DOCSLIB.ORG

Sonoran Desert in California

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sonoran Desert in California A Framework for Effective Conservation Management of the Sonoran Desert in California January 2009 This page intentionally left blank. A Framework for Effective Conservation Management of the Sonoran Desert in California Prepared by Prepared for The Nature Conservancy January 2009 A framework for effective conservation management of the Sonoran Desert in California This page intentionally left blank. Conservation Biology Institute ii A framework for effective conservation management of the Sonoran Desert in California TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................ vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................vii 1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................... 1 1.1. A Region of Under-Appreciated Natural Significance............................. 1 1.2. The Need for a Conservation Framework ................................................... 2 1.3. Overview of Project Approach......................................................................... 3 2. THE STUDY AREA........................................................................ 5 2.1. Geomorphology..................................................................................................... 5 2.2. Climate ..................................................................................................................... 6 2.3. Hydrology ................................................................................................................ 6 2.4. Land Use .................................................................................................................. 7 2.5. Land Ownership .................................................................................................... 8 3. CONSERVATION VALUES OF CALIFORNIA’S SONORAN DESERT ....... 11 3.1. Plant Diversity and Sensitive Plant Species............................................. 11 3.2. Faunal Diversity and Sensitive Animal Species...................................... 12 3.3. Landscape-scale Ecological Processes ....................................................... 12 3.3.1. Ecological Integrity and Ecosystem Services .................................. 12 3.3.2. Water and Watersheds............................................................................. 13 3.3.3. Eolian Processes and Sand Deposition .............................................. 14 3.3.4. Fire Regimes................................................................................................. 14 3.4. Cultural Resources............................................................................................. 15 3.5. Conservation Targets........................................................................................ 16 4. EXISTING MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION EFFORTS................ 21 4.1. Existing Management and Conservation Efforts .................................... 21 4.1.1. Federal Lands............................................................................................... 21 4.1.2. State Lands................................................................................................... 22 4.1.3. The Salton Sea............................................................................................ 23 4.1.4. Native American Lands ............................................................................ 24 4.1.5. Regional and Local Government Lands ............................................. 24 4.1.6. Non-governmental Organization Lands............................................. 25 4.1.7. Private Lands ............................................................................................... 25 4.2. Management Challenges ................................................................................. 26 4.2.1. Multiple Mandates and Constraints ..................................................... 26 4.2.2. Lack of Coordinated Management ....................................................... 26 4.2.3. Lack of Resources in a Vast Landscape............................................. 27 4.2.4. Diversity of Interests in the Desert..................................................... 27 4.2.5. Knowledge Gaps ......................................................................................... 28 5. THREATS AND CONSERVATION CHALLENGES ............................... 29 5.1 Land Conversion ..................................................................................................... 29 5.2. Habitat Fragmentation ..................................................................................... 30 Conservation Biology Institute iii A framework for effective conservation management of the Sonoran Desert in California 5.3. Land Use Impacts .............................................................................................. 31 5.3.1. Power Generation....................................................................................... 31 5.3.2. Mining ............................................................................................................. 32 5.3.3. Water Diversion and Groundwater Pumping ................................... 33 5.3.4. Recreational OHV Use............................................................................... 35 5.4. Invasive Non-native Species ......................................................................... 36 5.4.1. Plants .............................................................................................................. 36 5.4.2. Animals........................................................................................................... 39 5.5. Nitrogen Deposition........................................................................................... 