Our library features many hundreds of entries.

To search among them, click "Search" below to pull down options, including filtering by document type, author, year, and keyword.
Find these options under "Show only items where." Or you can also sort by author, title, type, and year clicking the headings below.

Export 1668 results:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 
S
 (20.08 MB)
Safran, S. M.; Hagerty, S.; Robinson, A.; Grenier, L. 2018. Translating Science-Based Restoration Strategies into Spatially-Explicit Restoration Opportunities in the Delta (2018 Bay-Delta Science Conference Presentation).

In a previous report titled “A Delta Renewed” we offered a collection of guidelines for science-based ecological restoration in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta that emphasized restoring or emulating natural processes, anticipating future changes associated with climate change, establishing appropriate configurations of habitat types at the landscape scale, and utilizing a variety multi-benefit management strategies. In this talk, we present on our recent work to support regional restoration planning efforts by developing a repeatable process for using these guidelines to identify spatially-explicit restoration opportunities. The process is largely GIS-based and utilizes spatial data on existing land cover and conservation status, habitat configuration (including patch sizes and distances), surface elevations (including depth of subsidence), and future changes in tidal elevations associated with sea-level rise.  By distilling generalized guidelines into spatially-explicit opportunities, we hope to provide a practical tool for incorporating science into planning. To that end, these new methods are currently being piloted through planning efforts focused on the Central Delta Corridor and the McCormack Williamson Tract, and are also being used to assist with the quantification of ecological restoration potential in the Delta Plan Ecosystem Amendment.

Presentation recording: available here.

 (3.78 MB)
Safran, S. M.; Clark, E.; Beller, E. E.; Grossinger, R. M. 2016. Mission Bay Historical Ecology Reconnaissance Study: Data Collection Summary (Technical Report). SFEI Contribution No. 777.

The goals of the Mission Bay Historical Ecology Reconnaissance Study were to collect and compile high-priority historical
data about the Mission Bay landscape, identify sources that could help to develop a deeper understanding of early
ecological conditions, and to identify future possible research directions based on the available data. This technical
memorandum is intended to document the archives consulted during the reconnaissance study, summarize the collected
and compiled data, and to identify potential next steps. A separate technical presentation to project staff and advisors will
summarize the preliminary findings and questions generated from a review of the historical dataset. Ultimately, this
research is intended to support the San Diego Audubon Society’s Mission Bay Wetlands Conceptual Restoration Plan (CRP)
and the ReWild Mission Bay project.

 (3.44 MB)
 (47.38 MB)
Safran, S. M.; Grenier, J. Letitia; Grossinger, R. M. 2016. Ecological implications of modeled hydrodynamic changes in the upper San Francisco Estuary: Phase II Technical Memorandum. SFEI Contribution No. 786.

The physical and ecological environment of the upper San Francisco Estuary has been profoundly altered since the early 1800s. Recent efforts have utilized maps of the upper estuary’s historical habitat types to infer associated changes in desired ecosystem processes and functions. The work presented in this memo builds on these previous efforts, but utilizes a new tool for evaluating change over time: a 3D hydrodynamic model of the pre-development estuary. This model was constructed by Resource Management Associates (RMA) using a new digital elevation model of the pre-development upper estuary generated by SFEI and UC Davis (UCD) and “natural” boundary flows calculated by the California Department of Water Resources (CDWR).


Once completed and calibrated, the pre-development model was paired with a similar model of the contemporary system in order to analyze hydrodynamic changes in the upper estuary. These analyses are presented in a technical memorandum published by RMA (2015). This memorandum takes these analyses and considers the ecological implications of modeled changes (see the “Results” section). Hydrodynamic analyses include analyzing changes in tidal prism, isohaline positions, low-salinity zone habitat, channel velocity, and source water distribution.


 In addition to describing the ecological implications of modeled hydrodynamic changes, this memorandum summarizes major ongoing questions about estuarine hydrodynamics that might be explored using these models, including changes in water residence time, temperature, transport pathways, and the connectivity of aquatic and semi-aquatic habitats. Understanding changes in these and other factors would greatly improve our understanding of the desirable ecosystem functions provided by the historical system and, as a result, improve our ability to recover these functions now and into the future.

