DOCSLIB.ORG

With Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
With Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration GUALALA SHOULDERS AND RUMBLE PROJECT MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DISTRICT 1 – MEN – 001 (Post Miles 6.4 to 6.8 and 9.2 to 9.5) 01-0F710 / 0116000047 INITIAL STUDY with Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared by the State of California Department of Transportation August 2021 General Information about this Document What’s in this document? The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has prepared this Initial Study with proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) which examines the potential environmental effects of a proposed project on State Route 1 near Gualala, California. Caltrans is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This document tells you why the project is being proposed, how the existing environment could be affected by the project, the potential impacts of the project, and proposed avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures. What should you do? Please read this document. Additional copies of this document and related technical studies are available for review at Caltrans District 1 Office, 1656 Union Street, Eureka CA 95501. This document may be downloaded at the following website:https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans- near-me/district-3/d3-programs/d3-environmental/d3-environmental-docs/d3-mendocino- county We’d like to hear what you think. If you have any comments about the proposed project, please send comments via U.S. mail to: California Department of Transportation Attention: Rachelle Estrada North Region Environmental–District 1 1656 Union Street Eureka, CA 95501 Send comments via e-mail to: [email protected] Be sure to send comments by the deadline: September 13, 2021 What happens after this? After comments are received from the public and reviewing agencies, Caltrans may (1) give environmental approval to the proposed project, (2) do additional environmental studies, or (3) abandon the project. If the project is given environmental approval and funding is obtained, Caltrans could complete design and construct all or part of the project. For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in Braille, in large print, on audiocassette, or on computer disk. To obtain a copy in one of these alternate formats, please write to or call Caltrans, Attention: Rachelle Estrada, North Region Environmental-District 1, 1656 Union Street, Eureka, CA 95501; (707) 492-4576 Voice, or use the California Relay Service TTY number, 711 or 1-800-735-2929. GUALALA SHOULDERS AND RUMBLE PROJECT Widen the shoulder and build rumble strips on State Route 1 in Mendocino County, from post miles 6.4 to 6.8 and from post miles 9.2 to 9.5 north of Gualala. INITIAL STUDY WITH PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION INITIAL STUDY with Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration Submitted Pursuant to: Division 13, California Public Resources Code THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation ________________________08/04/21 Date of Approval Brandon Larsen, Office Chief North Region Environmental-District 1 California Department of Transportation CEQA Lead Agency The following person(s) may be contacted for more information about this document: Rachelle Estrada, North Region Environmental-District 1 1656 Union Street, Eureka, CA 95501 (707) 492-4576 or use the California Relay Service TTY number, 711 or 1-800-735-2929. Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration Pursuant to: Division 13, California Public Resources Code SCH Number: Pending Project Description The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) proposes to widen the shoulders and build rumble strips on State Route 1 in Mendocino County, from post miles 6.4 to 6.8 and from post miles 9.2 to 9.5 north of Gualala. Determination This proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is included to give notice to interested agencies and the public that it is Caltrans’ intent to adopt an MND for this project. This does not mean that Caltrans’ decision regarding the project is final. This MND is subject to change based on comments received by interested agencies and the public. Caltrans has prepared an Initial Study for this project and, pending public review, expects to determine from this study that the proposed project would not have a significant impact on the environment for the following reasons: The project would have No Effect on agriculture and forest resources, air quality, cultural resources, energy, hazards and hazardous materials, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire. The project would have Less than Significant Impacts on: Aesthetic Resources Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hydrology and Water Quality Utilities and Service Systems With the following mitigation measures incorporated, the project would have Less than Significant Impacts to Biological Resources and Land Use & Planning: On-site revegetation and enhancement within palustrine emergent (PEM) wetland, riverine habitats, Bishop pine forest, and Pacific reedgrass meadow in the project area. Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration i Gualala Shoulders and Rumble Project Off-site riparian enhancement, daylighting waters, and wetland creation and improvements within Big-Navarro-Garcia Watershed, undertaken in cooperation with local land steward organizations or mitigation banks. Off-site preservation or planting and restoration or enhancement for both Bishop pine forest and Pacific reedgrass of appropriate habitat within a conservation easement, on public lands, at future mitigation banks, or other suitable locations. Plant salvage and onsite restoration of coast lily population in adjacent suitable habitat through propagation and planting would be used to help offset construction impacts. Additional funding may be contributed towards enhancement of coast lily habitat or propagation and restoration efforts on nearby public lands. ____________________________________ _____________________ Brandon Larsen, Office Chief Date North Region Environmental–District 1 California Department of Transportation Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration ii Gualala Shoulders and Rumble Project Table of Contents Page Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... iii List of Appendices...................................................................................................................... v List of Tables and Figures ........................................................................................................ vi List of Abbreviated Terms ....................................................................................................... viii Chapter 1. Proposed Project................