Appendix A. The history of the Stone and Kelsey murders and Bloody Island Massacre as told by William Ralganal Benson.

This version was taken from the Elem Indian Colony website, http://www.elemnation.org/bloodyisland.htm. Errors in spelling and punctuation were not corrected, as they may be part of the original version. The first published version is likely to have been found in ‘The Stone and Kelsey “Massacre” on the Shores of Clear Lake in 1849’ by W.R. Benson. “California Historical Society Quarterly”, Vol. 11, pp. 266-273, 1932. Introduction by P. Radin. The introduction in the paragraph below is an incomplete excerpt from the introduction by P. Radin.

Introduction: The writer, William Benson has at various times been informant and interpreter for most of the American anthropologists who have visited Lake County. He was born about 1862 near Lakeport, then very thinly settled by whites. He is a Pomo, and has been hereditary chief of both the Xolo-Napo and the XabopNapo divisions of his people. His Pomo name is Raganal, which means the "Wampum Gatherer" His family name (Benson) comes from LIZ father, a white settler, who followed the practice of some early squaw men or' abandoning white life entirely and residing permanently in the Pomo village. He died when his son was a mere child, and Benson there fore spoke only Pomo in his youth. Benson bears a high reputation for integrity and reliability. He is wholly without formal schooling, and his knowledge of English was picked up almost entirely by ear. However he taught himself to read as well, so that to some extent, his purely-phonetic spelling has corrected it self. Not only were reading and writing self acquired but also the use of the typewriter. Benson used it in the manner approved of those unfamiliar with business schools and innocent of the touch system. The preparation of this (the following narrative) was entirely his own idea and the story is here reproduced precisely as he wrote it. His original typescript is now on file in the Bancroft library, of the University of California.

The Wampum Gatherer's Narrative

The facts of Stone and Kelsey Massacre, in Lake County California. As it was stated to me by the five Indians who went to stone and Kelsey's house purpose to kill the two white men, after debating all night. Shuk and Xasis. these two men were the instigators of the massacre. it was not because Shuk and Xasis had any Ill feeling towards the two White men, there were two Indian villages, one on west side and one on the east side. the Indians in both of these camps were starving. stone 6 and Kelsey head would not let them go out hunting or fishing. Shuk and Xasis was stone and Kelsey head riders looking out for stock. cattle horses and hogs. the horses and cattle were all along the lake on the west side and some in bachelors valley, also in upper lake. so it took 18 indian herdsman to look after the stock in these places. Shuk and Xasis was foreman's for the herds. and only those herds got anything to eat. each one of these herders got 4 cups of wheat for a days work. this cup would hold about one and a half pint of water~ the wheat was boiled before it was given to the herders. and the herders shire with their families. the herders who had large families were also starving. about 20 old people died during the winter or from starvation. from severe whipping 4 died. a nephew of an indian lady who were living with

A-1 stone was shoot to death by stone. the mother of this young man was sick and starving this sick woman told her son to go over to stones wife or to the sick woman's sister. Tell your aunt that I am starving and sick tell her that I would like to have a handful of wheat. The young man lost no time going to Stones house. The young man told the aunt what his mother said, the lady then gave the young man 5 cups of wheat and tied it up in her apron and the young man started for the camp. Stone came about that time and called the young man back The young man stopped Stone who was horse back rode up to the young man took the wheat from him and then shot. The young man died two days after. Such as whipping and tying their hands together with rope. The rope then thrown over a limb of a tree and then drawn up until the indians toes barely touched the ground and let them hang there for hours. This was common punishment. When a father or mother of a young girl was asked to bring the girl to his house by stone or Kelsey, if this order was not obeyed he or her would be whipped or hung by the hands. Such punishment occurred two or three times a week and many of the old man and woman died from fear and starvation. These two white men had the indians to build a high fence around THEIR village and the head riders were to see that any indian went out side of this fence after dark. If anyone was caught out side of this fence after dark was taken to Stone and Kelsey's house and there was tied both hands and feet and placed in a room and kept there all night. The next day was taken to a tree and was tied down, then the strongest man was chosen to whip the prisoner. The village on the west side was the Qn-Lah-na-poh tribe the village on the east side, Xa-BahNa-oh tribes. The starvation of the indians was the cause of the massacre of Stone and Kelsey. The indians who was starving hired a man by the name of Shuk and another man by the name of Xasis to kill~ a beef for them Shuk and Xasis agreed to go out and kill beef for them. The two men then planned to go out that night and kill a beef for them. Their plan then was to take the best horses in the barn. Stones horse which was the best lasso horse. So between the two men, they agreed to take both Stones and Kelsey's horses. So the two men went to Stone's and Kelsey's house to see if they had went to bed. It was raining a little, moonlight now and then. They found Stone and Kelsey's horses and saddles. Shuk wanted to do the job in the day time but Xasis said Stone or Kelsey would sure find them and would kill the both of them. Shuk said then somebody is going to get killed on this job. So anyhow they went ~t west they knew where a large band was feeding then soon rounded the band up and Shuk was to make the first lasso Xasis was good on lashing the feet of an ox so he was to do the foot lassoing. Shuk said to Xasis get ready I see large one near, hurry and come one. Shuk got a chance and threw the rope on the large ox Xasis came as quick as he could the band then begin to stampede, the ox also started with the band, the ground was wet and slippery and raining and the ox got away. Oasis tried to lasso the horses but could not get near it to throw the rope on. The horse soon found the other horses and it was the much harder to get the horse, so the chase was given up. The two went back to the camp and reported to the people who hired them, told them the bad luck they had. Xasis then took the horse he had back to the barn which was Kelsey’s horse. All the men who hired Shuk.an4xasis was gathering in Xasis horse. They said Stone and Kelsey would kill them as soon as they would find out that the horses was taken without them knowing. One man got up and suggested that the tribe give Stone and Kelsey forty sticks of beads which means i6ooo be ads or 100 dollars, no one agreed. Another man suggested that he or Shuk tell Stone or Kelsey that the horses was stolen,. On one agreed. And another man suggested that the other horse should be turned out and tell Stone and Kelsey both horses were stolen, no one agreed. Everything looked bad for Shuk and Xasis. No one agreed with Shuk and

A-2 Xasis to kill the two white men at daylight one man agreed to go with Shuk and Xasis, his indian name 13a-tus was known by the whites as Basi. and a little while later Kre-nas agreed, and as the four men start out another man joined the Shuk Xasis band, Ma-laxa-Qo-Tu. While this debate was going on the hired or servants boys and girls of Stone's and Kelsey's were told by Shuk and Xasis to Carrie out all the guns, bows, and arrows, knives and everything like weapon was taken out of the house by these girls and boys so the two white men was helpless in defense. So Shuk and Xasis knew the white men did not have anything to defend themselves with and they were sure of their victims. So the five men went to the house where Stone always built a fire and a large pot in which he boiled wheat for the indian herders (about 16 of them) These five men waited with the pot full of fire which was taken from the fireplace and said to the indians what's the matter you boys came early this morning, something wrong? The indians said oh nothing we hungry that's all. Qka-Mas, or Coyote Jim as he was known by the whites, said to the men, I thought you men came to kill this man. Give me those arrows and bow. He jerked the bow and the arrows away from Shuk and drew it as he did Stone rose quickly and turned to Qka-Mas and said what are you trying to do Jim, and as Stone said it the indian cut loose. The arrow struck the victim in the pit of his stomach. The victim immediately pulled the arrow out and ran for the house, fighting his way, he broke one mans arm with the pot he had and succeeded in getting in the house and locking the door after him. A little later Kelsey came and noticed the blood on the doorstep, the indians advanced. Kelsey seen that the indians meant business, he said to them, no matter Kelsey. Kelsey -Bueno hombre para nosotros, The indians charged and two of the indians caught Kelsey an4 the fight began. In this fight Kelsey was stabbed twice in the back . Kelsey managed to brake loose. He ran for the creek and the indians after him. A man by the name of Qa-sis or blind Joe as he was known by the whites was in pursuit, shot Kelsey in the back. Kelsey managed to pull the arrow out just as he got to the creek and jumped in the water dove under and came out on the other side of the creek, where several indians were waiting. There was one man Kelsey knew well, he thought who would save him. This man was Joe Sufis, indian name Ju-Luh. He begged Joe to save him. Joe he could not save him from being killed Joe said to Kelsey its too late Kelsey, if I attempt to save you I also will be killed. cannot save you Kelsey was getting weak from loss of blood. Big Jim and Joe had Kelsey by the arms. Big Jim said to his wife. This is a man who killed our son~ This this spear, now you have the chance to take revenge. Big Jim's wife took the spear and stabbed the white man in the heart, this woman's name was Da-Pi-Ts. The body was left laying there for the coyotes. This happened on the east side of the creek. While this was going on. Xasis and QraMas was trailing the blood up stairs for a hour almost. Qra-Mas said they crawled up stairs breathless thinking that Stone was yet alive. They opened the door of a wheat bend saw Stone's foot. Qra-Mas drew his arrow across the bow ready to cut loose, for a moment they watched the lifeless body. Xasis discovered that the body was dead. They then took the body and threw it out the window, and then they called all the people to come and take what wheat an4 corn they could pack and take to a hiding place where they could not be found by the whites, so the indians of both villages came and took all the wheat and corn they could gather in the place and then went to hide themselves. Some went to Fishers point and some went to Scotts Valley. The men went out to kill cattle for their use and every man who was able to ride caught himself a horse. In around the valley and Upper Lake and Bachelor valley. There was about one thousand head of horse and about four thousand head of cattle's, so the indians lived fat for a while. Qra-Nas and Ma-Laq-Qo-Tou was chosen to watch the trail that

A-3 came from Lower lake And Shuk and Xasis was watching the trail on the west side of the valley. Yom-may-nah and Ge-we-lah were watching the trail that came from eight mile valley. Two--or three weeks had passed, no white man were seen on either trail. On day, Qra-Nas and Ma-Lag- Qe-Ton seen two white man on horseback come over the hill, they stopped on top of the hill, they saw nothing stirring around Stone and Kelsey's places. No indians in the village. Qra-Nas and Ma-Laq-Qe-Tou went around behind a small hill to cut the white men off. The white man saw the indians trying to go around behind them the whites turned and went back before the indians got in back of them so three or four days went by, no more white men were seen. One day the lake watchers saw a boat come around the point. Some news coming, they said to each other. Two of the men went to the landing to see what the news was. They were told that the white warriors had come to kill all the indians around the lake. So hide the best you can. The whites are making boats with that they are coming up the lake. So we are told by the peopled down there. So they had two men go up on top of Uncle Sam mountain, the north peak from there they watch the Lower Lake. For three days they watched the lake. One morning they saw a long boat come up the lake with pole on the bow with red cloth and several of them came every one of the boats had ten to 15 men. The smoke signal was given by the two watchmen. Every indians around the lake knew the soldiers were coming up the lake. And how may of them and these who were watching the trail saw the infantry coming over the hill from Lower Lake. Those two men were watching from Ash Hill. They went to Stones and Kelsey's house. Prom there the horsemen ride down toward the lake and the soldiers went across this valley toward Lakeport. They went on to Scotts valley. Shoot a few shots with their big guns and went on to Upper Lake and camped on Emerson Bill. From there they saw the indians camped on the island. The next morning the white warriors went across in their long dugouts. The indians said they would meet them in peace. So when the whites landed the indians went to welcome them but the white men was determined to kill~ them. Ga-wi-Lih said he threw up is hands and said no harm me good man. But the white man fired and shot him in the arm and another shot came and hit a man standing along side of him and was killed. So they had to run and fight back, as they ran back in the tulles and hid under the water, four or five of them gave a little battle and another man was shot in the shoulder, some of them jumped in the water and hid in the tulles. Many women and children were killed on around this island. One lady (a indian) told me she saw two white men coming their guns up in the air and on their guns hung a little girl. They brought it to the creek and threw it in the water. And a ]little while later two more men came in the same manner. This time they had a little boy on the end of their guns and also threw it in the water. A little ways from her she said laid a woman shot through the shoulder. She held her little baby in her arms. Two white men came running toward the woman and baby. They stabbed the woman and the baby and threw both of them over the bank into the water. She said she heard the woman say Oh my baby! she said when they gathered the dead they found all the little ones were killed by being stabbed. And many of the women were also killed by stabbing. She said it took them four or five days to gather up the dead. And the dead were all burnt on the east side of the peak. They called it the island creek (Ba-Dan-Bi-Da-Meh). This old lady also told about the whites hang a man on Emerson Island this indian was met by the soldiers while marching from Scotts valley to Upper Lake, the indian was hung and a large fire bunt under the hanging indian And another indian was caught near Emerson Pith. This one was tied to a tree and burnt to death. The next morning the soldiers started for Mendocino county. And there killed many indians. The camp was on the

A-4 ranch now known as Ed Howell ranch. The soldiers made camp a little ways below, about one half mile from the indian camp. The indians wanted to surrender, but the soldiers did no give them time. the soldiers went in the camp and shot them do as though they were dogs. Some of them escaped by going down a little creek leading to the river. And some of them hid in the bush. And those who hid in the brush most of them were killed, and those who hid in the water was over looked they killed mostly women and children. The soldiers caught two boys ages about 14 or 15 the soldiers took them to Lower Lake, and then turned them loose when the solders started the two boys back, they loaded them with meat and bard bread One said as soon as they go out of site they threw the meat away and some of the bread also he said they went on a dog trot for dear life. Thinking all the time that the soldiers would follow them and kill them. He said they would side track once in a while and get up on a high peak to see if the soldiers were coming he said when they got back that night they could nothing but cry. He said all the dead had been taken across to a large dance house had been and was cremated. Witness, Bo-Dom, Jao Beatti and Krao Lah, Indian name and old lady said her father dug a large hole in a bank of the river and they hid in the hole. One old man said that he was a boy at the time he said the soldiers shot his mother, she fell to the ground with her baby in her arms, he said his mother told him to climb high up in the tree so he did and from there he said he could see the soldiers running about the camp and shooting the men and woman and stabbing boys and girls. He said his mother was not yet dead and was telling him to keep quit. Two of the soldiers herd her talking and ran up to her and stabbed her and child. And a little ways from his mother, he said laid a man dying, holding his boy in his arms the soldiers also stabbed him, but did not kill the boy, they took the boy to the camp, crying, they gave it every thing they could find in camp but the little boy did not quit crying, it was about three years of age, when the soldiers were a getting ready to move camp they wrapped the boy up in a blanket and left the little boy setting by the fire wrapped up in a blanket and was still crying, and that boy is alive today, his name is Bill Ball, now lives in Boonville. One Old man told me about the soldiers killing the Indians in this same camp. He said young man from the description he gave me must have been about 18 or 20 years of age. He said he and another boy about the same age was taken by the soldiers and he said there were two soldiers in charge of them. One would walk ahead and one behind them, He said the soldiers took him and the other boy, they both were barefooted he said when they begin to climb the mountain between Mendocino and Lake county. He said they were made to keep up with the soldiers, their feet were getting sore but they had to keep up with the soldiers. When they were climbing over the Bettleresk mountain their feet were cut by the rocks and their feet were bleeding and they could not walk up with they soldiers. The man behind would jab them with the sharp knife fixed on the end of the gun. Re said one of the soldiers came up and looked at their feet and went to a box, opened it took a cup and dipped something out of a sack and brought it to them and told them both to hold their feet's on a log near by. The soldier took a hand full of the stuff and rubbed it in the cuts on the bottom of their feet. He said he noticed that the stuff the soldier put on their feet looked like salt. Sure enough it was salt. The soldier tied cloth over their feet and told them not to take them off. He said the tears were rolling down his cheeks. He said all the soldiers came and stood around them laughing. He said they rolled and twisted for about two hours, and they also rubbed salt in the wounds on their seats and backs where they jabbed them with the soldiers’ big knife. As he called it. Two or three days later the chief soldier told them they could go back. They were then given meat and bread. All they could pack. He said

A-5 they started on their back journey, he said it was all most difficult for them to walk, but wrapped a lot of cloth around their feet and by doing so made their way alright. He said the meat and bread got too heavy for fast traveling so they threw the meat and some of the bread away. Looking back all the time thinking that the soldiers would follow them and kill them. Now and then they would side track and look back to see if the soldiers were following them. After seeing no soldiers following they would start out for another run. He said they traveled in such manner until they got to their home. He said to himself. Here I am not to see my mother and sister but to see their blood scattered over the ground like water and their bodies for coyotes to devour. He said he sat down under a tree and cried all day.

