Patterns of Resource Use

Patterns of resource use often reflect land ownership and historic land use. Resource use can have profound impacts on salmonid populations. For example, road development can cause environmental changes that result in factors that limit the production of salmonid populations (see the Factors Limiting Salmonid Production section for more information). Below, patterns of resource use in San Mateo County, which has a land base of approximately 287,420 acres (California Department of Finance 2001), and Santa Cruz County, which comprises approximately 282,000 acres (California Association of Resource Conservation Districts 2002), are presented. To find out more about resource uses in the San Lorenzo River watershed, the largest watershed in Santa Cruz County, see the Land Cover and Land Use Mapping section of this Web site.

Commercial Uses

About 22,600 acres within San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties are used for commercial purposes (US EPA 1998). Commercial development has occurred in both counties to support residential and industrial development. In San Mateo County, this development has been mostly along the bayside and less dense along the ocean side. In Santa Cruz County, commercial development has occurred in urban areas and along the coast to support the tourism industry.

Industrial Uses

About 9,500 acres within San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties are used for industrial purposes (US EPA 1998). In San Mateo County, the majority of industrial development has occurred on the bayside where access to the deepwater port in Redwood City has enabled transportation of goods to other areas. In Santa Cruz , the major industrial uses consist of construction and equipment manufacturing, which occur in Watsonville and the City of Santa Cruz (California Employment Development Department 2003)

Urban development in the vicinity of the San Carlos Airport San Mateo County Bayside. Obtained from the San Mateo County Department of Public Works

Residential Uses

Approximately 80,500 acres within San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties are used for residential purposes (US EPA 1998).

In 1978, Santa Cruz county voters approved Measure J, a growth management plan that required that new growth be directed into existing urban areas and that commercially productive agricultural lands be maintained for agricultural uses (Patton 2003). The measure further stipulated that the County Board of Supervisors restrict the number of building permits to stay within predetermined annual growth rates and to ensure that 15 percent of all new housing would be affordable to lower income families (Jones 2000). Santa Cruz County is expected to continue to grow and land-use and housing issues will continue to be important. The County Board of Supervisors has historically voted to limit growth and slow the pace of development, so growth may occur more slowly than predicted (Holbrook 2000). In Santa Cruz County, the use of forested areas has changed, with rapid population growth resulting in increased residential development on lands that were previously used for timber production (Musitelli 2000).

In 2002, the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) in San Mateo County won the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (US EPA) National Award for Smart Growth Achievement in the Policies and Regulations Category for their Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Incentive Program. The program uses state transportation funding to provide incentives to local government planners and policy makers to make transit-oriented development decisions. The TOD Program uses transportation funds to help communities build more housing near existing rail stations. It encourages much-needed housing construction and benefits the environment by giving people the option of using the rail system rather than automobiles. The program directly links land use with the efficient use of an existing transportation system (US EPA 2003).

The C/CAG allocates up to 10 percent of State Transportation Improvement Funds to the San Mateo County TOD program. From 1999 to 2001, the C/CAG allocated 2.3 million dollars to support the development of 1,282 bedrooms in five residential development projects. For the second cycle from 2002 to 2004, over 2.9 million dollars has been allocated to 10 projects to support the construction of 2,407 bedrooms. Redwood City was the first to receive a TOD grant and used it to provide 206 new residential units within walking distance to both the Caltrain Station and the downtown district (US EPA 2003)

Timber Harvesting

Overview of Regulations

In 1973, the California State Legislature adopted the Z'Berg-Nejedly Forest Practices Act (FPA) to regulate timber harvesting on both state and privately owned land. The California Board of Forestry establishes Forest Practice Rules that apply to logging, and the California Department of Forestry (CDF) enforces those rules.

