General Biological Resources Survey Report

Appendix B General Biological Resources Survey Report

DRAFT

GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT FOR THE E. & J. GALLO LIVINGSTON WATER INNOVATION AND ENERGY FACILITY PROJECT, MERCED COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (37°22’39.93”N, 120°48’37.66”W)

P REPARED FOR:

E & J Gallo Winery 18000 W River Road Livingston, CA 95334 Contact: Glenn Wright 209.394.5848

P REPARED BY:

ICF International 75 E. Santa Clara Street, Suite 300 San José, CA 95113 Contact: Eric Christensen, Biologist

408.216.2819 email: [email protected]

June 2012

ICF International. 2012. General Biological Resources Study for the E. & J. Gallo Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility Project. Draft. June. (ICF 00265.12.) San José, CA. Prepared for E. & J. Gallo Winery, Livingston, CA. Contents

List of Figures ...... ii List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ...... iii

Page Chapter 1 Summary ...... 1‐1 Chapter 2 Introduction ...... 2‐1 Chapter 3 Methodology ...... 3‐1 Literature Reviewed ...... 3‐1 Field Study ...... 3‐1 Chapter 4 Setting and Survey Results ...... 4‐1 Environmental Setting ...... 4‐1 Existing Conditions ...... 4‐1 Special‐Status Species ...... 4‐3 Special‐Status Plants ...... 4‐3 Special‐Status Wildlife ...... 4‐3 Chapter 5 Regulatory Setting ...... 5‐1 Regulatory Setting ...... 5‐1 Federal Policies and Regulations ...... 5‐1 State Policies and Regulations ...... 5‐3 Chapter 6 Project Impact Analysis ...... 6‐1 Chapter 7 Mitigation Required ...... 7‐1 Chapter 8 References Cited ...... 8‐1 Chapter 9 Preparer’s Qualifications ...... 9‐1

Appendix A List of Plant Species Observed Appendix B List of Wildlife Species Observed Appendix C Special‐Status Plants Appendix D Special‐Status Wildlife Species Appendix E USFWS Letter Appendix F CNPS Inventory Search Results Appendix G CNDDB Search Results

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 i Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Figures

Follows Page

1 Project Location ...... 1‐1

2 Project Site Plan ...... 1‐1

3 CNDDB Occurences Within 5 Miles of Project Area ...... 3‐1

4 Vegetation Communities ...... 3‐1

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 ii Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Acronyms and Abbreviations

CCR California Code of Regulations CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CESA California Endangered Species Act CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNPS California Native Plant Society CRPR California Rare Plant Rank CWA Clean Water Act

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Federal Endangered Species Act

FR Federal Register

LWINE Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility

MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act

NOAA Fisheries National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service

SWANCC Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USC U.S. Government Code USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geologic Survey

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 iii Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Chapter 1 Summary

The purpose of this general biological resources study is to characterize the habitats within the Gallo Livingston Water Innovation and Energy (LWINE) Facility Project site and associated proposed irrigation pipeline (Figures 1 and 2) (project site); identify special‐status plants and wildlife, and sensitive habitats that occur or have potential to occur within the project site; discuss applicable regulations to biotic resources within the project site; and identify suitable mitigation measures to avoid, minimize, and/or offset potential impacts of the proposed project. A field survey was conducted on May 3, 2012 by ICF International biologist, Eric Christensen. The results of this survey, combined with a prior review of pertinent literature, identified three special‐status species with potential to occur within the project site: Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), and white‐tailed kite (Elanus leucurus). No sensitive habitats were observed within the project site during the field survey.

The Gallo LWINE Project (project) could potentially affect roosting hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), migrating American badger (Taxidea taxus), San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), nesting raptors, and migratory bird species, which would be considered a significant impact. Therefore, mitigation would be necessary to avoid and minimize these potential impacts. Mitigation includes a pre‐construction survey of the project site and surrounding vicinity, and the establishment of no‐ disturbance areas around any active nests of raptors and migratory birds (if ground‐disturbance will occur during the avian breeding season, February 1 to August 31). No‐disturbance buffers will be appropriate for the species of interest. If construction activities or ground disturbance is initiated between September 1 to January 31, outside of the raptor and migratory bird breeding season, then no impacts on nesting raptors or migratory bird species would occur as a result of the proposed project. Should construction activities or ground disturbance occur outside of the raptor and migratory bird species breeding season, no mitigation would be necessary as any ongoing activities within the project site would preclude raptors and migratory birds from establishing nests in the project site and surrounding vicinity. Compensation for the loss of Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsonii) foraging habitat is also expected to be necessary. The ratio of mitigation to impact is determined by the location of the nearest recent nest.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 1‐1 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

32 Orland Chico 99 5 Oak St Merced Ave Merced 162 Gri th Ave

45 80

20 20 Marysville 49 Merced River River Rd 99 70

65 Auburn

50 99 River Rd Woodland 5 88 49 Sacramento Project Site Davis 4 Gri th Ave Howard Rd Howard

Vacaville 80 120 5 99 395

Lodi 12 88 26 Stockton 4 4 24 5 SAN JOAQUIN 120 COUNTY 680 205 120 Project Location San Francisco 580 Tracy 580 Modesto 132 140 84 33 49 Turlock Livingston San José STANISLAUS Merced COUNTY 140

165 MERCED 99 5 33 COUNTY 41 101

152 152 1 FRESNO COUNTY

33 33 99 156 Fresno 25 180

5 Monterey NOT TO SCALE Graphics JD (5/12) … 00265.12 Figure 1 Project Location TULARE COUNTY E & J Gallo LWINE Project KINGS COUNTY 43 65 Inset Map 1

LWINE FACILITIES

Inset Map 2 Weir Ave Weir KEY River Rd Project Area Proposed Irrigation Line Pipeline End

Griﬃth Ave Magnolia Weir Ave Weir Source: Summit Engineering, ICF International 2012. Graphics…00265.12 IS/MND (6-14-2012) Graphics…00265.12 Figure 2 Project Site Plan E & J Gallo LWINE Project

Chapter 2 Introduction

The purpose of this general biological resources study report is to provide a detailed discussion of the biological resources related to the Gallo LWINE Project located immediately west of the City of Livingston, within Merced County, California (Figures 1 and 2). Gallo proposes to process winery and distillery wastewater and grape solids (pomace) from winery operations to create biogas to generate electrical power, create a fertilizer product from biosolids, provide treatment of the existing wastewater stream, and reclaim water for irrigation of adjacent vineyards. All construction staging would occur within the project site.

This study comprises a review of existing conditions based on a May 3, 2012 field survey; a summary of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, and Section 13260 of the California Water Code related to biological resources; and a discussion of potential impacts and associated mitigation measures for special‐status species identified in the project site. No recent biological studies specific to the project site are known to have been conducted.

For purposes of this report, the project site is defined as the proposed Gallo LWINE facility and adjacent areas of the proposed expansion, which is bound on the east by a private road between the existing Gallo facility and River Road, the existing Gallo facility on the north, a fallow field and Griffith Avenue on the west, and a photovoltaic solar field and River Road to the south. The project site, including the proposed irrigation pipeline, is depicted in Figure 2.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 2‐1 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Chapter 3 Methodology

Literature Reviewed An ICF International biologist reviewed existing resource information to evaluate whether sensitive habitats and special‐status species could be located in the project site. The following sources were reviewed.

 A search of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Turlock and Stevinson 7.5‐minute Quadrangles. Accessed: April 19, 2012.

 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) list of endangered, threatened, and proposed species for the USGS Turlock and Stevinson 7.5‐minute Quadrangles. Accessed: April 19, 2012. Available: http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/y_old_site/es/spp_lists/auto_list_form.cfm

 The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants within the U.S. Geological Survey Turlock, Ceres, Denair, Cressey, Arena, Montpelier, Hatch, Gustine, and Stevinson 7.5‐minute Quadrangles. Version 7‐12apr 4‐11‐12. Accessed: April 19, 2012. Available: http://cnps.site.aplus.net/cgi‐bin/inv/inventory.cgi/Html?item=checkbox_9.htm

 CNPS 2005 Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California.

 The 1961 (Photo revised 1976) USGS 7.5‐minute Turlock, California Topographic Quadrangle.

 The 1961 (Photo revised 1987) USGS 7.5‐minute Stevinson, California Topographic Quadrangle.

This information was used to develop lists of special‐status species and other sensitive biological resources that could be present in the project site. Figure 3 shows the identified special‐status plants and wildlife located within 5 miles of the project site.

Field Study ICF International biologist, Eric Christensen, surveyed the project site on May 3, 2012, from approximately 9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. to characterize existing conditions, including biological communities; to identify areas that could qualify as waters of the United States; and to evaluate the potential for occurrence of special‐status plant and wildlife species. Weather conditions were sunny with little to no cloud‐cover during the field survey. The biologist surveyed the entirety of the LWINE project site on foot with the aid of binoculars, where appropriate, to ensure total site coverage. The portion of the irrigation system alignment along River Road was surveyed by automobile with the aid of binoculars to assess general land uses and any habitat, if any, observed within and adjacent to the alignment. Photographs of portions of the irrigation system alignment east of River Road were reviewed to note current land uses and potential habitat, if any, of the proposed alignment. All land cover types and vegetation communities were mapped and are shown in Figure 4.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 3‐1 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Legend Merced kangaroo rat Irrigation Line Tie-In #25 Project Area 5 Mile Buffer CNDDB Occurrence Type

9 Plant

Animal

: e Merced monardella

T #2

0 ±

/ silvery legless lizard

4 / 0 0.5 1 2

#82

e t Miles valley elderberry longhorn beetle

D #47

d x Sources: Bing Maps Hybrid (2010) western pond turtle

4 #328

_ Swainson's hawk

l a #94

\ s Swainson's hawk

r u #550

F \ Swainson's hawk

0 #1761

p longhorn fairy shrimp a longhorn fairy shrimp m #9

y r #8

_ American badger

u #294

Figure 3 CNDDB Occurrences within 5 Miles of the Project E & J Gallo LWINE Project River Rd

Legend LWINE Facilities Developed /Landscaped (1.20 Acres) Project Site Disturbed (4.12 Acres) Irrigation Pipeline GriffithAve Fallow (8.64 Acres) Land Cover Type

Cereal Crops Vineyard (0.40 Acres) Ave Weir

(E) PV Solar Array

0200 400 800 ± Feet Sources: Bing Maps Aerial (2010)

K:\Projects_1\County_of_Merced\00702_11_Gallo_Winery\mapdoc\2012\Figures\Bio_Figures\Fig_5_Veg_Communities_v3_aka_Fig_4_20120614.mxd 3:52:56 Date: SS 6/14/2012PM Time:

Figure 4 Vegetation Communities E & J Gallo LWINE Project

Chapter 4 Setting and Survey Results

Environmental Setting The project site is located in north central Merced County, immediately west of the City of Livingston. Much of the project site consists of fallow field, developed commercial buildings and paved areas associated with existing Gallo winery operations. The project site is relatively flat with elevations ranging from approximately 117 to 108 feet above mean sea level. Soil types within the project site include Delhi loamy sand, 0% to 3% slopes; Delhi loamy sand, silty substratum, 0% to 3% slopes; Delhi sand, 0% to 3% slopes; and Delhi loamy fine sand, silty substratum, 0% to 3% slopes. The project site also includes portions of vineyard, disturbed areas, and developed/landscaped vegetation adjacent to Gallo facilities. Disturbed areas include unvegetated road shoulders and dirt roads. Existing Conditions Land uses in the project site and vicinity are predominantly agricultural, with numerous agricultural and sparse rural residential structures scattered throughout the region. The project site supports four biological communities: vineyard, fallow field, developed/landscaped, and disturbed. Several medium‐sized trees (primarily nonnative cork oak [Quercus suber] trees) are located along portions of roads and areas associated with development within and adjacent to the project site. Vegetation communities and biological habitat are shown on Figures 3 and 4 and described below. Lists of plants and wildlife observed within the project site are included in Appendices A and B, respectively.

