PUBLICATIONS
Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
RESEARCH ARTICLE
10.1002/2013JC009345
Key Points:
 Surface drifters released in the Gulf of
California: summer 2004, 2005, and
2006
 Coastal current with mean speed of
0.6 m/s and maximum 0.8 m/s in
June 2004
 In western half of the southern Gulf
of California the drifters mesoscale
eddies
Correspondence to:
R. Castro,
rcastro@uabc.edu.mx
Citation:
Lavın, M. F., R. Castro, E. Beier, C.
Cabrera, V. M. Godınez, and A.
Amador-Buenrostro (2014), Surface
circulation in the Gulf of California in
summer from surface drifters and
satellite images (2004–2006), J.
Geophys. Res. Oceans, 119, 4278–4290,
doi:10.1002/2013JC009345.
Received 12 AUG 2013
Accepted 18 JUN 2014
Accepted article online 23 JUN 2014
Published online 12 JUL 2014
LAVIN ET AL.
Surface circulation in the Gulf of California in summer from
surface drifters and satellite images (2004–2006)
n Castro3, Emilio Beier4, Carlos Cabrera1, Victor M. Godınez1, and
M. F. Lavın1,2, Rube
A. Amador-Buenrostro1
1
Departamento de Oceanografıa Fısica, CICESE, Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico, 2Deceased 28 January 2014, 3Facultad
de Ciencias Marinas, UABC, Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico, 4CICESE, Unidad La Paz, La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico
Abstract Surface drifters released in the Gulf of California between June 2004 and August 2006 are
used to describe the surface circulation in late spring and summer. In the June to September mean, there
was a poleward coastal current on the shelf and slope of the mainland side of the Gulf, with mean speed
0.3 m/s; it reached the northern Gulf and joined the cyclonic circulation typical of this zone in summer. In
the western half of the southern Gulf, the drifters presented recirculating currents that are due to mesoscale
eddies that appear to dominate the surface circulation in summer. In June 2004, the coastal current pre-
sented an enhancement event with mean speed around 0.60 m/s and maximum 0.80 m/s. It took 20
days for a particular drifter to travel the 1000 km from the Gulf entrance to the head. This strengthening of
the coastal current was apparent in chlorophyll a and SST satellite images, the drifters following closely the
intrusion of warm, chlorophyll-poor surface water from outside the Gulf. The drifters and the satellite images
suggest that the current-enhancement event lasted less than a month. This mesoscale event was linked
with a mesoscale remote forcing in the tropical Pacific coast and with a mesoscale local forcing of the wind.
These events seem to occur every year, and are probably important in carrying organisms and properties
from the entrance to the whole length of the Gulf.
1. Introduction
Many of the broad oceanographic features of the Gulf of California (GC, Figure 1a) are imposed by the
Pacific Ocean (see review by Lavın and Marinone [2003], and references therein), with which it has open
communication through a 200 km wide and 2700 m deep entrance. Its water masses are the same as
those in the eastern tropical Pacific, and the locally formed Gulf of California Water (salinity > 34.9) is a mix-
ture of Tropical Surface Water and Subtropical Subsurface Water transformed by mixing and evaporation
inside the Gulf. In addition to the tides, the dominance of the Pacific Ocean forcing on the GC has been
clearly identified at the seasonal time scale. Seasonal bulk heat and salt balances have shown that the rate
of surface heat flux is insufficient to explain the temporal rate of change of heat content (heating); therefore,
there must be an advective inflow of heat in spring-midsummer, and an outflow in fall-winter [Bray, 1988a,
n-Vera and Ripa, 2000, 2002; Mascarenhas et al., 2004].
1988b; Castro et al., 1994; Bero
This basic knowledge spurred research on the seasonal circulation in the GC, which has concluded that it is
driven mainly by the Pacific Ocean, with some contribution from the seasonal wind (which is monsoonal, north-
westerly in winter, and southeasterly in summer) [Ripa, 1997; Marinone, 2003; Bordoni et al., 2004]. Ripa [1997]
showed that the seasonal circulation of the GC could be modeled as a Kelvin-like internal wave of annual period
forced by the Pacific. More details of the seasonal circulation of the GC were revealed by Beier [1997] and Pala-
ndez et al. [2002] with two-layer horizontal 2-D models (linear the former, nonlinear the latter) and by
cios-Herna
Marinone [2003] and Marinone and Lavın [2008] with a full 3-D model. These models were forced at the GC
entrance by Kelvin-like wave hydrographic annual signals [Palacios-Herna ndez et al., 2002; Marinone and Lavın,
2008]; an overall cyclonic circulation is simulated for summer and anticyclonic for winter. Both models simulate
stronger currents over the mainland side than on the peninsula side of the GC.
A limitation of the models described above is that they do not predict the formation of mesoscale eddies
that are known to be present in the southern GC. These eddies are very obvious in satellite images (infrared
and color), and are 100–150 km in diameter [Badan-Dangon et al., 1985; Pegau et al., 2002], but they have
been studied little by direct observation [Lavın et al., 2013]. A numerical model that does produce mesoscale
C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.
V 4278
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

