Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-04-22; City Council; 14157 Exhibit 1; Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan Environmental Impact ReportTABLE OF CONTENTS I 1 I I 1 I I 1.2.6 Sensitive Biota .......................................... I I I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I I Section OVERVIEW 1 .......................................................... SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA: THE REGIONAL SETTING ........... 1.1 Introduction .................................................. 1.2 Existing Conditions ............................................. 1.2.1 Regional Overview 1.2.2 Topography ............................................ 1.2.3 Climate ............................................... 1.2.4 Geology and Soils 1.2.5 Plant Communities ....................................... 1.3 Summary and Conclusions ........................................ ....................................... ........................................ 2 CITY OF CARLSBAD: THE LOCAL SETTING ........................... 2.1 Introduction ... :. ............................................. 2.2 Existing Conditions ............................................. 2.2.1 General Topography and Landscape Features ................. 22.2 Climate .............................................. 2.2.3 Geology and Soils 2.2.4 Plant Communities ...................................... 2.2.5 Sensitive Biota ......................................... 3 RESOURCE INVENTORY AND MAPPING ............................. ....................................... 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Mate~als 3.3 Methods .................................................... 3.4 Results ................................................. .................................................... ..................................................... 3.4.1 Vegetation Map ........................................ 3.4.2 Sensitive Species Map ................................... .. 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Camtinued) Page 4 BIOLOGICAL PRESERVE PLANNING AREA ANID DESIGN APPROACH ........ 36 4.1 Introduction .................................................... 36 4.2 Preserve Design Literature Review ................................... 36 4.2.1 Size .................................................... 36 4.2.2 Shape ................................................... 37 4.2.3 Isolation/Wildlife Corridors ................................... 37 4.2.4 Buffers and Distance Setbacks ................................ 37 4.2.5 Other Considerations ....................................... 40 Preserve Design Rationale and Approach .............................. 40 Preserve Design Methodology ....................................... 41 4.4.1 Focused Planning Areas ..................................... 41 4.4.2 Preserve Feature Definitions and Ratings .- Habitat Value ........... 42 4.4.3 Preserve Feature Definitions and Ratings .- Habitat Sensitivity ........ 45 4.5 Results -- Habitat Value ........................................... 47 4.5.1 Amount of Natural Habitat .................................. 48 4.5.3 Habitat Connectivity ........................................ 49 4.5.4 Adjacent Land Use ........................................ 49 4.5.5 Discussion -- Habitat Value ......................................... 50 Results -- Habitat Sensitivity ........................................ 50 4.7.1 Amount of Sensitive Habitat ................................. 51 4.7.2 Sensitive Habitat Diversity ................................... 51 4.7.3 California Gnatcatcher ...................................... 51 4.7.4 Sensitive Plants ........................................... 52 4.7.5 Sensitive Wildlife .......................................... 52 4.7.6 Composite Habitat Sensitivity ................................. 52 4.3 4.4 4.5.2 Habitat Diversity ........................................... 48 Composite Habitat Value .................................... 49 4.6 4.7 4.8 Habitat Sensitivity -- Discussion ..................................... 53 4.9 Total Habitat Value/Sensitivity .- Results ............................... 53 ............................. 54 ........................................... 55 4.10 Total Habitat VaIue/Sensitivity -- Discussion 4.11 Limitations of Approach ... 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) I 1 8 I I 5.2.2 Results ................................................ I I I. 1 I I i) I 1 I 1 I 1 5 PRESERVE RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 5.1 Introduction .................................................. 5.1.1 Size of Preserve System ................................... 5i2.1 Methods.. ............................................. 5.2 Potential Core Preserve Areas .................................... 5.3 Potential Wildlife Corridors ...................................... 5.3.1 Methods.. ............................................. 5.3.2 Results ................................................ 5.4 Conceptual Preserve System ..................................... Compatible Land Use Analysis .................................... 5.5 5.6 Conclusion ................................................... 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................... :. .................. 7 LITERATURE CITED ............................................... Appendices k Federal and State Designated Sensitive Plant and WildliEe Species Resident or Breeding in San Diego County Environmental Impact Reports and Other Documents Consulted 1 B. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) LIST OF TABLES Page 1 . 2 . 3 . Comparison of Pre-European and 1988 Vegetation Coverage for San Diego County .............................................................. 5 Classification System for Habitat Communities Occurring in the City of Carlsbad ..... 12 Acreages by Aggregated Vegetation Types within the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan Study Area ...................................................... 34 4 . Frequency Distribution for Habitat Value Features ........................... 48 Composite Habitat Value ............................................... 50 6 . Frequency Distribution for Habitat Sensitivity Features ........................ 51 Total Habitat Value/Sensitivity Frequency Distribution ......................... 54 Listing Preserve Planning Areas .......................................... 58 Listing Preselve Planning Areas .......................................... 60 5 . 7 . 8 . 9 . 10 . 11 . 12 . Composite Habitat Sensitivity ............................................. 53 Acreages by Aggregated Vegetation Types for the F’re-California Gnatcatcher Acreages by Aggregated Vegetation Types for the Fost-California Gnatcatcher Pre-California Gnatcatcher Listing Preserve Planning Area Sensitive Species Records ............................................................ 63 Post-California Gnatcatcher Listing Preserve Planning Area Sensitive Species Records ...................................................... 64 LIST OF FIGURES Follows Page 1 . Regional Map ........................................................ 2 3 . Vegetation Map ..................................................... 33 Sensitive Species Map (Sheets 1 & 2) ...................................... 35 Pre-Gnatcatcher Listing Focused Planning Areas ............................. 41 6 . Post-Gnatca tcher Listing Focused Planning Areas ............................ 41 7 . Habitat Value Map ................................................... 49 8 . Habitat Sensitivity Map ................................................ 52 Total Habitat Value/Sensitivity Map ....................................... 53 10 . Pre-Listing Proposed Preserve Planning Areas/Corridors ....................... 57 2 . VicinityMap ........................................................ 10 4 . 5 . 9 . 11 . Post-Listing Proposed Preserve Planning Areas/Corndors 57 ....................... V OVERVIEW THE CARLSBAD HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 1 8 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I I At the direction of the Carlsbad City Council, the Community Development Departmer undertaken preparation of a Habitat Management Plan (HMP) for the City. The goals of the p are to develop an HMP that will: (1) constitute a major component of the Conservation El of the General Plan; and (2) result in implementation of a plan that will plroactively a protection of sensitive plant and animal species and their habitats as development occurs in Ca The HMP will provide direction about how best to identify, conserve, use, and manage the biological habitat resources and should result in an effective habitat preserve system. Del regarding the design of the preserve system will be based on scientific theory and be consister current knowledge from the field of conservation biology. A broadly based Citizens Advisory Group that contains representatives of land owners, environ groups, state and federal regulatory agencies, and City operating departments provides inp I 1 oversight to .the project. 1 S E C T.I 0 N SAN DIEGO Coum: CALIFOE Th \ I , I - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND HABITAT AN in supportofthe ClTY OF CAlUSBAD HABI'IAT MANAGEMENT PLAN SECTION 1 SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA THE REGIONAL SETTING 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1.1 INTRODUCTION This section provides an overview of the regional setting in which the HMP is being dew Other jurisdictions within San Diego County are currently undertaking or considering similar 1 resources planning programs. While Carlsbad’s plan is intended only to address land and h within its corporate limits, it is important in formulating such a plan to be aware of regional and other programs. As such, the Carlsbad HMP is intended to be consistent with three subregional programs -- the San Diego Clean Water Program Multi-Species Coriservation PI (MSCP), the County of San Diego Open Space and Habitat Management Plan (OSHMP), a North County Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP), as well as the anticipated ( County Wildlife Forum Plan. The plan also is intended to be consistent with the pilot P Communities Conservation Planning (NCCP) for coastal sage scrub habitat in Southern Cali This state program, if successful, would provide regional resource planning and prlotection for sage scrub and its threatened plant and wildlife species. I 1.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1.2.1 REGIONAL OVERVIEW San Diego County, California, is the most southwesterly county in the continental United St; is bordered on the east by Imperial County, on the north by Riverside and Orange counties, west by the Pacific Ocean, and on the south by Baja California, Mexico (Figure 1). R trapezoidal in shape, it extends about 70 miles (110 km) from east to west and 60 miles (80 kn north to south; it covers approximately 4,250 square miles (7,000 square km). Ekvations ran$ sea level along the coast to 6,533 feet (2,000 m) at the highest point -- Hot Springs Mounta Warner Springs. San Diego County supports an exceptionally diverse biota (Le., the animal and plant speci region): over 1,500 species of plants (Beauchamp 1986), 160 breeding and about 275 non-bi species of birds (McCaskie 1977), 75 species of reptiles and amphibians (Lichtwardt and Golc 125 resident species of butterflies (Brown 1991), 80 species of mammals (Bond 1977), estimated 10,000 to 20,000 species of terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates. A number of combine to support this rich biodiversity, including varied topography, complex climatic cor a wide variety of soil types, and a unique biogeographic history. San Diego County is also one of most rapidly-growing areas of the country. Because the < human population expansion and habitat change are occurring primarily along the coast wh most sensitive biological resources occur, the conflicts of growth and maintenance of bi diversity are acute. Planning has not previously been done on a regional scale for this area r in a highly fragmented natural landscape. This, in turn, makes preserve design more diffic necessitates designation or creation of wildlife corridors to interconnect habitat fragments. 1.2.2 TOPOGRAPHY Physical features found along the western edge of the county include sandy beaches, wic floodplains, low-lying salt marshes, and rocky bluffs. These areas support coastal dune, coa I 2 Riverside County WARNER WR Sff DESC~SO mwAR D EnUU VISTA / e No $ -I Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan marsh, Torrey pine woodland, and maritime succulent scrub plant communities. Inland from thl a series of coastal mesas, foothills, and canyons support coastal sage scrub, southem mixed cha chamise chaparral, and oak and riparian woodland communities. Further inland are the foot the Peninsular Range Mountains, covered primarily with chamise chaparral, southe m mixed cha and oak woodlands. Riparian woodlands occur along watercourses. The county is bisected ne south by an extension of the Peninsular Ranges, including the Palomar, Cuyamaca and I Mountains, which constitute a formidable barrier between the broad chaparral belt to the we the arid lowlands of the Colorado Desert to the east. The mountains reach peak elevations ( 6,000 feet above sea level (1,850 m) before dropping sharply to near sea-level in the Anza-B Desert. The mountainous areas support chaparral, oak woodland, montane coniferous forest, evergreen forest, and riparian woodlands. The desert is topographically diverse, extending frc eastern slopes of the mountains to far beyond the eastern border of the county. This re vegetationally diverse as well, supporting chaparral, pinyon-juniper woodland, creosote bush alkaline sink, dune, playa, and riparian habitats. I I I 1 I I 1.23 CLIMATE I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I Based on average temperature and precipitation, San Diego County includes faur natural c zones (Pryde 1984): (1) cool Mediterranean, (2) warm Mediterranean, (3) semiarid (or stepp (4) arid (or desert). All of these climatic zones are characterized by cool, moist winters and 1 summers. Within these four types, topographic features and proximity to the ocean coml create a diversity of specific micro-climatic regimes within the county. Along the narrow coast, fog constitutes a major source of water for many native plants. Average precipitation along th ranges between 10 and 12 inches (25-30 cm) per year. Proximity to the ocean helps m relatively constant temperatures. The lowland mesas (also known as marine terraces) are warmer than the immediate coast and receive slightly more precipitation -- 12 to 115 inches (30. per year. Above about 1,300 feet (400 m) elevation, the mountainous areas receive consic more precipitation than the coastal and mesa areas to the west, and the vegetation is tal denser. Above about 3,900 feet (1,200 m) elevation, temperature and precipitation regimes I coniferous forests. Winter snow is infrequent but regular in the higher elevation,s of the mol The rain-shadow effect of the mountains on lands further east, inhibiting moisture-laiden clouc reaching further inland, is manifested in dry, desert conditions that prevail throiighout most year. Desert temperatures are extremely variable; summer temperatures typically exceed 100 ( Fahrenheit (38 degrees Celsius) in the lower valleys. 1.2.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS San Diego County is divisible into two large geomorphic provinces on the basis of surface 1 and relief (Pryde 1984). The Coastal Province occupies the western portion of the corresponding to the region of sedimentary surface rocks. The dominant relief of this provi series of marine terraces also known as mesas. The Peninsular Range Province comprises the of the county located east of the Coastal Province and is composed of plutonic and metal surface rocks. The major relief elements of this province include the general northwest-sc trending foothills and mountain ranges, the highest peaks, and the steep eastern slopes mountains. According to Bowman (1973), 53 different soil series are present in San Diego County, ir sandy, cobbly, loamy, and clayey, and soils associated with gabbro parent material and Santial metavolcanic formations. A soil series is a group of closely related soils that shares similar of surface, slope, stoniness, and other characteristics that affect use of the sod by man. coastal terraces most of the soil series are comprised of sandy loams, clay loam:;, and clays. foothills on the western slopes of the mountains, the soils generally are well-drained sandy le 3 silt loams overlaying decomposed granitic or metavolcanic rock. The mountainous areas are characterized by well-drained sandy loams over granitic bedrock In the desert, soils range from virtually none on the steeper slopes, to coarse sandy alluvial soils on the gentler slopes. Soil diversity acts to promote botanical diversity: many endemic plant species are confined to a single or a few soil types (Oberbauer 1991a). 1.2.5 PLANT COMMUNITIES A plant community is an association of plant species that is readily recognizable in the field. Plant communities are thought to reflect particular biogeographic and ecological conditions. Plant communities are recognized by their "dominant" species, which tend to occur together. Plant communities are closely related to climatic zones, available moisture, slope aspect (exposure), soil type, and disturbance. For some communities, such as coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and southern interior cypress forest, fire plays an integral role in community succession and is necessary to maintain the integrity and productivity of the habitat (Zedler 1977). For other communities, perturbations may have very long-lasting dramatic effects. Plant communities are the major determinants of wildlife diversity and abundance, and they play a vital role in determining species distributions. The major plant communities present in San Diego County are discussed briefly below (see Table 1)- Terminology in the table is after Oberbauer (199lb) while the terminology in the text follows Holland ( 1986). Plant communities present along the coastal strand include a number of dune communities (Le-, active coastal dunes, southern foredunes, and southern dune scrub). The plants of these communities typically are small herbaceous or succulent species, often with a prostrate growth habit. They cover the surface sparsely, leaving areas of bare sand. The general aspect of this community is determined by nearly constant onshore breezes, fine sandy soils, and moderately saline conditions. Among the most common species in this habitat type are sea-rocket (Cakile marifha), beach evening-primrose (Camissonia cheirantbifolia), beach bur (Ambrosia chamis:Fonis), and sea-fig (Calpobrotus spp.). Coastal strand vegetation has been replaced in most areas by recreational or urban development, and elsewhere it has been degraded by frequent human disturbance. Dune communities are best preserved at Border Field and Silver Strand State Parks. In all other coastal areas throughout the county, coastal strand or dune communities are extremely limited. Wetland communities found along the coastal strand include southern coastal salt marsh, coastal brackish marsh, and coastal and valley freshwater marsh. In these aquatic and semi-aquatic habitats, plant species composition varies considerably, depending upon duration of inundation, tidal flow or runoff, and salinity. Salt marshes are characterized by low-growing succulents such as pickleweed (Salicomia spp.), salty Susan (Jaumea camosa), salt grass (Disfichlk spicata), salt-cedar (Monanthochloe littoralis), and other halophytic (salt-tolerant) species. Some salt marsh systems include an outer marsh characterized by stands of tall cordgrass (Sparha folkxa). Salt marsh communities are highly productive systems and function as hatcheries for many species of fish, and provide food and refuge resources for a variety of locally resident and migratory water birds. Salt marsh habitat is best developed at places like Tijuana Estuarine National Wildlife Refuge, the mouth of the Sweetwater River, and the mouth of the Santa Margarita River. Freshwater marshes typically are dominated by cattails (Typha spp.), bulrushes (Scirpus spp), and dock (Rumex spp.). Patches of this habitat are present at the upper ends of Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, Batiquitos, and San Elijo lagoons, where a mixture of plants of salt and freshwater habitats is encountered. Smaller freshwater marshes grow around the perimeter of many lakes and ponds on the coastal slope. 4 TABLE 1 I I I I I I I I II I I I I I 1 1 I D I COMPARISON OF PRE-EUROPEAN AND 1988 VEGETATION COTJERAGE FOR SAN DIEGO COUNTY (AFTER OBERBAUER 1991d) Directic Original Ac. Current Ac. Change Q) of Chal Chamise Chaparraf 599,820 466,947 22% Reduct Creosote Bush Scrub 532,290 500,220 6%) Reduct Mixed Chaparraf 500,540 467,715 7% Reduct Coastal Sage Scrub273 480,260 135,370 72% Reduct Desert Transition 143,680 143,680 0% NO Chi Native Grassland 125,680 7,250 94%) Reduct Oak Woodland (sparse) 80,500 78,540 2% Reduct Riparian Woodland 34,580 13,570 61% Reduct Oak Woodland (dense)* 3,9Oo 27,140 6% Reduct Desert Wash 21,040 21,040 0%) NO Chz Coastal Mixed Chaparraf 20,620 2,530 88% Reduct Mountain Meadow 16,480 16,480 0% NoChz Juniper Woodland 12,230 12,230 0% NoChz Pinon Woodland 8,190 8,190 0% NoChz Coastal Salt Marsh' 6,530 810 68% Reduct Creosote Bush-Wash Complex 5,040 5,040 0% NoChz Mesquite Bosque 4,610 4,209 9% Reduct Cypress Woodland 4,440 4,229 5% Reduct Coastal Strand2 1,940 0 100% Essentia Dry Lake-sink 1,580 1,580 0% NoChe Freshwater Marsh' 19090 100 91% Reduct, Torrey Pine Woodland 310 250 19% Reduct Agriculture-Urban complex4 0 339,030 100% NewTq Disturbed Grassland4 0 203,760 100% NewTq Agriculture4 0 159,640 100% NewTq Lakes/Reservoirs4 0 10,800 100% NewTq Total 2,709,360 2,709,360 1 = After: Oberbauer, T.A. 1991. In: Abbott, P. and B. Elliot. Geol. SOC. North Amc Calif. Reg., Sympos. 0ct.-21-24, 1991, San Diego, California. Does not follow Holland precisely. * = Occurs in Carlsbad 3 = Oberbauer splits coastal sage scrub into two components: inland sage scrub and m sage scrub. Inland sage scrub has been reduced from 428,480 acres to 13 1,OOO acres 1 reduction). Maritime sage scrub has been reduced from 51,780 acres to 4,370 acres ( reduction). 4 = Man made Coniferous Forest 79,010 79,010 0%) NO Chl 5 Terrestrial upland vegetation closest to the coast includes Diegan coastal sage scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub, maritime succulent scrub, southern maritime cha!parral, and Torrey pine forest. Diegan coastal sage scrub consists primarily of aromatic shrubs and sub-shrubs with an understory of annual herbs and perennial grasses. Characteristic species include coastal sagebrush (Artemisia califopnia), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), white sage (Salvia apiana), lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia), laurel sumac (Malosma laun'na), and purple needlegrass (Stipa pzclchra). Typical coastal sage scrub occurs in many places, including the hills around Poway, the Dulzura-Jamul area, south of Lake Hodges, and portions of Camp Pendleton. Southern coastal bluff and maritime succulent scrub include a variety of succulents and cacti, such as velvet cactus (Bergerocactus emoryi), fish-hook cactus (MammiZZarira dzbica), coast cholla (Opuntia prolifepa), San Diego barrel cactus (Ferocactus viridescens), prickly-pear cactus (Opuntia littoralis), cliff-spurge (Euphorbia mrkera), bladder-pod (Cleome isomeris), and several species of dudleya (DdZeya spp.), mixed with typical sage scrub species. This community type is well developed at Torrey Pines State Park, Tijuana Hills above Border Field State Park, and Cabrillo National Monument. Southern maritime chaparral is limited to the area between Mount Soledad and southern Carlsbad. It is a community characterized by several endemic shrubs, usually growing on sandstone: Del Mar Manzanita (Arctostaphylos glundulosa var. crassifoh), wart-stemmed ceanothus (Ceanothus vemicosus), coast spice bush (Cneoridium dumosum), mission manzanita (Xyllococcus bicolor), and Del Mar mesa sand-aster (Corethrogyne flaginifolia var. linifolia). Torrey pine forest is an exceedingly restricted community known only from the vicinity of Del Mar and Torrey Pines State Reserve in San Diego County. It is an open-to- moderately dense forest dominated by Torrey pine (Pinus ton-eyana), with an extremely variable understory. Scattered on flat-topped mesas, marine terraces, and some valleys is a unique habitat that is, unfortunately, one of the most depleted habitat types in San Diego County -- vernal pools (San Diego Mesa hardpan vernal pool and Otay Mesa claypan vernal pool). These small shallow pools develop in "mima mound" topography where an underlying semi-impermeable hardpan layer intercepts winter rainfall and creates a perched water table. Vernal pools support a unique and ephemeral aquatic and semi-aquatic biota, quite distinct from the adjacent chaparral or grassland, that includes several plant species recognized as rare, threatened, or endangered by local, regional, and national conservation agencies, including San Diego mesa mint (Pogogyne nbramsii)., Otay mesa mint (Pogogyne nudiuscula), San Diego button-celery (Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii], California Orcutt grass (Orcunin cal~omica), and San Diego navarretia (Navarretia fossalis). Vernal pools are found in several areas of the county, including Otay Mesa, Kearny Mesa, Dei Mair Mesa, Clairemont Mesa, San Marcos, Ramona, and Fletcher Hills (Bauder 1986). Inland from the coast, chaparral is the dominant plant community, covering about 35 percent of the county's land surface. Although several types of chaparral are recognized by Holland (1986) (Le., southern mixed chaparral, chamise chaparral, scrub oak chaparral, mixed montane chaparral, mesic north slope chaparral, and southern north slope chaparral), all are composed of tall shrubs with hard evergreen leaves and stiff woody stems. Plant species composition varies from region to region within the county, but dominant species usually include chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), manzanitas (Arctostaphylos spp. and Xyloccocus bicolor), wild-lilac 1: Ceanothus spp.), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), mountain-mahogany (Cercocarpus spp.), Spanish bayonet (Yucca whipplez?, and interior scrub oak (Quercus berbe&!$olhz). Fire plays an integral role in the succession of chaparral communities, and many of the resident plant species are highly adapted for vigorous vegetative reproduction (crown- and stump-sprouting) following fires. Occurring throughout the coastal area and into the foothills and mountains are several types of natural grasslands that often are associated with clayey soils. Coastal perennial grasslands may range in size from patches within sage scrub or chaparral that are less than 100 square feet to (rarely) 20 to 100 acres. They often are dominated by purple needlegrass, a number of non-native grasses (Le., 6 Avena spp., Bromus spp., Gastridium ventricosum, Vulpia spp.), sanicles (Sanicur'a spp.), blu grass (Skyrimhiurn bellum), and gum-plant (Grindelia robusta). Riparian woodlands (Le., southern coast live oak riparian forest, southern arroyo willow ri forest, southern cottonwood-willow riparian forest, and southern willow scrub) cover less tk percent of the county's area. Although small in acreage, these woodlands suipport the I diversity and greatest abundance of wildlife species of any community type; riparian woodlar noted for their rich diversity of breeding bird species (Unitt 1984). Riparian habitats play a vi1 in nutrient recycling and in water quality maintenance. Along large, perennial river cours smaller, seasonally moist drainages, the woodlands are comprised of willows (Sdix spp.), FI cottonwood (PopuZus@ernonri& and western sycamore (Platanus racemosa), with a tangled undl of poison-oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), desert grape (fitis girdiana), and a variety of hydrophytic (wetland) species. Canyon bottoms that do not have enough water to support t complement of riparian vegetation often contain sycamores. In drier canyon bottom, on north slopes, and along the edges of valleys, dense groves of coast live oak (Quercus ap~olia) form a canopy oak woodland. Another type of oak woodland occurs in some parts of the foothill where widely spaced individuals of the endemic Engelmann oak (Quercus engelmanniz) form a woodland or oak savannah. Coniferous woodland communities (Jeffrey pine forest, western ponderosa pine forest, and ( pine forest) are restricted to montane habitats and some isolated peaks that receive over ab inches (46 cm) of rain per year. Pines (Pinus spp.) are the dominant plants of this communi canyon live oak (Quercus chrysulepk), black oak (Quercus keZlog@z), and wild-lilac (Ceanothu also are important components. The composition and character of this community vary with hi and exposure. In drier, flatter areas, the trees are more widely spaced, there is little ground and Jeffrey (Pinus jefjeyi) and Coulter pines (Pinus coulten] dominate. In more humid area as Cuyamaca Mountain, Palomar Mountain, or on steep north-facing slopes, conifers arc diverse, and the flora includes incense-cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), white fir (Abies concolo cone Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga macrocaFa) and sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana). Scrub vegetation covers most of the desert edge at the steep eastern escarpment of the mo between about 2,500 and 4,000 feet (760-1,220 m). This area includes elements of chapar creosote bush scrub (described below), as well as plant species found sparingly in other art county. The most prominent of these are California juniper (Juniperus califomica), turpentine (Thamnosma montana), and desert apricot (Prunus fremontig. Most of the lower desert area is covered by a sparse scrub community known as Sonoran c: bush scrub. Creosote bush (Larrea tridentata) is the dominant shrub, but the density of p much lower than that found in other vegetational communities. Sub-dominants in this habitat ocotillo (Fouqueria spledem), brittlebush (Encelia farinosa), barrel cactus (Ferocactus acant and burrobush (Ambrosia dumosa). Other communities found in this drier easiern portion county include active desert dune, Sonoran mixed woody and succulent scrub, desert grea scrub, desert dry wash woodland, and peninsular juniper woodland and scrub. Although ( desolate during most of the year, the desert areas usually come to life in the spring following winter rainfall. Wildflower displays may be magnificent during this brief flowering season. 1 I I I i. 