Montezuma Wetlands Restoration Project
Status | In-progress | County | Solano |
---|---|---|---|
Project Type | Non-mitigation | Location | 38.10129° N, -121.88359° W Map |
Project Area (Acres) | 2,192 | Last Updated | 12 December 2024 |
Project Abstract | This 4-stage project will restore about 1,820 acres of tidal wetlands, seasonal wetlands, intertidal ponds, vernal pools, and upland buffer zone habitats through the engineered placement of about 20 million cubic yards of agency-approved dredged sediment to raise the subsided site to elevations appropriate for intertidal marsh. | ||
Project Groups | San Francisco Bay Adaptation | San Francisco Bay Joint Venture | San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority (Eligible) | San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority (Funded) | ||
Administrative Region | San Francisco Bay Joint Venture - Jemma Williams, SFBJV |
Project Identification
ID | Type |
---|---|
RA-001 | SFBRA - Project ID |
02-48-D0005 | SWRCB - 401 Certification Letter (e.g., Site Number or WDID) |
201051 | SWRCB - CIWQS Place Number |
194050 | USACE - DA File Number |
Habitat Plan
Site Name | Phase | Activity | SubActivities | Habitat | SubHabitat | Acres | Activity Status | Water Regime |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Montezuma Avoided Seasonal Wetlands and Vernal Pools | Implementation | Acquisition/Preservation/Protection | Vernal pools and swales | None | 1.40 | Implementation in-progress | ||
Montezuma Created Vernal Pools | Implementation | Creation/Establishment | Vernal pools and swales | None | 3.78 | Completed | Unknown/Unspecified | |
Montezuma Preserved Vernal Pools | Implementation | Acquisition/Preservation/Protection | Vernal pools and swales | None | 3.80 | Completed | ||
Montezuma Restoration Phase I | Implementation | Restoration (unspecified) | Buffer area | None | 2.40 | Completed | ||
Montezuma Restoration Phase I | Implementation | Restoration/Re-establishment | Estuarine Wetland | Marsh | 566.0 | Completed | Fully tidal | |
Montezuma Restoration Phase I | Implementation | Restoration/Rehabilitation | Seasonal Wetland | Unknown/Unspecified | 45.00 | Completed | ||
Montezuma Restoration Phase I | Implementation | Restoration/Rehabilitation | Subtidal Habitat | Soft substrate | 30.00 | Completed | ||
Montezuma Restoration Phase I | Implementation | Enhancement | Upland | Grassland | 220.0 | Completed | Seasonal non-tidal | |
Montezuma Restoration Phase II | Implementation | Restoration/Rehabilitation | Buffer area | None | 135.0 | Implementation in-progress | ||
Montezuma Restoration Phase II | Implementation | Restoration/Re-establishment | Estuarine Wetland | Marsh | 935.0 | Implementation in-progress | Fully tidal | |
Montezuma Restoration Phase II | Implementation | Enhancement | Upland | Grassland | 142.0 | Implementation in-progress | Seasonal non-tidal | |
Montezuma Restoration Phase III | Implementation | Enhancement | Upland | Grassland | 108.0 | Implementation in-progress | Seasonal non-tidal |
Related Habitat Impacts
Impact Project Name | Habitat | Acres Lost | Type of Loss |
---|---|---|---|
No Data |
Sites
Name | Status | Acres |
---|---|---|
Montezuma Avoided Seasonal Wetlands and Vernal Pools | Completed | 1.40 |
Montezuma Created Vernal Pools | Completed | 3.78 |
Montezuma Preserved Vernal Pools | Completed | 3.80 |
Montezuma Restoration Phase I | Completed | 863.4 |
Montezuma Restoration Phase II | In-progress/Implementation | 1,212 |
Montezuma Restoration Phase III | In-progress/Implementation | 108.0 |
Events
People
Type | Name | Organization | Department |
---|---|---|---|
Contact | Jim Levine | Montezuma Wetlands, LLC | Not applicable/Unknown |
Contact | Doug Lipton | Lipton Environmental Group, LLC | Not applicable/Unknown |
Contact | Cassie Pinnell | Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting | Not applicable/Unknown |
Funding
Funding Need: $7,000,000
Phase | Activity | Funder | Amount |
---|---|---|---|
Implementation | Enhancement | SFBRA San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority - Measure AA | |
Implementation | Restoration/Rehabilitation | SFBRA San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority - Measure AA | |
Implementation | Restoration (unspecified) | SFBRA San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority - Measure AA | |
Implementation | Restoration/Re-establishment | SFBRA San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority - Measure AA | $3,710,000 |
Related CRAM Assessments
Visit Date | Version | Site Name | Wetland Type | Index Score |
---|---|---|---|---|
2023-08-08 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 01 | estuarine perennial saline | 63 |
2023-08-08 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 06 | estuarine perennial saline | 76 |
2023-08-08 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 05 | estuarine perennial saline | 76 |
2023-08-08 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 02 | estuarine perennial saline | 65 |
2023-08-07 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 04 | estuarine perennial saline | 73 |
2023-08-07 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 07 | estuarine perennial saline | 69 |