Vineyard The dominant vegetation community in the project site is vineyard, which occurs over 0.4‐acre except for immediately south of the existing Gallo facilities, north of River Road. The proposed irrigation pipeline would run through the vineyard vegetation community. Other volunteer plant species are kept at a minimum level, as the vineyard is routinely managed, and nondesired plants in the vineyards reduce the amount of available nutrients available to the grape (Vitis spp.) vines. The most dominant volunteer plant species observed within the vineyards was Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon). Wildlife observed within the vineyards include tree swallow (Tachycinecta bicolor), American robin (Turdus migratorius), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), and American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos).

Fallow Field Fallow field comprises 8.6 acres of the project site. This vegetation community is located immediately south of the existing Gallo facility and on another portion situated north of River Road, west of the disturbed area. Areas of fallow field were formerly used for agriculture production but have been left fallow for a significant duration sufficient to allow other plant species to become established. Dominant plant species observed within this vegetation community were redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium), short‐pod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), prickly lettuce (Lactucca

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 4‐1 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Setting and Survey Results

serriola), purple sand spurry (Spergularia rubra), lupines (Lupinus spp.), pigweed (Amaranthus spp.), and clovers (Trifolium spp.).

The characteristics of fallow fields are highly dependent on the past uses of the land including the vegetation each field was planted with and the frequency of past plowing or discing activities. Fallow fields are generally typified by weedy species that become quickly become established in the disturbed soil following the cessation of agricultural and maintenance activities. Due to the variation of food and cover, fallow fields frequently support differing concentrations of rodents including mouse (Peromyscus spp.), California meadow vole (Microtus californicus), and black‐tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus). Consequently, the rodents supported by this vegetation community also support predators, including Swainson’s hawk, gopher snake, and coyote. Wildlife observed within this land cover type included those species observed within the vineyards, Audubon’s cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), as well as one red‐tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) foraging over the fallow fields at the time of the survey.

Developed and Landscaped Developed and landscaped areas that occur adjacent to the project site are a photovoltaic array, a residence and structures at the southwest corner of River Road and Weir Avenue, and structures between Weir Avenue and Peach Avenue. This land cover type comprises approximately 1.20 acres of the project site. Vegetation within this land cover type was largely planted as landscape vegetation and is maintained. Some landscape vegetation observed within the project site is frequently irrigated, as is the case with lawns of Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), to maintain uniform greenery throughout the year. The majority of vegetation is not irrigated, such as hedges of oleander (Nerium oleander) located along portions of the northern edge of the project site, immediately south of the existing Gallo facility, and the cork oak trees along the private road immediately south of the existing Gallo facilities.

While this land cover is anthropogenic, it supports certain wildlife species that coexist and, in some cases, thrive in developed areas. Many of these wildlife species exploit the landscape vegetation as food sources, or are drawn to these areas because of human‐derived food that may be available. Wildlife species observed in this land cover type include California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beechyeri), American crow, song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), and northern mockingbird (Mimus polygottos). Other wildlife species expected to occur within this land cover type include western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica) and American robin.

Disturbed Disturbed areas have undergone significant alteration at some point in time and typically support numerous weedy species of plants. This vegetation community comprises approximately 4.12 acres of the project site. Vegetation observed within this land cover type was very sparse and only existed around the periphery of this land cover, because nearly all of the area was an active borrow pit.

Wildlife species observed within the disturbed area include tree swallow, American crow, and song sparrow.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 4‐2 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Setting and Survey Results

Special‐Status Species Special‐status species are defined species that meet one or more of the following criteria.

 Species listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under ESA (50 CFR 17.12 [listed plants], 50 CFR 17.11 [listed animals], and various notices in the Federal Register [FR] [proposed species]).

 Species that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under ESA (64 FR 57534, October 25, 1999).

 Species listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened or endangered under CESA (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] 670.5).

 Species that meet the definitions of rare or endangered under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15380).

 Plants listed as rare under the California Native Plant Protection Act (California Fish and Game Code Section 1900 et seq.).

 Plants considered by California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) to be “rare, threatened, or endangered in California” (California Rare Plant Rank [CRPR] 1B and 2, CDFG 2010) (California Native Plant Society 2012).

 Plants listed by CDFG as plants about which more information is needed to determine their status, and plants of limited distribution (CRPR 3 and 4) (California Department of Fish and Game 2010; California Native Plant Society 2012), which may be included as special‐status species on the basis of local significance or recent biological information.

 Animal species of special concern to CDFG (Remsen 1978 [birds]; Williams 1986 [mammals]; Jennings and Hayes 1994 [amphibians and reptiles]).

 Animals fully protected in California (California Fish and Game Code Sections 3511 [birds], 4700 [mammals], and 5050 [amphibians and reptiles]). Special‐Status Plants Based on a review of existing information, 20 special‐status plant species were identified prior to the field survey as having potential to occur within the project region (Appendix C) (California Native Plant Society 2012). All of these species were determined to have no potential to occur in the project site because suitable habitat for these species is not present, and because the degree of routine historic agricultural‐related disturbance experienced by the project site is not compatible with the species’ requirements. The listing status, preferred habitat, and a brief explanation for the absence of these species and their habitats are provided in Appendix C. Special‐Status Wildlife A review of existing information (a search of the CNDDB [2012], species lists obtained from USFWS [2011], and species distribution and habitat requirements), identified 26 special‐status wildlife species that are known to occur or have the potential to occur in the project region (Appendix D).

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 4‐3 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Setting and Survey Results

Of the 27 special‐status wildlife species listed in Appendix D, the 20 species below were eliminated from further consideration because suitable habitat for these species is not present in the project site or because the species range does not extend into the project site.

 conservancy fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservatio)

 longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna)

 vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi)

 valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus)

 vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi)

 delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus)

 Central Valley steelhead (Oncohynchus mykiss)

 Central Valley spring‐run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)

 Sacramento River winter‐run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)

 California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense)

 California red‐legged frog (Rana draytonii)

 western spadefoot toad (Spea hammondii)

 silvery legless lizard (Anniella pulchra pulchra)

 western pond turtle (Emys marmorata)

 blunt‐nosed leopard lizard (Gambelia sila)

 giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas)

 Fresno kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides exilis)

 Merced kangaroo rat (Dipodomys heermanni dixoni)

 hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus)

 great egret (Ardea alba)

 great blue heron (Areda herodias)

A brief explanation for the absence of these species and their habitats is provided in Appendix D.

The project site provides low quality migratory habitat for San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutiea) and American badger (Taxidea taxus). While a small number of ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) burrows were observed under a portion of the hedgerow planted with oleander at the northern edge of the fallow field, the project site does not support an abundant prey‐ base necessary to provide San Joaquin kit fox and American badger with sustained foraging habitat. Additionally, the high degree of routine historical and recent agricultural‐related disturbance eliminates the potential for the project site to support dens of either species. American Badger and San Joaquin kit fox could occur within the project site utilizing the project site only as migratory habitat; however, the high degree of agricultural development and active existing Gallo facilities surrounding the project site reduce the likelihood that these species would occur within the project site.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 4‐4 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Setting and Survey Results

Trees within the project site provide suitable roosting habitat for hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus); however, their location along roadways and the routinely high activity level at the existing Gallo facilities reduces the potential for this species to occur within the project site. The exposure experienced by the single line of trees planted along the roads and the routine traffic on the roads reduces the likelihood that hoary bat would roost within this habitat; however, the potential for this species to utilize these trees remains.

The project site also provides potential nesting and foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsonii) and white‐tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), and potential foraging habitat for northern harrier (Circus cyaneus). Given the routine disturbance associated with traffic on the surrounding roads near the medium‐sized trees, the potential for Swainson’s hawk and white‐tailed kite to nest within the project site is low. There is potential for Swainson’s hawk, white‐tailed kite, and northern harrier to forage in the fallow fields and disturbed areas within the project site. There are some large trees located outside, but within 0.5‐mile, of the project site (particularly within the riparian corridor along the Merced River) that may provide suitable nesting substrate for Swainson’s hawk and other birds regulated by MBTA. These trees are associated with the riparian habitat north of the project site along the Merced River, as well as other trees near the rural structures and residences surrounding the project site. Trees that are located within the project site were surveyed and no nests were observed, but it is possible that nests could have been established after the survey was conducted. Project activities have the potential to affect active nests if any are located in trees within 0.5‐mile of the project site. The listing status, preferred habitat, and likelihood for occurrence of special‐status wildlife species in the study area are provided in Appendix D.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 4‐5 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Chapter 5 Regulatory Setting

Regulatory Setting This section discusses the federal, state, and local policies and regulations that are relevant to biological resources identified in the project site. Federal Policies and Regulations Federal Endangered Species Act The federal ESA was enacted in 1973 to protect fish and wildlife species (and their habitats) that have been identified by USFWS or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) as threatened or endangered. Endangered refers to species, subspecies, or distinct population segments in danger of extinction through all or a significant portion of their range; threatened refers to those likely to become endangered in the near future.

The federal ESA is administered by USFWS and NOAA Fisheries. In general, NOAA Fisheries is responsible for protection of ESA‐listed marine species and anadromous fish species, while other listed species are under USFWS jurisdiction. Provisions of Sections 7 and 9 of ESA are relevant to federally listed species.

ESA Authorization Process for Federal Actions (Section 7) Section 7 of ESA provides a means for authorizing take of threatened and endangered species by federal agencies. Under Section 7, the federal agency conducting, funding, or permitting an action (the lead federal agency) must consult with USFWS or NOAA Fisheries, as appropriate, to ensure that the proposed action will not jeopardize endangered or threatened species or destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. If a proposed project “may affect” a listed species or designated critical habitat, the lead agency is required to prepare a biological assessment evaluating the nature and severity of the expected effect. In response, USFWS or NOAA Fisheries issues a biological opinion, with a determination that the proposed action either:

 may jeopardize the continued existence of one or more listed species (jeopardy finding) or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat (adverse modification finding); or

 will not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species (no jeopardy finding) or result in adverse modification of critical habitat (no adverse modification finding).