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1.2.6 SENSITIVE BIOTA Southern California has a long history of human use and consequent alteration of the ecosysti it has experienced rapid urban expansion and habitat change over the past three or four decac Diego County has not been immune. Although habitat degradation has occurred throughoL of the county, the coastal areas have been altered the most severely. As well as providing prir 7 for housing and other development, these areas have been disrupted by the abuses of recreation and off-road vehicles. According to the City of San Diego (Hix 1990), the native coastal strand community has been eliminated nearly entirely; coastal salt marsh has been reduced by greater than 87 percent; coastal sage scrub has lost over 70 percent of its previous acreage; vernal pool habitats have been reduced by 96 percent; and coastal mixed chaparral has declined by more than 87 percent in §an Diego (see Table 1). The net overall result of this considerable loss in native habitat is the concurrent decrease in native wildlife and plant species. (See Appendix A for lists of wildlife and plant species in Sari Diego County with federal and state sensitive species designations.) Several species of birds associated with disappearing habitat types and/or habitat degradation are recognized as threatened or endangered by state or federal agencies: California brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis), light-footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostrk levipes), Belding’s Savannah sparrow (Ammodra,mus sandwichensis beldingi], and California least tern (Stema antillarum browni), all associated with coastal estuaries and salt marsh habitats; and least BelR’s vireo (Vireo belliipusillus), restricted to riparian woodlands. Also receiving much attenriion is the federal proposed endangered California gnatcatcher (Polwptila califomica), occurring primarily in coastal sage scrub communities below about 1,200 feet (370 m). Other species recognized as sensitive include coastal cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapihs sandkgensis), sage sparroiw (Aimophila belli), Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps canescens), California homed lark (Eremophila aIpestris actia), and several species of raptors (birds of prey). Mammal species occurring in San Diego County listed as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and WiIdIife Service (USFWS) or the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) include Stephens’ kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensz], found in the northwestern portion of the county and on Camp Pendleton; and peninsular bighorn sheep (&is canadensis cremnobates), an inhabitant of the rugged hills in the desert portion of the county. The ringtail (Bassarixus astutus), a state fully protected species, occurs in riparian, scrub, and forest habitats in the county. The CDFG recognizes 20 species of mammals that occur within San Diego County as “Species of Special Concern,” including eight species of bats. Species that are both federal Category 2 candidates and on the state list of sensitive species include the Pacific pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris pacificus), the Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus 1ongimembti.s brevinasus), and four bats. In addition, there are several new federal Category 2 candidates that are not yet designated by the State as sensitive species (see Appendix A). Reptiles that are recognized as federal Category 1 or 2 candidates for listing as endangered by the USF’WS or as Species of Special Concern by CDFG include the San Diego horned lizard (Phymosoma coronamm blainvillei), orange-throated whiptail (Cnemidophorus hypeiythms beldingi), northern red-diamond rattlesnake (Crotalus ruber), coastal whiptail (Cnemidophorus ti@ multiscutatus), barefoot banded gecko (Coleonyx switaki). and San Diego mountain kingsnake (Lampropeltis zonaita pulchra). Sensitive or declining amphibians include western spade-foot toad (Scaphwpus hammondi), reg-legged frog (Rana aurorci draytoni), and arroyo toad (Bufo [microscaphus califomicus] califomicus). Seven species of butterflies indigenous to San Diego &unty are recognized as federal Category 2 candidates for listing as threatened and endangered, namely the Laguna Mountains skipper (Pyrgus ruralis lagunae), wandering skipper (Pseudocopaeodes eunus). Harbison’s dun skipper (Euphyes vestris harbisoni), salt marsh skipper (Panoquina emans), Hermes copper (Lycaena hermes), Thorne’s hairstreak (Mitoura thomei), and quino checkerspot (Euphydiyas editha quino). The USFWS has been petitioned to list several of these species as endangered. Also, the globose dune beetle (CoeZus globosus), a resident of coastal dunes, is a federal Category 2 candidate species, and two other invertebrates -- the Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottonii) and San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegoensis) have been proposed or petitioned to be listed as endangered. 8 San Diego County exhibits an exceptionally high degree of floral endemism -- it contains nurr plant species that are found nowhere else. With 173 species recognized as sensitive by the Cali Native Plant Society (Smith and Berg 1988), San Diego County is second only to San Bern: County in this regard. Plant species of San Diego County listed as threatened or endangered 1 USFWS include salt marsh bird’s-beak (Cordylanthus maritimus), restricted to coastal salt ma and San Diego mesa mint (Pogogyne abramsii), an inhabitant of San Diego Mesa hardpan 3 pools. State-listed rare, threatened, or endangered plant species include the two listed abovc San Diego thornmint (Acanthomintha ilicifoh), coastal dunes milk vetch (Astrugtzlus tener va Encinitas baccharis (Baccharis vanessae), Dunn’s mariposa lily (Calochortus dunni), San Diego b celery (Elmgiurn ari.stulatum var. parishii), and many others. The USFWS recognizes 76 spec local plants as federal Category 1 or 2 candidates, and they have proposed three species for as endangered: Otay mesa mint, San Diego button-celery and California Orcutt grass. San Diego County also supports a variety of sensitive habitats. A sensitive habitat is define vegetation community type that has been significantly depleted due to development and has identified as warranting protection by the CDFG (e.g., coastal sage scrub, coastal1 strand, or c salt marsh), uncommon within a region, but common elsewhere (e.g., Jeffrey pine forest is limi San Diego County), as habitat that supports rare, endangered, or threatened plant or animal SI or areas that are needed to maintain a btilanced ecosystem or wildlife corridor (City of San 1991). Sensitive habitats in San Diego County relevant to the City of Carlsbad i3nd this doc are coastal sage scrub (including all subassociations), southern maritime chaparral, oak WOC riparian scrub, freshwater marsh, salt marsh, open water, and native grassland. 1.3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Because of its highly varied topography, soils, and climatic conditions, San Diego County suppc exceedingly diverse biota. Numerous plant communities are present within the county boun each of which supports its own distinctive assemblage of plant and wildlife species. Urban growth throughout San Diego County has had a tremendous effect on the local biota. plant and animal species have become increasingly rare throughout the region and some have b locally extinct. Projected land development and human population growth in the region will in the pressure on a large number of habitats and species that are literally now on the br extinction. Although sensitive species are designated as threatened, endangered, rare, declin depleted by local or regional conservation agencies, sensitive habitats are not provided wit designations. The most depleted habitat types include coastal dunes, coastal salt marsh, m: succulent scrub, coastal sage scrub, native grassland, riparian woodland, and venial pool. TI of natural habitat results in the decline of native plant and wildlife species. San Diego County is one of the most desirable places in the country to live. In order for the to continue to offer a high quality of human life, severe challenges in natural resource manal must be met, including preservation of open space, maintenance of water and air quality, management, control of noise pollution, and preservation of our natural heritage. Concurren economic vitality of the region must be maintained and enhanced for the present and the fu To achieve these objectives, it is vital to design and implement development alternatives t compatible with the preservation of biological resources. Habitat management plans, such under development by Carlsbad, and similar plans being undertaken by government and indil provide a means for attaining this goal. I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 8 1 1 1 I I 9 , , / \ / BIOLOGICAL &SOURCES AND !.%BITAT ANALYSIS in support ofthe CITY OF CARLsBAD HABITAT MANAGEMINT PLAN , SECTION 2 CITY OF CARLSBAD THE LOCAL SETTING I I I I R I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 2.1 INTRODUCTION The City of Carlsbad is situated along the Pacific coast of California, in northwestern San County, approximately 30 miles (45 km) north of the City of San Diego. It is bordered on the by the City of Oceanside, on the northeast by the City of Vista, on the east by the City c Marcos, on the south by the City of Encinitas, and on the west by the Pacific Owan (Figure extends about 4.5 miles (6 km) from east to west and about 7.0 miles (9 km) from north to so covers approximately 40 square miles (about 24,000 acres or 15.44 square Km). Elevations from sea level along the coast to about 960 feet (280 m) at the highest point at the southe I border of the City. The City of Carlsbad has been a valuable agricultural area since prior to the 20th century, ar experienced significant urban expansion over the past three or four decades. The human pop1 of the City is estimated to be approximately 63,000. Urban development for housing and othc has resulted in degradation and outright loss of significant blocks of native habitat. EncamF of migrant workers and homeless people also have degraded much habitat, particularly in ri areas. Native communities associated with the coastal areas have been disrupted by the abt active recreation and off-road vehicles. Although much of the City has been subject to agriculture, housing, commercial developme other uses, open space areas within Carlsbad support a diverse biota and a variety of sensitivc and wildlife species. Over 300 species of plants, 200 species of birds, 25 species of reptil, amphibians, 20 species of mammals, 44 species of fish, 45 species of butterflies, and several thc species of terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates retain populations within the City. 1 nformation status of many of these populations, however, is lacking, and it is not known whelher the ren populations of these species are viable. As with much of San Diego County, the City of Carlsbad has experienced significant urban in recent years. The entire City lies within 4.5 miles of the coast; hence human population eq and habitat change is concentrated within the coastal area where many sensitive and diminishing biological resources occur. Consequently, conflicts between urban growth a maintenance of biological diversity are encountered frequently. These factors make conse planning in these areas particularly challenging. 2.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.2.1 The western edge of the City, lying along the Pacific coast, is characterized by sandy beacl three low-lying river estuaries or lagoons -- Batiquitos Lagoon, Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and Vista Lagoon. Buena Vista Lagoon, at the northern border of the City, is fed by 13uena Vista a local drainage that forms much of the border between the cities of Oceanside and Carlsbz watershed of Agua Hedionda Lagoon includes a drainage that extends from Lake Calaver northeastern comer of Carlsbad. Batiquitos Lagoon lies along the southern boundary of the ( extends inland from the coast to near El Camino Real, where it receives runoff from slope: north side of the lagoon and a drainage from the south. The lagoons dominate the coastal la GENERAL TOPOGRAPHY AND LANDSCAPE FEATURES 10 Oceanside 7" = 65C r! Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan Vicinity Map of Carlsbad and provide habitat for a variety of resident and migratory bird species. Wit exception of some habitat that immediately borders the estuaries, native communities o immediate coast either have been degraded severely by human activities or have been lost alto! to development. Inland from the coast is a series of low coastal mesas and rolling foc supporting shrublands, grasslands, and agriculture, with intervening ravines and canyons supp narrow oak woodland, riparian scrub, coastal sage scrub, and chaparral communities. Two freshwater bodies occur within Carlsbad near the eastern edge of the City -- Lake Calaver Squires Dam. Both support adjacent freshwater marsh and riparian woodlands. A deep, roughl: west trending gorge dominates the landscape locally in the southeastern portion oE the City th the Fieldstone Company-owned lands east of La Costa. Agriculture (including tomatoes, flowers, and others) is a dominant feature of the land particularly in the area north of Palomar Airport Road east of Paseo del Norte, and south of Pa Airport Road east of El Camino Real. Private golf courses also occupy considerable areas of space, including courses associated with the La Costa and Aviara developments. Golf cc typically occupy lower, more level bottomland areas between steep or sloping terrain. 2.2.2 CLIMATE Based on average temperature and precipitation, the City of Carlsbad lies entirely within the se (or steppe) climatic zone (Pryde 1984). Average annual precipitation is 10.7 inches. Average 4 temperature is 59.2 degrees Fahrenheit (F'); average July/August high temperature is 72.9 degi and average January low temperature is 42.6 degrees F. Temperatures typically exhibit g differences furthest from the coast. Highly seasonal rainfall generally occurs between Octob April; coastal fog is common in May and June. 2.23 GEOLOGY AND SOILS The City of Carlsbad lies entirely within the Coastal Geomorphic Province, which occupi western portion of San Diego County corresponding to the region of sedimentary surface rock dominant relief of this province is a series of marine terraces also known as mesas. According to Bowman (1973), 33 different soil series are present in the City of Carlsbad, inc sandy, cobbly, loamy, and clayey types, and soils associated with gabbro parent ma1.erial and Sa Peak metavolcanic formations. On the coastal terraces most of the soil series are comprised oi loams, clay loams, and clays. In the foothills the soils generally are well-drained ,sandy loams loams overlaying decomposed granitic or metavolcanic rock. 2.2.4 PLANT COMMUNITIES Eight distinct native plant communities (Holland 1986) are present within the Ciiy of CarIsb; Section 3 for details of mapping). In addition, three non-native habitat types @e., euc woodland, disturbed wetland or floodplain, and disturbed habitat), open water, and developme account for significant areas within Carlsbad (see Section 3 for discussion). These native an native habitat types are discussed below with respect to their general habitat structure, composition, and general location within the City of Carisbad. Terminology andl definitions natural communities follow Holland (1986), for the most part, with modifications to confor community types recognized by Ogden Environmental and Energy Services (in [heir Multi- Conservation Plan [MSCP] mapping efforts) and SANDAG (Table 2). i I 8 I. I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I 11 TABLE 2 CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR HABITAT COMMUNITIES OCCURRING IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD SANDAG Holland Habitat Type Code Code Coastal Sage Scrubs coastal sage scrub 30 32000 disturbed coastal sage scrub 31 32001 maritime succulent scrub 40 32400 southern mixed chaparral 52 37120 chamise chaparral 53 37200 southern maritime chaparral 60 37630 coastal sage scrubkhaparral 70 37G non-native (annual) grassland 82 42200 native (perennial) grassland 83 42100 Saltwater Marsh 90 52100 Freshwater Marsh 100 52400 Sycamore Alluvial Woodland 123 62400 Riparian Scrub 130 63000 Oak Woodland 140 71 100 Chaparrals Grasslands Eucalyptus Woodland 190 Open Water 200 Disturbed Wetland 210 Disturbed Habitat 240 Active Disturbance 242 Active Agriculture 243 Golf Course 244 Developed 250 Source: MSCP Habitat Type (modified from Holland 19436). Coastal Sage Scrub Within the City of Carlsbad, coastal sage scrub is represented by Diegan coastal sage scrub and maritime succulent scrub, as well as disturbed forms of both types. Diegan coastal sage scrub is a droughtdeciduous community comprised of aromatic shrubs and subshrubs with a diverse understory of annual and perennial herbs, perennial and annual grasses and grass-like plants. Diegan coastal sage scrub occurs primarily on dry south-facing slopes and hillsides or on clay-rich soils adjacent to chaparral or upslope from riparian woodlands. Character istic species include coastal sagebrush, California buckwheat, black sage (Salvia mdlifera), white sage, lemonadeberry, laurel sumac, and purple needlegrass. It also supports a variety of sensitive plant species, including California adolphia (Adolphia califomica), ashy spike-moss (Selaginella czherascms), San Diego sand-aster, and several others. Sensitive wildlife species that occur primarily in coastal sage scrub include San Diego horned lizard, orange-throated whiptail, California gnatcatcher, and coastal cactus wren. Coastal sage scrub 12 frequently occurs in a mosaic distribution with native grasslands and occasionally with chaparra largest remaining tracts of Diegan coastal sage scrub are found in the vicinity of Lake Cal southeast of Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and near Rancho Santa Fe Road. Maritime succulent includes a variety of succulents, such as fish-hook cactus, coast cholla, California desert thorn (L cdifomicum), cliff-spurge, bladder-pod, and several species of dudleya (Dudleya spp.), mixec typical Diegan sage scrub species. This community type is found along the remaining narrow L borders of the lagoons and on some west-facing slopes near the coast. Cha~arral Three types of chaparral are recognized within the City: southern mixed chaparral, southern ma chaparral, and chamise chaparral. Southern mixed chaparral is a fire- and drought-ac community composed of a variety of woody shrubs, many of which are ''stump sprouters regenerate rapidly from underground undamaged tissues following fires or other ecol perturbation. It is a heterogeneous community type -- the dominant shrubs vary from site t In most situations the dominants include chamise, interior scrub oak, mission manzanita, laurel s lemonadeberry, and toyon. Understory plants include rush-rose (HeZianthemum scqpariurn), dee (Lotus scoparius), wreathplant (Stephanomeria spp.), and a variety of composites (Astera Southern maritime chaparral is similar to southern mixed chaparral, but it occuf?;; on sandstc is the most limited chaparral type in distribution, particularly in Carlsbad, and is characten several endemic shrubs, including Del Mar Manzanita, wart-stemmed ceanothus, coast spice bu: coastal scrub oak (Quercus dumosa). Other dominant shrubs encountered in this community i same as those listed above for southern mixed chaparral. Sensitive plant species encounte southern maritime chaparral include wart-stemmed ceanothus, summer-holly ( Comarostl diversifoh var. diversqoolia), Del Mar manzanita, ashy spike-moss, and western dichondra (Dic! occidentah). Chamise chaparral is a community where chamise is the overwhelming dominant This species may account for over 90 percent of the relative cover. The remaining species i shrubs and understory plants common in other types of chaparral. Chaparral has a patchy distribution throughout the City of Carlsbad, occurring on more mesic and west-facing slopes, alternating with coastal sage scrub, grasslands, and oak woodlands. The and most representative patches occur immediately east of the Safety Center, southwest of 5 Dam, at the north end of Rancho Santa Fe Road, and along El Camino Real south of P; Airport Road. Grassland Both native (perennial) and non-native (annual) grasslands are present within thle City of CP Native grasslands usually are small in area, frequently occurring as difficult-to-define, open I of habitat within coastal sage scrub. Many are associated with clayey soils. Native grasslai characterized by perennial bunch grasses such as needlegrass (Stipa spp.), and a variety of herb annuals and perennials such as Cleveland's shooting star (Dodecatheon clevelandii], blue-eyec fascicled tarweed (Hemizonia fasckuZatum), sanicles, and mariposa lily (Calochortus spp.) habitat type is extremely limited in quantity within the City of Carlsbad, although small patc distributed throughout many areas of native vegetation. Non-native grasslands occur where communities have been degraded by repeated fire, grazing or mechanical disturbance, in agriculture. These areas are dominated by a number of non-native grasses, including wild oats spp.), bromes (Bromus spp.), and others (e-g., Gastridium ventricosurn, Vdpia spp.); native are few. Other species present in non-native grasslands include invasive natives such as tel weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), fascicled tarweed, doveweed (Eremocalpus setigems), and introduced species such as Russian-thistle (SalsoZa austrah), black mustard (Brassica nig I D I I I 1 1 8 I 1 1 I I 1 t I I I I 13 tocalote (Centaurea melitensis). Non-native grasslands are: best represented in the southeastern corner of the City and south of Palomar Airport Road at the eastern edge of the City. Southern Coastal Salt Marsh Southern coastal salt marsh is a wetland community that develops in low, flat estuaries at the mouths of rivers and streams. Tidal inundation or excessive evaporation results in highly saline conditions around the margins of lagoons, and it is under these conditions that salt marshes develop. This community is characterized by low-growing succulents such as pickleweed, salty Susan, salt-cedar, and other halophytic (salt-tolerant) species. Salt marsh commuriities are highly productive systems that function as nurseries for many species of fsh and provide resources for a variety of locally resident and migratory water birds. This community supports a variety of sensitive birds, including Belding’s Savannah sparrow, light-footed clapper rail, and California least tern. It also supports one sensitive invertebrate -- the salt marsh skipper. Within the City of Carlsbad, salt marsh habitat is present surrounding Batiquitos Lagoon and Agua Hedionda Lagoon, although Batiquitos Lagoon is not open to the ocean. It also occurs in limited amounts around Bue:na Vista Lagoon and possibly at Loma Aha Creek. Several researchers have described distinct zones within southern coastal salt marsh (e.g., Zedler 1982). Coast and Vallev Freshwater Marsh Freshwater marsh occurs in drainages, seepages, and other perennially moist low places. This community is characterized by perennial, emergent monocots (e.g., grasses and lilies), 2-3 m (6-10 feet) tall, such as cattails and bulrushes. Understory species include curly dock, marsh fleabane (Plucheu atoruta), and a variety of hydrophytic grasses and herbs. Sensitive plants frequently encountered in the vicinity of this community are spiny rush (Juncus acutus var. sphaerocarpus) and San Diego marsh-eider (Iva hayesiana). Patches of this halbitat are present at the upper ends of Buena Vista, Agua Redionda, and Batiquitos lagoons, where a mixture of plants of salt and freshwater habitats is encountered. Smaller freshwater marshes grow around the perimeter of Lake Calavera and within riparian scrub communities, and may be: present in Loma Alta Creek. Svcamore Alluvial Woodland Sycamore alluvial woodland is an open to moderately closed, winter-deciduous, broadleafed riparian woodland, dominated by well-spaced western sycamore. The community typically includes individuals of several other tree species, including willow, coast live: oak, Mexican elderberry (Sambucus mexicam), and Fremont cottonwood. This community is best developed in broad channels of intermittent streams, usually with a cobbly substrate. Sycamore alluvial woodland is uncommon in Carlsbad, occurring primarily in the drainage east of the Safety Center and along a narrow drainage south of Lake Calavera. RiDarian Scrub As used herein, the term riparian scrub encompasses several natural and semi-disturbed wetland communities, including mulefat scrub, southern willow scrub, and baccharishamarisk scrub. These communities occur along river courses and seasonally moist drainages. In Carbbad, some riparian scrub communities are the result of urban or agricultural run-off. Riparian scrub typically is dominated by wiilows and Fremont cottonwood, or by mulefat, broom baccharis, or tamarisk ( Tamarix sp.), an introduced species. The understory is variable depending upon canopy coverage, disturbance history and water availability, and usually includes poison-oak, desert grape, western ragweed (Ambrosia psilostchya), rushes (Juncus spp.), and a variety of other hydrophytic (wetland) species. Riparian scrub is a highly productive community, contributing to nutrient recycling and the 14 maintenance of water quality, and providing habitat for numerous species. However, lo( supports few sensitive plant and wildlife species. Characteristic well-developed riparian scrub along El Camino Real south of Batiquitos Lagoon, extending east from the mudflats at the e end of Agua Hedionda Lagoon (e.g., Macario Canyon), and along the northern portion of tl- south of Highway 78 in Buena Vista Creek. Oak Woodland As used herein, oak woodland encompasses several closely related community types, includinj live oak woodland, southern coast live oak riparian forest, and Engelmann oak woodland. I Carlsbad, this community typically is restricted to mesic north-facing slopes, shaded ravine drainages. It is dominated by coast live oak, with scattered individuals of other tree species, inc western sycamore, willow, and Mexican elderberry. The understory includes toyon, laurel , California wild rose (Rosa califomica), poison-oak, and currant (Ribes spp.). Oak woodland i limited in the City of Carlsbad; it is best developed in the drainage behind the Safety Cente to the north and east. Disturbed Wetland/Floodplain Disturbed wetland or floodplain is not a native plant community. It typically occurs where the I wetland vegetation has been degraded by mechanical activities or invaded by weedy, non. species. This habitat is characterized by open and patchy vegetation that includes both nati introduced species. The dominant shrubs include mulefat, broom baccharis, and scattered trees. Other species present in varying density include coastal goldenbush (Isoc~oma veneta: dock, castor-bean (Ricinus communis), cockle-bur (Xanthium strumarium), spiny rush, and F grass (Cortaderia spp.). Eucalvutus Woodland Eucalyptus woodland also is a non-native community. It is dominated by various species of F eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.) that survived around old dwellings or in entire groves (e.g., the Grove). The understory is usually poorly developed or absent owing to the allelopathic (toxic: of eucalyptus leaves that acts to inhibit the growth of other plants. Although this habitat su no sensitive plant or wildlife species, it is often used for nesting by raptors and other birds or r( by bats. Disturbed Habitat As used herein, the term disturbed habitat encompasses a wide variety of open, non-native h that lack permanent structures and currently support activities that prohibit the siiccession of plant communities. Four types of disturbed habitat are recognized: (1) typical disturbed habi active disturbed habitat; (3) active agriculture; and (4) golf courses. Typical disturbed ha1 characterized by areas that have been graded, scraped, or subject to prior agricultural use. areas either lack vegetation or support weedy, introduced species such as Russian-thistle, dovi Australian saltbush (Atripla semibaccata), and black mustard. Typical disturbed habitat diffei annual grassland by the abundance or domination of weedy species. For example, fallow agric fields often become dominated by species such as Russian-thistle or black mustard. Active dis habitat supports mineral extraction or other active uses that inhibit the growth of plants. agriculture and golf courses are self explanatory, although what was active agriculture at this may appear to be annual grassland or typical disturbed habitat in subsequent years. Whik disturbed habitat types directly support few or no sensitive plant and wildlife species, they 1 used as foraging habitat by raptors and several mammal species. B 1 Q I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 15 Developed Developed areas are characterized by structures, parking lots, yards, roads, and a variety of buildings. These areas support no native vegetation. Developed areas occupy the majority of the western half of the City of Carlsbad, but occupy a considerably smaller pe:rcentage of the area east of El Camino Real. Own Water Open water is aquatic habitat that lacks vascular vegetation and includes lakes, ponds, reservoirs, and coastal lagoons and may be either fresh, brackish or saline. ’The area surrounding the open water is almost always characterized by freshwater marsh, salt marsh, or riparian habitats. The largest bodies of open water include the three major coastal lagoons (Batiquitos, Agua Hedionda, and Buena Vista), Lake Calavera, and Squires Dam, although there are a number of artificial ponds throughout the City. 2.2.5 SENSITIVE BIOTA A large number of plant and wildlife species recognized as sensitive, rare, threatened, or endangered by CDFG, USFWS, California Native Plant Society (Smith antd Berg 1988), or local resource agencies and conservation groups have been documented from the City of Carlsbad. These are discussed below. Species records come from published sources cited herein, from EIRs and other unpublished environmental documents and technical reports reviewed for the study (see Appendix B), and from personal communications with local biologists familiar with various parts of the City. Sensitive Wildlife Species Birds Several species of birds recognized as threatened or endangered by state or federal agencies occur within Carlsbad as overwintering individuals or resident populations. These include the light-footed clapper rail, Belding’s Savannah sparrow, and California least tern, all associated with coastal estuaries and salt marsh habitats. The least Bell’s vireo, restricted tal riparian woodlands, and the federally- proposed endangered California gnatcatcher, occurring primarily in coastal sage scrub communities below about 1,200 feet (370 m), also have been reported from Carlsbad. The latter species is widespread in coastal sage scrub habitats throughout Carlsbad. Other bird species that occur in Carlsbad that are recognized as sensitive by the resource agencies include the coastal cactus wren, Bell’s sage sparrow, southern California rufous-crowned sparrow, California homed lark, and several species of raptors. Accipiter coopen -- Cooper’s hawk USFWS: None CDFG Species of Special Concern Cooper’s hawk ranges through most of California and is a common winter migrant in San Diego County. In the county, Cooper’s hawk breeds almost exclusively in oak woodland habitats; in the winter they may be found in any woodland habitat (Unitt 1984). Mature trees in suburban areas also may support nesting Cooper’s hawks. Populations of this species have declined steadily throughout the state probably as a result of habitat destruction, falconIy, and pesticide abuse (Remsen 1979). Riparian areas and groves of mature trees within Carlsbad meet the habitat requirements of this species. 