Figure 1. (a) Bathymetry of the Gulf of California (m), with the track and velocity vectors of drifter 50016, for the period 10–30 June 2004. Values at 00:00 and 12:00 h of each day are
plotted. The tail of the vector is marked by a dot. Inset: velocity and speed time series. (b) Drifter velocity data for the months of June 2004 (blue), June 2005 (red), and June 2006 (green).
Inset: geostrophic velocity relative to 1500 m in the cross section marked with dots; positive values (orange) are into the Gulf of California. (c) Drifter velocity data for the months of July
2004 (blue), July 2005 (red), and July 2006 (green). (d) Track and velocity data for the months of August 2004 (blue), August 2005 (red), and August 2006 (green). Inset: geostrophic veloc-
ity relative to 1000 m in the cross section marked with dots; positive values (orange) are westward.

eddies is that of Zamudio et al. [2008], who adapted to the Gulf of California the Hybrid Coordinate Ocean
Model (HYCOM), nested in a global model; this model reproduces the seasonal cycle and the mesoscale
eddies. In particular showed that interaction of the poleward Mexican Coastal Current with topographic
irregularities could generate eddies by inducing instabilities baroclinic and this mechanism is strengthened
by arrival coastal-trapped wave of equatorial origin.

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4279
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

The only instrumented observational support for the GC circulation patterns predicted by the numerical
models is the surface drifter data of Lavın et al. [1997] and the moored current-meter observations of Pala-
ndez et al. [2002]; both studies were limited to the northern GC (NGC). The seasonally reversing
cios-Herna
flow pattern that they revealed for the NGC consists of a basin-wide cyclonic circulation from June to Sep-
tember and anticyclonic from November to April, both with mean speed 0.35 m/s. The numerical models
mentioned above reproduce this feature.
Another source of support for the circulation models comes from geostrophic current calculations. How-
ever, in the absence of systematic hydrographic observations in the GC, seasonal analysis has been per-
formed on constructed annual sets of data from single cross sections collected over disparate years, mostly
for the southern GC [Bray, 1988a; Ripa and Marinone, 1989; Carrillo et al., 2002; Mascarenhas et al., 2004; Cas-
tro et al., 2000, 2006]. In addition, the use of single cross sections has the problem of the recirculation by
eddies, which could seriously affect the results of seasonal analysis.
Despite the advances in the understanding of the GC circulation provided by satellite images and numerical
models, there is a lack of direct observations that can be used for practical applications by interdisciplinary
studies and for supporting numerical model results. Therefore, a program of surface circulation observations
in the GC was carried out between June 2004 and August 2006, using satellite-tracked surface drifters. The
drifter data were complemented with satellite images. As a feature of particular interest was the poleward
coastal current predicted by the numerical models for summer, two oceanographic surveys were carried
out in the summer of 2004, and the deployment of drifters was particularly intense. The objective of this
article is to describe the Gulf of California surface circulation in the spring-summer transition and in
summer, as revealed by these drifters.

2. Data
The GC surface-drifter deployment program spanned from June 2004 to August 2006. Lagrangian surface
currents were measured with surface drifters of the SVP design manufactured by Pacific Gyre (http://www.
pacificgyre.com/Lagrangian.aspx) with a 10 m Holey sock centered at 15 m. This is the surface drifter design
used by the Global Drifter Program of NOAA (http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/dac/gdp.html), which utilizes
the ARGOS satellite telemetry system. The data were cleaned and interpolated at 6 h intervals as described
by Hansen and Poulain [1996].
The most intense and systematic deployments took place in the first 12 months of the program, with
monthly deployments from commercial ferries on the routes Santa Rosalıa-Guaymas and La Paz-
Topolobampo (Figure 1) (three drifters each). Additional deployments were made in the course of oceano-
graphic cruises of opportunity. Some of the CTD data collected in the cruises NAME-1 (5–21 June 2004) and
NAME-2 (5–18 August 2004) are used here to calculate geostrophic currents, but detailed descriptions of
the hydrography and circulation during these cruises are reported by Lavın et al. [2009, 2013].
Daily satellite images (4 km 3 4 km) of sea surface temperature (SST) and satellite-derived chlorophyll pig-
ment (CHL) from the MODIS satellites were obtained from http://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi/level3.pl.
Sea level hourly data from coastal tide gauges were obtained from Secretarıa de Marina de Mexico with dif-
ferent length of time series but all include 2004. The tide gauge stations are Acapulco (16.83 N), Manzanillo
(19.00 N), Mazatlan (23.20 N), and Santa Rosalıa (27.25 N). The tide prediction and the long-term mean
were removed at each location from the complete length of time series to obtain the residues (sea surface
height anomalies).
Wind data with a horizontal resolution of 0.25 3 0.25 and sampled every 6 h between 1987 and 2011
were obtained from the product called ‘‘Cross-Calibrated Multiplatform (CCMP) Ocean Surface Wind Velocity
Product for Meteorological and Oceanographic Applications’’ [Atlas et al., 2011]. The wind stress and wind
stress curl were calculated as in Lavın et al. [2013, and references therein].