In 1976, the California State Legislature adopted the Forest Taxation Reform Act, which requires counties to create zoning for parcels of land used to grow and harvest timber. These parcels are called "Timberland Production Zones" (TPZs) and land so designated is restricted to the growing and harvesting of timber and other compatible uses. In return, the property owner receives tax assessment benefits. Also in 1976, the California State Legislature found that timber harvest is subject to review by the California Environmental Quality Act. In 1979, the State Legislature mandated the creation of Timber Harvest Plans (THP). A THP is similar to an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). It is an assessment of the anticipated impacts to the environment for a proposed timber harvest. A THP is required to be submitted by landowners to the California Department of Forestry outlining which timber will be harvested, how it will be harvested and any measures being taken to prevent environmental degradation. Registered Professional Foresters must prepare the plans and state-licensed timber operators must conduct the timber harvest operations. It is important to note that timber harvest can occur outside of TPZs in compliance with a THP that has been approved by the CDF (CDF 2003).

This combined land cover and land use map shows locations of Timber Production Zones (indicted in pink) in the San Lorenzo River Watershed.

In October 2003, Governor Gray Davis signed SB 810, a law that allows any State Water Quality Control Board to block a THP if its staff determines that the logging would violate water quality standards on any California streams that the US EPA has listed as impaired by sediment. This law affects many rivers in San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties. In San Mateo County these include Butano Creek, Pescadero Creek, and San Gregorio Creek. In Santa Cruz County, affected creeks include the San Lorenzo River, the Pajaro River, Aptos Creek, Fall Creek, Kings Creek, Lompico Creek, Newell Creek, and Zayante Creek (Rogers 2003). This change in law strengthens salmonid habitat restoration, but makes THPs more complex since landowners must now answer to two state agencies.

Forest Practice Rules vary throughout the state according to designated districts. Santa Cruz and San Mateo Counties are in the Southern Sub-district of the Coast Forest District. The Southern Sub-district requires selective cutting. Selective cutting allows timber operators to remove 60 percent of the conifers greater than 18 inches dbh (diameter at breast height), and 50 percent of all those greater than 12 inches dbh. Because redwoods usually re-sprout from the cut trunks, tree planting is generally not required for forest regeneration. The area cannot be harvested again for at least ten years.

Both San Mateo and Santa Cruz County have adopted stricter regulations than the State regarding logging in an effort to protect habitat and endangered salmonid populations, although the logging industry has challenged their right to do so. In 1995, the Circuit Court of Appeal upheld San Mateo County's right to require a 1000-foot residential setback on THPs outside of TPZs. These setbacks are in effect in the Skyline area and the Coastal Zone and can only be overturned if the residents agree (Committee for Green Foothills 2003). In Santa Cruz County, litigation is ongoing regarding the County's right to set stricter limitations on timber harvest than those set by the State. Since 1998, Santa Cruz County has restricted timber harvest to specific districts, restricted the locations of helicopter yarding, required a coastal plan amendment for any TPZ conversions in the coastal zone, and restricted stream corridor logging (Schiltgen 2002). In November 2003, Santa Cruz County representatives and representatives from the logging industry presented their cases to the 6th District Court of Appeals. The logging industry believes that the county is acting illegally by creating regulations when California State law bars them from regulating logging activities. The county, on the other hand, believes that recent court rulings uphold the rights of counties to determine land use within their jurisdiction (Alexander 2003). The Appellate Court hearing follows a 2001 decision by the Superior Court which found that Santa Cruz County can generally restrict the scope of logging operations, but cannot dictate the terms by which they occur. Both the county and the timber industry appealed the ruling. The California Coastal Commission is appealing the ruling alongside the county (Alexander 2003).

Timber Production

In California, TPZs are divided into five categories based on their ability to produce wood. Site Class I is used to denote areas having the highest timber productivity while Site Class V is used to denote those areas with the lowest productivity. In San Mateo County in 2002, 16 acres were classified as Site Class I, 4,796 acres (20 percent) were classified as Site Class II, 9,330 acres (39 percent) were classified as Site Class III, 3,993 acres (17 percent) were classified as Site Class IV, and 5,580 acres (24 percent) were classified as Site Class V. In Santa Cruz County in 2002, 52,750 acres (100 percent) were classified as Site Class III. Site Classes I and II can be viewed as analogous to prime agricultural land for the purpose of public policy (Shih 2002). San Mateo County had 20 percent of its timberland classified as Site I and II in 2002; Santa Cruz had no timberland so classified (Shih 2002).

