2026 ANNUAL WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND ASSESSMENT
FOR
FORTUNA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
City of Fortuna
180 Dinsmore Drive
Fortuna, California 95540
June 2026
Prepared With the Assistance of
Orrin Plocher
78 Sunny Brae Center
Arcata, California 95521
Phone (707) 839-0091
Freshwater Environmental Services
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF APPENDICES ....................................................................................... iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................1
1.1 Decision Making Process ............................................................................1
1.2 Data and Methodologies .............................................................................1
2.0 PRECIPITATION ............................................................................................3
3.0 GROUNDWATER BASIN ...............................................................................4
4.0 MUNICIPAL WELL OBSERVATIONS ............................................................8
5.0 INFRASTRUCTURE CAPABILITIES AND PLAUSIBLE CONSTRAINTS ....11
6.0 PROJECTED WATER DEMAND AND SUPPLY ..........................................12
7.0 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................13
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment
Reporting Tables
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of Fortuna’s (City's) 2026 Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment is intended to meet the requirements established in Water Code Section 10632(a)(2) which includes the following minimum procedures:
• The written decision-making process that an urban water supplier will use each year to determine its water supply reliability. • The key data inputs and assessment methodology used to evaluate the urban water supplier’s water supply reliability for the current year and one dry year, including all of the following:
o (i) Current year unconstrained demand, considering weather, growth, and other influencing factors, such as policies to manage current supplies to meet demand objectives in future years, as applicable.
o (ii) Current year available supply, considering hydrological and regulatory conditions in the current year and one dry year. The annual supply and demand assessment may consider more than one dry year solely at the discretion of the urban water supplier. o (iii) Existing infrastructure capabilities and plausible constraints. o (iv) A defined set of locally applicable evaluation criteria that are consistently relied upon for each annual water supply and demand assessment.
o (v) A description and quantification of each source of water supply. Water Code Section 10632.1
1.1 Decision Making Process
The City's Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment follows the methodology provided in the City of Fortuna Water Shortage Contingency Plan (FES, June 2021).
1.2 Data and Methodologies
Fortuna has prepared the 2026 Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment utilizing the following data:
• Precipitation data from the National Weather Service Scotia Station; • Groundwater elevation data from CASGEM wells within the Eel River Valley Groundwater Basin;
• Projected current year unconstrained demand; and
• Projected current year available supply.
The above data was evaluated with similar methodologies and added to the analysis of water supply reliability contained in the Fortuna Water Shortage Contingency Plan (FES, June 2021).
2.0 PRECIPITATION
The City of Fortuna performed an analysis of annual precipitation totals from the nearest weather station with a near continuous historic record (1926-2025), Scotia, California, and from Eureka the next nearest weather station.
In the previous 12 months the precipitation total at Scotia is (50.60 inches), 108% of the average annual total. In the previous 12 months the precipitation total at Eureka is (44.35 inches), 115% of the average annual total. Total annual (calendar year) precipitation data for Scotia and Eureka is shown below.
3.0 GROUNDWATER BASIN
Groundwater elevations from monitoring wells in the Eel River Valley Groundwater Basin for the annual wettest month (highest) and driest months (lowest) were plotted against annual total precipitation as seen in the examples below:
Well
Station #
Wet Season
Observations
Dry Season
Observations Drought Impacts
23181
Stable, somewhat
responsive to precipitation
trends
Stable, not
responsive to
precipitation
trends
Not apparent
Well
Station #Wet Season
Observations
Dry Season
Observations Drought Impacts
36943
Stable, somewhat
responsive to
precipitation trends
Stable, not
responsive to
precipitation trends
Dry season
groundwater
elevations were
stable before and
after the 5 driest
years
Well
Station
#
Wet Season
Observations
Dry Season
Observations Drought Impacts
36944
Stable, somewhat
responsive to
precipitation trends
Stable, somewhat
responsive to
precipitation trends
Dry season
groundwater elevations
were stable before and
after the 5 driest years
Groundwater elevation observations from the CASGEM wells indicate that groundwater levels are generally stable over the observation period and dry season groundwater elevations are generally not responsive to the periods of historic drought.
