DOCSLIB.ORG

Coastal Rail Trail Project Biological Resources Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Coastal Rail Trail Project Biological Resources Report Coastal Rail Trail Project Biological Resources Report Prepared for: City of Oceanside 300 North Coast Hwy Oceanside, CA 92054 Prepared by: DOKKEN ENGINEERING 110 Blue Ravine Road, Suite 200 Folsom, CA 95630 November 2020 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Summary Summary The City of Oceanside, in cooperation with the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), proposes to construct approximately 2,470 linear feet of Class I path including a bicycle/pedestrian bridge over the Loma Alta Creek. The trail would be constructed predominantly within North County Transit District (NCTD) railroad right-of-way on the west side of the existing railroad tracks. The project would provide a “missing link” by closing the final gap of the Coastal Rail Trail. This Biological Resources Report is a review and evaluation of the potential impacts to threatened, endangered, proposed listed or special status species and protected habitat resources as a result of the proposed Project. Field surveys were conducted within the Biological Study Area (BSA), which was defined as the proposed Project impact area and includes all areas necessary to accommodate the design and facilitate construction. Aquatic resources were identified within the BSA during field surveys. Each of the aquatic resources were evaluated to determine their jurisdictional status. All aquatic resources within the BSA were determined to have connectivity to navigable waters and are considered to be jurisdictional waters of the U.S. (WoUS), waters of the state (WoS), and CDFW jurisdictional habitats. The Project is anticipated to result in permanent and temporary impacts to jurisdictional WoUS, WoS, and CDFW jurisdictional habitats. Literature research, habitat assessments, and biological surveys determined that 3 regional special status species have the potential to occur within the BSA, including: yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia), tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi), and southern California legless lizard (Anniella stebbinsi). None of these special status species were observed during the June 4, 2020 field surveys; however, the listed species are still considered to have the potential to occur within the BSA based on nearby known occurrences and presence of suitable habitat either within or directly adjacent to the BSA. Tidewater goby is a federally listed endangered species with potential to occur within the BSA due to presence of suitable habitat and recent documented regional occurrences. Prior to completion of the environmental review process, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) will initiate and complete Section 7 Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for potential Project related impacts to the species pursuant the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA). In compliance with FESA, any additional avoidance and minimization measures or mitigation efforts resulting from the consultation process will be incorporated into the Project design. Considering the scale of impact, it is anticipated that the Project may affect, and is likely to adversely affect tidewater goby. The following permits will be obtained for the proposed Project prior to construction: Section 404 Nationwide Permit 7 from the USACE, Section 401 Water Quality Certification from California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), California Coastal Commission (CCC) Coastal Development Permit (CDP), Construction General Permit from State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for soil disturbance (over 1.0 acre), and a USFWS Section 7 Letter of Concurrence for project effects to tidewater goby. Coastal Rail Trail Project i Biological Resources Report - 2020 List of Figures and Tables Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Project Description ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1.1. Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 2 1.1.2. Need ........................................................................................................................... 2 Chapter 2. Study Methods ..................................................................................................... 7 2.1. Regulatory Requirements .................................................................................................. 7 2.1.1. Federal Endangered Species Act ................................................................................ 7 2.1.2. Clean Water Act .......................................................................................................... 7 2.1.3. Executive Order 13186: Migratory Bird Treaty Act ...................................................... 9 2.1.4. California Environmental Quality Act ........................................................................... 9 2.1.5. California Endangered Species Act ............................................................................. 9 2.1.6. Section 1602: Streambed Alteration Agreement ......................................................... 9 2.1.7. Section 3503 and 3503.5: Bird and Raptors .............................................................. 10 2.1.8. Section 3513: Migratory Birds ................................................................................... 10 2.1.9. California Coastal Act of 1972 ................................................................................... 10 2.1.10. Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act ............................................................. 11 2.1.11. Regional Water Quality Control Boards ................................................................. 11 2.1.12. San Diego Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan ...................................................... 11 2.1.13. City of Oceanside Local Coastal Program ............................................................. 11 2.2. Studies Required ............................................................................................................. 12 2.2.1. Biological Study Area ................................................................................................ 12 2.2.2. Survey Methods ........................................................................................................ 12 2.3. Personnel and Survey Dates ........................................................................................... 