Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 03-12; ADAMS STREET SFR NORTH; UPDATED BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES IMPACT ASSESSMENT; 2002-10-2424 October 2002 Mr. John St. Claire North County Custom Homes, Inc. 1839 Freda Lane Cardiff by the Sea, CA 92071 Re: Updated Biological Resources Impact Assessment for the Adams Street Residential Parcels 206492-34 & 206-192-38, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California. Dear Mr. St. Claire: This letter report constitutes an updated summary of my review of the existing onsite vegetation communities within parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-38 (formally parcels 12773 and 10178, respectively) in light of proposed residential development within each parcel. Both parcels are immediately adjacent to each other and are located just west of the intersection of Adams Street and Park Drive in the City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California (See Figures 1 & 2). This report follows site surveys conducted by myself on 19 October 1999,15 January2000, and 17 September 2002, as well as a prior letter report dated 16 January 2000. METHODS AND SURVEY LIMITATIONS All plant species encountered during the field surveys were identified and recorded (See Appendix B). Latin and common names of plants used in this report follow the Jepson Manual (Hickman 1993). Where not listed in the Jepson Manual (1993), common names are taken from A Flora of San Diego County, California (Beauchamp 1986). Plant community classifications used in this report follow Holland (1986), with modifications (as applicable) to accommodate the lack of conformity of the observed communities to those of Holland. The approximate locations of rare or sensitive plant species also were noted, and numbers present were estimated. Expected wildlife use of the site was not formally determined and site specific wildlife surveys (e.g., for the California gnatcatcher) were not conducted; however, wildlife usage is briefly discussed. SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Sensitive biological resources are those defined as follows: (1) species that have been given special recognition by federal, state, or local conservation agencies and organizations due to limited, declining, or threatened population sizes; (2) species and habitat types listed in the North County Multiple Habitat Conservation Program and the Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad; and (3) habitat areas or plant communities that are unique, are of relatively limited distribution, or are of particular value to wildlife. During the field visit a special effort was made to survey more thoroughly those areas suspected to support sensitive botanical resources; however, the timing of the 1999/2000 and 2002 surveys was not optimal for the detection for most spring-blooming ephemeral plants. Updated Biological Resources Impacts Assessment 2 for the Adams Street Residential Parcels 206-192-34 & 206-192-36 HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR NATURAL COMMUNITIES IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD The Habitat Management Plan (HMP) for the Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad (City) provides a comprehensive, city-wide program to identify how the City, in cooperation with federal and state wildlife agencies, can preserve the diversity of habitat and protect sensitive biological resources within the City while allowing for additional development consistent-with the City's General Plan and its Growth Management Plan. In so doing, the lIMP is intended to lead to citywide permits and authorization for the incidental take of sensitive species in conjunction with private development projects, public projects, and other activities which are consistent with the HMP. These permits would be issued under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, the California Endangered Species Act, and the California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (NCCP). Based on existing distribution of vegetation communities and sensitive,species, the HMP identifies Focus Planning Areas (FPA5). The PPM are further broken down into lIMP cores, linkages, and .Special Resource Areas. These areas include eight core FPAs that are connected to one another and to habitat areas outside the City by a variety of linkages and wildlife corridors. Special Resource Areas are certain naturally vegetated areas in the City which are too small, edge-effected, or