A-6 Appendix B. Geology Section of the Big Valley Ground Water Recharge Investigation Update (Christensen Associates Inc. 2003) Figure 5-4 included.

5.2 REGIONALGEOLOGICANDTECTONICSETTINGOFTHEBIG VALLEYAREA The Big Valley area is part of the large intra montane structural depression referred to as the Clear Lake Basin, located in the south central part of the northern Coast Ranges of California. The tectonics of this region is broadly dominated by the regional right shear of the San Andreas Fault system, part of the Pacific-North American plate boundary. This tectonic system is manifested by long relatively continuous right lateral strike slip faults oriented parallel to the NNW-SSE trend of the San Andreas fault along the coastline to the west. The strike slip faults form a pronounced regional grain that is seen both in the geologic structure (Figure 5-1) and in the terrain (Figure 5-2). As shown on Figure 5-1, the Clear Lake Basin occupies the central part of a large structural block defined by the Mayacama fault zone on the west and the Bartlett Springs fault zone on the east. This block is internally deformed by a complex pattern of faulting which, however, is also dominated by strike slip faults oriented parallel to the block boundary faults. Interactions among these faults during late Cenozoic including late Quaternary time have resulted in formation of the greater Clear Lake structural depression that includes both Big Valley and the constructional landforms of the Clear Lake volcanics. Figure 5-2 shows the principal faults that appear to form the Quaternary structural framework of the greater Clear Lake Basin. Some of these faults have established names (e.g. Collayomi, Big Valley faults) while others are assigned names herein for convenience of reference (e.g. "Clear Lake", "Scotts Valley", "Kelsey Creek" faults). The gross structural pattern shown on Figure 5-2 is one of several linear NNW-SSE oriented faults, the general trends of which are interrupted by more westerly oriented cross faults in the Big Valley area. Overall, however, the principal fault reaching this area from the southeast is the Collayomi fault which dies out northward between Big Valley and Mount Konocti in the southwest part of the basin, and the principal faults extending to the north are the Clover Valley and Clear Lake faults on the northeast side of the basin. This pattern describes a "right stepover" of lateral movement which in a right lateral fault system, results in a local region of extension that tends to be expressed by a structural depression and, at the surface, a topographic basin such as, in this case, the Clear Lake Basin. This mechanism is illustrated on Figure 5-3 diagrams A and B, and its application to the Clear Lake structural depression is noted in McLaughlin, 1981, among others. Figure 5-3 diagrams C and D illustrate the compressional effects that result from a left step of faults in a right slip system. As is discussed in Section 5.4 we consider this mechanism to be a likely explanation of the uplift of the Kelseyville Formation in the southern part of Big Valley.

A-7 5.3 GEOTECTONICEVOLUTIONOFTHECLEARLAKEBASINAND VOLCANICS Various aspects of the geotectonic evolution of the Clear Lake basin and the Clear Lake Volcanics are discussed in the series of articles that are presented in U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1141. The two aspects that have special relevance for this ground water investigation update are: 1. The structural evolution of the Clear Lake intra montane basin, and 2. Some of the eruptive history of the Clear Lake volcanics field. These provide the basis for defining the conditions of the present ground water regime in Big Valley. McLaughlin (1981), Hearn and others (1981), and Sims (1988) all cite evidence that the eruption of the Clear Lake volcanics began around 0.6 ma or possibly as early as 1.1 ma. This eruptive activity formed the earliest positive evidence for the existence of a structural depression in the area of the present Clear Lake basin. However, this followed development of the structurally similar Cache basin to the southeast, starting around 2.9 ma, with sedimentation there continuing to <1.66 ma. The initiation of deposition of the mainly lacustrine Kelseyville Formation is thought to have been roughly contemporaneous with eruption of the rhyolite of Thurston Creek, age dated as about 0.6 ma. Sedimentation continued in a basin corresponding in location to present day Big Valley and the main body of Clear Lake until around 0.3 ma, and included the air fall deposition of the Kelsey lapilli tuff that now forms an important aquifer in the central and upper Big Valley area. The Kelsey Tuff is thought by Hearn and others (1988) to have been erupted from a vent on or south of Mt. Konocti and to be around 0.35 to 0.4 ma. Construction of the Clear Lake volcanic field including its principal edifice, Mt. Konocti, occurred during and following deposition of the Kelseyville Formation in the contiguous shallow lake. Despite the proximity of this eruptive activity, the Kelsey Tuff is the only known deposit of fragmental volcanic debris in the mostly fine-grained Kelseyville strata. Detailed analysis of cores of the basin sediments of Clear Lake has shown, however, that numerous layers of silt and clay-like volcanic ash are present throughout both the younger basin deposits and the older, but otherwise similar Kelseyville strata. The eruptive activity of the Clear Lake volcanic field continued long past the termination, owing to uplift, of deposition of the Kelseyville Formation. The youngest known eruptive activity produced an obsidian flow about 10,000 years ago, and geothermal activity continues at present. 5.4 QUATERNARYSTRUCTURE,STRATIGRAPHYANDLAND FORMS OFTHEBIGVALLEYAREA From mid to late middle Pleistocene time (c. 0.6-0.3 ma), the Pleistocene Big Valley – Clear Lake basin was the site of essentially continuous deposition as it gradually subsided. The subsidence was partly an on-going tectonic structural process but may also have resulted in some degree from transfer of magma from the underlying chamber to the surface as the Clear Lake volcanics eruptions continued. Studies of the paleontology and palynology (fossil pollen)

A-8 content of the Kelseyville strata show that they mostly accumulated within a shallow freshwater lake, although the lake receded enough for a forest to grow during at least one interval. At around 0.3 ma, however, the Big Valley area was uplifted above lake level, and the streams that had supplied the Kelseyville Formation sediment now began to flow across and erode the uplifted area. It appears that the uplift of the southerly half of the Big Valley area resulted from an episode of tectonism involving the interaction between the two major strike slip faults consisting of the Collayomi fault on the east and the Scotts Valley fault on the west, that formed the structural boundaries of the Big Valley basin as shown on Figure 5-4. This interaction appears to have been related to the compressional left stepover between the north end of the Collayomi fault and the south end of the Scotts Valley fault, across the Big Valley basin, and probably was triggered by an episode of right slip on one or both of these faults. The resulting compression was accommodated by thrust and left lateral movement, on NE-SW oriented cross faults, and by south side up thrust uplift along the WNW-ESE oriented Big Valley fault. Based on an approximate correlation between the exposed uplifted upper surface of the Kelseyville Formation at 1,640 feet elevation and the base of the basin deposits present along the southern part of Big Valley at about 1,215 feet elevation, the vertical displacement across the Big Valley fault may be roughly 400-425 feet. The landform that existed in the Big Valley part of the Big Valley-Clear Lake basin as the post c.0.3 ma fault uplift progressed was of a valley floor terrace that terminated on the north at a degrading fault scarp lake shoreline. The geomorphic form of the lower canyons of Kelsey, Sweetwater and possibly even Cole Creeks south and southeast of Big Valley suggest that the drainage from the watersheds of these canyons may have continued northwest to join the flows of Adobe and Highland Creeks at this time. The combined flow of the four or five drainages then continued across the newly exposed Big Valley former lake floor and entered the now reduced Clear Lake basin. This eventually resulted in the erosional excavation of the Adobe Creek valley and the deposition of a delta in the new south margin of the Clear Lake basin. Ultimately, the bottom of the new valley reached an elevation of about 1,280 feet, which is the approximate elevation of the present bottom of Clear Lake. The valley was then backfilled to its present surface elevation of about 1,380 feet, possibly as a result of reduced flow when Kelsey Creek was diverted back to its present course along the east margin of Big Valley. The history of the drainage of Kelsey Creek between its source in the mountains southeast of Big Valley and the Clear Lake Basin is of considerable significance for the understanding of the present geohydrologic regime of Big Valley. The patterns of both elevations and thickness distribution of the A3 and "Ash" aquifers in the Kelseyville Formation suggests that the deposition of both units reflects the existence of channels entering the Pleistocene Big Valley basin from its southwest and southeast corners. This was similar to the present drainage pattern with Adobe and Highland Creeks entering and flowing down the west side of the valley and Kelsey and Cole Creeks entering on the southeast. During accumulation of the Kelseyville Formation, however, the Kelsey/Cole Creek drainage appears to have followed northwest-aligned channels that extended diagonally across the center of the basin, as shown on Figure 5-9.

A-9 This pattern changed with the partial disruption of the basin that resulted from uplift of the ground south of the Big Valley fault. At that time, the tectonism that gave rise to the uplift and local tilting of the Kelseyville Formation apparently also shifted the course of Kelsey and probably also Cole Creeks, where these creeks flowed across the Collayomi fault southeast of Big Valley. Following this derangement, the outlet of Kelsey Creek into the Big Valley basin was shifted to the southwest corner of the valley, resulting in a single principal discharge of Kelsey, Adobe and Highland Creeks into the valley that underlies the present Adobe Creek floodplain along the west side of the basin. The coarser alluvium carried by the combined drainage through this valley was then deposited as the delta in the new lake margin to form the A2 aquifer, as shown on Figure 5-7. This pattern of deposition was modified by a subsequent diversion of the course of Kelsey Creek upstream from Big Valley, back to a point of entry in the south center of the valley basin margin. Following this diversion, which probably occurred in response to deformation along the Kelsey Creek fault as shown on Figure 5-4? Kelsey creek eroded a new channel floored by Kelseyville Formation and graded to the delta that had been deposited along the south margin of the smaller Clear Lake basin at the base of the Big Valley fault scarp. The revised drainage pattern then resulted in the development of a pair of younger outwash deltas that coalesced and continued the encroachment of Big Valley into the remaining Clear Lake Basin, forming the A1 aquifer system.

A-10 A-11 Appendix C. Detailed Soil Information from the Lake County Soil Survey.

The United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, now known as the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, has mapped and described the soils of Lake County (USDASCS 1989). The survey divides the land area into map units consisting of one or more major soils. The survey was done in greatest detail for the cropland and urban areas in valleys and lesser detail in the hills and mountains. Because of the reduced mapping detail in hills and mountains, it is more common to find map units with more than one soil in these areas. These units are called complexes when soils are found in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on a map and associations when it was not considered necessary to map them separately.

The soil survey contains a great deal of information on the soils, including a description of the soil profile, chemical and physical properties of the soils, engineering index properties, and soil and water features. It describes suitability of soils for uses such as agriculture, rangeland, timber and fire production, recreational development, building site development, sanitary facilities, construction materials, and water management.

Map units in the Kelsey Creek watershed with a total area greater than 200 acres are listed in the table below. These map units represent 90% of the area of the watershed. Almost all of the soils with a slope less than 5% are considered prime farmland, although the soil survey also details limitations for agriculture due to poor or excessive drainage, or nutrient availability for many of these map units. The survey also indicates that most of the soils considered suitable for timber production formed on volcanic parent material.

A-12 Table C. Slope, total area, parent material, and suitability for agriculture and timber production for soil map units with an area greater than 200 acres in the Kelsey Creek watershed (USDASCS 1989).

Map Slope Total Area Prime Timber Unit # Map Unit Name (%) (acres) Parent Material farmland production 121 Clear Lake clay, drained, cool 0-2 699 Lacustrine deposit x 122 Clear Lake Variant clay, drained 0-2 708 Lacustrine deposit x 123 Cole clay loam, drained 0-2 1361 Alluvium x Cole Variant clay loam, calcareous 125 substratum 0-2 289 Alluvium x 132 Forbesville loam 2-5 291 Alluvium x 157 Landlow Variant silty clay loam 0-2 485 Lacustrine deposit x 233 Still loam, stratified substratum 0-2 1339 Alluvium x 234 Still gravelly loam 0-2 317 Alluvium x Bottlerock-Glenview-Arrowhead 117 complex 5-30 914 Volcanic rock x 127 Collayomi-Aiken-Whispering complex 5-30 2493 Volcanic rock x 128 Collayomi-Aiken-Whispering complex 30-50 1470 Volcanic rock x 129 Collayomi-Whispering complex 30-50 566 Volcanic rock x 134 Forward Variant-Kidd association 30-50 752 Volcanic rock x 148 Kidd-Forward complex 5-30 448 Volcanic rock x 170 Maymen-Etsel-Speaker association 30-50 555 Sedimentary rock x 226 Speaker-Maymen-Marpa association 50-75 310 Sedimentary rock x 228 Speaker-Sanhedrin gravelly loams 50-75 293 Sedimentary rock x 245 Whispering-Collayomi complex 50-75 665 Volcanic rock x 104 Asbill clay loam 5-8 207 Sedimentary rock 107 Bally-Phipps complex 15-30 1153 Alluvium 108 Bally-Phipps-Haploxeralfs association 30-75 350 Alluvium 113 Benridge-Konocti association 30-50 772 Volcanic rock 133 Forbesville loam 5-15 589 Alluvium 141 Henneke-Montara complex 8-15 742 Ultramafic rock 142 Henneke-Montara-Rock outcrop complex 15-50 3500 Ultramafic rock 151 Konocti-Benridge complex 50-75 347 Volcanic rock 166 Maymen-Etsel-Mayacama complex 15-30 466 Sedimentary rock 167 Maymen-Etsel-Mayacama complex 30-75 1797 Sedimentary rock 169 Maymen-Etsel-Snook complex 30-75 546 Sedimentary rock 171 Maymen-Hopland-Etsel association 15-50 595 Sedimentary rock 172 Maymen-Hopland-Mayacama complex 9-30 321 Sedimentary rock 173 Maymen-Hopland-Mayacama association 30-50 2524 Sedimentary rock 174 Maymen-Hopland-Mayacama association 50-75 1220 Sedimentary rock 175 Maymen-Millsholm-Bressa complex 30-50 577 Sedimentary rock 193 Okiota-Henneke-Dubakella association 15-50 706 Ultramafic rock 207 Skyhigh-Asbill complex 8-15 293 Sedimentary rock 208 Skyhigh-Asbill complex 15-50 545 Sedimentary rock 249 Xerofluvents-Riverwash complex 0-2 309 Alluvium

A-13 Appendix D. Information Sources for Watershed Users.

