DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix C: Evaluation of Special-Status Species for Coverage

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix C: Evaluation of Special-Status Species for Coverage Appendix C Evaluation of Special-Status Species for Coverage in the Santa Clara Valley HCP/NCCP Appendix C Evaluation of Special-Status Species for Coverage in the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Table C-1 lists species recommended for coverage in the Habitat Plan. Table C-2 lists species considered but not recommended as covered species. Literature Cited Printed References California Natural Diversity Database. 2005. Occurrence information. RareFind, Version 3.0.3. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. California Natural Diversity Database. 2012. RareFind, Version 3.1.0 (Updated April 2012). Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. Leidy, R.A., G. Becker, B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical status of coho salmon in streams of the urbanized San Francisco Estuary, California. California Fish and Game 91(4). Moyle, P.B. 2002. Inland fishes of California. Revised and expanded. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. Draft recovery plan for vernal pool ecosystems of California and Southern Oregon. Sacramento, CA. Personal Communications Hillman, Janell. 2005. Botanist, Santa Clara Valley Water District, San José, CA. Launer, Alan. 2005. Research Scientist, Center for Conservation Biology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA. Padley, Doug. 2005. Wildlife Biologist, Santa Clara Valley Water District, San José, CA. Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan August 2012 C-1 05489.05 Table C-1. Species Recommended for Coverage in the Habitat Plan Page 1 of 3 a b Status Criteria Recommended State/ Covered Species CNPS Federal Range Status Impact Data Statusc Notes Invertebrates Bay checkerspot butterfly – FT Y Y Y Y Y Study area contains almost all known Euphydryas editha bayensis populations and habitat of species throughout range. Amphibians and Reptiles California tiger salamander CSC FT Y Y Y Y Y Known to occur in multiple locations in study Ambystoma californiense area (CNDDB 2005). California red-legged frog CSC FT Y Y Y Y Y Known to occur in multiple locations in study Rana aurora draytoni area (CNDDB 2005). Foothill yellow-legged frog CSC – Y Y Y Y Y Known from study area. Rana boylii Western pond turtle CSC – Y Y Y Y Y Known to occur in study area (CNDDB 2005); Clemmys marmorata likelihood of listing within the permit term is low to moderate. Birds Western burrowing owl CSC MBTA Y Y Y Y Y Known to occur in study area (CNDDB 2005); Athene cunicularia hypugea could become listed during permit term. Species is protected under MBTA; take of individuals not allowed. Least Bell’s vireo SE FE, Y Y Y Y Y Recent breeding records from Llagas Creek Vireo bellii pusillus MBTA area (CNDDB 2005). Suitable habitat present on Uvas Creek, on Pajaro River, and around Coyote Reservoir (D. Padley pers. comm.). Species is listed under MBTA but Special Purpose Permit can be acquired for take of individuals. Tricolored blackbird CSC MBTA Y Y Y Y Y Known to breed in region (CNDDB 2005); Agelaius tricolor high likelihood of occurring in study area. Species is protected under MBTA; take of individuals not allowed. Table C-1. Continued Page 2 of 3 a b Status Criteria Recommended State/ Covered Species CNPS Federal Range Status Impact Data Statusc Notes Mammals San Joaquin kit fox ST FE Y Y Y Y Y Known to occur occasionally at edges of study Vulpes macrotis mutica area (two records from 1975, Aug. 2002 record in Henry Coe State Park; CNDDB 2005). Plants Tiburon Indian paintbrush ST/1B FE Y Y Y Y Y Two occurrences west of Anderson Reservoir Castilleja affinis ssp. neglecta on Coyote Ridge (CNDDB 2012). Coyote ceanothus 1B FE Y Y Y Y Y Study area includes all three known Ceanothus ferrisiae occurrences and habitat of species throughout range (CNDDB 2012). Mount Hamilton thistle 1B – Y Y Y Y Y Forty occurrences in study area (CNDDB 2012; Cirsium fontinale var. campylon T. Marker, pers. comm.). Santa Clara Valley dudleya 1B FE Y Y Y Y Y Study area includes all known occurrences Dudleya abramsii ssp. setchellii (207) and habitat of species throughout range (CNDDB 2012; T. Marker, pers. comm.). Fragrant fritillary 1B – Y Y Y Y Y Eight occurrences on east side of Santa Clara Fritillaria liliacea Valley (CNDDB 2012). Loma Prieta hoita 1B – Y Y Y Y Y Fourteen occurrences in study area (CNDDB Hoita strobilina 2012). Smooth lessingia 1B – Y Y Y Y Y Thirty-nine occurrences in study area (CNDDB Lessingia micradenia var. glabrata 2012). Metcalf Canyon jewelflower 1B FE Y Y Y Y Y Ten occurrences, mostly in Santa Clara Valley Streptanthus albidus ssp. albidus (CNDDB 2012). Most beautiful jewelflower 1B – Y Y Y Y Y Thirty-nine occurrences in study area (CNDDB Streptanthus albidus ssp. 2012). peramoenus Table C-1. Continued Page 3 of 3 a b Status Criteria Recommended State/ Covered Species CNPS Federal Range Status Impact Data Statusc Notes Notes: b Criteria a Status Range: The species is known to occur or is likely to occur within the study area, State Status based on credible