The biological opinion issued by USFWS or NOAA Fisheries may stipulate discretionary “reasonable and prudent” conservation measures. If the project would not jeopardize a listed species, USFWS or NOAA Fisheries issues an incidental take statement to authorize the proposed activity.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 5‐1 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Regulatory Setting

ESA Prohibitions (Section 9) Section 9 of ESA prohibits the take of any fish or wildlife species listed under ESA as endangered. Take of threatened species also is prohibited under Section 9, unless otherwise authorized by federal regulations.1 Take, as defined by ESA, means “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” Harm is defined as “any act that kills or injures the species, including significant habitat modification.” In addition, Section 9 prohibits removing, digging up, cutting, and maliciously damaging or destroying federally listed plants on sites under federal jurisdiction.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act The MBTA (16 U.S. Government Code [USC] 703) enacts the provisions of treaties between the United States, Great Britain, Mexico, Japan, and the Soviet Union, and authorizes the U.S. Secretary of the Interior to protect and regulate the taking of migratory birds. It establishes seasons and bag limits for hunted species and protects migratory birds, their occupied nests, and their eggs (16 USC 703; 50 CFR 10, 21). Most actions that result in taking or permanent or temporary possession of a protected species constitute violations of the MBTA. Examples of permitted actions that do not violate the MBTA are the possession of a hunting license to pursue specific game birds, legitimate research activities, display in zoological gardens, bird‐banding, and other similar activities. USFWS is responsible for overseeing compliance with the MBTA, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal Damage Control Officer makes recommendations on related animal protection issues.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regulation of Waters of the United States, Including Wetlands The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulate the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Waters of the United States include wetlands and lakes, rivers, streams, and their tributaries. Wetlands are defined for regulatory purposes as areas inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions (33 CFR 328.3, 40 CFR 230.3).

Project proponents must obtain a permit from USACE for all discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, before proceeding with a proposed action.

A recent federal ruling may affect whether wetlands are considered jurisdictional by USACE (January 9, 2001, Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County [SWANCC] ruling [SWANCC v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (121 S.CT. 675, 2001)]). Guidance on non‐navigable, isolated [and] intrastate waters was published on January 19, 2001, by Counsel for EPA and USACE in response to the January 9, 2001, SWANCC ruling. The guidance essentially resulted in the determination that non‐navigable, isolated waters may not be regulated by USACE.

As part of the wetland delineation and verification process, USACE will determine whether wetlands in a project site are isolated and therefore not regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. If

1 In some cases, exceptions may be made for threatened species under ESA Section 4[d]; in such cases, USFWS or NOAA Fisheries issues a 4[d] rule describing protections for the threatened species and specifying the circumstances under which take is allowed.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 5‐2 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Regulatory Setting

such wetlands are jurisdictional and could be filled as part of future development projects, USACE may either issue an individual permit or general permits on a program level (more likely an individual permit, if federally listed species are associated with such wetlands). General permits are prior‐authorized permits issued to cover similar activities that are expected to cause only minimal individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects.

Nationwide permits are a type of general permit that cover particular fill activities. Nationwide permits have a set of general conditions that must be met for the permits to apply to a project, as well as specific conditions that apply to each nationwide permit.

The following conditions would need to be met as part of the Section 404 permitting process.

 Procurement of Section 401 water quality certification from the RWQCB.

 Compliance with ESA, involving consultation with USFWS, if the project is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or its critical habitat.

 Compliance with the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. State Policies and Regulations California Endangered Species Act CESA protects wildlife and plants listed as endangered or threatened under the act by the California Fish and Game Commission. CESA is administered by CDFG. CESA prohibits all persons from taking state‐listed endangered or threatened species except under certain circumstances. The CESA definition of take is any action or attempt to “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” Section 2081 provides a means by which agencies or individuals may obtain authorization for incidental take of state‐listed species, except for certain species designated as fully protected under the California Fish and Game Code (see California Fish and Game Code below). Take must be incidental to, not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful activity. Requirements for a Section 2081 permit are similar to those used in the federal ESA Section 7 process; these include identification of impacts on listed species, development of mitigation measures that minimize and fully mitigate impacts, development of a monitoring plan, and assurance of funding to implement mitigation and monitoring. One state‐listed species (Swainson’s hawk) could be affected by the proposed project and could be subject to provisions of CESA.

California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3503.5 Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of California Fish and Game Code respectively protect bird nests and nests belonging to birds in the orders Falconiformes and Strigiformes. Section 3503 states, “it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto.” Section 3503.5 states, “it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds‐of‐prey) or to take, possess or destroy the nest of eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” Nests of northern harrier and white‐tailed kite are protected by both Fish and Game Sections 3503 and 3503.5.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 5‐3 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Regulatory Setting

Regional Water Quality Control Board Water Code Section 13260 requires “any person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, in any region that could affect the waters of the state to file a report of discharge (an application for waste discharge requirements).” Under the Porter‐Cologne Water Quality Control Act definition, the term waters of the state is defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state.” The recent SWANCC ruling, described above, has no bearing on the Porter‐Cologne definition. Although all waters of the United States that are within the borders of California are also waters of the state, the converse is not true (i.e., in California, waters of the United States represent a subset of waters of the state). Thus, California retains authority to regulate discharges of waste into any water of the state, regardless of whether UCACE has concurrent jurisdiction under Section 404.

If USACE determines that the wetland is not subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, Section 401 water quality certification is not required. However, the regional water quality control board may impose waste discharge requirements if fill material is placed into waters of the state.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 5‐4 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Chapter 6 Project Impact Analysis

Based on ICF International’s current understanding of the project, all construction activities are anticipated to occur within the project site, the limits of which are depicted on Figure 2.

Proposed construction associated with the proposed project has the potential to affect special‐status wildlife species or their habitat. Land cover and vegetation communities within the project site include approximately 8.64 acres of fallow field, 4.12 acres of disturbed land, 1.20 acres of developed/landscaped, and 0.4‐acre of vineyard.

Three special‐status mammalian species (American badger, hoary bat, San Joaquin kit fox) could respectively migrate through or roost in or near the project site. These species could be affected by ground or tree disturbance associated with construction of the project, representing a potentially significant impact. However, these potential impacts would be reduced to a less‐than‐significant level with the incorporation of mitigation presented in Chapter 7.

Three special‐status bird species (Swainson’s hawk, northern harrier, and white‐tailed kite) could forage and nest near the project site, and could be affected by ground or noise disturbance associated with construction of the project, representing a potentially significant impact. Further, the project would result in the removal of approximately 12.76 acres of suitable Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat, which would also be a significant impact. However, these impacts would be reduced to a less‐than‐significant level with implementation of mitigation presented in Chapter 7.

No sensitive habitats, special‐status plants, or other special‐status wildlife has potential to occur within the project site, especially given the high degree of disturbance associated with routine agricultural practices within the project site and surrounding lands. A discussion of potential impacts and recommended measures to avoid and minimize these impacts are provided below and in Chapter 7, respectively.

Impact 1: Potential Loss or Disturbance of American Badger, San Joaquin Kit Fox, or Hoary Bat

Construction activities occurring in the project site could result in the mortality or disturbance (e.g., noise, vibration) of special‐status mammals, such as American badger (state species of special concern), San Joaquin kit fox (federally listed as endangered and state listed as threatened), and hoary bat (state species of special concern). While American badger or San Joaquin kit fox are not expected to migrate through the project site, the potential for these species to be affected as they migrate through the project site exists. The removal of trees or disturbance (e.g., noise, vibration) within the project site could adversely affect hoary bat maternal roosts and result in the mortality of any adults or young that may be present. Mitigation Measures 1 and 2, presented in Chapter 7, is recommended to avoid and minimize impacts on special‐status mammals, and would reduce this impact to a less‐than‐significant level.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 6‐1 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Project Impact Analysis

Impact 2: Potential Loss or Disturbance of Tree‐, Shrub‐, and Ground‐Nesting Birds and Raptors

Construction activities occurring in the project site could result in the disturbance (e.g., noise, vibration) of nearby nests for special‐status birds, such as Swainson’s hawk (state‐listed threatened), northern harrier (state species of special‐concern), and white‐tailed kite (state fully protected species). Removal of the trees and shrubs in or adjacent to the project site that provide suitable nesting habitat for a number of common migratory birds, including loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludvicianus), lesser goldfinch (Carduelis psaltria), and tree swallow, could result in the removal or disturbance of an active migratory bird nest. Additionally, suitable Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat would be eliminated by the land use conversion from agricultural to development associated with the Gallo LWINE Project.

All migratory birds and raptors are protected under MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3503.5. If construction occurs during the breeding season (generally between February 1 and August 31), construction activities (e.g., tree and shrub removal, excavation, grading) that occur within the project site could disturb or remove occupied nests of Swainson’s hawk, northern harrier, white‐tailed kite, and other migratory birds. This disturbance could cause nest abandonment and subsequent loss of eggs or developing young at active nests located in or near the project site. This would be a violation of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3503.5. Mitigation Measures 1, 3, 4, and 5 presented in Chapter 7, is recommended to avoid and minimize impacts on nesting migratory birds and compensate for the removal of approximately 12.76 acres of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat, and would reduce this impact to a less‐than‐significant level.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 6‐2 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Chapter 7 Mitigation Required

In order to avoid and minimize project impacts on special‐status mammalian species and nesting raptors and migratory bird species, the following mitigation would be necessary. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 would reduce these impacts to a less‐than‐significant level.

Mitigation Measure 1: Develop Worker Awareness Program

Prior to construction, a Worker Awareness Program must be conducted to inform construction project workers of their responsibilities regarding sensitive environmental resources. Such program shall include environmental education about the American badger, San Joaquin kit fox, hoary bat, Swainson’s hawk, northern harrier, and white‐tailed kite, and shall include both visual aids to foster identification of suitable habitat, foraging practices, and identification of individuals of each species.

Mitigation Measure 2: Avoid disturbance of American badger, San Joaquin Kit Fox, and Hoary Bat

Immediately prior to the initiation of construction, a qualified biologist shall be retained and conduct preconstruction surveys for American badger, San Joaquin Kit Fox, and hoary bat to avoid impacts to these species. If these species are not found within the project site, then no further mitigation associated with this measure is necessary. If these species are found within the project site, a no‐activity buffer shall be established and kept in place until the individual(s) leave the project site, at which point construction may start as determined by the biologist. If the individual does not leave the project site or returns, the appropriate agencies (USFWS and/or CDFG) shall be contacted and conferred in the development of an impact avoidance plan. Once the impact avoidance plan is developed and implemented, construction may begin as dictated by the plan.

The project may adversely affect active Swainson’s hawk nests and foraging habitat within the project vicinity or suitable foraging habitat within a 5‐mile radius of the project because suitable nesting substrate occurs within 0.5 mile of the site and suitable foraging habitat occurs within the project site and the species could be adversely affect by project activities. Therefore the CDFG‐ preapproved CEQA mitigation measures described below in Mitigation Measure 3 and 4 will be required for the proposed project.

