DOCSLIB.ORG

Reyes Peak Forest Health and Fuels Reduction Project Proposal

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reyes Peak Forest Health and Fuels Reduction Project Proposal Reyes Peak Forest Health and Fuels Reduction Project Project Proposal May 8, 2020 Introduction The Reyes Peak Forest Health and Fuels Reduction Project, on the Ojai and Mt. Pinos Ranger Districts proposes to reduce surface and ladder fuels, reduce potential fire intensities and make the area more resilient to wildfire. The Reyes Peak Project is approximately 755 acres and located on Pine Mountain between Highway 33 and Reyes Peak, directly on the boundary of the Ojai and the Mt. Pinos Ranger Districts of the Los Padres National Forest. The project is located in Ventura County, California (San Bernardino Meridian) and runs from east to west along Pine Mountain and is approximately three miles south of the community of Camp Scheideck, California which has been identified as a community of concern within the 2006 Mt. Pinos Community Wildfire Protection Plan. The legal description for the project is: part of Section 12 in Township 7 North, Range 23 West; parts of Sections 35 and 36 in Township 7 North, Range 24 West; parts of sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, & 11 in Township 6 North, Range 23 West; part of sections 1 and 2 in Township 6 North, Range 24 West. Approximately 41 percent of the project lies within the Sespe-Frazier Inventoried Roadless Area. There are no wilderness areas within the project area. However, the Sespe Wilderness lies northeast and adjacent to the project area; the Matilija Wilderness lies to the southwest; and the Dick Smith Wilderness lies northwest of the project area (figure 1). Figure 1. Overview map of the Reyes Peak Project 1 Reyes Peak Proposed Action The Healthy Forest Restoration Act authority (2003, as amended 2018) would be used for this project. The purposes of the act relevant to this project include: • to reduce wildfire risk to communities, municipal water supplies, and other at-risk Federal land through a collaborative process of planning, prioritizing, and implementing hazardous fuel reduction projects; • to reduce risk or extent of, or increase the resilience to, insect or disease infestation; • to enhance efforts to protect watersheds and address threats to forest and rangeland health, including catastrophic wildfire, across the landscape; • to protect California spotted owl habitat to the north of the treated area from the effects of catastrophic wildfire (figure 2). Figure 2 shows the vegetation within a 1,500-foot buffer around the project area in relation to wildlife created by a wildlife suitability module (Zeiner et al. 1998 and 1990). Figure 2. Wildlife suitability habitat map for Reyes Peak Project 2 Reyes Peak Proposed Action Background Information/Existing Condition Fire, Vegetation, and Fuels Fire has played an integral part in defining and shaping vegetation patterns and composition in California for millions of years, both via natural, and more recently, human-caused ignitions (van Wagtendonk et al., 2018). Frequent, low to moderate severity fire in mixed conifer and yellow pine forests played an integral role in maintaining these ecosystems historically. Fire suppression starting in the early 20th century has led to altered fire regimes that affect forest composition, structure and risk of vegetation type conversion following disturbance. Southern California conifer forests have burned very infrequently since the early 1900s, resulting in large and homogenous areas of stand-replacing burns, likely exacerbated even further by recent fire- conducive weather conditions and extended periods of drought. Recovery from large, high severity burns is likely to be impeded by the small and disparate nature of mixed conifer forests and limited seed dispersal capabilities of remaining trees (Nigro and Molinari 2019). Figure 3 represents the time since the last fire in the forested areas that are adjacent or near the project area. Figure 3. Time since the last fire in the project vicinity for conifer forest types 3 Reyes Peak Proposed Action Vegetation Types Current vegetation consists primarily of Jeffrey Pine, Sierra Nevada mixed-conifer, white fir1, with chaparral, and canyon live oak2. The exclusion of fire has allowed biomass to accumulate in forested and chaparral vegetation types. Table 1 illustrates the amount of forested and chaparral areas by slope classes3 within the project area. Table 1. Forested and chaparral areas by slope class Vegetation Type Slope Class – Less than Slope Class – Greater than Total Acres 35 Percent or equal to 35 Percent Conifer 193 230 423 Chaparral 160 156 316 Non-forested 7 9 16 Totals 360 395 755 As a result, many changes associated with the current vegetation composition and structure have occurred, which also changes the fuel profile and subsequent fire behavior characteristics. Surface fuel loading levels, trees that are dead and dying due to insect and disease, and natural forest succession make stand-replacing fire an ongoing risk to the landscape. Preliminary fire behavior modeling results show under dry conditions, 67 percent of the project area displays passive crown fire activity and 76 percent of the project area shows flame lengths greater than four feet in height that would require indirect fire suppression tactics (figure 4). 