DOCSLIB.ORG

San Mateo Creek Map 111307.FH11

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
San Mateo Creek Map 111307.FH11 For adjoining area see Creek & Watershed Map of Daly City & Vicinity 37o37'30" EXPLANATION r C CREEK & WATERSHED MAP o Historical Features, circa 1850 n u 2 San Br Creeks, watershed area 0.2 km Creeks, buried or drained, dashed where location of uncertain Underground storm drains 24" Shoreline or marsh boundary San Mateo & Vicinity Engineered channels By Anne C. Tillery, Janet M. Sowers, William Lettis & Associates, Inc. Ephemeral creek and Sarah Pearce, San Francisco Estuary Institute Bay, ocean or natural lakes Historical wetlands research by the San Francisco Estuary Institute Lakes jon n Artificial bodies of water the current waterways of the San Mateo area, including maps. Historical tidal marshes and willow groves were researched by San a This map shows Z Water spreads over the ground the creek and storm drain network and present-day watershed boundaries. Francisco Estuary Institute using a variety of sources including the U. S. Bay fill Also shown are the historical creeks, tidal marshes, and lakes. Many of these Coast Survey. Complete documentation can be obtained from Anne Tillery Willow grove historical water features no longer exist. Urbanization resulted in the construction or Janet Sowers at William Lettis & Associates, Inc. in Walnut Creek, or El El El Present watersheds of underground storm drains and engineered channels, the filling of tidal www.museumca.org/creeks. The base map showing present geographic Tidal marsh and sloughs marshes and the bay, and construction of reservoirs. features consists of portions of the following U. S. Geological Survey 7.5- Modern tidal marsh formed after ~1850 minute topographic quadrangles: San Mateo 1993, Montara Mountain (1997) Notes: Only larger features are shown. Creeks and engineered channels and Redwood Point (1993). We added major new roads and highways. Now filled land must have minimum watershed areas of 0.2 square kilometers, and storm Canal Historical tidal marsh, circa 1850, still present SAN FRANCISCO BAY drains must have minimum diameters of 24 inches to be included on this Financial support was provided by the State Water Resources Control Board ek map. through CNPS Pollution Control Grant agreement No. 04-139-552-0 awarded Cre to San Francisco Estuary Institute. Canal Highline Engineered channels include both natural creeks significantly reinforced by Hills 1 en 1 0 1 MILE concrete or rock, and artificial channels, ditches, and canals not coincident was provided by the cities of Belmont, Burlingame, re 2 Technical assistance G with a historical creek. Some newer engineered channels are designed to Foster City, Hillsborough, Millbrae, Redwood City, San Bruno, San Carlos, 1000 0 1000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET mimic natural channels. San Mateo, the County of San Mateo, and by CalTrans. Field and editorial El Portal 1 .5 0 1 KILOMETER assistance were provided by Christopher Richard. The map was drafted by SCALE Accuracy: Every effort was made to produce an accurate map however, all Jason Holmberg. lines should be considered approximate. There is error in the historical maps, in the transfer of historical information to modern maps, and in the modern Fair Use and Citation Policy: This work is dedicated to the public domain, maps themselves. In addition, natural shifting of creeks and fluctuations in and we encourage the general public to use the information openly and the extent of marshes and lagoons can be expected both before and after appropriately. Proper citation for this map is: Creek Anza the historical maps or photos were made. Historical marsh and lagoon Tillery, A. C., Sowers, J.M., and Pearce, S., 2006, Creek & Watershed Map e ra Lagoon boundaries are considered accurate to within 1000 feet on either side of the of San Mateo & Vicinity: Oakland Museum of California, Oakland, CA, 1:25,800 lb San Andreas il Burlingame line shown. Historical creek locations are accurate to within 200 feet, ephemeral scale. Reservoir M Recreation channels to within 500 feet. Present-day creek and storm drain locations are Lagoon considered accurate to within 100 feet on either side of the line shown. How this map was made: Storm drains, engineered channels, flood control channels, and present-day creeks were compiled from city and county data, 2004 aerial photography, and field inspection. The historical locations of William Lettis & Associates, Inc. creeks were interpreted from 1943 aerial photography, and 1850-1910 historical k e SAN FRANCISCO BAY e r C C C Creek POINTS OF INTEREST (Continued) For adjoining area see Creek & Watershed Map of Daly City 15. Pulgas Water Temple. Built by San stream in its natural environment. From Francisco in 1934 to celebrate the the creek trail, notice the point bars and Poplar bringing of water from the Hetch Hetchy cut banks that form at the bends of the Reservoir to the Bay Area, this landmark creek. Point bars occur at the inside of r. is well worth a visit. The temple itself is a bend where the sediment deposits. Mills C a stoic circle of fluted columns in the Cut banks occur at the outside of a ek re e style of ancient Romans whose bend where erosion occurs. Notice the C m engineering methods inspired the Hetch alternating sequence of small pools and a g Hetchy water system. The serene riffles, typical in a natural channel. To n li setting adjoins Crystal Springs see a stream reach eroded into bedrock, r Reservoir, where