DRAFT EPA/600/R-ll/058a
DO NOT QUOTE OR CITE August 2011
External Review Draft
SFEP Report Tables and Figures
NOTICE
THIS DOCUMENT IS A PRELIMINARY DRAFT. IT has not been formally released by die
U.S. Environmental Protect ion Agency and should not at this staze be comlnied to represent
Agency policy. It is being circulated for comment cm its teclmical acciifacy and policy
unplicarioiis,
National Center for Envifonmenral
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Eiivircituiienlal Protection
EK"
-------
Table 1-1. Breakout group participants for the expert elicitation workshop
(see Appendix B for further details on selection criteria and credentials)
Sediment Retention Group
Dave Cacchione
U.S. Geological Survey
John Callaway
University of California, San Francisco
Chris Enright
California Department of Water Resources
Bruce Jaffe
U.S. Geological Survey
Lester McKee
San Francisco Estuary Institute
Dave Schoellhamer
U.S. Geological Survey
Mark Stacey
University of California, Berkeley
Community Interactions Group
Letitia Grenier
San Francisco Estuary Institute
Jessica (Jessie) Lacy
U.S. Geological Survey
Michelle Orr
Philip Williams & Associates
Diana Stralberg
Point Reyes Bird Observatory Conservation
Science
Stuart Siegel
Wetlands and Water Resources
Lynne Trulio
San Jose State University
Isa Woo
U.S. Geological Survey
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-1 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 2-1. Summary of Climate Scenario A ("Lower-Range" Scenario) and
Climate Scenario B ("Higher-Range" Scenario): averages for mid-century
Temperature3
Precipitation
Sea Level
Annual Average b
Average Increase of
Winter Temperature0
Average Increase of
Summer Temperature
Extreme Heat Daysd
Annual Change6
Winter change
Heavy Events
Total Increase for
2050g
Hourly Sea Level
Exceedances1
Storms/WindJ
Snow Pack Change
Spring Runoff
Seasonal Changes in Amount of
Freshwater Inflow to the Bay from the
Delta in 2060m
"Lower-Range" Scenario
+2.8°F(1.6°C)
+2.5°F(1.4°C)
+4.0°F(2.2°C)
+10 days/year
-4.5%
"Higher-Range" Scenario
+3.5°F(1.9°C)
+2.7°F(1.5°C)
+4.5°F(2.5°C)
+16 days/year
-7%
Reduced winter precipitation'
Decline in frequency of precipitation events (exceeding 3 mm/day) but
not a clear signal in changes of precipitation intensity
+30 cm
1343
+45 cm11
1438
Tendency toward a decline in storms.k Projections suggest an
increased tendency for heightened sea level events to persist for more
hours. ENSO is not projected to increase in frequency or intensity.
For the Sacramento -San Joaquin watershed, April watershed-total
snow accumulation projected to drop by 64% by 2060. '
Spring runoff occurring earlier and reduced overall
October through February: inflow +20%
March through September: inflow -20%
a Since the 1920s, minimum and maximum daily temperature have been observed to have increased in California
with minimum temperature increasing at a greater rate accented by a small cooling trend in the summer (Cayan et
al, 2009). These averages are for 2035-2064 projections relative to a 1961 to 1990 baseline for Bl and A2
emission scenarios.
b Approximate results using Bl and A2 emissions scenarios and three global climate models (PCM1, GFDL CM2.1,
HadCM3) (CEC, 2006).
0 These results are for Sacramento, California. This warming is projected to be more moderate along the coastline
(50 km from the coast) rising considerably inland (Cayan et al., 2009). These averages are for 2035-2064
projections relative to a 1961 to 1990 baseline for Bl and A2 emissions scenarios.
d Extreme heat days are defined as when the daily maximum temperature exceeds the 95th percentile of temperature
from the 1961-1990 historical averages of May-September days. 1961-1990 extreme heat days are approximately 8
days/year based on model runs. Results are provided by Cayan et al. (2009) using three climate models (CNRM
CMS, GFDL CM2.1, MICRO 3.2; with bias corrected spatial downscaling) for Bl and A2 emissions scenarios.
Mid-century projections suggest hot daytime and nighttime temperatures increase in frequency, magnitude, and
duration (Cayan et al., 2009). Extreme warm temperatures in California, historically a July and August
phenomenon, will increase in frequency and magnitude likely beginning in June and may continue into September
(Hayhoe et al., 2004; Gershunov and Douville, 2008; Miller et al., 2008).
e Results are averaged across 6 GCMs using the grid point nearest to Sacramento (Cayan et al., 2009) for Bl and A2
emissions scenarios.
f These results are provided by CEC (2008).
8 Sea level rise relative to 2000 levels. This study applies Rahmstorf's methodology of estimating sea level rise as a
function of rising temperatures. This study assumes sea level rise along the coast to be the same as global estimates
given the observed rate of rise along the southern California coast has been about 17 to 20 cm per century similar to
that of global sea level rise (assume no future changes in other factors that affect relative sea level rise such as
changes in regional/local ocean circulation, ocean density, etc.) (Cayan et al., 2009). DMRS also provides
recommended 2050 global sea level rise estimates relative to 1990 values: 11 cm (direct extrapolation of observed
increased during the 20th century), 20 cm (low-end value of Rahmstorf and approx mid-range of IPCC TAR), 30
cm (approx mid-range of Rahmstorf and high-end of IPCC TAR); 41 cm (high end of Rahmstorf) (DMRS, 2007).
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-2 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
h The total difference between mean range and spring range of 1.7 ft (50.3 cm) is slightly larger than the higher-
range scenario rise of 45 cm, based on the Point San Pedro tide station.
http://tidesandcurrents.noaa. gov/tides 10/tab2wc 1 a.html# 128
1 The hourly sea level exceedance is defined as the maximum duration (hours) when San Francisco sea level exceeds
the 99.99th % level (140 cm above mean sea level) based on the GFDL climate change (A2) simulation using the
Rahmstorf sea level scheme averaged 2 to 4 hours increase for mid-century (Cayan et al, 2009).
J These results are provided by Cayan et al. (2009).
k Storm is defined as sea level pressure (SLP) equaling or falling below 1005 millibar (mb).
1 Results provided by the Bay-Delta watershed model driven by temperature projections from a parallel climate
model under a 'business-as-usuaP scenario relative to 1995-2005 (precipitation is assumed to remain consistent
with today's observations) (Knowles and Cayan, 2004).
m This study does account for reservoirs, in-stream valley diversions, and in-Delta withdrawals and assumes no
future management adaptation or altered demand patterns (Knowles and Cayan, 2004).
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-3 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 2-2. Coding scheme used during the workshop exercise to characterize
influences. "Small" and "large" changes in variables are defined relative to
the current range of variation for each variable, with "small" indicating that
the variable is within its current range of variation and "large" indicating
that the variable has moved outside its current range of variation
Option
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Type and Degree of Influence Definition
No influence: We know that changes in X have no effect on changes in Y,
other variables constant.
holding all
Unknown influence: We don't know whether an increase in X will increase, decrease,
or have no effect on Y.
Proportional increase: A large increase in X is likely to cause a large increase in Y. A
small increase is likely to cause a small increase.
