Experiment – Part 2 Yolo Bypass Flow

Recently I posted about an unprecedented experiment being undertaken as part of the State’s new Delta Smelt Resiliency Strategy July 2016. That experiment now underway (“Experiment 1”) involves increasing Delta outflow in the latter part of July, 2016. The Strategy also included the North Delta Food Web Adaptive Management Projects (“Experiment 2”), management actions that would benefit juvenile and sub-adult Delta smelt by enhancing the north Delta forage supply for Delta smelt. Experiment 2 involves enhancing flow through the Yolo Bypass to the north Delta by closing the Knights Landing Outfall Gates and routing water from the Sacramento River at Hamilton City (GCID intakes) via the Colusa Basin Drain system into the Yolo Bypass to promote food production in areas where Delta smelt are known to occur. The objective of Experiment 2 is to enhance flow and increase nutrient inputs into the tidal north Delta in the Cache Slough-Lower Bypass region. Future food web enhancement flows would also be considered for “additional months in ways that will not conflict with agricultural and waterfowl management actions based on the availability of water to augment flows in the Yolo Bypass. DWR will also explore options for increasing outflow from the Yolo Bypass during the spring.” Experiment 2 also commenced in July 2016 as an “Emergency Action to Help Delta Smelt”.

As it turned out, the two experiments were timed together, probably to complement one another. Colusa Basin Drain flows increased in mid-July in Experiment 2 via diversion from GCID intakes at Hamilton City (Figure 1). Delta outflow (Figure 2) was increased in Experiment 1 by reducing Delta exports on July 15. Flow through the Yolo Bypass was increased (Figure 3) by closing the Knights Landing Outfall Gates from the Colusa Basin Drain to the Sacramento River and routing the flow through the Knights Landing Ridge Cut to the upper Yolo Bypass on down to Cache Slough and the North Delta (see route in Figure 1). Net flow through lower Cache Slough (Figure 4) increased from the combined effect of the higher flow in Yolo Bypass and the increased flow through Miners Slough and Steamboat Slough that resulted from reduced exports.

So is Experiment 2 having the desired effects? Water temperature in the upper and lower Bypass continue close to the 80°F mark due to high summer air temperatures, although the water temperature in the lower Bypass’s Tule Canal has been measurably higher than that in the adjacent Ship Channel (Figure 5). The higher flow in the Tule Canal likely carries a high organic load as is evident in the low night-time dissolved oxygen levels of 3 to 5 mg/l (Figure 6). Concentrations of salts (Figure 7) and organic matter (Figure 8) increase in the lower Bypass with higher flow. Plankton productivity as measured by chlorophyll levels in the lower Sacramento River channel at Rio Vista immediately below Cache Slough, though low (<10 micro-grams per liter), shows signs of increasing (Figure 9). However, several miles downstream in the channel at Sherman Island, there has been no sign of an increase in plankton (Figure 10). If an increase is indeed real, it is not clear if it is being caused by the higher Delta outflow, lower Delta exports, higher flow in the Bypass, or some combination thereof.

All in all, the warm nutrient- and organic-laden 500-600 cfs of water from the Colusa Basin agricultural drain moving down the Bypass appears to reach the tidal lower Bypass/Cache Slough complex. There, it mixes with higher net and tidal flows of Cache Slough and the Sacramento River. With 80,000 to 100,000 cfs going back and forth during the twice daily tide cycle between Cache Slough and Rio Vista, the Colusa Basin water from the Yolo Bypass is quickly mixed, and its signature is lost. The key question: is there sufficient “fertilizer” and extra plankton in this foreign water to stimulate plankton food production in the lower Yolo Bypass, Cache Slough and the north Delta to benefit Delta smelt? A reduction in river flow at Hamilton City from Experiment 2 might be considered an impact to Sacramento River fish unless additional water is specifically released from Shasta Reservoir for the experiment, or unless GCID water contractors forgo use of a portion of their allocated diversion at Hamilton City.

