ATTACHMENT G

BOTANICAL SURVEY FOR THE MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT, MARIPOSA, CALIFORNIA

April 5, 2017

Prepared for:

Mariposa County Resource Conservation District

Prepared by:

G.O. Graening, PhD, MSE, QSD and Timothy R. D. Nosal, MS Natural Investigations Company, Inc. 6124 Shadow Lane, Citrus Heights, CA 95621

MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

CONTENTS Contents ...... 2 1. Introduction ...... 3 2. Setting ...... 3 2.1. Regulatory Setting ...... 3 2.2. Biological Setting ...... 4 3. Methodology ...... 5 3.1. Target Species and Habitats ...... 5 3.2. Preliminary Data Gathering and Research ...... 5 3.3. Field Survey ...... 5 3.4. Map and Other Analyses ...... 5 4. Results ...... 8 4.1. Historical Special-status Plant Occurrences ...... 8 4.2. Inventory of Flora from site survey ...... 8 4.3. Habitat Assessment and Analyses of Likelihood of Occurrence of Target Species ...... 10 4.3.1. Ruderal/Developed Vegetation Community ...... 10 4.3.2. Gray Pine Woodland Vegetation Community ...... 10 4.3.3. Chaparral Vegetation Community ...... 11 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 11 6. References ...... 12 7. Qualifications of Surveyors ...... 14 8. Exhibits...... 15 9. Appendix: Site Photos ...... 16

Natural Investigations Co. Page 2 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

1. INTRODUCTION On behalf of Mariposa County Resource Conservation District, Natural Investigations Company conducted a Biological Resources Assessment for the proposed Mariposa Biomass Project. The proposed action is the construction of a 2.4 MW bioenergy facility (“Project”). The Project area is located in the Mariposa Industrial Park at 5673 Copper Leaf Drive, Mariposa, in Mariposa County, California (see Exhibits). The Project area is situated on 2 parcels having assessor’s parcel numbers 012-050-066 (2.86 acres) and 012-050-067 (2.41 acres). The combined parcel boundary (5.3 acres) was the Study Area for this assessment. 2. SETTING 2.1. Regulatory Setting The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service implement the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (FESA) (16 USC §1531 et seq.). Threatened and endangered species on the federal list (50 CFR §17.11, 17.12) are protected from “take” (direct or indirect harm), unless a FESA Section 10 Permit is granted or a FESA Section 7 Biological Opinion with incidental take provisions is rendered. Pursuant to the requirements of FESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any federally listed species may be present in the project area and determine whether the proposed project will have a potentially significant impact upon such species. Under FESA, habitat loss is considered to be an impact to the species. In addition, the agency is required to determine whether the project is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed under FESA or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat proposed to be designated for such species (16 USC §1536[3], [4]). Therefore, project-related impacts to these species or their habitats would be considered significant and would require mitigation. Species that are candidates for listing are not protected under FESA; however, USFWS advises that a candidate species could be elevated to listed status at any time, and therefore, applicants should regard these species with special consideration. The California Endangered Species Act of 1970 (CESA) (California Fish and Game Code §2050 et seq., and CCR Title 14, §670.2, 670.51) prohibits “take” (defined as hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill) of species listed under CESA. A CESA permit must be obtained if a project will result in take of listed species, either during construction or over the life of the project. Section 2081 establishes an incidental take permit program for state-listed species. Under CESA, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) has the responsibility for maintaining a list of threatened and endangered species designated under state law (CFG Code 2070). CDFG also maintains lists of species of special concern, which serve as “watch lists.” Pursuant to requirements of CESA, an agency reviewing proposed projects within its jurisdiction must determine whether any state-listed species may be present in the Study Area and determine whether the proposed project will have a potentially significant impact upon such species. Project-related impacts to species on the CESA list would be considered significant and would require mitigation. The California Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 (CFG Code §1900 et seq.) requires CDFG to establish criteria for determining if a species or variety of native plant is endangered or rare.