evidence, or the species is not currently known in the study area FP = Fully Protected. but is expected in the study area during the permit term (e.g., through range SE = State listed as endangered. expansion or reintroduction to historic range). ST = State listed as threatened. Status: The species is either: . SR = State listed as rare. listed under the federal ESA as threatened or endangered, or proposed for listing; . CSC = California special concern species (July 2005 list). listed under CESA as threatened or endangered or a candidate for such listing, or listed under the Native Plant Protection Act as rare; or Federal Status . expected to be listed under ESA or CESA within the permit term. Potential for MBTA = Migratory Bird Treaty Act. listing during the permit term is based on current listing status, consultation with FE = Federally endangered. experts and Wildlife Agency staff, evaluation of species population trends and FT = Federally threatened. threats, and best professional judgment. FC = Candidate for federal listing. Impact: The species or its habitat would be adversely affected by covered activities FPT = Federally proposed for threatened listing. or projects that may result in take of the species. FPD = Federally proposed for delisting. Data: Sufficient data exist on the species’ life history, habitat requirements, and FD = Federally delisted. occurrence in the study area to adequately evaluate impacts on the species and to SOC = Species of Concern (National Marine Fisheries Service develop conservation measures to mitigate these impacts to levels specified by designation). regulatory standards. California Native Plant Society Ranking Species proposed for coverage in the Plan were limited to those species for which 1A = Presumed extinct in California. impacts from covered activities were likely, in order to provide take authorization 1B = Rare or endangered in California and elsewhere. for the highest priority species. However, many other special-status species are expected to benefit from the Plan, as described in Chapter 5. 2 = Rare or endangered in California, more common c elsewhere. Recommended Covered Status 3 = Plants about which more information is needed. Y = recommended as covered species in the Habitat Plan. N = not recommended for coverage in the Habitat Plan. Sources: California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2005. RareFind 3, Version 3.0.3. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2012. RareFind 3, Version 3.1.0 (Updated April 2012). Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. Marker, Timothy. Manager of environmental engineering. Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne. January 22, 2007—Monitoring data provided in a letter to Jones & Stokes from United Technologies Corporation-Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne. Table C-2. Species Considered but Not Recommended as Covered Species Page 1 of 14 a b Status Criteria Recommended State/ Covered Species CNPS Federal Range Status Impact Data Statusc Notes Invertebrates Opler’s longhorn moth – – Y N Y Y N Common in serpentine habitats throughout study area; able Adela oplerella to persist in very small (~0.1 ha) patches of habitat Vernal pool fairy shrimp – FT N Y N Y N Study area outside of range or current distribution but may Branchinecta lynchi occur; no CNDDB records; no known vernal pool habitat within study area Vernal pool tadpole shrimp – FE N Y N Y N No known vernal pool habitat within study area and no Lepidurus packardi records listed in CNDDB (2005) San Francisco lacewing – – ? N ? Y N Not expected to become listed during permit term Nothochrysa californica Unsilvered fritillary – – N Y N N N Petition for federal listing was denied. Most viable Speyeria adiaste adiaste populations have been extirpated in the study area (A. Launer pers. comm.) and it is unlikely to occur in the study area (Spencer et al. 2006); impact of covered activities uncertain; lack of data on habitat requirements and conservation needs Callippe silverspot butterfly – FE N Y N N N Coyote and Uvas/Llagas Watersheds outside of range or Speyeria callipe callipe current distribution. Some have suggested that S. callippe callippe extends to study area, but local collections to date have been S. c. comstocki (A. Lauer pers. comm.) Serpentine phalangid – – N N Y N N Not expected to become listed during permit term. All the Calcina serpentinea other many phalangids (described and undescribed) in the study area are not likely to be listed (A. Launer pers. comm.) Horn’s micro-blind harvestman – – Y N N? N N Endemic to Santa Clara County; petitioned for listing in Microcina horni 1990 but rejected due to lack of data; impacts of covered activities uncertain Jung’s micro-blind harvestman – – Y N N? N N Endemic to Santa Clara County; petitioned for listing in Microcina jungi 1990 but rejected due to lack of data; impacts of covered activities uncertain Ricksecker’s water scavenger beetle – – N N N N N Not expected to become listed during permit term and not Hydrochara rickseckeri found in the study area Bridges (= Coast Range) shoulderband – – Y N Y Y N Not expected to become listed during permit term Helminthoglypta nickliniana bridgesi Table C-2.
