DOCSLIB.ORG

Attachment Iii: Baseline Status and Cumulative Effects for the San Francisco Bay Listed Species

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Attachment Iii: Baseline Status and Cumulative Effects for the San Francisco Bay Listed Species ATTACHMENT III: BASELINE STATUS AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY LISTED SPECIES 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1: ALAMEDAWHIPSNAKE ............................................................................................ 6 1.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ...................................................................................... 6 1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE........................................................................... 6 1.2.1 Factors affecting species within the action area ............................................... 6 1.2.1.1 Urban development .................................................................................... 7 1.2.1.2 Fire suppression ......................................................................................... 9 1.2.1.3 Predation .................................................................................................... 9 1.2.1.4 Grazing practices ..................................................................................... 10 1.2.1.5 Non-native species ................................................................................... 10 1.2.2 Baseline Status ................................................................................................ 11 1.3 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 13 2: BAY CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY ....................................................................... 14 2.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ................................................................................... 14 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE......................................................................... 14 2.2.1 Factors affecting species environment within the action area ........................ 14 2.2.1.1 Habitat loss and degradation .................................................................... 15 2.2.1.2 Invasive plants and air pollution .............................................................. 17 2.2.1.3 Overutilization for research and private purposes ................................... 17 2.2.1.4 Gopher control and vehicular disturbance ............................................... 18 2.2.1.5 Fire and grazing practices ........................................................................ 18 2.2.1.6 Climate change and climate extremes ...................................................... 19 2.2.2 Baseline Status ................................................................................................ 19 2.3 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 22 3: CALIFORNIA CLAPPER RAIL ................................................................................ 25 3.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ................................................................................... 25 3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE......................................................................... 25 3.2.1 Factors affecting species within the action area ............................................. 25 3.2.1.1 Habitat Loss and Fragmentation .............................................................. 26 3.2.1.2 Hunting .................................................................................................... 27 3.2.1.3 Predation .................................................................................................. 27 3.2.1.4 Disease ..................................................................................................... 28 3.2.1.5 Climate Extremes ..................................................................................... 28 3.2.1.6 Habitat Protection and Restoration .......................................................... 29 3.2.2 Baseline Status ................................................................................................ 29 3.3 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 30 4: CALIFORNIA FRESHWATER SHRIMP .................................................................. 34 4.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ................................................................................... 34 4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE......................................................................... 34 4.2.1 Factors affecting species environment within the action area ........................ 35 4.2.1.1 Urbanization .............................................................................................. 35 4.2.1.2 Stream Maintenance.................................................................................. 36 4.2.1.3 Water Resource Needs: Impoundments and Water Diversions ................ 36 4.2.1.4 Gravel Mining ........................................................................................... 37 4.2.1.5 Agriculture Developments ........................................................................ 37 2 4.2.1.6 Predation ................................................................................................... 38 4.2.1.7 Environmental Extremes ........................................................................... 39 4.2.1.8 Restoration Efforts .................................................................................... 40 4.2.2 Baseline Status .............................................................................................. 40 4.3 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 41 5: CALIFORNIA TIGER SALAMANDER: CENTRAL CALIFORNIA DISTINCT POPULATION SEGMENT.............................................................................................. 42 5.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ................................................................................... 42 5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE......................................................................... 42 5.2.1 Factors affecting species continued existence within the action area ............. 43 5.2.1.1 Rangeland Conversion and Habitat Fragmentation ................................. 43 5.2.1.2 Disease ..................................................................................................... 45 5.2.1.3 Predation, Competition, and Hybridization ............................................. 45 5.2.1.4 Other Factors affecting the species continued existence ......................... 47 5.2.2 Baseline Status ................................................................................................. 