bridge and the Rancho San Carlos Road bridge, streambanks in the river mainstem appear to be relatively stable during average water years with “frequent flow” storm events (i.e., flows with a return magnitude of less than five years). The program begun by MPWMD in 1984 (and later subsumed into the Mitigation Program) to stabilize streambanks appears to be achieving the goals that were initially set out, i.e., to reduce bank erosion during high-flow events up to a 10-year return-interval flow, restore vegetation along the streamside, and improve fisheries habitat.
Consistent with previous annual reports, it is likely that the following trends will continue:
Ř State and Federal agencies consider the Carmel River watershed to be a high priority area for restoration, as evidenced by the interest in addressing water supply issues, the removal of San Clemente Dam, impacts to the Carmel Bay Area of Special Biological Significance, and management of threatened species. Stringent avoidance and mitigation requirements will continue to be placed on activities that could have negative impacts on sensitive aquatic species or their habitats.
Ř Activities that interrupt or curtail natural stream functions, such as lining streambanks with riprap, have come under increasing scrutiny and now require significant mitigation offsets. Approximately 35% to 40% of the streambanks downstream of Carmel Valley Village have been altered or hardened since the late 1950s. Activities that increase the amount of habitat or restore natural stream functions are more likely to be approved or funded through State and Federal grant programs.
Ř Additional work to add instream features (such as large logs for steelhead refuge or backwater channel areas for frogs) can restore and diversify aquatic habitat.
Ř Major restoration projects completed between 1992 and 1999 have had extensive and successful work to diversify plantings. However, maintenance of irrigation systems is ongoing and requires extensive work in water years classified as below normal, dry and critically dry.
Ř Downstream of the Robinson Canyon Road bridge, the river continues to cut into the channel bottom and form a more complex system of pools, riffles and gravel bars.
Between the mouth of the river and Robinson Canyon Road bridge,
many areas of the river appear to be deeper than at any previous time since
measurements have been recorded (i.e., beginning in 1978), with many reaches
showing several feet of downcutting.
This trend, which was identified as a concern in the 1984 Carmel River
Management Program EIR, appears to have accelerated in the period from 1998 to
2013. This was a period of exceptional
stability (for the Carmel River) as streambanks hardened with structural
protection over the past several decades resisted erosion and the force of the
river during high flows was directed into the channel bottom. This condition has resulted in the
undermining of rip-rap protection and bridge infrastructure in some reaches.
Vegetation Restoration and Irrigation
To the maximum extent possible, MPWMD-sponsored river restoration projects incorporate a functional floodplain that is intended to be inundated in relatively frequent storm events (those expected every 1-2 years). For example, low benches at the Red Rock and All Saints Restoration Projects have served as natural recruitment areas and are currently being colonized by black cottonwoods, sycamores and willows. In addition, willow and cottonwood pole plantings in these areas were installed with a backhoe, which allows them to tap into the water table. These techniques have been successful and have reduced the need for supplemental irrigation.
Channel Vegetation Management
Another notable trend relating to the District’s vegetation management program was the widening of the Carmel River channel after floods in 1995 and 1998. With relatively normal years following these floods, the channel has narrowed as vegetation recruits on the channel bottom and gravel bars. Current Federal regulations such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA) “Section 4(d)” rules promulgated by NOAA Fisheries to protect steelhead significantly restrict vegetation management activities. Because of these restrictions, the District can carry out activities only on the most critical channel restrictions and erosion hazards in the lower 15 miles of the river. In the absence of high winter flows capable of scouring vegetation out of the channel bottom, encroaching vegetation may significantly restrict the channel. As vegetation in the river channel recovers from the high flows of 1995 and 1998 and matures in the channel bottom, more conflicts are likely to arise between preserving habitat and reducing the potential for property damage during high flows. MPWMD will continue to balance the need to treat erosion hazards in the river yet maintain features that contribute to aquatic habitat quality.
Permits for Channel Restoration and Vegetation Management
In 2012, MPWMD renewed its long term permits with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board for routine maintenance and restoration work. The District also filed an application with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to renew a long-term Routine Maintenance Agreement (RMA) to conduct regular maintenance and restoration activities. Accordingly, the District hopes to operate under a new RMA by the fall of 2014.
