RMP NewsVolume 3, Issue 2

Regional Monitoring News, Summer 1997

Contents

Watershed Pilot Study

Wetlands Pilot Study

Five-Year Program Review

Upcoming Presentations

SFEI Staff Profile

USGS Water Quality Data

RMP Calendar

Announcements

A Closer Look of the Watershed-Estuary Boundary: A Preview of the Watershed Pilot Study

by Rainer Hoenicke

"Why do we see exceedances of water quality objectives in the Estuary?" was one of the questions posed as early as the second year of the RMP, after data revealed that certain pollutants exceeded water quality objectives at many sampling stations. Other questions were: "What can environmental managers do to reduce pollutant inputs into the Estuary? How are they best controlled?" Many Program Participants came to the realization fairly early that the Estuary represents a mixing bowl whose pollutant profile is reflected by inflow of the two large rivers, local runoff contributions, waste water discharges, complex sediment resuspension and diffusion processes, and atmospheric deposition. To make the next step from describing the pollutant profile in the Estuary to drawing conclusions about general source categories, and getting from there to pollutant control actions, pilot studies would have to be undertaken. 

The Watershed Pilot Study is the first one of these with the general goal of determining if the pollutant spectrum from runoff contributions can be differentiated from that of nearby RMP stations in the South Bay. We recognized that prior to starting an expensive sampling program, more specific assessment questions should be selected which could then guide a targeted information review. Therefore, only one station at the watershed-Estuary interface was initially selected for water and sediment sampling. Approximately 20 people interested in this project developed a prioritized matrix of assessment questions which served as the foundation of an information review, released as a draft report in November 1996 it is scheduled to be included in the 1996 Annual Report. The report identifies data gaps and, together with the first year's sampling results, could identify additional or alternative sampling needs. 

In 1996, a sampling station (Standish Dam) was selected on Coyote Creek, very close to Dixon Landing Road and Highway 880 where the city boundaries of Fremont, Milpitas, and San Jose converge. This location is within the tidal prism of the creek. During last winter's sampling on an incoming tide, the salinity was zero from the water surface to the bottom of the creek, indicating that the station was exclusively influenced by the creek, while during the dry-season sampling, salinity approximately 1 meter below the surface was between 2.7 and 3 parts per thousand, indicating a mix of creek and Estuary water. The same parameters in water and sediment were collected at this location as in the Estuary, and at approximately the same times (late February/early March, late April, and early August). 

The goals of the Watershed Pilot Study were to: 

1. Link the contaminant patterns found in the Estuary with those in an adjacent watershed to test if runoff and sediment taken at the lower end of Coyote Creek differs from adjacent water and sediment in the South Bay, including the local effects monitoring stations maintained by the San Jose-Santa Clara Water Treatment Plant and the Sunnyvale Treatment Plant.
2. Explore what kinds of ancillary water quality parameters and watershed characteristics should be measured or described to explain some of the patterns found so as to improve sampling design and to fine-tune testing methodology.

1. Is the pollutant profile in water and sediment deposited in the lower reaches of Coyote Creek different from that at nearby Estuary stations, i.e., can a distinct watershed signal be discerned?
2. Are there seasonal differences in the pollutant profile at the sampling station?
3. Which factors may influence the findings?

It should be noted that the watershed station data are not necessarily representative, since they are comprised of only two and three data points for sediment and water, respectively. So far, the preliminary data set indicates the following for sediment samples: 

• Seasonal differences between the watershed station, the closest local effects monitoring station, and the closest Estuary station are apparent for chlorinated pesticides (Figure 1). Station differences also appear to be quite pronounced, with the Standish Dam site having the highest DDT and chlordane concentrations (Figure 2) during the wet season when high flows mobilize sediment in the watershed and carry down particle-associated pollutants with them. The Santa Clara Valley was prime agricultural land during the time these pesticides were still in use, and residual pesticides seem to become mobilized during the rainy season and are washed down the creek.
• Surprisingly, San Jose's local effects monitoring station had the highest sediment concentrations of DDT compounds in the dry season, both in absolute and relative terms. The nearest Estuary station was consistently low (Figure 3).
• PCBs also show pronounced seasonal and station differences: PCB levels were highest near the San Jose monitoring station, intermediate at the watershed site, and lowest in the Bay. It is quite striking that PCB concentrations in creek sediment, although not as high as at the San Jose local effects monitoring station, were higher than anywhere in the Estuary (Figure 4).
• Sediment PAH concentrations, on the other hand, were uniformly lower at Standish Dam than anywhere in the Estuary.