 (955.14 KB)
Sadaria, A. M.; Sutton, R.; Moran, K. D.; Teerlink, J.; Brown, J. V.; Halden, R. U. 2017. Passage of fiproles and imidacloprid from urban pest control uses through wastewater treatment plants in northern California. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 36, 1473-1482 . SFEI Contribution No. 783.

Urban pest control insecticides, specifically fipronil and its four major degradates (fipronil sulfone, sulfide, desulfinyl, and amide) and imidacloprid, were monitored during drought conditions in eight San Francisco Bay wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). In influent and effluent, ubiquitous detections were obtained in units of ng/L for fipronil (13-88), fipronil sulfone (1-28), fipronil sulfide (1-5) and imidacloprid (58-306). In influent, 100% of imidacloprid and 62 ± 9% of total fiproles (fipronil and degradates) were present in the dissolved state, with the balance being bound to filter-removable particulates. Targeted insecticides persisted during wastewater treatment, regardless of treatment technology utilized (imidacloprid: 93 ± 17%; total fiproles: 65 ± 11%), with partitioning into sludge (3.7-151.1 μg/kg dry weight as fipronil) accounting for minor losses of total fiproles entering WWTPs. The load of total fiproles was fairly consistent across the facilities but fiprole speciation varied. This first regional study on fiprole and imidacloprid occurrences in raw and treated California sewage revealed ubiquity and marked persistence to conventional treatment of both phenylpyrazole and neonicotinoid compounds. Flea and tick control agents for pets are identified as potential sources of pesticides in sewage meriting further investigation and inclusion in chemical-specific risk assessments. 

R
Ruhl, C. A.; Schoellhamer, D. H. 1998. Technical Report of the San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. SFEI Contribution No. 375. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (1.38 MB)
 (3.96 MB)
 (976.86 KB)
 (1.22 MB)
 (1.78 MB)
Ross, J. R. M.; Oros, D. R. 2004. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in San Francisco Estuary sediments. Marine Chemistry 86, 169-184 . SFEI Contribution No. 82.
 (1.89 MB)
 (1.42 MB)
 (1.59 MB)
 (1014.85 KB)
Robinson, A.; Slotton, D. G.; Lowe, S.; Davis, J. A. 2014. North Bay Mercury Biosentinel Project (December 2014 Report). SFEI Contribution No. 738. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (2.88 MB)
Robinson, A.; Beagle, J.; Safran, S. M.; McKnight, K.; Grenier, J. Letitia; Askevold, R. A. 2017. Delta Landscapes: A Delta Renewed User Guide. SFEI Contribution No. 854.

A Delta Renewed User Guide aims to increase the accessibility of the technical findings in A Delta Renewed for easier application to restoration and conservation efforts across the Delta. The recommendations in A Delta Renewed focus on landscape-scale ecological guidance. We present three examples of how the information in A Delta Renewed might be used to address different management and restoration questions. Because of the complexity of the Delta system, this guide does not address all possible questions and does not replace the need for detailed, site-specific data and expertise. Rather, it shows how the information in A Delta Renewed might provide a common foundation for restoration planning.

The User Guide was written for a broad audience, including restoration practitioners, landowners, and local, state and federal agencies. The guide provides a step-by-step path through A Delta Renewed; a user is walked through how to apply the findings of the report via a series of steps to address each of the three restoration and management questions. This process is intended to help the user access regionally-specific recommendations and strategies to plan and manage future Delta landscapes that can support desired ecological functions over the long term.


The goal of A Delta Renewed and this guide is not to recreate the Delta of the past. Rather, the objective is to understand how we can re-establish or mimic important natural processes and patterns within this altered system to support desirable ecological functions (such as healthy native fish populations, a productive food web, and support for endangered species), now and into the future.

