DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Draft Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine) Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields) Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam) Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment of the California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) Lasthenia burkei Blennosperma bakeri Limnanthes vinculans Jo-Ann Ordano J. E. (Jed) and Bonnie McClellan Jo-Ann Ordano © 2004 California Academy of Sciences © 1999 California Academy of Sciences © 2005 California Academy of Sciences Sonoma County California Tiger Salamander Gerald Corsi and Buff Corsi © 1999 California Academy of Sciences Draft Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine) Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields) Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam) California tiger salamander Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment (Ambystoma californiense) 2014 Region 8 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sacramento, California Approved: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region, Region 8, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Disclaimer Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, publish recovery plans, sometimes preparing them with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies, Tribal agencies, and other affected and interested parties. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Costs indicated for action implementation and time of recovery are estimates and subject to change. Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific actions, and may not represent the views or the official positions of any individuals or agencies involved in recovery plan formulation, other than the Service. Recovery plans represent our official position only after they have been signed by the Director or Regional Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery actions. LITERATURE CITATION SHOULD READ AS FOLLOWS: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014. Draft Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain: Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine); Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields); Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam); Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment of the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento, California. vi + 132 pp. An electronic copy of this draft recovery plan is available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=D01T i Acknowledgements The recovery planning process has benefitted from the advice and assistance of many individuals, agencies, and organizations. We wish to sincerely thank and gratefully acknowledge the recommendations and assistance from the following individuals: Valary Bloom, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hattie Brown, Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation Stephanie Buss, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Dave Cook, Sonoma County Water Agency Gene Cooley, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Steven Detwiler, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lisa Ellis, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Michael Fawcett, Fawcett Environmental Services Kandis Gilmore, M.S. Student, Sonoma State University Sarah Gordon, Gordon Ecological Cay Goude, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Colin Grant, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Vince Griego, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Michelle (Jensen) Halbur, Pepperwood Preserve Ann Howald, Garcia and Associates Josh Hull, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rick Kuyper, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Valerie Layne, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Tracy Love, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Stacy Martinelli, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Geoff Monk, Monk Associates Ray Moranz, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Maureen Ryan, University of Washington Chris Searcy, University of Toronto Mississauga, Ontario Brad Shaffer, University of California, Los Angeles Christina Sloop, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture Larry Stromberg, Wetlands Consultant Luisa Studen, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Steve Tally, Restoration Consultant Pete Trenham, Western Washington University John Vollmar, Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting Betty Warne, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Scott Wilson, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Ted Winfield, Winfield and Associates ii Executive Summary CURRENT SPECIES STATUS We listed Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine), Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields), and Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam) as endangered in 1991 (56 FR 61173). The State of California also listed these species as endangered (L. burkei and L. vinculans in 1979 and B. bakeri in 1992) (CDFW 2014). We listed the Sonoma County California tiger salamander, which we identified as a distinct population segment (DPS), as endangered in 2003 (68 FR 13497). In 2011, we published a final rule designating critical habitat for the Sonoma County California tiger salamander (76 FR 54346). The State of California listed the California tiger salamander as threatened state-wide in 2009 (CDFW 2009). The Central California tiger salamander and the Santa Barbara California tiger salamander are federally listed; however, they are considered distinct entities (as DPSs), and are not addressed in this plan. HABITAT REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITING FACTORS These species occur