DOCSLIB.ORG

Dos Osos Biological Resources Evaluation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dos Osos Biological Resources Evaluation Biological Resources Evaluation for the Dos Osos Reservoir Replacement Project Orinda, California July 20, 2016 Prepared For: East Bay Municipal Utility District 375 11th St Oakland, MS 701, CA 94607 510-287-1086 [email protected] Prepared By: Jessica Purificato Fisheries and Wildlife Division East Bay Municipal Utility District 500 San Pablo Dam Rd Orinda, CA 94563 510-287-2034 [email protected] Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Project Setting ..................................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Proposed Project Description .............................................................................................................. 5 2.0 REGULATORY BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Special Status Biological Communities ................................................................................................ 7 Waters of the United States ................................................................................................................. 8 Waters of the State ............................................................................................................................... 8 Streams, Lakes, and Riparian Habitat ................................................................................................... 8 Sensitive Natural Communities ............................................................................................................. 9 Wildlife Movement Corridors ............................................................................................................... 9 2.2 Special Status Species ......................................................................................................................... 9 Federal Endangered Species Act ......................................................................................................... 10 California Endangered Species Act ..................................................................................................... 10 California Environmental Quality Act.................................................................................................. 10 Migratory Bird Treaty Act ................................................................................................................... 11 2.3 Conservation Plans ............................................................................................................................ 11 2.4 Local Policies and Ordinances ........................................................................................................... 11 3.0 METHODS .............................................................................................................................................. 12 3.1 Biological Communities ..................................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Special Status Species ....................................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Conservation Plans ............................................................................................................................ 14 4.0 FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................................... 14 4.1 Biological Setting............................................................................................................................... 14 Climate ................................................................................................................................................ 14 Soils ..................................................................................................................................................... 14 Vegetation and Habitat Communities ................................................................................................ 15 4.2 Sensitive Biological Communities ...................................................................................................... 17 Wetlands, Waters and Riparian Habitat ............................................................................................. 17 Sensitive Natural Communities ........................................................................................................... 17 Wildlife Movement Corridors ............................................................................................................. 17 4.3 Sensitive Plant Species ...................................................................................................................... 18 Dos Osos Reservoir Replacement Project 2 Biological Resources Evaluation 4.4 Sensitive Wildlife Species .................................................................................................................. 23 Amphibians ......................................................................................................................................... 23 Reptiles................................................................................................................................................ 24 Birds .................................................................................................................................................... 26 Fish ...................................................................................................................................................... 27 Mammals ............................................................................................................................................ 28 Invertebrates ....................................................................................................................................... 30 4.5 Conservation Plans ............................................................................................................................ 32 5.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ............................................................................................................................. 33 5.1 Biological Communities ..................................................................................................................... 33 Wetlands, Waters and Riparian Habitat ............................................................................................. 