Wildlife Biological Assessment/Evaluation for Santa Barbara Front Country DFPZ, Santa Barbara Ranger District, Los Padres National Forest

Home , Gaviota State Park, La Brea Fire, La Cumbre Peak, Sisquoc River, Zaca Fire

Prepared by: Date: 31 August 2015 Patrick Lieske, Asst. Forest Biologist Los Padres National Forest

1.0 Background

Over the past half century, urban development has expanded into the chaparral and forested environments on the Santa Barbara Front. This expansion has placed residences adjacent to highly flammable wildland fuels that typically burn with high intensity and can pose a threat to both structures and residents alike. Much of this expansion of urban development has occurred next to National Forest boundaries without the adoption of sufficient provisions for the establishment of defensible space needed in the event of wildfire.

The Santa Barbara Mountain Communities Defense Zone Project would be located on the Santa Barbara Ranger District, Los Padres National Forest. We propose several activities covering a total of approximately 418 acres to directly improve the ability of the communities of Painted Cave, San Marcos Trout Club, Haney Tract, Rosario Park, Refugio, and Gaviota to address this threat. This project would create or expand on existing fuel breaks, reducing the amount of standing vegetation to improve the ability of the communities to strategically mitigate the potential impacts of wildfire.

Project Description The proposed project would be located on the Santa Barbara Front in the Santa Ynez Mountains. This area is north of U.S. Highway 101, in Santa Barbara County, California. It overlooks the Pacific Ocean between Santa Barbara, and Gaviota, California (Figure 1).

Historic Condition

The proposed project area has a Mediterranean climate and its chaparral ecosystem is considered to be one of the most fire hazardous landscapes in North America. The combination of uniformly dense chaparral fuels, summer drought, Sundowner winds (a local foehn wind), steep terrain, and communities built along exposed ridgelines and deep canyons contribute to this condition.

Wildfires are a fundamental part of the native chaparral ecosystem. Fires have occurred regularly around the communities located within this project area. The Santa Barbara Front Country area has had numerous devastating wildfires in the past. These fires include the Jesusita (2009), Gap (2008), Gaviota (2004), Paint (1990), Wheeler (1985), Eagle Canyon (1979), Sycamore Canyon (1977), Romero (1971), Coyote (1964), Polo (1964), and Refugio (1955). These fires have served as periodic reminders that the mountain communities of the Santa Barbara Front are at risk from the potential for wildland fire to spread from National Forest System (NFS) land, and the National Forest is at risk from the potential of a domestic fire spreading into the NFS land from one of these communities.

Figure 1. Map showing the location of the treatment units.

Because Southern California chaparral ecosystems typically burn in stand-replacing crown fires, extreme wildfires will inevitably continue to occur in the Santa Barbara Front Country. According to the California Fire Plan, the communities on the Santa Barbara Front are rated at high value, high risk, and have a high probability that large fires will occur.

This threat can be addressed through the strategies that promote fire-adapted communities. The mountain communities are aware of the potential wildfire impacts and have taken some corrective action to address this potential threat. Each has embarked on fuel reduction activities and has plans developed in collaboration with public fire agency professionals to reduce potential wildfire hazard. Agreements have been developed to cross boundaries between NFS and private lands with fuel reduction activities. For example, the Wildland Residents Association (WRA)1 was awarded a grant in 2005 to complete fuels reduction projects. Some of the local communities have applied for similar grants through the Forest Service for Fiscal Year 2015.

1 “The WRA serves as a liaison between Santa Barbara County’s mountain communities and various government agencies and provides the management of the San Marcos Pass Volunteer Fire Department” (http://www.wildlandresidents.org/about/).

Existing Condition

Communities have developed adjacent to the Los Padres National Forest with inadequate planning for defensible space. Because these communities are immediately adjacent to a chaparral ecosystem, fire behavior modeling conducted by fuels planners suggests wildfire impacts can be severe. This is particularly true under the weather conditions that result in the most extreme fire behavior. These conditions are referred to by fuels planners as 97th percentile fire weather.

Local weather data has been collected and recorded for the project area over the last several years using remote area weather stations (RAWS). These RAWS gather critical information necessary for fire behavior calculations such as wind speed and direction, air temperature, and relative humidity. When this weather information is modeled with the type and arrangement of vegetation in the project area (referred to as fire behavior fuel models), other important fire behavior factors such as slope, aspect, and position on the slope, a more definitive picture of potential fire behavior emerges for the project area.

2.0 Proposed Action Purpose and Need for Action

The purpose of the project is to address Forest Plan goals and desired conditions. The Forest Plan identifies goals that are responsive to both national priorities and the management challenges identified for the multiple-use management of the four southern California national forests (USDA Forest Service 2005, Forest Plan, Part 1: Southern California National Forests Vision; pp. 19-49). The responsible official for the Santa Barbara Mountain Communities Defense Zone Project has chosen to propose resource management actions that respond to the following Forest Plan goals:

 Goal 1.1: Improve the ability of southern California communities to limit loss of life and property and recover from the high-intensity wildland fires that are a natural part of this state’s ecosystem.

The desired condition is to have vegetation treated to enhance community protection and reduce the risk of loss of human life, structures, improvements, and natural resources from wildland fire and subsequent floods. Firefighters have improved opportunities for tactical operations and safety near structures, improvements, and high resource values. By providing for defensible space, public and firefighter safety is enhanced.

 Goal 1.2.2 - Reduce the number of acres at risk from excessively frequent fires while improving defensible space around communities.

The desired condition for chaparral is to establish a diversity of shrub age classes in key areas near communities to improve the effectiveness of fire suppression operations. Adequate defensible space around communities could greatly reduce the risk of structure loss, as well as improve safety for residents. Thus, at the urban interface there will be a management emphasis on direct community protection. This could be accomplished in at least two ways: (1) by removing or heavily modifying shrublands immediately adjacent to populated areas (Wildland/Urban Interface Defense Zones); and (2) by strategically creating blocks of young, less flammable vegetation near the interface areas. Both types of fuels modification could slow or even halt the rate of fire spread into urban areas.

The differences between existing conditions and desired conditions identified in the Forest Plan, and the Forest Service’s responsibility to reduce those differences through management practices, define the need for action. The need for Santa Barbara Mountain Communities Defense Zone Project is based on the Forest Plan goals identified above.

To make progress toward achieving these goals, the project would address the following need:

 The Forest Plan recognizes the need to create conditions that allow firefighters to stay on-the-ground and defend homes and property more safely within community defense zones (Forest Plan, Part 1: Southern California National Forests Vision; p. 13). Flame lengths below 2.4 m (8 feet) are desired because they allow for direct suppression of fires under more extreme fire weather conditions using readily available equipment, and represent a noticeable improvement for fire fighter and public safety. The goal after treatment is to attain a potential flame length of 6 feet for chaparral areas and 3 feet for grass areas in 97th percentile weather conditions.

 Once established, these zones should be maintained so they remain effective in the future.

Proposed Treatments

The project proposes to create and maintain fuel breaks on approximately 174 hectares (430 acres) of chaparral to help manage against the wildfire threat posed to the mountain communities. These treatments would occur within several separate treatment units on the Santa Barbara Ranger District at Painted Cave, Rosario Park, San Marcos Trout Club, Haney Tract and the Gaviota Fuelbreak along West Camino Cielo.

Treatment Definitions for Proposed Action Activities

The Forest Plan provides project design criteria for defense zone treatments in chaparral vegetation (Forest Plan, Part 3 Design Criteria for the Southern California National Forests, page 82).

“Generally, a [WUI Defense Zone] width of 30.5 to 91.4 m (100 to 300 feet) will be sufficient in some conditions to provide community safety objectives in chaparral types,

however on steep slopes or areas of significant mortality, a greatly expanded width of defense zones may be necessary. These conditions may require defense zone widths over 91.4 (300 feet). Defense Zone management activities take precedence over all other management activities within the Defense Zone and Standard 82 would apply. Some conditions may allow for less than the 100-foot width.

Isolated plants can be left intact within this zone as long they are maintained in such a way as to not ignite during a wildland fire. In that portion of the defense zone greater than 30.5 m (100 feet) from structures, chaparral vegetation should be reduced to 45.7 cm (18 inches) in height to promote low flame lengths and to minimize the potential for soil erosion.”