predominantly on the Santa Rosa Plain, which is located in central Sonoma County, California, and is characterized by seasonal wetlands, predominately in the form vernal pools, and associated upland grassland habitat. Vernal pools form in depressions having a shallow, impermeable soil layer that restricts the downward movement of water. The pools have an outlet barrier that further causes ponding (CH2M Hill 1995) and may be connected and fed by shallow drainage pathways called “swales”. Vernal pools generally fill during winter rains and dry in late spring or summer. “Natural” vernal pools are those that are found occurring naturally in the landscape. “Created” vernal pools are those that have been constructed in an area that was not a vernal pool in the recent past (within the last 100 to 200 years) and that is isolated from existing vernal pools (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2005)1. The listed plants grow only in seasonal wetlands. The Sonoma County California tiger salamander uses seasonal wetlands during the breeding season, and the surrounding uplands year-round. The threats to Blennosperma burkei, Lasthenia bakeri, and Limnanthes vinculans, and the Sonoma County California tiger salamander that led to their listing as endangered are many-fold. These are discussed in Section II in detail, but the primary threats are the modification and destruction of suitable habitat due to urbanization, agricultural conversion, and competition with non-native plants. In addition to habitat loss, the fragmented condition of remaining Sonoma County California tiger salamander habitat restricts migration between aquatic breeding sites and upland non-breeding habitat, along with dispersal among aquatic breeding sites (Cook et al. 2005). Since 1991, these threats have continued to such an extent that many populations of the 1 Vernal pool creation is considered an experimental science because the extent to which entire vernal pool plant and invertebrate communities can be successfully recreated is still unknown (M. Showers, CDFW, in litt, 2005). iii listed plants and salamander appear to have been extirpated or severely reduced in numbers. RECOVERY PRIORITY Recovery priority numbers for listed species addressed in this recovery plan are determined per criteria published in the Federal Register (Service 1983) and are based on degree of threat, degree of conflict with construction or other development projects or other economic activity, recovery potential, and taxonomy. The recovery priority number for Blennosperma bakeri is 5C, meaning it is a full species exposed to a high degree of threat and conflict, with a low potential for recovery. Lasthenia burkei and Limnanthes vinculans are ranked 2C, meaning they are full species, are exposed to a high degree of threat and conflict, and have a high potential for recovery. The Sonoma County California tiger salamander is ranked as a 3C, indicating that this DPS faces a high degree of threat and conflict, and has a high potential for recovery. RECOVERY STRATEGY, GOAL, OBJECTIVES, CRITERIA AND ACTIONS NEEDED The species covered by this recovery plan, Blennosperma bakeri, Lasthenia burkei, Limnanthes vinculans, and the Sonoma County California tiger salamander, have naturally limited geographic ranges, and are further constrained by inhabiting naturally rare habitat within that geographic range. Because the main cause of the decline and the main current threat to all species is the loss and degradation of habitat, our recovery strategy focuses upon this threat. We will achieve recovery of these species by preserving high-quality habitat that provides essential connectivity, reduces fragmentation, and sufficiently buffers against encroaching development. Management of these preserved areas will provide additional protection to the habitat, and address non-habitat related threats. Surveys and habitat assessments (where
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 118/Monday, June 20, 2016/Notices
    39944 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Notices information collection described in Type of Request: Extension. programs and projects that increase the Section A. Form Number: N/A. supply of affordable housing units, Description of the need for the prevent and reduce homelessness, A. Overview of Information Collection information and proposed use: improve data collection and reporting, Title of Information Collection: Application information is needed to and use coordinated neighborhood and OneCPD Technical Assistance Needs determine competition winners, i.e., the community development strategies to Assessment. technical assistance providers best able revitalize and strengthen their OMB Approval Number: 2506–0198. to develop efficient and effective communities. Number of Frequency of Responses Burden hour Annual burden Hourly cost Information collection respondents response per annum per response hours per response Annual cost Application .................... 52 1 52 100 5,200 $0 $0 Work Plans ................... 23 10 230 18 4,140 40 165,600 Reports ......................... 23 4 72 6 432 40 17,280 Recordkeeping ............. 23 12 276 6 1,656 40 66,240 Total ...................... ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 11,248 ........................ 249,120 B. Solicitation of Public Comment DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND or telephone (202) 708–2290. This is not URBAN DEVELOPMENT a toll-free number. Persons with hearing This notice is soliciting comments or speech impairments may access this [Docket No. FR–5910–N–10] from members of the public and affected number through TTY by calling the toll- parties concerning the collection of 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877– information described in Section A on Collection: Veterans Home 8339.
