DOCSLIB.ORG

Santa Barbara County Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Update 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Santa Barbara County Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Update 2019 SANTA BARBARA COUNTY INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE 2019 Prepared for : SANTA BARBARA COUNTY IRWM COOPERATING PARTNERS INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE 2019 Prepared by: 621 Chapala Street Santa Barbara, California 93101 Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Santa Barbara County IRWM Region IRWM Plan Update 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No. ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................... XI ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................................... XIII 1 INTRODUCTION TO IRWM PLAN UPDATE 2019 ...................................................1 1.1 Integrated Regional Water Management ................................................................ 6 2 REGIONAL DESCRIPTION ...........................................................................................9 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 9 2.2 Regional Overview ................................................................................................. 9 2.2.1 Regional Acceptance Process ..................................................................... 9 2.2.2 Internal Boundaries ..................................................................................... 9 2.2.3 Integrated Regional Water Resource Management in the Region ............ 17 2.3 Physical Setting ..................................................................................................... 21 2.3.1 Location .................................................................................................... 21 2.3.2 Climate ...................................................................................................... 21 2.3.3 Population ................................................................................................. 22 2.4 Land Use, Major Watersheds, and Water Systems ............................................... 25 2.4.1 Land Use ................................................................................................... 25 2.4.2 Watersheds ................................................................................................ 31 2.4.3 Groundwater Basins .................................................................................. 47 2.4.4 Major Infrastructure .................................................................................. 50 2.5 Ecological Processes ............................................................................................. 77 2.5.1 Aquatic Sensitive Species ......................................................................... 77 2.5.2 Freshwater Habitats .................................................................................. 78 2.5.3 Sloughs/Coastal Salt Marshes ................................................................... 81 2.5.4 Coastal Dunes ........................................................................................... 83 2.5.5 Areas of Special Biological Significance ................................................. 84 2.5.6 Marine Protected Areas............................................................................. 84 2.6 Regional Water Management History .................................................................. 89 2.6.1 Water Supply Development – South Coast, Santa Ynez Valley, and Lompoc Valley.......................................................................................... 89 2.6.2 Water Supply Development – Santa Maria Valley ................................... 95 2.6.3 State Water Project ................................................................................... 97 2.6.4 Wastewater Management .......................................................................... 98 11089 i January 2019 Santa Barbara County IRWM Region IRWM Plan Update 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Section Page No. 2.7 Water Supplies and Demand ............................................................................... 102 2.7.1 Water Supply .......................................................................................... 102 2.7.2 Water Demand ........................................................................................ 112 2.8 Projected Water Supply and Demand ................................................................. 114 2.8.1 Projected Municipal Water Supply ......................................................... 115 2.8.2 Projected Agricultural Supply................................................................. 115 2.8.3 Projected Municipal Water Demand ....................................................... 116 2.8.4 Municipal Conservation Estimates ......................................................... 116 2.8.5 Projected Industrial Water Demand ........................................................ 117 2.8.6 Projected Agricultural Water Demand.................................................... 117 2.8.7 Projected Future Water Demand and Supply Balance ............................ 118 2.8.8 Effects of Climate Change on Supply ..................................................... 119 2.8.9 Uncertainty .............................................................................................. 120 2.9 Reducing Dependence on the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta ........................... 121 2.10 Water Quality ...................................................................................................... 