Website addresses current as of January 2009.

Watersheds “Stream Care Guide, Landowner’s Guide to Healthy Watersheds in Lake County”. This booklet, prepared in 2001by the East Lake and West Lake Resource Conservation Districts provides a wealth of information and suggested resources for landowners. It is available at the NRCS office and Lake County Public Works Department.

“California Forest Stewardship Program, Information for Landowners”. This site contains information under the headings assistance, conservation easements, fire info, general interest to forest land owners, management practices, noxious weeds, pest management, planning, planting, resources, roads, species spotlight, taxes, watersheds and wildlife. http://www.ceres.ca.gov/foreststeward/html/landowners.html

“Know Your Watershed” website has a primer on the connectivity between the watershed and the lake and the ways in which watershed residents affect the lake and vice versa. http://www.ctic.purdue.edu/KYW/Brochures/ReflectingLakes.html

A brief understanding of a watershed and watershed management for the lay person can be found at http://conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/wp/Documents/California%20Watershed%20Program.pdf

“California Watershed Assessment Manual, Volumes I and II”. Provides information and guidance on conducting a watershed assessment so that some standardization is possible across different watersheds. Volume I gives excellent background on watershed processes, and discusses a watershed assessment approach. Volume II covers how and what to monitor, and how to analyze data for a watershed assessment. http://www.cwam.ucdavis.edu/

“Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect Our Waters”. Published by the EPA in March 2008 this book helps communities, watershed organizations, and state, local, tribal and federal environmental agencies develop and implement watershed plans to meet water quality standards and protect water resources. This book supplements the California guide, CWAM. http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/watershed_handbook

EPA online “Training in Watershed Management”. This site offers information on watershed management, watershed processes, and much more. http://www.epa.gov/watertrain/

Fire and Fire Safety The California Forest Stewardship Program has a website with a range information for landowners including fire safety, forest management, invasive weeds and more at http://www.ceres.ca.gov/foreststeward/html/landowners.html

A-14 CAL FIRE Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP). FRAP provides extensive technical and public information for statewide fire threat, fire hazard, watersheds, socio-economic conditions, environmental indicators, and forest-related climate change. This site gives access to maps and GIS data on fire and natural resources that are related to fire hazard. http://frap.fire.ca.gov/

“CAL FIRE General Guidelines for Creating Defensible Space”. This document describes defensible space requirements for buildings as required by Public Resources Code 4291. http://www.fire.ca.gov/cdfbofdb/pdfs/4291finalguidelines2_23_06.pdf

Public Resources Code with respect to defensible space can be found at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=prc&group=04001-05000&file=4291- 4299

CAL FIRE Wildland hazard and building codes web page. This site gives information on building code requirements in fire hazard areas. http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fire_prevention_wildland.php

Geology One of the more comprehensive web sources for geology information is http://geology.usgs.gov/index.htm . USGS Geology efforts characterize and map the geological landscape in terms of geochemical and geophysical data to address major societal issues that involve geologic hazards and disasters, climate variability and change, energy and mineral resources, ecosystem and human health, and ground-water availability.

Soils “The Soil Survey of Lake County, California” prepared by the USDA, Soil Conservation Service is the detailed source for mapped and descriptive soil information for farmers or ranchers, homebuyers, planners, community decision makers, engineers, developers, builders, conservationists, recreationists, agronomists, and specialists in wildlife management, waste disposal and pollution control. The map scale is 1mile = 2.625”.

The Soil Conservation Service is now known as the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), a division of USDA. This agency is a wealth of information for web-based soil information and Farm Bill programs that can give financial assistance to farmers and ranchers for resource conservation management practices. http://soils.usda.gov

Hydrology and Water Quality and Quantity The USGS is a good source for water resource information, on surface water, http://water.usgs.gov/osw, and ground water, http://water.usgs.gov/ogw.

From the “Know Your Watershed” website coordinated by the Conservation Technology Information Center a number of guides have been written to aid watershed partnerships

A-15 understand the basics. One such guide is, “Groundwater and Surface Water: Understanding the Interaction”. http://www.ctic.purdue.edu/KYW/Brochures/GroundSurface.html

Plants, wildlife and fish The California Department of Fish and Game has descriptions of habitat types at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cwhr/wildlife_habitats.asp#Tree

For botanists at every educational level, wanting information on wild California plants for conservation, education and appreciation this site has it all. It includes a “What Grows Here” database where users select a place in California, can be a town, zip code, etc., and find what plants have been observed growing there. http://www.calflora.org

For a current listing of special status plants and animals in California go to this website: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/species/list.html

The California Native Plant Society is one source for Lake County’s rare and endangered plant species. The California Department of Fish and Game website has current lists of all sensitive species, animals and plants, indexed in many different ways. http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/species/t_e_spp/index.html

Tules, Scirpus spp., is a protected species according to Lake County law, http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/lakeco/

Information on Clearlake Hitch can be found on the Chi Council website http://lakelive.info/chicouncil/index.html

California Partners in Flight (CalPIF) has information on birds and conservation of important bird habitat at http://www.prbo.org/calpif/plans.html

Invasive Species Global Invasive Species Team (GIST). Associated with The Nature Conservancy, GIST implemented a webipedia in 2008 on non-native, invasive species (animals and plants) in terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems (invasipedia). It allows anyone to identify noxious species in your area and learn how to control, eradicate and prevent invasions. http://tncinvasives.ucdavis.edu/

National Invasive Species Council Information Center is the gateway to invasive species information; covering Federal, State, local, and international sources. http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/index.shtml/

A-16 CDFA Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services has a variety of information on exotic plant pests and diseases. http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/

One invasive plant, hydrilla that was introduced to Clear Lake in the early 1990s, has been under a mandatory CDFA eradication program since 1994. http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/ipc/hydrilla_hp.htm

CDFA’s noxious weeds site can be queried by scientific and common name, country of origin, or CDFA pest rating. http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/ipc/encycloweedia/encycloweedia_hp.htm

California Invasive Plant Council is a non-profit organization that maintains an invasive plant inventory database of approximately 200 species. Cal-IPC assigns its own pest rating system (separate from CDFA) reflecting the level of each species negative ecological impact in CA. http://www.cal-ipc.org/

USDA NRCS noxious plants database is similar but older than the CDFA site: http://plants.usda.gov/java/noxiousDriver

California DFG has a website on nuisance and exotic (not native to CA) wildlife species http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/species/nuis_exo/

For more information on aquatic species the USGS site on non-indigenous aquatic species is the web reference site for the Florida Integrated Science Center, the central repository for non-native aquatic species: http://nas.er.usgs.gov/default.asp

The aquatic species that Lake County is determined to keep out of all waterbodies in the county are the zebra and quagga mussel. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/invasives/quaggamussel/

Land Use The best source of land use information is the Lake County General Plan: http://www.co.lake.ca.us/Government/Directory/Community_Development/2008FinGP.htm

The Code Enforcement Division of Lake County has produced a matrix of agency/department responsibilities for all manner of land use violations available at this website. http://www.co.lake.ca.us/Assets/CDD/CodeEnforcement/Code+Violations+and+Process/Violati on+information.pdf

A-17 Appendix E. Erosion Hazard Analysis Methods.

“Summary of Metadata from Soil Erosion Analysis” performed by James Komar, NRCS. This analysis was received April 3, 2009.

Surface erosion risk, or the hazard of soil loss from off-road and off-trail activities on disturbed sites, was determined with criteria based on the USDA-NRCS National Forestry Manual. Ratings were made for sites where disturbance was defined as 50-75% of the surface exposed by logging, grazing, mining or other activities. The NRCS Soil Surveys describe soil conditions based on map units, mapped areas of similar soil. Ratings of slight, moderate, severe, and very severe were created based on a combination of soil erodibility factor, Kw, and the percent slope. Kw represents both how susceptible soil particles are to detachment and how rapidly run-off occurs from the soil. The soil erodibility factor for the thickest mineral horizon in the 0-15 cm range for each map unit was used. Many map units include a range of slopes (e.g. 2-5% slopes). For this analysis, the percent slope used is the average value for the map unit.

A rating of "slight" indicates that erosion is unlikely under ordinary climatic conditions; "moderate" indicates that some erosion is likely and that erosion-control measures may be needed; "severe" indicates that erosion is very likely and that erosion-control measures, including re-vegetation of bare areas, are advised; and "very severe" indicates that significant erosion is expected, loss of soil productivity and off-site damage are likely, and erosion-control measures are costly and generally impractical. The ratings are summarized below in Table 1.

Table 1. K factor and slope combinations for determination of hazard of surface erosion from off-road and off-trail activities on disturbed sites. Slope % Soil Erodibility Factor Kw < 0.35 0-14 15-35 36-50 >50 Soil Erodibility Factor Kw > 0.35 0-9 10-25 26-40 >40 Resulting surface erosion hazard SLIGHT MODERATE SEVERE VERY SEVERE

The following factors were combined to define overall soil slippage risk where:

Overall slippage risk = (climate value*slope)/SSR

Climate value = 100 year, 24 hour precip. * average annual precipitation

The 100 year 24 hour precipitation intensity (100 year, 24 hour precip.) layer comes from the most recent PRISM climatologically data available through NOAA for the area of Lake County, CA.

NOAA Data is available here http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hdsc/PF_documents/Atlas2_Volume11.pdf

A-18 The NRCS PRISM data program can be reviewed here http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/climate/prism.html

Storm event data was originally in raster feature data, but was converted from polygons to raster grid cells on 500 meter square raster grids base on precipitation ranges.

The average annual precipitation data is the most recent climatological data available through NOAA for the area of Lake County, CA.

Slope is the average value for the slope for a soil map unit that most overlays a grid cell.

SSR (soil slippage rating) is a rating of 1, unstable, 2, moderately unstable or 3 slightly unstable based on parent material, slope range and geomorphic position/modifier as guided by NSSH part 618 exhibit 17 soil slippage rating guidance.

It is acknowledged that the SSR values of 1,2,3 are somewhat arbitrary, however the approach is reasonable as long as the focus remains on gradients of risk rather than specific index assignments of risk.

Definition. Soil slippage hazard is the possibility that a mass of soil will slip when these conditions are met: 1) vegetation is removed, 2) soil water is at or near saturation, and 3) other normal practices are applied. Increasing the hazard of slippage but not generally considered in this rating are: 1) undercutting lower portions or loading the upper parts of a slope or 2) altering the drainage or offsite water contribution to the site such as through irrigation. See http://soils.usda.gov/technical/handbook/contents/part618ex.html#ex17

The specific assignments are as follows:

A-19 Specific Assignments

Soil Slippage Slope Geom Rating Parent Materials Group Rv Geomorphic Position Modifier Assignment

S and Residuum Sandstone Shale Mountains West 2 Residuum Sandstone Shale Mountains N and E 2 N and E Residuum Sandstone Shale Mountains on 2 Residuum Sedimentary Rock Mountains, Hills 2 Int and Resid Sandstone Shale Mountains Lower 1 Residuum Sandstone Shale Mountains E and N 2 Slope Hills, Terraces RV Alluvium >= 5% Slope >= 5% Dissected 1 < 5% RV Floodplains, Terraces < Alluvium Slope 5% RV Slope 3 Alluvium Derived From Mixed Floodplains 3 Alluvium Derived From Sandstone and Shale Floodplains, Teraces 3 Lacustrine Floodplain/Basin 3 Residuum Rhyolite Mountains 2 Residuum Andesite Mountains 2 Residuum Basalt Mountains 1 Residuum Graywacke Mountains Unstable 1 Resid Ig Met Sed 1 Resid Metavolcanics Hills 2 Resid Obsidian Hills 1 Residuum Sandstone Mountains Unstable 1 Resid Serpentine Mountains 1 Resid Shale and Siltstone Hills 2 Sands and Gravels Floodplains 3 Volcanic Ash Hills 2

All layers were projected to UTM zone 10, NAD 1983.

A-20 Appendix F Aerial Photos Gravel mined area north of Kelseyville

N

07-02-1940 07-03-1952 05-14-1970

A-21 Gravel mined area north of Kelseyville

N

Spring 1984 02-08-2006

A-22 Changes at mouth of Kelsey Creek

1952

Kelsey Creek outlet

Cole Creek joins Kelsey

07-03-1952 1970

Kelsey Creek outlet Cole Creek outlet

05-14-1970

A-23 Gravel mined area north of Sweetwater Creek

N

05-14-1970 Spring 1984 2005

A-24 Appendix G. DWR Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling in the Kelsey Creek Watershed, 1979-1999.

Data Analysis by Tom Smythe and Erica Lundquist Lake County Water Resources Division

June 24, 2009

Methods

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) provided Lake County with an Excel file containing benthic macroinvertebrate data collected from streams in 1979- 1999. The file was separated into 4 worksheets titled Big Sulph. Cr. Data <1991, Big Sulph. Cr. > 1991, Geysers Data <1991 and Geysers Data > 1991. Although there is a Sulphur Creek in the Kelsey Creek watershed, Big Sulphur Creek is located to the south, outside the watershed. Therefore the data from Big Sulphur Creek was not processed further. The stream sample locations given in the two Geysers worksheets are all in the Kelsey Creek watershed, and therefore these data were analyzed further.

There is limited information available on how the samples were collected. DWR provided a description for the sampling and counting methods in 1993 (below). The description stated that two 4 ft2 plots were sampled for each sample, and the spreadsheets indicate that all data were for 8 ft2 samples, however it is unknown if other details of the 1993 sampling and counting description apply to all years. Sample locations that were provided are vague, for example “Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek” and more precise locations have not yet been provided by DWR. In addition DWR calculations of species richness, diversity, density and equitability were not provided. The DWR description of sampling and counting methods follows in its entirety:

Benthics– Benthic macroinvertebrates were collected during August and October 1993. Riffle habitat was selected for maximum species diversity. If no riffle was available near the station, samples were not taken. For each sample, two four square foot plots of substrate were selected randomly for collection. Data were entered into a computer database and species richness, diversity, density, and equitability were calculated.

Kick-net constructed from 510µ mesh Nitex nylon cloth approximately 30 inches wide by 20 inches high were used for invertebrate collection. All substrate within the net width and two feet out was disturbed to a depth of approximately 4 inches to suspend invertebrates into the net. Larger rocks and twigs are hand-rinsed in the stream and discarded from the sample area. Once the entire substrate was disturbed, the net was taken back to shore and the contents washed through a standard #30 Tyler sieve into a bucket, then transferred into a one liter plastic bottle filled with buffered 36% formaldehyde for preservation.

The samples were taken to the lab and rinsed under a vent hood until all traces of preservative are gone, deposited into a clear Pyrex sorting tray for sorting. A-25 Using a 3x illuminated magnifier, the sorter systematically picked all individual organisms from the detritus, sorting them into plastic multi-compartmented trays filled with a 70% solution of ethyl-alcohol. Invertebrates were identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level. Specimens that were too badly damaged, too small, or otherwise unrecognizable were left at the higher taxonomic level. The identification biologist used a stereo-zoom binocular microscope of 10x-70x. After all identifications were complete and the individuals counted, the invertebrates were removed from the trays using a pipette and tweezers and placed onto a filter/funnel apparatus for volumetric measurement.

