DOCSLIB.ORG

Saddle Mountain Open Space Preserve Management Plan (PDF)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Saddle Mountain Open Space Preserve Management Plan (PDF) SADDLE MOUNTAIN OPEN SPACE P R E S E R V E MANAGEMENT PLAN JUNE LAND FOR LIFE ——————–– 2019 1 • SADDLE MOUNTAIN OPEN SPACE PRESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN SADDLE MOUNTAIN OPEN SPACE PRESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1 1.1 Regional Setting ..........................................................................................................................1 1.2 History of Preserve Establishment ....................................................................................2 1.3 Vision Statement .......................................................................................................................2 1.4 Conservation Purpose ...........................................................................................................3 1.5 Goals and Objectives ..............................................................................................................3 1.6 Existing Plans and Partnerships ........................................................................................3 1.6.1 Existing Plans ...................................................................................................................3 1.6.2 Existing Studies ..............................................................................................................4 1.6.3 Existing Partnerships ...................................................................................................5 1.6.4 Funding Opportunities ...............................................................................................6 1.7 Management Plan Development Process .....................................................................6 1.7.1 Data Acquisition and Analysis .......................................................................................... 7 1.7.2 Public Participation in Planning ...................................................................................... 7 1.7.3 Management Plan Updates ............................................................................................. 7 1.8 Management Plan Structure ............................................................................................... 7 2. DESCRIPTION OF SADDLE MOUNTAIN OPEN SPACE PRESERVE ..........9 2.1 Location and Boundaries.......................................................................................................9 2.2 Legal Features .......................................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Adjacent Ownership .............................................................................................................10 2.4 Public and Private Access ..................................................................................................10 2.5 Infrastructure ........................................................................................................................... 11 2.6 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................ 12 2.8 Landscape Disturbance ...................................................................................................... 13 2.8.1 Disturbance by Fire .................................................................................................... 13 2.8.2 Disturbance by Grazers ........................................................................................... 14 2.9 Topography and Elevation .................................................................................................15 2.10 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................16 2.10.1 Geologic Units ............................................................................................................16 2.10.2 Soil Types .......................................................................................................................17 2.11 Climate and Precipitation ..........................................................................................19 2.12 Water Resources...........................................................................................................19 2.12.1 Surface Waters ............................................................................................................19 2.12.2 Groundwaters ...........................................................................................................20 2.12.3 Stream Depth and Flow ......................................................................................... 21 2.12.4 Dams and Impoundments .................................................................................... 21 2.13 Vegetation Communities ................................................................................................. 22 2.13.1 Annual Grassland (AGS) ............................................................................................... 23 2.13.2 Coastal Oak Woodland (COW)......................................................................... 24 2.13.3 Closed-Cone Pine-Cypress (CPC) .................................................................25 2.13.4 Douglas-Fir (DFR) ...................................................................................................25 2.13.5 Fresh Emergent Wetland (FEW) ..................................................................... 26 2.13.6 Lacustrine (LAC) .......................................................................................................27 2.13.7 Mixed Chaparral (MCH) .........................................................................................27 2.13.8 Montane Hardwood-Conifer (MHC) .............................................................. 28 I • SADDLE MOUNTAIN OPEN SPACE PRESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2.13.9 Montane Riparian (MRI) ....................................................................................... 28 2.13.10 Wet Meadow (WTM) ........................................................................................... 29 2.14 Sensitive Habitats ................................................................................................................30 2.14.1 Freshwater Seeps ....................................................................................................30 2.14.2 Vernal Pool ................................................................................................................... 