The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCDP 06-25; HAGEY RESIDENCE; BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORT; 2007-02-02I ___________ .. 7518 El Cajon Boulevard, Suite 200 La Mesa, CA 91941 I fax (619) 462-0552 phone (619) 462-1515 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Inland Empire Office phone (951) 328-1100 February 6, 2007 Mr. Ted Hagey P.O. -Box 99961 San Diego, CA 92169 t-<t:c.;1::1vEo MARO 6 2007 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT Subject: Biological Resources Report for the Hagey Parcels Dear Mr. Hagey: HAG-01 This report is an update to the existing conditions report for the Hagey parcels submitted by HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. (HELIX) on September 8, 2004. HELIX updated the vegetation mapping and completed a jurisdictional delineation during a site visit in December 2006. This report also reflects the project's consistency with the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan (City 2004). PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The proj_ect site is situated on the western side of Jefferson Street near the intersection of Los Flores Drive in the City of Carlsbad (City), California (Figures 1 and 2). The site consists of two parcels (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 155-140-37 and -38) encompassing approximately 0.46 acre. The property is shown on the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute San Marcos quadrangle map in Section 36, Township 11 South, and Range 5 West (Figure 2). Topography on site consists of a flat area adjacent to Jefferson Street and a steep escarpment leading to Buena Vista Lagoon. The upper portion of the site near and adjacent to Jefferson Street in the east consists of Marina loamy coarse sand, which occurs on undulating to gently rolling ridges. Elevations on site range from approximately 20 feet above mean sea level (ams!) near the western site boundary to approximately 65 feet ams! along the eastern site boundary. The site consists of undeveloped land primarily supporting non-native vegetation. Surrounding land uses consist of multi-family residential development to the north, single-family residential to the south, and Jefferson Street immediately to the east. The eastern side of Jefferson Street has additional single-family residential housing. The Buena Vista Lagoon lies to the west of the parcels. The proposed project would develop a single-family residence on the eastern portion of the site adjacent to Jefferson Street. The proposed project would revegetate the western portion of the site, adjacent to the lagoon, with native plants. , ' I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I ' ................. - Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 METHODS Page 2 of 17 HELIX biologist Derek Langsford, Ph.D. conducted a general biological survey of the parcels on October 3, 2003. A vegetation map was created and plant and animal species observed and/or detected were recorded. HELIX biologist Stacy Nigro updated the vegetation mapping and conducted a jurisdictional delineation on December 18, 2006. Habitats were mapped using direct observation combined with aerial photograph interpretation. Sensitive species with potential to occur on site were determined by a habitat- based analysis and consulting known distribution of sensitive species in San Diego County. ·Sensitive species are those that have been given special recognition by federal, state, or local government agencies and organizations because of_ limited, declining, or threatened populations. The potentially occurring plant and animal list also includes the 18 plants and animals in the City's Habitat Management Plan (HMP) list of narrow endemic species (City 2004). Focused surveys for rare plants and listed or sensitive animal species were not conducted as part of this survey and report. Plant and animal species observed on site are listed in Attachments A and B, respectively. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) wetland boundaries were determined using the three• criteria (vegetation; hydrology, and soils) established for wetland delineations as described within the Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Other references included memoranda (Studt 1991; Williams 1992) that help clarify the wetlands manual. All areas with depressions, drainage channels, or wetlands vegetation were evaluated for the presence of Waters of the U.S. (WUS), including jurisdictional wetlands. Areas were mapped as wetlands, non-wetland WUS, or uplands according to Corps policies and procedures. Califort)ia Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdictional boundaries were determined based on the presence of riparian vegetation or regular surface flow. Streambeds within CDFG jurisdiction were delineated based on the definition of streambed as "a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently . through a bed or channel having banks and supporting fish or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that. supports riparian vegetation" (Titl~ 14, Section 1.72). Riparian habitat is not defined in Title 14, but the section refers to vegetation and habitat associated with a stream. The CDFG jurisdictional habitat includes all riparian shrub or tree canopy that may extend beyond the banks of a stream. California Coastal Commission (CCC) jurisdictional boundaries were determined using the wetland definition in Section 30121 of the California Coastal Act. "Wetland" means lands within the coastal zone which may be covered periodically or permanently with shallow water and include saltwater marshes, freshwater marshes, open or closed brackish water marshes, swamps, mudflats, and fens. J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01\Reports\HAG-01 Bio Resources.do!