DRAFT
Foothill Feeder Inspection and Maintenance Activities Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan
August 2018
Prepared by
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Foothill Feeder Inspection and Maintenance Activities Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan
D R A F T
AUGUST 2018
Prepared by
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ...... i
Abbreviations and Acronyms ...... 1
Executive Summary ...... 1
Introduction and Background ...... 1
1.1 Overview/Background ...... 1-1 1.2 Regulatory Compliance Framework ...... 1-2 1.2.1 Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Amended ...... 1-2 1.2.2 National Environmental Policy Act ...... 1-6 1.2.3 Federal Clean Water Act ...... 1-6 1.2.4 National Historic Preservation Act ...... 1-7 1.3 HCP Boundaries (Covered Area) ...... 1-7
Covered Activities ...... 2-1
2.1 Shutdowns ...... 2-2 2.2 Emergency Dewatering Scenario ...... 2-4 2.3 UTS Conservation Action Site...... 2-5 2.4 Avoidance and Minimization Measures ...... 2-5
Environmental Setting / Biological Resources ...... 3-1
3.1 Physical Environment...... 3-1 3.1.1 Climate ...... 3-1 3.1.2 Air Quality ...... 3-1 3.1.3 Topography ...... 3-2 3.1.4 Geology and Soils ...... 3-2 3.1.5 Surface and Groundwater ...... 3-2 3.2 Biological Environment ...... 3-3 3.2.1 Vegetation Communities and Other Land Cover ...... 3-3 3.2.2 Common Wildlife ...... 3-4 3.2.3 Aquatic Biota ...... 3-6 3.2.4 Project Sites ...... 3-6 3.3 Species Considered for Coverage ...... 3-7 3.4 Proposed Covered Species ...... 3-7
August 2018 Table of Contents i METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER TABLE OF CONTENTS LOW-EFFECT HCP
3.4.1 Unarmored Threespine Stickleback ...... 3-8 3.4.2 Arroyo Toad ...... 3-11 3.4.3 California Red Legged Frog ...... 3-13 3.4.4 Santa Ana Sucker ...... 3-15 3.4.5 Western Spadefoot ...... 3-16 3.4.6 Two-Striped Garter Snake ...... 3-17 3.4.7 Western Pond Turtle ...... 3-18
Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment ...... 4-1
4.1 Type of Potential Effects ...... 4-1 4.2 General Description of Potential Effects ...... 4-1 4.3 Potential Effects on Covered Species ...... 4-2 4.3.1 Unarmored Threespine Stickleback ...... 4-2 4.3.2 Arroyo Toad ...... 4-4 4.3.3 California Red-legged Frog ...... 4-5 4.3.4 Santa Ana Sucker ...... 4-5 4.3.5 Western Spadefoot ...... 4-5 4.3.6 Two-striped Garter Snake ...... 4-6 4.3.7 Western Pond Turtle ...... 4-6 4.3.8 Summary of Potential Covered Species Effects ...... 4-6 4.4 Potential Effects on Critical Habitat ...... 4-7 4.5 Potential Cumulative Effects ...... 4-8 4.6 Take Estimate ...... 4-9
Conservation Program ...... 5-1
5.1 Biological Goals and Objectives ...... 5-1 5.2 Avoidance and Minimization Measures ...... 5-1 5.2.1 Shutdowns ...... 5-2 5.2.2 Emergency Dewatering Scenario ...... 5-5 5.2.3 UTS Conservation Action Site ...... 5-5 5.3 Mitigation Measures ...... 5-10 5.4 Monitoring, Adaptive Management, and Reporting ...... 5-10
Plan Implementation ...... 6-1
6.1 HCP Administration and Funding ...... 6-1 6.2 Changed and Unforeseen Circumstances ...... 6-1 6.2.1 Changed Circumstances ...... 6-1 6.2.2 Unforeseen Circumstances ...... 6-2 6.3 Revisions and Amendments ...... 6-3
Table of Contents ii August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER TABLE OF CONTENTS LOW-EFFECT HCP
6.3.1 Revisions ...... 6-3 6.3.2 Amendments to the Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permits ...... 6-4
Alternatives Analyzed ...... 7-1
Citations ...... 8-1
List of Preparers ...... 9-1 Appendices Appendix A Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in or near the Covered Area Appendix B 2012 Foothill Feeder Shutdown Biological Elements
Figures Figure 1-1 Regional Map ...... 1-3 Figure 1-2 Project Site Locations and Covered Area ...... 1-9 Figure 2-1 Foothill Feeder Station Profile ...... 2-4
Tables Table 1-1 Dewatering Locations ...... 1-8 Table 2-1 Future Inspections Gravity Flow and Pumping Discharge ...... 2-2 Table 3-1 Covered Species Status and Critical Habitat ...... 3-8 Table 4-1 Summary of Potential Effects on Covered Species by Covered Activities ...... 4-7 Table 5-1 Foothill Feeder Shutdown Water Release Plan ...... 5-2
August 2018 Table of Contents iii METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER TABLE OF CONTENTS LOW-EFFECT HCP
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Table of Contents iv August 2018
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Agencies USFWS and CDFW Basin South Coast Air Basin BMPs Best Management Practices BiOp Biological Opinion CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards Cal-OSHA California Occupational Safety & Health Administration CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CESA California Endangered Species Act cfs cubic feet per second CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CO carbon monoxide DWP City of Los Angeles Department of Water & Power EA Environmental Assessment EIR Environmental Impact Report EIS Environmental Impact Statement ESA Endangered Species Act gpm gallons per minute HCP Habitat Conservation Plan IA Implementing Agreement ITP Incidental Take Permit IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature Jensen Plant Joseph Jensen Water Treatment Plant km kilometer Metropolitan The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California mm millimeter NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards MND Mitigated Negative Declaration NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
August 2018 Abbreviations and Acronyms AA-1 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS LOW-EFFECT HCP
NOx nitrogen oxide O3 ozone O&M operations and maintenance PCCP prestressed concrete cylinder pipe PCE primary constituent element Permit Incidental Take Permit or Section 10(a)(1)(B) PM2.5 particulates that are 2.5 microns or smaller PM10 particulates that are 10 microns or smaller ppt parts per thousand Project Foothill Feeder Inspection and Maintenance Activities Project RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District Service USFWS Services USFWS and NMFS SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SRA State Receptor Area USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service VWRP Valencia Water Reclamation Plant
Abbreviations and Acronyms AA-2 August 2018
Executive Summary
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) has prepared this low-effect Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) in support of an application package for an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat. 884) as amended, from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or USFWS). Based on the magnitude of potential effects, implementation of conservation measures, and USFWS guidelines and procedures, this HCP qualifies as a low-effect HCP. Metropolitan is seeking a 25-year Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit for the incidental take in connection with future periodic inspections and maintenance activities associated with Metropolitan’s Foothill Feeder, a water conveyance pipeline located in Los Angeles County, California. Elements of the HCP include:
Covered Activities
The potential for take of Covered Species is associated with releases of water during pipeline shutdowns necessary to conduct inspections and/or repairs and various maintenance activities associated with the Foothill Feeder. Additionally, Covered activities would also include conservation-related activities, such as protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities, at the unarmored threespine stickleback (UTS) Conservation Action site.
Covered Species
The species identified as Covered Species related to the ITP are:
Unarmored threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni) Arroyo toad (Anaxyrus californicus) California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae) Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) Two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii) Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata)
Project Effects and Estimated Take
The potential for effects of Covered Activities on all life stages of these species is assessed. It is anticipated that no incidental take or very limited take of Covered Species would occur from the Covered Activities with implementation of the avoidance and minimization measures. Any incidental take of aquatic wildlife associated with the Covered Activities would primarily involve repatriation of any individuals stranded by receding waters during shutdown events and relocating individuals out of harm’s way.
Conservation Program
As guided by the biological goals and objectives of the conservation program, this HCP identifies measures that Metropolitan would implement to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the effects on the species covered by this HCP. Additionally, the HCP conservation program is based on an adaptive management strategy to allow for HCP implementation to adjust appropriately as information is gathered over time
through monitoring.
August 2018 Executive Summary ES-1 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY LOW-EFFECT HCP
Implementation
The HCP defines measures to ensure that the elements of the HCP are implemented in a timely manner. The HCP also discusses the possibility of changed circumstances and unforeseen events occurring. Funding for the HCP, alternatives to the proposed inspections and maintenance of the Foothill Feeder pipeline, and other measures required by Metropolitan and the Service are discussed.
Executive Summary ES-2 August 2018
S E C T I O N 1 Introduction and Background
1.1 Overview/Background
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (hereafter referred to as “Metropolitan”) is a public agency that was incorporated in 1929. Metropolitan provides a supplemental water supply for domestic and municipal uses to its member agencies. The member agencies serve nearly 19 million people in 250 cities and unincorporated communities within a 5,200-square-mile service area covering parts of Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego counties.
Metropolitan’s Foothill Feeder is a water conveyance pipeline that is located in unincorporated northwestern Los Angeles County east of Interstate 5 (I-5), in the City of Santa Clarita, and in the City of Los Angeles (Figure 1-1). The Foothill Feeder was constructed in the 1968 and is approximately 17.8 miles in total length. It consists of 6.3 miles of 16-foot, 9-inch diameter pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipe (PCCP), and 11.5 miles of 20-foot diameter tunnel (cast in place). The Foothill Feeder transports untreated water from Castaic Lake in Castaic to the Joseph Jensen Water Treatment Plant (Jensen Plant) in Granada Hills. At the Jensen Plant, water is treated for introduction into the potable water system. The Foothill Feeder is the primary source of Metropolitan-delivered water for its member agencies (i.e., Calleguas Municipal Water District, Las Virgenes Water District, City of Burbank, City of Glendale, and Los Angeles Department of Water and Power) that are served by the Jensen Plant.
The pipeline crosses a series of natural creeks and waterways that are tributaries to the mainstem of the Santa Clara River as well as the mainstem itself. The pipeline also crosses a tributary to Bull Creek in the Los Angeles River watershed, located just south of the Santa Clara River watershed. In order to assure the safety and reliability of the Foothill Feeder, inspections of the pipeline along with preventive and corrective maintenance are conducted by Metropolitan, referred to as the Foothill Feeder Repair and Future Inspections Project, Foothill Feeder Project, or project. These activities result in water releases at several locations that range from a small amount of water released over a short period of time to all of the water in the pipeline. The pipeline periodically is partially or fully dewatered11 by releases at various structures (blow-offs) along the Foothill Feeder to ensure the continued structural integrity of the pipeline. The blow-offs are located at low points along the pipeline, allowing water to be primarily released via gravity flow. Any water that cannot be drained by gravity is pumped out. Water from these activities is released into the following waterways: Castaic Lagoon, Charlie Canyon Creek, San Francisquito Creek, Santa Clara River, and Placerita Canyon Creek (Figure 1-2).
Metropolitan prepared and implemented a Shutdown Water Release Plan for dewatering the pipeline as well as other environmental protection measures described in the 2005 Foothill Feeder Repair and Future Inspections Environmental Impact Report (2005 EIR) to avoid “take” of listed species. However, monitoring during dewatering releases since that time has shown that it may be necessary to repatriate individuals of one or more federally-listed species at some locations to prevent mortality. This constitutes “take” of a listed species for which authorization is required under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat. 884) as amended. Such “take” would occur incidental to future inspections and various maintenance activities associated with the Foothill Feeder.
1 Removal of water from the pipeline, involving either gravity release or pumping, or both.
August 2018 Introduction and Background 1-1 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 1 LOW-EFFECT HCP INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Metropolitan has prepared this low-effect Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) in support of an application for an Incidental Take Permit (ITP or Permit), pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA from the USFWS. The HCP addresses potential effects and measures to avoid such effects on the following species (hereinafter referred to collectively as Covered Species) or their habitat during inspection and maintenance of the Foothill Feeder pipeline in Los Angeles County:
Status Federal State Unarmored threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni) E E, FP Arroyo toad (Anaxyrus californicus) E SSC California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) T SSC Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae) T* SSC Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) -- SSC Two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii) -- SSC Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) -- SSC Note: E = endangered, T = threatened, C = candidate for listing, FP = fully protected, SSC = Species of Special Concern * Not listed in the Santa Clara River drainage. The Santa Ana sucker is included in this HCP as a Covered Species in the event the species becomes listed in this drainage during the term of the ITP.
Metropolitan is seeking a 25-year Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit for incidental take, in the form of repatriation of stranded individuals and moving individuals out of harm’s way, of unarmored threespine stickleback (UTS), arroyo toad, and California red-legged frog in connection with future periodic inspections, maintenance activities, and conservation action activities associated with the Foothill Feeder. Take authorization is also requested for the Santa Ana sucker if it becomes listed in the Santa Clara River as well as the western spadefoot, two-striped garter snake, and western pond turtle, should they become listed during the term of the ITP.
1.2 Regulatory Compliance Framework
1.2.1 Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Amended
With several exceptions, Section 9 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1538(a)(1)(B)) prohibits the take of any endangered species and defines take as follows: “[t]he term ‘take’ means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, kill, trap, capture, collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct” (16 U.S.C. 1532(18)). The Service has further defined “harm” to mean “an act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such acts may include significant habitat modification or degradation, where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering” (50 CFR 17.3). Prior to 1982, non- federal entities had no recourse under the ESA to obtain an exemption for undertaking lawful activities that were likely to result in incidental take of a listed species. Congress amended the ESA in 1982 to establish Section 10(a)(1)(B), which allows for the incidental take of endangered and threatened species by non-federal entities. Incidental take is defined by the ESA as take that is “incidental to, and not the purpose of, the carrying out of an otherwise lawful activity” (16 U.S.C. 1539(a)(1)(B)). The requirements of Section 7 and Section 10 substantially overlap. Elements unique to Section 7 include analyses of effects on designated critical habitat, analyses of effects on listed plant species, if any, and analyses of indirect and cumulative effects on listed species. Cumulative effects are effects of future state, tribal, local, or private actions that are reasonably certain to occur in the action area, pursuant to Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA. These additional analyses are included in this HCP to meet the requirements of Section 7 and to assist the USFWS with its internal consultation.
Introduction and Background 1-2 August 2018 58
138 5
14 33 Castaic Lake Foothill Feeder
150
126
23 Joseph Jensen Water 118 Treatment Plant 2 232 210
34 170 101 27 134
405 10
1 60 187
105 d 605 5
Pacific 91 710 110
Ocean 39 213 22 47
015 0 Miles
FIGURE 1-1 Regional Map
Foothill Feeder Inspection and Maintenance Activities Low-Effect HCP Date: 1/22/2017 - Last saved by: kzecher - Path: \\dudek-files\GISData\Projects\j101090\MAPDOC\2_EIR\Figure 2-1_Regional.mx \\dudek-files\GISData\Projects\j101090\MAPDOC\2_EIR\Figure Path: - kzecher by: saved Last - 1/22/2017 Date: METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 1 LOW-EFFECT HCP INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Introduction and Background 1-4 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 1 LOW-EFFECT HCP INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Section 10 Habitat Conservation Plan Requirements and Guidelines
Preparation of an HCP is required for all Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit applications. The HCP defines activities to be addressed, characterizes the extent to which activities may affect ESA-listed species and their habitat, and then specifies measures to minimize and mitigate for impacts to ESA-listed species.
In approving the 1982 amendments to the ESA, created under Section 10, Congress expressed that HCPs be long-term, multi-species plans that cover not only ESA-listed species, but also unlisted species, as long as those species are treated as if they were ESA-listed (H.R. Rep. No. 835, 97th Cong., 2d Sess. 29 (1982)). Congress also recognized that HCPs should provide non-federal property owners seeking incidental take permits under Section 10, economic and regulatory certainty regarding the overall cost of species mitigation over the life of the permit, but that HCPs should also make provisions for circumstances and information that could change over time and that might require revisions to an HCP (H.R. Rep. No. 835, 97th Cong., 2d Sess. 29 (1982)). This regulatory certainty has often been referred to as ‘no surprises.’
The Section 10 process for obtaining an ITP has three primary phases: 1) the HCP development phase; 2) the formal permit processing phase; and 3) post-issuance phase. The Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook (USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS] 1996, as revised 2016) indicates an HCP submitted in support of an incidental take permit application must include the following information:
Impacts likely to result from the proposed taking of the species for which the permit coverage is requested;
Measures the applicant will undertake to monitor, minimize, and mitigate such impacts, the funding that will be made available to undertake such measures, and the procedures to deal with unforeseen circumstances;
Alternative actions the applicant considered that would not result in take, and the reasons why such alternatives are not being utilized; and
Additional measures USFWS or NMFS (collectively referred to as the Services) may require that are necessary or appropriate for purposes of the plan.
In addition, the Service must publish a Notice of Availability of the HCP in the Federal Register; prepare an Intra-Service Section 7 Biological Opinion (BiOp)2; prepare a Set of Findings, which evaluates the Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit application in the context of permit issuance criteria; and prepare a decision document that serves as the Service’s record of compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). For purposes of the Section 10 program, a special category for HCPs was established with relatively minor or negligible impacts. As such, low-effect HCPs require: (1) an HCP; (2) an application form and fee; (3) publication in the Federal Register of a Notice of Receipt of a Permit Application; (4) formal Section 7 consultation; (5) a Set of Findings, which evaluates a Section 10(a)(1(B) permit application in the context of permit issuance criteria found at Section 10(a)(2)(B) of the ESA; and (6) an
2 Section 7 of the ESA requires all federal agencies to ensure that any action to be authorized, funded, or carried out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any species listed under the ESA, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of its critical habitat. The issuance of an incidental take permit is a federal agency action; consequently, prior to issuing a permit, the Service must conduct an internal Section 7 consultation on the proposed HCP. The internal consultation begins after a non-federal entity develops and submits an HCP for formal processing and review. The internal consultation results in a BiOp prepared by the Service regarding whether issuance of the Permit and implementation of the HCP would result in jeopardy to any listed species or adversely modify critical habitat.
August 2018 Introduction and Background 1-5 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 1 LOW-EFFECT HCP INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Environmental Action Memorandum, a brief document that serves as the Service’s record of NEPA compliance for categorically excluded actions by explaining the reasons the Service concluded that no individual or cumulative significant effects on the environment will occur. An Implementing Agreement (IA) is not required for low-effect HCPs but may be included by the applicant.
A Section 10 ITP is granted upon the Service’s determination that all requirements for permit issuance have been met. Statutory criteria for permit issuance specify that:
taking will be incidental to an otherwise lawful activity;
impacts of incidental take will be minimized and mitigated to the maximum extent practicable;
adequate funding for implementing the HCP and procedures to handle unforeseen circumstances will be provided;
take will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of the species in the wild;
the applicant will provide additional measures that the Service requires as being necessary or appropriate; and
the Service has received assurances, as may be required, that the HCP will be implemented.
A notice in the Federal Register of the proposed issuance of the ITP is required and an opportunity for public comment must also be afforded before the above findings can be made by the Service and the ITP issued. During the post-issuance phase, the Permittee (i.e., Metropolitan) and/or other responsible entities implementing this HCP and the Service will monitor the Permittee’s compliance with the HCP as well as the long-term progress and success of the HCP.
1.2.2 National Environmental Policy Act
NEPA establishes the nationwide policy, goals, and legal authority for federal agencies regarding the environment. It requires federal agencies to study the environmental consequences of their actions and to use an interdisciplinary framework for environmental decision-making. The NEPA process helps federal agencies make informed decisions with respect to the environmental consequences of their actions and ensures that measures to protect, restore, and enhance the environment are included, as necessary, as a component of their actions. Issuance of an incidental take statement under Section 10 of the ESA is a federal action that triggers review under NEPA (42 U.S.C 4321-4347).
NEPA compliance is obtained through one of three actions: 1) preparation of an EIS; 2) preparation of an EA; or 3) categorical exclusion (allowed for low-effect HCPs). Low-effect HCPs, as defined in the HCP Handbook, are categorically excluded under NEPA, and the Service prepares an Environmental Action Memorandum as a record of NEPA compliance for the project.
1.2.3 Federal Clean Water Act
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) addresses protection of water quality and, in California, is administered by the State Water Resources Control Board. The Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) issue 401 certifications for project discharges that could affect water quality. Section 404 of the CWA regulates discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the U.S. and is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). An individual or nationwide permit is necessary for such
Introduction and Background 1-6 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 1 LOW-EFFECT HCP INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND discharges. A Section 404 permit may be needed if maintenance/dewatering activities involve placement of sand bags or other activities within waters of the U.S.
1.2.4 National Historic Preservation Act
All federal agencies are required to examine the impacts of their actions (e.g., issuance of a Section 10 permit) on cultural resources. This may require consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and appropriate American Indian tribes. All incidental take permit applicants are required to submit a Request for Cultural Resources Compliance form to the Service. To complete compliance, the applicants may be required to contract for cultural resource surveys and possibly mitigation.
1.3 HCP Boundaries (Covered Area)
Metropolitan’s Foothill Feeder is a 17.8-mile-long water pipeline that is located in unincorporated northwestern Los Angeles County east of Interstate 5 (I-5), in the City of Santa Clarita, and in the City of Los Angeles. Repair, inspection, maintenance, and emergency response activities occur in association with the Foothill Feeder infrastructure and conservation action activities would occur in association with an off-site UTS Conservation Action site located in Soledad Canyon. Environmental review for these activities was conducted as part of the 2005 Foothill Feeder Repair and Future Inspections Project Final Environmental Impact Report (Metropolitan 2005), the 2011 EIR supplement (Metropolitan 2011), and the 2018 EIR Supplement (Metropolitan 2018). All preparation activities, dewatering activities, inspection activities, refilling activities, emergency response activities, and Conservation Action site activities associated with Foothill Feeder were reviewed to identify the appropriate Covered Area for the Covered Species addressed by this HCP.
The Covered Area for this HCP includes the geographic area around the dewatering/discharge locations (i.e., “blow-off” locations), including the downstream areas within which released water would flow (Figure 1-2). Other portions of the Foothill Feeder project infrastructure that would not result in potential effects to federally-listed species were not included in the Covered Area. Additionally, the HCP covers the area of the proposed UTS Conservation Action site, being implemented in order to contribute to species recovery and satisfy the requirements of California Fish and Game Code Section 2081.10.
All of the potential dewatering locations associated with the Foothill Feeder are located within Metropolitan rights-of-way (both permanent easement and fee property). The locations of these sites along the Foothill Feeder are shown in Figure 1-2 and described in Table 1-1.
August 2018 Introduction and Background 1-7 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 1 LOW-EFFECT HCP INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Table 1-1 Dewatering Locations Site Name APN Coordinates Description USGS Quadrangle Castaic Valley 2865-004-902 34.510285°, -118.606340° Blow-off vault Warm Springs: T5N, R16W, location S19 Charlie Canyon 2865-005-271 34.493105°, -118.592594° Blow-off vault Newhall: T5N, R16W, S30 location San Francisquito 2810-071-271 34.450450°, -118.556853° Blow-off vault Newhall: T4N, R16W, no High Rise location section San Francisquito 2810-002-278 34.442394°, -118.558014° Discharge Newhall: T4N, R16W, no Low Rise location section Santa Clara River 2811-066-902 34.425307°, -118.546895° Discharge Newhall: T4N, R16W, no location section Placerita Canyon 2834-001-272 34.391391°, -118.531022° Blow-off vault Newhall: T4N, R16W, no location section
The specific land uses surrounding each of the dewatering locations are discussed below.
Castaic Valley Blow-Off (Station No. 17+40) – surrounded by open space to the north, east, and south, and by the Castaic Lagoon to the west. Drains the northernmost portion of the Foothill Feeder. Released water is directed into Castaic Afterbay Lagoon with no overland flow. Note that the lagoon is managed by the State Department of Water Resources (DWR). Any releases or overflow from the lagoon as a result of DWR management activities then enter Castaic Creek.
Charlie Canyon Blow-Off (Station No. 97+40) – surrounded by open space on all sides with Charlie Canyon Creek to the northwest. Water is released through a pipe into an unpaved, scrub- lined ditch that flows approximately 50 feet north to Charlie Canyon Creek.
San Francisquito High-Rise Blow-Off (Station No. 287+70) – surrounded by residential land uses with San Francisquito Canyon Creek to the north, west, and south. Release is via a 40-foot open channel into San Francisquito Canyon Creek.
San Francisquito Low-Rise Blow-Off (Station No. 321+40) – surrounded by residential land uses on all sides with San Francisquito Canyon Creek to the west. Released water is piped directly into a Los Angeles County storm drain under McBean Parkway that then discharges into San Francisquito Canyon Creek to the west via a maintained (by Los Angeles County) outlet channel.
Santa Clara River Blow-Off (Station No. 383+90) – surrounded by residential/open space land uses to the north and the Santa Clara River to the east, south, and west. Due to the high water pressure at this location, release from the Foothill Feeder is first directed to an energy dissipation chamber before being released to the Santa Clara River.
Placerita Canyon Blow-Off (Station No. 521+20) – surrounded by open space to the north, Placerita Creek to the east and west, and residential land uses to the south. Water is released through a pipe over a bank of energy-dissipating rock prior to entering Placerita Canyon Creek, a tributary to Newhall Creek.
