DOCSLIB.ORG

Orchard Hills Biological Technical Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Orchard Hills Biological Technical Report Orchard Hills Biological Technical Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page S SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ S-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................1 1.1 Purpose of the Report ........................................................................................1 1.2 Project Location and Description ......................................................................1 1.2.1 Project Location .....................................................................................1 1.2.2 Project Description ................................................................................1 1.3 Survey Methods .................................................................................................1 1.3.1 Literature Review ..................................................................................1 1.3.2 General Biological Survey .....................................................................2 1.3.3 Focused Species Surveys .......................................................................3 1.3.4 Jurisdictional Delineation ......................................................................3 1.3.5 Nomenclature .........................................................................................4 1.4 Environmental Setting .......................................................................................4 1.4.1 Regional Context ...................................................................................5 1.4.2 Habitat Types/Vegetation Communities ................................................5 1.4.3 Flora .......................................................................................................7 1.4.4 Fauna ......................................................................................................7 1.4.5 Sensitive Plant Species ..........................................................................7 1.4.6 Sensitive Animal Species .......................................................................8 1.4.7 Wetlands/Jurisdictional Waters .............................................................8 1.4.8 Habitat Connectivity and Wildlife Corridors .........................................8 1.5 Applicable Regulations ......................................................................................9 1.5.1 Federal Government...............................................................................9 1.5.2 State of California ................................................................................10 1.5.3 County of San Diego ............................................................................11 2.0 PROJECT EFFECTS ................................................................................................12 2.1 Special Status Species ......................................................................................12 2.2 Riparian Habitat or Sensitive Natural Community ..........................................12 2.3 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waterways ..........................................................12 2.4 Wildlife Movement and Nursery Sites ............................................................13 3.0 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES ..................................................................................13 3.1 Guidelines for the Determination of Significance ...........................................13 3.2 Analysis of Project Effects ..............................................................................14 3.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis ............................................................................16 i TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Section Title Page 3.0 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES (cont.) 3.4 Mitigation Measures and Design Considerations ............................................19 3.4.1 Plant Species ..........................................................................................20 3.4.2 Animal Species ......................................................................................20 3.5 Conclusions ......................................................................................................20 4.0 RIPARIAN HABITAT OR SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITY ...................20 4.1 Guidelines for the Determination of Significance ...........................................20 4.2 Analysis of Project Effects ..............................................................................21 4.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis ............................................................................22 4.4 Mitigation Measures and Design Considerations ............................................22 4.5 Conclusions ......................................................................................................23 5.0 JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS AND WATERWAYS .......................................23 5.1 Guidelines for the Determination of Significance ...........................................23 5.2 Analysis of Project Effects ..............................................................................23 5.