33 Sensitive Natural Communities ........................................................................................................... 33 Wildlife Movement Corridors ............................................................................................................. 33 5.2 Special Status Species ....................................................................................................................... 34 General Avoidance and Minimization Measures ................................................................................ 34 Sensitive Plant Species ........................................................................................................................ 34 Nesting Special Status Bird Species..................................................................................................... 35 Special Status Bat Species ................................................................................................................... 35 Alameda whipsnake ............................................................................................................................ 36 San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat ................................................................................................ 36 Bridge’s coast range shoulderband..................................................................................................... 37 5.3 Conservation Plans ............................................................................................................................ 37 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 37 7.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 39 8.0 REPORT FIGURES ................................................................................................................................... 43 Appendix A: ................................................................................................................................................. 46 List of Plant and Animal Species identified within 5 miles of the project site by CDFW in the California Native Diversity Database and by USFWS in the Official Species List for the Dos Osos Reservoir Placement Project ....................................................................................................................................... 46 Appendix B: ................................................................................................................................................. 58 List of Plant Species identified in the CNPS Rare or Endangered Plant Inventory, The Rare, Unusual or Significant Plants of Alameda or Contra Counties and EBMUD’s Managed Species Database for the Dos Osos Reservoir
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 45Th Anniversary Year
    VOLUME 45, NO. 1 Spring 2021 Journal of the Douglasia WASHINGTON NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY th To promote the appreciation and 45 conservation of Washington’s native plants Anniversary and their habitats through study, education, Year and advocacy. Spring 2021 • DOUGLASIA Douglasia VOLUME 45, NO. 1 SPRING 2021 journal of the washington native plant society WNPS Arthur R. Kruckberg Fellows* Clay Antieau Lou Messmer** President’s Message: William Barker** Joe Miller** Nelsa Buckingham** Margaret Miller** The View from Here Pamela Camp Mae Morey** Tom Corrigan** Brian O. Mulligan** by Keyna Bugner Melinda Denton** Ruth Peck Ownbey** Lee Ellis Sarah Reichard** Dear WNPS Members, Betty Jo Fitzgerald** Jim Riley** Mary Fries** Gary Smith For those that don’t Amy Jean Gilmartin** Ron Taylor** know me I would like Al Hanners** Richard Tinsley Lynn Hendrix** Ann Weinmann to introduce myself. I Karen Hinman** Fred Weinmann grew up in a small town Marie Hitchman * The WNPS Arthur R. Kruckeberg Fellow Catherine Hovanic in eastern Kansas where is the highest honor given to a member most of my time was Art Kermoade** by our society. This title is given to Don Knoke** those who have made outstanding spent outside explor- Terri Knoke** contributions to the understanding and/ ing tall grass prairie and Arthur R. Kruckeberg** or preservation of Washington’s flora, or woodlands. While I Mike Marsh to the success of WNPS. Joy Mastrogiuseppe ** Deceased love the Midwest, I was ready to venture west Douglasia Staff WNPS Staff for college. I earned Business Manager a Bachelor of Science Acting Editor Walter Fertig Denise Mahnke degree in Wildlife Biol- [email protected] 206-527-3319 [email protected] ogy from Colorado State Layout Editor University, where I really Mark Turner Office and Volunteer Coordinator [email protected] Elizabeth Gage got interested in native [email protected] plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny
    Outline of angiosperm phylogeny: orders, families, and representative genera with emphasis on Oregon native plants Priscilla Spears December 2013 The following listing gives an introduction to the phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants that has emerged in recent decades, and which is based on nucleic acid sequences as well as morphological and developmental data. This listing emphasizes temperate families of the Northern Hemisphere and is meant as an overview with examples of Oregon native plants. It includes many exotic genera that are grown in Oregon as ornamentals plus other plants of interest worldwide. The genera that are Oregon natives are printed in a blue font. Genera that are exotics are shown in black, however genera in blue may also contain non-native species. Names separated by a slash are alternatives or else the nomenclature is in flux. When several genera have the same common name, the names are separated by commas. The order of the family names is from the linear listing of families in the APG III report. For further information, see the references on the last page. Basal Angiosperms (ANITA grade) Amborellales Amborellaceae, sole family, the earliest branch of flowering plants, a shrub native to New Caledonia – Amborella Nymphaeales Hydatellaceae – aquatics from Australasia, previously classified as a grass Cabombaceae (water shield – Brasenia, fanwort – Cabomba) Nymphaeaceae (water lilies – Nymphaea; pond lilies – Nuphar) Austrobaileyales Schisandraceae (wild sarsaparilla, star vine – Schisandra; Japanese
    [Show full text]
  • Conceptual Design Documentation
