Public Review Draft California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies 

 References 

References 

Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 27-8

[EID] El Dorado Irrigation District. 2003. The Waterfront. 

Environmental Science Associates. 2003. Lancaster Water Reclamation Plant 2020 Facilities Plan EIR, District 14, 

Antelope Valley, Los Angeles County. Whittier, CA: Prepared for County Sanitation District 14 of Los 

Angeles County. 

Environmental Water Caucus. 1998. Blueprint for an Environmentally and Economically Sound CALFED Water 

Supply Reliability Program. 

[EPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey. 

www.epa.gov/OGWDW/needs.html. 

[EPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. Drinking Water Program. www.epa.gov/safewater. 

[EPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. National Water Quality Inventory (305(b) report). 

http://www.epa.gov/305b/. 

[EPA] US Environmental Protection Agency, Water Planning Division. 1983. Results of the Nationwide Urban 

Runoff Program--Final Report. 

[EPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Our Built and Natural Environment. Washington DC. EPA 231-

R-01-002. 

[EPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. The Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure GAP 

Analysis. EPA-816-R-02-020. 50 p. 

[EPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Perchlorate Environmental Contamination: Toxicological 

Review and Risk Characterization. 

Escalon Times Staff Writer. 2004 Jan 8. Farmington program web site goes online. 

Fetter CW. 1994. Applied Hydrogeology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. 

Fleckenstein J.H., M Anderson, G.E. Fogg, J. Mount. 2003 (in press). Managing surface water-groundwater to 

restore fall flows in the Cosumnes River. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management. 

Focazio Michael J, Thomas E. Reilly, Michael G. Rupert, Dennis R. Helsel. 2002. Assessing Ground-Water 

Vulnerability to Contamination: Providing Scientifically Defensible Information for Decision Makers. 

US Geological Survey. Circular 1224. 

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 1998. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, Crop 

Evapotranspiration, Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements. 300 p. 

Frayer W.E., D.D. Peters, H.R. Pywell. 1989. Wetlands of the California Central Valley, Status and Trends 1939 to 

mid 1980s. Portland, OR: US Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1. 29 p. 

Freeze R. Allan and John A. Cherry. 1979. Groundwater. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 604 p. 

[FWUA] Friant Water Users Authority. 2002. Water Supply Study, Development of Water Supply Alternatives for 

Use in Habitat Restoration for the San Joaquin River. 

Giannopoulus James (State Water Resources Control Board), Karen Baker (Department of Toxic Substances 

Control). Percholate Contamination of California's Groundwater Supplies. 

Givati A., D. Rosenfeld. 2004. Quantifying Precipitation Suppression Due to Air Pollution. Journal of Applied 

Meterology 43(1038-1056). 

Goldberg Carole, and Duane Champagne. 1996. A Second Century of Dishonor: Federal Inequities and California 

Tribes. Prepared by the UCLA American Indian Studies Center for the Advisory Council on California 

Indian Policy. Availability: http://www.aisc.ucla.edu/ca/Tribes.htm (Chapters may be updated 

periodically.) 

Gleick Peter H., Dana Haasz, Christine Henges-Jeck, Veena Srinivasan, Gary Wolff, Katherine Kao Cushing, 

Adardip Mann. 2003. Waste Not, Want Not: The Potential for Urban Water Conservation in California. 

Pacific Institute. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies Public Review Draft 

References 

27-9 Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 

Governor's Advisory Drought Planning Panel. 2000. Critical Water Shortage Contingency Plan. Dec 29. 

Availability: http://watsup2.water.ca.gov/contingency_plan.cfm. 

Great Valley Center. 2001. Economic Forecast for California's Central Valley. 69 p. 

Groundwater Resources Association of California. 2002. Perchlorate and NDMA: Rocket Fuel Contaminants a 

Serious Challenge to Drinking Water Supplies. 

Groundwater Resources Association of California, 2005. California Groundwater Management. GRAC, Sacramento, 

California. 

Hanak Ellen. 2002. California's Water Market, By the Numbers. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of 

California. 36 p. 

Hanak Ellen. 2003. Who Should Be Allowed to Sell Water in California? Third-party Issues and the Water Market. 

San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California. 196 p. 

Hayes P.D. and others. 1999. Water Resources Data - California, Water Year 1998 Vol 3. Sacramento: US 

Geological Survey. 

Heath Ralph C. 1983. Basic Ground-Water Hydrology. US Geological Survey. Water-Supply Paper 2220. 

Hess W.N. 1974. Weather and Climate Modification. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. 842 p. 

Hildebrand Gary, (Los Angeles County. Department of Public Works). 2003. 

Hogue Cheryl. 2003. Rocket-Fueled River. Chemical and Engineering News 81(33):37-46. 

Howe K. 2003 Feb 17. Carmel River Dam in danger. Monterey County Herald. 

Hydrologics. 2003. Operational Modeling. Prepared for El Dorado Irrigation District. 

[IPCC] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2001. The Scientific Basis: IPCC Third Assessment Report. 

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 

Jahagirdar S. 2003. Down the Drain. Los Angeles, CA: Environmental California Research and Policy Center. 25 p. 

Jarma A. 2003 Apr 10. Nacimiento drawdown approved. San Luis Obispo County Tribune. 

Jenkins Marion W et al. 2001. Improving California Water Management: Optimizing Value and Flexibility. 

University of California Davis. 

Johns G. 2003. Where is California Taking Water Transfers. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 

129(1):5. 

Kasler D. 2002 Jul 14. Kern, a Hub of the Water Trade. Sacramento Bee. 

[KCWA] Kern County Water Agency. Water Age newsletter. 

[KCWA] Kern County Water Agency. 2002. Annual Water Supply Reports, 1998. 

[KCWA] Kern County Water Agency. 2003. Annual Water Supply Reports, 1999. 

Kelley Robert. 1998. Battling the Inland Sea. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 

Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Antelope Valley Water Group. 1995. Antelope Valley Water Resource Study. 

Kessler John S (Kessler and Associates LLC). 2003. Personal communication. 

Knowles Noah, Cayan D. 2002. Global Climate Change: Potential Effects on the Sacramento/San Joaquin 

Watershed and the San Francisco Estuary. Geophysical Research Letters 29(18). Availability: 

http://cirrus.ucsd.edu/~pierce/crd/globalwarming/knowles_cayan_2002.pdf. 

Kuminoff NV, AD Sokolow, and DA Sumner. 2001. Farmland Conversion: Perceptions and Realities. Agricultural 

Issues Center, Issues Brief(No 16). Availability: http://aic.ucdavis.edu/pub/briefs/brief16.pdf. 

Laird [The Honorable] J (Assembly Member D-Santa Cruz 27th District). 2003 Jun 22. Commentary: SB 149 will 

not solve the Peninsula's water problems. Monterey County Herald. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Public Review Draft California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies 

 References 

References 

Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 27-10

Lawton K. 2003. In the Year 2013... Farm Industry News. 

Lerner P. 2003 May 4. Whither the Lawn: What Southern California's Booming Population and Looming Water 

Crisis Mean for the Great Green Carpet of Suburbia. Los Angeles Times. 

Los Angeles (City of). 1992. A Consensus Approach to Water Rates. 

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. 2003. Urban Water Management Plan: Fiscal Year 2002-2003 

Annual Update. 

Los Angeles Times Editorial Desk. 2001 Oct 16. Why Land Retirement Makes Sense for Westlands WD. Los 

Angeles Times. 

Maddaus William, Gleason Gwendolyn, Darmody John. 1999. Integrating Conservation into Water Supply 

Planning. Bloomfield, CO: MWH. 

Madrid Carlos. 1988. Artificial Ground Water Recharge in Southern California. In: Finlayson AIJaDJ, editor. 

Artificial Recharge of Ground Water: American Society of Civil Engineers. 

McKinney J. 2003. California Hydropower System: Energy and Environment. California Energy Commission. 

Environmental Performance Report. Appendix D. Oct. 

McMahan Nicki. 1998. Preserving Agricultural Land in the Monterey Bay Area - Who's Doing What and How You 

Can Help. Landwatch Monterey County. 

McNiesh C. 2003 Sep 24. Stopping Seawater Intrusion. Watsonville Register-Pajaronian. 

[MCWRA] Monterey County Water Resources Agency. 1995-1998. Groundwater Extraction Reports. Salinas. 

Mead & Hunt. 2003. FERC Economic Analysis Critique--El Dorado Hydroelectric Project. Prepared for El Dorado 

Irrigation District. 

Mitchell David L and W. Michael Hanemann. 1994. Setting Urban Water Rates for Efficiency and Conservation: A 

Discussion of Issues.: California Urban Water Conservation Council. 

Monterey County. 1999. Draft Monterey Co. Existing Conditions Report. Monterey. 

Monterey County. 2002. Monterey County General Plan. Monterey. 

Montgomery Watson. 2001. Palmdale Water District Final Water System Master Plan. 

Moran D. 2003 Apr 4. Plans for desalination plants move forward. Monterey County Herald. 

Moran D. 2003 Jul 9. Water supply bill could be tied to affordable housing. Monterey County Herald. 

Moran D and K Ramsayer. 2003 Apr 27. River of Slow Return. Monterey County Herald. 

[MPWMD] Monterey Peninsula Water Management District. 2001. Water Allocation EIR. Salinas. 

[MPWMD] Monterey Peninsula Water Management District. 2002. Annual Report. 

http://www.mpwmd.dst.ca.us/annrpt02/annrpt2002.htm. 

Mullin J, Nady P. 1985. Water Budgets for Major Streams in the Central Valley California 1961-77. Sacramento: 

US Geological Survey. 87 p. 

[MWD] Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Local Resources Program. 

http://www.mwdh2o.com/mwdh2o/pages/yourwater/sb60/old/sb60%5Frecycling.html. 

[MWD] Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. 2004. Annual Progress Report to the California State 

Legislature: Snapshots of the Past...Portrait of a New Reality. 

National Governors Association, Center for Best Practices. Private Lands, Public Benefits: A Policy Summit on 

Working Lands Conservation; 2001 Mar 16; Washington D.C. 

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices. 2001. Private Lands, Public Benefits: Principles for 

Advancing Working Lands Conservation. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies Public Review Draft 

References 

27-11 Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1998. Climatological Data California December 1997. 

Asheville, NC: US Department of Commerce. 75 p. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1999. Climatological Data California December 1998. 

Asheville, NC: US Department of Commerce. 75 p. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2000. Climatological Data California December 1999. 

Asheville, NC: US Department of Commerce. 75 p. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2001. Climatological Data California December 2000. 

Asheville, NC: US Department of Commerce. 75 p. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2002. Climatological Data California December 2001. 

Asheville, NC: US Department of Commerce. 75 p. 

National Research Council. 2003. Critical Issues on Weather Modification Research. Washington, DC: The National 

Academies Press. 

National Water Research Institute. 2003. Seawater Desalination: Opportunities and Challenges-Workshop Report. 

Natural Heritage Institute. 1998. Feasibility Study of a Maximal Program of Groundwater Banking. Dec. 

Natural Heritage Institute. 2000. Designing Successful Groundwater Banking Programs in the Central Valley. Feb. 

Natural Heritage Institute. 2001. The Hydrogeological Suitability of Potential Groundwater Banking Sites in the 

Central Valley. 

Natural Heritage Institute. 2002. Estimating the Potential for In-Lieu Conjunctive Management in the Central 

Valley. Feb. 

Newlin BD, MW Jenkins, JR Lund, RE Howitt. 2002. Southern California Water Markets: Potential and 

Limitations. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 128(1):21-32. 

Newton M, Crowley K, Curry D. 2001. Environmental Water Account, Need for Legislation Definition and 

Oversight. Sacramento: California Legislative Analyst's Office. 12 p. 

North American Interstate Weather Modification Council. 2004. Response to "Critical Issues in Weather 

Modification Research, A Report by the National Research Council". 

Obasi GOP (Secretary-General). 1999. Statement at the Italian Senate Hearing on Weather Modification on WMO's 

Activities on Weather Modification. Geneva, Switzerland: World Meterological Organization. p 8. 

O'Connell J. 2003. Down on the Farm. California Journal. 

[OEHHA] Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment of California Environmental Protection Agency and 

The Resources Agency. 2002. Environmental Protection Indicators for California (EPIC). 282 p. 

[OPR] California Governor's Office of Planning and Research. 2003. Governor's Environmental Goals and Policy 

Report. Nov. Availability: http://www.opr.ca.gov/EnvGoals/PDFs/EGPR--11-10-03.pdf. 

[OPR] California Governor's Office of Planning and Research. 2003. State of California General Plan Guidelines. 

290 p. Oct. Availability: http://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/PDFs/General_Plan_Guidelines_2003.pdf. 

