Advertisement

Water Provision in Chaparral Landscapes: Water Quality and Water Quantity

  • Christopher W. Solek
  • Vince H. Resh
Chapter
Part of the Springer Series on Environmental Management book series (SSEM)

Abstract

Rivers and streams in chaparral landscapes provide both direct and indirect critical services to humans. Water provision services can be broadly parsed into five categories: improvement of extractive water supply, improvement of in-stream water supply, water damage mitigation (e.g., flood control), water-related cultural services such as recreation, and water associated supporting services, such as enhancement of aquatic species biodiversity. Each of these services is influenced by the quantity and quality of water, location, and timing of flow. Water quantity and quality in California’s chaparral landscapes are affected by sequential flooding and drying, particularly in small seasonal streams, resulting from the highly seasonal precipitation patterns in Mediterranean-type climate regions. Fire is also a key factor affecting water quality and quantity. In these systems, water quantity is limited and quality often degraded, especially during the dry season. This is further exaggerated by diversions and withdrawals for urban, agriculture, and industrial uses, while future climate change could be particularly severe in these highly seasonal climate regions. Arguably, streams and rivers in chaparral landscapes are among the most vulnerable ecosystems to human activities, and are regularly subjected to various influences that may have deleterious effects on surface waters, such as groundwater pumping, conversion of natural lands to agriculture, cattle grazing, waste disposal, and urban encroachment. Because of high human population and agricultural demands in southern California, water security is essential. Reservoirs and storage facilities help provide this, although these alter the natural hydrographs of streams and rivers. Key management priorities to protect water provision services include the reduction of contaminants, eutrophication, and alteration of biogeochemical processes to reduce nutrient loads, along with establishing water-quality goals and aiding watershed protection. To best retain water provision services supplied by chaparral landscapes, coordination and efficiency of management practices and interventions across land jurisdictions, property lines, and watershed boundaries must be improved.

Keywords

Beneficial uses Flooding Hydrological services Hydroperiod Recreation Rivers Stormwater Streams Water provision Water quality 

References

  1. Alexander, R. B., R. A. Smith, and G. E. Schwarz. 2000. Effect of stream channel size on the delivery of nitrogen to the Gulf of Mexico. Nature 403:758-761.Google Scholar
  2. Ally, J. R. R. 2004. Survey of selected stream parameters in the East Fork San Gabriel River and its tributary Cattle Canyon, and in the North Fork San Gabriel River. Department of Fish and Game, South Coast Region, Inland Fisheries Unit. Los Alamitos, California, USA.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, J. E., L. A. Bêche, P. K. Mendez, and V. H. Resh. 2013. Biodiversity of Mediterranean-climate streams of California. Hydrobiologia 719:187-213.Google Scholar
  4. Barker, D. T., K. K. Schwall, and L. L. Pardy. 1994. Water quality control plan for the San Diego Basin (9), California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region, San Diego, California, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Barnett, T. P., J. C. Adam, and D. P. Lettenmaier. 2005. Potential impacts of a warming climate on water availability in snow-dominated regions. Nature 438:303-309.Google Scholar
  6. BBC Research and Consulting. 2010. California outdoor recreation economic study: statewide contributions and benefits. Denver, Colorado, USA.Google Scholar
  7. Benstead, J. P., J. G. March, C. M. Pringle, and F. N Scatena. 1999. Effects of a low-head dam and water abstraction on migratory tropical stream biota. Ecological Applications 9:656-668.Google Scholar
  8. Bernal, S., D. von Schiller, F. Sabater, and E. Martí, 2013. Hydrological extremes modulate nutrient dynamics in Mediterranean climate streams across different spatial scales. Hydrobiologia 719:31-42.Google Scholar
  9. Berrens, R., A. Bohara, C. Silva, M. McKee, and D. Brookshire. 2000. Contingent valuation of instream flows in New Mexico: with tests of scope, group-size reminder and temporal reliability. Journal of Environmental Management 58:73-90.Google Scholar
  10. Berrens, R. P., P. Ganderton, and C. L. Silva. 1996. Valuing protection of minimum instream flows in New Mexico. Journal of Agriculture and Resource Economics 21:294-309.Google Scholar
  11. Bischel, H. N., J. E. Lawrence, B. J. Halaburka, M. H. Plumlee, A. S. Bawazir, J. P. King, J. E. McCray, V. H. Resh, and R. G. Luthy. 2013. Renewing urban streams with recycled water for streamflow augmentation: hydrologic, water quality, and ecosystem services management. Environmental Engineering Science 30:455-479.Google Scholar
  12. Blaine, T. W. and F. R. Lichtkoppler. 2004. Willingness to pay for green space preservation: a comparison of soil and water conservation district clientele and the general public using the contingent valuation method. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 59:203-208.Google Scholar
  13. Bonada, N. and V. H. Resh. 2013. Mediterranean-climate streams and rivers: geographically separated but ecologically comparable freshwater systems. Hydrobiologia 719:1-29.Google Scholar
