Appendices
Appendix E Biological Resources Report
The Ontario Plan Draft EIR City of Ontario
Appendices
This page intentionally left blank.
The Planning Center April 2009
DRAFT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORT
for the
CITY OF ONTARIO
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
AND
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Prepared for:
City of Ontario
Ontario, CA
Prepared by:
The Planning Center 1580 Metro Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 and Earthworks Restoration Inc. 2116 Arlington Ave. Suite 301 Los Angeles, CA 90018
October 2006
Biological Resources Report
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 Biological Resources Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
INTRODUCTION...... 1 METHODOLOGY ...... 1 GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING...... 1 Physical Features...... 7 Climate ...... 7 Geology...... 7 Soils...... 7 Water Bodies and Drainages...... 11 Built Environment/Existing Land Uses ...... 12
REGULATORY SETTING ...... 12 Federal Regulations...... 12 State Regulations...... 16 Local Ordinances...... 16
EXISTING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ...... 16 Habitats and Vegetation Communities...... 17 Wildlife ...... 22 Sensitive Biological Resources...... 24 Jurisdictional Areas...... 39 Regional Connectivity/Wildlife Movement Corridors...... 39
CONSERVATION...... 40 Existing Conservation Areas...... 40 Proposed Conservation Plans and Areas...... 41
REFERENCES...... 45 Documents ...... 45 Websites ...... 46 Persons/Organizations Consulted ...... 47 Preparers...... 47
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 i Biological Resources Report
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
Figure 1 Regional Location...... 3 Figure 2 Aerial Photograph ...... 5 Figure 3 Soils...... 9 Figure 4 Existing Land Use...... 13 Figure 5 Vegetation Associations and Land Cover...... 19 Figure 6 Areas of Potential Occurrence for Sensitive Species...... 27
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Table 1 Sensitive Plant Species Known or Potentially Occurring Within the Ontario Planning Area ...... 26 Table 2 Sensitive Wildlife Species Known or Potentially Occurring Within the Ontario Planning Area ...... 29
APPENDIX A – Observed and Expected Fauna – City of Ontario
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center ii October 2006 Biological Resources Report
INTRODUCTION
This summary technical report has been prepared as part of an environmental assessment for the City of Ontario General Plan Update and the associated Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).
METHODOLOGY
This study relies primarily upon a review of existing literature and databases to determine the general occurrence and distribution of biological resources within the City of Ontario (also referred to as the planning area). Information has been incorporated from the previous biological inventories by Envicom (1997) for the Ontario Sphere of Influence (SOI) General Plan Amendment and EIR; and EIP Associates (1999) for the City of Ontario SOI Parks, Recreation, and Biological Resources Implementation Program; and from recent environmental documents for proposed development projects within the City. Database searches of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) On-Line Inventory were conducted to determine recorded occurrences of sensitive or rare plant or animal species and special natural communities within or near the planning area. Searches were conducted of the following U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles: Guasti and Ontario. A windshield survey of the City and its surrounding areas was also conducted in summer on July 19, 2006. Field observations were conducted by driving public roads throughout the City, with frequent stops for observing habitats, watercourses, plants, and wildlife within the limited range of accessibility. Binoculars were used to observe habitats and wildlife beyond fences. Photographs were taken of open areas, water bodies, and drainages.
GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of Ontario is located in San Bernardino County. It is bounded by the cities of Upland and Rancho Cucamonga to the north; Montclair and Chino to the west; Fontana, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties to the east; and Chino and Riverside County to the south (see Figure 1, Regional Location). Major transportation corridors that traverse the City include Interstate 10 (I-10), Interstate 15 (I-15), and State Route 60 (SR-60). An aerial photograph of the City is included as Figure 2.
The City encompasses approximately 32,000 acres (50 square miles) in the southwestern portion of the county. It is located in the upper Santa Ana Valley, which is east of and contiguous with the San Gabriel Valley. This area is roughly bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains and San Bernardino National Forest to the north, the San Bernardino Mountains to the northeast, the Puente Hills and Chino Hills to the southwest, and the San Jose Hills to the west (Helix 2006).
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 1 Biological Resources Report
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 2 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Figure 1 Regional Location 11x17 color
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 3 Biological Resources Report
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 4 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Figure 2 Aerial Photo 11x17 color
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 5 Biological Resources Report
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 6 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Physical Features
The general Ontario area lies within the northern/northwestern portion of the Peninsular Geomorphic Province of southern California, which is characterized by northwest-southwest-trending faults, folds, and mountain ranges (EIP 2005). The City is situated on a broad alluvial fan, which extends from the southern flank of the San Gabriel Mountains and dips gradually southward to the confluence of San Antonio Channel, Cucamonga Channel/Mill Creek, and the Santa Ana River at the Prado Dam Flood Control Basin in Riverside County. Elevation ranges from 1,150 feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the northwest portion to 650 feet amsl in the south-central portion of the City (USGS 1978).
Climate
The City is located in the nondesert portion of San Bernardino County within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin). The regional climate within the Basin is considered semiarid and is characterized by warm summers, mild winters, infrequent seasonal rainfall, moderate daytime onshore breezes, and year-round moderate temperatures and low humidity (EIP 2005). The average maximum temperature within the local vicinity is 90.9° Fahrenheit (F) in July while the average minimum temperature is reported at 40.5°F in December. Almost all rain falls from November through April and averages 21.64 inches per year within the vicinity of Ontario (WRCC 2006). The area also experiences a typical daily wind pattern that is a daytime onshore sea breeze from the west and a nighttime land breeze. This regime is broken only by occasional winter storms and infrequent strong northeasterly Santa Ana winds from the mountains and deserts north of the Basin.
Geology
Recent (quaternary) alluvium underlies the entire valley (Envicom 1998). The western portion of the City is underlain by young alluvial-fan deposits. The eastern portion is primarily underlain with young eolian (wind driven) deposits with small areas of young alluvial-fan deposits, artificial fill, and young alluvial-valley deposits. The City is bisected by very young alluvial-fan and very young wash deposits associated with the Cucamonga Creek Channel. The area underlying the Ontario International Airport consists of artificial fill.
Soils
The City is located in a region that is made of the alluvial valley floors, fans, and terraces that cover broad areas of southwest San Bernardino County, extending eastward from Chino to the general vicinity of Yucaipa. The Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of San Bernardino County, Southwestern Part (USDA 1980) identifies 10 soil types mapped for the City area, shown on Figure 3, Soils. These include:
• The Chino series consists of somewhat poorly drained, nearly level soils. These soils formed on floodplains and in basins in moderately fine textured alluvium. These soils are moderately slowly permeable. They occur in broad, smooth areas on alluvial valley bottoms and in basins. Historically, vegetation was annual grasses and forbs. Soils of the Chino series are used regionally for irrigated alfalfa, grains, corn silage, and pasture plants, with small areas used for
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 7 Biological Resources Report
homesites and related uses. Chino silt loam (Cb) is mapped in the far southwestern portion of the New Model Colony (NMC), in an area of existing agricultural uses.
• The Delhi series consists of somewhat excessively drained, nearly level to strongly sloping soils that formed on alluvial fans in coarse-textured, wind-reworked granitic material. In some areas, this soil was moderately to strongly sloping and on fans on wind-deposited hummocks 18 to 36 inches high. These rapidly permeable soils historically supported annual grasses and forbs. Regionally, these soils are used generally for grapes, alfalfa, pasture plants, and some citrus. It is also used as a source for sand and road fill. Delhi fine sand (Db) is on alluvial fans that have been reworked by wind action, and in other areas such as Colton, formed wind-deposited hummocks. Within the City boundaries, Delhi fine sand (Db) is mapped throughout the majority of the NMC and in the approximate eastern half of the City.
• The Grangeville series consists of somewhat poorly drained, nearly level soils. These soils formed on the slopes of alluvial fans in moderately coarse textured granitic alluvium. The soils are moderately rapidly permeable. Historically, vegetation was annual grasses and forbs and scattered cottonwood trees. In general, soils of the Grangeville series are used regionally for irrigated alfalfa, small grain, and pasture plants. Two relatively small areas in the southwestern and south-central portion of the City (in the NMC) are mapped as Grangeville fine sandy loam (Gr).
• The Hanford series consists of well-drained, nearly level to strongly sloping soils that formed in recent granitic alluvium on valley floors and alluvial fans. These soils are moderately rapidly permeable. Historically, vegetation was mainly annual grasses and forbs. These soils are used regionally for irrigated crops such as citrus, alfalfa, grapes, pasture plants, and small grains. Some areas are used for homesites. Hanford coarse sandy loam (HaC) occupies alluvial fans and is mapped near the western edge of the City and in the vicinity of Ontario International Airport. Hanford sandy loam (HbA) is on valley floors and toe slopes of alluvial fans. Small areas along the westernmost portion of the City are mapped as HbA.
• The Hilmar series consists of somewhat poorly drained, nearly level soils on alluvial valley floors and fans, formed in wind-laid coarse-textured material underlain by medium-textured granitic alluvium. The surface and upper coarse layers are rapidly permeable. The lower part of the underlying material is slowly permeable. These soils historically supported annual grasses and forbs. Soils of the Hilmar series are also used regionally for irrigated crops such as citrus, alfalfa, grapes, pasture plants, and small grains. Hilmar loamy fine sand (Hr) is mapped throughout the NMC with small, scattered areas occurring in the Old Model Colony (OMC).
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 8 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Figure 3 Soils 11x17 color
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 9 Biological Resources Report
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 10 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
• Psamments and Fluyvents, Frequently Flooded (Ps) consists of sandy and gravelly material in intermittent streambeds of the Santa Ana River, Mill, Warm, and Cajon Creeks, large creeks and their major tributaries. During each flood, alluvium is freshly deposited and reworked. These areas have no value for farming and are mainly used as a source of sand and gravel for construction. Historically, vegetation was limited to scanty grasses and forbs and a few willows and cottonwood trees. A small area in the central portion along the southern boundary of the City contains soils mapped as Ps.
• The Soboba series consists of excessively drained, nearly level to moderately sloping soils formed on alluvial fans in granitic alluvium. These soils historically supported chamise, annual grasses, and forbs. These soils are rapidly permeable and are used mainly for irrigated citrus and dryfarmed seeded pasture. Soboba stony loamy sand (SpC) is mapped in the northwest corner of the City and is mostly associated with the 8th Street Basins.
• The Tujunga series consists of somewhat excessively drained, nearly level to moderately sloping soils that formed on alluvial fans in granitic alluvium. Tujunga soils are rapidly permeable. These soils historically supported thin strands of chamise, some big sagebrush, and annual grasses and forbs. These soils are used mainly for irrigated crops including citrus, grapes, small grains and potatoes. Tujunga loamy sand (TuB) is a gently sloping soil on broad alluvial fans. It one of the predominant soils and is mapped throughout the approximate western half of the City. Tujunga gravelly loamy sand (TvC) is nearly level to moderately sloping soils occurring on long, broad, smooth alluvial fans. TvC is mostly found in the northern portions of the City.
Water Bodies and Drainages
Water bodies within the City consist of detention/percolation basins, man-made lakes associated with developed parks and golf courses, watercourses, and drainage/flood control channels. Accumulations of standing water also occur within the approximate southern half of the City, associated with dairy runoff retention ponds, low spots that collect surface runoff and stormwater, and drainages. Cucamonga Creek and Deer Creek originate 15 miles to the north in the Cucamonga Wilderness of the eastern San Gabriel Mountains. Cucamonga Canyon Creek Channel and Deer Creek enter the north-central portion of the City and converge just west of the Cucamonga Creek- Guasti Regional Park. The Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel is a concrete-lined channel that serves as the major drainage course within the City. It flows south through the approximate center of the City, converges with Lower Deer Creek Channel at Chris Basin (a small retention basin), exits the City, and eventually discharges to the Prado Flood Control Basin in Riverside County. At Prado Basin, Cucamonga Creek and San Antonio Creek (flowing to the basin west of Ontario) converge with the Santa Ana River and eventually discharge to the Pacific Ocean south of Huntington Beach in Orange County.
Other major drainages within Ontario include the West Cucamonga Channel, which drains into the 8th Street Basin (west of 8th Street and Grove Avenue), then traverses south through the northwestern portion of the City before terminating at the Ely Percolation Basins just north of SR- 60. Day Creek Channel, Etiwanda Creek/Channel, and Lower Etiwanda Creek Channel also flow south (east of I-15) through the northeastern portion of the City, converge, then discharge into Riverside Basin, just south of the City boundary at Philadelphia Street. All the above drainages
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 11 Biological Resources Report
(except for an approximate 1,000-foot section of Etiwanda Creek between I-10 and 4th Street), are also concrete-lined channels.
