EXHIBIT
2-A
2011-2012 ANNUAL REPORT
(July 1, 2011 -
June 30, 2012)
MPWMD MITIGATION PROGRAM
WATER ALLOCATION
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
MONTEREY PENINSULA
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
Prepared April 2013
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 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 several general 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 the 2012 mitigation plan.
The
This 2011-2012 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 2011-2012 (July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012, 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
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 21 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 2012, DWR has seasonally required Cal-Am to lower the water level in San Clemente Reservoir from 525 feet to 514 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 now 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 is scheduled to begin in 2013 with construction of a new access road and placement of the river diversion pipeline.
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 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 on August 14, 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 to help reduce current 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 explored by various entities. These projects, now 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 2011-2012 included: (1) completion of the electrical facilities
for the Phase 1 ASR Project at the Santa Margarita site; (2) construction of
the second ASR well at the second (Phase 2 or Water Project 2) ASR site; (3) receiving
permanent water right 20808C for Phase 2 of the ASR project; (4) coordination
with Cal-Am, federal, and state agencies to construct the necessary
infrastructure for the ASR project; (5) coordination with Cal-Am on necessary
actions and delivery system facilities to enable expanded ASR; and (6)
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 1990, District staff has noticed a period of general decline in the adult run from 2001 to 2012. 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, slightly above the 1994-2012 average of 431 adults.
Previous redd surveys below SCD confirm that the spawning habitat in the lower river has improved considerably over the last 21 years and adults are spawning in the lower river 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. The District deployed a DIDSON counting station, acquired from CDFW grant funding, during the 2011-2012 migration season in the lower river to help determine whether more adults are in fact spawning in the lower river.
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
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 2011-2012 reporting period, the average population density was well below the long-term average of 0.81 fpf for the Carmel River due primarily to low adult returns in 2009-2010.
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 Cal-Am’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 23 years, now totaling 366,873 fish through 2011;
Ř Rearing and releases of rescued fish from the SHSRF of nearly 82,000 juveniles and smolts back into the river and lagoon over the past 16 years, at sizes 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 draw-down; and the
Ř Potential for enhanced predation on smolts and YOY migrating through the sediment fields of LPD and SCD.
A recent challenge that may remain for some years is the potential effects of substantive physical and operational changes to San Clemente Dam required by DWR/DSOD, including possible removal of the dam. The most significant issue is the effect of released sediment from the reservoir on downstream river habitat, proper functioning of MPWMD’s SHSRF, and downstream property owners (flood elevations). Major changes include:
Ř Lowering of the reservoir water level to address seismic safety concerns;
Ř Significant changes in the sediment regime in the Carmel River downstream of San Clemente as the dam fills with sediment; 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 Cal-Am 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 seismic retrofit of San Clemente Dam. 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, the 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 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 Via Mallorca Road and Rancho San Carlos Road, streambanks in the Carmel River main stem presently appear to be relatively stable during average water years.
As
cited in previous reports, it is likely that the following trends will continue
or develop in the near future:
Ř
Permit applications by
MPWMD for river maintenance and restoration work will come under greater
scrutiny at all levels of governmental oversight. More stringent
avoidance and mitigation requirements will 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, may be discouraged or denied permits. Activities that increase
the amount of habitat or restore natural stream functions are more likely to be
approved.
Ř
Additional work to add
instream features (such as large logs for steelhead refuge or backwater channel
areas for frogs) will be necessary to restore and diversify aquatic habitat.
Ř
Major restoration
projects completed between 1992 and 1999 will require additional work to
diversify plantings and to maintain irrigation systems during the establishment
period (which varies from 5 to 10 years, depending on environmental conditions
and the availability of staff resources).
Ř Downstream of the Robinson Canyon Road Bridge, the river will continue to cut into the channel bottom and form a more complex system of pools, riffles and gravel bars.
A noticeable change to the channel bottom is the obvious continued degradation (i.e., the river channel is incising into floodplain deposits). Downcutting into channel deposits has both positive and negative aspects. On the plus side, it is clear that sand and fine material has been winnowed out in the past few years, exposing gravel and cobble layers that provide improved spawning habitat for steelhead and suitable substrate for the food web that steelhead depend on. However, a lack of a natural supply of sediment from the upper watershed (due to the presence of main stem dams) means that the river must remove material from the channel bottom and streambanks to make up for this deficit. The river system downstream of Los Padres Reservoir remains “sediment starved.”