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis ............................................................................23 5.4 Mitigation Measures and Design Considerations ............................................23 5.5 Conclusions ......................................................................................................23 6.0 WILDLIFE MOVEMENT AND NURSERY SITES ...............................................23 6.1 Guidelines for the Determination of Significance ...........................................23 6.2 Analysis of Project Effects ..............................................................................24 6.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis ............................................................................25 6.4 Mitigation Measures and Design Considerations ............................................26 6.5 Conclusions ......................................................................................................26 7.0 LOCAL POLICIES, ORDINANCES, AND ADOPTED PLANS ...........................26 7.1 Guidelines for the Determination of Significance ...........................................26 7.2 Analysis of Project Effects ..............................................................................27 7.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis ............................................................................29 7.4 Mitigation Measures and Design Considerations ............................................29 7.5 Conclusions ......................................................................................................29 8.0 SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION .................................29 9.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND PERSONS/ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED ......33 10.0 REFERENCES .........................................................................................................35 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) LIST OF APPENDICES Letter Title A Plant Species Observed B Animal Species Observed or Detected C Sensitive Flora and Fauna Potential Species List D Explanation of Status Codes for Plant and Animal Species E CNDDB Sensitive Species Forms LIST OF FIGURES Follows Number Title Page 1 Regional Location Map ..............................................................................................2 2 Project Location Map ..................................................................................................2 3 Aerial Photograph .......................................................................................................6 4 Vegetation Communities and Sensitive Resources ....................................................6 5 Vegetation Communities and Sensitive Resources/Impacts .....................................12 6 Cumulative Projects ..................................................................................................16 LIST OF TABLES Number Title Page 1 Survey Information .....................................................................................................2 2 Existing Vegetation Communities/Habitats ................................................................5 3 Cumulative Biological Resources Impacts ...............................................................17 4 Summary of Vegetation Communities, Impact, and Mitigation for the Orchard Hills Project .......................................................................................................................30 5 Summary of Mitigation Measures for the Orchard Hills Project ..............................31 iii GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS BMO Biological Mitigation Order CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNPS California Native Plant Society Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers County County of San Diego CWA Clean Water Act DCSS Diegan coastal sage scrub DEV Developed land DH Disturbed habitat EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act EW Eucalyptus woodland HCP Habitat Conservation Plan HELIX HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. HLP Habitat Loss Permit MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MSCP Multiple-Species Conservation Plan NCCP Natural Communities Conservation Program NNG Non-native grassland NPPA Native Plant Protection Act OHWM Ordinary high water mark PAMA Pre-Approved Mitigation Area RCA Resource
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pala Park Habitat Assessment
    Pala Park Bank Stabilization Project: Geotechnical Exploration TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ATTACHMENTS Biological Report Summary Report (Attachment E-3) Level of Significance Checklist (Attachment E-4) Biological Resources Map (Attachment E-5) Site Photographs (Attachment E-6) SECTION 2.0 HABITAT ASSESSMENT General Site Information ............................................................................................................... 1 Methods ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................................... 4 Special Status Resources ............................................................................................................. 8 Other Issues ................................................................................................................................ 14 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 14 References .................................................................................................................................. 16 LIST OF TABLES Page 1 Special Status Plant Species Known to Occur in the Vicinity of the Survey Area ........... 10 2 Chaparral Sand-Verbena Populations Observed in the Survey Area ............................. 12 3 Paniculate Tarplant