Water released from the blow-off locations in the Covered Area enter natural drainages: Charlie Canyon Creek, San Francisquito Creek, Santa Clara River, and Placerita Canyon Creek (Figure 1-2). Charlie Canyon Creek is tributary to Castaic Creek about 1.25 miles downstream from the blow-off location (SMEA 2007) while San Francisquito Canyon Creek is tributary to the Santa Clara River. Placerita
Introduction and Background 1-8 August 2018 Station 00+00 Station 07+78 Station 17+40 - Castaic Valley Blow-Off
Station 82+24 Station 97+40 - Charlie Canyon Blow-Off
Station 103+62
Station 232+95 Foothill Feeder Water Treatment Plant Station 287+70 - San Francisquito Canyon Project Sites High-Rise Blow-Off Work Site Station 290+40 STICKLEBACK Station 321+40 - San Francisquito Canyon Low-Rise Blow-Off MOVIE RANCH HCP Covered Area Station 353+33 UTS Conservation Action Site Station 383+90 - Santa Stickleback Movie Ranch Clara River Blow-Off 126 SANTA CLARITA
Station 408+72 14
Station 512+28 Station 521+20 - 5 Placerita Canyon Blow-Off
Station 596+87
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
VENTURA COUNTY red Area.mxd red
Station 778+05
Joseph Jensen Jensen Influent Water Treatment Plant Rejection Line 210 0 0.5 1 2 Miles LOS ANGELES SAN FERNANDO
SOURCE: MWD 2018 FIGURE 1-2 Project Site Locations and Covered Area
Foothill Feeder Inspection and Maintenance Activities Low-Effect HCP Date: 5/18/2018 - Last saved by: kzecher - Path: Z:\Projects\j1010901\MAPDOC\HCP\Figure 1-2_Project Site Locations and Cove and Locations Site 1-2_Project Z:\Projects\j1010901\MAPDOC\HCP\Figure - Path: kzecher by: saved Last - 5/18/2018 Date: METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 1 LOW-EFFECT HCP INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Introduction and Background 1-10 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 1 LOW-EFFECT HCP INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Canyon Creek is tributary to Newhall Creek which is tributary to the south fork or the Santa Clara River. At the location of the discharge sites, these waterways are intermittent (i.e., typically dry in the summer to fall), with the exception of the Santa Clara River, which has low perennial flow due to an upstream wastewater discharge. The distance downstream that released water will reach depends on amount of water released and recent hydrology. During the wet season when water is present in these drainages, the release would add to that flow and combine with upstream runoff. During the dry season, released water would percolate into the dry creek bed until flow exceeds the percolation rate. The same could occur during the wet season in a dry year if precipitation in the watershed is insufficient to maintain flow in the stream channels. The downstream geographic limits from dewatering were based on hydrologic modeling that utilized various cases to determine the geographic extent of dewatering at 100% valve opening. This modeling was used to determine the area of potential UTS take memorialized in the AB 2488 legislation and used in the CDFW 2081 Application for the project. The Covered Area includes the downstream reaches below each blow-off release location, including Charlie Canyon Creek downstream to Castaic Creek, Castaic Creek downstream to the Santa Clara River, San Francisquito Creek downstream to the Santa Clara River, Placerita Canyon Creek downstream to the Santa Clara River, and the Santa Clara River downstream to Castaic Creek.
Emergency situations in the project region, such as an earthquake or other unforeseen event, could affect all or parts of the Foothill Feeder. An emergency scenario would have the potential to necessitate an unplanned, emergency pipeline dewatering and repair, including replacement of badly damaged segments of the facility within any area of the Foothill Feeder infrastructure. Emergency response activities that have the potential to result in discharges are the same locations as described above.
As part of the mitigation requirements for the Foothill Feeder project, conservation activities would occur in the form of protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities at a suitable site to provide natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat, hereinafter referred to as a “Conservation Action.” The UTS Conservation Action site is located on a property in Soledad Canyon known as the Stickleback Movie Ranch. The Stickleback Movie Ranch is located in unincorporated Los Angeles County. The site is generally bounded by Soledad Canyon Road to the south, as well as undeveloped parcels to the north, east, south, and west. The Stickleback Movie Ranch property is also included as part of the Covered Area for this HCP.
August 2018 Introduction and Background 1-11
S E C T I O N 2 Covered Activities
The proposed Covered Activities consist of the following general elements to maintain the Foothill Feeder infrastructure integrity and operability:
Continue to repair and/or replace damaged segments of the Foothill Feeder to ensure continued public safety and reliability of the pipeline
Continue to periodically dewater the Foothill Feeder for inspection and maintenance activities
Respond to emergency situations within the project region, which may result in unexpected pipeline damages that could require an unplanned pipeline shutdown, necessitating dewatering as quickly as possible
Implement Conservation Action activities that contribute to UTS recovery and satisfy the requirements of California Fish and Game Code Section 2081.10. The Foothill Feeder requires maintenance, inspection, and repair to ensure continued public safety and pipeline reliability. This can involve site preparation, shutdown, dewatering, and refilling of the Foothill Feeder. Preparation involves grading of existing access roads, placement of aggregate (e.g., crushed rock used for road base or road surfacing) base on existing access roads or work areas, weed abatement around existing structures and along access roads, minor maintenance of valves and electrical components, and material and equipment staging. Shutdowns and subsequent refilling involve isolating water in the system, blowing off water in the pipeline segments through gravity and subsequently pumping out the remaining water in the system, providing entrance and exit/ventilation locations, conducting eddy current testing (ECT) inspections, conducting maintenance and upgrade activities, and refilling the pipeline.
All maintenance, inspection, and repair work would be performed by existing Metropolitan staff or its contractors. Access to the secured facilities where work will occur would be via existing paved and unpaved rights-of-way to which Metropolitan has already obtained fee and permanent easements and/or street easements. Metropolitan personnel will access the blow-off and other sites using pipeline support pickup-type utility vehicles. Minor maintenance of valves and electrical equipment would occur at all locations along the pipeline. Equipment needed for maintenance and inspection activities of the pipeline may include hydraulic-operated hoist, air compressor, centrifugal pumps, hand-held pneumatic and electric tools to operate valves, grease guns to lubricate valves and fittings, cranes (on-road and off- road), water trucks, ventilation blowers, generators, and overhead floodlights.
Metropolitan staff and contractors will comply with all regulatory requirements in order to safeguard against the inadvertent release of hazardous materials used during maintenance, such as diesel fuel, gasoline, other automotive fluids, hydraulic fluids, non-food-grade lubricants, and solvents. Any inadvertent releases also will be cleaned up in accordance with regulatory requirements. The appropriate regulatory agencies would be notified if hazardous materials from outside sources were found at the maintenance sites. No existing or standing water at any vault will be pumped or released without prior inspection for the presence of contamination indicators. Any water suspected of contamination will be sampled and removed following Metropolitan’s Environmental Compliance Procedures and monitored by trained staff.
August 2018 Covered Activities 2-1 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 2 LOW-EFFECT HCP COVERED ACTIVITIES
The Foothill Feeder will continue to be shut down for inspections and maintenance approximately every 5 years, during the wet season (November through March). This frequency could be increased or reduced, depending on scheduling, results of inspections, and priority of maintenance needs. The 2005 EIR specified that shutdowns would occur between December and February (the wet season). This will be modified to include the months of November and March for greater flexibility in planning and scheduling with cities and member agencies.
Emergency situations in the project region, such as an earthquake or other unforeseen event, could affect all or parts of the Foothill Feeder. An emergency scenario would have the potential to necessitate an unplanned, emergency pipeline dewatering and repair, including replacement of badly damaged segments of the facility. In the case of an emergency, partial or full shutdown of the Foothill Feeder may be required as soon as possible and as rapidly as possible; therefore, activities associated with emergency situations may occur at any time of year at an unknown frequency and duration.
Covered activities would also include conservation-related activities, such as protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities, at the UTS Conservation Action site.
2.1 Shutdowns
Activities associated with maintenance, inspection, and repair require either a partial shutdown and dewatering of the Foothill Feeder pipeline (only affecting some blow-off sites shown in Figure 1-2) or a full shutdown (affecting all of the blow-off sites and requiring additional pumping of residual water in the pipe). These shutdowns could would occur roughly every 5 years during the rainy season (November through March), and releases will follow the Shutdown Water Release Plan described in Section 5.2.1.1. Due to the varying topography and associated pipeline profile (Figure 2-1), the pipeline cannot be drained or pumped from a central location. Therefore, water will be released by gravity from areas of the pipeline located at lower elevations (the blow-off sites) to drain the upper elevations of the pipeline. Because inspection crews would need to be able to walk the entire length of the pipeline during the Future Inspections Project, any water remaining in low, flat areas of the pipeline below the blow-off sites will be pumped out after gravity release using submersible pumps and discharged at the blow- off sites, as necessary. Collectively, the gravity discharge and pumping are referred to as “dewatering.” Dewatering the pipeline involves discharging raw water from blow-off sites either directly to the Santa Clara River or to tributaries that ultimately drain into the Santa Clara River via storm drains or open wash channels. The rate and duration of these releases are shown in Table 2-1. All releases will be monitored by a qualified biologist, who would be responsible for determining the presence of Covered Species prior to the releases and ensuring that the releases would not harm individuals of Covered Species, such as UTS, arroyo toad, and California red-legged frog (see Section 5.2.1). Individuals at risk of harm from releases would be excluded or captured and relocated to a safer, suitable location in nearby habitat by the monitor, as appropriate for site-specific conditions. Any individuals that become stranded as the release is terminated would be captured and repatriated to areas of suitable habitat by the monitors.
Table 2-1 Future Inspections Gravity Flow and Pumping Discharge Gravity Flow Pumpinga Blow-Off Location AF cfs Duration AF gpm Duration Castaic Valley – Station No. 17+40 12.1 18.1 4 hours — — — Charlie Canyon – Station No. 97+34 54.2 15.3 43 hours 4.6 1,200 21 hours
Covered Activities 2-2 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 2 LOW-EFFECT HCP COVERED ACTIVITIES
Table 2-1 Future Inspections Gravity Flow and Pumping Discharge Gravity Flow Pumpinga Blow-Off Location AF cfs Duration AF gpm Duration San Francisquito Canyon High-Rise – 18.2 16.6 13.2 hours 31.9 2,400 48.1 hours Station No. 287+70 San Francisquito Canyon Low-Rise – 10.7 16.6 7.79 hours 31.9 1,200 48.1 hours Station No. 321+40 Santa Clara River – Station No. 383+90 116 31.5 31 hours 50 3,600 75 hours 42.5 11 hours Placerita Canyon – Station No. 521+20 32 10.7 31 hours 12.5 1,200 31 hours Source: Metropolitan 2005b. Notes: AF= acre-feet; cfs = cubic feet per second; gpm = gallons per minute. Either the San Francisquito Canyon High-Rise Blow-Off or the San Francisquito Canyon Low-Rise Blow-Off, or both, will be used to dewater the San Francisquito Canyon portion of the pipeline. Operational considerations made prior to the commencement of the dewatering activities will dictate which location is used to dewater the San Francisquito Canyon portion of the pipeline. a No pumping is needed at Castaic Valley due to the full gravity discharge of the line. In addition, the pumping acre-feet for the San Francisquito Canyon Low-Rise and High-Rise is a shared volume.
Preparation of the Foothill Feeder for shutdown, inspection, and maintenance may include the following activities: (1) grading of existing access roads; (2) placement of aggregate (e.g., crushed rock used for road base or road surfacing) base on existing access roads or work areas; (3) weed abatement around existing structures and along access roads; (4) minor maintenance of valves and electrical components; and (5) material and equipment staging. Additionally, minor maintenance of valves, which may involve minor water releases, and electrical equipment would occur at all locations along the pipeline, as necessary.
Water flows from Castaic Lake entering the Foothill Feeder will be gradually reduced by the Metropolitan Operations Control Center during the 24 hours leading up to complete shutdown of the pipeline. The reduction in water flows will be accomplished by incrementally closing valves at the Foothill Pressure Control Structure located at Castaic Lake Dam. The reduction in water flows will allow operations at the Jensen Plant to be scaled down in anticipation of a minimum plant inflow. Both the Operations Control Center and plant personnel will monitor system changes and pressures as needed. Ultimately, minimum water flow conditions will be achieved and maintained until the scheduled shutdown. With initiation of the shutdown, the valves will be completely closed and flows in the Foothill Feeder dropped to zero.
Following dewatering, inspection, repair, and maintenance activities, the Foothill Feeder will be sealed by securing all access flanges and blow-off locations. The Foothill Feeder will then be refilled with water by opening the Foothill Pressure Control Structure to allow flow into the pipeline at a rate of 100 cubic feet per second (cfs) until the Castaic Valley portion of the pipeline is filled, and then the flow will be increased to approximately 700 cfs for the remainder of the filling process.
Shutdown duration can vary, depending on the dewatering, inspection, minor repairs, and refilling needs. For example, the 2012 shutdown was planned to extend 23 days; however, the shutdown was completed in 18 days. The estimated time to fill the pipeline when it is completely empty is about 12 hours. Crews will remain at various points along the pipeline to monitor the fill and address any potential issues should they arise.
Crews will also monitor the pipeline during the following weeks to address any leakage or other potential issues. After refilling, patrollers inspect all the valves and other structures along the pipeline for any leaks. This also occurs on a weekly basis as part of routine procedure.
August 2018 Covered Activities 2-3 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 2 LOW-EFFECT HCP COVERED ACTIVITIES
Figure 2-1 Foothill Feeder Station Profile
2.2 Emergency Dewatering Scenario
As discussed in Section 1.3, an emergency scenario would have the potential to necessitate an unplanned, emergency pipeline dewatering and repair, including replacement of badly damaged segments of the facility. It should be noted that minor pipeline leaks are monitored closely and would be resolved during the routine shutdown, inspection, and maintenance processes. A minor leak does not constitute an emergency situation if it can be monitored and resolved according to planned maintenance procedures. Rather, an emergency situation would involve unexpected pipeline damage that endangers human health and safety and/or water supply, requiring immediate attention and resolution.
In the case of an emergency, partial or full shutdown of the Foothill Feeder may be required as soon as possible and as rapidly as possible. Although Metropolitan cannot control the timing and scheduling of dewatering in an emergency scenario, the flow would be up to 100% valve opening, similar to standard dewatering flow prior to the development of the 2004 Release Plan. Thus, such discharges may differ from planned shutdowns in that the flow could be up to 100% valve opening from the outset, instead of being opened incrementally, as described in the Release Plan. The extent of the shutdown (either a full shutdown or partial shutdown) would depend on the location and scope of the emergency. For example, repairs within a single pipeline segment may require shutdown and dewatering of that segment only. The analysis of the shutdown scenario described in the 2005 EIR assumes that shutdowns would occur only during the rainy season. Under an emergency scenario, a full or partial shutdown could occur
Covered Activities 2-4 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 2 LOW-EFFECT HCP COVERED ACTIVITIES outside of the rainy season. Equipment used for emergency repairs would be similar to that used for dewatering for inspection and planned maintenance.
Emergency situations are difficult to predict, and Metropolitan is prepared to perform any emergency repairs to the Foothill Feeder in an expedited and safe manner. Any shutdowns of the Foothill Feeder, whether planned or unplanned, would affect local jurisdictions’ water planning supplies, and Metropolitan makes every effort to ensure safe and reliable drinking water. Breakage of the pipe could occur anywhere and would require coordination with Metropolitan’s lead communication center, the Operation Control Center at the Eagle Rock facility. Eagle Rock would evaluate the pressures throughout the entire system, not just the Foothill Feeder, and then will prescribe how to quickly and safely dewater the pipeline.
2.3 UTS Conservation Action Site
To implement the conditions specified in California Fish and Game Code Section 2081.10, including “measures to minimize and fully mitigate” (California Fish and Game Code Section 2081.10(a)(3)) the impacts of the authorized take and to satisfy the conservation standard in Section 2805(d) of the California Fish and Game Code. To meet these standards, Conservation Action activities would occur in the form of preserving, enhancing, and managing a suitable site to provide natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat. The UTS Conservation Action is proposed to occur at an off-site location in Soledad Canyon referred to as the Stickleback Movie Ranch site. Conservation Action activities that would be HCP Covered Activities at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site include site protection, monitoring, and long-term management, including:
Long-term site protection and management funding
A long-term management plan that provides in-perpetuity management of the conservation site, describes adaptive management measures, and includes a Property Assessment Record for the funding mechanism
To the extent it is consistent with the long-term management plan for the Conservation Action site, Covered Activities may include other activities that enhance or restore the natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat and are designed to achieve the long-term management goals for the Conservation Action site. Such activities may include removal of non-native plants and wildlife, erosion and sedimentation control, channel recontouring, or revegetation. All activities conducted at the Conservation Action site would be implemented consistent with the 2018 EIR Supplement; applicable biological resources mitigation measures from the 2018 EIR Supplement have been incorporated as HCP avoidance and minimization measures below in Section 5.2. These measures have been incorporated to avoid and minimize the effects of the Conservation Action activities on UTS and other federally-listed species potentially occurring at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site. Additionally, activities would be implemented consistent with the pending incidental take permit from CDFW. Further, enhancement work that would occur in channels would obtain the proper permits from state and federal agencies, as necessary.
2.4 Avoidance and Minimization Measures
Covered Activities also include implementation of the Conservation Program activities described in Section 5, including implementation of the Release Plan, biological monitoring and oversight during Covered Activities, and avoidance and minimization measures associated with activities at the UTS Conservation Action site. See Section 5 for additional information on the Conservation Program.
August 2018 Covered Activities 2-5
S E C T I O N 3 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources
The following provides a summary of the environmental setting and biological resources of the Project area and HCP Covered Area based on the 2005 EIR, the 2011 EIR supplement (Metropolitan 2011), and the 2018 EIR supplement (Metropolitan 2018).
3.1 Physical Environment
3.1.1 Climate
The Project area has a Mediterranean-type climate characterized by warm, dry summers and mild winters. Most rainfall occurs between November and March, averaging 15-18 inches annually. Santa Ana winds often sweep through the area in the fall and winter months, bringing periods of warm, dry weather. The Foothill Feeder pipeline is located in a transitional microclimatic zone between two climate types: valley marginal and high desert.
3.1.2 Air Quality
The area encompassing the Foothill Feeder is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) governed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto mountains to the north and east. This Basin consistently experiences high levels of smog. The topography, described below, and climate of the Basin combine to make it an area of high smog potential. During the summer months, a warm air mass frequently descends over the lower cool, moist marine air layer. The warm upper layer forms a cap over the marine layer and inhibits air pollutants generated near the ground from dispersing upward. Concentrating volumes of pollutants in this manner allows the summer sunlight to generate high levels of smog. In the winter, cool ground temperatures and very light winds cause extremely low inversions and stagnation that trap carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) during the late night and morning hours. On days when no inversions occur, or when winds average 25 miles per hour or more, smog effects are minimal.
To monitor concentrations of criteria pollutants in the Basin, the SCAQMD has divided the Basin into source receptor areas in which 33 air quality monitoring stations are operated. The Foothill Feeder pipeline is located in source receptor area 13, which encompasses the Santa Clarita Valley west to the Ventura County line. The air quality monitoring station in this source receptor area is located at 12th Street and Placerita Canyon Road in the City of Santa Clarita. This station monitors ozone (O3), CO, NOX, and particulate matter. Based on monitored pollutant levels in the most recent years on record (2006-2008), the South Coast Air Basin has been designated as out of attainment for California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for O3, NOX, lead, particulate matter 10 microns or smaller (PM10), and PM2.5, and out of attainment for National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the same compounds with the exception of NOx (California Air Resources Board 2010).
August 2018 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-1 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
3.1.3 Topography
The Foothill Feeder is located within Santa Clarita Valley, which is generally flat with some gently rolling hills that range in elevation from approximately 1,200 to 1,600 feet. Elevations along the Foothill Feeder pipeline range from a low of approximately 1,075 feet to a high of approximately 1,250 feet. The general area surrounding the Foothill Feeder is bounded to the south by the Santa Susana Mountains, to the east by the San Gabriel Mountains, and to the north and west by the Angeles National Forest. The mountain ranges that surround the Santa Clara Valley can be viewed from great distances and form the dominant visual features in the area. Whitaker Peak located north of the Foothill Feeder has an elevation of 4,148 feet; Oat Mountain to the south is 3,747 feet high; and Mt. Gleason to the east has an elevation of 6,502 feet.
3.1.4 Geology and Soils
The Foothill Feeder is located within the tectonically active Transverse Ranges of southern California. The Transverse Ranges consist of a series of west-trending mountains and intervening valleys, which is contrary to the northwest geomorphic trend that is typical of most of California. This range system is largely the result of north-south compression, which has resulted in east-west trending folds and thrust vaults. Significant faults in the vicinity of the Foothill Feeder pipeline include the San Andreas Fault, Santa Susana Fault, San Fernando Fault, Sierra Madre Fault, San Gabriel Fault, Holser Fault Zone, San Cayetano Fault, and Oak Ridge Fault.
Several native soil types occur along the Foothill Feeder. The General Soils Map published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (1958) characterizes soils within the Covered Area as the Yolo-Metz-Cortina and Ojai-Agua Dulce associations. The Yolo-Metz-Cortina association, located along the alluvial fan and floodplain areas of the Foothill Feeder, consists of well-drained to excessively-drained, very deep soils that have a loam to loamy sand surface and are on nearly level to moderately level slopes. The Ojai-Agua Dulce association, located along the foothill areas of the Foothill Feeder, consists of well-drained, very deep to moderately deep soils that have a loam or stony loam surface layer and are on gentle to steep slopes.
3.1.5 Surface and Groundwater
The Foothill Feeder is located within the Santa Clara River watershed. The Santa Clara River flows approximately 100 miles from its headwaters near Acton, California, to the Pacific Ocean and is one of only two natural river systems remaining in southern California. The portion of the river that runs through Los Angeles County where the Foothill Feeder is located is generally referred to as the upper Santa Clara River, and the portion within Ventura County is referred to as the lower Santa Clara River. The upper Santa Clara River watershed consists of approximately 680 square miles of mostly natural land with some mixed development. Much of the developed areas are situated in or near the City of Santa Clarita, the only incorporated city in the upper Santa Clara River watershed. Some of the major tributaries to the Upper Santa Clara River include Castaic Creek, San Francisquito Creek, Bouquet Canyon Creek, Sand Canyon Creek, Mint Canyon Creek, and the Santa Clara River South Fork (Figure 3-1). The streams crossed by the Foothill Feeder are intermittent to ephemeral, except the portion of the Santa Clara River downstream from near the Bouquet Canyon Road Bridge, which is perennial due to flows originating from an upstream wastewater treatment plant (Saugus Water Reclamation Plant).
Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-2 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
3.2 Biological Environment
The following is a general description of biological resources in the Project area. Descriptions of Covered Species are in Section 3.4.
3.2.1 Vegetation Communities and Other Land Cover
Several vegetation communities have been identified during biological surveys conducted in the Project area, including surveys in 2004 to support the 2005 EIR and surveys conducted in 2016-2017 to support the 2018 EIR Supplement and project permitting. Additionally, the UTS Conservation Action site was surveyed in 2013 (Wishner 2013). Vegetation communities and other land covers along the Foothill Feeder pipeline corridor include large areas of developed land and ornamental vegetation, mostly within the Santa Clarita Valley, plus a mixture of riparian and bottomland/riverwash, scrub and chaparral, grassland, agriculture, and smaller amounts of oak woodland. Work locations consist of previously disturbed, graded land. The UTS Conservation Action site is characterized by disturbed land, ornamental vegetation, riparian vegetation, and scrub/chaparral vegetation. Descriptions of the vegetation communities in the Covered Area generally follow Holland (1986) and are summarized below.
3.2.1.1 Non-Native Grassland
This community occurs on relatively flat terrain, in various upland locations, and occasionally on gentle slopes in the Project area. Non-native grasslands typically occur on fine-textured, usually clay soils, that are moist to wet in the winter, but dry in the summer and fall (Holland 1986). Common non-native grass species observed in this community include several brome species (Bromus ssp.) and wild oats (Avena fatua, A. barbata). Introduced herbaceous species present include red-stemmed filaree (Erodium cicutarium), small-seed sandmat (Chamaesyce polycarpa), and shortpod (Mediterranean) mustard (Hirschfeldia incana). Scattered native plants observed in the non-native grassland areas include wishbone bush (Mirabilis californica), tansy phacelia (Phacelia tanacetifolia), and California thistle (Cirsium occidentalle var. californicum).
3.2.1.2 Coastal Sage Scrub/Chaparral
In the Project area, where chaparral and sage scrub intergrade, characteristics of each component can be observed. Although plant and wildlife species that would be associated with the individual communities can be found within this “intermingled” plant community, it is considered a distinct habitat type due to the change in plant species composition. Shrub density is relatively open, and the understory generally supports annual non-native grasses and herbaceous species. Dominant native plant species observed within this assemblage include chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), chaparral mallow (Malacothamnus fasciculatus), and black sage (Salvia melifera).
3.2.1.3 Mulefat Scrub
Several patches of mulefat scrub occur within and adjacent to the river and creek floodplains. Mulefat scrub is typically a tall, semi-woody and herbaceous riparian scrub that is nearly monotypic. The dominant species found in this community is native mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia). Within the Project area, the mulefat scrub understory commonly supports introduced species, such as brome grasses and mustard.
August 2018 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-3 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
3.2.1.4 Southern Riparian Scrub
This vegetation community is a combination of native mulefat and southern willow scrub species including mulefat, arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), narrow-leaf willow (Salix exigua), red willow (Salix laevigata), Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii ssp. fremontii), and scale-broom (Lepidospartum squamatum), as well as the highly invasive non-native tamarisk (Tamarix sp.) and giant reed (Arundo donax). Additional native species occurring in southern riparian scrub generally include Great Basin sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), shad-scale (Atriplex canescens ssp. linearis), blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), thick-leaved yerba santa (Eriodictyon crassifolium), cholla (Opuntia prolifera), and mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana).
3.2.1.5 Riverwash
Vegetation within channels of the Santa Clara River, Charlie Canyon Creek, Castaic Creek, San Francisquito Creek, and Placerita Creek, that occur adjacent to water release locations, is typically sparse and is subject to scouring by seasonal or introduced high flows. Soils within these creek beds consist of sands and gravels. Series of sandbars and low terraces exist within these channels. Scattered elements of southern riparian scrub vegetation occurs in the riverwash. Shrub species found in drier portions of the streambeds included mulefat, tamarisk, scale-broom, giant reed, California broom (Lotus scoparius), woolly star (Eriastrum sp.), and California buckwheat. Smaller species growing in the streambeds include buckwheat (Eriogonum baileyi), cryptantha (Cryptantha micrantha), hairy golden aster (Heterotheca sessiliflora ssp. jastigiata), tumble mustard (Sisymbrium altrissimum), foxtail chess (Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens), slender pectocarya (Pectocarya linearis ssp. jerocula), and annual bursage (Ambrosia acanthicarpa). Fremont cottonwood and willows are scattered individually or in smaller clumps in several of the channels; however, no riparian forest associations were present in any of the channels adjacent to water release locations. Because of the dynamic nature of vegetation growth within these channels, plant occurrence, density, and diversity can vary depending upon frequency and extent of scouring water flows and periods of low water or drought.