= I I I I I ,I ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Page 3 of 17 Plants were identified according to Hickman, ed. (1993), while sensitive plant status follows the California Native Plant Society (CNPS; 2007) and the CDFG's California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB; 2007). Soils information was taken from the Soil Survey of the San Diego Area, California (Bowman 1973) and Hydric Soil Lists (USDA 1992). Wetland affiliations of plant species follow the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS's) National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: California (USFWS 1996). Nomenclature used in this report follows Holland (1986) or Oberbauer (1996) for vegetation communities, Hickman, ed. (1993) for plants, Heath (2004) for butterflies, Crother (2001) for reptiles, the American Ornithologists' Union (2006) for birds, and Baker et al. (2003) for mammals. Sensitive animal status follows the CDFG CNDDB (2006). EXISTING CONDITIONS Vegetation ·Communities/Habitats Four vegetation communities and developed land occur on the property (Table 1; Figure 3). Table 1 SUMMARY OF VEGETATION COMMUNITIES/HABITATS VEGETATION COMMUNITY/HABITAT1 ACRE(S) Group A -Wetland/Riparian Southern willow scrub <0.01 Group E -Annual Grasslands Non-native grassland 0.16 Group F -Other Lands Non-native vegetation 0.28 Eucalyptus woodland <0.01 Developed areas 0.01 TOTAL 0.46 1Community names and codes are from Holland (1986) and Oberbauer (1996). Southern Willow Scrub Southern willow scrub consists of dense, broadleaved, winter-deciduous stands of trees dominated by shrubby willows (Salix sp.), usually in association with mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia). This habitat occurs on loose, sandy or fine gravelly alluvium deposited near stream channels during flood flows. The southern willow scrub occurs on site is dominated by arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), but also contains non-native species including castor bean (Ricinus communis), Bermuda-buttercup J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01\Reports\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc ,, ' ' ' ' ' ' , ------------- Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Page 4 of 17 (Oxalis pes-caprae), and garden nasturtium (Tropaeolum majus). Southern willow scrub on site occurs in the westernmost portion of the site at the base of the slope near the lakeshore and encompasses less than 0.01 acre. Non-native Grassland Non-native grassland is dominated by non-native grass species but can also contain native grasses and native and non-native forbs. Non-native grasses observed on site consists primarily of .rip gut grass (Bromus diandrus) and wild oats (Avena sp.). Other species in this community include castor bean, western ragweed (Ambrosia psi/ostachya), wild radish (R.aphanus sativus), ~nd Russian thistle (Sa/so/a tragus). The non-native grassland on site appears to have been recently mowed and is heavily used by ground squirrels (Spermophi/us beecheyt) that have made an extensive burrowing network on the property. Non-native grassland occurs in much of the southern half of the site and covers approximately 0.16 acre of land. Non,-native Vegetation Non-native vegetation on site contains hottentot-fig (Carpobrotus edulis) and golden wattle (Acacia longifolia). Tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), jimson weed (Datura wrightit), tarriarisk (Tamarix parviflora), and castor bean are also present. Non- native vegetation is the predominant vegetation community on site and occupies approximately 0.28 acre. Eucalyptus woodland Eucalyptus woodland is dominated by eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.), an introduced species that has often been planted for wind blocking, ornamental, and hardwood production purposes. Most groves are monotypic with the most common species being either the blue gum (Eucalyptus gunnii) or red gum (E. camaldulen.sis ssp. obtusa). Eucalyptus woodland occupies less than 0.01 acre on site. Developed Developed land is that where either permanent structures and/or pavement have been placed or maintained landscaping occurs. Approximately 0.01 acre of developed lands occur in the southern portion of the site, which consists of the remains of a former house foundation. Sensitive Resources Sensitive Vegetation Communities The following vegetation community foU:nd on the Hagey parcels is considered sensitive under the City's HMP: southern willow scrub (Figure 3; Table 1). Sensitive habit~ts are defined as habitat areas or vegetation communities that are J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-0 l \Reports\HAG-0 l Bio Resources.doc ·1 I I I I ·1 I : I I I I : I I I -I I I': I I-------~E-~~ -~ -·1J:i-J"-;Y'':"':"-~-.-,., __ \ ' '; ·,_ !> \/ '.'