Channel Islands National Park National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project
Final Environmental Impact Statement February 2010
Channel Islands National Park 1901 Spinnaker Drive Ventura, California 93001
This entire publication is available in PDF format at: http://www.nps.gov/chis/parkmgmt/planning.htm
Front cover photo:
Mouth of Cañada del Puerto creek, Prisoners Harbor, Channel Islands National Park (Power, 2006)
Citation: National Park Service. 2010. Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan. Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, CA.
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND
RESTORATION PLAN
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Channel Islands National Park Santa Cruz Island, Santa Barbara County, California February, 2010
ABSTRACT This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was prepared in accordance with the Department of Interior National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the National Park Service NEPA guidelines (DO-12), and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This document has been prepared because actions proposed as part of this Final EIS may be a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
The National Park Service (NPS) proposes to restore a functional, self-sustaining ecosystem at a coastal wetland site known as Prisoners Harbor and a 40-acre associated stream corridor in the lower Cañada del Puerto Creek on Santa Cruz Island. The project seeks to: (1) recreate a more natural topography and hydrology by reconnecting the Cañada del Puerto stream with its floodplain and removing non-native eucalyptus trees and other vegetation which have proliferated in the lower drainage; (2) increase biological diversity and productivity by removing fill and restoring the historic wetland; (3) provide an enhanced visitor experience by installing viewing benches and additional interpretive displays; and (4) protect significant cultural and historic resources. The Preferred Alternative, Alternative B, would restore 3.1 acres of palustrine wetlands and deepwater habitat, remove all of the cattle corrals and relocate the scale house to its pre-1960s location, remove eucalyptus, control invasive species, construct a barrier to protect archaeological resources, and improve the visitor experience. In addition, a portion of the berm would be removed, thereby reconnecting the creek to its floodplain.
Two additional alternatives are analyzed in this EIS: Alternative A (No Action) would not conduct any wetlands or riparian restoration activities; Alternative C would restore only 2.1 acres of wetlands, and leave two of the historic cattle corrals in place. For each alternative action, the Park analyzed the potential environmental impacts that would likely occur, divided into the following categories: Hydrologic Function, Wetlands and Floodplains, Water Quality, Wildlife, Vegetation, Archeological Resources, Historic Resources, and Visitor Experience.
Alternative B is the Park’s Preferred Alternative, and the Environmentally Preferred Alternative. It would produce the most ecological benefits by enabling more improvements to water quality, stream shading, flood attenuation, and groundwater exchange. It would remove a resource that contributes to the eligibility of the Ranching District to the National Register-eligible Santa Cruz Island Ranching District, but the District would remain eligible. Impacts to the visitor experience from the loss of the corrals would be partially mitigated by documentation and displays of these features at the Park Visitor Center.
As a delegated EIS the official responsible for final approval is the Regional Director, Pacific West Region. Thereafter, the Superintendent, Channel Islands National Park, would be responsible for implementation of the approved project and subsequent monitoring activities.
Abstract - i
Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND
RESTORATION PLAN
SUMMARY OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Introduction
Santa Cruz Island is the largest of the Channel Islands off the coast of Southern California. It is home to a variety of wildlife including a significant number of plants and animals found nowhere else in the world, making Santa Cruz Island a bastion of biological diversity. Ninety percent of the island is listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) for its archeological significance and the island’s ranching resources have been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Channel Islands National Park was established to protect and restore these nationally significant resources.
The National Park Service (NPS) proposes to restore a functional, self-sustaining ecosystem at a former 9-acre backbarrier coastal wetland site known as Prisoners Harbor and a 40-acre associated stream corridor in the lower Cañada del Puerto Creek on Santa Cruz Island. The proposed project area has been altered during the past 150 years by filling of the wetland; planting or accidental introduction of non-native vegetation such as eucalyptus, stone pines, and kikuyu grass, and construction of a berm, buildings, roads and corrals. The project seeks to: (1) recreate a more natural topography and hydrology by reconnecting the Cañada del Puerto stream with its floodplain and removing non- native eucalyptus trees and other vegetation which have proliferated in the lower drainage; (2) increase biological diversity and productivity by removing fill and restoring the historic wetland; (3) provide an enhanced visitor experience by installing viewing benches and additional interpretive displays; and (4) protect significant cultural and historic resources.
The proposed project area supports three types of wetlands: Marine, Palustrine, and Riverine wetlands. Before they were degraded, these wetlands most likely included open water habitat, marsh wetlands dominated by short perennial herbaceous plants, marsh wetlands dominated by cattail and tule, seasonally dry creek bed and associated riparian forest, non-vegetated lagoon habitat, non-riparian willow scrub habitat, and transitional zones between these habitats. Greater diversity and interzonation of wetland habitats at the site would have supported greater diversity and abundance of native flora and fauna.
In addition, the greater pre-historic wetland extent provided greater capacity and diversity of physical ecosystem services for biota. At Prisoners Harbor these would have included nutrient retention and cycling and organic soil development.
Summary - i
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Description of the Alternatives
The following screening criteria were used to develop and evaluate alternatives for consideration: Achievement of Project Goals and Objectives Hydrologic connection of the creek to the floodplain Groundwater levels and wetland restoration feasibility Area of wetland to be restored and the associated wetland ecosystem values Protection of archeological features Balanced use of mixed resources in the project area Visitor experience Protection and maintenance of the pier and road access
The Preferred Alternative, Alternative B, would remove all of the cattle corrals and restore 3.1 acres of palustrine wetlands and deepwater habitat, relocate the scale house to its pre-1960s location, remove eucalyptus, control invasive species, construct a protective barrier around a portion of the archeological site, and improve the visitor experience. In addition, a portion of the berm would be removed, thereby reconnecting the creek to its floodplain.
Alternative C differs from B in that it would remove six of the eight cattle corrals and restore 2.1 acres of palustrine wetlands and deepwater habitat, without relocating the scale house. It would also remove eucalyptus, control invasive species, construct a protective barrier around a portion of the archeological site, and improve the visitor experience. In addition, a portion of the berm would be removed, thereby reconnecting the creek to its floodplain.
Activities proposed for the Prisoners Harbor restoration include: • Preparing the wetlands restoration area--The Park would start by aggressively targeting, removing, and disposing of known non-native invasive plants on the restoration area – such as kikuyu grass, fennel, and eucalyptus – using appropriate techniques. These removal and disposal techniques may include hand pulling, hand- or machine-excavation, chain sawing, burning, chipping, and/or application of herbicide. • Corral removal-- Under the supervision of park cultural resource specialists and after consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office, the scale house would be partially dismantled, lifted off its current foundation, stabilized on its new foundation in its pre-1960’s location, and reassembled (Alternative B only). The corrals would be dismantled along with other posts, troughs, and old concrete foundations. Alternative B includes dismantling all eight corrals; Alternative C would include dismantling six. • Partial Berm and Fill Removal—The Park would remove approximately 250 feet of the low berm that severed the hydraulic connection between lower Cañada del Puerto and its floodplain, excavate sand and rock fill to restore a portion of the buried wetlands, and then replant the restoration area with native wetland species.
Summary - ii
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Work will be initiated in the late spring and completed in late summer or early fall when the Project Area is in its driest condition, and immediately before late-fall rains initiate plant germination and growth. Alternative B would restore 3.1 acres of the wetlands; Alternative C would restore 2.1 acres. • Wetland Restoration-- The approach to restoration design at Prisoners Harbor has three main components: 1) obtain a thorough understanding of site hydrology; 2) determine the depths and characteristics of fill material over buried wetland surfaces; and 3) use “reference” wetlands as models for restoration of disturbed sites. • Riparian Restoration-- Riparian restoration in Cañada del Puerto would take place in a two-pronged, step-wise approach. Eucalyptus trees would be removed 1) from downstream to upstream and 2) from the hillside toward the stream bank. The area of eucalyptus removal is approximately 20.02 acres or 33.5% of the project area. Woody native vegetation including established oaks, island cherry, and coffee berry would remain. The eucalyptus would be replaced with species typical of Southern Riparian Woodland, including oak, cottonwood, willow, and maple. Sufficient recovery of the channel restoration area would occur between implementation of the stages to minimize ecological impacts. • Protect Cultural Resources-- The Park proposes to protect high-value archeological resources at Prisoners Harbor from continuing (though lessened) exposure to erosion by stream flows in Cañada del Puerto, during and immediately after berm and fill removal activities. This would be achieved by placement of a small earth, log, and cobble berm or packing earth, log, and cobble against the base of the resource and planting with compatible native plants, thereby deflecting potential flood waters away from the culturally dense area of the resource. • Improve the Visitor Experience-- The project would improve the island gateway experience for visitors arriving on Santa Cruz Island at Prisoners Harbor by constructing project-compatible facilities such as temporary wayside exhibits (one or two), a wetland viewing bench, or interpretive signs.
Best Management Practices used during excavation of wetland fill would include properly installed silt fencing along the east side of the creek adjacent to the fill disposal area and along the west side of the creek. Silt fencing would also be installed on the north side of the excavation area to protect the remnant wetland. A monitoring plan to evaluate the success of the project would include installing a network of wells in the project area and establishing vegetation plots around each well.
The following table summarizes the alternatives analyzed in this EIS.
Summary - iii
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
A B C No 2/3 Wetland 1/3 Wetland Action Restoration Restoration with Partial with Partial Berm Berm Removal Removal Remove fill from most some former wetland Remove cattle some corrals Re-locate scale house to its pre- 1960’s location Remove portion of berm Structurally protect archeological resources Remove eucalyptus from riparian corridor Improve visitor experience Control invasive plant species
Alternatives Considered But Dismissed
• Remove all fill material in the Prisoners Harbor area
• Retain the berm
• Reconfigure cattle corral to create a narrow band of corrals and increase size of wetland restoration
• Retain three corrals parallel to the access road
• Removal of the entire berm
Summary - iv
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Summary of Environmental Consequences
For each alternative action, the Park analyzed the potential environmental impacts that would likely occur. Environmental Impacts were divided into the following categories: Hydrologic Function, Wetlands and Floodplains, Water Quality, Wildlife, Vegetation, Archeological Resources, Historic Resources, and Visitor Experience.
Alternative A is the No Action Alternative, Alternative B is 2/3 Wetland Restoration, and Corral Removal (the Preferred Alternative), and Alternative C is 1/3 Wetland Restoration, partial Corral Removal.
Hydrologic Function • Alternative A: Current management of the Park would not increase flood frequency or elevation and the historic warehouse would continue to be subject to flood waters when flows exceed the 100-year flood event and floodwaters leave the channel and flow along the existing park access road. A large storm event could alter the flow characteristics of the channel such that major erosion could occur at the Native American site. The result would have a major adverse impact. Failure of the berm during a large storm event could result in a substantial increase in flooding and major impacts to the Native American site and Park infrastructure.
• Alternative B: Partial removal of the berm would have a minor adverse impact related to hydrologic processes due to the increase in flood frequency. However, associated depths and velocities are not predicted to be high due to the enlarged area of the left bank floodplain. Partial removal of the berm would slow velocities, but have a negligible impact related to the potential change in stream sediment transport dynamics. Partial berm removal and removal of fill from the former wetland would have a beneficial effect related to increased stormwater and flood storage by connecting the channel to the floodplain and by increasing wetlands by 3.1 acres.
Stream channel restoration would have a negligible impact on flood elevation in the downstream reaches of Cañada del Puerto Creek resulting from removal of mature eucalyptus trees from the riparian corridor.
• Alternative C: The impacts on hydrologic function and processes would be qualitatively similar to Alternative B for flood elevation and frequency, hydrologic connectivity, sediment transport dynamics, and water quality. However, the reduction in restoration area compared to Alternative B can be expected to produce roughly proportional reductions in wetlands benefits.
Summary - v
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Wetlands and Floodplains • Alternative A: No change in the acreage of wetland or provide connectivity between the creek and its floodplain; therefore there would be no impact.
• Alternative B: Major beneficial impacts from removal of fill, restoration of 3.1 acres of wetland, and removal of the berm, through increased provision of wetlands functions: improved water quality, stream shading, flood attenuation, and groundwater exchange.
• Alternative C: Similar benefits as 2/3 restoration, but likely not to the same extent as provided in Alternative B, given smaller restoration area.
Water Quality • Alternative A: Negligible impacts on surface water quality. • Alternative B: Moderate beneficial impacts from the increased connectivity between stream and wetland, through decreases in sediment loads and nutrient concentrations. • Alternative C: Similar benefits as 2/3 restoration, but likely not to the same extent as provided in Alternative B, given smaller restoration area
Wildlife • Alternative A: Negligible to minor adverse impacts on the Island scrub-jay, and no impacts on any of the other special status species. No changes to habitat or abundance of other wildlife under this alternative. • Alternative B: Long-term moderate beneficial effects on wildlife from creation of high quality habitat. Short-term negligible and minor adverse effects would occur from disturbance and destruction of habitat and disturbance and displacement of species during construction activities. • Alternative C: Impacts would be similar to Alternative B; however, there would be one less acre of wetlands restoration for wildlife habitat, so the reduced buffer from human activities would limit waterfowl breeding and feeding. In addition, the smaller restoration area would likely limit benefits to species richness compared to Alternative B.
Vegetation • Alternative A: Moderate adverse effects on native plant communities due to continued spread of eucalyptus, loss in areal extent of native plant communities, and continued degraded conditions without wetland or riparian restoration. The Santa Cruz Island silver lotus would not be affected.
• Alternative B: Long-term major beneficial impacts on native plants from wetland and riparian restoration, which would improve the function and ecological value of native vegetation communities. Short-term negligible and minor adverse effects would occur with construction activities and non-native plant control which would disturb or destroy existing vegetation. Management control of non-
Summary - vi
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
native vegetation would have a minor beneficial impact on ecosystem values overall.
Riparian and wetland restoration would not provide any new habitat for re- establishment of special status plant species in the Project Area. There would be no impacts on the Santa Cruz Island silver.
• Alternative C: Similar impacts to Alternative B, but smaller restoration area would produce lesser habitat benefit. There would be no impacts on the Santa Cruz Island silver.
Archeological Resources • Alternative A: No adverse impacts; moderate beneficial impact from continued maintenance and protection • Alternative B: Short-term negligible to minor adverse impact on archeological resources from removal of eucalyptus and creation and use of fill disposal site. Long-term moderate to major beneficial impact to the resources from reduced risk of erosion from flooding after berm removal and berm construction. • Alternative C: Similar impacts to Alternative B, with slightly reduced adverse impact from less disturbance.
Historic Resources • Alternative A: Minor adverse impacts from natural degradation of features; moderate beneficial impact from continued efforts at maintenance and protection • Alternative B: Moderate long-term adverse impact on NRHP contributing features from removing corrals; possible but unlikely minor adverse impact if the historic rock retaining wall were uncovered intact while removing the man-made berm • Alternative C: Reduced impact compared to B, but still moderate long-term adverse impact on contributing features from removing most of the corrals.
Visitor Experience • Alternative A: No adverse impacts; moderate beneficial impact from potential facilities improvements in GMP • Alternative B: Short-term minor impacts from inconvenience; moderate long- term adverse impact from corral removal. Minor improvements from viewing bench and new signage • Alternative C: Same as Alternative B, except long-term adverse impact from corral removal is minor.
Response to Comments
In total, 11 letters or email correspondences were provided to the Park during the 60-day comment period for the Draft EIS. From this correspondence, the Park identified 11
Summary - vii
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement substantive comments. Substantive comments are those that are not simple statements for or against the proposal, but rather those comments requiring additional explanation or analysis of data and those that questioned facts or conclusions contained in the Draft EIS. The comments were divided into 9 categories. In the “Response to Comments” section the Park provides responses to all 11 substantive comments received on the project.
Draft EIS Commentator List
Government Agencies Groups and Organizations Individuals U.S. Environmental The Nature Conservancy Interested Individual Protection Agency California Coastal The Ventura Audubon Interested Individual Commission Society, Inc. Channel Islands National Santa Barbara Channel Interested Individual Marine Sanctuary (National Keepers Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) Interested Individual Interested Individual
Comment Categories
Category General Comment Summary Visitor Experience Enchanced interpretation at Prisoners Harbor Historical Resources Retention of all historic structures Removal of Non-Native Vegetation Management of eucalyptus and other non-natives Legal/Regulatory Compliance Coastal Zone Management Act Flood Flows Risk of new channelized flood flows Use of Best Management Practices Control non-native species and protect human health Grunion impacts Impact on grunion spawning areas Eelgrass bed impacts Impact on eelgrass habitat Marine impacts Impacts on National Marine Sanctuary waters
NPS Response to the Two Most Common Concerns
The Park organized the comments into “public concerns.” The two most common public concerns, and the Park’s response, are described below.
Summary - viii
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Concern: The Park should provide more opportunities for visitors to experience and understand the natural and historic resources around Prisoners Harbor.
Response: Through the development of a Comprehensive Interpretive Plan the Park will plan for the interpretation of the natural and cultural resources in the Prisoners Harbor area, with the goal of providing a range of interpretation media and opportunities without jeopardizing the resources themselves. Prior to the completion of this plan, the resources will be interpreted through temporary wayside exhibits, site bulletins, and an interpretive guide.
Concern: More historic resources should be retained as part of the overall restoration project—specifically, the historic former cattle corrals.
Response: The existing corrals were constructed in the 1950’s over filled wetland as part of the Stanton’s conversion from a sheep operation to a cattle operation. They replaced sheep corrals located against the base of the cliff and constructed in the mid-1800s. The sheep corrals were removed in the 1950s. The cattle corrals were abandoned in 1988 and re-paired by NPS in the 1990’s. The proposed project will not affect the pier.
The goal of this project is to restore coastal wetland ecosystem function while protecting archaeological and historical resources. The park developed two alternatives methods for restoring coastal wetland ecosystem function. The preferred alternative calls for removing all cattle corrals. The park has consulted with the California State Historic Preservation Office concerning the impact of removing the cattle corrals on the eligibility of the Santa Cruz Island Ranching District to the NRHP and possible mitigation measures. The results of that consultation are included in this EIS (Appendix G).
In addition, to help interpret the historic ranching use of Prisoners Harbor, the park will build a corral structure similar to the historic sheep corrals in photos dated c. 1900 (Figure 3.8). The corrals will be situated along the row of eucalyptus trees at the base of the cliff, extending toward the pier. Design and materials will approximate the appearance of the historic sheep corrals and be determined by NPS cultural resource specialists in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office during the design phase of the project.
Summary - ix Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT...... i SUMMARY OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ...... i Introduction...... i Description of the Alternatives ...... ii Alternatives Considered But Dismissed ...... iv Summary of Environmental Consequences...... v Response to Comments...... vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... x List of Figures...... xviii List of Tables ...... xix 1.0 Purpose and Need ...... 1 1.1 Project Area Ownership and Role of Lead Agencies ...... 1 1.2 Guidance and Authority for Resource Management ...... 3 1.3 Purpose and Need ...... 5 1.3.1 Project Purpose ...... 5 1.3.2 Need for Action...... 6 1.3.2.1 Restore wetland and riparian ecosystem function ...... 7 1.3.2.2 Recreate habitat for special status species, passerine birds and migratory waterfowl ...... 7 1.3.2.3 Protect significant cultural resources...... 8 1.3.2.4 Provide an enhanced visitor experience...... 8 1.4 Public Involvement and Scoping ...... 8 1.4.1 Notice of Intent (NOI) and Notice of Preparation (NOP)...... 9 1.4.2 Project Scoping ...... 9 1.4.3 Public Review of the Draft EIS ...... 9 1.5 Scope of the Proposed Action...... 9 1.6 Environmental Issues...... 9 1.6.1 Significant Environmental Issues ...... 9 1.6.1.1 Project Alternatives and likelihood of success ...... 10 1.6.1.2 Hydrologic Function ...... 10 1.6.1.3 Wetlands ...... 10 1.6.1.4 Water Quality...... 10 1.6.1.5 Island Vegetation ...... 10 1.6.1.6 Island Fauna...... 11 1.6.1.7 Archeological Resources ...... 11 1.6.1.8 Historic Resources ...... 11 1.6.1.9 Visitor Experience ...... 12 1.6.2 Dismissed Issues ...... 12 1.6.2.1 Conflict between land use plans, policies, or controls...... 12 1.6.2.2 Energy requirements and conservation potential...... 12 1.6.2.3 Natural or depletable resource requirements and conservation potential . 13 1.6.2.4 Urban quality and design of the built environment ...... 13
Table of Contents - x
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
1.6.2.5 Socially or economically disadvantaged populations...... 13 1.6.2.6 Prime and unique agricultural lands ...... 13 1.6.2.7 Sacred Sites...... 13 1.6.2.8 Indian Trust Resources ...... 13 1.6.2.9 Air Quality ...... 14 1.6.2.10 Socioeconomic Impacts ...... 14 1.6.2.11 Traffic and Transportation ...... 14 1.6.2.12 Noise ...... 14 1.6.2.13 Visual resources...... 14 1.6.2.14 Visitor Safety ...... 14 1.6.2.15 Museum Collections ...... 15 1.6.2.16 Waste Management...... 15 2.0 Alternatives...... 16 2.1 Development of Alternatives ...... 16 2.1.1 Internal Scoping and Public Involvement...... 16 2.1.1.1 Internal Scoping...... 16 2.1.1.2 Public Involvement ...... 17 2.1.2 Alternatives Screening Criteria...... 17 2.2 Alternatives Considered in Detail...... 17 2.2.1 No Action Alternative—Alternative A...... 17 2.2.2 Alternative B - 2/3 Wetland Restoration with Partial Berm Removal...... 20 2.2.2.1 Transportation and Transport of Supplies and Equipment ...... 20 2.2.2.2 Preparing the Wetlands Restoration Area...... 20 2.2.2.3 Corral Removal...... 23 2.2.2.4 Partial Berm and Fill Removal ...... 23 2.2.2.4.1 Best Management Practices ...... 24 2.2.2.5 Wetland Restoration...... 25 2.2.2.6 Riparian Restoration ...... 32 2.2.2.7 Cultural Resources...... 35 2.2.2.8 Improving Visitor Experience...... 35 2.2.3 Alternative C -1/3 Wetland Restoration with partial berm removal...... 35 2.2.3.1 Transportation and Transport of Supplies and Equipment ...... 35 2.2.3.2 Preparing the Wetlands Restoration Area...... 35 2.2.3.3 Corral Removal...... 36 2.2.3.4 Partial Berm and Fill Removal ...... 36 2.2.3.5 Wetland Restoration...... 36 2.2.3.6 Riparian Restoration ...... 38 2.2.3.7 Cultural Resource Protection ...... 38 2.2.3.8 Improving Visitor Experience...... 38 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Dismissed from Detailed Study ...... 38 2.3.1 Remove all fill material in the Prisoners Harbor area...... 38 2.3.2 Retain the Berm ...... 39 2.3.3 Reconfigure cattle corral to create a narrow band of corrals and increase size of wetland restoration...... 39 2.3.4 Retain three corrals parallel to the access road...... 39
Table of Contents - xi
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
2.3.5 Removal of the Entire Berm ...... 39 2.4 Preferred Alternative...... 39 2.5 Environmentally Preferred Alternative...... 40 2.6 Actions Common to All Alternatives ...... 40 2.7 Comparison of Alternatives ...... 40 3.0 Affected Environment...... 42 3.1 Physical Setting...... 42 3.1.1 Regional Context ...... 42 3.1.2 Santa Cruz Island ...... 43 3.1.3 Project Area ...... 45 3.1.4 Climate...... 47 3.1.4.1 Historic and Current Climate...... 47 3.1.4.2 Climate in the Future ...... 48 3.1.5 Geology and Geomorphic Processes ...... 50 3.1.5.1 Geologic Resources and Topography ...... 50 3.1.5.2 Soil Resources...... 51 3.1.5.3 Geomorphic Processes...... 51 3.1.5.4 Shoreline Characteristics and Processes ...... 52 3.1.6 Land Use History ...... 53 3.1.6.1 Pre-agricultural Period...... 53 3.1.6.2 Early Agricultural Period...... 54 3.1.6.3 Late Agricultural Period ...... 55 3.1.6.4 Conservation Period...... 55 3.2 Physical Resources...... 55 3.2.1 Water...... 55 3.2.1.1 Hydrologic Function ...... 55 3.2.1.1.1 Surfacewater ...... 55 3.2.1.1.2 Floodplain Processes...... 56 3.2.1.1.3 Alluvial groundwater ...... 56 3.2.1.2 Wetlands ...... 59 3.2.1.2.1 Types of wetlands in the Project Area ...... 59 3.2.1.2.2 Wetland functions ...... 61 3.2.1.2.3 Alteration of...... 62 wetlands at Prisoners Harbor ...... 62 3.2.1.3 Water Quality...... 64 3.3 Biological Resources ...... 64 3.3.1 Wildlife ...... 65 3.3.1.1 Birds...... 65 3.3.1.1.1 Island scrub-jay...... 67 3.3.1.1.2 Snowy plover ...... 68 3.3.1.1.3 Brown pelican ...... 68 3.3.1.1.4 Bald eagle...... 69 3.3.1.2 Mammals, reptiles, and amphibians...... 70 3.3.1.2.1 Santa Cruz Island fox...... 70 3.3.1.2.2 Santa Cruz Island deer mouse...... 71
Table of Contents - xii
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
3.3.1.2.3 Western harvest mouse ...... 71 3.3.1.2.4 Channel Islands slender salamander ...... 72 3.3.1.2.5 Island fence lizard...... 72 3.3.1.2.6 Santa Cruz gopher snake...... 72 3.3.1.3 Invertebrates and Fish...... 74 3.3.2 Vegetation...... 75 3.3.2.1 Santa Cruz Island Vegetation Communities...... 75 3.3.2.1.1 Eucalyptus Stands ...... 78 3.3.2.1.2 Coast Live Oak Alliance...... 79 3.3.2.1.3 Lemonadeberry Alliance...... 79 3.3.2.1.4 Mixed Arroyo Willow - Mule Fat...... 79 3.3.2.1.5 Arroyo Willow...... 79 3.3.2.1.6 Bulrush - Cattail...... 80 3.3.2.1.7 Fennel...... 80 3.3.2.1.8 Silver Beachbur - Beach Sand Verbena Alliance ...... 80 3.3.2.1.9 Stream Beds and Flats...... 80 3.3.2.1.10 Planted Trees and Shrubs...... 81 3.3.2.1.11 Built-up ...... 81 3.3.2.1.12 Rare, Special Status and Federally Listed Plant Species ...... 81 3.3.2.2 Non native plant species ...... 82 3.3.2.2.1 Vulnerability of Islands...... 82 3.3.2.2.2 Eucalyptus...... 83 3.4 Cultural Resources...... 85 3.4.1 Historical Overview...... 85 3.4.2 Cultural Resources...... 88 3.4.3 Historic Resources at Prisoners Harbor ...... 90 3.5 Social Resources ...... 91 3.5.1 Recreation and Visitor Experience ...... 91 3.5.1.1 Key Recreational Opportunities and Uses of the Project Area...... 92 3.5.1.2 Recreational Use Patterns in the Project Area ...... 92 3.5.1.3 Facilities to Support Recreation and Visitor Use in the Project Area...... 93 3.5.1.4 Visitor Education ...... 93 4.0 Environmental Consequences...... 94 4.1 Methodology...... 94 4.1.1 Water Resources ...... 94 4.1.1.1 Hydrologic Function & Processes ...... 94 4.1.1.2 Wetlands and Floodplains...... 96 4.1.1.3 Water Quality...... 97 4.1.2 Wildlife ...... 99 4.1.3 Vegetation...... 101 4.1.4 Archeological Resources ...... 102 4.1.5 Historic Resources ...... 102 4.1.6 Visitor Experience ...... 103 4.1.7 Cumulative Impact Scenario...... 104 4.1.8 Impairment of Park Resources...... 112
Table of Contents - xiii
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.2 Alternative A - No Action Alternative...... 113 4.2.1 Water Resources ...... 113 4.2.1.1 Hydrologic Function and Processes...... 114 4.2.1.1.1 Effects of Wetlands and Floodplain Restoration ...... 114 4.2.1.1.2 Effects of Stream Channel Restoration...... 116 4.2.1.1.3 Cumulative Impacts ...... 116 4.2.1.1.4 Conclusions (including impairment)...... 116 4.2.1.2 Wetlands and Floodplains...... 117 4.2.1.2.1 Effects of Wetlands and Floodplain Restoration ...... 117 4.2.1.2.2 Effects of Stream Channel Restoration...... 117 4.2.1.3 Water Quality...... 117 4.2.1.3.1 Wetland and Floodplain Restoration ...... 117 4.2.1.3.2 Riparian and Stream Channel Restoration...... 118 4.2.2 Biological Resources ...... 118 4.2.2.1 Wildlife ...... 118 4.2.2.1.1 Birds...... 119 4.2.2.1.2 Mammals, reptiles, and amphibians...... 119 4.2.2.1.3 Aquatic Invertebrates and Fish ...... 120 4.2.2.1.4 Cumulative Impacts ...... 120 4.2.2.1.5 Conclusions (including impairment)...... 121 4.2.2.2 Vegetation...... 121 4.2.2.2.1 Native Vegetation Communities...... 121 4.2.2.2.1.1 Cumulative Impacts ...... 122 4.2.2.2.1.2 Conclusions (including impairment)...... 123 4.2.2.2.2 Non-Native Vegetation ...... 123 4.2.2.2.2.1 Cumulative Impacts ...... 124 4.2.2.2.2.2 Conclusions (including impairment)...... 124 4.2.3 Cultural Resources...... 124 4.2.3.1 Archeological Resources ...... 124 4.2.3.1.1 Cumulative Impacts ...... 125 4.2.3.1.2 Conclusions (including impairment)...... 125 4.2.3.2 Historical Resources ...... 126 4.2.3.2.1 Cumulative Impacts ...... 128 4.2.3.2.2 Conclusions (including impairment)...... 129 4.2.4 Social Resources ...... 129 4.2.4.1 Recreation and Visitor Experience ...... 129 4.3 Alternative B – 2/3 Wetland Restoration with Partial Berm Removal...... 129 4.3.1 Water Resources ...... 129 4.3.1.1 Hydrologic Function & Processes ...... 131 4.3.1.1.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 131 4.3.1.1.2 Effects of Stream Channel Restoration...... 136 4.3.1.1.3 Cumulative Impacts ...... 137 4.3.1.1.4 Conclusions (including impairment)...... 137 4.3.1.1.5 Mitigation and Monitoring...... 138 4.3.1.2 Wetlands and Floodplains...... 139
Table of Contents - xiv
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.3.1.2.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 139 4.3.1.2.2 Effects of Stream Channel Restoration...... 141 4.3.1.2.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 141 4.3.1.2.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 142 4.3.1.2.5 Mitigation and Monitoring...... 142 4.3.1.3 Water Quality...... 142 4.3.1.3.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 143 4.3.1.3.2 Effects of Stream Channel Restoration...... 143 4.3.1.3.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 144 4.3.1.3.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 145 4.3.1.3.5 Mitigation and Monitoring...... 145 4.3.2 Biological Resources ...... 145 4.3.2.1 Wildlife ...... 145 4.3.2.1.1 Birds...... 145 4.3.2.1.1.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain Restoration...... 145 4.3.2.1.1.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 148 4.3.2.1.1.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 149 4.3.2.1.1.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 151 4.3.2.1.1.5 Mitigation and monitoring ...... 151 4.3.2.1.2 Mammals, reptiles, and amphibians...... 151 4.3.2.1.2.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 151 4.3.2.1.2.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 154 4.3.2.1.2.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 157 4.3.2.1.2.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 158 4.3.2.1.2.5 Mitigation and monitoring ...... 159 4.3.2.1.3 Aquatic Invertebrates and Fish ...... 159 4.3.2.1.3.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 159 4.3.2.1.3.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 160 4.3.2.1.3.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 161 4.3.2.1.3.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 161 4.3.2.1.3.5 Mitigation and monitoring ...... 162 4.3.2.2 Vegetation...... 162 4.3.2.2.1 Native Vegetation Communities...... 162 4.3.2.2.1.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 162 4.3.2.2.1.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 165 4.3.2.2.1.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 167 4.3.2.2.1.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 168 4.3.2.2.1.5 Mitigation and monitoring ...... 169 4.3.2.2.2 Non-Native Vegetation ...... 170 4.3.2.2.2.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 170 4.3.2.2.2.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 171 4.3.2.2.2.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS...... 172 4.3.2.2.2.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 173 4.3.2.2.2.5 Mitigation and monitoring ...... 173 4.3.3 Cultural Resources...... 173
Table of Contents - xv
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.3.3.1 Archeological Resources ...... 173 4.3.3.1.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration...... 174 4.3.3.1.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 176 4.3.3.1.3 Cumulative Impacts ...... 176 4.3.3.1.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 176 4.3.3.1.5 Mitigation and Monitoring...... 177 4.3.3.2 Historical Resources ...... 178 4.3.3.2.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 178 4.3.3.2.2 Effects of riparian restoration ...... 180 4.3.3.2.3 Cumulative Impacts ...... 181 4.3.3.2.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 181 4.3.3.2.5 Mitigation and Monitoring...... 182 4.3.4 Social Resources ...... 183 4.3.4.1 Recreation and Visitor Experience ...... 183 4.3.4.1.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 183 4.3.4.1.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 184 4.3.4.1.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 185 4.3.4.1.4 Conclusion ...... 185 4.4 Alternative C – 1/3 Wetland Restoration with Partial Berm Removal...... 185 4.4.1 Water Resources ...... 185 4.4.1.1 Hydrologic Function and Processes...... 185 4.4.1.2 Wetlands and Floodplains...... 186 4.4.1.3 Water Quality...... 186 4.4.2 Biological Resources ...... 187 4.4.2.1 Wildlife ...... 187 4.4.2.1.1 Birds...... 187 4.4.2.1.1.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 187 4.4.2.1.1.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 188 4.4.2.1.1.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 188 4.4.2.1.1.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 188 4.4.2.1.1.5 Mitigation and monitoring ...... 189 4.4.2.1.2 Mammals, reptiles, and amphibians...... 189 4.4.2.1.2.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 189 4.4.2.1.2.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 189 4.4.2.1.2.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 189 4.4.2.1.2.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 190 4.4.2.1.2.5 Mitigation and monitoring ...... 190 4.4.2.1.3 Aquatic Invertebrates and Fish ...... 190 4.4.2.1.3.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 190 4.4.2.1.3.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 191 4.4.2.1.3.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 191 4.4.2.1.3.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 191 4.4.2.1.3.5 Mitigation and monitoring ...... 191 4.4.2.2 Vegetation...... 192 4.4.2.2.1 Native Vegetation Communities...... 192
Table of Contents - xvi
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.4.2.2.1.1 Effects of wetlands floodplain restoration ...... 192 4.4.2.2.1.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 192 4.4.2.2.1.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 192 4.4.2.2.1.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 192 4.4.2.2.1.5 Mitigation and monitoring ...... 193 4.4.2.2.2 Non-Native Vegetation ...... 193 4.4.2.2.2.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 193 4.4.2.2.2.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 193 4.4.2.2.2.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 193 4.4.2.2.2.4 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 194 4.4.2.2.2.5 Mitigation and monitoring ...... 194 4.4.3 Cultural Resources...... 194 4.4.3.1 Archeological Resources ...... 194 4.4.3.1.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 194 4.4.3.1.2 Cumulative Impacts ...... 195 4.4.3.1.3 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 195 4.4.3.1.4 Mitigation and Monitoring...... 196 4.4.3.2 Historical Resources ...... 196 4.4.3.2.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 196 4.4.3.2.2 Cumulative Impacts ...... 197 4.4.3.2.3 Conclusion (including impairment) ...... 197 4.4.3.2.4 Mitigation and Monitoring...... 198 4.4.4 Social Resources ...... 198 4.4.4.1 Recreation and Visitor Experience ...... 198 4.4.4.1.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration ...... 198 4.4.4.1.2 Effects of stream channel restoration...... 199 4.4.4.1.3 Cumulative impacts ...... 199 4.4.4.1.4 Conclusion ...... 199 4.5 Sustainability and Long-Term Management ...... 199 4.5.1 Relationship between Local Short-Term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity...... 200 4.5.2 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources ...... 200 4.5.3 Significant and Unavoidable Adverse Impacts...... 200 4.6 Growth-Inducing Impacts ...... 200 4.7 Summary Comparison of Impacts by Alternative ...... 201 5.0 Consultation and Coordination ...... 206 5.1 Consultation ...... 206 5.1.1 California State Historic Preservation Office ...... 206 5.1.2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ...... 206 5.1.3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ...... 207 5.1.4 California Regional Water Quality Control Board ...... 207 5.1.5 California Department of Fish and Game...... 207 5.1.6 Coastal Commission ...... 207 5.2 Public Involvement Process...... 207 5.2.1 Internal Scoping...... 207
Table of Contents - xvii
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
5.2.2 External Scoping...... 207 5.2.2.1 Public Scoping ...... 207 5.2.2.2 Public Response to Scoping...... 209 5.3 Notification and Distribution of Draft EIS ...... 211 5.2.2 Draft EIS List of Recipients...... 211 5.4 List of Preparers...... 215 6.0 Response to Comments...... 217 7.0 References...... 242 INDEX ...... 247 APPENDIX A—NOTICE OF INTENT ...... A-1 APPENDIX B—SUMMARY OF SCOPING COMMENTS ...... B-1 APPENDIX C—GIS ANALYSIS OF REVEGETATION PLANS...... C-1 APPENDIX D—COWARDIN WETLANDS DELINEATION ...... D-1 APPENDIX E—PLANT SPECIES SURVEY ...... E-1 APPENDIX F—EUCALYPTUS SURVEY...... F-1 APPENDIX G—SHPO CONSULTATION ...... G-1 APPENDIX H—FWS CONSULTATION...... H-1 APPENDIX I—CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION ...... I-1
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Area...... 2 Figure 2.1 Alternative B – 2/3 Wetland Restoration with partial berm removal...... 22 Figure 2.2 Prisoners Harbor reference transect...... 26 Figure 2.3 Plant community–water table model from reference transect...... 27 Figure 2.4 Prisoners Harbor mean water table contours Nov 2005 – Nov 2006...... 28 Figure 2.5 Alternative B wetland restoration area...... 30 Figure 2.6 Stages in riparian restoration in Cañada del Puerto...... 34 Figure 2.7 Alternative C – 1/3 Wetland restoration with partial berm removal...... 37 Figure 3.1 Proposed Project Area ...... 46 Figure 3.2 Prisoners Harbor Well Network ...... 57 Figure 3.3 Ground Water Surface in Feet Above Mean Sea Level at Prisoners Harbor. . 59 Figure 3.4 Cowardin Wetlands and Riparian Areas at Prisoners Harbor and Lower Cañada del Puerto...... 61 Figure 3.5 Photo Looking North East at Prisoners Harbor circa 1880. Courtesy of Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History...... 63 Figure 3.6 Distribution of eucalyptus trees and native oaks in the Project Area...... 84 Figure 3.7 Prisoners Harbor looking south in Cañada del Puerto circa 1900. Courtesy of Santa Barbara Historical Museum...... 87 Figure 3.8 Prisoners Harbor looking west circa 1900. Courtesy SBMNH...... 91 Figure 3.9 Prisoners Harbor warehouse...... 92 Figure 4.1 An early scene at La Playa, Prisoners Harbor ...... 107 Figure 4.2 The house and kitchen at PrisonersHarbor...... 108 Figure 4.3 Santa Cruz Island Ranching District ...... 127
Table of Contents - xviii
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Matrix of Principal Actions Proposed under each Alternative...... 19 Table 2.2 The responses of wetland values and functions to various buffer sizes ...... 31 Table 2.3 Comparison of Alternatives...... 41 Table 3.1 Temperature and Precipitation on Santa Cruz Island ...... 48 Table 3.2 Bird species observed in the project area during an 8-station, circular count spring bird survey...... 66 Table 3.3 Non-avian vertebrates on Santa Cruz Island...... 73 Table 3.4 Plant communities in the Project Area ...... 78 Table 3.5 Plants of Santa Cruz Island with Special Legal Status or Local Endemism..... 81 Table 3.6 Visits at Prisoners Harbor from 2005-2008...... 93 Table 5.1 Informal walking tour included NPS experts ...... 208 Table 5.2 Major issues and concerns expressed during the on-island site visit...... 208 Table 5.3 Scoping Comments by Major Issue Topic...... 210
Table of Contents - xix Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND
RESTORATION PLAN
CHAPTER ONE
PURPOSE AND NEED
responsibility of the NPS, including 1.0 Purpose and Need overall project planning, fulfilling obligations of federal and local law, In accordance with Section 102(2)(c) of implementation, and post-project the National Environmental Policy Act monitoring on NPS lands. (NEPA) (42 US Code 4321 et seq.), the California Environmental Quality Act 1.1 Project Area Ownership and (CEQA) (California Public Resources Role of Lead Agencies Code Section 21000 et seq.), state CEQA guidelines (14 California Code of The 59.7-acre Project Area is located at Regulations 15000 et seq.), National Prisoners Harbor and along Cañada del Park Service policy, and US Department Puerto on the north side of Santa Cruz of Interior policy, Channel Islands Island. Ownership of the Project Area is National Park has prepared this divided between the NPS and TNC. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 19-acre Prisoners Harbor area is owned to identify and assess potential impacts by the NPS. The remaining portion of associated with proposed wetland the Project Area in Cañada del Puerto restoration actions near Prisoners Harbor canyon is owned by TNC (Figure 1.1). on Santa Cruz Island, CA.
The project has two sponsoring entities: landowners The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the National Park Service (NPS). Each cooperator has a unique role in planning and implementing the project. TNC is responsible for contributing to the project planning effort, providing review to ensure project consistency with TNC objectives, facilitating project implementation on TNC lands, and any post-project monitoring and actions needed on TNC lands. All other actions are the
Purpose and Need - 1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 1.1 Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Area.
Purpose and Need - 2
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
The Park’s enabling legislation protection of wildlife from poaching recognizes the value and appropriateness gradually gave way to recognition of the of achieving goals through projects complexities of comprehensive anywhere on the island and authorizes ecosystem management in a regional and the use of federal funds on privately-held global context (National Parks and portions of the Park in order to protect Conservation Association 1989). and restore resources. The NPS and TNC have similar mandates for In 1961 the Secretary of the Interior conservation and protection of natural convened a blue-ribbon panel to evaluate resources. The mission of Channel how the NPS should manage large Islands National Park is to protect the mammals and other animals. The nationally significant natural, cultural, resulting report (Leopold et al. 1963) scientific, and scenic values of the directed the NPS toward ecosystem Channel Islands and adjacent marine management, which is the management waters and to provide present and future of all components of an ecosystem as a generations’ opportunities to experience whole, rather than single species and understand Park resources. The management. The Leopold Commission Nature Conservancy, a private non-profit promoted the concept that national parks conservation organization, is committed should be managed as “vignettes of to preserving plants, animals, and natural primitive America” in order to preserve, communities and the biological diversity to the extent possible, the biota that they represent by protecting the lands existed or would have evolved had and waters they need to survive. European humans not colonized North America. Although this has been 1.2 Guidance and Authority for interpreted by some as a call for “hands- Resource Management off” management of a static primitive condition or scene, the Leopold The 1916 NPS Organic Act (16 USC 1 Commission actually promoted an et seq.) directs the NPS to mange lands aggressive stewardship of parklands with of the National Park System “in such “hands-on” management techniques, and manner and by such means as will leave perpetuation of dynamic, evolving them unimpaired for the enjoyment of ecosystems. For example, the reported future generations.” The Redwoods Act called for restoration of natural fire of 1978 (16 USC 1a-1) reaffirmed this regimes in parks. principle. In general, these two statutes confer upon the Secretary of Interior the More recent work has built upon the discretion to determine how best to findings of the Leopold Commission protect and preserve Park resources. regarding resource management in NPS parks. Parsons et al. (1986) states that Since the establishment of Yellowstone the principal aim of National Park National Park in 1872 and the Service resource management in natural subsequent formation of the National areas is the unimpeded interaction of Park Service in 1916, the philosophy of native ecosystem processes and natural resources management has structural elements. Parks should protect evolved. Simple concepts such as not only structural elements such as plants, animals, soil, water, and air, but
Purpose and Need - 3
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement also dynamic ecosystem processes such park system through restoration of as natural fire, biotic evolution, and previously degraded or destroyed nutrient cycling. wetlands….When natural wetland characteristics or functions have been In 1989 the NPS again convened a blue- degraded or lost due to previous or on- ribbon panel to assess the role of going human actions, the Service will, to resource management and research in the extent practicable, restore them to the future of national parks. The predisturbance conditions.” resulting report (National Parks and Conservation Association 1989) National Park Service management also validated findings of the Leopold is directed to protect, preserve, and Commission, affirming that the focus of foster appreciation of cultural resources park management should be to maintain through appropriate programs of or restore native biota and ecosystems research, planning, and stewardship and to resist establishment of alien, non- (NPS Management Policies, 2006). native organisms. Where possible, Guidance for cultural resources ecosystem management should attempt management in NPS units is found in to preserve natural processes operating National Park Service Management at a scale consistent with the evolution Policies and Cultural Resource of the ecosystem being managed. The Management Guidelines (NPS-28). report recommended that the NPS move Management of cultural resources in well beyond static scene management to NPS units is subject to the provisions of provide stewardship for the elements and the National Historic Preservation Act processes contained in parks. (16 USC 470 et seq.), the National Environmental Policy Act (42 USC 4371 The Park’s enabling legislation, PL 96- et seq.), the American Indian Religious 199 TITLE II Sec. 201, calls for Freedom Act (42 USC 1996), the protecting natural, scenic, wildlife, Advisory Council on Historic marine, ecological, archaeological, Preservation’s regulation regarding cultural, and scientific values. “Protection of Historic Properties (36 Furthermore, Public Law 96-199 Sec. CFR 800), the Secretary of Interior’s 204 directs the Secretary to utilize “Standards and Guidelines for statutory authority available for the Archeology and Historic Preservation conservation and management of (FR 48:44716-40) and “Federal Agency wildlife and natural and cultural Responsibilities under Section 110 of the resources as he deems appropriate. National Historic Preservation Act” (FR 53:4727-46). The Prisoners Harbor National Park Service management Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan policies (NPS 2006) state that parks will proposes actions that cause irreversible protect and restore the integrity of consequences to contributing elements to natural systems. Specific guidance is the cultural landscape. Section 106 of given for wetlands: “The Service will the Act mandates that federal agencies implement a no net loss of wetlands take into account the effects of their policy. In addition, the Service will actions on properties listed or eligible for strive to achieve a longer term goal of listing in the National Register, and give net gain of wetlands across the national the Advisory Council on Historic
Purpose and Need - 4
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Preservation a reasonable opportunity to policy to determine a course of action comment. The NPS consulted with the for the Prisoner’s Harbor area and State Historic Preservation Office and evaluate the effects of the action while the Mission Band of Santa Ynez Indians maintaining a balanced approach to (Chumash) on project alternatives and management of multiple resources. mitigation and avoidance measures. The federal Endangered Species Act The restoration of the coastal wetland at (ESA) requires that actions authorized, Prisoners Harbor is consistent with the funded, or carried out by federal NPS Management Policies (2006) and agencies not jeopardize the continued the current General Management Plan existence of listed species. Under (GMP) (1985) for Channel Islands section 7(a)(2) of the ESA (16 USC National Park. The Park GMP, written section 1536), federal agencies are prior to the NPS acquisition of the required to consult with the U.S. Fish project area, calls broadly for and Wildlife Service (FWS) on actions “management strategies for the which may affect listed species or preservation and restoration of natural critical habitat. Because this Prisoners ecosystems” and states that the Park Harbor Wetland Restoration Plan should be “managed for the restoration proposes actions that could affect the and preservation of natural biotic federally listed species on Santa Cruz associations” and to manage cultural Island, NPS will consult with FWS on resources “in accordance with likely effect to those species. procedures established by the National Park Service for treatment of 1.3 Purpose and Need archeological, historic, and other cultural properties.” The Park Statement for 1.3.1 Project Purpose Management (1991) calls for “recontouring of disturbed landscapes … During the past two centuries California to return park ecosystems to a semblance has lost over 90% of its coastal wetlands of natural conditions.” The Statement for (NOAA 1990) due to agriculture and Management further states that islands urbanization; in addition, California has “are managed for their cultural value.” lost more wetlands than any other A new GMP is in the early stages of Pacific-coast state (Dahl 1990). The preparation. Southern California coast has experienced the greatest intensity of this The EIS is tiered to the GMP, which wetlands loss: high-density urban calls for “an interdisciplinary approach locations have encroached on all of the to management actions because of the large coastal wetland areas causing abundance of sensitive resources.” In associated losses in biodiversity. Many describing management zones for the of the wetlands on the Southern Park, the Statement for Management California coast that have been lost were recognizes the need for “overlapping shallow-water habitats, such as brackish- development zones” and states that the water and salt marshes and intertidal islands are subject to “dual zoning.” The flats (Macdonald 1990). purpose of this plan and environmental impact statement is to apply laws and
Purpose and Need - 5
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
In response to this loss of highly productive habitat, the California Fish To restore ecosystem function to the and Game Commission recommends that former coastal backbarrier wetland at the state increase the area of wetlands in Prisoners Harbor and initiate the state by 50% through ecological ecosystem recovery to its associated restoration. Save the Wetlands, a non- stream corridor in the lower Cañada profit state-sponsored organization is del Puerto to the maximum extent leading a collaboration of more than 90 possible while protecting significant governmental agencies and non-profit cultural resources, the pier, and the organizations to begin planning access road at Prisoners Harbor. statewide, science-based wetland restoration projects (Zedler 1996). Project objectives include:
Although much of the Channel Islands - a) Reconnect Cañada del Puerto with including most of Santa Cruz Island - its floodplain within the project have escaped the widespread site, and restore a more natural development typical of Southern topography and hydrology to the California, the Prisoners Harbor area former wetland, in order to was ecologically altered in order to improve wetland functions, support sheep and cattle ranching particularly native species habitat. operations in the late-19th to mid-20th centuries. Before ranchers developed b) Protect the significant archeological lower Cañada del Puerto for agricultural resources from erosion and activities, the site supported about degradation. twelve acres of marsh and creek wetland habitat (Noon 2003). Today the site c) Provide an enhanced visitor supports about two acres of wetland experience for people arriving on habitat, more than a 50% reduction in Santa Cruz Island at Prisoners wetland habitat, and 0.3 miles of stream Harbor, by providing opportunities corridor has been altered by to learn about the ecology and channelization of the creek. human history of the island and the site. During the ranching era, four species of eucalyptus trees were planted on Santa d) Protect the historic warehouse, Cruz Island. Blue gum eucalyptus scale house, and well from (globulous) was planted in the Cañada degradation, including flooding. del Puerto watershed. Blue gum and red river gum (Eucalyptus camaludensis) e) Maintain access to the interior of have colonized much of the rest of the Santa Cruz Island for Park Cañada del Puerto floodplain, creating partners. virtual monocultures of eucalyptus trees in areas that would have been 1.3.2 Need for Action characterized as Southern Riparian Woodland (Junak, et al. 1995). Action is needed because prior modifications to the site, including The purpose of this project is to: filling the wetland, channelizing the
Purpose and Need - 6
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement stream, and introducing invasive species, at this site would have superior ability to degraded the ecosystem function of the migrate up-watershed in the face of sea coastal wetland and riparian corridor. level rise and potential change in off- shore currents. 1.3.2.1 Restore wetland and riparian ecosystem function 1.3.2.2 Recreate habitat for special status species, passerine birds and Prior to the early 1800s the Project Area migratory waterfowl supported about 12 acres of coastal marsh and riparian forest, and also likely Santa Cruz Island is sited on one of the supported a mixed live oak savannah on great migratory corridors of the the floodplain terraces immediately continent - the Pacific Flyway. During upstream of Prisoners Harbor in lower the spring and fall months, the remaining Cañada del Puerto. Prisoners Harbor wetland at Prisoners Harbor hosts was the largest wetland complex on waterfowl such as brant, pintails, and Santa Cruz Island, as it sits at the mouth mallard, and shorebirds such as stilts, of the island's largest watershed. When plovers, and gulls, which stop here to agriculturalists filled the wetlands in the rest, feed, and in some cases over- 19th and 20th centuries, in order to winter. support sheep and cattle operations at the harbor, important wetland functions and The Channel Islands represent some of ecosystem services were lost. These the best remaining undeveloped habitat functions include wildlife habitat and in Southern California; Prisoners forage, nutrient retention, and floodwater Harbor, at the mouth of Santa Cruz storage. In addition, establishment of Island's largest watershed, has the non-native and invasive eucalyptus trees greatest potential to improve wetland displaced native plant communities that habitat for Pacific Flyway birds utilizing also provided ecosystem services. These the Channel Islands. services included wildlife habitat and forage and a relatively open vegetation In addition, although many vertebrates structure on the floodplain to allow for are secretive the Project Area is likely floodwater dispersal. This project seeks frequented by special status and island- to return much of this ecological endemic species which are dependent on function to the site through active habitat diversity. These include Santa restoration. Cruz Island fox (Urocyon littoralis santacruzae; federally endangered, Wetland restoration at Prisoners Harbor Santa Cruz Island endemic), bald eagle has a high potential to return sustainable (Haliaeetus leucocephalus; former ecological function to the site, even in federal listed species), island spotted the face of climate change. Unlike most skunk (Spilogale gracilis amphiala; other potential coastal wetland Channel Islands endemic), and Santa restoration projects in the region, the Cruz Island deer mouse (Peromyscus proposed project at Prisoners Harbor maniculatus santacruzae; Santa Cruz provides an opportunity to restore Island endemic). Restoration of wetlands which are fully connected to floodplain and wetland habitat in lower the entire watershed. Restored wetlands Cañada del Puerto and at Prisoners
Purpose and Need - 7
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Harbor will provide high quality and in Cañada del Puerto creek. A stone high diversity habitat. retaining wall was constructed in the lower Cañada del Puerto creek Finally, wetland and floodplain during the Caire era It was damaged restoration within the Project Area will by floods and subsequently benefit breeding passerine birds. Fifty- bulldozed creating an earthen berm one species of landbird are known to separating the creek from filled breed on Santa Cruz Island (Diamond wetland, its floodplain. Significant and Jones 1980). Eight of island- portions of the archeological site breeding birds are subspecies endemic to remain, however, and recent two one more of the Northern Channel hydrologic studies suggest that the Islands, while one bird - the Island re-creation of the wetlands and the scrub-jay (Aphelocoma insularis) - is removal of the berm will slow the endemic to Santa Cruz Island. Many of dynamic water action that currently these birds utilize native riparian forest affects the site, improving the site’s and wetland marsh disproportionately to long-term survivability. upland habitat - because of the superior cover, habitat complexity, and food 1.3.2.4 Provide an enhanced visitor availability wetlands and floodplains experience provide, particularly in dry summer months. Island scrub-jays are frequently Park staff and Park partners disembark at observed in the remaining native Prisoners Harbor and travel through wetland and riparian habitat within the lower Cañada del Puerto to the Island's Project Area. Expansion of native Central Valley. In addition, visitors willow and emergent marsh vegetation disembark at Prisoners Harbor to begin and native oak savannah will improve day hikes, to begin overnight trips to the both breeding habitat and forage for jays backpacking campsite at Del Norte, or to and birds with similar habitat spend the afternoon visiting the Project requirements. Area. However, these visitors observe a diminished natural landscape compared 1.3.2.3 Protect significant cultural to its pre-19th century condition. resources Through this project the NPS seeks to improve the experience of visitors • Prisoners Harbor was the location of arriving at Santa Cruz Island at Prisoners an important island Chumash village. Harbor by restoring much of the natural This site is located at Prisoners landscape while retaining 19th century Harbor along both sides of the historic structures. The NPS also seeks stream channel. It has special to improve education orientation significance to the Native American facilities - to promote understanding and community and has yielded enjoyment of the site's natural and significant scientific data pertaining cultural resources. to the Late Prehistoric and Early Historic era. A stream channel was 1.4 Public Involvement and cut through the archeological site as Scoping an alternate outlet for water flowing
Purpose and Need - 8
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
alter natural hydrologic processes within 1.4.1 Notice of Intent (NOI) and Notice the Project Area. The project also of Preparation (NOP) proposes revegetation with native plants and post-project monitoring of The NPS formally initiated public ecological parameters at the site. scoping for this project on June 11, 2008, with the publication of the NOI in The National Park Service manages the Federal Register (Volume 73, natural resources within an adaptive Number 113, pages 33109-33111). The management framework; that is, if NOI is included in this document in management actions do not result in Appendix A. desired conditions additional action may be planned, evaluated, and implemented. 1.4.2 Project Scoping Long-term monitoring informs managers as to the need for additional management The NPS conducted scoping for this to achieve desired conditions. Actions project through two public meetings at that are needed to achieve desired the Park Headquarters in Ventura on conditions on NPS lands that are not July 1, 2008 and at the Santa Barbara described in this document and which do Public Library in Santa Barbara on July not represent on-going site maintenance 2, 2008 and interagency consultation, will be described and analyzed through a and publication of the project NOI. future environmental compliance Scoping for this project is described in process. more detail in Chapter 5: Consultation and Coordination. A scoping summary 1.6 Environmental Issues including a pre-scoping site visit for the project is provided in Appendix B. 1.6.1 Significant Environmental Issues
1.4.3 Public Review of the Draft EIS Impact topics included in this EIS are The draft EIS was published for described below: they were selected on circulation to local, state, and federal the basis of internal, public, and agency agencies, and to interested organizations scoping and baseline studies and are the and individuals to review and comment areas where the Park Service staff on the project and the environmental believe negligible to major impacts impacts analysis. There was a 60 day might occur from implementing the public review period. proposed alternatives. Further information about these impact topics is 1.5 Scope of the Proposed Action provided in Chapter 2 – Feasibility and Chapter 3 – Affected Environment. This document describes and analyzes Potential impacts resulting from the effects of actions to mitigate damage implementation of any of the proposed to wetland and floodplain resources in alternatives is the subject of Chapter 4 – the Project Area. The scope of the Environmental Consequences. project is to remove targeted non-native plants and to also remove materials that
Purpose and Need - 9
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
For clarification, a summary statement acres of coastal wetlands impounded by that defines the scope of the issue for a cobble bar; today the Project Area this project will accompany the supports 6 acres of wetlands - a 50% identified issues. decline. Alternatives in this document are evaluated for the potential to increase 1.6.1.1 Project Alternatives and the number of wetland acres at the site; likelihood of success the potential to increase wetland diversity; and the potential to improve Each alternative is analyzed for how wetland ecosystem services, such as well the proposed action would meet the wildlife habitat. project purpose, need, and objectives. Alternatives will be analyzed for the 1.6.1.4 Water Quality likelihood that actions will result in conditions that will enhance wetland and Wetlands and floodplains play a key role riparian ecosystem function; the relative in protecting and improving water ecosystem services provided, including quality as wetland plants and soils have native habitat quality, size, and diversity; the capacity to store and filter pollutants. the relative protection afforded to At the present time the vast majority of archeological resources within the the watershed is in a near natural state. Project Area; and the likelihood that Consequently, we would expect the alternatives will improve visitor prevailing surface water chemistry be experience at the site. the result of interaction between precipitation, soils, biota and bedrock. 1.6.1.2 Hydrologic Function Under natural conditions, the combination of variable bedrock The project seeks to restore natural geology, steep slopes, degraded soil hydrologic function to the Project Area structure due to historic over-grazing, potentially through removing non-native and intense precipitation events, may species which alter hydrology, removing result in the generation of large berms that channelize and direct flows in quantities of sediment within the lower Cañada del Puerto, and removing watershed. These sediment events are fill from former wetland habitat. highly episodic and are influenced by a Alternatives will be evaluated for their combination of meteorologic, geologic, potential performance in reconnecting biologic, and fluvial factors, and the stream channel and its floodplain therefore, are not definitively during high-water events, and reduction predictable. Project alternatives will be in number of perturbations to a natural evaluated for the potential to affect flow regime. sediment concentration in the creek during construction and the short 1.6.1.3 Wetlands term/long term following project implementation. A primary purpose of the project is to rehabilitate disturbed lands and restore 1.6.1.5 Island Vegetation degraded wetlands at Prisoners Harbor. NPS wetland scientists estimate that the Protection and promotion of native Project Area once supported about 12 vegetation communities is a foundation
Purpose and Need - 10
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement of maintaining functioning natural era (Arnold 2001). The site was bisected ecosystems. Within the Project Area in the late 1800s and was damaged again native vegetation communities have in the early 1900s when the stream was been degraded through alteration of channelized, and has also been affected hydrologic processes and establishment by subsequent erosion. Significant of non-native invasive plant species. portions of the site remain, however, and Project alternatives will be evaluated for recent hydrologic studies suggest that the potential to increase the number of the re-creation of the wetlands and the acres within the Project Area dominated removal of the berm will slow the by native species; the potential to reduce dynamic water action that currently the extent of Eucalyptus and other non- affects the site, improving the site’s long native invasive plant species; the term survivability. potential to improve habitat conditions for federal and state listed plant species; 1.6.1.8 Historic Resources and the potential to improve habitat conditions for other focal plant taxa, The Project Area is included within the such as live oak. National Register-eligible Santa Cruz Island Ranching District. The Prisoners 1.6.1.6 Island Fauna Harbor Ranch and its contributing resources are described in the Cultural Providing improved habitat conditions Landscape Inventory for the Santa Cruz for island fauna - including special Island Ranching District (National Park status, island endemic, and migratory Service 2004). species - is a primary goal of the project. Alternatives are evaluated for the Small-scale features which are potential to improve habitat quality for contributing elements to the landscape special status and endemic vertebrates, include cattle corrals and a scale house. the potential to improve the quality of The cattle corrals, built in the 1940s and breeding habitat for birds, and the 50s when the ranching operation was potential to improve habitat diversity in converted from a sheep operation to a lower Cañada del Puerto. cattle operation, are located in the area that existed as wetlands until the early 1.6.1.7 Archeological Resources 20th century. The scale-house is currently located within the cattle The Project Area is included within the corrals. Prior to construction of the National Register-listed Santa Cruz cattle corrals it was located adjacent to Island Archeological District. The the warehouse. archeological site, believed to be the historic Chumash village of Xaxas, is Non-native tree plantings at Prisoners located within the Project Area. The Harbor, including Italian stone pine, Chumash village site, which is located Dutch elm, and eucalyptus, are along both sides of the stream channel, contributing resources within the Santa has special significance to the Native Cruz Island Ranching District. While American community and has yielded many of the historic tree plantings can significant scientific data pertaining to be identified through historic the Late Prehistoric and Early Historic photographs, such as the row of
Purpose and Need - 11
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement eucalyptus to the west of the warehouse project alternatives. Negligible effects building, many others no longer exist. are those that are localized and/or Most of the eucalyptus trees that are immeasurable. Therefore these topics growing along the stream channel have have been removed from further spread extensively from the early discussion in the EIS. plantings. 1.6.2.1 Conflict between land use plans, Historic photos and an 1892 map of policies, or controls Prisoners Harbor show a rock retaining wall several hundred feet in length that The restoration of the coastal wetland at was built along the west side of the Prisoners Harbor is not specifically stream, presumably to prevent flooding addressed in the current General of the ranch area. This wall was either Management Plan (GMP) for the Park. destroyed by later stream modifications The Park GMP, written prior to the NPS or is currently buried beneath the acquisition of Prisoners Harbor, calls existing berm. broadly for “management strategies for the preservation and restoration of Other historic resources located within natural ecosystems” and states that the the Prisoners Harbor area include an Park should be “managed for the 1887 stone and brick warehouse, a restoration and preservation of natural stone-lined well from the same era and a biotic associations.” Additionally, the small wooden look-out building on the GMP calls for “the preservation, bluff overlooking the harbor. These restoration, protection, interpretation, resources, which contribute to the use, study, and management of National Register-eligible historic significant cultural resources…in ranching district, will not be affected by compliance with the requirements of the the undertaking. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended…” The Park Resource 1.6.1.9 Visitor Experience Management Plan and Statement for Management (1991) also call for the Prisoners Harbor is the point of restoration of natural ecosystems and embarkation for visitors arriving at Santa protection of cultural resources. The Cruz Island to either travel to the central proposed action does not conflict with valley or the isthmus or to visit NPS NPS plans, orders, and guidance resources at the harbor. Alternatives are documents. evaluated for the potential to provide secure access to inland destinations, and 1.6.2.2 Energy requirements and for the potential to improve visitor conservation potential understanding and enjoyment of Park resources. The Project Area has no electric or gas utilities or facilities. The Park’s 1.6.2 Dismissed Issues administration of the Channel Islands emphasizes energy conservation. For The following impact areas or topics instance all Park housing on the island is would not either be affected or would be totally self-sufficient for electricity affected negligibly by all proposed through the use of solar energy and
Purpose and Need - 12
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement diesel. The Navy maintains a well in the Register of Historic Places are analyzed Project Area which also is powered by in Chapter 4 – Environmental solar energy. This project will have no Consequences. impact on the amount of energy required to protect and administer Channel 1.6.2.5 Socially or economically Islands National Park. This project disadvantaged populations provides no potential for improving the Park's energy efficiency for operations, The proposed project would not change as there are no utilities within the Project the local population’s work, recreation, Area. or social interactions. As such Executive Order 12898 (environmental 1.6.2.3 Natural or depletable resource justice) does not apply to this analysis. requirements and conservation potential 1.6.2.6 Prime and unique agricultural This project would require consumption lands of depletable petroleum resources, specifically, gasoline and diesel fuel Since the early 1800s Santa Cruz Island used to transport and operate equipment has been used for rangeland for domestic to accomplish the restoration and livestock. Current ownership mitigation. In contrast to the petroleum emphasizes land conservation and resource consumption in the greater protection over agricultural use. Since Southern California region, use of non- no current agricultural practices are renewable energy resources for this occurring on the island no impacts project would be negligible. The NPS would occur to agricultural lands. The would employ a set of Best Management National Park Service interprets Practices for energy conservation - such historical land use practices to the as minimizing equipment idling and visiting public. The alternatives would minimizing truck runs - for this project not interfere with this ongoing to minimize consumption of non- interpretive program. renewable resources and allow for maximum conservation. 1.6.2.7 Sacred Sites
1.6.2.4 Urban quality and design of the The Park archeologist, in consultation built environment with Chumash Tribal representatives, has not identified any sacred sites on Santa Cruz Island does not have an Santa Cruz Island as defined by EO urban center or infrastructure associated 13007. with urban areas. This project does not include the addition of buildings or 1.6.2.8 Indian Trust Resources infrastructure and therefore would not impact urban quality or the design of the It is the policy of the DOI to recognize built environment. Historic features and and fulfill its legal obligations to archeological resources including identify, protect, and conserve the trust impacts to contributing elements to the resources of federally recognized Indian eligibility of the Santa Cruz Island tribes and tribal members, and to consult Ranching District to the National with tribes on a government-to-
Purpose and Need - 13
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
government basis whenever plans or 1.6.2.13 Visual resources actions affect tribal trust resources, trust assets, or tribal health and safety. There Santa Cruz Island is known for ocean are no Indian Trust resources on Santa views, natural landscape vistas, and its Cruz Island. cultural landscape values. Alternatives actions would not impact Santa Cruz 1.6.2.9 Air Quality Island’s ocean views and landscape vistas. Cultural landscape values are Santa Cruz Island is located in Santa discussed in Chapter 3 Affected Barbara County. Santa Barbara County Environment, section 3.4; and Chapter 4 is in attainment of the federal eight-hour Environmental Consequences, sections standard for ozone, but does not meet the 4.2.3.2, 4.3.3.2, and 4.4.3.2. one-hour standard. However, the Channel Islands – which experience 1.6.2.14 Visitor Safety different air quality from the mainland due to a relative lack of sources of Alternative actions would require the use pollutants – are designated as in- of heavy equipment at Prisoners Harbor attainment for ozone. and in Cañada del Puerto along the access road to the Central Valley of 1.6.2.10 Socioeconomic Impacts Santa Cruz Island. The Project Area would be clearly marked and public The project would not impact the work, access may be restricted in the Project recreation, or social interactions of Area during the implementation phase. island personnel or staff. Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare) and 1.6.2.11 Traffic and Transportation Kikuyu grass (Pennisetum clandestinum) are invasive plants that have been On-island transportation is by 4-wheel identified as high priority species for drive vehicles or All Terrain Vehicles on control on Santa Cruz Island. They unpaved roads. This project does not would be controlled in the Project Area call for the construction of additional using Garlon 4 on fennel and glyphosate roads or infrastructure and on Kikuyu grass. Glyphosate is a non- implementation would not impact selective systemic herbicide that serves current road use. Island transportation is as a growth regulator. When released accomplished mainly by boats owned into the environment glyphosate is and operated by the Park.. strongly adsorbed to soil, with little potential for leaching to groundwater. 1.6.2.12 Noise Microbes in the soil readily and completely degrade it even under low During implementation there is the temperatures. It tends to adhere to potential for localized, short-term sediments when released in water. elevated noise levels from the use of Glyphosate does not accumulate in heavy equipment. There would be no aquatic organisms. long-term impacts to noise levels on Santa Cruz Island. Herbicide would be applied by a certified pesticide applicator following
Purpose and Need - 14
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement manufacturer’s recommendations, specified Best Management Practices, and NPS approvals. Any herbicides which may be considered are all equally subject to strict advance approvals through the servicewide Integrated Pest Management program, which only allows for use of least-toxic chemicals and substances including surfactants which are appropriate for use in or near watersheds and marine waters.
1.6.2.15 Museum Collections
The Project Area includes an archeological site and small scale features of the historic ranching district. Action alternatives propose to document the existing historic cattle corrals at Prisoners Harbor. This information would be included in the NPS archive on the mainland and would not impact museum collections.
1.6.2.16 Waste Management
All waste generated on Park islands is transported off island and disposed of in a designated mainland waste disposal site. There would be no impacts to waste management.
