Relative Watershed Vulnerability index scores for California catchments are displayed in Figure 14. Regional
patterns in Relative Watershed Vulnerability index scores include:
- High vulnerability scores are concentrated in the Modoc and northern Central Valley regions.
- Large patches of mid to high vulnerability scores occur throughout the remainder of the state.
Examples include portions of the Sierra Nevada mountains, the San Francisco Bay area, Salinas
Valley, Imperial and Coachella Valleys, and areas north of Los Angeles and north of San Diego.
- Low vulnerability scores are concentrated in the Mojave and Colorado Deserts. Patches of low scores
also occur throughout the Sierra Nevada foothills, to the east of San Diego, and across much of the
Central Coast.
Scores for individual watershed vulnerability attribute indices (Climate Change, Land Cover, Water Use, and
Fire Vulnerability) are also shown in Figure 14. Regional patterns vary considerably among indices due to
thematic differences:
- High Climate Change Vulnerability scores are limited to the northern third of the state, where
temperatures are expected to increase and climate change is projected to alter snowpacks, surface
runoff, and baseflow.
- Land Cover Vulnerability scores are highest in the vicinity of existing towns and cities, and reflect
expected expansion of populations into nearby undeveloped areas.
- High Water Use Vulnerability scores are also concentrated in existing urban/agricultural hubs.
- Fire Vulnerability scores are highest in the forested regions of the northwest and Sierra Nevadas,
with developed areas receiving low fire vulnerability scores due to the absence of natural vegetation.
Relative Watershed Vulnerability scores represent a best approximation of the potential for future
degradation of aquatic ecosystem health. They depict projected changes in natural and anthropogenic
watershed characteristics that are related to aquatic ecosystem health rather than explicit changes in
physical, chemical, and biological stream conditions. The index is most valuable when used in conjunction
with information on current levels of watershed health, such as Relative Watershed Condition Index scores
and/or Relative Stream Health Index scores. For example, high vulnerability scores are evident west of Lake
Tahoe, and high Relative Stream Health Index scores are also concentrated in this region. Such areas where
high stream health coincides with high vulnerability to future degradation can be viewed as priorities for
detailed assessment of protection opportunities