Restoration of Desert Riparian,
Wash, and Marsh Wetland
Communities Affected by the Lining
of the Coachella Canal: Partnerships and Strategies that WorkPartnerships and Strategies that Work
Carla ScheidlingerRestoration Ecologist
AMEC Earth & Environmental9210 Sky Park Ct., Ste. 200
San Diego, CA, 92123carla.scheidlinger @amec.com
858.300.4311
2009 National Conference on Ecological RestorationJuly 20 - 24, 2009 in Los Angeles, California
Coachella Canal Lining Project (CCLP)
It’s All About Water
In order for California to stay within its allotment for Colorado River water, it entered into a Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) that included the Coachella Canal Lining Project (CCLP). This project requires a complex environmental mitigation
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 2
a complex environmental mitigation effort, requiring the development and management of restoration and mitigation activities in a desert environment that involved multiple stakeholders.
Colorado River Water Is Carried North
to Supply a Diverse Agriculture
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 3
Dos Palmas Mitigation Area
Source: USBR CCLP FEIS/FEIR 2001
Coachella Canal – Source of Water to Coachella Valley
Purpose of this Project:• Complete the lining of the remaining 34
miles of earthen canal in order to conserve 30,000 acre-feet/year of water
Coachella Canal:• Canal 123 miles long, built in 1940s to
bring Colorado River water to the Coachella Valley
• Initially unlined except for final 40 miles• Additional 49 miles lined in 1980s
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 4
conserve 30,000 acre-feet/year of water lost to leakage.
Key Agency Partners• CA Dept of Water Resources (CDWR)
– Partially funded the CCLP under California Water Code and the QSA
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)– CEQA Lead Agency, constructed project and is responsible for mitigations
• US Bureau of Reclamation (USBR)– Federal agency that owns the Canal; lead federal agency for NEPA
• San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA)– Benefits from the water under the QSA, pays for mitigations
• San Luis Rey Settlement Parties (SLR Parties)– Recipient of a portion (17%) of the conserved water to resolve claim with federal
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 5
– Recipient of a portion (17%) of the conserved water to resolve claim with federal government; also are to pay 17% of net additional O and M
• Bureau of Land Management (BLM)– Controls some of the land, carries out some of the mitigation projects
• Center for Natural Lands Management (CNLM)– Owns and manages some of the land
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)– Regulates impacts to federally listed species affected by the project
• California Department of Fish and Game CDFG)– Regulates impacts to state listed species affected by the project
Environmental Impacts of Lining the Canal
• Direct loss of mature desert wash trees during construction
• Gradual drying of several thousand acres of desert riparian habitat along length of canal
• Loss or potential loss of marsh/ aquatic habitat associated with canal leakage
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 6
Anticipated reduced production of flowing wells,
and changes in sub-surface hydrology
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 7
Species-related impacts
Potential effect on
endangered Yuma clapper
rail, California black rail, and
desert pupfish within the
Bureau of Land
Rail habitat
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 8
Bureau of Land
Management’s Dos Palmas
Area of Critical
Environmental Concern
(ACEC) and Salt Creek
watershed
Pupfish habitat
100% Loss of
Marsh/Riparian
Vegetation (pink)
100% Loss of
Marsh/Riparian
Vegetation (pink)
Increase in Salt
Cedar (orange)
Increase in Salt
Cedar (orange)
50% Reduction in Marsh
Vegetation (light green)
50% Reduction in Marsh
Vegetation (light green)
BOR modeled predictions for impacts following
canal lining
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 9
Vegetation (pink)Vegetation (pink)
50% Reduction in Salt
Creek Riparian
Vegetation (light blue)
50% Reduction in Salt
Creek Riparian
Vegetation (light blue)
Source: USBR CCLP
FEIS/FEIR 2001
No Change in
Vegetation (dark
green)
No Change in
Vegetation (dark
green)
CCLP Mitigation Requirements
• Replace mature desert wash trees• Restore desert riparian habitat – 352.5
acres• Create additional marsh/aquatic habitat –
17 acres• Maintain existing Dos Palmas habitat
resources for sensitive species:– core marsh/aquatic habitat – 105 acres.
– Protect desert pupfish habitat
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 10
– Protect desert pupfish habitat
– Maintain average annual flow of 623 ac-ft at USGS Salt Creek gauging station
Partnerships at WorkDevelopment of Mitigation Activities
Coachella Canal Lining Project Coordinating
Committee (CCLPC)• Legal representation for implementation and
management: consists of implementing agencies (CVWD and SDCWA and independent chairperson vote)
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 11
(CVWD and SDCWA and independent chairperson vote)
Biological Working Group (BWG)
• Environmental resource input to Committee from
resource agencies, key landowners and CCLP staff
relating to mitigation effectiveness and efficiency
Large Tree Replacement• Select sites
• Habitat assessments
• Perform pilot project
• Install trees –2500 to
survive after 5 years
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 12
• Maintain and monitor
for 5 years
Created Marsh• Design a 17-acre project
at Dos Palmas
• Permitting and Agency
Approval
• Construct: August 2009
• Plant: winter 2009 – 2010
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 13
• Manage and Monitor – for
one full year
Desert Riparian Restoration
• BLM responsible, with BWG
direction
• Select reference sites
• Determine methods
• Select potential restoration sites
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 14
• Select potential restoration sites
• Implement restoration activities –
passive at this time
Adaptive Management of Sensitive Habitats
• Development of monitoring and adaptive management plans
• Agency approvals
• Monitoring for rail presence
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 15
presence
• Monitoring for pupfish presence
• Monitoring for rail habitat quality
• Monitoring for pupfish habitat quality
• Monitoring for changes in marsh habitat quality and quantity
Rail, Pupfish, and Marsh Habitat Surveys
The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the file again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again.
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 16
Successes and Challenges
• Good “bang for the buck”
ratio by concentrating
mitigations at Dos
Palmas
• Agency cooperation at
• Complex surface and
groundwater hydrology
with slow response time
• Resolving differences in
managing for habitat vs.
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 17
• Agency cooperation at
the outset
• Competent leadership
and representation
• Cost-effective approach
that provides good
resource enhancement
managing for habitat vs.
managing for species
• Complexities of land
ownership and authority
• Meeting timetables for
success
Adapt to unforeseen effects…
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 18
Desert Riparian restoration actions using salt cedar control results in marsh habitat!
Applicability to Other Projects
• Find areas that have diverse and multiple potentials for mitigation
• Don’t be afraid of multiple jurisdictions
• Keep the agencies in the same room on a regular basis, and keep good notes of the meetings
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 19
and keep good notes of the meetings
• Track the progress of the mitigation activities in a transparent fashion
• Everyone gets to claim credit for some successes
• Opportunity to learn from adaptive management actions, in a larger mitigation framework
Questions?
Scheidlinger - NCER Conference, Los Angeles, CA 20