    [Show full text]
  • Botanical Survey Report Horseshoe Pond Restoration Project Point Reyes National Seashore Marin County, California
    Botanical Survey Report Horseshoe Pond Restoration Project Point Reyes National Seashore Marin County, California Prepared By: Lorraine Parsons Point Reyes National Seashore Division of Natural Resources Management Point Reyes Station, CA 94956 May 17, 2002 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 REGULATORY BACKGROUND The purpose of this report is to provide background information regarding botanical resources within the Horseshoe Pond Restoration Project area (Proposed Project Area). Point Reyes National Seashore (Seashore) is preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Proposed Project. Background information in this report will be used to guide development and assess potential environmental impacts of the Proposed Project. As part of the EA, the Seashore must consider whether the Proposed Project could impact special status plant species, as well as special status wildlife species and other sensitive biological resources such as wetlands and riparian areas. Special status plant species include those that are legally protected under the federal and California Endangered Species Acts (ESA) or other regulations and species that are considered rare by the scientific community. Special status species are defined as: • plants that are listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under the California ESA (Fish and Game Code §2050 et seq.; 14 CCR §670.1 et seq.) and/or the federal ESA (50 CFR 17.11 for animals; various notices in the Federal Register [FR] for proposed species); • plants that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under the federal ESA (61 FR 7506 February 28, 1996); • plants that meet the definition of rare or endangered under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (14 CCR §15380) which includes species not found on state or federal endangered species lists; • plants that are designated as “species of concern” (former category 2 candidates for listing) by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny
    Outline of angiosperm phylogeny: orders, families, and representative genera with emphasis on Oregon native plants Priscilla Spears December 2013 The following listing gives an introduction to the phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants that has emerged in recent decades, and which is based on nucleic acid sequences as well as morphological and developmental data. This listing emphasizes temperate families of the Northern Hemisphere and is meant as an overview with examples of Oregon native plants. It includes many exotic genera that are grown in Oregon as ornamentals plus other plants of interest worldwide. The genera that are Oregon natives are printed in a blue font. Genera that are exotics are shown in black, however genera in blue may also contain non-native species. Names separated by a slash are alternatives or else the nomenclature is in flux. When several genera have the same common name, the names are separated by commas. The order of the family names is from the linear listing of families in the APG III report. For further information, see the references on the last page. Basal Angiosperms (ANITA grade) Amborellales Amborellaceae, sole family, the earliest branch of flowering plants, a shrub native to New Caledonia – Amborella Nymphaeales Hydatellaceae – aquatics from Australasia, previously classified as a grass Cabombaceae (water shield – Brasenia, fanwort – Cabomba) Nymphaeaceae (water lilies – Nymphaea; pond lilies – Nuphar) Austrobaileyales Schisandraceae (wild sarsaparilla, star vine – Schisandra; Japanese
    [Show full text]
  • More Mesa Plant Guide
    More Mesa Plant Guide Coastal Woodfern Miniature Lupine Sky Lupine Arroyo Lupine Dryopteris arguta 1 Lupinus bicolor 2 Lupinus nanus 3 Lupinus succulentus 2 Pinpoint Clover White-tipped Clover Deerweed Desert Lotus Trifolium gracilentum 4 Trifolium variegatum 5 Acmispon glaber 3 Acmispon strigosus 3 Chaparral Lotus California Blackberry Toyon California Rose Acmispon grandiflorus Rubus ursinus 6 Heteromeles arbutifolia 3 Rosa californica 3 grandiflorus 3 Sticky Cinquefoil California Coffeeberry Stinging Nettle Pigmyweed Drymocallis glandulosa Frangula californica 6 Urtica dioica 6 Crassula aquatica 7 glandulosa 3 Pygmy Stonecrop Narrowleaf Milkweed Seacliff Wild Willow Dock Crassula connata 3 Asclepias fascicularis 3 Buckwheat Rumex salicifolius 8 Eriogonum parvifolium 6 Willow Weed Dotted Knotweed California Goosefoot Pacific Pickleweed Persicaria lapathifolia 9 Persicaria punctata 10 Chenopodium Salicornia pacifica 11 californicum 3 Spearscale Big Saltbush Saltmarsh Sand- Prostrate Amaranth Atriplex prostrata 6 Atriplex lentiformis spurrey Amaranthus blitoides 13 lentiformis 3 Spergularia marina 12 Redmaids Miner's Lettuce Short Styled Thistle California Brittlebush Calandrinia ciliata 6 Claytonia perfoliata 3 Cirsium brevistylum 3 Encelia californica 3 Horseweed Marsh Baccharis Coyote Brush Mule Fat Erigeron canadensis 6 Baccharis glutinosa 6 Baccharis pilularis 3 Baccharis salicifolia 6 California Sagebrush Mugwort Western Ragweed California Cudweed Artemisia californica 3 Artemisia douglasiana 2 Ambrosia psilostachya 14 Pseudognaphalium