Mitigation Measure 3: Avoid disturbance of tree‐nesting Swainson’s hawk and conduct preconstruction nesting surveys. 1. Protocol Surveys. The project applicant must conduct a protocol‐level survey in conformance with the “Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley,” Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee (www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/docs/swain_proto.pdf) (May 31, 2000) hereby incorporated by reference. This protocol prescribes minimum standards for survey equipment, mode of survey, angle and distance to tree, speed, visual and audible clues, distractions, notes and observations, and timing of surveys.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 7‐1 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Mitigation Required

a. Nesting surveys can only be performed between January 1 and July 30 and will vary depending on seasonal conditions and the actual nesting period.

b. Surveys must be performed by a qualified raptor biologist.

c. A written report with the pre‐construction survey results must be provided to the Planning Department and CDFG within 30 days prior to commencement of construction‐related activities. The report shall include: the date of the report, authors and affiliations, contact information, introduction, methods, study location, including map, results, discussion, and literature cited.

d. The project applicant must submit CNDDB forms for Swainson’s hawk occurrences and for any other listed, fully protected, or species of special concern encountered and positively identified during the surveys. www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb. 2. Nest Avoidance. If the required nesting surveys show there are no active nests within the appropriate radius then no additional mitigation will be required. If active nests are documented on the CNDDB data base, or other environmental study, or are discovered during the protocol survey, the project applicant must obtain CESA 2081 Management Authorization prior to the start of construction‐related activities. CDFG preapproved mitigation measures to avoid nest impacts during construction must include:

a. No intensive new disturbances (for example, heavy equipment operation associated with construction, use of cranes or draglines, new rock crushing activities), habitat conversions, or other project‐related activities that may cause nest abandonment or forced fledging, should be initiated within a 0.5 mile (in rural areas) or 0.25 mile (in urbanized areas) of an active nest between March 1 and September 15, or August 15 if written CESA 2081 Management Authorization obtained from CDFG prior to such disturbance.

b. Nest trees shall not be removed unless there is no feasible way of avoiding it. If a nest tree must be removed, written CESA 2081 Management Authorization must be obtained from CDFG prior to tree removal. Such written authorization must specify: . The tree removal period, which can typically be expected to be between October 1 and February 1. . The conditions required to offset the loss of the nest tree.

c. If disturbances, habitat conversions, or other project‐related activities, that may cause nest abandonment or forced fledging, are necessary, within the nest protection buffer zone, monitoring of the nest site by a qualified raptor biologist, funded by the project applicant, shall be required, to determine if the nest is abandoned. If the nest is abandoned, but the nestlings are still alive, the project proponent is required to fund the recovery and hacking that is the controlled release of captive reared young of the nestling.

d. Routine disturbances such as agricultural activities, commuter traffic, and routine maintenance activities within 0.25 mile of an active nest are not prohibited.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 7‐2 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Mitigation Required

Mitigation Measure 4: Compensate for loss of foraging habitat

As described above, known nesting trees are located closer than 5 miles to the project site, and therefore the project site qualifies as foraging habitat. Compensation for loss of foraging habitat is based on the distance from the nearest nest, as described on the table below. The specific compensation ratio will be based on the results of the preconstruction survey described in Mitigation Measure 3.

Distance from Project Boundary Mitigation Acreage Ratio* Within 1 mile 1.00:1** Between 1 and 5 miles 0.75:1 *Ratio means [acres of mitigation land] to [acres of foraging habitat impacted]. **This ratio shall be 0.5:1 if the acquired lands can be actively managed for prey production.

CDFG provides options for off‐site habitat management by fee title acquisition or conservation easement acquisition with CDFG‐approved management plan, and by the acquisition of comparable habitat. Mitigation credits may be pursued though a CDFG‐approved mitigation bank for Swainson’s hawk impacts in Merced County. Go to: www.dfg.ca.gov/habcon/conplan/mitbank/catalogue.

The CDFG preapproved CEQA mitigation measures are found at: “DFG Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks in the Central Valley of California,” CDFG (http://www.madera‐county.com/rma/archives/uploads/1188143775 Document_upload_23w.pdf ) (November 8, 1994).

Mitigation Measure 5: Avoid disturbance of tree‐, shrub‐, and ground‐nesting migratory birds and raptors (other than Swainson’s hawk) and conduct preconstruction nesting bird surveys.

The proposed project may adversely affect active migratory bird and raptor nests within the project vicinity because suitable nesting substrate occurs within 0.5 mile of the site and active nests could be adversely affected by project activities. 1. If the surveys indicate the presence of migratory bird nests in any areas that would be directly affected by vegetation removal, construction activities, or any other ground disturbing activities, a no‐disturbance buffer shall be established around the nesting site. 2. Factors determining the buffer size typically include the level of noise or construction disturbance, line of sight between the nest and the disturbance, ambient levels of noise and other disturbances, and other topographical or artificial barriers. These factors will be analyzed in order to make an appropriate decision on buffer distances. The distance, extent, and nature of the buffers will be determined by a qualified wildlife biologist in consultation with and subject to CDFG written approval. 3. To avoid disturbance or destruction of a nesting site, no construction shall occur within the no‐disturbance buffer until after the breeding season, or until a qualified wildlife biologist determines that the young have fledged, a report summarizing the survey results shall be submitted to CDFG and subject to the agency’s approval.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 7‐3 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Chapter 8 References Cited

California Department of Fish and Game. 2010. September 2010 CNDDB Newsletter. Biogeographic Data Branch. Sacramento, California. Available: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/CNDDB_News_Sep_2010.pdf

California Native Plant Society. 2012. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants that occur in or may be affected by the Project in the Turlock U.S. Geologic Survey 7.5‐minute quadrangle and surrounding nine quadrangles. Version 7‐12apr 4‐11‐12. Accessed: April 19, 2012. Available: http://cnps.site.aplus.net/cgi‐bin/inv/inventory.cgi/Html?item=checkbox_9.htm

California Natural Diversity Database. 2012. Special‐Status Plants, Animals, and Habitats that occur in or may be affected by the Project in the Turlock and Stevinson U.S. Geologic Survey 7.5‐ minute quadrangles. RareFind, Version 3.1.0 (March 31, 2012 update). Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game.

Jennings, M. R., and M. P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. Rancho Cordova, CA California Department of Fish and Game.

Remsen, J. V. 1978. Bird Species of Special Concern in California: An Annotated List of Declining or Vulnerable Bird Species. (Wildlife Management Branch Administrative Report No. 78‐1.) Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game, Nongame Wildlife Investigations.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Federal Endangered and Threatened Species that occur in or may be affected by the Project in the Turlock and Stevinson U.S. Geologic Survey 7.5‐minute quadrangles. Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office. Accessed: April 19, 2012. Available: http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/y_old_site/es/spp_lists/auto_list.cfm

U.S. Geologic Survey. 1961 (Photorevised 1976). Turlock, California 7.5‐minute Quadrangle. Department of the Interior.

U.S. Geologic Survey. 1961 (Photorevised 1987). Stevinson, California 7.5‐minute Quadrangle. Department of the Interior.

Williams, D. F. 1986. Mammalian Species of Special Concern in California. Administrative Report 86‐ 1:1‐112. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Management Division.

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 8‐1 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Chapter 9 Preparer’s Qualifications

General Biological Resources Survey for the E. & J. Gallo June 2012 9‐1 Winery Livingston Water Innovation and Energy Facility ICF 00265.12

Eric M. Christensen | Resume

ERIC M. CHRISTENSEN Biologist

Eric is a biologist that primarily specializes in surveys of wildlife Years of Experience species occurring in a variety of habitats, as well as the Professional start date: 9/2004 preparation of CEQA/NEPA biological analyses and ESA ICF start date: 10/2010 compliance. Eric has a wide array of experience in related areas including, but not limited to, conducting special-status wildlife Education and botanical species surveys, focused special-status species, BS, Evolution and Ecology, habitat assessments, stream assessments, mitigation University of California, Davis, monitoring, residual dry matter analyses, wetland delineations, California, 2004 water quality sample collection and analyses, stormwater Permits pollution prevention monitoring, and impact avoidance USFWS 10(a)1(1)(A) Permit #TE- assessments. He has prepared Section 7 biological 795934-10: Authorized to assessments, jurisdictional wetland delineations, and biological independently conduct surveys sections of various CEQA and NEPA documents. Eric has for listed vernal pool invertebrates throughout conducted numerous analyses and assessments for listed California, 2010 vernal pool branchiopods (fairy shrimp), California red-legged CDFG Scientific Collecting frog, California tiger salamander, and western burrowing owl Permit #SC-008785, California, 2011 on several occasions.

Key Skills Training Rare Pond Species Workshop, Vernal Pool Branchiopod (Fairy Shrimp) Surveys. Mr. Christensen Laguna de Santa Rosa holds a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Section 10(a)1(1)(A) Foundation, Rohnert Park, California, 2008 and 2012 Permit (TE-795934-10) authorizing him to conduct protocol- Western Pond Turtle Training level and presence/absence surveys for special-status vernal Course, Elkhorn Slough Coastal pool branchiopods throughout California. Training Program, 2011 California Rapid Assessment of California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM) Wetlands: Riverine and Estuarine Assessment/Wetland Delineation. Eric has completed numerous Modules, Moss Landing Marine Laboratory, 2011 wetland delineation courses, including the CRAM Riverine and Special Status Amphibians and Estuarine Modules, and conducted several wetland delineations Reptiles of Northern California, and CRAM assessments. UC Davis Extensions, Sacramento, California, 2009 Special-status Herpetological and Burrowing Owl Surveys. Mr. Wetland Delineation Course, Christensen has experience conducting protocol –level surveys Wetland Training Institute, Rocklin, California, 2006 and habitat assessments for California red-legged frog, Stormwater Pollution Prevention California tiger salamander, and western burrowing owl. Plan Monitor Workshop, Sacramento County, 2008, 2007, 2006 Fairy Shrimp of California, Mary Belk, UC Davis, California, 2005

Page 1

Eric M. Christensen | Resume

Project Experience

Water

San Jose Water Pollution Control Plant Project and Programmatic Biological Surveys—City of San José, San José, CA. Biologist. Conducted surveys for western burrowing owl, other special-status wildlife species, Congdon’s tarplant, other special- status plant species, habitat characterization, and wetland delineation on SJWPCP facilities and buffer lands.

Central Bay Operations and Maintenance Facility ESA Compliance—San Francisco Water Emergency Transportation Authority, San Francisco, California Biologist. Prepared Section 7 Biological Assessment for ESA compliance, which involved both analyzing effects on species regulated by the National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Thoroughly analyzed numerous effects of the project on listed species during proposed construction and maintenance operations, on both land and adjacent marine habitats.

Chain of Lakes Groundwater Recapture Biological Assessment—Zone 7 Water Agency, Livermore, California Biologist. Conducted wildlife surveys and wetland assessment of habitats within the project site and wrote the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.

Upper Penitencia Creek Improvement Project—Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority/Kimley-Horn and Associates, San José, California Biologist. Prepared the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and carried out necessary special-status wildlife and plant surveys of the project site. Also, surveyed trees within the project and wrote a tree survey report pursuant to City regulations.

Page 2

Eric M. Christensen | Resume

Springtown Culvert Replacement and Restoration Permitting—City of Livermore, California Biologist. Prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and conducted necessary fieldwork. Also, authored the Section 7 Biological Assessment to address effects to federally listed species.

Transportation—Rail

Pacheco Pass Corridor EIR/EIS—California High Speed Rail Authority/Parsons Transportation Group, San José, California Biologist. Conducted fieldwork that contributed to the biological resources section of the EIR/EIS.

BART Warm Springs Extension Wetland Delineation Update— Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), Milpitas and San José, California Wetland Delineator. Delineated features within the study area and prepared jurisdictional determination forms per Army Corps of Engineers’ guidance and the Arid West Supplement. Attended a field verification meeting with Army Corps of Engineers to determine jurisdictionality of features identified.

East-West Connector ESA Compliance—Alameda County Transportation Authority, Fremont, California Biologist. Prepared Section 7 Biological Assessment for ESA compliance, during which effects to federally-listed species and suitable mitigation alternatives were determined.

Schools

Livermore Charter School Biological CEQA/NEPA Compliance—City of Livermore, Livermore, California Biologist. Prepared biological sections for CEQA/NEPA analyses and associated documents to ensure project compliance.

Parks, Trails, and Open Space

Del Monte Forest Plan Phase 1 Environmental Scope—County of Monterey, Pebble Beach, California Biologist. Co-authored the biological resources section of the Pebble Beach Environmental Impact Report, utilizing data from numerous prior studies. Consolidated management and

Page 3

Eric M. Christensen | Resume

mitigation measures from prior accepted plans, and developed avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to suit the updated proposed project.