Purpose and Need - 15 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND
RESTORATION PLAN
CHAPTER TWO
ALTERNATIVES
2003 subject matter experts made a site 2.0 Alternatives visit and assessed the feasibility of wetlands restoration at Prisoners Harbor. In 2004 18 test wells were installed to This chapter describes the No Action evaluate the daily, seasonal, and annual alternative and two action alternatives to fluctuation in groundwater elevations. be considered for implementation. From November 2005 to March 2007, Alternatives considered but rejected are Park staff measured water levels in the discussed, and the preferred and wells approximately bi-weekly. Less environmentally preferred alternatives frequent monitoring has continued from are identified. April 2007 to present. At the time the test wells were installed a description of 2.1 Development of Alternatives the soil column was recorded. From these descriptions, it was possible to The development of the range of determine the extent of fill material in alternatives included internal scoping by the Project Area. The behavior of the the Interdisciplinary Team of Park creek at different flood levels was Service personnel, feasibility studies by evaluated based on a hydrologic analysis subject matter experts, an evaluation of of the area. existing information on Natural and Cultural resources, a screening criteria The natural resources in the Project Area process, and a diligent effort by the NPS were evaluated using the following to seek public input on environmental information: The Nature Conservancy’s issues and a range of reasonable Vegetation Map (2007) and Weed Map alternative methods for implementing (Santa Cruz Island Non-Natives 2009), the project. and the Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Map of Santa Cruz Island 2.1.1 Internal Scoping and Public (Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 2007). Involvement A eucalyptus and oak survey, vascular plant survey, bird survey (ongoing), and 2.1.1.1 Internal Scoping Cowardin wetland delineation were conducted. Subject matter experts on Internal scoping took place between amphibians, reptiles, and mammals were 2003 and 2008. An Interdisciplinary consulted. Team was identified and consulted on each member’s area of expertise. In
Alternatives - 16
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Cultural Resources were evaluated by a Achievement of Project Goals and review of the NPS Cultural Landscape Objectives Inventory and Historic Resources Study, pertinent archeological surveys and Hydrologic connection of the creek literature, and the assessment of historic to the floodplain photos housed at the Santa Barbara Public Library and the Santa Cruz Island Groundwater levels and wetland Foundation. restoration feasibility
2.1.1.2 Public Involvement Area of wetland to be restored and the associated wetland ecosystem A preliminary public input meeting was values conducted at Prisoners Harbor on Santa Cruz Island on April 5, 2007 with Protection of archeological features individuals and organizations known to have a stake in the management of the Balanced use of mixed resources in project area. A Notice of Intent (NOI) to the project area prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and formally initiate Visitor experiences public scoping was published in the Federal Register on June 11, 2008, Protection and maintenance of the followed by a press release announcing pier and road access public scoping distributed to 75 media outlets. A public scoping letter updating 2.2 Alternatives Considered in the proposed project was mailed to 240 Detail individuals, agencies, and organizations. Two Open Houses were held; one on The following sections discuss the No July 1, 2008 at the Channel Islands Action alternative and two potential National Park Visitors Center and one on action alternatives for achieving the July 2, 2008 at the Santa Barbara Public goals and objectives for the Project. Library Information, photographs, maps, announcements, results of public 2.2.1 No Action Alternative— scoping, and other information were Alternative A posted on the Channel Islands National Park website and the NPS planning Under Alternative A, the NEPA-required website. Input from the public was used No Action Alternative, the Park would to refine the purpose, objectives, and continue its current management alternatives. This is discussed in more practices within the Project Area at detail in Chapter 5. Prisoners Harbor on Santa Cruz Island. These activities fall into seven 2.1.2 Alternatives Screening Criteria categories: maintenance of cattle corrals, maintenance of the berm and stream The following screening criteria were channel clearing, control of invasive used to develop alternatives and plant species, maintenance of historic alternatives considered but rejected: and non-historic trees, maintenance of
Alternatives - 17
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement fencing for archeological resource trees on the west and southeast protection, maintenance of road access boundaries of the wetlands Project Area to the Central Valley and Navy Site, and (Figure 1.1). Park staff and contractors maintenance of visitor facilities. periodically trim the eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus) trees with chain The Park maintains the appearance of saws to remove tree limbs and bark that the existing cattle corrals through pose safety and fire hazards. In addition, periodic mowing of the plants inside the Park staff and contractors periodically corrals, painting, gate repair, and remove young eucalyptus recruits with replacement of deteriorated boards and chain saws, to prevent them from hardware. Park staff mows inside the spreading into new habitat. Park staff corrals two to four times per year, and chip the eucalyptus slash on-site, and paints the corrals approximately one in uses it for local road stabilization needs. every five years. These activities would continue under the No Action The Park maintains the appearance and Alternative. condition of the historic trees at the Project Area, which include an Italian Historically, the lower end of the creek stone pine (Pinus pinea) located near the has become clogged with sediment. Prisoners Harbor pier, a row of Long-term (approximately every 40 Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus gobulus) years) the stream channel collects extending from the warehouse at the enough sand, gravel, and cobble to base of the cliff on the west side of the impair stream flow and interfere with project area, a blackwood acacia (Acacia vehicle access across the stream. The melanoxylon) and a tree misidentified as last maintenance dredging was in the English walnut (Juglans regia) 60 feet early 1970’s and there may be a need to down the road and east of the warehouse re-dredge the channel and side cast the and Dutch elm. The Park or contractors material to maintain the existing berm. prune these trees periodically, to maintain their health and historic The Park currently conducts periodic appearance. weeding of the Project Area, predominantly to control the spread of The Park maintains the fence which invasive kikuyu grass (Pennisetum protects archeological resources at the clandestinum). The Nature Conservancy site, through periodic inspection and will continue an on-going effort to repair of the posts, wire and hardware. control fennel (Foeniculum vulgare) along the road to the Central Valley. To The Park maintains the vehicle road control kikuyu grass Park staff would through the Project Area, so that park spray kikuyu grass with Roundup®, a staff and its partners have access to lands target-specific herbicide and allow to dry in the Central Valley and Navy Site. and to decompose in place. The Nature Park staff periodically grades the vehicle Conservancy uses Garlon 4 to treat road, and lays down eucalyptus chips, as fennel along the road. necessary, to control rutting. The Park also generally maintains the low water In addition, the Park and TNC control crossing across Cañada del Puerto, so the stands of non-historic eucalyptus that vehicles can access the road to the
Alternatives - 18
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Navy Site (Figure 1.1); however, the low water crossing is not accessible year- The Nature Conservancy maintains the round due to periodic flooding. access road to the Central Valley on their property by grading when needed. The Park maintains a picnic area and a The Nature Conservancy and their two-stall comfort station in the Project contractors periodically treat roads sides Area (Figure 1.1). The Park periodically for invasive weeds. places eucalyptus chips on the ground in an area just west and north of the A summary of the actions proposed warehouse, in order to provide ground- under each alternative is presented in cover for staging and picnicking, and Table 2.1 below: maintains several picnic tables for visitor use. No potable water is available at the Project Area.
Table 2.1 Matrix of Principal Actions Proposed under each Alternative A B C No 2/3 Wetland 1/3 Wetland Action Restoration Restoration with Partial with Partial Berm Berm Removal Removal Remove fill from most some former wetland Remove cattle some corrals Re-locate scale house to its pre- 1960’s location Remove portion of berm Structurally protect archeological resources Remove eucalyptus from riparian corridor Improve visitor experience Control invasive plant species
Alternatives - 19
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
2.2.2 Alternative B - 2/3 Wetland 2.2.2.2 Preparing the Wetlands Restoration with Partial Berm Removal Restoration Area
Under Alternative B – 2/3 Wetland The Park would start by aggressively Restoration with Partial Berm Removal, targeting, removing, and disposing of the park would remove all of the cattle known non-native invasive plants on the corrals and restore 3.1 acres of palustrine restoration area – such as kikuyu grass, wetlands and deepwater habitat, relocate fennel, and eucalyptus – using the scale house to its pre-1960’s appropriate techniques. These removal location, remove eucalyptus, control and disposal techniques may include invasive species, construct a protective hand pulling, hand- or machine- barrier around a portion of the excavation, chain sawing, burning, archeological site, and improve the chipping, and/or application of visitor experience. In addition, a portion herbicide. Project staff would also of the berm would be removed, thereby appropriately remove other non-native reconnecting the creek to its floodplain plant species as they are identified. (Figure 2.1). Kikuyu grass (approximately 2 acres) 2.2.2.1 Transportation and Transport of and fennel (approximately 3.154 acres or Supplies and Equipment 5.3% of the Project Area) would be treated using glyphosate and 2% The Park would transport equipment, concentration of Garlon 4, respectively, vehicles, and other large materials and in a foliar application using a backpack supplies via marine landing craft to the sprayer by a certified pesticide islands. Each island has a designated applicator following manufacturer’s area for off-loading and loading the recommendations, specified Best landing craft. The designated Management Practices, and NPS loading/unloading area for this Project is approvals. Any herbicides which may located to the west of the pier. From this be considered are all equally subject to location heavy equipment, vehicles, fuel strict advance approvals through the totes, and other large material and servicewide Integrated Pest Management supplies required for the project would program, which only allows for use of be transported to an area previously used least-toxic chemicals and substances for staging heavy equipment located on including surfactants which are the west side of the creek on TNC appropriate for use in or near watersheds property. Park staff, contracted and marine waters. Each project personnel, personal gear, and some requires a new request for pesticide use supplies would be transported to the through the NPS Integrated Pest island by the regularly scheduled park Management Program to ensure use of boat or the Park concessionaire, Island appropriate herbicide for each project. Packers. While herbicides are used on park property, signs would be posted informing the public of the product being used, the location, the date and
Alternatives - 20
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement time of application, the purpose of the 12” below grade. This will eliminate the application, and park contact need to use herbicide in tree removal. information. Project area preparation Tree material less than 12” in diameter also will include the removal of 122 will be chipped and used on roadbeds. eucalyptus trees in the designated fill Logs greater than 12” will be used to disposal site. The two fill disposal areas create a protective barrier around a will be located on the east side of the portion of the archeological site and creek upstream and downstream from historic well. An archeologist will be the creek crossing. Personnel will use on-site to monitor ground-disturbing chainsaws, chippers, tractor, and a stump activities during eucalyptus removal. grinder to cut trees and grind stumps to
Alternatives - 21
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 2.1 Alternative B – 2/3 Wetland Restoration with partial berm removal. Figure shows wetland restoration area only.
Alternatives - 22
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Excavation and eucalyptus tree removal Some materials could be stockpiled on in the fill disposal site would require island for use in future projects or about 4 – 6 weeks. Temporary fencing repairs. The remaining materials would would be installed parallel to the access be transported via landing craft to the road in the Prisoners Harbor area. The mainland and disposed of in a designated fencing would direct visitors along the area. south side of the access road in the Prisoners Harbor area and away from the 2.2.2.4 Partial Berm and Fill Removal excavation site and fill disposal site. There would be access to the bathrooms, In order to fulfill the goal of Prisoners-Pelican trail, and the Central reconnecting the creek with its flood Valley. Access to the Navy site and Del plain and restoring ecological Norte would be re-routed through the functioning of the wetland, the project Central Valley during the construction would remove approximately 250 feet of phase. Campers hiking to Del Norte the low berm that severed the hydraulic would be allowed to walk across the connection between lower Cañada del creek at the low water crossing with Puerto and its floodplain, excavate sand permission from the on-site supervisor. and rock fill to restore 2/3 of the buried Vehicle use of the access road in the wetlands, and then replant the restoration Prisoners Harbor area would be limited area with native wetland species. Work to boat arrival and departure times to will be initiated in the late spring and allow for loading and unloading gear, completed in late summer or early fall supplies, and equipment at the pier. when the Project Area is in its driest condition, and immediately before late- 2.2.2.3 Corral Removal fall rains initiate plant germination and growth. Before commencement of earthmoving activities, the corrals would be mapped Using heavy equipment such as an and photographed and the construction excavator, a dozer and dump trucks, the methods and materials for the corrals project will remove the berm would be documented. This information (approximately 2,000 cubic yards +/- would be archived at Park Headquarters. 20%) material from the creek bank and Next project staff would re-locate the grade the bank to a height consistent scale house from its present-day location with naturally-formed creek banks. to its pre-1960’s location immediately Using this same heavy equipment, the west of the warehouse. Under the project will remove rock and sand fill supervision of park cultural resource from 2/3 of the former wetland area as specialists and after consultation with needed to create the desired wetland the State Historic Preservation Office, plant communities. Approximately the scale house would be partially 13,000 +/- 20% cubic yards of fill would dismantled, lifted off its current be removed from the restoration area and foundation, stabilized on its new placed at the two designated on-island foundation in its pre-1960’s location, fill disposal sites near the project area. and reassembled. The corrals would be The top layer of fill potentially dismantled along with other posts, containing kikuyu grass propogules will troughs, and old concrete foundations. be removed first and buried in the fill
Alternatives - 23
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement disposal area to ensure kikuyu grass is siltation in the creek and marine not spread. Small amounts of fill resources in the unlikely event of rain material may be used in several locations during the dry season. to reinforce road beds, fill in small disturbed upland areas located on the Best Management Practices would be east side of the creek above and below used by the construction contractor the creek crossing, or fill in the during construction to minimize impacts protective barrier that would be on wildlife including no pets, constructed around a portion of the containment of garbage, and no feeding archeological site. Material in the two of wildlife by construction crews that disposal sites will be compacted and may be housed on the island. sloped to natural contours and seeded with native upland plants. Selection of All storage containers used by the native propaguales suitable for that construction contractor during location would be guided by a GIS construction would meet specifications analysis prepared for the site (Hayashida outlined by the NPS. In particular, food 2009). The analysis used soil type, would only be transported in plastic elevation, distance from the ocean, containers using tight fitting lids. slope, and aspect as relevant factors (included in Appendix C). Project staff All landing craft would be required to and contractors would assure that the have rodent control in place prior to restored topography within the travel to the island. restoration area is consistent with depth- to-groundwater project design Best Management Practices would be specifications by constantly checking used by the construction contractor grades with survey equipment and during construction to minimize the completing final grading with the transport of unwanted weeds to the excavator and hand tools. A cultural island including inspection of all resources specialist would be present equipment and clothing for weedy during all ground-disturbing activities. species prior to transport to the island.
An archeological monitor will be present All contracted personnel will be during removal of the berm. There may educated on the prevention and control be remnants of the historic stone wall of unwanted hitchhikers and the spread buried beneath the berm. The Park is of non-native species. Material used in currently discussing with SHPO erosion control will be free of weeds potential responses to uncovering and/or weed seeds, chemical additives, remnants of the historic stone wall and non-biodegradable mesh. during de-construction of the berm. Mitigation measures will be identified 2.2.2.4.1 Best Management Practices that protect air quality including watering dry soil in excavation and fill Implementation of a Storm Water areas and limiting the speed of vehicles Pollution Control Plan would be on dirt roads. required of the contractor to reduce erosion of the fill disposal site and
Alternatives - 24
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
2.2.2.5 Wetland Restoration monitoring has continued from April 2007 to present. These The approach to restoration design at data have provided information Prisoners Harbor has three main on seasonal and interannual components: 1) obtain a thorough fluctuations in the water table, understanding of site hydrology; 2) ground water flow patterns, and determine the depths and characteristics water sources. On many of the of fill material over buried wetland monitoring dates, we measured surfaces; and 3) use “reference” water levels in the wells multiple wetlands as models for restoration of times over a tide cycle to disturbed sites. determine how much the water table was influenced by tides. • Obtain a Thorough We also measured specific Understanding of Site Hydrology conductance and salinity in the - In December 2004, the NPS wells to determine if that would installed 18 shallow wells be a factor in selection of plants throughout the site to monitor for restoration. We determined daily, seasonal and interannual that tidal influence on the water variations in water table depth table was minor (typically 0.0 - and specific conductance 0.2 ft over a tide cycle), although (monitoring ongoing through wells nearest the coast 2008). Wells were installed by occasionally fluctuated as much having a small backhoe excavate as 0.4 ft. during the driest a hole as deep into the water summer periods. Specific table as possible (typically 6-8 ft. conductance was typically in the deep). We then inserted a slotted fresh water to slightly brackish 2” diameter PVC pipe into the range. hole and backfilled the space around the well with excavated A hydrologic analysis predicted material. Fourteen wells were the frequency of overbank installed in the filled wetland flooding with and without the areas that are being considered berm in place and therefore the for restoration (1-14 in Figure frequency of connectivity 2.4). Three more wells (15-17 in between the creek and the Figure 2.4) were installed on a restored wetland area. transect passing through several relatively undisturbed (unfilled) • Determine the Depth and wetland and upland plant Characteristics of Fill Material - communities adjacent to the At each location where a well filled area. was installed, and at thirteen additional test pits scattered From November 2005 to March across the site, excavated holes 2007, NPS measured water levels were logged to indicate depths in the wells approximately bi- and characteristics of soils, fill weekly. Less frequent material, and buried wetland soil
Alternatives - 25
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
surfaces (organic layers). This into the final restoration grading information will be incorporated plans.
CHIS - Prisoners Harbor Reference Transect Gro und 12.00 Surf ace
Comm. saltgrass- sparse sparse willow dense willow B o und ary kikuyu willow dense tule tule & sticky tule marsh dense willow, kikuyu upland upland baccharis A nn. M ean 11.00 11/17/2005
1/27/2006
10.00 2/13/2006
3/1/2006
3/22/2006 9.00 5/4/2006
7/5/2006 Elevation (ft msl) (ft Elevation
8.00 8/11/2006
8/27/2006
9/12/2006 7.00
9/28/2006
Well 15 Well 16 Well 17 10/18/2006 6.00 11/20/2006 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 Distance along transect (ft)
Figure 2.2 Prisoners Harbor reference transect shows groundwater elevation in elation to ground surface.Vegetation communities can be modeled along a continuum of groundwater availability.
• Use “Reference” Transect relation to the water table there, Information to Create a Model and planting with appropriate for Restoration - For our species. A 240-foot long approach, it is necessary to reference transect was understand plant community – established in one of the only depth to water relationships in relatively undisturbed wetland nearby reference wetlands that areas at Prisoners Harbor have the same hydrologic (vicinity of wells 15-17 in Figure characteristics as the target 2.4). Ground surface elevations restoration area. Once these were surveyed and plant relationships are known, we can community boundaries were recreate them in the target area identified along the transect. by grading the site accordingly in Wells 15-17 were installed along
Alternatives - 26
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
the transect to provide the determine the depths of excavation necessary depth to water data. necessary to create the desired wetland Figure 2.2 shows the ground community types. For example, Figure surface elevations and plant 2.3 shows that the willow wetland community boundaries along the community is found at 0.3 to 1.1 feet reference transect, and water above the mean water table for the level data from the three wells. period 11/17/05 – 11/20/06. Using this information and the mean water table Data from the reference transect will be elevations at the target restoration site used to develop a wetland plant for the same time period (see mean community-depth to water model that water table contours in Figure 2.4), we will be used to guide the restoration know how deep to excavate at any process (see preliminary model in Figure location to recreate a willow wetland 2.3. Information from this model will be community. applied to the hydrologic data from the wells in the filled areas (wells 1-14) to
Willow Willow or Open water Tule marsh wetland herb. upland -6.0’to -2.5’ -2.5’ to +0.3’ +0.3’ to +1.1’ > +1.1’
2.0
l 1.0 High Annual W.L.
e
v
e
l
r
e
t .
a 0 t
f Mean Annual W.L.
w
l
n
i
a
,
u
6
n
0 n
/ -1.0
a
0
2
n
/
a 1
e Low Annual W.L.
1
m
–
o -2.0
t
5
0
e
/
v 7
i Notes:
t
1
/
a
l
1
e 1
r -3.0
Lower willow wetland zone would include Distichlis
. v
e spicata & Baccharis douglasii
l E -4.0 Upper willow wetland zone and willow/herb. upland zone would have mostly D. spicata in herbaceous layer -5.0 Excavate to at least -6 ft. Incorporate Scirpus maritimus, S. pungens, and as steep as possible to and D. spicata in shallow wetland zones near the help exclude tules ocean (no willow)
Figure 2.3 Plant community–water table model from reference transect
Alternatives - 27
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 2.4 Prisoners Harbor mean water table contours Nov 2005 – Nov 2006
A final grading plan will be prepared to post-construction staking, propagation achieve the desired wetland types (e.g., and planting. Native plant will be grown willow thicket, tule marsh, open water out in the on-island plant nursery in the pond, etc.). Excavation will be central valley. After grading is completed in the fall when water levels complete, willow (Salix lasiolepis), are low, and nursery-grown wetland saltgrass (Distichilis spicata), bulrush plants will be installed at the appropriate (Scirpus californicus, S. pungens, S. elevations once winter rains raise the maritimus), rush (Juncus spp.), and other water table near the ground surface. herbaceous wetland plants grown in the nursery will be planted in their Before starting earthmoving activities in appropriate depth-to-water-table zones, the wetland restoration area, project staff as designed in a vegetation planting plan would collect island-native vegetation created by subject matter experts. materials (seeds, plugs, cuttings) for Project staff would also collect seed
Alternatives - 28
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
from Santa Cruz Island upland plants for (common three-square), Baccharis use in vegetating fill disposal sites. douglasii (sticky baccharis) and Juncus mexicanus (Mexican rush), with Scirpus Soon after grading has been completed maritimus (alkali bulrush) included and once the rainy season starts, over nearest the coast. This zone would 52,000 herbaceous wetland plants will extend from 0.0 to 0.5 feet above the be installed on 18” centers in the mean annual water table. appropriate wetland community zones, according to the planting plan. Although Willow: This zone would be planted the project designers anticipate that there with Salix lasiolepis (arroyo willow) will be some natural willow recruitment stakes, which eventually will grow to from seed in the willow zones, these shrub and small tree size. Wetter zones will also be planted with over portions of this zone will also be planted 2,200 live willow stakes to assure with herbaceous wetland species successful willow establishment. The including Baccharis douglasii, Juncus resulting 3.1 acres of restored wetland patens (common rush), Juncus xiphiodes will include open-water habitat, native (iris-leaved rush), and Distichlis spicata willow forest, emergent marsh, and (saltgrass). Drier understory areas will saltgrass meadow. The following is a be planted with Distichlis spicata. description of each of the habitat types. Wetland portions of this zone would be excavated to 0.5 to 1.1 feet above the Open Water (Pond): The majority of mean annual water table, while drier this open water zone would be excavated willow areas would be excavated to 1.1 to at least 6 feet below the mean annual to 1.75 feet above the mean water table. water table. Side slopes would be excavated as steeply as possible at the Saltgrass meadow: This zone will be transitions to adjacent vegetated excavated to 1.1 to 1.75 feet above the communities. The deep excavations and mean annual water table of the design steep side slopes would discourage year, and will be planted primarily with encroachment by vegetation. Distichlis spicata. This zone may include small willow clusters or Deep/Fringe Marsh: This deep emergent depressions with wetter species such as marsh zone would be planted with Mexican rush. Scirpus californicus (California bulrush, or “tule”). Cattails may establish in Studies have shown that wetland species, portions of this zone through wind- particularly waterfowl, are sensitive to blown seed. This zone would be human disturbance (Castelle et al., 1992; excavated from 2.5 feet below the mean Burke and Gibbons, 1995; Semlitsch, annual water table up to the mean annual 1997). A buffer between wetland habitat water table (0.0 ft). and human activity can reduce the negative impact of human activity on Shallow marsh: This shallower emergent waterfowl breeding and feeding. With wetland zone is transitional between the increasing distance from human activity deep/fringe marsh and willow wetland there is a higher likelihood of finding a communities. Species to be planted in greater number of species and greater this zone would include Scirpus pungens wetland function (eg. filtering suspended
Alternatives - 29
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
solids from the water). See Table 2.2 wood acacia tree creating a wildlife The access road from the pier to the viewing area and rest area. Removing Central Valley and isthmus is well the corrals and creating a willow buffer traveled because it is the only access to will minimize the impacts of human the western 90% of the island. The disturbance and maximize the quality of corral area is mowed on a regular basis. restored wetland habitat. Additionally, After the corrals are removed a buffer of visitors walk along the beach. There is a willow trees would be planted along the buffer of vegetation which limits road. A gap in the willows would be disturbance from this area (Figure 2.5). created across the road from the warehouse and near the historic black
Prisoners Harbor Feasibility Study
100’ 200’ 300’
Figure 2.5 Alternative B wetland restoration areawith distance from access road indicated in 100, 200, 300’ increments.
Alternatives - 30
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Table 2.2 Responses of wetland values and functions to various buffer sizes Buffer Size Responses of Wetland Values and Functions (feet) 300+ •Waterfowl breeding/feeding retained Heron feeding maintained (Castelle et al., 1992) •Amphibian populations retained (Semlitsch, 1997) •Diversity of mammals maintained (e.g., beaver, muskrat) (Castelle et al.,1992) •Cavity nesting duck habitat protected (Castelle et al., 1992) •Bird diversity maintained (Castelle et al., 1992) 200-300 •Waterfowl breeding, but reduced diversity (Castelle et al., 1992) •Reduced mammal diversity, but beaver remain (Castelle et al., 1992) •Most sediment removed (Castelle et al., 1992) 100-200 •Waterfowl breeding, but reduced populations and diversity (Castelle et al., 1992) •Adequate sediment removal (75-80%) (Castelle et al., 1992) •Most nutrients filtered (Castelle et al., 1992) •Reduced salamander diversity (Semlitsch, 1997) vDecreased turtle abundance (Burke and Gibbons, 1995) 50-100 •Loss of many wetland bird species (e.g., belted kingfisher) (Castelle et al., 1992) •Songbird diversity maintained in forested buffers (Castelle et al., 1992) <50 •Generally ineffective in preserving major wetland functions (Castelle et al., 1992) •Human activities disturb breeding/feeding birds (Castelle et al., 1992) •Degradation of buffer habitats over time more likely (Castelle et al., 1992) Note: Specific research results were generalized into the above categories for ease of interpretation.
Best Management Practices used during installing a network of wells in the excavation of fill would include properly project area and establishing vegetation installed silt fencing along the east side plots around each well. The of the creek adjacent to the fill disposal groundwater wells would be located area and along the west side of the creek. primarily in the restored wetland area Silt fencing would also be installed on with three in the riparian corridor and a the north side of the excavation area to transducer at the natural creek bank protect the remnant wetland. where the berm was removed. The wells and transducer would be a random A monitoring plan to evaluate the sample of hydrologic conditions to success of the project would include determine if wetland hydrology has been
Alternatives - 31
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement reestablished. Circular vegetation plots Riparian Woodland intergrades into would be located around each well. The Island Chaparral target species would methodology described in the include manzanita (Archtostaphylus "Classification of Wetlands and insularis), ceonothus (Ceonothus Deepwater Habitats of the United megacarpus v. insularis), mountain States” (Cowardin et al. 1979) and the mahagony (Cercocarpus betuloides), Army Corps of Engineers' 1987 Manual and wild cherry (Prunus ilicifolia subsp. for Wetland Delineation and the 2006 lyonii). Seed from these species would Arid West Supplement to the Manual be broadcast among existing native would be used to record vegetation in plants. Stream banks would be planted each plot. with willow stakes. Sufficient recovery of the channel restoration area would 2.2.2.6 Riparian Restoration occur between implementation of the stages to minimize ecological impacts Riparian restoration in Cañada del and reduce the potential for sediment Puerto would take place in a two- transport to the creek. Similar work at pronged, step-wise approach. other sites on the Channel Islands have Eucalyptus trees would be removed 1) required little to no active revegetation from downstream to upstream and 2) to restore native floodplain communities. from the hillside toward the stream bank Park and TNC managers would utilize (Figure 2.6). The area of eucalyptus an adaptive management strategy to removal is approximately 20.02 acres or ascertain which riparian revegetation 33.5% of the project area. Woody native methods are most effective and efficient vegetation including established oaks in achieving restoration goals. Recovery (Quercus spp.), island cherry (Prunus would be determined by Park and TNC ilicifolia subsp. lyonii), and coffee berry biologists based on recruitment of native (Rhamnus californica) would remain. vegetation, distribution of federal and At each step of the eucalyptus removal state listed species, extent of eucalyptus process, care would be taken not to and other weedy species. disturb other established native woody plants, stream bank or soils. Access to eucalyptus removal areas in Revegetation would occur through Cañada del Puerto would be either by natural recruitment from the Project the Navy Well road or the access road to Area's seed bank, reproduction of the Central Valley. Access to eucalyptus remnant native plants on the floodplain, on the east side of the creek will require and active revegetation including driving for a short distance, seeding and planting, or some approximately 100 feet in the dry creek combination of these methods. The bed. During tree removal there would be eucalyptus would be replaced with access to the bathrooms and the species typical of Southern Riparian Prisoners-Pelican trail. Access to the Woodland (Junak, et al, 1995). Species Central Valley would be re-routed to the targeted for restoration include oak Navy Road during this time. Access to (Quercus agrifolia), cottonwood the Navy site, the Del Norte (Populus trichocarpa and P. fremontii), campground, and the Isthmus would not willow (Salix spp.) and maple (Acer be affected. macrophyllum). Where Southern
Alternatives - 32
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Best Management Practices used during greenhouse gas emissions - such as tree removal would include installation minimizing equipment idling, reusing of silt fencing along the side of the creek eucalyptus wood when possible, and where tree removal is taking place. minimizing truck and boat runs. Native oak trees would be clearly marked and would not be disturbed Evaluation of the success of the during tree removal. restoration will include continuing the bird survey at previously established Restoration of habitats at Prisoners survey points and establishing vegetation Harbor would release greenhouse gasses plots in the riparian corridor.Data from heavy equipment used during collected would include plant species, implementation. In addition, this project percent cover, and percent cover bare might release carbon dioxide to the ground and percent cover litter. atmosphere through removal and Evaluation may also include follow-up disposal of eucalyptus trees and other surveys of mice, amphibians and reptiles non-native plants. The NPS would using the same methods and trapping employ a set of Best Management locations as Drost and Gilczis (2007). Practices to minimize the amount of
Alternatives - 33
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 2.6 Stages in riparian restoration in Cañada del Puerto
Alternatives - 34
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
2.2.2.7 Cultural Resources 2.2.3 Alternative C -1/3 Wetland Restoration with partial berm removal The Park proposes to protect high-value archeological resources at Prisoners Under Alternative C – 1/3 Wetland Harbor from continuing (though Restoration with Partial Berm Removal, lessened) exposure to erosion by stream the park would retain two of the existing flows in Cañada del Puerto, during and cattle corrals adjacent to the access road immediately after berm and fill removal and restore 2.1 acres of palustrine activities. This would be achieved by wetlands and deepwater habitat, remove placement of a small earth, log, and eucalyptus, control invasive species, cobble berm or packing earth, log, and construct a protective barrier around a cobble against the base of the site and portion of the archeological site, and planting with compatible native plants, improve the visitor experience. In thereby deflecting potential flood waters addition, a portion of the berm would be away from the culturally dense area of removed, thereby reconnecting the creek the site. to its floodplain (Figure 2.7).
2.2.2.8 Improving Visitor Experience 2.2.3.1 Transportation and Transport of Supplies and Equipment During an on-site scoping meeting about the project, park partners expressed great The Park would transport equipment, interest in seeing enhanced visitor vehicles, and other large materials and experiences at the restoration site. The supplies via marine landing craft to the project would improve the island islands. Each island has a designated gateway experience for visitors arriving area for off-loading and loading the on Santa Cruz Island at Prisoners Harbor landing craft. The designated by constructing project-compatible loading/unloading area for this Project is facilities such as temporary wayside located to the west of the pier. From this exhibits (one or two), a wetland viewing location heavy equipment, vehicles, fuel bench, or interpretive signs. Project staff totes, and other large material and will design these facilities concurrent supplies required for the project will be with its designs for wetland restoration transported to a staging area. Park staff, and cultural resource protection. contracted personnel, gear, and some supplies would be transported to the The park will prepare a Comprehensive island by the regularly scheduled park Interpretive Plan for long-term boat or the Park concessionaire, Island interpretation of the natural and cultural Packers. resource in the Prisoners area, with the goal of providing a range of 2.2.3.2 Preparing the Wetlands interpretation media and opportunities Restoration Area without jeopardizing the resources themselves. Preparing the wetland restoration area for project implementation would be similar to Alternative B except in the remaining corral and scale house area native saltgrass (Distichlis spicata)
Alternatives - 35
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
would replace invasive kikuyu grass. scale house approximately one in every Planting native saltgrass would take five years. place simultaneously with the wetland re-vegetation. Site preparation actions 2.2.3.4 Partial Berm and Fill Removal are described more fully in Section 2.2.2.2--Preparing the Wetland Partial removal of the berm and Restoration Area. excavation of fill would be similar to the preferred Alternative B in method and 2.2.3.3 Corral Removal time of year, except a smaller volume of fill would be removed. Fill would not be Before commencement of earthmoving removed from within the two remaining activities, under the supervision of Park cattle corrals. Approximately 11,000 +/- cultural resource specialists and after 2-% yards of fill would be excavated and consultation with the State Historic transferred to two designated fill Preservation Office, all corrals would be disposal sites. Partial berm removal photographed and the construction would be the same as the preferred methods and materials for the corrals Alternative B. A more detailed would be documented. This information description of these actions are described would be archived by the NPS. Two in section 2.2.2.4 Partial Berm and Fill corrals adjacent to the road would Removal. remain and would be maintained by park staff in their current configuration. The 2.2.3.5 Wetland Restoration scale house would remain in its current location. The remaining six corrals The approach to restoration design would be dismantled along with other would be the same as the preferred posts, troughs, and old concrete Alternative B except that fewer plants foundations. Some of these materials would be used and salt grass would be could be stockpiled on island for use in planted within the corral area. In future projects or repairs. The remaining Alternative C 34,000 herbaceous materials would be transported via wetland plants and over 1,500 live landing craft to the mainland and willow stakes would be installed disposed of in a designated area. resulting in 2.1 acres of restored wetland including open-water habitat, native The Park would maintain the appearance willow forest, emergent marsh, and of the remaining cattle corrals through saltgrass meadow. A more detailed periodic mowing or trimming of plants description of the approach to restoration inside the corrals, painting, gate repair, design can be found in section 2.2.2.5 and replacement of deteriorated boards Wetland Restoration. and hardware. Park staff would mow inside the corrals two to four times per year as needed, and paint the corrals and
Alternatives - 36
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 2.7 Alternative C – 1/3 Wetland restoration with partial berm removal.
Alternatives - 37
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
The buffer between human disturbance the base of the site and planting with and restored wetland would be less compatible native plants, thereby compared with the preferred Alternative deflecting potential flood waters away B. With two corrals remaining in place, from the culturally dense area of the site. a small portion of the wetland would have a 100’-150’ buffer from human 2.2.3.8 Improving Visitor Experience disturbance (Figure 2.5). The majority of wetland area would have a 50’ to 100’ During an on-site scoping meeting about buffer from human disturbance. There the project, park partners expressed great would be minor wetland functions and interest in seeing enhanced visitor human disturbance of breeding/feeding experiences at the restoration site. The birds (Castelle et al., 1992). project would improve the island Degradation of buffer habitats over time gateway experience for visitors arriving would be more likely (Castelle et al., on Santa Cruz Island at Prisoners Harbor 1992). by constructing project-compatible facilities such as temporary wayside As with the preferred Alternative B, exhibits (one or two), a wetland viewing after restoration actions were completed, bench, or interpretive signs. Project staff the Park would monitor vegetation and will design these facilities concurrent hydrology for five years post-project, in with its designs for wetland restoration order to evaluate whether the restoration and cultural resource protection. area conformed to desired wetland conditions and site-specific management 2.3 Alternatives Considered but goals. Dismissed from Detailed Study
2.2.3.6 Riparian Restoration The following alternatives were considered by the Interdisciplinary Team Riparian restoration in Cañada del or suggested by the public to be Puerto would be the same as in the potentially viable alternatives but preferred Alternative B. For a more eliminated from further study. The detailed description of these actions see dismissed alternatives and rationales for section 2.2.2.6 Riparian Restoration. dismissing them are outlined below.
2.2.3.7 Cultural Resource Protection 2.3.1 Remove all fill material in the Prisoners Harbor area The Park proposes to protect high-value archeological resources at Prisoners Based on test well results, wetlands were Harbor (the Chumash Village site) from filled adjacent to the warehouse, in the continuing (though lessened) exposure to current Park picnic area and beneath the erosion by stream flows in Cañada del access road. Removing fill to this extent Puerto, during and immediately after would undermine other Park berm and fill removal activities. This infrastructure that was subsequently built would be achieved by placement of a on the fill, including the access road, and small earth, log, and cobble berm or by warehouse, and would be in conflict packing earth, log, and cobble against with other park goals. Therefore, to
Alternatives - 38
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement maintain critical infrastructure, including 2.3.4 Retain three corrals parallel to the the access road and warehouse, fill access road material in this area will not be removed. Retaining three corrals parallel to the 2.3.2 Retain the Berm access road would result in a wetland restoration configuration and size that Hydrologic functioning of the former would not support an open water habitat floodplain wetland would require or the desired wetland habitat and would reconnecting the creek with the not satisfy the goals of the project. floodplain to allow periodic surface inundation of the wetland. Without 2.3.5 Removal of the Entire Berm access by the river flood waters, the restored wetland area will be supported A stone-lined water well used during the by groundwater only and any floodplain historic ranching era is located near test processes such as slowing flow well #10. Removing the berm between velocities, re-channelization, the road and the historic water well redistribution of sediment, biota, and could jeopardize the well and would be organic matter, and creation of new in conflict with other Park management habitat conditions could not occur. A goals. portion of the berm must be removed for hydrologic and ecological functioning of 2.4 Preferred Alternative the restored wetland. Retaining the berm would not meet the project The preferred alternative remains the objective of restoring the hydrology of Park-preferred alternative at the time of the area. the draft EIS. The preferred alternative remains Alternative B: 2/3 Wetland 2.3.3 Reconfigure cattle corral to create Restoration with Partial Berm Removal. a narrow band of corrals and increase Under this alternative, the park would size of wetland restoration remove all of the cattle corrals and restore 3.1 acres of palustrine wetlands Park staff considered the effects of and deepwater habitat, re-locate the scale eliminating some corrals and house to its pre-1960’s location, remove reconfiguring other portions of the corral eucalyptus, control invasive species, fencing and the fenced areas to create a including kikuyu grass, fennel, and narrow band of corrals parallel to the remove eucalyptus trees from the lower access road. The loss of some corral Cañada del Puerto, construct a protective areas while maintaining the historic barrier around a portion of the configuration of the remaining areas was archeological site, improve the visitor considered acceptable, however experience. A portion of the berm reconfiguring the remaining cattle would be removed and the creek corrals would cause them to lose their connected to its floodplain. historic integrity and would not meet project objectives.
Alternatives - 39
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
2.5 Environmentally Preferred nor Alternative A (No Action) are Alternative environmentally preferred alternatives.
The environmentally preferred The preferred alternative, Alternative B, alternative is the same as the preferred would remove all corrals, convert this alternative. Under Alternative B, the area to high-value wetland habitat, park would remove all of the cattle increase species diversity, reduce the corrals and restore 3.1 acres of palustrine susceptibility of invasion by non-native wetlands and deepwater habitat, re- species, and reduce ongoing locate the scale house to its pre-1960’s maintenance needs. location, remove eucalyptus, control invasive species, including kikuyu grass, The preferred alternative will provide fennel, and remove eucalyptus trees added protection to the historic scale from the lower Cañada del Puerto, house by moving it out of the wetland construct a protective barrier around a floodplain and returning it to its pre- portion of the archeological site, and 1960’s location adjacent to the improve the visitor experience. warehouse.
Studies have shown that wetland species, 2.6 Actions Common to All particularly waterfowl, are sensitive to Alternatives human disturbance (Castelle et al., 1992; Burke and Gibbons, 1995; Semlitsch, Several management actions are 1997). Alternative B will restore a common to either action alternative - the larger wetland area and create a larger park would structurally protect buffer between wetland habitat and archeological resources at the Project human activity. The buffer can reduce Area, some portion of the floodplain the negative impact of human activity on wetland would be restored, a portion of waterfowl breeding and feeding. With the berm would be removed, invasive increasing distance from human activity eucalyptus in the riparian corridor in the there is a higher likelihood of finding lower Cañada del Puerto would be more species and greater wetland eliminated, invasive kikuyu grass and function (eg. filtering suspended solids fennel would be controlled as much as from the water). Degradation of buffer practicable, and visitor experiences habitats will be less likely over time in would be improved. the larger wetland (Castelle et al., 1992). 2.7 Comparison of Alternatives With two corrals retained under Alternative C, the corral area would The two action alternatives differ in the remain in a chronic state of disturbance amount of fill removed, area of wetland from regular mowing, susceptible to restored, and the amount of corral invasion by non-native kikuyu grass, fencing and corral area to be preserved. fennel, and other invasives species, and In Alternative C two corrals would be provide low habitat value for wildlife. retained, the scale house would remain For these reasons, neither Alternative C in its current location, and 2.1 acres of wetland would be restored. In
Alternatives - 40
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Alternative B, the preferred alternative, all corrals would be removed, the scale house would be re-located to its pre- 1960’s location and the maximum wetland restoration practical would be achieved.
Table 2.3 Comparison of Alternatives
A B C No Action 2/3 wetland 1/3 wetland restoration with restoration with partial berm partial berm removal removal Area of fill 0 3.1 acres 2.1 acres removal Critical No change Access road, Access road, visitor infrastructure visitor facilities, facilities, warehouse, warehouse, pier pier retained retained Historic elements No change All corrals Two corrals retained, removed, scale six corrals removed; house relocated to scale house remains in original location current location Partial berm No change Partial berm Partial berm removal removal removal downstream from downstream from historic well historic well Protection of Regular Protective barrier Protective barrier archeological maintenance around toe of around toe of resources of existing archeological site archeological site archeologica l site fencing Eucalyptus control Maintenance Remove all Remove all eucalyptus of existing eucalyptus from from the project area eucalyptus the project area (excluding historic trees on Park (excluding historic eucalyptus at base of land eucalyptus at base cliff) of cliff) Visitor experience Maintenance Additional Additional education of existing education signage signage facilities
Alternatives - 41
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND
RESTORATION PLAN
CHAPTER THREE
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
3.0 Affected Environment 3.4 Cultural Resources: archeological features and cultural landscapes within the Project Area Information presented in this chapter derives from the National Park Service 3.5 Social Resources: visitors’ Inventory and Monitoring Program, experience at the Project Area, from Channel Islands National Park aesthetics, and human health and natural and cultural resource safety management staff and partners, from data provided by The Nature 3.1 Physical Setting Conservancy, from US Fish and Wildlife Service species-protection plans, from This section provides a description of the independent and academic research regional context for the project - its studies, and from studies completed physiographic location, a brief specifically to inform decision-making discussion of Santa Cruz Island's for this project. physical and biological resources, a description of the Project Area, and a This chapter is divided into five sub- short narrative describing the general chapters: land use history of the Project Area.
3.1 Physical Setting: the regional Main sources for information in this context for the project and land use section are cited immediately following history of the Project Area the relevant text and listed alphabetically in the References Section. The reader is 3.2 Physical Resources: soils and referred to these reports, scientific geomorphic processes, and papers, and books for more thorough hydrology and water quality of the descriptions of the project setting and Project Area context.
3.3 Biological Resources: wildlife 3.1.1 Regional Context and vegetation of the Project Area
Alternatives - 42
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Off the southern coast California, a set metamorphic rocks reaches an elevation of low rounded ridges rise above sea of about 1,500 feet. At seaward base of level to form eight islands – the Channel this ridge a submerged shelf extends Islands. The four northern-most of these several miles southward before falling islands lie in the Santa Barbara Channel off into the Santa Cruz Basin, which is paralleling the Point Conception coast. more than a mile deep. The remaining islands are scattered offshore between Los Angeles and the The island’s Central Valley is bisected Mexican border (Figure 3.1). The by the Santa Cruz Island Fault, which Channel Islands vary considerably in juxtaposes older, more eroded 150- size, distance from each other, and million-year old metamorphic rocks on distance from the mainland. Because the south side of the island with much these lands remain in a relatively natural younger - 20-million-year old - volcanic state – especially when contrasted with formations on the north side of the the heavily populated cities on the island. Recent research suggests this nearby mainland coast – they provide an fault has been very active lately, causing ideal place for to protect and restore as much as 600-800 feet of movement in Southern California native biodiversity the last 30,000 years. This displacement and ecosystems. can be seen in several locations on the island where streambeds jog markedly as 3.1.2 Santa Cruz Island they cross the fault. The pronounced but discontinuous Central Valley, formed by The largest of the Channel Islands is the stream erosion along the fault zone, runs sixty-two thousand acre Santa Cruz the length of the island from east to west Island. Santa Cruz is twenty-four miles separating the two major ridges. Other long, and its width ranges from two features of geologic interest on the island miles across at the isthmus to 6.5 miles include sheep-induced erosion, diverse across through its great Central Valley. soils, unusual drainage patterns, and Santa Cruz sits in the Santa Barbara Pleistocene fossils of dwarf mammoths Channel nineteen miles from the nearest and Douglas fir trees. mainland point, and southwest from the city of Ventura, California. Cutting through the seaward side of both ridges is a series of steep-sided canyons The topography of Santa Cruz Island is supporting freshwater springs and dominated by two east-west mountain intermittent streams leading to the ocean. ranges flanking the fault-dominated Some of these creeks expire on gravel Central Valley. The Central Valley beaches at canyon mouths; others plunge divides the island into two very different from the cliffs directly into the sea. On geologic terrains: to the north, a purple- the interior faces of the ridges the brown ridge of young volcanic rocks canyons drain to the Central Valley and rises to Mt. Diablo and then plunges into the largest stream on the island: abruptly into the Santa Barbara Channel. Cañada del Puerto. After traveling At almost 2,500 feet in elevation, Mt. southeast through the Central Valley this Diablo is the highest point on all the stream turns abruptly northeast to drain Channel Islands. South of the Central through a steep gorge in the northern Valley a weathered ridge of reddish
Affected Environment - 43
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement range to the stream mouth at Prisoners sediment delivery to streams all over the Harbor. island, degrading water quality.
Santa Cruz Island watersheds are The island’s terrestrial and near-shore generally steep and exhibit many mass marine habitats are tremendously slope failures that result in high erosion diverse. Its coastline includes protected and sedimentation in the valleys. The coves, sandy beaches, vertical cliff faces, major watersheds have a mix of hidden sea caves, and dissected marine vegetation community types, with terraces. The diversity of the island’s coastal sage scrub on south facing topography and microclimates supports a slopes, chaparral on north facing slopes wide array of habitats, from rocky on volcanic substrates, and woodland intertidal to chaparral to pine forests. Its communities in the higher elevations size and complexity make the island with steeper slopes. Incised gullies are biologically similar to undisturbed areas commonplace throughout the drainages, on the adjacent mainland. Offshore, a situation that has been exacerbated by warm southern waters mingle with cold historic sheep ranching. Slope failures of currents from the north, creating a all sizes are also very evident throughout transition zone for marine life. The the watershed, although fewer slope island’s biota includes many organisms failures are evident in watersheds that endemic to the Channel Islands, some are in the volcanic geologic types. found only on Santa Cruz Island. Most drainages on Santa Cruz Island Scientists believe most plants and have only intermittent above ground animals reached the island by chance stream flow. Even the largest watershed after swimming, flying, or floating on on the island – the Central Valley debris, especially during periods of low watershed – has only intermittent flow in sea level. normal precipitation years. Water surfaces are in the main channel where Considering that it was colonized by bedrock is at or near the elevation of the overwater dispersal, Santa Cruz Island channel bed, while the flow disappears supports a remarkably rich biota. Some underground in stream reaches groups, however, are decidedly characterized by sandy or gravel depauperate, and certain organisms, substrates. Junak et al. (1995) note that lacking the usual competitors or there are many freshwater seeps and predators, have taken on different forms springs throughout the island. Minimal or have invaded niches unavailable to documentation exists as to water them on the mainland. Only four species chemistry (nutrients or animal waste) of terrestrial mammals inhabit the island monitoring within the streams of Santa - island fox, island skunk, and two Cruz Island, so concentrations of species of mice - accompanied by eleven microbes and nutrients are unknown. species of bats. The Island scrub-jay is a Historic sheep and cattle ranching, species of bird which occurs only on however, and a feral pig population Santa Cruz Island. Many species of degraded soil-stabilizing vegetation birds nest on the island including communities on steep hillsides; this American kestrel and Western resulted in higher rates of erosion and flycatcher.
Affected Environment - 44
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Inhabitants of the Chumash villages on A 0.815-acre polygon along Cañada del the islands may have introduced some Puerto is managed by the US Navy for organisms to the island during their water production. This project will not extensive travels between the mainland propose any management actions for and the islands. Santa Cruz Island’s these lands. In addition, the Project abundant, well-preserved archaeological Area encompasses a portion of the sites provide insight into past cultures access road that leads from the island's and environmental conditions. The main dock to the structures and facilities island’s seclusion, ruggedness, and in the Central Valley and the Navy history of conscientious private facility. The road to the Central Valley stewardship have protected the island both parallels the creek channel in the from many of the usual impacts of heavy project area; the road to the Navy facility exploitation following European contact. crosses the creek channel over a cement low water crossing. Both roads can Exotic plants and animals have affected become impassible during the generally the vegetation and soils of the island. short but occasionally intense winter Efforts are underway by all stewards of flooding of the creek channel. Roads are the island to deal with non-native maintained by landowners. In addition, organisms. The most recent successful the NPS owns and maintains the efforts were removal of sheep from the island in 2000 and removal of pigs from the island in 2005-2006. 3.1.3 Project Area
The 59.7-acre Project Area encompasses the lower reaches of the island's largest stream system: Cañada del Puerto (Figure 3.1).
Nineteen acres of the project area are owned and managed by the National Park Service. This area includes the beach, cobble bar, lower stream channel and its floodplain, cultural resources associated with the prehistoric village at the site, cultural resources associated with the island's ranching history, and stands of eucalyptus trees. The remaining portion of the Project Area is owned and managed by The Nature Conservancy. These lands include the predominantly sandy-bottomed intermittent Cañada del Puerto creek and its narrow floodplain, and two additional stands of eucalyptus trees.
Affected Environment - 45
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 3.1 Proposed Project Area
Affected Environment - 46
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Prisoners Harbor dock immediately West Coast of the US meet the warm adjoining the Project Area to the north. southern waters characteristic of oceanic conditions along the Baja and Southern 3.1.4 Climate California coast. The convergence of these water masses near the Channel 3.1.4.1 Historic and Current Climate Islands significantly affects the climate and the nearshore marine biota of the The Channel Islands exhibit the island chain. Mediterranean climate typical of the central and southern California coasts. The typical climate regime is heavily Precipitation patterns exhibit strong influenced by the El Niño Southern seasonal trends, with heavy rainfall Oscillation, or ENSO, a cyclical global between November to March, and circulation pattern that affects oceanic seasonal drought between late May and processes in the Eastern Pacific. The October when a stable high-pressure three-to-seven year ENSO cycle system settles off the coast. A shallow alternates El Niño and La Niña events: coastal marine layer raises atmospheric the El Niño stage of the cycle is humidity, frequently visible as fog, and characterized by wetter than normal helps to lessen the impact of the summer winters, increased risk of flooding, and drought conditions on the islands. elevation of sea temperatures; while La Moisture from fog accumulates on Niña events bring cool, dry winters vegetation and falls as fog-drip across the region. precipitation - which is a significant source of summer soil moisture. The longest continuous weather record on Santa Cruz Island comes from the Winds on the southern coast of Central Valley, 3.1 miles upstream from California are generally southeasterly in the Project Area. Records from this winter and northwesterly in summer. weather station document amounts of These summer winds pick up speed most rainfall at the Main Ranch since 1904. afternoons and drop off at night, driving The average annual precipitation at the summer fog against the island’s gauge between 1904 and 1993 is 19.9 northwestern slopes and creating more inches; however there is high variability humid conditions than found on the between years. The low annual rainfall mainland south-facing coastal slopes. during this period was 6.4 inches, and Santa Ana winds occasionally disrupt the high 56.2 inches. The standard this pattern, generally in the late fall and deviation of precipitation between years early winter. These wind events occur 10 for this period is 44% of the annual to 20 times per year, blowing hot dry air mean. Average maximum monthly from the high-pressure systems over the temperatures in the Central Valley range interior mainland toward typical low- from 59.8º F in January to 75.7º F in pressure systems over the Pacific coast. September, while average minimum monthly temperatures range from 39.3º Two distinctly different oceanic water F in January to 52.2º F in August, for masses meet just off the shores of the temperatures recorded between 1948 and Channel Islands - northern waters cooled 2007. Although two remote automated by the upwelling common along the weather stations were established on
Affected Environment - 47
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Santa Cruz Island in 1990 and 2000, at Project Area are generally similar to the Main Ranch in the Central Valley weather patterns in the Central Valley, and at Del Norte near Prisoners Harbor with precipitation and temperature overlooking the ocean, no long-term extremes moderated by maritime precipitation- or temperature-recording proximity Table 3.1. weather station exists within the Project Area. Overall weather patterns at the
Table 3.1 Temperature and Precipitation on Santa Cruz Island Ave. Air Temperature (ºF) Ave. Precipitation (inches) Central Valley Del Norte Central Del Norte (1990-2008) (2000-2007) Valley (2000-2007) (1904-2006) January 51.56 56.17 4.59 2.98 February 52.50 55.62 4.56 4.25 March 53.61 55.44 3.33 3.68 April 55.88 56.29 1.23 1.40 May 58.51 60.55 0.36 0.58 June 61.45 62.06 0.08 0.05 July 65.18 65.23 0.01 0.03 August 65.24 65.49 0.04 0.05 September 63.44 65.24 0.26 0.09 October 59.78 61.94 0.53 0.90 November 54.88 59.87 1.60 1.27 December 50.76 56.46 3.38 2.54 Annual 57.73 60.11 19.84 18.54 Source: Air temperature data from Remote Automated Weather Stations (RAWS) near Main Ranch and Del Norte Ranch. Precipitation records recorded manually at the Main Ranch and by RAWS at Del Norte. Data from RAWS were not used when more than 3 days/month were missing.
3.1.4.2 Climate in the Future unpredictable ways (IPCC, 2007). The scientific community expects that Increasing concentrations of greenhouse elevated concentrations of greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere are causing gasses will cause 1) increased air and changes to global, regional, and local ocean temperatures, 2) sea level rise, 3) climate regimes. These changes will alteration in recurrence and intensity of alter natural physical and biological extreme weather events, and 4) alteration processes in many predictable and in precipitation patterns. The first of
Affected Environment - 48
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement these two affects may be relatively terrestrial systems will absorb a higher predictable: computer models of future percentage of warming. climates generally agree that air/sea temperatures will be higher in the future, Warming trends are expected to as will sea elevations. However, continue, if not accelerate, the future: the computer models generally do not agree IPCC (2007) predicts warming of 0.36 º about the frequency, distribution, and F per decade for the next two decades. intensity of extreme weather events in Beyond that date warming would the future. They also do not create continue at 0.18 º F per decade if all consistent predictions of patterns in greenhouse gas emissions were rainfall intensity and timing, other than maintained at year 2000 levels. Under agreeing that some or all snowfall this scenario air temperatures would precipitation will change to rainfall raise by as much as 1.62 º F by the end precipitation with warming of the century. Alternate emission temperatures. Computer models are also scenarios predict warming as much as generally less predictive at regional and 11.52 º F over the same period. These local scales than at continental and predictions are for global averages; global scales. However, analysis of however warming rates are greatest at recent precipitation trends in the western the poles and over land in general, and United States show that human-induced have tremendous local variability. climate change is already altering Humans' ability to predict future changes patterns in snowfall, rainfall, runoff, and in precipitation patterns is improving, air temperatures. but still less competent than predictive abilities for temperature. Computer The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate models suggest that Southern California Change (2007) reports that of the twelve may experience a 10% to 20% reduction years between 1995 and 2006, eleven are in amount of precipitation. in the top-twelve warmest years on record in the instrumental record - since Sea level has risen approximately 400 1850. The linear warming trend for the feet since the peak of the last ice age years between 1956 and 2005 is 0.24 º F about 18,000 years ago. Most of that per decade, nearly twice the linear trend 400-foot rise occurred more than 6,000 for the years between 1906 and 2005. years ago (Axelrod 1981). From 3,000 Cold days, cold nights, and frosts are years ago to the start of the 19th century becoming less frequent throughout North the rate of sea level rise was low and America, while heat waves are becoming constant, however sea level rise has more common. Extreme precipitation accelerated in the 20th century. This events and droughts are also becoming recent sea level rise is attributable to more common. Although warming over thermal expansion (57%), melting of land has been accelerating, 80% of the continental glaciers and ice caps (28%), heat added to the climate system since and losses from the polar ice sheets 1961 has been absorbed by the world's (15%). oceans. This trend may reach a threshold at which point ocean heat- Human understanding of the potential accommodation capacity will fall and for positive and negative feedbacks between sea level changes and oceanic
Affected Environment - 49
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement circulation is limited. Because of this, Mountains. These ranges have been the IPCC explicitly declines to predict an subject to displacement, rotation, and upper bound for sea level rise. uplift, all as a result of complex tectonic However, based on current processes associated with the Pacific and understanding of ocean processes, the North American plates (Atwater, 1998). IPCC predicts mean global sea level The predominant structural feature on rises between 0.6 feet and 2 feet over the Santa Cruz Island is a major east-west next century, based on computer models trending fault, referred to as the Santa under varying emission scenarios. Cruz Island fault. This strike-slip fault, Although many regions exhibit which plunges steeply to the north, substantial variation from the mean, the cross-cuts the island, forming the Central IPCC concludes that most of the Valley. Left lateral movement along this coastline of the contiguous United States and other associated faults has displaced closely follows the global mean. Some rock assemblages great distances from climate specialists such as Overpeck et the south and east, resulting in rocks of al. (2006) believe that sea level rise varying age and lithology juxtaposed could be much more rapid, accelerated between the north and south portions of by chaotic and rapid melting of polar ice the island (Norris and Webb, 1976). sheets, resulting in seas 10 feet higher Diablo Peak, which rises to 2450 feet, is than at present within the century. part of this translated terrain as are the However, the IPCC predictions are the other aligned peaks of the northern most widely accepted, are considered the Channel Islands, a submerged, western best scientific knowledge, and therefore extension of the Santa Monica are used for this analysis. Mountains. With that, the Santa Barbara Channel is a submerged extension of the Habitat and landscape maps created for Ventura Basin (Harris and Tuttle, 1977). this document presume a 0.7-foot rise in sea level over the next 50 years - half of The oldest rocks exposed on Santa Cruz the moderate "B2" emissions scenario Island are the Mesozoic Santa Cruz prediction for the year 2099 from the Schists, which primarily occur on the 2007 IPCC synthesis report. The lowest southern side of the island, forming an elevation in the wetland area is about 8.5 elongate ridge south of the Santa Cruz feet above mean sea level (Figure 2.2). Island fault. On the northern side of the Consequently, the project area is well island, much younger Miocene strata rise above any anticipated rise in sea level. to relatively high elevations. The Miocene assemblage includes a wide 3.1.5 Geology and Geomorphic array of lithologies of both sedimentary Processes and volcanic origin. The sedimentary strata ranges from coarse brecchia- 3.1.5.1 Geologic Resources and conglomerates of the San Onofre Topography Breccia to deep water diatomacaeous, dolomitic, and cherty shales of the The Northern Channel Islands are all Monterey Formation. The Miocene part of an offshore extension of the volcanics include andesitic, diabasic, and Southern California Traverse Ranges, basaltic flows and contribute about 8000 specifically, of the Santa Monica feet to the geologic section on Santa
Affected Environment - 50
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Cruz Island. Post Miocene rocks are 3.1.5.3 Geomorphic Processes primarily Pleistocene and younger marine and non-marine terrace deposits. As mentioned, the greatest thickness of On Santa Cruz Island, locally thick rocks on Santa Cruz Island is the marine terrace deposits occur and Miocene sedimentary and volcanic alluvium fills most of the valleys to strata. These strata have been subjected varying depths. to uplift and erosion as is evidenced by marine terraces at elevations reaching up Through recent geologic history, to 1200 feet elevation (Harris and Tuttle, repeated periods of uplift and substantial 1977). The combination of friable changes in sea level associated with bedrock, extreme uplift, and intense glacial advance and recession have thunderstorms has resulted in deeply formed numerous marine terraces above incised canyons throughout the island. and below present day sea level. Additionally, the uplift and changing in Associated with the channel and valley sea level with the corresponding changes formation is the generation of substantial in base level have resulted in deep amounts of sediment from the drainages incision of most of the islands drainages. and associated highlands. These processes were especially evident during 3.1.5.2 Soil Resources the El Nino season of 1997-1998 when numerous soil slips and other mass On-site soil information specific to wasting events took place throughout the Prisoners Harbor was derived from 31 Channel Islands. Ultimately, material test pits excavated in 2004. The from these slope failures reaches locations of these pits were chosen to adjoining drainages becoming channel characterize the depth and nature of fill alluvium, where it is episodically material placed in the Cañada Del Puerto transported downstream by high flows. estuary over the last century or so. The Given the availability of sediment in the pits generally reached depths of about watershed and the low gradient of the four to six feet, and all appeared to Cañada del Puerto stream through contain a mixture of anthropogenic fill Prisoners Harbor, it is surprising that and natural channel and eolian deposits. more sediment aggradation has not taken In about one-half of the pits (15 of 31) a place in this area. Qualitative thin, organic rich layer was identified at assessment of the channel alluvium in depths ranging from about three to five the Prisoners Harbor area suggests that feet. This very thin (1-2 inches) yet the predominant grain sizes range from rather distinct layer was interpreted as an fines (sand and silt) to cobbles. element of a former wetland soil. For However, much coarser grained channel the most part, excavation in undisturbed alluvium exists in upstream reaches. areas was avoided due to the likely Inspection of aerial photographs and presence of cultural material. However, satellite imagery suggest that a great deal three observation wells were installed in of sediment is being stored in the a wetland portion of the estuary. The channel and floodplain of Cañada Del soil at these three auger sites was typical Puerto about 3000 feet upstream of the of wetland environments. proposed restoration site. The reason for sediment deposition in this reach of the
Affected Environment - 51
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement creek is unknown but may be related to Pacific Ocean is generally blocked. As a the valley gradient. result, conditions prevail where a pool of water forms at the terminus of Cañada Natural geomorphic processes in a Del Puerto Creek when hydrologic input pristine setting at Prisoners Harbor were exceeds evaporation and seepage to the primarily a dynamic equilibrium ocean. The salinity of this pool varies between tectonic, fluvial, and marine from near fresh water immediately after influences resulting in the formation of runoff events, to brackish concentrations an estuary that probably approached ten due to salt spray and air-borne cyclic acres or more. This dynamic salts. Apparently, when enough equilibrium was greatly altered by hydraulic pressure is exerted on the human intervention in the form of stream boulder bar from large streamflows, the channelization, berm construction, and boulder bar will fail, rapidly draining the wholesale filling of the pool. However, it appears that this is a estuary/floodplain system for very temporary condition as the boulder agricultural purposes. Consequently, bar is quick to reform under prevailing most of the wetland and floodplain conditions. habitats associated with this coastal estuary have been reduced to a fraction The overall hydraulic effect of the of their former size. The streamcourse marine boulder bar is to reduce the has been re-directed to the east margin gradient of the stream through Prisoners of the valley and is maintained in that Harbor. Elevations surveyed on the alignment, at least in part, by the 300+ boulder bar during the 2004 site visit foot-long berm previously mentioned. indicate that the crest at that time The only location where a semblance of approached and exceeded many of the natural fluvial process still exists is near ground elevations in the pasture areas. the terminus of the creek at the Pacific This gentle gradient through the site may Ocean. result in low velocity, backwater conditions. 3.1.5.4 Shoreline Characteristics and Processes Current available data on sea level rise are not sufficient to predict the exact The coastal embayment at Prisoners location of the boulder bar in the future. Harbor is a bar-mouth type of estuary. However, long-shore sediment transport, This kind of estuary system receives high energy wave action, and transport freshwater input from the watershed on of coarse-grained marine sediment will either a regular or periodic basis, but continue in the event of sea level rise marine input and processes are mostly resulting in the continued formation of excluded due to long-shore sediment the boulder bar and freshwater pool. transport that results in partial to Additionally, groundwater well no. 15, complete blockage of the outlet. At located in the remnant wetland and less Prisoners Harbor, there is both high than 200 feet from the shore and boulder wave energy and a great deal of bar is approximately 9 feet above mean available coarse-grained, marine sea level (Figure 2.2 and Figure 3.2). A sediment and, consequently, the outlet 0.7 foot rise in sea level is unlikely to from Cañada Del Puerto Creek to the result in a significant change in the
Affected Environment - 52
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement location of the boulder bar. In contrast communities on other islands and on the to mainland coastal wetlands where mainland. there is very little potential for the migration of habitats due to the The Santa Cruz Island Chumash may constraints of human activity and have first encountered non-Californian infrastructure, at Prisoners Harbor, people during Spaniard Juan Rodríguez hydrologic conditions exists for the Cabrillo's expedition in 1542. During boulder bar and fresh water pool to form the next two centuries the island was and migrate even in the event of greater observed only sporadically by non- climate change. Californians. In 1769 the Gaspar de Portolá expedition visited Santa Cruz 3.1.6 Land Use History Island, and claimed ownership of the island for the King of Spain. Members 3.1.6.1 Pre-agricultural Period of the Portola expedition were the first recorded Europeans to set foot on the Largest of the Channel Islands, Santa island; they gave the island the name it is Cruz Island has supported a human known by today. population for more than 8,000 years. Before contact with people of European Documentation of contact between descent, this island supported the largest Island Chumash and early European population of Island Chumash people travelers during the late 18th century is who resided in at least eleven villages sparse, but by the early 19th century across the island. The Chumash outbreaks of measles had decimated maintained a village within the Project Channel Island villages. During the first Area, Xaxas, which was probably the two decades of the 19th century Spanish second largest village on the island and and Mexican missionaries encouraged was occupied for about 5,000 years. residents of the Santa Cruz Island Other prehistoric sites on Santa Cruz villages to relocate to missions on the Island include shell mounds, chert mainland. In 1804 Xaxas was a quarries and workshop sites, rock community of 124 people; by the late shelters, and rock pavements 1820s no Chumash lived on Santa Cruz ethnographically identified as shrines. Island. Some of the rock shelters contain rock art of a simple style quite distinct from After the decline of the Island Chumash that known on the mainland. Formal communities on the island, Santa Cruz cemeteries are found close to many became largely unpopulated, visited only villages, especially later sites, and by mariners and hunters who left some isolated, seemingly random, human sparse physical evidence of their travels. burials are recorded for the island as In the 1830s the island was used briefly - well. The potential number of burials and unsuccessfully - as a penal colony ranges into the tens of thousands. The by the Mexican government. This short Chumash supported their large episode gave the island's main port the community on the island through name Prisoners Harbor. terrestrial and marine hunting, fishing, utilization of terrestrial and marine plants and algaes, and trade with
Affected Environment - 53
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
3.1.6.2 Early Agricultural Period Justinian Caire, a Frenchman and one of the ten investors, acquired the majority After failing at its attempt to employ its of the shares in the Santa Cruz Island lands as a prison, in 1839 the Mexican Company during an economic downturn government deeded Santa Cruz Island to in the 1870s and became sole owner of the Alta Californian politician and the island by the end of the 1880s or landowner Captain Andres Castillero. early 1890s. Caire and his descendants By 1853 Castillero had introduced continued and expanded the sheep livestock to the island via his agent Dr. ranching and agricultural enterprises on James Barron Shaw. Shaw wrote of his the island. activities on the island: "I have . . . placed cattle, horses, and sheep on Most of this agricultural activity [Santa Cruz Island]; built houses on it concentrated in the Central Valley, and made canals and cut roads on it." although Prisoners Harbor persisted as Castillero had also introduced pigs to the the main dock for travelers and island the previous year; these went feral livestock. The earliest known image of shortly after their arrival on Santa Cruz. the island is of the Central Valley: in A mid-19th century visitor described the 1855 an artist with the US Coast Survey island's hillsides as: "covered in oaks, created a watercolor sketch of the pines, and chaparral; the latter has pastoral valley, livestock paddocks, and several times saved the livestock from ranch buildings. The main ranch starvation, serving as browsing grounds included a residence, bunkhouses for on the dry seasons." winemakers, shepherds and vaqueros, barns, winery buildings, a dining hall, By 1852 the first known European-style bakery, laundry, kitchen, shops for residence - a frame house - had been wagon makers, blacksmiths and tool and constructed at Prisoners Harbor. By saddle makers, and a chapel. Substantial 1857 island managers had converted acreage was planted in grapevines, hay over 200 acres of floodplain and riparian and fruit trees. habitat to orchards and grain fields on the island. Sheep ranching on the valley Caire’s island workforce consisted bottoms and hillslopes intensified during primarily of French, Italian, Hispanic the 1850s; one 19th century writer noted and Native American workers, reflecting that "most" of the mutton consumed in Caire’s French origins, his wife’s Italian Los Angeles during this decade was heritage, and the local population. The produced on Santa Cruz Island. island operation was a largely self- sustaining community that supported a Dr. James Barron Shaw continued to diversity of permanent and seasonal manage the island rancho as agent for employees, which included a blacksmith, Castillero and the island’s subsequent carpenters, painters, team drivers, owners, the Barron and Forbes Company dairymen, cooks, stone cutters and until 1869, developing several ranch masons, gardeners, dairymen, vintners, outposts and the infrastructure that grape pickers, sheep shearers, wagon linked them. In 1869 ten San Francisco and saddle makers, a cobbler, a butcher, investors purchased the island and a baker, and a sea captain and sailors. formed the Santa Cruz Island Company.
Affected Environment - 54
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
In 1856 the Survey created a detailed map of Prisoners Harbor. The map 3.1.6.4 Conservation Period showed the site with two buildings near the beach, but no pier. In 1978 The Nature Conservancy secured permanent protection of the 3.1.6.3 Late Agricultural Period property from Carey Stanton; the Conservancy gained full control of the Justinian Caire died in 1897; his property upon Stanton’s death in 1987. widow’s unequal distribution of In 1997 the National Park Service company shares among their six children acquired full ownership of the east led to family disagreements and a portion of the island, in order to manage prolonged period of litigation. and protect it as part of Channel Islands Ultimately, the dispute was settled by a National Park. In 2000 The Nature court-ordered partition of the island in Conservancy donated 8,000 acres of its 1925, which divided the island into holdings on Santa Cruz Island to the parcels with the western 90 percent National Park Service. Called “the (54,500 acres) of the island going to isthmus” this acreage includes Prisoners Caire’s widow and four of their children, Harbor. and the eastern 10 percent (6,000 acres) going to the two married Caire 3.2 Physical Resources daughters. The Caire family maintained the western portion of the island until This section includes descriptions of the 1937, when they sold their land to Los physical resources of the Project Area, Angeles businessman Edwin L. Stanton. and also physical resources of Santa Stanton attempted unsuccessfully to Cruz Island and the Channel Islands in revive the island’s sheep business which general where applicable. In particular, had declined dramatically after Justinian for data that do not exist specifically for Caire’s death, and then switched to cattle the Project Area, this section describes ranching. Edwin Stanton’s son and heir, conditions documented elsewhere on Carey Stanton, continued the cattle Santa Cruz Island or presents current ranching operations after his father’s understanding of conditions based on a death in 1963. composite of data from multiple sites in the park or region. Topics covered in this The east end of the island remained in section include hydrologic function, the hands of the Caire descendants, wetlands, and water quality. consolidated under the ownership of Ambrose and Maria Gherini. They 3.2.1 Water continued the sheep ranching operation, with headquarters at Scorpion Ranch and 3.2.1.1 Hydrologic Function Smuggler’s Cove, the two east end satellite ranches. The ranch operations 3.2.1.1.1 Surfacewater were overseen by a series of superintendents and caretakers until the The reach of Cañada del Puerto Creek island was converted to a private through the site is an intermittent stream hunting, camping and recreational that drains a watershed of about 13 venture in the early 1980s.