31 2.14.3 Valley Needlegrass Grassland ............................................................................ 31 2.14.4 Serpentine Chaparral and Bunchgrass ........................................................... 31 2.14.5 Habitats Occupied by Listed Species .............................................................. 31 2.15 Sensitive Plant Species ...................................................................................................... 31 2.15.1 Clara Hunt’s Milk-Vetch ........................................................................................ 32 2.15.2 Lobb’s Buttercup ..................................................................................................... 32 2.15.3 Napa False Indigo .................................................................................................... 33 2.15.4 Narrow-Anthered California Brodiaea .......................................................... 33 2.15.5 Sonoma Ceanothus ............................................................................................... 33 2.15.6 Sonoma Manzanita ................................................................................................. 34 2.15.7 St. Helena Morning Glory ..................................................................................... 34 2.16 Animal Species ..................................................................................................................... 34 2.16.1 Native Wildlife.................................................................................................................... 34 2.16.2 Naturalized Exotic Animals ................................................................................. 34 2.17 Listed Wildlife Species ......................................................................................................35 2.17.1 Fishes ..............................................................................................................................35 2.17.2 Amphibians .................................................................................................................35 2.17.3 Reptiles .........................................................................................................................35 2.17.4 Birds ................................................................................................................................35 2.17.5 Mammals ......................................................................................................................35 3. OVERVIEW OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ISSUES ............................. 36 3.1 Erosion and Sedimentation ...............................................................................................36 3.1.1 Approach to Erosion Control .................................................................................36 3.1.2 Condition of Road Network ....................................................................................37
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Archival Study for the Fish Habitat Flows and Water Rights Project
    APPENDIX D Archival Study for the Fish Habitat Flows and Water Rights Project An Archival Study for the Fish Habitat Flows and Water Rights Project Mendocino and Sonoma Counties, California Eileen Barrow, M.A. June 6, 2016 An Archival Study for the Fish Habitat Flows and Water Rights Project Mendocino and Sonoma Counties, California Prepared by: _________________________________ Eileen Barrow, M.A. Tom Origer & Associates Post Office Box 1531 Rohnert Park, California 94927 (707) 584-8200 Prepared for: Sonoma County Water Agency 404 Aviation Santa Rosa, California 95407 June 6, 2016 ABSTRACT Tom Origer & Associates conducted an archival study for the Fish Habitat Flows and Water Rights Project, as requested by the Sonoma County Water Agency. This study was designed to meet requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Per the findings of the National Marine Fisheries Service (2008), the Sonoma County Water Agency is seeking to improve Coho salmon and steelhead habitat in the Russian River and Dry Creek by modifying the minimum instream flow requirements specified by the State Water Resources Control Board's 1986 Decision 1610. The current study includes a ⅛ mile buffer around Lake Mendocino, Lake Sonoma, the Russian River from Coyote Valley Dam to the Pacific Ocean, and Dry Creek from Warm Springs Dam to the Russian River. The study included archival research at the Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University (NWIC File No. 15-1481); archival research at the Museum of Paleontology, University of California, Berkeley; examination of the library and files of Tom Origer & Associates; and contact with the Native American community. Documentation pertaining to this study is on file at the offices of Tom Origer & Associates (File No.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
    SOUTHEAST GREENWAY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING DRAFT EIR CITY OF SANTA ROSA HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This chapter includes an evaluation of the potential environmental consequences associated with the adoption and implementation of the proposed project that are related to hydrology and water quality. Additionally, this chapter describes the environmental setting, including regulatory framework and existing conditions, and identifies mitigation measures, if required, that would avoid or reduce significant impacts. 4.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 4.8.1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Federal Regulations Clean Water Act The Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1977, as administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), seeks to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. The CWA employs a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory tools to reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. The CWA authorizes the USEPA to implement water-quality regulations. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program under Section 402(p) of the CWA controls water pollution by regulating stormwater discharges into the waters of the United States. California has an approved State NPDES program. The USEPA has delegated authority for water permitting to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) (Region 1). Section 303(d) of the CWA requires that each state identify water bodies or segments of water bodies that are “impaired” (i.e., not meeting one or more of the water-quality standards established by the state).
