BOLSA CHICA LOWLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT Monitoring Program

Annual Report 2013 Monitoring Years 4-7

Prepared for: Prepared by: California State Lands Commission Merkel & Associates, Inc. 100 Howe Avenue, Suite 100 South 5434 Ruffin Road Sacramento, CA 95825 San Diego, CA 92123

Merkel & Associates, Inc

Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Monitoring Program

2013 Annual Report Monitoring Years 4 through 7

Prepared for:

California State Lands Commission 100 Howe Avenue, Suite 100 South Sacramento, CA 95825

Prepared by:

Merkel & Associates 5434 Ruffin Road San Diego, CA 92123 Keith Merkel & Rachel Woodfield with: Moffatt & Nichol Engineers Coastal Frontiers Corporation Chambers Group Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Cover Photos (clockwise from upper left): seining in the Central Muted Tidal Basin, peregrine falcon perched on an oil pipe, eelgrass in the Full Tidal Basin, cordgrass on the mudflat off Nest Site 1 in the Full Tidal Basin, the second maintenance dredging in the Full Tidal Basin, native oysters colonizing a rock on a Full Tidal Basin mudflat.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary...... 1

Introduction...... 11

I. Biological Monitoring Program ...... 19

1.1. Vegetation/Habitat Monitoring...... 19 1.2. Soils/Sediment Monitoring...... 40 1.3. Fish Community Monitoring ...... 40 1.4. Benthic Monitoring...... 60 1.5. Water Quality Monitoring ...... 68 1.6. Avian Monitoring ...... 74

II. Physical Monitoring Program ...... 111

2.1. Inlet Flood Shoal ...... 111 2.2. Tidal Monitoring...... 117 2.3. Beach Monitoring...... 123

III. Maintenance Dredging Program ...... 149

3.1 Dredging Triggers...... 149 3.2 Maintenance Dredging...... 150

References...... 152

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 0-1. Site locator and vicinity map...... 12 Figure 0-2. Schedule of Bolsa Chica monitoring activities for Years 1 to 3 post-restoration...... 17 Figure 1-1. Monitoring stations...... 20 Figure 1-2. Salt marsh monitoring transect locations...... 23 Figure 1-3. Habitat map (August 2011)...... 24 Figure 1-4. Mean percent cover of salt marsh vegetation by survey area in Years 2 and 5...... 34 Figure 1-5. Comparison of habitat distributions between May 2008, July 2009, and July 2011...... 36 Figure 1-6. Fisheries sampling locations...... 41 Figure 1-7. Mean fish density by quarter for large beach seine, otter trawl, and purse seine at Stations 1 and 2 in the Full Tidal Basin in Years 2, 3, and 5...... 48 Figure 1-8. Mean fish biomass by quarter for large beach seine, otter trawl, and purse seine at Stations 1 and 2 in the Full Tidal Basin in Years 2, 3, and 5...... 50 Figure 1-9. Cumulative total of fish species by guild in the Full Tidal Basin in Years 2, 3, and 5 (October 2007 – July 2011)...... 51 Figure 1-10. Benthic sampling stations...... 61 Figure 1-11. Mean infauna density and biomass in January and July 2008 and 2011 by station and tidal elevation...... 66 Figure 1-12. October 2010 water quality data from the Full Tidal Basin...... 70 Figure 1-13. January 2011 water quality data from the Full Tidal Basin...... 71 Figure 1-14. April 2011 water quality data from the Full Tidal Basin...... 72

Merkel & Associates, Inc. i Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 1-15. July 2011 water quality data from the Full Tidal Basin...... 73 Figure 1-16. Avian survey zones...... 75 Figure 1-17. Avian abundance by habitat type at Bolsa Chica in Year 5 ...... 86 Figure 1-18. Belding’s Savannah sparrow territories (February and March 2010)...... 92 Figure 1-19. Belding’s Savannah sparrow territories (February and April 2011)...... 93 Figure 1-20. Belding’s Savannah sparrow territories (2012)...... 94 Figure 1-21. Belding’s Savannah sparrow territories (2013)...... 95 Figure 1-22. Total number of individual Belding’s Savannah sparrow in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 surveys and total number of breeding territories for comparison ...... 97 Figure 1-23. Total number of California least tern nests, eggs, chicks, and fledglings post-restoration at Bolsa Chica (2007-2013)...... 108 Figure 1-24. Total number of western snowy plover nests, chicks, and fledglings post-restoration at Bolsa Chica (2007-2013)...... 109 Figure 2-1a. Full Tidal Basin inlet bathymetry...... 113 Figure 2-1b. Full Tidal Basin inlet bathymetry...... 114 Figure 2-2. Full Tidal Basin accretion and erosion comparisons between surveys...... 115 Figure 2-3. Net sediment accretion rate per month since the FTB opening in August 2006...... 116 Figure 2-4. Average monthly tidal muting calculated for high tides, higher high tides, low tides and lower low tides. Bars indicate monthly minimums and maximums...... 120 Figure 2-5. Maximum spring lower low tide muting. (Muting reflects the maximum difference between the FTB and corresponding LAOH low tides)...... 121 Figure 2-6. Lower low spring tide levels in the FTB relative to the approximate operating ranges of the three muted tidal basins...... 122 Figure 2-7. Example comparison of recorded tides (January 2011) at FTB with the ocean tides (LAOH)...... 122 Figure 2-8. Beach profile transect location map...... 124 Figure 2-9. Beach profile data used in CCSTWS-OC...... 128 Figure 2-10. Beach profile survey operations...... 129 Figure 2-11. May 2010 and October 2010 beach widths...... 135 Figure 2-12. Long-term beach width changes, May 1963 to May 2010...... 136 Figure 2-13. Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period shoreline changes, October 2005 to October 2010...... 137 Figure 2-14. Long-term subaerial volume changes, May 1963 to October 2010...... 139 Figure 2-15. Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period subaerial volume changes, Oct. 2005 to Oct. 2010...... 140 Figure 2-16. Long-term shorezone volume changes, May 1963 to October 2010...... 141 Figure 2-17. Twelve -month average berm width at Corps Station 247+88...... 143 Figure 2-18. Twelve -month average berm width at Corps Station 307+88...... 144 Figure 2-19. Twelve-month average berm width at Corps Station 424+44...... 144 Figure 2-20. Shoreline changes at upcoast transects, October 2005 to October 2010...... 145 Figure 2-21. Shoreline changes at downdrift transects, October 2005 to October 2010...... 146 Figure 2-22. Subaerial volume changes at upcoast transects, October 2005 to October 2010...... 146 Figure 2-23. Subaerial volume changes at downcoast transects, October 2005 to October 2010...... 147 Figure 3-1. 2011 maintenance dredging project dredge plan...... 151

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1-1. Area of habitats within the Bolsa Chica study area (August 2011)...... 25 Table 1-2. Vegetation transect monitoring results in Year 5 (2011)...... 32 Table 1-3. Vegetation transect monitoring results in Year 2 (2008)...... 33 Table 1-4. Area (hectares) of select habitats in 2008, 2009, and 2011 (entire site)...... 37 Table 1-5. Summary of total fish abundance for the Full Tidal Basin in Year 5 (October 2010 – July 2011)...... 45

Merkel & Associates, Inc. ii Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-6. Summary of total fish mass for the Full Tidal Basin in Year 5 (October 2010 – July 2011)...46 Table 1-7. Water quality measurements taken during fish sampling in Year 5...... 52 Table 1-8. Summary of total fish abundance in the Muted Tidal Basins in Year 5...... 53 Table 1-9. Summary of total fish mass in the Muted Tidal Basins in Year 5...... 54 Table 1-10. Summary of total fish abundance in Muted Pocket Marsh in Year 5...... 55 Table 1-11. Summary of total fish mass in the Muted Pocket Marsh in Year 5...... 55 Table 1-12. Minimum and maximum standard length of all fish species captured by quarter at all stations in Year 5...... 57 Table 1-13. Counts of epibenthic invertebrates captured in fishing gear in Year 5...... 58 Table 1-14. Mean density of infauna in January 2011...... 63 Table 1-15. Mean biomass of infauna in January 2011...... 63 Table 1-16. Mean density of infauna in July 2011...... 64 Table 1-17. Mean biomass of infauna in July 2011...... 64 Table 1-18. Counts of epibenthic invertebrates detected in 1-m2 quadrats in January and July 2011...... 67 Table 1-19. Summary of 2010/2011(Year 5) survey dates and number of birds and species observed. ...78 Table 1-20. Avian abundance by survey 2010/2011 (Year 5)...... 78 Table 1-21. Year 5 density of birds (birds/hectare) by habitat type...... 87 Table 1-22. Belding’s Savannah sparrow territories at Bolsa Chica from 2007 to 2013...... 91 Table 1-23. 2010 - 2013 California least tern reproductive success for each nesting location...... 101 Table 1-24. 2010 nest, nest fate, and reproductive success distribution by cell or nest site...... 103 Table 1-25. 2011 nest, nest fate, and reproductive success distribution by cell or nest site...... 105 Table 1-26. 2012 nest, nest fate, and reproductive success distribution by cell or nest site...... 106 Table 1-27. 2013 snowy plover reproductive success for each nesting location...... 107 Table 2-2. Beach nourishment history...... 126 Table 2-3. Statistical range and depth of closure at Bolsa Chica area transects...... 132 Table 2-4. Beach width summary statistics, October 2005 to October 2010...... 138 Table 2-5. Berm width measurement program summary statistics, Jan. 2007 to Dec. 2010...... 142 Table 2-6. Baseline berm position statistics for Corps measurement transects (Jan. 1980 to Jan. 2000).143

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1-A. Sampling Location Coordinates Appendix 1-B. Annual Aerial Photos Appendix 1-C. Vegetation Transect Photos Appendix 1-D. List of All Fish Species Observed Appendix 1-E. Summary of Fish Counts Appendix 1-F. Avian Guilds Appendix 1-G. Avian Abundance by Zone in 2010 and 2011 Appendix 1-H. Final Report Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 Appendix 1-I. Final Report Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 Appendix 1-J. Final Report Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 Appendix 1-K. Final Report Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 Appendix 2-A. Monthly Tide Plots 2009 Appendix 2-B. Bolsa Beach Profile Plots Appendix 2-C. MSL Beach Width Appendix 2-D. Sediment Volume Data Appendix 2-E. MSL Beach Width Measurements Appendix 2-F. US Army Corps Beach Width Measurements Appendix 2-G. Bolsa Chica May 2011 Beach Profile Survey Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. iii Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

BOLSA CHICA LOWLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT Monitoring Program Annual Report 2010 to 2013 Monitoring Years 4 through 7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The construction phases of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project were principally complete by the end of 2006, including the opening of the Full Tidal Basin (FTB) to the ocean in August 2006. This report presents the biological and physical monitoring program data through 2013 focusing on the last four years post-restoration. Prior reports document earlier monitoring. The biological, physical, and beach monitoring programs reported in this report were conducted following the Bolsa Chica Lowland Restoration Project Biological Monitoring and Follow-up Plan and the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Beach Monitoring Plan, both prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2001. The monitoring team included Merkel & Associates, Moffat & Nichol Engineers, Coastal Frontiers, and Chambers Group, Inc. The findings are summarized in the following sections. VEGETATION/HABITAT The distribution of vegetation communities and unvegetated habitats was monitored in 2011 (Year 5) through the use of aerial photography and re-survey of transects established during Year 2. Habitats were delineated from the photographs and groundtruthed to create a habitat map, which was then compared to the Years 2 and 3 maps to examine changes in important vegetation communities and evaluate the restoration project effects on those communities. The most notable changes in habitat distribution observed between earlier monitoring and 2011 were the continuing shifts in the proportions of open water and salt marsh in the MTBs, the expansion of eelgrass (Zostera marina) and cordgrass (Spartina foliosa) in the FTB, and the expansion of non- native weeds on the avian nesting sites. The 2011 habitat mapping documented the continued conversion of the Muted Pocket Marsh (MPM) and MTB salt marsh to open water, a process that began in 2006 with introduction of tidal influence to the MPM and in 2008 with the opening of the west MTB to tidal influence. Some degree of salt marsh loss was anticipated, as salt marsh habitat at the lowest elevations experienced prolonged or permanent inundation periods. By 2011 the MPM supported less than half (1.9 ha) as much salt marsh as it did in 2008 (4.6 ha). It is expected that the MPM has reached equilibrium and will show minimal further losses of salt marsh in the coming years. With the impaired functioning of the MTBs, salt marsh at all but the highest elevations gradually died and eventually turned to open water. There was roughly half as much salt marsh/disturbed salt marsh in 2011 as in 2008 in the MTBs, a greater loss than was anticipated. When evaluating the functionality of the MTB marsh in light of the possible shortfall of coastal salt marsh coverage, it is important to recall that a central goal of the MTB creation was to provide ample nesting habitat for the state endangered Belding’s Savannah sparrow, which nests exclusively in coastal salt marsh, primarily pickleweed. Consecutive years of breeding season surveys for Belding’s Savannah sparrow have documented that despite the increased inundation and continued conversion of some nesting habitat to open water each year, the number of

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

breeding territories in the MTBs markedly rose or remained fairly stable from year to year post- restoration. This would suggest that the inundation, although reducing nesting habitat area, may have enhanced the suitability or viability of remaining habitat. Management actions that have been taken to improve the condition of coastal salt marsh habitat site-wide include culvert repairs between cells of the Seasonal Ponds and implementation of a water management plan, which uses the Freeman Creek pump to quickly lower water levels as needed following heavy or long rain events. Despite these efforts, the site still faces significant challenges relative to water management for the sake of habitat development and maintenance. From a habitat standpoint, the FTB inlet must be maintained to alleviate tidal muting, allowing the FTB to experience low tides below 0.3 meters NAVD88 on a regular basis. The MTBs would then have some capacity to be operated as intended. However, based on the early history of sand shoal development and tidal muting, it is anticipated that the MTBs should be operated differently than initially contemplated given the expectation that the lower elevations of the central and east MTBs would rarely allow for full gate operations, even with an aggressive shoal maintenance program. A transplant of cordgrass into the FTB in August 2007 was intended to accelerate the development of low salt marsh habitat. However, due to the considerable tidal muting, transplant areas at lower elevations suffered from the prolonged inundation periods, leaving only the cordgrass planted at higher elevations. The high wind wave conditions and heavy goose browsing on the cordgrass shelf also hampered its success. The permanent losses of transplanted cordgrass at the lower elevations on the cordgrass shelf reflect the reality that much of the shelf will never be suitable for cordgrass without a significant improvement of tidal drainage to achieve more inundation frequencies more typical of full tidal systems. Fortunately, all persisting stands of cordgrass began producing seed early on, allowing it the opportunity to disperse to and establish within higher locations of the FTB. Between the first year post- transplant (2008) and 2011, transplanted areas expanded from 196 m2 to 765 m2. Another habitat goal of the restoration was the establishment of eelgrass in the FTB. A 2007 transplant was successful, more than doubling in size after one year (to 0.8 ha [2.0 acres] in June 2008), and reaching 42.7 ha (105.4 acres) by June 2011. FISH COMMUNITY The Year 5 fish community sampling was conducted in October 2010, January 2011, April 2011, and July 2011 in the Full Tidal Basin, Muted Pocket Marsh, and the Muted Tidal Basins. Sampling equipment included an otter trawl, purse seine, and beach seines as appropriate for the station depth and accessibility. Captured fish were identified, counted, measured, and weighed. A total of 41 fish species were captured in Year 5, bringing the total number of species captured during the monitoring program (12 sampling events from 2007-2011) to 52. The Year 5 monitoring documented that the FTB provides habitat for a well-balanced ratio of fish guilds that has remained nearly the same since shortly after monitoring began in Year 2 post- restoration and the introduction of eelgrass as a habitat structuring element in 2007. Since that time, the basin has maintained a relatively stable distribution of demersal, open water, and structure-associated species, despite the rapid shift of great expanses of habitat from bare mud bottom to eelgrass beds. The captured species represented the full spectrum of trophic levels, from small juvenile schooling fish to adult predatory species. The most notable finding was the

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

capture of large numbers of northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax) in January, April, and July 2011. In the previous nine sampling events since 2007, only 25 northern anchovy were captured. This is an important prey species for nesting birds at Bolsa Chica. The northern portion of the basin is similar to other back-bay environments, with a soft mud bottom, limited vegetation, and higher summer water temperatures. However, unlike other back bays, it is well flushed and mixed by wind and thus experiences less extreme fluctuations in water quality than typically seen in back-bay environments. In recent years, the fish community has been dominated by northern anchovy, California grunion (Leuresthes tenuis) and topsmelt (Atherinops affinis). The southern portion of the FTB (Station 2) is largely vegetated with dense eelgrass and has developed a fish community typical of well-circulated waters and structured habitats, with species such as croaker, surfperch, kelpfish, and bass being common. Despite the great extents of eelgrass, sufficient habitat was available to support demersal species such as flatfish and sharks, commercially desirable species such as white seabass (Atractoscion nobilis) and California halibut (Paralichthys californicus), and ecologically important open water species of anchovy and atherinids. The creation of the FTB has increased the availability of important bay habitat, improving southern California fisheries resources. Nearly every fish species captured was represented by juvenile size classes (and usually adults as well), demonstrating the role of the basin as nursery habitat for spawning or post-larval settlement and rearing. The type and size of fish captured also reflect the extensive eelgrass meadows, which increase the complexity of the system by supporting resident fish species, providing egg-laying substrate and protection for breeding species, and forming the basis of detritus-based and grazing-based food webs. The marine life supported by the FTB also benefits offshore marine communities as some species leave the basin, and supports other ecological communities within the system through consumption by avian and mammalian consumers. In the MTBs, restricted tidal influence and periodic water quality extremes limited the fish community to a small number of hardy species. The west MTB was the only basin receiving daily tidal flushing, where nine species in Year 5, dominated by California killifish (Fundulus parvipinnis) and juvenile topsmelt. Eight species were captured in the central MTB, which received occasional tidal influence. California killifish, longjaw mudsucker (Gillichthys mirabilis), and juvenile topsmelt were the most abundant. Only four species were captured in the east MTB, which was never open to the FTB and received water only through gate leakage or surface flows. The Muted Pocket Marsh (not hydrologically connected to the FTB of Bolsa Chica) was generally found to be low in diversity but high in abundance of a few species, primarily California killifish and topsmelt. A total of 12 species has been captured in the MPM since monitoring was initiated, with nine captured during Year 5. These abundant small fish are a food source for the many piscivorous birds that use the marsh including terns, grebes, and wading birds. BENTHIC COMMUNITY Year 5 assessments of benthic infauna and epifauna were conducted in January and July 2011 at three stations in the FTB that were established during the first monitoring in Year 2. To sample the benthic infauna, three replicate sediment cores were collected from the +0.3-m (+1-foot)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

NAVD elevation and from the -0.6-m (–2-foot) NAVD elevation and the infauna identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level, counted, and weighed. Epibenthic invertebrates were assessed using 1-m2 quadrat at the same locations. All epifaunal organisms were identified and counted. Additionally, during the completion of fish studies described above, the incidental by- catch of epibenthic invertebrates was collected, identified, and counted to further enhance the detection of epibenthic organisms. As expected, high variability was observed in the benthic infaunal community due to the limited replication and frequency of sampling, variations in sediment type within and between stations, and the patchiness that is characteristic of infaunal communities in general. However, the findings during the fifth year post-restoration documented the persistence of benthic food resources available to birds, fish, and other invertebrates in the FTB. The created basin was found to support eleven phyla of infauna, with polychaetes and amphipods being the dominant taxa. Densities were similar at both tidal elevations. Comparisons between stations and with the Year 2 findings found high variability between all parameters with no clear seasonal or annual patterns between stations or elevations. The quadrat sampling to characterize epibenthic communities did not provide a good representation of the invertebrates present. Most epibenthic organisms are highly mobile and had vacated the mudflat shoreline during the low tides targeted for the survey work. However the tracking of epibenthic invertebrates in the fishing gear documented considerably more diversity due the greater area and depth range sampled. All taxa were marine species typical in bays and estuaries. FTB species seen in high numbers in Year 5 were the California green shrimp (Hippolyte californiensis), kelp humpback shrimp (Hippolyte clarki), and bubble snail (Bulla gouldiana). Four nearly ubiquitous non-native species were also identified in the FTB. In the MPM, various tunicates and California horn snail (Cerithidea californica) were the dominant invertebrates. In the central and west MTBs, invertebrates were more limited, with tunicates, bubble snails, and shore crabs were the primary taxa captured. WATER QUALITY Water quality monitoring was conducted quarterly in Year 5 using both tended and untended continuous recording instrumentation. The tended instruments were deployed during the fisheries monitoring to document current water quality. The untended instruments were deployed for one month each quarter. As detailed in the Year 2 report, considerable data collection failures occurred as a result of the long-term deployment, lack of instrument redundancy, and failure-prone instrumentation (Hydrolab Datasonde 5). The monitoring program was therefore modified in Year 5 to include mid-deployment instrument servicing, backup instrument deployment, and a switch to an alternate leading instrument manufacturer (YSI). The deployed units recorded water depth, temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, and salinity at 20-minute intervals for 30 days at two stations within the FTB: at the north and south end of the basin. The data collected evidenced the tidal marine influence that persists in the basin, reflecting the daily and monthly tidal fluctuations seen in the open ocean. All parameters were within acceptable ranges to support the fish, invertebrate, and vegetation communities in the FTB, and were indicative of a well-flushed marine environment.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 4 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

In the April and July months, the waters at the northern end of the basin had higher water temperatures because of increased solar heating. The better circulated waters of the southern portion of the basin were more influenced by cooler oceanic water, maintaining lower temperatures during the warmer months. Very little difference in temperature was seen between the two stations during the January sampling. These are temperature conditions typical of coastal embayments in the region. Dissolved oxygen levels were within the expected range and reflected the strong influence of diurnal tidal flow. Although DO frequently fell below 5 mg/L (a concentration which is typically considered the lower end of a range adequate to support biological organisms), this typically occurred only for a few hours at a time and quickly returned to higher levels. Many species are well adapted to survive brief periods of extremely low or even no DO by either physiologic or behavioral responses. There was no evidence from the fish and invertebrate monitoring work that hypoxia is a problem in the basin. The salinity data available reflected the absence of significant freshwater input into the FTB, with salinities similar to typical oceanic salinities for most of the year and rising somewhat during the summer months due to evaporative concentration. Turbidity was generally low at both stations, though interference with the sensor by fouling invertebrates and algae affected the acceptability of much of the data. There is concern that restrictions in the basin inlet could lead to partial or full closure of the basin and loss of any tidal circulation. In one instance, a brief inlet closure event was noted in the tidal data, followed by a self-breaching recovery of tidal exchange. On-going physical monitoring of the condition of the inlet and the flood shoal is key to foreseeing a full closure before it occurs. AVIAN COMMUNITY Year 5 saturation surveys of the avian community in the restoration area were conducted in October and December 2010, and February, April, June, and August 2011. Avian abundance was highest during the winter surveys and lowest during the June surveys, when many shorebirds and wintering ducks were absent. Species counts ranged from 72 to 99 species and were highest during the December and February surveys. A total of 129 species were observed. This brings the grand total species observed since the start of post-restoration monitoring in October 2007 to 159. Overall, the ten most abundant species observed in recent monitoring were western sandpiper (Calidris mauri) (30.3% of the total), followed by California gull (Larus californicus) (7.1%), black-bellied plover (Pluvialis squatarola) (7.0%), American coot (Fulica americana) (3.8%), dowitcher (Limnodromus spp.) (3.6%), northern shoveler (Anas clypeata), (3.6%), Belding’s Savannah sparrow (2.6%), elegant tern (2.3%), least sandpiper (Calidris minutilla) (1.7%), and northern pintail (Anas acuta) (1.8%). The high abundance of California gull was largely due to wintering gulls observed loafing in the Full Tidal Basin during the December 2010 survey. The habitats with the highest bird densities were intertidal sand shoal, inundated salt panne, and intertidal mudflat. In the winter there were large numbers of shorebirds, gulls, and pelicans loafing on the intertidal sand shoals and mudflats and a large number of shorebirds foraging on the mudflats. In the early spring there were migrating ducks and shorebirds using the inundated

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 5 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

salt panne and mudflats to rest and forage. Species richness was highest in the salt marsh (90 species), open water (79 species), inundated salt panne (72 species), and mudflat (62 species). Surveys for the state endangered Belding's Savannah sparrow were performed annually in Year 4 (2010), Year 5 (2011), Year 6 (2012), and Year 7 (2013). Two surveys were done in Years 4 and 5, and only one survey was done in Years 6 and 7 once it had been determined that duplicate surveys were not yielding significant additional benefit for the cost. A total of 237 and 199 territories were recorded in 2010 surveys, 259 and 264 territories in 2011, 310 in 2012, and 217 in 2013. It is believed that the 2013 numbers are an undercount based on additional subsampling that was performed. The count is only an estimate of the actual population, and detection of territories could fluctuate with weather conditions or breeding status. The highest number of territories was mapped in the first year post-restoration (2007), possibly due to displacement of birds arising from the removal of FTB salt marsh moving into the adjacent marsh. In the following years numbers fluctuated, then increased each year from 2010 to 2012, followed by the decrease in 2013 attributed to the survey being conducted prior to the peak in territorial activity. The largest proportion of the Belding's Savannah sparrow territories is located in the MTBs. An overall increase in usage each year occurred despite the continued decline in the amount of pickleweed-dominated marsh and an increase in the amount of open water as the MTBs adapt to continuing changes in inundation. The flooding of much of the marsh in the MTBs may have improved the quality of remaining pickleweed habitat through the control of weeds, reduction of predators, more reliable moisture, improved foraging conditions, and higher quality breeding habitat. Although increased marsh vigor is not evident in the spatial extent data, this hypothesis is supported by the stable number of territories throughout the MTBs and visible increased stature of remaining shrubs. Annual monitoring of the state and federally endangered California least tern (Sternula antillarum browni) continued in Years 4, 5, 6, and 7. The number of nests in 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 was highly variable: 446, 167, 305, and 157, respectively. The fate of these nests as measured by the number of fledglings produced was determined by the degree of predation of eggs and chicks each year. In 2010 an estimated range of only 67-114 fledglings were produced following a major loss of nearly the entire colony on Nest Site 1 (NS1) to a family of coyotes. In 2011 an estimated range of 66-95 fledglings were produced, with high nest predation and some abandonment. In 2012, despite a substantial increase in nests from the year before, only 16 fledglings were produced due to very high nest predation by coyotes and corvids. The record low number of nests in 2013 produced 35-67 fledglings, again with high predation by gulls, raptors, and corvids. Following the considerable losses in 2010 despite record high nesting, additional effort was put into protecting nesting species and preparing their sites. To deter coyotes, fences were extended on NS1 and installed at Nest Site 2 (NS2) prior to the 2013 nesting season to protect the nests from coyotes and other mammalian predators. Overall, reproductive success post-restoration (2007-2013) (as fledglings/pair) has not yet reached the high levels seen in 2005 prior to the creation of the new nest sites and in 2006, when the three nest sites had been completed (one nest site was utilized). Reported predation in these successful years was notably low. Annual monitoring of breeding western snowy plovers was continued in Years 4, 5, 6, and 7. In 2010, there were a total of 64 western snowy plover nests producing 63 fledglings. In 2011,

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 6 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

there were 73 nests producing 62 fledglings. In 2012, there were 68 nests producing 77 fledglings. In 2013, there were 66 nests producing 37 fledglings. The number of western snowy plover nests and adult pairs was stable from year to year, but reproductive success reached its lowest point since 2007 in 2013, despite large efforts made to prepare NS1 prior to nesting season. The site was scraped to remove the weeds and new sand was added to the site. Predation of adults and chicks remained the primary cause of low reproductive success. It should be noted that a portion of the reproductive success in 2010 through 2013 was attributable to the highly successful rearing and release of fledglings that were raised at the Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center from rescued abandoned eggs and chicks at Bolsa Chica. It is likely that these eggs or chicks had been abandoned due to the depredation of one or both adults. The restoration project included the creation of three nest sites targeting both least terns and snowy plovers. While NS1 has been heavily used by both terns and plovers since it was completed in 2006, California least tern did not expand to nest on NS2 and Nest Site 3 (NS3) until 2010. In 2010, reproductive success on these sites was low due to nest predation on NS2 and both egg and chick predation on NS3. In 2011, most of the least tern fledglings came from NS2, while NS3, with the greatest number of least tern nests at Bolsa Chica, yielded a very low fledging rate per nest. In 2012 and 2013 there were no fledglings produced at NS3 by the least terns nesting there. On NS2 nesting terns produced no fledglings in 2012, but between 34 and 66 in 2013. The snowy plover has used NS2 since 2009 and NS3 since 2006, with varying success. INLET FLOOD SHOAL Following the development of a large shoal in the FTB inlet after its opening to the ocean, a maintenance dredging event was undertaken from January to April 2009. Monitoring of the flood shoal resumed after the dredging to examine the rate at which the shoal began to reform. That monitoring continued in 2010, with surveys in January and July. A second maintenance dredging was performed from January to April 2011, with follow-up survey performed in April, May and June 2011 to again track the re-accretion of the shoal. The surveys documented the rapid accretion in the inlet following the first dredge event of early 2009, followed by re-accretion at a similar rate in the first half of 2010, but distributed over a wider area, with the sand pushing further into the basin. The main shoal continued to accrete in the second half of 2010 leading up to a second maintenance dredging event. Following the completion in April 2011, there was a very rapid re-accumulation of sand in the inlet. The second dredging event in 2011 involved the excavation of a large sand trap (to the originally designed basin depth) that was not done during the initial site construction or first maintenance dredging. This sand trap was intended to capture the initial rapid influx of sand following the dredging, allowing the basin more capacity to accept addition sand input over the following years. There was a rapid infill of the basin by littoral sediments followed by a decline in accretion rates. The sand trap was also intended to extend the period of improved tidal circulation in the basin, with the goal of greater system functionality. The trap served its function to provide sand storage capacity and thus curb the extent to which the flood shoal extended inward from the inlet mouth. However, the sand trap did not substantively assist in curbing the tidal muting within the FTB due to the fact that muting is principally the result of

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 7 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

shoal development immediately inside the flare of the FTB as the basin widens out from the inlet channel. TIDAL MONITORING Accretion of sand within the flood shoal of the FTB continues to be the most important factor causing tidal lag and muting. Tidal monitoring provides a means of tracking the lag and muting and is the primarily means of determining the need for maintenance dredging to ensure proper physical and ecological system functioning. Tidal monitoring was initiated in the FTB in December 2006 and has been continuous since then with data collected at 6-minute intervals. The collected data are analyzed to determine tidal lag and muting in the FTB. The tidal lag and muting analyses by tidal event illustrate that they are not similar among tidal events. Tidal lag (the amount of time between achievement of a particular tide event at Los Angeles Outer Harbor [LAOH] and the FTB) was most notable during lower low tides, almost negligible during higher high tides, and intermediate for low tides and high tides. The maximum observed lag in the FTB for 2010 (the year prior to dredging) was 234 minutes behind LAOH, observed during a lower low tide on July 10, 2010. In 2011, following the dredge event, the maximum lag was 193 minutes, observed on December 23, 2011. For comparison, the prior maximum lag in the FTB was 186 minutes, observed January 9, 2009, just days prior to the first maintenance dredging event. The tidal muting analysis comparing the FTB tide data against LAOH found that the FTB does not completely drain to local oceanic sea levels during outgoing tides. Tidal muting is most significant during lower low tides. The maximum tidal muting in the FTB for 2010 (the year prior to dredging) was 1.06 m at the lower low tide on July 11, 2010. In 2011, following the dredge event, the maximum muting was 0.99 m, observed on November 25, 2011. For comparison, the prior maximum muting in the FTB was 0.91 minutes, observed January 10, 2009. Spring tides refer to the exceptionally high and low tides that occur monthly at the time of the new or full moon; the greatest spring tides occur during the autumnal and vernal equinoxes. Analysis of the lowest spring tides illustrated when tidal muting was the most severe and can be used as a tool to direct management actions relative to functionality of the muted tidal basins. Spring lower low tide muting was relatively small (less than 0.4 m NAVD) for the first year (2007) following the opening of the FTB. Muting then increased slightly in Fall 2007 and was again steady until Spring 2008. In spring 2008, muting increased significantly and remained high until the 2009 dredging. Following the 2009 dredging, muting was reduced but still higher than the original post-dredge conditions. In 2010, muting steadily increased, reaching a maximum of 1.06 m NAVD. Muting improved temporarily following the 2011 dredging, but returned to pre-dredge conditions within seven months. The chronic tidal muting experienced in the FTB since late 2007, despite maintenance dredging efforts, meant that FTB water levels limited the functioning of the Muted Tidal Basins. For most of 2010 and 2011, the EMTB was not functional, except for a very brief period immediately following the 2011 maintenance dredging. The CMTB was able to drain for only several months post-dredge. The WMTB did not drain in 2010, but was restored to some functionality post- dredge in 2011. For the majority of time high FTB water levels prevented all of the MTBs from draining out on falling tides.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 8 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

It is unlikely that the CMTB and EMTB will ever achieve a muted tidal condition through connection to the FTB. Culverts have been installed between the basins, flowing from west to east and ultimately into Freeman Creek, which will allow for greater control over water levels, however these culverts remain at levels that are not optimal for achieving hydrologic control within the MTBs. The basins are typically flooded by gate leakage from the FTB, flow from the WMTB, and inflow of groundwater to surface water through porous sediments, mostly along relictual stream channels that cross the site. Given the lack of drainage control that can be achieved by gravity through the CMTB and EMTB gates, it is recommended that interior spill weirs between MTBs be modified to provide adjustable spill elevations. This would allow waters to be drained through the MTBs to Freeman Creek where the pump station may be used to lift waters and return them back to the FTB. The value of this surface water control within the MTBs cannot be overstated as the level of water within the MTBs effects many aspects of the system function and such control would allow for drainage of pools to control vector issues, seasonal drainage of water to promote availability of nesting habitat and to protect established nests from inundation. In addition, the ability to move water between MTBs at a lower overall elevation would open up greater seasonal capacity to absorb stormwater in the MTBs, while water is slowly drained out via the pump station at Freeman Creek. BEACH MONITORING Beach width measurements were collected monthly in 2010 and compared to previous measurements. During the period between the January 2007 and December 2010 observations, the Mean Seal Level (MSL) beach width decreased at two of the seven sites and increased at remaining five locations. The shoreline gains were confined to the area immediately north of the FTB entrance channel, with the greatest shoreline advance measuring 43 meters. The greatest shoreline retreat, 31 meters, occurred at the north end of the study area. Shoreline change rates during the four-year period ranged from -5.5 m/yr to +4.3 m/yr. Subaerial volume changes were similar to the beach width changes. Volume gains prevailed at each of the three transects located north of the FTB entrance channel. Volume losses occurred at three of the sites located south of the FTB entrance channel. It is not possible to quantitatively assess shorezone volume changes during the recent four-year period (the October 2005 profile does not extend below the waterline). However, a general trend of shorezone volume loss prevailed at six of the transects in the study area between January 2007 and October 2010. The highest rate of volume loss occurred in the northern portion of the study area. This may be attributable to the dispersal and redistribution of the ebb bar and natural erosion between Surfside-Sunset nourishment intervals Approximately 198,000 m3 of sediment was deposited in the lagoon during the initial 17-month period following the establishment of tidal exchange (August 2006 to January 2008; equivalent to approximately 140,000 m3/year). Sedimentation was reduced substantially during the second year (11-month period between January 2008 and December 2008) to approximately 36,000 m3 or 39,000 m3/year. During the 10-month period following the dredging operations, approximately 43,000 m3 of sediment was deposited within the FTB (April 2009 to January 2010; equivalent to approximately 52,000 m3/year). Additional shoaling of approximately 49,000 m3 (49,000 m3/year) occurred between January 2010 and January 2011. The second maintenance dredging episode was conducted in January. While a small fraction of this material

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 9 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

may have resulted from redistribution of basin sediments or aeolian processes, nearly all of the sediment has entered the basin from the ocean. It is possible that the high shoaling rate during the initial 17-month period was a transient effect attributable to inlet stabilization, and increased propensity for sedimentation due to the proximately of the pre-filled ebb bar and widened beaches adjacent to the inlet. The reduced shoaling rate during the second year is likely attributable to a reduced tidal prism due to high initial shoaling rates and the stabilization of the aforementioned local sediment sources (nourished beaches and ebb bar). The shoaling rate during the entire 28-month period between the establishment of tidal exchange (August 2006) and the initial maintenance dredging episode (December 2009) was approximately 100,000 m3/year. A substantially lower shoaling rate (53,000 m3/year) prevailed during the 21-month period following the initial maintenance dredging operations and leading up to the second dredging operation (January 2011). The reduction in shoaling following the initial dredging suggests that the high first-year shoaling rates may have been attributable to the initial stabilization of the inlet and surrounding beaches. Alternatively, the reduced shoaling rates also could be explained by a reduced tidal prism relative to the initial condition, given that the 2009 maintenance dredging removed only a portion of the accumulated material from the FTB (234,000 m3 accumulated vs. 180,000 m3 removed). Nevertheless, particular vigilance is warranted in monitoring the flood shoal accumulation rates following the 2011 dredging activities to confirm that the high sedimentation rates experienced during the first year were transitory, and to understand how the shoaling rates change in response to the eminent arrival of the recent Surfside-Sunset nourishment material to the Bolsa Chica area and the continued sediment accumulation and shoreline advance on the north side of the inlet. MAINTENANCE DREDGING In light of the rapid return of considerable tidal muting within seven months of the completion of the 2009 dredging, project plans for the second maintenance dredging included dredging a sand trap near the inlet to capture incoming sand and extend the post-dredge period of improved tidal conditions. This sand trap was dredged to the permitted depth of the final engineering design. The dredge work commenced in mid-January 2011 following a December 2010 mobilization. From January 11 to April 17, 2011, approximately 303,000 cubic meters of sand were dredged from the inlet and placed on the beach south of the inlet. As discussed above, the shoal again reformed quite rapidly, with highly muted conditions and the resultant lack of function of the central and east MTBs occurring within six months of the completion of dredging. As a result, the Steering Committee began exploring options for more functionally efficient and cost effective techniques for maintaining the inlet. It is possible that there are no feasible options that will allow all three MTBs to operate as originally envisioned. As a result, exploration of MTB operations has been focused on changes in the basin coupling weirs that would allow for an alternative water management program within the MTBs to be undertaken. Water management and flood shoal management within the Bolsa Chica Lowlands continue to be the most complex and costly elements of the long-term maintenance program. The focus of the Steering Committee in recent years has been on development of optimal methods to address these management issues.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 10 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

BOLSA CHICA LOWLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT Monitoring Program Annual Report 2010 to 2013 Monitoring Years 4 through 7

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND The Bolsa Chica Lowlands are located in Orange County, California, between Bolsa Chica Mesa on the northwest and Huntington Beach on the southeast (Figure 0-1). In 1996, eight state and federal agencies entered into an agreement to conduct wetland acquisition and restoration at the Lowlands. Following project planning, land purchase, restoration design, permit acquisition, and publication of a Final Environmental Impact Statement/Final Environmental Impact Report, restoration construction began on October 6, 2004. The project involved the creation of a Full Tidal Basin (FTB) and restoration of Muted Tidal Basins (MTB) by constructing an ocean inlet north of Huntington Mesa.

To create the FTB, approximately 1.57 million m3 of material were excavated from within the Bolsa Chica Lowlands to create a basin of a general depth of –1m NAVD, bounded by intertidal flats. The excavated sand was distributed on the adjacent beaches from March to June 2006 (102,500 m3, divided evenly to the north and south of the future inlet) as well as placed offshore from November 2005 to May 2006 to form an ebb bar (929,326 m3) outside of the future inlet. Approximately 531,354 m3 of material was placed to form the berms that bound the FTB basin and three nesting areas. Remaining material was hauled off-site. Jetties were constructed to form the ocean inlet to the FTB from March through June of 2006.

The FTB was opened to the ocean on August 24, 2006. The basin was designed to support 71.0 hectares (ha) (175.5 acres) of non-wetland waters, 49.6 ha (122.6 acres) of tidal flats, and 7.7 ha (19.1 acres) of pickleweed – a component of salt marsh habitat. In order to keep the inlet open, maintenance dredging is anticipated to be required every two to three years, with dredged sand to be placed on down-coast beaches.

Water control structures and culverts were installed through the berm to allow regular but muted tidal influence from the FTB to each of three MTBs (Figure 0-1), to support 51.1 ha (126.3 acres) of salt marsh habitat, and create 17.1 ha (42.3 acres) of tidal flats, 12.3 ha (30.5 acres) of cordgrass habitat, and 0.7 ha (1.4 acres) of non-wetland waters. The west MTB was opened to tidal influence from the FTB through its water control structure in March 2008, while the central and east basins remained closed in 2009 while additional oil spill and flood control protections were put into place. The restoration project involved no changes to the Future Full Tidal Basin or the Seasonal Ponds, areas that are currently an active oil production field (Figure 0-1).

The restoration project also returned muted tidal influence to the Muted Pocket Marsh (MPM), north of Wintersberg Channel (Figure 0-1). The MPM is not hydrologically connected to the FTB of Bolsa Chica, rather it receives muted tidal influence through a water control structure that was installed connecting it to outer Bolsa Bay, through Huntington Harbour, which ultimately opens to the ocean over 6.5 km (4 miles) to the northwest.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 11 Santa Barbara

Los Angeles Huntington Beach

burg Channel ters MAP AREA

en Grove Win ard East G Muted San Diego

Outer Pocket Marsh Bolsa Bay West WCS HUNTINGTON BEACH Muted Tidal Basins

Rabbit Island

Central Nest WCS Site 2 Inner Bolsa Bay Full Tidal Basin East WCS Nest Site 1

Freeman Freeman Creek North WCS Tern Island

Future Full Tidal

South Tern Nest Site 3 PACIFIC OCEAN Island

Flood Shoal Maintenance Area Seasonal Ponds

West Muted Tidal Basin Central Muted Tidal Basin East Muted Tidal Basin Ocean Monitoring Program Study Boundary Inlet 0100 200 400 600 800 Meters

Site locator and vicinity map Figure 0-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

SITE CONDITIONS 2010-2013 By 2010, nine months after completion of the first inlet maintenance dredging in April 2009, the flood shoal had re-accumulated to a degree that again full drainage of the FTB could not be achieved at low tides. This resulted in low tide muting, with as much as a meter of lost low tide, and increased daily durations of tidal inundation. It also again affected the physical functioning of the rest of the system, which relies on low tides in the FTB to adequately gravity drain the MTBs, Freeman Creek, and the Seasonal Ponds. In 2010 tidal movement in the MTBs was again limited (west MTB) or absent (central and east MTBs) due to the FTB muting.

The 2009/2010 El Nino winter brought heavy rains to Bolsa Chica from March to April 2010. The ponded rainfall, in conjunction with manual flooding of the basins in summer and the inability of the MTBs to drain out to the elevated FTB, resulted in long periods of inundation in the MTB marsh in 2010. This prolonged inundation in the MTBs was reflected in the conversion of large areas of low-lying salt marsh to open water.

The FTB muting continued to prevent Freeman Creek from draining water to the FTB as intended in the original design. This resulted in prolonged periods of inundation in the Seasonal Ponds that limited the foraging habitat available for western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus). It also raised concern about site flooding in the event of a prolonged rain event. Therefore in late 2010, a 12-inch pump station was installed at Freeman Creek, along with oil spill protections to assure the ability to drain Freeman Creek safely and as-needed to achieve habitat management and flood protection goals. This pump station went on-line in the winter of 2010/2011 to handle emergency drawdown needs and to provide a means to drain water from Freeman Creek to the FTB when muting of the FTB prevented gravity drainage through the same flap gate headwall structure.

A second maintenance dredging was performed from January to April 2011, after which the MTBs were all open and functioning properly. By September 2011 the shoal had again re- accumulated and the central and east MTBs were unable to achieve tidal movement. They were periodically flushed manually when tides allowed. The building flood shoal within the FTB had become a primary focus in the operational conditions of the wetlands due to the significant cost of shoal maintenance and the constraining maintenance funds.

In 2011, the Freeman Creek pump station began to be operated for water management purposes. At that time, the primary focus was on the evaluation of operational scenarios to provide flood storage capacity. However, drawdown of water levels in the Seasonal Ponds by pumping at Freeman Creek began to illuminate the full potential for using the pump station as a tool for management of habitat conditions within the system as well.

During 2012, inlet shoals continued to build within the FTB and tidal muting increased to the point where the west MTB was unable to drain and the fill gates had to be closed for a significant portion of the year. Drainage culverts were installed between the east MTB and Freeman Creek to enhance drawdown capabilities from the east MTB to Freeman Creek and to provide additional backfill capacity of the east MTB in the event of multiple large storms in close succession. These configuration changes, combined with a seasonal pump down plan provided the site with significant flood protection capacity, even with a muted FTB. Also in 2012, efforts

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 13 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

were undertaken to adopt an early spring season water drawdown at the Freeman Creek pump station in order to enhance the site suitability for nesting by western snowy plovers. This was a refined operation of the pump station. By drawing down water with the Freeman Creek pump early in the spring, evaporation later in spring improved the availability of salt panne nesting and foraging habitat for plovers.

In 2012, a decision was made to postpone inlet dredging and monitor shoal development in 2013. This was done to determine if shoaling would reach a point of some increased stability that would suggest a lower dredging volume or frequency to keep up with shoal development, in order to optimize the dredging maintenance based on costs and tidal circulation. The inlet shoal was monitored regularly since the completion of the 2011 dredging event. Sand influx rates have declined, but sand continues to be captured within the FTB. MONITORING PROGRAM The follow-up monitoring of the restoration generally conforms to the Bolsa Chica Lowland Restoration Project Biological Monitoring and Follow-up Plan prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2001 (Monitoring Plan)(USFWS 2001a). Responsibility for implementation of the plan before and during construction was held by the USFWS. Long-term responsibility for implementation of the Monitoring Plan was assumed post-construction by the California State Lands Commission, with a particular commitment to flood shoal maintenance and breeding habitats for listed species, particularly the least tern, snowy plover, and Belding’s Savannah sparrow. A maintenance endowment was established when the project began in 1997 and will be used to conduct the monitoring and flood shoal maintenance.

The Monitoring Plan notes that the purpose of the monitoring program is to document the habitat improvements for fish and wildlife, the success of revegetation efforts, and the use of the site by endangered species. Additional monitoring elements in the Monitoring Plan are intended to ensure that the inlet is properly maintained, constructed nesting areas have adequate maintenance, the rare plant coast woolly heads (Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata) is protected through weed control and seed introduction, and that construction impacts to Belding’s Savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) are minimized and offset through post- construction improvements to marsh habitat.

The Monitoring Plan identifies the ecological monitoring objectives as follows:  Facilitate evaluation of the effectiveness of the restoration to provide habitat for fish and wildlife.  Document changes in the ecology of the wetlands environment over time.  Provide timely identification of any problems with the physical, or biological development of the restored area.  Assist in providing a technical basis for resource management of the restored wetland by documenting maintenance needs and enhancement opportunities.

The Monitoring Plan calls for most biological monitoring to be conducted during the 2nd, 5th, and 10th years after completion of construction. Some additional monitoring will be conducted as warranted by conditions observed at the site or the need for additional data. State and federally listed avian species will be monitored every year. Physical monitoring will be

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 14 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

conducted in years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10, and during interim years as needed to investigate the functioning of the system.

Following monitoring Year 4, it became clear that monitoring and maintenance resources for the restoration project were being expended at a faster rate than anticipated, due to the high costs associated with the maintenance of the FTB inlet. In order to extend the life of the maintenance budget, the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Steering Committee sought opportunities to conserve resources. An examination of the monitoring program revealed tasks that offered limited useful information in the context of site performance evaluation or adaptive management. Therefore adjustments were made to the frequency or intensity of some tasks. These changes were detailed in a 2011 letter to the California Coastal Commission and are described where relevant in the following sections of this report.

Immediately west of the Lowlands is Inner Bolsa Bay, which was established as an Ecological Reserve in 1973 to be managed by the California Department of Fish and Game (renamed California Department of Fish and Wildlife [CDFW] in 2013) (Figure 0-1). On August 24, 2006, the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project acreage and the Muted Pocket Marsh were incorporated into the Ecological Reserve by agreement of the State Lands Commission and CDFW. This monitoring program study boundary includes only the restored Lowlands and Muted Pocket Marsh, not Bolsa Bay, with the exception that California least tern (Sternula antillarum browni) and western snowy plover monitoring was conducted throughout the Ecological Reserve (Restoration Area and Inner Bolsa Bay).

The Beach Monitoring for this program conforms to the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Beach Monitoring Plan (USFWS 2001b). The Beach Monitoring Plan defines monitoring activities and analyses that are expected to assure restoration project-related adverse impacts to area beaches are mitigated.

The State Lands Commission has contracted Merkel & Associates, Inc. (M&A) and its team to implement the Biological and Beach Monitoring Plans. The monitoring team includes Merkel & Associates, Moffatt & Nichol Engineers, Coastal Frontiers, and Chambers Group, Inc. The FTB was opened to the ocean on August 24, 2006, with additional remedial construction activities continuing to address various shoreline stabilization issues. Contracting was not in place to initiate immediate monitoring until late 2006. However the Year 2 biological monitoring was initiated on schedule in Fall 2007. The annual monitoring reports will be prepared by calendar year but will include data collected by monitoring year, which is based on a schedule starting in October 2006.

This has resulted in a somewhat complicated reporting schedule, detailed as follows: the first monitoring report included all data collected from November 2006 through December 2007, capturing all monitoring conducted under Year 1 of the monitoring program (October 2006 to September 2007), as well as the first quarter of Year 2 (October to December 2007) (M&A 2008a). The second (2008) monitoring report included all data collected from January to December 2008, capturing the last three quarters of Year 2 (through September 2008) and the first quarter of Year 3 (October to December 2008). The 2009 annual report included data collected from January to December 2009, capturing the last three quarters of Year 3 (through

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 15 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

September 2009) and the first quarter of Year 4 (October to December 2009). Monitoring Year 4 (October 2009 to September 2010) had limited monitoring activities and was not a reporting year; therefore, Year 4 data collected in 2010 were rolled forward into the present report. The Year 5 monitoring, extending from October 2010 to September 2011, is the focus of the present report. Minor monitoring for sensitive avian species was performed in Years 6 (October 2011 to September 2012) and 7 (October 2012 to September 2013). This is therefore a comprehensive report covering work conducted in 2010 through 2013. A schedule of monitoring activities and reporting is presented for clarification (Figure 0-2).

This document serves as the annual report for 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013. It is divided into three primary sections: Biological Monitoring, Physical Monitoring, and Maintenance Dredging Program. Copies of prior reports are posted on-line at www.bolsachicarestoration.org. HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL REFERENCE DATA The vertical datum used throughout this document is North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88), with units expressed in meters. For purposes of equating this datum to recognized biological zonation patterns in tidal marine systems, NAVD88 roughly equates to Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW). More precisely, at the project site, NAVD88 lies approximately 0.06 m (0.2 feet) above National Ocean Service (NOS) MLLW and 0.79 m (2.6 feet) below NOS Mean Sea Level (MSL; NOS, 2007).

Horizontally geo-referenced data are in meters relative to California State Plane Zone 6, North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). Area measurements are presented in hectares, with conversions to acres provided due to the greater ease with which many readers can envision areas in this unit of measurement. Additionally, discussion of sediment accumulation and dredging volumes are presented in cubic meters, with conversions to cubic yards due to the prevalence of this unit in the commercial dredging field. DEFINITIONS AND GEOGRAPHIC REFERENCES To assist the reader, this section has been provided to serve as a reference for terminology and abbreviations used in this report. In addition, this section includes a map of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands and surroundings labeled with place names to assist in following discussions that are geographically referenced to particular areas within the site (Figure 0-1).

Term Abbreviation Notes Full Tidal Basin FTB Area: 158.3 hectare (ha)(391.2 acres [ac]) Future Full Tidal Basin FFTB Area: 103.8 ha (256.5 ac) (not joined to FTB) Muted Tidal Basin MTB Area: 76.6 ha (189.3 ac) Seasonal Ponds Area: 49.6 ha (122.5 ac) Muted Pocket Marsh MPM Area: 14.0 ha (34.7 ac) Nest Site 1 NS 1 Nest Site 2 NS 2 Nest Site 3 NS 3 South Tern Island STI Inner Bolsa Bay (LETE and SNPL monitoring only) North Tern Island NTI Inner Bolsa Bay (LETE and SNPL monitoring only) Rabbit Island Intertidal island in northwest portion of FTB Water Control Structure WCS Gates to regulate tidal flow from FTB to MTBs

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 16 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 0-2. Schedule of Bolsa Chica monitoring activities for Years 1 to 3 post-restoration (continued on following page). Breaks in task numbering reflect analytical or administrative tasks that have not been shown.

2006 2007 2008 2009 TASK ASONDJ FMAMJ J ASONDJ FMAMJJ ASONDJ FMAMJ J ASOND Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 3

COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION 1.0. Ecological Monitoring Program 1.1. Water Quality 1.2. Soils 1.3. Vegetation/Habitat Mapping Aerial Photogrammetry Vegetation Mapping Vegetation Transect Monitoring Eelgrass Monitoring Cordgrass Monitoring 1.4. Fisheries 1.5. Benthos 1.6. Avian General Avian Surveys Species of Special Concern California Least Tern Monitoring Western Snowy Plover Monitoring Belding's Savannah Sparrow Monitoring 2.0. Physical Monitoring Program 2.1. Inlet Bathymetric Monitoring 2.2. Tidal Monitoring 2.3. Beach Monitoring Semiannual Beach Profile Surveys Monthly Beach Width Measurements 5.0. Maintenance Dredging Planning and Permitting Maintenance Dredging 7.0. Reporting Program 7.2. Annual Report Activity Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 17 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 0-2 (cont’d). Schedule of Bolsa Chica monitoring activities for Years 4 to 7 post-restoration.

2010 2011 2012 2013 TASK ONDJ F MAMJ J ASONDJ F MAMJ J ASONDJ FMAMJJ ASONDJ FMAMJJ AS Monitoring Year 4 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 6 Monitoring Year 7

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 18 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

I. BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM

The biological monitoring stations were established using direction provided in the Bolsa Chica Lowland Restoration Project Biological Monitoring and Follow-up Plan (Monitoring Plan), as well as observations made in the field at the time of station determination. Figure 1-1 presents the general sampling locations for vegetation, water quality, benthic infauna, fish, and birds. Within each of the following sections, more detailed maps of sampling locations are presented as needed. Appendix 1-A provides geographic coordinates for the sampling locations. Abbreviations used for the various regions of Bolsa Chica are: Full Tidal Basin (FTB), Muted Tidal Basins (MTBs), and Muted Pocket Marsh (MPM).

1.1. VEGETATION/HABITAT MONITORING

Introduction The distribution, composition, and evolution of vegetation communities and unvegetated habitats are being monitored through the use of aerial photography and quantitative transect methods. The Monitoring Plan calls for vegetation monitoring to be conducted in Years 2, 5, and 10. Therefore this section reports the findings of the Year 5 monitoring, with discussion providing comparison to the previous monitoring events. Methodology Habitat Mapping To map vegetated and non-vegetated habitats, the Bolsa Chica study area was contract flown by Skyview Aerial Photo on August 4, 2011 to photograph the site at a scale of 1:4,800 from true vertical position on 9”x9” false-color infrared (IR) film. Additionally, a single 1:19,400 true color spot aerial photograph was taken coincident with the IR imagery. This photograph was intended to provide an additional tool for habitat interpretation and mapping as well as serve as a base map for other field monitoring efforts and reporting. The photos were taken at approximately 1030 hours at a measured FTB tide of approximated +0.67 m NAVD88. This allowed photography of as much exposed intertidal habitat as possible while lighting and weather conditions were suitable for the photography on that particular day. The ocean tide at this time (measured at Los Angeles Outer Harbor) was +0.98 m NAVD88. Tidal muting in the FTB prevents the tide from getting to the 0.0 m tide that was targeted by the Monitoring Plan methodology. Additionally, attempts to collect the imagery in May, June, and July, at lower tides and at a comparable date to imagery collected in prior years, were hampered by a heavy marine layer during the appropriate tides. Following the survey flights, the aerial images were digitally scanned and registered to the project site. Heads-up digitization of vegetation boundaries in the imagery was performed to map communities in accordance with CDFW Holland classification codes (Holland 1986). Additional codes were used as necessary to supplement the vegetation codes with biologically important marsh zones, non-vegetated communities, and marine habitats that are lacking in the Holland system. The draft digitized habitat maps were printed and taken into the field for ground-truthing. Following field efforts, the habitat maps were updated and map products and summary statistics of habitat acreage and distribution across the various project components were generated. It

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 19 Muted

Pocket Marsh

STATION 1

wq1

STATION 3 (benthic only)

East Water Control Structure Tidal Monitoring Station

wq2

STATION 2

Water Quali ty Stat ions

Inlet Bathymetric Monitoring

Avian and Vegetation Study Boundary

0100 200 400 600 800 Meters

Monitoring stations Figure 1-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

should be noted that the aerial photography used for digitizing are not true orthophotos. As a result, the geographical position of features interpreted from the georeferenced aerial photos may change slightly from year to year. Therefore, small variations in habitat acreage (<0.1 hectare) over the course of the project are often within the range of expecting mapping error and should not be treated as a true habitat loss or gain. Future mapping efforts will examine habitat change relative to spatial and numeric parameters reported here. Aerial imagery was also collected in non-monitoring years for future reference if needed: Year 4 (2010), Year 6 (2012), and Year 7 (2013). Eelgrass (Zostera marina) was introduced into the FTB through a transplant conducted by M&A in August 2007. Eelgrass was harvested from the Cabrillo Beach region of the Port of Los Angeles and transplanted to 15 sites in the FTB in 45mx5m blocks. A total of 0.4 ha (0.9 acre) of eelgrass was transplanted. The distribution of eelgrass has been mapped in subsequent years utilizing a separate methodology from the vegetation mapping described above. The FTB was surveyed for eelgrass on June 27, 2011 from a vessel equipped with a sidescan sonar operating at 600 kHz, scanning out 20 meters (m) on both the starboard and port channels to cover a 40-m wide swath. Following completion of the survey, sidescan sonar traces were geographically registered, plotted on the georeferenced aerial image described above, and the eelgrass digitized to calculate the amount of coverage and show its distribution. Cordgrass (Spartina foliosa) harvested from upper Newport Bay was transplanted by M&A, along with resource agency and community volunteers, into the FTB on August 21 and 22, 2007. It was planted as both plugs (consisting of stems along with native sediment) and as bundles of individual bare-root stems. The cordgrass was planted in 45 m x 5 m blocks at 14 sites along the northeastern and western shore of the FTB, including Rabbit Island. A total of 0.3 ha (0.7 acre) of cordgrass was transplanted. An additional small transplant of cordgrass was undertaken in November 2009. Cordgrass was salvaged prior to dredging activities at Upper Newport Bay, brought to Bolsa Chica, bundled into units of three to eight bare root shoots, and transplanted onto unvegetated mudflats in the west and central MTBs. Approximately 270 units were planted in the west MTB (10 in Cell 50 and 260 around the water control structure in Cell 49) and 27 units were planted in the central MTB in the vicinity of the water control structure (Cell 42). The area planted totaled approximately 286 m2. This transplant was completed subsequent to the current monitoring activities; however, this cordgrass will be tracked in future assessments. The Year 5 (2011) cordgrass survey was conducted on October 6, 2011 by walking the perimeter of the cordgrass patches at each 2007 transplant site with a hand-held differential GPS (DGPS) unit. Groups of plants that were less than one meter apart were mapped as a single patch. Plants more than one meter from other plants were mapped individually. In addition to habitat mapping, some growth data were collected for the cordgrass transplants. The height of growing shoots was measured at five locations within each site (excluding flowers) and the number of shoots growing within five randomly placed 1-m2 quadrats was counted at each site. Quadrats that fell within a bare spot between plants mapped as a patch were recorded as zeros and factored into the site average. A photo of each cordgrass transplant site was taken generally from the west end of each transplant transect looking roughly eastward. A review of these photos in comparison to those collected in August 2008 and August 2009 has revealed that their presentation in this report would provide limited additional understanding of the status of the

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 21 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

cordgrass. Therefore the photos have been archived in the digital project file and will be revisited in future monitoring years. Salt Marsh Transect Monitoring Nineteen permanent vegetation transects were established in four survey areas at Bolsa Chica in 2008 during the Year 2 monitoring: three at Rabbit Island, four on the east and north shore of the FTB, three in the west MTB, three in the central MTB, three in the east MTB, and 3 in the Muted Pocket Marsh (Figure 1-2). The 50-m transects were positioned to characterize a range of elevations within the marsh and the endpoints each marked with labeled stakes and recorded using a dGPS. The coordinates for the transect endpoints are listed in Appendix 1-A. On September 28 and 29, and October 6, 2011, each transect was relocated and surveyed by stretching a fiberglass measuring tape between the stakes and using a line-intercept method to document the percent cover of plant species and bare ground/open water. The presence of individual plant species was recorded for each meter along the 50-m transect, including a notation of which species was dominant if there were multiple species. Plants and bare ground/open water were recorded only if a part of the plant or bare space fell underneath the vertical plane of the measuring tape. Additionally, a list of all species observed on each transect within one meter on either side of the transect was recorded. The canopy height was recorded at five points randomly selected along each transect and a photograph of each transect was taken from a fixed point to allow direct non-quantitative comparison of change over time as repeat photos are taken in subsequent years. The collected data were assessed to determine the percent cover of native and non-native species, both with and without overlap, on each transect within each survey area. The presence of multiple species within the plant canopy often resulted in the total percent cover exceeding 100%. The percent cover excluding overlap was determined by considering only the dominant plant species for each transect. Results Habitat Mapping The aerial photographs collected in 2010 (Year 4) and 2011 (Year 5) continued to reveal the large-scale changes in habitats that had occurred since the first photo was taken in 2007, particularly in the MTB region. The single spot aerials are presented in Appendix 1-B along with each prior annual aerial and two collected in the subsequent two years (2007-2013) for comparison. Eleven vegetated and seven non-vegetated habitats were mapped within the 402-ha (994-acre) study area in 2011. Vegetated habitats included southern coastal salt marsh, disturbed coastal salt marsh, cordgrass, mule fat scrub, coastal sage scrub, coastal and valley freshwater marsh, southern arroyo willow riparian forest, eelgrass, decaying/transitional vegetation, non-native vegetation, and coastal dune. Although cordgrass is a component of southern coastal salt marsh, it was mapped separately to track its spread throughout the site. Non-vegetated habitats included salt panne, disturbed salt panne, intertidal sand shoal, intertidal mudflat, open water, unvegetated nest site, and urban/developed. Figure 1-3 presents the habitat distribution, and Table 1-1 summarizes the acreage of each.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 22 05-162-02

Vegetation Monitoring Transects

WMTB 2 West Muted

MPM 3 Tidal Basin

Muted Pocket Marsh WMTB 3 MPM 2 MPM 1 WMTB 1 FTB North

Central Muted Tidal Basin

CMTB 1 East Muted RI 2 CMTB 2 Tidal Basin

EMTB 2 FTB E3

Rabbit CMTB 3 Island EMTB 3 RI 1

RI 3 FTB E2 EMTB 1

FTB E1

Full Tidal Basin

0 100 200 400 600 Meters

Vegetation monitoring transect locations Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Figure 1-2

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 05250 001,000 Meters

Habitat Map Southern coastal salt marsh Disturbed southern coastal salt marsh Cordgrass Mule fat scrub Coastal sage scrub Coastal and valley freshwater marsh Southern arroyo willow riparian forest Eelgrass Decaying/transitional vegetation Non-native vegetation Salt panne Disturbed salt panne Intertidal sand shoal Intertidal mudflat Open water Unvegetated nest site Urban/developed

Habitat map - August 2011 Figure 1-3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-1. Area of habitats within the Bolsa Chica study area (August 2011). Habitat Hectares Acres Southern coastal salt marsh 72.6 179.5 Disturbed southern coastal salt marsh* 3.9 9.5 Cordgrass* 0.1 0.2 Mule fat scrub 0.1 0.2 Coastal sage scrub 0.3 0.7 Coastal and valley freshwater marsh 3.2 7.9 Southern arroyo willow riparian forest 0.3 0.8 Eelgrass* 42.7 105.4 Decaying/transitional vegetation* 10.8 26.7 Non-native vegetation 8.3 20.5 Salt panne* 58.2 143.7 Disturbed salt panne* 11.31 28.0 Coastal dune* <0.1 (0.04) 0.1 Intertidal sand shoal* 0.5 1.2 Intertidal mudflat* 29.8 73.6 Open water 106.1 262.3 Unvegetated nest site* 6.0 14.8 Urban/developed 47.7 118.0 *Additional non-Holland habitat codes used to further break out biologically relevant species or habitat types.