    [Show full text]
  • Rancho Carillo
    County of Riverside - PSEC Project General Habitat Assessment Appendix A Rancho Carrillo Rancho Carrillo The Rancho Carrillo study area is located in the Riverside County portion of the CNF, approximately 9 miles southwest of Lake Elsinore. Existing Conditions General Site Conditions The study area is located on an undeveloped hilltop, approximately 150 feet from an existing water tank facility. The elevation of the study area is approximately 2,500 feet above sea level. The soils present consist of Blasingame stony loam, based on the USDA soil survey. Land use in the vicinity consists of the water tank facility to the southwest; a dirt access road bordered by federally designated Wilderness to the east, and open space followed by rural residential development to the northwest. The site is subject to minimal disturbance associated with maintenance of the water tank facility. Vegetation The vegetation on the study area consists of a dense, mixed chaparral plant community. Plant species observed include chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), black sage (Salvia mellifera), hoary-leaf ceanothus (Ceanothus crassifolia), scrub oak (Quercus berberidifolia), laural sumac (Malosma laurina), deerweed (Lotus scoparius), sticky monkeyflower (Mimulus aurantiacus), chaparral nightshade (Solanum xanti), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and saw-toothed goldenbush (Hazardia squarrosa). Young coast live oak (Quercus argrifolia) trees were also observed in the study area. Wildlife Wildlife activity was high during the survey. Wildlife species observed include mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), common raven (Corus corax), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica californica), wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), and mountain chickadee (Poecile gambeli). Sensitive Biological Resources Sensitive Species Federally and State Listed Species No habitat for any State- or federally-listed threatened or endangered species occurs within the study area.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX B Biological Resources Tables
    APPENDIX B Biological Resources Tables APPENDIX B SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TABLES Table B‐1 Sensitive Natural Communities Reported or Potentially Occurring within the VWD Service Area Global State MHCP MSCP Community Rank(1) Rank(2) Habitat Group(3) Habitat Tier(4) Mitigation Ratio(5) Non‐native grassland G4 S4 E III 0.5:1 Valley needlegrass grassland G1 S3.1 B I 3:1 Diegan coastal sage scrub G3 S3.1 C II 2:1 Diegan coastal sage – chaparral scrub G3 S3.2 C II 2:1 Chamise chaparral (Mafic) G4 S4 D III (I) 1:1 (3:1) Scrub oak chaparral G3 S3.3 D III 1:1 Southern maritime chaparral G1 S1.1 B I 3:1 Southern mixed chaparral (Mafic) G4 S4 D III (I) 1:1 (3:1) Coast live oak woodland G4 S4 B I 3:1 Southern coastal live oak riparian forest G3 S4 A I 3:1 (No Net Loss) Southern riparian forest G4 S4 Southern riparian scrub G3 S3.2 Coastal and valley freshwater marsh G3 S2.1 San Diego mesa claypan vernal pool G2 S2.1 A I 5:1 (1) Global Rank–The global rank is a reflection of the overall status of an element throughout its global range. G1 = Critically Imperiled–At very high risk of extinction due to extreme rarity, very steep declines, or other factors. Less than 6 viable element occurrences or less than 1,000 individuals or less than 2,000 acres. G2 = Imperiled–At high risk of extinction due to very restricted range, very few populations, steep declines, or other factors.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Vascular Plants of San Diego County 5Th Edition
    cHeckliSt of tHe vaScUlaR PlaNtS of SaN DieGo coUNty 5th edition Pinus torreyana subsp. torreyana Downingia concolor var. brevior Thermopsis californica var. semota Pogogyne abramsii Hulsea californica Cylindropuntia fosbergii Dudleya brevifolia Chorizanthe orcuttiana Astragalus deanei by Jon P. Rebman and Michael G. Simpson San Diego Natural History Museum and San Diego State University examples of checklist taxa: SPecieS SPecieS iNfRaSPecieS iNfRaSPecieS NaMe aUtHoR RaNk & NaMe aUtHoR Eriodictyon trichocalyx A. Heller var. lanatum (Brand) Jepson {SD 135251} [E. t. subsp. l. (Brand) Munz] Hairy yerba Santa SyNoNyM SyMBol foR NoN-NATIVE, NATURaliZeD PlaNt *Erodium cicutarium (L.) Aiton {SD 122398} red-Stem Filaree/StorkSbill HeRBaRiUM SPeciMeN coMMoN DocUMeNTATION NaMe SyMBol foR PlaNt Not liSteD iN THE JEPSON MANUAL †Rhus aromatica Aiton var. simplicifolia (Greene) Conquist {SD 118139} Single-leaF SkunkbruSH SyMBol foR StRict eNDeMic TO SaN DieGo coUNty §§Dudleya brevifolia (Moran) Moran {SD 130030} SHort-leaF dudleya [D. blochmaniae (Eastw.) Moran subsp. brevifolia Moran] 1B.1 S1.1 G2t1 ce SyMBol foR NeaR eNDeMic TO SaN DieGo coUNty §Nolina interrata Gentry {SD 79876} deHeSa nolina 1B.1 S2 G2 ce eNviRoNMeNTAL liStiNG SyMBol foR MiSiDeNtifieD PlaNt, Not occURRiNG iN coUNty (Note: this symbol used in appendix 1 only.) ?Cirsium brevistylum Cronq. indian tHiStle i checklist of the vascular plants of san Diego county 5th edition by Jon p. rebman and Michael g. simpson san Diego natural history Museum and san Diego state university publication of: san Diego natural history Museum san Diego, california ii Copyright © 2014 by Jon P. Rebman and Michael G. Simpson Fifth edition 2014. isBn 0-918969-08-5 Copyright © 2006 by Jon P.