These procedures are not consistent with standard California or US EPA procedures, and therefore caution should be used when interpreting the information.

Analysis of the DWR data by Lake County Division of Water Resources personnel was performed according to Harrington and Born (2000) Level 1 Taxonomic Effort with some modifications. Table 1 describes the biological metrics used by Harrington and Born and the expected response to disturbance.

Table 1. Biological metrics and expected response to disturbance. Level 1 Taxonomic Effort Biological Metrics Description Response to Disturbance Richness Measures

Taxa Richness Total number of individual taxa decrease Ephemeroptera Taxa Number of mayfly taxa decrease Plecoptera Taxa Number of stonefly taxa decrease Trichoptera Taxa Number of caddisfly taxa decrease EPT Taxa Number of taxa in the Ephemeroptera (mayfly), decrease Plecoptera (stonefly) and Trichoptera (caddisfly) insect orders Composition Measures

EPT Index Percent composition of mayfly, stonefly and decrease caddisfly larvae Tolerance/ Intolerance Measures

Percent Dominant Percent composition of the single most abundant increase Taxa taxon Percent Stoneflies Percent of organisms in the highly intolerant decrease stonefly order

The Harrington and Born (2000) method calls for taking a representative sub-sample of 100 organisms, and then identifying and counting these organisms into major taxa. The mayfly, stonefly and caddisfly larvae are sorted to the family level. The data sheet showing the taxa identified for this process is found in Appendix 1. The method used by DWR (1993) involved identifying and counting all organisms present, and identifying to the lowest practical taxonomic level. Calculations described below, therefore are based on counts of all organisms in the sample, which ranged from 44-10,856 organisms rather

A-26 than being based on 100 organisms. In addition, the DWR data were all summarized to the family level for further calculations of the biological metrics.

Calculation procedure:

1. The number of organisms in each family was calculated.

The following richness measures were calculated:

2. Taxa richness was calculated as the total number of families for a given sample. (Note for the Harrington and Born method, taxa were not all enumerated to the family level. Some were at the order or subclass level. Therefore this calculation will likely give higher taxa richness than the Harrington and Born method.)

3. Ephemeroptera taxa was calculated as the number of families in the Ephemeroptera (mayflies).

4. Plecoptera taxa was calculated as the number of families in the Plecoptera (stoneflies).

5. Trichoptera Taxa was calculated as the number of families in the Trichoptera (caddisflies).

6. EPT Taxa was calculated as the combined number of families in the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera orders.

The following composition measure was calculated:

7. The EPT Index was calculated by adding the number of organisms in the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera orders, dividing this sum by the total number of organisms counted and then multiplying by 100.

The following tolerance/intolerance measures were calculated:

8. The percent dominant taxon was calculated by dividing the number of organisms for the most abundant taxon by the total number of organisms and then multiplying by 100.

9. The percent stoneflies was determined by dividing the number of organisms in the stonefly order by the total number of organisms and then multiplying by 100.

Following these calculations data collected from 1979-1990 and from 1991-1999 were summarized separately, because the data were received in separate spreadsheets for these data, and because many of the sampling location names differed between these two sets of data.

At each location data from spring (early April), summer (early July) and fall (early October) richness, composition and tolerance/intolerance measures were plotted to look for trends over time. Because significant trends were not obvious, the mean, standard deviation and coefficient of variation for each measure at each location for spring, summer and fall were calculated. A-27 At one location, Hiatt Valley, three samples were recorded for the same date on two occasions. Although, it is not know if these data were taken as replicates to determine sampling variability, the mean, standard deviation and coefficient of variation for the multiple samples on a single date were calculated.

Results

Changes over time in the richness, composition and tolerance/intolerance measures for the various sample locations separated by spring, summer and fall samples are shown in Figures 1-10. Replicate samples on each sample date were not made, and so it is not possible to show error bars indicating the sampling variability on each date. An idea of the variability that might be expected can be calculated from the 1979-1990 Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley data, presuming that the multiple samples taken on the same date were intended as replicates. The coefficient of variation for these presumed replicates ranged from 9-95% for the different measures, indicating that variation above or below a given value ranged from 9-95% of that value (Table 2). Variability was considerably higher for the 1982 samples than for the 1983 samples. In general the changes in time of the various measures do not show obvious trends (Figures 1-10).

The EPT Index and Percent Dominant Taxon appear to be the most variable measures in Figures 1-10; however this is an artifact of plotting all the measures on the same scale, which tends to minimize the apparent variability of measures that have lower values. Other measures varied the same as a percentage of their value (Tables 3 and 4).

In order to compare potential differences in benthic macroinvertebrate communities from one location to another, the mean, standard deviation and coefficient of variation for each sample period (spring, summer or fall) at each location was calculated (Tables 3 and 4). Differences between locations are unlikely when the difference between the two values is less than the sum of their respective standard deviations. On this basis, there were few differences among locations.

One interesting comparison occurred, however, among the sample locations at different elevations in Kelsey Creek. Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook is the highest location at approximately 2300’ elevation, followed by Kelsey Creek above High Valley at approximately 2200’ elevation and Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville at approximately 1480’ elevation. As would be expected from high elevation, colder streams to low elevation, warmer streams, the EPT index decreased, the percent dominant taxon increased and the percent stoneflies decreased for the summer and fall samples (Figure 11). Because the stoneflies declined to very low levels at the lowest elevation, the difference between the percentage stoneflies at the highest and lowest elevations is likely to be significant (error bars, + 1 standard deviation, do not overlap).

Discussion of the Data and Analysis

The value of this data set is limited by several factors.

A-28 1. Standard California or US EPA methods were not followed collecting these data; therefore, the results cannot be compared to benthic macroinvertebrate indices developed for local river systems.

2. Observations of stream conditions, which would assist with interpretation of the benthic macroinvertebrate data, are not available.

3. The ability to use these data as a baseline for future studies is limited by the use of non-standard methodologies.

4. Precise locations for the samples are not known.

4. While Lake County Water Resources Division personnel did their best to interpret the data provided by DWR, further analysis by someone with greater expertise in this field is likely to add significantly to interpretation of the information.

References

Harrington, J. & M. Born. 2000. “Measuring the Health of California Streams and Rivers, A Methods Manual for: Water Resource Professionals, Citizen Monitors, and Natural Resources Students”.

A-29 Figure 1. Benthic macroinvertebrate measures at Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek, 1979-1990.

Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100

90

80

70

Taxa Richness 60 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa 50 EPT Taxa EPT Index 40 Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies

30

20

10

0 10/17/1979 2/28/1981 7/13/1982 11/25/1983 4/8/1985 8/21/1986 1/3/1988 5/17/1989 9/29/1990

Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Summer Samples 100

90 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 10/17/1979 2/28/1981 7/13/1982 11/25/1983 4/8/1985 8/21/1986 1/3/1988 5/17/1989 9/29/1990 2/11/1992

Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100

90 Taxa Richness 80 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 70 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa EPT Index 60 Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 50

40

30

20

10

0 10/17/1979 2/28/1981 7/13/1982 11/25/1983 4/8/1985 8/21/1986 1/3/1988 5/17/1989 9/29/1990

A-30 Figure 2. Benthic macroinvertebrate measures at Alder Creek at Mouth, 1979-1990.

Alder Creek at Mouth DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100

90

Taxa Richness 80 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 70 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 60 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 50 Percent Stoneflies

40

30

20

10

0 10/17/1979 2/28/1981 7/13/1982 11/25/1983 4/8/1985 8/21/1986 1/3/1988 5/17/1989

Alder Creek at Mouth DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Summer Samples 100

Taxa Richness 90 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa

60 Percent Stoneflies

50

40

30

20

10

0 10/17/1979 2/28/1981 7/13/1982 11/25/1983 4/8/1985 8/21/1986 1/3/1988 5/17/1989

Alder Creek at Mouth DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100

Taxa Richness 90 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa

60 Percent Stoneflies

50

40

30

20

10

0 10/17/1979 2/28/1981 7/13/1982 11/25/1983 4/8/1985 8/21/1986 1/3/1988 5/17/1989

A-31 Figure 3. Benthic macroinvertebrate measures at High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek, 1979-1990.

High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100 Taxa Richness 90 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa

70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 1/1/1979 5/15/1980 9/27/1981 2/9/1983 6/23/1984 11/5/1985 3/20/1987 8/1/1988 12/14/1989 4/28/1991

High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Summer Samples 100

Taxa Richness 90 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 1/1/1979 5/15/1980 9/27/1981 2/9/1983 6/23/1984 11/5/1985 3/20/1987 8/1/1988 12/14/1989 4/28/1991

High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100 Taxa Richness 90 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa

70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 1/1/1979 5/15/1980 9/27/1981 2/9/1983 6/23/1984 11/5/1985 3/20/1987 8/1/1988 12/14/1989 4/28/1991 9/9/1992

A-32 Figure 4. Benthic macroinvertebrate measures at High Valley Creek at Mouth, 1979-1990.

High Valley Creek at Mouth DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100

Taxa Richness 90 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 60 Percent Stoneflies

50

40

30

20

10

0 1/1/1982 5/16/1983 9/27/1984 2/9/1986 6/24/1987 11/5/1988 3/20/1990

High Valley Creek at Mouth DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Summer Samples 100

90 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 60 Percent Stoneflies

50

40

30

20

10

0 1/1/1982 5/16/1983 9/27/1984 2/9/1986 6/24/1987 11/5/1988 3/20/1990

High Valley Creek at Mouth DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100

Taxa Richness 90 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa

70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 1/1/1982 5/16/1983 9/27/1984 2/9/1986 6/24/1987 11/5/1988 3/20/1990

A-33 Figure 5. Benthic macroinvertebrate measures at Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley, 1979-1990.

Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100

90

Taxa Richness 80 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 70 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 60 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa

50 Percent Stoneflies

40

30

20

10

0 1/1/1980 7/19/1980 2/4/1981 8/23/1981 3/11/1982 9/27/1982 4/15/1983 11/1/1983

Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Summer Samples 100

Taxa Richness 90 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 60 Percent Stoneflies

50

40

30

20

10

0 1/1/1980 7/19/1980 2/4/1981 8/23/1981 3/11/1982 9/27/1982 4/15/1983 11/1/1983

Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100

90 Taxa Richness 80 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 70 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa EPT Index 60 Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 50

40

30

20

10

0 1/1/1980 7/19/1980 2/4/1981 8/23/1981 3/11/1982 9/27/1982 4/15/1983

A-34 Figure 6. Benthic macroinvertebrate measures at Alder Creek above Glenbrook, 1991-1999.

Alder Creek above Glenbrook DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100

90

80

70 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa 60 Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 50 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 40 Percent Stoneflies

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

Alder Creek above Glenbrook 100 DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Summer Samples

Taxa Richness 90 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa 80 EPT Taxa EPT Index 70 Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

Alder Creek above Glenbrook DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa 90 Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa 80 EPT Taxa EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 70 Percent Stoneflies

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

A-35 Figure 7. Benthic macroinvertebrate measures at High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek, 1991-1999. High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek DWR Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa 90 Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa 80 EPT Taxa EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 70 Percent Stoneflies

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek DWR Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data- Summer Samples 100

90 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek DWR Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100

90 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 60 Percent Stoneflies

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

A-36 Figure 8. Benthic macroinvertebrate measures at Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook, 1991-1999.

Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100

90

80

70

Taxa Richness 60 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 50 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa EPT Index 40 Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 30

20

10

0 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Summer Samples 100

90

80 Taxa Richness 70 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa 60 EPT Taxa EPT Index 50 Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies

40

30

20

10

0 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100

90

80

70 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa 60 Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa 50 EPT Taxa EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 40 Percent Stoneflies

30

20

10

0 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

A-37 Figure 9. Benthic macroinvertebrate measures at Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek, 1991-1999.

Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa 90 Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa 80 EPT Taxa EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 70 Percent Stoneflies

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Summer Samples 100 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa 90 Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa 80 EPT Taxa EPT Index 70 Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100

90 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa 80 Trichoptera Taxa EPT Taxa 70 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

A-38 Figure 10. Benthic macroinvertebrate measures at Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville, 1991-1999. Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100 Taxa Richness 90 Ephemeroptera Taxa Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa 80 EPT Taxa EPT Index 70 Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1991 8/11/1992 12/24/1993 5/8/1995 9/19/1996 2/1/1998 6/16/1999

Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Summer Samples 100 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa 90 Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa 80 EPT Taxa EPT Index 70 Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100

90 Taxa Richness Ephemeroptera Taxa 80 Plecoptera Taxa Trichoptera Taxa

70 EPT Taxa EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa 60 Percent Stoneflies

50

40

30

20

10

0 3/30/1990 8/12/1991 12/24/1992 5/8/1994 9/20/1995 2/1/1997 6/16/1998 10/29/1999

A-39 Table 2. Calculations of variability for replicate DWR macroinvertebrate data from Hiatt Valley. Three samples were recorded for each date. July 6, 1982 July 5, 1983 (Mean + standard (Coefficient of (Mean + standard (Coefficient of deviation) variation) deviation) variation) Taxa Richness 15.0+6.0 40.0% 19.0+1.7 9.1% Ephemeroptera Taxa 2.7+1.5 57.3% 3.0+1.0 33.3% Plecoptera Taxa 1.7+0.58 34.6% 2.3+0.6 24.7% Trichoptera Taxa 4.0+1.0 25.0% 4.7+0.6 12.4% EPT Taxa 8.3+2.9 34.6% 10.0+1.0 10.0% EPT Index 38.7+18.5 47.8% 27.9+6.1 21.7% Percent Dominant Taxon 34.6+13.2 38.1% 50.1+8.7 17.4% Percent Stoneflies 7.5+7.1 94.6% 8.3+5.4 65.3%

A-40 Table 3. Biological measures calculated from DWR macroinvertebrate samples in the Kelsey Creek watershed, 1979-1990.