Southern Coastal Salt Marsh While the majority of the habitat within Bolsa Chica can be considered southern coastal salt marsh, much of it is not truly intertidal marsh: one that experiences regular tidal seawater influence. Therefore, recognizable zonation of the salt marsh is not present at much of the site. Species that are tolerant of highly saline soils continue to persist and dominate the flora in these non-tidal areas (Seasonal Ponds, FFTB, and central and east MTBs). This relictual marsh is almost entirely composed of large expanses of pickleweed (Sarcocornia pacifica and Arthrocnemum subterminale). The pickleweed quality varies throughout the site from tall and robust, to short in stature and desiccated. Other species common in the salt marsh in low densities include: salt grass (Distichlis spicata), saltwort (Batis maritima), and alkali heath (Frankenia salina). The majority of the southern coastal salt marsh habitat within Bolsa Chica is of moderate quality based on its expansive nature, isolation from human disturbance, and limited infestation by exotic and upland species. There is low plant diversity within this habitat due to no or limited tidal flushing, hypersaline sediment conditions, and/or the environmental extremes of wet and dry seasons and years. More functional coastal salt marsh habitat is now present in the FTB (on Rabbit Island) and Muted Pocket Marsh (MPM), both of which received daily tidal flushing following the restoration completion in 2006. Plant diversity in the MPM is notably higher than the other salt

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 25 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

marsh areas of the restoration area, intrusion by non-native species is limited, and it has well- developed tidal channels that provide enough circulation to limit the extent of algal mats on the surface. The salt marsh on Rabbit Island is thriving at elevations receiving regular tidal inundation, but is limited from upward expansion in some areas by the persistence of hottentot fig (Carpobrotus edulis) above the high tide line. Sparse coastal salt marsh has become established at the base of the riprap along the cordgrass bench in the FTB and on the shorelines across from Rabbit Island. The west MTB has been mostly open to tidal influence from the FTB since March 2008, with the salt marsh receiving daily tidal flushing for the first time in many decades. This resulted in the inundation of large areas of pickleweed for some or nearly all of each day. The tidal ranges achieved in the west MTB are narrow and inconsistent due to poor drainage in the FTB and concerns by Orange County Vector Control about exposed mudflats, which are a source of mosquitoes in the area. In some areas the inundation frequency was greater than the tolerance of the pickleweed and those areas converted to open water or mudflat, resulting in a notable reduction in the extent of salt marsh in the west MTB. Areas where the salt marsh had died, but not fully decomposed to expose mudflat or open water, were mapped as decaying/transitional vegetation. The water control structures in the central and east MTBs are unable to provide muted tidal conditions to these basins due to the muting problems in the FTB. The basins fill with freshwater from rainfall and with salt water that leaks in through the gates of the water control structures, and cannot be readily drained out. The basins are often ponded for extended periods of time and as a result large areas of pickleweed have died and were mapped as decaying/transitional vegetation, or had fully converted to open water following decomposition of the plant material. Efforts are under way to establish greater control over water levels through the installation of culverts connecting the basins to Freeman Creek and installation of a permanent pump to drain Freeman Creek to the FTB. Disturbed Southern Coastal Salt Marsh This habitat category was used to distinguish areas of southern coastal salt marsh that were degraded due primarily to disturbance by heavy equipment and vehicles associated with both the construction elements of the restoration program and the on-going contamination remediation activities within the oil field. This category was also used for the unvegetated sidecast piles of sediment placed on either side of the channels that were dug out of the marsh as part of the restoration of the MTBs. The amount of disturbed salt marsh was reduced from 7.1 ha in 2008 to 2.9 ha in 2009 primarily through the establishment of Disturbed coastal salt marsh (tire tracks) in salt marsh pickleweed at the base of the sidecast mounds from mapped as decaying/transitional vegetation. channel construction within the MTBs. In 2011, the extent of disturbed salt marsh rose to 3.9 ha.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 26 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Cordgrass In August 2007, cordgrass salvaged from Upper Newport Bay was transplanted to fourteen locations in the FTB covering an area of 0.3 ha. During the first year post-transplant (2008), the persisting plants covered 196 m2. In August 2009, the cordgrass increased in coverage by 90% from 2008 to approximately 366 m2, with cordgrass persisting at 10 of the 14 transplant sites. An additional small transplant of cordgrass from Upper Newport Bay was made into the west and central MTBs Cordgrass expansion in the Full Tidal Basin 2009 in 2009. While some of the transplanted plants continue to survive in this transplant area, the transplant itself has met with only limited success due to the highly muted conditions of the site and inconsistent opening of the MTBs to tidal circulation. In October 2011, FTB cordgrass at the transplant sites covered 765 m2. This did not include small patches of cordgrass that have established by seed along the west shoreline of the FTB across from Rabbit Island, nor the cordgrass transplanted into the MTBs in 2009, which persists only in the West MTB. The cordgrass had expanded outside of the original transplant area at many locations and was observed to be denser and taller than in prior years. Cordgrass at all sites was flowering, with seeds seen scattered on the mudflat around the plants. In 2011, the shoot density ranged from 48 to 808 shoots/m2, with a mean of 300 shoots/m2 (the mean shoot density in 2009 was 72 shoots/m2 and 23 shoots/m2 in 2008). The canopy height ranged from 15 to 121 cm, with a mean of 63 cm. The mean height in 2009 was 46 cm, and 52 cm in 2008. Two additional transplant sites were lost between 2009 and 2011, with only eight of the original fourteen remaining and three new locations having emerged from recruitment of seed from the initial plantings. The failed transplant sites were generally located at elevations that experience longer inundation periods than anticipated, due to the muting in the FTB (loss of low tides below approximately +0.4 m NAVD). On the east side of the basin, the cordgrass was weighed down by mats of the green alga Enteromorpha sp. and bent over by the chronic strong winds that occur there. As in prior years, at nearly all transplant sites there was evidence of browsing by geese (footprints and droppings), with a portion of the cordgrass sheared off at ground level. It is assumed from observations during other survey work that Canada geese (Branta canadensis), which commonly eat cordgrass, were the grazers. Although there was a considerable loss of cordgrass leaves at some sites (sometimes as much as half of the cordgrass), it is anticipated that impacts from grazing geese will be less detrimental to the overall coverage in the future as the cordgrass continues to expand. Mule Fat Scrub Mule fat scrub occurs primarily in the southeast portion of the Seasonal Ponds, where perennial freshwater input supports several freshwater vegetation communities, and sporadically along the eastern boundaries of the study area near other sources of freshwater. This habitat is nearly

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 27 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

monotypic mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia) and is mapped in such limited areas that it is not visible on the habitat map. This habitat area has not been a significant habitat element within the wetland complex over time, with only about 0.1 ha of mule fat scrub being represented. Coastal Sage Scrub Coastal sage scrub occurring within the project site is Baccharis scrub, composed almost entirely of coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), Emory’s baccharis (Baccharis emoryi), and various non- native weeds such as radish (Raphanus sativus) and black mustard (Brassica nigra). Baccharis scrub is a sub-class of coastal sage scrub that is generally almost entirely dominated by coyote brush and is typically indicative of greater soil disturbance, higher moisture levels, and/or sandier soils. This vegetation occurs near the more highly disturbed eastern boundary of the wetland complex; however it was mapped in such limited areas that it is not visible on the habitat map. Totaling less than one acre in area over the past several years, this habitat is not a major component on the site. Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh A few small areas of coastal and valley freshwater marsh were mapped in the southeast corner of the seasonal ponds. The freshwater marsh is composed primarily of broad-leaved cattail (Typha latifolia) and narrow-leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia), with occasional California bulrush (Scirpus californicus) and prairie bulrush (Scirpus robustus) nearby. The components of marsh species within this wetland are indicative of variables seasonal salinity levels as well as brackish conditions of the water and soil. These small freshwater marshes persist on the margins of the coastal salt marsh due to perennial freshwater input as both surface runoff and groundwater seepage from adjacent lands. The marsh extent has been very consistent through the most recent mapping in 2011, though observations made in the field during 2012 and 2013 reveal a significant expansion of freshwater marsh in the Seasonal Ponds, primarily Cell 11, due to an increase in perennial freshwater from an unknown source. Southern Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest A single mature stand of arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) occurs adjacent to the freshwater marsh and mule fat scrub in the southeastern portion of the Seasonal Ponds. This willow stand receives high amounts of seepage from the adjacent bluff as well as surface runoff sources and has a small drainage running through it out onto the salt panne of Cell 11. The extent of this riparian habitat was nearly the same in all mapping efforts (2008, 2009, and 2011). Eelgrass Following the 2007 transplant of 0.4 ha (0.9 acre) of eelgrass at multiple sites the FTB, this shallow productive habitat expanded to 0.8 ha (2.0 acres) in 2008, 13.1 ha (35.5 acres) acres by June 2009, and 42.7 ha (105.4 acres) by June 2011 (Figure 1-3). Eelgrass had spread to cover the central portion of the FTB. In the inner northern portion of the basin eelgrass is concentrated along the shoreline and within the vicinity of the original transplant locations. It is unlikely that eelgrass will expand substantially into the highly dynamic inlet area at the southern end of the FTB where rapidly accumulating and shifting Eelgrass beds in the shallows of the FTB. sands discourage the establishment of seedlings.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 28 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Decaying/Transitional Vegetation This habitat was used to describe transitional vegetation communities exhibiting the effects of exposure to saltwater or inundation for extended periods of time. This has included rampikes of dead eucalyptus and Myoporum trees that ring the Muted Pocket Marsh, but primarily includes acres of decaying/transitional coastal salt marsh (dominated by pickleweed) in the MTBs and Seasonal Ponds. There has been a significant increase in area of this habitat since the 2008 survey when only 1.0 ha (2.4 acres) was present, to the 2009 and 2011 surveys when this Decaying coastal salt marsh in the MTBs. habitat accounted for 9.1 ha (22.5 acres) and 10.8 ha (26.7 acres), respectively. This significant increase in area is predominantly associated with the increased inundation of marsh habitat in the FTB and MTBs as a result of tidal muting in the FTB. Non-Native Vegetation Non-native vegetation is primarily mapped on the eastern boundaries of the study area in association with various oil field operations and staging areas, as well as residential areas that contribute escaped landscape plantings and on least tern nest sites. Along the disturbed eastern boundary of the site, common species include: radish, black mustard, castor-bean (Ricinus communis), myoporum (Myoporum laetum), hottentot fig, and tumbleweed (Amaranthus albus). The areas immediately adjacent to the roads bordering the marshes supported a narrow mix of roadside weeds and a few native species such as goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii). Unless these weed bands were more than about 3 m wide and monotypically non-native, these roadside areas were not called out as a distinct habitat. Rather, they were included as either the coastal salt marsh they were mixed with or the urban/developed road, as appropriate. Hottentot fig is the most prolific and aggressive of the roadside weeds and has been since prior to commencement of restoration. Weeds on nest sites, particularly Nest Site 1, continue to be a concern with the expansion of primarily slender-leaved iceplant (Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum) expanding to levels that have precluded full site use by several tern species. Control efforts have been undertake by CDFW in recent years, contributing to the reduction of non-native vegetation by 2.5 ha (6.2 acres) between 2009 and 2011. Salt Panne The habitat covering the third largest area within the study area was unvegetated salt panne, primarily in the Seasonal Ponds and Future Full Tidal Basin areas. These areas had historically been intermittently inundated by seawater for duck hunting, but are now inundated intermittently by primarily freshwater that drains into the wetlands from the surrounding uplands. These low permeability areas collect water during rainy months, and later dry by evaporation as conditions become warmer in spring and summer months. This leaves hypersaline and highly reduced soils that are inhospitable to most plants. Although pickleweed has colonized much of the salt panne margins and elevated hummocks, the areas that are lowest in elevation and that pool water for extended periods remain unvegetated.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 29 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

In the MTBs, salt panne converted to coastal salt marsh following the introduction of marine waters from the FTB. There was a slight reduction in salt panne from 2008 to 2009 and a much larger reduction between 2009 and 2011, when approximately 15 ha (38 acres) of this habitat was converted to disturbed salt panne, decaying/transitional vegetation, and open water as inundation levels increased in 2011. Disturbed Salt Panne Due to the use of the salt panne habitat by various migratory birds, including nesting western snowy plovers, it is relevant to call out large areas of salt panne that are disturbed. Generally, these areas are previously flat expanses that have been traversed by various trucks and equipment, primarily for contaminated sediment removal work. When disturbed during wet periods, this activity leaves the ground deeply rutted, less desirable to foraging

and nesting birds, and of some concern in relation to Disturbed salt panne in the Seasonal Ponds. harboring pests such as mosquitoes into the summer season. Disturbed salt panne increased in area slightly since 2008, but made up only 4% of the total salt panne area in 2009. However, in 2011, disturbed salt panne made up over 16 percent of all of the salt panne, due to increased disturbance from the contaminated soil cleanup work under way. Intertidal Sand Shoal This category refers to the depositional flood shoal present in the FTB inlet. The shoal is comprised of unvegetated and unconsolidated sand that can be highly transitory in nature as the shoal is in a chronic state of being accreted and reworked by the tides and waves. The mapped extent of this shoal is dependent on the tidal elevation at the time of the aerial imagery collection coupled with the time elapsed from the last dredging event. The mapped shoal was much smaller in 2009 than 2008 due to the recent completion of the maintenance dredging in early 2009, and was very small in 2011 following the completion of the 2011 dredging. A more comprehensive assessment shoaling is included in the bathymetric monitoring section of this report. Intertidal Mudflat This habitat included the unvegetated intertidal mudflats occurring below elevations at which vascular plant communities occur. This habitat occurred primarily on the borders of the FTB, in portions of the Muted Pocket Marsh, and at the lower elevations of Rabbit Island where inundated salt marsh transitioned to mudflat after the opening of the inlet. Although the cordgrass bench on the east shore of the FTB is above the typical intertidal mudflat zone, it is also mapped as intertidal mudflat until such time as marsh vegetation develops. The decline in mudflat is principally the result of the conversion of mudflat to subtidal open water as FTB water levels increase due to tidal muting. Open Water Open water habitat included all tidally submerged areas at the time of the aerial survey. It also includes all permanently inundated areas within the MTBs, Freeman Creek, and Pocket Marsh. Standing water in the Seasonal Ponds and FFTB areas were mapped as salt panne in consideration of their underlying, persistent substrate, and recognition that the inundated condition of these basins is a matter of seasonal water balance. Open water habitat covered the greatest acreage in 2009, due to commencement of substantial muting in the FTB and prior to the

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 30 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

major expansion of eelgrass that draws almost exclusively from the open water habitat category. When adding the eelgrass and open water areas together, it is easy to see that since the earliest monitoring of the wetland complex in 2007 at 89.3 ha (220.7 acres), inundated area has increased by more than 66 percent to 148.8 ha (367.7 acres). It is important to note that part of this change can be explained purely by the specific timing of the aerial flight relative to the lowest tidal conditions. However, as the muting of the system has become more pronounced, there is less variability in water levels relative to actual photographic timing. Unvegetated Nest Site This habitat includes Nest Sites 1, 2, & 3. They are topped with sand and groomed to appeal to targeted sensitive avian species that nest on such sites. Portions of the nest sites that had non- native vegetation growing at a high enough density to preclude nesting by the targeted avian species were excluded from the total nest site area calculations and mapped instead as non-native vegetation. Therefore the total area of Nest Site available in 2009 was 9% less than in 2008 and in 2011, the nest site area available was more than 24 percent reduced from the condition in 2008. While the overall nesting area has been reduced, the quality of the remaining areas has generally been increased by an aggressive management effort conducted by the CDFW. Urban/Developed The areas designated as urban/developed were comprised of paved streets, paved and unpaved oil field roadways, berm roads, recreational paths, oil pads, or highly disturbed areas adjacent to the residential neighborhoods or related to oil field operations and contamination remediation. Over time this habitat area has been reduced as the original wetland restoration scarring has healed and remediation activities have been reduced over time. Salt Marsh Transect Monitoring The results of the 2011 Year 5 transect monitoring are presented in Table 1-2. At the bottom of the table is a summary of the percent vegetative cover on each transect, disregarding any overlap of species, for all vegetation and for native species only. Summaries are also provided for native and non-native species, accounting for overlapping species within the transects. An objective of the vegetation monitoring is documenting the change in vegetation communities over time, therefore the results of the 2008 Year 2 transect monitoring are provided in Table 1-3 for comparison. Figure 1-4 presents the mean percent cover (without overlap) of native salt marsh vegetation for each of the survey areas. Algae and marine plants (only present in the FTB) have been excluded in the figure. The MPM transects were established two years after completion of the restoration work, which introduced muted tidal influence to the marsh in 2006. Unlike the other survey areas, there were no additional modifications to the habitat, therefore the transects in the MPM were expected to undergo limited change in subsequent years. In Year 5 (2011), the transects were vegetated similarly to how they were in Year 2 (2008). Mean salt marsh coverage increased from 65% to 75% through the expansion of marsh onto previously unvegetated mudflat, while coverage by non-native species remained below 1% in both years (Figure 1-4). The MPM continued to be the most diverse of the survey areas, with ten salt marsh species identified within the 1-m band on either side of the transects.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 31 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-2. Vegetation transect monitoring results in Year 5 (2011). Plant Species Observed Along Transects Percent Cover

Scientific Name Common Name RI 1 RI 2 RI 3 FTB N FTB E1 FTB E2 FTB E3 WMTB 1 WMTB 2 WMTB 3 CMTB 1 CMTB 2 CMTB 3 EMTB 1 EMTB 2 EMTB 3 MPM 1 MPM 2 MPM 3 Native Species

Sarcocornia pacifica Pacific pickleweed 22 46 30 8 82 24 2 20 64 50 58 37 52 36 30 Arthrocnemum subterminale Parish’s pickleweed ++6 8 Salicornia bigelovii Bigelow's pickleweed ++

Distichlis spicata Saltgrass 32 20 44 18 2 2 2 Frankenia salina Alkali heath 12 30 14 + 44 14 32

Monanthochloe littoralis Shoregrass 424 812 Cressa truxillensis Alkali weed + 6 Suaeda esteroa Estuary seablite + 22

Batis maritima Saltwort 78 36 6 Limonium californicum Western marsh rosemary +

Juncus acutus ssp. leopoldii Southwestern spiny rush 2 4

Atriplex canescens var. canescens Four wing saltbush 14

Heliotropium curassavicum Salt heliotrope 4 Lotus scoparius Deerweed +

Ruppia maritima Wigeon grass 16 88 66 12 Zostera marina Eelgrass 2 + Enteromorpha sp. (alga) Sea lettuce + Class Rhodophyta Foliose red algae + 80 66 Family Gracilariacea Gracilariod red algae +

Non-native Species Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum Slender-leaved iceplant ++

Bassia hyssopifolia Five hook bassia 22 2

Carpobrotus edulis Hottentot-fig 2

Dead plant debris 16 8 4 620 2

Bare construction sidecast 6

Open water 12 76 98 80 26 12 32 2 32 42 Bare ground /mudflat 32 6 4 88 82 12 34 2 2 16 4 54

Total Percent Vegetative Cover Without Overlap (all species) 52 86 100 8 18 88 66 86 24 2 20 66 52 58 37 100 68 70

Total Percent Native Vegetative Cover Without Overlap 52 86 98 8 18 88 66 84 24 2 20 66 50 58 37 98 68 70

Total Percent Native Vegetative Cover With Overlap 70 104 98 8 18 168 132 100 24 4 20 66 50 58 37 190 108 86 Total Percent Non-native Vegetative Cover With Overlap 0020000200002 00200

Total Number of Native Species within 1 m of Transect 5951143311121 12866 Total Number of Non-native Species within 1 m of Transect 0010000000002 00100

Mean Canopy Height (cm) 21 44 28 18 18 NC NC 47 32 7 40 40 29 35 18 43 45 55 Merkel & Associates, Inc. 32 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-3. Vegetation transect monitoring results in Year 2 (2008). Plant Species Observed Along Transects Percent Cover

Scientific Name Common Name RI 1 RI 2 RI 3 FTB N FTB E1 FTB E2 FTB E3 WMTB 1 WMTB 2 WMTB 3 CMTB 1 CMTB 2 CMTB 3 EMTB 1 EMTB 2 EMTB 3 MPM 1 MPM 2 MPM 3 Native Species

Sarcocornia pacifica Pacific pickleweed 14 50 32 10 8 100 36 88 48 76 28 82 74 42 16 4

Arthrocnemum subterminale Parish’s pickleweed 228

Distichlis spicata Saltgrass 26 4 26 58 6 76 14 6 4 4

Frankenia salina Alkali heath 26 2 104 4 8 34424

Monanthochloe littoralis Shoregrass 14

Cressa truxillensis Alkali weed 12 18 4

Suaeda esteroa Estuary seablite 12 4

Batis maritima Saltwort 26 12 2

Limonium californicum Western marsh rosemary 2

Juncus acutus ssp. leopoldii Southwestern spiny rush 6 2

Atriplex prostrata Spearscale 2

Atriplex canescens var. canescens Four wing saltbush 12

Ruppia maritima Wigeon grass 18 26 36

Enteromorpha sp. (alga) Sea lettuce 26

Non-native Species

Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum Slender-leaved iceplant 16 2 18 4 8

Bassia hyssopifolia Five hook bassia 18 12 12 8 2 2

Salsola tragus Russian thistle 4

Carpobrotus edulis Hottentot-fig 12 6 66

Polypogon monspeliensis Annual beard grass 62

Bromus madritensis rubens Red brome 2

Dead plant debris 14 2 14 14 10 4 4 8 18

Bare construction sidecast 812108

Open water 44234 Bare ground /mudflat 30 18 10 90 82 72 58 2 32 46 2 6 16 14

Total Percent Vegetative Cover Without Overlap (all species) 58 80 76 10 18 28 42 82 100 94 100 58 88 34 88 84 100 42 34

Total Percent Native Vegetative Cover Without Overlap 46 58 62 10 18 28 42 56 100 94 90 52 66 30 88 76 30 88 76

Total Percent Native Vegetative Cover With Overlap 50 62 78 10 18 28 42 68 106 124 106 54 80 32 102 92 124 46 36 Total Percent Non-native Vegetative Cover With Overlap 1222180000280018826408200

Total Number of Native Species within 1 m of Transect 5651122434323233966 Total Number of Non-native Species within 1 m of Transect 2320000400564122100

Mean Canopy Height (cm) 26 44 N/C 28 0 0 0 36 25 52 45 50 33 26 46 22 41 30 25

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 33 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

100

Year 2 - 2008 80 Year 5 - 2011

20 Mean % salt marsh cover saltMean marsh % 0 Rabbit Island Full Tidal Basin West MTB Central MTB East MTB Muted Pocket Mar s h Figure 1-4. Mean percent cover (without overlap) of salt marsh vegetation by survey area in Years 2 and 5.

The MTB transects had undergone greater change between Years 2 and 5 (Figure 1-4). In the west MTB, mean salt marsh coverage decreased from 83% to 37% salt marsh cover, with one transect losing all but 2% of the 94% cover that was present in Year 2 (see transect photos in Appendix 1-C). This was a result of the increased inundation of the west MTB in the years since it was opened to muted tidal influence from the FTB. Tidal influence was introduced in March 2008, roughly 6 months prior to the Year 2 transect monitoring. At that time salt marsh persisted on the transects due to the shorter, more natural, inundation periods experienced by the marsh in the early months of the water control structure’s opening. In the following years, the impaired tidal functioning of the west MTB resulted in longer or permanent periods of inundation that converted salt marsh to open water. In both years, the WMTB marsh had low diversity, supporting only S. pacifica and occasional D. spicata near the transects. The central MTB salt marsh decreased from 69% to 45% salt marsh cover from Year 2 to 5, with similar declines seen in the east MTB (82% reduced to 48% salt marsh cover). These basins were periodically open to tidal waters of the FTB in Years 3 to 5, but did not experience diurnal tidal fluctuations and remained primarily ponded throughout the year, with periods of higher or lower water depending on rain events or intentional water management efforts. Much of the salt marsh was converted to open water as a result (see photos in Appendix 1-C). During the Year 5 survey it was not possible to reach Transect east MTB1 due to its complete isolation by open water. Comparisons between Years 2 and 5 have removed that transect from calculations. In the CMTB the number of native species was reduced from three to two with the loss of Frankenia salina from the transects (Table 1-2). In the east MTB the number of native marsh species dropped from four to one. Introduction of marine waters also resulted in the decline of non- native weed species from five to two across the central MTB and east MTB between Years 2 and 5. The FTB transects are all located on the mudflats of the north and east shore of the basin (Figure 1-2). Tidal muting in the basin resulted in a rising mean water level since the restoration completion, despite maintenance dredging, with the mudflats at lower elevations inundated due to the loss of low tides below about +0.4 m NAVD. Therefore salt marsh failed to develop on

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 34 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

these transects, with low intertidal species such as eelgrass, wigeon grass, and various algae becoming established instead (Table 1-2). Rabbit Island is also located in the FTB (Figure 0-1). The Year 5 monitoring continued to document the process under way during the Year 2 monitoring: the conversion of previously upland, non-native habitat to salt marsh following introduction of tidal influence to the FTB in 2006. Large expanses of iceplant killed by salt water or herbicide treatments had been completely covered over by D. spicata and, in sandier dune areas, by Abronia maritima. On the transects, mean salt marsh cover between Years 2 and 5 increased from 55% to 79% (Figure 1- 4). The number of native species increased from six to nine along the transects, with non-native species dropping from three to one. Also of note, though not captured in the transect monitoring, was the persistence of the rare coastal dune plant coast woolly heads (Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata) on Rabbit Island. A comprehensive survey for this species was not conducted, however an assessment conducted by M&A in September 2010 estimated the presence of 964 plants. The survey was performed as part of a subsequent iceplant control effort that killed roughly 3.6 acres of iceplant. Continued active management of the high sandy portions of Rabbit Island will be critical to the survival of woolly heads at Bolsa Chica. The photos taken at each of the nineteen transects in Years 2 (2008) and 5 (2011) are presented side by side in Appendix 1-C. Discussion The most notable trends in habitat distribution observed between earlier monitoring and the 2011 (Year 5) monitoring were the continuing shifts in the proportions of open water and salt marsh in the MTBs, the expansion of eelgrass and cordgrass in the FTB, and the expansion of non-native weeds on the avian nesting sites. These observations are discussed in detail below. Figure 1-5 presents the 2008 (Year 2), 2009 (Year 3), and 2011 (Year 5) habitat maps together for comparison. The 2011 habitat mapping documented the continued conversion of MPM and MTB salt marsh to open water, a process that began in 2006 with introduction of tidal influence to the MPM and in 2008 with the opening of the west MTB to tidal influence. Some degree of salt marsh loss was anticipated, as salt marsh habitat at the lowest elevations experienced prolonged or permanent inundation periods. By 2011 the MPM supported less than half (1.9 ha) as much salt marsh as it did in 2008 (4.6 ha). It is expected that the MPM has reached equilibrium and will show minimal further losses of salt marsh in the coming years. With the impaired functioning of the MTBs, salt marsh at all but the highest elevations gradually died, first leaving the skeletons of the plants (mapped as decaying/transitional vegetation), and eventually turning to open water. Mudflat is exposed occasionally when favorable tidal conditions allow for some drainage of the basins, or during dry periods when evaporation brings down the water levels (primarily in the central and east MTBs, which are generally not open to tidal influence). These habitat shifts in the MPM and MTBs can be seen in the annual aerial imagery (Appendix 1-B) and the comparison of 2008, 2009, and 2011 habitat maps in Figure 1-5. The site-wide decrease in coastal salt marsh and increase in decaying/transitional vegetation seen in Table 1-4 is attributable primarily to this transition effect in the MTBs.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 35 2008 2009 2011

Southern coastal salt marsh Coastal sage scrub Decaying/transitional vegetation Intertidal sand shoal Urban/developed Disturbed southern coastal salt marsh Coastal and valley freshwater marsh Non-native vegetation Intertidal mudflat Cordgrass Southern arroyo willow riparian forest Salt panne Open water Mule fat scrub Eelgrass Disturbed salt panne Unvegetated nest site

Comparison of habitat distributions between May 2008, July 2009, and August 2011 Figure 1-5 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-4. Area (hectares) of select habitats in 2008, 2009, and 2011 (entire site). Habitat 2008 2009 2011 Southern coastal salt marsh 92.0 76.5 72.6 Disturbed southern coastal salt marsh 7.1 2.9 3.9 Cordgrass <0.1 (196 m2) <0.1 (366 m2) 0.1 (765 m2) Eelgrass 0.8 13.1 42.7 Decaying/transitional vegetation 1.0 9.1 10.8 Non-native vegetation 10.3 10.8 8.3 Unvegetated nest site 7.9 7.2 6.0

The MTB design process anticipated the observed transition from broad expanses of isolated, non-tidal pickleweed to a more functional tidal marsh, with a mix of open water channels, intertidal mudflat, and coastal salt marsh. The exact proportions of those habitats were difficult to precisely predict, with only computer models available to anticipate the final hydrologic conditions and resulting habitat distributions. The final design of the MTBs anticipated they could support approximately 51.1 ha (126.3 acres) of coastal salt marsh. In 2008 the three MTBs had a total of 49.8 ha (122.9 acres) of coastal salt marsh and disturbed coastal salt marsh. In 2009 the three MTBs had a total of 36.9 ha (91.2 acres), and in 2011 the MTB total was 25.9 ha (64.1 acres) of coastal salt marsh and disturbed coastal salt marsh. Conversely the remaining salt marsh plants show the enhanced vigor anticipated with restoration of muted tidal influence. This reduction in salt marsh was mirrored by an increase in open water beginning in 2008, once the west MTB was open and the central and east MTBs had begun ponding water (Figure 1-5). The amount of open water in 2008, 2009, and 2011 in the MTBs totaled 8.4 ha (20.7 acres), 13.8 ha (34.2 acres), and 31.0 ha (76.6 acres), respectively. When evaluating the functionality of the MTB marsh in light of the possible shortfall of coastal salt marsh coverage, it is important to recall that a central goal of the MTB creation was to provide ample nesting habitat for the state endangered Belding’s Savannah sparrow, which nests exclusively in coastal salt marsh, primarily pickleweed. The use of the MTBs by breeding Belding’s Savannah sparrows is discussed in detail in a later chapter of this document, however it is useful to consider here an excerpt from those survey results as the quality and health of the MTB salt marsh are considered. Consecutive years of breeding season surveys for Belding’s Savannah sparrow have documented increased breeding territories in the MTBs since the early post-restoration commencement of surveys. In each following year, despite the increased inundation and continued conversion of some nesting habitat to open water, the number of breeding territories in the MTBs markedly rose or remained fairly stable. These observations are discussed further in the avian section of this report, however the results suggest that the continued use and expansion of territories within the MTBs in the face of declining habitat area, and while suitable habitat elsewhere in the reserve remains unoccupied, show specific selection of the MTBs by breeding Belding’s Savannah sparrows. The FTB was designed to eventually support 7.7 ha (19.1 acres) of pickleweed. In 2009, approximately 7.0 ha (17.3 acres) of coastal salt marsh were present in the basin, including Rabbit Island. This expanded to 8.2 ha (20.3 acres) by 2011, due primarily to salt marsh development on the shorelines around Rabbit Island and the colonization of large areas of herbicide-treated non-native hottentot fig (iceplant) by salt grass (D. spicata), also on Rabbit

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 37 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Island. Treatment of the remaining acreage of iceplant there holds the greatest opportunity for gains in salt marsh coverage in the FTB. Salt marsh is not expected to become established elsewhere in the FTB except in a few limited high elevation areas. There are multiple management actions that have been taken or are under way throughout the site to improve the condition of coastal salt marsh habitat. Water management improvements have included culvert repairs between cells of the Seasonal Ponds, which have improved drainage of the salt marsh habitat on the margins of the cells. In addition a water management plan is in place that uses the large pump installed at Freeman Creek to quickly lower water levels in the Seasonal Ponds as needed following heavy or long rain events. While these management actions primarily target the habitat needs of the western snowy plover, they have the added benefit of reducing long-period inundation of Belding’s Savannah sparrow nesting habitat. While many elements have been installed to facilitate water management within the low-lying and substantially subsided wetlands of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands, the site still faces significant challenges relative to water management for the sake of habitat development and maintenance. From a habitat standpoint, it is critical that the FTB inlet be maintained to alleviate tidal muting, allowing the FTB to experience low tides below 0 meters NAVD88 on a regular basis. With the restoration of better tidal drainage within the FTB, the MTBs would have some capacity to be operated as intended. However, based on the early history of sand shoal development and tidal muting, it is anticipated that the MTBs should be operated differently than initially contemplated given the expectation that the lower elevations of the central and east MTBs would rarely allow for full gate operations, even with an exceptionally aggressive shoal maintenance program. Restoration of greater tidal range by shoal maintenance would have value for improving marsh development within the FTB as well as the MTBs. The transplant of cordgrass into the FTB in August 2007 was intended to accelerate the development of low salt marsh habitat, with the goal of providing suitable habitat for light-footed clapper rails (Rallus longirostris levipes) (renamed Ridgway’s Rail Rallus obsoletus levipes in July 2014). Though initial establishment and expansion is typically slow in cordgrass transplants, the severity of the tidal muting the in FTB was not fully anticipated. Transplant areas at lower elevations suffered from the prolonged inundation periods, leaving only the cordgrass planted at higher elevations. The high wind wave conditions and heavy goose browsing on the cordgrass shelf also hamper its success. The permanent losses of transplanted cordgrass at the lower elevations on the cordgrass shelf reflect the reality that much of the shelf will never be suitable for cordgrass without either a significant improvement of tidal drainage or raising the shelf elevation and installing boom or bar wave barriers. Although the current state of the cordgrass shelf reduces the near term potential habitat development for light-footed clapper rails within the wetlands, the unvegetated mudflat is developing a rich benthic community and is heavily utilized by foraging shorebirds at low tide. Fortunately, all persisting stands of cordgrass began producing seed early on, allowing it the opportunity to disperse to and establish within suitable locations of the FTB. Reduction of the muting in the FTB would also allow the pickleweed that has sprouted at the base of the riprap on the FTB cordgrass bench to establish and expand, providing some shelter for wildlife between the mudflat and riprap. The physical functioning of the FTB is discussed in detail in Chapter II - Physical Monitoring Program.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 38 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Another habitat goal of the restoration was the establishment of eelgrass in the FTB. The 2007 transplant was successful, more than doubling in size after one year, and reaching 105.4 acres in June 2011. Figure 1-5 shows the pattern of expansion year to year. The establishment of eelgrass in the FTB enhances the ecological value of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands complex. Eelgrass plays many important roles in coastal bays and estuaries. It clarifies water through sediment trapping and stabilization. It also provides the benefits of nutrient transformation and water oxygenation. Eelgrass serves as a primary producer in a detrital-based food web, and is further directly grazed upon by invertebrates, fish, and birds, thus contributing to ecosystem health at multiple trophic levels. Additionally, it provides physical structure as a habitat, and supports epiphytic plants and animals that in turn are grazed upon by other invertebrates, fish, and birds. It is also a nursery area for finfish and shellfish, both resident species and oceanic species that enter the estuaries to breed or spawn. Besides providing important habitat for fish, eelgrass is also considered an important food resource for migratory birds during critical life stages, including migratory periods. As can been seen in the following sections of this report, the invertebrate and fish populations are increasingly diverse in the FTB as a result of the complexity added to the basin by the eelgrass habitat. A final observation to consider from the history of habitat monitoring work is the changes in distribution of non-native vegetation (Figure 1-5). A focused iceplant treatment effort on Rabbit Island accounted for most of the reduction in non-native vegetation site wide. Although this work killed large expanses of iceplant, it continues to threaten a small population of the rare plant coast woolly heads (Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata) that persists there. This plant will need immediate protection through additional and ongoing removal of the iceplant that is encroaching on its remaining populations. The USFWS Monitoring Plan calls for the removal of iceplant from the higher elevations of Rabbit Island to restore open dune habitat, followed by the collection and reintroduction of coast woolly heads seed to cleared areas. Such an effort will require a multi-year eradication program in conjunction with several re-seeding events. CDFW has taken the lead on this effort and is in the process of implementing a 5-year eradication plan on Rabbit Island. In 2011, there was a considerable expansion of non-native vegetation on Nest Site 1 (NS1), as reflected in the reduced size of the Nest Sites between 2009 and 2011. The USFWS Monitoring Plan indicates that if vegetative cover on the Nest Sites exceeds 5%, vegetation must be removed before March of each year. CDFW has undertaken weed control efforts annually during the winter to prepare NS1 for the nesting season. This has involved spraying herbicide with a backpack sprayer and hand removal. It is recommended that consideration also be given to treatment of large areas with salt water by way of a portable irrigation system. This method has been used since 2006 at Famosa Slough in a volunteer-lead effort prescribed by M&A to maintain salt panne nesting sites. It has also been used on a large scale at Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach with a great deal of success (Agri Chemical & Supply, Inc. 2006). The next and final full vegetation monitoring event, including aerial photography, habitat mapping, and transect surveys, will be conducted in summer 2016 (Year 10) as called for in the Monitoring Plan. A single aerial image will continue to be collected annually to document interim conditions and provide a low cost archival history of site change through time.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 39 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

1.2. SOILS/SEDIMENT MONITORING

The Monitoring Plan anticipated that soil and sediment conditions throughout the restored portions of Bolsa Chica might be changed in the course of dredging and/or introduction of tidal flushing. It therefore calls for soils monitoring to be conducted concurrently with the vegetation transect monitoring in Years 2, 5, and 10. However, the stated goal of the monitoring is to use the collected data on soil conditions to help determine which factors might be controlling plant community diversity and productivity and which types of plant communities are likely to develop in the future. In fact, site hydrology is a substantially overwhelming controlling factor of vegetation at Bolsa Chica, rather than soil chemistry. Given the need to focus resources on water management, the Steering Committee supported removal of the soil/sediment monitoring elements of the monitoring program, since the results would not be immediately effective in supporting near-term management decisions at the site. Therefore the soil sampling work was removed from the monitoring program for Years 5 and 10, concurrent with the addition of continued annual aerial photograph collection. The results of the Year 2 soil monitoring can be reviewed in the 2009 annual report (M&A 2011a).

1.3. FISH COMMUNITY MONITORING

Introduction The Monitoring Plan calls for fisheries monitoring to be conducted in Years 2, 5, and 10 following the opening of the FTB to the ocean. The Bolsa Chica Steering Committee opted to collect an additional year of data in Year 3 as well. The Year 5 monitoring was conducted in October 2010, January 2011, April 2011, and July 2011, and is reported on below. Methodology Fisheries sampling was conducted over a multi-day period each quarter to obtain the appropriate tidal elevations for each gear type. During Year 5 surveys were conducted during daylight hours on October 7 and 25, January 13, 20, 27, April 14, 21, and May 25, and July 6, 14, and 21. Each quarter, sampling was done at Stations 1 and 2 in the FTB, in the Muted Pocket Marsh (MPM), and, in 2011 only, in the west and central MTBs (Figure 1-1). The coordinates of the sampling locations are provided in Appendix 1-A. Equipment Sampling equipment included an otter trawl, purse seine, and large beach seine at Stations 1 and 2 and a large beach seine only in the MPM. A small beach seine was used in the MTBs. A variety of depth, current, substrate, and exposure conditions exist within each station, each of which encompasses a large area. To characterize the fish communities that utilize the large sampling stations, three replicates hauls were made across each station, using gear as indicated in Figure 1-6. The following text describes each gear type. The otter trawl consists of a 4.6-m trawl with 2-cm mesh in the body and 0.3-centimeter (cm) mesh in the cod end. The otter trawl was deployed at offshore sampling locations using a small vessel traveling between 1.5 and 2 knots along 250-m transects. The trawl was used to sample primarily demersal offshore fish at Stations 1 and 2 in the FTB. The otter trawl was not used in the MPM due to the inaccessibility of the site by boat.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 40 SS WMTB Rep3 BS PM Rep1 West Muted BS PM Rep2 Tidal Basin BS PM Rep3 BS1 Rep1 Muted Pocket Marsh SS CMTB Rep3 PS1 Rep1 SS WMTB Rep2 OT1 Rep1 SS WMTB Rep1 Central Muted Tidal Basin STATION 1

SS CMTB Rep2 East Muted PS1 Rep2 Tidal Basin

BS1 Rep2 OT1 Rep3 SS CMTB Rep1 BS1 Rep3

PS1 Rep3

Full Tidal Basin

PS2 Rep1

Alt BS2 Rep3 BS2 Rep1

PS2 Rep2 BS2 Rep2

STATION 2

BS2 Rep3 PS2 Rep3

Purse Seine

Large Beach Seine (BS) Small Beach Seine (SS) Otter Trawl

0100 200 400 600 800 Meters

Fisheries sampling locations Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Figure 1-6

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

The purse seine consists of a 66-m x 6-m seine with 1.2-cm mesh in the wings and 0.6-cm mesh in the bag. The purse seine was deployed at offshore sampling locations using a small vessel. This gear was used to sample adult and juvenile fish species in the water column as well as demersal fish at Stations 1 and 2 in the FTB. The purse seine was not used in the MPM due to the inaccessibility of the site by boat. The large beach seine consists of a 15-m x 1.8-m net with a 1.8-m x 1.8-m x 1.8-m bag in the center. The seine has 1.2- cm mesh in the wings and 0.6-cm mesh in the bag. It was utilized to sample shoreline waters between the bottom and surface at depths of 0 to 1 m. The seine was positioned parallel to shore between 7 and 35 m from the water’s edge, depending on bottom contours. The seine was held in place for 3 minutes and then walked slowly to shore. The small beach seine is a 7.3-m x 1.2 m-net with 0.3-cm mesh, with no bag. It was utilized to sample waters between 0-1 m in depth on the shorelines of the MTBs. The seine was positioned perpendicular to the shore, walked parallel to the shore for a measured distance, then pivoted in and walked to shore. The length of the each haul was determined by the space and water available at the time of the sampling and recorded on the field datasheet. At each study location, physical water quality parameters were measured coincident with the biological sampling described above. A Hydrolab Quanta® multi-probe, calibrated in accordance with manufacturer specifications, was used to collect temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and salinity data. Readings were taken near the bottom and top of the water column. Fish Processing All fish captured in the nets were transferred to buckets or tubs filled with seawater, worked up, and released. Data collected for fish caught in each haul included species identification, individual counts, standard length (in millimeters [mm]), and wet weight (in grams [g]). Ectoparasites, lesions, or tumors, if any, were also noted. Species that were not identified in the field were transported to the laboratory and identified utilizing identification references and/or a dissecting microscope. All fish identifications were made using widely accepted field identification guides such as Miller and Lea (1972) and Eschmeyer et al. (1983). Fish nomenclature was standardized in conformance with Nelson et al. (2004). In some cases, some post-larval fish captured were not identified to species. For example, a haul of 2cm-long pipefish was recorded as pipefish, unidentified juvenile. If more than 30 individuals of a species were caught in a replicate of any gear type, a batch sampling procedure was utilized. First, the standard length and weight was measured for 30 randomly selected individuals within the species. Second, the batch weight was measured for 100 additional randomly selected individuals. Finally, the total weight was measured for all of the remaining, uncounted individuals caught in the replicate. The number of uncounted individuals was then estimated using the batch weight of the 100 randomly selected individuals. In July 2011, nearly 15,000 small California grunion (Leuresthes tenuis) and topsmelt (Atherinops affinis) were captured. To efficiently work up such large hauls of fish (which must each be inspected individually to make an identification), thirty of each species were identified and worked up as described above. Then a batch of 100 randomly selected individuals were examined and a ratio of grunion to topsmelt was determined, and the batch weight of that 100 measured and recorded. The ratio was applied to the batch weight to split it into grunion and

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 42 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

topsmelt. Finally, the total weight was measured for the remaining uncounted mix of the two species, and the same ratio applied to that total to split it into grunion and topsmelt. All survey data were initially recorded in the field on hard copy data sheets and later transferred to a digital database and checked for accuracy. Due to the difficulty of rapidly and conclusively distinguishing between small arrow goby (Clevelandia ios) and shadow goby (Quietula y-cauda) in the field, gobies that may have belonged to either species were identified as "arrow/shadow goby complex". These functionally similar species commonly co-occur and occupy similar niches in the demersal fish community. These species were often captured in high numbers in the beach seine and required excessive time to differentiate in the field. The beach seine work is highly time constrained due to the small window of time in which the tides are appropriate for the sampling. Vouchers of the gobies collected were brought back to the lab for identification to document the actual species present at a given station. All macroinvertebrates captured in the fish sampling nets were collected, identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, counted, and released. Due to the tremendous spatial variability of these species and the non-targeted methodology employed here to sample them, collected data were intended to generate a list of species that occur in the project area, rather than to provide definitive density and biomass data on their populations. Sampling Limitations In 2010 and 2011, the MTB fish sampling program was not fully implemented because the basins were not fully open to the FTB through the tide gates at the water control structures (WCS). The MTBs were sampled in January, May, and July 2011. The water levels in the basins were variable due to rainfall and water control limitations related to tidal muting. As a result, in some quarters some previously submerged sampling locations were dry and had to be moved slightly. During the May 2011 monitoring, CMBT Rep 3 (Figure 1-6) was not sampled due to the need to cross through nesting Belding’s Savannah sparrow habitat to reach an inundated portion of the site. The Year 5 shore-based (large beach seine) sampling in the FTB required some station adjustments to accommodate the increasingly muted condition the basin was experiencing. The October 2010 sampling was conducted prior to the second inlet maintenance dredging event. At that time the low tide muting had become so severe that all shore-based Station 2 sampling locations in the FTB were submerged at the time of the monitoring. The required tidal elevation needed to sample the FTB is about 0 NAVD. Although the predicted oceanic tide was approximately –0.2 m NAVD, the accumulated sand in the inlet prevented drainage of the FTB to below +0.4 m NAVD at that time, leaving no shoreline exposed onto which to pull the beach seine. A single replicate sample was therefore collected at an alternate location that had a small amount of shoreline exposed. This location is noted in Figure 1-6 as alt BS2 Rep 3. Similar conditions were encountered during the January 2011 sampling, at which time maintenance dredging had been under way for about ten days. Beach seine sampling was possible at the proper Station 2 Replicate 1 and 2 locations, but Replicate 3 had to be moved again to the alternate location noted above. Following completion of maintenance dredging in March 2011, all locations were accessible except the Station 1, Replicate 2 large beach seine location during the April survey work. Therefore only two replicates were collected for Station 1 at that time.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 43 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Several replicate-specific complications arising from excessive aquatic vegetation are discussed specifically in the following results section. Results A total of 41 fish species were captured in the Year 5 quarterly fish sampling, bringing the total number of species captured during the monitoring program (12 sampling events from 2007- 2011) to 52. The sampling results are presented below by sampling area: Full Tidal Basin (FTB), Muted Tidal Basins (MTBs), and Muted Pocket Marsh (MPM). A summary of the species captured throughout the monitoring program is presented in Appendix 1-D. Full Tidal Basin Table 1-5 provides a summary of total abundance (# individuals) of fish captured in the FTB within all replicates of all gear types during the Year 5 sampling intervals. A total of 40 species of fish were captured in the FTB in Year 5 (Table 1-5), with nearly the same number of fish captured at each station. The most notable finding was the capture of large numbers of northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax) at both stations in January, April, and July 2011. In the previous nine sampling events since 2007, only 25 northern anchovy were captured. In Year 5, northern anchovy made up 32% of the total catch (10,656 individuals). This is an important prey species for nesting birds at Bolsa Chica. Also abundant were atherinids, with topsmelt representing 45% of the total catch and California grunion representing 17%. Both species were most abundant in July 2011. Other captured schooling fish that are important avian prey items included Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax), slough anchovy (Anchoa delicatissima), and deepbody anchovy (Anchoa compressa), though in smaller numbers and only in April and July.

At Station 1, in the northern portion of the FTB furthest from the inlet, a total of 27 species were captured during the year. In addition to the anchovy and atherinids mentioned above, over 88% of the California grunion recorded in the FTB were captured at Station 1. Other species notably more abundant at Station 1 than Station 2 included deepbody and slough anchovy, California needlefish (Strongylura exilis), jacksmelt (Atherinopsis californiensis), bay pipefish (Syngnathus leptorhynchus), and various gobies (Table 1-5).

At Station 2, in the southern portion of the FTB, 36 species were captured with topsmelt and northern anchovy the most abundant (44% and 47% of the total catch, respectively). This station supported most of the elasmobranchs captured in the FTB, including leopard sharks (Triakis semifasciata), thornback (Raja clavata), and gray smoothhound (Mustelus californicus). Bat ray (Myliobatis californica) and round stingray (Urobatis halleri) were captured in about equal numbers at both stations. All sand bass (Paralabrax maculatofasciatus and Paralabrax nebulifer) and all barred surfperch (Amphistichus argenteus), dwarf surfperch (Micrometrus minimus), and walleye surfperch (Hyperprosopon argenteum) were captured at Station 2. Other structure-associated fish common at Station 2, which was densely vegetated by eelgrass, included giant kelpfish (Heterostichus rostratus) and bay blenny (Hypsoblennius gentilis). Shiner surfperch (Cymatogaster aggregata) were common at both stations.

Flatfish were captured at both stations, including hornyhead turbot (Pleuronichthys verticalis), captured for the first time in October 2010, California tonguefish (Symphurus atricaudus), California halibut (Paralichthys californicus), and diamond turbot (Pleuronichthys guttulatus). Five juvenile (41-49 cm) white seabass (Atractoscion nobilis) were captured in October and January of Year 5. Gobies were captured in the beach seine at both Stations 1 and 2. The

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 44 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-5. Summary of total fish abundance (# of individuals) for the Full Tidal Basin in Year 5 (October 2010 – July 2011). Year 5 October 2010 January 2011 April 2011 July 2011 Grand Grand Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) Total Total Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Species Station 1 Station 2 Seine Trawl Seine Seine* Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Leopard Shark 03 12 Gray Smoothhound 03 3 Thornback 01 1 Bat Ray 15 15 1 3 13 11 2 Round Stingray 1110 21 2 12 6 141 1 California Butterfly Ray 20 11 Pacific Sardine 0115 1114 Northern Anchovy 2,295 8,361 2,166 56 129 105 8,200 Deepbody Anchovy 131 13 131 13 Slough Anchovy 131 26 131 26 California Needlefish 25 0 22 2 1 California Killifish 106 139 101 128 2 10 31 California Grunion 5,067 680 261 55 280 4 21 4,526 600 Jacksmelt 50 5 Topsmelt 7,273 7,938 1,589 14 395 1,394 705 58 157 291 318 261 166 488 468 5 3,855 901 4,146 Bay Pipefish 30816019 9213 366724 121232421344521 Pipefish, unidentified juvenile 12 5 12 5 Staghorn Sculpin 43 16 33 9 10 4 3 Kelp Bass 117 111 312 Spotted Sand Bass 017 3 1 2 1 5 4 1 Barred Sand Bass 04 1 3 Queenfish 03 1 2 White Seabass 14 311 Yellowfin Croaker 76 1 1 2 3 5 1 Spotfin Croaker 71 7 1 Croaker, unidentified juvenile 04 4 Barred Surfperch 05 5 Walleye Surfperch 07 6 1 Shiner Surfperch 71 216 1 16 1 2 6 5 10 15 12 60 22 1 136 Dwarf Surfperch 01 1 Striped Mullet 01 1 Bay Blenny 27 1 4121 Giant Kelpfish 1064 1 9 9 126 1 3222 Longjaw Mudsucker 19 5 3 11154 Yellowfin Goby 201 1 Cheekspot Goby 11 3 2 3261 Arrow/Shadow Goby complex 30 58 2 55 1 2 25 1 1 1 Gobiidae, unidentified juvenile 12 11 1 California Tonguefish 01 1 California Halibut 4511312 1 Hornyhead Turbot 01 1 Diamond Turbot 21 8 1 20 3 3 1 1 Total Abundance (individual 15,611 17,925 1,729 1 303 594 25 1,481 764 5 2,520 266 14 377 399 7 669 209 48 680 800 24 8,390 1,012 12 13,207 2 Area Sampled (m ) 16,863 17,360 791 2,400 1,040 326 2,400 1,040 838 2,400 1,040 1,551 2,400 1,040 714 2,400 1,040 916 2,400 1,040 760 2,400 1,040 807 2,400 1,040 * only 1 of 3 beach seine replicates was collected at Station 2 in October 2010

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 45 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-6. Summary of total fish mass (g) for the Full Tidal Basin in Year 5 (October 2010 – July 2011).

Year 5 October 2010 January 2011 April 2011 July 2011 Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) Grand Grand Total Total Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Beach Otter Purse Species Station 1 Station 2 Seine Trawl Seine Seine* Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Seine Trawl Seine Leopard Shark 0 11,350 5,239 6,111 Gray Smoothhound 02,524 2,524 Thornback 01,673 1,673 Bat Ray 28,860 36,179 803 5,099 22,992 30,277 5,868 Round Stingray 2,741 2,767 701 271 386 486 421 1,569 305 932 211 226 California Butterfly Ray 1,097 0 427 670 Pacific Sardine 0856 7849 Northern Anchovy 1,462 60,032 855 9 608 91 59,933 Deepbody Anchovy 3,639 262 3,639 262 Slough Anchovy 1,584 113 1,584 113 California Needlefish 3,910 0 3,238 498 174 California Killifish 234 100 228 74 5 25 10.4 California Grunion 1,871 605 34 68 33 1 3 1,804 533 Jacksmelt 1,624 0 1,624 Topsmelt 11,745 15,093 1,854 36 823 2,636 2,136 788 745 1,846 1,082 3,846 1,312 3,611 609 2 1,392 534 3,586 Bay Pipefish 290 161 11 6 4 2 3 3 32 17 37 20 21 7 208 24 5 47 3 0.4 Pipefish, unidentified juvenile 111 1 Staghorn Sculpin 28 34 11 12 17 8 14 Kelp Bass 45 191 10 2 14 45 166 Spotted Sand Bass 0 11,627 1,607 519 1,338 645 3,209 3,827 482 Barred Sand Bass 0 2,022 335 1,687 Queenfish 017 5 13 White Seabass 1,400 4,483 2,900 1,400 1,583 Yellowfin Croaker 2,424 1,496 326 368 1,012 733 1,128 353 Spotfin Croaker 8,769 822 8,769 822 Croaker, unidentified juvenile 01 1 Barred Surfperch 050 50 Walleye Surfperch 0 676 542 134 Shiner Surfperch 24 2,210 14 261 24 84 10 6 11 101 368 8 141 7 1,200 Dwarf Surfperch 04 4 Striped Mullet 0115 115 Bay Blenny 21 19 10 4 7 5 15 Giant Kelpfish 25 357 35 82 20 56 46 5 120 8 10 Longjaw Mudsucker 8212 12520 Yellowfin Goby 14 0 13 1 Cheekspot Goby 20.30.2 10.210.1 Arrow/Shadow Goby complex 43 17 1 13 0.3 3 3 0.1 39 1 Gobiidae, unidentified juvenil 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.1 California Tonguefish 043 43 California Halibut 3,199 15,629 1,250 246 1,949 87 15,022 274 Hornyhead Turbot 0250 250 Diamond Turbot 31 1,115 283 4 2 602 27 228 Total Mass (g) 75,091 172,914 2,109 1,250 5,259 936 3,557 7,549 2,159 2,335 13,358 994 16,468 15,201 1,664 427 33,576 1,414 2,446 50,464 1,611 1,981 9,365 880 4,572 68,431 2 Area Sampled (m ) 16,863 17,360 791 2,400 1,040 326 2,400 1,040 838 2,400 1,040 1,551 2,400 1,040 714 2,400 1,040 916 2,400 1,040 760 2,400 1,040 807 2,400 1,040 * only 1 of 3 beach seine replicates was collected at Station 2 in October 2010 Note: fish weighing less than 0.5g reported to the closest 0.1g. All others rounded to the closest whole gram.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 46 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

density of gobies is considerably underrepresented because large numbers were often observed swimming out of the seine bag as it was pulled up onto shore. Their slippery texture, active nature, and narrow bodies allow them to align with the net mesh and escape more easily than the other species. Both arrow and shadow gobies were captured in FTB. The total mass (g) of fish captured for all replicates and gear types within the FTB during Year 5 is presented in Table 1-6. A total of 75 kilograms (kg) of fish was captured at Station 1, 38% of which was made up of bat rays (Myliobatis californica). Topsmelt and spotfin croaker (Roncador stearnsii) accounted for the majority of the remaining mass, at 16% and 12% of the total, respectively. Other species that contributed more than 2% each to overall mass at Station 1 were deepbody anchovy (5%), California needlefish (5%), California halibut (4%), round stingray (4%), and yellowfin croaker (Umbrina roncador) (3%). A total of 173 kg was captured at Station 2 during Year 5, dominated by northern anchovy (35%) and bat rays (21%). Other species that contributed more than 2% each to overall mass at Station 2 were California halibut (9%), topsmelt (9%), spotted sand bass (7%), leopard shark (7%), and white seabass (3%). It is important to note when reviewing these tables that survey intensity varied slightly between stations due to variations in large beach seine haul sizes, so direct comparisons of total abundance and mass between stations and quarters should be made carefully. In addition, the sampling biases between gear types preclude a detailed analysis of lumped abundance and mass data. To standardize for the area sampled and to allow direct comparisons of density and biomass between stations and sampling quarters, Figure 1-7 presents the mean density (individuals/m2) by gear by quarter for each station. Figure 1-8 presents mean biomass (g/m2) by gear by quarter for each station. The results of all sampling (Years 2, 3, and 5) are presented. Year 2 spanned the October 2007 to July 2008 period and Year 3 spanned October 2008 to July 2009. Year 5 spanned October 2010 to July 2011 (Figure 0-2). Figure 1-7 illustrates a general seasonal trend in fish density, with the greatest densities of fish occurring during July or October sampling intervals and the lowest densities occurring during the winter sampling intervals. This trend is particularly apparent for the large beach seine, and primarily reflects seasonal variations in topsmelt, and to a lesser degree California killifish, bay pipefish, and goby, abundance. Summer reproductive and recruitment events for these species are reflected in the higher July and October large seine densities. Over the course of the twelve sampling events, the mean density (+ 1 SE) in the large seine was higher at Station 1 (1.004 individuals/m2, + 0.203, n=35) than at Station 2 (0.438 individuals/m2, + 0.090, n=34). The higher densities at Station 1 were due primarily to the greater numbers of topsmelt captured there in the peak months. The samples at Station 2 in July 2011 were compromised by the thick eelgrass throughout the sampling area. The lead line of the net would roll as it passed over the bryozoan encrusted eelgrass, breaking the connection with the bottom and allowing fish to escape. It is likely that large seine counts at Station 2 overall were reduced due to interference by eelgrass and more fish escapes due to disturbance of the eelgrass providing both advance warning of the net arrival or refuge from capture. Fish density in the otter trawl was very low, with trends seen in Figure 1-7 driven primarily by the number of kelp bass, shiner surfperch, and bay pipefish captured. These species were captured in higher numbers at Station 2. The other dominant otter trawl catch, round stingray, was more abundant at Station 1. Over the course of the twelve sampling events, the mean

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 47 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Large Beach Seine 4.0

) 3.5 2

) 2 3.0 2.5 2.0 individuals/m (

1.5 y 1.0

Fish density (indiv/m 0.5

Fish densit Fish 0.0 Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul 07 08 08 08 08 09 09 09 10 11 11 11

Otter Trawl 0.05 ) ) 2 2 0.04 Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) 0.03

0.02

0.01 Fish density (indiv/m

Fish density (individuals/m 0.00 Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul 07 08 08 08 08 09 09 09 10 11 11 11

Purse Seine 20 18 ) ) 2 2 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 Fish density (indiv/m 2

Fish density (individuals/m 0 Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul 07 08 08 08 08 09 09 09 10 11 11 11 Figure 1-7. Mean fish density (individuals/m2) (+ 1 SE) by quarter for large beach seine, otter trawl, and purse seine at Stations 1 and 2 in the Full Tidal Basin in Years 2, 3, and 5 (note variable y-axis scales).

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 48 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

density (+ 1 SE) in the otter trawl was higher at Station 1 (0.005 individuals/m2, + 0.001, n=36) than at Station 2 (0.010 individuals/m2, + 0.002, n=36). The purse seine yielded the greatest overall densities. Trends in the purse seine data were driven primarily by the number of atherinids (topsmelt and grunion) captured each quarter (which made up 64% of the total purse seine density). Northern anchovy captured in January, April, and July 2011 accounted for 29% for the total density over all sampling periods. Over the course of the twelve sampling events, the mean density (+ 1 SE) of all fishes in the purse seine was lower at Station 1 (1.213 individuals/m2, + 0.431, n=36) than at Station 2 (1.803 individuals/m2, + 0.728, n=36). Looking at density over time, there is trend of increasing density from the start of the monitoring program in Year 2 through the end of Year 5. Again, this is due to increasing abundances of topsmelt, grunion, and northern anchovy over time. A table of all fish captured for the full monitoring time period is presented in Appendix 1-E. Figure 1-8 presents the mean biomass (g/m2) of fish by gear by quarter for each station. Quarterly biomass values were driven in some cases by the capture of a small number of large individuals, such as bat rays (which made up 23% of the total mass over all monitoring periods), and in other cases by the capture of large schools of northern anchovy (15% of the total mass, though nearly all captured in Year 5) and topsmelt (14% of the total mass). Biomass in the large beach seine was typically higher at Station 1 than 2 in April and July of each year due the regular capture of relatively large elasmobranches. In January and October months biomass at the two stations was more similar, reflecting a relatively even distribution of topsmelt between the two. Over the course of the twelve sampling events, the mean biomass (+ 1 SE) in the large seine was higher at Station 1 (5.3 g/m2, + 1.5, n=35) than at Station 2 (1.3 g/m2, + 0.2, n=34). Fish biomass in the otter trawl was relatively consistent between quarters, with occasional peaks associated with the capture of single large individuals including a large butterfly ray at Station 1 in April 2009 and a large California halibut (15 kg) at Station 2 in January 2011. Over the course of the twelve sampling events, the mean biomass (+ 1 SE) in the otter trawl was slightly lower at Station 1 (1.2 g/m2, + 0.6, n=36) than at Station 2 (1.5 g/m2, + 0.6, n=36). Biomass in the purse seine was highest in April and July and reflected the seasonal capture of topsmelt, bat rays, and, in Year 5, northern anchovy. Over the course of the twelve sampling events, the mean biomass (+ 1 SE) in the purse seine was lower at Station 1 (8.6 g/m2, + 2.7, n=36) than at Station 2 (14.2 g/m2, + 5.9, n=36). This is primarily due to the capture of leopard sharks, bat rays, and gray smoothhound at Station 2 in April 2011 and the capture of 59 kg of northern anchovy at Station 2 in July 2011 (Table 1-6). Purse seine biomass during the other quarters was more similar between the two stations. All species captured in the FTB were categorized as either demersal, pelagic, or structure associated species. Species that occupy more than one habitat type were placed in the category in which they are believed to occur within Bolsa Chica, though they likely move between habitats regularly. By the end of Year 5, a total of 21 demersal species, primarily represented by two shark, four rays, three croaker, five goby, and five flatfish species, had been captured in the FTB (Appendix 1-E). Eleven species that are generally considered pelagic or open water fishes,

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 49 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Large Beach Seine 36 32 ) 2 28 24 20 16 12 8 Fish biomass(g/m 4 0 Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul 07 08 08 08 08 09 09 09 10 11 11 11

Otter Trawl 16 14 )

2 Station 1 (North) 12 Station 2 (South) 10

8 6 4 Fish biomass (g/m biomass Fish 2 0 Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul 07 08 08 08 08 09 09 09 10 11 11 11

Purse Seine 140

120 ) 2 100

Fish biomass (g/m 20

0 Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul 07 08 08 08 08 09 09 09 10 11 11 11

Figure 1-8. Mean fish biomass (g/m2) (+ 1 SE) by quarter for large beach seine, otter trawl, and purse seine at Stations 1 and 2 in the Full Tidal Basin in Years 2, 3, and 5 (note variable y-axis scales between charts).

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 50 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

including various schooling fish such as herring, sardine, atherinids, anchovy, and striped mullet (Mugil cephalus) have been captured to date. The structured habitat guild has been made up of 20 species to date. This guild generally occurs in habitats with some sort of structure such as eelgrass, rocks, or pilings and included pipefishes, surfperch, kelpfish, blennies, and sand basses. Figure 1-9 shows an accumulated count of fish species during each sampling event, broken out by guild. With the opening of the FTB to regular tidal influence, marine and estuarine species are assumed to have immediately colonized the basin (monitoring did not begin until 14 months after the opening). The ratio of FTB usage by the three guilds was consistent over the three years of study.

60 Pelagic Habitat Guild 50 Structured Habitat Guild

40 Demers al Habitat Guild

10 cummulative of # species

0 Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul 07 08 08 08 08 09 09 09 10 11 11 11

Figure 1-9. Cumulative total of fish species by guild in the Full Tidal Basin in Years 2, 3, and 5 (October 2007 – July 2011).

The water quality conditions for all stations at the time of each Year 5 sampling event are presented in Table 1-7. All parameters measured in the FTB indicated a well-flushed system, with oceanic salinities, and warmer temperatures at Station 1 than 2, except in January, when temperatures at the Station 1 tend to be cooler than Station 2. Dissolved oxygen was always greater than 5.9 mg/L and as high as 11.1 mg/L in the FTB. Muted Tidal Basins The Muted Tidal Basins were sampled with the small beach seine as described in the methods section above, with variations in effort each quarter based on conditions within each basin. The area and water depth sampled was highly variable between quarters due to fluctuating water levels. In some cases, unvegetated shoreline was not exposed to pull the net up onto at the sampling site, so the net had to be lifted up prior to shoreline vegetation, which reduced sampling effectiveness and sampling of fish right along the shoreline. Hauls were often filled with dead plant debris from decaying pickleweed that was permanently inundated by the introduction of tidal waters or heavy rainfall.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 51 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-7. Water quality measurements taken during fish sampling in Year 5. October 2010 Station Monitoring Date Sampling Strata Time Depth Temp Dissolved Salinity Turbidity Quarter Event (m) (°C) Oxygen (ppt) (NTU) 1 Oct-10 10/7/2010 BS Midwater 16:08 0.5 23.0 11.1 33.9 50.2 Oct-10 10/25/2010 PS/OT Surface 12:50 0.3 19.7 7.9 33.5 21.8 Oct-10 10/25/2010 PS/OT Bottom 12:53 3.5 19.3 7.5 33.4 28.5 2 Oct-10 10/7/2010 BS Midwater 17:02 0.5 20.3 7.7 33.7 54.7 Oct-10 10/25/2010 PS/OT Surface 13:38 0.3 19.0 8.8 33.2 24.2 Oct-10 10/25/2010 PS/OT Bottom 13:41 2.8 19.1 8.6 33.2 24.2 MPM Oct-10 10/7/2010 BS Midwater 12:35 0.5 20.3 9.7 31.0 8.7 January 2011 Station Monitoring Date Sampling Strata Time Depth Temp Dissolved Salinity Turbidity Quarter Event (m) (°C) Oxygen (ppt) (NTU) 1 Jan-11 1/27/2011 BS Midwater 11:45 0.1 15.6 7.6 32.6 3.0 Jan-11 1/20/2011 PS/OT Surface 14:40 0.3 16.0 8.5 32.5 5.6 Jan-11 1/20/2011 PS/OT Bottom 14:43 2.0 15.7 8.1 32.5 5.0 2 Jan-11 1/27/2011 BS Midwater 14:40 0.5 17.2 9.0 32.1 3.0 Jan-11 1/20/2011 PS/OT Surface 10:23 0.3 14.6 8.8 32.6 7.6 Jan-11 1/20/2011 PS/OT Bottom 10:24 1.7 14.5 8.8 32.8 9.0 MPM Jan-11 1/13/2011 BS Midwater 9:36 0.3 13.2 6.9 30.2 7.3 WMTB 1 Jan-11 1/13/2011 BS Midwater 9:25 0.8 13.3 6.4 25.0 18.0 WMTB 2 Jan-11 1/13/2011 BS Midwater 10:00 0.1 12.7 12.8 19.6 4.0 WMTB 3 Jan-11 1/13/2011 BS Midwater 10:30 0.2 13.1 16.9 20.5 30.0 CMTB 1 Jan-11 1/13/2011 BS Midwater 11:05 0.4 12.6 9.1 30.2 21.0 CMTB 2 Jan-11 1/13/2011 BS Midwater 11:15 0.3 13.8 9.3 29.9 26.0 CMTB 3 Jan-11 1/13/2011 BS Midwater 10:50 0.2 13.0 7.5 31.0 22.0 EMTB 1 Jan-11 1/13/2011 BS Midwater 11:40 0.5 16.2 9.8 30.0 90.0 EMTB 2 Jan-11 1/13/2011 BS Midwater 12:10 0.4 13.3 11.5 31.2 50.0 EMTB 3 Jan-11 1/13/2011 BS Midwater 12:30 0.8 14.6 13.6 29.2 114.0 April 2011 Station Monitoring Date Sampling Strata Time Depth Temp Dissolved Salinity Turbidity Quarter Event (m) (°C) Oxygen (ppt) (NTU) 1 Apr-11 4/21/2011 BS Midwater 11:43 0.1 20.7 9.4 34.3 10.4 Apr-11 4/14/2011 PS/OT Surface 13:00 0.2 18.9 7.6 34.2 3.9 Apr-11 4/14/2011 PS/OT Bottom 13:12 1.7 18.7 7.5 34.1 7.8 2 Apr-11 4/21/2011 BS Midwater 11:15 0.2 19.7 7.3 33.7 7.8 Apr-11 4/14/2011 PS/OT Surface 12:54 0.2 18.7 8.1 33.7 3.7 Apr-11 4/14/2011 PS/OT Bottom 12:57 1.6 17.3 8.6 33.7 5.3 MPM* Apr-11 4/21/2011 BS Surface 9:40 0.1 19.1 2.6 32.3 13.1 WMTB 1 Apr-11 5/25/2011 BS Midwater 12:40 0.2 24.0 6.7 36.4 6.0 WMTB 2 Apr-11 5/25/2011 BS Midwater 13:18 0.2 29.5 11.6 53.7 119.0 WMTB 3 Apr-11 5/25/2011 BS Midwater 13:35 0.1 29.8 10.5 46.0 30.0 CMTB 1 Apr-11 5/25/2011 BS Midwater 10:45 0.1 22.7 3.7 36.6 4.5 CMTB 2 Apr-11 5/25/2011 BS Midwater 11:45 0.2 23.4 13.4 36.4 3.1 CMTB 3 Apr-11 5/25/2011 BS Midwater 13:50 0.4 19.7 1.2 44.5 4.0 EMTB 1 Apr-11 5/25/2011 BS Midwater 14:00 0.3 25.2 10.7 51.4 71.6 EMTB 2 Apr-11 5/25/2011 BS Midwater 9:30 0.1 20.9 7.2 55.0 96.0 EMTB 3 Apr-11 5/25/2011 BS Midwater 10:10 0.1 22.0 8.6 51.3 90.0 *April MPM reading taken at Replicate 1, rather than at Replicate 2

MPM = Muted Pocket Marsh WMTB/CMTB/EMTB = West/Central/East Muted Tidal Basin BS = Beach seine PS/OT = Purse seine/Otter trawl Merkel & Associates, Inc. 52 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-7. Water quality measurements taken during fish sampling in Year 5 (cont’d). July 2011 Station Monitoring Date Sampling Strata Time Depth Temp Dissolved Salinity Turbidity Quarter Event (m) (°C) Oxygen (ppt) (NTU) 1 Jul-11 7/7/2011 BS Midwater 9:17 0.1 24.3 8.2 33.8 1.6 Jul-11 7/14/2011 PS/OT Surface 12:15 0.2 21.0 7.5 33.8 1.8 Jul-11 7/14/2011 PS/OT Bottom 12:17 2.3 21.0 7.5 33.9 0.6 2 Jul-11 7/7/2011 BS Midwater 8:14 0.1 21.7 7.1 34.1 2.0 Jul-11 7/14/2011 PS/OT Surface 12:24 0.1 23.2 6.0 35.2 1.2 Jul-11 7/14/2011 PS/OT Bottom 12:26 2.1 23.3 5.9 35.6 2.3 MPM Jul-11 7/7/2011 BS Surface 13:24 0.1 30.7 9.0 34.0 10.0 WMTB 1 Jul-11 7/21/2011 BS Midwater 9:25 0.1 22.7 3.4 37.3 18.7 WMTB 2 Jul-11 7/21/2011 BS Midwater 11:25 0.1 22.0 5.5 45.5 8.1 WMTB 3 Jul-11 7/21/2011 BS Midwater 9:55 0.1 19.7 5.8 41.5 7.7 CMTB 1 Jul-11 7/21/2011 BS Midwater 9:00 0.1 21.5 5.0 37.9 16.2 CMTB 2 Jul-11 7/21/2011 BS Midwater 11:00 0.1 22.1 8.9 38.7 9.9 CMTB 3 Jul-11 7/21/2011 BS Midwater 10:10 0.1 27.4 4.8 59.1 94.8 EMTB 1 Jul-11 7/21/2011 BS Midwater 10:15 0.1 21.0 2.7 >100 185.0 EMTB 2 Jul-11 7/21/2011 BS Midwater 10:40 0.1 21.7 5.6 60.2 116.0 EMTB 3 Jul-11 7/21/2011 BS Midwater 8:45 0.1 21.8 2.5 63.5 128.0 MPM = Muted Pocket Marsh WMTB/CMTB/EMTB = West/Central/East Muted Tidal Basin BS = Beach seine PS/OT = Purse seine/Otter trawl

In January 2011 water levels were very high in each MTB, with the nets therefore being pulled through submerged marsh vegetation in some cases. In May 2011 water levels were much lower and extensive mats of green algae covered much of the water surface. This likely resulted in an undercapture of fish through less efficient seining. During Year 5, nine fish species were captured in the west MTB, bringing the total for the nine surveys completed to date to 12 species (Table 1-8). This basin is the only of the three MTBs that receives daily tidal flushing. California killifish (Fundulus parvipinnis) and juvenile topsmelt were the most commonly captured species each quarter, and accounted for 82% and 14% of the Year 5 total catch, respectively. In the west MTB, the mean density over the three sampling events was 3.5 individuals/m2. Though water quality was similar to the FTB at the westernmost replicate, there were more extremes in temperature, salinity, and DO at the other two (Table 1-7). Eight species were captured in the central MTB in Year 5. This basin experienced only occasional tidal circulation (several times per month). California killifish, longjaw mudsucker (Gillichthys mirabilis), and juvenile topsmelt were the most abundant. In the central MTB, the mean density over the three sampling events was 3.3 individuals/m2. High salinity and temperature, combined with variable DO, restricted the fish community to hardy species. The east MTB was never open to the FTB and received water only through leakage through the WCS gates or as overflow from the central basin during high water events. The basin frequently experienced high temperatures, hypersaline conditions, and variable DO (Table 1-7). Only four species of fish were captured in the east MTB, with the lowest mean density of the three basins: 0.5 individuals/m2.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 53 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-8. Summary of total fish abundance (# of individuals) in the Muted Tidal Basins in Year 5. January 2011 April 2011 July 2011 West Central East West Central East West Central East Species MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB* MTB MTB MTB MTB California Killifish 24 3 2 7 191 23 914 104 1 California Grunion 12 Topsmelt 26 22 38 130 53 45 9 84 13 Atherinid, unidentified juvenile 8 Staghorn Sculpin 3 1 Striped Mullet 5 Longjaw Mudsucker 7 4 5 137 66 2 2 Cheekspot Goby 1 6 11 4 Arrow Shadow Goby complex 29 7 4 Total Abundance (individuals) 58 32 44 172 415 145 923 198 16 2 Area Sampled (m ) 138 110 120 124 56 152 106 92 93 * only 2 of 3 replicates were collected in the CMTB in April 2011

The total mass of the fish captured in the MTBs during each sampling interval is presented in Table 1-9. Longjaw mudsucker, California killifish, and topsmelt (primarily juveniles) accounted for 48%, 28%, and 21%, respectively, of the total mass captured during the Year 5 sampling. Mean biomass over all three sampling events was greatest in the central MTB (2.2 g/m2), intermediate in the west MTB (1.7 g/m2), and lowest in the east MTB (1.0 g/m2).

Table 1-9. Summary of total fish mass (g) in the Muted Tidal Basins in Year 5. January 2011 April 2011 July 2011 West Central East West Central East West Central East Species MTB MTB MTB MTB MTB* MTB MTB MTB MTB California Killifish 19.3 1.0 2.4 0.8 51.9 2.4 295.0 35.5 0.1 California Grunion 1.4 Topsmelt 50.7 12.2 20.2 128.1 11.0 40.8 2.9 29.7 2.8 Atherinid, unidentified juvenile 0.8 Staghorn Sculpin 2.1 5.4 Striped Mullet 2.8 Longjaw Mudsucker 47.9 38.2 89.8 183.6 308.5 18.3 5.8 Cheekspot Goby 0.1 2.0 2.8 0.4 Arrow Shadow Goby complex 5.3 31.3 0.5 Total Mass (g) 74.9 61.1 60.8 224.1 287.4 354.5 297.9 84.4 8.7 2 Area Sampled (m ) 138 110 120 124 56 152 106 92 93

Muted Pocket Marsh The Muted Pocket Marsh was sampled with the large beach seine and was generally found to be low in diversity but high in abundance of a few species, primarily California killifish and topsmelt. A total of twelve species has been captured in the MPM since monitoring was initiated, with nine captured during Year 5 (Table 1-10). Sampling in the MPM was often impeded by aquatic vegetation, resulting in escaped fish or rejected samples. In October 2010, a dense bed of Ruppia maritima at Rep 3 Beach seine filled with algae in MPM.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 54 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-10. Summary of total fish abundance (# of individuals) in Muted Pocket Marsh in Year 5. October January April July Species 2010 2011 2011 2011* California Killifish 3,963 4 12 3,278 California Grunion 31 Topsmelt 872 29 133 255 Bay Pipefish 2 Barred Pipefish 1 Staghorn Sculpin 1 4 Longjaw Mudsucker 45 185 Cheekspot Goby 84 Diamond Turbot 1 1 Total Abundance (individuals) 4,868 35 279 3,719 Area Sampled (m2) 1,039 1,039 729 264 * only 2 of 3 replicates were collected in July 2011

lifted up the lead line of the net and allowed what were estimated to be hundreds of California killifish to escape. In July 2010, the sample from Rep 1 had to be rejected. The net was overwhelmed by algae, which caused it to tear and also likely alerted fish to the approaching net and allowed them to avoid it. The sampling area is not large enough to re-sample in a neighboring area, so the replicate was abandoned. Finally, in April 2010 lower than anticipated water levels reduced the size of the sampling areas in comparison to prior quarters. Therefore, the results reported here should be viewed as a characterization of the fish community of the MPM, rather than a true estimate of fish density and biomass.

