DOCSLIB.ORG

Attachment D

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Attachment D Draft CEQA Initial Study Mendocino County Medical Cannabis Cultivation Regulation ATTACHMENT D Summary Table Report California Department of Fish and Wildlife Natural Diversity database. Queried on September 15, 2016. November 7, 2016 Project No. 7746.12 Version 6 Summary Table Report California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Query Criteria: County<span style='color:Red'> IS </span>(Mendocino) Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence CNDDB Listing Status Range Total Historic Recent Poss. Name (Scientific/Common) Ranks (Fed/State) Other Lists (ft.) EO's A B C D X U > 20 yr <= 20 yr Extant Extirp. Extirp. Abronia umbellata var. breviflora G4G5T2 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1 5 57 0 3 1 0 0 7 5 6 11 0 0 BLM_S-Sensitive S:11 pink sand-verbena S1 None 40 Accipiter cooperii G5 None CDFW_WL-Watch List 1,200 107 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 Cooper's hawk S4 None IUCN_LC-Least S:1 Concern 1,200 Accipiter gentilis G5 None BLM_S-Sensitive 525 428 0 2 0 0 2 4 5 3 6 1 1 northern goshawk S3 None CDF_S-Sensitive S:8 CDFW_SSC-Species 4,400 of Special Concern IUCN_LC-Least Concern USFS_S-Sensitive Accipiter striatus G5 None CDFW_WL-Watch List 1,180 22 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 sharp-shinned hawk S4 None IUCN_LC-Least S:1 Concern 1,180 Agelaius tricolor G2G3 None BLM_S-Sensitive 306 838 1 3 0 0 0 4 1 7 8 0 0 tricolored blackbird S1S2 None CDFW_SSC-Species S:8 of Special Concern 1,054 IUCN_EN-Endangered NABCI_RWL-Red Watch List USFWS_BCC-Birds of Conservation Concern Agrostis blasdalei G2 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2 36 58 0 1 3 2 0 14 8 12 20 0 0 BLM_S-Sensitive S:20 Blasdale's bent grass S2 None 200 Alisma gramineum G5 None Rare Plant Rank - 2B.2 426 12 0 1 0 0 0 3 3 1 4 0 0 S:4 grass alisma S3 None 2,000 Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum G5T1 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2 1,050 21 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 S:1 Franciscan onion S1 None 1,050 Ammodramus savannarum G5 None CDFW_SSC-Species 840 20 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 grasshopper sparrow S3 None of Special Concern S:2 IUCN_LC-Least 1,000 Concern Anisocarpus scabridus G3 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.3 5,900 16 1 1 0 0 0 5 6 1 7 0 0 scabrid alpine tarplant S3 None BLM_S-Sensitive S:7 USFS_S-Sensitive 6,870 Commercial Version -- Dated September, 2 2016 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 16 Report Printed on Thursday, September 15, 2016 Information Expires 3/2/2017 Summary Table Report California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence CNDDB Listing Status Range Total Historic Recent Poss. Name (Scientific/Common) Ranks (Fed/State) Other Lists (ft.) EO's A B C D X U > 20 yr <= 20 yr Extant Extirp. Extirp. Anodonta californiensis G3Q None USFS_S-Sensitive 1,500 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 S:1 California floater S2? None 1,500 Antrozous pallidus G5 None BLM_S-Sensitive 500 405 1 0 0 0 0 3 2 2 4 0 0 pallid bat S3 None CDFW_SSC-Species S:4 of Special Concern 1,400 IUCN_LC-Least Concern USFS_S-Sensitive WBWG_H-High Priority Aplodontia rufa nigra G5T1 Endangered CDFW_SSC-Species 20 38 2 18 2 0 1 15 13 25 37 1 0 Point Arena mountain beaver S1 None of Special Concern S:38 IUCN_LC-Least 400 Concern Arabis mcdonaldiana G3 Endangered Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1 2,700 29 2 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 5 0 0 McDonald's rockcress S3 Endangered SB_BerrySB-Berry S:5 Seed Bank 4,000 SB_RSABG-Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden Arborimus pomo G3 None CDFW_SSC-Species 40 221 3 7 9 0 0 94 83 30 113 0 0 Sonoma tree vole S3 None of Special Concern S:113 IUCN_NT-Near 2,800 Threatened Arctostaphylos manzanita ssp. elegans G5T3 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.3 69 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 Konocti manzanita S3 None S:2 Arctostaphylos nummularia ssp. G3?THQ None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2 400 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 mendocinoensis S:1 SH None 400 pygmy manzanita Arctostaphylos stanfordiana ssp. raichei G3T2 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1 1,600 10 0 0 0 0 0 7 6 1 7 0 0 Raiche's manzanita S2 None SB_RSABG-Rancho S:7 Santa Ana Botanic 3,500 Garden SB_USDA-US Dept of Agriculture Ardea herodias G5 None CDF_S-Sensitive 100 137 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 great blue heron S4 None IUCN_LC-Least S:1 Concern 100 Artemisiospiza belli belli G5T2T4 None CDFW_WL-Watch List 2,700 60 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 Bell's sage sparrow S2? None USFWS_BCC-Birds of S:1 Conservation Concern 2,700 Commercial Version -- Dated September, 2 2016 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 