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires the Department of Water Resources to prioritize each of California’s 515 groundwater basins and subbasins based on eight components. Basin prioritization is a technical process that utilizes the best available data and information to classify groundwater basins into one of four categories high-, medium-, low-, or very low-priority. The technical process is based on eight components that are identified in the California Water Code Section 10933(b). (1) The population overlying the basin or subbasin.
(2) The rate of current and projected growth of the population overlying the basin or subbasin.
(3) The number of public supply wells that draw from the basin or subbasin. (4) The total number of wells that draw from the basin or subbasin. (5) The irrigated acreage overlying the basin or subbasin. (6) The degree to which persons overlying the basin or subbasin rely on groundwater as their primary source of water.
(7) Any documented impacts on the groundwater within the basin or subbasin, including overdraft, subsidence, saline intrusion, and other water quality degradation.
(8) Any other information determined to be relevant by the department, including adverse impacts on local habitat and local streamflows.
According to the Eel River Valley Groundwater Sustainability Plan, 2022:
“The groundwater sustainability plan alternative (GSP Alternative) submitted to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) in December 2016 (SHN, 2016) showed that groundwater levels within the Eel River Valley Groundwater Basin (Basin) have a relatively narrow range of fluctuation and have remained generally stable over time, including during the droughts of 1976-1977, 1987-1992, and the most recent drought of 2013-2015. Groundwater elevation measurements collected over the course of the 2019 WY indicate that water levels are consistent with historical fluctuations observed in wells associated with the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) program. “
4.0 MUNICIPAL WELL OBSERVATIONS
Annual average static and pumping groundwater elevations from the City of Fortuna wells in the Eel River Valley Groundwater Basin were plotted showing the single driest year, the driest 5 years, and the well bottom as shown below.
All four wells have had damaged screens which were corrected after 2002 and before 2014 resulting in pumping elevations being much lower than static water levels. Work on City Well # 5 continues and well # 5 is being replaced with a new well.
Observations regarding the above graphs are included in the table below:
City
Well
#
Static Water
Level
Observations
Pumping Water
Level
Observations
Drought
Impacts
Distance from
Pumping Elevation
to the Well Bottom
1 Stable since
2020 Decrease
Pumping
elevations
decreased
after the driest
5 years
50-60 feet
2 Stable Decreasing
Pumping
elevations
decreased
during the
driest 5 years
50-60 feet
4 Stable Stable Slight
decrease
Pumping
elevations
increased
during the
driest 5 years
65 -70 feet
5 Stable Decreasing
Pumping
elevations
decreased
during the
driest 5 years
20-35 feet
Conclusions regarding water source reliability include:
• Periods of dry weather appear to have an impact on the seasonally high groundwater elevations in the Eel River Valley Groundwater Basin. • Periods of dry weather appear to have a minimal impact on the seasonally low groundwater elevation trends in the Eel River Valley Groundwater Basin; and • The Fortuna water supply has been reliable even during periods of record low precipitation.
5.0 INFRASTRUCTURE CAPABILITIES AND PLAUSIBLE CONSTRAINTS The City of Fortuna relies on four groundwater wells within the Eel River groundwater basin to supply potable water to the community. This City exercises the pumps in the four wells by using them in a sequence. One plausible constraint is that well casings within the wells can become fouled and reduce their efficiency.
In that case, the City can supply the ongoing water demand of the community by using only one or two of the groundwater wells. This allows for one or two of the wells to be removed from service for maintenance, when necessary, The City is in the process of replacing Well # 5 which will further increase the resilience of the Fortuna water distribution system.
6.0 PROJECTED WATER DEMAND AND SUPPLY
Projected water demand for the next 24 months is based on the demand in the previous 12 months (2024-2025) as shown below. Population is not projected to increase, and demand is expected to remain steady, as shown below:
During the single driest year (2020) July production volume for the wells was approximately 54.867 MG. If the same production took place for 12 months the total annual production volume would be 658 MGY. The total available supply projected over the planning period is 658 MGY.
Based on historical conditions and our understanding of the Eel River Groundwater Basin, water demand is not anticipated to exceed supply over the next 24 months even if historic drought conditions occur over the next 24 months.
7.0 CONCLUSIONS
This Section describes the conclusion of the 2026 Annual Water Demand and Supply Analysis.