this imported drinking peek down behind the first play u B water is stored for San Francisco and structure. Do you see the same many Peninsula communities. The features? water temple is located about 1.5 miles Easton south of the map's edge along Caada 18. Bair Islands Restoration Project. Road. Originally islands of pickleweed marsh, San Creek later partially diked for salt ponds, Bair 16. Water Dog Lake. Banker William Islands were once slated for Ralston had this lake built in the 1800s development similar to Foster City. In Creek to provide domestic water for his 1982, Redwood City voters turned down Belmont estate. Located in the heavily the project in favor of preserving these wooded canyon of Belmont Creek, the old marshes. In 1998, the Bair Islands Andreas Creek lake is now in a city park within an open became part of the Don Edwards Terrace space preserve. The trail to the lake is National Wildlife Refuge. Still largely a wide fire road, which takes you bounded by levees from their salt-pond gh through native forests and past views days, there are plans to restore the Ralston lou POINTS OF INTEREST S across the bay. Connecting trails are islands to true tidal marshes by Lagoon Lagoon Lagoon popular for mountain biking. breaching the levees and allowing the 1. Junipero Serra bay to again ebb and flow over its old County Park. This large, Creek This large city haunts. Restoration will also reduce the 108-acre park set in the Sanchez k 17. Twin Pines Park. ee park offers groomed lawns, picnic areas, mosquito population by eliminating foothills of the Santa Cruz Cr and play structures as well as natural stagnant-water breeding sites. A trail Mountains includes the areas where you can walk alongside from Whipple Avenue (off the map) headwaters of El Zanjon, a creek lie es Belmont Creek in the shade of oaks, follows the levee around Inner Bair that once flowed through San L l eucalyptus, and redwood trees. Here, Island. a City Bruno. As you cross the creek on the e Belmont Creek looks like a mountain park entrance road, look upstream to S see the creek flowing in its natural channel with native streamside vegetation. Creek Downstream, the creek flows in an Central engineered channel. Notice that despite the fact that it is flowing through the natural setting Lake of a large park, the engineered channel banks Foster lack vegetation. k Cherry Canyon e re 2. San Bruno City Park. Tiny El Zanjon (big C ditch) flows in a shallow, concrete channel across this large park, its natural channel replaced l during development. Follow the channel behind Creek ore the swimming pool, along DeSoto Way, and B eventually to the childrenÕs play structure where San the creek disappears into an underground storm Lagoon drain. Near the baseball diamond, the creek Slough runs through a parking lot where it is shallow enough to drive across. Interestingly, this same trapezoidal, concrete channel can be traced to Mateo Creek Junipero Serra Park, about one kilometer upstream. Mateo t t t n n 3. Mosta Grove. The downstream reaches of n o o Millbrae Creek are hidden underground except Creek o for a small glimpse here and there. One of these m Borel l glimpses is available along the trail at Mosta 8. Ryder Park. The main e Grove. Named after MillbraeÕs sister city in Malta, ecologic focus of Ryder Park is B Lagoon Mosta Grove has a paved walking path following the mouth of San Mateo Creek Marina the historic path of the Millbrae Creek through entering San Francisco Bay. Beyond San a giant eucalyptus grove. Although the creek the large lawns, carefully landscaped is underground through much of the park, you trails, and extensive playground, a large, can catch a glimpse of the creek where it comes modern, pedestrian suspension bridge Creek in from the street and just before it flows under marks the creek mouth. Here, the the ball field. Shellmound Gurgle is a sculptural monument Beresford to the Indian shellmounds that once typified the 4. Shorebird Sanctuary. To see Mills Creek vicinity and an ingeniously engineered device O O complete its journey to the bay, visit BurlingameÕs creatively emphasizing the interaction of the O ' ' ' Shorebird Sanctuary at the mouth of the creek.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lower Crystal Springs Dam Improvements and Skyline Bridge Replacement Projects
    Lower Crystal Springs Dam Improvements and Skyline Bridge Replacement Projects Highlights, Timelines & FAQs In 2018, work was competed on several interconnected efforts by the County of San Mateo and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) to make improvements to the Lower Crystal Springs Dam and replaced the bridge on top of the dam, which allows the re-opening of Skyline Boulevard. Below are some key facts: Lower Crystal Springs Dam Improvement Highlights (SFPUC Project): • Doubling the width of the spillway to 200 feet • Raising the parapet wall on top of the dam by 9 feet • Replacing the stilling basin (which stills released water before it enters San Mateo Creek) with a new larger basin and erosion protection at the toe of the dam • $35 million total project cost, over two years (completed December 2012) Skyline Bridge Replacement Highlights (County of San Mateo project): • The new bridge is 626 feet long and 51.5 feet wide and approximately 7 feet higher than the former bridge. • Constructing retaining walls at the Scenic Vista Point parking area due to the change in bridge elevation. • Created a new 15-foot wide recreational trail on the west side of the bridge that is separated from vehicular traffic and providing connectivity for Crystal Springs Regional Trail users. • Installed new split rail fencing. • A new trail section south of the bridge allows trail users to continue along the Crystal Springs Regional Trail to the relatively new “South of Dam” trail section. • PG&E relocated overhead 230kV electrical transmission lines to the underside of the new bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioassessment and Water Quality Monitoring in the San Mateo Creek Watershed San Mateo County, California