[OPR and DWR] California Governor's Office of Planning and Research and California Department of Water 

Resources. 1979. The California Water Atlas. Sacramento: Distributed by William Kaufmann of Los Altos, 

Calif. 

Parsons J. 1987. A Geographer Looks at the San Joaquin Valley. UC Berkeley. 

Parsons L. 2003 Jan 15. Water project vote set. Salinas Californian. 

Parsons L. 2003 Feb 13. Cal-Am OKs Moss Landing desal plant. Salinas Californian. 

Parsons L. 2003 Apr 9. 85 Percent of Ballots Approve It. Salinas Californian. 

Pitt R., S. Clark, K. Parmer. 1994. Potential Groundwater Contamination from Intentional and Non-intentional 

Stormwater Infiltration. Upland, Penn.: Diane Press. 120 p. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Public Review Draft California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies 

 References 

References 

Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 27-12

Pollock D. 2003 Mar 9. Uprooted Vines, Overturned Lives. 

[PPIC] Public Policy Institute of California. 2003. What Should the State Do About California's Infrastructure. San 

Francisco. 2 p. 

[PPIC] Public Policy Institute of California. 2004. PPIC Statewide Survey: Special Survey of the Central Valley. 

Public Research Institute. 1998. The Boating Clean and Green Survey, California Coastal Commission. 

[PVWMA] Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency. Basin Management Plan. Watsonville. 

[PVWMA] Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency. 2002. Revised Basin Management Plan. Watsonville. 

[PVWMA] Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency. 2002. Study of Applied Water by Selected Crops. 

Watsonville. 

[PVWMA] Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency. 2002. Total Water Use Study 1998-2001 (preliminary data). 

Watsonville. 

Ramanathan V, PJ Crutzen, JT Kiehl, D Rosenfeld. 2001. Aerosols, Climate, and the Hydrologic Cycle. Science. 

Reason Foundation. 1993. Water-Utility Regulation: Rates and Cost Recovery. 

Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley. Basin Plans. 

www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb5/available_documents. 

Regional Water Quality Control Board, Various regions. Water Quality Control Plans. 

Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast. 2002. Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Water Quality 

Issues in the Los Osos Community. http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb3/WMI/LosOsos/FAQ1.pdf. 

Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast. 2002. Watershed Management Initiative. 

Rourke Daniel (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District). 2003. 

Salinas Californian Editorial Staff. 2003 Feb 7. Votes 'Yes' on Salinas Valley Water Projects. Salinas Californian. 

Salinas Californian Staff. 2003 Jan 24. District to buy Central Valley water for $25M. Salinas Californian. 

San Francisco Estuary Institute. 2003. The Pulse of the Estuary: Monitoring and Managing Contamination in the 

San Francisco Estuary. Oakland. 

Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority. 2002. Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Plan. 

Santa Barbara County Water Agency. 2000. Water Resources of Santa Barbara County. Santa Barbara. 

Santa Clarita Valley Water Purveyors. Annual Report. 

Seals B. 2003 Feb 23. Water woes cause area to give desalination plants a second look. Santa Cruz Sentinel. 

Seals B. 2003 Apr 6. Sea water may quench Central Coast's thirst. Santa Cruz Sentinel. 

[SFPUC] San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. Fact Sheet: Proposal to Rebuild San Francisco’s Water 

System. http://sfwater.org/detail.cfm/MSC_ID/6/MTO_ID/38/MC_ID/7/C_ID/543/holdSession/1. 

Shaffer B and others. 2000. Central Valley Wetlands Water Supply Investigations, CVPIA 3406 (d)(6)(A,B), A 

Report to Congress. US Fish and Wildlife Service and US Bureau of Reclamation. 

Shapiro Neal (City of Santa Monica). 2003. Personal communication 

Sherman Leroy K, George W. Musgrave. 1942. Infiltration. In: Meinzer OE, editor. Hydrology. New York: Dover 

Publications Inc. 

Smith F. 1980. A short review of the status of riparian forests in California. In: Sands A, editor. Riparian Forests in 

California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 

Smith R. 1994. Sinking and Swimming in Water Policy. Regulation: The Cato Review of Business & Government 

17(3). 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies Public Review Draft 

References 

27-13 Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 

Smithson JR and others. 2002. Water Resources Data - California, Water Year 2001. Vol 3. Sacramento: US 

Geological Survey. 

Sneed D. 2003 Jun 1. Aquifer troubles alarming Paso. San Luis Obispo Tribune. 

Snyder RL and others. 2002. Crop Coefficients. 

Stanislaus Council of Governments. 2002. Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for 2001 Regional 

Transportation Plan (RTP). Modesto. 

Stapley G. 2003 Mar 16. Dryspell for Wells. Modesto Bee. 

Starr Kevin. 2000. California: the Dream and the Challenge in the Twenty-first Century. Essay. Availability: 

http://www.ca.gov/state/portal/myca_homepage.jsp Link: History and Culture of California. 

State of California. Water Resources Board. 1954. Placer County Investigation. Bulletin 10. Jul 

State Water Conservation Coalition, Reclamation/Reuse Task Force, Bay Delta Reclamation Sub-Work Group. 

1991. Water Recycling 2000: California's Plan for the Future. 

Statutes of 2001 (California), ch 642. (Senate Bill 221), an act to amend § 11010 of the Business and Professions 

Code, and to amend § 65867.5 of, and to add §§ 66455.3 and 66473.7 to, the Government Code, relating to 

land use. 

http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=97580825206+8+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

Statutes of 2001 (California), ch. 643. (Senate Bill 610), an act to amend § 21151.9 of the Public Resources Code, 

and to amend §§ 10631, 10656, 10910, 10911, 10912, and 10915 of, to repeal § 10913 of, and to add and 

repeal Section 10657 of, the Water Code, relating to water. 

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/sb_0601-0650/sb_610_bill_20011009_chaptered.html

Statutes of 2002 (California), ch. 1016. (Assembly Bill 857), an act to amend §§ 13102, 13103, 65041, 65042, 

65048, 65049, and 66037 of, and to add §§ 65041.1 and 65404 to, the Government Code, relating to state 

planning. 

http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=97596026162+3+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

Swift CC, Haglund TR , Ruiz M , and Fisher RN. 1993. The status and distribution of freshwater fishes of Southern 

California. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 92:101-167. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board. 1995. Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco 

Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary. Sacramento. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board. 1999. A Guide to Water Transfers. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board. 2002. Addressing the Need to Protect California's Watersheds: 

Working with Local Partnerships, Report to the Legislature (as required by AB 2117, Chapter 735, Statutes 

of 2000). Apr. Availability: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/legislative/docs/ab2117legrptdraft032102.pdf. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board. 2002. Water Transfer Issues in California: Final Report to the 

California State Water Resources Control Board by the Water Transfer Workgroup. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board. 2003. California 305(b) Report on Water Quality 2002. California 

Environmental Protection Agency. 246 p. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board. 2003. A Comprehensive Goundwater Quality Monitoring Program 

for California (AB 599 Report to the Governor and Legislature). California Environmental Protection 

Agency. 98 p. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board. 2003. California Municipal Wastewater Reclamation Survey. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board. 2003. California Nonpoint Source Program Five-Year 

Implementation Plan July 2003 through June 2008. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board. 2003. Municipal Wastewater Recycling Survey. 

http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/recycling/recyfund/munirec/index.html. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Public Review Draft California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies 

 References 

References 

Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 27-14

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board, California Coastal Commission. 2000. Nonpoint Source Program 

Strategy and Implementation Plan, 1998-2013 (PROSIP). 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board, Office of Water Recycling. 2000. California State Water 

Resources Control Board Municipal Wastewater Reclamation Survey. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board, Office of Water Recycling. 2002. Municipal Wastewater 

Reclamation Survey. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board, Regional Water Quality Control Boards. 2001. Strategic Plan. 

California Environmental Protection Agency. 28 p. 

Taugher M. 2004 Jan 31. Los Vaqueros expansion debate hits boiling point. Contra Costa Times. 

Thompson Willard (Pacific Coast Producers). 2001. California's Water Woes. 

http://www.pcoastp.com/news/newslst_detail.asp?news_id=36. 

Tule River Association. 1999. Annual Report, 1998 Water Year. Porterville, CA. 

Tule River Association. 2001. Annual Report, 2000 Water Year. Porterville, CA. 

Tule River Association. 2002. Annual Report, 2001 Water Year. Porterville, CA. 

UC Cooperative Extension, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Cost and return studies on field, 

orchard, vineyard, truck, pasture, and rice crops. 

UC Cooperative Extension, Vegetable Research and Information Center. Vegetable Crop Series. 

Umbach K. 2002. San Joaquin Valley: Selected Statistics on Population, Economy, and Environment. California 

Research Bureau. 79 p. 

Umbach Kenneth W PhD. 1998. A Statistical Tour of California's Great Central Valley - 1998: Prepared at the 

Request of Assembly Member Dennis Cardoza. http://www.library.ca.gov/CRB/97/09/. 

US Bureau of Census. 2000. Census. 

US Bureau of Land Management. 2003. Draft Environmental Impact Report and Statement for the West Mojave 

Plan. 

US Department of Energy. 1998. Performance Based Contracting Guide. 

US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. NIOSH Pocket Guide 

to Chemical Hazards (NPG). www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npg.html. 

US General Services Administration. Federal Water Recycling Program. 

http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/contentView.do?contentType=GSA_OVERVIEW&contentId=11574&n

oc=T. 

[USACE] US Army Corps of Engineers. 2002. Conjunctive Use for Flood Protection. 

[USACE] US Army Corps of Engineers, The Reclamation Board (California). 2002. Sacramento and San Joaquin 

River Basins California Comprehensive Study. Interim Report. Sacramento. Dec 20. Availability: 

www.compstudy.org. 

[USACE and others] US Army Corps of Engineers, The Reclamation Board, California Bay-Delta Authority. 2004. 

Hamilton City Flood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration, California. Draft Feasibility Report 

and Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report. Mar. Availability: 

http://www.spk.usace.army.mil/civ/compstudy/docs/hamiltoncity_draft_eiseir/hamiltoncity_draft_eiseir_fu

ll.pdf. 

[USACE and VCWPD] US Army Corps of Engineers (Los Angeles District) and Ventura County Watershed 

Protection District [VCWPD]. 2004. Matilija Dam Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study. 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. 705 Report. 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation, Central Valley Operations Office. Report of Operations Monthly Delivery 

Tables. http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/vungvari/deliv.html. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies Public Review Draft 

References 

27-15 Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. Central Valley Operations Water Deliveries from the CVP [online]. 

http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/vungvari/deliv.html. 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. 1981. Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project: Environmental Assessment and Finding 

of No Significant Impact. Denver. 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. 1997. Incentive Pricing Handbook for Agricultural Districts. Washington, DC: 

Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of the Interior. 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. 2000. Southern California Comprehensive Water Reclamation and Reuse 

Study, Phase II. Final Report (Draft). 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. 2001. Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report, 

Grassland Bypass Project, Executive Overview. 11 p. 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. 2003. "Drought or Opportunity." Remarks prepared for delivery by John W. 

Keys, III, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation; Dec 12; Las Vegas, Nev: Colorado River Water Users 

Association 2003 Annual Meeting. Availability: http://www.usbr.gov/main/news/speeches/03-12-12.html

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. 2003. Truckee River Operating Agreement (TROA). 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. 2003. Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation Draft Phase I 

Investigation Report, Initial Surface Storage Options Screenings. 

[USDA] US Department of Agriculture. 2004. NRCS Activities in the Klamath River Basin. 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/feature/klamath/. Accessed on May 21, 2004. 

[USDA] US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1994. State Soil Geographic 

Database (STATSGO) for California. 

[USDA] US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Cartography and 

Geospatial Center. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database (for Alameda, Contra Costa, El Dorado, 

Marin, Mendocino, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma, Sutter, 

Yolo, and Yuba counties). http://www.ncgc.nrcs.usda.gov/branch/ssb/products/ssurgo/. 

[USDA] US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Pacific Southwest Major Land 

Resource Area Soil Survey Office Region #2. Soil Surveys (of all or part of Alameda, Amador, Contra 

Costa, El Dorado, Marin, Mendocino, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Santa Clara, 

Solano, Sonoma, Sutter, Yolo, and Yuba counties). http://www.ca.nrcs.usda.gov/mlra02/. 

[USFS] US Forest Service. 1996. Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project Report. 

[USFWS] US Fish and Wildlife Service. Grassland Bypass Project Contaminants Investigation. 

http://sacramento.fws.gov/ec/grassland.htm. 

[USFWS] US Fish and Wildlife Service. Salinas River National Wildlife Refuge, Draft Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment. 105 p. 