Level 1 Taxonomic Effort Biological Metrics Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data collected by CA DWR 1979-1990

Richness Measures Spring Summer Fall Standard of Sample Standard of Sample Standard of Sample Measure Location Mean Deviation Variation Number Mean Deviation Variation Number Mean Deviation Variation Number

Taxa Richness Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek 19.7 3.5 17.9% 3 21.4 3.6 17.0% 5 18.6 5.5 29.6% 5 Alder Creek at Glenbrook 19.0 12.7 67.0% 2 15.0 1 23.0 1 Alder Creek at mouth 13.6 5.8 42.9% 7 17.2 3.3 19.0% 5 20.6 5.4 26.3% 5 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 19.5 3.5 18.1% 2 20.7 1.5 7.4% 3 18.3 5.6 30.5% 4 High Valley Creek at mouth 16.7 3.4 20.7% 6 18.5 3.9 21.0% 6 20.0 6.1 30.7% 7 Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley 12.6 3.3 26.1% 4 17.0 2.8 16.6% 2 18.0 2.8 15.7% 2

Ephemeroptera Taxa Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek 4.7 0.6 12.4% 3 4.0 1.4 35.4% 5 4.0 1.2 30.6% 5 Alder Creek at Glenbrook 4.0 1.4 35.4% 2 3.0 1 4.0 1 Alder Creek at mouth 3.7 1.5 40.3% 7 3.2 0.4 14.0% 5 4.2 1.1 26.1% 5 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 4.5 2.1 47.1% 2 1.7 0.6 34.6% 3 2.3 1.3 55.9% 4 High Valley Creek at mouth 4.2 0.8 18.1% 6 2.3 0.5 22.1% 6 3.0 1.0 33.3% 7 Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley 3.3 0.5 15.4% 4 2.8 0.2 8.3% 2 3.5 0.7 20.2% 2

Plecoptera Taxa Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek 3.0 1.0 33.3% 3 1.6 0.9 55.9% 5 2.8 0.8 29.9% 5 Alder Creek at Glenbrook 3.5 2.1 60.6% 2 2.0 1 2.0 1 Alder Creek at mouth 2.1 1.6 73.4% 7 2.2 0.4 20.3% 5 3.4 1.1 33.5% 5 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 2.0 1.4 70.7% 2 2.0 0.0 0.0% 3 2.0 0.8 40.8% 4 High Valley Creek at mouth 2.5 0.8 33.5% 6 1.5 0.8 55.8% 6 2.6 1.0 38.0% 7 Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley 1.2 0.3 28.6% 4 2.0 0.5 23.6% 2 2.0 0.0 0.0% 2

Trichoptera Taxa Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek 3.7 1.2 31.5% 3 5.2 1.3 25.1% 5 3.2 1.3 40.7% 5 Alder Creek at Glenbrook 2.5 0.7 28.3% 2 2.0 1 7.0 1 Alder Creek at mouth 2.9 1.1 37.4% 7 4.4 1.5 34.5% 5 3.8 0.8 22.0% 5 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 4.0 0.0 0.0% 2 4.0 1.0 25.0% 3 3.3 2.5 76.9% 4 High Valley Creek at mouth 3.7 2.1 56.3% 6 4.0 0.6 15.8% 6 3.9 2.0 50.6% 7 Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley 3.1 1.7 55.4% 4 4.3 0.5 10.9% 2 4.5 3.5 78.6% 2

EPT Taxa Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek 11.3 1.2 10.2% 3 10.8 2.4 22.1% 5 10.0 2.9 29.2% 5 Alder Creek at Glenbrook 10.0 4.2 42.4% 2 7.0 1 13.0 1 Alder Creek at mouth 8.7 3.6 41.2% 7 9.8 1.9 19.6% 5 11.4 2.4 21.1% 5 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 10.5 3.5 33.7% 2 7.7 1.2 15.1% 3 7.5 4.5 60.1% 4 High Valley Creek at mouth 10.3 2.8 27.1% 6 7.8 1.5 18.8% 6 9.4 3.2 33.5% 7 Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley 7.5 1.3 17.2% 4 9.2 1.2 12.9% 2 10.0 4.2 42.4% 2

A-41 Table 3 Continued.

Level 1 Taxonomic Effort Biological Metrics Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data collected by CA DWR 1979-1990

Composition Measures Spring Summer Fall Standard of Sample Standard of Sample Standard of Sample Measure Location Mean Deviation Variation Number Mean Deviation Variation Number Mean Deviation Variation Number

EPT Index Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek 74.60 5.35 7.2% 3 40.83 18.58 45.5% 5 45.22 12.45 27.5% 5 Alder Creek at Glenbrook 90.34 9.54 10.6% 2 30.13 1 84.31 1 Alder Creek at mouth 87.51 6.72 7.7% 7 53.33 16.38 30.7% 5 57.65 15.23 26.4% 5 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 39.70 21.22 53.4% 2 42.49 3.53 8.3% 3 37.09 17.70 47.7% 4 High Valley Creek at mouth 58.45 34.56 59.1% 6 54.92 13.18 24.0% 6 44.54 20.04 45.0% 7 Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley 86.78 2.48 2.9% 4 33.31 7.61 22.8% 2 53.04 7.69 14.5% 2

Tolerance/Intolerance Measures Spring Summer Fall Standard of Sample Standard of Sample Standard of Sample Measure Location Mean Deviation Variation Number Mean Deviation Variation Number Mean Deviation Variation Number

Percent Dominant Taxon Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek 36.37 11.86 32.6% 3 41.62 8.29 19.9% 5 34.13 12.69 37.2% 5 Alder Creek at Glenbrook 50.51 26.51 52.5% 2 57.62 1 21.08 1 Alder Creek at mouth 48.45 16.47 34.0% 7 29.94 9.92 33.1% 5 21.53 4.57 21.2% 5 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 47.91 17.46 36.4% 2 29.82 3.03 10.2% 3 38.85 12.29 31.6% 4 High Valley Creek at mouth 50.10 17.38 34.7% 6 26.28 3.06 11.6% 6 35.76 14.96 41.8% 7 Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley 48.90 4.47 9.2% 4 42.35 10.92 25.8% 2 27.97 16.41 58.7% 2

Percent Stoneflies Alder Creek above Kelsey Creek 4.77 2.19 45.9% 3 5.49 5.49 100.0% 5 13.53 5.61 41.5% 5 Alder Creek at Glenbrook 2.19 0.10 4.8% 2 13.25 1 5.97 1 Alder Creek at mouth 6.47 6.48 100.2% 7 7.46 4.12 55.2% 5 19.01 6.98 36.7% 5 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 2.13 0.41 19.1% 2 6.63 4.20 63.4% 3 6.49 3.26 50.2% 4 High Valley Creek at mouth 3.62 4.99 137.8% 6 9.91 10.06 101.4% 6 5.93 4.04 68.0% 7 Kelsey Creek at Hiatt Valley 5.87 5.86 99.7% 4 7.91 0.54 6.8% 2 6.70 8.91 133.0% 2

A-42 Table 4. Biological measures calculated from DWR macroinvertebrate samples in the Kelsey Creek watershed, 1991-1999.

Level 1 Taxonomic Effort Biological Metrics Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data collected by CA DWR 1991-1999

Richness Measures Spring Summer Fall Standard Coefficient Sample Standard Coefficient Sample Standard Coefficient Sample Measure Location Mean Deviation of Variation Number Mean Deviation of Variation Number Mean Deviation of Variation Number

Taxa Richness Alder Creek above Glenbrook 20.3 4.2 20.7 9 24.6 4.5 18.3 8 24.4 7.0 28.6 7 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 19.6 5.6 28.4 8 21.0 6.0 28.3 8 24.7 5.4 21.8 7 Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook 18.4 4.2 22.6 7 21.6 2.3 10.7 7 22.4 4.7 20.9 7 Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek 18.7 3.6 19.5 9 24.0 7.4 30.7 8 24.1 5.8 24.2 7 Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville 21.3 5.7 26.9 7 20.5 6.4 31.4 8 24.9 8.2 33.1 7

Ephemeroptera Taxa Alder Creek above Glenbrook 4.9 0.6 12.3 9 4.8 0.9 18.7 8 4.6 0.5 11.7 7 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 5.1 0.8 16.3 8 3.5 0.9 26.5 8 4.1 1.2 29.3 7 Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook 4.7 0.8 16.0 7 3.3 1.0 28.9 7 4.6 0.8 17.2 7 Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek 5.1 0.9 18.2 9 4.1 1.5 35.3 8 4.4 1.4 31.6 7 Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville 5.4 1.0 18.0 7 3.5 1.8 50.7 8 3.9 1.8 46.0 7

Plecoptera Taxa Alder Creek above Glenbrook 4.6 1.4 31.3 9 3.6 0.5 14.3 8 5.0 1.4 28.3 7 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 3.9 1.8 46.7 8 3.0 1.5 50.4 8 4.1 1.2 29.3 7 Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook 3.7 1.6 43.2 7 3.1 0.4 12.0 7 4.1 0.9 21.7 7 Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek 3.0 1.1 37.3 9 3.1 0.6 20.5 8 4.9 1.1 22.0 7 Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville 2.9 1.5 51.2 7 2.4 1.5 63.4 8 3.0 2.0 66.7 7

Trichoptera Taxa Alder Creek above Glenbrook 2.1 0.9 44.0 9 5.0 1.3 26.2 8 4.7 1.4 29.3 7 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 2.8 1.3 46.6 8 4.0 1.3 32.7 8 4.7 1.8 38.2 7 Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook 2.3 0.5 21.3 7 4.3 1.1 26.0 7 3.4 1.4 40.8 7 Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek 2.7 1.2 45.9 9 5.3 2.4 45.2 8 4.7 2.1 45.4 7 Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville 3.4 1.4 40.8 7 4.0 1.8 44.3 8 4.3 2.4 56.7 7

EPT Taxa Alder Creek above Glenbrook 11.6 2.1 17.9 9 13.4 2.1 15.4 8 14.3 2.7 18.8 7 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 11.8 2.5 21.2 8 10.5 3.1 29.7 8 13.0 3.7 28.8 7 Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook 10.7 1.5 14.0 7 10.7 1.1 10.4 7 12.1 2.5 21.0 7 Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek 10.8 2.7 24.9 9 12.5 3.9 30.8 8 14.0 4.0 28.9 7 Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville 11.7 2.5 21.3 7 9.9 3.9 39.6 8 11.1 5.2 46.8 7

A-43 Table 4. Continued.

Level 1 Taxonomic Effort Biological Metrics Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data collected by CA DWR 1991-1999

Composition Measures Spring Summer Fall Standard Coefficient Sample Standard Coefficient Sample Standard Coefficient Sample Measure Location Mean Deviation of Variation Number Mean Deviation of Variation Number Mean Deviation of Variation Number

EPT Index Alder Creek above Glenbrook 78.8 8.5 10.8 9 56.0 13.3 23.8 8 64.4 7.3 11.3 7 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 60.3 15.2 25.3 8 38.4 10.5 27.2 8 41.8 19.2 45.8 7 Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook 70.6 12.3 17.4 7 55.6 23.7 42.6 7 58.0 19.6 33.8 7 Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek 65.6 17.4 26.5 9 37.2 18.5 49.8 8 43.0 7.3 17.0 7 Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville 58.8 7.8 13.3 7 31.0 15.5 50.0 8 25.0 15.5 61.9 7

Tolerance/Intolerance Measures Spring Summer Fall Standard Coefficient Sample Standard Coefficient Sample Standard Coefficient Sample Measure Location Mean Deviation of Variation Number Mean Deviation of Variation Number Mean Deviation of Variation Number

Percent Dominant Taxon Alder Creek above Glenbrook 30.5 8.6 28.2 9 30.3 8.8 29.0 8 27.3 8.9 32.6 7 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 31.6 13.0 41.3 8 37.9 16.0 42.2 8 32.0 9.6 30.1 7 Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook 25.1 6.0 24.1 7 34.6 21.7 62.7 7 31.5 19.5 61.8 7 Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek 36.1 18.3 50.8 9 37.0 13.8 37.4 8 29.2 9.9 33.9 7 Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville 22.2 3.9 17.4 7 49.1 24.6 50.1 8 47.2 25.2 53.4 7

Percent Stoneflies Alder Creek above Glenbrook 4.6 2.4 52.0 9 12.7 6.7 52.6 8 12.4 4.4 35.1 7 High Valley Creek above Kelsey Creek 5.3 2.5 47.7 8 11.9 10.6 89.1 8 12.8 6.0 47.2 7 Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook 7.9 5.8 74.0 7 22.3 11.3 50.5 7 16.8 7.2 42.6 7 Kelsey Creek above High Valley Creek 5.0 1.9 37.5 9 7.1 4.7 66.2 8 13.7 8.2 59.9 7 Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville 7.2 7.3 100.9 7 1.1 1.5 130.2 8 1.2 1.6 136.5 7

A-44 Figure 11. Mean (+ standard deviation) of composition and tolerance/intolerance measures for three locations on Kelsey Creek for 1991-1999 samples.

Kelsey Creek Composition and Tolerance/Intolerance measures DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Spring Samples 100

Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook

80 Kelsey Creek above High Valley

Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville

60

40

20

0 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies

-20

Kelsey Creek Composition and Tolerance/Intolerance Measures DWR Macroinveterbrate Data- Summer Samples 100 Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook

Kelsey Creek above High Valley 80 Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville

60

40

20

0 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies

-20

Kelsey Creek Composition and Tolerance/Intolerance Measures DWR Macroinvertebrate Data- Fall Samples 100 Kelsey Creek above Glenbrook

Kelsey Creek above High Valley 80 Kelsey Creek near Kelseyville

60

40

20

0 EPT Index Percent Dominant Taxa Percent Stoneflies

-20

A-45 Appendix 1. Taxa identified for Level 1 Taxonomic Effort according to Harrington and Born (2000).

A-46 Appendix H. Bioassessment Results.

A-47 A-48 A-49 Upper Cache Creek – Biometric Data Sheet

Sample Numbers: KC-DS1-025; KC-MS2-026; KC-US3-027

Sample Date and Time: 13 June 2006; 1050

Site Description: Kelsey Creek

Physical Habitat Score: 103

Notes: Bridge downstream; county & ranch road nearby

Lat: 39.00900 Long: -122.83881

Water Temperature: 18C Specific Conductance: 290 pH: 7.4 Dissolved Oxygen: 7

Metrics Sample Sample Sample Mean Russian River Score Taxa Richness 21 19 17 19 1 % Dominant Taxa 34.5 26.2 32.9 31 3 EPT Taxa 11 9 9 10 1 Modified EPT Index 3.58 2.95 4.08 4 1 Shannon Diversity 1.95 1.96 1.83 1.9 1 Tolerance Value 4.94 5.17 5.05 5.1 1

Sum: 8

Rating: Poor

A-50 A-51 Appendix I. Agricultural Water Demand Scenarios from the Lake County Water Demand Forecast. (CDM and DWR 2006a)

Scenario One

Scenario One is indicative of the future if present trends continue. This scenario assumes that the majority of land with pears and walnuts will convert to wine grapes and housing. Wine grapes will also expand into areas of native vegetation. The growth of wine grapes will be driven by lower land prices in Lake County than those in neighboring Napa and Sonoma counties, where vineyards and the wine industry are well established. The increase in housing is assumed as ranchette development, with homes on acreage, irrigating pasture for domestic farm animals (horses, as well as FFA and 4-H livestock). Scenario One assumes: ■ Removal of 3,780 acres, or approximately 80 percent, of pears and walnuts. ■ Conversion of land where pears and walnuts are removed to 3,280 acres of wine grapes and 500 acres of ranchettes. ■ Conversion of 200 acres of native vegetation to 200 acres of new ranchette acreage. ■ Irrigated pasture on 50 percent of ranchette acreage. ■ Conversion of 10,320 acres of native vegetation to 10,320 acres of new wine grape acreage. If current trends continue, predicting the exact amounts that the crops will increase or decrease is somewhat speculative. Scenario One represents a high degree of potential changes to pear and walnut acreage and a somewhat high change to vineyard acreage.

As discussed below, Scenario Two reflects changes to crop acreages at varying levels relative to Scenario One. Including two scenarios provides a better range of how the trends could change future crop acreages.