California killifish were the most abundant species in October and July, with topsmelt dominant in January and April. Both California grunion and barred pipefish (Syngnathus auliscus) had not been captured in the MPM before Year 5. Non-native yellowfin gobies, previously captured in the MPM, were not observed in Year 5. The total mass of fish captured in the Muted Pocket Marsh is presented in Table 1-11. Although California killifish were numerically dominant, topsmelt accounted for the majority of the total mass (26%), followed by killifish (30%). The high mass of topsmelt in October 2010 reflects the larger sized individuals captured then (as has been seen in prior years’ monitoring as well). The water quality conditions at the time of each Year 5 sampling event in the Muted Pocket Marsh were presented in Table 1-7. This basin experiences wide fluctuations in temperature due to its shallow depth and restricted circulation from Outer Bolsa Bay through the tide gates. The water temperature was 13.2C in January and 30.7C in July. Dissolved oxygen was high in October, January, and July (8.8 mg/L to 9.7 mg/L), and was low in April (2.6 mg/L). Salinity ranged from 30.2 in January to 34.0 in July.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 55 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-11. Summary of total fish mass (g) in the Muted Pocket Marsh in Year 5. October January April July Species 2010 2011 2011 2011* California Killifish 3,241.0 3.0 30.2 1,778.7 California Grunion 37.2 Topsmelt 10,147.3 34.0 734.7 480.6 Bay Pipefish 0.2 Barred Pipefish 1.0 Staghorn Sculpin 0.2 27.8 Longjaw Mudsucker 32.3 239.6 Cheekspot Goby 30.5 Diamond Turbot 0.1 0.7 Total Mass (g) 13,426 37 856 2,500 Area Sampled (m2) 1,039 1,039 729 264 * only 2 of 3 replicates were collected in July 2011

Fish Length The minimum and maximum standard length of each fish species captured in Year 5 is presented in Table 1-12. Nearly all species were represented to some degree by juveniles. Epifauna The epifaunal invertebrates captured in the fishing nets in Year 5 are presented in Table 1-13 by station and sampling quarter (all replicates combined). In the FTB, the most commonly captured species were California green shrimp (Hippolyte californiensis), kelp humpback shrimp (Hippolyte clarki), and bubble snail (Bulla gouldiana). Four commonly occurring non-native species were identified. In the MPM, various tunicates and California horn snail (Cerithidea californica) were the dominant invertebrates. In the central and west MTBs, invertebrates were more limited, with tunicates, bubble snails, and shore crabs the primary taxa captured. Discussion By the end of Year 5 of the monitoring program, 52 fish species had been captured at Bolsa Chica. In comparison, five years after tidal circulation was restored to Batiquitos Lagoon in Carlsbad in 1997, a total of 64 species had been documented using similar, but more intensive, sampling techniques (M&A 2009a). A one-year (4 event) fish monitoring program in nearby Upper Newport Bay in 2012 found 37 species, again using comparable sampling techniques (M&A 2013). A fish sampling program conducted in the Huntington Beach Wetlands (7 events from 2007 to 2009 using beach seine and otter trawl only) documented 27 fish species in the marsh and channels (M&A 2011b). Reviewing the data from these other locations indicates that Bolsa Chica is not lacking in fish diversity, despite its heavily armored shorelines and lack of freshwater input and estuarine components.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 56 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-12. Minimum and maximum standard length (mm) of all fish species captured by quarter at all stations in Year 5. October 2010 January 2011 April 2011 July 2011 Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Species SL (mm) SL (mm) SL (mm) SL (mm) SL (mm) SL (mm) SL (mm) SL (mm) Leopard Shark 1031 1031 460 1160 Gray Smoothhound 540 700 Thornback 560 560 Bat Ray (wing length) 232 310 245 425 330 390 Round Stingray (disk width) 73 220 127 154 85 231 130 200 California Butterfly Ray 198 215 Pacific Sardine 82 82 66 109 Northern Anchovy 207133651199 Deepbody Anchovy 74 128 Slough Anchovy 52 81 California Needlefish 410 569 560 580 520 520 California Killifish 17 64 16 66 3 61 12 79 California Grunion 7 75 18 55 21 31 20 62 Jacksmelt 301 311 Topsmelt 19 130 14 160 4 160 7 150 Atherinid, unidentified juvenile 16 19 Bay Pipefish 18 185 60 222 58 240 44 235 Barred Pipefish 119 119 Pipefish, unidentified juvenile 23 63 Staghorn Sculpin 116022735064 Kelp Bass 26 44 44 71 53.1 420 Spotted Sand Bass 97 275 267 277 240 325 215 350 Barred Sand Bass 225 225 135 355 Queenfish 64 72 White Seabass 405 450 445 487 Yellowfin Croaker 260 265 268 311 203 265 275 275 Spotfin Croaker 360 390 350 350 Croaker, unidentified juvenile 20 24 Barred Surfperch 58 63 Walleye Surfperch 99 173 160 160 Shiner Surfperch 72 94 80 122 31 128 39 121 Dwarf Surfperch 50 50 Striped Mullet 22 36 186 186 Bay Blenny 78 78 21 47 48 71 88 88 Giant Kelpfish 155 155 32 196 43 136 28 116 Longjaw Mudsucker 30 36 30 94 0.8 131 22 101 Yellowfin Goby 96 96 38 38 Cheekspot Goby 18 32 15 35 18 34 Arrow/Shadow Goby complex1838295121422140 Gobiidae, unidentified juvenile 16 20 13 13 California Tonguefish 150 150 California Halibut 240 430 109 970 239 239 Hornyhead Turbot 210 210 Diamond Turbot 210 210 12 207 29 29 99 184

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 57 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-13. Counts of epibenthic invertebrates captured in fishing gear in Year 5. October 2010 January 2011 April 2011 July 2011 Phylum Taxa Common name Sta 1 Sta 2 MPM Sta 1 Sta 2 MPM WMTB Sta 1 Sta 2 MPM WMTBCMTB Sta 1 Sta 2 MPM WMTBCMTB Arthropoda Balanus sp. Barnacle 2 Crangon franciscorum California Bay Shrimp 1 Cryptodromiopsis larraburei Pacific Sponge Crab 1 Hemigrapsus oregonensis Yellow Shore Crab 1 1 8 1 Hippolyte californiensis California Green Shrimp 174 200 100 300 370 101 350 190 Hippolyte clarki Kelp Humpback Shrimp 500 Pachygrapsus crassipes Lined Shore Crab 1 2 2 1 Palaemon macrodactylus* Oriental Shrimp 104 Pandalus sp. Pink Shrimp 70 10 Portunus xantusii Swimming Crab 1 Pugettia producta Shield-backed Kelp Crab 2 2 Romelean branneri Furrowed Rock Crab 1 Bryozoa Thalamoporella californica Bryozoan + + Zoobotryon verticillatum Zoobotryon +++ Chordata Botrylloides sp.* Chain Sea Squirt Order Ascidiacea Tunicate 8 301 1 450 20 Styela clava* Rough Sea Squirt 2 Styela plicata* Leathery Tunicate 11 5 1 11 Cnidaria Polyorchis sp. Bell Jelly 1 1 Class Anthozoa Anemone 32 Echinodermata Lytechinus anamesus White Sea Urchin 1 2 Strongylocentrotus purpuratu Purple Sea Urchin 2 Mollusca Acteon punctocaelatus Barrell Shell 1 Aplysia californica California Sea Hare 1 Argopecten ventricosus Pacific Calico Scallop 26 5 8 5 1 5 Bulla gouldiana Bubble Snail 24 18 2 2 19 4 24 11 257 28 140 13 Cerithidea californica California Horn Snail 29 2 5 1 Crepidula fornicata American Slipper Limpet 25 4 57 1 46 1 41 Lithopoma undosum Wavy Top Turban Snail 1 1 Lyonsia californica California Lyonsia 1 Nassarius tegula Covered-lip Nassa 2 6 37 4 Navanax inermis Navanax 9 3 30 1 3 2 1 1 Octopus bimaculoides Two-spot Octopus 1 2 2 Ostrea lurida Olympia Oyster 17 1 11 1 Phyllaplysia taylori Taylor's Sea Hare 2 11 9 Mytilus edulis Bay Mussel 3 1 15 1 Porifera Phylum Porifera Sponge + + + Total 300 328 334 150 922 2 1 451 208 479 3 15 668 294 162 0 13 * non-native species

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 58 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 1-9 shows that the FTB provides habitat for a well-balanced ratio of fish guilds that has remained nearly the same since shortly after monitoring began in Year 2 post-restoration. The basin maintains a good balance of demersal, open water, and structure-associated species, despite the rapid shift of great expanses of habitat from bare mud bottom to eelgrass beds (Figure 1-15). The northern portion of the Bolsa FTB (Station 1) is similar to other back bay environments, with a soft mud bottom, patchy eelgrass, and higher summer water temperatures. By Year 5 there were large eelgrass beds in the uppermost reaches of the FTB, reflected in the increase in species such as pipefish, shiner surfperch, and giant kelpfish at Station 1 in Year 5. Though rays were common there in all monitoring years (2, 3, and 5), the gray smoothhound shark and leopard sharks captured in Years 2 and 3 were not captured in Year 5 at Station 1. Other species also less abundant in Year 5 in the upper FTB than in prior years were California halibut and diamond turbot, though another demersal species, yellowfin croaker, was more frequently caught in Year 5. The open waters supported schooling baitfish, with high numbers of California grunion, topsmelt, and northern anchovy caught in Year 5. Overall the fish usage of the northern FTB suggests it is well circulated by tidal waters and provides a mix of habitats supporting multiple guilds of fish. This is less typical in other back bay environments, where poor circulation, more extreme fluctuations in water quality, and seasonal storm inflows often limit the fish community to a smaller number of hardy, euryhaline species. The southern portion of the FTB (Station 2) is largely vegetated with dense eelgrass and has developed a fish community typical of well-circulated waters and structured habitats, with species such as croaker, surfperch, kelpfish, and sand bass. Despite the great extents of eelgrass, sufficient habitat was available to support demersal species such as flatfish and sharks, commercially desirable species such as white seabass and California halibut, and ecologically important open water species of anchovy and atherinids. The creation of the FTB has increased the availability of important bay habitat, creating opportunities for the establishment of additional species and improving southern California fisheries resources through its provision of nursery functions for many marine fish. Nearly every fish species captured during the monitoring program to date has been represented by juvenile size classes, demonstrating the role of the basin as nursery habitat for spawning or post-larval dispersal. The eelgrass also provides nursery habitat for species such as topsmelt, which lay eggs on the eelgrass in estuaries and bays. The creation of shallow-water habitat rich with primary production supplies detritus-based and grazing-based food webs with energy. Ultimately, this energy is transferred to fish and used to support increased biomass and abundance in the basin. This increased production is also transferred offshore with individuals that leave the basin. The secondary production within the FTB also supports other ecological communities within the system by providing a ready fisheries food source for consumption by avian and mammalian consumers. Although all species of anchovy, an important prey group for terns and other birds, were either uncommon or absent from the FTB in Years 2 and 3, in Year 5 there were large catches of northern anchovy throughout the basin. Topsmelt and grunion were also considerably more abundant than in prior years. Other avian prey items such as Pacific sardine, slough anchovy, and deepbody anchovy were also available in the basin. The degree of avian consumption is not directly measured with the current monitoring program; however, twenty-five different bird species have been documented foraging for fish in the FTB. Piscivorous birds such as loons, cormorants, grebes, mergansers, and herons were regularly observed consuming fish.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 59 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Terns from the nearby nest sites were less commonly seen foraging in the FTB, though there were roughly three times as many foraging attempts recorded in Year 5 than in Years 2 and 3 for least tern, Forster’s tern, and Caspian tern. Foraging by elegant tern was much higher than Year 2 and lower than Year 3. Offshore waters likely provide alternative or preferred foraging habitat for terns. In the Muted Tidal Basins, restricted tidal influence and periodic water quality extremes limited the fish community to relatively hardy species in Year 5. However, the consistent presence of topsmelt, California killifish, and gobies in all three of the MTBs was reflected in the usage of these basins by terns and wading marsh birds for foraging. Although the west MTB showed relatively stable water quality, the central and east continued to experience fluctuations in temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen that limit the diversity of fish that can persist there. It is unlikely that diversity and complexity of the fish community in these basins will increase further due to the persistent FTB muting that prevents the basins from experiencing muted, but regular, tidal exchange as designed. The west MTB will continue to be the most diverse and functional basin due to its position at the highest elevation, thereby receiving some tidal circulation despite FTB muting. The Muted Pocket Marsh was sampled with the large beach seine and was generally found to be low in diversity but high in abundance of a few species, primarily California killifish and small topsmelt. In Year 5 there were more than twice as many fish captured as in Years 2 and 3, due to high densities of killifish. These small fish provide forage for the many piscivorous birds that use the marsh. It is key to note that the MPM is not hydrologically connected to the FTB of Bolsa Chica, rather it receives muted tidal influence through a water control structure from outer Bolsa Bay, through Huntington Harbour, which ultimately opens to the ocean over 6.5 km (4 miles) to the northwest. It is anticipated that future sampling events may document a few additional species tolerant of lower salinities and limited tidal flushing, however, the muted tidal conditions, the water control structure, and the distance from the ocean will limit the diversity and size of fish that ultimately make up the fish community of the marsh. The next monitoring is scheduled to occur in Year 10, with sampling events in October 2015, and January, April, and July 2016.

1.4. BENTHIC MONITORING

Introduction The Monitoring Plan calls for benthic invertebrate monitoring to be initiated in Year 2 and to be repeated in Years 5 and 10 following the opening of the FTB to the ocean. The Year 5 sampling was conducted in January and July of 2011. The objective of the benthic monitoring task in the Monitoring Plan is to characterize the marine invertebrate food resources available to birds and fish in the FTB, as well as provide an index of general habitat quality in the basin. Methodology Infauna Benthic sampling was performed in Year 5 on January 14 and July 5, 2011. Three sampling stations were established in the FTB during Year 2: one along the north eastern shore, one along the western shore, and one in the southern portion of the basin (Figure 1-10). Three replicate collection points were established for each station. At each replicate point, a sediment core was collected from locations established in 2008 at the + 0.3-m (+1-foot) NAVD elevation and from

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 60 Benthic Sta 1 Rep2 Benthic Sta 1 Rep1

Benthic Sta 3 Rep1

Benthic Sta 3 Rep2

Benthic Sta 1 Rep3

Benthic Sta 3 Rep3

Full Tidal Basin

Benthic Sta 2 Rep1

Benthic Sta 2 Rep2

Benthic Sta 2 Rep3

0100 200 400 600 800 Meters

Benthic sampling stations Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Figure 1-10

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

the -0.6-m (–2-foot) NAVD elevation (these elevations will be referred to in feet throughout this section). However, due to the tidal muting caused by the accumulated flood shoal in the basin inlet, the sample points received higher inundation frequencies than would be experienced at these elevations in a non-muted system. It would therefore be expected that the +1-foot samples would support fauna typically found at lower, less frequently exposed, elevations. The sediment cores were collected using a 15-cm diameter corer inserted to a sediment depth of 15 cm, and rinsed through a 1.0-mm sieve. The sediment area sampled by each core was 0.018 m2. Core collection unavoidably captured the biota occurring on the surface of the sampled core, as well as in the water column for the –2-foot NAVD samples. Therefore, the collected samples could include epibenthic and open water organisms along with the infauna. Although captured fish were removed from the samples, all other organisms were retained and worked up along with the infauna. Organisms from each sample were placed in containers, preserved in a buffered 10% formalin:seawater solution, and transported to the laboratory for subsequent analysis. After approximately one week, organisms collected from the benthic cores were transferred in the laboratory into 70% isopropyl alcohol. All individuals in each replicate sample were identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level, counted, and the wet weight measured. Wet weight was determined by transferring the sample, including alcohol, onto a paper towel and blotting quickly to remove excess liquid from the animals. Organisms were then transferred to a tared weighing dish and weighed to the nearest 0.0001 gram using an analytical balance. All samples were returned to the alcohol solution and archived for future reference. Because the benthic monitoring program was intended to broadly characterize the communities of infaunal organisms within the FTB of Bolsa Chica, species level classification was not deemed necessary. Rather, data were assembled into logical, higher-order taxonomic groups. Epifauna The epibenthic invertebrate sampling program made use of both a focused quadrat investigation and a more expansive field effort undertaken as a part of the fish community surveys. For the quadrat survey, a 1-m2 quadrat was tossed randomly at each of the sampling points, and at the two tidal elevations (+1 foot and –2 feet NAVD), utilized for the infauna coring (Figure 1-10). The muting condition discussed above would also have affected the epifaunal samples. All epifaunal organisms present on the surface of the substrate within the quadrat boundary were identified and counted. Macroalgae present in the quadrat were also recorded. Only representatives of those organisms that could not be positively identified in the field were collected for subsequent laboratory taxonomy and voucher collections. These individuals were preserved in a 10% formalin:seawater mixture and transported to the laboratory for identification. After approximately one week, organisms were transferred into 70% isopropyl alcohol and identified. Results Infauna In January 2011, eleven phyla were collected in the infauna cores at all three stations. Table 1- 14 presents the mean density of infauna for the three replicates at each station and elevation. Polychaetes and amphipods were the dominant taxa, accounting for 44% and 33% of the total abundance, respectively. Tanaids and gastropods were the third and fourth most abundant (11%

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 62 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

and 3% of the total, respectively). Densities of the major taxa were comparable at both the–2- foot and +1-foot elevation. Station 3 had the highest densities, driven primarily by greater numbers of polychaetes, amphipods, and tanaids than the other stations. Table 1-15 presents the mean biomass (g/m2) of infauna for the three replicates at each station and elevation in January 2011. Infaunal biomass in January was dominated by bivalves and polychaetes at all stations. Biomass was greater at the +1-foot elevation due to larger bivalves at Station 2.

Table 1-14. Mean density of infauna (individuals/m2) in January 2011. -2-feet NAVD +1-foot NAVD Phylum Taxa Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Annelida Class Polychaeta 640 2,373 5,876 3,446 2,335 1,921 Arthropoda Order Amphipoda 1,262 942 3,315 2,599 2,034 2,373 Order Decapoda 38 38 56 Order Isopoda 19 19 19 Order Tanaidacea 452 207 2,335 245 151 584 Cnidaria Class Anthozoa 38 19 Echinodermata Class Holothuroidea 19 56 19 Mollusca Class Bivalvia 19 320 19 75 377 75 Class Gastropoda 245 38 301 169 56 377 Nematoda Phylum Nematoda 19 Nemertea Phylum Nemertea 1,412 94 132 19 56 94 Phoronida Phylum Phoronida 38 Platyhelminthes Class Turbellaria 19 Chordata Class Ascidiacea 19 Sipuncula Phylum Sipuncula 19 Total Mean Density all Taxa (individuals/m2) 4,200 4,068 11,996 6,554 5,160 5,443

Table 1-15. Mean biomass of infauna (g/m2) in January 2011. -2-feet NAVD +1-foot NAVD Phylum Taxa Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Annelida Class Polychaeta 4.902 22.192 11.870 15.132 11.503 17.915 Arthropoda Order Amphipoda 1.209 0.635 5.557 3.474 2.548 2.706 Order Decapoda 0.416 0.168 8.945 Order Isopoda 0.038 0.021 0.013 Order Tanaidacea 0.132 0.173 1.878 0.322 0.040 0.171 Cnidaria Class Anthozoa 0.045 0.017 Echinodermata Class Holothuroidea 0.748 0.192 0.744 Mollusca Class Bivalvia 16.109 16.593 0.162 2.757 112.354 1.606 Class Gastropoda 0.802 0.200 3.537 0.439 1.266 10.473 Nematoda Phylum Nematoda 0.002 Nemertea Phylum Nemertea 4.893 0.183 0.635 0.107 0.149 0.352 Phoronida Phylum Phoronida 0.122 Platyhelminthes Class Turbellaria 0.077 Chordata Class Ascidiacea 0.202 Sipuncula Phylum Sipuncula 0.765 Total Mean Biomass all Taxa (g/m2) 29.618 40.243 23.655 22.231 137.774 33.968

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 63 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

In July 2011, eight phyla were collected from the infauna cores, with amphipods making up 48% of the total individuals captured, and polychaetes making up 33% (Table 1-16). Total density was similar at both elevations and greatest at Station 2, where notably more polychaetes and amphipods were found than at the other stations. Table 1-17 presents July 2011 biomass, which was also similar at both elevations and greatest at Station 2.

Table 1-16. Mean density of infauna (individuals/m2) in July 2011. -2-feet NAVD +1-foot NAVD Phylum Taxa Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Annelida Class Polychaeta 3.539 11.480 2.729 3.049 29.846 4.478 Arthropoda Order Amphipoda 0.198 0.797 2.222 0.281 5.573 0.637 Order Decapoda 0.234 0.130 0.111 0.186 34.008 Order Isopoda 0.228 0.458 0.104 0.092 Order Tanaidacea 0.068 0.316 0.339 0.047 0.153 0.205 Class Pycnogonida 0.019 Class Copepoda 0.017 0.019 Cnidaria Class Anthozoa 0.049 0.017 0.017 Class Scyphozoa 0.019 Echinodermata Class Holothuroidea 0.077 2.467 Subclass Ophiuroidea 0.128 Mollusca Class Bivalvia 19.814 80.456 0.115 167.488 128.077 Class Gastropoda 129.311 0.245 0.318 0.740 107.047 1.075 Nemertea Phylum Nemertea 0.832 0.275 0.128 0.041 0.160 0.185 Phoronida Phylum Phoronida 0.032 Platyhelminthes Class Turbellaria 0.021 Total Mean Biomass all Taxa (g/m2) 154.290 94.337 5.979 172.030 307.476 6.580

Table 1-17. Mean biomass of infauna (g/m2) in July 2011. -2-feet NAVD +1-foot NAVD Phylum Taxa Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Annelida Class Polychaeta 904 5,330 1,092 546 1,789 3,804 Arthropoda Order Amphipoda 377 5,725 3,126 395 8,456 1,262 Order Decapoda 19 75 19 19 188 Order Isopoda 94 433 38 38 Order Tanaidacea 56 452 1,563 38 414 1,149 Class Pycnogonida 19 Class Copepoda 19 19 Cnidaria Class Anthozoa 56 19 19 Class Scyphozoa 19 Echinodermata Class Holothuroidea 19 19 Subclass Ophiuroidea 113 Mollusca Class Bivalvia 75 339 19 151 433 Class Gastropoda 377 94 75 245 38 245 Nemertea Phylum Nemertea 56 339 75 19 75 38 Phoronida Phylum Phoronida 19 Platyhelminthes Class Turbellaria 38 Total Mean Density all Taxa (individuals/m2) 2,034 12,957 5,989 1,488 11,507 6,497

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 64 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 1-11 presents a summary comparison between the Year 2 (2008) and Year 5 (2011) January and July density and biomass of all taxa combined, by station and tidal elevation. There was high variability between all parameters with no clear seasonal or annual patterns between stations or elevations.

The epifauna documented in the 1-m quadrat assessment in January and July 2011 are presented in Table 1-18 (all replicates combined).

The epifaunal invertebrates captured in the fishing nets in 2011 were presented in Table 1-13 by station and sampling quarter (all replicates combined). Considerably more diversity was recorded than was seen in the quadrat assessment due the greater area and depth range sampled.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 65 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Infauna density at -2-feet NAVD 30,000 ) 2 25,000 January 2008 July 2008 20,000 January 2011 July 2011 15,000

10,000

5,000 Infauna density (indiv/m 0 Station 1 Station 2 Station 3

Infauna density at +1-foot NAVD 30,000 )

2 January 2008 25,000 July 2008 January 2011 20,000 July 2011 15,000

10,000

5,000 Infauna density (indiv/m 0 Station 1 Station 2 Station 3

Infauna biomass at -2-feet NAVD 400

) January 2008 2 350 July 2008 300 January 2011 250 July 2011 200 150 100

Infauna biomass (g/m biomass Infauna 50 0 Station 1 Station 2 Station 3

Infauna biomass at +1-foot NAVD 600

) January 2008 2 500 July 2008 January 2011 400 July 2011

300

200

100 Infauna biomass (g/m biomass Infauna

0 Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Figure 1-11. Mean infauna density (individuals/m2) and biomass (g/m2) (+ 1 SD) in January and July 2008 and 2011 by station and tidal elevation.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 66 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-18. Counts of epibenthic invertebrates detected in 1-m2 quadrats in January and July 2011.

January 2011January 2011 July 2011 July 2011 + 1-foot NAVD Elevation -2-foot NAVD Elevation + 1-foot NAVD Elevation -2-foot NAVD Elevation Phylum Taxa Common name Sta 1Sta 2Sta 3Sta 1Sta 2Sta 3Sta 1Sta 2Sta 3Sta 1Sta 2Sta 3 Phylum Chordata Styela plicata* Leathery Tunicate 46 3 18 13 8 1 2 1 Ciona sp. 2 Phylum Porifera Sponge present present Phylum Ectoprocta Phylum Ectoprocta Bryozoan present Phylum Mollusca Navanax inermis Navanax 1 2 1 Navanax inermis eggs Navanax present present present Phylum Mollusca Argopecten ventricosus Pacific Calico Scallop 3 Ostrea lurida Native Oyster 22 36 15 18 34 19 5 4 3 Mytilus galloprovincialis* Mediterranean Mussel 5 1 18 3 19 Crepidula fornicata American Slipper Limpet 5 22 Nassarius tegula Covered-lip Nassa 1 2 Bulla gouldiana California bubble snail 1 Algae Copomenia tuberculata 10% 10% Plants Zostera marina Eelgrass 2% 70% 20% 70% 100% 30% 10% 100% 80% 100% Ruppia maritima Wigeongrass 3% 15% 1% Total 6814551322320742412333 * non-native species

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 67 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

1.5. WATER QUALITY MONITORING

The Monitoring Plan calls for water quality monitoring to be conducted in Years 2, 5, and 10 post-restoration. The Year 5 monitoring was performed concurrently with quarterly fisheries monitoring activities, using untended, deployed instruments programmed to collect continuous data for month long intervals. As detailed in the Year 2 report (M&A 2009), considerable data collection failures occurred at that time as a result of the long-term deployment, lack of instrument redundancy, and failure-prone instrumentation (Hydrolab Datasonde 5). The monitoring program was therefore modified in Year 5 to include mid-deployment instrument servicing, backup instrument deployment, and a switch to an alternate leading instrument manufacturer. Methodology Two YSI 6920 V2 water quality dataloggers were deployed at each of two stations within the FTB: Station 1 and Station 2 (Figure 1-1). The station coordinates are provided in Appendix 1- A. These locations were positioned to correspond to the general location of fisheries and benthic invertebrate monitoring. The depths at water quality Stations 1 and 2 are approximately –1.2 m and –1.3 m NAVD, respectively. The units were calibrated in accordance with manufacturer specifications and programmed to log water depth (m), temperature (C), dissolved oxygen (DO)(mg/L), turbidity (NTU), and salinity (ppt) at 20-minute intervals for 30 days. The units were mounted side by side to weighted boards and deployed in the FTB in October 2010 and January, April, and July 2011 (Year 5). At the time of deployment and retrieval, water quality readings were taken with an independent, tended instrument next to the YSIs for quality control purposes. Roughly half way through the deployment period, the instruments were removed from the water, cleaned, and in some cases recalibrated. Following data collection, the retrieved units were placed in calibration solutions and re-checked for accuracy. A technician downloaded the units and transferred the data to the project database for review and analysis. The data were reviewed to detect and remove spurious data points that may have resulted from algal fouling of probes, signal decay from sediment loading or biologic activities within the sensor cup, or that were out of the range of the capability of the unit. Accepted data were plotted graphically, numerically analyzed, and reviewed to generate summary statistics. Despite the deployment of backup instruments at each station, in most cases only one acceptable dataset was obtained for each parameter at each station. The data that best matched the deployment and retrieval control readings were selected for presentation. In several instances only one of the four instruments provided usable data. As with the Hydrolab Datasondes used previously in the program, the YSIs experienced chronic problems including internal flooding, premature logging stoppage, unexplained signal decay, and out of range readings. The accepted data are presented in the following figures and summarized below. Results In October 2010 only one of the four deployed instruments collected usable data. The unit was at Station 1 and only the temperature and salinity probes returned data within the expected range and comparable to the quality control readings taken at deployment and retrieval. These data are

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 68 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

presented below in Figure 1-12. Temperature ranged from 18.2 to 22.4 Celsius (C) at Station 1, with a mean of 19.9C. Salinity ranged 33.2 to 37.3 parts per thousand (ppt). The acceptable January 2011 data are presented in Figure 1-13. At Station 1, temperature ranged from 12.1 to 16.5C, with a mean of 14.6C. At Station 2, temperature ranged from 12.8 to 16.3C, with a mean of 14.7C. Salinity data were only acceptable for the second half of the logging interval, at Station 1, ranging from 31.5 to 33.4 ppt, with a mean of 32.4 ppt. Dissolved oxygen (DO) data were complete at Station 1 and a week short at Station 2. Dissolved oxygen at Station 1 ranged from 6.7 to 10.5 milligrams/liter (mg/L) (mean of 8.2 mg/L) and at Station 2 ranged from 6.7 to 11.7 mg/L (mean of 8.5 mg/L). Turbidity data were erratic, reflecting frequent interference from biotic and abiotic items passing in front of the sensor, however the readings between interruptions show relatively low turbidity at both stations. In April 2011, temperature at Station 1 ranged from 17.6 to 22.8C, with a mean of 20.5C and at Station 2, ranged from 13.5 to 21.1C, with a mean of 17.7C (Figure 1-14). Salinity data were only acceptable at Station 1, ranging from 34.6 to 37.7 ppt, with a mean of 36.0 ppt. Dissolved oxygen at Station 1 ranged from 3.2 to 9.1 mg/L (mean of 6.5 mg/L). No DO data were usable from Station 2. Turbidity data were only acceptable at Station 2, for a portion of the logging period. The July 2011 dataset was most complete (Figure 1-15). At Station 1, temperature ranged from 22.1 to 26.2C, with a mean of 24.2C. At Station 2, temperature ranged from 15.9 to 24.0C, with a mean of 20.8C. Salinity data were only acceptable at Station 1, ranging from 32.5 to 35.1 ppt, with a mean of 33.9 ppt. Dissolved oxygen at Station 1 ranged from 3.2 to 7.3 mg/L (mean of 5.5 mg/L) and at Station 2 ranged from 2.9 to 9.3 mg/L (mean of 6.7 mg/L). Turbidity was generally higher at Station 1 than Station 2. Discussion The failure of much of the instrumentation illustrates the difficulty involved in collecting continuous water quality data for multiple parameters over an extended time period. Without retrieving, cleaning, and recalibrating the instruments every few days, which is generally cost prohibitive, it is unlikely that complete, reliable datasets can be collected for more than roughly one week within the FTB. An exception lies with the temperature data, which are collected by a probe that is very reliable, immune to fouling, and capable of holding its calibration for a month or longer. However, the data that were successfully collected show the FTB to be under full tidal marine influence, reflecting the daily and monthly tidal fluctuations seen in the open ocean. With no significant freshwater input into the FTB, water quality was driven primarily by water depth, circulation within the basin, and the quality of incoming ocean waters. All parameters were within acceptable ranges to support the fish, invertebrate, and vegetation communities documented elsewhere in this report, and are indicative of a well-flushed marine environment. Although DO frequently fell below 5 mg/L (a concentration which is typically considered the lower end of a range adequate to support biological organisms), it was only for several hours and quickly returned to higher levels. Many species are well adapted to survive brief periods of extremely low or even no DO by either physiologic or behavioral responses. If necessary, motile organisms can move to other areas, while some sessile invertebrates are able to

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 69 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Temperature Salinity 24 38

23 37

22 36

21 35 20

34 19

33 18 Station 1 (North) Station 1 (North) 32 17

16 31 15:00:51 6:20:52 21:40:52 13:00:52 4:20:53 19:40:53 11:00:52 2:20:52 17:40:52 9: 00:53 0:20:53 15:40:52 15:00:51 7: 20:52 23:40:52 16:00:53 8:20:52 0:40:52 17:00:52 9: 20:53 1:40:53 18:00:52 10:20:56 2: 40:51 10/ 7/ 2010 10/ 10/ 2010 10/ 12/ 2010 10/ 15/ 2010 10/ 18/ 2010 10/ 20/ 2010 10/ 23/ 2010 10/ 26/ 2010 10/ 28/ 2010 10/ 31/ 2010 11/ 3/ 2010 11/ 5/ 2010 10/ 7/ 2010 10/ 10/ 2010 10/ 12/ 2010 10/ 15/ 2010 10/ 18/ 2010 10/ 21/ 2010 10/ 23/ 2010 10/ 26/ 2010 10/ 29/ 2010 10/ 31/ 2010 11/ 3/ 2010 11/ 6/ 2010

Figure 1-12. October 2010 water quality data from the Full Tidal Basin.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 70 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Temperature Salinity 17 34

16 . 5 33.5

16 33 15 . 5

32.5 15

14 . 5 32

14 31.5

13 . 5 Station 1 (North) 31 13 Station 2 (South) Station 1 (North) 30.5 12 . 5

12 30 16:20:52 21:20:52 2:20:53 7:20:53 12:20:53 17:20:53 22:20:52 3:20:53 8:20:53 13:20:53 18:20:53 23:20:53 4:20:53 16:20:52 21:20:52 2:20:53 7:20:53 12:20:53 17:20:53 22:20:52 3:20:53 8:20:53 13:20:53 18:20:53 23:20:53 4:20:53 1/ 20/ 2011 1/ 22/ 2011 1/ 25/ 2011 1/ 27/ 2011 1/ 29/ 2011 1/ 31/ 2011 2/ 2/ 2011 2/ 5/ 2011 2/ 7/ 2011 2/ 9/ 2011 2/ 11/ 2011 2/ 13/ 2011 2/ 16/ 2011 1/ 20/ 2011 1/ 22/ 2011 1/ 25/ 2011 1/ 27/ 2011 1/ 29/ 2011 1/ 31/ 2011 2/ 2/ 2011 2/ 5/ 2011 2/ 7/ 2011 2/ 9/ 2011 2/ 11/ 2011 2/ 13/ 2011 2/ 16/ 2011

Turbidity Dissolved Oxygen

10 0 12

Station 1 (North) Station 1 (North) 11 80 Station 2 (South) Station 2 (South)

10 60

40 8

20 7

0 6 16:20:52 21:20:52 2: 20:53 7:20:53 12:20:53 17:20:53 22:20:52 3:20:53 8:20:53 13:20:53 18:20:53 23:20:53 4:20:53 16:20:52 21:40:53 3:00:53 8:20:53 13:40:53 19:00:53 0:20:53 5:40:52 11:00:53 16:20:53 21:40:53 3: 00:53 8:20:53 1/ 20/ 2011 1/ 22/ 2011 1/ 25/ 2011 1/ 27/ 2011 1/ 29/ 2011 1/ 31/ 2011 2/ 2/ 2011 2/ 5/ 2011 2/ 7/ 2011 2/ 9/ 2011 2/ 11/ 2011 2/ 13/ 2011 2/ 16/ 2011 1/ 20/ 2011 1/ 22/ 2011 1/ 25/ 2011 1/ 27/ 2011 1/ 29/ 2011 1/ 31/ 2011 2/ 3/ 2011 2/ 5/ 2011 2/ 7/ 2011 2/ 9/ 2011 2/ 11/ 2011 2/ 14/ 2011 2/ 16/ 2011 Figure 1-13. January 2011 water quality data from the Full Tidal Basin.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 71 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Temperature Salinity 24 38

37.5 22 37

36.5 20

18 35.5

35 16 34.5 Station 1 (North) 34 14 Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) 33.5

12 33 13:40:51 23:00:52 8:20:52 17:40:52 3:00:52 12:20:52 21:40:52 7:00:52 16:20:53 1:40:50 11:00:52 20:20:51 5:40:52 13:40:51 23:00:52 8:20:52 17:40:52 3:00:52 12:20:52 21:40:52 7:00:52 16:20:53 1:40:50 11:00:52 20:20:51 5:40:52 4/ 21/ 2011 4/ 23/ 2011 4/ 26/ 2011 4/ 28/ 2011 5/ 1/ 2011 5/ 3/ 2011 5/ 5/ 2011 5/ 8/ 2011 5/ 10/ 2011 5/ 13/ 2011 5/ 15/ 2011 5/ 17/ 2011 5/ 20/ 2011 4/ 21/ 2011 4/ 23/ 2011 4/ 26/ 2011 4/ 28/ 2011 5/ 1/ 2011 5/ 3/ 2011 5/ 5/ 2011 5/ 8/ 2011 5/ 10/ 2011 5/ 13/ 2011 5/ 15/ 2011 5/ 17/ 2011 5/ 20/ 2011

Turbidity Dissolved Oxygen

10 0 10

80 8 Station 2 (South)

7 60

40 5

4 20

3 Station 1 (North)

0 2 13:40:51 18:40:52 23:40:52 4:40:51 9:40:53 14:40:52 19:40:52 0:40:52 5:40:52 10:40:52 15:40:51 20:40:52 1:40:51 13:40:51 23:00:52 8:20:52 17:40:52 3:00:52 12:20:52 21:40:52 7:00:52 16:20:53 1:40:50 11:00:52 20:20:51 5:40:52 4/ 21/ 2011 4/ 23/ 2011 4/ 25/ 2011 4/ 28/ 2011 4/ 30/ 2011 5/ 2/ 2011 5/ 4/ 2011 5/ 7/ 2011 5/ 9/ 2011 5/ 11/ 2011 5/ 13/ 2011 5/ 15/ 2011 5/ 18/ 2011 4/ 21/ 2011 4/ 23/ 2011 4/ 26/ 2011 4/ 28/ 2011 5/ 1/ 2011 5/ 3/ 2011 5/ 5/ 2011 5/ 8/ 2011 5/ 10/ 2011 5/ 13/ 2011 5/ 15/ 2011 5/ 17/ 2011 5/ 20/ 2011

Figure 1-14. April 2011 water quality data from the Full Tidal Basin.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 72 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Temperature Salinity 28 36

26 35.5

35 24

34.5 22

34 20 33.5

18 33 Station 1 (North) Station 2 (South) 16 32.5 Station 2 (South)

14 32 16:00:50 0:40:50 9:20:50 18:00:51 2:40:51 11:20:50 20:00:51 4:40:50 13:20:51 22:00:51 6:40:51 15:20:51 0:00:51 16:00:50 0:40:50 9:20:50 18:00:51 2:40:51 11:20:50 20:00:51 4:40:50 13:20:51 22:00:51 6:40:51 15:20:51 0:00:51 7/ 5/ 2011 7/ 8/ 2011 7/ 10/ 2011 7/ 12/ 2011 7/ 15/ 2011 7/ 17/ 2011 7/ 19/ 2011 7/ 22/ 2011 7/ 24/ 2011 7/ 26/ 2011 7/ 29/ 2011 7/ 31/ 2011 8/ 3/ 2011 7/ 5/ 2011 7/ 8/ 2011 7/ 10/ 2011 7/ 12/ 2011 7/ 15/ 2011 7/ 17/ 2011 7/ 19/ 2011 7/ 22/ 2011 7/ 24/ 2011 7/ 26/ 2011 7/ 29/ 2011 7/ 31/ 2011 8/ 3/ 2011

Turbidity Dissolved Oxygen

10 0 10

9 Station 1 (North) 80 Station 2 (South) 8

60 6

5 40 4

3 20 Station 1 (North) 2 Station 2 (South) 0 1 16:00:50 1:20:50 10:40:50 20:00:51 5:20:51 14:40:50 0:00:51 9:20:50 18:40:50 4:00:50 13:20:50 22:40:51 8:00:51 16:00:50 2:40:50 13:20:50 0:00:50 10:40:50 21:20:50 8:00:51 18:40:51 5:20:50 16:00:51 2:40:51 13:20:51 0:00:51 7/ 5/ 2011 7/ 8/ 2011 7/ 10/ 2011 7/ 12/ 2011 7/ 15/ 2011 7/ 17/ 2011 7/ 20/ 2011 7/ 22/ 2011 7/ 24/ 2011 7/ 27/ 2011 7/ 29/ 2011 7/ 31/ 2011 8/ 3/ 2011 7/ 5/ 2011 7/ 8/ 2011 7/ 10/ 2011 7/ 13/ 2011 7/ 15/ 2011 7/ 17/ 2011 7/ 20/ 2011 7/ 22/ 2011 7/ 25/ 2011 7/ 27/ 2011 7/ 30/ 2011 8/ 1/ 2011 8/ 4/ 2011

Figure 1-15. July 2011 water quality data from the Full Tidal Basin.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 73 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

stretch from their burrows or extend body parts up into better oxygenated waters, increase water flow over respiration organs, or even shut down most metabolic functions until conditions improve. There was no evidence from the fish and invertebrate monitoring work that hypoxia is a problem in the basin. There is concern that possible restrictions in the basin inlet could lead to partial or full closure of the basin. On-going physical monitoring of the condition of the inlet and the flood shoal is key to foreseeing that event before it occurs. Such monitoring is conducted regularly as part of the management of the Bolsa Chica Restoration Project. Closure of the inlet would quickly result in a decline in water quality for the marine community in the basin, particularly DO. If restrictions of concern were detected, a focused study of DO levels in the basin would be initiated, employing the more intensive maintenance and quality control measures needed.

1.6. AVIAN MONITORING

GENERAL AVIAN MONITORING Introduction The general avian monitoring program for the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project was designed to employ similar methodologies and survey units as those used in previous pre- restoration biological survey work. The Monitoring Plan calls for avian monitoring to be conducted once per month in monitoring Years 2, 5, and 10. Review of other long-term avian monitoring program data, such as the Batiquitos Lagoon Restoration Long-Term Monitoring Program and the Port of Los Angeles/Port of Long Beach Biological Baseline Study, suggested that such closely spaced monitoring events (monthly) may not provide significantly more useful information on avian site-usage than quarterly or bi-monthly surveys. With review and concurrence by the Bolsa Chica Steering Committee and the California Coastal Commission, a revised monitoring schedule was adopted to conduct the surveys every other month, distributed over a period of two years (monitoring Years 2 and 3), for the same total of 12 surveys. Surveys would also be conducted every second month in Years 5/6 and 9/10. However, following completion of the Year 5 monitoring, it was clear that the post-restoration avian usage of the site to date had been well documented (18 surveys) and that there were no findings of concern that could be further investigated through another year of monitoring. The Steering Committee felt that, in light of a limited monitoring budget, other monitoring and management activities were a higher priority. No avian monitoring was conducted in Year 6. Merkel & Associates biologists conducted the avian surveys with assistance from a team of birders from Chambers Group, Inc. The results presented in this report are for Year 5 and compared to Years 2 and 3. Methodology Study Area The study area for the general avian surveys at Bolsa Chica was divided into "zones" (differing from "stations" for the fish and benthic studies) (Figure 1-16). The USFWS provided the initial zone boundaries and numbering. The term zone is interchangeable with the term cell, often used at Bolsa Chica when numbering the marsh units bounded by service roads throughout the site. The created Full Tidal Basin (FTB) was divided up into new zones as described below.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 74 Full Tidal Basin Future Full Tidal Muted Pocket Marsh Muted Tidal Basins 50 PM Seasonal Ponds 66 47

49 48

68 69 Cordgrass Bench 45

40 39 38

70 63 37 71 30

32 29 31 72 33 34 19 28 35 27 20 26 21 14 25 36

22 24 13 9 23

12 73 10

2 11

0100 200 400 600 800 Meters

Avian Zones Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Figure 1-16

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

The Seasonal Ponds at the southeastern side of Bolsa Chica were divided into Zones 2 through 13. These zones consist mainly of salt panne with small to extensive expanses of pickleweed, primarily along the slightly elevated zone boundaries. Portions are seasonally inundated with fresh to brackish water that becomes highly saline later as evaporation concentrates the remaining water over the salt panne. Zones 14 through 40 and Zone 63 (Future Full Tidal Basin) occur between the Seasonal Ponds and the Muted Tidal Basin and include Freeman Creek. These zones are very similar to the Seasonal Ponds and consist mainly of salt panne and pickleweed, although there are some areas that retain water year-round. Zone 36 is primarily a freshwater marsh. Zones 41 through 50 and Zone 66 (Muted Tidal Basin) occupy the northeastern section of Bolsa Chica. These zones generally contain less salt panne, with broad expanses of pickleweed. Zones 49, 50, 66, and a portion of 48 were exposed to muted tidal influence in March 2008. The other zones of the Muted Tidal Basins were inundated by tidal overflow and rainwater for much of the year, but were not open directly to the Full Tidal Basin. The portions of these zones closest to the residential neighborhoods, particularly Zone 47, have an increased amount of weedy species. Zones 68 through 73 are located within the FTB and are subject to full tidal influence. Zone 68 (Rabbit Island) is located on the western portion of the site between Inner Bolsa Bay and the FTB. This zone previously had more habitat diversity than most of the other zones, with salt marsh, alkali marsh, and upland plant species. The introduction of tidal influence in August 2006 resulted in the inundation of much of Rabbit Island during high spring tides, causing the existing low elevation habitats to die off as the area transitioned into mudflats and low to middle marsh habitats. Zone 69 borders Rabbit Island to the east. Zone 71 is the newly created California least tern (Sterna antillarum browni) and western snowy plover nesting site: Nest Site 1 (NS1). Zone 71 is generally maintained to be a relatively unvegetated, sandy strip that gently slopes towards the FTB. During the Year 5 surveys, however, Zone 71 had areas of moderate to high vegetation that included weedy species as well as dune plant species. The remaining zones include the intertidal mudflat on the eastern shore of the basin, often referred to often as the cordgrass bench, and open water bounded by shoreline riprap. The Muted Pocket Marsh (MPM) occurs north of Rabbit Island and is not hydrologically connected to the Bolsa Chica Lowlands; rather it experiences a muted tidal influence through a restricted tidal inlet leading to Outer Bolsa Bay. This area is shallow intertidal and subtidal with salt marsh at the higher elevations. The northern shore of the MPM is lined with large eucalyptus trees that died when tidal influence was introduced. The dead trees that remain provide roosting and perching habitat for multiple bird species that use the marsh. Survey Methodology The Muted Tidal Basins (MTB), Future Full Tidal Basin (FFTB), and Seasonal Ponds (Zones 1 through 66) were surveyed on foot by teams of biologists. The FTB (Zones 68 through 73) was surveyed by vehicle, with multiple stops to view and record birds on foot. Much of Zone 68 was surveyed from the pedestrian foot trail and the Muted Pocket Marsh was surveyed on foot. The survey of Zone 71, which is a breeding colony for terns and shorebirds (NS1), was modified according to the season. The entire zone was surveyed on foot except during the middle of the breeding season (June). During the June survey, access was adjusted to accommodate the nesting birds and was often viewed from a distance from both ends of the nest site.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 76 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Surveys began in October 2010 to mark the start of Year 5 of the monitoring program and were continued every other month (see Table 1-19 for survey dates). Prior avian surveys were conducted every other month from October 2007 until August 2009. Surveys were conducted over a two-day period at each survey interval in such a way as to minimize the possibility of double-counts between the two days. The FTB and Seasonal Ponds were normally surveyed the first day, and the MPM, FFTB, and MTBs surveyed the second day. The surveys were conducted during a tide low enough to expose the mudflat on the eastern shore of the FTB, generally within a predicted oceanic tide range of +0.9 to +0.3m (+3 to +1 ft) NAVD88. At this tide, the shoals in the inlet of the FTB where large numbers of gulls, cormorants, and pelicans loaf were only partially exposed. Each of five teams, which included 2-3 people (1-2 observers and 1 recorder), was responsible for surveying an assigned set of zones over each survey day, which extended from approximately 0700 to 1200. Team size depended upon complexity of the survey area and seasonal abundance of birds. Multiple observers allowed teams to minimize double-counts associated with bird movements between zones. The field biologists used both binoculars and spotting scopes to identify and count species. All teams conducted surveys simultaneously. Data collected included species, number of individuals, activities of the birds (foraging, flying, or resting), and habitats in which the birds occurred (open water, nest site [includes NS 1, 2, and 3], mud flat, salt marsh, disturbed salt marsh, freshwater marsh, willow riparian, mulefat scrub, coastal sage and baccharis scrub, salt panne [dry], inundated salt panne, decaying and transitional vegetation, riprap, sand bar, non- native vegetation, and disturbed/road). Weather conditions, including air temperature, wind speed, wind direction, cloud cover, precipitation, and tide height, were recorded several times during each survey day. Due to the large size of the zones being surveyed, particularly in the FTB, identifications were often made over great distances. When it was not possible to identify a bird to the species level due to distance, overhead flight, or a limited view of the bird, a less specific identification was made such as “unidentified gull” or “unidentified swallow”. In cases where challenging lighting conditions and long distances prevented the distinction between two species that are very similar and require close inspection to identify, the less specific name was used if necessary, i.e. greater and lesser scaup or long-billed and short-billed dowitcher were identified as “unidentified scaup” and “unidentified dowitcher”, respectively. Avifauna observed during field surveys were recorded on field data sheets along with collection location, time, and name of field observer. All field staff carried a field guide to avoid misidentification of uncommon species. In order to avoid double counts of birds, individuals that were observed on the boundary of a zone or flying from one zone to another were recorded by only one team. This was determined by communicating directly with the other team by phone. If contact could not be made, the data were recorded and details were noted on the data sheets including the time of the sighting. At the end of each survey, the survey teams rejoined to review the data sheets and, if necessary, corrections were made to the data sheets to avoid overcounting of individual birds. In some cases it was not possible to definitively assess whether a double-count had occurred, particularly with large flocks of highly transitory shorebirds and with raptors, which ranged over

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 77 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

all survey zones and were seen on both survey days. In cases where an over-count was suspected, a note was included in the reported table of birds observed. All survey data were initially recorded in the field on hard copy data sheets and then transferred in the office to digital database files and checked for accuracy. The database was then queried to extract summary information used to prepare tables and figures. Data were analyzed to identify spatial and temporal trends in total avian abundance, numbers of species, and patterns of habitat usage, activity, and seasonal variation. Each bird species observed was assigned to one of 9 ecological guilds (Appendix 1-F). Attempts were made previously to locate results of pre-restoration avian monitoring programs within Bolsa Chica for comparison. Data collected during prior general avian surveys of the site were not located. Prior western snowy plover reports prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Fancher, 1998; Fancher et al., 1998, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005a, 2005b, 2006) and the report on Belding’s Savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) populations in California (Zembal et al., 2006) were located and reviewed. The following results section includes all data collected from October 2010 to August 2011, capturing monitoring Year 5 (see Figure 0-2 for monitoring schedule). Results A summary of the 2010/11 (Year 5) avian survey results is presented in Table 1-19. Avian abundance was highest during the winter surveys and lowest during the June surveys, when counts were notably lower. The low count was due to the absence of many shorebirds and wintering ducks, and the timing of the survey at the end of the spring migration period. Species counts ranged from 72 to 99 species and were highest during the December and February surveys. A total of 129 species were observed in Year 5, for a grand total of 159 species observed since the start of post-restoration monitoring in October 2007. Table 1-19. Summary of 2010/2011(Year 5) survey dates and number of birds and species observed. Date Number of Birds Number of Species October 10 & 11, 2010 11,484 86 December 9 & 10, 2010 18,312 99 February 21 & 22, 2011 20,084 98 April 10 & 20, 2011 14,392 86 June 14 & 15, 2011 5,393 81 August 15 & 16, 2011 8,130 72

Table 1-20 presents the count totals by species for each survey event. Abundance data tables are presented in Appendix 1-G showing abundance for each species by survey zone. Overall, the ten most abundant species observed in 2010/11 were western sandpiper (Calidris mauri) (30.3% of the total), followed by California gull (Larus californicus) (7.1%), black-bellied plover (Pluvialis squatarola) (7.0%), American coot (Fulica americana) (3.8%), dowitcher (Limnodromus spp.) (3.6%), northern shoveler (Anas clypeata), (3.6%), Belding’s Savannah sparrow (2.6%), elegant tern (2.3%), least sandpiper (Calidris minutilla) (1.7%), and northern pintail (Anas acuta) (1.8%). The high abundance of California gull was largely due to the count of wintering gulls observed loafing in the Full Tidal Basin during the December 2010 survey.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 78 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-20. Avian abundance by survey 2010/2011 (Year 5). Species Oct-10 Dec-10 Feb-11 Apr-11 Jun-11 Aug-11 Total Pacific Loon 1 1 Horned Grebe 1 10 11 Eared Grebe 51 101 200 68 420 Pied-billed Grebe 32 33 27 12 1 4 109 Western Grebe 1 2 2 5 White Pelican 5 5 Brown Pelican 268 1 53 351 100 125 898 Double-crested Cormorant 141 53 68 36 127 156 581 Brandt's Cormorant 1 1 American Bittern 1 1 Black-crowned Night Heron 14 25 11 17 50 32 149 Green Heron 1 1 2 Reddish Egret 5 4 4 5 18 Snowy Egret 97 65 48 79 106 72 467 Great Egret 37 23 24 31 32 65 212 Great Blue Heron 17 19 25 11 39 47 158 White-faced Ibis 1 1 Canada Goose 5 354 29 29 9 426 Brant 6 15 88 1 110 Mallard 30 58 63 116 129 56 452 Gadwall 41 47 210 187 144 18 647 Green-winged Teal 62 317 348 3 730 American Wigeon 92 537 522 7 6 1,164 Northern Pintail 19 711 550 1,280 Northern Shoveler 186 965 1,413 217 2,781 Blue-winged Teal 5 27 21 28 4 2 87 Cinnamon Teal 5 26 79 42 5 157 Canvasback 2 2 4 Redhead 1 95 20 25 74 18 233 Greater Scaup 12 1 31 44 Lesser Scaup 20 20 Unidentified Scaup 23 31 2 56 Unidentified Duck 7 1 1 3 12 Surf Scoter 13 16 29 Bufflehead 253 158 411 Common Merganser 8 8 Red-breasted Merganser 12 1 9 22 Ruddy Duck 39 280 551 337 25 7 1,239 Turkey Vulture 2 3 3 2 10 Osprey 1 4 1 2 8 White-tailed Kite 2 2 2 2 7 15 Northern Harrier 6 15 21 Short-billed Dowitcher 12 12 Unidentified Dowitcher 526 655 714 550 203 180 2,828 Cooper's Hawk* 2 1 4 7 Red-shouldered Hawk 1 1 2 Red-tailed Hawk* 2 1 2 2 5 2 14

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 79 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-20. Avian abundance by survey (2010/2011) cont’d. Species Oct-10 Dec-10 Feb-11 Apr-11 Jun-11 Aug-11 Total American Kestrel* 8 1 3 12 Peregrine Falcon 4 1 4 2 11 Sora 1 2 2 2 1 2 10 American Coot 234 475 1,471 753 14 20 2,967 Common Moorhen 2 1 3 Black-bellied Plover 949 1,878 1,595 96 97 841 5,456 Western Snowy Plover 3 5 49 66 51 174 Semipalmated Plover 265 67 63 87 127 133 742 Killdeer 173 98 79 118 113 101 682 American Avocet 83 172 618 191 71 3 1,138 Black-necked Stilt 132 123 99 355 214 97 1,020 Willet 137 62 180 34 39 140 592 Greater Yellowlegs 16 42 13 4 43 11 129 Lesser Yellowlegs 7 8 4 4 4 27 Unidentified Yellowlegs 11 11 90 5 13 16 146 Whimbrel 3 14 12 10 11 14 64 Long-billed Curlew 20 19 21 13 7 37 117 Marbled Godwit 81 190 227 35 20 36 589 Ruddy Turnstone 23 17 4 3 7 4 58 Red Knot 21 4 34 6 65 Sanderling 74 62 103 12 11 2 264 Dunlin 141 194 337 42 102 816 Unidentified Sandpiper 1,105 445 165 283 148 2,146 Western Sandpiper 4,725 3,752 5,378 6,760 56 2,872 23,543 Least Sandpiper 98 333 554 14 2 325 1,326 Wilson's Phalarope 65 65 Red-necked Phalarope 102 102 Red Phalarope 1 1 2 Heerman's Gull 1 3 4 Ring-billed Gull 13 316 373 147 51 133 1,033 California Gull 1 3,638 1,359 453 32 23 5,506 Western Gull 170 30 46 50 77 148 521 Unidentified Gull 27 583 958 498 19 77 2,162 Elegant Tern 34 1 450 772 512 1,769 Royal Tern 14 1 15 Caspian Tern 1 11 95 58 87 252 Forster's Tern 63 13 55 141 159 28 459 California Least Tern 60 133 35 228 Black Skimmer 149 149 Unidentified Tern 5 4 2 11 Rock Pigeon 3 7 1 1 4 16 Mourning Dove 282 242 36 80 224 99 963 Anna's Hummingbird 7 9 8 12 4 6 46 Allen's Hummingbird* 3 8 4 15 4 34 Unidentified Hummingbird 3 4 7 Belted Kingfisher* 6 4 1 29 Unidentified Woodpecker 1 1

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 80 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-20. Avian abundance by survey (2010/2011) cont’d. Species Oct-10 Dec-10 Feb-11 Apr-11 Jun-11 Aug-11 Total Pacific-slope Flycatcher 2 2 Black Phoebe 20 20 11 2 17 26 96 Say's Phoebe 16 13 4 2 1 36 Ash-throated Flycatcher 1 1 Cassin's Kingbird 2 1 4 3 10 Loggerhead Shrike 2 1 1 1 5 American Crow 26 2 6 32 2 10 78 Common Raven 1 2 10 2 15 Horned Lark 1 35 2 7 3 2 50 Tree Swallow 20 220 3 243 Violet-green Swallow 194 194 Cliff Swallow 3 7 59 432 381 882 Northern Rough-winged Swallow 7 15 72 43 79 216 Barn Swallow 72 124 179 375 Unidentified Swallow 58 44 135 2 239 Bushtit 20 12 24 56 House Wren 4 1 5 Bewick's Wren 1 8 3 2 1 15 Marsh Wren 8 15 2 5 4 5 39 Unidentified wren 1 1 Blue-gray Gnatcatcher 2 3 1 6 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 3 3 Northern Mockingbird 2 7 9 European Starling 90 6 84 11 21 2 214 American Pipit 11 2 13 Yellow-rumped Warbler 1 51 10 1 63 Common Yellowthroat 23 9 16 20 31 12 111 Savannah Sparrow 33 14 2 49 Belding's Savannah Sparrow 278 269 366 394 559 173 2,039 Song Sparrow 20 9 20 7 3 8 67 White-crowned Sparrow 52 53 4 109 Unidentified Sparrow 2 8 2 12 Black-headed Grosbeak 1 1 Western Meadowlark 47 34 53 12 146 Red-winged Blackbird 3 2 14 19 20 2 60 Great-tailed Grackle 1 2 28 19 1 51 Brown-headed Cowbird 3 3 Hooded Oriole 2 2 House Finch 137 130 51 77 360 115 870 Spice Finch 1 1 American Goldfinch 1 5 2 8 Lawrence's Goldfinch 20 20 Lesser Goldfinch 26 6 2 3 7 12 56 House Sparrow 1 1 California Towhee 1 1 2 Total 11,484 18,312 20,084 14,392 5,393 8,130 77,813 * Species suspected of overcounting in some cases due to multiple sightings that could not be determined as either unique or duplicate.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 81 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Species observed for the first time in 2010/11 included Brandt’s cormorant (Phalacrocorax penicillatus), common moorhen, red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), horned lark (Eremophila alpestris), ruby-crowned kinglet (Regulus calendula), Lawrence’s goldfinch (Spinus lawrencei) and spice finch (Lonchura punctulata). Also noted is the Clark’s marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris clarkae), which was observed breeding on-site. The Clark’s marsh wren is a California Species of Special Concern and this is the first time it has been recorded as nesting at Bolsa Chica (P. Knapp pers. comm.). Guild Usage Shorebirds were the most abundant bird guild in all Year 5 survey periods except June (8,593 individuals in October, 8,146 in December, 10,261 individuals in February, 8,700 individuals in April, 1,107 individuals in June, and 5,296 individuals in August). Shorebirds made up an average of 54.1% of all birds observed in Year 5, with a high of 74.8% in October 2010. During June the number of shorebirds dropped to 1,107 individuals and represented only 20.5% of the birds present. The largest change in guild distribution seen over the entire monitoring program is the number of wintering shorebirds. In December 2008 (Year 3) there were 4,407 individual shorebirds and in December 2010 there were 8,138. In February 2008 (Year 2) and February 2009 (Year 3) there were less than 5,000 shorebirds (3,567 and 4,730 individuals, respectively), but this number increased to 10,261 individuals in February 2010. The largest concentration of shorebirds during the winter months is found on the mudflats of the Full Tidal Basin. The most numerous shorebird species in Year 5 was the western sandpiper with the highest numbers in April (6,760 individuals representing 46.9% of all birds observed) and the lowest numbers in June (56 individuals representing 1.0% of all birds observed). The remaining months ranged from 2,872 individuals to 5,378 individuals, much higher than those in June. Other abundant shorebirds included black-bellied plover, dowitcher, least sandpiper, American avocet (Recurvirostra americana), black-necked stilt (Himantopus himantopus), dunlin (Calidris alpine), and semipalmated plover (Charadrius semipalmatus), in order of abundance. In June, when most of the shorebirds were absent, the black-necked stilt and dowitcher were the most common shorebirds. The black-necked stilt is one of several shorebirds that nest at Bolsa Chica. The snowy plover is the only federal or state listed shorebird observed at Bolsa Chica and the count of 66 individuals in June was much higher than the 49 adults observed during focused surveys for this species conducted in May. The second most abundant guild in Year 5 was gulls with the largest number of gulls observed in December (4,568 individuals) and February (2,736 individuals). The California gull accounted for most of these numbers (3,638 individuals in December and 1,359 individuals in February). A large number of gulls were unidentified gulls flying over and therefore these numbers are minimum numbers. The ring-billed gull (Larus delawarensis) was also present in higher numbers during these months, although it was much less common than the California gull. Other gulls observed during the surveys were western gull (Larus occidentalis) and Heermann’s gull (Larus heermanni). The third most abundant guild was dabbling ducks/geese, and highest numbers of individuals in this guild were counted December (3,068 individuals) and February 3,249 individuals). The most abundant species of the dabbling ducks were northern shoveler, northern pintail, and

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 82 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

American wigeon (Anas americana), which are mainly found at Bolsa Chica during the winter months. Gadwall (Anas strepera) and mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) are the only dabbling ducks observed in numbers year-round. Also of note, were five Canada geese (Branta canadensis) goslings observed in Cell 36 again in June 2011. Ten goslings were recorded in June 2009. The fourth most abundant guild was upland birds, primarily due to the inclusion of Belding’s Savannah sparrows in this guild. The number of individuals in the guild remained fairly stable for the entire year although there was an increase in numbers during the June survey. During June, the upland bird count was 1,929 individuals comprising 35.8% of all birds observed during that survey. This increase was probably due to the presence of juveniles of many nesting species and an increase in the number of swallows present. The most numerous upland species, Belding’s Savannah sparrow, remains in the salt marsh year round. The highest numbers of Belding’s Savannah sparrow were recorded during the month of June when 559 individuals were counted. The lowest numbers of this species were observed in August (173 individuals), which corresponds to the end of the Belding’s Savannah sparrow breeding season when the sparrow is less detectable. There were also a large number of swallows included in the upland birds. The cliff swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota) was the most abundant, followed by the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). Swallow species also included smaller numbers of northern rough-winged swallow (Stelgidopteryx serripennis), tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor), and violet-green swallow (Tachycineta thalassina). Cliff swallow and barn swallow were most numerous in June (432 and 124 individuals, respectively) and August (381 and 179 individuals respectively). Violet-green swallow were observed during the February surveys only. The great-tailed grackle (Quiscalus mexicanus), not native to the area but an invading species from Sonora or southern Arizona, was observed breeding during April and June surveys but were absent the rest of the year. Aerial fish foragers were the fifth most abundant guild and accounted for 4.9% of all birds observed over the Year 5 monitoring year. The elegant tern was the most common, accounting for 46.4% of all aerial fish foragers. Other dominant species in this guild included, in descending order of abundance, brown pelican, Forster’s tern (Sterna forsteri), Caspian tern, California least tern, and black skimmer. Hundreds of brown pelican utilized the FTB in October and April, loafing on the mudflats in front of Nest Site 1. All of the tern species listed above, along with the royal tern, nest at Bolsa Chica in the area of the FTB and Inner Bolsa Bay, accounting for high numbers of these species counted during the April, June, and August surveys. Normally there are higher numbers counted on the survey; however, a normally high-density nesting area in Zone 71 (Nest Site 1) was abandoned by the terns early in the season due to predator activity. Those that remained nested on NTI and STI, which are outside the present survey area. Black skimmers were only observed during the June surveys in 2011 but were present at Bolsa Chica on NTI. They are normally recorded in the June, August, and October surveys loafing and foraging in the Full Tidal Basin. Other aerial fish foragers included belted kingfisher (Megaceryl alcyon) and white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos), which were observed loafing and foraging in very low numbers. The remaining guilds were represented in the following order of descending abundance: diving ducks/grebes/and cormorants, coots and rails, herons, bitterns, and ibis, and raptors. As in past years, the ruddy duck was the most common diving duck accounting for 41.1% of all individuals

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 83 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

in this guild, with the majority counted during the December, February and April surveys. Other common species in this guild were eared grebe (Podiceps nigricollis), double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus), bufflehead (Bucephala albeola), redhead (Aythya americana), and pied-billed grebe (Podilymbus podiceps) in order of abundance. Double-crested cormorant and redhead were observed nesting at Bolsa Chica. Coots and rails were primarily comprised of American coot, which is present in large numbers particularly in the fall and winter months. The herons, bitterns, and ibis guild was primarily snowy egret (Egretta thula), great egret (Ardea alba), black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax), and great blue heron (Ardea herodias). These species are present in small numbers year-round. Raptors typically account for the lowest individual counts due to their higher position in the food chain. They are more likely to be over-counted due to their mobility and large territories. Attempts were made by surveyors to eliminate over-counts; however, this proved difficult over time and between consecutive survey days. Nine species of raptor were observed in 2010/2011 surveys including red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), and red-shouldered hawk (Athene cunicularia). Avian Usage of the Survey Area Assessing the spatial avian usage of Bolsa Chica is complicated due to the frequent movements of shorebirds and waterfowl between areas such as the Seasonal Ponds and FTB within and between days. However, a general overview of patterns of use within the study area can be assessed. Full Tidal Basin The 158-hectare FTB is the largest and most highly utilized portion of the study area. A total of 38,063 individuals (48.9% of all birds observed), representing 82 species, were counted in the basin during Year 5 surveys. The heavy usage of this area was strongly linked to the low tidal elevation during which the surveys were conducted. During low tide, shorebirds (which made up 54.1% of all birds) foraged on the intertidal mudflats along the eastern shore of the basin (cordgrass bench), southwestern shoreline (Nest Site 1), and around Rabbit Island. The majority of small shorebirds are recorded in the FTB including: least sandpiper (75.1%), western sandpiper (70.7%), semipalmated plover (69.4%), black-bellied plover (67.1%), and dunlin (54.37%). Nearly all of the large shorebirds such as long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus), marbled godwit, whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus), and willet (Tringa semipalmata), were recorded foraging or resting in the FTB. Almost all the observed brown pelican (97.1%), western gull (87.5%), California gull (87.1%), and Canada goose (83.8%) were found in the FTB. Gulls, cormorants, and brown pelicans utilized the exposed mudflats and sand bars for loafing during the low tides. As the tide rose at the end of the surveys, many of the shorebirds and loafing gulls and pelicans would move to the zones east of the FTB levee once the mudflat was flooded in the FTB. Patterns of high tide usage are not reflected in the present dataset due to intentional low tide timing. Future Full Tidal Basin A total of 15,056 birds (103 species) were counted in the 104-hectare FFTB during the Year 5 survey period. The most abundant guilds in the FFTB were upland birds, shorebirds, and dabbling ducks/geese, respectively. The most abundant upland birds were Belding’s Savannah

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 84 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

sparrows, which utilized the pickleweed-dominated salt marsh. Also abundant were mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), cliff swallow, house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), barn swallow, and violet-green swallow. The mourning dove and house finch utilized the weedy uplands available in this area. These zones are dry and highly disturbed in some areas. The most abundant shorebirds were western sandpiper, black-necked stilt, dowitcher, and killdeer (Charadrius vociferous). Killdeer occurred in the more disturbed areas of the basin. The ponded water within Zones 38, 63, and 30 was utilized by dabbling ducks and shorebirds. American coots were also very abundant in this region. Seasonal Ponds A total of 10,363 individual birds were counted in the 50-hectare Seasonal Ponds during the Year 5 surveys, representing 90 species. These ponds are a very important habitat for shorebirds, waterfowl, and Belding’s Savannah sparrows. Zone 11 makes up the largest portion of the Seasonal Ponds, supports the most diverse habitats, and is the least disturbed of the Seasonal Pond zones. As a consequence, most bird activity was focused in this zone. The degree of inundation by rainfall fluctuates from year to year, but generally yields a mix of shallow water, salt panne, riparian forest, freshwater marsh, and salt marsh in this zone and the remainder of the Seasonal Ponds. The most abundant guild in the Seasonal Ponds is shorebirds such as the western sandpiper, American avocet, and black-bellied plover. Dabbling ducks and gulls were also abundant in the Seasonal Ponds with the most common species being northern shoveler, California gull, and ring-billed gull. Dabbling ducks used the shallow water in the inundated salt panne for foraging and the exposed salt panne for loafing. Gulls primarily loafed on the salt panne. The Seasonal Ponds also support considerable expanses of pickleweed that were heavily utilized for nesting by Belding’s Savannah sparrow. The Seasonal Ponds are much more heavily used by shorebirds during rising tides in the FTB when the mudflats are no longer exposed and large flocks of sandpiper, black-bellied plover, and semipalmated plover move over the levee and into the ponds. This condition is not reflected in this dataset.

Muted Tidal Basins The 77-hectare MTBs were the least utilized of all the survey areas, with the most abundant guilds being shorebirds and upland species. The MTBs accounted for a total of 8,451 individuals (87 species) during the Year 5 surveys. The most dominant species in the MTB are black-bellied plovers and black-necked stilt. As with the Seasonal Ponds, the MTBs were more heavily used by shorebirds during high tide, when mudflat was lost in the FTB but remained in the MTBs due to the tidal muting caused by operation or continued closure of the tide gates. The most abundant upland species observed in the MTBs during the surveys were Belding’s Savannah sparrow, house finch, and cliff swallow. The MTB is an important area for Belding’s Savannah sparrow nesting, providing large expanses of pickleweed. In 2009, there was a change to standing water in much of the MTBs due to the opening of the west MTB to the FTB and subsequent flow into the central and east MTB; however, Belding’s Savannah sparrow usage of this area remained high. This continues to be the case in 2010/11.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 85 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

The ponded water in the MTBs was utilized by California least terns and Forster’s terns for foraging. Muted Pocket Marsh The 14-hectare Muted Pocket Marsh consists primarily of shallow open water and mudflat and is, therefore, highly utilized by shorebirds and dabbling ducks particularly in December and February. A total of 5,880 individuals (72 species) were counted in the Muted Pocket Marsh during the Year 5 surveys. Although this area appeared to have the lowest number of individuals and species, this is solely due to its size. Compared to the highly utilized FTB, which had an overall density of 98 birds per hectare, the Muted Pocket Marsh supported a density of 273 birds per hectare. The most abundant shorebirds were western sandpiper, dowitcher, least sandpiper, and American avocet. The most abundant of dabbling ducks included American wigeon, green- winged teal, and northern pintail. Ruddy duck were also common in the pocket marsh. The dead Myoporum along the shorelines were frequently occupied by roosting black-crowned night heron. Avian Distribution and Abundance by Habitat Type Flying birds were recorded in the habitat over which they were flying at the time of observation, though they may not necessarily use that habitat on the ground. Flyovers accounted for 17.4% of all bird observations during the Year 5 surveys. All data for this section are analyzed with flyovers removed so that the data reflect only those species that were actually utilizing the habitat. Mudflats were the most utilized habitat type during the Year 5 surveys (accommodating 42.6% of all birds) (Figure 1-17). Large and small shorebirds had the highest utilization of the mudflats, primarily for foraging but also for loafing. Brown pelican, California gull, and elegant terns were also commonly observed loafing on the mudflats.

30,000 62

25,000

20,000

72 15 , 0 0 0

Number of birds of Number 10 , 0 0 0 79

90 5,000

34 24 44 24 40 56 37 17 8 28 18 12 0 Sal t Di stur bed Fr eshwater Willow/ Mulef at Decaying/ Sal t Inundated Nest Open Ri pr ap Mudf l at Sand Coastal Non-nati ve Ur ban/ Mar sh Sal t M ar s h Mar sh Ri par i an Sc r ub Tr ansi ti onal Panne Sal t P anne Si t e Wat er Shoal Sage Sc r ub Veget. Di stur bed

Figure 1-17. Avian abundance by habitat type at Bolsa Chica in Year 5 (number of species shown in label).

