Chinook Salmon (Central Valley spring-run ESU)

The linework for this layer is based on 1:100,000 scale stream routed hydrography.

Data creation process 2005.

cvsr_chinook_ch_06_2005.shp

Stream segments were identified and assigned attributes by Southwest Region (SWR) biologists using 1:100,000 hydrography data and other basemap information on hard copy maps. SWR biologists divided the routed hydrography into stream segments using the best available information to represent local Chinook distribution and habitat. The segments' upper and lower extents were manually marked onto the basemaps by the biologists. This information was then visually interpreted from the paper maps and entered into a digital format using the "Route Tools" extension provided by CDFG. The resulting event table was then used with the CDFG routed hydrography as the route reference to create routed events based on the biologists' segment determinations. The table containing the accompanying segment attribute information was joined using 'GIS_Link' as the related field, and the shapefile 'CVSR_Chinook_Draft_2004' was created from the routed events. To minimize errors that may have occurred during the process, the completed digital file was compared against the marked maps for consistency. The biologists also reviewed the completed digital file to ensure attribute information was associated with the correct stream segments.

Biologists rated each Calwater (California Watershed Map) Hydrologic Sub-area (HSA) based on occupancy and habitat quanitity and quality information found in the Chinook distribution shapefile (CVSR_Chinook_Draft_2004). These biological ratings were compared against economic values given to each HSA. Based on whether selected criteria were met, an HSA was determined to be included or excluded from critical habitat. All stream segments were then coded to reflect their HSA's designation. The only exceptions to this occured when a stream segment was valued as a migration corridor (the segment would be included as critical habitat even if the HSA was excluded) or if there were other overriding biological considerations.

Those segments coded as critical habitat were then extracted from the distribution shapfile and placed in the resulting 'CVSR_Chinook_Proposed_Critical_habitat' file. Public comments were received following draft publication of the critical habitat proposed rule in December 2004. These comments were incorporated into the data set and the final critical habitat file 'CVSR_Chinook_CH_06_2005' was created.

Data layers from the following were used during this process:

California Geospatial Information Data Library, State Coastal Conservancy, California Department of Forestry, US Geological Survey

cvsr_chinook_ch_06_2005.shp (California_Teale_Albers_NAD83) geographic transformation not necessary, unprojected -> CKCVS_ch.shp (GCS_North_American_1983 wkid 4269).

Geometry was not edited, attributes were not edited, metadata was edited.

The 2019 version CKCVS_ch.shp (GCS_North_American_1983 wkid 4269) was converted into the standardized feature class SalmonChinook_CentralValleyspringrunESU_20050902 (GCS_WGS_84 wkid 4326) using the National Critical Habitat Geodatabase processing protocol.

During standardization, geometry was not edited. Attributes were edited. Metadata was edited and populated using the final rule/CFR and the source cvsr_chinook_ch_06_2005.shp (California_Teale_Albers_NAD83).

Migrated fields: "STREAM_" into "UNIT" (edited stream/river names to standardize text), SPWNUTIL (values = yes, probable undocumented) + MIGRAUTIL (values = yes, probable undocumented) + NATALUTIL (values = yes, probable undocumented) + NON_NATALU (values = yes, probable undocumented) into "NOTES" (values = spawning, rearing, migration)

Dropped fields: FID, LLID, BEGFT, ENDFT, COMMENTS, EVENTID, ESU, BASIN, HAB_UTIL, QUALSPWN, QUALMIGRA, ADLTHLDUTI, QUALHOLD, QUALNATAL, QUALNON_NA