Monitoring Program
Vegetative moisture stress fluctuates depending on the rainfall, proximate stream flow, depth to groundwater, and average daily temperatures, and tends to be much lower in above-normal rainfall years. Typical trends for a single season start with little to no vegetative moisture stress in the spring, when the soil is moist and the river is flowing. As the river begins to dry up in lower Carmel Valley (normally around June) and temperatures begin to increase, an overall increase in vegetative moisture stress occurs. For much of the riparian corridor in the lower seven miles of the Carmel River, this stress has been mitigated by supplemental irrigation, thereby preventing the die off of large areas of riparian habitat. However, many recruiting trees experience high levels of stress or mortality in areas difficult to irrigate. Riparian vegetation exposed to rapid or substantial lowering of groundwater levels (i.e., below the root zones of the plants) will continue to require monitoring and irrigation during the dry season.
With respect to riparian songbird diversity, populations dropped after major floods in 1995 and 1998 because of the loss of streamside habitat. Since 1998, species diversity recovered and now fluctuates depending on habitat conditions. Values indicate that the District mitigation program is preserving and improving riparian habitat.
Integrated
Regional Water Management Plan
The IRWM program promoted by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) encourages planning and management of water resources on a regional scale and promotes projects that incorporate multiple objectives and strategies. In addition, the IRWM process brings stakeholders together and encourages cooperation among agencies in developing mutually beneficial solutions to resource problems.
In November 2007, the District adopted the final IRWM plan for a region encompassing Monterey Peninsula areas within the District boundary, the area in the Carmel River watershed outside of the MPWMD boundary, Carmel Bay and the Southern Monterey Bay. The plan combines strategies to improve and manage potable water supply, water conservation, stormwater runoff, floodwaters, wastewater, water recycling, habitat for wildlife, and public recreation.
Subsequently, MPWMD was successful in 2011 in obtaining a $995,000
grant from the Department of Water Resources to update the IRWM Plan to
Proposition 84 standards. The plan
combines strategies to improve and manage potable water supply, water
conservation, stormwater runoff, floodwaters, wastewater, water recycling,
habitat for wildlife, and public recreation.
In FY 2011-12, MPWMD entered into a grant agreement with DWR and
initiated work on 10 planning projects, including an update to the 2007 plan
and several planning projects to benefit local jurisdictions. During FY 2012-13, additional agreements were
executed to work on all 10 planning projects. The total cost of the project,
including local agency match, will be about $1.6 million and will be completed
by mid-2014.
In addition, MPWMD facilitated the expansion of the Regional Water Management Group (RWMG) to include the Marina Coast Water District (MCWD) and the Resource Conservation District (RCD) of Monterey County in order to continue the development and implementation of the IRWM Plan in the Ord Community. The RWMG is comprised of representatives of the Big Sur Land Trust, City of Monterey, Monterey County Water Resources Agency, Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency and MPWMD. The RWMG executed a Memorandum of Understanding concerning implementation of the IRWM Plan in 2008. The MOU was amended in 2013 to include MCWD and the RCD as part of the RWMG.
Funding from the IRWM grant program could provide the incentive to undertake a set of projects that would continue to improve the Carmel River environment and engage a larger number of organizations in helping to develop and implement a comprehensive solution to water resource problems in the planning region.
The District continues to support and encourage the ongoing habitat restoration efforts in the wetlands and riparian areas surrounding the Carmel River Lagoon. These efforts are consistent with goals that were identified in the Carmel River Lagoon Enhancement Plan (Philip Williams & Associates, 1992), which was partially funded by the District. The District continues to work with various agencies and landowners to implement ongoing restoration of the Odello West property and future restoration of the Odello East property across the highway. Because of the restoration activities on the south side of the lagoon, the District has concentrated its monitoring efforts on the relatively undisturbed north side. Staff have also continue to meet and discuss with other agencies the ongoing use of an existing CDPR agricultural well and potential future use of treated water from the Carmel Area Wastewater District to augment the lagoon during periods of low water.
The District expanded its long-term monitoring around the lagoon in 1995 in an attempt to determine if the reduction in freshwater flows due to groundwater pumping upstream might change the size or ecological character of the wetlands. Demonstrable changes have not been identified. Because of the complexity of the estuarine system, a variety of parameters are monitored, including vegetative cover in transects and quadrats, water conductivity, and hydrology. It is notable that due to the number of factors affecting this system, it would be premature to attribute any observed changes solely to groundwater pumping. During the 18-year period to date, for example, there have been two Extremely Wet (1995, 1998), two Wet (2005, 2006), five Above Normal (1996, 1997, 2000, 2010, 2011), and five Normal Water Year types (1999, 2001, 2003, 2008, 2009), in terms of total annual runoff. Thus, the hydrology of the watershed has been wetter than average 50% of the time, and at least normal or better 78% of the time during that period. Other natural factors that affect the wetlands include introduction of salt water into the system as waves overtop the sandbar in autumn and winter, tidal fluctuations, and long-term global climatic change. When the District initiated the long-term lagoon monitoring component of the Mitigation Program, it was with the understanding that it would be necessary to gather data for an extended period in order to draw conclusions about well production drawdown effects on wetland dynamics. It is recommended that the current vegetation, conductivity, topographical and wildlife monitoring be continued in order to provide a robust data set for continued analysis of potential changes around the lagoon.