    [Show full text]
  • Arnold Arboretum
    JOURNAL OF THE ARNOLD ARBORETUM HARVARD UNIVERSITY VOLUME 65 NUMBER 1 US ISSN 0004- Journal of the Arnold Arboretum I I M |ll I ll M "i I I \ \p! '\ Ml ,11 ; '!, I i« !>'. ' \i ] ,1, Mil, Subscription price $50.00 per year, plus So.iH) postage lor addresses outsi F 1)1 TO RIM, COMMll IFF S A. Npungberg. Editor E. B. Schmidt. Managing Editor P. S. Ashton K. S. Bawa P. F. Stevens C. E. Wood, Jr. s pusiaiM paid at Boston, Ma; HAYDEN ET AL., PICRODENDRON SYSTEMATICS AND PALYNOLOGY OF PICRODENDRON: FURTHER EVIDENCE FOR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE OLDFIELDIOIDEAE (EUPHORBIACEAE) ALTHOUGH KNOWN to botanical science for ?.S5 years, the genus Picrodendron Plan hon 1 s been poorly undci loocl lor most ofthis iim< The most pervasive problem has been that of discerning familial relationships, and there have been additional difliculti. • in ly if'yin ill gen n« name (Hayden & Reveal, 1980) and in distinguishing its three nominal spa ics. This paper provides a system- atic treatment foi Picrodendron ind demonsti te: it: n 1- tionships with Eu- phorbiaceae subfam. Oldfieldioideae Kohler & Webster as evidenced by data on gross morphology, palynology, anatomy, and cytology. Picrodendron aptured the attention of Di illiam T Gilii whili In wa< pursuing floristic studies of the Bahama Islands. During the decade preceding his death, Gillis accumulated a considerable amount of information on this problematic genus; he was attempting to complete this long-standing project in the weeks before he died in June, 1979. It has been a privilege tempered with sadness for one of us (W.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 2 Description of MHCP Study Area
    Section 2 Description of MHCP Study Area 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF MHCP STUDY AREA This section describes the ecological and socioeconomic setting in which the MHCP must accomplish its stated goals. The section briefly summarizes information on the geography, biological resources, land ownership, existing and planned land uses, and historical and forecast human population growth in the study area. These conditions strongly influence opportunities and constraints for implementing a viable subregional preserve system. 2.1 SUBREGIONAL SETTING The MHCP study area encompasses about 175 square miles (111,865 acres) comprising the seven incorporated cities of northwestern San Diego County (Carlsbad, Encinitas, Escondido, Oceanside, San Marcos, Solana Beach, and Vista). Unincorporated portions of the county, including several areas completely surrounded by incorporated cities, are excluded from the study area and will be planned by the County as the North County Subarea of the MSCP. The Pacific Ocean shoreline defines the western border of the study area; Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton borders the study area on the north; and unincorporated County of San Diego borders most of the study area on the east and south. This area of north coastal San Diego County is known for its natural beauty and mild Mediterranean climate, which make it a popular recreational and tourist destination. The area is largely developed, with approximately 30% consisting of vacant lands that still support natural vegetation communities. Major land uses within the study area include residential, commercial, and industrial development; parks, preserves, and golf courses; and agriculture. Larger areas of undeveloped and naturally vegetated lands adjoin the study area, particularly on unincorporated lands to the east and south, and on Camp Pendleton to the north.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Sensitive Plant Species Presence and Status a Dix 4
    Salvation Army Camp Biological Report M&A # 99-051-15 Appendix 4 Local Sensitive Plant Species Presence and Status A dix 4. L -- ---- - ---d -------- Scientific Name Common Name Habitat* Federal State CNPS MSCP Site Status Probability of Occurrence/ Status Status Status Reason for Absence Acanthomintha Chprl, CoScr, VFGrs, NE Present locally, San Diego Thorn-mint FT SE 18 Low to none, lack of suitable clay soils ilicifo/ia VnPls/clay Covered absent on-site NE Present locally, Low to none, species absent despite Baccharis vanessae Encinitas 8accharis Chprl (sandstone) FT SE 18 Covered absent on-site botanical surveys CCFrs, Chprl, CmWld, Present locally, Low to none, species absent despite Brodiaea orcuttii Orcutt's 8rodiaea None None 18 Covered Medws, VFGrs, VnPls/clay absent on-site botanical surveys in appropriate habitat NE Present locally, Optimal soil type (acid igenous) absent Ceanothus cyaneus Lakeside Lilac CCFrs, Chprl None None 18 Covered absent on-site from site Low, species grows in thickets and is Present locally, Chamaebatia australis Southern Mountain Misery Chprl None None 4 None not difficult to locate but was not absent on-site recorded on-site Chorizanthe Chprl, oftentimes on steep Present locally, Low, lack of open loamy areas within Peninsular Spineflower None None 4 None leptotheca slopes absent on-site chaparral Present locally, Low, limited grasslands on-site arc Clarkia delicata Delicate Clarkia Chprl, Cm Wid None None 18 None absent on-site disturbed Present locally, Harpagonella palmeri Palmer's Grappling Hook