123 2.10.1 Groundwater Quality .............................................................................. 128 2.10.2 Surface Water Quality............................................................................. 144 2.10.3 Ocean Water Quality............................................................................... 150 2.11 Social and Cultural Makeup of Santa Barbara County ....................................... 150 2.11.1 Economic Conditions and Trends in the Region .................................... 150 2.11.2 Social and Cultural Makeup .................................................................... 151 2.12 Natural Hazards Requiring Emergency Planning ............................................... 162 2.12.1 Severe Storms and Flooding ................................................................... 162 2.12.2 Earthquake .............................................................................................. 164 2.12.3 Fire .......................................................................................................... 164 2.12.4 Drought ................................................................................................... 165 2.13 Climate Change ................................................................................................... 168 2.13.1 Regional Impacts .................................................................................... 168 2.13.2 Identification of Vulnerabilities .............................................................. 174 2.13.3 Prioritized Vulnerabilities ....................................................................... 179 2.13.4 Methodology for Further Data Gathering and Analysis of Prioritized Vulnerabilities ....................................................................... 187 3 GOVERNANCE AND PARTICIPATION..................................................................189 3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 189 11089 ii January 2019 Santa Barbara County IRWM Region IRWM Plan Update 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Section Page No. 3.2 Governance Structure.......................................................................................... 189 3.2.1 Cooperating Partners ............................................................................... 192 3.2.2 Decision Making ..................................................................................... 194 3.3 Balanced Access and Opportunity for Participation in the IRWM Process ....... 196 3.3.1 Stakeholder Outreach and Inter-Regional Coordination......................... 197 3.3.2 Disadvantaged Community Outreach and Involvement ......................... 198 3.3.3 Tribal Communities ................................................................................ 203 3.4 Long-Term Implementation of the IRWM Plan ................................................. 203 3.5 Coordination with Neighboring IRWM Efforts and State and Federal Agencies ................................................................................................. 204 3.6 Neighboring IRWM Efforts ................................................................................ 205 3.7 Effective Communication, both Internal and External, throughout the IRWM Region ..................................................................................................... 206 4 OBJECTIVES, PRIORITIES, AND TARGETS ........................................................209 4.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 209 4.2 Objectives ........................................................................................................... 209 4.2.1 Groups and Stakeholders Involved in the Process .................................. 209 4.2.2 Process for Developing the Objectives ..................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tribal Marine Protected Areas: Protecting Maritime Ways And
    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The White Paper entitled Tribal Marine Protected Areas: Protecting Maritime Ways and Practice published by the Wishtoyo Foundation (Ventura County, Santa Barbara) in 2004 describes the ecological and cultural significance of south-central California’s marine environment as a suitable area to establish new marine protected areas or MPAs. Tribal MPAs can be one tool for tribal people to co-manage and protect important submerged Chumash cultural sites and coastal marine ecosystems. The Chumash people lived in villages along the south-central California coast from the present day sites of Malibu to Morro Bay and extended to the northern Channel Islands. The Chumash reference for the northern Channel Islands are Tuqan (San Miguel), Wi’ma (Santa Rosa), Limuw (Santa Cruz) and Anyapax (Anacapa). Limuw means “in the sea is the meaning of the language spoken” while Chumash villages were named after the sea, such as Mikiw or “the place of mussels”. Evidence of Chumash village sites and tomol routes show an intimate relationship with the culture, sea and northern Channel Islands. The map below shows the villages and tomol routes within the greater Chumash bioregion. The varied maritime culture was diverse and depended on the rich array of animals and plants. Many animals, such as the swordfish, played a central role in Chumash maritime song, ceremony, ritual and dance. The Chumash people were heavily dependent on a healthy marine environment; the marine component of the Chumash diet consisted of over 150 types of marine fishes as well as a variety of shellfish including crabs, lobsters, mussels, abalone, clams, oysters, chitons, and other gastropods.