Built Environment/Existing Land Uses
From a regional perspective, Ontario is located in a highly developed, urban/suburban area. Developed land uses (residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, public, institutional, airport, and utility and transportation easements) are interspersed throughout the area, shown on Figure 4, Existing Land Use. The northern half of the City, north of Riverside Drive (referred to as the Old Model Colony, is a fully developed, urbanized area. Undeveloped areas in the OMC are limited to small, scattered, highly disturbed, vacant parcels. The approximate southern half of the City, south of Riverside Drive, is the 8,200-acre New Model Colony area (formerly known as the SOI, which was annexed into the City in 1998). The NMC contains relatively flat and open topography dominated by agricultural fields, dairy and poultry operations, pasture, and croplands. The area supports mixed land uses, primarily agriculture with scattered residential, commercial, and industrial uses, and open space.
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal Regulations
Endangered Species Act
The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) of 1973, as amended, was promulgated to protect and conserve any species of plant or animal that is endangered or threatened with extinction and the habitats in which these species are found. “Take” of endangered species is prohibited under Section 9 of the FESA. “Take,” as defined under the FESA, means to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.”
• Section 7 of the FESA requires federal agencies to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on proposed federal actions which may affect any endangered, threatened or proposed (for listing) species or critical habitat that may support the species.
• Section 4(a) of the FESA requires that critical habitat be designated by the USFWS “to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, at the time a species is determined to be endangered or threatened.” Critical habitat identifies specific areas, both occupied and unoccupied by a federally protected species, that are essential to the conservation of the species and that may require special management considerations or protection. Critical habitat is formally designated by USFWS to provide guidance for planners/managers and biologists with an indication of where suitable habitat may occur and where high priority of preservation for a particular species should be given. The location of a proposed project within critical habitat typically warrants a habitat assessment and, if suitable habitat is present, focused (protocol) surveys to determine presence or absence of the listed species. Any project involving a federal agency, federal monies, or a federal permit that falls within an area designated as critical habitat requires the project proponent to consult with the USFWS regarding potential impacts to the listed species and conservation measures to offset identified impacts.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 12 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Figure 4 Existing Land Use 11x17 color
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 13 Biological Resources Report
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 14 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
• Section 10 of the FESA provides the regulatory mechanism that allows the incidental take of a listed species by private interests and nonfederal government agencies during lawful activities. Habitat conservation plans (HCPs) for the impacted species must be developed in support of incidental take permits for nonfederal projects to minimize impacts to the species and develop viable mitigation measures to offset the unavoidable impacts.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA), is the domestic law that affirms, or implements, the United States’ commitment to four international conventions with Canada, Japan, Mexico, and Russia for the protection of shared migratory bird resources. The MBTA governs the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests. It prohibits the take, possession, import, export, transport, sale, purchase, barter, or offering of these activities, except under a valid permit or as permitted in the implementing regulations. USFWS administers permits to take migratory birds in accordance with the regulations promulgated by the MBTA.
Clean Water Act, Section 404
The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regulates discharges of dredged or fill material into “Waters of the U.S.” (including wetlands and nonwetland bodies of water that meet specific criteria).1 Pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), a permit is required for any filling or dredging within waters of the U.S. The permit review process entails an assessment of potential adverse impacts to USACE wetlands and jurisdictional waters, wherein the USACE may require mitigation measures. Where a federally listed species may be affected, a Section 7 consultation with USFWS may be required. If there is potential for cultural resources to be present, Section 106 review may be required. Also, where a Section 404 permit is required, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification would also be required from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
Clean Water Act, Section 401
Section 401(a)(1) of the CWA specifies that any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that may result in any discharge into navigable waters, shall provide the federal permitting agency a certification from the state in which the discharge originates, that any such discharge will comply with the applicable provisions of the CWA. In California, the applicable RWQCB must certify that the project will comply with water quality standards. Permits requiring Section 401 certification include USACE Section 404 permits and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Section 402 of the CWA. The City of Ontario is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB (Region 8).
1“Waters of the United States,” as it applies to the jurisdictional limits of the authority of the Corps of Engineers under the Clean Water Act, includes: all waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; all interstate waters including interstate wetlands; all other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce; water impoundments; tributaries of waters; territorial seas; wetlands adjacent to waters. The terminology used by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act includes “navigable waters” which is defined at Section 502(7) of the Act as “waters of the United States including the territorial seas.” City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 15 Biological Resources Report
State Regulations
California Fish and Game Code, Section 1600
Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code requires that a project proponent notify the CDFG of any proposed alteration of streambeds, rivers, and lakes. The intent is to protect habitats that are important to fish and wildlife. CDFG may review a project and place conditions on the project as part of a Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA). The conditions are intended to address potentially significant adverse impacts within CDFG’s jurisdictional limits.
California Endangered Species Act
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) generally parallels the main provisions of the FESA and is administered by the CDFG. Its intent is to prohibit take and protect state-listed endangered and threatened species of fish, wildlife, and plants. Unlike its federal counterpart, CESA also applies the take prohibitions to species petitioned for listing (state candidates). At the discretion of the Fish and Game Commission, candidate species may be afforded temporary protection as though they were already listed as threatened or endangered. Unlike the FESA, CESA does not include listing provisions for invertebrate species. Under certain conditions, CESA has provisions for take through a 2081 permit or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). In addition, some sensitive mammals and birds are protected by the state as Fully Protected Species. California Species of Special Concern are species designated as vulnerable to extinction due to declining population levels, limited ranges, and/or continuing threats. This list is primarily a working document for the CDFG’s CNDDB project, which maintains a database of known and recorded occurrences of sensitive species. Informally listed taxa are not protected per se, but warrant consideration in the preparation of biological resources assessments.
Local Ordinances
The City of Ontario does not have ordinances protecting native biological resources. Preservation and maintenance of parkway trees are regulated by City Municipal Code Title 10, Parks and Recreation, Chapter 2: Parkway Trees. City Ordinance 1664 (as amended by Ordinance 2249) includes requirements for maintenance, removal, and planting, and prohibitions regarding injury to parkway trees.
EXISTING BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Currently, assessments of biological resources (if present) in the OMC are limited to proposed infill and redevelopment projects. A detailed assessment of the remaining biological resources of the City was conducted in February 1996 as part of the SOI General Plan Amendment EIR (SOI-EIR) for the NMC (Envicom 1997). Additional work in the NMC was conducted in 1998 (EIP 1999) as part of planning efforts subsequent to the 1996 General Plan Amendment and prior to the preparation of the NMC Specific Plans and development activity. Little development has occurred in this area over the last eight years and the previous assessments still generally apply to current conditions in the NMC, as described below (Hogle-Ireland 2005). Additional information is also included from recent biological assessments conducted for proposed developments within the City.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 16 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
The following discussion describes the biological resources that either occur or potentially occur in the City including vegetation associations, plants and wildlife, sensitive plants and wildlife, wildlife movement corridors, and jurisdictional areas.
Habitats and Vegetation Communities
Habitat describes the place or set of environmental conditions in which plants and animals naturally live and grow. Physical features and climate determine the dominant plant species of an area. The assemblages of these plant species (vegetation communities) and the physical features and climate determine in turn the animal species that occupy an area. The interrelationship of the physical environment of the habitats with the biological resources contained within is an ecological system. The value and diversity of habitats are determined by factors including climate, varied terrain, adequate space, a dependable supply of food and water, soils for vegetation growth, and shelter and nesting sites.
Remnants of native habitats and vegetation communities are virtually absent throughout Ontario. At one time, the developed OMC portion of the City was a major agricultural area. Native alluvial sage scrub was removed from the region in the late 1800s and early 1900s for vineyards and other forms of cultivation, including citrus groves and field crops, particularly wine grapes. A 1989 survey of existing land uses in the City, excluding the NMC, revealed no extensive, permanent agriculture (CBA 1992). Undeveloped, natural habitat is virtually absent in the OMC, which consists primarily of paved surfaces and structures and supports very little vegetation. The plants that are present—turf, weeds, nonnative grasses, and nonnative trees and plants used for landscaping—have limited biological resource value. Recent biological assessments for development projects in the OMC, including Pacific Gateway Cargo Center (Helix 2006), Tessier Work/Live Project (Willdan 2003), and Ontario Downtown Civic Center Project (Webb 2004) found no sensitive natural communities, riparian habitat, or sensitive plant or animal species on the developed and/or highly disturbed project sites.
Historically, the NMC area was probably dominated by coastal sage scrub vegetation distinctly associated with alluvial fans and drainages along the base of the Transverse and Peninsular ranges, called Riversidean sage scrub. Due to the long-standing history of agricultural use, the NMC area supports little native vegetation. The Cucamonga and Deer Creeks also once supported riparian vegetation; however, these drainages are now completely channelized where they traverse the City (Envicom 1997).
Currently, dairy and poultry farms, pasture, crop land, and remnant vineyards comprise the majority of the existing land uses in the NMC area (shown in Figure 4). Within the agricultural areas, there are areas that contain debris mounds—composed of debris and other refuse material (including manure) in piles that overly the native soils. Residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional uses are also scattered throughout the area. Although the NMC has been extensively altered from natural conditions to primarily agricultural use, the land still provides foraging and breeding habitat for a variety of common and sensitive wildlife species. In particular, windrows and surface water areas, such as agricultural ponds, water impoundments, and drainage channels, provide habitat for migratory birds, including raptors (birds of prey).
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 17 Biological Resources Report
While native terrestrial vegetation communities defined by Holland (1986) are not present in the City, the following nonnative vegetation communities that are present are described as vegetation associations (per EIP’s 1999 assessment). Vegetation association is a general term that can be applied to an assemblage of plant species that form characteristic vegetation types. Vegetation associations vary by floristic (species) composition, physiognomy (growth form or structure) and distribution that is characteristic of a particular habitat. Four vegetation associations and their related land use types occur within the City, primarily in the NMC (EIP 1999). These vegetation associations (with their closest Holland classifications and codes [per Oberbauer 1996] shown in brackets) occur in areas with land covers designated as:
• Surface water areas • Flood control channel areas • Agricultural fields • Developed
Figure 5, Vegetation Associations and Land Cover, shows the vegetation associations present in the City.
Surface Water Areas [13200 Non-Vegetated Channel, Floodway]
Open water bodies in the OMC areas include detention basins, man-made lakes associated with Guasti-Cucamonga Park and golf courses, and concrete-lined drainages that frequently contain surface water. Types of water bodies within the NMC area include ponds or series of ponds associated with dairy and poultry operations (state-mandated dairy manure water retention basins that serve as runoff collection/water treatment ponds), livestock-water ponds, and freshwater irrigation ponds. Most fallow fields accumulate surface waters in ponds or ditches. The portions of Cucamonga and Deer Creeks that traverse the NMC also frequently contain surface water. Perennially wet ponds can support native shrubs and trees typical of riparian habitats, including mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia) and willow (Salix spp.).
Flood Control Channels [13200 Non-Vegetated Channel, Floodway]
Flood control channels occur throughout the City and were previously described above. Vegetation, if present at all within these areas, is limited to aquatic species including pondweed (Potamegeton spp.), common water nymph (Najas guadelupensis), and hornwort (Ceratophyllum demersum). Hydrophytes (plants that are able to live either in water itself or in very moist soils), including cattail (Typha spp.), sedge (Cyperus spp.) and rush (Juncus spp.) occasionally emerge in areas along the flood control channel where sediment accumulates and ponding occurs.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 18 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Figure 5 Vegetation Associations and Land Cover 11x17 color
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 19 Biological Resources Report
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 20 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Agricultural Fields [18000 General Agriculture]
Four types of agricultural fields are present in the planning area.
Agricultural Industry [18200 Intensive Agriculture, Diaries, Nurseries, Chicken Ranches] includes areas such as feedlots, cattle holding pens, dairy and poultry operations, and equestrian activities. These areas are typically devoid of vegetation due to intensive disturbance associated with these activities. These areas are unable to support vegetation due to continuous presence of domesticated animals (e.g. cattle, horses, and chickens), and other farming or human activities.
Cultivated Fields [18320 Row Crops] include irrigated row crops of alfalfa, barley and strawberries. These fields are typically grazed after harvest then left fallow.