[USGS] US Geological Survey. National Water Quality Assessment Program. http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/. 

[USGS] US Geological Survey. 1995. Potential for Chemical Transport beneath a Storm Runoff Recharge 

(Retention) Basin for an Industrial Catchment in Fresno, California. 

[USGS] US Geological Survey. 2002. Artificial Recharge Workshop Proceedings, Sacramento, California, April 2-

4. Open-File Report 02-89. 

[USGS] US Geological Survey. 2002. Assessing Ground-Water Vulnerability to Contamination: Providing 

Scientifically Defensible Information for Decision Makers. USGS Circular 1224. 

[USGS] US Geological Survey. 2002. Ground Water and Surface Water, A Single Resource. USGS Circular 1139. 

[USGS] US Geological Survey. 2003. Earthquake Probabilities in the San Francisco Bay Region: 2002-2031. By 

Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities. Open-File Report 03-214. Availability: 

http://geopubs.wr.usgs.gov/open-file/of03-214/. 

Visalia Times-Delta Editorial Staff. 2003 Apr 30. Living with Cows and Living with People. Visalia Times-Delta. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Public Review Draft California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies 

 References 

References 

Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 27-16

Walsh D. 2003 May 6. Federal Suit Aims to Halt Resort. Sacramento Bee. 

Water Desalination Task Force. (Stats. 2002, ch 957) California Water Code § 12949.6 (2002) 

Water Education Foundation. 1997. Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin Study. 

Water Education Foundation. 2000. Layperson's Guide to the Delta. 

Water Education Foundation. 2003. Tapping the World's Largest Reservoir: Desalination. Western Water Jan/Feb. 

Water Resources Center (University of California). Biennial Groundwater Conference and Annual Meeting of the 

Groundwater Resources Association of California Abstracts; 2001. 

Weather Modification Association. 2004. Response to "Critical Issues in Weather Modification Research," report of 

a review panel. Journal of Weather Modification 36:53-82. 

Westlands Water District. Annual Reports. http://www.westlandswater.org/wwd/default2.asp?cwide=1024. 

Westlands Water District. 2001. Annual Report 2000/2001. 17 p. 

Westlands Water District. 2001. Water Resources Inventory. Fresno. 

Whipple D. 2003 Analysis: Land Use Climate Change Linked. UPI. 

Whitcomb John B PhD, Bill Hoffman, Jane H. Ploeser. 2001. BMP 9 Handbook: A Guide to Implementing 

Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional Water Conservation Programs as Specified in Best Management 

Practice 9. Sacramento: Prepared for the California Urban Water Conservation Council. 30 p. 

Whitcomb John B PhD. 2003. Urban CII Landscape Water Use and Efficiency in California. Sacramento: Prepared 

for California Landscape Contractors Association. 8 p. 

White B. 2003 Jul 24. Ground broken for Woodward water plant. Modesto Bee. 

Wilber Monique. 2003. Californians Without Safe Water. Sacramento: California Department of Water Resources. 

43 p. 

Wilkinson R. 2000. Methodology for Analysis of the Energy Intensity of California's Water Systems and An 

Assessment of Multiple Potential Benefits Through Integrated Water-Energy Efficiency Measures. 

California Institute for Energy Efficiency, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Jan. 

Williams (Dr.) Brian. 2004. Assessment of the Environmental Toxicity of Silver Iodide and Indium Iodide. Cooma, 

NSW, Australia: Snowy Hydro Limited. 

Wolff Jane. 2003. Delta Primer, a field guide to the California Delta. San Francisco: William Stout Publishers. 

196 p. 

Woodman DJ, Provost JR. 1999. Watermaster Report 1997-1998. Fresno: Kings River Water Association. 

Woodman DJ, Provost JR. 2000. Watermaster Report 1998-1999. Fresno: Kings River Water Association. 

Woodman DJ, Provost JR. 2001. Watermaster Report 2000-2001. Fresno: Kings River Water Association. 

Woodman DJ, Provost JR. 2002. Watermaster Report 2001-2002. Fresno: Kings River Water Association. 

World Meterological Organization. Statement on the Status of Weather Modificiation, Report to the 53rd session of 

the Executive Council, Annex III. http://www.wmo.ch/index-en.html. 

Yap F. 2003 Jun 26. Atascadero Development Must Include Cheaper Housing. San Luis Obispo Tribune. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies Public Review Draft 

References 

27-17 Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 

Web sites 

Agricultural Water Management Council. [Web site]. http://www.agwatercouncil.org/. 

Alameda County Water District. [Web site]. http://www.acwd.org/. 

American Farmland Trust. California Central Coast Region Narrative [Web site]. http://www.farmland.org. 

Association of California Water Agencies. [Web site]. www.acwanet.com. 

CALFED Bay-Delta Program. Los Vaqueros Reservoir Enlargement [Web site]. http://www.lvstudies.com. 

California Cattlemen's Association. [Web site]. http://www.calcattlemen.org/. 

California Central Valley Economic Development Corporation. [Web site]. http://www.californiacv.com/. 

California Coastal Commission. [Web site]. http://www.coastal.ca.gov/. 

California County Agricultural Commissioners. Annual. County Annual Crop Reports [Web site]. 

http://www.nass.usda.gov/ca/bul/agcom/indexcav.htm. 

California Department of Food and Agriculture. [Web site]. http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/. 

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The California Fire Plan [Web site]. 

http://www.fire.ca.gov/FireEmergencyResponse/FirePlan/FirePlan.asp. 

California Energy Commission. California Energy Center [Web site]. http://www.consumerenergycenter.com/. 

California Farm Water Coalition. [Web site]. http://www.farmwater.org/. 

California Polytechnic State University. Irrigation Training and Research Center (ITRC) [Web site]. 

http://www.itrc.org/. 

California State University Fresno. Center for Irrigation Technology (CIT) [Web site]. 

http://www.atinet.org/newcati/cit/. 

California Urban Water Conservation Council. [Web site]. http://www.cuwcc.org/home.html. 

[CBDA] California Bay-Delta Authority. [Web site]. http://calwater.ca.gov. 

[CDC] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [Web 

site]. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npg.html. 

[CDHS] California Department of Health Services. List of Drinking Water Contaminants and MCLs [Web site]. 

http://www.dhs.ca.gov/ps/ddwem/chemicals/mcl/mclindex.htm. 

[CDHS] California Department of Health Services. Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List [Web site]. 

http://www.dhs.ca.gov/ps/ddwem/chemicals/DLR/dlrindex.htm. 

[CDHS] California Department of Health Services. Regulations and Guidance [Web site]. 

http://www.applications.dhs.ca.gov/regulations/. 

Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy. [Web site]. http://www.ccsce.com/. 

[CERES] California Environmental Resources Evaluation System. 2004. California Natural Diversity Database. 

California's Plantlife [Web site]. http://ceres.ca.gov/ceres/calweb/plantlife.html. Accessed on April 15 and 

May 22, 2004. 

[CERES] California Environmental Resources Evaluation System. Links to California county information [Web 

site]. http://ceres.ca.gov/planning/counties. 

Delta Protection Commission. [Web site]. www.delta.ca.gov. 

[DFG] California Department of Fish and Game, License and Revenue Branch. [Web site]. 

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/licensing/index.html. 

[DWR] California Department of Water Resources. Grants and loans [Web site]. 

http://www.grantsloans.water.ca.gov/choose/index.cfm. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Public Review Draft California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies 

 References 

References 

Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 27-18

[DWR] California Department of Water Resources. North-of-the-Delta Offstream Storage [Web site]. 

http://www.storage.water.ca.gov/northdelta/index.cfm. 

[DWR] California Department of Water Resources. In-Delta Storage [Web site]. 

http://www.storage.water.ca.gov/indelta/index.cfm. 

[DWR] California Department of Water Resources. Office of Water Use Efficiency [Web site]. 

http://wwwowue.water.ca.gov/. Mar. 

[DWR] California Department of Water Resources. Groundwater laws and legislation [Web site]. 

http://www.groundwater.water.ca.gov/water_laws/index.cfm. 

[DWR] California Department of Water Resources, Division of Planning and Local Assistance, Statewide Water 

Planning. Agricultural and Urban Water Use [Web site]. 

http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/landwateruse/wateruse/wuindex.htm. 

Economy.com. [Web site]. www.dismal.com. 

Environmental Design Library. California Planning Online [Web site]. 

http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/ENVI/calplan.html. 

[EPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Ground water and drinking water. Perchlorate. [Web site]. 

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/ccl/perchlorate/perchlorate.html. Jan 23. 

Farmington Groundwater Recharge Program. [Web site]. http://www.farmingtonprogram.org/. 

Faultline: California's Environmental Magazine. [Web site]. http://www.faultline.org/index.html. 

[FWUA] Friant Water Users Authority. [Web site]. Friant Waterline: The Journal of the Friant Water Users 

Authority. http://www.fwua.org/

Giannini Foundation. [Web site]. http://giannini.ucop.edu/. 

Groundwater Replenishment System. [Web site]. http://www.gwrsystem.com/. 

LandWatch Monterey County. [Web site]. http://www.mclw.org/. 

Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program. [Web site]. http://www.lcrmscp.org/. 

National Agricultural Compliance Assistance Center. [Web site]. http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/index.html. 

Rand Corp. [Web site]. http://ca.rand.org/cgi-bin/homepage.cgi. 

Sacramento River Watershed Program. [Web site] http://www.sacriver.org/. 

San Diego County Water Authority. Recycled Water [Web site]. http://www.sdcwa.org/manage/sourcesrecycling.phtml. 

Shaw John A (Dr.). [Web site]. http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~johnsh/. 

Stewardship America. [Web site]. http://www.privatelands.org/index.htm. 

[SWRCB] State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Clean Water Programs. Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program [Web site]. www.swrcb.ca.gov/gama/. 

University of California Agricultural Issues Center. [Web site]. http://www.aic.ucdavis.edu/. 

University of California Cooperative Extension. Agriculture and Natural Resources [Web site]. 

http://ucanr.org/CES.CEA.shtml. 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. Watershare Program [Web site]. http://www.usbr.gov/mp/watershare/. 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigations [Web site]. 

http://www.usbr.gov/mp/slwri. 

[USBR] US Bureau of Reclamation. Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation [Web site]. 

http://www.usbr.gov/mp/sccao/storage. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005 Volume 2 – Resource Management Strategies Public Review Draft 

References 

27-19 Citations to the World Wide Web (URL) were accurate at the time of writing 

[USDA] US Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Research Service [Web site]. 

http://pwa.ars.usda.gov/locations.shtml. 

[USDA] US Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Services [Web site]. www.nrcs.usda.gov. 

[USDA] US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Recreational activities [Web site]. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/map/state_list.shtml#California. 

[USGS] US Geological Survey. [Web site]. http://www.usgs.gov/. 

[USGS] US Geological Survey. Water Resources Data and Water-Data Reports [Web site]. 

http://water.usgs.gov/pubs/wdr/#CA. 

Water Infrastructure Network. [Web site]. http://www.win-water.org/. 

WateReuse Association. [Web site]. http://www.watereuse.org/. 

Westlands Water District. [Web site]. http://www.westlandswater.org/wwd/default2.asp?cwide=1024. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1

California Water Plan Update 2005

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
The California Water Plan Update 2005 

is organized in five volumes:

Volume 1: Strategic Plan 

Volume 2: 25 Resource Management Strategies 

Volume 3: 12 Regional Reports 

Volume 4: Reference Guide (60+ articles) 

Volume 5: Technical Guide (Online documentation)

The final California Water Plan Update 2005 and the Water Plan Highlights briefing book were completed in 

December 2005. The five volumes of the update, the Highlights document, and the introductory video, “Water for 

Tomorrow,” are contained on the CD and DVD below and also available online at www.waterplan.water.ca.gov.

Printed copies are available. The Highlights briefing book, which contains the CD and DVD, is available at 

no charge. Volume 1, 2, and 3 are $15 each. Volume 4 is $50. For printed copies, contact:

California Department of Water Resources 

Attn: Publications and Paperwork Management Office 

P.O. Box 942836 

Sacramento, CA 94236-0001 

(916) 653-1097

For online order form, go to www.publicaffairs.water.ca.gov/information/pubs.cfm

If you need this publication in alternate form, contact the Public Affairs Office, 1-800-272-8869.

Cover photographs: DWR Graphic Services, Photography Unit.

Cover design: Chris Sanchez.