    [Show full text]
  • FINDINGS of CONFORMANCE MULTIPLE SPECIES CONSERVATION PROGRAM for Hamilton TPM TPM 21060
    FINDINGS OF CONFORMANCE MULTIPLE SPECIES CONSERVATION PROGRAM For Hamilton TPM TPM 21060 November 10, 2008 I. Introduction The proposed project is a 2-lot TPM of 24.29 gross acres for residential use. There is one existing home on-site to remain. The parcel, APN 522-080-49, is located on Skyline Truck Trail in Jamul, unincorporated San Diego County. The project will also include road improvements on- and off-site, fire clearing on-site, and a non-motorized trail easement over an existing dirt trail. The existing and proposed homes and access road are located on the eastern edge of the property. The habitat on-site is primarily mafic southern mixed chaparral, with smaller areas of coastal sage-chaparral scrub, disturbed, and developed. A CDFG/ACOE ephemeral drainage runs from southeast to northwest through the chaparral habitat in the center of the site. No state or federally listed plant or animal species were observed on-site. Two sensitive animal species, San Diego horned lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei), and Hermes copper butterfly (Lycaena hermes) were observed on-site. An additional 13 sensitive animal species have a high potential to occur on-site. Two County List A plant species were observed on-site: felt-leaved monardella (Monardella hypoleuca lanata) and Parry’s tetracoccus (Tetracoccus dioicus). No other sensitive plant species have a high potential to occur on-site, since they would have been observed during the surveys. The whole project site is designated as Pre-Approved Mitigation Area (PAMA) except for the very southwestern corner. The site is located within the southwestern edge of a PAMA that runs generally northwest-southeast.
    [Show full text]
  • Conceptual Models
    Enhancing the Resilience of Edaphic Endemic Plants: Prepared for: California Department of Fish and Wildlife Local Assistance Grant P1582108-00 Prepared by: Conservation Biology Institute August 2016 Enhancing the Resilience of Edaphic Endemic Plants: Conceptual Models Table of Contents Section Page Number Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Conceptual Model Development………………………………………………………………… 2 Process……………………………………………………………………………………….. 3 Structure……………………………………………………………………………………… 3 Conceptual Models and Model Narratives………………………………………………………. 4 San Diego Thornmint (Acanthomintha ilicifolia)……………………………………………. 4 Thread-leaved Brodiaea (Brodiaea filifolia)…………………………………………………. 5 Otay Tarplant (Deinandra conjugens)……………………………………………………… 16 Dehesa Nolina (Nolina interrata)…………………………………………………………… 16 Parry’s Tetracoccus (Tetracoccus dioicus)…………………………………………………. 21 Literature Cited………………………………………………………………………………….. 32 Figures 1 Diagram of General Conceptual Model Structure…………………………………… 4 2 Conceptual Model Diagram: San Diego Thornmint (Acanthomintha ilicifolia)……. 6 3 Conceptual Model Diagram: Thread-leaved Brodiaea (Brodiaea filifolia)………... 11 4 Conceptual Model Diagram: Otay Tarplant (Deinandra conjugens)…………........ 17 5 Conceptual Model Diagram: Dehesa Nolina (Nolina interrata)…………………… 22 6 Conceptual Model Diagram: Parry's Tetracoccus (Tetracoccus dioicus)………….. 28 Tables 1 Target Species………………………………………………………………………... 2 2 Conceptual Model Narrative: San Diego Thornmint (Acanthomintha ilicifolia)…... 7 3 Conceptual Model Narrative:
    [Show full text]
  • Description of the Plan Area