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix G Local Plant List 2013 APPENDIX
    Appendix G Local Plant List 2013 APPENDIX G LOCAL PLANT LIST PLANT LIST RECOMMENDATIONS Green Roofs Note: The following list is from the Green Roofs – Cooling Los Angeles: Resource Guide and provides vegetated roof plants applicable to Santa Barbara. For more information visit, http://www.fypower.org/pdf/LA_GreenRoofsResourceGuide.pdf. For roof garden plants, use sun and drought tolerant, self-sustaining native trees, shrubs and ecoroof plants. Common Name Scientific Name Gold Tooth Aloe Aloe nobilis Golden Barrel Cactus Echinocactus grusonii Hasse’s Dudleya Dudleya hassei Beavertail Prickly Pear Opuntia basilaris Blue-blad Cactus Opuntia violacea santa-rita Chalk Dudleya Dudleya Pulverulenta Felt Plant Kalanchoe beharensis Ice Plant Delosperma cooperii Lampranthus Lampranthus productus October Daphne Sedum sieboldii Oscularia Lampranthus deltoids Purple Stonecrop Sedum spathulifolium White Trailing Ice Plant Delosperma Alba Brown Sedge Carex testacea Deer Grass Muhlenbergia rigens Tussock Sedge Carex stricta Many species of agave Bioretention Areas, Rain Gardens, Planter Boxes, Infiltration Basins, Vegetated Swales, Vegetated Filter Strips, and Dry Extended Detention Basins: The plants listed in this section include native plantings that are suitable for areas that will receive short periods of inundation (e.g. 24 to 72 hours) as well as plants suitable for upland areas. Native Plantings – Trees (Can Handle Short Periods of Inundation) Common Name Scientific Name Western Sycamore Platanus racemosa Freemont Cottonwood Populus fremontii
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E Water Resources Technical Report
    Appendix E Water Resources Technical Report 1330 West Pico Blvd Project Water Resources Technical Report July 17, 2018 Prepared by: David J. Curtis, P.E., ENV SP PSOMAS 555 South Flower Street, Suite 4300 Los Angeles, California 90071 (213) 223-1400 (213) 223-1444 Fax Prepared for: Sandstone Properties 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Project Description ........................................................................................ 3 1.2 Scope of Work ............................................................................................... 3 2.0 Surface Water Hydrology ...................................................................................... 3 2.1 General Approach ........................................................................................... 3 2.2 Data Sources .................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Existing Site Conditions .................................................................................. 4 2.4 Proposed Site Conditions ............................................................................... 4 2.5 Hydrology Results ........................................................................................... 4 3.0 Surface Water Quality ............................................................................................ 5 3.1 General Approach ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Butte Co. Meadowfoam
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Air Force, respectively. All of the Fort Ord occurrences are on land within the Habitat Management Plan Habitat Reserve lands and will be conserved and managed in perpetuity (W. Collins in litt. 2005; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1997). The population at Travis Air Force Base, including over 20 acres of adjacent restored vernal pools, is protected as a special ecological preserve, with protective measures and appropriate management for the species provided in the Travis Air Force Base Land Management Plan. Seasonal managed cattle grazing has been returned to two conservation sites supporting Lasthenia conjugens: 1) the Warm Springs Seasonal Wetland Unit of the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge in Alameda County, and 2) the State Route 4 Preserve managed by the Muir Heritage Land Trust in Contra Costa County. The L. conjugens population at the Warm Springs Unit has declined during the last 10 years due to many factors including competition by nonnative plant species. During this time period, grazing, which occurred intermittently at the Warm Springs Unit since the 1800s, has been excluded by the Refuge until a management plan could be developed. The decline in the L. conjugens population at the Warm Springs Unit cannot be attributed to a single factor, but most likely results from the complex interaction of several variables including current and historical land uses, the abiotic environment, and annual climatic variation. The increasing dominance of nonnative grasses, however, coincides with the suspension of livestock grazing, suggesting that the lack of a disturbance regime may be a primary factor in the degradation of habitat for L.
