The SMC Stream Survey

What we’ve learned and where we’re going

Why collaborative monitoring?The SMC was created in 2001, and began its stream survey in 2009 as a collaborative program of leading stormwater and regulatory agencies

Coordinate efforts to leverage resources and knowledge

Answer regional questions and provide context for site‐specific management issues

Create platform for more in‐depth studies

SMC participants and member agenciesVentura County Watershed Protection District

Los Angeles County Flood Control District

Orange County Public Works

San Bernardino County Flood Control District

Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District

San Diego County Public Works

Council for Watershed Health

Los Angeles Regional WQ Control Board

Santa Ana Regional WQ Control Board

San Diego Regional WQ Control Board

State Water Resources Control Board

SWAMP/Perennial Stream Assessment

Department of Fish and Wildlife

SCCWRP

Stream survey began in 2009Key questions:1. What is the condition of perennial, wadeable streams in 

Southern California?2. What stressors are associated with poor condition?3. Are conditions changing over time?

Achievements of the first 5‐year survey~550 sites have been sampled (perhaps the most intensive probabilistic stream survey in the country)

Enhanced communication among participating agencies

Improved technical capacity

Data is used to guide statewide policy (e.g., bio‐objectives, NNEs, wetlands protection), tool development (e.g., CSCI, algae IBIs)

About 25% of perennial stream‐miles are healthy

Healthy streams are more extensive in some areas than in others

Next survey: Expand to nonperennial streams

21% were sampled18% were rejected for other reasons (e.g., access)

2% were not sampled

59% were nonperennial!

Next survey: Expand to nonperennial streams

Index Score

Stress

Low Moderate High

Focus on modified channels

Habitat constraints andWater quality impacts

Bugs Algae

Explore alternativeobjectives

Goo

d cond

ition

Poor con

ditio

n

Goo

d cond

ition

Poor con

ditio

n

• Nutrients• Major ions• Degraded habit

Top stressors associated with poor condition

Metals, toxicity, pyrethroids were limited, or weakly associated with biological condition.

Next survey: Modify constituents

Continue core constituents

BugsAlgaeCRAMPHABNutrientsMajor ions (Cl, SO4)TDS/TSS

Drop low‐priority stressors

Metals (water)Toxicity (water)Pyrethroids (water)

Add new analytes of interest

Hydromodification screeningChannel engineering assessmentVertebratesHydrologic regimesBioanalytic screensCECs

No obvious trends over time

However, different sites sampled each year.Can’t see changes at individual sites!

Next survey: Revisit sitesRevisit ~30% of our probabilistic sites every yearClassify sites as improving/degrading/stableExtrapolate to the region as a wholeAssociate stressors, conditions with changes in condition

Sharing our resultsFinal report under review by the SMC Executive committee (soon on SCCWRP website)4‐page fact sheet in developmentSome data available through CEDEN (data sharing process in development)

New partners for new cycle

Agricultural dischargers

Watershed monitoring groups

National parks and forests

Thank you!