Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Fresno County, California
Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) Fresno County, California Cascadel Point 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Township 9 South, Range 23 East, Section 12 Caltrans, District 6 BRLO-5942(214)
July 2015
Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts)
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Fresno County, California Cascade} Point 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Township 9 South, Range 23 East, Section 12 Caltrans, District 6 BRLQ-5942(214)
July 2015
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation Fresno County
Prepared By: ~ - k Date: ~s- Aimee Dour- mith, Senior Environmental Planner (916) 987-3362 Area West Environmental, Inc. 6248 Main Avenue Suite C, Orangevale, CA 95662
Recommended. c:-----,.· For Approval By: Primavera Park (559) 445 - 5502 Southern San Joaquin Management Branch Caltrans District 6 Central Region l3%'Wes Orve Av , P. t Box 12616, Fresno, CA, 93778-2616 r,(J , Date: / ~ . bYilham "Trais" N~fiis, III, Senior Environmentai-::P"::Ila'-+n--'ne=t-...... 4-..J (559) 445 - 6236 Southern San Joaquin Management Branch Caltrans District 6 Central Region 1352 West Olive Avenue, P.O. Box 12616, Fresno, CA, 93778-2616 For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document can be made available in Braille, in large print, on audiocassette, or on computer disk. To obtain a copy in one of these alternate formats, please call or write to Department of Transportation, Attn: Randall Bonds, San Joaquin Valley Management Branch, 855 “M” Street, Ste. 200, Fresno, CA 93721, (559) 445- 6447 (Voice), or use the California Relay Service 1(800) 735-2929 (TTY), 1 (800) 735-2929 (Voice) or 711.
Summary
Summary
S.1 Project Description Summary This Natural Environment Study Minimal Impacts (NES[MI]) report has been prepared for the Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project (Project). The County of Fresno (County), in cooperation with the County of Madera and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), is proposing to replace the existing one-lane, 5-span steel girder and steel truss structure (Bridge No. 42C-0261) over the San Joaquin River/Redinger Lake. The Project’s primary objective is to improve public safety and increase load carrying capacity on the bridge. The existing bridge has reached a structural condition that warrants replacement. Caltrans has given the bridge a structural deficiency rating of 22.9 out of 100, and its single lane width makes it functionally obsolete. S.2 Summary of Results and Project Effects Natural resources were identified through a review of existing information and biological field surveys. The following species and habitats were documented or identified as having the potential to occur in or near the proposed Project work limits and therefore could be affected by the proposed Project.
Natural Communities of Special Concern and Waters of the U.S. and State. The biological study area (BSA) supports two aquatic habitats (open water [Redinger Lake] and ephemeral drainages) that could qualify as waters of the U.S. and state, which would be regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) under Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), respectively, and by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC). Additionally, the BSA supports valley and foothill willow scrub habitat, which may be evaluated as part of a Streambed Alteration Agreement by CDFW under Section 1602 of CFGC.
The proposed Project would result in permanent and temporary impacts on aquatic and upland habitat, as summarized in Table S-1.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) S-1 July 2015 Summary
Table S-1. Summary of Temporary and Permanent Effects by Habitat Type
Habitat Community Permanent Impact (acres) Temporary Impact (acres) Canyon Live Oak Forest 0.056 2.123 Valley and Foothill Willow Scrub 0 0.119 Boulder and Rock Outcrops 0.185 0.553 Open Water (Redinger Lake) 0.056 0.725 Ephemeral Drainage 0 0.008 Ruderal 0.002 0.15 Developed 0.072 0.865 Total 0.371 4.543
Special-status Plant Species. The BSA supports potential habitat for six special-status plants. However, special-status plants were not observed during protocol-level plant surveys conducted on July 23, 2013 and May 5, 2014. Therefore, the proposed Project would not affect special- status plants.
Special-status Fish and Wildlife. The BSA supports potential habitat for the following special- status wildlife and other protected wildlife species.
. Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), a California species of special concern and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Forest Service Sensitive species: Although western pond turtle was not observed within the BSA, Redinger Lake in the BSA provides potential dispersal and nesting habitat for this species.
. Ringtail (Bassariscus astutus), a California fully protected species: Although ringtail were not observed within the BSA, potential foraging and den habitat for ringtail occurs within boulder and outcrop habitat and valley and foothill willow scrub habitat.
. Bat species, including California species of special concern and USFS Forest Service Sensitive species: The BSA supports potential roosting habitat for bats underneath the Italian Bar Road Bridge and in rock outcrops and large trees throughout the BSA. Bat species include five special-status bat species (pallid bat [Antrozous pallidus], Townsend’s big-eared bat [Corynorhinus townsendii], western mastiff bat [Eumops perotis californicus], spotted bat [Euderma maculatum], and fringed myotis [Myotis thysanodes]), as well as more common bat species. In addition to roosting, these species may also use the BSA for foraging, drinking, and as a flight corridor.
. Migratory birds and raptors: Suitable nesting habitat (shrubs) for migratory birds and raptors is present within the BSA. Trees within the BSA are too shrubby to provide suitable nesting habitat for bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden eagles
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) S-2 July 2015 Summary
(Aquila chrysaetos), however suitable trees for nesting are located within the vicinity of the Project and the BSA supports habitat for foraging.
. Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), a USFS Management Indicator Species: Within the BSA, there is potential foraging and dispersal habitat for mule deer.
Implementation of avoidance and minimization measures would ensure that the proposed Project does not adversely affect these sensitive species.
Invasive/Exotic Species. The BSA was surveyed for nonnative invasive plant species listed by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC). Invasive plant species are found within the BSA, but construction of the bridge would not result in new or severe infestations of invasive plant species.
S.3 Permit Requirement Summary Based on the current project description, existing site conditions, and biological resources present in the BSA, this NES (MI) report concludes that the following permits are required for the proposed Project:
. Section 404 Nationwide Permit from the Corps . Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB . CWA Section 402 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit . Streambed Alteration Agreement (Section 1602 of the CFGC) from CDFW S.4 Avoidance/Minimization Measure Summary Based on biological resources identified as having the potential to occur in or adjacent to the BSA and the potential effects resulting from the proposed Project, the following avoidance/minimization measures (abbreviated) have been identified and are further described in this NES (MI) report. The County will implement these measures as part of the proposed Project:
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 1: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 2: Install Temporary Fencing around Environmentally Sensitive Habitat
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 3: Conduct Site Monitoring Visits
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 4: Return Temporarily Disturbed Areas to Pre-Project Conditions
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) S-3 July 2015 Summary
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 5: Implement Water Quality Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 6: Provide Escape Ramps or Cover Open Trenches
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 7: Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Western Pond Turtle
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 8: Conduct Preconstruction Den Surveys for Ringtail and Establish Buffers
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 9: Avoid Disturbance to Bat Roosting Sites
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 10: Conduct a Preconstruction Nesting Migratory Bird and Raptor Survey and Establish Buffers
S.5 Compensatory Mitigation Implementation of avoidance and minimization efforts described in Chapter 4 would ensure that the proposed Project does not adversely affect special-status species or habitats. Therefore, no compensatory mitigation is required.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) S-4 July 2015 Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Summary ...... 1 S.1 Project Description Summary ...... 1 S.2 Summary of Results and Project Effects ...... 1 S.3 Permit Requirement Summary ...... 3 S.4 Avoidance/Minimization Measure Summary ...... 3 Chapter 1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Project Location and Existing Land Use ...... 1 1.2 Project History ...... 4 1.3 Project Purpose and Need ...... 4 1.4 Project Characteristics...... 4 1.4.1. Right of Way ...... 7 1.4.2. Construction Staging ...... 7 1.4.3. Construction Access ...... 8 1.4.4. Construction Schedule and Equipment ...... 8 1.4.5. In-Water Work and Dewatering ...... 10 1.5 Project Work Limits and the Biological Study Area ...... 10 Chapter 2 Study Methods ...... 13 2.1 Regulatory Requirements ...... 13 2.1.1. Special-status Species Protection ...... 13 2.1.2. Regulation of Activities in Waters of the U.S. and State ...... 14 2.1.3. Invasive Species Regulation ...... 16 2.1.4. Floodplain Policies ...... 17 2.1.5. U.S. Forest Service Plans and Policies...... 17 2.1.6. Local Plans and Policies ...... 18 2.2 Studies Required, Literature Search, and Field Reviews ...... 20 2.3 Personnel, Survey Dates, and Methods ...... 21 2.3.1. Botanical Resources ...... 23 2.3.2. Wildlife Resources ...... 23 2.3.3. Bat Surveys ...... 24 2.3.4. Aquatic Resources...... 24 2.4 Agency Coordination and Professional Contacts ...... 25 2.4.1. Caltrans ...... 25 2.4.2. Department of Fish and Wildlife...... 25 2.4.3. National Marine Fisheries Service ...... 25 2.4.4. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ...... 25 2.5 Limitations That May Influence Results ...... 25 Chapter 3 Environmental Setting ...... 27 3.1 Description of the Existing Biological and Physical Conditions ...... 27 3.1.1. Physical Conditions within the Biological Study Area ...... 27 3.1.2. Biological Conditions in the Biological Study Area ...... 33 3.1.3. Common Wildlife Species ...... 40 3.1.4. Habitat Connectivity and Wildlife Migration Corridors ...... 41 3.1.5. Nonnative Invasive Plant Species ...... 41 3.2 Regional Species and Habitats of Concern ...... 43
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) i July 2015 Table of Contents
3.2.1. Special-status Species ...... 43 3.2.2. Special-status Plants ...... 44 3.2.3. Special-status Wildlife ...... 45 Chapter 4 Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation ...... 67 4.1 Natural Communities of Special Concern...... 67 4.1.1. Waters of the U.S. and State ...... 67 4.1.2. Valley and Foothill Willow Scrub ...... 73 4.2 Special-status Plant Species ...... 75 4.3 Special-status Wildlife Species ...... 75 4.3.1. Western Pond Turtle ...... 75 4.3.2. Ringtail ...... 77 4.3.3. Roosting Bats ...... 79 4.3.4. Mule Deer ...... 83 4.3.5. Bald Eagle ...... 85 4.3.6. Golden Eagle ...... 87 4.3.7. Other Protected Migratory Birds and Raptors ...... 89 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Regulatory Determination ...... 91 5.1 Federal Endangered Species Act Consultation Summary ...... 91 5.2 Federal Fisheries and Essential Fish Habitat Consultation Summary...... 91 5.3 California Endangered Species Act Consultation Summary...... 91 5.4 Wetlands and Other Waters Coordination Summary ...... 91 5.5 Invasive Species ...... 92 5.6 Floodplains (Executive Order 11988) ...... 92 Chapter 6 References ...... 93
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) ii July 2015 Table of Contents
Figures, Tables, and Appendices
Figure 1-1. Study Area Vicinity ...... 2 Figure 1-2. Study Area Location ...... 3 Figure 1-3. Proposed Bridge Alignment ...... 6 Figure 1-4. Bridge Profile ...... 6 Figure 1-5. Project Site and Staging Areas ...... 11 Figure 1-6. Biological Study Area for the Bridge Replacement ...... 12 Figure 3-1. Soils within the BSA ...... 29 Figure 3-2. Hydrologic Unit Watershed ...... 31 Figure 3-3. Water Connection from the BSA to the Nearest Traditional Navigable ...... 32 Figure 3-4. Habitats within the BSA for Staging Areas 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 ...... 35 Figure 3-5. Habitats within the BSA (Bridge Site and Staging Areas 3 and 4) ...... 36 Figure 3-6. Delineation of Waters of the U.S. and State for Staging Areas 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 ...... 37 Figure 3-7. Delineation of Waters of the U.S. and State for the Bridge Replacement and Staging Areas 3 and 4 ...... 38 Figure 3-8. CNDDB Occurrences Within 10-miles of the BSA ...... 49 Figure 4-1. Impacts within the BSA for Staging Areas 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7...... 69 Figure 4-2. Temporary and Permanent Impacts (Bridge Replacement and Staging Areas 3 and 4)...... 70
Table 1-1. Proposed Project Bridge Design Details ...... 7 Table 1-2. Proposed Construction Equipment ...... 9 Table 2-1. Biological Surveys Conducted for the Project ...... 22 Table 3-1. Soils within the BSA ...... 28 Table 3-2. Habitat Community Types ...... 33 Table 3-3. Nonnative Invasive Plant Species Identified during Field Surveys ...... 42 Table 3-4. Results of Acoustic Bat Surveys and Visual Encounter Surveys within the BSA, April and May 2015 ...... 46 Table 3-5. Special-status Plant Species with the Potential to Occur in the Vicinity of the Project ...... 51 Table 3-6. Special-status Wildlife with the Potential to Occur in the Vicinity of the Project ...... 57 Table 4-1. Summary of Temporary and Permanent Effects by Habitat Type ...... 67
Appendix A. Biological Technical Memorandum for Modifications to the Italian Bar Road (Road 225) Whiskey Creek Tributary Bridge (No. 41C-0318) Appendix B. Species Lists Appendix C. NRCS Web Soil Survey Appendix D. List of Observed Plants and Wildlife Appendix E. Representative Biological Study Area Photographs Appendix F. WETS Table Appendix G. Wetland Delineation Report Appendix H. Bat Survey Report
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) iii July 2015 Table of Contents
List of Abbreviated Terms
ALP Alternative Licensing Process ADT Average Daily Traffic AWE Area West Environmental, Inc. BMP Best Management Practices BSA Biological Study Area Cal-IPC California Invasive Plant Council Caltrans California Department of Transportation CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CDWR California Department of Water Resources CFGC California Fish and Game Code CESA California Endangered Species Act CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CIDH Cast-in-drilled hole CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNPS California Native Plant Society Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers County County of Fresno CWA Clean Water Act DPS distinct population segment ED Ephemeral Drainage EFH Essential Fish Habitat EPA Environmental Protection Agency FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FESA Federal Endangered Species Act FHWA Federal Highway Administration FEIS Final Envonmental Impact Statement FR Federal Register GPS global positioning system HBP Highway Bridge Program HUC Hydrologic Unit Code K Erosivity factor MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act mph Miles per hour NES (MI) Natural Environment Study Minimal Impacts
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) iv July 2015 Table of Contents
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service OHWM ordinary high water mark PES Preliminary Environmetal Study Project Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project RUSLE Revised Universal Soil Equation RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SCE Southern California Edison SEIS Supplemental Impact Statement SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USGS U.S. Geological Survey USFS U.S. Forest Service USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WPCP Water Pollution Control Plan
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) v July 2015 Table of Contents
Page intentionally blank
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) vi July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 1 Introduction
This Natural Environment Study (NES) Minimal Impacts (MI) report has been prepared for the Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project (Project). The County of Fresno (County) is proposing to replace the existing one-lane, 5-span steel girder and steel truss structure (Bridge No. 42C-0261) over the San Joaquin River/Redinger Lake. The Project’s primary objective is to improve public safety and increase load carrying capacity on the bridge. The federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP) will provide the majority of the funds for this Project. This NES (MI) report generally follows the outline of the November 14, 2014 short-form template found on the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference web site (http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser).
1.1 Project Location and Existing Land Use
The proposed Project is located 55 miles northeast of Fresno, California in Township 9 South, Range 23 East, Section 12 (Figures 1-1 and 1-2). Italian Bar Road Bridge is approximately 10 miles southeast of the unincorporated community of North Fork, California and approximately 16 miles northeast of the unincorporated community of Auberry, California.
Italian Bar Road spans the San Joaquin River and crosses the Madera/Fresno County line within the Sierra National Forest in central California (Figures 1-1 and 1-2). At this location, the San Joaquin River is also known as Redinger Lake, an impoundment created by Southern California Edison (SCE)’s Big Creek Number 4 Hydroelectric Project. The area is largely undeveloped and consists primarily of federal land with scattered private inholdings. At the Project, large rock outcrops and oak woodlands dominate the steep canyon slopes.
Existing land uses in the Project vicinity consist of recreation, power generation, open space, residential, and agricultural uses. Recreational uses at Redinger Lake include camping, picnicking, boating, waterskiing, fishing, and hiking. Lands within the Sierra National Forest in the Project vicinity are managed primarily for recreation and open space uses. Nearby private lands support rural residential homes and grazing lands. SCE manages nearby property to support their hydroelectric facilities.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 1 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
Figure 1-1. Study Area Vicinity
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 2 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
Figure 1-2. Study Area Location
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 3 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
1.2 Project History
The original bridge on Italian Bar Road crossing the San Joaquin River / Redinger Lake was constructed in 1925 as a 3-span structure consisting of a 98-foot steel truss and two 27.5-foot steel girder spans. The steel truss segment was used to span the deep low-flow portion of the river. In 1951, these three spans were relocated approximately 25 feet downstream to form most of the existing 5-span structure present today. In 2008, the bridge was temporarily closed to replace two floor beams in span 4 and all the timber members in span 5. Italian Bar Road within the proposed Project is classified as a rural recreational road and has an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 109.
1.3 Project Purpose and Need
The primary objective of the Project is to replace the structurally deficient structure to improve public safety and increase the load carrying capacity along the route. The existing steel truss is structurally deficient, with a 2013 sufficiency rating of 22.9 out of 100, and the bridge has load carrying capacity restrictions. Because the existing bridge cannot be widened to current standards and has reached the end of its lifespan, a repair or rehabilitation would represent a questionable investment of limited long-term value to the County. Therefore, a replacement is required.
1.4 Project Characteristics
The Project would consist of the following elements:
. construction of a new two-lane approximately 205-foot long two-span bridge; . improvements to approach roads, including excavation of rock and construction of retaining walls; and . removal of the existing bridge after the new bridge is complete.
The proposed replacement bridge is a two-lane bridge located along a new alignment downstream of the existing bridge. The centerline of the proposed bridge is approximately 27 feet northwest of the existing centerline of bridge (Figure 1-3).
The proposed bridge is a 2-span, 205-foot-long structural steel I-girder bridge (Figure 1-4). The long span is approximately 150 feet and the short span is approximately 55 feet. The bridge will have a clear width of 22 feet between inside face of barrier rails. Bridge abutments would be supported by conventional spread footings founded on bedrock, which is estimated to have a high bearing capacity. Footings would penetrate into the granitic rock a depth of about 0.5 foot. At the pier location, a cast-in-drilled hole (CIDH) concrete pile rock-socket will be used to place
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 4 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
the single 60-inch diameter column bent, founded on a larger (84-inch) diameter concrete shaft into bedrock. Table 1-1 provides bridge design details for the proposed Project.
The Sierra National Forest specifies that the bridge clear the 100-year water surface elevation (WSE-100). In addition, SCE has specified that Redinger Lake has a maximum water elevation of 1,400 feet1, which is controlled by the Redinger Dam approximately 3.67 miles downstream of the Project. Since small boating and canoe traffic is possible during high water events, 12 feet of freeboard is preferred to allow for their passage. As a result, the minimum bridge vertical clearance is specified as the maximum of either WSE-100 or 1,400 feet plus 12 feet. By replacing the 5-span existing bridge with a 2-span bridge with higher freeboard, the proposed bridge would provide improved hydraulic function of Redinger Lake/ San Joaquin River and provide more open water and safer conditions for boaters.
The Project will include reconfiguration of the bridge approach roads (Figure 1-3). To accommodate the new bridge structure and meet design standards, the bridge approach roads will be widened for a proposed 2-lane approach road traveled-way width of 18 feet total, including shoulders. Given the mountainous terrain and narrow approach roads, the project design speed is 20 miles per hour (mph). The bridge approach conform extends 200 feet on the north side of the river and 300 feet on the south side of the river.
Large boulders and rock outcrops border Italian Bar Road in this steep river canyon. When evaluating whether to place the new bridge upstream or downstream of the existing location, the volume and complexity of rock excavation was a deciding factor. The rock outcrop on the north upstream side of the bridge is up to 50 feet taller than the outcrop on the south downstream side. As a result, the new bridge is being located on the downstream side to minimize the amount of rock excavation. Nevertheless, to relocate the road on the south side, a large amount of rock (up to 3,000 cubic yards) will still need to be excavated. This granitic rock is relatively massive and it is anticipated that blasting or hydraulic splitting will be required to excavate the road approach slopes and footings. No excavation is required on the north side, but fill material (up to 1,000 cubic yards) may be used to extend the roadway toward the waterway, thereby shortening the required bridge length. Remaining rock and soil materials would become property of the Contractor and hauled off-site and disposed of in a manner consistent with all federal, state, regional and local regulations.
1 The maximum water elevation is consistent with the top of tainter gate elevation provided by Southern California Edison. All elevations are based on North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88)
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 5 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
Figure 1-3. Proposed Bridge Alignment
Figure 1-4. Bridge Profile
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 6 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
Table 1-1. Proposed Project Bridge Design Details Structure Type Structural Steel I-Girder Bridge Spans 150 feet, 55 feet Structure Depth 7 feet 0 inches main span, 4 feet 0 inches approach span Seat type abutments supported on spread footings doweled into bedrock. Cantilever Abutments wingwalls monolithic with abutment seat. Single column bent (60 inch diameter) founded on large diameter (84 inch diameter) Type Bents II CIDH concrete shaft (rock socket) into bedrock. Minimum soffit elevation of 1412 feet, based on high flow WSE plus 12 foot minimum Vertical Clearance vertical clearance for boat traffic Barriers Type 80 barrier with tubular bicycle railing Approaches Structure approach Type EQ (10) Drains To be determined Temp. Range 10ºF to 112ºF Joints Type B joint seal: movement rating (MR) = 2 inches anticipated Utilities To be determined
After the new bridge has been completed, traffic will be routed onto the new bridge and demolition of the existing bridge would occur. There will be a short time period in which traffic handling and staged approach work are required until all traffic is diverted to the new structure. Demolition would include removal of the roadway and bridge deck, as well as bridge foundations. After the old bridge has been removed, the county will work with the USFS to restore the previous roadway areas to a natural vegetated condition.
