Longhorn Fairy Shrimp Research EA

Longhorn Fairy Shrimp Habitat Research in Contra Costa and Alameda Counties

Environmental Assessment

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation March 2017

Mission Statements

The Department of the Interior protects and manages the Nation's natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and other information about those resources; and honors its trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island communities

The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public.

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

BPRP Brushy Peak Regional Preserve CCWD Contra Costa Water District CFR Code of Federal Regulations CVP Central Valley Project CVPCP Central Valley Project Conservation Program EBRPD East Bay Regional Park District Geographic Information System GPS Global Positioning System LARPD Livermore Area Recreation and Park District LFS Longhorn Fairy Shrimp NHPA National Historic Properties Act USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service VCRP Vasco Caves Regional Preserve

Contents

Page

Section 1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 1.2 Need for the Proposal...... 1 Section 2 Alternatives Including the Proposed Action...... 3 2.1 No Action Alternative ...... 3 2.2 Proposed Action ...... 3 Section 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ...... 8 3.1 Resources Not Analyzed in Detail ...... 8 3.1.1 Cultural Resources ...... 8 3.1.2 Indian Trust Assets ...... 8 3.1.3 Indian Sacred Sites ...... 8 3.1.4 Environmental Justice ...... 8 3.2 Biological Resources ...... 10 3.2.1 Affected Environment ...... 10 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 11 Section 4 Consultation and Coordination ...... 12 4.1 Central Valley Project Conservation Program Technical Team ...... 12 4.2 ESA Consultation...... 12 Section 5 References ...... 13 Appendix A Cultural Resources Compliance...... 15 Appendix B Indian Trust Assets Compliance ...... 17 Appendix C Sensitive Species Within 5 Miles of the Research Area ...... 21 Appendix D Endangered Species Act Compliance ...... 24

Section 1 Introduction

1.1 Background

In conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508), and Department of the Interior Regulations (43 CFR Part 46), the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) prepared this Environmental Assessment to evaluate and disclose potential environmental impacts associated with providing $121,691.78 to the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) to conduct a project to improve conservation and management of the federally endangered longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna; LFS) in the Central Valley Project service area in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. Staff from EBRPD would compile and analyze available species documentation, remotely analyze documented occurrences in the field to identify spatial patterns and habitat parameters for use in future LFS habitat restoration and population recovery projects, conduct surveys for LFS, analyze soil samples for the presence and abundance of LFS cysts (resting eggs) to determine habitat suitability based on biotic and abiotic parameters, and use the resulting information to develop LFS habitat restoration methods and identify potential population recovery sites.

Research would be conducted at rock outcrop vernal pool habitats (rock pools) in Contra Costa County at Vasco Caves Regional Preserve (VCRP) of the EBRPD and Los Vaqueros Reservoir of the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). In Alameda County, research would be conducted at Brushy Peak Regional Preserve (BPRP) of the Livermore Area Recreation and Park District (LARPD), and at the Walker Family Ranches, LLC (Figure 1). An effort would be made to identify potentially suitable LFS habitat in other areas within the two county region. The project would last 4 years. Funding for the proposed action would be provided by the Central Valley Project Conservation Program (CVPCP).

1.2 Need for the Proposal

Reclamation’s Central Valley Project (CVP) has impacted vernal pool systems in the Central Valley floor through habitat loss due to agricultural and urban development. Recent work suggests that the LFS populations may have dramatically declined in this area due to habitat loss. The proposed research project is needed to better understand LFS ecology in order to develop LFS habitat restoration methods and identify potential population recovery sites.

Section 2 Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

2.1 No Action Alternative

Reclamation would not provide $121,691.78 to EBRPD to conduct a project to improve conservation and management of the federally endangered longhorn fairy shrimp (LFS) in the CVP service area in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. EBRPD would be required to obtain the $121,691.78 from other public or private sources to conduct this research. If alternative funding cannot be secured, the Proposed Action could not move forward.

2.2 Proposed Action

Reclamation would provide $121,691.78 to EBRPD to conduct a project to improve conservation and management of the federally endangered LFS in the CVP service area in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. EBRPD would do the following:

Objective 1. Compile, review, and analyze available LFS species documentation.