 (28.86 MB)
 (1.59 MB)
Robinson, A.; Safran, S. M.; Beagle, J.; Grenier, J. Letitia; Grossinger, R. M.; Spotswood, E.; Dusterhoff, S. D.; Richey, A. 2016. A Delta Renewed: A Guide to Science-Based Ecological Restoration in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Delta Landscapes Project. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Ecosystem Restoration Program. A Report of SFEI-ASC’s Resilient Landscapes Program. SFEI Contribution No. 799. San Francisco Estuary Institute - Aquatic Science Center: Richmond, CA.

This report offers guidance for creating and maintaining landscapes in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta that support desired ecological functions, while retaining the overall agricultural character and water-supply service of the region. Based on extensive research into how the Delta functioned historically, how it has changed, and how it is likely to evolve, we discuss where and how to re-establish the dynamic natural processes that can sustain native Delta habitats and wildlife into the future. The approach, building on work others have piloted and championed, is to restore or emulate natural processes where possible, establish an appropriate mosaic of habitat types at the landscape scale, use multi-benefit management strategies to increase support for native species in agricultural and urban areas, and allow the Delta to adapt to future uncertainties of climate change, levee failure, and human population growth. With this approach, it will be critical to integrate ecological improvements with the human landscape: a robust agricultural economy, water infrastructure and diversions, and urbanized areas. Strategic restoration that builds on the history and ecology of the region can contribute to the strong sense of place and recreational value of the Delta.

Printed copies of the report are available for purchase.

 

 (121.28 MB) (17.67 MB)
 (550.7 KB)
 (4.26 MB)
 (58.56 MB) (11.76 MB)
 (23.99 MB)
 (21.78 MB)
 (1.1 MB)
RMP. 2016. 2016 RMP Multi-Year Plan. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (5.57 MB)
2015. 2015 RMP Program Plan. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (414.17 KB)
2015. 2015 RMP Multi-Year Plan. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (2.22 MB)
RMP. 2017. 2017 RMP Multi-Year Plan. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (2.14 MB)
RMP. 2016. 2016 RMP Detailed Workplan and Budget. San Francisco Estuary Institue: Richmond, CA.
 (1.73 MB)
2015. 2015 RMP Detailed Workplan. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (546.26 KB)
RMP. 2017. 2017 RMP Detailed Workplan and Budget. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (2.27 MB)
 (5.94 MB)
 (332.88 KB)
 (19.83 MB)
 (14.83 MB)
 (1.89 MB)
Ridolfi, K.; Hoenicke, R.; Van Velsor, K. 2007. Critical Coastal Areas Program, Phase I Final Report. SFEI Contribution No. 541. San Francisco Estuary Institute.
 (10.77 MB)
Richey, A.; Dusterhoff, S. D.; McKnight, K.; Salomon, M.; Hagerty, S.; Askevold, R. A.; Grossinger, R. M. 2018. Resilient Landscape Vision for Upper Penitencia Creek. SFEI Contribution No. 894. San Francisco Estuary Institute - Aquatic Science Center: Richmond, CA.
 (67.6 MB) (11.75 MB)
Richey, A.; Dusterhoff, S. D.; Baumgarten, S. A.; Clark, E.; Benjamin, M.; Shaw, S.; Askevold, R. A.; McKnight, K. 2020. Restoration Vision for the Laguna de Santa Rosa. SFEI Contribution No. 983. SFEI: Richmond, CA.