  14. Bonada, N., M. Rieradevall, and N. Prat. 2007. Macroinvertebrate community structure and biological traits related to flow permanence in a Mediterranean river network. Hydrobiologia 589:91-106.Google Scholar
  15. Brauman, K. A., G. C. Daily, T. K. Duarte, and H. A. Mooney. 2007. The nature and value of ecosystem services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 32:67-98.Google Scholar
  16. Brown, T. C. 1992. Water for wilderness areas: instream flow needs, protection, and economic value. Rivers 2:311-325.Google Scholar
  17. Bunn, S. E. and A. H. Arthington, 2002. Basic principles and ecological consequences of altered flow regimes for aquatic biodiversity. Environmental Management 30:492-507.Google Scholar
  18. Camarasa-Belmonte, A.M., and F. Segura-Beltrán, 2001. Flood events in Mediterranean ephemeral streams (ramblas) in Valencia region, Spain. Catena 45:229-249.Google Scholar
  19. Cao Y., L. C. van de Werfhorst, B. Sercu, J. L. S. Murray, and P. A. Holden. 2011a. Application of an integrated community analysis approach for microbial source tracking in a coastal creek. Environmental Sciences and Technology 45:7195-7201.Google Scholar
  20. Cao Y., C. H. Wu, G. L Anderson, and P. A. Holden. 2011b. Community analysis-based methods. Pages 251-282 in C. Hagedorn, A. R. Blanch, and V. J. Harwood, Microbial source tracking: methods, applications, and case studies. Springer, New York, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  21. Carson, R. T., R. C. Mitchell, M. Hanemann, R. J. Kopp, S. Presser, and P. A. Ruud. 2003. Contingent valuation and lost passive use: damages from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environmental and Resource Economics 25:257-286.Google Scholar
  22. Carter, J. L. and V. H. Resh. 2005. Pacific coast rivers of the coterminous United States. Pages 541-590 in A. Benke and C. Cushing, editors. The rivers of North America. Elsevier Academic Press, Burlington, Massachusetts, USA.Google Scholar
  23. Cayan, D. R., Maurer, E. P., Dettinger, M. D., M. Tyree, and K. HayHoe. 2008. Climate change scenarios for the California region. Climatic Change 87:21-42.Google Scholar
  24. CBD [Center for Biological Diversity]. 2016. Introduction to the four southern California national forests: Los Padres, Angeles, San Bernardino, Cleveland. Tucson, Arizona, USA. http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/forests/southern_california_forests/pdfs/Intro-4-S-CA-National-Forests.pdf
  25. CCI [California Chaparral Institute]. 2010. The California chaparral preservation plan. Escondido, California, USA. http://www.californiachaparral.org/images/NEW_Chaparral_Preservation_Plan.pdf
  26. CDWR [California Department of Water Resources]. 2016. Drought contingency plan for water project operations. Sacramento, California, USA. http://www.water.ca.gov/waterconditions/docs/2016-DroughtContingencyPlan-CVP-SWPOperations-Feb-Nov_1.19.16-FINAL.pdf
  27. CEC [California Energy Commission]. 2005. California's water-energy relationship. CEC-700-2005-011-SF. Sacramento, California, USA. http://www.energy.ca.gov/2005publications/CEC-700-2005-011/CEC-700-2005-011-SF.PDF
  28. Chang, H., and M. R. Bonnette. 2016 Climate change and water-related ecosystem services: impacts of drought in California, USA. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability 2(12):e01254.Google Scholar
  29. Chase, S., R. Benkert, D. Manning, S. White, and S. Brady. 2000. Results of the Sonoma County Water Agency’s Mirabel Rubber Dam/Wohler pool reconnaissance fish sampling program. Sonoma County Water Agency, Santa Rosa, California, USA.Google Scholar
  30. Chen, H. and H. Chang. 2014. Response of discharge, TSS, and E. coli to rainfall events in urban, suburban, and rural watersheds. Environmental Science: Processes and Impacts 16:2313-2324. Google Scholar
  31. Chiu, M. C., C. Leigh, R. Mazor, N. Cid, and V. Resh. 2017. Anthropogenic threats to intermittent rivers and ephemeral streams. Pages 433-454 in T. Datry, N. Bonada, and A.  Boulton, editors. Intermittent rivers: ecology and management. Academic Press, London, UK.Google Scholar
  32. Clar, C. R. 1959. California government and forestry from Spanish days until the creation of the Department of Natural Resources in 1927. California Division of Forestry, Sacramento, California.Google Scholar
  33. Coombs, J. S. and J. M. Melack. 2013. The initial impacts of a wildfire on hydrology and suspended sediment and nutrient export in California chaparral watersheds. Hydrological Processes 26:3842-3851.Google Scholar
  34. Cooper, S. D., T. L. Dudley, and N. Hemphil. 1986. The biology of chaparral streams in southern California. Pages 139-151 in J. DeVries, editor. Proceedings of the Chaparral Ecosystem Research Conference, Report No. 62. California Water Resources Center, Davis, California, USA.Google Scholar
  35. Cooper, S. D., P. S. Lake, S. Sabater, J. M. Melack, and J. L. Sabo. 2013. The effects of land use changes on streams and rivers in Mediterranean climates. Hydrobiologia 719:383-425Google Scholar
  36. Costanza, R., R. d’Arge, R. de Groot, S. Faber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. V. O'Neill, J. Paruelo, R. G. Raskin, P. Sutton, and M. van den Belt. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253-260.Google Scholar