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 86 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

The inundated salt panne was also highly utilized (accommodating 23.7% of all birds), particularly by western sandpiper, northern shoveler, American coot, and California gull. Inundated salt panne and mudflat usage is high all year with the exception of June, when usage drops considerably because shorebirds are largely absent from the site. Open water, salt marsh, and sand shoal were the next most utilized habitats, accommodating (12.7%, 7.8%, and 2.9% of total birds, respectively). Open water usage doubles during the winter months. This is due to the increased use by American coot as well as diving and dabbling ducks during the winter months. The extent of each habitat varies greatly within the site (Table 1-1). The data presented above illustrate interesting patterns of overall habitat usage. However, they do not address density of birds within each habitat type. When standardized by the area of each habitat, seasonal patterns of avian habitat usage become apparent (Table 1-21). Table 1-21. Year 5 density of birds (birds/hectare) by habitat type (only highest usage habitat types included in table). Average Habitat Type Oct 2010 Dec 2010 Feb 2011 Apr 2011 June 2011 Aug 2011 Birds/Ha Intertidal Sand Shoal 724 2,718 6 6 427 55 3,920 Inundated Salt Panne 248 370 500 295 54 118 1,586 Intertidal Mudflat 141 206 244 238 22 109 959 Mulefat Scrub 57 285 0 157 185 0 686 Disturbed Salt Marsh 18 363 5 2 2 2 392 Willow Riparian 23 90 97 29 74 13 325 Nest Site 13 87 11 20 121 8 259

These density numbers reflect the seasonal activity at the site. In the winter there are a large number of shorebirds, gulls, and pelicans loafing on the intertidal sand shoals and mudflats and a large number of shorebirds foraging on the mudflats. The high number of birds/ha on the intertidal sand shoal in December was largely due to loafing California gulls. In the early spring there are migrating ducks and shorebirds using the inundated salt panne and mudflats to rest and forage. During the summer months the birds are nesting and terns increase in density on the nest sites. Species richness was highest in the salt marsh (90 species), open water (79 species), inundated salt panne (72 species), and mudflat (62 species) (Figure 1-17). All other habitat types had less than 56 species observed in Year 5. Eelgrass and cordgrass habitat are not shown on Figure 1- 17, but were utilized by 11 and one species of foraging bird, respectively. As noted in the prior annual report, the heavy usage of the intertidal sand shoals in Zone 73 (inlet) at low tide by gulls, cormorants, terns, and pelicans is not fully captured by these surveys, though this pattern of usage was observed regularly during late afternoon low tides at the site. The survey also cannot account for movement of birds into and out of the survey area from Bolsa Chica State Beach and from Inner and Outer Bolsa Bay. Discussion The Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project included several elements geared toward enhancement of the avian community within the project area. The creation of the Full Tidal Basin is the most notable, involving removing existing oil wells, excavating a basin, and constructing a permanent opening to the ocean in 2006. In Year 5, as in years immediately

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 87 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

following restoration, the FTB mudflats and open water were among the most highly used areas of the entire project area, providing expansive foraging and loafing habitat to 86 species, including five species that were found in no other area of the site: Brandt’s cormorant, Pacific loon (Gavia pacifica), surf scoter (Melanitta perspicillata), white pelican, and western grebe (Aechmophorus occidentalis). As detailed in the previous sections, the FTB supports a diverse marine community, including fish, invertebrates, and eelgrass, which provide important food resources for migrating, resident, and nesting birds. As eelgrass habitat continues to expand in the FTB in the coming years, more surf scoter, brant (Branta bernicla), and other diving birds will likely frequent the basin. There is an increase in the use of the FTB by foraging and loafing shorebirds, mainly western sandpipers, since 2007. As seen in the benthic chapter above, the FTB mudflat supports high densities of invertebrate prey items. There has also been an increase in the number of gulls, particularly California gull. This has mainly been apparent during the Year 5 winter surveys. It is unknown if this is a trend or an annual variation. The FTB design included intertidal mudflat suitable for the introduction of cordgrass. The expansion of the transplanted cordgrass over time was intended to provide habitat attractive to light-footed clapper rail in the coming years. Clapper rails have been observed periodically in the marsh of adjacent Inner Bolsa Bay, confirming their presence in the system and the potential for their movement into the FTB if vegetative cover were available. However, altered tidal ranges and inundation frequencies on the FTB mudflats related to the inlet issues will limit the growth of cordgrass for the foreseeable future. The creation of the three nest sites within Bolsa Chica substantially increased the available habitat for nesting terns and plovers and has resulted in improved production of fledglings. The usage of these nest sites and resulting reproductive success will be discussed further in the next section. In summary, in the 2011 breeding season there was an increased use of NS2 and decreased use of NS1 by nesting birds. Another element of the Project involved the introduction of muted tidal influence to the Muted Pocket Marsh. This area was previously freshwater and was converted to a saltwater system which resulted in increased avian usage of this area. This area had consistently high densities of birds, provides an easily accessible viewing area for the public, and supports several Belding’s Savannah sparrow breeding territories. The Muted Tidal Basins have been heavily utilized since their creation. The sidecast mounds on either side of the tidal channels have proven to be a heavily used feature, providing elevated dry areas for large numbers of shorebirds during high tide in the FTB and during periods of high water in MTBs. Prior to the restoration effort, the expanses of pickleweed in the MTBs were non-tidal and experienced hypersaline sediment conditions and the environmental extremes of wet and dry seasons. The Project design included restoration of muted tidal influence to these basins in order to provide greater environmental stability to the salt marsh, improve habitat conditions for Belding’s Savannah sparrow, and to create a more functional salt marsh with open water, intertidal mudflats, as well as low and mid marsh. Only the west MTB was open to tidal influence in Year 5. This basin maintained a high level of Belding’s Savannah sparrow territories despite the high water levels and inundation of much of the pickleweed. The open

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 88 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

waters of the MTBs were attractive to wintering ducks, herons, and foraging terns, and the limited mudflat and shallow water used by foraging sandpipers. The Seasonal Ponds and FFTB portions of the study area were minimally affected by the restoration and continued to support high numbers of waterfowl and shorebirds during the year. They provide high quality foraging sites for the western snowy plover. Diversity (as species counts) within the entire study area (135 species during Year 2, 131 species during Year 3, and 129 species during Year 5) is comparable to diversity observed at other coastal salt marshes in southern California. The bird usage of Batiquitos Lagoon in San Diego County was monitored, using similar methods to those of the present study, for 10 years following the restoration of tidal influence to the system. Two years post-restoration, 133 species were documented at Batiquitos Lagoon (M&A 2009a). Batiquitos Lagoon is a smaller site (approximately 2/3 the size), but includes more diverse habitats in a more balanced distribution. The Huntington Beach Wetlands are located roughly eight kilometers to the south of Bolsa Chica and were monitored prior to and following the restoration of tidal influence to Brookhurst and Magnolia Marshes. From January 2007 to October 2009 a total of 137 bird species were documented in quarterly saturation surveys of Brookhurst, Magnolia, and Talbert Marshes. These marshes contain similar expanses of non-tidal pickleweed marsh that were restored to tidal influence in 2009 (Brookhurst) and 2010 (Magnolia). LIGHT-FOOTED CLAPPER RAIL MONITORING Surveys for the State and Federally endangered light-footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes) (renamed Ridgway’s rail Rallus obsoletus levipes in July 2014) will not be initiated until or if suitable cordgrass habitat has developed to an extent and quality to attract the clapper rail. The status of the cordgrass transplants was discussed in the vegetation section of this report. CDFW staff has reported that a Bolsa Chica Conservancy staff person, Mr. Austin Parker, saw a clapper rail on Rabbit Island in the first week of January 2012. No other reports of this species are known from within the restoration area during this reporting period, however there were the following observations in adjacent Inner Bolsa Bay: two light-footed clapper rails were seen in August 2009, three were heard in the same area in January 2014, CDFW staff observed one on May 28, 2013; and two throughout June 2013.

More current information was provided by Kelly O’Reilly of CDFW in 2014 during the preparation of this report. CDFW staff heard a Ridgway’s rail call from the marsh in Inner Bolsa Bay on February 4, 2014, three were reported there in March 2014 by a Bolsa Chica Conservancy bird survey team, two of which were seen mating, and on or around May 5, 2014 the pair produced 3 chicks. On July 18, 2014, Mr. Steven Smith reported to CDFW that the same breeding pair had produced a second brood of four chicks. Mr. Smith has provided numerous photographs of the rails, which have remained on the reserve as of late 2014. The rails have also been seen in 2014 on Rabbit Island and in the Muted Pocket Marsh. These reports are encouraging and suggest that the species could expand into the restored wetland complex in the future as suitable habitat develops.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 89 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

BELDING’S SAVANNAH SPARROW MONITORING Introduction The Monitoring Plan calls for Belding’s Savannah sparrow monitoring to be conducted once per year in monitoring Years 1 through 10. The number of surveys had increased from one survey in 2007 to two in 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. Beginning in 2012 survey schedules returned to one survey per year. Two surveys had been performed to improve the reliability of the number of territories recorded; however, due to budget constraints and the relatively comparable data sets obtained by the double surveys, the single annual survey resumed in 2012. The following sections detail the Year 4 (2010), Year 5 (2011), Year 6 (2012), and Year 7 (2013) surveys, with all seven survey years assessed in the discussion section. Methodology The first survey in Year 4 was conducted February 23, 24, and 25, 2010 and the second on March 31, April 1, and April 2, 2010. The first survey in Year 5 was conducted on February 28 and March 1, 2011 and the second on April 4 and 5, 2011. The Year 6 survey was conducted on February 23 and March 1, 2012. The Year 7 survey was conducted on February 26, 27, and March 1, 2013. However, due to the low count of territories during the initial survey a small subsampling was conducted on April 9, 2013 in Cells 42, 45, 46, 48, and 49, which are all within the MTB. The purpose of this sampling was to confirm or adjust the original count. The Belding’s Savannah sparrow surveys utilized the same zones used in the general avian surveys (Figure 1-16). The study area was surveyed over a three-day period by assigning each surveyor a series of zones. Each zone was surveyed only once per survey. The survey was timed early in the season to better capture the earlier portion of the breeding season when displays of territorial and breeding behavior are most easily observed and to prevent over counting due to the presence of fledglings. All areas with potentially suitable breeding habitat for the Belding's Savannah sparrow (pickleweed-dominated salt marsh) were surveyed on foot by qualified biologists using binoculars and, in some cases, spotting scopes. Surveys were performed between 0530 hours and 1100 hours. Weather conditions including air temperature, cloud cover, precipitation, and approximate wind speed were recorded regularly throughout each survey. The surveys were discontinued for the day if wind, visibility, rain, or other factors were deemed to be unsuitable for accurate and effective data collection, including a lack of territorial behavior by the sparrows. In most cases this occurred around 1000, though extended later occasionally due to extended favorable conditions. In 2007 the survey program was initiated with a calibration training period with Mr. Dick Zembal prior to conducting the surveys so that data collected would be consistent between individuals and comparable to past surveys conducted at the site. The method employed gives a rapid estimate of the number of territories and their locations based on territorial behaviors and are consistent with those employed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and for statewide surveys (Zembal et al. 2006, Zembal and Hoffman 2010). The same team of biologists conducted the surveys in each of the following years to avoid surveyor bias. Surveys have been conducted annually to document changes in Belding’s Savannah sparrow breeding activity over time and space within the study area. The location of each Belding’s Savannah sparrow territory observed was plotted on a map based on the behavior observed which included: singing by a perched male, extended perching together of mates, territorial defensive behavior demonstrated by circular chasing of birds from a

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 90 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

territory, scolding, carrying nesting material or food, feeding young, extended high and fully exposed perching of individuals, and scolding. All behaviors were marked on the field map of the zone being assessed. At the completion of the survey of each zone, the biologist reviewed the notes, assessed the significance of each behavior noted, and wrote down a tally of the total number of territories assessed in that zone. Biologists were careful to keep track of birds within a zone to avoid over counting territories and did not spend too much time in a particular zone to avoid confusion. The ranking of behavior for determining a territory from most certain to least was: extended perching of a pair, singing male, territory by chase, and extended exposed perching by a male. From these breeding and territorial behaviors, the number and approximate locations of territories within each zone were estimated. As an additional metric of site usage by Belding’s Savannah sparrow, the total number of individuals observed was also recorded (beginning in 2009). All survey data were initially recorded in the field on hard copy maps of each zone and then transferred in the office to GIS database files. Results The locations of the Belding’s Savannah sparrow territories estimated in Years 4 to 7 from observed breeding and territorial behaviors are shown in Figures 1-18 through 1-21. Table 1-22 presents the number of territories reported during each survey since 2007.

Table 1-22. Belding’s Savannah sparrow territories at Bolsa Chica from 2007 to 2013. Number of Territories Zone April April May Feb Mar Feb Mar Feb April Feb Feb 2007 2008 2008 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2013 Full Tidal n/a 5 10 8 5 5 8 8 10 15 21 Basin Future Full 143 72 76 76 103 74 55 96 85 87 50 Tidal Basin Muted Tidal 118 45 72 123 93 101 93 103 112 141 93 Basins Seasonal 90 53 47 55 67 53 37 46 50 54 44 Ponds Pocket n/a 2 3 8 3 4 6 4 7 8 5 Marsh Nest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 4 Site 1 Total 351 177 208 270 268 237 199 259 264 310 217

Territories appeared to be relatively evenly dispersed throughout areas where pickleweed- dominated salt marsh occurred, however there were some cases where many males were clustered close together, while other areas that appeared ideal were unoccupied during both surveys. Although there are several areas in Figure 1-18 and 1-19 where the high density of adjacent territorial birds appears unlikely, it should be noted that the birds were mapped only if they were all observed simultaneously, to avoid overcounts. Because nesting surveys were not done, it is not known if the birds were actually nesting that close to one another or simply in close proximity as part of their territorial behavior.

In Year 4 (2010) there were of 237 territories identified within the study area in February and 199 territories in March (Figure 1-18). The number of territories estimated in 2010 was down

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 91 Cell # PM 2 9 10 11 12 13 14 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 38 39 40 41 42 45 46 47 48 49 50 63 66 68 Total Feb-10 4 9 7 9203 5 4 2 1 3 1 5 2 1 1 0 2 0103 8 8143 0 0 51110511178156101 8 5 237 Apr-10 67481044341103010010435681148891411799810188199

50 PM 66 47

49 48

68 69 45

41 40 39 71 38

70 63 37 30 32 29 31 72 33 19 34 28 35 20 27 26 14 21 25 36 22 24 13 9 23

12 73 10

2 11

February 2010 (237 Territories)

April 2010 (199 Territories)

0100 200 400 600 800 Meters 2010 Aerial Photo

Belding's Savannah sparrow territories - 2010 Figure 1-18 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Cell # 2 9 10 11 12 13 14 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 45 46 47 48 49 50 63 66 68 69 70 71 72 73 PM TOTAL Feb Territories59 6203 3 7 5 2 1 4 5 0 1 1 2 1 0 162 5 5 172 0 0 4 119161317104 157 134 0 8 0 0 2 0 0 4 259 Apr Territories4614157 4105 3 0 2 5 2 1 0 2 2 2 111 7 12132 2 0 3 6 9101925109 129 9 3 0 100 0 0 0 0 7 273

50 PM 66 47

49 48

68 69 45

41 40 39 71 38

70 63 37 30 32 29 31 72 33 19 34 28 35 20 27 26 14 21 25 36 22 24 13 9 23

12 73 10

2 11

February 2011 (259 Territories)

April 2011 (273 Territories)

0100 200 400 600 800 Meters 2011 Aerial Photo

Belding's Savannah sparrow territories - 2011 Figure 1-19 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Cell # 2 9 10 11 12 13 14 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 45 46 47 48 49 50 63 66 68 69 70 71 72 73 PM TOTAL Feb Territories 8 610234 3 3 9 5 3 1 5 0 1 1 4 1 1140 9 9 3 3 2 0 5 616191521147218112 9150 0 5 0 0 8 310

50 PM 66 47

49 48

68 69 45

41 40 39 71 38

70 63 37 30 32 29 31 72 33 19 34 28 35 20 27 26 14 21 25 36 22 24 13 9 23

12 73 10

2 11

Februay 2012 (310 Territories)

0100 200 400 600 800 Meters

Belding's Savannah sparrow territories - 2012 Figure 1-20 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Cell # 2 9 10 11 12 13 14 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 45 46 47 48 49 50 63 66 68 69 70 71 72 73 PM TOTAL Mar Territories5 7 8164 4 3 6 3 1 0 1 0 2 0 2 0 2 3 1 4 2 8 5 1 1 1 4 717714810107 8 0 5210 0 4 0 0 5 217

50 PM 66 47

49 48

68 69 45

41 40 39 71 38

70 63 37 30 32 29 31 72 33 19 34 28 35 20 27 26 14 21 25 36 22 24 13 9 23

12 73 10

2 11

March 2013 (217 Territories)

0100 200 400 600 800 Meters 2012 Aerial Photo

Belding's Savannah sparrow territories - 2013 Figure 1-21 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

from the estimate in 2009. The decline between 2009 and 2010 was principally a result of fewer territories being detected in the FFTB in and MTBs during the two surveys. In Year 5 (2011) the number of territories increased to 259 territories in February and 264 territories in April. The surveys yielded very similar distribution of territories across the various survey zones when compared to Year 4 (Figure 1-19). The overall territory count was up from the 2010 survey results and was more similar to the 2009 surveys. The MTBs hosted the greatest number of territories despite the continued loss of salt marsh habitat each year where high water has flooded out the lower elevation vegetation. The Year 6 (2012) territories are shown in Figure 1-20, when a total of 310 territories were detected. This was higher than in all previous years, with the exception of 2007, which had the highest count. The MTBs showed an increase in the number of territories over all other years, while the amount of pickleweed continued to decline as salt marsh converted to open water. Despite the reduction in the availability of salt marsh habitat, the number of Belding’s Savannah sparrow territories increased in the MTBs by approximately 26% from 2011 to 2012. Nest Site 1 (NS1) was utilized by Belding’s Savannah sparrow for the first time to maintain five territories even though there was limited salt marsh available for nesting. The site supported primarily non-native weeds and low-lying dune plants. In February of 2011 there were two territories on NS1; however, by April these territories had disappeared. It is expected that this may have occurred again in 2012. NS1 is adjacent to pickleweed-dominated marsh that grows along the Inner Bolsa Bay, which is outside of the survey area and therefore not assessed. A total of 217 Belding’s Savannah sparrow territories were detected in Year 7 (2013) (Figure 1- 21). There was some concern that the number of territories was undercounted because the birds appeared to be extremely quiet and inactive during the February surveys. In order to check the validity of the data a second survey of a subset of cells (Cells 42, 45, 46, 48, and 49) was conducted in April. All of the cells were in the MTBs. The second count had an increase of 65% (46 in February and 76 in April) in the number of territories recorded in those cells. Based on the differences in the survey results, it is believed that the onset of the breeding season may have been slightly delayed in 2013 from prior years. The total number of territories detected at Bolsa Chica was lower in February 2013 than in most previous years, with the exception of 2008 and 2010. If the breeding season was delayed in 2013 as is believed and the surveys conducted in the MTBs in April are indicative of the whole site, the nesting pairs in the study area would have been expected to be comparable to the 2012 levels if surveys had been delayed until slightly later in the season. Reviewing all data collected since the Year 1 post-restoration survey in 2007, the total number of territories fluctuates from year to year, as does usage by region (Table 1-22). In Years 1 and 2, the FFTB supported the most territories, however in Years 3 through 7, the MTBs supported the most territories, followed by the FFTB, then Seasonal Ponds. The number of territories did not correlate with the amount of salt marsh available, however this shift in usage from the FFTB to the MTBs suggests a shift in habitat quality.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 96 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

As an additional metric, the total numbers of Belding’s Savannah sparrows detected during the survey was recorded, regardless of gender, behavior, or age (Figure 1-22). This additional data collection was initiated in 2009 after it became clear that the territory counts were highly variable from survey to survey.

700 700

600 600

500 500

400 400

300 300 # of territories # of individuals of # 200 200

100 100

0 0 Feb 09 Mar 09 Feb 10 Mar 10 Feb 11 Apr 11 Feb 12 Feb 13

Figure 1-22. Total number of individual Belding’s Savannah sparrow (solid bars, colored by year) in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 surveys and total number of breeding territories for comparison (line).

The individual totals average (+ 1 standard deviation) 535 + 79 over the five years. The high total count in April 2011 likely reflects the presence of juveniles present later in the nesting season. As mentioned above, it is believed that the 2013 survey undercounts the number of individuals present during the active breeding season. The supplemental subsample performed later in the season found an increase of 64% in the number of individuals recorded in those cells, consistent with the 65% increase in the number of territories between the two surveys as well. Overall the February 2013 data should not be viewed as a documented decline in breeding activity at Bolsa Chica. Discussion The Belding’s Savannah Sparrow population is variable from year to year. The count is only an estimate of the actual population, and detection of territories could fluctuate with weather conditions or breeding status. The highest number of territories was mapped in the first year post-restoration (2007), possibly due to displacement of birds arising from the removal of FTB salt marsh moving into the adjacent marsh. In the following years numbers fluctuated, then increased each year from 2010 to 2012, followed by a decrease in 2013. As mentioned above it is believed that the survey in 2013 was conducted prior to the peak in territorial activity. A large proportion of the territories is located in the MTBs. An overall increase in usage each year occurred despite the continued decline in the amount of pickleweed-dominated marsh and an increase in the amount of open water as the MTBs adapt to continuing changes in inundation.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 97 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

The flooding of much of the marsh in the MTBs may have improved the quality of remaining pickleweed habitat through the control of weeds, more reliable moisture, improved foraging conditions, and higher quality breeding habitat. Although increased marsh vigor is not particularly evident visually, this hypothesis is supported by the stable number of territories throughout the MTBs. Again, the marked decrease in MTB territories in 2013 may not be an actual decline in usage, based on the results of the second survey in April 2013 when there was an increase of 65% in the number of territories in a selected number of cells. Only a portion of this increase can be explained by the presence of fledglings that were behaving like territorial males by perching high in the vegetation and therefore being misidentified as males in a territory. There were several signs of successful breeding while doing the April survey including a singing male with two or more individuals within his territory. In addition, when comparing the decline in number of territories from 2012 to 2013 by survey region, there is a consistent reduction in both the MTBs and in regions that did not experience a reduction in habitat availability. The MTBs had a 34% reduction in territories, and the relatively unchanged FFTB, MPM, and Seasonal Ponds had a 43%, 38%, and 17% reduction, respectively. This suggests that the overall 2013 decline in territory numbers is site-wide, and not a result of habitat losses in the MTBs. Usage of the Muted Pocket Marsh by Belding’s Savannah sparrow generally varies within a range of four to eight territories each year. The introduction of muted tidal influence during the restoration has vastly decreased the quantity of the pickleweed (Figure 1-15), but likely increased its quality, as well as increased foraging opportunities through the creation of tidal mudflats. The increase in mudflats allows for communal foraging and decreases the size of the territory required to support the pair. Usage of the FFTB is highly variable each year, likely due to periods of intensive construction alternating with lighter activity years. This is the most active region of the oil field, with regular well servicing, contaminated soil removal and stockpiling, and, in 2013, transporting of soil off- site with 30-50 truckloads per day. The noise either discourages establishment of territories in this area or reduces the frequency of territories displays. Throughout Bolsa Chica the Belding’s Savannah sparrows are observed becoming silent when noise levels are elevated due to trucks, other birds, or the helicopter that takes off and lands at the site repeatedly during the surveys. The number of territories in the Seasonal Ponds has remained stable over the course of the monitoring. The amount of salt marsh available in the ponds is relatively consistent, with minor annual fluctuations related to prolonged inundation of low-lying marsh. The number of territories in the FTB has increased steadily since Year 1, primarily due to increased usage of Rabbit Island where work is being continually conducted to improve the habitat quality through removal of non-native vegetation. The establishment of territories on NS1 in the FTB beginning in 2012 is likely due to the increased availability of forage from vegetation on the island. The territories likely include habitat in the adjacent Inner Bolsa Bay, which is not within the survey area but supports salt marsh habitat that is not present on NS1 to any great degree. The restoration project was not intended to increase the area of salt marsh; rather the intent was to increase Belding’s Savannah sparrow usage and reproductive success through the improvement of the habitat quality with the reintroduction of tidal flushing. The relatively stable

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 98 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

numbers that trend neither up nor downward in Figure 1-22, despite the long-term decrease in the area of pickleweed-dominated habitat indicates that increased habitat quality in the remaining pickleweed is likely being achieved. CALIFORNIA LEAST TERN AND WESTERN SNOWY PLOVER MONITORING

Methodology California least tern nest monitoring occurred on North Tern Island (NTI), South Tern Island (STI), Nest Site 1 (NS1), Nest Site 2 (NS2), and Nest Site 3 (NS3) (Figure 0-1). NTI and STI are located in Inner Bolsa Bay, outside of the project survey area, but are included in this report in order to give a more complete understanding of tern reproductive success within the Bolsa Chica system. NS1, NS2, and NS3 are nesting islands within the project area created as part of the restoration effort; NS1 is in the FTB bordering the FTB and Inner Bolsa Bay, NS2 is located within Zone 42 of the southern MTB, and NS3 is located in Zone 14 of the FFTB (Figure 0-1). Western snowy plover nest sites included all tern colonies listed above but also included the Seasonal Ponds, FTB, and MTB. Since 2007, the principal survey efforts for California least tern and western snowy plover have been undertaken by CDFW seasonal staff member Peter Knapp and assisted by Gary Keller, Wally Ross, and Kelly O’Reilly, also with CDFW. M&A biologists Bonnie Peterson and Antonette Gutierrez participated intermittently in the survey efforts to support and to aid in collecting data for report preparation. Surveys for nesting western snowy plover normally begin in late-March, however, breeding behavior has started earlier during the past few years with the earliest nest being found on February 23rd in 2009 and on March 5th in 2010. In 2011 the first nest was found on March 16th. Breeding behavior and the location of nests dictate the start of surveys for the season. Surveys were conducted at least twice a week, sometimes four to seven times a week, until the beginning of September. In 2013 surveys were conducted daily until the beginning of September. A field biologist was on-site daily; however, not all nest sites were surveyed daily. Rather, fieldwork was concentrated on areas of activity, with a goal of covering the Bolsa Chica survey area once every several days. California least tern monitoring began as soon as the birds started arriving at Bolsa Chica in mid- April and continued until the terns fledged and left the breeding grounds in late August. Surveys were conducted once per week at each nest site during this nesting season. Additionally, unscheduled site observations (to note predators, disturbance, maintenance needs, etc.) were made by on-site biologists more frequently. Because nesting sites were utilized by multiple species, survey efforts for California least tern and western snowy plover were combined. The accessibility and size of each nesting site dictated survey methods. STI and NS1 were surveyed by vehicle from the West Levee Road prior to arrival of the California least terns and then on foot once nesting was initiated. NTI was used primarily by nesting elegant tern and black skimmer; therefore, they required minimal monitoring for California least tern and western snowy plover. Observations of this nesting site were made from the West Levee Road. NS2 was surveyed by vehicle from the East Levee Road using a spotting scope with occasional survey efforts occurring on foot to better map individual nest sites. NS3 was surveyed by vehicle from the north end of the site and by foot when required. The large majority of suitable western snowy plover nesting habitat in the Seasonal

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 99 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Ponds was visible from the road network. Therefore, the observer(s) would slowly drive along the roads that subdivide this area. Frequent stops were made to examine specific areas adjacent to the road with binoculars or spotting scope without exiting the vehicle. Survey work was typically completed at each nesting site between 0600 and 1200 hours. During each survey for California least tern and western snowy plover, observers documented the location of any nests. NS1, NS2, and NS3 were sectioned by markers, which formed the basis for data recording. NS1 is significantly larger than the other two nest sites; therefore, NS1 was sectioned south to north from A though CC in a regular grid. Each least tern and snowy plover nest located during survey efforts was marked with a numbered tongue depressor and mapped for ease of relocation on subsequent visits. For western snowy plover other data collected include the gender of the incubating adult, length of incubation (days), number of eggs in the clutch, condition of the nest (e.g. signs of disturbance), and the fate of each nest (hatched, predated, or abandoned). Close examination of nests was usually conducted only once or twice per nest in order to minimize disturbance of nesting birds. Once a snowy plover nest was discovered, a welded wire mini-exclosure (ME) was anchored in place over the top of the nest and left in place until the eggs in the nest hatched. The MEs are 28 inches in width on all four sides and 16 inches in height. In 2013 a larger ME, measuring 48 inches square and 20 inches high, was used on nests that occurred in soft sand to prevent coyotes from digging under the ME to the nest and removing the eggs. These MEs have proven effective in deterring predation by corvids, gulls, and coyotes (Canis latrans). The use of the ME contributes greatly to the low egg predation at Bolsa Chica. It was usually possible to follow the movements and determine the fate of the chicks from each brood since there was dispersion over space and time sufficient to differentiate between broods. These regular brood observations were conducted to determine chick survival or fledgling production, as well as to detect movement between zones and use of specific cells for brood rearing. For California least tern, data collected included length of incubation (days), number of eggs in the clutch, condition of the nest (e.g. signs of disturbance), and the fate of each nest (hatched, predated, or abandoned). Any signs of disturbance within the tern colonies were also recorded. Additional observations on the general status of the colony (e.g. presence of other nesting species, evidence of predation, etc.) were made during each survey. Observations of least tern chicks and fledglings were made to determine hatching and fledging success. Monitoring of nests on NS1 is difficult due to the large number of nesting birds besides the western snowy plover and California least tern, including black skimmer, royal tern, and Caspian tern. These species typically nest on NTI. By the end of June, monitoring was modified to prevent the disruption of the nesting birds and their chicks. Most nest data were collected prior to that time; however, fledglings for both the California least tern and snowy plover on NS1 had to be estimated. Beginning in 2011, there was little activity on NS1 and surveys were conducted on foot or by vehicle.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 100 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Results California Least Tern The data from the 2010 (Year 4), 2011 (Year 5), 2012 (Year 6), 2013 (Year 7) California least tern breeding season at Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve were provided by CDFW and are formally reported in Marschalek (2010), and Marschalek (2011), and Frost (2012), and summarized for 2013 in O’Reilly and Knapp (2013). Table 1-23 presents the number of nests, eggs, chicks, and fledglings by year and location for Years 4 through 7. A summary of nesting data for the entire monitoring period (Years 1 through 7) is provided in the following discussion.

Table 1-23. 2010 - 2013 California least tern reproductive success for each nesting location. Location Total Nests Total Eggs Total Chicks Fledglings 2010 Nest Site 1 314 586 94 25-50 South Tern Island 80 152 93 41-60 North Tern Island 2 4 0 0 Nest Site 2 31 52 3 0 Nest Site 3 19 35 11 1-4 2010 Totals 446 829 201 67-114 2011 Nest Site 1 31 52 29 1-2 South Tern Island 21 35 21 12-18 Nest Site 2 49 86 79 51-72 Nest Site 3 66 95 31 2-3 2011 Totals 167 268 160 66-95 2012 Nest Site 1 176 306 86 1 South Tern Island 56 94 80 12 Nest Site 2 46 82 53 0 Nest Site 3 27 45 29 0 2012 Totals 305 527 248 16 2013 Nest Site 1 20 29 0 0 South Tern Island 84 124 50 1 Nest Site 2 50 80 69 34-66 Nest Site 3 3 3 0 0 2013 Totals 157 236 119 35-67

In 2010, the California least tern arrived at Bolsa Chica on April 14 and were last observed on the site August 15, which was very similar to past years. The terns nested primarily on NS1 and STI, but also had nests on NTI, NS2, and NS3 (Table 1-23). The first nest was initiated on May 11 on NS1 and STI. There were a total of 446 California least tern nests at Bolsa Chica in 2010, an increase over 2009 (317 nests) and 2008 (242 nests). The average clutch size was 1.9 eggs per nest. From an estimated 416 pairs, a total of 829 eggs were laid. Fledgling success for the 2010 season ranged from 67-114 fledglings with a rate of 0.15 to 0.26 fledglings per nest. This is compared to 15 fledglings (0.07 fledglings per nest) in 2007, 100-150 fledglings (0.41 to 0.62

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 101 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

fledglings per nest) in 2008 and 265-363 (0.83 to 1.15 fledglings per nest) in 2009. The first least tern fledgling was recorded on June 16. In 2010, a large percentage (87%) of California least tern nests were lost to predation either prior to hatching or shortly after hatching. The least tern eggs and chicks were depredated on NS1 by a family of coyotes (Canis latrans). On July 3, all 31 least tern nests on NS2 were destroyed by common raven (Corvus corax). In 2011, California least terns arrived at Bolsa Chica on April 18 and were last observed on the site August 21. In contrast with previous years, the least terns nested primarily on NS2 and NS3, with a decreased number of nests on NS1 and STI. California least terns did not utilize NTI. The first nest was initiated on May 8 on NS1. There were a total of 167 California least tern nests at Bolsa Chica in 2011. The average clutch size was 1.6 eggs per nest. From an estimated 80 pairs, a total of 268 eggs were laid. Fledgling success for the 2011 season ranged from 66-95 fledglings with a rate of 0.40 to 0.57 fledglings per nest. This is compared to 0.15 to 0.26 fledglings per nest in 2010. The first least tern fledgling of the year was recorded on June 20. In 2011, California least tern nest predation was high, with predation occurring at 50 nests (29.9% of all nests), and 10 nests (6.0% of all nests) were abandoned prior to hatching. Nest loss was high on NS3 with 32 nests (48.5%) being lost to predation and 6 nests (9.1%) abandoned. Coyotes were active on this nest site and they were assumed to be the major predator. NS1 also had high predation with 14 nests (45.2%) being lost to unknown predators. In 2012, California least terns arrived at Bolsa Chica on April 15 and were last observed on the site July 25 which was about a month earlier than in past years. The terns nested primarily on NS1 but also had high usage of NS1, NS3, and STI (Table 1-23). California least terns did not utilize NTI. The first nests were located on May 8 on both STI and NS1. Some nests had 2 eggs so their initiation date was probably May 6 or 7. There were a total of 305 California least tern nests at Bolsa Chica in 2012, an increase over 2011 (167 nests) but a decrease over other prior years (i.e. 2010 had 446 nests). The average clutch size was 1.7 eggs per nest. From an estimated 305 pairs, a total of 527 eggs were laid. Fledgling success for the 2012 season was extremely low with only 16 fledglings with a rate of 0.05 fledglings per nest. This is compared to an only moderately successful year in 2011 of 66-95 fledglings (0.40 to 0.57 fledglings per nest), but close to the 15 fledglings (0.07 fledglings per nest) in 2007, a previous low. The first least tern fledgling of the year was recorded on June 15, 2012. California least tern nest predation in 2012 was very high, with predation occurring at 158 nests (51.8% of all nests). Predation occurred on 129 nests (73.3%) on NS1, 14 nests (30.1%) on NS2, 8 nests (29.6%) on NS3, and 7 nests (12.5%) on STI. The primary predators responsible for the loss were coyotes on NS1 and NS3; coyotes and corvids on NS3; and the predators were unknown on STI. Twelve nests (3.9% of total nests) were abandoned prior to hatching. In 2013, California least terns arrived at Bolsa Chica on April 12 and were last observed on the site August 9. The terns nested primarily on STI but also had high usage of NS1, NS2, and NS3 (Table 1-23). California least terns did not utilize NTI. The first nests were located on May 8 on STI. Hatching was recorded between June 1 and July 9 with no second wave of nesting. There were a total of 157 California least tern nests at Bolsa Chica in 2013, a decrease over all previous years. The average clutch size was 1.5 eggs per nest. From an estimated 157 pairs, a total of 236 eggs were laid. Fledgling success for the 2013 season was low with only 35-67 fledglings with a

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 102 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

rate of 0.22 to 0.43 fledglings per nest. Although the fledgling rate was low it was an increase over 2012 which produced 16 fledglings with a rate of 0.05 fledglings per nest. The first least tern fledgling of the year was recorded during June on STI. All but one fledgling was from NS2. California least tern nest predation in 2013 was high, with predation occurring at 37 nests (23.6% of all nests). Predation occurred on 20 nests (100%) of nests on NS1, 1 nest (2%) on NS2, 3 nests (100%) on NS3, and 13 nests (16%) on STI. The primary predators responsible for the loss were gulls on NS1; corvids on NS3 and STI were taking eggs; and probably red-tailed hawk or northern harrier taking chicks on STI. Seven nests (4.5% of total nests) were abandoned prior to hatching. Western Snowy Plover The complete 2010 (Year 4), 2011 (Year 5), 2012 (Year 6), 2013 (Year 7) results for the western snowy plover breeding season at Bolsa Chica are detailed in Knapp and Peterson (2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013) (Appendices 1-H through 1-K). A summary of nesting data for the entire monitoring period (Years 1 through 7) is provided in the following discussion.

In 2010, there were a total of 64 western snowy plover nests producing 63 fledglings (Table 1- 24). The first nest was observed on March 5, earlier than typical years when nesting starts at the end of March. The last nest hatched on August 14. Western snowy plovers nested on STI, NTI, NS1, NS2, NS3, and a number of cells within the Seasonal Ponds, Future Full Tidal Basin, and Full Tidal Basin Inlet (Table 1-24). A total of 64 nests were located at Bolsa Chica. Two completed clutches were 2-egg clutches, while 59 were 3-egg clutches. From the 184 total eggs laid, 164 produced chicks.

Table 1-24. 2010 nest, nest fate, and reproductive success distribution by cell or nest site. Nests Hatched Location Total Nests Nests Failed (# chicks) Fledglings Seasonal Ponds: 11 1 10 (29) 12 Cell 9 2 0 2 (5) 2 Cell 10 5 0 5 (15) 8 Cell 11 3 1 2 (6) 0 Cell 12 1 0 1 (3) 2 Nest Site 1 26 2 24(67) 16* Nest Site 2 4 0 4 (12) 7 Nest Site 3 14 1 13 (37) 15 Future Full Tidal Basin: 4 1 3 (7) 6 Cell 14 3 1 2 (4) 3 Cell 22 1 0 1 (3) 3* Full Tidal Basin Inlet 1 0 1 (3) 3 North Tern Island 1 1 0 (0) 0 South Tern Island 2 0 2 (6) 2 East Levee Rd. 1 0 1 (3) 2 Total 64 6 58 (164) 63 * includes birds raised at Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 103 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

In 2010, eight nests were abandoned, one was depredated, and one nest contained non-viable eggs. The cause of the abandonment of three nests and two chicks from NS1 during the time frame of April 16 and April 23 is undocumented; however, it is believed that the cause of abandonment was due to the depredation of adult plovers. The only nest on NTI was abandoned due to elegant tern harassment of adult plovers attempting to reach their nest to incubate eggs. A nest in Cell 22 is believed to have been abandoned after tracks around the ME indicated that a pair of raccoons circled the exclosure. There was no evidence of adult depredation. Three nests were abandoned for unknown reasons. One nest was depredated prior to placement of the ME. The known predators were common raven, and American kestrel. Coyotes also had a high potential of being a predator. One nest contained sterile eggs. The female incubated 3 eggs for 83 days until the eggs were collected and determined sterile. The eggs from four nests were collected after determination that abandonment had occurred and were given to the Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center (HBWWCC) for possible salvage. Eleven of the twelve eggs hatched at the care center and were raised to fledging, banded, and subsequently released in Cell 13 of the Seasonal Pond area of Bolsa Chica. In addition, the two abandoned chicks mentioned above were taken to the care center for salvage. They were raised at the care center, fledged, banded and subsequently released in the Bolsa Chica area. Of the 164 total chicks produced in 2010, 63 (38.5%) survived to fledge. The number of fledglings per nest was 0.98, which is within the range of previous years. On NS1 there were 26 nests and the number of fledglings per nest was 0.62. If rescued eggs and chicks are excluded the fledge rate drops to 0.23 fledges/nest. Of the 57 nests that hatched chicks, 24 did not fledge chicks and 1 brood only fledged due to human interference. In 2011, there were 73 western snowy plover nests producing 62 fledglings (Table 1-25). The first nest was observed on March 16. The last nest hatched on August 6. Western snowy plovers nested on STI, NTI, NS1, NS2, NS3, and a number of cells within the Seasonal Ponds, Future Full Tidal Basin, Muted Tidal Basin and East Levee Road. All 73 nests were judged to be complete clutches with the exception of one in Cell 12, which was abandoned with just one egg. Eleven completed clutches were 2-egg clutches, one clutch was 4 eggs, and 61 were 3-egg clutches. From the 207 total eggs laid, 163 produced chicks. In 2011, six nests were abandoned, five were depredated, and two nests contained non-viable eggs. The cause of abandonment of nests is undocumented but is believed to be the depredation of adult plovers. All five nests that were predated were located on NS3 and were depredated by coyotes even though they were protected by an ME. Coyotes were able to dig in the soft sand on NS3 so that the eggs from the nest rolled down into the created depression and within reach. The only other egg loss is one of the eggs the nest on East Levee Road and the cause is undocumented. Eggs from two nests were salvaged after abnormal incubation periods. They were incubated for 48 and 49 days respectively until the eggs were salvaged and both contained sterile eggs.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 104 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 1-25. 2011 nest, nest fate, and reproductive success distribution by cell or nest site. Nests Hatched Location Total Nests Nests Failed (# chicks) Fledglings Seasonal Ponds: 19 1 18(50) 30 Cell 9 9 0 9(24) 12 Cell 10 3 0 3 (9) 8 Cell 11 3 0 3 (8) 3 Cell 12 1 1 0 (0) 0 Cell 13 3 0 3(9) 7 Nest Site 1 12 2 10(26) 9* Nest Site 2 13 1 12 (32) 5 Nest Site 3 16 5 11 (30) 11 Future Full Tidal Basin: 7 1 6 (14) 5 Cell 14 3 0 3 (7) 5 Cell 19 1 0 1(3) 0 Cell 22 2 0 2 (4) 0 Cell 32 1 1 0 (0) 0 South Tern Island 3 0 3 (8) 2 North Tern Island 1 0 1 (3) 0 MTB (Cell 45) 1 1 0 (0) 0 East Levee Rd. 1 0 1 (2) 0 Total 73 11 62(165) 62* *includes birds raised at Huntington Beach Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center.

The eggs from two nests were collected after determining that abandonment had occurred and were given to HBWWCC for possible salvage. One nest was unattended for a prolonged period and, although all three eggs hatched, two of the chicks were underdeveloped and only one chick survived to fledge. All three eggs from the other nest were successfully raised at the care center to fledging. Four chicks were banded, and subsequently released in the Seasonal Pond area of Bolsa Chica Of the 163 total chicks produced in 2011, 62 (38.0%) survived to fledge. The number of fledglings per nest was 0.84, which is within the range of previous years. The Seasonal Ponds was the most successful nesting area with 1.58 fledglings/nest. It also supported all the chicks from NS3, which had a success rate of 0.68 fledglings/nest. The number of nests on NS1 has decreased from a high of 37 nests in 2008 to 19 nests in 2011. Reproductive success on NS1 is also declining. In 2011 the fledge rate was 0.75 (fledglings/nest) and if rescued eggs (which would have failed due to adult abandonment) are excluded the fledge rate drops to 0.41 fledglings/nest. NS2, which had four nests in 2010 and a fledge rate of 1.75, had a record 13 nests in 2011. Unfortunately, crowding by other snowy plover broods had a negative effect on reproductive success and NS2 was only able to support 0.38 fledglings per nest. Of the 62 nests that hatched chicks, 32 did not fledge chicks and two broods only fledged due to human interference. The known predators were common raven, which took three chicks on NS3; red-tailed hawk, which took one chick on NS2; great egret, which took one chick on NS2; and

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 105 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

gull-billed tern (Gelochelidon nilotica), which took six chicks in Cell 11. Two gull-billed terns were present for a short time (observed sporadically between April 25 and May 20). The three chicks lost on NTI were probably taken by gulls after hatching. The remaining chick loss due to predation is undocumented. In 2012, the first western snowy plover nest of the year was observed on March 6. The last nest hatched on August 3. Western snowy plovers nested on NS1, NS2, NS3, and a number of cells within the Seasonal Ponds, Future Full Tidal Basin and Muted Tidal Basins (Table 1-26). NTI and STI were not used at all in 2012. A total of 68 nests were located at Bolsa Chica. Nine completed clutches were 2-egg clutches, one clutch had 4 eggs, and 53 were 3-egg clutches. A total of 161 chicks hatched from 193 total eggs laid during the 2012 nesting season, producing 77 fledglings..

Table 1-26. 2012 nest, nest fate, and reproductive success distribution by cell or nest site. Nests Hatched Location Total Nests Nests Failed (# chicks) Fledglings Seasonal Ponds: 26 2 24(66) 35 Cell 9 6 0 6(17) 11 Cell 10 4 0 4(12) 10 Cell 11 9 2 7 (19) 8 Cell 12 4 0 4(11) 4 Cell 13 3 0 3(7) 2 Nest Site 1 12 1 11(33) 23 Nest Site 2 7 2 5 (14) 4 Nest Site 3 9 2 7 (19) 7* Future Full Tidal Basin: 10 0 10 (24) 7 Cell 14 2 0 2 (6) 0 Cell 19 3 0 3(8) 0 Cell 22 3 0 3 (8) 6 Cell 30 1 0 1 (2) 1 Cell 32 1 0 1 (2) 1 Road by South Tern Island 1** 0 1 (1) 0 Muted Tidal Basin (Cell 40) 1 0 1(2) 1 80 Road 1 1 0 (0) 0 Full Tidal Basin Cove 1 0 1 (2) 0 Total 68 8 60 (161) 77* * includes bird raised at Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center. ** nest not found

Eight nests were abandoned (Nests #1, 7, 20, 24, 30, 34, 35, and 61). Nest #7 on NS3 was abandoned after 44 days of incubation. Nest #61, located in Cell 11, was abandoned due to flooding. All other nests were abandoned for unknown reasons. Nests #30, 34 (both from NS2), and 35 (from NS3) were all abandoned on March 31.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 106 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

The eggs from nest #31 were collected after determination that nest abandonment had occurred and the eggs were subsequently given to the Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center of Orange County (WWCCOC) (formerly the Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center) for possible salvage. Of the three eggs, two hatched, and one was raised to fledging, banded, and subsequently released in the Seasonal Pond area of Bolsa Chica. Of the 161 total chicks produced in 2012, a total of 77 chicks (47.8% of total chicks hatched) were estimated to have survived to fledge. There were 1.1 fledglings per nest, which was higher than most recorded years except 2004 and 2005 and higher than the average of 0.9 fledglings per nest. Of the 77 nests documented in 2012, 28 did not fledge chicks. Eight of these nests did not produce chicks due to abandonment, the rest were lost as chicks to unknown predators. The Seasonal Ponds were the area most utilized by the western snowy plover. They had the most nests in 2012 (26) even excluding the nine nests on NS3 (which is in the Seasonal Ponds). Nest Site 1 has shown a steady decline in nesting plovers. In 2012, there were 12 nests, the same as in 2011. The highest use was 36 nests in 2008 and 32 nests in 2009. In 2013, the first western snowy plover nest of the year was observed on March 21. The last nest hatched on August 2. Western snowy plovers nested on NS1, NS2, NS3, STI, and a number of cells within the Seasonal Ponds, Future Full Tidal Basin and Muted Tidal Basins (Table 1-27). NTI was not used at all by the snowy plover in 2013. A total of 66 nests were located at Bolsa Chica. Ten completed clutches were 2-egg clutches and 55 were 3-egg clutches. A total of 140 chicks hatched from 185 total eggs laid during the 2013 nesting season, producing 37 fledglings.

Table 1-27. 2013 snowy plover reproductive success for each nesting location. Nests Hatched Location Total Nests Nests Failed (# chicks) Fledglings Seasonal Ponds: 28 1 27 (74) 18 Cell 9 5 0 5 (13) 3 Cell 10 10 0 10 (27) 4 Cell 11 8 1 7 (20) 4 Cell 12 3 0 3 (9) 4 Cell 13 2 0 2 (5) 3 Nest Site 1 16 11 5 (14) 3 Nest Site 2 4 1 3 (9) 5* Nest Site 3 8 2 6 (18) 6 Future Full Tidal Basin: 5 1 4 (10) 2 Cell 14 2 1 1 (3) 0 Cell 19 2 0 2 (5) 2 Cell 22 1 0 1 (2) 0 STI 1 0 1 (3) 1 Muted Tidal Basin 2 0 2 (6) 1 Cell 40 1 0 1 (3) 0 Cell 45 1 0 1 (3) 1 80 Road 2 0 2 (6) 1 Total 66 16 50 (140) 37* * includes bird raised at the Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center of Orange County.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 107 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Of the 140 total chicks produced in 2013, a total of 37 chicks (26.4% of total chicks hatched) were estimated to have survived to fledge. There were 0.6 fledglings per nest, which was the lowest recorded since 2007 and much lower than the average of 0.9 fledglings per nest. Of the 66 nests documented in 2013, 16 did not fledge chicks. Six of these nests did not produce chicks due to abandonment, eight were predated, and two were sterile. Of the eight predated nests, seven were predated by gulls and one was unknown. The significant reduction in fledgling success from 77 in 2012 to 37 in 2013 is attributable to the following three depredation factors: 1) predation of nests on NS1 by gulls; 2) presence of two northern harriers during the breeding season; and 3) presence of other avian predators during the breeding season including American kestrel and red-tailed hawk. The reason for nest abandonment is undocumented.

The Seasonal Ponds were again the area most utilized by the western snowy plover, with 28 nests in 2013. Nest Site 1 has shown a steady decline in nesting plovers since 2009 but in 2013 there was a slight increase in the number of nests initiated. Sixteen nests were initiated on NS1 but 11 of these failed. Discussion The number of California least tern nests at Bolsa Chica increased steadily post-restoration to a high of 464 nests in 2010 (Figure 1-23). The record number of nests in 2010 marked a 41% increase from the year before, as well as supporting a record number of adult pairs. It was thought that the increase might have been associated with a large decline in adults at the Port of Los Angeles in 2010. However, their numbers remained low at the Port in 2011 and also declined at Bolsa Chica. In 2011, nesting least terns at Bolsa Chica declined to 167 nests. Nest numbers increased again in 2012, but fell to the lowest post-restoration number in 2013 (157 nests).

900

800

700

600 Nests 500

400 Eggs Number 300 Chicks

200 Fledglings 100 (Minimum)

9 07 10 12 0 00 0 0 2 2008 2 2 2011 2 2013 Year Figure 1-23. Total number of California least tern nests, eggs, chicks, and fledglings post- restoration at Bolsa Chica (2007-2013)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 108 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Reproductive success was highest in 2009, when, despite losses from trampling by other nesting tern species, predation was low. The following year, despite record numbers of nests, reproductive success for the least terns in 2010 was extremely low due to intensive predation by primarily coyotes. This problem continued in each of the following years, despite the additional effort put into protecting nesting species and preparing their sites (Figure 1-23). Due to previous predation by coyotes, fences were extended on NS1 and installed at NS2 prior to the 2013 nesting season to protect the nests from coyotes and other mammalian predators. The fencing did deter the coyotes, but the nests on NS1 were predated by gulls that had begun to use the area for loafing in 2013. Overall, reproductive success post-restoration (2007-2013) (as fledglings/pair) has not yet reached the high levels seen in 2005 prior to the creation of the new nest sites and in 2006, when the three nest sites had been completed (one nest site was utilized). Reported predation in these successful years was notably low (Marschalek 2006 and 2007). The number of western snowy plover nests and adult pairs is relatively stable from year to year, but reproductive success reached its lowest point since 2007 in 2013 (Figure 1-24), despite large efforts made to prepare NS1 prior to nesting season. The site was scraped to remove the weeds and new sand was added to the site. Predation of adults and chicks remains the primary cause of low reproductive success. It is worth noting that a portion of the reproductive success in the last four years was attributable to the release of fledglings that were raised at the HBWWCC from rescued abandoned eggs and chicks. It is likely that these eggs or chicks had been abandoned due to the depredation of one or both adults. 200 180 160 140

120 Nests 100 80 Chicks Number 60 40 Fledglings (Minimum) 20 0

7 9 0 3 08 11 00 0 01 0 2 2 200 2 2 2012 201 Year Figure 1-24. Total number of western snowy plover nests, chicks, and fledglings post-restoration at Bolsa Chica (2007-2013)

One method for deterring coyotes and corvids, and potentially gulls as well, from consuming eggs is implementation of an egg aversion program. Egg aversion is a learned association between a food item and illness. This technique requires that ill tasting or slightly toxic eggs be placed on the nest site in an attempt to emulate the California least tern or western snowy plover nests. When the eggs are consumed by the predator, a learned association is formed that deters the predator from seeking this same food type. This aversion is long lasting but may need to be reaffirmed in the event that new predators are being introduced onto the site. Often one event is

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 109 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

all that is required; however, in a situation like Bolsa Chica where a large number of natural eggs were consumed, repeated consumption of ill-tasting eggs may be required before successful aversion is obtained. This method has been used on the project site before with great success but was discontinued or used later in the breeding season. It is recommended that egg aversion techniques be resumed and used year round. The restoration project included the creation of three nest sites targeting these two species. While NS1 has been heavily used by both terns and plovers since it was completed in 2006, California least tern did not expand to nest on NS2 and NS3 until 2010 (Table 1-23). In 2010, reproductive success on these sites was low due to nest predation on NS2 and both nest and chick predation on NS3. In 2011, most of the least tern fledglings came from NS2 (77%), while NS3, with the most least tern nests at Bolsa Chica, yielded a very low fledge rate per nest (3%). In 2012 and 2013 there were no fledglings produced at NS3 by the least terns nesting there. On NS2 nesting terns produced no fledglings in 2012, but between 34 and 66 in 2013. The snowy plover has used NS2 since 2009 and NS3 since 2006, with varying success. Management of the California least tern and western snowy plover nesting sites is expected to be adaptive due to enhancement of the Bolsa Chica area and the creation of new nesting and foraging areas. Many recommendations from past years have been implemented with good results and are expected to continue. These actions include 1) removing non-native plants with herbicides and by hand on all the man-made nest sites, thus keeping the area clear for nesting; 2) placing tiles on the nest sites for the chicks to hide under, providing protection from both predation and trampling; 3) deploying the original small mini-enclosures on every western snowy plover nest to prevent egg loss due to predation and trampling; 4) focusing predator monitoring and management on known nest and chick predators; and 5) water management in the Seasonal Ponds. The newest management recommendation would be to establish a protocol for deterring gulls from using NS1.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 110 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

II. PHYSICAL MONITORING PROGRAM

The physical monitoring program focuses on large-scale morphological changes of the Bolsa Chica system and tidal response to these changes. Principally, this monitoring includes evaluation of inlet shoaling, coastal beach response to inlet conditions and sand loss to the inlet shoal, and tidal reaction to shoal development. The physical monitoring program is intended to monitor changes in relation to management needs, and to adaptively evaluate and recommend adjustment of maintenance and management triggers where appropriate to ensure health of the system and protection of coastal beach resources.

2.1. INLET FLOOD SHOAL

Introduction As beach sand migrates down the coastline, it is made available for capture by flood tides entering the Bolsa Chica Full Tidal Basin (FTB). A portion of this incoming sand is moved back out to the beach with the ebbing tide, while a portion of the sand settles to form a flood shoal inside the inlet. As the flood shoal matures, it begins to restrict ebbing tidal flow, thereby diminishing, or muting, the full tidal range in the system relative to the tidal range that would exist without the flood shoal. Therefore, a monitoring, maintenance, and maintenance dredging program was incorporated into the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project and is being implemented as an essential component to the long-term health and viability of the system. An additional factor affecting the functioning of the FTB in the early years post-restoration is the status of the various tidal basins. The oversized inlet of Bolsa Chica was designed to accommodate the tidal prism of the FTB, the three Muted Tidal Basins (MTBs), and the Future Full Tidal Basin (FFTB). From the time of opening and throughout 2007, only the FTB supplied tidal prism through the inlet. In February 2008, the West MTB was opened adding additional muted prism to the FTB. The Central and East MTB have remained essentially closed since 2007 and are not expected to be functional in the future without major physical interventions in the FTB inlet. The FFTB is a project element envisioned for a time well in the future when oil extraction operations are completed at the site, and will, therefore, not be providing tidal prism for decades to come. As a result of the oversizing of the inlet without all of the basins fully functional, tidal velocities through the inlet are too low to maintain the full channel width between the jetties. Therefore sedimentation occurs in the inlet channel as would be expected, but at a higher rate than anticipated once all basins are open in the future. If and when additional tidal prism is added to the system through the functionality of all MTBs and the FFTB, the inlet mouth is expected to increase in cross-sectional area in response to the higher tidal velocity required to feed the system during tidal exchanges. To track the size and location of the inlet flood shoal, a monitoring program was implemented in conjunction with tidal monitoring to determine if and when a maintenance dredging event is warranted. The inlet was dredged in early 2009 (Year 3). Bathymetric monitoring in Year 4 (2010) documented the rapid reforming of the shoal and a second maintenance dredging was performed from January to April 2011, during Year 5. The results of Year 4 and 5 monitoring are presented below.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 111 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Methodology The distribution of sand accretion in the FTB inlet was assessed by M&A on January 29, 2010 and July 20, 2010. Later, pre-dredge and post-dredge surveys were performed by the dredge contractor on January 11, 2011 and in April 2011, and are presented here as well. M&A performed follow-up surveys in May 3 and June 11, 2011, to further track the accretion rate immediately post-dredge. The May and June surveys did not get complete coverage of the assessment area, therefore gaps in the June survey were filled with data collected during the May survey. For temporal calculations, the June survey date was used, since the bulk of the data were collected that day. The bathymetric survey area was previously presented in Figure 1-1. The 2010 M&A surveys were conducted from a small survey vessel with sub-meter accurate DGPS and a survey-grade SyQuest Hydrobox® fathometer. Land surveying was conducted using a total station to assess areas that were too shallow for hydrographic surveys. A logger was deployed during the survey to measure tidal elevation. In 2011, M&A switched bathymetric survey methodologies and commenced conducting surveys using a SEA Swath® interferometric sidescan sonar system that provides high-density elevation data over the sea floor in continuous overlapping swaths. This data collection methodology eliminates the extrapolation between survey lines by filling all portions of the survey area with data points in a manner similar to multibeam sonar. Data from the vessel-based bathymetric assessment were post-processed to correct for tidal elevations at the time of the survey, and the boat and shore data were used to develop bathymetric contour plots for the basin. To estimate the rate of sand influx in the FTB, a sediment assessment polygon encompassing the area of shoal formation was established. The changes in volume within this polygon over time were quantified, both between surveys and in comparison to pre and post-dredge conditions. For calculations based on 2010 and 2011 surveys, it was not possible to use the full assessment polygon, due to slightly smaller survey boundaries used by the dredge contractors during dredge- related surveys. Therefore, for all calculations from January 2010 to June 2011 the largest area common to all survey datasets was used, as indicated in the analysis figure. Results The contour plots for the 2009 post-dredge survey and the five surveys described above are presented in Figure 2-1. Plots of all prior surveys can be found in prior annual reports (available at www.bolsachicarestoration.org). Figure 2-1 shows the re-accumulation of sand in the year and a half following the first maintenance dredging in early 2009, and in the few months following the second maintenance dredging. The April 2011 post-dredge survey reveals the pattern of parallel transects traveled by the dredge on the basin floor, a feature that persisted in the following survey. To examine the spatial and temporal features of sediment accretion, the contour plots of select surveys were compared to each other to identify areas of erosion and accretion between surveys, and to quantify the net change. These comparisons are presented graphically in Figure 2-2. The figure shows rapid accretion in the inlet following the first dredge event of early 2009, followed by accretion at a similar rate in the first half of 2010, but distributed over a wider area, with the sand pushing further into the basin. The main shoal continued to accrete in the second half of 2010, but the net change was offset by the development (erosion) of a deeper channel through the western edge of the main shoal. The final image in Figure 2-2 shows a very rapid re-

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 112 05-162-01

POST-dredge, April 6, 2009 January 29, 2010 (Northwest(Northwest Hydro)Hydro) (Merkel(Merkel && Associates,Associates, Inc)Inc)

July 20, 2010 PRE-dredge, January 11, 2011 (Merkel(Merkel && Associates,Associates, Inc)Inc) (Barnum)(Barnum)

Depth (m)

3.6 - 3.9 -0.4 - 0.0

3.1 - 3.5 -0.9 - -0.5

2.6 - 3.0 -1.4 - -1.0

2.1 - 2.5 -1.9 - -1.5

1.6 - 2.0 -2.4 - -2.0

1.1 - 1.5 -2.9 - -2.5

0.6 - 1.0 -3.4 - -3.0

0.1 - 0.5 -3.9 - -3.5

POST-dredge, April 25, 2011 May/June 2011 (Northwest(Northwest Hydro)Hydro) (Merkel(Merkel && Associates,Associates, Inc)Inc)

Inlet Bathymetry April 2009 - May/June 2011 Figure 2-1a Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 05-162-01

May/June 2011 January 11, 2013 (Merkel(Merkel && Associates,Associates, Inc)Inc) (Merkel(Merkel && Associates,Associates, Inc)Inc)

July 02, 2012 May 23, 2013 (Merkel(Merkel && Associates,Associates, Inc)Inc) (Merkel(Merkel && Associates,Associates, Inc)Inc)

Depth (m) 3.6 - 3.9 -0.4 - 0.0

3.1 - 3.5 -0.9 - -0.5

2.6 - 3.0 -1.4 - -1.0

2.1 - 2.5 -1.9 - -1.5

1.6 - 2.0 -2.4 - -2.0

1.1 - 1.5 -2.9 - -2.5

0.6 - 1.0 -3.4 - -3.0

0.1 - 0.5 -3.9 - -3.5

October 20, 2012 December 03, 2013 (Merkel(Merkel && Associates,Associates, Inc)Inc) (Merkel(Merkel && Associates,Associates, Inc)Inc)

Inlet Bathymetry May/June 2011 - December 3, 2013 Figure 2-1b Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 05-162-01

April 6, 2009 - January 29, 2010 - July 20, 2010 - Dredge Cycle April 25, 2011 - January 29, 2010 July 20, 2010 January 11, 2011 January 11, 2011 - June 11, 2011 net accretion = 62,421 m3 net accretion = 36,880 m3 net accretion = 4,108 m3 April 25, 2011 net accretion = 21,437 m3 298 day mean accretion = 209 m3/day 172 day mean accretion = 214 m3/day 175 day mean accretion = 23 m3/day net accretion = -262,009 m3 47 day mean accretion = 456 m3/day 104 day mean accretion = 2,519 m3/day

Difference (m) -3.0 - -2.5 -2.4 - -2.0 -1.9 - -1.5 -1.4 - -1.0 -0.9 - -0.5 -0.4 - -0.1 0.0 - 0.1 June 11, 2011 - July 2, 2012 - October 20, 2012 - January 11, 2013 - May 23, 2013 - July 2, 2012 October 20, 2012 January 11, 2013 May 23, 2013 December 3, 2013 0.2 - 0.5 net accretion = 79,206 m3 net accretion = 9,744 m3 net accretion = 26,646 m3 net accretion = 10,0024 m3 net accretion = 12,003 m3 3 3 3 3 3 0.6 - 1.0 387 day mean accretion = 205 m /day 110 day mean accretion = 89 m /day 83 day mean accretion = 321 m /day 132 day mean accretion = 76 m /day 194 day mean accretion = 62 m /day 1.1 - 1.5 1.6 - 2.0 2.1 - 5.0

Full Tidal Basin accretion and erosion comparisons between surveys April 6, 2009 through December 3, 2013 Figure 2-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

accumulation of sand in the months (April to June 2011) following the completion of the second dredge event. Per day accretion rates are presented in Figure 2-2 for temporal comparisons. Figure 2-3 presents the accretion rate graphically as net sediment accretion per month within the assessment area shown in Figure 2-1 (or the smaller area described above for 2010 and 2011). The rates do not represent the actual accretion per month, as field observations noted that deposition and erosion occurred at an uneven rate over time, but provide a useful means to examine the rates of change over time following a dredge event.

Figure 2-3. Net sediment accretion rate per month since the FTB opening in August 2006.

Discussion The surveys performed in the years after the first maintenance dredging (2009) found a generally steady rate of infill, followed by a period of notably slow accretion. While this suggests that the shoal had reached a point of moderate stability, it is important to note that, as can be seen in Figure 2-2, the low net change is partly the result of erosion on the inside corner of the inlet offsetting the accretion of sand further into the basin, particularly on the west edge of the shoal. Additionally, although the rate of shoal expansion did appear to have slowed during that time period leading up to the second maintenance dredging (July 2010 to January 2011), the vulnerability of the Full Tidal Basin to experience a closure event remained high due to the condition of the shoal near the inlet. As will be discussed in the following Maintenance Dredging section, the second dredging event in 2011 involved the excavation of a large sand trap (to the originally designed basin depth) that was not done during the initial site construction or first maintenance dredging. This sand trap was intended to capture the initial rapid influx of sand following the dredging, allowing the basin

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 116 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

more capacity to accept addition sand input over the following years. Following this dredge event, there was a rapid infill of the basin by littoral sediments followed by a decline in accretion rates (Figure 2-3). The sand trap was also intended to extend the period of improved tidal circulation in the basin, with the goal of greater system functionality. The trap served its function to provide sand storage capacity and thus curb the extent to which the flood shoal extends inward from the inlet mouth. However, the sand trap did not substantively assist in curbing the tidal muting within the FTB due to the fact that muting is principally the result of shoal development immediately inside the flare of the FTB as the basin widens out from the inlet channel. The extent of muting of the FTB is discussed in the next section of this report. The deposition of sand within the inlet has followed very predictable patterns of shoal development and episodic channel jumping in response to building shoal impediments along the primary channel thalwegs. The channel re-alignments result in changes in shoal form in a typical deltaic formation of lobed shoals and shallow relic channels. The south end of the shoal near the ocean inlet is further modified by the penetration of waves and swell that propagate up the inlet channel and push up a beach just inside the FTB to supratidal elevations.

2.2. TIDAL MONITORING

Introduction Tidal monitoring is fundamental to understanding the physical and biological structure of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands. As a non-estuarine system with minimal freshwater input, oceanic tides combined with oceanic and wind waves are the principal hydrodynamic forces within the wetlands. The short and long-term fluctuations in tidal elevations determine the composition and zonation of species within the intertidal marsh habitats. Sediments carried into the Bolsa Chica Lowlands via tidal currents are deposited within the system in a flood shoal. This change to the physical structure forms a feedback loop where tide profiles are altered. Currently, accretion and erosion of sand within the flood shoal of the FTB has the greatest impact on tidal conditions (refer to Section 2.1). The deposition of sand near the ocean inlet of the FTB results in tidal lag and muting. Tidal lag refers to the temporal (time) lag between oceanic tidal events (high tide, low tide, etc.) and those same events within the FTB. Tidal muting refers to the narrowing of the tidal prism (elevational change between high and low tides). The deposition of sand within the FTB results in restrictions to the flow of water and raise of lagoon floor in a manner that delays the timing and reduces the range of tidal events within the FTB from being the same as those of the open coast. Tidal muting and loss of drainage affect inundation frequency within the intertidal zone. This creates physical stress that can result in lowered diversity or altered habitat distributions. The inundation frequency further affects oxidation-reduction potential in the sediments. These changes in tidal hydroperiods and associated factors can have substantial consequences on mudflats and marshland development. In addition, because tidal lag and muting within the FTB have the effect of stretching out the drain-down curve of the ebb tide and perching water levels above normal oceanic tide levels. Muting of a tidal system raises the mean sea level of the FTB and can increase surface and groundwater influx to the MTBs and reduce surface and groundwater drainage out of the wetland complex.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 117 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Tidal monitoring can be used to monitor the extent of physical change within the system, plan dredge cycles, and therefore, identify suitable tidal ranges to protect intertidal habitats and the species that depend on them. Complete analyses of the collected tide data were performed in 2010 (prior to maintenance dredging) and 2011 (during and after maintenance dredging). Data collection is ongoing in the FTB, though only analyzed as needed for water management purposes. Methodology Tidal monitoring was initiated in the FTB on December 21, 2006 at 11:06 and has been continuous since then with data collected at 6-minute intervals (except where noted below). The tidal data were collected with a RBR Instruments TGR2050 pressure gauge. The TGR2050 has a depth accuracy of ± 5 mm and a resolution of ± 0.1 mm. A second TGR2050 pressure gauge was deployed nearby, on shore and used to correct the submerged pressure gauge for atmospheric pressure. The pressure data obtained from the submerged and atmospheric pressure gauges were used to calculate water depth at the sensor with the following formula:

Depth = (Pw – Patm) / (λ * 0.980665); where depth is the water depth in meters at the pressure gauge, Pw is the pressure in deciBars read at the in-water pressure gauge, Patm is the local atmospheric pressure in deciBars, λ is the density of seawater measured at the study site (1.027 g/cm3), and 0.980665 is a gravitational constant (RBR 2007). In October 2011, the RBR instrumentation was replaced by a Campbell Scientific pressure transducer Model CS455. This instrument is vented to integrally compensate for atmospheric pressure therefore eliminating the need for a separate surface logger and the above calculation. The tide logger was held in an aluminum bracket mounted to the FTB bulkhead at the east water control structure (mouth of the EMTB). The initial bracket configuration resulted in a sensor elevation of –0.05 m NAVD. This elevation was not sufficient to capture the lower low tides during spring tidal cycles. On January 19, 2007 at 13:00, the bracket was extended, resulting in a sensor elevation of –0.68 m NAVD. A subsequent elevational measurement of the FTB bulkhead by Coastal Frontiers resulted in adjustment of the sensor elevation to –0.72 m NAVD. This sensor elevation was used for data reported in the 2007 annual report. In 2008, it was learned that nearby Orange County elevational benchmarks had been adjusted 7 cm to account for local subsidence. Thus, the tide station’s sensor elevation was again corrected to –0.79 m NAVD. The Campbell Scientific transducer was installed on an identical bracket and at the same elevation as the RBR. Both were deployed concurrently for one month to check for consistency and allow a seamless transition from one instrument to the other. Absolute tidal elevations were calculated by adjusting the 6-minute water depth data with the sensor elevation. The recorded tides were compared with tides measured at the nearest NOAA tidal station, located 22.5 km (14 miles) north in Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAOH) (NOAA Station 9410660). The NOAA gauge is located immediately adjacent to the open ocean, and the recorded tides represent the ocean tidal conditions. The data were obtained from the NOAA Tides and Currents website (http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov). The obtained data were not

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 118 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

temporally corrected based on distance to the study site because the correction is less than the logging period. The tidal data, tidal muting, and tidal lag analyses presented in this chapter are based on data collected over a two year period (from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011) and compared to the LAOH tidal station data. Tidal data were analyzed to produce comparisons of tidal lag and tidal muting between the FTB tides and open coastal tide data from the LAOH tidal monitoring station. Analyses were performed for all daily tidal events (higher high tide, lower high tide [hereafter referred to as high tide], lower low tide, and higher low tide [hereafter referred to as low tide]). Results The results of tidal lag and muting analyses by tidal event illustrate that they are not similar among tidal events. Tidal lag (the amount of time between achievement of a particular tide event at LAOH and the FTB) was most notable during lower low tides, almost negligible during higher high tides, and intermediate for low tides and high tides. The maximum observed lag in the FTB for 2010 (the year prior to dredging) was 234 minutes behind LAOH, observed during a lower low tide on July 10, 2010. In 2011, following the dredge event, the maximum lag was 193 minutes, observed on December 23, 2011. For comparison, the prior maximum lag in the FTB was 186 minutes, observed January 9, 2009, just days prior to the first maintenance dredging event. The tidal muting analysis comparing the FTB tide data against LAOH shows that the FTB does not completely drain to local oceanic sea levels during outgoing tides. Tidal muting is most significant during lower low tides (Figure 2-4). The maximum tidal muting in the FTB for 2010 (the year prior to dredging) was 1.06 m at the lower low tide on July 11, 2010. In 2011, following the dredge event, the maximum muting was 0.99 m, observed on November 25, 2011. For comparison, the prior maximum muting in the FTB was 0.91 minutes, observed January 10, 2009. Spring tides refer to the exceptionally high and low tides that occur monthly at the time of the new or full moon; the greatest spring tides occur during the autumnal and vernal equinoxes. The longer-term trends in lower low spring tide muting are illustrated in Figure 2-5. Analysis of the lowest spring tides illustrates when tidal muting was the most severe and can be used as a tool to direct management actions relative to functionality of the muted tidal basins. Spring lower low tide muting was relatively small (less than 0.4 m NAVD) for the first year (2007) following the opening of the FTB. Muting then increased slightly in Fall 2007 and was again steady until Spring 2008. In spring 2008 muting increased significantly and remained high until the 2009 dredging. Following the 2009 dredging muting was reduced but still higher than the original post-dredge conditions. In 2010 muting steadily increased, reaching a maximum of 1.06 m NAVD. Muting improved temporarily following the 2011 dredging, but returned to pre-dredge conditions within seven months.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 119 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

High water tide muting 2010-2011 Higher high water tide muting 2010-2011 1.2 1.2

1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

Muting (meters) 0.2 Muting (meters) 0.2

0.0 0.0

-0.2 -0.2 Jul-10 Jul-11 Jul-10 Jul-11 Jun-10 Jun-11 Jun-10 Jun-11 Jan-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Oct-11 Jan-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Oct-11 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 Sep-10 Nov-10 Dec-10 Sep-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Sep-10 Nov-10 Dec-10 Sep-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 May-10 Aug-10 May-11 Aug-11 May-10 Aug-10 May-11 Aug-11

Low water muting 2010-2011 Lower low water tide muting 2010-2011 1.2 1.2

1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

Muting (meters) 0.2 Muting (meters) 0.2

0.0 0.0

-0.2 -0.2 Jul-10 Jul-11 Jul-10 Jul-11 Jan-10 Jun-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Jun-11 Oct-11 Jan-10 Jun-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Jun-11 Oct-11 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 Sep-10 Nov-10 Dec-10 Sep-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Sep-10 Nov-10 Dec-10 Sep-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 May-10 Aug-10 May-11 Aug-11 May-10 Aug-10 May-11 Aug-11 Figure 2-4. Average monthly tidal muting calculated for high tides (top left), higher high tides (top right), low tides (bottom left) and lower low tides (bottom right). Bars indicate monthly minimums and maximums.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 120 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 2-5. Maximum spring lower low tide muting. (Muting reflects the maximum difference between the FTB and corresponding LAOH low tides).

The chronic tidal muting experienced since late 2007, despite maintenance dredging efforts, meant that FTB water levels limited the functioning of the Muted Tidal Basins. Figure 2-6 illustrates the spring tide lower low water levels since monitoring began, relative to the operating ranges of the muted tidal basins (WMTB = west muted tidal basin, CMTB = central muted tidal basin, EMTB = east muted tidal basin). The filled blue area in the figure represents the lowest obtained water level in the FTB during spring tides. When the FTB water level is below the operating range of a given MTB, that MTB is capable of draining to the FTB. In all areas where the blue area (FTB water level) overlaps a shaded MTB operating range, that MTB cannot drain out and therefore does not drain tidally even periodically.

