DOCSLIB.ORG

NCCP Response2nd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NCCP Response2nd City of RPV NCCP/HCP Nelson Public Comment Robert Nelson 6612 Channelview Court Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service eMailed: May 4, 2019 c/o Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office Mailed: May 4, 2019 2177 Salk Avenue Suite 250 Carlsbad, CA 90008 Attn: Karen Goebel, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office Public Comment on: Recirculation of Draft of Rancho Palos Verdes (RPV) Natural Community Conservation Plan / Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) and Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Los Angeles County, California, 90275 The view(s), opinion(s) and content expressed/contained in this email do not necessarily reflect the view(s), opinion(s), official positions or policies of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes or any of its employees, agents, contractors, Commissions or Committees (the “City”). It should be interpreted solely as the view(s), opinion(s) and/or work product of the individual author and should not be relied upon as the official position, direction or decision of the City. Requested Action: If asked now, my vote would be to do nothing, vote to stop our NCCP/HCP/EA effort. My reasoning: readers should know RPV was founded as a ‘low tax’ city. For our 42,000 residents and 14,000 parcels this million dollar expense will be on top of significant, on- coming multi-millions city expenses for underfunded pensions, new large civic center, stopping the landslide, building a new Ladera Linda facility including maybe buying soccer fields for parking and, very important, whatever new major items come up over project’s 40 - 50 year period. It is not enforceable since it covers the entire city (RPV has 2 Code Enforcement staff). Most citizens will never know when it is applicable and when it is not! Weekend projects will ignore it. Finally, as I’ve found out, RPVers do not like being told their city is forcing them to … and all are experts at work-arounds! . But – Thank you for this opportunity to respond to RPV’s actual draft NCCP/HCP/EA, now including changes RPV’s City Council made and staff technical and clarifying edits made but not included in the original circulated draft of last December. My understanding of this item: This NCCP is to provide RPV Incidental Taking Permits (ITP) covering Federally listed wildlife. The ‘Environmental Assessment’ (EA) lists: 2 species on the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA): **Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly (PVB - Glaucopsyche lygdamus palosverdesensis) El Segundo Blue Butterfly (ESBB - Euphilotes battoides allyni) and 1 Federal Threatened species: Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) These 3 species are the only Federally listed wildlife applicable to ITPs. **Actually, it’s 2 species. page 1 City of RPV NCCP/HCP Nelson Public Comment ** Appendix H: pg. H-50: “Currently the PVB is known to occur only at the Naval Fuel Depot in El Segundo, south of Palos Verdes Drive North, Malaga Dunes and was recently reintroduced to the Chandler Preserve.” That is, Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly is not found the Preserve so staff, consultants and Agencies are doing all this for two species, a butterfly and a bird – whose ‘Threatened’ classification is being challenged I am told! Six additional plants and one bird are shown as ‘Unlisted,’ and no Federal concerns for these species are found. Simply put, US Fish and Wildlife is being asked to include 7 not listed species to accommodate the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). Why? Is any other Palos Verdes city recognizing the 7? Remove these, CNPS invited themselves to this effort and just complicate enforcement, cost, etc.. Doubt if these could be readily