  37. DeBano, L. F. 1981. Water repellent soils: a state-of-the-art. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report GTR-PSW-46. Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experimental Station, Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  38. DeBano, L. F. 2000. The role of fire and soil heating on water repellency in wildland environments: a review. Journal of Hydrology 231-232:195-206.Google Scholar
  39. DeBano, L. F., and C.E. Conrad. 1976. Nutrients lost in debris and runoff water from a burned chaparral watershed. Pages 13-27 in Proceedings of the Third Federal Inter-Agency Sedimentation Conference. Water Resource Council, Denver, Colorado, USA.Google Scholar
  40. DeBano, L. F., D. G. Neary, and P. F. Ffolliott. 1998. Fire's effect on ecosystems. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  41. DEFRA [Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs]. 2007. An introductory guide to valuing ecosystem services. Defra Publications, London, UK.Google Scholar
  42. Dettinger, M. D., D. R. Cayan, G. J. McCabe, and J. A. Marengo. 2000. Multiscale streamflow variability associated with El Nino/Southern oscillation. Pages 113-148 in H. F. Diaz and V. Markgrarf, editors. El Niño and the Southern Oscillation: multiscale variability and global and regional impacts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  43. Dodds, W. K., and E. B. Welch. 2000. Establishing nutrient criteria in streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19:186-196.Google Scholar
  44. Duffield, J. W., C. J. Neher, and T. C. Brown. 1992. Recreation benefits of instream flow: application to Montana's Big Hole and Bitterroot rivers. Water Resources Research 28:2169-2181.Google Scholar
  45. Earles, T. A., K. R. Wright, C. Brown, and T. E. Langan. 2004. Los Alamos forest fire impact modeling. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 40:371-384.Google Scholar
  46. ESA [Ecological Society of America]. 2017. Water purification fact sheet for communicating ecosystem services: tools for scientists to engage the public. The Ecological Society of America and the Union of Concerned Scientists. http://www.esa.org/ecoservices/
  47. Equinox Center. 2010. The potential of purified recycled water. H2Overview Project, San Diego, California, USA. https://www.scribd.com/document/34901564/Equinox-Potential-of-Recycled-Water-July-Final-Rev Google Scholar
  48. Erman, D. C., E. D. Andrews, M. Yoder-Williams. 1988. Effects of winter floods on fishes in the Sierra Nevada. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 45:2195-2200.Google Scholar
  49. Eubanks, T., P. Kerlinger, and R.H. Payne. 1993. High Island, Texas: a case study in avitourism. Birding 25:415-420.Google Scholar
  50. Ferranto, S., L. Huntsinger, C. Getz, M. Lahiff, W. Stewart, G. Nakamura, and M. Kelly. 2013. Management without borders? a survey of landowner practices and attitudes toward cross-boundary cooperation. Society and Natural Resources 26:1086-1100.Google Scholar
  51. Fetscher, A. E., M. A. Sutula, L. B. Busse, and E. D. Stein. 2013. Condition of California perennial, wadeable streams based on algal indicators. Final Technical Report 2007-11 prepared for the California State Water Board. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, Costa Mesa, California, USA.Google Scholar
  52. Ficke, A. D., C. A. Myrick, and L. J. Hansen. 2007. Potential impacts of global climate change on freshwater fisheries. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 17:581-613. Google Scholar
  53. Filipe, A. F., N. Bonada, and J. E. Lawrence. 2013. Vulnerability of stream biota to climate change in Mediterranean climate regions: a synthesis of ecological responses and conservation challenges. Hydrobiologia 719:331-351.Google Scholar
  54. Foley, J. A., R. DeFries, G. P. Asner, C. Barford, G. Bonan, S. R. Carpenter, F. S. Chapin, M. T. Coe, G. C. Daily, H. K. Gibbs, J. H. Helkowski, T. Holloway, E. A. Howard, C. J. Kucharik, C. Monfreda, J. A. Patz, C. Prentice, N. Ramankutty, and P. K. Snyder. 2005. Global Consequences of Land Use. Science 309:570-574.Google Scholar
  55. Gabet, E. J. 2003. Sediment transport by dry ravel. Journal of Geophysical Research 108:2049.Google Scholar
  56. Gallart, G., F. Gallego, J. Latrón, P. Llorens, G. G. Barberá, J. Froebrich. 2012. A novel approach to analysing the regimes of temporary streams in relation to their controls on the composition and structure of aquatic biota. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 16:3165-3182.Google Scholar
  57. Gasith, A., and V. H. Resh. 1999. Streams in Mediterranean climate regions: abiotic influences and biotic responses to predictable seasonal events. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 30:51-81.Google Scholar
  58. GEI Consultants/Navigant Consulting. 2010. Embedded energy in water studies-study 1: statewide and regional water-energy relationship, San Francisco, California, USA, Prepared for the California Public Utilities Commission, Energy Division.Google Scholar
  59. Geiling, S. 2015. The west is literally on fire, and the impacts could be widespread. ThinkProgress. https://thinkprogress.org/the-west-is-literally-on-fire-and-the-impacts-could-be-widespread-b93b4c9c38a
  60. Geosyntec Consultants. 2015. Stormwater capture master plan. Prepared for the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power in partnership with TreePeople, Los Angeles, California, USA. https://www.ladwp.com/cs/idcplg?IdcService=GET_FILE&dDocName=OPLADWPCCB421767&RevisionSelectionMethod=LatestReleased Google Scholar