1 Jeffrey pine, Sierra mixed conifer and white fir areas are aggregated to make up the conifer vegetation types. 2 Canyon live oak and chaparral areas are aggregated to make up the chaparral vegetation types. 3 Per the Forest plan standard S2: Ground based harvest systems will normally operate on slopes up to 35 percent, and on short steep pitches up to 50 percent. 4 Reyes Peak Proposed Action Figure 4. Potential fire behavior (modeled flame lengths) for the project area Chaparral cover almost two million acres of National Forest System land in southern California (USDA Forest Service 2005). Being prone to infrequent large, high intensity wildfires is the natural condition of chaparral (California Chaparral Institute). Chaparral often grows in a continuous stand of dense vegetation, creating a potentially flammable landscape. Some chaparral have flammable characteristics such as small fine leaves, lots of litter, and peeling bark. Fires in chaparral are usually high intensity and spread rapidly through the system. Wind driven, chaparral-fueled fires often burn hot and produce tall flames and copious embers (University of California). Most homes lost in the recent fires resulted from high-intensity fires spreading into urban areas from surrounding chaparral (USDA Forest Service). 5 Reyes Peak Proposed Action Fire Regime Groups4 Fire has played an important ecological role in the history of the ecosystems of the Los Padres National Forest. Approximately 8 million lightning strikes occur globally each day, and lightning starts more than 6,000 fires in the United States each year (Pyne 1982). Since the beginning of the early 20th century, the frequency of natural fire has decreased dramatically. This decrease has corresponded with an increased demand for wildland fire suppression to protect life and property. The natural or historic fire regime is a general classification of the role fire plays in an ecosystem. The concept of a fire regime provides an integrated way of classifying the impacts of these diverse spatial and temporal patterns of fire and impacts of fire at an ecosystem or landscape level (Hardy et al. 1998). Coarse scale definitions for natural (historical) fire regimes have been developed and interpreted for fire and fuels management. The five natural (historical) fire regimes are classified based on average number of years between fires (fire frequency) combined with the severity (amount of replacement) of the fire on the dominant over story vegetation (Hann and Bunnell 2001) and are displayed in table 2. Table 2. Fire regime groups Fire Regime Group Frequency/Severity Severity Description Fire Regime Group I 0-35 years, low/mixed Generally low-severity fires replacing less severity than 25% of the dominant over story vegetation; can include mixed-severity fires that replace up to 75% of the over story. Fire Regime Group II 0-35 years, replacement High-severity fires replacing greater than severity 75% of the dominant over story vegetation. Fire Regime Group III 35 – 200 years, mixed/low Generally mixed-severity; can also include severity low-severity fires. Fire Regime Group IV 35 – 200+ years, replacement High-severity fires severity Fire Regime Group V 200+ years, replacement/ any Generally, replacement-severity; can include severity any severity type in this frequency range. Approximately 89 percent of the Reyes Peak project area is classified as Fire Regime Group I with a less than 35-year fire return interval and a low/mixed fire severity. The proportion of vegetation types by acre and percentage are contained within each fire regime group and displayed in table 3. In table 3, LANDFIRE data fire regime group data was intersected with vegetation types to show the distribution of vegetation types within mapped Fire Regime Groups in the project area. The natural fire return interval for chaparral is 30 to 150 years. Today, there are more fires than the chaparral ecosystem can tolerate (Chaparral Institute). As displayed in table 1, there are approximately 272 acres of the project area that is characterized as chaparral within Fire Regime Group I. Fire Regime Group I is defined as having a 0- to 35-year frequency with a low/mixed fire severity. The Chaparral Institute noted, chaparral has a high-intensity, crown fire regime, 4 LANDFIRE (2010) version 1.2.0 data was used to conduct an assessment
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Appendix C - Response to Science
    Ringo EIS Appendix C - Response to Science Appendix C – RESPONSE TO SCIENCE The following table summarizes the Forest Service consideration of publications that were provided during the comment period and which were directly referenced in the comments, or determined to either have some relevance to the analysis or indicate there is a difference of opinion within the body of the science. NEPA states that comments on the EIS shall be as specific as possible (40 CFR 1503.3 Specificity of Comments). Some of the following documents are considered non-substantive comments that do not warrant further response. In either case, the following table explains the consideration given by the Forest Service. Referenced Document Forest Service Consideration/Response Cited Science by Dick Artley Mr. Artleys Attachment #1- Scientists Reveal the Natural Resources in the Forest are Harmed (and some destroyed) by