    [Show full text]
  • Gaviota Coast Plan), for Public Hearing and Commission Action at the May 10, 2018 Commission Hearing in Santa Rosa
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA -- NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SOUTH CENTRAL COAST AREA 89 SOUTH CALIFORNIA ST., SUITE 200 VENTURA, CA 93001 (805) 585-1800 Th19c DATE: April 24, 2018 TO: Commissioners and Interested Persons FROM: Steve Hudson, Deputy Director Barbara Carey, District Manager Deanna Christensen, Supervising Coastal Program Analyst Michelle Kubran, Coastal Program Analyst SUBJECT: County of Santa Barbara Local Coastal Program Amendment No. LCP-4-STB- 16-0067-3 (Gaviota Coast Plan), for public hearing and Commission action at the May 10, 2018 Commission Hearing in Santa Rosa. ______________________________________________________________________________ DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBMITTAL Santa Barbara County is requesting an amendment to the certified Land Use Plan (LUP) and certified Implementation Program/Coastal Zoning Ordinance (IP/CZO) portions of its certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) to designate the Gaviota Coast Plan area; add associated goals, objectives, policies, actions, programs and development standards as described in the Gaviota Coast Plan; and add implementing zoning district and overlay maps. The Gaviota Coast is located in southern Santa Barbara County and is bounded by the western boundary of the Goleta Community Plan to the east, Vandenberg Air Force Base to the west, the ridgeline of the Santa Ynez Mountains and Gaviota Creek Watershed to the north, and the Pacific Ocean to the south. The amendment will result in changes to the LUP and the IP/CZO. The County of Santa Barbara (County) submitted LCP Amendment LCP-4-STB-16-0067-3 to the Commission on December 20, 2016. The amendment submittal was deemed complete on March 30, 2017, after the complete submittal of additional information requested by Commission staff.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Protected Area Outreach, Education and Ambassador Programs September 2016 DRAFT List of Programs by Region DEL NORTE
    Marine Protected Area Outreach, Education and Ambassador Programs September 2016 DRAFT Please send any corrections or additions to [email protected] List of programs by region DEL NORTE – page 6 1. Redwood State and National Parks Education 2. Crescent City Harbor District 3. North Coast District PORTS Distance Learning Program HUMBOLDT – page 6 1. Friends of the Dunes 2. Kayak Zak’s 3. Redwood Edventures 4. BLM - King Range 5. MPA IPA 6. Humboldt MPA Chocolate 7. North Coast Junior Lifeguards 8. Humboldt Area Saltwater Anglers MENDOCINO – page 9 1. Beach Watch - Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary 2. Mendocino Coast Audubon Society 3. Reef Check - North Coast Region 4. CA Indian Water Commission: 5. Mendocino Ab Watch 6. Potter Valley Tribe/Mendocino MPA Collaborative 7. Mendocino State Parks: 8. Noyo Marine Center - Docent Program 9. Mendocino High School SONAR (School of Natural Resources) SONOMA – page 12 1. Sonoma County Water Agency 2. Bodega Marine Lab 3. LIMPETS - Farallones National Marine Sanctuary 4. Stewards of the Coast and Redwoods 5. Sonoma State Parks 6. Sonoma Surfrider Chapter 7. Sea to school - Marine Mammal Center 8. Sonoma MPA Collaborative 9. Beach Watch (see description under Mendocino) GOLDEN GATE – page 13 1. Golden Gate Collaborative Ambassador Program 2. Beach Watch - See description under Mendocino 3. Citizen Science Program - Cal Academy of Sciences 4. Rocky Shore Naturalist Program (being phased out) - Cal Academy of Sciences 5. Point Reyes National Sanctuary 6. Marin MPA Watch (Environmental Action Committee of West Marin) 7. Shark Stewards 8. Romberg Tiburon Center for Environmental Studies, San Francisco State University 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Refugio Beach Oil Spill Draft Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment
    Refugio Beach Oil Spill Draft Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment Prepared by: California Department of Fish and Wildlife California State Lands Commission California Department of Parks and Recreation University of California The Department of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Refugio Beach Oil Spill DRAFT Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment April 22, 2020 On the Cover: Oiled Beach by U.S. Coast Guard Oiled octopus and invertebrates by Natural Resource Damage Assessment Trustees Dolphins by Natural Resource Damage Assessment Trustees Pelicans by Natural Resource Damage Assessment Trustees Harbor seal by Santa Barbara Channelkeeper Suggested Citation: Refugio Beach Oil Spill Trustees. 2020. Refugio Beach Oil Spill Draft Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment. Prepared by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California State Lands Commission, California Department of Parks and Recreation, Regents of the University of California, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2 Refugio Beach Oil Spill Natural Resource Damage Assessment Summary: Shoreline Habitats Human Uses $5.5 million $3.9 million Injury: Aproximately 1,500 acres of shoreline Injury: The Trustees estimate over 140,000 lost habitat were impacted including sandy beach recreational user days in Santa Barbara and and rocky intertidal habitats. Ventura Counties; six days of beach closures in Los Angeles County; and lost research, Restoration: Remove Ellwood seawall, education, and outreach opportunities at the enhance red abalone populations, and restore University of California, Santa Barbara Coal Oil degraded sand dune habitats. Point Natural Reserve.