3.2.1.6 Other Land Cover
Other land cover within the Project area include developed land, disturbed land, and ornamental vegetation. Developed land includes lands supporting man-made structures including buildings, yards, roadways, and other highly modified lands supporting structures. Disturbed land typically occurs in areas where soils have been recently or repeatedly disturbed by grading or compaction, resulting in the growth of very few native perennials and are usually dominated by bare ground or non-native annuals. Ornamental vegetation include areas where non-native ornamentals and landscaping have been planted.
3.2.2 Common Wildlife
Common terrestrial wildlife species that were observed or are expected to occur on or near the Foothill Feeder Project area are discussed below. Because wildlife typically use a variety of plant communities, taxonomic grouping versus habitat association is used to describe the wildlife species observed or likely to occur within the Project area.
3.2.2.1 Amphibians and Reptiles
The Santa Clara River and creeks near the Project area are typically intermittent or ephemeral and, thus, provide marginal habitat for amphibians. During several successive years of average or greater levels of
Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-4 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES rainfall, water within these channels may be present into spring and early summer, which could provide habitat for amphibians.
Amphibian populations are typically low in the channels adjacent to the maintenance sites during the non- breeding season, due in large measure to the lack of persistent or permanent surface water for breeding.
California toad (Bufo boreas halophilus) and Baja California treefrog [Pseudacris hypocondriaca hypocondriaca] are abundant locally where suitable habitat is present and would be expected to occur in the channels when water is present. These and other species could be present in wetter downstream areas, such as in the Santa Clara River near I-5. African clawed frogs (Xenopus laevis) are known to be present in this area (ENTRIX 2007).
Common reptile species observed or expected to occur on or near the proposed Project sites include western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata), western skink (Eumeces skiltonianus), gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer), coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum), striped racer (M. lateralis), common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getulus), and southern Pacific rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis helleri).
3.2.2.2 Birds
The diversity of vegetation communities occurring throughout the Project area provides both forage and nesting habitat for a variety of native and migratory bird species. Some species are known to be closely associated with specific vegetation communities, whereas other species use a variety of habitat types for foraging, shelter, and breeding. Species such as Bewick's wren (Thryomanes bewickii), spotted towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), and California towhee (P. crissalis) are expected to occur in scrub habitats throughout the Project area. In open scrub and grassland habitats, species such as Say's phoebe (Saynoris saya), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and white- throated swift (Aeronautes saxatalis) are also expected. Representative species in large scrub plants or nearby trees include, but are not limited to, Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), and scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens). Numerous other species have the potential to occur as residents, seasonally as migrants, or as occasional foragers.
Because relatively undisturbed open space areas are present in the vicinity of the Foothill Feeder, in addition to large mature trees near several of the Project sites, a number of raptor (birds-of-prey) species occur within or adjacent to the Covered Area. Turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), red- shoulder hawk (Buteo lineatus), and American kestrel (Falco sparverius) are species known to forage over the open grassland and scrub habitat near the Foothill Feeder pipeline. Birds associated with well-developed riparian habitat could be present along the Santa Clara River while water-associated birds could be present at Castaic Lagoon. Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) have been long- time residents at Castaic Lagoon.
3.2.2.3 Mammals
A variety of mammal species occur within or adjacent to the Project area. Large species such as mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), coyote (Canis latrans), mountain lion (Puma concolor), and bobcat (Lynx rufus) are expected to use or pass through portions of the Project area. Dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes) may occur within dry drainage channels adjacent to or downstream from the water release sites. Desert cottontail (Sylvilagus auduboni), California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), and Botta's pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) are likely to be abundant in many of the undisturbed open
August 2018 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-5 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES areas throughout the Project area. Additional species known to occur within the Project area include common raccoon (Procyon lotor), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), and brush rabbit (Sylvilagus bachmani). Several other small mammal species are expected to occur near the Project sites in each of the habitat types present. A few common bat species including big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus) and California myotis (Myotis californicus) may potentially forage and temporarily roost on or near the Foothill Feeder pipeline corridor. However, open areas generally do not support ideal roosting habitat. Most of the locally occurring bat species typically feed on insects over or adjacent to aquatic habitats. Therefore, most bat species known to occur in the Project area would not be expected to use upland areas associated with the Foothill Feeder pipeline except on an infrequent basis.
3.2.3 Aquatic Biota
The abundance and species composition of aquatic biota in the streams at and immediately downstream of the maintenance sites are limited due to the short duration of water presence in most years. Aquatic invertebrates include those that drift in from upstream perennial stream segments or that can rapidly colonize the area when water is present. Similarly, fish from perennial reaches could only be present during the winter to spring when water is present. In addition to the amphibian species described above that use aquatic stream habitat, common fish species known to occur in the perennial reach of the Santa Clara River include UTS, mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis), arroyo chub (Gila orcuttii), and Santa Ana sucker (ENTRIX 2007). The non-native red swamp crayfish (Procambarus clarki) has been observed in perennial reach of the Santa Clara River. Convict cichlids (Amatitlania nigrofasciata) are present in the outflow of the Saugus Water Reclamation Plant (observed during June 2013 monitoring by Cardno ENTRIX).
3.2.4 Covered Area Description
As specified in Section 1.3, the HCP Covered Area includes the geographic area around the dewatering locations (i.e., “blow-off” locations) of the project, including the downstream areas within which released water would flow, and the area of the proposed UTS Conservation Actions at the Stickleback Movie Ranch. The following provides a brief description of these specific locations.
Castaic Valley. The Castaic Valley blow-off is located on a gravel pad surrounded by disturbance- adapted ruderal (weedy) vegetation such as annual grasses and Mediterranean mustard. A few scattered shrubs are also present in the area.
Charlie Canyon. The Charlie Canyon blow-off is located on a gravel pad adjacent to a ditch that flows into Charlie Canyon Creek and that supports open mulefat scrub vegetation with a few willows and cattails. The bank areas are primarily dominated by non-native grassland vegetation.
San Francisquito Canyon. The San Francisquito High-Rise blow-off is located on a gravel pad with ruderal vegetation such as Mediterranean mustard. Just below the outlet structure, a few willows and mulefat are present. In addition, open mulefat scrub is present in San Francisquito Creek where the outlet structure discharges. The San Francisquito Low-Rise blow-off is located on a gravel pad adjacent to planted trees in a park. The water from this structure is piped underground beneath residential development to the outlet drainage point on San Francisquito Creek to the west. The outlet for this release is located approximately 0.2 mile downstream of the Decoro Bridge and is surrounded by residential development to the north, east, and south. Patchy riparian vegetation is present around a perennial pool immediately to the west of the outlet.
Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-6 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Santa Clara River. The Santa Clara River blow-off is surrounded by ruderal vegetation. Willows, mulefat, and cattails are present in the river at the outlet structure. Patchy riparian vegetation is present downstream that becomes denser near I-5. Herbaceous aquatic plants grow seasonally along the flowing channels.
Placerita Canyon. The Placerita Canyon blow-off is located on a gravel pad surrounded by disturbed coastal scrub vegetation. It releases into Placerita Canyon which is a wash dominated by scale broom and buckwheat.
Stickleback Movie Ranch. On the Stickleback Movie Ranch property located in Soledad Canyon, the areas where Conservation Action activities would occur include the Santa Clara River characterized by open channel and associated riparian habitat.
3.3 Species Considered for Coverage
Special-status plant and animal species with the potential to occur within the Covered Area were identified by reviewing Federal Register listings, survey protocols, species data provided by the Service, and the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Other data sources reviewed included: 1) previously prepared environmental documents, such as the Foothill Feeder 2005 EIR and 2018 EIR Supplement and the technical documents supporting them; 2) biological documentation of the proposed maintenance sites and/or properties within the immediate vicinity; and 3) monitoring reports from maintenance and shutdown activities; and biological constraint information for the UTS Conservation Action site (Wishner 2013). A summary of the special-status species review is provided in Appendix A. This information was used to select Covered Species for this HCP (i.e., those that could be present and could be affected by Covered Activities).
3.4 Proposed Covered Species
Covered Species are those species for which coverage under an ITP (ESA Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit) is requested. As described in the USFWS Region 1 Guidelines for Determining Covered Species Lists (1995), HCP applicants should consider:
All federally-listed fish and wildlife species likely to be incidentally taken during the life of the permit,
State-listed species that are likely to be incidentally taken during the life of the permit,
Those species for which sufficient information is known and for which adequate existing management prescriptions exist or can be easily defined and implemented sufficient to support an application for an incidental take permit,
Those species about which a great deal of information may not be available but which are definitively known to share habitat with other Covered Species. For those species, it is believed that the management prescriptions (existing or easily defined) for other Covered Species would benefit sufficiently to support an application for an incidental take permit, and
Those species whose federal listing appears imminent, unless conservation measures are instituted which would be likely to assure survival and recovery of such species in the wild.
The species to be covered by the ITP for the Foothill Feeder Maintenance Project, their federal and state status, and presence of designated critical habitat in the Covered Area are presented in Table 3-1. The
August 2018 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-7 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES western spadefoot, two-striped garter snake, and western pond turtle are all associated with water but also use nearby terrestrial habitats. The egg and larval stages of the spadefoot are aquatic and could be affected by shutdown releases. Other special-status terrestrial wildlife species were considered but have a low potential to be present and were not included because no take is anticipated.
Table 3-1 Covered Species Status and Critical Habitat Federal State Common Name Scientific Name Status Status Critical Habitat 2 Unarmored threespine Gasterosteus aculeatus E E, FP None stickleback williamsoni Arroyo toad Anaxyrus californicus E SSC Unit 6b in lower 2.6 mi of Castaic Creek plus 4 mi of Santa Clara River from confluence of San Francisquito Creek to Castaic Creek; Unit 6c in Soledad Canyon California red-legged frog Rana draytonii T SSC None in Covered Area Santa Ana sucker Catostomus santaanae T1 SSC None in Covered Area 3 Western spadefoot Spea hammondii -- SSC Not applicable 3 Two-striped garter snake Thamnophis hammondii -- SSC Not applicable 3 Western pond turtle Emys marmorata -- SSC Not applicable 1. Not listed in Santa Clara River drainage 2. No designated critical habitat 3. Critical habitat designation is not applicable because species is not federally listed E = Endangered, T = Threatened, C = candidate for listing, FP = State Fully Protected, SSC = State Species of Special Concern (CDFW 2017)
A description of each of the Covered Species, life history, habitat requirements, and distribution within the Covered Area is provided below for the federally listed aquatic species for which take could occur. A description of the non-listed species (pre-listing agreements are requested) in the Covered Area that have a low potential to be affected also is presented.
3.4.1 Unarmored Threespine Stickleback
The UTS was federally listed as endangered on October 13, 1970 (USFWS 1970). The subspecies was state-listed as endangered in June 1971 and designated as a state fully-protected species (CDFW 2017). A Recovery Plan was produced for the UTS in 1977 and was revised in 1985 (USFWS 1985). There are no recovery units for the UTS, but three essential habitat units were described in the Recovery Plan. The Soledad Canyon and San Francisquito Canyon essential habitat units are located upstream of the Covered Area while the eastern portion of the Del Valle unit (westward from I-5) is at the downstream edge of the Covered Area. Shutdown releases from the Foothill Feeder that enter the Santa Clara River, or possibly San Francisquito Creek, could reach the latter area. Critical habitat was proposed for the UTS in 1980 (USFWS 1980) and corresponded to the essential habitat described above. However, critical habitat was never finally designated.
Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-8 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Species Description
The UTS is a small, spindle-shaped fish that is laterally flattened (from side-to-side) with a maximum total length of 4 inches. It is usually greenish or brownish in color, with slight barring or saddles along the sides and sometimes the dorsum. The UTS is named for its three prominent spines which are anterior to the dorsal fin. A spine also extends from each pelvic fin along the ventral side. Like other stickleback species, it lacks scales, but it also lacks large numbers of bony plates along its sides (Swift et al. 1993).
Historic Distribution
The original range of the UTS included the three major drainages of the Los Angeles Basin and the upper Santa Clara River drainage (Miller and Hubbs 1969). Known museum records show the subspecies to be present in the Los Angeles River in and near the City of Los Angeles; in the San Gabriel River in/near the towns of El Monte, Montebello, and Whittier; and in the Santa Ana River between Norco and San Bernardino. The revised recovery plan also identified a population of UTS in San Antonio Creek and mentioned that a population was introduced into Honda Creek in 1984, both in Santa Barbara County (USFWS 1985).
Current Distribution
UTS has been extirpated throughout much of its historic range and the subspecies is currently known from three general areas: the upper Santa Clara River and its tributaries in Los Angeles County, San Antonio Creek in northern Santa Barbara County, and the Shay Creek area of the San Bernardino Mountains in San Bernardino County (USFWS 2009a). In the upper Santa Clara River area of Los Angeles County, the 2009 USFWS 5-Year Review for UTS indicated that the subspecies’ distribution included or could include the following locations: Soledad Canyon, Santa Clara River, Bouquet Creek, San Francisquito Canyon, and Castaic Creek; however, the number and extent of UTS in the Santa Clara River Watershed continues to decline due to habitat loss, particularly from recent fires and drought. At this time, only three known occurrences remain (i.e., Santa Clara River, San Francisquito Canyon, and Soledad Canyon) and each are substantially compromised (USFWS 2018). The Santa Clara River population has been reduced to a small section of wetted stream near Interstate 5. San Francisquito Creek was extirpated following a high-water event in 2005, then UTS were reintroduced in 2014 following a rescue of fish from a drying pool from the Santa Clara River population. The June 2016 Sand Fire burned the upstream habitat of Soledad Creek at a high severity. A rescue was conducted in October 2016, which collected fish from Soledad Canyon and ultimately released them into Fish Canyon in order to save these individuals from post-fire sedimentation and water quality degradation that was anticipated to occur during winter rains. The status of UTS in Soledad Canyon is currently unknown (USFWS 2018).
Habitat
UTS occur in freshwater, with adults in areas of slow moving or standing water. In areas of moving water, it is found under obstructions, at stream edges, or under algal mats. Adults do not live in ponds permanently isolated from a main stream (USFWS 1985). Habitats supporting the largest number of individuals are small clean pools in streams with a constant flow of water (Baskin 1975 and Baskin and Bell 1976, as cited in USFWS 1985). Juveniles and sub-adults are found in areas protected by vegetation in slow moving or standing water (USFWS 1985).
Life History
UTS breeding begins in the spring when males develop nuptial coloration: a bright red throat, blue sides,
August 2018 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-9 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES and green eyes. Males defend a small territory and build a nest out of aquatic vegetation (USFWS 1985). The male’s courtship displays attract females who lay their eggs in the nest to be fertilized by the male. He defends the nest and briefly defends the young after hatching until almost fully formed. No significant larval stage is present. Eggs in the nest depend on fanning by the male to remain adequately oxygenated and free of debris (Ostlund-Nilsson 2006).
Usually, reproduction begins in March or April and continues at a high level into the early summer, but some stickleback reproduction occurs in the Santa Clara River in most months (Baskin 1975, Haglund and Baskin 1995). Populations are largest from late summer through fall until winter rains and higher flows disrupt the habitat. In winters with little flooding, large numbers of fish will remain in their usual summer habitat. Also, some reproductive activity can continue to occur throughout such winters. After reproduction has commenced, some post-spawning mortality of adults occurs (Baskin 1975, Haglund and Baskin 1995). Thus, the number of adult fish declines in late fall and winter due to natural mortality from spawning, storm events, and lower levels of reproduction (USFWS 1985). The UTS is territorial when breeding and sedentary. The subspecies probably disperses very little, except when high flows carry them downstream.
The UTS is an opportunistic feeder and will ingest almost any animal matter that can be taken in their small mouth openings. This includes snails, amphipods, aquatic insects, annelids, and nematodes (Moyle 2002, Wydoski and Whitney 2003). Benthic insects are their primary food source, although snails are also commonly eaten with nematodes and flatworms less frequently consumed (USFWS 1985).
Threats
Threats to the UTS include restricted distribution, loss of significant portions of habitat range, deterioration of habitats due to urbanization and flood control alterations of stream channels, deteriorating water quality and flow disruption, and introduction of non-native species. A description of threats in the context of the five listing factors used to assess subspecies for listing as threatened or endangered under the ESA is provided in the draft Recovery Plan (USFWS 1985).
Occurrence in the Covered Area
Previous surveys indicate that the UTS remains widely distributed throughout the Santa Clara River east of Ventura County (USFWS 1998a, SMEA 2005). San Francisquito Creek is known to support UTS throughout much of the reach within the Covered Area following initial seasonal storm events and prior to those flows retreating underground in the dryer months. Furthermore, two important seasonal breeding areas have been identified within or just downstream of the Covered Area, one in San Francisquito Creek adjacent to the confluence with the Santa Clara River and the other in the marshy areas adjacent to Castaic Junction approximately midway between San Francisquito Creek and Castaic Creek confluences (Impact Sciences, Inc. 2003). A population also may remain throughout the year in San Francisquito Creek north or upstream of the Foothill Feeder pipeline, within the Angeles National Forest. Sampling in the Santa Clara River from downstream of Bouquet Canyon Road Bridge to the VWRP outfall (just downstream of I-5) in most years since 1991 and occasionally from 1974-1990 have shown UTS to be consistently present in this stream reach (SMEA 2005). The San Francisquito Creek stickleback location on the U.S. Forest Service property is upstream of all blow-off release sites. The downstream reaches of San Francisquito Creek historically have held sticklebacks, although in the last few years this reach was usually dry. However, should surface flow be present sticklebacks could occupy lower San Francisquito Creek. The National Forest location, if still present, could serve as a source, and upstream movement from the Santa Clara River is also possible (SMEA 2005).
Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-10 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
3.4.2 Arroyo Toad
The arroyo toad was listed as endangered in 1994 (USFWS 1994). Critical habitat was designated for the arroyo toad (USFWS 2005a), revised critical habitat was proposed (USFWS 2009b), and the final designation was made on February 9, 2011(USFWS 2011). Subunit 6b encompasses 2.6 miles of Castaic Creek upstream from its confluence with the Santa Clara River and 4 miles of the Santa Clara River from its confluence with San Francisquito Creek to the confluence of Castaic Creek. Approximately 1.5 miles of designated critical habitat in the Santa Clara River are within the Covered Area. The Conservation Action site is located in arroyo toad critical habitat (Subunit 6c). The four primary constituent elements (PCEs) for arroyo toad critical habitat are 1) breeding habitat (pools less than 6 inches deep, flow less than 1.3 feet per second, and surface water for at least 2 months), 2) riparian and adjacent upland habitat with soils suitable for burrowing, 3) natural or near natural flooding regime, and 4) movement and dispersal areas (USFWS 2011). The Recovery Plan for the arroyo toad was released in 1999 (USFWS 1999).
Species Description
The arroyo toad is a small (2 to 3 inches snout-vent length) toad with a coloration ranging from light- olive green to grey to tannish brown (USFWS 2009c). It is distinguished by its non-paired, symmetrical dorsal blotches and its prominent white “v-shaped” strip across the top of its head between the eyes. Arroyo toads generally move by hopping, as opposed to walking or taking large leaps (USFWS 2009c).
Historic Distribution
Arroyo toads have historically been found from the upper Salinas River system in Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties, California southward to the Rio Santo Domingo system in Baja California, Mexico, and at elevations ranging from near sea level to 7,874 feet above sea level (Jennings and Hayes 1994).
Current Distribution
This species is found in headwater streams in Monterey, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, and San Diego counties and in Baja California, Mexico (USFWS 2014).
Habitat
Adults breed in pools adjacent to flowing channels which are free of predatory fishes and favor exposed shallow, low velocity pools with little marginal woody vegetation (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Adults lay eggs in less than 4 inches of water among gravel, leaves or sticks, or on mud or clean sand at the bottom of these pools (NatureServe 2009, USFWS 2011). Pools with little to no silt are necessary for larvae to feed and grow rapidly (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Newly metamorphosed arroyo toads remain near the pools for several weeks or until the pool is dry (NatureServe 2009). Adults prefer sandy streamsides with stable terraces for burrowing, and woody riparian vegetation (such as mulefat, California sycamore, Fremont’s cottonwood, and coast live oak) for overstory shelter (Jennings and Hayes 1994).
Life History
Adults are nocturnal and active from the first substantial rains in January to February until early August. Males precede females to the breeding pools and call nightly from late March to late June to attract females. Females forage for several weeks before producing a clutch of eggs (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Breeding may occur from early April through early July, and females lay between 2,000 and 10,000 small darkly pigmented eggs in two long strings in the shallow water of the male’s calling site (Jennings
August 2018 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-11 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES and Hayes 1994). Embryonic development requires approximately five days, but larvae are unable to swim effectively until around 2 weeks of age (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Metamorphosis occurs after 65-85 days and takes approximately four days to complete.
Juvenile arroyo toads are cryptic on a mixed rock-sand substrate and actively select damp substrates with temperatures between 32-35°C. They are unable to burrow and avoid shade, dry substances, and temperatures over 42°C. Once juveniles reach ¾ to 1 inch, they become nocturnal (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Once juveniles reach 1.2 inches in size, they move into willow areas around the breeding pools and burrow 4 to 7 inches into pockets of sandy substrate where they stay inactive for 6-8 months (Sweet 1993, as cited in Jennings and Hayes 1994). Reproductive maturity occurs after two years. After breeding, adults return to stream terraces where they construct deep burrows and remain inactive throughout the fall and winter (Sweet 1991, as cited in Jennings and Hayes 1994). Longevity in arroyo toads is relatively unknown, although some populations have been identified as not being long-lived (Jennings and Hayes 1994).
The arroyo toad diet consists of a wide variety of invertebrates. Larvae feed by sifting the substrate for organic detritus and interstitial algae, bacteria, protozoans, and fungi while small juveniles feed mostly on ants (Jennings and Hayes 1994, Sweet 1991as cited in Jennings and Hayes 1994). Larger juveniles shift to a diet of small beetles. Adults forage on open sandy ground under riparian trees for snails, crickets, beetles, and ants (NatureServe 2009). Arroyo toads are not known to migrate long distances, but they do move between non-breeding terrestrial habitats and breeding pools (NatureServe 2009).
Threats
Habitat degradation, short- and long-term changes in river hydrology (such as construction of dams and water diversions), alteration of riparian habitats by agricultural or urban uses, construction of roads, site- specific damage by off-highway vehicle use, development of recreational sites, over grazing, mining activities, and predation by exotic fishes and bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) have reduced populations of this species throughout its range (USFWS 1993a). Habitat alteration and destruction is the main threat to the arroyo toad. Out of the 295 river-miles once inhabited by the arroyo toad, only 74.6 miles exist (USFWS 1993a). Therefore, the arroyo toad has been removed from 75 percent of its former habitat. Most of the remaining populations exist on protected Forest Service land. Habitat loss and high mortality rates can result in isolated subpopulations. These subpopulations may continue to survive and reproduce over the short-term but are unlikely to persist over the long-term due to the limited availability of natural dispersals (USFWS 1993a). Habitat fragmentation increases the probability of local extirpation due to stochastic events, which will likely result in the reduction of genetic variability within the small isolated populations (USFWS 1993a).
Occurrence within the Covered Area
Small numbers of arroyo toads have been sporadically recorded from lower San Francisquito Creek, near the confluence of San Francisquito Creek and the Santa Clara River, and in the Santa Clara River upstream and downstream of the I-5 Bridge. No arroyo toads are expected to inhabit San Francisquito Creek between the Newhall Ranch Road crossing and the U.S. Forest Service lands or South Fork of the Santa Clara River above Valencia Boulevard (USFWS 2002a). Annual focused surveys for arroyo toads have been conducted in the Santa Clara River, including those portions of San Francisquito Creek potentially affected by proposed water releases from the Foothill Feeder pipeline. In four years, the only arroyo toads identified within the Covered Area were limited to a few individual adults that did not display any behaviors that suggested they were breeding, even though the surveys were conducted during the breeding season. Therefore, it is likely that at least a few arroyo toads occupy the stream reaches that will be affected by Metropolitan’s water releases (SMEA 2005). Arroyo toad is known from Soledad Canyon downstream of the UTS Conservation
Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-12 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Action site, but the species has not been recorded in the vicinity since 2003.
3.4.3 California Red Legged Frog
The California red-legged frog was federally listed as threatened on May 23, 1996 (USFWS 1996). Critical habitat was designated in March 2001 and was revised on March 17, 2010 (USFWS 2010a). Critical habitat in San Francisquito Canyon is located at least 4 miles upstream of the Foothill Feeder. The four primary constituent elements for California red-legged frog are aquatic breeding habitat, non- breeding aquatic habitat, upland habitat, and dispersal habitat (USFWS 2010a). The Final Recovery Plan for the California red-legged frog includes 8 recovery units (USFWS 2002b) which reflect areas with similar conservation needs and population statuses.
Species Description
The California red-legged frog is the largest native frog in the western United States, measuring up to 5.4 inches (138 millimeters) for females (USFWS 2002b). The posterior abdomen and hind legs are red or salmon pink and dorsolateral folds are prominent in adults. Tadpoles are 0.6 to 3.1 inches in length and are dark brown or olive with darker spots (USFWS 2002b).
Historic Distribution
California red-legged frog populations have been found from coastal Sonoma County and western Glenn County south along the coast to Baja, California, and from near Redding (Shasta County) south along the Sierra Nevada foothills to Fresno County (Storer 1925, Jennings and Hayes 1994). Populations apparently never occurred in the Central Valley north of the Kern River Basin, but they were widespread in southern California until the 1970s (Jennings and Hayes 1994, Stebbins 2003). Historical records of this species are also noted from Sespe Creek, Piru Creek, San Francisquito Canyon, Placerita Canyon, and Mint Canyon (CNDDB 2010, USFWS 2002b).
