DOCSLIB.ORG

A Conservation Blueprint: an Assessment and Recommendations from the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County May 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Conservation Blueprint: an Assessment and Recommendations from the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County May 2011 A Conservation Blueprint: An Assessment and Recommendations from the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County May 2011 Redwoods in clearing storm (Photograph by Jodi McGraw) Land Trust of Santa Cruz County 617 Water Street Santa Cruz, CA 95060 (831) 429-6116 [email protected] www.landtrustsantacruz.org This project is funded, in part, by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. Recommended Citation: Mackenzie, A., J. McGraw, and M. Freeman. 2011. Conservation Blueprint for Santa Cruz County: An Assessment and Recommendations from the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County. Land Trust of Santa Cruz County. Santa Cruz, CA. May 2011. 180 pages. Available at http://www.landtrustsantacruz.org/blueprint What we do Our goal is to protect and care for the spectacular beauty and natural resources that make Santa Cruz County special. We protect working lands, like farms and timberland, and natural lands with high conservation value—thus protecting water supplies, wildlife habitats, and open space. How we do it We believe that a relatively small investment now can save what we love forever. We protect land through a variety of means. Sometimes we buy the land from willing landowners. Sometimes we reach preservation agreements with landowners. Always, we serve as good stewards of the land under our care. We work with a wide variety of conservation partners to accomplish our goals. What we’ve done The Land Trust was founded in 1978 and has directly protected 3,200 acres of land and worked with partners to protect another 10,000 acres. We have protected redwood forests, rare sandhills habitat, wetlands at the heart of the Watsonville Sloughs, and 1,400 acres of farmland in the Pajaro Valley. Who funds our work Our work is funded by donations from individuals, as well as foundation and government grants which multiply the impact of individual gifts. During the past three years individual donations were matched $23 to $1 by grant funding. Our Board The Land Trust is a 501(c)(3) non-profit under the Internal Revenue Service Code (tax ID # 94-2431856) and is governed by a Board of Trustees that includes farmers, landowners, business people, conservationists, and community volunteers. BOARD OF TRUSTEES STAFF Cindy Rubin, President Terry Corwin, Executive Director Robert Stephens, VicePresident Stephen Slade, Deputy Director Lloyd Williams, Secretary Matt Freeman, Director of Conservation Katherine Beiers Val Cole Lisa Larson, Finance Director Harriet Deck Lynn Overtree, Stewardship Manager Cathleen Eckhardt Dan Medeiros, Acquisitions Manager Will Garroutte Andre Lafleur, Major Gifts Officer Bill Gielow Calah Pasley, Membership and Events Manager John Gilchrist Bernie Goldner Jeffrey Helmer, Land Steward Ron Hirsch Carolyn Johnson, Senior Administrative Assistant Larry I. Perlin Tim Tourkakis, Morgan Preserve Caretaker Rogelio Ponce, Jr Barry Baker, Stewardship Assistant Jim Rider Melody Sharp Sue Sheuerman The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, established in 2000, seeks to advance environmental conservation and cutting-edge scientific research around the world and improve the quality of life in the San Francisco Bay Area. For more information, visit www.moore.org. Conservation Blueprint: Contents Assessment and Recommendations Table of Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... viii Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... ix Foreword ...................................................................................................................................... xii Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... xiii Part I. Overview and Setting ........................................................................................................... 1 1. Overview .................................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 Santa Cruz County’s Threatened Resources: A Call to Action ............................................................ 2 1.2 A Vision for Santa Cruz County’s Resource-Rich Legacy ..................................................................... 4 1.3 Blueprint Purpose ............................................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Blueprint Role and Relationship to Adopted Plans and Policies ......................................................... 6 1.5 Blueprint Development Process ......................................................................................................... 7 1.6 Blueprint Organization ....................................................................................................................... 7 2. Regional Setting and Challenges .............................................................................................. 9 2.1 Conservation Challenges .................................................................................................................. 13 2.1.1 Population Trends and Future Growth Challenges ................................................................... 13 2.1.2 Resource Conservation and Viability Challenges ....................................................................... 18 2.1.3 Climate Change ......................................................................................................................... 