Affected Environment - 55
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement square miles. The upper watershed slopes. Regardless of the lack of design, extends into the Central Valley of the the berm serves to contain higher island and includes bedrock exposures, magnitude flows in the channel up to upland soils of varying quality and discharges that may approach the 100- thickness and alluvium/colluvium. As year flood. At some high flow level, mentioned, the bedrock is composed of a water will breach the channel at the road wide array of formations. Overall, most crossing and proceed northwest towards of the formations are poorly indurated the corrals and the coast. The warehouse and capable of providing large quantities is located west of the creek with an of sediment to the river systems on the elevation of about 12.8 feet at the island. A few bedrock outcrops exist in building corners, near the predicted the channel but most of the channel and elevation of a 100-year flood. After banks (including the entire lower reach) breaching the road crossing, floodwaters are composed of alluvium. tend to flow north into the corral area before reaching the warehouse. This has No substantial bedrock aquifers are occurred on at least one occasion during known to exist on Santa Cruz Island, and an extreme period of precipitation in therefore, baseflow to the streams is 1997-98. During that event, several minimal and provided primarily by small, yet well defined channels were storage in the valley alluvium. The lower cut into the pasture fill. reaches of the creek flow only in response to rainfall. Intense frontal 3.2.1.1.3 Alluvial groundwater storms, characteristic of this region, are capable of producing substantial runoff, As mentioned, no substantial bedrock and consequently, large flow events are aquifers are known to exist on Santa relatively common in the rainy season. Cruz Island so practically all groundwater is contained in alluvial 3.2.1.1.2 Floodplain Processes aquifers. Very little specific information was known about the characteristics of Storms in the winter of 1961-62 caused the alluvial groundwater in the area of damage to the Navy road and the historic Prisoners Harbor until recently. In adobe at Prisoners Harbor. At the creek December 2004, eighteen shallow wells draining into Prisoners’ Harbor, the were installed throughout the proposed Navy proposed construction of a wetland restoration site to monitor daily, cribbing barricade to prevent winter seasonal, and interannual variations in runoff from overflowing the banks into water table depth and salinity (Figure the corral area. The road crossing at that 3.2). Fifteen wells were installed in the location was examined as well, with a filled estuary. Three more wells concrete apron eventually being installed (numbers 15-17) were located in across the creek to the base of the Navy relatively undisturbed wetlands Road (Livingston, 2006). The existing immediately adjacent to the filled area, 300’+ berm, likely constructed at this including willow, bulrush, and time, is composed of channel alluvium transitional wetland communities. and not built to any design Water levels were measured specifications, as is evidenced by an approximately bi-weekly from uneven crest and overly steep side November 2005 to March 2007, and less
Affected Environment - 56
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement frequent monitoring has continued over a tide cycle to determine how tides through 2008. On many monitoring influenced the water table. dates, the wells were read multiple times
Figure 3.2 Prisoners Harbor Well Network
Salinity was measured to determine if it Prisoners Harbor. This twelve month would be a factor in selection of plants period had a total of 16.64 inches of for restoration. rainfall at the Santa Cruz Island Central Valley station. Although this is Data from November 2005 to October somewhat lower than the long-term 2006 are useful for examining seasonal annual mean of 19.9 inches, it is still water table fluctuations (Figure 3.3), considered reasonably characteristic for flow sources and directions, and depths the site. During this period, water levels to water below the fill material at in all 18 wells fluctuated in a very
Affected Environment - 57
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement similar pattern. All rose steadily in adjacent undisturbed wetland areas, response to wet season rain events and water levels fluctuated seasonally above peaked in May, and all followed a very and below the ground surface, as would similar pattern of steady decline once be expected for wetland communities. rainfall stopped in June. Water table fluctuations in the filled areas and in the Fewer water table measurements were adjacent, undisturbed (unfilled) wetland made during November 2006 to May areas were very similar in nature. The 2008, as shown in Figure 3.3. The very ranges of fluctuation in all wells were low water levels in December 2006 – approximately 1.5 - 2.0 feet over the 12 February 2007 represent a very rare month period. Tidal influence on the situation – the lowest annual rainfall water table was minor (typically 0.0 - year on record. However, wet season 0.2 ft over a tide cycle), although wells data from 2008 indicate a quick recovery nearest the coast occasionally fluctuated to water levels comparable to the 2006 as much as 0.4 ft. during the driest wet season. summer periods when hydrologic gradients near the coast are greatest. Overall, the water level data indicate that Salinity remained in the fresh water to the filled areas at Prisoners Harbor have slightly brackish range. a very high potential for wetland restoration. The site has a reliable water The water table data indicate that the source very near the ground surface, Cañada del Puerto valley upstream is the with a narrow range of fluctuation primary source of ground water for during the November 2005 - October Prisoners Harbor throughout the year, 2006 period. Average excavation of although hillslope runoff from the west only 2-3 feet of fill would re-expose the appears to affect the westernmost wells water table and re-create wetland after large rain events. Ground water conditions at the new surface. Also, levels were always highest at wells 9 and unfilled wetlands immediately adjacent 10, which are located where the narrow to the filled areas, including willow, stream valley opens onto the much bulrush, and transitional wetlands, have broader Prisoners Harbor coastal plain. water table dynamics and water sources From there, the water table slopes that are very comparable to the filled steadily toward the ocean across the site. areas. Therefore, they can be used as “reference” wetlands and serve as In the filled areas, depth to water during models for how to excavate the filled November 2005 to October 2006 site to create comparable wetland averaged approximately 2-3 feet below habitats. the ground surface across the site. In the
Affected Environment - 58
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
12 Well 1
Well 2 11 Well 3 Well 4
Well 5
10 Well 6 Well 7
Well 8
9 Well 9
Well 10
Well 11
8 Well 12
Water Table Elevation (ft msl) Elevation Table Water Well 13
Well 14 7 Well 15
Well 16
Well 17 6 Well 18 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 06 06 06 00 2005 200 200 20 20 200 200 /200 2006 200 2006 /200 200 7/ 1/ 2/200 8/200 8/20 0/ /5/ 6/ 4/200 1 13/ 3/ 2 5/4/20067/5/ 27/ 12 2 1 2 20 1 12 1/ 2/ 2/17/2 5/30/ 11/ 1/27/ 2/ 3/ 8/11/ 8/ 9/ 9/ 10/ 11/ 12/2
Figure 3.3 Ground Water Surface in Feet Above Mean Sea Level at Prisoners Harbor. Ground water elevation rises in the rainy season and drops in the dry season.
3.2.1.2 Wetlands conditions persist today on approximately 6.5 acres, including the 3.2.1.2.1 Types of wetlands in the intertidal beach and extending into a Project Area portion of the corral and pasture areas. Wetlands within the Project Area Before significant landscape provide a vital link between land and modification in the 19th and 20th open sea, exporting nutrients and organic centuries, the Project Area supported material to ocean waters. about 12 acres of wetland habitat. Based on 19th century maps of the site and A large proportion of California's coastal recent soil pits examining buried wetlands are estuarine salt marshes with wetland soils, the site's wetland complex associated tidal channels and mudflats. appears to have included a brackish However, the Project Area supports a water to freshwater estuary at the mouth more rare type of coastal wetland, a of Cañada del Puerto which opened freshwater floodplain marsh and occasionally onto the Santa Barbara associated stream channel. Like salt and channel; a floodplain wetland west of brackish-water marshes, the freshwater and including the existing stream system at Prisoners Harbor is vegetated channel, and northeast of and including mostly with herbaceous plants. Within the dock access road. Existing wetland the Project Area these are predominantly
Affected Environment - 59
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement freshwater species such as cattail (Typha the habitat is palustrine (marsh) habitat, domingensis), bulrush (Scirpus which is characterized by a dense californicus) and willow (Salix willow, forb, and grass canopy. lasiolepis), with only a small population Palustrine wetlands in the Project Area of salt-loving plants such as saltgrass can be further categorized in to three (Distichlis spicata). Coastal freshwater sub-classes: Palustrine Emergent marshes have mineral soils that are less Persistent wetlands, Palustrine Scrub- fertile than those of salt marshes, but Shrub, and Broad-Leaved Deciduous they exhibit a greater variety of plant wetlands, and Palustrine Forested Broad- species than do salt marshes. Leaved Deciduous wetlands. The remaining wetland within the Project The Project Area supports three types of Area is Riverine habitat. This habitat is wetlands, as categorized by the comprised of the stream channel itself, Cowardin (Cowardin et al. 1979) as defined by side slopes and a channel classification system: Marine, Palustrine, bottom, classified as Riverine Lower and Riverine wetlands (Figure 3.4; Perennial Rock Bottom. The stream Appendix D). Along the beach within channel is scoured frequently by winter the Project Area, the boulder bar consists storms. Annual herbaceous plants of Marine Intertidal Rocky Shore establish in late spring and summer with habitat. This habitat supports little or low cover (less than 5% canopy), and no vegetation, as it is regularly subjected then are scoured out annually by winter to ocean spray and wave overwash floods. during higher tides. Above the shoreline
Affected Environment - 60
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 3.4 Cowardin Wetlands and Riparian Areas at Prisoners Harbor and Lower Cañada del Puerto.
3.2.1.2.2 Wetland functions assimilation of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and sequestration of the Wetland functions are those ecosystem carbon in highly-organic wetland soils services that wetlands provide to (Brix et al. 2001). Wetlands can also promote natural ecological processes. produce methane and nitrous oxides, These include nutrient cycling, which are highly-potent greenhouse floodwater storage, wildlife habitat, gasses. Whether or not wetland drought mitigation, and others. Wetland restoration activities are neutral, functions are sometimes also referred to detrimental, or beneficial to the as "wetland values" and described as accumulation of greenhouse gasses in ecosystem services particularly valuable the atmosphere and their impact on to human societies, such as sequestration climate may depend on the type of of carbon and retardation of stream wetland established post-restoration; this channel erosion. Sequestration is the question is currently the focus of removal of carbon dioxide from the research projects around the world. atmosphere by photosynthetic
Affected Environment - 61
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Wetland functions are associated with interzonation of wetland habitats at the specific wetland types - for example, site would have supported greater coastal freshwater wetlands have a diversity and abundance of native flora particular and unique set of functions and fauna. which include floodwater retention and habitat for migrating birds (Tiner 2003). In addition, the greater pre-historic Ecologists and managers also measure wetland extent provided greater capacity wetland functions directly - generally and diversity of physical ecosystem with intensive, quantitative protocols services for biota. At Prisoners Harbor directed at a limited number of sites. these would have included nutrient For example, bird density, number of retention and cycling and organic soil rare plant populations, or annual net development. sediment storage may be interpreted as metrics of wetland function. 3.2.1.2.3 Alteration of wetlands at Prisoners Harbor Wetlands at Prisoners Harbor today almost certainly have reduced Lower Cañada del Puerto creek was functionality in comparison to habitats at dredged in the late 19th or early 20th the site prior to 19th and 20th century centuries to create a deep channel for an alterations. The approximately 12 acres approximate distance upstream from the of wetlands present at the harbor beach and bar of greater than 1,500 feet, provided better habitat for wetland- by 40 feet wide, in order to confine and dependent species and other island fauna control the creek flows along the east not merely due to the larger habitat bank. The dredge spoil has been piled to extent, but also because the larger pre- create berms on either side of the historic wetlands almost certainly channel. A review of historic supported a much greater diversity of information suggests that the original wetland habitats than exist at the site stream channel was shallow and spread today. These habitats most likely approximately 75 to 100 feet wide across included open water habitat, marsh most of the floodplain in the area above wetlands dominated by short perennial the main road crossing and adjacent to herbaceous plants, marsh wetlands the pump-station area. Approximately dominated by cattail and tule, seasonally 50 percent of the original wetland area dry creek bed and associated riparian has been filled or dredged. Historic forest, non-vegetated lagoon habitat, photographs show the area as having non-riparian willow scrub habitat, and been mud-flat, which may have been transitional zones between these denuded by livestock. habitats. Greater diversity and
Affected Environment - 62
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Historic photographs and documentation Over the years, it appears as though show workers shoveling fill (spilled some of the fill closest to the beach and from a one-ton mining car that moved on bar has been eroded by stream flooding a temporary rail-track system) into what and intertidal events. The remaining fill used to be a floodplain wetland that is area is now the corral and most of the occasionally influenced by salt water surrounding area. The original pre-20th (Figure 3.5). Based on field sampling, century marsh surface varies from the fill material is coarse sand and gravel approximately 1 to 4 feet below the and was likely dredge material taken present-day land surface. from the river channel and material extracted from the adjacent hillslopes.
Figure 3.5 Photo Looking North East at Prisoners Harbor circa 1880. Courtesy of Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History.
Affected Environment - 63
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
3.2.1.3 Water Quality therefore, are not definitively predictable. Very little specific water quality information exists for Cañada Del Puerto Sediments in the Prisoners Harbor area Creek in Prisoners Harbor. However, are primarily a combination of river based on knowledge of geology and alluvium, marine deposits, and land-use in the watershed, some anthropogenic fill. The fill material reasonable conclusions may be made rages in size from silt and sand to large about the general water chemistry cobbles. The marine deposits are most regime. Although previously subjected obvious at the beach margin where a to intensive agriculture, at the present relatively large cobble/boulder bar is time the vast majority of the watershed formed by persistent wave action. The is in a near natural state. Consequently, river alluvium observable in the channel we would expect the prevailing surface and banks of the creek is on the small water chemistry be the result of side, ranging from fines to interaction between precipitation, soils, small/medium cobbles. This is biota and bedrock. Major and minor ion somewhat of a surprising gradation chemistry is likely reflective of given the availability of much larger relatively dilute precipitation influenced grain sizes in the watershed. Inspection by contact with slightly reactive of aerial photographs and satellite sedimentary and igneous bedrock and imagery indicate that a large amount of associated soils. It is unlikely that high fluvial sediment is being stored in the concentrations of metals, organics or channel and floodplain of the creek just other contaminants ever occur. Near the upstream of the project area. The reason outlet to Cañada Del Puerto Creek in for this storage is not clear but may be Prisoners Harbor, there is an additional related to valley gradient changes, marine influence on water quality. encroachment of riparian vegetation, or Cyclic salts and occasional overwash both. may increase salinity levels to slightly brackish for surface and shallow Throughout the project area, well groundwater, especially in the dry developed riparian vegetation provides season. shade and cover to the stream corridor buffering the temperature regime of the One water quality parameter that could surface water. In the lower reaches, this be affected by the project is sediment vegetation is primarily native woody concentration. Under natural conditions, species. In the upper reaches, however, the combination of variable bedrock a large portion of this riparian vegetation geology, steep slopes, degraded soil is made up of mature eucalyptus trees. structure due to historic over-grazing, and intense precipitation events, may 3.3 Biological Resources result in the generation of large quantities of sediment within the This section describes the biological watershed. These sediment events are resources of the Project Area, including highly episodic and are influenced by a wildlife and vegetation that may be combination of meteorologic, geologic, affected by the proposed project. biologic, and fluvial factors, and
Affected Environment - 64
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Wildlife and vegetation patterns are populations can result in poor genetic described for the Channel Islands and resilience, and because natural and Santa Cruz Island in general where anthropogenic disturbances can cause appropriate - for example, to portray high rates of mortality within small and broad-scale patterns of vegetation and localized populations. describe wildlife populations and assemblages that are not confined to the 3.3.1.1 Birds Project Area. Additional descriptions are provided for special status species Fifty-one species of landbird are known found in the Project Area, and for to breed on Santa Cruz Island (Diamond vegetation and wildlife assemblages and Jones 1980), and dozens more visit observed there. Topics covered in this the island to forage or rest on migratory section include non-avian vertebrates journeys. Eight of island-breeding birds (including special-status species), birds are subspecies endemic to two or more (including special-status species), of the Northern Channel Islands, while invertebrates, native vegetation one bird - the Island scrub-jay communities; special status plant (Aphelocoma insularis) - is endemic to species; and non-native vegetation. Santa Cruz Island. During 2008, a spring breeding bird survey was 3.3.1 Wildlife conducted in the Project Area. Twenty- eight bird species were observed in the Santa Cruz Island supports fewer animal project area during the spring survey species than mainland areas of (Table 3.2). All species have been comparable size, because only a subset reported during breeding season in other of the mainland fauna successfully locations on the island (Diamond and colonized the island. However, the Jones, 1980) Observation stations were island's isolation from mainland dominated by either native vegetation or populations created a fauna that includes non-native eucalyptus trees. Native many species only found on the Channel vegetation in the project area (stations 2, Islands or only on Santa Cruz Island. In 3, 5, and 7) supported the greatest general, island fauna are species-poor, abundance and diversity of bird species because the low frequency of and stations located in areas dominated colonization of islands by either a by non-native eucalyptus trees (stations breeding pair or gravid female. In 1, 4, 6, and 8) supported the lowest addition, island animal species are at abundance and diversity of bird species high risk of extinction relative to their (Table 3.2). mainland cousins because small founder
Affected Environment - 65
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Table 3.2 Bird species observed in the project area during an 8-station, circular count spring bird survey. Common Name Station Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Acorn Woodpecker 3 3 Allen's Hummingbird 1 1 1 4 3 7 5 22 Anna's Hummingbird 3 4 2 1 2 1 13 Ash-throated 2 2 1 1 1 7 Flycatcher Barn Swallow 12 9 19 2 42 Belted Kingfisher 1 1 Bewick's Wren 3 2 2 4 6 7 9 9 42 Black Phoebe 4 1 2 7 Black-headed 1 2 3 Grosbeak Brown Pelican 2 2 Bushtit 10 3 13 Chipping Sparrow 1 1 Common Raven 4 7 4 2 2 1 20 House Finch 2 7 14 1 5 7 36 Hutton's Vireo 1 1 Island scrub-jay 1 1 2 1 1 1 7 Killdeer 1 1 Lesser Goldfinch 1 2 3 Mallard 3 20 23 Northern Flicker 1 2 2 5 Orange-crowned 3 11 2 5 3 2 7 3 36 Warbler Pacific-slope 1 3 4 Flycatcher Red-tailed Hawk 1 1 Rufous-sided Towhee 5 4 9 Sharp-shinned Hawk 1 1 Song Sparrow 7 1 6 1 4 4 7 2 32 Western Gull 2 2 Yellow-rumped 1 1 Warbler
Affected Environment - 66
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Total # individuals 37 49 56 33 52 24 53 34 Total # species 10 12 13 9 15 8 15 10 Source: Data from Lyndal Laughrin, Director University of California Santa Cruz Island Natural Reserve.
Coastal California is part of the Pacific with a high scrub oak component, and Flyway - one of the four principal bird forages in wooded habitats throughout migration routes in North America. the island, and in the Project Area During peak annual migration periods, particularly within the arroyo willow hundreds of thousands of birds migrating riparian forest. Breeding pairs forage for along the flyway descend upon coastal seeds and invertebrates within wetlands, including those on the Channel established territories. Nesting peaks Islands, in search of refuge and food. during the last two weeks in March - Although relatively few bird species are coinciding with flowering of chaparral year-round residents, many species plants and associated arthropod temporarily inhabit coastal marshes abundance. Birds build stick nests in during their annual migrations. During brush and trees from heights ranging the spring and fall months in previous from ground level to 40 feet, and years, waterfowl such as brant, pintails, produce two to five eggs per nesting and mallard, and shorebirds such as pair. Eggs are subject to heavy stilts, plovers, and gulls, which stop here predation from vertebrate predators, to rest, feed, and in some cases over including common raven, Island fox, winter have been observed in the Project Island spotted skunk, and even other Area. A fall bird survey conducted Island scrub-jay. during 2008 identified two sea bird species in the Prisoners Harbor area, Island scrub-jays are observed within the brown pelican and western gull. Project Area by many visitors to Prisoners Harbor. Recently, Several species observed on the island observations of scrub-jays in the project have special legal status under federal or area have substantially declined. Studies state endangered species laws. Special are underway to better understand the status species observed near or within population numbers, habitat use, and the Project Area (Table 3.2) are distribution is Island scrub-jays. During described in greater detail below. the 2008 spring breeding bird survey a total of 7 birds were observed in the 3.3.1.1.1 Island scrub-jay Project Area from 6 of 8 observation stations. The Island scrub-jay (Aphelocoma insularis) is found only on Santa Cruz A potential threat to the Island scrub-jay Island. This bird is distinguished from is West Nile Virus, a mosquito-borne its close cousins - the Western scrub-jay disease commonly found in Africa, Asia, and Florida scrub-jay - by its deeper blue and the Middle East. An infected coloring, larger body, and highly mosquito can bite any animal, but not all inquisitive behavior. The jay breeds in animals will become sick. The disease coast live oak woodland or chaparral most often affects birds but may
Affected Environment - 67
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement occasionally cause disease in other beaches used for nesting as well as on animals. Wild birds serve as the main beaches where they do not nest, and on source of virus for mosquitoes. Infection estuarine sand and mud flats. has been reported in more than 225 bird species. Although many birds that are Channel Islands National Park is one of infected with West Nile Virus will not the few locations in southern California appear ill, West Nile Virus infection can that supports breeding and wintering cause serious illness and death in some populations of western snowy plovers. birds. The most severe illnesses are seen Forty to fifty percent of the nests on the among the corvid birds, which include islands have been found in backdunes, crows, jays, ravens, and magpies. No about 490 to 980 feet from the shoreline. case of human, animal, or bird infected In the 1990s Santa Rosa and San Miguel with West Nile Virus has been reported Islands had both breeding and wintering from any islands in the Park. populations, but numbers have declined precipitously recently. A few birds also 3.3.1.1.2 Snowy plover lived on The Nature Conservancy portion of Santa Cruz. No snowy Western snowy plover (Charadrius plovers have been observed in the alexandrinus nivosus) - a federally listed Project Area. threatened species - breeds on beaches from Washington State to Baja 3.3.1.1.3 Brown pelican California. This bird is threatened primarily due to loss of breeding habitat Brown pelicans (Pelicanus occidentalis), to human disturbance and invasive dune are protected by the 1918 Migratory Bird plants. Most Western snowy plovers Treaty. DDT in their food supply return to the same site in subsequent reduced their numbers in the 1970s and breeding seasons to breed on beaches they became protected under the federal above the mean high tide line, Endangeres Species Act. They have particularly on dune-backed beaches recently been proposed for federal and near estuaries and at river mouths. Their state de-listing. They are observed nests typically are shallow scrapes or commonly within the Project Area, depressions on the ground on flat, open particularly bathing in the terminus of areas with sandy or saline substrates, Cañada del Puerto and resting and where vegetation and driftwood is sparse preening on the nearby boulder bar. or absent. The nesting season extends Brown pelican launch from the Project from early March through September, Area to hunt for fish – primarily with peak nesting between mid-April northern anchovies (Engraulis mordax) - and mid-August. Chicks reach fledging in waters just north of the Project Area. age about one month after hatching. Adult birds have wingspans of over six Adults forage for invertebrates primarily feet, and weigh up to eleven pounds, along the water’s edge. On the Channel with males slightly larger than females. Islands these birds forage in the wet sand Adults have few terrestrial predators, and amidst surf-cast kelp in the intertidal however, eggs and chicks are at risk zone and in dry, sandy areas above the from mammalian predators. On Santa high tide. In the non-breeding season Cruz Island predators may include Santa snowy plovers are found on many of the Cruz Island fox and island spotted
Affected Environment - 68
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement skunk. Breeding pairs build ground sea cliffs. Known nesting areas included nests of sticks in March and April and Pelican Bay, San Pedro Point, Blue hatch about three chicks per pair; nesting Banks, Valley Anchorage, Chinese has not been observed within the Project Harbor, Potato Harbor, and Middle Area, however these birds nest Grounds. sporadically nearby off Santa Cruz Island at Scorpion Rock. A ban on use of DDT in the United States in 1972 and listing of the bird Brown pelican were listed as federally under the federal Endangered Species endangered in 1970 due to population Act in 1967 supported recovery of the declines caused by exposure to the species from 417 nesting pairs in 1963 to chemical DDT. After the United States over 9,000 breeding pairs by 2007. The banned use of DDT in 1972, pelican bald eagle was removed from the federal populations experienced tremendous Endangered Species Act in 2007, due to recovery, and the species is now under its recovery; however the species is still consideration for de-listing by the US protected by the federal Migratory Bird Fish and Wildlife Service. Ongoing Treaty Act and Bald and Golden Eagle threats to species viability include Protection Act. completion with humans for sardines, entanglement with fishing equipment, Bald eagle is the only eagle endemic to disease due to overcrowding in higher- North America. Adult bald eagles are quality habitat, and unnatural climate recognized primarily by their large size - variation. wingspan can exceed 80 inches – dark body and underwings accompanied by a The range for the species extends from stark white head and tail. Juveniles of the Gulf of California to British up to four years old lack the crisp white Columbia; no critical habitat for this head and tail markings of adults, and are species has been designated. Pelicans generally dark with mottled white are rarely observed inland or far out to patches on head, tail, and underwings. sea. A 1983 Recovery Plan for the Bald eagles are hunters, fishers, and species is now outdated and has not been scavengers, and occasionally hunt and replaced. forage cooperatively. Birds generally forage and nest near seashores, rivers, 3.3.1.1.4 Bald eagle estuaries, and palustrine wetlands.
Santa Cruz Island once supported stable Bald eagles were reintroduced to Santa permanent populations of bald eagles Cruz Island beginning in 2002 through (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), however in cooperative efforts of non-profit and the by the mid 20th century the pesticide governmental entities. As a result of this DDT had brought the species to the effort, bald eagles hatched on Santa Cruz brink of extinction. By the mid-20th Island for the first time in half a century century bald eagles had been extirpated in 2006. Adult and juvenile eagles have from Santa Cruz Island (Kiff 1980). been observed in the northwest portion Before their expiration, Santa Cruz of the Project Area, in the riparian forest Island had supported at least five pairs of above the mouth of Cañada del Puerto. bald eagles, which nested in trees and on
Affected Environment - 69
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
3.3.1.2 Mammals, reptiles, and The island fox has similar markings to amphibians its ancestor, but is one-third smaller. Environmental and ecological factors Eight species of reptiles and amphibians such as drought or food scarcity may inhabit Santa Cruz Island (Table 3.3). have contributed to the natural selection Three of these are endemic to either for a smaller size. At 12 to 13 inches in Santa Cruz Island or the Channel height and 4 to 5 pounds, the island fox Islands: the Channel Islands slender is about the size of a housecat. Island salamander, the island fence lizard and foxes have gray coloring on the back, the Santa Cruz gopher snake. All of the rust coloring on the sides, and white amphibian and reptile species known underneath. The face has distinctive from Santa Cruz Island have been found black, white, and rufous-colored in Cañada del Puerto (Charles Drost, patterns. email to Paula Power September 15, 2008). Of the fifteen species of Island foxes are distributed as six mammals that have been observed on different subspecies, one on each of the Santa Cruz Island, eleven are bats. Of six Channel Islands on which they occur. the four non-bat mammals on the island, Each population is small, ranging from two are endemic to Santa Cruz, and the less than a few hundred to a few other - the island spotted skunk - occurs thousand individual animals. Foxes only on Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa from separate islands are still capable of Islands. Although the marine interbreeding, but are physically and environment in the Santa Barbara genetically distinct enough to be Channel just north of the Project Area recognized as separate subspecies. supports an abundant and diverse marine Subspecies are named for their island of fish assemblage, the fresh waters of origin. The subspecies endemic to Santa Cañada del Puerto and Santa Cruz Island Cruz Island is U. littoralis santacruzae. do not support permanent fish Due to its limited range and small populations. population numbers, the subspecies was listed as a threatened species under the Several non-avian vertebrate species on California Endangered Species Act in the island - including some island 1987. endemics - have special legal status under federal or state endangered species Island foxes occur in virtually every laws. Endemic or special status species habitat on the Channel Islands, and that have been observed near or within forage for a wide variety of prey (Moore the Project Area (Table 3.3) are and Collins 1995), including mice, described in greater detail below. ground-nesting birds, arthropods, and fruits. Fox home range size varies by 3.3.1.2.1 Santa Cruz Island fox habitat type, season, and gender of the animal (Faucett 1982; Laughrin 1977; The island fox (Urocyon littoralis) is the Crooks and Van Vuren 1995; Thompson largest of the Channel Islands' native et al. 1998; Roemer 1999). mammals. A descendent of the mainland gray fox, the island fox evolved into a The fox population on Santa Cruz Island unique species over 10,000 years ago. declined disastrously in the late 1990s
Affected Environment - 70
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement from about 2,000 individuals on the 3.3.1.2.3 Western harvest mouse island in 1994 to perhaps less than 135 animals in 2000 (Roemer 1999). This Western harvest mice (Reithrodontomys decline was probably due to predation by megalotis) are small rodents with long golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) tails and grayish to buffy brown fur. (Roemer 1999; Roemer et al. 2001) Compared to Peromyscus maniculatus which were unnaturally sustained on the santacruzae – the only other small island by non-native feral pigs. Recent mammal species found on Santa Cruz removal of golden eagles and Island – harvest mice are smaller and elimination of feral pigs from the island have a tail distinctly longer than the and a successful fox captive breeding body. Western harvest mice are and reintroduction program is resulting commonly observed on the California in recovery the Santa Cruz Island fox mainland where they inhabit a variety of population. About 300 reintroduced grassy and weedy areas. They have been foxes inhabit the island today, and their observed in deserts, pine and oak forests population is increasing. The US Fish and salt marshes (Webster and Jones and Wildlife Service believe this project 1982), but within in these areas they are will support the Santa Cruz Island fox still generally found in dense grass and (US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008). forb habitats. Proposed Avoidance Measures for the island fox during implementation of the There is little information available project are described in Chapter 4. about the distribution of Western harvest mice on the Channel Islands. The Santa 3.3.1.2.2 Santa Cruz Island deer mouse Cruz Island harvest mouse is limited to Catalina, San Clemente, and Santa Cruz The deer mouse (Peromyscus Islands, but the population on San maniculatus) occurs on all 5 islands in Clemente is probably a very recent Channel Islands National Park. The introduction from the mainland. species is further divided into subspecies Populations on Catalina and Santa Cruz with a separate subspecies on each are believed to be native, and distinct island. The Santa Cruz Island deer island-endemic subspecies have been mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus subsp. proposed for the two islands. However, santacruzae) has been observed in the recent genetic studies do not provide Project Area and throughout the island. strong support for subspecies recognition In a survey conducted between 2004 and (Ashley 1989, Collins and George 2006, during nearly 1,500 trap nights, 1990). deer mice were trapped in 26 of 29 locations throughout the island with a When Oliver Pearson first trapped trap success rate of 0-60% (Drost and harvest mice on Santa Cruz Island in Gelczis, 2007). The most recent data 1948 all of his specimens were captured suggests deer mice are about 4 times as at the interface of a “small grassy field abundant as the western harvest mouse with a small freshwater marsh” at on the island. Prisoner’s Harbor. In the 1960s through 1980s biologists trapped harvest mice in the Central Valley on Santa Cruz Island, and there have also been anecdotal
Affected Environment - 71
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement reports of harvest mouse nests found on including within the Project Area. the east end of the island at Scorpion Island fence lizards have brown, dark Canyon. gray, or black sharply keeled dorsal scales, sometimes with light-colored 3.3.1.2.4 Channel Islands slender blotches. Adults average four inches salamander long; males exhibit a light-colored whitish belly with iridescent blue bands The Channel Islands slender salamander along the sides, while females have faint (Batrachoseps pacificus) is a three-inch or absent blue markings. Fence lizards long amphibian with dark brown moist are diurnal, and are often observed skin, short limbs, conspicuous caudal basking on rocks or dark substrates. and costal grooves along its body, and a Mild temperatures on Santa Cruz Island worm-like appearance. Typical of probably allow for year-round foraging slender salamanders, these animals are and basking activity. When approached secretive and cryptic; visitors to the adults may exhibit territorial behavior Project Area rarely see them. They pumping body up and down from inhabit coastal scrub communities, forearms. Island fence lizards lay one to grasslands, oak woodlands, and crevices three clutches of terrestrial eggs in under beach driftwood (Charles Drost, spring – from April to July. Each clutch email to Paula Power September 15, contains between three and seventeen 2008). These animals often estivate eggs that hatch into juveniles within 60 underground during the hot dry summer days. The island fence lizard is not season, and utilize the wetter, cooler fall listed as a species of concern by any and winter months to forage for small jurisdiction; however, their natural range invertebrates and reproduce. Unlike is limited to Santa Cruz, San Miguel, many other amphibian taxa – which lay and Santa Rosa Islands. eggs in freshwater habitats that later hatch into aquatic larvae such as 3.3.1.2.6 Santa Cruz gopher snake tadpoles – slender salamanders lay eggs in moist terrestrial environments, which The Santa Cruz gopher snake (Pituophis hatch into offspring that resemble adults. cantenifer pumilus) is a dwarf subspecies of the Pacific gopher snake; Channel Islands slender salamanders are the subspecies is endemic to Santa Cruz endemic to Channel Islands National and Santa Rosa Islands. Unlike its Park – they are found only on Santa mainland cousins, which are as long as Cruz, San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and seven feet, adults of the island endemic Anacapa Islands. They are listed as a subspecies grow no longer than about federal species of concern due to three feet. Gopher snakes exhibit heavily vulnerability associated with their keeled brown and tan blotched scales, limited range. pale tan belly scales, and a narrow head only slightly wider than the neck. 3.3.1.2.5 Island fence lizard Gopher snakes are active in hot weather, especially at dusk and dawn, and are This small lizard (Sceloporus good burrowers, climbers, and occidentalis becki) is commonly swimmers. They opportunistically hunt observed all over Santa Cruz Island, invertebrates and small vertebrates.
Affected Environment - 72
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
However diet for these snakes is likely observed in grasslands, oak woodlands, limited on Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa and dry riparian habitat. Santa Cruz Islands due to the depauperate vertebrate gopher snake is a California species of fauna, and probably includes nestlings, concern, due to its limited range, and juvenile mice, lizards, and terrestrial possible habitat destruction by domestic invertebrates. They are most commonly and feral animals.
Table 3.3 Non-avian vertebrates on Santa Cruz Island Federal State Local Observed Status Status Endemism in Project Area? Amphibians Blackbelly slender salamander Yes Batrachoseps nigraventrus Channel Islands slender salamander FSC Channel Yes Batrachoseps pacificus Islands Pacific tree frog Yes Hyla regilla
Reptiles Southern alligator lizard Yes Elgaria multicarinata Island fence lizard Channel Yes Sceloporus occidentalis becki Islands Side-blotched lizard Yes Uta stansburiana Santa Cruz gopher snake FSC CSC Santa Cruz and Yes Pituophis cantenifer pumilus Santa Rosa Islands Western yellowbelly racer Yes Coluber constrictor mormon
Mammals California myotis No Myotis californicus caurins Big-eared myotis FSC No Myotis evotis Fringed myotis FSC No Myotis thysanodes Townsend's big-eared bat FSC CSC No
Affected Environment - 73
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii Big brown bat No Episicus fuscus Pallid bat CSC No Antrozous pallius pacificus Silver haired bat No Lasionycteris noctivagans Hoary bat No Lasiurus cinereus Red bat No Lasiurus borealis Mexican free-tailed bat No Tadarida brasiliensis Western mastiff bat FSC CSC No Eumops perotis californicus Santa Cruz Island deer mouse Santa Cruz Yes Peromyscus maniculatus Island santacruzae Western harvest mouse Considered for Yes Reithrodontomys megalotis recognition of endemic subspecies, but genetic studies suggest no endemism
Santa Cruz Island fox FE ST Santa Cruz No Urocyon littoralis santacruzae Island Island spotted skunk FSC CSC Santa Cruz and No Spilogale gracilis amphiala Santa Rosa Islands
3.3.1.3 Invertebrates and Fish the butterfly and moth species of the island are known to science - 550 The invertebrate fauna of Santa Cruz lepidopteron species have been observed Island is less well known than the on Santa Cruz Island. Three vertebrate fauna, due to traditional Lepidoptera are endemic to Santa Cruz greater interest in the latter, and the far Island, Acrocercops insulariella, greater diversity of the former. Powel Ephysteris sp. and Chlodes sylvanoides (1994) estimated that about 70-75% of subsp. santacruza (Powell, J.A. 1994).
Affected Environment - 74
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Cruz Island, the aquatic insect The native bee fauna of Santa Cruz assemblage within the streams on the Island is well known, due to research on island, including Cañada del Puerto, is the effects of non-native European depauperate as compared with mainland honeybee (Apis mellfera) on native bees habitats (Furlong 1999). The island (Thorpe et al. 1994). Euporean supports a greater than expected honeybees have been entirely removed abundance of flies (Order: Diptera) and from the island. beetles (Order: Coleoptera) with aquatic larval stages, and an under- Wetlands, streams, willow forests and representation of caddisflies (Order: riparian corridors are breeding habitat Trichoptera) and stoneflies (Order: for freshwater mosquitos. Mosquitos are Plecoptera). This discrepancy may be active within the Project Area and will due to greater dispersal ability of flies continue to occur post-project. and beetles relative to caddisflies and Mosquitoes are of particular concern stoneflies, or may reflect the ability of because they are primary vectors of flies and beetles to adapt to more flood- infectious diseases – such as West Nile prone and less-shaded stream channels Virus and encephalitis – for humans, as are found on Santa Cruz Island livestock, and wildlife in California. relative to the rest of Santa Barbara The most threatening mosquito-borne County. diseases in the United States are transmitted by mosquitoes of the Culex The creek through Cañada del Puerto genus, including California native flows during the winter and spring rainy species C. pipiens and C. tarsalis. The season, then slowly disappears during State of California maintains a regularly the dry summer months. When flowing, updated website with information on the creek eventually reaches the boulder West Nile Virus activity by county bar which forms a barrier between the (http://www.westnile.ca.gov/). To date, ocean and the Prisoners Harbor area West Nile Virus activity has been where fresh water slowly seeps through reported in birds but no human activity the boulder bar to the ocean. There are in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties. no known permanent fish species in There have been no reported cases of Cañada del Puerto creek. On at least one bird, animal, or human West Nile Virus occasion, several small fish – most likely activity in the Park. Some believe the top smelt washed over the boulder bar absence of West Nile Virus on the island during a high tide – were observed in the is because the island is too cool most of remnant wetland (Dan Richards, email to the year for the virus to replicate in its Paula Power June 21, 2007). mosquito hosts. On the mainland temperatures stay above that replication 3.3.2 Vegetation threshold of 14.30C longer (Neilsen, et al., 2008) – enabling the virus to 3.3.2.1 Santa Cruz Island Vegetation propagate in the landscape. Communities
Many species of insects – including Vegetation communities on Santa Cruz mosquitoes – have aquatic larval life Island, like those on the other Channel stages. As with the other fauna on Santa Islands, developed in relative isolation
Affected Environment - 75
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement from the mainland. Although many recovery of native plant communities. species on the islands are the same as However, ongoing damage to vegetation those found on the mainland, almost 50 communities from historic sheep and species are unique - endemic - to the cattle grazing, pig rooting, and invasive Channel Islands or even to a subset of plants are evident across the island. the Channel Islands. Some endemic island species are the only remaining Forest communities on the island are populations of taxa that were once drought-adapted and generally support a widespread on the mainland; others heavy representation of hard-leaved evolved into unique species on the evergreen woody plants such as Channel Islands - descendents of ironwood (Lyanothamnus floribundus), mainland species that colonized the Island cherry (Prunus illcifolia ssp. islands and then adapted to local lyonii), live oaks (Quercus agrifolia, Q. conditions through speciation. tomentella, and Q. chrysolepis), manzanita (Arctostaphylus insularis), Santa Cruz Island vegetation and toyon (Heteromoles arbutifolia). communities developed without human Bishop pine (Pinus muricata) is the only influence from the end of the Pleistocene native conifer on the island; on Santa approximately 12,500 years ago until the Cruz Island they generally occur with an first sizable human settlements on the understory of broadleaved evergreen islands about 7,000 years ago. Native trees. Other stands of conifers on the American settlers on the islands may island consist of non-native Italian stone have influenced these vegetation pine (Pinus pinea) or Monterey cypress communities with food gathering (Cupressus macrocarpa). Deciduous tree activities, harvest of vegetation for forests are limited to canyons with building materials, promotion of permanent surface or near-surface water economically important plants, and are dominated by either big leaf intensification of fires, and possible maple (Acer macrophyllum) or introduction of mainland plants and cottonwood (Populus fremontii and P. animals. About 150 years ago, people of balsamifera). European descent introduced domestic and feral animals to the island. In Shrub communities on the island addition, these most-recent settlers on similarly support a preponderance of Santa Cruz Island engaged in cultivation drought-tolerant, hard-leaved evergreen within the Project Area and in the woody species. The island supports a Central Valley, and introduced high diversity of upland shrub numerous alien plant taxa – both communities, including stands purposefully and unintentionally. These dominated by manzanitas actions disrupted the composition and (Arctostaphylus viridissima, A. insluaris, distribution of the island’s vegetation, and A. tomentosa), chamise and severely altered natural soil and (Adenostoma faciculatum), ceanothus hydrologic processes on the islands. (Ceanothus megacarpus and C. Cessation of agricultural and commercial arborus), scrub oaks (Quercus pacifica, grazing in the second-half of the 20th Q. dumosa, and Q. parvula), coyote century, and removal of feral pigs from brush (Baccharis pilularis), sagebrush the island in 2006 have allowed for some (Artemisia californica), buckwheat
Affected Environment - 76
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
(Erigonum arboresens), and Tejon milk aster (Stephanomeria monkeyflower (Mimulus flemingii). cichoriacca). Upland graminoid plant Canyons with surface or near-surface communities are widespread on flows for much of the year support hillslopes and valley bottoms, and are riparian communities of mulefat generally dominated by non-native (Baccharis salicifolia) and phreatophytic annual grasses, including Bromus spp., arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis). Avena spp, and harding grass (Philaris aquatica), but can also include native A survey of plant species in the project grass and forb components such as area conducted during 2008 identified brome (Bromus carinatus), barley 179 plant species (Appendix E). After a (Hordeum spp.), rye (Leymus spp.), search of the California Natural needlegrass (Nassella spp.), coyote Diversity Database, herbarium brush, and sagebrush. Wetland specimens, and this and other on-the- graminoid plant communities – those ground field surveys, the park and US confined to areas with high perennial Fish and Wildlife believe that no groundwater – include communities with federally listed plant species occur in the dominant canopies of bulrush (Scirpus area of proposed restoration work (US californica and S. maritimus) and Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008). One saltgrass (Distichlis spicata). state listed species was found in the main stream channel, Santa Cruz Island The Project Area supports eleven silver lotus (Lotus argophyllus ssp. distinct plant communities (Aerial argenteus). Information Systems, Inc. 2007; Table 3.4). Proposed restoration activities Despite removal of feral and grazing would occur in some of the mapping animals from Santa Cruz Island, the units. Fill material would be removed island still exhibits large areas from the Built-up mapping unit and dominated by alien herbaceous plant deposited in a Fennel mapping unit. species associated with these animals, Eucalyptus would be removed from particularly fennel (Foeniculum vulgare) Eucalyptus stands mapping units. The mixed with non-native annual grasses protective barrier for the archeological such as Avena spp., Bromus spp., and site would be installed in the Planted Hordium spp. Native herbaceous plant Trees and Shrubs mapping unit. These communities on the island generally vegetation types are described below as consist of graminoid species, although general plant community types found several upland plant communities have throughout Santa Cruz Island. Also, canopies of forbs including sea blite species observed within these mapping (Sueda taxifolia), San Miguel Island units within the Project Area are locoweed (Astragalus miguelensis), and described.
Affected Environment - 77
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Table 3.4 Plant communities in the Project Area Acreage within the Percentage of the Project Area Project Area Eucalyptus Stands 20.02 33.5 Coast Live Oak Alliance 8.204 13.7 Lemonade Berry Alliance 0.622 1.0 Mixed Arroyo Willow - 2.238 3.8 Mule Fat Arroyo Willow 7.409 12.4 Bulrush - Cattail 0.076 0.1 Fennel 2.598 4.3 Silver Beachbur - Beach 1.577 2.6 Sand Verbena Alliance Stream Beds and Flats 4.964 8.3 Planted Trees and Shrubs 1.130 1.9 Built-up 5.414 9.1 Mulefat Alliance 0.001 0.001 Coastal Bluff Scrub Habitat 0.261 0.4 California Sagebrush- 1.753 2.9 Lemonade berry Water 3.430 5.7
3.3.2.1.1 Eucalyptus Stands Their presence creates an adverse environment for many native species, The genus Eucalyptus includes about including passerine birds. Native plant 450 species and is native to Australia. understory used by birds for foraging During the late 19th century, it was and nesting is greatly reduced beneath widely planted throughout California, eucalyptus trees. According to the including four species on Santa Cruz Audubon Society, the flowers of Island (Junak, et al. 1995) where they eucalyptus trees have deep nectar cups, were planted for ornamental and with a tar-like substance at the entrance utilitarian purposes such as windbreaks of the cup. When native birds probe the and future pier pilings. Some trees flowers to get nectar and insects, this planted during the ranching era are now substance coats the feathers at the base considered contributing elements to the of the bill and may clog the bird’s historic landscape (NPS Cultural nostrils. Additionally, eucalyptus leaf Landscape Inventory, 2004). Most litter is highly flammable creating a fire eucalyptus trees on the island, however, hazard which poses a threat to historic are feral offspring of historic trees. buildings on Santa Cruz Island.
Affected Environment - 78
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
The Project Area includes four distinct This plant community appears in very areas dominated by eucalyptus species, limited extent in the northeast corner of all within the riparian corridor of Cañada the Project Area, on the slope above the del Puerto. Three of these stands consist Cañada del Puerto lagoon. The primarily of blue gum (Eucalyptus evergreen shrub lemonade berry (Rhus globulus). The other stand consists of integrefolia) dominates the stand with a red river gum (E. camaldulensis). Both sparse canopy. Sagebrush provides a species form nearly monotypic stands in minor component to the canopy. riparian areas once established. 3.3.2.1.4 Mixed Arroyo Willow - Mule Other common species in these stands Fat include coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), mulefat (B. salicifolia), This area supports a mix of Arroyo English ivy (Hedera helix), kikuyu grass willow (Salix lasiolepis) and mule fat (Pennisetum clandestinum), stinging (Baccharis salicifolia) in the top-most nettle (Urtica dioica), and Vinca (Vinca vegetation canopy. Within the Project major). A proposed action will be to Area this vegetation type is very sparsely remove invasive eucalyptus in a step- vegetated with mostly herbaceous and wise fashion, allowing each patch to young woody plants. This unit appears recover with the appropriate compliment to be frequently disturbed by scour from of native vegetation before continuing to winter flows in Cañada del Puerto. the next step. 3.3.2.1.5 Arroyo Willow 3.3.2.1.2 Coast Live Oak Alliance This is the dominant native wetland and In this mapping unit coast live oak riparian plant community in the Project (Quercus agrifolia) dominates the tree Area. Within the Project Area this canopy, with 25% to 60% of the total community type is dominated by a tree cover. Within the Project Area this moderate to dense canopy of arroyo vegetation community occurs in a mesic willow (Salix lasiolepis), and in some riparian setting, with an understory of areas the tree grows so densely to be shrub species including coyote brush virtually impenetrable. Arroyo willow (Baccharis pilularis), fennel can tolerate seasonally-saturated soils, (Foeniculum vulgare), and young but can also access deep groundwater eucalyptus (Eucalypus spp.). during droughts. The herbaceous component under the tree/shrub canopy 3.3.2.1.3 Lemonadeberry Alliance may fluctuate over time with changing groundwater availability – becoming more characterized by hydrophytic plants such as bulrush (Scirpus californica) during wet years, and reverting to more dry-adapted species, such as brome (Bromus spp.) and slender wild oats (Avena barbata) during dry years.
Affected Environment - 79
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Within the northern portion of the typically co-exist with an herbaceous Project Area this vegetation understory of Avena spp., Bromus spp., community’s spatial extent may vary and Hordeum ssp., and with native greatly over decadal time spans, shrubs such as coyote bush (Baccharis depending on water availability. During pilularis). drier periods this plant community may expand into areas that would normally Within the Project Area fennel stands have too-high groundwater to support persist on disturbed terraces above the arroyo willow. During wet periods, primary Cañada del Puerto floodplain generally characterized by frequent and stream channel. These units are not winter storms, high flows on floodplains directly adjacent to the channel, but may remove young willows, and allow border on arroyo willow and eucalyptus re-colonization of low-lying areas by stands. Fennel is overwhelmingly more-hydrophytic plant communities, dominant. Commonly observed species particularly bulrush-cattail. include coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) wood mint (Stachys bullata), 3.3.2.1.6 Bulrush - Cattail ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), California brome (Bromus carinatus), A small amount of acreage within the and horehound (Marrubium vulgare). Project Area is occupied by a dominant Among these species wood mint and canopy of bulrush (Scirpus californicus California brome are native to the island. and S. maritimus), with a small subcomponent of cattail (Typha 3.3.2.1.8 Silver Beachbur - Beach Sand dominguensis). This vegetation Verbena Alliance community persists in the wettest portions of the Project Area that support This alliance occurs on coastal dune and a high groundwater table year round. beach habitats where the sparse canopy This is a rare vegetation community on is dominated by a mix of silver beachbur Santa Cruz Island, due to its aridity and (Ambrosia chamissonis) and sand generally small watersheds. Cañada del verbena (Abronia maritima), with minor Puerto is the only watershed in the island components of sea rocket (Cakile to support a vegetation community maritima), and salt grass (Distichlis dominated by obligate wetland spicata). Of these four plants, only silver vegetation, such as bulrush and cattail. beachbur, sea rocket and salt grass have been observed within the Project Area 3.3.2.1.7 Fennel by park staff.
Although many acres on Santa Cruz 3.3.2.1.9 Stream Beds and Flats Island are heavily infested with this non- native plant, only a small percentage of Meandering through Cañada del Puerto, the Project Area is mapped as dominated the creek flows during the rainy season, by fennel (Foeniculum vulgare). Fennel transporting allochthanous material, typically thrives on disturbed upland sand, gravel, and cobble downstream. slopes and hillsides, although it can also The stream bed is scoured during the wet invade drier portions of floodplains. season and remains dry and largely Fennel stands on island the island unvegetated for much of the year. Low
Affected Environment - 80
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement herbaceous vegetation can be found in late 1800’s. The historic warehouse, wet areas during much of the year. cattle corrals, picnic area, and access road to the Central Valley are located 3.3.2.1.10 Planted Trees and Shrubs here. The dominant plant species are yerba mansa (Amenopsis californica), During the ranching era, trees and shrubs Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), were planted for ornamental and saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), yellow practical purposes. Some of these sweet clover (Melilotus indicus), Kikuyu plantings have persisted and expanded grass (Pennisetum clandestinum), and during the intervening years. The curly dock (Rumex crispus). Only planted trees and shrubs mapping unit saltgrass, common in coastal areas, is can be found directly overtop the native to Santa Cruz Island. archeological site and on an upland site along the Central Valley road. 3.3.2.1.12 Rare, Special Status and Dominant plants include coyote brush Federally Listed Plant Species (Baccharis pilularis) and kikuyu grass (Pennisetum clandestinum). Other Santa Cruz Island supports 14 plants commonly observed species include wild with special legal status, other special rose (Rosa californica), buckwheat status, and/or Santa Cruz Island (Eriogonum arborscens), and fennel endemics (Junack et al. 1997) (Table (Foeniculum vulgare), and ripgut brome 3.5). Only Santa Cruz Island silver (Bromus diandrus). Coyote brush, wild lotus, a state listed species, has been rose, and buckwheat are native. observed in the Project Area
3.3.2.1.11 Built-up
The built-up area, former coastal wetland and a focal area for this project, was filled during the ranching era in the
Table 3.5 Plants of Santa Cruz Island with Special Legal Status or Local Endemism Legal Other Endemic Observed Status Special in Project Status Area? Sunflower family (Asteraceae) Santa Cruz Island chicory E Channel no Malacothrix indicora Islands Island malacothrix E Channel no Malacothrix squalida Islands Barberry family (Berberidaceae) Island barberry E Channel no Berberis pinnata ssp. insularis Islands Mustard family (Brassicaceae)
Affected Environment - 81
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Hoffman’s rock cress E Channel no Arabis hoffmanii Islands Santa Cruz Island lace pod E Santa Cruz no Thysanocarpus conchuliferus Island Rockrose family (Cistaceae) Island rushrose E Channel no Helianthemum greenei Islands Stonecrop family (Crassulaceae) Santa Cruz Island live-forever E Santa Cruz no Dudleya nesiotica Island Heather family (Ericaceae) Santa Cruz Island manzanita - Santa Cruz no Arctostaphylos insularis Island McMinn’s manzanita - Santa Cruz no Arctostaphylos viridissima Island Pea family (Fabaceae) Santa Cruz Island silver lotus - E Santa Cruz yes Lotus argophyllus var. nivius CA Dept Island Fish Game Gooseberry family (Grossulariaceae) Santa Cruz Island gooseberry - Santa Cruz no Ribes thacariamum Island Mallow family (Malvaceae) Santa Cruz Island bush mallow E Santa Cruz no Malacothamnus faciculatus var. Island necioticus Madder family (Rubiaceae) Narrow-leaved bedstraw E Channel no Gllium angustifolium Islands Figwort (Scrophulariaceae) Santa Cruz Island monkey flower - Santa Cruz no Mimulus brandegei Island
3.3.2.2 Non native plant species to their low number of native plant species, some lack of competitive vigor 3.3.2.2.1 Vulnerability of Islands among long-isolated native taxa, and numerous "empty niches" of unoccupied Islands and remote peninsulas are habitat that mainland habitat specialists particularly vulnerable to invasion by can exploit. non-native plant species, potentially due
Affected Environment - 82
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Santa Cruz Island supports 650 plant vulgare), and hoary cress (Lepidium taxa, of which at least 170 species are draba). introduced. This represents 26% of the island's total flora. Eleven of the 88 3.3.2.2.2 Eucalyptus plant families represented on the island and 82 of the island's 348 plant genera The genus Eucalyptus includes about are represented entirely by non-native 450 species and is native to Australia. plants. Santa Cruz Island in general and During the late 19th century, it was the Project Area specifically are at widely planted throughout California, continual risk of colonization and re- including 4 species on Santa Cruz Island colonization by non-native plants from (Junak, et al. 1995) where they were seeds and vegetative material transported planted for ornamental and utilitarian to the island by vehicles and visitors, purposes such as windbreaks and future particularly arriving via the island's main pier pilings. Trees planted in a row dock at Prisoners Harbor. along the base of the cliff at Prisoners Harbor have persisted from the ranching The Project Area supports a variety of era to the present and are considered part non-native invasive plant species. Some of the historic landscape (NPS Cultural of these species are naturalized to the Landscape Inventory, 2004). In 1908, island, persist only in low numbers, are 500 eucalyptus (“gum”) trees were assumed to not substantially alter planted at Rincon Papal upstream from ecosystem processes, and therefore are the harbor in Cañada del Puerto not a primary management priority; (Livingston, 2005) The majority of these include species such as rabbit’s eucalyptus trees at Prisoners Harbor and foot grass (Polypogon monospliensis), in Cañada del Puerto have spread windmill pink (Silene gallica), and unintentionally from seed, displacing plantain (Plantago lanceolata). Other native vegetation over time, and are not invasive plant species form dense considered historic. monocultures that exclude native plants and degrade habitat for native animal During 2008 all eucalyptus trees in the species. Some non-native invasive project area with a diameter at breast plants also introduce toxic and/or height (dbh) greater than 6” were allelopathic chemicals into soils to measured and mapped. The total discourage competition from other number of non-historic eucalyptus trees plants. Invasive species of management counted in the project area was 1,737. concern within the Project Area include The majority (82%) of trees are less than blue gum and red river gum (Eucalyptus 24” in diameter. The remaining 18% of globulus and E. camaldulensis trees ranged from 24” to 84” in diameter. respectively), Kikuyu grass (Pennisetum A summary of the survey is included in clandestinum), fennel (Foeniculum Appendix E
Affected Environment - 83
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 3.6 Distribution of eucalyptus trees and native oaks in the Project Area.
Affected Environment - 84
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
Growth and establishment of native and workshop sites, rock shelters, and vegetation is suppressed by competition rock pavements ethnographically with eucalyptus for light, water, and identified as shrines. Some of the rock nutrients. Eucalyptus trees impair shelters contain rock art of a simple style riparian habitat by drawing large quite distinct from that known on the amounts of water from the groundwater, mainland. Formal cemeteries are found introducing soil chemicals toxic to close to many villages, especially later native plants, and excluding native sites, and isolated, seemingly random, plants and animals by heavy shade and human burials are recorded for the island litter. Because of these factors as well. The potential number of burials eucalyptus trees tend to form monotypic ranges into the tens of thousands. stands, however Cañada del Puerto retains an understory of native plants – Some 2,000 archeological sites provide including oak (Quercus spp.), island evidence of occupation, development, cherry (Prunus illicifolia), and coffee and flowering of the group known as the berry (Rhamnus californica). A survey Chumash, the inhabitants of the northern of oaks identified 342 established oak Channel Islands and the Southern trees growing in the Project Area (Figure California area from San Luis Obispo to 3.6). Malibu. Recent research shows occupation 8900 years ago, and the 3.4 Cultural Resources potential for even older material exists on the island. Like Santa Rosa and San The following is a discussion of the Miguel Islands, deposits on the west end historical and archeological resources in containing pygmy mammoth remains the project area. could also contain evidence of older human occupation. 3.4.1 Historical Overview Although Chumash occupation of Santa Largest of the Channel Islands, Santa Cruz Island ended in the early nineteenth Cruz Island has supported a large human century, many individuals who trace population for more than 8,000 years. their ancestry to specific villages retain a Eleven historic villages are known for lively interest in the preservation and Santa Cruz Island, equal to the total management of their heritage. Between number recognized for both Santa Rosa three and ten thousand Chumash live in and San Miguel Islands. Other sites, California today. ranging in size from only a few meters square to extensive shell mounds The European presence in the Channel covering hundreds of square meters are Islands began with Juan Rodriguez found along the coastline and within the Cabrillo’s explorations in 1542, interior at advantageous locations. Some followed by the subsequent expeditions of these mounds contain distinctive of Sebastian Vizcaino in 1602 and layers of red abalone shell, indicative of George Vancouver in 1769. While sea occupation about 5000 to 8000 years otter hunters, smugglers, and others ago. In addition to shell mounds, visited the islands and left their traces prehistoric sites include chert quarries during the historic period, permanent
Affected Environment - 85
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
European settlement did not occur on the Caire’s island workforce consisted islands until the mid-1800s. primarily of French, Italian, Hispanic and Native American workers, reflecting The Chumash population were removed Caire’s French origins, his wife’s Italian from Santa Cruz Island by the 1820s, heritage, and the local population. The settling primarily in and around the island operation was a largely self- Spanish Missions in Santa Barbara and sustaining community that supported a San Buenaventura. In 1839, the diversity of permanent and seasonal Mexican government granted title to the employees, which included a blacksmith, island to Andres Castillero, who became carpenters, painters, team drivers, the first private owner of Santa Cruz dairymen, cooks, stone cutters and Island. In 1853, Dr. James Barron masons, gardeners, dairymen, vintners, Shaw, acting as agent for Castillero and grape pickers, sheep shearers, wagon the island’s subsequent owners, the and saddle makers, a cobbler, a butcher, Barron and Forbes Company, began a baker, and a sea captain and sailors. stocking the island with sheep, horses, cattle and hogs. Shaw managed the The island ranching system developed island rancho until 1869, developing by Shaw included the main ranch and several ranch outposts and the satellite ranches at the east and west infrastructure that linked them. In 1869 ends of the island and at La Playa ten San Francisco investors purchased (Prisoners’ Harbor; Figure 3.7). Caire the island and formed the Santa Cruz continued to use these ranches and Island Company. Justinian Caire, a established additional ranches and camps Frenchman and one of the ten investors, at other locations on the island. The acquired the majority of the shares in the main ranch and the outranches at Santa Cruz Island Company during an Scorpion, Prisoners’ and Christy economic downturn in the 1870s and remained the primary ranches through became sole owner of the island by the the Justinian Caire period. The island’s end of the 1880s or early 1890s. Caire sheep population reached 40,000-50,000 and his descendants continued and head under Caire, their wool and meat expanded the sheep ranching and being shipped to market from Scorpion agricultural enterprises on the island. Ranch and Prisoners’ Harbor. Caire died in 1897; his widow’s unequal The heart of Shaw’s and, later, Caire’s distribution of company shares among operation was located in the island’s their six children led to family central valley. The main ranch included disagreements and a prolonged period of a residence, bunkhouses for winemakers, litigation. Ultimately, the dispute was shepherds and vaqueros, barns, winery settled by a court-ordered partition of the buildings, a dining hall, bakery, laundry, island in 1925, which divided the island kitchen, shops for wagon makers, into parcels with the western 90 percent blacksmiths and tool and saddle makers, (54,500 acres) of the island going to and a chapel. Substantial acreage was Caire’s widow and four of their children, planted in grapevines, hay and fruit and the eastern 10 percent (6,000 acres) trees. going to the two married Caire daughters. The Caire family maintained the western portion of the island until
Affected Environment - 86
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
1937, when they sold their land to Los Ambrose and Maria Gherini. They Angeles businessman Edwin L. Stanton. continued the sheep ranching operation, Stanton attempted unsuccessfully to with headquarters at Scorpion Ranch and revive the island’s sheep business which Smuggler’s Cove, the two east end had declined dramatically after Justinian satellite ranches. The ranch operations Caire’s death, and then switched to cattle were overseen by a series of ranching. Edwin Stanton’s son and heir, superintendents and caretakers until the Carey Stanton, continued the cattle island was converted to a private ranching operations after his father’s hunting, camping and recreational death in 1963. In 1978, the Nature venture in the early 1980s. The National Conservancy purchased the property Park Service acquired full ownership of from Stanton, and acquired control of the east of the island in 1997. In 2000 the property upon Stanton’s death, which The Nature Conservancy donated 8,000 was in 1987. acres adjacent to the Gherini property to the National Park Service. Called “the The east end of the island remained in isthmus” this acreage includes Prisoners the hands of the Caire descendants, Harbor. consolidated under the ownership of
Figure 3.7 Prisoners Harbor looking south in Cañada del Puerto circa 1900. Courtesy of Santa Barbara Historical Museum.
Affected Environment - 87
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
3.4.2 Cultural Resources the District. There is no question that the archeology of the eastern portion of Santa Cruz Island contains thousands of the island is at least as significant as the relatively intact archeological sites filled present archeological district, with rich research opportunities. These particularly since it contains most of the archeological sites and the islands chert quarries exploited in the past. The themselves also have cultural and National Park Service is managing the spiritual significance for living Chumash archeological resources on the east end people. More than 750 archeological of the island as a property eligible for the sites have been recorded on Santa Cruz National Register until such time as the Island with intensive survey covering existing nomination can be amended to perhaps 20% of the island. The entire add the east end acreage and resources. island probably contains about 3,000 archeological sites. In addition to the Chumash record, there is extensive historic archeology centered Sites on Santa Cruz Island are receiving on the island locations where ranches increasing attention from archeologists developed, as well as on the numerous because of the relatively long and coastal fishing and recreational camps, undisturbed record remaining on the which flourished around the turn of the island. Santa Cruz Island archeological 20th century. There are remnants of oil sites remain relativey undisturbed exploration on the island, at least one because of the lack of intensive abandoned World War II military development and the absence of encampment, and the remains of burrowing animals, such as gophers and shipwrecks can be found on the beaches squirrels, on the island. In contrast to and intertidal zone and in the waters the mainland, where development and surrounding the island. burrowing have seriously impacted archeologists’ ability to understand the The ranching and agricultural resources Chumash past, the sites on the island and form a historic period cultural landscape their relatively natural context constitute over much of the island. The main ranch the best materials for understanding the in the Central Valley is the largest and past of the Chumash. Feral pigs, whose most significant of the ranch complexes. destructive rooting caused much damage Most of the earliest buildings to archeological sites, were eradicated in constructed under Shaw’s 2006. superintendence were of adobe or wood, and most have disappeared. During the The island’s archeological resources Caire era, much of the permanent were listed on the National Register in construction was of stone masonry or 1978 as the Santa Cruz Island brick. The design of the buildings with Archeological District. The district their whitewashed stucco surfaces, large encompasses only the western 90 corner quoins and cobble walkways percent of the island because of the exhibit the Mediterranean heritage of division of ownership at the time of their owners. All of the construction nomination and listing. The previous materials except lumber were gleaned owners of East Santa Cruz Island did not from the island; brick was produced in choose to include their holdings within on-island kilns. Corrals and fencelines
Affected Environment - 88
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement define the ranching-era work areas, improved the road from Prisoners’ fields and pastures. Furrow lines from Harbor to the Navy base in 1950. the grapevine plantings can still be seen on many of the slopes that were Dry stone structures, built in the late cultivated for wine production. 1800s by Italian masons and laborers, are found throughout the island. In addition to the main ranch, significant Structures include stone-lined wells, building complexes remain at Prisoners’ rock retaining walls along stream Harbor, Scorpion Ranch, Smuggler’s channels and roads, and more than 200 Cove and Christy Ranch. Although all check dams on the east end alone, built of these ranches except Smuggler’s to channel water and slow erosion. Cove were established during Shaw’s Large rock piles dot the east end of the management of the island, most of the island, created when the fields were remaining buildings date to the Caire cleared for cultivation. period. The design and construction of the primary buildings on the outranches Plantings of eucalyptus, cypress, pepper are similar to that of the main ranch, trees and other ornamental species are though they contain fewer buildings and found at the ranch sites and elsewhere on landscape features. the island, dating primarily to the Caire era. A large olive grove survives at Ranches and outposts once stood at Smuggler’s Cove. Orchards and Rancho Punta West, Rancho Nuevo, plantings of fruit and nut species are Buena Vista, Portezuela and Rancho located at the main ranch and many of Sur. Their locations are marked now by the outranches. A few rare examples of foundations, plantings and remnants of grape plantings remain in the Central structures. Stone foundations of barns Valley. are found in a number of locations on the east end. A Stanton-period ranch was Fencelines throughout the island built at Del Norte in 1952-53. Its frame delineate pastures. Remnants of the house and corrals have been maintained sheep ranching operations include by the Santa Cruz Island Foundation. corrals, watering troughs and other features. While the nineteenth-century Most of the island’s road system dates fencelines and features on the eastern to the Caire development period, end of the island remain relatively although the Ridge Road or “Camino unchanged since their construction, the Viejo” predated Caire. The central ones on the western part of the island valley roads lined with eucalyptus trees were altered about 50 years ago to form grand avenues near the main ranch. accommodate Stanton’s cattle The Scorpion Valley road supported by operations. an immense dry stone retaining wall illustrates the challenges that the The ranch complexes and cultural nineteenth-century ranchers faced in landscape features are significant under developing this difficult terrain. The several National Register criteria. The Stanton family developed many dirt Santa Cruz Island Ranching District has ranch roads in the 1940s through 1960s, been determined eligible for the National especially on the isthmus, and the Navy Register of Historic Places. The long
Affected Environment - 89
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement period of ranching and agricultural granted the island to Andres Castillero in development has resulted in a pastoral 1839. By the 1860s a ranch had been landscape that reflects the island’s established at the harbor and in 1869 a management by Shaw, Caire and Stanton pier was constructed. A stone and adobe and which retains a great deal of historic building served as office, house and integrity. The island itself may be storage facility. A barn, kitchen and considered a significant rural historic outbuildings were added. The most landscape, as well as a series of substantial outbuilding was a stone and individual historic landscapes. brick double-gabled warehouse built in 1887. A stone well with a windmill 3.4.3 Historic Resources at Prisoners pumped water to a tank on the hill above Harbor the house. A narrow-gauge railroad led from the end of the pier to the warehouse The historic Chumash village of Xaxas and on to the house and barns, with is located at the mouth of the Cañada del small cars that carried goods back and Puerto at Prisoners’ Harbor. Described forth. Sheep corrals constructed by Arnold (2001) it was a major port of between the warehouse and the pier were trade and a departure point for cross- later replaced by cattle corrals in the channel travel throughout its long filled wetland area. Ranch workers history. The village was occupied nearly watched for vessels coming to the island continuously for 3,000 years or more. from a small wooden look-out building Its proximity to good quality chert atop the adjacent bluff. A massive quarries made it ideal for micro-drill and system of stone retaining walls lined the shell bead production. At the time of mouth of the creek to help prevent European contact the village was home flooding of the ranch structures (Figure to many high-ranking families including 3.8). Fenced fields were located in the a powerful chief, and tomol (plank Cañada del Puerto and on the hillsides canoe) owners. This village appears to east of the creek. Stone pine, blue gum be the last occupied by Chumash eucalyptus and other trees were planted residents to leave the Channel Islands. in the ranch area and along the creek. The site was bisected by creek diversions during the ranching period. The warehouse and look-out are the only The archeological site comprising the buildings that remain today (Figure 3.9). village is recorded as CA-SCrI-240 and The stone and adobe house was torn is a contributing resource within the down in 1968 after it was damaged by a National Register-listed Santa Cruz flood. The barns and outbuildings Island Archeological District. burned or were razed. The stone well remains, although the water tank and Prisoners’ Harbor was named for a windmill have disappeared, as has the group of prisoners that was shipped narrow-gauge railroad. The row of north from Baja California in 1830. eucalyptus still lines the foot of the bluff, Rejected by the Presidios in San Diego and several other tree plantings and the or Santa Barbara, the ship discharged the 20th-century corrals and earlier scale prisoners on Santa Cruz Island, where house remain. The stone retaining walls they eventually made their way to the along the creek may be buried under the mainland. The Mexican government later alterations to the stream mouth, or
Affected Environment - 90
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 3.8 Prisoners Harbor looking west circa 1900. Courtesy SBMNH
boundary line between the National Park they may have been destroyed. These Service property and The Nature remaining buildings, structures and Conservancy property within the project plantings are considered contributing area, recreation and visitor experience resources within the Santa Cruz Island this project area is considered the main Ranching District, which has been access point to the National Park isthmus determined eligible for listing in the area and The Nature Conservancy National Register of Historic Places. property. Lands owned by the National Park Service are fully open to visitor 3.5 Social Resources access and use. Although visitation has increased over the years to the project 3.5.1 Recreation and Visitor Experience area, visitor services have remained limited. Further development of visitor In August of 2000, The Nature services will not be implemented until Conservancy completed a gift of 8,500 the General Management planning effort acres of the isthmus area (including part is completed. of the project area) to the National Park Service. Since this gift established the
Affected Environment - 91
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
viewing historic buildings, beach access to water sports including kayaking and snorkeling, and trail access to day hiking and backpacking. These opportunities and uses are available to visitors who arrive via concession operators Island Packers and Truth Aquatics, private boaters, and special charters for Nature Conservancy and University of California Natural Reserve System guests and researchers.
Also, within this area is the trailhead access to the popular Prisoners to Pelican Bay trail on The Nature Figure 3.9 Prisoners Harbor Conservancy Property. The Nature warehouse Conservancy currently allows only private boaters with a permit and Island Packers led visitors to access this trail. Although public access to The Nature Conservancy property is limited, this Overnight visitors accessing the Del project area serves as the primary point Norte campground and Navy site on the of access to their property. Both isthmus and the Main Ranch and permitted private boaters and visitors University of California Natural Reserve with park concessioner, Island Packers, System Field Station in the central valley use this area as an access point to the pass through the Prisoners Harbor area popular Prisoners to Pelican Trail. In on their way to these destinations. addition, scientific researchers and educational groups use this area to 3.5.1.2 Recreational Use Patterns in the access the central valley where The Project Area Nature Conservancy island headquarters and University of California Santa Cruz Daily visitor use of the project area by Island Reserve field station are located. both private boaters and visitors that arrive via concessioner Island Packers 3.5.1.1 Key Recreational Opportunities and Truth Aquatics occurs during the and Uses of the Project Area late spring though early fall. During the rest of the year, use is more common on A variety of recreation opportunities and weekends. Visitation for the past 4 years uses of the project area are available to is included in Table 3.6. the public. On National Park Service property, these include beachcombing, fishing, picnicking, bird watching,
Affected Environment - 92
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Table 3.6 Visits at Prisoners Harbor from 2005-2008 as recorded by Park Rangers and staff from Island Packers and Truth Aquatics Month 2005 2006 2007 2008 Average January 45 387 211 336 245 February 165 284 233 296 244 March 395 537 543 387 466 April 782 719 731 220 613 May 767 782 728 725 750 June 700 773 711 656 710 July 684 835 781 937 809 August 1194 670 786 800 862 September 762 654 857 722 749 October 493 683 681 - 619 November 484 362 550 - 465 December 340 0 267 - 202 Total 6811 6686 7079
3.5.1.3 Facilities to Support Recreation University of California staff. A small and Visitor Use in the Project Area historic building with interpretive displays is also available to visitors near Facilities to support recreation and the beginning of the Prisoners to Pelican visitor use in the project are limited at trail. this time to a public pier, informational bulletin board, a picnic area and restroom facilities.
