The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3466; OLIVEHAIN RD WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT; FIFTH ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT; 2000-08-01Solutions Taking Shape. .- - ; I - ' - I I I I I Fifth'Annual Monitoring Report Upland and Wetland Mitigation', ' I Home Depot Encinitas , I Prepared for I Home Depot 0 602 South Placentia '' 0 Fullerton, California 92631 I 0 •0 Prepared by I ' Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Co., Inc. 5510. Morehouse Drive San Diego, California 92121 I (856)458-9044 0 I ' Report Prepared by ' Ryan Roberts I August 2000 Project No.312161000 I I TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION - TITLE PAGE MONITORING TIME LINE iv 1.0 INTRODUCTION I I 1.1 Upland Slope Mitigation 1 1.2 Wetland Mitigation 4 I- 1.3 Water Runoff Treatment Basins and Sediment Trap Monitoring V I: 2.0 UPLAND SLOPES MITIGATION MONITORING V 4 2.1 Horticultural Monitoring V 5 I 2.1 .1 Vegetation Development V 5 2.1.2 Irrigation V 6 I I 2.1.3 Pest Management 6 2.1.4 Soil Fertility Management V V V V 7 V I V 2.1:5 Vandalism V 2.1.6 V V Erosion V V V -. 7 V V V 2.2 Botanical Monitoring V V 8 3.0 WETLAND MITIGATION MONITORING 8 I 3.1 V Horticultural Monitoring V 8 V 3.1.1 Vegetation Development V 14 V I 3.1.2 V Irrigation V V V 14 V 3.1.3 V Pest Management V 14 3.1.4 Soil Fertility Management V 16 3.1.5 V Vandalism V V V 16 I V 3.1.6 3.2 Erosion V V V V 17 17 Botanical Monitoring I 4.0 WATER RUNOFF TREATMENT BASINS AND V SEDIMENT TRAP MONITORING RESULTS V 19 I V VV V V V V V V VV V V V 312761000 V V I TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) SECTION TITLE PAGE I 50 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 23 5.1- Upland Slopes Mitigation Conclusions and Recommendations 23 52 Wetland Mitigation Conclusions and Recommendations 25 6.0 REFERENCES 27 I LIST OF FIGURES I NUMBER TITLE PAGE 1 Regional Location of Project Site 2 2 Home Depot Encinitas Wetland Mitigation Area Showing Photo I View Locations 3 3 Photo Viewpoints - Viewpoints E and F 11 I 4 Photo Viewpoints - Viewpoints G and H 12 5 Photo Viewpoints - Viewpoint J 13 6 Views of Water Runoff Treatment Basins 24 I LIST OF TABLES 1 NUMBER TITLE PAGE 1 Species Observed in the Home Depot Slopes Mitigation 2 Area May2000 . Home Depot Riparian Mitigation Plant Species Percent Cover 9 May 2000 18 I 3 Species Detected in the Wetland Mitigation Area at Home Depot Encinitas, May 2000 - 20 4 Tree Height Data at Home Depot Encinitas, May 2000 22 I I 312761000 ii I TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) I LIST OF APPENDICES I LETTER TITLE PAGE A Transect Photos: A-I I B Raw Botanical Data B-I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 312761000 iii I I, MONITORING TIMELINE I HOME DEPOT MITIGATION MONITORING ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA Month YEAR J F MIAIMIJTJIAISIOIND 1995 POP 1996 1997 I kc :- 1998 I'mac"k k. 1 1999 r 2000 _!R I = Completed Maintenance Period to Date I . S = Completion of Installation and Start of Maintenance/Monitoring Program M = Botanical Monitoring R = Report Due T = Termination of Maintenance/Monitoring Program i i i I 1 312761000 iv I H I I' n 1.0 INTRODUCTION This is the fifth and final annual report required for the wetland and upland mitigation areas associated with Home Depot 'in -Encinitas, California. 'The project is located at the southeastern corner of El Camino Real and Olivenhain Road (Figures 1 and 2). Encinitas Creek flows through the northern portion Of the property and the wetland mitigation area lies on bOth sides of the creek and existing' floodplain; The upland"mitigation area lies on the cut slope behind the store building and on ,the cut slope facing El Camino Real. The project' was reviewed, and approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (ACOE), California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and City of Encinitas. ACOE issued Section 404 Permit No. 92459-EW, 'and CDFG issued 1603: Streambed Alteration Agreement No. -293-93. The conceptual 'mitigation plan was prepared by Ogden ' Environmental and Energy Services Co, Inc (Ogden) (Ogden 1993) and construction drawings were prepared by Forma Ogden has been the biological monitor of the project since its planning stages. This report covers the. fifth year of monitoring, from September 1999 to June 2000. The five-year maintenance and biological monitoring' period began on August 22, 1995. Geoscene Landscape has been maintaining the site since February, 1995. Vegetation buried by sediment that washed into the mitigation area in April 1998 from -the housing project north of Olivenhain ROad seems to be recovering adequately.- 1.1 UPLAND SLOPE MITIGATION The upland slope impacts were to scrub oak (Quercusberberdfolia) dominated chaparral and coastal sage scrub. These impacts occurred on the north-facing slope behind the building and on the west-facing slope along El Camino Real. Chaparral and coastal sage ,scrub species were planted on the cut and fill slopes, associated with the project. Transitional buffer areas adjacent to the wetland creation were also planted with Appropriate native upland species 312761000 ', -. ' ' ' ' ' . I •'.' . - ' ,, ,. I ....i-c. .' — \ OA WETLAND AREA S CAMP \ \2.\\ ; •;! S PENDLETON 16 — - -. PROJECT SITE FALLBROOK Af *14 V Lake LOCATION WOhifOfli PROJECT V7 "k7c Lake SCONDIDo Sutherland ( SANTA YSABEL Lake Hodges 78 78 JUU S9 6 RANCHO RAMONA BERNARDO 15 San Vicente P0 WAY Reservoir ELA - gElCapitan -.----' SANTEE ALPINE - 8 ELC JON Loveland Reservoir 54 94 GO weetwater JAMUL Barrett Lake 'Reservoir CH A VISTA fra 94 DULZURA Y Lake SAN YSIDRO — -- ---. TIJUANA I OGDEN Regional Location of Project Site FIGURE •• • I Env Ass/Home Depot Year 3/Home Depot County Map.FH7 2 A. EXISTING WETLAND RIPARIAN SCRUB PARKING LOT BRACKISH MARSH WILLOW WOODLAND BRACKISH MARSH '- 41 ..,.- — - ;ry-4 ,c c? -- - 41 SALT MARSH 7. [.I SCALE BRACKISH MARSH SALTIMARSH lePHOTO VIEW LOCATIONS FIGURE Home Depot Encinitas Wetland Mitigation Area Showing Photo View Locations 3 2 I " :. •"; •.: L.2 WETLAND MITIGATION .. '. To compensate for 3.0 acres of wetland impact, 4.4 wetland acres were created, for a I ' replacement ratio of approximately 1.5:1. Wetland impacts onsite 'totaled 0.1 acre of 2.9 fallow field Other habitats riparian woodland and acres of wetland. wetland onsite were preserved untouched,. other than to remove exotic red gum, trees (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) and pampas grass (Cortaderia species),.as an enhancement measure. In addition, the wetland creation acreage is being converted into a wildlife habitat of higher I value than the fallow field wetlands that were lost. 'The wetland creation acreage consists of riparian woodland, riparian scrub, salt marsh, and brackish marsh.'' , 13 WATER RUNOFF TREATMENT BASINS AND SEDIMENT TRAP MONITORING I, To minimize the potential for. water quality impacts, water pollution prevention' engineering structures were required. They consisted of sediment traps to collect larger I' . particle sediment and nuisance 'water treatment basins that should theoretically process some of the nutrients and chemicals in nuisance runoff that would otherwise flow freely downstream. S • : ' '' I s Permit requirements call for the maintenance and monitoring of. catch basin sediment traps and 'nuisance water treatment basins n th& Home Depot property. Permit I , conditions call' for one-third of the vegetation to be removed from the nuisance water treatment basins in March of each year, just prior to the bird bieeding season. The sediment traps need to be cleaned when they fill with sediment. I .. ,.' ' ' ' . S '' , *. ' ,• 2.0 , UPLAND SLOPES MITIGATION MONITORING ' The fve-year mitigation maintenance and monitoring program began on August 22, I •, 1995, when Ogden certified that the entire mitigation planting was completed. The upland slopes biological monitoring program consists of a more qualitative horticultural I ' monitoring geared toward speeding the establishment of desirable vegetation.. Botanical transect is for 'mitigation monitoring' not required' the upland slopes planting. '1 Quantitative monitoring in the upland slope areas consisted of counting dead container' plants and making replacements in the first three years of monitoring. I I 312761000 4 * I ' 2.1 HORTICULTURAL MONITORING. . I Horticultural direct landscape monitoring provides the supervision necessary to' the maintenance contractor's work in establishing the mitigation planting. It is both. qualitative and quantitative in nature. The goal is to establish the native vegetation to a self-sustaining status and obtain habitat value as' quickly as possible. Horticultural I monitoring is proactive because it attempts to identify and correct problems before they become serious. Ogden made a total of six horticultural monitoring visits' to the site during year five. . 