DOCSLIB.ORG

San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project 2015-16 Isp Monitoring and Treatment Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project 2015-16 Isp Monitoring and Treatment Report 2015-16 SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY INVASIVE SPARTINA PROJECT 2015-16 ISP MONITORING AND TREATMENT REPORT San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project 2015-2016 Monitoring and Treatment Report Prepared by: Tobias Rohmer Olofson Environmental, Inc. & Drew Kerr 1830 Embarcadero Cove, Suite 100 Oakland, California 94606 For the State Coastal Conservancy San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project 1330 Broadway, 13th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 April 2018 Cover Photos (clockwise from top left) Biologists frequently use airboats to gain access to marsh interiors, as seen here within Bair Island Ecological Reserve in Redwood City, The range of hybrid Spartina alterniflora expanded as this clone was discovered on the shore of Point Buckler Island in Grizzly Bay. Native Spartina foliosa has established and expanded in several restoration sites of the South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project, as documented here in Pond A21 along Coyote Creek. This report was prepared for the California Coastal Conservancy’s San Francisco Estuary In- vasive Spartina Project with support and fund- ing from the following contributors: California Coastal Conservancy California Wildlife Conservation Board (MOU #99-054-01 and subsequent) Table of Contents 1. Introduction and Summary of Progress Through 2014 ...................................................... 1 2. Treatment and Monitoring Completed 2015-2016 .............................................................. 3 2.2. Bay-wide Inventory ........................................................................................................................... 3 2.3. Regional Inventory and Treatment Activities ............................................................................. 14 2.3.1. Region 1: Marin .............................................................................................................. 14 2.3.2. Region 2: San Francisco Peninsula .............................................................................. 20 2.3.3. Region 3: San Mateo ...................................................................................................... 24 2.3.4. Region 4: Dumbarton South ........................................................................................ 28 2.3.5. Region 5: Union City ..................................................................................................... 31 2.3.6. Region 6: Hayward ........................................................................................................ 34 2.3.7. Region 7: San Leandro Bay .......................................................................................... 37 2.3.8. Region 8: Bay Bridge North ......................................................................................... 41 2.3.9. Region 9: Suisun ............................................................................................................. 44 2.3.10. Region 10: Vallejo .......................................................................................................... 47 2.3.11. Region 11: Petaluma ...................................................................................................... 51 2.3.12. Region 12: Outer Coast ................................................................................................ 54 3. Special Topics ................................................................................................................... 57 3.1. Multi-Year Drought and Impacts on the ISP ............................................................................. 57 3.2. South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project .................................................................................... 58 3.3. New Tidal Marsh Restoration Sites outside SBSP ..................................................................... 59 3.3.1 Central Bair Island Restoration .................................................................................... 59 3.3.2. Sears Point ...................................................................................................................... 60 3.4. Restricted Treatment Sites ............................................................................................................. 60 3.5. Early Fringe Marsh Treatment ...................................................................................................... 63 3.6. New Infestations and Sub-Areas Added in 2015-2016 ............................................................. 64 3.7. Spartina patens Update ...................................................................................................................... 66 4. Considerations for 2017..................................................................................................... 68 Invasive Spartina Project vii 2015-16 ISP Monitoring and Treatment Report Table of Figures Figure 1. ISP Reporting Regions and 2015 survey efforts throughout San Francisco Bay Estuary. ..... 6 Figure 2. ISP Reporting Regions and 2016 survey efforts throughout San Francisco Bay Estuary. ..... 7 Figure 6. Distribution of invasive Spartina in 2016 across the 21 sub-areas of Reporting Region 5: Union City. Sub-areas with current infestation are labeled in pink, while those with no detection of invasive Spartina are labeled in green. ............................................................................................................ 32 Figure 7. Distribution of invasive Spartina in 2016 across the 27 sub-areas of Reporting Region 6: Hayward. Sub-areas with current infestation are labeled in pink, while those with no detection of invasive Spartina are labeled in green. ............................................................................................................ 