DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Resources Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Resources Assessment BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT TRAILS SYSTEM MASTER PLAN AND PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN TOWN OF MAMMOTH LAKES, CALIFORNIA PCR JUNE 2011 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT TRAILS SYSTEM MASTER PLAN AND PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN TOWN OF MAMMOTH LAKES, CALIFORNIA Prepared For: Town of Mammoth Lakes P.O. Box 1609 Mammoth Lakes, California 93546 Contact: Ellen Clark, Senior Planner Prepared By: PCR Services Corporation One Venture, Suite 150 Irvine, California 92618 Contact: Steve Nelson, Director of Biological Services JUNE 2011 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Project Area Location .............................................................................................................................................................. 2 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Trails System Master Plan ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1.1 Paved Multi‐Use Path Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 2 2.1.2 Crossing Improvement Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 2 2.1.3 On‐Street Bikeways Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 2 2.1.4 Soft‐Surface Trails........................................................................................................................................................... 9 2.1.5 Recreational Node Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 10 2.1.6 Soft‐Surface Trails Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 10 2.2 Sherwin Area Recreation Plan .......................................................................................................................................... 10 2.3 Priority Projects ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12 2.4 Parks and Recreation Master Plan .................................................................................................................................. 14 3. METHODS OF STUDY ............................................................................................................................................. 17 3.1 Approach ................................................................................................................................................................................... 17 3.2 Literature Review .................................................................................................................................................................. 17 3.3 Field Investigations ............................................................................................................................................................... 18 3.3.1 Plant Community Mapping....................................................................................................................................... 19 3.3.2 General Plant Inventory ............................................................................................................................................ 19 3.3.3 Sensitive Plant Surveys .............................................................................................................................................. 19 3.3.4 General Wildlife Inventory ....................................................................................................................................... 19 3.3.5 Sensitive Wildlife Species ......................................................................................................................................... 19 3.3.6 Jurisdictional Waters .................................................................................................................................................. 19 3.3.7 Regional Connectivity/Wildlife Movement Corridor Assessment ........................................................... 20 4. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ................................................................................................................................ 20 4.1 Regulatory Framework ........................................................................................................................................................ 20 4.1.1 Migratory Bird Treaty Act ........................................................................................................................................ 20 4.1.2 State of California Fish and Game Code, Section 1602 ................................................................................. 20 4.1.3 Federal Clean Water Act, Section 404 ................................................................................................................. 21 4.1.4 Federal Clean Water Act, Section 401 ................................................................................................................. 21 4.1.5 California Native Plant Society ................................................................................................................................ 22 4.1.6 California’s Endangered Species Act (CESA) ..................................................................................................... 23 4.1.7 Federal Protection and Classifications ................................................................................................................ 23 4.1.8 USDA Forest Service Sensitive Species ............................................................................................................... 24 4.1.9 Inyo National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) .................................................... 24 4.1.10 The Town of Mammoth Lakes Ordinance ....................................................................................................... 26 4.1.11 The Town of Mammoth Lakes General Plan (2007) ................................................................................... 26 4.1.12 The Mono County General Plan ........................................................................................................................... 27 4.1.13 Upper Owens River Watershed Management Plan ..................................................................................... 27 Town of Mammoth Lakes TSMP Project PCR Services Corporation. i Table of Contents June 2011 4.1.14 Special Interest Species ........................................................................................................................................... 28 4.1.15 Protected Bird Species ............................................................................................................................................ 28 4.2 Vegetation and Wildlife ....................................................................................................................................................... 28 4.2.1 Vegetation Communities ............................................................................................................................................ 28 4.2.2 Wildlife ............................................................................................................................................................................. 33 4.2.3 Wildlife Movement ...................................................................................................................................................... 35 4.2.4 Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands ..................................................................................................................... 41 4.2.5 Sensitive Species and Habitats ............................................................................................................................... 41 5. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................................................................................... 80 5.1. Thresholds of Significance................................................................................................................................................. 80 5.2 Methodology/Approach ...................................................................................................................................................... 80 5.3 Impact Analysis ....................................................................................................................................................................... 82 5.3.1 Potential Direct and Indirect Impacts ................................................................................................................. 82 5.3.2 Parks and Recreation Master
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Subalpine Meadows of Mount Rainier • an Elevational Zone Just Below Timberline but Above the Reach of More Or Less Continuous Tree Or Shrub Cover
    Sub-Alpine/Alpine Zones and Flowers of Mt Rainier Lecturer: Cindy Luksus What We Are Going To Cover • Climate, Forest and Plant Communities of Mt Rainier • Common Flowers, Shrubs and Trees in Sub- Alpine and Alpine Zones by Family 1) Figwort Family 2) Saxifrage Family 3) Rose Family 4) Heath Family 5) Special mentions • Suggested Readings and Concluding Statements Climate of Mt Rainier • The location of the Park is on the west side of the Cascade Divide, but because it is so massive it produces its own rain shadow. • Most moisture is dropped on the south and west sides, while the northeast side can be comparatively dry. • Special microclimates result from unique interactions of landforms and weather patterns. • Knowing the amount of snow/rainfall and how the unique microclimates affect the vegetation will give you an idea of what will thrive in the area you visit. Forest and Plant Communities of Mt Rainier • The zones show regular patterns that result in “associations” of certain shrubs and herbs relating to the dominant, climax tree species. • The nature of the understory vegetation is largely determined by the amount of moisture available and the microclimates that exist. Forest Zones of Mt Rainier • Western Hemlock Zone – below 3,000 ft • Silver Fir Zone – between 2,500 and 4,700 ft • Mountain Hemlock Zone – above 4,000 ft Since most of the field trips will start above 4,000 ft we will only discuss plants found in the Mountain Hemlock Zone and above. This zone includes the Sub-Alpine and Alpine Plant communities. Forest and Plant Communities of Mt Rainier Subalpine Meadows of Mount Rainier • An elevational zone just below timberline but above the reach of more or less continuous tree or shrub cover.