3. Results
One of the most striking single-drifter tracks of the program, obtained in June 2004, is shown in Figure 1a
(tail of the arrow marks by a dot): drifter 50016 covered the 1000 km from the GC entrance to the NGC in

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4280
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

only 20 days, traveling northwestward at sustained speeds 0.6 m/s, with maxima 0.8 m/s (inset, Figure
1a), until it went into shallow water where the current was slower or the holey sock started to drag. The
velocity vectors from all the drifters deployed in June 2004 (Figure 1b, blue tracks) show that this track was
due to a fast, poleward coastal current over the continental shelf and slope on the mainland side of the GC.
By contrast, on the peninsula side, the drifters show recirculation suggesting eddies, and areas of weak cur-
rents. The drifter tracks for June 2005 (Figure 1b, red tracks) and June 2006 (Figure 1b, green tracks) also
show a coastal current extending to the NGC, and recirculating flows on the peninsula side; the June 2005
data were more eddy-like than during 2004 and 2006.
All the drifters that were taken to the NGC by the coastal current veered toward the mainland just after
crossing the constriction between Tiburon and Angel de la Guarda Islands, and then continued to the NW
parallel to the mainland coast. This coastal flow ultimately became part of the summer cyclonic circulation
of the NGC (Figure 1d).
The inset in Figure 1b shows the vertical structure of the geostrophic current during June 2004, normal to
an across-gulf line of stations (black dots in Figure 1b). The poleward coastal current was 50 km wide and
150–200 m deep. More details of the currents and hydrography in the GC entrance in June 2004 are given
by Lavın et al. [2009]. July drifter data were available mainly for 2004 and 2005 (Figure 1c). The data for July
2004 (Figure 1c, blue tracks) show that the fast coastal current had disappeared or weakened, and eddies in
the southern GC had become more evident; a series of counter-rotating eddies is suggested. The July 2005
data (Figure 1c, red tracks) show a fast coastal poleward current similar to that observed during June 2004,
and a well-defined cyclonic eddy. These results suggest that the mesoscale processes could be more
intense in some years [Pegau et al., 2002; Lavın et al., 2009]; e.g., the timing of the poleward coastal current
occurred in June during 2004, but in July during 2005. The June and July tracks (Figures 1b and 1c) suggest
the presence of eddies before the enhancement of the coastal current.
The drifter data from August 2004 (Figure 1d, blue tracks) and August 2005 (Figure 1d, red tracks) show sev-
eral eddies with both senses of rotation. Thanks to these and to the hydrographic data from August 2004
(NAME-2 cruise), we know that during this month the circulation in the GC was dominated by a sequence
of counter-rotating eddies aligned along the length of the Gulf, from the entrance region to the NGC [Lavın
et al., 2013]. The characteristics of the cyclonic eddy in the NGC are similar to those reported by Lavın et al.
[1997] and Palacios-Herna ndez et al. [2002] from observations and by Beier and Ripa [1999] from numerical
experiments. The eddies in the southern GC that were tracked by our drifters had surface currents 0.25–
0.50 m/s and rotation period 6–10 days. The geostrophic velocity in a cross section (black dots in Figure
1d) of the eddy best defined by the August 2004 drifters (inset, Figure 1d) shows maximum surface veloc-
ities 0.30–0.50 m/s, and that it was 500 m deep. The hydrodynamics of the train of eddies present in the
southern GC during August 2004 are described in detail by Lavın et al. [2013].
The SST and CHL images for selected days from 22 May to 29 June 2004 are shown in Figures 2 and 3.
The drifter tracks and 12 h velocity vectors for the 7 days prior to the image date are also shown (the
vectors are more easily seen in the SST images, Figure 2). The SST images for 22 May and 30 May (Fig-
ures 2a and 2b) show a southern GC with homogeneous surface temperature 27.5–28.0 C, and a cooler
northern GC (25 C). South of the archipelago, there is a strong across-Gulf thermal front between the
two regimes. An intrusion of cool water is seen south of the tip of the peninsula which appears to have
formed an anticyclone by May 30 (marked ‘‘A’’ in Figure 2b). Drastic changes had occurred by 8 June (Fig-
ure 2c), apparently due to the start of an intrusion of warm water along the mainland coast: warm water
intruding to the latitude of Tiburon Island caused the thermal front to take an along-Gulf orientation, the
cool intrusion south of the tip of the peninsula and eddy ‘‘A’’ seem elongated toward the interior of the
Gulf, and in the SE extreme of the region, there is an intrusion of warm water adjacent to the mainland
coast. By 15 and 20 June (Figures 2d and 2e), the coastal intrusion of warm water was well defined, as
was the injection of warm water to the NGC along the coast north of Tiburon Island. The drifter tracks in
these two images show that the intrusion of warm water was fast and close to the mainland coast. The
SST images and the drifter tracks between 8 June (Figure 2c) and 20 June (Figure 3e) suggest that the
coastal current was carrying warm water into the GC along the mainland side. The 29 June image
(Figure 2f) shows the southern GC with a homogeneous 30 C SST, while the drifters show that the
coastal current had ceased. This is confirmed by field data taken during the NAME-1 cruise [Lavın et al.,
2009].

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4281
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

Figure 2. Selected sequence of sea surface temperature images (MODIS) from the Gulf of California, from May 2004 to June 2004: (a) 22 May, (b) 30 May, (c) 8 June, (d) 15 June, (e) 20
June, and (f) 29 June. Surface drifter velocity is shown as arrows in Figures 2c–2f; drifter data are show every 12 h for the 7 days prior to the satellite image. Each image is the average of
the 3 days centered on the date shown.