Arroyo Trail Connector Bridge Preconstruction Surveys and Construction Monitoring—City of Livermore, Livermore, California Biological Monitor. Conducted preconstruction surveys for western burrowing owl, California red-legged frog, western pond turtle, and nesting raptor and migratory bird species. Led worker awareness training of special-status species issues prior to construction activities. Monitored construction activities to successfully avoid impacts to special-status species.

California Red-legged Frog Habitat Assessment—Private Land Owner, Folsom, California Assessed aquatic habitat on and within one mile of a site to determine potential for utilization by California red-legged frog based on the species’ requirements, proximity of known occurrences, and condition of habitat within study area.

Presence/Absence Herpetofauna Surveys—, Nevada County, California Conducted numerous presence/absence surveys along multiple canals for California red-legged frog, foothill yellow-legged frog, and western pond turtle.

Presence/Absence Surveys for Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods—Numerous Clients, Sacramento and San Joaquin Counties, California While surveying vernal pools for the presence/absence of vernal pool branchiopods in, over 40 California tiger salamander larvae were observed.

Presence/Absence Surveys for California Tiger Salamander— Private Land Owner, Sacramento County, California Assisted Michael Bumgardner in surveying a stockpond with minnow traps and vernal pools with dip-nets for the presence of California tiger salamander.

Page 4

Eric M. Christensen | Resume

Presence/Absence Surveys for Western Burrowing Owl— Numerous Clients, Several Locations Throughout Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, Yuba, Placer, El Dorado, San Joaquin, Solano, and Calaveras Counties, California Surveyed numerous sites within a wide variety of habitats were surveyed for the presence of western burrowing owls or evidence of active burrows. Numerous individuals and evidence of occupied burrows observed during survey experience.

Energy

Alameda Solar Energy Center—Cool Earth Solar, Alameda County, California Biologist. Authored the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and conducted biological fieldwork. Cooperated in the development of mitigation measures to compensate for effects to special-status species.

Transportation—Highways

Wetland Mitigation Design for US101 Willits Bypass— Caltrans, Willits, California Biologist/CRAM Assessor. Collected spatial and population data of Baker’s meadowfoam within proposed mitigation sites. Also, preformed CRAM assessments of multiple riverine sites, with the overall objective of qualifying wetland values throughout the project area and proposed mitigation sites.

Conservation Planning

Three Creeks HCP Support—Santa Clara Valley Water District/ Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP, Santa Clara County, California Biologist. Compiled information for numerous covered species and contributed in the writing the draft HCP and subsequent updated versions.

Multiple Region HCP—Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), San José, California Biologist. Compiled information for numerous covered species that occur within the Plan Area, which includes large, biologically diverse portions of California throughout much of the State.

Page 5

Eric M. Christensen | Resume

Participated in covered activities impact analyses, habitat suitability ranking and quantification, and development of avoidance and minimization measures, and composition of several sections of the HCP and various species accounts.

Military

Vernal Pool Surveys Aero Club Travis Air Force Base— U.S. Department of the Navy, Fairfield, California Permitted Biologist. Conducted protocol-level surveys of constructed and natural vernal pools and wetlands within the Aero Club study area. Data collected was included in a 90-day report presenting findings to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Restoration

Lower Spivey Pond Construction—American River Conservancy, El Dorado County, California. August 2004- October 2004. Biological Monitor. Oversaw and assisted in site preparation and construction of Lower Spivey Pond in to increase the amount of breeding habitat for California red-legged frog, which inhabits historic Upper Spivey Pond. Served as biological monitor for the site during construction activities to ensure and assisted with restoration planting following completion of the project. Assisted in conducting a protocol-level survey to determine the number of individuals inhabiting Upper Spivey Pond.

Recognition and Commendations March 2011 Bay Area Utilization (Billability) Award from ICF International

Employment History Foothill Associates. Biologist. Rocklin, California. February 2005– September 2011.

American River Conservancy. Biological Monitor. Coloma, California. August 2004–October 2004.

Page 6

Eric M. Christensen | Resume

Other Experience

Jepson Prairie California Tiger Salamander Population and Migration Study— U.C. Davis Herpetology Laboratory, Davis, California. December 2003-June 2004. Ecological Field Study Assistant. As an undergraduate, collected field data for an ongoing drift fence study while working under Dr. H. Bradley Shaffer, Dr. Peter Trenham, and Dr. Benjamin Fitzpatrick. Duties included diligent inspection of pit-fall traps dictated by weather conditions, collection of genetic data, record physical measurements and gender of each individual, photo documentation, and placement of individuals into suitable burrows.

Wildlands Studies— Numerous locations in the Rocky Mountains, Montana. March 2003-June 2003. Student. Participated in the Rocky Mountain Section of the Wildlands Studies Program offered by University of California Santa Barbara. Completed three classes (Biology of the Rockies, Land Use Planning and Law, and Natural and Cultural History of the Rockies) while camping at several locations within the backcountry of the Rocky Mountains. Tasks included, but were not limited to, the ecological study and analysis of the reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone National Park; evaluation of potential ecological, socioeconomic, and recreational effects of a proposed preservation area adjacent to the existing Gallatin National Forest; and anthropological study of the native American tribes prior to and following the immigration of homesteaders. Additional activities included interaction with local residents of towns, communities, and reservations, along the route; participating in interviewing influential community members and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists; and, in one occurrence, identification of Rocky Mountain tailed-frog.

Page 7

Appendix A List of Plant Species Observed

Appendix A

List of Plant Species Observed within the Gallo LWINE Facility Project Area

Scientific Name Common Name Associated Vegetation Community/Land Cover *Amaranthus spp. pigweed fallow field Ambrosia psilostachya western ragweed fallow field *Anagallis arvensis scarlet pimpernel fallow field *Aira caryophyllea hairgrass fallow field *Avena sativa oat fallow field *Bromus diandrus ripgut brome fallow field *Bromus hordeaceus softchess fallow field *Centaurea solstitialis yellow star‐thistle fallow field *Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed disturbed, fallow field, developed/landscaped Cynodon dactylon Bermuda grass developed/landscaped, fallow field, vineyards Cyperus eragrostis tall flatsedge fallow field *Erodium cicutarium. red‐stem filaree fallow field *Geranium spp. geranium fallow field *Hirschfeldia incana short‐pod mustard disturbed, fallow field Holocarpha virgata narrow tarplant fallow field *Hordeum spp. barley disturbed, fallow field, vineyards *Lactucca serriola prickly lettuce fallow field *Lolium multif lorum Italian ryegrass fallow field *Lupinus spp. lupine disturbed, fallow field *Lythrum hyssopifolium hyssop loosestrife disturbed, fallow field *Nerium oleander oleander developed/landscaped *Picris echioides bristly ox‐tongue disturbed, fallow field *Plantago lanceolata English plantain disturbed, fallow field *Quercus suber cork oak developed/landscaped *Raphanus sativus wild radish disturbed, fallow field *Rumex crispus curly dock fallow field Spergularia rubra purple sand spurry fallow field Trifolium spp. clover disturbed, fallow field *Triticum asetivum wheat fallow field *Vitis spp. wine grapes vineyards *Xanthium strumarium common cocklebur disturbed, fallow field Note: Non‐native species are indicated by an asterisk (*).

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 A‐1 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

Appendix B List of Wildlife Species Observed

Appendix B

List of Wildlife Species Observed within the Gallo LWINE Facility Project Area

Scientific Name Common Name Nature and Location of Observation Buteo jamaicensis red‐tailed hawk direct visual, fallow field Carpodacus mexicanus house finch direct visual, vineyard and fallow field Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow direct visual, vineyard, fallow field, developed/landscaped, and disturbed Melospiza melodia song sparrow direct visual, developed/landscaped and disturbed Mimus polyglottos northern mockingbird direct visual, developed/landscaped Otospermophilus beecheyi California ground direct visual, developed/landscaped squirrel Sylvilagus audubonii Audubon’s cottontail direct visual, fallow field Tachycinecta bicolor tree swallow direct visual, vineyard, fallow field, and disturbed Turdus migratorius American robin direct visual, vineyard and fallow field * indicates species was audibly detected.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 B‐1 Gallo LWINE Facility Project ICF 00265.12

Appendix C Special‐Status Plants

Appendix C

Special‐Status Plants Known to Occur or that May Occur in the Project Area

Statusa Federal/Sta Blooming Species te/CRPR California Distribution Habitats Period Likelihood to Occur in Project Areac Astragalus tener –/–/1B Southern Sacramento Valley, Grassy flats and vernal pool Mar-Jun None –there are no CNDDB records var. tener northern San Joaquin Valley, margins, on alkali soils, within 5 miles of the project area, and Alkali milk- east San Francisco Bay Area below 200 feet above mean there is no suitable habitat in the project vetch sea level (MSL). area. Further, the high degree of routine historical agricultural-related disturbance experienced by the project area reduce any potential for this species to occur here. Atriplex cordulata SC/–/1B Western Central Valley and Alkali grassland, alkali May-Oct None –there are no CNDDB records Heartscale valleys of adjacent foothills meadow, alkali scrub, within 5 miles of the project area, and below 660 feet above MSL. there is no suitable habitat in the project area. Further, the high degree of routine historical agricultural-related disturbance experienced by the project area reduce any potential for this species to occur here. Atriplex depressa –/–/1B Western and eastern Central Alkali grassland, alkali May-Oct None –there are no CNDDB records Brittlescale Valley and adjacent foothills on meadow, alkali scrub, within 5 miles of the project area, and west side of Central Valley chenopod scrub, playas, there is no suitable habitat in the project valley and foothill area. Further, the high degree of routine grasslands on alkaline or historical agricultural-related disturbance clay soils, below 660 feet experienced by the project area reduce any above MSL. potential for this species to occur here. Atriplex –/–/1B West edge of Central Valley Alkali meadow, alkali Apr-Sep None –there are no CNDDB records joaquiniana from Glenn County to Tulare grassland, saltbush scrub. within 5 miles of the project area, and San Joaquin County there is no suitable habitat in the project spearscale area. Further, the high degree of routine historical agricultural-related disturbance experienced by the project area reduce any potential for this species to occur here.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 C‐1 Gallo LWINE Facility Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix C

Statusa Federal/Sta Blooming Species te/CRPR California Distribution Habitats Period Likelihood to Occur in Project Areac Atriplex –/–/1B Sacramento and San Joaquin Alkali sink and sandy May-Oct None –there are no CNDDB records minuscule Valley, Butte County and from alkaline soils in grasslands, within 5 miles of the project area, and Lesser saltscale Merced County to Kern County between 65-325 feet above there is no suitable habitat in the project MSL. area. Further, the high degree of routine historical agricultural-related disturbance experienced by the project area reduce any potential for this species to occur here. Atriplex persistens –/–/1B Central Valley, from Glenn to Dry beds of vernal pools, on Jul-Oct None –there are no CNDDB records Vernal pool Tulare County alkaline soils, 33-380 feet within 5 miles of the project area, and smallscale above MSL. there is no suitable habitat in the project area. Further, the high degree of routine historical agricultural-related disturbance experienced by the project area reduce any potential for this species to occur here. Atriplex subtilis –/–/1B Central valley, especially San Alkali scalds and alkali Aug-Oct None –there are no CNDDB records Subtle orache Joaquin Valley: Butte, Fresno, grasslands often near vernal within 5 miles of the project area, and Kings, Kern, Madera, Merced, pools there is no suitable habitat in the project and Tulare Counties area. Further, the high degree of routine historical agricultural-related disturbance experienced by the project area reduce any potential for this species to occur here. Castilleja T/E/1B Eastern edge of San Joaquin Vernal pools (often acidic Apr-May None –there are no CNDDB records campestris ssp. Valley and adjacent foothills, soils) within 5 miles of the project area, and succulent from Stanislaus County to there is no suitable habitat in the project Succulent Fresno County area. owl’s-clover Chamaesvce T/–/1B Central Valley from Butte Below the high-water marks Jul None –there are no CNDDB records hooveri County to Tulare County of large northern hardpan within 5 miles of the project area, and Hoover’s and volcanic vernal pools, there is no suitable habitat in the project spurge below 800 above MSL. area.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 C‐2 Gallo LWINE Facility Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix C