1.4.1. Right of Way Fresno and Madera Counties operate and maintain Italian Bar Road through a special use permit from the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Sierra National Forest. Fresno County and Madera County will apply for a new or revised special use permit for the revised road and bridge alignment. No permanent right of way acquisition would be needed for the Project. A temporary construction easement would be acquired from the owner of the Chawanakee School for a proposed staging area.
1.4.2. Construction Staging During construction, Italian Bar Road will remain open to vehicular traffic across the existing bridge. Closing the bridge for construction would require a 35-mile detour over the Big Creek #7 104-022 Dam Bridge to the west. Given the mountainous terrain and low speeds of this route, it is anticipated that this detour would take approximately 1.5 hours to complete. To avoid a
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 7 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
lengthy detour, the proposed bridge would be replaced on a new alignment, allowing the existing bridge to remain open during the construction phase. The replacement bridge will be constructed downstream and construction activities will be separated from traffic using temporary concrete railing.
Italian Bar Road within the vicinity of the Project is a narrow rural road with tight turn radii and limited shoulder areas. As a result, much of the staging for construction equipment and materials would occur offsite. Project engineers identified potential staging areas, taking into consideration site constraints such as overhead utility lines, driveway access for private residents, and adequate turn-around length for larger vehicles. The largest proposed staging area is a parking area at the Chawanakee School, approximately 1.6 miles from the bridge site. The school is no longer open but is used periodically by the San Joaquin River Intertribal Heritage Education Corporation as a learning center. The paved school parking area would be used for equipment storage, maintenance, and fueling as well as materials storage. The staging areas closer to the bridge site would provide materials storage and short-term vehicle parking.
1.4.3. Construction Access Italian Bar Road is a narrow, mountainous, rural local road, which results in constraints to site access and delivery of construction materials, equipment, and components. Because site access from the south (Fresno County) includes many sharp turns with small radius curves, it is likely that construction cranes and other large construction equipment would use the northern access approach from through Madera County. In order to transport construction material to the Project site, heavily loaded trucks must cross a bridge over a tributary to Whiskey Creek (Bridge No. 41C-0318), which has posted load limit of 17 tons per vehicle. This small bridge must be improved to safely support the passage of larger vehicles transporting materials to the Italian Bar Road over San Joaqin River/Redinger Lake Bridge Replacement Project. In order to ensure the safe passage of heavy loaded trucks across this timber stringer bridge, Fresno and Madera Counties propose to reinforce the small bridge by installing welded trench plates and temporary timber supports to increase the load capacity of Bridge No. 41C-0318 for the duration of the bridge replacement project. A biological resources technical memorandum addressing the potential impacts to natural resources resulting from the temporary bridge reinforcements at the Whiskey Creek Tributary Bridge (Bridge No. 41C-0318) has been prepared and is provided in Appendix A.
1.4.4. Construction Schedule and Equipment Construction of the bridge and road approaches are anticipated to begin in the fall of 2017 and be completed in early 2020.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 8 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
Bridge foundation and pier construction is proposed for two months in each of two years, but may extend into a third year. SCE owns and operates the downstream Redinger Dam as well as upstream dams. SCE representatives have indicated that in a typical water year there would be no more than a two month expected window of low flows (an approximate water surface elevation of 1,370 feet). Although there is no guarantee of low water elevation in any given year, SCE reports that the lowest flow period at Redinger Lake typically occurs from October to November. All in-water construction and temporary falsework is anticipated during seasonal low flow period (June 1 through November 30). The seasonal low flow period would be considered the maximum construction duration for temporary falsework within the channel.
Equipment that may be required to construct the proposed Project includes, but is not limited to excavators, dozers, cranes, pavers, dump trucks, concrete trucks, concrete pumps, pile driving hammers, and pile driving equipment (Table 1-2).
Table 1-2. Proposed Construction Equipment Equipment Construction Purpose Asphalt Concrete Paver Paving roadways Backhoe Soil manipulation and drainage work Bobcat Fill distribution Bulldozer/Loader Earthwork construction, cleaning and grubbing Crane Placement of bridge precast girders, placing of forms, and rebar Drill Rig Drilling platform mounted on crane to drill and construct rock socket foundation. Air Track Drill/Rock Drilling Drilling equipment to facilitate blasting for rock Equipment excavation for roadway approaches to the bridge. Dump Truck Fill material delivery/surplus removal Excavator Soil manipulation Forklift Materials movement Front –end Loader Dirt or gravel manipulation Generator/Ganset Generate electricity Grader Ground leveling Haul Truck Earthwork construction; clearing and grubbing Paver Roadway paving Roller / Compactor Earthwork construction Rubber-tired loader Earthwork construction Scraper Earthwork construction; clearing and grubbing
Truck with Seed Sprayer Landscaping Water Truck Earthwork construction; clearing and grubbing
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 9 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
1.4.5. In-Water Work and Dewatering The abutments and pier have been located to take advantage of the low flow condition in the lake. As shown on Figure 1-4, both abutments and the bent are above the low flow elevation (1,380 feet), thereby minimizing in-water work. As noted above, all in-water construction and temporary falsework is anticipated during the low flow season. Dewatering and isolation of the work area from lake waters may be necessary if work cannot be completed at the minimum surface elevation. If dewatering is necessary, the contractor must prepare a diversion or isolation plan to dewater the in-lake construction area. As required by state and regional permits and regulations, water produced from dewatering operations would be pumped, treated as necessary, and discharged consistent with the applicable General Waste Discharge Requirements and National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
1.5 Project Work Limits and the Biological Study Area
The Project work limit includes all areas of potential permanent and temporary impacts where ground disturbance will occur, including temporary construction and staging areas for the proposed Project. The biological study area (BSA) includes the Project work limits as well as a 100-foot buffer area around the Project work limits (Figures 1-5 and 1-6). The BSA includes all areas that could potentially be affected by the Project and a buffer to accommodate any changes to Project limits that may occur during Project development and to account for potential indirect effects to sensitive resources.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 10 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
Figure 1-5. Project Site and Staging Areas
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 11 July 2015 Chapter 1 Introduction
Figure 1-6. Biological Study Area for the Bridge Replacement
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 12 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
Chapter 2 Study Methods
This chapter describes the methods used in the preparation of this NES (MI) report and includes a list of resources reviewed, field survey dates and personnel, and limitations encountered during the study that may influence the conclusions reached in this report.
2.1 Regulatory Requirements
This section summarizes the federal and state regulations that protect sensitive biological resources (special-status species; waters of the U.S. and state, including wetlands; and communities of special concern). This section also discusses pertinent USFS, County of Fresno and County of Madera goals, ordinances, and policies relating to the protection and preservation of biological resources.
2.1.1. Special-status Species Protection The following regulations pertain to special-status species or habitats in the BSA.
2.1.1.1. Federal Endangered Species Act Under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce jointly have the authority to list a species as threatened or endangered (16 United States Code [USC] Section 1533[c]). Pursuant to the requirements of the FESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any federally listed threatened or endangered species may be present in the project area and determine whether the project would result in “take” of any such species. In addition, the agency is required to determine whether the project is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed under the FESA or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat proposed to be designated for such species (16 USC Section 1536[3], [4]). Section 7 of the FESA provides a means for authorizing incidental take of federally endangered or threatened species that result from federally conducted, permitted, or funded projects. Similarly, Section 10 authorizes incidental take of federally endangered or threatened species that result from non-federal projects.
2.1.1.2. Migratory Bird Treaty Act The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 USC, Sec. 703, Supp. I, 1989) prohibits killing, possessing, or trading migratory birds except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. This act encompasses whole birds, parts of birds, bird nests, and eggs. The MBTA is administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and special
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 13 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
permits from the agency are generally required for the take of any migratory birds. This act applies to all persons and agencies in the U.S., including federal agencies.
2.1.1.3. California Endangered Species Act Under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has the responsibility for maintaining a list of threatened and endangered species designated under state law (California Fish and Game Code [CFGC] Section 2070). Pursuant to the requirements of CESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any state-listed endangered or threatened species may be present in the project area and determine whether the proposed project would result in take of any such species. Under CESA, “take” is defined as the action of or attempt to “pursue, hunt, shoot, capture, collect, or kill.” The CDFW may authorize the incidental take of a state-listed species under Section 2081 of the CFGC. For species that are listed as threatened or endangered under both the FESA and CESA, and for which an incidental take permit has been issued in accordance with Section 7 or Section 10 of the FESA, CDFW may authorize take after certifying that the federal incidental take permit is consistent with CESA, pursuant to Section 2080.1 of the CFGC.
2.1.1.4. California Fish and Game Code The CFGC provides protection for migratory birds and raptors. Raptors and raptor nests or eggs are protected from take under CFGC Section 3503.5. Migratory birds are expressly prohibited from take under CFGC Section 3513 and species designated by CDFW as fully protected species are protected from take under CFGC Sections 3511 4700, 5050, and 5515.
2.1.2. Regulation of Activities in Waters of the U.S. and State The following federal and state regulations pertain to waters of the U.S., including wetlands, found in the BSA.
2.1.2.1. Federal Regulation The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has primary federal responsibility for administering regulations that concern waters of the U.S., including wetlands and drainages. The Corps acts under two statutory authorities: the Rivers and Harbors Act (Sections 9 and 10), which governs specified activities in “navigable waters of the U.S.,” and the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404, which governs specified activities in waters of the U.S. The Corps requires that a permit be obtained if a project proposes placing structures within, over, or under navigable waters and/or discharging dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), USFWS, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and several other agencies provide comment on Corps permit applications.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 14 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
Executive Order 119900, Protection of Wetlands, was issued to “minimize the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands.” To meet these objectives, Executive Order 11990 requires Federal agencies, in planning their actions, to consider alternatives to wetland sites and limit potential damage if an activity affecting a wetland cannot be avoided. Executive Order 11990 applies to: acquisition, management, and disposition of Federal lands and facilities construction and improvement projects which are undertaken, financed or assisted by Federal agencies; and Federal activities and programs affecting land use, including but not limited to water and related land resources planning, regulation, and licensing activities.
2.1.2.2. State Regulation The State’s authority in regulating activities in waters of the U.S., including wetlands, resides primarily with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). SWRCB, acting through RWQCB, must certify that a Corps permit action meets state water quality objectives under Section 401 of the CWA. RWQCB jurisdiction over waters of the State is extended through the Porter-Cologne Act, which defines waters of the state as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the State (California Water Code Section 13050[e]). In the absence of CWA Section 404 jurisdiction over isolated waters or other waters of the state, California retains authority to regulate discharges of wastes into any waters of the state. The Porter-Cologne Act provides a comprehensive framework to protect water quality in California. It requires any entity that plans to discharge waste where it might adversely affect waters of the state to first notify the RWQCB, which may impose requirements to protect water quality.
Under the California General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (General Permit), SWRCB Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System No. CAS000002, a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP) that will minimize construction and storm water related impacts to waterways must be prepared when a project disturbs 1 acre or more or is part of a larger project. For projects that disturb less than 1 acre, Caltrans requires a preparation of a Water Pollution Control Plan (WPCP) that will minimize construction storm water related impacts.
Under the CFGC Sections 1600–1607, CDFW may develop mitigation measures and enter into Streambed Alteration Agreements with applicants who propose projects that would obstruct the flow of, or alter the bed, channel, or bank of, a river, stream, or lake in which there is a fish or wildlife resource, including seasonal drainages.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 15 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
2.1.3. Invasive Species Regulation Executive Order 13112 directs all federal agencies to prevent and control introductions of invasive species in a cost-effective and environmentally sound manner. Executive Order 13112 established a national Invasive Species Council made up of federal agencies and departments and a supporting Invasive Species Advisory Committee composed of state, local, and private entities. The Invasive Species Council and Advisory Committee oversee and facilitate implementation of the Executive Order, including preparation of a National Invasive Species Management Plan. The Management Plan recommends objectives and measures to implement the Executive Order and to prevent the introduction and spread of invasive species. The Executive Order and directives from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) require consideration of invasive species in NEPA analyses, including the identification and distribution of species, their potential impacts, and measures to prevent or eradicate them.
The USFS Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5), which the Sierra National Forest falls under, has its own Noxious Weed Management Strategy (USFS 2000). The primary goals of the Region’s noxious weed strategy are to:
1. Increase the understanding and awareness of noxious weeds and the adverse effects they have on wildland ecosystems.
2. Develop and promote implementation of a consistent integrated pest management approach.
3. Institutionalize consideration of noxious weeds in all planning and project analyses.
4. Develop strong partnerships and cooperation with private landowners, county governments, state and federal agencies, extension service, universities, and the research community for a consolidated and united approach to managing invasive species.
The Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Environmental Impact Statement summarizes management standards and guidelines for national forests in the Sierra Nevada and Modoc Plateau (USFS 2001). The plan’s goals for noxious weeds include the following:
1. Work cooperatively with state and local agencies to prevent the introduction and establishment of noxious weed infestations and to control existing infestations;
2. Conduct noxious weed risk assessments as part of project planning to determine whether project activities have low, moderate, or high risk for weed spread;
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 16 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
3. Off-road equipment and vehicles used to implement Forest Service projects will be required to be weed free;
4. The use of weed free hay and straw will be encouraged; and
5. Weed prevention measures will be prescribed when permits for livestock grazing, special uses, pack stock operators, and other uses are amended or reissued.
2.1.4. Floodplain Policies Executive Order 11988 is a flood hazard policy for all federal agencies that manage federal lands, sponsor federal projects, or provide federal funds to state or local projects. It requires that all federal agencies take necessary action to reduce the risk of flood loss; restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by floodplains; and minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health, and welfare. Specifically, Executive Order 11988 dictates that all federal agencies avoid construction or management practice that would adversely affect floodplains unless that agency finds that there is no practical alternative and the proposed action has been designed or modified to minimize harm to or within the floodplain.
2.1.5. U.S. Forest Service Plans and Policies The Sierra National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (USFS 1991, as amended 2004) directs management activities within the Sierra National Forest. The plan prescribes management standards and guidelines for the use and protection of forest resources. The plan includes management goals for sensitive species and ecosystems.
Under the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), the USFS is directed to “provide for diversity of plant and animal communities based on the suitability and capability of the specific land area in order to meet overall multiple-use objectives.” (Public Law 94-588, Sec 6 (g) (3) (B)). The regulations implementing the NFMA require that “Fish and wildlife habitat shall be managed to maintain viable populations of existing native and desired non-native vertebrate species in the planning area.” (36 CFR 219.19) USFS Region 5 maintains lists of Forest Sensitive Species and Management Indicator Species for the Sierra National Forest. Forest Sensitive Species are defined as “those plant and animal species identified by the Regional Forester for which population viability is a concern, as evidenced by a) significant current or predicted downward trends in population numbers or density and b) significant current or predicted downward trends in habitat capability that would reduce a species’ existing distribution” (Forest Service Manual section 2670.5). Management Indicator Species are used to serve as a barometer for species viability at the forest level and to assess the effects of management activities on various habitats and habitat assemblages with which the indicator
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 17 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
species is associated. This NES (MI) evaluated project effects on plant and animal species from the Region 5 Regional Forester’s 2013 Forest Sensitive Species and Management Indicator Species lists for the Sierra National Forest.
2.1.6. Local Plans and Policies The following local planning documents contain plans and policies applicable to biological resources in the BSA.
2.1.6.1. Fresno County General Plan The Fresno County General Plan (Fresno County 2000) establishes goals and policies relevant to biological resources in the vicinity of the proposed Project. The Open Space and Conservation Element is concerned with protecting and preserving natural resources, preserving open space areas, managing the production of commodity resources, protecting and enhancing cultural resources, and providing recreational opportunities. Some of the natural resource goals included in the County’s Open Space and Conservation Element area listed below.
. Goal OS-A. To protect and enhance the water quality and quantity in Fresno County’s streams, creeks, and groundwater basins.
. Goal OS-B. To maintain healthy, sustainable forests in Fresno County, conserve forest resources, enhance the quality and diversity of forest ecosystems, reduce conflicts between forestry and other uses, encourage a sustained yield of forest products, protect and conserve lands identified as suitable for commercial timber production within the county, and conserve forest lands that have other resource values including recreation, grazing, watershed, and wildlife habitats.
. Goal OS-D. To conserve the function and values of wetland communities and related riparian areas throughout Fresno County while allowing compatible uses where appropriate. Protection of these resource functions will positively affect aesthetics, water quality, floodplain management, ecological function, and recreation/tourism.
. Goal OS-E. To help protect, restore, and enhance habitats in Fresno County that support fish and wildlife species so that populations are maintained at viable levels.
. Goal OS-F. To preserve and protect the valuable vegetation resources of Fresno County.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 18 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
2.1.6.2. Fresno County Oak Woodland Management Guidelines The Fresno County Oak Woodland Management Guidelines (Fresno County 1998) provide guidance for building within oak woodlands. These voluntary guidelines direct applicants to include the following considerations when working within oak woodlands.
. Develop an Oak Woodland Management Plan to retain existing oaks, preserve agriculture, retain wildlife corridors, and enhance soil and water conservation practices.
. Avoid tree root compaction during construction by limiting heavy equipment in root zones.
. Carefully plan roads, cuts and fills, building foundations, and septic systems to avoid damage to tree roots.
. Design roads and consolidate utility services to minimize erosion and sedimentation to downstream sources. Also, consider reseeding any disturbed ground.
. Avoid landscaping which requires irrigation within ten (10) feet of the trunk of an existing oak tree to prevent root rot.
. Consider replacing trees whose removal during construction was avoidable.
. Use fire-inhibiting and drought-tolerant and oak-compatible landscaping wherever possible.
2.1.6.3. Madera County General Plan The Madera County General Plan (1995) provides an overall framework for development of the county and protection of its natural and cultural resources. The goals and policies contained in the Policy Document are applicable throughout Madera County. Some of the natural resource goals from the Madera County General Plan are listed below:
. Goal 5.B: To conserve Madera County’s forest resources, enhance the quality and diversity of forest ecosystems, reduce conflicts between forestry and other uses, and encourage a sustained yield of forest products
. Goal 5.C: To protect and enhance the natural qualities of Madera County’s streams, creeks, and groundwater.
. Goal 5.D: To protect wetland communities and related riparian areas throughout Madera County as valuable resources.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 19 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
. Goal 5.E: To protect, restore, and enhance habitats that support fish and wildlife species so as to maintain populations at viable levels.
. Goal 5.F: To preserve and protect the valuable vegetation resources of Madera County.
2.2 Studies Required, Literature Search, and Field Reviews
Prior to conducting field surveys, available information regarding biological resources on or near the BSA was gathered and reviewed, including information on special-status plant and wildlife species with the potential to occur in the vicinity of the BSA. Several data sources were reviewed, including:
. a records search of CDFW's California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) for species within 10 miles of the Cascadel Point 7.5 minute U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangles (CNDDB 2015) (Appendix B);
. an official list of federally listed threatened and endangered species that may occur within the proposed Project vicinity and/or may be affected by the proposed Project from the USFWS (USFWS 2015) (Appendix B);
. a search of the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants Database for the Cascadel Point and eight surrounding USGS topographic quadrangles (CNPS 2015) (Appendix B);
. California Invasive Plant Council's (Cal-IPC's) California Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal- IPC 2015);
. USFS Region 5 Regional Forester’s 2013 Sensitive Plant and Animal Species Lists (USFS 2015);
. Sierra Nevada Forests Management Indicator Species Amendment;
. soils information from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2015) (Appendix C);
. EPA’s Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) data for California watershed boundaries (U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA] 2015);
. SCE’s Big Creek 4 and Big Creek Alternative Licensing Process (ALP) Projects’ Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Applications and related studies and reports; and
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 20 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
. conversations with knowledgeable individuals.
Lists of special-status plant and wildlife species with the potential to occur in the vicinity of the proposed Project were developed based on the review of existing information, as identified above. These lists were used to focus the investigation on the special-status species and associated habitats with the potential to be present within the BSA.
Following a review of resources known to occur in the proposed Project region it was determined that field surveys were required to assess the BSA for sensitive biological resources, including a botanical survey, a wildlife habitat assessment, and a delineation of wetlands and other waters of the U.S. and state.
2.3 Personnel, Survey Dates, and Methods
Within the BSA shown on Figures 1-5 and 1-6, biologists from Area West Environmental, Inc. (AWE), Touré Associates, and The Wildlife Project completed the following surveys:
. Vegetation community mapping; . Botanical surveys; . Wildlife surveys; . Delineation of waters of the U.S. and state; . Special-status species habitat assessments; . Nesting bird surveys; and . Bat survey and acoustic monitoring.