The CHL images (Figure 3) show that, in general, the surface layer of the inner GC (north between La Paz
and Topolobampo section, see Figure 1) contained more CHL than the waters to the southeast. The 22 May
image (Figure 3a) shows, between the maximum CHL around the large-islands tidal-mixing zone and the
minimum CHL in the Gulf entrance, a series of eddies and CHL-rich meanders crossing the GC from west to
east; one of these meanders appears to originate in Bahıa de La Paz and another between Bahıa

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4282
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

Figure 3. Selected sequence of chlorophyll images (MODIS) from the Gulf of California, from May 2004 to June 2004: (a) 22 May, (b) 30 May, (c) 8 June, (d) 15 June, (e) 20 June, and (f) 29
June. Surface drifter data are shown as arrows in Figures 3c–3f; drifter data are show every 12 h for the 7 days prior to the satellite image. Each image is the average of the 3 days cen-
tered on the date shown.

Concepcio n and del Carmen Island (location names in Figure 1). On 30 May, the CHL-poor eddy marked ‘‘A’’
in Figure 3b in the Gulf entrance had moved toward the Gulf interior. On 8 June (Figure 3c), the meanders
and eddy ‘‘A’’ were very stretched toward the interior of the Gulf, along the mainland side, and a few drifter
tracks indicate a coastal current. By 15 and 20 June (Figures 3d and 3e), the stretched meanders and the
intrusion of CHL-poor water had reached the latitude of the large islands (28.5 ); the drifter tracks in these
two images strongly suggest that the stretching of the mesoscale features was due to the coastal current.

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4283
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

Figure 4. Mean velocity and variability ellipses of the drifter data, for June to September 2004–2006, in half-degree by half-degree cells.
Mean velocity and variability ellipses are shown only if more than 10 data points were available.

This pattern remained until 27 June (not shown), but by 29 June (Figure 3f) the conditions inside the Gulf
were very similar to those on 22 May (Figure 3a), with slightly rich CHL across-Gulf meanders and some
eddies. The drifters in Figure 3f, at the end of the current event, also suggested meanders or eddies, and no
fast coastal current.
An inspection of the daily SST and CHL images (not showed) and the drifter data indicate that the fast
coastal current probably lasted less than a month, from 30 May to 27 June, 2004.
In addition to the coastal current, Figures 2 and 3 show that the drifters tend to follow closely the mesoscale
structures (fronts, streamers, eddies) present in the images. For instance, Figures 3d–3f show that water
enriched in the tidal-mixing zone over the sills and in Ballenas Channel was injected into the NGC, first by
flowing northeastward and then parallel to the mainland coast, along the same path followed by the
drifters that entered the NGC from the south.
In order to obtain the mean summer pattern of surface circulation in the GC, we averaged the June to Sep-
tember (2004–2006) data in half-degree by half-degree squares (Figure 4); averages and variability ellipses
were obtained only if more than 10 data points were available for averaging. A clear circulation pattern
emerged (Figure 4), with a poleward coastal current over the mainland shelf and slope of the SGC, which
flows around Tiburon Island and then continues northwest to join the cyclonic circulation of the NGC. In the
peninsula side of the southern GC, the mean flow presented slower and recirculating flows, some of which

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4284
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

Figure 5. Mean velocity and variability ellipses of the drifter data, for December to March 2004–2006, in half-degree by half-degree cells.
Mean velocity and variability ellipses are shown only if more than 10 data points were available.

can be interpreted as eddies. There was an area of minimum speeds in the entrance zone (23–24 N). The
poleward coastal current between 24 and 29.5 N had a mean speed of 0.30 6 0.05 m/s (n 5 17). The mean
winter pattern of surface circulation in the GC is shown in Figure 5. The amount of drifter deployment in the
winter of 2004–2006 is minor compare with the summer 2004–2006, but it is possible to distinguish a sea-
sonal contrast between both pattern of surface circulation, namely, in summer (winter) the variability ellip-
ses is in the northwestward (southeastward) direction.

4. Discussion
This is the first time that a systematic drifter deployment program has been carried out in the GC. The only
previous use of satellite-tracked drifters in the GC was the deployment in the NGC of five drifters in summer
and five in winter by Lavın et al. [1997]. They revealed the presence of a cyclonic eddy in September 1995
and an anticyclonic eddy in March 1996; actually is well-established seasonally reversing circulation in that
area [Palacios-Hernandez et al., 2002; Marinone, 2003].