16 Report Printed on Thursday, September 15, 2016 Information Expires 3/2/2017 Summary Table Report California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence CNDDB Listing Status Range Total Historic Recent Poss. Name (Scientific/Common) Ranks (Fed/State) Other Lists (ft.) EO's A B C D X U > 20 yr <= 20 yr Extant Extirp. Extirp. Ascaphus truei G4 None CDFW_SSC-Species 40 373 0 16 3 1 0 50 8 62 70 0 0 Pacific tailed frog S3S4 None of Special Concern S:70 IUCN_LC-Least 2,000 Concern Astragalus agnicidus G2 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1 525 52 3 20 13 9 0 5 0 50 50 0 0 Humboldt milk-vetch S2 Endangered BLM_S-Sensitive S:50 SB_BerrySB-Berry 2,200 Seed Bank SB_RSABG-Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden Blennosperma nanum var. robustum G4T2 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2 40 13 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 S:1 Point Reyes blennosperma S2 Rare 40 Bombus caliginosus G4? None IUCN_VU-Vulnerable 15 181 0 0 0 0 0 20 20 0 20 0 0 S:20 obscure bumble bee S1S2 None 4,200 Bombus crotchii G3G4 None 1,400 233 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 S:1 Crotch bumble bee S1S2 None 1,400 Bombus occidentalis G2G3 None USFS_S-Sensitive 100 282 0 0 0 0 0 11 11 0 11 0 0 XERCES_IM-Imperiled S:11 western bumble bee S1 None 1,500 Botrypus virginianus G5 None Rare Plant Rank - 2B.2 3,440 34 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 S:2 rattlesnake fern S2 None 4,390 Brachyramphus marmoratus G3G4 Threatened CDF_S-Sensitive 300 110 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 3 0 0 marbled murrelet S1 Endangered IUCN_EN-Endangered S:3 NABCI_RWL-Red 1,600 Watch List Brasenia schreberi G5 None Rare Plant Rank - 2B.3 1,646 33 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 1 5 0 0 S:5 watershield S3 None 3,500 Calamagrostis crassiglumis G3Q None Rare Plant Rank - 2B.1 80 15 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 S:2 Thurber's reed grass S2 None 150 Calamagrostis foliosa G3 None Rare Plant Rank - 4.2 25 22 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 3 0 0 BLM_S-Sensitive S:3 leafy reed grass S3 Rare 50 Calileptoneta wapiti G1 None 150 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 S:2 Mendocino leptonetid spider S1 None 1,200 Calystegia atriplicifolia ssp. buttensis G5T3 None Rare Plant Rank - 4.2 3,600 121 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 S:1 Butte County morning-glory S3 None 3,600 Commercial Version -- Dated September, 2 2016 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 16 Report Printed on Thursday, September 15, 2016 Information Expires 3/2/2017 Summary Table Report California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence CNDDB Listing Status Range Total Historic Recent Poss. Name (Scientific/Common) Ranks (Fed/State) Other Lists (ft.) EO's A B C D X U > 20 yr <= 20 yr Extant Extirp. Extirp. Calystegia collina ssp. tridactylosa G4T1 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2 2,000 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 BLM_S-Sensitive S:2 three-fingered morning-glory S1 None 2,300 Calystegia purpurata ssp. saxicola G4T2T3 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2 40 30 1 2 2 1 0 2 2 6 8 0 0 S:8 coastal bluff morning-glory S2S3 None 200 Campanula californica G3 None Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2 20 132 8 35 11 3 0 15 19 53 72 0 0 BLM_S-Sensitive S:72 swamp harebell S3 None 1,700 Carex californica G5 None Rare Plant Rank - 2B.3 120 28 2 4 1 0 0 21 25 3 28 0 0 S:28 California sedge S2 None 1,100 Carex comosa G5 None Rare Plant Rank - 2B.1 982 29 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 S:1 bristly sedge S2 None 982 Carex lenticularis var.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Appendix B Biological Resources Background Information
    6/21/2018 IPaC: Explore Location IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service IPaC resource list This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly aected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of eects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specic (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specic (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information. Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS oce(s) with jurisdiction in the dened project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section. Location Monterey County, California Local oce Ventura Fish And Wildlife Oce (805) 644-1766 (805) 644-3958 2493 Portola Road, Suite B Ventura, CA 93003-7726 https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DJMXCEE7HJCPLIT645GTRHKWNI/resources 1/18 6/21/2018 IPaC: Explore Location Endangered species This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts. The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Assessment