AWE biologist conducted an initial reconnaissance-level site visit of the BSA on July 23, 2013 to identify constraints of the proposed Project and to determine the type of surveys and level of effort that would be required to analyze potential Project impacts to biological resources. Focused biological field surveys were conducted between April and July, 2014 by Touré Associates and AWE biologists. Bat surveys were completed by The Wildlife Project in April and May 2015. All vegetation and habitat types within the BSA were noted, mapped, and evaluated. Table 2-1 below lists survey dates, personnel, and qualifications. Methods involved with documenting botanical, wildlife, and aquatic resources are described below.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 21 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
Table 2-1. Biological Surveys Conducted for the Project
Survey Personnel Type of Survey Dates Name, Education, and Years Experience Caltrans field review, field July 23, Dustin Brown, AWE Biologist; B.S., Biological Sciences; 10 reconnaissance survey, botanical 2013 years survey April 29, Wetland delineation, Wildlife T’Shaka Touré, Toure Associates Biologist; 2014 surveys May 4, 2014 Wildlife surveys T’Shaka Touré, Toure Associates Biologist; Dustin Brown, AWE Biologist; B.S., Biological Sciences; 10 Botanical survey, habitat May 5, 2014 years assessment Mary Bailey, AWE Botanist; B.S., Biology; 25 years May 17, Wildlife surveys, bat emergence T’Shaka Touré, Toure Associates Biologist; 2014 surveys, and nocturnal surveys V. Williams, Toure Associates Biologist; May 23, Wildlife surveys G. Adest, Toure Associates Biologist; 2014 Bobby Kamansky, Toure Associates Biologist; V. Williams, Toure Associates Biologist; Wildlife surveys, bat emergence June 2, 2014 G. Adest, Toure Associates Biologist; surveys, nocturnal surveys Bobby Kamansky, Toure Associates Biologist; Bat emergence surveys and June 4, 2014 Scott Cashen, Toure Associates Biologist nocturnal surveys June 5, 2014 Wildlife surveys Scott Cashen, Toure Associates Biologist June 20, Bat emergence surveys and T’Shaka Touré, Toure Associates Biologist 2014 nocturnal surveys June 25, Wildlife surveys T’Shaka Touré, Toure Associates Biologist 2014 July 16 and Bat emergence survey and T’Shaka Touré, Toure Associates Biologist 17, 2014 nocturnal survey Scott Cashen, Toure Associates Biologist Dustin Brown, AWE Biologist; B.S., Biological Sciences; 10 December Wetland Delineation years 18, 2014 Wildlife survey Jeff Alvarez, The Wildlife Project Ecologist; B.S. Wildlife; 25 years April 17 to Jeff Alvarez, The Wildlife Project Ecologist; B.S. Wildlife; 25 Acoustic Bat Surveys May 3, 2015 years
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 22 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
The purpose of the biological field surveys was to: . characterize biological communities and their associated wildlife uses; . document common and special-status plant and wildlife species; . identify potentially jurisdictional waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that could be subject to state and federal regulations; . document use by bats; and . map noxious weed infestations.
2.3.1. Botanical Resources All plant species encountered during field surveys were identified to the level necessary to determine if they met the definition of special-status species. Personnel identified plants using identification keys in the Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California (Second Edition) (Baldwin 2012) and recorded in field notes. Appendix D includes lists of plant and wildlife species observed during the field surveys.
2.3.2. Wildlife Resources From April to July of 2014, Touré Associates wildlife biologists conducted general wildlife surveys within the BSA. The surveys focused on identifying and evaluating biological communities in and adjacent to the BSA and determining their suitability for common and special-status wildlife species.
Diurnal and nocturnal surveys were conducted within the Project and surrounding vicinity. The surveys techniques consisted of patch sampling, visual encounters survey, linear transects, frog call surveys, bat emergence surveys, nesting bird surveys, and remote sensor cameras. The BSA was surveyed on foot with the aid of binoculars, spotting scopes, global position system (GPS) units, digital camera, two remote sensor cameras, and field notebooks. Biologists walked at a slow pace carefully around suitable habitat and along the bank of the lake in order to detect the presence/absence of wildlife and plant species. Areas with vegetation coverage, potential wildlife refuge, tree canopy, cliff ledge, boulder peaks, and observable wildlife signs (i.e., white wash, scat, pellets, nests, burrows, prey items, etc.) were investigated. Visual surveys of undeveloped habitats adjacent to the BSA (where access was not obtained) were also conducted using binoculars to identify sensitive resources (i.e., raptor nests) that could be affected by the proposed Project. A list of all wildlife species observed during the field surveys is included in Appendix D.
Nesting bird surveys occurred during the breeding season (February through August). Areas that exhibited vegetative coverage for ground dwelling birds, tree canopy, cliff ledges, boulder peaks,
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 23 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
and burrows were investigated. Bird detection was also recorded by the identification of bird calls heard onsite.
2.3.3. Bat Surveys Touré Associates conducted visual encounter and preliminary bat emergence surveys during nocturnal hours in May, June, and July 2014. Locations for observing bat emergence, flight activity, and potential roosting locations took place from above and beneath the bridge structure, along rock-outcrop locations within upland habitat located upslope of the bridge structure, and sandy cove in the northwestern section of the Project. Nocturnal surveys were completed during the dusk, night, and pre-dawn periods of the day. Observations for bat activity began 30-minutes prior to sunset and continued throughout the evening hours. Locations where bat activity was observed were recorded and mapped.
The Wildlife Project conducted acoustic bat monitoring to determine whether bats were present, and/or are using the site for roosting, foraging, drinking, and/or for maternity roosts. Bat detectors (Wildlife Acoustics SM2+ and SM3 units) were deployed on April 17, 2015 and allowed to collect data for 16 consecutive days. Units were attached to the bridge—which included a cable and microphone that was hanging from the center of the bridge over the water— and deployed within the adjacent bedrock outcroppings (northeast and southwest sides of the bridge) to determine if the adjacent outcroppings were used for foraging and roosting. Units were programmed to start recording one hour before sunset and would continue recording for four hours, then were allowed to record for 30 minutes, rest 30 minutes, and so on until one hour after sunrise. On May 3, 2015 the units were collected from the site and the data were analyzed using a combination of the auto analysis feature on the Kaleidoscope software (version 3.0.1; Wildlife Acoustics), and the manual feature that allows a bat biologist to override the conclusions of the software in favor of professional judgment.
2.3.4. Aquatic Resources Fieldwork for a delineation of waters of the U.S. and state, including wetlands, was conducted by Touré Associates regulatory specialist T’Shaka Touré on April 29, 2014 and by Dustin Brown from AWE on December 18, 2014 using the routine on-site determination methods described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Corps 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0) (Corps 2008). The 1987 Manual and 2008 Supplement provide technical guidelines and methods for a three-parameter approach for determining the location and boundaries of jurisdictional wetlands. This approach requires that an area support positive indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology to be considered a jurisdictional
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 24 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
wetland. Routine wetland determination data forms were completed for two sample points. Other waters of the U.S. were mapped and delineated in the field in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-05 Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) Identification (Corps 2005). The channels, streams, and wetlands (features) were later digitized onto an aerial photograph with a topographic overlay into ESRI’s ArcGIS (Geographic Information System) program. Geographical coordinates (Latitude/Longitude) for each labeled feature was recorded on Wetland Determination Data Forms (Arid Wet Region, Version 2). Coordinates (Latitude/Longitude) are given for the mid-point of each feature.
2.4 Agency Coordination and Professional Contacts
The following agency coordination has been conducted for the proposed Project.
2.4.1. Caltrans A Caltrans site visit to review the Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) form was conducted on July 23, 2013. This site visit was attended by Dustin Brown from AWE and representatives from Caltrans, Fresno County, Madera County, Quincy Engineering, and Far Western.
2.4.2. Department of Fish and Wildlife Carrie Swanberg was contacted in June 2015 by an AWE biologist to discuss the Project and bat mitigation measures. Ms. Swanberg concurred with the approach of excluding bats from work areas before roosting season begins.
2.4.3. National Marine Fisheries Service When the Official Species list from the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Service was received (Appendix B), the Northern California distinct population segment (DPS) of steelhead was listed. The San Joaquin River system supports the Central Valley population of steelhead in downstream areas. AWE contacted the Sacramento NMFS office to determine which population of steelhead should be included on the Fish and Wildlife Service list for the Project vicinity. Steelhead specialist David Swank at the Sacramento NMFS office confirmed that steelhead within Fresno and Madera counties fall within the Central Valley DPS.
2.4.4. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service There has been no communication with the USFWS regarding the Project.
2.5 Limitations That May Influence Results
There were no limitations during surveys that may influence results.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 25 July 2015 Chapter 2 Study Methods
Page intentionally blank
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 26 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Chapter 3 Environmental Setting
3.1 Description of the Existing Biological and Physical Conditions
This Section provides a description of existing physical and biological conditions within the BSA. During field surveys, representative photographs were taken of the BSA; the photographs and a map showing the location and orientation of the photographs are provided in Appendix E.
3.1.1. Physical Conditions within the Biological Study Area Italian Bar Road traverses a thinly vegetated rural setting and is used primarily by SCE employees and recreational users of Redinger Lake. The BSA primarily consists of paved roadway and disturbed right-of-way and is sparsely vegetated with shrubs and oaks. ADT is reported as 109 vehicles per day.
The BSA is located at an elevation of approximately 1,400 feet above mean sea level (msl). Within the BSA, there are steep hillslopes, narrow valley bottoms, limited soil development, and sediment deposition. The onsite drainage features flow into Redinger Lake.
Redinger Lake is a run-of-the-river reservoir that was constructed by SCE in 1951 on the South Fork of the San Joaquin River above Kerckhoff Reservoir. The reservoir is approximately five river miles in length and varies in width from approximately 150 feet at the Italian Bar Bridge to 2,000 feet at its widest point. Redinger Lake, formed by Big Creek Dam No. 7, is part of the Big Creek hydroelectric project, which includes a system of lakes, tunnels, steel penstocks, and powerhouses that use water to generate electricity. Camping at Redinger Lake is restricted to a large open area near the dam (USDA 2014). Boating, water skiing, fishing, and paddling are popular activities on the lake. A boat-launching ramp is available to the public (GORP 2010). Redinger Lake has a normal water surface of 465 acres at an elevation of 1,403 feet, and a maximum capacity of 29,119 acre-feet (SCE 2009).
3.1.1.1. Soils Soils within and surrounding the BSA are mapped as Ahwahnee family, 35 to 65 percent slopes and Auberry-Ahwahnee families association, 5 to 35 percent slopes (Figure 3-1). A copy of the NRCS web soil survey (NRCS 2015) is provided in Appendix C.
The Ahwahnee series consists of moderately deep, well drained soils formed in material weathered from granitic rocks. These soils are foot slopes and mountains. Slope is 2 to 75 percent. The mean annual precipitation is about 30 inches and mean annual temperature is about 60 ºF. The representative profile for this soil is on a slope of 12 percent under annual grasses and occasional blue oak, at an elevation of 1,260 feet. The Ahwahnee family has 35 to 65 percent
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 27 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
slopes. The soil between 0 to 17 inches is slightly acid with coarse sandy loam, 17 to 29 inches is slightly acid with sandy loam, and 29 to 60 inches is weathered bedrock. Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water is low to moderately low (0.01 to 0.14 inch/hour). The depth to paralithic bedrock is 29 to 33 inches and depth to the water table is more than 80 inches. The soil is medium acid or slightly acid throughout. (NRCS 1998a)
The Auberry series consists of deep, well drained soils that formed in material weathered from intrusive, acid igneous rocks. Auberry soils are on foothills and mountainous uplands at elevations of 400 to 3,500 feet, and have slopes of 5 to 75 percent. The mean annual precipitation is about 22 inches and the mean annual air temperature is about 62 ºF. Vegetation is woodland grass, annual grasses and forbes, and brush. (NRCS 1998b)
The erosion potential of these soils can be classified as moderate to high. As noted in Table 3-1, drainage in the Ahwahnee soil is rapid. The Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) erosivity factor (K) was determined to be 0.20, where the range is 0.02-0.69, with higher values equating to increased erosion potential (NRCS 2015). Erosional features along Italian Bar Road are visible in several locations (Photographs 2 and 3).
Table 3-1. Soils within the BSA Soil Map Depth to Hydric or Unit Symbol Parent Restrictive Drainage Soil Profile Hydric and Material Layer Class Inclusion Name (inches) 102 Residuum 0 to 17 inches: coarse sandy loam 29 to 33 inches Well No weathered to paralithic drained Ahwahnee 17 to 29 inches: sandy loam family, 35 to 65 from bedrock percent slopes granodiorite 29 to 60 inches: Weathered bedrock 62 to 79 inches: N/A 107 Residuum 0 to 17 inches: Coarse sandy loam 62 to 66 inches Well No weathered to paralithic drained Auberry- 17 to 29 inches: Clay loam Ahwahnee from bedrock families granodiorite 29 to 60 inches: Coarse sandy loam association, 5 to 62 to 79 inches: Weathered bedrock 35 percent slopes Source:NRCS 2015
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 28 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Figure 3-1. Soils within the BSA
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 29 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
3.1.1.2. Climate Climate within the Project vicinity is characterized by hot dry summers and cold wet winters. The hottest month of the year is July with temperatures ranging from 61.5 ºF to 83.5 ºF to and the coldest month of the year is January with temperatures ranging from 32.0 ºF to 48.7 ºF. The average total precipitation is 30.5 inches. (Western Regional Climate Center 2015)
A copy of the NRCS field office climate data (i.e., “WETS” table) is provided in Appendix F.
3.1.1.3. Local and Regional Hydrology The proposed Project is located in the Upper San Joaquin River Watershed (Figure 3-2) (HUC 1804000610), which drains a 1,600-square mile area between the Sierra Nevada crest to the east and the Central Valley foothills to the west. The San Joaquin River Watershed is bordered by the Merced River Watershed to the north and the Kings River Watershed to the south. The San Joaquin River headwaters are in the John Muir Wilderness at elevations greater than 14,000 feet msl, and the river flows in a general southwesterly direction through the Sierra Nevada and foothills to the Central Valley region. Precipitation occurs mostly during the late fall, winter and early spring and is mostly in the form of snow above elevation 5,000 feet msl. Average yearly precipitation varies greatly with elevation with about 50 inches at 5,000 feet msl. Stream flow normally peaks during the late spring and/or early summer from snowmelt runoff.
Low flows within this watershed typically occur in late summer or early fall, after the snowmelt and before the runoff from the fall storms moving in from the Pacific Ocean. (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [FERC] 2009)
The San Joaquin River is the second longest river in California measuring approximately 300 miles. The San Joaquin River’s tributaries include the Stanislaus River, Tuolumne River, Merced River, Calaveras River, and Mokelumne River (California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region 1998).
Redinger Lake collects water from a drainage area of approximately 1,292 square miles and has a normal water surface area of 465 acres and a maximum capacity of 35,000 acre-feet (Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 2011). Downstream of Redinger Lake, the San Joaquin River flows to Kerckhoff Reservoir with 4,140 acre-feet of storage operated by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Millerton Lake, operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, has more than 500,000 acre-feet of storage and is located downstream of Kerckhoff Reservoir (FERC 2009). The nearest navigable waterway is the San Joaquin River 7 miles south of Highway 99 (Figure 3-3) (Corps 2015).
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 30 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Figure 3-2. Hydrologic Unit Watershed
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 31 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Figure 3-3. Water Connection from the BSA to the Nearest Traditional Navigable
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 32 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
3.1.1.1. Groundwater Hydrology The proposed Project is located within the San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region (HR) groundwater basin number 5-22 (California Department of Water Resources [CDWR] 2003). The San Joaquin River HR covers approximately 9.7 million acres (15,200 square miles) and includes all of Calaveras, Tuolumne, Mariposa, Madera, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus counties, most of Merced and Amador counties, and parts of Alpine, Fresno, Alameda, Contra Costa, Sacramento, El Dorado, and San Benito counties. Significant geographic features include the northern half of the San Joaquin Valley, the southern portion of the Delta, the Sierra Nevada Mountains, and Diablo Range (CDWR 2003). The Project is located within the Sierra Nevada foothill portion of the HR. This unit is not an important source of groundwater but may locally yield sufficient supplies for domestic and agricultural use. The Project is also located within the Fresno County designated Sole-Source Aquifer. However, the BSA does not contain wells or sewage facilities and the Project does not have the potential for aquifer contamination.
3.1.2. Biological Conditions in the Biological Study Area The BSA supports seven generalized vegetation community types consisting of two aquatic habitats (Redinger Lake [open water] and ephemeral drainage) and five upland habitats (canyon live oak forest, valley and foothill willow scrub, boulder and rock outcrops, ruderal, and developed) (Figures 3-4 and 3-5). A description of these community types, including dominant plant species, follows. Figures 3-4 and 3-5 show generalized habitat types in the BSA. Figures 3-6 and 3-7 provide a delineation of potential waters of the U.S. and state, including wetlands, within the Project work limits. The wetland delineation report is provided in Appendix G. Acreage of habitat types within the Project work limits is provided in Table 3-2. Representative photographs of these community types are provided in Appendix E.
Table 3-2. Habitat Community Types Acres within the Project Habitat Community Acres within the BSA Work Limits Canyon Live Oak Forest 10.172 3.143 Valley and Foothill Willow Scrub 0.223 0.177 Boulder and Rock Outcrops 0.922 0.799 Redinger Lake (Open Water) 4.045 1.033 Ephemeral Drainage 0.032 0.012 Ruderal 0.206 0.154 Developed 2.164 0.937 Total 17.764 6.255
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 33 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
3.1.2.1. Canyon Live Oak Forest Canyon live oak forest is a broad-leaved evergreen forest found below 6,000 feet msl. This habitat, dominated by canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis), is typically found in canyons or on north facing slopes. The canopy is often dense and little understory is present. When present, the shrub understory may include buckbrush (Ceanothus cuneatus var. cuneatus), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), and California yerba santa (Eriodictylon californicum).
Canyon live oak forest dominates the landscape in the BSA. Within the BSA, canopy coverage in this community varies from fairly dense to sparse, particularly on the rocky steep slopes of the southeast portion of the site. The occasional foothill pine (Pinus sabiniana) serves to create a two-tier component of the tree layer, rising above the more prevalent canyon live oak. California buckeye occurs throughout. The shrub understory is sparse, with California yerba santa, buckbrush, gaping keckiella (Keckiella breviflora var. breviflora), and silver bush lupine (Lupinus albifrons var. albifrons). The herbaceous layer includes various grasses, such as cheat grass (Bromus tectorum), hare barley (Hordeum murinum subsp. leporinum) and slender oat (Avena barbata), as well as forbs such as white nemophila (Nemophila heterophylla), frying pan poppy (Eschscholzia lobbii), rose clover (Trifolium hirtum), chia sage (Salvia columbariae), imbricate phacelia (Phacelia imbricate var. imbricata), common fiddleneck (Amsinckia intermedia), and others. Four ferns occur within this habitat, California polypody (Polypodium californicum), coffee fern (Pellaea andromedifolia), bird’s-foot fern (Pellaea mucronata), and gold back fern (Pentagramma triangularis subsp. triangularis).
Wildlife species or their sign observed within this community include mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), barn owl (Tyto alba), western screech-owl (Megascops kennicottii), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), canyon wren (Catherpes mexicanus), and oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus).
3.1.2.2. Valley and Foothill Willow Scrub Within the BSA, this habitat occurs within a narrow margin along the southern bank of Redinger Lake east of the bridge. Valley and foothill scrub habitat is not contiguous along Redinger Lake. Scattered pockets of riparian vegetation can be found in the Project vicinity along the upper banks, above the scour line. Dominant plant species that occur within this vegetation community include Goodding’s black willow (Salix gooddingii), white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), California brickellia (Brickellia californica), Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius), deer grass (Muhlenbergia rigens), and mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana).
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 34 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Figure 3-4. Habitats within the BSA for Staging Areas 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 35 July 2015
Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Figure 3-5. Habitats within the BSA (Bridge Site and Staging Areas 3 and 4)
Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 36 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Figure 3-6. Delineation of Waters of the U.S. and State for Staging Areas 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 37 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Figure 3-7. Delineation of Waters of the U.S. and State for the Bridge Replacement and Staging Areas 3 and 4
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 38 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Wildlife species or their sign observed within this community include common raven (Corvus corax), belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon), northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), California quail (Callipepla californica), common merganser (Mergus merganser), bobcat (Lynx rufous), gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer), western fence lizard (Sceloperous occidentalis), western toad (Anaxyrus boreas), side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), and alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata).
3.1.2.3. Boulder and Rock Outcrops The boulder and rock-outcrops primarily occur along the northeast and southwestern sections of the BSA. This habitat type primarily consisted of bedrock with sparse and scattered vegetation from the canyon live oak forest habitat.
Wildlife species or their sign observed within this habitat included western toad, side-blotched lizard, western fence lizard, bobcat, white-throated swift (Aeronautes saxatalis), and bats.