identified anyway. Again, only 3 species are Federally listed. We are adopting RPV’s NCCP at a cost of millions to protect two Federal species found in the Preserve! Kinda reminds some of the smelt fiasco up north! My review and comments apply to the re-circulated Implementing Agreement and Appendix. I did this since there is no question our current Council has decided RPV must have this NCCP (after long years of consultant / staff efforts) and implementation is our next major step. Realizing that, to understand what to expect, I concentrated on Implementation. Two areas of my public comments: 1. Format whoops, typos and potential corrections. 2. Brief philosophical comments. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My review and comments on NCCP’s Implementation Agreement: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment format: page numbers as found in our ‘Track Change Version,” chosen so I could see the changes Council and staff made after March 2108 version commented on last December). Binder: Cover page states the order is 1. NCCP/HCP; 2. Implementing Agreement. In my copy these were reversed; the Implementing Agreement was the 1st section and the NCCP/HCP was in the 2nd section. Should be reversed to correct to the Cover Sheet or change the Cover Sheet listing order. Title Sheet: Date shown is March 2018; s/b July 2019 (the date our Council will approve the documents is July 16, 2019, (per their scheduled meeting items) – giving you only probably 8 weeks to incorporate any changes you want / need to the +800 pages! Table of Contents: Pgs. iii, iv and v. Two lists of exhibits; one (pg. v) clearly states what each exhibit covers; the other (pgs. iii, iv) simply says Exhibit A through Exhibit E without any further detail. So we need to state 1. what are these unstated exhibits and 2. correct Exhibit d contents. Pg. iii and iv: Now: As follows: no explanation of what each overs. Exhibit A page 2 City of RPV NCCP/HCP Nelson Public Comment Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Each letter should add what it covers and pages numbers as below: Exhibit A: pg. 54: Model Certificate of Inclusion Exhibit B: pgs. 55-60: City Interim Resource Protection Ordinance Exhibit C: pg. 61: Species Covered Under the Plan Exhibit D: pgs. 62-82: Management Agreement between RPV and PVPLC Following Exhibit d the Table of Contents omits the following additional Exhibits found in the Implementation Agreement. Since there are duplicate letters, change the letter designation shown and add each to the Table of Contents. Letter shown is what is in the Agreement’s Exhibits. Exhibit A: pgs. 83-84: Map of Preserve Properties Managed by PVPLC Exhibit B-1: pgs. 85-86: PVPLC Obligations (updated 11/30/2011) Exhibit B-2: pgs. 87-89: City of RPV Obligations (updated 11/30/2011) Exhibit B-3: pgs. 90-92: PVPLC Permissive Activities (updated 11/30/2011) Exhibit C: pgs. 93-104: Oceanfront Estates Management Requirements Exhibit D: pgs. 105-108: Donor Recognition, Naming Criteria, Sites * Pgs. 109-116: Amendments to RPV-PVPLC Management Agreement *belongs after Exhibit d, pgs. 62-82: “Management Agreement between RPV and PVPLC,” not here. ** Pgs. 117-118: Preserve Maps **belongs after 2nd Exhibit A, pgs. 83-84: “Map of Preserve Properties Managed by PVPLC Exhibit E: pgs. 119-132: Conservation Easement (RPV to PVPLC) Pg. v: Again lists some Exhibits with explanations but manages to avoid many! Page v should simply be deleted as correcting as above will complete the Exhibit list correctly. What got my attention was the Table of Contents using just letters with no content info, then calling out 57 pages of Appendix d “ donor Recognition, Naming Criteria, Sites.” I know better! We don’t have anywhere near 57 pages of Donors! So when I got into those pages I found what should be and is listed above! Your call if you make those corrections. The