2.1.1 Vegetation Development . The native upland vegetation on the slopes is establishing as expected. Seeded species provide.the majority of cover... The fastér-growing.pioneering species, coastal goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii), is the most dominant species onsite at this time, especially on the north-facing slope. •The . plants are well adapted to site conditions and are near mature size. Somewhat slower-growing species like California sagebrush (Artemisia caljfornica) I . and, flat-topped buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum) are still relatively small and will become more dominant as the plants mature to full size in the coming years. Container plants like lemonadeberry (Rhus integrfolia), toyon (Heteromeles arbuilfolia), and scrub oak remain relatively small in comparison to their I mature size and make little contribution to native species cover at this time. They were also planted at relatively low I , densities. The north-facing Slope "A" contains more woody chaparral species than Slope "B," which is dominated by coastal sage scrub species. The differences are not yet readily I .. apparent because most of the larger-growing container species such as Del Mar manzanita (Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. crassfolia),' wart-stemmed ceanothus U (Ceanothus verrucosus), scrub oak, lemonadeberry, and Mexican' elderberry (Sambucus "B" mexicana) are still relatively small and were planted at low densities. Slope will ultimately be dominated by lower-growing species such as California sagebrush, and flat- 'topped buckwheat, species that were also planted from seed. Small seedlings of these species continue to germinate and establish on the slopes, indicating they should persist over time. I ' ' 312761000' , . S ' 5 All seeded species are found growing at the site. In addition, several native species are I volunteering into the mitigation area from the stockpiled topsoil. Seedling density is• generally good, and the coverage of vegetation on the lower slope along El Camino Real is slowly improving. 2.12 Irrigation " I The irrigation system 'has served its intended purpose and was disabled in December of 1998. The upland slope mitigation area has since been sustained on naturally occurring precipitation. . . •. . 2.13 Pest Management I Pest managenient involves monitoring plant pest species populations to determine whether they pose a risk to successful establishment of the mitigation area. If they do ' I pose a risk, control measures are recommended. Ogden uses an integrated pest management (IPM), approach where, ideally, pests are identified early and control I ' measures. are implemented before serious harm occurs. Pests that do not 'endanger the' quality of the habitat or the health of plants within it are generally ignored. Pests can be I 'broadly classified at the Home Depot mitigation area as weeds, insects, or disease. Weeds I' Annual weed 'invasion has lessened each year as the desired natives mature and occupy, I : most of the physical space available. Invasive exotic weed species like pampas grass,' fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), castor bean (Ricinus' communis), and salt cedar (Tamarix I species) have increased due to poor control the past couple of years and are still a concern requiring ongoing control measures. • ,' ' I Insects ' ' ' •• I ' • Insect plant pests have not been significant in the revégetation area. Insects on the mitigation area plants now serve as a food source for birds and other Wildlife. Ogden I ' monitors for harmful insect plant pests during regular monitoring visits. I .' • .. ' I ' . 312761000 • , ' ' • ' 6 ' Disease Diseases can be either biotic or abiotic in origin. Ogden has not observed any significant disease problems in the revegetation area Plant loss due to disease has been localized and minimal No control measures have been contemplated / Other Pests Vertebrate pests, including ground squirrels, pocket gophers, voles, rats, and mice, probably, occur at the project, but have not become serious pests. Rabbits have caused some damage by browsing on many of the plants, but damage has been minimal and no control measures have been contemplated .2.1.4 Soil Fertility Management In accordance with the revegetation plan, all container stock was planted with small quantities of supplemental nutrients in their backfill to speed growth and establishment Ogden has carefully observed plant growth and appearance to determine if soil fertility is adequate for healthy plant growth. .Most of the upland mitigation area is fully self- supporting and cover is adequate, so Ogden did not recommend any general fertilizer applications this year. Ogden did recommend fertilizing the scrub oaks that were planted in 1998, by top dressing Gro-Power Plus 5-34 to help improve their chances to establish into mature plants Gro-Power Plus 5-3-1 is a humus-based fertilizer with a soil penetrate to help improve root growth 2.1.5 Vandalism Vandalism has greatly decreased since the project's construction phase and first year of establishment Vandalism was not significant in year four. 2.1.6 Erosion There has been no noticeable erosion on the upland slopes of this project. No erosion is expected now that plant growth is well established and there is little unvegetated soil. : 312761000 . , 7 I .. 2.2 BOTANICAL MONITORING . * There is no transect monitoring associated with the upland slopes; the only quantitative I .monitoring consisted Of a dead container plant count in the first two years. Of a total 1,010 container plants installed, Ogden counted 178 dead container plants in the upland I irrigation slopes mitigatiOn area after one year, and 216 after two years. Ogden believes that during system problems and extensive vandalism the establishment period are responsible for the high rate of plant loss in the first year. Because of loss stabilization in I year two and the difficulty in locating dead container plants now that the vegetation is maturing, Ogden did not count dead container plants after year two: Ogden compiled a floral species list for the upland slopes mitigation area. A total of I .50 species were observed, 31 native to the area. Table 1 shows all species encountered • . during monitoring. .. . I ' 3.0 WETLAND MITIGATION MONITORING .. I The five-year mitigation maintenance and monitoring program began on August 22, 1995, when Ogden certified the mitigation planting was completed. The biological I . monitoring program consists of two distinct aspects: a more qualitative horticultural monitoring geared toward speeding the establishment of the desirable vegetation and a I quantitative botanical monitoring that measures the success of the native vegetation's establishment. The quantitative measurements are compared with the established milestones to help determine project success. Figures 3, 4, and 5 show several typical I views of the wetland mitigation area after four years of monitoring. Photo viewpoints are shown in Figure 2. . I . 3.1 HORTICULTURAL MONITORING . Horticultural monitoring provides the supervision necessary to direct the landscape maintenance contractor's work .in establishing the mitigation planting. It is both qualitative, and quantitative in nature. The goal is to establish the native vegetation to a I . self-sustaining status and obtain habitat value as quickly as possible. Horticultural is in it identify monitoring proactive that attempts to and correct problems before they become serious. Ogden made a total of six horticultural monitoring visits to the site I . during year five. • . . • I • 312761000 '1 8 , S • • Table I SPECIES OBSERVED, IN THE HOME DEPOT SLOPES MITIGATION AREA MAY 2000 Scientific Name Common Name Acacia cultformis knife acacia Adenostomafasciculatum chamise Ambrosia psilostachya western ragweed Amsinckia species fiddleneck Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. crassfolia Del Mar manzanita Artemisia calfornica California sagebrush Baccharis salicfolia mule fat Baccharzs sarothrozdes Spanish broom • Brassica nigra black mustard Ceanothus verrucosus wart-stemmed ceanothus Centaurium venustum canchalagua • Cenkiurea soistitialis yellow star-thistle • Conyza bonariensis hairy fleabane • Conyza canadensis horse weed .• Cortaderia spp. pampas grass • Cyperus esculentus : yellow nutsedge Encelia calfornica. California encelia Eremocarpus setigerus : turkey mullein Eriogonumfasciculatum flat-topped buckwheat Eriophyllum confertflorum golden yarrow • Erodium cicutarium redstem filaree Eschscholzia calfornica California poppy • Foeniculum vulgare fennel • Gnaphalium species cudweed Hemizoniafasciculata tarweed Heteromeles arbutfolia toyon Heterotheca grandifiora telegraph weed Isocoma rnenziesii coastal goldenbush Isomèris arborea bladderpod • Leymus condensatus - giant wild rye Lotus scoparius deerweed Malosmalaurina laurel sumac • Marubium vulgare horehound • Medicago hispida California burciover • Melilotus species sweetclover Mimulus aurantiacus red monkeyflower • Nicotiana glauca tree tobacco 312761000 9 I.: 1 Table 1 (continued) .. SPECIES OBSERVED IN THE HOME DEPOT SLOPES MITIGATION AREA MAY 2000 , I Scientific Name Common Name Pennisetumclandestinum : Kikuyu grass I Quercus berberidfolia scrub oak Rhus integrfolia . lemonadeberry Ricinus communis . castor bean I : Salix gooddingii... . . blackwillow Salvia apiana ,. white sage Salvia mellfera . . :. black sage I Sambucus mexicana . Mexican elderberry • 'Silybum marianum . - milk thistle Solanum douglasii . nightshade • . Tamarix species salt cedar I Toxicodendron diversilobum poison oak Unidentified exotic annual grasses no common name Denotes nonnative species . • I . I - I I I P I 1 I I I I . 