3.1.2.4. Open Water (Redinger Lake) Within the BSA, Redinger Lake (an impounded portion of the San Joaquin River) provides an open water habitat characterized by a deep-water channel and substrate consisting mostly of granitic boulders and bedrock with sand and silt filling the interstitial spaces. The margins of the lake are very narrow and at low water levels, many large boulders and bedrock are exposed. For the purpose of this report, open water includes all areas below the OHWM for Redinger Lake.
Wildlife species observed within the open water areas included rainbow trout (Oncorhychus mykiss), shiners (Notropis sp.), crawfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus), bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus), and western toad within the lake cove and along the bank.
3.1.2.5. Ephemeral Drainage The BSA supports two ephemeral drainages (ED) that cross under Italian Bar Road in culverts: ED-1 is northeast of the bridge near staging areas 3 and 4 and ED-2 is southwest of the bridge near staging area 6.
At the first drainage (ED-1), a slight bed, bank and channel are present and the channel averages approximately 18 inches wide to the apparent OHWM. During the April, May, and December 2014 site visits, significant water flows were not evident; dead leaves from the previous year remained at bed level. Water flow during normal rainfall years has formed a marginal channel. Vegetation within the drainage consisted primarily of upland species typically found above the OHWM. Although there is a slightly different vegetation palette within the drainage area itself, species present are more typical of foothill woodland ground cover in shaded areas than wetland vegetation, except for a Goodding’s black willow tree growing at the edge of the drainage. Tree
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 39 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
species above the OHWM include western redbud (Cercis occidentalis), California buckeye, and Oregon ash. Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and California grape (Vitis californica) occur atop a rock area outside of the tree canopy. Herbaceous species within and adjacent to the drainage include woodland geranium (Geranium molle), large-flowered miner’s lettuce (Claytonia parviflora subsp. grandiflora), white nemophila, hedge mustard (Sisymbrium officinale) hedge parsley (Torilis arvensis), and others.
The second drainage (ED-2) in staging area 6 has a marginal channel, approximately 6 feet wide, with water flows occurring only during storm events. Vegetation within the channel for ED-2 is upland and consists of species such as ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), wild oats (Avena sp.), fivespot (Nemophila maculate), large flowered miner’s lettuce, and Sierra man-root (Marah horrida). Woody species include canyon live oak, poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and California buckeye.
Wildlife species or their sign observed within this community included western toad, side- blotched lizard, western fence lizard, gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer), bobcat, raccoon (Procyon lotor), coyote (Canis latrans), mule deer, white-throated swift (Aeronautes saxatilis), Anna’s humming bird (Calypte anna), and western scrub-jay (Aphelocoma californica).
3.1.2.6. Ruderal Ruderal areas have been substantially graded, excavated, or in other ways disturbed by human activities. Within the BSA, this includes storm drainages and unpaved shoulders adjacent to Italian Bar Road. Ruderal areas are associated with previous human disturbance and contain large areas of bare ground or support low-growing weedy species such as red stem filaree (Erodium cicutarium) and tocalote (Centaurea melitensis).
3.1.2.7. Developed Developed areas are characterized by the presence of anthropogenic features, including paved roads, sidewalks, buildings, and parking lots, and storm drains. Within the BSA developed areas include Italian Bar Road, access roads north and south of Redinger Lake, dirt pullouts for vehicles, and the bridge structure. Developed areas around staging area 7 include buildings and parking lots.
3.1.3. Common Wildlife Species A total of 50 wildlife species were documented during the 2014 field season. A complete list of wildlife species observed during the field surveys is provided in Appendix D. Photographs depicting the existing condition of the Project are depicted in Appendix E.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 40 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Common species documented by Touré Associates during the 2014 field season included western toad, bullfrog, western fence lizard, side-blotched lizard, western skink (Plestiodon skiltonianus), gopher snake, acorn woodpecker, American robin (Turdus migratorius), and Anna’s humming bird.
3.1.4. Habitat Connectivity and Wildlife Migration Corridors The BSA and Project vicinity provide a contiguous wildlife corridor beneficial for wildlife species. The San Joaquin River within the BSA does not provide fish migration habitat. The BSA is characterized by a mosaic of oak woodlands, foothills, and gradually sloped hillsides and undeveloped rangeland and open space in the Sierra National Forest. Drainage features and woodlands within the Project vicinity provide wildlife corridors for species movement across the BSA and region. The BSA provides wildlife movement locally and regionally for species such as mule deer, coyote, bobcats, and other small mammals capable of moving through the BSA and surrounding areas.
SCE has conducted mule deer migration studies for the Big Creek hydroelectric project at Balsam meadows and Mammoth Pool (SCE 2003a, SCE 2004), both which are located at higher elevations than Redinger Lake, and determined deer migration routes, summer and winter ranges, and key holding areas. The San Joaquin deer herd in the Big Creek area range from 2,000 feet along the San Joaquin River to about 12,000 feet along the crest of the Sierra (SCE 2004). In summer, mule deer are commonly found above 4,500 feet and a large number use the summer range in Fresno County, whereas many winter on the north side of the San Joaquin River in Madera County (SCE 2004). The BSA is at a lover elevation (1,400 feet), but still provides important resources for migrating mule deer. Mule deer were observed in the BSA during the 2014 wildlife surveys conducted by Toure Associates.
3.1.5. Nonnative Invasive Plant Species Non-native invasive plant species are non-native plants that can spread into native ecosystems. These species also displace native species, hybridize with native species, alter biological communities, or alter ecosystem processes. The Cal-IPC provides an overall rating for all plants listed in the Invasive Plant Inventory for California (Cal-IPC 2015). A rating of high indicates a species with severe ecological impacts, high rates of dispersal and establishment, and usually widely distributed. A rating of moderate indicates a species with substantial and apparent ecological impacts, moderate to high rates of dispersal, establishment dependent on disturbance, and limited to widespread distribution. A rating of limited indicates a species with minor ecological impacts, low to moderate rates of invasion, limited distribution, and locally persistent
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 41 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
and problematic. In addition to the overall ratings, indications of a significant potential for invading new ecosystems triggers a “Red Alert” designation.
The BSA was surveyed for nonnative invasive plant species listed by Cal-IPC. A total of 11 nonnative invasive plant species listed in the Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal-IPC 2015) were documented within the BSA. Most of these species are widespread throughout the Sierra Nevada and none of the species are designated as Red Alert species by Cal-IPC. The general location of each of the nonnative invasive plants found in the BSA along with their Cal-IPC rating is provided below in Table 3-3.
Table 3-3. Nonnative Invasive Plant Species Identified during Field Surveys Name Rating1 Occurrence within the BSA Slender oat Moderate Occurs in the canyon live oak forest habitat. Avena barbata Ripgut grass Moderate Occurs in the ephemeral drainages. Bromus diandrus Soft chess brome Limited Occurs in the canyon live oak forest habitat. Bromus hordeaceus Cheat grass High Occurs in the canyon live oak forest habitat. Bromus tectorum Italian thistle Moderate Occurs in the ruderal and canyon live oak forest habitats. Carduus pycnocephalus subsp. pycnocephalus Tocalote Moderate Occurs in ruderal habitat. Centaurea melitensis Scotch broom High Occurs in valley and foothill willow scrub habitat. Cytisus scoparius Redstem filaree Limited Occurs in ruderal habitat. Erodium cicutarium Rat-tail six-weeks Moderate Occurs in the canyon live oak forest habitat. grass Festuca myuros Tall sock-destroyer Moderate Occurs in the ephemeral drainages. Torilis arvensis Rose clover Limited Occurs in the canyon live oak forest habitat. Trifolium hirtum 1 CAL-IPC rating definitions (CAL-IPC 2006)
High – These species have severe ecological impacts on physical processes, plant and animal communities, and vegetation structure. Their reproductive biology and other attributes are conducive to moderate to high rates of dispersal and establishment. Most are widely distributed ecologically.
Moderate – These species have substantial and apparent, but generally not severe, ecological impacts on physical processes, plant and animal communities, and vegetation structure. Their reproductive biology and other attributes are conducive to moderate to high rates of dispersal, though establishment is generally dependent upon ecological disturbance. Ecological amplitude and distribution may range from limited to widespread.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 42 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Limited – These species are invasive but their ecological impacts are minor on a statewide level or there was not enough information to justify a higher score. Their reproductive biology and other attributes result in low to moderate rates of invasiveness. Ecological amplitude and distribution are generally limited, but these species may be locally persistent and problematic. 3.2 Regional Species and Habitats of Concern
Fresno and Madera Counties support many special-status plants, animals, and unique habitats. The majority of special-status plant species identified during pre-field reviews are endemic to unique habitats which are absent from the BSA. Similarly, special-status wildlife species are also typically associated with regional habitats of concern such as riparian habitat or freshwater marsh, though some occur in more common plant communities like oak woodlands.
Two aquatic habitat types, perennial stream (Redinger Lake) and ephemeral drainage, are present within the BSA and could qualify as waters of the U.S. and state, which are protected under the CWA and CFGC.
3.2.1. Special-status Species Tables 3-5 and 3-6 (provided at the end of this chapter) list the special-status plant, wildlife, and fish species that are known to occur or have the potential to occur in the geographic region. As listed in Section 2.2 above and provided in Appendix B, these species were identified based on the CNDDB records search (2015), CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (2015), species lists provided by USFWS (2015) and species distribution and habitat requirements data. Figure 3-8 shows CNDDB results within 10 miles of the BSA.
For the purpose of this NES, special-status species are generally defined as follows:
. Plants listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under FESA. . Plants that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under the FESA (77 Federal Register [FR] 70103 70162, November 22, 2013). . Plants that meet the definitions of rare or endangered species under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15380). . Plants considered by the CNPS to be “rare, threatened, or endangered” in California (Lists 1A, 1B and 2 [CNPS 2015]). . Plants listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened or endangered under CESA (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] 670.5). . Plants listed under the California Native Plant Protection Act (CFGC 1900 et seq.).
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 43 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
. Plants considered sensitive by other federal agencies (i.e., USFS, Bureau of Land Management) or state and local agencies or jurisdictions. . Plants considered sensitive under the USFS Region 5 Regional Forester’s 2013 Sensitive Plant Species List; . Plants considered sensitive or unique by the scientific community or occurring at the limits of its natural range (CEQA Guidelines). . Wildlife species that are listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under FESA. . Wildlife species that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under the federal FESA (77 FR 70103 70162, November 22, 2013). . Wildlife species listed or proposed for listing under CESA (CFGC 1992 Sections 2050 et seq.; 14 CCR Sections 670.1 et seq.). . Wildlife species that are designated as Species of Special Concern by CDFW (CNDDB 2015). . Wildlife species that are designated as Fully Protected by CDFW (CFGC, Section 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515). . Wildlife considered sensitive under the USFS Region 5 Regional Forester’s 2013 Sensitive Animal Species List; . Wildlife species that meet the definition of rare or endangered under CEQA (14 CCR Section 15380). 3.2.2. Special-status Plants During the pre-field investigation, 19 special-status plant species were identified as potentially occurring in the vicinity of the BSA (Table 3-5; Appendix B). The July 23, 2013 and May 5, 2014 botanical surveys coincided with the bloom period of all special-status plant species listed in Table 3-5. The botanical surveys focused on identifying suitable habitat for these species, and where possible, identifying plants based on leaf or fruit morphology.
Based on the lack of suitable habitat (i.e., vernal pools, freshwater marsh, wet meadow, clay soils) only 6 of the 19 special-status plant species listed in Table 3-5 (Mariposa pussypaws [Calyptridium pulchellum], tree-anemone [Carpenteria californica], Madera leptosiphon [Leptosiphon serrulatus], orange lupine [Lupinus citrinus var. citrinus], slender-stalked monkeyflower [Mimulus gracilipes], and oval-leaved viburnum [Viburnum ellipticum]) would be expected to occur within the BSA. However, none of these species was observed during the July 23, 2013 and May 5, 2014 botanical surveys, conducted during the appropriate bloom time for
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 44 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
these species. Therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact on special-status plant species.
Rationale for the presence or absence of special-status plants within the BSA is provided in Table 3-5. A list of all plant species encountered during the field surveys is provided in Appendix D.
3.2.3. Special-status Wildlife Based on the results of the field surveys and review of existing information including a search of the CNDDB, USFWS species lists, and species distribution and habitat requirements data, 24 special-status wildlife species were identified during the pre-field review as occurring or having the potential to occur within the vicinity of the proposed Project. The listing status, preferred habitat, and potential for occurrence in the BSA for each of these species are listed in Table 3-5 (provided at the end of this chapter). Figure 3-8 shows CNDDB results within 10 miles of the BSA.
Of the 24 special-status wildlife species listed in Table 3-6, 14 species would not occur in the BSA or have the potential to be affected by the proposed Project construction because: 1) the BSA lacks suitable habitat for the species, 2) the BSA is outside the species’ known range, and/or 3) field surveys determined that the species is not present. These remaining 10 species have potential to occur within the BSA:
. Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata); state species of special concern;
. Ringtail (Basariscus astutas), fully protected mammal in California;
. Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), state species of special concern;
. Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), state candidate threatened species;
. Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus), state species of special concern;
. Spotted bat (Euderma maculatum); state species of special concern;
. Fringed mytois (Myotis thysanodes); USFS sensitive species;
. Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus); USFS management indicator species;
. Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus); state endangered and fully protected bird in California; and
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 45 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
. Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), a fully protected bird in California.
These species are further addressed in Chapter 4 of this NES. Table 3-6 provides the rational for presence or absence and describes the likelihood of occurrence within the BSA for all potentially occurring special-status fish and wildlife.
3.2.3.1. Bat Species The BSA supports an assortment of bat species, including special-status species. Acoustic detection devices deployed from mid-April to early May 2015 indicated that 12 species of bats utilized the area for foraging, drinking, and/or roosting (Appendix H). Table 3-4 shows the results of the 2015 acoustic bat surveys and the letter report which documents the survey results is provided as Appendix H. Mexican free-tailed bat (Tadarida braziliensis) was day roosting under the bridge during the 2015 survey period.
Table 3-4. Results of Acoustic Bat Surveys and Visual Encounter Surveys within the BSA, April and May 2015 Western Eastern Relative Species Bridge Side Side Site Use Frequency (rocks) (rocks) of Site Use Yuma Myotis X X X foraging, very high drinking (> 8,350 calls) Mexican Free- X X X drinking, very high tailed bat roosting (> 900 calls) Hoary Bat X X X foraging, very high drinking (> 2,300 calls) California X X vocalizing high Myotis (> 700 calls) Big Brown Bat X X X foraging, high drinking (> 550 calls) Western X X vocalizing high Parastrellus (> 350 calls) Long-legged X X vocalizing moderate Myotis (< 200 calls) Little Brown Bat X vocalizing low (< 100 calls) Townsend’s X drinking low Big-eared bat (< 50 calls) Pallid Bat X drinking low (< 50 calls)
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 46 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
3.2.3.2. Migratory Birds and Raptors In addition to the wildlife species listed in Table 3-5 and Appendix D, the BSA was also evaluated for its potential to support nonspecial-status migratory birds and raptors. Trees and shrubs within and adjacent to the BSA could provide nesting habitat for migratory birds and raptors. Migratory birds and raptors observed during the wildlife survey are listed in Appendix D.
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 47 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Page intentionally blank
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 48 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Figure 3-8. CNDDB Occurrences Within 10-miles of the BSA
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 49 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Page intentionally blank
Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 50 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Table 3-5. Special-status Plant Species with the Potential to Occur in the Vicinity of the Project Legal Status1 Species Common and Federal/State/ Bloom Present/ Scientific Name CNPS/ USFS Distribution Habitat Association Period Absent Rationale2 Abram’s onion --/--/1B.2/-- Fresno, Madera, and Tulare Often granitic sand in May - July Absent Suitable habitat not present Allium abramsii counties. lower and upper montane within the BSA. Species not coniferous forests. observed during botanical surveys conducted during the 885 – 3,050 meters blooming period. The closest CNDDB occurrence is approximately 5 miles south from the BSA.
Mariposa pussypaws FT/--/1B.1/-- Fresno, Madera, and Sandy or gravelly granitic April - August Absent Suitable habitat is present Calyptridium Mariposa counties. soils in chaparral and within the BSA. Species not pulchellum cismontane woodland. observed during botanical surveys conducted during the 400 – 1,100 meters blooming period. The closest CNDDB occurrence is approximately 2.5 miles southeast from the BSA. No effect
Mono Hot Springs --/--/1B.2/FSS Fresno, Madera, and Granitic, gravel and sand May - August Absent Suitable habitat is not present evening-primrose Mariposa counties. pans in lower and upper within the BSA. Species not Camissonia sierra ssp. montane coniferous forest. observed during botanical alticola surveys conducted during the 1,035 – 2,410 meters blooming period. The closest CNDDB occurrence is more than 10 miles from the BSA.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 51 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Species Common and Federal/State/ Bloom Present/ Scientific Name CNPS/ USFS Distribution Habitat Association Period Absent Rationale2 Northern meadow --/--/2B.2/-- Del Norte, Humboldt, Meadows and seeps May - July Absent Suitable habitat is not present sedge Madera, Mono, Placer, (mesic). within the BSA. Species not Carex praticola Siskiyou, and Tuolumne observed during botanical 0 – 3,200 meters counties. surveys conducted during the blooming period. The closest CNDDB occurrence is more than 10 miles from the BSA.
Tree-anemone --/ST/1B.2/FSS Fresno and Madera counties. Usually granitic in May - July Absent Suitable habitat is present Carpenteria californica chaparral and cismontane within the BSA. Species not woodland. observed during botanical surveys conducted during the 340 – 1,340 meters blooming period. The closest CNDDB occurrence is approximately 4.2 miles west from the BSA.
Succulent owl's-clover FT/SE/1B.2/-- Fresno, Madera, Merced, Vernal pools (often acidic). April - May Absent Suitable habitat is not present Castilleja campestris Mariposa, San Joaquin, and within the BSA. Species not 50 – 750 meters ssp. succulenta Stanislaus counties. observed during botanical surveys conducted during the blooming period. The closest CNDDB occurrence is more than 10 miles from the BSA. No effect
Rawson’s flaming- --/--/1B.2/FSS Madera County. Mesic soil in lower July - August Absent Suitable habitat is not present trumpet montane coniferous forest, within the BSA. Species not Collomia rawsoniana meadows and seeps, and observed during botanical riparian forest. surveys conducted during the blooming period. The closest 780 – 2,200 meters CNDDB occurrence is approximately 3 miles north from the BSA.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 52 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Species Common and Federal/State/ Bloom Present/ Scientific Name CNPS/ USFS Distribution Habitat Association Period Absent Rationale2 Spiny-sepaled button- --/--/1B.2/-- Contra Costa, Fresno, Kern, Valley and foothill April - June Absent Suitable habitat is not present celery Madera, Merced, San Luis grassland and vernal pools. within the BSA. Species not Eryngium spinosepalum Obispo, Stanislaus, Tulare, observed during botanical 80 – 620 meters and Tuolumne counties. surveys. The closest CNDDB occurrence is more than 10 miles from the BSA.
Shuteye Peak fawn lily --/--/1B.3/FSS Madera County. Granitic and rocky soils in May - July Absent Suitable habitat is not present Erythronium meadows and seeps, within the BSA. Species not pluriflorum subalpine coniferous observed during botanical forest, and upper montane surveys conducted during the coniferous forest. blooming period. The closest CNDDB occurrence is more 2,300 – 2,550 meters than 10 miles from the BSA. Brook pocket moss --/--/2B.2/FSS Madera and Siskiyou Rock, stream channel, and Year-round Absent Suitable habitat is not present Fissidens counties. waterfalls in lower and within the BSA. Species not aphelotaxifolius upper montane coniferous observed during botanical forests. surveys. The closest CNDDB occurrence is approximately 2,000 – 2,200 meters 8.7 miles north from the BSA.
Boggs Lake hedge --/SE/1B.2 Marin, Fresno, Lake, Lassen, Clay soil in marshes and April - August Absent Suitable habitat is not present hyssop Madera, Merced, Modoc, swamps (lake margins) and within the BSA. Species not Gratiola heterosepala Placer, Sacramento, Shasta, vernal pools. observed during botanical Siskiyou, San Joaquin, surveys. The closest CNDDB 10 – 2,375 meters Solano, Sonoma, and Tehama occurrence is more than 10 counties. miles from the BSA.
Short-leaved hulsea --/--/1B.2/-- El Dorado, Fresno, Madera, Granitic or volcanic soils, May - August Absent Suitable habitat is not present Hulsea brevifolia Mariposa, Tulare, and gravelly or sandy soils in within the BSA. Species not Tuolumne counties. lower and upper montane observed during botanical coniferous forests. surveys. The closest CNDDB occurrence is approximately 6 1,500 – 3,200 meters miles east from the BSA.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 53 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Species Common and Federal/State/ Bloom Present/ Scientific Name CNPS/ USFS Distribution Habitat Association Period Absent Rationale2 Madera leptosiphon --/--/1B.2/FSS Fresno, Kern, Madera, Cismontane woodland and April - May Absent Suitable habitat is present Leptosiphon serrulatus Mariposa, and Tulare lower montane coniferous within the BSA. Species not counties. forest. observed during botanical surveys conducted during the 300 – 1,300 meters blooming period. The closest CNDDB occurrence is approximately 5.5 miles northeast from the BSA.