Fallow Fields [18310 Field/Pasture] develop characteristic ruderal2 vegetation, including nonnative grasses and forbs (i.e., herbaceous plants other than grasses and sedges) such as black mustard (Brassica nigra), lambs quarters (Chenopodium album), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), puncture vine (Tribulus terrestris), cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), common sunflower (Helianthus annuus), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), tumbleweeds (Amaranthus spp.), sow-thistle (Sonchus oleraceus), dock (Rumex spp.), and other introduced grasses such as bromes (Bromus spp.), wild oats (Avena spp.), barleys (Hordeum spp.), and Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon). Native species can also be present in ruderal areas, including sandbur (Ambrosia acanthicarpa), horseweed (Conyza canadensis), jimsonweed (Datura wrightii), and spurge (Camaesyce sp.) (Envicom 1997).
Vineyards [18100 Orchards and Vineyards] were formerly extensive, but are currently limited to two parcels in the southeastern portion of the NMC.
Windrows of trees are the tallest vegetation within the agricultural fields and are prevalent along internal roadways within the areas designated as agricultural industry and cultivated fields. The most common windrow tree is blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus), although other species are used, including olive (Olea europaea), pine (Pinus spp.), salt cedar (Tamarix aphylla), and cypress (Cupressus spp.). These species and other trees, including ash (Fraxinus spp.), mulberry (Morus spp.), and various landscape and fruit trees, are found in residential yards and dairy frontages.
Developed [12000 Urban/Developed]
Developed areas contain structures, asphalt/concrete paved areas, residential homes, commercial and industrial buildings, schools, roadways and infrastructure (including the Southern California Edison [SCE] transmission corridors), the power substation, barren ground, and ornamental vegetation. These areas support very limited amounts of vegetation. Vegetation that is present typically consists of nonnative ornamental species planted for their aesthetic and utilitarian values.
2Includes areas typically dominated by pioneering herbaceous plants that readily colonize disturbed ground. Not a true habitat community as defined by Holland (1986). City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 21 Biological Resources Report
Wildlife
Ontario has been extensively altered from natural conditions by urbanization of the northern portion and intensive agriculture and dairy production in the southern portion of the City. As previously stated, native habitat is virtually absent in the OMC. Common wildlife species—particularly birds and mammals—utilize trees throughout the City and may be found in the scattered, undeveloped, vacant parcels. Domestic dog and cat, Norway rat, and house mouse are also common in urbanized areas. Migratory birds, including raptors (hawks, owls) may forage in the area and use trees to roost and nest. Migratory birds may also use detention basins and flood control channels where open water is present. Species previously found within the OMC area include hawks, quail, roadrunners, owls, hummingbirds, thrashers, sparrows, finches, wrens, warblers, woodpeckers, opossums, weasels, coyotes, rabbits, mice, gophers, squirrels, skunks, toads, frogs, salamanders, king snakes, lizard, whipsnakes, rattlesnakes, and gopher snakes (CBA 1992).
Despite the lack of native habitat and the prevalent agricultural industry, the NMC area supports a diversity of wildlife that persists in agricultural areas. The absence of dense urbanization provides open spaces that may still support native wildlife species, especially birds. Relative to wildlife, these agricultural habitats may be characterized as open water, agricultural fields, windrows, and dairy operations/residences (Envicom 1997). Virtually all the land is subject to changing patterns of grazing, agriculture, and related operations. While these habitats would not be classified as native or natural, as they are intensively managed for agricultural purposes, they still provide value for wildlife in a region characterized by accelerated urban growth.
The relatively flat topography of the agricultural areas contributes to the accumulation of standing water throughout the NMC (see Figure 5) in dairy runoff retention ponds and low spots that collect surface runoff, storm water, and floodwaters. Other water bodies—flood control channels, detention basins, and creeks—attract numerous birds. Migratory and resident bird species use the open water and shorelines for food, protection from predators, and shelter. Large impounds located at the confluence of Cucamonga and Deer Creeks support large concentrations of wintering bird species (Envicom 1997). Windrows provide important perching and nesting sites for raptors. The agricultural fields include areas of open fields that may be covered with crops, grazed by cattle, fallow, or disked.
Wildlife that have been observed and/or are expected to occur in the NMC are discussed below. Appendix A includes a listing of the common wildlife species observed or expected to occur in the planning area. Sensitive wildlife species are also included in the table, and are discussed separately below.
Amphibians
Amphibians require moisture for at least a portion of their life cycle and many require standing or flowing water for breeding. Amphibians are expected to be uncommon in open fields. They are more likely to be associated with the numerous wet areas and standing water present in the NMC. However, few species are expected to be present due to the lack of vegetation around most open water, frequent disturbance, and the often poor quality of surface water resulting from agricultural practices. Amphibian species such as black-bellied slender salamander (Batrachoseps nigriventris), California toad (Bufo boreas halophilus), Pacific chorus frog (tree frog) (Pseudacris regilla), and
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 22 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
introduced bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) may be present. No amphibian species were observed or documented in the 1996 surveys (Envicom 1997), 1998 surveys (EIP 1999), or the 2005 surveys for the Countryside Specific Plan EIR (EIP 2005). A recent biological assessment for the Chino Airport Master Plan, an area immediately outside of and adjacent to the southwestern corner of the City, observed Pacific chorus frog and California chorus frog (Pseudacris cadaverina) (Coffman 2005).
Reptiles
Reptile diversity and abundance typically varies with vegetation association type and character. Many species will forage in a variety of habitat types. Due to the history of land use in the NMC, the number of reptile species is expected to be low. In open fields, common reptiles expected to occur include the western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinatus), and gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus). These species tolerate a wide range of habitat types and human activity. Reptile species specifically associated with open waters and with the potential to occur include the southwestern pond turtle (Emys [Clemmys] marmorta pallida). Previous sightings of southwestern pond turtle have been noted in the Chino Airport area immediately outside of and adjacent to the southwestern corner of the City. However, this species was not observed during the 2004 biological surveys of the area (Coffman 2005). The potential for its occurrence within the NMC and the City is considered to be quite low due to limited suitable habitat.3
Birds
The open water areas of dairy runoff retention ponds, reservoirs, drainages, and low areas subject to flooding are the preferred locations for migratory birds in the NMC. Areas of open water that accumulate in the agricultural fields also attract wading birds that forage on small animals that concentrate in the wet areas. Notable open water areas include the holding ponds adjacent to the Cucamonga and Deer Creeks confluence and the larger stock and flood controls ponds scattered throughout the NMC.
Numerous migratory birds associated with the open water areas are expected, as listed in Appendix A. The entire basin is considered an important area for migratory or overwintering shorebirds, waterfowl, and raptors. The diversity and abundance of migratory birds that utilize the area are indicated in the results of the annual Audubon Christmas Bird Counts for the Santa Ana River Valley region, which encompasses the southern edge of the NMC. Previous counts (1993 and 1994) reported 133 bird species and 53,810 individuals, and 130 species and 52,075 individuals, respectively. The 2005–2006 count reported 131 species and 31,274 individuals. The 2004–2005 count reported 133 species and 26,956 individuals (Audubon 2006). Resident species in the planning area are joined in the late summer by migratory or wintering species from breeding grounds to the north, with these migrants remaining until spring.
The 1996 Envicom surveys found 49 species in the NMC areas. Nearly half (21 species) were found in open water and wet areas, including eared grebe (Podiceps nigricollis), double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus), Canada goose (Branta canadensis), American wigeon (Anas americana),
3Slow-moving permanent or intermittent streams, small ponds and lakes, reservoirs, abandoned gravel pits, permanent and ephemeral shallow wetlands, stock ponds, and treatment lagoons. Abundant basking sites and cover are necessary, including logs, rocks, submerged vegetation, and undercut banks. City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 23 Biological Resources Report
green-winged teal (Anas crecca), cinnamon teal (Anas cyanoptera), mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), gadwall (Anas strepera), northern pintail (Anas acuta), bufflehead (Bucephala albeola), ruddy duck (Oxyura jamaicensis), common moorhen (Gallinula chloropus), American coot (Fulica americana), black-nested stilt (Himantopus mexicanus), American avocet (Recurvirostra americana), killdeer (Charadrius vociferous), greater yellow legs (Tringa melanoleuca), least sandpiper (Calidris minutilla), Bonarparte’s gull (Larus philadelphia), ring-billed gull (Larus delawarensis), and California gull (Larus californicus) (Envicom 1996).
Numerous raptor species are attracted to windrows, including red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), American kestrel (Falco spaverius), and white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) (EIP 1999). Raptors use agricultural fields as foraging habitat, where small rodents or birds are most likely to be visible. The raptors may perch on trees in windrows, on utilities poles and transmission lines overlooking open fields, or soar over the fields to forage. In open fields, ferruginous hawks (Buteo regalis) may roost on the ground where vegetation is low.
Several other bird species observed in open and wet fields include cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis), white- faced ibis (Plegadis chihi), American crow (Corvus brachyrhunchos), western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta), red-winged blackbird (Aegilaius phoeniceus), brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater), and savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis) . Nonnative and common species observed around areas with structures, human activity, and livestock include house sparrow (Passer domesticus), rock dove (Colombia livia), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and domestic chicken (Gallus domesticus). Less common species include house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), and Brewer’s blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus).
Mammals
Agricultural fields also provide habitat for various small mammals such as mice (several species) and California ground squirrels (Spermophilus beecheyi beecheyi). Mammals observed during biological monitoring for the NMC General Plan Amendment include Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), California ground squirrel, raccoon (Procyon lotor), and striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis). Some of these mammals may use the trees in the windrows: in particular, raccoon and Virginia opossum. Common bat species have not been observed in surveys, but are also expected to use the trees. Nonnative mammal species expected in the area include domestic dog (Canis familiaris) and cat (Felis catus), cattle/domestic cow (Bos taurus), horse (Equus caballus) and other livestock. Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus) and house mouse (Mus musculus) feed on grains, produce, and garbage and are common near agricultural facilities and urban uses.
Sensitive Biological Resources
Sensitive biological resources include vegetation types and habitats that are either unique, of relatively limited distribution in a region, or of particularly high value to wildlife. These resources include a variety of plant and animal species that are specialized and endemic to a particular type of habitat. Due to loss of habitat, some of these species have been designated or “listed” by federal and state government resource agencies as “threatened” or “endangered.” Species listed as “threatened” are those whose numbers have dropped to such low levels, and /or whose populations are so isolated that the continuation of the species could be jeopardized. “Endangered” species are those with such
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 24 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
limited numbers or subject to such extreme circumstances that they are considered in imminent danger of extinction.
Other government agencies and resource organizations also identify “sensitive” species as those that are naturally rare and that have been locally depleted and put at risk by human activities. While not in imminent danger of jeopardy or extinction, sensitive species are considered vulnerable and can become candidates for future listing as threatened or endangered. These include plants identified as sensitive by the CNPS, and wildlife considered as species of special concern, special animals, or fully protected species in California. Certain habitat types are also classified as sensitive by the CDFG in the CNDDB.