4.1. The Coastal Current

This is the first report of direct observations of this mean coastal current (Figure 4), which numerical models
and heat-budget and single-section geostrophic velocity calculations had concluded must exist. Beier [1997]

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4285
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

concluded that this current must be forced externally by the Pacific Ocean, and numerical models that
include such forcing at the Gulf entrance consistently predict a coastal poleward flow in spring-summer
on the mainland side of the Gulf [Palacios-Herna ndez et al., 2002; Marinone, 2003]. These models, however,
predict a much wider current (almost half the width of the Gulf) and underestimate the current speed
(0.2 m/s versus 0.3 m/s). The first numerical model of the GC circulation nested in a global model [Zamu-
dio et al., 2007, 2008, 2011] also produced slightly underestimated speeds, and the authors concluded that
the poleward current in the GC is an extension of the Costa Rica Coastal Current and the Mexican Coastal
Current. Therefore, the observations of the drifters of the coastal current (Figures 1 and 4) improved the
general knowledge of the circulation in the GC.
The poleward Mexican Coastal Current could certainly produce the coastal current inside the GC; in the
observations of Lavın et al. [2006] for June 2003 and June 2005, this current was between 90 and 180 km
wide, 250–400 m deep, with surface speed between 0.15 and 0.3 m/s, and transported between 2.5 and 4
Sv. It is not known what happens with the poleward current after leaving Cabo Corrientes, but as aforemen-
tioned, numerical models [Zamudio et al., 2007, 2008, 2011] suggest that at least part of it continues into
the GC.
The presence of the coastal current in numerical models has been an important feature in particle-tracking
studies of connectivity [Marinone et al., 2008, 2011; Marinone, 2012] and of fish and invertebrate larval trans-
nchez-Velasco et al., 2009; Cudney-Bueno et al., 2009; Soria et al.,
port [Peguero-Icaza et al. 2008, 2011; Sa
2014] in the GC. These numerical and biological studies now have the support of our observations.
The climatological monthly march of the SST in the GC and in the neighboring Pacific (see Figure 2) [Lavın
et al., 2009] shows that accelerated surface heating inside the GC occurs from May to July, with the isotherms
turning north-south in May and along-gulf in June and July. The results from Lavın et al. [2009] supported the
suggestion of Mitchell et al. [2002] that, the May to July SST evolution is in great measure due to the advection
of warm water from the southeast by the coastal current. Here our results support in part this; the drifters
showed that between June and August the presence of the coastal poleward current on the shelf and slope
of the mainland side of the Gulf.

4.2. Enhanced Coastal Current

In addition to the mean current, the drifter’s revealed episodes (lasting 3–4 weeks) when the current
reached 0.8 m/s and maintained consistent speeds of 0.6 m/s for most of the length of the Gulf. These
velocities are faster than the currents in the NGC eddy [Lavın et al., 1997], and faster than the tidal currents
in most of the Gulf [Marinone and Lavın, 2005]. They are also much faster than the residual currents pre-
dicted by the numerical models. Finding such high speeds were surprising, due partly to the almost total
absence of direct current observations in the SGC, and partly because most previous works on the GC circu-
lation had focused on the annual frequency, so that events like these were not detected.
Although we have drifter data for only 3 years, it appears that these fast-current events occur every year,
but it is not clear if they occur more than once per year. The probable occurrence period suggested by our
data is between June and July.
To investigate the origin of the strong current observed during June 2004, we considered two types of addi-
tional observations: coastal sea surface height anomalies (SSHA) from tide gauges and wind data (wind
stress and curl wind stress anomalies).
In early June, in the mainland stations (for convenience, we show the locations of gauge stations in Figure 7)
disturbances of positive SSHA were observed (Figure 6), which apparently propagated northward. As all har-
monics were removed from the times series (including annual and semiannual period), in June of 2004, we
observe a mesoscale perturbation that last 1 month. Maximum surface displacements were 0.16, 0.29, and
0.31 m in Acapulco, Manzanillo, and Mazatlan, respectively. Santa Rosalıa station, which is located in the west
side of the GC, showed a weak anomaly (0.09 m). Using a similar set of tidal gauges data and a numerical
model, Zamudio et al. [2008] showed the equatorial Pacific as the generation region of Coastal Trapped waves
(CTW), which amplified as it propagates poleward along the east coast of North American, arriving to the GC
in June 2004. They hypothesized that CTW strengthened the Mexican Coastal Current and contributed at
eddy generation in the GC. As can be seen in Figure 1a, the drifter moved very close to the coast and covered

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4286
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

(a)
0.2

-0.2 SRO

(b)
0.2
SSHA (m)

-0.2 MAZ

(c)
0.2

-0.2 MNZ

(d)
0.2

-0.2 ACA

Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

2004

Figure 6. Sea surface height anomalies (SSHA) of tidal gauges at Acapulco (ACA), Manzanillo (MNZ), Mazatlan (MAZ), and Santa Rosalıa
(SRO). The shaded area is the period of the drifter 50016 (10-30 June).

1000 km in 20 days, which support partially the hypothesis of that the movement of this drifter could be a
consequence of mesoscale CTW propagation along the eastern tropical Pacific coast.
The timing of the enhancement of the coastal current around June is roughly the time of the reversal of the
surface winds inside the GC, from northwesterly to southeasterly [Bordoni et al., 2004; Marinone et al., 2004;
Lavın et al., 2009]. Although we cannot prove here a causal relationship, similar phenomena in other coastal
seas have been found to be intimately related with wind reversals. In northern and central California, Send
et al. [1987], Gan and Allen [2002], and Melton et al. [2009], respectively, described the formation of a coastal
poleward current during the episodic relaxation of upwelling-favorable winds, and a similar situation was
described for the Gulf of Cadiz by Relvas and Barton [2002]. In all cases, SST satellite images showed the
warm water intrusion driven by the coastal poleward countercurrent.
The wind stress and the wind stress curl for the June climatology (1987–2011) and the anomalies of wind
stress and the wind stress curl for June 2004 are shown in Figure 7. The wind stress in the Pacific side along
the coast of Baja California Peninsula, flow toward the southeast and turns cyclonically around of the tip of
Baja California Peninsula, and inside of the GC flow northward with an important component along the GC.
In this area, the wind stress curl was positive. Against the coast between Acapulco and Manzanillo, the June
climatology showed a strong wind stress along the coast with negative values of the wind stress curl (Figure
7a). The June 2004 anomalies of the wind stress and wind stress curl (Figure 7b) were mainly mesoscale