    [Show full text]
  • SBC LTER Midterm Review Report 2003
    SANTA BARBARA COASTAL LONG TERM ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH THREE YEAR PROGRESS REPORT – Volume 1 Runoff from Arroyo Burro Creek entering the ocean and adjacent kelp forest PREPARED FOR THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION SITE REVIEW TEAM JUNE 2 & 3, 2003 SANTA BARBARA, CA TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume 1 I. Introduction 1 II. Research Summaries of Programmatic Areas 7 A. Watersheds 7 B. Salt Marshes and Sandy Beaches 16 C. Coastal Ocean 20 D. Kelp Forests 29 III. Integration and Synthesis 37 IV. LTER Network-Level Activities and Cross-Site Research 41 V. Information Management 43 VI. Site Management 47 VII. Education & Outreach 49 VIII. Broader Impacts 53 IX. References 55 Volume 2 Appendices I. SBC Publications and Presentations 1 II. Budget and Expenditures 9 III. Collaborative Projects 11 IV. Biographical Sketches of Senior and Postdoctoral Investigators 15 V. SBC Graduate Student Profiles 49 VI. Site Review Agenda and Schedule 89 This page left intentionally blank SBC LTER - 3rd Year Progress Report I. Introduction The primary research focus of the Santa Barbara Coastal (SBC) LTER is on the relative importance of bottom-up processes and allochthonous inputs to giant kelp forests, a highly diverse and productive marine ecosystem that occurs on shallow rocky reefs at the interface of the land-ocean margin along the temperate coasts of western North and South America, southern Africa, Australia and most sub Antarctic islands, including Tasmania and New Zealand. Because of their close proximity to shore, kelp forests are influenced by physical and biological processes, which occur on land as well as in the open ocean. Streams and rivers transport nutrients, dissolved and particulate organic matter, sediments, and pollutants from coastal watersheds to kelp forests, while ocean currents supply larvae, plankton, and dissolved nutrients from adjacent offshore waters (Figure I.1).
    [Show full text]
  • C.2 Public Comments on Draft MPA Proposals Received from Public Open Houses As of July 20, 2009 (Draft Version) DRAFT Revised July 29, 2009
    California MLPA Initiative South Coast Project C.2 Public Comments on Draft MPA Proposals Received from Public Open Houses as of July 20, 2009 (draft version) DRAFT Revised July 29, 2009 City of Location # Name Comments specific to an MPA Proposal Subregion Comments specific to an individual MPA General comment about overall process Residence Carlsbad 001a Tom Bryant Escondido I am referring to subregion 5, Lapis 1. I find the loser of LaJolla is a bit extreme and really 5 unnecessary. I am a low impact fisherman who really loves the spot and I wish to show my family members the excitement I have there. With this closer to this part of the beach would be deverting to the fishing community in a whole. I spend on an average of $1000 a year on new gear and bait. If this place would to be closed my money that I spend would not be there to hlep of our local community. I think it would be a great idea to rethink the closing of LaJolla. In reference to Lapis 2 I like how this map is done. Carlsbad 001b Tom Bryant Looks a little more thought out goes well with Revised external proposal A. but back to lapis5 2 if this plan was passed I woudl be spending more money in the future in our local community and be able to pass knowledge to my kids and be able to spend time with my family. I think low impact fishing is a great thing if your looking to save sea life.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Section of Revised Draft
    SANTA BARBARA RANCH REVISED DRAFT EIR 9.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Sectiion 9..4 Biiollogiicall This section focuses on vegetation, wildlife habitats, non-regulated wildlife, and special-status Resources plants and animals as they relate to the Alternative 1 area. Special-status species occurrence records on the coastal terraces and south-facing slopes of the Santa Ynez Mountains between Goleta and Point Conception are evaluated. Potential project-related impacts are analyzed and mitigation measures are recommended to reduce these impacts to less than significant levels, where possible. 9.4.1 Regional Environmental Setting The Alternative 1 area is located on the southern foothills and associated coastal terraces of the Santa Ynez Mountains. The Santa Ynez Mountains are the western extension of the Transverse Ranges, a geomorphic unit characterized by east-west trending faults, folds, mountain ranges, and valleys. The coastal plain is composed of uplifted and dissected marine terraces, hills, and valleys, some of which form estuaries and lagoons (Dibblee, 1966). The south-facing slopes and foothills of the Santa Ynez Mountains and the coastal plain are highly dissected by drainage features. Consequently, differences in aspect and degree of slope create a variety of microclimates, often within a small area, which along with spatial variation in soil and bedrock features, control the distribution of native vegetation types and ultimately, the distribution of plant and wildlife species in this region. The coastal terraces and extreme southern portions of the foothills in the project area are formed on the Sisquoc, Rincon, and Monterey Shales. Soils derived from this formation tend to be deep, heavy clays.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2004-2005