Lagoon bathymetric cross sectional surveys, initially conducted in 1988, have been completed annually during the dry season since 1994. These data are useful in assessing changes in the sand supply within the main body of the lagoon and are necessary to answer to questions concerning whether or not the lagoon is filling up with sand, thus losing valuable habitat. As indicated in the survey plots, the sandy bed of the lagoon can vary significantly from year to year. In general, no major trends indicating sand accumulation or depletion at the lagoon cross sections have been identified based on available data, with the exception of the upstream-most cross section, which exhibits an overall loss in sand volume over the 1994-2013 period. The observed sand loss or down-cutting is consistent with the pervasive down-cutting that has occurred along the thalweg of the Lower Carmel River (LCR) upstream of the Highway 1 Bridge for several miles. The trend of LCR streambed scour appears to have begun in Water Year 2006.
Program Costs
Mitigation Program costs for FY 2012-2013 totaled approximately $2.22 million including direct personnel expenses, operating costs, project expenditures, capital equipment, and fixed asset purchases. The annual cost of mitigation efforts varies because several mitigation measures are weather dependent. Expenditures in FY 2012-2013 were $2.37 million less than the prior fiscal year largely due to capital expenditures for Aquifer Storage Recovery (ASR) project, which are no longer captured under Mitigation Program costs. However, the overall costs have remained fairly constant (average of $3 million per year) for last five years. In the past, expenditures had trended upward due to expenditures for the ASR Project. FY 2010-2011 expenditures were $5.84 million; and FY 2011-2012 expenditures were $4.59 million.
During FY 2012-2013, revenues totaled $2.74 million including mitigation program revenues, tax revenues, investment income and miscellaneous revenues. The Mitigation Program Fund as of June 30, 2013 had a balance of $30,969.
Table I-1
SUMMARY OF COMPONENTS OF MPWMD MITIGATION
PROGRAM
July 1, 2012 - June 30, 2013
-- Smolt rescues
-- Build acclimation facility/tagging study
-- Juvenile rescues
-- Build mid-Valley holding facility
-- Adult counts at San Clemente Dam
-- Juvenile population surveys
-- Spawning habitat restoration
--
Fish planting (steelhead broodstock program)
-- Coastal Salmon Recovery Program grant (began mid-2001)
-- Modify critical riffles
-- Cal-Am well irrigation (4 wells)
-- Channel clearing
-- Vegetation monitoring
-- Track and pursue violations
-- River Care Guide booklet
-- CRMP Erosion Protection Program
-- Water quality/quantity
-- Vegetation/soils
_______
Note 1: Mitigation measures are
dependent on implementation of the Lagoon Enhancement Plan by the California
Department of Parks and Recreation, the land owner and CEQA lead agency. Portions of the Enhancement Plan have been
implemented by CalTrans as part of a “mitigation banking” project.