    Appendix A: Conceptual Design Documentation APPENDIX A Conceptual Design Documentation June 2019 A-1 APPENDIX A: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN DOCUMENTATION The environmental analyses in the NEPA and CEQA documents for the proposed improvements at Oceano County Airport (the Airport) are based on conceptual designs prepared to provide a realistic basis for assessing their environmental consequences. 1. Widen runway from 50 to 60 feet 2. Widen Taxiways A, A-1, A-2, A-3, and A-4 from 20 to 25 feet 3. Relocate segmented circle and wind cone 4. Installation of taxiway edge lighting 5. Installation of hold position signage 6. Installation of a new electrical vault and connections 7. Installation of a pollution control facility (wash rack) CIVIL ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS The purpose of this conceptual design effort is to identify the amount of impervious surface, grading (cut and fill) and drainage implications of the projects identified above. The conceptual design calculations detailed in the following figures indicate that Projects 1 and 2, widening the runways and taxiways would increase the total amount of impervious surface on the Airport by 32,016 square feet, or 0.73 acres; a 6.6 percent increase in the Airport’s impervious surface area. Drainage patterns would remain the same as both the runway and taxiways would continue to sheet flow from their centerlines to the edge of pavement and then into open, grassed areas. The existing drainage system is able to accommodate the modest increase in stormwater runoff that would occur, particularly as soil conditions on the Airport are conducive to infiltration. Figure A-1 shows the locations of the seven projects incorporated in the Proposed Action.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.4 Biological Resources for the Purpose of This EIR, Biological Resources Comprise Vegetation, Wildlife, Natural Communities, and Wetlands and Other Waters
    Impact Analysis Alameda County Community Development Agency Biological Resources 3.4 Biological Resources For the purpose of this EIR, biological resources comprise vegetation, wildlife, natural communities, and wetlands and other waters. Potential biological resource impacts associated with the program and the two individual projects are analyzed. Potential impacts are described quantitatively and qualitatively in Section 3.4.2, Environmental Impacts. This section also identifies specific and detailed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for potentially significant impacts on biological resources, where necessary. 3.4.1 Existing Conditions Regulatory Setting Federal Endangered Species Act Pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) have authority over projects that may result in take of a species listed as threatened or endangered under the act. Take is defined under the ESA, in part, as killing, harming, or harassing. Under federal regulations, take is further defined to include habitat modification or degradation that results, or is reasonably expected to result, in death or injury to wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering. If a likelihood exists that a project would result in take of a federally listed species, either an incidental take permit, under Section 10(a) of the ESA, or a federal interagency consultation, under Section 7 of the ESA, is required. Several federally listed species—vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi), longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna), vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi), California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), California red‐legged frog (Rana draytonii), Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), and San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica)—have the potential to be affected by activities associated with the Golden Hills and Patterson Pass projects as well as subsequent repowering projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Contra Costa County, California
    APPENDIX G BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT AND ARBORIST REPORTS Biological Resources Assessment for the Sufi Church Project Contra Costa County, California Prepared for: Meher Schools G-1 Prepared for: Meher Schools 999 Leland Drive Lafayette, CA 94549 925-938-9958 Prepared by: EDAW 2099 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Suite 204 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 279-0580 June 18, 2008 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED SUFI CHURCH PROJECT, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA G-2 The information provided in this document is intended solely for the use and benefit of Meher Schools. No other person or entity shall be entitled to rely on the services, opinions, recommendations, plans or specifications provided herein, without the express written consent of EDAW, 2099 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Suite 204, Walnut Creek, CA 94596. G-3 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................. i 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND METHODS .............................................................................1 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS.............................................................................................5 2.1 SETTING......................................................................................................................5 2.2 PLANT COMMUNITIES AND WILDLIFE HABITATS........................................................5 3.0 SPECIAL-STATUS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.......................................................7 3.1 SPECIAL-STATUS PLANTS ...........................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Extrapolating Demography with Climate, Proximity and Phylogeny: Approach with Caution