    University of California Coastal Marine Institute Annual Report 2004 - 2005 University of California Coastal Marine Institute Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Russell J. Schmitt Program Manager, CMI and Director, Coastal Research Center Marine Science Institute University of California Santa Barbara, California 93106-6150 Mission of the Coastal Research Center The Coastal Research Center of the Marine Science Institute, UC Santa Barbara, facilitates research and research training that fosters a greater understanding of the causes and consequences of dynamics within and among coastal marine ecosystems. An explicit focus involves the application of innovative but basic research to help resolve coastal environmental issues. Disclaimer This document was prepared by the Coastal Marine Institute, which is jointly funded by the Minerals Management Service and the University of California, Minerals Management Service contract agreement number 14-35-01-CA-31063. The report has not been reviewed by the Service. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the Program and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S. Government. Availability of Report A limited number of extra copies of this report are available. To order, please write to: Karina Johnston Coastal Research Center Marine Science Institute University of California Santa Barbara, California 93106-6150 A PDF version of this report is available on our web site, http://www.coastalresearchcenter.ucsb.edu/CMI
    [Show full text]
  • Refugio Beach Oil Spill Final Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment
    Refugio Beach Oil Spill Final Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment Prepared by: California Department of Fish and Wildlife California State Lands Commission California Department of Parks and Recreation University of California The Department of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Refugio Beach Oil Spill FINAL Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment June 2021 On the Cover: Oiled Beach by U.S. Coast Guard Oiled octopus and invertebrates by Natural Resource Damage Assessment Trustees Dolphins by Natural Resource Damage Assessment Trustees Pelicans by Natural Resource Damage Assessment Trustees Harbor seal by Santa Barbara Channelkeeper Suggested Citation: Refugio Beach Oil Spill Trustees. 2021. Refugio Beach Oil Spill Final Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment. Prepared by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California State Lands Commission, California Department of Parks and Recreation, Regents of the University of California, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2 Refugio Beach Oil Spill Natural Resource Damage Assessment Summary: Shoreline Habitats Human Uses $5.5 million $3.9 million Injury: Approximately 1,500 acres of shoreline habitat Injury: The Trustees estimate over 140,000 lost recreational were impacted including sandy beach and rocky intertidal user da ys in Sa nta Barbara a nd Ventura Counties; six days of ha bitats. beach closures in Los Angeles County; and lost research, education, and outreach opportunities at the University of Restoration: Remove Ellwood seawall, enhance black California, Santa Barbara Coal Oil Point Na tural Reserve. abalone populations, and restore degraded sand dune Affected recreational activities included camping, ha bitats.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX a Brief Description of Marine Protected Areas in the MLPA South Coast Integrated Preferred Alternative MPA Proposal December 8, 2009