    Bioassessment and Water Quality Monitoring in the San Mateo Creek Watershed San Mateo County, California San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program August 2005 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Bioassessment and Water Quality Monitoring in the San Mateo Creek Watershed San Mateo County, California San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Prepared for the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program by EOA, Inc. 1410 Jackson St. Oakland, CA 94612 August 2005 This Page Intentionally Left Blank TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................... i 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................1 2.1 Description of Study Area ...................................................................................................1 2.2 Regulatory Information........................................................................................................1 2.3 Previous Water Quality Investigations ................................................................................2 3.0 METHODS ..............................................................................................................................2 3.1 Bioassessment....................................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Section 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4- Biological Resources
    SECTION 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section discusses the existing sensitive biological resources of the San Francisco Bay Estuary (the Estuary) that could be affected by project-related construction and locally increased levels of boating use, identifies potential impacts to those resources, and recommends mitigation strategies to reduce or eliminate those impacts. The Initial Study for this project identified potentially significant impacts on shorebirds and rafting waterbirds, marine mammals (harbor seals), and wetlands habitats and species. The potential for spread of invasive species also was identified as a possible impact. 3.4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SETTING HABITATS WITHIN AND AROUND SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY The vegetation and wildlife of bayland environments varies among geographic subregions in the bay (Figure 3.4-1), and also with the predominant land uses: urban (commercial, residential, industrial/port), urban/wildland interface, rural, and agricultural. For the purposes of discussion of biological resources, the Estuary is divided into Suisun Bay, San Pablo Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay (See Figure 3.4-2). The general landscape structure of the Estuary’s vegetation and habitats within the geographic scope of the WT is described below. URBAN SHORELINES Urban shorelines in the San Francisco Estuary are generally formed by artificial fill and structures armored with revetments, seawalls, rip-rap, pilings, and other structures. Waterways and embayments adjacent to urban shores are often dredged. With some important exceptions, tidal wetland vegetation and habitats adjacent to urban shores are often formed on steep slopes, and are relatively recently formed (historic infilled sediment) in narrow strips.
    [Show full text]
  • Podcast Show Notes & Transcript
    SHOW NOTES & TRANSCRIPT EPISODE SHOW NOTES Episode Title: Crystal Springs Dam Episode # & Date: Episode #24 – April 9, 2020 About this Episode: Peter uncovers the history of San Mateo’s great drinking water and the impressive Crystal Springs Dam that makes it possible. Episode Web Page: https://sanmateofocus.com/crystal-springs-dam/ EPISODE TRANSCRIPT This is San Mateo Focus, I’m Peter Radsliff filling in this week for Judy Gordon. When choosing what to present for this episode, it wasn’t lost on Judy and I how surreal life is right now and whether talking about local topics even made a difference in a San Mateo that is locked- down. But maybe because of this lack of normalcy, it’s all the more important to ensure we have some semblance of routine in our lives. It’s with that in mind that we offer ongoing stories of San Mateo’s history, culture, food, and things to do. Onto this week’s episode. When San Mateans hear the words Hetch Hetchy, most know it’s the name of a valley in Yosemite National Park about a four-hour drive away. Some might also know it’s the site of the impressive 431- foot tall O’Shaughnessy Dam that forms the Hetch Hetchy reservoir, which feeds the 160-mile long journey to Upper Crystal Springs Reservoir for us San Mateans to drink. What most probably don’t know is that the Lower Crystal Springs reservoir first existed because of the 141-foot tall Crystal Springs Dam that was built over San Mateo Creek in 1888, a full 35 years before O’Shaughnessy Dam opened in Hetch Hetchy! In this episode we’re going to explore the history of the Crystal Springs Dam and how vital it is to the lifestyle, economy, and safety of San Mateo.