Yosemite lewisia --/--/1B.2/FSS Fresno, Kern, Madera, Granitic, sandy soils in March - June Absent Suitable habitat is not present Lewisia disepala Mariposa, Tulare, and lower and upper montane within the BSA. Species not Tuolumne counties. coniferous forests and observed during botanical pinyon and juniper surveys. The closest CNDDB woodland. occurrence is more than 10 miles from the BSA. 1,035 – 3,500 meters Orange lupine --/--/1B.2/FSS Fresno and Madera counties. Granitic soil in chaparral, April - July Absent Suitable habitat is present Lupinus citrinus var. cismontane woodland, and within the BSA. Species not citrinus lower montane coniferous observed during botanical forest. surveys conducted during the bloom period. The closest 380 – 1,700 meters CNDDB occurrence is approximately 1.8 miles south from the BSA.
Slender-stalked --/--/1B.2/FSS Fresno, Madera, and Decomposed granitic, April - June Absent Suitable habitat is present monkeyflower Mariposa counties. often in burned or within the BSA. Species not Mimulus gracilipes disturbed areas in observed during botanical chaparral, cismontane surveys conducted during the woodland, and lower blooming period. The closest montane coniferous forest. CNDDB occurrence is approximately 5.1 miles south 500 – 1,300 meters from the BSA.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 54 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Species Common and Federal/State/ Bloom Present/ Scientific Name CNPS/ USFS Distribution Habitat Association Period Absent Rationale2 San Joaquin Valley FT/SE/1B.1/-- Fresno, Madera, Merced, Vernal pools. April - Absent Suitable habitat is not present Orcutt grass Solano, Stanislaus, and Tulare September within the BSA. Species not 10 – 755 meters Orcuttia inaequalis counties. observed during botanical surveys conducted during the blooming period. The closest CNDDB occurrence is more than 10 miles from the BSA. No effect
Oval-leaved viburnum --/--/2B.3/-- Contra Costa, El Dorado, Chaparral, cismontane May - June Absent Suitable habitat is marginally Viburnum ellipticum Fresno, Glenn, Humboldt, woodland, lower montane present within the BSA. Mendocino, Napa, Placer, coniferous forest. Species not observed during Shasta, and Sonoma Counties botanical surveys conducted 215 – 1,400 meters and Oregon and Washington during the bloom period. The States closest CNDDB occurrence is approximately 8 miles south from the BSA.
Grey-leaved violet --/--/1B.3/-- Fresno, Inyo, Kern, Los Meadows and seeps, April - July Absent Suitable habitat is not present Viola pinetorum var. Angeles, Madera, San subalpine coniferous within the BSA. Species not grisea Bernardino, Tulare, and forest, and upper montane observed during botanical Ventura counties. coniferous forest. surveys conducted during the blooming period. The closest 1,500 – 3,400 meters CNDDB occurrence is approximately 8.5 miles east from the BSA. 1 Status explanations:
-- = no listing. Federal FT = listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act.
State SE = listed as endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. ST = listed as threatened under the California Endangered Species Act.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 55 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
California Native Plant Society 1B = List 1B species: rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. 2B = List 2B species: rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere. 0.1 = Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat) 0.2 = Moderately threatened in California (20%-80% occurrences threatened/ moderate degree and immediacy of threat) 0.3 = Not very endangered in California
USFS FSS = Forest Service Sensitive
2Rationale includes an effects determination under the FESA for all federally listed species
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 56 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Table 3-6. Special-status Wildlife with the Potential to Occur in the Vicinity of the Project
Legal Status1 Habitat Common and Federal/State/ General Habitat Present Scientific Name USFS Distribution Association /Absent Rationale2 Invertebrates
Valley elderberry FT/--/-- Central Valley and surrounding Dependent on elderberry Absent Suitable habitat is not present within the longhorn beetle foothills below 1,500 feet shrubs (host plant) as a food BSA. No elderberry shrubs were Desmocerus elevations. plant; potential habitat is observed during the botanical surveys. californicus shrubs with stems 1 inch in The closest CNDDB occurrence is 1.6 dimorphus diameter within Central miles southeast from the BSA. Valley. No effect
Vernal pool fairy FT/--/-- Central Valley, Central and Common in vernal pools and Absent Suitable habitat is not present within the shrimp South Coast Ranges from seasonal wetlands; also found BSA. No vernal pools or seasonal Branchinecta lynchi Tehama County to Santa in sandstone rock outcrop wetlands occur within the BSA. The Barbara County; isolated pools. closest CNDDB occurrence is more populations also in Riverside than 10 miles from the BSA. County. No effect
Vernal pool tadpole FE/--/-- Central Valley from Shasta Vernal pools, vernal lakes, Absent Suitable habitat is not present within the shrimp County south to Merced and other seasonal wetlands. BSA. No vernal pools or seasonal Lepidurus packardi County. wetlands occur within the BSA. The closest CNDDB occurrence is more than 10 miles from the BSA. No effect
Amphibians
Foothill yellow- --/SSC/FSS Occurs in the Klamath, Creeks or rivers in woodlands Absent Suitable creek and river habitat with legged frog Cascade, north Coast, south or forests with rock and rocks, gravel, and low vegetation Rana boylii Coast, and Transverse Ranges; gravel substrate and low providing shade is not present within through the Sierra Nevada overhanging vegetation along the BSA. This species was not observed foothills up to approximately the edge; usually found near during wildlife surveys. The closest 6,000 feet south to Kern riffles with rocks and sunny CNDDB occurrence is approximately County. banks nearby. 2.1 miles southeast from the BSA.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 57 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Habitat Common and Federal/State/ General Habitat Present Scientific Name USFS Distribution Association /Absent Rationale2 California red- FT/SSC/-- Along the coast and coastal Found in permanent and Absent Suitable habitat is not present within the legged frog mountain ranges of California semi-permanent aquatic BSA. This species was not observed Rana draytonii from Marin County to San habitats, such as creeks and during wildlife surveys. The closest Diego County and in the Sierra ponds, with emergent and CNDDB occurrence is more than 10 Nevada from Tehama County submergent vegetation. May miles from the BSA to Fresno County. aestivate in rodent burrows or No effect cracks during dry periods. Sierra Nevada FE/ST,SCC/FSS Historically ranged from the Open lake, streams, and Absent The BSA, at an elevation of yellow-legged frog Diamond Mountains northeast isolated pool edges from approximately 1,500 feet, falls below Rana sierrae of the Sierra Nevada in Plumas 4,495 to 11,975 feet elevation the elevation that this species occurs at. County, California, south (Jennings and Hayes 1994). This species was not observed during through the Sierra Nevada to wildlife surveys. The closest CNDDB the type locality, in Inyo occurrence is approximately 7.8 miles County. southeast from the BSA. No effect
Reptiles
Western pond turtle --/SSC/FSS Populations extend throughout Thoroughly aquatic turtle of Present Suitable dispersal and nesting habitat is Emys marmorata the coast and central valley of ponds, marshes, rivers, present within the BSA. This species California. streams and irrigation ditches was not observed during the January with aquatic vegetation, 2015 wildlife surveys. The closest below 6,000 feet in elevation. CNDDB occurrence is approximately 0.75 mile southeast from the BSA.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 58 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Habitat Common and Federal/State/ General Habitat Present Scientific Name USFS Distribution Association /Absent Rationale2 Birds
Northern goshawk -- /SSC /FSS Permanent resident on the Nests and roosts in older Absent Suitable habitat not present within the Accipiter gentilis Klamath and Cascade Ranges, stands of red fir, Jeffrey pine, BSA. Nesting sites and individuals were on the north Coast Ranges from and lodgepole pine forests; not observed during wildlife surveys. Del Norte County to hunts in forests and in forest The nearest CNDDB occurrence is Mendocino County, and in the clearings and meadows. more than 10 miles from the BSA. Sierra Nevada south to Kern County; winters in Modoc, Lassen, Mono, and northern Inyo Counties; rare in southern California.
Golden eagle --/FP/-- Foothills and mountains Cliffs and escarpments or tall Present This species was detected foraging Aquila chrysaetos throughout California; trees for nesting; annual within the BSA during wildlife surveys. uncommon nonbreeding visitor grasslands, chaparral, and oak No nesting sites were observed within to lowlands such as the Central woodlands with plentiful the BSA during wildlife surveys. The Valley. Concentrated in the medium and large-sized nearest CNDDB occurrence is Central Valley and coastal mammals for prey approximately 9.5 miles southwest from valleys. the BSA.
Yellow warbler --/SSC/MIS Breeds along the western and Breeds in riparian woodlands, Absent Suitable nesting habitat for this species Setophaga petechia eastern slope of the Sierra montane chaparral, open is not present within the BSA. This Nevada, in the Coast Range, ponderosa pine, and mixed species was not observed during the and throughout Southern conifer habitats with January 2015 wildlife surveys. The California at elevations up to substantial amounts of brush. closest CNDDB is more than 10 miles 2,500 m. Winters in Imperial In migration, uses sparse to from the BSA. and Colorado River Valleys. dense woodland and forest habitats.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 59 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Habitat Common and Federal/State/ General Habitat Present Scientific Name USFS Distribution Association /Absent Rationale2 Willow flycatcher --/SE/FSS Rare to locally uncommon Breeding habitat is typically Absent Suitable habitat for this species is not Empidonax traillii summer resident in wet moist meadows with present within the BSA. This species meadows and montane riparian perennial streams; lowland was not observed during wildlife habitats from 2,000-8,000 feet riparian woodlands surveys. The nearest CNDDB in elevation and a common dominated by willows (Salix occurrence is approximately 8.6 miles spring (mid-May to early June) spp.), primarily in tree form, southeast from the BSA. and fall (mid-August to early and cottonwoods (Populus September) migrant at lower spp.); or smaller spring-fed or elevations, primarily in riparian boggy areas with willow or habitats, exclusive of the North alders. coast.
Bald eagle Delisted/ SE,FP/FS Nests in Siskiyou, Modoc, In western North America, Present Suitable foraging habitat for this species Haliaeetus S Trinity, Shasta, Lassen, Plumas, nests and roosts in coniferous is present within the BSA. Nesting sites leucocephalus Butte, Tehama, Lake, and forests within 1 mile of a or individuals were not observed during Mendocino Counties and in the lake, reservoir, stream, or wildlife surveys. CDFW and USFS have Lake Tahoe Basin; reintroduced ocean. reported high concentrations of into central coast; winter range wintering bald eagles within the includes the rest of California, Redinger Lake area (SCE 2003b)The except the southeastern deserts, nearest CNDDB occurrence is very high altitudes in the approximately 2.5 miles southwest from Sierras, and east of the Sierra the BSA. Nevada south of Mono County; range is expanding.
Great gray owl --/SE/FSS Permanent residents in the Associated with old-growth Absent Suitable habitat not present within the Strix nebulosa Sierra Nevada in portions of coniferous forests bordering BSA. Nesting sites and individuals were Tuolumne, Mariposa, Madera meadows: red fir, Jeffery not observed during wildlife surveys. and Fresno Counties pine, and lodge pole pine The nearest CNDDB occurrence is dominates. approximately 4.1 miles northwest from the BSA.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 60 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Habitat Common and Federal/State/ General Habitat Present Scientific Name USFS Distribution Association /Absent Rationale2 Mammals
Pallid bat --/SSC/FSS Throughout California except Grasslands, shrublands, Present This species was detected near the Antrozous pallidus for the high Sierra Nevada from woodlands, and forests from bridge during the 2015 bat surveys. Shasta to Kern Counties, and sea level up through mixed Pallid bat are anticipated to use the the northwestern corner of the conifer forests. The species is BSA primarily for drinking and as a state from Del Norte and most common in open, dry flight path since they are not known to western Siskiyou counties to habitats with rocky areas for forage over water. They are not northern Mendocino County. roosting. Roosts include expected to be found frequently within crevices in rocky outcrops, the BSA. The nearest CNDDB cliffs, caves, mines, trees, and occurrence is approximately 2 miles various human structures east from the BSA. such as bridges, barns, and porches.
Ringtail -- /FP / -- Sierra Nevada, Coast Ranges, Riparian forests, chaparral, Present Suitable habitat for this species is Basariscus astutas and the Central Valley; upper brushlands, oak woodlands, present within the BSA. This species and middle portions of the and rocky hillsides. was not observed during January 2015 Sacramento River, Feather wildlife surveys. Ringtail is not tracked River, and Bobelaine on CNDDB3. Sanctuary.
Townsend’s big- --/CT, SSC/FSS Occurs widely throughout Roosts in limestone caves, Present This species was detected near the eared bat California. tubes, mines, and buildings; bridge during the 2015 bat surveys. Corynorhinus will only roost in the open, Townsend’s big-eared bat are townsendii hanging from walls and anticipated to use the BSA primarily for ceilings; extremely sensitive drinking and as a flight path since they to disturbances. are not known to forage over water. They are not expected to be found frequently within the BSA. The nearest CNDDB occurrence is approximately 6 miles northeast of the BSA.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 61 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Habitat Common and Federal/State/ General Habitat Present Scientific Name USFS Distribution Association /Absent Rationale2 Spotted bat -- /SSC / -- Occurs throughout eastern and Roosts primarily in rock Present Although not detected during bat Euderma maculatum southern California, the central crevices; uses arid deserts and surveys, the BSA has cliffs and rock Sierra Nevada, and the Sierra open pine forests set in rocky crevice that could provide roosting Nevada foothills bordering the terrain; females may favor locations. CNDDB occurrence is San Joaquin Valley; probably ponderosa pine forests during approximately 4 miles northeast of the occurs in other portions of the reproduction BSA. state where habitat is suitable.
Western mastiff-bat -- /SSC / -- Occurs along the eastern San Roosts and breeds in deep, Present Although not detected during bat Eumops perotis Joaquin Valley from El Dorado narrow rock crevices; may surveys, the BSA rocky outcrops and californicus County, through Kern County; also use crevices in trees, crevice locations could provide roosting also found along the south buildings, and tunnels; locations. The nearest CNDDB Coast, Peninsular, and forages in a variety of occurrence is approximately 2 miles Transverse Ranges, from San semiarid to arid habitats. east of the BSA. Francisco to the Mexico border. Fringed myotis --/--/FSS Widespread in California in a Optimal habitats are pinyon- Present Although not detected during bat Myotis thysanodes variety of habitats ranging from juniper, valley foothill surveys, the BSA has cliffs and rock 0-9,400 feet in elevation. hardwood and hardwood- crevices that could provide roosting conifer, generally between locations. CNDDB occurrence is 4,000-7,000 feet. Roosts in approximately 3 miles east of the BSA. caves, mines, buildings, and crevices.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 62 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Habitat Common and Federal/State/ General Habitat Present Scientific Name USFS Distribution Association /Absent Rationale2 Fisher –West Coast PT/CT, SCC/FSS The Trinity and Inhabits forested areas from Absent Based on lack of detection and suitable Distinct Population Klamath/Siskiyou Mountains in sea level along the dense forest floor vegetation within the Segment northern California and California/Oregon Coast to footprint of the BSA, this species is not Martes pennanti southern Oregon, and Sierra approximately 1,970 to 8,530 expected to occur. The nearest Nevada in California. Also feet. Use forest habitats with CNDDB occurrence is 6 miles east of currently exist in reintroduced dense canopy closure, large the BSA. populations in the Oregon diameter live trees (conifers Cascades and most recently the and hardwoods) and snags Olympic peninsula in (dead trees) with cavities and Washington. other deformities, large diameter down wood, multiple canopy layers. Mature and late-successional coniferous or mixed forests that contain key habitat and structural components provide the most suitable fisher habitat potential den sites and preferred prey species.
Mule Deer --/--/MIS Widespread distribution Occur in early to intermediate Present Suitable habitat for this species is Odocoileus hemionus throughout most of California. successional stages of most present within the BSA. Mule deer was Occur along major river forest, woodland, and brush observed within the BSA during corridors in the Central Valley, habitats. Prefer mosaic of wildlife surveys. Mule deer is not and in scattered desert various-aged vegetation that tracked on CNDDB. mountain areas provides woody cover, meadow and shrubby openings, an free water
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 63 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Habitat Common and Federal/State/ General Habitat Present Scientific Name USFS Distribution Association /Absent Rationale2 Sierra Nevada Red --/ST/FSS Throughout high elevations of High elevation barren, conifer Absent Based on the lack of detection during Fox the Sierra Nevada from Tulare and shrub habitats; montane nocturnal spot light survey and minimal Vulpes vulpes necator County northward to Sierra meadows; subalpine denning burrows observed within the County, and from Mount Shasta woodlands and fell-fields. BSA, the species is not likely to occur. and Lassen Peak westward to May hunt in forest openings, The nearest CNDDB occurrence is the Trinity Mountains in Trinity meadows, and barren rocky approximately 5.3 miles southeast of County. Elevation range is areas. Dens are likely to be in the BSA. generally between 4,000 feet talus slopes and rock slides; and 12,000 feet. may use earthen dens, or boulder piles. Fish
Delta smelt FT/SE/-- Sacramento River–San Joaquin Euryhaline (fresh and Absent The BSA does not occur within the Hypomesus River Delta. brackish water) estuary range of Delta Smelt. The closest transpacificus channels. Spawning habitats CNDDB occurrence is more than 10 consist of side channels and miles from the BSA. sloughs in the middle reaches No effect of the Delta.
Hardhead --/SSC/FSS Klamath/North coast flowing Clear, deep pools with sand- Absent The BSA does not occur within the Mylopharodon waters and Sacramento/San gravel-boulder bottoms & range of hardhead. The Friant Dam on conocephalus Joaquin flowing waters. slow water velocity. Not the San Joaquin River downstream of found where exotic the BSA is a barrier to movement of centrarchids predominate. anadromous fish, including hardhead. The closest CNDDB occurrence is more than 10 miles from the BSA.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 64 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Legal Status1 Habitat Common and Federal/State/ General Habitat Present Scientific Name USFS Distribution Association /Absent Rationale2 Central Valley FT/--/-- The Sacramento and San Central Valley rivers and Absent The BSA does not occur within the Steelhead (Distinct Joaquin Rivers and their streams. Spawns in small range of Central Valley steelhead. The Population Segment) tributaries, excluding San streams where cool, well- Friant Dam on the San Joaquin River Francisco and San Pablo Bays oxygenated water is available downstream of the BSA is a barrier to Oncorhynchus mykiss and their tributaries, and coastal year round. movement of anadromous fish, marine waters off California. including steelhead. The closest CNDDB occurrence is more than 10 miles from the BSA. No effect 1 Status explanations:
-- = no listing. Delisted = removed from federal or California Endangered Species Act list. Federal FE = listed as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act. FT = listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. PT = proposed threatened
State SE = listed as endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. ST = listed as threatened under the California Endangered Species Act. FP = designated as a fully protected species under the CFGC. CT = candidate threatened SSC = state species of special concern
USFS FSS = Forest Service Sensitive MIS = Management Indicator Species
2Rationale includes an effects determination under the FESA for all federally listed species 3This species did not show up on the CNDDB or USFWS lists, but is included in this report because AWE expert biologists determined that suitable habitat is within the BSA and the BSA falls within the range for this species
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 65 July 2015 Chapter 3 Results: Environmental Setting
Page intentionally blank.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 66 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
Chapter 4 Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
This chapter provides survey results and analyzes the effects of the proposed Project on natural communities, special-status species, and other protected biological resources in the BSA. 4.1 Natural Communities of Special Concern
Waters of the U.S. and state and valley and foothill willow scrub (riparian) habitat qualify as natural communities of special concern, as they are regulated by state and federal resource agencies. Table 4-1 and Figures 4-1 and 4-2 summarize temporary and permanent impacts on habitats within the Project work limits.
Table 4-1. Summary of Temporary and Permanent Effects by Habitat Type Permanent Impact Temporary Impact Habitat Community (acres) (acres) Canyon Live Oak Forest 0.031 2.147 Valley and Foothill Willow Scrub 0 0.122 Boulder and Rock Outcrops 0.184 0.553 Open Water (Redinger Lake) 0.001 0.779 Ephemeral Drainage 0 0.012 Ruderal 0.002 0.149 Developed 0.073 0.864 Total 0.291 4.626
4.1.1. Waters of the U.S. and State Within the Project work limits, Redinger Lake and the ephemeral drainages would qualify as waters of the U.S. and state and would be regulated under the CWA and CFGC Section 1602 (Figures 3-8 and 2-9). Appendix G provides a delineation of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, within the Project work limits
4.1.1.1. Survey Results Based on the results of the wetland delineation field work, a total of 1.045 acre of waters of the U.S. and state were identified within the Project work limits (Figures 3-6 and 3-7). Two ephemeral drainages and Redinger Lake meet the Corps’ criteria as jurisdictional waters of the U.S., subject to regulation under Section 404 of the CWA.
Redinger Lake is an open water. The channel is not dominated by hydrophytic vegetation and lacks hydric soils indicators. However, Redinger Lake would be considered a relatively
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 67 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation permanent water and a water o the U.S. and state because it has a well-defined OHWM and drains to a navigable waterway (Figure 3-3) and is “navigable-in-fact” in that it is used for recreational boating.