Proportional decrease: A large decrease in X is likely to cause a large decrease in Y. A
small decrease is likely to cause a small decrease.
Inverse decrease: A small increase in X is likely to cause a small decrease
increase in X is likely to cause a large decrease in Y.
Inverse increase: A small decrease in X is likely to cause a small increase
decrease in X is likely to cause a large increase in Y.
in Y. A large
in Y. A large
A small increase in X is likely to cause a large increase in Y.
A small increase in X is likely to cause a large decrease in Y.
A large increase in X is likely to cause a small increase in Y.
A large increase in X is likely to cause a small decrease in Y.
A small decrease in X is likely to cause a large increase in Y.
A small decrease in X is likely to cause a large decrease in Y.
A large decrease in X is likely to cause a small increase in Y.
A large decrease in X is likely to cause a small decrease in Y.
Table 2-3. Coding scheme used during the workshop exercise to characterize
interactive influences
Interactive Influence
Independence
Synergy
AND Gate
NOR Gate
Competition
Definition
The effect of X on Y is independent of Z (default situation)
The effect of X on Y increases with increase in Z
The effect of X on Y happens only with large Z
The effect of X on Y happens only with small Z
The effect of X on Y decreases with increase in Z
Table 2-4. Coding scheme used during the workshop exercise to characterize
confidence
Confidence
LH
LL
HH
HL
Definition
Low evidence, High agreement =
Low evidence, Low agreement =
Established but incomplete
Speculative
High evidence, High agreement = Well established
High evidence, Low agreement =
Competing explanations
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-4 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 2-5. Sediment Retention variable definitions clarified during group
discussion
Variable
Land use/ land change: impervious cover
Freshwater inflow
Sediment flux
Vegetative production: net organic accumulation
Definition Agreed Upon by Group
Surfaces that reduce the ability of water to
enter soil or substrate
from local watersheds and the Delta,
influence on Net Organic Accumulation
depends on total or mean flow, influence on
Sediment Flux depends on peak flow
amount and rate
net of plant production and decomposition
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-5 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 2-6. Sediment Retention group influence judgments; columns A-Z represent individual influences (arrows) in the
influence diagram and rows represent individual respondents: dark green = agreement on influence type and degree,
light green = agreement on type but not degree, gray = no agreement; within columns, green numbers = same
(majority) grouping of type (though degree may be different), pink numbers = disagreement about type, red outline =
threshold response
CURRENT
Resp. 1
Resp. 2
Resp. 3
Resp. 4
Resp. 5
Resp. 6
Resp. 7
SCENARIO A
Resp. 1
Resp. 2
Resp. 3
Resp. 4
Resp. 5
Resp. 6
Resp. 7
SCENARIO B
Resp. 1
Resp. 2
Resp. 3
Resp. 4
Resp. 5
Resp. 6
Resp. 7
A
2/3
3
2
2/3
2/3
A
2/3
2
3
2/3
A
2/3
2
3
2/3
B
4/5
4/5
9
4/5
4
2/3
B
4/5
4/5
4
9
4
B
4/5
4/5
4
9
4
1
2/3
C
4/5
4/5
9
4/5
4
4
C
4/5
4/5
7
9
4
4
9A7
C
4/5
4/5
7
9
4
4
9A7
D
4/5
4/5
9
4/5
4
4
D
4/5
4/5
4
9
4
4
4
D
4/5
4/5
4
9
4
4
4
E
E
g
E
0
F
2/3
4/5
9
8/13
8
9
F
9
F
Q
G
9/12
4/5
6
9
8/13
7
9
G
9/12
1
6
9
8/13
7
9
G
9/12
1
6
9
8/13
7
9
H
4/5
4/5
7
1
2/3
8
9
H
4/5
4/5
7
1
2/3
8
9
H
4/5
4/5
7
1
2/3
8
9
I
2/3
I
o
2/3
I
Q
J
2/3
2/3
6/11
2
6/11
2
6/11
J
8/13
2/3
2/3
2
6
2
6/11
J
8/13
2/3
2/3
2
6
6
6/11
K
8/13
2/3
8
8
8/13
8
2/3
K
8/13
8
8
8
8
2
2
K
8/13
8
8
8
8
8
2/3
L
2/3
2/3
6/11
2
2/3
2
2/3
L
8/13
2/3
6/11
2
3
2
2/3
L
8/13
2/3
6/11
2
3
6
2/3
M
2/3
2/3
6/11
2
8
2/3
M
2/3
2/3
6/11
2
8
2/3
M
2/3
2/3
6/11
2
2
2/3
N
2/3
2/3
2/3
2
2/3
2
2/3
N
2/3
2/3
6
2
2
2
N
2/3
2/3
6
2
2
2
0
0
8/13
7
3
2
2/3
0
8/13
i
3
P
2/3
2/3
2/3
2
8/13
2
2/3
P
2/3
2/3
2/3
2A8
8/13
8
2/3
P
2/3
2/3
2/3
2A8
8/13
2
2/3
Q
2/3
2/3
2/3
2
2/3
2
4/5
Q
2/3
2/3
2/3
2
2/3
8
2
Q
2/3
2/3
2/3
2
2/3
2
2
R
6/11
2/3
3
6
2
2/3
R
6/11
2/3
3
6
2
2/3
R
6/11
2/3
3
6
1
6
2/3
S
9/12
6
2/3
2
6/11
8
2/3
S
9/12
6
2/3
2
6
8
2/3
S
9/12
6
2/3
2
6
2
T
1
2/3
1
4
6/11
2
2/3
T
T
U
2/3
2/3
8/13
2
6/11
2
2/3
U
2/3
2/3
2/3
2
6/11
8
8
U
2/3
2/3
2/3
2
6/11
8
V
2/3
2/3
2/3
2
8/13
2
2/3
V
2/3
2/3
2/3
2
8/13
8
2/3
V
2/3
2/3
2/3
2
8/13
2
2/3
W
9/12
2/3
2
8
6/11
3
7
W
9/12
6
2
8
6/11
2
6
W
9/12
6
2
8
6/11
6
6
X
4/5
4/5
9|10
4
6/11
0
3A4
X
4/5
4/5
9|10
4
4/5
X
4/5
4/5
9|10
4
6/11
Q
Y
2/3
2/3
2
6/11
2
2/3
Y
2/3
2/3
2
6/11
2/3
Y
2/3
2/3
2
6/11
2/3
Z
2/3
2/3
6/11
2
2/3
2/3
Z
8/13
2/3
3
2A4
2
2
6
Z
8/13
2/3
3
2
6
2
/'s1 document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-6 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 2-7. Sediment Retention group confidence for influences with agreement: NA = No agreement; HH = High
evidence, High agreement; HL = High evidence, Low agreement; LH = Low evidence, High agreement; LL = Low
evidence, Low agreement
CURRENT
SCENARIO A
SCENARIO B
A
HH
NA
NA
B
HH
HH
HH
C
HH
LH
LH
D
HH
LH
LH
F
NA
NA
NA
G
NA
LL
LL
H
NA
NA
NA
J
HH
HH
HH
K
HH
LL
LL
L
HH
NA
NA
M
HH
HH
HH
N
HH
HH
HH
O
NA
NA
NA
P
HH
HH
HH
Q
HH
HH
HH
R
HH
NA
NA
S
NA
NA
LL
T
NA
NA
NA
U
HH
HH
HH
V
HH
HH
HH
W
NA
NA
NA
X
NA
NA
NA
Y
NA
NA
NA
Z
HH
NA
NA
Table 2-8. Sediment Retention group interactive influences with agreement under current conditions and Climate