312761000 - -. • . . 10 •• I -. • ., :• t': ... - ft - • -. •• ..-.'•. .- - 1 '.' •-'• . • • ; ;1• :- na - •••-:. -' 4. .. ... .,k, :. . . '..r... • - r - .•. - L. ~ Xzl~l Zx Yç. j• . -•1 . I . '4 -Yqj-f . •:-., • - .-,..- ...g, .•: ,- I 5 - - . ••/ - I: (- :-- . . . ff, 17 . V • .'';;.:-:'-7\ .'. 14/ •.-.- •' .. _.•::i.- .. - f';,. . I. -'t . A 4 'cc . - ;;. ; r , V - ' I - 1 • - I 1(i •" I t f_ - ( 1 - I - 3.1.1 Vegetation Development Vegetation growth and development has been quite variable throughout the wetland I mitigation area This results primarily from differences in soil salinity and moisture levels, but also from variations in the container plant and seed palettes used for the project I Areas planted to salt marsh have fully established and many plants have attained mature size As the plants age, the salt marsh creation areas will become mdistmguishable from I the adjacent, existing salt marsh I Some areas originally planted to riparian scrub vegetation have converted to salt marsh because of high salinity. Most of the container plants have died due to toxic salt levels in I the soil, and the seed sown never. germinated Salt marsh species volunteers like pickleweed (Salicornia virginica), alkali mallow (Malvella leprosa), and alkali heath (Frankenia sauna) have filled the void These areas will attain the structure and density I of the existing salt marsh 1 3.1.2 Irrigation I The wetland mitigation area is now fully self-supporting and no longer requires irrigation to survive Because replacement container stock was planted at the beginning of 1999, I Ogden instructed the landscape maintenance contractor to irrigate portions of the wetland mitigation area to ensure the newly planted container plants survive their first dry season. Irrigation was intermittent due to irrigation controller problems and was subsequently I terminated The wetland mitigation area has since been sustained on naturally occurring precipitation 3.13. Pest Management Pest management involves, monitoring plant pest species populations to determine I 'whether they pose a risk to successful establishment of the mitigation area. If they do,. control measures are recommended Ideally, pests are identified early and control measures are implemented, before serious harm occurs. Ogden takes an IPM approach to 1 . pest control. Pests-that do not endanger the quality of the habitat or the health of plants within it are generally ignored Pests can be broadly classified at the Home Depot I mitigation area as weeds, insects, disease, or other pests 1 312761000 14 I 1 Weeds . I Pampas grass and salt cedar are the primary invasive exotic weed species found onsite. and the landscape maintenance contractor,.has not kept them under control. The wetland mitigation site was . infested with pampas grass prior to project construction, and it is a I common pest in the general vicinity. Pampas grass has the ability to displace. native species, spread extensively, and reduce habitat quality if not kept in cheek.. The I occurrence of pampas grass has increased since 1999 and care should be taken to eradicate this pest. . . . . . Bermuda grass (C)nodon dactylon), castor bean, acacia. (Acacia species), fennel, and.red I.. gum have also appeard in the mitigation area. The landscape contractor 'has been removing all but Bermuda grass. The . weed coiitrol efforts have been inconsistent, I . however, and some of these weeds reached maturity. Bermuda grass is a much more it is looks to the difficult management issue on this site because tenacious, very similar native saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), and these two species are sometimes found growing I together. Ogden has instructed the landscape maintenance contractor to only control Bermuda grass when there is no saltgrass growing in the vicinity. Annual weeds are no longer a threat to native species establishment, and native- species I dominate the wetland. The salty portions of the mitigation area have remained essentially. high weed free because few plants can tolerate the salt conditions. Insects . . . Insect pests have not threatened establishment of the desirable native species in the Home Depot mitigation area. Now that the mitigation area plants are well established, the I insects on them will serve as a food source for birds and other wildlife. I Disease ,.. ., . . Diseases can be either biotic or abiotic in origin. As discussed in previous annual reports (Ogden 1997a, 1997b), portions of the wetland mitigation area . have high salt concentrations in the soil that have caused severe distress and death of container plants. I A distinct salt crust can be seen on the soil surface in some locations. Ogden took soil S I .0 312761000 ' 15 . 0 . tests in 1997 to confirm that high salt concentrations were responsible for the decline and 1 death of these plants. Other Pests Ogden has observed rabbit damage on spiny rush (Juncus acutus ssp. leopoldii) and other I plants in the wetland. No control measures have been contemplated because the damage has not threatened plant health or habitat establishment. Vertebrate pests, including I ' ' ground squirrels, pocket gophers, voles, rats, and mice, probably occur at the project, but have not become serious plant pests. 3.1.4 Soil Fertility Management In accordance with the revegetation plan, all container stock was planted with small' quantities of supplemental nutrients in their backfill to speed growth and establishment. I ' Ogden has carefully observed plant growth and appearance to determine whether soil', fertility is adequate for healthy plant growth Growth has generally been acceptable I ' except where salt levels appear excessive. To date, Ogden has not recommended supplemental applications of fertilizer to these locations. ' Salt marsh continues to develop and mature in the areas where soil conditions are favorable for salt marsh species. As discussed in the second and third annual reports (Ogden 1997b, 1999a), areas where nearly all container plants died and hydroseed did not germinate were found to have an extremely high electrical conductivity (ECe) of I 102.7 millimhos per centimeter' (mmhos/cm) and a sodium I adsorption ratio (SAR) of 25.1. Native salt marsh species volunteered into these areas and continue to thrive, I ' including the obligate wetland species, pickleweed. In' response to soil test results, Ogden recommended that no measures be taken to address the salt problem because salt I levels are so high that any potential remedies would likely fail." I 3.1.5 Vandalism Vandalism has not been a significant problem since the first. year, when irrigation system I - vandalism was a continuing problem. Irrigation system vandalism has continued since then, but at 'a reduced' frequency and severity. 312761000 - , ' ' 16 3.1.6 Erosion• Ogden did not observe any erosion in year five There did not appear to be any additional sediment washing into the project from the. La Costa Valley project across Olivenhain Road, as occurred in spring 1998. In that location, an area approximately. 50 feet by 60 feet was buried in sediment to about 6 inches deep The sediment came from a new storm drain outlet placed just east of the Home Depot property. This sediment buried or partially buried wetland vegetation growing in the wetland mitigation area The sediment appears to have flowed out of a concrete v-ditch upstream of the wetland mitigation area This storm drain outlet was constructed during early. 1998, and a trench was dug with a backhoe to divert the runoff into Home Depot's wetland mitigation area The vegetation buried or partially buried by sediment has begun recovering and it appears it will recover completely over time. The plants buried here-..include pickleweed, saltgrass, and spiny rush A few willows also volunteered in the sediment near where the drainage water enters the wetland mitigation area. The flow of freshwater may reduce salt levels enough to permit the willows to survive if enough water continues to flow into the wetland from the development across the street 32 BOTANICAL MONITORING Botanical monitoring quantitatively describes the growth and establishment of the mitigation planting and measures it against established project success standards. Permit requirements call for the project to be monitored for five years following installation The primary botanical monitoring method employed at Home Depot's wetland mitigation area is the line intercept transect. Transect monitoring was performed on May 15, 2000. As called for in the Conceptual Mitigation Plan (Ogden 1993), fourteen 30-meter transects were randomly placed in the wetland mitigation area to measure vegetation development Cover data are presented in Table 2 Photos of each transect can be found in Appendix A Total species cover in the wetland mitigation area was 110.52 percent with 107.76 percent native cover and 2.75 percent of nonnative cover. Native species cover increased 10.8 percent and nonnative species cover decreased 2 percent from last year Despite a decrease in native cover, the fourth-year, cover standard of 80 percent was 312761000 . . 17 I I . Table I HOME DEPOT RIPARIAN MITIGATION PLANT SPECIES PERCENT COVER . MAY 2000 . I Absolute Percent - Scientific Name Common Name Cover I Ambrosia psilostachya 3.90 western ragweed . Anemopsis calfornica yerba mansa . 