Natural Investigations Co. Page 3 of 16 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

Section 19131 of the code requires that landowners notify CDFG at least 10 days prior to initiating activities that will destroy a listed plant to allow the salvage of plant material. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code §15380) defines “rare” in a broader sense than the definitions of threatened, endangered, or fully protected. Under the CEQA definition, CDFG can request additional consideration of species not otherwise protected. CEQA requires that the impacts of a project upon environmental resources must be analyzed and assessed using criteria determined by the lead agency. Sensitive species that would qualify for listing but are not currently listed may be afforded protection under CEQA. The CEQA Guidelines (§15065) require that a substantial reduction in numbers of a rare or endangered species be considered a significant effect. CEQA Guidelines (§15380) provide for assessment of unlisted species as rare or endangered under CEQA if the species can be shown to meet the criteria for listing. Plant species on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Lists 1A, 1B, or 2 are typically considered rare under CEQA. California “Species of Special Concern” is a category conferred by CDFG on those species that are indicators of regional habitat changes or are considered potential future protected species. While they do not have statutory protection, Species of Special Concern are typically considered rare under CEQA and thereby warrant specific protection measures.

2.2. Biological Setting The Study Area is located within the southern Sierra Nevada foothills geographic subregion, which is contained within the Sierra Nevada Mountains geographic subdivision of the larger California Floristic Province (Baldwin et al. 2012). This region has a Mediterranean-type climate, characterized by distinct seasons of hot, dry summers and wet, moderately- cold winters. The Study Area and vicinity is in climate Zone 7 “Gray Pine Belt”, with hot summers and mild but pronounced winters (Brenzel 2001). The topography of the Study Area is hilly with slopes that drain northward. The elevation ranges from approximately 2,320 feet to 2,410 feet above mean sea level. The Study Area is located within the Mariposa Creek/San Joaquin River watershed.

Natural Investigations Co. Page 4 of 16 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

3. METHODOLOGY The botanical survey was conducted in accordance with the standardized guidelines for botanical and rare plant surveys issued by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (1996), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) (2009), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) (2001). Survey methods consist of research of the existing distribution and studies of the target species, floristic field surveys, and habitat assessment. This field survey was performed prior to the blooming period of most of the target species.

3.1. Target Species and Habitats The target species consist of 9 rare or endangered plants identified in the California Natural Diversity Database as occurring within the vicinity of the Study Area. Table 1 lists the plant names, rarity rankings, general habitat, and microhabitat of each species. A special-status habitat—serpentine soils—also occurs in the vicinity.

3.2. Preliminary Data Gathering and Research Prior to conducting the botanical surveys the following information sources were reviewed: • USGS 7.5 minute topographic quadrangles; • Color aerial photography by USGS or Google of the Study Area and vicinity; and • California Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFW, 2017).

3.3. Field Survey Timothy R.D. Nosal conducted the botanical survey on March 23, 2017. On that date, 3.5 survey-hours were performed. Weather conditions consisted of mostly sunny skies, winds of 0-5 miles per hour, and air temperature ranging from 50° to 55° F. A variable-coverage pedestrian survey was performed within the Study Area. All visible flora was noted, and identified to the lowest possible taxon. When a taxon could not be identified in the field, a photograph or voucher specimen (depending upon permit requirements) was taken and sent to botanist Margriet Wetherwax (U.C. Berkeley, Jepson Herbarium). Mr. Nosal holds the following scientific collection permit: California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Plant Voucher Collecting Permit No. 2081(a)-16-102-V. Dr. Graening holds the following scientific collection permits: CDFW Scientific Collecting Permit No. SC-006802; and CDFW Plant Voucher Specimen Permit 09004. Taxonomic determinations were aided by referencing museum specimens or texts, including the following: Pavlik (1991); Stuart and Sawyer (2001); Lanner (2002); Baldwin et al. (2012); Calflora (2017); University of California at Berkeley (2017a,b); CDFW (2017); and NatureServe (2017). The locations of any special-status species sighted were marked on aerial photographs and/or georeferenced with a GPS receiver. Site photos are provided in the Appendix.

3.4. Map and Other Analyses General vegetation community types were recorded on aerial photographs and then digitized to produce vegetation community maps. Any occurrences of special status plant species within the Study Area were georeferenced with a GPS receiver. Geographic analyses were performed using geographical information system software (ArcGIS 10, ESRI, Inc.). When required, vegetation communities (assemblages of plant species growing in an area of similar biological and environmental factors), were classified by Vegetation Series (distinctive associations of plants, described by dominant species and particular environmental setting)

Natural Investigations Co. Page 5 of 16 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

using the CNPS Vegetation Classification system (Sawyer et al., 2009). Species’ ranges, habitat requirements, and life histories were researched using the following sources: Baldwin et al. (2012); CNPS (2017); Calflora (2017); CDFW (2017a,b); NatureServe (2017); and University of California at Berkeley (2015a,b).