.f:i'(, ... \ i\\ 'I I .,.._ j j' '\( lJ ';'ti \ \ I . l . " "--: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ----------- , _, Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Page 5 of 17 unique, of relatively limited distribution, or of particular value to wildlife. Less than 0.01 acre of southern willow scrub occurs along the western property boundary. Sensitive Plant Species Observed No federal, state, or HMP sensitive plant species were observed on site. Sensitive Plant Species with Potential to Occur Attachment C summarizes the sensitive plant species potentially occurring on the project site. Sensitive Animal Species No federal, state, or HMP sensitive animal species were observed on site. Sensitive Animal Species with Potential to Occur Attachment D presents listed or sensitive animal species with potential to occur on site; Attachment E provides a listing and explanation of status codes for both plant and animal species. The majority of the animal species have very low potential to occur on the property due to the poor quality of the habitats and its isolation with development on three sides and Buena Vista Lagoon on the other. Jurisdictional Resources A jurisdictional delineation was conducted to identify and map areas that may fall under Corps jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), wetland and streambed habitats under CDFG jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1600 of the Fish and Game Code, and wetland habitat under CCC pursuant to Section 30121 of the Coastal Act. The information provided below presents HELIX's best efforts to quantify the amount of jurisdictional habitats in the project area using current regulations, written policies, and guidance from the regulatory agencies. Only the regulating agencies can make a final determination of jurisdictional boundaries. Prior to beginning fieldwork, recent aerial photographs and topographic maps (1" = 200' scale) were reviewed to determine the location of potential jurisdictional areas that may be affected by the project. Data were collected in areas that were suspected to be jurisdictional habitats. One sample plot was studied, and a standard data form was completed for this plot in the field. Below is a summary of the sample plot, the location of which is shown in Figure 3. J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01 \Repom\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc ,,--------- ----------j--- Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Sample Plot 1 Page 6 of 17 This sample plot was located off site, immediately to the west of the western property boundary in the southern willow scrub. Hydrophytic vegetation (arroyo willow) was noted in the sample plot. A soil pit was excavated and it was determined that hydric soils were not present. No · signs of wetland hydrology were observed. This sample plot met only one of the three Corps wetland criteria and is therefore not a Corps wetland. However, it is a CDFG-jurisdictional habitat and CCC-jurisdictional habitat. Jurisdictional Habitat Summary The site contains a small amount of southern willow scrub along its western . boundary. Corps Jurisdiction No Corps-jurisdictional habitat occurs on site. CDFG Jurisdiction Less than 0.01 acre of southern willow scrub is considered CDFG-jurisdictional habitat. CCC Jurisdiction Less than 0.01 acre of southern willow scrub is considered CCC-jurisdictional habitat. Regional and Regulatory Context Laws and regulations that could potentially apply to the proposed project include the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), Clean Water Act, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Cali(ornia Fish and Game Code, Coastal Act, and NCCP (CDFG 1993). Under CEQA, impacts associated with a proposed project or program are assessed with regard to significance criteria determined by the CEQA Lead Agency (in this case, the City) and pursuant to State .CEQA Guidelines. The following laws, ordinances, and. regulations are potentially applicable to the project's resources. Federal Government Administered by the USFWS, the federal ESA provides the legal framework for listing and protection of species (and their habitats) that are identified as being J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01\Rcports\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Page 7 of 17 threatened or endangered with extinction. Actions that jeopardize threatened or endangered species and the habitats upon which they rely are considered "take," which ESA Section 9(a) defines as "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct." "Harm" and "harass" are further defined in federal regulations and case law to include actions that adversely impair or disrupt a listed species' behavioral patterns. Federal ESA Sections 4(d)7 and lO(a) regulate actions that could jeopardize threatened or endangered species. Section l0(a) allows issuance of permits for "incidental" take of threatened or endangered species, which applies if the taking of a listed species is incidental to and not the purpose of an otherwise lawful activity. No threatened or endangered species were observed or expected on site. Nesting raptors are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), which is generally protective of migratory birds but does not actually stipulate the type of protection required. In common practice, the USFWS places restrictions on disturbances allowed near active raptor nests. The project site does not appear to support suitable habitat for nesting raptors, as no large trees were observed on site. Federal wetland regulation (non-marine issues) is guided by the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and the Clean Water Act. The Rivers and Harbors Act deals primarily with discharges into navigable waters, while the purpose of the Clean Water Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of all WUS. Impacts to WUS are regulated by the Corps under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 1344; 33 U.S.C. 1413; and Department of Defense, Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers 33 CFR Part 323). A federal Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit would be required for the project to place fill in WUS. Impacts to less than 0.50 acre of WUS are generally processed with a Nationwide Permit. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification, which is administered by the State Water Resources Control Board, must be issued prior to any 404 Permit. Impacts to any Corps jurisdictional areas would require a permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. No Corps-jurisdictional habitats occur on site and no 404 Permit would be required. State of California The California ESA is similar to the federal ESA in that it contains a process for listing of species and regulating potential impacts to listed species. Section 2081 of the California ESA authorizes the CDFG to enter into a memorandum of agreement for take of listed species for scientific, educational, or management purposes. The Native Plant Protection Act (NPP A) enacted a process by which plants are listed as rare or endangered. The NPP A regulates collection, transport, and commerce in listed plants. The California ESA followed the NPP A and covers both plants and animals determined to be threatened or endangered with J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01\Reports\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc --,' \ \ ' ----....... _____ ,,,. Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Page 8 of 17 extinction. Plants listed as rare under the NPP A were designated threatened under the California ESA. The site has little potential to support listed plants. The CDFG regulates· alterations or impacts to streambeds or lakes under California Fish and Game Code 1602. CDFG requires a Streambed/1..ake Alteration Agreement (SAA) for projects that will divert or obstruct the natural flow of water; change the bed, channel, or bank of any stream; or use any material from a streambed. The SAA is a contract between the applicant and CDFG stating what can be done in the riparian zone and stream course (California Association of Resource Conservation Districts 2002). Any impacts to CDFG habitat would be regulated under Califorqia Fish and Game Code 1602 and · require an SAA. The CCC regulates impacts to wetlands under the California Coastal Act. The CCC requires a Coastal Development Permit for projects within the Coastal Zone. The Coastal Development Permit is an agreement between the CCC and the applicant stating what can be done in the coastal zone and in sensitive vegetation communities. Mitigation would be required for impacts to habitat under CCC- j urisdiction. The CEQA and its. implementing guidelines (CEQA Guidelines) require projects that potentially have significant effects (or impacts) on the environment to be submitted for environmental review. Significant impacts to the environment are typically mitigated through the environmental review process in accordance with existing laws and regulations. Natural Communities Conservation Planning Programs Areas that support native or naturalized vegetation can play a role in regional conservation planning pursuant to the NCCP Act. The site does support some 9-ative and naturalized habitats. The Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP) is a regional, comprehensive, jurisdictional planning program designed to develop an ecosystem preserve in the incorporated areas of northwestern San Diego County. The overall goal of the plan is to "maintain biodiversity and ecosystem health in the region while maintaining quality of life and economic growth opportunities." The MHCP Plan was adopted by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) in 2003. Within this plan, city-wide subarea plans describe the specific implementing mechanisms each city will institute for the MHCP. Carlsbad's Subarea Plan, the HMP, was approved.in 2004. City of Carlsbad . The City HMP has been in preparation since 1990, was adopted by the City (2004), and has received final approval by the USFWS and CDFG in December 2004. The HMP provides property owners with take authorizations for HMP- J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01\Rcports\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1: I ;J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Page 9 of 17 covered listed species. The HMP addresses potential impacts to native species and habitats (and some non-native habitats) and provides mitigation options that satisfy the federal and state ESAs. The primary objective of the HMP is to preserve the diversity of habitat and protect sensitive biological resources within the City while allowing for additional development. The plan identifies and maintains a preserve system that allows for the sustained existence of animals and plants at both the local and regional levels. The HMP preserve is a network of large habitat