Fuel breaks near the Painted Cave and San Marcos Trout Club communities would exceed widths of 300 feet to utilize the available topographic features in enhancing treatment effectiveness, and to provide sufficient treatment effectiveness on steep slopes where wildfire intensity and rate of spread would be greater.

Vegetation Treatments

Fuel levels would be reduced to the extent that would allow the desired conditions to be met. All vegetation is proposed for treatment, which would include the numerous brush species present along with the live oaks. Up to 95 percent of the existing vegetation would be cut within each fuel break. We would treat ground cover to produce younger seral stage of shrubs interspersed with a mixture of bare ground, grasses, and forbs. Where oaks or other trees are present, they would be thinned or pruned to remove the ladder fuels that would otherwise conduct fire into the tree canopy.

Where feasible, we would incorporate existing roads into the fuel break design. This would minimize the acres of removed vegetation, and facilitate the safe use of these roads by the public and emergency response personnel during a wildfire event.

Brush would be cut either by hand or by mechanical methods to create the fuel breaks. Hand methods would include crews using chainsaws and hand tools. Mechanical methods would include the use of heavy equipment with machines such as masticators. Most of the cut vegetation would be treated by grapple piling or hand piling. Hand cutting of brush would occur on slopes where mechanical treatments

2 “Community protection needs within the WUI Defense Zone take precedence over the requirements of other forest plan direction, including other standards identified in Part 3 of the forest plan. If expansion beyond the 91.4 m (300- foot) minimum width of the defense zone is needed due to site-specific conditions, projects will be designed to mitigate effects to other resources to the extent possible” (Forest Plan, Part 3 Design Criteria for the Southern California National Forests, page 5).

6 would not be feasible. Mechanical treatments would be limited to slopes of 35 percent or less, except for occasional pitches between 35 and 50 percent for short sections not exceeding 152.4 m (500 feet) in length.

Mechanically masticated, cut, or shredded material may be left on-site to decompose if leaving it on-site would produce the desired condition of a reduced flame length. Fuels created by machine or hand work could also be piled and burned through pile burning, jackpot burning3, or a combination of these treatments when conditions were safe to do so and when smoke would be adequately dispersed. Piles would be located away from the canopy drip lines of any existing trees to prevent scorch.

3.0 Current Management and Analysis Direction

Current management direction for Los Padres National Forest (LPNF) is described under the Forest Land Management Plan (FLMP) for the 4 southern California National Forests (USDA Forest Service 2005). Part 3 of the LMP covers design criteria containing the standards, guidelines, laws and policy direction regarding the conservation of wildlife populations and habitat on National Forest System (NFS) lands. The following LMP standards are applicable to the proposed action and are intended to protect special status (TEPCS) species and their habitat during the implementation of the project. Further management direction is provided under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 USC, Sect. 1533, ESA 4).

Forest Land Management Plan Standards

 S11- Managers are directed to consider biological resource protection guidance and involved resources specialists in project design, with the goal of promoting conservation and recovery of threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate and sensitive species and their habitats.  S12: When implementing new projects in areas that provide for threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate species, use design criteria and conservation practices (see Appendix H) so that discretionary uses and facilities promote the conservation and recovery of these species and their habitats. Accept short-term impacts where long-term effects would provide a net benefit for the species and its habitat where needed to achieve multiple-use objectives.  S17: In areas outside of Wildland/Urban Interface Defense Zones and fuelbreaks, retain soft snags and acorn storage trees unless they are a safety hazard, fire threat, or impediment.  S24- Mitigate impacts of on-going uses and management activities on TEPC species.

3 A modified form of broadcast slash burning in which spots of greater accumulations of slash are ignited and the fire is confined to these spots.

 S28- Avoid or minimize disturbance to breeding and roosting California condors by prohibiting or restricting management activities and human uses within 2.4 km (1.5 miles) of active California condor nest sites and within 0.8 km (0.5 miles) of active roosts. Refer to California condor species account (or subsequent species guidance document; see Appendix H) for additional guidance.  S30- Avoid activities that result in removal, crushing, burying, burning, or mowing of host plants within critical and occupied habitat for threatened, endangered, and proposed butterfly species; unless guided differently by a species-specific consultation.

Endangered Species Act of 1973 Section 4(a) of the ESA provides guidance concerning protective regulations which protect federally- listed threatened and endangered species and their habitats. It provides authority to the Secretary of Interior and the federal regulatory agencies under their direction to institute protections for species which are deemed to warrant them due to threats to their population viability. Section 7(a) of the ESA directs federal agencies to ensure that their actions will not be likely to jeopardize the continued existence of Threatened, Endangered, Proposed and Candidate (TEPC) species or adversely modify their critical habitats. Further, Section 7(c) requires that federal action agencies are required to complete a biological assessment (BA) prior to the implementation of a project to determine if federally- listed species might be affected.

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (40 CFR Section 1500-1508) set precedence for completion of environmental analysis documents on federal agency projects, or on independent projects on public lands that have potential to significantly impact air quality, water quality, soils and wildlife and botanical resources. Analysis is completed at 1 of 3 different levels; 1) Categorical Exclusion, 2) Environmental Assessment and 3) Environmental Impact Statement based on the complexity of a project and the severity of anticipated significant impacts. The biological evaluation (BE) is completed as a supporting document to the NEPA project record and is retained internally by the administrative unit with jurisdictional responsibility for the project area.

4.0 Site Visits and Monitoring

As part of the pre-planning process, multiple site visits were conducted by LPNF specialists (Valerie Hubbartt (SBRD Resource Officer), Steve Gilbraith (LPNF South Zone Archaeologist) and Patrick Lieske (Assistant Forest Biologist)) to various locations of the project area. Site visits occurred during

2014 on March 31, April 15, May 8, June 3, June 10, June 12, June 16-17, August 7-8 and October 1. During 2015, visits have occurred on March 31, April 15 and April 20. Site visits aided in identifying archaeological, botanical and wildlife resources which are management concerns for Los Padres National Forest so that impact avoidance strategies could be developed and incorporated into project design.

5.0 Scope of Analysis This Biological Assessment/Evaluation (BA/BE) will focus on impacts of the proposed action on the Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, Candidate (TEPC) and Forest Service Sensitive (FSS) species. This analysis (Table 1) will determine if a species is likely to occur within the project’s area of effect (AOE). Further analysis on these species (Species Accounts, Section 6.0) will support determinations regarding whether they are expected to be affected by the project activities. This analysis will assist in further development of the project and the selection of the best suited course of action.

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects Analysis Direct effects related to the project were limited to actions occurring within the project footprint and within the same time frame as project actions. Indirect effects analysis focuses on project actions which extend beyond the spatial and temporal boundaries of the project area (i.e. noise disturbance, soil erosion, soil deposition). Indirect impacts were limited to actions occurring within a 1.5 km buffer of the project area and within 1 year of project implementation.

The spatial and temporal limits for cumulative effects analysis are discussed in greater detail in the Santa Barbara Front Country EA. Spatial limits for analysis focus on 3 different spatial scales; site (actual footprint of proposed action activities), local (1.5 km buffer around the site footprint), and vicinity (10 km from the site footprint). Analysis was conducted at multiple scales to account for potential reasonable and foreseeable actions which may affect both federally-listed and FS Sensitive species. The temporal limits for analysis were constrained at 3 years before and following the completion of implementation. This time period was deemed adequate to encompass previously occurring actions and evaluate longer term effects at an integrated level.

