Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN Annual Report 2015

Cover Description

On February 27, 2015, the RCA acquired a property known as TNC/Monte Cristo. The project is located north of Avocado Mesa Road in the unincorporated Tenaja area of the County of Riverside. The property size is 22.92 acres and was purchased with State and Federal grant funding. The property is located within Rough Step Unit 5, MSHCP Criteria Cell number 7029, within Tenaja of the Southwest Area Plan. The vegetation for this property consists of grassland, coastal sage scrub, and woodland and forest habitat. Within this area, species known to exist, include California red-legged frog, Bell’s sage sparrow, Cooper’s hawk, grasshopper sparrow, bobcat and mountain lion. The property is adjacent to previously conserved lands on the south and east and connects to conserved lands to the north and west. Conservation of this land will help to assemble the reserve for this area, protecting important grassland and woodland forest habitats that are vital to many species.

Western Riverside County MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN

ANNUAL REPORT

For the Period

January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015

Submitted by the

Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... ES-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION...... 1-1 1.1 Overview of the Plan ...... 1-1 1.2 Reporting Requirements ...... 1-1 1.3 Methods...... 1-3

2.0 HABITAT GAINS ...... 2-1 2.1 Conservation Summary ...... 2-1 2.2 Conservation by Jurisdiction...... 2-3 2.3 Conservation by Area Plan ...... 2-4 2.4 Conservation and Acquisition Trends ...... 2-6 2.5 Development Projects and Future Conservation ...... 2-6 2.6 Non RCA Conservation ...... 2-7

3.0 HABITAT LOSSES ...... 3-1 3.1 Habitat Loss Summary ...... 3-1 3.2 Rough Step Summaries ...... 3-6

4.0 ACTIVITIES WITHIN PLAN AREA ...... 4-1 4.1 Single-Family/Mobile Home Activity ...... 4-1 4.2 Public Works Projects ...... 4-2 4.3 Participating Special Entity Permits ...... 4-4 4.4 Criteria Refinement ...... 4-4 4.5 Agency Cooperation ...... 4-4 4.6 Clerical/Minor Amendments to the MSHCP ...... 4-6 4.7 Fires, Floods, Drought ...... 4-7 4.8 Activities Affecting Reserve Assembly ...... 4-8

5.0 FUNDING SUMMARY...... 5-1

6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES ...... 6-1 6.1 Management Goal ...... 6-1 6.2 General Management Activities ...... 6-1 6.3 Reserve Management Units ...... 6-2

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) TOC-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

6.4 Reserve Management Staffing ...... 6-3 6.5 RCA Properties Managed by the Parks District ...... 6-4 6.6 2014 Management Activities ...... 6-6 6.7 Lands Received through 404 Permits and Section 7 ...... 6-13 6.8 Future Management Activities ...... 6-22

7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES ...... 7-1 7.1 Goals and Objectives ...... 7-1 7.2 Inventory Phase and Long-term Monitoring Phase ...... 7-1 7.3 Monitoring Program Operations ...... 7-2 7.4 Summary of 2014 Monitoring Activities and Evaluation of Progress toward Achieving Measurable Objectives ...... 7-6 7.5 Suggested Changes and Feedback for Adaptive Management ...... 7-59

8.0 REFERENCES ...... 8-1

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A RCA MSHCP Technical Reports ...... A-1 1. GIS Methodology, Process and Procedures ...... A-1 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results ...... A-1 3. Clerical Amendments to the MSHCP ...... A-2 4. Agricultural Operations Database and Maps ...... A-2 5. Development Project – Future Conservation GIS Data Files ...... A-2 6. GIS Data Files ...... A-3 7. Conservation by Area Plan Subunits ...... A-4 8. Contact Information ...... A-9

LIST OF FIGURES ES-1 Funding Expended 12/31/2015 ...... ES-3 ES-2 Acres Conserved 12/31/2015 ...... ES-4 1 Cumulative Acreage Contributions by Federal, State, and Local Jurisdictions ...... 2-2 2 Western Riverside County MSHCP Rough Step Analysis Units ...... 3-7 3 Rough Step Unit #1 ...... 3-14

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) TOC-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

4 Rough Step Unit #2 ...... 3-17 5 Rough Step Unit #3 ...... 3-20 6 Rough Step Unit #4 ...... 3-23 7 Rough Step Unit #5 ...... 3-26 8 Rough Step Unit #6 ...... 3-28 9 Rough Step Unit #7 ...... 3-31 10 Rough Step Unit #8 ...... 3-35 11 Rough Step Unit #9 ...... 3-38 12 Reserve Habitat Management Units (HMU) ...... 6-2 13 Acres by Habitat Management Unit (HMU) ...... 6-3 14 Evandale Wilson Property ...... 6-6 15 EMWD San Jacinto River Relocation Area...... 6-11 16 DR Horton ...... 6-15 17 Turtle trapping 2015 ...... 6-17 18 BFW Corona Property Picture of Regrowth ...... 6-19 19 Southshore Property Looking East ...... 6-20 20 Cactus Wren Core Areas, Survey Locations and Detections in 2015 ...... 7-30 21 Grasshopper Sparrow Core Areas, Survey Locations and Detections in 2015...... 7-32 22 Burrowing Owl Burrows Monitored in the Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake Core Area during the 2015 Pair Count Surveys ...... 7-35 23 Tricolored Blackbird Breeding Colonies in 2015 and Historic Breeding Sites ...... 7-37 24 Western Pond Turtle Trapping Locations and Detections in 2013-2015 ...... 7-41 25 San Diego Black-tailed Jackrabbit Core Areas and Occupied Core Areas from 2008- 2015...... 7-44 26 Brush Rabbit Core Areas and Occupied Core Areas from 2008-2015 ...... 7-45 27 San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Trapping Locations and Detections in 2015 ...... 7-47 28 Carnivore Camera Station Locations in 2015 ...... 7-49 29 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and Delhi Fly Survey Areas and Detections in 2015 ..... 7-51 30 Vernal Pool Survey Areas in 2014/15 and Target Species Detections From 2008-2015...... 7-54 31 Covered Plant Species Detections during Rare Plant Surveys in 2015 ...... 7-58

LIST OF TABLES 1 Conservation Summary ...... 2-2 2 Habitat Gains by Jurisdiction (January 1, 2015 – December 31, 2015) ...... 2-3

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) TOC-3 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

3 Conservation Goals by Jurisdiction ...... 2-4 4 Conservation Goals by Area Plan ...... 2-5 5 Habitat Loss by Jurisdiction (New Losses to the MSHCP issued between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015) ...... 3-2 6 Habitat Losses by Jurisdiction Cumulative (June 22, 2004 – December 31, 2015) ...... 3-3 7 Agricultural Grading Summary ...... 3-5 8 Habitat Losses In/Out of Criteria Area January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 .... 3-6 9 Rough Step Acreage Summary ...... 3-9 10 Rough Step 1 Acreage Totals ...... 3-11 11 Delhi Soils Rough Step Acreage Analysis (Species Account Objective 1B) ...... 3-12 12 Rough Step 2 Acreage Totals ...... 3-15 13 Rough Step 3 Acreage Totals ...... 3-18 14 Rough Step 4 Acreage Totals ...... 3-21 15 Rough Step 5 Acreage Totals ...... 3-24 16 Rough Step 6 Acreage Totals ...... 3-27 17 Rough Step 7 Acreage Totals ...... 3-30 18 Rough Step 8 Acreage Totals ...... 3-33 19 Rough Step 9 Acreage Totals ...... 3-36 20 Public Works Projects (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) ...... 4-3 21 2015 RCA Program Operation Financial Summary ...... 5-1 22 Permittee Revenue (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) ...... 5-4 23 Summary of New Properties Managed by County Parks added to the Reserve Inventory as of December 2015 ...... 6-4 24 Access Agreements Obtained for Surveys in 2015...... 7-5 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring ...... 7-8 26 Conservation Goals by Area Plan Subunit...... A-5

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) TOC-4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) is a comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional plan that conserves vulnerable plant and animal species and associated habitats in western Riverside County. The Plan was approved in 2003 and the permits issued on June 22, 2004 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The MSHCP Planning Area encompasses approximately 1.26 million acres in western Riverside County. The Plan calls for the conservation and management of approximately 500,000 acres within the Plan Area. Of the 500,000 acres, approximately 347,000 acres are currently within Public/Quasi-Public (PQP) ownership. Achievement of the 500,000-acre goal depends on conservation of an additional 153,000 acres within the Plan Area.

The Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) was formed in January 2004 and assumed administration and implementation responsibility for the MSHCP in March 2004. The MSHCP requires that the RCA prepare and submit a report of its annual activities. This report provides a summary of activities for the reporting period of January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015. This is the 11th annual report that covers a full calendar year of Plan implementation.

Reporting Requirements In addition to reporting the amount of habitat conserved and developed during the reporting period, this report includes other information that measures MSHCP progress. At a minimum, the MSHCP specifies that the annual report include:

• Reserve Assembly activities in relation to the rough step formulas presented in Section 6.7 of the MSHCP and in accordance with species-specific Objective 1B of the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly. • Acres authorized for disturbance within the Plan Area during the reporting period. • Single-family and mobile home activity within the Criteria Area for the preceding year and cumulatively occurring under the expedited review process (ERP) for these activities presented in Section 6.1.1 of the MSHCP. • New or expanded agricultural operations within the Criteria Area for the preceding year and cumulatively occurring under the processes identified in Section 6.2 of the MSHCP. • Minor Administrative/Clerical Amendments approved during the reporting period in accordance with the procedures described in Section 6.10.2 of the MSHCP.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) ES-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

• Ongoing management and monitoring activities highlighting issues of concern and proposed remedies/actions. • Documentation concerning funding/collection of mitigation fees.

Major Activities in 2015 During 2015, the RCA focused on the following:

(1) In 2015 a total of 1,186 acres were acquired, donated, or obtained through the local development process. The total of Additional Reserve Lands (ARL) acquired for conservation under the Plan consists of 49,889 acres.

(2) The RCA continued Joint Project Reviews (JPR) for projects being processed by Permittees within the Criteria Area.

(3) The RCA updated its GIS database through the identification of 10,321 acres that have been designated as dedications for future conservation through the Joint Project Review (JPR) process for development.

(4) The RCA enhanced its GIS databases through the identification of 5,344 acres that are currently in conservation both inside and outside of criteria cells that are held by private and public entities other than the RCA. These lands are secured through Conservation Easements or Grant Deeds to the Conservation Entity.

(5) Regular meetings of the RCA Board and Executive Committee were held throughout 2015. Both the RCA Board of Directors and RCA Executive Committee met eight times during the year.

(6) The RCA and its partners continued the Monitoring and Management Programs.

(7) In 2015 the RCA worked with Geographics to continue working on functionality and design enhancements on the RCA website which is being used to provide additional information and notifications, including newsletters, to the public. The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and associated documents and reports are available in the Document Library. RCA Board and Committee Agendas, Staff Reports, Minutes, Resolutions and Presentations are posted to the RCA’s website. (http://www.wrc-rca.org)

(8) The RCA continued offering training for Permittees.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) ES-2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

(9) The RCA Board received the Fiscal Year 2014-15 (July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015) Financial Statements and Independent Auditors’ Report of the RCA with no reportable findings.

(10) In 2015 the RCA received no Participating Special Entities (PSE) applications.

(11) In 2015 Rough Step 7 - Riparian Scrub, Woodland, Forest and Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage are out of step due to grading permits being issued before land set aside for conservation was dedicated to RCA.

(12) In 2015 Rough Step 8 – Grasslands, remains out of Rough Step.

Reserve Assembly Summary The MSHCP will ultimately create a 500,000-acre Reserve of protected open space within western Riverside County. In order to build the Reserve from the 347,000 acres already conserved lands in Public/Quasi-Public ownership at the time the MSHCP was adopted (PQP lands), 153,000 acres of land will be conserved from the “Criteria Area.”

Since the MSHCP was adopted, the RCA and Permittees have conserved a total of 49,889 acres and expended a total of $469,176,851 including donation values for Conservation as shown in the next two figures. In 2015, 1,186 acres contributing to Reserve Assembly were acquired.

Figure ES-1 Funding Expended – December 31, 2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) ES-3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Total Funding Expended – December 31, 2015 $469,176,851 (Donation Values Included)

Figure ES-2 Acres Conserved – December 2015

|

Total Acres Conserved 49,886

Rough Step Summary At the beginning of 2015, the RCA had 36 of 37 vegetation categories in Rough Step. In 2015, the RCA acquired acreage in critical vegetation communities for Rough Step, developed more detailed procedures to reconcile specific vegetation types that were out of rough step and reviewed development projects to determine if losses had actually occurred on those projects. The RCA ended the year with 36 of 37 vegetation categories in Rough Step, with only Grasslands in Rough Step Unit 8 remaining out of Rough Step.

The “Rough Step” measurement tool is one measurement of performance of the MSHCP. The Rough Step measure is a tool to help direct conservation within vegetation communities of similar weather patterns, geographies, soils, and geologies as development occurs. The Rough Step measure is intended to ensure that conservation efforts are in balance with development. The Rough Step analysis functions as a signal where development is outpacing conservation and where conservation efforts therefore need to be focused.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) ES-4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Of the 37 Rough Step vegetation communities within the Plan Area, 34 are in Rough Step, and 3 are out of Rough Step. One of the JPR projects received grading permits before the conserved areas were dedicated to RCA. The losses in Riparian Scrub, Woodland, Forest and Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage will cause these categories to be out of step in Rough Step Unit 7 until the dedication process has been completed. Rough Step 8’s Grasslands have been out of Rough Step due to issues during the plan implementation. The RCA will continue to work toward acquiring properties with the appropriate vegetation category to address the Rough Step Unit that is not currently in Rough Step.

Reserve Management In 2015 the RCA continued its security, protection and enhancement of existing and new lands brought into the MSHCP Reserve. At the end of 2015, the RCA was managing approximately 31,872 acres of conservation lands. The RCA utilizes a contract with the Riverside County Regional Park and Open-Space District (District) to manage the RCA’s properties. Activities during the reporting period focused on the establishment and maintenance of access controls in high trespass areas, installation of fencing and gates, evaluation of newly acquired lands, and coordination with other management entities.

Management activities for the MSHCP occur on two levels: habitat/landscaped-based, and species-specific based. The MSHCP Management Team focuses on the balance between managing the overall landscape of the future 500,000-acre Reserve, along with making sure that specific species requirements are also met. In 2015 MSHCP Reserve management practices incorporated limited Adaptive Management methodologies to improve habitat or species knowledge (burrowing owl habitat management in the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area, habitat restoration maintenance at CALMAT, Eastern Municipal Water District San Jacinto River vegetation management for small mammals, seasonal pool enhancements). As the MSHCP Reserve builds out and as the Monitoring Program data is more complete, MSHCP Reserve Managers will be able to develop and incorporate the more Adaptive Management activities.

Monitoring Program The overall goal of the Biological Monitoring Program (Monitoring Program) is to collect data on the 146 Covered Species and associated vegetation communities to assess the MSHCP’s effectiveness at meeting conservation objectives and provide information to the Adaptive Management Program. The MSHCP (Volume 2, Species Accounts) includes species-specific objectives that are intended to provide for the long-term conservation of all Covered Species. Species objectives influence the type and intensity of monitoring that is conducted by the Monitoring Program. Management decisions or actions are triggered if species objectives or MSHCP goals are not met.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) ES-5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The MSHCP and its associated Implementing Agreement originally designated the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to serve as the Monitoring Program Administrator for the first eight (8) years of MSHCP implementation. In 2010 the RCA began funding the Monitoring Program Administrator, and at the end of FY 11/12 when the State Wildlife Grant ended, the RCA assumed funding for the entire Monitoring Program. Transition from inventory phase to long-term monitoring phase continued in 2015 but with primary focus on rotational long-term monitoring. For species with short reporting requirements, such as Quino checkerspot butterfly (annual) or coastal California gnatcatcher (every three years), long-term monitoring is already in place. For species with longer reporting requirements, such as Los Angeles pocket mouse (every eight years) and with species-specific monitoring objectives requiring significant development and testing, the transition from inventory phase to long-term monitoring phase is ongoing.

The strategy for long-term monitoring includes survey protocols that maximize efficiency by collecting information on multiple species where possible. For example, bird species co- occurring in similar habitat (e.g., willow riparian) during the breeding season can be detected using the same protocol. Some Covered Species occur in isolated pockets within the Conservation Area or are difficult to detect using standard survey protocols (e.g., Delhi sands flower-loving fly). Focused surveys are required for these species. The Monitoring Program will also make use of species habitat models to the fullest extent possible to make surveys optimally efficient and collaborate with partnering agencies conducting relevant research or monitoring for Covered Species to avoid overlapping efforts.

In 2015 the Monitoring Program recorded, either through focused surveys or incidental detections, 103 of 146 Covered Species. Since June 2004, a total of 141 of 146 Covered Species have been detected in the Conservation Area (129 as a result of focused Monitoring Program surveys, 10 incidentally observed by Monitoring Program biologists, and two additional Covered Species reported by partnering agencies).

SUMMARY The 2015 Annual Report provides a means of evaluating the effectiveness of MSHCP implementation and the success of the RCA during the year.

The reporting period for this annual report continues to reflect the state of the economy both locally and nationally. Western Riverside County has seen building activity severely curtailed in the past few years, but as the economy gets stronger, the RCA is starting to see more permits and fees from the cities. The RCA will continue its efforts in the next year to acquire critical vegetation communities and build linkages.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) ES-6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The RCA will continue to evaluate losses and gains for the reporting period and set acquisition priorities when possible within different Rough Step Units. Although the Rough Step has improved over the last three years, it is only one component of a larger set of requirements that must be taken into consideration in measuring the overall process of Reserve Assembly and the acquisition of reserve lands. Other important factors that the RCA considers when making acquisitions is how the acquisition will impact the assembly of cores and linkages in a biologically meaningful way.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) ES-7

1.0 INTRODUCTION ______

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1. Overview of the Plan The Western Riverside County MSHCP is a comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional plan that conserves species and associated habitats to address biological and ecological diversity conservation needs, while development is simultaneously approved in western Riverside County. The Plan was approved and permits issued on June 22, 2004 by the USFWS and CDFW. The MSHCP Plan Area encompasses approximately 1.26 million acres (approximately 1,967 square miles) in western Riverside County. This Plan includes all land west of the crest of the San Jacinto Mountains and east of the Orange/Riverside County lines. The northern border of the Plan Area consists of the Riverside/San Bernardino County line, and the southern border consists of the Riverside/San Diego County line. The Plan Area includes all unincorporated County of Riverside land within this geographic area, as well as the incorporated cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Corona, Eastvale, Hemet, Jurupa Valley, Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Moreno Valley, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, Riverside, San Jacinto, Temecula and Wildomar. The Plan is the largest HCP ever attempted and covers multiple species and multiple habitats within a diverse landscape from urban cities to undeveloped foothills and montane forests. Bioregions within the Plan Area include the Santa Ana Mountains, Riverside Lowlands, San Jacinto Foothills, San Jacinto Mountains, Agua Tibia Mountains, Desert Transition, and San Bernardino Mountains.

The MSHCP calls for the conservation and management of approximately 500,000 acres of the 1.26 million-acre Plan Area. Of the 500,000 acres, 347,000 acres are currently within existing Public/Quasi-Public ownership. Achievement of the 500,000-acre goal depends on conservation of an additional 153,000 acres within the Plan Area. This Plan was developed in conjunction with the CDFW, USFWS, multiple local jurisdictions; state, federal and local agencies, and public interest groups/stakeholders.

The Western Riverside County RCA administers the MSCHP. The RCA is a joint powers authority responsible for acquiring acres necessary for meeting Plan goals, managing and monitoring the 153,000-acre Additional Reserve Lands, overseeing Plan compliance, and assisting with MSHCP implementation across the Plan Area.

1.2. Reporting Requirements The MSHCP requires that the RCA prepare and submit a report of its annual activities. This report provides a summary of MSHCP implementation activities for the 11th full year of RCA operation: January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015.

Per the MSHCP, the annual report must include a description of:

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 1-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ______

• Reserve Assembly activities in relation to the Rough Step formula presented in Section 6.7 of the MSHCP and as revised in the Minor Amendment 2007-01. The Rough Step is a tool to help direct conservation within vegetation communities of similar weather patterns, geographies, soils, and geologies as development occurs. It is intended to identify where development is proceeding at a pace that would preclude achieving the conservation goals for specific key vegetation communities. • Acres authorized for disturbance within the Plan Area during the reporting period. The Rough Step, Area Plan, subunit, and jurisdictional performance measures use the total acreage authorized for development as well as the total acres conserved in each reporting year. The number of acres authorized for disturbance and the acres conserved allows the RCA and Permittees to determine the rate of development and conservation occurring in distinct geographic areas. • Single-family and mobile home activity within the Criteria Area for the preceding year and cumulatively occurring under the ERP for these activities presented in Section 6.1.1 of the MSHCP. Applications for a single-family home grading permit or for a mobile home site preparation permit within the Criteria Area are subject to review against the MSHCP conservation criteria to determine the least-sensitive location for building pad and necessary access roadways. This review process is referred to as the ERP and, with approval under this process, applicable properties are referred to as “ERPs.” The MSHCP included ERP activity assumptions (i.e., number of permits and acres disturbed) (Section 7.3.2). The annual reporting process is used to determine whether ERP activity is occurring in a manner that is consistent with the assumptions made during MSHCP development. Furthermore, an analysis of ERP activity allows the RCA to determine if Reserve Assembly within the Criteria Area is being adversely impacted as a result of this provision. • New or expanded agricultural operations within the Criteria Area for the preceding year and cumulatively occurring under the processes identified in Section 6.2 of the MSHCP. Existing agricultural uses and conversion of natural lands to agricultural use are allowed as Covered Activities within the Criteria Area. New conversions to agricultural use within the Criteria Area are covered up to an established threshold of 10,000 acres over the life of the Plan. The annual reporting process is used to establish this initial threshold, to periodically measure new agricultural activities against it, and to analyze potential impacts to Reserve Assembly associated with these new agricultural activities. • Minor Administrative/Clerical Amendments approved in accordance with the procedures described in Section 6.10.2 of the MSHCP. The annual report provides a method to officially document such amendments. • Ongoing management and monitoring activities highlighting issues of concern and proposed remedies/actions. These items are included in the annual report to give insight into these efforts.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 1-2 1.0 INTRODUCTION ______

• Documentation concerning funding/collection of the Local Development Mitigation Fees to provide insight into management of partial local funding resources available.

1.3. Methods RCA staff works with each Local Permittee (the 18 cities and County of Riverside) to build a GIS database of relevant conservation and development activity, which was used to calculate performance measures. For annual reporting purposes, conservation is counted as a gain when acquired through transfer of title, recordation of conservation easement, or conservation by other entities that is managed pursuant to the terms of the MSCHP through a MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) with that particular entity. This annual report reflects the gains in conservation between February 2000 and December 31, 2015.

Development losses are counted at the time of grading permit issuance. This annual report reflects losses between June 22, 2004 and December 31, 2015. Losses are usually counted earlier in the development process (at time of grading permit issuance), and gains may be counted at the end of the development process (at time of fee title transfer/conservation easement recordation at the County Recorder’s Office). Because of this, the amount of habitat losses may appear greater as they are reported before the habitat gains can be reported to offset those losses.

The tracking of development losses is further complicated in some cases by the issuance of grading or building permits on a parcel, but the grading or building is never actually started by the owner of the parcel. Procedures have been developed to review losses from previous years to account for these permits that are issued but never actually result in a loss to the vegetation category.

Complete details regarding the methods and procedures used in preparing the GIS data and files for Rough Step Reporting and Gains and Losses for this report are included in Appendix A.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 1-3 2.0 HABITAT GAINS

2.0 HABITAT GAINS Habitat gains are the Reserve lands acquired or otherwise permanently protected for Conservation pursuant to the Plan. The MSHCP and coverage for the 146 species identified in the Plan are based on the establishment of a 500,000-acre Conservation Area, of which approximately 347,000 acres are currently in public or quasi-public (PQP) ownership. The additional 153,000 acres (500,000 – 347,000) of Additional Reserve Lands (ARL) will be assembled from various sources. These categories generally include:

• Private land acquisitions through the land development entitlement process • Acquisitions from willing sellers • Donations of fee title or conservation easements • Entities with Conservation Lands managed pursuant to the MSHCP with a MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) between the Entity and the RCA.

As of December 31, 2015, approximately 49,889 acres have been acquired for Conservation within the Plan Area. Habitat gains are the Reserve lands acquired or otherwise permanently protected for conservation pursuant to the Plan under the various methods listed above. Habitat gained (or conserved) is reported from the period February 2000 through December 31, 2015. February 2000 is used as the start of the gain reporting period because the County, CDFG, California Department of Parks and Recreation and the USFWS, in anticipation of MSHCP permit issuance, began an early, aggressive campaign to assemble the Reserve prior to Plan permit issuance.

2.1. Conservation Summary

In 2015 a total of 1,186 acres of Additional Reserve Lands (ARL) were acquired, donated, or obtained through the local development process. Cumulatively, as of December 31, 2015, a total of 49,889 acres of Additional Reserve Lands (ARL) have been conserved for purposes of habitat and species conservation. Table 1, MSHCP Conservation Summary, provides a snapshot of the conservation activity completed through December 31, 2015.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 2-1 2.0 HABITAT GAINS

TABLE 1 Conservation Summary

Acres Conserved Reported Time Period in Annual Reports Acres Conserved # February 2000 – June 22, 2004 17,901* 16,939 June 22, 2004 – December 31, 2004 1,370* 1,329 January 1, 2005 – December 31, 2005 4,112* 4,002 January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2006 9,873* 9,854 January 1, 2007 – December 31, 2007 3,687* 3,683 January 1, 2008 – December 31, 2008 4,077* 4,083 January 1, 2009 - December 31, 2009 1,712* 1,712 January 1, 2010 – December 31, 2010 1,431* 1,431 January 1, 2011 – December 31, 2011 1,664* 1,664 January 1, 2012 – December 31, 2012 1,075 1,075 January 1, 2013 – December 31, 2013 1,085 1,085 January 1, 2014 – December 31, 2014 1,842 1,842 January 1, 2015 – December 31, 2015 1,186

49,889# Adjusted Total * The acres reported as conserved have been refined which resulted in minor changes from the reported totals in previous annual reports. The changes are mainly due to accounting for some lands that were acquired outside of Criteria Cells and corrections to acreage totals for selected acquisitions. # The Lockheed Potrero MARB SKR acquisition (2,540 acres) is included in this total. A total of 1,190 acres that have been acquired outside of the Criteria Cells is also included. Totals may not add up due to rounding.

Many of the covered species and associated sensitive habitats are located on federal and state lands. For these reasons, existing federal and state lands were included in the existing 347,000 acres of Public/Quasi-Public lands (PQP). Pursuant to the Plan, conservation gains toward the 153,000 acres of Additional Reserve Lands are shared amongst the federal, state, and local permittees. The contributions by federal, state, and local entities are shown in Figure 1, Cumulative Acreage Contribution by Federal, State, and Local Jurisdictions.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 2-2 2.0 HABITAT GAINS

As of December 31, 2015, the federal agencies have contributed 6,816 acres toward the 153,000- acre Conservation goal of the MSHCP. The State agencies have contributed 11,384 acres toward the Conservation goal of the MSHCP. The Local Permittee contribution occurred through either recordation of conservation easements, acquisitions from willing sellers, donations, or acquisition of property from private developers through the HANS or equivalent process and totaled 31,686 acres toward the Conservation goal of the MSHCP. In 2012 the Wildlife Agencies and RCA developed agreed upon procedures for the determination of ARL or PQP lands. These procedures as (RCA_2013_AR_TR_ARL_PQP_Designations.pdf) are included within the Appendix under item 10.

2.2. Conservation by Jurisdiction During Plan development, targets to measure Plan performance within municipal jurisdictions were created. Jurisdictional acreage targets were developed for the original 14 cities and the unincorporated County during the preparation of the Plan in 2003. Since that time, the annexation of lands by the Cities in different areas of the County, as well as the incorporation of four new cities (Eastvale, Jurupa Valley, Menifee and Wildomar), renders these conservation targets in need of an update. The target numbers need to be increased for the areas now in the Cities and decreased for those areas removed from the County through a Minor Amendment to the Plan.

Acquisitions, including those outside of the criteria cells, that occurred within specific jurisdictions in 2015 are summarized in Table 2, Habitat Gains by Jurisdiction (January 1, 2015 – December 31, 2015).