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]
  • Initial Study Appendix B
    Uvas Road at Little Uvas Creek Bridge Replacement Project Biological Assessment Biological Assessment Uvas Road over Little Uvas Creek Bridge Replacement Project (37C-0095/37C-0601 [new]) Near Morgan Hill, Santa Clara County, California 04-SCL-0-CR Federal Project Number BRLO 5937(124) Caltrans District 04 November 2015 Biological Assessment Uvas Road over Little Uvas Creek Bridge Replacement Project (37C-0095/37C-0601 [new]) Near Morgan Hill, Santa Clara County, California 04-SCL-0-CR Federal Project Number BRLO 5937(124) Caltrans District 04 November 2015 STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation and Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department Prepared By: ___________________________________ Date: ____________ Patrick Boursier, Principal (408) 458-3204 H. T. Harvey & Associates Los Gatos, California Approved By: ___________________________________ Date: ____________ Solomon Tegegne, Associate Civil Engineer Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department Highway and Bridge Design 408-573-2495 Concurred By: ___________________________________ Date: ____________ Tom Holstein Environmental Branch Chief Office of Local Assistance Caltrans, District 4 Oakland, California 510-286-5250 For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in Braille, large print, on audiocassette, or computer disk. To obtain a copy in one of these alternate formats, please call or write to the Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department: Solomon Tegegne Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department 101 Skyport Drive San Jose, CA 95110 408-573-2495 Summary of Findings, Conclusions and Determinations Summary of Findings, Conclusions and Determinations The Uvas Road at Little Uvas Creek Bridge Replacement Project (proposed project) is proposed by the County of Santa Clara Roads and Airports Department in cooperation with the Office of Local Assistance of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and this Biological Assessment (BA) has been prepared following Caltrans’ procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • AQ Conformity Amended PBA 2040 Supplemental Report Mar.2018
    TRANSPORTATION-AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Metropolitan Transportation Commission Association of Bay Area Governments MARCH 2018 Metropolitan Transportation Commission Jake Mackenzie, Chair Dorene M. Giacopini Julie Pierce Sonoma County and Cities U.S. Department of Transportation Association of Bay Area Governments Scott Haggerty, Vice Chair Federal D. Glover Alameda County Contra Costa County Bijan Sartipi California State Alicia C. Aguirre Anne W. Halsted Transportation Agency Cities of San Mateo County San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Libby Schaaf Tom Azumbrado Oakland Mayor’s Appointee U.S. Department of Housing Nick Josefowitz and Urban Development San Francisco Mayor’s Appointee Warren Slocum San Mateo County Jeannie Bruins Jane Kim Cities of Santa Clara County City and County of San Francisco James P. Spering Solano County and Cities Damon Connolly Sam Liccardo Marin County and Cities San Jose Mayor’s Appointee Amy R. Worth Cities of Contra Costa County Dave Cortese Alfredo Pedroza Santa Clara County Napa County and Cities Carol Dutra-Vernaci Cities of Alameda County Association of Bay Area Governments Supervisor David Rabbit Supervisor David Cortese Councilmember Pradeep Gupta ABAG President Santa Clara City of South San Francisco / County of Sonoma San Mateo Supervisor Erin Hannigan Mayor Greg Scharff Solano Mayor Liz Gibbons ABAG Vice President City of Campbell / Santa Clara City of Palo Alto Representatives From Mayor Len Augustine Cities in Each County City of Vacaville
    [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]
  • 1982 Flood Report