Table 1. Preliminary Impact Analysis. Showing Forest Service Sensitive species on the Los Padres NF and the potential to be affected by project activities. BIRDS Status Location Suitable Habitat Occurs in Distance to Affected by Project (Yes, No or Possible) Common Name Project Project Area Area Scientific Name (Y/N/P) Bald Eagle FS-Sensitive SB, SLO Freshwater lakes and rivers No ≈ 2.5 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. There are from project no known occurrences within the project’s AOE. Closest occurrences are Haliateeus leucocephalus area (Alisal from Alisal Lake north of the Gaviota fuelbreak. Lake)

Brown Pelican FS-Sensitive M, SB, SLO, Along coastline only No ≈ 3.5 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. There are V south of the no known occurrences within the project’s AOE. Pelecanus occidentalis project area

California condor Federally K, LA, M, SB, Cliffs and ledges on exposed Possible 6.5 km N- While there is potential for the species to occur in the project area, there Endangered SLO, V rock formations for breeding. are no recent records of their using habitat within the project footprint. No Gymnogyps californianus Open country, coastal suitable roosting or nesting habitats would be affected by project actions. chaparral, forested The closest current observation to the project area was an individual condor mountaintops for roosting that roosted overnight on La Cumbre Peak on the Santa Barbara RD ≈ 6.5 km (seasonally), possibly east of the Painted Cave treatment area during May of 2015. redwoods. California Spotted Owl FS-Sensitive K, SB, V Late-seral and old-growth Possible < 1000m P- The species may occasionally utilize foraging habitat within the conifer forest, late-seral from project area, but no suitable roosting or nesting habitat occurs within Strix occidentalis occidentalis canyon live oak riparian Rosario the project’s AOE for direct or indirect effects. The project would not stands. Typically with a Park DFPZ alter PCE of foraging habitat for the species. large snag component. Least Bell’s vireo Federally LA, K, SB, Riparian woodlands typically No ≈13 km to N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. There are Endangered SLO, V along streams < 2800’ asl. the ENE of no known occurrences within the project’s AOE. Vireo bellii pusillus the Painted Cave DFPZ

Marbled murrelet Federally M Large trees in old growth or No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. Threatened late-successional conifer Brachyramphus marmoratus groves within 35 miles of the ocean.

Northern Goshawk FS-Sensitive SB, V, K Late-seral conifer and mixed No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. There are conifer stands. no known occurrences within the project’s AOE. Accipiter gentilis

BIRDS (continued) Status Location Suitable Habitat Occurs in Distance to Affected by Project (Yes, No or Possible) Common Name Project Project Area Area Scientific Name (Y/N/P) Southwestern willow Federally SB, V, K, LA Riparian tree/shrub habitat No > 15km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. There are Endangered no known occurrences within the project’s AOE. flycatcher Empidonax traillii traillii Western snowy plover Federally M, SB Sandy/gravelly coastal No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. There are Threatened beaches, alkali lakes no known occurrences within the project’s AOE. Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus Willow Flycatcher FS-Sensitive LA, M, SB, Riparian tree/shrub habitat for Yes ≈ 4.8 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. Individuals SLO, V nesting & migrants may pass through the project area during migration, but are not expected to Empidonax traillii utilize it as stopover habitat. Yellow-billed cuckoo, Federally SB, SLO, V Riparian tree/shrub habitat for No > 15km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. There are Threatened nesting & migrants no known occurrences within the project’s AOE. Western DPS Coccyzus americanus MAMMALS

Fringed myotis FS-Sensitive All Widespread in CA. Valley Possible > 15 km N- The project’s AOE occurs outside the species known range of foothill hardwood and distribution. Myotis thysanodes hardwood-conifer forest, generally at 4000-7000’. Caves, mines, buildings and crevices for cover. Mt. Pinos lodgepole chipmunk FS-Sensitive Mt. Pinos, Mt. Open mixed conifer forest on a No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. There are Tamias speciosus callipeplus Abel few higher peaks in Mt. Pinos no known occurrences within the project’s AOE. RD. Prefer rock outcroppings, logs for cover. Pallid bat FS-Sensitive All Rock crevices, tree hollow, Yes Extant P- Known to occur on the Santa Ynez Mountains ridgeline from NRIS mines, caves, structures Wildlife records. Foraging and roosting habitats may be affected by Antrozous pallidus project actions.

Tehachapi white-eared FS-Sensitive K Arid grass/scrub, pine No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. There are woodlands, 3500’-6000’ no known occurrences within the project’s AOE. pocket mouse Perognathus alticola inexpectus Townsend’s Big-eared Bat FS-Sensitive All Caves, mines for roosting. Possible > 15 km N- Roosting and foraging habitats would not be affected by project actions. Riparian for foraging. Closest known maternity roost is likely at Riconada Mine on SLRD where Plecotus townsendii townsendii occupancy was recently reconfirmed following extirpation from the site due to a fire.

Reptiles Status Location Suitable Habitat Occurs in Distance to Affected by Project (Yes, No or Possible) Common Name Project Project Area Area Scientific Name (Y/N/P) Blunt-nosed leopard lizard Federally SLO, SB, V & Arid shrub in San Joaquin No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. There are Threatened K Valley and adjacent valleys. no known occurrences within the project’s AOE. Gambelia silus

California legless lizard FS-Sensitive K, M, SLO Loose sandy soils, typically Yes Extant P- The species is known to occur in certain habitats within the project along coastal dunes but also area and may be impacted by project actions. Anniella pulchra inland in parts of Kern County.

San Bernardino ring-neck FS-Sensitive LA, V Moist habitats (riparian areas), No > 15 km N- The project occurs outside of the range of this subspecies which is not grassy hillsides, wet meadows known to extend westward past the Ventura/ Santa Barbara county line. snake Diadophis punctatus modestus

Two-striped garter snake FS-Sensitive All Riparian areas associated Yes ≈ 300m to P- Known to occur within the project’s AOE for indirect effects and with streams, pools and the SE of could potentially be affected by the project. Surveys of potential Thamnophis hammondii ponds. Rocky areas or the Gaviota habitats near the project area have detected the species. meadows in oak woodlands, fuelbreak. coastal chaparral or coniferous forest.

Western pond turtle FS-Sensitive All Rivers or streams  4000’ asl Yes 2.2 km SW N- There are no known areas of suitable habitat within the project’s projected of the project AOE. Surveys of potential habitats near the project area have not detected the Actinemys marmorata with deep pools and logs or emergent rocks or boulders for area species. basking locations.

Amphibians

Arroyo toad Federally LA, SB, SLO, Low gradient reaches of Yes > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. Endangered V perennial streams with sandy Bufo californicus banks which serve as developmental/estivation habitat. California red-legged frog Federally LA, M, SB, Perennial streams with deep Possible ≈1500 m P- Two records exist within proximity to the project at Canada de la Threatened SLO, V pools with vegetative bank from the Gaviota and Nojoqui Creek. Rana draytonii cover and emergent Gaviota vegetation for breeding fuelbreak habitat. <5000 feet asl.

Amphibians (continued) Status Location Suitable Habitat Occurs in Distance to Affected by Project (Yes, No or Possible) Common Name Project Project Area Area Scientific Name (Y/N/P) Foothill yellow-legged frog FS-Sensitive M Streams and rivers with rocky No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. substrate and open, sunny Rana boylii banks, in forests, chaparral, and woodlands.

Lesser slender salamander FS-Sensitive M Tanbark oak, madrone, canyon No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. live oak and blue oak forests, Batrachoseps minor favors north-facing slopes.

San Simeon slender FS-Sensitive M Closed canopy laurel and No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. sycamore forests near the salamander coast, open oak woodlands Batrachoseps incognitus inland.

Yellow-blotched salamander FS-Sensitive K, V Conifer or deciduous forests, No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. under rocks, logs, and other Ensatina eschscholtzii surface debris. Prefer shaded north-facing slopes, usually along streams or creeks.

Invertebrates

Conservancy fairy shrimp Federally K, M, SLO Larger moderately turbid, cool- No > 15 km N- Species is not known to occur inside the LPNF administrative boundary. Endangered water vernal pools. Nearest population is on the Carrizo Plain National Monument. Branchinecta conservatio Monarch butterfly FS-Sensitive SB, SLO, M, Fields, meadows, prairie Possible ≈ 10 km P- The species is known to breed and migrate within the extent of the V remnants, urban and from project area. There is a wintering location in western Goleta on Ellwood Danaus plexippus suburban parks, gardens, wintering Bluffs. trees, and roadsides. location Smith’s blue butterfly Federally M Coastal chaparral with No > 15 km N- No suitable habitat exists for the species near the project area. Endangered buckwheat host plants

Vernal pool fairy shrimp Federally All Ephemeral pools with Possible Unknown P- No vernal pools are known to occur within the project’s AOE. Threatened temperatures between 43 °F Habitats for this species would not be altered by project actions. Branchinecta lynchi (6 °C) and 68 °F (20 °C).