Analyses for metals at the Standish Dam site have not yet been completed for the dry season sediment samples, but some general observations can be made. The watershed-Estuary interface site has comparable metal concentrations to the nearest South Bay RMP site, and, with the exception of silver (Figure 5), it is also similar to the two local effects monitoring sites of the Cities of San Jose and Sunnyvale. In fact, only selenium concentrations in the dry season were appreciably higher at Standish Dam than at any other station (Figure 6). These preliminary metals data show that contaminant concentrations in sediment carried down the watershed and deposited where the creek meets the Bay are not very different from what we find in the Bay itself. In contrast, the Santa Clara Valley and the Alameda County urban runoff programs have found in their sampling studies that stream sediments were higher in lead, copper, zinc, cadmium, nickel, and chromium than Bay sediments, although nickel and chromium are likely from erosion of localized soils than from human inputs. Possibly because the sediments sampled at Standish Dam represent a mixture of Bay and creek sediments, the urban runoff program data were not corroborated. 

Results of the water analyses are a bit more spotty than for sediment, since none of the trace organics data have been finalized at this date. For metals, however, a slightly more differentiated picture than for sediment concentrations emerges: 

Arsenic and cadmium concentrations (both dissolved and total) were consistently lower at Standish Dam than at adjacent RMP and local effects monitoring stations for all three sampling events, while selenium (both dissolved and total) showed pronounced elevated signals compared to the South Bay stations at the spring and summer sampling events. Total mercury in Coyote Creek water was slightly higher than at the South Bay stations for all three sampling events. Total nickel was appreciably higher at the Standish Dam site during the wet season than in the South Bay, suggesting transport of nickel out of the watershed. Total copper, lead, silver, and zinc concentrations were comparable in creek and South Bay water. 

More in-depth analyses will be conducted once the complete data set has been assembled. Many of the observed contaminant patterns in water and sediment are influenced by the specific conditions at the time of sampling. For example, sediment contaminant concentrations are directly related to sediment particle size. Silt and clay can adsorb much more contaminant mass than sand particles. Sand predominated in wet-season sediment samples at Standish Dam, while clay dominated in the dry season. Water concentrations were most likely heavily influenced by releases of stored water in Anderson Reservoir at the time of the wet-season sampling. Incoming tides during the dry-season sampling, on the other hand, most likely influenced the concentrations in the Standish Dam sample in August. 

In 1997, another transitional station at the interface of the Guadalupe River and the South Bay in Alviso was added to determine if the same or similar patterns can be observed in a close-by watershed. These pilot station results will be closely linked to the watershed management planning process currently taking place in the Santa Clara Valley and evaluated for their applicability throughout the region. 

back to contents 

What About the Marshes?: The Wetlands Pilot Study

by Michael May

Sampling the Wetlands: Beyond the Base Program

Under the primary monitoring activities of the Regional Monitoring Program, about two dozen sites located throughout the Estuary are sampled. Most of these sites are located far from shore, along the "spine" of the Estuary, in a significant depth of water. These sites were chosen in order to gauge overall Estuary conditions, conditions apart from local, short-range influences such as nearby waste water outfalls. It is precisely at the shore, however, that we find the tidal marshes, and with them some of the most important ecological activity of the Estuary. Have Estuary contaminant inputs resulted in contamination of the tidal marshlands? 

The RMP Wetlands Pilot Study looks at this question. RMP Pilot studies are small-scale projects initiated on a trial basis. The potential gain from a full-blown effort can be judged from the real-world results of the pilot, with minimal expense. 

A Larger Context

The Wetlands Pilot is considered a preliminary step toward a coordinated, estuary-wide wetlands monitoring program. This effort is envisioned as part of an integrated plan for San Francisco Estuary wetlands protection, a plan currently in motion through efforts such as the Wetlands Ecosystem Goals Project*. 

The sampling approach taken in the Wetlands Pilot acknowledges the marsh as composed of many natural components (vegetated plains, levees, pannes, mudflats, small and large channels); each has its own regime of tidewater inundation, salinity, exposure to light and wind, vegetative cover, sediment grain size, and elevation. Thus, these marsh components should be considered individually in any monitoring program. Such an approach allows monitoring results to be related to particular marsh habitats and provides a link between contamination data and other evaluations such as ecological health and function. Many previous marsh contamination studies failed to provide a necessary level of detail, failing to specify which part of the marsh was sampled, or, if a location such as "channel" was specified, neglecting to specify that channel's position within the marsh drainage network. 