In Santa Cruz, the approximate area of land zoned for timber production is 65,578 acres, about 24% of the total land area (Santa Cruz County RCD 2003). More information about the forestland used for timber production can be obtained from the Santa Cruz County Resource Conservation District Web site.

As the forest environment becomes increasingly residential in San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties, citizens have lobbied to restrict logging and have created legislation such as that mentioned above. These laws hamper the ability of small property owners (those who own between 40 and 160 acres) to generate income through timber harvest and so, in many cases, they choose to subdivide the land and sell it for residential development (Musitelli 2000). This practice results in the permanent loss of forestland with important implications for salmonid recovery planning (see the Land Ownership section for more information).

Coastal agricultural lands in Santa Cruz County in 2003. Adjacent urban lands are visible in the background.

Agriculture

About 44,500 acres within San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties are used for agriculture. Of that land, about 60 acres is used for confined meat production, about 8,500 acres is used for orchards, vineyards, groves, nurseries, and ornamental production, and about 36,000 acres is used for crops and pastureland (US EPA 1998).

In San Mateo County, farmed land decreased 22 percent from 57,418 acres in 1992 to 44,588 acres in 1997. The amount of cropland harvested and the number of farms also decreased. The average size of farms decreased 2 percent from 190 acres in 1992 to 186 acres in 1997. Full time farms decreased 20 percent from 166 farms in 1992 to 132 farms in 1997 (USDA 1999a). In 2000, the top crops in San Mateo County were nursery stock and plants, mushrooms, potted and cut flowers, and brussel sprouts (Regents of the University of California 2001).

In Santa Cruz County, farmed land increased by 34 percent from 52,905 acres in 1992 to 71,115 acres in 1997. However, the number of farms decreased. The average size of farms increased 42 percent, from 69 acres in 1992 to 98 acres in 1997. Full time farms increased one percent to 432 farms from 426 farms in 1992 (USDA 1999b). In 2000, the leading crops in Santa Cruz County were fresh strawberries, raspberries, head lettuce, nursery products, and cut flowers (Regents of the University of California 2001).

Sand mines near Felton in Santa Cruz County in 2003.

Resource Extraction

In 2002, California ranked first in the United States for non-fuel mineral production, accounting for about 9 percent of the nationwide total (Kohler 2002). California led the nation in production of sand, gravel, portland cement, diatomite, and natural sodium sulfite. Construction sand and gravel were California 's leading industrial minerals. San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties contribute to the state's overall production of sand, gravel, and limestone for portland cement.

About 1,500 acres within San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties are used for mining activities (US EPA 1998). Hard rock mining and sand mining both occur in San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties. Drilling for oil and gas also occurs within the counties (California Department of Conservation 2003). In Santa Cruz County, the 220-acre Quail Hollow Quarry is used for the extraction of high quality glass sand. This inland sand is the product of marine deposition 10 million years ago. In San Mateo County in 2000, there were 116 establishments engaged in mining activities, of which 103 were involved with oil and gas extraction. In Santa Cruz County in 2003, there were eight active quarries.

Fisheries

In San Francisco Bay from the San Mateo Bridge south, there are several species of fish harvested commercially and recreationally. Abundant species include northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax) and English sole (Parophrys vetulus). Other species found in this area include Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax), sand sole (Psettichthys melanostictus), starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus), lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus), brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus), leopard shark (Triakis semifasciata), spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias), and skates (Raja sp.). Species considered to be rare in this area include calico rockfish (Sebastes dallii), rex sole (Errex zachirus), cabezon (Scorpaenichthys marmoratus), and soupfin shark (Galeorhinus galeus) (NOAA NMFS 2003).