Based on the analysis of local historic precipitation trends, groundwater elevation trends, observations from the City’s Wells, and documented sustainability of the Eel River Groundwater Basin,
• Currently the City of Fortuna is not experiencing a water shortage, and • The water supply will most likely meet the projected demand over the next 24 months, even if precipitation in the next 24 months is equal to historic lows.
APPENDIX A
ANNUAL WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND ASSESSMENT REPORTING
TABLES
Table 1. Annual Assessment Information
Supplier is a Wholesaler
Supplier is a Retailer
If you are both a wholesaler and retailer, will you be submitting two separate reports or a combined report? Number of Reports Year Covered By This Shortage Report (Required)
Start: July 1, 2026
End: June 30, 2027
Volume Unit for Reported Supply and Demand:
(Must use the same unit throughout) MG
Supplier's Annual Assessment Planning Cycle (Required)
Start Month: 7/1/2026
End Month: 6/30/2027
Data Interval: Monthly (12 data points per year)
Water Supplier's Contact Information (Required)
Water Supplier's Name: City of Fortuna
Contact Name: Andy Bowles
Contact Title: Chief plant operator
Street Address:
180 Dinsmore Drive
Fortuna, California
ZIP Code: 95540
Phone Number: (707)725 1476
Email Address: [email protected]
Report Preparer's Contact Information
(if different from above)
Preparer's Organization Name: Freshwater Environmental Services Preparer's Contact Name: Orrin Plocher
Phone Number: (707)498-9071
Email Address: [email protected] Supplier's Water Shortage Contingency Plan
WSCP Title City of Fortuna Water Shortage Contingency Plan WSCP Adoption Date 1-Jun-21
Other Annual Assessment Related Activities
Activity Timeline/ Outcomes / Links / Notes
Annual Assessment/ Shortage Report Title: Optional
Annual Assessment / Shortage Report Approval Date: MM/DD/YYYY Other Annual Assessment Related Activities: Optional
(Add rows as needed)
Type of Supplier (Required to check one or two)
= From prior tables
= Auto calculated
Use Type Start Year: 2026 Volumetric Unit Used2
: MG
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Total by Water Demand Type
Single Family 23.87 23.87 23.87 23.87 23.87 23.87 23.87 23.87 23.87 23.87 23.87 23.87 286.44 Commercial 3.59 3.59 3.59 3.59 3.59 3.59 3.59 3.59 3.59 3.59 3.59 3.59 43.08 Institutional/Governmental 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 13.92 Industrial 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 2.88 Agricultural irrigation 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 6.96 Losses 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 37.92 0 0
0 0
32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 391.2 0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Total
0 0
0 0
Table 2: Water Demands1
Projected Water Demands - Volume3
Total by Month (Non-Potable)
1 Projections are based on best available data at time of submitting the report and actual demand volumes could be different due to many factors. 2Units of measure (AF, CCF, MG) must remain consistent. 3When opting to provide other than monthly volumes (bi-monthly, quarterly, or annual), please see directions on entering data for Projected Water Demand in the Table Instructions.
Notes: List considered factors impacting demands
Total by Month (Potable)
Additional
Description
(as needed)
Level of
Treatment
for NonPotable
Supplies
Drop-down
list
Drop-down list
May select each use multiple times
These are the only Use Types that will
be recognized by the WUEdata online
submittal tool
(Add additional rows as needed)
Demands Served by Potable Supplies
Demands Served by Non-Potable Supplies
Three years ago total demand
Four years ago total demand
Optional (for comparison purposes)
Last year's total demand
Two years ago total demand
= Auto calculated
Water Supply Start Year: 2026 Volumetric Unit Used2
: MG
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Total by
Water
Supply Type
Groundwater (not desal.) 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 657.96 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 54.83 657.96 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 3: Water Supplies1
Projected Water Supplies - Volume3
Water
Quality
Drop-down
List
Total Right
or Safe
Yield*
(optional)
Additional
Detail on
Water Supply
Drop-down List
May use each category multiple
times.These are the only water
supply categories that will be
recognized by the WUEdata online
submittal tool
(Add additional rows as needed)
Potable Supplies
Non-Potable Supplies
1 Projections are based on best available data at time of submitting the report and actual supply volumes could be different due to many factors. 2Units of measure (AF, CCF, MG) must remain consistent. 3When opting to provide other than monthly volumes (bi-monthly, quarterly, or annual), please see directions on entering data for Projected Water Supplies in the Table Instructions.