16 Accipiter striatus -- sharp-shinned hawk USEWS: None CDFG Species of Special Concern This species is also a Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service watchlist species d declines in populations throughout its breeding range. The sharp-shinned hawk is a regular ‘v migrant in San Diego County and may be encountered in any woodland habitat (Unitt 3 Riparian woodlands and suburban areas in Carlsbad represent potential habitat fix this speci was reported from Rancho La Costa. AimophiZa m.eps canescens -- Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) 1 # 1 I 1 1 I I 1 8 I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 CDFG None The Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow is an uncommon to fairly common resident ( Diego County primarily found in coastal sage scrub that is known to occur in the City of Cz (Unitt 1984). This species recently became a federal candidate €or listing as threater endangered. Ammodramus sandwichemis beldingi -- Belding’s Savannah sparrow USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG. Endangered Belding’s Savannah sparrow ranges from Santa Barbara County, California south to about El R Baja California, Mexico. It is a permanent resident in San Diego County (Unitt 1984). This nests in salt marshes or the margins of lagoons in low vegetation dominated by pickl Apparently, it prefers the upper littoral zone of tidal marshes, areas flooded only by high sp storm tides (Massey 1977; Unitt f984), and it forages in marshes and nearby mudflats, beaches and in low coastal strand vegetation. In Carlsbad, Belding’s Savannah sparrow has been re from Batiquitos, Agua Hedionda, and Buena Vista lagoons. Buteo lineatus -- red-shouldered hawk USFWS: None CDFG None Audubon Society: Blue List, 19’72-1986 The red-shouldered hawk is an uncommon to fairly common resident in San Diiego CountJ 1984). It inhabits nearly the entire county west of the desert. Red-shouldered hawks 04 variety of woodland habitats, and stands of non-native trees (such as eucalyptus) may s breeding habitat. Although concern has been expressed that the numbers id this spec declining, Wilbur (1973) concluded that no major declines in population had occurred in Ce except possibly in the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys. These hawks can tolerate presence if mature trees with a high canopy are maintained; they nest in oak and riparian wc 1 suburban areas, and orchards. Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus sandiegensh -- San Diego (coastal) cactus wren USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG. Species of Special Concern The cactus wren is a widespread and common species of the southwestern deserts, extendir Pacific coast in southern California and Baja California. Rea and Weaver (1990) and others to them recognize a portion of the coastal population as a separate subspecies, Campy101 17 brunneicapdlus sandiegensis. According to Rea and Weaver, the range of C. b. sandiegensis (the "San Diego cactus wren") is restricted to the coastal slope of San Diego County, extreme southern Orange County, and northwestern Baja California. Populations occurring north of southern Orange County are assigned to the more common and widespread desert subspecies, C. b. anthonyi. Originally, all coastal populations from the Mexican border north to Ventura County had been assigned to the subspecies sandkgensis, but recently it has been concluded that populations in Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura counties more closely resemble C. b. anthonyi. It should be noted, however, that the American Ornithological Union Committee on Taxonomy and Systematics has not yet accepted the distinction between srandiegemik and anthonyi. Until they do 150, sandiegensis should be considered a proposed subspecies. Cactus thickets supporting large populations of the San Diego cactus wren in San Diego County occur primarily in sage scrub and Diegan coastal sage scrub communities, such as those found in the vicinity of San Pasqual, Lake Jennings, Sweetwater Dam, and Otay Mesa. Smaller populations occur at Camp Pendleton, San Elijo and Batiquitos lagoons, and Fletcher Hills. Cactus wrens also recently (ca. 1988) occurred north of Batiquitos and Agua Hedionda lagoons (H. Wier, pen. obs.). The San Diego cactus wren formerly was far more common in the coastal lowlands. Population declines are linked to loss of habitat, and in particular, loss of cholla and prickly-pear cactus thickets (Hix 1990). The San Diego cactus wren currently is being evaluated for possible listing as threatened or endangered by the USFWS. Cathartes aura -- turkey vulture USFWS: None CDFG: None Although not recognized as sensitive by the USFWS or the CDFG, the turkey vulture is considered a declining species in San Diego County (Everett 1979). Unitt (1984) reports that this species is a common spring and fall migrant, an uncommon to locally common winter visitor, and a rare to uncommon summer resident in San Diego County. He further states that turkey vultures are widespread throughout the county, particularly over open fields and grasslands. Circus cyaneus hudsonius -- northern harrier USFWS: None CDFG: Species of Special Concern On the national level, the northern harrier has been recognized as sensitive for many years by the National Audubon Society. It ranges throughout California and may be encountered in grasslands, open fields, and salt and freshwater marshes. According to Unitt (1984) the northern harrier is an uncommon to fairly common migrant and winter visitor in San Diego County, and a rare and local summer resident. This species is most common in the coastal lowlands, where as many as 10 (Tijuana River Valley) and 19 (Sweetwater Reservoir) have been observed. Observations of displaying pairs at Las Pulgas Creek and the Santa Margarita River suggest that small numbers of northern harriers still breed on Camp Pendleton. Nests and nesting behavior also have been observed at French Canyon, Sweetwater River, and Dennery Canyon. EIanus caeruZeus -- black-shouldered kite USFWS: None CDFG None Although not specifically designated as rare, threatened, or endangered by either CDFG or USFWS, the black-shouldered kite is regarded as a locally sensitive raptor. Formerly the Kelly Ranch north of Agua Hedionda Creek supported a communal roost for approximately 15 to 25 birds (H. Wier, 18 pers. obs.). The black-shouldered kite can nest in riparian woods and large shrubs in coasta scrub and chaparral. Empidonax traillii atimus -- southwestern willow flycatcher USFWS: Candidate (Category 1) CDFG None The southwestern willow flycatcher is an uncommon spring and fall migrant found through0 Diego County (Unitt 1984). Nesting pairs use willow thickets in riparian woodland. There records of this species from Carlsbad, but it may occasionally use the same habitat in the City 2 by the least Bell's vireo in the past (i.e., Macario Canyon and Buena Vista Creek:). Eremophila alpestris actiQ -- California horned lark USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None The California homed lark is a common breeding resident, and an abundant migrant and visitor (Unitt 1984). It is commonly found in both native and non-native grasslands, iI agricultural land, and along sandy ocean or bay shores. The homed lark has become a candid listing as threatened or endangered, apparently because of rapid development of its habitab species is likely to be relatively common in Carlsbad. Lanius ludovicianus -- loggerhead shrike USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None The loggerhead shrike is a relatively common resident of San Diego County found around agril land, native and non-native grassland, and broken coastal sage scrub and chaparral (Unitt 198' small raptor became a federal candidate for listing as threatened or endangered because c development of its habitats. Development not only threatens nesting areas for the shrike, but base as well (including insects, lizards, and small rodents). Pelecanus occidentalis califomicus -- California brown pelican USFWS: Endangered CDFG Endangered The California brown pelican is a common to very common non-breeding visitor along the S California coast (Unitt 1984). This species was listed as endangered by the state and governments as a result of reproductive failures, and consequent precipitous population declii to DDT contamination in the 1960s and 1970s. This species is commonly seen along the coast and lagoons in Carlsbad. Phalacrocorax auntus -- double-crested cormorant USFWS: None CDFG: None This species is a common non-breeding visitor in San Diego County (Unitt 1984). It is obser- frequently on bays, lagoons, and estuaries along the coast (Unitt 1984), but also inay be encc on ponds at inland localities. Everett (1979) considers the double-creasted cormorant as a "d species in San Diego County. He indicates that it formerly bred at Lake Henshaw, but I I I I I 1 1 I I I 8 1 I 1 I t I I 1 19 nested in the county since about 1933. This species occurs i3t Agua Hedionda, Buena Vista, and Batiquitos lagoons, and likely uses larger inland lakes as well. Polwptila califomica -- California gnatcatcher USFWS: Proposed endangered CDFG None The California gnatcatcher is a small gray nonmigratory bird with a black tail with white edges. In the breeding season the male has a black cap. It eats insects and builds a small, cup-shaped nest of plant material, animal hair, and spider webs. The present known range of the California gnatcatcher extends from an isolated population on the Palos Verdes Peninsula of Los Angeles County, and southern'orange, western Riverside, and San Diego counties, into northern Baja California, Mexico. It is an obligate resident of coastal sage scrub and Riversidean (inland) sage scrub communities, although it may use adjacent disturbed, chaparral, and riparian habitats. Individuals of this species are generally found at elevations below 800 feet along the coast, and below 1600 feet in Riverside County (Atwcd 1990). Based on average territory size and available habitat, Atwood (1990) estimated that 1,200~-2,000 pairs were resident within the state in 1990. A pair of gnatcatchers may forage over 6 to 45 acres of land during the breeding season (generally the end of July to the end of June), and may forage more widely at the end that period. In Carlsbad, gnatcatcher territories probably are less than 20 acres due to the coastal location and constrained condition of most of the suitable habitat locations (Mock 1992). The California gnatcatcher has no special status with the CDFG, although it formerly was listed (as Polwptila melanura) as a second priority "Species of Special Concern." The USFWS has proposed endangered status for the California gnatcatcher pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Although a decision by the USFWS on the status of the gnatcatcher originally was due in September of 1992, the "final rule" probably will not be issued until January 1993. In San Diego County, gnatcatcher populations are known from several sites along the coast and from as far inland as San Pasqual, Poway, Lakeside, Escondido and Ramona. The California gnatcatcher is widespread throughout the coastal sage scrub areas of Carlsbad. The largest populations are concentrated in the northeastern and southeastern portions of the City. Rallus longirostris levipex -- light-footed clapper rail USFWS: Endangered CDFG: Endangered This subspecies ranges from about Santa Barbara south into northern Baja California, Mexico (Unitt 1984). In San Diego County, it is an uncommon and very localized resident of tidal salt marshes that support large stands of cord grass (Spartzna folwsa) (Unitt 1984). It may also occur in brackish marshes dominated by cattails. The status of the clapper rail in San Diego County has been monitored closely since about 1973 by P. Jorgensen (Wilbur 1974; Wilbur et al. 1979) and the USFWS. Clapper rails formerly were much more common in the County. Its range and numbers have been reduced greatly by destruction and degradation of salt marsh habitats. Census results from 1973 through 1981 indicate that the total San Diego County population size fluctuates between about 55 arid 75 pairs; the total population in California was 173 pairs in 1981 (Unitt 1984). In Carlsbad, the light-footed clapper rail has small populations, but it has been reported from Batiquitos, Agua Hedionda, and Buena Vista lagoons. 20 Sterna antillarum browni -- California least tern USFWS: Endangered CDFG: Endangered The California least tern is a common, but very localized, summer resident and migrant in San : County (Unitt 1984). This species nests colonially along the coast on barrier dunes at river mc lagoon entrances, and along sandy strips. Within Carlsbad, the least tern has nested at the Hedionda, Batiquitos, and Buena Vista lagoons in the past (Unitt 1984). Threats to this specie3 from development of suitable nesting areas. This forces the least tern to use fewer nesting area increasing the risk of whole colony failure due to local predation and other disturbances. Vweo bellii pusiZIus -- least Bell’s vireo USFWS: Endangered CDFG Endangered Least Bell’s vireo is a small, gray and white, migratory songbird that inhabits willow-dorr riparian areas of southern California and adjacent northern Baja California, N[exico (San Association of Governments 1988). It is one of four North American subspecies of Bell’s Historically, this subspecies was abundant in riverine habitats from Baja California to Tehama ( in central California (Grinnell and Miller 1944; Willett 1933), with the center of its breeding in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys. Widespread destruction of its obligate riparian for agricultural use, livestock grazing, flood control, urban development, and various commercii in combination with increased brood parasitism by the exotic brown-headed cowbird (MoZolhm decimated vireo numbers, extirpating it from the central valleys, and restricting the species tc fragmented populations in a fraction of its former range (USFWS 1988). By 1!985, only 2E were known from 45 locations in 9 counties (USFWS 1988). In response to the unparalleled of this passerine, the least Bell’s vireo was listed as endangered by the CDFG in 1980, and USFWS in May 1986. The two Carlsbad records of which we are aware are males from Macario Canyon ((feeding a fl in 1987) and Buena Vista Creek (H. Wier, pers. obs. circa 1983). Reptiles and Amphibians Reptiles documented from Carlsbad that are recognized as federal Category 2 candidates fo as threatened or endangered by the USFWS or as Species of Special Concern by CDFG inch Diego horned lizard, orange-throated whiptail, western whiptail, and northern red d rattlesnake. Other sensitive reptiles likely to be present include two-striped garter sna southwestern pond turtle. The western spade-foot toad, recognized as a Species of Special ( by CDFG, also has been recorded from the City. Cnemidophorus hyperythrus beldingi -- orange-throated whiptail USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG Species of Special Concern The orange-throated whiptail is a small, slender, insectivorous lizard with a bright orange F its throat. It occurs in the United States and Mexico, ranging from southern California (we: transverse and peninsular ranges) south to about mid-way through the peninsula of Baja Ca This species has exhibited population declines in California associated with the conversion o sage scrub and dry wash habitats for agriculture, urban development, and flood control. P forager, the orange-throated whiptail frequents dry, often rocky hillsides, ridges, valleys, anc that support broken coastal sage scrub, chaparral, mule fat scrub, and grassland mixed with sa 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 8 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 21 I species. It often occurs with the more common western whiptail (C. ti@). The orange-throated whiptail relies to some extent on the burrows of small mammals, such as the California ground squirrel (Spemzophilus beecheyq, for protection from predators and adverse environmental conditions. This species was recorded on the Alanda project site located near El Camino Real in the northeastern portion of the City, and from an area located south of Palonnar Airport Road and west of El Camino Real. Cnemidophonu ti@ multkutatus -- coastal whiptail USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None The coastal whiptail is an active lizard that inhabits sparse coastal sage scrub habitat that provides room for running (Stebbins 1985). This species avoids dense shrub vegetation and grasslands. It was recently added to the candidate species list because of threats to its habitat by development. The coastal whiptail is likely to occur on more open, drier south-facing slopes in Carlsbad. Crotalus ruber -- northern reddiamond rattlesnake USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: None The northern red-diamond rattlesnake inhabits coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and open woodlands (Stebbins 1975). This species is relatively common in the coastal sage scrub community in San Diego County. However, it was added to the federal candidate list because of threats to its habitat by development. This species is highly likely to occur in the City of Carlsbad. Phymosoma coronaturn blainvillei -- San Diego horned lizard USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Species of Special Concern The San Diego homed lizard is a small, spiny, somewhat rounded lizard that occurs primarily in open areas in coastal sage scrub communities. It was a common species in San Diego County until about 10 years ago (Hix 1990). Three factors have contributed to its decline: loss of habitat, over collecting, and the introduction of exotic ants. In some places, especially adjacent to urban areas, the introduced ants have displaced the native species upon which tbe lizard feeds. This species has been recorded in the northeastern part of the City just west of Lake Calavera and to the northeast of Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Thamnophis hammondi -- two-striped garter snake USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None Although it currently receives no state or federal protection, the two-striped garter snake is recognized as a threatened species by the San Diego Herpetological Society (McGurty 1980). It occurs primarily in wetlands, particularly freshwater marsh and riparian scrub habitats. Although it has not been reported from Carlsbad, it is likely to be resident. Scaphwpus hammondi -- western spade-foot toad USFWS: None CDFG: Species of Special Concern The western spade-foot toad is primarily a species of the lowlands, frequenting washes, floodplains of rivers, alluvial fans, alkali flats (Stebbins 1985), temporary ponds, and vernal pools. It is considered 22 sensitive because of declines in populations associated with loss of habitat. This; species has reported from the Woolley project. Mammals No mammal species presently known to occur in the City are recognized as threatened or endar by the USFWS or CDFG. Five federal Category 2 candidate species are highly likely to oc Carlsbad: the San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit, San Diego desert woodrat, sou them grassh mouse, Dulzura California pocket mouse, and northwestern San Diego pocket mouse. Three mammal species recognized as federal Category 2 candidates for listing as threatened or endar have a remote chance of occurring at least occasionally in Carlsbad. These include the Pacific mouse, California mastiff bat (Eumops perotis caZifomicus), and spotted bat (Eucllerma rnacui The Pacific pocket mouse has been recorded near the coast in the City of Oceanside but otk is extremely rare within its historic range (Bond 1977). None of the bat species has been rei in Carlsbad, and there are relatively few suitable roosting sites for bats within the City limit: California mastiff bat, which has been recorded from near Lake Hodges, and the spotted b; require rugged, rocky areas with crevices for roosting. Both of the bats could occur in the City foraging bouts to take advantage of insects around agriculture and wetland areas or to utilize at lakes, streams, or swimming pools. In contrast to our knowledge of the distribution of plant and bird species, the status 01 mammals is poorly known. Most mammals are secretive and nocturnal or crepuscular (active i dusk or twilight) and are not readily identifiable unless captured and examined close at hand. has been much less field work on the occurrence and distribution of mammals in the City of Ci particularly small mammals and bats. Lepus califomicus bennettii -- San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None The San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit is found in open sage scrub habitat and grassland. recently added to the federal candidate list because of threats to its habitat by development. Diego County, it is known from San Marcos, Escondido, San Diego area, Janiul Creek, i Laguna Mountains (Bond 1977). It is highly likely to occur in Carlsbad. Neotoma lepida intermedia -- San Diego desert woodrat USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: None The San Diego desert woodrat inhabits areas with heavy growth, such as dense coastal sag chaparral, cactus, or rock crevices. This species was recently added to the federal candic because of threats to its habitat from development. In San Diego County, it is known fi Bonsall, Mission San Luis Rey, Mission Gorge, Murphy Canyon, Murray Dam, and San Diel (Bond 1977). Despite no collections specifically from the City of Carlsbad, these records es! surround the City and, thus, the species is likely to occur there. Onychomys torridus ramoncl -- southern grasshopper mouse USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None ne southern grasshopper mouse is a stout mouse with a relatively short and thick tail. Thi! primarily feeds on insects, but is known to capture and devour other rodents. Grasshopper I 1 I I I 1 I 1 8 1 1 I I 1 I 8 1 I I 23 interesting in that they emit audible "howls" upon leaving their day burrows. The grasshopper mouse is relatively uncommon throughout its range compared to other rodent species such as deer mice (Peromyscus spp.). 0. t. ramona is found in the lower and upper Sonoran life zones of the Pacific slopes, and in San Diego County has been recorded from Carlsbad, Culp Valley, Dulzura, San Diego, ' San Pasqual Valley, and Tijuana River Valley (Bond 1977). Continued urbanization of the coastal region threatens the existence of this subspecies. Perognathus (Chaetodipus) califomicus fernoralis -- Dulzura California pocket mouse USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None The Dulzura California pocket mouse typically is found on slopes dominated by chaparral or oaks. It is a relatively common pocket mouse within its preferred habitat. It was given candidate status apparently because of rapid depletion of its habitat in Southern California. In San Diego County, this species has been recorded from Banner, Campo, Dehesa, Dulzura, Escondido, Pala, Rainbow, Ramona, Palomar Mountain, San Marcos, Santee, Santa Ysabel, and Witch Creek (Bond (1977). Because of the proximity of these records to Carlsbad (e.g., !Sari Marcos), the Dulzura California pocket mouse is almost certainly an inhabitant of the City. Perognathus (Chaetodeus) fallax -- northwestern San Diego pocket mouse USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG. None The northwestern San Diego pocket mouse inhabits sparse or disturbed coastal sage scrub or grasslands with sandy soils. This species was recently added to the federal candidate list because of threats to its habitat by development. In San Diego County, it is known from Del Mar, Dulzura, Jacumba, Lake Hodges, Pala, San Diego area, and San Marcos (Bond 1977). Although these collection localities do not specifically include Carlsbad, they surround it and, thus, the species is highly likely to occur in the City of Carlsbad. Invertebrates Four species of butterflies that are resident or potentially resident within the City of Carlsbad are recognized as federal Category 2 candidates for listing as threatened and endangered: Harbison's dun skipper, salt marsh skipper, Hermes copper, and quino checkerspot. Although only the salt marsh skipper has been documented from Carlsbad, Harbison's dun skipper and Hermes copper are highly likely residents. Both are host specific insects and usually are encountered wherever their larval foodplants occur. The larvae of Harbison's dun skipper feeds exclusively on San Diego sedge (Carex spissa), which has been reported from several oak woodland and riparian areas within the City. The larvae of Hermes copper feed on redberry (Rhamnus crocea), which is a common species throughout much of the chaparral in the City. In addition to these sensitive butterflies, the federal Category 2 candidate globose dune beetle, a resident of coastal dunes, may be present in small remnants of dunes along the coastal margins of the City. Euphyes vestri5 harbisoni -- Harbison's dun skipper USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None Harbison's dun skipper is a medium-small, chocolate brown butterfly restricted to riparian habitats where its larval host, San Diego sedge (Carex spksa), grows. It occurs in a series of scattered and disjunct colonies throughout western San Diego County, extending as far north as the Santa Ana Mountains of Orange County (Brown and McGuire 1983). The insect is single brooded (one 24 generation per year); the flight period extends from late May to early July. Several instan extirpation are documented for populations of Euphyes vestris in San Diego County. Wherever Carex spissa is found, Harbison’s dun skipper also is likely to be present. Carex spis been documented ’from several riparian areas within Carlsbad. The most likely Carlsbad supporting a population of the Harbison’s dun skipper is the riparian scrub habitat along El C Real in the Evans Point area. Panoquina mans -- salt marsh skipper USWFS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None The salt marsh skipper is restricted to the narrow coastal margin from about Santa Barbara ( south to the southern tip of Baja California, Mexico (MacNeill 1%2; Donathue 1975). represented by a series of disjunct and isolated populations confined to coastal estuarine or salt habitats. The single larval host is salt grass (DistkhZis spkata) with which adults are con associated (Emmel and Emmel 1973; Brown 1981). Owing to the apparently tolerant and ii nature of salt grass, some colonies of the salt marsh skipper have managed to penist despite habitat alteration. Nectar sources for the skipper include heliotrope (Heliotroprtvn curvassa salty Susan, sea rocket, deerweed, and frankenia (Frankenia salina) (Brown 1981; Busnardc The flight period of the salt marsh skipper extends from March or April to October in mos in a series of overlapping generations. Population density reaches its highest in mid-to-late SI The salt marsh skipper is resident in several protected areas in Southern California. Becausc reduction in acreage of the salt marsh habitat in southern California, the salt marsh ski considered highly sensitive. Populations of the skipper are disappearing rapidly in Baja Ca as coastal marshes are being altered for salt production and other developments. The salt marsh skipper has been observed at the east end oE Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and it to be resident in salt marsh habitats around Batiquitos and Buena Vista lagoons. Sensitive Plant Species Within the City of Carlsbad, 20 species of plants recognized as regionally sensitive by the C; Native Plant Society (Smith and Berg 1988) have been detected. These species are discussec Acanthomintha iZiCifoZhz -- San Diego thorn-mint USFWS: Candidate (Category 1) CDFG Endangered CWS: List lB, 3-3-2 San Diego thorn-mint is an aromatic, spring-blooming (April-May) annual, 0.5-1.5 dm t: flowers occur in whorls that are subtended by several bracts armed with needlelike spines -- name “thorn-mint”. It is restricted in distribution to San Diego County and adjacent Baja Ci Mexico. San Diego thorn-mint occurs on day lenses of several geologic origins on mesas ar below 500 m (1,600 ft) elevation and is associated with Diegan coastal sage scrub, chapa native grassland. In San Diego County, the species is known from Encinitas and San Marc to Sweetwater and Otay Lakes (Beauchamp 1986). The species also is known from th elevations of McGinty Mountain and Poser Mountain. Reported from the Woolley Annexation Project, the Carlsbad Land Investors project, anc Hills Mobile Home Park project. I i 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I n 25 Adolphia caZifomica -- California adolphia USFWS: None CDFG None CNPS: List 2, 1-2-1 California adolphia is a moderate-sized (0.5-1.0 m) profusely branched, rigid, spiny shrub, ranging from western San Diego County, California, south into adjacent northwestern Baja California, Mexico (Wiggins 1980). It generally occurs on clay soils in dry canyons and on hillsides on south-facing slopes and washes in chaparral and coastal sage scrub communities below 300 m (965 ft) elevation. It blooms in early winter to spring (December-May). In Sara Diego County it has been reported from Morro Hill, Cemo de Calavera, Agua Hedionda, Rancho Santa Fe, Mount Soledad, Bernardo, Chollas Valley, Barrett Junction, and Proctor Valley (Beauchamp 1986). This species is threatened by urbanization, which has reduced considerabIy its former range (Smith and Berg 1988). The California adolphia has been reported from numerous localities in the City, including Arroyo La Costa, Airport Business Center, Santa Fe Glens, La Costa Northeast Annexation, Woolley Annexation Project, Carbbad Highlands, the east end of Dove Lane, western portion of Rancheros, Rancho Carrillo, Lake Calavera, Evans Point, Camino Hills Mobile Home Park, and others. ArctostaphyZos glandulma ssp. crassv0Zi.a -- Del Mar manzanita USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: None CNPS: List 1B (Reinstated, see below) Del Mar manzanita represents the coastal form of San Diego County's common burl-forming manzanita, and it is one of several sensitive plants that are inldicators of the unique and depleted southern maritime chaparral habitat. Because of taxonomic difficulties, the California Native Plant Society (Smith and Berg 1988) and the California Natural Diversity Data Base previously did not recognize this taxon as sensitive. In a recent treatment ofArcto!rtaphyZos, Wells (1990) considers ssp. crassif0i.a as a valid taxon representing those populations in coastal