On the Pacific Ocean side of Santa Cruz and San Mateo Counties, the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary extends from the Farallon Islands in the north to Morro Bay in the south. Commercial fisheries account for most of the fish caught in the sanctuary and throughout the California Coast. Hook and line trolls are used to catch salmon (Oncorhynchus sp.) and tuna (Thunnus sp.), trawls are used to catch rockfish (Sebastes sp.) and flatfish (order Pleuronectiformes), long-lines are used to catch rockfish, gill and trammel nets are used for halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis), rockfish, and croaker (Genyonemus lineatus), drift gillnets are used to catch swordfish (Xiphias gladius) and shark (Class Chondrichthyes), roundhaul and lampara nets are used for squid (Loligo sp.), anchovy, herring (Family Clupeidae), mackerel (Family Scombridae), and sardine and traps are used for prawns, dungeness crab (Cancer magister) and rock crab (Cancer productus, C. Antennarius, and C. anthonyi) (Weinstein 2001). Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) is one of the most commercially important fisheries and is consistently among the three most valuable fisheries in the state. Declining wild stock is being supplemented by hatchery stock to increase fishery production (Weinstein 2001). Although commercially important off of the coast of Santa Cruz and San Mateo Counties, chinook salmon do not inhabit the freshwater ecosystems of these counties.

The Boardwalk in Santa Cruz is California's only seaside amusement park. Photo courtesy of Kenneth Adelman, California Coastal Records Project, Copyright © 2002-2004.

Tourism

Nine coastal counties including San Mateo and Santa Cruz border the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. The Sanctuary generates tourism in the form of recreational boating, recreational fishing, diving, surfing, sightseeing, hiking, and nature observation (Weinstein 2001). Recreational fishing is of six types: commercial passenger fishing vessel/charter, private/rental boat, beach and bank, jetty and breakwater, pier and dock, and spear fishing. The major species caught by recreational fishers include nearshore rockfishes, surfperches, greenlings, lingcod, flatfishes, salmonids, mackerel, jacksmelt, and sculpins (Starr et al. 2002; Weinstein 2001). In the Sanctuary, California Department of Fish and Game officials have documented a downward trend in both recreational fishing effort and catches since 1981 (Starr et al. 2002).

In San Mateo County, tourism includes San Francisco Bay area tourism, natural resource tourism, agricultural tourism, and history tourism. The ocean side communities offer lodging and activities oriented towards enjoying the scenic beauty of the area, and several farms offer a variety of tourism opportunities (University of California Small Farm Center 2003; San Mateo County Convention and Visitors Bureau 2002). The National Park Service has commemorated the Spanish exploration of the area by designating a trail that follows Juan Batista de Anza's route from southern Arizona to the San Francisco Mission (National Park Service 2003) and there are many other historic landmarks within San Mateo County (San Mateo County Convention and Visitors Bureau 2002). The Bay Meadows Horse Racing Track is one of the only racing tracks in the bay area.

In Santa Cruz County, recreation and tourism are a multi-million dollar industry each year (California Association of Resource Conservation Districts 2002). Tourism includes natural resource tourism, agricultural tourism, and history tourism. Natural resources available to tourists include beaches, mountains, and the Pacific Ocean. Recreational sports activities include swimming, water-skiing, sailing, surfing, rock climbing, hang gliding, and fishing, to name a few of the most popular activities. Agricultural tourism is available through several farms in the area and wineries also offer tourism opportunities (University of California Small Farm Center 2003; Santa Cruz County Conference and Visitors Council 2003). The Boardwalk in the City of Santa Cruz is California's only seaside amusement park. Santa Cruz also has many points of historical interest (The California Coastal Trail 2003).

Locations of dams, reservoirs, and various other water storage sites in San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties.

Water Use

Water Supply

About 26,000 acres within San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties are used for water storage in reservoirs, streams, or canals (US EPA 1998). The California Department of Water Resources oversees the management of water throughout California. San Mateo County is in the Central District Regional Office, and Santa Cruz County is in the San Joaquin District Regional Office (California Department of Water Resources 2003).

In San Mateo County, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) owns almost all of the 23,000 acre Peninsula Watershed. The Peninsula Watershed has been protected from urbanization due to its use for water collection and storage. Land uses adjacent to the watershed are mainly residential to the north and east and unincorporated private open space to the west (SFPUC 1998). The Peninsula Watershed is open to the public for some activities such as hiking, running, bicycling, roller blading, and horseback riding. Fishing, camping, and boating are among several activities that are not allowed, and scientific study is allowed by permit only. An 18-hole golf course is present near Crystal Springs (SFPUC 1998).