Document: 1. Add Acronym list (to avoid reader bewilderment as to what NEPA, PAP, SSC, ESHA, PHMP, ACOE etc. are and their added complications. (In my former employment we had hundreds of acronyms but, if you used one, you first wrote it out then paren the acronym, for example, Rancho Palos Verdes (RPV). Should be mandatory here because many reading / implementing these requirements may not, in reality, have a clue what some acronyms mean. 2. NCCP covers all of RPV. Contrary to some Council members public statements, pg. 9 (4.42) clearly defines ‘Plan Area’ as “the boundaries of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes NCCP/HCP, consisting of approximately 8,616.5 acres within the CITY’S municipal boundaries , Los Angeles California , as depicted in Fig. 2-1 of the NCCP/HCP.” This diagram is of our entire city. page 3 City of RPV NCCP/HCP Nelson Public Comment Further clarification is in 2.17 on pg. 3: “The Plan developed by the CITY … encompasses the entire jurisdiction of the CITY (Plan Area) … approximately 8,616.5 acres … .” Council members need to be clear on this. They did away with our earlier ability to ‘opt out’ so we are all in. 3. Vague references: Throughout the Implementation doc the Plan (NCCP) is cited or referred to but without anything more than something like ‘Section 5.7 of the Plan.’ Normally you would expect a Plan title and page number to follow that reference as ‘”section 5.7: title, pgs. x-x”. I spent hours going back and forth from Implementation to the NCCP or Appendix double-checking and writing these details above these vague references! Specific pages: Pg. 15: 3rd sentence: ‘All of the lands to be dedicated to the Preserve are identified in Table 4-1 and figure 4-2 of the Plan … “ THESE REFERENCES ARE NOT IN THE IMPLEMENTATION DOC, THEY ARE IN THE NCCP DOC. Might want to make that clear. Readers could spend considerable time hunting for most references as they study the implementation requirements. But why don’t we show immediately in the Implementation doc what lands are covered? Why go to a 2nd doc to find that out? Pg.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nature Walks
    nature walks2017 nd 2 Saturdays january 14, 9 am White Point Nature Education Center & Preserve 1600 W Paseo Del Mar | San Pedro, CA 90731 | Tel: 310.561.0917 vicente bluffs reserve Hours: Wed, Sat & Sun 10 am - 4 pm Follow the bluff top from Family Nature Exploration: Every second Saturday (Free) 10 am Point Vicente to Oceanfront Third Wednesday Bird Walks: (Free-provided by Wild Birds Unlimited) 8:30 am Estates, an area containing Nature Walks with Naturalist: Every fourth Saturday (Free) 9 am restored coastal sage scrub Native Plant Sale: Every fourth Saturday 12 noon - 2 pm habitat. Great location for Workshops & Presentations: Different topic each month - For dates and to RSVP: pvplc.org sighting whales. Easy. RPV february 11, 3 pm George F Canyon Nature Center & Preserve 27305 Palos Verdes Drive East | Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 | Tel: 310.547.0862 sacred cove Hours: Fri 1- 4 pm; Sat & Sun 10 am - 4 pm Situated between First Saturday Family Hikes: Guided hikes through the canyon (Free) 9 am Portuguese Point and Fourth Wednesday Bird Walks: (Free-provided by Wild Birds Unlimited) 8:30 am Inspiration Point, this small Full Moon Hikes: Jan 13, Feb 10, Mar 12, Apr 9, May 7, June 9, July 8, Aug 6, Sep 3, Oct 6, cove features wonderful Nov 7, Dec 2. Must be age 9 and up ($12 person). For times and to RSVP: pvplc.org rock formations edged with tide pools and a channel into a sea cave. Strenuous. RPV june 10, 9 am october 14, 9 am Artists march 11, 2 pm alta vicente reserve lunada canyon white point/royal Explore 15-acre restoration Walk the trail in this quiet Plein air artists will be palms site with cactus wren neighborhood canyon in the painting on the preserves for the indicated walks.