0.57 Apium graveolens celery 0.29 I . Artemisia douglasiana mugwort - 1.90 Baccharis pilularis coyote brush : 1.19 Baccharis salicfolia 0 Carpobrotus edulis .. mule fat 3.21 I, fig-marigold Chenopodium species . pigweed •. 0.53 I.. Chorizanthe species spineflower. . 0.21 Cortaderia species . . pampas grass 1.43 Cotula coronopfolia brass-buttons . 0.50 ,. Cyperus esculentus S yellow nutsedge . . 0.54 Distichlis spicata saltgrass . . . . 1.50 I •. ELY CON ''S.. Eucalyptus species . . . . . gum tree . . . 0.02. 0.02 Foeniculum vulgare fennel . . . 0.05 Frankenia sauna Hemizoniafasciculata . alkali heath tarweed . 3.03 0.02 Heterotheca grandflora telegraph weed 0.13 Isocoma menziesii coastal goldenbush , 9.13 Iva hayesiana San Diego marsh-elder . 0.58 Juncus acurus ssp. leopoldii spiny 'rush 54.90 Lotus scoparius deerweed 0.90 Malvella leprosa . alkali-mallow 0.05 Melilotus species . sweetclover . ; 0.20 1 - ,Oenothera villosa . evening primrose . . . 2.42 Picris echioides . . bristly ox-tongue . . 1.24 - Pluchea.odorata . salt marsh fleabane - 2.70 I . Populusfremontii. . Fremont cottonwood . - 0.17 Rumex crispus curly dock 0.02 . Salicornia subterminalis pickleweed , , 8.05 S Salix exigua .' , - narrow-leaved willow ' ' 0.69 Sal ix lasiolepis arroyo willow, .. . . 7.69 . Scirpus calfornicus bulrush 5 . 2.67 Total Cover - " 110.52 ' Total Cover by Natives 5 . . . - 107.76 1 '• - 312761000 , • S 18 • : • "- , - . exceeded this year. The native species with the highest percent cover were spiny rush at 54.9 percent, coastal goldenbush at 9.13 percent, pickleweed at 8.05 percent, and arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) at 7.69 percent. The increase in native cover occurred without the benefit of irrigation and in a relatively dry year. Thi .may indicate that the site is becoming well established. 2 Table 3 is 'a species list to complement the cover data, including species that may have been missed in the transects due to small numbers on the site or seasonal occurrence. The transects picked up 40 species, 26 which were native. A total of 67 species were observed in the wetland mitigation area, 35 which were native to the area. No additional species were observed in the wetland mitigation site this year. Ogden: measured 10 randomly selected Fremont cottonwood, 35 arroyo willow trees, and 10 narrow-leaved willow trees to determine average tree heights in year two. In years three, four, and five, tree heights were' measured for all trees that were picked up on all transects, including many volunteer willow trees in the' process. Table 4 shows the average tree heights for all four years. A total ,of 35 arroyo willows were measured this year, most of them volunteers. As a result, the average tree height for arroyo willow remained at 2.3 meters from 1999 to 2000. ,The fifth-year height goal for arroyo willow is 3.4 meters, so the average willow height fell' short of the goal. After five years, the, average Fremont cottonwood tree height is 4.9 meters. The fifth-year height goal for Fremont cottonwood is '7.9 meters, o this species 'also fell short of its height goal. Narrow-leaved willow average tree height is 2.4 meters. The fifth-year height goal for narrow-leaved willow is 1.8 meters, so this species exceeded its height goal. Because of good native species cover and difficulty, locating, container plants and differentiating them from -seedling volunteers for some species, 'Ogden biologists 'did not count dead plants in 2000. The mortality rate was 4 percent after two years, well within the expected range. 4.0 WATER RUNOFF TREATMENT BASINS AND SEDIMENT TRAP MONITORING RESULTS Permit requirements call, for the maintenance, and monitoring of catch basin sedimt traps and nuisance water treatment basins on the Home Depot property. Ogden inspected. 312761000 " 19 I I Table 3 I SPECIES DETECTED IN THE WETLAND MITIGATION AREA. AT HOME DEPOT ENCINITAS • . . MAY2000. I . Scientific Name . . CommonName • Sydney golden wattle Acacia longifolia • Ambrosia psilostachya . western ragweed Anemopsis calfornica yerba mansa • Apium graveolens . celery Artemisia douglasiana Douglas mugwort Atriplexpatula • - .. spear oracle • A triplex semibaccata . . . . Australian saltbush . I Baccrpi11s . coyote brush Baccharis salicfolia. . mule fat. • Brassica nigra . . mustard • Carpobrótus edulis . . .. . fig-marigold . • Chenopodium species . pigweed . -. • Chorizanthe species . . . spineflower . I . . • Cortaderia species . pampas grass • Conyza bonariensis . hairy fleabane • Conyza canadensis . . - horse weed • Cotula coronopfolia . . brassbuttons I . • Cynodon dactylon -. Bermuda grass Cyperus eragrOstis . tall flatsedge • Cyperus esculentus . . yellow nutsedge I Datura wrightii .. . . . jimsonweed Distichlis spicata saltgrass Eriogonumfasciculatum flat-topped buckwheat • Eucalyptus species . gum tree . I . • Foeniculum vulgare .. fennel. Frankenia sauna . alkali heath • Gnaphalium species . . cudweed Hemizoniafasciculata . ' tarweed - I . Heterotheca grandora . telegraph weed Iva hayesiana - San Diego marsh-elder Isocoma menziesii . . coastal goldenbush • ,I • Juncus acutus ssp. leopoldii spiny rush Juncus bufonius toad rush . Juncus mexicanus • Mexican rush. I . • Lactula serriola . prickly lettuce Leymus condensatus . giant wild rye . . Lotus scoparius .• . deerweêd, I I' S. I I . . 312761000 -. . •: 20 ... .• . .. • I I ... Table 3 (éontinüed) I . SPECIES DETECTED IN THE WETLAND MITIGATION AREA - - AT HOME DEPOT ENCINITAS MAY 2000 -. Scientific Name Common Name I . Malvella leprosa . . .alkali-mallow Medicago hispida California burciOver' Melilotus species .. . . sweetciover Nicotiana glauca tree tobacco I.•. Oenothera villosa :. evening primrose Picris echioides . bristly ox-tongue Plantago major . . broadleaf plantain I Pluchea odorata salt marsh fleabane Pluchea séricea . . arrowweed Polygonum species knotweed Polypogon monspeliensis . annual beard grass 1 . Populusfremontii . . Fremont cottonwood . Ricinus communis . . castor bean I .. • Rumex crispus Salicorniasubterminalis . curly.dock . . pickleweed Salicornia virginica . . . pickleweed Salix exigua . . . narrow-leaved willow I , Salix gooddingii . . . black willow' - Salix lasiolepis . arroyo willow •',. Sambücus mexicana - Mexican elderberry Scirpus calfornicus . bulrush I Scirpus robustus • alkali. rush • Sonchus arvensis '• . . perennial sowthistle • Sonchus asper . Spergularia species . . . annual sowthistle sand-spurey Tamarix species . . salt cedar . • Typha latifolia . - broad-leaf cattail • Washingtonia robusta .' Mexican fan palm • Xanthium strumarium common cocklebur • Unidentified species , . unknown I • Denotes nonnative species . . . 4 - I H 1 -.•' :.-'''-' I 312761000 • ,. - 21 • ,1 •.' . I' -- - -- --. -... - --. .._ ,- - - - - MW - Table 4 TREE HEIGHT DATA * AT HOME DEPOT ENCINITAS MAY 2000 I Year 2 Year 3 . Year 4 Year 5 Scientific Name Common Name Number Avg. Height Number Avg. Height Number Avg. Height Number Avg. Height - (meters) (meters) : (meters)- (meters) Populusfremontii Fremont cottonwood 10 . 3.4 . 4.6 *10'. : 4.6 10- 4.9 Salixlasiolepis • - arroyo willow 10 3.7 57 1.8 35. 2.3 35 2.3 Salix exigua narrow-leaved - - - - 13 2.5 -. 10 2.4 • :willow • - . . . - • . * - . . - - - - • - * . -• - • .- • . • : -• - -. • - -• 4* 'I I 1 1 I I I I, I .1 the sediment traps and nuisance water treatment basins twice in year five. Sediment was minimal in the basins as of May 2000. The two nuisance water, treatment basins remain in good condition. The, freshwater marsh planted In the northernmost basin provides 100 percent vegetative cover and is fully self-supporting. The majority of project site runoff flows into this basin. In accordance with the project's plans, one-third of the vegetatiOn is to be removed each year. The more eastern nuisance water treatment basin has not filled in with freshwater marsh species after five years of monitoring. Ogden believes that this basin will not completely fill with freshwater marsh because there is not sufficient nuisance water flowing into it to support that much freshwater marsh vegetation, and groundwater is not at the surface at this location Figure 6 shows representative views of the two nuisance water treatment basins.. ' .. .. .. '. . . 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on biological monitoring observations and the prOject's success standards, Ogden concludes that the Home Depot revegetation area is performing well after its fifth and final year of maintenance and biological monitoring. Control of invasive exotic species is the only significant concern at this time. While the landscape maintenance contractor's performance has improved this year with regard to invasive exotic species control, they have still not brought the entire site under control. 5.1 UPLAND SLOPES MITIGATION CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Home Depot upland slopes mitigation area continues to successfully establish and mature and is beginning to blend into the surrounding . natural vegetation. Some of the pioneering, faster-growing native species are near maturity. ., No botanical transect monitoring is required for the upland slopes mitigation area, so total cover is. visually estimated. . . ,. Total native species cover is acceptable after five years of monitoring. There is some variability within the mitigation area, which is desirable and expected. The success standards require 70 percent cover after four years, and Ogden estimates this requirement 312761000 . - . 