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
State of California 

The Resources Agency 

Department of Water Resources

California Water Plan

Update 2005

A Framework for Action

Bulletin 160-05

December 2005

 Arnold Schwarzenegger Mike Chrisman Lester A. Snow

Governor Secretary for Resources Director 

State of California The Resources Agency Department of Water Resources

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 3

California Water Plan Update 2005

Volume 3 – Regional Reports

Chapter 1 State Summary 

Chapter 2 North Coast Hydrologic Region 

Chapter 3 San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Region 

Chapter 4 Central Coast Hydrologic Region 

Chapter 5 South Coast Hydrologic Region 

Chapter 6 Sacramento River Hydrologic Region 

Chapter 7 San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region 

Chapter 8 Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region 

Chapter 9 North Lahontan Hydrologic Region 

Chapter 10 South Lahontan Hydrologic Region 

Chapter 11 Colorado River Hydrologic Region 

Chapter 12 Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta 

Chapter 13 Mountain Counties 

Glossary 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 State Summary 

Volume 3 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 i

California Water Plan Update 2005

Chapter 1 State Summary

Contents 

Chapter 1 State Summary ........ 1-1

Hydrologic Regions ............. 1-1

Overlay Areas .................... 1-2

Coordination of Regional Reports .........................................................................................................................1-4

Hydrology for Current Conditions .........................................................................................................................1-5

Water Portfolios .................. 1-6

 Applied Water Methodology ...........................................................................................................................1-8

Statewide Water Balance Summary ....................................................................................................................1-10

Statewide Water Portfolio Results for Years 1998 (Wet), 2000 (Average), and 2001 (Dry) ......................................1-15

Statewide Water Data Needs .............................................................................................................................1-16

Boxes 

Box 1-1 California’s 10 Hydrologic Regions ..............................................................................................................1-1

Box 1-2 Acronyms Used in State Summary ...............................................................................................................1-2

Box 1-3 Two Overlay Areas ..... 1-4

Box 1-4 Water Portfolio Components ........................................................................................................................1-8

Box 1-5 Key Water Supply and Use Definitions .......................................................................................................1-10

Figures 

Figure 1-1 State of California (map) .........................................................................................................................1-ii

Figure 1-2 Hydrologic regions with Mountain Counties and Legal Delta ......................................................................1-3

Figure 1-3 Mountain Counties and Legal Delta overlays .............................................................................................1-4

Figure 1-4 Range of average annual precipitation across regions, 1961-1990 ............................................................1-5

Figure 1-5 Range of actual precipitation across regions, 1998 ...................................................................................1-5

Figure 1-6 Range of actual precipitation across regions, 2000 ...................................................................................1-6

Figure 1-7 Range of actual precipitation across regions, 2001 ...................................................................................1-6

Figure 1-8 State of California population ..................................................................................................................1-7

Figure 1-9 Regional inflows and outflows, year 2000 (an average water year) ............................................................1-9

Figure 1-10 California water balance for water years 1998, 2000, 2001 (2 bar charts) ............................................1-13

Figure 1-11 California - illustrated water flow diagram ............................................................................................1-19

Figure 1-12 California - schematic water flow diagram ............................................................................................1-20

Tables 

Table 1-1 California water summary ......................................................................................................................1-11

Table 1-2 State of California water balance summary .............................................................................................1-12

Table 1-3 California water use and distribution of dedicated supplies ........................................................................1-14

Table 1-4 California water portfolios .......................................................................................................................1-18

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Volume 3 Regional Reports

California Water Plan Update 2005

FRESNO INYO

TULARE

KINGS

SAN LUIS

OBISPO

KERN

VENTURA

LOS ANGELES

SAN BERNARDINO

ORANGE

RIVERSIDE

SAN DIEGO IMPERIAL

SANTA BARBARA

HUMBOLDT

TRINITY

TEHAMA

GLENN

LAKE

SONOMA

COLUSA

BUTTE

YUBA

SUTTER

NEVADA

SIERRA

SACRAMENTO

YOLO

NAPA

SOLANO

PLACER

EL DORADO

ALPINE

MONO

MARIPOSA

MERCED

MADERA

SAN

BENITO

MONTEREY

CALAVERAS

SAN

JOAQUIN

CONTRA

COSTA

ALAMEDA

SANTA

CLARA

SANTA

CRUZ

SAN

MATEO

MARIN

SAN

FRANCISCO

TUOLUMNE

STANISLAUS

MENDOCINO

PLUMAS

AMADOR

SISKYOU MODOC

SHASTA LASSEN

DEL

NORTE

Some Statistics

 Area - 158,552 square miles 

 Average annual precipitation - 22.9 inches

 Regional Precipitation range - 5.7 to 50.6 inches

 Year 2000 population - 34,088,135

 2030 population projection - 48,110,700

 Total reservoir storage capacity - 40,741 TAF

 2000 irrigated crop area - 9,511,850 acres

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Flow in TAF

1998

2,105

2000

1,498

2001

998

Inflow from Oregon

Flow in TAF

1998

184

2000

114

2001

66

Outflow to Oregon

Flow in TAF

1998

1,391

2000

754

2001

552

Outflow to Nevada

Inflow from Mexico

Flow in TAF

1998

182

2000

166

2001

155

Inflow from Colorado River

Flow in TAF

1998

4,896

2000

5,349

2001

5,197

Figure 1-1 State of California

The third largest state, California has a variety of landforms and climates. Annual rainfall ranges from more than 140 inches in the north coast to 

less than 4 inches in the southeastern part. Arrows indicate annual flows entering and leaving the region for water years 1998, 2000, and 2001.

*Outflow to Ocean includes Wild and Scenic Rivers, regulated flows, and estimated wastewater outflows.

Flow in TAF

1998

87,567

2000

43,413

2001

20,155

Outflow to Ocean*

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 1

California Water Plan Update 2005

This volume contains a statewide summary of water supply and water-use information for 1998, 2000 and 2001, followed 

by 12 individual regional reports. Ten reports summarize California’s hydrologic regions. Two additional reports are included 

— one for the Mountain Counties region and another for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region. These two reports describe 

areas with significant water issues that overlay parts of the other hydrologic regions. These 12 regional reports provide information on the current water supplies and uses in each area, as well as a discussion of the water issues, accomplishments, 

and challenges that are specific to each region of California. Figure 1-1 provides a geographic overview of California and 

summarizes surface water inflows and outflows with adjoining states.

Chapter 1 State Summary

10 hydrologic regions, corresponding to the state’s major 

water drainage basins. Using the drainage basins as planning 

boundaries allows logical tracking of natural water runoff and 

accounting of surface and groundwater supplies. See Figure 

1-2 and Box 1-1 California’s 10 Hydrologic Regions.

Hydrologic Regions

California has a variety of climates and landforms. To better 

understand these diversities and plan for future needs, the 

Department of Water Resources (DWR) divides the state into 

Box 1-1 California’s 10 Hydrologic Regions 

North Coast. Klamath River and Lost River Basins, and all basins draining into the Pacific Ocean from Oregon south through 

the Russian River Basin. 

San Francisco Bay. Basins draining into San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun Bays, and into the Sacramento River 

 downstream from Collinsville; western Contra Costa County; and basins directly tributary to the Pacific Ocean 

below the Russian River watershed to the southern boundary of the Pescadero Creek Basin.

Central Coast. Basins draining into the Pacific Ocean below the Pescadero Creek watershed to the southeastern 

boundary of Rincon Creek Basin in western Ventura County.

South Coast. Basins draining into the Pacific Ocean from the southeastern boundary of Rincon Creek Basin to the 

international border with Mexico.

Sacramento River. Basins draining into the Sacramento River system in the Central Valley (including the Pit River 

drainage), from the Oregon border south through the American River drainage basin.

San Joaquin River. Basins draining into the San Joaquin River system, from the Cosumnes River basin on the north 

through the southern boundary of the San Joaquin River watershed.

Tulare Lake. The closed drainage basin at the south end of the San Joaquin Valley, south of the San Joaquin River 

watershed, encompassing basins draining to Kern Lakebed, Tulare Lakebed, and Buena Vista Lakebed.

North Lahontan. Basins east of the Sierra Nevada crest and west of the Nevada state line, from the Oregon border 

south to the southern boundary of the Walker River watershed.

South Lahontan. The interior drainage basins east of the Sierra Nevada crest, south of the Walker River watershed, 

northeast of the Transverse Ranges, and north of the Colorado River Region. The main basins are the Owens and 

the Mojave River Basins.

Colorado River. Basins south and east of the South Coast and South Lahontan regions; areas that drain into the 

Colorado River, Salton Sea, and other closed basins north of the border with Mexico.

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005

1 2 Volume 3 Regional Reports

Box 1-2 Acronyms Used in State Summary

ABAG—Association of Bay Area Governments 

CALFED—State and Federal Bay Delta Authority

CBDA—California Bay-Delta Authority

DAU—Detailed Analysis Unit

DWR—California Department of Water Resources

ET—Evapotranspiration

ETAW—Evapotranspiration of Applied Water

maf—million acre-feet

PA—Planning Area

SWP—State Water Project

SWRCB—State Water Resource Control Board

taf—thousand acre-feet

California is a state of contrasts and diversity as illustrated in this satellite image of Central California. Visible to the east are the forested slopes and snowcovered higher peaks of the Sierra Nevada and the light blue Lake Tahoe. The great Central Valley appears in center of the image. Farther west are the Coast 

Range, the San Francisco Bay and Delta, and the Pacific Ocean. (Photo courtesy of NASA)

For planning and data collection, DWR subdivides the 10 

hydrologic regions into 56 planning areas (PAs) plus a more 

detailed breakdown into 278 detailed analysis units or DAUs 

(see Box 1-2 for more abbreviations used in this summary). 

Most of DWR data collection and analyses are started at the 

DAU level. This water plan update then gathers results into 

hydrologic regions for presentation.

Overlay Areas

Some areas of the state with common water issues or interests 

often cross the boundaries from one hydrologic region to 

another. This is the first water plan update in the Bulletin 160 

series to describe overlay areas. The two regional overlays in 

this report are the Mountain Counties region and the SacraEE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 3

California Water Plan Update 2005

Figure 1-2 Hydrologic regions with Mountain Counties and Legal Delta

The California Department of Water Resources divides the state into 10 hydrologic regions that correspond to its major drainage basins. 

This water plan update also describes the Mountain Counties and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta as two overlay areas of special interest. 

Santa Cruz Hollister

Salinas

Merced

Oakland

Redwood City

San Jose

San Luis Obispo

Bakersfield

Santa Barbara Ventura

Los Angeles

Santa Ana

Riverside

San Berdardino

San Diego

El Centro

San Rafael Martinez

Stockton

Modesto

Sonora

San Andreas

Jackson

Placerville

Bridgeport

Mariposa

Madera

Fresno

Hanford

Independence

Visalia

San Francisco

Crescent

City

Eureka

Yreka

Weaverville

Redding

Alturas

Susanville

Quincy

Downieville

Willows Oroville

Red Bluff

Ukiah Lakeport

Colusa Nevada City

Yuba City

Auburn

Santa Rosa

Napa Fairfield

Woodland

Marysville

Sacramento

Markleeville

DEL

NORTE

SISKYOU

SHASTA

MODOC

LASSEN

PLUMAS

HUMBOLDT TRINITY

TEHAMA

GLENN BUTTE SIERRA

NEVADA

PLACER

YUBA

EL DORADO

ALPINE

MONO

TUOLUMNE

CALAVERAS

AMADOR

SUTTER

YOLO

NAPA

COLUSA

LAKE

MENDOCINO

SONOMA

MARIN

SAN

FRANCISCO

SOLANO

CONTRA

COSTA

SAN

JOAQUIN

ALAMEDA

SACRAMENTO

SAN

MATEO

SANTA

CLARA

SANTA

CRUZ

STANISLAUS

MARIPOSA

MADERA MERCED

KINGS

FRESNO

SAN

BENITO

KERN

TULARE

INYO

SAN LUIS

OBISPO

VENTURA

SANTA

BARBARA

LOS ANGELES

MONTEREY

SAN BERNARDINO

RIVERSIDE

IMPERIAL SAN DIEGO

ORANGE

Hydrologic Regions

North Coast

San Francisco Bay

Central Coast

South Coast

Sacramento River

San Joaquin River

Tulare Lake

North Lahontan

South Lahontan

Colorado River

Mountain Counties

County Seat

County Line

Legal Delta Boundary

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005

1 4 Volume 3 Regional Reports

mento – San Joaquin Delta region (see Figure 1-3 and Box 

1-3 Two Overlay Areas). There are many other regional 

overlays that could be developed, based on boundaries such 

as county lines, regional water districts, or integrated regional 

planning areas. Two examples of other regional agencies 

that could be distinguished in this manner are the California 

Bay-Delta Authority’s (CBDA) Southern California regional 

area of infl uence and the nine-county regional boundary for 

the Association of Bay Area Governments.