35 Figure 8. Distribution of invasive Spartina in 2016 across the 19 sub-areas of Reporting Region 7: San Leandro Bay. Sub-areas with current infestation are labeled in pink, while those with no detection of invasive Spartina are labeled in green. ..................................................................................... 39 Figure 9. Distribution of invasive Spartina in 2016 across the 13 sub-areas of Reporting Region 8: Bay Bridge North. Sub-areas with current infestation are labeled in pink, while those with no detection of invasive Spartina are labeled in green. ..................................................................................... 42 Figure 10. Distribution of invasive Spartina in 2016 in the two sub-areas of Reporting Region 9: Suisun. Sub-areas with current infestation are labeled in pink, while those with no detection of invasive Spartina are labeled in green. ............................................................................................................ 45 Figure 11. Distribution of invasive Spartina in 2016 across the four sub-areas of Reporting Region 10: Vallejo. Sub-areas with current infestation are labeled in pink, while those with no detection of invasive Spartina are labeled in green. ............................................................................................................ 48 Figure 12. Distribution of invasive Spartina in 2016 across the four sub-areas of Reporting Region 11: Petaluma. Sub-areas with current infestation are labeled in pink, while those with no detection of invasive Spartina are labeled in green. ............................................................................................................ 52 Figure 13. Distribution of invasive Spartina in 2016 across the five sub-areas of Reporting Region 12: Outer Coast. Sub-areas with current infestation are labeled in pink, while those with no detection of invasive Spartina are labeled in green. ............................................................................................................ 55 Figure 20. Distribution map of the 11 ISP sub-areas in which treatment of hybrid S. alterniflora has been restricted since 2011. .............................................................................................................................. 62 Invasive Spartina Project viii 2015-16 ISP Monitoring and Treatment Report Table of Tables Table 1. 2016 Bay-wide summary of invasive Spartina area by species. ..................................................... 8 Table 2. 2016 Bay-wide summary of invasive Spartina area by ISP Reporting Region. ........................... 8 Table 3. Sub-areas with infestation history in which no invasive Spartina of any kind was detected in either 2015 or 2016. ........................................................................................................................................ 12 Table 3. Summary of 2016 invasive Spartina area by sub-area within Reporting Region 1: Marin. ..... 19 Table 4. Summary of 2016 invasive Spartina area by sub-area within Reporting Region 2: San Francisco Peninsula. ........................................................................................................................................ 23 Table 5. Summary of 2016 invasive Spartina area by sub-area within Reporting Region 3: San Mateo. ............................................................................................................................................................................ 27 Table 6. Summary of 2016 invasive Spartina area by sub-area within Reporting Region 4: Dumbarton South. ................................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Desilva Island
    SUISUN BAY 139 SUISUN BAY 140 SUISUN BAY SUISUN BAY Located immediately downstream of the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, Suisun Bay is the largest contiguous wetland area in the San Francisco Bay region. Suisun Bay is a dynamic, transitional zone between the freshwater input of the Central Valley rivers and the tidal influence of the upper San Francisco Estuary. This area supports a substantial number of nesting herons and egrets, including three of the largest colonies in the region. Although suburban development is rampant along the nearby Interstate 80 corridor to the north, most of the Suisun Bay area is protected from heavy development by the California Department of Fish and Game and a number of private duck clubs. Black- Active Great crowned or year Site Blue Great Snowy Night- Cattle last # Colony Site Heron Egret Egret Heron Egret County active Page 501 Bohannon Solano Active 142 502 Campbell Ranch Solano Active 143 503 Cordelia Road Solano 1998 145 504 Gold Hill Solano Active 146 505 Green Valley Road Solano Active 148 506 Hidden Cove Solano Active 149 507 Joice Island Solano 1994 150 508 Joice Island Annex Solano Active 151 509 Sherman Lake Sacramento Active 152 510 Simmons Island Solano 1994 153 511 Spoonbill Solano Active 154 512 Tree Slough Solano Active 155 513 Volanti Solano Active 156 514 Wheeler Island Solano Active 157 SUISUN BAY 141 142 SUISUN BAY Bohannon Great Blue Herons and Great Egrets nest in a grove of eucalyptus trees on a levee in Cross Slough, about 1.8 km east of Beldons Landing.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4- Biological Resources
    SECTION 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section discusses the existing sensitive biological resources of the San Francisco Bay Estuary (the Estuary) that could be affected by project-related construction and locally increased levels of boating use, identifies potential impacts to those resources, and recommends mitigation strategies to reduce or eliminate those impacts. The Initial Study for this project identified potentially significant impacts on shorebirds and rafting waterbirds, marine mammals (harbor seals), and wetlands habitats and species. The potential for spread of invasive species also was identified as a possible impact. 