    [Show full text]
  • Tidal Marsh Recovery Plan Habitat Creation Or Enhancement Project Within 5 Miles of OAK
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California California clapper rail Suaeda californica Cirsium hydrophilum Chloropyron molle Salt marsh harvest mouse (Rallus longirostris (California sea-blite) var. hydrophilum ssp. molle (Reithrodontomys obsoletus) (Suisun thistle) (soft bird’s-beak) raviventris) Volume II Appendices Tidal marsh at China Camp State Park. VII. APPENDICES Appendix A Species referred to in this recovery plan……………....…………………….3 Appendix B Recovery Priority Ranking System for Endangered and Threatened Species..........................................................................................................11 Appendix C Species of Concern or Regional Conservation Significance in Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California….......................................13 Appendix D Agencies, organizations, and websites involved with tidal marsh Recovery.................................................................................................... 189 Appendix E Environmental contaminants in San Francisco Bay...................................193 Appendix F Population Persistence Modeling for Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California with Intial Application to California clapper rail …............................................................................209 Appendix G Glossary……………......................................................................………229 Appendix H Summary of Major Public Comments and Service
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Plan
    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 34 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 68 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 59 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 50 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2600 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111 PHONE: (415) 352-3600 January 2008 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed and adopted by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission in 1968 and submitted to the California Legislature and Governor in January 1969. The Bay Plan was prepared by the Commission over a three-year period pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965 which established the Commission as a temporary agency to prepare an enforceable plan to guide the future protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline. In 1969, the Legislature acted upon the Commission’s recommendations in the Bay Plan and revised the McAteer-Petris Act by designating the Commission as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the Act and the Bay Plan for the protection of the Bay and its great natural resources and the development of the Bay and shore- line to their highest potential with a minimum of Bay fill.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.9 Land Use and Planning
    Redwood City New General Plan 4.9 Land Use and Planning 4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING This section describes existing land uses in and around the plan area, as well as applicable land use policies and regulations. Information in this section was derived from a technical land use background report, Redwood City General Plan Land Use Report, prepared in June 2008 by Hogle-Ireland, Inc., as well as CirclePoint’s reconnaissance of the plan area. 4.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The plan area covered by the New General Plan consists of the corporate City limits as well as lands within the City’s sphere of influence. The plan area comprises approximately 38 square miles within a diverse physical setting, with flat lands near the Bayfront area; hills in the western portion of the City; and the San Francisco Bay, stream corridors, and tidal marshes in the north and east. Current Land Use Patterns The current land use patterns reflect the diverse physical features within the plan area, with most office, commercial and residential uses south and west of U.S. 101 while most open space and industrial uses are north of U.S. 101 or in the southwestern foothill areas. The City consists of residential neighborhoods with varying densities and characters; a conventional downtown with retail, restaurant, office, and civic uses; active industrial areas, including research and development and heavy industrial uses associated with the Port of Redwood City; open space areas; and civic areas, including County offices, parks, schools, and community centers. These uses have been clustered within five distinct areas of the City reflecting their specific geographies and function, described below.