  61. Gleick, P. H. 1993. Water in crisis: a guide to the world’s fresh water resources. Oxford University Press, New York, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  62. Goldman, R. L., B. H. Thompson, and G. C. Daily. 2007. Institutional incentives for managing the landscape: inducing cooperation for the production of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 64:333-343.Google Scholar
  63. Goodrich, D. C., R. L. Scott, J. Qi, B. Goff, C. L. Unkrich, M. S. Moran, D. Williams, S. Schaeffer, K. Snydery, R. MacNish, T. Maddock, D. Pool, A. Chehbouni, D. I. Cooper, W. E. Eichinger, W. J. Shuttleworth, Y. Kerr, R. Marsett, and W. Ni. 2000. Seasonal estimates of riparian evapotranspiration using remote and in situ measurements. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 105:281-309.Google Scholar
  64. Goodridge, B. M. and J. M. Melack. 2012. Land use control of stream nitrate concentrations in mountainous coastal California watersheds. Journal of Geophysical Research 117:G02005.Google Scholar
  65. Gorn, D. 2016. Desalination’s future in California is clouded by cost and controversy. Drought Watch, KQED Science, Public Media for Northern California, San Francisco, California, USA. https://ww2.kqed.org/science/2016/10/31/desalination-why-tapping-sea-water-has-slowed-to-a-trickle-in-california/ Google Scholar
  66. Grantham T. E., R. Figueroa, and N. Prat. 2013. Water management in Mediterranean river basins: a comparison of management frameworks, physical impacts, and ecological responses. Hydrobiologia 719:451-482.Google Scholar
  67. Grantham, T. E., A. M. Merenlender, and V. H. Resh, 2010. Climatic influences and anthropogenic stressors: an integrated framework for streamflow management in Mediterranean-climate California, USA. Freshwater Biology 55:188-204.Google Scholar
  68. Grantham T. E., and J. H. Viers. 2014. 100 years of California’s water rights system: patterns, trends and uncertainty. Environmental Research Letters 9:084012.Google Scholar
  69. Grizzetti, B., D. Lanzanova, C. Liquete, A. Reynaud, and A. C. Cardoso. 2016. Assessing water ecosystem services for water resource management. Environmental Science and Policy 61:194-203.Google Scholar
  70. Hagedorn C., A. R. Blanch, and V. J. Harwood. 2011. Microbial source tracking: methods, applications and case studies. Springer, New York, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  71. Harmens, H., and G. Mills. 2012. Ozone pollution: impacts on carbon sequestration in Europe. ICP Vegetation Programme Coordination Centre. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Bangor, UK.Google Scholar
  72. Havstad, K. M., D. P. C. Peters, R. Skaggs, J. Brown, B. Bestelmeyer, E. Fredrickson, J. Herrick, and J. Wright. 2007. Ecological services to and from rangelands of the United States. Ecological Economics 64:261-268.Google Scholar
  73. He, C., S. B. Malcom, K. S. Dahlberg, and B. Fu. 2000. A conceptual framework for integrating hydrological and biological indicators into watershed management. Landscape and Urban Planning 49:25-34.Google Scholar
  74. Heiskary, S. A., and R. W. Bouchard Jr. 2015. Development of eutrophication criteria for Minnesota streams and rivers using multiple lines of evidence Freshwater Science 34:574-592.Google Scholar
  75. Hibbert, A. R. 1971. Increases in streamflow after converting chaparral to grass. Water Resources Research 7:71-80.Google Scholar
  76. Holmes, T. P., J. C. Bergstrom, E. Huszar, S. B. Kask, F. Orr III.2004. Contingent valuation, net marginal benefits, and the scale of riparian ecosystem restoration. Ecological Economics 49: 19-30.Google Scholar
  77. Howarth, R. W., G. Billen, D. Swaney, A. Townsend, N. Jaworski, K, Lajtha, A. Downing, R. Elmgreen, N. Caraco, T. Jordan, F. Berendse, J. Freney, V. Kudeyarov, P. Murdoch, and Z. Zhao-Liang. 1996. Regional nitrogen budgets and riverine N and P fluxes for the drainages to the North Atlantic Ocean: Natural and human influences. Biogeochemistry 35:181-226.Google Scholar
  78. Howitt, R., D. MacEwan, J. Medellin-Azuara, J. R. Lund, D. A. Sumner. 2015. Preliminary analysis: 2015 drought economic impact study. Center for Watershed Sciences, University of California, Davis, California, USA.Google Scholar
  79. Hubbert, K. R. and V. Oriol. 2005. Temporal fluctuations in soil water repellency following wildfire in chaparral steeplands, southern California. International Journal of Wildland Fire 14: 439-447.Google Scholar
  80. Hubbert, K. R., H. K. Preisler, P. M. Wohlgemuth, R. C. Graham, and M. G. Narog. 2006. Prescribed burning effects on soil physical properties and soil water repellency in a steep chaparral watershed, southern California, USA. Geoderma 130:284-298Google Scholar
  81. Huber-Sannwald, E., F. T. Maestre, J. E. Herrick, J. F. Reynolds. 2006. Ecohydrological feedbacks and linkages associated with land degradation: a case study from Mexico. Hydrological Processes 20:3395-3411.Google Scholar
  82. Huntsinger, L., and J. L. Oviedo. 2014. Ecosystem services are social-ecological services in a traditional pastoral system: the case in California’s Mediterranean rangelands. Ecology and Society 19:8.Google Scholar
  83. Huntsinger, L., M. Johnson, M. Stafford, and J. Fried. 2010. Hardwood rangeland landowners in California from 1985 to 2004: production, ecosystem services, and permanence. Rangeland Ecology and Management 63:324-334.Google Scholar