Figure 2-6 shows that for most of 2010 and 2011, the EMTB was not functional, except for a very brief period immediately following the 2011 maintenance dredging. The CMTB was able to drain for only several months post-dredge. The WMTB did not drain in 2010, but was restored to some functionality post-dredge in 2011. This figure only shows the lowest low tides achieved, and it should be noted that for the majority of time FTB water levels were at a higher point and therefore none of the MTBs were able to drain out on falling tides.

Plots of tidal elevations within the FTB and LAOH for 2010 and 2011 are presented on a monthly basis for the entire data set in Appendix 2-A. Figure 2-7 shows a sample tidal comparison of the FTB and LAOH during January 2011. The figure illustrates the differences in tidal elevations achieved between the FTB and LAOH. Tidal lag and muting are illustrated by noting where the two tidal curves do not overlap.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 121 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 2-6. Lower low spring tide levels in the FTB relative to the approximate operating ranges of the three muted tidal basins.

Jan 2011 2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0 ` 0.5 meters NAVDmeters 0.0

-0.5

-1.0 FTB LAOH

Figure 2-7. Example comparison of recorded tides (January 2011) at FTB with the ocean tides (LAOH).

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 122 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Discussion The dredging in early 2011 temporarily reduced tidal lag and muting in the FTB, improving the functionality of the WMTB and allowing a brief period of tidal flushing of the CMTB. However within six months, FTB lower low water levels had returned to elevations high enough to significantly impact the functioning of the MTBs. The FTB must be below the operating range of an MTB for the MTB to drain out. During preliminary engineering, tidal predictions were based on a theoretical average spring tidal condition, not the maximum spring tide condition noted in the muting analysis. Because of the importance of the low tide muting and lag to the drain-fill hydraulics of the MTBs, these maximum drain-out conditions are of key interest as they pertain to proper functioning of the MTBs. The MTB tidal conditions are strongly influenced by the amount of water stored in them as a result of prior tidal history. Waters step up in elevation during moderate neap tidal series in the FTB and drain down during the more extreme low water levels of spring tide series. This un- natural tidal fill and drain pattern is required to provide gravity driven muted tides to marshlands that are located at elevations well below mean sea level. Freeman Creek, which is key to site- wide drainage of accumulated rainfall out to the FTB, was originally intended to operate by gravity as well. However, due to the chronic FTB muting keeping FTB waters at elevations too high for Freeman Creek to gravity drain, a pump station was installed in Freeman Creek to allow for greater water management for flood control or habitat management. It is unlikely that the CMTB and EMTB will ever achieve a muted tidal condition through connection to the FTB. Culverts have been installed between the basins, flowing from west to east and ultimately into Freeman Creek, which will allow for greater control over water levels, however these culverts remain at levels that are not optimal for achieving hydrologic control within the MTBs. The basins are typically flooded by gate leakage from the FTB, flow from the WMTB, and inflow of groundwater to surface water through porous sediments, mostly along relictual stream channels that cross the site. Given the lack of drainage control that can be achieved by gravity through the CMTB and EMTB gates, it is recommended that interior spill weirs between MTBs be modified to provide adjustable spill elevations. This would allow waters to be drained through the MTBs to Freeman Creek where the pump station may be used to lift waters and return them back to the FTB. The value of this surface water control within the MTBs cannot be overstated as the level of water within the MTBs effects many aspects of the system function and such control would allow for drainage of pools to control vector issues, seasonal drainage of water to promote availability of nesting habitat and to protect established nests from inundation. In addition, the ability to move water between MTBs at a lower overall elevation would increase seasonal capacity to absorb stormwater in the MTBs, while water is slowly drained out via the pump station at Freeman Creek.

2.3. BEACH MONITORING

Introduction The objective of the beach monitoring program is to develop a quantitative understanding of changes in the condition of the beaches adjacent to the newly constructed Full Tidal Basin (FTB) entrance channel and to evaluate the collected data in the context of “triggers” developed to indicate the need for a maintenance action to protect the beach. The study area includes portions

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 123 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

of the Bolsa Chica and Huntington Cliffs shorelines. The monitoring program, which commenced in January 2007, is comprised of semi-annual beach profile surveys and monthly beach width measurements at seven sites located along a 5.3 km section of coastline between Bolsa Chica State Beach and 17th Street in Huntington Beach. Coastal Frontiers Corporation conducted the beach profile surveys, while Moffatt and Nichol performed the beach width measurements. The historical research and collected data analysis was conducted by Coastal Frontiers Corporation. Figure 2-8 shows the locations of the beach profile transects used in the monitoring program. Two of these were established specifically for the monitoring program and were first surveyed in January 2007. Five of the transects had been established previously and were included in the Coast of California Storm and Tidal Waves Study for the Orange County Region (CCSTWS- OC) conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE 2002).

Figure 2-8. Beach profile transect location map.

Transect establishment/recovery activities were conducted prior to the commencement of the initial beach profile survey. The initial beach profile survey for the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project was conducted in January 2007. Additional surveys were performed during

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 124 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

each of the subsequent May and October time periods in 2007, 2008, and 2009, and were reported on in previous annual reports. Profile surveys were continued in May and June 2010, and in May 2011. Following the May 2011 survey, in light of limited remaining monitoring and management funds, the Steering Committee reviewed the beach monitoring program, which was an expensive component of the overall monitoring program at Bolsa Chica. They felt that although the semi- annual beach profile surveys exhaustively documented the beach conditions, the findings were continually complicated by the periodic input of pulses of sand from Surfside Sunset further to the north and had not provided any information requiring a specific management response. The Steering Committee therefore discontinued the semi-annual beach profile surveys going forward. The surveys will be reinstituted at such time as observations by CDFW staff or the monitoring team indicate changes of concern in the profile. The monthly beach width measurements also commenced in January 2007. The monitoring activities were detailed previously by Coastal Frontiers (2007a, 2007b, 2008a, 2008b, 2009a, 2009b, 2010a, 2010b, 2011). Monitoring continued through October 2011. The Steering Committee also examined this aspect of the beach monitoring and determined that after five years of monthly monitoring the beach width dredging triggers had never been met due to the repeated early emergence of other system needs related to site functionality, primarily tidal muting, which indicated a dredging need much sooner than beach changes. The collected data also did not ever provide information that warranted immediate management actions. The management action envisioned by the established beach width triggers is maintenance dredging, which requires up to a nine-month lead time to initiate and cannot therefore promptly remedy observations of narrowing beach width revealed by the monthly monitoring. The Steering Committee determined that the most useful data to be collected from a cost/benefit perspective would be targeted beach width monitoring at key times of the year that would capture the expected extremes. These were identified as January, May, October, and after any significant storm event. If the observed beach conditions become cause for immediate concern, the Steering Committee would promptly explore more timely remedies, such as diversion of sand around the inlet, import of sand excavated from the shoal, or grooming of the beach to redistribute sand. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also collects the same beach width data each month at the five transects used in the trigger calculation mentioned above, so it would be possible to acquire the Corps data if our less frequent site visits revealed a need to examine more frequent data. Due to this modification, the monthly monitoring stopped in October 2011, to resume at a future time if warranted. A full analysis of all collected beach data has been performed annually in the past (by Coastal Frontiers Corporation), as was the case for data collected in 2010. The data collected in 2011 (May 2011 beach profile data and monthly beach width data through October 2011) were not analyzed as a full annual dataset. Therefore the text that follows is an annual analysis for 2010 only. Beach profile plots accompany this report in Appendix 2-B. Summary tables and figures are interspersed with the text, while supporting data are provided in Appendices 2-C, 2-D, 2-E, and 2-F. A summary memo of the May 2011 beach profile survey is provided in Appendix 2-G and not discussed any further below.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 125 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Historical Background Information The Bolsa Chica study area is contained within the Huntington Beach littoral cell, which spans the shoreline from the East Jetty of Anaheim Bay to the Newport Harbor Entrance. The area has been studied extensively as part of the CCSTWS-OC (USACE 2002) and in prior federal studies.

Prior to significant coastal development, sand was delivered to the littoral cell from the San Gabriel and Santa Ana Rivers, with modest input from coastal bluff erosion. The littoral transport regime changed substantially following construction of the Long Beach/Los Angeles Harbor Complex, the jetties at Anaheim Bay (for the U.S. Navy Weapons Station, Seal Beach), and numerous flood control measures. Coastal erosion was particularly severe in Surfside- Sunset Beach and West Newport Beach. In response to the loss of private and public property caused by erosion, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in concert with the State of California and the County of Orange, has undertaken periodic beach nourishment operations in the Huntington Beach cell since 1964. The majority of the sand nourishment has been placed at Surfside-Sunset Beach, immediately upcoast of the Bolsa Chica study area. Table 2-2 summarizes the beach nourishment history at Surfside-Sunset Beach.

Table 2-2. Beach nourishment history. Date Placement Site Borrow Site Volume (m3) 1964 Surfside/Sunset (Stage 1) Naval Weapons Station 3,058,000 1971 Surfside/Sunset (Stage 4) Naval Weapons Station 1,728,000 1979 Surfside/Sunset (Stage 7) Nearshore Borrow Pit 1,257,000 1983 Surfside/Sunset (Stage 8) Naval Weapons Station 382,000 1984 Surfside/Sunset (Stage 8) Nearshore Borrow Pits 1,147,000 1984 Surfside/Sunset (Stage 8) Naval Weapons Station 497,000 1988 Surfside/Sunset Naval Weapons Station 138,000 1990 Surfside/Sunset (Stage 9) Nearshore Borrow Pits 1,393,000 1997 Surfside/Sunset (Stage 10) Nearshore Borrow Pit 1,223,000 2002 Surfside/Sunset (Stage 11) Nearshore Borrow Pit 1,707,000 2009 Surfside/Sunset (Stage 12) Nearshore Borrow Pit 1,500,000 2009 Surfside/Sunset (nearshore) Anaheim Bay Entrance 88,000 2010 Surfside/Sunset (nearshore) Anaheim Bay Entrance 128,000 Source: USACE, 2002; Mesa, 2008a, 2010, 2011a

The beaches along the Bolsa Chica study area benefited as the downdrift recipient of the Surfside-Sunset nourishment material. During the 34-year period between 1963 and 1997, the beaches advanced at four of the five historical transects included in the Bolsa Chica monitoring program. Mean sea level (MSL) shoreline advance ranged from 14 m at Transect 423+89 to 71

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 126 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

m at Transect 350+71. The only occurrence of shoreline retreat during the 34-yr period was a loss of 18 m at Transect 378+28, located at Huntington Cliffs. The volume of sand above MSL increased in parallel to the beach width changes during the period. The shorezone volumes in the study area, which incorporate the sediment changes further offshore, increased at all of the sites. The greatest gains typically occurred prior to 1978 (USACE, 2002). Historical Shoreline Data Historical shoreline data were used to provide context for the results of the current Bolsa Chica monitoring program. The available beach profile and beach width measurement data are summarized below. Historical Beach Profile Data As indicated above, five of the beach profile transects used in the Bolsa Chica monitoring program were included in the CCSTWS-OC. The study incorporated data from 18 beach profile surveys conducted between 1963 and 1997. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers conducted an additional beach profile survey of the area in March 2002. More recent shoreline data are available from several Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) surveys commissioned by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. These data were used to provide historical context for the results of the current Bolsa Chica monitoring program. The survey data used in the CCSTWS-OC for the period 1963-1995 were retrieved from the archives maintained by the Scripps Institute of Oceanography. The 1997 and 2002 survey data were obtained from the Coastal Frontiers Corporate archives. LIDAR data for October 2005 and March 2006 were retrieved from archives maintained by NOAA (NOAA 2008). The beach profile data used in the CCSTWS-OC are summarized in Figure 2-9. The historical surveys are not uniform with respect to profile location or areal extent. Most of the surveys were performed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in support of the Surfside-Sunset nourishment program, navigation channel deepening at Anaheim Bay, or the CCSTWS-OC. The transect locations differ among surveys due to the scope of each project and the perceived needs at the time of each survey. Only the profile data obtained between 1992-1997, and more recently in March 2002, are coincident with the transect locations used in the CCSTWS-OC. In order to allow a comprehensive analysis based on the direct comparison of successive profiles at fixed locations, the CCSTWS-OC study employed a triangular irregular network (TIN) model to develop a set of “synthetic” profiles for the survey years with data that were not coincident with the CCSTWS-OC transect locations (typically the pre-1992 surveys). For the purposes of the Bolsa Chica monitoring program, the same TIN model approach was used to “re-generate” the synthetic profiles used in the CCSTWS-OC. This approach was not necessary for the data that were coincident with the transect locations (1992-1997 and 2002). The LIDAR data consists of densely spaced topographic points derived from an airborne survey. These data encompass the entire shoreline of the Bolsa Chica study area, but do not extend below the waterline. Beach profiles were created at each of the five historical transects and the two newly established transects using a TIN model developed from the LIDAR results. Synthetic profiles also were developed for the two newly established transects for March 2002 and several of the pre-1992 CCSTWS-OC survey dates. Using the same TIN model approach described above, synthetic profiles were created for each case when historical survey

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 127 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Surfside-Sunset Bolsa Chica Huntington Cliffs Huntington Beach West Newport

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 0 May-63 2 Jul-64 Oct-66 4 Apr-69 May-73 6 Dec-78 Jul-79 8 Apr-82 Jan-83 0 Feb-92 May-92 2 Nov-92 May-93 4 Oct-93 Apr-94 6 Oct-94 May-95 8 Nov-97

0 Station (feet) CCSTWS-OC Transect Surveyed Transect CCSTWS-OC Transect used in Bolsa Chica Monitoring Program

Figure 2-9. Beach profile data used in CCSTWS-OC.

data bracketed the location of the two newly established transects and at least one of the bracketing transects was not coincident with a historical transect. Profiles were generated for the following eight survey years: May 1963, July 1964, October 1966, April 1969, May 1973, April 1982, January 1983, and March 2002. Historical Beach Width Measurements U.S. Army Corps of Engineers personnel have acquired monthly beach width measurements along the Orange County coast since 1977. This extensive data set was initiated by Robert Clancy. Since the late 1980’s, Chuck Mesa of the Corps has continued the monthly data collection program. The data set contains measurements from a consistent back beach position to the break-in-slope at the beach berm. The location of the berm does not represent a vertically-referenced shoreline (such as the MSL shoreline). However, the measurements do provide an indication of gross changes in beach configuration. To differentiate these measurements from beach widths derived from profile data or from the beach width measurements collected on behalf of the Bolsa Chica project, they will be referred to hereafter as “Corps beach widths”. Three of the measurement stations are located within or immediately adjacent to the Bolsa Chica study area: 247+88, 308+88, and 424+44. These stations are not coincident with the transect

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 128 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

locations used for the CCSTWS-OC or the Bolsa Chica monitoring program. The beach width measurements at these stations were retrieved from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Mesa, 2008b, 2009, 2010, 2011b). Methodology Beach Profile Surveys Beach profile data were obtained on two occasions in 2010: May 4 and October 29. The methods employed were similar to those used on previous Orange County and Bolsa Chica surveys. In consequence, the results are directly comparable. The data acquisition and reduction methods are described below. The wading and bathymetric portions of each survey were performed concurrently by two crews, as illustrated in Figure 2-10. Data were acquired along each transect from the back beach to a depth of approximately 14 m below NAVD88. Wave heights typically were less than 1 m during each of the surveys.

Figure 2-10. Beach profile survey operations.

The beach and surf zone were surveyed using a total station and a survey rodman. The total station was used to determine the position and elevation of the beach at each location occupied by the rodman. Each transect was surveyed from the back beach seaward through the surf zone until the survey rod no longer protruded above the water surface when held vertically. This location, typically in a water depth of 3.0 to 3.5 m below NAVD88, provided substantial overlap with the landward portion of the bathymetric survey. Bathymetric data were collected with a digital acoustic echo sounder operated from a shallow- draft inflatable survey vessel. A dynamic motion sensor, which provides real-time corrections to the echo sounder for wave-induced vessel heave, also was utilized. A GPS receiver was used to

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 129 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

determine the position of each sounding. To improve the accuracy of each position, differential corrections transmitted in real-time from U.S. Coast Guard beacons were utilized (DGPS). All systems were interfaced to a laptop computer using the Hypack Max survey package. The boat traveled along each transect from the offshore terminus to the surf zone guided by DGPS navigation. Soundings were acquired on a continuous basis (approximately 3 soundings per second), while positions were recorded at 1-second intervals. The DGPS position data and sounding data were merged using the Hypack software, with interpolated positions being assigned to the soundings acquired between position fixes. The calibration of the echo sounder was checked at periodic intervals during the survey using a standard “bar check” procedure. In addition, measurements of the speed of sound in sea water also were obtained at the offshore end of each transect using a recording conductivity, temperature, and depth (CTD) instrument. The data from the wading portion of each survey were processed using software developed by Trimble. The software read the raw total station data, and the coordinates and elevation of each data point were calculated and inserted into a CAD drawing. The raw data from the bathymetric portion of each survey consisted of Hypack files containing the position data and heave-compensated soundings. These data were edited for outliers using the Hypack Single-Beam Processing Module. The dynamic motion sensor utilized during the survey removed the majority of the wave contamination from the record in real time. To further minimize the influence of wave-induced vessel motion on several transects, however, a smooth line was faired through the echo sounder record prior to digitizing it with the Hypack software package. Corrections for the draft of the transducer and the measured speed of sound in sea water then were applied to the measured depths. The speed-of-sound profiles were confirmed using the results of the “bar check” calibration procedure. Finally, the corrected soundings were adjusted to NAVD88 datum using tide measurements made by the U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, at Los Angeles Harbor. To provide a more accurate representation of local tide conditions, the water levels recorded at Los Angeles Harbor were adjusted to the project site using the time and height differences published by NOAA (NOS, 2011). The adjusted soundings were thinned to a nominal horizontal interval of 3 m to produce a file size suitable for developing beach profile plots. The resulting x, y, z data (easting, northing, and elevation) were inserted into the CAD drawing containing the wading data. As indicated above, the fieldwork was conducted in such a manner as to provide substantial overlap between the wading and bathymetric portions of the survey. The processed data were examined in this region to insure that the two data sets were compatible. Once this confirmatory inspection had been completed, only the more detailed data in the region of overlap were retained (typically the bathymetric data). The less detailed data were purged, after which the wading and bathymetric data were merged to create a single digital file. Based on past experience, the vertical accuracy of the processed soundings is approximately ±15 cm. According to the Hemisphere GPS equipment specifications, the accuracy of horizontal positions obtained in the manner described above is less than 1.0 m. The electronic total station used to conduct the survey is capable of measuring ranges to within 15 cm and elevation

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 130 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

differences to within 3 cm. Because the swimmer encountered waves and currents in the surf zone, however, the horizontal accuracy perpendicular to each transect (parallel to the shoreline) varied from minimal at short ranges to approximately 5 m at the offshore end. Beach Width Measurement Program Monthly beach width measurements were acquired at each of the seven profile sites, commencing in January 2007. The measurements were collected at tide heights ranging from - 0.67 m to 1.91 m NAVD88. The beach width was recorded as the distance from a permanent point at the back beach to the approximate intersection of the still water line and the beach face. The foreshore slope also was measured and recorded along with the date and time of the observation. The measurements then were adjusted to approximate the MSL beach width using the foreshore slope and NOAA tide elevations. In addition, the distance from the back beach to the berm was measured. Although inherently less accurate than surveys, the method provides a cost-effective means to supplement the more accurate MSL beach widths derived from the semi- annual beach profile survey data. Results The beach profile plots are provided in Appendix 2-B. MSL beach widths and sediment volume data are presented in Appendices 2-C and 2-D, respectively. Appendix 2-E contains the beach width measurements obtained for the Bolsa Chica monitoring program, while Appendix 2-F contains those collected by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Additional information for these products is provided below. Beach Profile Plots The 2010 beach profile data were used in conjunction with data from the historical surveys to create profile plots and compute changes in beach width and sediment volume. The beach profile plots developed from the survey data are provided in Appendix 2-B. The range on each profile plot represents the distance in meters seaward of the survey origin measured along the transect alignment. The elevation is given in meters relative to NAVD88. Two sets of beach profile plots were generated for each transect. The first set of plots shows all of the beach profile data available for each transect, while the second set of plots shows only those profiles obtained during the five-year period encompassing the last year of the construction of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project and the first four years post-restoration (October 2005 to October 2010). The plots focusing on the recent five-year period also show the envelope of all available profile data that preceded the opening of the Bolsa Chica entrance channel (May 1963 to March 2006). These plots also include two panels for each transect - one isolating the nearshore region of the profile and another displaying the entire profile length. Mean Sea Level Beach Widths Mean Sea Level (MSL) beach widths are provided in Appendix 2-C. The beach width was computed as the horizontal distance, in meters, between the landward edge of the beach sand and the point at which the beach profile intersected the plane of MSL Datum. In the Bolsa Chica area, MSL lies 0.79 m above NAVD88. Notwithstanding the use of NAVD88 as the elevation reference for the profile data, MSL was adopted as the shoreline reference in the belief that it provides a more accurate indicator of changes in beach configuration.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 131 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Sediment Volumes Sediment volume changes are provided in Appendix 2-D. The volume changes were computed along each transect for the entire width of the shorezone, and for that portion of the profile located above MSL (subaerial volume). The offshore boundary of the control volume for the beach above MSL was placed at the intersection of the profile and a horizontal line corresponding to the elevation of MSL. The offshore boundary for the shorezone was placed at the “statistical range of closure”. This parameter represents the distance seaward of the transect origin beyond which profile variations are smaller than the accuracy of the survey technique. As implied by its definition, the statistical range of closure was adopted as the offshore boundary to separate the signal of true profile change from the noise of survey inaccuracy. The sea bottom elevation at the range of closure corresponds to the “depth of closure” or the depth at which sediment transport is not substantially affected by littoral processes. The statistical range of closure was determined for the five historical transects as part of the CCSTWS-OC. However, these boundaries were no longer appropriate due to the profile changes that resulted at several locations from the placement of the ebb bar offshore of the Bolsa Chica entrance. As a result, the statistical range of closure was re-computed for each historical transect and for the two new transects based on all available survey data collected between May 1963 and October 2007. The procedure used to calculate the statistical range of closure for each transect was identical to that employed for the CCSTWS-OC (USACE 2002). The results are shown in Table 2-3.

Table 2-3. Statistical range and depth of closure at Bolsa Chica area transects. Transect Designation Range of Closure Depth of Closure (m) (m, NAVD88) 249+30 473 -6.97 311+22 900 -9.29 318+30 793 -8.80 333+30 717 -8.67 350+71 519 -7.70 378+29 381 -6.73 423+89 549 -8.72

Statistical closure was assumed to occur at the point at which the standard deviation of all measured elevations ceased to decrease in value. The procedure used to compute the point of statistical closure at each profile is summarized below:  Sea bottom elevations were interpolated at 15.2-m range intervals along all selected profiles.  The sample standard deviation of the interpolated elevations for all available survey profiles () was calculated at each 15.2-m interval.  Statistical closure was assumed to occur at the point at which  ceased to decrease.  The maximum depth of all available survey profiles at the point of statistical closure was recorded as the depth of statistical closure.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 132 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

 The distance from the transect origin to the point of statistical closure was recorded as the “range of statistical closure”. This range was adopted as the offshore boundary for the computation of shorezone volumes. The onshore boundary of the control volume for both the shorezone and subaerial volumes was placed at the landward edge of the beach sand. Beach Width Measurements The results of the beach width measurements obtained by Moffatt and Nichol at the seven Bolsa Chica area transects are presented graphically in Appendix 2-E. The plots include the MSL beach width and the horizontal distance from the back beach to the berm. The Corps beach widths, which consist of measurements from a consistent back beach position to the break-in-slope at the beach berm, are presented graphically in Appendix 2-F. Discussion The shoreline change assessment is based on the 47-year period between 1963 and 2010. Particular emphasis is placed on the five-year period encompassing the last year of the construction of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project and the first four years post- restoration (October 2005 to October 2010). This five-year period will be referred to as the “Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period”. The project components that influence coastal changes include placing approximately 929,326 m3 (1,214,579 y3) of sand in an ebb bar located offshore of the entrance channel during Winter 2005/2006, providing approximately 102,500 m3 (133,962 y3) of beach nourishment (50:50; north and south) to the shoreline adjacent to the channel in Summer 2006 and establishing tidal exchange at the FTB entrance channel in August 2006. Most recently, between January and April 2009, material derived from the initial maintenance dredging episode within the FTB provided 180,000 m3 of sediment to the beaches south of the entrance channel. In addition to the project activities, the Surfside-Sunset Stage 12 nourishment project provided approximately 1,500,000 m3 of sand to the beaches just north of the study area in Fall 2009. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers navigation projects at Anaheim Bay also resulted in approximately 216,000 m3 of material placed in the nearshore at Surfside-Sunset Beach. As indicated previously, the beaches along the Bolsa Chica study area have regularly benefited from the downdrift dispersal of the Surfside-Sunset nourishment material. A comprehensive account of the coastal changes in the area during the 34-year period between 1963 and 1997 can be found in the CCSTWS-OC (USACE 2002). Profile Changes Long-Term Profile Changes (1963 to 2010) The above-water portion of the 2010 beach profiles was seaward of the upper bound of the historical profile envelope at the two transects located immediately upcoast of the FTB entrance channel (Transects 311+22 and 318+30) and at the Huntington State Beach site (Transect 423+89). The majority of the gains appear to have occurred since 2005. The 2010 profiles exceeded the envelope by the greatest margin at Transect 318+30 (north of the FTB entrance channel). With the exception of Transect 378+29, located at Huntington Cliffs, the 2010 profiles at the remainder of the sites were near the middle or upper boundary of the historical profile

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 133 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

envelope. These findings are consistent with the long-term trend of beach width and sediment volume gains identified in the CCSTWS-OC for the Bolsa Chica study area. Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period Profile Changes (2005 to 2010) During the five-year Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period, above-water profile accretion occurred at the two transects located immediately north of the FTB entrance channel (Transects 311+22 and 318+30). Inspection of the consecutive profiles at these sites indicates a trend of progressive above-water volume gains since 2005. These gains may be explained by a combination of the beach nourishment placed in Summer 2006, onshore migration of the material placed in the ebb bar, and upcoast sediment trapping at the entrance jetties. Immediately south of the FTB entrance channel (Transect 333+30), the trend of above-water profile losses that persisted after completion of the restoration project was reversed in 2009 by the sediment placed at this location in late-2008. However, volume losses resumed in 2010. Further downcoast, at Transects 350+71, a trend of modest above-water profile loss is apparent. Relative profile stability prevailed at Transects 249+30 and 378+29, while modest gains occurred at the southernmost transect (423+89). The influence of the nourishment projects conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 2009 and 2010 (Table 2-2) is not apparent in the profiles, suggesting the material has not yet migrated into the project area. Offshore Ebb Bar Approximately 1.5 million m3 of sand was placed in an ebb bar located offshore of the Bolsa Chica FTB entrance channel between November 2005 and May 2006. This bar is evident in the 2007 profiles acquired at Transects 311+22, 318+30 and 333+30. Comparison of the successive October profiles obtained between 2007 and 2010 indicates the onshore migration of the ebb bar during the three-year period between the surveys. The most significant changes were isolated to depths above 8 m. The ebb bar was evident at Transect 318+30 at the time of the October 2010 survey, but had been largely dispersed at Transects 311+22 and 333+30. Beach Width Changes 2010 Beach Widths Figure 2-11 shows the beach widths in the Bolsa Chica study area at the time of the May 2010 and October 2010 surveys. Each figure also includes the range of historic Fall and Spring beach widths for all available data between 1963 and 2005. At the time of the May 2010 survey, beach widths ranged from 10 m at Transect 378+29 to 113 m at Transect 423+89. The greatest beach width at the time of the October 2010 survey was 113 m (Transect 423+89), while the narrowest beach width was 21 m (Transect 378+29). The beach width at Transects 311+22 and 318+30 (immediately north of the FTB entrance channel) exceeded the historical beach width envelope at the time of both the May and October 2010 surveys. The beach width at Transect 423+89 also exceeded the envelope in May 2010, but fell 7 m short of the historical maximum in October 2010. Long-Term Shoreline Changes (1963 to 2010) The time series plots in Appendix 2-C indicate a trend of long-term shoreline advance at six of the seven Bolsa Chica area transects during the 47-year period between 1963 and 2010. The exception was at Transects 378+29, where beach widths were relatively stable during this period with no apparent trend.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 134 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 2-11. May 2010 and October 2010 beach widths.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 135 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 2-12 shows the net long-term beach width changes in the Bolsa Chica study area between May 1963 and May 2010. To avoid a seasonal bias, the comparison utilizes the May 2009 survey rather than the more recent October 2010 survey. Shoreline advance predominated, with gains ranging from 15 m at Transect 350+71 to 76 m at Transect 318+30. Shoreline retreat occurred at only one location, a loss of 24 m at Transect 378+29.

Figure 2-12. Long-term beach width changes, May 1963 to May 2010.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 136 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period Shoreline Changes (2005 to 2010) Beach width changes between October 2005 and October 2010 are shown in Figure 2-13. During the five-year period encompassing the last year of the construction of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project and the first four years post-restoration, the shoreline advanced at the two transects located immediately north of the FTB entrance channel (311+22 and 318+30) and retreated at the remainder of the transects (four sites south of the FTB entrance channel and the site at the northern end of the study area). Investigation of the time series plots in Appendix 2-C indicates a trend of dramatic shoreline advance immediately north of the FTB entrance channel (311+22 and 318+30) during the Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period and modest shoreline retreat or stability at the remainder of the sites. During the five-year period, beach width changes ranged from a gain of 28 m at Transect 311+22 to a loss of 15 m at Transect 378+29.

Figure 2-13. Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period shoreline changes, October 2005 to October 2010.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 137 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Table 2-4 summarizes the beach width changes and trends during the five-year period encompassing the last year of the construction of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project and the first four years post-restoration. Assessment of shoreline data over this period indicates a trend of increasing beach width at the transects immediately north of the FTB entrance channel (Transects 311+22 and 318+30). The trends range from 5.7 to 6.5 m/year. These trends show no signs of abating with time. Further to the north at Transect 249+30, the shoreline position has remained relatively stable. South of the FTB entrance channel, a trend of shoreline retreat prevails. Shoreline losses ranging from 1.3 to 2.3 m/year occurred at the three transects nearest the FTB entrance channel (Transects 333+30, 350+71, and 378+29). These shoreline change rates are approximately 2 to 3 times that which occurred further downcoast at Transect 423+89 (0.7 m/year). Despite the periodic placement of material downcoast of the inlet as part of the lagoon maintenance operations, the trend of shoreline loss persists over the entire period. Similar to the upcoast transects, the trends show little evidence of abating with time.

Table 2-4. Beach width summary statistics, October 2005 to October 2010. Fall Beach Width Statistics (m) Transect Range Ave Change Trend (m) (m) (m) (m/yr)

249+30 71-91 83 -8 -0.1 311+22 63-92 81 28 5.7 318+30 64-104 88 27 6.5 333+30 41-81 67 -12 -2.0 350+71 43-62 53 -12 -1.3 378+29 10-41 26 -15 -2.3 423+89 103-120 111 -7 -0.7

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 138 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Sediment Volume Changes

Long-Term Subaerial Volume Changes (1963 to 2010) The long-term subaerial volume trends (Appendix 2-D) were similar to the long-term shoreline changes. Volume gains occurred at six of the seven Bolsa Chica area transects during the 47- year period between 1963 and 2010. In keeping with the shoreline change trends, the exception was Transect 378+29, where subaerial volumes were relatively stable during this period with no apparent trend. Figure 2-14, which shows the net long-term subaerial volume changes between May 1963 and May 2010, bears a striking resemblance to Figure 2-12 (showing beach width changes for the same period).

Figure 2-14. Long-term subaerial volume changes, May 1963 to October 2010.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 139 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period Subaerial Volume Changes (2005 to 2010) Subaerial volume changes during the five-year Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period are shown in Figure 2-15. In general, the subaerial volume changes are similar to the beach width changes. Volume gains prevailed at each of the three transects located north of the FTB entrance channel (249+30, 311+22, and 318+30). Volume losses occurred at three of the sites located south of the FTB entrance channel (Transect 423+89 being the exception).

Figure 2-15. Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period subaerial volume changes, Oct. 2005 to Oct. 2010.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 140 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Long-Term Shorezone Volume Changes (1963 to 2010) As described previously, the shorezone encompasses the entire littoral zone from the back beach to the depth of closure. Figure 2-16 shows the net long-term shorezone volume changes between May 1963 and October 2010 at each of the Bolsa Chica area transects. The comparison utilizes the May 1963 and October 2010 surveys because the shorezone volume is not subject to seasonal bias. Shorezone volume gains prevailed at six of the seven Bolsa Chica-area transects. The exception was Transect 378+29, which was essentially unchanged. The gains ranged from 183 m3/m at Transect 350+71 to 892 m3/m at Transect 318+30.

Figure 2-16. Long-term shorezone volume changes, May 1963 to October 2010.

The shorezone volume gains reflect not only the influence of the Surfside/Sunset nourishment activities, but also the ebb bar that was placed offshore of the entrance channel as part of the restoration project. The ebb bar, which was created by placing approximately 1.5 million m3 of sand offshore, is evident in the 2007 profiles at Transects 311+22, 318+30 and 333+30. The time series plots in Appendix 2-D show substantial volume gains at each of these transects between 2002 and 2007. As discussed previously, the ebb bar was evident at Transect 318+30 at the time of the October 2010 survey, but had been largely dispersed at Transects 311+22 and 333+30.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 141 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period Shorezone Volume Changes (2005 to 2010) It is not possible to quantify the shorezone volume changes for the Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period because the October 2005 profile does not extend below the waterline. However, investigation of the time series plots in Appendix 2-D indicate that a general trend of shorezone volume loss prevailed at six of the transects in the study area between January 2007 and October 2010 (the exception being Transect 423+89). The highest rate of volume loss occurred in the northern portion of the study area (Transects 249+30 to 333+30). This may be attributable to the dispersal and redistribution of the ebb bar and natural erosion between Surfside-Sunset nourishment intervals. In contrast, the shorezone volumes at Transect 423+89 were relatively stable over this period.

Beach Width Measurements Time series plots for the beach width measurements obtained at the seven Bolsa Chica area transects by Moffatt and Nichol and at three nearby locations by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are presented in Appendices 2-E and 2-F, respectively. The results of the beach width measurements obtained at the seven Bolsa Chica area transects are summarized in Table 2-5. During the period between the January 2007 and December 2010 observations, the MSL beach width decreased at two of the seven sites and increased at remaining five locations. The shoreline gains were confined to the area immediately north of the FTB entrance channel (311+22 and 318+30). The greatest shoreline advance was 43 m, and occurred north of the FTB entrance channel at Transects 311+22. The greatest shoreline retreat, 31 m, occurred at the north end of the study area at Transect 249+30. Shoreline change rates during the four-year period ranged from -5.5 m/yr at Transect 249+30 to 4.3 m/yr at Transect 311+22.

Table 2-5. Berm width measurement program summary statistics, Jan. 2007 to Dec. 2010. Distance to Berm (m) MSL Beach Width (m) Transect Range Ave Change Trend Range Ave Change Trend (m) (m) (m) (m/yr) (m) (m) (m) (m/yr)

249+30 49-86 61 -25 -5.6 58-104 80 -31 -5.5 311+22 50-93 63 5 4.8 58-107 79 43 4.3 318+30 56-83 70 12 4.0 65-99 86 16 3.6 333+30 14-67 34 4 -1.0 31-105 57 8 0.6 350+71 11-37 24 -13 -3.4 34-57 45 4 -0.9 378+29 0-17 5 1 0.4 2-52 21 32 3.0 423+89 67-101 84 -2 -0.3 74-115 100 -9 -1.1

The Bolsa Chica Monitoring Plan (USFWS, 2001b) defined beach nourishment triggers based on the monthly beach width observations at the Corps measurement sites within the study area. The minimum permitable beach width based on two consecutive monthly measurements was stipulated to be 15.2 m (50 ft). A second condition indicated that the 12-month rolling average

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 142 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

beach width could not deviate from the long-term mean beach width (based on the period January 1980 to January 2000) by more than two standard deviations. Table 2-6 shows the baseline berm position statistics for the three Corps measurement sites within the study that were provided in the monitoring plan.

Table 2-6. Baseline berm position statistics for Corps measurement transects (Jan. 1980 to Jan. 2000). Station Berm Position (m) Range Mean Std. Deviation 247+88 48 - 105 64.0 7.6 307+88 12 - 59 33.2 7.3 424+44 18 - 81 52.4 10.4

Figures 2-17, 2-18, and 2-19 show the long-term rolling average berm width from October 2006 (pre-project) to December 2010 at each of the three Corps measurement sites within the study area. The time series plots also show the minimum stipulated berm width (15.2 m), the long- term mean berm width, and the area encompassing two standard deviations above and below the long-term mean berm width. The measured berm width remained above the minimum stipulated berm width (15.2 m) throughout the period at each of the sites. At 307+88 and 424+44, the 12-month rolling average berm width exceeded two standard deviations above the long-term mean for the majority of the period. At no location, however, was the 12-month rolling average berm width less than two standard deviations below the long-term mean.

Figure 2-17. Twelve -month average berm width at Corps Station 247+88.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 143 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 2-18. Twelve -month average berm width at Corps Station 307+88.

Figure 2-19. Twelve-month average berm width at Corps Station 424+44.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 144 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Influence of FTB entrance channel Shoreline Changes Adjacent to FTB Entrance Channel: Between October 2005 and October 2010, the beaches upcoast (north) of the new FTB entrance channel accreted, while those downcoast (south) of the channel tended to erode. Figure 2-20 compares the shoreline changes immediately north of the channel (Transect 318+30) with the changes for the remaining upcoast monitoring sites (Transects 249+30 and 311+12). A trend of shoreline advance between October 2005 and October 2010 is evident at the two upcoast transects adjacent to the FTB entrance channel (Transects 311+22 and 318+30). The shoreline at Transect 249+30 has fluctuated over time but displays no distinct trend. The rate of shoreline advance is greatest immediately adjacent to the FTB entrance channel (Transect 318+30). This may be explained by the nourishment placed at the site in 2006 and the tendency for sediment to accumulate updrift of the FTB entrance channel jetties. If sediment continues to accumulate on the north side of the inlet and the shoreline position continues to advance at the north jetty, lagoon shoaling rates and the potential for closure may increase.

Figure 2-20. Shoreline changes at upcoast transects, October 2005 to October 2010.

A time series of the shoreline changes at the four transects located downcoast (south) of the FTB entrance channel is shown in Figure 2-21. The shoreline changes at Transect 333+30 (immediately downdrift of the channel) were nearly identical to those at Transects 350+71 and 423+89, and indicate a trend of shoreline retreat between October 2005 and October 2007. The shoreline changes at Transect 378+29 differed only modestly. Between October 2007 and October 2009 modest shoreline advance occurred at the two transects nearest the FTB entrance channel (333+30 and 350+71). In contrast, the shoreline retreated at the remaining sites. The shoreline advance adjacent to the FTB entrance channel may be explained in part by the sediment placed in this vicinity in late-2008. Shoreline retreat then prevailed between October 2009 and October 2010 at each of the sites except Transect 423+89.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 145 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 2-21. Shoreline changes at downdrift transects, October 2005 to October 2010.

Volume Changes Adjacent to FTB Entrance Channel: The subaerial volume changes upcoast of the FTB entrance channel (Figure 2-22) responded similarly to the shoreline changes. The subaerial volume increased during the five-year period at each of the sites, with the most pronounced gains occurring at Transect 318+30.

Figure 2-22. Subaerial volume changes at upcoast transects, October 2005 to October 2010.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 146 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

As shown in Figure 2-23 (downcoast volume changes), subaerial volume losses prevailed between January 2007 and October 2008 at the two transects nearest the FTB entrance channel (Transects 333+30 and 350+71). The sediment placed at this site in late-2008 was sufficient to reverse this trend at Transect 333+30, with volume gains predominating through May 2009. Volume losses then resumed through 2010. Similar subaerial volume changes were conspicuously absent further downcoast at Transect 350+71, where the general trend of volume loss persisted through 2010 without evidence of any influence from the late-2008 sand placement. Particular vigilance is warranted at these sites during future monitoring activities to determine if the erosional trend stabilizes. The remaining sites were relatively stable during this period, with modest gains at Transect 423+89 and slight losses at Transect 378+29. (Note: It is not possible to assess the shorezone volume changes for the Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period because the October 2005 profile does not extend below the waterline).

400

350

333+30 350+71 300 378+29

/m) 423+89 3 250

200

150

Subaerial Volume (m Volume Subaerial 100

0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year

Figure 2-23. Subaerial volume changes at downcoast transects, October 2005 to October 2010.

Sediment Trapping in the Full Tidal Basin: As indicated in Section 2.1, approximately 198,000 m3 of sediment was deposited in the lagoon during the initial 17-month period following the establishment of tidal exchange (August 2006 to January 2008; equivalent to approximately 140,000 m3/year). Sedimentation was reduced substantially during the second year (11-month period between January 2008 and December 2008) to approximately 36,000 m3 or 39,000 m3/year. The initial maintenance dredging episode (conducted in early 2009) removed approximately 180,000 m3 of material from within the FTB. During the 10-month period following the dredging operations, approximately 43,000 m3 of sediment was deposited within the FTB (April 2009 to January 2010; equivalent to approximately 52,000 m3/year). Additional shoaling of approximately 49,000 m3 (49,000 m3/year) occurred between January 2010 and January 2011. The second maintenance dredging episode was conducted in January 2011

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 147 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

(following the survey indicated above). While a small fraction of this material may have resulted from redistribution of basin sediments or aeolian processes, nearly all of the sediment has entered the basin from the ocean. It is possible that the high shoaling rate during the initial 17-month period (140,000 m3/year) was a transient effect attributable to inlet stabilization, and increased propensity for sedimentation due to the proximately of the pre-filled ebb bar and widened beaches adjacent to the inlet. The reduced shoaling rate during the second year is likely attributable to a reduced tidal prism due to high initial shoaling rates and the stabilization of the aforementioned local sediment sources (nourished beaches and ebb bar). The shoaling rate during the entire 28-month period between the establishment of tidal exchange (August 2006) and the initial maintenance dredging episode (December 2009) was approximately 100,000 m3/year. A substantially lower shoaling rate (53,000 m3/year) prevailed during the 21-month period following the initial maintenance dredging operations and leading up to the second dredging operation (January 2011). The reduction in shoaling following the initial dredging suggests that the high first-year shoaling rates may have been attributable to the initial stabilization of the inlet and surrounding beaches. Alternatively, the reduced shoaling rates also could be explained by a reduced tidal prism relative to the initial condition, given that the 2009 maintenance dredging removed only a portion of the accumulated material from the FTB (234,000 m3 accumulated vs. 180,000 m3 removed). Nevertheless, particular vigilance is warranted in monitoring the flood shoal accumulation rates following the 2011 dredging activities to confirm that the high sedimentation rates experienced during the first year were transitory, and to understand how the shoaling rates change in response to the eminent arrival of the recent Surfside-Sunset nourishment material to the Bolsa Chica area and the continued sediment accumulation and shoreline advance on the north side of the inlet. The shoaling rate measured during the initial 17-month period was on the same order of magnitude as the alongshore sediment transport rates developed as part of the CCSTWS-OC sediment budgets (estimated to range from 108,000 m3/y to 125,000 m3/year). In the event that trapping rates detected during the initial post-opening are not transitory, these rates are of a significant magnitude to be of major concern to longshore transport in the littoral cell. If left unchecked and unmanaged, the primary implication of a substantial reduction of the longshore sediment supply is shoreline erosion downdrift of the FTB entrance channel. The Bolsa Chica project, however, incorporates two sand management measures to actively address the potential for downdrift erosion by eliminating or substantially reducing the net long-term loss of sand downcoast. To compensate for anticipated short-term sediment losses from the littoral budget due to the natural formation of an ebb bar, initial lagoon shoaling, and fillet formation along the jetties, the ebb bar located offshore of the FTB entrance channel was pre-filled, and supplemental sand was placed as beach nourishment adjacent to the channel at the time of construction. These pre-fills were intended to minimize littoral sand loss to ebb bar formation and provide supplemental sand for early inlet stabilization. In addition, the long-term project sediment management plan provides for periodic down-coast beach nourishment using sediment derived from the FTB during maintenance dredging operations (these operations were conducted in early 2009 and 2011). This bypassing operation essentially restores the sediment lost from the littoral budget to the downdrift beaches over the long-term. Taken together, these measures are anticipated to maintain the historical supply of sediment to the beaches located south of the FTB entrance channel.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 148 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

III. MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROGRAM

The maintenance dredging program was planned as a sand management action to maintain “no net loss” of sand to the downcoast beaches as required in the EIR/EIS and project permits, as well as to ensure the vitality of the restored tidal system.

3.1 DREDGING TRIGGERS

The following parameters were identified early in the monitoring program to evaluate the functioning of the system and determine when dredging should be performed. Some of these parameters have previously established dredging triggers associated with them, as indicated, while others have thresholds that were established by the monitoring team, based on the need to sustain the biological and hydrological functioning of the system. Tidal Muting Muting of the average low tide elevations (Mean Low Water) on the order of 0.5 feet would indicate that the flood shoal maintenance dredging was warranted (Biological Monitoring and Follow-up Plan [USFWS 2001]). Muted Tidal Basin Function The flood shoal should be dredged if the tidal drainage in the MTBs is impeded and the MTB function is degraded as a result of inefficient drainage. Tidal monitoring in the FTB will help determine the dredging trigger related to tidal drainage in the MTBs (Monitoring Team determination). Beach Width Flood shoal dredging should occur if any beach is found to be narrower than 50 feet, based on two consecutive monthly beach width measurements, and/or if any 12-month rolling average of beach widths which deviate more than 2 standard deviations from the mean beach width, using the 20-year historic record to establish these means and standard deviations (Beach Monitoring Plan [USFWS, 2001]). Loss of Subtidal Habitat The flood shoal should be dredged if a 10% decrease in habitat acreage occurs (Basis of Design Report [M&N, 2003]). Closure Risk The flood shoal should be dredged if it is determined that the inlet is at risk of closure in a single storm scenario due to the localized shoaling pattern (Monitoring Team determination). Water quality Tidal circulation in the FTB will be slightly less efficient under the muted tidal condition. However, the FTB should still have an excellent circulation condition with a residence time of a few days. The water quality will degrade if the inlet is closed. At present, the large size of the FTB and the significant wave fetch is believed to be adequate to sustain good water quality even in highly muted conditions. However, substantial deviations in water quality parameters that suggest isolation from strong oceanic influences should trigger dredging of the flood shoal (Monitoring Team determination).

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 149 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

An extensive analysis of each of the above triggers was completed in the 2008 Monitoring Report (M&A 2009b). Although the original tidal muting trigger within the Biological Monitoring and Follow-up Plan has been determined to be inappropriate for the system, it is evident that tidal muting will likely always be the element that indicates the need for dredging, to address an intrinsic system need related to the functionality of the MTBs. The tidal monitoring chapter of the 2009 Monitoring Report (M&A 2011a) proposed an operational goal of spring low tide muting of less than 0.45 meters in order to have occasional tidal movement of water within each of the MTBs. Following completion of the January to April 2009 dredging, tidal muting was temporarily improved, however by November 2009 the 0.45- meter threshold was being repeatedly exceeded on each spring tide series. The continued progression to a highly muted condition and the resultant lack of function of the MTBs through 2010 prompted a second maintenance dredging event in January 2011.

3.2 MAINTENANCE DREDGING

Moffatt & Nichol prepared the dredge plans for the second maintenance dredging (Figure 3-1). In light of the rapid return of considerable tidal muting within seven months of the completion of the 2009 dredging, the plans included dredging a sand trap near the inlet to capture incoming sand and extend the post-dredge period of improved tidal conditions. This sand trap was designed to the permitted depth of the final engineering design. Dredging at the time of initial construction was not completed to full design depths within the maintenance basin. Other pre-dredge preparations included implementation of a Sampling and Analysis Plan, completion of a pre-dredge survey for the invasive seaweed Caulerpa taxifolia, and completion of the contractor bidding process. The dredge work was contracted to Ross Island Sand and Gravel Co., who mobilized in December 2010 and began dredging in mid-January 2011. From January 11 to April 17, 2011, approximately 303,000 cubic meters of sand was dredged from the inlet and placed on the beach south of the inlet, creating approximately 400 meters of new beach. Because the California grunion spawning season started before the beach replenishment was completed, a biological monitor was present during the three predicted grunion runs and documented the usage of the beach by spawning grunion. Based on the findings, the sand discharge and grooming activities were adjusted to avoid placing new sand in locations were grunion had been seen spawning. As discussed in the tide and inlet monitoring chapters above, the shoal again reformed quite rapidly, with highly muted conditions and the resultant lack of function of the central and east MTBs occurring within six months of the completion of dredging. As a result, the Steering Committee and supporting consultant team began exploring other more effective and cost effective techniques for maintaining the inlet. It is possible that there are no feasible options that will allow all three MTBs to operate as originally envisioned. As a result, exploration of MTB operations has been focused on changes in the basin coupling weirs that would allow water management within the MTBs to be enhanced through the use of the Freeman Creek pump. Water management and flood shoal management within the Bolsa Chica Lowlands continue to be the most complex and costly elements of the long-term maintenance program. The focus of the Steering Committee in recent years has been on development of optimal methods to address these management issues.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 150 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Figure 3-1. 2011 maintenance dredging project dredge plan.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 151 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

REFERENCES

Agri Chemical & Supply, Inc. 2006. 2005 Annual Report, Exotic Plant Eradication, Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach prepared for Southwest Division Naval Facilities Command and Environmental Programs & Sciences Office, Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach. 24pp.

Allen, B. J. and S.L. Williams. 2003. Native eelgrass Zostera marina controls growth and reproduction of an invasive mussel through food limitation. Marine Ecology Progress Series 254: 57-67.

California Department of Fish and Game. 2011. Special Animals. California Natural Diversity Data Base. January 2011. Retrieved from: ttp://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/SPAnimals.pdf

Cailliet, G.M. 2000. Biological Characteristics of Nearshore Fishes of California: A Review of Existing Knowledge and Proposed Additional Studies for the Pacific Ocean Interjurisdictional Fisheries Management Plan Coordination and Development Project. Prepared for Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission.

Coastal Frontiers. 2007a. Bolsa Chica January 2007 Beach Profile Survey, letter report prepared for Merkel and Associates, 8 pp + attachments.

Coastal Frontiers. 2007b. Bolsa Chica May 2007 Beach Profile Survey, letter report prepared for Merkel and Associates, 8 pp + attachments.

Coastal Frontiers. 2008a. Bolsa Chica October 2007 Beach Profile Survey, letter report prepared for Merkel and Associates, 9 pp + attachments.

Coastal Frontiers. 2008b. Bolsa Chica May 2008 Beach Profile Survey, letter report prepared for Merkel and Associates, 10 pp + attachments.

Coastal Frontiers. 2009a. Bolsa Chica October 2008 Beach Profile Survey, letter report prepared for Merkel and Associates, 10 pp + attachments.

Coastal Frontiers. 2009b. Bolsa Chica May 2009 Beach Profile Survey, letter report prepared for Merkel and Associates, 10 pp + attachments.

Coastal Frontiers. 2010. Bolsa Chica October 2009 Beach Profile Survey, letter report prepared for Merkel and Associates, 10 pp + attachments.

Coastal Frontiers. 2010b. Bolsa Chica May 2010 Beach Profile Survey, letter report prepared for Merkel and Associates, 10 pp + attachments.

Coastal Frontiers. 2011. Bolsa Chica October 2010 Beach Profile Survey, letter report prepared for Merkel and Associates, 10 pp + attachments.

Ehrlich, K.F., G.E. McGowen, and G. Muszynski. 1978. Temperature selection by young topsmelt: laboratory and field investigations. In: Energy and environmental stress in aquatic

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 152 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

systems: selected papers from a symposium held in Augusta, Georgia, November 2-4, 1977. National Technical Information Service, U.S. Dept. of Commerce. p 522-533.

Eschmeyer, W.N., E.S. Herald, and H. Hammann. 1983. A field guide to Pacific coast fishes North America. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, MA. 336 pp.

Fancher, J., P. Knapp, and L. Hays. 2006. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2006. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. February 2007 28pp.

Fancher, J., P. Knapp, and L. Hays. 2005. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2005. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. December 2005 28pp.

Fancher, J, P. Knapp, and L. Hays. 2005. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2004. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. January 2005 25pp.

Fancher, J., P. Knapp, and L. Hays. 2004. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2003. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. January 2004 22pp.

Fancher, J., L. Hays, and P. Knapp. 2002. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2002. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. December 2002. 23pp.

Fancher, J., L. Hays, and P. Knapp. 2002. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2001. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. February 2002. 24pp.

Fancher, J., L. Hays, and P. Knapp. 2001. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 1999 and 2000. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. February 2001. 34pp.

Fancher, J., R. Zembal, L. Hays, and P. Knapp. 1998. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California. 1998. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. October 1998. 27pp.

Fancher, J. 1998. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California. 1997. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. April 1998. 22pp.

Holland RF. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of terrestrial natural communities of California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California. 156 pp.

Howald, A. 2000. Lepidium latifolium. pp. 222-227 in Bossard, C. C., J.M. Randall, and M. C. Hoshovsky. Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. University of California Press. Berkeley, CA

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 153 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Jensen, G. C. Pacific Coast Crabs and Shrimps. Sea Challengers, Monterey, CA. 1995. 88 pp.

Knapp, P. and B. Peterson. 2013. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2013. December 2013. 22pp.

Knapp, P. and B. Peterson. 2012. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2012. December 2012.

Knapp, P. and B. Peterson. 2011. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2011. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Office. December 2011. 26pp.

Knapp, P. and B. Peterson. 2010. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2010. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Office. December 2010. 26pp.

Levin, L.A. and T.S. Talley. 2002. Natural and manipulated sources of Heterogeneity controlling early faunal development of a salt marsh. Ecological Applications 12(6):1785-1802.

Frost, N. 2012. California least tern breeding survey, 2012 season. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Nongame Wildlife Program, 2013-01. Sacramento, CA.

Marschalek, D.A. 2011. California least tern breeding survey, 2011 season. California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Branch, Nongame Wildlife Unit Report, 2011- 01. Sacramento, CA.

Marschalek, D.A. 2010. California least tern breeding survey, 2010 season. California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Branch, Nongame Wildlife Unit Report, 2010- 01. Sacramento, CA. 25pp.

Marschalek, D.A. 2007. California least tern breeding survey, 2006 season. California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Branch, Nongame Wildlife Unit Report, 2007- 01. Sacramento, CA. 22pp.

Marschalek, D.A. 2006. California least tern breeding survey, 2005 season. California Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation and Planning Branch, Species Conservation and Recovery Program, 2006-01. Sacramento, CA. 21pp.

Massey, B. W. 1979. The Belding’s Savannah Sparrow. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, DACW0978-C-0008, Los Angeles.

[M&A] Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2013. Upper Newport Bay Ecosystem Restoration Project Post-Restoration Monitoring Program. Annual Report. Year 2 - 2012. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 85pp.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 154 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

----2011a. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Monitoring Program –2009 Annual Report. Prepared for California State Lands Commission. 129pp.

----2011b. Huntington Beach Wetlands Restoration Project Monitoring Program, Methodology and Data Summary January 2007 to January 2011. Prepared for Huntington Beach Wetlands Conservancy. 60 pp.

----2009a. Batiquitos Lagoon Long-term Biological Monitoring Program Final Report. M&A Doc. No. 96-057-01-F. Prepared for City of Carlsbad Planning Department and Port of Los Angeles, Environmental Management Division. San Diego, CA.

----2009b. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Monitoring Program -Annual Report 2008. Monitoring Year 2. Prepared for California State Lands Commission. 103pp.

----2008. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Monitoring Program -Annual Report 2007. Monitoring Year 1. Prepared for California State Lands Commission. 103pp.

Mesa, Chuck. 2008a. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, LA District. personal communication by e-mail on February 7, 2008.

Mesa, Chuck. 2008b. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, LA District. personal communication by e-mail on February 5, 2008.

Mesa, Chuck. 2009. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, LA District. personal communication by e- mail on April 29, 2009.

Mesa, Chuck. 2010. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, LA District. personal communication by e- mail on May 13, 2010.

Mesa, Chuck. 2011a. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, LA District. personal communication by telephone.

Mesa, Chuck. 2011b. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, LA District. personal communication by e-mail on May 5, 2011.

Miller, D.J. and R.N. Lea. 1972. Guide to the coastal marine fishes of California. California Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin 157. 249 pp.

Moffatt & Nichol. 2003. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Basis of Design Final Report. August, 2003.

Moffatt & Nichol. 1999. Final Report, Preliminary Engineering Inlet Studies for Bolsa Chica Wetlands Restoration. December 1999.

National Ocean Service (NOS). 2011. Center for Operation Oceanographic Products and Services. http://co-ops.nos.noaa.gov.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 155 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2008. Coastal Services Center. http://maps.csc.noaa.gov/TCM/.

Nelson, J.S., E.J. Crossman, H. Espinosa-Pérez, L.T. Findley, C.R. Gilbert, R.N. Lea, and J.D. Williams. 2004. Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Sixth Edition. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 29, Bethesda, Maryland. 386 pp.

O’Reilly, K and P Knapp. 2013. 2013 Breeding Season Monitoring Results for California Least Tern, Sternula antillarum browni, at Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. 11pp.

Powell, A. N. and C. L. Collier. 1998. Reproductive Success of Belding’s Savannah Sparrows in a Highly Fragmented Landscape. The Auk 115(2): 508-513.

Randall, J. 2000. Schinus terebinthifolius. pp. 282-286 in Bossard, C. C., J.M. Randall, and M. C. Hoshovsky. Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. University of California Press. Berkeley, CA.

Ricketts E.F., J. Calvin, J.W. Hedgpeth. 1968. Between Pacific Tides. Stanford University Press, California, 614 pp.

Thrush, S.F., R.B. Whitlatch, R.D. Pridemore, J.E. Hewitt, V.J. Cummings, and M.R. Wilkinson. 1996. Scale-dependent recolonization: The role of sediment stability in a dynamic sandflat habitat. Ecology 77(8):2472-2487.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2002. Coast of California Storm and Tidal Wave Study - South Coast Region - Orange County, USACE, Los Angeles District, 545 pp + appendices.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001a. Bolsa Chica Lowland Restoration Project Biological Monitoring and Follow-up Plan.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001b. Bolsa Chica Lowland Restoration Project Beach Monitoring Plan.

Zembal, R., J. Konecny, and S. M. Hoffman. 2006. A survey of the Belding’s Savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) in California, 2006. Calif. Dep. Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Planning Branch, Species Conservation and Recovery Program Report 2006-03, Sacramento, CA. 15pp.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 156 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-A. SAMPLING LOCATION COORDINATES

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Sampling Location Coordinates California State Plane, Zone 6, NAD 83, Meters

Field Element Station and Replicate ID X Y Vegetation RI 1 stop 1,833,325.64 671,485.78 Transects RI 1 start 1,833,366.34 671,514.44 RI 2 stop 1,833,431.95 671,673.61 RI 2 start 1,833,464.57 671,635.45 RI 3 stop 1,833,526.47 671,445.14 RI 3 start 1,833,498.34 671,403.74 FTBW 1 stop 1,834,331.54 671,268.08 FTBW 1 start 1,834,365.01 671,305.46 FTBW 2 stop 1,834,143.34 671,411.92 FTBW 2 start 1,834,178.67 671,448.99 FTBW 3 stop 1,833,979.61 671,626.83 FTBW 3 start 1,834,015.89 671,661.42 FTB north stop 1,833,816.71 671,931.03 FTB north start 1,833,845.78 671,970.35 EMTB 1 stop 1,834,502.81 671,355.14 EMTB 1 start 1,834,552.68 671,353.17 EMTB 2 start 1,834,623.34 671,566.11 EMTB 2 stop 1,834,614.84 671,614.77 EMTB 3 stop 1,834,881.73 671,512.94 EMTB 3 start 1,834,899.29 671,465.86 CMTB 1 stop 1,834,387.15 671,693.14 CMTB 1 start 1,834,416.09 671,652.24 CMTB 2 stop 1,834,046.59 671,740.55 CMTB 2 start 1,834,046.26 671,690.73 CMTB 3 stop 1,834,194.00 671,620.91 CMTB 3 start 1,834,167.97 671,578.10 WMTB 1 start 1,834,129.94 671,948.04 WMTB 1 stop 1,834,084.83 671,926.02 WMTB 2 stop 1,834,179.65 672,099.48 WMTB 2 start 1,834,219.58 672,070.02 WMTB 3 start 1,833,962.40 671,993.38 WMTB 3 stop 1,833,912.52 671,996.52 MPM1 start 1,833,285.22 671,920.30 MPM1 stop 1,833,235.92 671,925.71 MPM2 start 1,833,368.76 671,974.94 MPM 2 stop 1,833,318.94 671,976.42 MPM3 start 1,833,423.99 672,050.83 MPM3 stop 1,833,440.42 672,003.96

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-A-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Purse Seine Station 1 Rep 1 1,833,662.56 671,875.62 Station 1 Rep 2 1,833,897.57 671,479.91 Station 1 Rep 3 1,834,106.99 671,308.46 Station 2 Rep 1 1,834,554.56 670,690.03 Station 2 Rep 2 1,834,463.66 670,337.65 Station 2 Rep 3 1,834,366.47 670,039.54 Otter Trawl Station 1 Rep 1N 1,833,739.41 671,870.60 Station 1 Rep 1S 1,833,832.46 671,638.59 Station 1 Rep 2N 1,833,728.03 671,609.96 Station 1 Rep 2S 1,833,843.77 671,388.44 Station 1 Rep 3N 1,833,962.78 671,461.67 Station 1 Rep 3S 1,834,012.69 671,215.96 Station 2 Rep 1N 1,834,448.76 670,736.71 Station 2 Rep 1S 1,834,420.89 670,489.02 Station 2 Rep 2N 1,834,523.64 670,509.52 Station 2 Rep 2S 1,834,571.90 670,263.45 Station 2 Rep 3N 1,834,452.21 670,173.52 Station 2 Rep 3S 1,834,463.48 669,923.39 Large Beach Pocket Marsh Rep 1 1,833,710.06 672,144.96 Seine Pocket Marsh Rep 2 1,833,470.21 672,021.93 Pocket Marsh Rep 3 1,833,273.77 671,924.75 Station 1 Rep 1 1,833,797.81 671,938.86 Station 1 Rep 2 1,833,686.35 671,401.07 Station 1 Rep 3 1,834,157.35 671,362.85 Station 2 Rep 1 1,834,680.13 670,539.00 Station 2 Rep 2 1,834,317.83 670,047.05 Station 2 Rep 3 1,834,685.46 670,314.34 Benthic Station 1 Rep 1 1,833,780.44 671,943.61 Station 1 Rep 2 1,833,624.94 671,941.40 Station 1 Rep 3 1,834,130.42 671,378.73 Station 2 Rep 1 1,834,676.95 670,541.17 Station 2 Rep 2 1,834,688.47 670,299.59 Station 2 Rep 3 1,834,332.74 670,053.99 Station 3 Rep 1 1,833,593.88 671,759.67 Station 3 Rep 2 1,833,700.39 671,385.09 Station 3 Rep 3 1,833,851.86 671,284.76 Water Quality Station 1 1,833,687.14 671,735.95 Station 2 1,834,520.64 670,639.78

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-A-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-B. ANNUAL AERIAL PHOTOS

Merkel & Associates, Inc. January 16, 2007 – Year 1 Post-restoration May 13, 2008 – Year 2 Post-restoration July 13, 2009 – Year 3 Post-restoration May 20, 2010 – Year 4 Post-restoration August 4, 2011 – Year 5 Post-restoration Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-C. VEGETATION TRANSECT PHOTOS

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

WMTB 1 - 2008. West to east. WMTB 1 - 2011. West to east. Note marsh lost to inundation, but increased vigor of remaining marsh.

WMTB 2 - 2008. South to north. WMTB 2 - 2011. South to north. Marsh lost to tidal inundation.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-C-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

WMTB 3 - 2008. North to south. WMTB 3 - 2011. North to south. Marsh lost to tidal inundation.

CMTB 1 - 2008. South to north. CMTB 1 - 2011. South to north. Note expansion of marsh and reduction in weed cover.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-C-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

CMTB 2 - 2008. North to south. CMTB 2 - 2011. North to south.

CMTB 3 - 2008. West to east. CMTB 3 - 2011. West to east.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-C-3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

EMTB 1 - 2008. East to west. EMTB 1 - 2011. Transect inaccessible due to complete isolation by water.

EMTB 2 - 2008. South to north. EMTB 2 - 2011. South to north. Marsh lost to prolonged inundation.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-C-4 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

EMTB 3 - 2008. South to north. EMTB 3 – 2011. South to north.

RI 1 - 2008. Rabbit Island east to west. RI 1 - 2011. Rabbit Island east to west.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-C-5 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

RI 2 - 2008. South to north. RI 2 - 2011. South to north. Note increased marsh vigor.

RI 3 - 2008. West to east. RI 3 - 2011. West to east. Note improved increased marsh vigor and herbicide-treated iceplant.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-C-6 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

FTB North - 2008. Full tidal basin, east to west. FTB North - 2011. East to west.

FTB East 1 - 2008. West to east FTB East 1 - 2011. West to east.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-C-7 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

FTB East 2 - 2008. West to east. FTB East 2 - 2011. West to east.

FTB East 3 - 2008. West to east. FTB East 3 - 2011. West to east.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-C-8 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

MPM 1 - 2008. Muted Pocket Marsh, east to west. MPM 1 - 2011. East to west.