3.5.1.4 Visitor Education
Education is limited within the project area. On National Park Service property, general orientations are offered to visitors by either park staff or concession employees that are trained as island naturalists. Guided walks onto the park property are occasionally offered. Guided walks onto the The Nature Conservancy’s Prisoners to Pelican trail (accessed through the project area) are offered routinely throughout the year by Island Packers naturalists and occasionally by Nature Conservancy and
Affected Environment - 93 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND
RESTORATION PLAN
CHAPTER FOUR
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
4.0 Environmental significant actions taking place over a period of time. Consequences The cumulative impacts analysis will This chapter describes the environmental consider the effects of past ranching and consequences (“impacts” or “effects”) of natural resource management activities implementing each alternative described on wetlands, hydrologic processes, flora in Chapter Two. In addition this chapter and fauna, cultural resources and the will analyze whether the actions visitor experience in the Prisoners proposed will impair park resources. Harbor area of Santa Cruz Island.
4.1 Methodology 4.1.1 Water Resources
Environmental consequences are 4.1.1.1 Hydrologic Function & categorized in three broad areas: direct, Processes indirect, and cumulative effects. These effects categories form the basis of the Local, state, and federal agencies have effects analysis in this chapter. Direct adopted polices regarding hydrologic effects, as defined by the Council on processes, specifically the need to Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1508.8), minimize hydrologic alterations and are those which are caused by the action maintain natural hydrologic processes and occur at the same time and place. for improved water quality, viable fish Indirect effects are those caused by the and wildlife populations, and action, but occur later in time or farther ecologically healthy fish and wildlife removed in distance, and that are still habitats. In its 2006 Management reasonably foreseeable. Cumulative Policies, the Park Service urges parks to effects are those which result “from the re-establish natural functions and incremental impact of the action when processes altered by changes in added to other past, present, and hydrologic patterns and sediment reasonably foreseeable future actions transport, acceleration of erosion and regardless of what agency (Federal or sedimentation, floodplains, and non-Federal) or person undertakes such disruption of natural processes to other actions.” (40 CFR 1508.7). conditions characteristic of the Cumulative impacts can result from surrounding environment (NPS 2006, individually minor but collectively Sections 4.1.5 and 4.6.4).
Environmental Consequences - 94
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Methodology and Assumptions Negligible: There would be a negligible • The purpose of the proposed change (≤10%) in vertical flood project is to restore natural elevations or frequency of flood hydrologic processes and events. No flooding of the Native functions, with the degree of American village site or Park restoration varying among the infrastructure would occur. action alternatives. • The extent of the restoration may Minor: There would be a minor change be affected by the desire to (±11-25%) in the vertical flood maintain protection for the elevation or frequency of flood significant archaeological site, events. No flooding of the Native the need for access, and park American village site or Park facilities. infrastructure would occur.
Impact Thresholds Moderate: There would be a moderate change (±26-50%) in the vertical The following impact thresholds were flood elevation or frequency of established in order to describe the flood events. If adverse, there relative changes in water resources (both would be in increase in the risk of overall, localized, short and long term, flooding to the Native American cumulatively, adverse and beneficial) village site or Park infrastructure. under the management alternatives. Major: There would be a major change (>50%) in the vertical flood Flood Elevation and Frequency elevation or frequency of flood The impact thresholds focus on changes events. If adverse, the increase in flood elevations and floodplain would potentially increase the risk storage capacity resulting from impacts to the Native American connecting Cañada del Puerto Creek to village site or Park infrastructure. its natural floodplain. The analysis focuses on the 10-year and 100-year Hydrologic Connectivity flood events relative to the existing Reconnecting the stream channel to its condition. The 10-year and 100-year floodplain would increase hydrologic flood events were chosen because the function of the wetlands and floodplains. current channel is capable of containing Increased connectivity would increase the 100-year flow event (estimated at floodplain storage and improve 2,590 cubic feet per second) and with the hydrologic function. berm removed, the channel could contain flows up to the 10-year flood No Impact: There would be no change event (estimated at 550 cubic feet per in the amount of floodplain storage second). and no change in the hydrologic function from the project. No Impact: There would be no impact to Beneficial: The stream channel would existing flood elevations or flood be reconnected with its floodplain frequency. and hydrologic connectivity and hydrologic function restored.
Environmental Consequences - 95
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Sediment Transport Dynamics natural flow conditions may be Changes in the sediment transport and attributed to the boulder bar that forms deposition regime could affect the naturally at the mouth of the creek. This existing channel flow characteristics and boulder bar produces a backwater pool redirection of stream flows could affect that reduces upstream velocities through cultural resources and park the area of effect. Impact thresholds infrastructure. focus on changes in the area subject to tidal processes relative to baseline No Impact: There would be no change in conditions. sediment transport from the project. No Impact: There would be no change Negligible: Sediment transport during in the hydraulic effect of the marine high flows would result in boulder bar or tidal processes. negligible aggradation (≤5%) of sediment within the channel with no Negligible: There would be a negligible redirection of stream flow. change (≤5%) in the hydraulic effect of the marine boulder bar or tidal Minor: Sediment transport during high processes. No impacts to the flows would result in minor cultural resources or infrastructure aggradation (±6-10%) of sediment would occur. within the channel with no redirection of stream flow. Minor: There would be a minor change (±6-10%) in the hydraulic effect of Moderate: Sediment transport during the marine boulder bar or tidal high flows would result in processes. No impacts to the appreciable aggradation (±11-25%) cultural resources or infrastructure of sediment within the channel would occur. causing moderate redirection of stream flow. Moderate: There would be a moderate change (±11-25%) in the hydraulic Major: Sediment transport during high effect of the marine boulder bar or flows would result in complete tidal processes. If adverse, there aggradation (±25-50%) of sediment would be in increase in the risk of within the channel causing impacts to cultural resources and redirection of stream flow and park infrastructure. impact of surrounding cultural resources and infrastructure. Major: There would be a major change (>25%) in the hydraulic effect of the marine boulder bar or tidal Changes in Surface Tidal Processes processes. If adverse, the increase The Native American village site has would potentially increase the risk existed for centuries under both natural impacts to cultural resources or park and unnatural flow conditions, including infrastructure. numerous extreme floods, without being lost through erosion. At least part of the 4.1.1.2 Wetlands and Floodplains site’s persistence through time under
Environmental Consequences - 96
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Wetlands are among the most valuable overall areal extent of wetlands or resources because they provide many connectivity to the floodplain. functions and values in a complex ecosystem. The function of wetlands Negligible/Adverse: There would be a include water quality improvement; negligible decrease (0.1 acres) in the stream shading; flood attenuation; overall areal extent of wetlands or shoreline stabilization; ground water connectivity to the floodplain. exchange; and habitat for aquatic, terrestrial, migratory, and rare plant and Minor/Beneficial: There would be animal species. The wetlands function minor increase (between 0.5 and 1 to remove pollutants and filter nutrients acre) in the overall areal extent of and organic matter. wetlands and connectivity to the floodplain. Impact Thresholds Minor/Adverse: There would be a minor Impact thresholds focus on change in decrease (between 0.1 and 0.25 wetland resources, specifically changes acres) in the overall areal extent of in the areal extent of wetlands relative to wetlands and connectivity to the current and historic conditions. Many of floodplain. the functions associated with the wetlands and floodplains such as Moderate/Beneficial: There would be a floodwater storage, water quality moderate increase (between 1 and 2 improvement, and wildlife habitat are acres) in the overall areal extent of evaluated separately in other sections. wetlands and connectivity to The criteria evaluate change on the basis floodplain. of whether the proposed project would either permanently impact existing Moderate/Adverse: There would be a wetlands or floodplains such that they moderate decrease (between 0.25 would be eliminated or would no longer and 1 acre) in the overall areal function or would create new areas with extent of wetlands and connectivity wetland characteristics and wetland to the floodplain. function. The National Park Service Management Policies push parks to Major or Substantial/Beneficial: There strive for a net gain in wetland acreage. would be a major or substantial For this reason, the thresholds reflect increase (>2 acres) in the overall this mandate by establishing more areal extent of wetlands and stringent thresholds for adverse impacts. connectivity to the floodplain.
No Impact: There would be no potential Major or Substantial/Adverse: There change in the areal extent of would be a major or substantial wetlands or connectivity to the decrease in (> 1 acre) in the overall floodplain associated with the areal extent of wetlands and proposed project. connectivity to the floodplain.
Negligible/Beneficial: There would be 4.1.1.3 Water Quality negligible increase (0.5 acre) in the
Environmental Consequences - 97
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Federal Clean Water Pollution Act (Clean Water Act) and subsequent Wetlands and floodplains play a key role amendments of 1977 (33 USC Section in protecting and improving water 1251 et seq) provides for the restoration quality as wetland plants and soils have and maintenance of the physical, the capacity to store and filter pollutants. chemical, and biological integrity of the Calm wetland waters with flat surfaces nation’s waters, primarily through three and flow characteristics allow sediments sections – Section 404, Section 401, and to settle out of the water column. Section 303(d). Wetlands which filter or store sediments for extended periods of time may In California, authority for Section 401 undergo changes. Sediments may and Section 303(d) has been delegated to eventually fill in wetlands and the State Water Resources Control eventually modify function over time. Board, which is responsible for Very little specific surface water quality overseeing California’s water quality information exists for Cañada del Puerto law, the Porter Cologne Act. Creek, and surface water quality data are not available. However, inferences can Methodology and Assumptions be made regarding water quality • Water quality objectives for the conditions. Currently a vast majority of Prisoners Harbor area are the watershed is virtually free of currently contained in the Basin structures, impervious surfaces, and Plan (RWQCB 1995) which hydrologic modifications; therefore applies to all waters along the prevailing surface water chemistry is the Central Coast. result of interaction between • Water quality monitoring data precipitation, soils, biota, and bedrock. are not available for Cañada del It is unlikely that high concentrations of Puerto Creek. metals, organics, or other contaminants • Changes in water quality were occur in the watershed. Near the outlet not analyzed as part of the to Cañada del Puerto Creek, there is a hydrodynamic modeling, but marine influence on water quality. modeling results and other Cyclic salts and occasional overwash hydrologic information collected may increase salinity levels to slightly can be used to qualitatively brackish for surface groundwater, predict changes in water quality especially in the dry season. conditions. • Changes in the functional Slightly more specific information is capacity to intercept and filter known about sediment concentrations in pollutants in flood flows from the the watershed. Sediment concentrations upstream portions of the are generally considered high due to the watershed are evaluated on a combination of variable bedrock qualitative basis. geology, steep slopes, degraded soil • Changes in water quality structure due to historic over-grazing, conditions are discussed for and intense precipitation events. Impact construction and short term/long thresholds therefore focus on: (1) the term. potential change in sediment concentrations in the Project Area based
Environmental Consequences - 98
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement on the functional capacity of the would be altered on a short-term wetlands and the floodplains to filter and basis. Impacts can be beneficial store sediments; and (2) change in (improvement in water quality) or overall surface water quality and adverse (deterioration of water groundwater conditions in the Project quality). Area. The impact analysis does not attempt to assess whether water quality Major: Impacts would be detectable and objectives would be met through would be frequently altered from the implementation of the project, because historical baseline or desired water there is no specific water quality data to quality conditions; and/or chemical, evaluate. Rather, this analysis represents physical, or biological water quality a qualitative estimation of changes standards or criteria would be expected with implementation of the slightly and singularly exceeded on project to assess which changes might be a short-term basis. Impacts can be beneficial or adverse. beneficial (improvement in water quality) or adverse (deterioration of Impact Thresholds water quality).
No Impact: There would be no potential 4.1.2 Wildlife for impact to water quality associated with the project. The NPS Organic Act, which directs parks to conserve wildlife unimpaired Negligible: Impacts are chemical, for future generations, is interpreted by physical, or biological effects that the agency to mean that native animal would not be detectable, would be life should be protected and perpetuated well below water quality standards as part of the park’s natural ecosystem. or criteria, and would be within Natural processes are relied on to control historical or desired water quality populations of native species to the conditions. Beneficial (improvement greatest extent possible; otherwise they in water quality) or Adverse are protected from harvest, harassment, (deterioration of water quality). or harm by human activities. According to NPS Management Policies 2006, the Minor: Impacts would be detectable but restoration of native species is a high would be well below water quality priority (sec. 4.1). Management goals for standards or criteria and within wildlife include maintaining components historical or desired water quality and processes of naturally evolving park conditions. Impacts can be ecosystems, including natural beneficial (improvement in water abundance, diversity, and the ecological quality) or adverse (deterioration of integrity of plants and animals. water quality).
Moderate: Impacts would be detectable but would be at or below water quality standards or criteria; however, historical baseline or desired water quality conditions
Environmental Consequences - 99
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Methodology and Assumptions functional to maintain viability of all species. Impacts would be Vegetation data were available from GIS outside critical reproduction periods mapping. The staff biologist, the U.S. for sensitive native species. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the California Department of Fish & Game Moderate: Breeding animals of concern provided wildlife information. are present; animals are present during particularly vulnerable life- Impact Thresholds stages, such as migration or juvenile stages; mortality or interference The following thresholds were used to with activities necessary for survival determine the magnitude of effects on can be expected on an occasional wildlife and wildlife habitat: basis, but is not expected to threaten the continued existence of the Negligible: There would be no species in the park unit. observable or measurable impacts to native species, their habitats, or the Impacts on native species, their natural processes sustaining them. habitats, or the natural processes Impacts would be of short duration sustaining them would be and well within natural fluctuations. detectable, and they could be outside the natural range of Minor: Impacts would be detectable, variability for short periods of time. but they would not be expected to Population numbers, population be outside the natural range of structure, and other demographic variability and would not be factors for species might have short- expected to have any long-term term changes, but would be effects on native species, their expected to rebound to pre-impact habitats, or the natural processes numbers and to remain stable and sustaining them. viable in the long term. Frequent responses to disturbance by some Population numbers, population individuals could be expected, with structure, and other demographic some negative impacts to feeding, factors for species might have small, reproduction, or other factors short-term changes, but long-term affecting short-term population characteristics would remain stable levels. and viable. Occasional responses to disturbance by some individuals Key ecosystem processes might could be expected, but without have short-term disruptions that interference to feeding, would be outside natural variation reproduction, or other factors (but would soon return to natural affecting population levels. conditions). Sufficient habitat would remain functional to maintain Key ecosystem processes might viability of all native species. Some have short-term disruptions that impacts might occur during critical would be within natural variation. periods of reproduction or in key Sufficient habitat would remain habitat for sensitive native species.
Environmental Consequences - 100
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Major: Impacts on native species, their Maps illustrating vegetation cover within habitats, or the natural processes (park) and communications with NPS sustaining them would be staff were used to identify baseline detectable, and they would be conditions within the study area. expected to be outside the natural range of variability for long periods Impact Thresholds of time or be permanent. Vegetation impacts were determined by Population numbers, population examining the potential effects of the structure, and other demographic (activity) and visitor use on vegetation, factors for species might have large, according to type and sensitivity. The short-term declines, with long-term following impact thresholds were population numbers significantly established to describe the relative depressed. Frequent responses to changes in vegetation under the various disturbance by some individuals alternatives being considered: would be expected, with negative impacts to feeding, reproduction, or Negligible: Impacts would have no other factors resulting in a long-term measurable or perceptible changes decrease in population levels. in plant community size, integrity, Breeding colonies of native species or continuity. might relocate to other portions of the park. Minor: Impacts would be measurable or perceptible but would be Key ecosystem processes might be localized within a relatively small disrupted in the long term or area. The overall viability of the permanently. Loss of habitat might plant community would not be affect the viability of at least some affected and, if left alone, would native species. recover.
4.1.3 Vegetation Moderate: Impacts would cause a change in the plant community (e.g. According to NPS Management Policies abundance, distribution, quantity, or 2006, the restoration of natural systems quality); however, the impact would and native species are high priorities remain localized. (sections 4.1 and 4.4). Biological or physical processes altered in the past by Major: Impacts to the plant community human activities may need to be actively would be substantial, highly managed to restore them to a natural noticeable, and permanent. condition or to maintain the closest approximation of the natural condition. Restoration efforts can include removal of exotic vegetation and restoration of native plants.
Methodology and Assumptions
Environmental Consequences - 101
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.1.4 Archeological Resources Minor: Adverse Impact – The Guidance for cultural resources disturbance of the site would be management in NPS units is found in confined to a small area with little, National Park Service Management if any, loss of important information Policies and Cultural Resource potential. Management Guidelines (NPS-28). Management of cultural resources in Beneficial Impact – A site would be NPS units is subject to the provisions of preserved in its natural state. the National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC 470 et seq.), the National Moderate: Adverse Impact – Environmental Policy Act (42 USC 4371 Disturbance of a site would not et seq.), the American Indian Religious result in a substantial loss of Freedom Act (42 USC 1996), the important information. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s regulation regarding Beneficial Impact – The site would be “Protection of Historic Properties (36 stabilized. CFR 800), the Secretary of Interior’s “Standards and Guidelines for Major: Adverse Impact – Disturbance Archeology and Historic Preservation of a site would be substantial and (FR 48:44716-40) and “Federal Agency would result in the loss of most or Responsibilities under Section 110 of the all of the site and its potential to National Historic Preservation Act” (FR yield important information. 53:4727-46). Beneficial Impact – There would be Methodology and Assumptions active intervention to preserve the site. The intensity of impacts to archeological resources from the project is evaluated in 4.1.5 Historic Resources relation to the impact’s potential to alter, directly or indirectly, the values that The intensity of impacts to historic contribute to the historic significance of resources from the Project is evaluated the Archeological District. in relation to the impact’s potential to alter, directly or indirectly, the historic Impact Thresholds values at Prisoners Harbor that contribute to the significance of the The thresholds of change for the Ranching District. intensity of an impact are defined as follows: Impact Thresholds
Negligible: The impact would be at the The thresholds of change for the lowest levels of detection barely intensity of an impact are defined as measurable, with no perceptible follows: consequences, either adverse or beneficial, to archeological resources.
Environmental Consequences - 102
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Negligible: The impact is at the Beneficial Impact – The structure, lowest levels of detection or barely building, or cultural landscape perceptible and not measureable. feature would be restored in accordance with the Secretary of the Minor: Adverse Impact – The impact Interior’s Standards to accurately would not affect the character- depict the features and character of defining features of a structure, a landscape as it appeared during its building, or cultural landscape period of significance. feature listed on or eligible for the National Register. 4.1.6 Visitor Experience
Beneficial Impact – Character- The purpose of the impact analysis is to defining features would be determine if the proposed restoration stabilized/preserved in accordance alternatives are compatible or in conflict with the Secretary of the Interior’s with the purpose of the park and its Standards, therefore maintaining the visitor experience goals. Thus, these integrity of the structure or building policies and goals are integrated into the (cultural landscape). impact thresholds.
Moderate: Adverse Impact – The Methodology and Assumptions impact would alter a character- defining feature of the structure, The Prisoners Harbor restoration building, or cultural landscape alternatives could impact the visitor feature but would not diminish the experience by reducing or limiting the integrity of the resource to the principal visitor uses: extent that its national register • access to and from arriving and eligibility would be jeopardized. departing tour boats • passage through the area towards Beneficial Impact – The structure, inland visitor resources, and building, or landscape features • access to existing historical would be rehabilitated in resources onsite—cattle corrals accordance with the Secretary of the and other ranching structures Interior’s Standards, to make within the harbor area possible compatible use of the property while preserving its Conversely, the visitor experience could character-defining feature. gain from the increased opportunity to view and enjoy healthier and more Major: Adverse Impact – The impact sustainable natural ecosystem in the would alter a character-defining wetlands, floodplain, and riparian features(s) of the structure, building, Project Areas. or cultural landscape feature, diminishing the integrity of the resource to the extent that it would no longer be eligible to be listed on the national register.
Environmental Consequences - 103
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Impact Thresholds enjoyment of park resources. Changes in visitor use and experience would be readily The following thresholds for evaluating apparent and long term. The change impacts on visitor experience were in visitor use and experience defined: proposed in the alternative would Negligible: Visitors would not likely be preclude future generations of some aware of the effects associated with visitors from enjoying park changes proposed for visitor use and resources and values. Some visitors enjoyment of park resources. who desire to continue their use and enjoyment of the activity / visitor Minor: Visitors would likely be aware experience would be required to of the effects associated with pursue their choice in other changes proposed for visitor use and available local or regional areas. enjoyment of park resources; however the changes in visitor use 4.1.7 Cumulative Impact Scenario and experience would be slight and likely short term. Other areas in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.7) park would remain available for require the assessment of cumulative similar visitor experience and use impacts (defined above) in the decision- without derogation of park making process for Federal projects. resources and values. Cumulative impacts are considered for Moderate: Visitors would be aware of all alternatives and are presented at the the effects associated with changes end of each impact topic discussion proposed for visitor use and analysis. To determine potential enjoyment of park resources. cumulative impacts, past actions that Changes in visitor use and created resource impacts in the vicinity experience would be readily of the proposed project site were apparent and likely long term. Other identified. Other projects identified as areas in the park would remain cumulative actions included any available for similar visitor planning, disturbance or development experience and use without activity that was currently being derogation of park resources and implemented or that would be values, but visitor satisfaction might implemented in the reasonably be measurably affected. Some foreseeable future. visitors who desire to continue their use and enjoyment of the These cumulative actions are evaluated activity/visitor experience would be in the cumulative impact analysis in required to pursue their choice in conjunction with the impacts of each other available local or regional alternative to determine if they would areas. have any additive effects on the natural or cultural resources analyzed in this Major: Visitors would be highly aware document. Because some of these of the effects associated with cumulative actions are in the early changes proposed for visitor use and planning stages, the evaluation of
Environmental Consequences - 104
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement cumulative effects was based on a sketches. A trail led from general description of the project. Prisoners’ Harbor in a southerly Known past, current, and reasonably direction to Valley Peak and foreseeable future projects and actions in another towards the “High the vicinity of the Project Area are Mountains” to the east described below: (Livingston 2006b).
Past Actions • A 200-ft wharf at Prisoners Harbor was constructed in 1870, Human occupation of Santa Cruz Island making it easier to load bales of began approximately 9,000 years ago. wood and livestock onto European commercial ships docking at the exploration began in the mid 1500’s with harbor. By 1875, the wharf had actual European occupation occurring in been extended to over 500 ft in the mid-1800’s. It is during this period length. that much of the decline in the native plant communities began, due to the • In 1875, a re-survey was done of sheep and cattle ranching that was the island, and in attempting to introduced at that time. By 1839, Mexico locate the original astronomical was conducting commercial fishing and station, the surveyors found a livestock operations on Santa Cruz shifting of the banks of the pond Island. at the base of a huge Indian mound: “the eastern bank of the Notable past actions that impacted pond has shifted 40 meters to the resources in the Prisoners Harbor Project eastward, the sand beach has also Area include: mud at 20 meters since the survey…in 1859.” (Livingston, • In 1856 two employees of the 2006c). At the time a series of Coast Survey laid out many fenced fields, three structures and survey signals, being the first to a pier stood at the harbor. The perform a general survey of the surveyor Forney described “a island. At that time, a road led to well of fresh water, but it is not the “Beach” at Prisoners’ Harbor, so good as that in the pond, when and a large fenced field occupied not impregnated with salt.” the flat area northwest of the (Livingston, 2006d). The survey ranch buildings, with a series of also noted the presence of a enclosures identified as sheep dwelling house and extensive corrals connected to and tanks for extracting tallow from southwest of it. Another, the carcasses of sheep. semicircular corral was tucked into a hollow a short distance • In the 1880’s Justinian Caire west from the ranch houses. No became the sole owner of the pier stood at Prisoners’ Harbor Santa Cruz Island Company, but two buildings were drawn which managed the island’s near the beach on one surveyor commerce, and hence the island
Environmental Consequences - 105
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
itself. He subsequently pier, passing the loading developed the Prisoners Harbor doors of the warehouse, area as the best landing site on where goods could be loaded the island for goods (Livingston or unloaded from long, wide 2006e). His actions included: flatcars and carts. Incoming • Planting eucalyptus groves in goods could be either the Cañada del Puerto Creek unloaded into the warehouse for use as pilings when or loaded onto wagons needed behind the house for the 3.1- • Enlarging the existing six- mile trip to the Main Ranch. room adobe house near the • Planting a large vegetable beach to a 10-room residence garden closer to the house, as (see Figures 4-1 and 4-2). well as alfafa and grain fields • Landscaping the entire area at upstream from the facilities. the mouth of the Cañada del • Adding a poultry raising Puerto Creek with grasses enterprise to the sheep and trees planted in rows. business, and making use of Workers straightened the the tidal lagoon as a means of creek with the aid of stone disposing of the poultry retaining walls, diminishing wastes. the lagoon that had crossed • Increasing the importation of through the area. Laborers number of pigs to the island. planted more eucalyptus trees During this era significant in a row behind the vegetation type conversion warehouse and sheep pens, from native woodland and and stone pines near the foot shrubland to nonnative of the pier. grasslands occurred. The • Filling a large portion of the rapid removal of cattle and wetland (Power, 2008a) and sheep are also thought to constructing a brick-faced, have played an important role rubble and concrete double in the large fennel expansion warehouse to store wool and that occurred on Santa Cruz wine awaiting shipment. A Island (NPS, 2002). small-gauge rail system had been laid from a point behind the residence to the end of the
Environmental Consequences - 106
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 4.1 An early scene at La Playa, Prisoners Harbor prior to the remodeling of the ranch house there. Sheep are gathered in the sand. Courtesy of Santa Barbara Historical Museum.
Environmental Consequences - 107
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 4.2 The house and kitchen at Prisoners Harbor as they appeared in 1903, almost two decades after remodeling. The gable-roofed kitchen building replaced two sheds. Courtesy of the California History Room, California State Library, Sacramento, California
• In 1904 laborers planted 39 pine both the creek and harbor. trees on the west side of the pier, Pictures from that era show a and 51 “sundries” on the east stone wall along the west bank of side; four years later, in 1908, the creek (Figure 3-7.) 500 eucalyptus (“gum”) trees (Livingston 2006g). were planted at Rincon Papal upstream from the harbor • In the 1940s the U. S. (Livingston 2006f). military, as part of its operations on the island, • A 1918 map of the area showed constructed a causeway fencing and corrals criss-crossed across the creek at the areas between the pier and Prisoners’ Harbor. This the creek. The map showed an diverted waters from the extensive bulkhead made of piles creek during the rainy (presumably eucalyptus) that ran season into the old house. about 1,000 feet along the beach After consulting with on either side of the pier, and a historic preservation 750-foot retaining wall in the officials, Edwin Stanton, creek. A heart-shaped lagoon who had purchased the remained near the mouth of the Caire portion of the island creek, apparently cut off from in 1937, decided to
Environmental Consequences - 108
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
demolish the house, and and evaluated the need for for safety reasons it was improved drainage to prevent a removed in January of recurrence of damage, a concern 1960. Stanton of Dr. Stanton’s. Navy personnel subsequently converted discussed various methods of the ranching operation on stabilizing the slope and the remaining 90 percent installing culverts and ditches of the island from sheep before the next rainy season. At to cattle. the creek draining into Prisoners’ Harbor, the Navy proposed • In 1952, the Navy construction of a cribbing exercised its rights to barricade to prevent winter explore for a new water runoff from overflowing the source. After a site at banks into the stockyards and Prisoners’ Harbor was pier area. The Navy admitted that located and specifications riprap placed at the Navy well developed, the Navy upstream had caused the waters commenced development to flow over to the area causing of the well in the spring damage. The road crossing at that of 1953. Contractors location was examined as well, drilled a well and with a concrete apron eventually constructed a 190 square- being installed across the creek foot pump house and to the base of the Navy Road pipeline. (Livingston 2006h). It is widely assumed that the current berm • In the late 1950s storm waters was created by bulldozer by the washed into the compound at Navy during these years (Power, Prisoners’ Harbor, allegedly 2008b). because of a diversion in the Cañada del Puerto Creek • After many periodic associated with the new Navy repairs, the Park replaced well; the flood damaged the the pier in 2001. cattle facilities and house at Prisoners’ Harbor, leading to the Between 1981-1988, The Nature demolition of the historic house Conservancy removed 36,000 sheep and in 1960. Storms in the winter of 1,500 cattle; the latter were removed in a 1961-62 caused damage to the 6 month period in 1988 (Benton and Navy road, which required Klinger 1994). The NPS removed 9,270 temporary repairs involving a sheep from the east-end between 1997 large cut and fill section near the and 1999. Navy base. The work required that a fence and the water line be In the late 1990’s the NPS and The moved to accommodate the cut. Nature Conservancy began an island- The Navy later addressed the wide effort to restore Santa Cruz Island. stabilization of the new cut slope Restoration included the reintroduction
Environmental Consequences - 109
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement of bald eagles, captive breeding of Santa no known nesting or juvenile golden Cruz Island fox, relocating golden eagles on the island, biologist are eagles, and eradication of feral pigs. watchful for any new golden eagle sightings. Bald eagles disappeared from the Channel Islands by the early 1960’s due Between 2005 and 2006 feral pigs were to human impacts, primarily from the eradicated from the island. A company release of DDT into the ocean off the that specializes in the removal of exotic Palos Verdes peninsula eventually animals from islands was contracted to contaminating the regional food web dispatch all feral pigs on the island. rendering eggs too fragile to reach Over 5000 pigs were dispatched. Since maturity. Between 2002 and 2006, 61 2006 no pig sign, tracks, or other bald eagles were released on Santa Cruz indication of living pigs has been Island. Today nearly 40 bald eagles observed on the island. reside on Santa Cruz Island including 4 nesting pairs. The Nature Conservancy was also active since 1990 to find the best way to treat By the late 1990’s predation by Golden fennel on the island. Two large studies Eagles caused a decline in the Santa (Dash and Gliessman 1994; Erskine Cruz Island fox population by over 90%. unpublished data) were initiated by TNC In 2000 there were fewer than 70 foxes during this decade and were used as the in the wild. Captive breeding in the basis for the fennel control protocols island’s Central Valley was begun as proposed in the 2002 Santa Cruz Island insurance against the loss of foxes from Primary Restoration Plan. Erskine’s golden eagle predation. Foxes were bred study was initiated in 1997 and treated in captivity and released into the wild. most of the fennel in the east portion of Today there are more than 410 foxes the Central Valley. living in the wild island-wide. The captive breeding facility was closed in During 2008, all fennel growing within 2007. 10 feet of roads on land owned by The Nature Conservancy, including within Historically, golden eagles had only the Project Area, was treated with a been “visitors” to Santa Cruz Island, but 0.5% solution of the herbicide Garlon 4. they began colonizing the island in the mid-1990’s, having discovered an The Park currently has a 3 year project abundant food supply in feral pigs. It is to treat 10 priority weed species on the presumed that golden eagles were east end and the isthmus of Santa Cruz previously excluded from the islands by Island. Priority species include fennel, the lack of a consistent food supply and yellow star thistle, pampas grass, by resident bald eagles. Golden eagles Harding grass, arundo, eucalyptus, also preyed upon foxes causing a Peruvian pepper tree, Italian stone pine, precipitous decline in the fox population. tamarisk, and European olive. More than 40 golden eagles were Treatment methods include manual relocated from Santa Cruz Island to the removal and chemical means. eastern Sierra Nevada Mountains in Eucalyptus less than 12” in diameter northern California. Although there are were removed from the hillside above
Environmental Consequences - 110
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement the historic row of eucalyptus in June preservation and 2008. Eucalyptus stumps were treated restoration of natural with Garlon 4. The downed logs and ecosystems” and states branches were chipped and spread on the that the park should be access road. “managed for the restoration and Since 2004, there has been an preservation of natural ongoing effort to control kikuyu biotic associations.” grass in the corral area and Additionally, the GMP among willow trees in the lower calls for “the Cañada del Puerto Creek by preservation, restoration, Channel Islands Restoration in protection, interpretation, partnership with the County of use, study, and Santa Barbara. Kikuyu was management of sprayed with RoundupPro using significant cultural backpack sprayers. resources…in compliance with the requirements of Present Actions the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 The Park conducts ongoing as amended…” The park monitoring and maintenance of has begun to work on a resources in the Prisoners Harbor new GMP. This new Project Area, including: GMP will provide a • Periodic fox and eagle vision for the park’s monitoring future, as well as broad • Ongoing maintenance of guidance in resource the corral area, consisting preservation, protection, of mowing the grass, facilities, and maintaining the developments that will warehouse and bathroom, help achieve that vision. and periodic trimming (or It will also help identify removal, if necessary) of how the National Park historic trees for safety Service may best protect reasons. cultural and natural resources while providing Reasonably Foreseeable Future for visitor enjoyment of Actions the park. It is unlikely that the revised GMP will • The Park’s General be completed prior to Management Plan (GMP) 2011. The goals in the was written in 1985, prior current GMP which call to the acquisition of for such restoration as Prisoners Harbor. It calls this initive will be carried broadly for “management forward unchanged in the strategies for the new GMP. There are no foreseeable projects being
Environmental Consequences - 111
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
considered as part of the impairment of the affected resources and GMP development values (National Park Service 2006, process that would impact Section 1.4.3). resources within the Prisoners Harbor Project Prohibited impairment is an impact that, Area. in the professional judgment of the • The Nature Conservancy, responsible NPS manager, would harm which owns the land the integrity of park resources or values, adjacent to and upstream including opportunities that otherwise of the Prisoners Harbor would be present for the enjoyment of wetlands restoration area, those resources or values. An impact to has an interest in any park resource or value may continued restoration of constitute impairment. However, an the Cañada del Puerto impact would more likely constitute Creek area. As such, it impairment to the extent it affects a may propose additional resource or value whose conservation is: removal of eucalyptus and other introduced • Necessary to fulfill specific species along the creek purposes identified in the above the furthest establishing legislation or upstream extent of the proclamation of the park; proposed project. While • Key to the natural or cultural no specific plans have yet integrity of the park or to been proposed, it is opportunities for enjoyment of foreseeable that such a the park; or project could be • Identified as a goal in the Park’s implemented. General Management Plan or other relevant NPS planning 4.1.8 Impairment of Park Resources documents.
The fundamental purpose of the National An impact would be less likely to Park System, established by the Organic constitute an impairment if it is an and reaffirmed by the General unavoidable result of an action necessary Authorities Act, as amended, begins to preserve or restore the integrity of with a mandate to conserve park park resources or values and it cannot be resources and values. NPS managers further mitigated. must always seek ways to avoid or minimize to the greatest degree The following process was used to practicable adverse impacts on park determine whether the alternatives had resources and values. However, the laws the potential to impair park resources do give the NPS management discretion and values: to allow impacts to park resources and 1. The park’s enabling legislation, values when necessary and appropriate the General Management Plan to fulfill the purposes of a park, as long and other relevant background as the impact does not constitute were reviewed with regard to the
Environmental Consequences - 112
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
unit’s purpose and significance, the natural grade of the channel and was resource values, and resource constructed of channel alluvium. management goals or desired future conditions. The watershed supporting the creek is about 13 square miles. Most of the 2. Thresholds were established for formations in the watershed are capable each resource of concern to of producing large quantities of sediment determine the context, intensity to the creek. No substantial bedrock and duration of impacts, as aquifers exist within the terrain, and defined above. therefore, baseflow in the stream is 3. An analysis was conducted to minimal and provided primarily by determine if the magnitude of water stored in the alluvium. The creek impact reached the level of is ephemeral throughout its lower “impairment,” as defined by NPS reaches, flowing in response to rainfall. Management Policies. Intense frontal storms are capable of producing substantial runoff, and Impairment analysis is considered consequently, large flow events are separately for each natural and cultural relatively common. resource analyzed in this document, and included in the discussion of that The outlet of the creek would empty resource. directly into the Pacific Ocean on the north side of the island, however, 4.2 Alternative A - No Action persistent wave action results in the formation and maintenance of a Alternative relatively high boulder bar at the outlet of the creek. This feature blocks water 4.2.1 Water Resources from leaving the channel and results in substantial backwater pool, which Currently, Cañada del Puerto Creek is a extends at times several hundred feet hydraulically complex system that upstream. As a result of this backwater, includes a marine boulder bar at the flow velocities and the overall erosive outlet to the ocean, as well as an capacity of the stream are restricted archaeological site, and a manmade throughout the area of the pool. The berm which all serve to alter river impounded water slowly drains through hydraulics. The boulder bar is a natural the coarse beach sediment most of the feature. The Native American village time. During substantial flow events, site predates American and Mexican hydraulic pressure causes the boulder settlement of the area and is considered a bar to breach periodically. Once permanent feature in the hydraulic breached, the boulder bar quickly system. The berm is of modern origin reforms and persists through different and was constructed and maintained th tidal stages and is a dynamic yet since the 20 century. The berm extends permanent feature of the fluvial- from near the archaeological site to estuarine system (Martin, 2007a). upstream of the road crossing. It is approximately five to six feet high above About 200 feet upstream of the boulder bar is an archaeological site which is
Environmental Consequences - 113
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement located on the left bank of the creek very 4.2.1.1 Hydrologic Function and near the active channel. The site stands Processes about 10 to 15 feet above the natural grade and restricts the creek flow 4.2.1.1.1 Effects of Wetlands and towards the eastern valley wall for a Floodplain Restoration distance of about 200-300 feet. The earthen berm extends upstream of the Flood Elevation and Frequency: Park archaeological site for about 400 feet to infrastructure and facilities would the road crossing. The road crossing is a remain under Alternative A. The Park concrete slab on grade with the bed of would continue its current management the creek which forms a low water practices within the Project Site. Fill crossing. The crossing provides an would not be removed from the former access point for flood flows to leave the wetland and the berm along Cañada del channel and flow along the road and Puerto Creek would remain in place. inundate the existing infrastructure in the area including the road and portions of No stream flow or gage record the corral area (Martin, 2007a). monitoring data is available for Cañada del Puerto Creek or any other creeks on Under Alternative A, the Park would the Channel Islands. The National Park continue its current management Service staff used regional flood activities including maintenance of the frequency equations developed for the cattle corrals, maintenance of the berm south coast region of California by the and stream channel clearing, control of United States Geologic Service (USGS) invasive plant species, maintenance of (Ries and Crouse, 2002) to determine historic trees, maintenance of fencing for flood frequency and flood magnitude archaeological resource protection, associated with existing conditions in the maintenance of the access road to the Project Area. The modeling data were Central Valley and Navy Site, and used to determine existing flood flow maintenance of visitor facilities. These characteristics, to evaluate channel and activities have little to no impact on overbank flow velocities, and to hydrologic or water resources as determine the extent of regulatory 100- discussed below. year flood elevation in relation to existing and proposed park infrastructure.
Continued maintenance under Alternative A would result in no measurable change in flood elevations or frequency of flooding as the existing condition would continue. Modeling results indicate that the stream channel at the road crossing is not capable of containing flood flows that approach the 100-year flood magnitude (Martin, 2007a). Flood flows that leave the channel at the road crossing follow the
Environmental Consequences - 114
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
road grade towards the historic could result in a long-term impact of warehouse and comfort station. Flows substantially increased flooding. also enter the corral area during these Alternative A would have no impact on flood events. Under Alternative A, flood storage, and no short-term impact flooding would continue to occur at the on flooding; however there would be a road crossing during large events major, adverse impact from substantially approaching the 100-year flood. This increased flooding from a catastrophic places the historic warehouse and the berm failure. comfort station within the regulatory 100-year floodplain. A Floodplain Sediment Transport Dynamics: There Statement of Findings would not be would be no change in the sediment required because the location of the transport dynamics with implementation historic warehouse is integral to its of Alternative A. Sediments would significance. The project is an continue to deposit primarily near the “excepted action” and the Procedural road crossing. The berm would remain Manual does not apply (Procedural in place and the stream flow velocities Manual 77-2: Floodplain Management and stream power would remain V.B). AWetland Statement of Findings relatively high adjacent to the would not be required because this archaeological site during extreme flow restoration alternative would qualify as events. Flows on the order of 10 to 12 an "excepted action" under section feet per second near the site would 4.2.1(h) of NPS Procedural Manual #77- continue because the archaeological site 1: Wetland Protection. constricts channel flow increasing velocity and power adjacent to the site. The berm was constructed since the later The current condition results in minor half of the 20th century. It has been erosion at the Native American village maintained since that time; however the site and this erosion would be expected berm was not designed or constructed to to continue. Although long-term any set design specifications and is channel conditions and sediment unlikely to withstand any prolonged transport dynamics of the channel are hydraulic pressure (Martin, 2007a). unknown at this time, a large storm Failure of the berm could result in event could alter the flow characteristics substantially increased flooding if failure and sediment transport dynamics such occurs during a large storm event, that the Native American site could be putting the Native American village site subjected to high stream flow velocities CA-SCrI-240 at risk. and increased stream power. This condition could result in major effects to Stormwater and Floodwater Storage: the integrity of the Native American site With the berm in place and the fill and it could result in damage or loss of material remaining in the former wetland Park infrastructure. Therefore, for Alternative A, the flood storage Alternative A could result in minor capacity would not change from its short-term and major long-term impacts current condition. The stream channel related to sediment transport, stream would remain disconnected from its aggradation, and impacts to cultural floodplain, and no additional floodplain resources and Park infrastructure. storage would be created. Berm failure
Environmental Consequences - 115
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Changes in Surface Tidal Processes: Park nor would the Park management There would be no change in the surface activities affect The Nature tidal processes with implementation of Conservancy’s potential future Alternative A. The berm would remain restoration plans. in place and the current dynamic of boulder bar formation and failure would The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate be expected to continue as it currently Change (IPCC, 2007) predicts mean does. Alternative A would have no global sea level rises between 0.6 feet impact on surface tidal processes. and 2 feet over the next century. The Park assumes a 0.7-foot rise in sea level 4.2.1.1.2 Effects of Stream Channel over the next 50 years or approximately Restoration half the moderate B2 emission scenario for the year 2099 from the 2007 IPCC No stream channel restoration would synthesis report. A rise in sea level occur with implementation of would not change the type of wetland in Alternative A. The existing condition the Project Area. The palustrine would continue with the presence of freshwater wetland is maintained by the mature eucalyptus trees along the presence of the boulder bar which channel and at the two spoils disposal physically prevents Cañada del Puerto sites adjacent to the channel. Alternative Creek from draining directly into the A would have no impact on flood ocean. The boulder is formed and frequency or flood elevations. The maintained by persistent wave action. channel would remain disconnected The frequency at which the boulder bar from the floodplain and fill would not be breaches and reforms would not change removed from the former wetland, and with an increase in sea level, and the bar therefore, there would be no change in would continue to persist through various the amount of floodplain storage and no tidal stages. The backwater pool created change in hydrologic connectivity. behind the bar would remain with an There would be no change in sediment increase in sea level. The palustrine transport dynamics, stream aggradation, freshwater wetland would remain behind and potential impacts to cultural the bar, because the boulder bar would resource or Park infrastructure resulting continue to limit salt water intrusion into from not implementing stream channel the wetland. Given the topography of restoration. the Project Area; it is unlikely that the overall extent of wetland habitat would 4.2.1.1.3 Cumulative Impacts significantly increase or decrease as a result of a rise in sea level. The Park would continue its current management practices which would not 4.2.1.1.4 Conclusions (including result in cumulative impacts related to impairment) hydrologic processes or hydrologic functions. The Nature Conservancy may Current management of the Park would implement riparian corridor not increase flood frequency or elevation improvements along Cañada del Puerto and the historic warehouse and comfort Creek; however, these projects would station would continue to be subject to not affect current management of the flood waters when flows exceed the 100-
Environmental Consequences - 116
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement year flood event and floodwaters leave 4.2.1.2.2 Effects of Stream Channel the channel and flow along the existing Restoration park access road. Park management would not change the frequency at which Alternative A would not increase or theses types of flood events occur. The decrease the areal extent of wetlands or Native American site is currently subject provide connectivity between the creek to stream flow velocities which cause and its floodplain. There would be no minor erosion during storm events and impact. result in minor adverse impacts. Although long-term channel conditions 4.2.1.3 Water Quality and sediment transport dynamics of the channel are unknown at this time, a large 4.2.1.3.1 Wetland and Floodplain storm event could alter the flow Restoration characteristics of the channel such that major erosion could occur at the Native The No Action Alternative would American site. The result would have a generally have negligible impacts on major adverse impact. Failure of the surface water quality in the Project Area. berm during a large storm event could Under Alternative A, the Park would result in a substantial increase in continue its current management flooding and major impacts to the Native practices within the Project Area American site and Park infrastructure. including maintenance of cattle corrals, maintenance of the berm and stream The level of impact on hydrologic channel clearing, control of invasive processes would not result in impairment plant species, maintenance of historic of park resources that fulfill the specific trees, maintenance of fencing for purposes identified in the enabling archeological resource protection, legislation or that are essential to the maintenance of road access to the natural or cultural integrity of the park. Central Valley and Navy Site, and maintenance of visitor facilities. 4.2.1.2 Wetlands and Floodplains Management practices in the Park would remain the same and therefore no 4.2.1.2.1 Effects of Wetlands and changes to water quality would be Floodplain Restoration expected under this alternative. Sediment concentrations in the Alternative A would not change the watershed are generally considered high acres of wetland or provide connectivity due to the combination of variable between the creek and its floodplain; bedrock geology, steep slopes, degraded therefore there would be no impact. The soil structure due to historic over- approximately 6.5 acres of existing grazing, and intense precipitation events. wetland would remain. Continued management of the Park would not change land use, and therefore no changes to water quality would be expected. The berm would remain in place along the western bank of creek, and the wetlands would not be restored. Without berm removal and increased
Environmental Consequences - 117
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement connectivity to the existing floodplain the berm, removing eucalyptus, and wetland, there would be no change protecting archeological resources, and in water quality or reduction in sediment improving the visitor experience would concentrations. The sediment stored in not occur. the channel and floodplain would continue to move through the fluvial 4.2.2.1 Wildlife system as it does currently. When the wetlands of Prisoners Harbor 4.2.1.3.2 Riparian and Stream Channel were filled in the 19th and 20th centuries Restoration in order to support sheep and cattle operations at the harbor, important The No Action Alternative would have wetland functions and ecosystem no impacts on surface water quality in processes were lost. These functions the Project Area. The well developed included wildlife habitat and forage, riparian vegetation which exists along nutrient retention, and floodwater Cañada del Puerto Creek would remain storage. In addition, establishment of with the No Action Alternative. non-native and invasive eucalyptus trees Eucalyptus trees would not be removed displaced native plant communities that and the native woody species would provided wildlife habitat and forage and remain along the lower and upper a relatively open vegetation structure on reaches of the channel. Therefore, the the floodplain to allow for floodwater stream temperature buffering capacity dispersal. associated with well developed vegetative cover would remain. The No Action Alternative would have either no effects or negligible to minor 4.2.2 Biological Resources adverse effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat in the Project Area. The acreage Introduction of wetland, riparian and other habitats would not change appreciably from The effects of the No Action Alternative current conditions under the No Action on biological resources (wildlife and Alternative. Although the Arroyo vegetation) in the Project Area would Willow and Coast Live Oak range from moderate adverse to communities may decrease in size due to negligible beneficial. Under the No spread of invasive non-native plants, as Action Alternative, current management described below in Section 4.3.2.2.1, practices at Prisoners Harbor would habitat quality and wildlife use in the continue: maintenance of cattle corrals, Project Area would be expected to control of invasive plant species, remain similar to current conditions or maintenance of historic trees, decrease slightly. Without restoring maintenance of fencing for archeological wetlands, reestablishing hydrologic resource protection, maintenance of road connectivity, and removing eucalyptus, access to the Central Valley and Navy there would not be any improvement of Site, and maintenance of visitor habitat quality for special status and facilities. Removing fill from the former endemic vertebrates, improvement of the wetland, removing cattle corrals, moving quality of breeding habitat for birds, nor the scale house, removing a portion of
Environmental Consequences - 118
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
improvement of habitat diversity in bathing in the terminus of Cañada del lower Cañada del Puerto Creek. Puerto Creek and resting and preening on the nearby boulder bar. Nesting has 4.2.2.1.1 Birds not been observed within the Project Area. Brown pelican habitat and use Coastal California is part of the Pacific would not change from current Flyway, one of the four principal bird conditions with the No Action migration routes in North America. Alternative as no actions would impact During peak annual migration periods, habitat or use. hundreds of thousands of birds migrating along the flyway descend upon coastal Bald eagles have been observed in the wetlands, including those on the Channel northwest portion of the Project Area in Islands, in search of refuge and food. the riparian forest above the mouth of Although relatively few bird species are Cañada del Puerto Creek. It is not likely year-round residents, many species that this area of riparian forest would temporarily inhabit coastal marshes change under the No Action Alternative; during their annual migrations. During therefore bald eagle habitat and use the spring and fall months, waterfowl would remain the same. such as brant, pintails, and mallard, and shorebirds such as stilts, plovers, and 4.2.2.1.2 Mammals, reptiles, and gulls, which stop there to rest, feed, and amphibians in some cases over winter, have been observed in the Project Area. The The eight species of reptiles and seasonal abundance of migratory amphibians that inhabit Santa Cruz waterfowl in the Project Area would be Island, three of which are special status expected to continue under the No species, all occur in Cañada del Puerto Action Alternative, but would not Creek. The Channel Islands slender increase as no additional wetland salamander is a terrestrial species not acreage would be created. found directly in the water, but under rocks, logs, and other cover in the The Island scrub-jay breeds in coast live floodplain of the drainage. It inhabits oak woodland or chaparral with a high coastal scrub communities, grasslands, scrub oak component and forages in oak woodlands, and crevices under wooded habitats throughout the island, beach driftwood. The Island fence lizard and in the Project Area particularly is widely distributed along the Prisoners within the Arroyo Willow riparian Harbor drainage, particularly in areas of forest. As this community type may shrubs and trees around rocks, logs, and decrease in size under this alternative other ground cover. The Santa Cruz due to the likely spread of eucalyptus gopher snake is most commonly (see analysis in Section 4.3.2.2.1), there observed in grasslands, oak woodlands, could be a negligible to minor adverse and dry riparian habitat. Current impact and Island scrub-jay habitat and management practices that would abundance of jays could decrease. continue under the No Action Alternative would not alter wetland, Brown pelican are observed commonly riparian or other habitat that these within the Project Area, particularly species occupy. Thus there would not
Environmental Consequences - 119
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement likely be any changes to habitat or effect on habitat availability or abundance of reptiles or amphibians abundance of island fox. under this alternative. 4.2.2.1.3 Aquatic Invertebrates and Fish Of the eleven bat species which are known to occur or may occur at Many species of insects have aquatic Prisoners Harbor and in Cañada del larval life stages. The island streams, Puerto Creek, only the California myotis including Cañada del Puerto Creek, breeds on the island. The other species support flies (Order: Diptera), beetles are rare occurrences and may forage in (Order: Coleoptera) with aquatic larval the area, single individuals may stages, caddisflies (Order: Trichoptera), occasionally roost around the remaining and stoneflies (Order: Plecoptera). buildings, or they may migrate through. Wetlands within the Project Area create It is likely, then, that habitat and use of breeding habitat for freshwater the Project Area by bats would not mosquitoes. There are no known change from current levels as there permanent fish populations in Cañada would not be any changes in del Puerto Creek. Several small fish, management actions or habitat alteration most likely top smelt, washed over the under the No Action Alternative. boulder bar during a high tide and were observed once in the remnant wetland. Of the four mammal species other than As there would not be any changes to the bats on the island, all have special status management of Prisoners Harbor under but only two are known to occur in the the No Action Alternative, aquatic Project Area. The Santa Cruz Island habitat for invertebrates and fish would deer mouse has been observed in the not change, nor would abundance of Project Area on the beach and upland invertebrate species or fish occurring in areas around the marsh. The western the creek or wetlands. harvest mouse commonly inhabits a variety of grassy and weedy areas, and 4.2.2.1.4 Cumulative Impacts has been observed in the Project Area around the marsh and grasslands. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable Current management practices that cumulative impacts on wildlife are would continue under the No Action described in detail under Alternative B Alternative would not alter habitats in sections 4.3.2.1.1.3, 4.3.2.1.2.3, and where these species occur. Thus there 4.3.2.1.3.3. The additional impacts would not likely be any changes to associated with the No Action habitat or abundance of the deer mouse alternative, as described above and as or harvest mouse under this alternative. compared to past, present, and foreseeable future cumulative impacts, The island fox occurs in every habitat on would contribute negligible adverse or the Channel Islands, including southern no cumulative impacts on wildlife. coastal oak woodland, southern riparian woodland, and coastal marsh habitat types. Foxes currently utilize existing habitats in the Project Area, thus the No Action alternative would not have any
Environmental Consequences - 120
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.2.2.1.5 Conclusions (including Prior to the early 1800s the Project Area impairment) supported coastal marsh and native riparian forest, and also likely supported Current management practices that a mixed live oak savannah on the would continue under the No Action floodplain terraces immediately Alternative would not alter wetland, upstream of Prisoners Harbor in lower riparian or other wildlife habitat. Thus Cañada del Puerto Creek. The Prisoners there would not likely be any changes to Harbor area was ecologically altered in habitat or abundance of wildlife under the late-19th to mid-20th centuries in this alternative. order to support sheep and cattle ranching operations. Before ranchers The No Action Alternative would have developed lower Cañada del Puerto negligible to minor adverse impacts on Creek for agricultural activities, the site the Island scrub-jay, and no impacts on supported about 12 acres of marsh and any of the other special status species. creek wetland habitat. Today the site supports 6.5 acres of wetland habitat, a The No Action Alternative would not reduction of about 50%. Within the result in impairment of park resources Project Area native vegetation that fulfill the specific purposes communities have been degraded identified in the enabling legislation or through alteration of hydrologic that are essential to the natural or processes with the filling of the wetland, cultural integrity of the park. channelizing of the stream, and establishment of non-native invasive 4.2.2.2 Vegetation plant species.
The No Action Alternative would have 4.2.2.2.1 Native Vegetation moderate adverse to minor beneficial Communities effects on vegetation resources in the Project Area. There would be continued Without wetland restoration and partial degradation of a large percentage of the berm removal, the hydrology of the native plant communities which would lower reach of Cañada del Puerto Creek remain ecologically disturbed due to loss would not be restored, and wetland and of hydrologic function, past human floodplain functions would not be alteration, and the presence and spread reestablished. With the continuation of of invasive non-native vegetation. current management practices under the Although wetlands and other vegetation No Action Alternative, native vegetation communities would continue to be communities would remain degraded but degraded, the areal extent and species relatively unchanged from current composition of existing vegetation conditions in the short-term, although communities would be expected to over time, the plant species composition remain fairly similar to current may shift somewhat in response to conditions in the short-term, but may natural fluctuations of water levels and shift to non-native vegetation types over non-native vegetation spread and the long-term. management.
Environmental Consequences - 121
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
The extent of the Arroyo Willow and invasive species could outcompete Bulrush-Cattail communities can native species in this community and fluctuate due to natural variability of potentially convert some acreage to non- water availability within the northern native community types. This loss of portion of the Project Area. During drier native community would constitute a periods the Arroyo Willow community moderate adverse impact over the long- may expand into areas that would term. normally have too-high groundwater to support arroyo willow. During wet There are not likely to be any changes periods, generally characterized by from current conditions in the Lemonade frequent winter storms, high flows on Berry, Silver Beachbur - Beach Sand floodplains may remove young willows, Verbena, and Stream Beds and Flats and allow re-colonization of low-lying vegetation types because none of the areas by more-hydrophytic plant current management actions would occur communities, particularly Bulrush- in these communities or alter them. Cattail. However, these natural fluctuations would not be the result of Santa Cruz Island supports 14 plants any actions associated with the No with special legal status, other special Action Alternative. status, and/or local endemism (see Table 3.5 in Chapter 3). There are no federally Current management practices that listed Threatened or Endangered plant would continue under the No Action species in the Project Area.. Only the Alternative include periodically Santa Cruz Island silver lotus, a state removing young eucalyptus recruits to listed endangered species, has been prevent them from spreading into new observed in the Project Area. It is habitat, particularly the Arroyo Willow common on rocky slopes, exposed and Coast Live Oak communities ridgetops, sandy flats and washes, gravel adjacent to much of the eucalyptus floodplains, chaparral, coastal scrub, and stands. If this spread of young riparian communities. In the Project eucalyptus is controlled rigorously, then Area a few plants occur in the dry creek it is possible that the areal extent of bed adjacent to the southern most adjacent native plant communities could eucalyptus stand. As no actions would remain intact. However, the size of the occur to disturb habitat or individuals, native willow and oak habitats would the Santa Cruz Island silver lotus would decrease over time if eucalyptus recruits not be affected by the No Action gain a foothold in the adjacent habitats. Alternative. Over the long-term, such a spread of eucalyptus is likely to occur, thus there 4.2.2.2.1.1 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS would be a moderate adverse impact on native vegetation communities. If current Park management activities can control the spread of young The Coast Live Oak community, which eucalyptus into the Coast Live Oak and currently comprises about 8.2 acres in Arroyo Willow communities, then it is the Project Area, could decrease in size possible that the areal extent of adjacent over time since it contains fennel and native plant communities could remain eucalyptus in the understory. These intact. However, the size of the native
Environmental Consequences - 122
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
willow and oak habitats would decrease Early non-indigenous settlers planted over time if eucalyptus recruits gain a stands of eucalyptus trees throughout the foothold in the adjacent habitats. Over lower Cañada del Puerto Creek the long-term, such a spread of watershed. These invasive trees have eucalyptus is likely to occur, thus there colonized much of the rest of the Cañada would be a moderate adverse cumulative del Puerto Creek floodplain, creating impact on native vegetation monocultures of eucalyptus in areas that communities. would have been characterized as native oak savannah. Additionally, fennel and 4.2.2.2.1.2 CONCLUSIONS (INCLUDING kikuyu grass are invasive plants that IMPAIRMENT) have been identified as high priority species for control on Santa Cruz Island. The No Action Alternative would have moderate adverse effects on native plant The NPS would continue to conduct communities due to continued spread of periodic weeding of the Project Area eucalyptus, loss in areal extent of native under the No Action Alternative, plant communities, and continued predominantly to control the spread of degraded conditions without wetland or invasive kikuyu grass. The Nature riparian restoration. Conservancy would continue an on- going effort to control fennel along the The Santa Cruz Island silver lotus would road to the Central Valley. These not be affected by the No Action management actions would keep Alternative as no actions would occur to populations of kikuyu grass and fennel disturb habitat or individuals. from spreading, in areas where they are controlled. However, in other areas, The No Action Alternative would not such as in fennel stands, these non- result in impairment of park resources native plants would continue to spread. that fulfill the specific purposes identified in the enabling legislation or In addition, the NPS would control the that are essential to the natural or stands of eucalyptus trees on the cultural integrity of the park. northwest and southeast boundaries of the Project Area. NPS staff would 4.2.2.2.2 Non-Native Vegetation periodically trim the eucalyptus trees with chain saws to remove tree limbs Under the No Action Alternative, the and bark that pose safety and fire Park would implement established hazards. In addition, NPS staff would invasive plant management programs periodically remove young eucalyptus within the Project Area, targeting some recruits with chain saws, to prevent them of the highest priority species. Invasive from spreading into new habitat. plant species represent a select subset of Control of invasive vegetation would largely, although not exclusively, non- have a minor beneficial impact on native species which pose some of the vegetation resources. worst threats to viability and persistence of native vegetation communities and It is likely that the areal extent of functions. vegetation communities supporting predominantly non-native plants would
Environmental Consequences - 123
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
not be reduced under the No Action would keep their populations from Alternative. Although some non-native spreading in areas where they are plant control would continue under this controlled. Such impacts to non-native alternative, it is mainly targeted at vegetation produce beneficial impacts to controlling the spread of the high native vegetation and the ecosystem as a priority species in certain areas rather whole. than decreasing the existing populations. Thus, there would still remain Moderate beneficial impacts on approximately 20.02 acres of Eucalyptus invasives would occur as species such as stands, 3.1 acres of Fennel stands, and fennel and eucalyptus would continue to 5.4 acres of the Built-up area which spread in areas where they are not mainly consists of non-native vegetation. controlled and because current The Eucalyptus and Fennel vegetation management programs do not focus on communities could even increase in size reducing existing populations of non- as these high priority species would native plants. Beneficial impacts to non- continue to spread where they are not native vegetation often produce adverse controlled. The likely continued spread effects on native vegetation and the of invasive species would have a ecosystem as a whole. moderate adverse impact on vegetation resources. The level of impact on non-native vegetation would reduce impairment of 4.2.2.2.2.1 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS park resources that fulfill the specific purposes identified in the enabling It is likely that the areal extent of legislation or that are essential to the vegetation communities supporting natural or cultural integrity of the park. predominantly non-native plants would not be reduced under the No Action 4.2.3 Cultural Resources Alternative. The Eucalyptus and Fennel vegetation communities could even 4.2.3.1 Archeological Resources increase in size as these high priority species would continue to spread where As described in Section 3.4.2, the they are not controlled. The likely Project Area is situated within the continued spread of invasive species National Register-listed Santa Cruz would have a moderate adverse Island Archeological District cumulative impact on vegetation (Archeological District). The resources. Archeological District encompasses 90 percent of Santa Cruz Island, contains 4.2.2.2.2.2 CONCLUSIONS (INCLUDING more than 630 recorded archeological IMPAIRMENT) sites, and is estimated to contain over two thousand additional resources that The No Action Alternative would have a are currently unrecorded. The minor impact on non-native plants with Archeological District is significant for continued control of invasive species the large number and diversity of through current established management pristine sites found on the island and programs. Targeting high priority their ability to yield information species, such as kikuyu grass and fennel, important to prehistory and history.
Environmental Consequences - 124
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
These resources are significant to recovery, if necessary. The Park also Chumash tribal history, and are of protects archeological resources through educational value to the public. Known its ongoing visitor orientation program archeological resources in the Project that includes a discussion of Area consist of archeological site CA- archeological resources at Santa Cruz SCrI-240, believed to be the historic Island and the regulations in effect to Chumash village of Xaxas, which was protect these resources. Continuation of probably the second largest village on the Park’s ongoing archeological the island. This site has special resource protection measures would significance to the Native American have a long-term moderate beneficial community and is a contributing long-term impact on archeological resource within the Archeological resources. District. There is potential within the Project Area for additional archeological As described in Section 1.6.1.7 resources that are currently unknown to Archeological Resources, archeological be present because they are entirely site CA-SCrI-240 was bisected by below ground or obscured by vegetation. Cañada del Puerto Creek in the late 1800s. In the early 1900s the stream was Under the No Action Alternative, the channelized. The new drainage pattern Park would continue its current caused by stream channelization diverted management practices to protect known storm water, resulting in flood damage archeological resources at Prisoners to this archeological site in the past, and Harbor that contribute to the Santa Cruz the potential flooding of this resource in Island Archeological District the future. In addition, although this (Archeological District) and additional archeological deposit is largely obscured unknown archeological resources that from view by dense vegetation and is may be present. These practices include surrounded by wire fencing, the potential regular maintenance of the fencing that exists for unauthorized collection of protects archeological site CA-SCrI-240 archeological materials from the site. through periodic inspection and repair of the posts, wire, and hardware; and 4.2.3.1.1 Cumulative Impacts controlling the spread of invasive vegetation, including kikuyu grass, The No Action Alternative would have a fennel, and young eucalyptus recruits, long-term impact on archaeological that otherwise would spread and resources at Prisoners. The No Action potentially disturb the integrity of any Alternative would contribute to a currently unknown archeological cumulative impact on archaeological resources. Control methods include resources within the Archeological herbicide spraying and hand cutting, District as a whole. which have minimal or no affect on archeological resources. The Park also 4.2.3.1.2 Conclusions (including undertakes cultural resources monitoring impairment) and/or subsurface testing within areas of potential ground-disturbance associated Continuation of the Park’s ongoing with proposed projects, and avoidance of resource protection measures under the any such resources if feasible, or data No Action Alternative would have a
Environmental Consequences - 125
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
long-term minor to moderate impact on the Ranching District are listed below archeological resources at Prisoners and described in greater detail in Section Harbor. 3.4 Cultural Resources. The locations of these resources are shown in Figure 4.3. The No Action Alternative would diminish the integrity of the Buildings and Structures include the Archeological District over time but 1887 stone and brick warehouse; and would not result in impairment of the a scale house that is currently located archeological resources. within the cattle corrals, but prior to the 1960s was located adjacent to the 4.2.3.2 Historical Resources warehouse.
This section presents an evaluation of Small-scale Features include a stone- the potential impacts of the Proposed lined well located east of the corrals Action and alternatives on historic and dating from the same period as resources within the Project Area. As the warehouse; a complex of cattle described in Section 3.4.3, the Project corrals; remnants of fencelines that Area is situated within the National divided the land into fields and Register-eligible Santa Cruz Island pastures, and a series of telephone Ranching District (Ranching District). poles, generally attached to fence The Ranching District is locally posts along Navy Road. A below- significant for its association with the ground water pipe runs from the developing American economy in the warehouse generally along Navy area of agriculture, animal husbandry, Road. Three water troughs are and frontier cattle ranches and for its located within the corral complex, potential to provide information and two water troughs and remnants regarding development of the ranch. It is of a fenceline are located off Navy also likely locally significant for its Road near the stone-lined wall.. A ability to express cultural values in the rock retaining wall may be buried area of architecture through the beneath the existing berm along the expression of a distinct style reminiscent west side of Cañada del Puerto of vernacular French Alps architecture, Creek. Remnants of the circulation features, and layout. system include Navy Road and the road to the Main Ranch. The Prisoners Harbor area of the Ranching District has undergone Vegetation includes native and non- modifications over time by human and native trees and plants used for natural forces to an extent that the area specific purposes. These include an no longer retains individual historic Italian stone pine tree located near integrity. However, the Prisoners Harbor the Prisoners Harbor pier; a row of historic resources contribute to the eucalyptus trees extending from the overall historical character and historic warehouse at the base of the cliff; a significance of the Ranching District as a black acacia that is located across the whole (NPS 2004). The historic road from the warehouse; and two resources at Prisoners Harbor that American elm trees east of the contribute to the historic significance of
Environmental Consequences - 126
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 4.3 Santa Cruz Island Ranching District
Environmental Consequences - 127
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
warehouse. In addition, some of the currently being used by the Park and eucalyptus trees along the Cañada del TNC for storage of vehicles, equipment Puerto Creek may be historic. A small and materials. The relatively low left area of yerba mansa that was planted in bank of Cañada del Puerto at the road the early 20th century by the island crossing provides an access point for cowboys is located in the corral area, flood waters to follow the road, thereby and the remnants of a garden area exposing the warehouse to occasional containing agave and rose bushes are floodwaters (NPS 2007). Under the No located near the site of the former ranch Action Alternative, the occasional house on The Nature Conservancy exposure of the warehouse to property. floodwaters would continue. To date, this exposure has not had a noticeable Under the No Action Alternative, the effect on the structure. This is Park would continue its current considered a minor long-term adverse management practices to protect historic impact on this historic resource. resources at Prisoners Harbor that contribute to the Santa Cruz Island The Park has mapped and photographed Ranching District (Ranching District). the three water troughs that are located These practices consist of maintaining within the corral complex and the row of the appearance of the cattle corrals and eight telephone poles that generally run scale house through painting, gate repair, along Navy road, and plans to map and and replacement of degraded boards and photograph the two water troughs in the hardware; periodic mowing of the plants vicinity of the stone-lined well. No inside the corrals; implementing an additional management actions are ongoing invasive plant control program taken, however, to protect these small- that eliminates the potential damage to scale features from natural degradation. historic features that these plants and The loss of these resources is considered their root systems can cause if left a minor long-term adverse impact unchecked; maintaining the historic because their loss would not appearance and condition of historic substantially reduce the character- trees by periodically trimming the defining features of Prisoner’s Harbor branches; maintaining the two historic and would not substantially diminish the roads within the Project Area--Navy integrity of the Ranching District. Road and the road to the Main Ranch; and avoiding disturbance to the stone- 4.2.3.2.1 Cumulative Impacts lined well, the water troughs, and the location of the below-ground water pipe Continuation of the Park’s management that runs from the warehouse generally practices would have a moderate along Navy Road. Continuation of the beneficial impact on historic resources at Park’s management practices would Prisoners Harbor and would not have a moderate beneficial impact on contribute to a cumulative adverse historic resources at Prisoners Harbor. impact on the Ranching District as a whole. Although the No Action The warehouse, which the Park Alternative would result in the eventual maintains as a historic structure, is loss of five historic water troughs and
Environmental Consequences - 128
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement eight telephones at Prisoners Harbor, management practices within the Project these types of small-scale features are Area at Prisoners Harbor on Santa Cruz found throughout the Ranching District Island. These activities include: and their other locations convey to maintenance of cattle corrals, convey its historic character. maintenance of the berm and stream channel clearing, control of invasive 4.2.3.2.2 Conclusions (including plant species, maintenance of historic impairment) trees to minimize risk to visitor safety from potential tree fall or limb drop, The No Action Alternative would have a maintenance of fencing for archeological minor long-term adverse to moderate resource protection, maintenance of road long-term beneficial impact on the access to the Central Valley and Navy historic resources at Prisoners Harbor. Site, and maintenance of visitor The Park’s management practices to facilities. protect historic resources at Prisoners Harbor and throughout the Ranching None of these ongoing maintenance District would continue under the No actions would change the visitor Action Alternative, and although some experience from its current situation. No historic small-scale features at Prisoners changes would occur in access to Harbor (specifically the five water embarkation of tour boats, pedestrian or troughs and eight telephone poles) vehicular passage through the Project would eventually be lost through natural Area, or access to existing historic degradation, the loss of these resources ranching features. Other activities that would not substantially reduce the would enhance the visitor experience character-defining features of Prisoners may be considered within the proposed Harbor or the integrity of the Ranching General Management Plan, but they District. have not been identified as yet.