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Project History ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Project Description .............................................................................................................. 1 1.3. Project Maps ....................................................................................................................... 8 1.4. Permits and Approvals Needed ........................................................................................ 13 1.5. Standard Measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) Included in All Alternatives .................................................................................................................. 14 1.6. Discussion of the NEPA Categorical Exclusion ................................................................ 23 Chapter 2. CEQA Environmental Checklist ....................................................................... 24 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................................................................... 24 Project Impact Analysis Under CEQA for Initial Study ................................................................... 25 2.1. Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................... 28 2.2. Agriculture and Forest Resources .................................................................................... 32 2.3. Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 34 2.4. Biological Resources ........................................................................................................ 35 2.5. Cultural Resources............................................................................................................ 96 2.6. Energy............................................................................................................................... 97 2.7. Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................. 98 2.8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................... 100 2.9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................. 119 2.10. Hydrology and Water Quality .......................................................................................... 121 2.11. Land Use and Planning ..................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Coptis Trifolia Conservation Assessment
    CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT for Coptis trifolia (L.) Salisb. Originally issued as Management Recommendations December 1998 Marty Stein Reconfigured-January 2005 Tracy L. Fuentes USDA Forest Service Region 6 and USDI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and Washington CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT FOR COPTIS TRIFOLIA Table of Contents Page List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. 2 List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ 2 Summary........................................................................................................................................ 4 I. NATURAL HISTORY............................................................................................................. 6 A. Taxonomy and Nomenclature.......................................................................................... 6 B. Species Description ........................................................................................................... 6 1. Morphology ................................................................................................................... 6 2. Reproductive Biology.................................................................................................... 7 3. Ecological Roles ............................................................................................................. 7 C. Range and Sites
    [Show full text]
  • Observations on the Mobility of the Silver-Studded Blue Plebejus Argus [Online]
    30 October 2019 © Harry E. Clarke Citation: Clarke, H.E. (2019). Observations on the Mobility of the Silver-studded Blue Plebejus argus [Online]. Available from http://www.dispar.org/reference.php?id=150 [Accessed November 15, 2019]. Observations on the Mobility of the Silver-studded Blue Plebejus argus Harry E. Clarke Abstract: The Silver-studded Blue is often considered to be a sedentary species, not moving more than 50 m during its life. However, based on recent research and my own experience from Surrey, this is not the case. Males can easily move 200 m when relocated away from ant nests, and new sites can be colonised within a few years from source sites at least 3 km away, probably a year or so after the ants Lasius niger or Lasius alienus have colonised. Silver-studded Blue is a butterfly of early successional habitat, so it needs to be mobile in order to find suitable habitat for the next generation. If it was very sedentary, then colonies would soon die out as habitat matures and becomes unsuitable to support the ants and the butterfly. Introduction This article has been prompted by the statements that Silver-studded Blue (Plebejus argus) is sedentary, barely moving more than 20 m, with 50 m considered exceptional, and breeding populations of 100 m or more considered isolated, based on three mark-release-recapture studies (Thomas, 2014) and (Eeles, 2019). This does not agree with my own observations and does not seem consistent with the habitat requirements. Figure 1 - Male Silver-studded Blue on Bell Heather Photo © Harry E.