MPM 2 - 2008. East to west. MPM 2 - 2011. East to west.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-C-9 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

MPM 3 - 2008. South to north. Note: transect stake MPM 3 - 2011. South to north. mislabeled in photo,

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-C-10 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-D. LIST OF ALL FISH SPECIES OBSERVED

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

List of All Fish Species Observed Since Start of Monitoring (2007-2011) Full Tidal Muted Tidal Pocket Guild Species Basin Basins Marsh Demersal Arrow/Shadow Goby complex X X X Habitat Bat Ray X California Butterfly Ray X California Corbina X California Halibut X California Lizardfish X California Tonguefish X Cheekspot Goby X X X Diamond Turbot X X Gray Smoothhound X Hornyhead Turbot X Leopard Shark X Longjaw Mudsucker X X X Round Stingray X Speckled Sanddab X Spotfin Croaker X Staghorn Sculpin X X X Thornback X Yellowfin Croaker X Yellowfin Goby X X X Pelagic Bonefish X Habitat California Grunion X X X California Needlefish X Deepbody Anchovy X Jacksmelt X Northern Anchovy X Pacific Herring X Pacific Sardine X Slough Anchovy X Striped Mullet X X Topsmelt X X X Structured Barred Pipefish X X X Habitat Barred Sand Bass X Barred Surfperch X Bay Blenny X Bay Pipefish X X X Black Croaker X Black Surfperch X California Killifish X X X Dwarf Surfperch X Giant Kelpfish X Kelp Bass X Opaleye X Queenfish X Salema X Sebastes, unidentified juvenile X Shiner Surfperch X Snubnose Pipefish X Spotted Sand Bass X Walleye Surfperch X White Seabass X

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-D-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-E. SUMMARY OF FISH COUNTS

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Raw count of fish by quarter and station (pg 1 of 2) for all post-restoration monitoring. See report text for sampling effort. Quarter Oct-07 Jan-08 Apr-08 Jul-08Oct-08 Jan-09 species 1 2PM1 2PM1 2PMWMTB 12PMCMTBWMTB 12PMCMTBWMTB 12PMCMTBWMTB Anchoa, unid. juvenile 611 5 Arrow Shadow Goby complex 1 4 11 17 1 18 8 167 330 11 1 1 1 Atherinid, unid. juvenile 21 210 373 120 3 14 Barred Pipefish 1 1 Barred Sand Bass 25 1 5 1 Barred Surfperch Bat Ray 1 1 2 7 Bay Blenny 1 1 2 1 Bay Pipefish 2 2 1 5 7 14 1 14 31 Black Croaker 27 1 Black Surfperch Bonefish 4 California Butterfly Ray 3 California Corbina 1 California Grunion 3 10 2 15 211 93 7 436 1 1 California Halibut 1 18 1 6 1 2 4 1 5 California Killifish 34 4 100 1 25 6 3 4 47 43 45 879 992 7 88 14 68 3 1 2 12 California Lizardfish 1 5 California Needlefish 2 1 California Tonguefish 1 Cheekspot Goby 14 21 22101214 3 1 Croaker, unid. juvenile Deepbody Anchovy 4 54 16 Diamond Turbot 22 1173965117 11 1 Dwarf Surfperch Giant Kelpfish 34 Gobiidae, unid. juvenile 1 1 3 Gray Smoothhound 1 6 Hornyhead Turbot Jacksmelt 1 9 1 Kelp Bass 14 13 7 1 2 27 3 Leopard Shark Longjaw Mudsucker 1 58 1 2 5 Northern Anchovy 1 15 3 Opaleye Pacific Herring 1 Pacific Sardine 2 Pipefish, unid. juvenile Queenfish 1 1 9 1 Round Stingray 7 1 20 2 Salema 9 7 Sebastes, unid. juvenile 1 Shiner Surfperch 1 49 5 Slough Anchovy 1 27 451 8 Snubnose Pipefish 1 Speckled Sanddab 1 Spotfin Croaker Spotted Sand Bass 522 Staghorn Sculpin 318211342183111 531 Striped Mullet 32 1 Thornback 1 Topsmelt 1459 780 1295 31 23 190 488 332 82 2 203 1362 591 76 26 293 866 293 168 301 259 182 6 78 Walleye Surfperch 1 White Seabass Yellowfin Croaker 16 Yellowfin Goby 4

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-E-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Quarter Apr-09 Jul-09 Oct-10 Jan-11 Apr-11 Jul-11 species 12PMCMTBWMTB 12PMCMTBWMTB 1 2 PM 1 2 PM CMTB EMTB WMTB 12PMCMTBEMTBWMTB 1 2 PM CMTB EMTBWMTB Anchoa, unid. juvenile Arrow Shadow Goby com 15 12 77 8 74 1 1 2 55 1 2 25 7 29 2 1 4 Atherinid, unid. juvenile 8 Barred Pipefish 1 Barred Sand Bass 1 1 1 1 3 Barred Surfperch 5 Bat Ray 11 1 3 4 13 11 2 Bay Blenny 1 4 1 4 1 2 1 Bay Pipefish 1 11 13 4 19 12 2 6 73 24 27 258 48 Black Croaker 1 Black Surfperch 1 1 Bonefish California Butterfly Ray 1 2 California Corbina 3 California Grunion 4 18 90 3020 261 55 31 280 25 12 4526 600 California Halibut 2 1 6 1 1 1 3 3 1 California Killifish 7 30 49 19 2 1378 66 32 101 128 3963 2 10 4 3 2 24 12 191 23 7 3 1 3278 104 1 914 California Lizardfish California Needlefish 5 22 2 1 California Tonguefish 1 Cheekspot Goby 1 19 15 17 7 86 2 3 2 84 6 11 1 6 1 4 Croaker, unid. juvenile 4 Deepbody Anchovy 4 9 14 131 13 Diamond Turbot 32 21 1 206 1 1 11 Dwarf Surfperch 1 Giant Kelpfish 14 9 10 1 9 9 18 1 36 Gobiidae, unid. juvenile 1 1 1 1 1 Gray Smoothhound 1 1 3 Hornyhead Turbot 1 Jacksmelt 5 Kelp Bass 4 3 3 12 3 1 2 Leopard Shark 1 2 1 2 Longjaw Mudsucker 1 33 2 3 30 4 5 3 7 4 1 1 45 137 66 5 15 4 185 2 2 Northern Anchovy 6 2166 56 129 105 8436 Opaleye 19 Pacific Herring Pacific Sardine 1 1114 Pipefish, unid. juvenile 12 5 Queenfish 2 3 Round Stingray 4 3 6 3 2 3 6 6 1 Salema Sebastes, unid. juvenile Shiner Surfperch 56 219 9 17 3 11 37 60 159 Slough Anchovy 131 26 Snubnose Pipefish Speckled Sanddab 1 Spotfin Croaker 71 Spotted Sand Bass 1 1 2 4 2 6 5 Staghorn Sculpin 12 15 7 8 1 33 9 1 3 10 4 4 1 3 Striped Mullet 51 Thornback 1 1 Topsmelt 224 243 2188 34 49 2437 776 147 4 9 1603 1789 872 763 448 29 22 38 26 579 654 133 53 45 130 4329 5047 255 84 13 9 Walleye Surfperch 8 6 1 White Seabass 311 Yellowfin Croaker 3 1 45 1 1 2 3 5 1 Yellowfin Goby 4 1 1 1 Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-E-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-F. AVIAN GUILDS

Merkel & Associates, Inc.1-E-3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Avian Guilds (2007, 2008, and 2009) Aerial Fish Foragers Belted Kingfisher Black Skimmer Brown Pelican California Least Tern Caspian Tern Elegant Tern Forster's Tern Gull-billed Tern Royal Tern Unidentified Tern White Pelican Coots and Rails American Bittern American Coot Sora Virginia Rail Dabbling Ducks/Geese American Wigeon Blue-winged Teal Brant Canada Goose Cinnamon Teal Gadwall Green-winged Teal Lesser Scaup Mallard Mute Swan Northern Pintail Northern Shoveler Snow Goose Unidentified Duck Wood Duck Diving Ducks/Grebes/Cormorants Bufflehead Canvasback Clark's Grebe Common Loon Common Merganser Double-crested Cormorant Eared Grebe Greater Scaup Hooded Merganser Horned Grebe Long-tailed Duck Pacific Loon Pelagic Cormorant Pied-billed Grebe Red-breasted Merganser Redhead

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-F-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Diving Ducks/Grebes/Cormorants Ring-necked Duck (cont'd) Ruddy Duck Surf Scoter Unidentified Duck Unidentified Scaup Western Grebe Gulls Bonaparte's Gull California Gull Glaucous-winged Gull Heerman's Gull Mew Gull Ring-billed Gull Unidentified Gull Western Gull Herons, Bitterns, and Ibis American Bittern Black-crowned Night Heron Cattle Egret Great Blue Heron Great Egret Green Heron Reddish Egret Snowy Egret White-faced Ibis Raptors American Kestrel Burrowing Owl Cooper's Hawk Merlin Northern Harrier Osprey Peregrine Falcon Red-tailed Hawk Sharp-shinned Hawk Short-eared Owl Turkey Vulture White-tailed Kite Shorebirds American Avocet Black-bellied Plover Black-necked Stilt Dunlin Greater Yellowlegs Killdeer Least Sandpiper Lesser Yellowlegs Long-billed Curlew Marbled Godwit Red Knot Red Phalarope

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-F-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Shorebirds (cont'd) Red-necked Phalarope Ruddy Turnstone Sanderling Semipalmated Plover Short-billed Dowitcher Spotted Sandpiper Unidentified Dowitcher Unidentified Plover Unidentified Sandpiper Unidentified Yellowlegs Western Sandpiper Western Snowy Plover Whimbrel Willet Wilson's Phalarope Wilson's Snipe Upland birds Allen's Hummingbird American Crow American Goldfinch American Pipit Anna's Hummingbird Ash-throated Flycatcher Barn Swallow Belding's Savannah Sparrow Bewick's Wren Black Phoebe Black-headed Grosbeak Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Brewer's Blackbird Brown-headed Cowbird Bushtit California Towhee Cassin's Kingbird Cliff Swallow Common Raven Common Yellowthroat Costa's Hummingbird European Starling Great-tailed Grackle Hooded Oriole House Finch House Sparrow House Wren Lesser Goldfinch Loggerhead Shrike Marsh Wren Mourning Dove

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-F-3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Upland birds (cont'd) Northern Flicker Northern Mockingbird Northern Rough-winged Swallow Orange-crowned Warbler Pacific-slope Flycatcher Red-winged Blackbird Rock Pigeon Savannah Sparrow Say's Phoebe Selasphorus sp. Song Sparrow Tree Swallow Unidentified Flycatcher Unidentified Gnatcatcher Unidentified Goldfinch Unidentified Hummingbird Unidentified Sparrow Unidentified Swallow Vaux's Swift Vesper Sparrow Violet-green Swallow Western Kingbird Western Meadowlark White-crowned Sparrow White-throated Swift Wilson's Warbler Wrentit Yellow-rumped Warbler

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1-F-4 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-G. AVIAN ABUNDANCE BY ZONE IN 2011

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Avian Abundance by Zone for all Year 5 Surveys Combined (Six surveys October 2010 to August 2011)

Grand Future Full Tidal Basin FFTB Full Tidal Basin FTB Muted Tidal Basin MTB Pocket Seasonal Ponds SP Total141920212223242526272829303132333435363738394063Total686970717273Total414245464748495066TotalMarsh2 910111213Total Allen's Hummingbird 34 772 161 1 114 6 1111 American Avocet 11389351103 48 10141926 56241121522 7135224319627 54145913741515783 American Bittern 1 11 American Coot 2967 30 1 10 5 1 292 112 18 3 26 6 12 34 25 148 84 226 166 404 34 193 70 253 38 2191 1 155 156 27 4 17 19 4 24 1 12 108 172 1 55 3 200 44 37 340 American Crow 78 6 2 1 12 1 1 23 4 4 2 2 8 4 37 41 American Goldfinch 8 1 23 55 American Kestrel 12 2 1 2 1 6 1 1 1 3 1 4 American Pipit 13 22 43 6 9 American Wigeon 1164 1686447 5 7 31418559 661342322201495411108 184 44 2148940121361422224 Anna's Hummingbird 46 1 3 151111112 18 1 4 52 4 164 8 8 Ash-throated Flycatcher 1 1 Barn Swallow 375 4 23 40 13 19 8 8 22 228527 4 18517222246541421611362855 1925 35 Belding's Savannah Sparrow 2039 49 40 23 11 11 14 30 8 6 16 11 6 58 14 21 25 83 24 5 3 23 59 52 28 620 60 32 37 157 32 41 359 87 85 142 92 65 113 47 43 48 722 78 17 40 38 111 31 23 260 Belted Kingfisher 18 1 111 6 8 1 13 5 4 Bewick's Wren 15 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 10 1 1 2 1 2 3 Black Phoebe 9611 3 3 1233115371347 2 11 4821131 9 25132 5 7 Black Skimmer 149 3 8 40 83 4 138 2 2 3 6 6 Black-bellied Plover 5456 13 1 14 125 1451 798 3 1138 144 3659 1 33 356 786 2 1178 6 2 22 572 3 599 Black-crowned Night Heron 149 2 821 21 16 4 4 653158131138247 Black-headed Grosbeak 1 1 Black-necked Stilt 1020 4 2 65 23 4623424 1723410226115181914 4122 270414237380409994212023311105617165 Blue-gray Gnatcatcher 6 11 144 Blue-winged Teal 87 77 2 45 2 49 27 4 4 Brandt's Cormorant 1 11 Brant 110 21 1 22 88 88 Brown Pelican 898 4 4 5 5 733 104 25 872 2 2 5 9 13 Brown-headed Cowbird 3 33 Bufflehead 411 4 1 4 1 6 1 1 1 4 7 14 4 3 2 53 13 29 30 33 170 275 1 2 3 5 11 51283 821 Bushtit 56 10 15 24 49 77 California Gull 5506 5 1 1 7 4 2 1664 520 2605 4795 17 1 18 19 667 667 California Towhee 2 11 1 Canada Goose 426 72 18 6 6 391192014410370357387341 261 12 3 Canvasback 4 2222 Caspian Tern 2521 22468292 4 42326182 1 969134382025118 71 12 115 4 126 22 Cassin's Kingbird 10 1 1141 11 10 Cinnamon Teal 1575 3 2 10221031432 74 3 1 242776274 10 14 Cliff Swallow 8828111211 31 4018 610109225853928363226 17216637535868272210 275 712198555178 Common Merganser 8 26 8 Common Moorhen 3 33 Common Raven 15 210 12 33 Common Yellowthroat 111 1 1 1 3566112 54 231 23118 38 38 Cooper's Hawk 7 121 261 1 Double-crested Cormorant 581 2 46 18 3 9 2 2 8 12 2 3 107 11 46 196 1 66 10 330 1 8 14 11 2 19 26 7 1 89 38 16 1 17 Dunlin 816 5 1 9 34 6 4 67 2 128 37 33 240 10 112 14 446 25 4 20 15 1 65 32 1 136 8 145 Eared Grebe 4207 2 6 1 2 1814321611146938524355567266 4211 3 1122 3 516428 Elegant Tern 1769 9 2 2 14 27 62 26 902 630 49 36 1705 4 7 3 8 2 3 27 2 4 4 8 European Starling 214 1 5 77 5 1 4 2 4 99 25112 5 345 76 76 Forster's Tern 45914 1 23 2 13117 5 5 6368313310588228248312312164157728 9 9 Gadwall 64713421207822 2 8961725118210 4 3321467152365127927226344103181374512529129 Great Blue Heron 158 3 1 611194 21 29592 6113312117531138161282 4 17 Great Egret 212 2 3 221 823225 321118 7633112310245165101111525 16 7 Greater Scaup 44 44 40 Greater Yellowlegs 129 2 2 111211 114 1121181 412745 3632 351323 318 813 113 Great-tailed Grackle 51 37 37 12 2 14 Green Heron 2 11 11 Green-winged Teal 730444 4 2 2329 9 6112 12 1026422417 220727218 Heerman's Gull 4 111113 Hooded Oriole 2 22 Horned Grebe 11 7 3 10 1 1 Horned Lark 50 1 1 48 48 11 House Finch 870 41 2 3321472166435465865214331 137167571117821833511 6 775290 House Sparrow 1 11 House Wren 5 1211 5 Killdeer 682 33 10 2214816411 162859292023 7721131181 19294813221422232217201531373222483711157 Lawrence's Goldfinch 20 20 20 Least Sandpiper 1326 15 25 4 3215 1 9 252 36 361211591193134180527219661 1441211825214112 32 8 Least Tern 2288 10 1 1 2 2 241611172872810755217141 71 889118 Lesser Goldfinch 56 9 122991152 12 3 1 Lesser Scaup 20 44 16 Page 1 of 2 Grand Future Full Tidal Basin FFTB Full Tidal Basin FTB Muted Tidal Basin MTB Pocket Seasonal Ponds SP Total141920212223242526272829303132333435363738394063Total686970717273Total414245464748495066TotalMarsh2 910111213Total Lesser Yellowlegs 27 1 11 1 21 3 1 111 111 231 8 1 32 16 Loggerhead Shrike 5 1 1 1115 Long-billed Curlew 117 25 13 43 7 12 4 104 2 2 7 4 4 Mallard 452 2 4 6 7 24 12 115 11 26 6 2 12 227 1 9 19 7 8 44 27 12 2 4 9 4 21 3 82 36 4 32 4 23 63 Marbled Godwit 589 248 51 40 18 41 87 485 1 1 2 88 14 14 Marsh Wren 39 911 1 12 5 41 1112 141 15 Mourning Dove 963 7 33 7 5 3 4 13 5 6 21 49 87 65 94 50 72 14 55 50 8 648 2 6 10 18 133 7 18 31 47 243212661 77111430 Northern Harrier 21 2 212 1 4 312 2 8 4 3 3 Northern Mockingbird 9 121329 Northern Pintail 1280 7 5 12 193 14 58 1 256 57 58 13 674 21 4 10 35 1 5 8 15 6 114 149 360 5 14 24 12 7 62 Northern Rough-winged Swallow 216 1 2 1 46 3 2 55 22 22 4 13 3 23 42 2 87 6 14 32 52 Northern Shoveler 2781 47 46 11 16 42 103 2 2 7 1 55 11 208 65 129 40 223 28 78 6 158 10 1288 1 1 38 47 40 34 2 59 44 264 68 9 8 10 950 62 121 1160 Osprey 8 11111233 Pacific Loon 1 11 Pacific-slope Flycatcher 2 11 11 Peregrine Falcon 11 21 3 2 2 211114 Pied-billed Grebe 109 9 1 105 8 11630 6 13732046 123 Red Knot 65 1 1 2 12024 45 1 1 16 18 Red Phalarope 2 1 1 11 Red-breasted Merganser 22 32 38 14 Reddish Egret 18 711 110 41 5 3 Redhead 233 1529 2 6 89318935 7 213 4 4 2452 131 112 Red-necked Phalarope 102 12 3 3 18 27 5 28 13 1 6 80 4 4 Red-shouldered Hawk 2 111 Red-tailed Hawk 14 1 111121 1 9 1 1 13 4 Red-winged Blackbird 60 41 3 10 54 3 3 33 Ring-billed Gull 1033 1 2 19 4 36 1 63 2 167 8 6 183 11 4 1 16 60 711 711 Rock Pigeon 16 1 3 4 8 1 1 7 7 Royal Tern 15 2 2 2 6512 8 1 1 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 3 11 22 Ruddy Duck 1239 24 3 73 9 1 7 1 179 27 42 4 176 9 5 37 5 602622 61475 1 7 8 340122180101214 Ruddy Turnstone 58 454012 52 1 3 4 2 2 Sanderling 264 40 2 42 1 189 9 199 8 11 4 15 Savannah Sparrow 49 4 1 1 3 4 1 14 3 9 1 13 1 1 7464 21 Say's Phoebe 36 211 1 1 2 11312 111 192 11 42 2 12 1 8 211 15 Semipalmated Plover 742 14 2 3 52 1 5 5 4 86 89 70 273 11 45 27 515 1 7 18 26 20 5 1 83 6 95 Short-billed Dowitcher 12 33 99 Snowy Egret 467 1 2 2 1 31 2 4 1 44 50 34 32 16 8 140 13 7 13 50 4 84 30 22 12 235 36 1 4 7 12 Song Sparrow 67 1 1597 32 1 1 2 11 292 32 Sora 10 11 99 Spice Finch 1 11 Surf Scoter 29 5 2 10 12 29 Tree Swallow 243 5413 3216 61 20 160 180 2 Turkey Vulture 10 11 21 11 2252 2 Unidentified Dowitcher 2828 19 3 1 16 3062123915141 347296451878792142423975719524028186 2422567340 Unidentified Duck 12 31 4 1 1 7 Unidentified Gull 2162 10 27 40 249 65 2 200 11 1 8 324 569 5 9 10 1530 28 1 67 2 52 225 375 15 30 137 8 2 8 200 4 10 2 12 27 2 53 Unidentified Hummingbird 7 41 5 22 Unidentified Sandpiper 2146 93 38 2 132885 5 291275128420784141621 4342 19 32505564726152 Unidentified Scaup 56 3 31038 5 26 2 1 3 24 Unidentified Sparrow 12 1 9 10 2 2 Unidentified Swallow 239 50 32 82 12 12 4 92 8 104 16 25 25 Unidentified Tern 11 4 42 5 7 Unidentified Woodpecker 1 1 Unidentified Wren 1 11 Unidentified Yellowlegs 146 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 11368 1 184 14 722121871323 9 Violet-green Swallow 194 26 32 130 188 66 Western Grebe 5 1315 Western Gull 5216 2 2 13 2 1 2 1912171965421844563 2221 1013 1 22 23 Western Meadowlark 1462 15 2 2137 14156113 2 64113913111 43 4 244436 Western Sandpiper 23543 116 74 1 3 463 2 7 78 25 320 147 2 1 40 1279 4853 2880 5715 107 2965 115 16635 16 23 62 153 19 926 100 129 1428 1566 5 78 39 1718 163 632 2635 Western Snowy Plover 174 19 3 22 1 5 24 17 15 62 10 4 1 2 17 43 4 24 2 73 Whimbrel 64 20 7 24 4 4 59 5 5 White Pelican 5 55 White-crowned Sparrow 109 1 13511118 49 3 3 17524 117 463 8 8 White-faced Ibis 1 11 White-tailed Kite 15 21 3 1 146 66 Willet 592 1 1 1 31294153124112360 2453786136190 3 3 Wilson's Phalarope 65 149 50 132 15 Yellow-rumped Warbler 63 3 1 1 1 6 2 1 3 4 22 2 2 13646 205 77 14 Grand Total 77802 606 388 150 152 589 1324 269 308 56 120 58 26 534 109 1309 478 1323 473 3178 291 1609 420 1039 247 15056 6728 5699 #### 1447 7419 4345 38063 687 590 904 1303 499 2547 489 1265 167 8451 5869 137 519 262 7555 678 1212 10363 Page 2 of 2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-H. FINAL REPORT WESTERN SNOWY PLOVER NESTING AT BOLSA CHICA, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 2010

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2010

Photo by Peter Knapp

by Peter Knapp* and Bonnie Peterson**

December 2010

* California Department of Fish & Game ** Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

INTRODUCTION

Bolsa Chica is a coastal lowland area between two mesas, the Bolsa Chica Mesa and the Huntington Beach Mesa in Orange County, California (Figure 1). Bolsa Chica, which a century ago was under full tidal influence, has started to come full circle. Over 100 years ago, Bolsa Chica was diked-off from direct tidal influence but remained below mean sea level, becoming influenced by freshwater and acted as a sump for local drainage. In 1978, restoration began on the State’s Ecological Reserve, and muted tidal influence was restored to the Inner Bolsa Bay area. At that time, two small islands, North Tern Island and South Tern Island, were created for nesting California least tern (Sternula antillarum browni), a State and Federal endangered species.

By the 2006 breeding season, 3 new nest sites were available for nesting and augmented the pre- existing North and South Tern Islands in Inner Bolsa Bay. The new ocean inlet, referred to as the Full Tidal Basin, was opened after the conclusion of the breeding season in August 24, 2006. The Full Tidal Basin is now subject to water level rise and fall that approximates the unequal semi- diurnal tidal range of southern California’s ocean waters.

The purpose of this investigation is to continue to improve the level of knowledge about the western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus), a federally listed, threatened species that currently uses Bolsa Chica, and to attempt interim management actions to benefit the reproductive success of this species. This annual study will aid or assist in documenting achievement levels in meeting the goals of the Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover (USFWS 2007). In addition, this study will aid in assessing the success of the restoration projects and allow for modifications that would enhance utilization and increase reproductive success of the western snowy plover. This annual study was first initiated in 1997. This report addresses the 2010 snowy plover breeding season at Bolsa Chica.

BACKGROUND

The western snowy plover is a sparrow-sized, white and tan colored shorebird with dark patches on either side of the neck, behind the eyes, and on the forehead. The coastal western snowy plover population is defined as those individuals that nest adjacent to or near tidal waters and includes all nesting colonies on the mainland coast, peninsulas, offshore islands, adjacent bays, and estuaries. The breeding range of the coastal population of the western snowy plover extends along coastal beaches from the southern portion of Washington State to southern Baja California, Mexico. The Pacific coast population of the western snowy plover is reproductively isolated from the interior populations.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1 Santa Barbara

Los Angeles Huntington Beach

MAP AREA

East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Muted San Diego Outer Pocket Marsh Bolsa Bay West WCS HUNTINGTON BEACH Muted Tidal Basins

Rabbit Island

Central Nest WCS Site 2 Inner Bolsa Bay Full Tidal Basin East WCS Nest Site 1

Freeman Freeman Creek North WCS Tern Island

Future Full Tidal

South Tern Nest Site 3 PACIFIC OCEAN Island

Flood Shoal Maintenance Area Seasonal Ponds

West Muted Tidal Basin Central Muted Tidal Basin East Muted Tidal Basin Ocean Monitoring Program Study Boundary Inlet 0100 200 400 600 800 Meters

Site Locator and Vicinity Map Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Figure 1 Orange County, CA

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

The recognized breeding season of the western snowy plover normally extends from March 1 through September 15; however, the first nest in 2009 occurred on February 23 and in 2010 the first nest was on March 5. In both years courting behavior began in late January. Generally, three eggs are laid in a nest on the ground, which consists of a shallow depression scraped in the substrate. Some nests are lined with plant parts, small pebbles, or shell fragments.

Both sexes incubate the eggs for an average of 27 days. Snowy plovers will renest after loss of a clutch or brood. Snowy plover chicks are precocial and leave the nest within hours of hatching in search of food. The tending adult(s) provide danger warnings, thermo-regulation assistance, and guide the chicks to foraging areas, but do not provide food to their chicks. Broods rarely stay in the immediate area of the nest. Young birds are able to fly within approximately 31 days of hatching.

Double brooding and polyandry are typical. Snowy plover females may leave very young chicks to find another mate. The male typically tends the brood until the chicks fledge. Western snowy plover adults and young forage on invertebrates and insects along intertidal areas, beaches in wet sand and surf cast kelp, foredune areas of dry sand above the high tide, on salt panne, and edges of salt marshes and salt ponds (Page et al. 1995, Tucker and Powell 1999). The snowy plover is primarily a run and glean type of forager.

Poor reproductive success resulting from human disturbance, predation, and inclement weather, combined with permanent or long-term loss of nesting habitat to urban development has led to the decline in active nesting colonies as well as an overall decline in the breeding and wintering population of the western snowy plover along the Pacific coast of the United States. In southern California, the very large human population and the resultant beach recreation activities by humans have precluded the western snowy plover from breeding in several historically used beach strand areas. As a result of these factors, the Pacific coast population of the western snowy plover was federally listed as threatened with extinction on March 5, 1993 (Federal Register 1993).

BOLSA CHICA STUDY AREA

The study area includes several snowy plover nesting areas within Bolsa Chica. These nesting areas include: Seasonal Ponds (Cells 2 through 13), Future Full Tidal Basin (Cells 14 through 40 and Cell 63), Muted Tidal Basin (Cells 41 through 50 and Cell 66), North Tern Island (NTI), South Tern Island (STI), Nest Site 1 (NS1), Nest Site 2 (NS2), Nest Site 3 (NS3), Levee Roads of the Full Tidal Basin and, in 2010, the sandbar at the ocean Tidal Inlet (Figure 2). Some areas in the vicinity of the Bolsa Chica study area were not surveyed in this study, although western snowy plovers may have used the habitats for foraging or loafing. Those areas are the ocean beach immediately to the west at Bolsa Chica State Beach, Outer Bolsa Bay, Rabbit Island, Inner Bolsa Bay to the west of West Levee Road with the exception of NTI and STI (Figure 2).

The Seasonal Ponds, Future Full Tidal Basin, and Muted Tidal Basin are demarcated into subareas (cells) by the network of slightly elevated roads constructed decades ago for access to the oil wells. These cells were numbered and form the basis for observer navigation, nest mapping, and data recording. Each cell is unique in configuration and area. The approximate areas of some key cells are: Cell 10 (17 acres) and Cell 11 (54 acres). The Seasonal Ponds are predominantly salt panne and the most dominant plant species is pickleweed (Sarcocornia pacifica). Portions of the ponds are seasonally inundated with fresh to brackish water that become highly saline as evaporation concentrates the remaining water in diminishing pools over the salt panne.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 3

μ > ! 11 12

23 

( !

(

 ! 24

(

! ( !

(

( !

( ! ( !

( !

22 ( ! 10

13 (

! 

(

!  ( !



( ! ( ( > ! !

26 !

( !

( ( (

! !

21 !

( !

(

! ( ! ( 34 !

  27 37 33 14

(

! >

! ( !

32 28

(

!  ( ! 31 63 30 19 29 38

> 40 !

( !

(

( !

(

41 ! ( !

( !

! ( !

( ! ( !





( !

> !

(

 !

(

( ! (  !

71 ( !

( ! ( !

( !

 ( !



 

> ( ! !

> !

> ! ( !

( ! ( !

( ! 46 48 Meters 47 Figure 2. Distribution of Western Snowy Plover Nests in 2010 at Bolsa Chica

 49

( ! 66 50 Nest Sites Nest Nest Least 1 At - Fledged Nest Abandoned or Predated 100 ! ( ! > ! ( 0 200 400 600 2010 Nest Locations Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

The Future Full Tidal Basin occurs between the Seasonal Ponds and the Muted Tidal Basin and includes Freeman Creek. These zones are very similar to the Seasonal Ponds and consist mainly of salt panne and pickleweed, although there are some areas that retain water year-round. The Muted Tidal Basin occupies the northeastern section of Bolsa Chica. These zones generally contain less salt panne, with broad expanses of pickleweed and are generally considered unsuitable for western snowy plover nesting.

Zones 49, 50, 66, and a portion of 48 were exposed to muted tidal influence starting in March 2008. The other zones of the Muted Tidal Basins were inundated by tidal overflow and rainwater for much of the spring and summer, but were not open directly to the Full Tidal Basin. Areas inundated by water during most of the breeding season (Cells 30 and 38) are unsuitable for nesting but the margins were regularly checked for nesting plovers. Large portions of Cells 11, 12, 13, and 22 were inundated in 2010 and were not available for snowy plover nesting.

NTI and STI are well-established, created islands surrounded by the muted tidal waters within Inner Bolsa Bay. The surface is dredge spoil with a developed boundary of intertidal or salt tolerant vegetation. STI is a regular breeding area for California least terns but also has several snowy plover nests per season. NTI has been used primarily by elegant tern (Thalasseus elegans), royal tern (Thalasseus maximus), Caspian tern (Hydroprogne caspia), black skimmers (Rynchops niger), and occasionally by western snowy plovers.

NS1 is a large linear nesting area between Inner Bolsa Bay and the Full Tidal Basin that was built during the creation of the Full Tidal Basin. The surface is dredge spoil that forms a flat surface that extends from the West Levee Rd. toward the basin. The shoreline of the nest site is now under full tidal influence. In 2009, vegetation covered much of the site, including beach evening primrose (Camissonia cheiranthifolia), beach sand verbena (Abronia umbellata var. umbellate), saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), alkali heath (Frankenia salina), pickleweed, coastal deerweed (Lotus scoparius), five-hook bassia (Bassia hyssopifolia), hottentot-fig (Carpobrotus edulis), crystalline iceplant (Mesembryanthemum crystallinum), and slender-leaved iceplant (Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum). Efforts were made during the winter and spring to remove much of the iceplant but it still persisted in large patches throughout the site during the 2010-nesting season. The northeastern shoreline generally lacks vegetation or debris that is normally found in a tidal area, though pickleweed is now spreading on this shoreline.

NS2 and NS3 are also newly created sites that are within Cell 42 and Cell 14, respectively. NS3 is within the Seasonal Ponds and NS2 is located in the Muted Tidal Basin. These sites were built up with fill and covered with sand. Winds have blown much of the sand from the surface of NS3, and rainfall has eroded NS2. In 2009, vegetation on both sites increased and continues to increase. On NS2 this occurred naturally. On NS3 seeded sand from the Huntington State Beach tern site was spread early in the 2009-breeding season and select plants were transplanted to NS3 from NS1. Cloth windbreaks were also added to retain the sand on the site and dunes have started to form. Chicks on NS2 hatched and foraged on the site through fledging. Chicks on NS3 tend to leave the site immediately after hatching to seek forage in the surrounding cells.

Public access is not allowed on any of the nest sites. The human presence in the study area is mostly related to the operation of the oil field, consisting of large and small oil service vehicles and small work crews along the roads and well pads.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 5 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

STUDY METHODS

Peter Knapp (the primary surveyor) assisted by Wally Ross, Gary Keller and Kelly O’Reilly (each of California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG)), and Bonnie Peterson and Antonette Gutierrez (Merkel & Associates) surveyed for nesting western snowy plovers a minimum of twice a week, but most often on a daily basis. Surveying begins as soon as there is evidence that the snowy plover is preparing to nest. Normally surveys would begin in mid to late March; however, in 2009 and 2010 regular surveys commenced in late January when scrapes were observed on NS1. Data collected during this study included the gender of the incubating adult, length of incubation (days), number of eggs in the clutch, condition of the nest (e.g. signs of disturbance), and the fate of each nest (hatched, predated, or abandoned). Observations were also recorded of western snowy plover distribution throughout the study area, not just those birds associated with nests.

The large majority of suitable western snowy plover nesting habitat in the Seasonal Ponds was visible from the road network. Usually between 7 am and noon, the observer(s) would slowly drive in a motor vehicle along the roads that subdivide this area. Frequent stops were made to examine specific areas adjacent to the road with binoculars or spotting scope without exiting the vehicle. In this manner, it was possible to discover most nests within a few days of eggs having been laid. Most of the time, a nest was evident when an adult was incubating. Other times the adult was foraging or preening near the nest and soon returned to it. The observer would occasionally exit the vehicle in order to inspect an area not visible from the road or to verify the presence of eggs or chicks in a nest. Close examination of nests was usually conducted only once or twice per nest.

STI was surveyed by vehicle from the West Levee Road and on foot as part of concurrent least tern surveys. NTI is used primarily by nesting elegant terns and black skimmers and was surveyed from the West Levee Road.

NS1, NS2, and NS3 are sectioned by markers which form the basis for data recording. NS1 is sectioned south to north from A though CC. NS1 was surveyed by vehicle, in the same manner as the Seasonal Ponds, either from the West Levee Road or the eastern slope of NS1. Due to nesting patterns of least terns, black skimmers, and other terns, vehicle surveys were limited after mid-May. NS1 was also surveyed on foot as part of least tern surveys. NS2 was surveyed by vehicle from the East Levee Road weekly using a spotting scope and irregularly on foot. NS3 was surveyed by vehicle from the west end of the site. All nests were marked with numbered tongue depressors and mapped for ease of relocation on subsequent visits.

On all sites other than NS1, it was usually possible to follow the movements and determine the fate of chicks of each brood since there was dispersion over space and time sufficient to differentiate between broods. In a few cases banded adults identified specific broods. Broods were observed between 2 and 7 days per week. These regular brood observations were conducted to determine chick survival and fledgling production, as well as to detect movement between cells and use of specific cells for brood rearing. Due to high nesting activity on NS1 following broods along such a long narrow reach was difficult. Effort was still made to determine the number of fledglings but it was often difficult to locate the brood or assign them to a specific nest.

A Range-wide, Breeding Season Window Survey was conducted at Bolsa Chica in May 2010. The survey was conducted in the same manner as in previous years and in accordance with the guidelines set out in the Snowy Plover Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007).

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 6 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

PROTECTION FROM PREDATORS

Once a nest was discovered, a welded wire mini-exclosure (ME) was anchored in place over the top of the nest and left in place until the eggs in the nest hatched. The MEs are 28 inches in width on all four sides and 16 inches in height. These dimensions have proven effective in deterring predation by corvids, gulls, and coyotes (Canis latrans). The use of the ME contributes greatly to the low egg predation at Bolsa Chica. Aversion nests have also been used in past years to deter coyote and corvid nest predation; however, this method was not used in 2010.

Observations were made of potential predators during the surveys. Predator management actions were then enacted commensurate with the threat to snowy plover breeding activity by that specific predator. Predator management has been a necessary recovery action for the California least tern for decades. In places such as Bolsa Chica where snowy plovers nest in proximity to the least tern, predator management activities on behalf of one species will also benefit the other species. In 2010, predator management was undertaken by Wally Ross.

Clay roof tiles were placed on NS1 and NS3 to provide shelter for young least tern and plover chicks. Adult plovers also use the tiles as a viewing platform for chick movement.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 7 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In 2010, the first snowy plover nest was established on NS1 on March 5. There were a total of 64 nests producing 63 fledglings (Table 1).

NUMBERS OF MALE AND FEMALE SNOWY PLOVERS

During May 2010, a Range-wide, Breeding Season Window Survey was conducted. The total number of snowy plovers present at Bolsa Chica was 45 adults: 22 female and 23 male (Table 1). The management goal of the Snowy Plover Recovery Plan for Bolsa Chica is 70 adults.

Table 1. Males, Females, Nests and Fledgling Production 1997-2010 Year Females Males Total Adults Total Nests Fledglings Total Fl/Nest Fl/Male

2010 22 23 45 64 63 0.98 2.74 2009 25 22 47 70 42-70* 0.60-1.00* 1.91-3.18* 2008 22 28 50 67 57-109* 0.85-1.62* 2.04-3.89* 2007 18 12 30 50 25 0.50 2.08 2006 27 35 62 71 64 0.90 1.83 2005 25 41 66 51 75 1.47 1.83 2004 25 20 45 65 79 1.22 3.95 2003 15 16 31 32 44 1.38 2.75 2002 19 20 39 50 27 0.54 1.35 2001 19 18 37 55 57 1.04 3.17 2000 15 16 31 39 42 1.08 2.63 1999 12 11 32 38 23 0.61 2.09 1998 11 16 27 34 25 0.74 1.56 1997 14 20 34 30 nd nd nd Fl = fledglings, nd = not determined * based on minimum/maximum numbers of fledglings

NEST DISTRIBUTION AND CHRONOLOGIES

The snowy plover utilized all available nest sites at Bolsa Chica in 2010; however, the distribution of nests indicates that NS1, NS3, and the Seasonal Ponds were the preferred plover nest sites. NS1 had 41% of all nests, NS3 had 23%, and the Seasonal Ponds had 17% of all nests (Figure 2, Table 2). NS2 was also utilized by nesting snowy plovers this year with a fairly high success rate. This nest site was used last year for the first time since 2006. After an absence of plover nests for 10 years at least one and probably two plover pairs nested on NTI, in 2008. These nests were abandoned due to conflict between plovers and elegant terns. In 2009 and 2010, one nest was initiated, but again due to conflict with elegant terns, adults abandoned the nests. Nests were established for the first time on the East Levee Road and at the Full Tidal Basin inlet. Appendix 1 provides the cell location, start and end dates, nest fates, and eggs and chicks produced for each nest. Appendix 2 provides information on historical nest distribution.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 8 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

Table 2. 2010 Nest, Nest Fate, and Reproductive Success Distribution by Cell Nests Hatched Location Total Nests Nests Failed (# chicks) Fledglings Nest Site 1 26 2 24(67) 16* Seasonal Ponds: 11 1 10 (29) 12 Cell 9 2 0 2 (5) 2 Cell 10 5 0 5 (15) 8 Cell 11 3 1 2 (6) 0 Cell 12 1 0 1 (3) 2 Future Full Tidal Basin: 4 1 3 (7) 6 Cell 14 3 1 2 (4) 3 Cell 22 1 0 1 (3) 3* Full Tidal Basin Inlet 1 0 1 (3) 3 East Levee Rd. 1 0 1 (3) 2 Nest Site 2 4 0 4 (12) 7 Nest Site 3 14 1 13 (37) 15 North Tern Island 1 1 0 (0) 0 South Tern Island 2 0 2 (6) 2 Total 64 6 58 (164) 63 * includes birds raised at Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center.

The Seasonal Pond cells, in addition to the nest sites, are also the primary feeding areas for hatched plovers other than those from STI, NS1, and NS2. More than one cell may be used by a brood and often a brood will travel to another cell within one or two days of hatching. As an example, although there were only two nests that hatched in Cell 11 in 2010, at least six broods not hatched from Cell 11 used this cell for foraging.

The State and Federal Endangered California least tern also nests at Bolsa Chica. In 2006, they nested on STI and on the newly created NS1 and have continued this nesting pattern through 2010. In 2010 the least terns also nested on NS2, NS3, and NTI. Snowy plover egg laying typically begins several months before the least tern begins its egg laying. This has been the case at Bolsa Chica. The two species tolerate the co-location of their nests.

Black skimmers, royal tern, California least tern, Caspian tern, American avocet (Recurvirostra americana), black-necked stilt (Himantopus himantopus), killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), gadwall (Anas strepera), and horned lark (Eremophila alpestris) all nested on NS1 in 2010. Due to the use of the ME, the tight colonial style of nesting of the terns and black skimmers had only minimal effect on nesting snowy plovers. However, it is suspected that their presence on NS1 had an effect on the overall reproductive success of the snowy plover once the nests hatched and the chicks left the protection of the ME. In late May and early June a family of coyotes began predating on the eggs and newly hatched chicks of the terns and skimmers on NS1, clearing the entire site of these species. It is unknown what this mass predation event had on snowy plover chicks.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 9 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

In 2010, the first plover nest was initiated March 5. Snowy plover nesting rose to a peak in late May and early June, slightly earlier than the average (Figure 3). The last known nests hatched at the end of July (Figure 4), although a brood of an adult and one chick was found on August 14 in Cell 14.

20 1997-2009 15 average

2010 10 # of Active Nests 5

0 23- 5- 15-Mar23-Mar29-Mar4- 11- 17- 22-Apr27-Apr1-May6-May13-May18-May23-May27- 3-J 9-J 15- 19- 25- 2-J 9-J 14-Ju21- 27- 2- 11-Aug17- Ma Apr un u u u Aug Feb Apr Apr M n Jun Jun Jun l l Jul Jul Aug r ay l Survey Date Figure 3. 1997-2010 Bolsa Chica Active Nest Chronology

10 initiated 8 hatched

6 abandoned/hatched*

# of Nests predated/lost 4

5 1 5 0 5 1 5 0 5 1 -5 -1 -3 -1 -3 -1 -3 -1 -3 -1 -3 1 1 6 1 6 1 6 1 6 l 1 6 g r 1 r 1 y 1 n 1 u l 1 u a r p r a y u n J u A M a A p M a J u J M A M J Survey Time Period

*nests collected and hatched at the Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center

Figure 4. Biweekly Western Snowy Plover Nest Initiation, Hatching, & Loss at Bolsa Chica in 2010

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 10 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

FLEDGLING PRODUCTION, EGGS, AND CHICKS

Of the 64 nests at Bolsa Chica in 2010, 37 nests produced a total of 63 fledglings. This includes 5 nests (13 individuals) that were raised at the Wetlands and Wildlife and Care Center (WWCC) in Huntington Beach. The overall fledge rate was 0.98 fledglings/nest. The number of nests on NS1 has decreased from a high of 37 nests in 2008 to 26 nests in 2010. Reproductive success on NS1 is also decreasing. In 2010 the fledge rate was 0.62 (fledge/nest) and if rescued eggs and chicks that would have failed due to adult abandonment are excluded the fledge rate drops to 0.23 fledglings/nest. The Seasonal Ponds and NS3 have similar fledge rates at 1.09 and 1.07 respectively. NS2, which has only had one nest prior to 2009, had 4 nests this year with a fledge rate of 1.75.

All 64 nests in 2010 were judged to be complete clutches with the exception of Nest 45 in Cell 14, which was depredated, and Nest 63 in Cell 11, which was abandoned with just one egg. Nest 64 was not located as a nest but as a single chick with an adult. Only two completed clutches were 2-egg clutches, while 59 were 3-egg clutches (Appendix 1). Eight nests were abandoned, one nest was depredated, and one nest had sterile eggs.

The cause of the abandonment of Nests 8, 13, and 14, and the abandonment of chicks from Nests 2, all from NS1, during the time frame of April 16 and April 23 is undocumented but is believed to be the depredation of adult plovers. The female from Nest 2 was banded YNRR and she was not seen again after the hatching of her chicks. Nest 5 on NS1 hatched on April 30 producing 3 chicks but the banded female WWYY was not seen again. In prior years she had produced clutches at Bolsa Chica. These observations are consistent with the results of a paper on the piping plover (Charadrius melodus) that demonstrate that nest abandonment is most likely due to the loss of attending adults (Roche et al. 2010)

Nest 23 on NTI was abandoned due to elegant tern harassment of adult plovers attempting to reach their nest to incubate eggs. Nest 37 is believed to have been abandoned after tracks around the ME indicated that a pair of raccoons circled the exclosure. There was no evidence of adult depredation. Nest 7, 40, and 63 were abandoned for unknown reasons.

Nest 25 contained sterile eggs. The female incubated 3 eggs for 83 days until the eggs were collected and determined sterile. This is the second instance of abnormal incubation periods on NS3. In 2009, Nest 27 was incubated for 81 days. Also in 2009 Nest 46 on NS1 was incubated from June 3 to August 30, 88 days and was found to have sterile eggs.

Photo by Paige The eggs from Nests 8, 13, 14 and 37 were collected after determination that Photo of banded chicks at the Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center abandonment had occurred and

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 11 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

were given to the WWCC for possible salvage (Table 3). Eleven of the twelve eggs hatched at the care center and were raised to fledging, banded, and subsequently released in Cell 13 of the Seasonal Pond area of Bolsa Chica. In addition, two abandoned chicks from Nest 2 on NS1 were taken to the WWCC for salvage. They were raised, fledged, banded, and subsequently released in the Seasonal Ponds at Bolsa Chica (Table 3). To aid in the release of the fledglings a temporary shelter or halfway house was built to provide shelter to the young birds while they familiarized themselves to their surroundings. This shelter consisted of a framed wire cage that was opened a both ends (see photo). It was placed over a small amount of pickleweed to offer the young fledglings some cover while inside the shelter.

A total of 184 snowy plover eggs were produced at Bolsa Chica in 2010, with 25 eggs abandoned, predated or failed to hatch, the remaining eggs produced 164 chicks. Of these 164 total chicks produced in 2010, 63 survived to fledge (Table 2, Figure 5). Fifty-nine nests (92% of all nests) survived to hatch.

In 2010, eight eggs were considered non-viable and did hot hatch including the three eggs from Nest 25. No laboratory analysis was made of these Photo by Cheryl Egger eggs; however, the eggs from Nest 25 Halfway House designed by Peter Knapp for the release of appeared to be unfertilized based on fledglings raised at the Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center. contents. In this study, when one or more eggs of a clutch hatch, several days are allowed to pass before any egg(s) that may have been abandoned are removed. No apparently abandoned eggs have been seen to hatch.

Table 3. Western Snowy Plovers Banded at the Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center in 2010. Band Nest Arrived Date Date Last Comment Combination # As Banded Released Observed YNWG 2 chick 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 YNGR 2 chick 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 YNYB 8 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 9/22/2010 YNYG 8 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 10/18/2010 Lost tape on Service band YNRB 8 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/13/2010 YNRG 13 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/25/2010 YNGG 13 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/21/2010 YNGW 14 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/25/2010 YNWY 14 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 7/05/2010 YNWR 14 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/25/2010 YNGY 37 egg 6/24/2010 7/24/2010 7/24/2010 BBYN 37 egg 6/24/2010 7/24/2010 7/24/2010 BYYN 37 egg 6/24/2010 7/24/2010 10/29/2010 Last seen at Balboa Beach 63 egg Did not hatch

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 12 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

80 70

60 50 Hatched Nests

40 Failed Nests 30 Fledglings

# Nests 20 10

** 9 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2010 1997* 2008** 200 Year

* no fledgling data available ** based on the minimum number of fledglings

Figure 5. Comparison of Number of Western Snowy Plover Hatched Nests, Failed Nests, and Fledglings 1997-2010 at Bolsa Chica

Two birds, YNYW and YNY (probable loss of second band on right leg), that were raised at WWCC in 2009 were observed during the 2010 breeding season and potentially nested at Bolsa Chica. This would represent a 22% return rate of fledglings to breed in the following year. The return of fledglings at Bolsa Chica is comparable to those in San Diego County from 1994-1998 (Powell et al. 1998) that ranged from 10% to 22%.

BROOD TRACKING

Due to the chronological and geographic spacing of each brood, it is often possible to locate and identify individual broods over the period before they fledge. As generally seen in prior years, in 2010 each brood tended to stay together and the males prevented overlap or co-mingling with other broods. There were confrontations between the males if the broods wandered too close together or tried to take advantage of the same resources.

Broods hatched from NS3 relocated within days to other locations to seek food. Snowy plovers readily used the roads of Bolsa Chica to cover distances of 1/3 to 3/4 mile. In the Seasonal Ponds, broods would move about or change cells but could generally be identified. Broods on NS1 were not tracked on a regular basis to avoid possible disturbance of other nesting birds on the site (least and Caspian terns, and black skimmers).

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 13 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

OBSERVATIONS OF BANDED ADULTS

A male, identified by banding color code (WNGY) has nested at Bolsa Chica every year since 2004. This male was banded at Guadalupe Dunes near Pismo Beach in 2003. He has wintered at both Surfside, Orange County and Bolsa Chica State Beach for the past four years. In 2010 he lost the WN bands on the left leg. He was seen on NS1 with a brood of 3 chicks on May 10 but has not been seen since.

A female (WWYY) banded as an adult at the South Spit, Humboldt Bay in 2006, had one clutch, Nest 5 on NS1, but disappeared after the clutch hatched on April 30.

Two females (SKM) banded at Camp Pendleton (year unknown), bred at least once each at Bolsa Chica in 2010. A male (SKM) also from Camp Pendleton nested a least once at Bolsa Chica in 2009 and 2010.

Banded birds that may have bred at Bolsa Chica were as follows: SKG, YNYW, and YNY (probable loss of second band on right leg). Other banded bird sightings not breeding at Bolsa Chica were as follows: RARW on April 9, YOWR on April 18, ARWA and RGRA on July 25.

A female SYK was seen in May. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (Service) band had slipped onto the foot so that the toes could not open (see photo). She did not nest at Bolsa Chica. Photo by Peter Knapp SYK observed at Bolsa Chica with Service band over foot A list of birds banded at Bolsa Chica can be found in Appendix 3.

PREDATION

In 2010, only one nest was depredated, Nest 45 from Cell 14. The low rate of nest loss and high degree of chick production was attributable the deployment of ME’s to deter corvid and coyote predation. Predators removed from Bolsa Chica are summarized in Table 4. The information was obtained from the annual predator management report (Ross 2010).

Chicks from Nest 47 on NS3 were taken upon hatching by common raven (Corvus corax). Tracks were seen all around the ME. Two chicks from Nest 3 on NS1 were also taken by raven. An American kestrel (Falco sparverius) was present on NS1 early in the breeding season and was seen carrying at least one plover chick. It was present for at least 3 weeks.

Red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis) were regularly present at Bolsa Chica, but no hawk nests were known to be present in 2010. Red-tailed hawks were present continuously on the power poles opposite STI. Although there was no documented take of snowy plover chicks by red-tailed hawk, one took at least one least tern chick from STI from this perch in 2008. These red-tailed hawks were resistant to repeated attempts to trap them and remained present during the entire breeding season.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 14 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

Table 4. Bolsa Chica Predator Removal Summary (1999-2010) Potential 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 Predator Gull-billed - - - Tern American 5 6 12 10 - 15 99 118 52 80 91 10 Crow America 2 5 4 4 6 13 19 5 12 13 15 11 Kestrel Loggerhead 1 - - - 4 1 10 5 3 6 2 5 Shrike Common 5 5 - 4 2 1 2 4 5 6 3 2 Raven Cooper’s 1 - 1 - - 8 ------Hawk Peregrine - - - 1 ------Falcon Red-tailed - 1 1 ------Hawk Gulls - - 1 7 - 1 ------Skunk ------2 1 - - - - Virginia - 1 ------Opossum Ground unkn unkn unkn unkn unkn unkn 4 3 - - - - Squirrel * * * * * * Brown Rat - 1 ------* bait stations used; therefore the number removed is unknown (unkn).

One gull-billed tern (Gelochelidon nilotica) was present for a short time (observed April 7 and 17) and is not believed to have been a predator in 2010. Chick loss to black skimmers is believed to have occurred on NS1. Both an adult peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) and a merlin (Falco columbarius) were observed at Bolsa Chica at the beginning of the season but appeared to have migrated away from the area without incident. A juvenile peregrine falcon appeared at Bolsa Chica at the end of the breeding season. It is not known if there were any snowy plover predation events. Black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) were present during all or part of the breeding season but were not suspected predators in 2010.

A family of coyotes was responsible for the predation of all eggs and chicks of the nesting species on NS1 including; black skimmer, California least tern, Caspian tern, elegant tern, and gadwall during the last week in May and early June. It is assumed that this devastating predation event included some snowy plover chicks, although snowy plover nests would have been protected by the ME.

As noted earlier, there were several highly probable instances of predation of adult snowy plovers while they were tending nests or young chicks. These nests were recorded as abandoned; however, the banded adults were not observed after the incidents. It is unknown what predator was involved with these predation events.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 15 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

The 2010 western snowy plover breeding season continued the high nest survival rates experienced since the 2002 breeding season. The high nest survival rates are attributable the use of MEs. The fledgling rate (Table 1), however, was moderate, with 50 fledglings in the wild and 13 in captivity for a total of 0.98 fledglings per nest. Therefore, management recommendations focus on maintaining existing management actions that have worked in the past as well as taking additional steps focused on improving fledgling success. The endangered California least tern, which nests in the same locations as the western snowy plover, needs to be considered in all management efforts.

Many of these recommendations from past years have been implemented with good results. These actions included: 1) placing tiles on the nest sites for the chicks to hide under, providing protection from both predation and trampling; 2) deploying MEs on every snowy plover nest to prevent egg loss due to predation and trampling; 3) utilizing drift fences to create dunes and maintain the sand on NS3; and 4) continuing with the “eyes on the colony” volunteer effort at NS1 that was initiated in 2010. These management efforts have been effective in the enhancement of nest sites and improving reproductive success of the snowy plover and should continue. It is also recommended that monitoring continue with the same intensity that has occurred in the past in order to maintain this quality of management within the nest sites.

In 2010, some of the management recommendations from prior years were in progress and need to continue until the outstanding issues are resolved. These issues include: overcrowding and low reproductive success on NS1, limited use of NS2 and NS3, the need to increase predator control actions, and the need for weed management on NS1. These management issues are discussed in detail below.

Improving water management at the Seasonal Ponds has been an issue for several years; however, a number of solutions have been implemented to improve the flow of water out of these cells to make them available for snowy plover nesting and foraging. These include repair of culverts between cells and installation of a permanent pump in Freeman Creek (to which the ponds drain), so that excess stormwater can be pumped out to the Full Tidal Basin if excessive shoaling in the basin prevents drainage by gravity. It is unknown at this point whether these management efforts will be sufficient.

1. Develop methods to manage overcrowding and improve reproductive success on NS1.

Overcrowding on NS1 was not an issue in 2010 due to large scale predation of eggs and nestlings utilizing the nest site. However, attempts were made by ten species to nest on NS1 including American avocet, California least tern, black skimmer, royal tern, Caspian tern, black-necked stilt, killdeer, horned lark, gadwall, as well as the western snowy plover. The problem of overcrowding is unresolved, although a number of options have been discussed. One of these options included encouraging the terns and skimmers to return to NTI, where they nested exclusively until 2007. Large tern decoys are already deployed on the island; however, black skimmer decoys should also be purchased and deployed. There are limitations to the number of birds that can be supported on NTI when considering the large number of terns and the small size of the island. Opportunities should also be sought to increase the size of NTI. Sand from the dredging efforts in the Full Tidal Basin should be used to expand this island and make room for the increase in nesting activity. Sand from the dredging effort should also be used to enhance STI. After a peak of nine nests in 2003 the number of plover nests has declined to only two in 2010. This would also enhance STI for the least tern.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 16 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

The fledgling rate on NS1 is well below average at 0.62 fledglings per nest and if you remove the fledglings that were raised at WWCC this number drops to 0.23 fledglings per nest. Although predation could have been the cause this year (discussed in recommendation #3), reproductive success has been low for several years. This trend should be monitored for potential reasons for this loss of chicks. Two methods of monitoring should be considered including: 1) additional observation time for the portion of NS1 that is not observable by the “eyes on the colony” volunteer effort and, 2) the banding of chicks on NS1. The banding of chicks on NS1 could offer insight into the causes of low fledging and supply management data for the following: Determining reproductive success by nest and/or adults Determining loss of adults and chicks during nesting season Determining the rate of return and dispersal Determining where winter sites are for potential winter site management

2. Increase usage and reproductive success on NS2 and NS3.

In 2010, both NS2 and NS3 were utilized by both snowy plover and California least tern. The reproductive success for the snowy plover was 1.75 fledglings per nest on NS2 and 1.07 fledglings per nest at NS3. The least terns had very low reproductive success (0 fledglings from 31 nests on NS2 and 1-4 fledglings from 19 nests on NS3). This was primarily due to predation.

The increased nesting by plovers can be partially attributed to the absence of Seasonal Pond nesting habitat and the creation of dunes on NS3 (see photo). The dunes provided structure at the site and allowing native dune plants to take root. This was done by staking in fabric fencing and allowing the sand to build up against the fencing. Weed control efforts have also been effective on these two sites. Increased predator control as discussed in the next management recommendation need to be activated to Photo by Peter Knapp encourage plovers and terns to continue use of these Sand dunes formed against fabric fencing on NS3. nest sites.

3. Deter predators on the Seasonal Ponds and Nest Sites

This year the Seasonal Ponds and Nest Sites were all hard hit by predators. This had a smaller effect on the snowy plover due to the use of the ME but was devastating to the terns and skimmers on NS1 and NS3. A family of coyotes began foraging on the tern eggs and chicks just prior to the hatching of the first wave of California least terns. A small group of common ravens were also actively foraging on least tern and snowy plover chicks in the Seasonal Ponds.

Egg aversion techniques have been developed that deter both coyotes and corvids from consuming eggs. Egg aversion is a learned association between a food item and illness. This technique requires that ill tasting or slightly toxic eggs be placed on the nest site in an attempt to emulate the California least tern or western snowy plover nests. When the eggs are consumed by the predator, a learned association is formed that deters the predator from seeking this same food type. This aversion is long

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 17 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

lasting but may need to be reaffirmed in the event that new predators are being introduced onto the site. Often one event is all that is required; however, in a situation like Bolsa Chica where a large number of good tasting eggs were consumed, a number of tastings may be required before successful aversion is obtained. This method has been used on the project site before with great success but was discontinued. We recommend that egg aversion techniques be resumed in the same manner as in the past.

Another useful tool is to try to deter the predator, in this case the coyote, from entering the nest site. This would be possible on NS1 where a single levee road surrounded by water is used to access the nest site. A gate with fencing on the levee road, which extends into the water to below the low tide mark, would be highly recommended for the West Levee Road south of NS1.

4. Improve weed control and/or eradication on all man-made nest sites.

For several years now, all man-made nest sites have been prepared for nesting by removing non- native plant cover with herbicides and by hand. This has been necessary in order to keep the area clear of unwanted vegetation and encourage nesting by the terns and plovers. On NS1, this effort has been massive and has not been able to produce the desired result. There are several alternatives that should be considered.

On some man-made nest sites, at other locations, annual grading or scraping has been used. This removes all vegetation just prior to the nesting of the California least tern. With no rainfall this eliminates weeds until the next rainy season. This method is required annually and encourages long- term weed growth by disturbing the soil. Grading must be completed prior to the nesting of all birds on NS1. The western snowy plover nests two months earlier than the California least tern (early May) and during the past two years has commenced nesting even earlier: February 23 in 2009 and March 5 in 2010. This timing is still within the rainy season in southern California and therefore the rain has the potential to germinate a new seed bank that would normally stay dormant until the fall. Scraping the site may be preferable to grading because of less ground disturbance which may discourage germination after only a few light rainfalls.

Another method that has been successful at the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station is the use of saltwater irrigation. This method was established following a study that incorporated four different non-native vegetation control methods and a control site (Agri Chemical & Supply 2006). The saltwater irrigation treatment was the most effective in terms of controlling non-native plants and providing a suitable nesting area. This method involves pumping salt water into an irrigation system once a year for about six hours or until the ground is saturated. This is repeated the next day. Saltwater irrigation is very effective at killing annual herbaceous plants and not as effective on iceplant and other invasives that can tolerate high salt content.

It is recommended that a combination of salt water irrigation and the application of herbicide or hand weeding on the more salt tolerant species would be the most feasible method for controlling weeds on all man-made nest sites at Bolsa Chica.

5. Improve water management in the Seasonal Ponds

A number of cells or large portions of cells within the Seasonal Ponds were not available for nesting due to seasonal inundation. This has been the case since 2008. These ponds frequently flood during

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 18 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

the winter but dry out prior to the snowy plover nesting season. Since 2008, water was not able to drain into Freeman Creek due to elevated levels in the creek and the closed condition of the storm water release flap gates. A large portion of Cell 11, in particular, has been highly used for snowy plover nesting in the past years but is now largely unavailable. This flooding caused the snowy plover to expand into potentially less suitable cells in order to locate suitable, dry nesting areas. Pumping of selected cells has occurred in 2008, 2009 and 2010 to lower the water level at the pond margins. A Water Management Plan has been drafted that includes provisions to seasonally reduce water levels in the Seasonal Ponds to provide additional plover nesting and foraging habitat as a management element. This will enhance efforts by improving habitat to accommodate the western snowy plover goal of 70 breeding adults in accordance with the goals of the Western Snowy Plover Recovery Plan.

Nesting in the Seasonal Ponds has decreased over the last 5 years, probably due to the creation of NS1; therefore, increasing the number of cells available in the Seasonal Ponds would also provide increased potential for nesting opportunities. Based on changing conditions in the Full Tidal Basin and Muted Tidal Basin, it is likely that similar pond basin flooding will continue to occur in future years.

Ongoing and adaptive management actions are essential to improving western snowy plover reproductive success at Bolsa Chica, which provides the best nesting option for snowy plovers within a 60-mile radius.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 19 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

REFERENCES

Agri Chemical & Supply. 2006. Exotic Plant Eradication Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach. 2005 Annual Report. Prepared for: Southwest Division Naval Facilities Command and Environmental Programs & Sciences Office, Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach. 24pp.

Fancher, J. 1998. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California. 1997. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. April 1998. 22pp.

Fancher, J., L. Hays, and P. Knapp. 2002. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2001. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. February 2002. 24pp

Fancher, J., L. Hays, and P. Knapp. 2002. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2002. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. December 2002. 23pp

Fancher, J., P. Knapp, and L. Hays. 2004. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2003. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. January 2004 22pp

Fancher, J, P. Knapp, and L. Hays. 2005. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2004. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. January 2005 25pp

Fancher, J., P. Knapp, and L. Hays. 2005. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2005. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. December 2005 28pp

Fancher, J., P. Knapp, and L. Hays. 2006. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2006. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. February 2007 28pp

Federal Register. 1993. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; determination of threatened status of the Pacific Coast population of the western snowy plover. Federal Register 58: 12864-12874.

Gochfield M. and J. Burger 1994. Black Skimmer (Rynchops niger). In The Birds of North America, No. 108 (A. Poole and F. Gills, Eds.) Philadelphia: The academy of Natural Sciences; Washington, D.C.: The American Ornithologists’ Union.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 20 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

Knapp, P., B. Peterson and J. Fancher. 2007. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2007. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. December 2007 22pp

Knapp, P. and B. Peterson. 2008. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2008. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. December 2008 25pp

Knapp, P. and B. Peterson. 2009. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2009. A report of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Office. December 2009 24pp

Page, G. W., J. S. Warriner, J.C. Warriner, and P.W. Patton 1995. Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus) in The Birds of North America (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.) No. 154. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia

Powell, A. N., J. M. Terp, B. L. Peterson, and C. L. Collier. 1998. The status of western snowy plovers (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus) in San Diego County, 1998. Report to California Dept. of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR. 30pp.

Roche, E.A., T.W. Arnold, and F. J. Cuthbert. 2010. Apparent Nest Abandonment as Evidence of Breeding-Season Mortality in Great Lakes Piping Plovers (Charadrius molodus). Auk 127 (2) 402-410.

Ross, W.L. 1999. Bolsa Chica Wetlands 1999 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 3pp

Ross, W.L. 2000. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2000 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 10pp

Ross, W.L. 2001. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2001 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 9 pp

Ross, W.L. 2002. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2002 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 9 pp

Ross, W.L. 2003. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2003 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 9 pp

Ross, W.L. 2004. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2004 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 13 pp

Ross, W.L. 2005. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2005 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 11 pp

Ross, W.L. 2006. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2006 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 9 pp

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 21 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

Ross, W.L. 2007. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2007 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 9 pp.

Ross, W.L. 2008. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2008 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 9 pp.

Ross, W.L. 2009. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2009 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 9 pp.

Ross, W.L. 2010. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2010 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 6 pp.

Tucker, M. A. and A. N. Powell. 1999. Snowy Plover diets in 1995 at a Coastal Southern California Breeding Site. Western Birds 30: 44-48.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus). In 2 volumes. Sacramento, California. xiv + 751 pages.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001a. Formal section 7 Biological Opinion on the Bolsa Chica Lowland Restoration Project, Orange County, California (FWS No. 1-66-01-1653). April 16, 2001. 22pp with attachment.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Corps of Engineers, and State Lands Commission. 2001. Final environmental impact report/environmental impact statement for the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project. April 2001. Appendices A-H and Volumes I-VI.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 22 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

Appendix 1. Snowy plover eggs laid, chicks hatched, and fledged at Bolsa Chica, 2010 Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings 1 NS1 F1 3-05 4-16 3 H 3 0 2 NS1 Y2 3-10 4-16 3 H 2* 2 3 NS1 AA2 3-12 4-15 3 H 3 1 4 NS1 R1 3-24 5-01 3 H 3 0 5 NS1 N1 3-25 4-30 3 H 3 0 6 NS3 6A 3-26 5-03 3 2H1A 2 2 7 NS1 Y1 3-18 4-17 3 A 0 0 8 NS1 A1 3-27 4-23 3 A/H 3 3 9 NS1 T1 3-27 5-04 3 H 3 0 10 NS1 I1 4-02 4-30 3 H 3 0 11 NS1 E1 4-03 5-08 3 H 3 0 12 NS3 B3 4-04 5-08 3 H 3 1 13 NS1 Y2 4-04 4-17 3 A/H 2 2 14 NS1 V1 4-07 4-21 3 A/H3 3 15 STI 4-09 5-07 3 H 3 1 16 CELL 10 4-15 5-20 3 H 3 3 17 NS1 J2 4-18 5-25 3 2H1A 2 0 EAST 18 4-30 5-24 3 H 3 2 LEVEE 19 NS3 2 4-30 6-05 3 H 3 0 20 NS3 5-03 5-20 3 H 3 1 21 NS3 5-04 5-31 3 H 3 1 22 STI 5-06 6-04 3 H 3 1 23 NTI 5-07 5-26 3 A 0 0 24 NS1 P1 5-07 6-08 3 H 3 0 25 NS3 4B 5-07 7-29 3 S 0 0 26 CELL 12 5-12 6-08 3 H 3 2 27 NS1 Z2 5-13 6-08 3 2H/1A 2 1 28 NS1 Z2 5-13 5-23 3 H 3 1 29 CELL 10 5-13 6-12 3 H 3 2 30 NS2 5-13 6-09 3 H 3 3 31 CELL 11 5-16 6-12 3 H 3 0 32 NS3 5-18 6-13 3 H 3 2 33 NS1 S2 5-19 6-08 3 PH 3 0 34 NS1 V3 5-19 6-15 3 PH 3 0 35 NS1 R2 5-15 5-25 3 2H/1A 2 0

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 23 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings 36 NS3 2B 5-20 6-15 3 H 3 1 37 CELL 22 5-22 6-04 3 A/H 3 3 38 NS2 5-22 6-18 3 H 3 2 39 NS1 G1 5-24 6-13 3 H 3 0 40 NS1 L2 5-25 7-07 3 A 0 0 41 NS2 5-26 6-18 3 H 3 1 42 NS1 M1 5-25 6-12 3 H 3 0 43 NS3 5-28 6-26 3 H 3 1 44 CELL 10 6-01 6-25 3 H 3 2 45 CELL 14 6-02 6-03 2 P 0 0 46 NS3 3 6-04 6-30 3 H 3 2 47 NS3 6D 6-09 7-05 3 H 3 0 48 NS3 6-09 7-07 3 H 3 2 49 NS1 M1 6-01 7-05 3 H 3 0 50 NS3 4A/5A 6-13 7-14 3 H 3 1 51 NS3 2/2A 6-16 7-16 2 H 2 1 53 CELL 9 6-18 7-15 3 H 3 0 54 CELL 14 6-18 7-15 3 H 3 2 55 CELL 9 6-20 7-20 2 H 2 2 56 NS1 F1 6-24 7-16 3 H 3 0 57 NS1 C1 6-24 7-15 3 H 3 1 58 CELL 10 6-27 7-24 3 H 3 0 59 CELL 10 6-27 7-24 3 H 3 1 60 NS1 H1 6-28 7-25 3 H 3 0 61 CELL 11 7-01 7-21 3 H 3 0 62 NS1 N1 7-05 7-31 3 H 3 3 63 CELL 11 7-08 7-24 1 A 0 0 64 CELL 14 8-14 8-14 1+ H 1 1 FTB 65 6-26 6-26 3 H 3 3 INLET

54H, 4A, 184 63 2010 Season Totals 4A/H, 1S, 1P 164 eggs fledglings 64 Nests chicks P = predated; A = abandoned; H – hatched, PH = probably hatch, A/H – abandoned eggs that were salvaged and hatched at Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center, S = sterile eggs, Note: In the Nest Fate column, 2H1A means the nest hatched but only two eggs produced chicks, one egg was abandoned. *chicks were abandoned but salvaged and sent to the Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center and subsequently released after fledging.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 24 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

Appendix 2. Distribution of Western Snowy Plover Nests at Bolsa Chica for 1997 through 2010. Distribution of nests throughout Bolsa Chica Cells eliminated during Seasonal Year Total # Nests restoration Ponds FFTB MTB NTI NS1 NS2 NS3 STI Other 1997 31 14 11 4 2 1998 34 16 15 2 1 1999 38 14 11 11 2 2000 39 11 21 6 1 2001 55 19 29 5 2 2002 50 14 17 19 2003 32 11 9 3 9 2004 65 17 33 10 5 2005 51 6 30 8 7 2006 71 13 13 16 16 1 8 4 2007 50 10 9 19 8 4 2008 67 10 10 37 5 4 1 2009 70 16 9 1 1 32 3 5 3 2010 64 11 4 1 26 4 14 2 2 Distribution of Nests within Cells Year Cell 2 Cell 9 Cell 10 Cell 11 Cell 12 Cell 13 Cell 14 Cell 17 Cell 18 Cell 19 Cell 22 Cell 25 Cell 30 Cell 31 Cell 32 Cell 33 Cell 34 Cell 36 Cell 45 1997 4 7 1 1 2 1998 2 7 6 1 1 1999 6 5 1 1 5 4 2000 2 6 12 1 1 1 1 3 2001 1 8 11 9 5 2002 1 2 1 10 3 3 5 10 1 2003 6 1 2 2 1 2004 5 12 13 2 1 1 3 1 4 1 2005 1 6 8 12 3 1 4 3 2006 2 6 5 13 2 1 2007 1 6 3 1 3 4 1 2008 2 5 3 4 6 2009 2 6 2 5 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 2010 2 5 3 1 - 3 - - - 1

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 25 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2010 December 2010

Appendix 3. Western Snowy Plovers Banded at the Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center. Band Nest Arrived Date Date Last Combinat Comment # As Banded Released Observed ion YNRW 11 chick 5/20/2009 6/19/2009 7/17/2009 YNYY 11 chick 5/20/2009 6/19/2009 7/13/2009 YNWB 11 chick 5/20/2009 6/19/2009 6/19/2009 YNBW 18 egg 5/20/2009 6/19/2009 6/19/2009 YNBB 18 egg 5/20/2009 6/19/2009 7/28/2009 YNRY 18 egg 5/20/2009 -- -- euthanized YNBG 47 egg 7/17/2009 8/8/2009 8/25/2009 YNBR 47 egg 7/17/2009 8/8/2009 10/15/2009 YNBY 47 egg 7/17/2009 -- -- predated YNGB 48 egg 7/17/2009 8/8/2009 8/25/2009 YNYW 48 egg 7/17/2009 8/8/2009 10/28/2010 -- 48 egg ------did not hatch injured YNBY juvenile 9/21/2009 9/21/2009 9/21/2009 Nested on Nest 2 in 2010, YNRR sick 9/30/2009 9/30/2009 4/16/2010 assumed depredated YNWG 2 chick 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 YNGR 2 chick 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 YNYB 8 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 9/22/2010 YNYG 8 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 10/18/2010 Lost tape on Service band YNRB 8 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/13/2010 YNRG 13 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/25/2010 YNGG 13 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/21/2010 YNGW 14 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/25/2010 YNWY 14 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 7/05/2010 YNWR 14 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/25/2010 YNGY 37 egg 6/24/2010 7/24/2010 7/24/2010 BBYN 37 egg 6/24/2010 7/24/2010 7/24/2010 BYYN 37 egg 6/24/2010 7/24/2010 10/29/2010 Last seen at Balboa Beach 63 egg Did not hatch

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 26 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-I. FINAL REPORT WESTERN SNOWY PLOVER NESTING AT BOLSA CHICA, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 2011

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2011

Photo by Peter Knapp

by Peter Knapp* and Bonnie Peterson**

December 2011

* California Department of Fish & Game ** Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction...... 1 Background...... 1 Bolsa Chica Study Area...... 3 Study Methods ...... 6 Protection from Predators...... 6 Results and Discussion ...... 7 Numbers Of Male And Female Snowy Plovers ...... 7 Nest Distribution And Chronologies ...... 8 Eggs, and Chicks, And Fledgling Production...... 9 Brood Tracking...... 13 Observations Of Banded Adults...... 13 Predation...... 14 Management Recommendations...... 15 References...... 19

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Vicinity Map...... 2 Figure 2. Distribution of Western Snowy Plover Nests in 2011at Bolsa Chica...... 4 Figure 3. 1997-2011 Bolsa Chica Active Nest Chronology ...... 9 Figure 4. Biweekly Western Snowy Plover Nest Initiation, Hatching, and Loss at Bolsa Chica in 2011....9 Figure 5. Comparison of Number of Western Snowy Plover Hatched Nests, Failed Nests, and Fledglings 1997-2011 at Bolsa Chica...... 10

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Males, Females, Nests and Fledgling Production 1997-2011...... 7 Table 2. 2011 Nest, Nest Fate, and Reproductive Success Distribution by Cell ...... 8 Table 3. Results of Analysis by the Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology of Abandoned Snowy Plover Eggs...... 11 Table 4. Western Snowy Plovers Banded at the Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center in 2011...... 12 Table 5. Banded Fledglings that Returned From Wintering Grounds to Breed...... 12 Table 6. Bolsa Chica Predator Removal Summary (1999-2011)...... 14

APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Snowy plover eggs laid, chicks hatched, and fledged at Bolsa Chica, 2011. Appendix 2. Distribution of Western Snowy Plover Nests at Bolsa Chica for 1997 through 2011. Appendix 3. Western Snowy Plovers Banded at the Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. i Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

INTRODUCTION

In 1997, the Bolsa Chica lowlands were acquired into public ownership. This marked the beginning of a multi-agency effort to design, evaluate, and implement a plan for restoring the fish and wildlife habitats. These habitats had been cut off from the ocean for a century and have been an operating oil field for over 50 years. Construction of the restoration project began in Fall 2004 and was completed in August 2006. By the 2006 breeding season, 3 new nest sites were available for nesting and augmented the pre-existing North and South Tern Islands in Inner Bolsa Bay. The new ocean inlet, referred to as the Full Tidal Basin, was opened after the conclusion of the breeding season on August 24, 2006. The Full Tidal Basin is now subject to water level rise and fall that approximates the unequal semi-diurnal tidal range of southern California’s ocean waters. The Muted Tidal Basin was opened to tidal influence from the Full Tidal Basin through its water control structures in March 2008.

The purpose of this investigation is to continue to improve the level of knowledge about the western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus), a federally listed, threatened species that currently uses Bolsa Chica, and to attempt interim management actions to benefit the reproductive success of this species. This annual study will also aid in documenting achievement levels required to meet the goals of the Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover (USFWS 2007). In addition, this study will aid in assessing the success of the restoration projects and allow for modifications that would enhance utilization and increase reproductive success of the western snowy plover. This annual study was first initiated in 1997. This document reports on the 2011 snowy plover breeding season at Bolsa Chica.

BACKGROUND

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1 Santa Barbara

Los Angeles Huntington Beach

MAP AREA

East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Muted San Diego Outer Pocket Marsh Bolsa Bay West WCS HUNTINGTON BEACH Muted Tidal Basins

Rabbit Island

Central Nest WCS Site 2 Inner Bolsa Bay Full Tidal Basin East WCS Nest Site 1

Freeman Freeman Creek North WCS Tern Island

Future Full Tidal

South Tern Nest Site 3 PACIFIC OCEAN Island

Flood Shoal Maintenance Area Seasonal Ponds

West Muted Tidal Basin Central Muted Tidal Basin East Muted Tidal Basin Ocean Monitoring Program Study Boundary Inlet 0100 200 400 600 800 Meters

Site Locator and Vicinity Map Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Figure 1 Orange County, CA

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

The recognized breeding season of the western snowy plover normally extends from March 1 through September 15; however, the first nest at Bolsa Chica in 2009 occurred on February 23 and courting behavior has been observed as early as late January. Generally, three eggs are laid in a nest on the ground, which consists of a shallow depression scraped in the substrate. Some nests are lined with plant parts, small pebbles, or shell fragments.

Double brooding and polyandry are typical for this species. Snowy plover females usually leave very young chicks with the male in order to find another mate. The male typically tends the brood until the chicks fledge. Western snowy plover adults and young forage on invertebrates and insects along intertidal areas, beaches in wet sand and surf cast kelp, foredune areas of dry sand above the high tide, on salt panne, and edges of salt marshes and salt ponds (Page et al. 1995, Tucker and Powell 1999). The snowy plover is primarily a run and glean type of forager.

BOLSA CHICA STUDY AREA

Snowy plover nesting areas within Bolsa Chica include: Seasonal Ponds (Cells 2 through 13), Future Full Tidal Basin (Cells 14 through 40 and Cell 63), Muted Tidal Basin (Cells 41 through 50 and Cell 66), North Tern Island (NTI), South Tern Island (STI), Nest Site 1 (NS1), Nest Site 2 (NS2), Nest Site 3 (NS3), and the Levee Roads of the Full Tidal Basin (Figure 2). Some areas in the vicinity of the Bolsa Chica study area were not surveyed in this study, although western snowy plovers may have used the habitats for foraging or loafing. Those areas are the ocean beach immediately to the west at Bolsa Chica State Beach, Outer Bolsa Bay, Rabbit Island, and Inner Bolsa Bay to the west of West Levee Road with the exception of NTI and STI (Figure 2).