Table I-2
Summary of MPWMD
Mitigation Program Accomplishments in 2012-2013
|
MITIGATION
ACTION |
MAJOR
ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN FY 2012-2013 |
|
|
|
|
Manage Water Production |
Developed and implemented multi-agency Memorandum of Agreement and quarterly water supply strategies based on normal-year conditions; worked cooperatively with resource agencies implementing the federal Endangered Species Act. Implemented ordinances that regulate wells and water distribution systems. |
|
Manage Water Demand |
Conducted 2,178 inspections,
which will save an estimated 17.116 acre-feet of water per year (AFY) through
required retrofits. The Rebate
Program was reinstated for fiscal year 2012-2013. From July 1, 2012, through June 30,
2013, 1,546 applications for
rebates were received, 1,202 applications were approved. Staff conducted multiple
public outreach events for the conservation program. Implemented new ordinances related to permits,
conservation, and enforcement regulations of the District. |
|
Monitor Water Usage |
Complied with SWRCB Order 95-10 for Water Year 2013. |
|
Augment Water Supply |
Long-term efforts to augment supply included: (1) Continued participation in the CPUC rate hearing process to review elements of the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (MPWSP); (2) Participated in meetings intended to resolve concerns about MPWSP construction, operations, financing, management and oversight; (3) Participated on Technical Advisory Committee to the Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority; (4) Operated Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Phase 1 and 2 projects in WY 2013 and injected 294 AF; (5) drilled second ASR Phase 2 injection well Seaside Middle School site; (6) obtained approval from Fort Ord Reuse Authority for land use associated with ASR testing; (7) Held regular coordination meetings with Cal-Am regarding needed infrastructure upgrades to deliver water supply to the ASR project wells at full capacity; (8) Conducted additional work related to alternative desalination plant sites; (9) Provided technical support to the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA) for the Groundwater Replenishment Project (GRP) and received presentations by MRWPCA; (10) Participated in CPUC hearing process on Cal-Am related rate requests. Near-term water supply efforts included injecting 294 AF into Seaside Basin in WY 2013 as part of ongoing ASR operations. Other ongoing activities included: (1) Served as member of both the Seaside Basin Watermaster Board and as the Technical Advisory Committee; (2) Delivered several database products to the Watermaster and its consultants under the District’s contract for the required Seaside Basin Monitoring and Management Plan; (3) Continued participation on technical committee regarding removal of San Clemente Dam and associated sediment management. |
|
|
Remained within Water Allocation Program limits. |
|
Determine Drought Reserve |
Rationing was not required due to maintenance of adequate storage reserve. |
|
|
River mainstem rescues were conducted by MPWMD crews over a five-month period, June 11-October 17, 2012. During this period, 8,130 rescued steelhead were released to four locations, including the Sleepy Hollow Steelhead Rearing Facility. Prior to a major storm event in December 2012, the stocked fish were released back to the river. In addition, during the 2012
dry season, June through October, 7,236 steelhead were rescued from four
Carmel River tributaries by the Carmel River Steelhead Association (CRSA). The fish counter and video monitoring equipment at San Clemente Dam was operated continually between December 2012 and May 2013. A total of 249 fish passed over the counter, including 18 in December, 46 in January, 47 in February, 115 in March, 23 in April, and 0 in May. During March 2013, fisheries staff completed
redd surveys in three separate reaches between Los Padres Dam and the Highway
1 Bridge. Due to the low instream flows, the District
directed Cal-Am to release an additional pulse of water from Los Padres
Reservoir from April 4-5 to allow adult steelhead trapped in the lower river
to continue their upstream migration.
Although not as successful as the previous year, likely due to the one
month later release date, the pulse helped both upstream and downstream migrants
reach better habitat. The 2013 adult run of 249 fish was below the average run size of 421 fish for the 1994-2013 period where fish have been reliably counted using the District’s continuous mechanical counter |
|
Riparian Habitat Program |
Continued revegetation efforts at exposed banks with little or no vegetation located between Via Mallorca and Esquiline Roads; Contracted to collect channel profile data and limited cross section data from the Carmel River for use in maintaining a long-term record and comparing to the past and future data; Made public presentations showing MPWMD-sponsored restoration work over the past 23 years; Continued long-term monitoring of physical and biological processes along the river in order to evaluate the District’s river management activities; Continued the annual inspections of the Carmel River from the upstream end of the lagoon to Camp Steffani; Walked the entire river to observe and record erosion damage, conditions that could cause erosion, riparian ordinance infractions, and the overall condition of the riparian corridor; Continued enforcement actions to address serious violations of District riparian ordinances; Carried out vegetation management activities; Developed an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan; Operated under Routine Maintenance Agreement with CDFW for MPWMD vegetation maintenance activities. |
|
Lagoon Habitat Program |
Provided technical expertise and data to multi-agency sponsors of lagoon restoration program; assisted Carmel Area Wastewater District to evaluate possible Lagoon augmentation with recycled water; facilitated Carmel River Lagoon Technical Advisory Committee meetings; pursued funding for the April 2007 Final Study Plan for the Long-Term Adaptive Management of the Carmel River State Beach and Lagoon; continued vegetation habitat monitoring; surveyed and analyzed four bathymetric transects; participated in interagency meetings regarding management of lagoon in winter storm events (see also steelhead efforts that benefit lagoon); conducted topographic, hydrology and wildlife surveys. |
|
|
See Riparian Habitat Program measures. |
U:\staff\Boardpacket\2014\20140519\ConsentClndr\08\item8_exh8a.docx