13 2.4. Agency Coordination and Consultation History ................................................................ 13 2.5. Limitations That May Influence Results ............................................................................ 13 Chapter 3. Environmental Baseline ..................................................................................... 14 3.1. Description of the Existing Biological and Physical Conditions ......................................... 14 3.1.1. Biological Study Area ................................................................................................ 14 3.1.2. Physical Conditions................................................................................................... 14 3.1.3. Biological Conditions in the Biological Study Area .................................................... 14 3.2. Regional Species, Habitats, and Natural Communities of Concern .................................. 21 Chapter 4. Survey Results and Effects of the Action ........................................................... 54 4.1. Habitats and Natural Communities of Concern ................................................................ 54 4.1.1. Discussion of Waters and Wetlands .......................................................................... 54 4.2. Special Status Plant Species ........................................................................................... 58 4.3. Status Wildlife Species .................................................................................................... 58 4.3.1. Discussion of Yellow Warbler .................................................................................... 61 4.3.2. Discussion of Tidewater Goby .................................................................................. 62 4.3.3. Discussion of Southern California Legless Lizard ..................................................... 65 4.4. Migratory Birds ................................................................................................................. 67 Chapter 5. Conclusions and Regulatory Determination ....................................................... 68 5.1. Federal Endangered Species Act Consultation Summary ................................................ 68 5.2. Essential Fish Habitat Consultation Summary .................................................................. 68 5.3. California Endangered Species Act Consultation Summary ............................................. 68 5.4. Wetlands and Other Waters Coordination Summary ........................................................ 68 Coastal Rail Trail Project ii Biological Resources Report - 2020 List of Figures and Tables 5.5. Invasive Species .............................................................................................................. 69 5.6. Other...............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rationales for Animal Species Considered for Species of Conservation Concern, Sequoia National Forest
    Rationales for Animal Species Considered for Species of Conservation Concern Sequoia National Forest Prepared by: Wildlife Biologists and Biologist Planner Regional Office, Sequoia National Forest and Washington Office Enterprise Program For: Sequoia National Forest June 2019 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Human Use of NCCP Reserves on Reptile and Mammal Species in San Diego
    FINAL REPORT Wildlife Conservation Society Agreement No: P1582100 Effects of Human Use of NCCP Reserves on Reptile and Mammal Species in San Diego SARAH E. REED1.2, COURTNEY L. LARSON2 and KEVIN R. CROOKS2 1Americas Program, Wildlife Conservation Society 2Department of Fish, Wildlife & Conservation Biology, Colorado State University June 1, 2019 Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Background and Objectives ............................................................................................................................. 4 Chapter 1. Landscape Model Validation ........................................................................................................ 8 Chapter 2. Citizen Science Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 13 Chapter 3. Effects of Human Activity on Reptiles and Mammals ........................................................... 18 Chapter 4. Before-After Control-Impact Experiment ............................................................................... 37 Discussion ......................................................................................................................................................... 42 Literature Cited ................................................................................................................................................ 50
    [Show full text]
  • <Insert Month, Day and Year>
    October 15, 2018 11414 Brittny Hummel Project Manager 2404 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 9E Los Angeles, CA 90057 Subject: Biological Resources Letter Report for the 434, 438, 442, and 458 West James Street Project, City of Los Angeles, California Dear Ms. Hummel: This biological resources letter report provides the results of a biological resources assessment for the approximate 15,142.6 square-foot (0.35-acre) 434, 438, 442, and 458 West James Street Project property hereafter referred to as the “Project”, including a 500-foot buffer from the Project, hereafter referred to as the “study area”. The Project is located in the City of Los Angeles, in Los Angeles County, California (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 5452-011-013, 5452-011-004, 5452- 011-005, and 5452-011-006). Dudek understands that the Project proposes to construct four new single-family dwellings, each of which includes two-floors of living area over a garage. The northernmost single-family dwelling (APN: 5452-011-013) is located apart from the other three. As such, the Project site is comprised of two separate tracts of land separated by an intervening private residence. This letter report is intended to: (1) describe the existing conditions of biological resources within the Project site in terms of vegetation, flora, wildlife, and wildlife habitats; (2) quantify impacts to biological resources that would result from implementation of the proposed Project and describe those impacts in terms of biological significance in view of federal, state, and local laws and policies; and (3) recommend mitigation measures for impacts to sensitive biological resources, as applicable.