    Town of Los Gatos 15215 Shannon Road Planned Development Application PD-15-001 Initial Study | Appendices Attachment 2 Biological Resources Assessment 2/4/16 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT FOR 10 RESERVOIR ROAD LOS GATOS, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA April 18, 2015 Prepared for: Geier & Geier Consulting, Inc. P.O. Box 5054 Berkeley, CA 94705‐5054 Prepared by: Wood Biological Consulting, Inc. 65 Alta Hill Way Walnut Creek, CA 94595 (925) 899‐1282 mike@wood‐biological.com The information provided in this document is intended solely for the use and benefit of Geier & Geier Consulting, Inc. and the Town of Los Gatos. No other person or entity shall be entitled to rely on the services, opinions, recommendations, plans or specifications provided herein, without the express written consent of Wood Biological Consulting, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION ........................................................................... 1 2.0 METHODS AND LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................. 1 3.0 SETTING ...................................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 PLANT COMMUNITIES
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan Pdf
    April 2015 VEGETATION AND BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Marin County Parks Marin County Open Space District VEGETATION AND BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAFT Prepared for: Marin County Parks Marin County Open Space District 3501 Civic Center Drive, Suite 260 San Rafael, CA 94903 (415) 473-6387 [email protected] www.marincountyparks.org Prepared by: May & Associates, Inc. Edited by: Gail Slemmer Alternative formats are available upon request TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents GLOSSARY 1. PROJECT INITIATION ...........................................................................................................1-1 The Need for a Plan..................................................................................................................1-1 Overview of the Marin County Open Space District ..............................................................1-1 The Fundamental Challenge Facing Preserve Managers Today ..........................................1-3 Purposes of the Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan .....................................1-5 Existing Guidance ....................................................................................................................1-5 Mission and Operation of the Marin County Open Space District .........................................1-5 Governing and Guidance Documents ...................................................................................1-6 Goals for the Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Program ..................................1-8 Summary of the Planning
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Assessment Rodeo Property Project City of Salinas, Monterey County, California
    Biological Resources Assessment Rodeo Property Project City of Salinas, Monterey County, California Prepared for: SyWest Development 150 Pelican Way San Rafael, CA 94901 Contact: Tracy LaTray, Project Coordinator Prepared by: FirstCarbon Solutions 1350 Treat Boulevard, Suite 380 Walnut Creek, CA 94597 925.357.2562 Contact: Jason Brandman, Project Director Brian Mayerle, Senior Biologist Date: August 17, 2018 NORTH AMERICA | EUROPE | AFRICA | AUSTRALIA | ASIA WWW.FIRSTCARBONSOLUTIONS.COM THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SyWest Development—Rodeo Property Project Biological Resources Assessment Table of Contents Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 - Project Summary ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 - Site Location ........................................................................................................... 1 1.1.2 - Project Description ................................................................................................. 1 Section 2: Methodology ................................................................................................................. 7 2.1 - Literature Review............................................................................................................... 7 2.1.1 - Existing Environmental Documentation ................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Garrapata State Park Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft
    COASTAL HABITAT RESTORATION AND COASTAL TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Garrapata State Park Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Monterey District June 13, 2012 This page intentionally blank. COASTAL HABITAT RESTORATION AND COASTAL TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IS/MND – DRAFT JUNE 2012 GARRAPATA STATE PARK CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................ 1 CHAPTER II ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST...................................................... 13 I. AESTHETICS. ................................................................................ 17 II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ...……………… 21 III. AIR QUALITY.................................................................................. 23 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .......................................................... 26 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................. 48 VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................. 64 VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................. 69 VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ................................. 70 IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY .......................................... 73 X. LAND USE AND PLANNING .......................................................... 78 XI. MINERAL
    [Show full text]
  • November 2009 an Analysis of Possible Risk To
    Project Title An Analysis of Possible Risk to Threatened and Endangered Plant Species Associated with Glyphosate Use in Alfalfa: A County-Level Analysis Authors Thomas Priester, Ph.D. Rick Kemman, M.S. Ashlea Rives Frank, M.Ent. Larry Turner, Ph.D. Bernalyn McGaughey David Howes, Ph.D. Jeffrey Giddings, Ph.D. Stephanie Dressel Data Requirements Pesticide Assessment Guidelines Subdivision E—Hazard Evaluation: Wildlife and Aquatic Organisms Guideline Number 70-1-SS: Special Studies—Effects on Endangered Species Date Completed August 22, 2007 Prepared by Compliance Services International 7501 Bridgeport Way West Lakewood, WA 98499-2423 (253) 473-9007 Sponsor Monsanto Company 800 N. Lindbergh Blvd. Saint Louis, MO 63167 Project Identification Compliance Services International Study 06711 Monsanto Study ID CS-2005-125 RD 1695 Volume 3 of 18 Page 1 of 258 Threatened & Endangered Plant Species Analysis CSI 06711 Glyphosate/Alfalfa Monsanto Study ID CS-2005-125 Page 2 of 258 STATEMENT OF NO DATA CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIMS The text below applies only to use of the data by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) in connection with the provisions of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) No claim of confidentiality is made for any information contained in this study on the basis of its falling within the scope of FIFRA §10(d)(1)(A), (B), or (C). We submit this material to the United States Environmental Protection Agency specifically under the requirements set forth in FIFRA as amended, and consent to the use and disclosure of this material by EPA strictly in accordance with FIFRA. By submitting this material to EPA in accordance with the method and format requirements contained in PR Notice 86-5, we reserve and do not waive any rights involving this material that are or can be claimed by the company notwithstanding this submission to EPA.
    [Show full text]
  • Fountaingrove Lodge Appendix G Rare Plant Report
    Appendix G Rare Plant Survey Report Rare Plant Survey Report FOUNTAINGROVE LODGE SANTA ROSA, SONOMA COUNTY CALIFORNIA Prepared For: Mr. Steve McCullagh Aegis Senior Living 220 Concourse Blvd. Santa Rosa, California 95403 Contact: Tom Fraser [email protected] Date: May 2007 2169-G Ea st Fra nc isc o Blvd ., Sa n Ra fa e l, C A 94901 (415) 454-8868 te l (415) 454-0129 fa x info @w ra -c a .c o m www.wra-ca.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................1 1.1 Study Area Description...............................................1 1.1.1 Vegetation................................................1 1.1.2 Soils.....................................................4 2.0 METHODS..............................................................6 2.1 Background Data...................................................6 2.2 Field Survey.......................................................6 3.0 RESULTS. .............................................................7 3.1 Background Data Search Results.......................................7 3.2 Field Survey Results.................................................7 4.0 CONCLUSIONS..........................................................7 5.0 REFERENCES...........................................................8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location Map of Fountaingrove Lodge site. 2 Figure 2. Biological Communities within the Fountaingrove Lodge site. 3 Figure 3. Soils Map for the Fountaingrove Lodge site. 5 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Study Area Photographs Appendix B Special Status Plant Species Documented to Occur in the Vicinity of the Study Area Appendix C List of Observed Plant Species 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of 5 separate special status plant surveys conducted on approximately 9.85 acres to be developed as Fountaingrove Lodge (Study Area) in Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California (Figure 1). The purpose of this study is to identify the location and presence of potentially occurring sensitive plant species.
