A total of 109 Prop 1, 62 SWG, 63 Traditional ESA Section 6, and 51 Non-Traditional ESA Section 6 projects were analyzed from the years 2015-2018, 2015-2020, 2015-2020, and 2015-2019, respectively, in order to answer the following questions for each project (which resulted in qualitative data):

1. Is the geographic scale of this project statewide? If so, proceed to question 12; otherwise, proceed to question 2.

2. For a project not spanning the entire state, would it directly benefit anadromous fishes? If not, proceed to question 4; otherwise, proceed to question 3.

3. For a project directly benefitting anadromous fishes, enter the salmonid ecoregion/s (see SWAP 2015 Figure 6.4-1) in which the project would be located, as well as the conservation target/s it would address, and the conservation strategy/strategies it would apply to those target/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 6.7-1, on pages 6-19 to 6-20). If this is a multibenefit project, proceed to question 4. Otherwise, there are no further questions.

4. For a project neither spanning the entire state nor directly benefitting anadromous fishes: a. Enter the geographic province/s that would bound the project site (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Figure 1.5-1, on page 1-14), as well as the ecoregion/s and/or marine conservation units in which the project would be located (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Figure 1.5-2, on page 1-16): b. Also, enter the hydrologic unit/s in which the project would be located (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Figure 1.5-3, on page 1-17; note: hydrologic units overlap with ecoregions).

5. For a project not directly benefitting anadromous fishes that would be sited in the Bay Delta & Central Coast geographic province (proceed to questions 6-11 for other locations), enter the conservation target/s it would address, under the appropriate conservation unit/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Figure 5.3-2, page 5.3-10, and Table 5.3-1, pages 5.3-12 to 5.3-13). Also, enter the key ecological attribute/s of (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.3-2, page 5.3-15) and pressure/s on the target/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.3-11, pages 5.3-59 to 5.3-60) it would address. Finally, enter the conservation strategy/strategies that would be applied to the conservation target/s to change the pressure/s on their key ecological attributes (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.3-11, pages 5.3-59 to 5.3-60).

6. For a project not directly benefitting anadromous fishes that would be sited in the Cascades & Modoc Plateau geographic province (proceed to questions 7-11 for other locations), enter the conservation target/s it would address, under the appropriate conservation unit/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.2-1, pages 5.2-9 to 5.2-11). Also, enter the key ecological attribute/s of (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.2-2, page 5.2-13) and pressure/s on the target/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.2-11, page 5.2-53) it would address. Finally, enter the conservation strategy/strategies that would be applied to the conservation target/s to change the pressure/s on their key ecological attributes (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.2-11, page 5.2-53).

7. For a project not directly benefitting anadromous fishes that would be sited in the Central Valley & Sierra Nevada geographic province (proceed to questions 8-11 for other locations), enter the conservation target/s it would address, under the appropriate conservation unit/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.4-1, pages 5.4-12 to 5.4-17). Also, enter the key ecological attribute/s of (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.4-2, page 5.4-18) and pressure/s on the target/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.4-18, pages 5.4-91 to 5.4-93) it would address. Finally, enter the conservation strategy/strategies that would be applied to the conservation target/s to change the pressure/s on their key ecological attributes (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.4-18, pages 5.4-91 to 5.4-93).

8. For a project not directly benefitting anadromous fishes that would be sited in the Deserts geographic province (proceed to questions 9-11 for other locations), enter the conservation target/s it would address, under the appropriate conservation unit/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.6-1, pages 5.6-11 to 5.6-13). Also, enter the key ecological attribute/s of (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.6-2, page 5.6-14) and pressure/s on the target/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.6-17, pages 5.6-75 to 5.6-77) it would address. Finally, enter the conservation strategy/strategies that would be applied to the conservation target/s to change the pressure/s on their key ecological attributes (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.6-17, pages 5.6-75 to 5.6-77).

9. For a project not directly benefitting anadromous fishes that would be sited in the Marine geographic province (proceed to questions 10-11 for other locations), enter the conservation target/s it would address, under the appropriate conservation unit/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Section 5.7.2, page 5.7-6). Also, enter the key ecological attribute/s of (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.7-4, page 5.7-27) and pressure/s on the target/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.7-4, page 5.7-27) it would address. Finally, enter the conservation strategy/strategies that would be applied to the conservation target/s to change the pressure/s on their key ecological attributes (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.7-4, page 5.7-27; note: SWAP 2015 conservation strategies were initially only developed for the Embayments, Estuaries, Lagoons target).

10. For a project not directly benefitting anadromous fishes that would be sited in the North Coast & Klamath geographic province (proceed to question 11 for the South Coast), enter the conservation target/s it would address, under the appropriate conservation unit/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.1-1, pages 5.1-9 to 5.1-12). Also, enter the key ecological attribute/s of (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.1-2, page 5.1-13) and pressure/s on the target/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.1-16, pages 5.1-79 to 5.1-81) it would address. Finally, enter the conservation strategy/strategies that would be applied to the conservation target/s to change the pressure/s on their key ecological attributes (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.1-16, pages 5.1-79 to 5.1-81).

11. For a project not directly benefitting anadromous fishes that would be sited in the South Coast geographic province, enter the conservation target/s it would address, under the appropriate conservation unit/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.5-1, page 5.5-9). Also, enter the key ecological attribute/s of (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.5-2, page 5.5-10) and pressure/s on the target/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.5-170, pages 5.5-39 to 5.5-40) it would address. Finally, enter the conservation strategy/strategies that would be applied to the conservation target/s to change the pressure/s on their key ecological attributes (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 5.5-170, pages 5.5-39 to 5.5-40).

12. For a statewide project directly benefitting anadromous fishes (for a statewide project not benefitting anadromous fishes, skip to question 13), enter the conservation target/s it would address and the conservation strategy/strategies it would apply to those target/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015 Table 6.7-1, on pages 6-19 to 6-20).

13. For a statewide project not directly benefitting anadromous fishes, enter the sub-goal/s it would address, under the appropriate goal/s (may enter more than one; these correspond to SWAP 2015, page 4-3).

This data and metadata were submitted by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Staff though the Data Management Plan (DMP) framework with the id: DMP000522. For more information, please visit https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/Sci-Data.