At a minimum, Experiment 2 has proved the efficacy of an action that might be even more effective from late fall to early spring when water used to stimulate plankton production in the Delta would augment the benefits of cooler, higher flows in the Sacramento River.

Figure 1. Path of flows diverted from the Sacramento River near Hamilton City. Water will move down through GCID's system, into the Colusa Basin Drain and Knights Landing Ridge Cut, through Wallace Weir and the Yolo Bypass, and into the Delta near Rio Vista. Source: http://www.norcalwater.org/wp-content/uploads/Smelt-action-fact-sheet.pdf

Figure 1. Path of flows diverted from the Sacramento River near Hamilton City. Water will move down through GCID’s system, into the Colusa Basin Drain and Knights Landing Ridge Cut, through Wallace Weir and the Yolo Bypass, and into the Delta near Rio Vista. Source: http://www.norcalwater.org/wp-content/uploads/Smelt-action-fact-sheet..pdf

Figure 2. Delta outflow July 2016.

Figure 2. Delta outflow July 2016.

Figure 3. Flow in the upper Yolo Bypass near Woodland July 2016.

Figure 3. Flow in the upper Yolo Bypass near Woodland July 2016.

Figure 4. Net tidally filtered flow in lower Cache Slough July 2016.

Figure 4. Net tidally filtered flow in lower Cache Slough July 2016.

Figure 5. Water temperature at adjacent stations in the lower Bypass Tule Canal (GREEN) and Ship Channel (BLUE) during July 2016.

Figure 5. Water temperature at adjacent stations in the lower Bypass Tule Canal (GREEN) and Ship Channel (BLUE) during July 2016.

Figure 6. Dissolved oxygen level in the Yolo Bypass Tule Canal at Lisbon 19-25 July 2016.

Figure 6. Dissolved oxygen level in the Yolo Bypass Tule Canal at Lisbon 19-25 July 2016.

Figure 7. Specific conductance of water in the lower Yolo Bypass at Liberty Cut late July 2016.

Figure 7. Specific conductance of water in the lower Yolo Bypass at Liberty Cut late July 2016.

Figure 8. Concentration of dissolved organic matter in lower Yolo Bypass at Liberty Cut late July 2016.

Figure 8. Concentration of dissolved organic matter in lower Yolo Bypass at Liberty Cut late July 2016.

Figure 9. Chlorophyll concentrations in the lower Sacramento River in north Delta at Rio Vista 18-28 July 2016.

Figure 9. Chlorophyll concentrations in the lower Sacramento River in north Delta at Rio Vista 18-28 July 2016.

Figure 10. Chlorophyll concentrations in the lower Sacramento River in north Delta at Sherman Island 17-28 July 2016.

Figure 10. Chlorophyll concentrations in the lower Sacramento River in north Delta at Sherman Island 17-28 July 2016.

An Unprecedented Experiment – July 2016

State’s Delta smelt plan calls for more water flowing to sea” – This headline to a recent Sacramento Bee article speaks of the state and federal governments’ hope to get more water for Delta outflow to the Bay this summer to help Delta smelt after four devastating drought years.  Smelt are at record lows, and their endangered status under the state and federal endangered species acts requires an effort to help recover them.  When the Delta smelt plan was announced, this year’s Summer Delta Smelt Index had just come in at 0.0, the same as it was last summer.

A grand experiment began on July 15.  With Shasta Reservoir releases held low to save cold water for salmon, more Delta outflow for the experiment was provided by reducing exports from 9000 cfs to 2000 cfs.  Deliveries to South-of-Delta CVP and SWP contractors were cut to a minimum, even though the plan had promised: “[no] cuts to water supply planned.”