Sensitive Plants
No sensitive plants species have been observed within the City of Ontario. The CNDDB and CNPS reports for the Ontario and Guasti quadrangles identified known occurrences of the following sensitive plant species (also listed in Table 1). Of these recorded occurrences, mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneata ssp. puberula), prostrate navarretia (Navarretia prostrata) and Robinson’s pepper grass (Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonii) were located just within or immediately adjacent to the City (see Figure 6, Areas of Potential Occurrence of Sensitive Species). However, these recorded occurrences were all prior to 1992 and the majority of sightings or collections were prior to 1937. These species are most likely eliminated due to substantial development in the area subsequent to the sightings. Overall, no federal or state-listed plant species are known or expected to occur. The potential for sensitive plant species to occur within the planning area is low due to the absence of suitable habitat, high levels of development, and history of land alteration and disturbance by agricultural activities.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 25 Biological Resources Report
Table 1 Sensitive Plant Species Known or Potentially Occurring within the Ontario Planning Area Federal/State CNPS Potential Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Listing Status Designation to Occur Calochortus plummerae Plummer’s mariposa Coastal scrub, chaparral, None/None 1B Low. No lily valley and foothill grassland, suitable cismontane woodland, lower habitat. montane coniferous forest. Occurs on rocky and sandy sites, usually of granitic or alluvial material. Horkelia cuneata ssp. mesa horkelia Chaparral, cismontane None/None 1B Low. No puberula woodland, coastal scrub. suitable Occurs on sand or gravelly habitat. sites. Lepidium virginicum Robinson’s pepper- Chaparral, coastal scrub. None/None 1B Low. No var. robinsonii grass Occurs in dry soils, shrubland. suitable habitat. Navarretia prostrata prostrate navarretia Coastal scrub, valley and None/None 2 Low. No foothill grassland, vernal suitable pools. Occurs on alkaline habitat. soils in grassland, or in vernal pools. Sidalcea neomexicana salt spring Alkali playas, brackish None/None 1B Low. No checkerbloom marshes, chaparral, coastal suitable scrub, lower montane habitat. coniferous forest, Mojavean desert scrub. Symphyotrichum San Bernardino Meadows and seeps, None/None 1B Low. No defoliatum aster marshes and swamps, suitable coastal scrub, cismontane habitat. woodland, lower montane coniferous forest, grassland. Occurs in vernally mesic grassland or near ditches, streams and springs, disturbed areas. Federal Designations FE Federally listed as “Endangered” FT Federally listed as “Threatened” FPE Federally proposed or petitioned as “Endangered” FC Federal Candidate FP Federally Protected
State Designations SE State listed as “Endangered” ST State listed as “Threatened” CSC California Species of Special Concern
CNPS: California Native Plant Society Classifications 1A Plants presumed by CNPS to be extinct in California 1B Plants considered by CNPS to be rare or endangered in California and elsewhere 2 Plants considered by CNPS to be rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but which are more common elsewhere 3 Review list of plants suggested by CNPS for consideration as endangered, but about which more information is needed 4 Watch list of plants of limited distribution whose status should be monitored
Source: California Department of Fish and Game, California Natural Diversity Database, Ontario and Guasti USGS Quadrangles, June 2006; California Native Plant Society On-line Inventory.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 26 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Figure 6 Areas of Potential Occurrence of Sensitive Species 11x17 color
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 27 Biological Resources Report
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 28 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Sensitive Wildlife
Several sensitive wildlife species have been recorded or are expected to occur in the planning area, mostly in the NMC portion of the City. Several species have also been observed in biological surveys for other proposed projects. The CNDDB reports for the Ontario and Guasti quadrangles and other previous biological reports identified known occurrences/observations of the sensitive wildlife species listed in Table 2. Several migrant raptor species that may potentially fly over, forage, or roost in the planning area are also included. Species with designated critical habitat (discussed below) within the City boundaries are included. Three species (one insect, one bird, and one mammal) are federally listed as endangered or threatened. Three bird species are state-listed as threatened or endangered. The remaining species are listed as state species of special concern, listed by other agencies or organizations as sensitive, or were included in the CNDDB because they are considered rare or sensitive and their conservation status may be of concern. The federal- and state-listed wildlife species are described in detail following Table 2.
Table 2 Sensitive Wildlife Species Known or Potentially Occurring within the Ontario Planning Area Federal/State Listing Other Potential to Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Status Designations Occur Insects Rhaphiomidas Delhi Sands flower- Wholly or partially FE/None None Low. Limited terminatus loving fly consolidated dunes (Delhi potential for abdominalis soils series), open sand. occurrence. Delhi Fine, sandy soils with sparse Sands built on vegetation cover of California and/or highly buckwheat, croton, disturbed. deerweed, and evening primrose Amphibians Spea [Scaphiopus] western spadefoot Seasonal pools in coastal None/None CSC/BLM Low. No suitable hammondi toad sage scrub, chaparral, and habitat. Expected grasslands. only rarely. Reptiles Anniella pulchra silvery (California) Coastal dune, valley-foothill, None/None CSC/FS Low. Limited to no pulchra legless lizard chaparral, coastal sage suitable habitat. scrub, oak woodland, and Expected only pine forests. Alluvial areas, rarely. sandy washes, a variety of woodland habitats, and potentially some agricultural areas. Prefers loose sandy soils associated with drainages and valley bottoms. Aspidoscelis tigris coastal (western) Open, often rocky areas with None/None CSC Low. Limited to no stejnegeri whiptail little vegetation or sunny suitable habitat. [Cnemidophorus microhabitats within shrub or Expected only tigris multiscutatus] grassland associations rarely. Diadophus punctatus San Bernardino Chaparral, coastal sage None/None None/FS Low. Limited modestus ringneck snake scrub, grassland, riparian, suitable habitat. and woodlands Expected only rarely.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 29 Biological Resources Report
Table 2 Sensitive Wildlife Species Known or Potentially Occurring within the Ontario Planning Area Federal/State Listing Other Potential to Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Status Designations Occur Emys [Clemmys] southwestern Slow-moving permanent or None/None CSC/FS/ Low. Limited to no marmorata pallida (western) pond turtle intermittent streams, small BLM suitable habitat. ponds and lakes, reservoirs, Expected only gravel pits, permanent and rarely.1 ephemeral shallow wetlands, stock ponds and treatment lagoons. Abundant basking sites and cover necessary. Phrynosoma coast (San Diego) Open areas of sandy soil None/None CSC/FS Low. Limited coronatum (blainvillii horned lizard with coastal sage scrub, suitable habitat. population) chaparral, grassland, Expected only riparian, and washes and rarely.2 watercourses Salvadora hexalepis coast (western) Desert scrub, coastal None/None CSC Low. Limited virgultea patch-nosed snake chaparral, washes, sandy suitable habitat. flats, and rocky areas. Broad Expected only generalist in its habitat rarely. requirements Birds Accipiter cooperi Cooper’s hawk Oak and riparian woodlands, None/None CSC Moderate. (nesting3) windrows, open fields. Suitable foraging, Known to use urban areas, limited suitable occupying trees among nesting habitat. residential and commercial Expected uses. occasionally. Observed. Accipiter striatus sharp-shinned hawk Variety of residential, None/None CSC High. Suitable (nesting) chaparral, grassland, sage foraging habitat. scrub, crop land, riparian, Uncommon winter and oak woodland, visitor. Observed. windrows, open fields. Agelaius tricolor tricolored blackbird Marshes and grasslands. None/None CSC/BCC/ High for foraging. Breeding colonies requires BLM Suitable foraging nearby water, nesting habitat. Low for substrate, and open range nesting. Limited foraging habitat of natural suitable nesting grassland, woodland, or habitat. Observed. agricultural cropland. Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle* Grasslands, brushlands, None/None CSC/SFP/ Low. Potential for deserts, oak savannas, open BCC/BLM/ foraging. None for coniferous forests and FS nesting. montane valleys. Nests on rock outcrops and ledges. Ardea alba great egret Wet areas, fields, margins of None/None SA/FS Moderate to High. [Casmerodius albus] open water. Fairly common (rookery) resident. Observed. Ardea herodias great blue heron Wet areas, fields, margins of None/None SA/FS Moderate to High. (rookery) open water. Fairly common resident. Observed.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 30 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Table 2 Sensitive Wildlife Species Known or Potentially Occurring within the Ontario Planning Area Federal/State Listing Other Potential to Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Status Designations Occur Athene [Speotyto] burrowing owl Shortgrass prairies, None/None CSC/BCC/ Low to Moderate. cunicularia grasslands lowland scrub, BLM/FS Suitable foraging hypugaea agricultural lands, coastal and nesting dunes, desert floors, and habitat. Observed. some artificial open areas. Uses abandoned ground squirrel burrows and artificial structures such as berms, culverts, and underpasses. Buteo regalis ferruginous hawk Grasslands and other open None/None CSC/BCC/ Moderate. (wintering) terrain of the plains and BLM Suitable foraging, foothills. Wintering species. limited nesting Primarily open fields with low habitat. Expected vegetation. occasionally. Observed. Buteo swainsoni Swainson’s hawk Grasslands and other open None/ST FS/BCC Low. Potential for (nesting) terrain. foraging. None for nesting. Expected only rarely. Charadrius mountain plover Dry upland prairies and None/None CSC/BCC Low. Limited montanus plains, semidesert, bare dirt suitable foraging fields. habitat. Expected only rarely. Observed. Circus cyaneus northern harrier Grasslands and other open None/None CSC Low. Suitable (nesting) terrain. Soars over open foraging, limited fields, low perches. nesting habitat. Expected only rarely. Observed. Coccyzus western yellow-billed Riparian. Uncommon to rare FC/SE None/BCC/ Low. No suitable americanus cuckoo summer resident of valley FS habitat. Not occidentalis foothill and desert riparian expected. habitats Egretta thula snowy egret Wet areas, fields, margins of None/None SA Moderate to high. (rookery) open water. Fairly common resident. Observed. Elanus leucurus white-tailed kite Open woodlands and None/None None/SFP Moderate. (nesting) grasslands, windrows. Suitable foraging, Hovers over open fields. limited nesting habitat. Expected occasionally. Observed. Eremophila alpestris California horned Variety of open habitats, None/None CSC Low. Uncommon actia lark usually where trees and large resident. shrubs are absent. Falco columbarius merlin Grasslands, coastal sage None/None CSC Low. Suitable (wintering) scrub and estuaries, foraging habitat, windrows, open fields. no nesting habitat. Expected only rarely. Winter visitor. Observed.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 31 Biological Resources Report
Table 2 Sensitive Wildlife Species Known or Potentially Occurring within the Ontario Planning Area Federal/State Listing Other Potential to Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Status Designations Occur Falco mexicanus prairie falcon Grasslands, coastal sage None/None CSC/BCC Low. Potential (nesting) scrub and estuaries. habitat for foraging, none for nesting. Expected only rarely. Winter visitor. Observed. Falco peregrinus peregrine falcon Estuaries, wetlands, and Delisted/SE None/BCC/ Low. Suitable anatum (nesting) coastal bluffs. Breeding SFP foraging, no habitat in high cliffs along the nesting habitat. coast. Observed. Lanius ludovicianus loggerhead shrike Grasslands and open scrub. None/None CSC/BCC Moderate. Forages in open country, Suitable foraging using low perches (fences and nesting etc.) for scanning, and nests habitat. Expected in dense scrub and brush. occasionally. Observed Larus californicus California gull Nearly all types of fresh and None/None CSC High. Common in (nesting colony) salt water, cropland, landfills, winter. Occasional refuse areas, open lawns. in summer. Expected. Observed. Numenius long-billed curlew Coastal estuaries, upland None/None CSC Moderate. americanus herbaceous areas, Expected croplands, wet areas, open occasionally. fields, shores of open water. Observed. Phalacrocorax double-crested Lakes, fresh, salt, and None/None CSC Moderate to high. auritus cormorant estuarine waters Suitable foraging, no suitable. nesting habitat. Fairly common in winter. Occasional in summer. Observed. Plegadis chihi white-faced ibis Freshwater marshes and None/None CSC Low. Limited (rookery site) brackish areas. suitable habitat. Expected only rarely. Observed. Polioptila californica coastal California Low elevation coastal sage FT/None CSC No suitable californica gnatcatcher scrub and coastal bluff scrub. habitat. Not expected. Mammals Antrozous pallidus pallid bat Oak and grassland ecotones. None/None CSC/FS/ Potential for Prefers foraging in the open. BLM occurrence. Roosts in attics or rock cracks; in the open, near foliage at night. Chaetodipus northwestern San Coastal sage scrub, sage None/None CSC Low. Uncommon. [Perognathus] fallax Diego pocket mouse scrub/grassland ecotones, fallax and chaparral communities. Moderately gravelly and rocky substrates, disturbed grassland and open sage scrub vegetation with sandy- loam to loam soils
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 32 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Table 2 Sensitive Wildlife Species Known or Potentially Occurring within the Ontario Planning Area Federal/State Listing Other Potential to Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Status Designations Occur Corynorhinus Townsend’s big- A wide variety of habitats None/None CSC/FS/ Potential for townsendii eared bat including woodlands and arid BLM occurrence. grasslands. Roosts in mines and caves. Dipodomys San Bernardino Riversidean alluvial fan sage FE/None CSC Low. Limited to no merriammi parvus kangaroo rat scrub and sandy loam soils, suitable habitat. alluvial fans and flood plains, Not expected. and along washes with nearby sage scrub. Prefers sandy loam substrates. Santa Ana River, Cajon Creek Wash, Lytle Creek Wash, City Creek, and upper Etiwanda Wash in San Bernardino County, and sites in western Riverside County Euderma maculatum spotted bat Arid deserts, grasslands, and None/None CSC/BLM Possible roosting mixed conifer forests. Roosts opportunities. in rock crevices. Eumops perotis California mastiff bat Open areas with high cliffs. None/None CSC/BLM Possible roosting californicus opportunities. Lasiurus xanthinus western yellow bat Desert regions of the None/None SA Possible roosting southwestern U.S., southern opportunities. California. Capture sites are often associated with water features; open grassy areas and scrub, canyons and riparian areas, orchards. Particular association with palms in oases and ornamental palms in landscaping. Lepus californicus San Diego black- Coastal sage scrub and on None/None CSC Low. Expected bennettii tAiled jackrabbit the margins between shrub only rarely.4 and herbaceous areas. Also know to occur in agricultural and ruderal areas. Myotis ciliolabrum small-footed myotis Feeds among trees or over None/None CSC/BLM Possible roosting brush. Roosts in caves, opportunities. mines, and in cliff or rock openings. Myotis yumanensis Yuma myotis Water and wooded canyon None/None CSC/BLM Possible roosting bottoms. Roosts in caves opportunities. and abandoned buildings. Neotoma lepida San Diego desert Riversidean and coastal None/None CSC Low to moderate. intermedia woodrat sage scrub, chaparral and Expected nonnative grasslands. Shrub occasionally. and desert habitats, primarily associated with rock outcroppings, boulders, cacti, or areas of dense undergrowth
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 33 Biological Resources Report
Table 2 Sensitive Wildlife Species Known or Potentially Occurring within the Ontario Planning Area Federal/State Listing Other Potential to Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Status Designations Occur Nyctinomops pocketed free-tailed Desert habitats. Roosts in None/None CSC Possible roosting femorosaccus bat rock crevices in cliffs. opportunities. Nyctinomops big free-tailed bat Desert habitats. Roosts in None/None CSC Possible roosting macrotis rock crevices in cliffs. opportunities. Perognathus Los Angeles pocket Inhabits open ground of fine None/None CSC/FS Low. Expected longimembris mouse sandy composition. Probably only rarely. brevinasus prefers sparsely vegetated habitats. Federal Designations FE Federally listed as “Endangered” FT Federally listed as “Threatened” FPE Federally proposed or petitioned as “Endangered” FC Federal Candidate FP Federally Protected BLM U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management “sensitive” species FS U.S. Forest Service “sensitive species” BCC USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern Delisted Delisted species are monitored for 5 years
State Designations
SE State listed as “Endangered” ST State listed as “Threatened” CSC California Species of Special Concern SFP State Fully Protected Species SA Special Animal. Taxa of concern to the California Natural Diversity Data Base regardless of their current legal or protected status.