Critical Habitat Status of Location Suitable Habitat Occurs in Distance to Affected by Project associated Project Project (Yes, No or Possible) Species species Area Area (Y/N/P)

Arroyo toad Federally LA, SB, SLO, Low gradient reaches of No ≈13 km to N- No potential direct or indirect impacts would affect critical habitat for this Endangered V perennial streams with sandy the NE of the species. Critical habitat occurs in a different watershed than the closest Bufo californicus banks which serve as Painted Cave portions of the project area. developmental/estivation DFPZ habitat.

California condor Federally LA, SB, SLO, Cliffs and ledges on exposed No ≈14 km to N- No potential direct or indirect impacts would affect critical habitat for this Endangered V rock formations for breeding. the NW of species. Gymnogyps californianus Open country, coastal the Painted chaparral, forested Cave DFPZ mountaintops for roosting (seasonally), possibly redwoods.

California red-legged frog Federally LA, M, SB, Perennial streams with deep Yes Extant- P- Slight overlap exists between critical habitat and the Gaviota Threatened SLO, V pools with vegetative bank treatment unit footprint. Other areas of critical habitat on the Santa Rana draytonii cover and emergent Ynez River are upstream of, or in different sub-watersheds than the vegetation for breeding treatment units. habitat. <1500 m asl.

Least Bell’s vireo Federally SB Riparian woodlands typically No ≈11 km to N- No potential direct or indirect impacts would affect critical habitat for this Endangered along streams < 2800’ asl. the ENE of species. Critical habitat occurs in a different watershed than the closest Vireo bellii pusillus the Painted portions of the project area. Cave DFPZ

Southwestern willow Federally SB, V, LA Riparian tree/shrub habitat No ≈6 km to the N- No potential direct or indirect impacts would affect critical habitat for this Endangered ENE of the species. Critical habitat occurs in a different watershed than the closest flycatcher Painted Cave portions of the project area. Empidonax traillii trailii DFPZ

1/ Status: As listed in 50 CFR 17.11 & 17.12; State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game-list, dated September 1994; Federal Register Updates as published; plus updates from US Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Office every 90 days.

2/ K = Kern Co. LA = Los Angeles Co. M = Monterey Co. SB = Santa Barbara Co. SLO = San Luis Obispo Co. V = Ventura Co. MPRD = Mt. Pinos Ranger District SLRD = Santa Lucia Ranger District, LPNF = Los Padres National Forest

6.0 Species Accounts 6.1 Federally-Listed Species 6.1.1 California red-legged frog California red-legged frog (CRLF) is a large frog belonging to the Rana genus. They are gray, olive, tan or dark brown dorsally, with moderately large dark spots across the back. Ventrally they are whitish with dark areas in the thoracic region, and whitish with a distinctive reddish pigmentation on the ventral surface of the body and legs from the pelvic region down. Frogs are 4.45-13.34 cm (1.75-5.25”) in length (snout to vent) (Nafis 2000-2014).

Habitat: CRLF inhabit a variety of aquatic habitats, such as streams, ponds, backwaters, marshes, stock ponds and springs from sea level to approximately 1500 m (USDI Fish and Wildlife Service 2002). They prefer aquatic habitats that retain sufficient water (>20 cm) through July in order to support tadpole metamorphosis. Preferred aquatic habitats generally have overhanging vegetation or emergent vegetation along the banks which provides the frogs with shade (moisture retention) and escape cover. Emergent vegetation is also an important component because it serves as an anchor for deposited egg masses.

Occurrence: On LPNF, suitable and critical habitat for California red-legged frogs occurs all along the Santa Ynez River (SYR) from the forest boundary just east of Lake Cachuma to Jameson Lake at the headwaters of the river (Figure 3). In addition to the riparian habitats along the river, frogs also make use of upland areas during dispersal. Breeding habitats along the river are patchy, occurring in specific locations where stream hydrology and topography results in suitable pools that contain the necessary constituent habitat elements. Other stream systems such as the Sisquoc River, Piru Creek, Agua Caliente Creek, Manzana Creek and North Fork LaBrea Creek also have breeding populations of CRLF. Large portions of these stream systems have been negatively impacted by a series of wildfires that occurred on the LPNF between 2003- 2009 (Piru Fire in 2003, Zaca Fire in 2007, Ranch Fire in 2007, and the La Brea Fire in 2009). These fires have resulted in large-scale sediment deposits that have negatively impacted populations of the species on these stream systems, causing extirpation or contraction of individual populations while the aquatic community recovers from the effects of the wildfires. Recovery has been limited by the effects of the current drought (2012-14), due to a lack of water to create suitable breeding, developmental and dispersal habitats.

Locally the species has been detected ≈ 1.5 km outside the treatment area footprint at Gaviota State Park (Canada de las Cruces Creek) and Nojoqui State Park (Nojoqui Creek) (NRIS Aquatics (EDW) 2015, NRIS Wildlife 2015).

Threats General Threats: Habitat loss due to sediment deposition, habitat degradation, conflicts with recreational usage of breeding habitats, vehicular traffic on low-water crossings. Urban development across most of the species’ range has resulted in extensive loss and degradation of much of the previous habitat. Water management practices (construction and management of reservoirs, canals and aqueducts) throughout the species’ range have caused additional extensive habitat loss and degradation. Competition with invasive species such as American bullfrog and red swamp crayfish limits the species reproductive capacity and eventual displaces the species from portions of its range.

Project-specific Threats: Dismantling of campground facilities could result in juveniles or adults being injured or killed if they were present. Transport of heavy equipment across the low-water crossing could result in the injury of CRLF tadpoles if project activities overlap with breeding activity.

Direct effects: No direct effects to CRLF are anticipated with this project. The species does not occur within the project area footprint because no suitable habitat is available. The closest potential habitat is located ≈ 200m from the treatment area on a pond in the upper Arroyo Hondo Creek watershed. This pond lacks emergent vegetation for effective breeding and CRLF have not been detected there during several site visits.

Determination: I have determined that activities associated with the proposed action will have No Effect on California red-legged frog. Suitable habitat is not present in riparian corridors on the higher reaches of stream systems because PCE are not present. The closest known occupied habitat occurs near

Nojoqui State Park ≈ 1.5km WNW of the Gaviota fuelbreak. Other populations on the Santa Ynez River are further away from project activities or fall within a different watershed of the Rosario Park and Painted Cave treatment units. Direct or indirect impacts are not expected to occur to the species, as treatment activities and potential erosion discharge would be nullified or dispersed as they are a sufficient distance away from the project footprint and buffered by riparian conservation areas (RCA). Reasonable and foreseeable cumulative impacts are not expected to have an effect on the species either.

6.1.2 Vernal pool fairy shrimp Vernal pool fairy shrimp are translucent, slender crustaceans related to lobsters, crabs, saltwater shrimp and barnacles. They are generally are less than 2.5 cm (1 inch) in length, and swim on their backs by slowly moving their 11 pairs of swimming legs. They eat algae and plankton by scraping and straining them from surfaces within the vernal pools where they live. They inhabit temporary pools and ponds that are uninhabited by aquatic predators (USDI- Fish and Wildlife Service 2015)

Habitat: Vernal pool fairy shrimp use ephemeral freshwater or alkali pools. They are dependent on a temperature range between 43 °F (6 °C) and 68 °F (20 °C, and have adapted their lifecycle so that hatching generally occurs in January when pools refill with water, and the shrimp life for approximately two months until the pools begin to dry up in March or April..

Occurrence: The species is distributed sporadically throughout southern Oregon and various locations in California. Locally it is known to occur at Soda Lake on the Carrizo Plain National Monument in San Luis Obispo County and other smaller ponds and pools around Santa Barbara County.

Threats General Threats: Habitat loss and fragmentation resulting from expanding agriculture in arid lands, expansion of the urban-wildland interface, and long-term alteration of watershed hydrology due to surface and groundwater management practices.

Project-specific Threats: Vegetation management actions, such as mastication could negatively impact vernal pool habitats if pools occurred within the project’s AOE. If mechanized vegetation management (mastication) were applied to ephemeral pools during the dry season, fairy shrimp eggs could be damaged or destroyed. Broadcast prescribed burning could also have negative impacts on the species.