Objectives

The following objectives were set to help assure that the wetlands pilot can lead to a monitoring program for contaminants that yields comparable data for bays, wetlands, and watersheds, and that the wetlands data contribute to the local and regional expressions of wetlands condition. 
 

• Develop equipment and train personnel to sample tidal marsh sediments for contaminant analysis. The intention is to develop a standard technique for sampling regional wetlands which, when used in future wetland contamination investigations, would insure a level of comparability. The technique should also yield results that are comparable to other results of the Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances (RMP), and that are consistent with other scientific efforts to understand tidal marshes.
• Gain insight about the usefulness of sampling individual components of the tidal marsh for understanding marsh contamination and for making comparisons within and among marshes.

The marshes

Two tidal marshes were selected for the Wetlands Pilot: China Camp State Park and Petaluma Marsh (Figure 1). These marshlands were selected for the following reasons: 

1. they are among the best understood tidal marshlands in the region, based upon past and continuing ecological and landform studies;
2. they are sites proposed to be included as part of the San Francisco Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR), and therefore future sampling in these marshlands may be supported through funding or in-kind services and coordination through the NERR;
3. they are public with easy access, such that this new sampling effort is not complicated by logistical problems;
4.  they contain areas that do not receive any direct runoff of sediment or water, and that are, therefore, indicative of the pattern of sediment contamination affected through tidewater inputs only; and
5. they are located adjacent to existing RMP stations for San Pablo Bay and the entrance to the Petaluma River, and therefore they are logical geographic extensions of the existing RMP for bays.

The tidal channel network

Tidal marshes contain branching networks of drainage channels, with the smallest channels draining to larger channels, and the larger channels draining to still larger channels, until the open bay, river, or ocean is reached. A channel's position within the network can be described using the Strahler system of channel "order"; the smallest channels are termed first-order; two first-order channels joining creates a second order channel, and so on (Figure 2). A channel network is named after the largest channel order contained within it; thus, a contiguous network of first-, second- and third-order channels is termed a third-order network. 

Just as in mountainous terrain, between adjacent drainage networks we find high areas, ridges in the landscape, known as drainage divides. In the marsh, the drainage divides are very subtle, but are there nevertheless, occurring at places roughly equidistant from any channels. 

Sampling stations

At China Camp and Petaluma, third-order channel networks are the most common; at each marsh, two third-order networks were selected for sampling. Three sampling stations were established in each of the four selected networks as follows: one station on the drainage divide of the vegetated plain, one station at the downstream reach of a second-order channel, and one station at the downstream reach of a third-order channel (Figure 2). Each drainage divide station involved an area of about 200 m². Each channel station was a reach of channel about 20 m long. Based upon this array of stations, contamination variability within and between channels large and small and whole drainage networks could be investigated. 

Each sample consisted of 10 sub-samples taken at random from a station, and combined in a clean bucket. This method of combining sub samples lessens the risk of unintentionally sampling a patch of sediment with unusually high or low contamination that would not be representative of the sample site as a whole. Each sub-sample was collected from the sediment surface to a depth of 5 cm, using a thick-walled glass tube (Figure 3). The total volume of a sample was about 500 cm³, which is comparable to the volume of an RMP in-bay sediment sample. To further assure comparability with the RMP Base Program, only sediments similar to the nearby bay stations of the RMP (unconsolidated fine-grained sediments) were sampled from the marsh channels. 

Sampling dates

Sampling took place twice a year for two years, in winter and fall of 1995 and 1996. During 1995, samples were taken only from the two drainage networks at China Camp. These results suggested that, for most chemicals analyzed, there was little difference between the two networks, and little difference between the second- and third-order stations within each network. Therefore, for 1996, the sampling effort at China Camp was decreased to a single network, and the third-order station eliminated. This decrease in sampling effort at China Camp provided resources to begin the pilot project at the two networks selected at Petaluma Marsh. Winter 1996 results for Petaluma Marsh suggest that the two Petaluma networks are, like China Camp, similar in most regards, which prompted a similar decrease in sampling effort at Petaluma for fall 1996. 