Natural Investigations Co. Page 6 of 16 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

Table 1. Special-status Plant Species Occurring within 5 Miles of Study Area (CNDDB, 2017)

Common Name Blooming Scientific Name Status Period General Habitat Microhabitat Mariposa clarkia CNPS 1B.2 Apr-Jul Chaparral, cismontane woodland. On serpentine. Several occurrences occur in the foothill Clarkia biloba ssp. australis woodland/riparian ecotone. 300-1460 m. beaked clarkia CNPS 1B.3 Apr-May Cismontane woodland, valley and North-facing slopes; sometimes on sandstone. 60-500 m. Clarkia rostrata foothill grassland. Mariposa cryptantha CNPS 1B.3 Apr-Jun Chaparral. On serpentine outcrops. 200-650 m. Cryptantha mariposae Mariposa daisy CNPS 1A Jun-Aug Cismontane woodland. One site known. 600-800 m. Erigeron mariposanus Madera leptosiphon CNPS 1B.2 Apr-May Cismontane woodland, lower Dry slopes; often on decomposed granite in woodland. 80- Leptosiphon serrulatus montane coniferous forest. 1575m. Congdon's lomatium CNPS 1B.2 Ma-Jun Cismontane woodland, chaparral. Serpentine soils with serpentine chaparral plants and grey Lomatium congdonii pines. 300-2100 m. Mariposa lupine Federally Apr-May Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Decomposed granitic sand on hilltops and hillsides on Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus threatened; western slope of the Sierra Nevada, mostly southern- CNPS 1B.2 exposure. 400-640m. shaggyhair lupine CNPS 1B.2 Apr-May Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Open rocky slopes of serpentine. Mostly on serpentine Lupinus spectabilis chaparral surrounded by gray pine woodland. 260-825 m. slender-stalked monkeyflower CNPS 1B.2 Apr-Jun Chaparral. Disturbed places such as burns and railroad grades; also on Mimulus gracilipes thin granitic soil in cracks in large granite rocks. 500-1300m.

Natural Investigations Co. Page 7 of 16 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

4. RESULTS 4.1. Historical Special-status Plant Occurrences A list of special-status plant species that historically occurred in the vicinity of the Study Area was compiled based upon the following: • A review of pertinent literature; • Informal consultation with USFWS by generating an electronic Species List (Information for Planning and Conservation website at https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/) • A query of the CNDDB. No special-status plant species were reported in the CNDDB within the Study Area, but several special-status plant species were historically reported within a 5-mile radius of the Study Area: (Table 1).

4.2. Inventory of Flora from site survey All flora sighted in the Study Area during the botanical surveys on March 23, 2017 are listed in the following table. No listed plant species or otherwise special-status species were detected within the Study Area.

Table 2. Checklist of Plants Detected in the Study Area

Scientific Name Common Name Adenostoma fasciculatum Chamise Agoseris retrorsa Spearleaf agoseris Arctostaphylos viscida White-leaf manzanita Arceuthobium occidentale Gray pine dwarf-mistletoe Avena barbata Slender wild oat Bromus diandrus Ripgut brome Bromus madrietensis Compact brome Bromus sterilis Poverty brome Calandrinia ciliata Red maids Calochortus sp. Mariposa lily Calystegia occidentalis ssp. fulcrata Chaparral False Bindweed Cardamine oligosperma Western bittercress Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle Ceanothus cuneatus Wedgeleaf ceanothus Centaurea melitensis Malta starthistle Cercocarpus betuloides Mountain mahogany Chlorogalum pomeridianum Wavy-leafed soap root Clarkia sp. Clarkia Claytonia parviflora ssp. parviflora Narrow leafed miner's lettuce Claytonia parviflora ssp. perfoliata Miner's lettuce Collomia heterophylla Variable-leaf collomia Crassula connata Pigmy-weed Cynosurus echinatus Hedgehog dogtail Daucus carota Wild carrot Dichelostemma capitatum Blue dicks Draba verna Spring whitlow-grass Elymus caput-medusae Medusa head

Natural Investigations Co. Page 8 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