None – not listed or designated as sensitive. Observed – recorded observation during previous surveys.
* Note: The golden eagle is also protected under the federal Bald Eagle Protection Act, June 8, 1949, as amended 1959. 1 Previous sightings noted in a drainage within the Chino Airport area, immediately outside of and adjacent to the southwestern corner of the City. No sighting in 2004 surveys. 2 Evidence, but no direct observation, of the species in 1992 by Harmsworth Associates at the UPS Cargo Hub in east Ontario. The site has since been developed. 3 “Nesting” or “rookery” indicates sensitivity due to loss of suitable nesting locations. “Wintering” indicates species that breed to the north, but whole habitat for winter is declining. 4 Observed on Chino Airport site (CAI 2005).
Source: California Department of Fish and Game, California Natural Diversity Database, Ontario and Guasti Quadrangles, accessed June 20, 2006; EIP 1999; Envicom 1997 and 1998; CAI 2005; EIP 2005; CBA 1992.
Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly The most prominent sensitive wildlife species noted in the region is the Delhi sands flower-loving fly (DSFLF) (Rhaphiomidas terminatus), a federally listed endangered species. The DSFLF is a large insect in the Dipteran family Mydidae. It has an elongated body and a long tubular mouthpart that may be used, as in butterflies, for extracting nectar from flowers. One of the largest flies, the DSFLF is approximately one inch (25 to 26 mm) long and orange-brown with dark brown oval spots on the upper surface of the abdomen. The fly is a strong, fast flier and is capable of stationary, hovering flight (USFWS 1997). During July through September, adult flies feed, mate, and lay eggs in the sandy soil. The DSFLF is restricted (endemic) to the Colton Dunes (consisting of Delhi soil series). Delhi soils are fine sandy soils, often wholly or partly sand dunes stabilized by sparse native vegetation. These soils cover approximately 40 square miles in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, underlying portions of the City of Ontario and other neighboring cities. By 1997, studies
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 34 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
indicated that over 97 percent of the area containing this soil types had been converted to agriculture, developed for urban or commercial uses, or otherwise altered. The DSFLF has not been observed in the City (Envicom 1998). A CNDDB-recorded occurrence of DSFLF is located outside and southeast of Ontario.
The DSFLF was emergency listed on September 23, 1993, because extinction within the foreseeable future is likely; the present distribution of the DSFLF encompasses less than 2 percent of its former range. Critical habitat has not been designated for this species. All existing populations of the DSFLF occur within eight miles of each other. The distribution straddles I-10 in the vicinity of Colton and Rialto, Riverside and San Bernardino counties on County, public utility, and private lands. In 1998, only six sites, totaling less than 45 acres, were known to be occupied and only one is permanently protected. The Draft Recovery Plan for the DSFLF was prepared in 1997. The plan delineated actions required to recover and/or protect the listed species. The former range of the species was divided into three Recovery Units (RUs): Jurupa, Colton and Ontario. Approximately 60 percent of the Ontario RU covers the City of Ontario (see Figure 6). According to the Draft Recovery Plan, restorable habitat for the DSFLF is located along the SCE right-of-way and a shallow wash in southwestern Ontario (West Cucamonga Channel), and a few other locations within the Ontario RU. The planned recovery of the DSFLF is partially dependent upon the restoration, management, and preservation of such areas.
Coastal California Gnatcatcher The coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica), a subspecies of the California gnatcatcher, is a federally listed threatened, California species of special concern. It is a small, long- tailed, blue-grey songbird measuring only 4.5 inches (11 cm). The coastal California gnatcatcher has a unique vocalization that consists of a series of kitten-like mew sounds. The species is a resident of arid coastal sage scrub–dominated plant communities from southern Ventura County southward through Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties, into Baja California, Mexico. Coastal sage scrub is composed of relatively low-growing, dry-season deciduous and succulent plants. Characteristic plants of this community include California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), various species of sage (Salvia sp.), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia), California encelia (Encelia californica), and Opuntia spp. Gnatcatchers also use chaparral, grassland, and riparian habitats where they occur adjacent to sage scrub.
Even in the early 1900s, the coastal California gnatcatcher population was described as being scarce and irregularly distributed, but by the 1940s habitat was noticeably reduced. In the U.S., loss of coastal sage scrub habitat has been estimated to be as much as 70 to 90 percent, with approximately 33 percent lost since 1993 when the species was federally listed as threatened. Brood parasitism by brown-headed cowbirds and loss of habitat to urban development has been cited as causes of the coastal California gnatcatcher population decline. In Ontario, while coastal sage scrub was historically the dominant vegetation in alluvial fans and drainages, it has long since been removed by development and agricultural production. Coastal California gnatcatcher is not expected to be present within the Ontario planning area due to lack of suitable habitat.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 35 Biological Resources Report
San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat
The San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriammi parvus) is federally listed endangered, California species of special concern. It is one of 19 recognized subspecies of Merriam’s kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriammi). In coastal southern California, it is the only species of kangaroo rat with four toes on each of its hind feet. The species are typically found on alluvial fans, in floodplains, along washes, in adjacent upland areas, and in areas with historical braided channels. Currently they occupy approximately 3,240 acres of suitable habitat, divided among seven widely separated locations in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. An additional 13,193 acres are distributed within the Santa Ana River Wash, Lytle and Cajon creeks, and San Jacinto River.
The San Bernardino kangaroo rat was emergency listed as endangered in January 1998, when its population had been reduced by approximately 95 percent due to habitat loss, urban development, degradation, water conservation activities, and fragmentation owing to sand and gravel mining operations. Final designation of critical habitat for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat was issued in April 2002 (Department of the Interior 2002). A total of approximately 33,295 acres in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties has been designated as critical habitat for the species. The northeastern corner of the City between 4th Street and I-10, is associated with Etiwanda Creek and the Etiwanda Conservation Basin, and is located within the very southern portion of Critical Habitat Unit 4 Etiwanda Alluvial Fan and Wash (see Figure 6). There may be some potential for remnant suitable habitat for San Bernardino kangaroo rat to be present. However, the area is disturbed and surrounded by developed industrial uses. There is very low potential for the species to occur within the City.
Swainson’s Hawk Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) is state-listed as threatened. It is a large (18 inches), broad- winged (49-inch wingspan), broad-tailed hawk. It is slender, with a long tail and pointed wings, compared to other buteos. Typical habitat of the Swainson’s hawk is open desert, sparse shrub lands, grassland, or row, grain, and hay cropland containing scattered, large trees or small groves. The species cannot forage in most perennial crops or in annual crops that grow much higher than native grasses. It roosts in large trees, especially along stream courses or in open woodlands, but will roost on the ground if no trees are available. During their migration movements, they rest and feed in grasslands and harvested fields, especially where grasshoppers are numerous, often perching on fence posts, telephone poles, and power poles.
Swainson’s hawks have the second-longest migration of all raptor species; this species migrates over 10,000 kilometers (km) every spring and fall between its breeding grounds in North America to its wintering grounds in South America. They summer in the western half of North America and winter in eastern Argentina, Paraguay, and southern Brazil. The species is in decline because of habitat destruction, a reduction in its main prey species, and pesticide use. There are probably no key population areas within the planning area, but migratory stopovers or observations of flight within the region include locations along the Santa Ana River, where they may roost due to the access to trees. They may occur during migration wherever there are foraging and roosting opportunities. There are potential foraging and roosting areas for this species in the NMC area of the City, but none for nesting. This species is expected to occur only rarely.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 36 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Western Yellow-Billed Cuckoo The western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis) is a federal candidate, state- listed threatened species. One of two subspecies of yellow-billed cuckoos, they are medium birds (11 to 13 inches 28 to 33 cm) with long tails. The western yellow-billed cuckoo is grayish brown above and white-below, with rufous primaries (wing feathers), yellow bill, and white/grey undertail markings. Their range historically extended from southern British Columbia to northern Mexico. Currently the only known populations of breeding western yellow-billed cuckoos are in California, Arizona, and western New Mexico. In California, the species requires dense, wide riparian woodlands with well-developed understories for breeding. It occurs in densely foliaged, deciduous trees and shrubs—especially willows—which are required for roost sites. It is an uncommon-to-rare summer resident of valley, foothill, and desert riparian habitats in scattered locations in California. The species presumably migrates throughout much of North America and winters primarily from northern to central South America. Up to five western yellow-billed cuckoo populations have been documented in the Prado Basin and adjacent reach of the Santa Ana River, located southwest of Ontario. However, this species is not expected to occur in Ontario due to the lack of suitable dense riparian habitat.
Peregrine Falcon The peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) was formerly federally listed endangered, state- listed endangered, and is a state fully protected animal. The slate-grey, crow-sized falcon averages 15 inches with a wingspan of 40 inches. Airborne, this falcon can be recognized by characteristic rapid wingbeats interspersed with long glides. It feeds primarily on birds, which it takes on the wing, plunging from tremendous heights, reaching up to 180 mph in pursuit of prey. Throughout the species’ range, peregrines are found in a large variety of open habitats, including tundra, marshes, seacoasts, savannahs and high mountains. The species breeds mostly in woodland, forest, and coastal habitats. Riparian areas and coastal and inland wetlands are important habitats year-round, especially in nonbreeding seasons. During migration, the peregrine falcon may be found near marshes, lakes, and ponds that have high concentrations of waterfowl, shorebirds, and other birds, and they often travel along mountain ridges on both eastern and western coastlines. Within southern California, peregrine falcons are primarily found at coastal estuaries and inland oases. The species breeds and winters throughout the state, with the exception of desert areas. The peregrine is a very uncommon breeding resident and uncommon as a migrant or a winter resident. There is suitable foraging habitat within the planning area. The species has been observed foraging over the NMC area, but it is a very uncommon breeding resident and uncommon as a migrant (Envicom 1998).