3.4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SETTING HABITATS WITHIN AND AROUND SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY The vegetation and wildlife of bayland environments varies among geographic subregions in the bay (Figure 3.4-1), and also with the predominant land uses: urban (commercial, residential, industrial/port), urban/wildland interface, rural, and agricultural. For the purposes of discussion of biological resources, the Estuary is divided into Suisun Bay, San Pablo Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay (See Figure 3.4-2). The general landscape structure of the Estuary’s vegetation and habitats within the geographic scope of the WT is described below. URBAN SHORELINES Urban shorelines in the San Francisco Estuary are generally formed by artificial fill and structures armored with revetments, seawalls, rip-rap, pilings, and other structures. Waterways and embayments adjacent to urban shores are often dredged. With some important exceptions, tidal wetland vegetation and habitats adjacent to urban shores are often formed on steep slopes, and are relatively recently formed (historic infilled sediment) in narrow strips.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District 1325 J Street Sacramento, California Contract: DACA05-97-D-0013, Task 0001 FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION
    CALIFORNIA HISTORIC MILITARY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES INVENTORY VOLUME II: THE HISTORY AND HISTORIC RESOURCES OF THE MILITARY IN CALIFORNIA, 1769-1989 by Stephen D. Mikesell Prepared for: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District 1325 J Street Sacramento, California Contract: DACA05-97-D-0013, Task 0001 FOSTER WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION Prepared by: JRP JRP HISTORICAL CONSULTING SERVICES Davis, California 95616 March 2000 California llistoric Military Buildings and Stnictures Inventory, Volume II CONTENTS CONTENTS ..................................................................................................................................... i FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................. iv PREFACE .................................................................................................................................... viii 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1-1 2.0 COLONIAL ERA (1769-1846) .............................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Spanish-Mexican Era Buildings Owned by the Military ............................................... 2-8 2.2 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Salinity Effects on Native and Introduced SAV of Suisun Bay and the Delta 2
    ! Section 1: Summary Information 1. Project title: Salinity effects on native and introduced SAV of Suisun Bay and the Delta 2. Applicant name: San Francisco State University, Romberg Tiburon Center for Environmental Studies 3. Contact person: Katharyn E. Boyer 4. Address: 3152 Paradise Drive 5. City, State, Zip: Tiburon, CA, 94920 6. Telephone #: 510-504-2424 7. Fax #: 510-558-0167 8. Email address: [email protected] 9. Agency Type: University (CSU) 10. Certified nonprofit organization: No 11. New grantee: Yes 12. Amount requested: $412,410 13. Total project cost: $412,410 (University rules do not allow formal attribution of closely related projects as match; however, two projects funded in recent weeks by the Delta Science Program [$160K] and NOAA Fisheries [$10K] represent substantial leveraging of requested funds) 14. Topic Area(s): Primary: Shallow water and marsh habitat; Secondary: X2 (freshwater- seawater interface), Non-native invasive species 15. ERP Project type: Primary: Research; Secondary: Monitoring, Pilot/Demonstration 16. Ecosystem Element: Primary: Tidal perennial aquatic habitat; Secondary: Invasive aquatic plants, Essential fish habitat, Mid-channel islands and shoals 17. Water Quality Constituent: Primary: Salinity; Secondary: Turbidity, Nutrients 18. At-Risk species benefited: Delta Smelt, Central Valley Fall-/Late-Fall-Run Chinook Salmon ESU, and Green Sturgeon ! "! ! 19. Project objectives: Characterize salinity and other abiotic factors in and outside native Stuckenia pectinata beds with comparisons to four invasive Egeria densa beds, and use mescosom experiments to evaluate and predict the effects of increased salinity on Stuckenia and Egeria, and their invertebrate assemblages. 20. Time frame: 3 years, beginning fall 2011 (depending on award/contracting schedule) Section 2: Location Information 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Tidal Marsh Recovery Plan Habitat Creation Or Enhancement Project Within 5 Miles of OAK
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California California clapper rail Suaeda californica Cirsium hydrophilum Chloropyron molle Salt marsh harvest mouse (Rallus longirostris (California sea-blite) var. hydrophilum ssp. molle (Reithrodontomys obsoletus) (Suisun thistle) (soft bird’s-beak) raviventris) Volume II Appendices Tidal marsh at China Camp State Park. VII. APPENDICES Appendix A Species referred to in this recovery plan……………....…………………….3 Appendix B Recovery Priority Ranking System for Endangered and Threatened Species..........................................................................................................11 Appendix C Species of Concern or Regional Conservation Significance in Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California….......................................13 Appendix D Agencies, organizations, and websites involved with tidal marsh Recovery.................................................................................................... 189 Appendix E Environmental contaminants in San Francisco Bay...................................193 Appendix F Population Persistence Modeling for Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California with Intial Application to California clapper rail …............................................................................209 Appendix G Glossary……………......................................................................………229 Appendix H Summary of Major Public Comments and Service
    [Show full text]
  • San Pablo Bay and Marin Islands National Wildlife Refuges - Refuges in the North Bay by Bryan Winton