49 5.3 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 50 6: CALIFORNIA TIGER SALAMANDER: SANTA BARBARA COUNTY DISTINCT POPULATION SEGMENT.............................................................................................. 51 6.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ................................................................................... 51 6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE......................................................................... 51 6.2.1 Factors affecting species continued existence within the action area ............. 52 6.2.1.1 Conversion of rangeland for urban and agricultural uses ........................ 52 6.2.1.2 Contaminants ........................................................................................... 54 6.2.1.3 Pest control............................................................................................... 55 6.2.1.4 Grazing and Water drawdown ................................................................. 56 6.2.1.5 Predation, Competition, and Hybridization ............................................. 56 6.2.1.6 Disease ..................................................................................................... 58 6.2.2 Baseline Status ................................................................................................ 59 6.3 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 61 7: CALIFORNIA TIGER SALAMANDER: SONOMA COUNTY DISTINCT POPULATION SEGMENT.............................................................................................. 63 7.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ................................................................................... 63 7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE......................................................................... 63 7.2.1 Factors affecting species continued existence within the action area ............. 63 7.2.1.1 Habitat Destruction, Degradation, and Fragmentation ............................. 64 7.2.1.2 Disease ...................................................................................................... 65 7.2.1.3 Predation, Competition, and Hybridization ............................................. 66 7.2.1.4 Other Factors affecting the species continued existence ......................... 68 7.2.2 Baseline Status ................................................................................................. 70 7.3 References .............................................................................................................. 73 8: DELTA SMELT .......................................................................................................... 75 8.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ................................................................................... 75 8.2 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE......................................................................... 75 8.2.1 Factors affecting species environment within the action area
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Section 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4- Biological Resources
    SECTION 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section discusses the existing sensitive biological resources of the San Francisco Bay Estuary (the Estuary) that could be affected by project-related construction and locally increased levels of boating use, identifies potential impacts to those resources, and recommends mitigation strategies to reduce or eliminate those impacts. The Initial Study for this project identified potentially significant impacts on shorebirds and rafting waterbirds, marine mammals (harbor seals), and wetlands habitats and species. The potential for spread of invasive species also was identified as a possible impact. 3.4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SETTING HABITATS WITHIN AND AROUND SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY The vegetation and wildlife of bayland environments varies among geographic subregions in the bay (Figure 3.4-1), and also with the predominant land uses: urban (commercial, residential, industrial/port), urban/wildland interface, rural, and agricultural. For the purposes of discussion of biological resources, the Estuary is divided into Suisun Bay, San Pablo Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay (See Figure 3.4-2). The general landscape structure of the Estuary’s vegetation and habitats within the geographic scope of the WT is described below. URBAN SHORELINES Urban shorelines in the San Francisco Estuary are generally formed by artificial fill and structures armored with revetments, seawalls, rip-rap, pilings, and other structures. Waterways and embayments adjacent to urban shores are often dredged. With some important exceptions, tidal wetland vegetation and habitats adjacent to urban shores are often formed on steep slopes, and are relatively recently formed (historic infilled sediment) in narrow strips.
    [Show full text]
  • Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge 2020
    Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2020 -2021 Waterfowl Hunting Regulations These Regulations along with maps and directions are available at: http://www.fws.gov/refuge/Don_Edwards_San_Francisco_Bay/hunting.html General Information The Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge (refuge) contains approximately 10,580 acres of tidal areas and salt ponds that are open to waterfowl hunting (Map 1). Season opening and closing dates are determined by the State of California. Check the California Waterfowl Regulations (https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Hunting) each season for these dates. Hunters must comply with all State and Federal regulations including regulations listed under 50 CFR 32.24, and the refuge-specific regulations described below. Permit Requirements Hunters 18 years of age or older will need to have: 1) a valid California hunting license; 2) a valid, signed Federal Duck Stamp; 3) a California Duck Validation; 4) a Harvest Information Program (HIP) Validation; and 5) identification that includes a photograph (e.g., driver’s license). Junior and Youth hunters need the following: Junior/Youth Hunter Summary 15 yrs old or 16-17 yrs old w/ Jr 18 yrs old w/ Jr under (Youth) license (Junior) license (Junior) Participate in post-season youth hunt? Yes Yes No Needs a California hunting license? Yes Yes Yes Needs a HIP Validation? Yes Yes Yes Needs a Federal Duck Stamp? No Yes Yes Needs a State Duck Stamp (validation)? No No No Needs an adult accompanying them on regular hunt days? Yes No No Needs an adult accompanying them for youth hunt days? Yes Yes Yes It is required that all hunters possess a Refuge Waterfowl Hunting Permit when hunting in the Alviso Ponds.