Conditions on July 12 can be seen in Figure 1.  Reservoir releases and some natural river flow totaled approximately 30,000 cfs.  Most (80%) of the 20,000 cfs of Delta inflow was coming from Oroville and Folsom reservoirs.  Of that amount, only 7000 cfs was leaving the Delta for the Bay (the required minimum outflow in July of a Below Normal year under state standards is 6500 cfs).  Approximately 6,000 cfs was being diverted from the upper Sacramento River below Redding.  Another 3,000 cfs was being diverted from the lower river and its tribs.  Another 4,000 cfs was diverted in the Delta.  Finally, the state SWP was pumping 7000 cfs and federal CVP was pumping 1000 cfs from the south Delta.

By July 15, conditions in the Delta changed.  Delta outflow doubled, while exports were reduced by 80% (Figure 2).

We often hear about “adaptive management” to test things to see if they help or not.   This is a big, very unprecedented adaptive management experiment.  The purpose is to help Delta smelt recover from a dramatic decline over the past two decades.  However, it will be difficult to help what is not there. There were few smelt out there a month ago; hopefully, there are still enough that the experiment will make a difference.

The important thing now with such an experiment is to make sure we learn everything we can from it.  The following are some questions that should be addressed.

  1. What changes occur in flow, nutrients, salinity and water temperature in the Delta and Bay?
  2. If there are no Delta smelt, what changes occur to the other pelagic organisms such as phytoplankton, zooplankton, shrimp, longfin smelt, striped bass, herring, anchovy, and threadfin shad?
  3. Will the change stimulate a plankton bloom that benefits the Bay-Delta estuary?

From the point of view of managing the experiment, it is good that other important factors such as Delta inflow remain unchanged, so that there are not too many variables to filter out as determinative in any response.  It will be difficult enough to determine the relative importance of higher outflow versus lower export.

Hydrology

Preliminary results indicate that the experiment (as expected) had a noticeable effect on Delta hydrology.  By July 24, outflow had dropped back from its peak during the experiment of 14,000 cfs to 9000 cfs (Figure 3), as exports were again increased to about 7000 cfs, as shown in Old and Middle River tidally averaged flow (Figure 4).  Net lower San Joaquin River flow at Jersey Point initially increased sharply in response to the reduced exports (Figure 5).  The net flows diverted from the lower Sacramento to the lower San Joaquin via Threemile Slough were also reduced (Figure 6).

Salinity

Salinity (EC) eventually responded to the higher outflows as the pulse of freshwater pushed westward.  Salinity on the lower Sacramento at Emmaton (Figure 7) and Jersey Point on the lower San Joaquin (Figure 8) declined measurably.  Salinity also declined downstream at the confluence of the two rivers near Collinsville in eastern Suisun Bay (Figure 9).

Water Temperature

There has been slightly lower water temperature in the western Delta.  This is at least partially explained by cooler air temperatures during the experiment.  The water temperature at X2 (location of 2 ppt salinity or 2700 EC declined as X2 was located on-average further west during the experiment  (Figure 10).  However, that too could be explained by lower air temperatures.

Plankton Blooms

So far there is no evidence of enhanced plankton production by the experiment.  There has been little change in chlorophyll measured at selected gaging stations in the central and west Delta.

Fish

While results of Delta-wide fish surveys will not be available for some time, results of export salvage of two pelagic Delta species, striped bass and threadfin shad, showed sharp reductions as expected (Figures 11 and 12).

Figure 1. Water conditions in mid July 2016 in the Sacramento Valley and Delta before the experiment. Red denotes major water releases in cfs from the Valley’s four largest reservoirs. Blue denotes three key river flow locations: lower Sacramento River upstream of the Feather River, Freeport coming into the Delta, and Delta outflow. Green denotes south Delta exports.

Figure 1. Water conditions in mid July 2016 in the Sacramento Valley and Delta before the experiment. Red denotes major water releases in cfs from the Valley’s four largest reservoirs. Blue denotes three key river flow locations: lower Sacramento River upstream of the Feather River, Freeport coming into the Delta, and Delta outflow. Green denotes south Delta exports.