TABLE 2 Habitat Gains by Jurisdiction (1/1/2015 – 12/31/2015) Jurisdiction Acres Conserved County of Riverside 1103 Hemet 24 Lake Elsinore 24 Murrieta 4 San Jacinto 30 Total 1,186

Table 3, Conservation Targets by Jurisdiction, provides a summary of Table 2 (conservation within 2015), as well as cumulative conservation by jurisdiction (from February 2000 to the end of 2015). Original target conservation acreages were identified for each jurisdiction in Section 3.3 of the MSHCP and need to be modified through the Minor Amendment due to the new Cities and annexations by existing cities.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 2-3 2.0 HABITAT GAINS

Conservation within Beaumont, Calimesa, Moreno Valley, and Riverside has surpassed the original low-range Conservation acreage goals.

TABLE 3 Conservation Goals by Jurisdiction

Total Acres Total Conserved between Acres February 2000 Low End of High End of Conserved and December 31, Jurisdiction Goals Goals in 2015* 2015 * Banning 50 90 0 0 Beaumont 5,440 9,060 0 8,123 Calimesa 1,240 2,240 0 1,629 Canyon Lake 30 50 0 0 Corona 330 610 0 176 Eastvale* 0 0 Hemet 620 1,000 24 145 Jurupa Valley* 0 438 Lake Elsinore 4,830 7,870 24 3,077 Menifee* 0 0 Moreno Valley 80 130 0 1,030 Murrieta 1,580 3,200 4 715 Norco 60 140 0 34 Perris 720 1,400 0 113 Riverside 55 125 0 89 San Jacinto 1,580 2,680 0 1,122 Temecula 600 1,380 0 3 Wildomar* 148 831 Unincorporated, County of Riverside 107,265 159,800 1,103 32,362 Totals 124,480 189,775 1,842* 49,889**

*Acquisition goals have not been calculated for cities incorporated since 2004 but remain in County of Riverside goals. Overall reserve assembly goals by Area Plan, Cell Group and Cell remain and affect newly incorporated cities as applicable.

** The Totals includes the Potrero MARB SKR acquisition of 2,540 acres and portions of acquisitions that have occurred outside of MSHCP Criteria Cells.

2.3. Conservation by Area Plan Area Plans are used as an MSHCP performance measure unit to monitor success of Plan implementation. The 16 Area Plans relate to County planning boundaries associated with the Riverside County General Plan.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 2-4 2.0 HABITAT GAINS

Table 4, Conservation Goals by Area Plan provides a summary of all conservation achieved to date (February 2000 to December 31, 2015) within each Area Plan, as well as the target conservation acreages identified for each Area Plan in MSHCP Section 3.3. Target conservation acreages include an overall target conservation acreage (Public/Quasi-Public lands plus Additional Reserve Lands). The low- and high-range targets included in Table 4 reflect only the Additional Reserve Lands targets, rather than the overall Area Plan targets, which include previously conserved lands, such as the Public/Quasi-Public lands. This distinction in the data below provides, for annual reporting purposes, an additional check-and-balance mechanism for Reserve Assembly. The fourth column in Table 4 reports the total acreage conserved during the reporting period (January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015). The fifth column includes a running total of all land conserved within the Area Plan.

TABLE 4 Conservation Goals by Area Plan

Conservation High End of Goal January 1, Low End of Goal (additional 2015 – Total Acres Conserved (additional Reserve Reserve lands December 31, between February 2000 and Area Plan Lands only) only) 2015 * December 31, 2015 * Eastvale 145 290 0 0 Elsinore 11,700 18,515 24 5,568 Harvest Valley/Winchester 430 605 0 71 Highgrove 345 675 28 44 Jurupa 890 1,870 0 438 Lake Mathews/Woodcrest 3,215 5,470 20 649 Lakeview/Nuevo 6,650 10,235 9 543 Mead Valley 1,885 3,635 22 141 The Pass 8,540 13,925 74 10,049 Reche Canyon/Badlands 10,520 15,610 9 5,785 REMAP 41,400 58,470 583 16,727 San Jacinto Valley 11,540 19,465 54 4,778 Sun City/Menifee Valley 1,120 1,585 190 528 Southwest 22,500 36,360 174 4,090 Temescal Canyon 3,485 5,800 0 355 Riverside/Norco 90 240 0 123 Total 124,455 192,750 1187* 49,889* * The totals include the Potrero MARB SKR acquisition of 2,540 acres and portions of acquisitions that have occurred outside of Criteria Cells. Acquisitions made prior to Plan approval are included. Totals may not add up due to rounding.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 2-5 2.0 HABITAT GAINS

2.4. Conservation and Acquisition Trends RCA, in conjunction with the Permittees, continues to focus its acquisition and conservation efforts toward meeting Rough Step and jurisdiction goals. However, priorities for acquisitions are constrained by the lingering recession that has reduced funding for acquisitions and the need to acquire Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Processes (HANS) 100% conservation properties as a high priority. The RCA also works with willing sellers, and the need to assemble linkages and constrained linkages does not always improve the Rough Step numbers. The RCA continues to work with local Permittees on obtaining donations through the land development process. This focus has been successful in improving or protecting Rough Step status over the past five years. A number of large donations are currently in progress as part of the development review process within the County of Riverside and affected cities as addressed in the next section.

2.5. Development Projects and Future Conservation The HANS process, described in the MSHCP in Volume One, Section 6.1.1, and the Joint Project/Acquisition Review process, described in the MSHCP in Volume One, Section 6.6 E, provides several processes for the review of development projects for consistency with the MSHCP. These HANS and Joint Project Reviews (JPR) performed by the Permittees and the RCA on proposed development projects are used to determine the impacts to the MSHCP for these projects. The MSCHP designates a total of 41,000 acres to be set aside through dedication from development projects. The MSHCP projected that from the beginning of the Plan, that each year approximately 2,050 acres would be conserved through the development process. In retrospect, this estimate was too aggressive and also did not take into account the extended period of time that development projects require to receive approvals and begin construction.

The JPR database was first developed prior to the adoption of the MSHCP and permit issuance, but has been refined over the years. During the JPR and HANS review process, a development footprint area and areas described for conservation are designated within the project area for each project. These designated areas are stored in a JPR database as Proposed MSHCP Conservation Area and Proposed Other Conservation Area. Some of these lands in the JPR database are acquired as Additional Reserve Lands by the RCA because the site is designated as 100% conservation.

As of December 31, 2015, a total of 10,321 acres are currently designated as future conservation dedications from development. This future conservation has not been applied to the Rough Step Analysis but does serve to provide an indication of conservation that will be acquired through the development process in the future. Some of the projects that include areas of conservation may not be completed or the associated conservation dedicated for a considerable amount of time.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 2-6 2.0 HABITAT GAINS

2.6. Non RCA Conservation The RCA has identified additional lands as being in a conservation status through Conservation Easements or through transfer to a conservation entity through a Grant Deed which have been verified through the review of the recorded deed. The grant deeds, easement deeds or conservation easements recorded by the Riverside County Clerk and Recorder as official records of Riverside County were downloaded to the RCA Server. Each grant or easement deed has been reviewed, located, and tied to the particular parcel that it describes. The lands identified as being in a conservation status through a conservation easement or owned by the conservation entity are located both in MSHCP Criteria Cells as well as outside the cell boundaries. These lands were also reviewed to make sure that they had not been previously identified as Public/Quasi-Public Lands. As of December 31, 2015, a total of 5,344 acres have been identified as additional lands in conservation within the Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area.

Conservation entities such as the Center for Natural Lands Management (CNLM) control acreages that are in conservation but not yet counted towards Rough Step. These acres cannot yet contribute to Reserve Assembly. The RCA continues to work on developing additional MOUs with these conservation entities so that the lands can be counted in the future as either Public/Quasi-Public Lands (PQP) or Additional Reserve Lands (ARL) that contribute to the Western Riverside County MSHCP.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 2-7

3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

The MSHCP includes the establishment of a 500,000-acre Conservation Area, of which approximately 347,000 acres are currently in Public/Quasi-Public ownership. The additional 153,000 acres of Additional Reserve Lands (ARL) will be assembled primarily from private land acquisitions, donations, and through the land development entitlement process.

As the Reserve is assembled, habitat is lost due to development, construction of infrastructure, and other activities. Habitat gains as defined for purposes of this section are the ARL acquired since February 2000. Habitat gained (conserved) is reported from the period February 2000 through December 31, 2015 because the County, CDFG, California Department of Parks and Recreation, and the USFWS, in anticipation of MSHCP permit issuance, began an early, aggressive campaign to begin to assemble the Reserve prior to Plan permit issuance. Since the Plan’s state and federal permits were not issued until June 22, 2004, habitat losses are only tracked starting from June 22, 2004.

This chapter is devoted to summarizing all habitat “losses” that occurred between June 22, 2004 and December 31, 2015. One of the MSHCP performance measures, the “Rough Step” analysis, utilizes loss data to determine whether the Permittees are allowing an acceptable amount of habitat loss to occur based on conservation activity within certain geographic units. The second part of this section provides this required Rough Step analysis.

3.1. Habitat Loss Summary

Development Activity

During 2015, a total of 2,994 acres were approved for development throughout the Plan Area and therefore are counted as habitat losses. Of this number, 1,751 acres were lost outside the Criteria Area and 1,243 acres were lost within Criteria Area (Criteria Cells). It is important to note whether losses occur within the MSHCP Criteria Area (where the ultimate 153,000-acre MSHCP Reserve is envisioned to be assembled) or outside of the Criteria Area. Because the Criteria Area totals approximately 300,000 acres, the MSHCP assumes that a portion of the area within the Criteria Area would be developed. The MSHCP considered that a majority of future habitat losses would occur outside of the Criteria Cells.

Table 5, Habitat Loss by Jurisdiction (January 1, 2015 – December 31, 2015), and Table 6, Habitat Losses (June 22, 2005 – December 31, 2015), provide a summary of the total new losses that have occurred during the 2015 annual reporting year and since Plan inception, respectively.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-1 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Table 5 lists grading/building permits issued by Permittees between January 1 and December 31, 2015 that are recognized as a new loss to the MSHCP. Multiple types of permits (e.g., building, grading) were issued by the Permittees for various types of land development activities in this and previous years. However, for MSHCP annual reporting purposes, multiple permits issued on one parcel were summarized into one permit and counted as one loss.

TABLE 5 Habitat Loss by Jurisdiction (New Losses to the MSHCP between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015) Acreage Number of Records Acreage on Impacted by Representing Total Acreage Permits Issued Permit Issuance Grading/Building on Permits outside of within Criteria Permittee Permits Issued Issued Criteria Area Area Banning 0 0 0 0 Beaumont 281 57 57 0 Calimesa 1 5 5 0 Canyon Lake 10 2 2 0 Corona 29 56 55 1 Eastvale (October 1, 2010) 278 215 148 68 Hemet 12 139 139 0 Jurupa Valley (July 1, 2011) 279 187 183 3 Lake Elsinore 236 39 39 0 Menifee (October 1, 2008) 34 7 7 0 Moreno Valley 9 84 84 0 Murrieta 46 43 24 19 Norco 30 31 29 2 Perris 47 118 109 9 Riverside, City of 158 105 105 0 San Jacinto 8 5 5 0 Temecula 120 43 43 0 Wildomar (July 1, 2008) 126 54 49 5 Unincorporated, County of Riverside 154 1,804 669 1,135 Total 1,858 2,994 1,751 1,243 100% 58% 42% Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-2 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

TABLE 6 Habitat Losses by Jurisdiction Cumulative (June 22, 2004 – December 31, 2015)

Acres Approved for City/County Development Outside Criteria Inside Criteria (Losses) Cells Cells Banning 391 391 0 Beaumont 2,876 2,367 508 Calimesa 521 414 107 Canyon Lake 46 45 1 Corona 1,952 1,699 253 Eastvale (October 1, 2010) 3,242 3,126 116 Hemet 3,042 2,925 117 Jurupa Valley (July 1, 2011) 2,137 1,972 165 Lake Elsinore 2,901 1,687 1,213 Menifee (October 1, 2008) 5,514 5,503 11 Moreno Valley 3,482 3,481 1 Murrieta 2,723 1,643 1,079 Norco 406 401 5 Perris 2,439 2,278 160 Riverside 2,604 2,583 20 San Jacinto 1,695 1,541 154 Temecula 1,774 1,442 332 Wildomar (July 1, 2008) 1,297 1,169 128 Unincorporated County 34,109 24,949 9,160 Total 73,148 59,619 13,529 100% 82% 18% Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding.

As indicated above, Riverside County approved the largest number of permits affecting the largest area, which is to be expected, given its geographic area of 988,000 acres within the 1.26-million- acre Plan Area. These tables show that 82% of the development is occurring outside of the Criteria Areas, which means that the majority of the loss is not occurring within the areas considered for Conservation.

Agricultural Activities Existing agricultural uses and conversion of natural lands to agricultural use are Covered Activities within the MSHCP boundaries. Establishment of new agricultural uses specifically within the Criteria Area is covered up to 10,000 acres over the life of the Plan. The MSHCP defines agricultural operations as production of all plants (horticulture), fish farms, animals and related production activities, including the planting, cultivation and tillage of the soil, dairying, and

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-3 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

apiculture; and the production, plowing, seeding, cultivation, growing, harvesting, pasturing, and fallowing for the purpose of crop rotation of any agricultural commodity, including viticulture, apiculture, horticulture, and the breeding, feeding, and raising of livestock, horses, fur-bearing animals, fish, or poultry and all uses conducted as a normal part of such operations, provided such actions are in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. The RCA established the existing agricultural operations database and reports each year the agricultural activities within the MSHCP.

(a) Agricultural Grading Permits 2015 Agricultural grading permits are issued by the County Building and Safety Department, and these permits represent conversion of undeveloped land to agricultural uses, as well as additional or new agricultural activities on parcels that had already been in agricultural use. In 2015 there were 48 Agricultural grading permits issued by the County Building and Safety Department. In 2015 the Agricultural Commissioner did not receive or process any Certificates of Inclusion (COI). All of the permits were verified to be within the Plan Area. The 48 agricultural grading permits combined for a loss of 945 acres. Twenty permits that totaled 234 acres were added to the Agricultural Operations Database. The remaining permits with 711 acres were already shown as being in agricultural use. Further details are provided in the WRC_Agricultural_Operations.pdf, including the GIS data.

(b) New Agriculture in Criteria Areas Accounting Establishment of new agricultural uses specifically within the Criteria Area is covered up to 10,000 acres over the life of the Plan. Since Plan adoption to December 31, 2015, a total of 943 acres within Criteria Cells have been approved through either COIs or Agricultural Grading.

(c) Agricultural Operations Database Summary Further details on the process, procedures and methods to update the Agricultural Operations Database with the COIs and Agricultural Grading permits for the MSHCP are described in the associated GIS metadata files. Table 7 contains the summary.

The Agricultural Operations Database as updated for the 2015 Annual Report continues to represent 143,491 acres utilized for agricultural purposes as of December 31, 2015.

Since the review process was completed to develop the Agricultural Operations Database baseline, a total of 1,696 acres of new agricultural operations within the Western Riverside County MSHCP area have been converted to agricultural use and added to the Agricultural Operations Database.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-4 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Table 7 Agricultural Grading Summary AG Grading Count Towards 10,000 Acres AG Cap Since Plan Conception 143,257 782 2015 234 161 Total 143,490 943

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-5 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

3.2. Rough Step Summaries The Rough Step measure is one of the MSHCP performance measures used to monitor success of the MSHCP; however, it does not measure the full success of reserve assembly in the evaluation of linkages and constrained linkages. Rough Step is a methodology that helps direct acquisition activity within specific vegetation communities of similar weather patterns, geographies, soils, and geologies as development occurs in specific areas. The Rough Step measure is intended to ensure that conservation of specific, narrowly distributed habitats occurs in “Rough Step” with development approvals. The Rough Step Analysis functions as an early warning system to signal where development is outpacing conservation and where future conservation efforts should be focused (see Figure 2, Western Riverside County MSHCP Rough Step Analysis Units).

Table 8, Habitat Losses In/Out of Criteria Area for 2015, shows for each Rough Step Unit, how much development, or loss, has taken place outside the Criteria Area and inside the Criteria Area during the last year.

TABLE 8 Habitat Losses In/Out of Criteria Area by Rough Step Unit January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015

Total Development Acres Development Acres Rough Step Unit Development in Outside Criteria Area Inside Criteria Area Rough Step Unit 1 397 74 472 2 112 123 235 3 306 38 343 4 86 289 374 5 129 56 185 6 379 271 650 7 175 372 547 8 141 20 161 9 27 0 27 Total 1,751 1,243 2,994 Percentage 58% 42% 100% Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding.

The 2015 Annual Report continues to use the corrected formula agreed upon by the Wildlife Agencies and RCA, as well as the changes made to Table 6-3, Private Land Acres and Additional Reserve Land Acreage Goals which was made part of the Plan through Minor Amendment 2007- 01 (http://www.wrc-rca.org).

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-6 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-7 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Table 9, Rough Step Acreage Summary, compares the acres by vegetation type within each Rough Step’s Criteria Area of available private lands (column 3) and Additional Reserve Land goals (column 4) to acres conserved (column 5) and acres authorized for development (column 7). The sixth column includes the allowable development acreage targets by vegetation type for each Rough Step, based on the amount of conservation that has occurred (column 5). Habitat Gains for conservation (column 5) are through December 31, 2015. Allowable development was calculated using losses (derived from grading or building permits) between June 22, 2004 and December 31, 2015. Where acres authorized for development (column 7) are higher (red) than the allowable development calculated using the Rough Step formula (column 6), the vegetation community would be considered out of Rough Step. Table 9 summarizes each Rough Step category for the 2015 annual reporting year.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-8 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

TABLE 9 Rough Step Acreage Summary Total Acres Authorized for Development From Table 6-3 in MSHCP** Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Private Land Reserve Land (between Development (between Rough Acres within the Acreage Goal for February 2000 Acreage June 22, Step Key Vegetation Criteria Area in the Key and through 2004, and Analysis Communities within the Analysis Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Unit Analysis Unit Unit Community 2015) 2015 2015) Coastal Sage Scrub 1,210 930 405 138 51

Grasslands 820 180 0 64 42 Riparian Scrub, 680 550 53 24 5 1 Woodland, Forest Coastal Sage Scrub 14,969 10,359 3,865 2,009 226

Grasslands 8,656 4,866 2,894 2,408 253

Riparian Scrub, 590 460 213 67 8 Woodland, Forest Riversidean Alluvial 1,190 1,110 553 44 7 Fan Sage Scrub 2* Woodlands and Forests 300 180 81 61 11 Coastal Sage Scrub 3,670 2,050 222 320 74

Grasslands 4,690 900 94 736 260 Playas and Vernal 4,340 3,830 932 163 15 Pools Riparian Scrub, 220 110 4 15 0 Woodland, Forest Riversidean Alluvial 190 100 2 11 6 3 Fan Sage Scrub Coastal Sage Scrub 21,828 17,948 3,374 1,044 866 Desert Scrubs 4,340 3,680 1,842 363 117 Grasslands 10,991 5,961 614 970 820 Riparian Scrub, 1,420 1,322 72 15 9 Woodland, Forest Riversidean Alluvial 1,169 1,099 161 16 11 Fan Sage Scrub

4 Woodlands and Forests 1,562 872 158 181 34 Coastal Sage Scrub 1,540 370 21 177 163

Grasslands 3,880 1,010 140 646 509 Riparian Scrub, 550 460 4 10 7 5 Woodland, Forest

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-9 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Total Acres Authorized for From Table 6-3 in MSHCP** Development Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Private Land Reserve Land (between Development (between Rough Acres within the Acreage Goal for February 2000 Acreage June 22, Step Key Vegetation Criteria Area in the Key and through 2004, and Analysis Communities within the Analysis Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Unit Analysis Unit Unit Community 2015) 2015 2015 Riversidean Alluvial 370 260 0 11 7 Fan Sage Scrub

Woodlands and Forests 2,080 1,000 149 253 95 5 Coastal Sage Scrub 4,796 3,876 829 269 265 Grasslands 6,188 3,688 940 823 527 Riparian Scrub, 268 208 34 15 12 Woodland, Forest Woodlands and Forests 140 110 37 12 3 6 Coastal Sage Scrub 9,222 7,102 1,121 513 428

Grasslands 3,620 1,550 140 376 141 Woodlands and Forests 493 333 27 28 1 Riparian Scrub, 570 460 50 22 23 Woodland, Forest Riversidean Alluvial 400 350 39 10 24 7 Fan Sage Scrub Coastal Sage Scrub 6,400 4,940 2,745 876 290

Grasslands 3,690 1,840 209 374 529 Riparian Scrub, 280 250 85 12 0 Woodland, Forest Riversidean Alluvial 190 130 17 13 9 8 Fan Sage Scrub No vegetation communities in Unit 9 were identified for 9 Rough Step analyses.

* The acres within this Rough Step do now include the total of 2,540 acres of Stephens’ kangaroo rat habitat in the State Potrero acquisition. ** This table uses the Rough Step formula, Private Land acres and Additional Reserve Lands Goals as per Minor Amendment 2007-01.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-10 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

In 2012 a policy on reserve lands outside of Criteria Cells counting as Additional Reserve Lands and toward Rough Step analysis was developed in consultation with the Wildlife Agencies. The policy allows lands outside Criteria Cells to be counted under certain circumstances with Wildlife Agency concurrence. Please refer to Appendix A-RCA_2012_AR_TR_ARL_PQP_Designations.

3.2.1. Rough Step Unit 1 Rough Step Unit 1 encompasses 93,945 acres within the northwestern corner of western Riverside County and includes the Prado Basin, Santa Ana River, Delhi Sands flower-loving fly habitat, and the Jurupa Mountains (see Figure 3, Rough Step Unit #1). It is bounded by Interstate 91 to the southeast, Cleveland National Forest to the southwest, and Orange and San Bernardino Counties to the north and west. Within Rough Step Unit 1, there are 9,896 acres within the Criteria Area. Key vegetation communities within Rough Step Unit 1 are coastal sage scrub, grasslands, and riparian scrub, woodland, forest. Rough Step acreage goals are therefore provided for each of these habitat types. All habitats, including those where Rough Step goals do not exist, are included for each Rough Step Unit in the following discussion (see Table 10, Rough Step Unit 1 Acreage Totals).

TABLE 10 Rough Step Unit 1 Acreage Totals Total Acres Authorized for Table 6-3 Development Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Private Land Reserve Land (between Development (between Acres within Acreage Goal February 2000 Acreage June 22, 2004, Key Vegetation the Criteria for the Key and through and Communities within the Area in the Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Rough Step Rough Step Community 2015) 2015 2015) Coastal Sage Scrub 1,210 930 405 138 52

Grasslands 820 180 0 64 42 Riparian Scrub, Woodland, 680 550 53 24 5 Forest Remaining Vegetation Categories without Rough Step Acreage Goals Agriculture 3 181 Chaparral 13 26 Developed or Disturbed 9 59 Water 1 0 Unknown – Outside of data 1 0 Total 485 365

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-11 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Through 2015, a total of 485 acres of conservation Rough Step Unit 1 Snapshot has been acquired within this Rough Step Unit. There were no acquisition gains during 2015. • All vegetation categories are “in” Rough Step

• Delhi Soils is “in” Rough Step Delhi Soils Rough Step

All suitable habitat for the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly within the MSHCP Plan Area is located in Rough Step Unit 1. The Delhi sands flower-loving fly is found within the fine, sandy Delhi series soils along the northern edge of Rough Step Unit 1. Unlike any other covered species, the Permittees were given options for conservation of this species. These options were described in the Delhi sands flower-loving fly species account objectives. As part of the MSHCP Implementing Agreement, the Wildlife Agencies and Riverside County jointly opted to follow Delhi sands flower-loving fly species account Objective 1B. Objective 1B mandates that surveys are to be conducted in areas where suitable habitat exists within the mapped Delhi soils (with the exception of Cells 21, 22, and 55). When the species is present, 75 percent of mapped Delhi soils on-site must be conserved. Within Cells 21, 22, and 55, surveys are not required. Instead for this three-cell area, 50 acres of Additional Reserve Lands with Delhi soils and suitable habitat for the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly shall be acquired. Species Objective 1B includes Rough Step figures to ensure that Additional Reserve Lands are being acquired within Rough Step with development in Cells 21, 22, and 55. Table 11, Delhi Soils rough Step Acreage Analysis (Species Account Objective 1B), provides a summary of the Delhi Sands rough step acreage analysis.

TABLE 11 Delhi Soils Rough Step Acreage Analysis (Species Account Objective 1B) Total Acres Authorized for From Objective 1-B in MSHCP Development Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Private Land Reserve Land (between Development (between Acres within Acreage Goal February 2000 Acreage June 22, 2004, Key Vegetation the Criteria for the Key and through and Communities within the Area in the Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Rough Step Rough Step Community 2015) 2015 2015) Delhi Soils 270 50 7 49 24 Total 7 24

In 2009 the Wildlife Agencies and the RCA became aware that there might be some mapping inconsistencies related to the Delhi Sands layer. The reporting includes the acres within the Teledyne Acquisition that included Delhi Sands soils that were not identified by the Wildlife

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-12 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Agencies as counting for conservation prior to the MSHCP. The Annual Reports for 2009, 2010, and 2011 do not include the Rough Step analysis for Delhi soils. The mapping issues were resolved to the extent possible and reporting resumed in 2012.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-13 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-14 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

3.2.2. Rough Step Unit 2 Rough Step Unit 2 encompasses 177,606 acres along the northern border and within the northeastern corner of western Riverside County (see Figure 4, Rough Step Unit #2). This area includes the Badlands, Reche Canyon, San Timoteo Creek, and the San Jacinto Mountains. This area is bounded by Interstate 215 to the west, the San Jacinto River to the southwest, the San Jacinto Mountains to the southeast, and the San Bernardino Mountains to the northeast. There are over 61,020 acres within the Criteria Area in Rough Step Unit 2. Key vegetation communities within Rough Step Unit 2 include: coastal sage scrub; grasslands; riparian scrub, woodland, forest; Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub; and woodlands and forests. Rough Step acreage goals are therefore provided for each of these habitat types. Table 12, Rough Step Unit 2 Acreage Totals, also includes acres conserved for habitats for which Rough Step acreage goals do not exist.

TABLE 12 Rough Step Unit 2 Acreage Totals Total Acres Authorized for Table 6-3 Development Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Private Land Reserve Land (between Development (between Acres within Acreage Goal February 2000 Acreage June 22, 2004 Key Vegetation the Criteria for the Key and through and Communities within the Area in the Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Rough Step Rough Step Community 2015)* 2015 2015) Coastal Sage Scrub 14,969 10,359 3,865 2,009 226 Grasslands 8,656 4,866 2894 2408 254 Riparian Scrub, Woodland, 590 460 213 67 8 Forest Riversidean Alluvial Fan 1,190 1,110 553 44 7 Sage Scrub Woodlands and Forests 300 180 85 63 11 Remaining Vegetation Categories without Rough Step Acreage Goals Agricultural Land 218 398 Chaparral 8,777 364 Developed or Disturbed 98 98 Water 2 0 Unknown - Outside of Veg 0 0 Layer Total 16,705 1,366 * The acres within this Rough Step now include the total of 2,540 acres of Stephens’ kangaroo rat habitat in the State Potrero acquisition.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-15 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Through 2015, a total of 16,705 acres of conservation has been acquired within this Rough Step Unit. In Rough Step Unit 2 Snapshot 2015, 140 acres were acquired in the following • All vegetation categories are “in” vegetation categories: 72 acres of Chaparral, 34 acres Rough Step of Coastal Sage Scrub, 28 acres of Agricultural Land, 1 acre of Developed or Disturbed Land, 1 acre of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub and 4 acres of Woodlands and Forests. Although all vegetation categories in this unit are in Rough Step, conservation efforts continue in order to build the reserve.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-16 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-17 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

3.2.3. Rough Step Unit 3 Rough Step Unit 3 encompasses 150,086 acres within the north-central portion of western Riverside County (see Figure 5, Rough Step Unit #3). This Rough Step Unit includes Lake Perris, the San Jacinto Wildlife Area, the San Jacinto River, and the Lakeview Mountains. This Rough Step area is bounded by Interstate 215 to the west, a branch of the San Jacinto River to the northeast, State Route 60 to the north, and Newport Road, Olive Avenue, and Stetson Avenue to the south. There are 32,432 acres within the Criteria Area within Rough Step Unit 3. Key vegetation communities within Rough Step Unit 3 include: coastal sage scrub, grasslands, playas and vernal pools, riparian scrub, woodland, forest, and Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub. Rough Step acreage goals are therefore provided for each of these habitat types. Table 13, Rough Step Unit 3 Acreage Totals, also includes acres conserved for habitats for which Rough Step acreage goals do not exist.