Scenarios A and B: NA = No agreement; HH = High evidence, High agreement; HL = High evidence, Low agreement;
LH = Low evidence, High agreement; LL = Low evidence, Low agreement; () = Number of respondents
Interaction
M+N
P+Z
Q+R
Q+S
R+S
Variable X
Tides
Tides
Sediment Flux
Sediment Flux
Sediment Size
on
on
on
on
on
on
Variable Y
Inundation Regime
Sediment Flux
Net Mineral
Accumulation
Net Mineral
Accumulation
Net Mineral
Accumulation
with
with
with
with
with
with
Variable Z
Relative Sea Level
Wind /Waves
Sediment Size
Inundation Regime
Inundation Regime
CURRENT
Interactive
Influence
Synergy (3)
Synergy (3)
Synergy (5)
Synergy (5)
Synergy (3)
Confidence
NA
NA
HH(3)
HH(3)
NA
CLIMATE A
Interactive
Influence
NA
Synergy (3)
Synergy (3)
Synergy (4)
NA
Confidence
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
CLIMATE B
Interactive
Influence
NA
Synergy (3)
Synergy (3)
Synergy (4)
NA
Confidence
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-7 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 2-9. Community Interactions variable definitions clarified during
group discussion
Variable
Water management
Restoration
Land use change
Freshwater inflow
Sediment supply
Landscape mosaic
Wind/waves
Water quality
Inundation regime*
Sediment resuspension and deposition
Bed sediment characteristics and quality
Extent of mudflats (acre hours)
Predators and disturbance (anthropogenic)
Shorebird prey community
Shorebirds
Definition Agreed Upon by Group
reservoir management, upstream operations
restoration and management of former Bay
lands
impervious surface, shoreline armoring,
freshwater demand, retaining sea level rise
accommodation space (land conservation to
prevent development)
annual hydrograph from local watersheds and
the Delta (includes winter storm frequency and
intensity)
total mass of sediment (physical material
coming into the system from local watersheds
and the delta)
includes ponds, diked wetlands, seasonal
wetlands, muted tidal wetlands and is spatially
explicit (metric: amount of energy needed per
day; probability of mortality)
wave power (spring and summer predominant
winds, storm events)
nutrients, contaminants, salinity
tides, bathymetry
mass of sediment deposited or removed from
mudflat
grain size, bulk density, chemical contamination
metric: acre hours
predators: % shorebird population and numbers
taken; Anthropogenic disturbance includes all
human activity in or adjacent to system that is
affecting it (e.g., hiking, biking, recreational,
commercial traffic, clamming)
biomass, energetics
winter abundance of shorebirds in San Francisco
Bay
* On Day 2, "inundation regime" was split into two variable boxes: "tides and hydrodynamics" and "mudflat
bathymetry", with the addition of accompanying arrows. Judgments for these new arrows under current
conditions were made before the group proceeded with judgments under the climate scenarios.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-8 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 2-10. Community Interactions group influence judgments; columns A-KK represent individual influences
(arrows) in the influence diagram and rows represent individual respondents: dark green = agreement on influence
type and degree, light green = agreement on type but not degree, gray = no agreement; within columns, green numbers
= same (majority) grouping of type (though degree may be different), pink numbers = disagreement about type, red
outline = threshold res
CURRENT
Resp. 1
Resp. 2
Resp. 3
Resp. 4
Resp. 5
Resp. 6
Resp. 7
SCENARIO A
Resp. 1
Resp. 2
Resp. 3
Resp. 4
Resp. 5
Resp. 6
Resp. 7
SCENARIO B
Resp. 1
Resp. 2
Resp. 3
Resp. 4
Resp. 5
Resp. 6
Resp. 7
A
3
2/3
4/5
3
2
2
A
3
A
B
3
2/3
4/5
3
2
B
3
B
C
O
4
2
c
9
9
2
8
2
2
C
9
9
2
8
2
2
D
4/5
4
3
5
4
9
D
4/5
7
3
7
4
9
D
4/5
7
3
4
9
E
1
7
2
3
6
6
6
E
1
7
6
11
6
2
7
E
1
7
6
11
6
2A6
7
F
8
3
2
2
7
2
F
7
7
F
ponse
G
7
g
G
1
G
1
10
H
7
2
H
H
6
I
2
2
2/3
2
2/3
2
I
2
3
11
2
2/3
I
2
7|3
11
2
2/3
J
4|10
J
J
12
K
2/3
2A8
2/3
2
8
8
K
2/3
2A6
6
13A0
3A13
K
2/3
2A6
13A0
3A13
L
2
2/3
2
2
L
1
L
1
M
2/3
M
M
N
1
N
1
1
N
1
1
O
6
6/11
6
2
6
2
O
6
6
6/11
6
2
3
6
O
6
6
6/11
6
2
11
6
P
2/3
8
2/3
8
8
2
P
2/3
8
2/3
6
8
P
2/3
6
2/3
8
Q
2
2
2/3
2
2
2
Q
2
2
8
2
2
2
Q
2
2
8
2
2
2
R
R
12
R
2
S
3
2/3
2
2
8
2
S
3
7
2
2
3
11
S
3
2
2
3
11
T
T
0
T
U
2/3
2
8/13
2
2/3
2
U
2/3
2
2
2/3
U
2/3
2
2
2/3
V
2/3
4/5
V
2
V
W
2/3
2/3
7
W
-
W
7
X
4|10
X
2/3
6A7
7
7
7J3
7
X
2/3
6A7
7
7
7
7
Y
2/3
2
2/3
2
6
Y
2/3
6
2/3
2
3
6
Y
2/3
6
2/3
2
3A11
2
Z
2/3
Z
Z
AA
4/5
5
4|10
10
4
AA
4/5
5
10
12
4
AA
4/5
10
10
12A3
4
BB
2/3
8/13
8
2/3
3
3
BB
2/3
7A4
8
2/3
2A8
11
BB
2/3
7
8
2/3
2A8
11
CC
2/3
2/3
2
2/3
7J3
5A11
CC
2/3
7A4
2
2/3
2A8
11
CC
2/3
7
2
2/3
2A8
11
DD
2/3
2
6/11
2
2/3
6
6
DD
2/3
2
6/11
10
2/3
2A6
11
DD
2/3
6
6/11
2/3
6
11
EE
2/3
2
2/3
2
2/3
6
2
EE
2/3
2
2
2/3
2
11
EE
2/3
2
2
2/3
2
11
FF
4/5
7
9/12
9
4/5
8
7
FF
7
7
7
4/5
7
FF
7
7
7
4/5
7
GG
2/3
8
2/3A6/ll
2
2/3
2
2
GG
2/3
2
2/3
2
2
GG
2/3
6
2/3
2
2
HH
2/3
2
2/3
2
2
HH
2/3
2
2/3
2
7
11
HH
2/3
2
2/3
2
11
JJ
7
6/11
2
11
6
JJ
6/11
11
11
11
JJ
KK
2/3A6/ll
2
KK
KK
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-9 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 2-11. Community Interactions group confidence for influences with agreement: NA = No agreement; HH = High
evidence, High agreement; HL = High evidence, Low agreement; LH = Low evidence, High agreement; LL = Low