At the onset of the project, the project team would seek out and compile all available LFS literature and occurrence data. An attempt would be made to obtain precise location data for as many of the known occurrences as possible. All of the data would then be entered into a digital library. All literature titles would be entered into a searchable Endnote bibliography with key words. Habitat characteristics for pools documented to contain LFS would be standardized and entered into an Access database. Spatial data would be compiled and standardized with respect to attributes within an ArcGIS GeoDatabase that can be tied into the Access database. Outcomes: A complete bibliography of available literature and other documents pertaining to longhorn fairy shrimp occurrence data and a refined and standardized spatial GeoDatabase of occurrences.

Objective 2. Remotely analyze documented LFS occurrences to identify spatial patterns and habitat parameters; extrapolate to identify potential unknown occurrences and population recovery sites.

The team would compile and analyze available geographical information system (GIS) data and develop maps of all documented occurrences of LFS, with particular emphasis on the rock outcrop pools and surrounding vicinity in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. The data layers would include the complete occurrence data compiled as part of Objective 1; along with aerial photography (minimum 1-meter pixel resolution); geomorphic and; climate data. The data would be combined and displayed on large-scale maps and made available for use within GIS software in order to analyze spatial patterns and habitat parameters of documented LFS occurrences. Large rock outcrops with potential to support LFS habitat pools would be identified and recorded using GIS software with aerial photography layers, starting within areas featuring similar habitat conditions to those of the documented LFS occurrences. Outcome: A remote habitat model of

existing longhorn fairy shrimp occurrences. The model would be used to target new LFS occurrences and potential population recovery sites and also to guide field surveys.

Objective 3. Obtain land access to areas with rock outcrop vernal pool habitat.

Aside from lands for which access has already been obtained as described above, (EBRPD, LARPD, and CCWD lands), many additional properties with potentially suitable habitat for the species would require permission from landowners to survey their properties. Both the EBRPD and project contractor Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting, Inc. have connections to numerous landowners throughout the study area and would contact as many landowners as possible with identified rock pool habitat on their property to arrange for protocol level surveys. Outcome: Access to a maximum number of sites with potentially undocumented occurrences of LFS and/or suitable population recovery habitat for the species.

Objective 4. Conduct dry-season field surveys of documented and potentially suitable habitat.

Intensive habitat surveys would be conducted at a minimum of 25 rock outcrops within accessible lands where LFS is not currently documented. Targeted rock outcrops with rock pool basins that could support LFS would be mapped with a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit. Habitat parameters (below) would be measured, assessed, and recorded into a GPS data dictionary. The data dictionary would be developed as a habitat checklist with standardized, mandatory field entries in menu form in order to ensure complete and consistent data collection at each site. The habitat checklist would be maintained as a digital database that can be queried and graphed to easily analyze parameters. The checklist would ultimately be utilized to produce objective habitat scores that would be employed in the LFS habitat site selection process. Habitat parameters to be collected in the field include rock type (e.g., sandstone versus volcanic), pool size, presumed depth (based on water marks or other indicators), position of the pool within the outcrop (i.e., near top versus bottom, or within a cave), soil coverage and depth, and the presence and type of vegetation within basins (to the extent possible during the dry season). These parameters are already documented at the known occurrence outcrop sites. The data would be used to score and rank the quality of habitat within newly identified rock pools.

During the dry-season surveys, quantitative soil samples would be collected from up to 12 of the newly identified rock pool sites determined to provide potential habitat for LFS, and also from three sites where LFS are documented to occur in the Alameda County and Contra Costa County area. The samples would allow for detection of the presence and abundance of Branchinecta cysts as well as other vernal pool invertebrates, which in turn would shed light on each pool’s biotic community characteristics. Branchinecta cysts from the most promising potential habitats from both undocumented and documented sites would be submitted for genetic analysis in order to confirm species presence (e.g., LFS versus vernal pool fairy shrimp), and to potentially provide data on the genetic traits of B. longiantenna.