41 5.6. Modified Fire Regimes ...................................................................................... 42 5.7. Climate Change................................................................................................... 42 6. A FRAMEWORK FOR CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT ...................... 45 6.1. Describing the Current Conservation Landscape................................... 45 6.1.1. Biological Integrity of the Landscape ................................................. 45 6.1.2. Identifying Areas of High Conservation Value ................................ 45 6.1.3. The Current Conservation Landscape ................................................ 46 6.2. A Vision for Enhanced and Effective Conservation Efforts................. 47 6.2.1. Conservation and Management Objectives...................................... 47 6.2.2. Conservation Opportunities.................................................................... 47 6.3. Implementing the Vision ................................................................................. 61 6.3.1. Protecting and Building on Existing Investments.......................... 61 6.3.2. Promoting Collaborative Conservation............................................... 62 6.3.3. Conclusion..................................................................................................... 65 7. LITERATURE CITED ................................................................... 67 8. APPENDICES ............................................................................ 77 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1: Land ownership in the study area Table 3-1: Conservation targets Table 5-1: Acres and percentage of GAP categories within the U.S. portion of the study area Table B-1: Organizations and agencies contacted for input Table B-2: Digital data sources Table B-3: Gap vegetation communities in the study area, and combined categories selected as vegetation community conservation targets. Table B-4: Approach for spatially classifying threats. Table B-5: Conservation goal sets used for Marxan analysis LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A: The Role of the California Sonoran Desert in Conserving Transboundary Connectivity APPENDIX B: Methods for Developing a Framework for Conservation Management APPENDIX C: The Cultural Resources of the Sonoran Desert in California Conservation Biology Institute iv A framework for effective conservation management of the Sonoran Desert in California APPENDIX D: Scientific Names of Plants and Animals APPENDIX E: Existing Management and Conservation Efforts APPENDIX F: Acronyms Used in This Report LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1: Location of the Sonoran Desert in California. Figure 2-1: The Sonoran Desert, California, conservation assessment study area. Figure 2-2: Hydrology. Figure 2-3: Ownership. Figure 3-1: Conservation Targets: vegetation communities. Figure 3-2: Conservation Targets: palm oases, pupfish ponds, saguaros, sand dunes, and mesquite bosques. Figure 3-3: Conservation Targets: ciénagas, playas, and combined water-related habitats Figure 3-4: Focal Species: flat-tailed horned lizard and desert tortoise Figure 3-5: Focal Species: bighorn sheep, least Bell’s vireo, and birds of the Salton Sea Figure 3-6: Focal Species: Peirson’s milk-vetch and Triple-ribbed milk-vetch Figure 4-1: Lands with elevated protection (classified as GAP 1 and 2) Figure 5-1: Risk of land conversion and existing fragmentation Figure 5-2: Relative probability of renewable energy development Figure 5-3: Risk of groundwater and watershed impairment Figure 5-4: Relative probability of OHV activity Figure 5-5: Risk of tamarisk, Saharan mustard, burros, and livestock grazing Figure 6-1: Determination of conservation categories Figure 6-2:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cultural Landscape Planning: the Mexicali Valley, Mexico
    The Sustainable City VII, Vol. 1 457 Cultural landscape planning: the Mexicali Valley, Mexico R. I. Rojas-Caldelas1, C. A. Pena-Salmon1 & J. Ley-Garcia2 1Faculty of Architecture and Design, Autonomous University of Baja California, Mexicali, México 2Institute of Research in Social Sciences, Autonomous University of Baja California, Mexicali, México Abstract Initiating around the eighties, the academic training of landscape architects in Mexico is quite recent compared with the tradition in Europe and the U.S. Also new, is the development of landscape research conducted mainly by geographers, urban planners and other professionals trained in natural sciences, whose work is primarily oriented to land use management for urban development and conservation of natural resources or cultural heritage purposes. However, the issue of the cultural landscape in Mexico has been little explored and lacks any integrated and multidisciplinary methodology to bring together social, cultural and natural processes for study. Therefore, this work focuses on the presentation of an appropriate methodology to address the issue of the evolving cultural landscape of the Valley of Mexicali. This work has been developed into three stages: characterization, multiple assessment of landscape and integration of strategies for their management. Thus progress will be presented for the characterization of physical units, landscape components through pictures, visual and spatial patterns of landscape that structure the region and its settlements. As a partial result it was found that multi-valued zones visually and spatially exist in the Mexicali Valley, as well as activities that give character and differentiate it from other agricultural areas of Baja California. Keywords: cultural landscape, landscape assessment methodologies, visual and spatial assessment, sustainable landscape planning.