evidence, Low agreement
CURRENT
SCENARIO A
SCENARIO B
A
HH
HH
NA
B
HH
NA
NA
C
NA
NA
NA
D
LH
NA
NA
E
HH
NA
NA
F
NA
NA
NA
I
HH
NA
NA
K
NA
NA
NA
L
NA
NA
NA
O
LH
LH
LH
P
NA
NA
NA
Q
HH
NA
NA
S
NA
NA
NA
U
HH
HH
HH
X
HH
HH
HH
Y
NA
HH
HH
AA
NA
NA
NA
BB
LH
NA
NA
CC
HH
NA
NA
DD
HH
HH
HH
EE
HH
HH
HH
FF
NA
LH
LH
GG
HH
NA
NA
HH
NA
NA
NA
JJ
HH
HH
HH
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-10 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 2-12. Adaptation strategies and associated top pathways for
management (see section 3.2 for pathways). SG=Sediment Retention Green
pathway; SB=Sediment Retention Blue pathway; SP=Sediment Retention
Purple pathway; CG=Community Interactions Green pathway;
CB=Community Interactions Blue pathway; CP=Community Interactions
Purple pathway
Adaptation Strategies
Start restoration soon to achieve functions of mature marshes, including attainment of
threshold elevations for organic accumulation, ahead of sea level rise
Plan for the temporal progression of habitats (e.g., by establishing habitats that will thrive
under future climate conditions)
Plan for the spatial progression of restoration (e.g., consider impacts of broaching Suisun
Marsh levees on downstream estuary restoration efforts)
Maintain adjacent transitional uplands to allow for local marsh migration
Move restoration focus from fringing marshes to where there is available space for multiple
habitats
Create mosaics of habitats where there are opportunities for migration upslope
Plan restoration projects to provide connectivity
Sort sites with restoration potential based on where there is flexibility in management
Support resilience by restoring habitat complexity and facilitating high -energy parts of the
system such as tides, wind-driven waves, and freshwater flows
Develop policies that encourage removing or preventing barriers to marsh migration and
discourage new development on lands where there is restoration potential
Move highways and railroads that are barriers to marsh migration where there is otherwise
space for marsh expansion/migration
Preserve habitats that are unlikely to persist under future climate conditions as interim
habitats until alternate habitats that serve the same ecosystem functions can be established
Practice integrated water management, including water conservation, as a priority
If it is not possible to make maintaining marsh salinity a top priority for Delta freshwater
storage policies, plan for the restoration of tidal wetlands further up the estuary
Develop methods to move sediment into the bay, to keep pace vertically with sea level rise
Develop methods to reduce wave action on the front side of marshes
Adjust policies that prevent coarse sediment from entering the bay (e.g., for streams that
don't support salmonids, change policies to allow an increase in sediment load)
Involve authorities in flood control districts to recouple streams to wetlands
Monitor change at the landscape scale to assess management effectiveness
Develop rapid response plans for catastrophes (e.g., levee breaks), with the political and
scientific bases in place to respond properly
Pathways
SG, CG
SG, CG
SG, CG
CG
CG
CG
CG
CG
SB, SP,
CG
CG
CG
CG
SG, SP,
CB
SG, CG
SB, SP,
CB, CP
SB, CB
SG, SP,
CG
SP, CG
SB, CG
SB,CG
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-11 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 3-1. Sediment Retention group crosswalk for comparison of influence type and degree, sensitivity and relative
impact for current conditions and climate scenarios. NA = No agreement; Prop = Proportional; Disprop =
Disproportional; L = Low sensitivity; I = Intermediate sensitivity; H = High sensitivity; H-trend = No agreement but
trending toward high sensitivity; X = High relative impact; T = Increasing relative impact from current; () = Number
of respondents; Ranking column orders the influences according to completeness of information
Influence
N
Z
M
U
B
A
C
D
K
L
P
Q
V
Variable X
Relative Sea Level
Wind / Waves
Tides
Net Organic
Accumulation
Water Resource
Management:
Reservoir
Management
Water Resource
Management:
Delta Outflow
Water Resource
Management:
Reservoir
Management
Water Resource
Management:
Reservoir
Management
Relative Sea Level
Freshwater Inflow
Tides
Sediment Flux
Net Mineral
Accumulation
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
Variable Y
Inundation
Regime
Sediment Flux
Inundation
Regime
Net Accretion /
Erosion
Freshwater Inflow
Freshwater Inflow
Sediment Flux
Sediment Size
Tides
Sediment Flux
Sediment Flux
Net Mineral
Accumulation
Net Accretion /
Erosion
CURRENT
Influence
Direct Prop
(7)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(5)
Inverse Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(5)
Inverse Prop
(5)
Inverse Prop
(6)
Direct
Disprop,
weak (5)
Direct Prop
(6)
Direct Prop
(6)
Direct Prop
(6)
Direct Prop
(6)
Sensitivity
1(7)
1(5)
1(4)
1(5)
1(6)
1(5)
1(5)
1(6)
L(5)
1(6)
1(6)
1(7)
1(7)
Relative
Impact
X
X
X
X
CLIMATE A
Influence
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Inverse Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Inverse Prop
(4)
Inverse Prop
(6)
Direct
Disprop,
weak (5)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(6)
Direct Prop
(5)
Sensitivity
1(5)
1(5)
1(4)
1(4)
1(5)
1(4)
1(4)
1(6)
L(5)
1(5)
1(4)
1(6)
1(6)
Relative
Impact
X
[threshold!