Current Distribution
The California red-legged frog is currently present throughout much of its historic range, but its current distribution has been reduced in the Sierra Nevada and in southern California (Lannoo 2005, as cited in NatureServe 2009). In southern California, California red-legged frogs are currently known from the headwaters and tributaries of the Santa Clara River and the recently rediscovered locations in Los Virgenes Creek in the Santa Monica Mountains and in the Whitewater River in the San Bernardino Mountains of Riverside County (Backlin et al. 2017; USFWS 2002b).
Habitat
The California red-legged frog inhabits a wide-range of aquatic habitats including creeks, streams, and ponds that have perennial or near-perennial standing water. Breeding sites include streams, deep pools, backwaters within streams and creeks, ponds, marshes, sag ponds, dune ponds, lagoons, and artificial impoundments such as stock ponds with emergent vegetation. These frogs also occur in upland habitat and have been recorded moving as far as 2.25 miles from non-breeding to breeding sites. They can also be found further than 328 feet from water in adjacent vegetation (USFWS 2000a). Preferred habitats have water 2 to 3 feet deep with dense emergent or shoreline vegetation. Although they may move between breeding pools and foraging areas, they rarely leave the cover of the riparian corridor. The species is found from sea level to about 5,000 feet, although it usually occurs below 4,000 feet (NatureServe 2009).
August 2018 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-13 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Life History
The California red-legged frog breeds from November through March and favors fully sunlit ponds and slow sections of sunlit streams as spawning habitat. Breeding habitat must have some submerged structure, such as emergent vegetation, to which eggs can be attached (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Indicators of suitable California red-legged frog spawning habitat include still or very slow water; water may be seasonal or permanent but seasonal water must last into August; mud or silt substrate; dense, continuous bordering, overhanging, and emergent vegetative cover usually comprised of tules (Scirpus sp.), cattails (Typha sp.), sedges (Juncus sp.), and willows (Salix spp.) in pure stands or in combination; available direct sunlight for most of the day; scarcity or absence of exotic centrarchids (“warm water game fish”) such as bass (Micropterus sp.) or green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus), and the absence of large populations of bullfrogs or crayfish; and a food supply that includes a complex of invertebrate macrofauna and small rodent populations for the adults, and extensive algae and herbaceous submerged plant material for tadpoles.
Additionally, the California red-legged frog favors aquatic spawning pool habitat dominated by masses of rooted floating vegetation (e.g., Ludwigia sp., Potamogeton sp.) (Barry and Fellers 2013). If incident sunlight is adequate in intensity and daily duration, the predominant surrounding vegetation community seems not to be a direct factor in California red-legged frog habitat selection. Frogs congregate along the edges of spawning pools as described above, and females attach baseball-sized masses of 500 to 2,000 eggs (up to 6,000 have been reported) to emergent or floating vegetation (Storer 1925, Stebbins 2003). The eggs hatch in 7 to 14 days, and the larvae usually metamorphose in 4 to 5 months, by late August (Storer 1925, Barry 2000, Jennings and Hayes 1994). Sexual maturity is reached at 3 to 4 years, and individuals may live up to 10 years (USFWS 1996).
California red-legged frogs are omnivorous and will eat a variety of prey including other amphibians and small mammals (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Invertebrates are the most common food for frogs (USFWS 1996). Major predators of the California red-legged frog include introduced fish, bullfrogs, and native garter snakes (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Adult frogs are nocturnal, whereas juveniles are active during both day and night (USFWS 1996, Jennings and Hayes 1994).
All life history stages of the California red-legged frog may inhabit spawning pools and their margins, but dispersing adults and juveniles will use a variety of aquatic, riparian, and upland habitats during movement from one location to another (USFWS 2005b). California red-legged frogs do not have a distinct breeding migration. Adult frogs are nearly always associated with permanent bodies of water. Some frogs remain at breeding sites all year while others disperse. Dispersal distances can range from a few feet to over 2 miles (USFWS 2005b). Movements are typically along riparian corridors, but some individuals move directly from one site to another through exposed habitats, such as heavily grazed pastures or oak-grassland savannas (Bulger 1999).
Threats
Loss of habitat, urbanization, hydrological alterations, construction of dams, flood control activities, mining, chemicals, and the introduction of aquatic predators, including bullfrogs and non-native fish, have drastically reduced populations of this species throughout its range (USFWS 2002b).
Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-14 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Occurrence within the Covered Area
Current populations persist in San Francisquito Canyon at least 5 miles upstream of the Foothill Feeder (CNDDB 2010). None are known to be present in the Covered Area.
3.4.4 Santa Ana Sucker
The Santa Ana sucker is included in this HCP because the population in the Santa Clara River could become listed during the term of the ITP. Populations in the Los Angeles, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana river basins are currently listed (USFWS 2000b), and a recovery plan has been prepared for these populations of Santa Ana sucker (USFWS 2017). Critical habitat has been designated and revised for the listed populations of this species (USFWS 2005c, USFWS 2010b).
Species Description
The Santa Ana sucker is a freshwater fish that is usually less than 10 inches long (NatureServe 2009). This species closely resembles mountain suckers. Body coloration on Santa Ana suckers is silver on the ventral surface, and darker with irregular blotches on the dorsal surface (Moyle et al. 1995).
Historic Distribution
Historically, the Santa Ana sucker occurred in the rivers and larger streams of the Los Angeles Basin (Los Angeles, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana river drainages) in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties (USFWS 2000b). There are very few records of the historic range of this species, but it is presumed that Santa Ana suckers ranged from near the Pacific Ocean to the uplands of the Los Angeles and San Gabriel river systems and at least up to the San Bernardino National Forest boundary in the Santa Ana River (Swift et al. 1993). It is believed that the Santa Ana sucker has lost approximately 75 percent of its historic native range (USFWS 2000b).
Current Distribution
Currently, native noncontiguous populations of Santa Ana suckers occur in the lower to middle Santa Ana River, lower Big Tujunga Creek in the Los Angeles River drainage, and East, West, and North forks of the San Gabriel River (USFWS 2017; NatureServe 2009). Additionally, a population occurs in the Santa Clara River drainage in Ventura and Los Angeles counties. Santa Ana suckers upstream (east) of the “Piru Gap” (a large presistently dry section of the Santa Clara River) are considered to be native Santa Ana suckers; whereas, suckers in the lower (western) reach of the Santa Clara River downstream of the Piru Gap show evidence of hybridization with the introduced Owens River sucker (Catostomus fumeiventris) (Richmond et al. 2017; USFWS 2017). Santa Ana sucker has been documented in Soledad Canyon.
Habitat
The Santa Ana sucker is usually found in permanent pools and runs of small to medium size (less than 23 feet in width), and in water ranging in depth from a few inches to greater than 3 feet (Smith 1966, Dinstadt et al. 1990, as cited in Moyle et al. 1995). This species is mainly found in clear streams but is known to tolerate turbidity (NatureServe 2009). Preferred substrate for this species includes gravel, rubble, and boulder and is generally coarse, although individuals have been found in streams with sand/mud substrates (Moyle et al.1995). Occupied habitat typically has slight to swift flow, but some populations occur in streams that are subject to periodic and severe flooding (Moyle et al. 1995). This species prefers overhanging riparian plants for cover (as shade), and does not require streamside cover when larger, deeper holes and riffles are present for refuge (Moyle et al. 1995).
August 2018 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-15 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Life History
Santa Ana suckers reach sexual maturity in just over one year and typically do not live more than 3 years (USFWS 2000b). However, in the Santa Clara River this species matures during its second year (NatureServe 2009), which may be at less than one year of age for fish from late (June or July) spawning the year before. Females produce between 4,423 and 16,151 eggs (Moyle et al. 1995) with spawning from early April to early July, peaking in late May to early June (Greenfield et al. 1970, as cited in USFWS 2000b). Studies in the San Gabriel River indicate that spawning may be very protracted and begin as early as November (USFWS 2000b). Santa Ana suckers spawn over gravel in riffles, and the eggs adhere to the substrate (Moyle 2002). The high fecundity of the Santa Ana sucker, in combination with early sexual maturity and a protracted spawning period, allows this species to quickly repopulate streams following periodic flood events that could decimate populations (Moyle 2002). The Santa Ana sucker is omnivorous. The diet includes detritus, algae, diatoms, aquatic insects and larvae, and fish eggs, with larger fish feeding more on aquatic insects (Moyle et al. 1995). The Santa Ana sucker is not known to migrate.
Threats
Intense urban development throughout the Los Angeles metropolitan area has resulted in destruction, modification, and curtailment of Santa Ana sucker habitat through water diversions, alteration of stream channels, erosion and debris torrents, wildfires in occupied watersheds, pollution, and the establishment of non-native species (Moyle and Yoshiyama 1992, as cited in USFWS 2000b). These impacts associated with urbanization are most likely the primary cause of extirpation of this species from lowland reaches of the Los Angeles, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana rivers. Urbanization results in changes to water quality and quantity and the hydrology of the rivers within the Los Angeles Basin. Moyle and Yoshiyama (1992) stated, “even though Santa Ana suckers seem to be quite generalized in their habitat requirements, they are intolerant of polluted or highly modified streams” (USFWS 2000b).
Occurrence within the Covered Area
The Santa Ana sucker population in the Santa Clara River may be native, introduced, or hybridized (Richmond et al. 2017; USFWS 2017; USFWS 2010b). Suckers in the Santa Clara River or its tributaries downstream of the Piru Gap are considered to be hybrids with the introduced Owens River sucker. Santa Ana suckers upstream of the Piru Gap are considered pure, native Santa Ana sucker, including those in Soledad Canyon in the vicinity of the UTS Conservation Action site (USFWS 2017). Santa Ana suckers could occur in the Covered Area in the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Canyon, and several were observed in the Santa Clara River during monitoring of the 2007 shutdown (SMEA 2007) and 2012 shutdown (Aquatic Consulting Services, Inc. 2012)
3.4.5 Western Spadefoot
Western spadefoot is currently under federal review for listing under the ESA (80 FR 37568-79). Western spadefoot is a California Species of Special Concern (CDFW 2017).
Species Description
The western spadefoot is a toad named after the spade shape of the hind feet, known to assist in digging soil. Adults have a total length of 1.5-2.5 inches with dorsal colorations of greenish, brown, cream, or gray. Dorsal colorations also include four lateral light stripes and sporadic dark blotches with reddish spots at tips of skin tubercles. Ventrally they are unmarked and whitish. Their eyes are pale gold with vertical pupils (CaliforniaHerps 2012).
Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-16 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Distribution
The western spadefoot historically ranged from Mesa de San Carlos in Baja California, Mexico, north to Redding in Shasta County (Stebbins 1985). They have been found in elevations from sea level up to 4,500 feet in the San Diego County mountains (CaliforniaHerps 2012).
Habitat
The western spadefoot is primarily terrestrial. Grassland habitat is preferred; however, they may be found in a variety of habitats including woodlands, coastal sage scrub, chaparral, river floodplains, alkali flats, foothills, and mountains (Zeiner et al. 1988, CaliforniaHerps 2012). Terrestrial upland habitat is required for burrowing and lying dormant during the dry season while wetlands are required for breeding (Zeiner et al. 1988).
Life History
Adults spend most of the year retreated in burrows and emerge during autumn and winter rains (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Spawning occurs in late winter or spring, with eggs laid when temperatures have warmed somewhat from late February to late May (Jennings and Hayes 1994) in aquatic habitat including vernal pools, pools of intermittent streams, and cattle tanks. Females will lay groups of 10-42 eggs attached to underwater vegetation or detritus. Eggs hatch into tadpoles within 3-4 days, and tadpoles will metamorphose into juveniles anywhere from 4-11 weeks. Juveniles move upland just days after metamorphosis (CaliforniaHerps 2012).
Threats
The primary threat to the western spadefoot is loss of habitat. Southern California populations have been extirpated in more than 80 percent of their habitat in Santa Barbara and Kern counties due primarily to urban and agricultural development (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Predation by introduced mosquitofish also poses a threat to some populations (CaliforniaHerps 2012).
Occurrence within the Covered Area
This species is known from several locations in the vicinity Covered Area, including in San Francisquito Canyon, Placerita Canyon, and Soledad Canyon. These records were in locations out of the main riverbeds in adjacent uplands or impoundments. The western spadefoot has a low potential to occur at the Conservation Action site due to a general lack of suitable habitat (Metropolitan 2018).
3.4.6 Two-Striped Garter Snake
The two-striped garter snake currently has no federal listing status. It is a California Species of Special Concern (CDFW 2017) and was previously listed as threatened by the state (Jennings and Hayes 1994).
Species Description
Two-striped garter snakes are medium sized (23.5-29 inches) with dorsal coloration of olive, brown, or brownish grey, and a single yellow-orange lateral stripe on each side of the body (Jennings and Hayes 1994). A nuchal spot may be present on the back of the neck when the middorsal stripe is absent. The iris is a light tan color (Jennings and Hayes 1994).
August 2018 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-17 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Distribution
The two-striped garter snake can be found from Monterey County in California to as far south as the mouth of Rio Rosario in Baja California, Mexico (Stebbins 1985). The two-striped garter snake has disappeared from approximately 40 percent of its historic range in California and is considered common only in eastern San Diego County (Jennings and Hayes 1994).
Habitat
This species is highly aquatic and is found in or near permanent fresh water (Stebbins 1985). It can be found from sea level to about 7,000 feet elevation (CNDDB 2011) and inhabits perennial and intermittent streams having rocky beds bordered by willows or dense vegetation. Large sandy river beds, such as those found in the Santa Clara River, provide suitable habitat if riparian vegetation is present along the stream course. This species also uses stock ponds and other artificially-created habitat if bordering riparian vegetation and amphibian and fish prey are present (Jennings and Hayes 1994).
Life History
Breeding occurs in late March to early April, and females bear 1 to 25 live young in July and August (Stebbins 1985). The two-striped garter snake diet consists primarily of fish, fish eggs, and tadpoles (Jennings and Hayes 1994).
Threats
Populations have been affected by the elimination of natural sloughs and marshy areas; loss of riparian habitat through agricultural practices and urban development; predation by introduced bullfrogs, fishes, and feral pigs; and loss of amphibian prey (Jennings and Hayes 1994).
Occurrence within the Covered Area
This species is not currently known to occur within the Covered Area. The species could be present along the Santa Clara River in the Covered Area with a low potential to occur near any of the other maintenance sites. The species has a high potential to occur at the UTS Conservation Action site.
3.4.7 Western Pond Turtle
The western pond turtle is currently under federal review for listing under the ESA (80 FR 19259-63). The western pond turtle is a California Species of Special Concern (CDFW 2017).
Species Description
The western pond turtles are a medium sized turtle ranging from 3.5 to 8.5 inches carapace length for adults. Hatchlings are approximately 1 inch in carapace length, with tail lengths almost as long as the carapace. Western pond turtles have unkeeled carapaces which can be drab dark brown, olive brown, or blackish in color, usually with a pattern of lines or spots radiating from the centers of the scutes. The plastron lacks hinges and has six pairs of shields which can be cream or yellowish in color with large dark brown markings, or unmarked. The legs have black speckling and may show cream to yellowish coloring. The head usually has black spots on it and may show cream to yellowish coloring with the throat and neck being uniformly light in color (CaliforniaHerps 2011).
Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-18 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 3 LOW-EFFECT HCP ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING / BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Distribution
This subspecies of western pond turtle is found from San Francisco Bay south, along the coastal ranges into northern Baja California, from sea level to over 5,905 feet in elevation.
Habitat
Western pond turtles are primarily diurnal though some nocturnal activity occurs in summer (Holland and Bury 1998). The species is highly aquatic. Preferred habitat includes ponds, lakes, rivers, streams, creeks, marshes, and irrigation ditches, with abundant vegetation, and either rocky or muddy bottoms, in woodland, forest, and grassland. In streams, western pond turtles prefer pools over shallower areas. Adequate structure such as logs, rocks, cattail mats, and exposed banks is required for basking (Stebbins 2003). This turtle typically basks on structures or plant material at water level and seldom basks by floating at the surface (Holland 1985a). They will quickly slide into the water and dive to escape threats. Western pond turtles are typically active from February to November, though may be active all year at warmer southern latitudes. In winter, western pond turtles hibernate underwater, often in the muddy bottom of a pool, though they may overwinter on land up to 0.3 mile from the nearest watercourse (Holland 1994). If summer droughts result in the disappearance of wetted habitat, the western pond turtle may aestivate by burying itself in soft bottom mud or may move to upland areas to shelter under dense brush, logs, leaves, or wood rat nests (Slavens 1995, Lemm 2006).
Life History
Adult western pond turtles do not mate until they are approximately eight to ten years old. Reproduction typically begins with mating in April and May. From April through August, females climb onto land to dig a nest where they lay a clutch of 2 to 11 eggs. While some females may lay two clutches in a year, most are thought to lay eggs every other year. Hatchlings emerge in early fall or overwinter in the nest (Holland 1994). Western pond turtles eat a wide variety of foods including aquatic plants, invertebrates, worms, frog and salamander eggs and larvae, crayfish, carrion, and occasionally frogs and fish (Holland 1994 and 1985b, Bury 1986).
Threats
The greatest single threat to this species is habitat destruction. Over 90 percent of the wetland habitats within the historic range of the species in California alone have been eliminated due to agricultural development, flood control and water diversion projects, and urbanization (USFWS 1992). Associated with these threats have been an increase in habitat fragmentation and its attendant effects on genetic variability. Other localized threats include contaminant spills, grazing, off-road vehicle use (USFWS 1993), and predation by non-native, introduced predators such as bullfrogs (Holland 1994).
Occurrence within the Covered Area
This species is known to occur in the Covered Area, including at several locations along the Santa Clara River near Interstate 5. Suitable habitat for the species exists at the UTS Conservation Action site (Metropolitan 2018).
August 2018 Environmental Setting / Biological Resources 3-19
S E C T I O N 4 Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment
The potential biological effects of Project activities on Covered Species are evaluated in this section based on the distribution of Covered Species relative to Covered Activities. Additionally, this section provides an assessment of take for the Covered Species.
4.1 Type of Potential Effects
Evaluation of effects is based on both the context (e.g., type of activity) and intensity (e.g., duration) of the action. Effects can be either “direct” or “indirect.” Direct effects encompass the immediate, often obvious effect of the project activity on a species or its habitat (typically direct harm or harassment to individuals and/or habitat). Examples of potential direct effects are disturbance, injury, or mortality that may occur during operation or maintenance activities, including alterations to habitat. Indirect effects are caused by or result from a project activity and are later in time, but are still reasonably certain to occur. In contrast to direct effects, indirect effects can often be more subtle, and may affect species’ populations and habitat quality over an extended period of time, long after project activities have been completed. Indirect effects are of particular concern for longer-lived species, because project-related effects may not become evident in individuals or populations until years later.
4.2 General Description of Potential Effects
Maintenance, inspection, and repair of the Foothill Feeder can involve preparation, shutdown, dewatering, and refilling of the pipeline.
Preparation involves grading of existing access roads, placement of aggregate (e.g., crushed rock used for road base or road surfacing) base on existing access roads or work areas, weed abatement around existing structures and along access roads, minor maintenance of valves and electrical components, and material and equipment staging. All of the sites have paved or unpaved road access and are surrounded by barren or sparsely vegetated areas dominated by weedy species and non-native grassland. The San Francisquito Low Rise blow-off is in an urban open space with planted trees. No habitat for Covered Species is present in the upland areas where preparation and minor maintenance activities would occur at any of these sites. Any water releases from preparation and minor maintenance would be of small volumes for short durations. These activities would have a low potential to affect Covered Species; the potential for take from these activities is discussed for each species below.
Shutdowns and subsequent refilling involve isolating water in the system, discharging water in the pipeline segments through gravity and subsequently pumping out the remaining water in the system, providing entrance and exit/ventilation locations, conducting eddy current testing (ECT) inspections, conducting maintenance and upgrade activities, and refilling the pipeline. Dewatering associated with shutdowns would involve additional equipment and duration than the preparation and minor maintenance activities described above. The dewatering activities would not result in long-term effect on habitat. The water releases are not expected to substantially affect vegetation communities or alter stream hydrology through scouring. Incremental valve opening according to the Release Plan closely mimics a natural winter runoff events with a gradual ramping up and down of the hydrograph. The rate and duration of
August 2018 Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment 4-1 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 4 LOW-EFFECT HCP POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS / TAKE ASSESSMENT water release would be as described in Section 2.1 and have a potential to affect life stages of aquatic Covered Species downstream of the discharge locations.
An emergency situation may have the potential to necessitate an unplanned, emergency pipeline dewatering and repair, including replacement of badly damaged segments of the facility. Emergency situations are difficult to predict, and Metropolitan is prepared to perform any emergency repairs to the Foothill Feeder in an expedited and safe manner. An emergency dewatering scenario may necessitate discharging flow at up to 100% valve opening from the outset of dewatering, as opposed to incremental valve opening that is standard practice according to the Release Plan. Dewatering the pipeline at 100% valve opening from the outset would not exceed the level of runoff associated with a modeled 2-year storm event, and would not result in long-term effects on aquatic Covered Species habitat.These scenarios are likely to be infrequent but have a potential to affect life stages of aquatic Covered Species downstream of the discharge locations.
Implementation of UTS Conservation Action activities at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site have the potential to affect life stages of aquatic Covered Species on or downstream of the site. Because the UTS Conservation Action activities would be implemented to contribute to UTS recovery and satisfy the requirements of California Fish and Game Code Section 2081.10, these activities would result in a net habitat benefit for UTS.
4.3 Potential Effects on Covered Species
Potential effects on Covered Species as a result of Covered Activities are discussed below.
4.3.1 Unarmored Threespine Stickleback
As noted above, no long-term effects on habitat are expected from continued periodic maintenance of the Foothill Feeder, and UTS Conservation Action activities would result in net habitat benefits for UTS. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in permanent displacement of any UTS due to habitat loss. Additionally, preparation activities and minor valve maintenance activities would not result in effects to UTS. Most water releases from shutdowns are not expected to cause substantial temporary effects on UTS habitat, but potential may exist for displacement and stranding of UTS during shutdown releases during some years, depending on flow and distribution of fish.
UTS population units that have the potential to be affected by Metropolitan’s Foothill Feeder shutdown water releases are known to occur in San Francisquito Creek downstream of the blow-off release sites and in the mainstem Santa Clara River. Observations of dewatering releases in January 2007 and February 2012 showed that water from the Charlie Canyon blow-off (average of 15 cfs, Table 5-1) and Placerita Canyon blow-off (average of 11 cfs, Table 5-1) infiltrated into dry reaches of the streambed between the release sites and the fish (SMEA 2007, Aquatic Consulting Services, Inc. 2012). Releases during the 2005 shutdown coincided with a major storm event and were inconsequential compared to flows present in San Francisquito Creek and the Santa Clara River (SMEA 2007). Similarly, releases into Castaic Lagoon (average of 18 cfs, Table 5-1) would not affect the species near the mouth of Castaic Creek due to distance and the small amount, if any, of overflow from the lagoon during a dewatering release. Potential effects of shutdown releases from the San Francisquito Canyon and Santa Clara River blow-offs are described below.
The potential for and severity of Foothill Feeder shutdown release effects on the UTS are related to timing of water releases, recent hydrology, and pattern/volume of release. In general, unless they percolate into the streambed, high flows can displace fish, particularly smaller fish such as juveniles, downstream of existing locations and can even result in fish mortality. UTS are adapted to periodic high-
Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment 4-2 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 4 LOW-EFFECT HCP POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS / TAKE ASSESSMENT flow regimes during the rainy season. While some individuals may be displaced during high flows, such flows may also increase gene flow, which benefit the UTS population. High flows are relatively common in January and February within the Santa Clara River watershed.
The pattern of water release is also important. To the degree that dewatering releases for shutdowns during the rainy season (approximately December through February) can more closely mimic a natural high-flow event (gradually increasing then decreasing the release volume), these releases from the Foothill Feeder should not differ from those of a natural high-flow event. Such a release pattern would reduce the potential for habitat scour and would reduce the potential for fish strandings. Strandings occur when fish retreat to low flow areas of the channel (such as flooded side channels) to avoid high flows and then a rapid decrease in flow volume dewaters these areas. Gradual increases allow fish to find an appropriate refuge from the high velocity, and gradually declining flows allow the fish to leave their refuge before it becomes "cut off" from the stream channel.
Shutdown water releases into San Francisquito Creek and the Santa Clara River following the Shutdown Water Release Plan (Section 5.2.1.1) during the rainy season in normal to wet years would mimic natural high-flow events and would not adversely affect UTS in either drainage. Gradually ramping the release rate up at the beginning and allowing the release rate to decline as the water drains out of the pipeline at the end of the release will minimize displacement and stranding of individuals. Shutdown releases at these locations will be monitored by qualified biologists as described in Section 5.2.1.2 with repatriation of stranded individuals or relocation of individuals out of harm’s way. Therefore, shutdown releases conducted under the Release Plan during the months from November to March would not result in impacts to individual UTS through displacement. However, mortality may occur should UTS become stranded due to discharge from shutdown releases. Once flows recede following dewatering, any UTS potentially stranded would be rescued and relocated to the nearest suitable habitat in waters connected to stream flows. Rescue and relocation of UTS may result in mortality of a small percentage, up to 5%3 of the UTS rescued.