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4287
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

Figure 7. (a) June climatology (1987–2011) of wind stress (vectors) and wind stress curl (color). (b) June 2004 minus June climatology
(1987–2011) of wind stress (vectors) and wind stress curl (color) from CCMP data. The location of tidal gauges is included.

events that could be compared with the mesoscale anomalies of sea level elevation of Figure 6. As can be
seen in Figure 7b, the June 2004 anomalies of wind stress along the coast (from Acapulco to Manzanillo)
double the values of June climatology, which means that the cumulative effect of wind stress could force a
Kelvin-like-signal. This could increase the amplitude of sea level elevation at this mesoscale period during
June 2004 (Figure 6). The wind stress and wind stress curl anomalies off the tip of the peninsula (Figure 7b)
also show the values with the same order of magnitude as June climatology. The wind stress straightfor-
wardly flows along the gulf, which could also force a costal trapped wave.
We find two mesoscale forcing that could be linked with the track of drifter showed in Figure 1a: a remote
forcing produced by the CTW in the tropical Pacific; and a local forcing produced by the wind stress at the
tip of Baja California Peninsula. Both forcing are in phase, the remote forcing of CTW is backed for numerical
model of Zamudio et al. [2008], and the local forcing of the wind stress is backed for the intrusion of Califor-
nia Current Water into the GC as was reported by Lavın et al. [2009, see their Figure 6].

4.3. The Eddies

The average June to September (2004–2006) drifter velocity data, Figure 4, suggest a series of eddies along
the SGC. Although eddies had been observed by satellite imagery [Pegau et al., 2002] and in hydrographic

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4288
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

data [Figueroa et al., 2003; Lavın et al., 2013], this is the first statistically supported evidence that they are a
very important part of the circulation in the Gulf of California during the summer.
Zamudio et al. [2008] studied the origin of these eddies with numerical models, and concluded that they
are formed by the interaction of the poleward current with coastal promontories, and that the process is
enhanced by the passage of coastally trapped waves of equatorial origin.

4.4. Desirable Future Work

Although Figure 4 provides a first view of the mean surface circulation pattern in the GC during summer, it
is clear that more drifter data are needed to improve statistics.
It would be rewarding to conduct a study focused on the coastal current-enhancement events. In particular,
current-meter time series are needed to establish their origin and the variability of their time of occurrence.

5. Conclusions
Surface drifters deployed in the Gulf of California between June 2004 and August 2006 reveal that in
summer there is a poleward coastal current, with speed 0.3 m/s, on the mainland shelf and slope. On the
peninsula side of the southern Gulf, summer surface circulation is dominated by mesoscale eddies.
In June 2004, the coastal current presented an enhancement event with mean speed around 0.60 m/s and
maximum 0.80 m/s. It took 20 days for a drifter to travel from the Gulf entrance to the head. This
strengthening of the coastal current was apparent in CHL and SST satellite images, the drifters following
closely the intrusion of warm, CHL-poor surface water from outside the Gulf. The drifters and the satellite
images suggest that the current event lasted less than a month. This mesoscale event was linked with a
mesoscale remote forcing in the tropical Pacific coast and with a mesoscale local forcing of the wind. As
both forcings are in phase, it was not possible distinguish what event really produced the track of the drifter
or whether both forcing enhanced each other.