Figure 2. Flow conditions in the Sacramento Valley and Delta on 20 July 2016. Delta outflow is 14,000 cfs. Sacramento River flow above the mouth of the Feather River was 4,000 cfs. Sacramento River inflow to the Delta at Freeport is 19,000 cfs. (Note total Delta inflow was about 20,000 cfs. Total Central Valley reservoir releases and uncontrolled river inflows was over 30,000 cfs.). About two-thirds of the Delta inflow came from Feather Riverand American River reservoirs. Though only 2000 cfs was being exported from the south Delta projects, approximately 14,000 cfs of Sacramento Valley reservoir releases were being diverted for water supply from Sacramento Valley rivers and the interior Delta. Nearly all San Joaquin Valley reservoir releases were being diverted.

Figure 2. Flow conditions in the Sacramento Valley and Delta on 20 July 2016. Delta outflow is 14,000 cfs. Sacramento River flow above the mouth of the Feather River was 4,000 cfs. Sacramento River inflow to the Delta at Freeport is 19,000 cfs. (Note total Delta inflow was about 20,000 cfs. Total Central Valley reservoir releases and uncontrolled river inflows was over 30,000 cfs.). About two-thirds of the Delta inflow came from Feather Riverand American River reservoirs. Though only 2000 cfs was being exported from the south Delta projects, approximately 14,000 cfs of Sacramento Valley reservoir releases were being diverted for water supply from Sacramento Valley rivers and the interior Delta. Nearly all San Joaquin Valley reservoir releases were being diverted.

Figure 3. Delta outflow increased to 14,000 cfs during the July 15-23 experiment.

Figure 3. Delta outflow increased to 14,000 cfs during the July 15-23 experiment.

Figure 4. The tidally filter flow in the central Delta showed about a 6500 cfs reduction in the flow in Old and Middle River toward the south Delta export pumps.

Figure 4. The tidally filter flow in the central Delta showed about a 6500 cfs reduction in the flow in Old and Middle River toward the south Delta export pumps.

Figure 5. The experiment brought a sharp response in the tidally filtered flow at Jersey Point in the lower San Joaquin River in the western Delta.

Figure 5. The experiment brought a sharp response in the tidally filtered flow at Jersey Point in the lower San Joaquin River in the western Delta.

Figure 6. The experiment brought a reduction in net flows pulled from the lower Sacramento River to the lower San Joaquin via Threemile Slough.

Figure 6. The experiment brought a reduction in net flows pulled from the lower Sacramento River to the lower San Joaquin via Threemile Slough.

Figure 7. Salinity (EC) at Emmaton on the lower Sacramento River just north of Antioch 14-24 July, 2016.

Figure 7. Salinity (EC) at Emmaton on the lower Sacramento River just north of Antioch 14-24 July, 2016.

Figure 8. Salinity (EC) at Jersey Point on the lower San Joaquin River near Antioch 14-24 July, 2016.

Figure 8. Salinity (EC) at Jersey Point on the lower San Joaquin River near Antioch 14-24 July, 2016.

Figure 9. Salinity (EC) at Collinsville near the confluence of the lower Sacramento and San Joaquin channels in eastern Suisun Bay 14-24 July, 2016.

Figure 9. Salinity (EC) at Collinsville near the confluence of the lower Sacramento and San Joaquin channels in eastern Suisun Bay 14-24 July, 2016.

Figure 10. Water temperature (F) at Collinsville in eastern Suisun Bay 14-24 July, 2016. Red dots indicate water temperature when X2 was located at Collinsville

Figure 10. Water temperature (F) at Collinsville in eastern Suisun Bay 14-24 July, 2016. Red dots indicate water temperature when X2 was located at Collinsville

Figure 11. Salvage of striped bass at south Delta export facilities July 1-20, 2016.

Figure 11. Salvage of striped bass at south Delta export facilities July 1-20, 2016.

Figure 12. Salvage of threadfin shad at south Delta export facilities July 1-20, 2016.

Figure 12. Salvage of threadfin shad at south Delta export facilities July 1-20, 2016.