Notes: List hydrological and regulatory conditions, infrastructure capabilities, and plausible constraints which may impact the water supplies Total by Month (Potable)
Total by Month (Non-Potable)
= Auto calculated
= For manual input
Table 4(P): Potable Water Shortage Assessment1
Start Year: 2026 Volumetric Unit Used2
: MG
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun3 Total
Anticipated Unconstrained Demand 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 391.20 Anticipated Total Water Supply 54.8 54.8 54.8 54.8 54.8 54.8 54.8 54.8 54.8 54.8 54.8 54.8 657.96 Surplus/Shortage w/o WSCP Action 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 266.8 % Surplus/Shortage w/o WSCP Action 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% State Standard Shortage Level 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Benefit from WSCP: Supply Augmentation 0.0
Benefit from WSCP: Demand Reduction 0.0
Revised Surplus/Shortage with WSCP 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 266.8 % Revised Surplus/Shortage with WSCP 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% = Auto calculated
= For manual input
Table 4(NP): Non-Potable Water Shortage Assessment1
Start Year: 2026 Volumetric Unit Used2
: MG
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun3 Total
Anticipated Unconstrained Demand: Non-Potable 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 Anticipated Total Water Supply: Non-Potable 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Surplus/Shortage w/o WSCP Action: Non-Potable 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 % Surplus/Shortage w/o WSCP Action: Non-Potable
Benefit from WSCP: Supply Augmentation 0.0
Benefit from WSCP: Demand Reduction 0.0
Revised Surplus/Shortage with WSCP 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 % Revised Surplus/Shortage with WSCP
1 Assessments are based on best available data at time of submitting the report and actual volumes could be different due to many factors. 2Units of measure (AF, CCF, MG) must remain consistent. 3When optional monthly volumes aren't provided, verify Tables 2 and 3 use the same columns for data entry and are reflected properly in Table 4 and make sure to use those same columns to enter the benefits from Planned WSCP Actions. Please see directions on the shortage balancing exercise in the Table Instructions. If a shortage is projected, the supplier is highly recommended to perform a monthly analysis to more accurately identify the time of shortage. 4 If you enter any WSCP Benefits, then you must enter the corresponding planned Actions into Table 5. = From prior tables
Planned WSCP Actions4
1 Assessments are based on best available data at time of submitting the report and actual volumes could be different due to many factors. 2Units of measure (AF, CCF, MG) must remain consistent. 3When optional monthly volumes aren't provided, verify Tables 2 and 3 use the same columns for data entry and are reflected properly in Table 4 and make sure to use those same columns to enter the benefits from Planned WSCP Actions. Please see directions on the shortage balancing exercise in the Table Instructions. If a shortage is projected, the supplier is highly recommended to perform a monthly analysis to more accurately identify the time of shortage. 4 If you enter any WSCP Benefits, then you must enter the corresponding planned Actions into Table 5. = From prior tables
Planned WSCP Actions4
July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027
Enter Amount
(Drop-down
List)
Select % or
Volume Unit
Start Month End Month
0 (No Shortage) No Actions Yes
NOTES:
Notes Section to be used only
for clarifying details, and not
for listing specific actions.
Actions must be entred into
table rows above.
1 If you plan Supply Augmentation Actions then you must enter WSCP Benefits from Supply Augmentation Actions into Table 4. If you plan Demand Reduction Actions then you must enter WSCP Benefits from Demand Reduction Actions into Table 4. 2 If an Action is planned to be implemented in multiple non-contiguous periods of the year, please make separate entries on multiple rows for the same action spanning the different implementation periods.
Table 5: Planned Water Shortage Response Actions
Add additional rows as needed
How much is action going to
reduce the shortage gap?
(Optional)
When is shortage response
action anticipated to be
implemented2?
Is action
already being
implemented?
(Y/N)
ACTIONS1: Demand Reduction, Supply
Augmentation, and Other Actions.
(Drop-down List)
These are the only categories that will be
accepted by the WUEdata online
submittal tool. Select those that apply.
Anticipated Shortage
Level
Drop-down List of
State Standard Levels (1 -
6) and Level 0 (No
Shortage)