    [Show full text]
  • Coachella Valley Conservation Commission
    COACHELLA VALLEY CONSERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, May 10, 2012 11:00 a.m. CVAG Offices 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 119 Palm Desert, CA 92260 (760) 346-1127 Teleconferencing will be available at: Imperial Irrigation District 1653 W. Main Street El Centro CA 92243 THIS MEETING IS HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE. ACTION MAY RESULT ON ANY ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA. 1. CALL TO ORDER - Chair Richard W. Kite, Councilmember, City of Rancho Mirage 2. ROLL CALL A. Member Roster P. 4 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for any person wishing to address the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission to do so. 5. COMMITTEE MEMBER/DIRECTOR COMMENTS 6. CONSENT CALENDAR` A. Approve Minutes of the April 12, 2012 Coachella Valley Conservation P. 5 Commission B. Receive and File 1. Quarterly Unaudited Financial Statements as at March 31, 2012 P. 8 2. Investment Report as at March 31, 2012 P. 9 3. Participating Special Entity Status for Southern California Edison Pole P. 10 Replacement Project 4. Attendance Roster P. 11 7. DISCUSSION / ACTION (Map 1 – Regional Context for Land Acquisitions is referenced in staff reports 7A through 7E. Map 1 is found only in Item 7A) A. Acquisition of approximately 2.74 acres from private landowners for a total P. 12 purchase price of $38,000 plus closing costs (continued from April 12 meeting) - Kevin McKernan, Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution 12-004 authorizing acquisition of 2.74 acres (2 parcels) within the CVMSHCP Conservation Areas for a total purchase price of $38,000 and an additional amount not expected to exceed $1,000 for closing costs, and authorize the Executive Director or Chair to sign documents and take such actions as necessary to effect the conveyance.
    [Show full text]
  • Sonoran Desert GEORGE GENTRY/FWSGEORGE the Sonoran Desert Has 2,000 Endemic Plant Species—More Than Anywhere Else in North America
    in the shadow of the wall: borderlands conservation hotspots on the line Borderlands Conservation Hotspot 2. Sonoran Desert GEORGE GENTRY/FWSGEORGE The Sonoran Desert has 2,000 endemic plant species—more than anywhere else in North America. hink deserts are wastelands? A visit to one of the national monuments or national wildlife refuges in the Sonoran Desert could change your mind. These borderlands are teeming with plants and animals impressively adapted to extreme conditions. T During your visit you might encounter a biologist, a volunteer or a local activist in awe of the place and dedicated to protecting it. The Sonoran Desert is so important to the natural heritage of the United States and Mexico that both countries are vested in conservation lands and programs and on a joint mission to preserve it. “A border wall,” says one conservation coalition leader, “harms our mission” (Campbell 2017). The Sonoran Desert is one of the largest intact wild areas mountains, where they find nesting cavities and swoop in the country, 100,387 square miles stretching across the between cactuses and trees to hunt lizards and other prey. southwestern United States and northwestern Mexico. This Rare desert bighorn sheep stick to the steep, rocky slopes of desert is renowned for columnar cactuses like saguaro, organ isolated desert mountain ranges where they keep a watchful pipe and cardón. Lesser known is the fact that the Sonoran eye for predators. One of the most endangered mammals in Desert has more endemic plant species—2,000—than North America, Sonoran pronghorn still occasionally cross anywhere else in North America (Nabhan 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Providence Mountains State Recreation Area 38200 Essex Road Or P.O
    Our Mission Providence The mission of California State Parks is to provide for the health, inspiration and In the middle of the education of the people of California by helping Mountains to preserve the state’s extraordinary biological Mojave Desert, Jack and diversity, protecting its most valued natural and State Recreation Area cultural resources, and creating opportunities Ida Mitchell shared with for high-quality outdoor recreation. thousands of fortunate visitors the cool beauty of the caverns’ magnificent “draperies” and “coral California State Parks supports equal access. pipes” formations. Prior to arrival, visitors with disabilities who need assistance should contact the park at (760) 928-2586. If you need this publication in an alternate format, contact [email protected]. CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS P.O. Box 942896 Sacramento, CA 94296-0001 For information call: (800) 777-0369 (916) 653-6995, outside the U.S. 711, TTY relay service www.parks.ca.gov Providence Mountains State Recreation Area 38200 Essex Road or P.O. Box 1 Essex, CA 92332 • (760) 928-2586 © 2010 California State Parks (Rev. 2017) V isitors to Providence Mountains State that left abundant shell-covered organisms Recreation Area are greeted by the sight on the sea floor. of jagged slopes of gray limestone, topped The shells and plant materials that settled by volcanic peaks of red rhyolite. Located on the sea bottom eventually became on the eastern slope of the Providence limestone. As the restless land heaved Mountains Range, the park lies within the upward, these formations were pushed boundaries of the 1.6-million acre Mojave above the level of the former ocean bed.