    [Show full text]
  • Goga Wrfr.Pdf
    The National Park Service Water Resources Division is responsible for providing water resources management policy and guidelines, planning, technical assistance, training, and operational support to units of the National Park System. Program areas include water rights, water resources planning, regulatory guidance and review, hydrology, water quality, watershed management, watershed studies, and aquatic ecology. Technical Reports The National Park Service disseminates the results of biological, physical, and social research through the Natural Resources Technical Report Series. Natural resources inventories and monitoring activities, scientific literature reviews, bibliographies, and proceedings of technical workshops and conferences are also disseminated through this series. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service. Copies of this report are available from the following: National Park Service (970) 225-3500 Water Resources Division 1201 Oak Ridge Drive, Suite 250 Fort Collins, CO 80525 National Park Service (303) 969-2130 Technical Information Center Denver Service Center P.O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287 Cover photos: Top: Golden Gate Bridge, Don Weeks Middle: Rodeo Lagoon, Joel Wagner Bottom: Crissy Field, Joel Wagner ii CONTENTS Contents, iii List of Figures, iv Executive Summary, 1 Introduction, 7 Water Resources Planning, 9 Location and Demography, 11 Description of Natural Resources, 12 Climate, 12 Physiography, 12 Geology, 13 Soils, 13
    [Show full text]
  • City of Encinitas Sea Level Rise Workshop
    City of Encinitas Sea Level Rise Workshop Climate Action Plan May 8, 2018 Crystal Najera, CAP Program Administrator 1 PRESENTATION OVERVIEW How does the City’s Climate Action Plan address Sea Level Rise? 2 Global Climate Change 3 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE 4 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE Industrial activities have raised global atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 400 parts per million in the last 150 years. 5 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE Temperatures will More droughts and continue to rise heat waves The frost-free season (growing season) will Sea level will rise lengthen 1-4 feet by 2100 Change in precipitation Hurricanes will become patterns stronger and more intense 6 Local Climate Change 7 ENCINITAS CLIMATE ACTION PLAN • Mitigation • Adaptation 8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (2012) 9 LOCAL CLIMATE CHANGE 85 Average Temperature 80 80 78 Average Temperature 75 74 (Avg) Degrees Fahrenheit Degrees 80 70 1950 2005 2050 2099 50 74 Extreme Heat Events 37 40 93F + 30 20 Days per yearper Days 10 4 12 10 Source: Cal-Adapt 0 1960-2005 2090-2099 LOCAL CLIMATE CHANGE Extreme Heat Days (93.3 F or more) 37 12 4 11 Source: Cal-Adapt LOCAL CLIMATE CHANGE 20 18 Annual Rainfall 16 14 14.5 12 10.9 (Avg) 11.1 11.6 10 10.8 Inches 8 6 4 2 0 1950-2005 2050 2099 Fire Risk 12 Source: Cal-Adapt 6 5.5 Sea Level Rise High Emissions Scenario 5 4 3 Feet 2.0 2 Low Emissions Scenario 1.0 1 1.4 0.2 0.4 0 2000 2030 2050 2100 Source: Encinitas Climate Action Plan, 2018; San Diego Coastal Resilience Assessment, 2012 LOCAL CLIMATE CHANGE Sea Level Rise 167 cm (SD high)
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Pacific Coast Winter Window Survey Results
    2020 Winter Window Survey for Snowy Plovers on U.S. Pacific Coast with 2013-2020 Results for Comparison. Note: blanks indicate no survey was conducted. REGION SITE OWNER 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 Date Primary Observer(s) Gray's Harbor Copalis Spit State Parks 0 0 0 0 28-Jan C. Sundstrum Conner Creek State Parks 0 0 0 0 28-Jan C. Sundstrum, W. Michaelis Damon Point WDNR 0 0 0 0 30-Jan C. Sundstrum Oyhut Spit WDNR 0 0 0 0 30-Jan C. Sundstrum Ocean Shores to Ocean City 4 10 0 9 28-Jan C. Sundstrum, W. Michaelis County Total 4 10 0 9 Pacific Midway Beach Private, State Parks 22 28 58 66 27-Jan C. Sundstrum, W. Michaelis Graveyard Spit Shoalwater Indian Tribe 0 0 0 0 30-Jan C. Sundstrum, R. Ashley Leadbetter Point NWR USFWS, State Parks 34 3 15 0 11-Feb W. Ritchie South Long Beach Private 6 0 7 0 10-Feb W. Ritchie Benson Beach State Parks 0 0 0 0 20-Jan W. Ritchie County Total 62 31 80 66 Washington Total 66 41 80 75 Clatsop Fort Stevens State Park (Clatsop Spit) ACOE, OPRD 10 19 21 20-Jan T. Pyle, D. Osis DeLaura Beach OPRD No survey Camp Rilea DOD 0 0 0 No survey Sunset Beach OPRD 0 No survey Del Rio Beach OPRD 0 No survey Necanicum Spit OPRD 0 0 0 20-Jan J. Everett, S. Everett Gearhart Beach OPRD 0 No survey Columbia R-Necanicum R. OPRD No survey County Total 0 10 19 21 Tillamook Nehalem Spit OPRD 0 17 26 19-Jan D.