Acknowledgments References
This study was supported by CONACYT
Atlas, R., N. R. Hoffman, J. Ardizzone, S. M. Leidner, J. C. Jusem, D. K. Smith, and D. Gombos (2011), A cross-calibrated multi-platform ocean
(Mexico) through grant D41881-F and
surface wind velocity for meteorological and oceanographic applications, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 92, 157–174, doi:10.1175/
by NOAA as part of the North
2010BAMS2946.
American Monsoon Experiment 2004
Badan-Dangon, A., C. J. Koblinsky, and T. Baumgartner (1985), Spring and summer in the Gulf of California observations of thermal pat-
(NOAA contract GC04-219, P.I. Michael
terns, Oceanol. Acta, 8, 13–22.
Douglas). This work also supported by
Beier, E. (1997), A numerical investigation of the annual variability of the Gulf of California, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 27, 615–632.
UABC projects (P-0324, P-0352, P-
Beier, E., and P. Ripa (1999), Seasonal gyres in the northern Gulf of California, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 29, 302–311.
0376). M.F.L. was at SIO-UCSD as
Beron-Vera, F. J., and P. Ripa (2000), Three-dimensional aspects of the seasonal heat balance in the Gulf of California, J. Geophys. Res., 105,
recipient of a sabbatical scholarship
11,441–11,457, doi:10.1029/2000JC900038.
from UC-MEXUS, hosted by Prof. P.
Beron-Vera, F. J., and P. Ripa (2002), Seasonal salinity balance in the Gulf of California, J. Geophys. Res., 107(C8), doi:10.1029/2000JC000769.
Niiler and R.C. was at NPS as sabbatical
Bordoni, S., P. E. Ciesielski, R. H. Johnson, B. D. McNoldy, and B. Stevens (2004), The low-level circulation of the North American Monsoon as
hosted by Prof. C Collins with a
revealed by QuikScat, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L10109, doi:10.1029/2004GL020009.
CONACyT scholarship when part of
Bray, N. A. (1988a), Thermohaline circulation in the Gulf of California, J. Geophys. Res., 93, 4993–5020, doi:10.1029/JC093iC05p04993.
this work was performed. We thank
Bray, N. A. (1988b), Water mass formation in the Gulf of California, J. Geophys. Res., 93, 9223–9240, doi:10.1029/JC093iC08p09223.
the support of Secretarıa de Marina of
Carrillo, L., M. F. Lavın, and E. Palacios-Hernandez (2002), Seasonal evolution of the geostrophic circulation in the Northern Gulf of Califor-
Mexico, Baja Ferries, and CIBNOR.
nia, Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci., 54, 157–173, doi:10.1006/ecss.2001.0845.
Drifter data managing by Mayra Pazos
Castro, R., M. F. Lavın, and P. Ripa (1994), Seasonal heat balance in the Gulf of California, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 3249–3261, doi:10.1029/
(Global Drifter Program Data Assembly
93JC02861.
Center). Technical support by A.
Castro, R., A. S. Mascarenhas, R. Durazo, and C. A. Collins (2000), Seasonal variation of the temperature and salinity at the entrance to the
Ocampo and D. Urıas (CIBNOR). M.L.,
Gulf of California, M exico, Cienc. Mar., 26, 561–583.
E.B., V.G., and C.C. are part of the
Castro, R., R. Durazo, A. Mascarenhas, and C. A. Collins (2006), Thermohaline variability and geostrophic circulation in the southern portion
project ‘‘A Study of the Mexican
of the Gulf of California, Deep Sea Res., Part I, 53, 188–200.
Coastal Current and surrounding
Cudney-Bueno, R., M. F. Lavın, G. Marinone, P. T. Raimondi, and W. W. Shaw (2009), Rapid effects of marine reserves via larval dispersal,
Pacific with a SeaGlider,
PLoS One, 4(1), e4140, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004140.
oceanographic cruises, and satellite
Figueroa, M., G. Marinone, and M. F. Lavın (2003), Geostrophic gyres in the southern Gulf of California, in Nonlinear Processes in the Geo-
data’’ CONACyT, CB-2011-168034.
physical Fluid Dynamics, edited by O. U. Velasco et al., Kluwer Acad., Dordrecht, Netherlands.
Gan, J. P., and J. S. Allen (2002), A modeling study of shelf circulation off northern California in the region of the Coastal Ocean dynamics
experiment: Response to relaxation of upwelling winds, J. Geophys. Res., 107(C9), 3123, doi:10.1029/2000JC000768.
Hansen, D., and P. M. Poulain (1996), Quality control and interpolations of WOCE-TOGA drifter data, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 13, 900–
909.
Lavın, M. F., and S. G. Marinone (2003), An overview of the physical oceanography of the Gulf of California, in Nonlinear Processes in the
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics, edited by O. U. Velasco et al., Kluwer Acad., Dordrecht, Netherlands.
Lavın, M. F., R. Durazo, E. Palacios, M. L. Argote, and L. Carrillo (1997), Lagrangian observations of the circulation in the Northern Gulf of Cal-
ifornia, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 27, 2298–2305.

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4289
 Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 10.1002/2013JC009345