    [Show full text]
  • October 2013
    THE MONITOR NEWSLETTER OF THE HOOSIER HERPETOLOGICAL SOCIETY A non-profit organization dedicated to the education of its membership and the conservation of all amphibians and reptiles Volume 24 Number 10 October 2013 Welcome Hoosier Herpetological Society members! RENEWALS Pat Hammond October HHS meeting October 23rd 7:00 p.m. Holliday Park, Auditorium Speaker: Jim Horton Topic: "Snake Road Herping Adventures" Snake Road is located in the Southern tip of Illinois and is one of the most famous areas for "herpers" to explore. It is located between a large swamp and a bluff where the snakes hibernate during the winter.To visit there is like going back in time. Everyone that explores this area is impressed by its unspoiled pristine rugged beauty. Jim Horton, besides being our society's president and newsletter editor, is an experienced field "herper" and excellent wildlife photographer. He, along with other HHS members, have taken several trips to snake road. I have only been able to go to Snake Road once but it is a trip I will never forget because of the vast variety of "herps" that can be found in the fall or spring as they journey into or out of the swamp. My favorite memory from Snake Road is my first sighting of water moccasins or cottonmouths on a field trip! Very rare in Indiana (if they do still exist in Indiana) these cottonmouths are the most common snake seen along this site! What a treat! Let Jim and our other members share their experiences in this amazing place. Be sure to attend this program! **Remember we are meeting on Oct.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecography ECOG-03593 Tarr, S., Meiri, S., Hicks, J
    Ecography ECOG-03593 Tarr, S., Meiri, S., Hicks, J. J. and Algar, A. C. 2018. A biogeographic reversal in sexual size dimorphism along a continental temperature gradient. – Ecography doi: 10.1111/ecog.03593 Supplementary material SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL A biogeographic reversal in sexual size dimorphism along a continental temperature gradient Appendix 1: Supplementary Tables and Figures Table A1. Placement of species missing from phylogeny. Species Comment Reference Most closely related to oaxaca and Campbell, J.A., et al. 2016. A new species of Abronia mixteca, most similar to mixteca Abronia cuetzpali (Squamata: Anguidae) from the Sierra Madre del Sur of according to Campbell et al. so add Oaxaca, Mexico. Journal of Herpetology 50: 149-156. as sister to mixteca Anolis alocomyos Both formerly part of tropidolepis, Köhler, G., et al. 2014. Two new species of the Norops & Anolis make a random clade with pachypus complex (Squamata, Dactyloidae) from Costa leditzigorum tropidolepis Rica. Mesoamerican Herpetology 1: 254–280. Part of a clade with microtus and Poe S, Ryan M.J. 2017. Description of two new species Anolis brooksi & ginaelisae so make a random clade similar to Anolis insignis (Squamata: Iguanidae) and Anolis kathydayae with these & brooksi & kathydayae, resurrection of Anolis (Diaphoranolis) brooksi. Amphibian based on Poe & Ryan. & Reptile Conservation 11: 1–16. Part of a clade with aquaticus and Köhler, J.J., et al. 2015. Anolis marsupialis Taylor 1956, a Anolis woodi so make a random clade with valid species from southern Pacific Costa Rica (Reptilia, marsupialis these Squamata, Dactyloidae). Zootaxa 3915111–122 Köhler, G., et al. 2016. Taxonomic revision of the Norops Anolis mccraniei, Formerly part of tropidonotus, so tropidonotus complex (Squamata, Dactyloidae), with the Anolis spilorhipis, split tropidonotus into a random resurrection of N.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I Cultural and Paleontological Assessment: Magnolia Tank Farm Project City of Huntington Beach, Orange County, California
    PHASE I CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT: MAGNOLIA TANK FARM PROJECT CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared on Behalf of: SLF-HB Magnolia, LLC 2 Park Plaza Irvine, CA 92614 Principal Investigators/Authors: Tria Marie Belcourt, M.A., Registered Professional Archaeologist Jennifer Kelly, M.Sc., Geology, Professional Paleontologist Sonia Sifuentes, M.Sc., Registered Professional Archaeologist Material Culture Consulting Project Number: SRI-17-01 Type of Study: Cultural and paleontological resources assessment Cultural Resources within Area of Potential Impact: None Paleontological Formations: Younger Quaternary Alluvium USGS Quadrangle: Newport Beach APN(s): 114-150-36, 114-481-32 Survey Area: 29 acres Date of Survey: August 8, 2017 Key Words: Paleontology, Archaeology, CEQA, Phase I Survey, Negative Survey MANAGEMENT SUMMARY SLF-HB Magnolia, LLC proposes to convert a currently vacant and graded lot into a mixed-use community that provides visitor serving commercial uses, new residential neighborhoods, opportunities for coastal access and passive recreation and incorporates measures to protect adjacent natural resources, called the Magnolia Tank Farm Project (Project). The Project is located in the City of Huntington Beach, Orange County, California The Project includes construction of up to 250 for-sale residential units and visitor-and-resident-serving commercial uses facilities. Material Culture Consulting, Inc. (Material Culture) was retained by SLF-HB Magnolia, LLC (SLF-HB) to conduct the Phase I cultural and paleontological resource investigation of the Project Area. These assessments were conducted in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and included cultural and paleontological records searches, a search of the Sacred Lands File by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), outreach efforts with ten Native American tribal representatives, background research, and a pedestrian field survey, all of which resulted in negative findings.