    [Show full text]
  • Legally Listed Species of the California Central Coast Region (U S Fish and Wildlife Service and /Or the State of California)
    Legally Listed Species of the California Central Coast Region (U S Fish and Wildlife Service and /or the State of California) (Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, western Kern, Santa Barbara, and Ventura counties) The following taxa, in alphabetical order by scientific name, are listed either by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Endangered Species Act) or by the State of California, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Natural Diversity Database. A comprehensive list for the State of California is updated quarterly by the California Natural Diversity Database. [Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List.] The distribution of these species has been documented for California’s central coast region from Monterey and San Benito counties south to Ventura County, and including western Kern County. Scientific names are those used in Baldwin et. al., 2012, The Jepson Manual: vascular plants of California, UC Press, Berkeley. Where nomenclature has changed from the name used initially in the listing process, they are referenced to the current name (e.g., Arabis hoffmannii = Boechera hoffmannii). Listing Status FE = federally endangered (Endangered Species Act, 1973 as amended) FT = federally threatened (Endangered Species Act, 1973 as amended) SE = state endangered (California Endangered Species Act; Fish and Game Code §2050 et seq.) ST = state threatened (California Endangered Species Act; Fish and Game Code §2050 et seq.) SR = state rare (California Native Plant Protection Act; Fish and Game Code §1900 et seq.). Scientific Name Common Name Status Acmispon argophyllus var. niveus Santa Cruz Island birds-foot trefoil SE Arabis hoffmannii = Boechera hoffmannii Boechera hoffmannii Hoffmann’s rock-cress FE Arctostaphylos confertiflora Santa Rosa Island manzanita FE Arctostaphylos hookeri subsp.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Peter R. Baye, Ph.D. Coastal Plant Ecologist
    Peter R. Baye, Ph.D. Coastal Plant Ecologist 33660 Annapolis Road Annapolis, CA 95412 (415) 310-5109 [email protected] Forest Practices California Department of Forestry 135 Ridgeway Santa Rosa, CA 95401 COMMENTS - THP 1-04-059 SON Martin (Sleepy Hollow) Timber Conversion Permit/Timber Harvest Plan (Brushy Ridge, Annapolis, Sonoma County) May 19, 2004 To the California Department of Forestry: Please consider the following comments on THP 1-03-059 SON (Martin Conversion, Sleepy Hollow, Annapolis, Sonoma County TCP/THP). I am a professional plant ecologist and botanist, specializing in coastal plant communities and species for over 25 years. My professional experience and qualification includes over 12 years experience in preparation, management, and review of joint NEPA/CEQA documents (EIR/EIS, environmental assessment/initial study) for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (San Francisco District), and as a private consultant for the California Coastal Conservancy. I also have over 12 years experience in coordination and preparation of Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultations for the Corps and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and over 5 years of experience preparing endangered species recovery plans for the Service. Much of my regulatory and environmental planning work has emphasized critical review or preparation of mitigation and restoration plans for endangered species and wetlands. I have reviewed the Timber Conversion Permit/Timber Harvest Plan (TCP/THP) the proposed vineyard conversion and development. A summary of my comments is presented below, followed by more detailed explanation. (1) The TCP/THP fails to identify, or grossly underestimates, significant cumulative impacts of escalating agricultural conversion on wildlife habitat (including endangered species), plant communities, biological diversity, wetlands, and water quality of the assessment area.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Mapping of Eastman and Hensley Lakes and Environs, Southern Sierra Nevada Foothills, California
    Vegetation Mapping of Eastman and Hensley Lakes and Environs, Southern Sierra Nevada Foothills, California By Sara Taylor, Daniel Hastings, Jaime Ratchford, Julie Evens, and Kendra Sikes of the 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento CA, 95816 2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To Those Who Generously Provided Support and Guidance: Many groups and individuals assisted us in completing this report and the supporting vegetation map/data. First, we expressly thank an anonymous donor who provided financial support in 2010 for this project’s fieldwork and mapping in the southern foothills of the Sierra Nevada. We also are thankful of the generous support from California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW, previously Department of Fish and Game) in funding 2008 field survey work in the region. We are indebted to the following additional staff and volunteers of the California Native Plant Society who provided us with field surveying, mission planning, technical GIS, and other input to accomplish this project: Jennifer Buck, Andra Forney, Andrew Georgeades, Brett Hall, Betsy Harbert, Kate Huxster, Theresa Johnson, Claire Muerdter, Eric Peterson, Stu Richardson, Lisa Stelzner, and Aaron Wentzel. To Those Who Provided Land Access: Angela Bradley, Ranger, Eastman Lake, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Bridget Fithian, Mariposa Program Manager, Sierra Foothill Conservancy Chuck Peck, Founder, Sierra Foothill Conservancy Diana Singleton, private landowner Diane Bohna, private landowner Duane Furman, private landowner Jeannette Tuitele-Lewis, Executive Director, Sierra Foothill Conservancy Kristen Boysen, Conservation Project Manager, Sierra Foothill Conservancy Park staff at Hensley Lake, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers i This page has been intentionally left blank. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I.