Soil samples would be collected down to a maximum of 1 inch in depth with a tubular soil sample probe (inside diameter of 1 inch) at the intersections of a 12 inch square grid superimposed over each pool. This sampling design would maximize data retrieval while

minimizing disturbance. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) dry-season sampling protocol to be used in the project requires that no more than 10% of the pool sediment is disturbed, and less than the 2 liters of soil removed, per 10 m2 of pool floor. The proposed method would disturb less than 1% of the pool floor and remove less than one third of the maximum allotted soil volume. For example, in a very small pool with a surface area of 26 ft2 (2.5 m2), more than 2.5 times the minimum soil samples required would be collected using this method. Each soil sample core would be 1 inch in length and divided into the following three increments beginning at the soil surface: top ¼ inch, middle ¼ inch, and bottom ½ inch. Each sample would be placed separately into small plastic petri dishes and labeled with the Site ID number, Pool ID number, Sample ID number, and depth (i.e., 1 = top ¼ inch, 2 = middle ¼ inch, and 3 = bottom ½ inch). Outcomes: Development of detailed habitat data for potential LFS population recovery sites and sites with previously undocumented LFS occurrences. Soil samples would be collected from known LFS occurrence sites and potential population recovery sites for the purpose of analysis (see Objective 5).

Objective 5: Analyze soil sample cyst banks for presence and abundance of Branchinecta species and the invertebrate community as a whole.

The soil sample petri dishes would be submitted to Helm Biological Consulting’s (HBC) laboratory in Sheridan, California, and their contents examined under a 10 to 252-power dissecting microscope. Any cysts observed would be enumerated and compared to HBC’s cyst reference collection or scanning electron micrographs of large branchiopods. At a minimum, individuals of the following taxonomic groups would be enumerated where found: large branchiopod cysts; Microturbellaria (flatworms) cysts; Cladocera (water fleas) eggs and ephippia; live Ostracoda (seed shrimp), their cysts and carapaces; live Copepoda (small aquatic crustaceans) and their cysts; live Hydracarina (water mites); live Nematoda (round worms) and their cysts; and live Collembola (springtails). Information on these species would be used to determine if correlations exist between LFS and other invertebrate species co-inhabiting the rock pools. Such information may assist with identification of suitable rock pools for LFS recovery. Outcomes: Data obtained from dry-season sampling would include: presence or absence of cysts belonging to the genus Branchinecta and other large branchiopods; determination of cyst population estimates (egg bank) of LFS and other permanent resident macroscopic aquatic invertebrates estimated from cyst concentrations at different soil depths. Cysts would be provided for LFS laboratory culturing, with assurances that no more than 1% of cyst populations would be collected from any rock pool.

Objective 6: Conduct intensive wet-season field surveys of documented occurrences within rock pools and associate the occurrences with biotic and abiotic parameters.

Over 100 rock pools at VCRP and BPRP have been measured for their biotic and abiotic parameters over the past 6 years. This data would be analyzed using multiple logistic regression to evaluate which abiotic (e.g., dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, conductivity, turbidity, and phosphates) and biotic (grazers and predators) parameters are associated with LFS presence. Multivariate approaches would then be used to identify rock pools in the study area that are most similar to occupied pools for wet- and dry-season monitoring (Objective 4). A total of 15 rock pools would be selected for monitoring on a weekly basis during inundation for 2 years (2017

and 2018). Of the 15 pools, 12 would be from among the newly identified LFS pools, along with 3 pools currently known to support LFS. Six of these pools would be at VCRP and six at BPRP. As time permits, additional pools would be selected in and among the other rock outcroppings at VCRP and BPRP. Sampling of the 15 pools and other selected rock pools would include identification of all aquatic macroinvertebrates, using dip nets or aquarium nets depending on the size of the target species. Aquatic macroinvertebrates would be identified, enumerated (for concentration estimates), and returned to the pool. Unknown aquatic macroinvertebrate specimens would be preserved and taken back to Dr. Jamie Kneitel’s laboratory at Sacramento State University (Kneitel lab) for identification. At each of these 15 pools, pool characteristics would be recorded including surface area, maximum and average depth, pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen content, and conductivity. A 50 ml water sample would be collected for further analyses in the Kneitel lab, including for phosphates, nitrates, turbidity, and chlorophyll. In addition, all rock pools at VCRP and BPRP that become inundated during the wet season would be monitored on a bi-weekly basis during inundation to determine presence/absence of LFS. Should LFS presence be discovered in any rock pools, those pools would be incorporated into the study protocols for weekly wet season surveys as outlined above. Outcomes: An assessment of compiled abiotic and biotic variables would be conducted to identify characteristics most associated with LFS. Identification of rock pools most similar to these characteristics would help guide the choice of rock pools in the vicinity to be sampled for LFS. Data obtained from the selected pools would include the biotic and abiotic variables of these rock pools. Newly identified rock pools with LFS presence would be included in the monitoring.