Timber Harvest Activities Al-jabber, Jabber M. “Habitat Fragmentation:: Effects and The picture in the Cascadia Wildlands Project publication shows clearcuts and talks Implications” about fragmentation and edge effects which results in crowding of the ark (Meffe et Clearcuts and forest fragmentation, Willamette NF, Oregon. al. 1997) where after logging, species all try to exist in the remaining patches of From: Cascadia Wildland Project, Spring 2003 unlogged forest. Clear cuts are not proposed for the Ringo project. There are http://faculty.ksu.edu.sa/a/Documents/Habitat%20Fragmentation%20Eff openings that will be created that are consistent with gaps and openings of at least 0.5 ects%20and%20Implication.pdf acres described in the Old Growth Definitions (USDA FS 1993, Region 6 interim Old Growth Definitions).
    [Show full text]
  • Original Draft CWPP
    DRAFT CITY OF SANTA BARBARA May 2020 Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Table of Contents SECTIONS Acronyms and Abbreviations ..........................................................................................................................................................v Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................... vii 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Development Team ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Community Involvement ................................................................................................................................................. 3 1.3.1 Stakeholders ................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3.2 Public Outreach and Engagement Plan ........................................................................................................ 4 1.3.3 Public Outreach Meetings .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The 2007 Southern California Wildfires: Lessons in Complexity
    fire The 2007 Southern California Wildfires: Lessons in Complexity s is evidenced year after year, the na- ture of the “fire problem” in south- Jon E. Keeley, Hugh Safford, C.J. Fotheringham, A ern California differs from most of Janet Franklin, and Max Moritz the rest of the United States, both by nature and degree. Nationally, the highest losses in ϳ The 2007 wildfire season in southern California burned over 1,000,000 ac ( 400,000 ha) and property and life caused by wildfire occur in included several megafires. We use the 2007 fires as a case study to draw three major lessons about southern California, but, at the same time, wildfires and wildfire complexity in southern California. First, the great majority of large fires in expansion of housing into these fire-prone southern California occur in the autumn under the influence of Santa Ana windstorms. These fires also wildlands continues at an enormous pace cost the most to contain and cause the most damage to life and property, and the October 2007 fires (Safford 2007). Although modest areas of were no exception because thousands of homes were lost and seven people were killed. Being pushed conifer forest in the southern California by wind gusts over 100 kph, young fuels presented little barrier to their spread as the 2007 fires mountains experience the same negative ef- reburned considerable portions of the area burned in the historic 2003 fire season. Adding to the size fects of long-term fire suppression that are of these fires was the historic 2006–2007 drought that contributed to high dead fuel loads and long evident in other western forests (e.g., high distance spotting.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Agenda Packet
    NOTICE AND AGENDA FOR REGULAR MEETING DATE/TIME: Wednesday, February 13, 2019, 1:30 PM PLACE: Board of Supervisors Chambers 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA 94553 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Commission will hear and consider oral or written testimony presented by any affected agency or any interested person who wishes to appear. Proponents and opponents, or their representatives, are expected to attend the hearings. From time to time, the Chair may announce time limits and direct the focus of public comment for any given proposal. Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by LAFCO to a majority of the members of the Commission less than 72 hours prior to that meeting will be available for public inspection in the office at 651 Pine Street, Six Floor, Martinez, CA, during normal business hours as well as at the LAFCO meeting. All matters listed under CONSENT ITEMS are considered by the Commission to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless requested by a member of the Commission or a member of the public prior to the time the Commission votes on the motion to adopt. For agenda items not requiring a formal public hearing, the Chair will ask for public comments. For formal public hearings the Chair will announce the opening and closing of the public hearing. If you wish to speak, please complete a speaker’s card and approach the podium; speak clearly into the microphone, start by stating your name and address for the record.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Supply Management Report 2018-2019 Water Year