23 II I' I ________ L VT— • - - r -• I f .r,•-• ,-. -.. - ..-.' _'_..f'•__••_• • ...• • • •- . ..•,'. - - ' .• IN 4 - ol •••• '-• .7, , III • 31 0 I ,'O • has been met. As native cover increases, annual weed species cover has declined from 4.7 percent to 2.7 perôent. I .Container plant mortality was relatively high at 21 percent after two years, with most of during first few the the loss due to irrigation system vandalism the months of project. Container plant losses stabilized after the first year. A dead container plant count, was not I conducted this year because of the difficulty locating all the container -plants and because native species cover is adequate. The project's success standards require 100 percent tree I . species container, plant survival and 80 percent 'shrub species ,container plant survival after five years. Due to acceptable native species cover and the desireS to' phase out I .irrigation on the upland mitigation area slopes, Ogden recommends no further container plant replacements. I . Seedling establishment is good throughout the upland mitigation area. Some of the seeded species, such as coastal goidenbush 'and California sagebrush, have set seed and. produced second generation seedlings. The success standards require establishment Of all seeded species. This requirement has been met. Invasive perennial exotic weed species also appear onsite in limited numbers and require I regular control measures by' the landscape maintenance contractor. Pampas grass, salt cedar, castor bean, and red gum were all present prior to Home Depot construction and I (Nicotiana will continue to invade the mitigation area. Fennel, castor bean, and tree tobacco glauca) also, invade the site. The landscape maintenance contractor has periodically taken appropriate control measures for these species, but their efforts have 1 ' not been adequate over the past three years. Invasive exotic weed species control has improved this year, but invasive exotic weeds have not been brought fully under control 1 yet. • ' .' ' . 5.2 WETLAND MITIGATION CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS After five years of maintenance and biological monitoring, the Home Depot wetland , has its Success 'standards mitigation area met native species cover requirements. require 80 percent cover after five years. With cover at 110.52 percent after five years, 'the • I ' five-year standard has been met. There is some variability within the mitigation area, as expected. Opportunistic annual weeds remain a minor presence in the wetland mitigation, 1' area. Exotic species make up only 2.76 percent cover. • . I. .312761000 •,- 25 , • P I . Invasive perennial exotic weed species appear on the site and require regular control measures by the landscape maintenance contractor., Pampas grass, salt cedar, castor bean, I acacia, and red gum were all present prior to Home Depot construction and continue to invade landscape has the project site. The maintenance contractor periodically taken control measures for these species, but has not kept them under adequate control. Some I ' ' of these weeds have attained mature stature and have bloomed and set seed without being -, controlled.r This has allowed for pampas grass to increase in cover within the existing I willow woodland. Pampas grass declined this year with improved control measures. There are still mature pampas grass and other invasive exotic, weed species growing in the wetland mitigation area that require control. . ' . . .. . . . Average free height for arroyo willow remained constant 'this' year at 2.3 meters, just I below the five-year milestone of 3.4 meters. Arroyo willow has fallen below the success standards because many of the trees measured are younger volunteers among the five- year old-cont ainer planted trees. In addition, rainfall this year. was below average, which could limit growth and high salt conditions in much of the wetland area would tend to I ' inhibit growth as well. Average tree 'height for Fremont cottonwood tree height is 4.9 meters after five years, 3 meters higher than last year. The fifth-year height goal for I Fremont cottonwood is 7.9 meters, so this species' fell well short of its height goal. Below average rainfall and salty soil conditions in some areas are probably responsible 'for Fremont cottonwood falling short of its fifth-year milestone. Narrow-leaved willow height is 2.4 The fifthheight for ,average tree meters. -year goal narrow-leaved'willow is . L.8 meters, so this species exceeded its height goal. Because of the known high salt I conditions in much of the wetland mitigation, area, Ogden believes most trees in these locations will not grow as large or as vigorously as those found growing in more favorable conditions, but they should grow to maturity over, time. Mitigating the high salt levels does not appear to be an option in this case. Seedling establishment remains good, except in those locations with extreme salt I . conditions. In areas with extreme salt concentrations, pickleweed has volunteered and is increasing in Though slowly cover. not the species planted, natural invasion of a native obligate wetland species is a sign that these areas of the mitigation site are wetland and I . appropriate for pickleweed. • . ' . '. '. . , I 312761000 ' ' . . , , 26' , . • III I 6.0 REFERENCES S V V V V V Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Co., Inc. •V 1993. Conceptual Riparian V V Mitigation Design for Home Depot - Encinitas Project. V V V I Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Co., Inc. 1997a. V First Annual Monitoring I V Report, Upland and Wetland Mitigation, Home Depot Encinitas. February. V V V Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Co., Inc. 1997b. Second Annual Monitoring VU Report, Upland and Wetland Mitigation, Home Depot Encinitas. November.-- Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Co., In. 1999a. Third Annual Monitoring I Report, . Upland and Wetland Mitigation, Home Depot Encinitas, May. V EnvirOnmental and Energy Services Co., Inc. 1999b. Fourth Annual Monitoring . I Ogden V V Report, Upland and Wetland Mitigation, Home Depot Encinitas. October. Jr., Porter B; 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: V I Reed, V • V - V California (Region 0). May. V • • • : . • I VV S H f ,S V I V VS5 V, V V I I I I 1 I. - V • S I I V V 312761000 V V •• - V 27 • V -- S LM O GDEN . Home Dèpàt May 2000 . . • Transects ii and 12 DD.DD . Bio'ogy/Home Depot/home Depot Trans 11_ 12.FH8 71 4-4 4Y &/ J It ? - • '4 -'-L , 14 it - 0 &;!. - -; 14 Y_kI ( r 7 ON,' MU N 1 1; AWN - - 30 IN.___ •, - -, • tP'tL IX A - . •. M' '•_.4', • .. , • ci . I •. 1 I'V. .' 71, t • &_ I.- S .4' . "jku.. . . ".\.'•'. r \.4l1 5 Ambrosia psilostachya 7..5 9 1.5 0.36 3 Ambrosia psilostachya 10.8 10.95 0.15 0.04 4 Ambrosia psiipstachya 4.5 4.55 0.05 0.01 4 Ambrosia psilosta-chya 5.7 6 0.3 0.07 4 Ambrcsia psilostachya 9.1 9.15 0.05 0.01 4 Ambrosia psilostachya 11.1 11.15 0.05 0.01 4 Ambrosia psilostachya 11.8 .12:05 0.25 0.06 7 Ambrosia psilostachya 8.7 8.8 0.1 0.02 7 Ambrosia. psilostachya . 117 12.75 1.05 0.25 7 Ambrosia psilostachya 16.6 16.7. . 0.1 '0.02 7 Ambrosia psilostachya 17.5 i7.6 0.1 0.02 8 Ambrosia psilostachya 1.95 .2.05' ' 0.1 0.02 8 Ambrosia psilostachya 2.75 2.8 0.05 0.01 8 .'Ambrosia psilostachya .3.1 . 3.3 0.2 0.05 8 Ambrosia psilostachya 4.02 4.-1 0.08 0 02 8 Ambrosia psilostachya 4.46 •.. '. 4.5 , ' '0.04 ' 0.01 8 Ambrosia psilostachya, . 5.7 .5.73 0.03 , 0.01 13 . Ambrosia psilostachya 10.2, - 10.4 ,: 0.2 0.05 13 Ambrosia psilostachya 10.7 11 0.3 0.07 13 Ambrosia psilostachya 12.26 13.32 1.06 ' 0.25 13 Ambrosia psilostachya. 12.5 ' 12.57 ' 0.07 0.02 13., Ambrosia psilostachya 13.34 13.8 0.46 0.11 13' 'Ambrosia psilostachya 14.82 14.92 0.1 0.02 13 Ambrosia psilostachya 16.94 , 17.1 0.16 . 0.04 14 Ambrosia psilostachya ' 11.39 11.43 0.04 0.01 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 11.57 , 11.62 0.05 0.01 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 11.85 11.93 ' 0.08 0.02 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 12.6 12.63 0.03' ., 0.01 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 12.76 13 , 0.24 0.06 .14 Ambrosia psilostachya 13.88 14.9 ' 1.02 0.24 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 14.12 14.15 . 0.03 ' 0.01 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 14.62 ' 14.66 , 0.04 0.01 .14 Ambrosia psilostachya 14.86, 14.9 " - 0.04 ' 0.01 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 15.39 . 15.42 -- 0.03' 0.01 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 25.4 25.44 0.04 . 0.01 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 26.2 , 26.23 ' 0.03 0.01 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 27.6 ., 27.64 . 0.04 0.01 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 28.9 29.95 . 1.05 0.25 14 Ambrosia psilostachya '• 29.84 29.87 , , 0.03 , 0.01 14 Ambrosia psilostachya 29.95 ' 31 1.05 ' 0.25 10 ' Ambrosia psilostachya ' 7.2 7.25 0.05 . ' 0.01 10 Ambrosia psilostachya 7.8 7 85 0.05 0.01 10 Ambrosia psilostachya ' 17.65 - 17.9 . 