San Diego County and adjacent northern Baja California (Munz 1974). CNPS botanist Mark Skinner has proposed to reinstate Del Mar manzanita as a List 1B species. This species was reported from Arroyo La Costa and Rancho Carrillo, and a few others. Artemisia palmen -- San Diego sagewort USFWS: None CDFG: None CNPS: List 2, 2-2-1 San Diego sagewort is a summer-blooming (July-September) weak shrub with long (0.5-0.8 m) wandlike stems (Munz 1974). It is restricted in distribution to San Diego County and Baja California. It typically occurs at low elevations (below 660 m) along intermittent streams and arroyos. In San Diego County it has been recorded from Ramona, Mt. Woodson, Del Dios, Poway, and at several sites from Tecolote Canyon south to the international border arid east to Jamul (Beauchamp 1986). In Carlsbad this species is common in a drainage surrounded by chaparral adjacent to El Camino Real, south of Palomar Airport Road. 26 Brodiaea flfolia -- thread-leaved brodiaea USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Endangered Thread-leaved brodiaea is a rare, herbaceous, spring-blooming (May-June) perennial, wil grasslike leaves and violet flowers. It grows in heavy clay soils that form open areas in coast: scrub and chaparral communities below about 600 m (2,000 ft). It is found primarily in grasslai vernal pool habitats. In San Diego, thread-leaved brodiaea is known from Alta Loma Creek, Thibodo Ranch, Buena, San Marcos Hills, and Agua Hedionda (Beauchamp 1986). This spec’ reported from the Camino Hills Mobile Home Park project and west of Calavera Hills, and hz the subject of a revegetation program at the Camino Hills site. Brodiaea orcuttii -- Orcutt’s brodiaea USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None 1. i i I 1 t 8 1 1 1 I I 1 I t I 1 1 I CNPS: List lB, 1-3-2 Orcutt’s brodiaea is a herbaceous, spring-blooming ( April-July) perennial that grows from 2 It is found only in San Diego County, the Santa Rosa Plateau in Riverside County and northe California, Mexico (Wiggins 1980). It occurs in association with vernal pools, streams, anc In San Diego County, the species occurs infrequently in coastal and foothill regions below 3 (4,827 ft) elevation. Reported localities include the Santa Margarita Mountains, 3an Marcos, Henshaw Dam, Santa Ysabel, Cuyamaca Mountains, Miramar Naval Air Station, R Buschalaugh Canyon, Japatual Valley, Woodwardia Canyon, Cedar Canyon, Otay Mountain, Mountain and lower Otay Reservoir (Beauchamp 1986). This species was reported from An Costa. Ceanothus vermcosus -- wart-stemmed ceanothus USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None CNPS: List 2, 1-2-1 Wart-stemmed ceanothus is an erect, stiff-branched, rounded, evergreen shrub, 1.0-3.0 m t occurs on dry hills and mesas in coastal and mixed chaparral habitats below 300 FL (965 ft) in San Diego County and adjacent Baja California, Mexico. It is a spring-blooming species, fl from January to April (Munz 1974). Beauchamp (1986) reports this species from Agua He Encinitas, Leucadia, Torrey Pines State Reserve, Kearny Mesa, Lake Hodges, and Point LC Baja California wart-stemmed ceanothus ranges from the Pacific coast to the foothills of th Juarez and Sierra San Pedro Martir (Wiggins 1980). This species was reported from sevei in the City, including Arroyo La Costa, Rancho La Costa, and the south end of Batiquitos Comarostaphylk divemfoh ssp. diversifolia -- summer-holly USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: None CNPS: List lB, 2-2-2 Summer-holly is a large shrub generally occurring on north-facing canyons and slopes and washes in chaparral and foothill habitats below 700 m (2,297 ft) in scattered locations from tb coast in San Diego County south into Baja California. Reported localities in the County inc Marcos Mountains, Mount Whitney, Rancho Santa Fe, Gonzales Canyon, Encini tas, Mount Penasquitos Canyon, Del Mar Heights, Iron Mountain, canyons of Mission Valley, Jamul V: 27 Otay Mountain (Beauchamp 1986). This species was reported from Arroyo La Costa, the Airport Euphorbia misera -- cliff spurge USFWS: None CDFG None CNPS: List 2, 2-2-1 Cliff spurge is a moderately large (0.3-1.0 m) irregularly branched shrub that occurs along sea and in coastal sage scrub. This species is distributed from Orange and Riverside counties, Calif to Baja California, Mexico, and on San Clemente and Santa Catalina Islands. In San Diego G cliff spurge occurs from about Carlsbad south to the international border. It is relatively COI but extremely local in southwestern San Diego County- In adjacent Baja California, it extends almost to the 28th parallel (Wiggins 1980). Cliff spurge is known from one locality in Carlsbad -- a small patch of maritime succulent scrut of Windsong Shores. FritiEIaria biflora -- chocolate lily or mission bells USFWS: None CDFG None CNPS: Considered, but rejected: Too common Chocolate lily is a small herbaceous perennial, 15-40 cm in height, with large, nodding, dark to greenish purple, bell-shaped flowers. It is in bloom from about January through April. Chc lily is occasional on open slopes with clay soils in native grassland and sparse coastal sagc communities below about 700 m (2,297 ft). It ranges from San Diego and Riverside countie to Mendocino County (Munz 1974). In San Diego County it has been recorded from up€ Onofre Canyon, San Marcos, Rancho Santa Fe, Bernardo, Del Mar, San Diego, Point Loma, I McGinty Mountain, Santee, and several other localities (Beauchamp 1986). Although the chi lily has a relatively broad distribution in coastal California, the fact that it is restricted to grasslands, a rare and depleted habitat, suggests that it should be considered a sensitive spec Carlsbad, this species has been reported from Bressi Ranch (south of Palomar Road/eas Camino Real). HarpagonelZa palmen var. palmen -- Palmer’s grappling-hook USFWS: None CDFG: None CNPS: List 2, 1-2-1 This widely-distributed, diminutive annual occurs in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and Sal counties, and also on San Clemente Island, in Arizona, in Baja California, and in Sonora, It typically grows on clay soils and burns below 1,OOO m (3,280 ft) elevation, and flow< February to April (Munz 1974; Wiggins, 1980; Beauchamp 1986). In San Diego County, 1 grappling hook is reported in Guajome Mesa, Rancho Santa Fe, Olivenhain, Paway Grade, Mesa, Emerald Hills, Mission Gorge, Otay, Dehesa, Rice Canyon, Table Mountain, and Box (Beauchamp 1986). This species was reported from Calavera Hills. Iva hayesiana -- San Diego marsh-elder, poverty weed USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: None CNPS: List 2, 2-2-1 This low perennial shrub occurs in southwestern San Diego County and northern Baja C (Munz 1974; Smith and Berg 1988). It grows in low-lying, moist or alkaline places along intf 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 8 1 1 I 8 il I I R I 1 29 streams in coastal areas. Although it has a fairly restricted range in San Diego County, San Diego marsh-elder is apparently more widespread to the south, ranging into central Baja California (Wiggins 1980). San Diego marsh-elder often grows in association with spiny rush and other indicators of wetland habitat (Reed 1988). San Diego marsh-elder may be a dominant understory plant in disturbed floodplain situations such as that in the Otay River Valley. Its habitat in southwestern San Diego County is threatened by coastal development and channelization of local streams and rivers. Muilla cIevelandii -- San Diego golden-star USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None CNPS: List lB, 2-2-2 San Diego golden-star is found only in southern San Diego County and adjacent northwestern Baja California, Mexico. This spring-blooming (March-May), herbaceous perennial occurs infrequently on clay soils on dry mesas and hillsides and among vernal pools in Diegan coastal sage scrub or chaparral. Primary threats to this species are illegal dumping, off-road vehicle activity, and urbanization (Smith and Berg 1988). A survey of herbarium specimens collected in the past century and deposited at the San Diego Natural History Museum indicates that few previous localities for this plant still exist in an undeveloped state or condition otherwise suitable for supporting populations of this plant. Extant populations include those in vernal pool habitats on Naval Air Station Miramar, west of Rancho Bernardo, and San Ysidro Mountains. In Carlsbad, large populations occur on the Rancheros property and south of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Juncus acufus var. sphaerocarpus -- spiny rush USFWS: None CDFG None CNPS: List 4, 1-1-3 This large (0.5-1.5 m), tufted, perennial rush, with stout, rigid stems, is encountered frequently in alkaline seeps and marshes or in areas adjacent to these. Spiny rush has a wide distribution from San Luis Obispo County south to Baja California and east to Imperial County and Arizona, although some doubt exists regarding the taxonomy of eastern populations. Although urbanization represents a serious threat to spiny rush (Smith and Berg 1988), the abundance of this plant in many widely separated wetlands, together with the current application of protection for these habitats, indicates a rather low threat to this species. This species was reported from the La Costa Development, Batiquitos Pointe Site, west side of Batiquitos Lagoon, Lake Calavera, Buena Vista, Evans Point, Buena Vista Creek, and other locations. Quercus engelmannu -- Engelmann oak USFWS: None CDFG: None . CNPS: List 4, 1-2-2 Engelmann oak is a moderately large tree with gray-green foliage, whitish and shallowy furrowed bark, and an open, airy appearance. It generally occurs on mesas and open slopes in foothill and coastal areas below about 1,300 m (4,200 ft), in San Diego, Riverside, and Orange counties and northern Baja California. It may occur in closed canopy riparian woodlands dominated by coast live oak or in more monotypic stands as an oak savanna on moist north-€acing slopes. This oak occupies the smallest range of any oak tree in the southwestern United States (Scott 1990); the center of its distribution is cismontane San Diego County. Engelmann oaks are sensitive to land management practices such as fire, and their small, disjunct woodlands are highly susceptible to extirpation. Individual trees typically live from 50 to 80 years; however, a few trees in every woodland may be 150 30 to 350 years old (Scott 1990). This species was recorded from the woodland areas south of Pz Airport Road west of El Camino Real (SW Quad). Selaginella cinerascens -- ashy spike-moss or mesa ciubmoss USFWS: None CDFG: None i 1 1 I I I I i 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I CNPS: List 4, 1-2-1 This tiny, prostrate, whitish gray, moss-like plant occurs in San Diego County and ad northwestern Baja California, Mexico. In San Diego County it ranges from about Rancho Bel south to the international border. It is relatively abundant in coastal areas, occurring on flat below 300 m (%5 ft), that are prime locations for housing. Development of these areas has ( massive reduction of the habitat of the ashy spike-moss. Although this plant is one of thc common understory plants in Diegan coastal sage scrub and coastal chaparral cornmunit' extremely restricted geographical range and the rapid disappearance of its primary habitats cc to make it a sensitive resource. This species was reported from Arroyo La Costa, Airport B Center, Woolley Annexation Project, Carlsbad Highlands, western side of Rancheros, inter: (NW) of Alga Road and El Camino Real, north of N end of Ambrosia Lane, Rancho Card Evans Point. Solanum tenuiiobatum -- narrow-leaved nightshade USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG None CNPS: List lB, 3-1-3 This purple-flowered, low, woody shrub occurs infrequently between 200 and 1,100 m (656 tc ft) elevation in chaparral habitats in southern San Diego County and Baja California. It is from Jamul, Lyons Valley, Otay Mountain, Potrero Grade, Barrett Dam, Silvewood, ( (Beauchamp 1986), the east slope of San Miguei Mountain (PSBS 1980), the eastern end Sweetwater River Valley, and near Mussey Grade Road near Ramona (F. T. Sproul, pers. c This species was reported from Carlsbad Highlands. Other Key Species In addition to sensitive wildlife and plant species, there also are several key wildlife species presence in Carlsbad reflect the overall health and viability of the City's natural resources. A of these species includes mule deer (Odocoileus hembnus), bobcat (Felzk mfus), gray fox (t cinereoargenteus), coyote (Canis latrans), and golden eagle (Aquila chyaetos). The conse program and preserve system developed by the City should consider the requirements of these as well. 31 / i \ SECTION ome Inve ry and Mdpl , ., / \ \ -& AND HABITAT h&YSIS "4 in suppoyt of the ClTY OF CAIUSBAD HABITAT WAGEMENT PLAN , SECTION 3 RESOURCE INVENTORY AND MAPPING 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 I I R I I 1 1 3.6 INTRODUCTION The resource analysis for the HMP focused on two major biological tasks: (1) accumulatio biological inventory and mapping of habitats and sensitive species present within the City of Ca and (2) identification of a potential interconnected preserve system to accommodate both re1 common and sensitive biological resources. This section details the methods and results of tf task. The second task included analyses of habitat value and habitat sensitivity, which are des in detail in Section 4. The study focused on undeveloped areas within Carlsbad, with particular emphasis on large connected areas of undisturbed native habitat. The majority of the data for the biological re analysis was obtained by reviewing environmental documents, topographic maps, and photographs made available through the City of Carlsbad, resource agencies, and lando developers. A limited amount of field surveys were conducted to check the accurixcy of the m efforts. Data from areas immediately adjacent to the City of Carlsbad @e., Encinitas ai Marcos) also were reviewed, because of their relevance to establishing wildlife corridors and linkages to offsite open space areas. 3.2 MATERIALS Data for the biological inventory and mapping effort were obtained from a variety of source: primary source of data was the library of the City of Carlsbad, which includes over 50 bic resources reports from EIRs and other environmental documents for projects proposed wit1 City from 1978 to present (see Appendix B). Because the reports represent a variety of prc developments, have been written by a variety of biologists, and cover a wide range of years, tl highly variable in their thoroughness and coverage. Most of the reports include vegetation locations of sensitive species, lists of plant and wildlife species observed, and descriptions of types. Additional data regarding sensitive species and habitats present within the City of Carlsbai obtained from the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) (USGS quadrangles S; Rey, San Marcos, Encinitas, and Rancho Santa Fe), the California Native Plant 'Society's In1 of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants (Smith and Berg 1988), Report on the California But Listed as Candidates for Endangered Status by the USFWS (Murphy lw), Eleauchamp discussions with local experts, and available information regarding the distribution of vernal I San Diego County (Bauder 1986). Other materials consulted included soil maps from Bowman (1973), a 7.5' x 7.5', 500-scale (1' color aerial photograph of the City (Aerial Fotobank, Inc., 6 February 1988), and a set of scale (1"=4OO') blueline aerial orthophotos prepared by Fraser Engineering from aerial photc dated September-October 1988. The blueline orthophotos were produced from a :;et of mylars by the City of Carlsbad. 33 METHODS A preliminary vegetation map was generated based on photo interpretation by circum: vegetation communities (polygons) on the 400-scale blueline orthophotos using existing veg 1 I II I 32 maps from biological resources reports and observed distributions of vegetation types on the orthophotos. Figure 3 illustrates the total area from which field-generated vegetation maps were available. During this task, soils maps (Bowman 1973) and the MO-scale color aerial photograph were consulted to help define vegetation boundaries. Reconnaissance level field surveys were conducted by John Brown, Ph.D. (Dudek & Associates) and Sarah Flick (hlichael Brandman Associates) in areas within the City where vegetation maps were incomplete, incompatible, or lacking. During the field surveys, any sensitive plant or animal species encountered were noted and incorporated into the data base, Terminology for vegetation communities employed are standardized community types as adopted by SANDAG for their GIs efforts. These communities types follow Holland (1986) for the most part, and are listed in Table 2. The 23 completed 400-scale vegetation maps were photo-reduced and combined to produce a 1,OOO- scale (l"=l,oOOq mylar of the preliminary vegetation map. The map was made available to private and public agencies and landowners/deveIopers. Several planners, property owners, and developers (e.g., Hoffman Planning Associates, Fieldstone Company, etc.) submitted more detailed or more recent versions of the portion of the map that included their ownerships or planning areas. Each of these submissions were subject to field review before incorporation into the final vegetation map. During this review period, several other recent environmental documents became available (e.g., Lake Calavera EIR, Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR, Carrillo Ranch EIIR, and the Aviara EIR), thus allowing further fine-tuning of the preliminary vegetation and sensitive species maps. A final set of 4OCl-scale blueline maps of the vegetation communities was produced incorporating all , of the data received. Clear mylars of the vegetation polygons were made by tracing vegetation lines from the 400-scale bluelines calibrated with the originals of thle City of Carlsbad orthotopo mylars. Each polygon was labelled by a number code representing a specific community type (see Table 2). The clear mylars with vegetation boundaries and reference points were submitted to SANDAG for digitization. The vegetation plots produced by the SANDAG GIs system were submitted to team biologists to check the accuracy of presentation and adherence: to the original orthophoto mapping. Locations of sensitive plant and wildlife species were transcribed onto the 400-scale bluelines orthophotos from existing biological documents. Sensitive species observed during field checking of the vegetation maps also were recorded on the maps. Also, all publicly available information regarding the distribution of the California gnatcatcher, as made available by Sweetwater Environmental biologists, were incorporated into the map. Locations of sensitive species were transferred onto the clear mylars of the vegetation communities and digitized by SANDAG subsequent to digitization of the vegetation communities. Locations of most sensitive species were identified by a point. However, large stands of specific sensitive plant species (e.g., California adolphia and Del Mar manzanita) were identified by small polygons. 3.4 RESULTS 3.4.1 VEGETATION MAP It is important to understand that the vegetation map was generated through photo interpretation of blueline orthophotos and existing vegetation maps from EIRs and other available technical documents. A limited amount of field work was conducted to field-check the accuracy of the maps. There are areas of the (City that have not been surveyed beyond the photo interpretation provided here. This methodology is adequate to develop a general vegetation map, but is not intended to provide precise, site-specific vegetation information. Also, this methodology does not allow for vegetation descriptions more precise than the plant community level. To satisfy the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), specific project areas will require focused field 33 LEGEND SOURCE: SANDAG, August 1992 1 surveys to fine-tune the information provided here, characterize the general biological resou the site, and provide site-specific analyses of sensitive resources. Table 3 presents acreage by aggregated vegetation type for the City. More than 10,OOO acre percent) of the City of Carlsbad were mapped as developed. Approximately 10,200 acres (41 pt of the City still support natural habitat. Of the natural habitat, approximately 7,150 acI percent) are comprised of native habitats. Although there is natural habitat distributed throi the City, the largest areas of contiguous habitat generally are located in the eastern portion City. With the exception of the lagoons, the western portion of the City is mostly develo supports disturbed habitat. I 1 i 1 I 1 I 8 8 I 1 1 1 i 1 I I I Id TABLE 3 ACREAGES BY AGGREGATED VEGETATION TYPES WITHIN THE CARLSBAD HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN STUDY AREA VegetationlLand Percent Percent Cover Study Area of Total City of Total Coastal Sage Scrub 3,018 10.6 2,503 10.0 Disturbed Coastal Sage 638 2.3 633 2.5 Chaparral 2,409 8.5 1,727 8.1 Non-Native Grassland & 2,619 9.2 2,449 9.8 Native Grassland 23 0.1 22 0.1 SaltiFreshwater Marsh 372 1.3 358 1.4 Scrub Disturbed Grassland Oak Woodland & Sycamore 709 2.5 618 2.5 Eucalyptus Woodland 305 1.1 302 1.2 Open Water 1,172 4.1 1,102 4.4 Alluvial Woodland Disturbed Wetland 190 0.7 190 0.8 Disturbed Habitat, Active 4,986 17.3 4,545 18.2 Developed 1 1,987 42.3 10,191 410.9 Agriculture, Golf Course TOTAL 28,337 100 24,940 100 Sensitive habitats present within the City include 3,149 acres (12.6 percent of the City) coast scrub (including maritime succulent scrub and disturbed coastal sage scrub), 22 acres of grassland, 358 acres of salt- and freshwater marsh, and 618 acres of oak and sycamore woodlands. Chaparral, including southern mixed chaparral, chamise chaparral, southern m chaparral, and coastal sage scrub/chaparral, occupies about 1,727 acres (8.1 percent of thc Among the subtypes of chaparral, southern maritime chaparral is considered sensitive by lo( regional resource agencies. 34 3.4.2 SENSITIVE SPECIES MAP As with the vegetation map, it is important to note that the existing sensitive species information for the City is limited. The information provided here comes from published information, existing EIRs and other technical reports, and from communications with local biologists. While the data base is reasonably good for plants and birds, information on sensitive reptiles and amphibians, for example, is relatively poor -- even for previously surveyed areas -- because these species are often difficult to detect. Other areas have not been surveyed for sensitive species at all. Therefore, the sensitive species map can only be interpreted as evidence of positive findings. The absence of sensitive species may indicate areas inadequately surveyed or not surveyed at all. The results of the sensitive species mapping are presented in Figure 4. The most widespread sensitive plant species within the City include California adolphia and ashy spike-moss, primarily in coastal sage scrub; and wart-stemmed ceanothus, summer-holly, and Del hiar manzanita, primarily in southern maritime chaparral. In drainages and riparian areas spiny rush is fairly common. Other sensitive plants encountered less frequently include San Diego golden-star, western dichondra, Engelmann oak, San Diego sagewort, San Diego marsh-elder, San Diego thorn-mint, and thread-leaved brodiaea. The most widespread sensitive wildlife species present in the City is the federally-proposed endangered California gnatcatcher. This species is resident nearly everywhere that coastal sage scrub occurs. Figure 4 illustrates 113 gnatcatcher records, which includes both singletons and pairs. While recording absolute numbers is useful for quantibng the presence and distribution of the species in the City, it is important to note that numbers fluctuate from season to season and year to year, and that not all areas of the City have been thoroughly surveyed. Dr. Pat Mock of Ogden Environmental and Energy Services suggests that, based on a density estimate of one pair per 15 acres (which is an average home range in the San Diego area) and approximately 2,500 acres of coastal sage scrub in the City, Carlsbad could support as many as 166 pairs (P. Mock, pers. comm.). Thus, the number of gnatcatchers in the City is at minimum 113, with perhaps as many as 166. Other sensitive wildlife species encountered infrequently within the City include San Diego horned lizard and orange-throated whiptail in coastal sage scrub; California least tern, Belding’s Savannah sparrow, and light-footed clapper rail in estuaries and salt marshi areas; and least Bell’s vireo in willow riparian habitat. Although not represented in the sensitive species map, the California brown pelican and California least tern are common along the coast and in the lagoons in Carlsbad. 35 -_ #M am LBU CAlEl cm I lo Ev cm cm QRA cm BSSP mE Cffi I Cm - - .- ~ cm ------ --- 1 I ------ \- 4IRPrlRT ~ CMll cv at$ Em cvcv td CACll 01 CAOW cm 89Idtive Pbntr k AdoYlbdhb A# *cfwfcpn#a3 #m&m 4 ktrnldopdJlm k' hthmmtho?3who I hdkwmllbla Q mraro muni w ComaraslqPh$bdlLWsllbkD ct conthr0P)MAbgnlblis cv CaaMLhuJvmnvlur dp &&mdvocdmtdo En Euphdb mima R FrrtITm bium I) IW ham a .AnKu¶aaitur m u,aa ddme OI lkrcurmprlmmnll Smndtive Anlmd8 \ \ * ~&Cmwo#M# Bsp Eddmg'a Smnm 'm \ cm Cdifomb GndcDtchu am Clopprr Ral QtE Cdifornio lad Tan leu Lead W'r \hrso om h9.-hdod HrItptOll Lid sOHL Sm Dkqo Mcd Litad I I 8 \ , , Bio Logica 1 Preserve Ph and Design App rd / / 1 \ \ RESOURCES AND HABITAT ANALYSIS -%d in support 4th ClTY OF WBAD HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN' SECTION 4 BIOLOGICAL PRESERVE PLANNING AREA AND DESIGN APPROhACH I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I 4.1 INTRODUCTION A critical component of the HMP for the City of Carlsbad is the identification of areas withir City limits that are suitable for a system of biological preserves, conservation, or management a This section provides a discussion of the features used to identify biologically valuable areas. 7 factors then are incorporated in a quantitative methodology used to rank areas of the City in r( to their biological value, rarity, and uniqueness. The results obtained from the ranking methot form the basis for future decisions concerning habitat evaluation, acquisition, and imlplementatio management of an HMP that are consistent with the City's General Plan, as well as state and fe conservation planning efforts (e.g., NCCP and Habitat Conservation Plans [HCP]'). It is important to consider the conservation effort of the City in the context of other planning e in San Diego County and the Southern California region (e.g., the MSCP, the North County M and the NCCP for coastal sage scrub). Carlsbad, by itself, likely does not have enough remi natural habitat to conserve any of the sensitive habitats or species of concern occurring in thc in perpetuity (100- or 200-year survival with a 95 percent probability are common definitic perpetuity used by conservation biologists). However, by developing an HMP that is consister other conservation planning efforts, and through mutual cooperation with other jiurisdictions region, Carlsbad can make a significant contribution to the conservation of native habitats and s in Southern California. Within this context, therefore, the HMP does not purport to pro comprehensive, stand alone preserve system for sensitive habitats and species. Rather, the p of the HMP is to provide a program that contributes to overall conservation efforts and maintc of functional ecosystems in Southern California. 4.2 PRESERVE DESIGN LITERATURE REVIEW 4.2.1 SIZE Much of the literature on the design of nature preserves has focused on the physical charact of the preserves, including their shape, size, and degree of isolation from other areas of habitat. When the primary goal of a preserve system is to minimize the probability of extinc its component species and maintain a functional ecosystem, larger preserves are more effecti smaller ones. In isolated patches of habitat, it has been shown empirically and theoretically f rate of species extinction is inversely related to patch size (Diamond 1975; Wright and Hubbe Usher 1987; Soule 1991). The preserve size required to maintain various kinds of ecosys poorly understood and requires much more scientific study. In general, the smaller the prese greater the level of protection and hands-on management it will require to remain viable (Nos There are several reasons why large preserves may be superior to small ones. Smaller p necessarily support smaller populations of organisms. These small populations are more prc larger ones to chance fluctuations in birth and death rates which, when extreme, can lead extinction (Wilson and Willis 1975; Shaffer 1981; Jensen 1987). Small populations also genetic variation as a consequence of genetic drift more rapidly than large populations ( 1980; Lacy 1987). Loss of genetic variation can negatively affect a population of organisms it results in higher levels of homozygosity, a condition in which a pair of genes at a particular on a chromosome are alike. Homozygosity can be associated with poor growth, higher fret 36 of disease, and decreased survival during periods of stress (Soule and Simberloff 1986). Over the longer term (from decades to thousands of years), depletion of genetic variation in small populations can lead to an inability to adapt to changing environmental clonditions, and ultimately to population extinction (Lacy 1987; Lande and Barrowclough 1987). 4.2.2 SHAPE The shape of a preserve also can influence its ability to effectively conserve native species. At their borders, nature preserves often will be subject to negative influences or "edge effects" from the outside, including increased levels of predation and nest parasitism (e.g7 cowbirds laying eggs in vireo nests), microclimatic changes (e.g., increased sunlight and temperature), and direct destruction of . native vegetation and wildlife by human uses (Schonewald-(=lox and Bayless 1986, Yahner 1988). Edge effects are strongest on habitat fragments that are small and irregularly shaped (Forman and Godron 1981; Laurence and Yensen 1991). Several studies have considered the effect of increasing perimeter relative to preserve size using a variety of quantitative measures (Faeth and Kane 1978; Game 1980; Blouin and Conner 1985). Although the relationship between preserve shape and immigration and emigration rates requires further investigation, it is generally true that preserves that are circular in shape will have the least amount of edge for their size and thus will be least vulnerable to edge effects. The extent and severity of edge effects ultimately will depend on the nature of the habitat surrounding a preserve. In urban areas where immediate threats from "human-commensal" species (e.g., pets and some pest species) exist at the edges of preserve boundaries (Murphy 1988; Soule et ai. 1988), the ratio of edge to interior probably should be minimized whenever possible. 