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Lehman Caves Management Plan
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Great Basin National Park Lehman Caves Management Plan June 2019 ON THE COVER Photograph of visitors on tour of Lehman Caves NPS Photo ON THIS PAGE Photograph of cave shields, Grand Palace, Lehman Caves NPS Photo Shields in the Grand Palace, Lehman Caves. Lehman Caves Management Plan Great Basin National Park Baker, Nevada June 2019 Approved by: James Woolsey, Superintendent Date Executive Summary The Lehman Caves Management Plan (LCMP) guides management for Lehman Caves, located within Great Basin National Park (GRBA). The primary goal of the Lehman Caves Management Plan is to manage the cave in a manner that will preserve and protect cave resources and processes while allowing for respectful recreation and scientific use. More specifically, the intent of this plan is to manage Lehman Caves to maintain its geological, scenic, educational, cultural, biological, hydrological, paleontological, and recreational resources in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and current guidelines such as the Federal Cave Resource Protection Act and National Park Service Management Policies. Section 1.0 provides an introduction and background to the park and pertinent laws and regulations. Section 2.0 goes into detail of the natural and cultural history of Lehman Caves. This history includes how infrastructure was built up in the cave to allow visitors to enter and tour, as well as visitation numbers from the 1920s to present. Section 3.0 states the management direction and objectives for Lehman Caves. Section 4.0 covers how the Management Plan will meet each of the objectives in Section 3.0.
    [Show full text]
  • Chromosomal Evolution and Apomixis in the Cruciferous Tribe Boechereae
    fpls-11-00514 May 26, 2020 Time: 17:57 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 28 May 2020 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.00514 Chromosomal Evolution and Apomixis in the Cruciferous Tribe Boechereae Terezie Mandáková1, Petra Hloušková1, Michael D. Windham2, Thomas Mitchell-Olds2, Kaylynn Ashby3, Bo Price3, John Carman3 and Martin A. Lysak1* 1 CEITEC, Masaryk University, Brno, Czechia, 2 Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States, 3 Plants, Soils, and Climate Department, Utah State University, Logan, UT, United States The mustard family (Brassicaceae) comprises several dozen monophyletic clades usually ranked as tribes. The tribe Boechereae plays a prominent role in plant research due to the incidence of apomixis and its close relationship to Arabidopsis. This tribe, largely confined to western North America, harbors nine genera and c. 130 species, with >90% of species belonging to the genus Boechera. Hundreds of apomictic diploid and triploid Boechera hybrids have spurred interest in this genus, but the remaining Boechereae genomes remain virtually unstudied. Here we report on comparative Edited by: genome structure of six genera (Borodinia, Cusickiella, Phoenicaulis, Polyctenium, Steven Dodsworth, Nevada, and Sandbergia) and three Boechera species as revealed by comparative University of Bedfordshire, United Kingdom chromosome painting (CCP). All analyzed taxa shared the same seven-chromosome Reviewed by: genome structure. Comparisons with the sister Halimolobeae tribe (n = 8) showed Ana Paula Moraes, that the ancestral Boechereae genome (n = 7) was derived from an older n = 8 Universidade Federal do ABC, Brazil Aretuza Sousa Dos Santos, genome by descending dysploidy followed by the divergence of extant Boechereae Ludwig Maximilian University taxa.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Tahoe Geographic Response Plan
    Lake Tahoe Geographic Response Plan El Dorado and Placer Counties, California and Douglas and Washoe Counties, and Carson City, Nevada September 2007 Prepared by: Lake Tahoe Response Plan Area Committee (LTRPAC) Lake Tahoe Geographic Response Plan September 2007 If this is an Emergency… …Involving a release or threatened release of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or other contaminants impacting public health and/or the environment Most important – Protect yourself and others! Then: 1) Turn to the Immediate Action Guide (Yellow Tab) for initial steps taken in a hazardous material, petroleum product, or other contaminant emergency. First On-Scene (Fire, Law, EMS, Public, etc.) will notify local Dispatch (via 911 or radio) A complete list of Dispatch Centers can be found beginning on page R-2 of this plan Dispatch will make the following Mandatory Notifications California State Warning Center (OES) (800) 852-7550 or (916) 845-8911 Nevada Division of Emergency Management (775) 687-0300 or (775) 687-0400 National Response Center (800) 424-8802 Dispatch will also consider notifying the following Affected or Adjacent Agencies: County Environmental Health Local OES - County Emergency Management Truckee River Water Master (775) 742-9289 Local Drinking Water Agencies 2) After the Mandatory Notifications are made, use Notification (Red Tab) to implement the notification procedures described in the Immediate Action Guide. 3) Use the Lake Tahoe Basin Maps (Green Tab) to pinpoint the location and surrounding geography of the incident site. 4) Use the Lake and River Response Strategies (Blue Tab) to develop a mitigation plan. 5) Review the Supporting Documentation (White Tabs) for additional information needed during the response.