    GB 1399.4 S383 R4 1982 I ; CLARA VAltEY WATER DISlRIDl LIBRARY 5750 ALMADEN EXPRESSYIAY SAN JOSE. CAUFORN!A 9Sll8 REPORT ON FLOODING AND FLOOD RELATED DAMAGES IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY January 1 to April 30, 1982 Prepared by John H. Sutcliffe Acting Division Engineer Operations Division With Contributions From Michael McNeely Division Engineer Design Division and Jeanette Scanlon Assistant Civil Engineer Design Division Under the Direction of Leo F. Cournoyer Assistant Operations and Maintenance Manager and Daniel F. Kriege Operations and Maintenance Manager August 24, 1982 DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Arthur T. Pfeiffer, Chairman District 1 James J. Lenihan District 5 Patrick T. Ferraro District 2 Sio Sanchez. Vice Chairman At Large Robert W. Gross District 3 Audrey H. Fisher At large Maurice E. Dullea District 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCrfION .......................... a ••••••••••••••••••• 4 •• Ill • 1 STORM OF JANUARY 3-5, 1982 .•.•.•.•.•••••••.••••••••.••.••.••.••••. 3 STORMS OF MARCH 31 THROUGH APRIL 13, 1982 ••.....••••••.•••••••••••• 7 SUMMARY e • • • • • • • • • : • 111 • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1111 o e • e • • o • e • e o e • e 1111 • • • • • e • e 12 TABLES I Storm Rainfall Summary •••••••••.••••.•••••••.••••••••••••• 14 II Historical Rainfall Data •••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••• 15 III Channel Flood Flow Summary •••••.•••••.•••••••••••••••••••• 16 IV Historical Stream flow Data •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 17 V January 3-5, 1982 Damage Assessment Summary •••••••••••••••••• 18 VI March 31 - April 13, 1982 Damage
    [Show full text]
  • Botanical Priority Guidebook
    Botanical Priority Protection Areas Alameda and Contra Costa Counties the East Bay Regional Park District. However, certain BPPAs include Hills have been from residential development. public parcels or properties with other conservation status. These are cases where land has been conserved since the creation of these boundaries or where potential management decisions have the poten- Following this initial mapping effort, the East Bay Chap- \ ntroduction tial to negatively affect an area’s botanical resources. Additionally, ter’s Conservation Committee began to utilize the con- each acre within these BPPAs represents a potential area of high pri- cept in draft form in key local planning efforts. Lech ority. Both urban and natural settings are included within these Naumovich, the chapter’s Conservation Analyst staff The lands that comprise the East Bay Chapter are located at the convergence boundaries, therefore, they are intended to be considered as areas person, showcased the map set in forums such as the of the San Francisco Bay, the North and South Coast Ranges, the Sacra- warranting further scrutiny due to the abundance of nearby sensitive BAOSC’s Upland Habitat Goals Project and the Green mento-San Joaquin Delta, and the San Joaquin Valley. The East Bay Chapter botanical resources supported by high quality habitat within each E A S T B A Y Vision Group (in association with Greenbelt Alliance); area supports a unique congregation of ecological conditions and native BPPA. Although a parcel, available for preservation through fee title C N P S East Bay Regional Park District’s Master Plan Process; plants. Based on historic botanical collections, the pressures from growth- purchase or conservation easement, may be located within the and local municipalities.
    [Show full text]
  • CREEK & WATERSHED MAP Morgan Hill & Gilroy
    POINTS OF INTEREST 1. Coyote Creek Parkway Trailhead. Coyote Creek Parkway is a remaining sycamores dot the landscape, creating a beautiful setting to Springs Trail to follow Center Creek into its headwater canyons. The trail paved trail following Coyote Creek for 15 miles from southern San Jose savor the streamside serenity. will eventually cross over into the headwaters of New Creek as it rises to Morgan Hill. Popular with walkers, bikers, equestrians, and skaters, toward the summit of Coyote Ridge, 1.5 miles from the trailhead. much of this trail passes through rural scenery. View riparian woodland 4. Anderson Dam and Reservoir. Anderson dam, built in 1950, species such as big-leaf maple, cottonwood, sycamore, willow, and impounds Coyote Creek, the largest stream in the Santa Clara Valley. The 12. Coyote Lake. Streams carry water and sediment from the hills to the coast live oak along the trail. The oaks produce acorns, which were an dam backs up a deep reservoir, which can store 90,000 acre-feet of water, ocean; damming a stream blocks the flow of both. Sediment typically important source of food to the Native Americans, and still serve many the largest reservoir in Santa Clara Valley. Like SCVWD’s nine other deposits where the stream first enters the lake, forming a broad plain Coyote animal species today. reservoirs built between 1935 and 1957, Anderson Reservoir’s major called a delta. From the county park campground, enjoy a beautiful view purpose is to store wintertime runoff for groundwater recharge during the of the delta of Coyote Creek, Coyote Lake, and the valley below.