    ! ∀#∀#∃ %& ∋(∀∀!∃ ∀)∗+∋ ,+−, ./ ∃ ∋∃ 0∋∀ /∋0 0 ∃0 . ∃0 1##23%−34 ∃−5 6 Extrapolating demography with climate, proximity and phylogeny: approach with caution Shaun R. Coutts1,2,3, Roberto Salguero-Gómez1,2,3,4, Anna M. Csergő3, Yvonne M. Buckley1,3 October 31, 2016 1. School of Biological Sciences. Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science. The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia. 2. Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield, UK. 3. School of Natural Sciences, Zoology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland. 4. Evolutionary Demography Laboratory. Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research. Rostock, DE-18057, Germany. Keywords: COMPADRE Plant Matrix Database, comparative demography, damping ratio, elasticity, matrix population model, phylogenetic analysis, population growth rate (λ), spatially lagged models Author statement: SRC developed the initial concept, performed the statistical analysis and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. RSG helped develop the initial concept, provided code for deriving de- mographic metrics and phylogenetic analysis, and provided the matrix selection criteria. YMB helped develop the initial concept and advised on analysis. All authors made substantial contributions to editing the manuscript and further refining ideas and interpretations. 1 Distance and ancestry predict demography 2 ABSTRACT Plant population responses are key to understanding the effects of threats such as climate change and invasions. However, we lack demographic data for most species, and the data we have are often geographically aggregated. We determined to what extent existing data can be extrapolated to predict pop- ulation performance across larger sets of species and spatial areas. We used 550 matrix models, across 210 species, sourced from the COMPADRE Plant Matrix Database, to model how climate, geographic proximity and phylogeny predicted population performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Assessment
    Biological Resources Assessment Valle Vista Properties HAYWARD, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared For: William Lyon Homes, Inc. 2603 Camino Ramon, Suite 450 San Ramon, California 94583 Contact: Scott Roylance WRA Contact: Mark Kalnins [email protected] Date: July 10, 2017 Revised: November 16, 2017 2169-G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94702 (415) 454-8868 tel [email protected] www.wra-ca.com This page intentionally blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 3 2.0 REGULATORY BACKGROUND ........................................................................................... 3 2.1 Sensitive Biological Communities .............................................................................. 3 2.2 Special-Status Species .............................................................................................. 8 2.3 Relevant Local Policies, Ordinances, Regulations ..................................................... 9 3.0 METHODS ............................................................................................................................. 9 3.1 Biological Communities ............................................................................................ 10 3.1.1 Non-Sensitive Biological Communities ...................................................... 10 3.1.2 Sensitive Biological Communities .............................................................. 10 3.2 Special-Status Species ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations
    Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations Revised Report and Documentation Prepared for: Department of Defense U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Submitted by: January 2004 Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations: Revised Report and Documentation CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary..........................................................................................iii 2.0 Introduction – Project Description................................................................. 1 3.0 Methods ................................................................................................................ 3 3.1 NatureServe Data................................................................................................ 3 3.2 DOD Installations............................................................................................... 5 3.3 Species at Risk .................................................................................................... 6 4.0 Results................................................................................................................... 8 4.1 Nationwide Assessment of Species at Risk on DOD Installations..................... 8 4.2 Assessment of Species at Risk by Military Service.......................................... 13 4.3 Assessment of Species at Risk on Installations ................................................ 15 5.0 Conclusion and Management Recommendations.................................... 22 6.0 Future Directions.............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Download the *.Pdf File
    ECOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE PROPOSED BIG PINE MOUNTAIN RESEARCH NATURAL AREA LOS PADRES NATIONAL FOREST, SANTA BARBARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA TODD KEELER-WOLF FEBRUARY 1991 (PURCHASE ORDER # 40-9AD6-9-0407) INTRODUCTION 1 Access 1 PRINCIPAL DISTINGUISHING FEATURES 2 JUSTIFICATION FOR ESTABLISHMENT 4 Mixed Coniferous Forest 4 California Condor 5 Rare Plants 6 Animal of Special Concern 7 Biogeographic Significance 7 Large Predator and Pristine Environment 9 Riparian Habitat 9 Vegetation Diversity 10 History of Scientific Research 11 PHYSICAL AND CLIMATIC CONDITIONS 11 VEGETATION AND FLORA 13 Vegetation Types 13 Sierran Mixed Coniferous Forest 13 Northern Mixed Chaparral 22 Canyon Live Oak Forest 23 Coulter Pine Forest 23 Bigcone Douglas-fir/Canyon Live Oak Forest 25 Montane Chaparral 26 Rock Outcrop 28 Jeffrey Pine Forest 28 Montane Riparian Forest 31 Shale Barrens 33 Valley and Foothill Grassland 34 FAUNA 35 GEOLOGY 37 SOILS 37 AQUATIC VALUES 38 CULTURAL VALUES 38 IMPACTS AND POSSIBLE CONFLICTS 39 MANAGEMENT CONCERNS 40 BOUNDARY CHANGES 40 RECOMMENDATIONS 41 LITERATURE CITED 41 APPENDICES 41 Vascular Plant List 43 Vertebrate List 52 PHOTOGRAPHS AND MAPS 57 INTRODUCTION The Big Pine Mountain candidate Research Natural Area (RNA) is on the Santa Lucia Ranger District, Los Padres National Forest, in Santa Barbara County, California. The area was nominated by the National Forest as a candidate RNA in 1986 to preserve an example of the Sierra Nevada mixed conifer forest for the South Coast Range Province. The RNA as defined in this report covers 2963 acres (1199 ha). The boundaries differ from those originally proposed by the National Forest (map 5, and see discussion of boundaries in later section).