1
[threshold]
X
t
t
CLIMATE B
Influence
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Inverse Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Inverse Prop
(4)
Inverse Prop
(6)
Direct
Disprop,
weak (6)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(7)
Direct Prop
(6)
Sensitivity
1(5)
1(5)
1(5)
1(4)
1(5)
1(4)
1(4)
1(6)
L(6)
1(4)
1(5)
1(7)
1(7)
Relative
Impact
X
[thresholdl
1
[threshold]
X
1
1
Ranking
1
1
2
2
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-12 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Influence
Y
J
R
G
W
X
T
F
0
S
H
I
E
Variable X
Net Organic
Accumulation
Wind / Waves
Sediment Size
Water Resource
Management:
Channelization
Inundation
Regime
Net Accretion /
Erosion
Inundation
Regime
Water Resource
Management:
Channelization
Freshwater Inflow
Inundation
Regime
Land Use / Land
Cover Change:
Impervious Cover
Land Use / Land
Cover Change:
Impervious Cover
Water Resource
Management:
Channelization
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
Variable Y
Net Mineral
Accumulation
Sediment Size
Net Mineral
Accumulation
Sediment Size
Wind / Waves
Inundation
Regime
Net Organic
Accumulation
Sediment Flux
Net Organic
Accumulation
Net Mineral
Accumulation
Sediment Flux
Sediment Size
Freshwater Inflow
CURRENT
Influence
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Inverse (5)
Direct (5)
Inverse (4)
Direct (4)
Inverse (4)
NA
Direct (6)
Inverse (4)
NA
NA
Sensitivity
1(5)
1(4)
1(4)
L(4)
NA
1(4)
1(4)
L(4)
1(4)
NA
NA
1(4)
NA
Relative
Impact
X
X
CLIMATE A
Influence
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Inverse (5)
Direct (6)
Inverse Prop
(4)
NA
NA
Direct (4)
Direct (6)
Inverse (4)
NA
NA
Sensitivity
1(4)
1(4)
1(4)
L(4)
H-trend
1(4)
H-trend
L(4)
NA
NA
NA
1(4)
NA
Relative
Impact
X
X
1
CLIMATE B
Influence
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct (7)
Direct (6)
Inverse (4)
Direct
Disprop,
strong (4)
Inverse (4)
NA
NA
NA
Direct (5)
Inverse (4)
NA
NA
Sensitivity
1(4)
H-trend
H-trend
L(4)
H(4)
NA
NA
L(4)
NA
H-trend
NA
1(4)
NA
Relative
Impact
X
X
1
Ranking
4
5
5
6
6
6
7
8
8
8
9
9
10
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-13 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table 3-2. Community Interactions group crosswalk for comparison of influence type and degree, sensitivity and
relative impact for current conditions and climate scenarios. NA = No agreement; Prop = Proportional; Disprop =
Disproportional; L = Low sensitivity; I = Intermediate sensitivity; H = High sensitivity; H-trend = No agreement but
trending toward high sensitivity; T = Increasing relative impact from current; () = Number of respondents; Ranking
column orders the influences according to completeness of information
Influence
O
GG
Q
S
DD
EE
U
Y
FF
HH
BB
Variable X
Landscape
Mosaic
Shorebird Prey
Community
Wind /Waves
Water Quality
Extent of
Mudflat
Extent of
Mudflat
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
Sediment
Resuspension /
Deposition
Predators and
Disturbance
Sediment
Resuspension /
Deposition
Bed Sediment
Characteristics
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
Variable Y
Shorebirds
Shorebirds
Sediment
Resuspension /
Deposition
Shorebird Prey
Community
Shorebirds
Shorebird Prey
Community
Sediment
Resuspension /
Deposition
Extent of
Mudflat
Shorebirds
Mudflat
Bathymetry
Shorebirds
CURRENT
Influence
Direct
Disprop,
strong (4)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(6)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(6)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Inverse (6)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Sensitivity
H(4)
1(6)
1(6)
1(6)
1(4)
1(6)
1(5)
1(4)
NA
1(5)
1(4)
Relative
Impact
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
Tertiary
CLIMATE A
Influence
Direct
Disprop,
strong (5)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct (6)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Inverse
Disprop,
strong (4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct (5)
Sensitivity
H(5)
1(5)
1(5)
1(4)
H-trend
1(5)
1(4)
1(4)
H(4)
1(4)
NA
Relative
Impact
1
1
1
[threshold]
Primary
1
1
[threshold]
CLIMATE B
Influence
Direct
Disprop,
strong (6)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct
Disprop,
strong (4)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Inverse
Disprop,
strong (4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct (5)
Sensitivity
H(6)
1(4)
1(5)
1(4)
H(5)
1(5)
1(4)
1(4)
H(5)
1(4)
H-trend
Relative
Impact
1
1
1
[threshold]
Primary
1
1
[threshold]
Ranking
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-14 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Influence
E
I
X
AA
D
CC
JJ
A
B
K
F
G
L
P
W
C
Variable X
Restoration
Freshwater
Inflow
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
Extent of
Mudflat
Restoration
Bed Sediment
Characteristics
Mudflat
Bathymetry
Water
Management
Water
Management
Freshwater
Inflow
Land Use
Change
Land Use
Change
Sediment
Supply
Wind /Waves
Sediment
Resuspension /
Deposition
Restoration
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
Variable Y
Landscape
Mosaic
Sediment
Supply
Extent of
Mudflat
Predators and
Disturbance
Sediment
Supply
Shorebird Prey
Community
Extent of
Mudflat
Freshwater
Inflow
Sediment
Supply
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
Sediment
Supply
Landscape
Mosaic
Sediment
Resuspension /
Deposition
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
Bed Sediment
Characteristics
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
CURRENT
Influence
Direct (5)
Direct Prop
(6)
NA
Inverse
Prop (4)
Inverse
Prop (4)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct (4)
Direct Prop
(5)
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct (6)
Direct Prop
(4)
NA
Direct Prop
(4)
Direct (6)
NA
NA
Sensitivity
H(4)
1(6)
H(4)
1(4)
1(5)
1(4)
H(4)
1(7)
1(6)
NA
1(5)
H(4)
1(4)
NA
1(4)
NA
Relative
Impact
CLIMATE A
Influence
Direct (4)
Direct Prop
(4)
Inverse
Disprop,
strong (4)
Inverse (5)
Inverse (5)
Direct (5)
Direct
Disprop,
strong (4)
NA
NA
Direct (5)
NA
NA
NA
Direct (5)
NA
Direct (4)
Sensitivity
H(5)
1(4)
H(5)
NA
H-trend
H-trend
H(5)
1(5)
1(4)
NA
H-trend
H-trend
NA
NA
H-trend
NA
Relative
Impact
1
1
1
[threshold]
CLIMATE B
Influence
Direct (4)
Direct (4)
Inverse
Disprop,
strong (4)
Inverse (4)
Inverse (4)
Direct (5)
NA
NA
NA
Direct (4)
NA
NA
NA
Direct (4)
NA
Direct (4)
Sensitivity
H(5)
NA
H(6)
H-trend
NA
NA
H(4)
H-trend
H-trend
NA
NA
H-trend
NA
NA
H-trend
NA
Relative
Impact
1
1
1
[threshold]
Ranking
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
9
9
9
9
10
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-15 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Influence
N
V
H
J
M
R
T
Z
KK
Variable X
Landscape
Mosaic
Bed Sediment
Characteristics
Land Use
Change
Freshwater
Inflow
Sediment
Supply
Water Quality
Sediment
Resuspension /
Deposition
Extent of
Mudflat
Mudflat
Bathymetry
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
Variable Y
Predators and
Disturbance
Sediment
Resuspension /
Deposition
Water Quality
Water Quality
Bed Sediment
Characteristics
Bed Sediment
Characteristics
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
Sediment
Resuspension /
Deposition
Sediment
Resuspension /
Deposition
CURRENT
Influence
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Sensitivity
NA
1(5)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Relative
Impact
CLIMATE A
Influence
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Sensitivity
H-trend
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Relative
Impact
CLIMATE B
Influence
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Sensitivity
H-trend
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Relative
Impact
Ranking
10
11
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-16 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table B-l. Sediment Retention breakout group participants, affiliations, and
qualifications
Name
Dave Cacchione
John Callaway
Chris Enright
Bruce Jaffe
Lester McKee
Dave Schoellhamer
Mark Stacey
Affiliation
U.S. Geological Survey
University of
California, San
Francisco
California Department
of Water Resources
U.S. Geological Survey
San Francisco Estuary
Institute
U.S. Geological Survey
University of
California, Berkeley
Qualifications
Emeritus oceanographer for USGS. Research on
sediment transport, ocean-bottom boundary
layers, erosion, wave effects in San Francisco
Bay area. Expertise in sediment processes and
wave impacts on coastal areas.