TABLE 13 Rough Step Unit 3 Acreage Totals Total Acres Authorized for Development Table 6-3 Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Reserve Land (between Development (between Private Land Acres Acreage Goal February 2000 Acreage June 22, 2004 Key Vegetation within the Criteria for the Key and through and Communities within Area in the Rough Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, the Rough Step Step Community 2015) 2015 2015) Coastal Sage Scrub 3,670 2,050 222 320 74 Grasslands 4,690 900 94 736 260

Playas and Vernal Pools 4,340 3,830 932 163 15 Riparian Scrub, 220 110 4 15 0 Woodland, Forest Riversidean Alluvial Fan 190 100 2 11 6 Sage Scrub Remaining Vegetation Categories without Rough Step Acreage Goals Agricultural Land 1,809 341 Chaparral 1,032 202 Developed or Disturbed 30 59 Pennisular Juniper 0 0 Woodland and Scrub Water 168 13 Woodlands and Forests 0 2 Total 4,293 972

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-18 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

A total of 4,293 acres of conservation has been Rough Step Unit 3 Snapshot acquired within this Rough Step Unit. In 2015, there were 33 acres added to the Rough Step Unit where 24 • All vegetation categories are “in” Rough Step acres were part of the Playas and Vernal Pools, 7 acres were Chaparral, and 2 acres from the Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation category.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-19 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-20 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

3.2.4. Rough Step Unit 4 Rough Step Unit 4 encompasses 212,630 acres within the southeastern corner of western Riverside County and includes Proposed Core 4 and Proposed Core 7 (see Figure 6, Rough Step Unit #4). These areas are composed of upland and wetland habitat types in the Vail Lake, Sage, and Wilson Valley areas. This area is bounded by Diamond Valley Lake, Lake Skinner, and Johnson Ranch to the west, San Diego County and the Agua Tibia Mountains to the south, and the San Jacinto Mountains and eastern Riverside County to the west. There are 105,759 acres within the Criteria Area in this Rough Step Unit. Key vegetation communities within Rough Step Unit 4 include: coastal sage scrub, desert scrubs, grasslands, riparian scrub, woodland, forest, Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, and woodlands and forests. Rough Step acreage goals are therefore provided for each of these habitat types. Table 14, Rough Step Unit 4 Acreage Totals, also includes acres conserved for habitats for which Rough Step acreage goals do not exist.

TABLE 14 Rough Step Unit 4 Acreage Totals Total Acres Authorized Table 6-3 for Development Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Private Land Reserve Land (between Development (between Acres within Acreage Goal February 2000 Acreage June 22, Key Vegetation the Criteria for the Key and through 2004, and Communities within the Area in the Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Rough Step Rough Step Community 2015) 2015 2015) Coastal Sage Scrub 21,828 17,948 3,374 1044 866 Desert Scrubs 4,340 3,680 1,842 363 117 Grasslands 10,991 5,961 614 970 820 Riparian Scrub, Woodland, 1,420 1,322 72 15 9 Forest Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage 1,169 1,099 161 16 11 Scrub Woodlands and Forests 1,562 872 158 181 34 Remaining Vegetation Categories without Rough Step Acreage Goals Agricultural Land 53 140 Chaparral 11,258 1,611 Developed or Disturbed 68 261 Cismontane Alkali Marsh 7 0 Total 17,607 3,869

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-21 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

A total of 17,607 acres of conservation has been acquired in Rough Step Unit 4 this Rough Step Unit. In 2015 a total of 608 acres were Snapshot acquired in Rough Step Unit 4. There were 407 acres of Chaparral, 138 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub, approximately • All vegetation categories are “in” Rough Step 32 acres of Desert Scrub, 23 acres of Grassland, 1 acre of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, and 7 acres of Woodlands and Forests. An acre of Developed or Disturbed Land was also picked up in 2015.

Development within Rough Step Unit 4 has occurred exclusively within the unincorporated area of Riverside County. There have not been any large development projects within Rough Step Unit 4 since plan inception due to the rural nature of this portion of the Plan Area. The majority of land within Rough Step Unit 4 consists of 5-, 10-, and 20-acre parcels.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-22 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-23 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

3.2.5. Rough Step Unit 5 Rough Step Unit 5 encompasses 91,734 acres within the southwestern corner of western Riverside County and includes the Santa Rosa Plateau, the Tenaja Corridor, and Murrieta Creek (see Figure 7, Rough Step Unit #5). It is bounded by Interstate 15 to the northeast, San Diego County to the south, and the Santa Ana Mountains in the Cleveland National Forest to the west. Within Rough Step Unit 5, there are 24,326 acres within the Criteria Area. Key vegetation communities within Rough Step Unit 5 include: coastal sage scrub, grasslands, riparian scrub, woodland, forest, Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, and woodlands and forests. Rough Step acreage goals are therefore provided for each of these habitat types. Table 15, Rough Step Unit 5 Acreage Totals, also includes acres conserved for habitats for which Rough Step acreage goals do not exist.

TABLE 15 Rough Step Unit 5 Acreage Totals Total Acres Authorized for Table 6-3 Development Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Reserve Land (between Development (between Private Land Acres Acreage Goal February 2000 Acreage June 22, 2004, Key Vegetation within the Criteria for the Key and through and Communities within the Area in the Rough Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Rough Step Step Community 2014) 2014 2014) Coastal Sage Scrub 1,540 370 21 177 163 Grasslands 3,880 1,010 140 646 509 Riparian Scrub, 550 460 4 10 7 Woodland, Forest Riversidean Alluvial Fan 370 260 0 11 7 Sage Scrub Woodlands and Forests 2,080 1,000 149 253 95 Remaining Vegetation Categories without Rough Step Acreage Goals Agricultural Land 1 429 Chaparral 656 401 Developed or Disturbed 1 242 Water 0 1 Unknown - Outside of veg 0 0 layer Total 972 1,854

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-24 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

A total of 972 acres of conservation has been acquired within this Rough Step Unit. In 2015 a Rough Step Unit 5 Snapshot total of 44 acres were acquired within this Rough • All vegetation categories are “in” Rough Step Unit. The conserved vegetation includes 29 Step acres of Chaparral, 10 acres of Grassland, 3 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub, and 2 acres of Woodlands and Forests

Within Rough Step Unit 5, development has largely occurred within the areas of the unincorporated County, but also within the cities of Temecula, Murrieta and Wildomar. A significant portion of land within Rough Step Unit 5 consists of 5-, 10-, and 20-acre parcels with single family homes approved through the (ERP) Expedited Review Process.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-25 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-26 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

3.2.6. Rough Step Unit 6 Rough Step Unit 6 encompasses 101,542 acres within the south-central region of western Riverside County and includes Antelope Valley, Warm Springs Creek, Paloma Creek, Lake Skinner, Johnson Ranch, and Diamond Valley Lake (see Figure 8, Rough Step Unit #6). This Rough Step area is bounded by Interstate 15 to the northwest, Bundy Canyon Road and Olive Avenue to the north, and Palm Avenue to the west. Within Rough Step Unit 6, 24,836 acres are located within the Criteria Area. Key vegetation communities within Rough Step Unit 6 include: coastal sage scrub, grasslands, riparian scrub, woodland, forest, and woodlands and forests. Rough step acreage goals are therefore provided for each of these habitat types. Table 16, Rough Step Unit 6 Acreage Totals, also includes acres conserved for habitats for which Rough Step acreage goals do not exist.

TABLE 16 Rough Step Unit 6 Acreage Totals Total Acres Table 6-3 Authorized for Additional Development by Reserve Total Acres Cities and the Land Conserved Allowable County Acreage (between Development (between Private Land Goal for the February 2000 Acreage June 22, 2004 Key Vegetation Acres within the Key and through and Communities within the Criteria Area in Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Rough Step the Rough Step Community 2015) 2015 2015) Coastal Sage Scrub 4,796 3,876 829 269 265 Grasslands 6,188 3,688 940 823 527 Riparian Scrub, Woodland, 268 208 34 15 12 Forest Woodlands and Forests 140 110 37 12 3 Remaining Vegetation Categories without Rough Step Acreage Goals Agriculture 944 1,200 Chaparral 739 120 Developed or Disturbed 32 205 Playas and Vernal Pools 0 0 Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage 2 2 Scrub Water 1 1 Total 3,558 2,335

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-27 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-28 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

A total of 3,558 acres of conservation has been acquired within this Rough Step Unit. In 2015 a Rough Step Unit 6 Snapshot

total of 294 acres were acquired within this Rough • All vegetation categories are “in” Rough Step Unit. This included 43 acres of Coastal Sage Step Scrub, 54 acres of Grassland, 5 acres of Woodlands and Forest, and 192 acres of non-key vegetation communities within this Rough Step Unit.

The RCA and affected Permittees are continuing to prioritize and focus efforts in acquiring riparian scrub, woodland forests within this Rough Step Unit.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-29 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

3.2.7. Rough Step Unit 7 Rough Step Unit 7 encompasses 130,824 acres within the central northwestern corner of western Riverside County (see Figure 9, Rough Step Unit #7). This Rough Step area includes Lake Matthews, Estelle Mountain, Motte Rimrock Preserve, and upland habitats in the Gavilan Hills and Harford Springs Park. This Rough Step Unit also includes portions of the cities of Corona, Riverside, and Perris. This unit is bound by State Route 91 to the north, Interstate 215 to the east, and the Santa Ana Mountains to west. Within Rough Step Unit 7, there are 26,775 acres within the Criteria Area. Key vegetation communities within Rough Step Unit 7 include: coastal sage scrub, grasslands, woodlands and forests, riparian scrub, woodland, forest, and Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub. Rough Step acreage goals are therefore provided for each of these habitat types. Table 17, Rough Step Unit 7 Acreage Totals, also includes acres conserved for habitats for which Rough Step acreage goals do not exist.

TABLE 17 Rough Step Unit 7 Acreage Totals Total Acres Authorized for Table 6-3 Development Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Reserve Land (between Development (between Private Land Acres Acreage Goal February 2000 Acreage June 22, 2004 Key Vegetation within the Criteria for the Key and through and Communities within the Area in the Rough Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Rough Step Step Community 2015) 2015 2015) Coastal Sage Scrub 9,222 7,102 1,121 513 428 Grasslands 3,620 1,550 140 376 179 Woodlands and Forests 493 333 27 28 1 Riparian Scrub, 570 460 50 22 23 Woodland, Forest Riversidean Alluvial Fan 400 350 39 10 24 Sage Scrub Remaining Vegetation Categories without Rough Step Acreage Goals Agriculture 3 149 Chaparral 300 116 Developed or Disturbed 40 242 Peninsular Juniper 7 30 Woodland and Scrub Water 4 9 Total 1,731 1,201

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-30 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-31 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

A total of 1,731 acres of conservation has been Rough Step Unit 7 Snapshot acquired or conserved within this Rough Step Unit.

In 2015, 42 acres of Additional Reserve Lands were • Riparian Scrub, Woodland, Forest “out” of acquired for conservation. Five acres of coastal sage Rough Step* scrub and 5 acres of grasslands were acquired. The • Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub “out” of Rough Step* rest of the 32 acres were in non-key vegetation communities.

*Both the riparian scrub, woodland, forest and the Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub vegetation categories are out of step due to one project. The grading permits were issued in 2015 for the Forestar Toscana project but grading did not start in 2015. In Phase I of three conservation phases the developer will convey 123 acres of conservation land to RCA. Within the 123 acres, 31 acres are riparian scrub, woodland, and forest and 31 acres are Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub which will bring Rough Step Unit 7 back “in” Rough Step.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-32 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

3.2.8. Rough Step Unit 8 Rough Step Unit 8 encompasses 50,408 acres within the west-central region of western Riverside County and includes the cities of Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake, the Alberhill Area, San Jacinto River, Horsethief Canyon, and Temescal Wash (see Figure 10, Rough Step Unit #8). This Rough Step Unit is bounded by the Santa Ana Mountains to the west, Interstate 215 to the east, Bundy Canyon Road to the south, and Rough Step Unit 7 to the north. Within Rough Step Unit 8, there are 22,690 acres within the Criteria Area. Key vegetation communities within Rough Step Unit 8 include: coastal sage scrub, grasslands, riparian scrub, woodland, forest, and Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub. Rough Step acreage goals are therefore provided for each of these habitat types. Table 18, Rough Step Unit 8 Acreage Totals, also includes acres conserved for habitats for which Rough Step acreage goals do not exist.

TABLE 18 Rough Step Unit 8 Acreage Totals Total Acres Authorized for Table 6-3 Development Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Reserve Land (between Development (between Private Land Acres Acreage Goal February 2000 Acreage June 22, 2004 Key Vegetation within the Criteria for the Key and through and Communities within the Area in the Rough Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Rough Step Step Community 2015) 2015 2015) Coastal Sage Scrub 6,400 4,940 2,745 876 290 Grasslands 3,690 1,840 209 374 529 Riparian Scrub, 280 250 85 12 0 Woodland, Forest Riversidean Alluvial Fan 190 130 17 13 9 Sage Scrub Remaining Vegetation Categories without Rough Step Acreage Goals Agriculture 2 66 Chaparral 1138 329 Developed or Disturbed 333 288 Water 0 0 Woodlands and Forests 6 0 Total 4,535 1,511

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-33 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

A total of 4,535 acres of conservation has been acquired Rough Step Unit 8 Snapshot within this Rough Step Unit. In 2015, 20 acres were acquired for conservation. This includes 12 acres of • Grasslands are “out of Rough Step” coastal sage scrub and 8 acres in non-key vegetation The RCA needs to acquire total of 172 acres of grasslands to bring this unit categories. back into Rough Step.

At the end of 2015, the vegetation category of Grasslands remains “out of Rough Step.” To bring the vegetation category back into Rough Step, a total of 172 acres are needed- a decrease of 19 acres from last year. There are 448 acres of pending grassland conservation in RSU 8; 1) completed JPR projects but not yet conveyed (212 ac), 2) Summerly Back Basin mitigation areas (139 ac), and 3) Cottonwood Canyon conservation area (97 ac). While the timing of conveyance of development related conservation is unknown, both the Summerly Back Basin and Cottonwood Canyon conservation can be expected within 1-2 years. The RCA and Permittees continue to focus our acquisition efforts when possible on grasslands, as well as working to acquire additional acres in the other vegetation categories, within this Rough Step Unit.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-34 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-35 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

3.2.9. Rough Step Unit 9 Rough Step Unit 9 is composed of three separate areas within Riverside County. The first area encompasses 80,163 acres within Western Riverside County within the Southwest area of the MSHCP. This portion of the Rough Step Unit consists of mostly Public/Quasi-Public Lands within the Cleveland National Forest forming the coastal mountain range between Southwest Riverside County and Orange County. The second area encompasses 20,975 acres within Western Riverside County within the Northeast area of the MSHCP. This portion of the Rough Step Unit consists of mostly Public/Quasi-Public Lands within the San Bernardino National Forest and the City of Banning north of the Morongo Indian Tribal Lands. The third area encompasses 138,720 acres within Western Riverside County within the Southeast Middle portion of the MSHCP. This portion of the Rough Step Unit consists of mostly Public/Quasi-Public Lands within the San Bernardino National Forest but does include the unincorporated areas of Idyllwild and Pine Cove, as well as Garner Valley north of Anza. (See Figure 12, Rough Step Unit #9). No Key vegetation communities within Rough Step Unit 9 were identified for Rough Step Analysis. Table 19, Rough Step Unit 9 Acreage Totals, includes acres conserved for habitats as well as development acreages within this Rough Step Unit.

TABLE 19 Rough Step Unit 9 Acreage Totals Total Acres Table 6-3 Authorized for Development Total Acres by Cities and Additional Conserved Allowable the County Reserve Land (between Development (between Private Land Acres Acreage Goal for February 2000 Acreage June 22, 2004 Key Vegetation within the Criteria the Key and through and Communities within the Area in the Rough Vegetation December 31, December 31, December 31, Rough Step Step Community 2015) 2015 2015) No Vegetation Categories have Rough Step Acreage Goals Agriculture 0 1 Chaparral 2 31 Coastal Sage Scrub 0 2 Developed or Disturbed 0 1 Grasslands 0 9 Meadow 0 0 Montane Coniferous 0 0 Forest Riparian Scrub, 0 0 Woodland, Forest Unknown 0 0 Woodlands and Forest 0 0 Total 2 44

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-36 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

The two acres of conservation that have been acquired within this Rough Step Unit consists of properties that Rough Step Unit 9 Snapshot were acquired in other Rough Step Units where the • No vegetation communities within property lines slightly cross into this unit. Losses are Rough Step Unit 9 were identified for primarily single-family homes or mobile homes on Rough Step Analysis large lots within unincorporated mountain communities.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-37 3.0 HABITAT LOSSES

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 3-38

4.0 ACTIVITIES WITHIN PLAN AREA

4.0 ACTIVITIES WITHIN PLAN AREA

4.1. Single-Family/Mobile Home Activity

4.1.1. Background In accordance with existing land use regulations, development of a single-family home or mobile home on an existing legal parcel is a Covered Activity within the Plan Area, per Section 7.3.2 of the MSHCP. Single-family home grading/site preparation permits and mobile home site preparation permits on existing legal lots within the Criteria Area are reviewed against the MSHCP Conservation Criteria solely to determine the least sensitive portion of the lot for building pad location. These activities are covered by the Expedited Review Process (ERP) provision of the Property Owner Initiated Habitat Evaluation and Acquisitions Negotiation Process. Section 7.3.2 of the MSHCP lists several assumptions regarding the predicted annual level of single- family/mobile home activity within the Criteria Area. Based on key assumptions, the MSHCP estimated approximately 75 parcels would utilize the ERP provision within the Criteria Area annually. These parcels were estimated to impact approximately 675 acres of land. It was also assumed that, of these 675 acres, half (338 acres) would be within areas considered desirable for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area. Finally, it was assumed that the Permittees would successfully negotiate conservation on 75% of all of the 338 acres, leaving 85 acres for single- family/mobile home development. The annual reporting process is used to determine whether ERP activity is occurring in a manner that is consistent with the assumptions made during MSHCP development.

4.1.2. Effect on Reserve Assembly Between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015, 32 single-family/mobile home permits utilized the ERP. These permits covered approximately 146 acres within the Criteria Area

A majority of the ERP activities occur within Rough Step Unit 4. A total of 113 acres (of the 146 acres that utilized the ERP) were identified as the “least sensitive” area and were assumed to be developed. The remaining 33 out of the 146 acres were identified as “sensitive,” meaning no disturbance (i.e., grading) is assumed for 33 acres of the ERP parcels. In summary, of the area utilized by the single-family/mobile home application process, approximately 23% of the area was determined to be “sensitive” and therefore avoided by development, while the remaining 77% was allowed to be disturbed (i.e., appropriate for development).

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 4-1

4.0 ACTIVITIES WITHIN PLAN AREA

4.1.3. 2015 Work Plan In 2015 the RCA will continue working with both the Cities and County to track single-family home projects that use the ERP. The RCA will continue to review aerial orthophotos when new ones become available for some projects that were reported as a loss to determine and confirm if the actual area of loss represented by those projects was correctly reported. The reviews performed to date have identified projects that did not impact as many acres of sensitive areas as first reported. The reviews also indicate that projects that were issued grading or building permits were later abandoned with little or no impact to sensitive areas. These projects have been documented in the appropriate losses corrected GIS files for each year.

4.2. Public Works Projects MSHCP Permittees include the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (County Flood), Riverside County Park and Open-Space District (County Parks), Riverside County Waste Management Department, Riverside County Transportation Commission, the 18 cities in western Riverside County, Riverside County, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and California Department of Parks and Recreation (State Parks). These agencies’ projects are Covered Activities under the Plan and, in some instances, are subject to Joint Project Review (JPR). JPRs for State Parks and Caltrans are the responsibility of the Wildlife Agencies, while the JPR process for public projects by the other Permittees, as appropriate, is the responsibility of the RCA. Table 20, Public Works Projects (January 1 through December 31, 2015), summarizes public works project activity during 2015.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 4-2

4.0 ACTIVITIES WITHIN PLAN AREA

TABLE 20 Public Works Projects (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015)

Public Works Permittee Activities Approved between January 1 and December 31, 2015

County of Riverside Transportation • Coronita Traffic Signal and Lighting Project Department • El Cerrito, Hemet, and Perris Maintenance Years Pavement Resurfacing Projects • Retention Basin for SR-79 • Fiscal year slurry/resurfacing project over various roads • Clinton Keith Road Extension, Phase 2

Riverside County Transportation • I-215 Bi County HOV Gap Closure, Riverside to San Bernardino Commission • I-215 Central, Menifee, Perris • 91 HOV Project, Riverside • 91 / Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension

Riverside County Park and Open-Space • Outdoor Classrooms at Hidden Valley District • Trail plans for Hidden Valley

Riverside Flood Control and Water • Romoland MDP Line A, Stages 4,5,6 Conservation District • Santa Ana Canyon Below Prado IE Brine Line Protection Project • Hemet MDP Line C, Stage 4 • Little Lake MDP Line B, Stage 1 • Stetson Avenue Channel, Stage 7 (aka Hemet MDP Line D) • Temescal Creek – Foster Road Storm Drain

California State Parks • Various campground facilities refurbishment and replacement

CalTrans • SR-91 – Upgrading Guard Rails • SR-371 – Rubberized Hot Mix Asphalt Gap – Graded & Localized Dig Out • SR-371- Construct Centerline and Edgeline Rumble Strips • SR 74 – Pavement Rehabilitation • Bridge Preservation on various routes • Methacrylate Bridge Decks, Repair Approach Slabs, and Joint Deals • I-215 – Line and/or Invert Pave 3 culverts • I-215 – Oversight(RCTD): Widen Newport Rd OC, Reconstruct IC Ramps • SR-371 – Construct 4’ Right Shoulder on both directions

Waste Management • Lamb Canyon Improvements • Badlands Landfill Improvements

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 4-3

4.0 ACTIVITIES WITHIN PLAN AREA

4.3 Participating Special Entity Permits Per Section 6.1.6 of the MSHCP, the RCA may grant MSHCP take authorization to non-signatory public agencies and other regional service providers under the Participating Special Entity provision, as described in Section 11.8 of the Implementation Agreement. The MSHCP defines “Participating Special Entity” as any regional public facility provider, such as a utility company or a public district or other agency that operates and/or owns land within the MSHCP Plan Area but who is not a Permittee and who is granted take authorization.

There were no PSE projects that were started or completed in 2015.

4.4 Criteria Refinement As indicated in Section 6.6.2F of the MSHCP, Permittees are expected to implement the MSHCP consistent with Cell Criteria. In cases where a Permittee and/or landowner believes that conservation objectives could be achieved in an alternative location or alternative Reserve design scenario, the criteria can be refined to reflect such modification.

For the annual reporting year of 2015, the RCA met with several Permittees about potential Criteria Refinements, but none were officially proposed or submitted to the RCA.

4.5 Agency Cooperation Many of the covered species and associated sensitive habitats are located on federal and state lands. For these reasons, existing federal and state lands were included in the existing 347,000 acres of Public/Quasi-Public lands. Assumption for conservation of these lands came with the goal that memoranda of understanding (MOU) between these state, federal, and other governmental/quasi- governmental agencies must be established to ensure that lands are managed in concert with covered species’ needs.

U.S. Forest Service. Under agreement with the San Bernardino and Cleveland National Forests, MSHCP Monitoring Program biologists have been conducting species surveys in Forest areas since 2005 and continued the process of completing the scheduled initial inventory for species presence. Survey information is shared and activities coordinated with Forest and other Reserve Managers within the MSHCP at monthly Reserve Managers meetings hosted by the Monitoring Program.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 4-4

4.0 ACTIVITIES WITHIN PLAN AREA

Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Lands owned by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Western Riverside County contribute to Reserve Assembly as PQP lands. The majority of the BLM lands within the MSHCP are associated with the Riverside County Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan (SKR-HCP). The BLM released the revision to their South Coast Resource Management Plan in June 2011 . The RCA entered into an MOU with the BLM (RCA Agreement No. 09002, BLM MOU No.CA-660-08-01) on June 6, 2008 as a cooperating agency on this plan. Through this MOU, the RCA worked with the BLM to maximize coordination and achieve consistency where practical in the development of the revisions to the SCRMP. When completed and adopted, the revised SCRMP will be the basis for the BLM and RCA to enter into additional MOU discussions to allow Adaptive Management on BLM properties that would be necessary to meet the objectives of the MSHCP's species specific management plans as they evolve following completion of the initial Monitoring Program species inventory. The SCRMP has not yet been adopted by the BLM.

Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA). The RCHCA is the joint powers authority responsible for implementation of the Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat HCP in western Riverside County. The RCHCA owns approximately 6,700 acres of conservation land at Estelle Mountain and the Southwest MSR surrounding Lake Skinner and Diamond Valley Lake, and manages another 10,000 acres at Southwest MSR. As such, the RCHCA is an important conservation land owner in the MSHCP Plan area and monitoring/management coordination between the RCHCA and RCA will benefit MSHCP Covered Species. The RCHCA allows access for MSHCP biological monitoring purposes.

Riverside Corona Resource Conservation District (RCRCD). In 2010 the RCA and RCRCD entered into a management MOU for properties which RCRCD either holds in fee title or has a conservation easement over. RCRCD manages those lands in a cooperative manner consistent with the goals and objectives of the MSHCP. The RCA and RCRCD also work collaboratively on in lieu fee program related mitigation opportunities on RCA-owned land and on potential acquisitions within RCRCD’s service area.

Inland Empire Resource Conservation District (IERCD) In 2012 the RCA and IERCD entered into a management MOU for properties within the Plan area which IERCD either holds in fee title or has a conservation easement over. IERCD manages those lands in a cooperative manner consistent with the goals and objectives of the MSHCP. The RCA and IERCD also work collaboratively on in lieu fee program related mitigation opportunities on RCA-owned land.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 4-5

4.0 ACTIVITIES WITHIN PLAN AREA

4.6 Clerical/Minor Amendments to the MSHCP

4.6.1 Clerical Amendments Section 6.10.1 of the MSHCP outlines clerical amendments to the MSHCP and associated revision requirements. The MSHCP states that clerical amendments shall be made by the RCA on its own initiative or in response to a written request submitted by any Permittee or Wildlife Agency, which includes documentation supporting the proposed clerical change. Clerical changes shall not require any amendment to the MSHCP, the Permits, or the Implementing Agreement. Clerical changes include corrections of typographical, grammatical, and similar editing errors that do not change the intended meaning and corrections of any maps or exhibits to correct insignificant errors in mapping. It is assumed that most clerical changes to the MSHCP will occur during the first 10 years of MSHCP implementation. Clerical amendments are to be summarized in each annual report and are found in Appendix A of this report.

In 2015, the RCA did not process any clerical amendments.

4.6.2 Minor Amendments Section 6.10.2 of the MSHCP outlines minor amendments to the MSHCP and associated revision procedures. The following items are considered minor amendments to the MSHCP and shall be administratively implemented:

(1) Minor corrections to land ownership; (2) minor revisions to survey, monitoring, reporting, and/or management protocols that clearly do not affect covered species or overall MSHCP Conservation Area functions and values; (3) transfer of target Reserve Assembly acreages between identified subunits within a single Area Plan and/or between Area Plans within a single Rough Step Analysis Unit consistent with the criteria; (4) application of take authorization to development within Cities incorporated within the MSHCP boundaries after the effective date of the Implementing Agreement, assuming such inclusion does not preclude Reserve Assembly, significantly increase the cost of MSHCP Conservation Area management or assembly, or preclude achieving covered species conservation and goals; (5) annexation or deannexation of property within the Plan Area pursuant to Section 11.5 of the Implementing Agreement, provided such inclusion does not preclude Reserve Assembly, significantly increase the cost of the MSHCP Conservation Area management or assembly, or preclude achieving covered species conservation and goals;

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 4-6

4.0 ACTIVITIES WITHIN PLAN AREA

(6) minor extension of cut or fill slopes outside of the right-of-way limits analyzed in the MSHCP for covered roadways to accommodate construction in rolling or mountainous terrain; and (7) updates/corrections to the vegetation map and/or species occurrence data.

No minor amendments were processed in 2015.

4.7 Fires, Floods, Drought and Reserve Assembly Section 6.8.3 of the MSHCP discusses changed circumstances potentially affecting the MSCHP Conservation Area that include Short-Interval Return Fire, Floods, Drought and Invasion by Exotic Species. While none of these changed circumstances have occurred, the Annual Report will continue reporting on fires within the MSHCP area. RCA staff started reporting fire activity in 2012.

Short-Interval Return Fire

For the purpose of defining Changed Circumstances, short-interval return fire is defined as fire occurring in the same location as a previous fire within the same footprint more than once in a 5- year period within the MSHCP Conservation Area. The RCA lands have not experienced a wildfire in the same area in any six year period.

Fire Regime defines the expected fire return interval and the severity of the damage from the wildfire. Condition Class is an indication of the degree to which the vegetation is within the Fire Regime Classification. Both of these factors are defined by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group.

