Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel - Rubber Dam No. 1 and Drop Structure Fishway Project

Status In-progress County Alameda
Project Type Non-mitigation Location Not Mapped
Project Area (Acres) 0.50 Last Updated 23 March 2017

Project Identification

818 JV - Record Number

Habitat Plan

ActivityHabitatSubHabitatAcresActivity StatusWater Regime
Enhancement Creek and Lake (SFBJV Only) Creek and riparian zone 0.50 In-progress/Implementation Riparian

Related Habitat Impacts

HabitatAcres LostType of Loss
No Data


ACFCC Rubber Dam No. 1 In-progress/Implementation 0.50


DateTypeDescriptionSite Name
2014-05-01 Project start date


Contact Therese Wooding Alameda County Water District Not applicable/Unknown


Funding Need: $16,000,000

No Data

Related CRAM Assessments

Visit DateVersionSite NameWetland TypeIndex Score
No Data

Performance Criteria

StatusDetailsEvaluation Date
No Data

Project Description

The Alameda Flood Control Channel in Alameda County contains a series of rubber dams and diversion pipelines constructed by the Alameda County Water District (ACWD) to divert water from the channel into groundwater recharge facilities. The upper portion of Alameda Creek supports one of the best assemblages of native stream fish, including steelhead, in the San Francisco Bay Region. However, passage barriers in the flood control channel prevent access to good upstream habitat. As part of a long---term multi---agency regional effort begun in 1999, ACWD, the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (ACFCWCD), and other interested parties have supported efforts to develop the 2002 Draft Steelhead Restoration Plan for steelhead restoration in the Alameda Creek watershed. The plan identified both ACWD’s Rubber Dam No. 1 and the adjacent drop structure as impediments to fish passage. Construction of a fishway will provide passage through the urbanized section of Alameda Creek past the dam and drop structure. The fishway will consist of a roughened channel and reinforced concrete vertical slot type fish ladder. In addition, a plunge pool will also be provided for passage of fish that may swim over the dam. Construction of the fishway at the Rubber Dam No 1 and the drop structure will open up approximately 27 stream miles of steelhead habitat in the upper watershed.
Upload files or links

No files found.

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 ( 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