19 2.2 Regulatory and Policy Framework .................................................................................................... 19 Part II. Conservation Approach ..................................................................................................... 21 3. Conservation Goals ................................................................................................................ 22 4. Integrated Conservation Approach ....................................................................................... 23 4.1 Priority Multi-Benefit Conservation Areas ....................................................................................... 23 4.1.1 Upper San Lorenzo .................................................................................................................... 24 4.1.2 North Coast Watersheds ........................................................................................................... 31 4.1.3 Sandhills .................................................................................................................................... 31 4.1.4 Upper Corralitos ........................................................................................................................ 32 4.1.5 Larkin Valley .............................................................................................................................. 32 4.1.6 Interlaken .................................................................................................................................. 33 4.1.7 Watsonville Sloughs/Lower Pajaro River ................................................................................... 33 4.1.8 Pajaro Hills ................................................................................................................................. 34 Land Trust of Santa Cruz County iii May 2011 Conservation Blueprint: Contents Assessment and Recommendations 4.1.9 Riparian and Riverine Systems .................................................................................................. 34 4.2 Prioritizing Conservation Work in Multi-Benefit Areas .................................................................... 35 4.3 Conservation Tools ........................................................................................................................... 36 4.4 Ecosystem Services: Benefits and Innovative Models ...................................................................... 38 4.5 Critical Next Steps ............................................................................................................................ 40 4.5.1 Biodiversity ................................................................................................................................ 41 4.5.2 Water Resources ....................................................................................................................... 41 4.5.3 Working Lands ........................................................................................................................... 42 4.5.4 Recreation and Healthy Communities ....................................................................................... 43 Part III. Conservation Assessment ................................................................................................ 45 5. Biodiversity Assessment ........................................................................................................ 46 5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 46 5.1.1 Biodiversity Planning Goals and Objectives .............................................................................. 47 5.1.2 Biodiversity Planning
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Flood Insurance?
    Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program The passage of the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program in 2012 has made the community’s long term goals for protecting the future of the Santa Clara Valley possible, including: • Supplying safe, healthy water • Retrofitting dams and critical infrastructure for earthquakes • Reducing toxins, hazards and contaminants • Restoring wildlife habitat in our waterways • Providing natural flood protection Even though we are in a drought, flooding can happen. Santa Clara County has had several damaging floods over the years, Extreme dry conditions can harden the ground. Within the first few most notably in 1995 and 1997 along the Guadalupe River and 1998 days of heavy rain, the ground can deflect water into streams and along Coyote and San Francisquito creeks. Call your city’s floodplain creeks, increasing the chances of flash flooding. It can strike quickly manager or the Santa Clara Valley Water District’s Community with little or no warning. Projects Unit at 408.630.2650 to determine if you are in a floodplain. Floodwater can flow swiftly through neighborhoods and away from The water district’s flood prevention and flood awareness outreach streams when creeks “overbank” or flood. Dangerously fast-moving efforts reduce flood insurance rates by as much as 10 percent. FEMA’s floodwaters can flow thousands of feet away from the flooded creek National Flood Insurance Program Community Rating System (CRS) within minutes. evaluates the flood protection efforts that CRS communities make and provides a rating. While the chances may seem slim for a 1 percent flood* to occur, the real odds of a 1 percent flood are greater than one in four during the In our area, *participating CRS communities (noted on the magnet) earn length of a 30-year mortgage.