    San Pablo Bay NWR Tideline Newsletter Archives San Pablo Bay and Marin Islands National Wildlife Refuges - Refuges in the North Bay by Bryan Winton Editor’s Note: In March 2003, the National Wildlife Refuge System will be celebrating its 100th anniversary. This system is the world’s most unique network of lands and waters set aside specifically for the conservation of fish, wildlife and plants. President Theodore Roosevelt established the first refuge, 3- acre Pelican Island Bird Reservation in Florida’s Indian River Lagoon, in 1903. Roosevelt went on to create 55 more refuges before he left office in 1909; today the refuge system encompasses more than 535 units spread over 94 million acres. Leading up to 2003, the Tideline will feature each national wildlife refuge in the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex. This complex is made up of seven Refuges (soon to be eight) located throughout the San Francisco Bay Area and headquartered at Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge in Fremont. We hope these articles will enhance your appreciation of the uniqueness of each refuge and the diversity of habitats and wildlife in the San Francisco Bay Area. San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge Tucked away in the northern reaches of the San Francisco Bay estuary lies a body of water and land unique to the San Francisco Bay Area. Every winter, thousands of canvasbacks - one of North America’s largest and fastest flying ducks, will descend into San Pablo Bay and the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge. This refuge not only boasts the largest wintering population of canvasbacks on the west coast, it protects the largest remaining contiguous patch of pickleweed-dominated tidal marsh found in the northern San Francisco Bay - habitat critical to Aerial view of San Pablo Bay NWR the survival of the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Plan
    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 34 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 68 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 59 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 50 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2600 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111 PHONE: (415) 352-3600 January 2008 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed and adopted by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission in 1968 and submitted to the California Legislature and Governor in January 1969. The Bay Plan was prepared by the Commission over a three-year period pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965 which established the Commission as a temporary agency to prepare an enforceable plan to guide the future protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline. In 1969, the Legislature acted upon the Commission’s recommendations in the Bay Plan and revised the McAteer-Petris Act by designating the Commission as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the Act and the Bay Plan for the protection of the Bay and its great natural resources and the development of the Bay and shore- line to their highest potential with a minimum of Bay fill.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident Meagan Bowis University of San Francisco, [email protected]
    The University of San Francisco USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center Master's Projects and Capstones Theses, Dissertations, Capstones and Projects Spring 5-20-2016 Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident Meagan Bowis University of San Francisco, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.usfca.edu/capstone Part of the Environmental Health and Protection Commons, Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons, Natural Resource Economics Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons, and the Other Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons Recommended Citation Bowis, Meagan, "Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident" (2016). Master's Projects and Capstones. 340. https://repository.usfca.edu/capstone/340 This Project/Capstone is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, Capstones and Projects at USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Projects and Capstones by an authorized administrator of USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This Master’s Project Northern San Francisco Bay Ecological Risk Assessment: Potential Crude by Rail Incident By Meagan Kane Bowis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
    [Show full text]
  • 4.9 Land Use and Planning
    Redwood City New General Plan 4.9 Land Use and Planning 4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING This section describes existing land uses in and around the plan area, as well as applicable land use policies and regulations. Information in this section was derived from a technical land use background report, Redwood City General Plan Land Use Report, prepared in June 2008 by Hogle-Ireland, Inc., as well as CirclePoint’s reconnaissance of the plan area. 4.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The plan area covered by the New General Plan consists of the corporate City limits as well as lands within the City’s sphere of influence. The plan area comprises approximately 38 square miles within a diverse physical setting, with flat lands near the Bayfront area; hills in the western portion of the City; and the San Francisco Bay, stream corridors, and tidal marshes in the north and east. Current Land Use Patterns The current land use patterns reflect the diverse physical features within the plan area, with most office, commercial and residential uses south and west of U.S. 101 while most open space and industrial uses are north of U.S. 101 or in the southwestern foothill areas. The City consists of residential neighborhoods with varying densities and characters; a conventional downtown with retail, restaurant, office, and civic uses; active industrial areas, including research and development and heavy industrial uses associated with the Port of Redwood City; open space areas; and civic areas, including County offices, parks, schools, and community centers. These uses have been clustered within five distinct areas of the City reflecting their specific geographies and function, described below.