Most of the coastal sage and chaparral of the RCA is within the Fire Regime III, which has a 35 to 100 year fire return interval with mixed severity. The condition class varies based on location and fire history. In 2015 the Mustang Fire burned RCA lands northeast of San Timoteo Canyon, which contained coastal sage and chaparral. The area was previously burned in 1970.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 4-7

4.0 ACTIVITIES WITHIN PLAN AREA

4.8 Activities Affecting Reserve Assembly In consultation with the Wildlife Agencies, this section is meant to provide documentation of actions which have influenced reserve design during the last year. No significant activities occurred in 2015 which influenced reserve design above those activities already reported herein.

Detailed information was reported in past Annual Reports on any activities that affected Reserve Assembly.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 4-8

5.0 FUNDING SUMMARY

5.0 FUNDING SUMMARY The Plan requires that the RCA provide an accounting of relevant financial information for each reporting period. Table 21, RCA Program Operation Financial Summary, reflects the specific categories, as detailed in Appendix B-05 of the MSHCP. Table 22, Permittee Revenue (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015), summarizes monthly income for each Permittee for the reporting period.

TABLE 21 RCA Program Operation Financial Summary

Prior to Plan Approval through January 1 through December 31, 2014 December 31, 2015 Program Costs Conservation Using HANS 41,000 acres to be conserved Projection of % Conserved Annually 61% 5% Projection of acres to be conserved 25,010 2,050 % of Conservation through 1.85% 0.00% Development Process Actual Conserved Acres (Note 1) 759.76 0.00

Local Acquisitions Projection of % Acquired Annually 65% 5% 56,000 acres to be conserved Projection of acres to be acquired 36,400 2,800 Projected Price per Acre $13,100 $13,100 Actual % of Conservation by Local 53.92% 1.09% Acquisition Actual Price per Acre $9,654 $7,639 Actual Acquisition Cost (Note 2) $291,521,556 $4,641,607 Actual Conserved Acres 30,197.00 607.63

97,000 acres to be conserved Total Acres New Conservation 30,956.76 607.63

State and Federal Acquisitions State Acquisitions 56,000 acres to be conserved Actual Price per Acre $8,780 $8,664 Actual Acquisition Cost $95,927,937 $1,672,190

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 5-1

5.0 FUNDING SUMMARY

Prior to Plan Approval through January 1 through December 31, 2014 December 31, 2015 Actual Conserved Acres 10,925.75 193.01

Federal Acquisitions Actual Price per Acre $7,908 $8,386 Actual Acquisition Cost $49,449,624 $3,232,810 Actual Conserved Acres 6,253.20 385.49

State and Federal Acquisitions Actual Acquisition Costs $145,377,561 $4,905,000 Actual Conserved Acres 17,178.95 578.50

MSHCP Total Acres Total Acquisition Costs $436,899,117 $9,546,607 153,000 acres to be Conserved Total Acres New Conservation 48,135.71 1,186.13

Program Management

Management Based on Actual $7,048,074 $1,029,268

Monitoring Based on Actual $11,641,567 $1,242,875

Administration Based on Actual $33,589,426 $3,055,008 Management Existing Lands $17 (30% of management cost) N.A. N.A. Subtotal Management and $52,279,067 $5,327,151 Administration Costs

Total Reporting Period Costs $489,178,184 $14,873,758

Program Revenue Development Fees Per unit Residential Fee $1,651 Combined Residential, Commercial $146,374,628 $10,919,055 Per acre Com & Ind Fee $5,160 and Industrial Fees Total Development Fee Revenue $146,374,628 $10,919,055

Density Bonus Fees Program Still in Development $0 $0

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 5-2

5.0 FUNDING SUMMARY

Prior to Plan Approval through January 1 through December 31, 2014 December 31, 2015 Units using density bonus Program Still in Development $0 $0 Per Unit Fee Program Still in Development NA NA Density Bonus Fees NA NA Subtotal Density Bonus Revenue $0 $0 Landfill Revenue Landfill Revenue - Previous Years $6,000,000 N.A. El Sobrante Revenue $20,054,562 $2,583,960 Other Landfill Fees $2,387,379 $319,085 Subtotal Landfill Revenue $28,441,941 $2,903,045

Infrastructure Mitigation Measure “A” Revenue $137,009,708 $3,000,000 TUMF $3,300,232 $200,000 Flood Control $2,524,940 $1,568,057 Other Gov MSHCP Infrastructure $1,213,689 $88,113 Other Gov MSHCP Civic projects $2,318,998 $41,969 Misc Participating Fees $9,825,273 $7,206 Subtotal Infrastructure Revenue $156,192,840 $4,905,345

Total Revenue in Reporting Period $331,009,409 $18,727,444 Total Reporting Period Costs $489,178,184 $14,873,758

Note 1: There are approximately 9,857 acres identified to be conserved at some future date from the JPR (Joint Project Review) and HANS Review of developments from the inception of the Plan. Note 2: Acquisition Costs includes RCTC Measure "A" funds. Note 3: Total Acres New Conservation includes the Potrero - MARB SKR Tradeout lands and all acquisitions both inside and outside of the MSHCP Criteria Cells by RCA and Permittees since February 2000.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 5-3

5.0 FUNDING SUMMARY

TABLE 22 Permittee Revenue (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) Permittee January-15 February-15 March-15 April-15 May-15 June-15 July-15 CITY OF BANNING $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CITY OF BEAUMONT $71,706 $36,822 $48,450 $75,582 $104,652 $209,304 $19,520 CITY OF CALIMESA $0 $0 $27,132 $54,264 $15,504 $13,566 $0 CITY OF CANYON LAKE $0 $3,876 $3,876 $0 $0 $5,814 $0 CITY OF CORONA $0 $31,008 $1,938 $3,876 $0 $0 $185,357 CITY OF EASTVALE $142,562 $98,532 $37,109 $102,743 $278,815 $104,268 $1,250,967 CITY OF HEMET $6,115 $7,805 $7,871 $15,504 $3,876 $28,336 $19,520 CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY $46,512 $70,171 $160,384 $73,817 $38,760 $104,652 $150,784 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,811 $0 $0 CITY OF MENIFEE $54,264 $73,850 $54,264 $98,838 $103,554 $69,768 $101,454 CITY OF MORENO VALLEY $27,132 $23,256 $58,053 $73,644 $15,982 $454,402 $0 CITY OF MURRIETA $0 $0 $249,662 $0 $16,888 $1,122 $1,938 CITY OF NORCO $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CITY OF PERRIS $19,149 $27,132 $40,698 $32,946 $17,442 $29,070 $27,132 CITY OF RIVERSIDE $70,352 $30,940 $11,322 $47,914 $65,822 $85,894 $8,374 CITY OF SAN JACINTO $15,504 $13,698 $0 $3,876 $40,269 $56,202 $0 CITY OF TEMECULA $3,179 $30,396 $41,106 $0 $37,230 $15,504 $0 CITY OF WILDOMAR $1,269 $3,876 $0 $0 $17,442 $15,504 $24,950 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE $178,011 $93,024 $201,552 $68,556 $82,533 $246,299 $169,810 Totals $635,755 $544,386 $943,417 $651,560 $860,580 $1,439,705 $1,959,806

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 5-4

5.0 FUNDING SUMMARY

TABLE 22 (Continued) Permittee Revenue (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) Permittee Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Totals 2015 % of TOTAL CITY OF BANNING $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% CITY OF BEAUMONT $40,992 $60,512 $81,984 $98,929 $39,040 $887,493 8.13% CITY OF CALIMESA $31,232 $0 $0 $0 $74,176 $215,874 1.98% CITY OF CANYON LAKE $3,904 $1,952 $0 $0 $0 $19,422 0.18% CITY OF CORONA $0 $165,926 $3,904 $5,856 $0 $397,865 3.64% CITY OF EASTVALE $23,033 $77,013 $25,376 $38,935 $29,280 $2,208,633 20.23% CITY OF HEMET $0 $23,424 $7,808 $15,616 $0 $135,875 1.25% CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY $154,015 $70,272 $31,856 $39,040 $37,088 $977,351 8.95% CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,811 0.20% CITY OF MENIFEE $54,656 $124,928 $47,172 $17,568 $42,944 $843,260 7.72% CITY OF MORENO VALLEY $0 $1,952 $18,972 $95,315 $0 $768,708 7.04% CITY OF MURRIETA $0 $25,888 $1,952 $333,450 $0 $630,900 5.78% CITY OF NORCO $0 $10,753 $0 $0 $0 $10,753 0.10% CITY OF PERRIS $74,452 $52,172 $201,153 $422,209 $25,376 $968,931 8.87% CITY OF RIVERSIDE $142,043 $8,840 $12,092 $207,512 $31,858 $722,963 6.62% CITY OF SAN JACINTO $0 $33,184 $4,850 $11,712 $17,568 $196,863 1.80% CITY OF TEMECULA $15,504 $9,564 $19,602 $42,595 $17,900 $232,580 2.13% CITY OF WILDOMAR $9,760 $0 $0 $23,424 $15,616 $111,841 1.02% COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE $95,803 $124,341 $145,527 $100,104 $62,372 $1,567,932 14.36% Totals $645,394 $790,721 $602,248 $1,452,265 $393,218 $10,919,055 100.00%

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 5-5

6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

6.1 Management Goal

Section 5.2 of the MSHCP indicates that management’s goal is to “establish and maintain a self- sustaining MSHCP Conservation Area that focuses on conserving habitats and species and is consistent with the conservation objectives for the covered species.”

Management activities for the MSHCP will occur at two levels: habitat/landscaped-based, and species-specific-based. The MSHCP Management team will need to focus on the balance between managing the overall landscape of the future 500,000-acre Reserve, along with making sure that specific species requirements (see Table 5-2 of MSHCP) are also met. The key to management of the MSHCP Reserve will be to incorporate an Adaptive Management methodology so that management of habitats and species can be flexible and adaptable. As the MSHCP Reserve builds out, and as the Monitoring Program data increases, MSHCP Reserve Managers will be able to develop and incorporate Adaptive Management activities.

In the last year, MSHCP Reserve Management team has been working closely with the Biological Monitoring Program team to better understand survey data and how to compare and/or correlate data with habitat/landscaped-based activities.

6.2 General Management Activities

Section 5.2.1 of the MSHCP stipulates that the Reserve Managers and Reserve Management Oversight Committee (RMOC) identify the priorities for management activities to carry out the species objectives and biological values. In 2009 the RMOC Steering Committee was formed to focus and direct the functions of the RMOC. The RMOC Steering Committee consists of; RCA, USFWS, CDFW, State Parks, and County Parks.

The RCA Reserve Manager, a contracted employee of Riverside County Regional Park and Open- Space District, established priorities in collaboration with RCA management staff. The following outlines activities that MSHCP Reserve Management staff focused on in 2015 per Section 5.2.1 of the MSHCP:

• Controlled unauthorized public access through fencing, gates, signage, etc. • Performing initial baseline assessments of new acquired properties within the first four years of conveyance to the MSHCP. • Maintaining upland and lowland habitats in conditions similar to or better than when it was acquired.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-1 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

• Maintaining wetland and riparian habitats in conditions similar to or better than when it was acquired. • Removal of non-native invasive species and restored natural habitat using plants grown from propagated seeds collected on-site. • Conducting weed abatement projects to comply with County Ordinance 695.

6.3 Reserve Management Units

The MSHCP contemplated five management units (See Figure 5-1 of MSHCP). After Plan adoption, the Reserve Managers created a more detailed breakdown of the management units depicted in the MSHCP. In order to manage the entire 500,000-acre Reserve in an effective and efficient manner, it was necessary to break up the MSHCP’s five management units into more manageable sizes. The current nine Reserve Management Units are shown below:

Figure 12 Reserve Habitat Management Units (HMU)

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-2 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

The MSHCP Management team has completed the draft management plan for the Menifee HMU which will act as the “blueprint” for how each unit should be managed over time. The management plans will identify specific habitat or vegetation management methodologies (i.e., burning, mowing, grazing, herbicides, hand clearing or thinning), as well as focus on any species-specific management needs. When approved by the Reserve Managers Oversight Committee, the Menifee HMU Management Plan will act as a model for subsequent HMU management plans.

The figure below shows the number of acres acquired and owned by the RCA toward the Reserve in each Habitat Management Unit. As the reserve land in each management unit is assembled, implementation of the management activities within the Plan Area will become more cohesive and easier to implement. Acres by Habitat Management Unit 14,000 12,945

12,000 Sage Cactus Valley 10,000 Menifee

8,000 San Timoteo Gavilan

ACREAGE 6,000 San Jacinto Badlands 3,601 3,572 3,554 4,000 Santa Ana Mtns 2,563 2,130 River 2,000 1,641 1,009 Forest Service Trabuco 286 1 0 HABITAT MANAGEMENT UNITS

Figure 13 Acres by Habitat Management Unit (HMU)

6.4 Reserve Management Staffing

In addition to RCA management staff, the RCA contracts with Riverside County Regional Park and Open-Space District (Parks District) for reserve management. The Parks District reserve management in 2015 had 8.75 full time equivalent (F.T.E.) personnel assigned to the RCA program. These included a Natural Resources Manager (dividing assignments 75% to MSHCP and 25% to other District duties) who oversees all MSHCP management services; two full-time Natural Resource Specialists, who perform a variety of resource related tasks including the evaluation of newly acquired MSHCP lands; one Park Ranger Supervisor, who oversees day-to-

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-3 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

day field operations of Rangers and Park Maintenance Workers; two Park Ranger IIs, and three Park Maintenance Workers.

6.5 RCA Properties Managed by the Park District

Currently, the Reserve Management team oversees approximately 630 individual parcels at 190 locations in the MSHCP Reserve totaling approximately 31,716 acres. The properties added in 2015 are shown in Table 23. Acquisitions were moderate during this reporting period. It should be noted that not all the MSHCP Reserve properties are directly managed by the Parks District. The Park District only manages lands that the RCA holds in fee title or has a recorded conservation easement over. Other lands are generally managed by the owning entities. The RCA continues to work with those entities to ensure reserve properties are managed in accordance with the MSHCP.

Summary of New Properties Managed by County Parks added to the Reserve Inventory as of December, 2015 Table 23 NEW RCA RESERVE PROPERTIES ACQUIRED IN 2015 Closed Date Property Name Map/Detail Number Acres 1/16/2015 ANHEUSER BUSCH PHASE 4 15-001 73.21 2/18/2015 OLDAR, MARK & MARY #2 15-002 157.26 2/27/2015 TNC/MONTE CRISTO 15-003 20.66 3/25/2015 WITEK, SHARON 15-004 19.81 5/15/2015 EVANDEL - WILSON 15-005 81.67 5/22/2015 McCAUSLAND, LOUISE & STEPHEN 15-006 6.94 5/29/2015 EVANDALE - BERGSTEIN 15-007 107.99 8/25/2015 KAELIN #2 15-008 25.26 8/26/2015 CONSTANZO, CONSTANCE 15-009 9.09 10/09/2015 INLAND PREMIER PHASE 2 15-010 73.66 10/09/2015 RCTC DONATION 15-011 5.00 10/22/2015 SHEFFIELD 15-012 19.65 10/30/2015 McCORMICK, JAMES 15-013 4.63 11/16/2015 STEARNS ESTUDILLO 15-014 81.51 12/03/2015 DYER, WYNN 15-015 20.19 10/06/2015 TAX SALE PARCELS 2013 DETAIL 1 15-016 20.00 10/06/2015 TAX SALE PARCELS 2013 DETAIL 2 15-017 12.44 10/06/2015 TAX SALE PARCELS 2013 DETAIL 6 15-018 17.00 10/06/2015 TAX SALE PARCELS 2013 DETAIL 7 15-019 10.00

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-4 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

10/06/2015 TAX SALE PARCELS 2013 DETAIL 8 15-020 27.56 10/06/2015 TAX SALE PARCELS 2013 DETAIL 9 15-021 40.00 10/06/2015 TAX SALE PARCELS 2013 DETAIL 1 15-022 25.37 10/06/2015 TAX SALE PARCELS 2013 DETAIL 1 15-023 21.41 10/06/2015 TAX SALE PARCELS 2014 15-024 19.83 12/15/2015 LLOYD, CAMERON & SETH 15-025 161.81 TOTAL ACRES 1061.95* *Acres added in 2013 do not include properties managed by Federal, State or Local Agencies and Districts

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-5 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

6.6 2015 Management Activities

6.6.1 Property Assessments

Properties that meet MSHCP conservation needs continue to be acquired by the RCA. Following appraisals and negotiations, the RCA requests a walk-over inspection of the site to ensure there are no significant issues that would prevent the RCA from acquiring and managing. Such issues include significant trash dumps, hazmat or other health and safety issues. The District also inspects the properties to ensure that the property corners have been clearly staked and marked. If no issues are identified during the inspections, the RCA is informed, and the acquisition can be completed, at which point the property is turned over to the Reserve Management. Management staff assisted the RCA in inspections of all new sites. Once the property is acquired by the RCA, then Reserve Management staff prepares an Initial Management Evaluation Report (IMER). During 2015, no IMERs were completed. The IMERs are maintained by the RCA, and will be helpful over time in preparing adaptive management plans.

Figure 14 Evandel-Wilson Property

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-6 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

6.6.2 Habitat Protection and Site Security

A clearly stated goal of management of the MSHCP is the protection of Reserve lands from human activities that can degrade or destroy the habitat. Measures put in place to ensure the protection of the species and limit habitat degradation include fencing, gates, fuels reduction/weed abatement and increased ranger patrol during sensitive periods of life history cycle (e.g., during burrowing owl breeding season or spadefoot metamorphosis). During 2015 the majority of MSHCP management efforts have been spent on these endeavors. As time goes by, more of Management staff time will be spent on a more in-depth adaptive and biological management of the Reserve properties. Currently, most staff time still needs to be spent securing and protecting the properties from degradation.

The types of uses permitted on MSHCP properties continue to be addressed on a case-by-case basis in discussions between the RCA and Management staff. In general, pursuant to the requirements of the MSHCP, passive public use is not excluded from the MSHCP Reserve properties, but motorized access or recreation is not permitted. Additionally, hunting, shooting, archery (unless authorized), recreational paint ball, camping and fires are not permitted. Generally, State owned and managed MSHCP reserve properties allow hunting with restrictions.

Maintenance efforts continue to focus on the establishment and maintenance of access controls in high trespass areas. Such areas during the 2015 calendar year include the San Timoteo Canyon, Gavilan Hills, and Sage/Anza areas. For the 2015 year, no third party vendors were used for the installation of fencing or gates, unless the fencing was for a mitigation restoration project. All of the new and permanent fencing and gates were fabricated and installed by Reserve Management staff. In total, Management staff fabricated and installed approximately 2,050 linear feet of new fencing at 10 different sites and fabricated and installed 7 gates and 1 access step-over.

Most of the enforcement efforts in during 2015 were focused on the patrol for the interdiction of OHV users, illegal dumping and illegal hunting. Interdiction and cooperation from OHV users continues to be difficult and highly problematic in terms of effectiveness. To this end, Management staff has been working with Park District Rangers (Open-Space Unit), the Riverside County Sheriff’s ROVE patrols (when available), Riverside County Code Enforcement, as well as other law enforcement agencies, including Department of Fish and Wildlife Officers and BLM Rangers, in an attempt to coordinate activities and to assist and solicit assistance between these groups. Given the budget shortages on all sides, interaction with the aforementioned agencies has been limited, but assistance from Riverside County Sheriff’s ROVE Patrol and the Department of Fish and Wildlife has increased during the year. During the 2015 calendar year, ROVE patrol conducted citation sweeps in the Badlands, San Timoteo, and Menifee HMUs making contact with

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-7 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

and citing multiple groups and individuals for illegal OHV use and trespass. Opportunities to cooperate with other regional resource agencies and increasing Park District Ranger citation capability should be consider in the future to improve compliance.

Illegal dumping continued to be a major concern. Areas cleaned up have often been dumped on again within a very short time, sometimes within 24 hours. With the decrease in Code Enforcement personnel, Management staff has been forced to decrease its reliance on inter-agency communication and cooperation. Metal theft continues to be a problem with multiple gates and fences being stolen and damaged during the year. A total of ±11.40 tons (22,800 pounds) of illegally dumped refuse was removed from RCA properties in 2015. All ±11.40 tons of refuse were taken to the local dump, while residual and smaller dumps were placed in MSHCP commercial dumpsters at the Natural Resources Management Office in Hidden Valley. There was a decrease of ±7.05 tons of refuse illegally dumped on RCA properties in 2015.

Management Activity Data Sheets (MADS)

In 2014, Reserve Management implemented a pilot program to document issues and unwanted activities that occur throughout the Reserve system. The results of the pilot program were shown to be very effective in understanding where resources should be allocated and where Rangers should patrol. In 2015, staff continued to document any disturbance or unwanted activity, noting location, time and date. Field information was then inputted into ArcPad, ArcGIS and then mapped; which depicted known hotspots and allowed Ranger staff to respond accordingly.

From January to December of 2015, 178 MADS were submitted by staff which documented 15 dumping incidents (12 total in 2014), 84 incidents of fence damage (41), 7 incidents of gate damage (6), 10 OHV contacts (8), and 26 incidents of OHV damage (9). In total, 2420 feet of fencing was repaired and/or replaced due to theft or damage (1,139 feet repaired in 2014).

Of the documented occurrences, 123 out of 178 were associated with OHV activity. OHV activity includes damage to habitat, newly established trails or jumps, damaged fencing and gates with obvious signs of OHV use, OHV activity observed within RCA Reserve lands (no contact made) and direct-contact and escort removal of OHV off RCA Reserve lands.

Future MADS documenting efforts will move toward electronic field input, which will decrease the amount of paper used and data input/analysis time.

6.6.3 Management Coordination

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-8 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

During 2015 the monthly Reserve Managers meetings continued to provide a venue to discuss coordination between different management entities in the boundaries of the MSHCP. Since the inception of the Reserve Managers group, the meetings have grown to include members from most local management agencies, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, California Department of Parks and Recreation, and the Center for Natural Lands Management. Together, this group discusses a myriad of management and monitoring issues and how to best solve them.

Management staff also attends monthly meetings with RCA and Monitoring Program management to discuss the month’s activities, seek input on management issues, and generally coordinate field evaluations for RCA acquisitions. Additionally, Management staff meets internally on a bi-weekly basis to discuss current projects and acquisitions and to coordinate its activities.

6.6.4 Habitat Enhancement

In 2015 Management staff continued efforts to enhance disturbed habitat at various Reserve properties. Activities conducted during the 2015 calendar year included both creation and restoration projects that will directly benefit the covered species. Some of the highlighted projects are described in this section.

Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD)-SBKR Relocation Habitat Enhancement Project

In summary, management activities that took place during 2015 included monthly site visits, photo point stations, vegetation management, trapping efforts, and seed collection.

The EMWD property, which includes conservation easements over 200 acres of EMWD lands and over 252 acres of Lake Hemet Municipal Water District lands in the upper San Jacinto River, is subject to ongoing habitat management for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat. In 2015, management staff implemented a variety of methods to improve the habitat within the EMWD SBKR treatment areas in 5 Treatment Areas. All management areas were visited monthly in 2015. Site conditions was assessed and photo points were taken. In addition to regular visits and photo points some of the treatment areas required additional management.

Treatment Area A: Treatment Area A was treated for mustard (Brassica spp) during the spring and summer of 2015. Approximately 2.70 acres of mustard was chemically treated with Roundup® or mechanically removed by gas powered string trimmers or hand pulling. Treatment Area A was visited multiple

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-9 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

times throughout the spring and summer to ensure all the mustard was removed and regrowth did not occur.

Treatment Area B: Treatment Area B was treated for mustard during the spring and summer of 2015. Approximately 1.50 acres of mustard was chemically treated with Roundup® or mechanically removed by gas powered string trimmers or hand pulling. Treatment Area B was visited multiple times throughout the spring and summer to ensure all the mustard was removed. Any mustard that was missed in the initial applications of herbicide was hand pulled or removed via string trimmers.

Treatment Area F: In 2013 native container plants were planted in Treatment Area F in areas with no vegetation cover. Along with the planting, each plant was affixed with protective wire cages and shade cloth. In 2015 all protective wire cages and shade cloth was removed around the plantings. The majority of the plants have survived and are growing into healthy shrubs. At the end of 2015, Treatment Area F experienced a high regrowth of Russian thistle (Salsola tragus) and approximately 4.0 acres was treated with chemical or mechanical means.

In addition to vegetation management, the EMWD SBKR site was also trapped for small mammals in the year 2015. Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris) and San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus) were detected but not in high densities. Deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax) and a western harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis) were also trapped.

Seed collection of native plants was completed at the EMWD property. Encelia seed was collected throughout the EMWD management area. Seeds were collected to be grown in green houses at the RCA Goodhart Reserve and at the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area. Seeds were germinated in seed trays and transplanted to 1 gallon containers. In the future, these plants can be planted in the Treatment Areas to improve habitat.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-10 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

Figure 15 EMWD San Jacinto River Relocation Area-Before and After

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-11 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

CALMAT

In 2012 Management staff embarked on a ±11.0 acre habitat restoration project with in the CALMAT Reserve using grant funding obtained by the Parks District from the California Off Highway Vehicle Recreation division of the California State Parks Department. The CALMAT property is located in the Badlands area east of the City of Moreno Valley, northwest of the intersection of Gilman Springs Road and Jack Rabbit Trail. Prior to RCA acquisition in 2010 the CALMAT property had been heavily used as an OHV recreation area and sustained direct OHV damage and indirect damage from wildfires resulting in vegetation damage and erosion from the network of OHV trails.

In 2015, Management staff continued regular site visits to irrigate planted areas after the end of restoration contract. Staff also spent several weeks applying herbicide to entire planted area to control prolific Russian thistle. As of the end of 2015 the site had less than <60% plant mortality and very little Russian thistle went to seed in the planted area. Going into 2016 staff only expects the site to require a moderate amount of upkeep to retain restoration efforts.

Hidden Valley Wildlife Area BUOW Habitat Improvements In early spring of 2015 efforts were made to make the Hidden Valley artificial burrow complex more attractive to ground squirrels. Nine wood piles were installed in the southern portion of the complex to provide cover for ground squirrels. Wood piles allow for a safe places for ground squirrels from adjacent areas to start new burrows in an otherwise inhospitable landscape. In addition, 22 coyote melon (Cucurbita foetidissima) tubers were transplanted to the field. The seeds of the coyote melon provide an important food for ground squirrels and other rodents. Approximately half of the melons started to grow during the summer; however only four of the melons thrived and produced fruit (all in the southern portion of the property). Despite these efforts there was no sign of ground squirrels in the burrow complex. Management staff assumes the sandy texture of the soils is not suitable for ground squirrel burrow construction.

OTHER ACTIVITIES:

Seasonal Pool Enhancement Projects

Benton 36: The 2014/2015 winter was the first winter since clay amendments were applied to the Benton 36 pool (amendments occurred in fall 2014). The 2014/15 winter was an extremely dry winter. Only one rain event occurred that was large enough to raise water levels in the pool. Although no spadefoot toads bred in the Benton 36 pool in the winter of 2014/15, versatile fairy shrimp (B. lindahli) developed to maturity. Photo were taken at established photo stations around the pool

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-12 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES during every site visit throughout the wet season. In February 2015 efforts were made to increase the watershed of the pool. To accomplish this the topography of an adjacent, highly disturbed area was altered to redirect rainwater to the pool. Small berms were made of buried sandbags filled with dirt and cement, and trenches were exuviated. The 2014/15 winter was well below average in terms of precipitation. During a more normal rainfall year with no long periods between rain events the Benton pool is likely to sustain spadefoot tadpoles until metamorphosis without artificial inundation. The permeability of the pool could also be further decreased with additional compaction.

Shaing: The compaction improvements at the Shaing pool done in fall 2014 have only been modestly successful at reducing pool permeability. During the 2014/2015 winter approximately 1000 spadefoot eggs hatched in the pool. Although versatile fairy shrimp in the pool were able to complete their development the pool dried long before the spadefoot tadpoles could develop. In late December approximately 200 tadpoles were collected from the nearly dry pool and brought back to the Hidden Valley office. Tadpoles were reared in an artificial pond until metamorphosis. A subset of juveniles was toe clipped for later identification, and all were released back to at the pool. A total of 167 juvenile spadefoots were released back into the (dry) pool and surrounding burrows in two separate batches. Photo of the pool were taken during every site visit throughout the wet season. In its current state, even in an above average rainfall year, the Shaing pool is not likely to support spadefoot tadpoles through to metamorphosis relying on natural precipitation. Any number of measures could be attempted to further decrease permeability of the pool, including better compaction, clay amendments, or geotextile liners.