Because
approximately 35% of the streambanks downstream of Carmel Valley Village have
been altered or hardened over the past 40 years, most of the current sediment
supply comes from scouring of the channel bottom, which results in exposing the
base of streambanks, bridge piers and abutments. Eventually,
without corrective measures to balance the sediment load with the flow of
water, streambanks will begin to collapse and the integrity of bridges will be
threatened.
A
comprehensive, long-term solution to overall environmental degradation requires
a significant increase in dry-season water flows in the lower river, a reversal
of the incision process, and reestablishment of a natural meander
pattern. Of these, MPWMD has made progress with increasing summer low
flows and in identifying areas where restoration of a natural meander pattern
could be considered. Reversal, or at least halting, of channel incision
may be possible if the supply of sediment is brought into balance with the
transport capacity of the river. Although the supply of sediment to the
lower portion of the river may increase as San Clemente Reservoir fills with
sediment and sediment starts to flow down the river, it is likely that the
supply of sediment downstream of the San Clemente Dam will increase slowly in
the very near future, but may not be enough to halt the incision process.
The
DWR and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers finalized a combined EIR/EIS in
January 2008 concerning alternatives to remediate the safety deficiencies that
have been identified at San Clemente Dam. Cal-Am withdrew its
application to the Department of Water Resources to buttress the dam and now
supports an alternative in which the dam would be removed and the Carmel River
would be rerouted around the existing reservoir sediment field. Funding for this alternative remains uncertain,
but the collaborative public-private partnership between Cal-Am, the California
Coastal Conservancy, and NOAA Fisheries has made significant steps toward full
funding. Completion of this project in
the next several years could affect the timing of the delivery of sediment to
the lower river. In the interim, DWR has
continued to direct Cal-Am to draw San Clemente Reservoir down and maintain it
10 feet lower than the spillway, except between February 1 and May 31 (to allow
for downstream migration of steelhead).
Over
the long term, an increase in sediment supply downstream of San Clemente Dam
could help reduce streambank instability and erosion threats to public and
private infrastructure. However, reestablishing a natural supply of
sediment and a natural meander pattern across the valley floor in the lower
15.5 miles of the river presents significant political, environmental, and
fiscal challenges, and is not currently being considered as part of the
Mitigation Program.
Vegetation Restoration and Irrigation
To the
maximum extent possible, MPWMD-sponsored river restoration projects incorporate
a functional floodplain that is inundated in relatively frequent storm events
(i.e., those expected every 1-2 years). For example, low benches at the
Red Rock and All Saints 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. However, as pumping has increased in the lower Carmel Valley
(pursuant to direction by the SWRCB and a Conservation Agreement between Cal-Am
and NMFS) supplemental irrigation has been installed on engineered floodplains
and on vulnerable banks.
Channel Vegetation Management
Another notable trend relating to the District’s vegetation management program was the widening of the channel after the floods in 1995 and 1998. With relatively normal years following these floods, the channel has narrowed as vegetation recruits on the streambanks and gravel bars. Current Federal regulations such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA) “Section 4(d)” rules promulgated by NMFS to protect steelhead significantly restrict vegetation management activities. Currently, vegetation is slowly encroaching 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
To cope
with the rising level of environmental analysis and documentation necessary to
obtain permits, MPWMD sought and obtained a long-term permits from the Corps
and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board for routine maintenance
and restoration projects. The District operates under a Regional General Permit
from the Corps (obtained in 2004). However, this permit expired November 1, 2010
and the District is currently in the process of renewing it. In addition, the
District has a Routine Maintenance Agreement with CDFG (obtained in 2008).
Monitoring Program
Vegetative moisture stress fluctuates depending on the rainfall, proximate stream flow, 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 along the lower seven miles of the 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 during dry years. 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. However,
they have rebounded in the last few years and have fluctuated within a normal
range since monitoring began in 1992, indicating that the District mitigation
program is preserving and improving riparian habitat.
Integrated
Regional Water Management Plan
Consistent with the Mitigation Program goal of comprehensive resource management, the District is serving as the lead agency to update and implement the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (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. This cooperative effort has resulted in increased state and federal grant funding for solutions to augment the Mitigation Program efforts. MPWMD secured a $496,957 grant from the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) for 2007 Plan, which cost a total of about $1,258,000 to prepare. In FY 2010-2011, MPWMD facilitated stakeholder meetings and prepared a grant application that was submitted to DWR. Subsequently, MPWMD was awarded an additional $995,000 to update the IRWM Plan to Proposition 84 standards. In FY 2011-2012, MPWMD facilitated stakeholder meetings and worked on: Project 1 – Update to the Canyon Del Rey Drainage Plan; Project 2 – Seaside Groundwater Basin Salt and Nutrient Management Plan; Project 3 – Assessment of Steelhead Passage Barriers in Portions of Four Tributaries to the Carmel River Main Stem; Project 4 – Geographic Information Systems Internet Mapping Site Development; Project 6 – Assessment for San Jose Creek Watershed; and Project 8 – Development of a Surface and Groundwater Model for the Carmel Valley Basin. 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 addition, MPWMD facilitated the expansion of the Regional Water Management Group (RWMG) to include the Marina Coast Water District (MCWD) 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 2012 to include MCWD as part of the RWMG.