Scientific Name Common Name Epilobium brachycarpum Tall willowherb Ericameria arborescens Golden-fleece Eriodictyon californicum Yerba santa Eriophyllum confertiflorum Golden-yarrow Erodium cicutarium Redstem fillaree Erythronium multiscapoideum Sierra fawn-lily Euphorbia peplus Petty spurge Festuca myuros Rattail sixweeks grass Galium aparine Goosegrass Galium bolanderi Climbing bedstraw Galium porrigens Bolander's bedstraw Geranium dissectum Cut-leaved geranium Geranium molle Dove's-foot geranium Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon Hirschfeldia incana Shortpod mustard Holocarpha heermannii Heerman's tarplant Holozonia filipes Whitecrown Hypericum perfoliatum Klamathweed Hypochaeris glabra Smooth cat's-ear Lasthenia fremontii Fremont's goldfields Lasthenia gracilis Common goldfields Leontodon taraxacoides Hawkbit Lepidium nitidum Shining peppergrass Leptosiphon ciliatus Whisker brush Lonicera interrupta Chaparral honeysuckle Lotus corniculatus Bird's-foot trefoil Lupinus benthamii Spider lupine Lupinus microcarpus Chick lupine Luzula comosa var. comosa Wood rush Melica sp. Melic grass Mimulus guttatus Seep monkeyflower Pentagramma triangularis Gold-backed fern Phacelia egena Rock phacelia Pinus sabiniana Gray pine Plagiobothrys fulvus Fulvus popcorn-flower Plagiobothrys tenellus Slender popcorn-flower Plantago erecta Erect plantain Plantago lanceolata English plantain Plectritis ciliosa Longspur plectritis Poa secunda One-sided bluegrass Populus fremontii Fremont cottonwood Primula hendersonii Mosquito bills Pseudobahia heermannii Foothill sunburst Quercus douglasii Blue oak Quercus wislizeni Interior live-oak Ranunculus californicus California buttercup Rumex crispus Curly dock Sanicula bipinnata Poison sanicle Sanicula bipinnitifida Purple sanicle

Natural Investigations Co. Page 9 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

Scientific Name Common Name Sanicula crassicaulis Pacific sanicle Senecio vulgare Common groundsel Sidalcea calycosa Annual checkerbloom Stellaria media Chickweed Stipa pulchra Purple needlegrass Thysanocarpus curvipes Fringepod Thysanocarpus radians Spokepod Torilis arvensis Tall sock-destroyer Torilis nodosa Short sock-destroyer Toxicodendron diversilobum Poison-oak Trifolium angustifolium Narrow-leaved clover Trifolium sp. Clover Triphysaria eriantha Butter and eggs Triteleia sp. Triteleia Turritis glabra Tower-mustard Vicia villosa Winter vetch

4.3. Habitat Assessment and Analyses of Likelihood of Occurrence of Target Species The Study Area contains 3 general vegetation community types: ruderal/developed; gray pine woodland; and foothill chaparral. The geology underlaying part of the Study Area contains ultramafic (serpentine) and metavolcanic rock types (California Geological Survey, 2010), which can support a special vegetation community adapted to serpentine soils. These vegetation community types are discussed in detail in the following text and are delineated in the Exhibits.

4.3.1. Ruderal/Developed Vegetation Community Ruderal/Developed habitat is found within the disturbed and graded portions of the Study Area, including roads and the building pad. Vegetation within this habitat type consists primarily of nonnative weedy or invasive ruderal species lacking a consistent community structure. This habitat is classified as Holland vegetation type – “Urban – 11100.” Common species sighted include compact brome (Bromus madrietensis), poverty brome (Bromus sterilis), rattail sixweeks grass (Festuca myuros), red-stem filaree (Erodium cicutarium), smooth cat’s ear (Hypochaeris glabra), Heermann’s tarplant (Holocarpha heermannii), bird’s-foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), erect plantain (Plantago erecta), and common groundsel (Senecio vulgare). The disturbed and altered condition of these lands greatly reduces their habitat value and ability to sustain rare plants. None of the target species are expected to occur in the Ruderal/Developed community type because of competition from invasive, non-native species.