Emergency releases may also be necessary. During the history of the Foothill Feeder, emergency repairs have occurred only once. These repairs occurred due to damage from the Northridge Earthquake in January 1994, and repairs did not result in dewatering into the Santa Clara River watershed. However, should emergency repairs be required in the future, the exact nature of these repairs and any associated dewatering cannot be predicted. However, due to considerations of time related to public safety and potential environmental impacts, such repairs may require rapid dewatering that would necessitate a 100% valve opening from the outset and discharge of water into the Santa Clara River. As noted above, such a release would not exceed the level of runoff associated with a modeled 2-year storm event and would not result in long-term effects on UTS habitat. In addition, the existing dissipation chamber combined with vegetation at the release point would dissipate energy from any releases, reducing the velocity of flows. Should such flows occur during the same period as scheduled releases, when only adults are present, UTS should be able to escape flows from discharge due to the releases and avoid displacement. Should strandings occur from emergency releases, procedures for rescuing and relocating UTS would be the same as procedures during scheduled releases, and mortality could occur during handling of UTS for rescue and relocation.
UTS Conservation Action activities in the form of protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities would occur at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site to provide natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat. These activities would result in a net benefit to UTS habitat.
3 This estimate accounts for a worst-case scenario for the level of mortality during rescue and relocation, which here is assumed to be 5%. This is higher than the 1.1% mortality that occurred during the 2014 relocation by CDFW from the Santa Clara River to San Francisquito Creek. However, it is expected that any fish rescued during shutdown releases would be relocated only to the nearest suitable area where water is connected to the flowing stream along the Santa Clara River, not to a tributary stream.
August 2018 Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment 4-3 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 4 LOW-EFFECT HCP POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS / TAKE ASSESSMENT
Implementation of measures described in Section 5.2.3 should result in avoidance and minimization of incidental take of UTS. Because pre-construction surveys would result in identification of suitable UTS habitat, would require surveys for UTS if suitable habitat is present, and would require exclusion of UTS from the Conservation Action site, or consultation with CDFW and USFWS before initiating measures to relocate UTS, UTS mortality is very unlikely. However, some possibility exists that relocation of a small number of UTS may be necessary to implement Conservation Action activities and that mortality of UTS could result.
4.3.2 Arroyo Toad
The dewatering activities would not result in long-term effect on arroyo toad habitat. The water releases are not expected to substantially affect vegetation communities or alter stream hydrology through scouring. Incremental valve opening according to the Release Plan closely mimics a natural winter runoff events with a gradual ramping up and down of the hydrograph. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in permanent displacement of any arroyo toad due to habitat loss. Additionally, preparation activities and minor valve maintenance activities would not result in effects arroyo toad. Water releases during shutdowns in the wet season would not adversely affect arroyo toads any differently than natural storm events; therefore, adults are not likely to be affected. Depending on the timing of winter storms, arroyo toad may begin breeding in late winter, and high flows have the potential to dislodge egg masses or wash larvae downstream to areas that may not be suitable for their development. However, through implementation of the Release Plan, which would result in a relatively flat hydrograph (lower amplitude of discharge, with gradual rise and flow), impacts to any arroyo toad egg masses would be avoided.
Based on records for the species relative to the Covered Area, few, if any, individuals would be present in San Francisquito Creek or the Santa Clara River. Releases into other tributaries to the Santa Clara River are too far from potential arroyo toad habitat to have any effect. Shutdown releases into San Francisquito Creek and the Santa Clara River will be monitored by qualified biologists as described in Section 5.2.1.2. No repatriation of stranded individuals or relocation of individuals out of harm’s way is anticipated to be necessary, but would occur if necessary.
As described above, emergency releases may also be necessary that may require rapid dewatering that would necessitate a 100% valve opening from the outset and discharge of water into the Santa Clara River. As noted above, such a release would not exceed the level of runoff associated with a modeled 2- year storm event and would not result in long-term effects on arroyo toad habitat. In addition, the existing dissipation chamber combined with vegetation at the release point would dissipate energy from any releases, reducing the velocity of flows. No repatriation of stranded individuals or relocation of individuals out of harm’s way is anticipated to be necessary, but would occur if necessary.
Conservation Action activities in the form of protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities would occur at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site to provide natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat. Implementation of measures described in Section 5.2.3 should result in avoidance and minimization of incidental take of arroyo toad. Because pre-construction surveys would result in identification of suitable arroyo toad habitat, would require surveys for arroyo toad if suitable habitat is present, and would require exclusion of arroyo toad from the Conservation Action site, arroyo toad mortality is not likely. In the event that arroyo toad are detected on the Conservation Action site and take cannot be avoided, adaptive management actions would be triggered (see Section 5.4). See Section 4.4 for a discussion of arroyo toad critical habitat at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site.
Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment 4-4 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 4 LOW-EFFECT HCP POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS / TAKE ASSESSMENT
4.3.3 California Red-legged Frog
California red-legged frog has not been recorded in the Covered Area where water releases would occur, but is known from approximately 5 miles upstream of the Covered Area in San Francisquito Creek. Effects of shutdown releases during the wet season would essentially be the same as a natural storm event and would not adversely affect California red-legged frog habitat or individuals, if present, in San Francisquito Creek. Therefore, the species is not expected to be affected by discharges (scheduled or emergency). Shutdown releases into San Francisquito Creek will be monitored by qualified biologists as described in Section 5.2.1.2. No repatriation of stranded individuals or relocation of individuals out of harm’s way is anticipated to be necessary, but would occur if necessary.
Conservation Action activities in the form of protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities would occur at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site to provide natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat. Implementation of measures described in Section 5.2.3 should result in avoidance and minimization of incidental take of California red-legged frog. Because pre- construction surveys would result in identification of suitable California red-legged frog habitat, would require surveys for California red-legged frog if suitable habitat is present, and would require exclusion of California red-legged frog from the Conservation Action site, California red-legged frog mortality is not likely. In the event that California red-legged frog are detected on the Conservation Action site and take cannot be avoided, adaptive management actions would be triggered (see Section 5.4).
4.3.4 Santa Ana Sucker
Santa Ana sucker is a federally-listed species in other drainages but is not listed in the Santa Clara River; the population in the Santa Clara River may be native, introduced, or hybridized. Potential adverse effects on the Santa Ana sucker as a result of Foothill Feeder pipeline shutdown releases (scheduled and emergency) would be similar to those described for UTS above. No long-term effects on habitat are expected from continued periodic maintenance of the Foothill Feeder; therefore, the proposed project would not result in permanent displacement of any Santa Ana sucker due to habitat loss. Additionally, preparation activities and minor valve maintenance activities would not result in effects to Santa Ana sucker. Most water releases from shutdowns are not expected to cause substantial temporary effects on Santa Ana sucker habitat, but potential may exist for displacement and stranding of Santa Ana sucker during shutdown releases during some years, depending on flow and distribution of fish. Shutdown releases will be monitored by qualified biologists as described in Section 5.2.1.2 with repatriation of stranded individuals or relocation of individuals out of harm’s way.
Conservation Action activities in the form of protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities would occur at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site to provide natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat, which would result in a net benefit to Santa Ana sucker habitat. Implementation of measures described in Section 5.2.3 should result in avoidance or minimization of incidental take of Santa Ana sucker and mortality is very unlikely. However, some possibility exists that relocation of a small number of Santa Ana sucker may be necessary to implement Conservation Action activities and that mortality of Santa Ana sucker could result.
4.3.5 Western Spadefoot
The dewatering activities would not result in long-term effect on western spadefoot habitat. The water releases (scheduled or emergency) are not expected to substantially affect vegetation communities or alter stream hydrology through scouring. Preparation activities and minor valve maintenance activities would not result in effects western spadefoot. Effects of shutdown releases during the wet season would essentially
August 2018 Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment 4-5 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 4 LOW-EFFECT HCP POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS / TAKE ASSESSMENT be the same as a natural storm event and would not adversely affect adult or juvenile western spadefoot. Shutdown releases during the breeding season (as early as late February) could dislodge eggs or wash larvae (tadpoles) downstream to areas that may not be suitable for their development. High flows followed by low, natural flows during larval development could strand larvae as the water recedes. Shutdown releases will be monitored by qualified biologists as described in Section 5.2.12. No repatriation of stranded individuals or relocation of individuals out of harm’s way is anticipated to be necessary, but would occur if necessary.
Conservation Action activities in the form of protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities would occur at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site to provide natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat. No effects to western spadefoot would be expected from Conservation Action activities at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site.
4.3.6 Two-striped Garter Snake
The dewatering activities would not result in long-term effect on two-striped garter snake habitat. The water releases (scheduled or emergency) are not expected to substantially affect vegetation communities or alter stream hydrology through scouring. Preparation activities and minor valve maintenance activities would not result in effects two-striped garter snake. Water releases during shutdowns (schedule or emergency) are not anticipated to adversely affect two-striped garter snakes due to their mobility. Shutdown releases will be monitored by qualified biologists as described in Section 5.2.1.2. In the unlikely event that individuals become stranded during shutdowns, they would be relocated out of harm’s way.
Conservation Action activities in the form of protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities would occur at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site to provide natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat. Implementation of measures described in Section 5.2.3 should result in avoidance and minimization of incidental take of two-striped garter snake. Because pre- construction surveys would result in identification of suitable two-striped garter snake habitat and would require avoidance, two-striped garter snake mortality is not likely.
4.3.7 Western Pond Turtle
The dewatering activities would not result in long-term effect on western pond turtle habitat. The water releases (scheduled or emergency) are not expected to substantially affect vegetation communities or alter stream hydrology through scouring. Preparation activities and minor valve maintenance activities would not result in effects western pond turtle. Water releases during shutdowns are not anticipated to adversely affect western pond turtles due to their mobility. Shutdown releases will be monitored by qualified biologists as described in Section 5.2.12. In the unlikely event that individuals become stranded during shutdowns, they would be relocated out of harm’s way.
Conservation Action activities in the form of protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities would occur at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site to provide natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat. Implementation of measures described in Section 5.2.3 should result in avoidance and minimization of incidental take of western pond turtle. Because pre-construction surveys would result in identification of suitable western pond turtle habitat and would require avoidance, western pond turtle mortality is not likely.
4.3.8 Summary of Potential Covered Species Effects
Potential take that could occur for each of the Covered Species prior to implementation of the avoidance
Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment 4-6 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 4 LOW-EFFECT HCP POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS / TAKE ASSESSMENT measures is summarized in Table 4-1. Shutdown-related activities is anticipated to result in potential take of UTS, arroyo toad, California red-legged frog, Santa Ana sucker, and western spadefoot. For mobile water- associated species, such as western pond turtle and two-striped garter snake, water releases are not anticipated to result in any take of individuals that may be present in the areas inundated by the water releases. In the unlikely event that avoidance measures cannot be implemented or would not avoid take, individuals of water-associated species would be repatriated or moved out of harm’s way. Unavoidable effects may also occur to Covered Species from the implementation of Conservation Action activities at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site.
Table 4-1 Summary of Potential Effects on Covered Species by Covered Activities Shutdown- Conservation related Action Species Affected Activities Activities Type of Effect Unarmored threespine stickleback X X Potential displacement, stranding, injury, or mortality Arroyo toad X X Potential displacement, stranding, injury, or mortality California red-legged frog X X Potential displacement, stranding, injury, or mortality Santa Ana sucker X X Potential displacement, stranding, injury, or mortality Western spadefoot X -- Potential displacement, stranding, injury, or mortality Two-striped garter snake -- X Potential unavoidable injury or mortality from UTS habitat enhancement activities Western pond turtle -- X Potential unavoidable injury or mortality from UTS habitat enhancement activities
4.4 Potential Effects on Critical Habitat
In order to approve an ITP, the “Services must ensure constituent elements of critical habitat will not be altered or destroyed by proposed activities to the extent that the survival and recovery of affected species would be appreciably reduced” (USFWS and NMFS 1996; 2016). No critical habitat has been designated for the UTS, and that designated for the California red-legged frog and Santa Ana sucker is located well outside the Covered Area.
Designated critical habitat for the arroyo toad is present within a portion of the Covered Area in the Santa Clara River from the San Francisquito Canyon confluence to Castaic Creek and at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site (USFWS 2011). The four PCEs for arroyo toad critical habitat are 1) breeding habitat (pools less than 6 inches deep, flow less than 1.3 feet per second, and surface water for at least 2 months), 2) riparian and adjacent upland habitat with soils suitable for burrowing, 3) natural or near natural flooding regime, and 4) movement and dispersal areas (USFWS 2011). Schedule shutdowns and water releases would be conducted according to the Water Release Plan, which mimics a natural winter runoff events, and emergency releases would not exceed the level of runoff associated with a modeled 2- year storm event.
The Stickleback Ranch Conservation Action site is located within Subunit 6c of arroyo toad critical habitat. Conservation Action activities in the form of protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long- term management activities would occur at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site to provide natural riverine
August 2018 Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment 4-7 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 4 LOW-EFFECT HCP POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS / TAKE ASSESSMENT
fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat. In the event that the Conservation Action activities on the site have the potential to impact the PCEs for arroyo toad habitat (i.e., breeding habitat pool depth, flow rate, surface water duration; adjacent upland habitat quality; flood regime; or movement and dispersal areas), adaptive management actions would be triggered (see Section 5.4).
4.5 Potential Cumulative Effects
In contrast with the analysis of cumulative effects under Section 7, Section 10 of the ESA and HCPs analyze cumulative effects as incremental effects of the action on the environment when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non- federal) or person undertakes such other actions. The geographic area for analysis is defined by the manifestation of direct or indirect effects as a result of Covered Activities. Cumulative effects under Section 10 of the ESA can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.
As noted above in Section 4.2, the proposed project would not result in impact to Covered Species habitat; therefore, it would not contribute to reasonably foreseeable cumulative impact to Covered Species habitat from other projects. Activities and project buildout in the vicinity of the proposed project have the potential to affect biological resources in the area, including reducing the amount of available habitat for special-status species, impacting special-status plants and animals, and impacting vegetation communities and wetlands. However, implementation of the Foothill Feeder Covered Activities associated with dewatering and repair would not make a significant contribution to these cumulative impacts. Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed project to protect special-status biological resources. As a result, the contribution of the project to direct or indirect impacts on these resources, when considered in conjunction with related projects in the area, would not be cumulatively considerable.
Effects to Covered Species may result from the Conservation Actions at the mitigation site; however, these mitigation activities would result in a net benefit for UTS and the other Covered Species that utilize stream habitat. Measures are in place to avoid and minimize the effects of the mitigation activities on Covered Species. Therefore, impacts to Covered Species from the Conservation Actions at the mitigation site would not be cumulatively considerable.
Several projects were examined to determine whether cumulative impacts to UTS would occur with implementation of the proposed mitigation activities, including the County Stickleback Movie Ranch Restoration Project, Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration Project, Soledad to Fish Canyon Creek Rescue, Sierra Highway over Santa Clara River Project, Bridge No. 53C1777L&R, and LARC Ranch Water Pipeline Project. Only the Stickleback Movie Ranch Restoration Project, Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration Project and Soledad to Fish Canyon Creek Rescue may result in the incidental take of UTS.
The Los Angeles County Flood Control District intends to implement a habitat mitigation program at the Stickleback Movie Ranch. The District would create, restore, and enhance up to 40 acres of cottonwood–willow woodland, transitional riparian, alluvial sage scrub, oak woodland, and upland scrub. This is the same location identified as the Conservation Action Site for the Foothill Feeder project, which focuses on improvements to the main channel, whereas the District’s habitat mitigation program focuses on the areas adjacent to the main channel. Construction of the District’s habitat mitigation program is not expected to directly impact UTS but may indirectly affect UTS through impacts to water quality during construction.
The USFWS released an Intra-Service Biological Opinion for the Bouquet Canyon Creek Restoration Project in October 2015 that describes the incidental take of UTS during project implementation
Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment 4-8 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 4 LOW-EFFECT HCP POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS / TAKE ASSESSMENT
(USFWS 2015). The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Bouquet Canyon Creek project includes a related project that would remove partially armored threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus microcephalus) and hybridized threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni × Gasterosteus aculeatus microcephalus) from Bouquet Canyon Creek in the Angeles National Forest for the conservation and recovery of the species. These are two related but separate projects, and the USFWS’s UTS recovery project will coincide with implementation of the Bouquet Creek Restoration Project in terms of timing. USFWS will remove an estimated 2,692 individuals of a hybridized UTS species, the Bouquet Creek Restoration Project will improve suitable habitat for the species, and USFWS will subsequently reintroduce pure strain UTS after completion of the restoration project. The incidental take of UTS will be fully mitigated by the USFWS’s Intra-Service Biological Opinion and an incidental take permit authorized for the project by CDFW.
CDFW rescued UTS from Soledad Creek in October 2016 and released them in Fish Canyon Creek in the upper Castaic drainage in April 2017, after holding them for several months at the Fillmore Fish Hatchery. No UTS died during the rescue or release efforts, but had incidental take of UTS occurred, the overall effect of the rescue effort was expected to compensate for the loss by contributing to the recovery of the species.
CDFW is executing a lake and streambed alteration agreement pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code for the Sierra Highway Over Santa Clara River Project, Bridge No. 53C1777L&R. The project would impact 3.25 acres of streambed/lake, which would be mitigated with 3.48 acres of creation, restoration, and/or enhancement. However, the incidental take of UTS is not described in the Notice of Determination.
Although the LARC Ranch Water Pipeline Project crosses over the Bouquet Creek, it would be located outside the OHWM and the 100-year floodplain. Therefore, no direct impacts to UTS would be anticipated with implementation of this project.
It is of note that the Biological Opinion for the Newhall Ranch Resource Management and Development Plan located in Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, documented the cumulative estimated incidental take of UTS in that area to be 68 UTS individuals for biological opinions issued between 1994 and 2006. None of the biological opinions issued for UTS resulted in jeopardy determinations.
Given that only three of the projects on the cumulative projects list may result in the incidental take of UTS and all three include restoration and/or rescue efforts designed to contribute to the species’ recovery, any injury or mortality to UTS resulting from the proposed Conservation Action activities at the mitigation site is likely to be within the range of the natural fluctuations of its populations. Therefore, impacts to UTS from the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable.
4.6 Take Estimate
Upland areas where activities would occur in the Covered Area do not provide habitat for any of the aquatic Covered Species, and no take would occur in these areas.
Shutdown releases during the wet season, as described in Section 2, would be unlikely to affect breeding by Covered Species. Capture of stranded individuals (primarily fish) in isolated habitats and their repatriation to suitable habitat during ramp down of shutdown releases would be considered take. Such take of UTS could occur in San Francisquito Creek when water is present during shutdown releases or the Santa Clara River for releases that reach occupied habitat. Take (relocation) of California red-legged frog larvae in San Francisquito Creek and arroyo toad larvae in San Francisquito Creek and the Santa Clara River is unlikely to be necessary due to timing of the releases during November to March. Pre-
August 2018 Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment 4-9 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 4 LOW-EFFECT HCP POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS / TAKE ASSESSMENT release surveys, monitoring during the releases at these locations, and repatriation/relocation of individuals by the monitors will minimize shutdown effects on Covered Species. The potential for long- term displacement or mortality of individuals as a result of shutdown-related releases is considered very low. Despite implementation of the avoidance and minimization measures described in Section 5.2.1 and 5.2.2, an unknown number of UTS, arroyo toad, California red-legged frog, Santa Ana sucker, and western spadefoot individuals may be taken due to displacement, stranding, relocation, or repatriation during or after water releases (scheduled or emergency).
Conservation Action activities in the form of protection, enhancement, monitoring, and long-term management activities would occur at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site to provide natural riverine fluvial processes supporting UTS habitat. Implementation of measures described in Section 5.2.3 should result in avoidance and minimization of incidental take of Covered Species. Despite implementation of the avoidance and minimization measures described in 5.2.3, an unknown number of UTS, arroyo toad, California red-legged frog, Santa Ana sucker, two-striped garter snake, and western pond turtle individuals may be taken due to relocation, repatriation, or exclusion activities associated with habitat enhancement or management activities, if present.
In summary, with implementation of the avoidance and minimization measures in Section 5.2, “take” is not anticipated for any of the Covered Species, except during shutdowns when stranded individuals must be repatriated to suitable habitat or when individuals are relocated out of harm’s way and during enhancement and management activities at the Conservation Action site.
Potential Biological Effects / Take Assessment 4-10 August 2018
S E C T I O N 5 Conservation Program
The conservation program for this HCP was developed in accordance with ESA Section 10(a)(2)(A) and 10(a)(2)(B), its implementing regulations (50 CFR 17.22, 222.307), and the Habitat Conservation Planning and Incidental Take Permitting Handbook (USFWS and NOAA 2016; HCP Handbook). The conservation program includes biological goals and objectives; measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate take of Covered Species; and a monitoring program to track HCP compliance and effectiveness. The conservation program also incorporates an adaptive management strategy that establishes the iterative process for adjusting elements of the conservation program over time based on new information and monitoring results.
5.1 Biological Goals and Objectives
As part of the “Five Point” Policy adopted by the Service and National Marine Fisheries Service in 2000, HCPs must establish biological goals and objectives (65 FR 35242; June 1, 2000). Biological goals are broad, guiding principles that describe the desired future condition to ensure that the conservation program is consistent with and contributes to the conservation and recovery goals established for the species. Biological objectives are concise statements that define biological targets or conditions to meet the biological goals and how they will be achieved in measurable terms (USFWS and NOAA 2016). Goals and objectives are developed based upon the species’ biology, threats to the species, the potential effects of the covered activities, and the scope of the HCP. For this HCP, the biological goal and objectives are as follows:
Goal 1. Minimize take of Covered Species during water releases.
Objective 1.1: Develop and implement monitoring protocols for shutdowns, discharges, and maintenance activities.
Objective 1.2: Develop and implement operational protocols for shutdowns, discharges, and maintenance activities that include measures to avoid release of pollutants and introduction of invasive species and to protect habitat.
Goal 2. Maintain and enhance habitat for Covered Species at the Conservation Action site.
Objective 2.1: Provide long-term protection and management of habitat for UTS and the other Covered Species at the Conservation Action Site.
Objective 2.2: To the extent compatible long-term habitat management goals, enhance habitat quality and value for UTS and the other Covered Species at the Conservation Action site.
Objective 2.3: Develop and implement avoidance and minimization measures for Covered Species during management and enhancement activities at the Conservation Action site.
5.2 Avoidance and Minimization Measures
The following measures will be implemented to avoid and minimize effects of the Project on Covered Species.
August 2018 Conservation Program 5-1 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM
5.2.1 Shutdowns
5.2.1.1 Shutdown Water Release Plan
As noted above, Metropolitan previously developed a Shutdown Water Release Plan to avoid impacts of dewatering the Foothill Feeder pipeline on special-status species and other sensitive biological resources during shutdowns. This Release Plan was designed as part of the project and is a component of the Covered Activities. The Release Plan was developed using the following assumptions:
Potential for take of or significant effects on aquatic life stages of Covered Species from stranding could be avoided if releases in the vicinity of these populations were made in such a way as to produce a hydrograph that did not spike up or down rapidly;
A gradual ramping of the hydrograph up could be accomplished using a lower release rate over a longer period; and
High flows or flooding are not inherently adverse to the Covered Species or their habitats, depending on the season and recent hydrology.
Dewatering the Foothill Feeder will be accomplished by reducing the rate of release over a longer period to minimize the potential for stranding of Covered Species. Metropolitan will incrementally open valves at each of the blow-off locations to control releases. The prescribed incremental valve opening schedule will result in a release flow rate (cfs) that is on average 22 to 29 percent of the flow rate that would otherwise result from an initial valve opening of 100 percent at each of the locations (refer to Table 5-1). This would yield a flatter hydrograph (lower amplitude with a more gradual rise and fall).
To maintain the prescribed release rates, valve operators at each blow-off location need to make time- based adjustments to the valves. Valve operators will be provided with written time-based instructions to maintain prescribed average valve openings and will maintain a log to ensure adherence to the Plan.
Table 5-1 Foothill Feeder Shutdown Water Release Plan Avg. Plug Valve Opening at Avg. Plug Valve Opening at 50% 100% Total Average Blow-Off Flow Blow-Off Location Hours (cfs) Average Blow-Off Flow (cfs) Castaic Valley – Station No. 17+40 8.1 18 78 Charlie Canyon – Station No. 97+40 42.7 15 64 San Francisquito Canyon – Station No. 287+70 11.4 33 141 San Francisquito Canyon – (a) Station No. 321+40 17 69 San Francisquito Canyon – (b) Station No. 321+40 4 18 Santa Clara River – (a) Station No. 383+90 42.4 32 108 Santa Clara River – (b) Station No. 383+90 42 146 Placerita Canyon – Station No. 521+20 31.4 11 45 Notes: (a) Shared volume with another blow-off. (b) Remaining volume drained through one valve in the final stages of the discharge.
Conservation Program 5-2 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM
5.2.1.2 Biological Oversight and Monitoring
Metropolitan will notify the USFWS and CDFW of upcoming shutdowns for future inspections, repairs, and maintenance activities associated with the Foothill Feeder.
Metropolitan will implement the following avoidance and minimization measures to offset the potential for direct or indirect effects on Covered Species during shutdowns. These avoidance and minimization measures are (1) measures from the 2005 EIR included to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to biological resources including Covered Species, and (2) additional measures from the 2018 EIR Supplement that are incorporated here as HCP avoidance and minimization measures.
MM-BR-1 A qualified biologist shall assess the potential of special-status plant and wildlife species to occur immediately adjacent to all proposed preparation and dewatering blow-off and work stations, as well as staging and storage areas, once these have been identified and delineated. The assessment shall be based on overall suitability of habitat to support such species, and known or historical occurrences of these species in the immediate vicinity.
MM-BR-2 If special-status species are determined to potentially occur immediately adjacent to any of the locations identified in MM-BR-1 above, such work areas shall be fenced with appropriate materials to exclude suitable habitat areas, and approved by a qualified biologist following the installation. All preparation and dewatering activities, as well as equipment and materials staging and storage, shall be confined to within the fenced area. Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, and generators shall be positioned over drip pans.
MM-BR-3 Prior to a complete shutdown of the Foothill Feeder pipeline, a qualified biologist shall conduct a training/education session to all construction, grading, and/or field managers responsible for work or activities conducted within the workstation areas. The biologist shall address the particular species that could occur within the adjacent habitat and measures to minimize adverse impacts to adjacent habitat areas. Actions to be taken should any special-status species be observed within work station areas or immediately adjacent to such area shall also be addressed. Any equipment or vehicles driven and/or operated adjacent to natural open space areas shall be checked and maintained daily to prevent leaks of materials/liquids into these areas.