The Peninsula Watershed is located in central San Mateo County and includes the San Andreas, Crystal Springs, and Pilarcitos Reservoirs. The reservoirs store water piped in from the Alameda Watershed and the Hetch Hetchy Water and Power system, and local runoff. The San Mateo, Pilarcitos, and San Andreas Creeks feed the local runoff into the reservoirs. This runoff provides five to ten percent of the water system's total supply. The catchment area for the Pilarcitos Reservoir is 3.8 square miles with a maximum storage area of 3,100 acre-feet. The catchment area for the San Andreas Reservoir is 4.4 square miles with a maximum capacity of 19,000 acre-feet. The catchment area of the Crystal Springs Reservoir is 22.5 square miles with a maximum capacity of 58,400 acre-feet. The water is treated and filtered at the Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant located in San Bruno, San Mateo County (SFPUC 1998).

In Santa Cruz County, seven public water agencies serve the growing population. These include: the Central Water District in Aptos, the Lompico County Water District in Felton, the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency in Watsonville, the San Lorenzo Valley Water District in Boulder Creek, the Scotts Valley Water District in Scotts Valley, the Soquel Creek Water District in Soquel, and the Santa Cruz County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Public Works) for Zones 5, 6, and 8 (Cole 2002; Santa Cruz Local Agency Formation 2003).

Crystal Springs Dam. Photo courtesy of the San Mateo County Public Works Department.

The Central Water District serves mainly rural residential customers in the foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains east of Aptos. Water is obtained from two aquifers, the Aromas Red Sands Aquifer and the Purisima Aquifer (Central Water District personal communication 12/10/03).

The Lompico Water District serves about 500 residential customers in Lompico Canyon. Water is obtained from the local aquifer using wells and from Lompico Creek (Lompico Water District personal communication 12/10/03).

The Soquel Creek Water District serves the urban coastal area from 41st Avenue in Capitola to La Selva Beach in Santa Cruz County. The water supply is obtained from 17 wells in two groundwater aquifers. In addition to the Water District, there are approximately 1,300 other wells pumping from the same aquifers. Saltwater intrusion due to pumping more water from the basins than is recharged threatens the coastal aquifers from which the Soquel Creek Water District obtains water (Soquel Creek Water District 2003).

The San Lorenzo Valley Water District serves the communities of Boulder Creek, Brookdale, Ben Lomond, Zayante, Fenton, and Scotts Valley (Santa Cruz LAFCO 2003). It is located in the Santa Cruz Mountains in Northern Santa Cruz County in Boulder Creek, California. The water district supplies its customers through the use of deep wells that tap into freshwater aquifers and from a surface water treatment plant (San Lorenzo Valley Water District 2002).

The Scotts Valley Water District obtains water from the Santa Margarita groundwater basin to supply the City of Scotts Valley and the surrounding areas. The Santa Margarita basin is located in the Santa Cruz Mountains. As in the other water districts, the Scotts Valley faces increasing demand for water, while the supply is limited (Todd Engineers 2003).

The Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency draws water from the Pajaro Valley groundwater basin and serves the communities of Pajaro, Watsonville, Aromas, Los Lomas, Chittenden, and Freedom, as well as unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz, San Benito, and Monterey Counties. Pajaro Valley groundwater levels are declining and saltwater intrusion is occurring near the coast (Raines, Melton, and Carella Inc. 2002). Land use in the Pajaro Valley is mainly agriculture, but urban growth is increasing and is expected to continue to increase (Raines, Melton, and Carella Inc. 2002). The Pajaro Valley Water District is currently attempting to augment its water supply. In September 2003 it reached an agreement to purchase Central Valley Project water and was constructing a pipeline to transport stored rainwater to coastal farmers who are experiencing salt-water intrusion in their wells (McNiesh 2003).

The Santa Cruz County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is charged with providing for conservation of water and control and disposition of flood, storm and other waters of the district and with providing water for present or future beneficial use; conserving water; replenishing groundwater supply, and selling, appropriating and acquiring water for district zones 5, 6 and 8 (Berkeley Digital Library Project 2003; Santa Cruz LAFCO 2003).