Direct effects: No direct impacts to VPFS are anticipated from project activities. The species does not occur within the project area footprint because no suitable habitat is available. The closest potential

17 habitat is located ≈ 200m from the treatment area on a pond in the upper Arroyo Hondo Creek watershed. This pond is known to contain aquatic predators (TSGS) and VPFS have not been detected there during several site visits.

Indirect effects: There are 2 known pools which occur within the vicinity of the project area. Neither of these pools occurs within the AOE for indirect impacts related to project activities.

Determination: I have determined that project actions will have No Effect on the species. The species is not known to occur within the project treatment footprint. Areas of potential suitable habitat are outside the anticipated extent of indirect impacts from project activities. This project is not anticipated to contribute to any reasonable and foreseeable cumulative impacts to the species. Other federal and nonfederal cumulative impacts to the species which may affect its population viability are outside the scope of this project to mitigate.

6.2 Federally-designated Critical Habitat

6.2.1 California red-legged frog Habitat: Designated critical habitat (Figure 4) occurs in upland areas on the northern slope of the Santa Ynez Mountains ridgeline to the north of the Gaviota fuelbreak. Critical habitat extends upslope from the LPNF administrative boundary to the top of the Santa Ynez Front Range ridgeline. Critical habitat in this area does not contain primary constituent elements (PCE) for suitable breeding or developmental habitats, but may still function as dispersal habitat. Slopes are too severe (>30%) and riparian corridors are too constrained to allow for pooling of water and growth of emergent vegetation.

2009 (Piru Fire in 2003, Zaca Fire in 2007, Ranch Fire in 2007, and the La Brea Fire in 2009). These fires have resulted in large-scale sediment deposits that have negatively impacted populations of the species on these stream systems, causing extirpation or contraction of individual populations while the aquatic community recovers from the effects of the wildfires. Recovery has been limited by the effects of the current drought (2012-14), due to a lack of water to create suitable breeding, developmental and dispersal habitats.

Although critical habitat is designated for the species within the project’s AOE it is considered unlikely that CRLF are using this habitat. Parts of Nojoqui Creek are occupied below the falls, but the waterfall is considered a substantial impediment to dispersal.

Project-specific Threats: Vegetation management projects could potentially impact critical habitat if primary constituent elements are present and may be impacted directly or indirectly by project actions. Course woody debris which is used as refugia habitat by dispersing animals may be reduced through project actions involving handpiling and pile burning of woody fuels within the project area.

Direct effects: No direct impacts to designated critical habitat are anticipated. There are areas of overlap between the project footprint and CRLF critical habitat (Figure 4) on the Gaviota treatment unit; however, these overlaps occur on top of the ridgeline where PCEs are not present. While upland areas are known to function as dispersal habitat and CRLF may travel long distances overland away from water (Bulger et. al. 2003), the lack of suitable habitats on the south slope of the Santa Ynez ridgeline have likely been historically prohibitive to upland dispersal in this direction. CRLF are not known to occur in the upper stream reaches on the northern slope of the Gaviota unit or on the drier southern slope where no suitable habitats are present. Further, research indicates that habitat use by the species is not impaired by vegetation structure present within the dispersal habitat (Bulger et. al. 2003, Fellers and Kleeman 2007),

19 and that reduction of chaparral shrub height and density within the treatment area would not function as an impediment to CRLF dispersal across this area of upland habitat.

Indirect effects: As previously stated, CRLF have not been detected within the site, local or vicinity spatial scales of the project area to which indirect effects analysis is applied for over 40 years. Indirect effects of project actions are likely to be most intensive within the site footprint (noise disturbance, physical disturbance, air quality etc.) and to dissipate rapidly at increased distance (more extensively downstream) from the site. Effects such as noise disturbance and air quality alteration should not exceed 400m from the site footprint, and would not have an impact on critical habitat, as no structural alteration would occur. Water quality impacts from soil erosion are considered extremely unlikely. Stream channels within the designated critical habitat near the Gaviota treatment unit are ephemeral, and the headwaters of the streams are sufficient distance (≈ 640 and 840 m) from the treatment area footprint that water quality impacts would be negligible. The distance to the headwaters of these streams greatly exceeds the standard riparian conservation area buffers for both ephemeral streams (30m) and perennial streams (100 m) specified in the FLMP (Part 3, pg. 65) (USDA-Forest Service 2005).

Determination: I have determined that activities associated with the proposed action will have No Effect on California red-legged frog critical habitat. Suitable habitat is not present in riparian corridors on the higher reaches of stream systems because PCE are not present. The closest known occupied habitat occurs near Nojoqui State Park WNW of the Gaviota fuelbreak. Project actions would not alter PCEs through direct, indirect or cumulative impacts, so the probability of adverse modifications to critical habitat occurring are negligible.

6.3 Forest Service Sensitive Species 6.3.1 California Spotted Owl The California spotted owl (CSOW) is 1 of 3 subspecies of the spotted owl, and is distributed from the southern Cascade Mountains southward through the Sierra Nevadas in eastern California, and from Monterey Point southward to the Mexican border on the coast (Shufford and Giraldi 2008). The species is a medium-sized owl that exhibits obligate preferences for late-seral and old growth habitats in which it occurs.

Habitat: California spotted owls (CSOW) on the Los Padres National Forest (LPNF) demonstrates dichotomous habitat preferences. A portion of the population on the Mt. Pinos Ranger District (MPRD) shows preferences similar to those identified for the Sierra Nevada mountains, utilizing moderate to dense stands of late-seral to old-growth Sierran Mixed Conifer, White fir and Jeffrey/Ponderosa pine. MPRD is

20 higher in elevation than the rest of LPNF and represents a geographically isolated area of habitat, which is mostly unique from the rest of the Los Padres. Some other mountaintop “sky islands” of conifer habitat are also present on a few other peaks such as Big Pine Mountain, Pine Mountain and Figueroa Mountain.

On other parts of the LPNF (Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Kern and Ventura counties) the subspecies utilizes linear riparian woodland habitats that are composed of late-seral canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis), coastal redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) (Monterey only), big-cone Douglas fir (Psuedotsuga macrocarpa) and California live oak (Quercus agrifolia). These habitats are typically characterized by narrow canyons with northern aspect slopes that contain larger diameter trees with high canopy cover (Shufford and Giraldi 2008).

Occurrence: CSOW on the Los Padres are known to occur at various locations across the forest (NRIS Wildlife database), of which there are 393 current records for the subspecies. These records include both coniferous forest and oak riparian woodlands habitats.

Locally, riparian oak woodland habitats are found in proximity to the project area along specific riparian corridors. CSOW have been previously detected in suitable habitats along Nojoqui Creek (Nojoqui State Park), Refugio Peak (as recently as 2009), Tequipis Canyon Creek (as recently as 2014), Los Laureles Canyon, Lewis Canyon, and the Arroyo Burro trail (NRIS Wildlife 2015).

Threats

General Threats: Historic habitat loss throughout the species range, resulting from logging operations, continues to affect the population. Habitat modification of forested habitats due to silvicultural treatments. Habitat loss or alteration is known to occur due to severe wildfire. Conflicting land uses (mining, recreation, human development etc.) are also believed to cumulatively have an interaction effect on reproductive success and habitat suitability. Population trends for the subspecies in the Sierra Nevada Mountains were inconclusive, with variation occurring between monitoring sites between 1990 and 2005 (Blakesley et. al. 2010). The California spotted owl is currently not known to be impacted through competition with the barred owl (Strix varia) (BDOW), (as is the northern spotted owl) but may potentially suffer from similar competitive impacts as the barred owl continues to expand its range southward through the Sierra Nevada’s and the California coastal mountains. The species

Project-specific Threats: No known project threats are associated with this species. Project activities will not occur in riparian woodland habitats suitable to the species. Activities associated with the proposed action may result in some alteration of riparian habitats, primarily on private lands. These impacts would be expected to be negligible in affecting the species as vegetation removal would be minor

21 and incidental. Overall, the same set of vegetation management parameters used on federal lands also applies to non-federal lands, albeit without agency oversight.

Direct and Indirect Effects: It is possible that project actions will modify areas of potential foraging habitat for the species. However, habitats within the project footprint are not considered suitable nesting or foraging habitats for the species, and any habitat usage by CSOW would be considered incidental. No direct impacts to the species are anticipated.