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment Ii
    ATTACHMENT II: STATUS AND LIFE HISTORY OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY LISTED SPECIES 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1: ALAMEDA WHIPSNAKE ........................................................................................... 5 1.1 Species Listing Status .............................................................................................. 5 1.2 Description ............................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Distribution .............................................................................................................. 5 1.4 USFWS Critical Habitat .......................................................................................... 6 1.5 Habitat .................................................................................................................... 11 1.6 Diet ......................................................................................................................... 11 1.7 Life History and Reproduction .............................................................................. 11 1.8 References .............................................................................................................. 12 2: BAY CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY ....................................................................... 14 2.1 Species Listing Status ............................................................................................ 14 2.2 Description ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • P.L. 94-171 COUNTY BLOCK MAP (2010 CENSUS): San Diego County, CA 117.270098W
    33.107128N 33.105876N 117.34042W P.L. 94-171 COUNTY BLOCK MAP (2010 CENSUS): San Diego County, CA 117.270098W 2040* Avena Ct W C t 2002* 2023 C Seascape Dr Towhee Ln Avena Ct E i 2059* S 3008* n 2004* a n r r T 2056* Butt H Cattail Pl d e a e r n Ponto Dr 3006* cu e e p d R F Ca a 3001* m r a 2022* s t d on l R R i ras W t p Cir 3004* r LEGEND a 4004* 4006* l 3005* urina Ct g i u t o Breakwater Rd al Macadamia Dr o rc e a e S S w h R d n R Strand St n te e n 3001* r Q R Sandbar Way i t r t D t a a u T o u e D t B a u Ave e 2055* k P s l i c h P s e 2050 r c B c a l e a u C t t a d l a t r p l l y Sandcastle Dr e R C us e 3008 P C 3012* P S h r B r l SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SYMBOL LABEL STYLE m D y C 2025* Coral o m s t i 3009* Waters End Dr u n Lobelia Ct v P r t l s e Conosa 2024 a r e s r ll e ly t i F C n id St Mallee 178.11 W Reef Ave D A o e 4013* s E Way Sweetwater St s Ct l r l 3011 h r 3005* 2012* e B t 3000* a D Federal American Indian s r C e t r r t A l Pso del Norte g T r viara t u i t a Catamaran Dr d P C e e e r u Crane Ct C e L'ANSE RES 1880 S l l M f i Pkwy Reservation o S o 2010 s f a d Tradewinds Dr h i d in R r t O o Brookside C R k i o 2060 4001* V Sage Ct Dr Snapdragon P Blac r r r 2049* r l fb c t 2009 2001 d h R e r C e Raintree l l li Wimbrel Ct i t u id n o Co e a S r L M W m 2017* Dr s T n S o D a e r c l 2054 r gu o r Off-Reservation Trust Land, e Ivy St a 4001* t P g rit e e D r Pl n e L n A r h t m T1880 s m Pl Goldfinch D t Hawaiian Home Land u Way b r r u r e h r N Boxthorn Way Ter o 4012* D v 2008 T A 2051* s
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Coast SNPL 2012 Breeding Survey with WA OR CA