Objective 7. Analyze all complied data sets within the study area to characterize habitat suitability, develop habitat restoration methods, and to identify LFS population recovery sites to establish new populations and enhance existing populations. Prepare interim and final reports. Prepare manuscripts for publication.

Results would be statistically analyzed to assess spatial and temporal patterns in abiotic and biotic parameters of the rock pools. For example, previous work has shown that pools at the VCRP and BPRP sites have higher than average turbidity and lower than average predator (e.g., Notonectidae) diversity. The primary purpose of the analyses would be to further characterize and associate environmental variables with LFS occupancy and density. Population changes over time and their associations with quantitative variables (including pool characteristics [depth, surface area, soil depth], water physio-chemistry, and densities of other species) would be assessed. Results would be used to rank potential population recovery sites on a scale of 1 (most parameters present) to 4 (least parameters present). Monitoring pools with a range of parameters would allow for testing hypotheses on habitat restoration outcomes. Results would be presented in semi-annual and final reports and manuscripts prepared for publication. Outcomes: Data obtained from field sampling would be compiled into statistical models to evaluate abiotic and biotic variables associated with LFS presence, and to rank potential rock pools for population recovery.

Permits

Dr. Douglas Bell, Dr. Jamie Kneitel, Dr. Brent Helm, Jake Schweitzer, and John Everett Vollmar have obtained valid Federal permits for the proposed activities funded through this action under

Section 10(a)(1)(a) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. §1531 et seq., from the USFWS.

Section 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3.1 Resources Not Analyzed in Detail

Department of the Interior Regulations, Executive Orders, and Reclamation guidelines require a discussion of the following items when preparing environmental documentation:

3.1.1 Cultural Resources

The Proposed Action is an undertaking as defined at 36 CFR § 800.16(y). Reclamation determined the undertaking has no potential to cause effects on historic properties, pursuant to 36 CFR § 800.3(a)(1), and, therefore, would result in no significant impacts to cultural resources. As such, Reclamation has no further obligations under 54 U.S.C. § 306108, commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. (See Appendix A).

3.1.2 Indian Trust Assets

Indian Trust Assets are legal interests in assets that are held in trust by the United States for federally recognized Indian tribes or individuals. There are no Indian reservations, rancherias or allotments in the project area. The nearest Indian Trust Asset is the Lytton Rancheria which about 36.17 miles to the northwest of the project site. Therefore, the Proposed Action does not have a potential to affect Indian Trust Assets (See Appendix B).

3.1.3 Indian Sacred Sites Executive Order 13007 (May 24, 1996) requires Federal agencies to protect and preserve Indian religious practices on Federal lands through accommodating access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites by Indian religious practitioners and avoiding adversely affecting the physical integrity of such sacred sites. Executive Order 13007 is applicable to sacred sites identified by Federally-recognized Indian tribes on Federal land. The Proposed Action does not involve Federal land. As such, the Proposed Action would result in no impacts related to the access or use of Indian sacred sites.

3.1.4 Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898 requires each Federal agency to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects, including social and economic effects of its program, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations.

Reclamation has not identified adverse human health or environmental effects on any population as a result of implementing the Proposed Action. Therefore, implementing the Proposed Action could not have a significant or disproportionately negative impact on low-income or minority individuals within the Proposed Action area.