0.25 ' 0.06 10 Ambrosia psilostachya 18.3 - 21.4 . 3.1 0.74 10 Ambrosia psilostachya , 22.37 . , 22.7 ' 0.33 , 0.08 10 Ambrosia psi'1ostachja 22.9 23.08 018 0.04 10 Ambrosia psilostachya • ' 23.37 . 23.45 , 0.08' 0.02 10 Ambrosia psilostachya 23.94 24 25 0 3]. 0.07 10 Ambrosia psilostachya 24.87 25.17 '0.3 0.07 1 J 10 Ambrosia psilostachya . 25.55 26.87 ' 1.32 0.31 10 Ambrosia psilostachya 25.95 ' 26 - 0.05 . 0.01 I . : 10 Ambrosia psilostachya 26.2 26.5 0.3 0.07 10 Ambrosia psilostachya 26.9 27.1 0.2 0.05 .10 Ambrosia psilostachya' 29.3 2955 - 0.25 0.06 I 10 k Ambrosia psilostachya . 29.9 30 0.1 0.02 9 Ambrosia psilostachya . 7.7 '7.76 0.06 0.01 9 Ambrosia psilostachya 11.5 11.53. . 0.03 0.01 9 Ambrosia psilostachya . 13.2 13.53 . 0.33 . .0.08 'I - 9 Ambrosia psilostachya . '18.14, 18.35 . 0.21 0.05 Ambrosia psilostachya Total ,.. 16.39 "3.90 6 Anemopsis californica 25 26.1 - 1.1 , 0.26 I 6 ' Anemopsis californica, 25.8 25.85 0.05 0.01 6 Anemopsis californica 27.2 27.5' 0.3 . 0.07' 6 Anemopsis ca1if6nica , 28.25 " 28.3 0.05 0.01 I 6 Anemopsis californica 29.85 29.9 ' ' 0.05 0.01 7 Anemopsis californica '. 5.3 . , 5.35, ' . 0.05 7' Anemopsis californica 10.1 10.3 ' ' 0.2 , 0.05 7 Anemopsis californica 10.9 11.1 ' . 0.2 0.05 8 Anemopsis californica 27 27.3 . 0.3 , 0.07 9 . Anemopsis californica 11.5 11.G 0'..]. 0.02 Anemopsis californica Total 2.4 0.57 8 'Apium gravelens ' 23.6 24.8 ' 1.2 0.29 ' Apium gravelens Total " : 1.2 ' 0.29 I 5 ' Artemesia douglasiana 8.4 . 9.1 ' 0.7 0.17 5 Artemesia douglasiana ' 13.5 '.14 0.5 , . 0.12 5 Artemesia douglasiana 13.5 13.9 0.4 0.10 1 5 Artemesia douglasiana 18 , . 18.2 0.2 , . 0.05 5 Artemesia douglasiana 18.4 , 19.5 1.1 ' 0.26 5 Artemesia douglasiana 19.6 19.8 " 0.2 0.05 1 , 1Artemesia douglasiana 22.31 :22.4,- - ' 0.09 -. 0.02 3 Artemesia douglasiana:' 3.6 3.8 . 0.2 0.05 3 Artemesia douglasiana 3.85 3.9. 0.05 0.01. 3 Artemesia douglasiana 5.6 .7 ' 1.4 , - 0.33 3 Artemesia douglasiana 6.1, :6.3 0.2' 0.05 4 Artemesia douglasiana 3.8 3.85 . - 0.05, 0.01 4 Artemesia douglasiana 17.9 17.95 0.05 ' 0.01 I 4 Artemesia douglasiana 22.1 - 22.2 , 0.1 ' 0.02 4 Artemesia douglasiana 22.5 22.6 .' 0.1 0.02 ' 6Artemesia douglasiana , 6-.85 ' 6.95 ' . , 0. 1, - 0.02 I 6 . Artemesia douglasiana . 10.4 10.45 0.05 , 0.01 6 Artemesia douglasiana 16.75 ' 16.85 ' 0.1 - " - 0.02 12 Artemesia douglasiana' 20.53 20.,7 0.17 ' 0.04 I. 12 Artemesia douglasiana ' 21.02 .22,. 08 , 1.06 0.25 12 Artemesia douglãsiana 23.1 23.22 - ' 0.12 ' 0.03 12 ' Artemesia douglasiana .23.27 '.23.3: 0.03 '' 0.01 12 Artemesia douglasiana ' 23.99 24.55- . ' '0.56 , 0.13 12 Artemesia douglasiana 25.7 , 25.75 - 0.05 , 0.01 12 Artemesia douglasiana , 29 , 29.08 0.08 - 0.02 0.03 0.3 7.99 0.5 1 0.05 0.3 0.1. 0.31 1.2 0.9 0.4 0.2.' 0.06" 5.01' 0.3 0.8 1.1 0.25 0.28 0.03- 0.06 0.23, 0.05 0.1 02 0.15 0.1 0:2 0.1 0.25 0.1 1.4 0.1 0.4 1.35 0.1 0.25 0.05 0.35 9 .1 0.1 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 03 0.01 0.07 1.90 0.12 0.24 0.01 0.07 0.02 0.07 0.29 0.21 0.10 0.05 0.0]: 1.19 0.07 0.19' 0.26 0.06 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.05" 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.06 : 0 .02 0.33 0.02 0.10 0.32 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.08 0.02. 0.17 0.12 0.0.7 0.10 0.02. 0.02 0.07 Artemesia douglasiana 4.3 4.33 Artemesia douglasiana .27.2 27..5 Artemesia douglasiana Total Baccharis pilularis 2.5 3' ..Baccharis pilularis " 16.4 17.4 Baccharis pilularis 10.85 10.9 Baccharis pilularis 14.6 14.9 Baccharis pilularis . 18.7. . 18.8 Baccharis pilularis 12.3 12.6 Baccharis pilularis 13.7 , 14.9 Baccharis pilularis . 14.4 . 15.3 Baccharis pilularis . .6.3 ' , 6.7 Baccharis. pilularis , 16.6 . 16.8 Baccharis pilularis 11.9 11.96 Baccharis. pilularis, Total . Baccharis salicifolia . ' 11.5 11.8 Baccharis salicifolia . 15.6 ........4 Baccharis salicifolia " 20.3 21.4 Baccharis sal-icifolia 14.05 14.3 Baccharis salicifolia 16.07 16'.35 Baccharis salicifolia 19.23 19.26 Baácharis salicifolia 19.33 ' 19.39 Baccharis salicifolia 23.42 23.65 Baccharis salicifolia 25.92 - ' 25.97 Baccharis salicifolia 21.9 22 Baccharis salicifolia 25 , 25.2 Baccharis salicifolia 8.7 8.85 Baccharis salicifolia 12.4 12.5 Baccharis salicifolia 13.5 13.7 Baccharis salicifolia 18.6 18.7 Baccharis salicifolia 20 20.25 Baccharis salicifoliá 21.8 21.9 Baccharis salicifolia . 22.1 23.5 , Baccharis salicifolia 24.1 .24.2 Baccharis salicifolia 24.4 ' 24.8 Baccharis salicifolia 25.15 26.5. Baccharis salicifolia 26.7 26.8 Bàccharis salicifolia 26.95 27;2 Baccharis salicifolia 27.4 . 27.45 Baccharis salicifolia 27.55 , 27.9 Baccharis salicifolia 29.9 30 Baccharis salicifolia 21.9 . 22 Bacchäris salicifolia 23.6 24.3 Baccharis salicifolia 26.7 .27.2 Baccharis salicifolia .9.6 9.9 Baccharis salicifolia 18.9 , 19.3 Baccharis salicifolia 20.5 .20.6 Baccharis salicifolia 12.2 12.3 Baccharis salicifolia 26.9. 27.2.. 13 10 5 5 2 2 3 4 4 4 6 6 13 '5 5 5 1 1 1 ,1 1 1 2- 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 6 6 6 .7 12 I 13 Baccharis salicifolia 7.4 7.6 0.2 0.05 • 13. Baccharis salicifolia 15.7 15.83 0;13 0.03 10 Baccharis salicifolia 5.84 5.9 0.06 0.01 10 Baccharis salicifolia 13.3 13.'5 0.2 0.05 10 Baccharis salicifolia '20.65 209 0.25 0.06 10 Baccharis salicifolia 21.7 21.8 0.1 0.02 10 . Baccharis salicifolia 25.8 ' 26.3 0.5 0.12 10 Baccharis salicifolia ' 27.3 28.1 0.8 0.19 9 Baccharis salicifolia ' 23.2 23.3 0.1 0.02 • 9 Baccharis salicifolia 25.7 25.8 0.1 0.02 7 ' Baccharis salicifolia 21.3 ' 21.45 0.15 0.04 '. Baccharis salicifolia Total 13.49 3.21 10 Càrpobrotus edulis 16.3 16.5 . .0.2 0.05 • Carpobrotus edulis Total 0.2 0.05. 9 Chenopodium species , 16.3 16.5 0.2 0.05 9 Chenopodium species 16.62 16.65 0 03 0.01 9 Chenopodium species 17.24 17.3 0.06 0.01 9 Chenopodium species 20.8 21 '. 0.2 , 0.05 9 Chenopodium species, 21.4 '. 22.8 1.4 ' 0.33 9 Chenopodium species 28.8 ' 28.93 0.13 0.03 9 Chenopodium species 29.5 29.17 0.2 0.05 Chenopodium- species Total 2. 2.2' 0.53 13 Chorizanthe sp. 27.7 , 28.3 0.6 ' 0.14 . 10 Chorizanthe sp. 3.7 4 0.3 0.07 Chorizanthe sp. Total 0.9 0.21 12 Cortideria sp. 29.91 30 , 0.09 0.02 5 Cortideria sp. , 28.3 30 • 1.7' 0.40 2 Cortideria sp. 20.4 21.7 ' 1.3 0.31 4 Cortideria sp. 2.2 4.3 2.1 , 0.50 llCotula Cortideria sp. Total coronopifolia 6.6 , 8.7 6 2.1 1.43 0.50 Cotula coronopifolia Total , ,. . 2.1 0.50 3 ' Cyperus sp. , 29.3 . 29.4 0.1 0.02 10 Cyperus sp. .17.4 17.6 . 0.21 0.05 9 Cyperus sp. • 0.3 1.9' • 1.6 0.38 9 Cyperus sp. ' 2.83 3.2 ' , 0.37 ' 0.09 Cyperus op. Total ' 2.27 0.54 7 Distichlisspicata 23.6 - 23.7 . 0.1 0.02 7 Distichlis spicata • 24.7 24.9 0.2 . 0.05 7Distichlis spicata 26.8 ' 27 0.2 0.05 7 Distichlis spicata 27.8 27.9 0.1 0.02 7 Distichlis spicata 28.6 28.7 0.1 0.02 8 Distichlis spicata 1.8 2.1 0.3 0.07 8 Distichlis spicata 2.4 2.95 , 0.55 0.13 8 • Distichlis spicata 3 5.2 2.2 ' 0.52 14 Distichlis spicata 13.48 13.5 0.0 2 0.00, 14 Distichlis spicata , 15.4 . 15.43 0.03 0.01 14 Distichlis spicata 15.66 15.69 0.03 0.01 14 Distichlis spicata 16.4 16.45 '0.05 0.01 14 Distichlis spicata 17.3 17.42 0.12 0.03 14 Distichlis spicata 20.35 20.37 0.02 0.00 14 Distichlis spicata 20.96 21.98 1.02 0.24 14 Distichlis spicata 21.55 V 22.16 0.61 0.15 14 Distichlis spicata V 22.9 V 23.2 0.3 0.07 V 14 Distichlis spicata 23.6 23.94 0.34 0.08 V Distichlis spicata Total V 6.29 V 1.50- 3 ELY CON 05 06 01 002 ELY CON Total 0.1 0.02 2 Eucalypus sp. 17 1 -i7.2 0.1 0.02 Eucalypus sp. Total V V 01 0.02 4 Foeniculum vulgare 7 9 V 8.1 V 0.2 0.05 V Foeniculum vulgare Total V V V 0.2 0.05 3 Frankinia sauna 13 13.6 0.6 V 0.14 3. Frankinia sauna V 22.7 23 V 0.3 0.07 3 Frankinia sauna .23 .6 23.65 0.05 0.01 3 Frankinia sauna 24.47 25.53 1.06 0.25 3 Frankinia sauna V 28.2 28.25 V 0.05 0.01 14 Frankinia sauna V :0 0.45 0.45 0.11 1.4 Frankinia salina V 0.65 0.97 0.32 V 0.08 14 Frnkinia sauna V ].] 1.33 V 0.23 0.05 14 Frankinia sauna V 1.56 2.04 0.48 0.11 14 Frankinia sauna 2.5 2.52 0.02 0.00 14 Frankinia sauna 2.7 4.75 2.05 0.49 14 V Frankinia sauna 23.89 23.94 0.05 0.01 14 Frankinia sauna V 24.05 24.2 0.15 V 0.04 14 Frankinia sauna 24.4 V 27.55 3.15 0.75 11 Frankinia sauna 975 128 3.05 0.73 11 Frankinia sauna 13 13.35 0.35 0.08 11 Frankinia sauna 13.6 13.95 0.35 0.08 Frankinia sauna Total 12.71 V 3.03 V 11 Heinizonia fasciulata V 2.25 2.35 V 0.1 V 0.02 V Hemizonia fasciulata Total 0.1 0.02 13 Heterotheca grandiflora 9.73 10.023 0.293 V 0.07 13 Heterotheca grandiflora 14 14.2 0.2 0.05 13 Heterotheca grandiflora 14.58 14.65 V 0.07 V 0.02 V Heterotheca grandiflora Total V 0.563 0.13 V V Isocoma menziesii 10.1 10.13 0.03 0.01 3 Isocoma menziesii 10.4 16.6 V 0.2 0.05 Isocoma menziesii- 10.89 11.2 0.31 007 3 Isocoma menziesii 11.7 11.72 0.02 0.00 3 Isocoma menziesii 12.1 12.2 0.1 0.02 6 Isocoma menziesii 13.4 14.6 1.2 0.29 7 Isocoma menziesii 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.02 7 Isocoma menziesii 1.2 1.35 V 0.15 V 0.04 7 Isocoma menziesii 2.2 2.3 0.1 V 0.02 7 Isocoma menziesii 3.3 4.4 1.1 0.26 7 Isocoma menziesii 8.3 8.35 0.05 0.01 7 V Isocoma menziesii 18.4 18.6 0.2 0.05 7 Isocoma menziesii 21.1 21.2 0.1 0.02 7 Isocoma menziesii 28.3 28.5 0.2 0.05 7 Isocoma menziesii 29.3 29.6 0.3 0.07 8 Isocoma menziesii 0 1.9 1.9 0.45 8 Isocoma menziesii . 2.1. 2.35 0.25 0.06 8 Isocoma .menziesii 7.51 . 