    CARLSBAD HMP C. Description of the Plan Area The summary of biological resources provided below supplements and updates biological information included in the following documents, which are incorporated herein by reference: · Draft Biological Resources and Habitat Analysis, City of Carlsbad, California (Michael Brandman Associates [MBA] and Dudek & Associates 1992) · Public Review Draft Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad, California (Carlsbad 1994) · Review Draft Biological Goals, Standards, and Guidelines for Multiple Habitat Preserve Design [for the MHCP] (Ogden 1997) Biological information in the first two documents was updated extensively in connection with the MHCP and through studies conducted for the HMP after 1994. The most pertinent of these database updates are as follows: · In 1996, vegetation mapping for the MHCP subregion was updated and refined using 1995 satellite imagery to systematically update the regional vegetation database. Where available, project-specific field mapping performed since 1992 also was incorporated. · In 1996-97, data on the distribution of certain species of concern were refined and coordinated. Where biologists or other reliable sources suggested additions or deletions to species location points, these changes were made to the GIS database so long as the information could be verified by USFWS, CDFG, or Ogden biologists. · In 1997, the Carlsbad vegetation and species maps were further updated and refined by merging the most accurate and current portions of GIS data files that had previously been maintained independently by SANDAG and the City. SANDAG produced maps showing where the two databases differed. Where differences occurred, Ogden biologists, in concert with city staff, identified which version was most accurate and current.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 3 Conservation of Vegetation and Ecological Communities
    Section 3 Conservation of Vegetation and Ecological Communities 3.0 CONSERVATION OF VEGETATION AND ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES This section summarizes expected conservation of biological resources by the MHCP. It first summarizes conservation levels for the major vegetation community types and the overall preserve configuration. Next, we summarize conservation of ecological communities, or groups of species that tend to co-occur in similar habitat types. These analyses are presented primarily in support for the final section, which analyzes each of the 77 MHCP species independently. The species evaluations also provide the species-specific permit conditions, including management and monitoring conditions, that must be met for the MHCP to ensure species persistence and qualify for take authorizations. 3.1 CONSERVATION OF VEGETATION COMMUNITIES This section briefly summarizes the level of conservation for each vegetation community in the MHCP study area, along with the landscape configuration that would result at ultimate “build out” of the preserve. This information serves as a foundation for the species-specific analyses that form the bulk of this document. 3.1.1 Conservation Levels Table 3-1 summarizes the level of conservation estimated using the May 1999 FPA. It summarizes total acreages and percentages (relative to total acreage in the study area) by each vegetation community type within the FPA. It also summarizes the acreages and proportion of the BCLA that would be conserved for each vegetation community. The BCLA conservation figures represent conservation of the biologically most valuable lands. Existing Vegetation—The study area (111,865 acres) currently supports approximately 29,895 acres of natural vegetation (or about 27% of the area) as depicted in Figure 2-2.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Alliances of Western Riverside County, California
    Vegetation Alliances of Western Riverside County, California By Anne Klein and Julie Evens California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento CA, 95816 Final report prepared for The California Department of Fish and Game Habitat Conservation Division Contract Number: P0185404 August 2005 (Revised May 2006) TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................1 METHODS .......................................................................................................................................................1 Study area.................................................................................................................................................1 Figure 1. Study area in Western Riverside County within Southern California, showing ecological subsections...............................................................................................................................................3 Sampling...................................................................................................................................................4 Figure 2. Locations of field surveys within Western Riverside County.....................................................5 Existing Literature Review ........................................................................................................................7 Cluster analyses for vegetation classification...........................................................................................7
    [Show full text]