3.2 Biological Resources

3.2.1 Affected Environment

The LFS is a large branchiopod that is endemic to temporary aquatic habitats in California (Eng et al. 1990). LFS was first described by Eng et al. (1990) and listed as an endangered species shortly thereafter (USFWS 1994). LFS is extremely rare and occurs in only five widely disjointed populations (Eriksen and Belk 1999, USFWS 2005, 2007). California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) records list 18 locations across five counties with the northernmost (Alameda and Contra Costa counties) known populations occurring in rock pools. Based on CNDDB records, other state and federal threatened and endangered species known to inhabit rock pools and surrounding lands in the study area include the federally threatened vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi), the Federal and State threatened California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), the federally threatened California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii), and the federally endangered and State threatened San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica). Other sensitive species in the area are shown in Appendix C.

Surveys conducted by Kneitel (2010, 2011, 2012) and Bell and Kneitel (unpublished data) have documented LFS occurrence in only 3 rocks pools in just two wet seasons at BPRP, Alameda County; and VCRP, Contra Costa County. In its determination of endangered status for the LFS, USFWS (1994) reported that rock pools in the area of the Los Vaqueros Project were inhabited by LFS. However, the species has not been documented in rock pool habitat at Los Vaqueros Reservoir over the past 15 years (CCWD 2014), nor has it been detected in grassland vernal pools of the two counties (Condor Country Consulting 2010, Bell 2015).

The project would address some of the research needs identified in the Recovery Plan for Vernal Pool Ecosystems of California and Southern Oregon (USFWS 2007, 2012). These needs are:

• characterization of the habitat requirements (biotic and abiotic) and biology of LFS in rock pools which in turn would inform rock pool habitat management and restoration efforts;

• investigate optimal LFS hatching conditions in the laboratory and experimental reintroductions to rock pool habitats; conduct surveys on public and private lands with a high potential for supporting additional populations of the species in areas adjacent to the Brushy Peak and Vasco Caves preserves and along portions of the west side of the Central Valley;

• monitoring of existing rock pools through a multi-year drought cycle.

The project would also contribute to genetic research on the species though collaboration with other researchers. The project focal point is located in Critical Habitat Unit 1A-B of the Altamont Hills in Contra Costa and Alameda counties (USFWS 2006a, 2006b). The proposed research is expected to benefit LFS by providing much needed information that may be used to facilitate recovery of the species.

Through their USFWS permit, the permittees are authorized to take (harass by survey, capture, handle,

release and collect adult vouchers (specimens), and collect branchiopod cysts (resting eggs)) of the longhorn fairy shrimp, the Conservancy fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservatio), the vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi), and the vernal pool fairy shrimp (collectively referred to as vernal pool branchiopods), in conjunction with surveys and population monitoring for the purpose of enhancing the species’ survival. The permit limits the number of hatched individuals and cysts that can be collected. Adverse effects from this project on LFS would be in the form of injury, temporary disturbance of habitat, and death related to sampling efforts within the wet season. Dry season adverse effects would likely be associated with temporary disturbance of the rock pools and the loss or damage of cysts during collection efforts. Project parameters would limit the affects to less than the USFWS permit thresholds for take. Prior to initiation of collecting, the permittees must request and receive approval from the appropriate USFWS office to sample or collect at the specific location. This is in order to receive guidance on how to address concerns USFWS may have about impacts to the species at that location. Within 90 days following completion of the last field visit at each project site, a report shall be submitted by the permittees to the appropriate USFWS office. The report would allow the USFWS and the permittees to evaluate the effect of the project on listed species, and to adapt the study design as needed to reduce impacts to listed species to the maximum extent practical.

The results of the project would likely provide information beneficial to LFS recovery efforts by documenting environmental characteristics of occupied LFS rock pools. The project would also identify similar pools for consideration during LFS recovery planning.

The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB, January 2017 data) was queried to identify sensitive species and habitats recorded within 5 miles of the research area. (Appendix C). Numerous special status species and habitats were identified in the CNDDB search. However ,suitable habitat in the study area would be limited to rock outcrop vernal pools and grasslands.

3.2.2 Environmental Consequences

The researchers have obtained valid Federal Recovery Permits for the proposed activities funded through this action under Section 10(a)(1)(a) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. §1531 et seq., from the USFWS. The proposed action would be in accordance with the permits. Therefore, the proposed action would have no additional adverse effects or exceed take from what was previously authorized by the Federal Recovery Permits. Consequently, the proposed action would not adversely affect any federally listed species beyond what was detailed and evaluated in the issuance of the Federal Recovery Permits. (See Appendix D).