4.23 ISOLATIONIurILDLIF'E CORRIDORS The degree of isolation of individual preserves also is an important design consideration, and in some cases, may be at least as significant for the maintenance of regional biodiversity as overall preserve size (Noss 1983). Both demographic (considering factors such as population size, reproduction, mortality, emigration, and immigration) (Fahrig and Merriam 1985; Burkey 1989) and genetic (Boeklen 1986, Boeklen and Bell 1987; Lacy 1987) models predict that higher levels of migration between preserves will lead to lower probabilities of extinction. Only modest levels of migration (one or two migrants per subpopulation per generation) may be required to mitigate the negative genetic effects of population fragmentation (Lande and Barrowclough 1987). These models lead to the design recommendation that isolated preserves be located as close together as possible in order to facilitate exchange of individuals between subpopulations (Diamond 1975; Wilson and Willis 1975). For species reluctant or unable to move through non-natural habitats (e.g., golf courses or agricultural fields), the incorporation of habitat linkages (e.g., a wildlife corridor) into the design of a preserve system is critical. Although empirical research on the optimal design for linkages is lacking, computer simulations have been useful in identifying some of the basic factors that may influence habitat linkage utility. Effective linkages must be wide enough to resist edge effects, contain the appropriate habitat(s) of the key species expected to travel through them or use them for dispersal, possess adequate cover to prevent excessive predation on migrants or dispersers, and contain as few turns or other barriers to movement or dispersal as is feasible (Soule and Gilpin 1991). In addition, networks of several habitat linkages probably provide a better system for migration and dispersal than single connections because alternative routes are available (Forman and Godron 1981; Noss 1987). 4.2.4 BUFFERS AND DISTANCE SETBACKS In order to maintain the integrity of biological resources adjacent to development or other land uses generally considered incompatible with biological resource areas (e.g., active recreation areas that receive heavy human use), the interface between natural open space and development (sometimes 37 called the naturalhrban interface) must include an appropriate buffer area. Strictly define "buffer" includes the area between the open space boundary and the boundary of a SI development or land use. It is assumed that habitat within the buffer area will be degrad human-caused disturbance and, thus, the area should not be considered part of the "preseme Various approaches have been taken to quantify disturbance from development and s appropriate buffers for biological resources in Southern California (Scott 1992; Sauvajot 1992; and Rotenberry 1992). It is clear that no single approach or specific buffer distance will satis buffer needs for different resources under different levels of pressure from development. I Diego, for example, a table of distance setbacks between land-use types and biological resourcc developed by Pacific Southwest Biological Services (PSBS ). A comparable set of guidelines ha: developed for the San Diego County Resource Protection Ordinance (RPO). Howeve recommended buffer distances deviate greatly between the two lists. Dudek & Associatt developed a set of buffer values that represents a compromise between the PSBS and recommendations. The ranges of buffers are meant to provide a general guideline and a intended to act as rigid standards. Also, these guidelines derive from qualitative inpui experienced field biologists and do not come from scientific field studies. Unfortunately, thou tested and validated field data do not exist at this time, although ongoing studies shlould providt data on the question of buffers in the next two to four years (Scott 1992; Sauvajot 1992). specific naturalhrban interface should be evaluated independently considering the guidelines a biological sensitivity of the habitat and wildlife species adjacent to development. Flexibility in setback distance is necessary to reasonably and logically accommodate the varying I or sensitivity of resources within natural open space adjacent to proposed land uses. For ex buffer width should be greater between high quality coastal sage scrub and residences, becam quality coastal sage scrub is likely to support more sensitive species. Narrow riparian corrido require wider buffers than broad riparian corridors in order to allow comparable imobstructec space to facilitate wildlife use and movement. Topographic barriers, such as canyons, rock ou steep slopes, and elevational differences, may render prescribed buffer distances inapprc Finally, simple linear calculations or formulas for buffers may be inappropriate when develc patterns create variations in the contour of the natural urban interface. For example, a develc with an undulating boundary or comers at acute angles (i.e., less than 90 degrees) will result i space peninsulas which share more border with the development than a development with angles. In this situation, the buffer would have to be greater to compensate for the greater in area. Ideally, no recreational activities or active land uses would be permitted within buffer areas. I buffer areas, however, passive recreation may be an acceptable use. Whether recreational ac are acceptable in certain buffers will depend on the characteristics of the buffer, the sensitiviq natural area, and the planned recreational use. Hiking and equestrian trails, for example, wc appropriate in many buffer areas while off-road vehicles would not. While natural habi designated as open space is the preferred buffer, cut slopes, fills, brush management zones, a breaks may be acceptable depending on the type of habitat. Some general suggestions for specific habitat types, based on the RPO staindards anc recommendations, are provided below. It is important to keep in mind that these guidelin provide minimum buffer sizes, that each case must be evaluated independently, and that there scientific data or even agreement among biologists regarding the appropriate buf €er distance: given setting. I I I I I I 8 I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I 38 Coastal Sage Scrub and Chaparral In general, scrub communities such as coastal sage scrub and chaparral should be provided with at least a 100-foot buffer where interfacing with residences and a 50 to 75-foot buffer where interfacing with commercial and industrial development, active park uses., and schools. For coastal sage scrub and chaparral communities occupied by sensitive plants, the buffers are the same as cited above, because plants are unlikely to be affected by noise and light impacts associated with these types of developments. The greatest risk to sensitive plants is from trampling by human foot traffic, mountain bikes, and motorized off-road vehicles. For coastal sage scrub occupied by California gnatcatchers and other sage scrub avian species, a buffer of at least 200 feet is recommended at interfaces between residential and commercial development and the occupied habitat. Occupied habitat can be defined as the native vegetational community that is within the territory of a single pair of birds. Grasslands For annual (non-native) and perennial (native) grasslands, buffers of at least 20 to 50 feet are recommended between the habitat and proposed residential and commercial development. Again, the precise buffer distance should be determined by the quality and quantity of the specific grassland habitat. For some annual grasslands, a buffer may be inappropriate or unnecessary under certain conditions; for instance, where the grassland does not represent sensitive plant or wildlife habitat or does not serve a corridor function. Mulefat Scrub As a component of the riparian system, mulefat scrub should be provided with a buffer that is 50 to 100 feet wide, depending on the quality of the habitat and its function within the matrix of the surrounding vegetation (e.g., corridor, foraging habitat). The County RPO specifies that 25 feet is the minimum buffer far riparian habitat; PSBS suggests 100 feet for most interfaces between mulefat scrub and development. Southern Willow ScruWRiDarian Habitat Throughout Southern California, southern willow scrubhiparia n woodlands are recognized as highly productive habitats. The structural diversity of the woodlands i3nd the availability of water and food resources combine to support a rich diversity and abundance of wildlife species. According to the County RPO, the "appropriate width of a buffer adjacent to an area of riparian habitat varies depending upon specific site conditions." The RPO recommends a minimum buffer of 25 feet, but indicates that buffers up to 200 feet may be required in some instances to maintain the biological viability of the habitat. To avoid disturbance to resident wildlife, it is recommended that buffers between riparian woodlands and commercial and residential dewelopment be at least 100 feet wide. Where riparian woodlands are occupied by least Bell's vireo, buffers should be based, to a large extent, on the width of the riparian corridor. The USFWS, for example, has indicated that the average width of vireo-occupied habitat on the San Luis Rey River is approximately 800 feet. Assuming that the 8W-foot corridor is appropriate for vireo habitat, buffers should be large enough to accommodate this width. Hence, if the riparian corridor is 200 feet in width, buffers of at least 300 feet on each side are appropriate (Le., 300 feet + 200 feet -t- 300 feet = 800 feet). The RPO suggests 200 feet and PSBS suggests 500 feet as buffers to vireo-inhabited riparian areas. Oak Woodland Oak woodlands support considerably more wildlife species than the scrub and grassland communities discussed above. More than 300 vertebrate species are known to utilize oak-dominated woodlands 39 in California for reproduction, overwintering, and during migration (Block et al. 1990). IF disturbances to oak woodlands are particularly acute because these woodlands generally are accessed by the public and thus are adversely affected by legitimate recreation activities (i.e., k mountain bikes, picnicking, etc.) as well as by illegitimate uses (trash dumping, vandalism, itii worker camps, shooting, etc.). Preliminary scientific information concerning urban effects c woodlands adjacent to residential housing indicates a decline in bird species diversity resultin1 the influx of people and human-commensal species such starlings and house sparrows (Scott The County RPO sets minimum buffer for oak woodlands at 25 feet from the dripline individual tree or from the edge of an oak woodland. However, to reduce disturblance to wild is recommended that buffers between oak woodlands and development be at least 50 to 10 wide. Furthermore, oak woodlands designated as part of a biological preserve either should I. limits to the public or receive controlled numbers of visitors engaging in passive recreation aci (e.g., nature hikes or bird watching restricted to established trails). 4.2.5 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS In addition to the physical aspects of preserve design, several authors have discussed biological criteria, including where preserves ideally should be located, what types of communities and : they should contain, and how they ultimately should be managed. Biological criteria employed designs for preserves include the diversity, rarity, uniqueness, representativeness of the s habitats, and natural communities contained in potential preserve areas (Tubbs anld Blackwooc Goldsmith 1975). Other studies have emphasized that the threat of human interference, avai of land containing undisturbed natural habitat, and ease of management, also should be corn in the location of preserves (Tans 1974; Gelbach 1975; Wright 1977). Margules and Usher stressed the benefits of using a quantitative scheme to assess the relative suitability of si inclusion in preserve systems. Some of the most successful methodologies have been tho: incorporate information both on the biological value and manageability of natural areas, and ( procedures for differentially weighting chosen criteria (Duever and Noss 1990). Fundamental differences between ecosystems necessitate that the physical and biological as€ preserve design must be addressed independently for each preserve system. However, results studies provide useful general guidelines, especially with regard to which physical variab .important for long-term viability of preserves and how biological resources contained in dl potential preserve sites might be compared objectively. 43 A "landscape" approach is used to identify critical biological resource areas in Carlsbad approach, which considers the existing biological diversitywithin the City, is based upon the fo goals: 1 I 1 I I I E I 1 I I I I I I I I I PRESERVE DESTGN RATIONALE AND APPROACH e The primary goal is to conserve large landscape-sized features in an intercoi system of self-sustaining (Le., independent) ecological units. Although mana will be an important component of the HMP, preserved areas should remaii without extreme intervention measures, including extensive vegetative restor I translocation of species. e A secondary goal is to conserve areas known to support viable populations and federally listed endangered and threatened species and their habitat: species and habitats likely to become threatened, endangered, or rare in the and other species or habitats of concern on the state, regional, or local leve, 40 The methodology used for the biological resource analysis was as follows: 0 An attempt was made to broadly categorize areas as to their overall biological value and sensitivity rather than to plan for a particular subset of species. Because limited time and money precluded focused, detailed biological surveys throughout the City, general habitat and vegetation information, specific information from previous biological surveys (e.g., from EIRs), consultation of resource data bases (e.g., CNDDB and CNPS), and interviews with local biological experts served as the information base for identifying the critical resource areas. Preserve design criteria and evaluation follow from general conservation principles and biogeography theory, as discussed above. 0 4.4 PRESERVE DESIGN METH ODOLOGY The methodology for identifylng potentia1 preserve areas and developing a ranking system for components of the preserve system is described in this section. This approach serves as a guideline for identifymg potentia1 preserve units. The approach was not meant to assign absolute biological values to each of the units or areas considered for preservation, but to provide relative values for comparisons among areas. For this reason, while there is a solid scientific foundation for the preserve design features chosen, the point values assigned in the ranking system were somewhat arbitrary. The main goal was to develop a ranking system that auld be applied objectively and fairly to each of the areas considered for preservation. This approach represents an amalgamation of approaches used in other settings (e.g., Duever and Noss 1990, ERCE 1991), but tailored to the needs of the City of Carlsbad as allowed by the available funds and time to develop the information. 4.4.1 FOCUSED PUNNING AREAS As an initial step, undeveloped areas within the City of Carlsbad were divided into seven or eight focused planning areas (FPAs). For purposes of our analyses, "undeveloped areas" were defined in two alternative ways: ~(l) all areas that presently are mostly vacant (Le., without permanent physical structures) and do not have an approved tentative map (Figure 5); and (2) all areas that presently are vacant, including those with an approved tentative map (Figure 6). The reason for two different sets of FPAs is that areas with approved tentative maps may yet be constrained from development if the California gnatcatcher is federally listed as endangered. Under Section 9 of the federal ESA, any lands with gnatcatchers would be protected until issuance of a Section 1O(a) incidental take permit or a permit issued pursuant to Section 7 (in the case of a federal action linked to the project). Lands with gnatcatchers thus would be potential preserve areas even if they had an approved tentative map. The first alternative (Le., the pre-gnatcatcher listing scenario) resulted in eight distinct FTAS. The second alternative @e., the post-gnatcatcher listing scenario) resulted in seven distinct FPAS. The FPAS were delineated by circumscribing large, continuous areas of the relatively undeveloped land. Major existing roadways (e.g., El Camino Real and Pallomar Airport Road) and existing or proposed development (under alternative 1) provided relatively natural and intuitive boundaries for the FPAs. Using GIs, the entire City of Carlsbad and some adjacent areas in San Marcos and Encinitas were overlain with a grid comprised of cells 1,OOO feet on each side. Each cell contains 22.9 acres. The grid approach was used because it provides a neutral, objective method for dividing up the focused planning areas into analyzable units. Public and private property boundaries, proposed land uses, and circulation elements, which likely will affect the configuration of the preserves, were explicitly 41 excluded from this analysis in order to focus only on biological factors. Also, a grid system is more amenable to computer analysis using the GIS data base. "le GIS output from SANDAG was used to generate an overall rating of two features, habitat (HV) and habitat sensitivity (HS), utilizing separate layers with vegetation community distrib and sensitive species. (Vegetation communities and habitat are treated as synonynious here be each native or introduced community, including introduced eucalyptus, provides habitat for a \ of species). After each of the cells was rated on HV and HS, they were ranked for their impoi for inclusion in a preserve system. It was assumed that sets of adjacent cells with high rankings become the building blocks for the preserve system. Evaluation of HV was based on: (1) the amount of natural habitat in the cell, including coasta scrub, chaparral, native and non-native grassland, riparian scrub, oak woodland, eucalyptus woo freshwater marsh, salt marsh, disturbed wetland, and open water; (2) the number of different h represented; (3) the connectivity of natural habitats in the cell with habitats of the same type i sharing a side with the focal cell (i.e., excluding cells that connect on the corners); ai vulnerability and manageability, based on land use in the adjacent cells. Each cell was rated fc feature and given a total HV rating, with a maximum of 100 points. Evaluation of HS of each cell was based on: (1) the presence and amount of sensitive habit the diversity of sensitive habitats; (3) the presence and abundance of the California gnatcatch coastal sage scrub; (4) numbers of sensitive plant species; and (5) numbers of sensitive c species. Each cell was rated for each feature and given an HS rating, with a maxirnum of 100 A separate category for presence of the California gnatcatcher was added because the species il to be federally listed as endangered, and thus will be a key environmental issue for the pr system. I I I I E 1 i 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 4.4.2 PRESERW FEATURE DEFINITIONS AND RATINGS -- HABITAT VALUE Habitat value refers to the general biological value of each of the cells based upon the pres( natural vegetation. The presence of sensitive habitats, endangered or threatened species, o sensitive biological resources were not considered or given extra weight for the HV rating. TI of rating cells for HV simply was to identify those areas that have the best remaining vegetation and habitat in Carlsbad, and those areas that will provide the foundation for a biological preserve system. Amount of Natural VegetatiodHabitat Areas This feature addresses the amount oE natural communities or habitat within a cell. The amc natural habitat is an important factor for the contribution of a cell to the overall biological T of the preserve system. The goal is to assemble several contiguous cells, each with substantial habitat, into a cohesive, self-sustaining ecological preserve area. Also, cells with large amo natural habitat are likely to presently contain more species diversity than cells with less habit sustain biological diversity (community and species diversity) over long periods of time (Albei 1992). "Natural communities" encompass coastal sage scrub (all subassociations), chaparral grassland, riparian scrub, disturbed wetland, oak woodland, freshwater marsh, salt marsh, ope] and non-native associations including eucalyptus woodland and non-native grassland. 1 42 Criteria and points for amount of habitat were as follows: Criteria Points > 22 acres 25 17 to 22 acres 20 11 to 16 acres 15 4 to 10 acres 10 e 4 acres 0 Community/Habitat Diversity This feature addresses the number of different natural vegetation communities or habitat types within a cell. The assumption was that cells with several different communities will have relatively more biological value than cells with little diversity. This assumption, however, is not always correct or useful. In the case of coastal sage scrub or freshwater marsh, for example, a cell with a single sensitive community may have extremely high biological value. Such cells were considered on the HS rating to ensure that they were not undervalued in the final ranking of the cells. For the purpose of assessing community diversity, the vegetation and habitat types listed above were used. Community types that have subassociations (e-g., coastal sage scrub and chaparral) were considered as a single community type. Unfortunately species diversity within a community could not be considered for the analysis because there are too little current field data. Detailed field investigations would be required to address species diversity. Criteria and points for natural communityhabitat diversity were as follows: Criteria Points > 5 communities 25 4 or 5 communities 20 2 or 3 communities 15 1 community 10 0 natural communities 0 Connectivity of Cell This feature addresses whether or not a cell has meaningful biological connectivity to adjacent cells. An adjacent cell was defined as a cell that shares a side with thie focal cell. Cells that connect at the comers of the focal cell were not included in this analysis because the connection is at only a single point. Thus, each focal cell is adjacent to four other cells. Meaningful biological connectivity was defined as adjacent cells containing the same community type. For example, if coastal sage scrub occurs in adjacent cells, those cells are considered to have meaningful biological connectivity because the species within those cells would comprise a single population, even though the habitat may not be strictly continuous. Furthermore, the "continuous" habitat could serve as a habitat linkage to 43 other, disjunct cells. The connectivity feature is important for assembling several biologically va units into a cohesive preserve area. The degree or value of connectivity was determined b; many sides of the focal cell connect with adjacent cells having the same habitat. A cell that COI to three or four other cells clearly is more valuable as a preserve unit than a cell with on1 connection; Le., an edge unit (although the edge unit may serve as an effective buffer). A difficulty that arises with this feature, as defined, is that focal cells bordered by cells with very patches of habitat would be given high scores even though the biological "connection" value t habitats would be relatively low, particularly with habitats such as coastal sage scrub, chaparra non-native grassland. These habitats must be at least a few acres in size to have much loq biological value. Other habitats such as riparian woodland, scrub, marsh habitats, arid open watc have relatively high value even if they comprise only a few acres. To offset the problem of in connectivity scores, adjacent celIs had to contain at least one acre of coastal sage scrub, chaj or non-native grassland to be scored as an adjacent cell with the same habitat. The criteria and points for connectivity were as follows: I i u I i 1 1 3 sides connecting to same habitat 20 8 1 0 sides connecting to same habitat 0 I 1 I I I I 1 8 I 1 Criteria Points 4 sides connecting to same habitat 25 2 sides connecting to same habitat 15 10 1 side connecting to same habitat Land Uses Adiacent to Cell This feature addresses whether land uses in adjacent cells are compatible with the biological v and integrity of the focal cell. The assumption was that residential, commercial, and in( development are existing land uses relatively incompatible with the biological viatdity of a fo because of the potential for human disturbance, including active recreation (e.g., off-road v or mountain bikes), predation by pets, trash dumping, and chemical spills. Ultimately edges preserve areas will border adjacent land uses that likely will pose some threal to the pre However, the overall management plan should include measures to minimize adverse impacts preserves by adjacent land uses (e.g., the development of buffers, anti-pet Fencing, ant restrictions). For the purpose of rating each cell, cells surrounded by natural habitats of ai received the highest rating, and those surrounded by developrrient or disturbed habitat receiT lowest rating. By definition, an adjacent cell with at least 20 acres of natural habitat was coni undisturbed. 44 The criteria and points for adjacent land uses were as follows: Criteria Points At least 20 acres natural 25 habitat on 4 sides At least 20 acres natural habitat on 3 sides At least 20 acres natural habitat on 2 sides At least 20 acres natural habitat on 1 side Less than 20 acres natural habitat on any side 20 15 10 0 4.43 PRESERVE FEATURE DEFINITIONS AND RATINGS -- HABITAT SENSITIVITY The habitat sensitivity rating considers the presence of sensitive vegetation communities or habitat, such as coastal sage scrub or wetlands, and the presence, or potential presence based on habitat, of sensitive wildlife or plants species. Because the proposed endangered California gnatcatcher and coastal sage scrub is ai key issue for development of the HMP, and several other federal candidate species occupy coastal sage scrub, gnatcatchers and coastal sage scrub were given a separate category. Amount of Sensitive Habitat This feature addresses the question of how much, if any, sensitive habitat a cell contains. Sensitive habitat includes coastal sage scrub (including all subassociatioris), southern maritime chaparral, oak woodland, riparian scrub, freshwater marsh, salt marsh, open water, and native grassland. The criteria and points for amount of sensitive habitat were as follows: Criteria Points > 22 acres 20 15 to 22 acres 15 9 to 14 acres 10 2 to 8 acres 5 e 2 acres 0 Five points were added if the cell supports any sensitive habitat other than coastal sage scrub. (This accounts for the problem that some sensitive habitats often cover small areas, such as wetlands, riparian woodland, or native grassland.) 45 Diversitv of Sensitive Habitats This feature addresses the diversity of sensitive habitats within a cell. The assumiption was th greater the diversity of sensitive habitats within a cell, the greater its biological value and the valuable it would be for acquisition. The criteria and points for the diversity of sensitive habitats were as follows: I i I 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 I 1 Criteria Points 4 or more sensitive habitats 20 3 sensitive habitats 15 1 2 sensitive habitats 10 1 sensitive habitat 5 0 sensitive habitats 0 I California Gnatcatcher This feature addresses the presence of the California gnatcatcher or its habitat within a cell. Bi the gnatcatcher is likely to be federally listed as endangered, preservation of gnatcatcher ha1 a high priority for the HMP. The highest ratings were given to cells that are known to si gnatcatchers and have the highest quality gnatcatcher habitat. Areas with coastal sage scrub, documented gnatcatchers received a lower rating. The criteria and points for gnatcatcher habitat were as follows: 1 Criteria Points 2 gnatcatcher pairs 20 1 gnatcatcher pair 15 At least 15 acres of coastal 5 sage scrub, but no documented gnatcatcher pairs Less than 15 acres of coastal sage scrub or no potential habitat 0 Sensitive Plants This feature addresses whether the cell supports plant species that are recognized as sensitk or unique by the USFWS, CDFG, CNPS, or other regional or local organizatiom. The criteria and points for sensitive plants were as follows: 1 46 Criteria Points 20 Documented presence of state or federal endangered or threatened plant species Presence of federal candidate 15 species Presence of two or more CNPS or locally-recognized Sensitive species 10 Presence of one CNPS or locally- No documented presence of 0 5 recognized sensitive species sensitive species Sensitive Wildlife This feature addresses the presence of sensitive wildlife, or lhabitat with potential for supporting sensitive wildlife, within a cell. Sensitive wildlife was defined as both vertebrates and invertebrates that have state or federal endangered or threatened status, federal candidate species, state Species of Special Concern, or species considered sensitive, rare, or unique by regional or local agencies or organizations. Thus, any sensitive mammals, reptiles, amphibians, birds, or insects were considered here. Sensitive habitats that provides breeding, foraging, or refuge opportunities for sensitive wildlife also were considered. Criteria and points for sensitive wildlife were as follows: Criteria Points Documented presence of federal 20 or state endangered or threatened species Presence of federal candidate 15 or state Species of Special Concern Presence of at least 15 acres of sensitive habitat 5 4.5 RESULTS -- HABITAT VALUE As described in detail above, the analysis of habitat value (HV) for each of the cells was based on the amount of natural vegetation within a cell, the diversity of vegetation communities, the connectivity of the ceIls, and the adjacent land use. For the purpose of analysis, the grid was laid over a study area consisting of the entire City of Carbbad and some adjacent areas to the south and east that contain natural open space (i.e., Encinitas and San Marcos), yielding a total of 1,237 cells (a total of 28,327 acres). A total of 1,179 cells (26,999 acres) occur either in part or whole in the Carlsbad City limits. Because the grid was placed in an arbitrary position over the study area, the 47 perimeter cells usually fall partly inside and outside of the City limits. Of the 1,237 cells, 97 (79 percent) scored at least 10 points. This accounts for 22,373 acres of the 28,337 acres in the area (see Table 3). Cells scoring no points are located in the most urbanized areas of Ca Table 4 shows the frequency distributions for each of the features comprising the HV score. of the features is discussed below. 4.5.1 AMOUNT OF NATURAL HABITAT The frequency distribution for the amount feature illustrated in Table 4 demonstrates that the for the feature are well distributed. There were 336 cells (34 percent) receiving scores of better (Le., cells with 17 acres or more). There were 480 cells (49 percent) receiving scores o less (i.e-, 10 or fewer acres). 