Statusa Federal/Sta Blooming Species te/CRPR California Distribution Habitats Period Likelihood to Occur in Project Areac Chloropyron SC/–/1B Central Valley: Alameda, Kern, Meadow, grassland, playa, Jun-Sep None –there are no CNDDB records molle ssp. Merced, Placer, and Solano on alkaline soils, below 500' within 5 miles of the project area, and hispidum Counties there is no suitable habitat in the project Hispid bird’s area. Further, the high degree of routine beak historical agricultural-related disturbance experienced by the project area reduce any potential for this species to occur here. Eryngium –/E/1B San Joaquin River delta, Riparian scrub, seasonally Jun-Aug None –there are no CNDDB records racemosum floodplains, and adjacent Sierra inundated depressions along within 5 miles of the project area, and Delta button- Nevada foothills: Calaveras, floodplains on clay soils, there is no suitable habitat in the project celery Merced, San Joaquin*, and below 250 feet above MSL. area. Stanislaus Counties Lasthenia SC/–/1B Scattered locations in southern Grasslands, vernal pools, Feb-Jun None –there are no CNDDB records glabrata ssp. California from San Luis Obispo alkali sinks, playas, in within 5 miles of the project area, and coulteri County to San Diego County. alkaline soils, below 4,600 there is no suitable habitat in the project Coulter’s Outer south coast range, south above MSL. area. Further, the high degree of routine goldfields coast, northern Channel Islands, historical agricultural-related disturbance peninsular range, western experienced by the project area reduce any Mojave desert potential for this species to occur here. Lepidium latipes –/–/1B Southern Sacramento Valley, Annual grassland on Apr-May None –there are no CNDDB records var. heckardii Glenn, Solano, and Yolo margins of alkali scalds, within 5 miles of the project area, and Heckard’s Counties below 660 above MSL. there is no suitable habitat in the project peppergrass area. Further, the high degree of routine historical agricultural-related disturbance experienced by the project area reduce any potential for this species to occur here. Monardella SC/–/1A Presumed extirpated, last seen in Moist, sub-alkaline soils May-Aug None –there is one CNDDB record within leucocephala 1941, historically known from associated with low 5 miles of the project area, located Merced northern San Joaquin Valley elevation grassland, in immediately south of Delhi that is from an monardella sandy depressions and observation made in 1941. There is no riverbeds, from 115 to 330 suitable habitat in the project area, due to feet above MSL. the high degree of routine historical agricultural-related disturbance experienced.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 C‐3 Gallo LWINE Facility Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix C

Statusa Federal/Sta Blooming Species te/CRPR California Distribution Habitats Period Likelihood to Occur in Project Areac Navarretia –/–/1B Western San Joaquin Valley, Vernal pools and mesic Apr-Jul None –there are no CNDDB records prostrate interior South Coast Ranges, areas in coastal scrub and within 5 miles of the project area, and Prostrate central South Coast, Peninsular alkali grasslands there is no suitable habitat in the project navarretia Ranges: Los Angeles, Merced, area. Monterey, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties Neostapfia T/E/1B Central Valley, Colusa*, Adobe soils of vernal pools, May-Sep None –there are no CNDDB records colusana Glenn*, Merced, Solano, generally below 650 above within 5 miles of the project area, and Colusa grass Stanislaus, and Yolo Counties MSL. there is no suitable habitat in the project area. Further, the high degree of routine historical agricultural-related disturbance experienced by the project area reduce any potential for this species to occur here. Orcuttia T/E/1B Scattered locations along east Vernal pools Apr-Sep None –there are no CNDDB records inaequalis edge of the San Joaquin Valley within 5 miles of the project area, and San Joaquin and adjacent foothills, from there is no suitable habitat in the project Valley Orcutt Stanislaus County to Tulare area. grass County Orcuttia pilosa E/E/1B Scattered locations along east Vernal pools, 150-650 May-Aug None –there are no CNDDB records Hairy Orcutt edge of the Central Valley and above MSL. within 5 miles of the project area, and grass adjacent foothills, from Tehama there is no suitable habitat in the project County to Merced County area. Sagittaria –/–/1B Scattered locations in Central Freshwater marshes, May-Aug None –there are no CNDDB records sanfordii Valley and Coast Ranges sloughs, canals, and other within 5 miles of the project area, and Sanford’s slow-moving water habitats, there is no suitable habitat in the project arrowhead below 1,000 above MSL. area. Tuctoria greenei E/R/1B Scattered distribution along Dry vernal pools, 100-3,350 May-Sep None –there are no CNDDB records Greene’s eastern Central Valley and above MSL. within 5 miles of the project area, and tuctoria foothills from Shasta County to there is no suitable habitat in the project Tulare County area. MSL = Mean Sea Level Note: CNDDB records queried were limited to a 5-mile radius around the project area and the Turlock and Stevinson 7.5-minute USGS quadrangles. a Status explanations:

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 C‐4 Gallo LWINE Facility Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix C

Statusa Federal/Sta Blooming Species te/CRPR California Distribution Habitats Period Likelihood to Occur in Project Areac Federal E = listed as endangered under the ESA – = no listing State E = listed as endangered under the CESA – = no listing California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1A = List 1A species: presumed extinct in California 1B = List 1B species: rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere 2 = List 2 species: rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere CRPR Code Extensions: 0.1 = seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat 0.2 = fairly endangered in California (20- 80% of occurrences threatened) b Populations uncertain or extirpated in the county c Definitions of levels of Occurrence likelihood: Moderate: Plant known to occur in the region from the CNDDB, or other documents in the vicinity of the project, or habitat conditions are of suitable quality. Low: Plant not known to occur in the region from the CNDDB, or other documents in the vicinity of the project; or habitat conditions are of poor quality. None: Plant not known to occur in the region from the CNDDB, or other documents in the vicinity of the project; or suitable habitat is not present in any condition.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 C‐5 Gallo LWINE Facility Project ICF 00265.12

Appendix D Special‐Status Wildlife Species

Appendix D

Special‐Status Wildlife Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Region

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Invertebrates

Branchinecta conservatio E/‐‐ Disjunct occurrences in Solano, Large, deep vernal pools in None –there are no Conservancy fairy shrimp Merced, Tehama, Ventura, Butte, annual grasslands CNDDB records within 5 and Glenn Counties miles of the project area, and there is no suitable habitat in the study area.

Branchinecta longiantenna E/‐‐ Eastern margin of central Coast Small, clear pools in sandstone None –there is one CNDDB Longhorn fairy shrimp Ranges from Contra Costa County to rock outcrops of clear to record within 5 miles of San Luis Obispo County; disjunct moderately turbid clay‐ or grass‐ the project area, but there population in Madera County bottomed pools is no suitable habitat in the study area.

Branchinecta lynchi T/‐‐ Central Valley, central and south Common in vernal pools; also None –there are no Vernal pool fairy shrimp Coast Ranges from Tehama County found in sandstone rock outcrop CNDDB records within 5 to Santa Barbara County; isolated pools. miles of the project area, populations also in Riverside and there is no suitable County. habitat in the study area.

Desmocerus californicus T/‐‐ Stream side habitats below 3,000 Riparian and oak savanna None –there is one CNDDB dimorphus feet throughout the Central Valley. habitats with elderberry shrubs; record within 5 miles of Valley elderberry longhorn elderberries are the host plant. the project area, but there beetle is no suitable habitat (elderberry shrubs) in the study area.

Lepidurus packardi E/‐‐ Shasta County south to Merced Vernal pools and ephemeral stock None –there are no Vernal pool tadpole County. ponds. CNDDB records within 5 shrimp miles of the project area, and there is no suitable habitat in the study area.

General Biological Resources Survey April 2012 D‐1 Gallo LWINE Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Fish

Hypomesus transpacificus T/E Primarily in the Sacramento–San Occurs in estuary habitat in the None – outside of species Delta smelt Joaquin Estuary, but has been found Delta where fresh and brackish known range, there are no as far upstream as the mouth of the water mix in the salinity range of CNDDB records within 5 American River on the Sacramento 2–7 parts per thousand (Moyle miles of the project area, River and Mossdale on the San 2002). and there is no suitable Joaquin River; range extends habitat (Sacramento and downstream to San Pablo Bay. San Joaquin Rivers or their tributaries) in the study area.

Oncorhynchus mykiss T/‐‐ Sacramento and San Joaquin River An anadromous fish that spawns None – there are no Central Valley steelhead and their tributaries. and spends a portion of its life in CNDDB records within 5 inland streams, typically miles of the project area, maturing in the open ocean and there is no suitable habitat (Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers or their tributaries) in the study area.

Oncorhynchus tshawytscha T/T Sacramento and San Joaquin River An anadromous fish that spawns None – there are no Central Valley spring‐run and their tributaries. and spends a portion of its life in CNDDB records within 5 Chinook salmon inland streams, typically miles of the project area, maturing in the open ocean and there is no suitable habitat (Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers or their tributaries) in the study area.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐2 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Oncorhynchus tshawytscha E/E Sacramento and San Joaquin River An anadromous fish that spawns None – there are no Sacramento River winter‐ and their tributaries. and spends a portion of its life in CNDDB records within 5 run Chinook salmon inland streams, typically miles of the project area, maturing in the open ocean and there is no suitable habitat (Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers or their tributaries) in the study area.

Amphibians

Ambystoma californiense T/T Central Valley, including Sierra Small ponds, lakes, or vernal None – there are no California tiger Nevada foothills, up to pools in grasslands and oak CNDDB records within 5 salamander approximately 1,000 feet, and woodlands for larvae; rodent miles of the project area, coastal region from Sonoma County burrows, rock crevices, or fallen and there is no suitable south to Santa Barbara County. logs for cover for adults and for habitat in the study area. summer dormancy.