2022-07-29 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 04 | estuarine perennial saline | 60 |
2022-07-29 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 01 | estuarine perennial saline | 61 |
2022-07-29 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 02 | estuarine perennial saline | 68 |
2022-07-28 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 05 | estuarine perennial saline | 72 |
2022-07-28 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 06 | estuarine perennial saline | 69 |
2022-07-28 | 6.1 | Montezuma Phase 1 - 07 | estuarine perennial saline | 63 |
2021-04-15 | 6.2 | 3 Montezuma Wetlands | vernal pool system | 65 |
2016-05-13 | 6.1 | Montezuma Created Pools | vernal pool system | 77 |
2016-05-13 | 6.2 | Montezuma Created Pools | vernal pool system | 75 |
2016-05-13 | 6.2 | Montezuma Wetlands Natural Pools | vernal pool system | 88 |
2016-05-13 | 6.1 | Montezuma Natural Pools | vernal pool system | 86 |
2011-05-18 | 5.0.2 | Montezuma Preserve Pools | vernal pool system | 82 |
2011-05-18 | 6.2 | Montezuma Preserve Pools | vernal pool system | 89 |
Performance Measures
Plan Name | Plan Goal | Performance Measure | Measure Value | Status | Evaluation Date |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Community Engagement | Benefits economically disadvantaged communities | 0 / 0 no 0% 0% |
in-progress/partially achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Community Engagement | Has significant youth involvement component | 0 / 0 no 0% 0% |
in-progress/partially achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Community Engagement | Number of unique volunteers expected to participate | 0 count | measure achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Community Engagement | Number of volunteer hours expected to be contributed | 0 count | measure achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Community Engagement | Number of youth participants expected to be engaged | 0 count | measure achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Flood Protection | Miles of levee to be constructed | 1 / 1 miles 100% 100% |
in-progress/partially achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Public Access | Miles of Bay Trail to be constructed | 0 miles | measure achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Public Access | Number of public access facilities to be constructed | 0 count | measure achieved |
Name | File Type | Submitted On | Submitted By |
---|---|---|---|
Biological Survey Reports | Monitoring Report | 2010-09-22 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
California Least Tern Reports | Monitoring Report | 2024-03-20 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Department of the Army Permit No. 19405N | Plan Or Permit | 2008-03-14 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
First Annual Report of the Technical Review Team | Other | 2004-06-10 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Habitat Types and Acreages from ACOE Permit #194050 | Plan Or Permit | 2005-10-28 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Map of planned restoration | Plan Or Permit | 2024-03-20 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) | Plan Or Permit | 2010-11-19 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Plan - Updated 2019 | Plan Or Permit | 2017-03-07 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Montezuma Technical Review Team page | Other | 2011-10-26 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Montezuma Wetlands Project | Other | 2004-06-11 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Phase I Sediment Placement | Other | 2003-11-07 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Project Description | Other | 2003-10-31 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Project Maps from ACOE Permit #194050 | Plan Or Permit | 2005-10-28 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Project Site Map | Other | 2005-07-25 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
QAPP Revision 1 | Plan Or Permit | 2013-11-19 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse Reports | Monitoring Report | 2024-03-20 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Second Annual Report of the Technical Review Team | Other | 2007-12-13 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Sediment and Water Quality Reports | Monitoring Report | 2014-09-15 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Staff Recommendation | Other | 2019-05-08 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Staff Recommendation for Montezuma Wetlands Restoration Project | Other | 2020-11-18 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Updated Waste Discharge Requirements | Plan Or Permit | 2013-09-22 | Sara Haugen, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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:
- Examine the HDC for each of the four CRAM Attributes;
- Identify the Attribute(s) scoring below the HDC;
- 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);
- Assume the low score of an Attribute is due to its low-scoring Metric(s);
- 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.