    [Show full text]
  • Geographical Names and Sustainable Tourism
    No. 59 NOVEMBERNo. 59 NOVEMBER 2020 2020 Geographical Names and Sustainable Tourism Socio- Institutional cultural Sustainable Tourism Economic Environmental Table of Contents The Information Bulletin of the United Nations MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRPERSON ............................................... 3 Group of Experts on Geographical Names (formerly Reconsidérer notre mobilité ......................................................... 3 UNGEGN Newsletter) is issued twice a year by the Secretariat of the Group of Experts. The Secretariat Reconsider our mobility ............................................................... 4 is served by the Statistics Division (UNSD), MESSAGE FROM THE SECRETARIAT ................................................. 5 Department for Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), Secretariat of the United Nations. Contributions “Geographical names and sustainable tourism ............................ 5 and reports received from the Experts of the Group, IN MEMORIAM ................................................................................ 7 its Linguistic/Geographical Divisions and its Working Groups are reviewed and edited jointly by the Danutė Janė Mardosienė (1947-2020) ........................................ 7 Secretariat and the UNGEGN Working Group on SPECIAL FEATURE: GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES AND SUSTAINABLE Publicity and Funding. Contributions for the TOURISM ......................................................................................... 9 Information Bulletin can only be considered when they are made
    [Show full text]
  • 37Th World Heritage Committee Session Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 16-27 June 2013
    Enhancing the IUCN World Heritage Programme II – Focus Europe 7-11 November 2013, Vilm, Germany 37th World Heritage Committee Session Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 16-27 June 2013 Boris Erg IUCN The 37th Session of the World Heritage Committee took place in the Kingdom of Cambodia, in Phnom Penh and Siem Reap-Angkor, from 16th to 27th June 2013. It was organized by UNESCO and the National Commission of Cambodia with the support of the Office of the Council of Ministers. World Heritage Committee The Committee is a governing body responsible for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. It decides on new inscriptions on the World Heritage List. It examines State of Conservation reports and also decides on the inscription or deletion of properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger. World Heritage Committee (ctd.) The 21 States Parties of the current World Heritage Committee are the following: Algeria, Cambodia, Colombia, Estonia, Ethiopia, France, Germany, India, Iraq, Japan, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Qatar, Russian Federation, Senegal, Serbia, South Africa, Switzerland, Thailand, and United Arab Emirates. During the 19th session of the General Assembly (19-21 November 2013), 12 seats will have to be filled. Outgoing members in 2013 are: Cambodia, Estonia, Ethiopia, France, Iraq, Mali, Mexico, Russian Federation, South Africa, Switzerland, Thailand, United Arab Emirates. IUCN’s advisory role Ahead of the annual World Heritage Committee meeting, IUCN submits its recommendations regarding the inscriptions of new sites following a rigorous evaluation process through which it works with members on the ground, scientific experts, independent feedback and desk reviews. IUCN also submits “state of conservation” reports for sites under threat or sites that are already on the danger list or that it considers should be.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Bacterias Promotoras De Crecimiento De Plantas Autóctonas Y Su Efecto En Prosopis Chilensis (Molina) Stunz
    Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas ISSN: 2007-0934 [email protected] Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias México Villegas-Espinoza, Jorge Arnoldo; Rueda-Puente, Edgar Omar; Murillo-Amador, Bernardo; Puente, María Esther; Ruiz-Espinoza, Higinio; Zamora-Salgado, Sergio; Beltran Morales, Félix Alfredo Bacterias promotoras de crecimiento de plantas autóctonas y su efecto en Prosopis chilensis (Molina) Stunz Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas, vol. 5, núm. 6, agosto-septiembre, 2014, pp. 1041-1053 Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias Estado de México, México Disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=263131532011 Cómo citar el artículo Número completo Sistema de Información Científica Más información del