Mechanical removal of vegetation within the project area wouldn’t change constituent habitat elements for the subspecies as they are already considered unsuitable. Temporary piling of brush may provide more cover for small mammal populations resulting in improved foraging conditions. Additionally CSOW may benefit from fuelbreak maintenance as it reduces the probability of severe wildfire coming from the south and destroying habitats on Tecuya Ridge to the north of the project area.

Determination: I have determined that the project will have No Effect on California spotted owl individuals or their habitat, nor would it contribute to a trend that would require listing the species. Project actions occur outside suitable habitats for the species and would not structurally affect the constituent habitat elements. It is also possible that the species will benefit from the project due to protection of higher quality habitats on Tecuya ridge and a potential increase in foraging habitat.

6.3.2 Pallid bat The pallid bat is identifiable by it’s larger than normal eyes, large ears, and light-colored pelage (buffy tan to light brown) from which its name is derived. Its average body length ranges from 92 to 135 mm (3.6 to 5.3 inches) in body length.

Habitat and Occurrence

The species is widely distributed across the western United States, including California. It occurs across a wide variety of habitats, but has a demonstrated preference for arid to semi-arid habitats; including grasslands, desert scrub and chaparral (Zeiner et.al. 1988-1990)

Threats General Threats: Loss of habitat. Habitat degradation, resulting from the loss of snags for roosting habitat.

Project-specific Threats: The project could potentially result in some loss of snags or damaged live trees that function as roosts for the species. Treatments result in some reduction of smaller diameter trees/snags, while hazard tree reduction can also result in loss of larger diameter snags and damaged trees. This could potentially affect the species within the project’s treatment area.

Direct effects: Noise disturbance from heavy machinery used to accomplish project actions may disturb roosting bats if they are present within the project area. While this disturbance may be an inconvenience to the species, it is unlike to have long-term harmful effects. There is sufficient additional roosting habitat outside the project area that bats can utilize to avoid this temporary disturbance.

Indirect effects: Pallid bats may be impacted indirectly by alteration of potential foraging or roosting habitat. Project actions, such as mastication and hazard tree removal, may alter vegetation sufficiently that it affects the ability of the bats to use the habitat effectively at certain locations. Bats may need to shift habitat use to areas outside the project footprint.

Determination: I have determined that while the project may impact individuals, it is unlikely to contribute to a trend which would require the species to be listed. There is sufficient available roosting habitat adjacent to the project footprint that any bats present should have sufficient available roosting locations. Larger scale impacts which are driving population trends for the species are occurring outside USFS administered lands and are outside the scope of this project to analyze and mitigate.

6.3.2 Northern California legless lizard In September 2013 the California legless lizard was divided into 5 distinct species based on recent research examining genetic differences between lineages within the Anniella genus (Papenfuss and Parham 2013). The northern coastal lineage (northern California legless lizard, NCLL), which occurs on parts of Los Padres National Forest, maintained the species name (Anniella pulchra).

Habitat and Occurrence: Legless lizards are slender, small-scaled, blunt-tailed and often confused with snakes, as they have no appendages (as their name implies). They can be differentiated from snakes by the presence of eyelids (snakes have none) when the lizard blinks. They prefer loose, sandy soils, and spend most of their time in underground burrows. They are diurnal and forage for larval insects, beetles, termites, and spiders in loose soil and leaf litter primarily during the crepuscular hours (Nafis 2000-2014).

NCLL inhabit sparsely vegetated habitats with sandy soils, such as sand dunes and alluvial flats along river drainages. On LPNF they generally occur along creek or river drainages (such as the

Cuyama or Sisquoc Rivers and their tributaries) that contain low gradient stretches that result in sand washes and broad channels.

Threats General Threats: Recreational usage of beaches and trail systems (specifically those that pass through suitable habitat along creeks or rivers). Grazing. Off-highway vehicle use, both as part of established trail systems and off-trail trespassing.

Project Specific Threats: There is some potential for individual NCLL to be crushed or injured through project activities. Primary sources of potential impact would be heavy equipment associated with vegetation mastication. Individuals could also be inadvertently killed or injured by handtools or powertools operated by work crews.

Direct Effects: There is a minor risk of individuals being injured or killed from project activities due to trampling by work crews and/or being inadvertently struck by heavy equipment during implementation. They are not known to occur in the area, so the risk of impact is considered relatively small compared to the long-term benefit to the species from infrastructure removal. There is also a minor risk that egg clutches could be trampled or unearthed during the performance of project activities.

Indirect Effects: Indirect effects of project activities on NCLL are (if they were to occur in the project area) expected to be related primarily to alterations in habitat occurring from the removal of the low-water crossing, and/or impairment in the species’ ability to use the habitat effectively due to chemical contamination. Leaks from heavy equipment (engine oil, transmission fluid, hydraulic fluid etc.) are considered a minimal risk related to the long-term benefit of infrastructure removal. Project design criteria contain measures for the containment of contaminants to protect wildlife habitat and water quality.

Determination: I have determined that activities related to the proposed action May Affect individuals, but are unlikely to contribute to a population trend which would warrant listing of the species. The risk of injury/death to individual animals is considered minor. Training and education of work crews, and the implementation of project design criteria can further alleviate any potential problems and prevent unwanted consequences to the species.

6.3.3 Two-striped Garter Snake This species was once considered a race of the Western aquatic garter snake prior to being elevated to full species status after being found to be genetically distinct. It is also listed as a California Species of Special Concern. Two-striped garter snake (TSGS) is semi-aquatic, residing in riparian habitats associated with streams and rivers, pools and ponds. They also will inhabit rock areas or meadows associated with oak woodland, coastal chaparral and coniferous forest.

Habitat and Occurrence: The species’ range covers the coastal counties of central and southern California, from northern Monterey County down to Baja California. It resides inland into the coastal and transverse mountain ranges. In arid habitats (Kern County, Riverside County) it is restricted specifically to riparian corridors around perennial sources of water. Two-striped garter snakes, like other garter snakes, are ovoviviparous; meaning that embryos develop in eggs inside the female’s body and are birthed after hatching from the egg. Because their young are carried around by the female and are birthed alive and fully mobile, garter snakes are not susceptible to nest depredation or accidental destruction of nest sites through trampling, as are some other reptiles.

Potential habitat for TSGS occurs in numerous riparian corridors across LPNF, such as Mono and Agua Caliente Creeks on Santa Barbara RD (Figure 4) and Manzana Creek and the Sisquoc River on Santa Lucia RD (Figure 5). Potential conflicts exist where habitats overlap with existing trail systems where work will be occurring.

Threats General Threats The reduction of wetland and riparian habitats across California has resulted in a range contraction for the species. The primary threat to TSGS is the loss of habitat; either due to the conversion of wetlands and riparian areas for agricultural purposes, or from conversion of natural areas due to human development. Other threats to the species include vehicle mortality.

Project-specific Threats: Project activities are not implemented within riparian conservation areas where the species typically occurs. There is a slight probability that individuals could be injured or killed by heavy equipment, handtools or powertools if they were to be dispersing through active project areas.

Direct Effects:

There is very minimal risk of direct incidental contact occurring between TSGS and work crews/ heavy equipment. TSGS occur at locations that are outside of the treatment areas for the project. The closest locations are at a small pond on the upper reaches of the Arroyo Hondo Creek watershed. This pond is approximately 250m from the edge of the treatment area and falls outside the area of direct impacts. Because the upper reaches of Arroyo Hondo Creek are ephemeral and water is likely only present after rain events TSGS are very unlikely to disperse into parts of the project area where they could be affected. Also, two-stripe garter snakes are highly mobile and capable of avoiding most situations where they might feel threatened by project activities. Egg clutches are also very unlikely to occur inside the project treatment area, so direct impacts are considered very unlikely.

Indirect Effects: Indirect effects of project activities on TSGS are considered very unlikely, as the species occurs outside of the spatial parameters of where indirect effects are expected to extend. Project design features will incorporate suitable riparian conservation area buffers (USDA Forest Service 2005) along stream channels as an additional protective measure. Potential sources of indirect impacts such as leaks from heavy equipment (engine oil, transmission fluid, hydraulic fluid etc.) are considered a minimal risk related to the project. Project design criteria contain measures for the containment of contaminants to protect wildlife habitat and water quality. Erosion and sedimentation impacts are also considered unlikely given the adopted riparian conservation area buffers.