State Comes Through With Lower Exports

On July 12, the State came out with its plan to save smelt by reducing Delta exports and increasing Delta freshwater outflow. The next day, exports were increased 1000 cfs (from 8000 to 9000 cfs) and outflow was reduced 1000 cfs to 3000 cfs as measured by USGS. But on July 17, the State finally came through. The State dropped State Water Project (SWP) exports from 7000 to 4000, and the feds dropped Central Valley Project (CVP) exports from 1,600 to 800. Then on July 19, combined exports dropped another 3000 cfs, to less than 2000 cfs. Delta outflow is now nearly 14,000 cfs, the level it was in late July 2011, the last wet year. Though the change may have come too late, we will see come fall any response in the indices for longfin smelt and Delta smelt.

The flow response showed up immediately in flow gages in Old and Middle Rivers, where flows of minus 11,000 dropped to minus 5,000 cfs (Figure 1). The response in salinity levels will take a few days, but it’s already showing up in the western Delta at False River (Figure 2) and Jersey Point (Figure 3). Even in the smaller confines in False River, the effect of the change is hard to perceive over the effect of tides (Figure 4), but it is there. Eventually, the higher freshwater outflow will push the salt westward.

The first measure of progress should appear in surveys 5 and 6 of the Summer Townet Survey. Because there are few smelt left from which to observe a response, a response will be most noticeable in striped bass. We should be able to see a change to a more westward distribution of the Low Salinity Zone and striped bass juveniles (Figure 5).

Flow Graph

Figure 1. Hourly flow in Old and Middle Rivers combined in the central Delta from July 8 to July 18, 2016.

Salinity graph

Figure 2. Salinity (EC) in False River in western Delta from July 8 to July 18, 2016.

Electrical conductivity graph

Figure 3. Salinity (EC) in lower San Joaquin River at Jersey Point in western Delta from July 8 to July 18, 2016.

Flow Graph

Figure 4. Hourly flow in False River in western Delta from July 8 to July 18, 2016.

Map of striped bass choice

Figure 5. Townet survey 1 catch of striped bass June 2016.

Barging Hatchery Smolts to the Bay

In this blog I often recommend barging hatchery and even wild salmon from spawning rivers to the Bay up to 200 miles or more over conventional trucking or direct releases from hatcheries. The theory is that continuous recirculation of water in the barge (or boat) holding tank helps the young salmon remember from where they came and imprint the route back to their home river or hatchery.  Trucking directly to the Bay is believed to cause straying to non-natal rivers, resulting unnatural mixing of stocks, hatchery fish straying into wild fish spawning rivers, and less salmon returning to their home hatcheries where their eggs may be needed to meet quotas.  It is well documented that trucking and pen acclimation significantly increases the contribution of hatchery smolts to the ocean fishery up to two or three fold or more.  Concern over straying has kept the practice to a minimum.

Well it turns out from studies conducted with tagged hatchery salmon beginning with releases in 2008 that trucking, at least of American and Feather hatchery smolts, does not lead to significant amounts of straying.  Also, barging does not significantly reduce the already low straying rate.  So trucking to Bay net pens for acclimation remains the chosen strategy for the two largest State hatcheries, and probably the other two on the Mokelumne and Merced rivers.

The jury is still out on the Coleman and Livingston Stone federal hatcheries near Redding.  Straying rates are higher and the benefits of trucking over 200 miles seem questionable.  One concern I have is the high straying rate encountered for Coleman (Battle Creek) fish includes fish that move past Battle Creek further up in the Sacramento River and its upper tributaries.  Most of the spawning fish in these areas come from Coleman and Livingston Stone national fish hatcheries.  Because Coleman was built to mitigate for the loss of fish to those areas, I question their inclusion in the straying estimates.  The USFWS, which manages the two hatcheries, continues to be reluctant to truck and barge fish.