Scenario Two

Scenario Two is similar to Scenario One, but reflects a smaller reduction in pears and walnuts, and a larger increase in wine grapes. Ranchette development occurs at the same levels as Scenario One. Relative to the current conditions, Scenario Two assumes: ■ Removal of 3,024 acres, or approximately 67 percent, of pears and walnuts. ■ Conversion of the land where pears and walnuts are removed to 2,524 acres of wine grapes and 500 acres of ranchettes. ■ Conversion of 200 acres of native vegetation to 200 acres of new ranchette acreage. ■ Irrigated pasture on 50 percent of ranchette acreage. ■ Conversion of 14,266 acres of native vegetation to 14,266 acres of new wine grape acreage.

A-52 Scenario Three

Scenario Three assumes that growers will keep their land in production by expanding their marketing efforts with value-added production and diversifying their crop choices to alternative crops. Growers may shift to new crops that grow well in the soils and climatic conditions of Lake County. These new crops will likely be better for agritourism or will have “specialty” status. Chestnuts and pecans could replace the more common walnut, which may decrease competition within the economic market for walnuts, making walnut production more profitable. The fig and pomegranate are components of a Mediterranean diet, which has gained public interest for its health potential. Growers could also choose to plant Asian and heritage vegetables, which are perceived as gourmet foods (Tous and Ferguson, 1996; McGourty 2004; Ceran and Elkins 1997). Scenario Three includes: ■ Conversion of 3,240 acres pear acreage to 3,240 acres pomegranates and figs. ■ Conversion of 540 acres walnuts to 520 acres pecans and chestnuts. ■ Conversion of 250 acres of native vegetation to 250 acres of new heritage and Asian vegetable acreage. ■ Conversion of 13,600 acres of native vegetation to 13,600 acres of new wine grape acreage. ■ Conversion of 200 acres of native vegetation to 200 acres of new ranchette acreage. ■ Irrigated pasture on 50 percent of ranchette acreage.

A-53 Appendix J. Wildlife Habitats.

Information on the location of habitat types in the Kelsey Creek watershed comes from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) multi-source land cover data. The land cover data is compiled from various mapping efforts throughout the state, and the information is combined into the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) system of classification (CDFG 1988). Much of the mapping is based on remote sensing, and field verification is needed to confirm the accuracy of the mapped habitats. CWHR descriptions were used for most of the material describing habitats here.

Riparian zones are relatively narrow strips of land bordering streams, rivers, and other water bodies, such as Clear Lake. The vegetation in riparian zones differs from the surrounding landscape because it requires or tolerates wet and sometimes flooded conditions. Although riparian zones make up a small proportion of the total land area, they provide important habitat for a wide variety of animals. Of all California animal species, an estimated 25% of land mammals, 40% of reptiles, and 83% of amphibians depend on riparian systems for some or all of their life cycle (Brode, J.M. and R.B. Bury 1984, Williams, D.F. and K.S. Kilburn 1984). Riparian zones are considered the most critical habitat for conservation of resident and Neotropical migrant birds in the western U.S. Riparian vegetation provides shade, food, and nutrients that are the basis of the aquatic food chain. Despite the importance of riparian habitat, it is estimated that only 2-15% of historic riparian habitat remains in California (CalPIF 2004).

In the Kelsey Creek watershed riparian zones are classified as valley foothill riparian habitat in the lower watershed and montane riparian habitat in the middle and upper watershed. Valley foothill riparian forest consists of a tree canopy dominated by cottonwood and valley oak; a lower layer in the forest includes boxelder and Oregon ash. The understory shrub layer includes wild grape, wild rose, blackberry, elderberry, poison oak, and willows, and an herbaceous layer consists of sedges, rushes, grasses, and many broadleaf plants. In the upper portion of the Kelsey Creek watershed, white alder and bigleaf maple replace cottonwood and valley oak as dominant tree species (CDFG 1988, Lake County Planning Department 1992).

The structure of riparian forests varies significantly from the broad, lower valleys to the steep areas at the top of the watershed. In the lower watershed, broad valley floodplain areas such as Big Valley have deep alluvial soils that can support riparian forests with multiple canopy layers. In contrast, the steep headwaters streams have actively eroding channels that are close to bedrock with little soil to support riparian vegetation. In these areas, riparian vegetation is often a single level canopy comprised of common species in the region whether it is chaparral or forest species. At middle elevations where the stream grade decreases, valleys widen and terraces form that can support riparian groves (Roberts, R.C. 1984).

The area of riparian forests, especially in broad level valleys, has declined due to conversion to agriculture and other purposes. Habitat fragmentation is another issue for many birds and animals. When remaining riparian areas are too small or are disconnected, they may be

A-54 unable to support viable populations due to excessive predation or barriers to movement between habitat patches (RHJV 2004).

Channelization and building of levees disrupts the natural meandering of a stream and with it the constant regeneration of new stages of riparian forest. As a stream meanders, it cuts away the banks on the outside of curves, while depositing material on the inside, or point bar. Cutting away the banks will tend to destroy mature forest stages, while on the point bars new stages begin with colonization by willows, sedges, and cottonwoods. This process creates a mosaic of habitat types. The downed wood in stream channels provides important habitat for aquatic insects and fish (McBride, J.R. and J. Strahan 1984).

Annual grasslands are open landscapes dominated by annual grasses and forbs (herbaceous plants found in grasslands). Beginning with the first Spanish colonists in California, native grassland plants were replaced by exotic species leading to almost complete replacement in about 100 years. On wetter locations (probably including most of the North Coast), the original perennial bunch grasses have been replaced by annual grasses. Most of California’s original grasslands have been converted to agriculture, and today the majority of California grasslands occur in areas that were cleared by ranchers from shrub and oak woodlands (CalPIF 2000, CDFG 1988).

In most of California grasslands (and in other habitats with a grass understory), common annual grasses include wild oats, soft chess, ripgut brome, red brome, wild barley, and foxtail fescue. Common forbs include filarees, turkey mullein, clovers, and popcorn flower. Specialized plant communities are found in vernal pools, seasonally flooded depressions that are underlain by an impermeable layer. Because the pools are flooded in winter and dry out in the summer, only specially adapted plants and animals (mostly native species) can survive in them (CalPIF 2000, CDFG 1988).

Reptiles that occur in annual grassland include the western fence lizard, common garter snake, and western rattlesnake. Mammals include the black-tailed jackrabbit, California ground squirrel, Botta’s pocket gopher, western harvest mouse, California vole, badger, and coyote. Common birds that breed in annual grasslands include the burrowing owl, short-eared owl, horned lark, and western meadowlark. Annual grasslands provide foraging habitat for the turkey vulture, northern harrier, American kestrel, black-shouldered kite, and prairie falcon (CDFG 1988).

Oak woodlands discussed here include both valley oak and blue oak woodlands. Valley oak woodlands, found primarily on deep, well-drained alluvial soils in valley bottoms, range from open landscapes with scattered trees to forest-like stands. Blue oak woodlands, located largely on shallow, rocky, well-drained soils on sloping ground, tend to be present as scattered trees (CDFG 1988).

Oak woodlands support a diverse and abundant wildlife community, primarily because acorns provide an abundant food supply. As many as 330 species of birds, mammals, reptiles

A-55 and amphibians rely on oak woodlands during some stage of their life cycle. Oaks provide cavities for nesting birds, and their dead branches provide acorn storage sites for acorn woodpeckers (CalPIF 2002b). Animals such as scrub jays and squirrels in turn improve oak tree regeneration by burying acorns.

Approximately 1/3 of California’s oak woodlands have been lost due to development since the arrival of European settlers. Another threat to both blue and valley oaks is a lack of regeneration. Young oak seedlings are not surviving, and so as older trees are lost, the area of oak woodlands is decreasing. There are multiple reasons for the lack of regeneration. Fire suppression has given an advantage to competing trees in some areas. Over-grazing by cattle encouraged the invasion of weedy annual grasses that compete with oak seedlings for water. Both cattle and native mammals such as deer graze on oak shoots (CalPIF 2002b).

Researchers have found numerous management techniques to improve oak tree regeneration. Because 85% of California’s oak woodlands are on private lands, it will be important for state and federal organizations to collaborate with landowners to preserve oak woodlands.

Thus far, blue, valley, and Oregon oaks (the white oak group) do not appear to be susceptible to sudden oak death (SOD), a newly emerged pathogen attacking other oak species in California (CalPIF 2002b).

Chaparral is brushland that occurs on dry, shallow soils of hill- and mountainsides. Chaparral plants are adapted to fire; some have seeds that germinate following fire, and the roots of brushy species re-sprout following fire. Many chaparral plants have evergreen leaves covered with a heavy waxy cuticle to prevent water loss. Dominant plants in chaparral include scrub oak, chaparral oak, chamise, and several species of manzanita and ceanothus. In mature stands of chaparral, vegetative cover is often greater than 80%. On very rocky soils, or soils formed on ultramafic minerals, cover may reach only 30% (CDFG 1988).

Chaparral plant communities change following wildfire. For 1-3 years after a fire, herbaceous cover dominates, while re-sprouted shrubs increase in size. Brush canopy begins to dominate from 3 to 15 years following the fire. From 10 to 30 or more years after a fire, the canopy closes together and dead plant material accumulates (CDFG 1988).

A wide range of wildlife species are found in chaparral, and these species are also found in other habitats such as woodland or forest habitats. Longterm fire suppression that leads to senescent stands of chaparral can lead to declines in deer, small mammal, bird, and reptile populations (CDFG 1988). The herbaceous cover, re-sprouting, and young shrubs provide excellent deer forage. The presence of a patchwork of recently burned and older chaparral stages provides both food and forage for deer and other wildlife.

Closed-cone pine-cypress habitat often occurs as islands within chaparral or other forests types. These pines are fire-dependent. Seeds are released from cones following the heat

A-56 of fire, and seedlings rapidly develop on the bare soils, creating dense, even-aged stands (CDFG 1988). Tree squirrels, band-tailed pigeons, and other species use closed-cone pine-cypress for feed and cover, and birds such as the great horned owl and red-tailed hawk use it for nesting (CDFG 1988).

Montane hardwood and Montane hardwood-conifer habitats occur primarily on north and east facing slopes (LCCDD 1995). Typically these forests have significant tree canopy with limited shrub and herbaceous growth. Montane hardwood-conifer may occur as a mosaic of conifer and hardwood stands, or conifers may form an upper canopy and hardwoods a lower canopy. Common tree species include canyon live oak, madrone, California laurel, black oak, Douglas fir, and ponderosa pine.

These forests support abundant wildlife. Mature forests provide nesting sites for cavity nesting birds, and acorns are a food source for many birds and mammals. In cooler locations, many amphibians are found in the leaf litter layer. Birds found here include scrub jays, acorn woodpeckers, wild turkey, mountain quail, and band-tailed pigeon. Mammals include western gray squirrel, California ground squirrel, dusky-footed woodrat, black bear and mule deer (CDFG 1988).

A potential threat to some of the trees in these forests is sudden oak death (SOD). SOD is caused by a fungus-like agent, Phytophthora ramorum. It occurs primarily in the cool, wet coastal fog belt along California’s central and north coast. SOD has killed tanoak, coast live oak, California black oak, Shreve oak, and canyon live oak and causes twig and foliar diseases on many other plants including California laurel and Douglas fir. In Lake County, SOD has only been found in the southwestern corner of the county near the Sonoma County line, and models indicate a low risk of the establishment and spread of SOD in most of the county (COMTF 2004). Nevertheless, cooler locations in the upper Kelsey Creek watershed may be at risk, and since oak trees are most affected by the disease, SOD could threaten a vital wildlife food source.

SOD is spread by several types of spores. Some are released by plants, such as California laurels, during wet weather, and these travel in moist soil or by rain splash. Spores can also be tracked by people and animals and are carried on wood or leaves from infected trees. It is important for people to recognize when they have been in infected areas. Wood and other plant materials should not be transported from infected areas. Soil can also spread the disease, so after visiting an infected area, shoes and vehicle tires should be cleaned and disinfected with bleach (UCANR 2006).

Douglas fir and Ponderosa pine habitats have many similarities. Douglas fir is generally a mix of evergreen hardwoods with an overstory of conifers. It takes many years (80- 250) without disturbance before hardwood species decline due to natural mortality, and Douglas firs dominate the canopy (CDFG 1988). Ponderosa pine habitat is defined as having 50% or more of the canopy as ponderosa pine. Ponderosa pines are more prevalent in dry locations, while Douglas firs are present in cooler, wetter locations. In the upper Kelsey creek watershed

A-57 north and east facing slopes have a greater dominance of Douglas fir, while south and west facing slopes are dominated by ponderosa pine.

These habitats support diverse and varied wildlife. The cooler, wetter Douglas fir forests are important habitat for many amphibians. Old growth Douglas fir forests support bird species, such as Marbled Murrelets, Spotted Owls, Gray Jays, Brown Creepers, and Pileated Woodpeckers, that require old-growth forests for breeding. Ponderosa pine habitat is sometimes important migratory and transitional habitat for deer (CDFG 1988).

Fire suppression and forest management have the potential to reduce structural diversity leading to dense homogeneous forests with closed canopies with reduced opportunities for many birds and other animals (CalPIF 2002a, CDFG 1988). The current management plan of the Boggs Mountain Demonstration State Forest (BMDSF) recognizes the importance of restoring habitat diversity:

“The development of BMDSF as true all-aged forest will provide for a more biologically diverse habitat than is found in the current predominantly young forest. The single tree selection, group selection, commercial thinning, and sanitation-salvage harvesting will improve the forest habitat by developing and maintaining a variety of crown levels, stand densities, and small openings in the Forest. Group selection openings will provide habitat for wildlife species that prefer and need edge cover. The openings themselves will provide feeding habitat for rodents and the predators that feed on the rodents. The multilevel forest canopy will provide habitat for the wildlife that lives in the various levels of the forest canopy. The variable crown canopy density will allow varying amounts of light to reach the forest floor, which will determine the amount and types of vegetation which may grow on the forest floor and provide cover, food, and shelter for wildlife that utilizes the forest floor” (CDFFP 2008).

A-58 Appendix K. Vertebrate animals potentially found in the Kelsey Creek Watershed.

The California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System (Version 8.1, 2005) was used to determine potential vertebrate species present in the Kelsey Creek watershed.