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, 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 ground water 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 17-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 53% of the time, and at least normal or better 82% 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 draw-down effects on wetland dynamics. It is recommended that the annual 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 number 4, which exhibits an overall loss in sand volume over the 1994-2012 period. The sand loss or down-cutting observed at cross section 4, 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 2011-2012 totaled approximately $4.59 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 2011-2012 were $1.25 million less than the prior fiscal year largely due to less capital expenditures for ASR. However, the overall costs have remained fairly constant (average of $3 million per year) for last five years. In several prior years, expenditures had trended upward due to expenditures for the Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project. FY 2009-2010 expenditures were $3.27 million; and FY 2010-2011 expenditures were $5.84 million.
During FY 2011-2012, revenues totaled $3.31 million including mitigation program revenues, tax revenues, reimbursements, interest and miscellaneous revenues. The Mitigation Program Fund as of June 30, 2012 had a deficit balance of ($488,632).
Table I-1
SUMMARY OF
COMPONENTS OF MPWMD MITIGATION PROGRAM
July 1, 2011 -
June 30, 2012
-- 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 are being
implemented by CalTrans as part of a “mitigation banking” project.
Table I-2
Summary of MPWMD Mitigation Program Accomplishments in
2011-2012
|
MITIGATION
ACTION |
MAJOR
ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN FY 2011-2012 |
|
|
|
|
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 |
Inspected about 1,320
properties, which will save an estimated 9.287 acre-feet of water per year
(AFY) through required retrofits. The
Rebate Program was suspended for lack of funding for fiscal year 2011-2012. From July 1, 2011, through June 30,
2012, a total of 39 applications
for rebates were received, one application was approved with the use of
rebate refund. Staff conducted public
outreach for conservation program. Implemented
Ordinance No. 109 enabling sale of water entitlements to properties within
Del Monte Forest to fund expanded Pebble Beach reclamation program; implemented
Ordinance No. 132 to allow expansion of the Cal-Am System to provide service
and water-use permits for Sand City. |
|
Monitor Water Usage |
Complied with SWRCB Order 95-10 for Water Year 2012. |
|
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) Prepared written testimony and participated in CPUC hearings; (4) Operated Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Phase 1 project from December 2011 through May 2012, and injected 132 AF; (5) completed drilling and construction of first ASR Phase 2 injection well at Seaside Middle School site; (6) began approval process for drilling second ASR well at Seaside Middle School site; (7) Held regular coordination meetings with Cal-Am regarding needed infrastructure upgrades to deliver water supply to the ASR Phase 2 wells at full capacity; (8) Continued investigation of alternative Desal Plant feasibility; (9) Provided technical support to the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA) for its Groundwater Replenishment Project (GWR) under agreement with MRWPCA; (10) Participated in CPUC hearing process on Cal-Am related rate requests. Near-term water supply efforts included injecting 132 AF into Seaside Basin in 2011-2012 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. |
|
Steelhead Fishery Program |
During the 2011 dry season, June through September, a total of 7,713 steelhead were rescued from five Carmel River tributaries by the Carmel River Steelhead Association (CRSA), including 7,480 YOY, 233 yearlings, with 218 (2.8%) mortalities. The majority of the rescued fish were from Cachagua/Finch Creeks (5,995), with lesser numbers from Garzas Cr (616), Robinson Canyon Cr. (363), Hitchcock Canyon Cr. (694), and Potrero Cr. (45). The CRSA did not do any mainstem rescues in 2011. District staff has noticed a period of general decline in the adult run from 2001 to 2012. However, in 2009 and 2010, the population underwent a dramatic reduction to 95 and 157 adults respectively. In 2012, the population rebounded again with 470 adults passing over SCD, slightly above the 1994-2012 average of 431 adults. |
|
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; continued development of 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; provided follow-up to 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\2013\20130520\ConsentCalendar\02\item2_exh2a.docx