    [Show full text]
  • Download The
    SYSTEMATICA OF ARNICA, SUBGENUS AUSTROMONTANA AND A NEW SUBGENUS, CALARNICA (ASTERACEAE:SENECIONEAE) by GERALD BANE STRALEY B.Sc, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 1968 M.Sc, Ohio University, 1974 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Botany) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA March 1980 © Gerald Bane Straley, 1980 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department nf Botany The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 26 March 1980 ABSTRACT Seven species are recognized in Arnica subgenus Austromontana and two species in a new subgenus Calarnica based on a critical review and conserva• tive revision of the species. Chromosome numbers are given for 91 populations representing all species, including the first reports for Arnica nevadensis. Results of apomixis, vegetative reproduction, breeding studies, and artifi• cial hybridizations are given. Interrelationships of insect pollinators, leaf miners, achene feeders, and floret feeders are presented. Arnica cordifolia, the ancestral species consists largely of tetraploid populations, which are either autonomous or pseudogamous apomicts, and to a lesser degree diploid, triploid, pentaploid, and hexaploid populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plant List
    UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plants Below is the most recently updated plant list for UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve. * non-native taxon ? presence in question Listed Species Information: CNPS Listed - as designated by the California Rare Plant Ranks (formerly known as CNPS Lists). More information at http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/ranking.php Cal IPC Listed - an inventory that categorizes exotic and invasive plants as High, Moderate, or Limited, reflecting the level of each species' negative ecological impact in California. More information at http://www.cal-ipc.org More information about Federal and State threatened and endangered species listings can be found at https://www.fws.gov/endangered/ (US) and http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/ t_e_spp/ (CA). FAMILY NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME LISTED Ferns AZOLLACEAE - Mosquito Fern American water fern, mosquito fern, Family Azolla filiculoides ? Mosquito fern, Pacific mosquitofern DENNSTAEDTIACEAE - Bracken Hairy brackenfern, Western bracken Family Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens fern DRYOPTERIDACEAE - Shield or California wood fern, Coastal wood wood fern family Dryopteris arguta fern, Shield fern Common horsetail rush, Common horsetail, field horsetail, Field EQUISETACEAE - Horsetail Family Equisetum arvense horsetail Equisetum telmateia ssp. braunii Giant horse tail, Giant horsetail Pentagramma triangularis ssp. PTERIDACEAE - Brake Family triangularis Gold back fern Gymnosperms CUPRESSACEAE - Cypress Family Hesperocyparis macrocarpa Monterey cypress CNPS - 1B.2, Cal IPC
    [Show full text]
  • Alameda Whipsnake: the Fasttest Snake in the West by Mike Westphal
    Alameda Whipsnake: The Fasttest Snake in the West by Mike Westphal A narrow footpath circles the crest of Mt. Diablo. The sunlight comes early to this high place and in May will warm the rocky soil around the manzanita bushes early in the morning, once the fog has burned away. If you were a snake - a fast snake, a snake that hunted lizards by day - you would live in a place like this, a place among the shrubbery where you could heat up and go. If you, on the other hand, up and go. If you, on the other hand, were a person and Photo by Sheila Larsen / USFWS wanted to pay a call on the Alameda whipsnake, you might also come here. A simple wooden rail follows the footpath on the downhill side. Walk slowly along the rail and watch the ground. Be quiet and alert. The Alameda whipsnake does not wait. If it sees you and doesn’t want to hang around, it will be gone before you even know what you’re looking at. If you are careful enough, you may see a rare and beautiful snake - a snake built for speed. Its body is long (to six feet) annd whiplike (hence the name). The neck is slender, topped with a darting head that houses the big eyes of a visual predator. In color, it is the deep, deep green traditional to British racecars; it is detailed on either side with a bold orange stripe. The whipsnake is polished and glossy in the morning sun. Stare at it as long as you can, for this is no "sit-and-wait" predator, and will soon move away to chase down a fat lizard for breakfast.
    [Show full text]