Table K. Vertebrates potentially found in the Kelsey Creek watershed. WATERSHED AREA* SPECIES LOWER MIDDLE UPPER STATUS** AMPHIBIANS CALIFORNIA GIANT SALAMANDER X X X 7 ROUGH-SKINNED NEWT X X X CALIFORNIA NEWT X X X 7 RED-BELLIED NEWT X X X ENSATINA X X X 7 CALIFORNIA SLENDER SALAMANDER X X X BLACK SALAMANDER X X X ARBOREAL SALAMANDER X X X WESTERN TOAD X X X PACIFIC TREEFROG X X X RED-LEGGED FROG X X X 2,7 FOOTHILL YELLOW-LEGGED FROG X X X 7 BULLFROG X X X PACIFIC GIANT SALAMANDER X X X REPTILES POND SLIDER X WESTERN POND TURTLE X X X 7 WESTERN FENCE LIZARD X X X SAGEBRUSH LIZARD X X WESTERN SKINK X X X 7 WESTERN WHIPTAIL X X X SOUTHERN ALLIGATOR LIZARD X X X NORTHERN ALLIGATOR LIZARD X X X RUBBER BOA X X X 4 RING-NECKED SNAKE X X X SHARP-TAILED SNAKE X X X RACER X X X CALIFORNIA WHIPSNAKE(STRIPED RACER) X X X 2,4 GOPHER SNAKE X X X 7 COMMON KINGSNAKE X X X CALIFORNIA MOUNTAIN KINGSNAKE X X X 7 LONG-NOSED SNAKE X X COMMON GARTER SNAKE X X X 1,3,5,7 WESTERN TERRESTRIAL GARTER SNAKE X X X NIGHT SNAKE X X X WESTERN RATTLESNAKE X X X

A-59 AQUATIC GARTER SNAKE X X X BIRDS COMMON LOON X 7 PIED-BILLED GREBE X HORNED GREBE X EARED GREBE X WESTERN GREBE X AMERICAN WHITE PELICAN X 7 DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANT X 7 AMERICAN BITTERN X GREAT BLUE HERON X X X GREAT EGRET X X X SNOWY EGRET X X X GREEN HERON X X X BLACK-CROWNED NIGHT HERON X X X TUNDRA SWAN X X GREATER WHITE-FRONTED GOOSE X X SNOW GOOSE X X CANADA GOOSE X X WOOD DUCK X X X GREEN-WINGED TEAL X X MALLARD X X NORTHERN PINTAIL X X CINNAMON TEAL X X NORTHERN SHOVELER X X GADWALL X X EURASIAN WIGEON X X AMERICAN WIGEON X X CANVASBACK X RING-NECKED DUCK X GREATER SCAUP X LESSER SCAUP X X COMMON GOLDENEYE X BARROW'S GOLDENEYE X 7 BUFFLEHEAD X HOODED MERGANSER X COMMON MERGANSER X X X RED-BREASTED MERGANSER X RUDDY DUCK X TURKEY VULTURE X X X OSPREY X X X 7 WHITE-TAILED KITE X X X 5 BALD EAGLE X X X 2,3,5 NORTHERN HARRIER X X X 7 SHARP-SHINNED HAWK X X X 7 COOPER'S HAWK X X X 7 NORTHERN GOSHAWK X X X 7 RED-SHOULDERED HAWK X X X

A-60 RED-TAILED HAWK X X X FERRUGINOUS HAWK X X X 7 ROUGH-LEGGED HAWK X X X GOLDEN EAGLE X X X 5,7 AMERICAN KESTREL X X X MERLIN X X X 7 PEREGRINE FALCON X X X 3,5 PRAIRIE FALCON X X X 7 RING-NECKED PHEASANT X X BLUE GROUSE X X X WILD TURKEY X X X CALIFORNIA QUAIL X X X MOUNTAIN QUAIL X X X VIRGINIA RAIL X SORA X COMMON MOORHEN X AMERICAN COOT X X SEMIPALMATED PLOVER X X KILLDEER X X GREATER YELLOWLEGS X LESSER YELLOWLEGS X SPOTTED SANDPIPER X WESTERN SANDPIPER X LEAST SANDPIPER X DUNLIN X SHORT-BILLED DOWITCHER X LONG-BILLED DOWITCHER X WILSON'S SNIPE X WILSON'S PHALAROPE X X BONAPARTE'S GULL X MEW GULL X RING-BILLED GULL X X CALIFORNIA GULL X X 7 HERRING GULL X THAYER'S GULL X GLAUCOUS-WINGED GULL X CASPIAN TERN X FORSTER'S TERN X ROCK PIGEON X X BAND-TAILED PIGEON X X X MOURNING DOVE X X X YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO X 3 GREATER ROADRUNNER X X BARN OWL X X X FLAMMULATED OWL X X WESTERN SCREECH OWL X X X GREAT HORNED OWL X X X NORTHERN PYGMY OWL X X X

A-61 BURROWING OWL X X X 7 SPOTTED OWL X X X 2,7 LONG-EARED OWL X X X 7 SHORT-EARED OWL X X X 7 NORTHERN SAW-WHET OWL X X X COMMON POORWILL X X X VAUX'S SWIFT X X X 7 WHITE-THROATED SWIFT X X X ANNA'S HUMMINGBIRD X X X RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD X X X ALLEN'S HUMMINGBIRD X X X BELTED KINGFISHER X X X LEWIS' S WOODPECKER X X X ACORN WOODPECKER X X X RED-BREASTED SAPSUCKER X X X NUTTALL'S WOODPECKER X X X DOWNY WOODPECKER X X X HAIRY WOODPECKER X X X WHITE-HEADED WOODPECKER X X NORTHERN FLICKER X X X PILEATED WOODPECKER X X OLIVE-SIDED FLYCATCHER X X WESTERN WOOD-PEWEE X X X HAMMOND'S FLYCATCHER X X X DUSKY FLYCATCHER X X X PACIFIC-SLOPE FLYCATCHER X X X BLACK PHOEBE X X X SAY'S PHOEBE X X ASH-THROATED FLYCATCHER X X X WESTERN KINGBIRD X X X HORNED LARK X X 7 PURPLE MARTIN X X X 7 TREE SWALLOW X X X VIOLET-GREEN SWALLOW X X X NORTHERN ROUGH-WINGED SWALLOW X X X BANK SWALLOW X X X 4 CLIFF SWALLOW X X X BARN SWALLOW X X X STELLER'S JAY X X X WESTERN SCRUB-JAY X X X 7 CLARK'S NUTCRACKER X YELLOW-BILLED MAGPIE X X X AMERICAN CROW X X X COMMON RAVEN X X X MOUNTAIN CHICKADEE X X X CHESTNUT-BACKED CHICKADEE X X X OAK TITMOUSE X X X BUSHTIT X X X

A-62 RED-BREASTED NUTHATCH X X X WHITE-BREASTED NUTHATCH X X X PYGMY NUTHATCH X X BROWN CREEPER X X X ROCK WREN X X X CANYON WREN X X X BEWICK'S WREN X X X HOUSE WREN X X X WINTER WREN X X X MARSH WREN X AMERICAN DIPPER X X X GOLDEN-CROWNED KINGLET X X X RUBY-CROWNED KINGLET X X X BLUE-GRAY GNATCATCHER X X X WESTERN BLUEBIRD X X X MOUNTAIN BLUEBIRD X X X TOWNSEND'S SOLITAIRE X X SWAINSON'S THRUSH X X X HERMIT THRUSH X X X AMERICAN ROBIN X X X VARIED THRUSH X X X WRENTIT X X NORTHERN MOCKINGBIRD X X X CALIFORNIA THRASHER X X AMERICAN PIPIT X X CEDAR WAXWING X X X PHAINOPEPLA X X X LOGGERHEAD SHRIKE X X X 1,7 EUROPEAN STARLING X X X CASSIN'S VIREO X X X HUTTON'S VIREO X X X WARBLING VIREO X X X ORANGE-CROWNED WARBLER X X X NASHVILLE WARBLER X X X YELLOW WARBLER X X X 7 YELLOW-RUMPED WARBLER X X X BLACK-THROATED GRAY WARBLER X X X TOWNSEND'S WARBLER X X X HERMIT WARBLER X X X MACGILLIVRAY'S WARBLER X X X COMMON YELLOWTHROAT X X 7 WILSON'S WARBLER X X X YELLOW-BREASTED CHAT X X 7 WESTERN TANAGER X X X BLACK-HEADED GROSBEAK X X X LAZULI BUNTING X X X GREEN-TAILED TOWHEE X SPOTTED TOWHEE X X X 7

A-63 CALIFORNIA TOWHEE X X X 2,3 RUFOUS-CROWNED SPARROW X X 7 CHIPPING SPARROW X X X BLACK-CHINNED SPARROW X LARK SPARROW X X X SAGE SPARROW X 2,7 SAVANNAH SPARROW X X 3,7 GRASSHOPPER SPARROW X X FOX SPARROW X X X SONG SPARROW X X X 7 LINCOLN'S SPARROW X X X GOLDEN-CROWNED SPARROW X X X WHITE-CROWNED SPARROW X X X DARK-EYED JUNCO X X X 7 RED-WINGED BLACKBIRD X X TRICOLORED BLACKBIRD X X 7 WESTERN MEADOWLARK X X X YELLOW-HEADED BLACKBIRD X X BREWER'S BLACKBIRD X X X BROWN-HEADED COWBIRD X X X BULLOCK'S ORIOLE X X X PURPLE FINCH X X X CASSIN'S FINCH X X HOUSE FINCH X X X HOUSE FINCH X X PINE SISKIN X X X LESSER GOLDFINCH X X X LAWRENCE'S GOLDFINCH X X X AMERICAN GOLDFINCH X X X EVENING GROSBEAK X X X HOUSE SPARROW X X X CLARK'S GREBE X PLUMBEOUS VIREO X X X BAIRD'S SANDPIPER X PECTORAL SANDPIPER X RED-NECKED PHALAROPE X RED PHALAROPE X AMERICAN REDSTART X X X WHITE-THROATED SPARROW X X X HARRIS'S SPARROW X X X INDIGO BUNTING X X X MAMMALS VIRGINIA OPOSSUM X X X ORNATE SHREW X X X 1,7 TROWBRIDGE'S SHREW X X X SHREW-MOLE X X X BROAD-FOOTED MOLE X X X 7 LITTLE BROWN MYOTIS X X X

A-64 YUMA MYOTIS X X X LONG-EARED MYOTIS X X X FRINGED MYOTIS X X X LONG-LEGGED MYOTIS X X X CALIFORNIA MYOTIS X X X SILVER-HAIRED BAT X X X WESTERN PIPISTRELLE X X X BIG BROWN BAT X X X WESTERN RED BAT X X X HOARY BAT X X X TOWNSEND'S BIG-EARED BAT X X X 7 PALLID BAT X X X 7 BRAZILIAN FREE-TAILED BAT X X X BRUSH RABBIT X X X 1,3 DESERT COTTONTAIL X X X BLACK-TAILED JACKRABBIT X X X 7 ALLEN'S CHIPMUNK X X X SONOMA CHIPMUNK X X X CALIFORNIA GROUND SQUIRREL X X X GOLDEN-MANTLED GROUND SQUIRREL X X X WESTERN GRAY SQUIRREL X X X EASTERN FOX SQUIRREL X X X DOUGLAS' SQUIRREL X X NORTHERN FLYING SQUIRREL X X X 7 BOTTA'S POCKET GOPHER X X X SAN JOAQUIN POCKET MOUSE X X 7 CALIFORNIA KANGAROO RAT X X X 7 AMERICAN BEAVER X X X WESTERN HARVEST MOUSE X X X DEER MOUSE X X X 7 BRUSH MOUSE X X X PINYON MOUSE X X X DUSKY-FOOTED WOODRAT X X X 1,7 WESTERN RED-BACKED VOLE X X CALIFORNIA VOLE X X X 1,3,7 COMMON MUSKRAT X X X NORWAY RAT X X X HOUSE MOUSE X X X COMMON PORCUPINE X X X COYOTE X X X RED FOX X X X 4 GRAY FOX X X X BLACK BEAR X X X RINGTAIL X X X 5 RACCOON X X X AMERICAN MARTEN X X X 7 FISHER X X 7 ERMINE X X X

A-65 LONG-TAILED WEASEL X X X AMERICAN MINK X X X AMERICAN BADGER X X X 7 WESTERN SPOTTED SKUNK X X X STRIPED SKUNK X X X NORTHERN RIVER OTTER X X X MOUNTAIN LION X X X 7 BOBCAT X X X WILD PIG X X X ELK X X X MULE DEER X X X *LOWER = valley oak woodland, valley foothill riparian, annual grassland, pasture, deciduous orchard, vineyard, irrigated hayfield, lacustrine, and fresh emergent wetland habitats MIDDLE=blue oak woodland, blue oak-foothill pine, closed-cone pine-cypress, montane riparian, chamise-redshank chaparral, mixed chaparral, and annual grassland habitats UPPER=coastal oak woodland, ponderosa pine, montane hardwood, montane hardwood- conifer, Douglas fir, and montane riparian habitats **1=Federal endangered, 2=Federal threatened, 3=California endangered, 4=California threatened 5=California fully protected, 6=California protected, 7=California species of concern Note: Any given status code for a species may apply to the full species or to only one or more subspecies or distinct populations.

A-66 Appendix L. Upper watershed environmental studies with plant and animal species lists.

Available at Lake County Community Development Department.

Gennis and Associates, Engineers. 1977. “Second Progress Submittal Environmental Impact Report McCulloch Oil Company Cobb Valley”. Prepared for County of Lake Planning Department.

Gennis and Associates, Engineers. 1980. “Initial Environmental Study Bottle Rock Road Reconstruction Project”. Prepared for County of Lake.

Ecoview Environmental Consultants. 1974. “Draft Environmental Impact Report for California Geothermal Incorporated Cobb Mountain Leasehold Lake County, California”.

VTN Consolidated, Inc. 1978. “Final Environmental Impact Report for Cobb Mountain Estates Geothermal Exploratory Project”. Prepared for Lake County Planning Department Lakeport, California.

A-67 Appendix M. Rare, threatened, and endangered species in Lake County.