artículo Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal Página de la revista en redalyc.org Proyecto académico sin fines de lucro, desarrollado bajo la iniciativa de acceso abierto Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas Vol.5 Núm.6 14 de agosto - 27 de septiembre, 2014 p. 1041-1053 Bacterias promotoras de crecimiento de plantas autóctonas y su efecto en Prosopis chilensis (Molina) Stunz* Native plant growth promoting bacteria and their effect on Prosopis chilensis (Molina) Stunz Jorge Arnoldo Villegas-Espinoza1, Edgar Omar Rueda-Puente2, Bernardo Murillo-Amador3, María Esther Puente3, Francisco Higinio Ruiz-Espinoza1, Sergio Zamora-Salgado1 y Félix Alfredo Beltran Morales1§ 1Departamento Académico de Agronomía- Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur. Carretera al sur km 5.5, A. P. 19-B, C. P. 23080. La Paz, Baja California Sur, México. Tel. (612) 123 88 00. Ext. 5518, 5507, 5110 y 5509. ([email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]).
    [Show full text]
  • 4.4 Biological Resources
    LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT JULY 2013 LA ENTRADA SPECIFIC PLAN CITY OF COACHELLA 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 4.4.1 Introduction This section provides a discussion of existing biological resources within the boundaries of the La Entrada Specific Plan (proposed project) site and provides an evaluation of potential impacts to biological resources as a result of project implementation. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and federal Endangered Species Act (CESA and FESA, respectively), mitigation measures and other pertinent regulations will be prescribed where impacts are identified. Information in this section is based on the Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) (LSA, June 2013) included in Appendix E, and the Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters and the La Entrada Specific Plan Impact Analysis Technical Memorandum (both prepared by RBF Consulting, April 2013), which are included in Appendix E. 4.4.2 Methodology Literature Review and Records Search. LSA biologists examined a variety of database records and technical documents to determine the existence or potential occurrence of special-interest plant and animal species located on site and in the vicinity of the site. A records search of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) RareFind 3.1.0 (CDFG CNDDB 2012), and California Native Plant Society’s Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CNPS v7-12, August 10, 2012) for the Thermal Canyon, Rockhouse Canyon, Cottonwood Basin, Indio, and Mecca, California United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5- minute quadrangles was conducted on September 13, 2012. Other documents reviewed include: • Thomas Leslie Corporation (TLC): March 16, 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Imperial Irrigation Decision Support System Summary Report
    Draft Imperial Irrigation Decision Support System Summary Report Prepared for Imperial Irrigation District December 2001 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, California In Association with: Keller-Bliesner Engineering Davids Engineering Colorado State University Allen Engineering Contents Section Page 1.0 Introduction.........................................................................................................................1-1 IID Irrigation and Drainage Systems................................................................................1-1 Water Transfer Basics..........................................................................................................1-4 Imperial Irrigation Decision Support System..................................................................1-5 IID System Representation....................................................................................1-5 IIDSS Purpose .........................................................................................................1-5 Peer Review..........................................................................................................................1-6 2.0 Design of the Imperial Irrigation Decision Support System.....................................2-1 Irrigation System Overview...............................................................................................2-1 Delivery System......................................................................................................2-3 On-farm System......................................................................................................2-3
    [Show full text]
  • SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 4 County of Riverside