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 3

> ! 11 12

23 PONDS

(

24 !

SEASONAL

( ! ( !

(

! ( !

( ! ( !

( !

(

! 2

( ! 10

(

25 !

(

! TIDAL INLET (

35 !

(

! NEST (

(

SITE #3 !

( !

( >

! !

( ! (

26 !

9 ( ( !

! >

(

21 ! ( ( ! !

( TIDAL BASIN TIDAL !

> ( ! FUTURE FULL ! 34 > !

( ! 27

37 33

! 20

( ! ( !

32 28

( !

( ! ( ! STI 31 63 30 19 29 38 39

> !

( !

> NEST !

SITE #2 ( !

(

( ! ( !

( !

WEST LEVEE ROAD LEVEE WEST

( ! >

( !

(

! NTI !

(

! (

(

! ( !

(

( ! ( ! 42 71

NEST

SITE #1

> !

FULL TIDAL BASIN TIDAL FULL EAST LEVEE ROAD LEVEE EAST

( BAY BOLSA INNER !

( ! ( !

( ! 46 MUTED TIDAL BASIN TIDAL MUTED 48 Meters 47 Figure 2. Distribution of Western Snowy Plover Nests in 2011 at Bolsa Chica Figure 2. Snowy Distribution of Plover Nests Western in 2011

( ! 66 50 Nest -Unsuccessful Abandoned or Predated 1) least at (fledged Successful - Nest Nest Sites Nest 100 ! ( ! > ! ( 0 200 400 600 2011 Nest2011 Locations Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

the salt panne. Large portions of Cells 11, 12, 13, and 22 in the Seasonal Ponds were inundated in 2011 and were not available for snowy plover nesting.

The Future Full Tidal Basin occurs between the Seasonal Ponds and the Muted Tidal Basin and includes Freeman Creek. These zones are very similar to the Seasonal Ponds and consist mainly of salt panne and pickleweed, although there are some areas that retain water year-round (Cells 30 and 38). Though these areas are mostly unsuitable for nesting the margins were regularly checked for nesting plovers.

NTI and STI are well established, created islands surrounded by the muted tidal waters within Inner Bolsa Bay. The surface is dredge spoil with a developed boundary of intertidal or salt tolerant vegetation. STI is a regular breeding area for California least terns but also has several snowy plover nests per season. NTI has been used primarily by elegant tern (Thalasseus elegans), royal tern (Thalasseus maximus), Caspian tern (Hydroprogne caspia), black skimmers (Rynchops niger), and occasionally by western snowy plovers.

NS1 is a large linear nesting area between Inner Bolsa Bay and the Full Tidal Basin that was built during the creation of the Full Tidal Basin. The surface is dredge spoil that forms a flat surface that extends from the West Levee Rd. toward the basin. The shoreline of the nest site is now under full tidal influence. In 2011, vegetation covered much of the site, including beach evening primrose (Camissonia cheiranthifolia), beach sand verbena (Abronia umbellata var. umbellate), red sand verbena (Abronia maritime), saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), alkali heath (Frankenia salina), pickleweed, coastal deerweed (Lotus scoparius), five-hook bassia (Bassia hyssopifolia), hottentot-fig (Carpobrotus edulis), crystalline iceplant (Mesembryanthemum crystallinum), and slender-leaved iceplant (Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum). A huge effort was made during the winter and spring to remove much of the non-native vegetation, mostly by use of herbicide, but it still persisted in large patches throughout the site during the 2011 nesting season. The northeastern shoreline is becoming more structured, with pickleweed forming along the shoreline.

NS2 and NS3 are also created sites in Cell 42 and Cell 14, respectively. NS2 is located in the east Muted Tidal Basin and NS3 is within the Seasonal Ponds. These sites were built up with fill and covered with sand. Winds originally had blown much of the sand from the surface of NS3; however, recent efforts of adding sand containing native seeds and constructing cloth windbreaks to prevent the sand from leaving the site have created a dune system and improved the site. Both nest sites require some weed control. Some chicks on NS2 foraged on the site while others were led from the site by the adult by swimming across surrounding water. These chicks foraged and fledged from the adjacent Cell 45 and other cells within the seasonal ponds. Chicks on NS3 tend to leave the site immediately after hatching to seek forage in the surrounding cells.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 5 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

STUDY METHODS

The principal survey effort for western snowy plover was undertaken by California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) staff member, Peter Knapp. Merkel & Associates biologists Bonnie Peterson and Antonette Gutierrez participated intermittently in the survey efforts to support and to aid in collecting data for report preparation. Surveys for nesting western snowy plover normally begin in mid to late March unless nesting begins earlier. Surveys were conducted at least twice a week, sometimes 6 or 7 times a week, until the beginning of September. A monitor was on-site daily; however, not all nest sites were surveyed daily. Rather, fieldwork was concentrated on areas of activity, with a goal of covering the Bolsa Chica survey area once every several days.

The accessibility and size of each nesting site dictated survey methods. STI and NS1 were surveyed by vehicle from the West Levee Road prior to arrival of the California least terns and then on foot once nesting was initiated. NTI was used primarily by nesting large terns and black skimmer and, therefore, required minimal monitoring for western snowy plover. Observations of this nesting site were made from the West Levee Road. NS2 was surveyed by vehicle from the East Levee Road using a spotting scope with occasional survey efforts occurring on foot. NS3 was surveyed by vehicle from the north end of the site. The large majority of suitable western snowy plover nesting habitat in the Seasonal Ponds was visible from the road network. Therefore, the observer(s) would slowly drive along the roads that subdivide this area. Frequent stops were made to examine specific areas adjacent to the road with binoculars or spotting scope without exiting the vehicle.

During each survey for western snowy plover, observers documented the location of any new nests. NS1, NS2, and NS3 were sectioned by markers, which formed the basis for data recording. NS1 is significantly larger than the other two nest sites; therefore, NS1 was sectioned south to north from A though CC in a regular grid. Each snowy plover nest located during survey efforts was marked with a numbered tongue depressor, mapped for ease of relocation on subsequent visits, and a mini- exclosure (ME) was placed on the nest.

On all sites it was usually possible to follow the movements and determine the fate of chicks of each brood since there was dispersion over space and time sufficient to differentiate between broods. In a few cases banded adults identified specific broods. Broods were observed between 2 and 7 days per week. These regular brood observations were conducted to determine chick survival and fledgling production, as well as to detect movement between cells and use of specific cells for brood rearing.

A Range-wide, Breeding Season Window Survey was conducted at Bolsa Chica in May 2011. The survey was conducted in the same manner as in previous years and in accordance with the guidelines set out in the Snowy Plover Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2007).

PROTECTION FROM PREDATORS

Once a nest was discovered, a welded wire mini-exclosure (ME) was anchored in place over the top of the nest and left in place until the eggs in the nest hatched. The MEs are 28 inches in width on all four sides and 16 inches in height. These dimensions have proven effective in deterring predation by corvids, gulls, and coyotes (Canis latrans). The use of the ME contributes greatly to the low egg predation at Bolsa Chica. Aversion nests were also used to deter coyote and corvid nest predation. This was accomplished by placing ill tasting eggs in clutches within the nesting areas. Once the coyotes or corvids taste the eggs they are more reluctant to take eggs as a food source.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 6 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

Observations were made of potential predators during the surveys. Predator management actions were then enacted commensurate with the threat to snowy plover breeding activity by that specific predator. Predator management has been a necessary recovery action for the California least tern for decades. In places such as Bolsa Chica where snowy plovers nest in proximity to the least tern, predator management activities on behalf of one species will also benefit the other species. In 2011, predator management was undertaken by Wally Ross of CDFG.

Clay roof tiles were placed on STI, NS1 and NS3 to provide shelter for young least tern and plover chicks. Adult plovers also use the tiles as a viewing platform for chick movement.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In 2011, the first snowy plover nest was established on NS1 on March 16. There were a total of 73 nests producing 62 fledglings (Table 1).

NUMBERS OF MALE AND FEMALE SNOWY PLOVERS

During May 2011, a Range-wide, Breeding Season Window Survey was conducted. The total number of snowy plovers present at Bolsa Chica was 49 adults: 20 female, 28 male, and one of unknown sex (Table 1). The management goal of the Snowy Plover Recovery Plan for Bolsa Chica is 70 adults.

Table 1. Males, Females, Nests and Fledgling Production 1997-2011. Year Females Males Total Adults Total Nests Fledglings Total Fl/Nest Fl/Male

2011 20 (1 unk) 28 49 73 62 0.85 2.21 2010 22 23 45 64 63 0.98 2.74 2009 25 22 47 70 42-70* 0.60-1.00* 1.91-3.18* 2008 22 28 50 67 57-109* 0.85-1.62* 2.04-3.89* 2007 18 12 30 50 25 0.50 2.08 2006 27 35 62 71 64 0.90 1.83 2005 25 41 66 51 75 1.47 1.83 2004 25 20 45 65 79 1.22 3.95 2003 15 16 31 32 44 1.38 2.75 2002 19 20 39 50 27 0.54 1.35 2001 19 18 37 55 57 1.04 3.17 2000 15 16 31 39 42 1.08 2.63 1999 12 11 32 38 23 0.61 2.09 1998 11 16 27 34 25 0.74 1.56 1997 14 20 34 30 nd nd nd Fl = fledglings, nd = not determined * based on minimum/maximum numbers of fledglings

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 7 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

NEST DISTRIBUTION AND CHRONOLOGIES

Snowy plover utilized all available nest sites at Bolsa Chica in 2011. Seasonal Ponds had 26% of all nests, NS3 had 22%, NS2 had 18%, and NS1 had 16% of all nests (Figure 2, Table 2). Cell 45, immediately adjacent to NS2 in the Muted Tidal Basin, was used for nesting this year. The only other time it has been used was in 2009. NTI has had nests every year since 2008 but every nest, either prior to or immediately after hatching, has been lost due to conflicts with large nesting terns, skimmers, and gulls. Appendix 1 provides the cell location, start and end dates, nest fates, and eggs and chicks produced for each nest in 2011. Appendix 2 provides information on historical nest distribution.

Table 2. 2011 Nest, Nest Fate, and Reproductive Success Distribution by Cell Nests Hatched Location Total Nests Nests Failed (# chicks) Fledglings Seasonal Ponds: 19 1 18(50) 30 Cell 9 9 0 9(24) 12 Cell 10 3 0 3 (9) 8 Cell 11 3 0 3 (8) 3 Cell 12 1 1 0 (0) 0 Cell 13 3 0 3(9) 7 Nest Site 1 12 2 10(26) 9* Nest Site 2 13 1 12 (32) 5 Nest Site 3 16 5 11 (30) 11 Future Full Tidal Basin: 7 1 6 (14) 5 Cell 14 3 0 3 (7) 5 Cell 19 1 0 1(3) 0 Cell 22 2 0 2 (4) 0 Cell 32 1 1 0 (0) 0 South Tern Island 3 0 3 (8) 2 North Tern Island 1 0 1 (3) 0 Muted Tidal Basin (Cell 45) 1 1 0 (0) 0 East Levee Rd. 1 0 1 (2) 0 Total 73 11 62(165) 62* x includes birds raised at Huntington Beach Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center.

The State and Federal Endangered California least tern also nests at Bolsa Chica. Snowy plover egg laying typically begins several months before the least tern begins its egg laying. This has been the case at Bolsa Chica as well. The two species tolerate the co-location of their nests. This was apparent in 2011 when they both nested on NS1, NS2, NS3, and STI.

In 2011, the first plover nest was initiated March 16. Snowy plover nesting rose to a peak in early June, similar to the average, with an uncharacteristic increase in nesting in mid-July (Figure 3). The last known nests hatched during the first week of August (Figure 4).

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 8 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

25 1997-2010 20 average

15 2011

# of Active Nests Active # of 5

0 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 2 6 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 3 - 1 9 7 - 3 0 7 - 5 2 - 2 1 0 1 3 - - - A - - - M - - - J - - J - - - - - F M M p A A A a M M M u J J u J J J A A e a a r p p p y a a a n u u l u u u u u b r r r r r y y y n n l l l g g Survey Date Figure 3. 1997-2011 Bolsa Chica Active Nest Chronology

10 initiated 8 hatched abandoned/hatched* 6

# of Nests predated/lost 4

1 5 0 5 1 5 0 5 1 5 -3 -1 -3 -1 -3 -1 -3 -1 -3 -1 6 1 6 1 6 1 6 1 6 1 1 r 1 y 1 n 1 l 1 g r r a y u n Ju l a Ap M a J u Ju Au M Ap M J Survey Time Period *includes nests collected and hatched at the Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center

Figure 4. Biweekly Western Snowy Plover Nest Initiation, Hatching, and Loss at Bolsa Chica in 2011.

EGGS, AND CHICKS, AND FLEDGLING PRODUCTION

A total of 207 snowy plover eggs were produced at Bolsa Chica in 2011, with 42 eggs abandoned, predated or failed to hatch, and the remaining eggs producing 164 chicks. Of these 164 total chicks produced in 2011, 62 survived to fledge (Table 2, Figure 5). Sixty-two nests (85% of all nests) survived to hatch.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 9 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

50 Hatched Nests

s 40 Failed Nests Fledglings 30

# Nest 20

* 8 9 99 01 03 05 06 07 10 11 97 0 19 19 2000 20 2002 20 2004 20 2 20 20 20 19 2008** 2009** Year

* no fledgling data available ** based on the minimum number of fledglings Figure 5. Comparison of Number of Western Snowy Plover Hatched Nests, Failed Nests, and Fledglings 1997-2011 at Bolsa Chica.

All 73 nests in 2011 were judged to be complete clutches with the exception of Nest 59 in Cell 12, which was abandoned with just one egg. Eleven completed clutches were 2-egg clutches, one clutch was 4 eggs, and 61 were 3-egg clutches (Appendix 1).

Six nests were abandoned. The cause of abandonment of nests 3, 11, 21, 23, 28, and 59 is undocumented. Incubation of these nests was respectively 16, 3, 27, 21, 18, and 0 days. Four of these nests were on NS1 and had similar abandonment dates. Nests 3 and 11 were abandoned between May 26 and May 28. In general abandonment of a nest is most likely caused by the loss of one of the adults (Roche et al. 2010). Five days after abandonment of Nest 23, a coyote crushed the ME breaking 2 of the 3 eggs. Nest 28 on NS2, the only 4-egg nest, was abandoned after 18 days of incubation. Nest 59 in Cell 12 had only one egg and was never incubated.

All five nests that were predated were located on NS3 and were depredated by coyotes (Nests 33, 39, 40, 50, and 54).

The eggs from two nests were salvaged after abnormal incubation periods. Nests 43 and 70 both contained sterile eggs. They were Photo by P. Knapp incubated for 48 and 49 days respectively until the eggs were ME crushed by coyote trying to obtain abandoned eggs. salvaged. This is the fifth instance of prolonged abnormal incubation

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 10 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

periods. In 2009, two nests were incubated for over 80 days and in 2010, one nest was incubated for over 80 days prior to salvage of eggs. All eggs were sterile (Table 3).

For the first recorded time at Bolsa Chica three nests (9, 16, and 56) each hatched one chick after the first 2 eggs from the clutch had hatched and the brood had left the area of the nest to forage. All the chicks died.

For the first time at Bolsa Chica 16 unhatched eggs were salvaged and given to the Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology (WFVZ) for analysis of sterility. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Results of Analysis by the Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology of Abandoned Snowy Plover Eggs. Eggs Clutch Eggs Results from Nest # abandoned Notes size hatched WFVZ (collected) 17 3 2 1 Normal incubation infertile 20 3 2 1 Normal incubation infertile 23 3 0 1 2 eggs lost to predation, 1 egg large embryo abandoned 28 4 0 4 18 days of incubation 3 infertile, 1 with small embryo 30 3 2 1 Normal incubation contents solid 43 2 3 2 Incubated for 48 days infertile 45 3 2 1 Normal incubation contents solid 59 1 0 1 Never incubated infertile 66 2 1 1 Normal incubation infertile 70 3 0 3 Incubated for 49 days infertile

The eggs from Nests 3 and 11 were collected after determining that abandonment had occurred and were given to the Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center (HBWWCC) for possible salvage (Table 4). Nest 3 was unattended for a prolonged period and, although all three eggs hatched, two of the chicks were underdeveloped and only one chick survived to fledge. All three eggs from Nest 11 plus the one from Nest 3 were successfully raised at the care center to fledging, were banded, and subsequently released in the Seasonal Pond area of Bolsa Chica (Table 4). To aid in the release of the fledglings, a temporary shelter or halfway house was built to provide shelter to the young birds while they familiarized themselves with their surroundings. The shelter consisted of a framed wire cage that is open at both ends. It was placed over a small amount of pickleweed to offer the young fledglings some cover while inside the shelter. This shelter was first used in 2010 and appears to have increased the survival of these hand-reared fledglings (photo provided in Knapp and Peterson 2010).

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 11 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

Table 4. Western Snowy Plovers Banded at the Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center in 2011. Band Nest # Arrived As Date Banded Date Released Last Observed Combination YNRY 3 egg 5/17/2011 6/24/2011 7/13/2011 BRYN 3 egg 5/17/2011 6/27/2011 7/27/2011 BWYN 3 egg 5/17/2011 6/27/2011 6/27/2011 YBYN 11 egg 6/20/2011 6/24/2011 6/29/2011

Photo by P. Knapp Due to the banding of fledglings released from HBWWCC since 2008, we have been able to track their individual success. In order for an individual to be successful it must survive to breeding age. In order to determine how successful the hand-reared snowy plovers are compared to parent-reared plovers we compared our data with data from San Diego County collected during a long-term study by Dr. Abby Powell (Powell et al. 1998). In this study all chicks were banded with individual bands. The number of banded birds returning the year following their hatch year were compared to data collected from the fledglings released from HBWWCC (Table 5). The expected result would be that parent-reared birds would develop Fledgling BRYN after release from HBWWCC. stronger predator avoidance and foraging techniques that would result in increased survivorship. Although the sample sizes are low for Bolsa Chica the results indicate that survivorship to breeding age is unrelated to how the chicks are raised. The return of fledglings at Bolsa Chica is comparable and at times higher than those in San Diego County from 1994-1998 (Powell et al. 1998) that ranged from 10% to 22%.

Table 5. Banded Fledglings that Returned From Wintering Grounds to Breed. Year Site Banded Fledges Returned Fledges 1995 San Diego County* 62 7 (11%) 1996 San Diego County* 59 13 (22%) 1997 San Diego County* 83 8 (10%) 1998 San Diego County* 73 15 (21%) 2008 Bolsa Chica 2 2 (100%) 2009 Bolsa Chica 9 1 (11%)** 2010 Bolsa Chica 13 4 (31%) * data from report on The Status of Western Snowy Plovers in San Diego County, 1998. ** a second bird was located in San Quintin in 2011 but is not known to have returned to breed, increasing the actual survivorship to 22%.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 12 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

Of the 73 nests at Bolsa Chica in 2011, a total of 62 fledglings were produced. This includes two nests (4 individuals) that were raised at the HBWWCC. The overall fledge rate was 0.84 fledglings/nest. The Seasonal Ponds were the most successful nesting area with 1.58 fledglings/nest. It also supported all the chicks from NS3 that had a success rate of 0.68 fledglings/nest. The number of nests on NS1 has decreased from a high of 37 nests in 2008 to 19 nests in 2011. Reproductive success on NS1 is also declining. In 2011 the fledge rate was 0.75 (fledglings/nest) and if rescued eggs (which would have failed due to adult abandonment) are excluded the fledge rate drops to 0.41 fledglings/nest. NS2, which had four nests in 2010 and a fledge rate of 1.75, had a record 13 nests in 2011. Unfortunately, crowding by other snowy plover broods had a negative effect on reproductive success and NS2 was only able to support 0.38 fledglings per nest. This site could probably support two or at most three broods at one time.

BROOD TRACKING

Due to the chronological and Photo by P. Knapp geographic spacing of each brood, it is often possible to locate and identify individual broods over the period before they fledge. As generally seen in prior years, in 2011 each brood tended to stay together and the males prevented overlap or co-mingling with other broods. There were confrontations between the males if the broods wandered too close together or tried to take advantage of the same resources. This was apparent on NS2.

Broods hatched from NS3 relocated within days to locations within the Seasonal Ponds to seek food. Snowy plovers readily used the roads of Bolsa Brooding female Chica to cover distances of 1/3 to 3/4 mile. In the Seasonal Ponds, broods would move about or change cells but could generally be identified. More than one cell may be used by a brood and often a brood will travel to another cell within one or two days of hatching. As an example, although there were only three nests that hatched in Cell 11 in 2011, at least 10 broods not hatched from Cell 11 used this cell for foraging.

OBSERVATIONS OF BANDED ADULTS

A female, WWYY (assumed lost tape on lower right leg making it WWYS, S=Service band missing yellow tape), was banded as an adult at the South Spit, Humboldt Bay in 2006, had one clutch, Nest 18 on NS1, but disappeared after the clutch hatched on May 21. This is the fourth year this female has nested at Bolsa Chica.

A female, YNYB, nested at Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge in 2011 and also NS2 at Bolsa Chica (Nest 57) and hatched 3 chicks from each nest. This bird was banded as a fledgling at HBWWCC in 2010.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 13 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

A male, YNWR, attempted to nest at Bolsa Chica in 2011 (Nest 59) but only one egg was laid and subsequently abandoned. Later tests showed that the egg was sterile. This bird was banded as a fledgling at Bolsa Chica after being raised at HBWWCC in 2010.

A female, YNYW, nested at Bolsa Chica in 2011 (Nest 58) on NS2. This bird was banded as a fledgling at Bolsa Chica after being raised at HBWWCC in 2009. One chick fledged.

Other nesting banded birds included male SKL (Nest 19), female SKM (Nest 13), Male SKM (Nest 26), female SKM (Nest 61), and male with Service band on left leg (Nest 62). SKM banded birds are from Camp Pendleton and SKL bands are from Naval Amphibious Base (NAB) Ocean in San Diego. The following birds were seen for only one or two days and assumed to be in migration: YGBR (7/20), RRAW (7/25, 7/26), BBYG (7/31), GGGR (8/02), NBBB (8/15, 8/16), and YYBO (8/20). Other banded birds were seen but unconfirmed.

A list of birds banded at Bolsa Chica can be found in Appendix 3.

PREDATION

Predators removed from Bolsa Chica are summarized in Table 6. The information was obtained from the annual predator management report (O’Reilly et al. 2011).

Table 6. Bolsa Chica Predator Removal Summary (1999-2011)

Potential Predator 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999

Gull-billed Tern - - - - American Crow 6 5 6 12 10 - 15 99 118 52 80 91 10 America Kestrel 14 2 5 4 4 6 13 19 5 12 13 15 11 Loggerhead Shrike 7 1 - - - 4 1 10 5 3 6 2 5 Common Raven 1 5 5 - 4 2 1 2 4 5 6 3 2 Cooper’s Hawk - 1 - 1 - - 8 ------Peregrine Falcon - - - - 1 ------Red-tailed Hawk 3 - 1 1 ------Gulls - - - 1 7 - 1 ------Skunk ------2 1 - - - - Virginia Opossum - - 1 ------Ground Squirrel 3 * 4 3 * * * * * - - - - Brown Rat - - 1 ------* bait stations used; therefore the number removed is unknown

In 2011 five nests were depredated. The low rate of nest loss and high degree of chick production is normally attributable to the deployment of ME’s. This year all nests predated on NS3 were taken by coyote even though they were protected by an ME. The coyotes were able to dig in the soft sand so that the eggs from the nest rolled down into the created depression and thereby within reach of the coyote (see photo below). This was the highest nest loss since introduction of ME’s to protect plover

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 14 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

nests. Coyotes attempted to dig under other ME’s in the Seasonal Pond cells but were unsuccessful due to the type of cell substrate (see photo). The only other egg loss is one of the eggs from Nest 4 on the East Levee Road and the cause is undocumented. One nest, Nest 23, was attacked by a coyote on NS1 crushing the ME and breaking 2 of 3 eggs after the nest had been abandoned for 5 days (see photo).

Photo by A. Gutierrez Photo by P. Knapp

Two nests covered by ME’s and attacked by coyotes. The left picture is on NS3 where the sand is soft. The coyote was able to depredate the eggs. The right picture was on the hardened salt panne in the Seasonal Ponds and the coyote was unable to dig under the ME and the eggs were protected.

Documentation of chick loss to predators included common raven (Corvus corax), which took three chicks on NS3; red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), which took one chick on NS2; great egret (Ardea alba) that took one chick on NS2; and gull-billed tern (Gelochelidon nilotica), which took six chicks in Cell 11. Two gull-billed terns were present for a short time (observed sporadically between April 25 and May 20). The 3 chicks lost from Nest 14 on NTI were probably taken by gulls after hatching. The remaining chick loss due to predation is undocumented.

Both an adult peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) and a merlin (Falco columbarius) were observed at Bolsa Chica at the beginning of the season but appear to have migrated away from the area without incident. A juvenile peregrine falcon appeared at Bolsa Chica at the end of the breeding season but no snowy plover predation was noted. Black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) were present during all or part of the breeding season but were not suspected predators in 2011.

MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

The 2011 western snowy plover breeding season continued the high nest survival rates which have been experienced since the 2002 breeding season. The high nest survival rates are attributable the use of MEs. However, a number of nests were lost in 2011 even with the use of the ME. This is discussed below. The fledge rate (Table 1) was moderate, with 58 fledglings in the wild and 4 in captivity for a total of 0.85 fledglings/nest. Therefore, management recommendations focus on maintaining existing management actions that have worked in the past as well as taking additional

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 15 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

steps focused on improving nest and fledgling success. The endangered California least tern, which nests in the same locations as the western snowy plover, needs to be considered in all management efforts.

Many recommendations from past years have been implemented with good results. These actions included: 1) placing tiles on the nest sites for the chicks to hide under, both providing protection from predation and a viewing platform for adults; 2) deploying MEs on every snowy plover nest to reduce egg loss due to predation; 3) utilizing drift fences to create dunes and maintain the sand on NS3; 4) continuing weed management on all manmade nest sites; and 5) increasing efforts for predator management over those performed in 2010. These management efforts have been effective in the enhancement of nest sites and improving reproductive success of the snowy plover and should continue. It is also recommended that monitoring continue with the same intensity that has occurred in the past in order to maintain this quality of management within the nest sites.

1. Management of NS1.

NS1 has been plagued with problems that have been difficult to solve. Overcrowding has been a major problem in the past, although the last two years the site has been only lightly used for nesting. This was due to large-scale predation in 2010 and possibly due to predation or weed overgrowth in 2011. Coyotes depredated almost all tern and skimmer nests in 2010 and to prevent this from occurring in 2011 a fence was put in on the south end of the nest site on the West Levee Road. Egg aversion, which has been used in the past, was also implemented on the site during the 2011 nesting season.

The snowy plover nests were protected by the MEs during the egg stage; however, four (33% of nests on NS1) nests were lost during the egg stage. Two nests were abandoned between April 10 and April 15 and two nests were abandoned between May 26 and May 28. The number of chicks lost to predation on NS1 was 75% of those that hatched. The predators were unknown. Without knowing whether the problem is due to aerial predators, coyotes, or other predators it is difficult to develop a management strategy. We recommend that egg aversion begins prior to the nesting season or even continues through the winter to deter both coyote and corvid predators from frequenting the site. We also recommend that the site be patrolled early in the nesting season to identify potential diurnal and nocturnal predators before the problem gets out of control. Coyotes are still entering the site and patrolling the site could also identify their point of entry so that the problem can be rectified.

Weed management still remains a problem on NS1 even after exhaustive efforts were made to remove weeds prior to dispersion of additional seeds. Rainfall was well spaced during late 2010 and early 2011 causing seeds to germinate repeatedly during the winter and early spring. On some man- made nest sites, at other regional locations, annual grading or scraping has been used. This removes all vegetation just prior to the nesting of the California least tern. With no rainfall this eliminates weeds until the next rainy season. This method is required annually and encourages long-term weed growth by disturbing the soil. Grading would need to be completed prior to the nesting of all birds on NS1. The western snowy plover nests two months earlier than the California least tern (early May) and during the past two years snowy plover nesting commenced even earlier: February 23 in 2009 and March 5 in 2010. This timing is still within the rainy season in southern California, therefore the rain has the potential to germinate a new seed bank that would normally stay dormant until the fall.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 16 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

Another method that has been successful at the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station is the use of saltwater irrigation. This method was established following a study that incorporated four different non-native vegetation control methods and a control site (Agri Chemical & Supply 2006). The saltwater irrigation treatment was the most effective in terms of controlling non-native plants and providing a suitable nesting area. This method involves pumping salt water into an irrigation system for about six hours or until the ground is saturated. This is repeated the next day. Saltwater irrigation is very effective at killing annual herbaceous plants and not as effective on iceplant and other invasives that can tolerate high salt content. This two-day process is done prior to the nesting season each year.

It is recommended that a combination of salt water irrigation and the application of herbicide or hand weeding on the more salt tolerant species be considered to control weeds on NS1, as an expansion of the current weed control efforts.

2. Management of NS2.

There were a record number of nests on NS2 in 2011. Thirteen snowy plover nests (four in 2010) and 45 California least tern nests were initiated. The reproductive success for the snowy plover was 0.39 fledglings/nest in 2011 compared to 1.75 fledglings/nest in 2010. For the snowy plover there was no nest predation; however, one nest was abandoned. A total of 32 chicks hatched on NS2. Five of these were documented as fledged. Of the remaining 27, two chicks were predated by known predators (red-tailed hawk and great egret) and two by an unknown predator in Cell 30. The outcome of the remaining 23 chicks is undocumented. It is possible that there were additional fledglings from the site, but accounting for them proved difficult as vegetation cover increased substantially during the season, and the confined configuration of the site itself did not allow for visual separation of the broods. It is known that when feeding at the base of the site at the surrounding water edge there were confrontations between adults with broods. This has led to a conclusion that the site may not be capable of successfully supporting multiple broods simultaneously.

Our management recommendation would be to continue weed management aggressively during the non-breeding season.

3. Management of NS3.

There were a record 16 snowy plover nests on NS3 in 2011, slightly higher than the 14 recorded in 2010. In 2011, coyote depredated five nests, four on a single day and unsuccessful attempts were made on several other nests. Soft sand was placed on the nest site during the winter making the site much more natural looking; however, the soft substrate allowed the coyotes to dig under the ME and in some cases were able to reach the eggs. Unlike NS2 it does not appear that overcrowding is a problem on NS3 because the chicks leave the nest site once they have hatched.

Our management recommendations for this site would be to continue weed management, initiate predator aversion nests prior to nesting season, and to modify the ME design to increase protection in soft sand. In many cases the coyote was able to reach the eggs within the ME by digging in the soft sand, so enlarging the size could prevent the coyote from reaching the eggs.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 17 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

4. Improve water management in the Seasonal Ponds

The Seasonal Ponds are an extremely important foraging and nesting area for the snowy plover. In 2011, 47 of the 62 fledglings (76%) at Bolsa Chica foraged in the seasonal ponds. The other 25% were either raised at the HBWWCC (7%) or other areas of Bolsa Chica (18%). Based upon the recent history of early nest initiations and the fledgling success from those nests it would appear advantageous to have areas within the seasonal ponds managed to support earlier nesting. Currently the Seasonal Ponds are inundated with water and are not really available for nesting until at least mid-April. Due to the early nesting it has become even more important to have a flexible management process for balancing the amount of water in these cells. Improving water management at the Seasonal Ponds has been an issue for several years; however, a number of solutions have been implemented to improve the flow of water out of these cells to make them available for snowy plover nesting and foraging. These include repair of culverts between cells and installation of a permanent pump in Freeman Creek (to which the ponds drain) so that excess storm water can be pumped out to the Full Tidal Basin if excessive shoaling in the basin prevents drainage by gravity. Hopefully this will correct some of the problems below; however, in the spring further assessment should be made of some of the key components of improving water management in the Seasonal Ponds.

Some of the key components that need to be addressed include: 1) removing water from Cell 9; 2) removing water from Cell 22; 3) generating greater flow from Cell 14 into Cell 19.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 18 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 December 2011

REFERENCES

Knapp, P. and B. Peterson. 2010. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2010. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Office. December 2010 26pp.

O’Reilly, K. M., W. L. Ross, and P. L. Knapp. 2011. California Department of Fish and Game Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve California least tern and western snowy plover 2011 breeding season predator management report. December 2011. 7pp.

Roche, E. A., T. W. Todd, A. and F. J. Cuthbert. 2010. Apparent Nest Abandonment as Evidence of Breeding-Season Mortality in Great Lakes Piping Plovers (Charadrius melodus), The Auk Vol. 127, No. 2, pp. 402-410.

Ross, W.L. 2011. Bolsa Chica Wetlands California least tern, western snowy plover, 2011 breeding season predator management report. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 6 pp.

Tucker, M. A. and A. N. Powell. 1999. Snowy Plover diets in 1995 at a Coastal Southern California Breeding Site. Western Birds 30: 44-48.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 19 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011

Appendix 1. Snowy plover eggs laid, chicks hatched, and fledged at Bolsa Chica, 2011 Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings comments 1 NS1 E1 3-16 4-20 3 H 3 0 2 NS1 Y2 3-18 4-22 3 2H1A 2 0 1 egg abandoned, infertile (PK) 3 NS1 M1 3-23 4-10 3 A/H 3 1 3 eggs abandoned, hatched at HBWWCC: 2 chicks died 4 E. LEVEE 3-25 4-25 3 2H1P 2 0 1 egg taken by unknown predator 5 NS1 AA2 3-25 4-24 2 1H1A 1 0 1 egg abandoned, unknown contents 6 CELL 11 4-03 5-01 3 H 3 0 7 NS3 Q 4-06 5-06 3 H 3 0 Chicks predated by raven 8 NS3 W 4-07 5-05 3 H 3 1 9 NS3 R-S 4-08 5-06 3 H 3 0 1 egg hatched late, chick dead in egg 10 NS3 4-09 5-10 3 H 3 0 11 NS1 T1 4-11 4-15 3 A/H 3 3 3 eggs abandoned; hatched at HBWWCC 12 CELL 9 4-16 5-20 3 H 3 1 13 NS3 H 4-17 5-02 3 1H2A 1 0 Female SKL, 2 abandoned eggs; infertile (PK) 14 NTI 4-19 5-12 3 H 3 0 Chicks predated by gulls 15 CELL 11 4-21 5-19 2 H 2 0 16 NS1 C1 4-21 5-19 3 H 3 1 1 egg hatched late; chick dead 17 NS1 J1 4-23 5-15 3 2H1A 2 2 1 egg abandoned; infertile (WFVZ) 18 NS1 V1 4-23 5-21 3 H 3 0 Female WW/YS 19 CELL 10 4-25 5-26 3 H 3 2 Male SKL 20 CELL 14 4-29 5-31 3 2H1A 2 0 1 egg abandoned; infertile (WFVZ) 21 NS1 H1 4-29 5-26 2 A 0 0 22 STI 4-30 5-20 3 2H1A 2 0 2 probable chicks; 1 egg abandoned; contents unknown 23 NS1 B1 5-06 5-28 3 A 0 0 3 fertile eggs (2 PK, 1 WFVZ) 24 STI 5-06 5-30 3 H 3 0 3 probable chicks 25 NS1 L1 5-08 6-05 3 H 3 2 26 CELL 9 5-08 6-08 3 H 3 1 Male SKM 27 NS2 5-09 5-21 3 1H2A 1 0 2 eggs abandoned; contents unknown 28 NS2 5-10 5/28 4 A 0 0 4 eggs abandoned; 3 fertile, 1 fertile (WFVZ)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-1-1 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011

Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings comments 29 NS1 Y1 5-16 6-13 3 H 3 0 30 NS2 5-19 6-15 3 2H1A 2 0 1 egg abandoned; contents solid, status unknown (WFVZ) 31 NS2 5-19 6-15 3 H 3 0 32 NS3 5-25 6-16 3 H 3 2 33 NS3 5-25 6-21 3 P 0 0 Predated by coyote 34 NS3 5-19 6-21 3 H 3 0 35 STI 5-28 6-27 3 H 3 2 36 NS2 5-19 6-20 3 H 3 0 37 NS2 5-25 6-19 3 H 3 0 38 NS2 5-25 6-02 3 H 3 0 39 NS3 5-29 6-25 2 P 0 0 Predated by coyote 40 NS3 A 5-31 6-21 2 P 0 0 Predated by coyote 41 CELL 10 5-31 6-30 3 H 3 3 42 NS2 6-01 6-25 3 H 3 0 43 CELL 45 6-02 7-20 2 S 0 0 2 eggs salvaged; infertile (WFVZ) 44 NS3 V 6-04 7-01 3 H 3 0 45 NS3 5-31 6-25 3 2H1A 2 2 1 egg abandoned; contents solid, status unknown (WFVZ) 46 NS3 6-06 7-02 3 H 3 3 47 NS3 L 6-06 7-02 3 H 3 3 48 NS2 6-02 7-02 3 H 3 2 49 NS2 6-10 6-27 3 H 3 2 Female YS/YW 50 NS3 D 6-10 6-21 3 P 0 0 Predated by coyote 51 CELL 19 6-15 6-20 3 H 3 0 52 NS2 6-22 7-15 2 H 2 0 53 CELL 13 6-22 7-20 3 H 3 2 54 NS3 V 6-28 7-01 3 P 0 0 Predated by coyote 55 CELL 9 6-29 7-26 3 H 3 0 56 CELL 9 6-29 7-24 3 H 2 0 1 egg hatched late, chick dead in egg 57 NS2 6-27 7-20 3 H 3 0

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-1-2 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011

Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings comments 58 NS2 6-28 7-16 3 H 3 1 YNYW female 59 CELL 12 6-29 7-20 1 A 0 0 1 egg abandoned; infertile (WFVZ), YN/WR male 60 CELL 91 6-29 7-22 3 H 3 2 61 CELL 14 7-02 7-27 3 H 3 3 Female SKM 62 CELL 11 7-02 7-29 3 H 3 3 Male S (left leg only) 63 CELL 9 7-02 8-03 3 H 3 3 64 CELL 22 7-04 8-02 2 H 2 0 65 CELL 9 7-06 8-05 3 H 3 2 66 CELL 9 7-06 8-05 2 1H1A 1 1 1 egg abandoned; infertile (WFVZ) 67 CELL 14 7-06 8-01 2 H 2 2 68 CELL 9 7-06 7-26 3 H 3 2 69 CELL 10 7-07 7-30 3 H 3 3 70 CELL 32 7-07 8-19 3 S 0 0 3 eggs salvaged; infertile (WFVZ) 71 CELL 13 7-11 8-05 3 H 3 3 72 CELL 13 7-11 8-06 3 H 3 2 73 CELL 22 7-18 7-28 2 H 2 0

60H, 4A, 207 62 2011 Season Totals 2A/H, 2S, 5P 163 eggs fledglings 73 Nests chicks P = predated; A = abandoned; H – hatched, A/H – abandoned eggs that were salvaged and hatched at HBWWCC, S = sterile eggs. Note: In the Nest Fate column, 2H1A means the nest hatched but only two eggs produced chicks, one egg was abandoned. WFVZ= Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology; PK=Peter Knapp; HBWWCC = Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-1-3 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011

Appendix 2. Distribution of Western Snowy Plover Nests at Bolsa Chica for 1997 through 2011.

Distribution of nests throughout Bolsa Chica Cells eliminated Total # during Seasonal Year Nests restoration Ponds FFTB MTB NTI NS1 NS2 NS3 STI Other 1997 31 14 11 4 2 1998 34 16 15 2 1 1999 38 14 11 11 2 2000 39 11 21 6 1 2001 55 19 29 5 2 2002 50 14 17 19 2003 32 11 9 3 9 2004 65 17 33 10 5 2005 51 6 30 8 7 2006 71 13 13 16 16 1 8 4 2007 50 10 9 19 8 4 2008 67 10 10 37 5 4 1 2009 70 16 9 1 1 32 3 5 3 2010 64 11 4 1 26 4 14 2 2 2011 73 19 7 1 1 12 13 16 3 1

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-2-1 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011

Distribution of Nests by Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Year 2 9 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 19 22 25 30 31 32 33 34 36 45 1997 4 7 1 1 2 1998 2 7 6 1 1 1999 6 5 1 1 5 4 2000 2 6 12 1 1 1 1 3 2001 1 8 11 9 5 2002 1 2 1 10 3 3 5 10 1 2003 6 1 2 2 1 2004 5 12 13 2 1 1 3 1 4 1 2005 1 6 8 12 3 1 4 3 2006 2 6 5 13 2 1 2007 1 6 3 1 3 4 1 2008 2 5 3 4 6 2009 2 6 2 5 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 2010 2 5 3 1 3 1 2011 9 3 3 1 3 3 1 2 1 1

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-2-2 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2011 Appendix 3. Western Snowy Plovers Banded at the Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center. Band Nest Arrived Date Date Last Comment Combination # As Banded Released Observed YNYR 6/2008 6/10/2011 YNWW 6/2008 10/09/10 Observed in San Quintin, YNRW 11 chick 5/20/2009 6/19/2009 1/09/2011 Baja YNYY 11 chick 5/20/2009 6/19/2009 7/13/2009 YNWB 11 chick 5/20/2009 6/19/2009 6/19/2009 YNBW 18 egg 5/20/2009 6/19/2009 6/19/2009 YNBB 18 egg 5/20/2009 6/19/2009 7/28/2009 YNBG 47 egg 7/17/2009 8/8/2009 11/20/2009 YNBR 47 egg 7/17/2009 8/8/2009 2/10/2010 YNGB 48 egg 7/17/2009 8/8/2009 9/14/2009 YNYW 48 egg 7/17/2009 8/8/2009 10/13/2011 YSYW – missing tape injured YNBY juvenile 9/21/2009 9/21/2009 9/21/2009 Nested on Nest 2 in 2010, YNRR sick 9/30/2009 9/30/2009 4/16/2010 assumed depredated YNWG 2 chick 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 YNGR 2 chick 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 YNYB 8 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 12/01/2011 YNYG 8 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 10/18/2010 YSYG – missing tape YNRB 8 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/13/2010 YNRG 13 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/27/2010 YNGG 13 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 6/21/2010 YNGW 14 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 10/24/2011 YSGW – missing tape YNWY 14 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 7/05/2010 YNWR 14 egg 5/19/2010 5/19/2010 8/02/2011 YNGY 37 egg 6/24/2010 7/24/2010 7/24/2010 BBYN 37 egg 6/24/2010 7/24/2010 7/24/2010 BYYN 37 egg 6/24/2010 7/24/2010 12/07/2011 BYYS – missing tape YNRY 3 egg 5/17/2011 6/24/2011 7/25/2011 BRYN 3 egg 5/17/2011 6/27/2011 9/30/2011 BRYS – missing tape BWYN 3 egg 5/17/2011 6/27/2011 6/27/2011 YBYN 11 egg 6/20/2011 6/24/2011 7/06/2011

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-3-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-J. FINAL REPORT WESTERN SNOWY PLOVER NESTING AT BOLSA CHICA, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 2012

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2012

Photo by Peter Knapp

by Peter Knapp* and Bonnie Peterson**

December 2012

* California Department of Fish & Game ** Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction...... 1 Background...... 1 Bolsa Chica Study Area...... 3 Study Methods ...... 6 Protection from Predators...... 6 Results and Discussion ...... 7 Numbers Of Male And Female Snowy Plovers ...... 7 Nest Distribution And Chronologies ...... 8 Eggs, and Chicks, And Fledgling Production...... 9 Brood Tracking...... 11 Observations Of Banded Adults...... 12 Predation...... 12 Management Recommendations...... 13 References...... 16

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Vicinity Map...... 2 Figure 2. Distribution of Western Snowy Plover Nests in 2012 at Bolsa Chica...... 4 Figure 3. Comparison of Number of Western Snowy Plover Hatched Nests, Failed Nests, and Fledglings 1997-2012 at Bolsa Chica...... 10

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Males, Females, Nests and Fledgling Production 1997-2012...... 7 Table 2. 2012 Nest, Nest Fate, and Reproductive Success Distribution by Cell ...... 8

APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Western snowy plover eggs laid, chicks hatched, and fledged at Bolsa Chica, 2012. Appendix 2. Distribution of western snowy plover nests at Bolsa Chica for 1997 through 2012.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. i Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

INTRODUCTION

In 1997, the Bolsa Chica lowlands were acquired into public ownership. This marked the beginning of a multi-agency effort to design, evaluate, and implement a plan for restoring the fish and wildlife habitats. These habitats had been cut off from the ocean for a century and have been an operating oil field for over 50 years. Construction of the restoration project began in fall 2004 and was completed in August 2006. By the 2006 breeding season, three new nest sites were available for nesting and augmented the pre-existing North and South Tern Islands in Inner Bolsa Bay. The new ocean inlet, referred to as the Full Tidal Basin, was opened after the conclusion of the breeding season on August 24, 2006. The Full Tidal Basin is now subject to water level rise and fall that approximates the unequal semi-diurnal tidal range of southern California’s ocean waters. The Muted Tidal Basin was opened to tidal influence from the Full Tidal Basin through its water control structures in March 2008.

The purpose of this investigation is to continue to improve the level of knowledge about the western snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus), a federally listed, threatened species that currently uses Bolsa Chica, and to attempt interim management actions to benefit the reproductive success of this species. This annual study will also aid in documenting achievement levels required to meet the goals of the Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover (USFWS 2007). In addition, this study will aid in assessing the success of the restoration projects and allow for modifications that would enhance utilization and increase reproductive success of the western snowy plover. This annual study was first initiated in 1997. This document reports on the 2012 snowy plover breeding season at Bolsa Chica.

BACKGROUND

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1 Santa Barbara

Los Angeles Huntington Beach

MAP AREA

East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Muted San Diego Outer Pocket Marsh Bolsa Bay West WCS HUNTINGTON BEACH Muted Tidal Basins

Rabbit Island

Central Nest WCS Site 2 Inner Bolsa Bay Full Tidal Basin East WCS Nest Site 1

Freeman Freeman Creek North WCS Tern Island

Future Full Tidal

South Tern Nest Site 3 PACIFIC OCEAN Island

Flood Shoal Maintenance Area Seasonal Ponds

West Muted Tidal Basin Central Muted Tidal Basin East Muted Tidal Basin Ocean Monitoring Program Study Boundary Inlet 0100 200 400 600 800 Meters

Site Locator and Vicinity Map Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Figure 1 Orange County, CA

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

BOLSA CHICA STUDY AREA

The Seasonal Ponds are predominantly salt panne and the most dominant plant species is pickleweed (Sarcocornia pacifica). Portions of the ponds are seasonally inundated with fresh to brackish water that become highly saline as evaporation concentrates the remaining water in diminishing pools over the salt panne. Large portions of Cells 11 and 13 in the Seasonal Ponds were inundated in 2012 and were available for snowy plover nesting for only a portion of the breeding season.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 3 2012 Nest Locations Nest - Unsuccessful Nest Successful (fledged at least 1) Predated or Abandoned q Roads Nest Sites Seasonal Ponds

15 5GCUQPCN2QPFU /WVGF6KFCN$CUKP 23

10 68 8 34 27 30 14 25 44 0GUV 29 55 5KVG 63 50 20 54 67

49 19 '#56.'8''41#& 64 66 36 37 28 7 45 61 31 21 35 26 42 12 32 52 47 43 51 5 53 56 6 57 41 60 59 40

22 (WNN6KFCN$CUKP 9

13 17 33 16 0GUV5KVG24 62 11 4 39 65 56+ 2 18 9'56.'8''41#&

06+ +PPGT$QNUC$C[

6KFCN+PNGV Meters 0100 200 400 600 Figure 2. Western Snowy Plover Nesting Sites Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

The Future Full Tidal Basin lies between the Seasonal Ponds and the Muted Tidal Basin and includes Freeman Creek. These zones are very similar to the Seasonal Ponds and consist mainly of salt panne and pickleweed, although there are some areas that retain water year-round (Cells 30 and 38). Though these areas are mostly unsuitable for nesting the margins were regularly checked for nesting plovers.

The Muted Tidal Basin occupies the northeastern section of Bolsa Chica and is divided into west, central, and east basins. Muted tidal influence was introduced to the west Muted Tidal Basin in March 2008, and later to the central and east basins in March and May 2011, respectively. Due to considerable tidal muting in the Full Tidal Basin, the central and east Muted Tidal Basins were non- tidal in 2012, though water levels were manually adjusted on several occasions for various management purposes. The Muted Tidal Basins are largely inundated, composed of pickleweed, open water, and mudflat, and are generally considered unsuitable for western snowy plover nesting.

NTI and STI are well established, created islands surrounded by the muted tidal waters of Inner Bolsa Bay. The surface is dredge spoil with a developed boundary of intertidal or salt tolerant vegetation. STI is a regular breeding area for California least terns but also has several snowy plover nests per season. NTI has been used primarily by elegant tern (Thalasseus elegans), royal tern (Thalasseus maximus), Caspian tern (Hydroprogne caspia), black skimmers (Rynchops niger), and occasionally by western snowy plovers.

NS1 is a large linear nesting area between Inner Bolsa Bay and the Full Tidal Basin that was built during the creation of the Full Tidal Basin. The surface is dredge spoil that forms a flat surface that extends from the West Levee Rd. toward the basin. The shoreline of the nest site is now under full tidal influence. In 2012 vegetation covered much of the site including beach evening primrose (Camissoniopsis cheiranthifolia), beach sand verbena (Abronia umbellata var. umbellata), red sand verbena (Abronia maritima), saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), alkali heath (Frankenia salina), pickleweed, coastal deerweed (Acmispon glaber var. glaber), five-hook bassia (Bassia hyssopifolia), hottentot-fig (Carpobrotus edulis), crystalline iceplant (Mesembryanthemum crystallinum), and slender-leaved iceplant (Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum). A huge effort was made during the winter and spring to remove much of the non-native vegetation, mostly by use of herbicide and secondarily by physical or manual removal, but the non-natives still persisted in large patches throughout the site during the 2012 nesting season. The northeastern shoreline is becoming more structured, with pickleweed forming in the intertidal zone. Fences have been installed at both ends of the nest site in order to prevent the public from accessing the site and to limit the access of mammalian predators.

NS2 and NS3 are also created sites in Cell 42 and Cell 14, respectively. NS2 is located in the east Muted Tidal Basin and NS3 is within the Seasonal Ponds. These sites were built up with fill and covered with sand. Both nest sites require some weed control. Some chicks on NS2 forage on the site while others are led from the site by the adult by swimming across surrounding water. Chicks on NS3 tend to leave the site immediately after hatching to seek forage in the surrounding seasonal pond cells.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 5 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

STUDY METHODS

The principal survey effort for western snowy plover in 2012 was undertaken by California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) staff member Peter Knapp, with assistance from Ross Griswold, a CDFG volunteer, and Gary Keller, a CDFG staff member. Surveys for nesting western snowy plover begin in February. Surveys were conducted at least twice a week, sometimes 6 or 7 times a week, until the end of August. A monitor was on-site daily; however, not all nest sites were surveyed daily. Rather, fieldwork was concentrated on areas of activity, with a goal of covering the Bolsa Chica survey area once every several days.

A Range-wide, Breeding Season Window Survey was conducted at Bolsa Chica in May 2012. The survey was conducted in the same manner as in previous years and in accordance with the guidelines set out in the Snowy Plover Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2007).

PROTECTION FROM PREDATORS

Once a nest was discovered, a welded wire mini-exclosure (ME) was anchored in place over the top of the nest and left in place until the eggs in the nest hatched. The MEs are 28 inches in width on all four sides and 16 inches in height. These dimensions have proven effective in deterring predation by corvids, gulls, and coyotes (Canis latrans). The use of the ME contributes greatly to the low egg predation at Bolsa Chica. Aversion nests, used to deter coyote and corvid nest predation, were not effectively used during the 2012 breeding season.

Observations were made of potential predators during the surveys. Predator management actions were then enacted commensurate with the threat to snowy plover breeding activity by that specific

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 6 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

predator. Predator management has been a necessary recovery action for the California least tern for decades. In places such as Bolsa Chica where snowy plovers nest in proximity to the least tern, predator management activities on behalf of one species will also benefit the other species. In 2012, predator management was undertaken by Wally Ross of CDFG.

Clay roof tiles are placed on STI, NS1, NS2, and NS3 to provide shelter for young least tern and plover chicks. Adult plovers also use the tiles as a viewing platform for chick movement.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In 2012, the first snowy plover nest was established on March 6 at the cove at the north end of the Full Tidal Basin. There were a total of 68 nests producing 77 fledglings for the season (Table 1).

NUMBERS OF MALE AND FEMALE SNOWY PLOVERS

During May 2012, a Range-wide, Breeding Season Window Survey was conducted. The total number of snowy plovers present at Bolsa Chica was 57 adults: 26 females and 31 males (Table 1). The management goal of the Snowy Plover Recovery Plan for Bolsa Chica is 70 adults.

Table 1. Males, Females, Nests and Fledgling Production 1997-2012. Year Females Males Total Adults Total Nests Fledglings Total Fl/Nest Fl/Male

2012 26 31 57 68 77 1.13 2.48 2011 20 (1 unk) 28 49 73 62 0.85 2.21 2010 22 23 45 64 63 0.98 2.74 2009 25 22 47 70 42-70* 0.60-1.00* 1.91-3.18* 2008 22 28 50 67 57-109* 0.85-1.62* 2.04-3.89* 2007 18 12 30 50 25 0.50 2.08 2006 27 35 62 71 64 0.90 1.83 2005 25 41 66 51 75 1.47 1.83 2004 25 20 45 65 79 1.22 3.95 2003 15 16 31 32 44 1.38 2.75 2002 19 20 39 50 27 0.54 1.35 2001 19 18 37 55 57 1.04 3.17 2000 15 16 31 39 42 1.08 2.63 1999 12 11 32 38 23 0.61 2.09 1998 11 16 27 34 25 0.74 1.56 1997 14 20 34 30 nd nd nd Fl = fledglings, nd = not determined * based on minimum/maximum numbers of fledglings

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 7 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

NEST DISTRIBUTION AND CHRONOLOGIES

Snowy plover utilized all available nest sites at Bolsa Chica in 2012 except STI and NTI. Seasonal Ponds had 34% of all nests, NS1 had 16%, Future Full Tidal Basin had 13%, NS3 had 12%, and NS2 had 9% of all nests (Figure 2, Table 2). Cell 45, immediately adjacent to NS2 in the Muted Tidal Basin, was used for nesting this year, as it was in 2009 and 2011. Cell 40, also in the Muted Tidal Basin, was used for the first time in 2012. Cell 30, for the first time this year, had a confirmed nest. Appendix 1 provides the cell location, start and end dates, nest fates, and eggs and chicks produced for each nest in 2012. Appendix 2 provides information on historical nest distribution.

Table 2. 2012 Nest, Nest Fate, and Reproductive Success Distribution by Cell Nests Hatched Location Total Nests Nests Failed (# chicks) Fledglings Seasonal Ponds: 26 2 24(66) 35 Cell 9 6 0 6(17) 11 Cell 10 4 0 4(12) 10 Cell 11 9 2 7 (19) 8 Cell 12 4 0 4(11) 4 Cell 13 3 0 3(7) 2 Nest Site 1 12 1 11(33) 23 Nest Site 2 7 2 5 (14) 4 Nest Site 3 9 2 7 (19) 7* Future Full Tidal Basin: 10 0 10 (24) 7 Cell 14 2 0 2 (6) 0 Cell 19 3 0 3(8) 0 Cell 22 3 0 3 (8) 6 Cell 30 1 0 1 (2) 1 Cell 32 1 0 1 (2) 1 Road by South Tern Island 1** 0 1 (1) 0 Muted Tidal Basin (Cell 40) 1 0 1(2) 1 80 Road 1 1 0 (0) 0 Full Tidal Basin Cove 1 0 1 (2) 0 Total 68 8 60 (161) 77* * includes bird raised at Huntington Beach Huntington Beach Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center. ** nest not found

In 2012, the first plover nest was initiated March 6. Snowy plover nesting rose to a peak in early May and again in late June (Figure 3). The last known nests hatched during the first week of August (Figure 3). Fifty-nine (85%) nests survived to hatch. There was an active nest and/or a prefledge brood for a total of 175 days of the 2012 breeding season at Bolsa Chica.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 8 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

Figure 3. 1997-2012 Bolsa Chica Active Nest Chronology

EGGS, CHICKS, AND FLEDGLING PRODUCTION

A total of 193 snowy plover eggs were produced at Bolsa Chica in 2012, with 32 eggs abandoned, predated or failed to hatch, and the remaining eggs producing 161 chicks. Of these 161 total chicks produced in 2012, 77 survived to fledge (Table 2, Figure 4). Of the chicks hatched, 24 (15%) died within the first day of hatching and 41 (25%) died within the first week of hatching. Conversely, of the chicks that perished, 29% died within the first day and 49% died within the first week. The causes of death were unknown.

Of the 68 nests found in 2012, five were found as broods only and the nest were not located including Nest 38 with 2 chicks, Nests 46, 65, and 69 with 3 chicks each, and Nest 58 with 1 chick. The remaining 63 nests were judged to be complete. Nine completed clutches were 2-egg clutches, one clutch was 4 eggs, and 53 were 3-egg clutches (Appendix 1).

Eight nests were abandoned. The cause of abandonment of Nests 1, 20, 24, 30, 34, and 35 is undocumented. Incubation of these nests was 20, 16, 14, 16, 3, and 9 days, respectively. Nest 61 located on Cell 11 was abandoned due to flooding. Cell 11 had dried up and cracked in the area where the nest was located; however, this was followed by ground water seeping up through the ground and filling the cracks with standing water causing the nest to flood. Nest 7 was classified as abandoned when eggs were collected from the nest after an abnormally long incubation period of 44 days. This is the sixth instance of prolonged abnormal incubation periods; in 2009 there were two nests, one nest in 2010, and two nests in 2011.

Only one nest was predated in 2012. In Cell 11 a coyote was able to dig under the ME at Nest 42 and remove the eggs. Additional attempts were made by coyote on Nests 44, 47, 50, 53, 54, 64, and 67, all of which were unsuccessful. Each of these nests successfully hatched full clutches.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 9 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

* no fledgling data available ** based on the minimum number of fledglings Figure 4. Comparison of Number of Western Snowy Plover Hatched Nests, Failed Nests, and Fledglings 1997-2012 at Bolsa Chica.

For the second time at Bolsa Chica 28 unhatched eggs were salvaged and given to the Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology (WFVZ) for analysis of sterility. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 3 on the following page.

Two chicks from Nest 31 were orphaned after hatching due to parent desertion and were salvaged by Peter Knapp and taken to the Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center of Orange County (WWCCOC). The third chick from Nest 31 was never found. One of the chicks survived to fledge and was banded and released at Bolsa Chica on July 21. The band combination was YNRR. To aid in the release of the fledgling, a temporary shelter or halfway house was built to provide shelter to the young bird while it familiarized itself with its surroundings. The shelter consisted of a framed wire cage that was open at both ends. It was placed over a small amount of pickleweed to offer the young fledgling some cover while inside the shelter. This shelter was first used in 2010 and appears to have increased the survival of these hand-reared fledglings.

Of the 68 nests at Bolsa Chica in 2012, a total of 77 fledglings were produced. The overall fledge rate was 1.13 fledglings/nest. NS1 was the most successful nesting area with 1.92 fledglings/nest. This is a major increase from 2011 when the fledge rate was to 0.41 fledglings/nest. The number of nests on NS1 has decreased from a high of 37 nests in 2008 to 12 nests in 2012. NS2, which had a record 13 nests in 2011, had 7 nests in 2012. In 2011 NS2 had a fledglings/nest rate of 0.38 and in 2012 it was 0.57. Crowding by other snowy plover broods is believed to have had a negative effect on reproductive success on NS2. This site could possibly support two or at most three broods at one time. NS3 had fledglings/nest rate of 0.67 in 2012. Broods from nests on NS3 left the site and foraged in the Seasonal Ponds. The Seasonal Ponds had a fledge rate of 1.35 fledglings/nest.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 10 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

Table 3. Results of Analysis by the Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology of Abandoned Snowy Plover Eggs. Eggs Nest Clutch Eggs abandoned Notes Results from WFVZ # size hatched (collected) Large embryo, rotten 1 3 0 1 Normal incubation shells, very weak Long incubation, incubated No development, shells 7 3 0 3 for 44 days weak. Normal incubation, one egg 8 3 2 1 No development, infertile did not hatched Incubated 16 days and 20 3 0 3 Large embryos abandoned 24 3 0 1 Abandoned Large embryos 1 large embryo, 2 no 30 3 0 3 Incubated for 17 days development Two large embryos, one 34 3 0 3 Abandoned infertile Abandoned after 10 days, no 35 3 0 3 No development development 36 4 1 3 Incubated 26 days Medium development 49 3 2 1 Incubated 26 days Medium development 60 3 2 1 Incubated 27 days No development, infertile 61 2 0 2 Abandoned after 7 days No development

BROOD TRACKING

Due to the chronological and geographic spacing of each brood, it is usually possible to locate and identify individual broods over the period before they fledge and it is these observations that are the basis for determining fledgling success. As generally seen in prior years, in 2012 each brood tended to stay together and the males prevented overlap or co-mingling with other broods. There were confrontations between the males if the broods wandered too close together or tried to take advantage of the same resources. This was apparent on NS2.

Broods hatched from NS3 relocated within days to locations within the Seasonal Ponds to seek food. Snowy plovers readily used the roads of Bolsa Chica to cover distances of 1/3 to 3/4 mile. In the Seasonal Ponds, broods would move about or change cells but could generally be identified. More than one cell may be used by a brood and often a brood will travel to another cell within one or two days of hatching. As an example, although there were only seven nests that hatched in Cell 11 in 2012, at least 8 broods not hatched from Cell 11 also used this cell for foraging.

Nests 62 and 65 on NS1 hatched three chicks each at about the same time in late July. The brood from Nest 65 was soon observed with only two chicks and the brood from Nest 62 with four chicks. Since there were no other nests or broods on NS1 during this period it appears the fourth chick in brood 62 was adopted from the brood from Nest 65. These broods were normally separated by 800 feet. There were six fledglings from these two broods.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 11 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

OBSERVATIONS OF BANDED ADULTS

A female, WWYY (assumed lost tape on lower right leg making it WWYS, S=Service band missing yellow tape), was banded as an adult at the South Spit, Humboldt Bay in 2006, had two clutches; one at Nest 13 on NS1 which had two fledges and a second on Nest 64 in Cell 19 that was unsuccessful. This is the fifth year this female has nested at Bolsa Chica.

A female, YNYB, hatched 3 chicks from Nest 47 in Cell 11. This bird was banded as a fledgling at Bolsa Chica after being raised at WWCCOC in 2010.

A male, YNWR, attempted to nest at Bolsa Chica in 2011 and 2012, but a nest was never located. This bird was banded as a fledgling at Bolsa Chica after being raised at WWCCOC in 2010.

A female, YNYW, nested at Bolsa Chica in 2011 and was observed during the winter and early spring but was not observed nesting in 2012.

A female, NBGG, nested at NS1 on Nest 24. This nest was unsuccessful and abandoned. The eggs were fertile and the cause of abandonment is unknown. This female was seen at Bolsa Chica State Beach in the fall of 2012. This bird was banded at Vandenberg Air Force Base in 2011.

PREDATION

Last year, in 2011, five nests were predated. This year, 2012, only one nest, Nest 42, was predated, in Cell 11 by a coyote despite being protected by an ME. The coyote was able to dig up the substrate and the eggs rolled from the nest into the dig. The low rate of nest loss and high degree of chick production is normally attributable to the deployment of MEs.

Photo by P. Knapp

Nest 50 after an unsuccessful coyote attack under the ME. The snowy plover returned to incubate eggs after the attack.

Photo by P. Knapp

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 12 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

One adult was predated at Nest 39 on NS1 and was found deceased inside the ME. Three chicks from this nest, age 1 day, were missing and assumed to have been predated by the same unknown predator. There was no evidence of cause of mortality or identity of predator.

Eight other nests in the Seasonal Ponds were unsuccessfully attacked by coyote. These include Nests 67, 53, and 47 in Cell 11; Nests 44, 50, 54, and 55 in Cells 12; and Nest 64 in Cell 19. All of the nests were protected by MEs and eventually hatched. See photo of Nest 50 in Cell 12 on previous page.

Both an adult peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) and a merlin (Falco columbarius) were observed at Bolsa Chica at the beginning of the season but appear to have Photo by P. Knapp migrated away from the area without incident. A juvenile peregrine Nest 42 predated by coyotes in Cell 11 falcon appeared at Bolsa Chica at the end of the breeding season but no snowy plover predation was noted. Black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) were present during all or part of the breeding season but were not suspected predators in 2012.

MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS/ACTION ITEMS

The 2012 western snowy plover breeding season continued the high nest survival rates which have been experienced since the 2002 breeding season. The high nest survival rates are attributable to the use of MEs. Therefore, management recommendations focus on maintaining existing management actions that have worked in the past, as well as taking additional steps focused on improving fledgling success. The endangered California least tern, which nests in the same locations as the western snowy plover, needs to be considered in all management efforts.

Many recommendations from past years have been implemented with good results. These actions included: 1) placing tiles on the nest sites for the chicks to hide under, both providing protection from predation and a viewing platform for adults; 2) deploying MEs on every snowy plover nest to reduce egg loss due to predation; 3) utilizing drift fences to create dunes and maintain the sand on NS3; and 4) continuing weed management on all manmade nest sites. These management efforts have been effective in the enhancement of nest sites and improving reproductive success of the snowy plover and should continue. It is also recommended that monitoring continue with the same intensity that has occurred in the past in order to maintain this quality of management within the nest sites.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 13 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

1. Management of NS1.

NS1 has been plagued with problems that have been difficult to solve. Overcrowding has been a major problem in the past although in the last two years the site has been only lightly used for nesting by large terns. This was due to large-scale predation in 2010 and possibly due to predation or weed overgrowth in 2011. Coyotes predated almost all tern nests in 2012. Coyote predation did not appear to affect plover breeding activity on NS1 in 2012.

During the 2012 fall season vegetation was removed mechanically from large sections of NS1 and refurbished with fresh sand. This should substantially restore the site to unvegetated habitat for the snowy plovers and least terns for the 2013 breeding season.

Coyote predation of least tern eggs and chicks in 2012 on NS1 was the primary cause of an unsuccessful breeding season for the terns. The barriers to coyote entry onto the site include chain link fencing at the north and south ends of the peninsula-like site and water on either side of the site. Planned additions of chain link fencing will hopefully deter some entry, although coyote are adept swimmers. Further use of aversion nests during the winter of 2012/2013 will hopefully deter coyotes from seeing NS1 as a food source.

2. Management of NS2.

After a record number of 13 nests on NS2 in 2011 with only 0.39 fledglings/nest, there were seven nests with 0.57 fledgling/nest in 2012. Possible confrontations between broods feeding at the base of the site have led to the conclusion that the site may not be capable of successfully supporting more than two or three broods simultaneously.

Weed management is required on this site during the non-breeding season. To this end, a pilot program is planned for the 2012/2013 winter season to treat the site with salt water. This method has been successful at Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station in controlling non-native vegetation. The method was established following a study that incorporated four different non-native vegetation control methods and a control site (Agri Chemical & Supply 2006). Saltwater irrigation treatment was the most effective in terms of controlling non-native plants and providing a suitable nesting area. This method involves pumping salt water into an irrigation system for about six hours or until the ground is saturated. This is repeated the next day. Saltwater irrigation is very effective at killing annual herbaceous plants and not as effective on iceplant and other invasive plants that can tolerate high salt content. This two-day process is done prior to the nesting season each year.

3. Management of NS3.

There were a record 16 snowy plover nests on NS3 in 2011, slightly higher than the 14 recorded in 2010, and decreasing to 9 in 2012. In 2011, coyotes predated five nests, four on a single day and unsuccessful attempts were made on several other nests. In 2012 there were no snowy plover nests predated by coyote on this nest site; however, two nests were abandoned and there were repeated signs that coyote had been visiting the site. The California least tern continues to loose nests on NS3 due to their lack of protection from the coyote during nesting.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 14 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

Plans are now in place to fence the entire nest site. Fencing can often lead to increased predation by raptors and corvids that are allowed to perch above the nest site and wait for movement that would indicate a nest or chicks. This should not be the case at NS3 due to the elevated nature of the site. The fence would be placed at the bottom of the slope and would not rise above the nesting plateau that is used by both least terns and snowy plover for nesting.

4. Improve water management in the Seasonal Ponds

The Seasonal Ponds are an extremely important foraging and nesting area for the snowy plover. In 2012, 48 of the 77 fledglings (62%) at Bolsa Chica foraged in the Seasonal Ponds. Based upon the recent history of early nest initiations and the fledgling success from those nests it would appear advantageous to have areas within the Seasonal Ponds managed to support earlier nesting. Currently the Seasonal Ponds are inundated with water and are not really available for nesting until at least mid-April. Due to the early nesting it has become even more important to have a flexible management process for balancing the amount of water in these cells. Improving water management at the Seasonal Ponds has been an issue for several years; however, a number of solutions have been implemented to improve the flow of water out of these cells to make them available for snowy plover nesting and foraging. These include repair of culverts between cells and installation of a permanent pump in Freeman Creek (to which the ponds drain) so that excess storm water can be pumped out to the Full Tidal Basin.

From the middle of the 2012 nesting season, apparent increases in the fresh water levels in Cell 11 promoted unusual freshwater marsh vegetation growth. One method to control this growth is provided for in the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Water Management Plan: Seasonal Ponds and Freeman Creek Water Management Unit (M&A 2011). This requires management to introduce salt water into the Seasonal Ponds beginning immediately after the close of the breeding season. This normally would begin in September. In 2012 the first use of this method began in October. The success or failure of this method in inhibiting additional growth will be evaluated in 2013.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 15 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012 December 2012

REFERENCES

Knapp, P. and B. Peterson. 2011. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2011. A report for the Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Office. December 2011. 26pp.

Merkel & Associates (M&A) 2011. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Water Management Plan: Seasonal Ponds and Freeman Creek Water Management Unit. Prepared for the California State Lands Commission as part of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Operations and Maintenance Manual prepared by Moffatt & Nichol.