    [Show full text]
  • Storm Water Management Plan
    PhasePhase IIII NPDESNPDES StormStorm WaterWater ManagementManagement PlanPlan March 2005 Prepared By WINZLER&KELLY CONSULTING ENGINEERS Town of Windsor Phase II NPDES Storm Water Management Plan Project No. 03-228303-003 Project Contacts: Toni Bertolero Project Manager [email protected] Brian Bacciarini Staff Scientist [email protected] Winzler & Kelly Consulting Engineers 495 Tesconi Circle, Suite 9, Santa Rosa, California 95401 Phone: (707) 523-1010 Fax: (707) 527-8679 March 2005 Reviewed by:__________ Date:__________ TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Background...........................................................................................................................1 1.1 Regulatory Background..................................................................................................1 1.2 Town Resources .............................................................................................................2 1.2.1 Public Works Department..................................................................................2 1.2.2 Planning Department..........................................................................................2 1.2.3 Building Division ...............................................................................................3 1.2.4 Economic Development and Community Services Department .......................3 1.2.5 Administrative Services Department .................................................................3 1.3 Outside Agencies............................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Russian River Watershed Directory September 2012
    Russian River Watershed Directory September 2012 A guide to resources and services For management and stewardship of the Russian River Watershed © www.robertjanover.com. Russian River & Big Sulphur Creek at Cloverdale, CA. Photo By Robert Janover Production of this directory was made possible through funding from the US Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Conservation. In addition to this version of the directory, you can find updated versions online at www.sotoyomercd.org Russian River Watershed Directory version September 2012 - 1 - Preface The Sotoyome Resource Conservation District (RCD) has updated our Russian River Watershed directory to assist landowners, residents, professionals, educators, organizations and agencies interested in the many resources available for natural resource management and stewardship throughout the Russian River watershed. In 1997, The Sotoyome RCD compiled the first known resource directory of agencies and organization working in the Russian River Watershed. The directory was an example of an emerging Coordinated Resource Management and Planning (CRMP) effort to encourage community-based solutions for natural resource management. Since that Photo courtesy of Sonoma County Water Agency time the directory has gone through several updates with our most recent edition being released electronically and re-formatting for ease of use. For more information or to include your organization in the Directory, please contact the Sotoyome Resource Conservation District Sotoyome Resource Conservation
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Project Appraisal of Santa Rosa Creek Restoration ______
    University of California, Berkeley LDARCH 227 : River and Stream Restoration __________________________________________________________________________ Post-Project Appraisal of Santa Rosa Creek Restoration __________________________________________________________________________ Final Draft Authors: Charlie Yue Elizabeth Hurley Elyssa Lawrence Zhiyao Shu Abstract: The purpose of this project is to assess the success of past Santa Rosa Creek restorations as a form of post-restoration monitoring of previous projects. Core objectives of this creek restoration applied to the reach of the Santa Rosa Creek ranging from E Street to Pierson Street were analyzed to the extent possible with available resources. The overarching objectives were to improve and restore habitat, remediate and maintain a healthy creek ecosystem, and bolster community involvement within this specified reach. To measure the success of these objectives, the team gathered documentation of flora and fauna, pebble counts, and interviews with members of the community. Reported flora showed the creek was composed of about 79% of the original planted species, and of the total observed species, 16% were non-native and 84% were native. Interviews with the community indicated that the creek is used frequently for recreational purposes and that the community is concerned with litter and crime along the creek. With the results from this study, it was determined that the majority of past projects were successful though improvements could be made to maintain healthier, safer, and cleaner paths along the river. Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction 3 History of the Santa Rosa Watershed and Creek 3 Santa Rosa Citywide Master Plan and Post-restoration Projects 4 Purpose of This Study 6 Chapter 2. Methods 8 Flora and Fauna Identification 8 Stream Composition 8 Community Interaction 9 GIS data Application 11 Chapter 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep Now & the Seed Bank Project
    DEEP NOW & THE SEED BANK PROJECT by Rachael Marne Jones A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment Of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Fine Arts in Art MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana April 2018 ©COPYRIGHT by Rachael Marne Jones 2018 All Rights Reserved ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................1 2. BODY ..............................................................................................................................3 3. CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................................30 REFERENCES CITED ......................................................................................................32 iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Detail of Landmark II ..........................................................................................6 2. Detail of Out of Site .............................................................................................9 3. Flow State Diptych .............................................................................................12 4. Instructional Drawing For The Seed Bank Project: Step 1 ...............................13 5. Instructional Drawing For The Seed Bank Project: Step 2 ...............................13 6. Ana Mendietta. Four stills from Silhueta Sangrieta ..........................................17 7. Prototype For The Long Now Clock .................................................................19