    FINAL January 28, 2020 City of Santa Barbara Water Supply Management Report 2018-2019 Water Year Prepared by Water Resources Division, Public Works Department City of Santa Barbara Water Supply Management Report 2019 Water Year (October 1, 2018 – September 30, 2019) Water Resources Division, Public Works Department January 28, 2020 INTRODUCTION The City of Santa Barbara operates the water utility to provide water for its citizens, certain out-of-City areas, and visitors. Santa Barbara is an arid area, so providing an adequate water supply requires careful management of water resources. The City has a diverse water supply including local reservoirs (Lake Cachuma and Gibraltar Reservoir), groundwater, State Water, desalination, and recycled water. The City also considers water conservation an important tool for balancing water supply and demand. The City's current Long-Term Water Supply Plan (LTWSP) was adopted by City Council on June 14, 2011. This annual report summarizes the following information: The status of water supplies at the end of the water year (September 30, 2019) Drought outlook Water conservation and demand Major capital projects that affect the City’s ability to provide safe clean water Significant issues that affect the security and reliability of the City’s water supplies Appendix A provides supplemental detail. Additional information about the City's water supply can be found on-line at: www.SantaBarbaraCA.gov/Water. WATER SUPPLIES The City has developed five different water supplies: local surface water; local groundwater (which includes water that seeps into Mission Tunnel); State Water; desalinated seawater; and recycled water. Typically, most of the City’s demand is met by local surface water reservoirs and recycled water and augmented as necessary by local groundwater, State Water, and desalination.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara Multi-Temporal Remote
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara Multi-temporal Remote Sensing of Vegetation Regrowth After a Large Wildfire A Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in Geography by Christopher Linscott Kibler Committee in charge: Professor Dar A. Roberts, Chair Professor Stuart H. Sweeney Professor Carla M. D’Antonio June 2019 The thesis of Christopher Linscott Kibler is approved. _____________________________________________ Stuart H. Sweeney _____________________________________________ Carla M. D’Antonio _____________________________________________ Dar A. Roberts, Committee Chair June 2019 Multi-temporal Remote Sensing of Vegetation Regrowth After a Large Wildfire Copyright © 2019 by Christopher Linscott Kibler iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the people whose guidance and support made this thesis possible. I would like to thank my advisor, Professor Dar Roberts, for his valuable mentorship and guidance over the last three years. Professors Stuart Sweeney and Carla D’Antonio also provided valuable advice about how to design and implement this study. In addition to my committee members, several other people made substantial contributions to this research. Anne-Marie Parkinson worked tirelessly to organize the fieldwork trips and analyze the field survey data. She was assisted by field technicians Monica Goodwin and Payton Thomas, whose diligence and perseverance enabled us to collect excellent data. Seth Peterson provided valuable advice about how to design and implement the remote sensing analyses. Members of the VIPER laboratory also provided useful guidance on many occasions. Finally, I would like to thank my girlfriend, Claire, for her encouragement and enthusiasm as I completed this project. I would also like to thank my parents for their unwavering love and support during all of my endeavors.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2007 Southern California Wildfires: Lessons in Complexity
    Western Ecological Research Center Publication Brief for Resource Managers Release: Contact: Phone: Email and web page: September 2009 Dr. Jon E. Keeley 559-565-3170 [email protected] http://www.werc.usgs.gov/products/personinfo.asp?PerPK=33 Sequoia and Kings Canyon Field Station, USGS Western Ecological Research Center, 47050 Generals Highway #4, Three Rivers, CA 93271 The 2007 Southern California Wildfires: Lessons in Complexity As is evidenced year after year, the nature of the “fire Management Implications: problem” in southern California differs from most of • Essentially all destructive fires in southern Cali- the rest of the U.S., both by nature and degree and fornia are ignited by people and thus potentially this is well illustrated by the 2007 wildfire season that preventable through: better restrictions on use of burned over a million acres and included several mega- machinery in wildland areas during severe fire fires. Lessons to be drawn from these fires illustrate weather (cause of the 2007 Zaca Fire), placement some of the complexity of fires in this region and are of power lines underground in corridors of known discussed in a recent paper published in Journal of For- Santa Ana winds (cause of the 2007 Witch Fire), estry by USGS scientists Jon E. Keeley and C.J. Foth- more conspicuous arson patrols during Santa Ana eringham, USFS scientist Hugh Safford, Janet Franklin wind events (cause of the 2007 Santiago Fire), or from San Diego State University, and Max Moritz from barriers along roadsides (ignition site for many of the University of California, Berkeley. the 2007 fires).