4.5.2 HABITAT DIVERSITY For the diversity of vegetation communities, the scores for cells also were well distributed. Hc the scores tended to fall more in the middle values than with the amount feature. Only fi~ received scores of 25 (> 5 different communities) while only 11 cells received scores of 0 (no 1 communities). However, 134 cells received scores of 20 or better (4 or more different commu I I 1 1 1 1 1 t TABLE 4 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR HABITAT VALUE FEATURES Habitat Value Features I 1 1 I I 1 Assigned Amount Diversity Connectivity Adjacent Value Land Use 0 244* 11 73 450 10 236 302 50 272 15 162 53 1 147 165 20 180 129 264 62 25 156 5 444 29 I TOTAL 978 978 978 978 1 * The number or frequency of celIs assigned a particular value I i 1 48 4.53 HABITAT CONNECIlVITY Cells tended to fall at the high end of values for the connectivity feature; 444 cells (45 percent) received scores of 25. The reason for this result is because the threshold for inclusion as a connected adjacent cell was fairly liberal. If a cell had any habitat that was the same as the focal cell, except for coastal sage scrub, chaparral, or non-native grassland, it was scored as a connected adjacent cell. This liberal criterion was used because even very small patches of certain vegetation communities, such as riparian woodland, salt and freshwater marsh, or native grassland, have high biological value and are valuable if proximate to the same habitat in an adjacent cell. For coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and non-native grassland, the threshold for scoring as an adjacent cell was that it must contain at least one acre of the same vegetation community. The rationale for this contingency is that these communities require somewhat larger areas to provide viable habitat for wildlife and plant species. The one acre requirement thus eliminates slivers of extremely small patches of vegetation that carry relatively little biological value. 4.5.4 ADJACENT LAND USE Adjacent land use scores provided almost a mirror image of the distribution for connectivity; 722 cells (74 percent) scored 0 or 10 and only 256 cells (26 percent) scored 15 or more. In other words, relatively few cells have adjacent cells with 20 or more acres on at least two sides. 4.5.5 COMPOSITE HABITAT VALUE Table 5 shows the composite HV frequency distribution. This distribution reflects the total score of each of the cells achieved by adding the scores for each of the FW features discussed above. No cells had a perfect score of 100. The overall distribution approximate:s a normal (bell-shaped) distribution, with most of the scores falling in the middle of the distribution. There were, however, a disproportionate number of scores, assuming a normal distribution, with a score of only 10. These cells are located in the more urbanized areas of Carlsbad and tend not to occur in the FPAs. Overall, 228 cells (23 percent) scored 75 points or better, 382 cells (39 percent) scored 50 to 70 points, 269 cells (27 percent) scored 25 to 45 points, and 98 cells (10 percent) scored 20 points or fewer. The spatial distribution of HV scores is illustrated in Figure 7. 'The map illustrates that cells with the highest scores tend ta cluster together. Clustering here is defined as a focal cell having a direct connection with another cell either by sharing a side or connecting on a corner. Only four of the 228 cells scoring 75 points or more were not in some way directly connected (including a connection on a comer) to an adjacent cell scoring at least 75 points. In part, this is because connectivity was a factor in the HV score, but it also reflects the fact that Carlsbad still has relatively large, contiguous areas with high habitat value. Approximately 5,100 acres of the best habitat in Carlsbad generally occurs together. These clusters range in size from about 850 acres in the southeast part of the City to about 68 acres in the northern part. Cells that received scores between 50 and 70 tend to surround the highest scoring clusters. Cells with lower scores tend to be around the perimeter of the higher scoring clusters and in the areas outside of the FPAs. Only five of 96 cells scoring 20 points or fewer are completely surrounded by cells scoring at least 25 points. Figure 7 shows that the FPAs do indeed capture most of the best remaining habitat in Carlsbad. 49 I i 1 I I 1 1 I i 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I - Carisbad Habitat Management P Habitat Value M m TABLE 5 COMPOSITE HABITAT VALUE Value Frequency h7alue Frequency 10 57 55 84 15 7 60 77 20 34 65 70 25 44 70 74 30 59 75 80 35 40 810 63 40 67 8.5 53 45 59 93 28 50 77 9.5 4 TOTAL 977 4.6 DISCUSSION -- HABITAT VALUE Decisions concerning habitat acquisition and implementation of the preserve and corridor system will in large part rest on the habitat value of the parcels considered for acquisition, as well as upon acquirability, economic, and land use factors. Any strategy, however, will allow for acquisition of only a portion of the remaining natural habitat within the City. Thle optimum strategy is to acquire and conserve the best remaining core areas and link them by multiple habitat corridors. The results of the HV analysis indicate that Carlsbad should have reasonably good flexibility in establishing an interconnected preserve system, because there are six or seven core areas with generally high habitat value. Some subset of three or four of these areas, with corridor linkages connecting all or part of the system, would be desirable. Most important, it appears that Carlsbad at least has the raw biological material from which to assemble a functional preserve system. While an analysis of general HV is an important aspect of delineating potential preseme areas, information about general species richness and the presence of sensitive habitat and species also is important. The HV analysis provides a starting point from which to consider the other factors important for designing feasible and functional preserves. The next section considers the presence and distribution of sensitive habitat and species. 4,7 RESULTS -- HABITAT SENSITIVITY The analysis of habitat sensitivity (HS) for each cell was based on the amount of sensitive habitat(s) within the cell, the presence of, or habitat for, the California gnatcatcher, the presence of sensitive plants, and the presence of sensitive wildlife species. Sensitive habitats included coastal sage scrub (including all subassociations), southern maritime chaparral, oak: woodland, riparian scrub, freshwater marsh, salt marsh, open water, and native grassland. 50 4.7.1 AMOUNT OF SENSITlVE HABITAT The frequency distribution for the amount of sensitive habitat within a cell is well distributed I 6). Most cells scored relatively low, but 268 cells (27 percent) received 15 or 20 points. The acre cells contain at least 15 acres of sensitive habitat. This kind of distribution was expected bc sensitive habitats, by definition, are more rare and comprise fewer total acres thlan other ha This is especially true for riparian, marsh, and native grassland habitats. 4.7.2 SENSITIVE HABITAT DIVERSITY The frequency distribution for the diversity of sensitive habitats is similar to that for the ama sensitive habitat. Most cells received a low score, but 129 cells (13 percent) received 15 or 20 That is, these cells contain three or more different sensitive habitats within the same cell. 8 R 1 I I II TABLE 6 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR HABITAT SENSITIVITY FEATURES Habitat Sensitivity Features 1 II i 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 B I Size Diversity Gnatcatcher Sensitive Sensitive Assigned Value Presence Plants Wildlife 0 267 164 833 820 742 5 218 457 65 105 150 10 225 228 NA 34 NA 15 133 % 66 9 5 20 135 33 14 10 81 TOTAL. 978 978 978 978 978 1 4.73 CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER Table 6 and Figure 4 show the most recent publicly available information concerning the dist of California gnatcatchers in the City of Carlsbad. (It is important to note that all not all the City have been surveyed for gnatcatchers nor were all data available €or public review at 1 of this writing.) Cells scoring 20 points had two gnatcatcher pairs, cells scoring 15 points 1 pair, and cells scoring 5 points had no documented pairs, but contained at least 15 acres of sage scrub, and thus have at least some potential to support gnatcatchers. Figure 4 ihstra the gnatcatcher distribution tends to cluster similarly to cells scoring high in habitat value (set 51 7), with the exception of 17 pairs in disjunct or isolated cells (i.e., cells having no direct connection with another cell either containing gnatcatchers or having at lleast 15 acres of coastal sage scrub). 4.7.4 SENSITn7E PLANTS Table 6 shows the distribution of cells containing plants witlh three levels of sensitivity: state or federally threatened or endangered, federal candidates, and CNPS or locally-recognized sensitive species. Only 10 cells contained plants with the most sensitive status and only nine cells contained federal candidate species. Plants with CNPS or local status were found in 139 cells. 4.7.5 SENSITTVE WILDLIFE The California gnatcatcher is a proposed endangered species. However, because it is likely to be listed as endangered by early 1993, it was treated in the analysis as federally endangered. The gnatcatcher was also included under sensitive wildlife, in addition to its own category, because of its high profile in the HMP process. In essence, it receives more than double weighting in this analysis because any cells containing a single gnatcatcher pair receives 20 points. Table 6 shows that 81 cells received 20 points; 80 of which contain gnatcatchers and one of which contains a least Bell’s vireo. Only five cells contain federal candidate species, including the San Diego horned lizard and orange- throated whiptail (see Figure 4). Because the data base for sensitive wildlife is primarily comprised of biological surveys conducted for EIb9 there is a paucity of information on sensitive wildlife compared to the amount of information available on the presence of sensitive habitats and gnatcatchers. The absence of other sensitive species from cells may only reflect a lack of focused surveys for these species. Prior to acquisition of habitat for the preserves, additional focused surveys for sensitive wildlife will be necessary if this factor is to be an important acquisition criterion. 4.7.6 COMPOSITE HABITAT SENSITMTY Table 7 shows the composite frequency distribution for HS resulting from adding the feature scores for each cell. The scores are well distributed, but skewed toward the lower scores. This was expected due to the rarity and uniqueness of the biological resources considered sensitive. Only eight cells (< 1 percent) scored 75 points or more, 74 cells (7 percent) scored 50 to 70 points, 284 cells (29 percent) scored 25 to 45 points, and 612 cells (62 percent) scored 20 points or fewer. Cells with higher HS scores tend to be clustered in the FPAs (Figure 8). Only 14 of 82 cells (17 percent) that scored mare than 50 points are completely isolated from other cells scoring at least 50 points. Twelve cells scoring at least 50 points are connected only at the corner with another cell scoring at least 50 points. In other words, of the 82 cells scoring at least 50 points, 56 (68 percent) share at least a side with another cell scoring 50 or more ]points. As would be expected, the distribution of cells with high HS scores generally matches the distribution of cells with high HV scores. However, because the HS score represents more rare and unique biological resources, the absolute scores for HS are generally lower than HV scores on a cell by cell comparison. Only two cells that scored at least 75 on HS scored lower than 75 on HV. 52 1 I I 1 I U I I I 1 I 1 II I 8 I 1 I i - Carlsbad Habitat Management P Habitat Sensithrity M TABLE 7 COMPOSITE HABITAT SENSI[TIVITY Value Frequency Value Frequency 0 1 43 45 26 5 1 08 50 19 10 164 55 19 15 95 60 17 20 102 65 9. 25 68 70 10 30 76 75 3 35 70 75 3 40 44 80 3 85 2 TOTAL 978 4.8 HABITAT SENSITIVITY -- DISCUSSION As with overall HV, the distribution of cells with high HS scores generally are concentrated in the FPAs. An acquisition strategy that focuses on cells with high Hv usually will include the cells that have high HS scores. However, some relatively isolated cells receiving high HS scores may be worth acquiring, because they contain resources, such as a sensitive plant, that can be protected with only a small amount of habitat. Consequently, those cells with high HS scores should be evaluated individually to determine whether they should be acquired. 4.9 TOTAL HABITAT VALUWSENSITMTY -- RESULTlS For each cell, the HV and HS scores were summed to yield a total HV/HS score (Table 8). Only 13 cells (4 percent) scored at least 150 points, 257 cells (26 percent) scored 100 to 145 points, 456 cells (47 percent) scored 50 to 95 points, and 252 cells (26 percent) scored less than 50 points. Cells that scored at least 100 points account for approximately 6,183 acres of the approximately 10,000 acres of natural habitat remaining in the City of Carlsbad. As with HV and HS considered separately, cells with high totail HV/HS scores are clustered in the FPAs (Figure 9)- Only six cells within the City boundaries scoring at least 100 points are completely isolated from other cells scoring at least 100 points. Only seven cells scoring at least 100 points are connected only at a diagonal to another cell scoring at least 100 points. All other cells scoring at least 1QO points connect on at least one full side with another cell scoring at least as well. 53 I I i 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 - Carlsbad Habitat Management P Total Habitat ValuelSensitivity M TABLE 8 TOTAL HABITAT VALUWSENSITIVITY FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION Value Frequency Value Frequency 10 27 90 46 15 30 95 37 20 17 100 38 25 14 105 40 30 34 110 36 35 37 115 36 40 52 120 29 45 41 125 29 50 53 130 24 55 50 135 10 60 46 140 7 65 44 145 8 70 47 150 3 75 43 155 3 80 41 160 3 85 49 165 2 170 2 TOTAL 978 4.10 TOTAL HABITAT VALUWSENSITMTY -- DISCUSSEN The results for the total HV/HS were similar to the results for HV and HS considered separately. For this reason, further analyses of the FPAs will focus on the total W/HS scores. These scores will also be used to determine potential wildlife corridors to link the core preserve areas. The results suggest that the City of Carlsbad has several areas with high biological value and hence high potential value as part of a preserve system. Fortunately, as illustrated in Figure 9, these areas tend to cluster in the FpAs, and thus are at least potentially available for acquisition. Because these biologically valuable areas comprise more than 6,OOO acres, it is clear that only a subset of the areas with high HSW will be acquired for the preserves. From a purely biological perspective, the preserve lands acquisition strategy should include at least three components: e e Clustered cells scoring at least 100 points should receive top priority in the preserve system. Cells scoring 50 to 100 points that share a side with higher scoring cells also should be considered for inclusion in the core preserves, but with a lower priority. These cells may serve as buffers for the higher quality habitat and as potential corridors. 54 8 As cells are considered for acquisition, potential habitat linkages between core areas sl be considered. 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I i I 1 1 I 1 I I I 4.11 LIMITATIONS OF APPROACH The preserve design approach taken here has some limitations. It has been noted that the sen species data base is not complete because not all areas of the City of Carlsbad have been sun Also, the number of sensitive species not recognized by the resource agencies has grown considt in the past few years and, thus, species considered to be sensitive now were not necessarily sur for in past efforts. Therefore, even for sites with good biological information, suiweys for ser species may have been inadequate. From the perspective of sensitive species alone, a more con data base may result in some modifications to the existing preserve planning areas in orc encompass sensitive species that were not captured in this phase of the work. Work conduc> Phase 111 of the HMP and beyond will in part be directed to developing a more complete sei species data base from ongoing and future field work 55 I 1 I I -I , / \ SECTION \ I 8 Preserve Recomwenddt / \ BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND HABITAT ANALYSIS in support ofthe ClTY OF CAIUSBAD HABITAT MANAGEMENT PIAN SECTION 5 PRESERVE RECOMMENDATIONS 1 I 0 1 II I t 1 I 1 R 1 1 1 I I 1 I 5.1 INTRODUCTION In this section, recommendations intended to assist the City of Carlsbad in assembling a biological preserve system are provided. This section consists of an analysis of the propose1 preserve areas from which the ultimate preserve system will be built, identification of PO wildlife corridors that would serve to link the core areas, and an analysis of potential lanc adjacent to preserve areas in terms of their impacts and ways to minimize those impacts. The goal of this section is to provide the City of Carlsbad with the information necess implement a preserve land acquisition strategy. As such, specific minimal preserve boundari not drawn. Rather, the analysis will allow the City to choose from a menu of alternative prl options that will result in a viable preserve system in concert with concurrent conservation effi the region (e.g., the North County MHCP, the Clean Water Program MSCP, and ,the County ( Diego OSHMP). In this way, the City will have the maximum flexibility in implementing the prl system. 5.1.1 SIZE OF PRESERVE SYSTEM An important issue for the establishment of preserves is determining the sizes of the individul preserves and the overall system. The solution to this depends on several factors, including th needed to support minimum viable populations of the key species included in 1.he preserve quality of the habitat preserved, connections between core preserve areas, adjacent land use long-term management of the preserve system. As discussed in Section 4.2, the larger the pres the better, because species' extinction rates are inversely related to patch size (Diamond 1975; J and Hubbell 1983; Usher 1987; Soule 1991). Soule et al. (1988) suggest that habitat fragmc southern California smaller than 250 ha (617 acres) will likely lose some species. All things equal, smaller preserves require a greater level of protection and more intense, hands-on manag to remain viable (Noss 1983). Unfortunately, the fundamental biological information needed to specify the minimum areas rei by key species is lacking. For this reason, the City of Carlsbad should take a conservative apy to identifying the areas targeted for acquisition and retain as much flexibility as possi implementing the HMP. As biological information on key species (e.g., the California gnatc and orange-throated whiptail) accrues, the preserve system should be fine-tuned to meet the of these species and maintain functional ecological systems. 5.2 POTENTIAL CORE PRESERVE AREAS In Section 4.4.1, pre- and post-gnatcatcher focused planning areas (FPAs) were described. The included undeveloped areas in the City of Carlsbad that have relatively contiguoius natural h It was clear that the biological preserve system would be developed from some subset of the because the best remaining habitat in Carlsbad is captured in the -As and much of the habital would be available for acquisition. However, the amount of natural habitat in the ITAs was fa1 than would be feasible to acquire for the final preserve system. Upon completion alf the habital (HV) and habitat sensitivity (HS) analyses, it was possible to further refine the ITAs. The of this analysis yielded a set of preserve planning areas. The preserve planning are< I 56 distinguished from the FPAs in terms of the quality of habitat included. The methodology and results of this analysis are presented below. 5.2.1 METHODS In order to refine the FPAS, a simple decision rule about whether to include a specific habitat cell in the preserve planning area was employed'. Any habitat ciell scoring fewer than 100 points that was not adjacent to another habitat cell scoring at least 100 points was excluded from the preserve planning area. Adjacency was defined as the habitat cell sharing at least one side with a cell scoring at least 100 points; Le., connections at corners with cells scoring at least 100 points did not qualify a cell for inclusion in the preserve planning area. Cells scorin<p fewer than 100 points were included in the preserve planning area if adjacent on at least one side tgo a high scoring cell because they may serve as corridors between better habitat or as buffers. It is important to note that this method was used only to circumscribe potential core preserve areas and was not intended to identify wildlife corridors. The methotlology to identify corridors is described below. It also is important to note that the circumscribed areas provide an artificial picture of the ultimate preserve areas, because the grid overlay was placed in an arbitrary position. The final preserve areas likely will have boundaries that follow the contoiurs of property boundaries, vegetation, topography, and other constraints or open space plans included in development projects. The circumscribed areas described here as potential core preseme areas provide a guide to the best remaining natural habitat in Carlsbad rather than a specific delineation of where precise boundaries should fall. 5.2.2 RESULTS Separate analyses were camed out for the pre- and post-gnatcatcher listing FPAs (see Figures 5 and 6). Figures 10 and 11 show the pre-listing and post-listing preserve planning areas, respectively. Figure 10 shows the vegetation communities occurring in the pre-listing preserve planning areas. Table 9 provides the acreages by aggregated vegetation type for the pre-listing preserve planning areas. Figure 11 shows the vegetation communities occurring in the post-listing preserve planning areas. Table 10 provides the acreages by aggregated vegetation type for the post-gnatcatcher listing preserve planning areas. Within the pre- and post-California gnatcatcher listing preserve planning areas, the following percentages of native vegetation types within the City are included in the total preserve planning area: Plre Post Coastal Sage Scrub 65% 77% Chaparral 58% 73 % Native Grassland 23% 27% Saltwater/Freshwater Marsh 48% 78% 1 The preserve planning areas discussed here were determined prior to minor final revisions of the vegetation map. A, few cells along the boundaries of the preserve planning areas changed value in the final run of the habitat value/sensitivity analysis and would not have been included in the preserve planning areas. Changes to the preserve planning areas as a result of the vegetation revisions will be considered in Phase I11 of the HMP. 57 LEGEND Ip mASTM SAT SCRUB a DlSTllRBEO EOASTA 5A6E SfRUB {DCSS) PISTURBED IIARITIY! SUCCUL Ill S RUB m QIPARRAt 5 UIHERU YMD CRAPbRRAL {SSIE C IF llired Chop) ~~~bl~~~~~~6~~~~~~~~~s) COASTAL f:YktkN5\iYi:L SACI/CHIPARRAI &#%E:!$!. MIX ip) B MSTURBEC CHAPPARtt a YATIYL GRhSS11W @61. Rdiw 61) DlSIURBED OUUT El UAft2IIME CHAPARRAL BHTURBED COdAL SAWCIIAPARRAt YIX DfWR3€~ SRASSLIRD a SALIRATER MARSH ( 1Y FRESRIATEE UARSR qFl@ m RlPkRUl WBB (SW. RS. Rp, Riparian) m OM MOBII(D MI d Oak t fdUW) SYCIUORE Iltl&AL bQDkARE (SAk.Sycmort) m €OCAlYPfllf IOPIILARII ~EQC,EIK Idl&Eicr) 1 OElI 1kTW ttW.43pa IlliBpep Mer) a MSIBIIBEB RTLIRD mal vcthnd. W) m HOW-SAT E 6RASSUltD (RRCL.6L) kt wrrb) a lTAq&%H ACTIVE CRKil[lUsE~DlSTIJ Rt$bW \ YAP] tFD 1 /f6.A6RI) GOLF COURSE UlSTVR ED UA81 AI 6C 01 D YYLLBPED {DEV.DML) VI Preserve Planning Area -~ ~ ~~~ '4% wc1-2 1.1 m -WildMe Corridor - - - LEGEND (rI Preserve Planning Area "ell wc1-2 I I El I Wildlife Corridor m E zv) z3a zsd 1 I I 1 I I 1 CI c z &I \o d & m w v) 2 3( v) I+ d & 3 223 y'I L &I M E FWCr .I ca=c * v) 26 Ln_ 3 F-l s co 3 8 m N rn Q OF 8 % 03 8 C 08 m 0 t- CI In "3 2 t- 2 d d NIn 3 N 3 2 4 + $?w m E22 d 423 2 pl, gw &is ae;lg 4 oI QUZ I 1 I I I I I I 1 I *Om *EN mC "Y 3s EL u 4 rn 0 OS .I "2 8 3 m E& d 0 act: 3 3 M $1 M \o d e4 c &I a 0 0 O2 s r3 q g C 4 2 a o\ Md 0 M e *- v) m -- $2 8- r3 4 - e E &Z 13 cu +T -.I 2.3 $3 3s 2 0: - - 2- $83 82 d Z6Z2 y)"p E *z. P 10 $a s?, ?, z 2-z rr*Q U c"m Q a Q-.3 UY v1. b mu u om Phnc.' mu u-3 a5 aa'c0 cu2-z 5 0 a,( rnZ$ =o l=m oas 0 * rn 0 Bo 2:Eak 4 E e.5 ~QJ.SUZ e.2~ 0 :* 283 WE: 52 *-E2 u kj '5 gzz ? E g 1 3 0) 2 3.3 $r asr 52 *,om3 mm TJ .Ycacu> SJ=2 g '2 0 .- 5 5.z s.~ as ESs; z.~ a .g l= m3m3m am2 g gi + mQ J=ozo ag 3: ms SG W G *" v) G do- W? 2 m dbN3 2% WFZM m + cu N 33 szg 2 m 23a CI * N a N PI mNoG cu h 0 hcu ZNO cu 4 34 6( ", 3 d F * \o rnN F 2* \e t E, 53 1, 3 8 d oc) b\D mbmh v, mm *? 4 a a 3 IPI N c on d m oc) r- 0 mu! IA 0 1.- # vr 3 m 2.4 Y,z Zk v, z zn .R 'c) v) o\ v, m Q\ z 03'9N N N cu m 3O c m m 13 PI dmtu3 N 00 F cu m -, !2 E3 2 N E, 8 2 m 3 cu $3 2 a 600 om r( v, d 34 se & m $8 G"83, m 3?% ('? PI m c$? 2 Nr, e H b 0- H N a c a d 2 L a 3 .? 2 w 55 a 0 L! .z 0 Yk B ss T1 2g e e E- zs G % % iqg5 22 1 zg g xi % 0 p&d z1L 2 +2 32 b 3 X$ ->lo2 TI ms 2 smwz 1 .I ;;; Qm 3 *I 3 $3 3 i2 e; gs 2 $-&p 3 Q) 23 L, g Aim E ';ij u c E; 2.2 y bbb% on I .- m K 88 000 2 P Grt; & Om 3 82 a" bbb$ a Q) u c '2 .- L2 OQ Y 0 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 8 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I m id Eg 0, 2% gi3 wtrq FEU + BET g cq 2 ;SF oq -eg Ed& giy 3 ccla ci5 b4 0% 02 0 u c r *- m 2 2& co 3 In 3 .r( 3 ZSa sZ$ In I? og b N -3 8 m g 8 2 00 d d c.l e \o m 0 0 0 00 & F F v) d\o d VI 2 -3 2 F vl a 42 2 2 3 8 * 2 g$ $1 f3 &l 2 d d d cob N 0 OB e $1 M E: .I c vl 0 om Jrn v, ell 3 N 0 om Q\ 00 2 *% 2 v) v, a 0 0 O13 3 0, 0 i 2 e -3 v) m v? % 3 *- % In In U d 4 q Q\* 3 F& ..I c, m a- d - 5.8 52 a 82 2.. 3 * 32 2 2 % az m- 38 39 $A2 5; m $$$ ce 5; =%* mu &- E z .8 I w;$- s2z - 22 a sass c 2: &rnS 3QC -$ 322 0-3 gz 0 a*zU 2$% *3g .?Smm> &&Z 3 c3i 3 QC * a 3. ged)& - E p, 2 0.Y03 e.cu d) $4 ; g):; 3.5 gs €5 a 3.23 -2 a3m3m SmgJ * g? 5 m.22 .YQ soso % Sar: aT: U~O~Q a~m E zi a L mu u 0) a 583 82 I zm2 $:wl :v% aa: 0 E -2, * 1 3 0 .I * > G 2” m r- 00 8GY3P 3 a N 22 d =sg 8 zs5r ez oc) d d dm ZNC9C‘ 2 G -3 4 In 5, 5, \o * PO rcl N c> 5r 5r N r4 rclN 4 2 TP 8 MC‘U’,+ m Q& *\o In oc) # 4 & 5, i2 ?D v, 2 a - 8 -w .-.I 0 ma * i! 2 - Ye& M G .I c) v) 2 0 %iS~L& 7-4 5 CJ G de4 0s SVl F wg Ed bs 2 4 ‘J &aE rrr: 40 Is: v, 8 r4 N N 3% d 141 2 5, 4 %a 2 Tt. m CJ CMC3In bb d d Ec N 3- fi 3 ‘2 N 22 2 T.. 4 dQ c .- cn 2 7-4 SEc 6 2 m a 0 .k cd 8 $ 2 c3 k2 s 2 T1 oJ 5Jm c 82 - 3 $: .o,= 4 ;;I3 *= h sz ; c 3 2.2 0 C%Lz -- & owl m”x ts Q< Q us L rn mw $s dd T? E: “;s m cu s E J u w =E *- 0 -2 2: oz % 4.4 s a$ Zh $5 g t s 23 s m $ $ z mc 3 5; g 24m u 8 2 .2b ti 0 .(I k 5 e4 3 > 3 3 d G! Q!! 74 4 b \o 4 d “!. 7-4 d v, M ri 3 t‘, d Q \o d :- m o\ m MQO sad z- $! c\1 3 Z<U? i? EN E&&$ “*On h2LZ a!