 The Laguna de Santa Rosa, located in the Russian River watershed in Sonoma County, CA, is an expansive freshwater wetland complex that hosts a rich diversity of plant and wildlife species, many of which are federally or state listed as threatened, endangered, or species of special concern. The Laguna is also home to a thriving agricultural community that depends on the land for its livelihood. Since the mid-19th century, development within the Laguna and its surrounding watershed have had a considerable impact on the landscape, affecting both wildlife and people. Compared to pre-development conditions, the Laguna currently experiences increased stormwater runoff and flooding, increased delivery and accumulation of fine sediment and nutrients, spread of problematic invasive species, and decreased habitat for native fish and wildlife species. Predicted changes in future precipitation patterns and summertime air temperatures, combined with expanding development pressure, could exacerbate these problems. People who manage land and regulate land management decisions in and around the Laguna, including landowners; federal, state, and local agencies; and local stakeholders, are seeking a long-term management approach for the Laguna that improves conditions for the wildlife and people that call the Laguna home. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Sonoma Water funded the Laguna-Mark West Creek Watershed Master Restoration Planning Project to develop such a management approach, focusing on the need to identify restoration and management actions that enhance desired ecological functions of the Laguna, while also supporting the area’s agriculture and its local residents.

 (29.19 MB)
 (2.78 MB)
 (1.2 MB)
 (1.57 MB)
 (1.44 MB)
P
Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in the SF Estuary. 2007. 2006 RMP Annual Monitoring Results. SFEI Contribution No. 542. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Oakland.
 (19.02 MB)
Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in the SF Estuary. 2007. 2007 RMP Annual Monitoring Results. SFEI Contribution No. 572. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Oakland, CA.
 (2.2 MB)
 (7.38 MB)
Program, H. Ecology. 2012. Historical Ecology of the McCormack-Williamson Tract: A Landscape Framework for Restoration. SFEI Contribution No. 674. Aquatic Science Center / San Francisco Estuary: Richmond, CA.
 (15.27 MB)
 (15.27 MB)
Phillips, A. 1988. Executive Summary of the Monitoring of Toxic Contaminants in the San Francisco Bay-Delta: A Crtical Review. SFEI Contribution No. 151. San Francisco Estuary Institue: Richmond, CA. p 14.
 (502.17 KB)
 (1.53 MB)
 (1.23 MB)
Phillips, D. J. H. 1987. Toxic Contaminants in the San Francisco Bay-Delta and their Possible Biological Effects. SFEI Contribution No. 145. Aquatic Habitat Institute: Richmond, CA. p 472.
 (19.02 MB)
Phillips, D. J. H. 1987. Executive Summary of Toxic Contaminats in the San Francisco Bay - Delta and Their Possible Biological Effects. SFEI Contribution No. 139. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA. p 15.
 (12.94 MB)
Phillips, J. H.; Baumgartner, D. J. 1987. The Screening of Problems Relating to the San Francisco Bay_Delta. SFEI Contribution No. 138. San Francisco Estuary Insitute: Richmond, CA. p 77.
 (434.71 KB)
 (61.71 MB)
 (2.68 MB)
 (30.68 MB)
 (117.55 KB)
 (233.43 KB)
Pearce, S.; McKee, L. J. . 2009. Alameda Creek Bulk Sediment Study Technical Memorandum. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Oakland,Ca.
 (2.68 MB)
 (498.88 KB)
 (15.06 MB)
 (652.08 KB)
 (716.68 KB)
 (451.13 KB)
Palenik, B.; Flegal, R. A. 1999. Cyanobacterial Populations in San Francisco Bay. SFEI Contribution No. 42. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (39.11 KB)
 (399.23 KB)
O
 (3 MB)
 (11.38 MB)
 (1.33 MB)
Oros, D. R.; Taberski, K. 2000. Closing in on unidentified contaminants. pp p. 18-19 . SFEI Contribution No. 274.
 (1.33 MB)
Oros, D. R.; Simoneit, B. R. T.; Mazurek, M. A.; Baham, J. E. 2002. Organic Tracers from Wild Fire Residues in Soils and Rain/River Wash-Out. Water, Air and Soil Pollution 137, p.203-233 . SFEI Contribution No. 479.
Oros, D. R. 2002. Polar aromatic biomarkers in the miocene Maritza-East Lignite, Bulgaria. Organic Geo-chemistry . SFEI Contribution No. 476.
Oros, D. R. 2005. Emerging Contaminants: Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs). RMP Regional Monitoring News, San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances 10, p.1-11 . SFEI Contribution No. 502.
 (736.14 KB)