The No Action Alternative would not The level of impact on the visitor result in impairment of historic resources experience from the No Action because it would not result in a major, Alternative would not result in adverse impact to a resource or value impairment of park resources that fulfill whose conservation is necessary to the specific purposes identified in the fulfill specific purposes of the Park; key enabling legislation or that are essential to the natural or cultural integrity of the to the natural or cultural integrity of the Park; or identified as a goal in the Park’s park. planning documents. 4.3 Alternative B – 2/3 Wetland 4.2.4 Social Resources Restoration with Partial Berm Removal 4.2.4.1 Recreation and Visitor
Experience 4.3.1 Water Resources Under the No Action Alternative, no restoration activities will be conducted. Introduction The Park would continue its current
Environmental Consequences - 129
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
This section presents an evaluation of a low artificial berm that has severed the the potential impacts of the Proposed hydraulic connection between the lower Action on water resources within the Cañada del Puerto Creek and its Project Area. Several project floodplain, excavate sand and rock fill to components included as part of restore approximately 2/3 of the former Alternative B would have no impact on wetland, and replant the restoration area water resources, and therefore are not with native species. included in the discussion below. The discussion focuses on impacts associated Approximately 2,400 cubic yards of fill with the removal of fill from the former material would be removed from the wetland, removal of portions of the berm and placed at two designated existing berm along Cañada del Puerto disposal sites. Following removal of the Creek, structural protection of berm, the stream channel would then be archaeological resources and park graded and reshaped to a height infrastructure, and channel restoration consistent with the naturally-formed through removal of eucalyptus along the channel banks. The project would also riparian corridor. Relocation of the scale include removal of approximately house and improved visitor experience 17,400 cubic yards of rock and sand fill are not evaluated below because there from the former wetland, removing fill would be no impact water resources. to provide sufficient depth to the alluvial groundwater below. The depth of fill Wetlands and floodplain Restoration removal would range depending on the type of wetland created: up to 6 feet Several project components could affect below the mean annual water table for hydrologic function and processes creation of the open water/pond habitat, including changes in flood elevations up to 2.5 feet below the mean annual and frequency, changes in sediment water table for fringe marsh habitat, up transport dynamics and stream power, to 0.5 feet for shallow marsh habitat, and and changes in water quality. Under between 0.5 and 1.75 feet above the Alternative B, the Park would reconnect mean water table for willow and Cañada del Puerto Creek to its natural saltgrass meadow habitat. Fill material floodplain through removal of a portion removed from the berm and from the of the berm, restore 3.1 acres of former wetland would be placed at the palustrine wetlands and deepwater designated disposal sites. habitat, complete stream channel restoration through a phased removal of Approximately 2.8 acres would be eucalyptus trees along Cañada del Puerto needed to dispose of the fill material: 1.0 Creek, control non-native plant species, acres would be needed at the northern construct a protective barrier around the disposal site and 1.8 acres at the archaeological site, and improve the southern site. The disposal sites would visitor experience. be located on the east side of the creek above the 100-year floodplain, upstream To reconnect the creek to the natural and downstream of the creek crossing. floodplain and restore the ecological Eucalyptus trees and other vegetation function of the wetland, the project would be removed from the disposal would remove approximately 250 feet of sites to accommodate fill placement.
Environmental Consequences - 130
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Trees would be removed from the species. Removal of eucalyptus would disposal sites prior to commencing work follow the schedule listed below and on the berm and the wetland. Once fill discussed in Chapter 2: material is placed at the disposal sites, the material would be compacted and Step 2 – 2.96 acres sloped to natural grades and seeded with Step 3 – 4.18 acres native upland plants. Step 4 – 3.60 acres Step 5 – 3.80 acres The project would require use of heavy Step 6 – 1.59 acres equipment to remove the berm and Step 7 – 0.81 acres excavate the fill from the wetland. The heavy equipment would be used in and Sufficient recovery of the channel around the stream channel as well as the restoration area would occur between wetland. Excavation work would be implementation of the stages to completed in the fall when water levels minimize ecological impacts and reduce are low to facilitate removal of fill the potential for sediment transport to material. the creek. The Park would use an adaptive management strategy to The project includes removal of invasive determine which riparian revegetation non-native species, including kikuyu methods are the most effective in grass, fennel, and young eucalyptus trees achieving the restoration goals and to which otherwise would spread and determine when the area is sufficiently potentially interfere with revegetation recovered to move onto the next efforts and natural vegetation restoration site. The adaptive recruitment. The control methods would management strategy and monitoring likely include herbicide spraying and requirements are discussed in Chapter 2. hand cutting, which have minimal or no Smaller eucalyptus trees would be affect on water resources. chipped and the chips spread on roadbeds for stabilization purposes. Riparian and Stream Channel Larger trees would be hauled off the Restoration island either for disposal, used in other island project, or used as erosion The project would also include riparian protection for the Village site. restoration along Cañada del Puerto Creek following a phased approach. The impact evaluation presented below Eucalyptus trees would be removed in a includes evaluation of construction- step-wise approach covering related/short-term impacts and long-term approximately 20 acres. Year 1 would effects of the project. include removal at the northern and southern fill disposal areas as well as an 4.3.1.1 Hydrologic Function & additional 3.08 acres on the north and Processes south banks of the creek outside of the fill disposal sites. Eucalyptus would be 4.3.1.1.1 Effects of wetlands and replaced with native riparian woodland floodplain restoration species and seeded using broadcast seed methods and planting with native
Environmental Consequences - 131
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Flood Elevation and Frequency: the road crossing during the 100- Alternative B would have a minor year flood. adverse impact on flood elevation and flood frequency, and a beneficial effect 4. With the berm removed, the of reduced flooding at the road crossing. velocity and stream power adjacent Removal of the berm would increase the to the archeological site during a frequency that the creek overflows its 100-year storm are predicted to be banks connecting the flows to the about 3 to 4 feet per second velocity floodplain and the recreated wetland. and 4 pounds per foot-second Predictive hydrologic models indicate stream power. By comparison, the that removal of the berm would allow a velocity and stream power adjacent much greater number of lower to the archaeological site with the magnitude floods to overtop the left berm in place is estimated at 10-12 bank and access the associated feet per second 18-20 pounds per floodplain. This in turn could increase foot second, respectively. the potential of inundation and erosion of the archeological site. To evaluate the The hydraulic analysis indicates that potential impact to the archaeological overbank velocities just upstream of the site and Park infrastructure from archaeological site would reach values increased flooding, hydraulic modeling of about 3 feet per second during was performed for the creek with the extreme events in the range of the 100- berm removed. The hydraulic modeling year flood. This is well below the results for the creek with the berm erosive range for unconsolidated removed are summarized below (Martin, sediments larger than fine sand (Martin, 2007a and 2007b). 2007a). Even though the hydraulic analysis indicates that hydraulic forces 1. The channel with the berm removed of floodwaters would not likely affect would be capable of containing the archaeological site, Alternative B flows somewhat beyond the range includes measures to further stabilize the of the estimated 10-year flood of site given its value as a cultural resource. 546 cubic feet per second. Flows Protection would include placement of a greater than this would overtop the small earth, log, and cobble berm around left bank and spread across the the site or packing earth, log, and cobble floodplain and restored wetlands. against the base of the site and planting with compatible native plants. The 2. The 100-year flood with the berm protective barrier is described in more removed is predicted to achieve an detail in Chapter 2. elevation of about 13.7 feet. The predicted elevations of the 100-year 3. Removal of the berm is predicted to flood with the berm removed were result in a fairly substantial compared to the surveyed elevations of reduction (about four feet) in the other infrastructure of concern, including elevation of the 100-year flood at the road, warehouse building, and dock. the road crossing. This reduction in With the berm removed, the 100-year the water level is enough to flood is predicted to achieve an elevation maintain flow within the channel at of about 13.7 feet (Martin, 2007b). This
Environmental Consequences - 132
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
elevation would result in overbank flows channel at the road crossing. The lapping against the road grade and frequency flood waters leaving the overtopping the road surface at some channel in the vicinity of the road locations. The lowest point surveyed on crossing, flowing down the road, and the road is adjacent to the warehouse affecting park infrastructure would be with an elevation of about 12.8 feet at substantially reduced with the removal the building corners. Consequently, in of the berm. the event of a 100-year flood, the warehouse building and portions of the Construction activities could result in a road could be inundated to a depth of short-term impact; however, removal of about one foot with very low velocity the berm and removal of the fill from the flood water (Martin, 2007b). wetland would be completed during the driest time of the year when the risk of There are no surveyed elevations on the rainfall is minimal. Placement of fill pier deck; however, a nearby ground material at the two disposal sites would point has a surveyed elevation of 13.64 result in increased surface runoff from feet, very near the predicted elevation of the site, but would not increase flood the 100-year flood (Martin, 2007b). elevations. Best management practices Considering that nearby elevation, the described in Chapter 2 would minimize location of the pier at the extreme edge the risk of impacts during construction of the floodplain, the general slope of the and reduce the risk of surface runoff land away from the pier area and through proper grading and effective towards the channel and ocean, it is very erosion control methods. unlikely that the pier would be subjected to any kind of destructive flood flows Stormwater and Floodwater Storage: under condition that are likely to occur Alternative B would have a beneficial and also unlikely that it would effect related to the increased area for experience any increased frequency of stormwater and flood storage. Removal flooding (Martin, 2007b). of the berm is predicted to allow a much greater number of higher magnitude The hydraulic analysis performed for the floods to overtop the left bank and creek showed that the road crossing at access the associated floodplain, existing the upstream boundary of the study area wetlands and recreated wetlands. The forms a low water type crossing. The recreated wetlands would increase the relatively low left bank of the creek at existing flood storage area by 3.1 acres the road crossing provides an access for a total of 9.6 acres of functioning point for flood waters to follow the road wetlands. The dense vegetation and and inundate the existing infrastructure location at the lower reaches of Cañada in this area. Subsequent hydraulic del Puerto Creek would slow stormwater modeling runs with the berm removed runoff and provide storage area for flood predicted a reduction of about four feet waters. This periodic flooding would be in the elevation of the 100-year flood at beneficial to the hydrologic and this cross section (Martin, 2007a). This ecological functioning of the restored reduction in stage is enough to maintain wetlands and would meet the project flow within the channel, but keep the objective of reconnecting the stream 100-year flood from overtopping the channel and its floodplain.
Environmental Consequences - 133
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
eight feet per second down to about two Sediment Transport Dynamics: feet per second for flows that exceed the Alternative B would have a negligible 10-year flood (Martin, 2007b). adverse impact related to sediment Velocities in the two feet per second transport dynamics including sediment range likely occur under the present transport during high flows and potential conditions (with the berm in place) at the aggradation of sediments within the road crossing because the channel is channel. Removal of the berm is wider at the road crossing than the predicted to allow a much greater channel above and below the crossing, number of higher magnitude floods to yet no severe aggradation has been overtop the left bank and access the documented at this location (Martin, associated floodplain. This increase of 2007b). flow area for flood waters results in a decrease of velocity which may affect Based on the hydraulic modeling results, the stream’s ability to mobilize and the water in the channel during the 10- transport sediment through this reach of year flood would be capable of the creek. In terms of hydraulics, mobilizing particles in the range of removal of the berm would reduce the course gravel up to medium cobble depth of the higher magnitude flows, (about one- to four-inch diameter possibly reducing the channel velocity material). Examination of photos taken and stream power below the threshold of over the past several years suggest that sediment entrainment and transport the bedload present in the creek ranges resulting in deposition and aggradation. from fine grained silt and sand to small cobbles. Anticipated channel velocities To assess the likelihood of channel and sheer stress following berm removal aggradation and sediment transport would result in minimal aggradation of dynamics, the Park performed a sediment within the channel. The stream comparison of the average channel flow would remain in the current velocity before and after berm removal channel and not be redirected towards through the entire range of design the archaeological site or towards park floods, 2-year to 100-year flows. infrastructure as a result of sediment Generally, results indicated that there aggradation. was no difference between the system with the berm and without the berm for Construction activities could result in a lower magnitude flows up to the 10-year short-term impact; however removal of flood. For flows exceeding the 10-year the berm and removal of the fill from the flood, such as the 25-, 50-, and the 100- wetland would be completed during the year flows, a substantial difference was driest time of the year when the risk of realized in the channel velocity as a rainfall is minimal. Best management result of berm removal and the practices described in Chapter 2 would subsequent flood waters leaving the minimize the risk of impacts during channel and flowing into the floodplain. construction. The analysis indicated that removal of the berm would reduce channel Changes in Surface Tidal Processes: velocities and stream power in the The boulder bar located at the mouth of adjacent reach of the creek from about Cañada del Puerto Creek physically
Environmental Consequences - 134
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement prevents the creek from emptying archaeological site given its great value directly into the ocean. Rather, the as a cultural resource. Protection would impounded water forms a backwater include placement of a small earth, log, pool that slowly drains through the and cobble berm around the site or course sediments. The boulder bar packing earth, log, and cobble against results in a reduction in flow velocities the base of the site and planting with and erosive capacity of the stream. compatible native plants as described in Substantial flow events can create Chapter 2. enough hydraulic pressure to cause the boulder bar to fail periodically. Following removal of the berm, the channelized configuration of Cañada del After failing, the boulder bar is reformed Puerto Creek would still have a fairly and maintained by persistent wave high left bank (about five feet above action and creek deposition. Smaller channel bottom). All flows up to about grain sizes in the bar are likely due to 550 cubic feet per second would still be ocean-side, longshore sediment contained completely within the channel, transport, occurring constantly. The and therefore, there would be no change larger stones and boulders are likely re- in sediment transport capacity for the deposited near the mouth of the creek by majority of flow events expected to storm events to re-form the bulk of the occur. It is these more frequent flows boulder bar once it has failed. that are considered the primary channel maintenance flows, or channel forming The Channel Islands National Park flows. Historic Resources Study includes a U.S. Coast Survey map showing Prisoners Hydraulic modeling was performed for Harbor in the year 1856. This map was the creek with the berm removed. This developed before the berm was built included a channel velocity analysis that along Cañada del Puerto Creek in the includes modeling for the 25-year flood. early 1900s. The 1856 map of Prisoners The velocity profiles extended through Harbor illustrates a meandering stream the entire study reach of the creek under draining towards the central portion of existing conditions (berm in place) and the marsh near the beach. It appears that under proposed conditions (berm the creek is shown to the west of the removed). Predictive hydrologic models present day location on the west side of indicate that velocities at the boulder bar the Native American village site. The are the same with and without the berm in creek was later straightened with the aid place. Given these observations, the of stone retaining walls that diminished current dynamic of boulder bar formation the lagoon that previously wandered and failure would be expected to continue through the area. as it currently does. There would be a no change in the hydraulic effect of the The archaeological site has existed for marine boulder bar or tidal processes. centuries under both natural and No impacts to the cultural resources or unnatural flow conditions, including infrastructure would occur. numerous extreme floods, without being lost through erosion. Alternative B The pier at Prisoners Harbor is the oldest includes measures to stabilize the pier site in Santa Barbara County. The
Environmental Consequences - 135
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement original pier was constructed in 1871, efforts. Willow staking would be utilized well before the existing berm in Cañada along streambanks as necessary to del Puerto Creek was built. Therefore, ensure rapid and successful revegetation the pier was not previously located in an efforts in more critical areas. Seeds area that relied on the berm for flood from some species would be broadcast control in order to prevent flooding and over the site in some locations to hasten erosive forces that could undermine its recovery times. Revegetation efforts stability. No impact to the stability of the would include any of the methods pier would occur. described and would depend on the site characteristics following tree removal. 4.3.1.1.2 Effects of Stream Channel Park staff would utilize an adaptive Restoration management strategy to determine which restoration and revegetation methods are Flood Elevation and Frequency: most effective in rapidly achieving the Alternative B would have a negligible restoration goals as described in Chapter impact on flood elevation in the 2. Sufficient recovery of the channel downstream reaches of Cañada del restoration area would occur between Puerto Creek resulting from removal of implementation of the stages to mature eucalyptus trees from the riparian minimize ecological impacts and reduce corridor along an approximately 0.7 mile the potential for sediment transport to stretch of channel. The Park would the creek. The phased approach and the implement riparian restoration following revegetation efforts would minimize the a step-wise, phased approach removing short-term and long-term hydrologic eucalyptus trees from approximately 20 effects and reduce the potential for acres. Step 1 would include removal at increased flood elevations. the fill disposal sites (2.78 acres) and on 3.08 additional acres along lower Tree removal activities could result in Cañada del Puerto Creek and removal areas of exposed soils in some areas from subsequent restoration sites would which may be subject to increased runoff proceed at a pace set through monitoring from large storm events, and thus recovery of the previously restored potentially result in higher flood water areas. elevation. Implementation of Best Management Practices designed to The Park would implement a phased protect soil surfaces from increased approach to tree removal and riparian runoff are described Chapter 2. restoration to ensure that increased flood Implementation of the measures ensures elevations are negligible. Trees would that areas of bare soils are kept to a be carefully removed to minimize minimum and that soils are protected disturbance to the existing native from the erosive forces of rainfall vegetation, streambanks and soils. immediately following construction Woody native vegetation and understory activities. vegetation would remain intact following tree removal. In some areas Sediment Transport Dynamics: native species from the Southern Alternative B would result in a Riparian Woodland habitat would be negligible adverse impact related to planted at the site to speed recovery sediment transport dynamics. Riparian
Environmental Consequences - 136
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
restoration in Cañada del Puerto Creek determined by Park and The Nature would take place with a phased Conservancy (TNC) biologists, and the approach. Eucalyptus removal would assessment of recovery would be based begin at the most downstream reach of on successful recruitment of native the creek and would proceed upstream in vegetation, distribution of federal and sectional reaches. Sufficient recovery of state listed species, and the extent of the channel restoration area would occur eucalyptus and other woody species. between implementation of the stages to minimize ecological impacts and reduce The Nature Conservancy owns a the potential for sediment transport to majority of the Cañada del Puerto Creek the channel and alteration of sediment watershed above the Park Project Area. transport dynamics. In addition, the It is reasonable to assume that TNC has Park would implement Best an interest in continued restoration of the Management Practices designed to Cañada del Puerto Creek area. These reduce potential construction-related plans could include additional removal impacts and reduce the potential soil of eucalyptus trees and other introduced deposition to the channel. Riparian species along the riparian corridor, and restoration activities would not increase the timing could be similar to that or decrease sediment transport during proposed by the Park. If TNC high flows and therefore would not implements a riparian restoration plan cause aggradation or redirect the stream during the same 20-year period as the channel. Park, then there is the potential for cumulative impacts related to hydrology. 4.3.1.1.3 Cumulative Impacts However, the impact would be negligible assuming that TNC would Wetland and floodplain restoration implement similar Best Management through partial removal of the berm and Practices as those used in the Park. removal of the fill material from the wetland at Prisoners Harbor would not 4.3.1.1.4 Conclusions (including result in cumulative impacts in the impairment) watershed. There are no other past or reasonably foreseeable projects that Activities under Alternative B would would potentially affect restoration have negligible to moderate adverse efforts. impacts and major beneficial impacts on water resources. Stream channel restoration activities conducted by the Park independent of Partial removal of the berm would have other restoration activities in the a minor adverse impact due to the watershed would not result in increase in flood frequency. Removal of cumulative impacts. The Park would the berm would increase the frequency use their adaptive management strategy of flooding near the archaeological site, to ensure that riparian restoration areas however, associated depths and are sufficiently recovered to ensure there velocities are predicted to be lower due are no cumulative impacts resulting from to the enlarged area of the left bank the phased approach to the Park’s floodplain. In addition, the flat surface restoration efforts. Recovery would be of the floodplain and the thick vegetation
Environmental Consequences - 137
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement would slow flood waters further. As a stormwater and flood storage by result, the depth and velocity of connecting the channel to the floodplain floodwaters are not predicted to result in and by increasing wetlands by 3.1 acres. substantial velocities on the upstream Periodic flooding would be beneficial to face of the archeological site. the hydrologic and ecological Nevertheless, Alternative B includes functioning of the restored wetlands and design of structural protection to would meet the project objective of mitigate hydraulic forces to protect this reconnecting the stream channel and its high value site. All other park floodplain. Placement of fill material infrastructure of concern – i.e. the road, removed from the former wetland at the historic warehouse, and dock -- are on disposal site could result in some short- the farthest margins of the floodplain term, construction-related impacts and would not experience erosive associated with potential runoff. velocities from overbank flows any Implementation of Best Management greater than those at the village site. Practices would keep the impacts Though the historic warehouse and negligible. village site are marginally located within the regulatory 100-year floodplain, a Stream channel restoration would have a Floodplain Statement of Findings would negligible impact on flood elevation in not be required because the location of the downstream reaches of Cañada del the historic warehouse and village site Puerto Creek resulting from removal of are integral to their significance; and mature eucalyptus trees from the riparian therefore, the procedural manual does corridor. There could be short-term not apply (Procedural Manual 77-2: impacts related to tree removal; however Floodplain Management, V.B). the Park would minimize impacts Furthermore, a Wetland Statement of through monitoring and adaptive Findings would not be required because management strategies describe in this restoration alternative would qualify Chapter 2. Monitoring of the restoration as an "excepted action" under section efforts and proceeding with the phased 4.2.1(h) of NPS Procedural Manual #77- implementation only after the previous 1: Wetland Protection. section has recovered sufficiently would minimize the potential impacts on flood Partial removal of the berm would slow elevation. velocities, but have a negligible impact related to the potential change in stream The level of impact on water resources sediment transport dynamics. Although would not result in impairment of park flow velocities would decrease with resources that fulfill the specific removal of the berm, the decrease would purposes identified in the enabling not result in conditions where sediment legislation or that are essential to the aggradation would cause redirection of natural or cultural integrity of the park. stream flow and impacts to cultural resources or park infrastructure. 4.3.1.1.5 Mitigation and Monitoring
Partial berm removal and removal of fill Alternative B includes design and from the former wetland would have a installation of structural protection to beneficial effect related to increased mitigate potential hydraulic forces to
Environmental Consequences - 138
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
protect the archaeological site. The The ranges of fluctuation in the protection measures are included as part groundwater wells were approximately of the project; and therefore, no 1.5 to 2.0 feet over a 12-month period. additional mitigation measures are Tidal influence on the water table was required related to flood elevation and minor, typically 0.0 to 0.2 feet over a flood frequency. tide cycle. Wells closest to the coast occasionally fluctuated as much as 0.4 The Park would use their adaptive feet during the driest periods. The water management strategy to ensure that ranged from fresh water to slightly riparian restoration areas are sufficiently brackish. Water depth in the wetland fill recovered to ensure there are no area averaged approximately two to cumulative impacts resulting from the three feet below the ground surface. phased approach to restoration as Overall, the water level data indicate that described in Chapter 2. Recovery would the fill areas at Prisoners Harbor have a be determined by Park and The Nature high potential for successful wetland Conservancy biologists, and the restoration, because the site had a assessment of recovery would be based reliable water source very near to ground on successful recruitment of native surface and the depth the groundwater vegetation, distribution of federal and has a very narrow range and the depth to state listed species, and the extent of groundwater had a very narrow range eucalyptus and other woody species. during this near-average rainfall year.
4.3.1.2 Wetlands and Floodplains 4.3.1.2.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration Wetlands are among the most valuable resources because they provide many Alternative B would have a major functions and values in a complex beneficial effect on wetlands and ecosystem. The function of wetlands floodplains. Before significant include water quality improvement; landscape modifications in the 19th and stream shading; flood attenuation; 20th century, the Project Area supported shoreline stabilization; ground water about 12 acres of wetland habitat. exchange; and habitat for aquatic, Historic wetlands appear to have terrestrial, migratory, and rare plant and included brackish to freshwater animal species. The wetlands function conditions at the mouth of Cañada del to remove pollutants and filter nutrients Puerto Creek which opened occasionally and organic matter. onto a floodplain wetland west of the existing stream channel and northeast of Groundwater monitoring indicates that the dock access road. Approximately the groundwater in the Project Area is 6.5 acres of wetland exists today contained in the alluvial aquifer. including the intertidal beach area. The Information gathered from monitoring existing wetlands in the Project Area results during November 2005-October provide a vital link between land and the 2006 indicate that groundwater rose ocean, exporting nutrients and organic steadily in response to wet season rain material to the ocean. events and peaked in May and steadily declined once rainfall stopped in June.
Environmental Consequences - 139
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
The Project Area supports a rare type of surrounding wetland and floodplain coastal wetland known as a freshwater complex increasing the likelihood of floodplain marsh and associated stream developing a sustainable and functioning channel. Alternative B would increase wetland. Native vegetation including the wetland habitat by 3.1 acres through willow (Salix lasiolepis) and saltgrass removal of sand and rock fill material (Distichlis spicata), bulrush (Scirpus and planting native vegetation. The 3.1 spp), rush (Juncus spp), and other acres of restored wetland would include herbaceous wetland plants would be open-water habitat, native willow forest, planted in their appropriate depth-to- emergent marsh and saltgrass meadow water table zones. Use of species native and would restore 2/3 of the buried to the site and found within the reference wetlands. wetland would increase vegetation survival and function of the wetland. The Park Service has completed groundwater monitoring for the alluvial Fill material removed from the wetland aquifer under Prisoners Harbor. would be placed at one of the two Groundwater wells were monitored designated disposal sites. The disposal daily, seasonally, and interannually to sites would be located outside the 100- determine variations in water table depth year floodplain, and therefore would not and salinity and to determine if water affect the amount of wetlands in the level data indicated that the filled areas floodplain. at Prisoners Harbor could be restored to a properly functioning and sustainable Removal of the existing berm along the wetland. Results indicated that the site channel would reconnect the Riverine has a reliable water source very near the wetland (Cañada del Puerto Creek) to ground surface, with only a narrow the existing 6.5 acres of wetlands and range of groundwater depth. Results floodplain and to the newly created 3.1 also indicated that an average excavation acres of wetland. A review of historic depth of two to three feet of fill would information suggests that the original re-expose the water table and re-create stream channel was shallow and spread the wetland conditions in the excavated approximately 75 to 100 feet wide across areas. The depth of excavation would most of the floodplain. Removal of the vary depending on the type of wetland berm would allow the creek to overflow habitat desired: up to 6 feet for open its bank and utilize more of the historic water habitat to approximately 2 feet for floodplain and provide increased creation of saltgrass meadow. Park floodwater storage capacity. The berm ecologists studied the wetlands adjacent removal would allow flood waters to to the fill area and determined that the inundate the floodplain, the existing existing wetlands have water table wetlands, and the restored wetland, dynamics and water sources that support which would inundate the created willow, bulrush, and transitional wetland and allow for hydrologic input wetlands. Ecologists would use the on a more regular basis. The more adjacent wetlands as a reference wetland frequent inundation from floodwaters to serve as a model for how to excavate and the continual flow of groundwater the filled site to create a functioning from the alluvial aquifer would ensure wetland. Plantings would mimic the the viability of the existing wetlands and
Environmental Consequences - 140
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement the restored wetland. This gain in 4.3.1.2.2 Effects of Stream Channel connectivity between the creek, the Restoration floodplain, and the wetlands would represent a major beneficial effect. Alternative B would include 20.2 acres of riparian restoration along Cañada del Minor temporary impacts to the Puerto Creek over a 20-year timeframe. wetlands surrounding the restored The restoration activities would have no wetlands may occur; however, no impact on the areal extent of wetlands or permanent loss or filling of existing floodplains. Restoration activities would wetlands would occur during removal be designed to minimize disturbance to and stockpile of excavated sediments. the native woody plant understory, Removal of the fill from the wetland and stream banks, or soils. Revegetation from the berm would require use of would occur through natural recruitment heavy equipment to excavate from the Project Area’s seed bank, approximately 19,800 cubic yards of reproduction of remnant native plants on sand and rock fill. Removal activities the floodplain, and active revegetation may temporarily impact jurisdictional including seeding and planting or a waters. BMPs would be instituted to combination of both. There would be no minimize construction impacts, and impact to wetlands or floodplains from these measures are described in Chapter removal of eucalyptus trees and channel 2. Activities within wetlands could restoration efforts. require permits from the US Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the 4.3.1.2.3 Cumulative impacts Clean Water Act, the California Coastal Commission under the federal Coastal None of the past or foreseeable future Act, and the California Regional Water activities in the Cañada del Puerto Creek Quality Control Board under Section appear to affect the existing wetland or 401 of the Clean Water Act. A Wetland floodplain at Prisoners Harbor. Statement of Findings would not be Restoration of wetlands and required because this restoration reconnection of the creek to its alternative would qualify as an floodplain would result in a net increase "excepted action" under section 4.2.1(h) in wetland habitat. of NPS Procedural Manual #77-1: Wetland Protection. Overall, there The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate would be minor adverse effects during Change (IPCC 2007) predicts mean construction and temporary impacts to global sea level rises between 0.6 feet wetlands and the stream channel. and 2 feet over the next century. The However, over the short-and long-term, Park assumes a 0.7-foot rise in sea level the benefits of 3.1 acres of restored over the next 50 years or approximately wetlands and the reconnection of the half the moderate B2 emission scenario creek channel to the floodplain and for the year 2099 from the 2007 IPCC wetland would offset the temporary synthesis report. The rise in sea level construction impacts. The increase in could change the frequency and areal wetlands and floodplain would represent extent of tidal inundation of the lower a major beneficial effect. estuary and could possibly convert some of the existing and restored wetlands
Environmental Consequences - 141
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
from a palustrine freshwater wetland 4.3.1.2.5 Mitigation and Monitoring type to more intertidal wetland. A rise in sea level would likely increase the No mitigation measures or monitoring extent of areas subject to tidal requirements are needed beyond those inundation. However, given the described in Chapter 2. topography of the Project Area; it is unlikely that the overall extent of 4.3.1.3 Water Quality wetland habitat would increase and upland habitat decrease as a result of a Wetlands and floodplains play a key role rise in sea level. in protecting and improving water quality as wetland plants and soils have 4.3.1.2.4 Conclusion (including the capacity to store and filter pollutants. impairment) Calm wetland waters with flat surfaces and flow characteristics allow nutrients Removal of the fill material and re- and sediments to settle out of the water creation of 3.1 acres of wetland and column. Wetlands which filter or store removal of the berm would result in a sediments for extended periods of time major beneficial effect. Creation of an may undergo changes. Sediments may additional 3.1 acres of wetland increases eventually fill in wetlands and the total wetlands in the Prisoners eventually modify function over time. Harbor area to 9.6 acres. The existing Very little surface water quality berm located adjacent to the western information exists for Cañada del Puerto bank of the creek would be removed. Creek, and surface water quality data are Removal of the berm would reconnect not available. However, inferences can the left bank floodplain with the channel be made regarding water quality and allow floodplain storage as well as conditions. Currently a vast majority of hydrologic input on a more frequent the watershed is in a near natural state; basis. As result, Alternative B would be therefore prevailing surface water beneficial to the hydrologic and chemistry is the result of interaction ecological functioning of the restored between precipitation, soils, biota, and wetlands and would meet the project bedrock. It is unlikely that high objective of reconnecting the stream concentrations of metals, organics, or channel and its floodplain. other contaminants occur in the watershed. Near the outlet to Cañada del Removal of eucalyptus trees within the Puerto Creek, there is a marine influence riparian corridor along Cañada del on water quality. Cyclic salts and Puerto Creek would not affect wetlands occasional overwash may increase or floodplains. salinity levels to slightly brackish for surface groundwater, especially in the The level of impact on wetlands would dry season. not result in impairment of park resources that fulfill the specific More specific information is known purposes identified in the enabling about sediment concentrations in the legislation or that are essential to the watershed. Sediment concentrations are natural or cultural integrity of the park. generally considered high due to the combination of variable bedrock
Environmental Consequences - 142
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement geology, steep slopes, degraded soil potential impacts associated with structure due to historic over-grazing, incidental release of sediments to the and intense precipitation events. Impact adjacent wetlands and the stream thresholds therefore focus on change in channel. These measures are described sediment concentrations in the Project in Chapter 2. Area based on the functional capacity of the wetlands and the floodplains to filter Moving equipment and materials to and and store sediments. from staging areas could disturb vegetation and soils between the staging 4.3.1.3.1 Effects of wetlands and area and restoration areas. Repeated floodplain restoration disturbance of vegetation and soils (i.e., due to vehicle passes) during these Alternative B would have a moderate activities in areas where native beneficial water quality impact from vegetation occurs would cause surface restoration of 3.1 acres of wetland and erosion and temporarily affect water reconnection of Cañada del Puerto Creek quality if unseasonable precipitation to its floodplain. Fill removal from the occurred. Construction activities could wetland and berm removal would result result in relatively large areas of exposed in a total of 9.6 acres of wetland and soils which may be subject to increased floodplain. Improved hydraulic runoff from large storm events and thus connectivity would be expected to have potentially higher flood water elevation. a beneficial effect on water quality with Construction activities would occur flows exceeding the 10-year flow event. during the driest part of the year to The wetlands and floodplain would store ensure groundwater levels would be low; floodwaters by spreading water out over and the risk of storm events would be the area, decreasing flow velocities and low. Implementation of Best allowing sediments to settle out. There Management Practices designed to is no water quality monitoring data protect soil surfaces from increased available to determine sediment loads or runoff are described in the storm water nutrient content of Cañada del Puerto management mitigation measure Creek, so the total sediment load described in Chapter 2. reduction and water quality improvement cannot be calculated. Methods to control invasive vegetation Water quality improvement is based on include herbicide spraying, which has the known benefits wetlands and negligible or no affect on water quality floodplain storage provide. because the Park would utilize Best Management Practices for herbicide use. Removal of 17,400 cubic yards of fill from 3.1 acres of former wetlands and 4.3.1.3.2 Effects of Stream Channel partial removal of the berm would have Restoration a short-term adverse impact on water quality during fill removal and disposal Alternative B could have a moderate activities. Water quality impacts during adverse effect related to water quality construction would be characterized as primarily due to the potential for negligible, because Best Management increased water temperatures resulting Practices would be instituted to reduce from the removal of riparian cover.
Environmental Consequences - 143
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Throughout the Project Area, well 4.3.1.3.3 Cumulative impacts developed riparian vegetation provides shade and cover to the stream corridor There are currently no other proposed buffering the temperature regime of the projects that would have the potential to surface water. In the lower reaches the cause cumulative impacts. vegetation is primarily native woody species and in the upper reaches the Stream channel restoration activities vegetation is primarily made up of conducted by the Park independent of mature eucalyptus trees. Removal of other restoration activities in the eucalyptus trees along the channel could watershed would not result in increase water temperature; however the cumulative impacts. The Park would project would proceed following a use their adaptive management strategy phased approach. This would allow to ensure that riparian restoration areas recovery and partial revegetation with are sufficiently recovered to ensure there native plants before work would proceed are no cumulative impacts to water to the next section immediately quality, specifically increased water upstream. Park and The Nature temperatures result from the phased Conservancy managers would use an approach to the Park’s restoration adaptive management strategy including efforts. Recovery would be determined evaluation plant species, percent cover by Park and The Nature Conservancy and percent bare ground, and litter (TNC) managers, and the assessment of accumulations to determine when the recovery would be based on successful subsequent phase of the riparian recruitment of native vegetation, restoration should occur. distribution of federal and state listed species, and the extent of eucalyptus and Vegetation removal could have a short- other woody species. term negligible adverse impact on water quality. Caution would be taken during The Nature Conservancy owns a vegetation removal to limit soil majority of the Cañada del Puerto Creek disturbance and protect existing watershed above the Park Project Area. understory vegetation. Water quality It is reasonable to assume that TNC has impacts during construction would be an interest in continued restoration of the characterized as negligible adverse, Cañada del Puerto Creek area. These because BMPs would be instituted to plans could include additional removal reduce potential impacts associated with of eucalyptus trees and other introduced incidental release of sediments to the species along the riparian corridor, and adjacent wetlands and the stream the timing could be similar to that channel. proposed by the Park. If TNC implements a riparian restoration plan Methods to control of invasive during the same 20-year period as the vegetation include herbicide spraying Park, then there is the potential for and hand cutting, which have negligible cumulative impacts related to surface or no affect on water quality because the water quality, primarily water Park would utilize Best Management temperature. Practices for herbicide use.
Environmental Consequences - 144
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.3.1.3.4 Conclusion (including described in Chapter 2. No additional impairment) monitoring would be required.
Activities under Alternative B would 4.3.2 Biological Resources have no impact to negligible adverse effects and moderate beneficial impacts Introduction on water quality. Alternative B would result in a moderate Under Alternative B, the Park would beneficial effect related to water quality. remove all of the cattle corrals, restore Partial removal of the berm and removal 3.1 acres of palustrine wetlands and of the fill material from the former deepwater habitat, remove eucalyptus, wetland would provide increased control invasive species, construct a hydrologic connectivity between the protective barrier around the stream and the wetland and floodplain. archeological site, and improve the Access of floodwater and storm flow to visitor experience. A portion of the the wetlands would result in a decrease berm would be removed and the creek in sediment loads and a decrease in connected to its floodplain. nutrient concentrations. 4.3.2.1 Wildlife Removal of the eucalyptus trees from the riparian corridor could result in a 4.3.2.1.1 Birds moderate adverse impact to water quality from potential increases in water 4.3.2.1.1.1 EFFECTS OF WETLANDS AND temperature, and it could result in short- FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION term negligible adverse impacts due to sedimentation resulting from vegetation Wetlands restoration in Alternative B removal efforts. The riparian corridor would result in an increase of wetland restoration could also result in a habitat from 6.5 acres currently to 9.6 cumulative impact related to water acres total. The resulting 3.1 acres of quality if The Nature Conservancy restored wetlands would include open- implements stream channel restoration water habitat, native willow forest efforts during the same 20-year time habitat, emergent marsh habitat, and period. saltgrass meadow habitat. The expansion of wetland area would support The level of impact on water quality an increase in use of such species as would not result in impairment of park marsh wrens, song sparrows, Virginia resources that fulfill the specific rails, great blue and green herons, as purposes identified in the enabling well as migratory waterfowl. An legislation or that are essential to the increase in wetland habitats would natural or cultural integrity of the park. provide greater foraging opportunities for both dabbling and diving ducks, 4.3.1.3.5 Mitigation and Monitoring other species of waterfowl, marsh- associated passerines, and shorebirds Best Management Practices and the that utilize nearby areas during different adaptive management strategy are times of the year. The expansion of
Environmental Consequences - 145
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
wetlands may also increase breeding greater number of species and greater potential for species such as American wetland function (eg. filtering suspended coot, mallard, Canada goose and resident solids from the water). The access road and Neotropical migrant passerines. from the pier to the Central Valley is Newly restored wetlands would provide well traveled by day visitors and also foraging habitat for raptor species, such researchers, TNC staff, and island bald eagles, red-tailed and sharp-shinned residents and the corral area is mowed hawks, and osprey, which would be on a regular basis. After the corrals are drawn to the site by small vertebrates removed a buffer of willow trees would such as mice and snakes. During peak be planted along the road. A gap in the annual migration periods, waterfowl willows would be created across the road such as brants, teals, and pintails, and from the warehouse and near the historic shorebirds such as stilts, killdeer, blackwood acacia tree creating a wildlife plovers, and gulls, which stop at Santa viewing area and rest area. Removing Cruz Island to rest, feed, and in some the corrals and creating a willow buffer cases over-winter, would use the would minimize human disturbance and restored wetlands in search of refuge and maximize the quality of restored wetland food. The availability of an additional habitat (Figure 2.5). With corrals 3.1 acres of wetlands in this alternative removed and the wetland revegetated, a would have a moderate beneficial impact portion of the wetland would have a on birds. 200’ to 300’ buffer from human disturbance (Figure 2.5). The area with Berm removal and restored hydrological a 300’ buffer would support waterfowl connectivity between Cañada del Puerto breeding and feeding (Table 2.2). The Creek and its floodplain would allow for majority of wetland area would have a more frequent flood events to reach the 100’ buffer from human disturbance. wetland than with the berm intact. This would support some waterfowl During these flood events, nutrients and breeding. organic material would be delivered to the wetland, resulting in enhanced Activities associated with wetland productivity, habitat, and water quality restoration would involve disturbance of functions. These functions would existing wildlife habitats through benefit birds using the wetlands to a vegetation clearing, earth moving, and greater extent than without berm disposal of fill. These activities would removal and restored flood regime. cause adverse impacts on habitat in and adjacent to the wetland restoration area, Studies have shown that wetland species, fill disposal areas, and equipment particularly waterfowl, are sensitive to staging areas. Habitat disturbance would human disturbance (Castelle et al., 1992; occur on 3.1 acres in the Built Up unit, Burke and Gibbons, 1995; Semlitsch, 1.74 acres of Eucalyptus, and 1.04 acres 1997). A buffer between wetland habitat of Fennel. These habitat types are non- and human activity can reduce the native and altered habitats, but all the negative impact of human activity on areas that would be disturbed during waterfowl breeding and feeding. With construction provide some suitable increasing distance from human activity habitat for several species of birds. there is a higher likelihood of finding a Thus, despite short-term minor adverse
Environmental Consequences - 146
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
impacts on habitat, restoration of birds in close proximity. If pre- wetlands would provide beneficial construction surveys were conducted effects that would outweigh the negative prior to initiating construction, it would effects from destruction of current ensure that construction activities do not habitat. There would also be localized disrupt breeding, nesting, or habitat disturbance from foot traffic fledging/rearing and reduce impacts to during vegetation clearing, excavation of short-term negligible to minor adverse. fill, fill disposal, non-native plant control, and collection of plant materials; The Island scrub-jay breeds in coast live however, these areas would likely be oak woodland or chaparral with a high minimal and limited to the area scrub oak component, forages in wooded immediately surrounding the work areas habitats throughout the island, and in the with negligible adverse impacts. Project Area occurs particularly within the arroyo willow riparian forest. The Construction activities for wetland new willow forest habitat that would be restoration and human presence would created with wetland restoration could cause temporary displacement and provide additional, albeit small, foraging disturbance of birds for the several habitat for the jay, constituting minor months duration of construction. beneficial impacts. The bald eagle would Impacts to bird species would be minor also benefit from newly restored adverse and range from noise and wetlands which would provide disturbance during construction to additional foraging habitat. Habitat and changes in the available habitats on site use patterns of the brown pelican are not over the short- and long-term. Species likely to change in the long-term. are expected to return to the area after However, there may be short-term construction is completed. Some species adverse effects on the brown pelican may be prevented from using the during restoration activities with resources on the project site due to increased noise and activity and from the habitat alteration or until the new equipment loading/unloading area sited wetlands and revegetated fill areas on the other side of the pier close to the become established and mature, and new beach where brown pelicans rest. bird species are likely to occupy the new Additionally, the Island scrub-jay and habitats. bald eagle could also be temporarily disturbed by noise and activity during Impacts to nesting birds would be wetland restoration. Construction minimized due to timing of restoration activities would have short-term minor activities. Work would be initiated in adverse impacts on special status bird the late spring and completed in late species. summer or early fall. Much of this time period is after the spring bird breeding Enhanced visitor experiences at the season, although may coincide with restoration site could increase some fledging and rearing. Noise of disturbance of wildlife as visitors would truck operations or other heavy be likely to spend more time in the area equipment used for vegetation clearing, with the addition of two wayside earth moving, grading, and disposal of exhibits and a wetland viewing bench. fill could adversely impact breeding Birdwatchers may be attracted to spend
Environmental Consequences - 147
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement more time in the area since more birds phase. This strategy would minimize are likely to be present and use the ecological impacts, reduce the potential restored wetlands. The effects of public for sediment transport, and allow for access on wildlife can cause immediate availability of mature habitat for wildlife adverse responses such as flushing or species that use the area. avoidance, or more indirect or long-term responses such as altered behavior, Although a loss of mature riparian reduced health and productivity, and habitat, albeit consisting of non-native changes in abundance or species eucalyptus, would be an unavoidable composition. However, the amount of consequence of project implementation visitor use in the area would not be during the short-term with a temporal likely to change appreciably from loss of small areas of riparian habitat current levels. In this context, impacts along the Cañada del Puerto Creek on birds relative to existing conditions corridor between the time when would be expected to be negligible eucalyptus trees are removed and new adverse; however, the benefit of native riparian vegetation is established, additional wetland habitat would likely over the long-term naturally functioning outweigh the adverse effects of wildlife riparian acreage would increase. This viewing.. would benefit riparian-associated bird species, such as thrushes, warblers, 4.3.2.1.1.2 EFFECTS OF STREAM CHANNEL tanagers, sparrows, and vireos. RESTORATION Restoration of native riparian habitat would be beneficial in the long-term Riparian restoration in Cañada del because the areal extent would Puerto Creek would take place with a eventually increase from about 18.8 phased approach to eucalyptus removal. acres of native riparian habitat currently A total of 20.02 acres would be restored to 38.82 acres, which would more than to native riparian vegetation double the amount of native riparian communities consisting of Southern habitat over existing conditions. A Riparian Woodland and areas where it contiguous native riparian corridor intergrades into Island Chaparral. increases riparian value to breeding and Initially, habitat functioning of the migratory birds, as well as resulting in restored riparian communities (e.g., additional snags and cavities for cavity shading, bird habitat) would be nesters. Over the long-term, riparian somewhat limited due to the relatively restoration would have a moderate smaller stature of trees and the absence beneficial impact on birds. of snags and dead branches. Over time, habitat value would improve as the Loss of riparian habitat would be riparian habitat matures, and an increase supplanted by restoration of native in the areal extent of fully functioning riparian habitat in the long term. In the riparian vegetation would occur along short term, newly planted trees would Cañada del Puerto Creek. With the not have the same value as mature phased approach, NPS and TNC riparian habitat (i.e., established biologist would determine when native vegetative structure, older trees with vegetation becomes established before cavities), as it would take several restoration would proceed to the next decades for trees to mature. The loss of
Environmental Consequences - 148
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement mature riparian habitat would occur in plant communities that they originally phases, and possibly by the time the later foraged in or inhabited. Ultimately, phases are reached, habitat restored existing trees would be replaced by during earlier phases would be riparian species that would offer higher approaching maturity, thus reducing ecological value for wildlife. When impacts on cavity-nesting birds and newly restored riparian plant species other species to minor adverse. As become established and mature, existing native riparian habitat expands following and new birds species are likely to removal of eucalyptus, an increase in occupy the new habitats. foraging and breeding habitat for riparian associates (residents and The Island scrub-jay breeds in coast live Neotropical migrants) would be oak woodland or chaparral and forages expected. Mature riparian habitat would in wooded habitats throughout the provide structural refuge critical to island, particularly within the Arroyo passerine birds and other wildlife Willow riparian forest in the Project species. Area, and would benefit from riparian restoration. The ecological benefit of Construction activities during riparian removing eucalyptus trees from fill habitat restoration would have short- disposal and other areas include opening term minor adverse impacts on birds for the area for re-colonization by native several months during each phase of plant species, restoring riparian oak restoration. Work would be conducted woodland ecological function, and in summer after the spring bird breeding improving habitat for many species of season and fall before the rainy season. birds including the Island scrub-jay. An Impacts would be associated with noise additional 20.02 acres of native riparian and human disturbance from actions forest would be available for Island such as creek bank grading, removal of scrub-jays once all phases of restoration eucalyptus trees, depositing of fill and are completed. Bald eagles are known to grading at fill disposal areas, moving forage in riparian areas near rivers, thus equipment and materials to and from would benefit from the expanded areal staging areas, and revegetation activities. extent of native riparian vegetation. These activities would have temporary Riparian restoration under this adverse effects on birds, such as alternative would have long-term minor displacement and disturbance, although to moderate beneficial impacts on these restoration would be timed to occur after two special status species. The brown the end of the breeding season for avian pelican would not be affected by riparian species likely to use eucalyptus. restoration as it does not occupy this habitat type. There would also be changes in the available habitats on site over the short 4.3.2.1.1.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS and long term. The removal of eucalyptus would initially displace those Past activities which have impacted species that utilize eucalyptus habitat. birds mainly relate to alteration of Those species displaced by the removal habitat. Activities associated with of eucalyptus would return to the American and Mexican settlement of adjacent more structurally diverse native Santa Cruz Island in the nineteenth
Environmental Consequences - 149
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement century included the clearing and maintenance of facilities, and research farming of certain areas on the island; and monitoring. Prisoners Harbor is the establishment of non-native species considered the main access point to the such as eucalyptus trees; and the National Park isthmus area and The introduction of sheep, pigs, cattle, and Nature Conservancy property. Lands horses. Bird habitat was altered or owned by the National Park Service are destroyed through: overgrazing by fully open to visitor access and use, and sheep; the spread of non-native plants visitation has increased over the years to such as fennel and eucalyptus; the Project Area. Hikers use this area as introducing pigs which caused an access for day hiking and significant vegetation damage; backpacking, and scientific researchers vegetation type conversion from native and educational groups use this area to woodland and shrubland to non-native access the central valley. Other grasslands; and filling in a large portion recreation opportunities and uses of the of the wetland at Prisoners Harbor. area include beachcombing, fishing, picnicking, bird watching, viewing Bald eagles disappeared from the historic buildings, and beach access to Channel Islands by the early 1960’s due water sports including kayaking and to human impacts, primarily from the snorkeling. Birds could be disturbed and release of DDT into the ocean off the displaced temporarily while humans are Palos Verdes peninsula eventually present in an area. Monitoring of bald contaminating the regional food web and golden eagles provides important rendering eggs too fragile to reach data used for making decisions on maturity. Between 2002 and 2006, 61 management of these two species. bald eagles were released on Santa Cruz Present actions combined contribute Island. Today nearly 40 bald eagles negligible adverse cumulative impacts reside on Santa Cruz Island including on birds. four nesting pairs. Golden eagles historically were only visitors to Santa Future cumulative impacts to birds Cruz Island. They began colonizing the would include continued human island in the mid-1990’s, having presence via recreation, maintenance, discovered an abundant food supply in and research as are occurring presently. feral pigs. Golden eagles also preyed Restoration of the Cañada del Puerto upon foxes causing a precipitous decline Creek area on TNC land adjacent to and in the fox population. More than 40 upstream of the Prisoners Harbor golden eagles were relocated from Santa wetlands restoration area could be Cruz Island. Although there are no implemented, which would provide known nesting or juvenile golden eagles additional high quality native habitat for on the island, biologist are watchful for birds. Future actions would contribute any new golden eagle sitings. Past both negligible adverse and negligible actions combined have contributed beneficial cumulative impacts on birds. minor adverse cumulative impacts on birds. The additional impacts associated with Alternative B, as described above and as Present actions which could impact birds compared to past, present, and include public recreational activities, foreseeable future cumulative impacts,
Environmental Consequences - 150
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
would contribute moderate beneficial This alternative would have minor cumulative impacts on birds. beneficial impacts on two of the special status bird species in the Project Area, 4.3.2.1.1.4 CONCLUSION (INCLUDING the Island scrub-jay and the bald eagle, IMPAIRMENT) with restoration of wetlands and riparian habitat which would provide additional Alternative B would have negligible foraging habitat for both species. adverse to moderate beneficial effects on birds in the Project Area. Long-term The level of impact on birds would not moderate beneficial impacts would result result in impairment of park resources from 3.1 acres of wetland restoration, that fulfill the specific purposes which would support an increase in use identified in the enabling legislation or by many bird species for refuge and that are essential to the natural or forage. Long-term moderate beneficial cultural integrity of the park. impacts would also result from 20.02 acres of riparian restoration by 4.3.2.1.1.5 MITIGATION AND eradication of eucalyptus trees and MONITORING revegetation to re-establish native riparian plant communities. Riparian NPS and TNC biologists will survey restoration would benefit riparian- stands of eucalyptus trees identified for associated bird species by increasing removal for nests of federally protected riparian value to breeding and migratory or island endemic bird species. If birds, as well as resulting in additional protected or endemic nests of actively snags and cavities for cavity nesters. breeding birds are located, eucalyptus removal will not proceed until the end of Short-term negligible and minor adverse breeding season. effects would occur on existing wildlife habitats with disturbance and destruction The NPS spring and fall bird survey in from construction activities associated the Project Area will continue through with wetland and riparian restoration. construction and for five years post However, these impacts would be construction. Data collected in the bird outweighed by the availability of native surveys will be entered into the Park’s habitats with improved ecological landbird database. integrity once restoration is complete. 4.3.2.1.2 Mammals, reptiles, and There would also be short-term amphibians negligible and minor adverse effects on birds, including special status birds, 4.3.2.1.2.1 EFFECTS OF WETLANDS AND during construction activities for wetland FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION and riparian restoration as species would be temporarily disturbed or displaced by Wetlands restoration in Alternative B noise and human activity. Impacts to would result in an increase of wetland nesting birds would be minimized as habitat from 6.5 acres currently to 9.6 most activities would be scheduled after acres total. The resulting 3.1 acres of the spring breeding season. restored wetlands would include open- water habitat, native willow forest
Environmental Consequences - 151
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement habitat, emergent marsh habitat, and on the site. Populations would likely saltgrass meadow habitat. The adapt to long-term habitat changes and expansion of wetland area would support occupy suitable habitat as needed. an increase in use of mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. An increase in wetland Activities associated with wetland habitats would provide greater foraging restoration would involve disturbance of and refuge opportunities for the deer existing wildlife habitats through mouse, western harvest mouse, bats, and vegetation clearing, earth moving, and the island fox. The expansion of disposal of fill. These activities would wetlands may also increase breeding cause adverse impacts on habitat in and opportunities for species such as the adjacent to the wetland restoration area, Pacific tree frog which lays eggs in fill disposal areas, and equipment water and salamanders which lay eggs in staging areas. Habitat disturbance would moist places on land. Wetland occur on 2.1 acres in the Built Up unit, restoration in Alternative C would have 1.74 acres of Eucalyptus, and 1.04 acres long-term moderate beneficial impacts of Fennel. These habitat types are non- on mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. native and altered habitats, but all the areas that would be disturbed during Berm removal and restored hydrological construction provide some suitable connectivity between Cañada del Puerto habitat for several species of mammals, Creek and its floodplain would allow for reptiles, and amphibians. Thus, despite more frequent flood events to reach the short-term minor adverse impacts on wetland than with the berm intact. habitat, restoration of wetlands would During these flood events, nutrients and provide beneficial effects that would organic material would be delivered to outweigh the negative effects from the wetland, resulting in enhanced destruction of current habitat. There productivity, habitat, and water quality would also be localized habitat functions. These functions would disturbance from foot traffic during benefit wildlife using the wetlands to a vegetation clearing, excavation of fill, greater extent than without berm fill disposal, non-native plant control, removal and restored flood regime. and collection of plant materials; however, these areas would likely be Overall habitat extent, function and minimal and limited to the area quality would be improved with wetland immediately surrounding the work areas restoration. The new habitat would with negligible adverse impacts. provide ecologically functional hydroperiod, vegetation, and Construction activities for wetland microhabitat features for species that restoration and human presence would would occupy the wetlands. Loss of cause temporary displacement and habitat from construction, as well as disturbance of wildlife for the several long-term changes in habitat mosaics as months duration of construction. a result of wetland restoration would Impacts to mammals, reptiles, and result in adverse and beneficial effects amphibians would be minor adverse and on populations. In general, a suitable range from noise and disturbance during mix of habitat would exist for most, if construction to changes in the available not all, common species currently found habitats on site over the short and long
Environmental Consequences - 152
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement term. Species are expected to return to listed as species of concern or are the area after construction is completed. protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Some species may be prevented from Act, could occur in the Project Area. using the resources on the project site Removal of hollow snags as part of due to habitat alteration or until the new restoration construction and fill disposal wetlands and revegetated fill areas could have adverse effects on roosting become established and mature, and new habitat. Long-term effects would be wildlife species are likely to occupy the beneficial with additional open water new habitats. and emergent marsh habitat that would function as foraging areas and a reliable Construction activities could result in drinking water source. Impacts would mortality of reptiles and amphibians be negligible adverse over the short-term through individual animals being and minor beneficial over the long-term. crushed by construction equipment or being excavated from burrows or other The island fox could be affected by refugia during ground disturbing construction activities since it is known activities. These actions also have the to occur in the Project Area. If an potential to disrupt breeding cycles. individual is observed at the restoration Work would be initiated in the late site, proper mitigation measures would spring and completed in late summer or be employed to insure that impacts are early fall; this time period does not minimized or avoided. There could be coincide with salamanders which lay long-term minor beneficial effects with eggs in winter and hatch in early spring, the increase in wetland habitat, as island but it does coincide with lizard and fox is known to occupy coastal marshes. snake egg laying in late spring and summer and hatching in late summer and The deer mouse and western harvest early fall. Thus the potential exists for mouse could be adversely affected by crushing eggs and juveniles during wetland restoration activities as restoration construction. These described above. However, mitigation construction impacts would be short- measures, such as avoiding disturbance term, minor and adverse as it is likely of part of the known habitat so that a that few individuals or eggs would be portion of the population can survive affected. The tree frogs would not be until the restored wetland becomes affected as there would not be any work established, would reduce construction taking place in aquatic habitats. If impacts to negligible to minor adverse in preconstruction surveys are conducted the short-term. Long-term impacts could prior to construction, wildlife could be moderate beneficial with the either be relocated or encouraged to availability of 3.1 additional acres of leave the area, thus minimizing the wetlands for forage and cover. potential for construction-related mortality. The slender salamander inhabits coastal scrub communities, grasslands, oak Wetland restoration under Alternative B woodlands, and crevices under beach would have both adverse and beneficial driftwood and lays eggs in moist impacts on special status species. Bat terrestrial environments. In the Project species, some of which are federally Area, the slender salamander is known
Environmental Consequences - 153
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement to occur along moist banks of the stream, would apply and be negligible and thus it is not likely that wetland adverse. Since this species prefers dry restoration activities, which would occur habitats, it is not likely that wetland in the dry Built Up area, would restoration would provide any new adversely impact slender salamander habitat or beneficial effects. habitat or individuals. However, availability of 3.1 additional acres of 4.3.2.1.2.2 EFFECTS OF STREAM CHANNEL wetlands, which could provide moist RESTORATION breeding habitat, could have long-term minor beneficial impacts on the slender Riparian restoration in Cañada del salamander. Puerto Creek would take place with a phased approach to eucalyptus removal. The island fence lizard prefers open A total of 20.02 acres would be restored sunny areas, occurs along stream banks to native riparian vegetation and around human settlements, and lays communities consisting of Southern eggs in terrestrial environments. Thus it Riparian Woodland and areas where it is possible that construction activities intergrades into Island Chaparral. associated with wetland restoration Initially, habitat functioning of the could adversely impact this species as restored riparian community (e.g., described above, including disturbance shading, wildlife habitat) would be and mortality of individuals, crushing of somewhat limited due to the relatively eggs, and habitat destruction. These smaller stature of trees and the absence impacts would have short-term minor woody debris and ground litter. Over adverse consequences during time, habitat value would improve as the construction and long-term minor riparian habitat matures, and an increase adverse consequences since some habitat in the areal extent of fully functioning in the human settlement area would be riparian vegetation would occur along lost. However, enough suitable habitat Cañada del Puerto Creek. With the would remain for this species to inhabit. phased approach, NPS and TNC Island fence lizards are not likely to use biologist would determine when native newly restored wetland habitat, thus vegetation becomes established before restoration would not provide any restoration would proceed to the next beneficial impacts to this species. phase. This strategy would minimize ecological impacts, reduce the potential The Santa Cruz gopher snake occupies for sediment transport, and allow for grasslands, oak woodlands, dry riparian availability of mature habitat for wildlife habitat, and dry stream beds. In the species that use the area. Riparian Project Area it has been observed along restoration in Alternative B would have the stream, although it is possible that it long-term moderate beneficial impacts could occur in the dry Built Up area on mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. where wetland restoration would be implemented. It is likely that Although a loss of mature riparian construction would not impact the habitat, albeit consisting of non-native gopher snake. If individuals do inhabit eucalyptus, would be an unavoidable the Built Up area, then the impacts from consequence of project implementation construction activities described above during the short-term with a temporal
Environmental Consequences - 154
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
loss of small areas of riparian habitat would have short-term minor adverse along the Cañada del Puerto Creek impacts on wildlife for several months corridor between the time when during each phase of restoration. eucalyptus trees are removed and new Adverse effects would be associated native riparian vegetation is established, with noise and human disturbance from over the long-term naturally functioning actions such as creek bank grading, riparian acreage would increase. This removal of eucalyptus trees, depositing would benefit riparian-associated of fill and grading at fill disposal areas, species, all the reptiles and amphibians moving equipment and materials to and known to occur in the Project Area. from staging areas, and revegetation Restoration of native riparian habitat activities. These activities would have would be beneficial in the long-term temporary adverse effects, such as because the areal extent would displacement and disturbance, on species eventually increase from about 18.8 currently using eucalyptus habitats. acres of native riparian habitat currently There would also be changes in the to 38.82 acres, which would more than available habitats on site over the short double the amount of native riparian and long term. Ultimately, eucalyptus habitat over existing conditions. A trees would be replaced by native contiguous native riparian corridor riparian vegetation that would offer increases riparian value to wildlife that higher ecological value for wildlife. breeds and forages in this habitat. Over Species are expected to return to the area the long-term, riparian restoration would after construction is completed. have a moderate beneficial impact on mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. Construction activities could result in mortality of reptiles and amphibians Loss of riparian habitat would be through individual animals being supplanted by introduction of new crushed by construction equipment in riparian habitat, which would not have riparian habitats or being excavated from the same value as mature riparian habitat burrows or other refugia during ground (i.e., established vegetative structure) disturbing activities. These actions also during the short-term. The loss of have the potential to disrupt breeding existing mature non-native riparian cycles. Work would be conducted habitat would occur in phases, and during the summer and fall months; this possibly by the time the later phases are time period does not coincide when reached, habitat restored during earlier salamanders lay eggs in winter and hatch phases would be approaching maturity. in early spring, but it does coincides with As native riparian habitat expands lizard and snake egg laying in late spring following removal of eucalyptus, and summer and hatching in late summer wildlife would benefit from an increase and early fall. Thus the potential exists in higher quality foraging and breeding for crushing eggs and juveniles during habitat. Riparian habitat also provides riparian construction. These structural refuge critical to mammals, construction impacts would be short- reptiles, and amphibians. term, minor and adverse as it is likely that few individuals or eggs would be Construction activities during removal of affected. The tree frog eggs and small areas of eucalyptus riparian habitat tadpoles would not be affected as there
Environmental Consequences - 155
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement would not be any work taking place in other construction activities would, the stream. If preconstruction surveys therefore, not have any impacts on the are conducted prior to construction, deer mouse and harvest mouse. wildlife could either be relocated or However, there may be short-term minor encouraged to leave the area, thus beneficial effects with the availability of minimizing the potential for open, immature restored riparian habitat construction-related mortality. and fill disposal areas that can be used for forage and cover, particularly during Riparian restoration under Alternative B the first phase of riparian restoration would have both adverse and beneficial which would occur close to known impacts on special status species. Bat mouse habitat in Prisoners Harbor. As species, some of which are federally restored riparian habitat matures, these listed as species of concern or are species may no longer occupy these protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty habitats. Act, could occur in the Project Area. Removal of hollow snags as part of The slender salamander inhabits coastal restoration construction and fill disposal scrub communities, grasslands, oak could have adverse effects on roosting woodlands, and crevices under beach habitat. Long-term effects would be driftwood and lay eggs in moist beneficial with additional riparian and terrestrial environments. In the Project oak woodland habitat that would Area, the slender salamander is known function as roosting areas once trees to occur along moist banks of the stream, mature. Impacts would be negligible thus riparian restoration activities would adverse over the short-term and have minor adverse effects on habitat, negligible beneficial over the long-term. individuals, and breeding as described above. However, availability of 20.02 The island fox could be affected by acres of restored riparian habitat, which construction activities since it is known could provide high quality breeding to occur in the Project Area; however, if habitat, would have long-term moderate an individual is observed at the beneficial impacts on the slender restoration site, proper mitigation salamander. measures would be employed to insure that impacts are minimized or avoided. The island fence lizard prefers open There could be long-term minor sunny areas, occurs along stream banks beneficial effects with the 20.02-acre and around human settlements, and lays increase in riparian habitat as island fox eggs in terrestrial environments. Thus it is known to occupy Southern Riparian is possible that construction activities Woodland. associated with riparian restoration could adversely impact this species as The deer mouse and western harvest described above, including disturbance mouse could also be adversely affected and mortality of individuals, crushing of by riparian restoration. These two eggs, and habitat alteration. These species generally occupy marshy, grassy, impacts would have short-term minor and weedy habitat in the Project Area, adverse consequences during thus are not as likely to occur in forested construction and long-term minor riparian habitat. Eucalyptus removal and beneficial consequences with restored
Environmental Consequences - 156
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement riparian areas that would provide new association with golden eagles. Golden streamside habitat. eagles historically were only visitors to Santa Cruz Island. They began The Santa Cruz gopher snake occupies colonizing the island in the mid-1990’s, grasslands, oak woodlands, dry riparian having discovered an abundant food habitat, and dry stream beds. In the supply in feral pigs. Golden eagles also Project Area it has been observed along preyed upon foxes causing a precipitous the stream, thus there could be short- decline in the fox population. By the term minor adverse impacts during late 1990’s predation by golden eagles riparian restoration as described above, caused a decline in the Santa Cruz Island and long-term, minor, beneficial effects fox population by over 90%. In 2000 from newly available riparian habitat. there were fewer than 70 foxes in the wild. Captive breeding in the island’s 4.3.2.1.2.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Central Valley was begun as insurance against the loss of foxes from golden Past activities which have impacted eagle predation. Foxes were bred in mammals, reptiles, and amphibians, captivity and released into the wild. mainly relate to alteration of habitat. Today there are more than 410 foxes Activities associated with American and living in the wild island-wide. Golden Mexican settlement of Santa Cruz Island eagles have been relocated from Santa in the nineteenth century included the Cruz Island and there are no longer any clearing and farming of certain areas on known nesting or juvenile golden eagles the island; the establishment of non- on the island. Relocation of golden native species such as eucalyptus trees; eagles from the island has increase and the introduction of sheep, pigs, survivorship of island foxes. Past cattle, and horses. Wildlife habitat was actions combined have contributed altered or destroyed through: moderate adverse cumulative impacts on overgrazing by sheep; the spread of non- mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. native plants such as fennel and eucalyptus; introducing pigs which Present actions which could impact caused significant vegetation damage; mammals, reptiles, and amphibians vegetation type conversion from native include public recreational activities, woodland and shrubland to non-native maintenance of facilities, and research grasslands; and filling in a large portion and monitoring. Prisoners Harbor is of the wetland at Prisoners Harbor. considered the main access point to the Between 2005 and 2006 feral pigs were National Park isthmus area and The eradicated from the island. Over 5000 Nature Conservancy property. Lands pigs were dispatched. Since 2006 no pig owned by the National Park Service are sign, tracks, or other indication of living fully open to visitor access and use, and pigs has been observed on the island. visitation has increased over the years to the Project Area. Hikers use this area as Introduction of nonnative fauna to Santa an access for day hiking and Cruz Island in the past has also backpacking, and scientific researchers negatively affected native island fauna. and educational groups use this area to This effect is best understood with the access the central valley. Other decline of the Island fox and its negative recreation opportunities and uses of the
Environmental Consequences - 157
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
area include beachcombing, fishing, would also result from 20.02 acres of picnicking, bird watching, viewing riparian restoration by eradication of historic buildings, and beach access to eucalyptus trees and revegetation to re- water sports including kayaking and establish native riparian plant snorkeling. Wildlife could be disturbed communities. Riparian restoration and displaced temporarily while humans would benefit wildlife species by are present in an area. Present actions increasing riparian value as the habitat combined contribute negligible adverse matures and an increase in the areal cumulative impacts on mammals, extent of fully functioning riparian reptiles, and amphibians. communities.
Future cumulative impacts on mammals, Short-term negligible and minor adverse reptiles, and amphibians would include effects would occur on existing wildlife continued human presence via habitats with disturbance and destruction recreation, maintenance, and research as from construction activities associated are occurring currently. Restoration of with wetland and riparian restoration. the Cañada del Puerto Creek area on However, these impacts would be TNC land adjacent to and upstream of outweighed by the availability of native the Prisoners Harbor wetlands habitats with improved ecological restoration area could be implemented, integrity once restoration is complete. which would provide additional high quality native habitat for wildlife. There would also be short-term Future actions would contribute both negligible and minor adverse effects on negligible adverse and negligible mammals, reptiles, and amphibians, beneficial cumulative impacts on birds. including special status species, during construction activities for wetland and The additional impacts associated with riparian restoration as species would be Alternative B, as described above and as temporarily disturbed or displaced by compared to past, present, and noise and human activity or could be foreseeable future cumulative impacts, crushed and killed during ground would contribute moderate beneficial disturbing activities. Restoration actions cumulative impacts on mammals, also have the potential to disrupt reptiles, and amphibians. breeding cycles as some work would coincides with lizard and snake egg 4.3.2.1.2.4 CONCLUSION (INCLUDING laying periods. IMPAIRMENT) Specials status species would benefit Alternative B would have negligible from wetland or riparian restoration or adverse to moderate beneficial effects on both. Wetland restoration would provide mammals, reptiles, and amphibians in additional habitat for bats, island fox, the Project Area. Long-term moderate deer mouse, harvest mouse, and slender beneficial impacts would result from 3.1 salamander. Riparian restoration would acres of wetland restoration, which provide additional habitat for bats, island would support an increase in use by fox, slender salamander, island fence wildlife for breeding, refuge and forage. lizard, and gopher snake. Long-term moderate beneficial impacts
Environmental Consequences - 158
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
The level of impact on mammals, Monitoring the Santa Cruz Island fox reptiles, and amphibians would not result will continue under the Santa Cruz in impairment of park resources that Island Fox Recovery Plan. fulfill the specific purposes identified in the enabling legislation or that are Western Harvest Mouse essential to the natural or cultural (Reithrodontomys megalotis) integrity of the park. Avoidance measures may include 4.3.2.1.2.5 MITIGATION AND avoiding disturbance of part of the MONITORING known habitat, so that a portion of the population can survive until the restored Santa Cruz Island Fox (Urocyon wetland becomes established. If post- littoralis santacruzae) excavation monitoring shows a considerable decrease in western harvest If an individual(s) Santa Cruz Island fox mouse numbers in the project area is observed within the immediate compared with 2007 pre-project vicinity of the Project Area, Park staff or monitoring (Drost and Gelczis, 2007) the on-site project supervisor would stop translocating harvest mice from another operations. NPS biologists would then area such as Scorpion Valley should be notified immediately in order to meet this concern. determine the potential impacts that could result from the attendant human 4.3.2.1.3 Aquatic Invertebrates and Fish activity. Specific mitigation measures would then be developed to best avoid or 4.3.2.1.3.1 EFFECTS OF WETLANDS AND minimize impacts from conflicts FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION between humans and island fox. Mitigation could include, but is not Wetlands restoration in Alternative B limited to, restricting park operations or would result in an increase of wetland visitor use within the active den area or habitat from 6.5 acres currently to 9.6 relocating individual foxes to more acres total. The resulting 3.1 acres of remote areas of the island. restored wetlands would include open- water habitat, native willow forest Staging areas would be thoroughly habitat, emergent marsh habitat, and inspected by the construction contractor saltgrass meadow habitat. The to ensure no foxes have taken refuge expansion of wetland area would likely within stockpiled materials or support use by insects with aquatic life equipment. If a fox is found and does stages, such as flies, beetles with aquatic not leave on its own accord, NPS larval stages, caddisflies, and stoneflies. biologist would be informed and the fox Abundance and areal extent of aquatic would be removed in a manner invertebrate species would likely determined by the biologist that would increase with the increase in aquatic cause the least amount of harm and habitat, and there would be long-term stress to the animal. minor beneficial impacts. Additional wetlands acreage would also create new breeding habitat for freshwater mosquitoes. Mosquitoes are of
Environmental Consequences - 159
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement particular concern because they are connectivity between the creek and its primary vectors of infectious diseases, floodplain, would inundate the such as West Nile Virus and floodplain at regular frequencies. These encephalitis, which affect humans, temporary wet areas would not likely livestock, and wildlife. provide aquatic habitat or support aquatic invertebrates beyond possible Construction activities associated with short-term periods. Thus riparian wetland restoration would not impact restoration would have negligible aquatic invertebrates since none of the beneficial impacts on aquatic actions would occur in wet invertebrates. environments. There is the potential for mortality of some individual insects, Construction activities associated with such as beetles, while they are in their riparian restoration would not directly terrestrial life stages to be crushed by impact aquatic invertebrates since none construction equipment or excavated of the actions would occur in the creek from burrows during ground disturbing and would be conducted during the dry activities. These impacts would be season. There is the potential for short-term and negligible adverse. mortality of some individual insects, such as beetles, while they are in their As there are no known permanent fish terrestrial life stages to be crushed by species in Cañada del Puerto Creek or construction equipment or excavated the remnant wetland, there would not be from burrows during ground disturbing any adverse or beneficial impacts on fish activities. These impacts would be from wetland restoration. Fish that short-term and negligible adverse. could wash over the boulder bar during a high tide, as has been observed in the Grading creek banks after eucalyptus past in the remnant wetland, may or may removal, berm removal, and fill disposal not be present at the time when has the potential to negatively affect restoration activities are implemented. It aquatic organisms through incidental is unknown whether new wetland sediment discharge during earthmoving habitat, particularly the open water and removal of trees that provide habitat, would be populated by fish in overhanging shade and habitat future. complexity in surface waters. Increased turbidity and sedimentation could also 4.3.2.1.3.2 EFFECTS OF STREAM CHANNEL be caused by the release of fine sediment RESTORATION during the first few years after each phase of restoration is completed until Riparian restoration in Cañada del roots of newly revegetated plants Puerto Creek would take place with a become established and stabilize creek phased approach to eucalyptus removal. banks. Best Management Practices A total of 20.02 acres would be restored would be implemented to reduce such to native riparian vegetation impacts to negligible and adverse. communities, but this would not provide aquatic habitat or affect use by aquatic Construction could lead to releases of invertebrates. Partial berm removal, fuels, oils, and other construction-related which would restore hydrologic hazardous materials, which could reach
Environmental Consequences - 160
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement surface or groundwater. Accidental spills have contributed minor adverse from construction equipment could also cumulative impacts on aquatic result in increased contaminant levels. invertebrates. Even if materials were released at lethal levels, project timing would be limited There are no present actions that would to the dry season which would likely contribute cumulative impacts on aquatic protect aquatic invertebrate populations invertebrates. from adverse effects. In addition, implementation of a spill prevention and The foreseeable future action by TNC protection plan would outline measures which would continue restoration of the to reduce the potential for spills and Cañada del Puerto Creek area on TNC isolate accidental spills should they land adjacent to and upstream of the occur. The plan would also identify and Prisoners Harbor wetlands restoration limit areas of contaminant storage and area by removal of eucalyptus trees transfer to outside of sensitive aquatic would have positive effects on the creek habitats. Thus impacts on aquatic and aquatic habitat. Future actions invertebrates from possible hazardous would contribute negligible beneficial material spills would be negligible and cumulative impacts on aquatic adverse. invertebrates.