    [Show full text]
  • Fallen Leaf Lake Fishing Report
    Fallen Leaf Lake Fishing Report Thaddeus is inflexibly tinned after cislunar Jimmie craving his plashes motherless. Wry and spermophytic Nelsen still crimps his Waldheim hurryingly. Unextinguishable and calendric Gershom costuming some boa so centrically! Big and baits, peripheral vascular surgery for them up on our boat launch boat and small Desolation Wilderness. Are usually near Fallen Leaf area between Emerald Bay and Echo Lakes. Vertically fishing guide of both the many visitors, how to withstand an eye of commerce, and should know how many coves around fallen leaf lake fishing report covers water. From brown and rainbow to cutthroat and golden, here are the lakes Babbit recommends to get your trout on in the Sierra Nevada backcountry. Rollins Lake is located in Marinette County, Wisconsin. Plus Le Conte and Jabu according to US Forest Service reports Nevertheless fish still populate most of Desolation's lakes including rainbow. Hot spring: The parking around Fallen Leaf score is limited, so somehow there early. Largemouth bass can also be caught in most of the main lake coves as well as in the state park using spinnerbaits, crankbaits, and Senkos. Lake Toho Fishing Reports on well the Lake Toho for it trophy bass and record distance to Orlando, Florida. Basin once consisted of stable small natural lakes, called Medley Lakes. After losing other one, quiet took hold air we spun around atop the eastern flats back towards the poor Island. Adults are allowed to help children fish, but not allowed to fish themselves. The two body in Lake Tahoe does the freeze The stored heat in town Lake's massive amount off water compared to claim relative new area prevents the match from reaching freezing temperature under the prevailing climatic conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Monophyly and Biogeography of Cryptantha (Boraginaceae)
    Systematic Botany (2018), 43(1): pp. 53–76 © Copyright 2018 by the American Society of Plant Taxonomists DOI 10.1600/036364418X696978 Date of publication April 18, 2018 Evaluating the Monophyly and Biogeography of Cryptantha (Boraginaceae) Makenzie E. Mabry1,2 and Michael G. Simpson1 1Department of Biology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California 92182, U. S. A. 2Current address: Division of Biological Sciences and Bond Life Sciences Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211, U. S. A. Authors for correspondence ([email protected]; [email protected]) Abstract—Cryptantha, an herbaceous plant genus of the Boraginaceae, subtribe Amsinckiinae, has an American amphitropical disjunct distri- bution, found in western North America and western South America, but not in the intervening tropics. In a previous study, Cryptantha was found to be polyphyletic and was split into five genera, including a weakly supported, potentially non-monophyletic Cryptantha s. s. In this and subsequent studies of the Amsinckiinae, interrelationships within Cryptantha were generally not strongly supported and sample size was generally low. Here we analyze a greatly increased sampling of Cryptantha taxa using high-throughput, genome skimming data, in which we obtained the complete ribosomal cistron, the nearly complete chloroplast genome, and twenty-three mitochondrial genes. Our analyses have allowed for inference of clades within this complex with strong support. The occurrence of a non-monophyletic Cryptantha is confirmed, with three major clades obtained, termed here the Johnstonella/Albidae clade, the Maritimae clade, and a large Cryptantha core clade, each strongly supported as monophyletic. From these phylogenomic analyses, we assess the classification, character evolution, and phylogeographic history that elucidates the current amphitropical distribution of the group.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plant Inventory of Mount Rainier National Park
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Vascular Plant Inventory of Mount Rainier National Park Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCCN/NRTR—2010/347 ON THE COVER Mount Rainier and meadow courtesy of 2007 Mount Rainier National Park Vegetation Crew Vascular Plant Inventory of Mount Rainier National Park Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCCN/NRTR—2010/347 Regina M. Rochefort North Cascades National Park Service Complex 810 State Route 20 Sedro-Woolley, Washington 98284 June 2010 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics 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 Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of 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. This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Boraginaceae), with an Emphasis on the Popcornflowers (Plagiobothrys)