Rana draytonii T/SSC Found along the coast and coastal Permanent and semipermanent None – there are no California red‐legged frog mountain ranges of California from aquatic habitats, such as creeks CNDDB records within 5 Mendocino County to San Diego and cold‐water ponds, with miles of the project area, County and in the Sierra Nevada emergent and submergent and there is no suitable from Butte County to Stanislaus vegetation; may aestivate in habitat in the study area. County. rodent burrows or cracks during dry periods

Spea hammondii ‐‐/SSC Sierra Nevada foothills, Central Shallow streams with riffles and None – there are no Western spadefoot toad Valley, Coast Ranges, coastal seasonal wetlands, such as vernal CNDDB records within 5 counties in southern California. pools in annual grasslands and miles of the project area, oak woodlands. and there is no suitable habitat in the study area.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐3 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Reptiles

Anniella pulchra pulchra ‐‐/SSC Along the Coast, Transverse, and Habitats with loose soil for None – there is one Silvery legless lizard Peninsular Ranges from Contra burrowing or thick duff or leaf CNDDB record within 5 Costa County to San Diego County litter; often forages in leaf litter at miles of the project area with spotty occurrences in the San plant bases; may be found on on the opposite side of the Joaquin Valley. beaches, sandy washes, and in Merced River from the woodland, chaparral, and riparian project area that is from areas. an observation made in 1998. There is a small amount of low quality habitat in the study area, but this habitat is not likely to support this species due to the intensive historical and recent agricultural‐related disturbance (e.g., discing) of these areas. Further, the project area is surrounded by land that is either developed, active vineyards, or active agricultural fields.

Emys marmorata ‐–/SSC The western pond turtle is Occupies ponds, marshes, rivers, None— there is one Western pond turtle uncommon to common in suitable streams, and irrigation canals CNDDB occurrence of this aquatic habitat throughout with muddy or rocky bottoms and species within 5 miles of California, west of the Sierra‐ with watercress, cattails, water the project area on the Cascade crest and absent from lilies, or other aquatic vegetation other side of the Merced desert regions, except in the Mojave in woodlands, grasslands, and River. There is no suitable Desert along the Mojave River and open forests. Nests are typically aquatic habitat for this its tributaries. constructed in upland habitat species within the project within 0.25 mile of aquatic area, and the project area habitat. is not near any ponds or water bodies enough to provide nesting habitat.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐4 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Gambelia sila E/E, FP San Joaquin Valley from Stanislaus Open habitats with scattered low None – there are no Blunt‐nosed leopard lizard County through Kern County and bushes on alkali flats, and low CNDDB records within 5 along the eastern edges of San Luis foothills, canyon floors, plains, miles of the project area Obispo and San Benito Counties washes, and arroyos; substrates and there is no suitable may range from sandy or gravelly habitat in the study area, soils to hardpan as the project area and surrounding land are either developed or active agricultural fields. Additionally, portions of the site that are not currently used for agricultural production have been historically and recently disturbed (e.g. discing).

Thamnophis gigas T/T Central Valley from the vicinity of Sloughs, canals, low gradient None – there are no Giant garter snake Burrel in Fresno County north to streams and freshwater marsh CNDDB records within 5 near Chico in Butte County; has habitats where there is a prey miles of the project area been extirpated from areas south of base of small fish and and there is no suitable Fresno amphibians; also found in habitat in the study area, irrigation ditches and rice fields; as the ponds within the requires grassy banks and project area and the emergent vegetation for basking adjacent offsite canal do and areas of high ground not support aquatic and protected from flooding during emergent vegetation winter required by this species.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐5 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Mammals

Dipodomys nitratoides exilis E/E Historically found from Merced Co. Found at elevations from 200 to None – there are no Fresno kangaroo rat south to Central Fresno Co. 300 feet in alkali sink habitats CNDDB records within 5 miles of the project area and there is no suitable habitat in the study area, as the project area and surrounding land are either developed or active agricultural fields.

Dipodomys heermanni dixoni ‐‐/‐‐ No data. No data. None – there is one Merced kangaroo rat CNDDB record within 5 miles of the project area from an observation in 1922, located in an area that is now developed (Delhi). There is no suitable habitat in the study area, as the project area and surrounding land are either developed or active agricultural fields.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐6 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Lasiurus cinereus ‐‐/‐‐ Widespread throughout California Roosts in coniferous and Low – there are no CNDDB Hoary bat deciduous trees, typically within records within 5 miles of forests. the project area. Trees within the study area are located along roads and immediately adjacent to the existing Gallo facilities in the project area represent suitable roosting habitat. The high degree of development or active agricultural fields and low density of trees further reduces the expectation that this species would occur within the study area.

Taxidea taxus ‐‐/SSC Throughout California, except the Typically open areas of drier Low (migratory American badger northern corner of the north coast scrub, forest, and herbaceous only)/None (denning or area. habitats with friable soils. foraging) – there are no CNDDB records of this species within 5 miles of the project site, and there is no suitable denning or foraging habitat.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐7 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Vulpes macrotis mutiea E/T Principally occurs in the San Saltbush scrub, grassland, oak, Low (migratory San Joaquin kit fox Joaquin Valley and adjacent open savanna, and freshwater scrub only)/None (denning) – foothills to the west; recent records there are no CNDDB from 17 counties extending from records within 5 miles of Kern County north to Contra Costa the project area and there County is a small amount of low quality habitat in the study area, as the project area and surrounding land are active vineyards and the existing Gallo facility.

Birds

Ardea alba ‐‐/‐‐(rookery) Nests in suitable habitat throughout Widely distributed in freshwater None – There are no Great egret California except at higher and calm‐water intertidal CNDDB records of this elevations in Sierra Nevada and habitats. species within 5 miles of Cascade mountain ranges. the project area. There are suitable nesting trees within the project area; however, this species is not expected to use these trees due to their location along roadways and being a significant distance from wetland habitat.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐8 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Areda herodias ‐‐/‐‐(rookery) Nests in suitable habitat throughout Widely distributed in freshwater None – There are no Great blue heron California except at higher and calm‐water intertidal CNDDB records of this elevations in Sierra Nevada and habitats. species within 5 miles of Cascade mountain ranges. the project area. There are suitable nesting trees within the project area; however, this species is not expected to use these trees due to their location along roadways and being a significant distance from wetland habitat.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐9 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Buteo swainsoni ‐‐/T Lower Sacramento and San Joaquin Nests in oaks or cottonwoods in Moderate (foraging)/Low Swainson’s hawk Valleys, the Klamath Basin, and or near riparian habitats. Forages (nesting) – there are two Butte Valley. Highest nesting in grasslands, irrigated pastures, CNDDB records within 5 densities occur near Davis and and grain fields miles of the project area. Woodland, Yolo County Trees within the study area could provide suitable nesting substrate and open agricultural fields provide suitable foraging habitat for this species. The high degree of development and low density of trees further reduces the probability that this species would nest within the study area. Of the two occurrences depicted on Figure 4, record #1761 (located ~2.5 miles south of the project area) is from on observation made in 2009 and describes two nesting adults, and record #92 (located ~1.5 miles southwest of the project area) is from an observation made in 1979 and describes two adults but no nest.

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐10 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area

Circus cyaneus ‐‐/SSC Occurs throughout lowland Grasslands, meadows, marshes, Moderate (foraging Northern harrier California. Has been recorded in fall and seasonal and agricultural habitat only) —there are at high elevations wetlands no CNDDB records within 5 miles of the project area. However, suitable foraging habitat occurs in the open fields within the project area.

Elanus leucurus ‐‐/FP Lowland areas west of Sierra Low foothills or valley areas with Moderate (foraging)/Low White‐tailed kite Nevada from the head of the valley or live oaks, riparian areas, (nesting) —there are no Sacramento Valley south, including and marshes near open CNDDB records within 5 coastal valleys and foothills to grasslands for foraging miles of the project area. western San Diego County at the However, suitable Mexico border foraging habitat occurs in the open fields and suitable nesting substrate occurs in the trees within the project area. Notes: CNDDB records queried were limited to a 5-mile radius around the project area and the Turlock 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle. Status explanations: Federal E = listed as endangered under the ESA T = listed as threatened under the ESA PT = proposed for federal listing as threatened under the ESA C = species for which USFWS has on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threat(s) to support issuance of a proposed rule to list, but issuance of the proposed rule is precluded D = delisted – = no listing State E = listed as endangered under CESA T = listed as threatened under CESA FP = fully protected under the California Fish and Game Code SSC = species of special concern in California D = delisted – = no listing

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐11 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

County of Merced Appendix D

Scientific and Common Status Potential Occurrence in Names Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Study Area Potential Occurrence in the Study Area High: Known occurrences of the species within the study area, or CNDDB, or other documents, records the occurrence of the species within a 5‐mile radius of the study area; suitable habitat is present within the study area Moderate: CNDDB, or other documents, records the known occurrence of the species within a 5‐mile radius of the study area; poor quality suitable habitat is present within the study area Low: CNDDB, or other documents, does not record the occurrence of the species within a 5‐mile radius of the study area; suitable habitat is present within the study area

General Biological Resources Survey May 2012 D‐12 Gallo LWINE Facility Expansion Project ICF 00265.12

Appendix E USFWS Letter

Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office Species List Page 1 of 2

United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605 Sacramento, California 95825

April 19, 2012

Document Number: 120419115841

Eric Christensen ICF International 75 E. Santa Clara Street, Suite 300 San Jose, CA 95113

Subject: Species List for Gallo LWINE Project

Dear: Mr. Christensen

We are sending this official species list in response to your April 19, 2012 request for information about endangered and threatened species. The list covers the California counties and/or U.S. Geological Survey 7½ minute quad or quads you requested.

Our database was developed primarily to assist Federal agencies that are consulting with us. Therefore, our lists include all of the sensitive species that have been found in a certain area and also ones that may be affected by projects in the area. For example, a fish may be on the list for a quad if it lives somewhere downstream from that quad. Birds are included even if they only migrate through an area. In other words, we include all of the species we want people to consider when they do something that affects the environment.

Please read Important Information About Your Species List (below). It explains how we made the list and describes your responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act.

Our database is constantly updated as species are proposed, listed and delisted. If you address proposed and candidate species in your planning, this should not be a problem. However, we recommend that you get an updated list every 90 days. That would be July 18, 2012.

Please contact us if your project may affect endangered or threatened species or if you have any questions about the attached list or your responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act. A list of Endangered Species Program contacts can be found here.

Endangered Species Division

http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/ES_Species/Lists/es_species_lists_auto-letter.cfm 4/19/2012 Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office Species List Page 1 of 5

These buttons will not appear on your list.

Revise Selection

Print this page

Print species list before going on to letter.

Make Official Letter

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office

Federal Endangered and Threatened Species that Occur in or may be Affected by Projects in the Counties and/or U.S.G.S. 7 1/2 Minute Quads you requested

Document Number: 120419115841

Database Last Updated: September 18, 2011

Quad Lists

Listed Species

Invertebrates

z Branchinecta conservatio { Conservancy fairy shrimp (E) { Critical habitat, Conservancy fairy shrimp (X)

z Branchinecta longiantenna { Critical habitat, longhorn fairy shrimp (X) { longhorn fairy shrimp (E)

z Branchinecta lynchi { Critical habitat, vernal pool fairy shrimp (X) { vernal pool fairy shrimp (T)

z Desmocerus californicus dimorphus { valley elderberry longhorn beetle (T)

z Lepidurus packardi { Critical habitat, vernal pool tadpole shrimp (X) { vernal pool tadpole shrimp (E)

Fish

http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/ES_Species/Lists/es_species_lists.cfm 4/19/2012 Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office Species List Page 2 of 5

z Hypomesus transpacificus { delta smelt (T)

z Oncorhynchus mykiss { Central Valley steelhead (T) (NMFS) { Critical habitat, Central Valley steelhead (X) (NMFS)

z Oncorhynchus tshawytscha { Central Valley spring-run chinook salmon (T) (NMFS) { winter-run chinook salmon, Sacramento River (E) (NMFS)

Amphibians

z Ambystoma californiense { California tiger salamander, central population (T)

z Rana draytonii { California red-legged frog (T)

Reptiles

z Gambelia (=Crotaphytus) sila { blunt-nosed leopard lizard (E)

z Thamnophis gigas { giant garter snake (T)

Mammals

z Dipodomys nitratoides exilis { Fresno kangaroo rat (E)

z Vulpes macrotis mutica { San Joaquin kit fox (E)

Plants

z Chamaesyce hooveri { Critical habitat, Hoover's spurge (X)

Quads Containing Listed, Proposed or Candidate Species:

TURLOCK (423A)

STEVINSON (423D)

County Lists

No county species lists requested.

