Introduction

1. 20 Years of Restoration in the Carmel River Introduction Introduction

2. Monterey PeninsulaWater Management District Mission Statement BALANCE COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL WATER NEEDS by MANAGING PROTECTING and AUGMENTING PENINSULA WATER RESOURCES

3. Carmel River Watershed MPWMD BOUNDARY

4. Monterey PeninsulaWater Management District MPWMD Service Area Monterey Bay Sand City Pacific Grove Seaside Del Rey Oaks Pebble Beach Monterey Carmel-by-the-Sea Carmel Highlands Carmel Valley Village Carmel River San Clemente Dam Los Padres Dam

5. Current Water Sources

6. Order 95-10 State Cuts Cal-Am Supplies Current Limit Past Use In 1995, the State limited the amount of water that can be pumped from under the Carmel River by Cal-Am, which supplies most of the water on the Monterey Peninsula, and declared the alluvial aquifer to be fully appropriated during the dry season. Future Limit 11,285 AF, temporary permission to use this much water 3,376 AF, Cal-Am’s recognized water right 14,106 acre-feet (AF), average Carmel River production in 1980s

7. Carmel River Flow LEFT – THE RIVER RISES RAPIDLY IN RESPONSE TO WINTER RAINS. THIS PHOTO, TAKEN MARCH 10, 1995 AT THE BORONDA ROAD BRIDGE, SHOWS THE RIVER AT APPROXIMATELY 15,000 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND. IN JUST TWO DAYS (MARCH 10 & 11), THIS STORM EVENT PRODUCED ENOUGH RUNOFF TO SUPPLY MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER NEEDS FOR A YEAR. RIGHT – PHOTO TAKEN IN MAY 2002 AT THE SAME LOCATION AT A FLOW OF ABOUT 20 CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (CFS). FLOW AT THIS SITE DROPS TO AS LITTLE AS FIVE CFS IN THE DRY SEASON.

8. TWO MAIN STEM RESERVOIRS STORE LESS THAN 3% OF ANNUAL FLOW FOR SUMMER RELEASE (NOTE – ONLY ONE RESERVOIR IS SHOWN HERE). INFLOWING SEDIMENT HAS REDUCED SURFACE STORAGE AND CONTRIBUTED TO CHANNEL DEGRADATION AND STREAMBANK EROSION DOWNSTREAM. San Clemente Dam and Reservoir FEBRUARY 9, 1998 ABOVE – DEBRIS CLOGS RESERVOIR PORTS DURING HIGH FLOWS IN FEBRUARY 1998. WORKERS SPENT THREE MONTHS CUTTING WOOD AND SENDING PIECES DOWNSTREAM. RIGHT – LOOKING UPSTREAM AT THE DAM FACE JULY 1982

9. July 1982 500 feet upstream San Clemente ReservoirForeset Slope April 2001 January 2003 April 2001 TWO VIEWS LOOKING UPSTREAM FROM THE DAM FACE AT THE FORESET SLOPE CREEPING DOWNSTREAM AS SEDIMENT FILLS THE RESERVOIR. LESS THAN 10% OF THE ORIGINAL STORAGE VOLUME REMAINS.

10. Groundwater Extraction Except in extremely wet years, groundwater pumping causes a portion of the river to dry up annually. Here, in this 1980 photo, a well was located in the bottom of the channel (note the flow in the center of the photo), nine miles upstream of the ocean. Up to 15 miles were annually dewatered. After the addition of wells closer to the end of the river, pumping was shifted downstream, resulting in fewer miles of river going dry.

11. Steelhead Migration Impacted April 30, 1987 Low flows in late spring combined with groundwater extraction leads to stranding of adults, smolts, and fingerling steelhead. Groundwater pumping lowers water levels, which ultimately dries up the river and results in dead and dying fish. Since 1984, MPWMD has annually rescued stranded fish from drying sections in the main stem. Depending on life cycle stage, fish are transferred either to the ocean or to perennial sections. This is a kelt, which is an adult returning to the ocean, that either evaded capture or died of natural causes.

12. Carmel River Restoration Left – looking upstream from the Schulte Bridge area. Prior to 1978, this reach was a single-thread channel, flanked by a dense riparian corridor. By the spring of 1982, erosion had transformed the reach into a braided, meandering channel with virtually no streamside cover. January 10, 1982 Degradation of the riparian corridor culminated in an episode of erosion that scoured the channel and streambanks between 1978 and 1983. Faced with destroyed streambanks, a precipitous drop in the steelhead run, and an almost complete loss of streamside vegetation, property owners and concerned environmental groups demanded – and received - a restoration program. The program, which began in 1984 with funding from riverfront property owners and District water users, continues today.

13. Schulte Restoration Project Right – looking upstream from Schulte Bridge. With no streamside vegetation to hold the banks together, streambanks are prone to scour and slumping. Most of the concrete rubble seen here was placed on the streambank in 1982, washed out in 1983, and was replaced by tires banded together (see photo below). Prior to rules prohibiting the use of deleterious materials, property owners placed whatever material they could afford to on streambanks to prevent additional loss. 1983 1982 Left – looking downstream to Schulte Bridge. MPWMD carried out a pilot project in 1986 to restore this area using biotechnical methods (see Schulte Restoration Project). MPWMD continues protection and restoration work in the Carmel River under the District’s Mitigation Program.

14. MITIGATION PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT(July 1, 2001 - June 30, 2002) Mitigation Program In 1990, MPWMD certified the Water Allocation Program Environmental Impact Report, which officially recognized that water extraction practices were causing environmental damage. To mitigate for the damage, MPWMD enacted the Mitigation Program, which combined the District’s fisheries, riparian corridor irrigation, and river restoration programs into a single integrated approach to water supply and resource management. Because water extraction practices are still impacting the environment, the program continues today. Please visit the links below for more information about MPWMD’s activities in the Carmel River and around the District. Carmel River Restoration Projects (under construction) MPWMD homepage Fisheries