Lavın, M. F., E. Beier, J. G

omez-Vald es, V. M. Godınez, and J. Garcıa (2006), On the summer poleward coastal current off SW M exico, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 33, L02601, doi:10.1029/2005GLO24686.
Lavın, M. F., R. Castro, E. Beier, V. M. Godınez, A. Amador, and P. Guest (2009), SST, thermohaline structure and circulation in the southern
Gulf of California in June 2004, during the North American Monsoon Experiment, J. Geophys. Res., 114, C02025, doi:10.1029/
2008JC004896.
Lavın, M. F., R. Castro, E. Beier, and V. M. Godınez (2013), Mesoscale eddies in the southern Gulf of California during summer: Characteristics
and interaction with the wind stress, J. Geophys. Res., 118, 1367–1381, doi:10.1002/jgrc.20132.
Marinone, S. G. (2003), A three dimensional model of the mean and seasonal circulation of the Gulf of California, J. Geophys. Res., 108(C10),
3325, doi:10.1029/2002JC001720.
Marinone, S. G. (2012), Seasonal Surface Connectivity in the Gulf of California, Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci., 100, 133–141, doi:10.1016/
j.ecss.2012.01.003.
Marinone, S. G., and M. F. Lavın (2005), Tidal current ellipses in a 3D baroclinic numerical model of the Gulf of California, Estuarine Coastal
Shelf Sci., 64, 519–530, doi:10.1016/j.ecss.2005.03.009.
Marinone, S. G., and M. F. Lavın (2008), On the three dimensional numerical modeling of the deep circulation around Angel  de la Guarda
Island in the Gulf of California, Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci., 80(3), 430–434, doi:10.1016/j.ecss.2008.09.002.
Marinone, S. G., A. Par es-Sierra, R. Castro, and A. Mascarenhas (2004), Correction to ’’Temporal and spatial variation of the surface winds in
the Gulf of California’’, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L10305, doi:10.1029/2004GL020064.
Marinone, S. G., M. J. Ulloa, A. Par es-Sierra, M. F. Lavın, and R. Cudney-Bueno (2008), Connectivity in the northern Gulf of California from
particle tracking in a three-dimensional numerical model, J. Mar. Syst., 71, 149–158, doi:10.1016/j.marsys.2007.06.005.
Marinone, S. G., M. F. Lavın, and A. Par es-Sierra (2011), A quantitative characterization of the seasonal Lagrangian circulation of the Gulf of
California from a three-dimensional numerical model, Cont. Shelf Res., 31, 1420–1426, doi:10.1016/j.csr.2011.05.014.
Mascarenhas, A. S., Jr., R. Castro, C. A. Collins, and R. Durazo (2004), Seasonal variation of geostrophic velocity and heat flux at the entrance
to the Gulf of California, Mexico, J. Geophys. Res., 109, C07008, doi:10.1029/2003JC002124.
Melton, C., L. Washburn, and C. Gotschalk (2009), Wind relaxations and poleward flow events in coastal upwelling systems central Califor-
nia coast, J. Geophys. Res., 114, C11016, doi:10.1029/2009JC005397.
Mitchell, D. L., D. Ivanova, R. Rabin, T. Brown, and K. Redmond (2002), Gulf of California sea surface temperatures and the North American
monsoon: Mechanistic implications from observations, J. Clim., 15, 2261–2281.
Palacios-Hernandez, E., E. Beier, M. F. Lavın, and P. Ripa (2002), The effect of winter mixing on the circulation of the Northern Gulf of Califor-
nia, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 32, 705–728.
Pegau, E. S., E. Boss, and A. Martinez (2002), Ocean color observations of eddies during the summer in the Gulf of California, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 29(9), 1295, doi:10.1029/2001GL014076.
Peguero-Icaza, M. L., L. Sanchez-Velasco, M. F. Lavın, and S. G. Marinone (2008), Larval fish assemblages, environment and circulation in a
semienclosed sea (Gulf of California, Mexico), Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci., 79, 277–288.
Peguero-Icaza, M., L. Sanchez-Velasco, M. Lavın, S.G. Marinone y E. Beier (2011), Seasonal changes in connectivity routes among larval fish
assemblages in a semi-enclosed sea (Gulf of California), J. Plankton Research, 33, 517–533, doi:10.1093/plankt/fbq107.
Relvas, P., and E. D. Barton (2002), Mesoscale patterns in the Cape Sao Vicente (Iberian peninsula) upwelling region, J. Geophys. Res.,
107(C10), 3164, doi:10.1029/2000JC000456.
Ripa, P. (1997), Toward a physical explanation of the seasonal dynamics and thermodynamics of the Gulf of California, J. Phys. Oceanogr.,
27, 597–614.
Ripa, P., and S. G. Marinone (1989), Seasonal variability of temperature, salinity, velocity, vorticity and sea level in the central Gulf of Califor-
nia, as inferred from historical data, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 115, 887–913.
Sanchez-Velasco, L., M. F. Lavın, M. Peguero-Icaza, C. A. Le on-Chavez, F. Contreras-Catala, S. G. Marinone, I. V. Guti
errez-Palacios, and V. M.
Godınez (2009), Seasonal changes in larval fish assemblages in a semi-enclosed sea (Gulf of California), Cont. Shelf Res., 29, 1697–1710,
doi:10.1016/j.csr.2009.06.001.
Send, U., R. C. Beardsley, and C. D. Winant (1987), Relaxation from upwelling in the Coastal Ocean Dynamics Experiment, J. Geophys. Res.,
92, 1683–1698.
Soria, G., J. Torre, A. Munguia-Vega, G. Marinone, M. F. Lavın, A. Cinti, and M. Moreno-Baez (2014), Dynamic connectivity patterns over large
spatial but small temporal scales from an insular marine protected area in the Gulf of California, J. Mar. Syst., 129, 248–258, doi:10.1016/
j.jmarsys.2013.06.012.
Zamudio, L., H. E. Hurlburt, E. J. Metzger, and C. E. Tilburg (2007), Tropical wave-induced oceanic eddies at Cabo Corrientes and the Marıa
Islands, Mexico, J. Geophys. Res., 112, C05048, doi:10.1029/2006JC004018.
Zamudio, L., P. Hogan, and E. J. Metzger (2008), Summer generation of the Southern Gulf of California eddy train, J. Geophys. Res., 113,
C06020, doi:10.1029/2007JC004467.
Zamudio, L., P. Hogan, and E. J. Metzger (2011), Modeling the seasonal and interannual variability of the northern Gulf of California salinity,
J. Geophys. Res., 116, C02017, doi:10.1029/2010JC006631.

LAVIN ET AL. C 2014. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

V 4290