isolated to be considered biological Cores or linkage areas, but are nonetheless important to preserve design or the conservation of particular species. Additionally, a number of proposed public and private projects have submitted proposed hardline design for inclusion in the lIMP and the preserve system. For some key properties within the City which have not submitted proposed hardline designs for inclusion in the preserve system, the lIMP includes conservation goals and standards which will apply to future development proposals in these areas. The goals and standards have been arranged according to the Local Facilities Management Zones (LFMZs) to which they apply. The planning standards are based on biological issues defined speciflcallfor each zone based upon the existing biological conditions and preserve design considerations. It is noteworthy that the protection of coastal sage scrub habitat is of particular importance in these remaining, unplanned areas of the City. Therefore, unless otherwise specifically stated in the standards fora particular zone, a minimum of 67% of the coastal sage scrub shall be conserved in each of the standards areas, as well as 75% of gnatcatchers. Also of particular importance is the protection of Narrow Endemic species. The standard requires 100% conservation of Narrow Endemics within a focused planning area. CITY OF CARLSBAD LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM Parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-38 lie within the Mello II geographic segment of the coastal zone. The City assumes primary responsibility for implementing the Local Coastal Program (LCP) Land Use Element as it affects private land use. The LCP is the standard for evaluating and making decisions on land use proposals in the Coastal Zone. As identified in the Mello U element of the LCP, development on steep slopes (>25%) occupied by endangered species, or coastal sage scrub and/or chaparral habitats is restricted to 10% encroachment with exceptions made for reasonable use of a legal parcel dominated by such conditions. Biological Resources Review & Proposed Impacts Assessment 3 for the Adams Street Residential Parcels 206-192-34 & 206-192-38 SITE DESCRIPTION Parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-36 are located immediately west of the intersection of Adams Street and Park Drive, in the west-central portion of the City of Carlsbad to the north of Aqua Hedionda Lagoon (Figure 1). Onsite elevations range from 50 feet above mean sea level (ams!) along the eastern end of each parcel to 160 feet amsi at the western boundary of the parcels. Land use within both parcels includes limited acreage of ruderal land in the eastern portions, and dense native habitat/vegetation in the approximate western two-thirds of the parcels. Biological resources within the parcels are landlocked to the west and east by residential development. Land use to the north and south consists of a remnant band of dense native habitat, which itself is landlocked. Soils mapped for the both parcels (Bowman 1973) include Las Flores - Urban land complex, 2-9% slopes (LfC) and Loamy alluvial land-l-luerhuero complex, 9-50% slopes, severely eroded (LvF3). The two soil types are described below: Las Plores - Urban land complex, 2 to 9% slopes - (LIC) - The Las Flores series soils consist of moderately well-drained loamy fine sands that have a sandy clay subsoil. These soils formed in material weathered from siliceous marine sandstone. These soils have a slow to medium runoff rate. The erosion hazard is slight to moderate. Loamy alluvial land-Huerhuero complex, 9 to 50% slopes, severely eroded— (LvF3) - This complex occurs on old coastal ridges. The landscape is one of strongly sloping to steep, severely eroded soils and alluvial fill along drainage ways. Runoff is rapid and erosion hazard can be severe. RESULTS OF VEGETATION SURVEY Based on species composition and general physiognomy, two plant communities (or habitat types) were identified within parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-38 and the adjoining parcel 206-192-35 providing driveway access: coastal sage scrub, and ruderal land. Coastal sage scrub was observed in disturbed as well as undisturbed conditions. These communities are illustrated in the following Table and Figure 3, and discussed within the general headings below. Table 1. Vegetation Communities IdentifiS on the Adams Street Residential Parcels. Coastal sage scrub 0.63 ac 0.36 ac 0.09 ac Ruderal land 0.06 