Determination: I determined that project related activities will have No Effect on TSGS individuals, nor will they contribute to a population trend which would require listing the two-striped garter snake. Individuals of the species are known to occur within the vicinity of the project, but risks of injury or displacement are extremely minimal as suitable habitat is absent in the project footprint, the species is highly mobile, and risks will be further reduced through implementing project design criteria for wildlife protection (riparian conservation areas).

6.3.4 Monarch butterfly- This species was recently added to the Sensitive species list for Los Padres NF as of July 2013 (USDA Forest Service 2013). (Monarch butterflies belong to the sub-family Danainae, which are dependent on various species of milkweed as host plants. Monarch butterflies use a variety of habitats including meadows, fields, roadsides, suburban parks and gardens. Adults lay their eggs on milkweed plants (Asclepias spp.) which provide the sole food source for larvae after they hatch. The monarch caterpillars (larvae) will frequently attach themselves to milkweed plants while they generate their chrysalis and

26 undergo the metamorphic process in transforming to adult butterflies. The final generation of the monarch lifecycle (4th) migrates to over-wintering grounds in September or October where the butterflies spend the next several months (Monarch Butterfly Fund 2015) .

Habitat and Occurrence: Several locations on the central California coast such as Santa Barbara County (Goleta, CA), San Luis Obispo County (Pismo Beach, CA) and Monterey County (Pacific Grove, CA) contain over-wintering sites for the species in close proximity to FS lands. However the greatest proportion of the population over-winters in central Mexico.

Monarchs are known to occur in a variety of different habitat types on LPNF. They frequent wet meadows around springs, roadsides, along established trails, and vegetated margins around ponds or lakes. The species is likely to have some habitat overlap with areas where project activities are planned to occur.

Due to their recent addition as a sensitive species, LPNF has only limited data available for this species. Most observations are incidental, and no monitoring strategies have been developed at this time.

General Threats: Habitat loss both in their breeding and wintering habitats are known to affect the species. Because monarch butterflies are dependent on milkweed for the larval stage of their lifecycle, they are susceptible to factors which might affect the distribution and density of milkweed. These include the loss of field margins due to intensive agriculture, the pervasive use of genetically-modified crops, use of herbicides/ pesticides both privately and commercially and development. These factors directly impact breeding locations across North America, while wintering locations in central Mexico have traditionally been threatened by timber management practices that result in a loss of winter roosting trees.

Monarch butterflies found on LPNF belong to a separate western sub-population and are susceptible to different local ecological circumstances (drought, micro-habitat conditions). Butterflies in the western population winter at several smaller sites on the central California coast and breed locally and at locations further north in California, Oregon, Washington and British Columbia. Although the populations are separate, habitat loss due to agricultural practices and human development also appear to be the key factors driving population declines for the western sub-population (Jessica Griffiths, personal communication).

Within the project area, project activities such as trampling by people or pack animals and the cutting/ removal of host plants and/or metamorphosing butterflies are potential risks to the species.

Direct Effects: The project may directly affect monarch butterflies through actions which would affect the distribution and/or density of milkweed plants. Activities such as trail maintenance which involves the cutting of vegetation along trails could reduce the amount of available habitat for the species and have a negative impact.

Indirect Effects: In addition to the direct effects of cutting/ removing milkweed plants on the species, the loss of host plants may also affect individuals indirectly. Monarchs looking for host plants to lay eggs in areas where plants have been cut would be expected to incur higher energetic costs which might result in reduced breeding success in subsequent generations.

Determination: I determined that project related activities may affect individuals, but are unlikely to contribute to a population trend which would warrant listing the Monarch butterfly. Although some risks exist for individual monarch butterflies, the loss of habitat specifically related to activities resulting from the proposed action can be minimized through mitigation procedures, such as training work crews to recognize the species and their host plants, and avoid impacting individual butterflies or cutting host plants which would result in lost habitat.

The risks of larvae, adults or monarchs in the metamorphic state being trampled, or of habitat being damaged or removed is considered to be low. While trampling or the cutting of individual milkweed plants may occur, it is likely an infrequent event and is highly unlikely to exceed the background level of potential risk to the species represented by other cumulative impacts outside the scope of this project. Factors driving species population dynamics (i.e. agricultural practices, drought conditions, water management) are broad-scale conservation concerns and considered outside the scope of this project.

6.3 Cumulative Effects Spatial limits for analysis were set at 3 different scales; site (treatment area), local (1.5km from the site footprint), and vicinity (1.5- 10.0 km from site footprint) (Figure 3). Within these spatial constraints I

28 evaluated reasonable and foreseeable impacts which would occur both on Forest Service and non-Forest Service lands within the temporal boundings of 3 years before and after project implementation. This approach meets the requirements for cumulative effects analysis under both the ESA and NEPA.

Site The site footprint is restricted primarily to activities related to recreation (bicycling, hiking, illegal target shooting etc.), transportation (FS roads), and project related activities. Authorized and unauthorized recreational activities are known to occur within the site footprint. Authorized recreational activities occur within the scope permitted under the FLMP (USDA Forest Service 2005). Other unauthorized activities such as illegal target shooting are known to occur and are mitigated through fines by LPNF law enforcement. Harmful effects, such as garbage and spent shell casings, are mitigated by site cleanups done in cooperation with volunteer groups. Transportation activities also occur within the scope permitted under the FLMP (USDA Forest Service 2005), although occasional trespass issues occur and are dealt with through by posting signs, law enforcement and using restrictive access barriers (fences and gates).

Local The local project scale applies a 1.5 km buffer around the SBFC treatment units. In addition to activities analyzed at the site scale, other activities which are known to occur within the local project area include various recreational activities, residential inholdings, fuels management projects (Camino Cielo Project), biological surveying and wildfires.

Various recreational activities (hiking, mountain biking, backpacking, wildlife watching etc.) occur on both Forest Service and non-Forest Service lands within the local project area. The impacts of various recreational activities on Forest Service lands were evaluated under a Forest-wide biological assessment covering ongoing activities and their effect on riparian obligate species. These activities were evaluated by USFWS and NMFS, and are permitted under biological opinions provided by each regulatory agency. These activities also occur on private lands, but to a lesser extent as access is not open to the general public.

There are numerous private in-holdings within the LPNF administrative boundary. The degree of impact that these in-holdings have on NFS lands within the local area is dependent on how much variance occurs between private and federal land management practices. These differences can result in impaired

29 functionality of wildlife habitats due to fragmentation, impaired watersheds (chemical contamination), impaired recreational opportunities (due to access) and other cascading negative effects.

Fuels management projects such as the proposed SBFC project and the Camino Cielo Vegetation Management project reduce fuel loading along key wildfire containment features. These fuelbreaks assist in controlling wildfires and minimizing potential undesirable impacts to human health and safety, wildlife habitats, aquatic systems and archaeological resources. While they have desirable benefits they also have potential negative impacts related to their capacity in altering vegetation and resulting in cascading effects to hydrology and soil resources. These negative impacts are minimized to the greatest extent possible through appropriate impact avoidance measures.

Biological surveys for wildlife and botanical resources is an ongoing activity that occurs within the local project area resulting from work completed by both LPNF staff, private entities and consultants. While these surveys increase the knowledge base regarding these resources, they also cause minor additive contributions to road traffic, wildlife disturbance, trail usage and greenhouse gas emissions.

Human-caused wildfires such as the Gaviota Fire occur at both the local and vicinity scales Anthropogenic wildfires are a common occurrence in southern California due to a high concentration of human population interspersed within areas of urban-wildland interface. Fire return intervals vary within coastal chaparral ecological communities depending on local micro-climate and soil type, but are commonly from 7-15 years. Specific wildfire locations and impacts are too unpredictable to evaluate impacts as a “reasonable and foreseeable activity”. Wildfires are also a contributing factor to greenhouse gas emissions as the release large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Vicinity In addition to activities covered at the site and local levels, other activities occur within a 10 km buffer of the site footprint.

Ranching: Small private inholdings adjacent to the project area near Rosario Park, Painted Cave and the Gaviota fuelbreak have private ranches. These ranching activities overlap with actions related to the project and result in minor to severe alterations in vegetation. While the LPNF has the ability to regulate ranching on public lands there is no capacity to affect management of private in-holdings.