6.7 Lands Received through 404 Permits and Section 7 Consultations

The RCA has acquired the following properties, either in fee title or is the grantee of a conservation easement, that are subject to special reporting under the provisions related to 404 permits and/or Section 7 ESA consultations. Reporting on the monitoring, maintenance, and management activities for these properties can include:

1. Annual removal of trash or man-made debris. 2. Annual maintenance of signage and other notification features. 3. Maintenance of fences installed. 4. Any annual restoration of the easement property damaged by any prohibited activities.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-13 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

Teledyne - Mira Loma RC22100001 Project ID 03-013 Acquisition Conservation Easement 2007-0514161 Recorded 8/09/2007 Conservation Easement 2008-0056649 Recorded 2/05/2008

Species Monitoring The Biological Monitoring Program conducted Delhi sands flower-loving fly surveys to document both presence and reproduction. Currently, this property supports the only population of the species on conserved land within the WRC MSHCP. The 2014 survey documented both presence and reproduction.

Management Staff continued the Delhi sands flower-loving fly restoration and habitat improvement project. Work completed on the site included clearing an additional 0.6 acres of dead, thatched vegetation from the lower dunes and the establishment of ±2.0 miles of paths in formally cleared areas to maintain open non-vegetated areas. Staff also string trimmed and hand weeded ±10.0 acres of mustard. An in-depth report detailing restoration at the site was prepared and submitted to the RCA.

DR Horton RC21100007 Project ID 06-E01 Easement Conservation Easement 2006-0198804 Recorded 3/21/2006

Species Monitoring The RCA Biological Monitoring Program did not perform any focused surveys in 2015 on this property.

Management No management was completed at the DR Horton property in 2015. Due to the double wrought iron fences along its border with the adjacent housing development (enclosing riparian restoration area), the property has very little access by the public. The CSS and riparian restoration on the site have been successful as measured by a high survivorship of planted plants. ~1000 feet of PCV pipe and numerous sprinkler heads still remain on site and should be removed. Ranger patrols did not detect any problems during the 2015 year. Management is currently conducted by Elsinore/Anza/Murrieta Resource Conservation District and the adjacent HOA.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-14 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

Figure 16 DR Horton

Richmond American RC21000023 Project ID 07-011 Acquisition Conservation Easement 2003-552497 Recorded 7/24/2003

Species Monitoring The RCA Biological Monitoring Program did not perform any focused surveys in 2015 on this property.

Management The Richmond American parcel was a conservation easement originally recorded in 2003 in favor of The Environmental Trust. The parcel was acquired by the RCA as Project 07-011 on March 7, 2007. 2015 management activities included monthly patrols, trash removal and seasonal, but minimal, fuel/vegetation reduction adjacent to the housing development. Activities within the Richmond American property also included turtle trapping, three turtles were captured. Two of the

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-15 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES turtles were recaptured males from previous years. Turtle 95784322 was a recaptured male that was originally trapped in 2013 on the Winchester 700 Murrieta property. This turtle traveled over two miles to the Richmond America property. The third turtle was a female who was new for all years. The female was fitted with a radio transmitter for tracking purposes. The pond was visited in subsequent weeks to determine location and movement patterns of the female turtle. All turtles exhibited the same movement patterns in the northern perimeter of the pond, staying within a 10 meter radius of the trapping location. No upland movement was detected.

Figure 17 Richmond American Turtle trapping 2015.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-16 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

Elsinore Lakeview Estates – Amberhill/Pulte Homes

RC21000012 & 29 Project ID 06-041 & 06-005 Acquired 12/29/2006

Species Monitoring The RCA Biological Monitoring Program did not perform any focused surveys in 2015 on this property.

Management The Elsinore Lakeview Estates-Amber Hill property was routinely patrolled in 2015. The area is accessible to, and occasionally used by OHV. OHV activity is confined to two main ridges on the property. The steep, north facing slopes of the property are acting as refugia to CSS dependent species. Increased patrols of the area by MSHCP Rangers and the Sheriff’s Department would help to discourage OHV activity at the site. The rugged topography and general openness of habitat on the property makes partial fencing as an access control measure infeasible.

BFW CORONA RC21000025 Project ID 07-014 Acquired 03/07/2007

Species Monitoring The RCA Biological Monitoring Program did not perform any focused surveys in 2013 on this property.

Management The BFW Corona property was burned in late 2014 by a vehicle fire that started along Interstate 15 and spread into the property. A Restoration Action Plan was produced for the BFW Corona property which outlined steps to be taken to restore the site after the fire. Roundup was applied to a section of Eucalyptus on the property to test efficiency of the herbicide treatment. Subsequent site visits showed that the herbicide was effective. Photo points were established to monitor post fire regeneration of the vegetative community. The majority of the plant biomass coming back is Eucalyptus.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-17 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

Figure 18 BFW Corona - Picture of Regrowth

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-18 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

Southshore RC21000027 Project ID 06-040 Acquired 12/29/2006

Species Monitoring The RCA Biological Monitoring Program staff did not perform any focused surveys in 2015 on this property.

Management The Southshore property was routinely patrolled by rangers in 2015. Although the surrounding area is accessible to and used by OHV, they do not enter this property. The property consists of dead or dying drought/climatically/nitrogen deposition stressed mature CSS. The property is occupied by California gnatcatchers. A pile of approximately 10 tires, as well as four 5 gallon metal jugs are located in the center of the property and should be removed. An opened access gate off property could be secured to discourage OHV activity in the area (including on the nearby and heavily accessed White Rock property). No other management is needed.

Figure 19 Southshore Property Looking East

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-19 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

Emerald Meadows RC21000031 Acquired 3/15/2007

Species Monitoring The RCA Biological Monitoring Program staff did not perform any focused surveys in 2015 on this property.

Management In 2015 management activities on the Emerald Meadows reserve included monthly patrols and site evaluations. Management staff conducted mowing and string trimming activities along the road and along the property boundary near the structure on a neighboring property. Ongoing Santa Ana sucker habitat restoration is currently being conducted by the Santa Ana Watershed Association on the property adjacent to the Emerald Meadows parcel.

TET Sedco Hills RC21000036 Project ID 09-001 Acquired 03/31/2009

Species Monitoring The RCA Biological Monitoring Program did not perform any focused surveys in 2015 on this property.

Management Management activities on the TET Sedco Hills property included bi-monthly patrols to deter OHV activity and illegal dumping. The property is only accessible via OHV from the north and northeast. The site is comprised of moderately steep hills, punctuated by valleys and canyons. In general, healthy chamise/thick-leafed ceanothus dominated chaparral coverers all north facing slopes, while its south facing slopes are covered by Riversidean sage scrub. Very small patches of riparian woodlands were found in various canyons on the property. Impacts to the site include continued moderate OHV activity on existing trails/dirt roads. Efforts to limit OHV access from the east off Lost Road should be considered. Management should work with private land owners to see if blocking key access road would benefit all surrounding land owners.

EMWD SJ RIVER Recharge Conservation Easement RC21000036 Project ID 09-001 Acquired 03/31/2009

Species Monitoring The RCA Biological Monitoring Program performed small mammal trapping surveys in 2015 on this property. San Bernardino kangaroo rat, Los Angeles pocket mouse northwestern San Diego pocket mouse and Dulzura kangaroo rat were present.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-20 6.0 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

Management Various management activities took place during the 2015 year which included vegetation management for San Bernardino kangaroo rat, native container replanting and routine patrols to deter OHV activity.

RCTC Conservation Easement RC21000036 Project ID 09-001 Acquired 03/31/2009

Species Monitoring The RCA Biological Monitoring Program did not perform any focused surveys in 2015 on this property.

Management In 2015 management activities on the site were minimal, but site inspections were conducted. The site is still being managed by RCTC to fulfill mitigation requirements that include active restoration of vernal pools and narrow endemic plants on the site.

6.8 Future Management Activities

Major goals and tasks for 2016 include:

• Complete additional Reserve Management Plans per RMOC Steering Committee direction; • Continue to plan and implement vegetation control measures, including the use of prescriptive burns; • Continue to complete IMER evaluations for existing properties and newly acquired lands; • Maintain patrol and maintenance efforts and develop tablet based MADS system; • Purchase and install fencing and other access controls such as k-rails or boulder fences; • Perform necessary infrastructure improvements on existing properties; • Continue coordination with monitoring staff to establish and conduct burrowing owl breeding pair survey for Existing Core Area J (Johnson Ranch/Skinner-MSR/El Sol), Existing Core Area C (Estelle Mountain-Lake Mathews Reserve) and add Existing Core Area A (Santa Ana River). • Develop amphibian and arroyo chub rearing program; • Design and develop avian holding facility; and • Continue and increase cooperation and coordination with local law enforcement entities.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 6-21 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES 7.1 Goals and Objectives

The overall goals of the Biological Monitoring Program (Monitoring Program) are to collect data on the 146 Covered Species and associated vegetation communities over a 500,000 acre Conservation Area to assess the MSHCP’s effectiveness at meeting conservation objectives and to provide useful information to Reserve Managers in an adaptive management context. The MSHCP (Volume 2, Species Accounts) includes species-specific objectives that are intended to provide for the long-term conservation of all Covered Species. Species objectives direct the type and intensity of monitoring that is conducted by the Monitoring Program on an annual basis. Management decisions or actions are triggered if species objectives or MSHCP conservation goals are not met.

7.2 Inventory Phase and Long-term Monitoring Phase

Because there was little existing science-based data for the majority of Covered Species when the MSHCP was permitted, the Monitoring Program is being implemented in two phases: an initial Inventory and Assessment Phase (Inventory Phase) and a Long-term Monitoring Phase. The purpose of the Inventory Phase was to determine where Covered Species occur within the Conservation Area, to gather more information on their habitat preferences and life history (e.g., seasonal activity, reproduction requirements), and to develop efficient survey protocols for species detection. The development of science-based survey protocols is necessary to standardize data collection, to test the reliability of survey methods, to determine feasible and useful monitoring metrics, and to provide a confidence level that unobserved species are truly absent at the survey location, rather than overlooked.

The transition from Inventory Phase to Long-term Monitoring Phase has been gradual rather than abrupt. For species with short reporting requirements such as Quino checkerspot butterfly (annual) or coastal California gnatcatcher (every three years) long-term monitoring is already in place. Multiple surveys for species with short reporting requirements have been conducted, providing the initial data points for population trend assessment. For species with longer reporting requirements such as Los Angeles pocket mouse (every eight years) and with species-specific monitoring objectives requiring significant development and testing, the transition from Inventory Phase to Long-term Monitoring Phase is ongoing.

The transition into long-term monitoring will involve developing monitoring metrics that are both efficient to collect, and robust measures of species status and population trend. The baseline monitoring objective for all Covered Species requires at least 75 percent of listed Core Areas or

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-1

7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

known locations to be documented as occupied at least once every eight years. Monitoring protocols that provide additional information such as relative abundance of populations at occupied locations, reproductive success, or health of observed individuals will be employed whenever possible, to provide the most useful representations of species status. Monitoring Program staff has worked in collaboration with University of California Riverside Center for Conservation Biology staff to develop conceptual models of Covered Species and their habitats to help identify key population drivers and environmental stressors upon which management can act.

One significant task included in the Inventory Phase was development of a Long-term Monitoring Strategy document, as described in Section 5 of the MSHCP. This document explicitly describes the approach taken to meet the goals of the Monitoring Program. It does not include taxa-specific monitoring protocols, which are available from the Monitoring Program by request. Monitoring Program staff completed and delivered the Long-term Monitoring Strategy to the RCA and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW, previously Department of Fish and Game) as part of a State Wildlife Grant that expired on June 30, 2012.

The Long-term Monitoring Strategy describes a two-level design that gives priority to assessing the status of Covered Species as stated in the species-specific conservation objectives of the Plan which emphasize the continued occupancy of MSHCP-defined Core Areas or other areas of known occurrence. For some species, the objectives require that reproduction and/or minimum densities of individuals within species Core Areas be verified. The second level extends sampling for terrestrial vertebrates to the entire Conservation Area in a cost-efficient manner. The Long-term Monitoring Strategy document also includes chapters describing monitoring goals and objectives, sample design considerations, proper protocol development, data and information management strategies, collaboration and communication with other organizations, and describes the organizational framework of the Monitoring Program.

One of the explicit goals of the Monitoring Program is to develop efficient long-term monitoring protocols that reduce redundancies by collecting information on multiple species where possible. For example, bird species co-occurring in similar habitat (e.g., willow riparian) during the breeding season can be detected using the same survey protocols. There will always be some Covered Species that occur in isolated pockets within the Conservation Area or that are difficult to detect using standard survey protocols; for these species a focused survey effort will always be required.

7.3 Monitoring Program Operations

The Monitoring Program is implemented within the existing MSHCP Conservation Area on lands that are owned and managed by the various MSHCP participants and other entities. As of 2015, those lands total approximately 399,889 acres. CDFW was responsible for implementing the

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-2

7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Monitoring Program for the first eight years of the Permit (MSHCP Volume 1, Section 6). The MSHCP was permitted in June 2004, making June 2012 the eight-year anniversary after Permit issuance. To ensure consistency in monitoring efforts throughout the Conservation Area, the Monitoring Program is overseen and implemented by a Monitoring Program Administrator. Since May of 2010, the Monitoring Program Administrator position has been funded by the RCA, along with the majority of full-time Monitoring Program staff. Effective July 1, 2012, when the State Wildlife Grant ended, the RCA assumed all funding responsibility for the Monitoring Program with the exception of one full-time position funded by the State of California.

In the initial years of the Monitoring Program, extensive effort was devoted to setting up operating procedures, determining budgets, establishing contracts, purchasing supplies and equipment, hiring and training personnel, acquiring land access agreements, and coordinating with Reserve Managers within the Plan Area. These processes are now largely developed and only require updating (e.g., operating procedures), renewal (e.g., expiring right of entry agreements), or training when new personnel are involved (e.g., new Monitoring Program staff or Reserve Managers).

An integrated database to make information collected by the Monitoring Program manageable and accessible is now complete. Monitoring Program datasets that have been thoroughly proofed and certified complete by the Data Manager are submitted to CDFW’s Biogeographic Information and Observation System every year, as well as to local partnering agencies and entities. The structure needed to support a long-term Monitoring Program is now in place.

7.3.1 Monitoring Program Personnel

The Monitoring Program Administrator oversees staff provided by the RCA and CDFW. RCA- funded staff is provided through a contract with the Santa Ana Watershed Association. Monitoring Program staff work together as a team to coordinate, develop, and implement required monitoring activities for the MSHCP.

In 2015, 15 positions were filled in the Monitoring Program, 14 of which were funded by the RCA, with one funded by CDFW. Nine of these positions consist of office-based staff or Program Leads and six are filled by full-time field biologists. Because some Monitoring Program employees departed in 2015, not all 15 positions were filled year-round. Annual staffing levels, and therefore survey effort, reflect the budget available to the Monitoring Program. Although progress continues to be made towards documenting the current status of all 146 Covered Species, the availability of funds will ultimately determine whether or not the species objectives can be evaluated within the time frame designated by the MSHCP.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-3

7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

7.3.2 Training

All Monitoring Program field biologists are trained on local species identification, handling, and data collection methods. Field staff also learn identification and survey techniques for multiple taxa to provide scheduling flexibility and increase staff utility. Specific training provided in any given year depends on the survey activities planned; however, safety training (e.g., wilderness first aid, CPR) is provided to all staff as necessary to keep certifications active. The Monitoring Program is required to use training programs approved by the Wildlife Agencies to ensure consistent data collection, uniform implementation of protocols, safe handling procedures, and appropriate experience with Covered Species (MSHCP Volume 1, Section 7). Training is provided both by experienced Monitoring Program biologists and by qualified outside entities (e.g., U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). More information on species training received by Monitoring Program biologists is included in the taxa-specific survey reports found in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.3.3 Land Access Agreements and Coordination with Reserve Managers

The Monitoring Program only conducts surveys within the existing Conservation Area, which is composed of Public/Quasi-Public lands and Additional Reserve Lands that are owned and managed by various entities. Before surveys are conducted by the Monitoring Program, permission is obtained from the appropriate landowners or managing entities to access the survey areas. Land access agreements for 2015 for Monitoring Program activities are listed in Table 24. Access Agreements for 2015 Surveys.

TABLE 24 Access Agreements for 2015 Surveys

Landowner Property/Reserve Name Bureau of Land Management BLM land in MSHCP Plan Area California Department of Fish and Wildlife San Jacinto Wildlife Area (Davis and Potrero units), Hidden Valley Wildlife Area, French Valley Wildlife Area, Santa Rosa Plateau Ecological Reserve, Estelle Mountain California Department of Parks and Recreation Lake Perris State Recreation Area, Chino Hills State Park, San Timeteo Canyon Center for Natural Lands Management Johnson Ranch, Skunk Hollow, Wilson Valley Metropolitan Water District Lake Mathews Regional Conservation Authority RCA-owned lands Riverside County County-owned conservation lands in MSHCP Plan Area Riverside County Flood Control and Water Santa Ana River, Salt Creek, San Jacinto River Conservation District Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency Estelle Mountain, Southwestern Riverside County Multi-Species Reserve

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-4

7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 24 Access Agreements for 2015 Surveys

Landowner Property/Reserve Name Riverside County Regional Parks & Open Space County Parks & Open Space Land District San Diego State University, Field Stations Program Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve U.S. Forest Service San Bernardino National Forest, Cleveland National Forest

To facilitate land access and to better coordinate monitoring activities with management activities, Monitoring Program staff meets monthly with Reserve Managers (Reserve examples listed above in Table 24). At these meetings, Monitoring Program staff provides a description of current activities, including protocols and maps when relevant, and presents species occurrence data, monitoring results, and survey reports to the Reserve Managers. Management/Monitoring coordination meetings also feature a short presentation on a relevant topic. In addition to Monitoring Program Leads presenting recent survey results and plans for future work, speakers have included professors from local universities, local biologists conducting similar monitoring or land management work, and regulatory officials. In 2015, meeting topics included:

• Computational entomology: What can computer science do for you?

• Developing and managing an effective volunteer program

• Rare plants in western Riverside County

• A systems approach to conservation: Western Riverside County as a test case

• Vegetation management: recent non-natives showing up and best management practices

• Quino checkerspot butterfly conservation

• Raptors and a changing climate

• Examples and lessons learned from habitat restoration projects

• Citizen science, distributed databases, and the new Amphibian and Reptile Atlas of Peninsular California

• Golden Eagle research in San Diego and expansion of nesting pair occupancy across southern California

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-5

7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

The monthly meetings are also a forum for Reserve Managers to discuss overlapping activities, mutually valuable land management lessons learned, and collaborative monitoring and management actions.

7.4 Summary of 2015 Monitoring Activities and Evaluation of Progress toward Achieving Measurable Objectives

The activities of the Monitoring Program are largely based on requirements of the MSHCP species-specific monitoring objectives outlined in Section 5 of the MSHCP. Species objectives specify time intervals for detecting and reporting on each of the Covered Species in the Conservation Area. When species objectives do not specify a time interval, the status of the Covered Species must be reported at least once every eight years (MSHCP Volume 1, Section 5). In addition to species objectives, survey priorities are influenced by the quantity and quality of information available for each species (e.g., little or poor information means greater survey effort sooner), whether another agency is already conducting surveys (less effort required by the Monitoring Program), relative ease of gathering information (e.g., Yellow Warbler detections during Least Bell’s Vireo surveys), and priority of the species to the RCA, Permittees, and Wildlife Agencies (e.g., Burrowing Owl is high priority).

The Monitoring Program only addresses species objectives that must be evaluated using biological surveys. Those species objectives, along with the frequency of the reporting requirement, whether the species was detected in the past or in the current reporting year, and whether or not the stated objectives are met are provided in Table 25. Details of Covered Species Monitoring. The majority (121 of 146) of the Covered Species must be reported on at least once every eight years. The remaining 25 species have reporting requirements that vary between one and five years. The Monitoring Program has developed a timeline for the survey of Covered Species. The scheduling of surveys is approximate due to the prioritization process described above and because survey protocols can take more than one year to complete. Modifications to the timeline are expected to occur based on the results of each year’s monitoring efforts and available budget.

The 2015 reporting period represents the 11th full survey season for the Monitoring Program. The following survey activities were carried out in 2015 by the Monitoring Program:

• Cactus Wren survey • Arroyo toad survey

• Grasshopper sparrow survey • Western pond turtle survey

• Burrowing Owl pair count • Terrestrial reptile survey

• Tricolored Blackbird survey • Rabbit survey

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-6

7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

• San Bernardino kangaroo rat survey • Delhi Sands flower-loving fly survey

• Carnivore survey • Vernal pool survey

• Quino checkerspot butterfly survey • Rare plant survey

Detailed survey reports for most projects, including the rationale for survey protocols, a description of methods, and survey results can be found in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results. For ongoing survey efforts with no change in the status of relevant species-specific monitoring objectives standalone survey reports will be completed when there are significant results to convey or when the effort concludes.

Evaluation of MSHCP-listed monitoring objectives for Covered Species occurs annually. In 2015 Monitoring Program biologists conducted focused surveys for 52 of 146 Covered Species in the Conservation Area. Forty-four targeted Covered Species were detected and 58 more Covered Species were incidentally observed (Table 25. Details of Covered Species Monitoring). Mountain yellow-legged frog was also detected during focused surveys by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Thus, 103 of 146 Covered Species were detected within the Conservation Area in 2015.

Since June 2004, a total of 141 of 146 Covered Species have been detected in the Conservation Area (134 as a result of focused Monitoring Program surveys, 5 incidentally observed by Monitoring Program biologists, and two additional Covered Species reported by partnering agencies).

When data collected by the Monitoring Program are determined to be sufficient to meet the species-specific monitoring objectives described in the species accounts from Volume 2 of the MSHCP a “YES” appears in the “Obj. Met?” column of Table 25. Details of Covered Species Monitoring. When data collected by the Monitoring Program indicate that the expected conservation identified in the species accounts has not yet been achieved a “NO” appears in the “Obj. Met?” column. Finally, if the Monitoring Program does not have enough information to draw a conclusion about whether or not the monitoring objective(s) for a given species has been met or has not yet evaluated a particular species, a “TBD” (To Be Determined) appears in the “Obj. Met?” column. To date, the Monitoring Program has collected sufficient data to confirm that species-specific monitoring objectives for 76 Covered Species have been met.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-7

7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Maintain breeding populations at a minimum of 80% of conserved breeding locations as measured by Arroyo toad Bufo californicus 5 F / D† F / N NO the presence/absence of juvenile toads, tadpoles, or egg masses across any 5 consecutive years. Determine if successful reproduction is occurring as measured by the presence/absence of tadpoles, California red- Rana aurora egg masses, or juvenile frogs once a year for the first 5 years after permit issuance and then as 1 F / N N / N NO legged frog draytonii determined by the Reserve Management Oversight Committee. Maintain occupancy of at least 75% of occupied habitat and determine if successful reproduction is Coast range Taricha tarosa occurring within the MSHCP Conservation Area as measured by the presence/absence of larvae or egg 1 F / D N / I YES newt tarosa masses once a year for the first 5 years after permit issuance and then as determined by the Reserve Management Oversight Committee. Mountain Maintain successful reproduction as measured by the presence/absence of tadpoles, egg masses, or N / D (by yellow-legged Rana muscosa juvenile frogs once a year for the first 5 years after permit issuance and then as determined by the 1 F / D USGS) TBD frog Reserve Management Oversight Committee. Western Scaphiopus Maintain successful reproduction at a minimum of 75% of the conserved breeding locations as 8 F / D F / D TBD spadefoot hammondii measured by the presence/absence of tadpoles, egg masses, or juvenile toads once every 8 years. American Botaurus Maintain the continued use of 50% of the Core Areas. 8 F / I N / I YES bittern lentiginosus Haliaeetus Monitor distribution at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and continued use at 75% Bald eagle 8 F / D N / I YES leucocephalus of identified locations. Bells' sage Amphispiza belli Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / I YES sparrow belli continued use at 75% of identified locations. * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-8

7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Black swift Cypseloides niger 8 F / I N / I NO continued use at 75% of identified locations. Black- Nycticorax Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and crowned 8 N / I N / I YES nycticorax continued use at 75% of identified locations. night-heron Include within the MSHCP Conservation Area at least 5 Core Areas and interconnecting linkages. Core Athene Areas may include the following: (1) Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake area; (2) playa west of Hemet; Burrowing owl cunicularia (3) San Jacinto Wildlife Area/Mystic Lake area including Lake Perris area; (4) Lake Mathews and (5) 8 F / D F / D NO hypugaea along the Santa Ana River; The Core Areas should support a combined total breeding population of approximately 120 burrowing owls with no fewer than 5 pairs in any 1 Core Area. Campylorhynchus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Cactus wren 8 F / D F / D NO brunneicapillus continued use at 75% of identified Core Areas. California Eremophila Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / I YES horned lark alpestris actia continued use at 75% of identified locations. California Strix occidentalis Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / N NO spotted owl occidentalis continued use at 75% of identified locations. Coastal Polioptila California californica Maintain continued use of and successful reproduction at 75% of the Core Areas. 3 F / D N / I YES gnatcatcher californica Cooper's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Accipiter cooperii 8 F / D N / I YES hawk continued use at 75% of identified Core Areas.

* Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-9 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Double- Phalacrocorax Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and crested 8 F / D N / I YES auritus continued use at 75% of identified locations. cormorant Downy Picoides Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / I NO woodpecker pubescens continued use at 75% of identified locations. Ferruginous Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Buteo regalis 8 F / D N / I YES hawk continued use at 75% of identified locations.

Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction at 75% of the known nesting localities 8 F / D N / I NO

Maintain occupation within 3 large Core Areas (100%) and at least 3 of the 4 smaller Core Areas (75%) in at least 1 year out of any 5-consecutive-year period In order for this species to become a covered species adequately conserved, the following conservation must be demonstrated: Include within the Conservation Area at least 8,000 acres in 7 Core Areas. Core Areas may include the following: (1) Prado Basin, (2) Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake/Johnson Ranch area, (3) Lake Mathews-Estelle Mountain, (4) Badlands, (5) Box Springs, (6) Santa Rosa Plateau/Tenaja, (7) Kabian Park, (8) Steele Grasshopper Ammodramus Peak, (9) Sycamore Canyon, (10) Potrero, and (11) Mystic Lake/San Jacinto Wildlife Area. Three of the 1 to 5 F / D F / D NO sparrow savannarum 7 Core Areas will be large, consisting of a minimum of 2,000 acres of grassland habitat or grassland- dominated habitat. The other 4 Core Areas may be smaller but will consist of at least 500 acres of contiguous grassland habitat or grassland-dominated habitat. Five of the 7 Core Areas will be demonstrated to support at least 20 grasshopper sparrow pairs with evidence of successful reproduction within the first 5 years after permit. Covered Species not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-10 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Great blue Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Ardea herodias 8 N / I N / I YES heron continued use at 75% of identified locations. Least Bell's Vireo bellii Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction at 75% of the known vireo-occupied habitat 3 F / D F / D NO vireo pusillus Maintain occupancy within 3 large Core Areas (100%) in at least 1 year out of any 5-consecutive-year period. In order for this species to become a covered species adequately conserved, the following conservation must be demonstrated: Include within the MSHCP Conservation Area at least 100 acres in 3 Core Areas. Core Areas may include the following: (1) Tahquitz Valley; (2) Round Valley; (3) Garner Lincoln’s Melospiza Valley. The 3 Core Areas will be large, consisting of a minimum of 50 acres of montane meadow, wet 1 to 5 F / I N / I NO sparrow lincolnii montane meadow, and edges of montane riparian or riparian scrub. The Core Areas will be demonstrated to support at least 20 Lincoln sparrow pairs with evidence of successful reproduction within the first 5 years after permit issuance. Covered Species not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. Loggerhead Lanius Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction within 75% of the Core Areas. 8 F / D N / I NO shrike ludovicianus MacGillivray’s Oporornis tolmiei Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. 8 F / D N / I YES warbler Falco Merlin Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. 8 F / D N / I YES columbarius Mountain Charadrius Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. 8 F / D N / I NO plover montanus * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-11 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Mountain Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Oreortyx pictus 8 N / I N / I YES quail continued use at 75% of identified locations. Nashville Vermivora Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / N NO warbler ruficapilla continued use at 75% of identified Core Areas. Northern Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction at a minimum of 75% of the known nesting Accipiter gentilis 3 F / I N / N NO goshawk localities. Northern Circus cyaneus Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction at 75% of the known nesting. 5 F / D N / I NO harrier Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Osprey Pandion haliaetus 8 F / D N / I YES continued use at 75% of identified locations. Peregrine Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Falco peregrinus 8 F / D N / I YES falcon continued use at 75% of identified locations. Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Prairie falcon Falco mexicanus 8 F / D N / I NO continued use at 75% of identified locations. Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Purple martin Progne subis 8 F / I N / I NO continued use at 75% of identified Core Areas. Sharp- Accipiter striatus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. 8 F / D N / I YES shinned hawk

* Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-12 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Southern California Aimophila Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and rufous- ruficeps 8 F / D N / I YES continued use at 75% of identified Core Areas. crowned canescens sparrow Southwestern Empidonax traillii Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction at 75% of the known southwestern willow willow 3 F / D F / D NO extimus flycatcher occupied Core Areas. flycatcher Swainson’s Buteo swainsoni Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. 8 F / D N / I YES hawk Tachycineta Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Tree swallow 8 F / D N / I YES bicolor continued use at 75% of identified locations. Tricolored Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction within at least 1 of the identified Core Areas. Agelaius tricolor 5 F / D F / D YES blackbird Successful reproduction is defined as a nest which fledged at least 1 known young. Turkey Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction at the 2 known nesting locations and at Cathartes aura 3 F / D N / I NO vulture nesting locations identified in the MSHCP Conservation Area in the future. Western Coccyzus Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction at 75% of the known western yellow-billed yellow-billed americanus 3 F / D (by OCWD) N / N NO cuckoo occupied Core Areas cuckoo occidentalis White-faced Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Plegadis chihi 8 N / I N / I YES ibis continued use at 75% of identified locations.

* Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-13 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? White-tailed Elanus leucurus Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction at 75% of the core breeding areas. 3 F / D N / I NO kite Williamson's Sphyrapicus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / N NO sapsucker thyroideus continued use at 75% of identified locations. Wilson's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Wilsonia pusilla 8 F / D N / I YES warbler continued use at 75% of identified locations. Dendroica Yellow petechia Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction at 75% of the Core Areas. 5 F / D F / D NO warbler brewsteri Yellow- Icteria virens Maintain the continued use of and successful reproduction at 75% of the Core Areas. 5 F / D F / D NO breasted chat Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Arroyo chub Gila orcutti 8 F / D N / I NO continued use at 75% of identified Core Areas.

Santa Ana Catastomus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D (by SAWPA) N / I YES sucker santaanae continued use at 75% of identified Core Areas.

Riverside Streptocephalus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D F/D NO fairy shrimp woottoni continued use at 75% of identified Core Areas. Santa Rosa Linderiella Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Plateau fairy 8 F / D F / D YES santarosae continued use at 75% of identified locations. shrimp * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-14 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Vernal pool Branchinecta Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D F / D NO fairy shrimp lynchi continued use at 75% of identified locations. Reserve Managers shall document successful reproduction at all 3 Core Areas or other areas to be Delhi Sands Rhaphiomidas conserved in accordance with Objective 1, as measured by the presence/absence of pupae cases or flower-loving terminatus 1 F / D F / D NO newly emerged (teneral) individuals once a year for the first 5 years after permit issuance and then as fly abdominalis determined to be appropriate. Quino Euphydryas Reserve Managers will document the distribution of Quino checkerspot on an annual basis. 1 F / D F / D YES checkerspot editha quino Within the 5,484 acres of occupied and suitable habitat in the MSHCP Conservation Area, ensure that Aguanga Dipodomys at least 75% (4,113 acres) of the total is occupied and that at least 20% of the occupied habitat 1 to 8 F / D N / N TBD kangaroo rat merriami collinus (approximately 823 acres) supports a medium or higher population density (≥ 5 to 15 individuals per hectare) of the species as measured across any 8-year period. Maintain or improve functionality of dispersal routes. Existing undercrossings in key areas will be Bobcat Lynx rufus evaluated for their adequacy and improved as necessary to convey bobcats. Maintain species presence 8 F / D F / D YES and continued use at 75% of identified locations. Sylvilagus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Brush rabbit 8 F / D F / D TBD bachmani continued use at 75% of identified Core Areas. Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Coyote Canis latrans 8 F / D F / D YES continued use at 75% of identified locations. Dulzura Dipodomys Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / I YES kangaroo rat simulans continued use at 75% of identified locations.

* Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-15 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Long-tailed Maintain the continued use of long-tailed weasel at a minimum of 75% of the localities where the species Mustela frenata 8 F / D N / I YES weasel has been known to occur. Perognathus Reserve Managers shall demonstrate that each of the 7 Core Areas supports a stable or increasing Los Angeles longimembris population that occupies at least 30% of the suitable habitat (at least 4,200 acres) as measured over 8 F / D N / I NO pocket mouse brevinasus any 8-consecutive-year period. Maintain or improve functionality of dispersal routes. Existing undercrossings in key areas will be Mountain lion Puma concolor evaluated for their adequacy to convey mountain lions. Maintain species presence and continued use 8 F / D F / D TBD at 75% of identified locations. Northwestern Chaetodipus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and San Diego 8 F / D N / I YES fallax fallax continued use at 75% of identified locations. pocket mouse San Glaucomys Confirm occupation of 1,000 ha (2,470 acres) with a mean density of at least 2 individuals per hectare Bernardino sabrinus (2 individuals per 2.47 acres) in the San Jacinto Mountains; in the San Bernardino Mountains, confirm 8 N / N N / N TBD flying squirrel californicus occupation of 100 ha. Covered Species not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. Within the 4,440 acres of suitable habitat in the MSHCP Conservation Area, ensure that at least 75% San Dipodomys of the total (3,330 acres) is occupied and that at least 20% of the occupied habitat (approximately 666 Bernardino 1 to 8 F / D F / D TBD merriami parvus acres) supports a medium or higher population density (≥ 5 to 15 individuals per hectare) of the species kangaroo rat as measured across any 8-year period. San Diego Lepus californicus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and black-tailed 8 F / D F/I TBD bennettii continued use at 75% of identified locations. jackrabbit San Diego Neotoma lepida Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and desert 8 F / D N / I TBD intermedia continued use at 75% of identified locations. woodrat * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-16 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Within the minimum 15,000 acres of occupied habitat in the MSHCP Conservation Area, maintain at Stephens' Dipodomys least 30% of the occupied habitat (approximately 4,500 acres) at a population density of medium or 8 F / D N / N NO kangaroo rat stephensi higher (i.e., at least 5-10 individuals per hectare) across all Core Areas. No single Core Area will account for more than 30% of the total medium (or higher) population density area. Confirm 16 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section) with no fewer than 50 Beautiful Hulsea vestita individuals each (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Covered 8 F / D N / N YES hulsea ssp. callicarpha Species not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. Brand’s Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Phacelia stellaris 8 F / D F / N TBD phacelia continued use at 75% of identified locations. California Penstemon Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / I TBD beardtongue californicus continued use at 75% of identified locations. Galium California Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and californicum ssp. 8 F / D N / N YES bedstraw continued use at 75% of identified locations. primum Juglans California Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and californica var. 8 F / D F / D TBD black walnut continued use at 75% of identified locations. californica Confirm 10 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section) containing at least 50 California Muhlenbergia clumps (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Covered Species 8 F / N N / N NO muhly californica not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. California Orcuttia Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D F / D TBD Orcutt grass californica continued use at 75% of identified locations.

* Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-17 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Confirm 10 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section) managed with 1,000 Chickweed Oxytheca individuals each (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Covered 8 F / D N / N YES oxytheca caryophylloides Species not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. Cleveland's Mimulus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and bush 8 F / D N / N YES clevelandii continued use at 75% of identified locations. monkeyflower Confirm 5 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section). Covered Species not Cliff cinquefoil Potentilla rimicola 8 F / D F / D TBD adequately conserved until the above objective is met. Lasthenia Coulter's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and glabrata ssp. 8 F / D F / D TBD goldfields continued use at 75% of identified locations. coulteri Coulter's Confirm 30 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section). Covered Species not Romneya coulteri 8 F / D N / N YES matilija poppy adequately conserved until the above objective is met. Davidson's Atriplex serenana Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D F / D TBD saltscale var. davidsonii continued use at 75% of identified locations. Engelmann Quercus Maintain recruitment at a minimum of 80% of the conserved populations as measured by the 5 F / D F / D YES oak engelmannii presence/absence of seedlings and/or saplings across any consecutive 5 years. Confirm 10 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section) with at least 50 Fish's Polygala cornuta 8 individuals (ramets or genets) each (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self- F / D N / N YES milkwort var. fishiae sustaining). Covered Species not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. Holocarpha Confirm 10 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section) with 1,000 individuals Graceful virgata ssp. each (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Covered Species not 8 F / D N / N YES tarplant elongata adequately conserved until the above objective is met. * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-18 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Monardella Hall's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and macrantha ssp. 8 F / D N / N YES monardella continued use at 75% of identified locations. hallii Hamitt’s clay- Sibaropsis Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D F / D YES cress hammittii continued use at 75% of identified locations. Heart-leaved Lepechinia Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / N YES pitcher sage cardiophylla continued use at 75% of identified locations. Calochortus Intermediate Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and weedii var. 8 F / D N / N TBD mariposa lily continued use at 75% of identified locations. intermedius Astragalus Jaeger's milk- Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and pachypus var. 8 F / D F / D TBD vetch continued use at 75% of identified locations. jaegeri Johnston's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Arabis johnstonii 8 F / D N / I TBD rock cress continued use at 75% of identified locations. Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Lemon lily Lilium parryi 8 F / D N / N YES continued use at 75% of identified locations. Little Myosurus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D F / D YES mousetail minimus continued use at 75% of identified locations. Chorizanthe Long-spined Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and polygonoides var. 8 F / D F / D YES spine flower continued use at 75% of identified locations. longispina * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-19 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Many- Dudleya Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and stemmed 8 F / D N / N TBD multicaulis continued use at 75% of identified locations. dudleya Include within the MSHCP Conservation Area at least 4 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller Mojave Deinandra than 1 quarter section) occupying at least 100 acres. Covered Species not adequately conserved until 8 F / D N / I TBD tarplant mohavensis the above objective is met. Nama Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Mud nama 8 F / D N / N YES stenocarpum continued use at 75% of identified locations. Calochortus Munz's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and palmeri var. 8 F / D F / D YES mariposa lily continued use at 75% of identified locations. munzii Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Munz's onion Allium munzii 8 F / D F / D YES continued use at 75% of identified locations. Nevin's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Berberis nevinii 8 F / D N / N TBD barberry continued use at 75% of identified locations. Ocellated Lilium humboldtii Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / I YES Humboldt lily ssp. ocellatum continued use at 75% of identified locations. Orcutt's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Brodiaea orcuttii 8 F / N N / N TBD brodiaea continued use at 75% of identified locations. Palmer's Harpagonella Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D F / D YES grapplinghook palmeri continued use at 75% of identified locations.

* Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-20 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Palomar Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Mimulus diffusus 8 F / D F / N TBD monkeyflower continued use at 75% of identified locations. Parish's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Atriplex parishii 8 F / N F / N TBD brittlescale continued use at 75% of identified locations. Limnanthes Parish's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and gracilis var. 8 F / D N / N YES meadowfoam continued use at 75% of identified locations. parishii Parry's spine Chorizanthe Confirm 10 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section) with at least 1,000. 8 F / D F / D YES flower parryi var. parryi Covered Species not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. Payson's Caulanthus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / N YES jewelflower simulans continued use at 75% of identified locations. Peninsular Chorizanthe Confirm 10 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section) with at least 1,000 8 F / D F / D YES spine flower leptotheca individuals. Maintain species presence and continued use at 75% of identified locations. Plummer's Calochortus Confirm 6 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section) of at least 500 individuals. 8 F / D N / N YES mariposa lily plummerae Covered Species not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. Prostrate Navarretia Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / I YES navarretia prostrata continued use at 75% of identified locations. Prostrate Chorizanthe Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D F / D YES spine flower procumbens continued use at 75% of identified locations. Rainbow Arctostaphylos Confirm 10 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section) with more than 50 8 F / D N / N YES manzanita rainbowensis individuals each. Covered Species not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-21 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Round-leaved Erodium Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D F / D YES filaree macrophyllum continued use at 75% of identified locations. San Diego Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Ambrosia pumila 8 F / D F / D TBD ambrosia continued use at 75% of identified locations. Eryngium San Diego Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and aristulatum var. 8 F / D F / D YES button-celery continued use at 75% of identified locations. parishii San Jacinto Galium Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Mountains angustifolium ssp. 8 F / D F / D YES continued use at 75% of identified locations. bedstraw Jacinticum San Jacinto Atriplex coronata Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Valley 8 F / D F / I YES var. notatior continued use at 75% of identified locations. crownscale San Miguel Satureja Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / N TBD savory chandleri continued use at 75% of identified locations. Santa Ana Eriastrum Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and River densifolium ssp. 8 F / D N / N YES continued use at 75% of identified locations. woollystar sanctorum Shaggy- Heuchera Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and haired 8 F / D N / N TBD hirsutissima continued use at 75% of identified locations. alumroot * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-22 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Slender- Dodecahema Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and horned spine 8 F / D N / N TBD leptoceras continued use at 75% of identified locations. flower Small- Microseris Confirm 10 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than 1 quarter section) with at least 1,000 flowered douglasii var. 8 F / D F / D YES individuals. Covered Species not adequately conserved until the above objective is met. microseris platycarpha Small- Convolvulus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and flowered 8 F / D F / D YES simulans continued use at 75% of identified locations. morning-glory Smooth Centromadia Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D F / D TBD tarplant pungens continued use at 75% of identified locations. Spreading Navarretia Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / I TBD navarretia fossalis continued use at 75% of identified locations. Sticky-leaved Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Dudleya viscida 8 F / D N / N YES dudleya continued use at 75% of identified locations. Thread- Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and leaved Brodiaea filifolia 8 F / D F / D TBD continued use at 75% of identified locations. brodiaea Vail Lake Ceanothus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / N TBD ceanothus ophiochilus continued use at 75% of identified locations. Hordeum Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Vernal barley 8 F / D F / I TBD intercedens continued use at 75% of identified locations. * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-23 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Trichocoronis Wright's Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and wrightii var. 8 F / D F / N TBD trichocoronis continued use at 75% of identified locations. wrightii Yucaipa Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Allium marvinii 8 F / D N / N YES onion continued use at 75% of identified locations. Belding’s Cnemidophorus orange- Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and hyperythrus 8 F / D N / I YES throated continued use at 75% of Core Areas. beldingi whiptail Coastal Cnemidophorus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and western tigris 8 F / D N / I YES continued use at 75% of identified Core Areas. whiptail multiscutatus Xantusia Granite night Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and henshawi 8 F / D N / I YES lizard continued use at 75% of Core Areas. henshawi Granite spiny Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Sceloporus orcutti 8 F / D N / I YES lizard continued use at 75% of Core Areas. Northern red- Crotalus ruber Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and diamond 8 F / D N / I YES ruber continued use at 75% of identified areas. rattlesnake San Bernardino Lampropeltis Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / D N / I YES Mountain zonata parvirubra continued use at 75% of Core Areas. kingsnake * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-24 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

TABLE 25 Details of Covered Species Monitoring

Common Obj. Name Latin Name Species Objective Evaluated by the Monitoring Program* Freq. 2004-2014** 2015 Met? Coleonyx San Diego Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and variegatus 8 F / D N / N TBD banded gecko continued use at 75% of Core Areas. abbottii Phrynosoma San Diego Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and coronatum 8 F / D N / I YES horned lizard continued use at 75% of Core Areas. blainvillei San Diego Lampropeltis Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and Mountain 8 F / D N / I TBD zonata pulchra continued use at 75% of Core Areas. kingsnake Southern Charina bottae Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and 8 F / I N / N YES rubber boa umbratica continued use at 75% of Core Areas. Southern Sceloporus Monitor the distribution of this species at least once every 8 years. Maintain species presence and sagebrush graciosus 8 F / D N / I NO continued use at 75% of Core Areas. lizard vandenburgianus Western pond Clemmys Maintain continued use at a minimum of 75% of the conserved Core Areas as measured once every 3 3 F / D F / D YES turtle marmorata pallida years. * Only objectives evaluated by the Biological Monitoring Program are included. Objectives have been shortened to fit in the table; for full text, see the Species Accounts in Volume 2 of the MSHCP. ** Includes data collected by the Center for Conservation Biology under contract to the California Department of Fish and Game. Multiple years combined for formatting purposes. † Survey Type/Detection Type: F / D = focused survey, species detected; F / N = focused survey, species not detected; F / I = focused survey, species not detected during survey but detected incidentally; N / I = no focused survey but detected incidentally; N / N = no focused survey and not detected; N / D = no focused survey by the Monitoring Program but species detected during focused survey by agency reported in parentheses.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-25 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

According to the MSHCP (Section 2.1.4), 118 of the 146 Covered Species are considered to be adequately conserved. The remaining 28 Covered Species will be considered to be adequately conserved when certain conservation requirements are met as identified in the species-specific conservation objectives for those species. For 16 of the 28 species, particular species-specific conservation objectives, which are identified in MSHCP Table 9-3, must be satisfied to shift those particular species to the list of Covered Species Adequately Conserved. For the remaining 12 species, a Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Forest Service that addresses management for these species on Forest Service Land in order to shift these species to the list of Covered Species Adequately Conserved.

When data collected by the Monitoring Program are determined to be sufficient to meet the species-specific objectives described in MSHCP Table 9-3 a “YES” appears in the “Table 9-3 Requirement Met?” column of Table 26. Status of Covered Species Not Adequately Conserved. When data collected by the Monitoring Program indicate that the expected conservation identified in Table 9-3 has not yet been achieved a “NO” appears in the “Table 9-3 Requirement Met?” column. Finally, if the Monitoring Program does not have enough information to draw a conclusion about whether or not the objective(s) listed in Table 9-3 for a given species has been met or has not yet evaluated a particular species, a “TBD” (To Be Determined) appears in the “Table 9-3 Requirement Met?” column. To date, the Monitoring Program has collected sufficient data to confirm that requirements listed in MSHCP Table 9-3 for 10 Covered Species not adequately conserved have been met.

TABLE 26 Status of Covered Species Not Adequately Conserved

Table 9-3 Common Name Latin Name Table 9-3 Requirement Requirement Met?

Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm 16 localities Hulsea vestita ssp. (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section) Beautiful hulsea YES callicarpha with no fewer than 50 individuals each (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Galium A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the California californicum ssp. Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* bedstraw primum Forest Service Land. Muhlenbergia Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm 10 localities California muhly NO californica (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section)

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-26 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Table 9-3 Common Name Latin Name Table 9-3 Requirement Requirement Met?

containing at least 50 clumps (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining).

A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the California Strix occidentalis Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* spotted owl occidentalis Forest Service Land. Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm 10 localities Chickweed Oxytheca (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section) YES oxytheca caryophylloides managed with 1,000 individuals each (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Cleveland's A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Mimulus bush Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* clevelandii monkeyflower Forest Service Land. Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm five localities Cliff cinquefoil Potentilla rimicola TBD (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section). Coulter's matilija Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm 30 localities Romneya coulteri YES poppy (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section). Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm 10 localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section) Polygala cornuta Fish's milkwort with at least 50 individuals (ramets or genets) each (unless a YES var. fishiae smaller population has been demonstrated to be self- sustaining). Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm 10 localities Holocarpha virgata (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section) Graceful tarplant YES ssp. elongata with 1,000 individuals each (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, maintain occupancy within 3 large Core Areas (100 percent) and at least 3 of the 4 smaller Core Areas (75 percent) in at least 1 year out of any 5 consecutive year period. In order for this species to become a Covered Species Adequately Conserved, the following conservation must be demonstrated: Include within the MSHCP Conservation Area at least 8,000 acres in 7 Core Areas. Three of the 7 Core Areas will be large, consisting of a Grasshopper Ammodramus minimum of 2,000 acres of grassland habitat or grassland NO sparrow savannarum dominated habitat (<20 percent shrub cover). The other 4 Core Areas may be smaller but will consist of at least 500 acres of contiguous grassland habitat or grassland-dominated habitat (<20 percent shrub cover). Five of the 7 Core Areas will be demonstrated to support at least 20 grasshopper sparrow pairs with evidence of successful reproduction within the first 5 years after permit issuance. Successful reproduction is defined as a nest which fledged at least one known young.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-27 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Table 9-3 Common Name Latin Name Table 9-3 Requirement Requirement Met?

A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Lemon lily Lilium parryi Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* Forest Service Land. Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, maintain occupancy within 3 large Core Areas (100 percent) in at least 1 year out of any 5 consecutive-year period. In order for this species to become a Covered Species Adequately Conserved, the following conservation must be demonstrated: Include within the MSHCP Conservation Area at least 100 acres in 3 Core Lincoln's Areas. The three Core Areas will be large, consisting of a Melospiza lincolnii NO sparrow minimum of 50 acres of montane meadow, wet montane meadow, and edges of montane riparian or riparian scrub. The Core Areas will be demonstrated to support at least 20 Lincoln’s sparrow pairs with evidence of successful reproduction within the first 5 years after permit issuance. Successful reproduction is defined as a nest which fledged at least one known young. Include within the MSHCP Conservation Area at least four Deinandra Mojave tarplant localities (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter TBD mohavensis section) occupying at least 100 acres. A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Ocellated Lilium humboldtii Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* Humboldt lily ssp. ocellatum Forest Service Land. Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm 10 localities Parry's spine Chorizanthe parryi (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section) YES flower var. parryi with at least 1,000 individuals (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm 10 localities Peninsular spine Chorizanthe (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section) YES flower leptotheca with at least 1,000 individuals (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm six localities Plummer's Calochortus (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section) YES mariposa lily plummerae of at least 500 individuals each (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm 10 localities Rainbow Arctostaphylos (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section) YES manzanita rainbowensis with more than 50 individuals each (unless a smaller population has been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm occupation of Glaucomys 1000 ha (2470 acres) with a mean density of at least 2 San Bernardino sabrinus individuals per hectare (2 individuals per 2.47 acres) in the NO flying squirrel californicus San Jacinto mountains; and in the San Bernardino Mountains confirm occupation of 100 ha.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-28 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Table 9-3 Common Name Latin Name Table 9-3 Requirement Requirement Met?

San Bernardino A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Lampropeltis Mountain Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* zonata parvirubra kingsnake Forest Service Land. San Diego A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Lampropeltis Mountain Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* zonata pulchra kingsnake Forest Service Land. A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Shaggy-haired Heuchera Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* alumroot hirsutissima Forest Service Land. Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, confirm 10 localities Microseris Small-flowered (locality in this sense is not smaller than one quarter section) douglasii var. YES microseris with at least 1,000 individuals (unless a smaller population has platycarpha been demonstrated to be self-sustaining). A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Southern rubber Charina bottae Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* boa umbratica Forest Service Land. Sceloporus A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Southern graciosus Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* sagebrush lizard vandenburgianus Forest Service Land. A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Sticky-leaved Dudleya viscida Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* dudleya Forest Service Land. A Memorandum of Understanding must be executed with the Williamson's Sphyrapicus Forest Service that addresses management for this species on NO* sapsucker thyroideus Forest Service Land. * Monitoring Objectives met or partially met, but MOU needed to move to Adequately Conserved.

7.4.1 Cactus Wren Survey

The species-specific objectives for Cactus Wren require documentation of continued use of at least 75 percent of 11 Core Areas and interconnecting Linkages once every eight years. Cactus Wren Core Areas include: Aguanga, Alberhill, Badlands, Box Springs Mountain, Chino Hills, Lake Mathews-Estelle Mountain, Lake Perris/Bernasconi Hills, Lake Skinner, Motte-Rimrock, Vail Lake, and Wilson Valley. Monitoring Program biologists documented the presence of Cactus Wrens in 2015 with repeat-visit point-count surveys using vocalization broadcasts at points that were at least 250 meters apart. Each of 55 randomly-located survey points within suitable habitat in designated Core Areas was surveyed three times between March and June, 2015.

Biologists detected 71 avian species during 2015 Cactus Wren surveys; 11 of the species are covered under the MSHCP. Cactus Wrens were detected at 33 of the 55 survey points (60%)

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-29 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 20. Cactus Wren Core Areas, Survey Locations and Detections in 2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-30 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES during the 2015 survey season (Figure 20. Cactus Wren Core Areas, Survey Locations and Detections in 2015). Occupied survey points were located in the Aguana, Badlands, and Wilson Valley Core Areas with the majority of the detections within the Wilson Valley Core Area. The Chino Hills Core Area was also confirmed as occupied in 2010, although no Cactus Wrens were detected in this core in 2015. Therefore, Cactus Wrens have been documented in 4 of the 11 (36%) designated Core Areas and Linkages during the current reporting period (2008–2015). Active management in the form of vegetation management and possibly animal translocation will likely be necessary to meet the species objectives for Cactus Wren, as additional land acquisition of currently occupied habitat is unlikely.

A full description of survey methods and results, including detection probability analysis can be found in the 2015 Cactus Wren Survey Report included in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.4.2 Grasshopper Sparrow Survey

The species objectives for Grasshopper Sparrow require that the species occupy three designated large Core Areas (i.e., ≥809 ha of conserved grassland habitat) and at least three of four (75%) designated smaller (≥202 ha) Core Areas in at least one year out of any five-consecutive-year period. The species account identifies 11 potential Core Areas including: Badlands, Box Springs, Kabian Park, Lake Mathews-Estelle Mountain, Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake/Johnson Ranch, Mystic Lake/San Jacinto Wildlife Area (WA), Potrero, Prado Basin, Santa Rosa Plateau/Tenaja, Steele Peak, and Sycamore Canyon. Furthermore, five of the seven designated Core Areas must support at least 20 Grasshopper Sparrow pairs with evidence of successful reproduction within the first five years after permit issuance. This objective was not met when the Monitoring Program conducted Grasshopper Sparrow surveys in 2005. As a result, the 2015 surveys will not have a nest-searching and monitoring component. If the occupancy objective is met, follow-up monitoring to assess the reproduction objective should be conducted.

To document the distribution of Grasshopper Sparrow and evaluate whether species objectives are being met, Monitoring Program biologists made repeat visits to 100-meter-long line transects within accessible Grasshopper Sparrow foraging and nesting habitat in the Plan Area, recording all bird species observed. With exceptions as noted, each of 94 randomly-located transects within suitable habitat in designated Core Areas was surveyed three times between March and June, 2015. Eight transects were removed in Round 3 because they were within a prescribed burn area and a ninth transect was eliminated after confirming it was not entirely within the existing Conservation Area.

Biologists detected 96 avian species during 2015 surveys; 20 of which are covered by the MSHCP. Grasshopper Sparrows were detected in 2 of the 3 (67%) large Core Areas and 1 of the

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-31 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 21. Grasshopper Sparrow Core Areas, Survey Locations and Detections in 2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-32 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

2 (50%) small Core Areas during 2015 surveys (Figure 21. Grasshopper Sparrow Core Areas, Survey Locations and Detections in 2015). Overall, Grasshopper Sparrows were detected at 29 of the 94 (31%) transects. Although not observed during surveys in 2015, biologists previously detected the species within the Lake Mathews-Estelle Mountain Core Area in 2014 which is within the current reporting period. No Grasshopper Sparrows were observed in the Box Springs, Kabian Park, Mystic Lake/San Jacinto Wildlife Area, Prado Basin, Steele Peak, or Sycamore Canyon Core Areas in 2015.

Active management in the form of vegetation management will likely be necessary to meet the species objectives for Grasshopper Sparrow. Any management technique for improving Grasshopper Sparrow habitat should seek to create a diverse grassland ecosystem that contains a patchwork of bare ground, litter, shrubs, and dense grasses and forbs. This kind of patchwork should encourage use by adult Grasshopper Sparrows, but may also be critically important for juvenile Grasshopper Sparrows.

A full description of survey methods and results, including detection probability analysis can be found in the 2015 Grasshopper Sparrow Survey Report included in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.4.3 Burrowing Owl Monitoring

The species objectives for Burrowing Owl (owl) require the conservation of five Core Areas, plus interconnecting linkages, containing a breeding population of 120 owls with no fewer than five pairs in any one Core Area. Core Areas listed in the MSHCP include: Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake, playa west of Hemet, San Jacinto Wildlife Area/Mystic Lake area including Lake Perris, Lake Mathews, and along the Santa Ana River. Several land managers within the Conservation Area have installed artificial burrows and are managing vegetation to facilitate Burrowing Owl use of Core Areas. Reserve Managers or Monitoring Program biologists check all artificial and previously-occupied natural burrows at least three times each year (April, August, and December) to determine whether they are being used by Burrowing Owls, if there is burrow maintenance needed to make them hospitable to owls, and whether nearby habitat needs to be modified or managed to further encourage use by Burrowing Owls.

Monitoring Program biologists conducted pair count surveys within the Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake Core Area in 2015. Burrows that appeared active, as determined during pre-survey visits, were surveyed four times during the breeding season (March-June). No other Core Area has maintained close to the minimal number of breeding pairs in recent years.