7.76 0.25 0.06 8 Isocoma menziesii . .8 8.05 0.05 0.01 8 Isocoma menziesii 27.35 27.4 0.05 0.01 11 Isocoma menziesii. 10.9 10.95 0.05 0.01 11 Isocoma menziesii 14.65 14.75 0.1... 0.02 11 Isocoma menziesii 16.93 17.2 0.27 . 0.06 11 Isocoma.menzjésii 19.3 19.45 0.15 6.04 11 Isocoma menziesii 20.8 20.93 0.13 0.03 11 Isocoma menziesii 21.3 21.45 0.15 0.04 11 Isocoma menziesii 22.1 22.58 . 0.48 0.11 11 Isocoma menziesii 23.1 26.3 3.2 0.76 11 Isocoma menziesii . 27 28.6 1.6 0.38 11 Isocoma menziesii 28.8 30. 1.2 .., 0.29 12 Isocoma menziesii 14.74 14.76 0.02 . 0.00 12 Isocoma menziesii 16 16.04 . 0.04 0.01 12 Isocoma menziesii . 16.15 16.36 0.21 0.05 12 Isocoma menziesii 16.49 17.4 0.91 0.22 12e Isocoma menziesii-.'.. 17.8 18.9 1.1 . 0.26 12 Isocoma menziesii 18.8 20.2 . 1.4 0.33 12 Isocoma menziesii 20.2 20.24 - 0.04 . 0.01 12 Isocoma menziesii 20.7 21.4 0.7 017 . 12 Isocoma menziesii 21.9 23.8 - 1.9 0.45 12 Isocoma menziesii 24.03 25.6 1.57 0.37 12 Isocoma menziesii 25.9 . 26.3 0.4 0.10 12 Isocoma menziesii . 26.62 27 0.38 0.09 12 Isocoma menziesii 27.32 27.52 0.2 0.05 12 Isocoma menziesii 27.93 28.8 . 0.87 0.21 12 Isocoma menziesii 29.38 29.4 0.02 0.00 .12 Isocoma menziesii 29.6 29.91, - 0.31 0.07 12 Isocoma menziesii 29.93 30 0.07 0.02 13 - Isocoma menziesii 0 0.2 0.2 0.05 13 Isocoma menziesii 1.5 1.8 0.3 0.07 13 Isocoma menziesii 4.5 4.63 . 0.13 0.03 13 Isocoma menziesii 4.9 5.6 . 0.7 0.17 13 Isocomamenziesii 7.26 7.5 0.24 . 0.06 13 Isocbma menziesii - 7.9 -. 7.95 - 0.05 0.01 13 Isocoma menziesjj 8.52 . 8.61 0.09 0.02 13 Isocoma menziesii 19.4 20.5 1.1 : 0.26 14 Isocoma menziesii 0.48 0.51 . 0.03 . 0.01 14 Isocoma menziesii 4.33 4.54 0.21 •. . 0.05 14 Isocomamenziesii 5.6 ., 6.4 . 0.8 - 0.19 14 Isocoma menziesii 6.55 .7.2 0.65 0.15 14 Isocoma menziesii . 7.4 7.49 0.0.9 0.02 14 Isocoma menziesii . 7.99 8.62 0.63 0.15 '1 14 Isocoma menziesii 8.73 9.03 , 0.3 0.07' 14 Isocoma menziesii . 9.17 9.97 . 0.8 0.19 14 Isocoma menziesii 10.4 11.31 0.91 0.22 14 Isocoma menziesii' 11.9 12.55 0.65' 0.15 14 Isocoma menziesii . 13.3 1373 0.43 0.10 I 14 Isocoma menziesii 14.16 15.3 1.14 0.27 14 Isocoma menziesii 16.58 16.6 0.02 0.00' 14 Isocoma menziesii '• 18.4 18.62 0.22 . 0.05' 14 Isocoma menziesii , 19.41 ' 19.76 0.35 0.08 14 Isocoma ménziesii 19.85 : 20.2 ' 0.35 , 0.08 14 Isocoma menziésii 20.42 . 20.9 0.48 0.11 14 Isocoma menziesii 21.03 . 21.13 0.1 0.02 14 Isocoma menziesii 22.58 22.62 0.04 ' 0.01 • 14 Isocoma menziesii . 24.8 25.1 , 0.3. ' 0.07' 14 Isocoma menziesii , 26.8 27.03 0.23 0.05 • 14 . Isocotna.menziesii 27.7 28.58 0.88 0.21 10 Isocoma menziesii ' .16.4 16.46 ... 0.06 0.01 • 10 Isocoma menziesii ' 24.53 ' 25.57 1.04 0.25 I 10 Isocoma menziesii 28.7 28.85 0.15 0.04 •, 10 Isocoma menziesii 29.4 29.8 0.4 0.10 .1 9 9 Isocoma menziesii . Isocoma menziesii 4.5, 10.75 4.6 10.8 0.1 0.05 0.02 ' 0.01 Isocoma menziesii Total . 38.35 9.13 1 Iva hayseiana ' 5.54 5.6 0.06 ' • 0.01 1 Iva hayseiana • 5.9 ' 5.99 0.09 • . 0.02 - . 6 Iva hayseiana 0.9 ' 2.15 1.25 .0.30 6 Iva hayseiana . 2.4 2.55 0.15 0.04 I. 6 Iva hayseiana 3.5 3.6 , 0.1 0.02 6 Iva hayseiana . 4.1 4.2 ' 0.1 0.02 7 Iva hayseiana 22.3 , 22.5 • 0.2' . 0.05 I, 7 Iva.hayseiana 25.9 '26.4 0.5; . 0.12 Iva hayseiana Total ' ' 2.45 0.58 5 Juncus acutus • ' ' 8 14 ' 6 1.43 I . ' 5Juncus acutus 14.5 , ' 17 2.5 0.60 '5 Juncus acutus 17.5 I9.3 1.8 ' 0.43 5 , Juncus acutus 24.9 25.6 ' 0.7 0.17 '1 Juncus acutus , 0 0.4 , 0.4 0.10 -. 1 Juncus acutus 0. 39 0.47 0.08 '' 0.02 1 Juncus acutus 0.48 1.89 1.41 0.34 1 Juncus acutus • 2.7 4.73 • ' 2.03 0.48 • 1 Juncus acutus 4.4 12.88 . 8.48 • 2.02 1 Juncus acutus • ' 13.42 13.86 0.44 1 Juncus acutus 14.2 22.95 ' 8.75 2.08 1 Juncus acutus , • 23.13 • 30 . 6.87 1.64 , , 2 Juncus acutus 0'' 9.8 • 9.8 2.33 2 Juncus acutus 11.2 30 . 18.8 4.48 3 Juncus acutus 1.1 5.2 , 4.1 0.98 3 Juncus acutus . . 5.4 .7.8 2.4 ' ' 0.57' • 3 • Juncus acutus " 8.7' 8.86 , 0.16 •. ' 0.04 • -. • -. - - •• ' • ••.' 3 Juncus acutus . 9.28 9.9 - 0.62 3 Juncus acutus 10.35' 10.-7 0.35 3 Juncus acutus 11.25 12.2 0.95 3 Juncus acutus 12.5 17.2 4.7 3 Juncus acutus 17.6 23.1 . 5.5 3 Juncus acutus 23.61 30 6.39 4 Juncus' acutus 0 0.4 0.4 4 Juncus acutus 9.7 11.1 1.4 4 Juncus acutus 19.8 22.2 2.4. 4 Juncus acutus 23.2 23.25 0.05 4 Juncus acutus 26.8 27.1 0.3 4 Juncus acutus 28.2 28.5 0.3 4 Juncus acutus 29.1 30 0.9 6 Juncus acutus 3.9 . 4.1 0.2 6 .Juncus acutus . 4.4 - 4.9 0.5 6 Juncus acutus 5.1, 8.9 ' 3.8 , 6 .. ' Juñcus acutus . 10.02 13.4. 3.38 6 Juncus acutus ' . 13.8 29.1 "' 15.3 6 Juncus acutus 29.31, 0.7 C- 7 Juncus acutus 0 15 , 15 7 Juncus acutus 16.]. 17.5 1.4 7 Juncus acutus 18.7 19.9 . . 1.2 7 Juncus acutus ' 25.4 . 26 . 0.6 7 Juncus acutus 26.4 26.6 0.2 7 Juncus acutus 29.7 ' 29.9 0.2 8 . Juncus acutus 5.4 5.5 , 0.1 8 Juncus acutus . 5.88 5.95 0.07 8 Juncus 'acutus , 6.1 7\ 0.9 8 Juncus acutus 7.9 7.96 0.06 8 Juncus acutus 12.2 12.8 0.6 8 Juncus acutus 13.35 13.43 0.08 8 Juncus acutus , 13.9 ' 14.15 ' , 0.25 8 Juncus acutus 15.5 19.6 ' . 4.1 8 Juncus acutus 19.8 20.2 0.4 8 Juncus acutus 21.25 21.45. '. 0.2 8 Juncus. acutus . ' 22.6 30 ,• 7.4 11 Juncus acutus 0 0.5 0.5 11 Juncus acutus 0.9 1.95 1.05 11 Juncus acutus ' 3.8 ' 4.2 0.4 11 Juncus acutus '5 . 5.15 . . 0.15 11 Juncus acutus 10.6 10.7 ' 0.1 11 . Juncus acutus 12.7 ' 13.. ' 0.3 11 Juncus acutus , 13.94 14.02 ' 0.08 11 Juncus acutus 14.6 14.8 '.. 0.2 11 Juncus acutus : 16.2 16.45 0.25 11 Juncus acutus 18.35 22 3.65 11 Juncus acutus : 25.2 27.3 ,, 2.1 12 Juncus acutus 11.4 13 ' 1.6 12 Juncus-acutus. 20.18 , 20.7 . 0.52 0.15 0.08 0.23 1.12 1.31 1.52 0.10 0.33 0.57 0.01 '0.07 0.07 0.21 0.05- 0..12 0.90 0.80 3.64 0.17 3.57 0.33 0.29 0.14 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.21 0.01 0.14 0.02 0 .06 0.98 0.10 0.05 1.76 0.12 0.25 0.10 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.02 0-05 0.06 0.87 0.87 0.50 0.38 - 0.12 • H .' .; H 12 Juncus acutus 20.85 22.46 1.61 0.38 13 Juncus acutus . 0 4.5 4.5 1.07 13 Juncus acutus .' 6.4 7.1 0.7 0.17 • 13 Juncus acutus , ' 8.7 10 1.3 0.31 13 Juncus acutus 11.1 :12.5 1.4 0.33 13 Juncus acutus , 12.9 13 ' 0.1 0.02 13 Juncus acutus 13.54 13.71 0.17 0.04 13 Juncus acutus 14.05 14.9 0.85. 0.20 Juncus acutus 15 -.'S 15.9 .. 0.4 0.10 13 13 Juncus acutus 16.2 17.05 0.85 0.20 13 Juncus acutus 17.5. 17.6 0.1 0.02 ' 13 Juncus acutus 18.5 18.6 0.1 0.02 13 Juncus acutus 19.4 20.15 . 0.75 0.18 13 Juncus acutus 20.5 20.75 0.25 0,06 13 Juncus acutus •, ' 21.3 ' 22.1 0.8 0.19 13 Juncus acutus 22.9 27.7 ' 4.8 1.14 '13 Juncus acutus .' 28.3 30 , 1.7' ' 0.40 14 Juncus acutus' ' . 3.4 ' 4.2 0.8 0.19 14 Juncus acutus ' 4.33 6.8 2.47 0.59 14 Juncus acutus 14 15.4 . 1.4 ,. 0.33 14 Juncus acutus , 15.94 16.08 ' 0.14 0.03 14 Juncus acutus '., 16.9 17.6 . 0.7 , 0.17 14 Juncus acutus 17.8 18.75 . 0.95 0.23 14 14 ' Juncus Juncus acutus , ' acutus ' ' 18.9 . 29.7 19.1 , 30 ' '0.2 0.3 0.05 0.07 10 ' Juncus acutus .0 '2.7 ' 2.7 0.64 • 10 Juncus acutus acutus . 3.9 4.7 ' . 0.8 0.15 , 0.19 10 Juncus 4.95 . 5.1 0.04 10 Juncus acutus , 5.8 9.7 3.9 0.93 '. 10 10 Juncus Juncus acutus acutus 10.5 12.6 12.3 18.25 1.8 5.65 . 6.3,5 0.43 1.35 10 Juncus acutus 21.25 •, 27.6 1.51 10 Juncus acutus . 28.4 29.5 1.1 0.26 I : ' 10 Juncus, acutus 29.9 ' 30 0.1 • 0.02 9 ' Juncusacutus ' 2.72 .3.01 6.5 • 0.29 0.07 9 Juncus -acutus 3.2 3.3 0.79 9 Juncus acutus 6.82 8.5 1.68 0.40 9 Juncus acutus acutus • 9.3 15.3 6 1.43 9 Juncus ' 15.9 ' 17.7 1.8 0.43 Juncus acutus • 17.9 19 1.1 0.26 9 Juncus acutus Total . 230.58 : 54.90 5 Lotus scoparius 0 1.1 1.1 0.26 5 Lotus scoparius 1.3 1. 9 0.6 0.14 5 Lotus scoparius . 8.6 8.7 0.1 0.2 0.02 0.05 • 5 Lotus scdparius • 22.5 22.7 ' SLotus scoparius 25.4 26 0.6 , 0.14 5 Lotus scoparius ' 26.5 27.1. 0.6 0.14 5 Lotus scoparius • • 27.8 28.3 0.5 0.12 4 Lotus 'scoparius • 2.7 2.8 0.1 0.02 i . .' , ' • . ... . . . .. 0, Lotus scoparius Total . 3.8 0.90 13 Malvella leprosa .5.8 5.82 0.02 0.00 13 Malvella leprosa 6.05 .6.1 , 0.05 0.01 13 Malvella leprosa 6.2 6.23 0.03 0.01 13 Malvella leprosa 7.24 7.33 0.09 0.02 Malvella leprosa Total 0.19 0.05 14 Melilotus species . 21.2 . 21.27 0.07 . 0.02 5 Melilotus species 25 25.6 0.6 0.14 Melilotus.. species 29.7 29.8 0.1 0.02 4 Melilotus species 1.2 . 1.25 0.05 0.01 Melilótüs species Total 5 Oenothera villosa 0.3 0 0.6 0.3 0.07 5 Oenothera villosa 5 5.2 ' 0.2 ' 0.05 5 Oenothera villosà 5.8 6.6 . 0.8 0.19 0 5 Oenothera villosa ' 11 12.1 0, . 0.26 0 5 Oenothera villosa 21.5 21.6 0.1 0.02 5 Oenothera villosa 25.1 26.1. 1 0.24 0 5 Oenothera 'villosa . . . 26 .26.6 0.6 0.14 5 Oeriothera villosa 28 .28.05 0.05 . 0.01 S Oenothera villosa 29.8 30 . 0.2 0.05 2 Oenothera villosa , 0.7 , 0.75 0.05 . 0.01 2 Oenothera villosa . . 6.2 6.4 0.2 0.05 2 Oenothera villosá 13.5 13.6 . 0.1 0.02 2 Oenothera villosa .0 22.6 22.7 0.1 0.02' 2 Oenothera villosa 29.1 29.2 ' 0.1 0.02 4 Oenothera villosa i3 3.2 0.2 0.05 4 Oenothera villosa 4.7 4.9 0.2 0.05, 4 Oenothera villosa 5.4 5.5 0.1 0.02 4 Oenothera villosa 6 6.1''0.1 0.02 ' 4 41 Oenothera villosa Oenothera villosa ' 6.6 7.3 6.8 7.9 0.2 0.6 0.05 0.14 4 Oenotherá villosa ' 8.6 - 9 0, 0.4 0.10 4 Oenothera villosa 9.2 9.35 0.15 0.04 4 Oenothera villosa •. 11.9 12.05 0.15 ' 0.04 4 Oenothera villosa 15.5 15.6 0.1 0.02 4 Oenothera villosa 16.5 17.1 . 