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Recipients of 5 Star Grant Program (PDF)
    2010 Five Star Recipients Alabama Project Title: Tapawingo Springs Wetlands Restoration (AL) Organization: Freshwater Land Trust Award Amount: $14,980 Project Location: The project is located at the foot of Sand mountain along Tapawingo Road in northeastern Jefferson County, Alabama. Project Description: Conduct riparian wetland habitat restoration of abandoned residential property concentrating on re-establishing wetland hydrology and native species and eradication of invasive species. Project Title: Village Creek Trail and Restoration (AL) Organization: Freshwater Land Trust Award Amount: $20,620 Project Location: Birmingham and Jefferson Counties Project Description: Construct and maintain a trail system along the Village Creek head waters. Project will include invasive plant removal, wetland enhancement, and bioswale construction. California Project Title: Audubon Bobcat Ranch Oak Woodland Corridor (CA) - III Organization: National Audubon Society Award Amount: $40,000 Project Location: Putah Creek Watershed, Yolo County Project Description: Create an ecological connection between the Dry Creek tributaries and the main channel of Putah Creek in Yolo County. Project will create a wild-way managed by landowners. Project Title: Cooley Landing Restoration and Education (CA) Organization: City of East Palo Alto Award Amount: $40,000 Project Location: East Palo Alto and Menlo Park, San Mateo County Project Description: Restore nine acres of upland habitat for endangered clapper rail and salt marsh harvest mouse. Project will create a new passive recreation park and environmental and history education center. Project Title: Cresta Riparian Habitat Enhancement and Education (CA) Organization: Sotoyome Resource Conservation District Award Amount: $20,000 Project Location: Project is located along Porter Creek in the Mayacamas Mountains of northeastern Sonoma County.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimating Soil Seed Bank Characteristics in Ponderosa Pine Forests Using Vegetation and Forest-Floor Data
    Estimating Soil Seed Bank Characteristics in Ponderosa Pine Forests Using United States Department of Agriculture Vegetation and Forest-Floor Data Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station Research Note Scott R. Abella and Judith D. Springer RMRS-RN-35 September 2008 Abstract—Soil seed banks are important for vegetation management because they contain propagules of species that may be considered desirable or undesirable for site colonization after management and disturbance events. Knowledge of seed bank size and composition before planning management activities facilitates proactive management by providing early alerts of exotic species presence and of abilities of seed banks to promote colonization by desirable species. We developed models in ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) forests in northern Arizona to estimate the size and richness of mineral soil seed banks using readily observable vegetation and forest- floor characteristics. Regression models using three or fewer predictors explained 41 to 59 percent of the variance in 0- to 2-inch (0- to 5-cm) seed densities of total and native perennial seed banks. Key predictors included aboveground plant species richness/10.8 ft2 (1 m2), litter weight and thickness, and tree canopy type (open or closed). Both total and native perennial seed banks were larger and richer in plots containing: (1) species-rich understories, (2) sparse litter, and (3) tree canopy openings. A regression tree model estimated that seed bank density of native perennials is 14-fold greater if aboveground plant richness exceeds eight species/10.8 ft2, forest-floor leaf litter is < 1 inch (2.5 cm) thick, and tree canopies are open. Introduction Soil seed banks are important for vegetation man- agement in ponderosa pine forests in at least four ways.
    [Show full text]
  • BLM Seeds of Success Program
    collect • evaluate • establish • grow • store • restore Seeds of Success (SOS) was established in 2001 by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in partnership with the Millennium Seed Bank Project (MSB) to collect, conserve, and develop native plant materials for restoration across the United States. The initial partnership between BLM and MSB quickly grew to include many additional partners, such as botanic gardens, arboreta, zoos, and municipalities. These SOS teams share a common protocol to coordinate seed collecting and species targeting efforts. SOS is a vital part of the Native Plant Materials Development Program. To date, SOS has over 12,000 native seed collections in its National Collection. This material is used for restoration projects, native plant materials development projects such as germination trials, common garden studies, and protocol establishment. Portions of each collection are also held in long-term storage facilities for conservation. 2010 was an especially productive collection year, made possible by an influx of $1.25 million in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds. These funds put an additional 43 collectors on the ground, allowing SOS to nearly double collection capacity. 3,000 ~2,700 SOS has partnerships nationwide for permits to collect on 40 USDA Forest Service National Forests, 10 U.S. Fish & 2,500 Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuges, 6 Department 2,000 of Defense areas, The Nature Conservancy’s lands and 1,474 1,504 1,500 multiple state and local lands. Non-federal SOS partners 1,235 1,208 1,012 1,044 1,058 have made significant collections in the Midwest, Texas, 1,000 685 447 Eastern U.S., and San Diego County.