MM-BR-4 Metropolitan shall use best management practices to ensure that no debris, oil, petroleum products, or other organic material from any dewatering or associated activity, or equipment storage, repair, or maintenance, shall be allowed to enter into, or be placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff into, adjacent natural habitat areas, including watercourses. When shutdown operations are completed, any excess materials or debris shall be removed from all work areas.
MM-BR-5 A qualified biologist shall periodically monitor all activities at blow-off and other work stations during the preparation, dewatering, inspection, and maintenance/repair periods to ensure that impacts to adjacent habitat areas are being minimized/avoided and to assess the success of all mitigation measures.
August 2018 Conservation Program 5-3 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM
SMM-BR-5 Prior to conducting any dewatering activities related to inspection and maintenance activities, emergency repairs (to the extent feasible), and channel activities at the UTS conservation action site that may adversely affect UTS, The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) shall prepare an Unarmored Threespine Stickleback Monitoring, Rescue, and Relocation Plan (Plan) in consultation with CDFW and USFWS. The Plan shall describe procedures for monitoring for stranded UTS and for rescuing stranded or potentially stranded fish and relocating them to waters connected with stream flows. The Plan shall include, at a minimum, the following:
Methods and requirements for pre-construction surveys for UTS and determining the presence and extent of aquatic habitat
Procedures for monitoring for stranded UTS in the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek (if flows from the latter reach the Santa Clara River) during shutdown releases and at the UTS conservation action site
The stipulation that under no circumstances shall UTS be collected or relocated, unless CDFW and USFWS personnel or their agents implement this measure pursuant to applicable permit requirements
Criteria for determining when stranded or potentially stranded UTS shall be rescued
The specification that UTS shall only be relocated to nearby waters connected with flows in the Santa Clara River (or other stream from which the fish are rescued)
Habitat parameters for where rescued UTS shall be relocated, such as flow velocity and water depth
Procedures for capturing, handling, and transporting stranded fish
Procedures for decontamination of any equipment used in the rescue and relocation of UTS
Reporting of the results of any relocation efforts to CDFW and USFWS, including:
o Dates and times
o Whether or not relocated UTS were rescued from clearly isolated pools or moved as a precaution from pools that may have been connected to stream flows
o Location(s) where stranded or potentially stranded UTS were rescued
o Location where UTS were released
o Total UTS relocated
o Total mortality of UTS (if any)
o Estimated numbers of any other native species relocated
Conservation Program 5-4 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM
5.2.2 Emergency Dewatering Scenario
To the extent feasible, Metropolitan would implement SMM-BR-5 (see Section 5.2.1.2) in an emergency dewatering scenario.
Metropolitan would also implement the following avoidance and minimization measure in an emergency dewatering scenario:
SMM-BR-1 For emergency repairs, should these activities occur between March 1 and August 31, the biological monitor shall be present during all daytime hours to monitor potential impacts to nesting birds, in addition to other monitoring duties described in MM-BR-5. The biologist shall visually survey for nesting birds that may be impacted by activities in the vicinity of work locations and by water releases and, to the extent feasible, ensure that nesting activities are not disrupted. The biologist shall provide recommendations and feasible actions including coordination with work crews on the location of equipment used in project activities, temporary placement of sandbags to protect nests on the ground that are in danger of inundation during dewatering, and additional measures that may be permitted under an emergency situation.
5.2.3 UTS Conservation Action Site
Metropolitan would implement SMM-BR-5 (see Section 5.2.1.2) if dewatering is necessary at the UTS Conservation Action site.
Additionally, Metropolitan would implement the following avoidance and minimization measures for Covered Species and other listed species to the extent these measures are applicable to the activities implemented at the UTS Conservation Action site.
SMM-BR-2A Pre-construction surveys for special-status plant species shall be conducted prior to vegetation removal and site grading within the potential unarmored threespine stickleback (UTS) conservation site. Surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist during a time when the plant species with potential to occur are identifiable (i.e., during their blooming period for annual species). Surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. Surveys will involve mapping any areas within the conservation site that would be subject to direct or indirect impacts. Surveys shall conform to the 2001 Botanical Survey Guidelines from the California Native Plant Society; the 2009 Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Populations and Natural Communities from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG); and the 2002 General Rare Plant Survey Guidelines from the Endangered Species Recovery Program. All plant species encountered during the field surveys shall be identified to subspecies or variety, if applicable, to determine sensitivity status.
If feasible, populations and individuals of any special-status plant species found during pre- construction surveys will be avoided during implementation of restoration or enhancement activities. Installation of protective fencing, and erosion and sediment control measures, as appropriate, will be implemented to protect special-status plant populations found near construction zones within the conservation site. Refer to SMM-BR-2B and SMM-BR-7 for additional details if special-status species are found within the potential conservation site.
August 2018 Conservation Program 5-5 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM
SMM-BR-2B In cases where disturbances to special-status plant species within the UTS conservation action site cannot be avoided, viable populations will be identified and transplanted to established preservation and conservation areas. Prior to transplantation, a mitigation and monitoring plan shall be submitted to CDFW for review and approval prior to ground disturbance to occupied habitat. Upon approval, the plan will be implemented by the applicant or its designee. Habitat replacement/enhancement will be at a 1:1 ratio (occupied acres restored/enhanced to occupied acres impacted).
The mitigation and monitoring plan for the transplanted special-status plant(s) will describe habitat improvement/restoration measures to be completed prior to introducing transplanted special-status plants. Habitat improvement/restoration will be based on native special-status plant occupied habitat. The plan will specify (1) the location of mitigation sites; (2) a description of “target” vegetation that includes estimated cover and abundance of native shrubs and grasses in occupied habitat; (3) site preparation measures to include topsoil treatment, soil decompaction, erosion control, temporary irrigation systems, or other measures as appropriate; (4) methods for the removal of non-native plants (e.g., mowing, weeding, raking, herbicide application, or burning); (5) the source of all plant propagules (seed, potted nursery stock, etc.) and the quantity and species of seed or potted stock of all plants to be introduced or planted into the restoration/enhancement areas; (6) a schedule and action plan to maintain and monitor the enhancement/restoration areas, to include, at minimum, qualitative annual monitoring for revegetation success and site degradation due to erosion, trespass, or animal damage for a period of no less than 2 years; (7) as needed where sites are near trails or other access points, measures such as fencing, signage, or security patrols to exclude unauthorized entry into the restoration/enhancement areas; and (8) contingency measures such as replanting, weed control, or erosion control to be implemented if habitat improvement/restoration efforts are not successful. In addition, the plan will specify methods to collect special-status plants and introduce them into this mitigation site.
Annual monitoring reports will be prepared and submitted to CDFW until the success criteria are met. Monitoring reports will describe all restoration/enhancement measures taken in the preceding year, describe success and completion of those efforts and other pertinent site conditions (erosion, trespass, animal damage) in qualitative terms, and describe special-status plant survival or establishment in quantitative terms.
Take of any listed species, or collection and transplantation of any individuals and populations of any listed species, will require approval by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or CDFW and issuance of an incidental take permit.
SMM-BR-3 Pre-construction surveys for special-status vegetation communities shall be conducted prior to vegetation removal and site grading within the potential conservation site. Vegetation mapping will be consistent with the 2009 CDFW Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Populations and Natural Communities and vegetation communities will be identified by keying them out in the 2009 Sawyer et al. Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition.
Any special-status vegetation communities found during pre-construction surveys will be avoided during restoration or enhancement activities. Installation of protective fencing, and erosion and sediment control measures, as appropriate, will be implemented to protect special-
Conservation Program 5-6 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM
status vegetation communities found near construction zones within the conservation site.
SMM-BR-4 For any impacts to jurisdictional waters containing vegetation associated with the UTS conservation action, revegetation will be performed in accordance with a habitat mitigation and monitoring plan (HMMP) that describes proposed functions and services, rationale for expecting success, implementation schedule, and specifics of revegetation implementation. The revegetation component of the HMMP will describe, as applicable to the site, grading, erosion control and best management practices (BMPs), initial weed control, planting design, container planting, seeding installation, site irrigation, 120-day monitoring period, and any required construction monitoring. Restoration maintenance described in the HMMP may include weed control by hand removal or chemical treatment, hand watering, trash removal, and remedial planting/seeding. Biological monitoring described in the HMMP will include mitigation area performance standards, contingency measures, and annual monitoring report requirements. Implementation of the HMMP will mitigate any impacts to jurisdictional waters and wetlands associated with the UTS conservation action such that the project will be self-mitigating.
SMM-BR-6 Prior to any ground-disturbing activities, a qualified biologist shall be retained to monitor activities related to the UTS conservation action site habitat restoration or enhancement. The biological monitor shall be present during ground disturbance activities to monitor for the presence of special-status vegetation communities, special-status species, including fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals, to ensure that no impacts occur to these resources. The qualified biological monitor shall ensure that all BMPs are properly installed and performing as designed, to prevent any sediment, debris, and pollutants from entering stream channels, wetlands, or sensitive habitat. The monitor shall also ensure that fencing associated with the restoration area is installed properly. Finally, the qualified biological monitor shall provide a training/education session to all workers participating in UTS conservation action site restoration activities. The session shall address the particular species that could occur within the restoration and adjacent habitat and measures to minimize adverse impacts to adjacent habitat areas. Actions to be taken should any special-status species be observed within work sites or immediately adjacent to such areas shall also be addressed.
SMM-BR-7 If special-status vegetation communities or species are determined to occur immediately adjacent to a UTS conservation action site, fencing shall be located between the work area and special-status vegetation communities as well as occupied habitat, using appropriate materials, to protect the special-status resources. Fencing shall be approved by a qualified biologist following the installation. All UTS conservation action site habitat restoration or enhancement activities, as well as equipment and materials staging and storage, shall be confined within the work area, outside the suitable occupied habitat.
SMM-BR-8 At sites being restored or enhanced as part of the UTS conservation action, Metropolitan shall use BMPs to ensure that no debris, oil, petroleum products, or other organic material associated with restoration, or equipment storage or maintenance shall be allowed to enter into, or be placed where it may be washed by rainfall or run off into, adjacent natural habitat areas, including watercourses. Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, and generators shall be positioned over drip pans. When restoration or enhancement activities are completed, any
August 2018 Conservation Program 5-7 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM
excess materials or debris shall be removed from all work areas.
SMM-BR-9 Should the UTS conservation action site result in impacts to aquatic habitat, no less than 30 days prior to initiation of habitat restoration or enhancement activities, Metropolitan shall conduct a special-status fish habitat assessment and, if necessary, a survey for UTS, Santa Ana sucker, and arroyo chub. The survey shall be conducted in aquatic habitat within 300 feet of proposed impacts to suitable aquatic habitat. Should Santa Ana sucker and/or arroyo chub occur within the survey area, Metropolitan may initiate exclusion measures and, in consultation with CDFW and USFWS, relocation measures. Exclusion measures may include use of block nets upstream and/or downstream of the location of ground disturbances, to ensure that neither Santa Ana sucker nor arroyo chub enter the work area. If either of these special-status fish species occurs within or adjacent to the work area, Metropolitan may consult with CDFW and USFWS to initiate measures to relocate the fish to a safe location outside the UTS conservation action site. If UTS are observed during the survey, Metropolitan shall implement the Unarmored Threespine Stickleback Monitoring, Rescue, and Relocation Plan, as described in SMM-BR-5.
SMM-BR-11 Prior to initiating ground disturbances associated with the UTS conservation action, Metropolitan shall conduct a habitat assessment for arroyo toad and California red-legged frog and, if necessary, shall conduct protocol surveys for these special-status species. Surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in suitable habitat in all work areas and access roads within the streambed, as well as all streambed areas within 1,000 feet of the restoration or enhancement area and access roads. The timing and methods for arroyo toad surveys shall follow the requirements in the 1999 USFWS Survey Protocol for Arroyo Toad. These surveys would include six daytime and nighttime surveys between March 15 and July 1, with at least one survey per month during April, May, and June.
The timing and methods for California red-legged frog surveys shall adhere to the specifications in the 2005 USFWS Revised Guidance on Site Assessments and Field Surveys for the California Red-Legged Frog. A site assessment for suitability of habitat for California red- legged frog may be submitted to USFWS before conducting protocol surveys, to determine whether site conditions support the need to complete surveys. If surveys are necessary, eight surveys should be completed between February 25 and September 30, including surveys conducted during the breeding and non-breeding periods, as outlined in the USFWS 2005 Revised Guidance. If either arroyo toad or California red-legged frog is detected in or adjacent to the restoration/enhancement site, no work will be authorized within 500 feet of occupied habitat without additional consultation with USFWS.
SMM-BR-12 Prior to initiating ground disturbances associated with the UTS conservation action, all work areas and access roads within the streambed, as well as all streambed areas within 500 feet of restoration or enhancement sites and access roads, shall be surveyed at the appropriate season for western pond turtle. Focused surveys shall consist of a minimum of two daytime surveys of any aquatic habitat, to be completed between April 1 and June 1. Surveys shall follow survey techniques described for “visual encounter” in the U.S. Geological Survey’s 2006 Western Pond Turtle (Emys marmorata) Visual Survey Protocol for the Southcoast Ecoregion. If western pond turtles are detected in or adjacent to the restoration or enhancement area, nesting surveys shall be conducted. Focused surveys for evidence of western pond turtle nesting shall be conducted in, or adjacent to, the project area when suitable nesting habitat exists within 500
Conservation Program 5-8 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM
feet of occupied aquatic habitat in an area where ground disturbance will occur. If both of those conditions are met, a qualified biologist shall conduct focused, systematic surveys for western pond turtle nesting sites. The survey area shall include all suitable nesting habitat within 500 feet of occupied habitat in which ground disturbance will occur. This area may be adjusted based on the existing topographical features on a case-by-case basis. Surveys will entail searching for evidence of pond turtle nesting, including remnant eggshell fragments, which may be found on the ground following nest depredation. If a western pond turtle nesting area would be adversely impacted by ground disturbances associated with restoration, Metropolitan shall avoid the nesting area until the nest is empty. If non-nesting western pond turtles are found within areas subject to ground disturbance, and avoidance is not feasible, Metropolitan shall consult with CDFW on appropriate methods to relocate individual western pond turtles.
SMM-BR-13 Prior to initiating ground disturbances associated with the UTS conservation action, all work areas and access roads within the streambed, as well as all streambed areas within 300 feet of restoration or enhancement sites and access roads, shall be surveyed at the appropriate season for two-striped gartersnake and south coast gartersnake (Thamnophis sirtalis ssp.). A qualified biologist shall conduct the focused surveys, which shall consist of minimum of two daytime surveys completed between April 1 and September 1. If a gartersnake is located, the biologist will make a best effort to capture the individual, using a snake stick or snake tongs. Any captured individual shall be relocated to a suitable area in the vicinity where it is not in danger of injury from project activities. During all days when ground-disturbing activities occur, the biological monitor shall conduct a pre-work survey to clear the area of two-striped gartersnake and south coast gartersnake.
SMM-BR-15 Prior to initiating ground disturbances associated with the UTS conservation action, Metropolitan shall contract with a qualified biologist to provide a habitat assessment and, if necessary, conduct protocol surveys for least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), and coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica).
For listed riparian birds (least Bell’s vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, western yellow- billed cuckoo), USFWS protocol surveys shall be conducted where suitable habitat occurs. If a nest is present, a 500-foot disturbance-free buffer shall be established and demarcated by fencing or flagging. No restoration activities may occur in these areas until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged and there is no evidence of a second nesting attempt, unless otherwise authorized by USFWS and CDFW. If no active nests are observed, construction may proceed. If active nests are found, work may proceed, provided that construction activity is located at least 500 feet from active nests.
For coastal California gnatcatcher, Metropolitan shall conduct USFWS protocol surveys in suitable habitat within the range of the species, in all areas within 500 feet of access or construction-related disturbance areas. Suitable habitats, according to the protocol, include “coastal sage scrub, alluvial fan, chaparral, or intermixed or adjacent areas of grassland and riparian habitats.” A permitted qualified biologist shall perform these surveys according to the 1997 USFWS Coastal California Gnatcatcher Presence/Absence Survey Guidelines. If a territory or nest is confirmed, USFWS and CDFW shall be notified immediately. If a nest is present, a 500-foot disturbance-free buffer shall be established and demarcated by fencing or flagging. No restoration activities may occur in these areas unless otherwise authorized by USFWS and CDFW. Restoration activities in suitable gnatcatcher habitat will be monitored
August 2018 Conservation Program 5-9 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM
regularly by a qualified biologist. The monitoring shall be of a sufficient intensity to ensure that the qualified biologist could detect the presence of a bird in the construction area.
5.3 Mitigation Measures
The effects of shutdown-related Covered Activities on Covered Species would be avoided and minimized using the measures described in Section 5.2.1 and 5.2.2, and take would be limited to that associated with repatriation/relocation activities, as described in Section 4.6. No permanent loss or alteration of habitat for Covered Species would result from shutdown-related Covered Activities.
As described in Section 2.3, Covered Activities include implementation of conditions specified in California Fish and Game Code Section 2081.10, including “measures to minimize and fully mitigate” (California Fish and Game Code Section 2081.10(a)(3)) the impacts of the authorized take and to satisfy the conservation standard in Section 2805(d) of the California Fish and Game Code. To meet these standards, Conservation Action activities would occur in the form of preserving, enhancing, and managing natural riverine fluvial processes supporting habitat for UTS and the other Covered Species at an off-site location in Soledad Canyon referred to as the Stickleback Movie Ranch site. Conservation Action activities at this site would provide for preservation and enhancement of habitat for UTS and the other Covered Species in this HCP.
Implementation of the Conservation Action activities would fully mitigate the effects of the project on UTS. In order to avoid and minimize the effects of the actitvities at the Stickleback Movie Ranch site, numerous measures have been incorporated into the project, as outlined in Section 5.2.3. Conservation Action activities would result in a net habitat benefit for the Covered Species, and adaptive management measures have been incorporated to assure that unavoidable impacts from enhancement activities do not result in effects to the Covered Species or other federally-listed species.
5.4 Monitoring, Adaptive Management, and Reporting
Monitoring tracks compliance with the terms and conditions of the HCP and ITP. There are three types of monitoring: (1) compliance monitoring tracks the permittee’s compliance with the requirements specified in the HCP and ITP; (2) effects monitoring tracks the impacts of the covered activities on the covered species; and (3) effectiveness monitoring tracks the progress of the conservation strategy in meeting the HCP’s biological goals and objectives (includes species surveys, reproductive success, etc.). Monitoring provides information for making adaptive management decisions.
Compliance Monitoring
In order to provide for monitoring of compliance with the terms and conditions of the HCP and ITP, Metropolitan will submit an annual report to the USFWS that includes a description of:
Narrative discussion of the HCP implementation activities implemented and funded during the reporting period and since ITP issuance
Statements of compliance with the permit terms and conditions, including the amount of take authorized for the Covered Species.
Effects Monitoring
Effects monitoring during Covered Activity implementation will be conducted as described above under
Conservation Program 5-10 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM
Section 5.2. Metropolitan will submit an annual report to the USFWS that documents the observations from the effects monitoring that includes:
A brief summary of the Covered Activities implemented during the reporting period
A brief summary of the monitoring, avoidance, and minimization measures implemented during the reporting period
Tabular and narrative summaries of impacts to Covered Species during the reporting period
Effectiveness Monitoring
Monitoring during the implementation of Covered Activities would implemented as described under Section 5.2, including monitoring the reaches downstream of the discharge sites before, during, and after every release event and monitoring at the UTS Conservation Action site. Data from these monitoring efforts (e.g., species observed, number of individuals, life stages, habitat conditions, number of relocations) will be evaluated to determine effectiveness of the HCP conservation program. This HCP was developed based on an adaptive management strategy that provides the process to iteratively adjust elements of the conservation program over time as informed by new information. The adaptive management strategy allows for flexibility in management responses to addressing uncertainties (USFWS and NOAA 2016; Williams and Brown 2012; Williams et al. 2009; Atkinson et al. 2004).
The need for adaptive management can be triggered by changed circumstances as well as by the results of surveys and monitoring to verify that the HCP is being implemented properly. These triggers include:
1. New information on Covered Species (see Section 6.2.1.4).
2. Avoidance and minimization measures (e.g., Shutdown Water Release Plan) that are not performing as expected.
3. Conservation Action activities required at the Stickleback Ranch site may affect Covered Species, federally-listed species, or critical habitat.
Following each shutdown, Metropolitan will evaluate the monitoring activities and data and will coordinate with Service and CDFW biologists. If needed based on a review of the conservation program effectiveness, adaptive management measures that fit within the HCP may be implemented.
Records of the dates and personnel trained will be kept. Employees and contractors will be instructed to immediately notify Metropolitan of any incidents of direct harm or mortality of a Covered Species, and Metropolitan will notify the Service within 48 hours of such an incident. Disposition of any dead or injured animals will be as directed by the USFWS, and a written report detailing the date, time, location, and general circumstances under which it was found must be submitted to the Service and CDFW within five business days following the incident.
Prior to implementing any enhancement or management activities at the UTS Conservation Action site, Metropolitan will implement the avoidance and minimization measures described in Section 5.2. In the event that a Covered Species or other federally-listed listed species is detected on the Stickleback Ranch site that cannot be avoided using the Section 5.2 measures, adaptive management would be triggered. Prior to implementing such enhancement or management actions, Metropolitan would confer with the USFWS and CDFW to identify a mutually agreed upon approach that achieves the habitat enhancement goals for the Stickleback Ranch site and also avoids any take of Covered Species or other federally-listed
August 2018 Conservation Program 5-11 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 5 LOW-EFFECT HCP CONSERVATION PROGRAM species not authorized by the ITP associated with this HCP.
An HCP annual report that includes the required elements described above will be submitted to the USFWS each year for the duration of permit. Other reporting specifications described in the avoidance and minimization measures of Section 5.2 will also be implemented as specified in those measures.
Conservation Program 5-12 August 2018
S E C T I O N 6 Plan Implementation
6.1 HCP Administration and Funding
Metropolitan will be responsible for administration and implementation of this low-effect HCP under the conditions of the Section 10(a)(1)(B) ITP. A demonstration that adequate funding is available for implementation of conservation measures is one of the fundamental elements that the HCP must present before the Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit is issued. Sufficient funding is essential to demonstrate that implementation of conservation measures is consistent with the cumulative level of take. The anticipated maintenance activities for the Foothill Feeder have been factored into Metropolitan’s existing operating budget. Implementation of this HCP will be funded by Metropolitan. Additionally, in order to comply with the ITP conditions from CDFW for this project, Metropolitan will be required to establish a security in the amount of approximately $973,000. This security will provide assurance that this HCP, including the avoidance and minimization measures, mitigation measures, monitoring, and reporting, will be implemented as specified.
6.2 Changed and Unforeseen Circumstances
Section 10 regulations [50 CFS 17.22 (b)(2)(iii)] require that an HCP specify the procedures to be used for dealing with changed and unforeseen circumstances that may arise during implementation of the HCP. In addition, the Habitat Conservation Plan Assurances (No Surprises) Rule [50 CFR 17.21 (b)(5)- (6) and 17.22 (b)(5)-(6); 63 F.R. 8859] defines “changed circumstances” and “unforeseen circumstances” and describes the obligations of the Permittee (i.e., Metropolitan) and the Service. The purpose of the “No Surprises” Rule is to provide assurances to non-federal landowners participating in habitat conservation planning (under ESA) that no additional land restrictions or financial compensation will be required for species adequately covered by a properly implemented HCP, in light of unforeseen circumstances, without the consent of the Permittee (Metropolitan).
6.2.1 Changed Circumstances
Changed circumstances are defined in 50 CFR 17.3 as changes in circumstances affecting a species or geographic area covered by a conservation plan that can reasonably be anticipated by plan developers and the Service and for which contingency plans can be prepared (e.g., the new listing of species, a fire, or other natural catastrophic event in areas prone to such an event). If additional conservation and mitigation measures are deemed necessary to respond to changed circumstances and these additional measures were already provided for in the plan’s operating conservation program (the conservation measures agreed to in this HCP), then Metropolitan will implement those measures as specified in the plan. However, if additional conservation management measures are deemed necessary to respond to changed circumstances and such measures were not provided for in the plan’s operating conservation program, the Service will not require these additional measures absent the consent of Metropolitan, provided that this low-effect HCP is being “properly implemented” (which means the commitments and provisions of the HCP and Permit have been or are fully implemented).
The low likelihood of changed circumstances (e.g., fire, flood, etc.) during the duration of the permit makes the occurrence of any such circumstance within the permit period unlikely. However, the following addresses several circumstances that may be regarded as changed.
August 2018 Plan Implementation 6-1 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 6 LOW-EFFECT HCP PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
6.2.1.1 Listing of a New Species
In the event that a non-covered species that may be affected by maintenance activities associated with the Foothill Feeder pipeline becomes listed under the ESA, Metropolitan will implement the “no-take/no jeopardy/no adverse modification” measures identified by the Service until the ITP is amended to include such species, or until the Service notifies Metropolitan that such measures are no longer needed to avoid jeopardy to, take of, or adverse modification of habitat, if any, of the non-covered species.
6.2.1.2 Change in Listing Status
If a Covered Species is delisted or if it is upgraded from threatened to endangered, the HCP conditions still apply. No more or no less minimization and mitigation will be required. If the Santa Ana sucker becomes listed in the Santa Clara River, the HCP avoidance and minimization measures will be implemented for that species, and the HCP will be amended to change the Santa Ana sucker’s federal listing status.
6.2.1.3 Changes in Critical Habitat
If existing critical habitat is modified or new critical habitat is designated within the Covered Area for Covered Species (e.g., UTS or Santa Ana sucker), the HCP avoidance and minimization measures still apply. No more or less minimization and mitigation measures will be required.