    SSUUPPEERRVVIISSOORRIIAALL DDIISSTTRRIICCTT 44 CCoouunnttyy ooff RRiivveerrssiiddee San Bernardino County ?u ?u COLORADO RIVER MISSION LAKES MISSION LAKES BLV DESERT HOT SPRINGS PIERSON BLV HACIENDA DR D R W E PAINTED I V HILLS NORTH N PALM SPRINGS I A T D N R U DILLON RD D T O R E M E N L N A E D B R A D C C M E GARNET L M A P DESERT EDGE P !"`$ IN T E O V DESERT B A A HAVEN JOSHUA TREE NATIONAL PARK S N I A SKY N I R D VALLEY D N I INDIO HILLS MIDLAND PALMS PARK AÌ EAGLE MOUNTAIN D R E N I VISTA CHINO L R V R D A JOSHUA TREE E R N W M O E INDIO HILLS P L R A R P D E AR T LING TON MINE RD A THOUSAND D D Af I PALMS L INDIO HILLS PALMS PARK L K O RAMON RD A N IS CATHEDRA L R E D R MESQUITE AVE R D CITY R D L R C L D PALM SPRINGS A O V INDIO HILLS E L A P PALMS PARK D O O H R B DESERT A O D B PALMS O FRANK SINATRA DR M ID R L I A V N D E R R T D COUNTRY CLUB DR D RANCHO S T R E S N I O N A R O T MIRAGE N T LAKE N O G U PA LM DESERT M TAMARISK N BERMUDA I O H Palm Desert Office M DUNES S E A L 4th District E W G V 44TH AVE FRED WARING DR A A E ^_ A L MILES AVE O DESERT D T R R INDIO CENTER I N O C O L P O L I T D T T T S S O JO R N S N H E W T U E 48TH AVE L A S T R Y O R D T E N U O R E B O D D N S L N S E A R I A P T F E COACHELLA 50TH AVE V R F I Y O I A F N 10 N E H G ¨¦§ A J S L P R A 6TH AVE 52ND AVE D R K VISTA V L B SANTA ROSA !"`$ N SAN BERNARDINO 54TH AVE I K NATIONAL FOREST LA QUINTA E V CHIRIACO SUMMIT O L D TH AVE AIRPORT BLV N R 10 YO C N H Blythe Airport CA U EAST A¦ THERMAL OX C B K o W CHUCKAWALLA BLYTHE AL o LAKE CAHUILLA
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Exposures
    Searching for the Pliocene: Southern Exposures Robert E. Reynolds, editor California State University Desert Studies Center The 2012 Desert Research Symposium April 2012 Table of contents Searching for the Pliocene: Field trip guide to the southern exposures Field trip day 1 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5 Robert E. Reynolds, editor Field trip day 2 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19 George T. Jefferson, David Lynch, L. K. Murray, and R. E. Reynolds Basin thickness variations at the junction of the Eastern California Shear Zone and the San Bernardino Mountains, California: how thick could the Pliocene section be? ��������������������������������������������������������������� 31 Victoria Langenheim, Tammy L. Surko, Phillip A. Armstrong, Jonathan C. Matti The morphology and anatomy of a Miocene long-runout landslide, Old Dad Mountain, California: implications for rock avalanche mechanics �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 38 Kim M. Bishop The discovery of the California Blue Mine ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 44 Rick Kennedy Geomorphic evolution of the Morongo Valley, California ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 45 Frank Jordan, Jr. New records
    [Show full text]
  • General Habitat Assessment, the Only Section 80072 Species Observed Was Barrel Cactus at the Morongo Site
    Habitat Assessments for the Public Safety Enterprise Communication Project Riverside, Orange, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties, California Prepared for: County of Riverside 3133 Mission Inn Avenue Riverside, CA 92507 Contact: Ms. Claudia Steiding, Senior Environmental Planner Prepared by: Michael Brandman Associates 220 Commerce, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92602 714.508.4100 Author: Steve Norton, Project Biologist Report Date: June 3, 2008 County of Riverside - PSEC Project Biological Resources Assessment Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: Introduction .......................................................................................................1 1.1 - Project Description.............................................................................................1 Section 2: Regulatory and Resource Management Requirements ..................................9 2.1 - Sensitive Species Directives..............................................................................9 2.1.1 - Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) ...........................................9 2.1.2 - California Endangered Species Act (CESA) ......................................10 2.1.3 - Western Riverside County Multiple Species Conservation Plan (WRMSHCP) ....................................................................................13 2.1.4 - Western Riverside County Habitat Conservation Plan for Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat (SKRHCP).................................................14 2.1.5 - Coachella Valley Multiple Species Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP)
    [Show full text]