    [Show full text]
  • RECORD PACKET COPY 180Th Day: Sept
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SOUTH COAST AREA 245 W. BROADWAY, STE. 380 Filed: March 28, 1996 P.O. BOX 1450 49th Day: HAlVED LONG BEACH, CA 90802·4416 RECORD PACKET COPY 180th Day: Sept. 24, 1996 {310) 590·5071 Staff: JLR-LOB Staff Report: Sept. 9, 1996 Hearing Date: Oct. 8-11 , 1996 STAFF REPQRT AND RECQMMENQATIQN ON APPEAL APPEAL SUBSTANTIAL ISSUE STAFF REPORT LOCAL GOVERNMENT: City of Rancho Palos Verdes LOCAL DECISION: Approval with Conditions APPEAL NO.: AS-RPV-96-061 APPLICANT: Portuguese Bend Beach Club Homeowners Association and City of Rancho Palos Verdes PROJECT LOCATION: 4100 Palos Verdes Drive South (Portuguese Bend Area) City of Rancho Palos Verdes PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Appeal by Lois Larue from decision of City of Rancho Palos Verdes granting permit with conditions to Portuguese Bend Beach Club Homeowners Association to permit continual remedial grading according to a specific 11 tontour grading plan" in order to prevent the toe of the Portuguese Bend Landslide from damaging the adjacent homes and Yacht Harbor Drive. APPELLANT: Lois Larue SUBSTANTIVE FILE DOCUMENTS: 1. City Coastal Permit No. 77 dated March 11, 1996 2. City Council Resolution No. 96-14 dated March 11, 1996 SUMMARY OF STAFF RECQMMENQATION: The staff recommends that the Commission find that the appeal raises tiQ Substantial Issue because the project. as conditionally approved by the City is consistent with Coastal Act policies regarding public access and the City's certified LCP policies regarding natural hazards and sensitive environmental habitat. Page 2 ,., AS-RPV-96-061 I.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft General Plan Document with Track Changes (PDF)
    DRAFT INTRODUCTION comparison to current General Plan Introduction 4/26/2018 version Note: This document compares the proposed Draft Introduction with the current General Plan Introduction. Changes are shown as follows: bold underline text for new text proposed to be added, strikethrough text for existing text proposed to be removed, and normal text for existing text to remain. 1 Palos Verdes Peninsula The City of Rancho Palos Verdes s located on the Palos Verdes Peninsula in the southwest tip of Los Angeles County. The City includes 12.3 square miles of land and 7-1/2 miles of coastline. One-third of the total land is vacant, with more than three-fourths of the immediate coastline land vacant. The Peninsula has a unique physiography, formed over millions of years of submerging and lifting from the Pacific Ocean. The residents of the Palos Verdes Peninsula are the beneficiaries of a unique geography, formed from millions of years of volcanic activity, plate tectonics and terracing from changing sea levels. The nine-mile wide Peninsula, once an island, the Peninsula, none miles wide by four miles deep, now rises above the Los Angeles Basin with a highest elevation at to a maximum of 1,480 feet, with uniquely terraced configurations and steep, rocky cliffs jutting upward 50 to 300 feet from the ocean. The forming of the Peninsula has resulted in the unique terrace configurations readily observable today and the steep, rocky cliffs at the ocean’s edge which rise from fifty to three hundred feet. Erosion has created contributed to the creation of numerous steep-walled canyons.
    [Show full text]
  • PV PENINSULA WATER RELIABILITY PROJECT Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
    Public Review Draft PV PENINSULA WATER RELIABILITY PROJECT Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared for November 2017 City of Rolling Hills Estates Public Review Draft PV PENINSULA WATER RELIABILITY PROJECT Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared for November 2017 City of Rolling Hills Estates 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 Contact: Jeannie Naughton, AICP 2121 Alton Parkway Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92606 949.753.7001 www.pcrnet.com Irvine Sacramento Los Angeles San Diego Oakland San Francisco Orlando Santa Monica Pasadena Seattle Petaluma Tampa Portland Woodland Hills DPCIB03.EP Table of Contents Page CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ......................................................................... IS‐1 ATTACHMENT A ‐ PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................ A‐1 A. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................ A‐1 B. Project Location and Surrounding Uses .................................................................................................................. A‐1 C. Environmental Setting .................................................................................................................................................... A‐1 D. Land Use and Zoning Designations...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy
    Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy January -- December 2010 PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE REPORT FOR THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES PO Box 3427 Palos Verdes Peninsula, NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PLAN California 90274 T 310-541-7613 F 310-541-7623 www.pvplc.org May 2011 Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy 2010 PVNP Report for the Rancho Palos Verdes NCCP TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND INFORMATION ........................................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Site Description ................................................................................................................................ 2 Management Plan .............................................................................................................................. 5 HABITAT RESTORATION AND MONITORING ............................................................................ 5 Habitat Restoration ......................................................................................................................... 5 Habitat Management Plan ....................................................................................................... 6 Additional Restoration .......................................................................................................... 11 Habitat Monitoring .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • O-11 Ken H. Osborne
    Ken H. Osborne 6675 Avenue Juan Diaz, Riverside, CA, 92509 May 22, 2015 Mr. Dennis Campbell County of San Diego Planning and Development Services 5510 Overland Avenue, Suite 110 San Diego, California 92123 Subject: Draft Environmental Impact Report, General Plan Amendment, and Specific Plan Amendment for Otay Ranch Village 13/Resort Village Impacts on the Federally Endangered Quino Checkerspot Butterfly. Dear Mr. Campbell Endangered Habitats League has asked that I review the proposed Otay Ranch Village 13/Resort Village project in its various alternative forms as described in the March 2015 draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), in light of any potential impacts that it (they) may have on the resident population of federally endangered Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Quino) on the project site. I am a known biologist with some depth of understanding in the biology, ecology, and conservation of this endangered species (Appendix). To this end, I will begin by providing my overall prognosis of implications for Quino with this project and evidence supporting my prognosis including detailed explanation of mechanisms of impact and illustration of example populations extirpated in the wake of similar developments. Although briefed in my introductory comments, a detailed description of Quino biology and ecology will be provided in the appendix as foundational material. After reviewing the DEIR, I have quickly and easily come to the conclusion that this project is not compatible with Quino conservation. Although I can’t go so far to say that this development would, by itself, cause the global extinction of Quino, it would certainly significantly contribute to that end. Even with Alternative G, it’s apparently minimal development footprint gives me concern.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservancy Timeline
    PALOS VERDES PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY TIMELINE 1988 Bill Ailor founds the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy as a 50 l (c)3 nonprofit corporation. Eleven local residents gathered together as the first Board of Directors of a nonpolitical group dedicated to the preservation of open space on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. 1989 Conservancy begins effort to create a 1,000-acre "Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve," to preserve the 53-acre Shoreline Park, and to dedicate the Lunada Canyon parcel. The first newsletter "Open Spaces" is published. 1990 Conservancy places $12.5 million for PV land preservation in County-wide measure. The measure fails, but brings recognition of PV open space issues. 1991 First Conservancy-presented Guided Nature Walk with over 300 people attended first monthly walk. First Executive Director is hired. 1992 20-acre Lunada Canyon is preserved with a major donation by the E.K. Zuckerman family. L.A County voters approve over $7 million for Peninsula open space preservation through the Conservancy-led L.A. County Measure A. 1993 28.5-acre Chandler Trust property preserved using I992 Measure A funds. First Conservancy-sponsored Children's Walk with over 100 children attending. Conservancy gathers nearly 10,000 signatures favoring CalPAW 94, which included a $4 million allocation for Peninsula open space. Measure did not pass, but put the Peninsula on the map as a critical area for land preservation. 1994 Chandler Trust lands dedicated as Linden H. Chandler Preserve. Conservancy spearheads first survey of community on open space preservation issues of over 600 residents shows over 60% would tax themselves to save land.
