Miwok and Heather Cutoff Trail Surface Hydrology Rehabilitation Project

Status Planning County Marin
Project Type Non-mitigation Location Not Mapped
Project Area (Acres) < 0.1 Last Updated 4 March 2019
Project Abstract No Data

Project Identification

IDType
400980 SWRCB - 401 Certification Letter (e.g., Site Number or WDID)
815251 SWRCB - CIWQS Place Number

Habitat Plan

ActivityHabitatSubHabitatAcresActivity StatusWater Regime
Enhancement Unknown/unspecified wetland habitat None < 0.1 Construction planned Unknown/Unspecified
Unknown/Unspecified Unknown/unspecified wetland habitat None < 0.1 Construction planned Unknown/Unspecified

Related Habitat Impacts

HabitatAcres LostType of Loss
No Data

Sites

NameStatusAcres
Miwok and Heather Trail Construction planned < 0.1

Events

DateTypeDescriptionSite Name
2021-08-01 Monitoring end Miwok and Heather Trail
2021-08-01 Monitoring end
2017-08-01 Monitoring start Miwok and Heather Trail
2017-08-01 Monitoring start
2016-10-01 Groundwork end
2016-10-01 Groundwork end Miwok and Heather Trail
2016-08-01 Groundwork start
2016-08-01 Groundwork start Miwok and Heather Trail

People

TypeNameOrganizationDepartment
Contact Caroline Christman Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy Not applicable/Unknown

Funding

ActivityFunderAmount
No Data

Related CRAM Assessments

Visit DateVersionSite NameWetland TypeIndex Score
No Data

Performance Criteria

StatusDetailsEvaluation Date
Original criteria To verify that that the Project is functioning as desired, the California Department of Parks and Recreation shall monitor trail stability and potential erosion at the armored crossings and new bridges every other year for a minimum of five years (i.e., Years 1, 3, and 5). Monitoring shall be conducted at approximately the same time during the low flow summer season and shall consist of the photo-documentation at each armored crossing and bridge, and visual inspections of trail improvements and crossings to assess whether the Project is functioning as designed to reduce erosion and sedimentation and facilitate material transport in the watershed. Photo-documentation shall at a minimum consists of the following: a) Two photographs looking upstream and downstream (i.e., one photograph each direction) from each armored crossing and bridge; b) Two photographs at each crossing and bridge looking towards the crossing or bridge from the trail on both sides of the crossing or bridge; and c) Representative photographs of the trail including photographs of any signs of erosion. The purpose of the photographs is to document that the armored crossings, bridges and associated creek banks are remaining stable and functional, and the trail is draining properly. The performance criteria shall be (1) no observed signs of significant erosion in the creeks (e.g., scarps or scour that threaten to deliver fine sediment to the creeks or that threaten to flank or undermine the crossings or bridge) and (2) no observed signs of significant erosion and sediment delivery to creeks from the trail (e.g., rills and gullies in or adjacent to the trail that threaten to deliver sediment to creeks). Annual monitoring reports, presenting the results of the trail stability and erosion monitoring activities, shall be submitted by January 31 following each monitoring year with the first monitoring year commencing the year after completing the mitigation for the Project. These reports shall reference CIWQS Place ID 815251 and shall include detailed descriptions of the monitoring results, i.e., observations and conclusions, as well as photographs of the site to document whether performance criteria are being achieved. Annual monitoring reports shall be submitted either by uploading them to the California EcoAtlas website at http://ecoatlas.org/regions/ecoregion/bay-delta/projects, and sending to Xavier Fernando via email at [email protected], or by mailing to the attention of Xavier Fernandez at the Regional Water Board (see the address on the letterhead). 2016-08-01
Upload files or links
Name File Type Submitted On Submitted By
Year 1 Monitoring Report Monitoring Report 2019-07-01 Kara Mirmelstein, Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy

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