    [Show full text]
  • Herpetofauna Monitoring in the Mediterranean Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network: Cabrillo National Monument 2015–2018 Report
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Herpetofauna Monitoring in the Mediterranean Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network Cabrillo National Monument 2015–2018 Report Natural Resource Report NPS/MEDN/NRR—2019/1963 ON THE COVER California striped racer, Masticophis lateralis, in pitfall bucket during 2017 herpetofauna monitoring efforts. NPS Photo Herpetofauna Monitoring in the Mediterranean Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network Cabrillo National Monument 2015–2018 Report Natural Resource Report NPS/MEDN/NRR—2019/1963 Stephanie Root National Park Service Cabrillo National Monument 1800 Cabrillo Memorial Drive San Diego, California 92106 August 2019 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Temblor Legless Lizard Petition
    BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR PETITION TO LIST THE TEMBLOR LEGLESS LIZARD (Anniella alexanderae) AS A THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT AND TO CONCURRENTLY DESIGNATE CRITICAL HABITAT CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY OCTOBER 20, 2020 1 NOTICE OF PETITION Submitted this 20th day of October, 2020 David Bernhardt, Secretary Gary Frazer, Asst. Director for End. Species U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1849 C Street NW 1849 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20240 Washington, D.C. 202040 [email protected] [email protected] Aurelia Skipwith, Director Paul Souza, Regional Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 8 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1849 C Street NW 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W2606 Washington, D.C. 20240 Sacramento, California 95825 [email protected] [email protected] Petitioner: Center for Biological Diversity 1212 Broadway, Suite 800, Oakland, CA 94612 Contact: Jeff Miller, [email protected] Pursuant to Section 4(b) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b); section 553(e) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 553(e); and 50 C.F.R. § 424.14(a), the Center for Biological Diversity hereby petitions the Secretary of the Interior, through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), to protect the Temblor legless lizard (Anniella alexanderae) as a threatened or endangered species under the ESA. Petitioners request immediate action on the listing of the Temblor legless lizard, considering the ongoing impacts of oil and gas development in its limited range. The USFWS has the authority to promulgate an emergency listing rule for any species when an emergency exists that poses a significant risk to the species.
    [Show full text]
  • A Biogeographic Reversal in Sexual Size Dimorphism Along A
    1 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH 2 3 TITLE: A biogeographic reversal in sexual size dimorphism along a continental temperature 4 gradient 5 6 AUTHORS 7 Simon Tarr 8 School of Geography, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK 9 [email protected] 10 Orcid ID: 0000-0001-8464-1240 11 12 Shai Meiri 13 Department of Zoology, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, 69978, Israel 14 [email protected] 15 Orcid ID: 0000-0003-3839-6330 16 17 James J. Hicks 18 School of Geography, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK 19 [email protected] 20 Orcid ID: 0000-0001-5154-5615 21 22 Adam C. Algar (Corresponding Author) 23 School of Geography, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK 24 [email protected] 25 Orcid ID: 0000-0001-8095-0097 26 27 28 KEYWORDS 29 Body size, sexual size dimorphism, sexual selection 30 31 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 32 Thanks to Daniel Pincheira-Donoso and Andrew MacColl for thoughts on the early stages of this 33 work. The University of Nottingham’s Biogeography, Ecology and Evolution Research group 34 supplied valuable feedback on an earlier draft. 35 36 2 37 ABSTRACT 38 The magnitude and direction of sexual size dimorphism (SSD) varies greatly across the animal 39 kingdom, reflecting differential selection pressures on the reproductive and/or ecological roles of 40 males and females. If the selection pressures and constraints imposed on body size change along 41 environmental gradients, then SSD will vary geographically in a predictable way. Here, we uncover a 42 biogeographical reversal in SSD of lizards from Central and North America: in warm, low latitude 43 environments, males are larger than females, but at colder, high latitudes, females are larger than 44 males.