blocks with interconnecting link~ges. The areas covered by the City HMP include hard-line preserve areas, Core Areas 1 through 8, Linkages A through F, and Local Facility Management Zones (LFMZ) 1 through 25. The site is located within Core 1 and LFMZ 1 of the HMP. Core 1 consists of Buena Vista Lagoon and adjoining wetland and upland habitat. Buena Vista Lagoon and its surrounding vegetation provide habitat for critical populations of California least tern (Sterna antillarum brownz), western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus), light-footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes), American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum), California brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis californicus), white-faced ibis (Plegadis chiht), and southwestern pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata pallida). As a result, the lagoon and its associated vegetation have been designated "hardline Preserve Areas" by the City and "conserved lands" by the CDFG. The potential biological resources issues within LFMZ 1, as described by the Carlsbad HMP, are major and critical stands of riparian habitat and scattered patches of coastal sage scrub, non-native grassland, maritime succulent scrub, saltmarsh, and freshwater marsh. Several HMP Conservation Goals are applicable to this project: • No net loss of wetland habitat. • Retain and manage natural habitats adjacent to the lagoon to buffer wetland resources from adverse effects and to provide upland nesting habitat for pond turtles and other HMP species. • Maximize the preservation of habitat adjacent to the lagoon. • If native habitats cannot be avoided, mitigate by creation or enhancement of like habitats adjacent to the lagoon. This project has taken these goals into consideration and will avoid the small amount of wetland habitat that occurs on site. A 100-foot buffer between the wetlands and development area has been incorporated into the project design (Figure 3). Although they are located adjacent to a preserved area (Buena Vista Lagoon and its vegetation), the Hagey parcels are currently in a highly disturbed state and are located adjacent to developed properties. Therefore, the parcels are of limited value to wildlife and the habitat on site is not expected to provide suitable nesting habitat for HMP species. J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01\Reports\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc / I ' ' Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Coastal Zone Page 10 of 17 Additional conservation stap.dards apply to projects in the coastal zone. This project is within the coastal zone and the following standards are applicable to the project. Wetlands Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 30233, no impacts to wetlands shall be allowed in the Coastal Zone except as provided in this Section. Section 30121 of the California Coastal Act defines wetlands as being "lands within the coastal zone which may be covered periodically, or permanently, with shallow water and include saltwater marshes, freshwate•r marshes, open or closed brackish water marshes, swamps, mudflats, and fens." Upland Habitat Mitigation Requirements No impacts will occur to sensitive upland habitats. Mitigation for impacts to non- native grassland, non-native vegetation, eucalyptus woodland, and developed lands, which are not conserved on site, shall pay a per-acre in-lieu mitigation fee in an amount to be determined by the City Council per the HMP. According to the Addendum to the City's HMP (p. 10), in-lieu mitigation fees are $8,000 for unoccupied Diegan coastal sage scrub and chaparral (Group D), $4,000 for grassland (Group E), and .$800 for eucalyptus woodland and disturbed habitat. Buffers and Fuel Modification Zones Buffers shall be provided between preserved areas and development. The minimum buffer width for riparian areas is 50 feet and wetlands require a 100-foot buffer width. No development, grading, or alterations, including clearing of vegetation, shall occur in the buffer area with two exceptions: no fuel modification shall take place within 50 feet of riparian areas or wetlands, and recreation trails and public pathways may occur within the 15 feet closest to the development provided it is consistent with the preservation goals of the preserved habitat and appropriate measures are taken for physical separation from sensitive areas. Buffer areas that do not contain native habitat shall be landscaped with native plants. Signage and barders shall be required to minimize edge effects. Grading and Landsrnping Requirements Grading activity shall be prohibited during the rainy season (October 1 to April 1). The City Engineer may extend this deadline if specific provisions are met. A coastal development permit or permit amendment would allow grading activities during the winter as. resource agencies prohibit grading on sites during the summer to protect endangered or rare species. All graded areas shall have J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01\Reports\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc I I: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Page 11 of 17 temporary or permanent landscaping installed prior to October 1 and shall be maintained and replanted if not well-established by December 1 following the initial planting. Local Coastal Program