    [Show full text]
  • SMS01S040? 40-E.Indd
    GRASSY BURN: SLO County Cal Fire allowed a fire that started near the Camp SLO gun range to char 250 acres before putting it out this past summer. The area was scheduled for a prescribed burn the following day. 8 Pent up fuel PHOTO COURTESY OF CAL FIRE n estimated 129 million trees in “Our landscape is covered, particularly on California are dead. It sounds State and federal agencies focus on increasing federal land, continuously with large fires over apocalyptic, but it’s true. the years,” Fire Battalion Chief Rob Hazard About one-fifth of those, or 27 million, prescribed burns for wildfire prevention, told the board. “The extensive fire history in died between November 2016 and this county goes back decades and decades. ADecember 2017. More than 60 million died the but environmental groups say that’s not the answer We know that large wildfires are a permanent previous year. BY CAMILLIA LANHAM fixture in our county.” Most of the die-off has occurred in the Sierra The fuels, mostly chaparral and grass; shape Nevada, but forests on the Central Coast have in that time, the Chimney Fire, which burned state agencies are focused on increased fuel of the land, steep canyons that face the way the lost their own share of oak, pine, and fir stands. 46,000 acres and 49 homes. management techniques such as prescribed wind blows; and weather, hot, dry sundowner The U.S. Forest Service surveyed 4.2 million While the Thomas Fire held the record as the burns, environmental groups say the winds with low precipitation, give the Santa acres of national forest land between Monterey state’s largest fire since record keeping began, the government should be looking at where and Barbara front country a propensity for ignition.
    [Show full text]
  • Future Megafires and Smoke Impacts
    FUTURE MEGAFIRES AND SMOKE IMPACTS Final Report to the Joint Fire Science Program Project #11-1-7-4 September 30, 2015 Lead Investigators: Narasimhan K. Larkin, U.S. Forest Service John T. Abatzoglou, University of Idaho Renaud Barbero, University of Idaho Crystal Kolden, University of Idaho Donald McKenzie, U.S. Forest Service Brian Potter, U.S. Forest Service E. Natasha Stavros, University of Washington E. Ashley Steel, U.S. Forest Service Brian J. Stocks, B.J. Stocks Wildfire Investigations Contributing Authors: Kenneth Craig, Sonoma Technology Stacy Drury, Sonoma Technology Shih-Ming Huang, Sonoma Technology Harry Podschwit, University of Washington Sean Raffuse, Sonoma Technology Tara Strand, Scion Research Corresponding Author Contacts: Dr. Narasimhan K. (‘Sim’) Larkin Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences Laboratory U.S. Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station [email protected]; 206-732-7849 Prof. John T. Abatzoglou Department of Geography University of Idaho [email protected] Dr. Donald McKenzie Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences Laboratory U.S. Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station [email protected] ABSTRACT “Megafire” events, in which large high-intensity fires propagate over extended periods, can cause both immense damage to the local environment and catastrophic air quality impacts on cities and towns downwind. Increases in extreme events associated with climate change (e.g., droughts, heat waves) are projected to result in more frequent and extensive very large fires exhibiting extreme fire behavior (IPCC, 2007; Flannigan et al., 2009), especially when combined with fuel accumulation resulting from past fire suppression practices and an expanding wildland-urban interface. Maintaining current levels of fire suppression effectiveness is already proving challenging under these conditions, making more megafires a strong future possibility.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Wildfire on Drinking Water Utilities and Effective Practices for Wildfire Risk Reduction and Mitigation