    [Show full text]
  • Temblor Legless Lizard Petition
    BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR PETITION TO LIST THE TEMBLOR LEGLESS LIZARD (Anniella alexanderae) AS A THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT AND TO CONCURRENTLY DESIGNATE CRITICAL HABITAT CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY OCTOBER 19, 2020 1 NOTICE OF PETITION Submitted this 19th day of October, 2020 David Bernhardt, Secretary Gary Frazer, Asst. Director for End. Species U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1849 C Street NW 1849 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20240 Washington, D.C. 202040 [email protected] [email protected] Aurelia Skipwith, Director Paul Souza, Regional Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 8 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1849 C Street NW 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W2606 Washington, D.C. 20240 Sacramento, California 95825 [email protected] [email protected] Petitioner: Center for Biological Diversity 1212 Broadway, Suite 800, Oakland, CA 94612 Contact: Jeff Miller, [email protected] Pursuant to Section 4(b) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b); section 553(e) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 553(e); and 50 C.F.R. § 424.14(a), the Center for Biological Diversity hereby petitions the Secretary of the Interior, through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), to protect the Temblor legless lizard (Anniella alexanderae) as a threatened or endangered species under the ESA. Petitioners request immediate action on the listing of the Temblor legless lizard, considering the ongoing impacts of oil and gas development in its limited range. The USFWS has the authority to promulgate an emergency listing rule for any species when an emergency exists that poses a significant risk to the species.
    [Show full text]
  • 107647 FSPLT3 4183562.Pdf
    I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Biological Evaluation (BE) is to review the potential impacts associated with the Lucas Creek Project to determine its effect on Forest Service sensitive terrestrial animal species. The BE will determine whether the proposed action would contribute to a trend toward any Forest Service sensitive species becoming federally listed. This BE was prepared in accordance with the standards established under Forest Service Manual direction (FSM 2672.42). NRIS Wildlife records, the California Natural Diversity Data Base, species habitat requirements, and species range information from the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships database were used to develop the list of species likely to be found in or near the project area. Species considered in depth are listed in Table 1. Appendix A contains a detailed listing of other sensitive species that have the potential to occur within Sequoia National Forest but were eliminated from the need for detailed analysis under this document based on various criteria related to habitat requirements, geographic range or potential effects. Table 1. Species considered in detail for the Lucas Creek Project. Common Name Scientific Name California Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis occidentalis Pallid Bat Antrozous pallidus Fringed Myotis Myotis thysanodes Yellow-blotched Salamander Ensatina eschscholtzii croceater Relictual Salamander Batrachoseps relictus California Legless Lizard Anniella pulchra II. CURRENT MANAGEMENT DIRECTION Direction for sensitive species management is provided in the Forest Service Manual (FSM 2672.1), and the Sequoia Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) (USDA 1988) as amended by the 2004 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA 2004) and the 1990 Mediated Settlement Agreement (USDA 1999).
    [Show full text]
  • Mesa Wind Repower Project, Appendix G, Biological Resources
    Appendix G Biological Resources Technical Report APPENDIX G Biological Resources Technical Report Mesa Wind Project Repower Prepared for: PMB 422 6703 Oak Creek Rd. Mojave, CA 93501 Prepared by: 5020 Chesebro Road, Suite 200 Agoura Hills, CA 91301 February 2020 Biological Resources Technical Report Mesa Wind Project Repower Contents 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Description .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Location ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.0 Methods ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Field Surveys ..................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]