Table M. Rare, threatened, and endangered species in Lake County (CNDDB 2008). California Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Status2 CDFG3 CNPS Rank4 Amphibians Rana boylii foothill yellow-legged frog None None SC Reptiles Actinemys marmorata marmorata northwestern pond turtle None None SC Fish Lavinia exilicauda chi Clear Lake hitch None None SC Archoplites interruptus Sacramento perch None None SC Birds Phalacrocorax auritus double-crested cormorant None None Ardea herodias great blue heron None None Pandion haliaetus osprey None None Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Delisted Endangered Accipiter gentilis northern goshawk None None SC Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle None None Falco mexicanus prairie falcon None None Coccyzus americanus occidentalis western yellow-billed cuckoo Candidate Endangered Progne subis purple martin None None SC Amphispiza belli belli Bell's sage sparrow None None Agelaius tricolor tricolored blackbird None None SC Mammals Myotis evotis long-eared myotis None None Myotis thysanodes fringed myotis None None Lasionycteris noctivagans silver-haired bat None None Lasiurus cinereus hoary bat None None Lasiurus blossevillii western red bat None None SC Corynorhinus townsendii Townsend's big-eared bat None None SC Antrozous pallidus pallid bat None None SC Perognathus inornatus inornatus San Joaquin pocket mouse None None

A-68 Martes americana humboldtensis Humboldt marten None None SC Martes pennanti (pacifica) DPS Pacific fisher Candidate None SC Gulo gulo California wolverine None Threatened Taxidea taxus American badger None None SC Plants Didymodon norrisii Norris' beard moss None None 2.2 Mielichhoferia elongata elongate copper moss None None 2.2 Tortella alpicola alpine crisp moss None None 2.3 Trichodon cylindricus cylindrical trichodon None None 2.2 Eryngium constancei Loch Lomond button-celery Endangered Endangered 1B.1

Balsamorhiza macrolepis var. macrolepis big-scale balsamroot None None 1B.2 Calycadenia micrantha small-flowered calycadenia None None 1B.2 Erigeron angustatus Greene's narrow-leaved daisy None None 1B.2 Centromadia parryi ssp. parryi pappose tarplant None None 1B.2 Lasthenia burkei Burke's goldfields Endangered Endangered 1B.1 Layia septentrionalis Colusa layia None None 1B.2 Harmonia hallii Hall's harmonia None None 1B.2 Tracyina rostrata beaked tracyina None None 1B.2 Anisocarpus scabridus scabrid alpine tarplant None None 1B.3 Amsinckia lunaris bent-flowered fiddleneck None None 1B.2 Cryptantha clevelandii var. dissita serpentine cryptantha None None 1B.1 Plagiobothrys lithocaryus Mayacamas popcorn-flower None None 1A

Streptanthus brachiatus ssp. hoffmanii Freed's jewel-flower None None 1B.2 Streptanthus breweri var. hesperidis green jewel-flower None None 1B.2 Streptanthus morrisonii see individual subspecies! None None Legenere limosa legenere None None 1B.1

Calystegia collina ssp. oxyphylla Mt. Saint Helena morning-glory None None 4.2 Calystegia collina ssp. tridactylosa coast range bindweed None None 1B.2 Calystegia purpurata ssp. saxicola coastal bluff morning-glory None None 1B.2 Sedella leiocarpa Lake County stonecrop Endangered Endangered 1B.1

A-69 Cuscuta jepsonii Jepson's dodder None None 3

Arctostaphylos canescens ssp. sonomensis Sonoma canescent manzanita None None 1B.2

Arctostaphylos stanfordiana ssp. raichei Raiche's manzanita None None 1B.1

Arctostaphylos manzanita ssp. elegans Konocti manzanita None None 1B.3 Astragalus rattanii var. jepsonianus Jepson's milk-vetch None None 1B.2 Lupinus antoninus Anthony Peak lupine None None 1B.3 Lupinus sericatus Cobb Mountain lupine None None 1B.2 California macrophylla round-leaved filaree None None 1B.1

Juglans hindsii Northern California black walnut None None 1B.1 Monardella villosa ssp. globosa robust monardella None None 1B.2 Hesperolinon adenophyllum glandular western flax None None 1B.2 Hesperolinon bicarpellatum two-carpellate western flax None None 1B.2 Hesperolinon didymocarpum Lake County western flax None Endangered 1B.2 Hesperolinon drymarioides drymaria-like western flax None None 1B.2 Hesperolinon sp. nov. serpentinum"" Napa western flax None None 1B.1 Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. viridis Marin checkerbloom None None 1B.3 Sidalcea oregana ssp. hydrophila marsh checkerbloom None None 1B.2 Epilobium nivium Snow Mountain willowherb None None 1B.2 Eriogonum nervulosum Snow Mountain buckwheat None None 1B.2 Eriastrum brandegeeae Brandegee's eriastrum None None 1B.2 Leptosiphon jepsonii Jepson's leptosiphon None None 1B.2 Navarretia leucocephala ssp. bakeri Baker's navarretia None None 1B.1

Navarretia leucocephala ssp. pauciflora few-flowered navarretia Endangered Threatened 1B.1

Navarretia leucocephala ssp. plieantha many-flowered navarretia Endangered Endangered 1B.2 Navarretia myersii ssp. deminuta small pincushion navarretia None None 1B.1 Ceanothus confusus Rincon Ridge ceanothus None None 1B.1 Ceanothus divergens Calistoga ceanothus None None 1B.2

A-70 Horkelia bolanderi Bolander's horkelia None None 1B.2

Castilleja rubicundula ssp. rubicundula pink creamsacs None None 1B.2 Gratiola heterosepala Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop None Endangered 1B.2

Penstemon newberryi var. sonomensis Sonoma beardtongue None None 1B.3 Antirrhinum subcordatum dimorphic snapdragon None None 4.3 Carex comosa bristly sedge None None 2.1 Carex hystericina porcupine sedge None None 2.1

Brodiaea californica var. leptandra narrow-anthered California brodiaea None None 1B.2 Brodiaea coronaria ssp. rosea Indian Valley brodiaea None Endangered 1B.1

Chlorogalum pomeridianum var. minus dwarf soaproot None None 1B.2 Fritillaria pluriflora adobe-lily None None 1B.2 Imperata brevifolia California satintail None None 2.1 Orcuttia tenuis slender orcutt grass Threatened Endangered 1B.1 Potamogeton zosteriformis eel-grass pondweed None None 2.2 1 Federal species status. 2 State of California species status. 3 California Department of Fish and Game. SC indicates species of special concern. 4 California Native Plant Society Ranking. 1A presumed extinct in California (CA), 1B rare, threatened, or endangered in CA or elsewhere; 2 rare, threatened, endangered in CA, more common elsewhere; 3 status uncertain, 4 limited Distribution; 0.1 seriously threatened in CA; 0.2 fairly threatened in CA; 0.3 not very threatened in CA.

A-71 Appendix N. Watershed Conditions Remembered by Big Valley Rancheria Tribal Elders

A Survey by the Environmental Protection Office of the Big Valley Tribe was done in 2008 to identify beneficial uses for Tribal waters. Responses to questions about watershed conditions from two Tribal Elders were provided for this watershed assessment. Their answers are given following the questions that were asked. One is identified as PM, one as JG. III. Historical water quality a. Stream channel condition 1. Do you or any member of your family have memories or stories about any Pomo stream channel conditions before the time when levees were built, gravel was mined, or stream channels straightened or altered? What was the stream called? What is the name of the stream now?

2. Do you or any member of your family have memories or stories about stream channel conditions that have changed since those activities began?

3. What was said to be the depth from the near-bank water to the deepest part of any stream channel? The width of the stream channel?

4. How straight/twisty was the stream?

5. Were there natural pools?

6. Was the stream bottom gravel, silt, rock, mud or a mix?

7. Was there many plants or trees along the stream banks?

8. Were there fallen trees, limbs or other debris regularly in the stream?

“Yes, bank to bank the creek was pretty wide. There were a few pools here and there, the deepest one was at the old bridge. The creek was probably about knee deep in some parts, and real deep in others. The bottom of the creek was gravel. The creek was pretty clean and was always running.” (PM)

“Yes. The creek was good. It was about knee to waist deep, but there were some drop offs and deeper pools here and there. It had a gravel bottom and was very clean / clear. There was very little debris, if any at all. Lots of berries grew along the banks and we would pick them all the time.” (JG)

A-72 b. Water availability 9. Have you or any family member seen or talked about changes in stream flow and well levels? If so, when did these occur?

“Yes. The creek started to gradually run slower.” (PM)

“Yes I have. Now the creek always dries up.” (JG)

10. Any thoughts about what might cause of these changes?

“I think it’s from all the people, houses, farms, dams and all their water use. Now the creek dries up every year.” (PM)

“This started occurring after all the farms and people began building by the creek.” (JG) c. Fish and other aquatic life 11. What types of fish do you or your family members catch in streams here?

12. What part of the year would you expect to catch that type of fish?

“We seen and caught Chi (Hitch) in the early Spring. Spawning conditions used to be real good, lots of fish spawning. Conditions are steadily getting worse, there are fewer and fewer Hitch. Now Shad are running up the creek. Before there never were Shad.” (PM)

“We used to see and catch Chi (Hitch) right after the last rain.” (JG)

13. Do you remember, or have your family members commented on, any change in

the number of hitch in spawning runs over the past ten years?

14. Was there any particular year or years when large spawning runs occurred?

15. What was the variability in these runs?

16. What streams were the best for hitch?

“A long time ago spawning conditions were very good, but as years passed they have gotten worse.” (JG)

A-73 d. Wildlife 17. What do you remember, or do you have family stories, about the number and different types of wildlife in the past compared to today?

“There isn’t very many animals now like there was before.” (PM)

“There used to be lots of animals. Deer, ducks, cottontail rabbits, quail, etc. Now there are hardly no animals at all.” (JG)

18. If there were changes, what do you think might have been the cause or causes?

“I think the changes are due to all the people and building.” (PM) “I think the changes are due to all the people and building.” (JG) e. Flooding 19. Can you remember, or do you have family stories about, serious flooding?

“Can’t remember.” (PM)

“Can’t remember.” (JG)

20. What areas were flooded? When?

21. Do you suspect, or have any of your family members suggested, that any conditions like land use or stream alterations might have increased or influenced flooding? f. Fire 22. Do you remember, or are there any family stories about, wildfires in the past?

“I don’t remember any big fires.” (PM)

“I don’t remember any big fires.” (JG)

23. When were these fires?

24. How destructive were these fires?

25. At the time, was controlled burning practiced by Pomos? If so, what was the objective? Do you have any opinions about whether the controlled burning made the fires worse? Better?

A-74 Appendix O. Clear Lake hitch.

The Clear Lake hitch, Lavinia exilicauda chi, is a minnow species that reaches a fairly large size, up to 14 inches in length and over one pound in weight. The Latin name is somewhat confusing as chi was the Native American name for the Clear Lake splittail. Hitch, however, was the native name for the Clear Lake hitch. While other subspecies of hitch exist in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River watersheds and Monterey Bay, this subspecies is found only in Clear Lake and its tributaries. Hitch are adapted to lake conditions with deeper bodies and larger eyes than the other subspecies (Macedo R. 1994).

The hitch were a staple in native peoples’ diets. Fishing by native people focused on spring spawning runs when vast numbers of hitch, splittail, and pikeminnow could be readily caught. The abundant fish were dried, stored, and eaten throughout the year and were used for trade with people from surrounding regions (McLendon S. and M.J. Lowy 1978).

The hitch spawning run occurs between mid-February and mid-June, however, peak spawning usually occurs in March and April. Females seek out shallow gravelly areas, often near a stream bank, to deposit eggs. Several males coax a female into releasing eggs, and the males fertilize the eggs as they are released. Once fertilized, the eggs swell and sink into openings in the gravel bed. In 5-10 days the eggs hatch and after another 5-10 days the larval hitch can swim well enough to begin a gradual migration back to Clear Lake. Juvenile hitch remain along the shore of the lake feeding on aquatic insects and their eggs and larvae until they reach about two inches in length, which takes approximately 80 days. Then hitch leave the shoreline of the lake for open water where they feed primarily on Daphnia, tiny floating crustaceans. Male hitch mature in 1-2 years and females mature in 2-3 years, after which they begin the spring migrations upstream to spawn. Hitch can live to about 5 years of age, completing several spawning runs. Occasionally, hitch may spawn on gravel in shallow waters along the lakeshore (Macedo, R. 1994, Moyle P.B. et al. 1995).

There have been few studies of hitch populations in Clear Lake, and until the 2004 formation of the Chi Council, a local group dedicated to restoring hitch populations, there were no consistent records of hitch spawning runs. Historical records document streams literally packed with fish. Two of these records described spectacular runs that occurred prior to 1900 (Allison G.M. and W. R. McIntire 1949, Rideout, W.L. 1899). Other records described streams “choked” with fish in the past but indicated that populations had declined by the time of writing (Benson, H.W. and H. Mauldin 1974 and Murphy, G.I. 1948, 1951). A 1960s study, using a variety of fishing methods over several years, found that Hitch were the most abundant native fish in Clear Lake and considered their population to be secure (Cook, S.F. et al. 1966). The study did not investigate spawning runs, so it is not known how runs in the 1960s compared to previous years. This study noted that hitch populations were quite variable from year to

A-75 year, possibly due to changing rainfall patterns. In dry years, early drying of streams may reduce the success of spawning runs.

A clear indication of declining hitch populations is the apparent disappearance of spawning runs from several creeks. No hitch have been observed in Seigler Canyon and Schindler Creeks since the start of the volunteer monitoring program in 2004, although these creeks had previously supported hitch spawning runs (Windrem, P. F. 2008). Seigler Canyon Creek was considered one of the important spawning streams for hitch with excellent runs in 1990 and reduced runs in following years (Moyle, P.B. et al. 1995).

Loss of spawning habitat and stream nursery areas is thought to be a major contributor to the decline in the hitch population. Lower reaches of spawning streams dry up earlier than in the past, reducing the period of time for adult migration upstream and return of juvenile hitch to Clear Lake. Earlier drying is due to water diversion, groundwater pumping, and a lower groundwater level from stream channel modifications. Sedimentation of gravel beds due to in- stream activities such as gravel mining and erosion from the surrounding watershed may also have been detrimental to the success of hitch spawning.

Clear Lake hitch are not strong swimmers or jumpers, and bridge footings, road crossings, and other structures that create waterfalls of one or more feet can slow or obstruct upstream migration. Below these barriers, spawning activity can become crowded. Under crowded conditions, suffocation of eggs and juveniles due to lack of oxygen or high concentrations of nitrogenous wastes may occur (Macedo, R. 1994).

On Kelsey Creek, there are currently three major barriers to hitch migration, the old Quercus Bridge, Kelsey Creek Detention Structure, and Main Street Bridge. The old Quercus Bridge and detention structure present partial, but not complete barriers to hitch migration. At times hitch are able to migrate above the old Quercus Bridge, and a portion of the hitch population is able to successfully utilize the fish ladders at the detention structure. The detention structure control gates present a complete barrier to fish passage, however, they are operated to permit hitch passage. When hitch migrations are observed, the gates are gradually opened. They are maintained open until “the majority of fish have returned downstream” (Lake County Department of Public Works 2001). The fish ladder at the Main St. Bridge in Kelseyville has not been successful, and the bridge footing remains a complete barrier to hitch passage. The Merrit Rd. low water crossing, which previously obstructed hitch passage, was replaced in 2007 with a bridge that does not obstruct fish passage.

Changes in Clear Lake have also contributed to the decline in the hitch population. Introduced fish species prey on and may compete with the Clear Lake hitch. Largemouth bass and channel catfish both prey on adult hitch (Moyle, P.B. 1995). Several fish species, including bass, crappie, and bluegill feed on young hitch. The young of many fish species in Clear Lake and adults of

A-76 several species are planktivores, competing with the hitch for food. Threadfin shad are an introduced species that may present the greatest competition with hitch because of their ability to reach extremely high populations.

Wetland habitat surrounding Clear Lake is important for the survival of juvenile hitch, and this habitat has declined significantly due to wetland reclamation and clearing of shoreline vegetation. An estimate made in 1982 found that 79% of the original marshlands had been lost (Week 1982). Wetland vegetation around the shoreline of Clear Lake is now protected by county ordinance (Lake County Code, Section 23-15).

In the spring of 2004, the Lake County Group of the Sierra Club organized a program to monitor the hitch migration. Volunteers participate by stopping at bridges and recording the absence, presence, and approximate number of hitch. In August 2004, the Chi Council for the Clear Lake Hitch (Chi Council), a Coordinated Resource Management and Planning (CRMP) group, was formed by Sierra Club members, local landowners, local Tribes, and representatives of government agencies. The goals of this group were to study, protect, restore, and maintain the watershed ecosystem to restore the population of Clear Lake hitch (Chi Council, 1994). This group has continued the volunteer monitoring program up to the present and continues to pursue contacts with government agencies and academic institutions to encourage study of the hitch and improvement of their habitat. Local Tribes began a hitch tagging study in 2009, and they are developing an Adaptive Management Plan that will address migration barriers, high nutrient loads, water use for agriculture and development, and stream flows.

A-77