According to the City's Local Coastal Program (LCP) Policy 7-6, an access trail is required to be provided along the southern shoreline of Buena Vista Lagoon. Each parcel adjacent to the lagoon is required to make an offer of dedication of lateral accessways, irrevocable for a term of 21 years, and shall be of at least 25 f~et in width upland from environmentally sensitive area and any required buffers thereto. Due to the small size of the parcels and topography constraints, the proposed location of the access easement is within the wetland buffer area, but is a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of the wetland vegetation (Figure 4). The CCC has issued a permit (6-92-184) contingent upon a deed restricted open space that is to be placed on the western end of the property to protect the off-site wetland with a 100-foot buffer (Figure 3). According to the Mello II segment of the City's LCP, the site itself has been planned and zoned for residential use, but the LCP requires that development must be set back a minimum of 100 feet from wetlands in order to buffer sensitive habitat areas. If a wetland area is bordered by steep slopes, a buffer area of less than 100 feet may be allowed. Furthermore, in conformity with the provisions of Sections 39560 et seq. of the California Government Code, the City's Office of the Fire Chief notifies the property owner each year that he must remove hazardous vegetation and/or rubbish from both parcels, subject to abatement by City contracted crews. IMPACTS ANALYSIS This section presents an impact analysis of the project as a component of the HMP. Impacts are assessed based on the current grading limits and compared with impacts and mitigation measures approved under the HMP and to show consistency of the current plan with the HMP. Impacts are effects of a project that may be direct or indirect. Direct impacts to biological resources occur as a result of grading, development, or other habitat- destructive activities that immediately alter the affected biological resources such that those resources are not expected to recover to their pre-impacted state. An assumption of this direct impact assessment is that all areas outside the HMP Preserve Area on the project will be interpreted as being directly impacted, either from grading or other effects. Indirect impacts are secondary effects of a project. Examples of indirect impacts include habitat insularization, edge effect, non-native J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01 \Reports\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc ---------------------------------------------, Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Page 12 of 17 1 species invasion, vehicular noise, and increased human or pet intrusion. The magnitude of an indirect impact can be as great as a direct impact. Impacts were calculated based on the most recent impact footprints for the project (i.e., the edge of the 100-foot wetland buffer; Figure 4). Areas that would be modified as a result of grading, placement of structures, fuel modification, or alteration of existing features are all direct impacts. Impacts to biological resources would be considered significant if implementation of the proposed project would: • Substantially affect (directly or· through habitat modifications) any candidate, sensitive, or special status species. in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the USFWS and CDFG; • Substantially affect any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or general plans, policies, regulations, or by the USFWS and CDFG; • Substantially affect federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means; • Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites; • Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources ·such as the Carlsbad HMP; and • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or other approved local, !egional, or state habitat conservation plan. Direct Impacts Direct impacts that result from the project total 0.27 acre of the 0.46-acre site (Table 2). Habitats impacted include non-native grassland (0.06 acre), non-native vege.tation (0.20 acre), and developed areas (0.01 acre). Impacts to non-native grassland are considered significant. The proposed project would pay an in-lieu mitigation fee for impacts to non-native grassland. No sensitive plant or animal species would be directly impacted by the project. No Corps-, CDFG:., or CCC- jurisdictional habitats would be impacted by the proposed project. Therefore, a 404 Permit/401 Water Quality Certification or a Stream.bed Alteration Agreement under California Fish and Game Code 1602 are not required. J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01 \Reports\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc I I I I I. I I. I I I 1· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Letter Report to Mr. Ted Ha:gey February 6, 2007 Table 2 VEGETATION IMPACTS HABITAT1 ACRE(S) Group A -Wetland/Riparian Southern willow scrub <0.01 Group E -Annual Grasslands Non-native grassland 0.16 Group F -Other Lands Non-native vegetation 0.28 Eucalyptus woodland <0.01 Developed areas 0.01 TOTAL 0.46 1Community names and codes are from Holland Oberbauer (1996). Indirect Impacts Page 13 of 17 IMPACTS 0.00 0.06 0.20 0.00 0.01 0.27 (1986) and Indirect impacts are impacts to biological resources that occur over short or long periods of time as a result