$$: &Or- bbbz 0002 bbbm PN? Pmt Riparian Scrub 53% 7'6% 1 I 1 ! I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I D 1 OaldSycamore Alluvial Woodland 82% 900% Open Water 97% 96% With the exception of native grassland, and salt and freshwater marsh under the prie-listing scei the majority of native habitat within the City is included in the preserve planning areas. Sal freshwater marsh, however, already have statutory protection. The preserve planning area analysis allows for the designation of those areas in Carlsbad constitute the best remaining habitat within the City. The fact that the City retains; more than acres of good habitat under the pre-gnatcatcher listing alternative and nearly 9,4013 acres undr post-gnatcatcher listing alternative indicates that the City has an excellent opportunity to asst a biological preserve system. Each preserve planning area is considered in detail below. Sensitive Species Figure 4 shows the distribution of sensitive species in the City of Carlsbad and Section 2 prov detailed discussion of each species. Information concerning sensitive species was gathered existing EIRs, other environmental documents, and discussions with local experts. Tables 11 r provide a matrix of records for sensitive species by preserve planning area for both the pre- anc listing scenarios, respectively. Under the pre-listing scenario, preserve planning areas 2,4,5, and 7 contain a good diversity c sensitive wildlife and plant species. Under the post-listing scenario, the results are similar, wi exception that preserve planning area 3 captures much greater diversity, because its area is h expanded, from 859 acres to 1,708 acres. Tables 11 and 12 list all the sensitive species recorded from the preserve planning areas bai information available for the present study. There certainly are more instances of sensitive 2 occurring in these areas than presented here. For example, the Belding's Savannah sparrou is much more widespread in the salt marsh habitat around the lagoons than reflected in thesi 1 Not all of the sensitive wildlife and plant species occurring in Carlsbad are captured in the PI planning areas. These omissions may reflect gaps in the ultimate protection of these areas. other hand, existing protected lands or designated open space may provide protection for SI these resources. Resolution of such questions requires performance of a "gap analysis", wh be performed in Phase III of the HMP work plan. 62 TABLE 11 PRE-CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER LISTING PRESERVE PLANNING AREA SENSITIVE SPECIES RECORDS Preserve Planning Areaa Species 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WILDLIFE BeMing’s Savannah Sparrow California Least Tern Least Bell’s Vireo Light-footed Clapper Rail California Gnatcatcher l& .2 6 13 35 Orange- throa ted Whip tail 3 2 San Diego Homed Lizard 2 PLANTS Ashy-spike Moss x X X X California Adolphia X X X Del Mar Manzanita X X Engelmann Oak X X Orcutt’s Brodiaea San Diego Golden-star X San Diego Thorn-mint Spiny Rush X X X Summer-holly X X X Wart-stemmed Ceanothus X X Western Dichondra X X a Based on existing available data. New surveys were not performed in potential PPAs b Indicates number of records Indicates presence C 63 TABLE 12 1 1 I I Species 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 I I t PLANTS 1 1 1 I Western Dichondra X X 1 I D 1 I 1 1 POST-CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER LISTING PRESERVE PLANNING AREA SENSITIVE SPECIES RECOROS Preserve Planning Areal WILDLIFE Belding’s Savannah Sparrow 1 California Gnatcatcher 16 6 7 13 4( California Least Tern 1 Least Bell’s Vireo 1 Light-footed Clapper Rail 1 Orange-throated Whiptail 3 2 San Diego Homed Lizard 2 Ashy-spike Moss X X X X X California Adolphia X X X X x Del Mar Manzanita X X x Engelmann Oak X X Orcutt’s Brodiaea x San Diego Golden-star X San Diego Thorn-mint X X Spiny Rush X X X X Summer-holly X X X Wart-stemmed Ceanothus X X X X Sensitive species known to occur outside of the pre-listing preserve planning areas include: Belding’s Savannah Sparrow Light-footed Clapper Rail California Least Tern Least Bell’s Vireo Chocolate Lily Cliff Spurge Del Mar Mesa Sand Aster San Diego Marsh Elder Thread-leaved Brodiaea The post-listing preserve planning areas capture more sensitive species, because they are 1 However, sensitive species known to occur outside of the post-listing preserve planning areas inc 64 Chocolate Lily Cliff Spurge Del Mar Mesa Sand Aster San Diego Marsh Elder Thread-leaved Brodiaea Fortunately, most of the species not captured by the preserve: planning areas are plants that could be preserved by acquiring small areas of land or implementiing some type of localized protection program (conservation easements, fencing, etc.). Based on available information and discussions with local experts, it is estimated that there are between 113 and 166 California gnatcatcher pairs in the City of Carlsbad (P. Mock, pers. comm.). The 113 known to the City probably underestimate the total, because some coastal sage scrub habitat is unsurveyed. Of the known gnatcatchers in the City, the pre-listing preserve planning area includes approximately 72 pairs and the post-listing preserve planning area includes approximately 82 pairs. The remaining known pairs tend to be scattered among fragments of coastal sage scrub habitat throughout the City. Some of these pairs inhabit areas already protected as open space or along utility easements. Thus, most of the known gnatcatchers subject to the greatest risk are included in the preserve planning areas. These gnatcatchers also tend to be dustered wherever they occur. Therefore Carlsbad will have the opportunity to make a significant contribution to the conservation of gnatcatchers on a regional basis. Each of the preserve planning areas are discussed in detail below. Pre-Gnatcatcher Listing Preserve PlanninP Areas Preserve Planning Area 1 (PPA1) PPAl consists primarily of the Buena Vista Lagoon in its western portion and Buena Vita Creek in its eastern portion. This 393-acre area lies at the northwestern border of Carlsbad, and is bounded by State Highway 78 on the north and urban development on the south. The dominant habitat type is the open water of the lagoon (108 acres). The eastern portion supports riparian scrub and non- native annual grassland. The planning area also includes some small patches of disturbed habitat. As a potential preserve area, PPAl contains highly sensitive wetland habitats. The lagoons and salt marsh and freshwater marsh habitats are statutorily protected from development under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act and Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code. Furthermore, Buena Vista Lagoon is managed as an ecological reserve area by CDFG and is therefore already under state protection and management. The open water habitat of the lagoon supports a variety of fishes and provides foraging habitat for numerous waterfowl, diving birds, and shorebirds. Sensitive wildlife species likely to occur in the lagoon or the associated salt marsh include the Belding’s Savannah sparrow, light-footed clapper rail, California least tern, and salt-marsh skipper. Freshwater marsh provides habitat for two sensitive plant species: spiny rush and San Diego marsh elder. Carlsbad will need to manage the watershed and tidal influences that affect the viability of the lagoon, as well as Batiquitos and Agua Hedionda lagoons. While the lagoons and marsh habitat currently have statutory protection, and thus do not require acquisition, the HMP should include provisions for preserving or enhancing the quality of these valuable resources. A concern recently voiced is the enforcement of runoff control measures to reduce sedimentation into the lagoons, and in particular 65 Batiquitos. Another concern is to manage the watersheds of the lagoons to ensure a: balance bet freshwater and tidal influences on the fragile lagoon ecosystem. Preserve Planning Area 2 (PPA2) PPA2 contains 2,113 acres generally located east of Tamarack Avenue, northeast of El Camino and north of Palomar Airport Road. The dominant vegetation in this area is coasi;al sage scru chaparral (1,114 acres), with relatively large patches of disturbed habitat interspersed with the scrub and chaparral. This area supports one of the two remaining areas in Carlsbad with contiguous stands of coastal sage scrub. Other notable features in PPA2 include L,ake Calaver Squires Dam, riparian scrub, and well developed oak woodlands in the southern portion of the The important habitat in PPA2 occurs in three large blocks: around Lake Calavera, the blc coastal sage scrub east of Rancho Carlsbad Golf Course, and the block of coastal sage scru chaparral around Agua Hedionda Creek in the southeast portion of the planning asea. The no1 and southern portions contain the greatest diversity and density of sensitive species. These should be the focus of future acquisitions. Ideally, these sub-areas would be acquired as large h blocks connected by wildlife corridors. The woodland along Agua Hedionda Creek would pi a potential connection between the more southern habitat blocks. PPA2 supports substantial coastal sage scrub (550 acres) and the second greateslt concentral gnatcatchers in the City, as well as several other sensitive species (Table 12). Portions of PPr serve as a key part of the preserve system . Preserve Planning Area 3 (PPA3) PPA3 is an 859-acre area primarily comprised of Agua Hedionda Lagoon (264 acres) in th portion. The area lies south of Tamarack Avenue, north of Palomar Airport Road, and is bi by Hidden Valley Road. The eastern portion of PPA3 supports riparian scrub and relativelj areas of coastal sage scrub in the eastern portion. The greatest value of PPA3 is the lagoc riparian scrub, because these areas already have statutory protection. The remaining habitat ic is marginal: the patches of coastal sage scrub and chaparral would become fragmented with e\ development to the north and northeast (e.g., Evans Point) and thus will not connect with othe or chaparral in the City available for acquisition under the pre-listing scenario. Preserve Planning Area 4 (PPA4) PPA4 is a 679-acre area bordered on the north by Palomar Airport Road, on the east by El C Real, and on the north and south by development. This area contains patches of maritime su( scrub in the western portion, chaparral in the central and eastern portion, and some smaller i riparian scrub and oak woodland. Much of PPA4 supports non-native grassland and disturbed (310 acres). The coastal sage scrub in PPA4 borders relativeiy large stands of sage scrub to th and south, but these areas are rapidly urbanizing. It is unlikely that the coastal sa;ge scrub rex in this area will retain high biological value over the years unless adjacent development I include preservation of substantial areas of coastal sage scrub. The chaparral in the cent eastern portion of PPA4 is intact and connects to some large patches of chaparral to the PPA5. The chaparral-oak woodland mosaic in the eastern part of the area is the best ha 1 PPA4. I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 The primary value of PPA4 is that it contains a variety of sensitive plants associ<ated with II succulent scrub. Fortunately these patches of habitat can be preserved without requiring acq of large areas or connections to other habitat, since the primary purpose will be to preserve s vegetation. 66 Preserve Planning Auea 5 (PPAS) PPA5 contains 1,341 acres. The area is bounded on the north by Palomar Airport Road, on the south by Alga Road, an the west by El Camino Real, and or1 the west by the City of San Marcos. PPA5 supports a patchwork of coastal sage scrub, chaparral, oak woodland, and riparian scrub. The dominant vegetation, however, is non-native grassland (446 acres). The coastal sage scrub and chaparral habitats in PPA5 are much more fragmented than the habitats in PPA2 or PPA7. However, the coastal sage scrub on the eastern boundary of PPA5 connects with substantial coastal sage scrub in the City of San Marcos. Despite the apparent fragmentation of habitat in PPA5, thiis planning area supports at least 13 gnatcatcher pairs and a variety of sensitive plants (Table 12). PPA5 also would serve an important function as a link between the coastal sage scrub and chaparral habitats in PPA2 and PPA7. Potential corridors exist along the western edge of the area, just to the east of the western edge, and in the eastern part of PPA5. The habitat along the western edge, which parallels El Camino Real, consists primarily of chaparral and does not connect to other large chaparral patches. The more interior comdor is comprised of discrete but proximate patches of coastal sage scrub and riparian scrub. This potential corridor may function for coastal sage scrub species such as the gnatcatcher. The eastern comdor would require the assemblage of small fragmented patches of coastal sage scrub and riparian habitat to serve as a conduit for coastal sage scrub species. The most promising habitat link lies to the east and would connect with coastal sage scrub habitat in San Marcos (see discussion of wildlife comdors below). Preserve Planning Amis 6 (PPA6) PPA6 consists of the Batiquitos Lagoon area and comprises 671 acres. This area is bordered on the south by La Costa Avenue and the City of Encinitas, on the east by El Camino Real, and on the north by residential development and disturbed habitat. PPA6 is dominated by the open water habitat of the lagoon, with salt and freshwater marsh along the edges (529 total acres). As described above for the Buena 'Vista Lagoon, biologically this habitat is extremely valuable and sensitive. Sensitive species likely to occur also are as described above. The CDFG manages the Batiquitos Lagoon as an ecological preserve, and thus it is already under state protection. Preserve Planning Area 7 (PPA7) PPA7 consists of a 1,322-acre area located in the southeastern portion of the City. The property primarily is owned by the Fieldstone Company. This area is bisected by Rancho Santa Fe Road, bordered on the north by Alga Road, and on the southeast by ,the City of Encinitas. PPA7 supports the largest contiguous stand of coastal sage scrub in the City of Carlsbad and currently provides habitat for at least 35 gnatcatcher pairs. The remaining habitat in the PPA7 mostly is comprised of chaparral (205 acres) with smaller patches of non-native grassland and disturbed habitat in the central portion. There also are small areas of riparian scrub and a small area of open water. In addition to gnatcatchers, PPA7 supports a variety of sensitive plants. PPA7 will be a significant part of the preserve system because of its coastal sage scrub habitat. In coordination with the USFWS and the City of Carlsbad, the Fieldstone Company hi3S a pre-listing Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) proposal for preservation of nearly 500 acres of coastal sage scrub and gnatcatcher habitat as mitigation for their residential development project and the widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road. This preserved habitat will be a keystone of the City's preserve system and will provide a link to other gnatcatcher populations and coastal sage scrub in the City of Carlsbad, as well as with coastal sage scrub habitat outside of the City. This regional linkage will be essential for the viability of the 67 Carlsbad gnatcatcher population and will contribute to the viability of the regional gnatc population. Post-Gnatcatcher Listing Preserve PlanninP Areas The post-listing preserve planning areas are larger than the pre-listing areas because they i undeveloped areas that have an approved tentative map. However, there is a great deg concordance between the two sets of planning areas. In this section, significant differences preserve planning areas are noted. Preserve Planning Area 1 (PPA1) Same as pre-listing PPAl. Preserve Planning Area 2 (PPA2) PPA2 generally is the same as the pre-listing PPA2. The post-listing PPA2 contains 2,44( generally located east of Tamarack Avenue, northeast of El Camino Real, and north of P Airport Road. The dominant vegetation in this area is coastal sage scrub and chaparral (1,261 with relatively large patches of disturbed habitat interspersed with the sage scrub and chaparrs post-listing scenario differs from the pre-listing scenario primarily in the addition of a large ; coastal sage scrub in the northern portion. While addition of this area increases the amc coastal sage scrub in PPA2, there are no records of gnatcatchers in the added habitat. Th does, however, support a substantial population of California adolphia. Preserve Planning Area 3 (PPA3) The post-listing PPA3 extends the planning area well to the north and south of the pre planning area. PPA3 contains 1,708 acres including the Agua Hedionda Lagoon, marsh ha mosaic of coastal sage scrub, chaparral, non-native grassland, and disturbed habitat in the n< portion. The value of the post-listing PPA3 is significantly improved over the pre-listing plannii via the addition of substantial sage scrub and chaparral. The number of sensitive wildlife an species captured greatly increases by the expansion of PPA3 (Table 12). Also, the expand€ creates more opportunities for connecting the adjacent preserve planning areas. Preserve Planning Area 4 (PPA4) The post-listing PPA4, at 854 acres, is somewhat larger than the pre-listing PPA4, with the a of some coastal sage scrub and non-native grassland in the northwest comer and some chapar eucalyptus stands in the southern part. However, much of the habitat in PPA4 is non grassland and disturbed habitat. With the additional habitat in the north, PPA4 could serve a between PPA3 and PPA6. As described above, the primary value of PPA4 is the large nun sensitive plants that occur in the area. Preserve Planning Area 5 (PPAS) The post-listing PPA5 is the same as the pre-listing PPA5. Preserve Planning Area 6 (PPAB) The post-listing PPA6 is the same as the pre-listing PPA6. 1 I I I u I 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I 68 Preserve Planning Am 7 (PPA7) The post-listing PPA7 encompasses the pre-listing PPA7 and adds habitat in the extreme southeast comer of the City for a total of 1,983 acres. As described above, PPA7 includes the largest single area of continuous coastal sage scrub in the Carlsbad. The areas to the south add some areas of chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and riparian scrub, but the additional area mostly supports non-native grassland. However, the number of known gnatcatchers in PPA7 is 40 and the number of sensitive plants increases as well (Table 12). The addition of these areas also provides the potential for linking PPA6 (Batiquitos Lagoon) and PPA7 via riparian scrub habitat. 53 POTENTIA L WILDLIFE CORRIDORS As discussed in Section 4.2.3, the degree of isolation of individual presemes is an important design consideration, because one of the functions of a preserve system is to promote regional biological diversity. For maintenance of biodiversity, it is assumed that at least modest levels of migration between preserves via habitat linkages or wildlife corridors must occur to prevent local extinctions within the individual preserves. Some of the key factors for wildlife corridors to function effectively are: (1) isolated preserves must be as close together as possible to facilitate exchange of individuals between subpopulations (Diamond 1975; Wilson and Willis 1975); (2) corridors must be wide enough to overcome edge effects; (3) corridors must possess appropriate habitat and cover for the key species expected to travel through them; and (4) corridors must have as few turns or other barriers to movement as feasible (Soule and Gilpin 1991). 53.1 METHODS Potential wildlife corridors linking the preserve planning areas in Carlsbad were identified by examining the vegetation map with the pre- and post-listing planning area overlays (see Figures 10 and 11). Those areas identified as possible corridors provide either the shortest physical link between two preserve planning areas or areas with continuous or nearly continuous habitat that wildlife could use for movement and cover. In several cases, the corridors crciss major roadways such as El Camino Real or Palomar Airport Road, because there is no other way of connecting preserve areas. In these cases, the habitat of the planning areas generally abuts the road. These kinds of corridors will be of limited value, however, because they would preclude use by certain species. Not all of the corridors identified will be functional or desirable. In some cases, a corridor may effectively link two areas, but be non-functional because the two preserves support different species. Such a corridor could even be detrimental in the long term because animals using it may be at greater risk to predation resulting from edge effects, relative lack of cover or refuge, and unfamiliarity with the area. The corridor, in essence, acts as a "sink" for individuals and serves to reduce numbers in the feeder populations. The dashed lines signifymg wildlife corridors in Figures 10 arid 11 represent strips 375 feet wide. Ideally, corridors should be at least 1,OOO feet wide to provide adequate cover and space for the wildlife. However, the minimum width will depend on the type of habitat, the length of the corridor, and the amount of cover provided. (See discussion of buffers and distance setbacks provided in Section 4.2.4.) It is important to keep in mind that the corridors discussed bebw refer only to potential connections between preserve planning areas. Because the preserve planning areas represent the best remaining contiguous natural habitat in the City, the proposed corridors almost always will consist of more degraded or fragmented habitat. Also, as the preserve planning areas are further refined, corridors within the preserve planning areas will become important (Le., local or internal corridors). The same 69 ' principles discussed below for the corridors will apply to the local corridors. Fortunately, bc these corridors would be developed in habitat considered of high biological value, it should be to design connections that contain appropriate habitat and adequate space. 53.2 RESULTS Pre-Gnatcatcher Listine Wildlife Corridors Figure 10 illustrates the potential wildlife corridors under the pre-listing scenario. For brevi wildlife corridors are coded by the preserve planning areas they connect. For example, the u corridor between PPAl and PPA2 is coded as WC1-2. Where there are multiple corridors conn two preserves, a capital letter is added to the code to distinguish the different connections. WC1-2 is approximately 2,000 feet in length and crosses patches of coastal sage scrub. The va this corridor is questionable because it connects the coastal sage scrub in PPA2 with non- grassland in PPA1, and thus would not serve a useful function for coastal sage scrub species. is an example of a wildlife corridor that could function as a sink for some species. Larger mar such as coyotes, foxes, skunks or raccoons probably would use this corridor. WC2-SA bridges a gap of approximately 2,600 feet between chaparral north of Palomar Airpor in PPA2 and chaparral to the south in PPM. The corridor crosses Palomar Airport Ro; disturbed habitat. The major impediment posed along this corridor is the roadway. Palomar r! Road receives heavy traffic flow during the day, which would preclude diurnal movements of u Species capable of moving at night, such as coyotes, foxes, raccoons, skunks, and perhaps bc may be able to cross the roadway without great risk. Rabbits and rodents also may effectivc this corridor. WC2-5B connects PPA2 and PPA5 via strips of coastal sage scrub and disturbed habitat approxi 3,700 feet long and about 700 feet wide. It ties in oak woodland in PPA2 with a patch of I sage scrub in PPA5. This corridor could function for larger species as well as small coastal sagc species. The major obstacle in this corridor is Palomar Airport Road, which may inhibit or pr movement by some species as described for WC2-5A. WC4-5 connects the east part of PPA4 with the west part of PPM. This corridor would CI patches of chaparral in the two preserve planning areas and may link areas of oak woodland two preserve areas. The major drawback to this linkage is that it crosses El Camino Real, poses an obstacle to smaller and diurnal species. Larger nocturnal species likely use this CI without much difficulty. As discussed above, however, the main biological value of PPA4 comc sensitive plants species. The wildlife in PPA4 is threatened by urbanization to the north. The a wildlife corridor linking PPA4 and PPA5 probably is of low priority. WC4-6 connects the southern portion of PPA4 with the northern portion of PPA6 at Bar Lagoon. The corridor crosses Alga Road and extends approximately 5,000 feet through disturt: eucalyptus woodland habitat. Because of the lack of cover and the obstacle posed by Alga Ro of the corridor would be limited to crepuscular and nocturnal movements by species such as I foxes, raccoons, coyotes, and perhaps bobcats. The eucalyptus woodland provides habitat for 1 i 1 1 R I 1 I I IC I I 1 I 1 1 1 il 1 and other birds. WC5-7A is located east of the City boundary and connects PPM with PPA7. It t approximately 6,000 feet, of which 4,500 feet is coastal sage scrub, 1,100 feet is riparian scri 400 feet is developed. This may be a critical link between the coastal sage scrub habitat and sage scrub species in the southeast portion of Carlsbad and that in the City of San Marcos. 70 WC5-7B is a 3,300-foot corridor approximately 300-400 feet wide that connects PPM and PPA7. It follows an existing powerline easement. The corridor primarily supports non-native grassland and probably serves as a corridor for larger species such as coyotes, foxes, and skunks. It would not be particularly useful for coastal sage scrub species because there is relatively little scrub habitat in PPM. Small species that use non-native grasslands, such 25 rodents and rabbits could use this corridor as well. WC5-6,7 comprises La Costa Golf Course. It connects PPA5 and PPA7 and links with PPA6 via a strip of marsh and disturbed habitat. While golf courses do not :serve as corridors for many sage scrub and chaparral species, larger mammalian species such as coyotes and rabbits will use such areas for movements. The connection to PPA6 would provide a corridor for species using Batiquitos Lagoon. Post-Gnatcatcher Listing Wildlife Corridors WC1-2 is the same as the pre-listing WC1-2. WC2-3A is a 3,700-foot corridor that connects PPA2 and PPKI. This corridor includes coastal sage scrub, non-native annual grassland, and disturbed habitat. It links coastal sage scrub habitat in PPA2 with riparian scrub, eucalyptus woodland, and disturbed habitat in PPA3. There are areas of chaparral and coastal sage scrub in the northern part of PPA3 that potentially could link with PPAZ habitat via this corridor, The drawback to this corridor is that it crosses El Camino Real below the intersection of El Camino and Tamarack Avenue, thus precluding or inhibiting the movement of diurnal and smaller species that would have difficulty safely crossing a four-lane thoroughfare. WC2-3B is a 4,500-foot corridor that connects PPA2 and PPA3 just to the east of WC2-3A via riparian scrub. This corridor, although lengthy, directly connects coastal sage scrub in PPA2 with riparian scrub on PPA3. Again, however, the corridor must cross El Camino Real, thus providing an obstacle to the movement of many animals. The other main dlisadvantage of this corridor is that it is rather narrow -- generally less than 200 feet wide and is adjacent to disturbed habitat. WC2-3C is a 1,500-foot corridor that connects riparian scrub in PPA2 with eucalyptus woodland in PPA3. A patch of chaparral lies southwest of the eucalyptus. This may be an effective corridor for some avian species that can use the riparian scrub and oak woodland to the east in PPA2 and also utilize the eucalyptus woodland and riparian habitats in PIPM. As with the other corridors connecting PPA2 and PPA3, El Camino Real provides an obstacle to movement between the two areas, although it would not be an obstacle to many avian species. WC2-§A is the same as the pre-listing WC2-5A. WC2-53 is the same as the pre-listing WC2-5B. WC3-4 is a 5W-fOOt corridor between PPA3 and PPA4. This corridor probably would not serve an important function because it is interrupted by Palomar Airport Road. Also, the western end of PPA4 has questionable value as a wildlife preserve because is consists of a patchwork of coastal sage scrub, non-native grassland, and disturbed habitat. WC4-5 is the same as the pre-listing WC4-5. WC4-6 is the same as the pre-listing WC4-6. WC5-7A is the same as the pre-listing WC5-7A. 71 WC5-7B is the same as the pre-listing WC5-7B. WCS-6,7 is the same as the pre-listing WC5-6,7. WC6-7 is a 3,oot)-foot corridor that connects the eastern end oE PPA6 and the western end of 1 The corridor supports riparian scrub that is 500-700 feet wide. This corridor would serve to cc marsh areas in PPA6 with riparian scrub in PPA7. An obstacle for this corridor is the La Avenue-El Camino Real intersection area. This corridor likely would be effective for avian si that use the marshkiparian habitats, but limited for small mammals. WC7-7A is an 1,100-foot corridor that connects two parts of PPA7. The corridor supports non- grassland and connects non-native grassland areas in the two parts of PPA7. There also are patches of coastal sage scrub, riparian scrub, and chaparral near the corridor connectior potentially could benefit from the linkage. W7-7B is a 1,500-foot corridor that connects two parts of PPA7. The corridor contains disi habitat and non-na tive grassland. 1 5.4 CONCEPTUAL PRESERVE SYSTEM I 1 1 1 I I t I I 1 1 i I I I i 1 I Under the City of Carlsbad Draft Comprehensive Open Space and Conservation Re: Management Plan, dated January 3, 1992, three existing preserves are present within the Batiquitos Lagoon, Buena Vista Lagoon, and the University of California Reserve. The conservation proposal between the City, Fieldstone, and the USEWS concerning gnatcatche coastal sage scrub would establish a fourth preserve of nearly 500 acres in the vicinity of R Santa Fe Road. Assuming that the lagoons and associated marshhetland habitat, riparian scri woodland habitat, and the Fieldstone site have protected status, approximately 2,500 acres of 1 in the City is protected. This does not include areas already under City protection provic General Plan and zoning controls, such as hillsides, steep slopes, canyons, or areas identified of the City trails system. Those protected lands still must be added to the information t identify valuable, yet unprotected, lands. The intent of this report is to provide the City of Carlsbad with the requisite biological infor, to supplement the natural resources already under protection in the City. As such, the infor provided in the form of the rated habitat cells, preserve planning areas, and potential I corridors should provide the City with the basic information needed to guide future re planning. It is recommended that the City consider acquisition of at least two or three additional habita to develop a complete preserve system. The best remaining habitat areas in the City are 1 around the western end of Lake Calavera and the riparian scrub running south from the la1 Agua Hedionda Creek area south of Squires Dam, the western portion of PPA.5, and the 1 portion of PPA4. Ideally, the Lake Calavera, Agua Hedionda Creek, and PPA5 areas could be with wildlife corridors. Local corridors within PPA2 have not been specifically identifiec corridor between PPA2 and PPM is WC2-5A. PPA5 and PPA7 could be linked with WC5-' described above, the central portion of PPA4 supports maritime succulent scrub and a vai sensitive plant species. corridors. It is important to note that these recommendations are very general. It is not possible at tk to specify parcels for acquisition. Several steps are necessary before the City can begin ac habitat for the preserve system, including: These areas could be preserved effectively without additional 72 a Identification of habitat areas already under public ownership or part of the Citywide trails system (Le., the gap analysis) Identification of habitat areas protected as open space in existing and proposed development projects Analysis of how public and protected habitat relates to unprotected core preserve areas identified in this document Targeting of specific acquisition areas based upon the above analyses Focused biological field surveys of targeted areas to validate the habitat analysis presented here and to provide current information on general and sensitive resource diversity and abundance a a 0 8 5.5 COMPATIBLE LAND USE ANALYSIS One of the difficult challenges for designing and implementing a preserve system in the City of Carlsbad will be to specify appropriate buffers and setbacks between development and preserve areas, as well as to define acceptable human uses of preserve areas. A discussion of buffers and setbacks is presented in Section 4-, along with some recommendations relating to different habitat types. These recommendations are based on guidelines from the San Diego County RPO and a separate set of guidelines from PSBS. There are very little data on the impacts of development on preserve areas. One point of general agreement, however, is that buffers and setbacks should not be considered as part of the preserve area. These areas will certainly be degraded by human related activity. Researchers presently are conducting studies on the "naturalhrban interface" and some guidelines should be forthcoming in the next few years (e.g., Scott 1992; Savaujot 1992). In the absence of quantitative data on impacts by development, there are a few general guidelines that should be followed in delineating preserve boundaries. These guidelines relate to the physical features of the landscape and planned uses in developed areas. With regard to physical features, vegetation and topography can play an important role in how well a natural area is protected by affecting the level of public access to a natural area. In the absence of an established trail system, dense vegetation (e.g., chaparral, coastal sage scrub, or wetland habitat) can provide barriers to access by both humans and pets. Likewise, a preserve boundary on a ridgeline surrounded by steep slopes can restrict access to the preserved area. In natural areas used by the public, low wooden fencing or planting of shrub species, such as ceanothus or cactus, can serve to limit trespass into sensitive areas. That is, most people choose the path of least resistance, and few are likely to make the effort to gain access to rugged or densely vegetated areas. Recreation activities such as hiking, jogging, walking dogs, and mountain biking should be limited to specified trails and rigorously enforced. These activities, however, may not be appropriate for some preserved areas. The general idea is to create a preserve system where easy public access is restricted either by natural or artificial physical features. Such a benign approach (as opposed to wire fencing, heavy patrol, etc.) is preferable because of the cost savings and the public's perception of the resource as available for public enjoyment. Development adjacent to preserve areas poses varying degree:; of risk to them. Medium and high density residential development probably poses the