    [Show full text]
  • D.W. ALLEY & Associates Aquatic Biology
    D.W. ALLEY & Associates Aquatic Biology -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2006 Juvenile Steelhead Densities in the San Lorenzo, Soquel, Aptos and Corralitos Watersheds, Santa Cruz County, California Coastrange Sculpin Photographed by Jessica Wheeler D.W. ALLEY & Associates, Aquatic Biology Don Alley, Chad Steiner and Jerry Smith, Fishery Biologists With Field Assistance from Kristen Kittleson, Dawn Reis and Jessica Wheeler Prepared For the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department Government Center, 701 Ocean Street, Room 312, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Funding From the San Lorenzo Valley Water District, Soquel Creek Water District, Lompico County Water District, Cities of Santa Cruz and Watsonville and the County of Santa Cruz May 2007 Project # 200-04 340 Old River Lane • P.O. Box 200 • Brookdale, California 95007 • (831) 338-7971 TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORT SUMMARY...................................................................................10 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................31 I-1. Steelhead and Coho Salmon Ecology...................................................... 31 I-3. Project Purpose and General Study Approach ........................................ 34 METHODS ....................................................................................................35 M-1. Choice of Reaches and Vicinity of Sites to be Sampled- Methods........... 35 M-2. Classification of Habitat Types and Measurement of Habitat Characteristics.............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Elkhorn Slough Estuary
    A RICH NATURAL RESOURCE YOU CAN HELP! Elkhorn Slough Estuary WATER QUALITY REPORT CARD Located on Monterey Bay, Elkhorn Slough and surround- There are several ways we can all help improve water 2015 ing wetlands comprise a network of estuarine habitats that quality in our communities: include salt and brackish marshes, mudflats, and tidal • Limit the use of fertilizers in your garden. channels. • Maintain septic systems to avoid leakages. • Dispose of pharmaceuticals properly, and prevent Estuarine wetlands harsh soaps and other contaminants from running are rare in California, into storm drains. and provide important • Buy produce from local farmers applying habitat for many spe- sustainable management practices. cies. Elkhorn Slough • Vote for the environment by supporting candidates provides special refuge and bills favoring clean water and habitat for a large number of restoration. sea otters, which rest, • Let your elected representatives and district forage and raise pups officials know you care about water quality in in the shallow waters, Elkhorn Slough and support efforts to reduce question: How is the water in Elkhorn Slough? and nap on the salt marshes. Migratory shorebirds by the polluted run-off and to restore wetlands. thousands stop here to rest and feed on tiny creatures in • Attend meetings of the Central Coast Regional answer: It could be a lot better… the mud. Leopard sharks by the hundreds come into the Water Quality Control Board to share your estuary to give birth. concerns and support for action. Elkhorn Slough estuary hosts diverse wetland habitats, wildlife and recreational activities. Such diversity depends Thousands of people come to Elkhorn Slough each year JOIN OUR EFFORT! to a great extent on the quality of the water.
    [Show full text]
  • 140 Years of Railroading in Santa Cruz County by Rick Hamman
    140 Years of Railroading in Santa Cruz County By Rick Hamman Introduction To describe the last 140 years of area railroading in 4,000 words, or two articles, seems a reasonable task. After all, how much railroad history could there be in such a small county? In the summer of 1856 Davis & Jordon opened their horse powered railroad to haul lime from the Rancho Canada Del Rincon to their wharf in Santa Cruz. Today, the Santa Cruz, Big Trees & Pacific Railway continues to carry freight and passengers through those same Rancho lands to Santa Cruz. Between the time span of these two companies there has been no less than 37 different railroads operating at one time or another within Santa Cruz County. From these various lines has already come sufficient history to fill at least eight books and numerous historical articles. Many of these writings are available in your local library. As we begin this piece the author hopes to give the reader an overview and insight into what railroads have meant for Santa Cruz County, what they provide today, and what their relevance could be for tomorrow. Before There Were Railroads As people first moved west in search of gold, and later found reason to remain, Santa Cruz County offered many inducements. It was already well known because of its proximity to the former Alta California capital at Monterey, its Mission at Santa Cruz and its excellent weather. Further, within its boundaries were vast mineral deposits in the form of limestone and aggregates, rich alluvial farming soils and fertile orchard lands, and billions of standing board feet of uncut pine and redwood lumber to supply the construction of the San Francisco and Monterey bay areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Santa Cruz, California, U.S.A
    SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA, U.S.A. Santa Cruz, California, the birthplace of mainland surfing welcomes visitors to the quintessential beach town. From old growth coastal redwood forests, to a legendary 100-year old seaside amusement park Surf’soverlooking up! the sparkling blue Monterey Bay, Santa Cruz County offers the classic California beach vacation. LOCATION wooden roller coaster that has thrilled visitors for local surfing history and overlooks Steamer Lane, Santa Cruz is approximately 70 miles/113 km south over 85 years. Seventy-three hand-carved horses one of the best places in the country to surf. of San Francisco and 349 miles/562 km north of prance proudly to the music from two beauti- Los Angeles. Many visitors choose to take scenic ful antiques: the park’s original 342- pipe Ruth STATE PARKS Highway 1 along the California coastline to Santa band organ and Wurlitzer 165 band organ at the • Santa Cruz County is home to the largest number Cruz or Highway 17 from Silicon Valley and San Jose famous Looff Carousel, built in 1911. Both the of state parks and beaches than any other county through the Santa Cruz Mountains. Visitors can Giant Dipper and the Looff Carousel are National in California - 14 in all – including California’s also choose to fly in to San Francisco International Historic Landmarks. oldest, Big Basin Redwoods State Park. Airport or Mineta-San Jose International Airport. • In the Santa Cruz Mountains, Roaring Camp • State Parks in Santa Cruz County offer visitors Railroads hosts visitors on nostalgic rides through a vast amount of diverse landscapes, from the CLIMATE the redwoods aboard vintage steam locomotives.