Key:

http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/ES_Species/Lists/es_species_lists.cfm 4/19/2012 Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office Species List Page 3 of 5

z (E) Endangered - Listed as being in danger of extinction. z (T) Threatened - Listed as likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. z (P) Proposed - Officially proposed in the Federal Register for listing as endangered or threatened. z (NMFS) Species under the Jurisdiction of the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service. Consult with them directly about these species. z Critical Habitat - Area essential to the conservation of a species. z (PX) Proposed Critical Habitat - The species is already listed. Critical habitat is being proposed for it. z (C) Candidate - Candidate to become a proposed species. z (V) Vacated by a court order. Not currently in effect. Being reviewed by the Service. z (X) Critical Habitat designated for this species

Important Information About Your Species List

How We Make Species Lists

We store information about endangered and threatened species lists by U.S. Geological Survey 7½ minute quads. The United States is divided into these quads, which are about the size of San Francisco.

The animals on your species list are ones that occur within, or may be affected by projects within, the quads covered by the list.

z Fish and other aquatic species appear on your list if they are in the same watershed as your quad or if water use in your quad might affect them. z Amphibians will be on the list for a quad or county if pesticides applied in that area may be carried to their habitat by air currents. z Birds are shown regardless of whether they are resident or migratory. Relevant birds on the county list should be considered regardless of whether they appear on a quad list.

Plants

Any plants on your list are ones that have actually been observed in the area covered by the list. Plants may exist in an area without ever having been detected there. You can find out what's in the surrounding quads through the California Native Plant Society's online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants.

Surveying

Some of the species on your list may not be affected by your project. A trained biologist and/or botanist, familiar with the habitat requirements of the species on your list, should determine whether they or habitats suitable for them may be affected by your project. We recommend that your surveys include any proposed and candidate species on your list. See our Protocol and Recovery Permits pages.

For plant surveys, we recommend using the Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories. The results of your surveys should be published in any environmental documents prepared for your project.

Your Responsibilities Under the Endangered Species Act

All animals identified as listed above are fully protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Section 9 of the Act and its implementing regulations prohibit the take of a federally listed wildlife species. Take is defined by the Act as "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect" any such animal.

http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/ES_Species/Lists/es_species_lists.cfm 4/19/2012 Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office Species List Page 4 of 5

Take may include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or shelter (50 CFR §17.3).

Take incidental to an otherwise lawful activity may be authorized by one of two procedures:

z If a Federal agency is involved with the permitting, funding, or carrying out of a project that may result in take, then that agency must engage in a formal consultation with the Service. z During formal consultation, the Federal agency, the applicant and the Service work together to avoid or minimize the impact on listed species and their habitat. Such consultation would result in a biological opinion by the Service addressing the anticipated effect of the project on listed and proposed species. The opinion may authorize a limited level of incidental take. z If no Federal agency is involved with the project, and federally listed species may be taken as part of the project, then you, the applicant, should apply for an incidental take permit. The Service may issue such a permit if you submit a satisfactory conservation plan for the species that would be affected by your project. z Should your survey determine that federally listed or proposed species occur in the area and are likely to be affected by the project, we recommend that you work with this office and the California Department of Fish and Game to develop a plan that minimizes the project's direct and indirect impacts to listed species and compensates for project-related loss of habitat. You should include the plan in any environmental documents you file.

Critical Habitat

When a species is listed as endangered or threatened, areas of habitat considered essential to its conservation may be designated as critical habitat. These areas may require special management considerations or protection. They provide needed space for growth and normal behavior; food, water, air, light, other nutritional or physiological requirements; cover or shelter; and sites for breeding, reproduction, rearing of offspring, germination or seed dispersal.

Although critical habitat may be designated on private or State lands, activities on these lands are not restricted unless there is Federal involvement in the activities or direct harm to listed wildlife.

If any species has proposed or designated critical habitat within a quad, there will be a separate line for this on the species list. Boundary descriptions of the critical habitat may be found in the Federal Register. The information is also reprinted in the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 17.95). See our Map Room page.

Candidate Species

We recommend that you address impacts to candidate species. We put plants and animals on our candidate list when we have enough scientific information to eventually propose them for listing as threatened or endangered. By considering these species early in your planning process you may be able to avoid the problems that could develop if one of these candidates was listed before the end of your project.

Species of Concern

The Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office no longer maintains a list of species of concern. However, various other agencies and organizations maintain lists of at-risk species. These lists provide essential information for land management planning and conservation efforts. More info

Wetlands

If your project will impact wetlands, riparian habitat, or other jurisdictional waters as defined by section

http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/ES_Species/Lists/es_species_lists.cfm 4/19/2012 Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office Species List Page 5 of 5

404 of the Clean Water Act and/or section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, you will need to obtain a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Impacts to wetland habitats require site specific mitigation and monitoring. For questions regarding wetlands, please contact Mark Littlefield of this office at (916) 414-6520.

Updates

http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/ES_Species/Lists/es_species_lists.cfm 4/19/2012 Sacramento Fish & Wildlife Office Species List Page 2 of 2

http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/ES_Species/Lists/es_species_lists_auto-letter.cfm 4/19/2012

Appendix F CNPS Inventory Search Results

CNPS Inventory: search results Page 1 of 2

Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants v7-12apr 4-11-12

Status: search results - Thu, Apr. 19, 2012 13:53 c

{QUADS_123} =~ m/423A|442C|442D|422B|422C|441C|423B|423C Search Tip: Want to search by county? Try the county index.[all tips and help.][search history]

Your Quad Selection: Turlock (423A) 3712047, Ceres (442C) 3712058, Denair (442D) 3712057, Cressey (422B) 3712046, Arena (422C) 3712036, Montpelier (441C) 3712056, Hatch (423B) 3712048, Gustine (423C) 3712038, Stevinson (423D) 3712037 Hits 1 to 21 of 21 Requests that specify topo quads will return only Lists 1-3.

To save selected records for later study, click the ADD button. ADD checked items to Plant Press check all check none Selections will appear in a new window.

open save hits scientific common family CNPS Astragalus tener var. List 1 alkali milk-vetch Fabaceae tener 1B.2 List 1 heartscale Chenopodiaceae Atriplex cordulata 1B.2 List 1 brittlescale Chenopodiaceae Atriplex depressa 1B.2 San Joaquin List 1 Chenopodiaceae Atriplex joaquiniana spearscale 1B.2 List 1 lesser saltscale Chenopodiaceae Atriplex minuscula 1B.1 vernal pool List 1 Chenopodiaceae Atriplex persistens smallscale 1B.2 List 1 subtle orache Chenopodiaceae Atriplex subtilis 1B.2 Castilleja campestris succulent owl's- List 1 Orobanchaceae ssp. succulenta clover 1B.2 Chamaesyce hooveri List 1 Hoover's spurge Euphorbiaceae 1B.2 Chloropyron molle ssp. List 1 hispid bird's-beak Orobanchaceae hispidum 1B.1 Eryngium racemosum List 1 Delta button-celery Apiaceae 1B.1 Lasthenia glabrata ssp. List 1 Coulter's goldfields Asteraceae coulteri 1B.1 Lepidium latipes var. Heckard's pepper- List 1 Brassicaceae heckardii grass 1B.2 Monardella List 1 Merced monardella Lamiaceae leucocephala 1A Myosurus minimus ssp. List 1 little mousetail Ranunculaceae apus 3.1

http://cnps.site.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi/Search?f%3A1=COUNTIES&e%3A1=... 4/19/2012 CNPS Inventory: search results Page 2 of 2

prostrate vernal List 1 Polemoniaceae Navarretia prostrata pool navarretia 1B.1 List 1 Colusa grass Poaceae Neostapfia colusana 1B.1 San Joaquin Valley List 1 Poaceae Orcuttia inaequalis Orcutt grass 1B.1 List 1 hairy Orcutt grass Poaceae Orcuttia pilosa 1B.1 Sanford's List 1 Alismataceae Sagittaria sanfordii arrowhead 1B.2 List 1 Greene's tuctoria Poaceae Tuctoria greenei 1B.1

To save selected records for later study, click the ADD button. ADD checked items to Plant Press check all check none Selections will appear in a new window.

No more hits.

http://cnps.site.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi/Search?f%3A1=COUNTIES&e%3A1=... 4/19/2012 Appendix G CNDDB Search Results

California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Database Selected Elements by Scientific Name - Landscape Gallo LWINE Project

Scientific Name Common Name Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank CNPS CDFG

1 Ambystoma californiense California tiger salamander AAAAA01180 Threatened Threatened G2G3 S2S3 SC 2 Anniella pulchra pulchra silvery legless lizard ARACC01012 G3G4T3T4 S3 SC Q 3 Ardea alba great egret ABNGA04040 G5 S4 4 Ardea herodias great blue heron ABNGA04010 G5 S4 5 Astragalus tener var. tener alkali milk-vetch PDFAB0F8R1 G2T2 S2 1B.2 6 Atriplex cordulata heartscale PDCHE040B0 G2? S2.2? 1B.2 7 Atriplex depressa brittlescale PDCHE042L0 G2Q S2.2 1B.2 8 Atriplex persistens vernal pool smallscale PDCHE042P0 G2 S2.2 1B.2 9 Branchinecta conservatio Conservancy fairy shrimp ICBRA03010 Endangered G1 S1 10 Branchinecta longiantenna longhorn fairy shrimp ICBRA03020 Endangered G1 S1 11 Branchinecta lynchi vernal pool fairy shrimp ICBRA03030 Threatened G3 S2S3 12 Buteo swainsoni Swainson's hawk ABNKC19070 Threatened G5 S2 13 Dipodomys heermanni dixoni Merced kangaroo rat AMAFD03062 G3G4T2T3 S2S3 14 Eryngium racemosum Delta button-celery PDAPI0Z0S0 Endangered G1Q S1 1B.1 15 Lasiurus cinereus hoary bat AMACC05030 G5 S4? 16 Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri Coulter's goldfields PDAST5L0A1 G4T3 S2.1 1B.1 17 Lepidurus packardi vernal pool tadpole shrimp ICBRA10010 Endangered G3 S2S3 18 Linderiella occidentalis California linderiella ICBRA06010 G3 S2S3 19 Monardella leucocephala Merced monardella PDLAM180C0 GH SH 1A 20 Navarretia prostrata prostrate vernal pool navarretia PDPLM0C0Q0 G2 S2 1B.1 21 Spea hammondii western spadefoot AAABF02020 G3 S3 SC 22 Taxidea taxus American badger AMAJF04010 G5 S4 SC 23 Valley Sacaton Grassland Valley Sacaton Grassland CTT42120CA G1 S1.1 24 Vulpes macrotis mutica San Joaquin kit fox AMAJA03041 Endangered Threatened G4T2T3 S2S3

Commercial Version -- Dated March 31, 2012 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 Report Printed on Thursday, April 19, 2012 Information Expires 09/30/2012