    [Show full text]
  • Visual Foxpro
    Appendix F Biological Resources Berths 302-306 [APL] Container Terminal Project ADP# 081203-131 December 2011 SCH# 2009071021 This page left intentionally blank Appendix F1 CNNDB Full Report Berths 302-306 [APL] Container Terminal Project ADP# 081203-131 December 2011 SCH# 2009071021 This page left intentionally blank California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Database Full Report with Sources for Selected Elements Aphanisma blitoides aphanisma Element Code: PDCHE02010 Status NDDB Element Ranks Other Lists Federal: None Global: G2 CNPS List: 1B.2 State: None State: S1.1 Habitat Associations General: COASTAL BLUFF SCRUB, COASTAL DUNES, COASTAL SCRUB. Micro: ON BLUFFS AND SLOPES NEAR THE OCEAN IN SANDY OR CLAY SOILS. IN STEEP DECLINE ON THE ISLANDS AND THE MAINLAND. 1-305M. Occurrence No. 1 Map Index: 37104 EO Index: 12882 Dates Last Seen Occ Rank: Fair Element: 2001-05-30 Origin: Natural/Native occurrence Site: 2001-05-30 Presence: Presumed Extant Trend: Unknown Record Last Updated: 2009-06-12 Quad Summary: San Pedro (3311863/073A) County Summary: Los Angeles Lat/Long: 33.72714º / -118.34703º Township: 05S UTM: Zone-11 N3732717 E375203 Range: 14W Mapping Precision: SPECIFIC Section: 21 Qtr: XX Symbol Type: POLYGON Meridian: S Area: 52.3 acres Elevation: 150 ft Location: PALOS VERDES PENINSULA; FROM NEAR PORTUGUESE BEND SOUTHWARD TO NEAR ROYAL PALMS BEACH PARK. Location Detail: SCATTERED COLONIES ALONG BLUFFS. MAPPED AS FIVE POLYGONS AT THE CNDDB. Ecological: STEEP TALUSED SLOPE WITH CISTANTHE MARITIMA, LYCIUM CALIFORNICUM, RHUS INTEGRIFOLIA, CALANDRINIA MARITIMA, DUDLEYA VIRENS, OPUNTIA LITTORALIS, O. POROLIFERA, AND MIRABILIS CALIFORNICA. Threat: GOLF COURSE AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, DIRT RD TO BEACH, EXOTIC PLANTS, AND DEWATERING FOR LANDSLIDE CONTROL THREATEN.
    [Show full text]
  • The Butterfly Project at America’S the Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly Was Listed As an Butterflyteaching Zoo Provides a Endangered Species in 1980
    THE PROJECT The Butterfly Project at America’s The Palos Verdes blue butterfly was listed as an ButterflyTeaching Zoo provides a endangered species in 1980. eclosion secondary captive rearing The Palos Verdes blue thrives on two host plants, site for the endangered locoweed and deerweed. This butterfly goes through Palos Verdes blue butterfly. one generation per year, with the adults emerging in The primary site is in San early spring, synchronously with the flowering of its foodplants. In the wild, the adults will live around 10 Pedro on federal land. Both days, during which time they will mate and lay eggs. sites are funded through The The eggs are oviposited mostly on Urban Wildlands Group by the the flowers of the foodplant US Defense Logistics Agency which is the preferred wings larval diet. The larvae (USDLA), and the US Navy hatch within 10 days expanding (USN). and eat for around a month, molting A recent shift in the care and several times. handling of the butterfly at The larvae will then seek out the primary site resulted in a sheltered a quadrupling of the captive space in which population. This provided to pupate. The an opportunity to open a adult males and mating females may be secondary site at America’s distinguished Teaching Zoo. by a difference in wing color, the males’ Students and staff of upper wing surface Moorpark College, including being iridescent blue and the the Exotic Animal Training females’ a darker charcoal gray. and Management Program at The butterfly’s coastal scrub habitat on the Palos America’s Teaching Zoo, joina Verdes Peninsula has been shrinking under pressure distinguished team of partners from urban development.