    [Show full text]
  • Countywide Trails Prioritization and Gaps Analysis
    Countywide Trails Prioritization and Gaps Analysis Informational Report March 17, 2015 County of Santa Clara Parks and Recreation Department CONTENTS I: Introduction 1 County Parks’ Role in the Implementation of the Countywide Trails Master Plan 1 II: Countywide Trails Master Plan Status 2 Progress since 1995 2 Alignment Status 5 Remaining Gaps 5 III: Trail Prioritization 9 Prioritization Process 9 Criteria-Based Prioritization 9 Priorities Identified by Cities 13 Priorities Identified by the County 16 Priorities Identified by other Partners 16 Countywide Trail Priorities 17 IV: Challenges and Strategies 18 Countywide Challenges 18 Funding 18 Property Acquisition 19 Pending Flood Protection Improvement Projects 19 Physical Barriers 20 Riparian Zone Permitting 20 Remediation 20 Trails within the Street Right-of-Way 21 V: Next Steps for County Parks 22 Role I: Lead Agency in the Unincorporated Areas 22 Role II: Funding Partner in Acquisition in the Incorporated Areas 25 Role III: Lead Partner in Updates to the CWTMP and Related Countywide Trail Planning Efforts 27 Appendix A: Tier I Trail Network Gaps Analysis 29 Appendix B: Assessment of Unincorporated Urban Pockets 43 I: INTRODUCTION In 2012 the County Board of Supervisors approved the Santa Clara County Parkland Acquisition Plan Update along with recommendations to prioritize countywide trails planning. To follow this direction, this Countywide Trails Prioritization and Gaps Analysis Report presents the status of the Santa Clara Countywide Trails Master Plan Update (CWTMP), adopted by the County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors on November 14, 1995. This report has the following goals: 1. Report the current status of the trail alignments in the CWTMP 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Uvas Creek, California, Downstream of a Reservoir
    San Jose State University SJSU ScholarWorks Master's Theses Master's Theses and Graduate Research Fall 2014 Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Uvas Creek, California, Downstream of a Reservoir Carole Ann Foster San Jose State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_theses Recommended Citation Foster, Carole Ann, "Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Uvas Creek, California, Downstream of a Reservoir" (2014). Master's Theses. 4494. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31979/etd.xj7k-ak6r https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_theses/4494 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses and Graduate Research at SJSU ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of SJSU ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES IN UVAS CREEK, CALIFORNIA, DOWNSTREAM OF A RESERVOIR A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Biological Sciences San José State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science by Carole A. Foster December 2014 © 2014 Carole A. Foster ALL RIGHTS RESERVED The Designated Thesis Committee Approves the Thesis Titled BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES IN UVAS CREEK, CALIFORNIA, DOWNSTREAM OF A RESERVOIR by Carole A. Foster APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES SAN JOSÉ STATE UNIVERSITY December 2014 Dr. Jerry J. Smith Department of Biological Sciences Dr. Paula Messina Department of Geology Steven V. Fend United States Geological Survey ABSTRACT BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES IN UVAS CREEK, CALIFORNIA, DOWNSTREAM OF A RESERVOIR By Carole A. Foster I sampled macroinvertebrates in May, July, and October 2008 in Uvas Creek, a reservoir-regulated stream in south Santa Clara County, California, to assess what factors (including canopy closure, turbidity, and stream flow) downstream of the reservoir were related to food availability for rearing juvenile Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss).