Analysis

Marsh sediment samples were analyzed by the same laboratories and using the same procedures as with the RMP open-bay sediment samples. Samples were analyzed for 13 trace metals (e.g., copper, lead, and mercury) and 5 groups of organic compounds (e.g., DDTs and PCBs), as well as sediment quality parameters such as grain size and total organic carbon. 

Summary of results

A summary of the results is presented here. Full results from the Wetlands Pilot for 1995 can be viewed in the 1995 RMP Annual Report, and for 1995 and 1996, in the 1996 RMP Annual Report. 

Trace metal patterns and values

In most cases, trace metal levels were found to be higher in the channel that on the drainage divides. A representative example of this pattern is seen in copper (Figure 4.) Although the difference is not great, values are consistently higher in the channel at both China Camp and Petaluma. 

Several values are higher than the neighboring RMP open-bay station, BD22 (San Pablo Bay station). Every trace metal analyzed had some values which exceeded the values found in San Pablo Bay; in some cases highest marsh values were over five times San Pablo Bay values. These results suggest that San Francisco Bay marshlands could be acting as a sink for trace metal contaminants and these areas may warrant particular concern regarding trace metal contamination. 

Trace organics patterns and values

Interestingly, in most cases organic contaminants had higher levels at the drainage divide stations than at the channel stations, a pattern opposite that of the trace metals. A representative example is seen in the PCBs (Figure 5). 

With the exception of the PAHs, all groups of organic contaminants from the marsh had values which were higher than those of the neighboring RMP San Pablo Bay station. One value for chlordanes at China Camp is over 30 times the highest value seen at the RMP San Pablo Bay station. These results suggest that, as with the trace metals, San Francisco Bay marshlands could be acting as a sink for organic contaminants and these areas may warrant particular concern regarding trace organic contamination. 

Cause for the contamination patterns seen

The cause of the observed pattern in tidal marshland contamination is not clear. Both metal and organic contaminant values are strongly influenced by sediment grain sizes and organic carbon content (peat versus clay), yet the opposite patterns seen for the two groups of contaminants prevents a simple explanation based on such factors. The patterns may be a result of how contaminants arrived at the marsh (whether brought in by the tides or deposited from the atmosphere), whether contamination of incoming tidewater is occasional or continual, and whether tidal action can "scrub" contaminants from one part of the marsh (e.g., channels) and deposit them on another (e.g., the marsh plain). A more in depth discussion of the possible causes for the observed patterns will appear in the 1996 RMP Annual Report. 

The evidence that tidal marshland sediments are more contaminated than the sediments of the open bay is not surprising, given that the marshlands are retentive filters washed twice daily by the tides. This does not preclude the rather obvious need, however, to assess the effect of these high concentrations upon the ecological functions of the tidal marshes. 

The Future of RMP Wetlands Monitoring

Future monitoring could seek to replicate the channel-drainage divide patterns observed, examine them in more detail across the marsh, expand monitoring to other marshes in the Estuary, and focus on specific monitoring objectives such as endangered species support or assessment of local watershed inputs. However, 1996 was the last year for the RMP Wetlands Pilot and at this time, there are no plans for further wetlands monitoring under the RMP. Wetlands monitoring under the RMP could resume in the future, depending on available funding and other monitoring priorities of the RMP. 

For more information on the RMP Wetlands Pilot Study, please refer to the article in the 1995 RMP Annual Report, available from the San Francisco Estuary Institute at (510) 430-0801. The 1996 RMP Annual Report, slated for release next January, will contain an updated article and the complete dataset. 

^* For more information on the Wetlands Ecosystem Goals Project, please call Peggy Olofson at (510) 286-0427. For more information on the NERR system please call Dr. Dwayne E. Porter at (803) 777-4615 or see http://inlet.geol.scarolina.edu/nerrscdmo.html. 

Figure 1. Location of RMP wetland sampling sites. 

Figure 3. Sampling channel sediment at China Camp State Park. 
 

back to contents 

Five-Year Program Review: What Value Does the RMP Provide?

by Rainer Hoenicke

In early 1997, seven independent scientists and specialists skilled in matters pertaining to monitoring design, data analysis, quality assurance, and science administration and management evaluated the Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances (see RMP News, Vol. 3, Issue 1). This external program review had been built into the initial design of the RMP, with the purpose of examining the technical underpinnings, structure, function, and performance of the RMP and its staff, contractors, and administrative infrastructure. 