    [Show full text]
  • State of the Regional Water System Report
    San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 2018 State of the Regional Water System Report State of the Regional Water System September 2018 San Francisco Public Utilities Commission September 2018 1 San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 2018 State of the Regional Water System Report List of Contributors: Manouchehr Boozarpour Mary Ellen Carroll Jason Chen John Chester Eric Choi Jonathan Chow Fonda Davidis Andrew DeGraca Alexis Dufour Anna Fedman Stacie Feng Ed Forner Josh Gale Nancy Hom Margaret Hannaford Annie Li Nicholas Martin Adam Mazurkiewicz Chris Nelson Tim Ramirez Scott Riley Brian Rolley Ken Salmon Enio Sebastiani Eddy So Shailen Talati Dan Wade James West Mike Williams Derrick Wong San Francisco Public Utilities Commission September 2018 2 San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 2018 State of the Regional Water System Report Table of Contents 1. Overview........................................................................................................................................... 13 1.1 Purpose of this Report ............................................................................................................... 13 1.2 Value Added Under Water System Improvement Program ...................................................... 14 1.3 Continuing to Invest .................................................................................................................. 15 1.4 Recent Notable Events .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hazard Vulnerability Assessment
    SAN MATEO COUNTY HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT APPENDIX TO THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN (HAZARD + RISK = VULNERABILITY) San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office Homeland Security Division Office of Emergency Services J A N U A R Y 2 , 2 0 1 5 SAN MATEO COUNTY HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT County of San Mateo Sheriff’s Office Homeland Security Division Office of EmergencyServices 400 County Center Redwood City, CA 94063 650-363-4955 www.smcsheriff.com i 01/02/2015 SAN MATEO COUNTY HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL ............................................................................................................................. 1 SAN MATEO COUNTY PROFILE ................................................................................................ 3 HAZARD 1: DAM FAILURE ...................................................................................................... 5 HAZARD 2: DROUGHT ......................................................................................................... 11 HAZARD 3: EARTHQUAKES ................................................................................................... 15 HAZARD 4: EXTREME HEAT .................................................................................................. 23 HAZARD 5: FLOODING ......................................................................................................... 25 HAZARD 6: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Berryessa Recycling Facility
    Oracle Design Tech Charter School Civil Improvements Biological Resources Report Project #3732-01 Prepared for: Shannon George David J. Powers & Associates 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 San José, CA 95126 Prepared by: H. T. Harvey & Associates 9 October 2015 983 University Avenue, Building D Los Gatos, CA 95032 Ph: 408.458.3200 F: 408.458.3210 Table of Contents Section 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Existing Site Characteristics ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2.1 Property Description ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2.2 Existing Land Use and Topography ............................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Proposed Site Development .................................................................................................................................. 2 Section 2.0 Methods .................................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Background Review ...............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Dredging at Lagoon Intake Structure Initial Study
    DREDGING AT LAGOON INTAKE STRUCTURE INITIAL STUDY City of Foster City September 16, 2016 1 2 SEPTEMBER 2016 FOSTER CITY DREDGING AT LAGOON INTAKE STRUCTURE INITIAL STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................ 5 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ....................................................... 27 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ............................................................................................ 29 I. Aesthetics .......................................................................................................... 30 II. Agriculture and Forest Resources ...................................................................... 52 III. Air Quality .......................................................................................................... 54 IV. Biological Resources .......................................................................................... 74 V. Cultural Resources ........................................................................................... 111 VI. Hydrology and Water Quality............................................................................ 116 VII. Hazards ........................................................................................................... 136 VIII. Geology and Soils ............................................................................................ 146 IX. Greenhouse Gas Emissions .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Invasive Spartina Project Treatment Schedule
    2021 Invasive Spartina Project Treatment Schedule Updated: 7/26/21 Environmental Review Site Locations (map) Treatment Methods Where: How: Herbicide Use: of Imazapyr Treatment Method Treatment Location Treatment Dates* Imazapyr Herbicide Manual Digging, Site Sub-Area *(COI=Dug during Complete Amphibious Aerial: Mowing, Site Name Sub-Area Name Truck Backpack Airboat # Number course of inventory) for 2021? vehicle Broadcast and/or Covering 01a Channel Mouth X Lower Channel (not including 01b X mouth) 01c Upper Channel X Alameda Flood 4 years with no 1 Upper Channel - Union City Blvd to Control Channel 01d invasive Spartina I-880 (2017-2020) 01e Strip Marsh No. of Channel Mouth X No Invasive 01f Pond 3-AFCC Spartina 2020 02a.1a Belmont Slough Mouth X X X 02a.1b Belmont Slough Mouth South X X X Upper Belmont Slough and 02a.2 X X X Redwood Shores 02a.3 Bird Island X 02a.4 Redwood Shores Mitigation Bank X 02b.1 Corkscrew Slough X X Steinberger Slough South, 02b.2 X X Redwood Creek Northwest 02c.1a B2 North Quadrant West 8/14 X X 02c.1b B2 North Quadrant East 8/24 X X 02c.2 B2 North Quadrant South 8/12-8/13 X X 02d.1a B2 South Quadrant West X 02d.1b B2 South Quadrant East X 02d.2 B2 South Quadrant (2) X 2 Bair/Greco Islands 02d.3 B2 South Quadrant (3) X 02e Westpoint Slough NW X X 02f Greco Island North X X 02g Westpoint Slough SW and East X X 02h Greco Island South X X 02i Ravenswood Slough & Mouth X Ravenswood Open Space Preserve 02j.1 X (north Hwy 84) * Scheduling occurs throughout the treatment season.
    [Show full text]