Coordination of Regional Reports

As this California Water Plan Update 2005 was being prepared, 

CBDA was also preparing multiyear plans for implementation of 

the CALFED Bay-Delta Plan. As part of that activity, CBDA was 

preparing a description of regional water management needs 

as well as regional and state plans to meet those needs for all 

regions within the CALFED solution area. CBDA is interested 

in providing the most up-to-date information on how CALFED 

implementation is being integrated with regional efforts to 

address both local and state needs.

Box 1-3 Two Overlay Areas

Mountain Counties. The Mountain Counties include the foothills and mountains of the western slope of the Sierra 

 Nevada and a portion of the Cascade Range. The area includes the eastern portions of the Sacramento River and 

 San Joaquin River hydrologic regions. This area shares common water and other resource issues and is the origin 

 for much of the state’s developed surface water supply. 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The Legal Delta includes about 740,000 acres of tidally infl uenced land near the confl uence 

 of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. While the Delta occupies portions of the Sacramento, San Joaquin and a 

 small part of the San Francisco hydrologic regions, the Delta is described as an overlay area because of its common 

 characteristics, environmental signifi cance, and the important role it has in the State’s water systems.

Figure 1-3 Mountain Counties and Legal Delta overlays

Some areas of California with common water issues or interests span more than one hydrologic region and are called overlay areas. 

The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the Mountain Counties are two overlay areas described in this water plan update.

Santa Cruz Hollister

Salinas

Merced

Oakland

Redwood City

San Jose

San Rafael Martinez

Stockton

Modesto

Sonora

San Andreas

Jackson

Placerville

Bridgeport

Mariposa

Madera

Fresno Independence

San Francisco

Eureka

Weaverville

Redding

Susanville

Quincy

Downieville

Willows Oroville

Red Bluff

Ukiah Lakeport

Colusa Nevada City

Yuba City

Auburn

Santa Rosa

Napa Fairfield

Woodland

Marysville

Sacramento

Markleeville

SHASTA

LASSEN

PLUMAS

HUMBOLDT TRINITY

TEHAMA

GLENN BUTTE SIERRA

NEVADA

PLACER

YUBA

EL DORADO

ALPINE

MONO

TUOLUMNE

CALAVERAS

AMADOR

SUTTER

YOLO

NAPA

COLUSA

LAKE

MENDOCINO

SONOMA

MARIN

SAN

FRANCISCO

SOLANO

CONTRA

COSTA

SAN

JOAQUIN

ALAMEDA

SACRAMENTO

SAN

MATEO

SANTA

CLARA

SANTA

CRUZ

STANISLAUS

MARIPOSA

MADERA MERCED

FRESNO

SAN

BENITO INYO

Hydrologic Regions

North Coast

San Francisco Bay

Central Coast

South Coast

Sacramento River

San Joaquin River

Tulare Lake

North Lahontan

South Lahontan

Colorado River

Mountain Counties

County Seat

County Line

Legal Delta Boundary

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 5

California Water Plan Update 2005

Figure 1-5 Range of actual precipitation 

across regions, 1998

Color contour map shows range of actual precipitation throughout California in water year 1998. Percentage of average precipitation for each hydrologic region is shown in box. In 1998, 

an El Nino year, all regions received from 1.5 to 2 times their 

average precipitation.

In October 2003, DWR and CBDA agreed that the regional 

reports that fall within the CALFED solution area should 

be jointly coordinated and prepared. This includes the 

Sacramento River, San Francisco Bay, San Joaquin River, 

Tulare Lake, and South Coast hydrologic regions as well as 

the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta overlay. As part of this 

ongoing coordination, CBDA and DWR will work cooperatively to add additional information to these joint reports, 

regarding local or regional water management needs 

and plans to meet those needs as it becomes available. 

Hydrology for Current Conditions

Previous updates to the California water plan presented 

information about current water use and supplies by using a 

process that statistically “normalized” all water year data to 

represent average conditions. For Bulletin 160-98, year 1995 

was chosen to represent current conditions and levels of water 

use. However, water year 1995 was actually classifi ed as a 

wet year. Thus to develop information about average water 

year uses and supplies, the actual annual water supply and 

use data was statistically adjusted (also called normalized) 

based on historical trends, so that the 1995 level of all water 

uses represented what would be expected to occur in a statistically average water supply year. In the same way, a drought 

scenario was calculated to represent 1995 level water uses 

under drought water supply conditions. 

As a result of signifi cant public advisory committee input and 

recommendations for California Water Plan Update 2005, the 

previous process was changed. The advisory committee and 

the public requested that data for current levels of water use 

be prepared and presented from recent actual years, without 

any statistical adjustments. Three years were selected to show 

the range of actual water supplies and uses, based on a range 

of hydrologic conditions:

• 1998, which was a wet water-supply year statewide

• 2000, an overall average or normal water year

• 2001, a below average or dry year for most of the state 

Figure 1-4 Range of average annual precipitation 

across regions, 1961 - 1990

Color contour map shows 30-year average annual precipitation 

throughout California. Fourteen colors indicate ranges of precipitation from a low range less than 12 inches per year to a high

range greater than 156 inches per year. The 10 hydrologic 

regions are delineated on the map.

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005

1 6 Volume 3 Regional Reports

A consequence of this new method is that the actual data 

presented in this report is not directly comparable to the type 

of data presented in previous Bulletin 160 updates. The three 

recent years refl ect the supplies and uses at a certain time 

and under specifi c conditions. Similarly, the data for 2001 

do not constitute drought conditions, but only present actual 

conditions for a single dry water year. 

In addition, these generally wet, average, and dry conditions 

for the entire state are not universally the same for all regions 

of the state. Figure 1-4 presents a map depicting long-term 

(based on years 1961 – 1990) average annual precipitation 

amounts throughout the state. For comparison, Figures 1-5, 

1-6, and 1-7 show the range of actual precipitation across the 

different regions of the state for individual years 1998, 2000, 

and 2001 respectively. These maps were developed using data 

from National Weather Service’s California Normal Stations. 

See Volume 5 Technical Guide for further information. 

Population growth is a major factor that infl uences current 

and future water uses. California’s population increased from 

about 30 million in 1990 to about 36.5 million in 2005. The 

California Department of Finance projects that the population 

could exceed 48 million by 2030 (Figure 1-8). 

Water Portfolios 

Previous updates to the California water plan have only 

provided regional and statewide water information for the 

developed water supplies and identifi ed uses, but not for the 

entire water supply of the whole state. For California Water 

Plan Update 2005, a new concept was developed (nicknamed 

the water portfolio) to describe and evaluate the entire water 

resources of the state. The reasons for documenting this 

expanded water portfolio concept are to:

• identify and evaluate all of the statewide water supply 

sources whether or not they are currently developed and used,

• provide better information on the disposition of our source 

 waters statewide by including additional categories of 

 water supply and use, 

• present water balances using accepted accounting principles,

Figure 1-6 Range of actual precipitation 

across regions, 2000

Color contour map shows range of actual precipitation throughout California in water year 2000. Percentage of average precipitation for each hydrologic region is shown in box. In 2000, 

most regions received near average precipitation, while the 

South Coast, South Lahontan, and Colorado River regions 

received significantly less.

Figure 1-7 Range of actual precipitation 

across regions, 2001

Color contour map shows range of actual precipitation throughout California in water year 2001. Percentage of average prec

ipitation for each hydrologic region is shown in box. In 2001, 

northern regions received significantly less than average precipitation, while more southern regions received just below 

average precipitation.

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 7

California Water Plan Update 2005

0

10,000,000

20,000,000

30,000,000

40,000,000

50,000,000

60,000,000

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Figure 1-8 State of California population

The nation's most populous state is now growing by about 600,000 people per year. The California Department of Finance 

projects that the state’s population may exceed 48 million by 2030 and 55 million by 2050. 

• provide insight where there may be underutilized “assets” 

 (supply) and unmet “liabilities” (uses), 

• provide insight about natural, physical (infrastructure) and 

institutional constraints, and water management decisions, 

 by combining water balances with narrative discussions, 

• identify ‘data gaps’ where additional information is needed 

to evaluate supplies and uses, and 

• include key supplemental information such as water quality, 

water rights, and water contracts. 

This new concept was derived from a comparison with the 

principles of a traditional fi nancial accounting portfolio, and 

is intended to identify all of the state’s water assets whether or 

not they are currently developed and used.

The water portfolios are based on the concept of the hydrologic cycle, and identify all possible categories of statewide 

water supplies and uses for each of the three specifi ed years 

(1998, 2000, and 2001). On a statewide and regional basis, 

the portfolio diagrams also show the routing of water from 

initial source of supply to fi nal disposition. The basic data and 

assumptions that are presented in these portfolio diagrams have 

been assembled for smaller local and regional areas (PAs and 

DAUs), and then accumulated to compile water portfolio totals 

for each hydrologic region and statewide. All of the information 

presented in the portfolio diagrams has also been cross-referenced by number codes to the tabular versions of the data. For 

consistency in each of the subsequent regional reports within 

Volume 3, the same portfolio format and data tables are used 

(see Box 1-4 Water Portfolio Components).

The primary reason for using these new water portfolio tables 

and fl ow diagrams is to provide an accounting of all water 

that enters and leaves the state and that is exchanged between 

the regions. This is important to all water planning activities. 

(See Figure 1-9 for regional infl ows and outfl ows and further 

discussion under Statewide Water Portfolio Results later in this 

chapter). One shortcoming of this expanded process is that there 

are many regions of the state where some of the water portfolio 

data categories have never been measured. The resulting water 

portfolio tables show many categories where inadequate data are 

available. However, the ability to identify what data are needed 

is an important byproduct of this process. Another disadvantage 

resulting from the use of real data from three specifi c years is 

that those years provide no information about how supplies and 

demands would change during a drought sequence of several 

dry years. The collection of water supply and water use data for 

a series of 10 or more actual years would be very helpful toward 

the development of representative conditions for both average 

and extended droughts.

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005

1 8 Volume 3 Regional Reports

Applied Water Methodology

As previously developed in Bulletin 160-98, Bulletin 160-05 

computes dedicated water supplies and uses on the basis of 

applied water data. Applied water refers to the total amount of 

water that is diverted from any source to meet the demands of 

water users, without adjusting for water that is used up, returned 

to the developed supply or irrecoverable. Within Volume 3, 

Tables 1-1 and 1-2 and Figure 1-10 present total statewide 

information on an applied water basis (see next section for 

discussion of Figure 1-10 and Tables 1-1 and 1-2). However, 

for the remaining statewide tables and each of the individual 

regional reports (Chapters 2 through 13), the information 

Box 1-4 Water Portfolio Components

The water portfolios for the California Water Plan Update consist of the following items

Flow Diagrams

The flow diagrams presented in Update 2005 are an expanded version of the diagram that originally appeared in 

Bulletin 160-83 on page 88. The flow diagram begins with the sources of water, such as precipitation and inflows 

into the state, and attempts to track all the water as it flows through many different uses until it reaches its ultimate 

destination in the ocean, an inland sea or as evaporation to the atmosphere. Diagrams have been prepared for each 

of the 10 hydrologic regions, Mountain Counties, and statewide totals by year. 

Flow Diagram Table Format

The Flow Diagram Table provides additional detail for 1998, 2000 and 2001, by presenting each of the components 

of the flow diagram by number and category (inputs or withdrawals). In addition, the web portal for this Water Plan 

update includes the Flow Diagram Tables by Planning Area in each region.

Developed / Dedicated Water Balances

As previously in Bulletin 160-98, water balances are computed for applied water use, net water use and depletion for 

each region and planning area within a region, Mountain Counties, and for statewide totals. The balances include 

measured water supplies that are applied to the following dedicated or developed uses within a region: 

• Agricultural 

• Urban (including commercial and industrial)

• Wildlife refuges (managed wetlands)

• Instream flow requirements

• Wild and scenic river requirements

• Required Delta outflow

These tables include reuse of water within a region, but not show water exported from a region.

Water Quality

Existing water quality basin plans prepared by the SWRCB and RWQCB will eventually become part of the California 

Water Plan. In the future, those basin plans along with other water quality reports will be integrated regionally into 

the water portfolios. 

has been expanded to also present net water uses and water 

depletion. Net water supply and net water use data are smaller 

than applied water use. Net water use consists of water that is 

consumed in the system, irrecoverable water and outflow, while 

applied water also includes reuse of surface and groundwater 

supplies. Water depletion is net water use minus water that can 

be later recovered, such as deep percolation and return flow 

to developed supply (see Box 1-5 Key Water Supply and Use 

Definitions). Water supply information that is presented using 

applied water methodology is easier for local water agencies 

to evaluate because applied water use information is closer in 

concept to agency water system delivery data.