Researchers would access the project area in vehicles using existing roads, and access to rock pool survey and collection sites would be on foot. While there are several special status plant and animal species potentially within the area, the focused sampling efforts in rock outcrop pools, access to the sites via existing roads and on foot, and activities being conducted during daylight hours reduce the potential to adversely impact non-target species to a discountable level. No impacts to special status species are expected other than to vernal pool branchiopods. The researchers also have obtained State permits needed to conduct the work including a California Scientific Collecting Permit.

Section 4 Consultation and Coordination

4.1 Agencies and Persons consulted during preparation of the EA

Individuals consulted in the process of developing this EA include those involved with the preparation and submission of the funding application for the proposed action. Those include staff of the East Bay Regional Park District, Sacramento State University, Helm Biological Consulting, and Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting.

4.2 Central Valley Project Conservation Program Technical Team

CVPCP managers are guided by a Technical Team of biologists and natural resource specialists from Reclamation, the USFWS, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. During the period of October 12, 2015 through January 21, 2016, members of the Technical Team reviewed and scored proposals submitted to Reclamation for consideration for funding. The LFS project proposal ranked in the top tier of proposals and was recommended for funding following evaluation by the Team. Reclamation and USFWS management subsequently approved the Technical Team’s recommendation for funding of the proposed action.

4.3 ESA Consultation

No consultation is required because all adverse effects to federally listed species is accounted for in the Incidental Take Statement of the applicant’s Federal Recover Permits as described in Section 3.2.2. Since take, as prohibited under Section 9 of the ESA, has been exempted through the Section 10 permit, and no additional take would occur, no other consultation is required by Reclamation under Section 7 of the ESA.

Section 5 References

Bell, D.A. 2015. 90-day report for Large Branchiopod Survey, Service Number 2105-TA-0178 California Natural Diversity Database. January 2017 data. CCWD 2014. Annual Monitoring of Vernal Pool Branchiopods, Los Vaqueros Watershed, Contra Costa Water District, with Technical Assistance by California Environmental Services, San Ramon, CA. Condor Country Consulting. 2010. Survey for listed large branchiopods in east Contra Costa County. Report to the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development. Martinez, CA Eng, L., D. Belk, and C. Eriksen. 1990. Californian Anostraca: Distribution, Habitat, and Status. Journal of Crustacean Biology 10(2):247–277. Eriksen, C. and D. Belk. 1999. Fairy shrimps of California’s Pools, Puddles, and Playas. Mad River Press, Eureka, California Kneitel, J. M. 2010. Summary Report for Rock Pool Aquatic Communities at Vasco Caves and Brushy Peak Sites (East Bay Regional Park District). Kneitel, J. M. 2011. Summary Report for Rock Pool Aquatic Communities at Vasco Caves and Brushy Peak Sites (East Bay Regional Park District). Kneitel, J. M. 2012. Summary Report for Rock Pool Aquatic Communities at Vasco Caves and Brushy Peak Sites (East Bay Regional Park District). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1994. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Final rule: Determination of Endangered Status for the Conservancy Fairy Shrimp, Longhorn Fairy Shrimp, and the Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp; and Threatened Status for the Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp. 59 FR 48136. ———. 2005. Recovery plan for vernal pool ecosystems of California and Southern Oregon. Portland, Oregon. Xxvi + 606 pages.

. 2006a. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: Final rule; administrative revisions – Designation of Critical Habitat for Four Vernal Pool Crustaceans and Eleven Vernal Pool Plants, Final Rule. 71 FR 7118 7316. . 2006b. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: Clarification of the Economic and Non-Economic Exclusions of the Final Designation of Critical Habitat for Four Verbal Pool Crustaceans and Eleven Vernal Pool Plants in California and Southern Oregon. 72 FR 30279. ———. 2007. Longhorn Fairy Shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Sacramento, CA. September 2007. . 2012. Longhorn Fairy Shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Sacramento, CA. June 2012.

Appendix A Cultural Resources Compliance

Appendix B Indian Trust Assets Compliance

Appendix C Sensitive Species Within 5 Miles of the Research Area

Appendix D Endangered Species Act Compliance