    [Show full text]
  • Classification of the Vegetation Alliances and Associations of Sonoma County, California
    Classification of the Vegetation Alliances and Associations of Sonoma County, California Volume 1 of 2 – Introduction, Methods, and Results Prepared by: California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program California Native Plant Society Vegetation Program For: The Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District The Sonoma County Water Agency Authors: Anne Klein, Todd Keeler-Wolf, and Julie Evens December 2015 ABSTRACT This report describes 118 alliances and 212 associations that are found in Sonoma County, California, comprising the most comprehensive local vegetation classification to date. The vegetation types were defined using a standardized classification approach consistent with the Survey of California Vegetation (SCV) and the United States National Vegetation Classification (USNVC) system. This floristic classification is the basis for an integrated, countywide vegetation map that the Sonoma County Vegetation Mapping and Lidar Program expects to complete in 2017. Ecologists with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the California Native Plant Society analyzed species data from 1149 field surveys collected in Sonoma County between 2001 and 2014. The data include 851 surveys collected in 2013 and 2014 through funding provided specifically for this classification effort. An additional 283 surveys that were conducted in adjacent counties are included in the analysis to provide a broader, regional understanding. A total of 34 tree-overstory, 28 shrubland, and 56 herbaceous alliances are described, with 69 tree-overstory, 51 shrubland, and 92 herbaceous associations. This report is divided into two volumes. Volume 1 (this volume) is composed of the project introduction, methods, and results. It includes a floristic key to all vegetation types, a table showing the full local classification nested within the USNVC hierarchy, and a crosswalk showing the relationship between this and other classification systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian River Estuary Management Project Draft
    4.0 Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures 4.4 Biological Resources 4.4.1 Introduction This section describes biological resources, with focus on terrestrial and wetland resources, and assesses potential impacts that could occur with implementation of the Russian River Estuary Management Project (Estuary Management Project or proposed project). Fisheries resources are addressed in Section 4.5, Fisheries. Terrestrial and wetland resources include terrestrial, wetland, and non-fisheries-related species, sensitive habitats or natural communities, special-status plant and animal species, and protected trees. Impacts on terrestrial and wetland resources are analyzed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) significance criteria (CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G). For impacts determined to be either significant or potentially significant, mitigation measures to minimize or avoid these impacts are identified. Information Sources and Survey Methodology The primary sources of information for this analysis are the existing biological resource studies and reports prepared for the Russian River Estuary (Estuary) (Heckel, 1994; Merritt Smith Consulting, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000; Sonoma County Water Agency [Water Agency; SCWA in references] and Merritt Smith Consulting 2001; SCWA, 2006; SCWA and Stewards of the Coast and Redwoods, 2009). These reports, incorporated by reference, present the methods and results of vegetation classification and mapping, fish and invertebrate sampling, amphibian surveys, and observations of bird and pinniped1 numbers and behavior, as well as other sampling efforts (e.g., water quality sampling) conducted in the Russian River Estuary. In addition to the reports listed above, information was obtained from conservation and management plans and planning documents prepared for lands within the project vicinity (Prunuske Chatham, Inc., 2005; California Department of Parks and Recreation [State Parks], 2007), as well as the U.S.
    [Show full text]