The City of Santa Cruz Water Department produces, operates, and maintains water storage, treatment, and collection systems for municipal customers. The water department obtains water from four sources: the San Lorenzo River, North Coast sources, the Loch Lomond Reservoir, and the Live Oak Wells. The surface water sources are treated at the Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant to remove impurities. The Live Oak Wells obtain water from a groundwater source; the groundwater is used to supplement summer surface water shortages and is treated at the Live Oak Wells Water Treatment Plant.

Water Rights

Water rights laws in the Western United States are constructed upon two concepts – prior appropriation and beneficial use. Prior appropriation indicates that the earliest users of a water source have priority in allocation issues and beneficial use denotes that water for which the rights have been acquired must be used rather than reserved for a future date. In California prior to 1872, water rights were acquired by diverting and "beneficially" using water for some constructive purpose. Priority of ownership was given to those water users who first beneficially used water, rather than those who first diverted it. In 1872, the California Civil Code Sections 1410 through 1422 established a permissive system for water appropriation. If beneficial use ceased once the water right had been established, the water right was lost. Until 1914, water rights could only be proven by evidence of original appropriation and continuous beneficial use (SWRCB 1990).

In December 1914, the California Water Commission Act was passed. The California Water Code now regulates water appropriation water from surface streams, other bodies of surface water, and subterranean streams (SWRCB 1990). Those wishing to obtain permits must apply to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Once obtained, a right is complete as soon as beneficial use is being made in accordance with the permit filed with the SWRCB. The SWRCB also issues permits and licenses for the appropriation of underground water, but only "subterranean streams flowing through known and defined channels" (SWRCB 1990), not aquifers or other underground bodies of water. Other underground water is not subject to permit, although those who pump groundwater are required to file a notice with the SWRCB.

Riparian water rights of landowners with streams on their property are governed by common law. Landowners "may have a right to share in a reasonable beneficial use of the natural flow of water" (SWRCB 1990) that flows on their land. Those who divert water from streams are required to file a Statement of Water Diversion and Use with SWRCB. There is no penalty for not filing, however, and so non-compliance with this rule may be high (Frank Roddy pers. Comm. 1/28/04). Lack of accurate estimates of water diversions on a stream can be extremely detrimental to successful salmonid recovery planning.

In San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties, there are many water diversions in place. Most of the diversions are in the lower reaches and these are mostly direct diversions. The higher reaches contain mostly reservoirs. All major streams in the study area contain diversions.

References

Alexander, K. 2003. Fight over control of logging begins. Santa Cruz Sentinel Online, November 21, 2003. View on-line source.

Berkeley Digital Library Project. 2003. Advanced Structure Document Examples General Comparison of Water District Acts County Water Districts [Web page] [cited December 11, 2003]. View on-line source.

California Association of Resource Conservation Districts. 2002. RCD - Watershed Information Sharing Project [Web page] [cited 2003]. View on-line source.

California Coastal Trail. 2003. Points of Historical Interest Santa Cruz County [Web page] [cited December 12, 2003]. View on-line source.

California Department of Conservation. 2003. Oil and Gas Wells in San Mateo, Alameda, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz Counties. California Department of Conservation Draft Map - FIELDS: Half Moon Bay, La Honda, Moody Gulch, Oil Creek Sargent; COUNTIES: Alameda, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz. View document (PDF).

California Department of Finance. 2002. County Profiles: San Mateo County [Excel file] [cited 2003]. View on-line source.

California Department of Water Resources. 2003. Regional Offices [Web page] [cited December 12, 2003]. View on-line source.

California Employment Development Department. 2003. Labor Market Information. Major Employers in Santa Cruz County [Web page] [cited December 12, 2003]. View on-line source.

California Department of Forestry. 2003. Resource Management and Forestry: Forest Practice [Web page] [cited December 11, 2003]. View on-line source.

Cole, D.W. 2000. Tapping out. While local water agencies resist cooperation, they agree that current supplies can't keep pace with demand. Santa Cruz Sentinel Online - A New Century. View on-line source.

Committee for Green Foothills. 2003. Current Projects [Web page] [cited December 5, 2003]. View on-line source.

Holbrook, S. 2000. Our changing face. County's population shifts as numbers continue to climb. Santa Cruz Sentinel - A New Century. View on-line source.