    [Show full text]
  • Der Idas-Bläuling (Plebejus Idas Linnaeus 1771) Am Lech
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Berichte des naturwiss. Vereins für Schwaben, Augsburg Jahr/Year: 2003 Band/Volume: 107 Autor(en)/Author(s): Pfeuffer Eberhard Artikel/Article: Der Idas-Bläuling (Plebejus idas L innaeus 1771) am Lech 64-81 Berichte des Naturwissenschaftlichen©Naturwissenschaftlicher Vereins Verein für für Schwaben, Schwaben download e.V. unter www.biologiezentrum.at 107. Bd. 2003 Eberhard Pfeuffer Der Idas-Bläuling (Plebejus idas Linnaeus 1771) amLech 1. Einleitung Schotterheiden und Weiden-Tamariskenfluren der Alpenflüsse waren in Süddeutschland ursprünliche Habitate des Idas-Bläulings Plebejus idas Linnaeus 1771 (Schwibinger & Bräu 2001). 1836 hatte C. F. Freyer zum Vorkommen des Idas-Bläulings bei Augsburg vermerkt: „Er fliegt in hiesiger Gegend Mitte Juni gerne in den Flussbeeten der Wertach und des Leches“ Ähnlich beschreibt 1860 J. B.K ranz das Habitat im Isartal bei München: besonders in Auen auf kiesigen, sonnigen Plätzen mit schwa­ cher Vegetation sehr häufig“. Kiesige Auenstandorte größeren Ausmaßes mit lückiger Vegetation gibt es heute im Bereich der nördlichen Alpenflüsse nur noch im inneralpinen Raum, außeralpin als Folge der Fluss Verbauungen des 19. und 20. Jh. längst nicht mehr. Dies trifft besonders für den Lech zu. Nur im Oberen Lechtal1 in Tirol ist die Wild­ flusslandschaft des Lechs mit Umlagerungsstrecken und der typischen Zonierung noch weitgehend erhalten. In seinem weiteren Verlauf wurde der Wildfluss durch den Aus­ bau zu einer Kette von Staustufen nahezu völlig und die ehemalige Auenlandschaft weitgehend zerstört. Trotz dieser tiefgreifenden Veränderungen des Flusstales kommt heuteP. idas nicht nur im inneralpinen, sondern auch im außeralpinen Bereich vor: am Oberen Lech in seinen ursprünglichen Habitaten, am Unteren Lech auf Sekundärstandorten.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea, Papilionoidea) of the Kampinos National Park and Its Buffer Zone
    Fr a g m e n t a Fa u n ist ic a 51 (2): 107-118, 2008 PL ISSN 0015-9301 O M u seu m a n d I n s t i t u t e o f Z o o l o g y PAS Butterflies (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea, Papilionoidea) of the Kampinos National Park and its buffer zone Izabela DZIEKAŃSKA* and M arcin SlELEZNlEW** * Department o f Applied Entomology, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska 159, 02-776, Warszawa, Poland; e-mail: e-mail: [email protected] **Department o f Invertebrate Zoology, Institute o f Biology, University o f Białystok, Świerkowa 2OB, 15-950 Białystok, Poland; e-mail: [email protected] Abstract: Kampinos National Park is the second largest protected area in Poland and therefore a potentially important stronghold for biodiversity in the Mazovia region. However it has been abandoned as an area of lepidopterological studies for a long time. A total number of 80 butterfly species were recorded during inventory studies (2005-2008), which proved the occurrence of 80 species (81.6% of species recorded in the Mazovia voivodeship and about half of Polish fauna), including 7 from the European Red Data Book and 15 from the national red list (8 protected by law). Several xerothermophilous species have probably become extinct in the last few decadesColias ( myrmidone, Pseudophilotes vicrama, Melitaea aurelia, Hipparchia statilinus, H. alcyone), or are endangered in the KNP and in the region (e.g. Maculinea arion, Melitaea didyma), due to afforestation and spontaneous succession. Higrophilous butterflies have generally suffered less from recent changes in land use, but action to stop the deterioration of their habitats is urgently needed.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Report City of Fort Bragg Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade
    BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORT CITY OF FORT BRAGG WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE 101 West Cypress Street (APN 008-020-07) Fort Bragg Mendocino County, California prepared by: William Maslach [email protected] August 2016 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORT CITY OF FORT BRAGG WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE 101 WEST CYPRESS STREET (APN 008-020-07) FORT BRAGG MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: Scott Perkins Associate Planner City of Fort Bragg 416 North Franklin Street Fort Bragg, California PREPARED BY: William Maslach 32915 Nameless Lane Fort Bragg, California (707) 732-3287 [email protected] Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... iv 1 Introduction and Background ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope of Work ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Location & Environmental Setting ................................................................................................ 1 1.4 Land Use ........................................................................................................................................ 2 1.5 Site Directions ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies & Flowers of the Kackars
    Butterflies and Botany of the Kackars in Turkey Greenwings holiday report 14-22 July 2018 Led by Martin Warren, Yiannis Christofides and Yasemin Konuralp White-bordered Grayling © Alan Woodward Greenwings Wildlife Holidays Tel: 01473 254658 Web: www.greenwings.co.uk Email: [email protected] ©Greenwings 2018 Introduction This was the second year of a tour to see the wonderful array of butterflies and plants in the Kaçkar mountains of north-east Turkey. These rugged mountains rise steeply from Turkey’s Black Sea coast and are an extension of the Caucasus mountains which are considered by the World Wide Fund for Nature to be a global biodiversity hotspot. The Kaçkars are thought to be the richest area for butterflies in this range, a hotspot in a hotspot with over 160 resident species. The valley of the River Çoruh lies at the heart of the Kaçkar and the centre of the trip explored its upper reaches at altitudes of 1,300—2,300m. The area consists of steep-sided valleys with dry Mediterranean vegetation, typically with dense woodland and trees in the valley bottoms interspersed with small hay-meadows. In the upper reaches these merge into alpine meadows with wet flushes and few trees. The highest mountain in the range is Kaçkar Dağı with an elevation of 3,937 metres The tour was centred around the two charming little villages of Barhal and Olgunlar, the latter being at the fur- thest end of the valley that you can reach by car. The area is very remote and only accessed by a narrow road that winds its way up the valley providing extraordinary views that change with every turn.
    [Show full text]
  • State of California the Natural Resources Agency DEPARTMENT of FISH and GAME Biogeographic Data Branch California Natural Diversity Database
    State of California The Natural Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Biogeographic Data Branch California Natural Diversity Database STATE & FEDERALLY LISTED ENDANGERED & THREATENED ANIMALS OF CALIFORNIA January 2010 This is a list of animals found within California or off the coast of the State that have been classified as Endangered or Threatened by the California Fish & Game Commission (state list) or by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior or the U.S. Secretary of Commerce (federal list). The official California listing of Endangered and Threatened animals is contained in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 670.5. The official federal listing of Endangered and Threatened animals is published in the Federal Register, 50 CFR 17.11. The California Endangered Species Act of 1970 created the categories of “Endangered” and “Rare”. The California Endangered Species Act of 1984 created the categories of “Endangered” and “Threatened”. On January 1, 1985, all animal species designated as “Rare” were reclassified as “Threatened”. Animals that are candidates for state listing and animals proposed for federal listing are also included on this list. A state candidate species is one that the Fish and Game commission had formally noticed as being under review by the Department for addition to the State list. A federal proposed species is one for which a proposed regulation has been published in the Federal Register. Code Designation: Totals as of January 2010 SE = State-listed as Endangered 45 ST = State listed as Threatened 34 SR = State listed as Rare – old designation, all animals reclassified to Threatened on 1/1/85 0 FE = Federally listed as Endangered (21.5% of all U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Yukon Butterflies a Guide to Yukon Butterflies