  84. Jamison, P. 2015. Army Corps Board Approves $1.3 billion LA River Restoration Proposal. Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, USA. http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-army-corps-l-a-river-restoration-20150716-story.html Google Scholar
  85. Jiménez Cisneros, B. E., T. Oki, N.W. Arnell, G. Benito, J. G. Cogley, P. Döll, T. Jiang, and S. S. Mwakalila. 2014. Freshwater resources. Pages 229-269 in C. B. Field, V. R. Barros, D. J. Dokken, K. J. Mach, M. D. Mastrandrea, T. E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K. L. Ebi, Y. O. Estrada, R. C. Genova, B. Girma, E. S. Kissel, A. N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P. R. Mastrandrea, and L. White, editors. Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: Global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, UK and New York, New York, USA, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Johnston, R. J., E. Y. Besedin, R. Iovanna, C. J. Miller, R. F. Wardwell, and M. H. Ranson. 2005. Systematic variation in willingness to pay for aquatic resource improvements and implications for benefit transfer: a meta‐analysis. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 53:221-248.Google Scholar
  87. Jones, J. A., and D. A. Post. 2004. Seasonal and successional streamflow response to forest cutting and regrowth in the northwest and eastern United States. Water Resources Research 40:W05203.Google Scholar
  88. Jones, M. L. M., A. Provins, L. Harper-Simmonds, M. Holland, G. Mills, F. Hayes, B. A. Emmett, J. Hall, L. G. Sheppard, R. Smith, M. Sutton, K. Hicks, M. Ashmore, R. Haines-Young. 2012. Using the ecosystems services approach to value air quality. NE0117. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Bangor, UK.Google Scholar
  89. Jones, L., A. Provins, L. Harper-Simmonds, M. Holland, G. Mills, F. Hayes, B. A. Emmett, J. Hall, L. G. Sheppard, R. Smith, M. Sutton, K. Hicks, M. Ashmore, R. Haines-Young. 2014. A review and application of the evidence for nitrogen impacts on ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services 7:76-88.Google Scholar
  90. Katz, J., P. B. Moyle, R. M. Quinones, J. Israel, and S. Purdy. 2013. Impending extinction of salmon, steelhead, and trout (Salmonidae) in California. Environmental Biology of Fishes 96:1169-1186.Google Scholar
  91. Keeley, J. E., and T. J. Brennan. 2012. Fire-driven alien invasion in a fire-adapted ecosystem. Oecologia 169:1043-1052.Google Scholar
  92. Keeley, J. E., and P. H. Zedler. 2009. Large, high-intensity fire events in southern California shrublands: debunking the fine-grain age patch model. Ecological Applications 19:69-94.Google Scholar
  93. Kenny, J. F., N. L. Barber, S. S. Hutson, K. S. Linsey, J. K. Lovelace, and M. A. Maupin. 2009. Estimated use of water in the United States in 2005. US Geological Survey Circular 1344. Reston, Virginia, USA.Google Scholar
  94. Kimball, S., M. L. Goulden, K. N. Suding, and S. Parker. 2014. Altered water and nitrogen input shifts succession in a southern California coastal sage community. Ecological Applications 24:1390-1404.Google Scholar
  95. Kinney, A. 1900. Forest and water. Post Publishing, Los Angeles, California, USA.Google Scholar
  96. Klein, C., F. Cheever, B. C. Birdsong. 2013. Natural resources law: a place-based book of problems and cases, third edition (Aspen Casebook), New York, New York, USA, Wolters Kluwer Law and Business.Google Scholar
  97. Kondolf, G. M. and R. J. Batalla. 2005. Hydrological effects of dams and water diversions on rivers of Mediterranean-climate regions: examples from California. Developments in Earth Surface Processes 7:197-211.Google Scholar
  98. Kondolf, G. M., K. Podolak and T. E. Grantham. 2013. Restoring mediterranean-climate rivers. Hydrobiologia 719:527-545.Google Scholar
  99. Konrad, C. P. and D. B. Booth. 2005. Hydrologic changes in urban streams and their ecological significance. American Fisheries Society Symposium 47:157-177.Google Scholar
  100. Krause, A., 2011. Mechanical extraction and augmentation of coarse and fine sediment on the Trinity River, California, 1950-2011. TR-TRRP-2011-3, Weaverville, California, USA, Trinity River Restoration Program.Google Scholar
  101. Kreye, M. M., D. C. Adams, and F. J. Escobedo. 2014. The value of forest conservation for water quality protection. Forests 5:862-884.Google Scholar
  102. LACSD [Sanitations Districts of Los Angeles County]. 2017. Wastewater treatment and water reclamation. Whittier, California, USA. http://www.lacsd.org/wastewater/wwfacilities/moresanj.asp
  103. Leggett, C. G., and N. E. Bockstael. 2000. Evidence of the effects of water quality on residential land prices. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 39:121-144.Google Scholar
  104. Leones, J., B. Colby, D. Cory, and L. Ryan. 1997. Measuring regional economic impacts of streamflow depletions. Water Resources Research 33:831-838.Google Scholar
  105. Lippitt, C. L., D. A Stow, J. F. O'Leary, J. Franklin. 2013. Influence of short-interval fire occurrence on post-fire recovery of fire-prone shrublands in California, USA. International Journal of Wildland Fire 22:184-193.Google Scholar
  106. Llasat, M. C., M. Llasat-Botija, A. Rodriguez, and S. Lindbergh, 2010. Flash floods in Catalonia: a recurrent situation. Advances in Geosciences 26:105-111.Google Scholar
  107. Loaiciga, H. A., D. Pedreros, and D. Roberts. 2001. Wildfire-streamflow interaction in a chaparral watershed. Advances in Environmental Research 5:295-305.Google Scholar