0.6 0.14 4 Oenothera villosa 17.6 17.8 0.2 0.05 4 Oenothera villosa 19.1 19.3 .0.2 0.05 4 . Oenothera villosa 25.5 25.8 0.3 0.07 4 Oenothera villosa 26.9 27 0.1 , 0.02 3 Oenothera villosa 0.2 0.41,' 0.21 0.05 3 Oenothera villosa 7.9 8 0.1 0.02 6 Oenothera villosa 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.05 6 Oenothera villosa 2.5 2.53 0.03 0.01 6 Oenothera villosa 3 3.2 0.2 0.05 6 Oenothera villosa 3.8 3.91 0.1 0.02 6 Oenothera villosa. 19.3 19.6 0.3 ' , 0.07 10 ' Oenothera villosa 2785 28 ' ' 0.15 0.04' 10 Oenothera villosa . 28.3 . 28.45 0.15 0.04 - 10 Oenothera villosa 29.9 30 0 1 -9 Oenothera villosa 11.67 11.73 0.06 9 Oenothera villosa 12.5 12.57. 0.07 - Oenothera villosa Total .. 10.17 11 Picris echioides 0.7 0 75 0.05 11 Picris echioides 2.06 '.1 0.04 - 11 Picris echioides 2.4 2.64 0.24 11 Picris echioides 2.85 3.25 '. 0.4 11 Picris echioides 3.4 3.75 0.35° 11 Picris echioides 4.5 4.8 0.3 11 Picris echioides 6.4 6.9 0.5 11 Picris echioides 9.5 .9.75 0.25 11 Picris echioides . 11.1 11.13 0.03 11 Picris echioides 11.84 11.9 0.06 11 Picris echioides 13.37 14.6' 1.23 11 Picris echioides 15:75 15.82 0.07 11 Picris echioides 16.1 16.2 0.1 11 Picris echioides . 16.45 17.6 13 Picris echioides 26.14 26.3 0.16 13 Picris echioides 26.74 ' 26.9 0.16 13 Picris echioides - 27.35 27.45 0.1 Picris echioides Total ' ° 5.19 7 Pluchea servicea 13.3 14 0.7 7 Pluchea' servicea 14.5 14.7 0.2 7 Pluchea servicea 15.1 15.2 0.1 7 Pluchea servicea 15.6 15.8 0.2 7 Pluchea servicea 16.2 16.45 0.25 7 Pluchea servicea 17 17.1 0.1 7 Pluchea servicea . 17.7 18.1 '0.4 7 Pluchea servicea 19.7 19.8 : 0.1 7 Pluchea servicea 20.3 20.5 . 0.2 7 Pluchea servicea 21.4 ° .21.5 0.1 7 Pluchea servicea . 25.5 25.6 . 0.1 7 Pluchea servicea 26.5 26 7 0.2 7 Pluchea servicea 27 30 '. ' 3 8 Pluchea servicea 3.6 3.8 - 0.2' 8- Pluchea servicea ° 5 5.9 ' . 0.9 8 Pluchea servicea 6.3 6.33 ' 0.03 8 Pluchea servicea 6.7 '6.8 0.1 8 Pluchea servicea ' 6.95 7.1 '. 0.15 8 Pluchea servicea 7.5 7.65 . ... 0.15 8 Pluchea servicea 25.65 27.73 2.08 8 Pluchea servicea . 28.61 28.67 . ' '. 0.06 9 Pluchea servicea 0.55 0.6 0.05 9 ' Pluchea servicêa 1.9 1.94 . ' 0.04 9 Pluchea servicea 2.06 2.09 0.03 9 Pluchea servicea ' 2.1 1 6 2.2 - 9 Pluchea servicea . . 2.61 2.64 0.03 5 Pluchea servicea . 3 3.2 ' ' 0.2 0.02 0.01 0.02 2.42 0.01 0.0l 0.06 0.10 0.08 .0.07 0. 12. 0.06 0.01' 0.01 0.29 0.02 0.02 0.27 0.04 0.04 0.02 1.24 0.17 0.05 0.02 0.05' 0.06 0.02 0.10 0.02'' 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.71 0.05 0.21 '0.01 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.50 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.•01 0.01 0.05 5 Pluchea servicea 4.1 4.3 0.2 0.05 . 5 Pluchéa servicea 25.8 25.9 0.1 0.02 s Pluchea servicea 29.9 30: , 0.1- 0.02 2 Pluchea servicea 0.7 1 0.3 0.'07- 2 Pluchea servicea 2.6 2.65 ''' 0.05 0.01 4 Pluchea servicea 2.7 3 1 0.4' 0.10 4' ' Pluchea servicea 3.9 4.2 0.3 0.07 4 Pluchea servicea 4.9 5 1 0.2 0.05 Plucheaservicea Total 11.36 2.70' 9 Poplus fremontii 15 15.7 0 7 0.,17 Poplus fremontii Total 0 7 0 17 10 Rumex crispus 1 1.07 -0.07 . 0.02 Rumex crispus Total 0.07 0.02 7 Salicornia virginica S. 6 5.65 0.05 0.01 Salicornia virginica .6 .1 6.15 0.05 0.01 7 7 Salicornia virginica 6.7. 7.85- 1.15. 0.27 7 Salicornia virginica .9.1 9.15, - 0.05 0.01''. 7 7 Salicornia virginica Salicornia virginica 10 6 13.2 10.65 13 3 'o .b5 0...1 0.01 0.02 7 Salicornia virginica 14.3 14.45 0.15 ' 0.04 7 Sálicornia virginica 15.8' - 16.9, ' .1.1 0.26 7 Salicornia virginica...18.1 19.2 1.1 0.26 7 Salicornia virginica 19.9 20.3 0.4 0.10 7 Salicornia virginica 21.8 21.9 0.1 0.02- 7 Salicornia virginica 22.9 ' 23.3 . , 0.4 0.10 7 Salicornia virginica 24 24.5 0.5 0.12 7 Salicornia virginica 25 25.2 0.2 0.05 7 Salicornia virginica 27.7 27.8 0.1 0.02 7 Salicornia virginica 28.8 29 0.2 0.05 8 Salicornia virginica 0 0.35 0.35 0.08 8 Salicornia virginica 0.95 ,- 0.98 0.03 0.01 8 Salicornia virginica 1.6 1.63 0.03 0.01 8 Salicornia virginica 2.2 2.24 , 0.04 0.01 8 Salicornia virginica 4.3 ' 4.33 , 0.03 0.01. 8 Salicornia virginica 4.75 -4.8 0.05 0.01 8 Salicornia virginica 4.85 4.9 0.05 0.01 Salicornia virginica 5.15 5.2 0 05 0.01 8 8 Salicornia virginica 16.42 6.45 0.03 0.61 8 Salicornia virginica 6.74 6.8 0.06 0.01 8 Salicornia virginica 7A 7.34 0 04 0.01 8 Salicornia virginica 8 1 8.15 0 05 0.01 8 Salicornia virginica 8.3 8.93' 0.63 0.15 8 Salicornia virginica 9.2 9.8 0.6 0 14 8 - Salicornia virginica 10 10.4 , 0.4 '0.10 8 Salicornia virginica 10.7 10.9 0 2 0.05 8 Salicornia virginica 11.02 .' .11.1 '. 0.08 - 0.02 8 Salicornia virginica 11 3 11.38 0.-08 0.02 8 Salicornia virginica 11.74 12.05 0.31 0.07 8 Salicornia virginica 12.8 13.1 0.3 0.07 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Salicornia virginica , 13.5 13.6° 0.1 - 0.02 Salicornia virginica. 13.75 13.8 '0.05 0.01 Salicornia virginica 14.8 14.93 '. 0.13 , 0.03 Salicornia virginica 16 16.33 0.33 . 0.08 Salicornia virginica 16.41 16.44 0.03 0.01' Salicornia virginica 16.6 16.62 0.02 0.00 Salicornia virginica 16.79 16.82 0.03 0.01 Salicornia virginica - 17.5 17.58 0.08 0.02 ' Salicornia virginica 18.2 18.22 0.02 0.00 Salicornia virginica 18.8 19.1, 0.3 ' 0.07 Salicornia virginica ' 19.8. 19.9 0.1 0.02 Salicornia virginica 20.6 . 20.7 ' . 0.1 0.02 Salicornia virginica 20.8 21.1 0.3 0.07 Salicornia virginica' 21.2 21.24 0.04 . 0.01 Salicornia virginica 21.4 24.65 , 3.25 0.77 Salicornia virginica 29.14 29.2 0.06 0.01 ° Salicornia virginica 0.7 0.8k . 0.1 - 0,02 Salicornia virginica . 1.76 , 1.8 • , 0.04° . . . 0.01 Salicornia virginica 2.77 . 2.79 - . 0.02 . 0.00. Salicornia virginica 4.95 . 4.97 0.02 0.00 Salicornia virginica 5.2 5.8° . , 0.6 ' 0.14. Salicornia virginica ' .6.7 6.77 0.07 - 0.02 Salicornia virginica 6.9 '7.2 0:3 . 0.07 Salicornia virginica 7.4 8.55 1.15 0.27 Salicornia virginica 8.8 9.4 ° 0.6 0.14° Salicornia virginica ' ° 10.3 10.45 0.15 0.04, Salicornia virginica ° 10.8 10.85' 0.05 0.01 Salicornia virginica 11.67 11;7 -- 0.03 0.01 Salicornia virginica . 14.05 14.5 0.45 ' 0.11 Salicornia virginica 14.9 15.5 , 0.6 0.14 Salicornia virginica 16.92 17.06. 0.14 0.03 Salicornia virginica 17.45 - , 17.5 ' 0.05 . 0.01 Salicornia virginica 17.8 18.33 '° 0.53 0.13. Salicornia virginica' 19.5 19.85 0.35 , . 0.08 Salicornia virginica 20.15 20.86 • ° 0.71 0.17 Salicornia virginica 21.57 21.72 ° 0.15 0.04 'Salicornia virginica 0 . 1.9 P1.9 - 0.45 Salicornia virginica 2.63 '° 3.17 ' 0.54 0.13 Salicornia virgini'ca 3.37 , 4.1 0.73 0.17 Salicornia virginica 4.44 4.86. , , 0.42 0.10 Salicornia virginica 5.3 6.6 1.3 • 0.3]. Salicornia virginica . 6.86 8.95 2.09 0.50. Salicornia virginica 9.64 11.7 2.06 . 0.49 Salicornia virginica , 12.01 12.87 ° .° 0;.86 , 0.20 Salicornia virginica 13.09 13.2. 0.11 0.03 Sálicornia virginica ' 13.5 • 13.81 ' • ° 0.31 0.07 Salicornia virginica 14.09 1.4.4 0.31 0.07 Salicornia virginica .. 14.53 . 16:3 1.77 '0.42 Salicornia virginica 16.45 °, 17.6 ° 1.15 0.27 13 Salicornia virginica 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.02 Salicornia virginica Total 33.81 8.05 S Salix exigua 28.9 29.2 0.3 0.07 2 'Salix exigua 27 28.01 1.01 0.24 2 Salix exigua 29.9 30 0.1, .0.02 4 Sa'lix exigua 25..8 26.1 0.3 0.07 4 Salix exigua 27.6 27 .9, 0.3 0.07 4 Salix exigua 28.4 28 9L 0.5 0.12 6 Sálix exigua 22.2 . 22.5 ,-. 0.3 0.07 9 Salix exigua 10.02 '10.12' . 0.1 , 0:02 Salix exigua Total. ' 2.91 0.69 S Salix lasiolepis 5 6 1 0.24 5 Salix lasiolepis 5.9 7.1 1.2 0.29 5 Salix lasiolepis . . .7.5 7.8 ', ' ., .., 0.3 0.07 .5 Salix lasiolepis ' . '' 9 .11.9 2.9 . ' 0.69 5 Salix lasiolepis 17.1 23.2 6.1 1 45 5 Salix lasiolepis 28.4 28.9 . 0.5 0.12 5 Salix lasiolepis 29.3 29.7 •. 0.4 0.10 1 Salix lasiolepis 4.8 5.8 1 0.24 1 Salix lasiolepis . 5.7 5.95 0.25 ' 0.06 1 Salix lasiolepis . 6.03 6.49 0.46 ' 0.11 1 Salix lasiolepis 6.23 6.39 , 0.16 0.04. 1 Salix lasiolepis 6.84 7.8 0.96 0.23 1 Salix lasiolepis 8.73 8.97 0.24 0.06 '2 Salix lasiolepis 27 ' 27.3 0.3 0.07 3 Salix lasiolepis ''4.95 6.2 ' 1.25 , 0.30 3 Salix lasiolepis , , 7.8 8.6 ' . 0.8 0.19 3 Salix lasiolepis 8A 9.05 .0 .15 0.04 3 Salix lasiolepis 11.65 11.8 . ' 0.15 0.04 3 Salix lasiolepis 12.35 12.9 0.55 0.13 3 Salix lasiolepis '12.9 13.7 0.8 0.19 .3 Salix lasiolepis 14.9 15.5 ' ' 0.6 ' 0.14' 3 Salix lasiolepis ' 15.5 17.6 . 2.1 0.50 4 Salix lasiolepis 15.6 16.2 , 0.6 6.14- 4 , Salix lasiolepis 18.7 18.8. ' 0.1 ' 0.02 6 Salix lasiolepis ' 0 0.53 , 0.53 0.13 6 Salix lasiolepis ' 3.2 3.5 ', 0.3 ' 0.07 6 Salix lasiolepis 3.75 4.1 0-.35 0.08 6 Salix lasiolepis 4.1 5.1 1 , 0.24 6 Salix lasiolepis , 6 . 7.8 1.8 0.43 6 Salix lasiolepis 16.'8 17 0.2 0.05 Salix lasiolepis , 20.7 21.2 0.5 0.12 6 Salix lasiolepis 23.3 23.9 0.6 , 0.14' 6 Salix lasiolepis 29.9 29.95 0.05 0.01 7 Salix lasiolepis 0 0-3 0.3 0.07 7 Salix lasiolepis 4.7 4.8 0.1 ' 0.02 7 Salix lasiolepis 11.1 11.5 0 4 0.10 10 Salix lasiolepis ' 28.9 29.1 f 0.2, '. 0.05 9 Salix lasiolepis - 13.4 ' 16.5 . 3.1 0.74 Salix lasiolepis Total . . 32.3 7.69 1 Scirpus californicus . : 11.76 12.09 0.33 .0.08 , 1 Scirpus californicus '12.28 15 .8, 3.52 0.84 1 Scirpus californicus 13.8. 14.68 0.28 0.07 9 Scirpus californicus 22.9 30 7.1 1.69 Scirpus californicus Total 11.23 2.67 Grand Total P 1 -• .. .. .. TRANSECT SPECIES START END HEIGHT NOTES 11 Tamarix sp. 13.6. 13.75 . 1 Typha latifolia . . 1.9 . 2.1 . 1 Typha latifolia 2.4 2.a 12 UNK 2 13:22 -13.4 ATRIPLEX 14 UNK 3 3.76 3.8 SALTY 4 tJNK1 12.2 19.4: .• . - . 8 UNKNOWN 1 24.85 25.04 JUNCUS 8 UNKNOWN 1 28 6 28.8 JUNCUS 8 UNKNOWN 1 29 29 1 EPOT MONITORING 01-Jun-00 . .