The reviewers noted that "the RMP is an innovative and successful program....[that] has combined shared support, direction, and participation by regulatory agencies and regulated organizations and industries in a trend setting model for collective responsibility...such a model for collaboration and cooperation deserves national and international recognition." 

According to the review panel "high-quality data have been collected, evaluated, and presented in a manner that allows evaluation of the chemical and toxicological characteristics of the open-Bay environment. In many cases, they reflect state-of-the-art analysis for environmental parameters that is unequaled in a monitoring program of this size." RMP Participants believe that the program is important and valuable to them and will, in the long run, be of benefit to regulators, dischargers, and the population of the Bay Area. After five years, it is time, however, to re-examine the original program objectives, while continuing to focus on toxic and potentially toxic trace elements and organic contaminants. The RMP has matured to the point where it would benefit from a collaborative effort among all participants aimed at providing expanded, more clearly stated program objectives, a more precise statement of questions to be answered, and a more refined statement of the overall goals of the project. This effort should be framed within a clearer definition of roles and responsibilities for all participants in the program. 

The review panel stressed that data analysis is a key step in converting raw data into information useful in making high-priority environmental management decisions. The success of the analysis activity depends directly on the appropriateness of the technical study design. Both analysis activity and study design could be significantly improved by more detailed and precise statements of key questions and by a tighter link between program objectives and analysis approaches. Data from other monitoring programs and from historical data sets, as well as Pilot and Special Studies should be better integrated with the RMP. 

The review panel also evaluated the day-to-day operation of the RMP and developed a series of recommendations that could streamline and further improve the management aspects of the RMP. These include reduction of administrative layers, expansion of the planning horizon, and development of a strategic plan for the next five years, as well as a process for developing one. 

With respect to resources available to carry out the RMP in its current form, the review panel concluded that the potential cost-savings related to changes in study design and management structure may compensate for additional tasks in the areas of data integration, modeling, and analysis. Furthermore, the panelists acknowledged that the existing cooperative and participatory structure of the program facilitates significant in-kind contributions provided by virtually all parties to the program, including the contractors. These contributions add a great deal of value to the program, although they are difficult to measure in dollar terms. There are no current efforts to obtain additional state, federal, or grant funds and/or in-kind services to support the RMP, although efforts should be made to obtain such support. The large body of data from historical studies of the Bay as well as from other ongoing monitoring an research programs represents a valuable, but as of yet under-utilized resource for the RMP. 

The RMP Steering Committee is currently preparing for a series of facilitated working sessions designed to map out an effective decision-making process. Some of the first challenges for the Steering Committee to take on is to: 
 

• better define core program objectives,
• formulate specific management and scientific questions needed to focus study design and analysis, and
• clearly spell out roles, responsibilities, and authorities of all parties to the RMP.

For a copy of the RMP Five-Year Review, please call Gabriele Marek at (510) 430-0801. 
 

back to contents 

Upcoming Presentations

Relationships Among Sediments, Toxicity, and Benthos in San Francisco Bay

Bruce Thompson, San Francisco Estuary Institute; Brian Anderson and John Hunt University of California, Santa Cruz; Heather Peterson, California Department of Water Resources; and Karen Taberski, San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board will be presenting results of three different monitoring programs which evaluated the condition of sediments and benthos in the San Francisco Bay at the Estuarine Research Federation Meeting in Providence, Rhode Island in October. Below is an excerpt from the presentation description. For more information, please contact Bruce Thompson at (510) 231-5613. 

Data from three monitoring programs showed that only nickel in sediments exceeded National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Effects Range Median guidelines in most samples, but several metals and DDTs exceeded Effects Range Low (ERL) guidelines at most stations. Eohaustorius and larval bivalve bioassays showed that toxicity was widespread in space and time. At some stations, toxicity was related to elevated chlordanes or PAH contamination. In the absence of obvious relationships with individual contaminants, the additive effects of several contaminants was related to toxicity. Stations where more than seven contaminants exceeded ERLs were usually toxic to amphipods, but not bivalve larvae. At some stations toxicity occurred in the absence of obviously elevated contamination and may have been related to unmeasured pesticides or algal toxins. Four benthic assemblages were identified that reflected salinity gradients and sediment types. The lowest diversity occurred in the zone of estuarine mixing and the highest diversity occurred near sewage outfalls. Each assemblage included a few species that indicate impacts, but benthic impacts appeared slight, even in areas with considerable toxicity and elevated contaminants in the sediments. Amphipod abundances and other benthic indicators were not clearly correlated with bioassay results. 