  108. Loomis, J. 1987. The economic value of instream flow: methodology and benefit estimates of optimum flow. Journal of Environmental Management 24:169-179.Google Scholar
  109. Loomis, J. 1998. Estimating the public’s values for instream flow: economic techniques and dollar values. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 34:1007-1014.Google Scholar
  110. Loomis, J. and M. D. Creel. 1992. Recreation benefits of increased flows in California's San Joaquin and Stanislaus Rivers. Rivers 3:1-13.Google Scholar
  111. Matamoros, V., C. Arias, H. Brix and J. Bayona. 2007. Removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) from urban wastewater in a pilot vertical flow constructed wetland and a sand filter. Environmental Science and Technology 41:8171-8177.Google Scholar
  112. Maupin, M. A., J. F Kenny, S. S. Hutson, J. K. Lovelace, N. L. Barber, and K. S. Linsey. 2014. Estimated use of water in the United States in 2010. US Geological Survey Circular 1405. Reston, Virginia, USA.Google Scholar
  113. Mazor, R. D. 2015. Bioassessment of perennial streams in southern California: a report on the first five years of the Stormwater Monitoring Coalition’s regional stream survey. Technical Report 844. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Costa Mesa, California, USA.Google Scholar
  114. McNeil, B. E., J. M. Read, T. J. Sullivan, T. C. McDonnell, I. J. Fernandez, and C. T. Driscoll. 2008. The spatial pattern of nitrogen cycling in the Adirondack Park, New York, Ecological Applications 18:438-452.Google Scholar
  115. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2003 Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  116. Merenlender, A. M., and M. K. Matella 2013. Maintaining and restoring hydrologic habitat connectivity in Mediterranean streams: an integrated modeling framework. Hydrobiologia 719:509-525. Google Scholar
  117. Miller, E. K., A. VanArsdale, G. J. Keeler, A. Chalmers, L. Poissant, N. Kamman, and R. Brulotte. 2005. Estimation and mapping of wet and dry mercury deposition across Northeastern North America. Ecotoxicology 14:53-70.Google Scholar
  118. Mills, G. and H. Harmens. 2011. Ozone pollution: a hidden threat to food security. ICP Vegetation Programme Coordination Centre, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Bangor, UK.Google Scholar
  119. Mills, G., S. Wagg, and H. Harmens. 2013. Ozone pollution: impacts on ecosystem services and biodiversity. ICP Vegetation Programme Coordination Centre, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Bangor, UK.Google Scholar
  120. Miltner, R. J., D. White, and C. Yoder. 2004. The biotic integrity of streams in urban and suburbanizing landscapes Landscape and Urban Planning 69:87-100.Google Scholar
  121. Mount, J. F., 1995. California rivers and streams: the conflict between fluvial process and land use. University of California Press, Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  122. Moyle, P. B. 2014. Novel aquatic ecosystems: the new reality for streams in California and other Mediterranean climate regions. River Research and Applications. 30:1335-1344.Google Scholar
  123. Moyle, P. B., J. V. E. Katz and R. M. Quiñones, 2011. Rapid decline of California’s native inland fishes: a status assessment. Biological Conservation 144:2414-2423.Google Scholar
  124. Muñoz-Mas, R., A. Lopez-Nicolas, F. Martinez-Capel, and M. Pulido-Velazquez. 2016. Shifts in the suitable habitat available for brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) under short-term climate change scenarios. Science of the Total Environment 544:686-700.Google Scholar
  125. Naiman, R. J., J. J. Magnuson, D. M. McKnight, J. A. Stanford, and J. R. Karr. 1995. Freshwater ecosystems and their management: a national initiative. Science 270:584-585.Google Scholar
  126. Neary, D. G. 2004. An overview of fire effects on soils. Southwest Hydrology 3:18-19.Google Scholar
  127. Neary, D. G., C. C. Klopatek, L. F. DeBano, and P. F. Ffolliott. 1999. Fire effects on belowground sustainability: a review and synthesis. Forest Ecology and Management 122:51-71.Google Scholar
  128. NRC [National Research Council]. 2012. Water reuse: potential for expanding the nation’s water supply through reuse of municipal wastewater, The National Academic Press, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  129. Null, S. E., J. H. Viers, M. L. Deas, S. K. Tanaka, and J. F. Mount. 2012. Stream temperature sensitivity to climate warming in California's Sierra Nevada: impacts to cold water habitat. Climatic Change 116:149-170.Google Scholar
  130. Null, S. E., and J. H. Viers. 2013. In bad waters: water year classification in nonstationary climates. Water Resources Research 49:1137-1148.Google Scholar
  131. Pejchar, L., and K. Warner. 2001. A river might run through it again: criteria for consideration of dam removal and interim lessons from California. Environmental Management 28:561-575.Google Scholar
  132. Plieninger T., S. Ferranto. L. Huntsinger. M. Kelly, and C. Getz. 2012. Appreciation, use, and management of biodiversity and ecosystem services in California’s working landscapes. Environmental Management 50:427-440.Google Scholar
  133. Postel, S., and S. Carpenter. 1997. Freshwater ecosystem services. Pages 195-214 in G. C. Daily, editor. Nature's services. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  134. Prat, N., and J. V. Ward. 1994. The tamed river. Pages 219-236 in R. Margalef, editor. Limnology now: a paradigm of planetary problems. Elsevier, London, UK.Google Scholar