6.2.1.4 New Information on Covered Species
New information for Covered Species that could become available during the term of the HCP includes newly identified locations and increases or decreases in abundance at known locations within the Covered Area. For example, the distribution and abundance of arroyo toads in San Francisquito Creek and the Santa Clara River could change over time, and breeding could occur in San Francisquito Creek. The California red-legged frog could also be found in the Santa Clara River within the Covered Area. If the potential for take increases due to these changes, the existing avoidance and minimization measures
in the HCP would be evaluated and adapted, if necessary.
6.2.2 Unforeseen Circumstances
The policy defines unforeseen circumstances as changes in circumstances that affect a species or geographic area covered by the HCP that could not reasonably be anticipated by plan developers and the Service at the time of the plan’s negotiations and development and that result in a substantial and adverse change in status of a Covered Species. In case of an unforeseen event, the Service shall have the burden of demonstrating that an unforeseen circumstance has occurred and that such circumstance is having or is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the Covered Species and/or its habitat. The findings of the Service must be clearly documented and be based upon the best scientific and commercial data available regarding the status and habitat requirements of the species. Based on the results of an expedited analysis of the changed or unforeseen circumstance(s) and the information provided by Metropolitan, the Service shall provide justification and approval for any reallocation of funds or resources necessary to respond to the circumstance(s) within the existing commitments of Metropolitan under this low-effect HCP.
The Service will determine that an unforeseen circumstance has occurred by evaluating factors such as 1) size of the current range of the affected species; 2) percentage of range conserved by the HCP; 3) percentage of range adversely affected; 4) ecological significance of the portion of the range covered by
Plan Implementation 6-2 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 6 LOW-EFFECT HCP PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
the HCP; 5) level of knowledge of the affected species or habitat; and 6) whether failure to adopt additional conservation measures would significantly reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of the species in the wild.
In implementing the “No Surprises” Rule, Congress intended that additional mitigation requirements should not be imposed on a Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permittee (i.e., Metropolitan) in the event of unforeseen circumstances. If the Service determines that an unforeseen circumstance has occurred and additional conservation measures subsequently are deemed necessary to provide for conservation of a species that is otherwise adequately covered under the HCP, and the HCP is properly functioning, the obligation for such measures shall not rest with Metropolitan. The Service agrees that it will consider all practical measures and alternatives, and adopt only those that will have the least impact on Metropolitan, while at the same time addressing the unforeseen circumstance and the survival and recovery of the affected Covered Species and/or its habitat.
6.3 Revisions and Amendments
Two types of changes may be made to a HCP, HCP permits, and/or its associated documents:
Revisions
Major Amendments
Revisions and amendments shall be processed in accordance with all applicable legal requirements, including but not limited to the ESA, NEPA, and any applicable federal regulations.
6.3.1 Revisions
Revisions to a HCP are changes provided for under the Operating Conservation Program, including responses to “Changed Circumstances.” Revisions do not modify the scope or nature of activities or actions covered by the Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit or result in operations under the HCP that are significantly different from those contemplated or analyzed in connection with the HCP as approved, that are adverse effects on the environment that are new or significantly different from those analyzed in connection with the HCP as approved, or that are additional “take” not analyzed in connection with the HCP as approved.
Revisions to the HCP may include, but are not limited to the following:
Correction of any maps or exhibits to correct mapping errors or to reflect previously approved changes in the Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit or HCP.
Modifying existing or establishing new Incidental Take Avoidance Measures.
Modifying reporting protocols for annual reports.
Minor changes to monitoring or reporting protocols.
Any other modifications to the HCP that are consistent with the HCP conservation strategy and that the Service has analyzed.
Metropolitan may submit proposed revisions to the Service for review. The Service shall respond in writing to a proposed revision within sixty (60) calendar days of receipt of the request. The responses
August 2018 Plan Implementation 6-3 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 6 LOW-EFFECT HCP PLAN IMPLEMENTATION shall: 1) concur in the proposed revision; 2) identify additional information necessary to enable the Service to approve or disapprove the revision; or 3) disapprove the revision. If the Service disapproves the revision, it must be processed as an amendment to the HCP and Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit and shall include in its written response an explanation of its determination.
6.3.2 Amendments to the Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permits
The amendment of a Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit shall be treated as an original permit application. Such applications typically require submittal of a revised HCP, a completed permit application form with appropriate fees, and preparation of an environmental review document prepared in accordance with NEPA. However, if the permit amendment qualifies as a “low-effect” HCP, the IA and NEPA document would not be necessary.
Following receipt of a complete application package for a proposed Amendment to a Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit, the Service shall publish a notice of the proposed amendment in the Federal Register. The Service shall use reasonable efforts to process the proposed amendment within sixty (60) calendar days of publication, except where longer periods are required by law.
Plan Implementation 6-4 August 2018
S E C T I O N 7 Alternatives Analyzed
Section 10(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the Act [and 50 CFR 17.22(b)(1)(iii) and 17.32(b)(1)(iii)] requires that alternatives to the taking of species be considered and reasons why such alternatives are not implemented be discussed.
Potential alternatives to the Project relate to the location, volume, and timing of water releases, as well as No Action. Because the Covered Activities are for an existing water delivery pipeline, no alternative locations for the water releases from shutdowns are feasible. The total amount of water to be released during shutdowns cannot be changed as it is determined by pipeline size and topography, and the location and nature of the work to be performed.
Shutdowns for inspection, repair, or maintenance are scheduled during November through March (in the rainy season) when releases would mimic storm events. Scheduling shutdowns at other times of the year would increase the potential for effects on Covered Species because eggs and young could be present and at least in some locations affected by the releases. Therefore, alternative timing for shutdowns would not reduce the potential for effects on Covered Species.
Under the No Action Alternative, no ITP would be issued, and the water releases could only be made when and where no take of listed species could occur. As a result, inspection, repair, and maintenance activities would not be conducted at some locations, which could compromise the integrity of the facilities and potentially result in failure of some structures with uncontrolled release of water and significant environmental impacts. Thus, the No Action Alternative is not viable.
August 2018 Alternatives Analyzed 7-1
S E C T I O N 8 Citations
Aquatic Consulting Services, Inc. 2012. Foothill Feeder System Shutdown Biological Elements. Unpublished report submitted to the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. February.
Atkinson, A.J., KP.C. Trenham, R.N. Fisher, S.A. Hathaway, B.S. Johnson, S.G. Torres, and Y.C. Moore. 2004. Designing Monitoring Programs in an Adaptive Management Context for Regional Multiple Species Conservation Plans. Prepared by U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, in partnership with California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Backlin, A., Richmond, J., Gallegos, E., Christensen, C., & Fisher, R. 2017. An extirpated lineage of a threatened frog species resurfaces in southern California. Oryx, 1-5. doi:10.1017/S0030605317001168
Barry, S. 2000. Letter to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service providing comments on the Draft California Red- legged Frog Recovery Plan (Unpublished data).
Barry, S. J. and G. M. Fellers. 2013. The History and Status of the California Red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) in the Sierra Nevada. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 8(2):456-502.
Baskin, J. N. 1975. Biology and the Habitat of the Unarmored Three-spine Stickleback: Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni, in the Upper Santa Clara River, California. Unpublished report, Contract No. AB-27, California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento.
Bulger, J. B. 1999. Terrestrial Activity and Conservation of California Red-legged Frogs (Rana aurora draytonii) in Forested Habitats of Santa Cruz County, California. Prepared for Land Trust of Santa Cruz County. March 2.
Bury, B. R. 1986. Feeding ecology of the turtle Clemmys marmorata. J. Herpetol. 20:515-521.
California Air Resources Board. 2010. Air Quality Data Statistics. Available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/index.html.
CDFW. 2017d. “Special Animals (904 taxa).” California Natural Diversity Database, Biogeographic Data Branch. January 2017. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/ plants_and_animals.asp.
CaliforniaHerps. 2011. Southwestern Pond Turtle. Accessed online at http://www. californiaherps.com/turtles/pages/a.m.pallida.html.
CaliforniaHerps. 2012. Spea hammondii – Western Spadefoot. Available at http://www.californiaherps.com/frogs/pages/s.hammondii.html. Accessed April.
CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2017. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. Online ed.
August 2018 Citations 8-1 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 8 LOW-EFFECT HCP CITATIONS
Version 8-02. Sacramento, California: CNPS, Rare Plant Program. http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/.
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2010. Electronic database record search for information on Threatened, Rare, or otherwise Sensitive Species and Communities occurring on the Burnt Peak, Burbank, Canoga Park, Green Valley, Lake Hughes, Liebre Mountain, Mint Canyon, Newhall, Oat Mountain, San Fernando, Simi, Sunland, Val Verde, Van Nuys, Warm Springs, Mountain, and Whitaker Peak, 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle maps. California Department of Fish and Game, State of California Resources Agency. Sacramento, California.
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2011. California Natural Diversity Database. Rarefind 2 Natural Diversity Database. Electronic database. California Department of Fish and Game Natural Heritage Division, Rancho Cordova, California.
ENTRIX. 2007. Special Status Fish Rescue for the Santa Clara River Channel Diversion and Associated Dewatering Conducted on July 31 to October 17, 2007, The Old Road Outlet Project, Santa Clarita, CA. Letter report to Mr. James Tong, City of Santa Clarita.
Haglund, T. R., and J. N. Baskin. 1995. Final Report: Sensitive Aquatic Species Survey, Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek, Newhall Land and Farming Company Property, Los Angeles County, California. Prepared for Mark Subbotin, Valencia Company. December 1995.
Holland, D. C. 1985a. An ecological and quantitative study of the western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata) in San Luis Obispo County, California. M.S. Thesis, Calif. State Univ., Fresno.
Holland, D. C. 1985b. Western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata): Feeding. Herpetol. Rev. 16:112-113. Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Non-Game Heritage Program. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California.
Holland, D. C. 1994. The Western Pond Turtle: habitat and history. Final Report. DOE/BP-62137-1. Bonneville Power Administration, U. S. Dept. of Energy, and Wildlife Diversity Program, Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Portland.
Holland, D. C., and R. B. Bury. 1998. Clemmys marmorata (Baird and Girard 1852) Western Pond Turtle. In
P. C. H. Pritchard and A. G. J. Rhodin (eds.) The Conservation Biology of Freshwater Turtles. Chelonian Research Monographs 2(2).
Impact Sciences, Inc. 2003. Annual Status Report for Unarmored Threespine Stickleback within the Natural River Management Plan Area Valencia, California. Prepared for Newhall Land and Farming. October 1, 2003.
Jelks, H. L., S. J. Walsh, N. M. Burkhead, E. B. Taylor, S. Contreras-Balderas, E. Díaz-Pardo, D. A. Hendrickson, J. Lyons, N. E. Mandrak, F. McCormick, J. S. Nelson, S. P. Platania, B. A. Porter,
C. B. Renaud, J. J. Schmitter-Soto, E. B. Taylor, and M. L. Warren, Jr. 2008. Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes. Fisheries 33:327-407.
Citations 8-2 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 8 LOW-EFFECT HCP CITATIONS
Jennings, M. R., and M. P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. Prepared for California Department of Fish and Game Inland Fisheries Division, Contract No. 8023.
Lemm, J. 2006. Field Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles of the San Diego Region (California Natural History Guides). University of California Press.
Metropolitan (The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California). 2005. Foothill Feeder Repair and Future Inspections Project Final Environmental Impact Report. State Clearinghouse No. 2005071082. Report No. 1274. Los Angeles, California: The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. November 2005.
Metropolitan. 2011. Supplement to the Foothill Feeder Repair and Future Inspections Project Final EIR. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report State Clearinghouse No. 2005071082. Report No. 1274. Los Angeles, California: The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. October 2011.
Metropolitan. 2018. Final Foothill Feeder Repair and Future Inspections Project Supplemental EIR. State Clearinghouse No. 2005071082. Metropolitan Report No. 1556. February.
Miller, R. R., and C. L. Hubbs. 1969. Systematics of Gasterosteus aculeatus, with Particular Reference to Intergradation and Introgression along the Pacific Coast of North America: a Commentary on a Recent Contribution. Copeia. 1961:52-69.
Moyle, P. B. 2002. Inland Fishes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. Moyle, P. B., R. M. Yoshiyama, J. E. Williams, and E. D. Wikramanayake. 1995. Fish Species of Special Concern in California, Second edition. Prepared for California Department of Fish and Game.
NatureServe. 2009. NatureServe Explorer. Available at http://www.natureserve.org/explorer.
Ostlund-Nilsson, S., I. Mayer, and F. A. Huntingford. 2006. Biology of the Three-spined Stickleback.
Richmond, J.Q., A.R. Backlin, C. Galst-Cavalcante, J.W. O’Brien, R.N. Fisher. 2017. Loss of Dendritic Connectivity in Southern California’s Urban Riverscape Facilitates Decline of Endemic Freshwater Fish. Molecular Ecology. 2017:1-18.
San Marino Environmental Associates (SMEA). 2005. Unarmored Threespine Sticklebacks, Arroyo Toads and Future Water Releases from the Foothill Feeder. Prepared for Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. 18 pp.
San Marino Environmental Associates (SMEA). 2007. Report on the Metropolitan Water District’s Foothill Feeder Release January 2007. Prepared for Metropolitan Water District. July.
Sawyer, J. O., and T. Keeler-Wolf. 1995. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, California.
Slavens, K. 1995. The status of the western pond turtle in Klickitat County, including notes on the 1995 survey of Lake Washington, King County. Unpubl. Rep. on file at WDFW. 25 pp.
Stebbins, R. C. 1985. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin
August 2018 Citations 8-3 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 8 LOW-EFFECT HCP CITATIONS
Co. Stebbins, R. C. 2003. A Field Guide to the Western Amphibians and Reptiles. 3rd Edition. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, Massachusetts.
Storer, T. I. 1925. A Synopsis of the Amphibia of California. University of California Publications in Zoology 27:1-342.
Swift, C. C., T. R. Haglund, M. Ruiz, and R. N. Fisher. 1993. The Status and Distribution of the Freshwater Fishes of Southern California. Bull. Southern California Acad. Sci. 92(3):101-167.
USDI Geological Services. 2002. Unpublished report of post fire assessment of critical habitat and population status for California red-legged frog and unarmored threespine stickleback in San Francisquito Canyon.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1970. Appendix D – United States List of Endangered Native Fish and Wildlife. Federal Register 35:16047-16048. October 13.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1980. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; proposed designation of critical habitat for the endangered unarmored threespine stickleback. Federal Register 45(223):76012-76015.U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 1985. Revised Unarmored Three Spine Stickleback Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon. December.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 1992. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; 90-day finding and commencement of status reviews for a petition to list the western pond turtle and
California red-legged frog. Federal Register 57:45761-45762.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 1993a. Proposed Endangered Status for the Arroyo Southwestern Toad. Federal Register 58(147):41231-41237.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 1993b. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; notice of a 1-year petition finding on the western pond turtle. Federal Register 58:42717-42718.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 1994. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status for the Arroyo Southwestern Toad. Federal Register 59(241):64859-64867.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 1996. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for the California Red-Legged Frog. Federal Register 61(101):25813-25833.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 1998a. Biological Opinion for the Valencia Company’s Clean Water Act Section 404 Authorization for Portions of the Santa Clara River, Los Angeles County, California (1-8-98-F/C-61). November 27.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1999. Arroyo Southwestern Toad (Bufo microscaphus californicus) Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon. vi + 199 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2000a. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Designation of Critical Habitat for the California Red-Legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii). Proposed rule. Federal Register 65(176):54892-54932.
Citations 8-4 August 2018 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 8 LOW-EFFECT HCP CITATIONS
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2000b. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Status for the Santa Ana Sucker. Final rule. Federal Register 65(71):1968619698.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2002a. Biological Opinion for the Natural River Management Plan, Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California (1-8-02-F-4R) (File No. 940050400- BAH). November 15.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2002b. Recovery Plan for the California Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii). Region 1. Portland Oregon. May.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2005a. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation of Critical Habitat for the Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus). Federal Register 70(70):19562-19633.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2005b. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Proposed Designation of Critical Habitat for the California Red-Legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii). Proposed rule. Federal Register 70(212):66906-67064.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2005c. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule to Designate Critical Habitat for the Santa Ana Sucker (Catostomus santaanae). Federal Register 70(2):426-458.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2005d. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Astralagus brauntonii and Pentachaeta lyonii. Proposed Rule. Federal Register 70(217):68982-69019.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2006. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Astragalus brauntonii and Pentachaeta lyonii. Final Rule. Federal Register 71(219):66374-66423.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2009a. Unarmored Threespine Stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, May 29.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2009b. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical Habitat for the Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus californicus). Federal Register 74(196):52612- 52664.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2009c. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arroyo Toad Species Profile. Available at http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/ speciesProfile.action?spcode=D020.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009d. Navarretia fossalis (Spreading navarretia) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. August 10.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2010a. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the California Red-Legged Frog. Final rule. Federal Register 75(51): 12816-12959.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010b. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;
August 2018 Citations 8-5 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 8 LOW-EFFECT HCP CITATIONS
Revised Critical Habitat for Santa Ana Sucker. Proposed rule; reopening of comment period. Federal Register 75(127):38441-38451.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2011a. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical Habitat for the Arroyo Toad. Federal Register 76(27):7246-7467.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2011b. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native Species That Are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Action. Federal Register 76(207):66370-66439.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2014. Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus californicus) Species Report. Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, Ventura, California. March 24, Final.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2017. Recovery Plan for the Santa Ana Sucker (Catostomus santaanae). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento, California.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2018. Personal communication with Chris Dellith (Senior Fish and Wildlife Biologist). June 19, 2018.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1996. Habitat Conservation Planning and Incidental Take Permit Processing Handbook. November 4.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2016. Habitat Conservation Planning and Incidental Take Permit Processing Handbook. December 21.
Williams, B.K., R.C. Szaro, and C.D. Shapiro. 2009. Adaptive Management, The U.S. Department of the Interior Technical Guide. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, Adaptive Management Working Group. http://www.doi.gov/ppa/upload/ TechGuide-WebOptimized-2.pdf.
Williams, B.K., and E.D. Brown. 2012. Adaptive Management, The U.S. Department of the Interior Applications Guide. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, Adaptive Management Working Group. April 2012. http://www.doi.gov/ ppa/upload/DOI-Adaptive-Management-Applications-Guide-WebOptimized.pdf.
Wishner, Carl. 2013. Stickleback River Ranch Biological Constraints Analysis. Prepared for Rancho Agua Dulce LLC. July 11.
Wydoski, R. S., and R. R. Whitney. 2003. Inland Fishes of Washington. American Fisheries Society in association with University of Washington Press, Bethesda, Maryland and Seattle, Washington.
Zeiner, D. C., W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr., and K. E. Mayer (eds.). 1988. California’s wildlife. Volume I: Reptiles. California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationships System. Sacramento, California: California Department of Fish and Game.
Citations 8-6 August 2018
S E C T I O N 9 List of Preparers
Rosemary Thompson, Ph.D., Cardno ENTRIX
Tamara Klug, Cardno ENTRIX
Lorraine Woodman, Ph.D., Cardno ENTRIX
Megan Olesen, Cardno ENTRIX
Mark Horne, Cardno ENTRIX
Anna Clare, Cardno ENTRIX
Sarah Lozano, Dudek
Mike Howard, Dudek
Debbie Drezner, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Marty Meisler, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Sean Carlson, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
August 2018 List of Preparers 9-1 METROPOLITAN’S FOOTHILL FEEDER SECTION 9 LOW-EFFECT HCP LIST OF PREPARERS
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
List of Preparers 9-2 August 2018
Appendix A Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in or near the Covered Area
APPENDIX A SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN OR NEAR THE COVERED AREA
Appendix A-1 Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in or near the Covered Area Common Name Status Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur in Covered Area Scientific Name Federal State Plants Low Potential: Suitable habitat occurs near the Foothill Feeder in scrub and chaparral Closed-cone coniferous forest, habitat. Nearest known location is chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and Braunton’s milkvetch approximately 12 miles away in the Simi FE -- foothill grasslands, and recent Hills (USFWS 2006). However, proposed Astragalus brauntonii burns or disturbed areas, carbonate maintenance site locations are highly soils. disturbed and do not support habitat characteristics typical for this species.
California Orcutt grass Typically occurs in vernal pools Not Expected: Suitable vernal pool habitat FE SE Orcuttia californica and vernal swales. does not occur in the Covered Area.
Lyon’s pentachaeta Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and Not Expected: No suitable soils within the FE SE foothill grasslands; volcanic Covered Area. Pentachaeata lyonii endemic soils. Only occurs in vernal pools in Los Not Expected: Suitable vernal pool habitat Spreading navarretia Angeles and San Diego counties. does not occur in the Covered Area. FT -- Also occurs in chenopod scrub, Navarretia fossalis marshes and swamps, and playas in riverside County (USFWS 2009d). Not Expected: Suitable habitat occurs near the Foothill Feeder; however, this woody Nevin’s barberry Chaparral, coastal scrub, shrub was not observed during initial FE SE cismontane woodlands, and general reconnaissance surveys; proposed Berberis nevinii riparian scrub. maintenance site locations are highly disturbed and do not support habitat characteristics for this species.
San Fernando Valley Low Potential: Suitable habitat occurs near spineflower the Foothill Feeder; however proposed FC SE Coastal scrub and sandy soils. maintenance site locations are highly Chorizanthe parryi ssp. disturbed and do not support habitat fernandina characteristics typical for this species. Not Expected: Suitable habitat occurs on Slender-horned Alluvial fans including chaparral, alluvial terraces downstream of water spineflower FE SE coastal scrub, and cismontane release locations, but species would not woodlands in sandy soils. Dodecahema leptoceras occur in the area affected by releases. Fish Potential: During times of the year when Arroyo chub Slow- moving or backwater flow is present in the Covered Area, the -- SSC sections of warm to cool streams arroyo chub could occur near or Gila orcutti with mud or sand. downstream from the release sites. Species may be introduced in Santa Clara drainage. Potential: During times of the year when flow is present in the Covered Area, the FT (not Santa Ana sucker could occur near or Small to medium sized perennial listed in downstream from release sites. Although the Santa Ana sucker streams with water from a few Santa SSC population in the Santa Clara River system centimeters to a meter or more Catostomus santaanae Clara is not included in the Threatened status, deep. River) ongoing genetic studies may determine that Santa Ana suckers in the Covered Area should be listed. Unarmored threespine Known: During times of the year when FE SE, FP Weedy pools, backwaters, and stickleback among emergent vegetation at the flow is present in the Covered Area,
July 2014 Appendix A A-1 APPENDIX A SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN OR NEAR THE COVERED AREA
Appendix A-1 Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in or near the Covered Area Common Name Status Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur in Covered Area Scientific Name Federal State Gasterosteus aculeatus stream edge in small southern individuals are known to occur near or williamsoni California streams with vegetation. downstream from release sites in the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek. Amphibians Restricted to rivers with shallow, Known: Suitable breeding habitat is limited gravely pools adjacent to sandy in the Covered Area due to swift flows and terraces with a nearly closed little to no ponding. However, small canopy of cottonwoods, oaks, or numbers of arroyo toads have been Arroyo toad willows, and almost no herbaceous sporadically recorded near the confluence of FE SSC Anaxyrus californicus cover; require shallow pools with the Santa Clara River with San Francisquito minimal current, little to no Creek and in parts of the river upstream and emergent vegetation, and a sand or downstream of the I-5 Bridge. pea gravel substrate overlain with flocculent silt for egg deposition. Lowlands and foothills in or near Potential: Suitable habitat occurs in the semi-permanent sources of deep Covered Area; known to occur in San California red-legged water with dense, shrubby or Francisquito Canyon and has designated emergent vegetation, but can be critical habitat northeast of the Covered frog FT SSC found in other habitats. Requires Area. Rana draytonii 11-20 weeks of continuous water for larval development. Must have access to aestivation habitat. Open areas in lowland grasslands, Low Potential: Vernal or other seasonal chaparral, and pine-oak woodlands; rain pools may occur adjacent to or Western spadefoot require temporary rain pools that downstream from release sites, which could -- SSC Spea hammondii last approximately three weeks and support this species. lack exotic predators for reproduction. Reptiles Low Potential: Suitable habitat occurs Relatively open grasslands, Coast horned lizard within the Covered Area in association with -- SSC scrublands, and woodlands with open scrub and riverbank habitats. Water Phrynosoma coronatum fine, loose soils. releases are unlikely to affect these habitats. Not Expected: While suitable habitat Stabilized dunes, beaches, dry occurs within the Covered Area in washes, pine, oak, and riparian Silvery legless lizard association with open scrub and riverbank -- SSC woodlands, and chaparral; in habitats, this species has not been recently Anniella pulchra pulchra sparse vegetation with sandy loose reported in the vicinity of the Foothill or loamy soils. Feeder. Perennial and intermittent streams Potential: Has historically occurred in Two-striped garter snake having rocky or sandy beds; backwater and pond areas adjacent to the -- SSC artificially created aquatic habitats Santa Clara River. It could also occur Thamnophis hammondii (man-made lakes and stock ponds); downstream of the water release sites in requires dense riparian vegetation. tributaries to the river.
Southwestern pond turtle Stream, ponds, freshwater marshes, Potential: Has historically occurred within -- SSC and lakes with growth of aquatic backwater and pond areas adjacent to the Emys marmorata pallida vegetation. Santa Clara River. Birds Coastal California Not Expected: Although this species has gnatcatcher Coastal sage scrub in areas of flat been documented within the Covered Area, FT SSC Polioptila californica or gently sloping terrain. no suitable coastal sage scrub habitat occurs californica at the maintenance site locations.
A-2 Appendix A July 2014 APPENDIX A SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN OR NEAR THE COVERED AREA
Appendix A-1 Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in or near the Covered Area Common Name Status Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur in Covered Area Scientific Name Federal State Cooper’s hawk Low Potential: Limited amount of marginal Dense stands of live oaks and (nesting) -- FP nesting habitat in the Covered Area; could riparian woodlands. Accipiter cooperii occasionally forage in the Covered Area.