    APPENDIX A Brief Description of Marine Protected Areas in the MLPA South Coast Integrated Preferred Alternative MPA Proposal December 8, 2009 This appendix provides a brief description of each marine protected area (MPA) identified in the MLPA South Coast Integrated Preferred Alternative (IPA) MPA Proposal; the description highlights the source(s) for each MPA design, purpose, considerations made, and rationale for any modifications in MPA design relative to the stakeholder proposals. In addition, key ecological and socioeconomic considerations are highlighted to provide additional rationale for the recommendation for these MPAs. For a complete description of ecological, socioeconomic, cultural and other considerations for each proposed MPA, please see the more detailed description of MPAs table for the IPA. Note that the MLPA South Coast Integrated Preferred Alternative MPA Proposal also includes two military closures proposed for San Clemente Island as federal safety zones, where activities would be restricted to military training only; all three revised SCRSG proposals also included these two military closures. In addition, the thirteen existing state MPAs within the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary are included as part of the IPA, per guidance from the California Fish and Game Commission. Point Conception State Marine Reserve Source of Individual MPA: SCRSG Proposal 1 (but high degree of geographic convergence among the three proposals) Key Purpose: This MPA is the northern-most component of the "backbone" of the MPA proposal and is designed to meet the preferred science size. Contains all but two key habitats, provides connection to central coast MPAs. Boundary or Regulation Modifications: Boundaries and proposed regulations were directly taken from the Point Conception State Marine Reserve in SCRSG Proposal 1; no modifications were made.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Supplemental EIS on the Translocation of Southern Sea Otters
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Translocation of Southern Sea Otters ©Jeff Foott Prepared by U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office Ventura, California November 2012 Volume 1 This page intentionally left blank. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Translocation of Southern Sea Otters Responsible agency: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office 2493 Portola Road, Suite B Ventura, California 93003 (805) 644-1766 For additional information, contact: Lilian Carswell, at the above address, or by email: [email protected] Abstract: The purpose of this final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (final SEIS) is to reevaluate the effects of the southern sea otter translocation plan, as described in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 1987 environmental impact statement on the translocation of southern sea otters. Using information obtained over the decades since the plan’s implementation, we evaluate the impacts of alternatives to the current translocation program, including termination of the program or revisions to it. The need for action stems from our inability to meet the goals of the southern sea otter translocation program. Contrary to the primary recovery objective of the program, the translocation of sea otters to San Nicolas Island has not resulted in an established population sufficient to repopulate other areas of the range should a catastrophic event affect the mainland population. Additionally, maintenance of a management zone has proven to be more difficult than anticipated and hinders or may prevent recovery of the southern sea otter. The affected area includes Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego Counties in California.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Section of Final
    SANTA BARBARA RANCH FINAL EIR 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Sectiion 3..4 Biiollogiicall This section focuses on vegetation, wildlife habitats, non-regulated wildlife, and special-status Resources plants and animals as they relate to the MOU Project area. Special-status species occurrence records on the coastal terraces and south-facing slopes of the Santa Ynez Mountains between Goleta and Point Conception are evaluated. Potential project-related impacts are analyzed and mitigation measures are recommended to reduce these impacts to less than significant levels, where possible. 3.4.1 Regional Environmental Setting The MOU Project area is located on the southern foothills and associated coastal terraces of the Santa Ynez Mountains. The Santa Ynez Mountains are the western extension of the Transverse Ranges, a geomorphic unit characterized by east-west trending faults, folds, mountain ranges and valleys. The coastal plain is composed of uplifted and dissected marine terraces, hills, and valleys, some of which form estuaries and lagoons (Dibblee, 1966). The south-facing slopes and foothills of the Santa Ynez Mountains and the coastal plain are highly dissected by drainage features. Consequently, differences in aspect and degree of slope create a variety of microclimates, often within a small area, which along with spatial variation in soil and bedrock features, control the distribution of native vegetation types and ultimately, the distribution of plant and wildlife species in this region. The coastal terraces and extreme southern portions of the foothills in the project area are formed on the Sisquoc, Rincon, and Monterey Shales. Soils derived from this formation tend to be deep, heavy clays.
    [Show full text]