Illegal marijuana cultivation: Agricultural growth of marijuana plants on National Forest lands is a violation of federal law. Plantations are present throughout the LPNF and are primarily a result of cartel activity from Mexico and Central America. To a smaller scale there are also private individuals who grow small plantations on federal land. Marijuana plantations have a number of harmful effects resulting from use of toxic chemicals (rodenticides, herbicides, fertilizers) with a natural environment. Other negative by-products include vegetation alteration, garbage, local extirpation of wildlife, and risks to human health and safety. Illegal marijuana cultivation is considered a severe problem on LPNF lands and is mitigated through law enforcement to the extent possible.

Urbanization: Santa Barbara County has an increasing wildland-urban interface resulting from mild climate and a continuously growing population within the state of California. The increase in acreage of wildland-urban interface exacerbates a number of other issues that are increasingly prevalent problems across broader areas of the western United States. These issues include water storage/ availability, air quality, water quality, biological diversity, wildfire risk and greenhouse gas emissions. These issues are extremely broad in their AOE and have extremely complex causes and positive feedback loops. LPNF addresses these issues to the extent possible by participating in climate change planning, developing conservation partnerships and adopting better management practices (BMPs) to protect increasingly overstressed resources.

6.3.1 Summary of Cumulative Effects Analysis For purposes of cumulative effects analysis under the ESA, only impacts outside of Forest Service lands are considered concerning how they contribute to effects on federally-listed species. Under NEPA analysis, agency specialists consider impacts of both Forest Service and non-Forest Service actions on both federally-listed and FS Sensitive species. For the purposes of this document, the holistic NEPA approach is used, as this BA/BE serves as both a Section 7 consultation document and the NEPA specialist report for wildlife resources.

Cumulative effects impacts were considered while evaluating each species to provide separate determinations on how they were expected to be affected by the considered actions. For federally-listed species, non-Forest Service reasonable and foreseeable actions were weighed in relation to how a species would be impacted directly and indirectly by actions related to the SBFC project. Separate analysis for individual species was considered unnecessary, as cumulative impacts affect species in similar ways and have common causes.

7.0 Recommended Impact Avoidance Measures 7.1 Project implementation timing To the extent possible, project implementation should occur outside of the breeding/ active habitat use windows for various wildlife species which have a reasonable probability of occurring within the project footprint. This recommended limited operating period would incorporate periods of habitat use for avian species covered under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918, bats and monarch butterflies. A time period of March 15- July 31 is recommended.

7.2 Biological surveys Pre-work biological surveys were conducted by Valerie Hubbartt (SBRD Resource Officer) and Patrick Lieske (Assistant Forest Biologist) as part of the initial analysis for this project. Changes in species habitat utilization for federally-listed species (i.e. California condors) may trigger additional follow-up surveys prior to or during implementation to adjust proposed actions and mitigate potential impacts.

7.3 Duration of Biological Analysis As the SBFC project is a long-term vegetation management project, implementation will occur at regular intervals over a long timeframe. The biological analysis for this biological assessment/evaluation should be updated every 5 years to stay current with changes in regional FS sensitive species lists. Any changes to federally-listed species would require preliminary impact analysis to determine if a species may occur within the project area.

7.4 Spill Containment and Removal Protocols Projects involving the usage of heavy equipment, such as masticators, have potential to result in leaks or spills of fluids associated with heavy machinery (hydraulic fluid, transmission fluid, engine oil etc.). Procedures for containment and removal of these chemical spills will be established before implementation. Relevant protocols will follow established Forest Service procedures and Best Management Practices (USDA Forest Service 2015).

References Blakesley, J. A., M. E. Seamans, M. M. Conner, A. B. Franklin, G. C. White, R. J. Gutiérrez, J.E. Hines, J. D. Nichols, T. E. Munton, D.W. H. Shaw, J. J. Keane, G. N. Steger, and T. L. McDonald. 2010. Population dynamics ofspotted owls in the Sierra Nevada, California. Wildlife Monographs: 174 (1). 36 pp.

Bulger, J.B., N.J. Scott Jr, and R.B. Seymour. 2003. Terrestrial activity and conservation of adult California Red-legged Frogs Rana aurora draytonii in coastal forests and grasslands. Biological Conservation 110:85-9.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2014. Available at: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx (accessed 25 February 2014).

Feller, G.M. and P.M. Kleeman. 2007. California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) movement and habitat use: implications for conservation. Journal of Herpetology 41: 276-86.

Griffiths, J. 2014. Monarch Alert Program coordinator. Personal communication. (February 28, 2014).

Klose, K. 2014. Forest fisheries biologist, Los Padres NF. Personal communication. (April 9, 2015).

Lehman, P. 1994. Birds of Santa Barbara County, California. The Vertebrate Museum, University of California, Santa Barbara.

Lehman, P. E. 2014. The Birds of Santa Barbara County, California. Revised edition, April 2014, available at https://sites.google.com/site/lehmanbosbc/, 2014. Original edition: The Vertebrate Museum, University of California, Santa Barbara, 1994.

Lieske, P. D. 2013. Reasoner Canyon riparian habitat assessment. Forest Service internal report. Los Padres National Forest, California.

Monarch Butterfly Fund. 2015. The monarch butterfly’s annual cycle. Available at: http://www.monarchbutterflyfund.org/node/148 (Accessed on May 6, 2015).

Moyle, P. B. 2002. Inland fishes of California. University of California Press. Los Angeles, California. 502pp.

Nafis, G. (2000-2014). A Guide to the Amphibians and Reptiles of California. Available at: http://www.californiaherps.com/ (accessed 25 February 2014).

National Marine Fisheries Service. 2013. Biological opinion for Los Padres National Forest’s proposed ongoing activities for the Forest Land Management Plan. Issued on August 2, 2013. Southwest Region Office.

North American Field Herping Association. 2014. Herpetological Education and Research Project (HERP). Available at: http://www.naherp.com/ (Accessed on 25 February 2014).

NRIS Aquatics Database (EDW). 2015. USDA Forest Service. Accessed on February 3, 2015.

NRIS Wildlife Database. 2015. USDA Forest Service. Accessed on April 3, 2015.

Papenfuss, T. J. and J. F. Parham. 2013. Four new species of California legless lizards (Anniella). Breviora, Number 536:1-17. Available at: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3099/MCZ10.1

Shuford, W. D. and T. Gardali (editors). 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento.

Stoecker, M. W. and Coast Conception Project. 2002. Steelhead assessment and recovery opportunities in southern Santa Barbara County, California. Coast Conception Project. 439 pp.

USDA Forest Service 2005. Land Management Plan, Part I : Southern California National Forests (R5-MB-075), Part 2: Los Padres National Forest Strategy (R5-MB-078) and Part 3: Design Criteria for the Southern California National forests (R5-MB-080). Pacific Southwest Region.

USDA Forest Service. 2013. Pacific Southwest Region, Sensitive Animal Species by Forest. Released on 30 June 2013.

USDA Forest Service. 2015. Santa Barbara Front Country Biological Assessment/ Biological Evaluation (BA/BE). Los Padres National Forest. Goleta, CA.

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Recovery plan for the California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. viii + 173 pp.

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013a. Biological Opinion for Ongoing Activities Associated With Hiking Trail Use and Maintenance, Los Padres National Forest, California (8-8-12-F-57). Issued on Sept. 4, 2013. Ventura Field Office.

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013b. Biological Opinion for Ongoing Activities Associated with the Off-Highway Vehicle Program, Los Padres National Forest, California (8-8-12-F-42). Issued on Sept. 11, 2013. Ventura Field Office.

USDI- Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Vernal pool fairy shrimp (species fact sheet). US Fish and Wildlife Service- Oregon Field Office. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/species/data/vernalpoolfairyshrimp/

Figure 2. Federally-listed and Forest Service sensitive wildlife species occurrence data and designated critical habitat in relation to the eastern project units of the Santa Barbara Front Country project.

Figure 3. Federally-listed and Forest Service sensitive wildlife species occurrence data and designated critical habitat in relation to the Gaviota fuelbreak.

Figure 4. Showing overlap between California red-legged frog critical habitat and the Gaviota treatment area.