The following sensitive species are also of interest:
Coast (San Diego) Horned Lizard The coast (San Diego) horned lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillii) is a California species of special concern and considered a U.S. Forest Service sensitive species. It is a small (2.3 to 4.2 inch; 5.9 to 10.6 cm) lizard with a distinctive rounded, flat body with horns on its head and rows of fringed scales down its sides. This species is found in a wide variety of vegetation types including coastal sage scrub, annual grassland, chaparral, oak woodland, riparian woodland, and coniferous forest. In inland areas, this species is restricted to areas with pockets of open microhabitat, created by disturbance (e.g., floods, fire, roads, grazed areas, firebreaks). It prefers open areas of loose, friable,
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 37 Biological Resources Report
sandy soil within coastal sage scrub, chaparral, grassland, riparian, and washes and watercourses. In California, coast (San Diego) horned lizard ranges from the Transverse Ranges south to the Mexican border west of the deserts, although the species occurs on scattered sites along the extreme western desert slope of the Peninsular Ranges. No occurrences of the species have been documented within the City. However, evidence of the coast San Diego horned lizard, but no direct observation, was noted during biologic surveys in 1987 of the United Parcel Service Cargo Hub area (CBA 1992). This species is rarely expected to be present because there is limited suitable habitat within the planning area.
Burrowing Owl Burrowing owl (Athene [Speotyto] cunicularia hypugea) is a state species of special concern. It is a small (8.5 to 11 inches; 21.6 to 28 cm), ground-dwelling owl with a round head and no ear tufts. Burrowing owls are comparatively easy to see because they are often active in daylight. They are found in open, dry grasslands; agricultural and range lands; and desert habitats often associated with burrowing animals, particularly prairie dogs, ground squirrels and badgers. They can also inhabit grass, forb, and shrub stages of pinyon and ponderosa pine habitats. Burrowing owls are highly terrestrial, and are often seen perched on telegraph or fence posts, or on top of mounds outside of burrows. This semicolonial species requires large open expanses of sparsely vegetated areas on gently rolling or level terrain with an abundance of active small mammal burrows which they used for roosting and nesting cover. They occur in all states west of the Mississippi Valley and breed south through the western and Midwestern states and across grassland regions in Canada. It is a resident in the open areas of the lowlands over much of the southern California region. The species is greatly reduced in number within the lowlands of Riverside County and appears to be resident within the region although there is some movement of more northerly birds into the southern and coastal parts of the region. Burrowing owl has been observed in the central and northwestern portion of the NMC (Envicom 1998). A CNDDB- recorded occurrence is located in the vicinity of Ontario Mills. Burrowing owl was also observed in the adjacent Chino Airport area (CAI 2005).
Southwestern (Western) Pond Turtle Southwestern pond turtle (Emys [Clemmys] marmorata pallida) is a California species of special concern. The turtle is an aquatic animal that moves to upland areas for egg-laying. It winters in underground burrows in upland habitats. In the warmer months it will bask on rocks and logs near slow-moving streams. Its habitat includes permanent or intermittent streams, small ponds, small lakes, reservoirs, abandoned gravel pits, permanent and ephemeral shallow wetlands, stock ponds, and sewage treatment lagoons. Pools are the preferred habitat within streams, with abundant logs, rocks, submerged vegetation, mud, undercut banks, and ledges as necessary habitat components for cover, basking and nesting sites. Currently, it ranges south of San Francisco Bay to northern Baja California, Mexico, and intergrades with northwestern pond turtle (Emys [Clemmys] marmorata marmorata) over a large area in central California. Previous sightings of southwestern pond turtle were noted in a drainage within the Chino Airport area, immediately outside of and adjacent to the southwestern corner of the City. However, the species was not observed in 2004 surveys of the airport site. There is limited suitable habitat for southwestern pond turtle within Ontario.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 38 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Jurisdictional Areas
The USACE and CDFG have jurisdiction over streams, watercourses, and wetlands, as previously described. Wetlands that fall under USACE jurisdiction must exhibit three characteristics including hydrology, hydrophytic plants, and soils. In the absence of wetlands, USACE jurisdiction in nontidal waters such as rivers, lakes and intermittent streams extends to the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM).4 Pursuant to Sections 1600–1603 of the California Fish and Game Code, CDFG regulates all diversions, obstructions, or changes to the natural flow or bed, channel or bank of any river, stream, or lake that supports fish or wildlife resources. There are differences between USACE and CDFG jurisdictions. The CDFG uses less well-defined and more ecologically based criteria in their jurisdiction determinations. For a watercourse to be considered under CDFG jurisdiction, it must have a terminus, banks, and channel through which water can flow, at least periodically, and needs to exhibit evidence of an OHWM. CDFG jurisdiction may only exhibit one of the three USACE indicators. Generally, CDFG jurisdiction may extend to the wider limit of riparian vegetation associated with the water course, encompassing the entire limits of USACE jurisdiction.
Waters and wetlands within the planning area that potentially fall under USACE or CDFG jurisdiction include the major watercourses that traverse the City. West Cucamonga Channel, Cucamonga Creek, Deer, Day and Etiwanda Creeks enter the City from the north and generally traverse the City to the south. Cucamonga Creek and its tributary, the Lower Deer Creek Channel, once supported riparian vegetation; however, these drainages have since been completely channelized through the City. In fact, all drainages which traverse the City of Ontario, including Cucamonga Creek, West Cucamonga Channel, Lower Deer Creek Channel, Cucamonga Canyon Channel, Deer Creek Channel, Day Creek Channel, Etiwanda Creek Channel (except for an approximately 1,000-foot section between I-10 and 4th Street), and Lower Etiwanda Creek Channel have been channelized through the City. Within these channels there may be areas where sediment has accumulated and riparian vegetation has developed. These channels also discharge to numerous detention basins located throughout the City (shown on Figure 2). Riparian vegetation may also be present in the detention basins, particularly where flowing or standing water persists. These riparian resources, including any wetlands that may occur along drainages, potentially fall under the jurisdiction of the USACE and CDFG.
Other open water bodies include dairy manure water retention basins, irrigation ponds, livestock watering, and man-made lakes (associated with parks and golf courses). In addition, fields under cultivation or left fallow accumulate surface waters in ponds or ditches. These waters would likely be considered “isolated wetlands” and would not fall under USACE jurisdiction after the 2001 SWANCC decision that limited the scope of the USACE CWA Section 404–permitting as applied to isolated waters of the U.S. (i.e., those that are not adjacent to or connected to a navigable water body, such as a river, lake or marine waters).5 However, CDFG may still take jurisdiction over these surface waters.
Regional Connectivity/Wildlife Movement Corridors
Wildlife corridors link areas of suitable habitat that are otherwise separated by rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. Corridors act as links between different populations of
4 Indicated by the presence of an incised streambed with defined bank shelving. 5 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County vs. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (531 U.S. 159, 2001) City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 39 Biological Resources Report
a species and mitigate the effects of habitat fragmentation by (1) allowing animals to move between remaining habitats (which allows replenishment of depleted populations and promotes genetic diversity; (2) providing escape routes from fire, predators, and human disturbances that put populations or local species at risk; and (3) serving as travel routes for individuals moving within their home ranges for food, water, mates, and shelter. Wildlife movement activities usually fall into one of three movement categories: dispersal, seasonal migration, and movements related to home- range activities. Large open spaces will generally support a diverse wildlife community representing all types of movement. Wildlife movement may range from nonmigratory movement of amphibians, reptiles, and some birds on a “local” level to the many-square-mile home ranges of large mammals moving at a “regional” level.
Ontario is almost completely developed with urban and agricultural uses. There are no large, open spaces with native habitat present in the City. Open space consists of agricultural fields, parks and golf courses, and scattered vacant lots. Further, the City is generally surrounded by highly developed areas. The north-south watercourses that flow through the City provide open water areas utilized by resident and migratory birds. These drainages can also function as wildlife corridors, but because they are concrete channels, they provide limited habitat cover and do not directly link natural open spaces within and in the immediate vicinity of the City. Within the region, Cucamonga and Deer Creeks flow from the San Gabriel Mountains to the Prado Dam Flood Control Basin, which contains over 2,100 acres of riparian habitat upstream of the dam. These creeks are concrete-line channels where they traverse through Ontario. Regional movement of larger mammal species with expansive home ranges, such as mountain lion (Felis concolor) or mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) is not likely to occur in the channels. Insects, amphibians, reptiles, small and medium-sized mammals— including urban-adapted species such as raccoon, Virginia opossum, striped skunk, and coyote—and bird species likely utilize the channels and the SCE easement as local wildlife movement corridors within the City.
CONSERVATION
Existing Conservation Areas
An integral component for the protection of biological resources is the conservation of natural communities that support sensitive species. No conservation areas currently exist within or immediately adjacent to the City of Ontario boundaries.
Relative to the DSFLF, there are a few locations in the City that the USFWS considers as restorable habitat. Currently, the City of Ontario has no established DSFLF mitigation or restoration areas. However, approximately 10 acres at the northwest corner at Milliken Avenue and Greystone Drive, between Ontario Boulevard and SR-60, have been set aside by USFWS for DSFLF habitat restoration.6 The site will be surrounded by development to the north, east and west, with the freeway to the south.
6 Richard C. Ayala, Senior Planner, City of Ontario Planning Department, personal communication. City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 40 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Proposed Conservation Plans and Areas
Given the absence of natural wildlife habitat in the OMD and the infeasibility of creating buffers or restoring natural habitat values in the fragmented islands of highly disturbed undeveloped land that is left in the OMC, conservation of biological resources north of Riverside Avenue was not an issue addressed in the 1992 GP. An evaluation of the currently proposed Ontario General Plan Update assessed that this next phase of the General Plan Update does not need to address conservation of biological resources in the OMC (Hogle-Ireland 2005).
New Model Colony Land Trust
Regarding the NMC area south of Riverside Avenue, the 1996 biological resources assessment conducted as part of the SOI General Plan Amendment determined that although the NMC has been extensively altered from natural conditions, the open agricultural lands and surface waters provide foraging and breeding habitat for a variety of common and sensitive wildlife. The SOI EIR adopted mitigation measures to offset significant impacts that would result from implementation of the NMC General Plan (i.e., development of the SOI) including: loss of windrows/raptor habitat; loss of habitat for sensitive waterfowl and raptors; and indirect impacts to DSFLF recovery. The mitigation measures included contributing to creation of a 160-acre off-site wetland and waterfowl habitat through purchase of nonpublic lands within the Chino Basin; creation of a 145-acre Waterfowl and Raptor Conservation Area within the NMC; and cooperating with USFWS to implement the DSFLF Recovery Plan.
Subsequent to the adoption of the SOI General Plan and EIR, a lawsuit was filed against the City by the Endangered Habitats League, Inc., and Sierra Club challenging the City’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance and approval of the SOI General Plan Amendment. A Settlement Agreement was reached and agreed to by all parties that set forth revised mitigation measures for potential impacts in the NMC (referred to as Annexation Area 163 in the agreement) to the burrowing owl, the DSFLF, raptor foraging and wildlife habitat, loss of open space, actual and potential habitat and agricultural land, and sensitive (listed and nonlisted) species. The mitigation measures are summarized below. These measures will be in effect until all of the developable acres within the NMC reach full build-out, as determined by the City. Further, a land trust, conservancy, or non-profit corporation or nonprofit entity (Land Trust) will be created or selected to carry out the responsibilities, goals, and objectives of the mitigation as set forth in the settlement agreement.
• Prior to issuance of grading permits, Ontario shall impose a $2,000 per acre Mitigation Fee on proposed developments in Annexation Area 163 that require discretionary approval or permitting from the City.
• Ontario in consultation with CDFG will identify through CEQA review, lands occupied by burrowing owl and suitable as long-term habitat. The City will require avoidance of those lands to maintain a viable territory and require long-term maintenance through dedication in fee or grant of easement to the Land Trust. If the site is not viable long-term habitat, the developer shall pay the mitigation fee and make provisions for relocation of the owls.
• Since habitat that benefits DSFLF can be expected to benefit burrowing owl, up to 25 percent of the Mitigation Fee maybe used by the City for DSFLF recovery. City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 41 Biological Resources Report
• All Mitigation Fees collected shall be used for the above-described purposes and may be used to purchase property, conservation easements, or other land with long-term conservation value for the environmental impacts; enhance/restore lands with such values; maintain and operates these lands; and pay for related administrative costs (not to exceed 10 percent of the total fees).
• Land/easements dedicated, conveyed, or purchased to benefit wildlife, waterfowl, raptors/and or burrowing owl must have long-term conservation value for those species and must be managed by the Land Trust. The parcels must be located within the Habitat Area designated as part of the Settlement Agreement. Unacceptable properties are those that would otherwise by purchased by another entity or group as open space mitigation for environmental impacts.