    [Show full text]
  • AQ Conformity Amended PBA 2040 Supplemental Report Mar.2018
    TRANSPORTATION-AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Metropolitan Transportation Commission Association of Bay Area Governments MARCH 2018 Metropolitan Transportation Commission Jake Mackenzie, Chair Dorene M. Giacopini Julie Pierce Sonoma County and Cities U.S. Department of Transportation Association of Bay Area Governments Scott Haggerty, Vice Chair Federal D. Glover Alameda County Contra Costa County Bijan Sartipi California State Alicia C. Aguirre Anne W. Halsted Transportation Agency Cities of San Mateo County San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Libby Schaaf Tom Azumbrado Oakland Mayor’s Appointee U.S. Department of Housing Nick Josefowitz and Urban Development San Francisco Mayor’s Appointee Warren Slocum San Mateo County Jeannie Bruins Jane Kim Cities of Santa Clara County City and County of San Francisco James P. Spering Solano County and Cities Damon Connolly Sam Liccardo Marin County and Cities San Jose Mayor’s Appointee Amy R. Worth Cities of Contra Costa County Dave Cortese Alfredo Pedroza Santa Clara County Napa County and Cities Carol Dutra-Vernaci Cities of Alameda County Association of Bay Area Governments Supervisor David Rabbit Supervisor David Cortese Councilmember Pradeep Gupta ABAG President Santa Clara City of South San Francisco / County of Sonoma San Mateo Supervisor Erin Hannigan Mayor Greg Scharff Solano Mayor Liz Gibbons ABAG Vice President City of Campbell / Santa Clara City of Palo Alto Representatives From Mayor Len Augustine Cities in Each County City of Vacaville
    [Show full text]
  • HISTORICAL CHANGES in CHANNEL ALIGNMENT Along Lower Laguna De Santa Rosa and Mark West Creek
    HISTORICAL CHANGES IN CHANNEL ALIGNMENT along Lower Laguna de Santa Rosa and Mark West Creek PREPARED FOR SONOMA COUNTY WATER AGENCY JUNE 2014 Prepared by: Sean Baumgarten1 Erin Beller1 Robin Grossinger1 Chuck Striplen1 Contributors: Hattie Brown2 Scott Dusterhoff1 Micha Salomon1 Design: Ruth Askevold1 1 San Francisco Estuary Institute 2 Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation San Francisco Estuary Institute Publication #715 Suggested Citation: Baumgarten S, EE Beller, RM Grossinger, CS Striplen, H Brown, S Dusterhoff, M Salomon, RA Askevold. 2014. Historical Changes in Channel Alignment along Lower Laguna de Santa Rosa and Mark West Creek. SFEI Publication #715, San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA. Report and GIS layers are available on SFEI’s website, at http://www.sfei.org/ MarkWestHE Permissions rights for images used in this publication have been specifically acquired for one-time use in this publication only. Further use or reproduction is prohibited without express written permission from the responsible source institution. For permissions and reproductions inquiries, please contact the responsible source institution directly. CONTENTS 1. Introduction .....................................................................................1 a. Environmental Setting..........................................................................2 b. Study Area ................................................................................................2 2. Methods ............................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • 4.14 Water Supply
    Cotati Downtown Specific Plan WATER SUPPLY Draft EIR 4.14 Water Supply 4.14.1 Issues Implementation of the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) will increase the demand for water as compared to the existing demand in the Downtown Specific Plan area. Improvements to water supply and conveyance infrastructure may be required to support buildout of the project and the surrounding area. According to the Downtown Specific Plan Water Supply Assessment (WSA), the City will have sufficient water supply for the project. The WSA considers water supply and demand requirements during normal, single dry, and multiple dry years. This section is largely derived from the WSA, which is incorporated by reference and included in this EIR as Appendix 4.14. 4.14.2 Setting Planning Area For the purpose of assessing direct impacts, the planning area is the DSP area. The cumulative analysis includes the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) service area (see Figure 4.14-1). The City of Cotati serves the planning area with a 6- to 14-inch waterline distribution system. Water System Water supply to the planning area is provided by the City of Cotati through three city wells and the SCWA aqueduct. The planning area is also served by a 1.0 million gallon (mg) storage tank located on West Sierra Avenue outside the City limits. Cotati receives most of its water supply from the SCWA, using its city wells for supplemental supply. Water Sources Sonoma County Water Agency. The SCWA receives groundwater from wells and surface water from the Russian River, with rights to divert up to 75,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) to its customers.
    [Show full text]