Research on wetland ecology and restoration in
San Francisco Bay. Expertise in wetland
restoration, wetland plant ecology, and sediment
dynamics.
Chief Water Resources Engineer for Suisun
Marsh Branch of California Department of Water
Resources. Expertise in water resources planning,
management, and sediment dynamics.
Research on historical sedimentation and
geomorphic evolution of the San Francisco
Estuary. Expertise in sediment transport.
Research on transport, transformation, and
loadings of sediments, nutrients and contaminants
in San Francisco Bay area watersheds. Expertise
in sediment transport, hydrology, and nutrients.
Research on suspended-sediment transport in San
Francisco Bay and Delta. Expertise in estuarine
physics, sediment transport, and hydrology.
Research on transport and mixing in estuarine
and coastal environments. Expertise in sediment
transport and environmental fluid mechanics.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-17 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table B-2. Community Interactions breakout group participants,
affiliations, and qualifications
Name
Affiliation
Qualifications
Letitia Grenier
San Francisco Estuary
Institute
Research on tidal marsh food web structure, song
sparrow fitness and behavior, monitoring of biota
in the South Bay Salt Ponds. Expertise in tidal
marsh ecology.
Jessica (Jessie) Lacy
U.S. Geological Survey
Research on interaction between aquatic
vegetation and hydrodynamics. Expertise in
sediment transport, estuarine hydrodynamics, and
aquatic ecosystems.
Michelle Orr
Philip Williams &
Associates
Water resources engineer involved with coastal
marsh geomorphology, hydraulic and sediment
transport modeling, and tidal channel dynamics.
Expertise in wetland restoration planning and
design.
Diana Stralberg
Point Reyes Bird
Observatory
Conservation Science
Research on modeling avian distributional
responses to climate, vegetation, and land use
patterns. Expertise in landscape ecology and
avian species.
Stuart Siegel
Wetlands and Water
Resources
Consulting on wetlands technical and regulatory
issues in the San Francisco Bay area. Expertise in
wetland and aquatic ecology, wetland restoration
and management.
Lynne Trulio
San Jose State
University
Research on tidal salt marsh restoration and
wildlife management in the San Francisco Bay.
Expertise in tidal marsh ecology and restoration.
Isa Woo
U.S. Geological Survey
Research on tidal marsh foodwebs, trophic
interactions, and wetland restoration. Expertise in
wetland restoration and management.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-18 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table B-3. Example of expert elicitation handout for influences under current conditions (Sediment Retention group)
Instructions: Please assess the effect of X on Y by selecting the appropriate "degree of influence" and its associated "confidence".
^^^^^H Current Conditions
Relationship A
Relationship B
Relationship C
Relationship D
Relationship E
Relationship F
Relationship G
Variable X
Water Resource
Management: Delta
Outflow
Water Resource
Management:
Reservoir Management
Water Resource
Management:
Reservoir Management
Water Resource
Management:
Reservoir Management
Water Resource
Management:
Channelization
Water Resource
Management:
Channelization
Water Resource
Management:
Channelization
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
Variable Y
Freshwater Inflow
Freshwater Inflow
Sediment Flux
Sediment Size
Freshwater Inflow
Sediment Flux
Sediment Size
Degree of influence
(Please select 0-13)
Confidence
(LH, LL, HH, HL)
Notes
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-19 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table B-4. Example of expert elicitation handout for influences under climate scenarios (Community Interactions
group)
Instructions:
Please assess the effect of X on Y by selecting the appropriate "degree of influence" and its associated "confidence".
Relationship A
Relationship B
Relationship C
Relationship D
Relationship £
Relationship F
Relationship G
Variable X
Water
Management
Water
Management
Restoration
Restoration
Restoration
Land Use
Change
Land Use
Change
on
on
on
on
on
on
on
Variable Y
Freshwater
Inflow
Sediment
Supply
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
Sediment
Supply
Landscape
Mosaic
Sediment
Supply
Landscape
Mosaic
Climate Scenario A
Degree of influence
(Please select 0-13)
Confidence
(LH, LL, HH,
HL)
Climate Scenario B
Degree of influence
(Please select 0-13)
Confidence
(LH, LL, HH,
HL)
Notes
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-20 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Table B-5. Example of expert elicitation handout for interactive influences under climate scenarios (Sediment Retention
group)
Instructions: Please assess the effect of X on Y with Z by selecting the appropriate "interactive influence" and its associated "confidence".
Example 1:
Relationship
A+B
Example 2:
Relationship
Q+R
Variable X
Water
Resource
Management:
Delta Outflow
Sediment Flux
on
on
on
Variable Y
Freshwater
Inflow
Net Mineral
Accumulation
with
with
with
Variable Z
Water Resource
Management:
Reservoir
Management
Sediment Size
Climate Scenario A
Interactive
Influence
Confidence
(LH, LL,
HH, HL)
Climate Scenario B
Interactive
Influence
Confidence
(LH, LL,
HH, HL)
Notes
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
T-21 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Salt Marsh
Sediment Retention
Community Interactions:
Shorebirds
The balance between the processes of removal
and deposition of sediment
Access of Western sandpiper and Marbled godwit
to mudflat prey
Figure ES-1. Selected ecosystem processes for the pilot vulnerability
assessment.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-l DRAFT—DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Key
JL Increasing relative impact
Increasing sensitivity
Threshold
Figure ES-2. Top pathways for management of the Net Accretion/Erosion endpoint.