    [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]
  • Tidal Marsh Vegetation of China Camp, San Pablo Bay, California Peter R
    AUGUST 2012 Tidal Marsh Vegetation of China Camp, San Pablo Bay, California Peter R. Baye1 ABSTRACT vegetation. Narrow high tidal marsh ecotones that borders terrestrial grasslands are locally dominated China Camp (Marin County, California) preserves by creeping wildrye (Elymus triticoides) and Baltic extensive relict stands of salt marsh vegetation rush (Juncus balticus), mostly on south-facing slopes. developed on a prehistoric salt marsh platform with Brackish tidal marsh ecotones above ordinary high a complex sinuous tidal creek network. The low salt tides are associated with freshwater discharges from marsh along tidal creeks supports extensive native groundwater and surface flows. Brackish marsh eco- stands of Pacific cordgrass (Spartina foliosa). After tones support large clonal stands of sedge, bulrush, hydraulic gold mining sedimentation, the outer and rush vegetation (Carex praegracilis, C. barbarae, salt marsh accreted. It consists of a wave-scarped Bolboschoenus maritimus, Juncus phaeocephalus, pickleweed-dominated (Sarcocornia pacifica) high Schoenoplectus acutus), intergrading with terrestrial salt marsh terrace, with a broad fringing low marsh freshwater wetlands and salt marsh. The terrestrial dominated by S. foliosa, including intermittent, vari- ecotone assemblages at China Camp are comparable able stands of alkali-bulrush (Bolboschoenus mari- with those of other prehistoric tidal marshes in the timus). Most of the extensive prehistoric salt marsh San Francisco Estuary, but China Camp lacks most plains within the tidal creek network also support native clonal perennial Asteraceae and halophytic mixed assemblages of S. pacifica, but high marsh annual forbs of the region’s remnant high tidal marsh zones along tidal creek banks support nearly continu- ecotones. Few globally-rare salt marsh plant popula- ous linear stands of gumplant (Grindelia stricta) and tions have been reported from China Camp within saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) with more diverse salt the National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR) and marsh forb assemblages.
    [Show full text]
  • Edible Seeds and Grains of California Tribes
    National Plant Data Team August 2012 Edible Seeds and Grains of California Tribes and the Klamath Tribe of Oregon in the Phoebe Apperson Hearst Museum of Anthropology Collections, University of California, Berkeley August 2012 Cover photos: Left: Maidu woman harvesting tarweed seeds. Courtesy, The Field Museum, CSA1835 Right: Thick patch of elegant madia (Madia elegans) in a blue oak woodland in the Sierra foothills The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its pro- grams and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sex- ual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250–9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Acknowledgments This report was authored by M. Kat Anderson, ethnoecologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Jim Effenberger, Don Joley, and Deborah J. Lionakis Meyer, senior seed bota- nists, California Department of Food and Agriculture Plant Pest Diagnostics Center. Special thanks to the Phoebe Apperson Hearst Museum staff, especially Joan Knudsen, Natasha Johnson, Ira Jacknis, and Thusa Chu for approving the project, helping to locate catalogue cards, and lending us seed samples from their collections.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Report City of Fort Bragg Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade
    BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORT CITY OF FORT BRAGG WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE 101 West Cypress Street (APN 008-020-07) Fort Bragg Mendocino County, California prepared by: William Maslach [email protected] August 2016 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORT CITY OF FORT BRAGG WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE 101 WEST CYPRESS STREET (APN 008-020-07) FORT BRAGG MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: Scott Perkins Associate Planner City of Fort Bragg 416 North Franklin Street Fort Bragg, California PREPARED BY: William Maslach 32915 Nameless Lane Fort Bragg, California (707) 732-3287 [email protected] Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... iv 1 Introduction and Background ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope of Work ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Location & Environmental Setting ................................................................................................ 1 1.4 Land Use ........................................................................................................................................ 2 1.5 Site Directions ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]