ac 0.15 ac - - veloped,. ;jQOap TC 0€ac G3Qac Total Acreage 028 ac 0.64 ac 0.39 ac Coastal Sage Scrub Coastal sage scrub is a native plant community composed of a variety of soft, low, aromatic shrubs, characteristically dominated by drought-deciduous species such as California.sagebrush (Artem!sia califomica), flat-top buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), and sages (Salvia spp.), with scattered evergreen shrubs, including lemonadeberry (Rims integrifolia), laurel sumac (Malosma laudna), and toyon (Hetemme!es arhutifolia). It typically develops on south-facing slopes and other xeric situations. Biological Resources Review & Proposed Impacts Assessment - 4 for the Adams Street Residential Parcels 206-192-34 & 206-192-38 Onsite, coastal sage scrub is composed of well-established, woody, mature specimens including some chaparral component species. Much of it is dominated by California sagebrush and black sage (Salvia mellifera), with flat-top buckwheat, laurel sumac, white sage (Sai'via apiana), sawtooth goldenbush (Hazardia squarrosa), California adolphia (Adoiphia califomica), summer holly (Cemarostaphylis diversifolia ssp. diversifolia), toyon, and chamise (Adenostema fasciculatum) as lesser chaparral components. Coastal sage scrub is recognized as a sensitive plant community by local, state, and federal resource agencies. It supports a rich diversity of sensitive plants and animals, and it is estimated that it has been reduced by 75-80% of its historical coverage throughout southern California. It is the focus of the current State of California Natural Communities Conservation Program (NCCP). Disturbed coastal sage scrub - A limited amount of disturbed coastal sage scrub (dOSS) was observed within parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-38. Mapped dOSS was dominated by bare ground similar to ruderal portions of the parcels; however, the remaining vegetative component consisted of limited amounts of native deeiweed (Lotus scopadus), California sagebrush, and laurel sumac versus weedy non-native annuals typical of rurieral lands. Given the limited cover by native species and the apparent lack of habitat value, mapped dCSS is not considered a sensitive plant community on these parcels. Ruderal LancP Ruderal lands are defined as areas where the native vegetation has been removed by mechanical means and weedy non-native annual dicots, such as telegraph weed (Hetemtheca grandiflora), Russian-thistle (Salsofa tragus), and horseweed (Conyza canadensis), or bare ground are predominant. This category includes open fields and other areas supporting weeds. Portions of parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-38 appear to have been historically disturbed by site access and pad grading, significantly altering the Knativex grade. Developed Areas Developed areas refer to highly modified land supporting structures, land use, or vegetation associated with dwellings. The eastern access points of each parcel previously were modified in association with adjacent residential development. Adjoining parcels 206-192-36 and 206-192-37 are completely developed, supporting no sensitive vegetation. Floral Diversity A total of twenty-eight species of vascular plants - twenty-four native species (86 1/*) and four non- native species (14%) - were recorded from the site (Appendix B). Two species present onsite, California adolphia and summer holly, are considered sensitive by local or regional resource agencies. SENSITIVE PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED Two sensitive plant species were observed and are described below. Both species were found to be widespread within parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-38. The listing authorities for sensitive plant species and explanation of listing categories are presented in Appendix C. No other narrow endemic, lIMP-listed, or other sensitive plant species were observed. Adoiphia califomica - California adolphia USFWS: None - CDFG: None CNPS: List 2. 