The Settlement Agreement also modified the provisions for the on-site 145-acre Waterfowl and Raptor Conservation Area (WRCA). The alternative provision for mitigation will allow the City to determine the area to be removed from the on-site WRCA. For each acre removed, the City will provide funding at the rate of $40,000 per acre for off-site mitigation of wildlife impacts, through an impact fee or other revenue-generating mechanism. The funding may cover preservation of the 160 acres of off-site mitigation for a total of up to 305 acres of off-site mitigation (which should be located within the designated Habitat Area). The funds will be managed by the Land Trust. The Land Trust will also be the entity responsible for acquiring and administering the off-site mitigation lands. Further, for development projects in the NMC requiring discretionary approval or permitting, Ontario will require a biological habitat assessment, including focused protocol surveys when appropriate, as part of a subsequent CEQA environmental review process.
As part of the implementation of the terms of the settlement agreement, the City of Ontario has established and presently collects a mitigation fee for new development in the NMC, a portion of which funds a land trust to acquire and protect habitat supporting burrowing owls, waterfowl, raptors, and DSFLF. Development impact fees for new development in the NMC were adopted on June 23, 2003, by the City Council. The NMC Development Impact Fees include a Habitat Mitigation fee of $4,320 per net acre for proposed residential, commercial, hotel and restaurant, office, and industrial development (City of Ontario 2005). Up to $500 of the fees may be used for DSFLF.7 In addition, current City procedure is to require a Habitat Assessment to determine existing habitat and biological resources on proposed development sites. If the assessment determines that there is potential habitat for sensitive species, focused protocol surveys are required. If potential DSFLF habitat is present, two-year (consecutive) protocol surveys, per the USFWS “Interim General Survey Guidelines for the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly,” are required (USFWS 1996).
Waterfowl and Raptor Conservation Area
The land use plan for the NMC originally provided for establishment of the WRCA, a wetlands and habitat area near the confluence of the Cucamonga Creek and the Lower Deer Creek Channels. Creation of the WRCA as part of the NMC was intended to provide a concentrated area for wetlands, which would receive storm drainage from the west. Funding for the environmental restoration of the existing 85-acre Lower Cucamonga flood control basin under the WRCA would have been provided through the USACE with matching funds from the City of Ontario. This conservation area plus
7 Richard C. Ayala, Senior Planner, City of Ontario Planning Department, personal communication. City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 42 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
acquisition of 145 acres of off-site mitigation land was intended to provide mitigation for impacts resulting from development of the NMC.
Per the conditions of the Settlement Agreement, the WRCA within the NMC is no longer proposed. Currently, the City’s main emphasis is to pursue off-site mitigation lands for habitat restoration within the El Prado Basin, as outlined in the settlement agreement. The acquisition of land within the El Prado Basin Area will be conducted by a land conservancy with participation by the CDFG. The City is currently in the process of selecting the Riverside Land Conservancy to oversee the acquisition, management, and operation of approximately 305 acres of off-site mitigation lands in the El Prado Basin. Funding for these off-site mitigation lands will be provided through the NMC habitat mitigation fees and managed by the Riverside Land Conversancy.
Habitat Conservation Plan/ Natural Community Conservation Plan
Under Section 10 of the FESA, an “incidental take permit” from the USFWS is required when nonfederal activities will result in take of threatened or endangered wildlife. A Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) must accompany an application to the USFWS for an incidental take permit. If the USFWS accepts the HCP, then the agency issues the permit, which allows permittees to take an endangered species if such taking is incidental to, and not the primary purpose of, the proposed activity. The permit is required prior to developing any part of an endangered species’ habitat because USFWS regulations equate habitat modification with taking an endangered species, which is prohibited under federal law.
The purpose of the HCP planning process is to ensure that there is adequate minimizing and mitigation of the effects of the authorized incidental-take permit. The Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) program is an unprecedented federal, state, and local cooperative effort that takes a broad-based ecosystem approach to planning for the protection and perpetuation of biological diversity. Rather than identify and protect individual species that have already declined in number significantly, an NCCP provides for the regional or area-wide protection of plants, animals, and habitats at the ecosystem scale, while accommodating compatible and appropriate land use. A local agency (such as a City, County, or District) coordinates with USFWS, CDFG, and other parties to develop a conservation plan.
An HCP/NCCP is intended to standardize and streamline the existing permitting process for incidental take of listed species under FESA for the participating entity(ies). Upon granting of Take Approval from the USFWS, the participating entity(ies) assumes the Service’s permitting responsibilities for proposed projects that would potentially take “Covered Species.” Covered Species includes species currently listed as threatened or endangered and certain species that may become listed during the term of the HCP/NCCP. Mitigation/compensation measures established under an HCP/NCCP would satisfy applicable provisions of the FESA and CESA. In general, an HCP/NCCP would require the County and cities to collect local development mitigation fees; negotiate with developers to site projects through a land exchange/dedication process; comply with the plan’s policies designed to protect species; contribute to the assembly of a reserve through the regular land use process and other means; and enforce project conditions to ensure compliance with the HCP/NCCP.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 43 Biological Resources Report
San Bernardino Valley-Wide Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan
Presently, there is no approved HCP/NCCP plan for San Bernardino County. The San Bernardino Valley-Wide Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (SBVMSHCP) has been in preparation for several years. The proposed MSHCP encompasses approximately 500 square miles and contains 6 unlisted species, 6 state-listed endangered or threatened species, 13 federally listed endangered threatened species, and 53 species of special concern. San Bernardino County, through the San Bernardino County Museum staff, has been conducting biological and botanical surveys for several years to identify habitat needs and requirements for the various species. The City of Ontario, the County of San Bernardino, and 14 other cities in the County signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the USFWS and CDFG to participate in the development of the SBVMSHCP in 1998, with a target date for final approval by the end of 2000. However, planning for the SBVMSHCP does not appear to be active at this time, and the schedule for completion and adoption of the SBVMSHCP is uncertain. The City of Ontario is not currently participating in planning efforts for the MSHCP.8
8 Richard C. Ayala, Senior Planner, City of Ontario Planning Department, personal communication. City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 44 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
REFERENCES
Documents
California Department of Fish and Game. 2006. Natural Diversity Database. Ontario. Search results of database searches, Ontario and Guasti 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles.
California Department of Fish and Game. 2006. Special Animals List. September 2006.
California Department of Fish and Game. 2006. State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California. July 2006.
City of Ontario. General Plan. 1992.
City of Ontario Development Agency. 2005. Development Impact Fees. Effective April 1, 2005.
Coffmann Associates, Inc. 2005. Initial Study for Improvements Outlined within the Chino Airport Master Plan, Chino, California. October 2005.
Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc. (CBA). 1992. Ontario General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 90020456. May 1992.
Earth Consultants International (ECI). 2006. Geologic Map, Ontario, California. Plate 2-1. June 2006.
EIP Associates 2005. Countryside Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2004071001. October 18, 2005.
EIP Associates (EIP). 1999. City of Ontario Sphere of Influence Parks, Recreation, and Biological Resources Implementation Program. Final Hearing Draft. September 20, 1999.
Envicom Corporation. 1998. New Model Colony Sphere of Influence General Plan Amendment. January 7, 1998.
Envicom Corporation. 1997. Sphere of Influence General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Appendix B, Biological Resources Technical Background.
Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. (GLA). 2005. Biological Technical Report for the Chino Airport Master Plan, City of Chino, San Bernardino County California. Prepared for Coffman Associates, Inc. September 9, 2005.
Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. (Helix). 2006. Pacific Gateway Cargo Center at Ontario International Airport, Draft Environmental Impact Report. State Clearinghouse No. 2003101081, City of Los Angeles Case No. AD 022-03. April 2006.
Hogle-Ireland, Inc. 2005. Final Report. Ontario General Plan Update Phase I. January 3, 2005.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 45 Biological Resources Report
Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. State of California. The Resources Agency. Department of Fish and Game. 156 pp.
National Geographic. 1999. Field Guide to the Birds of North America, Third Edition, printed 2001.
Oberbauer, Thomas. 1996. Terrestrial Vegetation Communities in San Diego County Based on Holland’s Descriptions. Suggested by Thomas Oberbauer, revised February 1996.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1980. Soil Survey of San Bernardino County, Southwestern Part, California. Prepared by Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with University of California Agricultural Experiment Station.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2002. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Determination of Critical Habitat for the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat; Final Rule.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2000. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Determination of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher; Final Rule. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 206, October 24, 2000.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1997. Final Recovery Plan for the Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis). September 14, 1997.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1996. Interim General Survey Guidelines for the Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly. Prepared by Chris Nagano and Jeff Newman, Carlsbad Field Office. December 30, 1996.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1978 Ontario 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle and Guasti 7.5- minute quadrangle
Websites
Audubon Website. Christmas Bird Counts. Accessed 9/9/06. http://cbc.audubon.org/cbccurrent/current_table.html
California Native Plant Society On-line Inventory. Guasti and Ontario Quads. Accessed: 6/26/06. http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi
Center for Biological Diversity Website. Accessed 6/26/06 Text: http://www.sw-center.org/swcbd/species/krat/crit_hab.html#4 Map: http://www.sw-center.org/swcbd/species/krat/images/unit4.gif
Department of Fish and Game. Habitat Conservation Planning Branch. Fully Protected Animals. Accessed 9/9/06. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/hcpb/species/t_e_spp/fullypro/fully_pro.shtml
Environmental Protection Agency. The SWANCC Decision and State Regulations of Wetlands. Accessed 10/1/06. http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/guidance/SWANCC/index.html
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 46 October 2006 Biological Resources Report
Helix. 2006. Pacific Gateway Cargo Center EIR http://www.lawa.org/ont/docs/PGCC%20CH%208-0%20EFNTBS.pdf Western Regional Climate Center Website. Accessed 6/26/06 Climatological Data Summaries, (Temperature and Precipitation) for Fontana Kaiser, California (043120). Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary. Period of Record: 3/1/1951 to 8/31/1984 http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/