Least Bell’s vireo Potential: No nesting habitat was observed Riparian vegetation with extensive in drainages adjacent to maintenance (nesting) FE SE willows, below 2,000 feet. locations, but known to occur in riparian Vireo bellii pusillus habitats along the Santa Clara River. Potential: Suitable foraging habitat present Northern harrier Coastal salt marsh, freshwater adjacent to and downstream from (nesting) -- SSC marshes, grasslands, and maintenance sites, but no nesting habitat is agricultural fields. Circus cyaneus present. Low Potential: No nesting was observed in Summer tanager Cottonwood-willow riparian drainages adjacent to maintenance sites, but (nesting) -- SSC habitats, especially older, dense species has been recorded from the Santa stands along rivers and streams. Piranga rubra Clara River.
Southwestern willow Potential: No nesting habitat was observed in drainages adjacent to maintenance sites, flycatcher Riparian woodlands that contain FE SE but species is known to occur along the (nesting) water and low willow thickets. Santa Clara River in suitable riparian Epidonax traillii extimus habitats. Low Potential: Suitable nesting habitat in Tricolored blackbird limited areas within the Covered Area in Freshwater marshes and riparian (nesting colony) -- SSC association with wetland vegetation and scrub. Agelaius tricolor may periodically forage at maintenance site locations. Not Expected: Limited suitable habitat for Western burrowing owl Grasslands and open scrub, migrant burrowing owls in the vicinity of (burrow sites) -- SSC particularly with ground squirrel the Foothill Feeder. Nesting is not known to burrows. Athene cunicularia occur within the Covered Area.
Western yellow-billed Nests along the broad, lower flood Not Expected: Limited suitable nesting cuckoo bottoms of larger river systems; habitat present within the vicinity of the riparian forests and riparian jungles Foothill Feeder. Very few occurrences of (nesting) FC SE of willows often mixed with this species have been recorded from this Coccyzus americanus cottonwoods, with understory of region. occidentalis blackberry, nettles and wild grape.
White-tailed kite Forages over open vegetation and Low Potential: Suitable foraging and (nesting) -- FP uses woodlands for roosting and nesting habitat present at several locations Elanus leucurus nesting. in or adjacent to the Covered Area.
Yellow warbler Potential: No nesting habitat was observed (nesting) in drainages adjacent to maintenance sites, -- SSC Riparian thickets and woodlands. but species is known to occur in suitable Dendroica petechia riparian habitats along the Santa Clara brewsteri River. Potential: No nesting habitat was observed in drainages adjacent to maintenance sites, Yellow-breasted chat but species is known to occur in suitable Riparian thickets and riparian (nesting) -- SSC riparian habitats along the Santa Clara woodlands with dense understory. Icteria virens River.
July 2014 Appendix A A-3 APPENDIX A SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN OR NEAR THE COVERED AREA
Appendix A-1 Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in or near the Covered Area Common Name Status Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur in Covered Area Scientific Name Federal State Mammals Arid habitats, including grasslands, Potential: Suitable foraging and limited Pallid bat shrublands, woodlands, and roosting habitat occurs in the vicinity of the -- SSC forests; prefers rocky outcrops, Foothill Feeder; known to occur in or near Antrozous pallidus cliffs, and crevices with access to the Covered Area. open habitats for foraging. San Diego desert Chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and Potential: Suitable habitat occurs in the woodrat understory of tree thickets. vicinity of the Foothill Feeder; known to -- SSC Neotoma lepida occur in or near the Covered Area. intermedia San Diego black-tailed Chaparral and coastal sage scrub. Potential: Suitable habitat occurs in the jackrabbit vicinity of the Foothill Feeder; known to -- SSC Lepus californicus occur in the Covered area. bennettii Deserts, scrublands, chaparral, and Not Expected: Limited suitable habitat Spotted bat coniferous woodlands. occurs in the Covered Area; very few -- SSC Euderma maculata spotted bats have been recorded from Project vicinity. Primarily arid lowlands and coastal Not Expected: Limited suitable habitat Western mastiff bat basins with rugged, rocky terrain, occurs in the Covered Area; very few -- SSC Eumops perotis along with suitable crevices for day western mastiff bats have been recorded roosts. from Project vicinity. FE: Federally listed as Endangered FT: Federally listed as Threatened FC: Federal Candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered SE: California listed as Endangered ST: California listed as Threatened FP: California Fully Protected SSC: California Species of Special Concern
A-4 Appendix A July 2014
Appendix B 2012 Foothill Feeder Shutdown Biological Elements
2012 FOOTHILL FEEDER SYSTEM SHUTDOWN
BIOLOGICAL ELEMENTS (February 12 though February 20, 2012)
Prepared for:
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Prepared by:
Aquatic Consulting Services, Inc. Field Report 59.12 April 2012 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
I. INTRODUCTION
During February 2012, The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) conducted a routine shutdown of its Foothill Feeder (FHF) pipeline to dewater and inspect the pipeline for maintenance and repair purposes. The FHF is the primary source of water delivered by Metropolitan to member agencies that are served by the Joseph Jensen Water Treatment Plant. This was not the first time Metropolitan has completed this activity. Past shutdowns have revealed the potential to affect several endangered species during the course of dewatering the pipeline. In order to avoid impacts to these species, Metropolitan, with the assistance of San Marino Environmental Associates (SMEA), developed a Release Plan as part of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prior to the 2005 release. This plan was based on the following assumptions:
Releases conducted during January or February would eliminate exposure of vulnerable life stages to the flood flows: Unarmored Threespine Stickleback (UTS) eggs, fry, and juveniles would not be present and neither would arroyo toad eggs and tadpoles. The potential for take or significant impacts to the UTS and arroyo toad could be avoided if releases in the vicinity of populations of these two federally endangered species were made in such a way as to produce a hydrograph that did not rise or drop too rapidly. A gradual ramping up and down of the releases would produce the desired hydrograph by using a lower discharge rate over a longer period of time. Flooding is not inherently adverse to the UTS and arroyo toad or their habitats depending on the season in which it occurs.
Using these same assumptions, Metropolitan further refined the release plan based on experience obtained during the shutdown of 2007 and during the months preceding the 2012 shutdown presented an Environmental Training Program to all Metropolitan staff associated with the shutdown. Aquatic Consulting Services, Inc. (ACS) was a part of this training, and provided its sub-consultants with guidelines for providing adequate monitoring and safeguards to any and all aquatic organisms that could be encountered during the shutdown. ACS drafted a team of professional biologists to serve as monitors during the shutdown. These biological monitors were assigned to each of five stations involved with the shutdown: Charlie Canyon Creek (Station No. 97+34), San Francisquito Creek High-Rise (Station No. 287+70), San Francisquito Creek Low-Rise (Station No. 321+40), Placerita Canyon Creek (Station No. 521+20), and the Santa Clara River (Station No. 383+90). In addition, releases were made into the Castaic Lagoon. Biologists did not monitor the Castaic Lagoon as it had no potential to impact either UTS or arroyo toads. The goal of the biological monitors was to check their assigned dewatering points, rescue any stranded native species, and determine the effectiveness of the release plan.
During the release phase of the shutdown, biologists walked the wetted reaches around the clock (day and night) to check for any stranded fish and/or amphibian eggs or tadpoles.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 1 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
The shutdown consisted of two specific phases of discharge. The first phase involved gravity flow released from the station, and the second phase included pumping from the section of pipe underneath the discharge point. The gravity-flow was a controlled release designed to allow the pipeline to maintain a hydraulic head while slowly opening the valve(s) to maintain a constant head-pressure- driven flow. Pumping was accomplished by inserting a pump or series of pumps down into the substructure (40 to 50 feet below the discharge). Some discharge stations have multiple discharge valves, requiring a pump for each discharge. Pumping was at a constant rate, but the volume of discharge pumped into the drainages slowly tapered off as the water was removed from the pipeline. As the sites began to shutdown, biological monitors were transferred from sites that had gone dry to other locations where discharges were still occurring to provide additional staffing and patrols of flowing water.
The stations were completely dewatered in the following order: 1. Charlie Canyon Creek (Station No. 97+34); 2. San Francisquito Creek High-Rise (Station No. 287+70); 3. San Francisquito Creek Low-Rise (Station No. 321+40); 4. Placerita Creek (Station No. 521+20) and 5. Santa Clara River (Station No. 383+90)
The dewatering of these locations took place over the course of 5 days with 24-hour biological monitoring (as noted above).
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Santa Clara River drainage originates as drainage from the Pacifico Mountain located within the San Gabriel Mountains and flows westward to the Pacific Ocean. From its source on the north facing slopes of the San Gabriel Mountains in Los Angeles County, the Santa Clara River flows westward for about 35 miles to the Los Angles/Ventura County line, and then predominantly west-southwest for another 37 miles to the Pacific Ocean near Oxnard. Precipitation and runoff in the upper Santa Clara River Basin historically follows a seasonal pattern, with about 80 percent of the total precipitation occurring during the four months December through March.
Prior to starting the February 2012 release, each and every station was checked and photographed. The purpose of this was to establish a baseline condition and confirm that no water was draining from each station. Individual photographs were taken con serve as the baseline condition. Pre-discharge photographs are included at the end of this report. There was no water released from any station to the receiving water prior to the discharge.
Due to the unusually low rainfall received before the 2012 shutdown in the project area, most drainages were completely dry with no flowing surface water prior to the shutdown. No surface flows were present in the Charlie, San Francisquito and Placerita Creek
ACS Report 59.12 Page 2 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
drainages and consequently, no fish were present in any of these creeks at and below the discharge points prior to the shutdown.
Currently, the Santa Clara River receives a continuous flow from the Saugus Water Reclamation Plant above the discharge site (Station 383+90). During drought years, with limited winter storm runoff, this regulated discharge provides the only surface flow within the river. This was the situation prior to the 2012 shutdown; the water from the reclamation plant was the only water flowing in the riverbed. The remainder of the channel was completely dry with no surface water prior to the shutdown. The reclamation plant flow was briefly checked for sensitive fish species immediately prior to the shutdown, but none were observed.
III. MONITORING
Each station was monitored twenty-four hours a day during the shutdown. Once a station was completely drained by gravity flow, pumps were inserted down into the feeder pipeline and turned on. Pumped water flowed down the same discharge path as the gravity flow for approximately 24 to 72 hours. Once the pipe was drained completely, the station was shutdown, and further monitoring was discontinued.
Monitoring consisted of having a biologist check the discharged water for aquatic organisms (fish and amphibians) over the entire length of wetted channel. During the nighttime hours, headlamps or flashlights were used. During the daylight hours, the entire stream was checked to determine the presence of animals. The biological monitors simply walked the stream length and noted any animals. This cycle was repeated several times each 12-hour shift.
IV. DISCHARGE LOCATIONS
There were five stations monitored during the shutdown: Charlie Canyon Creek, San Francisquito Creek High-Rise, San Francisquito Creek Low-Rise, Placerita Canyon Creek, and the Santa Clara River. Figures 1, 2, and 3 show the general location of each station. Each site is briefly described and discussed below:
Charlie Canyon Creek Station (Station No. 97+34) (Figure 1) - This station is located within Charlie Canyon approximately 1.8 miles upstream of the Castaic Creek drainage. The flow reached all the way downstream to the paint-ball-park access road before going subsurface. No fish were captured within the discharge during the release (Table 1).
San Francisquito Creek High-Rise Station (Station No. 287+70) (Figure 2) - This station is located along San Francisquito Creek approximately 0.6 miles upstream of Decoro Bridge within the Santa Clara River drainage. One sculpin (Cottus gulosus) and one mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) were captured during the release (Table 1). Water flowed to Decoro Bridge and quickly drained into the creekbed.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 3
AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Table 1. Summary of Fish Collected at Stations and Dates
LOCATION SPECIES TOTAL IN- DATE TIME FISH STREAM FISH Charlie Canyon Creek None None None ALL San Francisquito Sculpin (Cottus gulosus) -live 1 0 2-14-12 11:00 am Creek High-Rise Mosquitofish (Gambusia affins) -live 1 0 2-14-12 14:00 pm
San Francisquito Mosquitofish (Gambusia affins) - live 1 1 2-13-12 2:30 am Creek Low-Rise Santa Clara River Santa Ana Sucker (Catostomus santaanae) - live 2 2 2-15-12 5:00 am, 10:30 pm Sculpin (Cottus gulosus) - live 1 0 2-16-12 6:45 am Sculpin (Cottus gulosus) - live 1 0 2-16-12 1:45 am Convict Cichlid (Cichlasoma nigrofasciatum) -dead 1 1 2-17-12 9:00 pm
Placerita Creek Sculpin (Cottus gulosus) - dead 1 0 2-15-12 5:00 pm Sculpin (Cottus gulosus) - live 29 0 2-16-12 8:00 am Sculpin (Cottus gulosus) - dead 49 0 2-16-12 10:00 am Threadfin Shad (Dorosoma petenense) - dead 5 0 2-16-12 12:00 am Grass Shrimp (Palaemonetes paludosus) - dead 23 0 2-16-12 12:00 am Grass Shrimp (Palaemonetes paludosus) – dead 1 0 2-17-12 10:00 am Sculpin (Cottus gulosus) - dead 2 0 2-17-12 11:00 am Sculpin (Cottus gulosus) - live 5 0 2-17-12 11:00 am
ACS Report 59.12 Page Page 7 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
San Francisquito Creek Low-Rise Station (Station No. 321 + 40) (Figure 2) - This station is located along San Francisquito Creek approximately 0.2 miles downstream of the Decoro Bridge within the Santa Clara River drainage. One mosquito fish (Gambusia affinis) which was present in the pool below the outlet prior to discharges was captured at this location (Table 1). Water quickly drained into the creekbed.
Placerita Creek Station (Station No. 521 + 20) (Figure 3) – This station is located along Placerita Creek approximately 1.3 miles upstream from the South Fork of the Santa Clara River. No fish were captured from the gravity release. However, several species emerged from the pipe during pumping: riffle sculpin (Cottus gulosus) (25 live and 52 dead), threadfin shad (Dorosoma petenense) (5 dead), and 23 grass shrimp (Palaemonetes paludosus) (23 dead) (Table 1). Water flow reached the South Fork of the Santa Clara River, but this section of the river was dry at the time of the discharge. This station required several hours to pump residual water from the substructure. The was due to the large pump used to dewater the system, which quickly over-drafted the system and had to be shut down for approximately one hour and then operated for only 10 minutes. This allowed the water to flow into the substructure before operating the pump for another 10 minutes. It also kept the pump from overheating or running dry. This lengthened the pumping period by several hours.
Santa Clara River station (Station No. 383 + 90) (Figure 3) – This station is located along the mainstem of the Santa Clara River approximately one-quarter mile downstream of the Bouquet Canyon Creek Drain. There is a continuous flow past this station from the Newhall Wastewater Treatment Plant and during the wet season runoff from the Santa Clara River drainage east of Bouquet Bridge. During the discharge period, a few fish species were collected from this station including: Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae) (2 live); riffle sculpin (Cottus gulosus) (1 live); and convict cichlid (Cichlasoma nigrofasciatum) (l live) (Table 1). The fish that originated from within the Santa Clara River drainage was the Santa Ana Sucker and convict cichlid. The ruffle sculpin most likely originated from the discharge.
On the first day during the gravity flow, the water began to flow past the McBean Bridge. As a precaution, a block net was installed along the Santa Clara River approximately 3,000 feet downstream of McBean Bridge to prevent the discharge flows from attracting fish upstream from the lower reaches. This 50-by-3-foot (1/4 –inch) mesh net was installed across the channel immediately below the wetted portion of the stream. A flag was installed to mark the point where the initial discharge reached this portion of the drainage. Photograph 1 (located at the end of this report) shows the block net installed at the area downstream of McBean Bridge.
The rate of gravity flow was reduced at this station due to the concern of CDFG biologists that flows could affect a suspected population of UTS located downstream of the railroad bridge and east of the Interstate 5 crossing. As a result, pumping of the remaining water from the substructure was delayed by approximately 24 hours. This reduction in discharges resulted in reduced flow past the McBean Bridge. Pumping began on day 3,
ACS Report 59.12 Page 8 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
and flow again passed the McBean Bridge but slowly decreased to a point where flowing water disappeared in a section of river upstream of the McBean Bridge.
A second block net (20-by-3-foot (1/4-inch mesh)) was installed within the outfall from the Saugus Water Reclamation Plant (Photograph 2 located at the end of this report) to prevent any fish residing within this reach from moving downstream into the active flow channel. This second net also served as a point for releasing any captured fish collected from the wetted section of the Santa Clara mainstem.
It should be noted, at the time of the discharge the river had not experienced winter flood flows and the wetted portion was minimal. This resulted in few fish residing within the mainstem. Captured fish consisted of riffle sculpin (Cottus gulosus), Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae), and convict cichlid (Cichlasoma nigrofasciatum).
Along the Santa Clara River Station, the water flow came from the Saugus Water Reclamation Plant. This outfall has a population of convict cichlids (Cichlasoma nigrofasciatum) living in the treated sewage discharge. These fish are temperature dependent, orienting into the warmest section of the discharge. They tend to avoid cooler water. We encountered one convict cichlid during our last survey along the main river stem between the discharge point and several hundred yards upstream of McBean Bridge.
V. EROSION
On February 12, 2012, biological monitors walked each site and photographed existing conditions. This was to serve as a baseline record of any scour that occurred within the various drainages. On February 20, 2012 following completion of releases from the pipeline, biologists again walked each site to photograph any hydromorphological changes that may have occurred as a result of the discharges. These pre-and post- discharge photographs were compared to evaluate whether any erosion had occurred. Metropolitan also employed engineers to monitor the potential for erosion at each station and photograph site conditions during the course of the discharges. Engineers monitored around the clock (day and night) at all dewatering locations. Sandbags were installed at several stations to reduce the potential impact of the elevated flow on the streambeds. In all cases, sandbags were placed on either concrete-lined or rip-rapped sections of the pipeline discharge channels. All these specific photographs are included at the end of this report along with a narrative discussion.
Prior to the discharges, sandbags were installed at Charlie Canyon Creek within the concrete-lined portion of the discharge channel (see photographs 3-7). Nevertheless, the creekbed experienced extensive erosion for the first 100 feet of streambed (see photographs 8-14) at this location. The elevated flow also washed out the access road to the paint ball park and another Arizona road crossing to the west of the blow-off location. The “paint ball park” road crossing was damaged by the elevated flow during the discharges due to plugged culverts under the roadway (see photographs 15-16).
ACS Report 59.12 Page 9 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
San Francisquito Creek High-rise had been sand bagged prior to discharge (see photographs 17 and 18) and experienced minimal sediment displacement within the streambed. San Francisquito Creek low-rise also had minimal sediment displacement (see photographs 19-20).
San Francisquito Creek Low-rise had not been sand bagged prior to release and only experienced minor erosion (see photographs 21-22).
Sandbags had been installed at the Placerita Creek blow-off prior to discharge (see photograph 23), but some minor erosion did occur at this location (see photographs 24-30). The existing “Arizona” crossing located approximately 75 feet downstream from the pipeline discharge was in bad disrepair prior to the release. Water from the release slightly undercut the structure allowing water to flow under and directly down the creekbed.
Sandbags had also been installed at the Santa Clara River discharge (see photograph 31- 33). The Santa Clara River experienced some minor sediment displacement within the streambed just downstream of the blowoff location (see photographs 34-37). No erosion was evident within the existing pool adjacent to the discharge pipes. Once releases stopped at this location, the existing upstream flow from the Saugus Water Reclamation Plant remained within its original (pre-discharge) channel in the river.
VI. DISCUSSION
Because no recent storm event had occurred prior to and during this shutdown, the river had a limited surface area and few fish were found within the existing wetted portions of the drainage. Had more rainfall occurred, many more fish probably would have been washed downstream from the headwaters into and below the discharge locations, potentially causing impacts to sensitive fish. The lack of significant rainfall during the 2011-2012 season precluded impacts to sensitive species associated with the shutdown by significantly reducing the wetted channel area. In addition, the project successfully avoided impacting fish residing downstream of the McBean Bridge along the Santa Clara River possibly due to the block net installed below McBean Bridge. A second block net installed upstream of the Santa Clara River station also may have prevented fish from accessing the wetted channel. Only three existing fish were found within the wetted portions of the Santa Clara River during the release (see Table 1).
Placerita Creek was a different story. During the gravity phase no fish were found in the discharge, however during the pumping phase, many fish trapped inside the pipeline were pumped out. A large number of these fish were chopped up by the pump installed within the pipeline. The few survivors (primarily sculpins) were captured and released into the Santa Clara River upstream of the second the block net installed above the Santa Clara River discharge point.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 10 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 1. View looking upstream of block net installed downstream of McBean Bridge. Yellow arrows mark the top of the net. Date of photograph: 2/14/12.
Photograph 2. Block net installed upstream of the Santa Clara River Discharge Point. Date of photograph: 2/16/12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 11 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
CHARLIE CANYON SITE
ACS Report 59.12 Page 12 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 3. Sandbags installed within Charlie Canyon discharge channel prior to the release. Date of photograph: 2-12-12.
Photograph 4. Terminus of the drainage channel from the Charlie Canyon Station prior to water release. Several large mulefat bushes were present. Date of photograph: 2-12-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 13 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 5. View downstream from the terminus of the discharge channel prior to release. Date of photograph: 2-12-12.
Photograph 6. View downstream of Charlie Canyon Creekbed from eucalyptus tree prior to water release. Date of photograph: 2-12-12
ACS Report 59.12 Page 14 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 7. View upstream along Charlie Canyon Creek looking towards eucalyptus tree prior to discharge. Date of photograph: 2-12-12.
Photograph 8. View of sandbags installed across the Charlie Canyon discharge channel following water release. Date of photograph: 2-20-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 15 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 9. Terminus of Charlie Canyon drainage channel following water release. Date of photograph: 2-20-12.
Photograph 10. View of mulefat bushes at terminus of the Charlie Canyon discharge channel following water release. Date of photograph: 2-20-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 16 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 11. View west along Charlie Canyon Creek at the terminus of the drainage channel. This section of creekbed was eroded. Date of photograph: 2-20-12.
Photograph 12. View looking west along Charlie Canyon Creek following water release. Erosion is evident. Date of photograph: 2-12-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 17 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 13. View looking west along Charlie Canyon Creek following water release. Erosion is evident.Date of photograph: 2-20-12.
Photograph 14. View upstream (east) along Charlie Canyon Creek showing eroded area. Date of photograph 2-20-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 18 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 15. Charlie Canyon eroded Paint Ball Park Road. Date of photograph: 2-14-12.
Photograph 16 . Charlie Canyon eroded Paint Ball Park Road. Date of photograph: 2-14-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 19 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK HIGH RISE
ACS Report 59.12 Page 20 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 17. San Francisquito High-Rise Station prior to release. Sand bags had been installed to reduce erosion. Date of Photograph 2-12-12.
Photograph 18. View from San Francisquito Creek High-Rise Station prior to water release. Date of photograph: 2-12-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 21 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 19. San Francisquito Creek High-Rise Station following release. Minimal sediment displacement is noted. Date of photograph 2-20-12.
Photograph 20. San Francisquito Creek High-Rise Station following release. Minimal sediment displacement is noted. Date of photograph 2-20-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 22 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK LOW-RISE STATION
ACS Report 59.12 Page 23 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 21. San Francisquito Creek Low-Rise Station prior to release. Date of photograph: 2-12- 12.
Photograph 22. San Francisquito Creek Low-Rise Station following release. The vegetation has been laid down but there is minimal erosion at this station. Date of photograph: 2-20-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 24 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
PLACERITA CREEK STATION
ACS Report 59.12 Page 25 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 23. Placerita Creek Station. Sand bags have been installed around discharge point. Date of photograph: 2/12/12.
Photograph 24. Water release at the Placerita Creek station. Date of photograph: 2-13-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 26 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 25. View looking downstream along Placerita Creek during water release. The discharge point is located along the top left of the photograph (red arrow). Date of photograph: 2-13- 12.
Photograph 26. View of water release from Placerita Creek near the “Arizona” crossing. Date of photograph 2-13-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 27 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 27. View looking east (upstream) at the “Arizona” crossing. Water is flowing under the crossing into the downstream channel. Date of photograph: 2-13-12.
Photograph 28. View of pumped discharge from Placerita Creek Station. Water was being pumped through the fence above the discharge point. Date of photograph: 2-16-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 28 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 29. Close-up view of various species pumped the Placerita Creek pipeline during the discharge. Date of photograph: 2-15-12.
Photograph 30. Close-up view of shrimp collected at the Placerita Creek station. Date of photograph: 2-15-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 29 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
SANTA CLARA RIVER STATION
ACS Report 59.12 Page 30 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 31. Santa Clara River outfall prior to water release. A sandbag barrier has been constructed. Date of photograph: 2-12-12.
Photograph 32. The Santa Clara Riverbed prior to water release. The active channel is located on the south side of the riverbed (blue arrows). There is no discharge from this station to the active channel. Date of photograph 2-12-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 31 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 33. View looking west along the riverbed prior to water release. The active channel is located on the south side of the river (blue arrows). Date of photograph: 2-12-12.
Photograph 34. View looking south at the Santa Clara River after water release. Some channelization has occurred due to displacement of sandy sediment within the riverbed. The active channel is still located to the south (blue arrows). Date of photograph: 2-20-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 32 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 35. View looking south at the Santa Clara River after water release. Some channelization has occurred due to displacement of sandy sediment within the riverbed. The active channel is still located to the south (blue arrows). Date of photograph: 2-20-12.
Photograph 36. View looking southwest at the Santa Clara River after water release. Some channelization has occurred due to displacement of sandy sediment within the riverbed. The active channel is still located to the south (blue arrows). The red arrows mark the new discharge channel created during the water release. Date of photograph: 2-20-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 33 AQUATIC CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.
Photograph 37. View looking southwest at the Santa Clara River after water release. Minor channelization has occurred due to displacement of sandy sediment within the riverbed. The active channel is still located to the south (blue arrows). Date of photograph: 2-20-12.
ACS Report 59.12 Page 34