As there are no known permanent fish The additional impacts associated with species in Cañada del Puerto Creek, Alternative B, as described above and as there would not be any adverse or compared to past, present, and beneficial impacts on fish from riparian foreseeable future cumulative impacts, restoration. would contribute minor beneficial cumulative impacts on aquatic 4.3.2.1.3.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS invertebrates. As there are no known permanent fish species in Cañada del Past activities which have impacted Puerto Creek, there would not be any aquatic invertebrates occurred with associated cumulative impacts on fish. American and Mexican settlement of Santa Cruz Island in the nineteenth 4.3.2.1.3.4 CONCLUSION (INCLUDING century. Activities associated with IMPAIRMENT) settlement that altered aquatic habitats included establishment of non-native Alternative B would have negligible eucalyptus trees which use large adverse and negligible to minor amounts of water, filling in a large beneficial effects on aquatic portion of the wetland at Prisoners invertebrates in the Project Area. Long- Harbor, and straightening Cañada del term minor beneficial impacts would Puerto Creek with the aid of stone result from 3.1 acres of wetland retaining walls thus diminishing the restoration, which would support an lagoon that had wandered through the increase in use by aquatic invertebrates. area. Such decrease in areal extent of Long-term negligible beneficial impacts surface water has resulted in less would also result from 20.02 acres of available habitat for aquatic riparian restoration which would benefit invertebrates. Past actions combined aquatic invertebrates by reconnecting
Environmental Consequences - 161
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
hydrologic function between Cañada del Puerto Creek and its floodplain. 4.3.2.2 Vegetation
There would also be short-term 4.3.2.2.1 Native Vegetation negligible adverse effects on aquatic Communities organisms during construction activities for wetland and riparian restoration as 4.3.2.2.1.1 EFFECTS OF WETLANDS AND there is the potential for mortality of FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION some individual insects while they are in their terrestrial life stages to be crushed Alternative B would result in an increase by construction equipment or excavated of wetland communities from 6.5 acres from burrows during ground disturbing currently to 9.6 acres total with wetlands activities. restoration. A portion of the Built Up area would be converted to wetlands Restoration activities could have through eradication of non-native negligible adverse impacts on aquatic vegetation, removal of rock and sand fill habitat from sediment release during from 2/3 of the former wetland area, and construction or during the first few years revegetation to create the desired after each phase of restoration until wetland plant communities. The riparian vegetation becomes established. resulting 3.1 acres of restored wetland Negligible adverse impacts can also be would include open-water, native willow cause by fuel and oil spills from forest, emergent marsh, and saltgrass construction equipment that could reach meadow. Wetland restoration would surface or groundwater. result in improved functioning and ecological value of native vegetation As there are no known permanent fish communities in the Project Area. The species in Cañada del Puerto Creek or wetland would be sub-irrigated by the remnant wetland, there would not be groundwater; fill would be removed to any adverse or beneficial impacts on fish sufficient depth to reconnect the restored from riparian or wetland restoration. wetland to the groundwater, forming the hydrologic basis for sustaining the The level of impact on aquatic wetlands and vegetation communities. invertebrates and fish would not result in impairment of park resources that fulfill Additionally, the created wetland would the specific purposes identified in the have restored hydrological and enabling legislation or that are essential geomorphic connectivity to Cañada del to the natural or cultural integrity of the Puerto Creek with partial berm removal, park. improving the natural processes that form and sustain wetland vegetation 4.3.2.1.3.5 MITIGATION AND over time. The 10-year flood event MONITORING would overtop the channel and flood waters would move into the floodplain The Park and its contractor will develop and into the created wetlands. The 100- a Storm Water Pollution Control Plan to year flood event would do the same be implemented during fill excavation thing. The restored wetlands in the and eucalyptus removal. Project Area are anticipated to have
Environmental Consequences - 162
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
enhanced productivity, habitat, and occur in the Built Up area, which is a water quality functions compared to the previously disturbed, non-natural wetlands in their existing degraded vegetation community. Although some condition. Under this alternative, native plant species would be cleared, wetland restoration with partial berm such as saltgrass, many non-native removal would have major beneficial species would be removed as well, such impacts on native vegetation as kikuyu grass and Bermuda grass. communities. Additionally, the major This disturbance would cause minor beneficial impacts in Alternative B adverse impacts on existing native would affect native vegetation to a vegetation and minor beneficial effects greater extent than Alternative C as more on non-native vegetation. Revegetation acres of wetlands would be restored. and restoration of the site with native vegetation would provide beneficial Restoration activities would involve effects that would compensate for and revegetation and other actions to restore outweigh the negative effects from ecological function and integrity as vegetation removal. rapidly as possible following restoration. Before starting earthmoving activities, Removal and disposal techniques for project staff would collect island-native non-native plants on the restoration site, vegetation materials (seeds, plugs, including hand pulling, hand- or cuttings) for post-construction staking, machine-excavation, chain sawing, propagation and planting. After grading burning, chipping, and/or application of is complete, willow, saltgrass, bulrush, herbicide, would likely disturb, damage, rush, and other herbaceous wetland or destroy native vegetation on-site as plants that exist in nearby reference well. However, as the whole restoration wetlands would be planted in their site would be cleared of vegetation appropriate depth-to-water-table zones. during earth moving activities, Project staff would also collect seed vegetation disturbance during exotic from Santa Cruz Island upland plants for plant control would be inconsequential. use in vegetating fill disposal sites. There may, however, be some vegetation Collection of native plant material would disturbance in areas immediately minimally disturb native plants due to adjacent to the restoration site, for possible trampling of adjacent vegetation example, during transport of machines by foot traffic and cutting small amounts for excavation or from herbicides that of targeted plant species, which would may land on plants other than target have negligible adverse effects on native species. However, disturbance of native vegetation. vegetation in such adjacent areas would likely be minimal as Best Management Activities associated with wetland Practices would be followed. restoration would involve disturbance of existing vegetation communities through Moving equipment and materials to and non-native plant removal, vegetation from staging areas, removal of fill, clearing, earth moving, grading, staging grading, and disposal of fill would areas for construction equipment and disturb vegetation in and adjacent to materials, and disposal of fill. Site these areas. Repeated disturbance of disturbance during earth moving would vegetation (i.e., due to vehicle passes)
Environmental Consequences - 163
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
during these activities in areas where levels. During wet periods, high flows plants are not cleared would cause on floodplains may remove young damage to plants and destruction of the willows, and allow re-colonization of vegetation mat. The majority of low-lying areas by more-hydrophytic vegetation disturbance would occur in plant communities, particularly Bulrush- the previously disturbed Built Up area, Cattail. Berm removal would have minimizing adverse impacts on major beneficial impacts on native vegetation. There would also be vegetation since the natural flood regime localized vegetation disturbance from and ecological processes in vegetation foot traffic during wetland restoration, communities would be restored. fill disposal, and access of the staging area; however, these areas would likely Activities associated with partial berm be minimal and limited to the areas removal would involve disturbance of immediately surrounding the sites. Site existing vegetation in the area disturbance would be minimized to the surrounding the deconstruction site. greatest extent possible by concentrating Heavy equipment would remove the the area of disturbance associated with artificial berm material from the creek restoration actions to the minimum bank and grade the bank to a height necessary to complete the project, thus consistent with naturally-formed creek impacts would be negligible and banks. Site disturbance on 100 feet of adverse. berm during deconstruction would occur in the Arroyo Willow vegetation With part of the berm removed from the community. Some native plant species left bank of the creek, higher magnitude would be cleared, which would cause flows (approximately at the 10-year adverse impacts on existing vegetation. flood level) would overtop the left bank However, since the area has been and spread across the floodplain. previously disturbed when the berm was Removal of the berm would increase the built, and revegetation and restoration of frequency of overbank flooding the site would result in replacement of substantially compared to leaving the destroyed plants, the impact would be berm intact. With the berm in place, the reduced to minor and adverse in the riparian system of the left bank only short-term. rarely, if ever, receives hydraulic input directly from the river, whereas, under With berm removal, high-value natural conditions it would occur archeological resources at Prisoners roughly once every 10 years. With Harbor (the Chumash Village site) regular frequency of flooding events would need to be protected. The site restored to the Arroyo Willow would be protected by stabilizing it in a vegetation community, which occurs manner to deflect potential flood waters adjacent to the left bank of channel, away. Protection would include there could be some vegetation dieback, placement of a small earth, log, and change in species composition, or other cobble berm around the site or packing effects affecting vegetation that has not earth, log, and cobble against the base of been flooded at regular intervals for the site and planting with compatible years. This could be similar to the native plants. Disturbance of native natural fluctuations in groundwater vegetation in the Arroyo Willow
Environmental Consequences - 164
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement community would comprise 164 feet of macrophyllum). Where Southern protective barrier during construction Riparian Woodland intergrades into activities, which would constitute a Island Chaparral, target species would short-term negligible adverse impact. include manzanita (Archtostaphylus insularis), ceonothus (Ceonothus A variety of special status plant species megacarpus v. insularis), mountain associated with various habitat types mahagony (Cercocarpus betuloides), occur on Santa Cruz Island. While only and wild cherry (Prunus ilicifolia subsp. one special status plant species is known lyonii). Revegetation would occur to occur currently in the Project Area, through natural recruitment from the the Santa Cruz Island silver lotus, site's seedbank, reproduction of remnant restoration activities could alter the native plants on the floodplain, and amount of habitat available for future active revegetation including seeding colonization by special status plant and planting. species. Restoration actions that increase the areal extent or reduce Initially, habitat functioning of the nonnative species cover in target habitats restored riparian community (e.g., could increase the potential for special shading, bird habitat) would be status species to colonize the Project somewhat limited due to the relatively Area. However, none of the special smaller stature of trees and the absence status species on Santa Cruz Island of snags and dead branches. Over time, occupy wetland habitats, thus it is not habitat value would improve as the expected that there would be any re- riparian habitat matures, and an increase establishment by special status species in in the areal extent of fully functioning the restored wetland. riparian vegetation would occur along Cañada del Puerto Creek. Sufficient 4.3.2.2.1.2 EFFECTS OF STREAM CHANNEL recovery of the channel restoration area RESTORATION would occur between implementation of the stages to minimize ecological Riparian restoration in Cañada del impacts and reduce the potential for Puerto Creek under Alternative B would sediment transport to the creek. There take place with a phased approach to would be major beneficial impacts to eucalyptus removal. Trees would be native vegetation from riparian removed from downstream to upstream restoration. and from the hillside toward the stream bank so as to protect existing native Activities associated with riparian vegetation and disturb the stream bank restoration could disturb existing native and soils as little as possible. A total of vegetation communities through 20.02 acres would be restored to native vegetation clearing and transport of riparian vegetation communities. construction equipment and materials. Eucalyptus would be replaced with Site disturbance during removal of species typical of Southern Riparian eucalyptus trees would occur in the Woodland including oak (Quercus Eucalyptus habitat type, which is a agrifolia), cottonwood (Populus previously disturbed, non-native trichocarpa and P. fremontii), willow vegetation community. Although some (Salix spp.) and maple (Acer native plant species may be disturbed or
Environmental Consequences - 165
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement destroyed, such as coyote brush and disturbance from foot traffic during mulefat, many non-native species would riparian restoration; however, these areas be removed as well, such as kikuyu grass would likely be minimal and limited to and English ivy, as well as eucalyptus. the areas immediately surrounding the This disturbance would cause minor work sites. Such impacts would be adverse impacts on existing vegetation; minor and adverse in the short-term however, revegetation and restoration of during the construction period. the site would provide beneficial effects that would outweigh the negative effects Although fill disposal is an action from vegetation disturbance. associated with wetland restoration, the Additionally, care would be taken not to fill areas would be located in the riparian disturb existing native woody plants. corridor, but above the 100-year The eucalyptus would be replaced with floodplain. Fill disposal would occupy willow stakes along the streambank, and 2.78 acres at two distinct sites in acorns, seeds from ceonothus, Eucalyptus and Fennel community manzanita, wild cherry and other types. Disturbance to existing native appropriate species in more upland and non-native vegetation at the disposal areas. sites would result from truck delivery of fill material, turn-around areas used by In order to fulfill the goal of trucks, potential temporary stockpiles, reconnecting the creek with its and the placement of fill for long-term floodplain and restoring ecological storage. Trees and brushy material in functioning of the wetland, Alternative B areas to be filled would be cut prior to would remove the low artificial berm these activities. Additionally, small that severed the hydraulic connection amounts of fill material may be used in between lower Cañada del Puerto Creek several other locations to reinforce road and its floodplain. Restored hydrologic beds or fill in small disturbed upland function would support and sustain areas located on the east side of the obligate wetland vegetation in the creek above and below the creek restored wetland as well as improve crossing. Some fill material would be ecological conditions for restored used in the construction of a protective riparian vegetation communities. barrier around the archeological site. The fill disposal areas would be compacted, Moving equipment and materials to and recontoured, and revegetated with native from staging areas would disturb upland and riparian plant species. The vegetation between the staging area and ecological benefit of removing the non- restoration areas. Repeated disturbance native trees include opening the area for of vegetation (i.e., due to vehicle passes) re-colonization by native plant species during these activities in areas where and restoring riparian oak woodland native vegetation occurs would cause ecological function, improving habitat damage to plants and destruction of the for many species of birds including the vegetation mat. Care would be taken to Island scrub-jay and animal species transport equipment on unvegetated including the island fox. Impacts on surfaces, such as roads and dry stream vegetation in the fill disposal areas bed, thus minimizing adverse impacts. would be minor and adverse in the short- There would also be localized vegetation
Environmental Consequences - 166
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement term and moderate and beneficial over villages, and may have deliberately set the long-term. fires for vegetation management purposes. Impacts also occurred and The Santa Cruz Island silver lotus, were greatly accelerated with American special status species, is common on settlement of Santa Cruz Island in the rocky slopes, exposed ridgetops, sandy nineteenth century. Activities associated flats and washes, gravel floodplains, with settlement included the clearing and chaparral, coastal scrub, and riparian farming of certain areas on the island; communities. In the Project Area, a few the establishment of non-native species plants occur in the dry creek bed such as eucalyptus trees; and the adjacent to the southern most eucalyptus introduction of sheep, pigs, cattle, and stand. Additionally, silver lotus plants horses. Of these activities, the one that are common in the dry creek bed would most impact the native vegetation upstream of the Project Area. No was the introduction of sheep. By 1875, activity is anticipated in the creek while there were an estimated 60,000 sheep on eucalyptus trees are removed for riparian the island. In 1939, a systematic roundup restoration. Equipment would access the of the sheep was begun. By 1980, after adjacent eucalyptus stand from the road, decades of overgrazing by sheep, all of not from the creek. Trees would be the island’s plant communities had been felled to avoid falling in the creek in this adversely affected. These effects area so as to avoid impacting the silver included changes in population structure lotus. Thus there would not be any and species diversity, and changes in impacts on the silver lotus. species distribution. Additionally, the rapid removal of cattle and sheep are Riparian restoration would not provide thought to have played an important role any new habitat for re-establishment of in the large fennel expansion that other special status species in the Project occurred. Introducing pigs to the island Area. The 13 special status plants that caused significant vegetation damage as occur on Santa Cruz Island, not pigs disturbed the soils and ate corms, including the silver lotus, all occupy bulbs, and acorns. Type conversion upland habitat types, such as coastal from native woodland and shrubland to bluffs, dry or moist canyons, rocky cliffs non-native grasslands occurred during and ridges, chaparral, and scrub. No this era. By 2006 all feral pigs were new special status plants would be eradicated from the island allowing for expected to occupy the Project Area as a recovery of native vegetation. At result of riparian restoration. Prisoners Harbor, the entire area at the mouth of the Cañada del Puerto Creek 4.3.2.2.1.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS was landscaped with grasses and trees planted in rows, a large portion of the Past activities which have impacted wetland was filled, eucalyptus trees were native vegetation likely first occurred planted, and sheep and cattle ranching from the manipulation and use of plant occurred. Past actions combined have communities by Native Americans prior contributed major adverse cumulative to the arrival of Americans and impacts on native vegetation. Mexicans who harvested plants for food, may also have altered habitats near their
Environmental Consequences - 167
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Present activities which could impact is foreseeable that additional riparian native plant communities include public restoration could be implemented. recreational activities and road Future actions would contribute both maintenance. Prisoners Harbor is negligible adverse and minor to considered the main access point to the moderate beneficial cumulative impacts National Park isthmus area and The on native vegetation. Nature Conservancy property. Lands owned by the National Park Service are The additional impacts associated with fully open to visitor access and use, and Alternative B, as described above and as visitation has increased over the years to compared to past, present, and the Project Area. Hikers use this area as foreseeable future cumulative impacts, an access for day hiking and would contribute moderate beneficial backpacking, and scientific researchers cumulative impacts on native vegetation. and educational groups use this area to access the central valley. Other 4.3.2.2.1.4 CONCLUSION (INCLUDING recreation opportunities and uses of the IMPAIRMENT) area include beachcombing, fishing, picnicking, bird watching, viewing Alternative B would have negligible historic buildings, and beach access to adverse to major beneficial effects on water sports including kayaking and native vegetation communities in the snorkeling. Hiking outside of trails can Project Area. Long-term major trample and crush native vegetation and beneficial impacts would result from 3.1 is usually most noticeable immediately acres of wetland restoration, which adjacent to hiking trails and high use would improve functioning and areas. The use of these areas also ecological value of native vegetation compacts the soil, which locally communities in the Project Area. Long- increases water run-off and soil erosion. term major beneficial impacts would The constant disturbance of trails also result from 20.02 acres of riparian facilitates the spread and establishment restoration by eradication of eucalyptus of invasive non-native plant species. trees and revegeation of native plants to Similar effects are seen with road restore native riparian vegetation grading and maintenance. Present communities. With berm removal, the actions combined contribute negligible hydrological connectivity of the system adverse cumulative impacts on native between Cañada del Puerto Creek and vegetation. the new wetlands and riparian areas would be restored. Restored Future cumulative impacts to native hydrological connectivity would allow plant communities would include native plant communities to function recreation and road maintenance which naturally and sustainably over the long- are occurring presently and would term and fully meet project objectives. continue in the future, as well as Additionally, the major beneficial continued restoration of the Cañada del impacts in Alternative B would affect Puerto Creek area on TNC land adjacent native vegetation to a greater extent than to and upstream of the Prisoners Harbor Alternative C as more wetland area wetlands restoration area. While no would be restored. specific plans have yet been proposed, it
Environmental Consequences - 168
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Short-term negligible and minor adverse Hoffmann’s rock-cress(Arabis effects would occur with construction hoffmannii), box-leaved bedstraw activities associated with wetland and (Galium buxifolium), island rush-rose riparian restoration and non-native plant (Helianthemum greenei), Santa Cruz control which would disturb or destroy Island malacothrix (Malacothrix existing vegetation. However, these indecora), island malcothrix (M. adverse effects would be balanced or squalida), and Santa cruz Island lacepod outweighed by the beneficial effects of (Thysanocarpus conchuliferus). If one the restoration efforts. of the listed species is observed in the Project Area and it is possible that There would be no impacts to the Santa impacts could occur from project Cruz Island silver lotus or other special activities, then project operations would status plant species. Restoration cease until appropriate mitigation could activities would take place in the area be enacted. Mitigation could include, where silver lotus plants occur but care but is not limited to, clearly marking the would be taken not to impact them, and location of the plant(s) and restricting no new habitat would be created in park operations or visitor use within a which any of the special status plants on limited distance of the plant(s) during Santa Cruz Island can re-establish. the implementation phase. Additionally all listed plant locations found will be The level of impact on native vegetation identified with a GPS device and would not result in impairment of park appropriate data forms filled out for each resources that fulfill the specific occurrence or local population. purposes identified in the enabling legislation or that are essential to the California state listed species natural or cultural integrity of the park. Santa Cruz Island silver lotus (Lotus 4.3.2.2.1.5 MITIGATION AND argophyllus niveus) MONITORING Known occurrences of Santa Cruz Island Federally listed species silver lotus in the Project Area will be located and clearly marked. Contractors A botanical survey of the Project Area and NPS personnel will be apprised of was conducted in August 2008 and no the location and no project activity will federally listed species were found. The take place that could impact the plant. state listed Santa Cruz Island silver lotus (Lotus argophyllus niveus) was found in Post-project monitoring will include the dry creek bed in a number of placement of monitoring plots in the locations at the upper end of the Project Project Area using methodology Area. developed by USGS (Drost and McEachern [in draft]). Data collected During implementation personnel from plots will be included in the Park’s working within the Project Area will be releve database. Permanent line trained to identify the six listed species transects may be installed in the Project known to occur in the project action area Area following the methodology of the (USGS quad Santa Cruz Island C), Park’s I&M Vegetation Monitoring
Environmental Consequences - 169
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Program. Data collected from transects would be removed with fill. The active will be entered into the Park’s vegetation removal of invasive plants and seeds data base and be included in I&M would greatly reduce their populations at Vegetation Monitoring Report. the restoration site, allowing for increased establishment of native 4.3.2.2.2 Non-Native Vegetation vegetation, an increase in native species diversity and abundance, and increased Proposed actions in Alternative B would ecosystem integrity and function. Thus affect the extent of invasive plant species wetland restoration would have long- through 1) increasing disturbance, which term moderate beneficial impacts as can encourage expansion of species non-native species would be eradicated adapted to disturbance; 2) removal or from areas where corrals would be eradication of invasive plant species removed and from much of the Built Up occurrences; and 3) changing physical area that would be converted to conditions such that viability of existing wetlands. occurrences and potential for establishment or expansion is affected, Restoration activities could import either positively or negatively. noxious weed propagules on construction machinery. Heavy While not all non-native plant species equipment, however, would be required are invasive or are documented to have to be cleaned and weed-free before negative effects on native plant species entering the Project Area. Noxious communities or wildlife habitats, weed removal would be conducted as vegetation communities dominated by part of restoration actions, reducing the natives are considered to have more potential for widespread invasion as a ecological integrity and be perhaps more result of construction activities. likely to support native wildlife through providing habitat, food, and other Changes in hydrologic conditions which important relationships. would result in a wetter site would reduce the potential for establishment of 4.3.2.2.2.1 EFFECTS OF WETLANDS AND kikuyu grass and other non-native FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION species found in the area. It is possible that invasive species adapted to wet Extensive ground disturbance and conditions could establish in the new creation of new open areas during wetlands; however, since such species restoration activities could result in the do not yet occur at Prisoners Harbor, and colonization of the disturbed ground by Best Management Practices would be kikuyu grass and other non-native practiced so that they are not introduced species. However, prior to to the area, it is unlikely that the new commencement of wetland restoration, wetlands would be invaded by non- invasive non-native species would be native species. aggressively removed from the site. Non-native plant species would be removed on 3.1 acres of the Built Up community type. Additionally, many non-native seeds in the soil seed bank
Environmental Consequences - 170
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.3.2.2.2.2 EFFECTS OF STREAM CHANNEL Woodland ecological function. With the RESTORATION removal of eucalyptus trees and fennel in the fill disposal areas, 2.78 acres of non- Riparian restoration in Cañada del native vegetation would be removed, and Puerto Creek would take place with a there would be a moderate beneficial phased approach. Eucalyptus removal impact. would begin at the most downstream reach of the creek and would proceed Disturbed soil generally attracts upstream in sectional reaches. infestation by fast-growing invasive Approximately 1737 eucalyptus trees weed species with widely dispersed would be removed and 20.02 acres of the propagules. Fill placement would be a Eucalyptus habitat type would be target for new establishment of weedy restored to native riparian vegetation species. Some fill hauled from the types. Such widespread removal of wetland restoration site would contain eucalyptus trees would have major propagules of noxious weed species, beneficial impacts on non-native such as Kikuyu grass. Non-native vegetation. species could spread and become established on the fill in areas where Revegetation during the phased such species may not already occur. approach to eucalyptus removal and Their proximity to relatively healthy riparian restoration would occur either vegetation communities would represent through natural recruitment from the a new threat to the native habitats. If fill site's seedbank, reproduction of remnant containing propagules of weed species native plants on the floodplain, or active would be placed at least a foot under the revegetation including seeding and final grade of the area, growth of the planting. Areas restored during early imported propagules could be avoided. phases would be susceptible to This, along with follow-up non-native reinvasion by eucalyptus from adjacent plant control and revegetation to stands that would not have yet been establish native plant species, would restored, especially if relying on natural reduce impacts of disturbing ground and recruitment for revegetation, which fill disposal to negligible to minor would take longer than active planting of adverse. native species. Monitoring and continued eucalyptus control would need Partial berm removal would result in to occur for successful restoration. ground disturbance and creation of new open areas during deconstruction Although fill disposal is an action activities that could result in associated with wetland restoration, the colonization by non-native species. fill areas would be located in or near the Revegetating and restoring the creek riparian corridor. Site preparation would bank with native vegetation should include the removal of 122 non-historic provide competition for non-native eucalyptus trees in the designated fill species. Along with continued non- disposal areas. The ecological benefit of native plant control, the area of berm removing the trees include opening the removal would provide 100 feet of area for re-colonization by native plant restored creek bank vegetation species and restoring Southern Riparian community. Impacts on non-native
Environmental Consequences - 171
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement species from berm removal would be fennel has been an ongoing effort in the minor and beneficial over the long-term, east portion of the Central Valley, but could be negligible adverse in the although full control has not yet been short-term due to ground disturbance achieved. Additionally, in 2008 the during deconstruction. TNC treated all fennel plants growing within 10 feet of roads on their land, 4.3.2.2.2.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS including within the Project Area, with herbicide. Since 2004, there has been an Past activities which have impacted non- ongoing effort to control kikuyu grass in native vegetation occurred with the corral area and among willow trees American and Mexican settlement of in the lower Cañada del Puerto Creek. Santa Cruz Island in the nineteenth Past actions combined have contributed century. Activities associated with moderate adverse cumulative impacts on settlement included the clearing and non-native native vegetation. farming of certain areas on the island; the establishment of non-native species Present activities which could impact such as eucalyptus trees; and the non-native native vegetation consist of introduction of sheep, pigs, cattle, and ongoing invasive plant control. The horses. Past grazing and human Park currently has a three year project to disturbance have allowed the transport treat 10 priority weed species on the east of weed seeds to Santa Cruz Island and end and the isthmus of Santa Cruz has resulted in the current weed Island. Priority species include fennel, infestation on the island. Additionally, yellow star thistle, pampas grass, the rapid removal of cattle and sheep are Harding grass, arundo, eucalyptus, thought to have played an important role Peruvian pepper tree, Italian stone pine, in the large fennel expansion that tamarisk, and European olive. In the occurred. Introducing pigs to the island Project Area, there is an ongoing effort caused significant vegetation damage as to control kikuyu grass in the corral area pigs disturbed the soils and ate corms, and among willow trees in the lower bulbs, and acorns. Type conversion Cañada del Puerto Creek. The Nature from native woodland and shrubland to Conservancy has an on-going effort to non-native grasslands occurred during control fennel along the road to the this era. At Prisoners Harbor, the entire Central Valley. On the negative side, area at the mouth of the Cañada del human activities continue to provide the Puerto Creek was landscaped with most likely vector of transporting weeds grasses and trees planted in rows, a large from mainland sources to Santa Cruz portion of the wetland was filled, Island. Present actions combined eucalyptus trees were planted, and sheep contribute minor beneficial cumulative and cattle ranching occurred. impacts on non-native vegetation.
There have been past actions which have Future cumulative impacts to non-native also had beneficial impacts on non- plant communities would include native vegetation. By 2006 all feral continued restoration of the Cañada del pigs were eradicated from the island, Puerto Creek area on TNC land adjacent allowing for recovery of native to and upstream of the Prisoners Harbor vegetation. Treatment of non-native wetlands restoration area. TNC may
Environmental Consequences - 172
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
propose additional removal of species. However, any new colonization eucalyptus and other introduced species would be removed as restoration and along the creek above the furthest revegetation efforts are completed. upstream extent of the proposed project. While no specific plans have yet been The level of impact on non-native proposed, it is foreseeable that additional vegetation would not result in riparian restoration could be impairment of park resources that fulfill implemented. Conversely, ongoing and the specific purposes identified in the future human activities could introduce enabling legislation or that are essential weeds from the mainland to the island. to the natural or cultural integrity of the Future actions would contribute minor park. beneficial cumulative impacts on native vegetation. 4.3.2.2.2.5 MITIGATION AND MONITORING The additional impacts associated with Alternative B, as described above and as Best Management Practices described in compared to past, present, and section 2.2.2.4.1 will be followed to foreseeable future cumulative impacts, prevent the transport of unwanted weedy would contribute moderate beneficial species to the island. cumulative impacts on non-native vegetation. The Project Area will be surveyed by NPS and TNC biologists for fennel, 4.3.2.2.2.4 CONCLUSION (INCLUDING kikuyu grass and eucalyptus each spring. IMPAIRMENT) New occurrences of each species will be treated for five years following project Alternative B would have negligible completion. adverse to major beneficial effects from eradication and control of non-native 4.3.3 Cultural Resources vegetation in the Project Area. Long- term major beneficial effects would 4.3.3.1 Archeological Resources result from 20.02 acres of riparian restoration in which 1737 eucalyptus Under Alternative B – 2/3 Wetland trees would be eradicated, as well as Restoration with Partial Berm Removal, eucalyptus removal on fill disposal sites. the Park would restore 3.1 acres of the Long-term moderate beneficial impacts former wetland; remove the existing would also result from 3.1 acres of cattle corrals and relocate the scale wetland restoration by removal of all house to its pre-1960s location; remove a non-native species on the site. portion of the berm along the Cañada del Puerto Creek; remove invasive Short-term negligible to minor adverse eucalyptus trees and control other effects would occur with construction invasive plant species; construct a activities associated with wetland and protective barrier around archeological riparian restoration as ground site CA-SCrI-240, and construct wayside disturbance and creation of new open exhibits, a wetland viewing bench, or an areas during restoration activities could interpretive guide at select locations result in the colonization by non-native within the Project Area.
Environmental Consequences - 173
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Two fill disposal sites for temporary 4.3.3.1.1 Effects of wetlands and stockpiling of the fill removed from the floodplain restoration wetland area would be located on the east side of the Cañada del Puerto Creek, Removal of invasive non-native plant upstream and downstream from the species from the wetland restoration area creek crossing. These sites would also would be accomplished by hand pulling, be used as construction staging areas for hand- or machine-excavation, chain heavy equipment, vehicles, fuel totes, sawing, burning or application of and other large material and supplies herbicide. After the removal of invasive required for the project. Together these plants, sand and rock fill would be two sites encompass 2.78 acres of land. excavated from the 3.1-acre wetland One of the two fill disposal sites restoration area using heavy equipment. overlaps a portion of archeological site After removal activities are completed, CA-SCrI-240. The overlap occurs at the the site would be replanted with native edge of the site where cultural materials wetland species. Archeological resources are less dense (Pacific Legacy 2007). are known to be present on elevated points of land within the wetland To prepare the sites for fill placement, restoration area. Removal of invasive over 100 non-historic eucalyptus trees plants could impact archaeological would be removed. Personnel would use resources within the plant removal area. chainsaws, chippers, tractor, and a stump Sand and rock fill removal is unlikely to grinder to cut trees and grind stumps to impact archeological resources because 12 inches below grade. The stockpile fill is not present on elevated points of sites would be covered with straw or land and would not, therefore, require geotechnical fabric prior to placement of removal. An archeologist would be fill. This would serve to separate the present during all ground disturbing archeological deposit from the fill and activities associated with invasive plant provide some protection to the deposit and fill removal to ensure that any during filling operations. Upon currently unknown archaeological completion of stockpiling, the fill would resources that may be encountered be compacted, sloped to natural would receive proper treatment. If any contours, and seeded with native plants. archeological deposits are encountered, An archeologist and Native American work would be stopped in the vicinity representative would be onsite to and the resource would be evaluated. If monitor eucalyptus removal and fill the resource is determined to be stockpiling to ensure that these activities significant, mitigation measures would have a minor impact on the be implemented. Such measures could archeological deposit. Although include avoidance or data recovery, in stockpiling of fill could compact any consultation with the Tribe and SHPO. archeological deposits that may be Therefore, invasive plant and fill present in the stockpile areas, it is removal activities is considered to have a anticipated that once the fill is in place, short-term minor adverse impact on it would help protect and preserve that archeological resources. portion of the archeological site from wind and water-induced erosion and potential for unauthorized removal of
Environmental Consequences - 174
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
cultural material. Removal and of materials by reducing the visibility stockpiling activities would have a and the potential for exposure of intact minor adverse impact on CA-SCrI-240 deposits. However, because the cultural deposits. effectiveness of this barrier in protecting the resource and its long-term structural Alternative B also includes the removal integrity is not assured, construction of of a portion of the artificial berm that the barrier is considered a long-term runs along the west bank of Cañada del moderate beneficial impact on the Puerto Creek. Hydraulic modeling resource. indicates that with the berm in place, the velocity and stream power of the portion The two temporary wayside exhibits, a of Cañada del Puerto Creek adjacent to wetland viewing bench, or interpretive CA-SCrI-240 during a 100-year storm guide to educate the public about the are relatively high (velocities of 10 to 12 historic uses of Prisoners Harbor and the feet per second with stream power restored wetlands would be designed and values of 18 to 20 pounds per foot placed to avoid archeological resources. second), which causes flood-induced The area designated for erosion of the archeological deposit. By loading/unloading equipment, vehicles, comparison, removal of the berm would and other large materials contains no result in a relatively unconstricted known archeological resources. These channel and would have stream power structures and facilities, therefore, would values in the range of 2 to 3 pounds per have no impact on archeological foot second for the same flow because of resources. the reduction of water depth (NPS 2007). It is expected that removal of the Under Alternative B, the Park would berm would increase the frequency of continue its current management flooding near CA-SCrI-240, but the practices to protect known archeological depths and velocities of the floodwaters resources at Prisoners Harbor that are predicted to be reduced. To protect contribute to the Archeological District CA-ScrI-240 from continuing (although and additional unknown archeological lessened) exposure to erosion, the Park resources that may be present. These would deflect potential flood waters practices include regular maintenance of away from the culturally dense area of the fencing that protects archeological the site by the placement of a small site CA-SCrI-240; and controlling the earth, log, and cobble berm around the spread of invasive vegetation. The Park upstream face of the archeological site or also undertakes cultural resources by packing earth, logs, and cobbles monitoring and/or subsurface testing against the base of the archeological site within areas of potential ground- and planting with compatible native disturbance associated with proposed plants. Eucalyptus logs removed from projects, and avoidance of any such the wetland restoration site that have a resources if feasible, or data recovery, if diameter greater than 12 inches would be necessary. Continuation of ongoing used to create the protective barrier. This maintenance practices would have a barrier, in addition to deflecting flood long-term moderate beneficial impact on waters from the site, would also reduce archeological resources. the potential for unauthorized collection
Environmental Consequences - 175
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.3.3.1.2 Effects of stream channel to cumulative impacts on archeological restoration resources because the Park’s ongoing management practices provide Riparian restoration of the Cañada del protection to archeological resources Puerto Creek requires removal of throughout the Archeological District. eucalyptus trees along an approximately 0.7 mile stretch of the stream channel. Alternative B would have long-term The eucalyptus removal area has not moderate beneficial impact on been systematically surveyed for archeological resources by protecting archeological resources because of the CA-ScrI-240 from stream erosion and presence of dense underbrush and fallen unauthorized collection of materials, and trees. Therefore it is not known if by continuing ongoing management archeological resources are present in practices to protect known and unknown this area. Cutting, dragging, hauling, and archeological resources at Prisoners vehicle operation associated with Harbor and throughout the eucalyptus removal could damage any Archeological District. These activities archeological deposits that may be have a long-term moderate beneficial present. Therefore, cultural resources cumulative impact on archeological specialists would monitor these activities resources. to ensure that any archeological deposits encountered receive proper treatment. If 4.3.3.1.4 Conclusion (including any archeological deposits are impairment) encountered, work would be stopped in the vicinity and the resource would be The activities that would take place evaluated. If the resource is determined under Alternative B would have a short- to be significant, mitigation measures term negligible to minor adverse impact would be implemented. Such measures and a long-term moderate beneficial could include avoidance or data impact on archeological resources. recovery, in consultation with the SHPO and the tribe. Therefore, eucalyptus tree Removal of invasive plants, including removal along the Cañada del Puerto is eucalyptus trees, in the wetlands considered to have a short-term restoration area, the fill disposal site, and negligible to minor adverse impact on along the Cañada del Puerto Creek could archeological resources. impact known and unknown archaeological resources that may be 4.3.3.1.3 Cumulative Impacts present within the removal areas. An archeologist would be present during all Alternative B would have a short-term ground disturbing activities associated negligible to minor adverse impact on with invasive plant removal to ensure currently known archeological resources, that any currently unknown and unknown archeological resources archaeological resources that may be that could be encountered during encountered would receive proper vegetation and tree removal activities treatment. Therefore, these activities associated with wetlands and stream would have short-term negligible to channel restoration and stockpiling of minor adverse impacts on archeological fill. These impacts would not contribute resources.
Environmental Consequences - 176
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
area would have no impact on One of the two fill disposal sites archeological resources. overlaps a portion of archeological site CA-SCrI-240 where cultural materials Eucalyptus tree removal associated with are less dense. An archeologist and riparian restoration of a portion of Native American representative would Cañada del Puerto Creek could damage be onsite to monitor eucalyptus tree any currently unknown archeological removal and fill stockpiling to ensure features that may be present in the that this activity has a minor impact on removal area. Cultural resources the archeological deposit. Although specialists would monitor tree removal stockpiling of fill could compact any to ensure that any archeological deposits archeological deposits that may be encountered receive proper present in the stockpile areas, it is consideration. Tree removal is anticipated that once the fill is in place, considered a short-term negligible to it would help protect and preserve that minor adverse impact on archaeological portion of the archeological site from resources. wind and water-induced erosion and potential for unauthorized removal of Under Alternative B, the Park would cultural material. Removal and continue its current management stockpiling activities would have a practices to protect known archeological minor adverse impact on CA-SCrI-240 resources at Prisoners Harbor that cultural deposits. contribute to the Archeological District and additional unknown archeological The removal of a portion of the artificial resources that may be present. In berm that runs along the west bank of addition, the Park’s maintenance Cañada del Puerto Creek would help activities would be expanded to include protect CA-SCrI-240 by reducing the monitoring the protective barrier at CA- potential for stream flows to erode the SCrI-240 for its effectiveness in cultural deposit. In addition, the Park protecting the archeological deposit and would deflect potential flood waters checking it for structural integrity, with away from the culturally dense area of repairs made if needed. These practices the site by the placement of a small berm would have a moderate long-term around the upstream face of CA-SCrI- beneficial impact on archeological 240. This barrier would also reduce the resources. potential for unauthorized collection of materials by reducing the potential for The level of impact on archeological exposure of intact deposits. Protection of resources would not result in impairment the site from ongoing erosion and of park resources that fulfill the specific reducing the potential for unauthorized purposes identified in the enabling removal of cultural materials is legislation or that are essential to the considered a long-term moderate natural or cultural integrity of the park. beneficial impact. 4.3.3.1.5 Mitigation and Monitoring Construction of interpretive facilities and use of a designated loading/unloading The Park’s maintenance activities would be expanded to include monitoring the
Environmental Consequences - 177
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement protective barrier at CA-SCrI-240 after the island cowboys would also be flood events to check for structural removed, but would be replanted in integrity and effectiveness in protecting another area. Cement from the hunt club the archeological deposit. Repairs or foundation also would be removed. modifications to the berm would be made as needed to ensure protection of The cattle corrals, water troughs, and the resource. telephone poles are contributing resources to the Ranching District. The Implementation of mitigation measure corrals are highly visible to Prisoners would result in a major long-term Harbor visitors and are readily beneficial impact to the resource. associated with ranching. Their location near Prisoners Harbor pier and adjacent 4.3.3.2 Historical Resources to Navy Road, and their geographic extent, make them a dominant feature in Under Alternative B – 2/3 Wetland the landscape that is important in Restoration with Partial Berm Removal, conveying the historical use of Prisoners the Park would restore 3.1 acres of the Harbor for ranching. These cattle corrals former wetland, requiring the removal of are the only remaining corrals at all the cattle corrals; relocate the scale Prisoners Harbor and their removal house from its present-day location to its would reduce the contribution that pre-1960s location; remove a portion of Prisoners Harbor makes to the Ranching the berm along the Cañada del Puerto District. However, their removal would Creek; remove invasive eucalyptus trees not diminish the integrity of the and control other invasive plant species; Ranching District to the extent that the construct protective barriers around Ranching District’s National Register archeological site CA-SCrI-240 and eligibility would be jeopardized. This is construct wayside exhibits, a wetland because even with their loss, the many viewing bench, or an interpretive guide buildings, structures, small-scale at select locations within the Project features, and landscape elements Area to educate the public about throughout the island that are wetlands restoration and the historic uses contributing characteristics to the of Prisoners Harbor. Historic District would continue to reflect the ranching history of the island. 4.3.3.2.1 Effects of wetlands and floodplain restoration Wetland restoration under Alternative B would have a moderate adverse impact Removal of invasive non-native plant on historic resources. species from the 3.1-acre wetlands restoration area and removal of fill to No historic resources are known to be restore the wetland would require the present within the 2.78 acres of land removal of all the cattle corrals. In adjacent to the Cañada del Puerto Creek addition 7 of the 8 telephone poles and proposed for fill stockpiling and only all 3 water troughs in the corral area non-historic eucalyptus trees would be would be removed. A small area of removed. Most of the eucalyptus trees yerba mansa that was planted in the that are growing along the stream corral area in the early 20th century by channel have spread extensively from
Environmental Consequences - 178
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement the early plantings. The Park is that are contributing characteristics to analyzing historic photographs, maps, the Historic District would continue to and tree measurements to determine if reflect the ranching history of the island. any of the eucalyptus or other trees Documentation of this feature prior to its along the stream channel were part of removal would serve to retain the the late-19th century development. If information it provides regarding the any such plantings are identified, the historic development of the ranch. Berm Park would consult with the State removal would have a potential minor Historic Preservation Office regarding adverse impact on historic resources. the status of the plantings as contributing or non-contributing to the Ranching Removal of the berm would increase District, and to identify the appropriate overbank flooding in the stream reach treatment or mitigation for their between the road crossing and the Native removal.These activities, therefore, American village site. The access road would have a minor adverse impact on and the historical warehouse are located historic resources. on the extreme southwestern margin of the Cañada Del Puerto greater Partial removal of the berm along the geomorphic floodplain. Under existing Cañada del Puerto Creek could impact a conditions (berm in place) high flows are historic resource. Historic photos and an contained in the channel below the road 1892 map of Prisoners Harbor show a crossing, producing a backwater effect rock retaining wall several hundred feet and causing floodwaters to exit the in length along the west side of the channel at the crossing. Based on stream, presumably built to prevent anecdotal reports, this phenomenon has flooding of the ranch area. This wall was resulted in flood waters traveling down most likely destroyed by later stream the road and reaching the historic modifications, although it is possibly warehouse. Removal of the berm will buried beneath the existing berm. If it reduce hydraulic pressure on the road were present with its integrity retained, crossing and result in less frequent this rock retaining wall would be a overbank flows at that location. One contributing resource to the Ranching dimensional hydraulic modeling (HEC- District. Berm removal would be RAS) of this creek and its floodplain monitored by an archeologist. If suggest that a sustained 100-year flood remnants of the rock wall are uncovered, of 2590 cfs may still reach the elevation they would be photographed and of the warehouse with the berm documented. Although the potential removed. However, given the non- removal of a historic rock retaining wall confining nature of this fluvial system would slightly reduce the contribution and the low gradient of the valley in this that Prisoners Harbor makes to the area, even this relatively rare event Ranching District, its removal would not would not reach depths greater than diminish the integrity of the Ranching about 1 foot over the road, nor velocities District to the extent that the District’s in excess of about 1-2 feet per second. National Register eligibility would be jeopardized, because the many buildings, The wayside exhibits, wetland viewing structures, small-scale features, and bench, or interpretive guide would be landscape elements throughout the island small in scale and would be placed to
Environmental Consequences - 179
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement avoid direct conflict with views of the underbrush and fallen trees. Therefore it historic features at Prisoners Harbor. is not know if such resources are present Therefore, they would have a long-term in this area. Cutting, dragging, hauling, negligible impact on the historic setting and vehicle operation associated with of Prisoners Harbor and would increase eucalyptus removal could damage any the public’s awareness of the history of such features that may be present. the area. Cultural resources specialists would monitor these activities to ensure that Under Alternative B, the Park would any features encountered receive proper continue its current management treatment. If any historic features are practices to protect the remaining encountered, work would be stopped in historic resources at Prisoners Harbor the vicinity and the resource would be that contribute to the Ranching District. evaluated. If the resource is determined These practices consist of implementing to be significant, mitigation measures an ongoing invasive plant control would be implemented. Such measures program that eliminates the potential could include avoidance, recordation, or damage to historic features that these data recovery, in consultation with the plants and their root systems can cause if SHPO. Therefore, eucalyptus tree left unchecked; maintaining the historic removal along the Cañada del Puerto is appearance and condition of historic considered to have a short-term minor trees by periodically trimming the adverse impact on historic resources. branches to maintain their health and historic appearance; maintaining the two While it is possible that some of the historic roads within the Project Area: eucalyptus trees to be removed may date Navy Road and the road to the Main to the historic ranching period, the Ranch; and avoiding the location of the majority of eucalyptus trees at Prisoners below-ground water pipe that runs from Harbor and in Cañada del Puerto Creek the warehouse generally along Navy have spread unintentionally from early Road and the remnant of the rose and plantings. The Park is analyzing historic agave garden adjacent to the water pipe. photographs, maps, and tree These management practices would have measurements to determine if any of the a long-term moderate beneficial impact eucalyptus or other trees along the on the historic resources at Prisoners stream channel were part of the late-19th Harbor that contribute to the significance century development (when the island of the Ranching District. tree planting campaign took place). If any such plantings are identified, the 4.3.3.2.2 Effects of riparian restoration Park would consult with the State Historic Preservation Office regarding Riparian restoration of the Cañada del the status of the plantings as contributing Puerto Creek consists of the removal of or non-contributing to the Ranching eucalyptus trees along an approximately District, and to identify the appropriate 0.7 mile stretch of the stream channel. treatment or mitigation for their removal. The eucalyptus removal area has not Riparian restoration of the Cañada del been systematically surveyed for historic Puerto Creek, therefore, would have a resources, such as structure foundations, potential short-term negligible adverse because of the presence of dense impact on historic resources.
Environmental Consequences - 180
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
the Cañada del Puerto Creek to ensure 4.3.3.2.3 Cumulative Impacts that any historic features encountered receive proper treatment. In addition, the Removal of the cattle corrals and various Park is undertaking studies to determine other small-scale features at Prisoners if any of the eucalyptus or other trees Harbor under Alternative B would be along the stream channel were part of cumulatively considerable when added the late-19th century development. If any to the loss of structures and other small- such plantings are identified, the Park scale features at Prisoners Harbor over would consult with the State Historic time as described in Section 4.1, Preservation Office regarding the status Cumulative Impacts Scenario. However, of the plantings as contributing or non- the cumulative losses at Prisoners contributing to the Ranching District, Harbor would not diminish the integrity and to identify the appropriate treatment of the Ranching District to the extent or mitigation for their removal. that the District’s National Register Therefore, riparian restoration of the eligibility would be jeopardized. Cañada del Puerto Creek would not Therefore, removal of the cattle corrals contribute to cumulative loss of historic and various other small-scale features at features or historic vegetation within the Prisoners Harbor is considered a Ranching District. moderate cumulative impact. Continuation of the Park’s management Fill stockpiling and non-historic practices for protecting historic eucalyptus tree removal are anticipated resources at Prisoners Harbor and to have no impact on historic resources throughout the Ranching District would and therefore would not contribute to contribute to a long-term major cumulative impacts. beneficial cumulative impact on the historic resources within the Ranching Although a number of non-contributing District as a whole. features have been constructed within the Ranching District by the National 4.3.3.2.4 Conclusion (including Park Service and The Nature impairment) Conservancy, such as new fencelines, visitor-service facilities, and signage, the Removal of the cattle corrals would effect of the accumulation of these reduce the contribution that Prisoners features has been minimal due to their Harbor makes to the Ranching District, placement in isolated locations, small but would not diminish the integrity of size, and limited quantity (NPS 2004). the Ranching District to the extent that Therefore, the placement of wayside the Ranching District’s National interpretive features would make a Register eligibility would be minor contribution to any adverse jeopardized. cumulative impacts from non- contributing features on the Historic Fill stockpiling and non-historic District. eucalyptus tree removal are anticipated to have no impact on historic resources. Cultural resources specialists would Placement of wayside exhibits is monitor eucalyptus tree removal along considered a long-term negligible
Environmental Consequences - 181
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement adverse visual impact on historic Although the project would remove the resources. only remaining cattle corrals at Prisoners Harbor and their removal would reduce Although the potential removal of a the contribution that Prisoners Harbor historic rock retaining wall that may be makes to the Ranching District, their identified during berm removal would removal would not diminish the integrity slightly reduce the contribution that of the Ranching District to the extent Prisoners Harbor makes to the Ranching that the Ranching District’s National District, its removal would not diminish Register eligibility would be the integrity of the Ranching District to jeopardized. This is because even with the extent that its National Register their loss, the many buildings, structures, eligibility would be jeopardized. small-scale features, and landscape Documentation of these features prior to elements throughout the island that are their removal would serve to retain the contributing characteristics to the information provided by this feature Historic District would continue to regarding the historic development of reflect the ranching history of the island. the ranch, including past construction practices. Therefore, berm removal Therefore, Alternative B would not would have a potential minor adverse result in impairment of historical impact on historic resources. resources because it would not result in a major, adverse impact to a resource or The Park is undertaking studies to value whose conservation is necessary to determine if any of the eucalyptus or fulfill specific purposes of the Park; key other trees along the stream channel to the natural or cultural integrity of the were part of the late-19th century Park; or identified as a goal in the Park’s development. If any such plantings are planning documents. identified, the Park would consult with the State Historic Preservation Office regarding the status of the plantings as 4.3.3.2.5 Mitigation and Monitoring contributing or non-contributing to the Ranching District, and to identify the The Park intends to relocate the scale appropriate treatment or mitigation for house from its present-day location their removal. Riparian restoration of the within the cattle corral complex to its Cañada del Puerto Creek, therefore, pre-1960s location near the historic would have a potential short-term minor warehouse. This would be accomplished adverse impact on historic resources. under the supervision of Park cultural resource specialists and after Continuation of the Park’s management consultation with the State Historic practices for protecting historic Preservation Office. resources would have a long-term moderate beneficial impact on the Prior to removal of the corrals and historic resources at Prisoners Harbor relocation of the scale house, the entire that contribute to the significance of the corral complex at Prisoners Harbor Ranching District. would be photographed and documented, including documentation of construction methods and material. This
Environmental Consequences - 182
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement information would be archived at Park of the fill disposal areas would Headquarters. Documentation of these effectively block access to Navy Road, resources prior to their removal would but the small number of hikers destined serve to retain the information provided for Del Norte would be allowed to pass by the corrals and other features Cañada del Puerto Creek with regarding the historic development of permission from the on-site supervisor. the ranch. Relocating the scale house to Vehicle access to the Navy site and Del its pre-1960s location would partially Norte campground would be re-routed compensate for the loss of the corral through the Central Valley. This re- complex. To help interpret the historic routing would cause a minor short-term ranching use of Prisoners Harbor, the impact on Del Norte visitors and users of park will build a corral structure similar the Navy site, as it would approximately to the historic sheep corrals in photos double the driving distance and time dated c. 1900 (Figure 3.8). The corrals from about 6 miles and 0.5 hours to will be situated along the row of about 12 miles and 1 hour. Both routes eucalyptus trees at the base of the cliff, require 4-wheel drive vehicles, but road extending toward the pier. Design and conditions are slightly rougher on the materials will approximate the alternate route. appearance of the historic sheep corrals and be determined by NPS cultural Vehicle use of the access road in the resource specialists in consultation with Prisoners Harbor area would be limited the State Historic Preservation Office to boat arrival and departure times to during the design phase of the project. allow for loading and unloading gear, supplies, and equipment at the pier. This 4.3.4 Social Resources limitation in road access would produce a minor short-term inconvenience impact 4.3.4.1 Recreation and Visitor to campers traveling by vehicle. Experience Restoration activities will not impede 4.3.4.1.1 Effects of wetlands and access to embarking or disembarking floodplain restoration tour boats.
Excavation and eucalyptus tree removal This alternative is not expected to in the fill disposal site would require increase visitor use beyond the Park’s about 4 – 6 weeks. During that time, limit of 100 visitors per day. temporary fencing would be installed parallel to the access road in the The removal of the eight historic cattle Prisoners Harbor area. The fencing corrals would have a moderate, adverse would direct visitors along the south side and permanent impact on the visitor of the access road in the Prisoners experience. The corrals are one of the Harbor area and away from the first features the visitor sees when excavation site and fill disposal site. disembarking at Prisoners Harbor. Pedestrian access to the restrooms and While the surrounding ranching Prisoners-Pelican trail would remain structures would still remain intact and unchanged, as would road access to the would continue to convey some historic Central Valley. Truck activity and use character of the ranching operations (see
Environmental Consequences - 183
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement section 4.3.3.2.1), without the corrals the 4.3.4.1.2 Effects of stream channel scope and landscape context of the restoration Ranching District will have to be conveyed by the use of corral Eucalyptus tree removal in Cañada del photographs in a new interpretive Puerto Creek would take place in display at the Visitors Center. intervals of about 6 weeks in duration. Additionally, moving the scale house to During tree removal access to the its pre-1960’s location adjacent to the restrooms and the Prisoners-Pelican trail warehouse will aid visitor understanding would remain unchanged. Access to the of the relationship between these two Central Valley would be re-routed to the ranching facilities. The interpretive Navy Road during this time. Just as signage onsite will describe the blocking the Navy road doubled travel Ranching District features, past and time to Del Norte and the Navy site, present. when the stream channel is being restored, blocking the Access Road The addition of interpretive signage at would double travel time to the Central two locations and the viewing bench, Valley, causing short-term minor and additional interpretive material at inconvenience to visitors headed there. the Visitors Center will have moderate Access to the Navy site, the Del Norte long-term beneficial effects on the campground, and the rest of the Isthmus visitor experience. The bench will would not be affected. contribute to the visitor’s appreciation for the natural and cultural features of Stream channel restoration activities will the Harbor, and the signage will provide not impede access to embarking or specific information about the disembarking tour boats, and they will ecological, cultural and historical have no impact on access to existing context of the site area, and the historic ranching structures. relationship of the natural resources to the history of human activities at The visibility of restoration work and Prisoners Harbor. This contributes to equipment along the riparian trail would the Park’s visitor experience goals. produce a minor temporary visual impact on the visitor experience. The visibility of restoration work and equipment within the Prisoners Harbor would produce a minor temporary visual and aural impact on the visitor experience.
Environmental Consequences - 184
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.3.4.1.3 Cumulative impacts 4.4 Alternative C – 1/3 Wetland Alternative B would contribute to Restoration with Partial Berm moderate adverse cumulative impacts on Removal the visitor experience. The removal of
the cattle corrals means the loss of one 4.4.1 Water Resources component of the complex of features
that contribute to the historical appeal of Alternative C – 1/3 Wetland Restoration the Prisoners Harbor area. Photos and with Partial Berm Removal is identical other documentation of the corrals will to Alternative B, except that 2.1 acres of be included in new interpretive material wetlands would be restored instead of at the Visitors Center. The addition of the 3.1 acres restored under Alternative interpretive signage at two locations and B, two of the historic corrals could be the viewing bench along the wetland maintained in place, and the scalehouse periphery will have moderate beneficial would not be moved. impacts, as described.
4.4.1.1 Hydrologic Function and 4.3.4.1.4 Conclusion Processes
Wetlands restoration activities will have The impacts associated with Alternative short-term minor adverse impacts to a C on hydrologic function and processes small number of visitors (and residents would be similar to those impacts of the Navy site) whose passage to Del presented in Section 4.3.1.1 for flood Norte campground and the Navy site elevation and frequency, hydrologic will be re-routed during the 4-6 weeks of connectivity, sediment transport actual restoration work. Access to dynamics, and water quality. However, recreational features in the interior of the the reduction in restoration area Island will still be available, though compared to Alternative B can be inconvenienced during restoration. expected to produce roughly
proportional reductions in wetlands Removal of the corrals will produce benefits (Bartoldus et al., 1994). moderate long-term adverse impacts to
the visitor experience, which will be Flood Elevation and Frequency: partially mitigated by the return of the Alternative C would have a minor scale house to its historic location, and adverse impact on flood elevation and the additions and improvements to flood frequency, and a beneficial effect interpretation onsite and at the Visitors of reduced flooding at the road crossing. Center. Removal of the berm would increase the
frequency that the creek overflows its Riparian restoration will have short-term banks connecting the flows to the minor adverse impacts to a small number floodplain and the recreated wetland as of visitors whose passage to the Central described for Alternative B in Section Valley will be re-routed during the 6 4.3.1.1.1. week segments of actual restoration, which will occur several times over the multi-year duration of this restoration.
Environmental Consequences - 185
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Stormwater and Floodwater Storage: studies in the wetlands literature suggest Alternative C would have a beneficial a positive relationship between wetlands effect related to the increased area for functions and wetland size (Bartoldus, et stormwater and flood storage as al, 1994, Marble, 1992), but the described for Alterative B; however the relationships are not explored at the recreated wetlands would increase the relatively small scale of this project, so existing flood storage by 2.1 acres rather precise prediction of the difference in than 3.1 acres. Approximately 8.6 acres functional improvements between of functioning wetlands would be Alternatives B & C is not possible. The available for floodwater storage same monitoring requirements would be capacity. A detailed discussion of implemented as part of the project for impacts is included in Section 4.3.1.1.1. this alternative.
Sediment Transport Dynamics: The level of impact on wetlands would Alternative C would have a negligible not result in impairment of park adverse impact related to sediment resources that fulfill the specific transport dynamics as described in purposes identified in the enabling Alternative B. legislation or that are essential to the natural or cultural integrity of the park. The level of impact on hydrologic function would not result in impairment 4.4.1.3 Water Quality of park resources that fulfill the specific purposes identified in the enabling The water quality impacts associated legislation or that are essential to the with Alternative C would be similar to natural or cultural integrity of the park. those discussed in Section 4.3.1.3. A total of 2.1 acres of fill removal and 4.4.1.2 Wetlands and Floodplains wetland re-creation would have a moderate beneficial effect similar to the The impacts associated with Alternative benefits expected from 3.1 acres C on changes in wetlands and discussed for Alternative B. A number floodplains is the same as those impacts of studies in the wetlands literature presented in Section 4.3.1.2 except that suggest a positive relationship between the total number of acres of wetland re- wetlands functions and wetland size creation is 2.1 acres rather than 3.1 (Bartoldus, et al, 1994, Marble, 1992), acres. The recreated wetland would but the relationships are not explored at provide similar wetland functions and the relatively small scale of this project, values, such as improved water quality, so precise prediction of the difference in stream shading, flood attenuation, and functional improvements between groundwater exchange, as described for Alternatives B & C is not possible. Alternative B except the areal extent of wetland would be one acre less. The level of impact on water quality Alternative C would have substantial would not result in impairment of park beneficial impact because resources that fulfill the specific implementation of the alternative would purposes identified in the enabling increase the areal extent of wetlands by legislation or that are essential to the greater than 2 acres. A number of natural or cultural integrity of the park.
Environmental Consequences - 186
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Study results suggested that creation of 4.4.2 Biological Resources larger wetland complexes should be preferred over the creation of isolated Introduction wetlands. Additionally, the study concluded that the size of the individual Under Alternative C, the Park would wetland may be important for certain retain two of the existing cattle corrals area-sensitive bird species and groups adjacent to the access road, restore 2.1 since there was a significant increase in acres of palustrine wetlands and species richness with increasing wetland deepwater habitat, remove eucalyptus, area for marshes <5.5ha. (1 ha = 2.47 control invasive species, construct a acres). protective barrier around the archeological site, and improve the Generally, as a wetland’s size increases, visitor experience. A portion of the so does its habitat diversity and stability. berm would be removed and the creek Increased species richness with wetland connected to its floodplain. size has been reported by several studies as described in Weller (1999). 4.4.2.1 Wildlife Increasing the size of small wetlands usually has a greater impact on 4.4.2.1.1 Birds increasing animal species richness than increasing the size of large areas 4.4.2.1.1.1 EFFECTS OF WETLANDS AND (Marble, 1992). Thus, increased avian FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION species richness with greater wetland size could be applicable to the small The effects of wetlands restoration on wetland areas restored by this project. birds would be similar to those in Alternative B as described in Section Wetland species, particularly waterfowl, 4.3.2.1.1.1. The main difference are sensitive to human disturbance between alternatives is that 2.1 acres of (Castelle et al., 1992; Burke and wetlands would be restored in Gibbons, 1995; Semlitsch, 1997). A Alternative C, compared with 3.1 acres buffer between wetland habitat and in Alternative B, providing one less acre human activity can reduce the negative of habitat; however, the availability of impact of human activity on waterfowl an additional 2.1 acres of wetlands in breeding and feeding. With two corrals this alternative would still have a in place under this alternative, as moderate beneficial impact on birds. opposed to removing all the corrals as in Alternative B, a small portion of the The benefits of restoring 2.1 acres of wetland would have a 100’-150’ buffer wetlands in Alternative C would not from human disturbance (Figure 2.5). In likely be as great as restoring 3.1 acres this area there would be some waterfowl in Alternative B. A study of Ohio breeding, but with reduced populations wetlands in 2001-2002 (Porej, No Date) and diversity compared with a 200’ to found that species richness and densities 300’ buffer from human disturbance of several species and groups of species, (Table 2.2). The majority of wetland including migrating waterfowl, were area would have a 50’ to 100’ buffer associated with the size of wetlands. from human disturbance. The wetland
Environmental Consequences - 187
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement generally would be ineffective in 4.4.2.1.1.4 CONCLUSION (INCLUDING preserving major wetland functions and IMPAIRMENT) human activities would disturb breeding/feeding birds (Castelle et al., Alternative C would have negligible 1992). Degradation of buffer habitats adverse to moderate beneficial effects on over time would be more likely to occur birds in the Project Area. Long-term in the area with a 50’ to 100’ buffer moderate beneficial impacts would result (Castelle et al., 1992). from 2.1 acres of wetland restoration, which would support an increase in use The temporary displacement and by many bird species for refuge and disturbance of birds caused by forage. Long-term moderate beneficial construction activities for wetland impacts would also result from 20.02 restoration and human presence would acres of riparian restoration by occur for the several months duration of eradication of eucalyptus trees and construction. However, the duration of revegetation to re-establish native disturbance would be shorter in this riparian plant communities. Riparian alternative than under Alternative B as restoration would benefit riparian- the area of restoration is one acre less. associated bird species by increasing Impacts to bird species would still be riparian value to breeding and migratory minor and adverse. birds, as well as resulting in additional snags and cavities for cavity nesters. 4.4.2.1.1.2 EFFECTS OF STREAM CHANNEL RESTORATION Short-term negligible and minor adverse effects would occur on existing bird The effects of riparian restoration on habitats with disturbance and destruction birds would be similar to those in from construction activities associated Alternative B as described in Section with wetland and riparian restoration. 4.3.2.1.1.2. However, these impacts would be outweighed by the availability of native 4.4.2.1.1.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS habitats with improved ecological integrity once restoration is complete. Cumulative past, present, and foreseeable future impacts on birds for There would also be short-term this alternative would be similar to those negligible and minor adverse effects on described for Alterative B in Section birds, including special status birds, 4.3.2.1.1.3. The additional impacts during construction activities for wetland associated with Alternative C, as and riparian restoration as species would described above and as compared to be temporarily disturbed or displaced by past, present, and foreseeable future noise and human activity. Impacts to cumulative impacts, would contribute nesting birds would be minimized as moderate beneficial cumulative impacts most activities would be scheduled after on birds. the spring breeding season.
This alternative would have minor beneficial impacts on two of the special status bird species in the Project Area,
Environmental Consequences - 188
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
the Island scrub-jay and the bald eagle, wetland size does not appear to be a with restoration of wetlands and riparian useful sole criterion for determining habitat which would provide additional wetland functional value for amphibians. foraging habitat for both species. Thus it is not likely that the difference in wetland size between alternatives would The level of impact on birds would not affect the extent of beneficial impacts on result in impairment of park resources amphibians. that fulfill the specific purposes identified in the enabling legislation or The temporary displacement and that are essential to the natural or disturbance of mammals, reptiles, and cultural integrity of the park. amphibians caused by construction activities for wetland restoration and 4.4.2.1.1.5 MITIGATION AND human presence would occur for the MONITORING several months duration of construction. Mitigation and monitoring activities However, the duration of disturbance would be the same as those for would be shorter in this alternative than Alternative B, described in Section under Alternative B as the area of 4.3.2.1.1.5. restoration is one acre less. Impacts to mammals, reptiles, and amphibians 4.4.2.1.2 Mammals, reptiles, and would still be minor and adverse. amphibians 4.4.2.1.2.2 EFFECTS OF STREAM CHANNEL 4.4.2.1.2.1 EFFECTS OF WETLANDS AND RESTORATION FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION The effects of riparian restoration on The effects of wetlands restoration on mammals, reptiles, and amphibians mammals, reptiles, and amphibians would be similar to those in Alternative would be similar to those in Alternative B as described in Section 4.3.2.1.2.2. B as described in Section 4.3.2.1.2.1. The main difference between 4.4.2.1.2.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS alternatives is that 2.1 acres of wetlands would be restored in Alternative C, Cumulative past, present, and compared with 3.1 acres in Alternative foreseeable future impacts on mammals, B, providing one less acre of habitat; reptiles, and amphibians for this however, the availability of an additional alternative would be similar to those 2.1 acres of wetlands in this alternative described for Alterative B in Section would still have overall moderate 4.3.2.1.2.3. The additional impacts beneficial impacts on mammals, reptiles, associated with Alternative C, as and amphibians. described above and as compared to past, present, and foreseeable future Babbitt (2005) found in a study on New cumulative impacts, would contribute Hampshire wetlands that species moderate beneficial cumulative impacts richness was related to wetland size in on mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. wetlands with short and intermediate hydroperiods, but not wetlands with long hydroperiods. The study concluded that
Environmental Consequences - 189
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.4.2.1.2.4 CONCLUSION (INCLUDING coincides with lizard and snake egg IMPAIRMENT) laying periods.
Alternative C would have negligible Specials status species would benefit adverse to moderate beneficial effects on from wetland or riparian restoration or mammals, reptiles, and amphibians in both. Wetland restoration would provide the Project Area. Long-term moderate additional habitat for bats, island fox, beneficial impacts would result from 2.1 deer mouse, harvest mouse, and slender acres of wetland restoration, which salamander. Riparian restoration would would support an increase in use by provide additional habitat for bats, island wildlife for breeding, refuge and forage. fox, slender salamander, island fence Long-term moderate beneficial impacts lizard, and gopher snake. would also result from 20.02 acres of riparian restoration by eradication of The level of impact on mammals, eucalyptus trees and revegetation to re- reptiles, and amphibians would not result establish native riparian plant in impairment of park resources that communities. Riparian restoration fulfill the specific purposes identified in would benefit wildlife species by the enabling legislation or that are increasing riparian value as the habitat essential to the natural or cultural matures and an increase in the areal integrity of the park. extent of fully functioning riparian communities. 4.4.2.1.2.5 MITIGATION AND MONITORING Short-term negligible and minor adverse effects would occur on existing wildlife Mitigation and monitoring activities habitats with disturbance and destruction would be the same as those for from construction activities associated Alternative B, described in Section with wetland and riparian restoration. 4.3.2.1.2.5. However, these impacts would be outweighed by the availability of native 4.4.2.1.3 Aquatic Invertebrates and Fish habitats with improved ecological integrity once restoration is complete. 4.4.2.1.3.1 EFFECTS OF WETLANDS AND FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION There would also be short-term negligible and minor adverse effects on The effects of wetlands restoration on mammals, reptiles, and amphibians, aquatic invertebrates and fish would be including special status species, during similar to those in Alternative B as construction activities for wetland and described in Section 4.3.2.1.3.1. The riparian restoration as species would be main difference between alternatives is temporarily disturbed or displaced by that 2.1 acres of wetlands would be noise and human activity or could be restored in Alternative C, compared with crushed and killed during ground 3.1 acres in Alternative B, providing one disturbing activities. Restoration actions less acre of habitat; however, the also have the potential to disrupt availability of an additional 2.1 acres of breeding cycles as some work would wetlands in this alternative would still
Environmental Consequences - 190
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
have overall minor beneficial impacts on hydrologic function between Cañada del aquatic invertebrates and fish. Puerto Creek and its floodplain.