    [Show full text]
  • Abies Bracteata Revised 2011 1 Abies Bracteata (D. Don) Poit
    Lead Forest: Los Padres National Forest Forest Service Endemic: No Abies bracteata (D. Don) Poit. (bristlecone fir) Known Potential Synonym: Abies venusta (Douglas ex Hook.) K. Koch; Pinus bracteata D. Don; Pinus venusta Douglas ex Hook (Tropicos 2011). Table 1. Legal or Protection Status (CNDDB 2011, CNPS 2011, and Other Sources). Federal Listing Status; State Heritage Rank California Rare Other Lists Listing Status Plant Rank None; None G2/S2.3 1B.3 USFS Sensitive Plant description: Abies bracteata (Pinaceae) (Fig. 1) is a perennial monoecious plant with trunks longer than 55 m and less than 1.3 m wide. The branches are more-or-less drooping, and the bark is thin. The twigs are glabrous, and the buds are 1-2.5 cm long, sharp-pointed, and non- resinous. The leaves are less than 6 cm long, are dark green, faintly grooved on their upper surfaces, and have tips that are sharply spiny. Seed cones are less than 9 cm long with stalks that are under15 mm long. The cones have bracts that are spreading, exserted, and that are 1.5–4.5 cm long with a slender spine at the apex. Taxonomy: Abies bracteata is a fir species and a member of the pine family (Pinaceae). Out of the fir species growing in North America (Griffin and Critchfield 1976), Abies bracteata has the smallest range and is the least abundant. Identification: Many features of A. bracteata can be used to distinguish this species from other conifers, including the sharp-tipped needles, thin bark, club-shaped crown, non-resinous buds, and exserted spine tipped bracts (Gymnosperms Database 2010).
    [Show full text]
  • 19 BULL THISTLE (SPEAR THISTLE) PEST STATUS of WEED Nature Of
    In: Van Driesche, R., et al., 2002, Biological Control of Invasive Plants in the Eastern United States, USDA Forest Service Publication FHTET-2002-04, 413 p. 19 BULL THISTLE (SPEAR THISTLE) L.-T. Kok1 and A. Gassmann2 1Department of Entomology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061-0319, USA; 2CABI Bioscience Centre Switzerland, Delémont, Switzerland trast to those of Canada thistle. Leaves are covered PEST STATUS OF WEED with coarse hairs on the upper surface of the leaf Bull thistle, Cirsium vulgare (Savi) Tenore, is an in- blade, and are woolly below. Long spines extend from vasive thistle from Eurasia, found throughout the the leaf blade at the midrib and at each lobe. The leaf United States and in Canada from Newfoundland to bases extend downward on the stem forming long British Columbia. It is capable of invading fields, pas- wings. tures, wastelands and along roadsides, but will not Biology survive in cultivated fields. Bull thistle is a biennial species that reproduces by Nature of Damage seed. The root system consists of several primary Economic damage. Bull thistle occurs in overgrazed roots each with several smaller lateral roots. It does pastures, where heavy infestations can exclude live- not reproduce by vegetative means. Bull thistle is erect stock from infested areas. It also is common along and bushy in appearance, up to 2 m high, and has roadside and vacant fields. many spreading branches (Fig. 1). Stems are erect, Ecological damage. Although bull thistle is a stout, often branched, and hairy. Leaves are green on problem predominantly in disturbed areas, it also can the upper side, with woolly gray hairs on the under- be found in natural areas.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of Vascular Plants Endemic to California
    Humboldt State University Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University Botanical Studies Open Educational Resources and Data 3-2020 A Checklist of Vascular Plants Endemic to California James P. Smith Jr Humboldt State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Smith, James P. Jr, "A Checklist of Vascular Plants Endemic to California" (2020). Botanical Studies. 42. https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps/42 This Flora of California is brought to you for free and open access by the Open Educational Resources and Data at Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Botanical Studies by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A LIST OF THE VASCULAR PLANTS ENDEMIC TO CALIFORNIA Compiled By James P. Smith, Jr. Professor Emeritus of Botany Department of Biological Sciences Humboldt State University Arcata, California 13 February 2020 CONTENTS Willis Jepson (1923-1925) recognized that the assemblage of plants that characterized our flora excludes the desert province of southwest California Introduction. 1 and extends beyond its political boundaries to include An Overview. 2 southwestern Oregon, a small portion of western Endemic Genera . 2 Nevada, and the northern portion of Baja California, Almost Endemic Genera . 3 Mexico. This expanded region became known as the California Floristic Province (CFP). Keep in mind that List of Endemic Plants . 4 not all plants endemic to California lie within the CFP Plants Endemic to a Single County or Island 24 and others that are endemic to the CFP are not County and Channel Island Abbreviations .
    [Show full text]