Jones, D. 2000. Santa Cruz County: A century. The 1970s. The fight for Lighthouse Field launched a political career. Santa Cruz Sentinel Online. View on-line source.

Kohler, S. 2002. "California Non-Fuel Minerals 2002." California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey. 6 pp.

McNeish, C. 2003. Stopping seawater intrusion PVWMA is making progress on an important project. Register-Pajaronian, September 24, 2003.

Musitelli, R. 2000. Urban forests. Timberland feels the squeeze as community grows. Santa Cruz Sentinel - A New Century. View on-line source.

National Park Service. 2003. Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail California [Web site] [cited December 11, 2003]. View on-line source.

NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2003. Fisheries Management Plan (FMP) Species Distributions in San Francisco, San Pablo and Suisun Bays [Web page]. NMFS Southwest Regional Office [cited December 11, 2003]. View on-line source.

Patton, G. 2003. Land Use Report, Thursday January 9, 2003 [Web page]. KUSP 88.9 FM [cited December 8, 2003]. View on-line source.

Raines Melton and Carella Inc. 2002. "Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency Revised Basin Management Plan." Prepared for the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency. View on-line source.

Regents of the University of California. 2004. Counting California [Web page] [cited December 6, 2003]. View on-line source.

Rogers, P. 2003. Logging industry absorbs new blow. San Jose Mercury News. Politics and Government. Tuesday, October 14, 2003.

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. 1998. "Draft Peninsula Watershed Management Plan." View document (PDF).

San Lorenzo Valley Water District. 2002. About San Lorenzo Valley Water District [Web site] [cited December 11, 2003]. View on-line source.

San Mateo County Convention and Visitors Bureau. 2002. Travel and Tourism [Web site] [cited December 9, 2003]. View on-line source.

Santa Cruz County Resource Conservation District. 2002. "A Long-Range Conservation Plan 2000 - 2010." Santa Cruz County Resource Conservation District. 19 pp. View on-line source.

Santa Cruz Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). 2003. Cities and Special Districts in Santa Cruz County [Web page] [cited December 12, 2003]. View on-line source.

Schiltgen, D. 2002. "Regulating Location of Timber Harvest Activities." County of Sonoma Permit and Resource Management Division. Memorandum to GP2002 Citizens Advisory Committee. View on-line document.

Shih, T.T. 2002. "Timberland Site Class on Private Lands Zoned for Timber Production." Fire and Resource Assessment Program, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 10 pp. View on-line document.

Soquel Creek Water District. 2003. Water Supply [Web page] [cited December 8, 2003]. View on-line source.

Starr, R., J. Cope, and L. Kerr. 2002. "Trends in Fisheries and Fishery Resources Associated with the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary from 1981 to 2000." California Sea Grant College Program. 169 pp. View document (PDF).

State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 1990. "Information Pertaining to Water Rights in California." California State Water Resources Control Board. View on-line source.

Todd Engineers. 2003. "Hydrogeologic studies, Scotts Valley Water District." View on-line source.

University of California Small Farm Center. 2003. California Agri-Tourism Database [Web page] [cited December 9, 2003]. View on-line source.

US Census Bureau. 2003a. Nonemployer Statistics, 2000 Mining San Mateo County [Web site] [cited December 9, 2003]. View on-line source.

US Census Bureau. 2003b. Nonemployer Statistics, 2000 Mining Santa Cruz County, CA [Web site] [cited December 9, 2003]. View on-line source.

US Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1999a. "1997 Census of Agriculture, County Profile: San Mateo, California." View on-line document.

US Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1999b. "1997 Census of Agriculture, County Profile: Santa Cruz, California." View on-line document.

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1998. 1:250,000 Scale Quadrangles Land Use/Land Cover GIRAS Spatial Data of CONUS in BASINS [Web page] [cited December 8, 2003]. View on-line source.

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 2003. Smart Growth. National Award for Smart Growth Acheivement 2002 Winners [Web page] [cited December 6, 2003]. View on-line source.

Weinstein, A. 2001. Socioeconomic Uses. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Site Characterization [Web page] [cited December 6, 2003]. View on-line source.

Back to top