The mapped ephemeral drainages located in staging areas 4 and 6 lack wetland soils and vegetation, but have evidence of an OHWM and drain through a tributary system to a navigable water. Therefore, these features would be considered waters of the U.S. and state.
4.1.1.2. Project Impacts The proposed Project will permanently affect 0.001 acre and temporarily impact up to 0.779 acre of other waters of the U.S. and state (Table 4-1, Figures 4-1 and 4-2). During construction, direct effects on Redinger Lake would include excavation and fill to construct the new bridge, create staging area 3, and demolish the existing bridge pier/abutments. Although construction is planned to occur during low flow periods, short-term alterations to the streambed and channel would be expected.
The Project could result in temporary indirect effects on Redinger Lake. Earthmoving, excavation, and blasting adjacent to Redinger Lake for construction of the new roadway could result in increased sediment loads, turbidity, and siltation into Redinger Lake. Lakebed disturbance during construction of the bridge pier and abutments could result in temporary increase in turbidity. Bridge demolition could cause debris and dust to fall into the lake, degrading water quality. The accidental introduction of washwater, solvents, oil, cement, or other pollutants during construction could also harm the aquatic environment in Redinger Lake. Use of staging area 6 may also result in temporary disturbance of a small segment of an ephemeral drainage (Figure 4-1). Implementation of avoidance and minimization measures identified below would ensure that the proposed Project minimizes disturbance to waters of the U.S. and state and restores temporarily affected areas to pre-Project conditions.
Removal of the current bridge is anticipated to offset permanent impacts on open water from placement of the new bridge. Replacing the existing 5-span bridge with the proposed 2-span bridge would remove between 200 to 250 square feet of bridge piers within the open water of Redinger Lake. Placement of the new bridge will add approximately 20 square feet of bridge column (Bent 2) within the open water resulting in a net gain of approximately 200 square feet of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and state from Project activities. Also, based on the preliminary Project design, the Project would permanently affect less than 0.001 acre of ephemeral drainage.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 68 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
Figure 4-1. Impacts within the BSA for Staging Areas 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 69 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
Figure 4-2. Temporary and Permanent Impacts (Bridge Replacement and Staging Areas 3 and 4)
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 70 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
4.1.1.3. Avoidance and Minimization Efforts The following avoidance and minimization measures shall be implemented prior to and during construction to avoid direct and indirect adverse effects to Redinger Lake, the ephemeral drainages, and to downstream water quality.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 1: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training Before any work occurs in the proposed Project work limits, including grading and equipment staging, all construction personnel shall participate in an environmental awareness training regarding special-status species and sensitive habitats present in the proposed Project limits. If new construction personnel are added to the proposed Project, they must receive the mandatory training before starting work. As part of the training, an environmental awareness handout will be provided to all personnel that describes and illustrates sensitive resources (i.e., waters of the U.S. and state, riparian habitat, special-status species and habitat, roosting bats, nesting birds/raptors) to be avoided during proposed Project construction and lists applicable permit conditions identified by state and federal agencies to protect these resources.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 2: Install Temporary Fencing around Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Before any ground-disturbing activity occurs within the Project work limits, the County shall ensure that temporary construction barrier fencing, silt fencing, and/or flagging is installed between the work area and environmentally sensitive habitat areas (i.e., waters of the U.S. and state, special-status species habitat, active bird/raptor nests to be avoided), as appropriate. Construction personnel and construction activity shall avoid areas outside the fencing. The exact location of the fencing and/or flagging shall be determined by the resident engineer coordinating with a qualified biologist, with the goal of protecting sensitive biological habitat and water quality. The fencing/flagging shall be checked regularly and maintained until all construction is complete. No construction activity shall be allowed until this condition is satisfied. Any required barrier or sediment fencing and a note reflecting this condition shall be shown on the final construction documents.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 3: Conduct Weekly Monitoring Visits A representative of the County will make weekly monitoring visits to construction areas occurring in or adjacent to environmentally sensitive habitat areas, (i.e., waters of the U.S. and state, special-status species habitat, active bird/raptor nests). The representative of the County will be responsible for ensuring that the contractor maintains the fencing/flagging protecting sensitive biological resources. Additionally, the County will retain a qualified biologist on-call to assist the County and the construction crew in complying with all Project implementation restrictions and guidelines as needed.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 71 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 4: Return Temporarily Disturbed Areas to Pre- Project Conditions All temporarily disturbed areas will be returned to pre-Project conditions upon completion of construction. These areas will be properly protected from washout and erosion using appropriate erosion control devices including coir netting, hydroseeding, and revegetation. In sloped areas additional erosion control measures would be applied including erosion control blankets and biodegradable fiber rolls. If woody species (i.e., trees and large shrubs) are removed, these areas would be replanted with comparable native vegetation.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 5: Implement Water Quality Best Management Practices Before any ground-disturbing activities, the County shall prepare and implement a SWPPP (as required under the SWRCB’s General Construction Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ [and as amended by most current order(s)]) or a WPCP, as applicable, that includes erosion control measures and construction waste containment measures to ensure that waters of the state are protected during and after Project construction. The Plan (a SWPPP or WPCP) shall include site design to minimize offsite storm water runoff that might otherwise affect adjacent lake or stream habitat.
The Plan (a SWPPP or WPCP) shall be prepared with the following objectives: (a) to identify pollutant sources, including sources of sediment, that may affect the quality of storm water discharges from the construction of the proposed Project; (b) to identify BMPs to reduce or eliminate pollutants in storm water discharges and authorized non-storm water discharges from the Project during construction; (c) to outline and provide guidance for BMP monitoring; (d) to identify proposed project discharge points and receiving waters; to address post-construction BMP implementation and monitoring; and (f) to address sedimentation, siltation, and turbidity.
The SWPPP shall require that the construction contractor implement the following or similar BMPs to protect water quality within Redinger Lake.
. Install sediment fencing, fiber rolls, or other equivalent erosion and sediment control measures between the designated work area and Redinger Lake, as necessary, to ensure that construction debris and sediment does not inadvertently enter the waterway. Tightly woven fiber netting (no monofilament netting) or similar material shall be used for erosion control or other purposes within the Project work limits to ensure that wildlife are not trapped. This limitation will be communicated to the contractor through the special provisions included in the bid solicitation package. Coconut coir matting and burlap
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 72 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
contained fiber rolls are an example of acceptable erosion control materials. The County will also cover or otherwise stabilize all exposed soil 48 hours prior to potential precipitation events of greater than 0.5 inch.
. Immediately after bridge construction is complete, all exposed soil shall be stabilized. Soil stabilization may include, but is not limited to, seeding with a native grass seed mix, planting native plants and placement of rock.
. No refueling, storage, servicing, or maintenance of equipment shall take place within 100 feet of aquatic habitat.
. All machinery used during construction of the proposed Project shall be properly maintained and cleaned to prevent spills and leaks that could contaminate soil or water.
. Any spills or leaks from construction equipment (i.e., fuel, oil, hydraulic fluid, and grease) shall be cleaned up in accordance with applicable local, state, and/or federal regulations.
. If dewatering is necessary, the contractor will prepare a dewatering plan describing the methods, materials, quantities and locations of dewatering activities. All discharge from dewatering operations will adhere to requirements in the General Waste Discharge Requirements/NPDES Permit for Dewatering and Other Low Threat Discharges to Surface Waters (Order No. R5-2013-0074/NPDES Permit No. CAG995001).
. During bridge demolition, BMPs will be used to minimize or prevent debris from entering the lake.
4.1.1.4. Compensatory Mitigation Since the Project will result in a net gain in open water and implementation of avoidance and minimization efforts described under Section 4.1.1.3. would minimize temporary impacts on waters of the U.S. and state, including water quality, no compensatory mitigation is required.
4.1.2. Valley and Foothill Willow Scrub Valley and foothill willow scrub habitat is present along the southeast bank Redinger Lake within the BSA. The bed, bank and channel of Redinger Lake are regulated by CDFW under Section 1602 of the CFGC for the purpose of protecting fish and wildlife resources; valley and foothill willow scrub habitat along the stream bank may be evaluated as part of the Section 1602 permit.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 73 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
4.1.2.1. Survey Results Within the BSA, valley and foothill willow scrub habitat occupies the southeast bank of Redinger Lake outside of the OHWM. Although sparse and shrubby, trees within this habitat provide cover, shade, and food to wildlife. Valley and foothill will scrub vegetation provides shade and offers habitat for invertebrates which are a source of food for aquatic and terrestrial life. Migratory birds could also use this habitat for nesting.
4.1.2.2. Project Impacts Construction of the road approach to the new bridge over Redinger Lake will affect valley and foothill willow scrub habitat. The proposed Project has been sited to minimize impacts on valley and foothill willow scrub habitat by conforming to the current road as much as possible, so no permanent impact to valley and foothill willow scrub habitat would occur. Construction of the new road approaches to the new bridge will result in 0.122 acre of temporary impacts to valley and foothill willow scrub habitat.
Temporary impacts would occur as a result of vegetation disturbance, clearing or trimming of tree canopy that would be required in order to provide clearance for construction equipment and work area during blasting activities at the southern bridge approach.
4.1.2.3. Avoidance and Minimization Measures The following avoidance and minimization measures will be implemented prior to and during bridge construction to avoid and minimize potential impacts on valley and foothill willow scrub habitat.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 1: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 2: Install Temporary Fencing around Environmentally Sensitive Habitat (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 3: Conduct Weekly Monitoring Visits (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 4: Return Temporarily Disturbed Areas to Pre- Project Conditions (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 74 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
4.1.2.4. Compensatory Mitigation Implementation of avoidance and minimization efforts described under Section 4.1.2.3. would ensure that the proposed Project does not adversely affect valley and foothill willow scrub. Therefore, no compensatory mitigation is required.
4.2 Special-status Plant Species
Based on the results of the botanical surveys, no special-status plants are present in the BSA. As described in Section 3.2.2., the BSA does not support potential habitat for any of the 19 special- status species identified as potentially occurring in the vicinity of the Project (Table 3-5).
4.3 Special-status Wildlife Species
After completion of the wildlife habitat assessment and review of existing information on special-status wildlife in the proposed Project region, the following special-status wildlife species could occur in the BSA or be affected by construction activities:
. western pond turtle . ringtail . pallid bat . Townsend’s big-eared bat, . western mastiff bat, . spotted bat, . fringed myotis . mule deer . bald eagle, and . golden eagle Each of these species is discussed below.
4.3.1. Western Pond Turtle The western pond turtle is designated as a state species of special concern. Western pond turtles inhabit aquatic habitats such as ponds, marshes, or streams with rocky or muddy bottoms and vegetative cover. They will occasionally leave the water to bask, and females leave the water from May through July to lay eggs, up to 1,300 feet (396 meters) or more into upland areas
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 75 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
(Jennings and Hayes 1994). Western pond turtles typically become active in March and return to overwintering sites by October or November (Jennings et al. 1992).
4.3.1.1. Survey Results No western pond turtles were observed during the wildlife surveys. The Project work limit does not provide slow-moving shallow water, sandy substrate with adequate vegetative coverage, or logs for basking locations. However, suitable upland nesting habitat occurs within the BSA in sandy and friable soils adjacent to Redinger Lake. The nearest CNDDB record for the species is located approximately 0.75 miles southeast of the BSA where slow moving water, sandy substrate, and adequate vegetative coverage exists.
4.3.1.2. Proposed Project Impacts Potential aquatic and upland dispersal and nesting habitat for western pond turtle is present within the BSA. If western pond turtles are present within the Project work limits during construction, the movement of equipment within Redinger Lake and construction of bridge structures could crush pond turtles or nests containing eggs or young. The Project will result in a permanent impact of 0.001 acre and temporary impact of 0.779 acre of potential western pond turtle habitat.
4.3.1.3. Avoidance and Minimization Efforts The following avoidance and minimization measure shall be implemented prior to and during construction to avoid adverse effects on western pond turtle.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 1: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 3: Conduct Weekly Monitoring Visits (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 4: Return Temporarily Disturbed Areas to Pre- Project Conditions (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 5: Implement Water Quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 6: Provide Escape Ramps or Cover Open Trenches To avoid entrapment of wildlife, all excavated steep-walled holes or trenches more than six inches deep will be provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 76 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation planks at the end of each workday. If escape ramps cannot be provided, then holes or trenches will be covered with plywood or similar materials. Providing escape ramps or covering open trenches will prevent injury or mortality of wildlife resulting from falling into trenches and becoming trapped. The trenches will be thoroughly inspected for the presence of wildlife at the beginning of each workday. Any species observed shall be allowed to voluntarily move outside of the work area on its own.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 7: Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Western Pond Turtle A qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction clearance survey for western pond turtles within 48 hours prior to any ground disturbance within Redinger Lake and within the Project work limits, up to 1,300 feet from the channel in undeveloped upland habitats where access permits. Any western pond turtles found within the construction work area shall be allowed to voluntarily move out of this area or shall be captured and held by a qualified biologist for the minimum amount of time necessary to release them into suitable aquatic habitat outside the construction work area. If a western pond turtle nest containing eggs or young is identified within the construction work area, CDFW shall be consulted to determine an appropriate no- disturbance buffer to ensure avoidance of the nest.
4.3.1.4. Compensatory Mitigation Implementation of avoidance and minimization efforts described under Section 4.3.1.3. would ensure that the proposed Project does not adversely affect western pond turtle. Therefore, no compensatory mitigation is required.
4.3.2. Ringtail The ringtail, also known as ringtail cat, is a widely distributed small mammal in California and is fully protected under CESA by CDFW. Ringtail has the appearance of a small raccoon (Procyon lotor), but with a slender build and an extremely long black and white banded tail. This species is found in brushy and wooded riparian areas and is most common in foothill and mountain canyons up to 8,500 feet in elevation. Denning usually takes place among large boulders near canyon bottoms and in hollow trees. Ringtail are strongly nocturnal and rarely active during the daytime. This species usually shuns urban development but occasionally enters mountain cabins. (Zeiner et al. 1990, Poglayen-Neuwall and Toweill 1988)
4.3.2.1. Survey Results Within the BSA, potential foraging and den habitat for ringtail occurs within the boulder and rock outcrop and valley and foothill willow scrub habitats. This species was not observed during wildlife surveys.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 77 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
4.3.2.2. Proposed Project Impacts The Project would permanently impact approximately 0.184 acre of boulder and rock outcrop and temporarily impact 0.553 acres of boulder and rock outcrop and 0.122 acres of valley and foothill willow scrub. These habitats represent potential foraging and den habitat for ringtail. Construction activities and related noise may cause short-term, temporary disturbance to ringtail that may forage in the BSA. However, ringtail typically forage after sunset and so would not be foraging in the Project work limits during daylight hours. Therefore, the potential effects of Project activities on ringtail would be minimal.
4.3.2.3. Avoidance and Minimization Measures The following avoidance and minimization measure shall be implemented prior to and during construction to avoid adverse effects on ringtail.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 1: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 2: Install Temporary Fencing around Environmentally Sensitive Habitat (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 3: Conduct Weekly Monitoring Visits (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 4: Return Temporarily Disturbed Areas to Pre- Project Conditions (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 6: Provide Escape Ramps or Cover Open Trenches (described above under Section 4.3.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 8: Conduct Preconstruction Den Surveys for Ringtail and Establish Buffers Before the start of ground-disturbing activities, a qualified biologist will conduct preconstruction surveys for den sites within suitable habitats in the construction footprint. These surveys will be conducted no more than 30 days before the start of ground-disturbing activities.
If an occupied den is found, the qualified biologist will establish a 50-foot buffer around the den. If a maternity den is found, the qualified biologist will establish a 100-foot buffer around the maternity den through the pup-rearing season (May 1 through June 15). Adjustments to the buffer(s) will require prior approval by CDFW as coordinated by the qualified biologist.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 78 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
4.3.2.4. Compensatory Mitigation Implementation of avoidance and minimization efforts described under Section 4.3.2.3 would ensure that the proposed Project does not adversely affect ringtail. Therefore, no compensatory mitigation is required.
4.3.3. Roosting Bats Five special-status bat species have the potential to occur within the BSA: Pallid bat (species of special concern), Townsend’s big-eared bat (state candidate threatened and species of special concern), western mastiff bat (species of special concern), spotted bat (species of special concern), and fringed myotis (forest service sensitive species).
Pallid bats are one of the largest bats in California. Colonies of this species generally roost in rocky outcroppings, in buildings, under bridges, and in hollow trees, ranging from a few to over a hundred individuals in any given roost. Pallid bats forage on terrestrial arthropods and frequent dry, open grasslands near water.
Townsend’s big-eared bat is a medium-sized bat 0.28 to 0.49 ounces with rabbit-like ears, a small indistinct face and overall brownish coloration. In California, Townsend’s big-eared bat populations have been concentrated in the limestone formations of the Sierra Nevada and Klamath mountain ranges, the volcanic formations in the Columbian Plateau (e.g., Lava Beds National Monument), and throughout mining districts. In California, this species occurs in many habitats including active agricultural areas, riparian communities, coastal habitat types, oak woodland, conifer forest, desert scrub, and native prairie. Roosting habitat is limited to caves, mines, tunnels, and other features that mimic caves, such as large tree hollows, abandoned buildings with cave-like attics, water diversion tunnels, and internal spaces in bridges. Foraging occurs primarily along edges of wooded habitats and along streams (Kunz and Marin 1982). This species both feeds in the air and gleans insects off leaf surfaces. (Yolo County H/NCCP JPA 2013)
Western mastiff bat has a “free-tail” which extends visibly beyond the edge of the interfemoral (tail) membrane. It has large bonnet-like ears, which extend forward over the eyes and are connected at the midline, a wingspan of 20.47 to 22.05 inches, a forearm of 2.95 to 3.27 inches, and an adult weight of 2.12 to 2.54 ounces. The distribution of western mastiff bats is likely geomorphically determined, with the species being present only where there are significant rock features offering suitable roosting habitat. It is found in a variety of habitats, from desert scrub to chaparral to oak woodland and into the ponderosa pine belt. The species primarily dwells in crevices that are at least 3.28 feet (3.5 meters) above the ground. Their diet primarily consists of moths (Lepidoptera). (Pierson and Rainey 1998)
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 79 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
Spotted bat by can be distinguished from all other North American species by its unique coloration (three dorsal spots on a background of black fur), and very large, pinkish-red ears (39- 50 mm). Its wing and tail membranes, like the ears, are pinkish-red. Its ventral fur (like the dorsal spots) is white with a black base. Other North American species with very large ears lack the black and white color pattern. Little is known about the population biology of spotted bats, although available data suggest that females roost singly, and give bird to a single young (Findley and Jones 1965, Watkins 1977), with births occurring in June or July. Spotted bat appears to primarily feed on months, but in one study stomach contents of two individuals were 10 to 30 percent by volume June Beetles (Easterla and Whitaker 1972). Typically this species are detected in meadows or open areas surrounded by Ponderosa pine. Pierson and Rainey (1998) have found spotted bats associated with cliffs and wet, montane meadows (from 1,200 to 2,900 meters) in the Sierra Nevada. (Bolster 1998)
Fringed myotis can be distinguished from all other California bat species by a well-developed fringe of hair on the posterior edge of the tail membrane. It has relatively large ears, and can be confused with the long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis). In California this species is found from the coast to the Sierra Nevada (below 1,800 meters). The majority of known localities are on the west side of the Sierra Nevada. This species occurs in a wide range of habitats, from desert scrub to high elevation conifer forest. Most known roosts are in caves, buildings, or mines. (Bolster 1998)
4.3.3.1. Survey Results Visual encounter surveys and acoustic detections indicated, with an extremely high level of certainty, that 12 species of bats, including Townsend’s big-eared bat and pallid bat, utilized the area from mid-April to early May in 2015. Pallid bat and Townsend’s big-eared bat are likely using the BSA as a corridor for drinking or as a flight path only since they are not known to forage over water (Appendix H). Some species (Yuma myotis [Myotis yumanensis], Mexican free-tailed bat, and hoary bat [Lasiurus cinereus]) use the site commonly and were detected each day acoustic devises were deployed. Site use determination was subjective and based on habitat and micro-habitat within the area used by bats. For example, acoustic detections collected over water are believed to be from drinking bats and some individuals that forage over water. Most bats do not actively echolocate over water unless drinking or foraging, so their detection suggests one or both behaviors.
One bat species, Mexican free-tailed bat, was determined to be roosting under and upon the existing bridge. They appear to be roosting between wooden support joists that are covered by long strips of diamond-plate metal that run the length of the bridge and lay in line with car tires (see photos in Appendix H). The diamond-plate metal strips, contribute to the appropriate micro-
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 80 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation habitat for bats that roost under the bridge. Although not a listed or special status species, it is Caltrans’ policy to minimize impacts to all roosting bats, as regulated under CEQA and CDFW streambed alteration agreements.
The BSA and vicinity include extensive areas of large rock outcrops where bats may roost, particularly during the day, but also at night. Many, if not all of the species detected during echolocation surveys, can and will use some form of rock outcrops for day roosting.