of the project action. Although biological resources may not initially be directly impacted, over time they may be affected indirectly as a result of the relative proximity of development. Examples of indirect impacts expected to occur as a result of the proposed project include regional connectivity and several urban edge effects, including habitat insularization, exotic species invasion, domestic pets, increased human intrusion, lighting, and noise. This section provides the rationale presented in the HMP as to long-term project impacts in terms of regional (preserve design) and indirect effects to individual species. Finally, there is a discussion of urban edge effects directly relating to the site. Regional Preserve The primary regional concern is preservation of important biological resources present on site and maintenance of connectivity of the habitats on site to the surrounding open space, particularly to the other core areas within the HMP. The site is considered part of a larger core area (Core 1). A small amount of wetland vegetation would be conserved by the proposed project. The project would not inhibit linkages to any of the surrounding core areas within the HMP plan area, specifically Core 2. The project does not have significant impacts to regional preserve design because construction is limited to the eastern disturbed portion of the site adjacent co the existing development. J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01 \Reporcs\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc / I ' ' ,, ' . \ ...................... --I , Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey -February 6, 2007 Construction Effects Page 14. of 17 The extent of indirect construction impacts vary, but in general the potential indirect impacts are considered significant when they occur adjacent to any sensitive plant populations, sensitive animals, or riparian habitats because these habitats are considered sensitive, natural vegetation communities. Other potential construction effects include noise associated with equipment, construction dust, and human activities. The project is not expected to have significant construction effects it is surrounded on three sides by development and because a 100-foot wetland buffer has been incorporated into the project design (Figure 3). Urban Edge Effects The City's preserve system consists of conserved habitat areas that are adjacent to development. Development may have detrimental impacts on the open space areas over the short and long term, particularly in areas that support . sensitive plant populations and sensitive natural communities, such as southern maritime chaparral or riparian habitats. To prevent negative effects of either area on the other, adjacency standards for the development/habitat interface must be addressed, including fire management, erosion control, landscaping restrictions, buffers, exotic species control, fencing, signs, and lighting. Fire management will achieve biological goals and reduce hazards to humans and their property. Erosion is a problem because it can result in pollution and sedimentation of important water sources and the loss of vegetative cover from landslides. Exotic species invasion happens primarily ·as a result of dumping or use of invasive species in landscaping. Increased human and pet intrusion into open space areas is a problem that potentially damages sensitive resources as a result of direct crushing of vegetation, plant collection, release of unwanted species, and predation (especially from domestic cats). Fixed lighting also poses concerns, especially in the vicinity of the preserved areas from its effects on nocturnal wildlife activities. Table 3 provides the native plant palette proposed for erosion control of the disturbed slope between the project site and the lagoon. The first part of the table lists plants that are relatively fire safe and that do not need irrigation; the second portion lists the plants that could be added if irrigation is implemented. Approval of use of t.hese species should be obtained from the City's fire marshal prior to planting. The plants would also aid in buffering the resources at the lagoon's edge and improve the quality of the existing habitat. Incorporation of the 100-foot wetland buffer and the erosion control mix (Table 3) would render urban edge effects to a level below significance. J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01 \Reports\HAG-01 Bio. Resources.doc I' I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I I Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Table 3 Page 15 of 17 SUGGESTED PLANTS FOR SLOPE REVEGETATION SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMONNAME Elymus condensatus giant wild rye Eriophyllum confertiflorum golden yarrow Isocoma menziesii goldenbush Lasthenia californica common goldfields Lotus scoparius deerweed Muhlenbergia rigens California deergrass Nase/la pulchra purple needle grass 0Puntia littoralis coastal prickly pear cactus Plantago insularus woolly plantain Sambucus mexicana Mexican elderberry Yucca schidigera Mohave yucca Plants to be Added if Irrigation is Implemented Artemisia californica California sagebrush Cneoridium dumosum Coast spice bush Encelia cali_fornica California encelia Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat Salvia apiana white sage Salvia mellifera black sage Long-term Development Effects