    [Show full text]
  • CLASSIFICATION of CALIFORNIA ESTUARIES BASED on NATURAL CLOSURE PATTERNS: TEMPLATES for RESTORATION and MANAGEMENT Revised
    CLASSIFICATION OF CALIFORNIA ESTUARIES BASED ON NATURAL CLOSURE PATTERNS: TEMPLATES FOR RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT Revised David K. Jacobs Eric D. Stein Travis Longcore Technical Report 619.a - August 2011 Classification of California Estuaries Based on Natural Closure Patterns: Templates for Restoration and Management David K. Jacobs1, Eric D. Stein2, and Travis Longcore3 1UCLA Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology 2Southern California Coastal Water Research Project 3University of Southern California - Spatial Sciences Institute August 2010 Revised August 2011 Technical Report 619.a ABSTRACT Determining the appropriate design template is critical to coastal wetland restoration. In seasonally wet and semi-arid regions of the world coastal wetlands tend to close off from the sea seasonally or episodically, and decisions regarding estuarine mouth closure have far reaching implications for cost, management, and ultimate success of coastal wetland restoration. In the past restoration planners relied on an incomplete understanding of the factors that influence estuarine mouth closure. Consequently, templates from other climatic/physiographic regions are often inappropriately applied. The first step to addressing this issue is to develop a classification system based on an understanding of the processes that formed the estuaries and thus define their pre-development structure. Here we propose a new classification system for California estuaries based on the geomorphic history and the dominant physical processes that govern the formation of the estuary space or volume. It is distinct from previous estuary closure models, which focused primarily on the relationship between estuary size and tidal prism in constraining closure. This classification system uses geologic origin, exposure to littoral process, watershed size and runoff characteristics as the basis of a conceptual model that predicts likely frequency and duration of closure of the estuary mouth.
    [Show full text]
  • Top Attractions and Activities in Santa Cruz, California
    Top Attractions and Activities in Santa Cruz, California With 29 miles of sun-drenched coastline, Santa Cruz County offers some of California's best beaches, beautiful coastline trails, mountains and activities to suit everyone. Visit the historic Beach Boardwalk, a museum or art gallery, go winetasting, try one of our local craft breweries, ride a steam train, view the redwoods, or attend one of our many local events! Buffeted by the Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay, Santa Cruz attractions offer a variety of activities, whether your visit is long or short. 1. Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk The admission-free Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk is an historic, classic seaside amusement park located on a mile of sandy beach. Visitors can enjoy over 35 rides and attractions, games, food and shopping. Events at the Boardwalk include free Friday Night Bands on the Beach, Movie Nights, Santa Cruz Clam Chowder Cook-Off and the Chili Cook-Off. The Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk features the world famous Giant Dipper roller coaster and the historic 1911 Looff Carousel. Coupons, schedules and operating hours can be found on the Boardwalk's website. Season passes and daily ride wristbands are available. Read more about our world-famous landmark here: http://www.santacruzca.org/blog/?p=4046 Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk 400 Beach Street Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Phone: 831.426.7433 831.423.5590 beachboardwalk.com 2. West Cliff Drive West Cliff Drive is a scenic, 3 mile walking and biking path along the Pacific Ocean in Santa Cruz. Watch surfers, observe wildlife or just admire the incredible ocean views.