Topozone. Accessed 9/15/06 http://www.topozone.com/
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Recovery Plan for the Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plans/1997/970914.pdf
Persons and Organizations Consulted
City of Ontario Planning Department. Richard C. Ayala, Senior Planner
Preparers
Earthworks Restoration Inc. Donna Eto – Biologist Margot Griswold – Senior Ecologist, Principal
The Planning Center Rachel Struglia – Project Manager Craig Ramella – Graphics Gina Froelich – Technical Editing
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 47 Biological Resources Report
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center 48 October 2006 Appendix A
APPENDIX A
Observed and Expected Fauna - City of Ontario
FAMILY Scientific Name Common Name CLASS INSECTA INSECTS LYCAEENIDAE BLUES Brephidium exilis Pygmy blue NYMPHALIDAE BRUSH-FOOTED BUTTERFLIES Vanessa cardui Painted lady PIERIDAE WHITES AND SULPHURS Artogeia rapae Cabbage white FORMICIDAE ANTS Pogonomyrmex californicus California harvester ant APIDAE HONEY BEES AND BUMBLE BEES Apis mellifera Honey bee MUSCIDAE HOUSE/STABLE FLIES Musca domestica House fly Tabanus sp. Horse fly MYDIDAE MYDAS FLIES Raphiomidas ternimatus abdominalis Delhi sands flower-loving fly CLASS AMPHIBIA AMPHIBIANS PLETHODONTIDAE SLENDER SALAMANDERS Batrachoseps nigriventris Black bellied slender salamander Batrachoseps pacificus Pacific slender salamander PELOBATIDAE SPADEFOOTS Spea [Scaphiopus] hammondi Hammond’s spadefoot BUFONIDAE TRUE TOADS Bufo boreas halophilus California (western) toad HYLIDAE TREEFROGS Psuedacris cadaverina California chorus frog Pseudacris regilla Pacific treefrog RANIDAE TRUE FROGS Rana catesbeiana Bullfrog CLASS REPTILIA REPTILES EMYDIDAE BOX AND WATER TURTLES Emys [Clemmys] marmorata pallida Southwestern pond turtle IGUANIDAE IGUANIDS Phrynosoma coronaturm blainvillei San Diego coast horned lizard Sceloporus occcidentalis Western fence lizard Uta stansburiana hesperis California side-blotched lizard SCINCIDAE SKINKS Eumeces gilberti Gilbert’s skink Eumeces skiltonianus skiltonianus Western skink TEIIDAE WHIPTAILS Cnemidophorus tigris multiscutatus Coastal western whiptail ANGUIDAE ALLIGATOR LIZARDS Elgaria multicarinatus webbi San Diego (southern) alligator lizard ANNIELLIDAE CALIFORNIA LEGLESS LIZARDS Anniella pulchra pulchra Silvery (California) legless lizard LEPTOTYPHLOPIDAE SLENDER BLIND SNAKES Leptotyphlops humilis Western blind snake COLUBRIDAE COLUBRIDS Arizona elegans occidentalis California glossy snake Coluber constrictor mormon Western yellow-bellied racer Diadophis punctatus modestus San Bernardino ringneck snake Lampropeltis getulus californiae California (common) kingsnake Masticophis flagellum piceus Red coachwhip (red racer)
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 A-1 Appendix A
FAMILY Scientific Name Common Name Pituophis melanoleucus annectens San Diego gopher snake Rhinocheilus lecontei lecontei Western long-nosed snake Salvadora hexalepis virgultea Coast (western) patch-nosed snake Tantilla planiceps California black-headed snake Trimorphodon biscutatus vandenburghi California lyre snake VIPERIDAE VIPERS Crotalis viridis helleri Southern pacific (western) rattlesnake CLASS AVES BIRDS PODICIPEDIDAE GREBES Aechmophorus occidentalis Western grebe Podiceps nigricollis Eared grebe Podilymbus podiceps Pied-billed grebe PHALACROCORACIDAE CORMORANTS Phalacrocorax auritus Double-crested cormorant ARDEIDAE BITTERNS AND HERONS Ardea herodias Great blue heron Ardea alba Great egret Butorides virescens Green heron Bubulcus ibis Cattle egret Egretta thula Snowy egret THRESKIORNITHIDAE IBIS Plegadis chihi White-faced ibis ANATIDAE SWANS, GEESE, AND DUCKS Anas acuta Northern pintail Anas americana American wigeon Anas clypeata Northern shoveler Anas crecca Green-winged teal Anas cyanoptera Cinammon teal Anas discors Blue-winged teal Anas platyrhynchos Mallard Anas strepera Gadwall Anser albifrons Greater white-fronted goose Anser caeruluscens Snow goose Aythya affinis Lesser scaup Aythya americana Redhead Aythya collaris Ring-necked duck Aythya valisineria Canvasback Branta canadensis Canada goose Bucephala albeola Bufflehead Mergus serrator Red-breasted merganser Oxyura jamaicensis Ruddy duck CATHARTIDAE NEW WORLD VULTURES Cathartes aura Turkey vulture ACCIPITRIDAE HAWKS Accipiter striatus Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter cooperi Cooper’s hawk Buteo lineatus Red-shouldered hawk Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk Buteo swainsoni Swainson’s hawk Buteo regalis Ferruginous hawk Circus cyaneus Northern harrier Elanus leucurus White-tailed kite FALCONIDAE FALCONS Falco columbarius Merlin Falco mexicanus Prairie falcon Falco sparverius American kestrel PHASIANIDAE GROUSE AND QUAIL Callipepla californica California quail
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center A-2 October 2006 Appendix A
FAMILY Scientific Name Common Name RALLIDAE RAILS, GALLINULES Fulica americana American coot Gallinula chloropus Common moorhen Himantopus mexicanus Black-necked stilt Porzana carolina Sora Rallus limicola Virginia rail RECURVIROSTRIDAE STILTS AND AVOCETS Himantopus mexicanus Black-necked stilt Recurvirostra americana American avocet CHARADRIIDAE PLOVERS Charadrius montanus Mountain plover Charadrius vociferous Killdeer Pluvialis squatarola Black-bellied plover SCOLOPACIDAE SANDPIPERS AND PHALAROPES Acutis macularia Spotted sandpiper Calidris marui Western sandpiper Calidris minutilla Least sandpiper Catoptrophorus semipalmatus Willet Gallinago gallinago Common snipe Limnodromus scolopaceus Long-billed dowitcher Limosa fedoa Marbled godwit Numenius americanus Long-billed curlew Tringa melanoleuca Greater yellowlegs LARIDAE GULLS AND TERNS Larus californicus California gull Larus delawarensis Ring-billed gull Larus philadelphia Bonaparte’s gull Sterna caspia Caspian tern Sterna forsteri Forster’s tern COLUMBIDAE DOVES AND PIGEONS Columba livia Rock dove Streptopelia chinensis Spotted dove Zenaida macroura Mourning dove CUCULIDAE CUCKOOS Coccyzus americanus occidentalis Western yellow-billed cuckoo Geococcyx americanus Greater roadrunner TYTONIDAE BARN OWLS Tyto alba Barn owl STRIGIDAE TYPICAL OWLS Athene cunicularia hypugea Western burrowing owl Bubo virginianus Great-horned owl CAPRIMULGIDAE GOATSUCKERS (NIGHTJARS) Chordeiles acutipennis Lesser nighthawk APODIDAE SWIFTS Aeronautes saxatalis White-throated swift Chaetura vauxi Vaux’s swift TROCHILIDAE HUMMINGBIRDS Archilochus alexandri Black-chinned hummingbird Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird Calypte costae Costa’s hummingbird Selasphorus rufus Rufous hummingbird Selasphorus sasin Allen’s hummingbird ALCEDINIDAE KINGFISHERS Ce;ryle alcyon Belted kingfisher PICIDAE WOODPECKERS Colaptes auratus Northern flicker (red-shafted) Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn woodpecker Picoides nuttallii Nuttall’s woodpecker Picoides pubescens Downy woodpecker
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 A-3 Appendix A
FAMILY Scientific Name Common Name Sphyrapicus ruber Red-breasted sapsucker TYRANNIDAE TYRANT FLYCATCHERS Empidonax difficilis Pacific-slope flycatcher Myiarchus cinerascens Ash-throated flycatcher Sayornis nigricans Black phoebe Sayornis saya Say’s phoebe Tyrannus verticalis Western kingbird Tyrannus vociferans Cassin’s kingbird ALAUDIDAE LARKS Eremophila alpestris Horned lark HIRUNDINIDAE SWALLOWS Hirundo pyrrohnota Cliff swallow Hirundo rustica Barn swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis Northern rough-winged swallow Tachycineta bicolor Tree swallow Tachycineta thalassina Violet-green swallow CORVIDAE CROWS, JAYS, AND MAGPIES Aphelocoma califrornica Western scrub-jay Corvus brachyrhynchus American crow Corvus corax Common raven PARIDAE CHICKADEES AND TITMICE Parus inornatus Plain titmouse AEGITHALIDAE BUSHTITS Psaltriparus minimus Bushtit TROGLODYTIDAE WRENS Troglodytes aedon House wren REGULIDAE KINGLETS Regulus calendula Ruby-crowned kinglet TURDIDAE THRUSHES Catharus guttatus Hermit thrush Sialia currucoides Mountain bluebird Sialia mexicana Western bluebird Turdus migratorius American robin SYLVIIDAE OLD WORLD WARBLERS AND GNATCATCHERS Polioptila californica californica Coastal California gnatcatcher MIMIDAE MIMIC THRUSHES Mimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird MOTACILLIDAE WAGTAILS AND PIPITS Anthus rufescens American pipit BOMBYCILLIDAE WAXWINGS Bombycilla cedrorum Cedar waxwing PTILOGONATIDAE SILKY FLYCATCHERS Phainopepla nitens Phainopepla LANIIDAE SHRIKES Lanius ludovicianus Loggerhead shrike STURNIDAE STARLINGS Sternus vulgaris European starling VIREONIDAE VIREOS Vireo gilvus Warbling vireo PARULIDAE WOOD WARBLERS Dendroica coronata Yellow-rumped warbler Dendroica nigrescens Black-throated gray warbler Dendroica townsendi Townsend’s warbler Geothlypis trichas Common yellowthroat Vermivora celata Orange-crowned warbler Wilsonia pusilla Wilson’s warbler ICTERIDAE BLACKBIRDS, ORIOLES, AND TANAGERS Agelaius phoeniceus Red-winged blackbird Agelaius tricolor Tricolored blackbird
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center A-4 October 2006 Appendix A
FAMILY Scientific Name Common Name Euphagus cyanocephalus Brewer’s blackbird Icterus bullockii Bullock’s oriole Icterus cucullatus Hooded oriole Molothrus ater Brown-headed cowbird Quiscalus mexicanus Great-tailed grackle Sturnella neglecta Western meadowlark EMBERIZIDAE SPARROWS AND TOWHEES Chondestes grammacus Lark sparrow Junco hyemalis oreganos Dark-eyed junco (Oregon) Melospiza melodia Song sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis Savannah sparrow Pipilo crissalis California towhee Pipilo maculatus Spotted towhee Zonotrichia atricapilla Golden-crowned sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys White-crowned sparrow FRINGILIDAE FINCHES Carduelis lawrencei Lawrence’s goldfinch Carduelis psaltria Lesser goldfinch Carduelis tristis American goldfinch Carpodacus mexicanus House finch Carpodacus purpureus Purple finch PASSERIDAE OLD WORLD SPARROWS Passer domesticus House sparrow PHASIANIDAE TURKEYS, GROUSE, PHEASANTS, AND PARTRIDGES Gallus domesticus Domestic chicken CLASS MAMMALIA MAMMALS DIDELPHIIDAE OPOSSUMS Didelphis marsupialis Virginia opossum SORICIDAE SHREWS Notiorex crawfordi Desert shrew Sorex ornatus ornatus Ornate shrew TALPIDAE MOLES Scapanus latimanus Broad-handed mole VESPERTILLIONIDAE PLAIN NOSE BATS Antrozous pallidus Pallid bat Eptesicus fuscus Big brown bat Euderma maculatum Spotted bat Lasiurus borealis Red bat Lasiurus cinerea Hoary bat Myotis californicus California myotis Myotis evotis Long-eared myotis Myotis subulatus leibii Small-gooted myotis Myotis thysanodes Fringed myotis Myotis volans Hairy-winged (long-legged) myotis Myotis yumanensis Yuma myotis Pipistrellus hesperus Western pipistrella Plecotus townsendi pallescens Pale big-eared bat MOLOSSIDAE FREETAIL BATS Eumops perotis californicus California (western) mastiff bat Tadarida brasiliensis Brazilian (Mexican) freetail bat LEPORIDAE HARES AND RABBITS Lepus californicus bennettii San Diego black-tailed hare Sylvilagus audubonii Desert cottontail SCIURIDAE SQUIRRELS Spermophilus beechyi beechyi California ground squirrel GEOMYIDAE POCKET GOPHERS Thomomys bottae Botta’s pocket gopher HETEROMYIDAE POCKET AND KANGAROO MICE AND RATS Dipodomys agilis agilis Pacific kangaroo rat
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center October 2006 A-5 Appendix A
FAMILY Scientific Name Common Name Dipodomys merriami Merriam’s kangaroo rat Dipodomys merriami parvus San Bernardino kangaroo rat Perognathus californicus California pocket mouse Perognathus fallax fallax San Diego pocket mouse Perognathus longimembris brevinasus Los Angeles little pocket mouse CRICETIDAE MICE, RATS, LEMMINGS, VOLES Microtus californicus sanctidiegi California vole Neotoma lepida intermedia (San Diego) desert woodrat Onychomys torridus ramona Southern grasshopper mouse Peromyscus boylii rowleyi Brush mouse Peromyscus californicus insignis Parasitic (California) mouse Peromyscus eremicus eremicus Cactus mouse Peromyscus maniculatus gambelii Deer mouse Reithrodontomys megalotis longicaudis Western harvest mouse MURIDAE OLD WORKD RATS AND MICE Mus musculus House mouse Rattus norvegicus Norway rat Rattus rattus Black rat CANIDAE DOGS, WOLVES, FOXES Canis familiaris Domestic dog Canis latrans ochropus Coyote Urocyon cinereoargenteus californicus Gray fox PROCYONIDAE RACOONS, COATIS Procyon lotor Raccoon MULSTELIDAE WEASELS, SKUNKS, ETC. Mephitis mephitis Striped skunk Mustea frenata Long-tailed weasel Spilogale gracilis Western spotted skunk Taxidea taxus American badger FELIDAE CATS Felis catus House cat Felis rufus Bobcat BOVIDAE CATTLE Bos taurus Cattle/Domestic cow EQUIDAE HORSES Equus caballus Horse Source: Envicom 1997 and 1999, EIP 2005, CAI 2005
City of Ontario General Plan Update and EIR The Planning Center A-6 October 2006