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 9

California Water Plan Update 2005

Klamath and Lost Rivers

1,498

Klamath Straits Drain and Lost River

114

North Fork Ditch

2

Sonoma Petaluma 

Aqueduct

33

Trinity River

1,111

Outflow to Ocean

18,888 NC

Outflow to Ocean

21,751

SF

San Felipe Unit (CVP)

89

Outflow to Ocean

276

CC

East Branch California Aqueduct (SWP)

West Branch California Aqueduct and

Los Angeles Aqueduct

1,695

Outflow to Ocean

2,498

SC

Putah South Canal

North Bay Aqueduct (SWP)

City of Vallejo

72

Sacramento River

18,156

Folsom South Canal

Delta Mendota Canal

California Aqueduct

6,174

SR

San Felipe Unit (CVP)

113

Sly Park

30

San Joaquin River

2,846

Contra Costa Canal

Mokelumne Aqueduct

Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct

South Bay Aqueduct

629

SJ

California Aqueduct

1,509

Friant-Kern Canal

1,212

Kings River

0

Coastal Branch

California Aqueduct

31

California Aqueduct

San Luis Unit (CVP)

DMC-Mendota Pool

Cross Valley Canal

4,414 TL

Colorado Aqueducts and

All American Canal

5,349

Colorado River Aqueduct

1,296 New River

166

CR

Virginia Creek

1

To Nevada

754

Echo Lake

Conduit

1

Little Truckee

9

Pit River

3

NL

East Branch California Aqueduct

West Branch California Aqueduct and

Los Angeles Aqueduct

1,695

SL

Figure 1-9 Regional inflows and outflows, year 2000 (an average water year)

Water moves great distances within and between California’s 10 hydrologic regions, some through natural waterways and some through constructed water systems. Shown are the volumes of water in million acre-feet that flowed from one region to another in 2000, an average water year. 

NC

SF

CC

SC

SR

SJ

TL

NL

SL

CR

North Coast

San Francisco

Central Coast

South Coast

Sacramento River

San Joaquin River

Tulare Lake

North Lahontan

South Lahontan

Colorado River

Hydrologic Regions

*Outflow to Ocean includes Wild and Scenic Rivers, regulated flows, and estimated wastewater outflows.

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005

1 10 Volume 3 Regional Reports

Box 1-5 Key Water Supply and Use Definitions

The water portfolio tables presented throughout Volume 3 summarize California’s water supplies and urban, agricultural 

and environmental water uses for 1998, 2000 and 2001. Certain key concepts, defined below, provide an essential 

foundation for understanding and evaluating the water supplies and water uses presented in these tables. 

Applied Water. The amount of water from any source needed to meet the demand of the user. Examples would include the quantity 

of water that is delivered at any of the following locations: 

• The intake to a city water system or a factory. 

• The farm headgate or other point of measurement for agricultural use. 

• The diversion point to a managed wetland, either directly or from other drainage flows.

For instream use, applied water is quantified as the amount of stream flow dedicated to instream purposes (or reserved 

under federal or State wild and scenic rivers legislation). It is also identified as the amount of stream flow required 

for maintaining flow and water quality in the Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta per the SWRCB’s Decision 1630 or 

previous standards. 

Net Water. The amount of water needed in a water service area to meet all demands. It is the sum of several components 

including (1) evapotranspiration of applied water within an area, (2) the irrecoverable water from the distribution 

system, and (3) the agricultural return flow or treated urban wastewater leaving the area. 

Irrecoverable Water. The amount of water that flows to a salt sink, is used by the growth process of plants (evapo 

transpiration), or evaporates from a conveyance facility or drainage canal.

Evapotranspiration. ET is the amount of water transpired (given off), retained in plant tissues, and evaporated into 

the atmosphere from plant tissues and the surrounding soil surfaces.

Evapotranspiration of Applied Water. ETAW is the portion of total ET which was provided from the applied irrigation water. 

Depletion. The amount of water consumed within a service area that is no longer available as a source of supply. For 

agricultural and environmental wetlands water use, depletion is the sum of irrecoverable water and the ETAW due 

to crops, wetlands vegetation, and flooded water surfaces. For urban water use, depletion is the ETAW due to 

landscaping, wastewater outflow to a salt sink, and incidental ET. For environmental instream use, depletion is the 

amount of dedicated flow that proceeds to a salt sink. 

Statewide Water Balance Summary 

In average water years like 2000, California receives close to 

200 million acre-feet of water from precipitation and imports 

from Colorado, Oregon and Mexico. Of this total supply, about 

50 to 60 percent is either used by native vegetation; evaporates 

to the atmosphere; provides some of the water for agricultural 

crops and managed wetlands (effective precipitation); or flows 

to Oregon, Nevada, the Pacific Ocean, and salt sinks like 

saline groundwater aquifers and Salton Sea. The remaining 

40 to 50 percent, called the dedicated or developed supply, 

is distributed among urban and agricultural uses, water for 

protecting and restoring the environment, or storage in surface 

water and groundwater reservoirs for later use. In any year, 

some of the dedicated supply includes water that is used multiple 

times (reuse) and water held in storage from previous years. 

Ultimately, about a third of the dedicated supply flows out to the 

Pacific Ocean or to other salt sinks, in part to meet environmental water requirements for designated Wild and Scenic rivers. 

Table 1-1 summarizes the total supply and distribution of the 

dedicated supply to various uses within California for the three 

years evaluated. As indicated for wet (1998) and dry (2001) 

years, the total supply and the distribution of the dedicated 

supply to various uses do change significantly, compared to the 

average year 2000 values. 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 11

California Water Plan Update 2005

Table 1-1 California water summary - MAF

1998 2000 2001

(171% of normal)a (97% of normal)a (72% of normal)a

Total supply (precipitation & imports) 336.9 194.7 145.5 

Total uses, outflows, & evaporation 331.5 200.4 159.9 

Net storage changes in state 5.5 -5.7 -14.3

Distribution of dedicated supply (includes reuse) to various applied water uses

Urban uses 7.8 (8%) 8.9 (11%) 8.6 (13%)

Agricultural uses 27.3 (29%) 34.2 (41%) 33.7 (52%)

Environmental waterb 59.4 (63%) 39.4 (48%) 22.5 (35%)

Total dedicated supply 94.5 82.5 64.8

 maf = million acre-feet

 a. Percent of normal precipitation. Water year 1998 represents a wet year; 2000, average water year; 2001, drier water year.

 b. Environmental water includes instream flows, wild and scenic flows, required Delta outflow, and managed wetlands water use. 

 Some environmental water is reused by agricultural and urban water users. 

Key components of the illustrated flow diagram are shown as characteristic elements of the hydrologic cycle. This volume has flow diagrams for 

statewide water summary in this chapter and for regional water summaries in their respective chapters.

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005

1 12 Volume 3 Regional Reports

Water Entering the State

 Precipitation 329.6 187.7 139.2

 Inflow from Oregon/Mexico 2.3 1.7 1.1

 Inflow from Colorado River 5.0 5.3 5.2

 Imports from Other Regions N/A N/A N/A

 Total 336.9 194.7 145.5

Water Leaving the State

 Consumptive Use of Applied Water * 22.5 27.9 27.8

 (Ag, M&I, Wetlands) 

 Outflow to Oregon/Nevada/Mexico 1.6 0.9 0.7

 Exports to Other Regions N/A N/A N/A

 Statutory Required Outflow to Salt Sink 43.8 28.0 13.9

 Additional Outflow to Salt Sink 73.0 37.1 17.7

Evaporation, Evapotranspiration of Native 

 Vegetation, Groundwater Subsurface Outflows, 190.5 106.5 99.7

 Natural and Incidental Runoff, Ag Effective 

 Precipitation & Other Outflows

Total 331.4 200.4 159.8

Storage Changes in State

 [+] Water added to storage

 [−] Water removed from storage 

 Change in Surface Reservoir Storage 7.2 -1.3 -4.6

 Change in Groundwater Storage ** -1.7 -4.4 -9.7

 Total 5.5 -5.7 -14.3

Applied Water * (compare with Consumptive Use) 33.9 41.8 41.2

*Footnote for applied water

Consumptive use is the amount of applied water used and no longer available as a source of supply. Applied water is 

 greater than consumptive use because it includes consumptive use, reuse, and outflows. 

**Footnote for change in Groundwater Storage

Change in Groundwater Storage is based upon best available information. Basins in the north part of the 

state (North Coast, San Francisco, Sacramento River and North Lahontan regions and parts of Central 

 Coast and San Joaquin River regions) have been modeled – spring 1997 to spring 1998 for the 1998 

 water year and spring 1999 to spring 2000 for the 2000 water year. All other regions and year 2001 were 

 calculated using the following equation: 

GW change in storage =

 intentional recharge + deep percolation of applied water + conveyance deep percolation - withdrawals

This equation does not include the unknown factors such as natural recharge and subsurface inflow and outflow.

 Water Year (Percent of Normal Precipitation) 

1998 (171%) 2000 (97%) 2001 (72%)

Table 1-2 State of California water balance summary - MAF

Water Entering the Region – Water Leaving the Region = Storage Changes in Region

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 13

California Water Plan Update 2005

Figure 1-10 California water balance for water years 1998, 2000, 2001

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

1998 2000 2001

 Million Acre-Feet

Wild & Scenic

R.

Instream Flow

Req Delta

Outflow

Managed

Wetlands

Irrigated

Agriculture

Urban

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

1998 2000 2001

Million Acre-Feet

Instream

Environmental

Reuse &

Recycle

Ground Water

State Project

Federal

Projects

Colorado

Project

Local Projects

Dedicated Water Supplies

Applied Water Uses

Three years show a marked change in amount and relative proportions of water delivered to urban and agricultural sectors and water dedicated to the environment (applied water, top chart), where the water came from, and how much was reused among sectors (dedicated 

water supplies, bottom chart).

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005

1 14 Volume 3 Regional Reports

 Applied Net Depletion Applied Net Depletion Applied Net Depletion

Water Use Water Use Water Use Water Use Water Use Water Use

1998 2000 2001

Table 1-3 California water use and distribution of dedicated supplies - MAF

 WATER USE 

Urban 

Large Landscape 0.6 0.7 0.6 

Commercial 1.3 1.6 1.6 

Industrial 0.5 0.6 0.6 

Energy Production 0.1 0.1 0.1 

Residential - Interior 2.9 3.3 3.1 

Residential - Exterior 2.0 2.3 2.3 

Evapotranspiration of Applied Water 2.3 2.3 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.6

E&ET and Deep Perc to Salt Sink 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7

Outflow 3.1 3.1 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.5

Conveyance Applied Water 0.2 0.2 0.2 

Conveyance Evaporation & ETAW 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

Conveyance Deep Perc to Salt Sink 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Conveyance Outflow 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

GW Recharge Applied Water 0.2 0.1 0.0 

GW Recharge Evap + Evapotranspiration 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Urban Use 7.8 6.3 6.3 8.9 7.2 7.2 8.6 7.0 7.0

 

Agriculture 

On-Farm Applied Water 24.1 31.1 31.2 

Evapotranspiration of Applied Water 16.8 16.8 21.6 21.6 21.8 21.8

E&ET and Deep Perc to Salt Sink 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8

Outflow 3.7 1.5 4.0 1.8 4.0 2.1

Conveyance Applied Water 2.1 2.4 2.2 

Conveyance Evaporation & ETAW 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8

Conveyance Deep Perc to Salt Sink 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

Conveyance Outflow 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3

GW Recharge Applied Water 1.1 0.7 0.3 

GW Recharge Evap + Evapotranspiration 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Agricultural Use 27.3 22.6 20.4 34.2 27.8 25.6 33.7 27.9 26.0

Environmental 

Instream 

 Applied Water 6.9 7.5 6.8 

 Outflow 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2

Wild & Scenic 

 Applied Water 41.6 23.1 9.8 

 Outflow 32.1 32.1 18.2 18.2 6.9 6.9

Required Delta Outflow 

 Applied Water 9.5 7.2 4.5 

 Outflow 9.5 9.5 7.2 7.2 4.5 4.5

Managed Wetlands 

 Habitat Applied Water 1.4 1.5 1.3 

 Evapotranspiration of Applied Water 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

 E&ET and Deep Perc to Salt Sink 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

 Outflow 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3

 Conveyance Applied Water 0.0 0.0 0.0 

 Conveyance Evaporation & ETAW 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

 Conveyance Deep Perc to Salt Sink 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

 Conveyance Outflow 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total Managed Wetlands Use 1.4 1.0 0.8 1.5 1.1 1.0 1.3 1.0 0.9