Tucker, M. A. and A. N. Powell. 1999. Snowy Plover diets in 1995 at a Coastal Southern California Breeding Site. Western Birds 30: 44-48.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 16 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012

Appendix 1. Snowy plover eggs laid, chicks hatched, and fledged at Bolsa Chica, 2012 Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings comments 1 FTB Cove 3-06 4-06 3 A 0 0 eggs abandoned; large embryos (WFVZ) 2 NS1 BB2 3-19 4-23 3 H 3 3 4 NS1 Y2 3-27 4-29 3 H 3 2 5 CELL 11 3-30 5-04 3 H 3 3 6 CELL 9 4-03 5-05 3 H 3 1 7 NS3 B3 4-05 5-27 3 S 0 0 incubated 44 days; no development, shells weak (WFVZ) 8 CELL 22 4-06 4-30 3 2H1A 2 2 Collected 1 egg; infertile (WFVZ) 9 CELL 10 4-06 5-10 3 H 3 2 10 CELL 22 4-07 5-08 3 H 3 2 11 NS1 L1 4-09 5-12 3 H 3 2 12 NS3 G 4-10 5-08 3 H 3 1 13 NS1 F1 4-10 5-14 3 H 3 2 Female was WW:YS 14 NS2 C2 4-15 5-17 3 H 3 1 15 CELL 40 4-15 5-16 2 H 2 1 16 NS1 H1 4-17 5-04 3 H 3 1 Female was YN:RY 17 NS1 C2 4-17 5-11 3 H 3 2 18 NS1 T1 4-20 5-18 3 H 3 2 19 CELL 13 4-22 5-22 2 H 2 2 Collected 3 eggs after abandoned; 3 large embryos 20 80 ROAD 4-23 5-18 3 A 0 0 (WFVZ) 21 NS3 C1 4-24 6-05 3 H 3 0 1 dead chick and 1 dead chick in egg 22 CELL 10 4-28 5-28 3 H 3 3 23 CELL 22 5-01 6-03 3 H 3 2 Collected 3 eggs after abandoned; two large embryos, one 24 NS1 M2 5-03 6-06 3 A 0 0 infertile 25 NS2 5-04 5-31 3 H 3 0 26 CELL 11 5-04 5-25 3 H 3 2 27 CELL 30 5-05 5-09 3 2H1A 2 1 Collected 1 egg

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-1-1 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012

Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings comments 28 NS3 B1 5-07 5-30 3 H 3 2 29 NS2 A1 5-09 6-06 3 H 3 2 Collected 3 eggs after abandoned; one large embryo, 2 30 NS2 D1 5-06 5-31 3 A 0 0 infertile (WFVZ) 31 NS3 F 5-09 6-06 3 H 3 1 2 chicks died, one fledged 32 NS3 D2 5-09 6-05 3 H 3 0 2 dead chicks 33 NS1 J2 5-09 5-19 3 H 3 3 Collected 3 eggs after abandoned; two large embryos, one 34 5-16 5-31 3 A 0 0 NS2 G1 infertile (WFVZ) 35 NS3 B6 5-17 5-31 3 A 0 0 Collected 3 eggs after abandoned; no development 36 NS3 5-20 6-20 4 1H3A 1 0 Collected 3 eggs after abandoned; medium development 37 NS3 A6 5-24 6-19 3 H 3 3 38 CELL 13? 5-24 5-24 2 H 2 0 Found brood in Cell 13; nest location unknown 39 NS1 Y2 5-22 6-22 3 H 3 0 40 CELL 10 6-04 6-23 3 H 3 2 41 CELL 9 6-04 6-29 3 H 3 3 42 CELL 11 6-04 7-02 2 P 0 0 Coyote dug under ME and removed eggs 43 CELL 11 6-04 6-25 3 H 3 1 44 CELL 12 6-04 6-25 3 H 3 1 45 CELL 13 6-05 6-23 3 H 3 0 46 CELL 9 6-06 6-06 3 H 3 3 Found brood in Cell 9; Nest location unknown 47 CELL 11 6-05 7-04 3 H 3 0 Male was YN:YB 48 CELL 10 6-07 6-16 3 2H1A 2 0 49 CELL 19 6-07 7-02 3 H 3 2 Collected 1 egg; medium development (WFVZ) 50 CELL 12 6-07 7-06 2 H 2 2 51 CELL 14 6-08 7-05 3 H 3 0 52 CELL 14 6-08 7-07 3 H 3 0 53 CELL 11 6-08 7-12 2 H 2 1 54 CELL 12 6-12 7-12 3 H 3 1

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-1-2 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012

Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings comments 55 CELL 12 6-16 7-11 3 H 3 0 56 CELL 9 6-17 7-03 3 H 3 0 57 CELL 11 6-23 7-20 2 H 2 0 ROAD by 58 6-24 6-24 1 H 1 0 Found brood on road; nest location unknown STI 59 CELL 9 6-25 7-05 3 H 3 2 60 CELL 9 6-25 7-22 3 2H1A 2 2 Collected 1 egg; infertile (WFVZ) Water flooded nest; collected 2 eggs after abandoned; no 61 CELL 11 6-26 7-04 2 A 0 0 development 62 NS1 J1 6-26 7-23 3 H 3 3 63 NS2 6-26 7-20 2 H 2 1 64 CELL 19 6-29 7-29 3 H 3 0 Female was WW:YS Found brood on NS1; nest location unknown: 65 NS1 N1 6-30 6-30 3 H 3 0 Female was YN:RY 66 CELL 19 7-05 8-02 3 H 3 0 67 CELL 11 7-06 7-29 3 H 3 1 68 CELL 32 7-07 8-03 2 H 2 0 69 NS2 7-18 7-18 3 H 3 0 Found brood on NS2; nest location unknown

59H, 7A, 1S, 193 77 2012 Season Totals 1P 161 eggs fledglings 68 Nests chicks P = predated; A = abandoned; H – hatched, A/H – abandoned eggs that were salvaged and hatched at WWCCOC, S = sterile eggs. Note: In the Nest Fate column, 2H1A means the nest hatched but only two eggs produced chicks, one egg was abandoned. WFVZ= Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology; PK=Peter Knapp; WWCCOC = Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center of Orange County

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-1-3 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012

Appendix 2. Distribution of Western Snowy Plover Nests at Bolsa Chica for 1997 through 2012.

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-2-1 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2012

Distribution of Nests by Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Year 2 9 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 19 22 25 30 31 32 33 34 36 40 45 1997 4 7 1 1 2 1998 2 7 6 1 1 1999 6 5 1 1 5 4 2000 2 6 12 1 1 1 1 3 2001 1 8 11 9 5 2002 1 2 1 10 3 3 5 10 1 2003 6 1 2 2 1 2004 5 12 13 2 1 1 3 1 4 1 2005 1 6 8 12 3 1 4 3 2006 2 6 5 13 2 1 2007 1 6 3 1 3 4 1 2008 2 5 3 4 6 2009 2 6 2 5 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 2010 2 5 3 1 3 1 2011 9 3 3 1 3 3 1 2 1 1 2012 6 4 9 4 3 2 3 3 1 1 1

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-2-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 1-K. FINAL REPORT WESTERN SNOWY PLOVER NESTING AT BOLSA CHICA, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 2013

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California 2013 3KRWRE\3HWHU.QDSS E\3HWHU.QDSS DQG%RQQLH3HWHUVRQ 'HFHPEHU &DOLIRUQLD'HSDUWPHQWRI)LVK :LOGOLIH 0HUNHO $VVRFLDWHV,QF Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS

,QWURGXFWLRQ %DFNJURXQG %ROVD&KLFD6WXG\$UHD 6WXG\0HWKRGV 3URWHFWLRQIURP3UHGDWRUV 5HVXOWVDQG'LVFXVVLRQ 1XPEHUV2I0DOH$QG)HPDOH6QRZ\3ORYHUV 1HVW'LVWULEXWLRQ$QG&KURQRORJLHV 1HVW6LWH6HOHFWLRQ (JJV&KLFNV$QG)OHGJOLQJ3URGXFWLRQ %URRG7UDFNLQJ 2EVHUYDWLRQV2I%DQGHG$GXOWV 3UHGDWLRQ 0DQDJHPHQW5HFRPPHQGDWLRQV$FWLRQ,WHPV 5HIHUHQFHV

LIST OF FIGURES

)LJXUH9LFLQLW\0DS )LJXUH'LVWULEXWLRQRI:HVWHUQ6QRZ\3ORYHU1HVWVLQDW%ROVD&KLFD )LJXUH%ROVD&KLFD$FWLYH1HVW&KURQRORJ\ )LJXUH&RPSDULVRQRI1XPEHURI:HVWHUQ6QRZ\3ORYHU+DWFKHG1HVWV)DLOHG1HVWVDQG)OHGJOLQJV DW%ROVD&KLFD

LIST OF TABLES

7DEOH0DOHV)HPDOHV1HVWVDQG)OHGJOLQJ3URGXFWLRQ 7DEOH1HVW1HVW)DWHDQG5HSURGXFWLYH6XFFHVV'LVWULEXWLRQE\&HOO 7DEOH5HVXOWVRI$QDO\VLVE\WKH:HVWHUQ)RXQGDWLRQRI9HUWHEUDWH=RRORJ\ :)9= RI$EDQGRQHGRU 6WHULOH6QRZ\3ORYHU(JJV APPENDICES

$SSHQGL[:HVWHUQVQRZ\SORYHUHJJVODLGFKLFNVKDWFKHGDQGIOHGJHGDW%ROVD&KLFD $SSHQGL['LVWULEXWLRQRIZHVWHUQVQRZ\SORYHUQHVWVDW%ROVD&KLFDIRUWKURXJK

Merkel & Associates, Inc. i Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

INTRODUCTION

%ROVD&KLFDLVDFRDVWDOORZODQGDUHDEHWZHHQWZRPHVDVWKH%ROVD&KLFD0HVDDQGWKH+XQWLQJWRQ %HDFK0HVDLQ2UDQJH&RXQW\&DOLIRUQLD )LJXUH %ROVD&KLFDZKLFKDFHQWXU\DJRZDVXQGHU IXOOWLGDOLQIOXHQFHKDVVWDUWHGWRFRPHIXOOFLUFOH2YHU\HDUVDJR%ROVD&KLFDZDVGLNHGRII IURPGLUHFWWLGDOLQIOXHQFHEXWUHPDLQHGEHORZPHDQVHDOHYHOEHFRPLQJLQIOXHQFHGE\IUHVKZDWHU DQGDFWHGDVDVXPSIRUORFDOGUDLQDJH,QUHVWRUDWLRQEHJDQRQWKH6WDWH¶V(FRORJLFDO5HVHUYH DQGPXWHGWLGDOLQIOXHQFHZDVUHVWRUHGWRWKH,QQHU%ROVD%D\DUHD$WWKDWWLPHWZRVPDOOLVODQGV 1RUWK 7HUQ ,VODQG DQG 6RXWK 7HUQ ,VODQG ZHUH FUHDWHG IRU QHVWLQJ &DOLIRUQLD OHDVW WHUQ Sternula antillarum browni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¶VRFHDQZDWHUV7KH0XWHG7LGDO%DVLQZDV RSHQHG WR WLGDO LQIOXHQFH IURP WKH )XOO 7LGDO %DVLQ WKURXJK LWV ZDWHU FRQWURO VWUXFWXUHV LQ 0DUFK 7KHSXUSRVHRIWKLVLQYHVWLJDWLRQLVWRFRQWLQXHWRLPSURYHWKHOHYHORINQRZOHGJHDERXWWKHZHVWHUQ VQRZ\SORYHU Charadrius nivosus nivosus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

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1 Santa Barbara

Los Angeles Huntington Beach

MAP AREA

East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Muted San Diego Outer Pocket Marsh Bolsa Bay West WCS HUNTINGTON BEACH Muted Tidal Basins

Rabbit Island

Central Nest WCS Site 2 Inner Bolsa Bay Full Tidal Basin East WCS Nest Site 1

Freeman Freeman Creek North WCS Tern Island

Future Full Tidal

South Tern Nest Site 3 PACIFIC OCEAN Island

Flood Shoal Maintenance Area Seasonal Ponds

West Muted Tidal Basin Central Muted Tidal Basin East Muted Tidal Basin Ocean Monitoring Program Study Boundary Inlet 0100 200 400 600 800 Meters

Site Locator and Vicinity Map Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Figure 1 Orange County, CA

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

%RWKVH[HVLQFXEDWHWKHHJJVIRUDQDYHUDJHRIGD\V6QRZ\SORYHUVZLOOUHQHVWDIWHUORVVRID FOXWFKRUEURRG6QRZ\SORYHUFKLFNVDUHSUHFRFLDODQGOHDYHWKHQHVWZLWKLQKRXUVRIKDWFKLQJLQ VHDUFK RI IRRG 7KH WHQGLQJ DGXOW V SURYLGH GDQJHU ZDUQLQJV WKHUPRUHJXODWLRQ DVVLVWDQFH DQG JXLGHWKHFKLFNVWRIRUDJLQJDUHDVEXWGRQRWSURYLGHIRRGWRWKHLUFKLFNV%URRGVUDUHO\VWD\LQWKH LPPHGLDWHDUHDRIWKHQHVW

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 3 Status Nest - Unsuccessful Nest Successfull (fledged at least 1 chick) Predated or Abandoned q Roads Nest Sites Seasonal Ponds

5GCUQPCN2QPFU 14 /WVGF6KFCN$CUKP /WVGF6KFCN$CUKP 55

57 25 43 0GUV 13 52 45 22 5KVG 63 47 31 19

26 59

0GUV '#56.'8''41#& 30 16 7 49 5KVG 20 5 44 17 24 18 41 21 37 36 61 48 51 32 10 4 1 56 62 50 54 (WNN6KFCN$CUKP 58 65 46 6 12 42 15 53 11 60

27 38 0GUV5KVG 9 3 35 64 34 28 8 39 40 29 23 2 33 9'56.'8''41#& 56+

06+ +PPGT$QNUC$C[

6KFCN+PNGV Meters 0100 200 400 600 Figure 2. Western Snowy Plover Nesting Sites Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

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halasseus elegans UR\DO WHUQ Thalasseus maximus &DVSLDQWHUQ Hydroprogne caspia EODFNVNLPPHUV Rynchops niger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bronia umbellata YDUumbellate DQDWLYHSHUHQQLDODQGILYHKRRNEDVVLD Bassia hyssopifolia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

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 5 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

3XEOLFDFFHVVLVQRWDOORZHGRQDQ\RIWKHQHVWVLWHV7KHKXPDQSUHVHQFHLQWKHVWXG\DUHDLVPRVWO\ UHODWHGWRWKHRSHUDWLRQRIWKHRLOILHOGFRQVLVWLQJRIODUJHDQGVPDOORLOVHUYLFHYHKLFOHVDQGVPDOO ZRUNFUHZVDORQJWKHURDGVDQGZHOOSDGV

STUDY METHODS 7KH SULQFLSDO VXUYH\ HIIRUW IRU ZHVWHUQ VQRZ\ SORYHU LQ ZDV XQGHUWDNHQ E\ &DOLIRUQLD 'HSDUWPHQW RI )LVK :LOGOLIH &'): VWDII PHPEHU 3HWHU .QDSS ZLWK DVVLVWDQFH IURP 5RVV *ULVZROGD&'):YROXQWHHUDQG*DU\.HOOHUD&'):VWDIIPHPEHU 6XUYH\VZHUHFRQGXFWHG GDLO\E\RQHRUPRUHLQGLYLGXDOVEHJLQQLQJLQPLG)HEUXDU\DQGFRQWLQXHXQWLOWKHHQGRI$XJXVW (DFKQHVWZDVFKHFNHGGDLO\IURPDGLVWDQFHWRHQVXUHWKDWLWZDVVWLOODFWLYH 7KHDFFHVVLELOLW\DQGVL]HRIHDFKQHVWLQJVLWHGLFWDWHGVXUYH\PHWKRGV67,DQG16ZHUHVXUYH\HG E\YHKLFOHIURPWKH:HVW/HYHH5RDGSULRUWRDUULYDORIWKH&DOLIRUQLDOHDVWWHUQVDQGWKHQRQIRRW RQFHQHVWLQJZDVLQLWLDWHG17,ZDVXVHGSULPDULO\E\QHVWLQJODUJHWHUQVDQGEODFNVNLPPHUDQG WKHUHIRUHUHTXLUHGPLQLPDOPRQLWRULQJIRUZHVWHUQVQRZ\SORYHU2EVHUYDWLRQVRIWKLVQHVWLQJVLWH ZHUHPDGHIURPWKH:HVW/HYHH5RDG16ZDVVXUYH\HGE\YHKLFOHIURPWKH(DVW/HYHH5RDG XVLQJ D VSRWWLQJ VFRSH ZLWK RFFDVLRQDO VXUYH\ HIIRUWV RFFXUULQJ RQ IRRW 16 ZDV VXUYH\HG E\ YHKLFOHIURPWKHQRUWKHQGRIWKHVLWH7KHODUJHPDMRULW\RIVXLWDEOHZHVWHUQVQRZ\SORYHUQHVWLQJ KDELWDWLQWKH6HDVRQDO3RQGVZDVYLVLEOHIURPWKHURDGQHWZRUN7KHUHIRUHWKHREVHUYHU V ZRXOG VORZO\GULYHDORQJWKHURDGVWKDWVXEGLYLGHWKLVDUHD)UHTXHQWVWRSVZHUHPDGHWRH[DPLQHVSHFLILF DUHDVDGMDFHQWWRWKHURDGZLWKELQRFXODUVRUVSRWWLQJVFRSHZLWKRXWH[LWLQJWKHYHKLFOH 'XULQJHDFKVXUYH\IRUZHVWHUQVQRZ\SORYHUREVHUYHUVGRFXPHQWHGWKHORFDWLRQRIDQ\QHZQHVWV 1616DQG16ZHUHVHFWLRQHGE\PDUNHUVZKLFKIRUPHGWKHEDVLVIRUGDWDUHFRUGLQJ16LV VLJQLILFDQWO\ODUJHUWKDQWKHRWKHUWZRQHVWVLWHVWKHUHIRUH16ZDVVHFWLRQHGVRXWKWRQRUWKIURP$ WKRXJK&&LQDUHJXODUJULG(DFKVQRZ\SORYHUQHVWORFDWHGGXULQJVXUYH\HIIRUWVZDVPDUNHGZLWK D QXPEHUHG WRQJXH GHSUHVVRU PDSSHG IRU HDVH RI UHORFDWLRQ RQ VXEVHTXHQW YLVLWV DQG D PLQL H[FORVXUH 0( ZDVSODFHGRQWKHQHVW 2QDOOVLWHVLWZDVXVXDOO\SRVVLEOHWRIROORZWKHPRYHPHQWVDQGGHWHUPLQHWKHIDWHRIFKLFNVRIHDFK EURRGVLQFHWKHUHZDVGLVSHUVLRQRYHUVSDFHDQGWLPHVXIILFLHQWWRGLIIHUHQWLDWHEHWZHHQEURRGV,QD IHZ FDVHV EDQGHG DGXOWV LGHQWLILHG VSHFLILF EURRGV %URRGV ZHUH REVHUYHG GDLO\ 7KHVH UHJXODU EURRGREVHUYDWLRQVZHUHFRQGXFWHGWRGHWHUPLQHFKLFNVXUYLYDODQGIOHGJOLQJSURGXFWLRQDVZHOODV WRGHWHFWPRYHPHQWEHWZHHQFHOOVDQGXVHRIVSHFLILFFHOOVIRUEURRGUHDULQJ $UDQJHZLGH%UHHGLQJ6HDVRQ:LQGRZ6XUYH\ZDVFRQGXFWHGDW%ROVD&KLFDLQ0D\7KH VXUYH\ZDVFRQGXFWHGLQWKHVDPHPDQQHUDVLQSUHYLRXV\HDUVDQGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKHJXLGHOLQHV VHWRXWLQWKH6QRZ\3ORYHU5HFRYHU\3ODQ 86)LVKDQG:LOGOLIH6HUYLFH

PROTECTION FROM PREDATORS

2QFHDQHVWZDVGLVFRYHUHGDZHOGHGZLUH0(ZDVDQFKRUHGLQSODFHRYHUWKHWRSRIWKHQHVWDQG OHIWLQSODFHXQWLOWKHHJJVLQWKHQHVWKDWFKHG7KH0(VDUHLQFKHVLQZLGWKRQDOOIRXUVLGHVDQG LQFKHVLQKHLJKW7KHVHGLPHQVLRQVKDYHSURYHQHIIHFWLYHLQGHWHUULQJSUHGDWLRQE\FRUYLGVJXOOV DQGFR\RWHV Canis latrans 7KHXVHRIWKH0(FRQWULEXWHVJUHDWO\WRWKHORZHJJSUHGDWLRQDW%ROVD &KLFD $YHUVLRQ QHVWV XVHG WR GHWHU FR\RWH DQG FRUYLG QHVW SUHGDWLRQ ZHUH QRW HIIHFWLYHO\ XVHG GXULQJWKHEUHHGLQJVHDVRQ

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 6 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

,QODUJHU0(V ´[´[´ ZHUHLQWURGXFHGRQ16WRSUHFOXGHGHSUHGDWLRQE\FR\RWHVWKDW KDYHUHFHQWO\VWDUWHGGLJJLQJLQWKHIUHVKVDQGWRJDLQDFFHVVWRWKHHJJVXQGHUWKH0(7KHVHODUJHU 0(¶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

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ,QWKHILUVWVQRZ\SORYHUQHVWZDVHVWDEOLVKHGRQ0DUFKLQ&HOORIWKH6HDVRQDO3RQGV 7KHUHZHUHDWRWDORIQHVWVSURGXFLQJIOHGJOLQJVIRUWKHVHDVRQ 7DEOH

Table 1. Males, Females, Nests and Fledgling Production 1997-2013.

XQN QG QG QG )O IOHGJOLQJVQG QRWGHWHUPLQHG EDVHGRQPLQLPXPPD[LPXPQXPEHUVRIIOHGJOLQJV

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 7 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

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

NEST DISTRIBUTION AND CHRONOLOGIES 6QRZ\SORYHUXWLOL]HGDOODYDLODEOHQHVWVLWHVDW%ROVD&KLFDLQH[FHSW17,6HDVRQDO3RQGVKDG RIDOOQHVWV16KDG16KDG)XWXUH)XOO7LGDO%DVLQKDGDQG16KDGRI DOOQHVWV )LJXUH7DEOH &HOOLPPHGLDWHO\DGMDFHQWWR16LQWKH0XWHG7LGDO%DVLQZDV DOVRXVHGIRUQHVWLQJDVLWZDVLQDQG&HOODOVRLQWKH0XWHG7LGDO%DVLQZDV XVHGIRUWKHILUVWWLPHLQDQGDJDLQLQ$SSHQGL[SURYLGHVWKHFHOOORFDWLRQVWDUWDQGHQG GDWHV QHVW IDWHV DQG HJJV DQG FKLFNV SURGXFHG IRU HDFK QHVW LQ $SSHQGL[ SURYLGHV LQIRUPDWLRQRQKLVWRULFDOQHVWGLVWULEXWLRQ

Table 2. 2013 Nest, Nest Fate, and Reproductive Success Distribution by Cell Nests Hatched Location Total Nests Nests Failed (# chicks) Fledglings Seasonal Ponds: 28 1 27 (74) 18 Cell 9 5 0 5 (13) 3 Cell 10 10 0 10 (27) 4 Cell 11 8 1 7 (20) 4 Cell 12 3 0 3 (9) 4 Cell 13 2 0 2 (5) 3 Nest Site 1 16 11 5 (14) 3 Nest Site 2 4 1 3 (9) 5* Nest Site 3 8 2 6 (18) 6 Future Full Tidal Basin: 5 1 4 (10) 2 Cell 14 2 1 1 (3) 0 Cell 19 2 0 2 (5) 2 Cell 22 1 0 1 (2) 0 STI 1 0 1 (3) 1 Muted Tidal Basin 2 0 2 (6) 1 Cell 40 1 0 1 (3) 0 Cell 45 1 0 1 (3) 1 80 Road 2 0 2 (6) 1 Total 66 16 50 (140) 37* LQFOXGHVELUGUDLVHGDWWKH:HWODQGVDQG:LOGOLIH&DUH&HQWHURI2UDQJH&RXQW\

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 8 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

7KH6WDWHDQG)HGHUDO(QGDQJHUHG&DOLIRUQLDOHDVWWHUQDOVRQHVWVDW%ROVD&KLFD6QRZ\SORYHUHJJ OD\LQJW\SLFDOO\EHJLQVVHYHUDOPRQWKVEHIRUHWKHOHDVWWHUQEHJLQVLWVHJJOD\LQJ7KLVKDVEHHQWKH FDVH DW %ROVD &KLFD DV ZHOO 7KH WZR VSHFLHV WROHUDWH WKH FRORFDWLRQ RI WKHLU QHVWV 7KLV ZDV DSSDUHQWLQZKHQWKH\ERWKQHVWHGRQ67,1616DQG16

,Q WKH ILUVW SORYHU QHVW ZDV LQLWLDWHG 0DUFK VRPHZKDWODWHU WKDQ DYHUDJH +RZHYHU WKH QXPEHURIVQRZ\SORYHUQHVWVURVHTXLFNO\WRQHVWVE\$SULO )LJXUH 7KHODVWNQRZQQHVWV KDWFKHGGXULQJWKHILUVWIHZGD\VRI$XJXVW )LJXUH )LIW\ QHVWVVXUYLYHGWRKDWFK7KHUH ZDVDQDFWLYHQHVWDQGRUDSUHIOHGJHEURRGIRUDWRWDORIGD\VRIWKHEUHHGLQJVHDVRQDW %ROVD&KLFD

30 1997-2012 average 25 2013 20

# of Active Nests Active # of 5

0 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 2 6 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 3 - 1 9 7 - 3 0 7 - 5 2 - 2 1 0 1 3 - - - A - - - M - - - J - - J - - - - - F M M p A A A a M M M u J J u J J J A A e a a r p p p y a a a n u u l u u u u u b r r r r r y y y n n l l l g g Survey Date Figure 3. 1997-2013 Bolsa Chica Active Nest Chronology.

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

EGGS, CHICKS, AND FLEDGLING PRODUCTION

$WRWDORIVQRZ\SORYHUHJJVZHUHSURGXFHGDW%ROVD&KLFDLQZLWKHJJVDEDQGRQHG SUHGDWHGRUIDLOHGWRKDWFKDQGWKHUHPDLQLQJHJJVSURGXFLQJFKLFNV2IWKHVHWRWDOFKLFNV SURGXFHGLQRQO\VXUYLYHGWRIOHGJH 7DEOH)LJXUH 2IWKHFKLFNVKDWFKHG

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 9 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

GLHGZLWKLQWKHILUVWGD\RIKDWFKLQJ GLHGZLWKLQWKHILUVWWZRGD\VDQG GLHG ZLWKLQWKHILUVWZHHNRIKDWFKLQJ$PRQJWKHFKLFNVWKDWSHULVKHGGLHGZLWKLQWKHILUVWGD\ GLHGZLWKLQWKHILUVWWZRGD\VDQGGLHGZLWKLQWKHILUVWZHHNRIKDWFKLQJ

90 80

70 60 50 Hatched Nests

40 Failed Nests Fledglings 30 20 # Nests

10 0

* 98 00 01 02 03 04 05 07 * 10 11 12 13 0 0 08** 09 19 1999 2 20 20 20 20 20 2006 2 0 20 20 20 20 1997* 2 20 Year Figure 4. Comparison of Number of Western Snowy Plover Hatched Nests, Failed Nests, and Fledglings 1997-2013 at Bolsa Chica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

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 10 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

ZHUHWZRQHVWVRQHQHVWLQWZRQHVWVLQDQGRQHQHVWLQ7KHVHZHUHDOOXQEDQGHG ELUGV (LJKWQHVWVZHUHSUHGDWHGLQDQGDOOEXWRQHZDVORFDWHGRQ167KHQHVWVRQ16ZHUHHLWKHU GHSUHGDWHGE\JXOOVRUZHUHVXVSHFWHGRIEHLQJGHSUHGDWHGE\JXOOV2QHQHVWZDVSUHGDWHGLQ&HOO EXWWKHFDXVHLVXQNQRZQ )RU WKH WKLUG WLPH DW %ROVD &KLFD XQKDWFKHG HJJV ZHUH VDOYDJHG DQG JLYHQ WR WKH :)9= IRU DQDO\VLVRIVWHULOLW\7KHUHVXOWVRIWKHDQDO\VLVDUHSUHVHQWHGLQ7DEOH Table 3. Results of Analysis by the Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology (WFVZ) of Abandoned or Sterile Snowy Plover Eggs. Eggs Nest Clutch Eggs abandoned Notes Results from WFVZ # size hatched (collected) 2QHKDGDPHGLXP 1HVWORVWWRZLQGEORZQ HPEU\RDQGRQHKDGQR VDQG GHYHORSPHQW /RQJLQFXEDWLRQLQFXEDWHG 1RYLVLEOHGHYHORSPHQW IRUGD\V $OOKDGHPEU\RVWZR 1HVWDEDQGRQHG OLVWHGDVPHGLXPWRODUJH DQGRQHOLVWHGDVVPDOO 1HVWDEDQGRQHG /DUJHHPEU\RV 1HVWDEDQGRQHG /DUJHHPEU\RV /RQJLQFXEDWLRQLQFXEDWHG 1RYLVLEOHGHYHORSPHQW IRUGD\V 1HVWDEDQGRQHG 6PDOOHPEU\RV

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

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 11 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

2IWKHQHVWVDW%ROVD&KLFDLQDWRWDORIIOHGJOLQJVZHUHSURGXFHG7KHRYHUDOOIOHGJHUDWH IOHGJOLQJVQHVW ZDV 7DEOH 7KHUHZDVDOVRWKHORZHVWIOHGJOLQJVPDOHUDWH WKDWKDV EHHQHQFRXQWHUHGVLQFHZHEHJDQFROOHFWLQJGDWDDWWKLVVLWH16DQG67,ZHUHWKHPRVWVXFFHVVIXO QHVWLQJDUHDVZLWKDIOHGJHUDWHRI7KLVLVVWLOOIDLUO\ORZDQGWKHVDPSOHVL]HVDUHRQO\IURPILYH DQGRQHQHVWUHVSHFWLYHO\16KDGQHVWVDQGKDGDIOHGJHUDWHRI 7KH6HDVRQDO3RQGVZDVWKHPRVWVXFFHVVIXOQHVWLQJDUHDLQZLWKDIOHGJHUDWHRIEXWLQ LWKDGDIOHGJHUDWHRIRQO\ 7KHQXPEHURIQHVWVLQRQ16 KDVLQFUHDVHGWRQHVWVIURPDORZ RI QHVWV LQ DQG GHFUHDVHG IURPDKLJKRIQHVWVLQ7KH IOHGJOLQJ UDWH ZDV YHU\ ORZ DW ,QWKHIOHGJOLQJUDWHZDV 16KDGDUHFRUGQHVWVLQ QHVWV LQ DQG GHFUHDVHG WR QHVWV LQ ,Q 16 KDG D IOHGJOLQJUDWHRIDQGLQLW ZDV ,Q WKH QXPEHU RI QHVWV ZDV ORZ EXW WKH IOHGJH UDWH LQFUHDVHGWR&URZGLQJE\RWKHU 3KRWRE\3HWHU.QDSS VQRZ\ SORYHU EURRGV LV EHOLHYHG WR KDYH KDG D QHJDWLYH HIIHFW RQ UHSURGXFWLYHVXFFHVVRQ16 $GXOWPDOHLQFXEDWLQJQHVW 1HVW MRLQHGE\KLVSUHIOHGJHG VLEOLQJIURP1HVW7KH\DUHVLWWLQJWRJHWKHUXQGHUDQ0( ZKLOHWKHPDOHLQFXEDWHVKLVQHZQHVW 16 KDG D IOHGJH UDWH RI LQ DQGLQ%URRGVIURPQHVWVRQ16OHIWWKHVLWHDQGIRUDJHGLQWKH6HDVRQDO3RQGV 7KHVLJQLILFDQWUHGXFWLRQLQIOHGJOLQJVXFFHVVIURPLQWRLQLVDWWULEXWDEOHWRWKH IROORZLQJ WKUHH GHSUHGDWLRQ IDFWRUV SUHGDWLRQ RI QHVWV RQ 16 E\ JXOOV SUHVHQFH RI WZR QRUWKHUQ KDUULHUV Circus cyaneus GXULQJ WKH EUHHGLQJ VHDVRQ DQG SUHVHQFH RI RWKHU DYLDQ SUHGDWRUVGXULQJWKHEUHHGLQJVHDVRQLQFOXGLQJ$PHULFDQNHVWUHO Falco sparverius DQGUHGWDLOHG KDZN Buteo jamaicensis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

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 12 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

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

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 13 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

,Q WKH 6HDVRQDO 3RQGV FR\RWHV URXWLQHO\ 3KRWRE\3.QDSS DWWHPSWHG WR DWWDFN 0(SURWHFWHG QHVWV EXWZHUHXQVXFFHVVIXO6HHSKRWRRI1HVW LQ &HOO $OO SURWHFWHG QHVWV LQ WKH 6HDVRQDO3RQGVVXUYLYHGWRKDWFK $ SDLU RI QRUWKHUQ KDUULHUV ZHUH SUHVHQW IRU WKH ILUVW WLPH GXULQJ WKH ODWHU SDUW RI WKHVQRZ\SORYHUEUHHGLQJVHDVRQ7KH\ ZHUHVXVSHFWHGWREHWKHSULPDUO\FDXVHRI FKLFN ORVV LQ WKH 6HDVRQDO 3RQGV 'RFXPHQWDWLRQ ZDV OLPLWHG WR REVHUYDWLRQV RI WKHLU KXQWLQJ LQ WKH IRUDJLQJDUHDVRIWKHVQRZ\SORYHUFKLFNV

&R\RWHGXJDOOWKHZD\DURXQG0( 1HVWLQ&HOO EXWXQDEOHWR UHDFKHJJV

MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS/ACTION ITEMS

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anagement of NS1. 'XULQJWKHIDOOVHDVRQYHJHWDWLRQZDVUHPRYHGPHFKDQLFDOO\IURPODUJHVHFWLRQVRI16DQG UHIXUELVKHGZLWKIUHVKVDQG7KLVVXEVWDQWLDOO\UHVWRUHGWKHVLWHWRXQYHJHWDWHGKDELWDWIRUWKHVQRZ\ SORYHUVDQGOHDVWWHUQVIRUWKHEUHHGLQJVHDVRQ 2. Vegetation Control on NS1, NS2, and NS3.

&RQWLQXH YHJHWDWLRQ PDQDJHPHQW WKURXJK PDQXDO UHPRYDO RI QRQQDWLYH SODQWV DQG WKH XVH RI KHUELFLGH

Improve water management in the Seasonal Ponds

7KH 6HDVRQDO 3RQGV DUH DQ H[WUHPHO\ LPSRUWDQW IRUDJLQJ DQG QHVWLQJ DUHD IRU WKH VQRZ\ SORYHU %DVHGXSRQWKHUHFHQWKLVWRU\RIHDUO\QHVWLQLWLDWLRQVDQGWKHIOHGJOLQJVXFFHVVIURPWKRVHQHVWVLW ZRXOG DSSHDU DGYDQWDJHRXV WR KDYH DUHDV ZLWKLQ WKH 6HDVRQDO 3RQGV PDQDJHG WR VXSSRUW HDUOLHU QHVWLQJ &XUUHQWO\ WKH 6HDVRQDO 3RQGV DUH LQXQGDWHG ZLWK ZDWHU DQG DUH QRW UHDOO\ DYDLODEOH IRU

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 14 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

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onduct a study of nest abandonment utilizing a protocol developed during the 2013 season. 7KLVSURWRFROLV

Ideally a mini-exclosure (ME) is placed upon a nest as soon as the first egg(s) are observed. Regular observations thereafter are made to determine the status of a nest including continued incubation, disturbance and/or hatching. When a nest with a complete clutch of eggs is observed unattended by an adult, the observer will continue observation of the nest for fifteen (15) minutes or until the adult returns to resume incubation, whichever occurs first. If the nest is unattended after 15 minutes, the observer documents the time unattended and investigates a disturbance and/or hatching. If the clutch is still complete after the investigation, the observer will repeat the observation one (1) hour later. If the nest is now attended by an adult, document this and resume a normal schedule. If the nest is still unattended, repeat the 5 minute observation, document, and return in one hour. Abandonment of the nest will be assumed if the attending adult is not present after three hourly observations. At this time the observer can consider salvage of the eggs and deliver them to a permitted care facility for incubation and required care.

5. Enhancement of potential nest site. $WWKHVWDUWRIWKHEUHHGLQJVHDVRQVHYHUDOORFDWLRQVZLWKLQWKH6HDVRQDO3RQGVZHUHHQKDQFHGE\ VSUHDGLQJ D FRPELQDWLRQ RI ODUJHJUDLQHG VDQGV DQG VPDOO VKHOO IUDJPHQWV LQ DUHDV WKDW KDG SUHYLRXVO\ EHHQ VHOHFWHG E\ VQRZ\ SORYHUV DV VXLWDEOH QHVWLQJ VLWHV ,W LV WKRXJKW WKDW WKLV HQKDQFHPHQW PD\ KDYH HQFRXUDJHG QHVW VLWH VHOHFWLRQ 7KH UHFRPPHQGDWLRQ LV WR FRQWLQXH WKH HQKDQFHPHQWRIWKHVHDUHDVHDFK\HDU 6. Determine the individual(s) responsible for sterile eggs production 7KHUH KDYH EHHQ RQH RU WZR QHVWV SHU \HDU IRU DW OHDVW WKUHH \HDUV WKDW KDYH EHHQ LQFXEDWHG IRU H[WHQGHG SHULRGV RI WLPH 7KHVH KDYH EHHQ FROOHFWHG DQG VHQW WR WKH :HVWHUQ )RXQGDWLRQ RI 9HUWHEUDWH =RRORJ\ RU DQDO\VLV 7KH UHVXOWV KDYH EHHQ WKDW WKH HJJV DUH VWHULOH DQG KDYH QRW GHYHORSHG,WLVXQNQRZQLIWKLVLVGXHWRRQHRUPRUHVQRZ\SORYHUV,QWKHHYHQWWKDWLQGLYLGXDO

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 15 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

QHVWVDUHLQFXEDWHGIRUDQDEQRUPDOOHQJWKRIWLPHZHSURSRVHWRWUDSDQGEDQGWKHDGXOWVDVVRFLDWHG ZLWKWKHVSHFLILFQHVWV7KLVZLOOLGHQWLI\DGXOWVWKDWPD\VXIIHUIURPLQIHUWLOLW\ 7. Use of Mini-exclosures. 'XHWRWKHSRWHQWLDOWKUHDWWRVQRZ\SORYHUDGXOWVWKHXVHRIWKHODUJHU0( IHHWVTXDUHDQG LQFKHVKLJK VKRXOGEHGLVFRQWLQXHG7KHUHDVRQIRUWKHWKUHDWLVXQNQRZQEXWDQ\ORVVRIDGXOW SORYHUVLVXQDFFHSWDEOH7KHXVHRIWKHVPDOOHU0( LQFKHVVTXDUHDQGLQFKHVKLJK ZLOO FRQWLQXHGXHWRLW¶VSURYHQVXFFHVV 7KHHQGDQJHUHG&DOLIRUQLDOHDVWWHUQZKLFKQHVWVLQWKHVDPHORFDWLRQVDVWKHZHVWHUQVQRZ\SORYHU QHHGVWREHFRQVLGHUHGLQDOOPDQDJHPHQWHIIRUWV2QJRLQJDQGDGDSWLYHPDQDJHPHQWDFWLRQVDUH HVVHQWLDOWRLPSURYLQJZHVWHUQVQRZ\SORYHUUHSURGXFWLYHVXFFHVVDW%ROVD&KLFDZKLFKSURYLGHVWKH EHVWQHVWLQJRSWLRQIRUVQRZ\SORYHUVZLWKLQDPLOHUDGLXV

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 16 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013 December 2013

REFERENCES )HGHUDO5HJLVWHU(QGDQJHUHGDQGWKUHDWHQHGZLOGOLIHDQGSODQWVGHWHUPLQDWLRQRIWKUHDWHQHG VWDWXV RI WKH 3DFLILF &RDVW SRSXODWLRQ RI WKH ZHVWHUQ VQRZ\ SORYHU )HGHUDO 5HJLVWHU .QDSS 3 DQG % 3HWHUVRQ :HVWHUQ VQRZ\ SORYHU QHVWLQJ DW %ROVD &KLFD 2UDQJH &RXQW\ &DOLIRUQLD$UHSRUWIRUWKH)LVKDQG:LOGOLIH6HUYLFH&DUOVEDG2IILFH'HFHPEHU SS 3DJH * : - 6 :DUULQHU -& :DUULQHU DQG 3: 3DWWRQ 6QRZ\ 3ORYHU Charadrius alexandrinus LQ7KH%LUGVRI1RUWK$PHULFD $3RROHDQG)*LOOHGV 1R$FDG1DW 6FL3KLODGHOSKLD 86)LVKDQG:LOGOLIH6HUYLFH5HFRYHU\3ODQIRUWKH3DFLILF&RDVW3RSXODWLRQRIWKH:HVWHUQ 6QRZ\3ORYHU Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus ,QYROXPHV6DFUDPHQWR&DOLIRUQLD[LY SDJHV

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 17 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013

Appendix 1. Snowy plover eggs laid, chicks hatched, and fledged at Bolsa Chica, 2013 Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings comments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

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-1-1 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013

Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings comments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

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-1-2 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013

Nest # Cell # date found date ended eggs nest fate chicks fledglings comments 52$' H &(// H &(// 2H/1A &(// H &(// H 16* H &(// H &(// H &(// H &(// H &(// H &(// H 16. H &(// H &(// H

50H, 6A, 2S, 186 37 2013 Season Totals 8P 140 eggs fledglings 66 Nests chicks 3 SUHGDWHG$ DEDQGRQHG+±KDWFKHG6 VWHULOHHJJV Note:,QWKH1HVW)DWHFROXPQ2H1APHDQVWKHQHVWKDWFKHGEXWRQO\WZRHJJVSURGXFHGFKLFNVRQHHJJZDVDEDQGRQHG :)9= :HVWHUQ)RXQGDWLRQRI9HUWHEUDWH=RRORJ\3. 3HWHU.QDSS::&&2& :HWODQGVDQG:LOGOLIH&DUH&HQWHURI2UDQJH&RXQW\

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-1-3 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013

Appendix 2. Distribution of Western Snowy Plover Nests at Bolsa Chica for 1997 through 2013. Distribution of nests throughout Bolsa Chica Cells eliminated Total # during Seasonal Year Nests restoration Ponds FFTB MTB NTI NS1 NS2 NS3 STI Other 1997 31 1998 34 1999 38 2000 39 2001 55 2002 50 2003 32 2004 65 2005 51 2006 71 2007 50 2008 67 2009 70 2010 64 2011 73 2012 68 2013 66 28 5 2 16 4 8 1 2

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-2-1 Western Snowy Plover Nesting at Bolsa Chica, 2013

Merkel & Associates, Inc. A-2-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 2-A. MONTHLY TIDE PLOTS 2010 AND 2011

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for January 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Jan 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for February 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Feb 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for March 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Mar 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for April 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Apr 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-4 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for May 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

May 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-5 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for June 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Jun 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-6 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for July 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Jul 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-7 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for August 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD) Aug 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-8 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for September 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Sep 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-9 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for October 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Oct 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-10 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for November 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD) Nov 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-11 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for December 2010. (Elevations are in meters NAVD) Dec 2010

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-12 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for January 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Jan 2011

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-13 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for February 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD) Feb 2011

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-14 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for March 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD). Data reveal the effects of the Japanese tsunami during this monitoring period.

Mar 2011

2.0

1.5 1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-15 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for April 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Apr 2011

2.5

2.0 1.5

1.0

0.5 0.0

-0.5

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-16 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for May 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

May 2011

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-17 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for June 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Jun 2011

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-18 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for July 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Jul 2011

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0

Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-19 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for August 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Aug 2011 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-20 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for September 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Sep 2011

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-21 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for October 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD) Oct 2011

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-22 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for November 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Nov 2011

2.5

1.5

0.5

-0.5

-1.5

-2.5 Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-23 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Monthly tidal elevations for the Bolsa Chica Wetlands Full Tidal Basin (Tide) and Los Angeles Outer Harbor (LAMeas) for December 2011. (Elevations are in meters NAVD)

Dec 2011

2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 Tide (m-NAVD) LAMeas(m-NAVD)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-A-24 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 2-B. BOLSA BEACH PROFILE PLOTS

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-4 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-5 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-6 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-7 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-8 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-9 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-10 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-11 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-12 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-B-13 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 2-C. MSL BEACH WIDTH

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Mean Sea Level Beach Width (1) (m)

Survey Transect Designation Date 249+30 311+22 318+30 333+30 350+71 378+29 423+89 May 1963 36.6 (1) 17.7 (1) 21.0 (1) 28.9 (1) 33.0 (1) 33.6 (1) 71.2 (1) Jul 1964 40.1 (1) 22.7 (1) 33.2 (1) 29.9 (1) - - - Oct 1966 48.8 (1) 24.6 (1) 33.4 (1) 30.7 (1) 35.4 (1) 22.0 (1) 58.0 (1) Apr 1969 63.2 (1) 34.6 (1) 47.5 (1) 40.4 (1) 40.4 (1) 25.2 (1) 43.6 (1) May 1973 88.6 (1) 46.4 (1) 49.0 (1) 40.1 (1) 49.0 (1) 19.2 (1) 34.5 (1) Dec 1978 83.3 (1) 61.6 (1) - - 37.4 (1) 29.6 (1) 55.0 (1) Jun 1979 113.8 (1) 74.4 (1) - - 51.9 (1) 42.3 (1) 67.6 (1) Apr 1982 82.5 (1) 55.3 (1) 57.3 (1) 48.9 (1) 44.2 (1) 19.5 (1) 70.3 (1) Jan 1983 84.0 (1) 54.4 (1) 58.4 (1) 53.4 (1) 43.6 (1) 26.2 (1) 69.5 (1) Feb 1992 89.3 58.3 - - 61.4 11.9 82.1 May 1992 96.4 61.6 - - 58.3 14.3 75.1 Nov 1992 93.5 54.1 - - 56.4 13.7 81.0 May 1993 84.5 57.9 - - 56.1 13.0 65.5 Oct 1993 92.6 68.0 - - 67.0 26.4 72.9 Apr 1994 90.0 66.2 - - 62.5 30.4 76.0 Oct 1994 100.7 69.7 - - 73.6 33.6 89.5 May 1995 83.6 60.2 - - 54.3 19.7 69.5 Nov 1997 93.6 (2) 88.6 (2) - - 56.1 (2) 15.7 (2) 83.6 (2) Mar 2002 78.1 60.2 67.3 (1) 66.0 (1) 57.7 20.7 96.4 Oct 2005 85.9 (3) 63.4 (3) 70.5 (3) 79.3 (3) 62.1 (3) 36.1 (3) 120.2 (3) Mar 2006 71.2 (3) 64.6 (3) 64.1 (3) 67.5 (3) 53.6 (3) 22.3 (3) 111.3 (3) Jan 2007 86.8 70.3 85.9 66.6 54.1 23.9 110.5 May 2007 84.7 76.2 86.1 61.9 48.9 27.8 106.9 Oct 2007 91.0 85.5 82.7 72.3 54.8 41.1 113.3 May 2008 74.5 86.3 93.5 46.8 42.6 21.3 108.8 Oct 2008 87.1 87.1 93.5 80.5 57.2 26.4 106.6 May 2009 86.1 83.0 97.2 72.2 47.6 25.1 103.2 Oct 2009 83.8 85.9 104.1 78.7 59.8 30.7 111.9 May 2010 81.7 92.3 97.3 40.6 46.5 10.0 112.7 Oct 2010 77.5 91.4 97.3 66.9 50.6 20.8 113.3 Notes: (1) Beach profile data generated from TIN model (2) Beach profile data interpolated at 15.24 m (50.0 ft) intervals (3) Beach profile data generated from LIDAR with a TIN model, topography only (4) Mean Sea Level (MSL) lies 0.79 m above NAVD88 datum

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-C-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-C-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-4 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-5 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-6 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-7 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-8 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 2-D. SEDIMENT VOLUME DATA

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Subaerial Volume (4) (m3/m)

Transect Designation Survey Date 249+30 311+22 318+30 333+30 350+71 378+29 423+89 May 1963 40 (1) 28 (1) 50 (1) 64 (1) 33 (1) 35 (1) 165 (1) Jul 1964 45 (1) 26 (1) 82 (1) 74 (1) - - - Oct 1966 80 (1) 18 (1) 69 (1) 55 (1) 30 (1) 19 (1) 128 (1) Apr 1969 131 (1) 66 (1) 114 (1) 87 (1) 43 (1) 10 (1) 80 (1) May 1973 231 (1) 111 (1) 147 (1) 103 (1) 90 (1) 10 (1) 68 (1) Dec 1978 206 (1) 138 (1) - - 69 (1) 68 (1) 96 (1) Jun 1979 209 (1) 146 (1) - - 96 (1) 24 (1) 131 (1) Apr 1982 217 (1) 151 (1) 179 (1) 139 (1) 77 (1) 12 (1) 189 (1) Jan 1983 227 (1) 137 (1) 179 (1) 140 (1) 72 (1) 20 (1) 156 (1) Feb 1992 246 153 - - 116 1 214 May 1992 259 148 - - 107 3 217 Nov 1992 262 142 - - 104 1 224 May 1993 246 151 - - 110 1 195 Oct 1993 245 153 - - 119 9 198 Apr 1994 253 170 - - 113 10 212 Oct 1994 250 173 - - 124 14 219 May 1995 244 155 - - 107 7 194 Nov 1997 233 (2) 294 (2) - - 98 (2) 2 (2) 220 (2) Mar 2002 206 181 217 (1) 211 (1) 130 11 277 Oct 2005 214 (3) 173 (3) 199 (3) 221 (3) 100 (3) 30 (3) 326 (3) Mar 2006 200 (3) 172 (3) 200 (3) 241 (3) 113 (3) 9 (3) 346 (3) Jan 2007 226 211 268 257 113 16 343 May 2007 237 221 276 234 101 21 338 Oct 2007 252 235 264 232 97 38 361 May 2008 214 259 311 186 81 12 342 Oct 2008 233 258 305 210 84 12 341 May 2009 232 252 317 296 80 19 333 Oct 2009 245 241 328 293 96 25 343 May 2010 238 290 338 134 65 0 353 Oct 2010 232 296 345 172 75 8 375

Notes: (1) Beach profile data generated from TIN model (2) Beach profile data interpolated at 15.24 m (50.0 ft) intervals (3) Beach profile data generated from LIDAR with a TIN model, topography only (4) Subaerial volume boundary extends from the back beach to the intersection of the beach profile and Mean Sea Level (MSL). MSL lies 0.79 m above NAVD88 datum

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-4 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-5 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-6 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-7 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-8 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-9 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Shorezone Volume (3) (m3/m)

Survey Transect Designation Date 249+30 311+22 318+30 333+30 350+71 378+29 423+89 May 1963 4901 (1) 7556 (1) 7069 (1) 6577 (1) 5191 (1) 3990 (1) 5661 (1) Jul 1964 5166 (1) 7605 (1) 7342 (1) 6848 (1) - - - Oct 1966 4973 (1) 7449 (1) 7182 (1) 6757 (1) 5247 (1) 4162 (1) 5637 (1) Apr 1969 4991 (1) 7384 (1) 7087 (1) 6700 (1) 5530 (1) 4180 (1) 5431 (1) May 1973 5324 (1) 7713 (1) 7324 (1) 6798 (1) 5246 (1) 4068 (1) 5374 (1) Dec 1978 5398 (1) 8067 (1) - - 5388 (1) 4073 (1) 5497 (1) Jun 1979 5411 (1) 7752 (1) - - 5314 (1) 4107 (1) 5448 (1) Apr 1982 5313 (1) 7390 (1) 7051 (1) 6575 (1) 5079 (1) 4021 (1) 5538 (1) Jan 1983 5417 (1) 7686 (1) 7408 (1) 6923 (1) 5355 (1) 4061 (1) 5656 (1) Feb 1992 5385 7293 - - 5231 3697 5528 May 1992 5385 7352 - - 5183 3783 5581 Nov 1992 5378 7384 - - 5289 3890 5570 May 1993 5428 7669 - - 5348 3857 5655 Oct 1993 5397 7694 - - 5373 4197 5710 Apr 1994 5452 7701 - - 5438 4083 5785 Oct 1994 5400 7388 - - 5416 4114 5812 May 1995 5439 7630 - - 5376 3925 5772 Nov 1997 5437 (2) 7848 (2) - - 5474 (2) 3948 (2) 5886 (2) Mar 2002 5375 7635 7310 (1) 6873 (1) 5323 3937 6022 Oct 2005 ------Mar 2006 ------Jan 2007 5407 8369 8234 7255 5405 4068 6210 May 2007 5381 8268 8292 7386 5433 4075 6167 Oct 2007 5394 8327 8258 7304 5380 4119 6193 May 2008 5347 8186 8026 7105 5285 3923 6157 Oct 2008 5355 8216 8075 7268 5316 4062 6175 May 2009 5345 8217 8142 7401 5358 4074 6155 Oct 2009 5311 8216 8178 7435 5442 4146 6181 May 2010 5326 8191 7972 6950 5312 3908 6177 Oct 2010 5275 8108 7961 7178 5373 3991 6222 Notes: (1) Beach profile data generated from TIN model (2) Beach profile data interpolated at 15.24 m (50.0 ft) intervals (3) Shorezone volume boundary extends from the back beach to the statistical range of closure. Shorezone volume basement elevation located at -13.83 m NAVD88 (-45.0 ft, MLLW, 1960-1978 tidal datum epoch)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-10 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Shorezone Volume Change Relative to 1963 Survey (3) (m3/m)

Survey Transect Designation Date 249+30 311+22 318+30 333+30 350+71 378+29 423+89 May 1963 0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) 0 (1) Jul 1964 265 (1) 49 (1) 273 (1) 271 (1) - - - Oct 1966 72 (1) -107 (1) 113 (1) 180 (1) 56 (1) 172 (1) -24 (1) Apr 1969 90 (1) -172 (1) 18 (1) 123 (1) 339 (1) 190 (1) -230 (1) May 1973 423 (1) 157 (1) 255 (1) 221 (1) 55 (1) 78 (1) -287 (1) Dec 1978 497 (1) 511 (1) - - 197 (1) 83 (1) -164 (1) Jun 1979 510 (1) 196 (1) - - 123 (1) 117 (1) -213 (1) Apr 1982 412 (1) -166 (1) -18 (1) -2 (1) -112 (1) 31 (1) -123 (1) Jan 1983 516 (1) 130 (1) 339 (1) 346 (1) 164 (1) 71 (1) -5 (1) Feb 1992 484 -263 - - 40 -293 -133 May 1992 484 -204 - - -8 -207 -80 Nov 1992 477 -172 - - 98 -100 -91 May 1993 527 113 - - 157 -133 -6 Oct 1993 496 138 - - 182 207 49 Apr 1994 551 145 - - 247 93 124 Oct 1994 499 -168 - - 225 124 151 May 1995 538 74 - - 185 -65 111 Nov 1997 536 (2) 292 (2) - - 283 (2) -42 (2) 225 (2) Mar 2002 474 79 241 (1) 296 (1) 132 -53 361 Oct 2005 ------Mar 2006 ------Jan 2007 506 813 1165 678 214 78 549 May 2007 480 712 1223 809 242 85 506 Oct 2007 493 771 1189 727 189 129 532 May 2008 446 630 957 528 94 -67 496 Oct 2008 454 660 1006 691 125 72 514 May 2009 444 661 1073 824 167 84 494 Oct 2009 410 660 1109 858 251 156 520 May 2010 425 635 903 373 121 -82 516 Oct 2010 374 552 892 601 182 1 561 Notes: (1) Beach profile data generated from TIN model (2) Beach profile data interpolated at 15.24 m (50.0 ft) intervals (3) Shorezone volume boundary extends from the back beach to the statistical range of closure. Shorezone volume basement elevation located at -13.83 m NAVD88 (-45.0 ft, MLLW, 1960-1978 tidal datum epoch)

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-11 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-12 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-13 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-14 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-15 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-16 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-17 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-D-18 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 2-E. MSL BEACH WIDTH MEASUREMENTS

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Transect 249+30

140 Distance to Berm

MSL Beach Width 120 MSL Beach Width From Profile Data 100

20 MSL Beach Width/Distance to Berm (meters) Berm to Width/Distance Beach MSL

0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Date

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-E-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Transect 311+22

140 Distance to Berm

120 MSL Beach Width

MSL Beach Width From Profile Data 100

20 MSL Beach Width/Distance to Berm (meters) Berm to Width/Distance Beach MSL

0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Date

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-E-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Transect 318+30

140 Distance to Berm

120 MSL Beach Width MSL Beach Width From Profile Data 100

20 MSL Beach Width/Distance to Berm (meters) Berm to Width/Distance Beach MSL

0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Date

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-E-3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Transect 333+30

140 Distance to Berm

120 MSL Beach Width Sand by-passing beach fill MSL Beach Width From Profile Data 100

20 MSL Beach Width/Distance to Berm (meters) Berm to Width/Distance Beach MSL

0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Date

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-E-4 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Transect 350+71

140 Distance to Berm

120 MSL Beach Width

MSL Beach Width From Profile Data 100

20 MSL Beach Width/Distance to Berm (meters) Berm to Width/Distance Beach MSL

0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Date

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-E-5 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Transect 378+29

140 Distance to Berm

120 MSL Beach Width

MSL Beach Width 100 From Profile Data

20 MSL Beach Width/Distance to Berm (meters) Berm to Width/Distance Beach MSL

0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Date

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-E-6 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Transect 423+89

140

120

100

40 Distance to Berm

MSL Beach Width 20

MSL Beach Width/Distance to Berm (meters) Berm to Width/Distance Beach MSL MSL Beach Width From Profile Data 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Date

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-E-7 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 2-F. US ARMY CORPS BEACH WIDTH MEASUREMENTS

Merkel & Associates, Inc. Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Transect 247+88

120

Stage 7 Stage 8 Stage 9 Stage 10 Stage 11 Stage 12 3 3 3 3 3 1.3 mil m 2.0 mil m 1.4 mil m 1.2 mil m 1.7 mil m3 1.5 mil m 100

40 Berm Width (meters) Width Berm

= Surfside-Sunset Nourishment 0 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Year

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-F-1 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Transect 307+88

120

Stage 7 Stage 8 Stage 9 Stage 10 Stage 11 Stage 12 3 3 3 3 3 1.3 mil m 2.0 mil m 1.4 mil m 1.2 mil m 1.7 mil m3 1.5 mil m 100

40 Berm Width (meters) Width Berm

= Surfside-Sunset Nourishment 0 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Year

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-F-2 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

Transect 424+44

120 Stage 7 Stage 8 Stage 9 Stage 10 Stage 11 Stage 12 1.3 mil m3 2.0 mil m3 1.4 mil m3 1.2 mil m3 1.7 mil m3 1.5 mil m3 100

40 Berm Width (meters) Width Berm

= Surfside-Sunset Nourishment 0 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Year

Merkel & Associates, Inc. 2-F-3 Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Monitoring 2013 Annual Report

APPENDIX 2-G. BOLSA CHICA MAY 2011 BEACH PROFILE SURVEY REPORT COASTAL FRONTIERS CORPORATION

Merkel & Associates, Inc. COASTAL FRONTIERS

September 19, 2011 CFC-799-10

Ms. Rachel Woodfield Merkel and Associates, Inc. 5435 Ruffin Road San Diego, CA 92123

Subject: Bolsa Chica May 2011 Beach Profile Survey

Ms. Woodfield:

This letter report presents the methods and results of the Bolsa Chica May 2011 Beach Profile Survey. The survey represents the tenth such effort conducted in support of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project Beach Monitoring Program. The sections that follow provide an overview of the monitoring program, discuss the May 2011 beach profile survey, and present the results. Beach profile plots accompany this report in Attachment A.

The vertical datum used throughout this report is North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88), with units expressed in meters. At the project site, NAVD88 lies approximately 0.06 m above National Ocean Service (NOS) Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) and 0.79 m below NOS Mean Sea Level (MSL; NOS, 2011). In the case of the geo-referenced data, the horizontal positions are given in meters relative to California State Plane Zone 6, North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Overview

The objective of the beach monitoring program is to develop a quantitative understanding of changes in the condition of the beaches adjacent to the newly constructed Bolsa Chica Lagoon entrance channel. The program, which commenced in January 2007, is comprised of semi- annual beach profile surveys and monthly beach width measurements at seven sites located along a 5.3 km section of coastline between Bolsa Chica State Beach and 17th Street in Huntington Beach. The beach profile surveys are conducted by Coastal Frontiers Corporation, while the beach width measurements are obtained by Moffatt and Nichol.

Figure 1 shows the locations of the beach profile transects used in the monitoring program. Two of these were established specifically for the monitoring program, and were first surveyed in January 2007. Five of the transects had been established previously, and were included in the Coast of California Storm and Tidal Waves Study for the Orange County Region (CCSTWS-OC) conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Coastal Frontiers Corporation 9420 Topanga Canyon Blvd, Suite 101 Chatsworth, CA 91311-5759 (818) 341-8133 Fax (818) 341-4498 Ms. Rachel Woodfield September 19, 2011 Page 2

Historical Transect

Newly-Established Transect

249+30

FTB Entrance Channel

311+22

318+30

333+30

350+71

378+29

N 2 km 423+89 Figure 1. Location Map

May 2011 Beach Profile Survey

Field activities were conducted on May 12, 2011. The methods employed were similar to those used on previous Orange County surveys. In consequence, the results are directly comparable. The following sections discuss the data acquisition and reduction methods for the May 2011 Beach Profile Survey.

Beach Profile Data Acquisition

The wading and bathymetric portions of the survey were performed concurrently by two crews. Data were acquired along each transect from the back beach to a depth of approximately 14 m below NAVD88. At the time of the May 2011 survey, the wave heights were typically less than 1 m, while the wind speeds remained below 10 kts. Ms. Rachel Woodfield September 19, 2011 Page 3

Bathymetric data were collected with a digital acoustic echo sounder operated from a shallow-draft inflatable survey vessel. A dynamic motion sensor, which provides real-time corrections to the echo sounder for wave-induced vessel heave, also was utilized. A GPS receiver was used to determine the position of each sounding. To improve the accuracy of each position, differential corrections transmitted in real-time from U.S. Coast Guard beacons were utilized (DGPS). All systems were interfaced to a laptop computer using the Hypack Max survey package.

The boat traveled along each transect from the offshore terminus to the surf zone guided by DGPS navigation. Soundings were acquired on a continuous basis (approximately 3 soundings per second), while positions were recorded at 1-second intervals. The DGPS position data and sounding data were merged using the Hypack software, with interpolated positions being assigned to the soundings acquired between position fixes.

The calibration of the echo sounder was checked at periodic intervals during the survey using a standard “bar check” procedure. In addition, measurements of the speed of sound in sea water also were obtained at the offshore end of each transect using a recording conductivity, temperature, and depth (CTD) instrument.

Beach Profile Data Reduction

The data from the wading portion of the survey were processed using software developed by Trimble. The raw total station data were read by the software, and the coordinates and elevation of each data point were calculated and inserted into a CAD drawing.

The raw data from the bathymetric portion of the survey consisted of Hypack files containing the position data and heave-compensated soundings. These data were edited for outliers using the Hypack Single-Beam Processing Module. The dynamic motion sensor utilized during the survey removed the majority of the wave contamination from the record in real time. However, to further minimize the influence of wave-induced vessel motion on a limited number of transects, a smooth line was faired through select portions of the echo sounder record prior to digitizing it with the Hypack software package. Ms. Rachel Woodfield September 19, 2011 Page 4

Corrections for the draft of the transducer and the measured speed of sound in sea water then were applied to the measured depths. The speed-of-sound profiles were confirmed using the results of the “bar check” calibration procedure. Finally, the corrected soundings were adjusted to NAVD88 Datum using tide measurements made by the U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, at Los Angeles Harbor. To provide a more accurate representation of local tide conditions, the water levels recorded at Los Angeles Harbor were adjusted to the project site using the time and height differences published by NOAA (NOS, 2008).

The adjusted soundings were thinned to a nominal interval of 3 m to produce a file size suitable for developing beach profile plots. The resulting x, y, z data (easting, northing, and elevation) were inserted into the CAD drawing containing the wading data. As indicated above, the field work was conducted in such a manner as to provide substantial overlap between the wading and bathymetric portions of the survey. The processed data were examined in this region to insure that the two data sets were compatible. Once this confirmatory inspection had been completed, only the more detailed data in the region of overlap were retained (typically the bathymetric data). The less detailed data were purged, after which the wading and bathymetric data were merged to create a single digital file.

Based on past experience, the vertical accuracy of the processed soundings is approximately ±15 cm. According to the Hemisphere GPS equipment specifications, the accuracy of horizontal positions obtained in the manner described above is less than 60 cm. The electronic total station used to conduct the survey is capable of measuring ranges to within r15 cm and elevation differences to within r3 cm. However, because the swimmer encountered waves and currents in the surf zone, the horizontal accuracy perpendicular to each transect (parallel to the shoreline) varied from minimal at short ranges to approximately r5 m at the offshore end.

Results

The May 2011 beach profile data were used in conjunction with data from the historical surveys to create profile plots and compute changes in beach width. The beach profile plots developed from the survey data are provided in Attachment A, while the beach width changes are presented below. The range on each profile plot represents the distance in meters seaward of the transect origin. The CCSTWS-OC survey monument serves as the origin for the historical transects, while the survey markers are used for the newly-established transects. The elevations are given in meters relative to NAVD88.

The beach profile plots developed from the May 2011 survey data show those profiles obtained during the 5.5-year period from October 2005 to May 2011 as well as the envelope of all available profile data that preceded the opening of the Bolsa Chica entrance channel (May 1963 to March 2006). These plots also include two panels for each transect - one isolating the nearshore region of the profile and another displaying the entire profile length. Ms. Rachel Woodfield September 19, 2011 Page 5

The May 2011 beach profile data were delivered electronically, and contained ASCII files of: (1) range and elevation for each profile, and (2) northing, easting, and elevation triplets (n,e,z) for the entire survey. In the case of the geo-referenced data, the horizontal positions are in meters relative to California State Plane Zone 6, NAD 83. As indicated previously, elevations are given in meters relative to NAVD88. It is important to note that revisions were made to the survey control at Transect 378+29 at the time of the October 2007 survey. Consequently, the results of the previous two surveys (January 2007 and May 2007) were resubmitted and should supersede all previous data deliverables.

A detailed assessment of beach changes will be provided in the annual report. General observations are offered, however, based on the profile plots (Attachment A) and the MSL beach width data presented in the tables and figures below. The MSL beach width data are reckoned from the landward extent of the sandy beach.

1.) Beach Widths (Table 1, Figure 2): At the time of the May 2011 Survey, MSL beach widths in the Bolsa Chica study area ranged from 16.0 m at Transect 378+29 to 106.6 m at Transect 423+89. Figure 2 shows the May 2011 beach widths in addition to the envelope of historical Spring beach widths (1963-2002). Beach width values exceeded the historical maximums at the nearest two transects north and south of the Full Tidal Basin (FTB) entrance channel. Similarly, Transect 423+89 also exceeded the historical Spring beach width envelope. At the two remaining transects (249+30 and 378+29), the May 2011 beach widths were within the range of historical values.

2.) Seasonal Shoreline Changes (Table 2): Converse to the expected trend of shoreline recession that typically occurs during the winter season (October through May), shoreline advance predominated during the winter 2010/2011 at Bolsa Chica-area beaches. During this period, the shoreline retreated at two of the seven sites, advanced at four, and was essentially unchanged (3 m or less) at the remaining location. The greatest shoreline loss, 6.7 m, occurred at the southern end of the study area at Transect 423+89. The greatest shoreline advances occurred directly south of the entrance channel at Transects 333+30 and 350+71, with gains of 26.2 m and 26.7 m, respectively. These gains are attributable to the placement and downcoast dispersal of dredge spoils from the FTB entrance channel maintenance activities. Given the trend of shoreline retreat at these sites since completion of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project, the gains may be short- lived.

3.) Annual Shoreline Changes (Table 2): During the one-year period between the May 2010 and May 2011 surveys, the MSL shoreline retreated at two sites and advanced at the remaining five locations. The greatest shoreline loss, 6.1 m, occurred at Transect 423+89 The greatest shoreline advance over the previous year, a gain of 52.5 m, occurred at Ms. Rachel Woodfield September 19, 2011 Page 6

Transect 333+30. As noted previously, the sizeable gains noted immediately south of the FTB entrance channel are likely due to the FTB maintenance activities.

4.) Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period Shoreline Changes (Table 2, Figure 3): During the approximately five-year period (March 2006 to May 2011) encompassing the construction of the Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project, the MSL shoreline advanced at five sites and retreated at the remaining two transects. Similar to previous years, shoreline advances predominated north of the entrance channel (Transect 249+30 to 318+30). Gains were also evident immediately south of the entrance channel at Transects 333+30 and 350+71. However, these shoreline advances likely resulted from the placement of dredged material from the entrance channel maintenance activities and may be short-lived considering the trend of shoreline retreat at these sites since the FTB was constructed. The two transects at the southern end of the study area (378+29 and 423+89) both realized shoreline retreat during the five-year period. The greatest shoreline gain occurred at Transect 318+30, measuring 36.8 m. The greatest shoreline loss measured 4.7 m and occurred at Transect 378+29. Ms. Rachel Woodfield September 19, 2011 Page 7

Table 1. MSL Beach Widths Derived From Profile Data

MSL Beach Width (m) (1, 2,3) Transect Oct Mar Jan May Oct May Oct May Oct May Oct May 2005 2006 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011

249+30 85.9 71.2 86.8 84.7 91.0 74.5 87.1 86.1 83.8 81.7 77.5 76.8

311+22 63.4 64.6 70.3 76.2 85.5 86.3 87.1 83.0 85.9 92.3 91.4 96.5 318+30 70.5 64.1 85.9 86.1 82.7 93.5 93.5 97.2 104.1 97.3 97.3 100.9

333+30 79.3 67.5 66.6 61.9 72.3 46.8 80.5 72.2 78.7 40.6 66.9 93.1

350+71 62.1 53.6 54.1 48.9 54.8 42.6 57.2 47.6 59.8 46.5 50.6 77.3

378+29 36.1 22.3 23.9 27.8 41.1 21.3 26.4 25.1 30.7 10.0 20.8 16.0

423+89 120.2 111.3 110.5 106.9 113.3 108.8 106.6 103.2 111.9 112.7 113.3 106.6 Notes: (1) Mean Sea Level (MSL) lies 0.79 m above NAVD88 datum. (2) MSL beach width reckoned from the landward extent of the sandy beach. (3) October 2005 and March 2006 beach profile data generated from LIDAR with a TIN model, topography only. Ms. Rachel Woodfield September 19, 2011 Page 8

Figure 2. May 2011 Beach Widths Ms. Rachel Woodfield September 19, 2011 Page 9

Table 2. MSL Shoreline Changes Derived From Beach Profile Data MSL Shoreline Change (m) Bolsa Chica (1) Annual Winter Seasonal Transect Monitoring Period May 2010 - May 2011 October 2010 - May 2011 March 2006 - May 2011 (12 months) (7 months) (~5 years) 249+30 -4.9 -0.7 5.6 311+22 4.2 5.1 31.9 318+30 3.6 3.6 36.8 333+30 52.5 26.2 25.6 350+71 30.8 26.7 23.7 378+29 6.0 -4.8 -6.3 423+89 -6.1 -6.7 -4.7 Note: (1) March 2006 beach profile data generated from LIDAR with a TIN model, topography only. Ms. Rachel Woodfield September 19, 2011 Page 10

Figure 3. Bolsa Chica Monitoring Period Shoreline Changes, March 2006 to May 2011 Ms. Rachel Woodfield September 19, 2011 Page 11

We have sincerely appreciated the opportunity to assist Merkel and Associates, and look forward to continued participation in the Beach Monitoring Program. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or require additional information.

Sincerely, Coastal Frontiers Corporation

Gregory E. Hearon, P.E. Brady Richmond, P.E. Principal Project Engineer

Attachments: (A) Beach Profile Plots

References

National Ocean Service (NOS). 2011. Center for Operation Oceanographic Products and Services. http://co-ops.nos.noaa.gov. Attachment A

Beach Profile Plots Transect 249+30 10

MSL 0

í5 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í10 Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í15

í20 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000

Transect 249+30, Nearshore 10

2 MSL 0

í2 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í4

Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í6

í8

í10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 CrossíShore Distance (Meters Seaward of Transect Origin)

May 2011 Oct 2010 May 2010 Oct 2009 May 2009 Oct 2008 May 2008 Oct 2007 May 2007 Jan 2007 Mar 2006 Oct 2005 Transect 311+22 10

MSL 0

í5 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í10 Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í15

í20 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000

Transect 311+22, Nearshore 10

2 MSL 0

í2 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í4

Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í6

í8

í10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 CrossíShore Distance (Meters Seaward of Transect Origin)

May 2011 Oct 2010 May 2010 Oct 2009 May 2009 Oct 2008 May 2008 Oct 2007 May 2007 Jan 2007 Mar 2006 Oct 2005 Transect 318+30 10

MSL 0

í5 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í10 Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í15

í20 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000

Transect 318+30, Nearshore 10

2 MSL 0

í2 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í4

Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í6

í8

í10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 CrossíShore Distance (Meters Seaward of Transect Origin)

May 2011 Oct 2010 May 2010 Oct 2009 May 2009 Oct 2008 May 2008 Oct 2007 May 2007 Jan 2007 Mar 2006 Oct 2005 Transect 333+30 10

MSL 0

í5 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í10 Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í15

í20 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000

Transect 333+30, Nearshore 10

2 MSL 0

í2 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í4

Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í6

í8

í10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 CrossíShore Distance (Meters Seaward of Transect Origin)

May 2011 Oct 2010 May 2010 Oct 2009 May 2009 Oct 2008 May 2008 Oct 2007 May 2007 Jan 2007 Mar 2006 Oct 2005 Transect 350+71 10

MSL 0

í5 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í10 Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í15

í20 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000

Transect 350+71, Nearshore 10

2 MSL 0

í2 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í4

Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í6

í8

í10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 CrossíShore Distance (Meters Seaward of Transect Origin)

May 2011 Oct 2010 May 2010 Oct 2009 May 2009 Oct 2008 May 2008 Oct 2007 May 2007 Jan 2007 Mar 2006 Oct 2005 Transect 378+29 10

MSL 0

í5 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í10 Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í15

í20 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000

Transect 378+29, Nearshore 10

2 MSL 0

í2 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í4

Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í6

í8

í10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 CrossíShore Distance (Meters Seaward of Transect Origin)

May 2011 Oct 2010 May 2010 Oct 2009 May 2009 Oct 2008 May 2008 Oct 2007 May 2007 Jan 2007 Mar 2006 Oct 2005 Transect 423+89 10

MSL 0

í5 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í10 Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í15

í20 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000

Transect 423+89, Nearshore 10

2 MSL 0

í2 Profile Envelope May 1963 í March 2006 í4

Elevation (Meters, NAVD88) í6

í8

í10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 CrossíShore Distance (Meters Seaward of Transect Origin)

May 2011 Oct 2010 May 2010 Oct 2009 May 2009 Oct 2008 May 2008 Oct 2007 May 2007 Jan 2007 Mar 2006 Oct 2005