1-2-1 Biological Resources Review & Proposed Impacts Assessment - 5 for the Adams Street Residential Parcels 206-192-34 & 206-192-38 California adolphia is a moderate-sized (0.5-1.0 m), profusely branched, rigid, spinescent shrub, ranging from the Carlsbad area in San Diego County, California, south into adjacent northwestern Baja California, Mexico (Munz 1974, Beauchamp 1956, Skinner & Pavlik 1994). It generally occurs on clay soils and on dry south-facing slopes in chaparral and coastal sage scrub communities below about 300 m (935 ft) elevation. It blooms in late winter to spring (December-May). In San Diego County it has been reported from Morro Hill, Cerro de Calavera, Agua Hedionda, Rancho Santa Fe, Mount Soledad, Bemardo, Chollas Valley, Barrett Junction, Proctor Valley (Beauchamp 1986). This species is threatened by urbanization, road construction, and grazing (Skinner 1994). California adolphia was observed within both parcels. The total numbers are estimated at 100+ individuals within parcel 206-192-38 and 200+ individuals within parcel 206-192-34. Comarostaphylis diversifolia ssp. diversifolia - summer-holly USFWS: former Category 2 candidate CDFG: None CNPS: List lB. 2-2-2 Summer-holly is a large shrub generally occurring on north-facing canyons and slopes in chaparral and foothill habitats below about 700 m (2,297 ft) in scattered locations from the Pacific coast in San Diego County south into Baja California. Reported localities in the County include San Marcos Mountains, Mount Whitney, Rancho Santa Fe, Gonzales Canyon, Encinitas, Mount Soledad, Penasquitos Canyon, Del Mar Heights, Iron Mountain, canyons of Mission Valley, Jamul Valley, and Otay Mountain (Beauchamp 1986). This species is threatened by development and gravel mining (Skinner & Pavlik). Summer holly was observed within both parcels. The total numbers are estimated at 100+ individuals within parcel 206-192-38 and 200+ individuals within parcel 206-192-34. This species is an identified HMP species, and therefore it should be conserved to the maximum extent feasible. SENsiTwE HABITATS Sensitive habitats are those that 1) are considered rare within the region. 2) are listed by the North County Multiple Habitats Conservation Program and the Habitat Management Plan for the Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad, 3) support sensitive plant andIorwildlife species, or 4) function as corridors for wildlife movement. Onsite, these include coastal sage scrub and disturbed coastal sage scrub. Regionally, coastal sage scrub provides habitat for numerous sensitive plant and wildlife species. Animals confined primarily to this habitat include California gnatcatcher, cactus wren, orange- throated whiptail, and San Diego horned lizard. Sensitive plants characteristic of coastal sage scrub include San Diego barrel cactus, ashy spike-moss, and California adolphia. Corridors. Wildlife corridors are linear features that connect large patches of natural open space and provide avenues for the immigration and emigration of animals. Wildlife corridors contribute to population viability in several ways: (1) they assure the continual exchange of genes between populations which helps maintain genetic diversity; (2) they provide access to adjacent habitat areas representing additional territory for foraging and mating; (3) they allow for a greater carrying capacity; and (4) they provide routes for colonization of habitat lands following local populations extinctions or habitat recovery from ecological catastrophes (e.g., fires). Habitat Linkages. Habitat linkages are patches of native habitat that function to join two larger patches of habitat They serve as connections between habitat patches and help reduce the adverse affects of habitat fragmentation. Although individual animals may not move through a habitat linkage, the linkage does represent a potential route for gene flow and long-term dispersal. Biological Reources Review & Proposed Impacts Assessment 6 for the Adams Street Residential Parcels 206-192-34 & 206-192-38 Habitat linkages may serve as both habitat and avenues of gene flow for small animals such as reptiles and amphibians. Habitat linkages may be represented by continuous patches of habitat or by nearby habitat "islands" that function as "stepping stones" for dispersal. Owing to the geographic position of the parcels in the context of surrounding urbania and the dominance of steep slopes, it is unlikely that the property receives significant use from larger mammals such as mule deer, coyote, and bobcat. Coastal sage scrub habitat in this location most likely doesn't function as a habitat corridor due to us Jack of connectivity at its northern and southern termini; however, this habitat area may act as a linkage, owing to its geographi4' proximity to Aqua Hedionda Lagoon, providing a 'stepping stonew for species dispersal. ANTICIPATED PROJECT IMPACTS This section addresses potential impacts to biological resources that would result from implementation of the proposed residential