    Report on the Effects of Wildfire on Drinking Water Utilities and Effective Practices for Wildfire Risk Reduction and Mitigation Report on the Effects of Wildfire on Drinking Water Utilities and Effective Practices for Wildfire Risk Reduction and Mitigation August 2013 Prepared by: Chi Ho Sham, Mary Ellen Tuccillo, and Jaime Rooke The Cadmus Group, Inc. 100 5th Ave., Suite 100 Waltham, MA 02451 Jointly Sponsored by: Water Research Foundation 6666 West Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235-3098 and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. Published by: [Insert WaterRF logo] DISCLAIMER This study was jointly funded by the Water Research Foundation (Foundation) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The Foundation and USEPA assume no responsibility for the content of the research study reported in this publication or for the opinions or statements of fact expressed in the report. The mention of trade names for commercial products does not represent or imply the approval or endorsement of either the Foundation or USEPA. This report is presented solely for informational purposes Copyright © 2013 by Water Research Foundation ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this publication may be copied, reproduced or otherwise utilized without permission. ISBN [inserted by the Foundation] Printed in the U.S.A. CONTENTS DISCLAIMER.............................................................................................................................. iv CONTENTS..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8–Fire Hazards
    CHAPTER 8–FIRE HAZARDS CHAPTER 8 – FIRE HAZARDS: RISKS AND MITIGATION CHAPTER CONTENT 8.1 Wildfire Hazards, Vulnerability, and Risk Assessment 8.1.1 Identifying Wildfire Hazards 8.1.2 Profiling Wildfire Hazards 8.1.3 Assessment of State Wildfire Vulnerability and Potential Losses 8.1.4 Assessment of Local Wildfire Vulnerability and Potential Losses 8.1.5 Current Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Efforts 8.1.6 Additional Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Opportunities 8.2 Urban Structural Fire Hazards, Vulnerability, and Risk Assessment About Chapter 8 Among California’s three primary hazards, wildfire, and particularly wildland-urban interface (WUI) fire, has represented the third greatest source of hazard to California, both in terms of recent state history as well as the probability of future destruction of greater magnitudes than previously recorded. More recently, with the catastrophic wildfire events of 2017 and 2018, fire has emerged as an annual threat roughly comparable to floods. Fire and flood fire hazards are surpassed only by high magnitude earthquake hazards, which typically occur less frequently but can result in extreme disaster events. For the 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP), the fire hazards risk assessment has been expanded to include separate discussions on wildfire hazards and structural fire hazards. Structural fire hazards can occur as a cascading hazard emerging from wildfires or earthquakes, or as an independent hazard event. In either case, fire hazard mitigation actions are crucial in minimizing potential risk. Preparation and implementation of Local Hazard Mitigation Plans (LHMPs) with linkage to a jurisdiction’s general plan, play an important role in the fire mitigation process.
    [Show full text]
  • Illuminating Botanical Blackholes to Inform Habitat Restoration in the Zaca and Jesusita Fire Scars
    Illuminating Botanical Blackholes to Inform Habitat Restoration in the Zaca and Jesusita Fire Scars Final Report September 2019 Prepared for: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation 1133 15th Street, N.W., Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20005 Prepared by: The Santa Barbara Botanic Garden 1212 Mission Canyon Road Santa Barbara, CA 93105 Recommended citation: Knapp, D. and S. Calloway. 2019. Illuminating botanical blackholes to inform habitat restoration in the Zaca and Jesusita fire scars. Unpublished final report prepared for the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation by the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden. Santa Barbara, California. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 3 List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... 4 List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. 5 Summary of Accomplishments ...................................................................................................... 6 Project Activities and Timing .......................................................................................................... 6 Preparation ......................................................................................................................... 6 Field work ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]