Total Environmental Use 59.4 44.8 44.7 39.4 28.7 28.5 22.5 14.7 14.5

 TOTAL USE AND OUTFLOW 94.5 73.8 71.4 82.5 63.6 61.3 64.8 49.7 47.5

 DEDICATED WATER SUPPLIES 

Surface Water 

 Local Deliveries 22.5 22.5 21.1 19.8 19.5 18.2 15.3 15.3 14.3

 Local Imported Deliveries 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8

 Colorado River Deliveries 5.0 5.0 4.7 5.3 5.3 5.0 5.2 5.2 4.8

 CVP Base and Project Deliveries 5.3 5.3 4.9 6.7 6.7 6.3 6.1 6.1 5.7

 Other Federal Deliveries 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6

 SWP Deliveries 2.1 2.1 2.0 3.6 3.6 3.4 2.1 2.1 1.9

 Required Environmental Instream Flow 32.4 32.4 32.4 18.7 18.7 18.7 8.0 8.0 8.0

Groundwater

 Net Withdrawal 4.4 4.4 4.4 7.8 7.8 7.8 11.0 11.0 11.0

 Deep Percolation of Surface and GW 5.6 7.0 6.7 

Reuse/Recycle 

 Reuse Surface Water 15.1 11.5 8.5 

 Recycled Water 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 

TOTAL SUPPLIES 94.5 73.8 71.4 82.5 63.6 61.3 64.8 49.7 47.5 

Balance = Use - Supplies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 15

California Water Plan Update 2005

Table 1-2 provides more detailed information about total 

statewide water supply sources and provides estimates for the 

primary uses of the state’s supplies for these three years. As 

indicated, a large component of the statewide water supply is 

used by natural processes, such as evaporation, evapotranspiration from native vegetation and forests, and percolation to 

groundwater. This water is generally not counted as part of the 

dedicated water supplies. Each of the regional reports within 

Volume 3 presents the same tabular information at the regional 

level. For some of the items presented in Table 1-2, the numerical values were developed by estimation techniques, because 

measured data are not available on a statewide basis.

A statewide summary of dedicated water supplies and uses 

is presented in Table 1-3, which provides a more detailed 

breakdown of the components of developed supplies used for 

agricultural, urban, and environmental purposes. For each of 

the three water years, information is presented as both applied 

water and net water usage, as well as the calculated total water 

depletion. As previously mentioned, much of the environmental 

water usage in this table is actually dedicated to instream flow 

requirements and Wild and Scenic rivers, which in some cases 

can later be reused for other downstream purposes. Figure 

1-10 identifies all of the water supply sources used to meet 

the developed and dedicated water uses statewide for years 

1998, 2000 and 2001 and also summarizes all of the corresponding urban, agricultural and environmental water uses 

for the three years. In each of the following regional report 

chapters, similar regional bar charts are provided, which 

can be compared to Figure 1-10 to understand how each 

individual region compares to the statewide distribution. 

 

Statewide Water Portfolio Results for 

Years 1998 (Wet), 2000 (Average), 

and 2001 (Dry) 

Statewide summaries of water supplies and applied water uses 

are presented graphically in the portfolio flow diagram (Figures 1-11 and 1-12), and numerically for years 1998, 2000 

and 2001 in the accompanying water portfolio data Table 1-4. 

These figures and tables are large-format and placed in the 

back of this chapter; similar regional graphics are placed in 

the back of the regional chapters. The primary purpose of these 

diagrams and tables is to present information for comparison 

about how water supplies and uses can vary between the wet, 

average, and dry hydrologic conditions that are represented by 

these three specific years. It is important to remember that actual 

water supply and water use information from these three years 

is only a snapshot of a single year’s hydrology and water uses. 

It would not be appropriate to assume that other past or future 

years with similar hydrology (wet, average, or dry) would produce the same levels of water use as summarized in Table 1-4. 

The statewide information has been assembled from the 10 

individual hydrologic regions. The organization of the portfolio 

diagrams and the numerical identification for the data categories are consistent between the 10 regional reports and these 

statewide summaries. However, note that when water supply and 

water-use information from the regional reports is accumulated 

for the statewide totals, some categories, such as interregional 

water transfers between one hydrologic region and an adjoining 

region, are not applicable, so they are not shown in the statewide 

tables. Figure 1-9 presents a map of California’s hydrologic 

regions with all interregional transfers shown, using data from 

average water year 2000. In the statewide diagrams and tables 

presented in this chapter, several categories indicate “incomplete” or “unknown” data for components of water supply and 

water use where information is either not available, or only partially available from some regions of the state. Within the data 

tables, the code “N/A” is used to identify categories where data 

are not available, and the symbol “-” is used to identify water 

data categories that are not applicable on a statewide basis. 

On a statewide basis, Figure 1-12 shows a detailed flow diagram for water supplies and uses, with numerical references to 

data in Table 1-4 for 1998, 2000, and 2001. Companion Figure 

1-11 presents the same information in an illustrated picture to 

graphically show the identified components of water supply, 

movement, and use. In the statewide and all of the regional 

portfolio flow diagrams throughout Volume 3, the information is consistently organized to show sources of water supply 

on the left side, water uses in the middle, and the ways that 

water leaves the state on the right side. To assist the reader in 

following the movement of water from initial sources to final 

disposition in these diagrams, water supplies, called deposits, 

are consistently shown in blue boxes, water uses are summarized in green boxes, and water withdrawals (how water 

leaves the state) are shown in yellow boxes. The numerical 

identification numbers in the small circles on the diagram correspond to the tabular presentation of the data in Table 1-4. 

The flow diagram data (Table 1-4) presents the statewide 

water portfolio information from the flow diagram, with 61 

major categories of water supply and water use identified. 

This statewide table is different from the regional data tables 

in the following chapters, in that there is only one column 

shown for each year with the water supply and applied 

water use values aggregated together. The regional tables 

in the following chapters are more detailed, because they 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005

1 16 Volume 3 Regional Reports

also present water-use information on a net-water basis and 

tabulate water depletions where appropriate. In addition, 

there are several water data categories that are accounted 

for at the regional level, but which lose their relevance at the 

statewide level, such as interregional water transfers. 

Statewide Water Data Needs

When the concept of developing water portfolios with information about all of California’s supplies and uses was first 

discussed, it was noted that there would be insufficient information available for many of the data categories and several 

of the less developed regions of the state. However, identifying 

the categories where inadequate information is available is a 

necessary first step toward making improvements in the types 

and amount of water data that needs to be collected. 

The types of necessary technical information can be grouped into 

three categories: 

• Data – factual or observed information, such as 

 measurements or statistics including gauged flows in a river, 

 population as measured by census, and salinity of a water 

sample. Sets of data can be raw as taken from a measurement 

 device, elaborated by modifying it slightly as part of quality 

 assessment and quality control measures, or supplemented 

 to address missing measurements. 

• Relationships or system interactions – descriptions of how 

 the social, physical, and environmental systems affect 

 or are affected by the status of water supply and 

 water use in California. Examples include (1) how 

 releases from a reservoir affect water temperature at 

 a point in a river downstream, (2) the crop mix in a 

 region and the expected market conditions for each 

 crop, and (3) mountain snowpack conditions in February as 

 used to forecast the delivery of State Water Project water. 

• Estimates – inferred, derived or forecasted quantities 

 based on available data, defined relationships, and other 

 assumptions. Examples include population forecasts for 

 the Los Angeles area in 2030, groundwater flows between 

 adjacent regions, future available water deliveries, and the 

 projected cost to implement water conservation best 

 management practices.

There are a number of categories where data are simply 

not available or else it is very expensive to compile. The 

Data and Analytical Tools section of the Volume 4 Reference Guide contains additional information about these 

types of data needs in the article titled “Future Quantitative 

Analysis for California Water Planning.” In addition, many 

types of data are available for the developed regions of the 

state, but significant gaps exist in the undeveloped parts of 

California, so that statewide summaries cannot be generated. Significant categories with insufficient data include: 

• Statewide land use data, for example, delineation and 

 acreage for native vegetation, urbanized regions and 

 boundaries, areas with nonirrigated agriculture, and 

 irrigated agriculture acreage and crop-type delineation 

• Groundwater, including total natural recharge, subsurface 

 inflow and outflow, recharge and extractions, water levels, 

 and water quality 

• Surface water, including natural and incidental runoff, local 

 diversions, return flows, total stream flows, conveyance 

 recoverable and irrecoverable water, and runoff to salt sinks 

• Amounts of water consumed by evaporation from 

 water surfaces, evapotranspiration from native vegetation, 

 wetlands, urban runoff and nonirrigated agricultural 

 production

A number of data items are necessary to calculate or 

estimate these categories. Some of the major data items 

needed to complete the water portfolio flow diagram 

and the water balances are listed below. These include 

the measurement and calculation of information needed 

to identify the differences between applied water use 

and consumptive water use. The major data items are: 

• Information on the source of water supply - surface, 

 groundwater, or amounts from both 

• Data for the amounts of surface outflow leaving any 

 identified region 

• Water level data for depth to groundwater 

• Groundwater recharge rates 

• Water needed to maintain designated natural 

 riparian habitats 

• Evapotranspiration rates for all types of vegetation, 

 which vary by the geographic region of the state 

• Detailed surface water return flow information 

• More detailed physical information about the water 

 infrastructure for all watersheds, water systems and 

 groundwater basins in the state 

A significant increase in the amount of data collected and 

evaluated will be needed, before California can fully quantify 

and understand the state’s water supplies and plan for future 

water needs.

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 17

California Water Plan Update 2005

Water Portfolios

State Summary

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
California Water Plan Update 2005

1 18 Volume 3 Regional Reports

 ID CA CA CA

Number: Flow Diagram Component (see legend) 1998 2000 2001

 1 Colorado River Deliveries 4,986.4 5,349.0 5,197.1

 2 Total Desalination 0.0 0.0 0.0

 3 Water from Refineries 0.0 0.0 0.0

 4a Inflow From Oregon 2,104.5 1,498.0 988.0

 b Inflow From Mexico 182.4 165.6 154.7

 5 Precipitation 329,588.3 187,742.9 139,182.6

 6a Runoff - Natural 53,812.0 no data no data

 b Runoff - Incidental no data no data no data

 7 Total Groundwater Natural Recharge no data no data no data

 8 Groundwater Subsurface Inflow 0.0 0.0 0.0

 9 Local Deliveries 22,538.3 19,770.7 15,342.3

 10 Local Imports 955.2 810.7 828.4

 11a Central Valley Project :: Base Deliveries 1,585.1 1,925.7 2,014.8

 b Central Valley Project :: Project Deliveries 3,706.7 4,790.1 4,106.0

 12 Other Federal Deliveries 692.8 799.3 667.4

 13 State Water Project Deliveries 2,130.4 3,629.3 2,086.4

 14a Water Transfers - Regional 1.0 1.0 0.2

 b Water Transfers - Imported 0.0 0.0 0.0

 15a Releases for Delta Outflow - CVP 0.0 0.0 0.0

 b Releases for Delta Outflow - SWP 0.0 0.0 0.0

 c Instream Flow Applied Water 6,903.7 7,523.0 6,842.6

 16 Environmental Water Account Releases 0.0 264.0 242.0

 17a Conveyance Return Flows to Developed Supply - Urban 0.0 0.0 0.0

 b Conveyance Return Flows to Developed Supply - Ag 60.0 44.5 45.4

 c Conveyance Return Flows to Developed Supply - Managed Wetlands 0.0 0.0 0.0

 18a Conveyance Seepage - Urban 0.0 0.0 0.0

 b Conveyance Seepage - Ag 219.2 283.3 279.0

 c Conveyance Seepage - Managed Wetlands 23.8 24.5 13.4

 19a Recycled Water - Agriculture 28.4 28.2 28.2

 b Recycled Water - Urban 270.7 253.9 261.7

 c Recycled Water - Groundwater 8.3 43.3 42.4

 20a Return Flow to Developed Supply - Ag 2,182.1 2,167.2 1,930.7

 b Return Flow to Developed Supply - Wetlands 139.7 133.4 140.6

 c Return Flow to Developed Supply - Urban 2.6 2.6 2.6

 21a Deep Percolation of Applied Water - Ag 2,152.9 3,753.7 3,964.9

 b Deep Percolation of Applied Water - Wetlands 211.2 209.5 190.1

 c Deep Percolation of Applied Water - Urban 1,282.0 1,530.5 1,531.3

 22a Reuse of Return Flows within Region - Ag 593.8 825.0 635.7

 b Reuse of Return Flows within Region - Wetlands, Instream, W&S 14,287.7 10,351.9 7,558.0