During the 2015 breeding season, 27 active burrows within the Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake Core Area were monitored, and 21 burrows showed evidence of nesting (Figure 22.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-33 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Burrowing Owl Burrows Monitored in the Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake Core Area during 2015 Pair Count Surveys). However, it is expected that many of those 21 burrows were satellite burrows, and that pairs of owls likely moved around to occupy multiple burrows at different parts of the breeding season. At least 5 breeding pairs were confirmed during the March 2015 pair count, with 11 pairs in April, 10 pairs in May, and 9 pairs in June. Therefore, there were at least 11 breeding pairs within the Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake Core Area in 2015. Thirteen fledglings were also confirmed in 2015. Note that there are additional breeding pairs of Burrowing Owls at the Skunk Hollow Reserve managed by the Center for Natural Lands Management. While this location is close to other occupied areas in the Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake Core Area, it does not fall within the existing boundaries as described in the MSHCP and so is not included in the above numbers.

A comprehensive Burrowing Owl Habitat Management Plan for western Riverside County has been drafted in collaboration with local Reserve Managers and a Burrowing Owl Translocation Standards document is near completion. The translocation document describes a standardized program for implementing passive and active relocation efforts within the MSHCP Plan Area to ensure consistent methods are employed and directly comparable results across projects can be analyzed. Further details can be found in Section 6.0 – Management Activities of this report. Because there was no change in the status of the relevant species-specific monitoring objective in 2015 and annual survey efforts are continuing, a standalone technical report was not written for this survey effort. Results from previous years and a full description of survey methods and results can be found in the 2013 and 2014 Western Burrowing Owl Pair Count Report included in the RCA’s 2014 Annual Report Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.4.4 Tricolored Blackbird Survey

The species objectives for Tricolored Blackbird require documenting continued use and successful reproduction in at least one of five Core Areas at least once every five years, and protection of all known nesting locations on conserved lands. Designated Core Areas include the San Jacinto floodplain, Mystic Lake/San Jacinto Wildlife Area, Collier Marsh and Lake Elsinore Grasslands, Alberhill, and Vail Lake/Wilson Valley/eastern Temecula Creek.

The monitoring objective for Tricolored Blackbird has already been met for the current reporting period. However, due to the dramatic decline of this species over the last two decades, the critical need to obtain continuous data on population distribution and trends, and the relatively minor effort required, surveys for this species are conducted each year if feasible. In most years, surveys target historic breeding sites as well as other suitable habitat within Core Areas. The goals of

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-34 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 22. Burrowing Owl Burrows Monitored in the Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake Core Area during 2015 Pair Count Surveys

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-35 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

the 2015 Tricolored Blackbird surveys were to assess population status, document breeding-season distribution, identify foraging habitat and invertebrate prey selection of colonies, and document reproductive status within the Conservation Area.

Targeted searches for Tricolored Blackbird colonies were conducted from April 20 – 22, 2015, during the peak of the breeding season. The primary purpose of this effort was to estimate population size and, secondarily, to document current distribution of active colony sites. The short duration of the survey period is intended to prevent duplicate counting of birds that could occur if colony sites are abandoned by birds relocating and nesting in other areas. Biologists visited all known historic colony sites, with one exception, surveyed all five Core Area, and surveyed as much other suitable breeding habitat within the species’ range as time and accessibility allowed. Lake Norconian was not surveyed because there have been no documented occurrences of this species there since 1950, and the area appears to support only marginal foraging habitat. Targeted searches of suitable habitat within the Nuevo and San Jacinto Valley North areas were also conducted. These areas encompass the San Jacinto River Floodplain Core Area and are where the majority of Tricolored Blackbird colonies in western Riverside County have been observed over the last 20 years. Surveyors assessed invertebrate species composition and relative abundance in areas where foraging activity was concentrated and monitored reproductive success by revisiting colony sites at weekly intervals during the nesting cycle.

Five breeding colonies were detected during targeted searches for Tricolored Blackbirds in 2015 (Figure 23. Tricolored Blackbird Breeding Colonies in 2015 and Historic Breeding Sites). Four colonies were present within the Mystic Lake/San Jacinto Wildlife Area Core Area. The largest colony (approximately 2,250 birds) was located in cattail marsh on a two-acre pond on the Little Ramona Duck Club, a private inholding within the Davis Unit of the San Jacinto Wildlife Area. Smaller colonies were located in mixed upland vegetation in the Mystic Lake dry lakebed (100 birds), and in cattail marsh in Bridge Street Pond (90 birds) and the Spring-Summer Wetlands east of Davis Road (250 birds). A fifth colony of approximately 1,200 birds was located in cattail marsh on private property at a site in Tule Valley that has been occupied every year since 2008. This location was monitored from an adjacent public roadway.

All counts sum to a total estimated population size of 3,890 nesting birds within the Plan Area, a decrease of 455 birds from 4,345 observed in 2014. However follow-up monitoring suggested that true numbers might have been higher than estimated during the three-day annual survey period. See the 2015 Tricolored Blackbird Survey Report included in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results for additional details.

Tricolored Blackbirds successfully reproduced at three colonies within the Davis Unit of the San Jacinto Wildlife Area (Spring-Summer Wetlands, Bridge Street Pond, and the Little Ramona Duck Club) and Tule Valley in 2015. The Davis Unit of the San Jacinto Wildlife Area lies within

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-36 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 23. Tricolored Blackbird Breeding Colonies in 2015 and Historic Breeding Sites

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-37 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

the Mystic Lake/San Jacinto Wildlife Area Core Area. The Tule Valley colony site is not currently protected under the MSHCP. The Little Ramona Duck Club colony produced the largest number of juveniles, estimated at 3,000 birds in May 2015.

For the first time since Monitoring Program surveys began in 2005, the entire San Jacinto Valley breeding population nested at the San Jacinto Wildlife Area. This may be due to efforts to enhance habitat for the species at this site that began in 2014. The Davis Unit of the San Jacinto Wildlife Area remains the single most important site for the restoration of the population in Riverside County and southern California as a whole.

It is important to continue to survey historic breeding sites on an annual basis except where suitable habitat no longer exists. Tricolored Blackbirds continue to depend heavily on managed habitats and the local population will likely require active management to persist. Management should aim for rapid restoration of population numbers and multiple large breeding colonies (≥5,000 birds). A full description of survey methods and results can be found in the 2015 Tricolored Blackbird Survey Report included in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.4.5 Arroyo Toad Survey

The species objectives for arroyo toad require the conservation of nine Core Areas: San Juan Creek, Los Alamos Creek, San Jacinto River, Indian Creek, Bautista Creek, Wilson Creek, Temecula Creek, Arroyo Seco, and Vail Lake. The species objectives for arroyo toad further require that within the MSHCP Conservation Area, breeding populations must be maintained at a minimum of 80 percent of the conserved breeding locations as measured by the presence/absence of juvenile toads, tadpoles, or egg masses across any five consecutive years. During 2010 surveys by Monitoring Program biologists, breeding populations of arroyo toad were documented in three of the nine Core Areas: Arroyo Seco, Bautista Creek, and San Juan Creek. An additional breeding population was found in Cole Creek on the Santa Rosa Plateau in 2005.

Survey efforts in 2015 focused on resurveying the Core Areas where arroyo toad had most recently been documented. Surveys were conducted according to a U.S. Geological Survey protocol, which employs a visual encounter and dip-net survey method for detecting all life stages of amphibians, and includes an assessment of habitat characteristics. Unfortunately, no arroyo toads were detected during 2015 surveys. Although there were small amounts of water at all survey locations in 2015, the recent sustained drought has greatly reduced availability of suitable habitat for arroyo toad, especially breeding habitat. Anecdotal reports from other groups conducting surveys for arroyo toad throughout southern California in recent years corroborate a greatly reduced population. After failure to detect any adults or evidence of breeding at survey locations in 2015, biologists

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-38 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

conducted nocturnal surveys targeting adults at Bautista Creek and Santa Rosa Plateau but were also unsuccessful.

One adult arroyo toad was documented via photograph by a Nature Conservancy biologist at the Santa Rosa Plateau in 2015. Another adult arroyo toad was reported to the Monitoring Program within the Arroyo Seco Core Area in 2015; however, Monitoring Program biologists were subsequently unable to confirm arroyo toad presence at the reported location.

Because there was no change in the status of the relevant species-specific monitoring objective in 2015 and annual survey efforts are continuing, a standalone technical report was not written for this survey effort. Results from previous years and a full description of survey methods and results can be found in the 2010 Arroyo Toad Survey Report included in the RCA’s 2010 Annual Report Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.4.6 Western Pond Turtle Survey

The species objectives for western pond turtle (pond turtle) require the continued use of at least 75 percent of conserved Core Areas as measured once every three years. Core Areas for this species include: Cajalco Creek, San Mateo Creek, Santa Ana River, Chino Creek, Temecula Creek, Murrieta Creek, Santa Rosa Plateau, and San Jacinto River east of I-215. These Core Areas include a 2-kilometer buffer of upland habitat surrounding each waterway.

Monitoring Program biologists have surveyed for pond turtles within Core Areas and other suitable areas in conservation every year since 2006, except 2013. The pond turtle monitoring objective was met in 2012, negating the need for a focused 2013 survey. Early efforts focused on developing a robust trapping protocol that gives a high level of confidence that individuals will be captured if the species is present at a trapping location. A visual habitat assessment and trapping protocol developed and tested in San Diego County by the Western Ecological Research Center of the U.S. Geological Survey was adopted, with modification by the Monitoring Program Herpetology Program Lead. The pond turtle trapping protocol incorporates baited live-capture traps to detect all turtle species present in a given area. This protocol is widely used for trapping pond turtles in southern California.

The 2014 survey effort focused on three Core Areas that were last surveyed in 2012: the Santa Ana River, San Jacinto River, and San Mateo Creek. In 2015, trapping efforts were focused in the Santa Margarita River, a non-Core Area with a robust population of pond turtles. In addition to trapping surveys, biologists conducted directed searches along approximately 5 kilometers of stream segments in Long Canyon within the Cleveland National Forest which is part of the Temecula Creek Core Area. Long Canyon is too remote to transport traps into, so biologists conducted visual and hand capture surveys to confirm species presence. Monitoring Program

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-39 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES biologists also occasionally assisted the MSHCP Management Program with turtle trapping efforts in 2015 as part of a radio-tracking project to understand pond turtle dispersal patterns, and remained vigilant during surveys for other target species in order to confirm pond turtles at locations via incidental observations.

Fifty-one pond turtles were captured during trapping efforts at the Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve in 2015 (Figure 24. Western Pond Turtle Survey Locations and Detections 2013-2015). Thirteen pond turtles were confirmed at Long Canyon within the Temecula Creek Core Area. During collaborative trapping efforts with the Management Program in 2015, pond turtles were also documented in the Cajalco Creek Core Area, and in Warm Springs Creek, which is not a Core Area. Monitoring Program biologists incidentally observed pond turtles within the Murrieta Creek Core Area in 2015, and two pond turtles were also incidentally observed by Reserve Management staff at the Santa Rosa Plateau and reported to the Monitoring Program in 2015.

In 2014, two pond turtles were captured during trapping efforts in the Santa Ana River Core Area and six pond turtles were observed during visual surveys in the San Mateo Creek Core Area. Finally, pond turtles were incidentally observed by Monitoring Program biologists in the Agua Tibia Wilderness, and reported by Santa Ana Watershed Association staff along a tributary of the Santa Ana River called Sunnyslope Creek in 2014. No pond turtles have been confirmed within the Chino Creek or San Jacinto River Core Areas in the current reporting period, although a robust population occurs along Chino Creek just north of the Plan Area in San Bernardino County. The Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve would be a logical choice to serve as a replacement for a more highly disturbed or unsuitable Core Area as Monitoring Program surveys have consistently documented multiple pond turtles and abundant suitable habitat at this reserve. With six of eight cores occupied, the species-specific monitoring objectives are currently met.

Several non-native species were captured at trapping sites in the current reporting period including: spiny softshell turtles, red-eared sliders, a common snapping turtle, bullfrogs, red swamp crayfish, fathead minnows, green sunfish, mosquitofish, and black bullhead. After uniquely marking individuals in order to positively identify any future recaptures, all captured exotic turtles were donated to the California Turtle and Tortoise Club (Orange County, CA) to be relocated or adopted out. All other non-native animals were either released on-site or destroyed, according to land manager desires and surveyor’s personal willingness. Biologists also collected and delivered tissue samples from turtles and other aquatic species in support of the U.S. Geological Survey’s ongoing population genetics study. A full description of survey methods and previous results can be found in the 2015 Western Pond Turtle Survey Report included in the RCA’s 2015 Annual Report Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-40 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 24. Western Pond Turtle Survey Locations and Detections 2013-2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-41 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

7.4.7 Terrestrial Reptile Survey

The species objectives for covered terrestrial reptile species require the Monitoring Program to document the continued use of 75 percent or more of species-specific Core Areas listed in the MSHCP at least once every eight years. Covered terrestrial reptiles include the following species: Belding’s orange-throated whiptail, coastal western whiptail, granite night lizard, granite spiny lizard, northern red-diamond rattlesnake, San Diego horned lizard, southern sagebrush lizard, southern rubber boa, San Diego banded gecko, San Bernardino mountain kingsnake, and San Diego mountain kingsnake. Although some species may require a more focused survey effort (e.g., nocturnal surveys for granite night lizard) or have distributions somewhat offset from the majority of the other species (e.g., kingsnakes), most covered terrestrial reptiles share similar suitable habitat needs and thus can be monitored simultaneously. Past Monitoring Program efforts targeting terrestrial reptiles have incorporated artificial cover, nocturnal and diurnal transect surveys, and area searches within suitable habitat. Surveys in 2015 were designed to produce documented observations required to meet outstanding species objectives using area searches of suitable habitat within Core Areas and artificial cover checks.

Whether during terrestrial reptile surveys, recorded as incidental observations, or reported by partnering agencies, Belding’s orange-throated whiptail, coastal western whiptail, granite night lizard, granite spiny lizard, northern red-diamond rattlesnake, San Diego horned lizard, southern sagebrush lizard, San Bernardino mountain kingsnake, and San Diego mountain kingsnake were all observed on conserved land in 2015. These data contribute to ongoing assessments of species- specific objectives, all of which are currently met, except for San Diego banded gecko, San Diego mountain kingsnake, and southern sagebrush lizard.

In 2015, Monitoring Program biologists collected tissue samples from 293 individuals of 26 reptile species and 8 amphibian species in support of an ongoing U.S. Geological Survey population genetics study of reptiles and amphibians in southern California. Samples were processed in accordance with U.S. Geological Survey guidelines and shipped to the local office in San Diego. The Monitoring Program recently surpassed 1,000 total reptile and amphibian samples that have been donated to the U.S. Geological Survey for genetic analysis. Because there was no change in the status of relevant species-specific monitoring objectives in 2015 and annual survey efforts are continuing, a standalone technical report was not written for this survey effort. Results from previous years and a full description of survey methods and results can be found in the 2012 Diurnal Reptile Survey Report included in the RCA’s 2012 Annual Report Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-42 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

7.4.8 Rabbit Survey

Species objectives for San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit and brush rabbit require the conservation of Core Areas and the maintenance of corridors that provide an effective means for dispersal between large blocks of habitat. The Monitoring Program must document the continued use of 75 percent or more of species-specific Core Areas listed in the MSHCP at least once every eight years. Incidental observations of both species either recorded by Monitoring Program biologists conducting focused surveys for other Covered Species or reported to the Monitoring Program by partners comprised the dataset of confirmed occurrences until 2015. Because these data were insufficient to confirm whether or not the species objectives are currently met, surveys targeting both rabbits began in 2015.

Results from incidental records from 2008-2015 showed that San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit only require two more occupied Core Area for presence to be documented on at least 75 percent of Core Areas. In late 2015 Monitoring Program biologists began targeted road surveys for this species utilizing spotlights in Core Areas where presence has never been recorded. San Diego black-tailed jackrabbits were widespread throughout multiple cores and linkages in the Plan Area across the year (Figure 25. San Diego Black-tailed Jackrabbit Core Areas and Occupied Core Areas from 2008-2015). However, no additional Core Areas were confirmed as occupied in 2015, thus species presence in at least two additional Core Area is still needed to confirm that the San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit objective is met.

Brush rabbits are generally inconspicuous and therefore are seldom detected incidentally. Furthermore, incidental records for this species must be viewed with caution as brush rabbits are difficult to distinguish from desert cottontails. In early 2015 brush rabbit surveys employing live- capture tomahawk traps were initiated to capture this species in needed Core Areas (Figure 26. Brush Rabbit Core Areas and Occupied Core Areas from 2008-2015). Trapping locations were based on previous incidental observations of potential brush rabbits and on rabbit sign. One brush rabbit was captured on two occasions at the Potrero Reserve in Existing Core 3. Additionally, tomahawk traps designed to capture brush rabbit were placed around trapping grids targeting small mammal populations in Bautista Creek but were unsuccessful in capturing any brush rabbit. Surveys targeting brush rabbits will continue in future years. All captured brush rabbits and desert cottontails will be photographed and thoroughly measured to build a local database of physical characteristics that may be used to differentiate between these species without having the animals in-hand. In addition to incidental observations and live-capture traps, motion-triggered camera stations, scat identification, and specially-trained detection dogs may also be used to monitor animal presence.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-43 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 25. San Diego Black-tailed Jackrabbit Core Areas and Occupied Core Areas from 2008- 2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-44 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 26. Brush Rabbit Core Areas and Occupied Core Areas from 2008-2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-45 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Because there was no change in the status of relevant species-specific monitoring objectives in 2015 and annual survey efforts are continuing, a standalone technical report was not written for this survey effort.

7.4.9 San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Survey

The species objectives for San Bernardino kangaroo rat require that a minimum of 4,400 acres of occupied or suitable habitat be conserved in the San Jacinto River and Bautista Creek and their tributaries, as measured across any consecutive 8-year period. Moreover, at least 75% of the total habitat (3,330 acres) must be confirmed as occupied, and at least 20% of the occupied habitat (666 acres) must support a population of medium or higher density (i.e., 5-15 individuals per hectare). Prior to 2015, the Biological Monitoring Program had not conducted targeted surveys for San Bernardino kangaroo rat. However, this species was incidentally captured in the San Jacinto River while trapping for Los Angeles pocket mouse during 2010-2012 monitoring efforts, and also during a small relocation project conducted for the Riverside County Flood Control District in 2014. Monitoring Program San Bernardino kangaroo rat survey efforts in 2015 were conducted on conserved land in the San Jacinto River and Bautista Creek, with the aim of estimating the current area of suitable habitat occupied.

In the San Jacinto River, San Bernardino kangaroo rat were captured at 21 of 66 (32%) trapping grids, while none of the trapping grids were occupied in Bautista Creek (Figure 27. San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Trapping Locations and Detections in 2015). Data collected in 2015 indicate that the species-specific objectives for San Bernardino kangaroo rat are not currently met. Had at least 75% of the potentially suitable habitat been occupied, the next monitoring step would have been to conduct follow-up trapping aimed at estimating population density. Additional land acquisition within Core Areas and active management to increase habitat suitability will likely be needed to meet the species objectives for San Bernardino kangaroo rat.

Four additional Covered Species (Los Angeles pocket mouse, Dulzura kangaroo rat, northwestern San Diego pocket mouse, and San Diego desert woodrat), and six non-covered small mammal species were captured during the 2015 San Bernardino kangaroo rat survey effort. The distributional information on non-target species of interest gathered through the San Bernardino kangaroo rat study will be used to supplement and focus other small mammal studies undertaken by the Monitoring Program. A full description of trapping activities and results can be found in the 2015 San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus) Survey Report included in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-46 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 27. San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Trapping Locations and Detections in 2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-47 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

7.4.10 Carnivore Survey

Species objectives for bobcat, coyote, long-tailed weasel, and mountain lion require the conservation of contiguous-habitat blocks and the maintenance of corridors that provide an effective means for dispersal. Carnivore surveys targeting the species listed above began in 2008. Various remote-detection methods have been employed by the Monitoring Program, including scent-stations, area-search surveys (which include recording scat, tracks, and visual sightings), and motion-triggered cameras.

Results from surveys in 2008-2015 showed that Core Area and habitat-block occupancy objectives are being met for all four covered carnivore species with species presence having been documented on at least 75 percent of Core Areas and habitat blocks described in individual species accounts. Habitat-linkage objectives remain to be met for mountain lion.

In 2015 carnivore surveys employed motion-triggered cameras to document movement of the four covered carnivore species across potential dispersal barriers and in listed habitat blocks and linkages not adequately surveyed prior to 2015. A total of four motion-triggered camera stations were installed at two locations in 2015: Singleton Road in Constrained Linkage 23 and Jackrabbit Trail in Proposed Core 3 (Figure 28. Carnivore Camera Station Locations in 2015). Cameras were selectively installed at locations that captured landscape features most likely to be used by carnivores (e.g., game trails, drainages). The two cameras at Singleton Road were installed in December 2014, were checked once per week, and then removed in April 2016. Two additional cameras were installed at Jackrabbit Trail in April 2015 and were checked once per week. One Jackrabbit Trail camera was removed in September 2015 and the other in April 2016. Although there is overlap between years, only 2015 data are discussed here.

Motion-triggered camera stations recorded 1,288 discernible images of large- or medium-sized mammals, 39 images of small mammals, 53 images of birds, 1 image of a lizard, and 74 images of humans in 2015. Coyote was the most common Covered Species photo-captured (93 images) followed by bobcat (53 images). Coyote and bobcat were detected at both survey locations. Mountain lion and long-tailed weasel were not recorded at camera station locations in 2015.

Monitoring Program biologists recorded several incidental observations of covered carnivore species during surveys for other Covered Species on conserved lands in 2015. Reserve Managers throughout the Plan Area also provided observation information about these Covered Species. Coyotes and bobcat were widespread throughout multiple core areas and linkages in the Plan Area across the year. Monitoring Program staff observed a long-tailed weasel crossing a road at the San Jacinto Wildlife Area. MSHCP Management Program staff reported mountain lion tracks at Santa Rosa Hills. Mountain lions were also photo-captured by Reserve staff at the Santa Rosa Plateau Ecological Reserve.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-48 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 28. Carnivore Camera Station Locations in 2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-49 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Surveys of mountain lion habitat-linkages and movement corridors will continue in future years. Camera stations will continue to be used to monitor animal dispersal within habitat linkages and Core Areas, especially those named specifically in species accounts for bobcat and mountain lion. Ongoing collaborations with other researchers working in our area (e.g., Dr. Winston Vickers with U.C. Davis) will also continue to be developed. Because there was no change in the status of relevant species-specific monitoring objectives in 2015 and annual survey efforts are continuing, a standalone technical report was not written for this survey effort. Results from previous years and a full description of survey methods can be found in the 2012 Carnivore Survey Report, included in the RCA’s 2012 Annual Report Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.4.11 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey

The species objectives for Quino checkerspot butterfly (Quino) require annual documentation of its distribution within the Conservation Area. Monitoring Program biologists have conducted surveys for Quino within the Conservation Area every year since 2005, with survey intensity depending on trained surveyor availability and annual habitat conditions (i.e., more surveys are conducted in years when Quino are relatively abundant due to beneficial environmental conditions, pending staff availability).

Monitoring Program biologists monitored three previously established ‘sentinel sites’ across the Conservation Area known to support populations of Quino in order to track their flight season, determine presence/absence of larvae and/or adults, relative abundance, and available species- specific resources in 2015. Sentinel sites were located at the Southwestern Riverside County Multi- Species Reserve, Oak Mountain, and Anza (Figure 29. Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and Delhi Fly Survey Areas and Detections in 2015). Searches for adult Quino were also conducted at sites within Core Areas that have been occupied within the last five years.

Monitoring Program biologists surveyed 97 sampling stations at 15 survey sites in six of the seven Core Areas in 2015: Warm Springs Creek, Wilson Valley, Sage, Silverado/Tule Peak, Johnson Ranch/Lake Skinner and Oak Mountain. No surveys were conducted at the Lake Mathews/Estelle Mountain/Harford Springs Core Area. Quino are believed to have been extirpated from that Core Area as they have never been observed there by Monitoring Program biologists despite repeated surveys. Two of the 15 sites surveyed in 2015 were not in designated Core Areas, however adult Quino have been observed at both sites within the last five years. These sites were within the San Bernardino National Forest: Horse Creek (off of Bautista Rd) and a site specifically named San Bernardino National Forest that is approximately halfway between Cahuilla Mountain and Thomas Mountain.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-50 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 29. Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and Delhi Fly Survey Areas and Detections in 2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-51 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Adult Quino were observed at all three sentinel sites and the following five survey sites in 2015: Multi-Species Reserve, Magee Hills, Horse Creek, Beauty Mountain, and Winchester 700 Tule Peak (Figure 29. Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and Delhi Fly Survey Areas and Detections in 2015). Four of seven Core Areas were occupied in 2015: Sage, Johnson Ranch/Lake Skinner, Oak Mountain, and Silverado/Tule Peak. The only other Core Area Quino has recently occupied is the Wilson Valley Core. The Warm Springs Creek Core Area has been extensively surveyed in the last eight flight seasons (2008-2015) without finding Quino. A full description of survey methods and results can be found in the 2015 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) Survey Report included in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.4.12 Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly Survey

Species objectives for Delhi Sands flower-loving fly (Delhi fly) require annual documentation of successful reproduction at all three Core Areas identified in the MSHCP. However, just one Core Area has been conserved to date (i.e., Teledyne in the Jurupa Hills) (Figure 29. Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and Delhi Fly Survey Areas and Detections in 2015). Surveys allowing density estimates of Delhi fly within the only Core Area accessible to the Monitoring Program to be calculated were conducted from 2005-2010. In 2011 these efforts were reduced to simply documenting successful reproduction, greatly reducing necessary resources. However, the MSHCP Management Program has recently been conducting management actions to control the spread of non-native vegetation within occupied habitat, and to potentially open up more habitat at the edges of the recently occupied area. In order to properly assess the effectiveness of these actions, the more intensive study design allowing a density estimate of Delhi fly to be calculated was re-established in 2014 and conducted in 2015.

Biologists observed Delhi fly on 101 occasions at Teledyne in 2015 (70 males, 27 females, 4 indeterminate). Because it is possible that unique Delhi fly individuals were observed multiple times on the same or different days, and observers may miss individuals that are obscured from view, the above values should not be interpreted as true numbers of flies on-site. Rather, these observations are used when calculating density estimates and comparing observations per kilometer surveyed across years. Eight individuals were confirmed as teneral, and seven additional exuviae (pupal case) were documented while conducting surveys, thus confirming reproduction at the Teledyne site in 2015.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-52 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Density estimates and observations per kilometer in 2015 increased considerably from 2014 values, though remain lower than 2009 and 2010 which were the peak years. The daily density estimate in 2015 was 0.86 individuals/ha, compared to 0.31 individuals/ha in 2014, 2.76 in 2009 and 1.44 in 2010. The number of observations per kilometer surveyed was 0.45 in 2015, compared to 0.21 in 2014, 0.90 in 2009, and 0.75 in 2010. From 2011-2013 the survey protocol did not include walking pre-established transects; thus comparable data are unavailable for those years.

It is encouraging that Delhi fly density at the Teledyne site appears to be increasing, suggesting that the management efforts are proving beneficial to the species. Management Program habitat enhancement activities at Teledyne to improve site conditions for Delhi fly have included fencing to prevent unauthorized vehicle access, erosion-control, and vegetation control measures designed to reduce the percent cover of vegetation, especially non-native vegetation. Many of the vegetation metrics tracked from pre- and post-management activities show beneficial effects. These management actions are guided by, and conducted in accordance with, the Delhi Sands Flower- loving Fly Habitat Management Plan for Jurupa Hills, Riverside County. Monitoring Program staff will continue to track the population status of Delhi fly on site.

A full description of survey methods and results can be found in the 2015 Delhi Sands Flower- loving Fly Survey Report included in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.4.13 Vernal Pool Survey

There are three covered fairy shrimp species and one covered amphibian species that inhabit vernal pools in the MSHCP Plan Area: Riverside fairy shrimp, Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp, vernal pool fairy shrimp, and western spadefoot. Although species-specific survey objectives are not listed for fairy shrimp, the default MSHCP monitoring objective states that species presence and continued use shall be maintained at 75 percent of the listed Core Areas at least once every eight years. The species objectives for western spadefoot require maintaining successful reproduction at 75 percent of conserved breeding locations once every eight years. Previous survey efforts for these species focused on locating vernal pools in the Conservation Area, assessing the suitability of pools for target species, and documenting species presence within Core Areas and other potentially suitable habitat in the Conservation Area.