4.3.2. Gray Pine Woodland Vegetation Community Gray Pine Woodland is the dominant habitat type within the Study Area. Vegetation within this habitat type consists of scattered trees with an understory of shrubs. This habitat is classified as Holland vegetation type – “Open Digger Pine Woodland – 71310,” and “Pinus sabiniana

Natural Investigations Co. Page 10 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

Woodland Alliance (Foothill Pine Woodland)” vegetation type by Sawyer et al (2009). This habitat type provides significant food and breeding resources for wildlife. Species sighted include gray pine (Pinus sabiniana), interior live-oak (Quercus wislizeni), blue oak (Quercus douglasii), wedgeleaf ceanothus (Ceanothus cuneatus), poison-oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), while-leaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos viscida), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), poverty brome, compact brome, ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), Mariposa lily (Calochortus sp.), wavy- leaved soaproot (Chlorogalum pomeridianum), blue dicks (Dichelostemma capitatum), red- stem filaree, Sierra fawn-lily (Erythronium multiscapoideum), bedstraw (Galium spp.), sock destroyer (Torilis spp.) and winter vetch (Vicia villosa).

The portions of the Study Area containing Gray Pine Woodland habitat have a low to moderate potential for occurrence of the following plants known to occur in woodland habitats: Mariposa daisy, Madera leptosiphon, Mariposa lupine, and slender-stalked monkeyflower. However, the survey on March 23, 2007 failed to detect these rare species.

4.3.3. Chaparral Vegetation Community Where chaparral integrates into the gray pine woodland, it is classified as the community 87.130.04 Foothill Pine - Interior Live Oak / Wedgeleaf Ceanothus [Pinus sabiniana-Quercus wislizeni/Ceanothus cuneatus] (Sawyer et al. 2009). Where it intersects serpentine soils, it is classified as 87.130.01 Serpentine Digger Pine Chaparral Woodland. Chaparral habitat type occurs in a narrow band along the southern edge of the study area. Vegetation within this habitat type consists of annual herbs with scattered shrubs and occasional trees. This habitat is classified as Holland vegetation type – “Buck Brush Chaparral – 37810,” and “Ceanothus cuneatus Alliance (Wedge Leaf Ceanothus Chaparral)” vegetation type by Sawyer et al (2009). Shrub cover may be low in this habitat type due to the presence of serpentine/ultramafic soils. Serpentine soils are high in several potentially toxic elements including iron and magnesium and low in required nutrients such as calcium. This restrictive soil type is home to numerous endemic plant species, many of which are rare. vegetation type Sawyer et al (2009) describes this community as 37.000.06 Mixed Serpentine Chaparral. Species observed include wedgeleaf ceanothus, gray pine, poison-oak, wavy-leaved soaproot, erect plantain, seep monkeyflower (Mimulus guttatus), shining peppergrass (Lepidium nitidum), annual checkerbloom (Sidalcea calycosa) and common goldfields (Lasthenia gracilis). The restrictive soil chemistry within this vegetation type limits the overall vegetative cover although the relative plant species diversity can be high. The portions of the Study Area containing serpentine soils have a moderate to high potential for occurrence of the following plants known to occur on serpentine soils: Mariposa clarkia, Beaked clarkia, Mariposa cryptantha, Congdon’s lomatium and shaggyhair lupine. The field survey failed to detect these rare species. 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS No listed plant species or other species with special status was detected within the Study Area. The portions of the Study Area containing Gray Pine Woodland habitat have a low to moderate potential for occurrence of the following plants known to occur in woodland habitats: Mariposa daisy, Madera leptosiphon, Mariposa lupine, and slender-stalked monkeyflower. The portions of the Study Area containing serpentine soils have a moderate to high potential for occurrence of the following plants known to occur on serpentine soils: Mariposa clarkia, Beaked clarkia, Mariposa cryptantha, Congdon’s lomatium and shaggyhair lupine. If project implementation

Natural Investigations Co. Page 11 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY involves ground disturbance or habitat conversion in areas containing gray pine woodland or serpentine soils, a pre-construction botanical survey is recommended to ensure that no special-status plant species are present. 6. REFERENCES Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, and T.J. Rosatti, editors. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, second edition, thoroughly revised and expanded. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 1,600 pp.

Brenzel, K.N. 2001. Sunset Western Garden Book. Sunset Publishing Corporation, Menlo Park, California. 768 pp.

Calflora. 2017. Calflora, the on-line gateway to information about native and introduced wild plants in California. Internet database available at http://www.calflora.org/index0.html.