4.4.2.1.3.2 EFFECTS OF STREAM CHANNEL There would also be short-term RESTORATION negligible adverse effects on aquatic organisms during construction activities The effects of riparian restoration on for wetland and riparian restoration as aquatic invertebrates and fish would be there is the potential for mortality of similar to those in Alternative B as some individual insects while they are in described in Section 4.3.2.1.3.2. their terrestrial life stages to be crushed by construction equipment or excavated 4.4.2.1.3.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS from burrows during ground disturbing activities. Cumulative past, present, and foreseeable future impacts on aquatic Restoration activities could have invertebrates and fish for this alternative negligible adverse impacts on aquatic would be similar to those described for habitat from sediment release during Alternative B in Section 4.3.2.1.3.3. construction or during the first few years after each phase of restoration until The additional impacts associated with riparian vegetation becomes established. Alternative C, as described above and as Negligible adverse impacts can also be compared to past, present, and cause by fuel and oil spills from foreseeable future cumulative impacts, construction equipment that could reach would contribute minor beneficial surface or groundwater. cumulative impacts on aquatic invertebrates. As there are no known As there are no known permanent fish permanent fish species in Cañada del species in Cañada del Puerto Creek or Puerto Creek, there would not be any the remnant wetland, there would not be associated cumulative impacts on fish. any adverse or beneficial impacts on fish from riparian or wetland restoration. 4.4.2.1.3.4 CONCLUSION (INCLUDING IMPAIRMENT) The level of impact on aquatic invertebrates and fish would not result in Alternative C would have negligible impairment of park resources that fulfill adverse and negligible to minor the specific purposes identified in the beneficial effects on aquatic enabling legislation or that are essential invertebrates in the Project Area. Long- to the natural or cultural integrity of the term minor beneficial impacts would park. result from 2.1 acres of wetland restoration, which would support an 4.4.2.1.3.5 MITIGATION AND increase in use by aquatic invertebrates. MONITORING Long-term negligible beneficial impacts would also result from 20.02 acres of Mitigation and monitoring activities riparian restoration which would benefit would be the same as those for aquatic invertebrates by reconnecting Alternative B, described in Section 4.3.2.1.3.5.
Environmental Consequences - 191
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.4.2.2.1.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 4.4.2.2 Vegetation Cumulative past, present, and 4.4.2.2.1 Native Vegetation foreseeable future impacts on native Communities vegetation communities for this alternative would be similar to those 4.4.2.2.1.1 EFFECTS OF WETLANDS described for Alterative B in Section FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION 4.3.2.2.1.3. The additional impacts associated with Alternative C, as The effects of wetlands restoration on described above and as compared to native vegetation communities would be past, present, and foreseeable future similar to those in Alternative B as cumulative impacts, would contribute described in Section 4.3.2.2.1.1. The moderate beneficial cumulative impacts main difference between alternatives is on native vegetation communities. that 2.1 acres of wetlands would be restored in Alternative C, compared with 4.4.2.2.1.4 CONCLUSION (INCLUDING 3.1 acres in Alternative B, providing one IMPAIRMENT) less acre of native vegetation. Under this alternative, wetland restoration with Alternative C would have negligible partial berm removal would have major adverse to major beneficial effects on beneficial impacts on native vegetation native vegetation communities in the communities. However, the major Project Area. Long-term major beneficial impacts in Alternative C beneficial impacts would result from 2.1 would benefit native vegetation to a acres of wetland restoration, which lesser extent than Alternative B as fewer would improve functioning and acres of wetlands would be restored. In ecological value of native vegetation a study of wetlands in Ontario, Canada communities in the Project Area. Long- Houlahan et al. (2006) found that term major beneficial impacts would wetland size is the most important also result from 20.02 acres of riparian predictor of plant species richness, restoration by eradication of eucalyptus which was positively correlated with trees and revegetation of native plants to wetland area. Thus it is possible that the restore native riparian vegetation one acre difference between alternatives communities. With berm removal, the would be enough to result in lower plant hydrological connectivity of the system species richness under Alternative C between Cañada del Puerto Creek and than Alternative B. the new wetlands and riparian areas would be restored. Restored 4.4.2.2.1.2 EFFECTS OF STREAM CHANNEL hydrological connectivity would allow RESTORATION native plant communities to function naturally and sustainably over the long- The effects of riparian restoration on term and fully meet project objectives. native vegetation communities would be similar to those in Alternative B as Short-term negligible and minor adverse described in Section 4.3.2.2.1.2. effects would occur with construction activities associated with wetland and riparian restoration and non-native plant
Environmental Consequences - 192
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement control which would disturb or destroy While not all non-native plant species existing vegetation. However, these are invasive or are documented to have adverse effects would be balanced or negative effects on native plant species outweighed by the beneficial effects of communities or wildlife habitats, the restoration efforts. vegetation communities dominated by natives are considered to have more There would be no impacts to the Santa ecological integrity and be perhaps more Cruz Island silver lotus or other special likely to support native wildlife through status plant species. Restoration providing habitat, food, and other activities would take place in the area important relationships. where silver lotus plants occur but care would be taken not to impact them, and 4.4.2.2.2.1 EFFECTS OF WETLANDS AND no new habitat would be created in FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION which any of the special status plants on Santa Cruz Island can re-establish. The effects of wetlands restoration on non-native vegetation would be similar The level of impact on native vegetation to those in Alternative B as described in would not result in impairment of park Section 4.3.2.2.2.1. The main difference resources that fulfill the specific between alternatives is that 2.1 acres of purposes identified in the enabling wetlands would be restored in legislation or that are essential to the Alternative C, compared with 3.1 acres natural or cultural integrity of the park. in Alternative B, removing one less acre of non-native vegetation. Under this 4.4.2.2.1.5 MITIGATION AND alternative, wetland restoration would MONITORING have long-term beneficial impacts in control of non-native vegetation; these Mitigation and monitoring activities effects would be minor as some of the would be the same as those for same non-native species would still Alternative B, described in Section remain in the two corrals and other parts 4.3.2.2.1.5. of the Built Up area that are not being converted to wetlands. 4.4.2.2.2 Non-Native Vegetation 4.4.2.2.2.2 EFFECTS OF STREAM CHANNEL Proposed actions in Alternative C would RESTORATION affect the extent of invasive plant species through 1) increasing disturbance, which The effects of riparian restoration on can encourage expansion of species native vegetation communities would be adapted to disturbance; 2) removal or similar to those in Alternative B as eradication of invasive plant species described in Section 4.3.2.2.2.2. occurrences; and 3) changing physical conditions such that viability of existing 4.4.2.2.2.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS occurrences and potential for establishment or expansion is affected, Cumulative past, present, and either positively or negatively. foreseeable future impacts on non-native vegetation for this alternative would be similar to those described for Alterative
Environmental Consequences - 193
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
B in Section 4.3.2.2.2.3. The additional impacts associated with Alternative C, as 4.4.2.2.2.5 MITIGATION AND described above and as compared to MONITORING past, present, and foreseeable future cumulative impacts, would contribute Mitigation and monitoring activities moderate beneficial cumulative impacts would be the same as those for on non-native vegetation. Alternative B, described in Section 4.3.2.2.2.5. 4.4.2.2.2.4 CONCLUSION (INCLUDING IMPAIRMENT) 4.4.3 Cultural Resources
Alternative C would have negligible 4.4.3.1 Archeological Resources adverse to major beneficial effects from eradication and control of non-native Alternative C – 1/3 Wetland Restoration vegetation in the Project Area. Long- with Partial Berm Removal is identical term major beneficial effects would to Alternative C except that 2.1 acres of result from 20.02 acres of riparian wetlands would be restored instead of restoration in which 1737 eucalyptus the 3.1 acres restored under Alternative trees would be eradicated, as well as B, requiring the removal six of the eight eucalyptus removal on fill disposal sites. cattle corrals. Long-term minor beneficial impacts would also result from 2.1 acres of 4.4.3.1.1 Effects of wetlands and wetland restoration during which there floodplain restoration would be removal of all non-native species on the site, but non-native Removal of invasive non-native species species would remain in adjacent corral from the 2.1-acre wetlands restoration and other Built Up areas. area would have a slightly less potential to impact archeological resources Short-term negligible to minor adverse because of the smaller area of land effects would occur with construction disturbance that would occur under activities associated with wetland and Alternative C compared to Alternative riparian restoration as ground B. An archeologist would be present disturbance and creation of new open during all ground disturbing activities areas during restoration activities could associated with invasive plant and fill result in the colonization by non-native removal to ensure that archaeological species. However, any new colonization resources that may be encountered would be removed as restoration and would receive proper consideration. revegetation efforts are completed. Therefore, similar to Alternative B, these activities would have a short-term The level of impact on non-native negligible adverse impact on vegetation would not result in archeological resources. impairment of park resources that fulfill the specific purposes identified in the Two fill disposal sites for temporary enabling legislation or that are essential stockpiling of the fill removed from the to the natural or cultural integrity of the wetlands area would be located at the park. same location as under Alternative B and
Environmental Consequences - 194
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement would also encompass 2.78-acres of land practices include regular maintenance of but would be slightly lower in height. As the fencing that protects archeological under Alternative B, an archeologist site CA-SCrI-240 through periodic would be onsite to monitor eucalyptus inspection and repair of the posts, wire, removal and fill stockpiling to ensure and hardware; and controlling the spread that these activities have a minimal of invasive vegetation, including kikuyu impact on the archeological deposit. grass, fennel, and young eucalyptus Therefore, removal and stockpiling recruits, that otherwise would spread and activities would have, at most, a short- potentially disturb the integrity of any term minor adverse impact on CA-SCrI- currently unknown archeological 240 cultural deposits. It is anticipated resources. Control methods include that once the fill is in place, it would herbicide spraying and hand cutting, help protect and preserve that portion of which have minimal or no affect on the archeological site from wind and archeological resources. The Park also water-induced erosion and the potential undertakes cultural resources monitoring for unauthorized removal of cultural and/or subsurface testing within areas of material. This is considered a long-term potential ground-disturbance associated moderate beneficial impact. with proposed projects, and avoidance of any such resources, if feasible, or data Under Alternative C, to protect CA- recovery, if necessary. Continuation of SCrI-240 from continuing (although the Park’s ongoing archeological lessened) exposure to erosion, the Park resource protection measures would would deflect potential flood waters have a moderate beneficial long-term away from the culturally dense area of impact on archeological resources. the site by the placement of a berm around the upstream face of the Because all other activities under archeological site. This barrier, in Alternative C would be the same as addition to deflecting flood waters from those described for Alternative B, the site, would also reduce the potential potential impacts to archeological for unauthorized collection of materials resources would also be the same. by reducing the visibility and the potential for exposure of intact deposits. 4.4.3.1.2 Cumulative Impacts However, because the effectiveness of this barrier in protecting the resource and Alternative C would have the same its long-term structural integrity is not cumulative impacts on archeological assured, construction of the barrier is resources as described in Section considered a long-term moderate 4.3.3.1.3 for Alternative B. beneficial impact on the resource. 4.4.3.1.3 Conclusion (including Under Alternative C, the Park would impairment) continue its current management practices to protect known archeological Alternative C would have the same resources at Prisoners Harbor that impacts on archeological resources as contribute to the Archeological District those described above in Section 4.3.4.1 and additional unknown archeological for Alternative B. The only difference resources that may be present. These would be a slighter less potential for
Environmental Consequences - 195
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement removal of invasive non-native species Implementation of mitigation measure from the wetlands restoration area to would result in a major long-term impact archeological resources because beneficial impact to the resource. of the smaller area of land disturbance. An archeologist would be present during 4.4.3.2 Historical Resources all ground disturbing activities associated with invasive plant and fill Alternative C – 1/3 Wetland Restoration removal to ensure that any currently with Partial Berm Removal is identical unknown archaeological resources that to Alternative B except that 2.1 acres of may be encountered would receive wetland would be restored instead of the proper consideration. Therefore, similar 3.1 acres restored under Alternative B, to Alternative B, these activities would requiring the removal of 6 of the 8 cattle have a minor short-term adverse impact corrals, 6 of the 8 telephone poles and 2 on archeological resources. of the 3 water troughs. Prior to commencement of invasive plant Once the berm is removed and the fill removal and other earthmoving activities site is constructed, it would help protect in this area, the entire corral complex and preserve that portion of the would be photographed and archeological site from wind and water- documented, including documentation of induced erosion and the potential for construction methods and materials. This unauthorized removal of cultural information would be archived at Park material. This is considered a long-term Headquarters. moderate beneficial impact. 4.4.3.2.1 Effects of wetlands and The level of impact archeological floodplain restoration resources from Alternative C would not result in impairment of park resources Retaining two of the eight cattle corrals, that fulfill the specific purposes including the scale house, would help to identified in the enabling legislation or convey to visitors the historic use of that are essential to the natural or Prisoners Harbor for cattle ranching and cultural integrity of the park. would be immediately visible to visitors accessing the island from Prisoners 4.4.3.1.4 Mitigation and Monitoring Harbor pier. However, the loss of six of the eight cattle corrals would diminish The Park’s maintenance activities would the historic design and feeling of the be expanded to included monitoring the corral complex as it existed during the protective barrier at CA-SCrI-240 after period of historic significance to the flood events to check for structural extent that it would no longer be integrity and effectiveness in protecting considered as contributing to the the archeological deposit. Repairs or Ranching District. Their removal, modifications to the berm would be however, would not diminish the made as needed to ensure protection of integrity of the Ranching District to the the resource. extent that the Ranching District’s National Register eligibility would be jeopardized.
Environmental Consequences - 196
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Wetland restoration under Alternative C the warehouse generally along Navy would have a moderate adverse impact Road and the remnant of the rose and on historic resources. agave garden adjacent to the water pipe. These management practices would have The hunt club cement foundation post- a long-term moderate beneficial impact dates the period of significance and does on the historic resources at Prisoners not contribute to the Ranching District. Harbor that contribute to the significance Therefore, its removal would have no of the Ranching District. impact on contributing historic resources. 4.4.3.2.2 Cumulative Impacts
The designated loading/unloading area Removal of a portion of the cattle for equipment, vehicles, and other large corrrals, telephone poles, and water materials and supplies would be located troughs in the wetland restoration area adjacent to a portion of the cattle corrals and the removal of the historic rock and would introduce a visual element retaining wall that could be present that is out of character with the historic beneath the berm would reduce the setting in this area. However, because its contribution that small-scale features at use would be short-term it is considered Prisoners Harbor make to the Ranching to be a short-term minor adverse impact District. However, because many such on historic resources. featues remain throughout the Ranching District, and the remaining historic Under Alternative C, the Park would resources at Prisoners Harbor would continue its management practices to continue to convey the historic use of protect historic resources at Prisoners Prisoners Harbor for cattle ranching, Harbor that contribute to the Ranching their loss would make a minor District. These practices consist of contribution to cumulative adverse maintaining the appearance of the impacts on the Historic District as a remaining cattle corrals and scale house whole. through painting, gate repair, and replacement of degraded boards and 4.4.3.2.3 Conclusion (including hardware; and periodic mowing of the impairment) plants inside the corrals; implementing an ongoing invasive plant control Alternative C would have the same program that eliminates the potential impacts on historic resources as damage to historic features that these Alternative B except that retaining a plants and their root systems can cause if portion of the cattle corrals, telephone left unchecked; maintaining the historic poles, and troughs would help convey to appearance and condition of historic visitors the historical use of Prisoners trees by periodically trimming the Harbor for cattle ranching. The removal branches to maintain their health and of six of the eight cattle corrals would historic appearance; maintaining the two diminish the historic design and feeling historic roads within the Project Area: of the corral complex as it existed during Navy Road and the road to the Main the period of historic significance to the Ranch; and avoiding the location of the extent that it would no longer be below-ground water pipe that runs from considered a small-scale landscape
Environmental Consequences - 197
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement feature and a contributing element to the methods and materials. This information cultural landscape Therefore, vegetation would be archived at Park Headquarters. and fill removal from the 2.1-acre wetland restoration area is considered a Documentation of these resources prior long-term moderate adverse impact on to their removal would serve to retain historic resources. Use of a designated the information provided by the corrals loading/unloading area is considered a and other features regarding the historic short-term minor adverse visual impact development of the ranch. However this on historic resources. measure would not fully mitigate the loss of the corral complex and other Although the project would remove a small-scale features. No additional substantial portion of the remaining feasible mitigation measures have been cattle corrals at Prisoners Harbor and identified to further reduce the impact. their removal would reduce the Therefore it remains a moderate adverse contribution that Prisoners Harbor makes impact. to the Ranching District, their removal would not diminish the integrity of the 4.4.4 Social Resources Ranching District to the extent that the Ranching District’s National Register 4.4.4.1 Recreation and Visitor eligibility would be jeopardized. This is Experience because even with their loss, the many buildings, structures, small-scale 4.4.4.1.1 Effects of wetlands and features, and landscape elements floodplain restoration throughout the island that are contributing characteristics to the As they relate to the visitor experience, Historic District would continue to the activities of wetlands and floodplain reflect the ranching history of the island. restoration are same as Alternative B; Therefore, Alternative C would not therefore the effects are the same as result in impairment of historical described in Section 4.3.4.1.1, with the resources because it would not result in a exception of the removal of corrals and major, adverse impact to a resource or relocation of the scale house. value whose conservation is necessary to fulfill specific purposes of the Park; key The removal of six of the eight historic to the natural or cultural integrity of the cattle corrals would have a minor Park; or identified as a goal in the Park’s adverse and permanent impact on the planning documents. visitor experience. With two of the corrals as well as the surrounding 4.4.3.2.4 Mitigation and Monitoring ranching structures remaining intact, the historic contribution of the corrals to Prior to commencement of invasive ranching operations (see Section plant removal and other earthmoving 4.3.3.2.1 would be impacted but not activities in the corral complex area, the destroyed. The scope and landscape entire corral complex should be context of the Ranching District would, photographed and documented, however, be more fully conveyed by the including documentation of construction use of corral photographs in a new interpretive display at the Visitors
Environmental Consequences - 198
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Center. Additionally, the interpretive signage at two locations and the viewing signage onsite will describe the bench along the wetland periphery will Ranching District features, past and have moderate beneficial impacts, as present. described.
The addition of interpretive signage at 4.4.4.1.4 Conclusion two locations and the viewing bench, and additional interpretive material at Wetlands restoration activities will have the Visitors Center will have moderate short-term minor adverse impacts to a long-term beneficial effects on the small number of visitors (and residents visitor experience. The bench will of the Navy site) whose passage to Del contribute to the visitors’ appreciation Norte campground and the Navy site for the natural and cultural features of will be re-routed during the 4-6 weeks of the Harbor, and the signage will provide actual restoration work. Access to specific information about the recreational features in the interior of the ecological, cultural and historical Island will still be available, though context of the site area, and the inconvenienced during restoration. relationship of the natural resources to the history of human activities at Removal of the corrals will produce Prisoners Harbor. This contributes to moderate long-term adverse impacts to the Park’s visitor experience goals. the visitor experience. The remaining corrals can convey only a portion of the The visibility of restoration work and historic context of the ranching period, equipment within the Prisoners Harbor which will be partially mitigated by the would produce a minor temporary visual additions and improvements to and aural impact on the visitor interpretation onsite and at the Visitors experience. Center.
4.4.4.1.2 Effects of stream channel Riparian restoration will have short-term restoration minor adverse impacts to a small number of visitors whose passage to the Central The effects of Alternative C are identical Valley will be re-routed during the 6 to those in Alternative B, as described in week segments of actual restoration, Section 4.3.4.1.2. which will occur several times over the multi-year duration of this restoration. 4.4.4.1.3 Cumulative impacts 4.5 Sustainability and Long- Alternative C would contribute to Term Management moderate adverse cumulative impacts on the visitor experience. The removal of This section of the analysis will focus in all but two of the cattle corrals impacts on the relationship between local short- the overall historic impact of viewing the term uses of the environment and the site. Photos and descriptions of the maintenance and enhancement of long corrals will be included in new term productivity, irreversible and interpretive material at the Visitors Center. The addition of interpretive
Environmental Consequences - 199
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement irretrievable commitments of resources, location and by including the and unavoidable adverse impacts. photographic and historic documentation of the corrals in interpretive treatments 4.5.1 Relationship between Local onsite and at the Visitors Center, but the Short-Term Uses of the Environment loss would not be fully mitigated. The and the Maintenance and Ranching District overall would still be Enhancement of Long-Term eligible for listing on the National Productivity Register.
For any of the alternatives considered, 4.5.3 Significant and Unavoidable no long-term management possibilities Adverse Impacts or Park productivity of resources are being sacrificed for the immediate use of Impacts to one contributing feature of NPS-owned land. The actions of the Santa Cruz Island Ranching District, restoring the wetlands, reconnecting the eligible for listing in the National creek to its natural floodplain, protecting Register of Historic Places, are the known archeological site, and moderate, unavoidable, and adverse, in restoring the riparian corridor along both alternatives. In Alternative B, the Cañada del Puerto Creek meet the long- impact is more severe because all the term goals of protecting the significant corrals are removed; in Alternative C, natural, ecological, and cultural values the remaining presence of two corrals of the Park. If the Park chooses the would still convey some of their historic Preferred Alternative, in which the ranch role of the Ranching District to the Park corrals are entirely removed as part of visitor, but removal of contributing the wider wetlands restoration and features still would constitute a moderate removal of the berm, the remaining adverse impact. In both alternatives, the Prisoners Harbor area ranching Ranching District overall would still structures will still contribute to the retain sufficient historic integrity to eligibility of the Santa Cruz Island maintain its eligibility for listing. Ranching District to the NRHP, and overall Park historic and archeological The No Action alternative would leave resources will be preserved in a manner the Native American village site at risk consistent with its goals and of erosion from a major flood event, as management policies. well as from the threat from illegal collection of archeological remains. 4.5.2 Irreversible and Irretrievable Alternatives B & C reduce this threat by Commitments of Resources reconnecting the creek to its floodplain.
If the Park chooses the Preferred 4.6 Growth-Inducing Impacts Alternative, the removal of all the historic ranching corrals would There are no activities within the constitute an irreversible commitment of Proposed Action that would induce resources, because the demolition of residential or commercial growth within historic structures cannot be reversed. the Park or its surrounding areas. This loss would be partially mitigated by moving the scale house to its 1960’s
Environmental Consequences - 200
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
4.7 Summary Comparison of Impacts by Alternative
Alternative A—No Alternative B—2/3 Alternative C—1/3 Action Restoration, all corrals Restoration, 2 corrals removed remain The No Action Alternative B would have Impacts of Alternative Alternative would have long-term major beneficial C would be similar to moderate adverse effects impacts on native plants Alternative B; however, on native plant from wetland and riparian there would be 2.1 acres communities due to restoration, which would of wetlands restored and continued spread of improve functioning and the major beneficial eucalyptus, loss in areal ecological value of native impacts in Alternative C extent of native plant vegetation communities. would benefit native communities, and There would be an vegetation to a lesser continued degraded additional 3.1 acres of extent than Alternative conditions without native wetland B as fewer acres of wetland or riparian communities and 20.04 wetlands would be restoration. acres of native riparian restored. communities. Short-term negligible and minor adverse effects would Native Plant communities Native Plant occur with construction activities associated with wetland and riparian restoration and non-native plant control which would disturb or destroy existing vegetation. The Santa Cruz Island Riparian and wetland Impacts of Alternative silver lotus would not be restoration would not C would be the same as affected by the No provide any new habitat Alternative B. Action Alternative as no for re-establishment of actions would occur to special status plant species disturb habitat or in the Project Area. There individuals. would not be any impacts on the Santa Cruz Island silver lotus as there would T&E Plant Species be no activity in the creek bed where they occur.
Environmental Consequences - 201
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
The No Action Alternative B would have Impacts of Alternative Alternative would have long-term major beneficial C would be similar to minor adverse impact on effects from eradication Alternative B; however, non-native plants and control of non-native one less acre of non- themselves, with plants with the removal of native plants would be continued control of 1737 eucalyptus trees on removed during wetland invasive species 20.02 acres of restored restoration. producing minor riparian habitat, and beneficial impacts on removal of non-native native vegetation. plants on 3.1 acres of restored wetlands. Short- term negligible to minor adverse effects would occur with construction Non-Native Plants activities associated with wetland and riparian restoration as ground disturbance and creation of new open areas during restoration activities could result in the colonization by non-native species. Current management Alternative B would have Impacts of Alternative practices that would long-term moderate C would be similar to continue under the No beneficial effects on Alternative B; however, Action Alternative wildlife from 3.1 acres of there would be one less would not alter wetland, wetland and 20.04 acres of acre of wetlands riparian or other wildlife riparian restoration that restoration for wildlife habitat. Thus there would provide high habitat, so the reduced would not likely be any quality habitat. Short-term buffer from human
changes to habitat or negligible and minor activities would limit
Wildlife abundance of wildlife adverse effects would waterfowl breeding and under this alternative. occur from disturbance feeding. In addition, and destruction of habitat the smaller restoration and disturbance and area would likely limit displacement of species benefits to species during construction richness compared to activities. Alternative B.
Environmental Consequences - 202
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
The No Action Alternative B would have Impacts of Alternative Alternative would have minor beneficial impacts C would be similar to negligible to minor on the Island scrub-jay and Alternative B; however, adverse impacts on the the bald eagle with there would be one less Island scrub-jay, and no restoration of wetlands acre of wetlands impacts on any of the and riparian habitat. restoration for wildlife other special status Wetland restoration would habitat. species. have minor to moderate beneficial impacts on bats, island fox, deer mouse, harvest mouse, and slender salamander by providing additional habitat. Riparian restoration would have negligible to moderate beneficial T&E Wildlife impacts on bats, island fox, slender salamander, island fence lizard, and gopher snake by providing additional habitat. There would be short-term negligible to minor adverse impacts due to disturbance and displacement during construction activities. No Impact – flood Negligible to Moderate Same as Alternative B elevations and frequency Adverse impacts and would remain. There Major Beneficial impacts would be no increase in on hydrologic processes. stormwater or flood Removal of the berm storage and existing would increase stream velocities and connectivity of the power would continue. channel to its floodplain.
Removal of the berm would increase flood frequency, but decrease
Hydrologic processes flood water velocity and power. Building protective berm around arch site would further reduce risk.
Environmental Consequences - 203
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
No Impact – no new Major Beneficial Impact Major Beneficial wetlands or increased to hydrologic and Impact from creation of hydrologic connectivity ecological function from 2.1 acres of wetland, between Cañada Del creation of 3.1 acres of although functional Puerto Creek and the wetland. benefits would likely Wetlands floodplain would occur. not be as great as from Alt B. No Impact – water Moderate Beneficial Similar to Alternative B quality conditions would impacts from removal of except that there would not change. the berm and reconnection be only 2.1 acres of of the channel to the additional wetlands floodplain. Re-creation of added to the floodplain, 3.1 acres of wetlands so beneficial impacts increases floodplain would likely be capacity. Negligible reduced. Water Quality Adverse effects from removal of non-native eucalyptus. No adverse impacts; Short-term negligible to Similar to B except moderate beneficial minor adverse impact on slightly reduced adverse impact from continued arch resources from impact from less maintenance and removal of eucalyptus and disturbance. protection creation and use of fill disposal site. Long-term moderate to major beneficial impact to site 240 from reduced risk of erosion from flooding after berm removal and Archeological Resources arch site berm construction. Minor adverse impacts Moderate long-term Reduced but still from natural degradation adverse impact on moderate long-term of features; moderate contributing features from adverse impact on beneficial impact from removing corrals; Minor contributing features continued maintenance adverse impact from from removing corrals. Historical Historical Resources and protection removal of historic rock retaining wall
Environmental Consequences - 204
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
No adverse impacts; Short-term minor impacts Same as Alternative B, moderate beneficial from inconvenience; except long-term impact from potential Moderate long-term adverse impact from facilities improvements adverse impact from corral corral removal is minor. erience p
Visitor in GMP removal. Minor
Ex improvements from bench and new signage
Environmental Consequences - 205 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND
RESTORATION PLAN
CHAPTER FIVE
CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION
5.0 Consultation and 5.1.1 California State Historic Preservation Office Coordination The State Historic Preservation Office This chapter includes a summary of was contacted regarding the potential efforts to involve federal, state, and local effects on the cattle corrals in the project agencies, organizations, and the public, area. A letter providing information and including local community members in seeking concurrence with the Area of the planning process for the proposed Potential Effect and the park’s project beginning with a preliminary determination of effects on properties public scoping meeting in April 2006. listed on and eligible for the National Register of Historic Places was sent 5.1 Consultation October 18, 2008. Following a site visit with staff from the Office of Historic Agency scoping was conducted Preservation (OHP) and representatives throughout the planning process to from the tribe to the Prisoners Harbor ensure that agencies were familiar with project area on February 24, 2009, the the project and had ample opportunity to park evaluated suggestions made by the provide input while it was easy to OHP staff and consulted with the Tribe incorporate suggestions into planning regarding treatment of the east side of documents. the drainage. A letter from the Tribe was received on September 4, 2009 and Agencies consulted with during the a concurrence letter from OHP was planning process include the U.S. Fish received on January 22, 2010. This and Wildlife Service, California State correspondence is contained in Historical Preservation Office, U.S. Appendix G. Army Corps of Engineers, California Coastal Commission, California 5.1.2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department of Fish and Game. Under Section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act, the park reviewed the proposed activities and determined whether any listed federally listed species may be affected. A species list
Consultation and Coordination - 206
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement was prepared for the US Fish and 5.1.6 Coastal Commission Wildlife service in a letter dated August The Coastal Commission was contacted 1, 2008. In a letter dated September 11, regarding a Consistency Determination. 2008 (Appendix H), the FWS believed The park has determined that the that there were no federally listed plant restoration of the coastal wetland and species in the project area and the riparian corridor would not affect public proposed project could support the only access, recreation, the marine listed animal species, the island fox environment, or the coastal zone, and (Urocyon littoralis cruzae). Proposed therefore, does not require a consistency avoidance measures during project determination. A copy of the negative implementation for the island fox are declaration is included in Appendix I. described in Chapter 4. 5.2 Public Involvement Process 5.1.3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 5.2.1 Internal Scoping A Cowardin Wetlands Delineation was completed during 2008 by the NPS In 2003 Channel Islands National Park Water Resources Division. It is received Technical Assistance from the contained in Appendix D. The U.S. NPS Water Resources Division to Army Corps of Engineers was contacted evaluate the feasibility of wetland regarding the need for a Clean Water restoration at Prisoners Harbor on Santa Act Section 404 Wetlands Permit and/or Cruz Island. a Rivers and Harbors Act section 10 or 13. An application for A Clean Water 5.2.2 External Scoping Act Section 404 permit will be submitted by the park. The National Park Service sought input on a range of concerns and 5.1.4 California Regional Water environmental issues and suggestions for Quality Control Board alternative methods for implementing the proposed project. This summary The California Regional Water Quality informs the public on the extent and Control Board will be contacted nature of the comments received by the regarding the need for a Clean Water NPS during public scoping. Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification. 5.2.2.1 Public Scoping
5.1.5 California Department of Fish A preliminary public input meeting was and Game conducted at Prisoners Harbor on Santa Cruz Island on April 5, 2007. Thirty- The California Department of Fish and three interested individuals, experts, and Game has been contacted regarding a partners were invited. Twenty-one non- Streambed Alteration Agreement and NPS individuals attended. The agenda incidental take permit. This project will for the meeting included introductions, not require a Stream Alteration or site orientation with an informal walking Incidental Take Permit. tour of the site, followed by a round-
Consultation and Coordination - 207
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement robin discussion with opportunity to ask 5.1, Table 5.2). questions and express concerns (Table
Table 5.1 Informal walking tour included NPS experts stationed at specific locations to answer questions. LOCATION TOPIC DISCUSSION EXPERT A. Road to Hydrology Removing levee, changes in Mike Martin Archeological hydrology site B. Eastern Wetland Restoration method, removing and Joel Wagner edge of corrals Restoration relocating fill, revegetation
C. Warehouse Historic District Cattle/sheep corrals Ann Huston D. Archeological Location and extent of Kelly Minas Archeological site Archeological site site E. Seating Environmental Public Input to the NEPA process Marie Denn area Compliance F. Beach Natural Backbarrier wetland, history, Kate Faulkner, Resource ecological benefits Values
Table 5.2 Major issues and concerns expressed during the on-island site visit. MAJOR ISSUE CONCERN NAME Visitor Experience Control visitor impacts (mischief, vandalism) Island Packers using boardwalks, viewing platforms Control and educate the public so no damage is Santa Ynez band done to arch site of Chumash Indians Educate visitors to reduce potential for Descendant, Santa disturbance or desecration of arch site Cruz Island Chumash Historic Reduce size of corrals to 55’, this creates Santa Cruz Resources buffer, reduces potential visitor impacts, and Island preserves part of corral Foundation Natural Resources Don’t extirpate harvest mouse during Santa Barbara construction Museum of Plan for desirable wetland species Natural History Do not lose human history Plan for veg. management in corrals Control Kikuyu grass
Consultation and Coordination - 208
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Campground near wetland will affect wetland re:buffer Potential for increased sedimentation and/or University of decreased run-off should be included in the California model Natural Reserve System Eucalyptus are a recent occurrence and The Nature disrupt water budget Conservancy Avoid extirpation of harvest mouse during Interested construction individual Archeological Preserve arch site, preserve levee adjacent to Subject Matter Resources arch site, add berm to south side of arch site Expert Removing levee may impact arch site Santa Ynez band of Chumash Indians Park Planning Should not proceed without GMP Santa Cruz Island Foundation Maintenance Potential long-term maintenance needs Interested Earth moving concerns, deposition of fill individual Potential for water impacts to road and arch site
A Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS and conduct public scoping was The NPS mailed approximately 240 published in the Federal Register on public scoping announcements with the June 11, 2008. On June 12, 2008, a time, date, and location of the public press release announcing public scoping open houses. was distributed to the Ventura County Star and the Santa Barbara News-Press, Approximately nine members of the as well as 73 other media outlets, public attended the public open house at including newspaper, radio stations, and Channel Islands National Park television stations. The press release Headquarters and approximately 13 explained the public scoping process, members of the public attended the announced two public open houses, and public open house at the Santa Barbara provided the web address for Channel Public Library. Islands National Park and NPS park planning. The NOI and press release The 45-day public scoping period closed were posted on the park website. A July 27, 2008. notice of the public scoping open houses was printed in the Ventura County Star 5.2.2.2 Public Response to Scoping on June 23, 2008 and in the Santa Barbara News-Press on June 23, 2008.
Consultation and Coordination - 209
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Five individuals or private organizations restoration, one letter expressed concern hand delivered or emailed comments about park planning and the impacts of regarding the Prisoners Harbor Coastal levee removal, another letter wanted to Wetland Restoration Plan. Commenting see support for the project from the organizations included The Nature Chumash. Conservancy and the Santa Cruz Island Foundation. No comments were The following table consolidates scoping received from federal or state agencies. comments under major issue topics. Four letters supported wetland Table 5.3 Scoping Comments by Major Issue Topic ISSUE TOPIC COMMENT Park Planning Enabling legislation does not mandate Santa Cruz Island restoration of island conditions to pre- Foundation European times
Park should not undertake Prisoners Harbor Santa Cruz Island Coastal Wetland Restoration without a current Foundation General Management Plan
Historic Support for relocating the scalehouse and Interested Resources removing the corrals Individual
Concern that removing the levee will cause Santa Cruz Island irreparable harm to archeological site, historic Foundation warehouse, and corral system
Supports designing the wetland to prevent Interested damage to road and warehouse during Individual flooding
Archeological Support for making the archeological site Interested Resources visible with signage Individual
Chumash tribe should support the project Journalist
Wetland General support for restoring wetland and The Nature Restoration riparian ecosystems Conservancy, Interested Individual, journalist Eucalyptus Supports removing eucalyptus Interested removal individual
Consultation and Coordination - 210
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Visitor Would support a “nature” trail with signage Interested experience describing wildlife, Chumash and ranching individual history along the perimeter of the wetland
5.3 Notification and Distribution formate on the Channel Islands National of Draft EIS Park website, the NPS Park Planning website, and the availability of paper The park widely distributed the draft EIS copies of the draft EIS in four public for comment. Methods the park used to libraries to government agencies, notify the general public, organizations, organizations, libraries, businesses, and and agencies that the draft EIS was individuals for a total of 247 available for review and comment announcements. included: 5.3.1 Draft EIS List of Recipients Federal Register A Notice of Availability for the draft Government EIS was published in the Federal Army Corps of Engineers Register on May 15, 2009. California Coastal Commission California Coastal National Monument Press Release California Department of Fish and Game The park issued a Press Release on May California Department of Parks and 26, 2009 announcing the availability of Recreation the draft EIS for comment, the length of California Office of Historic the comment period, and the time, date, Preservation and location of the Public Open House. California Resources Agency, CERES California State Clearing House Public Open House California State Lands Commission One Public Open House was held on California State Parks June 23, 2009 from 5 pm to 7 pm at Central Coast Regional Water Quality Channel Islands National Park Robert J, Control Board Largomarsino Visitor Center. Four Channel Islands National Marine interested individuals attended. Sanctuary City of Oxnard Website City of Santa Barbara The park posted the draft EIS on the City of Ventura Channel Islands National Park website County of Santa Barbara and the NPS Park Planning website on Honorable Barbara Boxer May 15, 2009. The park invited Honorable Dianne Feinstein comment on the draft EIS through both Honorable Lois Capps websites. Honorable Elton Gallegly Honorable Brad Sherman List of Recipients of Announcement of Honorable James Hansen Availability of Draft EIS Los Padres National Forest The park mailed an announcement of the Minerals Management Service availability the draft EIS in electronic National Marine Fisheries Service
Consultation and Coordination - 211
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Naval Warfare Center San Buenaventura American Indian Santa Monica Mountains National Council Recreation Area San Fernando Mission Indians United States Environmental Protection San Luis Obispo County Chumash Agency Council United States Fish and Wildlife Service Santa Barbara Audubon Society United States Geological Service Santa Barbara Botanic Garden Vandenberg Airforce Base Santa Barbara Museum of Natural Ventura County Air Pollution Control History District Santa Catalina Island Conservancy Santa Cruz Island Foundation Libraries, Organizations, and Businesses Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians Alpine Training Center Smithsonian Institute Aspen Helicopters Southwind Kayak Center Bararene Chumash Council Success Oriented Achievement Realized Barbareno/Ventureno Band of Chumash (SOAR) Indians Terra Marine Boojum Institute The Dunn School California Preservation Foundation The Nature Conservancy California State Coastal Conservancy Thousand Oaks Library Channel Islands Aviation Tribal Elders Council Santa Ynez Band Channel Islands Kayak Center of Mission Indians Chumash Maritime Association Truth Aquatics Environmental Management and University of California, Santa Barbara Planning Solutions Ventura Audubon Society Gabrieleno-Tongva Tribal Council Growing Solutions Individuals Guided Discoveries Larry Agenbroad Island Packers Scott Anderson Los Angeles Maritime Institute David Anderson Los Angeles Public Library Eleanor Arellanes Middleburg College Vincent Armenta Montrose Settlements Restoration Jeanne Arnold Program Ellen Aronson National Parks Conservation Association Frank Arredondo National Trust for Historic Preservation Adolfo Bailon NOAA Restoration Center Greg Baker Northern Chumash Tribal Council Joy Bannerman Northwestern University Brian Barnwell Orange Coast College Starleen Bellone Owl Clan Fred Benko Oxnard Public Library Steve Bennett Paddle Sports Mary Bergen Restoration Resources Shauna Bingham Salinan-Chumash Nation James Birchler Marty Blum
Consultation and Coordination - 212
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Jennifer Boyce Brooks Firestone Leannah Bradley Karen Flagg Todd Braje John Flynn Peter Brand Timothy Flynn Jean Braudaff-Kerr Paul Friesema Brian Brennan Glen Fritzler Julia Brownley Bill Fulton Roger Briggs Richard Garcia Alex Brodie Elena Gherini Johnny Brown Denny Gherini Tony Brown John Gherini Salud Carabajal Pete Gherini Harry Carter Andrea Gherini David Castanon Jim Gladson Henry Chaney Warren Glaser David Chang Michael Glassow Darlene Chirman Phylicia Gomes Michael Cohen Cathy Good Fred Collins Suzanne Goode Paul Collins Inez Goodwin Kirk Connally Paul Grossgold Mark Connally Lois Grunwald Brian Connor Darcee Guttilla Roberta Cordero James Haas Coleen Cory Rick Hanks Natalie Cosentino Donald Hartley Rachel Couch Ruth Hartman Diane Cross Sean Hastings Marla Daily Brain Hatfield Nan Deal Laird Henkel Mark Delaplane Andres Herrera Robert DeLong Thomas Holden Diane Devine Grant House Deanne DiPietro Jeff Howarth Wayne Donaldson Alissa Hummer Milford Donaldson Karl Hutterer Richard Doutt Mark Hyatt Terry Dressler Deb Jensen Charles Drost John Johnson Rachel Duarte Kori Johnson Sam Dunlap Ann Jones Bill Ehorn Randy Judycki Krista Fahy Steven Junak Iya Falcone Tom Kiernan Bob Feron John King Ed Fess Mick Kronman
Consultation and Coordination - 213
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
John Kuizenga Jaret Owens Calvin Lamb Gary Pace Mike Lamm Rosa Pace Lyndal Laughrin Rachel Pace Meredith Laws Christine Palmer Carmelita Lemos Greg Pelka Robin Lemos Luis Perez Frank Lemos Juanita Perez Garcia Joan Lentz Darryl Perlin Betsy Lester Robert David Peterson Tommy Liddell Karen Prioleau Eric Little Carol Pulido Annie Little Theresa Raitt Peter Lopez James Raives Teresa Lopez Tina Reed Kote Lotah Michael Rees Jennifer Lucchesi Virginia Reyes Drew Madrigal Torben Rick Lisa Mangione Freddie Romero Beatrice Marcoe Sarah Romero Kris Mashburn George Runner Drew Mashburn Dwight Sanders Dean Maulhardt M.A. Sanjayan David Mazurkiewicz Heane Schneider Gerry McChesney Ed Schreiner Travis McDaniel Richard Schubel Kathryn McEachern Steven Schwartz Genie McGaugh Nancy Settle Charlie McLaughlin Betty Silva Robert Median Larry Simon John Menke Marianne Slaughter Don Mills Mary Small James Monahan David Smith Carl Morehouse Sam Spaulding Scott Morrison Alex Stone Sean Morton Ed Summers Vivian Murai Jenny Theodoro Barbara Murray Bob Thiel Pedro Nava Tim Thomas Terri Nevins Robert Treanor Diane Noda Steve Treanor Mark Oberman Elise Tripp Jack O’Connell Leo Tumamait Justin Olenik Patrick Tumamait Mike Ong Poss Turner Ruby Ortega Carol Tyson
Consultation and Coordination - 214
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Amber Tyson Resources Division in Ft. Collins, Patty Velez CO. Lotus Vermeer Mark Vigil Kelly Minas, BA in Anthropology, Mark Vigil, Sr. Archeologist at Channel Islands Julie Ward National Park. Christy Weir Mark White Kevin Noon, PhD in Wetlands Ecology, Dieter Wilken Certified Professional Wetland Das Williams Scientist with the NPS Water Robin Wills Resources Division in Lakewood, John Wilson CO. Joe Winkelmaier David Witting Paula Power, MS in Plant Ecology, Rachel Wolstenholm Vegetation Ecologist at Channel William Wyatt Islands National Park. Debra Yang Arthur Zapf Joel Wagner, MS in Environmental Donald Zapf Science, Certified Professional John Zaragoza Wetland Scientist with the NPS Water Resources Division in 5.4 List of Preparers Lakewood, CO.
Individuals who participated in the Mangi Environmental Group preparation of this Environmental Impact Statement are listed below: Mark Blevins, MS Geography, GIS Specialist National Park Service Bruce Kaplan, Master of Studies in Environmental Law, Project Marie Denn, MESM Master in Manager Environmental Science and Anna Lundin, M.S., Environmental Management, Aquatic Ecologist Engineering, Wetlands with the Pacific West Region. Jim Mangi, Ph.D., Ecology, Project Oversight Ann Huston, MA in Historic Eveline Martin, MS Forestry, Senior Preservation, Chief of Cultural Biologist Resources Division for Channel Ian Martin, MS Forestry, Biologist Islands National Park. Pam Sarlouis, Document Manager Philip Sczerzenie, Ph.D Wildlife Derek Lohuis, BA in History, Park Biology, Consulting Biologist Ranger at Channel Islands National Park. Winzler & Kelly
Mike Martin, MS in Watershed Science, Brian Bacciarini - B.S. Environmental Hydrologist with NPS Water Studies, Hydrology
Consultation and Coordination - 215
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Pat Collins - M.S. Environmental Health Sciences, Technical Review David Demko - M.S. Ocean Engineering, Hydrology, Coastal Processes Carol Kielusiak, MA Anthropology, Cultural Resources Carrie Lukacic, BS Natural Resources Planning & Interpretation, Wetlands and Water Quality, W&K Project Manager Tony Williams - B.S. Civil Engineering, US Navy Civil Engineer Corps Officer School, Hydrology, Coastal Processes
Consultation and Coordination - 216 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND
RESTORATION PLAN
CHAPTER SIX
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
6.0 Response to Comments
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to analyze the comments given to the Park by the public. The Final EIS is to be an accurate analysis of impacts of the proposed action and the alternatives. Public and agency review of the draft helps to ensure this accuracy. Analysis of comments allows the Park to identify the public’s opinion on the project, and to garner new information on resources, alternatives, and environmental issues. The Park uses public comments to modify alternatives; supplement, improve, or modify our analysis; make factual corrections; or clarify information in the draft version.
The four sections in this chapter are: • Introduction • Commentator Summary • Copy of Commentator Letters and E-mails • NPS Response to Comments
In total, 11 letters or email correspondences were provided to the Park during the 60-day comment period for the Draft EIS. From this correspondence, the Park identified 11 substantive comments. Substantive comments are those that are not simple statements for or against the proposal, but rather those comments requiring additional explanation or analysis of data and those that questioned facts or conclusions contained in the Draft EIS. Letters of support, labeled NA, were included in this chapter. Substantive comments were divided into 9 categories.
Response to Comments - 217
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Commentator Summary
Commentator Name Comment Category Comment Number NOAA (National Marine Mitigation/Avoidance 1 Sanctuary) Comments Noted NA California Coastal Legal/Regulatory 2 Commission U.S. Environmental Best Management 3 Protection Agency Region IX Practices Santa Barbara Channel Eelgrass impacts 4 Keepers Grunion impacts 5 Comments Noted NA The Nature Conservancy Comments Noted NA The Ventura Audubon Comments Noted NA Society, Inc. Interested Individual Visitor Experience 6 Historic Resources 7 Comment noted 8 Flood flows 9 Interested Individual Visitor Experience see comment #6 Historic Resources 10 Interested Individual Removal of non- 11 native vegetation Interested Individual Comments Noted NA Interested Individual Comments Noted NA
Response to Comments - 218
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
1
Response to Comments - 219
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Response to Comments - 220
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
18069 Protect 2 4 The California Coastal Commission notes that Section 07/13/20 No (4) Unaffiliated California Simon, Larry . No and 7 5.1.6 of the DEIS states that the Commission will be 09 Individual Coastal 45 Fremont Street, enhance 5 contacted regarding a consistency determination. A Commission Suite 2000, San resources 1 consistency determination (CD) will need to be Francisco, CA at 6 prepared by the NPS and submitted to the Coastal 2 94105 Prisoners Commission for the proposed project prior to San Francisco, CA Harbor implementation of the project. The CD should include 94105 an analysis of the project's consistency with the USA applicable policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act, [email protected] including policies addressing public access and .gov recreation, marine resources and water quality, environmentally sensitive habitats, cultural resources, and visual resources.
Response to Comments - 221
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
3
Response to Comments - 222
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Response to Comments - 223
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Response to Comments - 224
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Response to Comments - 225
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
4
Response to Comments - 226
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
5
Response to Comments - 227
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Response to Comments - 228
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Response to Comments - 229
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Response to Comments - 230
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Response to Comments - 231
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Response to Comments - 232
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Response to Comments - 233
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
6
7
8
9
Response to Comments - 234
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
18069 Protect and enhance 2365 1 Thank-you for hosting the informative public information on July 1st at the CINP Visitor's Center. It was a pleasure resources at 7 meeting and talking with Russell, Kate, Paula and Ann. As a Channel Islands Naturalist Corp volunteer, I Prisoners Harbor appreciate the opportunity to learn more about the history and geology of our Channel Islands.
I am very much in favor of restoring the wetlands at Prisoners Harbor. Anytime natural habitat we have altered or destroyed can be returned to what it once was is a big win for the plants and animals that once utililzed the habitat. The proposals you have strike a good balance between retaining the important cultural resources - both the midden site and the ranch buildings and corrals - and recovering the lost habitat.
Here are several items that are important to me:
1. Enhancing the visitor experience: Providing visitors with views and information about this restored habitat. I would like to see a "nature" trail along the perimeter of the wetlands with occasional signage describing not only the wildlife present but also information about the Chumash and ranching history.
2. Protecting cultural resources: Ensuring that the recovered wetland area is set back far enough to prevent damage to the road and buildings even in a worse-case flooding scenario. 10
3. Don't bury the midden archeology site. I'm no archeologist, but it seems wrong try to hide it from view. I'd rather you make it visible and even point it out on a sign while finding other ways to protect it.
4. I have no problem with the relocating of the scale house and some of the corrals. Nor do I have a problem with removal of the Eucalyptis trees.
5. One obvious concern is what you will do with the excavated dirt and the cut-down trees. I know you haven't got to that part of the planning process yet, but I'll be interested in the ideas you have when you get to that phase.
Thanks again for the opportunity to participate in this project proposal.
Joel Justin...
Response to Comments - 235
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
18069 Protect 2 5 STOP demonizing non-native species..eucalyptus are 07/13/20 No (5) Unaffiliated Kept Private Yes and 7 beautiful trees and home to many species..bionativism 09 Individual Kept Private enhance 5 is a psychological problem, not an ecological Carpinteria, CA resources 1 problem..stop killing and destroying in the name of 93013 at 6 species cleansing..this restoration is a SCAM!! non- 11 USA Prisoners natives always grow back as nature intends in spite of Kept Private Harbor the time and money you waste trying to get rid of them!
18069 Protect 2 1 I have been involved as a volunteer interpreter for 05/29/20 No (1) Unaffiliated Channel Islands Kept Private Yes and 7 Channel Islands National Park and Channel Islands 09 Individual Naturalist Corp Kept Private enhance 5 National Marine Sanctuary for over 15 years and am Westlake resources 1 very familiar with the islands in general, and with Village, CA at 6 Prisoner's Harbor/Santa Cruz Island in particular. This 91361 Prisoners includes a knowledge base of a wide variety of factors USA Harbor and issues regarding the overall environment of the Kept Private area as well as the cultural history.
I have reviewed the wetlands restoration project eir, and have attended talks and public forums regarding the project. I have also discussed it first-hand with the planners and I fully support the project.
It is my feeling that once completed, the restoration of the wetlands and this area of Prisoner's Harbor will lead to better balance in the natural environment, while protecting and even enhancing the cultural resources of the area.
The plan is well thought out and comprehensive and should go forward.
David Begun
Response to Comments - 236
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
18069 Protect and enhance 27516 3 I have reviewed the project 7/3/2009 No ffiliated Individual resources at Prisoners descripton for the NPS Harbor Alternative B - preferred alternative. I am in support of this alternative and urge this as the best environmental option.
If funding is an issue for this alternative, I am willing to volunteer for th
Response to Comments - 237 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
NPS Response to Comments
1) Project activities are focused on restoring ecosystem function of wetland and riparian communities. No project activities will take place in the intertidal zone or on the seabed. On p. 25 section 2.2.2.4.1, the EIS states: Implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Control Plan would be required of the contractor to reduce erosion of the fill disposal site and siltation in the creek and marine resources in the unlikely event of rain during the dry season.
The use of herbicides is discussed on p.23, section 2.2.2.2. The EIS states: “Any herbicides which may be considered are all equally subject to strict advance approvals through the service-wide Integrated Pest Management Program, which only allows for use of least-toxic chemicals and substances including surfactants which are appropriate for use in or near watersheds and marine waters.”
Activities will only occur during daylight hours and will not require supplemental lighting.
2) In accordance with the Federal coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 as amended, Section 307c(1), the park has determined that the restoration of the Prisoners Harbor coastal wetland and associated riparian corridor on Santa Cruz Island would have no effect upon coastal uses or resources; and therefore, does not require a consistency determination with the California Coastal Management Program. A negative determination has been prepared by the park and mailed to the California Coastal Commission.
3) On p.23, section 2.2.2.2, the EIS states: “Any herbicides which may be considered are all equally subject to strict advance approvals through the service-wide Integrated Pest Management Program, which only allows for use of least-toxic chemicals and substances including surfactants which are appropriate for use in or near watersheds and marine waters.” Furthermore, when herbicides are used on park property, signs are posted informing the public of the product being used, the location, the date and time of application, the purpose of the application, and park contact information.
Mitigation measures will be incorporated into the project Implementation Plan to prevent the unintended transport of non-native species to the island. On p. 26, section 2.2.2.4, the EIS states, “Best Management Practices would be used by the construction contractor during construction to minimize the transport of unwanted weeds to the island including inspection of all equipment and clothing for weedy species prior to transport to the island.
Mitigation measures will include educating all contracted personnel on the prevention and control of unwanted hitchhikers and the spread of non-native species. Material used in erosion control will be free of weeds and/or weed seeds, chemical additives, and non-biodegradable mesh.
References - 238
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Mitigation measures will be identified that protect air quality, including watering dry soil in excavation and fill areas and limiting the speed of vehicles on dirt roads.
4) The Cañada del Puerto creek is seasonal, flowing during the rainy season and forming a pool at the marine boulder bar. For most of the year, the marine boulder bar acts as a filter, removing sediments as the creek drains through the marine boulder bar to the ocean. The marine boulder bar typically opens briefly during the winter months when tides are high and storms are more common. Then quickly reforms. During winter storms Cañada del Puerto creek is carrying sediments from the entire 13 square mile watershed including the Central Valley.
The EIS addresses concerns about erosion and siltation during excavation and tree removal. Excavation of fill would take place during the dry season to reduce the chance of sediment transport to the creek. On p. 26, section 2.2.2.4.1 the EIS states, “Implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Control Plan would be required of the contractor to reduce erosion of the fill disposal site and siltation in the creek and marine resources in the unlikely event of rain during the dry season.” On p. 35, section 2.2.2.6, the EIS states, “Best Management Practices used during tree removal would include installation of silt fencing along the side of the creek where tree removal is taking place.”
5) The project area is separated from the beach by a remnant wetland. Construction activities will take place between the access road and the remnant wetland and will noat involve the marine boulder bar or beach area. Equipment will be staged in The Nature Conservancy parking area. Restoration activities will not occur during night hours therefore no additional lighting would be required.
6) On page 35, section 2.2.2.8, the EIS states: “The park will prepare a Comprehensive Interpretive Plan for long-term interpretation of the natural and cultural resource in the Prisoners area, with the goal of providing a range of interpretation media and opportunities without jeopardizing the resources themselves.” Prior to the completion of this plan, the resources will be interpreted through temporary wayside exhibits, site bulletins, and an interpretive guide.
7) On page 185, section 4.3.3.2.5, the EIS states: “To help interpret the historic ranching use of Prisoners Harbor, the park will build a corral structure similar to the historic sheep corrals in photos dated c. 1900 (Figure 3.8). The corrals will be situated along the row of eucalyptus trees at the base of the cliff, extending toward the pier. Design and materials will approximate the appearance of the historic sheep corrals and be determined by NPS cultural resource specialists in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office during the design phase of the project.
Response to Comments - 239
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
8) Thank-you for your comment. The legends of Figures 2.1 and 2.7 have been edited to clarify that the displayed berm (cross-hatching symbol) represents the portion of the berm that will remain after partial removal.
9) According to elevation data collected in the project area between 2004 and 2007, the marine boulder bar varies from about 7 to 12 feet above mean sea level with the higher elevations in the direction of the pier, suggesting a land surface gradient away from the pier toward the channel outlet. Previous out-of-bank flows demonstrated no tendency to threaten the pier or breach the marine boulder bar in any other location.
10) On page 181, section 4.3.3.2.1, the EIS states: “Removal of the berm would increase overbank flooding in the stream reach between the road crossing and the Native American village site. The access road and the historical warehouse are located on the extreme southwestern margin of the Canada del Puerto greater geomorphic floodplain. Under existing conditions (berm in place) high flows are contained in the channel below the road crossing, producing a backwater effect and causing floodwaters to exit the channel at the crossing. Based on anecdotal reports, this phenomenon has resulted in flood waters traveling down the road and reaching the historic warehouse. Removal of the berm will reduce hydraulic pressure on the road crossing and result in less frequent overbank flows at that location. One deimensional hydraulic modeling (HEC-RES) of this creek and its floodplain suggest that a sustained 100-year flood of 2590 cfs may still reach the elevation of the warehouse with the berm removed. However, given the non- confining nature of this fluvial system and the low gradient of the valley in this area, even this relatively rare event would not reach depths greater than about 1 foot over the road, nor velocitites in excess of about 1-2 feet per second.” Therefore, based on our analysis, a 100-year flood would not be likely to cause significant damage to the historic buildings.
11) On page 79, section 3.3.2.1.1, the EIS states: “The genus Eucalyptus includes about 450 species and is native to Australia. During the late 19th century, it was widely planted throughout California, including four species on Santa Cruz Island (Junak, et al. 1995) where they were planted for ornamental and utilitarian purposes such as windbreaks and future pier pilings. Some trees planted during the ranching era are now considered contributing elements to the historic landscape (NPS Cultural Landscape Inventory, 2004). Most eucalyptus trees on the island, however, are feral offspring of historic trees.
Their presence creates an adverse environment for many native species, including passerine birds. Native plant understory used by birds for foraging and nesting is greatly reduced beneath eucalyptus trees. According to the Audubon Society, the flowers of eucalyptus trees have deep nectar cups, with a tar-like substance at the entrance of the cup. When native birds probe the flowers to get nectar and insects, this substance coats the feathers at the base of the bill and may clog the bird’s
Response to Comments - 240
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
nostrils. Additionally, eucalyptus leaf litter is highly flammable creating a fire hazard which poses a threat to historic buildings on Santa Cruz Island.”
One goal of the project is to replace eucalyptus trees with native plant species appropriate to the site. Native plants provide improved habitat for native birds and other fauna and reduce hazardous fuels buildup.
Response to Comments - 241
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND
RESTORATION PLAN
CHAPTER SEVEN
REFERENCES
7.0 References
Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 2007. Santa Cruz Island Photo Interpretation and Mapping Classification Report. Submitted to The Nature Conservancy.
Arnold, J., ed. 2001. The Origins of a Pacific Coast Chiefdom, The Chumash of the Channel Islands. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah. Pp. 48-52.
Ashley, M. and C. Wills. 1987. Analysis of mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms among Channel Island deer mice. Evolution 41(4):854-863.
Atwater, T. M. 1998. Plate Tectonic History of Southern California with Emphasis on the Western Transverse Ranges and Northern Channel Islands. Pp. 1-8 in Weigand, P.W., ed., Contributions to the geology of the Northern Channel Islands, Southern California: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Pacific Section, MP 45.
Axelrod, D. I. 1981. Role of volcanism in climate and evolution. The Geological Society of America Special Paper 185: 59.
Brix, H., B. K. Sorrell, and B. Lorenzen. 2001. Are Phragmites-dominated wetlands a net source or net sink of greenhouse gases? Aquatic Botany 69(2-4):313-324.
Burke, V. J. and J. W. Gibbons. 1995. Terrestrial buffer zones and wetland conservation: A case study of freshwater turtles in a Carolina Bay. Conservation Biology 9(6):1365-1369.
Castelle, A. J., C. Conolly, M. Emers, E. D. Metz, S. Meyer, M. Witter, S. Maurerman, T. Erickson, and S. S. Cooke. 1992. Wetland buffers: use and effectiveness. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington.
Collins, P. W. and S. B. George. 1990. Systematics and Taxonomy of Island and Mainland Populations of Western Harvest Mice (Reithrodontomys megalotis) in Southern California. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA.
Response to Comments - 242
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
Crooks, K. R., and D. Van Vuren. 1995. Resource utilization by two insular endemic mammalian carnivores, the island fox and island spotted skunk. Oecologia 104:301-307.
Dahl, T.E. 1990. Wetlands-Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's. Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report to Congress. 13 pp.
Diamond, J. H., and H. L. Jones. 1980. Breeding land birds of the Channel Islands. Pp. 597-614 in, D. M. Power, ed., The California Islands: proceedings of a multidisciplinary symposium. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, CA.
Drost, C. 2008. Email to Paula Power, September 15, 2008.
Drost, C., and L. Gelczis. 2007. Western Harvest Mouse Surveys on Santa Cruz Island, California. Draft final report submitted to Channel Islands National Park.
Fausett, L. L. 1982. Activity and movement patterns of the island fox, Urocyon littoralis, Baird 1857 (Carnivora: Canidae). Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. 132 pp.
Furlong, L. J. and A. M. Wenner. 1999. Stream fauna of Santa Cruz Island. Pp. 27 in Fifth California Islands Symposium. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History. Santa Barbara, California.
Harris, A. G., and E. Tuttle. 1977. Geology of National Parks. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 554 pp.
Hayashida, M. 2009. Using GIS to Develop Revegetation Plans, Channel Islands National Park. Report submitted to Channel Islands National Park. November 2009.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R. K. and A. Reisinger (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp.
Junak, S., T. Ayers, R. Scott, D. Wilken, and D. Young. 1995. A Flora of Santa Cruz Island. Santa Barbara Botanic Garden and California Native Plant Society, Santa Barbara and Sacramento, CA. 397 pp.
Kiff, L. F. 1980. Historical changes in resident populations of California islands raptors. Pp. 651-674 in, D. M. Power, ed., The California Islands: proceedings of a
References - 243
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
multidisciplinary symposium. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, CA.
Laughrin, L. L. 1977. The island fox: a field study of its behavior and ecology. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara. 83 pp.
Leopold, A. S., S. A. Cain, C. M. Cottam, J. M. Gabrielson, and T. L. Kimball. 1963. Wildlife management in the national parks. American Forestry 69:32-35, 61-63.
Livingston, D. S. 2006. Draft Historic Resource Study, Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, CA.
Macdonald, K. B. 1990. Marine ecological characterization, bay history and physical environment. South San Diego Bay enhancement plan, Vol. 1, Resources Atlas. San Diego Unified Port District, San Diego, CA.
Martin, M. 2007a. Memo from Mike Martin, Hydrologist, NPS Water Resources Division to Superintendent CHIS, Results of Hydraulic Modeling for Cañada del Puerto Creek, Prisoners Harbor, Santa Cruz Island, 28 February 2007.
Martin, M. 2007b. Memo from Mike Martin, Hydrologist, NPS Water Resources Division, to Superintendent CHIS, Summary and analysis of concerns expressed at the April 4, 2007 Public Meeting regarding levee removal as part of the Prisoners Harbor Estuary restoration project, 5 June 2007.
Moore, C. M., and P. W. Collins. 1995. Urocyon littoralis. Mammalian Species 489:1-7.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 1990. Estuaries of the United States: vital statistics of a national resource base. Strategic Assessment Branch, Ocean Assessments Division, Office of Oceanography and Marine Assessment, NOAA. 79 pp.
National Parks and Conservation Association. 1989. National Parks: From vignettes to a global view. A report from the Commission on Research and Resource Management Policy in the National Park System, John C. Gordon, Chair. National Parks Conservation Association, Washington, DC.
National Park Service. 1985. General management plan for Channel Islands National Park, Vol. 1. National Park Service, Ventura, California.
National Park Service. 1991. Statement for Management. National Park Service. Cultural Resources Library, PWR, Oakland, CA and Park Archives.
National Park Service. 2004. Cultural Landscape Inventory, Santa Cruz Island Ranching District. Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, CA.
References - 244
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
National Park Service. 2006. Management Policies. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Washington, D.C.
National Park Service. 2008. Yosemite National Park Invasive Plant Management Plan. National Park Service, Yosemite, California.
Nielsen, Carrie F., M.V. Armijos, S. Wheeler, T.E. Carpenter, W.M Boyce, K. Kelley, D. Brown, T.W. Scott, and W.K. Reisen. 2008. Risk Factors Associated with Human Infection during the 2006 West Nile Virus Outbreak in Davis, a Residential Community in Northern California. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygience. 78(1):53- 62.
Noon, K. 2003. Memo to Russell Galipeau, Superintendent, Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, CA. August 19, 2003.
Norris, R. M., and R. W. Webb. 1976. Geology of California. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York. 365 pp.
Overpeck, J. T., B. L. Otto-Bliesner, G. H. Miller, D. R. Muhs, R. B. Alley, and J. T. Kiehl. 2006. Paleoclimatic Evidence for Future Ice-Sheet Instability and Rapid Sea- Level Rise. Science 311(5768): 1747-1750.
Parsons, D. J., D. M. Graber, J. K. Agee, and J. W. van Wagtendonk. 1986. Natural fire management in the National Park Service. Environmental Management 10(1):21-24.
Powell, J. A. 1994. Biogeography of Lepidoptera on the California Channel Islands. In W. L. Halvorson and G. J. Maender, eds., The Fourth California Islands Symposium: Update on the Status of Resources. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, CA.
Dan Richards. 2007. Email to Paula Power. June 21, 2007.
Roemer, G. 1999. Conservation and ecology of the island fox. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Los Angeles.
Roemer, G. W., T. J. Coonan, D. K. Garcelon, J. Bascompte, and L. Laughrin. 2001. Feral pigs facilitate hyperpredation by golden eagles and indirectly cause the decline of the island fox. Animal Conservation 4:307-318.
Santa Cruz Island Non-Natives [computer file]. 2009. The Nature Conservancy/National Park Service, CA.
Semlitsch, R. D. 1998. Biological Delineation of Terrestrial Buffer Zones for Pond- Breeding Salamanders. Conservation Biology 12(5):1113-1119.
References - 245
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Thompson, C. M., E. L. Stackhouse, G. W. Roemer, and D. K. Garcelon. 1998. Home range and density of the island fox in China Canyon, San Clemente Island, California. U.S. Navy, Natural Resources Management Branch, Southwest Div., Nav. Fac. Eng. Command, San Diego, CA. 31 pp.
Thorpe, R. W., A. M. Wenner, and J. F. Barthell. 1994. Flowers visited by honey bees and native bees on Santa Cruz Island. Pp. 351-395 400 in W. L. Halvorson and G.J. Maender, eds., The Fourth California Islands Symposium: Update on the Status of Resources. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, CA.
Tiner, R. W. 2003. Geographically Isolated Wetlands of the United States. Wetlands 23(3):494-516.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Wetlands Delineation Manual. 1987. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2006. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Vicksburg, MS.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2007. Soil survey of Channel Islands National Park, California. Accessible online at: http://soils.usda.gov/survey/printed_surveys/.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Letter to Russell Galipeau, Superintendent, Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, CA. September 11, 2008. Webster, W., and J. Jones. 1982. Reithrodontomys megalotis. Mammalian Species, 167: 1-5.
Zedler, J. B. 1996. Coastal mitigation in southern California: The need for a regional restoration strategy. Ecological Applications 6:84-93.