Colors are used to distinguish different pathways. Red symbols highlight potential
changes under future climate conditions.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-2 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Bed Sediment
Characteristics
and Quality
Key
•JL Increasing relative impact
Increasing sensitivity
Threshold
Figure ES-3. Top pathways for management of the Shorebirds endpoint. Colors
are used to distinguish different pathways. Red symbols highlight potential changes
under future climate conditions.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-3 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
a
a
Scoping
Selection of Key
Management Goals
Selection of Focal
Ecosystems
Selection of Ecosystem
Processes
Development of
Conceptual Models
U
H
"§ f Development of
a, I Climate Scenarios
ri J~ Development of Expert
rt. L Elicitation Exercise
M
.%
•3
Pre-Workshop
Selection of Workshop
Participants
Development of "Straw
Man" Influence
Diagrams
Pre-Workshop Briefing
and Homework
Assignment
Development of
Consolidated Influence
Diagrams
pa
•
Workshop
Development of Group
Influence Diagrams
Expert Elicitation
Exercise and
Discussions
Discussion of Climate
Scenarios
Management
Discussion
Analysis
Diagrams,
Agreement, Relative
L Impact, Confidence
•-{_ Adaptation Strategies
r Linking Information
I to Management
Top Pathways for
Management
^H J" Insights from the
""* ^ Workshop
f
-------
Altered Flows / Water
Demand:
Reservoir Management
Land Use / Land Cover
Change:
Impervious Cover
Figure 2-1. Simplified influence diagram for sediment retention.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-5 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Water Resource
Management:
Delta Outflow
Water Resource
Management:
Reservoir
Management
Water Resource
Management:
Channelization
Land Use / Land
Cover Change:
Impervious Cover
Vegetative Production:
Net Organic
Accumulation
Figure 2-2. Sediment Retention group influence diagram.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-6 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Water Resource
Management: Delta
Outflow
Water Resource
Management: Reservoir
Management
Water Resource
Management:
Channelization
Land Use/Land Cover
Change: Impervious
Cover
Wind/
Waves
Tides
K
Relative Sea
Level
Freshwater
Inflow
L
Sediment Flux
W
Key
Low sensitivity
Intermediate sensitivity
->. High sensitivity
Intermediate-to-high trend
-^. No agreement
Sediment Size
Vegetative Production:
Net Organic
Accumulation
Figure 2-3. Sediment Retention group summary influence diagram of
sensitivities under current conditions.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-7 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Current
Scenario A
Scenario B
Key
Low sensitivity
-^ Intermediate sensitivity
-^ High sensitivity
-^- Intermediate-to-high trend
-^ No agreement
Figure 2-4. Sediment Retention group summary influence diagrams of
sensitivities: variance across current conditions and two climate scenarios.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-8 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Water Resource
Management:
Delta Outflow
Water Resource
Management:
Reservoir
Management
Water Resource
Management:
Channelization
Land Use / Land
Cover Change:
Impervious Cover
Tides
i *
\-- —
K
*
Relative Sea
Level
y
Freshwater Inflow
L j
•^^
L
Sediment Flux
t J
-7
\ jT~ >
Key
M
Sediment Size
High Impact
Figure 2-5. Sediment Retention influences indicated as having high relative
impact under current conditions.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-9 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Water Resource
Management:
Delta Outflow
Water Resource
Management:
Reservoir
Management
Water Resource
Management:
Channelization
Land Use/ Land
Cover Change:
Impervious Cover
r ^
Tides
k. 1 ->
K
Relative Sea
Level
L J
Freshwater Inflow
..
L
Sediment Flux
Vegetative Production:
Net Organic
Accumulation
Net Mineral
Accumulation
Sediment Size
Key
High impact
Increasing impact under climate scenarios
Figure 2-6. Sediment Retention group influences indicated as having high
relative impact under climate scenarios.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-10 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
100
90
80
I Current
Climate A
Climate B
HH
HL
LH
LL
None given
Figure 2-7. Sediment Retention group confidence results for all influences;
HH = High evidence, High agreement; HL = High evidence, Low agreement;
LH = Low evidence, High agreement; LL = Low evidence, Low agreement.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-ll DRAFT—DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Land Use Change
Water
Management
Freshwater Inf ow
Sediment Supply
Landscape Mosaic
Water Quality
(Contaminants
Salinity)
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
Resuspension
and Deposition
Characteristics
and Quality
Predators and
Disturbance
(Anthropogenic)
Extent of Mudflat
(Acre Hours)
Shorebird Prey
Community
Shorebirds
Marbled Godwit &
Western Sandpiper
Figure 2-8. Community Interactions group influence diagram.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-12 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Key
\0 / *
'-/---... \ f Water Q
"V-~^ (Contami
Water Quality
(Contaminants,
Salinity)
Sediment
Resuspension and
Deposition
Characteristics/
Tides and Hydrodynamics
Mudflat Bathymetry
Predators and
Disturbance
(Anthropogenic)
Extent of Mudflat
(Acre Hours)
Shorebird Prey
Community
Shorebirds
Marbled Godwit &
Western Sandpiper
_^. Low sensitivity
+. Intermediate sensitivity
•+• High sensitivity
-^- Intermediate-to-high trend
->• No agreement
Figure 2-9. Community Interactions group summary influence diagram of
sensitivities under current conditions.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-13 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Current
Scenario A
Scenario B
Key
High sensitivity
Intermediate-to-high trend
-^- No agreement
Figure 2-10. Community Interactions group summary influence diagrams of
sensitivities: variance across current conditions and two climate scenarios.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-14 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Key
Land Use Change
Water
Management
Freshwater Inflow
Sediment Supply
Landscape Mosaic
Water Quality
(Contaminants
Salinity)
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
Bed Sediment
Characteristics
and Quality
Resuspension
and Deposition
Predators and
Disturbance
(Anthropogenic)
Extent of Mudflat
(Acre Hours)
Shorebird Prey
Community
Primary impact
Secondary impact
Tertiary impact
f^ Shorebirds
{ Marbled Godwit &
V Western Sandpiper
Figure 2-11. Community Interactions influences indicated as having high
relative impact under current conditions.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-15 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Land Use Change
Freshwater Inflow
Sediment Supply
Landscape Mosaic
Water Quality
(Contaminants
Salinity)
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
Sediment
Resuspension
and Deposition
Bed Sediment
Characteristics
and Quality
Predators and
Disturbance
(Anthropogenic)
Extent of Mudflat
(Acre Hours)
Shorebird Prey
Community
Shorebirds
Marbled Godwit &
Western Sandpiper
Key
Relative impact remains the same under climate scenarios
Increased impact under climate scenarios
Figure 2-12. Community Interactions group influences indicated as having
high relative impact under climate scenarios.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-16 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I Current
Climate A
Climate B
HH
HL
LH
LL
None given
Figure 2-13. Community Interactions group confidence results for all
influences; HH = High evidence, High agreement; HL = High evidence, Low
agreement; LH = Low evidence, High agreement; LL = Low evidence, Low
agreement.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-17 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Influence Type
Sensitivity
Relative Impact
Current
Future
Reservoir
Management
— Direct
^^— Inverse
- • - No agreement
Thickness denotes degree: all are proportional
Intermediate sensitivity
No agreement
Reservoir
Management
High impact
Increasing impact under climate scenarios
• Lower impact
Figure 3-1. Sediment Retention example pathway. Future = Climate Scenario B.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-18 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Influence Type
Sensitivity
Relative Impact
Current
Future
Restoration
X E
Landscape Mosaic
f Shorebirds ^S
Restoration
E
Direct
Direct, no agreement on degree
Thickness denotes degree: 0 is disproportional strong
High sensitivity
Primary impact
Increasing impact under climate scenarios
Lower impact
Figure 3-2. Community Interactions example pathway. Future = Climate Scenario B.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-19 DRAFT—DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Delta Outflow
Tides
Relative Sea
Level
Direct > Inverse
Effect (Threshold)**
Direct Effect
Increasing
Direct Effect
Figure 3-3. Top pathways for management of the Net Accretion/Erosion
endpoint. Blue, green and purple colors are used to distinguish different
pathways. Red boxes highlight changes under future climate conditions. *
indicates high relative impact under current conditions. A indicates
increasing relative impact under future conditions. A direct to inverse
threshold occurs where there is a direct effect under current conditions that
may shift to an inverse effect under future climate conditions. Dashed lines
indicate inconsistent agreement across scenarios.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-20 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Water
Management
Land Use Change
Increasing
Direct Effect
Landscape
Mosaic
Freshwater Inflow
Sediment Supply
Water Quality
(Contaminants,
Salinity)
Direct > Strong
Direct Effect
(Threshold)
Bed Sediment
Characteristics
and Quality
Sediment
Resuspension
Tides and
Hydrodynamics
and Deposition
Mudflat
Bathymetry
Predators and
Disturbance
(Anthropogenic
Strong Direct
Effect, 1°A
Strong Direct Effect
Shorebird Prey
Community
Extent of Mudflat
(Acre Hours)
Direct > Strong Direct
Effect (Threshold), 1°
Direct Effect, 2°A
Shorebirds
Marbled Godwit &
Western Sandpiper
Figure 3-4. Top pathways for management of the Shorebirds endpoint. Blue,
green and purple colors are used to distinguish different pathways. Red boxes
o o
highlight changes under future climate conditions. 1 and 2 indicate primary
and secondary relative impact under current conditions, respectively. A
indicates increasing relative impact under future conditions. A direct to strong
direct threshold occurs where there is a direct effect under current conditions
that may shift to a very strong direct effect under future climate conditions.
