Tennessee Hollow: Quartermaster Reach/Crissy Field Phase 2

Status Completed County San Francisco
Project Type Compensatory mitigation Location 37.80357° N, -122.45322° W Map
Project Area (Acres) 5.17 Last Updated 23 July 2021
Project Abstract This project will create very rare brackish marsh habitat as well as riparian forest on the south end of its reach, and mud flats and salt marsh on the north end.
Project Groups San Francisco Bay Joint Venture | San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority (Eligible)
Administrative Region San Francisco Bay Joint Venture - Jemma Williams, SFBJV

Project Identification

IDType
643 JV - Record Number

Habitat Plan

Site NamePhaseActivitySubActivitiesHabitatSubHabitatAcresActivity StatusWater Regime
Tennessee Hollow: Quartermaster Reach/Crissy Field Phase 2 None Creation/Establishment Vegetation Management, Wildlife-specific Measures Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) Tidal marsh 5.17 Construction completed Fully tidal

Related Habitat Impacts

Impact Project NameHabitatAcres LostType of Loss
No Data

Sites

NameStatusAcres
Tennessee Hollow: Quartermaster Reach/Crissy Field Phase 2 Construction completed 5.17

Events

DateTypeDescriptionSite Name
2020-11-01 Groundwork end The site was constructed and planting is also now finished as of 3/2021 Tennessee Hollow: Quartermaster Reach/Crissy Field Phase 2
2020-01-10 Groundwork start Construction has begun as of January 2020 on utility relocation. Shoring and excavation work will begin in February.
2020-01-10 Groundwork start Utility relocation began in January 2020. Shoring and excavation will begin in February and proceed through spring and summer 2020. Tennessee Hollow: Quartermaster Reach/Crissy Field Phase 2
2016-08-01 Project start date

People

TypeNameOrganizationDepartment
Contact Lewis Stringer Presidio Trust Not applicable/Unknown

Funding

PhaseActivityFunderAmount
None Creation/Establishment U.S. Environmental Protection Agency $1,000,000

Related CRAM Assessments

Visit DateVersionSite NameWetland TypeIndex Score
2013-10-07 6.1 Crissy Field Marsh estuarine perennial saline 60
2008-02-12 5.0.1 Crissy Field estuarine perennial saline 50
Name File Type Submitted On Submitted By
QMR Final Finish Topo Data Set 2021-03-11 Cristina Grosso, San Francisco Estuary Institute
Quartermaster Reach As-built Topo survey Other 2021-03-11 Cristina Grosso, San Francisco Estuary Institute

How to Use the Habitat Development Curve

Habitat Development Curves (HDCs) are used to determine the developmental status and trajectory of on-the-ground projects to create, restore, or enhance California wetland and stream habitats. Each HDC is based on assessments of habitat condition for different age areas of one habitat type that in aggregate represent the full spectrum of habitat development. The assessments of condition are provided by expert applications of the California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM). Visit the CRAM website for more information about CRAM.

For each HDC, reference condition is represented by areas of a habitat that consistently get very high CRAM scores, have not been subject to disruptive management practices, and exist within landscapes that are protected and managed for their natural conditions. The horizontal lines intersecting the top of an HDC represent the mean CRAM score and standard deviation of scores for 25 qualifying reference areas.

The age of a project is estimated as the elapsed time in years between the groundwork end date for the project and the date of the CRAM assessment. To add or update a groundwork end date, use the Project Events form in Project Tracker (ptrack.ecoatlas.org). The minimum age in years of a non-project area, including any natural reference area, is estimated from all available local information, including historical maps and imagery, historical written accounts, and place-specific scientific studies of habitat development.

An HDC can be used to address the following questions:

  1. At what time in the future will the area of assessed habitat achieve the reference condition or other milestones in habitat development? The HDC can answer this question if the CRAM score for the assessed area is within the confidence interval of the HDC. The answer is the time in years along the HDC between the current age of the assessed area and the future date corresponding to the intersection of the HDC and the reference condition or other milestone.
  2. Is the area of assessed habitat likely to develop faster, slower, or at the same pace as most other areas of the same habitat type? The habitat area is likely to develop faster, slower, or at the same pace if the CRAM score for the area is above, below, or within the confidence interval of the HDC, respectively.
  3. What can be done to improve the condition of the habitat area or to increase its rate of development? HDCs by themselves cannot answer this question. Possible answers can be inferred by the following analysis that involves HDCs:
    1. Examine the HDC for each of the four CRAM Attributes;
    2. Identify the Attribute(s) scoring below the HDC;
    3. For any low-scoring Attribute, examine the component Metric Scores (note: the Metric Scores for any public CRAM assessment in the CRAM database can be obtained through EcoAtlas);
    4. Assume the low score of an Attribute is due to its low-scoring Metric(s);
    5. Consider modifying the design or management of the habitat area in ways that will sustainably increase its score(s) for the low-scoring Metric(s).

For more information about CRAM Attributes and Metrics, including their scientific rationale, see the CRAM Manual.

Display Habitat Development Curves For Wetland Type:

CRAM Site Scores