    [Show full text]
  • Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy, a Partner in the Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly Recovery Program
    Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy, A Partner in the Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly Recovery Program The Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy is dedicated to maintaining open space on the Peninsula for the education and enjoyment of all. When the Palos Verdes blue butterfly was rediscovered on the Peninsula in March 1994, the Conservancy played a significant role in the recovery efforts to bring the butterfly back from near extinction. The Conservancy worked with a coalition of concerned entities including The Defense Energy Support Center, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Moorpark College, and The Urban Wildlands Group to establish an on-site captive rearing program. Together we worked to nurture this endangered species through open space preservation, habitat restoration, and culturing support. As a partner in the Palos Verdes blue butterfly program, the Conservancy: • Manages a nursery to grow plants for the captive rearing program • Manages and monitors current Palos Verdes blue butterfly habitat at Chandler Preserve in Rolling Hills Estates and the Defense Fuel Supply Point in San Pedro, CA. • Collects local native seed for propagation of nursery stock • Leads in native habitat restoration for the butterfly elsewhere on the Palos Verdes Peninsula • Involves community volunteers to help with nursery operations and habitat restoration • Promotes scientific research supporting the Palos Verdes blue butterfly recovery program Today, we are delighted with the announcement of the release of the butterflies at Friendship Park in San Pedro. With our continued efforts throughout the Peninsula, we are confident that the PV blue butterfly will thrive on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. Students observe Palos Verdes Jana Johnson working with a high A high school student at a potential blue butterflies.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C Biological Resources: Habitat Assessment
    Appendix C Biological Resources: Habitat Assessment Rancho Palos Verdes Portuguese Bend Habitat Assessment City of Rancho Palos Verdes, California Prepared for: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, California 90275 Prepared by: Rincon Consultants, Inc. 180 N. Ashwood Avenue Ventura, California 93003 Revised January 2011 This report produced on 50% recycled paper with 10% post-consumer content. Rancho Palos Verdes Portuguese Bend Habitat Assessment RANCHO PALOS VERDES PORTUGUESE BEND HABITAT ASSESSMENT CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................ 1 Habitat Types .......................................................................................................................... 5 Wildlife ..................................................................................................................................... 6 SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ........................................................................................................ 6 Special-Status Species Definitions .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SALVAGE of INDIVIDUAL PUPAE AS a MITIGATION MEASURE for LOSS of PALOS VERDES BLUE BUTTERFLY HABITAT the Federally Endangered
    116116 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 59(1), 2005, SALVAGE OF INDIVIDUAL PUPAE AS A MITIGATION MEASURE FOR LOSS OF PALOS VERDES BLUE BUTTERFLY HABITAT Additional key words: Glaucopsyche lygdamus palosverdesensis, Lycaenidae, environmental impact assessment, endangered species The federally endangered Palos Verdes blue butterfly Female Palos Verdes blue butterflies oviposit on (Glaucopsyche lygdamus palosverdesensis) had been either Lotus scoparius or Astragalus trichopodus. presumed extinct for 10 years when Mattoni (1994) Larvae pupate in the duff and soil beneath the plants rediscovered it on the Defense Fuel Support Point (Mattoni 1994, Mattoni and George 2002), which is (DFSP) in San Pedro, California. This single military similar to that reported for many other lycaenids (see installation constitutes the only consistently occupied New 1993, Wagner 1995, Weeks 2003). Earlier we locality for the species. G. l. lygdamus is vulnerable to recovered six pupae from a search under foodplants in a extinction. The population is exceedingly small; we 0.5 ha area to be destroyed as part of fuel pipeline estimate that the brood of adult butterflies each year repairs at DFSP (Mattoni 1999), and also have since 1994 is fewer than 300, with some years fewer recovered hundreds of pupae from the duff and soil in than 50 (Longcore and Mattoni 2003). outdoor cages used for captive rearing (Mattoni and Surveyors located Glaucopsyche lygdamus George 2002, Mattoni et al. 2003). palosverdesensis on a U.S. Navy-owned housing At the housing site, we inspected the duff and top 10 development adjacent to DFSP while negotiations were cm of soil under all Lotus scoparius plants in patches under way to dispose the housing property as surplus to (three or more plants together), all plants within 30 m of allow redevelopment.
    [Show full text]