Data Uncertainty Levels and Data Use: A Case Study

Rainer Hoenicke and Sarah Lowe of the San Francisco Estuary Institute, and Genine Scelfo of the University of California, Santa Cruz will give a presentation on the RMP Quality Assurance and Control Program on Wednesday, November 19 at the National Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) conference in San Francisco, California. The conference runs from November 16 through 20 at the San Francisco Hilton and Towers. Below is an excerpt from the presentation description. Please contact Rainer Hoenicke at (510) 231-5731 for more information on the RMP Quality Assurance and Control Program. For more information about the SETAC conference call (904) 469-1500. 

The RMP is a large-scale data collection effort designed to assess contaminant concentrations in water, sediment, fish, and bivalve tissue in the San Francisco Estuary and to determine seasonal, annual, and long-term trends in chemical and biological water quality. The program uses state-of-the-art sampling and analysis techniques to minimize and control measurement errors. High emphasis is placed on connecting environmental management questions with corresponding data quality objectives expressed in terms of analytical detection levels, accuracy, and precision. The QA program has quantified potential measurement errors in both field and laboratory in order to evaluate to what extent data uncertainty influences the types of questions that can be answered related to pollutant source categories, trends and control measures. Examples of specific quality assurance and control steps taken during sampling and analysis of trace elements and trace organic contaminants and their implications for data use will be given. 
 
 

back to contents 

RMP Contributions List

back to contents 

Staff Profile: Meet Dr. Jay A. Davis--Environmental Scientist

Water Quality Data for San Francisco Bay Now on the World Wide Web

For almost three decades the United States Geological Survey has maintained a program of research and observation in San Francisco Bay. The program, supported in part by the RMP, includes regular measurements of water quality along a 145-kilometer transect spanning the length of the entire estuarine system, from the South Bay to the Sacramento River. The data set includes measures of salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and chlorophyll concentration. A new website has been established to describe the measurement program, display results of historic water quality measurements, and provide an opportunity to see the current conditions in the Bay from results of the most recent USGS sampling. Connect your browser to URL: 

http://sfbay.wr.usgs.gov/access/wqdata/index.html 

For more information about this measurement program, contact Jim Cloern by e-mail at jecloernusgs.gov. 
 

back to contents 

RMP Staff E-mail Addresses and Telephone Extensions

The main line is (510) 430-0801.

back to contents 

RMP Calendar

Steering Committee Implementation Workshop, 9:00-5:00, at SFEI offices on the Richmond Field Station. 

Saturday, September 13^th--4^th Annual Volunteer Monitoring Conference˜Launching Partnerships, 9:00?5:00, at the San Francisco Theological Seminary, San Anselmo. Call Andy Peri (415) 457-0802 for more information. 

Friday, September 19^th--RMP Quality Assurance and Control Workshop, 9:30-3:30, location to be determined. Call Rainer Hoenicke (510) 231-5731 for more information. 

Sunday, November 16^th-Thursday, November 20^th--SETAC 18^th Annual Meeting: Bridging the Global Environment: Technology, Communication and Education at the San Francisco Hilton and Towers. For more information call (904) 469-1500 or e-mail setacsetac.org. 
 

Announcements

RMP Program Review Available

The RMP Five-Year Program Review is now available from SFEI. This report is the first time the program has been comprehensively and formally evaluated by independent scientists and specialists from outside the San Francisco Bay area. To request a copy, please contact Gabriele Marek at (510) 430-0801. 

Newsletters and Annual Reports

Back Issues of Regional Monitoring News and RMP Annual Reports are available. For ordering information, please contact Gabriele Marek at (510) 430-0801. 

The RMP visits Estuary Newsletter

The fall issue of Regional Monitoring News will be replaced by a RMP insert in the October issue of Estuary. Everyone on our newsletter mailing list will receive a copy of Estuary in October. Regional Monitoring News will return in winter 1997/98. 
 

San Francisco Estuary Institute
7770 Pardee Lane
Oakland, CA 94621-1424
(510) 746-SFEI (7334)
Fax (510) 746-7300
www.sfei.org