    2012 Summer Window Survey for Snowy Plovers on U.S. Pacific Coast with 2005-2011 Results for Comparison. Note: blanks indicate no survey was conducted. Total Adults 2012 Adult Breakdown REGION SITE OWNER 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 male fem. sex? Grays Harbor Copalis Spit State Parks 00000 00 00 0 Conner Creek State Parks 00000 00 00 0 Damon Point/Oyhut S. Parks, D. Nat R. F & W 500000 00 00 0 County Total 500000 00 00 0 Pacific Midway Beach Private, State Parks 23 25 22 12 16 18 22 11 65 0 Graveyard Shoalwater Indian Tribe 10 0 0 2 11 0 Leadbetter Point NWR USFWS, State Parks 9 42282926201215 10 4 1 South Long Beach Private 00000 County Total 32 67 50 42 42 38 34 28 17 10 1 Washington Total 37 67 50 42 42 38 34 28 17 10 1 Clatsop Fort Stevens State Park (Clatsop Spit) ACOE, OPRD 0 0 0 0 1 00 1 Necanicum Spit OPRD 0000 0 01 00 1 County Total 000000 02 00 2 Tillamook Nehalem Spit OPRD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 Bayocean Spit ACOE 00000 00 00 0 Netarts Spit OPRD 000000 00 00 0 Sand Lake Spit (S) USFS 000000 00 00 0 Nestucca Spit OPRD 0000 0 0 00 0 County Total 000000 00 00 0 Lane Baker Beach/Sutton Creek USFS 0200 1 00 00 0 Sutton Cr./Siuslaw River N Jetty USFS 0 0 0 0 00 0 Siuslaw River S Jetty to Siltcoos USFS 4 40 0 Siltcoos Spits N & S USFS 11 18 16 11 17 18 18 22 11 10 1 County Total 11 20 16 11 17 19 18 26 15 10 1 Douglas Siltcoos-Tahkenitch (Dunes Overlook) USFS 9 2 19 7 6 19 39 42 22 20 0 Tahkenitch Spit N & S USFS 515035132716 11 0 Umpqua River S Jetty to Tenmile Spit USFS 0 11 10 12 57 0 County Total 14 3 24 7 20 24 62 81 43 38 0 Coos Tenmile Spits USFS 13 15 27 24 24 36 13 16 88 0 Coos Bay N Spit BLM, ACOE 27 27 26 30 41 38 39 52 35 17 0 Whiskey Run to Coquille River OPRD 0000 00 00 0 Bandon State Park to New River OPRD, Private, BLM 22 12 15 8 14 40 16 14 95 0 County Total 62 54 68 62 79 114 68 82 52 30 0 Curry New River to Floras Lake BLM, Private, County 13 14 17 25 24 1 20 15 96 0 Blacklock Point to Sixes River (C.
    [Show full text]
  • PUBLIC LAW 92-330-JUNE 30, 1972 399 Public Law 92
    86 STAT.] PUBLIC LAW 92-330-JUNE 30, 1972 399 Public Law 92-330 AN ACT June 30, 1972 To provide for the establishment of the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife [H. R. 12143] Refuge. Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the San Francisco United States of America in Congress assembled^ That, for the preser­ Bay National vation and enhancement of highly significant wildlife habitat in the Wildlife Refuge. area known as south San Francisco Bay in the State of California, for Establishment. the protection of migratory waterfowl and other wildlife, including species known to be threatened with extinction, and to provide an opportunity for wildlife-oriented recreation and nature study within the open space so preserved, the Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter referred to as the "Secretary") is authorized and directed to establish, as herein provided, a national wildlife refuge to be known as the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Kefuge (hereinafter referred to as the "refuge"). SEC. 2. There shall be included within the boundaries of the refuge Description. those lands, marshes, tidal flats, salt ponds, submerged lands, and open waters in the south San Francisco Bay area generally depicted on the map entitled "Boundary Map, Proposed San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge", dated July 1971, and which comprise approximately twenty-one thousand six hundred and sixty-two acres within four dis­ tinct units to be known as Fremont (five thousand five hundred and twenty acres), Mowry Slough (seven thousand one hundred and seventy-five acres), Alviso (three thousand and eighty acres), and Greco Island (five thousand eight hundred and eig'hty-seven acres).