    [Show full text]
  • F-1'7-03 Meeting
    MINUTE ITEM This Calendar Item No. <!I/ was approved as Minute Item No . .J.L. by the California State Lands Commission by a vote of _g__ to,L'at Its f-1'7-03 meeting. CALENDAR ITEM C11 A) 11 08/19/03 PRC 5438 WP 5438.1 S) 2 L. Burks AMENDMENT OF MASTER LEASE NO. PRC 5438.1 (ADDENDUM NO. 14) APPLICANT: Pacific Gas and Electric Company AREA, LAND TYPE, AND LOCATION: Master Lease: Over 100 waterway crossings throughout the State. Amendment: Delete from the Lease 6.07 acres, more or less, of tide and submerged lands in Honker and Suisun Bays, near Bay Point, Contra Costa and Solano counties. AUTHORIZED USE: Master Lease: Continued use and maintenance of distribution pipelines to transport natural and synthetic gas. Amendment: Removal of an existing 10-inch and 12-inch diameter pipeline known as PG&E Line 182. LEASE TERM: Existing Master Lease: 20 years, beginning January 1, 1978. A new lease is currently being negotiated. The existing lease is in holdover. CONSIDERATION: Existing Master Lease: $30,400 per year; with the State reserving the right to fix a different rent periodically during the lease term, as provided in the lease. SPECIFIC LEASE PROVISIONS: Liability insurance: $10,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $10,000,000 for property damage. n1 r 01. I lJs l 1U·"t REVISED 08/18/03 0 -1- CALEMDAR PAGE Mir<UT E PA GE CALENDAR ITEM NO. C11 (CONT'D) PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The Master Lease provides that the lease may periodically be amended by a series of addenda for the purpose of adding to and deleting from the lease the parcels of land necessary for the distribution of natural gas pipelines.
    [Show full text]
  • 18-1246 PC M 11-12-2020.Pdf
    Communication from Public Name: Daniel Gaines Date Submitted: 11/12/2020 12:54 PM Council File No: 18-1246 Comments for Public Posting: This ordinance, if passed, would essentially ignore our housing crisis and prioritize tourists over long term tenants and the wealthy over people who desperately need housing. As someone who works in homeless services, I see firsthand how the shortage of housing is a public health issue for the folks I serve, and we know that deaths of unhoused individuals have skyrocketed in recent months. LA is in a state of emergency when it comes to housing and I implore the council to alleviate the crisis of houselessness BEFORE focusing on lodgings for tourists who all have homes to return to. It is unconscionable for our City to consider removing housing from the long-term rental market at a time when tenants are being displaced and and homelessness is increasing. If passed, this ordinance will potentially remove 14,740 homes from the long term rental market in Los Angeles. (LA Times: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-12-19/los-angeles-vacation-rentals-city-council-considers-loosening-rules) In these dire times, we are asking PLUM to please consider who really needs their protection: working Angelenos trying to stay in their homes, or the wealthiest among us trying to profit from second homes they don’t actually live in? Communication from Public Name: Stella Grey Date Submitted: 11/11/2020 11:51 PM Council File No: 18-1246 Comments for Public Posting: Dear members of the Committee, Our neighborhood known as Bird Streets already bears the brunt of party houses epidemic.
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Ospreys Nesting on San Francisco Bay ANTHONY J
    STATUS OF OSPREYS NESTING ON SAN FRANCISCO BAY ANTHONY J. BRAKE, 1201 Brickyard Way, Richmond, California 94801; [email protected] HARVEY A. WILSON, 1113 Otis Drive, Alameda, California 94501; [email protected] ROBIN LEONG, 336 Benson Avenue, Vallejo, California 94590 ALLEN M. FISH, Golden Gate Raptor Observatory, Building 1064, Fort Cronkhite, Sausalito, California 94965 ABSTRACT: Historical records from the early 1900s, as well as surveys updated in the late 1980s and more recent information from local breeding bird atlases, in- dicate that Ospreys rarely nested on San Francisco Bay prior to 2005. In 2013, we surveyed nesting Ospreys baywide and located 26 nesting pairs, 17 of which were successful and fledged 44 young. We also report on findings from previous annual nest surveys of a portion of San Francisco Bay beginning in 1999. These results demonstrate a greater breeding abundance than has previously been recognized. The density of Osprey nests is highest near the north end of San Francisco Bay, but nesting also appears to be expanding southward. Nearly all of the nests observed were built on artificial structures, some of which were inappropriate and required nests to be removed. Over half of unsuccessful pairs experienced significant human disturbance. We recommend that conservation efforts focus on reducing this ratio, and to help do so, we urge erecting nest platforms as part of efforts to deter nesting when it conflicts with human activity. The Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) is a diurnal, piscivorous raptor that breeds or winters in a variety of habitats on all continents except Antarctica. Upon reaching maturity, the birds typically return close to their natal site to breed.
    [Show full text]