Though barging may not be needed for the Feather and American River hatcheries, it still holds potential for improving survival and reducing straying overall.  So far, there is no evidence that barging improves survival over trucking to Bay net pens.  I reviewed subsequent tag returns for a barge release group in early May 2012 with returns from two net pen groups released at the same time in the Bay.  I found the subsequent return percentage of the barge group  to be in between the two trucked pen release groups.  In the notes of the barge release, high predation by birds was noted.  In the photo of a barge release below many birds can be seen.  I wonder if the barge release would also benefit from the same pen acclimation that is employed after trucking, which significantly improves trucked fish release survival and subsequent contribution to the fishery.  (Note: I have been present at numerous truck releases to the Bay and have observed obvious extreme predation on the disoriented and confused hatchery fish, often released into warmer, saltier water than was present at the hatchery by a horde of well-trained and waiting birds and predatory fish.  Release to net pens at variable locations for acclimation and tow to open waters for underwater release seemed to greatly reduce predation, which proved true in subsequent tag returns.)

A closer look at the tag-release-recovery data and further experimentation would better answer the questions, concerns, and hypotheses.  There were nine barged groups released into the Bay from 2012-2014.  With some tags still out or not processed (tags are in noses of adult fish returns 2-4 years after release), information continues to come in.  The nearly million or so coded-wire-tags released from the nine barge groups swam with approximately 30 million other tagged fish from the six Central Valley hatcheries.  Furthermore, records are meticulously kept with other tagged groups from Washington and Oregon, as well as from other California watersheds (e.g., Klamath), by the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission.  An example of the type of information available is shown in the map-chart below for just the one barge release group from 2012.  The California Department of Fish and Wildlife has its own team and program to keep track of California immense database on releases and recoveries.  The Department’s report from November 2015 provides an excellent review of the whole process and results to date.

Barge in SF Bay

image2

Managing the Delta in Summer to Protect Delta Smelt

During June of this year, there was an effort on the part of the US Fish and Wildlife Service to procure water for summer Delta outflow for Delta smelt. Now the State has announced a similar plan. The summer standards for outflow in this Below Normal water year are a monthly average of 6500 cfs in July, 4000 cfs in August, and 3000 cfs in September. These outflows and the variability inherent in the monthly average standard are not protective of Delta smelt. In a June post, I recommended 9000, 5000, and 4000 cfs, respectively, to protect remaining smelt after four years of drought conditions. No water has been procured, and Delta outflow so far in July has averaged 7000 cfs.

The map below (Figure 1) shows the average location of X2, the location where salinity is approximately 2 parts per thousand (sea water is approximately 30 ppt) at various Delta outflows in cubic feet per second. X2 is the general location of the critical mixing zone of the estuary and the upper end of the Low Salinity Zone (1-6 ppt). The state Delta outflow standard for August is 4000 cfs, which should keep the daily average location of X2 west of Emmaton (EMM) and Jersey Pt (SJJ). This standard is required to protect Delta water quality, keep Delta smelt west of the influence of South Delta exports, and keep emigrating juvenile salmon moving west toward the Bay and Ocean. The standard applies in wetter year types including this year. In drier years, as in the past four years, the standard is 3000-3500 cfs.

The need for the higher July outflow protection stems from the fact that the smelt gradually move westward into more brackish water over the summer. In July they tend to be upstream of X2 in a planktonic stage and vulnerable to being drawn into the central Delta. They are often located at the upper end of the Low Salinity Zone (500-1500 EC) which in July, at 6500 cfs outflow, is vulnerable to exports (see location of Threemile Slough TSL, Jersey Pt SJJ, and False River FAL in Figure 1).

