Perspectives on Bay–Delta Science and Policy

Healey, M. C.; Dettinger, Michael D.; Norgaard, Richard B.

doi:10.15447/sfews.2016v14iss4art6

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is little doubt that implementing adaptive management is difficult in this ecosystem because of its large size and complexity, highly altered physical and biological systems, the presence of endangered species, numerous stakeholders, multiple agencies with different responsibilities and mandates, increasing (and often conflicting) demands for water, and growing impacts of climate change and invasive species (Healey et al 2016). Still, participants in the Delta ISB (2016) review did not consider complexity to be the greatest single impediment to undertaking adaptive management in the Delta; rather, they attributed difficulties to the lack of reliable, long-term funding.…”

Section: Adaptive Management In the Deltamentioning

confidence: 99%

Facilitating Adaptive Management in California’s Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta

Wiens¹,

Zedler²,

Resh³

et al. 2017

SFEWS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Adaptive Management In the Deltamentioning

confidence: 99%

Facilitating Adaptive Management in California’s Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta

Wiens¹,

Zedler²,

Resh³

et al. 2017

SFEWS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A recent decadal synthesis of contaminant research in the San Francisco Bay−Delta (Bay−Delta; Fong et al 2016) concluded that contaminants are present at concentrations that can cause both acute lethality as well as sublethal toxicity to aquatic organisms. Chemical pollution is therefore likely to play a significant role in the currently degraded state of the Bay− Delta ecosystem (Healey et al 2016). As an indication of risk to delicate food webs, acute toxicity has been documented in both tributaries and mainstem rivers of the Delta (Deanovic et al 2014;Hasenbein et al 2014;Weston et al 2015a;Deanovic et al 2018;Weston et al 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As an indication of risk to delicate food webs, acute toxicity has been documented in both tributaries and mainstem rivers of the Delta (Deanovic et al 2014;Hasenbein et al 2014;Weston et al 2015a;Deanovic et al 2018;Weston et al 2018). Moreover, environmental surveillance efforts have measured a diversity of contaminants in Bay−Delta habitats at concentrations known to negatively affect the health of fish and invertebrates (Fong et al 2016;Healey et al 2016;Jabusch et al 2018). Collectively, this has raised concerns that poor water quality conditions are limiting the recovery of Delta Smelt and other high-priority species for conservation (Hobbs et al 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous reviews have repeatedly emphasized that contaminants have been an area of critical uncertainty that needed focused research (CALFED 2000;SBDS 2008;Brooks et al 2012;Mount et al 2012; 1 https://marinescience.ucdavis.edu/engagement/past-events Scholz et al 2012;NRC 2013;IEP MAST 2015;Luoma et al 2015). Nevertheless, despite previous needs assessments, much remains unknown about the presence and fate of contaminants in the Bay−Delta, as well as their effects across broad scales of biological organization (Fong et al 2016;Healey et al 2016). This review:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Review of and Recommendations for Monitoring Contaminants and their Effects in the San Francisco Bay−Delta

Connon

Hasenbein

Brander

et al. 2019

SFEWS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Legacy and current-use contaminants enter into and accumulate throughout the San Francisco Bay−Delta (Bay−Delta), and are present at concentrations with known effects on species important to this diverse watershed. There remains major uncertainty and a lack of focused research able to address and provide understanding of effects across multiple biological scales, despite previous and ongoing emphasis on the need for it. These needs are challenging specifically because of the established regulatory programs that often monitor on a chemical-by-chemical basis, or in which decisions are grounded in lethality-based endpoints. To best address issues of contaminants in the Bay−Delta, monitoring efforts should consider effects of environmentally relevant mixtures and sub-lethal impacts that can affect ecosystem health. These efforts need to consider the complex environment in the Bay−Delta including variable abiotic (e.g., temperature, salinity) and biotic (e.g., pathogens) factors. This calls for controlled and focused research, and the development of a multi-disciplinary contaminant monitoring and assessment program that provides information across biological scales. Information gained in this manner will contribute toward evaluating parameters that could alleviate ecologically detrimental outcomes. This review is a result of a Special Symposium convened at the University of California−Davis (UCD) on January 31, 2017 to address critical information needed on how contaminants affect the Bay−Delta. The UCD Symposium focused on new tools and approaches for assessing multiple stressor effects to freshwater and estuarine systems. Our approach is similar to the recently proposed framework laid out by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) that uses weight of evidence to scale toxicological responses to chemical contaminants in a laboratory, and to guide the conservation of priority species and habitats. As such, we also aimed to recommend multiple endpoints that could be used to promote a multi-disciplinary understanding of contaminant risks in Bay−Delta while supporting management needs.

show abstract

“…The first "State of Bay-Delta Science" was published in 2008 (Healey et al 2008). The most recent update of the State of Bay-Delta Science (Healey et al 2016a(Healey et al , 2016b, and accompanying articles) considered species of concern (Delta Smelt, Chinook Salmon), processes (fish predation, nutrient dynamics, food webs, flow and transport), stressors (contaminant effects, climate change), tools (multidimensional models), and human uses and effects on the Delta (Delta landscapes, climate change, agricultural and urban water supply, and the levee system). Other comprehensive overviews are also available; for example, IEP (2015), Johnson et al (2017), andSherman et al (2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%