  135. Pringle, C. 2003. What is hydrologic connectivity and why is it ecologically important? Hydrological Processes 17:2685-2689.Google Scholar
  136. Purcell, A. H., C. Friedrich, and V. H. Resh. 2002. An assessment of a small, urban stream restoration project in Northern California. Restoration Ecology 10:685-694.Google Scholar
  137. Reid, W. V. 2001. Capturing the value of ecosystem services to protect biodiversity. Pages 197-225 in V. C. Hollowell, editor. Managing human dominated ecosystems. Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.Google Scholar
  138. Resh, V. H., L. A. Bêche, J. E. Lawrence, R. P. Mazor, E. P. McElravy, A. P. O’Dowd, D. Rudnick, and S. M. Carlson. 2013. Long-term population and community patterns of benthic macroinvertebrates and fishes in Northern California Mediterranean-climate streams. Hydrobiologia 719:93-118.Google Scholar
  139. Rice, R. M. 1974. The hydrology of chaparral watersheds. Pages 27-34 in M. Rosenthal, editor. Proceedings of the symposium on Living with the Chaparral. Sierra Club, San Francisco, California, USA.Google Scholar
  140. Riggan, P. J., S. E. Franklin, J. A. Brass, and F. E. Brooks. 1994. Perspectives on fire management in Mediterranean ecosystems of southern California. Pages 140-162 in J. Moreno and W. Oechel, editors. Fire and global change in Mediterranean ecosystems. Ecological studies 107. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  141. Rowe, P. B., O. M. Countryman, and H. C. Storey. 1954. Hydrologic analysis used to determine effects of fire on peak discharge and erosion rates in southern California watersheds. US Forest Service, California Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  142. Sagoff, M. 2002. On the value of natural ecosystems: the Catskills parable. Politics and the Life Sciences 21:16-21.Google Scholar
  143. Sahgun, L. 2014. Army Corps to recommend $1-billion LA River project. Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, USA. http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-la-river-approval-20140529-story.html Google Scholar
  144. Schlesinger, W. H., T. J. Ward, and J. Anderson. 2000. Nutrient losses in runoff from grassland and shrubland habitats in southern New Mexico: II. Field plots. Biogeochemistry 49:69-86.Google Scholar
  145. Sercu, B., L. C. van de Werfhorst, J. Murray, and P. A. Holden. 2009. Storm drains are sources of human fecal pollution during dry weather in three urban southern California watersheds. Environmental Science and Technology 43:293-298.Google Scholar
  146. Shakesby, R. A. 2011. Post-wildfire soil erosion in the Mediterranean: review and future research directions Earth Science Reviews 105:71-100.Google Scholar
  147. Shakesby, R. A. and S. H. Doerr. 2006. Wildfire as a hydrological and geomorphological agent. Earth Science Reviews 74:269-307.Google Scholar
  148. Shaw, M. R., L. Pendleton, D. Cameron, B. Morris, G. Bratman, D. Bachelet, K. Klausmeyer, J. MacKenzie, D. Conklin, J. Lenihan, E. Haunreiter, C. Daly, and R. Roehrdanz. 2011. The impact of climate change on California’s ecosystem services. Climatic Change 109:465-484.Google Scholar
  149. Shrestha, R. K., and J. R. R Alavalapati. 2004. Valuing environmental benefits of silvopasture practice: a case study of the Lake Okeechobee watershed in Florida. Ecological Economics 49:349-359.Google Scholar
  150. Singh, V. P. 1995. Computer models of watershed hydrology. Pages 1-22 in V. P. Singh, editor. Watershed modeling. Water Resources Publications, Highlands Ranch, Colorado, USA.Google Scholar
  151. Smakhtin, V. U. 2001. Low flow hydrology: a review. Journal of Hydrology 240:147-186.Google Scholar
  152. Smith, V. H. 2003. Eutrophication of freshwater and coastal marine ecosystems: a global problem. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 10:126-39.Google Scholar
  153. Smith, H., P. J. Wood, and J. Gunn. 2003. The influence of habitat structure and flow permanence on invertebrate communities in karst spring systems. Hydrobiologia 510:53-66.Google Scholar
  154. Solek, C. W. 2008. Ecology of the San Gabriel River catchment: anthropogenic effects on black flies (Diptera: Simuliidae) and other benthic macroinvertebrates. Dissertation. University of California, Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  155. Stein, E. D. and J. Brown. 2009. Effects of post-fire runoff on surface water quality: Development of a southern California regional monitoring program with management questions and implementation recommendations. Technical Report 598. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Costa Mesa, California, USA.Google Scholar
  156. Stella, J. C., P. M. Rodríguez-González, S. Dufour, and J. Bendix. 2013. Riparian vegetation research in Mediterranean-climate regions: common patterns, ecological processes, and considerations for management. Hydrobiologia 719:291-315.Google Scholar
  157. Stokes, J. R. and A. Horvath. 2009. Energy and air emission effects of water supply. Environmental Science and Technology 43:2680-2687.Google Scholar
  158. Stoof, C. R., E. C. Slingerland, W. Mol, J. van den Berg, P. J. Vermeulen, A. J. D. Ferreira, C. J. Ritsema, J. Y. Parlange, and T. S. Steenhuis. 2014. Preferential flow as a potential mechanism for fire-induced increase in streamflow. Water Resources Research 50:1840-1845.Google Scholar
  159. Tague, C., L. Seaby, and A. Hope. 2009. Modeling the eco-hydrologic response of a Mediterranean type ecosystem to the combined impacts of projected climate change and altered fire frequencies. Climatic Change 93:137-155.Google Scholar