California Department of Fish and Game. 2009. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities. California Natural Resources Agency, Sacramento, California. 7 pp.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2017. RareFind 4.x, California Natural Diversity Data Base. Sacramento, California. California Native Plant Society. 2001. CNPS botanical survey guidelines. Pages 38-40 in D.P. Tibor, editor. California Native Plant Society’s Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California, 6th edition, Special Publication No. 1., California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. 387 pp. (Available electronically on the Internet at http://www.cnps.org/programs/Rare_Plant/inventory/guidelines.htm).

California Native Plant Society. 2007. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants, 7th edition. Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee, David P. Tibor, convening editor. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, California. Internet database available at http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi.

Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Nongame Heritage Program, Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California. 156 pp.

Lanner, R. M. 2002. Conifers of California. Cachuma Press, Los Olivos, California. 274 pp.

NatureServe. 2017. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 4.7. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available at http://www.natureserve.org/explorer.

Pavlik, B. M., P. C. Muick, S. G. Johnson, and M. Popper. 1991. Oaks of California. Cachuma Press and the California Oak Foundation. Los Olivos, California. 184 pp.

Sawyer, J.O., and T. Keeler-Wolf. 1995. A manual of California vegetation. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. Available electronically at http://davisherb.ucdavis.edu/cnpsActiveServer/index.html.

Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. 1,300 pp.

Stuart, J. D., and J.O. Sawyer. 2001. Trees and Shrubs of California. California Natural History Guides. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 467 pp.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Guidelines for conducting and reporting botanical inventories for federally listed, proposed, and candidate plants. Sacramento, California. 2 pp. Available electronically on the Internet at http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/es/protocol.htm.

Natural Investigations Co. Page 12 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

University of California at Berkeley. 2017a. Jepson Online Interchange for California Floristics. Jepson Flora Project, University Herbarium and Jepson Herbarium, University of California at Berkeley. http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/interchange.html.

University of California at Berkeley. 2017b. CalPhotos. Biodiversity Sciences Technology Group, University of California at Berkeley. Internet database available at http://calphotos.berkeley.edu/.

Natural Investigations Co. Page 13 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

7. QUALIFICATIONS OF SURVEYORS

G.O. GRAENING, Ph.D. G. O. Graening holds a PhD in Biological Sciences and a Master of Science in Biological and Agricultural Engineering. Dr. Graening is an adjunct Professor at California State University at Sacramento, and is an active researcher in the area of conservation biology and groundwater ecology; his publication list is available online at http://www.csus.edu/indiv/g/graeningg/pubs.htm. Dr. Graening is also a Certified Arborist (ISA # WE-6725A). Dr. Graening has 16 years of experience in environmental assessment, including previous employment with The Nature Conservancy, Tetra Tech Inc., and CH2M Hill, Inc.

On of Dr. Graening’s most recent botanical surveys was on the Farview Drive Property development project, El Dorado County, CA (2015). Dr. Graening performed 2 botanical surveys for Pine Hill endemics, and then authored a mitigation plan, including a nature preserve design.

Timothy R. D. Nosal, M.S. Timothy R. D. Nosal holds a B.S. and M.S. in Biological Sciences. Mr. Nosal has statewide experience performing sensitive plant and animal surveys in addition to terrestrial vegetation investigations. Mr. Nosal has over 25 years of experience in botanical surveys, environmental assessment and teaching with employers that include California Department of Fish and Wildlife, State Water Resources Control Board, American River College, MTI College, and Pacific Municipal Consultants.

Natural Investigations Co. Page 14 MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

8. EXHIBITS

Natural Investigations Co. Exhibits and Appendices Project Location Map s M era o lav n Ca o Tuolumne S

t a n i s l a u s Mariposa

Merced Madera Project Location Fresno Fresno

Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

Project Location 0 0.5 1 Mariposa Biomass Kilometers Figure 1 : Project Location 0 0.5 1 ® Miles 1:24,000 Map Date 3/12/2017 Bear Valley 1947 Quadrangle Photorevised 1973: Township 5S, Range 18 E, Las Mariposas Parcel boundaries Vegetation Community Types Gray Pine woodland Chaparral / Serpentine soils Ruderal/developed

Vegetation Community Types Mariposa Biomass Energy Project MARIPOSA BIOMASS PROJECT BOTANICAL SURVEY

9. APPENDIX: SITE PHOTOS

Natural Investigations Co. Exhibits and Appendices