References - 246 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND RESTORATION PLAN INDEX
203, 205, 206, 207, 210, 214, 216, A 221, 222, 225, 226, 228, 230, 236, adaptive management, 11, 38, 153, 158, 237, 241 159, 160, 161, 167, 168 Best management practices, 16, 17, 24, aggradation, 63, 113, 134, 155, 156, 159, 28, 37, 39, 155, 156, 158, 159, 160, 160 166, 167, 168, 186, 190, 198, 201, alluvium, 62, 67, 68, 76, 131, 132 265, 266 American Indian Religious Freedom birds, 8, 9, 13, 37, 55, 74, 77, 79, 80, 81, Act, 4, 120 83, 88, 138, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, American kestrel, 55 174, 175, 183, 193, 216, 217, 218 amphibians, 20, 39, 82, 138, 139, 176, boulder bar, 63, 64, 72, 76, 81, 113, 114, 177, 179, 180, 182, 183, 184, 218, 131, 132, 134, 135, 138, 156, 157 219, 220 brackish, 6, 29, 63, 70, 71, 72, 76, 116, Andres Castillero, 65, 102, 107 161, 162, 165 annual grasses, 90 Brown pelican, 81, 138 Aquatic Invertebrates, 139, 185, 220 buffer, 35, 37, 45, 47, 169, 217, 234, 241 aquifer, 67, 68, 132, 161, 162, 163 Bulrush-Cattail, 141, 191 archaeological resources, 146, 151, 202, 205, 206, 225, 226 C Archeological District, 13, 105, 107, Caire, 9, 66, 67, 102, 103, 105, 106, 124, 120, 145, 146, 204, 206, 225 127 archeology, 5 California Coastal Commission, 163, Army Corps of Engineers, 38, 163, 239 238 California Department of Fish and B Game, 238, 239 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, California Environmental Quality Act, 1, 82 10, 52 bald eagle, 8, 81, 82, 128, 138, 169, 171, California Regional Water Quality 173, 174, 175, 218, 235 Control Board, 163, 239 bats, 55, 82, 139, 176, 184, 220, 235 Canada del Puerto, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 17, bedrock, 13, 54, 62, 67, 68, 76, 116, 132, 45, 63, 67, 74, 81, 82, 88, 93, 95, 107, 136, 165 149, 204, 209 berm, 9, 14, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 30, CA-SCrI-240, 107, 133, 145, 146, 202, 38, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 50, 63, 68, 203, 204, 205, 206, 225, 226 112, 127, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, Central Valley, 9, 15, 17, 21, 22, 27, 33, 136, 137, 141, 147, 150, 151, 152, 35, 39, 53, 54, 56, 58, 59, 61, 66, 67, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 159, 160, 69, 84, 89, 95, 102, 105, 106, 109, 163, 164, 166, 168, 169, 176, 186, 128, 129, 132, 136, 137, 143, 150, 189, 190, 191, 193, 196, 199, 201,
Index - 247
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
169, 174, 183, 195, 200, 212, 213, 95, 98, 101, 106, 107, 124, 126, 129, 214, 230 130, 137, 138, 141, 142, 143, 144, Chumash, 9, 13, 16, 45, 55, 64, 65, 101, 145, 151, 152, 153, 159, 161, 167, 102, 104, 105, 107, 145, 191, 240, 168, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 241, 242, 243 176, 179, 180, 181, 182, 186, 188, climate change, 8, 60, 64 191, 192, 193, 194, 198, 200, 201, Coast Live Oak, 92, 93, 137, 142 203, 204, 207, 209, 210, 211, 212, coastal marsh, 7, 139, 141 213, 216, 224, 225, 232, 236, 237, conductance, 29 241, 243, 13 connectivity, 30, 112, 113, 114, 115, eucalyptus trees, 6, 7, 8, 14, 22, 25, 39, 134, 136, 138, 163, 166, 168, 169, 47, 50, 56, 77, 98, 99, 100, 124, 134, 176, 186, 189, 196, 214, 222, 236 137, 143, 147, 151, 152, 153, 158, contaminants, 76, 116, 165 159, 160, 164, 165, 167, 168, 172, corrals, 14, 18, 21, 23, 27, 35, 41, 42, 45, 173, 175, 179, 180, 182, 184, 187, 46, 47, 48, 50, 68, 95, 106, 107, 122, 192, 194, 195, 196, 198, 199, 200, 123, 126, 132, 136, 137, 147, 149, 201, 202, 204, 205, 206, 207, 209, 150, 168, 170, 201, 206, 207, 209, 210, 217, 219, 222, 224, 233 210, 212, 214, 216, 217, 223, 224, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 237, F 238, 240, 241, 243 fencing, 21, 27, 37, 39, 46, 48, 50, 126, Council on Environmental Quality, 111 132, 136, 137, 145, 146, 150, 204, Cowardin wetland delineation, 20 212, 225, 266 Cultural Resource Management fennel, 17, 21, 22, 24, 47, 48, 90, 92, 93, Guidelines, 4, 120 94, 95, 98, 125, 128, 129, 142, 143, 144, 145, 152, 170, 174, 177, 182, D 193, 194, 199, 200, 201, 225 DDT, 81, 128, 174 Fill, 27, 30, 42, 90, 133, 152, 163, 166, Del Norte, 9, 27, 39, 59, 106, 109, 212, 193, 199, 210 213, 214, 230 fill disposal, 25, 27, 28, 34, 37, 42, 152, Directors Order-12, 20 158, 170, 173, 176, 177, 180, 181, Dr. James Barron Shaw, 65, 102 186, 189, 190, 193, 199, 201, 202, dredging, 21 205, 212, 224, 225, 237, 266 fish, 81, 82, 88, 111, 140, 186, 187, 188, E 220, 221 Edwin L. Stanton, 103 flood attenuation, 114, 161, 215 Endangered Species Act, 6, 81, 83, 239 flood elevation, 112, 133, 153, 158, 160, endemic, 8, 9, 13, 55, 77, 82, 83, 84, 85, 161, 214 87, 89, 138, 175, 3 floodplain, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 21, 24, 27, 38, erosion, vi, 7, 14, 28, 41, 45, 54, 62, 73, 41, 46, 47, 55, 63, 65, 71, 74, 75, 76, 106, 111, 113, 134, 135, 153, 155, 95, 112, 113, 114, 115, 122, 133, 134, 157, 166, 195, 203, 204, 205, 225, 136, 137, 139, 141, 143, 151, 152, 226, 231, 237, 266 153, 154, 155, 156, 159, 160, 161, estuary, 62, 63, 68, 71, 164 162, 163, 164, 166, 168, 169, 176, eucalyptus, 6, 13, 14, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 185, 186, 188, 189, 190, 192, 193, 27, 38, 39, 41, 47, 48, 50, 91, 92, 93, 197, 198, 202, 206, 212, 215, 216,
Index - 248
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
218, 220, 221, 223, 225, 227, 229, 206, 208, 216, 223, 225, 226, 227, 230, 231, 236 229, 233 floodwater storage, 8, 73, 114, 133, 137, invertebrates, 77, 79, 80, 85, 140, 185, 155, 163, 215 186, 187, 188, 220, 221 floodwaters, 68, 135, 149, 154, 160, 163, Island Chaparral, 38, 171, 179, 192 166, 203 island fence lizard, 82, 85, 178, 181, freshwater pool, 64 184, 220, 235 island fox, 55, 83, 139, 176, 178, 181, G 184, 193, 220, 235, 239 Gaspar de Portolá, 65 Island Packers, 24, 41, 109, 110 General Management Plan, 5, 15, 129, Island scrub-jay, 55, 79, 138, 140, 171, 131, 150, 243 173, 175, 218, 235 geomorphic processes, 52, 63 island spotted skunk, 8, 81, 82 groundwater wells, 38, 161 isthmus, 15, 35, 53, 67, 103, 106, 108, 109, 129, 174, 183, 195, 200 H J habitat, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 22, 24, 34, 35, 37, 41, 42, 46, 47, 65, 71, 72, 73, 74, Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo, 102 80, 81, 83, 85, 97, 98, 101, 114, 117, 118, 135, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, K 142, 143, 144, 151, 152, 158, 161, kikuyu grass, 21, 24, 28, 42, 47, 48, 93, 162, 164, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 95, 129, 143, 144, 145, 152, 189, 192, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 197, 198, 200, 201, 225 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 191, 192, 193, L 194, 196, 197, 198, 216, 217, 218, Lemonade Berry, 92, 93, 142 219, 220, 221, 223, 233, 234, 235 Leopold Commission, 3, 4 Habitat levee, 240, 241, 242, 243 Riparian, 73 likelihood of success, 12 herbicide, 17, 22, 24, 25, 129, 145, 152, 166, 167, 190, 200, 202, 226 M Historic Resources Study, 20, 157 Main Ranch, 58, 59, 109, 124, 147, 149, hydraulic modeling, 157, 203 208, 227 hydrology, 7, 12, 29, 38, 45, 46, 52, 141, mammals, 3, 20, 37, 55, 82, 83, 86, 138, 159, 240 176, 177, 179, 180, 182, 183, 184, I 218, 219 management zones, 5 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Maria Gherini, 67, 103 Change, 60, 135, 164 Marine Intertidal Rocky Shore, 72 invasive, 7, 8, 13, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24, 41, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 82, 177, 180 42, 47, 48, 80, 89, 93, 98, 132, 136, mixed live oak savannah, 7, 141 137, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 149, 150, 152, 166, 167, 168, 195, 197, 198, 199, 200, 202, 204, 205,
Index - 249
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
N P National Environmental Policy Act, 1, 4, Pacific Flyway, 8, 79, 138 10, 52, 120 pigs, 55, 65, 83, 89, 105, 124, 128, 173, National Historic Preservation Act, 4, 174, 182, 194, 199, 200 15, 120, 130 pipeline, 127 National Park Service Management Prisoners Harbor, 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, Policies, 4, 114, 120 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, National Register of Historic Places, 16, 29, 30, 31, 33, 39, 41, 45, 54, 58, 59, 106, 108, 231, 238 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, native, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 24, 27, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 79, 88, 98, 103, 28, 33, 34, 38, 41, 42, 45, 53, 74, 76, 104, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 115, 77, 83, 84, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, 121, 123, 124, 129, 130, 137, 139, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 117, 118, 119, 140, 141, 145, 146, 147, 149, 150, 123, 124, 137, 140, 141, 142, 143, 157, 159, 162, 164, 174, 181, 182, 144, 147, 151, 152, 154, 157, 158, 183, 187, 191, 194, 195, 198, 200, 159, 161, 162, 163, 164, 166, 167, 203, 204, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 211, 212, 213, 214, 225, 227, 228, 176, 177, 179, 180, 182, 183, 184, 229, 230, 239, 240, 242, 243 185, 186, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, Prisoners Harbor pier, 207, 227 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, Prisoners-Pelican trail, 27, 39, 212, 213 200, 201, 202, 203, 217, 218, 219, public involvement, 10, 19 221, 222, 223, 224, 232, 233 pump house, 127 Navy, 15, 21, 22, 27, 39, 56, 68, 106, pygmy mammoth, 101 109, 127, 132, 136, 137, 147, 149, 150, 207, 208, 212, 213, 214, 227, R 230, 245 ranching, 6, 14, 18, 46, 54, 56, 65, 66, Navy Road, 39, 68, 127, 147, 149, 208, 67, 95, 98, 102, 103, 105, 106, 107, 228 111, 122, 123, 127, 141, 150, 195, noise levels, 17 200, 207, 208, 209, 213, 227, 228, non-native, 4, 8, 11, 12, 13, 24, 39, 55, 229, 230, 231, 243 77, 83, 88, 89, 90, 94, 97, 98, 137, Ranching District, 14, 16, 106, 108, 121, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 147, 151, 146, 149, 150, 207, 208, 209, 210, 152, 170, 172, 173, 177, 179, 180, 211, 213, 227, 228, 229, 231 182, 187, 188, 189, 190, 192, 193, Redwoods Act of 1978, 3 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, reference transect, 30, 31, 32 201, 202, 206, 222, 223, 224, 225, reptiles, 20, 39, 82, 138, 139, 176, 177, 226, 232, 233, 236 179, 180, 182, 183, 184, 218, 219, 220 NPS Cultural Landscape Inventory, 20, retaining wall, 9, 14, 106, 126, 147, 207, 98 210, 228, 237 NPS Organic Act, 3, 117 revegetation, 38, 158, 164, 189, 192, 198 NPS Pacific West Region, 11 riparian, 7, 9, 12, 23, 38, 39, 40, 48, 65, 76, 79, 82, 85, 90, 93, 94, 101, 122, O 135, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, Oliver Pearson, 84 143, 151, 152, 153, 158, 159, 160, 161, 164, 165, 167, 168, 171, 172,
Index - 250
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
173, 175, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, Section 110, 5, 120 184, 186, 187, 188, 190, 192, 193, sediment, 13, 21, 37, 38, 46, 55, 62, 63, 194, 195, 196, 198, 199, 201, 205, 64, 67, 74, 76, 111, 113, 116, 132, 209, 210, 213, 217, 218, 219, 220, 134, 135, 136, 151, 153, 155, 156, 221, 222, 223, 224, 230, 232, 233, 157, 158, 159, 160, 165, 166, 168, 234, 235, 243 172, 179, 186, 188, 192, 214, 215, 221 Riparian, 137 Sediment concentrations, 116, 136, 165 Saltgrass meadow, 1 sediment transport, 113, 134, 155, 158, Shallow Marsh, 1 159, 215 Willow, 1 shallow marsh, 152 riparian forest, 138, 173 sheep, 66, 67, 102 Silver Beachbur - Beach Sand Verbena, S 92, 95, 142 sacred sites, 16 slender salamander, 82, 84, 86, 139, 178, salinity, 29, 63, 68, 76, 116, 162, 165 181, 184, 220, 235 saltgrass meadow, 34, 43, 152, 162, 169, snowy plover, 80 176, 185, 188 Southern Riparian Woodland, 7, 38, 158, San Miguel Island 171, 179, 181, 192, 199 San Miguel, 101 special status plants, 194, 196, 223 Santa Cruz gopher snake, 82, 85, 86, staging area, 41, 166, 190, 193 139, 178, 182 Standards and Guidelines for Santa Cruz Island, 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, Archeology and Historic Preservation, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 34, 41, 45, 53, 54, 5, 120 55, 58, 59, 61, 62, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69, Stanton, 66, 106 77, 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, State Historic Preservation Office, 5, 27, 89, 90, 91, 94, 96, 97, 98, 104, 105, 42, 207, 209, 210, 211, 238 106, 107, 108, 109, 111, 123, 124, Storm Water Pollution Control Plan, 28, 125, 128, 129, 139, 143, 145, 146, 188, 266 149, 150, 169, 173, 174, 182, 184, stormwater, 133, 155, 160, 215, 236 185, 187, 189, 191, 194, 196, 197, Stream Beds and Flats, 92, 95, 142 199, 200, 222, 230, 231, 233, 239, stream channel, 9, 12, 13, 14, 21, 55, 71, 240, 242, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273, 2 72, 73, 74, 90, 95, 112, 113, 132, 133, Santa Cruz Island, 64, 66, 101, 102 134, 136, 150, 151, 152, 155, 159, Santa Cruz Island deer mouse, 8, 83, 84, 160, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 87, 139 168, 171, 179, 186, 191, 198, 204, Santa Cruz Island Foundation, 20, 106, 207, 209, 210, 211, 213, 217, 219, 242 220, 222, 223, 229 Santa Cruz Island silver lotus, 90, 96, stream flow, 21, 54, 113, 133, 134, 135, 97, 142, 143, 191, 194, 196, 197, 222, 156, 160 233 stream shading, 114, 161, 215 scale house, 7, 14, 23, 24, 27, 42, 47, 48, 50, 107, 137, 147, 149, 151, 201, 206, T 211, 212, 213, 214, 227, 229, 231 The Nature Conservancy, 1, 3, 20, 21, Scorpion Canyon, 84, 208 22, 52, 56, 67, 80, 103, 108, 109, 110, Scorpion Ranch, 67, 103, 105 127, 128, 129, 130, 135, 143, 149,
Index - 251
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
159, 161, 167, 168, 174, 183, 195, Built Up, 170, 176, 178, 179, 188, 200, 210, 241, 242, 243 189, 190, 197, 198, 223 Threatened and Endangered Species, 2 village site, 13, 112, 113, 131, 133, 134, TNC, 1, 3, 22, 24, 38, 128, 149, 159, 157, 160, 231 167, 168, 170, 172, 174, 175, 179, 183, 187, 195, 200, 201 W warehouse, 7, 14, 22, 27, 35, 46, 50, 68, U 95, 107, 124, 129, 133, 135, 147, 149, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 238 154, 160, 161, 170, 208, 211, 213, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 6, 117, 228, 243 238, 239 waste, 18, 54 University of California Natural Reserve Water Quality, 76, 115, 136, 165, 215, System Field Station, 109 236, 239, 244 uplift, 61, 62 water table, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 68, 69, US Coast Survey, 66 70, 152, 161, 162 waterfowl, 8, 35, 47, 79, 138, 169, 216, V 234 vegetation, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 33, 34, 35, watershed, 244 37, 38, 39, 42, 45, 52, 54, 55, 58, 72, West Nile Virus, 80, 88, 185 76, 77, 80, 89, 91, 93, 94, 95, 98, 99, Western flycatcher, 55 101, 119, 124, 137, 140, 141, 142, western gull, 79 143, 144, 145, 146, 152, 155, 158, Western Gull, 78 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 166, 167, western harvest mouse, 84, 139, 176, 168, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 176, 178, 181, 185 177, 179, 180, 182, 186, 188, 189, wetland marsh, 9 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, Wetlands 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 204, 210, Coastal, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 15, 63, 64, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 228, 232 71, 74, 79, 95, 138, 162, 242, 243 Vegetation, 13, 20, 30, 89, 117, 119, Palustrine, 24, 41, 46, 47, 72, 82, 135, 141, 143, 147, 167, 188, 197, 221, 151, 164, 168, 216 223, 244 Riparian, 74 Native, 238 Riverine, 72, 163 Non-native, 238 willow, 9, 31, 33, 34, 35, 38, 42, 68, 70, Vegetation Community Types 72, 74, 129, 142, 152, 162, 169, 170, Arroyo Willow, 34, 79, 90, 92, 93, 94, 176, 185, 188, 189, 192, 200 95, 137, 138, 141, 142, 171, 173, X 190, 191 Xaxas, 13, 64, 65, 107, 145
Index - 252 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
APPENDIX A—NOTICE OF INTENT
Appendix –A-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix A-2
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix A-3
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix A-4 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
APPENDIX B—SUMMARY OF SCOPING COMMENTS
Appendix B-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Summary of Scoping Comments Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration
National Park Service Channel Islands National Park
Introduction
The National Park Service (NPS), in accordance with provisions in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), conducted public scoping for the Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Public scoping is held early in the NEPA process to seek public input on the range of concerns, issues and alternatives that should be addressed in the EIS. This summary informs the public on the extent and nature of the comments received by the NPS during public scoping.
Background on Public Scoping
A preliminary public input meeting was conducted at Prisoners Harbor on Santa Cruz Island on April 5, 2007. Thirty-three interested individuals, experts, and partners were invited. Twenty-one non-NPS individuals attended. The agenda for the meeting included introductions, site orientation with an informal walking tour of the site, followed by a round-robin discussion with opportunity to ask questions and express concerns (Table 1, Table 2).
Table 1. Informal walking tour included NPS experts stationed at specific locations to answer questions. LOCATION TOPIC DISCUSSION EXPERT A. Road to Hydrology Removing levee, changes in Mike Martin Archeological site hydrology B. Eastern edge of Wetland Restoration method, removing and Joel Wagner corrals Restoration relocating fill, revegetation
C. Warehouse Historic District Cattle/sheep corrals Ann Huston D. Archeological Archeological Location and extent of Archeological Kelly Minas site site site E. Seating area Environmental Public Input to the NEPA process Marie Denn Compliance F. Beach Natural Resource Backbarrier wetland, history, Kate Faulkner, Values ecological benefits
Appendix B-2
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Table 2. Major issues and concerns expressed during the on-island site visit. MAJOR ISSUE CONCERN NAME Visitor Experience Control visitor impacts (mischief, vandalism) Island Packers using boardwalks, viewing platforms Control and educate the public so no damage is Santa Ynez Band done to arch site of Chumash Indians Educate visitors to reduce potential for Santa Cruz Island disturbance or desecration of arch site Descendent Historic Resources Reduce size of corrals to 55’, this creates Santa Cruz Island buffer, reduces potential visitor impacts, and Foundation preserves part of corral Natural Resources Don’t extirpate harvest mouse during Santa Barbara construction Museum of Plan for desirable wetland species Natural History Do not lose human history Plan for veg. management in corrals Control Kikuyu grass Campground near wetland will affect wetland re:buffer Potential for increased sedimentation and/or University of decreased run-off should be included in the California Natural model Reserve System Eucalyptus are a recent occurrence and The Nature disrupt water budget Conservancy Avoid extirpation of harvest mouse during Interested construction Individual Archeological Preserve arch site, preserve levee adjacent to Interested Resources arch site, add berm to south side of arch site Individual Removing levee may impact arch site Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians Park Planning Should not proceed without GMP Santa Cruz Island Foundation Maintenance Potential long-term maintenance needs Interested Earth moving concerns, deposition of fill Individual Potential for water impacts to road and arch site
A Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS and conduct public scoping was published in the Federal Register on June 11, 2008. On June 12, 2008, a press release announcing public scoping was distributed to the Ventura County Star and the Santa Barbara News- Press, as well as 73 other media outlets, including newspaper, radio stations, and television stations. The press release explained the public scoping process, announced two public open houses, and provided the web address for Channel Islands National Park
Appendix B-3
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement and NPS park planning. The NOI and press release were posted on the park website. A notice of the public scoping open houses was printed in the Ventura County Star on June 23, 2008 and in the Santa Barbara News-Press on June 23, 2008.
The NPS mailed approximately 240 public scoping announcements with the time, date, and location of the public open houses.
Approximately nine members of the public attended the public open house at Channel Islands National Park Headquarters and approximately 13 members of the public attended the public open house at the Santa Barbara Public Library.
The 45-day public scoping period closed July 27, 2008.
Public Response to Scoping
Five individuals or private organizations hand delivered or emailed comments regarding the Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan. Commenting organizations included The Nature Conservancy and the Santa Cruz Island Foundation. No comments were received from federal or state agencies. Four letters supported wetland restoration, one letter expressed concern about park planning and the impacts of levee removal, another letter wanted to see support for the project from the Chumash.
The following table consolidates scoping comments under major issue topics.
ISSUE TOPIC COMMENT Park Planning Enabling legislation does not mandate Santa Cruz Island restoration of island conditions to pre-European Foundation times
Park should not undertake Prisoners Harbor Santa Cruz Island Coastal Wetland Restoration without a current Foundation General Management Plan
Historic Support for relocating the scalehouse and Interested Resources removing the corrals Individual
Concern that removing the levee will cause Santa Cruz Island irreparable harm to archeological site, historic Foundation warehouse, and corral system
Supports designing the wetland to prevent Interested damage to road and warehouse during flooding Individual
Appendix B-4
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Archeological Support for making the archeological site Interested Resources visible with signage Individual
Chumash tribe should support the project Journalist
Wetland General support for restoring wetland and The Nature Restoration riparian ecosystems Conservancy, Interested Individual, Journalist Eucalyptus Supports removing eucalyptus Interested removal Individual Visitor Would support a “nature” trail with signage Interested experience describing wildlife, Chumash and ranching Individual history along the perimeter of the wetland
Written comments received by the NPS are available for review at Channel Islands National Park. Notes from the April 5, 2007 site visit are available for review at the NPS park planning website at http//:parkplanning.nps.gov.
Appendix B-5 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
APPENDIX C—GIS ANALYSIS OF REVEGETATION PLANS
Appendix C-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Using GIS to Develop Revegetation Plans
Melissa Hayashida Channel Islands National Park Intern Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, CA November 2009
Appendix C-2
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
With its ability to manage and analyze spatial data, GIS (geographic information systems) is a powerful resource management tool. GIS analysis helps solve problems by identifying geographic patterns and relationships. Because of its ability to organize geographic data and combine a variety of datasets into an interactive map (Essays on Geography and GIS 2008), GIS was chosen to help form a basis for a revegetation plan on Santa Cruz Island, the largest island in Channel Islands National Park. Specifically, Channel Islands National Park used GIS to identify suitable vegetation for a fill disposal site on Prisoners Harbor. The fill disposal site is part of its Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan.
Through its Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan, the Park seeks to restore the 9‐acre Prisoners Harbor coastal wetland site and its 40‐acre associated stream corridor in the lower Cañada del Puerto Creek on Santa Cruz Island (Figure 1). Prisoners Harbor wetland was the largest wetland complex on Santa Cruz Island. Before the early 1800’s, the wetland site supported about 12 acres of coastal marsh and riparian forest. A mixed live oak savannah was likely supported in lower Cañada del Puerto on the floodplain terraces immediately upstream from Prisoners Harbor. The wetland was filled in by agriculturalists in the 19th and 20th centuries to support sheep and cattle operations. The loss of important wetland functions and ecosystem services was further amplified by the channelizing of the Cañada del Puerto stream and the introduction of invasive species. With the Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan, the Park will reconnect the Cañada del Puerto stream with its floodplain, remove non‐native vegetation, enhance the visitor experience, and protect cultural and historic resources.
Figure 1. Prisoners Harbor Wetland Restoration Project Area
Appendix C-3
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Approximately 13,000 +/‐ 20% cubic yards of fill material will be removed from atop the buried wetland surfaces to restore 2/3 of the buried wetlands. This fill will be placed at one or two nearby fill disposal sites, compacted and sloped to natural contours, and seeded with native plants (NPS Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Draft EIS 2009). The Park decided to use ESRI’s ArcGIS to help choose which native plants should be planted in the fill disposal site/s. GIS was used to search for places on the island that are similar to the fill disposal site and identify the vegetation types growing in those places.
Methods Data Sources Our GIS analysis relied on a variety of datasets. An elevation dataset was used to determine elevation, aspect, and slope for the entire island. The elevation data used was Southern California Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (IfSAR) data, which was collected for Santa Cruz Island in the winter of 2002/2003. The IfSAR data has three meter point spacing and approximately one‐meter vertical accuracy in non‐vegetated areas (NOAA NOS and CSC 2004).
Using the slope and aspect tools (par t of ArcGIS’s Spatial Analyst extension), slope and aspect were derived from the IfSAR data. The slope tool calculates the maximum rate of change between each cell and its neighbors and the aspect tool identifies the downslope direction of the maximum rate of change in value from each cell to its neighbor (ESRI 2007).
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) contracted Aerial Information Systems, Inc. to create a vegetation map of Santa Cruz Island. We used this vegetation map to identify vegetation classes and vegetation types (vegetation alliances and sub‐alliances) throughout the island. Aerial Information Systems, Inc. used base imagery (IKONOS one‐meter natural color and color‐ infrared imagery 2005; Air Photo USA one‐meter natural color photography 2002; I.K. Curtis 1:12000 natural color photography 2005), aerial photographs, field plots, field reconnaissance, and other source material to identify vegetation on the island. Further details regarding the map can be found in the Santa Cruz Island Photo Interpretation and Mapping Classification Report (Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 2007).
To determine soil types throughout the island, the Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey of Channel Islands National Park was consulted (USDA NRCS 2007).
Shoreline data from 1994 USGS Digital Orthophoto Quarter Quads (Schwemm 1998) supplied provided a fairly accurate representation of Santa Cruz Island’s shoreline.
Appendix C-4
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Geoprocessing Steps
1. Relevant factors for vegetation success were chosen
Elevation, slope, aspect, soil type, and proximity to the coast were identified as important, defining characteristics of a vegetation’s habitat.
2. The slope, aspect, elevation, and proximity to the coast of the fill disposal site were determined
In order to determine the elevation, slope, aspect, soil type, and proximity to the coast of the fill disposal site, it was necessary to identify the location of the fill disposal site on an aerial photograph (a secondary disposal site, not shown below, was chosen in case the amount of fill exceeds the capacity of the first fill site; see Appendix A). Within ArcMap, a polygon was digitized to define the area enclosed by the disposal site (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Prisoners Harbor Wetland Restoration Fill Disposal Site
Using the elevation, slope, aspect, soil, and shoreline datasets, the elevation, slope, aspect, soil type, and proximity to the coast of the fill disposal site were determined. The zonal
Appendix C-5
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement statistics tool (part of the Spatial Analyst extension), which calculates statistics on values of a raster within the zones of another dataset (ESRI 2008), was used to find out the range of elevation and the range of slope within the fill disposal site. The aspect of the fill disposal site was determined by simply overlaying the aspect layer on top of the fill disposal site and then visually inspecting the disposal site area. This same method could be used to figure out which soil types fall within the fill disposal sites; however, it’s also possible to use the “Select by Location” feature (simply select for soil types that fall within the fill disposal site polygon). Finally, the “measure” tool was used to obtain the disposal site’s proximity to the coast.
Using these methods, the following characteristics of the disposal site were determined:
Elevation Slope Aspect Soil Type Proximity to coast Fill Disposal Site 6.74‐42.81m 0.15‐45.27% Northwest and Starboard‐ ~50 meters from Characteristics West Fantail‐Halyard; the coast Typic Xerofluvents Riverwash Table 1. Characteristics of the fill disposal site
It would be too restricting to search for places on the island with exactly the same characteristics as the fill disposal sites. Because of this, the criteria used to search for places on the island with similar characteristics as the fill disposal sites were based on the figures in Table 2. The search criteria differ slightly from the actual fill disposal characteristics in order to search for places on the island that may be very similar to, but perhaps not exactly alike, the fill disposal site. The search criteria also take into account the fact that some characteristics of the fill site will change with the addition and contouring of the fill material.
Elevation Slope Aspect Soil Type Proximity to coast Search Criteria 0‐150m 0‐32% Northwest and Starboard‐ Within 1 mi West Fantail‐Halyard; Typic Xerofluvents Riverwash Table 2. Search Criteria
3. GIS was used to locate areas on the island that are similar (in elevation, slope, aspect, soil type, and proximity to the coast) to the fill disposal site
Once the search criteria were defined, the raster calculator was used to produce new elevation, aspect, and slope rasters from the original elevation, aspect, and slope rasters. These new rasters only included the range of values specified in our search criteria. A new elevation raster was created that showed only those places on the island with an elevation between 0 and 150m, a new slope raster was created that showed only those places with slopes between 0 and
Appendix C-6
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
32%, and a new aspect raster was created that showed only those places with Northwest and West aspects.
Next, the raster calculator was used again (see Geoprocessing Details for explanation) to produce a single raster that shows only those places on the island where the new elevation, slope, and aspect rasters overlap. This single raster shows only those places on the island where the elevation is between 0 and 150m AND where the slope is between 0 and 32% AND where there are Northwest and West‐facing slopes.
Geoprocessing Details • The new elevation, slope, and aspect rasters each contain two grid values: 0 (not part of specified range of values) and 1 (part of specified range of values) • The raster calculator is used to find all areas where: elevation raster + slope raster + aspect raster = 3 (where the specified ranges of all three rasters overlap) • This produces a new raster, again with two grid values: 0 (areas where all three rasters did NOT overlap) and 1 (the overlapping areas of all three rasters)
Then, this single raster was converted to a polygon/vector feature to enable future manageability with other polygon/vector features. (After converting the new raster to a polygon, a definition query was used to select only those areas where the grid value = 1).
The next step involves narrowing our result to only those areas in certain soil types and within a certain distance from the coast (the polygon just created is not restrictive in regard to soil type and distance from the coast). So, the polygon was clipped by only the areas on the island with Starboard‐Fantail‐Halyard or Typic Xerofluvents Riverwash soils. It was also clipped by only the areas on the island within 1 mile from the coast.
4. Using the vegetation map, the vegetation known to exist in these areas was determined
The resulting polygon included only the areas on the island whose elevation, slope, aspect, soil type, and proximity to the coast match the search criteria values (Figure 3). This polygon feature had no information regarding vegetation type, so the vegetation map was added to the ArcMap workspace. This vegetation map was then clipped by our polygon in order to eliminate all areas on the vegetation map that do not fall within the specified elevation, aspect, and slope ranges, are not within the soil types of interest, and that are not within one mile from the coast.
Appendix C-7
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 3. The black polygons represent areas on the island with a similar elevation, slope, aspect, soil type, and proximity to the coast as the fill disposal site
The result of this clip included information on the vegetation classes and the vegetation types within the areas on the island that are similar (in regard to our criteria) to the fill disposal site (Figure 4). Now, it was possible to determine which vegetation classes/types cover what percentage of these areas. First, the “calculate geometry” feature was used to update the area calculations in the vegetation layer’s attribute table. Next, the “summary” feature (located within the vegetation map’s attribute table) was used to sum the area for each vegetation class/type. In doing this, the dominant vegetation classes/types located in areas similar to the fill site were determined.
Appendix C-8
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 4. The black polygons (which represent areas on the island with a similar elevation, slope, aspect, soil type, and proximity to the coast as the fill disposal site) are overlaid upon the vegetation map
Results The dominant vegetation classes/types in the areas were determined in regards to soil type. In other words, the dominant vegetation classes/types were determined for those areas in Starboard‐Fantail‐Halyard soils (Figure 5, Table 3) and the dominant vegetation classes/types were determined for those areas in Typic Xerofluvents Riverwash soils (Figure 6, Table 3). In Starboard soils, the dominant vegetation classes included Coastal Sagebrush, Grasslands, Shrublands, and Oak Woodland. In Riverwash soils, the dominant vegetation classes included Shrublands, Riparian, Bare, Grasslands, Evergreen Forest, Oak Woodland, Coastal Sagebrush, and Human Use.
Appendix C-9
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Vegetation Classes on Starboard-Fantail-Halyard Soils
Figure 5. Shows vegetation classes for areas on the island with Starboard soils and a similar elevation, slope, aspect, and proximity to the coast as the fill disposal site
Appendix C-10
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Vegetation Classes on Typic Xerofluvents Riverwash Soils
Figure 6. Shows vegetation classes for areas on the island with Riverwash soils and a similar elevation, slope, aspect, and proximity to the coast as the fill disposal site
Appendix C-11
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Top Vegetation Types (see descriptions Appendix B) Starboard‐Fantail‐Halyard Soils Typic Xerofluvents Riverwash soils California Sagebrush – Lemonadeberry 15.78% Mulefat Alliance 20.22%
California Annual Grasslands Alliance 14.63% Mixed Arroyo Willow‐ Mule Fat Mapping Unit 18.41%
Coast Live Oak Alliance 10.51% Stream Beds and Flats 11.79%
Island Scrub Oak‐ Coastal Sage Scrub Transition 9.27% Eucalyptus Stands Mapping Unit 7.60%
Coyote Brush Alliance 7.56% Coyote Brush Alliance 7.34%
Coastal Bluff Scrub Habitat 7.50% Tall Temperate Annual Graminoids 5.73%
California Sagebrush Alliance 7.00% Live Oak Alliance 4.45%
Island Scrub Oak – Island Ceanothus 4.67% Arroyo Willow Alliance 4.00%
Fennel Mapping Unit 4.39% Fennel Mapping Unit 2.48%
Santa Cruz Island Buckwheat Alliance 2.81% Built‐up 2.21%
Table 3
Discussion
It is important to recognize the limitations involved with using the preceding methods to determine which vegetation may be appropriate for the fill site. The datasets upon which the analysis was conducted (the elevation, slope, and aspect datasets; and the vegetation and soil maps) have to be accurate, of an appropriate spatial resolution, up‐to‐date, etc., if the analysis results are to be of any use. Also, it may be difficult to determine all of the factors that influence vegetation success. For our analysis, we chose elevation, slope, aspect, soil type, and proximity to the coast as important factors. These may or may not be the only useful or most useful factors for determining vegetation suitability. Furthermore, when looking for vegetation that’s suitable for the fill site, we chose a range of values for elevation, slope, aspect, and proximity to the coast that we thought would represent the places on the island that are similar to the fill site. These were somewhat arbitrary choices. For example, if we expanded our elevation range to include just slightly steeper slopes, the analysis output may have included different types of vegetation.
While our GIS analysis contains various shortcomings, there are some methods that, with more expertise and time, could be used to increase accuracy, efficiency, and repeatability. In our analysis, equal value was assigned to each fill site characteristic. Elevation, slope, aspect, soil type, and proximity to the coast were all equally important in finding areas similar to the fill
Appendix C-12
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement site. In reality, it may be more important to emphasize one or some characteristic/s over others. Using the Weighted Overlay tool, it is possible to give certain characteristics more or less weight. With the Weighted Overlay tool, such parameters can be easily changed to test many different scenarios (ESRI 2008).
ModelBuilder, an application within ArcGIS, could help document the steps used in the analysis. Within ModelBuilder, a model links geoprocessing tools together, feeding the output of each tool into the input of the next (ESRI Developer Network). The geoprocessing tools and the datasets used by those tools are saved within the model (see Figure 7). The model can be exported to script and passed on for use by others. In this way, other users can easily run the same analysis (using different datasets if desired).
Figure 7: ModelBuilder Model
Although our GIS analysis contains limitations, it does provide a basis for determining which vegetation types should be used to revegetate the disposal site. Once again, the disposal site will contain fill material (which may be a mixture of Riverwash soil, Starboard soil, and other soil types) and it will be contoured such that it slopes downward toward the west (toward the stream). Using the output of our GIS analysis, it seems sensible to plant riparian vegetation along the fill site’s wetter western border. As the site slopes upward toward the east and becomes drier, a transition from riparian vegetation to sagebrush/grasslands should take place (Figure 8).
Appendix C-13
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Figure 8: Outlines a possible revegetation plan
This represents a basis for a revegetation plan and must be altered or added to with the knowledge of plant and island specialists before devising a final, more detailed plan. However, GIS‐ with its ability to overlay a variety of data layers, search for and select certain criteria, and summarize results‐ serves as a valuable tool in the establishment of a revegetation strategy.
Appendix C-14
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix A Fill Disposal Site #2
The secondary, potential fill site is located within a fennel infestation along Cañada del Puerto (see below). If necessary, it’s possible to use the same steps described for the main fill site to determine potential vegetation types to plant in this fill site. Most of those steps have already been done below.
Appendix C-15
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Elevation Slope Aspect Soil Type Proximity to coast Fill Disposal Site 12‐46m 0.86‐51.59% North, Starboard‐ Within 1 mi 2 Characteristics Northwest, and Fantail‐Halyard; West Typic Xerofluvents Riverwash Search Criteria 0‐150m 0‐52% North, Starboard‐ Within 1 mi Northwest, and Fantail‐Halyard; West Typic Xerofluvents Riverwash
Vegetation Classes on Starboard-Fantail-Halyard Soils
Shows vegetation classes for areas on the island with Starboard soils and a similar elevation, slope, aspect, and proximity to the coast as fill disposal site #2
Appendix C-16
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Vegetation Classes on Typic Xerofluvents Riverwash Soils
Shows vegetation classes for areas on the island with Riverwash soils and a similar elevation, slope, aspect, and proximity to the coast as fill disposal site #2
Appendix C-17
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix B Vegetation Type Descriptions (summarized from Aerial Informations Systems, Inc. 2007)
Top Vegetation Types on Starboard‐Fantail‐Halyard Soils California Sagebrush – Lemonadeberry 15.78% (Mapped where Artemisia californica dominates or co‐ dominates the shrub layer with Rhus integrifolia generally in dense settings. Rhus integrifolia can locally dominate over small areas. Mapped in a wide variety of slope related settings from gentle to steep, usually trending southerly in fairly exposed, xeric environments. Most polygons mapped fairly close to the shoreline extending inland along Canada Christy and Canada Medio. Stands mapped in the south and above mentioned canyons often transition into a mix of Quercus Pacifica, Artemisia californica, and Rhus integrifolia. This type is commonly mapped on the western side of the island) California Annual Grasslands Alliance 14.63% (Mapped in generally dense cover where species from the genera Avena, Bromus, Hordeum, or Lolium usually dominate. Forbs and other species of annual grass can dominate over smaller areas. Ridgelines, spurs and rockier areas generally have a significant native component of Nasella. Woody vegetation is generally well below 10% cover and often includes species such as Baccharis salicifolia and Artemisia californica. Mapped extensively on deep poorly drained soils in valleys and ridgelines throughout the island in a variety of slope positions. Much more extensively mapped on the eastern third of the island but common throughout except on rocky slopes and ridges) Coast Live Oak Alliance 10.51% (Quercus agrifolia Alliance; mapped only to the alliance lvel where Quercus agrifolia dominates the tree layer; conditions vary from riparian to gently sloping ridgelines and spurs, rarely noted on south trending slopes, but found occasionally on steep concave to neutral north facing slopes) Island Scrub Oak‐ Coastal Sage Scrub Transition 9.27% (Mapped where Quercus pacifica generally dominates the chaparral canopy, usually with a minor component of Rhus integrifolia. Coastal sage scrub species (CSS) usually are an important component to this type as an open to dense understory, with Artemisia californica the most common species in the CSS layer. Other CSS species such as Eriogonium arborescens can be a sparse component to the stand. Annual grasses can be an important component to this type; mapped in the most xeric settings for this alliance, often interfacing with dry CSS or inland bluff scrub communities, common on steep south, east and west trending slopes not too far inland from coast; Good representative stands occur on the southern canyons near the coast and on south facing slopes in the eastern portion of the Central Valley. Most stands are within about ½ mile from the coast) Coyote Brush Alliance 7.56% (Generally mapped in open grassy settings where Baccharis pilularis dominates the shrub layer in sparse to moderate cover. Stands can occasionally have a dense cover of over 60% especially on gentle north trending slopes in the isthmus region. Rhus integrifolia and or Artemisia californica can be minor components to the stand in coastal areas. Sparse stands of Baccharis pilularis below 5‐10% cover in grassy settings are common and are noted as a shrub component in the density cover layer; Mapped on gentle to moderately sloping environments of deep soil on a variety of aspects and slope positions. Also noted on drier riparian fringes of major washes and on old stream terraces just upslope from the active channel.Commonly found on most portions of the island with the exception of the highest and most inland slopes. Good representative stands are found on gentle slopes on the northern third of the island and northern portions of the isthmus and in the vicinity of Campo Del Norte) Coastal Bluff Scrub Habitat 7.50% (Mapped based primarily on location where bluff and steep cliffs extend no further than several hundred meters from the shoreline. Vegetation is usually sparse; often in a rocky setting with a sparse herbaceous layer, but overall cover is at least 2‐5%. Species dominating or sharing dominance on the bluff may include the following, but is not limited to: Artemisia californica, Dudleya, Coreopsis gigantean, Encelia californica, Eriophyllum staechadifolium, Leymus condensatus, Rhus integrifolia, and Opuntia littoralis. Further analysis of the plot data may categorize the mapped polygons into floristic types that will be too fine scale to distinguish on the aerial photography. Subsequent modeling efforts based on geologic substrate or slope related characteristics may aid in refining the
Appendix C-18
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement mapped polygons into a floristic type. Several patches on the bluff itself are mapped to floristic alliances including (Rhus integrifolia or Artemisia californica) where visible on the imagery. Moderately steep to vertical cliff faces that are generally rocky with minimal soil development characterize most of the coastal bluffs along Santa Cruz Island. Over 90% of the island’s coastal fringe end in a steep bluff edge; bluff faces are interrupted generally where larger streams form small sandy beaches at their mouth) California Sagebrush Alliance 7.00% (Mapped where Artemisia californica dominates the stand in a wide variety of settings from an open sparse shrub layer to a dense cover. Mapped to the alliance level where photo interpreters cannot distinguish at finer levels in the classification or in extremely small patches below approximately one hectare. Most stands mapped within a mile of the coast extending inland into the western portions of the Central Valley and well into Canada Christy. It is less common on well‐drained, coarser, grained soils. Several stands, especially in the southern portion of the island west of the isthmus have a significant component of Salvia mellifera, however, no signature correlate has been developed for this species off the aerial photography) Island Scrub Oak – Island Ceanothus 4.67% (mapped where Quercus pacifica dominates or co‐dominate the stand with Ceanothus arborus, both generally as tall shrubs; mesic scrub oak type found on north trending canyons and upper coves on neutral to concave settings in a variety of positions from lower to upper slopes) Fennel Mapping Unit 4.39% (Mapped where Foeniculum vulgare dominates the herbaceous layer. Annual grasses including Avena spp, Bromus spp. and Hordeum spp. can dominate in portions of the mapped polygon. Shrubs, especially Baccharis pilularis are often a common overstory component and may be increasing in cover during the past decade. Common invasive plant in a variety of sparse shrub and grassy areas, which is potentially limited only by very steep, rocky environments. Foeniculum vulgare often grows in dense stands on gentle slopes in grasslands adjacent to major stream channels. The most extensive fennel stands occur on the isthmus along Navy Road west of Mount Pleasant. Other areas of dense fennel are located west of the UC Field Station, Christy Ranch, Main Ranch Airfield and the hills south of Smugglers’ Cove. Dense fennel is occasionally mapped in narrow channels downstream from large ridge top stands; these channels may act as a conduit for further spreading of this invasive weed to grassy areas in the extreme southern portions of the island. Note plot data along San Justiniano Road northeast of Willows Anchorage depicting this species in the southern portion of the island. Santa Cruz Island Buckwheat Alliance 2.81% (Mapped where Eriogonum arboresens dominates the stand as extremely sparse to sparse cover over a rocky or herbaceous understory. Other species common to inland bluff scrub environments may be a component to the stand. Occasionally, shrub cover becomes dense over very small areas in locally favorable settings, which aren’t quite as steep or rocky.Generally found on steep to very steep mid to upper south trending slopes, which are usually rocky but not as severe as inland bluff scrub conditions. Often found just upslope from the California Sagebrush – Santa Cruz Island Buckwheat type (type 3312) and adjacent to inland bluff scrub which is normally found in harsher settings. Mapped extensively, especially on the western half of the island in areas near the coast to well inland.
Top Vegetation Types on Typic Xerofluvents Riverwash Soils Mulefat Alliance 20.22% (Mapped where Baccharis salicifolia dominates the stand or co‐dominates the stand with Baccharis pilularis. Willow species, especially Salix lasiolepis can be a minor component to wetter stands. Understory herbaceous layer varies considerably. Noted in active sandy or gravelly well‐ drained flat channels in environments wetter than Baccharis pilularis but drier than Salix lasiolepis. Fairly common in most major stream channels that are not too narrow. The most extensive stands occur on the west side of the island in the larger south trending drainages from Playa Larga to White Rock.) Mixed Arroyo Willow‐ Mule Fat Mapping Unit 18.41% (Mapped where Baccharis salicifolia or Salix lasiolepis either dominates or co‐dominates riparian stands of vegetation in moderately dense to dense cover. Drier fringes contain less Salix lasiolepis with a minor component of Baccharis pilularis. Wetter locations tend to have more Salix lasiolepis, possibly with other Salix or Populus individuals as a minor component to the stand. Found in riparian and riparian fringe areas in streams with a large watershed, allowing for seasonal to perennial flow during most years. Stream channel width varies considerably.
Appendix C-19
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Wider systems may contain a zone of pure willow in the wettest portions that transition to coyote brush dominant areas on the higher terraces with Baccharis salicifolia occupying intermediate locations. Common in streams, especially streams that drain south of Ridge Road south of the Central Valley. Major watersheds where this type is extensively mapped include: Canada Christy, Laguna Canyon, Willows Canyon and Canada del Puerto. Much more extensively mapped west of the isthmus) Stream Beds and Flats 11.79% no description Eucalyptus Stands Mapping Unit 7.60% (mapped as pure stands where Eucalyptus spp. (primarily E. globules) is the sole component of the canopy layer. Noted primarily in association with land use related features. Several stands notes, primarily in the Central Valley. Largest stands noted west of the UC research headquarters on the western side of the island and adjacent to the NPS headquarters on the eastern portion of the island.) Coyote Brush Alliance 7.34% (see above) Tall Temperate Annual Graminoids 5.73% no description Live Oak Alliance 4.45% (see above) Arroyo Willow Alliance 4.00% (Mapped where Salix lasiolepis is the sole dominant to the tall shrub or small tree canopy,usually in dense stands. Other willow species in addition to Populus fremontii or P. balsamifera can form a minor emergent tree layer to the canopy. Found extending several hundred meters below small springs in upper drainages or in streams where water flows most of the year. Stands are rarely found beyond the active flood channel except in saturated conditions. Not as common as the mixed arroyo willow ‐ mule fat type (type 3401), but found in most of the drainages mentioned in that community. Stands are also not as extensive and often form very narrow linear polygons in narrow canyons with large watersheds.) Fennel Mapping Unit 2.48% (see above) Built‐up 2.21% no description
Appendix C-20
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix C Reverse Analysis
In our analysis, a search was conducted for vegetation that grows in areas similar to the fill site. Our planting site was already known, but the vegetation with which to plant in the site had yet to be identified. Instead, what happens if a vegetation type is known and suitable planting sites for that vegetation type need to be located? In this case, suitability or site selection modeling can be performed using GIS. First, existing occurrences of the vegetation type of interest are located. The dominant characteristics of these locations are then used to discover other potential habitats for that vegetation type. An example is shown below using Fremont Cottonwoods.
Elevation Slope Aspect Soil Type Characteristics of 7‐450 meters 0‐28% Mostly North, Mostly Spinnaker‐ areas on the Northwest, and West Starboard‐Rock island where outcrop complex cottonwoods are found
Appendix C-21
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Literature Cited
Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 2007. Santa Cruz Island Photo Interpretation and Mapping Classification Report. Redlands, California.
Coastal Services Center, Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service. 2004. 2002/2003 Southern California IfSAR data.
ESRI. 2007. ArcGIS 9.2 Desktop Help. Calculating Slope. http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.2/index.cfm?TopicName=Calculating_slope
ESRI. 2007. ArcGIS 9.2 Desktop Help. Determining Aspect. http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.2/index.cfm?TopicName=Determining_aspect
ESRI. 2008. ArcGIS 9.2 Desktop Help. How Weighted Overlay Works. http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.2/index.cfm?TopicName=How_Weighted_Overlay_w orks
ESRI. 2008. ArcGIS 9.2 Desktop Help. Zonal Statistics. http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.2/index.cfm?TopicName=zonal_statistics
ESRI. ESRI Developer Network. Documentation Library. What is geoprocessing? http://edndoc.esri.com/arcobjects/9.2/net/shared/geoprocessing/geoprocessing/what_is_geop rocessing_qst_.htm
ESRI. 2008. Essays on Geography and GIS. What is GIS? Redlands, California.
National Park Service. 2009. Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement. National Park Service, Ventura, California.
Schwemm, Cathy. 1998. Shoreline data. (Originally taken from USGS DLG data, edited to conform to USGS 1994 Digital Orthophoto Quarter Quad data for Santa Cruz Island). National Park Service, Ventura, California.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2007. Soil survey of Channel Islands National Park, California. http://soils.usda.gov/survey/printed_surveys/
Appendix C-22 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
APPENDIX D—COWARDIN WETLANDS DELINEATION
Appendix D-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-2
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-3
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-4
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-5
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-6
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-7
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-8
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-9
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-10
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-11
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-12
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-13
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-14
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-15
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-16
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-17
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-18
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-19
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix D-20 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
APPENDIX E—PLANT SPECIES SURVEY
Appendix E-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND RESTORATION PROJECT AREA PLANT SPECIES LIST
A plant survey of the Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration project area was conducted on July 3 and July 25 – 29, 2008. The project area was previously classified by vegetation type by The Nature Conservancy (Aerial Information Systems, Inc. March 31, 2007). There are 12 vegetation types in the project area. Vegetation type polygons were downloaded to a Trimble GPS device and groups of two or three people were assigned one vegetation type polygon to survey. The survey was conducted by walking the entire vegetation type polygon and recording all plant species observed. If a plant was difficult to identify a sample was collected and keyed out to species later in the day.
Participants included NPS personnel: Paula Power, Dirk Rodriguez, Clark Cowan, James R. Roberts. Marie Denn; TNC Staff: Colleen Cory; and volunteer expert botanists: Ken Niessen and William Abbott.
The total number of species found on the site was 179. There were no federally listed species found in the project area. One state listed species was found in the main stream channel, Santa Cruz Island silver lotus (Lotus argophyllus ssp. argenteus). No unusual or unexpected plant species were identified.
The relative abundance of individual species is indicated by the following key: D – dominant, C – common, O – occasional, R – rare
Some vegetation types were represented by more than one polygon. Where more than one polygon was surveyed for a given vegetation type, the higher overall abundance was used. In some cases a range was given, for example C – D, or if a species was more abundant locally this was noted as “C – edge” or “C – patch”.
The species acronyms used were taken from the CHIS species list for the park islands. Stands of Blue gum and Red gum eucalyptus were treated separately in the species list.
The Vegetation Types included in the survey are: 1120 – Eucalyptus Stands Mapping Unit. Column heading is 1120 Blue Euc or 1120 Red Euc 2110 – Coast Live Oak Alliance is 2110 QUAG allian on the list 3150 – Lemonadeberry Alliance is 3150 RHIN allian on the list 3313 – California Sagebrush – Lemonadeberry is 3313 RHIN/ARCA on the list 3401 – Mixed Arroyo Willow – Mule Fat Mapping Unit is 3401 SALA/BASA on the list 3410 – Arroyo Willow Alliance is 3410 SALA on the list 4101 – Bulrush – Cattail Mapping Unit is 4101 SCCA/TYDO on the list 4301 – Fennel Mapping Unit is 4301 FOVU on the list 4410 – Silver Beachbur – Beach Sand-Verbena Alliance is 4410 AMCH/ABMA on the list 9100 – Built up
Appendix E-2
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
9430 – Stream Beds and Flats is Streambed-flat on the list 9600 – Planted trees and shrubs is Planted trees on the list
The vegetation map and vegetation classification are taken from: Santa Cruz Island Photo Interpretation and Mapping Classification Report, The Nature Conservancy, Santa Cruz Island, Vegetation Map Final Report, Aerial Information Systems, Inc. March 31, 2007.
Appendix E-3
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Prisoners Wetland Project Area Plant Species Survey D- dominant C- common O- occasional R – rare
VEGETATION TYPES
SPECIES 1120 1120 2110 3150 3313 3401 3410
BLUE RED Acacia melanoxylon O D in 10 Acourtia microcephala R
Adiantum jordanii R
Agave americana
Agrostis viridis O
Albizzia lophantha
Amaranthus albus R Ambrosia chamissonis R Amsinckia menziesii
Anagallis arvensis R Anemopsis californicus R O Artemisia californica R O O Artemisia douglasiana C C O O C Asclepias fascicularis R R Atriplex leucophylla Atriplex semibaccata
Atriplex prostrata R
Avena barbata
Avena fatua Baccharis douglasiana C O C
Baccharis pilularis D O C O C Baccharis plummerae O R O O
Appendix E-4
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Baccharis salicifolia C O O C D
1120 1120 2110 3150 3313 3401 3410 Brachypodium distachyon R
Brassica nigra O R R O Brickellia californica O O O
Bromus carinatus C O O C R C
Bromus diandrus C C C C C Bromus hordeaceus O O O O Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens
Cakile maritima R R Calystegia marcostegia C O O O Ceanothus arboreus O R Ceanothus megacarpus R R Centaurea melitensis R Centaurea solstitialis R R Cercocarpus betuloides O R Chenopodium ambrosioides Chenopodium californicum R R R Chenopodium murale Clematis ligusticifolia O Comarostaphylos diversifolia R R O Convolvulus arvensis O O Conyza bonariensis R O
Conyza O R
Appendix E-5
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
canadensis
Coreopsis gigantea Cotula coronopifolia
1120 1120 2110 3150 3313 3401 3410
Cynodon dactylon O O O Dichelostemma capitata R C
Distichlis spicata O Dudleya candelabrum C
Epilobium canum O C R O
Epilobium ciliatum O Epipactis giganteum Equisetum laevigatum O O O Eremocarpus setigerus R Eriogonum arborescens O C O Eriogonum grande var. grande C O Erodium cicutarium Eschscholtzia californica Eucalyptus calmadulensis O D O C O Eucalyptus globulus D O Eucrypta chrysanthemifolia Foeniculum vulgare C TO D C C C O TO C Galium angustifolium O R
Galium aparine O R Galium nuttallii insulare
Appendix E-6
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Gastridium ventricosum Gnaphalium californicum R O Gnaphalium canescens O R O O Gnaphalium luteo-album R R R
1120 1120 2110 3150 3313 3401 3410
Hazardia detonsa R Hazardia squarrosa
Hedera helix C R Heteromeles arbutifolia C C O O O C Heterotheca grandiflora R Hirschfeldia incana R R R Hordeum murinum O O Hypochaeris glabra O
Juncus bufonius
Juncus mexicana O R R
Juncus patens R O
Juncus xyphoides Keckiella cordifolia O R
Lactuca saligna
Lactuca serriola O-ROAD R O
Larmarckia aurea
Lathyrus vestitus R R R R O
Lepidium draba O O Lepidospartum squamatum O D - Leymus triticoides O LOCALLY Lolium multiflorum X
Appendix E-7
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Lotus argophyllus R R O- Lotus corniculatus EDGE O
Lotus dendroideus R
Lotus grandiflorus
Lotus purshianus R C
Lupinus albifrons R
Lupinus bicolor
1120 1120 2110 3150 3313 3401 3410 Lupinus hirsutissimus R Lythrum hyssopifolia R
Madia sativa C R Malacothrix saxatilis
Malva parviflora O O Marah macrocarpus O O O R Marrubium vulgare O O R R Medicago polymorpha C O O
Medicago sativa
Melilotus albus R O- Melilotus indicus R O EDGE O Mimulus cardinalis R-EDGE
Mimulus guttatus Mimulus longiflorus O O O O O
Nasella cernua Oenothera elata ssp. hirsutissima R
Olea europaea R
Opuntia littoralis
Oxalis corniculata R
Appendix E-8
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Paspalum distichum R Pennisetum C- clandestinum C-D D O PATCH C/D Phacelia ramossisima X Pholistoma auritum
Pinus pinea R Piptatherum miliaceum C C O C O
Plantago lanceolata C-ROAD O O O C
1120 1120 2110 3150 3313 3401 3410
Plantago major Platanus racemosa R R Polygonum O- arenastrum O-ROAD O EDGE O-ROAD Polygonum lapathifolium R O O Polypogon interruptus R O Polypogon monspeliensis R O Populus balsamifera R R Prunus illicifolia ssp. lyonii D C O R C- Quercus agrifolia C/D O D R LOCALLY Quercus x macdonaldii R
Quercus pacifica O O R Raphanus raphinastrum
Raphanus sativa Rhamnus californica O O
Rhus integrifolia O C O D O O
Rhus ovata R Robinia pseudoacacia R
Appendix E-9
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
C- Rosa californica LOCALLY O O O-C Rubus ursinus O PATCHES R Rumex conglomeratus
Rumex crispus O O O C
Rumex pulcher O O R- EDGE
Rumex salicifolius O
Salix exigua O O
Salix lasiolepis C-D O C C/D
1120 1120 2110 3150 3313 3401 3410 Scirpus californicus O
Scirpus maritimus
Silene laciniata Silybum marianum O R
Sllene gallica R R
Solanum clokeyi
Solanum douglasii C C O O R
Sonchus asper R R Sonchus oleraceus O O R O Spergularia bocconii
Stachys bullata O/C C R O O
Stellaria media Stephanomeria cichoriacea C Symphoricarpos mollis O Tetragonia tetragonioides Toxicodendron diversiloba O/C R R R Trifolium microcephalum
Appendix E-10
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Trifolium willdenovii Typha dominguensis
Ulmus hollandica O-C Urtica dioica C PATCHES R Verbascum thapsis Verbena lasiostachys R Veronica anagallis-aquatica O Vicia benghalensis R
Vicia sativa R
1120 1120 2110 3150 3313 3401 3410
Vinca major C/D C O O O
Vulpia myuros Woodwardia fimbriata
VEGETATION TYPES
SPECIES 4101 4301 4410 9100 9430 9600
Acacia melanoxylon R R
Acourtia microcephala
Adiantum jordanii
Agave americana O
Agrostis viridis R O O
Albizzia lophantha R R
Amaranthus albus R O
Ambrosia chamissonis D O
Amsinckia menziesii R
Anagallis arvensis C O
Anemopsis californicus C
Artemisia californica R O R O
Appendix E-11
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Artemisia douglasiana O
Asclepias fascicularis
Atriplex leucophylla O R
Atriplex semibaccata O O
Atriplex triangularis C R R C
Avena barbata O R
Avena fatua R
Baccharis douglasiana C C O O
Baccharis pilularis C-EDGE O O D
Baccharis plummerae R O O
Baccharis salicifolia O O O O C O
4101 4301 4410 9100 9430 9600
Brachypodium distachyon O
Brassica nigra O O O
Brickellia californica O O O
Bromus carinatus C R O C
Bromus diandrus C C O O C
Bromus hordeaceus O R O O
Bromus rubens O
Cakile maritima C O
Calystegia marcostegia R O
Ceanothus arboreus O O
Ceanothus megacarpus R
Centaurea melitensis O R R
Centaurea solstitialis R R O
Cercocarpus betuloides
Chenopodium ambrosioides R
Chenopodium californicum R C O
Chenopodium murale R
Clematis ligusticifolia
Appendix E-12
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Comarostaphylos diversifolia
Convolvulus arvensis O O R
Conyza bonariensis O
Conyza canadensis O R O
Coreopsis gigantea R C
Cotula coronopifolia C R
Cynodon dactylon C C C
Dichelostemma capitata R
Distichlis spicata C D C
Dudleya candelabrum R R
Epilobium canum O C
4101 4301 4410 9100 9430 9600
Epilobium ciliatum O C
Epipactis giganteum R
Equisetum laevigatum
Eremocarpus setigerus R
Eriogonum arborescens O R C
Eriogonum grande grande O O O
Erodium cicutarium O R
Eschscholtzia californica R O
Eucalyptus calmadulensis R R O
Eucalyptus globulus D O
Eucrypta chrysanthemifolia R
Foeniculum vulgare DDD C C C
Galium angustifolium
Galium aparine R
Galium nuttallii insulare
Gastridium ventricosum R
Gnaphalium californicum R
Gnaphalium canescens R R R C R
Appendix E-13
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Gnaphalium luteo-album R C
Hazardia detonsa O
Hazardia squarrosa O
Hedera helix
Heteromeles arbutifolia R O
Heterotheca grandiflora O O
Hirschfeldia incana O C
Hordeum murinum R O O
Hypochaeris glabra O O
Juncus bufonius
Juncus mexicana
4101 4301 4410 9100 9430 9600
Juncus patens C
Juncus xyphoides R
Keckiella cordifolia
Lactuca saligna
Lactuca serriola C
Larmarckia aurea O R
Lathyrus vestitus O R O O- Lepidium draba LOCALLY O R
Lepidospartum squamatum R C
Leymus triticoides
Lolium multiflorum O R O
Lotus argophyllus O
Lotus corniculatus R R
Lotus dendroideus C R O
Lotus grandiflorus R
Lotus purshianus R C O
Lupinus albifrons R R R
Appendix E-14
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Lupinus bicolor O O
Lupinus hirsutissimus
Lythrum hyssopifolia O
Madia sativa
Malacothrix saxatilis R
Malva parviflora C R
Marah macrocarpa O O C
Marrubium vulgare C
Medicago polymorpha R O O
Medicago sativa R O
Melilotus albus R
Melilotus indicus O R C O
4101 4301 4410 9100 9430 9600
Mimulus cardinalis R O
Mimulus guttatus O
Mimulus longiflorus O R O
Nasella cernua O
Oenothera elata hirsuta R
Olea europaea
Opuntia littoralis R
Oxalis corniculata
Paspalum distichum
Pennisetum clandestinum C/D C D/C D
Phacelia ramossisima
Pholistoma auritum R R
Pinus pinea R
Piptatherum miliaceum O/C O
Plantago lanceolata R C C O
Plantago major R O R
Platanus racemosa R
Appendix E-15
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Polygonum arenastrum C O
Polygonum lapathifolium R R O O
Polypogon interruptus O O
Polypogon monspeliensis O C C C O
Populus balsamifera
Prunus illicifolia lyonii R
Quercus agrifolia R R O
Quercus x macdonaldii
Quercus pacifica R
Raphanus raphinastrum O
Raphanus sativa O
Rhamnus californica
4101 4301 4410 9100 9430 9600
Rhus integrifolia O R O O O
Rhus ovata O
Robinia pseudoacacia R
Rosa californica C
Rubus ursinus R O
Rumex conglomeratus R R R
Rumex crispus O C O
Rumex pulcher R O
Rumex salicifolius O
Salix exigua O C D- Salix lasiolepis C/D O O EDGE D
Scirpus californicus D C R R
Scirpus maritimus C O
Silene laciniata R
Silybum marianum O O
Sllene gallica O R O R
Appendix E-16
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Solanum clokeyi R
Solanum douglasii R O R R
Sonchus asper R O O
Sonchus oleraceus R R O O O
Spergularia bocconii R
Stachys bullata C R O
Stellaria media R
Stephanomeria cichoriacea
Symphoricarpos mollis R
Tetragonia tetragonioides O
Toxicodendron diversiloba R
Trifolium microcephalum R
Trifolium willdenovii R
4101 4301 4410 9100 9430 9600
Typha dominguensis D
Ulmus hollandica O
Urtica dioica R C
Verbascum thapsis R
Verbena lasiostachys
Veronica anagallis-aquatica R R C O
Vicia benghalensis ?
Vicia sativa R
Vinca major O
Vulpia myuros R
Woodwardia fimbriata
Appendix E-17 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
APPENDIX F—EUCALYPTUS SURVEY
Appendix F-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
A Survey of Eucalyptus Trees in Prisoners Harbor and lower Cañada del Puerto September 24, 2008
Introduction The genus Eucalyptus includes about 450 species and is native to Australia. During the late 19th century, it was widely planted throughout California, including 4 species on Santa Cruz Island (Junak, et al. 1995) where they were planted for ornamental and utilitarian purposes such as windbreaks and future pier pilings. Trees planted in a row along the base of the cliff at Prisoners Harbor have persisted from the ranching era to the present and are considered historic (NPS Cultural Landscape Inventory, 2004). The majority of eucalyptus trees at Prisoners Harbor and in Cañada del Puerto have spread unintentionally from seed, displacing native vegetation over time, and are not considered historic. This survey of eucalyptus trees was conducted to improve our understanding of the number, size, and distribution of eucalyptus trees in the Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration project area (Fig 1).
Eucalyptus Survey and Mapping in Cañada del Puerto During August and September 2008, Paula Power, Clark Cowan, and Jim Roberts mapped and recorded the diameter at breast height (dbh) of eucalyptus trees greater than 6” dbh in the Prisoners Harbor and lower Cañada del Puerto area. For ease of data collection and mapping, the project area was subdivided into smaller areas and each area was assigned a letter designation. The total number of eucalyptus trees greater than 6”dbh in the project areas was approximately 1737. There are 741 trees with a dbh less than 12” (30 cm), 692 trees with a dbh between 12” and 24” (30 cm and 60 cm), and 304 trees with a dbh greater than 24” (60 cm) (Fig 2). Area G and H had the greatest number of trees and 82% of trees were less than 24” (60 cm) dbh (Fig 2; Table 1).
Area G and H had many trees that were downed either by strong winds or felled with a chainsaw to open the area for re-colonization by native plants (Fig 1). It was estimated that up to 25% of trees in area H were standing dead wood. Downed trees and standing dead wood were not included in the survey.
Example of eucalyptus removal on the mainland The City of Port Hueneme completed a eucalyptus removal project near the Sea Bee base in Port Hueneme in 2008. Ninety-five 60’-80’tall mature trees were declared a hazard by an arborist due to fungus and rot and the trees were removed. Twelve men worked for 2½ to 3 weeks using 1 crane and chainsaws with long bars. The trees were first limbed, then a 30-ton crane was used to choke a trunk section, the section was cut and lowered, and a stump grinder ground the stump to 12” below grade. The crane was used to lower the cut trunk sections to the ground to avoid damaging existing infrastructure such as power lines, sidewalks, pavement, and underground utilities. A loader picked up large logs and placed them in “end dumps”. Logs small enough to put through a chipper were chipped and distributed to avocado orchards for mulch. Large logs were cut into smaller pieces for use as fire wood.
Appendix F-2
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Three vendors were used for tree removal, chipping, and firewood. Tree removal cost was $1800.00/tree. The City of Port Hueneme contracted West Coast Arborist for the tree removal (www.wcainc.com; 2889 Bunsen Ave #P, Ventura, CA 93003, 805-644- 2671). This is one of a number of local companies that are certified and equipped to remove large trees.
In 2008 the cost of disposing of material at Shoreline Organics, a green waste facility is $27.00/ton or the City of Oxnard is $43.00/ton.
Removing Eucalyptus trees on island
Trees could be disposed of using a number of methods. Trees with a dbh less than 12” (742 trees) could be chipped and the chipped material spread on the Central Valley and the Navy roads. The straightest trees with a dbh between 12” and 24” could be stock piled on island and eventually used in other repair or appropriate construction projects such as building a protective barrier around the archeological site and historic well, for future road work, or fire wood at the Main Ranch and the UC Field Station. There are fewer reasonable alternatives for disposing of trees with a dbh greater than 24”. Some can be burned or others used to create brush piles for habitat. Some could be transported off island.
The proposed fill disposal area for the wetlands restoration project is Area A, B, and C. The total number of eucalyptus trees in Area A, B, and C is 125 trees. One approach may be to remove the trees in phases beginning with area A, B, and C. Then remove additional trees in the remaining areas as funding becomes available.
The ecological cost of removing trees from the island would be the use of fossil fuels to transport equipment on and off the island, the use of fossil fuels to operate the hand-held and heavy equipment required to remove the trees, and the loss of habitat and carbon sequestration potential during the time the native plant community is recovering. The ecological benefit of removing the trees include opening the area for re-colonization by native plant species, restoring riaparian oak woodland ecological function, increasing habitat diversity, improving habitat for many species of birds including the Island scrub- jay and other passerine birds known to breed in the area and animal species including the island fox.
Appendix F-3
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Prisoners Harbor and lower Canada del Puerto Eucalyptus spp. Diameter at Breast Height (dbh) 800 blue gums 700 red gums
600
s 500
400
300 number of trunk of number
200
100
0 1 3 6 9 1 1 1 2 2 5- 1- 1- 1- 21 51 81 11 41 30 60 90 12 -1 -1 -2 -2 -2 c c c 0 50 80 10 40 70 m m m c m cm cm cm cm cm Trunk dbh 30 cm = 1 foot
Figure 2. Red and blue gum eucalyptus diameter at breast height. 81% of trees have a dbh less than 60 cm (24”). The average dbh for red gum and blue gum eucalyptus was 34 cm (14”) and 52 cm (21”) respectively.
Appendix F-4
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Table 1. The greatest number of trees are located in area G and H with dbh less than 60 cm.
Area # of Trunks Total 15-30 31-60 61-90 91-120 121-150 151-180 181-210 211-240 241-270 (dbh cm) (dbh (dbh (dbh (dbh (dbh (dbh (dbh (dbh cm) cm) cm) cm) cm) cm) cm) cm) A 2 3 2 2 0 1 0 10 B 3 4 8 5 0 1 1 22 C 19 60 8 5 1 0 0 93 D 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 6 E 1 4 2 1 0 0 0 8 F 5 6 12 8 4 2 1 38 G 259 295 93 42 27 4 0 720 H 451 311 53 5 1 1 1 823 M 1 9 7 0 0 0 0 17 Total 741 692 189 70 33 9 3 1737
Appendix F-5
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement
Eucalyptus
Area 1oSp No. of trunks Ave. DBH(cm) A Blue 10 80 B Blue 22 80 C Blue 93 62 D Blue 6 88 M E Blue 8 86 A F Blue 38 89 G Blue 720 47 H Red 823 34 D M Blue 17 57 B C E
H
F
G
Figure 1. Clusters of trees within the project area were assigned a letter designation to simplify the survey. The vast majority of trees were in area G and H. The proposed fill disposal area for the wetlands restoration is area A, B, and C. The total number of trees in these three areas is 125.
Appendix F-6 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
APPENDIX G—SHPO CONSULTATION
Appendix G-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Consultation With State Historic Preservation Office
Appendix G-2
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-3
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-4
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-5
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-6
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-7
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-8
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-9
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-10
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-11
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-12
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-13
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-14
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Consultation with Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians
Appendix G-15
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-16
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-17
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix G-18 Final Environmental Impact Statement Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, California
APPENDIX H—FWS CONSULTATION
Appendix I-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
L7617-CHIS
Mr. Roger Root U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ventura Field Office 2493 Portola Road, Suite B Ventura, CA 93003
Reference: Channel Islands National Park, Santa Cruz Island Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration
Dear Mr. Root:
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, the National Park Service is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement to evaluate possible alternatives for restoring the former coastal wetland at Prisoners Harbor and associated riparian corridor in the lower Cañada del Puerto. Please refer to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle titled Santa Cruz Island C and the enclosed vicinity map. The project area extends over approximately 50 acres of land owned by Channel Islands National Park and The Nature Conservancy. Action is needed because prior modifications to the site, including filling the wetland, channelizing the stream, and introducing invasive species, degraded the ecosystem function of the coastal wetland and riparian corridor.
At this early stage in the planning, we wish to ensure that we are working with a complete list of species that should be considered under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and to solicit any early input or concerns that you may have regarding this proposed action. A search of the California Natural Diversity Database, herbarium specimens, and on-the-ground field surveys indicate that the federally listed species in the project area is the Santa Cruz Island fox (Urocyon littoralis santacruzae). The known listed species within the project action area, USGS quad Santa Cruz Island C are listed below.
Threatened and Endangered Species in USGS quad Santa Cruz Island C
Scientific Name Common Name Federal State Anacapa Santa Santa San Santa Cruz Rosa Miguel Barbara
Urocyon littoralis Santa Cruz Island fox E T C cruzae Arabis hoffmannii Hoffmann’s rock-cress E A! C R
Galium buxifolium Box-leaved bedstraw E C M
Helianthemum greenei Island rush-rose T C R
Santa Cruz Island Malacothrix indecora E C R M malacothrix
Malacothrix squalida Island malacothrix E A C
Appendix I-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Thysanocarpus Santa Cruz Island E C conchuliferus lacepod
Legend
E = Endangered T = Threatened (EE) = Single island endemic (E) = Endemic to the islands ! = Extirpated (no longer occurs) * = Thought to be extinct A, C, R, M, B = Island of occurrence
We look forward to working with your office and the public as we proceed with the environmental planning process for this project. If you have any questions, please contact Paula Power, Ecologist, at 805/658-5784 or at [email protected]
Sincerely,
Russell E. Galipeau, Jr. Superintendent
Enclosure
bcc: CHIS-File, K. Faulkner, P. Power CHIS:PPOWER:cl:07/29/08
Appendix I-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix I-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix I-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
APPENDIX I—CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
Appendix I-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix I-1
Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement
Appendix I-1 Channel Islands National Park National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
Channel Islands National Park 1901 Spinnaker Drive Ventura, CA 93001
EXPERIENCE YOUR AMERICATM