4.3.3.2. Proposed Project Impacts Bats are using the Project work limits for roosting (i.e., Mexican free-tailed bats on the Italian Bar Road Bridge), but also for foraging, drinking, and a flight corridor. Since the proposed Project includes complete removal and replacement of the existing bridge and alteration of the surrounding bedrock, some individual bats and local groups of bats may be permanently affected.
Direct impacts to roosting bats could occur if construction or bridge demolition occurs when bats are typically present (March-October). Temporary impacts would occur as a result of disturbance from increased noise, vibration, and lights used during construction. Permanent impacts include the loss of roosting habitat on the existing bridge and the loss or alteration of potential roosting habitat in rock crevices that will be removed. Alterations that affect bats usability of a site include changes that obstruct entrances or that change the airflow, temperature, and humidity of roost sites (Johnston et al 2004).
4.3.3.3. Avoidance and Minimization Efforts The following avoidance and minimization measure shall be implemented prior to and during construction to avoid adverse effects on roosting bats.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 1: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 3: Conduct Weekly Monitoring Visits (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 4: Return Temporarily Disturbed Areas to Pre- Project Conditions (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 9: Avoid Disturbance to Bat Roosting Sites The diamond plate metal strips that run the length of the bridge contribute to the appropriate microhabitat for roosting bats under the bridge and, if feasible, should be removed between late
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 81 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
October and early March, prior to construction. The panels can be replaced by expanded metal panels that would support vehicle traffic and protect the wooden sub-structure of the bridge, while creating airflow throughout the area currently used by free-tailed bats to roost. This increased airflow would greatly reduce or eliminate the use of the bridge by bats. The feasibility of removing the diamond metal strips must be reviewed and approved by County representatives and a structural engineer. Alternatively, the underside of the bridge could be netted with tightly strung netting that has less than half-inch mesh, and that has no opening greater than half-inch within any seams, transitions, or connection points with the bridge. Netting should be checked weekly and repairs made immediately. Completely and effectively covering the underside of the bridge with netting may prove difficult, due to the structure of the bridge and height above water, but netting professionals will be consulted for expert advice. Demolition and removal of the existing bridge should be initiated only after the bridge has been determined to be bat free (after installation of netting or during the months from late October through early March).
Rock outcrops associated with the area around the bridge likely support bats. Since every crack, crevice, and rock outcrop overhang cannot be checked with 100 percent certainty, some rock crevices may support one or more species or individuals. If feasible, bedrock removal or alteration should occur when most or all bat species and individuals have migrated downslope or to southern destinations during fall and winter months (typically late October through early March). Some bat species or individuals may still remain in the area during winter months and intermittently become active, which could escape detection with acoustic devices. Because of the relatively high level of uncertainty of bat presence in the bedrock and rock outcrops, the site should be flagged and marked where rock removal or bedrock alteration will occur, and a bat biologist should survey the area for appropriate bat roosting micro-habitat. Any crevices that are detected should be chinked (filled) with burlap, allowing for only small areas to be open where plastic flaps could be installed as one-way doors for bat escapes. In the case of large cracks and gaps that may lead to obscured roosting micro-habitat, bat biologist should cover the rock cracks with 1 to 3 mil plastic, which is also covered and secured, weighted, or otherwise immobilized with netting. Plastic and netting coverings should include escape flaps for bats that may not have been detected. Plastic covering and chinking should be conducted 2 to 3 weeks or more prior to construction and be made of durable materials that can last through the Project life. The netted areas should be occasionally monitored and repaired immediately in order to maintain the security of the system and to keep bats from roosting in or adjacent to the Project work limits.
If bats are found roosting in the Project work limits and adjacent areas during the construction period, consultation with CDFW and a qualified biologist should commence as soon as bats are reported or observed. No bats should be removed, handled, killed, hazed, or otherwise engaged without direction from CDFW and/or a qualified biologist.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 82 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
4.3.3.4. Compensatory Mitigation Implementation of avoidance and minimization efforts described under Section 4.3.3.3. would ensure that the proposed Project does not directly affect roosting bats. Additionally, based on conversations with Jeff Alvarez, bat specialist with The Wildlife Project, and Carrie Swanburg at CDFW, mitigation should consider the context of the impact. These experts concurred that because the Project occurs in a canyon that provides an abundance of roosting opportunities for bats, the loss of the small existing roost site on the bridge would not stress bat species in the area or result in adverse effects to special-status species. Therefore, no compensatory mitigation is required.
4.3.4. Mule Deer The USFS lists mule deer as a Management Indicator Species for the Sierra National Forest.
Mule deer are common to abundant, yearlong resident or elevation migrant with a widespread distribution throughout most of California, except in deserts and intensively farmed areas without cover. Mule deer browse and graze, preferring tender new growth of various shrubs, many forbs, and a few grasses. Mule deer generally are generally active during twilight hours, but may be active day or night. This species may be resident or migratory. In the mountains of California, mule deer migrate downslope in the winter to areas with less than 18 inches of snow. As the snow melts, mule deer will migrate to higher elevations. Natural predators of deer have been reduced in numbers in most areas. Overpopulation, with resultant winter die-offs and destruction of habitat, occurs periodically in California, as in other states. Mule deer are preyed upon regularly by mountain lions and coyotes, and occasionally by bobcats, black bears, and domestic dogs. Deer populations can respond rapidly to habitat management. However, populations can decline in response to fragmentation, degradation, or destruction of habitat caused by urban expansion, incompatible use of land resources (e.g., timber, water, rangeland), and disturbance by humans. (Zeiner 1990)
The San Joaquin deer herd occurs within the Big Creek ALP project vicinity, which is close to the Project vicinity, ranges from about 2,000 feet along the San Joaquin River up to about 12,000 feet along the crest of the Sierra. A large number of deer using the summer range in Fresno County winter on the north side of the San Joaquin River in Madera County. (SCE 2003a)
4.3.4.1. Survey results During wildlife surveys, mule deer were observed within the ephemeral drainage habitat within the BSA. Within the BSA, potential foraging and dispersal habitat for mule deer occurs within the canyon live oak and valley and foothill willow scrub habitats.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 83 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
SCE has also conducted extensive studies on the San Joaquin deer herd at Mammoth Pool, located approximately 13 miles north of the Project, to determine the location of deer holding areas, summer and winter habitat areas, migration routes, and identify and characterize areas of deer mortality at the project facilities during migration (SCE 2003a). SCE determined that spring deer migration across Mammoth Pool Reservoir is usually in progress by the first of May, with peak numbers crossing from May 15 to June 15. In the fall there is usually movement across Mammoth Pool Reservoir by late October. For most years, migration was found to be well underway before heavy snow occurred. Deer mortality was determined to be primarily caused by construction of the Daulton Creek diversion tunnel, trash buildup at points where deer were trying to swim the reservoir, and harassment from recreational activities on the reservoir. SCE implemented agency-recommended measures to mitigate for the loss of mule deer at Mammoth Pool, which include fencing, buoys, bridges, and sand placement on the dam to aid in deer crossing (SCE 2003a).
4.3.4.2. Proposed Project Impacts The Project would permanently impact approximately 0.031 acre of canyon live oak and temporarily impact 2.147 acres of canyon live oak and 0.122 acre of valley and foothill willow scrub. These habitats represent potential foraging and dispersal habitats for mule deer. Construction activities and related noise may cause short-term, temporary disturbance to mule deer that may forage in the BSA. Implementation of avoidance and minimization measures will ensure that potential effects of Project activities on mule deer would be minimal.
4.3.4.3. Avoidance and Minimization Efforts The following avoidance and minimization measure shall be implemented prior to and during construction to avoid adverse effects on mule deer.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 1: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 2: Install Temporary Fencing around Environmentally Sensitive Habitat (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 3: Conduct Weekly Monitoring Visits (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 4: Return Temporarily Disturbed Areas to Pre- Project Conditions (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 84 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
4.3.4.4. Compensatory Mitigation Implementation of avoidance and minimization efforts described under Section 4.3.4.3. would ensure that the proposed Project does not adversely affect mule deer. Therefore, no compensatory mitigation is required.
4.3.5. Bald Eagle The bald eagle was listed as federally endangered on March 11, 1967 (USFWS 1967), down listed to threatened on July 12, 1995 (USFWS 1995), and delisted on July 9, 2007, due to recovery (USFWS 2007). This species is protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) and is a federal bird of conservation concern (USFWS 2008). There is no designated critical habitat for the species. The bald eagle was listed by the state of California as endangered on June 27, 1971, and is a California fully protected species (CDFW 2013). The California Fish and Game Code Section 3511 states that fully protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time, and no licenses or permits may be issued for their take except for collecting these species for necessary scientific research and relocation of the bird species for the protection of livestock.
Historically, the bald eagle established breeding sites in a variety of habitats in California, including offshore islands, coastal cliffs and pinnacles, along coastal rivers, interior valley streams and wetlands, and along mountain lakes and rivers (Detrich 1985). Currently most eagle nesting territories are found in montane habitat in ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forests (Detrich 1985; Jurek 1990; Lehman 1979). Nest trees include a variety of hardwoods as well as conifers. Bald eagle nest sites are always associated with bodies of water, usually lakes and rivers that support abundant fish, waterfowl, or other waterbird prey. In California, approximately 70 percent of the breeding eagle population is associated with water bodies larger than 495 acres (200 hectares) (Detrich 1985). Nest trees are usually found within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of water and are typically in mature and old-growth conifer stands (Buehler 2000). Nest trees usually have an unobstructed view of a water body and are typically the dominant or co-dominant trees in their surrounding stands (Lehman 1979). Snags and dead-topped live trees are important for perch and roost sites. Anthony et al. (1982) reported that the mean diameter of nest trees in California and Oregon was 41 to 46 inches (104 to 117 centimeters) at breast height.
In California, the bald eagle breeds or winters throughout the state except in the desert areas with most breeding activity occurring in Butte, Lake, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Shasta, Siskiyou, and Trinity counties (Buehler 2000). California’s breeding population of bald eagle is resident year- round in most areas where the climate is relatively mild (Jurek 1988).
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 85 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
The bald eagle winters along rivers, lakes, or reservoirs that support abundant fish or waterbird prey and that have large trees or snags for perch or roost sites. The species typically forages in waters less than 1,650 feet (0.5 kilometers) from perching habitat (Buehler 2000). The bald eagle often roosts communally during the winter, typically in mature trees or snags that are isolated from human disturbance. Communal night roost sites often possess different habitat components than daytime use areas, including day perch sites. While day perches are generally snags or dead-topped trees, night roost groves generally have live trees and a more closed canopy. Night roosts are often in sites that are sheltered from the weather by landforms and in areas of coniferous stands that provide insulation from the weather (Buehler 2000). While there are no known bald eagle nests in the Redinger Lake vicinity, they are known to roost and forage in the area year-round (SCE 2003b)
4.3.5.1. Survey Results Trees within the BSA are too shrubby to provide suitable nesting habitat for bald eagles, however suitable trees are located within the vicinity of the Project. No potential raptor nests were identified within the Project work limits during wildlife surveys. Although not detected, representatives of CDFW and USFS have reported high concentration of wintering bald eagle occurrences in the Redinger Lake area (SCE 2003b) and the BSA has the potential to support foraging bald eagle within the open water habitat.
4.3.5.2. Proposed Project Impacts Noise associated with construction activities involving heavy equipment operation that occurs during the breeding season (generally between February 1 and August 31) could disturb nesting bald eagle if an active nest is located near these activities. Noise associated within construction activities could also disturb bald eagles foraging within the Project vicinity.
4.3.5.3. Avoidance and Minimization Efforts The following avoidance and minimization measures shall be implemented prior to and during construction to avoid adverse effects on nesting migratory birds and raptors and ensure that the proposed Project would not result in take of bald eagles or occupied nests with eggs or young.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 1: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 3: Conduct Weekly Monitoring Visits (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 86 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 4: Return Temporarily Disturbed Areas to Pre- Project Conditions (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 10: Conduct a Preconstruction Nesting Migratory Bird and Raptor Survey and Establish Buffers If construction or vegetation removal will occur during the breeding season for migratory birds and raptors (generally February through August), the County shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a preconstruction nesting bird and raptor survey prior to the start of construction activities (including equipment staging). The preconstruction nesting bird and raptor surveys shall be conducted between February 1 and August 31 within suitable habitat within the designated Project work limits. Surveys for raptors’ nests should extend 1.0 mile from the Project work limits to ensure that nesting raptors are not affected by construction disturbances. For raptor surveys outside the Project work limits where property access has not been granted or is not accessible (e.g., due to steep terrain or lack of access roads and trails), the surveying biologist shall use binoculars to scan any suitable nesting substrate for potential raptor nests. The preconstruction survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days before the initiation of construction activities. If an active bird or raptor nest is identified within the construction work area or an active raptor nest is identified within 1.0 mile from the construction work area, a no- disturbance buffer shall be established around the nest to avoid disturbance of the nesting birds or raptors until a qualified biologist determines that the young have fledged and are foraging on their own. The extent of these buffers shall be determined by the biologist (coordinating with the CDFW) and shall depend on the species identified, level of noise or construction disturbance, line-of-sight between the nest and the disturbance, ambient levels of noise and other disturbances, and other topographical or artificial barriers. In addition to the establishment of buffers, other avoidance measures (determined during CDFW coordination) may include monitoring of the nest during construction and restricting the type of work that can be conducted near the nest site. If no active nests are found during the preconstruction surveys, then no additional mitigation is required.
4.3.5.4. Compensatory Mitigation Implementation of avoidance and minimization efforts described under Section 4.3.5.3 would ensure that the proposed Project does not adversely affect bald eagle. Therefore, no compensatory mitigation is required.
4.3.6. Golden Eagle The golden eagle does not have state or federal legal status. However, the species is protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and is a fully protected species under the California
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 87 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
Fish and Game Code and is a federal bird species of conservation concern (CDFW 2013; USFWS 2008).
The golden eagle uses nearly all terrestrial habitats of the western states except densely forested areas. Rugged, open habitats with canyons and escarpments are used most frequently for nesting (Kochert et al. 2002). The species nests primarily on cliffs and hunts in nearby open habitats, such as grasslands, oak savannas, and open shrublands. Nest trees include oak (Quercus spp.), foothill pine (Pinus sabiniana and P. coulteri), California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica), eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.), and western sycamore (Plantanus racemosa) (Hunt et al. 1998). Nests are typically located 10-100 feet (3-30 meters) above the ground. Trees may also be used for nesting and are more commonly used in the interior Coast Ranges where suitable cliff nesting habitat is scarce. Important elements of suitable breeding habitat include: 1) cliff ledges, rocky outcrops, or large trees for nesting; 2) open foraging terrain such as grassland, desert, savannah, shrubland, and to a lesser extent cropland; and 3) availability of small to medium-sized mammalian prey, particularly ground squirrels (Spermophilus and Otospermophilus spp.) and rabbits (Order: Lagomorpha) (Kochert et al. 2002; DeLong 2004).
In the western United States, wintering golden eagles use a variety of open habitats that are dominated by native vegetation and that support substantial prey populations of ground squirrels and black-tailed jackrabbits (Lepus californicus) and tend to avoid urban, agricultural, and forested areas (Kochert et al. 2002; Johnsgard 1990).
4.3.6.1. Survey Results Trees within the BSA are too shrubby to provide suitable nesting habitat for golden eagles, however suitable trees are located within the vicinity of the Project. No potential raptor nests were identified within the Project work limits during wildlife surveys. A golden eagle was observed foraging in the BSA during the 2014 wildlife surveys. The BSA supports foraging golden eagles within the canyon live oak forest.
4.3.6.2. Proposed Project Impacts Noise associated with construction activities involving heavy equipment operation that occurs during the breeding season (generally between March 1 and August 31) could disturb nesting golden eagle if an active nest is located near these activities. Noise associated within construction activities could also disturb golden eagles foraging within the Project vicinity.
4.3.6.3. Avoidance and Minimization Efforts The following avoidance and minimization measures shall be implemented prior to and during construction to avoid adverse effects on nesting migratory birds and raptors and ensure that the proposed Project would not result in take of golden eagles or occupied nests with eggs or young.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 88 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 1: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 3: Conduct Weekly Monitoring Visits (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 4: Return Temporarily Disturbed Areas to Pre- Project Conditions (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 10: Conduct a Preconstruction Nesting Migratory Bird and Raptor Survey and Establish Buffers (described above under Section 4.3.5.3)
4.3.6.4. Compensatory Mitigation Implementation of avoidance and minimization efforts described under Section 4.3.6.3 would ensure that the proposed Project does not adversely affect golden eagle. Therefore, no compensatory mitigation is required.
4.3.7. Other Protected Migratory Birds and Raptors Migratory birds and raptors could nest in trees within or adjacent to the proposed project site. The breeding season for most birds and raptors within the proposed project region is generally from February 1 to August 31. The occupied nests and eggs of these birds are protected by federal and state laws, including the MBTA and CFGC Sections 3503 and 3503.5.
4.3.7.1. Survey Results Trees within the BSA provide suitable nesting habitat for a variety of nesting birds and raptors. Raptors observed during wildlife surveys are listed in Appendix D and include golden eagle, great horned owl, red-tailed hawk, western screech owl, barn owl, and osprey. No potential raptor nests were identified within the Project work limits during wildlife surveys. Although no large nests were identified within or immediately adjacent to the Project work limits during field surveys, the BSA supports foraging and nesting birds and raptors within the canyon live oak forest and valley and foothill will scrub habitats.
4.3.7.2. Proposed Project Impacts Removal of trees and shrubs within the Project work limits could directly affect nesting birds. Additionally, noise associated with construction activities involving heavy equipment operation that occurs during the breeding season (generally between March 1 and August 31) could disturb nesting migratory birds and raptors if an active nest is located near these activities. Any
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 89 July 2015 Chapter 4: Results: Biological Resources, Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation disturbance that causes migratory bird or raptor nest abandonment and subsequent loss of eggs or developing young at active nests located at or near the construction work area would violate CFGC Sections 3503 or 3503.5 and the MBTA.
4.3.7.3. Avoidance and Minimization Efforts The following avoidance and minimization measures shall be implemented prior to and during construction to avoid adverse effects on nesting migratory birds and raptors and ensure that the proposed project would not result in take of migratory birds and raptors or occupied nests with eggs or young.
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 1: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 3: Conduct Weekly Monitoring Visits (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 4: Return Temporarily Disturbed Areas to Pre- Project Conditions (described above under Section 4.1.1.3.)
Avoidance and Minimization Measure 10: Conduct a Preconstruction Nesting Migratory Bird and Raptor Survey and Establish Buffers (described above under Section 4.3.5.3)
4.3.7.4. Compensatory Mitigation Implementation of avoidance and minimization efforts described under Section 4.3.7.3. would ensure that the proposed Project does not adversely affect protected migratory birds and raptors. Therefore, no compensatory mitigation is required.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 90 July 2015 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Regulatory Determination
Chapter 5 Conclusions and Regulatory Determination
5.1 Federal Endangered Species Act Consultation Summary
To date, there has been no FESA consultation with USFWS for the proposed Project. A species list from the USFWS was received on May 27, 2015. The Project vicinity does not support any federally listed species. Since proposed Project will avoid take of federally listed species, no FESA consultation is required.
5.2 Federal Fisheries and Essential Fish Habitat Consultation Summary
To date, there has been no federal fisheries or Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation with NMFS for the proposed Project. No listed fish species occur within the Project work limits. Redinger Lake within the BSA is not considered EFH; therefore EFH consultation is not required for the proposed Project.
5.3 California Endangered Species Act Consultation Summary
To date, there has been no CESA consultation with CDFW for the proposed Project. The proposed Project will avoid take of state listed and candidate species; therefore, no CESA consultation is required.
5.4 Wetlands and Other Waters Coordination Summary
To date, there has been no CWA, Porter-Cologne Act, Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act or CFGC Section 1602 coordination with the Corps or RWQCB, for the proposed Project. CDFW representative Carrie Swanberg was contacted in June 2015 to discuss the Project and bat mitigation measures.
The proposed Project may result in the placement of fill within waters of the U.S. and state; therefore, the County will apply for and obtain a CWA Section 404 permit, CWA Section 401 permit, and a CFGC Section 1600 permit for the proposed Project. The Project would result in the permanent disturbance of 0.001 acre and temporary disturbance of approximately 0.779 acre of other waters of the U.S. and state. Additionally, if the proposed Project will result in one acre or more of ground disturbance the County will comply with Section 402 of the CWA by preparing a SWPPP for the proposed Project under the General Construction Permit issued by SWRCB. If the Project results in less than one acre of disturbance, a WPCP would be prepared.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 91 July 2015 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Regulatory Determination
5.5 Invasive Species
Bridge construction would occur along the existing road right of way within a disturbed corridor. The BSA currently supports non-native invasive plants. Implementation of the proposed Project is not expected to result in the introduction, establishment, and spread of new invasive weeds into Fresno or Madera County. Therefore, no coordination with the Fresno County Agricultural Commissioner’s office is required.