    Wildlife Viewing Yukon butterflies A guide to Yukon butterflies Where to find them Currently, about 91 species of butterflies, representing five families, are known from Yukon, but scientists expect to discover more. Finding butterflies in Yukon is easy. Just look in any natural, open area on a warm, sunny day. Two excellent butterfly viewing spots are Keno Hill and the Blackstone Uplands. Pick up Yukon’s Wildlife Viewing Guide to find these and other wildlife viewing hotspots. Visitors follow an old mining road Viewing tips to explore the alpine on top of Keno Hill. This booklet will help you view and identify some of the more common butterflies, and a few distinctive but less common species. Additional species are mentioned but not illustrated. In some cases, © Government of Yukon 2019 you will need a detailed book, such as , ISBN 978-1-55362-862-2 The Butterflies of Canada to identify the exact species that you have seen. All photos by Crispin Guppy except as follows: In the Alpine (p.ii) Some Yukon butterflies, by Ryan Agar; Cerisy’s Sphynx moth (p.2) by Sara Nielsen; Anicia such as the large swallowtails, Checkerspot (p.2) by Bruce Bennett; swallowtails (p.3) by Bruce are bright to advertise their Bennett; Freija Fritillary (p.12) by Sonja Stange; Gallium Sphinx presence to mates. Others are caterpillar (p.19) by William Kleeden (www.yukonexplorer.com); coloured in dull earth tones Butterfly hike at Keno (p.21) by Peter Long; Alpine Interpretive that allow them to hide from bird Centre (p.22) by Bruce Bennett.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plants of Santa Cruz County, California
    ANNOTATED CHECKLIST of the VASCULAR PLANTS of SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SECOND EDITION Dylan Neubauer Artwork by Tim Hyland & Maps by Ben Pease CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CHAPTER Copyright © 2013 by Dylan Neubauer All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written permission from the author. Design & Production by Dylan Neubauer Artwork by Tim Hyland Maps by Ben Pease, Pease Press Cartography (peasepress.com) Cover photos (Eschscholzia californica & Big Willow Gulch, Swanton) by Dylan Neubauer California Native Plant Society Santa Cruz County Chapter P.O. Box 1622 Santa Cruz, CA 95061 To order, please go to www.cruzcps.org For other correspondence, write to Dylan Neubauer [email protected] ISBN: 978-0-615-85493-9 Printed on recycled paper by Community Printers, Santa Cruz, CA For Tim Forsell, who appreciates the tiny ones ... Nobody sees a flower, really— it is so small— we haven’t time, and to see takes time, like to have a friend takes time. —GEORGIA O’KEEFFE CONTENTS ~ u Acknowledgments / 1 u Santa Cruz County Map / 2–3 u Introduction / 4 u Checklist Conventions / 8 u Floristic Regions Map / 12 u Checklist Format, Checklist Symbols, & Region Codes / 13 u Checklist Lycophytes / 14 Ferns / 14 Gymnosperms / 15 Nymphaeales / 16 Magnoliids / 16 Ceratophyllales / 16 Eudicots / 16 Monocots / 61 u Appendices 1. Listed Taxa / 76 2. Endemic Taxa / 78 3. Taxa Extirpated in County / 79 4. Taxa Not Currently Recognized / 80 5. Undescribed Taxa / 82 6. Most Invasive Non-native Taxa / 83 7. Rejected Taxa / 84 8. Notes / 86 u References / 152 u Index to Families & Genera / 154 u Floristic Regions Map with USGS Quad Overlay / 166 “True science teaches, above all, to doubt and be ignorant.” —MIGUEL DE UNAMUNO 1 ~ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ~ ANY THANKS TO THE GENEROUS DONORS without whom this publication would not M have been possible—and to the numerous individuals, organizations, insti- tutions, and agencies that so willingly gave of their time and expertise.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Recovery Plan Revision for Gabbro Soil Plants of the Central Sierra
    Recovery Plan Revision for Gabbro Soil Plants of the Central Sierra Nevada Foothills: El Dorado bedstraw (Galium californicum ssp. sierrae) and Pine Hill flannelbush (Fremontodendron californicum ssp. decumbens) Original Approved: August 2002 Original Prepared by: Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office DRAFT AMENDMENT 1 We have identified best available information that indicates the need to amend recovery criteria for this species since the Recovery Plan for Gabbro Soil Plants of the Central Sierra Nevada Foothills (recovery plan) was completed. In this recovery plan modification, we synthesize the adequacy of the existing recovery criteria, show amended recovery criteria, and describe the rationale