    [Show full text]
  • 1982 Flood Report
    GB 1399.4 S383 R4 1982 I ; CLARA VAltEY WATER DISlRIDl LIBRARY 5750 ALMADEN EXPRESSYIAY SAN JOSE. CAUFORN!A 9Sll8 REPORT ON FLOODING AND FLOOD RELATED DAMAGES IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY January 1 to April 30, 1982 Prepared by John H. Sutcliffe Acting Division Engineer Operations Division With Contributions From Michael McNeely Division Engineer Design Division and Jeanette Scanlon Assistant Civil Engineer Design Division Under the Direction of Leo F. Cournoyer Assistant Operations and Maintenance Manager and Daniel F. Kriege Operations and Maintenance Manager August 24, 1982 DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Arthur T. Pfeiffer, Chairman District 1 James J. Lenihan District 5 Patrick T. Ferraro District 2 Sio Sanchez. Vice Chairman At Large Robert W. Gross District 3 Audrey H. Fisher At large Maurice E. Dullea District 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCrfION .......................... a ••••••••••••••••••• 4 •• Ill • 1 STORM OF JANUARY 3-5, 1982 .•.•.•.•.•••••••.••••••••.••.••.••.••••. 3 STORMS OF MARCH 31 THROUGH APRIL 13, 1982 ••.....••••••.•••••••••••• 7 SUMMARY e • • • • • • • • • : • 111 • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1111 o e • e • • o • e • e o e • e 1111 • • • • • e • e 12 TABLES I Storm Rainfall Summary •••••••••.••••.•••••••.••••••••••••• 14 II Historical Rainfall Data •••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••• 15 III Channel Flood Flow Summary •••••.•••••.•••••••••••••••••••• 16 IV Historical Stream flow Data •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 17 V January 3-5, 1982 Damage Assessment Summary •••••••••••••••••• 18 VI March 31 - April 13, 1982 Damage
    [Show full text]
  • UNDERSTANDING REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS California Adaptation Planning Guide
    C A L I F O R N I A ADAPTATION PLANNING GUIDE UNDERSTANDING REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS CALIFORNIA ADAPTATION PLANNING GUIDE Prepared by: California Emergency Management Agency 3650 Schriever Avenue Mather, CA 95655 www.calema.ca.gov California Natural Resources Agency 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 resources.ca.gov WITH FUNDING Support From: Federal Emergency Management Agency 1111 Broadway, Suite 1200 Oakland, CA 94607-4052 California Energy Commission 1516 Ninth Street, MS-29 Sacramento, CA 95814-5512 WITH Technical Support From: California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 July 2012 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Adaptation Planning Guide (APG) has benefited from the ideas, assessment, feedback, and support from members of the APG Advisory Committee, local governments, regional entities, members of the public, state and local non-governmental organizations, and participants in the APG pilot program. CALIFORNIA EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY MARK GHILARDUCCI SECRETARY MIKE DAYTON UNDERSECRETARY CHRISTINA CURRY ASSISTANT SECRETARY PREPAREDNESS KATHY MCKEEVER DIRECTOR OFFICE OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION JOANNE BRANDANI CHIEF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION DIVISION, HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION KEN WORMAN CHIEF HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION JULIE NORRIS SENIOR EMERGENCY SERVICES COORDINATOR HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION KAREN MCCREADY ASSOCIATE GOVERNMENT PROGRAM ANALYST HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCE AGENCY JOHN LAIRD SECRETARY JANELLE BELAND UNDERSECRETARY
    [Show full text]
  • Declining Biodiversity: Why Species Matter and How Their Functions Might Be Restored in Californian Tidal Marshes
    Features Declining Biodiversity: Why Species Matter and How Their Functions Might Be Restored in Californian Tidal Marshes JOY B. ZEDLER, JOHN C. CALLAWAY, AND GARY SULLIVAN pecies diversity is being lost in habitats that are Sincreasingly diminished by development, fragmenta- BIODIVERSITY WAS DECLINING BEFORE tion, and urban runoff; the sensitive species drop out and a few aggressive ones persist, at the expense of others. Alarmed OUR EYES, BUT IT TOOK REGIONAL by declining biodiversity, many conservationists and re- CENSUSES TO RECOGNIZE THE PROBLEM, searchers are asking what happens to ecosystem functioning if we lose species, how diverse communities can be restored, LONG-TERM MONITORING TO IDENTIFY which (if any) particular species are critical for performing ecosystem services, and which functions are most critical to THE CAUSES, AND EXPERIMENTAL ecosystem sustainability. In southern California, 90% of the coastal wetland area has been destroyed, and remaining wet- PLANTINGS TO SHOW WHY THE LOSS OF lands continue to be damaged; even the region’s protected re- SPECIES MATTERS AND WHICH RESTORA- serves are threatened by highway and utility-expansion pro- jects. The fate of biodiversity in these diminished wetlands TION STRATEGIES MIGHT REESTABLISH serves to warn other regions of the need for continual as- sessment of the status and function of both common and rare SPECIES species, as well as the need for experimental tests of their importance—before they are lost. This article synthesizes data for tidal marshes of the Cali- fornian biogeographic region, which stretches from Point Conception near Santa Barbara south to Bahía San Quintín Joy B. Zedler, Aldo Leopold Chair of Restoration Ecology, Botany De- in Baja California.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of the Fishes of the Monterey Bay Area Including Elkhorn Slough, the San Lorenzo, Pajaro and Salinas Rivers
    f3/oC-4'( Contributions from the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories No. 26 Technical Publication 72-2 CASUC-MLML-TP-72-02 A CHECKLIST OF THE FISHES OF THE MONTEREY BAY AREA INCLUDING ELKHORN SLOUGH, THE SAN LORENZO, PAJARO AND SALINAS RIVERS by Gary E. Kukowski Sea Grant Research Assistant June 1972 LIBRARY Moss L8ndillg ,\:Jrine Laboratories r. O. Box 223 Moss Landing, Calif. 95039 This study was supported by National Sea Grant Program National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration United States Department of Commerce - Grant No. 2-35137 to Moss Landing Marine Laboratories of the California State University at Fresno, Hayward, Sacramento, San Francisco, and San Jose Dr. Robert E. Arnal, Coordinator , ·./ "':., - 'I." ~:. 1"-"'00 ~~ ~~ IAbm>~toriesi Technical Publication 72-2: A GI-lliGKL.TST OF THE FISHES OF TtlE MONTEREY my Jl.REA INCLUDING mmORH SLOUGH, THE SAN LCRENZO, PAY-ARO AND SALINAS RIVERS .. 1&let~: Page 14 - A1estria§.·~iligtro1ophua - Stone cockscomb - r-m Page 17 - J:,iparis'W10pus." Ribbon' snailt'ish - HE , ,~ ~Ei 31 - AlectrlQ~iu.e,ctro1OphUfi- 87-B9 . .', . ': ". .' Page 31 - Ceb1diehtlrrs rlolaCewi - 89 , Page 35 - Liparis t!01:f-.e - 89 .Qhange: Page 11 - FmWulns parvipin¢.rl, add: Probable misidentification Page 20 - .BathopWuBt.lemin&, change to: .Mhgghilu§. llemipg+ Page 54 - Ji\mdJ11ui~~ add: Probable. misidentifioation Page 60 - Item. number 67, authOr should be .Hubbs, Clark TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 AREA OF COVERAGE 1 METHODS OF LITERATURE SEARCH 2 EXPLANATION OF CHECKLIST 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 4 TABLE 1
    [Show full text]
  • California Clapper Rail (Rallus Longirostris Obsoletus) 5-Year Review
    California clapper rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus ) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation Photo by Allen Edwards U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office Sacramento, California April 2013 5-YEAR REVIEW California clapper rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus) I. GENERAL INFORMATION Purpose of 5-Year Reviews: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is required by section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) to conduct a status review of each listed species at least once every 5 years. The purpose of a 5-year review is to evaluate whether or not the species’ status has changed since it was listed (or since the most recent 5-year review). Based on the 5-year review, we recommend whether the species should be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species, be changed in status from endangered to threatened, or be changed in status from threatened to endangered. The California clapper rail was listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Preservation Act in 1970, so was not subject to the current listing processes and, therefore, did not include an analysis of threats to the California clapper rail. In this 5-year review, we will consider listing of this species as endangered or threatened based on the existence of threats attributable to one or more of the five threat factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act, and we must consider these same five factors in any subsequent consideration of reclassification or delisting of this species. We will consider the best available scientific and commercial data on the species, and focus on new information available since the species was listed.
    [Show full text]