    Diversification, biogeography, and classification of Amsinckiinae (Boraginaceae), with an emphasis on the popcornflowers (Plagiobothrys) By Christopher Matthew Guilliams A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Integrative Biology in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Bruce G. Baldwin, Chair Professor David Ackerly Professor Brent Mishler Professor Patrick O'Grady Summer 2015 Abstract Diversification, biogeography, and classification of Amsinckiinae (Boraginaceae), with an emphasis on the popcornflowers (Plagiobothrys) by Christopher Matthew Guilliams Doctor of Philosophy in Integrative Biology University of California, Berkeley Professor Bruce G. Baldwin, Chair Amsinckiinae is a diverse and ecologically important subtribe of annual herbaceous or perennial suffrutescent taxa with centers of distribution in western North America and southern South America. Taxa in the subtribe occur in all major ecosystems in California and more broadly in western North America, from the deserts of Baja California in the south where Johnstonella and Pectocarya are common, north to the ephemeral wetland ecosystems of the California Floristic Province where a majority of Plagiobothrys sect. Allocarya taxa occur, and east to the Basin and Range Province of western North America, where Cryptantha sensu stricto (s.s.) and Oreocarya are well represented. The subtribe minimally includes 9 genera: Amsinckia, Cryptantha s.s., Eremocarya, Greeneocharis, Harpagonella, Johnstonella, Oreocarya, Pectocarya, and Plagiobothrys; overall minimum-rank taxonomic diversity in the subtribe is ca. 330-342 taxa, with ca. 245--257 taxa occurring in North America, 86 in South America, and 4 in Australia. Despite their prevalence on the landscape and a history of active botanical research for well over a century, considerable research needs remain in Amsinckiinae, especially in one of the two largest genera, Plagiobothrys.
    [Show full text]
  • NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment
    APPENDIX E Biological Resources Assessment This page intentionally left blank. NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment June 2017 Prepared by Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Watershed Resources Group NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 PURPOSE................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION ................................................................................................. 2 1.3 PROJECT OVERVIEW................................................................................................. 4 1.3.1 NORTH HAIWEE DAM NUMBER 2 ......................................................................... 4 1.3.2 LOS ANGELES AQUEDUCT REALIGNMENT ............................................................ 7 1.3.3 CACTUS FLATS ROAD REALIGNMENT .................................................................. 7 1.4 BORROW SITES ........................................................................................................ 8 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ............................................................................................ 8 2.1 REGIONAL SETTING .................................................................................................. 8 2.2 LOCAL SETTING ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Back Matter 7 (4)
    Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany Volume 7 | Issue 4 Article 9 1972 Back Matter 7 (4) Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso Recommended Citation (1972) "Back Matter 7 (4)," Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany: Vol. 7: Iss. 4, Article 9. Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso/vol7/iss4/9 ALISO VoL. 7, No. 4, pp. 539-556 J ULY 20, 1972 THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT RANcHo SANTA ANA BoTANIC GARDEN 1971 It is a pleasure for me to present an account of the activities at the botanic garden for the year 1971. Except for the effec's of the weather which are given elsewhere in this report, the year was one of steady and sound development. The building program of the previous year had been completed, and early in 1971 landscaping around the annex was finis3ed and the grounds once again were quiet and serene, suitable for study and contemplation by the thousands of persons who visit the garden each year. Among events which undoubtedly will mark this year in the garden's history are two, especially, which should be mentioned. The botanic garden is a member of the American Association of Museums and durinJ; the year we applied for accreditation by that organization. In August we were notified that we had been granted interim approval until an on-site evalu1tion of the institution could be made by the AAM Accredit1tion Visitin~ Commit­ tee. This visit is expected early in 1972. The second item of interest is that the botanic garden for the first time applied for a plant patent to cover a new hybrid which soon will be released to the horticultural trade.
    [Show full text]