In 2015, after yet another winter of below-average rainfall in western Riverside County, Monitoring Program biologists conducted focused surveys within Core Areas for fairy shrimp and western spadefoot. After biologists scouted potential target areas, suitable pools were surveyed near Hemet, Tenaja Corridor, Twin Pines, and Tripp Flats (Figure 30. Vernal Pool Survey Areas in 2014/2015 and Target Species Detections From 2008-2015). Due to insufficient

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-53 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 30. Vernal Pool Survey Areas in 2014/2015 and Target Species Detections From 2008- 2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-54 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES rainfall, pools at the Skunk Hollow and Johnson Ranch properties near Lake Skinner were not surveyed by Center for Natural Lands Management biologists in the winter of 2014/15. Also due to insufficient rainfall, the majority of the pools Monitoring Program biologists surveyed were not surveyed three times as directed by typical protocol, because they dried up too quickly.

Because documenting target species occupancy at additional sites was the primary survey goal, only locations not previously confirmed to be occupied by target species were surveyed. While versatile fairy shrimp, which is not a Covered Species, was detected during vernal pool surveys, Monitoring Program biologists did not detect any Covered Species of fairy shrimp during the 2014/15 survey season. Monitoring Program biologists did not detect any evidence of breeding western spadefoot at conserved locations not previously known to support breeding spadefoot in 2014/15 (Figure 30. Vernal Pool Survey Areas in 2014/2015 and Target Species Detections From 2008-2015).

Combining observations made by Monitoring Program biologists and those of partnering agencies, Riverside fairy shrimp has been detected at three of five Core Areas to date: Lake Elsinore (2010), Skunk Hollow (2008) and the Santa Rosa Plateau (2009). One additional Core Area (Alberhill or Murrieta) will need to be confirmed as occupied in order for the species objective to be met.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp have been detected at two Core Areas: the Santa Rosa Plateau (2010) and Skunk Hollow (2011) and one non-core area (Estelle Mountain). Salt Creek was surveyed for western spadefoot, but vernal pools suitable for fairy shrimp do not exist within the currently conserved area around Salt Creek. The area immediately surrounding the creek does have potential habitat for vernal pool fairy shrimp that is not currently included in the Conservation Area. Ideally, future land acquisition will include properties in this area that have appropriate vernal pool habitat. As written, species objectives will not be met until the species is found in all three of its Core Areas.

Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp were detected by Monitoring Program biologists at its only Core Area, the Santa Rosa Plateau, in 2008, fulfilling the species objective for the current eight-year period.

As of the winter of 2014/15, breeding spadefoot have been confirmed at 9 of 16 (56%) conserved breeding locations. Adults without recent evidence of breeding have also been detected at two other conserved breeding locations, and adults or tadpoles have been observed at four additional locations not specifically listed in the MSHCP as conserved breeding locations. Additional land acquisition within listed Core Areas and surveys targeting conserved breeding locations will be necessary to address the species objectives for this species.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-55 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Because there was no change in the status of relevant species-specific monitoring objectives in 2015 and annual survey efforts are continuing, a standalone technical report was not written for this survey effort. A full description of survey methods and previous results can be found in the Vernal Pool Survey Report 2011, included in the RCA’s 2011 Annual Report Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.4.14 Rare Plant Survey

There are 63 rare plants listed as Covered Species under the MSHCP. For most of these species, the MSHCP requires confirmation of a specific number of occurrences, often at specified sites, within the Plan Area. Unless a given species-specific conservation objective has more rigorous requirements, the Biological Monitoring Program is obligated to survey for the distribution of covered plant species at least once every eight years with the goal of verifying occupancy at 75% or more of the sites listed in the species objective. Some Covered Species have additional “demonstrate-conservation” objectives that require documentation of a specific level of conservation, such as confirmation of a minimum number of individuals. Monitoring Program biologists have surveyed historical locations within the Plan Area for targeted plant species every year since permit issuance. This effort was necessary due to the varying sources, precisions, and ages of historical records and the need to verify the current status of covered plant species in the Plan Area. Target plant species chosen for monitoring within a given year depend upon whether or not known locations for Covered Species have been verified during the current reporting period, the availability of rare annual species given recent environmental conditions (e.g., rainfall), and availability of trained personnel. Additionally, they were chosen because they either were observed and abundant during a sentinel survey, or because they were known to co-occur in the area being surveyed, with species having unmet objectives given higher priority.

In 2015, Monitoring Program biologists conducted surveys for 32 covered rare plant species to verify persistence at historic locations, and to locate unconfirmed occurrences on recently conserved land. There are three types of rare plant surveys that are conducted to meet those objectives: sentinel site surveys, inventory surveys, and long-term monitoring surveys. The phenology of available target plant species was monitored at multiple ‘sentinel sites’ (locations with known and persistent populations of target species) to guide the timing of searches for covered plant species at other locations. Inventory surveys were conducted for 13 Covered Species. Long- term monitoring surveys were conducted for 23 Covered Species. Four Covered Species had locations where inventory surveys were needed and separate locations where long-term monitoring surveys were appropriate.

Depending upon available information and survey goals, surveyors either navigated to assigned 250 meter x 250 meter grid cells containing historically documented occurrences of targeted plant

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-56 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

species or conducted surveys directly around known occurrences queried from the Monitoring Program’s database of historic plant locations. Assigned cells or survey locations were searched until all species of interest were located or all suitable habitats were thoroughly covered. Although each survey focused on particular target species, surveyors remained vigilant for all Covered Species.

A total of 21 (91%) Covered Species were reconfirmed at previously documented locations in a long-term monitoring context in 2015 by Monitoring Program biologists, fulfilling 45 of 55 (82%) occurrence objectives monitored this season (Figure 31. Covered Plant Species Detection Locations in 2015). All rare plant species are grouped together in Figure 31 due to the difficulty in symbolizing 29 individual species. Of the 13 target species for which inventory monitoring was conducted, 8 (62%) were detected in 7 of 40 grids surveyed (18%). These detections fulfilled three unmet occurrence objectives and increased the known distribution of five other targeted Covered Species. Biologists additionally observed 14 covered plant species incidentally, 10 of which were unique occurrences.

Four properties were surveyed for the first time by program botanists: KB San Jacinto River Donation, EVMWD north of Kabian Park, Salt Creek Channel west of I-215, and Warren Road Partners in Hemet. Covered Species were detected on all four of these properties.

Current data are adequate to confirm that 34 covered rare plant species-specific objectives are met. Additional land acquisition and subsequent documentation of additional occurrences or localities are necessary to confirm that species objectives for the remaining covered plant species are being met. For particular details about locations of observed rare plant species observed by Monitoring Program biologists in 2015, and a full description of survey methods and results see the Monitoring Program’s 2015 Rare Plant Survey Report included in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

7.4.15 Incidental Species Sightings

Covered Species incidentally observed during unrelated survey activities are recorded by Monitoring Program biologists to increase knowledge of the distribution of Covered Species in the Conservation Area. Incidental observations are different than focused survey data as the methods are not standardized and only positive data are recorded. However, recording incidental observations of species that are difficult to detect is extremely important. Incidental observation data may be used as current documentation of species presence at a given location, as a starting point for future focused survey efforts, and to provide information about appropriate habitat for the detected species in the future. Incidental observations of Covered Species made during surveys in 2015 were entered into the Monitoring Program’s centralized database and these data

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-57 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

Figure 31. Covered Plant Species Detections during Rare Plant Surveys in 2015

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-58 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES were incorporated into taxa-specific reports. All observations of Covered Species, whether made by focused survey or incidentally, are used when making a determination of whether or not species- specific objectives have been met for a given reporting period.

7.5 Suggested Changes and Feedback for Adaptive Management

Effective land and species management requires current information regarding vegetation communities, wildlife habitats, species status, and population trends. The Monitoring Program coordinates and shares information with Reserve Managers as data are collected and processed. Management/monitoring coordination meetings are held on a monthly basis to provide summaries of results and a venue for information exchange. The following suggestions for adaptive management are based on Monitoring Program surveys and other entities providing data to the Monitoring Program.

Kangaroo Rats. Aguanga kangaroo rat, Stephens’ kangaroo rat, Dulzura kangaroo rat, and San Bernardino kangaroo rat are all covered under the MSHCP. Kangaroo rats, most notably Stephens’ are typically found in habitats with sparse vegetation, as density of vegetation affects their burrowing, locomotion and foraging ability. Active management to reduce exotic annual grass cover in conserved areas could contribute significantly to achieving the conservation objectives for these and many other Covered Species.

Burrowing Owl. The species objectives for Burrowing Owl require the conservation of five Core Areas, plus interconnecting linkages, containing a breeding population of 120 owls with no fewer than five pairs in any one Core Area. The Core Areas listed in the Plan are: Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake (which includes the El Sol and Johnson Ranch properties), playa west of Hemet, San Jacinto Wildlife Area/Mystic Lake area including Lake Perris, Lake Mathews, and along the Santa Ana River.

Since 2006, the RCA’s Management Program and Monitoring Program have collaborated with local Reserve Managers on an adaptive management project with the goal of increasing Burrowing Owl habitat within the Conservation Area. This collaborative effort has grown to include management and monitoring of natural and artificial burrows at the Southwestern Riverside County Multi-Species Reserve, Lake Mathews/Estelle Mountain Reserve, El Sobrante Landfill, Lake Perris State Recreation Area, Johnson Ranch, San Jacinto Wildlife Area, and El Sol property. Reserve Managers have installed artificial burrows and managed vegetation within several Core Areas to facilitate Burrowing Owl use of Core Areas, including installing at least 46 burrows within the Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake Core Area, at least 5 in the San Jacinto Wildlife Area/Mystic Lake Core Area including Lake Perris, and at least 52 in the Lake Mathews Core Area. Cooperation with Reserve Managers has expanded to include a schedule and shared data

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-59 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

sheet for monitoring Burrowing Owl burrows. The collected data are stored in a Monitoring Program database.

Based on surveys in recent years by the Monitoring Program, Management Program, and Reserve Managers, only the Lake Skinner/Diamond Valley Lake Core Area currently supports the minimum number of breeding pairs of Burrowing Owls. Burrowing owls need open areas with sparse or low-growing vegetation. Therefore, appropriate active management tools may be needed to control non-native grasses (e.g., grazing, mowing, prescribed fire). These management actions would likely benefit several other Covered Species such as Stephens’ kangaroo rat and Mountain Plover. A comprehensive Burrowing Owl Habitat Management Plan for western Riverside County has been drafted in collaboration with local Reserve Managers. A Burrowing Owl Translocation Program document is also near completion. Program biologists in 2015 initiated a Burrowing Owl habitat assessment project to collect habitat data at burrows used by breeding Burrowing Owls. These data can be used by managers to decide whether a site is conducive to owl occupancy prior to translocation. To achieve the conservation objectives for Burrowing Owl, management of habitat within the remaining Core Areas, and active translocation of owls will likely be necessary. Additional land may also need to be acquired that supports Burrowing Owls.

Covered Amphibians and Aquatic Reptiles. Exotic species such as bullfrogs, red-eared sliders, mosquito fish, and African clawed frogs exist within many waterways within the Conservation Area and have significant negative impacts on native amphibians and aquatic reptiles by direct predation and competition for limited resources. At a minimum, the habitat within Core Areas that are infested with exotic species would be greatly enhanced by removal of these exotics. Although reintroduction of some covered amphibians may be an appropriate management action (e.g., mountain yellow-legged frog) no reintroductions of Covered Species should be considered for areas currently infested with exotic species until management actions have the exotics under control.

Monitoring Program employees have participated in annual efforts led by CDFW to remove trout from streams in the San Jacinto Mountains to facilitate otherwise suitable habitat use by mountain yellow-legged frogs. This multi-year effort has been increasingly successful in removing the trout although it remains unclear whether they have been completely eliminated from target areas. Once the trout are eliminated, mountain yellow-legged frogs in nearby occupied areas will be free to expand their territories. If no frogs move into the recently cleared area, translocation of mountain yellow-legged frogs currently in captivity will be considered.

Monitoring Program biologists also participate in Management Program-led efforts to locate and exterminate aquatic exotic species on RCA-managed properties when possible. Further details can be found in Section 6.0 – Management Activities of this report.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-60 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

No California red-legged frogs have been found in western Riverside County since one male was seen in Cole Creek at the Santa Rosa Plateau Ecological Reserve in September 2003. The species is not known to currently occur in the Plan Area despite the apparent presence of suitable habitat. Significant effort was expended by the Monitoring Program during the Inventory Phase to survey for red-legged frog within Core Areas, and to evaluate and identify suitable habitat for red-legged frog within the Conservation Area. The probable causes of the decline of red-legged frog are introductions of non-native predators such as bullfrogs and fish, habitat loss due to development and agriculture, pesticide pollution, and pathogens such as Chytrid fungus. Without future active management (e.g., exotic species removal, species translocation) extensive additional efforts to locate red-legged frogs within the Conservation Area would be an inefficient expenditure of resources.

In addition to documenting the distribution of pond turtle populations throughout western Riverside County, it is recommended that the turtle trapping protocol be amended to include population estimates. Population estimates would enable Reserve Managers to better monitor the status of pond turtle populations over time and could potentially provide valuable information regarding population responses to management actions. Furthermore, a more comprehensive assessment of upland habitat usage would help facilitate appropriate management. This would involve a more thorough evaluation of landscape composition, such as collecting parameters of upland slope and distance to suitable nesting locations. Because pond turtles do not nest in the aquatic system itself, it is important to assess all of their habitat requirements to most effectively manage for sustainable populations within the Conservation Area. The ongoing telemetry studies conducted by the Management Program will help determine specific upland habitat use by nesting female turtles at RCA-owned properties within the Conservation Area which will be valuable information for active management of this species.

Tricolored Blackbird. Region-wide surveys conducted from 2009-2015 indicate that the populations of Tricolored Blackbird in Riverside County and southern California as a whole remain near historic lows. In December 2014, the Tricolored Blackbird was temporarily listed as an Endangered Species by the California Fish and Game Commission. Tricolored Blackbirds continue to depend heavily on managed habitats and the local population will likely require active management to persist. The California Fish and Game Commission voted again in December 2015 to advance the Tricolored Blackbird to candidacy under the California Endangered Species Act. CDFW will now conduct a 12-month status review to recommend whether the California Fish and Game Commission should list the species as threatened or endangered. According to law, the Tricolored Blackbird receives the same legal protection as a threatened or endangered species while it is a candidate for listing. Management must aim for rapid restoration of population numbers and multiple large breeding colonies (N ≥5,000 birds).

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-61 7.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES

In April, 2014 RCA received a $70,732 NCCP Local Assistance Grant award to enhance breeding habitat at the San Jacinto Wildlife Area. The ultimate goal of the two-year project is to stabilize and rebuild the population of Tricolored Blackbirds within the MSHCP Plan Area.

The MSHCP species account for the Tricolored Blackbird should be modified to recognize loss of foraging habitat in the vicinity of breeding sites as a significant threat to the survival of the species, and the stated management objectives should be reconsidered as well. In particular, the prescription for managing “… this species in order to maintain (once every five years) the continued use of, and successful reproduction within at least one of the identified Core Areas” is likely insufficient for a rapidly declining species that is dependent on resources that are both highly variable in space and time, and are rapidly being lost throughout the Plan Area.

Because of the rapid rate of recent decline, it is recommended that monitoring be conducted for Tricolored Blackbird colonies every year rather than every five years. Annual surveys should also be coordinated with the state-wide surveys occurring every three years. Given the limited number of active colony sites, it is recommended that Reserve Managers seek to maintain suitable breeding and foraging habitat at all recently occupied historic and potential colony sites.

Additional information and recommendations can be found in 2015 Tricolored Blackbird Survey Report included in Appendix A – RCA MSHCP Technical Reports – 2. Monitoring Program Survey Results.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015) 7-62 8.0 REFERENCES

8.0 REFERENCES

Egetter, Pat. 2012. RCA Technical Report. MSHCP Vegetation Corrections, Updated January 7, 2015 for Annual Report.

Evens, J.M. and A.N. Klein. 2006. “A New Model for Conservation Planning: Vegetation Mapping in Western Riverside County.” Fremontia, 34(2): 11-18, April 2006.

Henderson, Roy 2015. RCA Technical Report. GIS Methodology, Process, and Procedures to prepare the RCA Annual Report 2014, May 19, 2016.

Riverside, County of. 2003. General Plan.

Riverside, County of. 2003. Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). June 2003.

Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency. 1996. Habitat Conservation Plan for the Stephen’s Kangaroo Rat in Western Riverside County California. March 1996

United States Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game. 2003. “Completion of the Land Acquisition Portion of the Reserve Expansion Requirement of the Long-Term Habitat Conservation Plan for the Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat and Exchange of the SKR Management Area of the Former March Air Force Base.” Letter from United States Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game to Carolyn Syms Luna, Executive Director, Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency and Philip Rizzo, Executive Director, March Joint Powers Authority, December 2003.

Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority. 2011. Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). “Minor Amendment 2007-01”, July 21, 2009.

Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority and Riverside-Corona Resource Conservation District. 2011. Memorandum of Understanding By and Between the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority and the Riverside Corona Resource Conservation District Coordinating Habitat management for RCRCD Lands and Potential Restoration for RCA Lands, June 15, 2010.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) 8-1

APPENDIX

Additional Technical Reports and Information used to prepare the RCA 2015 Annual Report

APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL REPORTS AND INFORMATION

Additional Reports and Information

The following reports, methods, procedures, and information contain information that was utilized or developed during the reporting period of January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015. The reports, documents, and maps are provided as supporting information to the annual report and have been published in separate technical reports both on the Internet in PDF format as well as included on a DVD with the published report. The Annual Report, Appendixes, Survey Reports, Maps and Documents can be found at the following location:

http://www.wrc-rca.org/AnnualReport_2015/Annual_Report_2015.html

RCA MSHCP Technical Reports

1. GIS Methodology, Process and Procedures This document was created to provide the details on how the Permit and Project information was assembled from the Permittees. The document describes the files and process that was used to prepare the information for the Annual Report, as well as the datasets used for rough step reporting and to develop the Habitrak Maps. The methodology, process, and procedures using ESRI ArcInfo GIS to assemble the numbers for the rough step vegetation, area plans, area plan sub units and jurisdictions for both losses and gains are described.

RCA_2015_AR_TR_GIS_Methods_Procedures.pdf

2. Monitoring Program Survey Results Separate documents and reports account for the survey activities undertaken by the Biological Monitoring Program for the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) during 2015. The Biological Monitoring Program monitors the distribution and status of the 146 Covered Species within the Conservation Area to provide information to Permittees, land managers, the public and the Wildlife Agencies (i.e., the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). Monitoring Program activities are guided by the MSHCP Species Objectives for each Covered Species, the MSHCP information needs identified in Section 5.3 or elsewhere in the MSHCP, and the information needs of the Permittees.

2015 Cactus Wren Report.pdf 2015 Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly Report.pdf

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) A-1 APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL REPORTS AND INFORMATION

2015 Grasshopper Sparrow Report.pdf 2015 Quino Checkspot Butterfly Report.pdf 2015 Rare Plants Report.pdf 2015 San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Report.pdf 2015 Tricolored Blackbird Report.pdf 2015 Western Pond Turtle Report.pdf

3. Clerical Amendments to the MSHCP The RCA did not process or identify any clerical amendments to the MSCHP in 2015.

4. Agricultural Operations Database

The Implementation Agreement for the MSHCP, in Section 11.3, required that the RCA and County establish an Agricultural Operations database and report on agricultural activities, such as agricultural grading permits issued each year. Agricultural grading permits are included within the GIS Loss files for each reporting year.

WRC_Agricultural_Operations.shp (includes all updates to 12/31/2015) WRC_Agricultural_Operations.pdf (documentation) GIS Metadata is included and the PDF provides the supporting information on changes and procedures for the addition of data to the file.

5. Development Projects - Future Conservation GIS Data Files

Future Conservation is the update process for the GIS layer that represents conservation that will be acquired at some point in time in the future by the RCA through the Development Process.

The Joint Project Review (JPR) - Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Process (HANS) performed by the RCA and the Permittees on proposed development projects is used as the basis for developing this new data layer. The JPR and HANS projects have a development footprint and conservation area (if any) mapped within the project area and saved in the RCA GIS JPR database. The JPR database was used as the basis for developing this file and all records that had completed the JPR review and designated portions of the lands to be conserved were saved to this file. Any projects that had been acquired by the RCA or had conservation easements were then removed from the file.

The update process and methods as described in the included documentation file WRC_RCA_Future_Conservation.pdf was used to remove all parcels that had been

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) A-2 APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL REPORTS AND INFORMATION

acquired by the RCA or other conservation entities. The JPR projects for 2015 that were processed and completed designating new conservation were then added to the GIS layer. As of December 31, 2015, approximately 13,601 acres have been designated as future conservation through development.

6. Conservation by Area Plan Subunits

Appendix Table 1, Conservation Targets by Area Plan Subunit, includes these variable goal acreages within each subunit of each Area Plan. As discussed above, the subunits are subsets of each Area Plan targeted for conservation. Acquisitions made over the calendar year of 2015 by subunit are listed below. The last column provides a context within which to compare the conservation achieved during the reporting period with conservation achieved to date. Appendix Table 1 shows that progress is being made toward achieving the target acreage goals within the subunits.

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) A-3 APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL REPORTS AND INFORMATION

Appendix Table 1 Conservation Goals by Area Plan Subunit Acres Conservation Conserved (January 1, (February 2015 – 2000 to December 31, December 31, Area Plan Subunit Low Midpoint High 2015)* 2015)* Eastvale Area Plan

SU1 – Santa Ana River Central 145 220 290 0 0 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 0 Subtotal within Area Plan 145 220 290 0 0 Elsinore Area Plan SU1 – Estelle Mountain/Indian Canyon 4,100 5,065 6,030 0 1,826 SU2 – Alberhill 1,760 2,385 3,010 0 824 SU3 – Elsinore 925 1,370 1,815 0 0 SU4 – Sedco Hills 2,415 3,130 3,845 0 982 SU5 – Ramsgate 1,645 2,090 2,535 24 963 SU6 – Steele Peak 855 1,070 1,280 0 898 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 74 Subtotal within Area Plan 11,700 15,110 18,515 24 5,568 Harvest Valley/Winchester Area Plan SU1 – French Valley/Diamond Valley 130 135 145 0 0 Lake Connection SU2 – Hemet Vernal Pool West 300 380 460 0 71 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 0 Subtotal within Area Plan 430 515 605 0 71 Highgrove Area Plan SU1 – Sycamore Canyon/Box Springs 95 140 180 0 0 Central SU2 – Springbrook Wash North 250 370 495 28 126 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 6 Subtotal within Area Plan 345 510 675 28 127 Jurupa Area Plan SU1 – Santa Ana River North 135 190 245 0 10 SU2 – Jurupa Mountains 445 750 1,055 0 427

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) A-4 APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL REPORTS AND INFORMATION

Acres Conservation Conserved (January 1, (February 2015 – 2000 to December 31, December 31, Area Plan Subunit Low Midpoint High 2015)* 2015)* SU3 – Delhi Sands Area 310 440 570 0 0 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 0 Subtotal within Area Plan 890 1380 1870 0 438 Lake Mathews/Woodcrest Area Plan SU1 – Lake Mathews East 1,140 1,410 1,680 0 59 SU2 - Dawson Canyon (Temescal 815 950 1,090 0 486 Wash East) SU3 – Gavilan Hills West 1,175 1,825 2,475 20 82 SU4 – Good Hope West 85 155 225 0 21 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 1 Subtotal within Area Plan 3,215 4,340 5,470 20 649 Lakeview/Nuevo Area Plan SU1 – San Jacinto River, Middle Reach 2,605 3,315 4,025 0 393 SU2 – Lakeview Mountains West 4,045 5,130 6,210 9 149 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 0 Subtotal within Area Plan 6,650 8,445 10,235 9 542 Mead Valley Area Plan SU1 – Motte/Rimrock 315 455 590 0 0 SU2 – Gavilan Hills East 485 750 1,015 12 18 SU3 – Good Hope East 290 390 495 10 10 SU4 – San Jacinto River Lower 795 1,165 1,535 0 114 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 0 Subtotal within Area Plan 1,885 2,760 3,635 22 141 The Pass Area Plan SU1 – Potrero/Badlands 5,570 7,420 9,275 0 8,119 SU2 – Badlands/San Bernardino 1,105 1,650 2,195 73 829 National Forest SU3 – San Timoteo Creek 1,865 2,160 2,455 0 676 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 1 425

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) A-5 APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL REPORTS AND INFORMATION

Acres Conservation Conserved (January 1, (February 2015 – 2000 to December 31, December 31, Area Plan Subunit Low Midpoint High 2015)* 2015)* Subtotal within Area Plan 8,540 11,230 13,925 74 10,049 Reche Canyon/Badlands Area Plan SU1 – Box Springs East 175 265 350 0 0 SU2 – Reche Canyon 1,215 1,915 2,615 9 76 SU3 – Badlands North 8,270 9,580 10,895 0 3,414 SU4 – San Jacinto Wildlife Area/Mystic 860 1,305 1,750 0 1,950 Lake Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 346 Subtotal within Area Plan 10,520 13,065 15,610 9 5,785 REMAP (Riverside Extended Mountain Area Plan) SU1 – Cactus Valley 6,020 6,805 7,590 305 2,705 SU2 – Wilson Valley/Sage 26,205 30,815 35,425 238 10,008 SU3 – Temecula and Cottonwood 1,480 2,115 2,745 0 119 Creeks SU4 – Tule Creek/Anza Valley 6,415 8,515 10,615 0 3,057 SU5 – Upper San Jacinto River 750 985 1,220 0 0 SU6 – Tripp Flats 520 680 840 0 0 SU7 – Southern Badlands East 10 20 35 0 0 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 40 797 Subtotal within Area Plan 41,400 49,935 58,470 583 16,727 San Jacinto Valley Area Plan SU1 – Gilman Springs 3,540 5,030 6,520 0 2,414 SU2 – Lakeview Mountains East 1,305 1,730 2,150 0 1,091 SU3 – Upper San Jacinto River/Bautista 2,085 2,980 3,875 30 645 Creek SU4 – Hemet Vernal Pool Areas East 940 1,190 1,445 24 145 SU5 – Mica Butte 3,670 4,570 5,475 0 473 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 10 Subtotal within Area Plan 11,540 15,500 19,465 54 4,778 Sun City/Menifee Valley Area Plan

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) A-6 APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL REPORTS AND INFORMATION

Acres Conservation Conserved (January 1, (February 2015 – 2000 to December 31, December 31, Area Plan Subunit Low Midpoint High 2015)* 2015)* SU1 – Warm Springs Creek/French 395 480 565 0 338 Valley Area SU2 – Lower Sedco Hills 725 875 1,020 190 190 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 0 Subtotal within Area Plan 1,120 1,355 1,585 190 528 Southwest Area Plan SU1 – Murrieta Creek 640 1,055 1,465 0 66 SU2 – Temecula and Pechanga Creeks 365 600 840 0 3 SU3 – Vail Lake 10,065 11,500 12,930 25 232 SU4 – Cactus Valley/SWRC- 4,395 6,180 7,970 20 767 MSR/Johnson Ranch SU5 – French Valley/Lower Sedco Hills 4,360 5,880 7,395 85 1,319 SU6 – Santa Rosa Plateau 1,285 2,100 2,915 21 247 SU7 – Tenaja Corridor 1,390 2,115 2,845 23 441 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 1,013 Subtotal within Area Plan 22,500 29,430 36,360 174 4,088 Temescal Canyon Area Plan SU1 – Santa Ana River/Santa Ana 250 400 550 0 13 Mountains SU2 – Prado Basin 200 300 395 0 0 SU3 – Temescal Wash West 2,790 3,600 4,415 0 247 SU4 – La Sierra Hills/Lake Mathews 210 285 355 0 0 West SU5 – Temescal/Santa Ana Mountains 35 60 85 0 78 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 16 Subtotal within Area Plan 3,485 4,645 5,800 0 355 Cities of Riverside and Norco Area Plan SU1 – Santa Ana River South 75 140 200 0 34 SU2 – Sycamore Canyon West 15 25 40 0 0 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 0

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) A-7 APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL REPORTS AND INFORMATION

Acres Conservation Conserved (January 1, (February 2015 – 2000 to December 31, December 31, Area Plan Subunit Low Midpoint High 2015)* 2015)* Subtotal within Area Plan 90 165 240 0 0 Not within a Subunit NA NA NA 0 7 Subtotal within Area Plan 90 165 240 0 40 Grand Totals 124,455 158,605 192,750 1,186* 49,886*

*The total includes acreage adjustments for planned roadways, the Potrero MARB SKR acquisition of 2,540 acres, and acquisitions outside of Criteria Cells. Acquisitions made prior to Plan approval are also included. Totals may not add up due to rounding.

7. Contact Information

Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority Riverside Centre Building 3403 10th Street, Suite 320 Riverside, CA 92501 Phone: (951) 955-9700

Philip Kang Chief of Technical Information Phone: (951) 955-3792 Email: [email protected]

Western Riverside County MSHCP Annual Report (January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015) A-8