  160. Thurow, T.L. 1991. Hydrology and erosion. Pages 141-159 in R. K. Heitschmidt and J. W. Stuth, editors. Grazing management: an ecological perspective. Timber Press, Portland, Oregon, USA.Google Scholar
  161. Tiedemann, A. R., C. E. Conrad, J. H. Dieterich, J. W. Hornbeck, W. F. Megahan, L. A. Viereck, and D. D. Wade. 1979. Effects of fire on water: a state-of-knowledge review. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report GTR-WO-10. US Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  162. USEPA [United States Environmental Protection Agency]. 1999. Giardia: drinking water health advisory. EPA-822-R-99-008. Office of Science and Technology, Office of Water, Washington D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  163. USEPA [United States Environmental Protection Agency]. 2002. Evaluation of impacts to underground sources of drinking water by hydraulic fracturing of coalbed methane reservoirs. EPA 816-R-04-003. Office of Water, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Drinking Water Protection Division, Prevention Branch, Washington D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  164. USEPA [United States Environmental Protection Agency]. 2016. Water quality. Pacific Southwest, Region 9, Los Angeles, California, USA. https://archive.epa.gov/region9/socal/web/html/index-9.html
  165. USEPA [United States Environmental Protection Agency]. 2017. Wetland functions and values. Online training module. Washington D.C, USA. https://cfpub.epa.gov/watertrain/moduleFrame.cfm?parent_object_id=285 Google Scholar
  166. USFWS [United States Fish and Wildlife Service] and Hoopa Valley Tribe. 1999. Trinity River flow evaluation final report. Arcata, California, USA.Google Scholar
  167. USFS [United States Forest Service]. 2012. Improving recreation opportunities. http://www.funoutdoors.com/files/USFS%20Recreation%20Strategy%20Final%20PDF.pdf
  168. Verkaik, I., M. Rieradevall, S. D. Cooper, J. M. Melack, T. L. Dudley, and N. Prat. 2013. Fire as a disturbance in Mediterranean climate streams. Hydrobiologia 719:353-382.Google Scholar
  169. Vicuna, S., E. P. Maurer, B. Joyce, J. A. Dracup, and D. Purkey. 2007. The sensitivity of California water resources to climate change scenarios. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43:482-498. Google Scholar
  170. Vidal-Abarca, M. R. 1990. Los ríos de las cuencas áridas y semiáridas: una perspectiva ecológica comparativa y de síntesis. Scientia gerundensis 16:219-228.Google Scholar
  171. Ward, F. A. 1987. Economics of water allocation to instream uses in a fully appropriated river basin: evidence from a New Mexico wild river. Water Resources Research 23:381-392.Google Scholar
  172. Weatherdon, L. V., A. K. Magnan, A. D. Rogers, U. Rashid Sumaila, and W. W. L. Cheung. 2016. Observed and projected impacts of climate change on marine fisheries, aquaculture, coastal tourism, and human health: an update. Frontiers in Marine Science 3:48.Google Scholar
  173. Weber, M. A., and R. P. Berrens. 2006. Value of instream recreation in the Sonoran Desert. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 132:53-60.Google Scholar
  174. Wells, W. G. 1987. The effects of fire on the generation of debris flows in southern California. Geology 7:105-114.Google Scholar
  175. Wells, C. G., R. E. Campbell, L. F. DeBano, C. E. Lewis, R. L. Fredriksen, E. C. Franklin, R. C. Froelich, and P. H. Dunn. 1979. Effects of fire on soil: a state of knowledge review. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report GTR-WO-7. Washington, D.C., USA, US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  176. White, J., M. Belmont, and C. Metcalfe. 2006. Pharmaceutical compounds in wastewater: wetland treatment as a potential solution. The Scientific World Journal 6:1731-1736.Google Scholar
  177. Whitehead, J. 1990. Measuring willingness-to-pay for wetlands preservation with the contingent valuation method. Wetlands 10:187-201.Google Scholar
  178. Whitehead, P. G., R. L. Wilby, R. W. Batterbee, M. Kernan, and A. J. Wade. 2009. A review of the potential impacts of climate change on surface water quality. Hydrological Sciences Journal 54:101-123.Google Scholar
  179. Wilcox, B. P., and T. L. Thurow. 2006. Emerging issues in rangeland ecohydrology: vegetation change and the water cycle. Rangeland Ecology and Management 59:220-224.Google Scholar
  180. Wilkinson, R. 2002. The potential consequences of climate variability and change for California. A report of the California Regional Assessment for the United States Global Change Research Program. Washington D.C., USA. http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/pubs/CA_Report.pdf
  181. WIW [Water in the West]. 2013. Water and energy nexus: a literature review, Stanford, California, USA, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment and Bill Lane Center for the American West.Google Scholar
  182. Wolff, G., R. Cohen, and B. Nelson. 2004. Energy down the drain: the hidden costs of California’s Water Supply. Natural Resources Defense Council. Pacific Institute. Oakland, California, USA. https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/edrain.pdf Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Council for Watershed HealthLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.University of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations