In order to provide an accurate data set of service area boundaries for California drinking water systems, the Division of Drinking Water of the California Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB DDW) has undertaken a project to vet and verify the data collected by the Tracking California's Water Boundary Tool (WBT).Note: This feature layer is updated on a regular basis. However, in some locations where it is shared, it shows the “Data Updated” date as the last time the item has changed, not the data. To accurately determine when the data was last updated, open the data table and sort by Last Edited Date field.SWRCB DDW downloaded a copy of the current water system service areas loaded in the WBT as of June 27, 2019. Additional attribute fields indicating verification status, verification staff and system type were appended to the data set. SWRCB DDW staff are reviewing and validating the displayed boundaries of each service area as well as contacting the service providers regarding necessary corrections. The verification status of any particular service area may be found in the Verification Status field.For any questions regarding this dataset, please contact the Data Support Unit at DDW-DSU@waterboards.ca.gov.

This dataset represents polygon boundaries of all public water agencies in California including public water systems, agricultural water districts, urban water districts, Federal and State water contractors, wholesalers, retailers, and other public or private utilities that deliver water to the end user.

The Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Unit falls under the purview of the County of Santa Cruz Information Services Department. The GIS Unit serves all County departments and external customers and provides data on land, features and people of Santa Cruz County. Santa Cruz County encompasses 4 cities and approximately 265,000 people. This coverage can be used for basic applications such as viewing, querying and map output production, or to provide a basemap to support graphical overlays and analyses of geospatial data.

To provide an alternative to the native NHD measuring system of percentage of distance along reach length with one that enhances the ability to examine distance relationships along entire stream courses.

The California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program (GAMA) is a statewide assessment of groundwater quality designed to help better understand and identify risks to groundwater resources. GAMA is implemented by the California State Water Resources Control Board. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is the technical lead for the Priority Basin Project (PBP), one of the components of the GAMA Program. Starting in 2012, GAMA began an assessment of water resources in shallow aquifers in California. These shallow aquifers provide water for domestic and small community-supply wells, which are often drilled to shallower depths in the groundwater system than public-supply wells. Shallow aquifers are of interest because shallow groundwater may respond more quickly and be more susceptible to contamination from human activities at the land surface, than the deeper aquifers (USGS, 2018). To prioritize shallow aquifers, California was divided into 938 groundwater units consisting of California Department of Water Resources (DWR) groundwater basins and highland areas outside of the basins defined by California Groundwater Units (Johnson and Belitz, 2014) or Hydrologic Units (HUC8) from the Watershed Boundary Dataset (USGS and USDA, 2013). The groundwater units were prioritized for sampling based on the number and density of households relying on domestic wells, water-use, and well-location information compiled from well-completion reports submitted to the DWR. The groundwater units were grouped into study units designed to facilitate comparison of groundwater quality between the shallow aquifer systems and the deep aquifer systems assessed by GAMA from 2004 to 2012 (Bennett, 2018). The study units (and study areas when applicable) were divided into equal area polygons (cells) so that all cells within a given study unit (or study area) have an equal area. These grid cells can be found in the GAMA_PBP_SAA_GridCells shapefile included in this Data Release.

This data was acquired from the Integrated Water Resources Information System (IWRIS), hosted by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The Bulletin 118 Groundwater Basins shapefile was downloaded, projected to the CCS83 Zone 5 (ftUS) Map projection and clipped to the Los Angeles County Boundary for internal Los Angeles County use. Please also visit information on Bulletin 118.Supplemental Information:Stormwater Engineering, a Division of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, maintains a list of its spreading grounds.The California Department of Water Resources has information on statewide issues.The California Geoportal offers statewide GIS data.

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - No changes v1.0 - Initial public release Description Borders of all Water Management Areas (WMAs) across the 11 western-most states of the coterminous United States are available filtered through a single source. The legal name for this set of boundaries varies state-by-state. The data is provided as two compressed shapefiles. One, stateWMAs, contains data for all 11 states. For 10 of those states, Arizona being the exception, the polygons represent the legal management boundaries used by those states to manage their surface and groundwater resources respectively. WMAs refer to the set of boundaries a particular state uses to manage its water resources. Each set of boundaries was collected from the states individually, and then merged into one spatial layer. The merging process included renaming some columns to enable merging with all other source layers, as well as removing columns deemed not required for followup analysis. The retained columns for each boundary are: basinNum - the state provided unique numerical ID; basinName - the state provided English name of the area, where applicable; state - the state name; and uniID - a unique identifier we created by concatenating the state name, and underscore, and the state numerical ID. Arizona is unique within this collection of states in that surface and groundwater resources are managed using two separate sets of boundaries. During our followup analysis (Grogan et al., in review) we decided to focus on one set of boundaries, those for surface water. This is due to the recommendation of our hydrologists that the surface water boundary set is a more realist representation of how water moves across the landscape, as a few of the groundwater boundaries are based on political and/or economic considerations. Therefore, the Arizona surface WMAs are included within stateWMAs. The Arizona groundwater WMAs are provided as a separate file, azGroundWMAs, as a companion to the first file for completeness and general reference. WMA spatial boundary data sources by state: Arizona: Arizona Surface Water Watersheds; Collected February, 2020; https://gisdata2016-11-18t150447874z-azwater.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/surface-watershed/explore?location=34.158174%2C-111.970823%2C7.50 Arizona: Arizona Ground Water Basins; Collected February, 2020; https://gisdata2016-11-18t150447874z-azwater.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/groundwater-basin-2/explore?location=34.158174%2C-111.970823%2C7.50 California: California CalWater 2.2.1; Collected February, 2020; https://www.mlml.calstate.edu/mpsl-mlml/data-center/data-entry-tools/data-tools/gis-shapefile-layers/ Colorado: Colorado Water District Boundaries; Collected February, 2020; https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdss/gis-data-category Idaho: Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) Administrative Basins; Collected November, 2015; https://data-idwr.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/fb0df7d688a04074bad92ca8ef74cc26_4/explore?location=45.018686%2C-113.862284%2C6.93 Montana: Collected June, 2019; Directly contacted Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) Office of Information Technology (OIT) Nevada: Nevada State Engineer Admin Basin Boundaries; Collected April, 2020 https://ndwr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?layers=1364d0c3a0284fa1bcd90f952b2b9f1c New Mexico: New Mexico Office of the State Engineer (OSE) Declared Groundwater Basins; Collected April, 2020 https://geospatialdata-ose.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ose-declared-groundwater-basins/explore?location=34.179783%2C-105.996542%2C7.51 Oregon: Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) Administrative Basins; Collected February, 2020; https://www.oregon.gov/OWRD/access_Data/Pages/Data.aspx Utah: Utah Adjudication Books; Collected April, 2020; https://opendata.gis.utah.gov/datasets/utahDNR::utah-adjudication-books/explore?location=39.497165%2C-111.587782%2C-1.00 Washington: Washington Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA); Collected June, 2017; https://ecology.wa.gov/Research-Data/Data-resources/Geographic-Information-Systems-GIS/Data Wyoming: Wyoming State Engineer's Office Board of Control Water Districts; Collected June, 2019; Directly contacted Wyoming State Engineer's Office

This polygon shapefile depicts boundaries of Major Watersheds in the County of Santa Clara, California. The Santa Clara Valley Water District manages an integrated water resources system that includes the supply of clean, safe water, flood protection and stewardship of streams on behalf of Santa Clara County's 1.8 million residents. This layer is part of a collection of GIS data for Santa Clara County, California.

Companies or organizations who take over 50,000 litres of water/day from a lake, river, stream or groundwater source, must obtain a Permit to Take Water from the Ministry of the Environment -with a few exceptions.

Permit holders are legally required to record how much water they take each day.

Data includes:

• purpose
• location
• water source (e.g., ground or surface)
• maximum amount allowed per day
• permit number
• expiry date of the permit

Permitted water-taking map

Create a map for a water-taking application

This data release documents five tables and one geographic information systems shapefile feature used to evaluate groundwater quality and concentration trends for groundwater basins in the Gilroy-Hollister Valley and northern San Joaquin Valley, California. This dataset provides a framework for evaluating groundwater quality data at the spatial scale of groundwater basins and the temporal scale of 5-year intervals. These spatial and temporal scales were selected because the California Sustainable Management Act (SGMA) program includes local Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) with 5-year review cycles for approved basins (California Department of Water Resources, 2025). This dataset presents a proposed method for water-quality evaluations and is not intended to supersede datasets or results presented in existing GSPs. Groundwater quality data were downloaded from the California State Water Resources Control Boards - Groundwater Information System Data and Download Page (SWRCB, 2024), which compiles local, state, and federal agencies and is commonly used as a data source for GSPs. Groundwater quality data were selected for five groundwater basins: Gilroy-Hollister Valley - Llagas Area (3-003.01), Gilroy-Hollister Valley - North San Benito (3-003.05), San Joaquin Valley - Modesto (5-022.02), San Joaquin Valley - Turlock (5-022.03), San Joaquin Valley - Merced (5-022.04). Groundwater-quality data were evaluated against state and federal water quality benchmarks used for drinking water. Each groundwater basin was divided into 15 or 20 equal-area grid cells that were used to spatially weight detection frequencies above benchmarks and identify areas where groundwater quality and trends may be more prevalent than other areas. This data release evaluated detection frequencies of constituents above benchmarks in wells, in cells, and in the basin. This data release also computed groundwater quality trends in municipal and domestic wells by comparing concentrations in the previous two five-year time periods (2014-2018; 2019-2023) and by computing monotonic concentration trends in municipal wells. Results from this effort may identify constituents and areas needing additional monitoring to assess groundwater quality conditions and trends in a groundwater basin. Methods for calculating spatial weighting of concentrations and the statistical tests for trends are based on common techniques and recently published work (Belitz and others, 2010; Jurgens and others, 2019; Haugen and others, 2021). Results of the water quality characteristics and trends are summarized in table 1. Table 2 is a list of all constituents that were above a federal or state water-quality benchmark in at least one of the groundwater basins and an evaluation of reporting levels among the different projects that analyzed each constituent. Table 3 is a list of the maximum value at a well for each groundwater quality constituent in each five-year time-period. Table 4 is a count of wells in cells that are high, moderate, or low for each constituent analyzed. Table 5 is a detailed report on the statistical results of the three trend methods used in this data release. Geospatial data of the gridded groundwater basins is included in a GIS shapefile.

The Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) from USGS' The National Map (TNM) defines the perimeter of drainage areas formed by the terrain and other landscape characteristics. The drainage areas are nested within each other so that a large drainage area, such as the Sacramento River, will be composed of multiple smaller drainage areas, such as the Feather River. Each of these smaller areas can further be subdivided into smaller and smaller drainage areas. The WBD uses six different levels in this hierarchy, with the smallest averaging about 30,000 acres. The WBD is made up of polygons nested into six levels of data respectively defined by Regions, Subregions, Basins, Subbasins, Watersheds, and Subwatersheds. For additional information on the WBD, go to https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national-hydrography/watershed-boundary-dataset. DWR was the steward for NHD and WBD in California. We worked with other organizations to edit and improve NHD and WBD, using the business rules for California. California's WBD improvements are sent to USGS for certification and incorporation to the national geodatabase. The certified WBD is included within the National Hydrography Dataset downloadable file geodatabase, and is also available in shapefile format and as web map services accessible from the USGS website. (https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national-hydrography/access-national-hydrography-products).

The final static version of the WBD was published in January 2025. No edits to this dataset are being accepted by USGS. Future mapping of drainage areas will be done by USGS as the 3D Hydrography Program (3DHP) is built out. DWR and its stewardship partners are actively producing LiDAR-derived hydrography data for inclusion in the California portion of 3DHP data and eventually its companion set of drainage areas. For now, the WBD is considered the authoritative source for watershed delineations in California.

There are critical needs for a nationwide compilation of reliable shoreline data. To meet these needs, the USGS has produced a comprehensive database of digital vector shorelines by compiling shoreline positions from pre-existing historical shoreline databases and by generating historical and modern shoreline data. Shorelines are compiled by state and generally correspond to one of four time periods: 1800s, 1920s-1930s, 1970s, and 1998-2002. Each shoreline may represent a compilation of data from one or more sources for one or more dates provided by one or more agencies. Details regarding source are provided in the 'Data Quality Information' section of this metadata report. Shoreline vectors derived from historic sources (first three time periods) represent the high water line at the time of the survey, whereas modern shorelines (final time period) represent the mean high water line.

This layer is a snapshot of stream gages from the fall of 2020. It is the product of an attempt to compile a comprehensive, geospatial list of long-term stream gages whose data is publicly available. Initially, the layer will consist of USGS and CDEC gages. Over time, local (county, municipal, etc.) gages will be added. This layer is not claimed to be authoritative. In cases where this layer and the data maintained by the source entity differ, this layer always defers to the source entity. For analysis purposes, the gage point locations have been altered by SWRCB to coincide with the corresponding line features in the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Medium Resolution. The original point locations can be found "x" and "y" fields of the layer's attribute table.For questions, contact the SWRCB Division of Water Rights: DWR@waterboards.ca.gov.Data dictionary:

Field Name Description Data Type

SiteID Site ID Text

SiteName Site Name Text

Operator Agency or entity which operates the gage Text

DataSource The agency or entity which publishes the data online (source not exclusive) Text

SiteStatus Is the site, in general, active or inactive? Text - Active or Inactive

Stage_YN Did the gage report stage at any time? Text - Y or N or U

Stage_POR Stage period of record in days (if a site had multiple stage sensors or duration codes, then the max POR was used) Integer

Stage_Status Status of stage reporting (active/inactive) Text

Stage_RealTime Is/was stage reported hourly or more frequently? Text - Y or N

Flow_YN Did the gage report flow at any time? Text - Y or N or U

Flow_POR Flow period of record in days (if a site had multiple flow sensors or duration codes, then the max POR was used) Integer

Flow_Status Status of flow reporting (active/inactive) Text

Flow_RealTime Is/was flow reported hourly or more frequently? Text - Y or N

WatQual_YN Did the gage report one or more water quality parameters at any time? Includes parameters such as water chemistry, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity, but not temperature Text - Y or N or U

WatQual_POR Water quality period of record in days (if a site had multiple water quality sensors or duration codes, then the max POR was used) Integer

WatQual_Status Status of water quality reporting (active/inactive) Text

WatQual_RealTime Is/was water quality reported hourly or more frequently? Text - Y or N

Temp_YN Did the gage report water temperature at any time? Text - Y or N or U

Temp_POR Temperature period of record in days (if a site had multiple temperature sensors or duration codes, then the max POR was used) Integer

Temp_Status Status of temperature reporting (active/inactive) Text

Temp_RealTime Is/was temperature reported hourly or more frequently? Text - Y or N

FloodMgmt Primary purpose of gage is flood management Text - Y or N

EcosysMgmt Primary purpose of gage is ecosystem management (flow and water quality) Text - Y or N

GrdwtrMgmt Primary purpose of gage is groundwater management Text - Y or N

PubSafety Primary purpose of gage is public safety Text - Y or N

WtrSupply Primary purpose of gage is water supply (municipal or agricultural) Text - Y or N

Ref_GagesII Is the gage site considered a reference site in Gages II dataset? Text - Y or N

StrmOrder Strahler stream order Integer

UCDStrmClass UCD eFlows stream classification Text

StreamType Type of water conveyance the gage is measuring (e.g. Stream/River, Canal/Ditch, Artificial Path, etc.) Text

TotDASqKM Total drainage area in square kilometers Double

TotDASqMi Total drainage area in square miles Double

GNISID_MedRes GNIS (Geographic Names Information System) identification number of the NHD line segment the gage is on (from the NHD Medium Resolution dataset) Text

RchCd_MedRes Reach Code identification number of the NHD line segment the gage is on (from the NHD Medium Resolution dataset) Text

COMID_MedRes COM ID (common identifier) of the NHD line segment the gage is on (from the NHD Medium Resolution dataset) Text

WebLink Web address to access each gage's data Text

x_orig X coordinate as provided by source entity (NAD83 CA Teale Albers meters) Double

y_orig Y coordinate as provided by source entity (NAD83 CA Teale Albers meters) Double

WtrshdNm_HUC8 Name of containing HUC8 watershed Text

HUC8 Containing HUC 8 (Hydrologic Unit Code 8) identifier Text

WtrshdNm_HUC10 Name of containing HUC10 watershed Text

HUC10 Containing HUC 10 (Hydrologic Unit Code 10) identifier Text

WtrshdNm_HUC12 Name of containing HUC12 watershed Text

HUC12 Containing HUC 12 (Hydrologic Unit Code 12) identifier Text

GageGap_Status Status of Gage for Gage Gap Analysis (e.g. Well-Gaged, AWG = Almost Well-Gaged, or Exclude) Text

Infrastructure Gage is suspected of being located on infrastructure Text - Y or N

ReactivateSF Gage is a candidate for reactivation Text - Y or N

Priority_Reactivate Reactivation priority based on gage metadata alone (e.g. period_of_record, parameter status, end-date and other factors, but not including based on gage gap or management criteria) Text

AddFlow_2Stage Upgrade candidate: gage is actively reporting stage, potential upgrade to flow and stage Text - Y or N

AddFlow_2WQ Upgrade candidate: gage is actively reporting water quality or temperature data, but not flow and/or stage. Text - Y or N

AddTelemetry Upgrade candidate: gage is actively reporting stage and/or flow, but not in real-time Text - Y or N

AddTemp_2Flow Upgrade candidate: gage is actively reporting stage and/or flow, but not water temperature Text - Y or N

Dataset represents centerlines of major water project canals that are managed by local area government agencies or entities. This dataset does not contain major State or Federal canals. The original data were from many sources including NHD,USBR,DWR,and contained errors in the attributes and locations. These errors were rectified by Jeff Galef of DWR Delta Levees Special Investigations Branch, using 2005 and 2006 NAIP imagery and Central Valley Aerials Express. These updates were as of 2009. Conflicts between this original data source and any new linework added was resolved using NAIP imagery from 2012. Digitizing was done at approximately 1:9000 scale. Many unnamed canals were identified using USGS topo maps and ESRI Street Map. Additional canal features were added in November 2017 which were inadvertently not included in the initial dataset.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) entered into a cooperative study with the California Department of Water Resources and the Ramona Band of Cahuilla to characterize the hydrogeology of the Cahuilla Valley and Terwilliger Valley groundwater basins and surrounding water-bearing units, with the ultimate goal of developing a calibrated integrated hydrologic model to manage the groundwater supplies on a sustainable basis. A three-dimensional geologic framework model (GFM) was developed to quantify the structural geometry and distribution of water-bearing units in the groundwater basins, using borehole lithology and hydraulic information, geologic maps, and gravity-derived depth-to-basement information. This dataset includes (1) tabular data of selected boreholes with their location and construction information, (2) borehole lithology information, (3) a geographic information systems (GIS) shapefile of a cellular array containing interpolated elevations and thicknesses of modeled geologic units from the GFM in the format of a polygon feature class, (4) and a table of summary textural classes for the alluvial fill unit from borehole logs and summary textural classes used in geologic framework model.