supporting the proposed recovery plan modification. The proposed criteria amendments are shown as an appendix that supplements the recovery plan, pages III-2 through III-37 of the recovery plan that applies to El Dorado bedstraw and Pine Hill flannelbush. For U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Southwest Region Sacramento, California December 2018 Approved: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region, Region 8, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 1 METHODOLOGY USED TO COMPLETE THE RECOVERY PLAN AMENDMENT This draft amendment was prepared by the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office (SFWO) of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and will be peer reviewed in accordance with the OMB Peer Review Bulletin following the publication of the Notice of Availability. We used information from our files, survey information and monitoring reports spanning various localities of the species, and communication with species experts. Communication with species experts was our primary source to update the species status and threats, and was instrumental in developing amended recovery criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Hunter Creek Nancy J
    Hunter Creek Nancy J. Brian District Botanist, BLM Coos Bay District Office, North Bend, OR 97459 magine you can “apparate” (disappear from one place and reappear almost instantly in Ianother, like the wizards and witches in the Harry Potter series) to the middle of Hunter Creek Bog. As you slowly sank into the bog, you’d find yourself surrounded by California pitcherplant, pleated and Mendocino gentians, Labrador tea, western tofieldia, California bog asphodel, sedges, Columbia and Vollmer’s lilies, and Pacific reed grass. Outside of this watery jungle, you would see dry, bare, red rocky slopes and a scattering of Port Orford cedar and Jeffrey pine. Luckily, “muggles” (the non-magical community) don’t need to “apparate” to get to Hunter Creek Bog. We can turn off Highway 101, just south of Gold Beach in Curry County, and drive east about 10.5 miles to visit this public land botanical jewel managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). ACEC Status There are two Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) at Hunter Creek: Hunter Creek Bog ACEC and the North Fork Hunter Creek ACEC, which together total about 2,300 acres. In 1982 the Kalmiopsis Audubon Society and the Innominata Garden Club nominated Hunter Creek Bog (Section 13) and Hunter Springs Bog (Section 24) for ACEC status (Bowen and others 1982). In 1994, 570 acres in those sections and 1,730 acres of North Fork Hunter Creek were proposed as a separate ACEC. In 1995, both ACEC proposals were designated, including lands located in Sections 1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 24, Township 37 South, Range 14 West (BLM 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Fernandez Ranch Biological Resources
    TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT HISTORY AND BACKGROUND ...................................................................................... 1 3.0 METHODS ................................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 Review of Existing Information..........................................................................................................................3 3.2 Expert Consultations...........................................................................................................................................4 3.3 Field Surveys ......................................................................................................................................................4 3.3.1 Habitat Mapping.........................................................................................................................................4 3.3.2 Special-Status Species Surveys ...................................................................................................................6 3.3.5 Valley Oak and Oregon Oak Morphological Assessment...........................................................................7 3.3.4 Invasive Wildlife Species Surveys ...............................................................................................................8 3.3.5 Noxious Weed Mapping ..............................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]