5.6 Floodplains (Executive Order 11988)
The proposed Project is within the boundary of the 100-year floodplain for Redinger Lake. The boundary of a 100-year floodplain is used to demarcate flood hazards and indicates the geographic area having a one percent chance of being flooded in any given year. Replacing the existing bridge with a two span steel 1 girder bridge will improve hydraulic capacity and conveyance under the bridge and will not substantially change the hydrology of the floodplain for Redinger Lake. A location hydrology report has been prepared for the Project.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 92 July 2015 Chapter 6 References
Chapter 6 References
Anthony, R.G., R.L. Knight, G.T. Allen, B.R. McClelland, and J.L. Hodges. 1982. “Habitat Use by Nesting and Roosting Bald Eagles in the Pacific Northwest.” Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resource Conference 47:332-42.
Baldwin, B.G. (ed.). 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, 2nd Edition. University of California Press. Berkeley, California.
Bolster, B.C., editor. 1998. Terrestrial Mammal Species of Special Concern in California. Draft Final Report prepared by P.V. Brylski, P.W. Collins, E.D. Pierson, W.E. Rainey and T.E. Kucera. Report submitted to California Department of Fish and Game Wildlife Management Division, Nongame Bird and Mammal Conservation Program for Contract No.FG3146WM.
Buehler, D.A. 2000. “Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus).” The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Accessed December 3, 2013. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/506.
CDFW. See California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
CDWR. See California Department of Water Resources.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2013. State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California, October 2013. Sacramento: California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Natural Diversity Database.
. 2015. California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). Available at: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/mapsanddata.asp. Accessed on May 27, 2014.
California Department of Water Resources. 2003. California’s Groundwater Update 2003. Bulletin 118.
California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC). 2015. California Invasive Plant Inventory Database. California Invasive Plant Council: Berkeley, CA. Available at: http://cal- ipc.org/paf/. Accessed on May 27, 2015.
. 2006. California Invasive Plant Inventory. California Invasive Plant Council: Berkeley, CA. Available at http://www.cal-ipc.org/ip/inventory/pdf/Inventory2006.pdf. Website accessed April 10, 2015.
California Native Plant Society. 2015. Inventory of rare, threatened, and endangered plants of California. Available at: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Website accessed on May 27, 2015.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 93 July 2015 Chapter 6 References
California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region. 1998. Fourth Edition of the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins. Accessed March 2015. Available at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/basin_plans/sacsjr.pdf.
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2011. Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin Basin. Fourth Edition revised September 1998 with Approved Amendments.
CNDDB. See California Natural Diversity Data Base.
CNPS. See California Native Plant Society.
CDFW. See California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Corps. See U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
DeLong, J. P. 2004. Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Golden Eagle. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND.
Detrich, P.J. 1985. “The Status and Distribution of Bald Eagle in California.” M.S. thesis, California State University, Chico.
Easterla, D. A., and J. O. Whitaker Jr. 1972. Food habits of some bats from Big Bend National Park, Texas. J. Mammal., 53:887-890.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 2009. Final Environmental Impact Statement for Hydropower Licenses Big Creek ALP Projects Docket Nos. P-67,2175,2085, and 120.
Findley, J. S., and C. Jones. 1965. Comments on spotted bats. J. Mammal., 46(4):679-680.
Fresno County. 2000. Fresno County General Plan October 2000.
Fresno County. 1998. Fresno County Oak Woodland Management Guidelines.
Great Outdoor Recreation Pages (GORP). 2014. Redinger Lake. Accessed November 2014. Available at http://www.gorp.com/parks-guide/travel-ta-sierra-national-forest-california- sidwcmdev_065972.html
Hunt, W.G., R.E. Jackman, T.L. Brown, D.E. Driscoll, and L. Culp. 1998. A Population Study of Golden Eagles in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area: Population Trend Analysis 1997. Report to National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Subcontract XAT-6-16459-01 to the Predatory Bird Research Group. University of California, Santa Cruz.
Jennings, M. R., and M. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. Sacramento, California: California Department of Fish and Game.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 94 July 2015 Chapter 6 References
Jennings, M. R., M. P. Hayes, and D. C. Holland. 1992. A Petition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to Place the California Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii) and the Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata) on the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.
Johnsgard, P.A. 1990. Hawks, Eagles and Falcons of North America: Biology and Natural History. Washington and London: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Johnston, D., G. Tatarian, E.D. Pierson, and G.R. Trapp. 2004. California bat mitigation techniques, solutions, and effectiveness. Caltrans Project number 2394-01
Jurek, R.M. 1988. “Five-Year Status Report. Bald Eagle.” (unpublished report. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Management Division).
. 1990. California Bald Eagle Breeding Population Survey and Trend, 1970-90. Sacramento: California Department of Fish and Game, Nongame Bird and Mammal Section.
Kochert, M.N., and K. Steenhof. 2002. “Golden Eagles in the U.S. and Canada: Status, Trends, and Conservation Challenges.” Journal of Raptor Restoration 36 (1 supplement): 33-41.
Kunz, T.H., and R.A. Marin. 1982. Plecotus townsendii. American Society of Mammalogists, Mammalian Species 175:1-6
Lehman, R.N. 1979. A Survey of Selected Habitat Features of Bald Eagle Nest Sites in California. Administrative Report 79-1. Sacramento: California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Management Branch.
Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. The National Wetland Plant List: 2014 update of wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2014-41: 1–42. Published April 2014.
Madera County. 1995. Madera County General Plan Policy Document.
Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1998a. Ahwahnee Series. Accessed November 2014. Available at https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/A/AHWAHNEE.html.
. 1998b. Auberry Series. Accessed June 2015. Available at https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/A/AUBERRY.html
. 2015. Web Soil Survey. Accessed June, 2015. Available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.
NRCS. See Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Pierson, E. D., and W. E. Rainey. 1998. Distribution of the spotted bat, Euderma maculatum, in California. Journal of Mammal 79(4): 1296-1305.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 95 July 2015 Chapter 6 References
Poglayen-Neuwall, Ivo and Toweill, Dale. 1988. Bassariscus astutus. Published in Mammalian Species, No.327 (1-8), 27 December 1988 by the American Society of Mammalogists
Southern California Edison (SCE). 2003a. TERR 14, Mule Deer and TERR 15, other Game technical study report package for the Big Creek Hydroelectric ALP Project.
_____. 2003b. TERR 9 Bald Eagle and Osprey Terrestrial Resource Study Plan for the Big Creek ALP Relicensing. Available at https://www.sce.com/NR/rdonlyres/9E6F08DD- FE0E-4A29-96C3-0619118A0F79/0/SDCTERR09_Report.pdf.
_____. 2004. REC 12 Hunting technical study report package for the Big Creek Hydroelectric System ALP Project.
_____. 2009. Schematic Profile of the Big Creek System. Available at http://photon.usc.edu/fyi180/Global_Energy_Crisis/Hydro_files/SCE_Big_Creek_hydro_ map.pdf.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. (Technical Report Y-87-1.) Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station.
_____. 2005. Regulatory Guidance Letter: Ordinary High Water Mark Identification (RGL 05- 05). Available: http://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecw o/reg/rgls/rgl05-05.pdf
_____. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Arid West Region (Version 2.0). Vicksburg, MS: http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/trel08- 28.pdf.
_____. 2015. Estimated Extent of Navigable Waterways in the Sacramento District. Accessed February 2015. Available at http://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/Jurisdiction/NavigableWatersofthe US.aspx
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2014. Redinger Lake. Accessed November 2014. Available at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/sierra/recreation/?cid=stelprdb5308924
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2015. National Hydrography Dataset. Available at http://nhd.usgs.gov/data.html. Accessed on April 30, 2015.
USDA. See U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFS. See U.S. Forest Service
USFWS. See U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region. 2000. Region 5 Noxious Weed Strategy.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 96 July 2015 Chapter 6 References
. 2001. Record of Decision Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Environmental Impact Statement
. 2004. Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removing the Bald Eagle in the Lower 48 States from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.” Federal Register 72 (130): 37346-37372.
. 2008. Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. Arlington, Virginia: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/SpecialTopics/BCC2008/B CC2008.pdf.
. 2015. List of Threatened and Endangered Species that May Occur in the Italian Bar Road Bridge Replacement Project location, and/or may be affected by the proposed project.
Watkins, L. C. 1977. Euderma maculatum. Mammalian Species, 77:1-4.
Western Regional Climate Center. 2015. Big Creek PH 1, California (040755) Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary. Available at http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi- bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca0755.
Yolo County H/NCCP JPA (Yolo County Habitat/Natural Community Conservation Plan Joint Powers Agency). 2013. First Administrative Draft Yolo Natural Heritage Program. Woodland, California. Available at http://www.yoloconservationplan.org/ maps-and-documents.html#Second_Draft. Accessed April 30, 2015.
Zeiner, D.C., W.H. Laudenslayer, K.E. Mayer, and M. White. 1990. California’s Wildlife, volumes 1, 2, and 3. California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationships System, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Sacramento, California.
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 97 July 2015 Chapter 6 References
This page intentionally left blank
Italian Bar Bridge Replacement Project Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts) 98 July 2015
Appendix A Biological Technical Memorandum for Modifications to the Italian Bar Road (Road 225) Whiskey Creek Tributary Bridge (Bridge No. 41C-0318)
Appendix B CNDDB, CNPS, and USFWS Species Lists
Appendix C NRCS Web Soil Survey
Appendix D List of Observed Plants and Wildlife
Appendix D. Plant Species Observed in the BSA on July 13, 2013 and May 5, 2014 Wetland Indicator Status (Arid West Scientific Name1 Common Name Family Nativity Region)2 Acmispon americanus var. americanus Spanish Lotus Fabaceae Native UPL Acmispon argophyllus var. Southern California silver argophyllus lotus Fabaceae Native NL Acmispon wrangelianus Chilean trefoil Fabaceae Native NL Aesculus californica California buckeye Sapindaceae Native NL Alnus rhombifolia White alder Betulaceae Native FACW Mat amaranth, procumbent Amaranthus blitoides pigweed Amaranthaceae Native FACW Amsinckia intermedia Common fiddleneck Boraginaceae Native NL Common fiddleneck, small- Amsinckia menziesii flowered fiddleneck Boraginaceae Native NL Andropogon virginicus var. Broom-sedge, broomsedge virginicus bluestem Poaceae Naturalized FAC
Arctostaphylos sp. Manzanita sp. Ericaceae Native NL Douglas' wormwood, Artemisia douglasiana mugwort Asteraceae Native FAC Avena barbata Slender wild oat Poaceae Naturalized NL Boechera arcuata Arching rockcress Brassicaceae Native NL Brickellia californica California brickellia Asteraceae Native FACU Bromus diandrus Ripgut grass Poaceae Naturalized NL Bromus hordeaceus Soft brome, soft chess Poaceae Naturalized FACU Chinook brome, woodland Bromus laevipes brome Poaceae Native NL Bromus madritensis subsp. Foxtail chess, Madrid madritensis brome Poaceae Naturalized NL Bromus sterilis Poverty brome Poaceae Naturalized NL Bromus tectorum Cheat grass, downy chess Poaceae Naturalized NL Western sweetshrub, sweet- Calycanthus occidentalis shrub, spicebush Calycanthaceae Native FAC Carduus pycnocephalus subsp. pycnocephalus Italian thistle Asteraceae Naturalized NL
Ceanothus cuneatus var. cuneatus Buckbrush Rhamnaceae Native NL Centaurea melitensis Tocalote Asteraceae Naturalized NL Cephalanthus occidentalis Button willow Rubiaceae Native OBL Cercis occidentalis Redbud, western redbud Fabaceae Native NL Clarkia cylindrica Speckled clarkia Onagraceae Native NL Woodland clarkia, elegant Clarkia unguiculata clarkia Onagraceae Native NL Claytonia parviflora subsp. Large-flowered miner’s grandiflora lettuce Montiaceae Native FACU Collinsia heterophylla Chinese houses, purple Plantaginaceae Native NL
1
Wetland Indicator Status (Arid West Scientific Name1 Common Name Family Nativity Region)2 Chinese houses
Croton setigerus Turkey-mullein, dove weed Euphorbiaceae Native NL Cytisus scoparius Scotch broom Fabaceae Naturalized NL El Dorado larkspur, Delphinium hansenii Hansen’s larkspur Ranunculaceae Native NL Canyon liveforever, canyon Dudleya cymosa dudleya, Rock Lettuce Crassulaceae Native NL
Epilobium sp. Epilobium Onagraceae Native NL Eriodictyon californicum California yerba santa Boraginaceae Native NL California buckwheat Eriogonum fasciculatum (group 4) Polygonaceae Native NL Eriophyllum lanatum var. integrifolium Oregon sunshine Asteraceae Native NL Erodium botrys Long-beak stork's-bill Geraniaceae Naturalized FACU Erodium cicutarium Redstem filaree Geraniaceae Naturalized NL Eschscholzia lobbii Frying pan poppy Papaveraceae Native NL Festuca microstachys Small fescue Poaceae Native NL Festuca myuros Rat-tail six-weeks grass Poaceae Naturalized FACU Fraxinus latifolia Green ash, Oregon ash Oleaceae Native FACW Geranium molle Woodland geranium Geraniaceae Naturalized NL Gilia tricolor Bird's-eye gilia Polemoniaceae Native NL Hesperocnide tenella Western sting nettle Urticaceae Native NL Hordeum murinum subsp. leporinum Wall barley, hare barley Poaceae Naturalized FACU Hypericum concinnum Gold-wire Hypericaceae Native NL Juncus balticus Baltic rush Juncaceae Native FACW Juncus bufonius var. bufonius Toad rush Juncaceae Native FACW Keckiella breviflora var. breviflora Gaping keckiella Plantaginaceae Native NL Lagophylla glandulosa Glandular hareleaf Asteraceae Native NL Lesser hawkbit, hairy Leontodon saxatilis hawkbit Asteraceae Naturalized FACU Lepidium strictum Peppergrass Brassicaceae Native NL Leptosiphon ciliatus Whisker brush Polemoniaceae Native NL Logfia gallica Daggerleaf cottonrose Asteraceae Naturalized NL Lupinus albifrons var. albifrons Silver bush lupine Fabaceae Native NL Madia gracilis Gumweed Asteraceae Native NL Pineapple-weed, rayless Matricaria discoidea chamomile Asteraceae Naturalized FACU Muhlenbergia rigens Deer grass Poaceae Native FAC Nemophila heterophylla White nemophila Boraginaceae Native NL
2
Wetland Indicator Status (Arid West Scientific Name1 Common Name Family Nativity Region)2 Nemophila maculata Fivespot Boraginaceae Native NL Pellaea andromedifolia Coffee fern Pteridaceae Native NL Pellaea mucronata Bird's-foot fern Pteridaceae Native NL Pentagramma triangularis subsp. triangularis Gold back fern Pteridaceae Native NL Phacelia imbricata subsp. imbricata Imbricate phacelia Boraginaceae Native NL Pinus sabiniana Gray, ghost, or foothill pine Pinaceae Native NL Plagiobothrys canescens Valley popcornflower Boraginaceae Native NL Plagiobothrys fulvus var. campestris Field popcornflower Boraginaceae Native NL Plagiobothrys tenellus Pacific popcorn-flower Boraginaceae Native FACU Poa annua Annual blue grass Poaceae Naturalized FACU Polypodium californicum California polypody Polypodiaceae Native NL Quercus berberidifolia Scrub oak Fagaceae Native NL Quercus douglasii Blue oak Fagaceae Native NL Quercus chrysolepis Maul oak, canyon live oak Fagaceae Native NL Quercus wislizeni Interior live oak Fagaceae Native NL Rigiopappus leptocladus Wireweed Asteraceae Native NL Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry Rosaceae Naturalized FACU Salix gooddingii Goodding's black willow Salicaceae Native FACW Salvia columbariae Chia sage Lamiaceae Native NL Selaginella hansenii Hansen’s spikemoss Selaginellaceae Native NL Sisymbrium officinale Hedge mustard Brassicaceae Naturalized NL Spergularia bocconi Boccone's sandspurry Caryophllyaceae Naturalized FACW Stellaria media Common chickweed Caryophllyaceae Naturalized FACU Symphoricarpos albus var. laevigatus Common snowberry Caprifoliaceae Native FACU Torilis arvensis Hedge parsley Apiaceae Naturalized NL
Toxicodendron diversilobum Western poison oak Anacardiaceae Native NL Trifolium ciliolatum Foothill clover Fabaceae Native NL Trifolium hirtum Rose clover Fabaceae Naturalized NL Trifolium willdenovii Tomcat clover Fabaceae Native NL Umbellularia californica California bay Lauraceae Native FAC California grape, California Vitis californica wild grape Vitaceae Native FACU Footnotes: 1 Scientific nomenclature follows Baldwin, B., G., Douglas H. G., David J. K., Robert P., Thomas J. R., and Dieter H. W. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California. Second edition, revised and expanded. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 2 Wetland indicator status definitions are provided below (Lichvar 2014).
3
Indicator Category Wetland Occurrence OBL (Obligate Wetland Plants) Almost always occur in wetlands. FACW (Facultative Wetland Plants) Usually occur in wetlands, but may occur in nonwetlands. FAC (Facultative Wetland Plants) Occur in wetlands and nonwetlands. FACU (Facultative Upland Plants) Usually occur in nonwetlands, but may occur in wetlands. NL Not listed UPL (Obligate Upland Plants) Almost never occur in wetlands. The wetland indicator status definitions were obtained from: Lichvar, R., N. Melvin, M. Butterwick, and W. Kirchner. 2012. National Wetland Plant List Indicator Rating Definitions. ERDC/CRREL TN-12-1 Plant wetland indicator statuses were obtained from: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2013. NWPL Version 3.1. http://rsgisias.crrel.usace.army.mil/NWPL/
4
Appendix D. Wildlife Species Observed in the BSA April-July 20141 Birds and Raptors Aeronautes saxatalis White-throated swift Aimophila ruficeps Rufous-crowned sparrow Aphelocoma californica Western scrub-jay Aquila chrysaetos Golden eagle Baeolophus inornatus Oak titmouse Bubo virginianus Great horned owl Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk Callipepla californica California quail Calypte anna Anna’s humming bird Catherpes mexicanus Canyon wren Cathartes aura Turkey vulture Colaptes auratus Northern flicker Corvus corax Common raven Megaceryle alcyon Belted kingfisher Megascops kennicottii Western screech-owl Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn woodpecker Meleagris gallopavo Wild turkey Melozone crissalis California towhee Mergus merganser Common merganser Mimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird Myiarchus cinerascens Ash-throated flycatcher Passer domesticus House sparrow Pandion haliaetus Osprey Phainopepla nitens Phainopepla Picoides nuttallii Nuttall’s woodpecker Pipilo crissalis California towhee Pipilo masculatus Spotted towhee Sitta carolinensis White-breasted nuthatch Turdus migratorius American robin Tyto alba Barn owl Zenaida macroura Mourning dove Mammals Canis latrans Coyote Lynx rufus Bobcat Mephitis mephitis Striped skunk Myotis sp. Myotis bat, undetermined Odocoileus hemionus Mule deer Pipistrellus hesperus Western pipistrelle Procyon lotor Raccoon Spermophilus beecheyi California ground squirrel Urocyon cinereoargenteus Gray fox Reptiles Elgaria multicarinata Alligator lizard
5
Pituophis catenifer Gopher snake Plestiodon skiltonianus Western skink Sceloperus occidentalis Western fence lizard Uta stansburiana Side-blotched lizard Amphibians Anaxyrus boreas Western toad Lithobates catesbieanna Bullfrog Fish Oncorhychus mykiss Rainbow trout Notropis sp. Shiner Crestacean Pacifastacus leniusculus Crayfish
1Source: Toure Associates 2014
6
Appendix E Representative Biological Study Area Photographs
Representative Photographs from the Project
Photo 1. View of bridge structure looking eastward Photo 2. View of bridge looking southwest across from Italian Bar Road Redinger Lake
Photo 3. View of bridge and northern boulder rock- Photo 4. View of southern boulder rock outcropping outcroppings, facing northeast proposed for removal– facing southwest
Photo 5. View of bridge – facing southwest Photo 6. View of bridge from northern rock outcropping – facing west
1
Photo 7. View of the bridge pilings – facing southwest Photo 8. View of Redinger Lake downstream of the bridge – facing northwest
Photo 9. Posted load limits, facing south Photo 10. View of bridge from upstream, valley and foothill willow scrub along bank, facing northwest
Photo 11. Northern approach road, facing southeast Photo 12. Southern approach road, facing northwest toward bridge toward bridge
2
Photo 13. Potential Staging Area 1 – facing northwest Photo 14. Potential Staging Area 2 – facing south toward Italian Bar Road
Photo 15. Potential Staging Area 3 – facing southwest Photo 16. Potential Staging Area 4 – facing west
Photo 17. Ephemeral drainage at Potential Staging Area 4 Photo 18. Potential Staging Area 5 – facing west – facing north
3
Photo 19. Potential Staging Area 6 – facing west Photo 20. Potential Staging Area 7 – facing north
Photo 21. Golden eagle observed foraging within Photo 22. Mule deer observed outside of the northwestern the Project vicinity Project boundary
4
Appendix F WETS Table
Appendix G Wetland Delineation Report
Appendix H Bat Survey Report