 24a Return Flow for Delta Outflow - Ag 0.0 0.0 227.9

 b Return Flow for Delta Outflow - Wetlands, Instream, W&S 1,565.8 1,414.8 966.5

 c Return Flow for Delta Outflow - Urban Wastewater 0.0 0.0 0.0

 25 Direct Diversions 0.0 0.0 0.0

 26 Surface Water in Storage - Beg of Yr 23,996.2 27,062.6 25,745.6

 27 Groundwater Extractions - Banked 0.0 0.0 0.0

 28 Groundwater Extractions - Adjudicated 847.8 926.8 903.1

 29 Groundwater Extractions - Unadjudicated 9,121.6 13,926.5 16,785.4

 23 Groundwater Subsurface Outflow 0 0 0

 30 Surface Water Storage - End of Yr 31,190.3 25,745.6 21,099.0

 31 Groundwater Recharge-Contract Banking 85.1 108.2 -12.8

 32 Groundwater Recharge-Adjudicated Basins 0.0 0.0 0.0

 33 Groundwater Recharge-Unadjudicated Basins 0.0 0.0 0.0

 34a Evaporation and Evapotranspiration from Native Vegetation 0 0 0

 b Evaporation and Evapotranspiration from Unirrigated Ag 0 0 0

 35a Evaporation from Lakes 2527.3 2574.9 2556.7

 b Evaporation from Reservoirs 2189.3 2414.5 2292.9

 36 Ag Effective Precipitation on Irrigated Lands 6212.5 3646.2 3203.1

 37 Agricultural Applied Water Use 25,171.7 31,777.2 31,530.2

 38 Managed Wetlands Applied Water Use 1,354.9 1,472.9 1,284.6

 39a Urban Residential Use - Single Family - Interior 1,746.7 2,123.8 1,996.0

 b Urban Residential Use - Single Family - Exterior 1,698.1 1,918.5 1,925.9

 c Urban Residential Use - Multi-family - Interior 1,123.4 1,132.3 1,120.8

 d Urban Residential Use - Multi-family - Exterior 307.5 364.3 385.3

 40 Urban Commercial Use 1,263.3 1,581.2 1,583.1

 41 Urban Industrial Use 542.2 590.0 596.3

 42 Urban Large Landscape 579.7 677.5 610.7

 43 Urban Energy Production 137.1 137.4 137.2

 44 Instream Flow Net Use 2198.9 2216 2249.9

 45 Required Delta Outflow Net Use 9505 7231.6 4486.2

 46 Wild and Scenic Rivers Net Use 32139.8 18254.8 6945.3

 47a Evapotranspiration of Applied Water - Ag 16826.6 21676 21785.85

 b Evapotranspiration of Applied Water - Managed Wetlands 501 646.5 580

 c Evapotranspiration of Applied Water - Urban 2331.784 2669.591 2610.971

 48 Evaporation and Evapotranspiration from Urban Wastewater 0.4 0.3 0.4

 49 Return Flows Evaporation and Evapotranspiration - Ag 345.7 352 334.8

 50 Urban Waste Water Produced 3015.74 3475.14 3375.04

 51a Conveyance Evaporation and Evapotranspiration - Urban 414.52 435.42 431.11

 b Conveyance Evaporation and Evapotranspiration - Ag 767.3 884 773.1

 c Conveyance Evaporation and Evapotranspiration - Managed Wetlands 12.3 17 15.8

 d Conveyance Outflow to Mexico 0 0 0

 52a Return Flows to Salt Sink - Ag 2431.1 2810.1 2831.7

 b Return Flows to Salt Sink - Urban 3570.38 4103.09 3987.1

 c Return Flows to Salt Sink - Wetlands 184.04 169.5 174.4

 53 Remaining Natural Runoff - Flows to Salt Sink 66786.8 30012 10718.5

 54a Outflow to Nevada 1390.6 753.9 551.9

 b Outflow to Oregon 183.7 113.7 66.4

 c Outflow to Mexico 0 0 0

 55 Regional Imports n/a n/a n/a

 56 Regional Exports n/a n/a n/a

 59 Groundwater Net Change in Storage -1,695.0 -4,407.4 -9,679.7

 60 Surface Water Net Change in Storage 7,194.1 -1,317.0 -4,646.6

 61 Surface Water Total Available Storage 39,690.0 40,740.9 40,740.9

 

 Inflows Outflows Green number signifies included in summary boxes

Table 1-4 California water portfolios (TAF)

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Volume 3 Regional Reports Chapter 1 California State Summary 1 19

California Water Plan Update 2005

Figure 1-11 California - illustrated water flow diagram

INFLOWS

SUMMARY

OUTFLOWS

8

15a,b

21

27

31

45

48

51

5

6

46

14 16

33

28

29

32

39- 43

59

50

18

9

51

34

47b

38

35

51

26

30

60

61

11

12

13

15c

54

56

7

1

4

55

10 44

36

47a

49

51

37

17

20

47c

22

25 24

31

23

2

3

52

53

19

In this illustration of Table 1-4, key components of the flow diagram are shown as characteristic elements of the hydrologic cycle. Circled numbers correspond to the identification number of the table’s flow diagram components; color indicates whether the component is water input, output, or summary.

52

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Figure 1-12 California - schematic water flow diagram

1

2

5

4

3

55

6

13

11

19

12

10

9

7

20

21

45

29

26

30

35

39 to 43

37

38

53

54

46

14

34 36

28

52

16

24

17

18

25

47

50

49

48

27

31

32

33

23

8

15C

15A

15B

56

44

16

51

22

SURFACE WATER IN 

STORAGE: 

 Beg of Yr: 

End of Yr: 

DIRECT 

DIVERSIONS:

Service Area

Return 

Flow within

Return of

Required Instream 

Flows

Return of

Required Wild & 

Scenic Flows

SUMMARY

OUTFLOWS

INFLOWS

In schematic of Table 1-4, key components of the flow diagram are shown as boxes and connectors in a flow chart. Circled numbers correspond to the identification number of flow diagram components in the table; box color indicates whether component is water input, output, or summary.

TO E & ET

OTHER REGIONAL TRANSFER 

WILD & SCENIC RIVERS NET 

USE:

COLORADO R 

DELIVERIES:

RUNOFF:

NATURAL: INCIDENTAL: 

PRECIPITATION: TOTAL STREAM 

FLOW: 

AG EFFECTIVE 

PRECIPITATION ON 

IRRIGATED LANDS: 

INFLOW FROM 

OREGON:

INFLOW FROM 

MEXICO:

LOCAL IMPORTED 

DELIVERIES:

LOCAL

DELIVERIES:

CVP BASE 

DELIVERIES: CVP 

PROJECT

DELIVERIES:

OTHER FEDERAL 

DELIVERIES:

SWP DELIVERIES: 

WATER DEPOSITS: 

SURFACE WATER:

GROUNDWATER 

RECYL & DESAL:

TRANSFERS:

TOTAL GROUNDWATER NATURAL RECHARGE: 

GROUNDWATER CHANGE IN STORAGE: 

BANKED:

ADJUDICATED:

UNADJUDICATED: 

GW EXTRACTIONS:

CONTRACT BANKS:

ADJUDICATED BASINS: 

UNADJUDICATED BASINS: 

EVAPOTRANSPIRATION 

OF APPLIED WATER: 

AG:

WETLANDS:

URBAN:

WATER USE (APPLIED): 

AGRICULTURAL: 

WETLANDS:

URBAN:

RECYCLED WATER: 

AG: URBAN:

GW: 

URBAN

WASTEWATER 

PRODUCED:

INCIDENTAL E & ET 

AG RETURN FLOWS: 

AG & WETLANDS 

RETURN FLOWS:

RETURN FLOWS TO SALT 

SINKS:

AG: WETLANDS:

URBAN:

REQUIRED DELTA OUTFLOW: 

REMAINING NATURAL 

RUNOFF

FLOW TO SALT SINKS: 

OUTFLOW TO NEVADA: 

OUTFLOW TO OREGON:

OUTFLOW TO MEXICO: 

DEEP PERC OF APPLIED 

WATER: 

AG: WETLANDS:

URBAN:

RETURN FLOW TO 

DEVELOPED

SUPPLY: 

AG:

WETLANDS:

URBAN:

EVAP FROM: 

LAKES:

RESERVOIRS:

UNIRRIGATED AG: 

OCEAN DESAL: 

RELEASES FOR 

INSTREAM USE: 

RELEASES FOR

DELTA OUTFLOW 

CVP: SWP: 

WATER 

TRANSFERS:

REGIONAL:

IMPORTED: 

CONVEYANCE E&ET, 

RETURN FLOWS, & 

SEEPAGE:

URBAN: AG:

WETLANDS:

CONVEYANCE E & ET: 

URBAN: AG:

WETLANDS:

MEXICO:

CONVEYANCE RETURN 

FLOWS:

URBAN: AG:

WETLANDS:

CONVEYANCE SEEPAGE: 

URBAN: AG:

WETLANDS:

ENVIRONMENTAL 

WATER ACCOUNT 

RELEASES:

RETURN FLOW FOR 

DELTA OUTFLOW: 

AG:

WETLANDS:

URBAN : 

EVAPORATION AND EVAPOTRANSPIRATION OF APPLIED WATER, 

PRECIPITATION AND CONVEYANCE: 

GW RECHARGE:

CONTRACT BANKING:

ADJUDICATED BASINS: 

UNADJUDICATED BASINS: 

WATER FROM 

REFINERIES:

SUBSURFACE GW 

INFLOW: 

SUBSURFACE 

GROUNDWATER 

OUTFLOW: 

INSTREAM NET USE:

ENVIRONMENTAL WATER 

ACCOUNT RELEASES: 

REGIONAL

TRANSFER IN: 

1 20 Chapter 1 California State Summary Volume 3 Regional Reports

California Water Plan Update 2005

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 2 North Coast Hydrologic Region 

Volume 3 

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Chapter 2 North Coast Hydrologic Region 2 i

California Water Plan Update 2005

Chapter 2 North Coast Hydrologic Region

Contents

Chapter 2 North Coast Hydrologic Region ................................................................................................................2-1

Setting ................................ 2-1

Climate ............................... 2-1

Population .......................... 2-1

Land Use ............................ 2-2

Water Supply and Use ......... 2-3

State of the Region .............. 2-4

 Challenges ..................... 2-6

 Accomplishments ............ 2-8

Relationship with Other Regions ...........................................................................................................................2-8

Looking to the Future ........... 2-9

Regional Planning ............... 2-9

Water Portfolios for Water Years 1998, 2000, and 2001 .....................................................................................2-10

Selected References ........... 2-10

Figures

Figure 2-1 North Coast Hydrologic Region (map) ......................................................................................................2-ii

Figure 2-2 North Coast Hydrologic Region population ...............................................................................................2-3

Figure 2-3 North Coast water balance for water years 1998, 2000, 2001 (2 bar charts) .............................................2-5

Figure 2-4 North Coast region - illustrated water flow diagram ................................................................................2-15

Figure 2-5 North Coast region - schematic flow diagram .........................................................................................2-16

Tables

Table 2-1 North Coast Hydrologic Region water balance summary ...........................................................................2-11

Table 2-2 North Coast Hydrologic Region water use and distribution of dedicated supplies .........................................2-12

Table 2-3 North Coast water portfolios ...................................................................................................................2-14

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A
Volume 3 Regional Reports

California Water Plan Update 2005

Flow in TAF

1998

2,105

2000

1,498

2001

998

Klamath and Lost Rivers

Flow in TAF

1998

184

2000

114

2001

66

Klamath Straits Drain and Lost River

Flow in TAF

1998

2

2000

2

2001

2

Sacramento River Region

North Fork Ditch

Flow in TAF

1998

32

2000

33

2001

34

San Francisco Region

Sonoma Petaluma

Flow in TAF

1998

851

2000

1,111

2001

669

Sacramento River Region

Trinity River

HUMBOLDT TRINITY

SONOMA

MENDOCINO

SISKYOU

MODOC

DEL

NORTE

Some Statistics

 Area - 19,476 square miles (12.3% of State)

 Average annual precipitation - 50.6 inches

 Year 2000 population - 644,000

 2030 population projection - 895,150

 Total reservoir storage capacity - 3,780 TAF

 2000 irrigated crop area - 326,600 acres

.

.

.

.

.

.

Figure 2-1 North Coast Hydrologic Region

North Coast Hydrologic Region is in the northwestern corner of California and includes redwood forests, inland mountain valleys, and the 

arid Modoc Plateau. Arrows indicate annual flows entering and leaving the region for water years 1998, 2000, and 2001. 

Flow in TAF

1998

32,464

2000

18,888

2001

8,143

Outflow to Ocean*

*Outflow to Ocean includes Wild and Scenic Rivers, regulated flows, and estimated wastewater outflows.

EE-RM-PET-100 C0MMENT 01A