Dashed lines indicate inconsistent agreement across scenarios.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-21 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Climate
Drivers
Changes in Air
Temperature
Changes in
Precipitation
Sea Level Rise
Changes in Storm
Climatology and
Wind
Invasive
Species
Changes in Water
Temperature
Sedimentation
arfS-trosion '
tend Use/Land
Coyer Change
Community
Interactions
Primary
Productivity
Water
Purification
Water
Retention
Nutrient
Cycling
Sediment
Retention
Indicators
Biodiversity
Species
Population
Size
Water Quality
Standards
Freshwater
Inflow
Extent of
Aquatic
Habitat
Sediment
Quantity
Figure A-l. Salt Marsh Conceptual Model.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-22 DRAFT-
DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Climate
Drivers
Changes in Air
Temperature
Changes in
->• Precipitation
Sea Level Rise
Changes in Storm
Climatology and Wind
Changes in Water
Temperature
'-Sedimentation
ancTE-resieff''
Flooding
Contaminants
Community
Interactions
Primary
Production
Biomass
Key Species
Nutrient
Cycling
Indicators
Biodiversity
Species Population
Size
Extent of Aquatic
Habitat
Water Quality
Standards
Figure A-2. Mudflat Conceptual Model.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-23
DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Climate
Drivers
Indicators
I ;
Changes in Air
Temperature
Changes in
Precipitation
Changes in Storm
Climatology and Wind
Altered Flows/Water Demand
Upstream water diversions and
controls:
o Change in peak (max or min)
flow volume
o Change in flow variability
o Change in flow frequency and
duration
Dredging and dredge disposal:
**^ Frequency, location and extent
^dredging
Boating)(shipping:
o Frequerky and degree of wake
disturbance^
Invasive Species
Spartina alterniflora,
Eelgrass, Mussels,
Mitten crabs: /
o % cover or arefi
Sediment
Retention
Sea Level Rise
sedimentation
and^Erosion
Latid Use/Land Cover Change
'Increase in impervious cover:
o Area or % change in impervious
cover
o Land conversion from agriculture to
o Area or % change in land use
classification
Freshwater
inflow
' Change in X2 location (Km)
Streamflow (daily flow in cubic
ft per second)
Net Delta outflow (daily flow in
cubic feet per second)
Sediment
Quantity
' Marsh elevation (feet)
Suspended sediment
concentration (mg/L)
Sediment deposition (cubic
meters or metric tons annually
Species Population
Size
Native species cover (e.g.,
pickleweed, % cover or area)
Invasive species cover (e.g.,
Spartina alterniflora, % cover
or area (acres))
Extent of Aquatic
Habitat
' Acreage (total acres or
hectares using aerial data)
Change in extent
Figure A-3. Sediment Retention sub-model.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-24 DRAFT-
DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Climate
Drivers
Changes in Air
Temperature
Changes in
Precipitation
Sea Level Rise
Changes in Storm
Climatology and Wind
Changes in Salinity
Location of mesohaline/oligohaline transition
Frequency or % of time mesohaline
Invasive Species
Spartina alterniflora
colonization
looping
% Time inundated
Watershed infrastructure
i and manage/fient practices
Existing exposures
Marbled
godwit
Community Interactions
Invertebrates:
Polychaetes
Bivalves
Amphipods
Western
sandpiper
deep
Indicators
Biodiversity
Figure A-4. Community Interactions sub-model.
Species
Population Size
Extent of
Aquatic Habitat
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-25
DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Altered Flows /
Water Demand:
Delta Pumping
Altered Flows /
Water Demand:
Reservoir
Management
Other Human Uses:
Dredging
Land Use / Land Cover
Change:
Impervious Cover
Land Use / Land Cover
Change:
Shoreline Armoring
Sediment
Deposition /
Retention
Figure B-l. Sediment Retention "straw-man" influence diagram.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-26 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Altered Flows /
Water Demand:
Delta Pumping
Altered Flows /
Water Demand:
Reservoir
Management
Other Human Uses:
Dredging
Land Use / Land Cover
Change:
Impervious Cover
Land Use / Land Cover
Change:
Shoreline Armoring
Inundation
Regime
k J
M
Sediment
Deposition /
Retention
Shorebird Predators
Peregrine Falcons,
Merlins
Water Depth to
Mudflat Surface
Shorebirds
Ratio Deep Probers (Marbled
Godwit) to Shallow Probers
(Western Sandpiper)
Shorebird Prey
Polychaetes, Bivalves,
Amphipods
Figure B-2. Community Interactions "straw-man" influence diagram.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-27 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Current
Scenario A
Scenario B
Participant 1
Participant 2
Participant 3
Participant 4
Key
Low sensitivity
No influence
Intermediate sensitivity Unknown
High sensitivity
No answer
Figure B-3. Sediment Retention influence diagrams of sensitivities: variance
across participants (continued on next page).
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-28 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Current
Scenario A
Scenario B
Participant 5
Participant 6 ( | [ | |
Participant 7
Key
Low sensitivity
No influence
Intermediate sensitivity Unknown
High sensitivity
No answer
Figure B-3 (cont). Sediment Retention influence diagrams of sensitivities:
variance across participants.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-29 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Current
Scenario A
Scenario B
Participant 1
Participant 2
Participant 3
Participant 4
Key
Low sensitivity
Intermediate sensitivity
High sensitivity
No influence
Unknown
^.
No answer
Figure B-4. Community Interactions influence diagrams of sensitivities:
variance across participants (continued on next page).
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-30 DRAFT—DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Current
Scenario A
Scenario B
Participant 5
Participant 6
Participant? | | /
'•. '••/..
Key
Low sensitivity
No influence
Intermediate sensitivity Unknown
High sensitivity
No answer
Figure B-4 (cont). Community Interactions influence diagrams of
sensitivities: variance across participants.
This document is a draft for review purposes only and does not constitute Agency policy.
F-31 DRAFT— DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
------- |