The issue of summer protections for smelt is critical to the future management prescriptions being developed in new water quality standards and smelt biological opinions. That makes it important to water contracting agencies like the Metropolitan Water District:

One of the key things the water contracting agencies are focusing on is the science behind the summer flow. “There’s been nothing that’s been articulated in writing in a comprehensive nature describing the science that leads to this proposal as to what kind of function is this summertime flow providing or what types of changes do they expect to occur for Delta smelt as a result of taking this kind of action,” he [Steve Arakawa, Bay Delta Initiatives Manager of Metropolitan Water District] said. “The water contracting agencies are following this very carefully because of the longer term implication of where such an action could show up in future regulations, whether it’s the biological opinions for the projects or whether it’s the State Water Resources Control Board setting standards and how Fish and Wildlife Service might be making proposals in future regulation proceedings.”… “There has been no clear indication of the science behind the flow proposal,” he said. “There have been discussions about turbidity, temperature, and salinity, but in many cases it’s mainly salinity that is affected by this flow. Whether turbidity or temperature can be affected by the flow is another question or maybe uncertain. Then it’s about with this additional flow, where do the fish go – do they stay in the Suisun Bay, do they go up into the channels into Suisun Marsh, farther up north? All of that is in question. The interest of the water contracting agencies is if this does proceed, is there a thought-out way of measuring the benefits of such proposed flows to monitor where do the fish go, what kind of results do we expect, and whether in fact those results did occur with such action.” 1

Figure 1. Location of X2 (2 parts per thousand salinity) in the Delta at various Delta outflows.

Figure 1. Location of X2 (2 parts per thousand salinity) in the Delta at various Delta outflows.

To protect Delta smelt in early summer (June and July), X2 and the Low Salinity Zone need to be located west of Emmaton and Jersey Point to ensure portions of the LSZ are not drawn into the central Delta from Jersey Point (via False River FAL) or Threemile Slough (TSL). In the following sections, graphs show clearly that such protections did not occur in drought years 2014 and 2015, and as yet not in 2016.

Keeping X2 below Jersey Point requires some daily, even hourly tuning of the Central Valley and Delta plumbing to compensate for tides. The next two charts (Figures 2 and 3) show that EC of 2000-4000 (X2 is about 2700 EC) reaches Jersey Point when tidally-filtered flow falls below zero during spring tides. The LSZ and X2 were at Jersey Point in early summer in both drought years.

Figure 2. Salinity (EC) in blue and tidally filtered flows in red at Jersey Point in early summer 2015. Delta outflows were 3000-4000 cfs in this critically dry year.

Figure 2. Salinity (EC) in blue and tidally filtered flows in red at Jersey Point in early summer 2015. Delta outflows were 3000-4000 cfs in this critically dry year.

Figure 3. Salinity (EC) in blue and tidally filtered flows in red at Jersey Point in early summer 2014. Delta outflows were 3000-5000 cfs in this critically dry year.

Figure 3. Salinity (EC) in blue and tidally filtered flows in red at Jersey Point in early summer 2014. Delta outflows were 3000-5000 cfs in this critically dry year.

In 2016 to date, by contrast, with outflow about 7000 cfs in early summer, salinity at Jersey Point is lower (Figure 4), but the upper LSZ remains at Jersey Point. Increasingly high salinity is indicative of rising south Delta exports through the period, beginning near 3000 cfs in early June and reaching 8000 cfs in early July. The tidally filtered flow at Jersey Point (Figure 5) gradually declined with increasing exports after mid-June.

In short, my recommendation for 9000 cfs outflow in July, and rationale for the quest for more water by the USFWS, are simply to bring salinity at Jersey Point back where it was in early June: below 500 EC. This would keep X2 and the LSZ with its remaining Delta smelt downstream of Jersey Point and away from the net negative flows toward the export pumps. Also, the further west X2 and the LSZ are located, the cooler they will be, which also benefits the smelt. If it were up to me, I would set a standard that EC should not exceed 500 at Jersey Point in early summer.

Figure 4. Salinity at Jersey Point in early summer 2016. X2 (EC 2700) has remained downstream.

Figure 4. Salinity at Jersey Point in early summer 2016. X2 (EC 2700) has remained downstream.

Figure 5. Tidally filtered flow at Jersey Point in early summer 2016. High negative flows are caused by South Delta exports during spring tides.

Figure 5. Tidally filtered flow at Jersey Point in early summer 2016. High negative flows are caused by South Delta exports during spring tides.