    [Show full text]
  • Tidal Marsh Recovery Plan Habitat Creation Or Enhancement Project Within 5 Miles of OAK
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California California clapper rail Suaeda californica Cirsium hydrophilum Chloropyron molle Salt marsh harvest mouse (Rallus longirostris (California sea-blite) var. hydrophilum ssp. molle (Reithrodontomys obsoletus) (Suisun thistle) (soft bird’s-beak) raviventris) Volume II Appendices Tidal marsh at China Camp State Park. VII. APPENDICES Appendix A Species referred to in this recovery plan……………....…………………….3 Appendix B Recovery Priority Ranking System for Endangered and Threatened Species..........................................................................................................11 Appendix C Species of Concern or Regional Conservation Significance in Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California….......................................13 Appendix D Agencies, organizations, and websites involved with tidal marsh Recovery.................................................................................................... 189 Appendix E Environmental contaminants in San Francisco Bay...................................193 Appendix F Population Persistence Modeling for Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California with Intial Application to California clapper rail …............................................................................209 Appendix G Glossary……………......................................................................………229 Appendix H Summary of Major Public Comments and Service
    [Show full text]
  • Light-Footed Ridgway's (Clapper) Rail in California
    Light-footed Ridgway’s (Clapper) Rail in California 2018 Season By Richard Zembal, Susan M. Hoffman, John Konecny, and Beth Sabiston Final Report to US Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Wildlife Light-footed Ridgway’s (Clapper) Rail in California 2018 Season Richard Zembal, Susan M. Hoffman, John Konecny, and Beth Sabiston Clapper Rail Recovery Fund Huntington Beach Wetlands Conservancy 24821 Buckboard Lane Laguna Hills, CA 92653 December 21, 2018 Table of Contents ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................... 2 METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Population Monitoring .........................................................................................................4 Nest Monitoring ...................................................................................................................5 Breeding in Zoological Facilities .........................................................................................6 Banding and Tracking ..........................................................................................................8 STUDY AREAS ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Inland Fishes of California
    Inland Fishes of California Revise d and Expanded PETER B. MO YL E Illustrations by Chris Ma ri van Dyck and Joe Tome ller i NIVERS ITyor ALfFORNJA PRESS Ikrkd cr I.", ..\ n~d e ' Lon don Universit }, 0 Ca lifornia Press Herkdey and Los Angeles, Ca lifornia Uni ve rsity of alifornia Press, Ltd. Lundun, England ~ 2002 by the Regents of the Unive rsi ty of Ca lifornia Library of Cungress ataloging-in -Publ ica tion Data j\·[oyk, Pen: r B. Inland fis hes of California / Peter B. Moyle ; illustrations by Chris Mari van D)'ck and Joe Tomell eri.- Rev. and expanded. p. cm. In lu de> bibl iographical refe rences (p. ). ISBN 0- 20-2.2754 -'1 (cl ot h: alk. papa) I. rreshw:ltcr lishes-Cali(ornia. I. Title. QL62S C2 M6H 2002 597 .17/i'097Q4-dc21 20010 27680 1\!UlIl.Ifaclu rcd in Canacla II 10 Q9 00 07 06 0 04 03 02 10 ' 1\ 7 b '; -\ 3 2 1 Th paper u!)ed in thi> public.ltiu(] 111l'd., the minimum requirements "fA SI / i': ISO Z39.4H-1992 (R 199;) ( Pmlllllh'/l e ofPa pcr) . e Special Thanks The illustrations for this book were made possible by gra nts from the following : California-Nevada Chapter, American Fi she ries Soc iety Western Di vision, Am erican Fi she ries Society California Department of Fish and Game Giles W. and El ise G. Mead Foundation We appreciate the generous funding support toward the publication of this book by the United Sta tes Environme ntal Protection Agency, Region IX, San Francisco Contents Pre(acc ix Salmon and Trout, Salmonidae 242 Ackl10 11'ledgl11 el1ts Xlll Silversides, Atherinopsidae 307 COlll'er,<iol1 ['actors xv
    [Show full text]