development, and provides analyses of significance for each potential impact. Impacts to biological resources can be direct- resulting from the permanent removal of habitat, or indirect- resulting from changes in land use adjacent to natural habitat (e.g., increased light, noise, and urban runoff, interruption of wildlife movement, etc.). Both of these types of impacts and their levels of significance are discussed in this section. Direct impacts are quantified in Table 2 below. - Table 2. Anticipated Vegetation Community Impacts Associated with Proposed Development of Adams Street Residential Parcels 206-192-34 and 206-19248.. Parcel 206-192-34-t -; Disturbed coastal sage G.04 ac - - scrub -------- Developed :-:-- •:- :0.05 a6 Parcel 206-192-38 - - - - - - - flerr* Si!ci±J Disturbed coastal sage oorac -i0.07ac scrub e -- --7! zcr' RUdra±4 i5ac_. S:a &tESt Developed 0.06 ac - 0.36 ac - -- Parcel 206-19245 (Off-site Driveway Access) &zi Disturbed coastal sage - - - -scrub - - - - Ruderatjand cnit aa -rSn a4tc Developed 0.30 ac - - 0.35 ac - - Biological Resources Revie.w & Proposed Impacts Assesthnent 7 for the Adams Street Residential Parcels 206-192-34 & 206-192-38 Direct Impacts Direct impacts are anticipated in association with the development of one residence within each parcel, for a total of two residences. A significant factor in lot development is the need for a thirty- foot wide brush management building setback for fire control and emergency access. Direct loss of coastal sage scrub habitat primarily is due to the brush management setback - Coastal Sage Scrub A total of 0.3 acre of coastal sage scrub would be directly and permanently impacted by the proposed development including the thirty-foot brush management zone. An additional 0.05 acre of disturbed coastal sage scrub would be directly and permanently impacted in association with construction of the off-site driveway access. Because coastal sage scrub is a depleted habitat type and the focus of regional conservation programs (e.g., NCCP), all impacts to coastal sage scrub are considered significant. Disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub Impacts to this habitat type are considered less than significant. Ruderal Land Impacts to this habitat type are considered not significant. Developed Areas Impacts to such areas are considered not significant. Sensitive P/edt Species Within both parcels, California adoiphia and summer holly are found in significant numbers throughout the coastal sage scrub habitat. It is estimated that approximately 50 individuals of each species would be directly impacted within the brush management zone. These impacts are considered less than significant due to the regional presence of these species within other conserved portions of the City's HMP. Indirect Impacts Separate from the direct loss of habitat, site development will cause indirect effects to the biota. Indirect impacts are those that do not actually result in the physical loss of habitat, but may affect use of habitat, reduce population numbers, and promote pest species as a result of use of the area by an increased number of people, vehicles, their pets, pest plants and animals, lighting, and noise. Often, indirect effects are perceived to expand the impact area of a development out into otherwise natural habitat. Biologists have documented the occurrence of indirect effects (e.g., Soule at al 1988), but the importance of the effect on the biota usually is not known. Examples of activities and their possible indirect effects include: lighting into natural areas, increasing predation risk of native animals: introduction of predatory pets, increasing predation on reptiles, birds and small mammals: unauthorized brush clearing, trash dumping and trail blazing, causing habitat degradation; use of pesticides and herbicides on landscaping, causing mortalities to wildlife using the affected areas; uncontrolled runoff, causing erosion, loss of vegetation, deposition of material into habitat; increased noise, primarily from roads, causing changes in use of habitats adjacent to the noise source; and traffic, causing mortality to animals attempting to cross the road. It is expected that the most important indirect effect of site development within Parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-38 will be increased lighting and noise, and possible introduction of predatory pets. It is not likely that indirect effects referred to above will extend far into the conserved coastal sage scrub area, especially given the steep topography of the western portions of the parcel and the geographic position of the parcels in the context of surrounding urbania; therefore, these impacts are consider Biological Resources Review & Proposed Impacts Assessment 8 for the Adams Street Residential Parcels 206-192-34 & 206-192-38 - less than significant. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS Parcels 205-192-34 and 206-192-38 lie within Local Facilities Management Zone 1 (LFMZ 1). Neither parcel is identified within an HMP core area, linkage, special - resource area, existing or proposed hardline conservation area, or proposed standards area. The Conservation Goal for LFMZ I states: 1 Conserve the majority of habitats in or contiguous with biological core areas, including no net loss of wetland habitat, and preserve, as feasible, coastal sage scrub and maritime succulent scrub adjacent to the lagoons. Retain and manage natural habitats adjacent to lagoons to buffer wetland resources from adverse effects and provide upland nesting habitat for pond turtles and other HMP species. No wetland habitats were observed within either parcel. Furthermore, neither parcel contributes to the Aqua Hedionda Lagoon as a wetland buffer. As previously mentioned, unless otherwise indicated in an identified standards area for a particular zone, a minimum of 67% of the coastal sage scrub (CSS) habitat shall be conserved within the standards area. As proposed, the combined development of parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-38, including the 30-foot brush management limits, would conserve 70% of the CSS (individual percentages totaling 65.1% and 77.8%, respectively). Therefore, the proposed development significantly conserves CSS consistent with the HMP planning standards. Mitigation The HMP does not require off-site mitigation for projects that conserve at least 67% of the habitat on-site. Given the limited development proposed within parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-38 and the conserved habitat numbers mentioned above, additional off-site mitigation should not be required. Therefore, no further mitigation is suggested. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or require additional information at (858) 259- 8113. Very lyly yours, JeW-t*lhomas Environmental Consultant Attachments: Figures 1-3 Appendix A Literature Cited Appendix B Vascular Plant Species Observed in Parcels 206-192-34 and 206-192-38 Appendix C Species Sensitivity Categories H9: 8' 23C 7. upoc Xl-l(t ,as . APL} CYA WLES C.- \ a., " Ift Pt -3 -c 14ALYjU NS0i L #. 4 ' .CAALWD U' ø\ — 10 tILc ,s 0 - 4 4 r '00 CZR ., RD - n1r - 44Lt ' ; - S\ ke - O3E Alt * wct \_k;L • A S Val in; ., A 2A -- -r0 $ tHJ E,. -J jc 4,a et t- 3 - j C> RIVIEPS AOl) \\No HEO1O - A4 A hEOIC4 " \ \LAZQN( Swff L4N CAR SSAD TATE I- -- I RFAIIT ______ • . N Source: 1999 Thomas Bros. Guide 1" = 1900' Figure BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE REVIEW AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT -1 ADAMS STREET RESIDENTIAL PARCELS EXflflflT 1- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1L4P r7ci Ab, Its LEENP jF -V iL I COASTAL SASS SORt/S (csS) 7 / - :-- ------.. doo op -•/-• .-.. •...\ • -.• '&- L:L. p,wsEDCSe -' . - DL LAhV r~~OPIMV LAW / :Th..' .•• .py:t::p:;i4.-. . - - 7 206492-37 1- ---: f•.•-•-•. ::z:.-t / -• / N - - I — 206-192-M - 1 - •• I —_____z.___----------- - ••• . .\.....:z:.1 . —4 - -c-r — • ••• . . \..:..t.:.!!S V .- •.. -•.. • . •• - ___ -- GRAPHIC SCALE I"=50 r..r. Figure - - -- 2 0 50 100 150 )t ,( h;;'. 20%lWa ' - LA' -\ -: GRAPHIC SCALE 1 =50 0 50 100 150 EXIflISH - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Wi Pit OPOS ii DIE VEL OPNIEJ%T IMPACTS OVEICIJA V LE6ENP I.e t F- /. C -ct-czWR'1- ? 192-35 dop 206-192-37 css' • / - — - — — - r - • • tL 23649248 71- • -- F - - - t __ ___ Figure - LIMIT OF DEVELOF?vWT IMPACTS ° - AREA OF 055 /MAC TED SY D5VL0neN7 THIS INCWPES SOW GRADINS ASSOCIATED P117H DSvoflNT AS POLL AS SRL.H ?tAMASEMENT ZONE. APPENDIX A LITERATURE CITED Beauchamp, ft M. 1986. A Flora of San Diego County, California. Sweetwater Press, National City, California. 241 pp. Bowman, R. H. 1973. Soil Survey, San Diego Area, California, Part 1. United States Department of the Agriculture. 104 pp. + appendices. California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1987. Designated Endangered or Rare Plants. Summary list from Section 1904 Fish and Game Code (Native Plant Protection Act). State of California Resources Agency, Sacramento, California. City of Carlsbad. April 1999. Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad. City of Carlsbad. 1996. Local Coastal Program. Hickman, J. C. 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley. 1400 pp. Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Nongame-Heritage Program, California Department of Fish and Game. 156 pp Munz, P. 1974. A Flora of Southern California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 1086 pp. Skinner, M. W. and B. M. PavIlk. 1994. California Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Special Publication No. 1 (5th Edition), California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. 338 pp. APPENDIX B (Continued) POLYGONACEAE - BUCKWHEAT FAMILY Eriogonum fasciculatum - flat-top buckwheat RHAMNACEAE - BUCKTHORN FAMILY Adoiphia califomica - California adoiphia ROSACEAE - ROSE FAMILY Adenostoma fasciculatum - chamise - Heteromeles arbutifolia - toyon SCROPHULARIACEAE - FIGWORT FAMILY Mimulus aurantiacus - bush monkeyflower SOLANACEAE - NIGHTSHADE FAMILY * Nicotiana glauca - tree tobacco ANGIOSPERMAE (MONOCOTYLEDONES)- LILIACEAE - LILY FAMILY Yucca schidigera - Mohave yucca POACEAE - GRASS FAMILY * Bromus hordeaceus - soft chess * Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens - foxtail chess Nasella Jepida- foothill needlegrass Nasella pufchra - purple needlegrass * denotes non-native, introduced species APPENDIX C SPECIES SENSITIVITY CATEGORIES Federal (1993) Endangered. Taxa threatened throughout all or a significant portion of theirsange. Threatened. Taxa likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future. Category 1. Taxa for which the USFWS currently has on file substantial information on biological vulnerability and threat(s) to support the appropriateness of proposing to list them as endangered or threatened species. Category 2. Taxa for which information now in possession of the USFWS indicates that proposing to list them as endangered or threatened is appropriate but for which substantial data on biological vulnerability and threat(s) are not known or on file to support the immediate preparation of rules. Category 3. Taxa that were once consideted for listing as endangered or threatened, but are currently not receiving such consideration. These taxa are included in one of the following three subcategories. Subeategori 3k Taxa presumed to be extinct. Subcategory 38: Taxa whose names do not meet the Endangered Species Act's legal definition of species. Subcategory SC: Taxa now considered to be more widespread that originally thought. Note: The taxa in Categories 1 and 2 are candidates for possible addition to the list of endangered and threatened species. The USFWS encourages their consideration in environmental planning. State of California (1990) Endangered. Taxa which are in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of their range due to one or more causes including loss of habitat, change in habitat, over exploitation, predation, competition, or disease (Section 2062 of the Fish and Game Code). Threatened. Taxa which, although not presently threatened with extinction, are likely to become endangered species in the foreseeable future (Section 2067 of the Fish and Game Code). APPENDIX C (Continued) Rare. Taxa which, although not presently threatened with extinction, are present in such small numbers throughout their range that they may become endangered if the present environment worsens (Section 1901 of the Ash and Game Code). Candidate. Taxa which the Fish and Game Commission has formally noticed as being under review by the Department in addition to the list of threatened and endangered species. California Native Plant Society (1995) Lists 1k Presumed Extinct in California I B: Rare or Endangered in California and Elsewhere 2: Rare or Endangered in California, More Common Elsewhere 3: Need More Information 4: Plants of Limited Distribution Note: Plants on CNPS list 113 meet California Department of Fish and Game Criteria for Rare or 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. 2- Occurrence confined to several populations or to one extended population. 3- Occurrence limited to one or a few highly restricted populations, or present in such small numbers that it is seldom reported. E (Endangerment) 1- Not endangered 2- Endangered in a portion of its range 3- Endangered throughout its range D (Distribution) 1- More or less widespread outside of California 2- Rare outside California Endemic to California