greatest riisk, because of the sheer number of people, noise, lighting, use of nearby open space for recreation, pets, human-commensal species (e.g., 73 starlings and house sparrows that compete with native species for nesting areas and other resoi arson and accidental fires, and trash dumping. Preserve areas near residential developmen require the greatest amount of buffering either through distance, vegetation, topography, or fe Commercial development poses less of a risk to natural open space because of the limitec people use these areas, the absence of children, and the absence of pets. The most compatibl uses include active recreation areas such as parks, athletic fields (although nighttime lighting I: a problem), golf courses, and active agricultural uses. The greatest risk posed by these uses be maintenance operations, such as the use of chemicals on maintained turf or crops. Also, c of runoff from cultivated areas is an important issue. A final, and very difficult issue, is that of itinerant worker camps scattered throughout the dra and canyons of Carlsbad. These camps are located in some of the most sensitive habitats in th (e.g., oak woodlands and riparian areas or any areas with heavy canopy cover and an understory). The presence of the camps has seriously degraded these habitats because of tra: garbage, trampling of vegetation, and unsanitary living conditions (e.g., open latrine : Ultimately, the City will have to address this problem if these sensitive areas are to be pres Also, many of the areas used by the itinerant workers constitute important wildIife corrido habitat linkages. The presence of people in these areas certainly disrupts their use by wildlif 5.6 CONCLUSION The City of Carlsbad has the opportunity to develop a preserve system to conserve a var general and sensitive biological resources. This analysis provides the biological information nec for implementing a preserve system within the City that will integrate with regional consel planning efforts. It is anticipated that the City can effectively develop a preserve system USI information provided in this document, along with additional information regarding land u public and private property ownership in the City. This document is a fundamental step I i i 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I achieving that goal. 74 I \ SECTION Ackn o w ledgem BIOLOGICAL RF3OURCES AND HABITAT ANALYSIS in support ofthe CITY OF CARLSBAD HAB~AT MANACEMENT PLAN I SECTION 6 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Completion of the Biological Resources Inventory and Analysis phase of the Carlsbad Hat Management Plan was the joint effort of many participants. The HMP Advisory Committee is tc commended for their faithful attendance and participation at the monthly meetings. Rick Alexa. of Consultants Collaborative, Inc. provided excellent leadership and guidance in his role as cha the committee. Don Rideout and Michael Holzmiller of the City of Carlsbad were critical tc success of the work through their provision of City resources. Bob Parrott, Paula Cunningham, Sue Carnevale of SANDAG provided GIS services, and Bob wrote the computer program foi habitat quality analyses. Also important to the success of this project were numerous property ow and their consultants who provided additional information and corrections to the biological resot data base. Finally, we thank the many reviewers who provided valuable comments on the ( document . The following are the biological consultant team members: H. Lee Jones, Ph.D. -- Project Director, Michael Brandman Associates Allison Alberts, Ph.D. -- Preserve Design Specialist, Center €or the Reproduction of Endani Philip R. Behrends, Ph.D. -- Project Manager, Biologist, Dudek & Associates Nancy Bell-Gallagher -- Graphic Artist, Michael Brandman PLssociates John W. Brown, Ph.D. -- Biologist, Dudek & Associates Martie k Clemons -- Graphic Artist, Dudek & Associates Michael Evans -- Natural Resources Consultant Sarah k Flick -- Botanist, Michael Brandman Associates Tonette S. Foster -- Word Processing, Administrative Assistant, Dudek & Associates Marcia McRae -- Word Processing, Administrative Assistant, Michael Brandman Associates Gregory Pregill, Ph.D. -- Sensitive Amphibians and Reptiles, San Diego Natural History Mus( Fran Saveriano -- Regional Business Manager, Michael Brandman Associates Wayne D. Spencer, Ph.D. -- Biologist, Michael Brandman Associates Fred T. Sproul -- Sensitive Plant Species, Plant Ecology Harold (Howie) Wier -- Biologist, Dudek & Associates Species, Zoological Society of San Diego 75 SECTION / Literatwe C , \ ’ -& BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND HABITAT ANALYSIS 3 in support of the ClTY OF CARLSBAD HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN - i SECTION 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LITERATURE CITED Alberts, A. C., k D. Richman, D. Tran, R. Sauvajot, C. McCalvin and D. T. Bolger. (In prepara Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Species Diversity of Native and Exotic Plar Southern California Coastal Scrub. In J. E. Keely (ed) The Interface Between Ecolog Land Development in California. Based on a paper presented at the Southern Calif Academy of Sciences Annual Meeting, Occidental College, May 1-2, 1992. Atwood, J. L. 1990. Status Review of the California Gnatcatcher (PoliopfiIa califor I Unpublished technical report, Manomet Bird Observatory, Manomet, Massachusetts, Bauder, E. T. 1986. San Diego vernal pools. Recent and projected losses: their conditior threats to their existence, 1979-1990. Vols. 1 & 2. Report and Appendices 1-9. Pre for the California Department of Fish and Game, Endangered Plant Project. Beauchamp, R. M. 1986. A Flora of San Diego County, California. Sweetwater Press, Nationa California. Block, W., M. Morrison, and J. Verner. 1990. Widlife and oak-woodland interdepenc Fremontia 1872-76. Blouin, M. S. and E. E Conner. 1985. Conservation 32: 277-288. Is there a best shape for nature preserves? Bio, Boecklen, W. J. 1986. Optimal design for nature reserves: consequences of genetic drift. Bioi Conservation 38: 323-338. Boecklen, W. J. and G. W. Bell. 1987. Consequences of faunal collapse and genetic drift f design of nature reserves. Pages 141-149 in D. A. Saunders, G. W. Arnold, k A. BUI and A. J. M. Hopkins, (eds). Nature Conservation: The Role of Remnants of Vegetation. Surrey Beatty, Australia. . Bond, S. I. 1977. An annotated list of the mammals of San Diego County, California. Trar Diego Soc. Nat. Hi&. 18: 229-248. Bowman, R. H. 1973. Soil Survey of Sun Diego Area, California, Part 1. United States Depa of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service. 104 pp. Brown, J. W. 1981. The wandering skipper: at home on the coastal salt marsh. Envirc Southwest 492:26. Brown, J. W. and W. W. McGuire. 1983. A new subspecies of Euphyes vestris (Boisduva Southern California (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae). Trans. Sun Diego Soc. Nut. Hkt. 20 Sensitive and declining buttefly species in Sun Diego County, Cal Brown, J. W. 1991. Manuscript. Available from Dudek and Associates, Inc. 20 pp. Burkey, T. V. 1989. Extinction in nature reserves: the effect of fragmentation and the imp of migration between reserve fragments. Oikos 55: 75-81. 76 Busnardo, M. 1989. The autecology of Panoquina erram (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae): preliminary field and laboratory observations. Tijuana Estuary RestorationEnhancement Project, Spring, 1989.6 pp. + maps. Carlsbad, City of. 1992. Draft Comprehensive Open Space and Conservation Resource Management Plan. Diamond, J. M. 1975. The island dilemma: lessons of modern biogeographic studies for the design of natural reserves. Biological Conservation 7: 129-146. Donahue, J. P. 1975. A report on the 24 species of California butterflies being considered for Submitted to placement on the Federal Lists of Endangered or Threatened Species. California Department of Food and Agriculture. 58 pp. Duever, L. C. and R. E Noss. 1990. A computerized method of priority ranking for natural areas. Nau York State Museum Bulletin 471: 22-33. Emmel, T. C. and J. F. Emmel. 1973. "The Butterflies of Southern California." Natural History Museum of L,os Angeles County, Science Series 26:l-148. ERCE. 1991. "Detailed Biological Assessment for the City of Poway." Prepared for City of Poway Planning Department. Everett, W. T. 1979. Sensitive, Threatened and Declining Bird Species of San Diego County. San Diego Audubon Society Sketches 29:2-3. Faeth, S. H. and T. C. Kane.. 1978. Urban biogeography: city parks as islands for Diptera and Coleoptera. Oecologia 32: 127-138. Fahrig, L. and G. Merriam. 1985. Habitat patch connectivity and population survival. Ecology 66: 1762- 1768. Forman, R. T. T. and M. Godron. 1981. Patches and structural components for a landscape ecology. Bioscience 31: 738-740. Franklin, I. R. 1980. Evolutionary changes in small populations. Pages 135-149 in M. E. Soule and B. A Wilcox (eds). Conservation Biology: An Evolutioitaly Perspective. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts . Game, M. 1980. Best shape for nature reserves. Nature 287: 1530-632. Gelbach, F. R. 1975. Investigation, evaluation, and priority ranking of natural reserves. Biological Conservation 8: 79-88. Goldsmith, F. B. 1975. The evaluation of ecological resources in the countryside for conservation purposes. Biological Conservation 8: 89-96. Grinnell, J. and A Miller. 1944. The distribution of the birds of California. Pa&& Coast Avifauna 27: 1-608. 77 Hix, A. B. (ed.) 1990. Sensitivity of San Diego’s biological resources: an informational 1 Compiled by City of San Diego Planning Department, Development and Environi Planning Division (primarily Lisa Wood). 29 pp. + attachments. I I I I I I I Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestd Natural Communities of Cah Nongame-Heritage Program, California Department of Fish and Game. 150 pp. Jensen, D. B. 1987. Concepts of preserve design: what we have learned. Pages 595-603 ii Elias, (ed). Conservation and Management of Rare and Endangered Plants. California Plant Society, Sacramento, California. Kelly, P. and J. Rotenberry. (In preparation). Buffer zones for ecological reserves in Califon J. E. Keely (ed) The Interface Between Ecology and Land Development in California. presented at the Southern California Academy of Sciences Annual Meeting, Occ College, May 1-2, 1992. Lacy, R. C. 1987. Loss of genetic diversity from managed populations: interacting effects c mutation, immigration, selection, and population subdivision. Conservation Biology 1: 11 Lande, R. and G. F. Barrowclough. 1987. Effective population size, genetic variation, and th for population management. Pages 87-123 in M. E. Soule (ed). Vmble Populatit Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. I I Biological Conservation 55: 77-92. I I I I Laurence, W. F. and E. Yensen. 1991. Predicting the impacts of edge effects in fragmented hi Lichtwardt, E. and E. Gold. 1980. Field checklist of Amphibians and Reptiles of San Dieq Imperial eounties. Special Publ. No. 3, San Diego Herpetological Society. MacNeill, C. D. 1962. Preliminary report on the Hesperiidae of Baja California. Proceeding California Academy of Sciences 30: 91-116. Margules, C. and M. B. Usher. 1981. Criteria used in assessing wildlife conservation poten review. Biological Conservation 21: 79-109. Massey, B, W. 1977. A census of the breeding population of Belding’s Savannah Spar California, 1977. Study VI, Job 1.2, Final Report. California Department of Fish and McCaskie, G. 1977. A Field Checklist of the Birds of San Diego County. Prepared for San County Parks and Recreation Department. I I I I I I McGurty, B. M. 1980. Survey and status of endangered and threatened species of reptiles r occurring in San Diego, California. San Diego Herpetological Society. Munz, P. 1974. A Flora of Southern California. University of California Press, Berkeley, Cal 1086 pp. Murphy, D. D. 1988. Challenges to biological diversity in urban areas. Pages 71-76 in E. 0. (ed). Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 78 Murphy, D. D. 19990. A report on the California butterflies as candidates for endangered status by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Draft report for California Department of Fish and Game Contract No. C-1755. 60 pp. Noss, R. F. 1983. A regional landscape approach to maintain diversity. Bioscience 33: 700-706. Noss, R. F. 1987, Corridors in real landscapes: a reply to Simberloff and Cox. Conservation Biology 1: 159-164. Oberbauer, T.A. 1991a. Southern California Botanists. Unique soils and plants of limited distribution in the Peninsular Ranges. Paper presented at Symposium of So. California Botanists. October 26, 1991, CSU Fullerton. Oberbauer, T. A. 1991b. In P. Abbott and B. Elliot (eds). Geol. Soc. North her., So. Calif. Reg. Sympos. San Diego, October 21-24, 1991. Pryde, P. R. 1984. San Diego: An Introduction to the Region. KendalliHunt Publ. Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 297 pp. Rea, A. M., and K. L. Weaver. 1990. Ten taxonomy, distribution, and status of coastal California cactus wrens. Western Birds 21: 81-126. Reed, P. B. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: California (Region 0). Biological Report S(26.10). United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. Remsen, J. V. 1978. Bird Species of Special Concern in California. State of California Department of Fish and Game. San Diego Association of Governments. 1988. Draft Comprehlensive Species Management Plan for the least Bell’s vireo. Prepared by RECON. 195 pp. et appendices. Sauvajot, R. (In preparation). Effects of urban encroachment on wildlife in the Santa Monica Mountains. In J. E. Keely (ed) The Interface Between Ecology and Land Development in California. Based on paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern California Academy of Sciences, Occidental College, May 1-2, 19’92. Schonewald-Cox, C. M. and J. W. Bayless, 1986. The boundary model: a geographical analysis of design and conservation of natural reserves. Biological Conservation 38: 305-322. Scott, T. A. 1990. Conserving California’s rarest white oak: the Engelmann oak. Fremontia 1826- 29. Scott, T. A. (In preparation). Effect of housing developments on urban bird populations. In J. E. Keely (ed) The Interface Between Ecology and Land Development in California. Based on paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern California Academy of Sciences, Occidental College, May 1-2, 1992. Shaffer, M. I,. 1981. Minimum population sizes for species conservation. Bioscience 31: 131-134. 79 Smith, J. P., Jr., and K. Berg. 1988. California Native Plant Society’s Inventory of Rar Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Special Publication No. 1 (4th Edition), Cali Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. 168 pp, I I I I I 1 I Soule, M. E. 1991. Land use planning and wildlife maintenance: guidelines for conserving N in an urban landscape. Journal of the American Planning Association 57: 313-323. Soule, M. E., D. T. Bolger, A. C. Alberts, J. Wright, M. Sorice, and S. Hill. 1988. Reconsti dynamics of rapid extinctions of chaparral-requiring birds in urban habitat is Conservation Biology 2: 75-92. Soule, M. E. and M. E. Gilpin. 1991. The theory of wildlife corridor capability. Pages 3-8 in Saunders and R. J. Hobbs (eds). The Role of Corridors in Nature Conservation. Surrey E Sydney, Australia. Souie, M. E. and D. SimberIoff. 1986. What do genetics and ecology tell us about the de: nature reserves? Biological Conservation 35: 19-40, Stebbins, R. C. 1985. A Field Guide to Western ReptiZes and Amphibians. Houghton Miffli Boston, Mass. I I Conservation 3: 169-172. I Oregon. I 276 pp. Tans, W. 1974. Priority ranking of biotic natural areas. Michigan Botanist 13: 31-39. Tubbs, C. R. and J. W. Blackwood. 1971. Ecological evaluation for planning purposes. Bic United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1988. Least Bell’s Vireo Draft Recovery Plan. Po Unitt, P. A. 1984. Birds of San Diego County. Memoir 13, San Diego Society of Natural € Usher, M. B. 1987. Effects of fragmentation in communities and populations: a revie applications to wildlife conservation. Pages 103-121 in D. A. Saunders, G. W. Arnolc Burbridge, and A J. M. Hopkins (eds). Nature Consemation: The Role of Remnants oj Vegetation. Surrey Beatty, Australia. I I I I R I I I Wells, P. 1990. Review of Arctostaphylos glandulosa complex. Four Seasons. 8: 46-70. Wiggins, I. L. 1980. A Flora of Baja California. Stanford University Press. 1025 pp. Wilbur, S. R. 1973. The Red-shouldered hawk in the western United States. Testern Birds 4 Wilbur, S. R. 1974. The status of the Light-footed Clapper Rail. American Birds 28: 8684 Wilbur, S. R., P. D. Jorgensen, B. W. Massey, and V. A. Basham. 1979. The Light-footed t Rail: an update. American Birds 33: 251. Willet, G. 1933. Revised list of birds of southwestern California. Pacific Coast Avifauna 21 80 Wilson, E. 0. and E. 0. Willis. 1975. Applied biogeography. Pages 522-534 in M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond (eds). Ecology and Evolution of Communities. Belknap Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Wright, D. F. 1977. A site evaluation scheme for use in the assessment of potential nature reserves. BwZogical Conservation 11: 293-305. Wright, D. F. and S. P. Hubbell. 1983. Stochastic extinction and reseme size: a focal species approach. Ohs 41: 466-476. Yahner, R. H. 1988. Changes in wildlife communities near edges. Comervation BWZogy 4: 333-339. Zedler, P. H. 1977. Life history attributes of plants and fire cycles; a case study in chaparral dominated by Cupressusforbesii, pp. 451-458, in: Mooney, H. and L. Conrad (tech. coor.), Proceedings of the Symposium on the Environmeniral Consequences of Fire and Fuel Management on Mediterranean Ecosystems. Palo Alto. California. Zedler, J. B. 1982. The ecology of southern California coaslal salt marshes: a community profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Senice. FWSlOBS-8lR4. 110 lpp. [Second printing with corrections 1984.1 81 , ERALAND S ' SENSITWEPLANT \ SPECIES RESIDENT OR BREEDI~ SAN DIEGO Cor / / I -4@% 3 -% BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND HABITAT ANALYSIS in support oftbe ClTY OF ORLSBAD WBITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 \ I I I I I I I I I I I 1 e 1 I I I I FEDERAL AND STATE DESIGNATED SENSITIVE WILDLIFE SPECIES OCCURRING IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY 1 SPECIES USFWS CDFG BIRDS None Ahnophila mfkeps canescens caa Agelaius tricolor c2 CSe Ammodramus (Passerculus) sandwichensis beldingi a SI? Ammodramus (Passerculus) sandwichensis rostrn tus c2 CSC Southern California Rufous-crowned Sparrow Tricolored Blackbird Belding’s Savannah Sparrow Large-Billed Savannah Sparrow Amphkpua bellii bellii c2 None None Bell’s Sage Sparrow Campylorhynchus biunneicapillus sandiegensis c2 Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus Cld cse Coastal Cactus Wren Western Snowy Plover Chilodanius niger c2 None Empidonax traillu &us C1 None None Black Tern Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Eremophila alpestrk actia c2 California Horned Lark Falco peregrinus anatum FE? SE American Peregine Falcon e Haliaeem leucocephalus FE SE Bald Eagle Lank ludovicianus c2 None Loggerhead Shrike Laterallus jamaicemis c2 None Black Rail Oreortyx pktw c2 None Moutan Quail Pejecanus occidentalis califomicus FE SE Plegadis chihi c2 csC Polwptila califomica califomica Proposed CSC California Brown Pelican White-faced Ibis California Gnatcatcher Ehdangered Rallus longirostris IevjPes FE SE Light-footed Clapper Rail Stema aniillamm browni FE SE California Least Tern Sterna elegans c2 CSC Elegant Tern Strix occidentalis occdentalis c2 None California Spotted Owl Vieo beliu pusillus FE SE Least Bell’s Vireo MAMMALS None Choeronycteh mexicana IC2 Dr;podomys stephensi :E ST Mexican Long-tongued Bat Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat None Eudenna maculatum (2 Spotted Bat Eumops peroh ca1ifomicu.s c2 CSC California Mastiff Bat Lepus califomicus bennettii (2 None San Diego Black-tailed Jackrabbit Macrotus califomicus (2 CSC California Leaf-nosed Bat Neotoma lepida intermedia (2 None San Diego Desert Woodrat I Onychomys torridus ramona c2 None 1 Southern Grasshopper Mouse 1 Pennisular Bighorn Sheep Ovis canadensis cremnobates c2 ST Perognathus (Chaetodipus) califomicus fernoralis c2 None Dulzura California Pocket Mouse a None 8 I 1 II I Perognathus (Chaetodipus) fallax fallax Northwestern San Diego Pocket Mouse Perognathus (Chaetodipus) fallax pczllidiis a None Pallid San Diego Pocket Mouse Perognathus longimembris brevinasus c2 csc Los Angeles Pocket Mouse Perognathus 1ongimembi-h internationalis c2 None Jucumba Little Pocket Mouse Perognathus longimembrir pacificus c2 ac 1 Pacific Pocket Mouse 1 REPTILES I California Tiger Salamander m Orange-throated Whiptail s Coastal Western Whiptail I Southwestern Pond Turtle Ambystoma califomkme c2 None Cnemidophorus hyperythrus c2 cse Cnemidophom tignk multiscutatus c2 None Clemmys mamarota pallida C1 CSC Coleonyx swaitaki c2 ST Barefoot Banded Gecko c2 None I 1 I I I Coleonyx variegatus abbotti San Diego Banded Gecko c2 None Crotalus ruber ruber Northern Red Diamond Rattlesnake Diadophus punciatus similis c2 None San Diego Ringneck Snake Eumeces skdtonianus inierparieialis c2 None Coronado Skink Laanpropelhk zonaia pulchra c2 None San Diego Mountain Kingsnake Licharana irivirigata rosamca c2 None Coastal Rosy Boa Phrynosorna coronaturn blainvdIei c2 CSC Phrynosorna mcalli c1 CSC San Diego Homed Lizard Flat-tailed Homed Lizard Salvadora hexalepis v@liea c2 None Western Patch-nosed Snake Sauromatus obesus c2 None Common Chuckwalla Scetoporus gracwsus vandenburgianus a None Southern Sagebrush Lizard Thamnophis harnrnondi c2 None Two-striped Garter Snake AMPHIBIANS Bufo (mkroscaphus califomicus) califoinicus IC2 a&. AITOYQ Toad Ensatina eschscholtzi klauberi c-2 CSC Large-blotched Salamander Rana aurora drayioni (21 eSC California Red-legged Frog Rana mucosa (22 CSC Mountain Yellow-legged Frog 1 1 I 1 I s 1 1 INVERTEBRATES INSECTA Coelus globosus c2 None Euphydryas editha quho c2 None Euphyes viestriS harbonsi c2 None None Globose Dune Beetle Quino Checker Harbison's Dun Skipper Lycaena hemes c2 Heme Copper c2 None Mitoura thomei Thorne's Hairstreak a None Panoquina errans Pseudocopaeodes emus e2 None Qragus ruralis lagunae a None Salt Marsh Skipper 1 Wandering SEpper I Laguna Mountains SEpper 1 ANOSTRACA Branchinecta "sandkgonemb'@ Petitioned for San Diego Fairy Shrimp Listing as Endangered I I 1 1 1 I I None Streptocephalus woottoni Proposed Riverside Fairy Shrimp Endangered e a C2 -- Category 2 Candidat; b c SE -- State Endangered c~ C1 -- Category 1 Candidate! e FE -- Federally Endangered f ST -- State Threatened @ csc -- California Species of special Concern Species currently undescribed, but under consideration for species status, Category 2 Candidate for federal listing includes those taxa for which existing biological information may warrant listing, but for which substantial biological information to support a proposed listing is lacking. Category 1 Candidate for federal listing includes those taxa for which there exists sufficient biological information to support a proposal to list as threatened or endangered. * ! 1 STATE AND FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED SENSITIVE PLANT SPECIES OCCURRING IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY I II SPECIES USFWS CDFG CNP Acanthomintha ikicifolia Cl SE List lB, San Diego Thorn-mint 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 8 I 1 i 1 I Ambrosia pumika c2 None List lB, San Diego Ambrosia Aphanisma blitoides a None List 3, ?. Aphanisma Arctostaphylos otayensis c2 None List lB, Qtay Manzanita Astragalus deanei c2 None List lB, Dean’s Milk Vetch Astragalus douglasii var. peps frictus c2 None List lB, Jacumba Milk Vetch Astragalus magdaleme var. peirsonii c2 SE List lB, Peirson’s Milk Vetch Astragalus oocapus c2 None List lB, Descanso Milk Vetch Astragalus tener var. tili c2 SE List lB, Coastal Dunes Milk Vetch Bacchark vanessae c2 SE List lB, Encinitas Baccharis Brodiaea jZifo1i.a c2 SE List lB, Thread-leaved Brodiaea Brodkea orcutt% c2 None List lB, Orcutt’s Brodiaea Calamagrostis densa c2 None List 4, I Dense Reed Grass 1 San Miguel Savory Calamintha (Satureja) chandlen c2 None List 4, 1 Calochottm dunnii c2 Rare List lB, 2-2-2 Dunm’s Mariposa Lily Caulanthus simulans c2 None List 4, 1-2-3 Payson’s Caulanthus Caulanthus stenocarpus c2 Rare List lB, 3-2-2 Slender-pod Caulanthus Ceanothus cyaneus c2 None List lB, 3-2-2 Lakeside Ceanothus (wild-lilac) Chaenacris parishii c2 None List 4, 1-1-2 Parish’s (Chaenactis Chorizanthe orcuttiuna c2 SE List 1A Orcutt’s Spineflower Chorizanthe pave var. fernandha c1 None List 1A San Fernando Valley Spineflower Cora‘ylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus FE SE List 1B, 2-2-2 Salt Marsh Bird’s-beak Corethrogyne jilaginifolk var. linijiolia c2 None List lB, 3-2-3 Del Mar Mesa Sand Aster Cryptantha ganderi c2 None List lB, 3-3-3 Gander’s Cryptan tha Delphinium hesperium ssp. cuyamacae c2 Rare List lb, 2-2-3 Cuyamaca Larkspur Downingia concolor vas. brevwr C2 SE List lB, 3-3-3 Cuyamaca Lake Downingia Ddeya brevifolia c1 SE List lB, 3-3-3 Short-leaved Dudleya Dudleya multicaulis c2 None List lB, 1-2-3 Many-stemmed Dudleya Dudleya varkgata c2 None List 4, 1-2-2 Variegated Dudleya DudEeya vircida c1 None List lB, 3-2-3 Sticky Dudleya ErVngium aristulatum var. parishii c2 SE List lB, 1-3-2 San Diego Button-celery 1 I 1 I I I 1 R I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I Ferocactus acanthodes c2 None List 4, ? 1 California Barrel Cactus Ferocactus viridescens c2 None List 2, 1 San Diego Barrel Cactus Fremontodendron mexicanum c2 Rare List lB, Mexican Flannelbush Galium angustifolium ssp. borregoense a Rare List lB, . Borrego Bedstraw Githopsis dipa ssp. jilicaulk c2 None List lB, Mission Canyon Bluecup Hazardia orcuttii c2 None List lB, Orcutt’s Hazardia Hemuonia conjugens c2 SE List lB, Otay Tarplant Hemuonia floribunda c2 None List lB, Tecate Tarplant Heuchera brevistaminea c2 None List lB, Laguna Mtns. Alumroot Lepechinia cardwphylla c2 None List lB, Heart-leaved Pitcher Sage Lepechinia ganderi c2 None List lB, Gander’s Pitcher-sage Lepidium jlavum var. felipense c2 None List lB, : Borrego Peppergrass Lesshgia glandulifea var. tomeneosa c2 None List lB, 1 Warner Springs Lessingia Lilium panyi var. panyi c2 None List 4, 1- Lemon Lily Limnanthes gracilis var. pankhii c2 SE List lB, : Parish’s Meadowfoam Linanthus orcuttii c2 None List lB, 2 Orcutt’s Linanthus Lupinus mubitus var. medius c2 None List lB, 2 Mountain Springs Bush Lupine Machaeranthera asterodes var. lagunensis c2 Rare List lB, 3-3-3 Laguna Mtns. Aster c1 SE List lB, 3-3-3 Mahonia nevinu Nevin’s Barberq List 4, 1-1-2 None Mimuius aridus c2 Low Bush Monkey Flower Monardella hypoleuca var. lanata c2 None List lB, 3-1-2 Felt-leaved Monardella Monardella linoides spp. viminea c2 SE List lB, 2-3-2 Willowy Monardella Monardella nana ssp. leptosiphon c2 None List lB, 3-2-3 San Felipe Monardella Mudla cievelandii c2 None List 1B, 2-2-2 San Diego Goldenstar Myosums minimus var. apus c2 None List 3, 2-3-2 Little Mousetail List lB, 2-3-2 None Navarretia fossah c2 San Diego (Ditch) Navarettia Nolina interrata c1 SE List lB, 3-3-2 Dehesa Nolina Opuntia panyi var. seTentina c2 None List lB, 3-3-2 Snake Cholla Opuntiu wigginsu c2 None List lB, 3-1-2 Wiggins’ Cholla Orcuttia caiifomica c1 SE List lB, 2-3-2 California Orcutt Grass Orobanche parish% ssp. brachyloba c2 None List lB, 2-2-2 Short-lobed Broomrape Orthocapus laswrhynci5us c2 None List lB, 1-2-3 San Bernardino Mtns. Owls-clover Perideridia gairdneri ssp. gairdnea’ c2 None List 1B, 1-2-3 Gairdner’s Yampah Pinus torreyana ssp. torreyana c2 None List lB, 3-2-3 Torrey Pine 1 List lB, 2. Poa atropurpurea c1 None 1 San Bernardino Blue Grass I San Diego Mesa Mint Pogogyne abramsu FE SE List lB, 2 List lB, 3 Pogogyne nudiuscuia Cl SE Otay Mesa Mint Ribes canthariforme c2 None List lB, 3 1 1 I 1 4 I 1 I I t 0 1 1 I I Moreno Currant Rorippa gambeilu c2 None List lB, C List lB, : Gambel’s Water Cress Rubus glaucifoiius var. gande~ c2 None Salvia eremostachya c2 None List 4, 1- Cuyamaca Raspberry Desert Sage Senecw ganderi c2 Rare List lB, Solanum benudobaturn c2 None List lB, Gander’s Butterweed Narrow-leaved Nightshade Tetracoccus dwkus c2 None List lB, Parry’s Tetracoccus Xylorhua orcutrii c2 None List IB, Qrcutt’s Woody Aster * California Native Plant Society 1988 List of Suecies Designations 1B: 3: 2: Species is rare or endangered in California and clsewhere. Plants about which more information is needed. Rare or endangered in California, more common elsewhere. 1 4 Plants of limited distribution (a watch list). - Note: Plants on CNPS list 1B meet CDFG criteria for Rare of Endangered Listing. R-E-D Code R- (Rarity) 1 - Rare, but found in sufficient numbers and distributed widely enough that the potential for extinction or extirpation is low at this time. Occurrence confined to several populations or one extended population. Occurrence limited to one or a few highly remitted populations, or present in such small numbers that it is seldom reported. 2 - 3 - E - (Endangerment) 1 - Not endangered 2 - 3 - Endangered in a portion of its range Endangered throughout its range D - (Distribution) 1 .. 2 - Rare outside California 3 - Endemic to California More or less widespread outside California I APPENDIX ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REP AND C)THER DOCUM CONSU / BIOLOGICAL &SOURCES AND HABITAT ANALYSIS in support ofthe ClTY OF CAWBAD HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN \ I I 1 I 1 1 1 0 I I 1 1 I I I I R I 1 Agua Hedionda EIR (329) Alanda Project EIR (83-5) Alanda Project EIR (83-5, Part 11) Anderson EIR (81-10) Airport Business Center EIR (81-6) Arroyo La Costa Master Plan EIR (86-2) Batiquitos Lagoon EIR (84-3) Batiquitos Pointe EIR (82-4) Bressi Ranch EIR (83-10) Buena Vista Park Plaza EIR (82-5) Calavera EIR (403) Camino Hills EIR (83-9) Carlsbad Highlands EIR (80-8) Carlsbad Highlands EIR (80-8, Supplemental EIR) Carlsbad Land Investors EIR (83-8) Carlsbad Oaks (81-4) City Operations Center EIR (82-1) Coast Waste Management EIR (84-1) Cannon Road Reach 1 EIR (87-1) Del Mar Financial EIR (83-1, General Information) Evans Point EIR (85-3) Hosp Grove EIR (86-4) HPI Development EIR (83-2) Hunt Properties EIR (83-2, DEIR General Plan) Hunt Properties EIR (83-2, Annexation of City of Carlsbad) Huntington Palomar Project EIR (81-9) Kelly Ranch EIR (83-4) La Costa Northeast EIR (149) La Costa Vale EIR (35) Lake Calavera EIR (89-3) Macario Canyon Park EIR (80-9) Occidental Land Inc. EIR (81-1) Poinsettia Lane EIR (82-6) Pointe San Malo Condominium EIR (80-4) Rancho Carillo EIR (80-7) Rancho Del Cerro EIR (85-2) Rancho La Costa EIR (114) Ranch Santa Fe Road EIR (91-1) Robert’s Group Project EIR (83-7) Robertson Ranch EIR (81-7) Royal Palms EIR (85-5) Santa Fe Glens EIR (276) Santa Fe Knolls Preliminary Environmental Informa tion (85-5) Seabluff EIR (81-8) Seawall EIR (84-2) ShermadSouthers EIR (81-5) Stagecoach Park EIR (84-5) Telescope Point EIR (81-2) Windsong Shores Focus EIR (83-3) Wooley Annexation EIR (82-3)