The development may have detrimental impacts on the open space areas over the long term, particularly in areas that support sensitive plant populations and sensitive natural communities, such as southern maritime chaparral or riparian habitats. Specific concerns include exotic species invasion, fire management, access control, and anthropogenic disturbances. Sensitive animal species pre.sent within the preserve areas may be subject to predation by domestic pets and brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) nest parasitism. These potential impacts are not considered significant because of the project's small size and the amount of current development north and south of the site, along the edges of the lagoon (Figure 3). CONCLUSION The CCC is prepared to recommend approval of the project provided that it complies with the conditions established by the LCP. Figure 4 illustrates where development would occur relative to the lagoon, which is consistent with the requirements of the LCP and the land use and zoning designations. Mitigation for impacts to non-native grassland would be through the City's in-lieu mitigation fee as designated in the HMP. J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01\Reports\HAG-01 Bio Resources.doc ,' I ' ' ' ' ' ' . ', , _______ ...... Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Derek H. Langsford, Ph.D. Project Manager and County-certified Biologist Enclosures: Figure 1 2 3 4 Regional Location Map Project Location Map Vegetation Map · Vegetation Map and Site Plan Plant Species Observed Page 16 of 17 Shelby Howard Biologist Attachment A B C D E Listed or Sensitive Plant Species with Potential to Occur Animal Species Observed or Detected REFERENCES Listed or Sensitive Animai Species with Potential to Occur Explanation of Status Codes for Plant and Animal Species American Ornithologists' Union. 2006. List of the 2,041 Bird Species (with Scientific and English Names) Known from the AOU Check-list Area. URL: http://www.aou.org/checklist/birdlist4 7. pdf. Baker, R.J., L.C. Bradley, R.D. Bradley, J.W. Dragoo, _M.D. Engstrom, R.S. Hoffmann, C.A. Jones, F. Reid, D.W. Rice; and C. Jones. 2003. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico. Occasional ·Papers of t:he Museum, Texas Tech University 223. Bowman, R. 1973. Soil Survey of the San Diego Area. USDA in cooperation with the USDI, UC Agricultural Experiment Station, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Navy, and the U.S. Marine Corps. California Association of Resource Conservation Districts. 2002. Guide to Watershed Project Permitting for the State of California. Available at URL: http://www.carcd.org/permitting/pguide.pd£ California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2007. State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California. State of California, The Resources Agency; Department of Fish and Game Habitat' Conservation Division, Wildlife & Habita~ Data Analysis Branch. URL: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/whdab/pdfs(fEPlants.pdf. January.· J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-01\Reports\H.AG-01 Bio Resources.doc I i Ii Ii I: I I: I I 1· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Letter Report to Mr. Ted Hagey February 6, 2007 Page 17 of 17 2006. State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game Biogeographic Data Branch. URL: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/ whdab/pdfs/TEAnimals. pd£ October. California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2007. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. Internet searchable database Version 7-07 a. URL: http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi. Updated quarterly. January 17. Carlsbad, City of (City). 2004. Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad. November. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 100 pp. with Appendices. Heath, F. 2004. An Introduction to Southern California Butterflies. Mountain Press Publishing Co, Missoula, MT. Hickman, J.C., ed. 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, State of California, Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. 156 pp. Oberbauer, T. 1996. Terrestrial Vegetation Communities in San Diego County Based on Holland's Descriptions. San Diego Association of Governments, San Diego, California, 6 pp. Studt, J.F. 1991. Memorandum: Questions and Answers on 1987 Manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. October 7. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service. 1992. Hydric Soil Lists. Field Office Official List of Hydric Soils Map Units for San Diego Area, California. Section II Field Office Technical Guide. Davis, CA. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Branch of Habitat Assessment. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands. http://www.nwi.fws.gov/bha/ (in downloadable .pdf format). 1996. URL: Williams, A.E. 1992. Memorandum: Clarification and Interpretation of the 1987 Manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. March 6. J :\PROJECTS\Biology\H\hag-0 l \Reports\HAG~0 l Bio Resources.doc I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I : RIVERSIDE I COUNTY I•-••-••-••-••-, ORANGE ! SAN DIEGO :..._ COUNTY) COUNTY •·, •• ,. ,._ ... ,,,,~ ........... , 8 Pacific Ocean N .~ WWE s 4 0 O'Neil/Lake~ 8 Miles I \ArcGIS\II\IIAG-0l liagcy\Map\BIO\ExislCond1t1ons\F\gt_Rcg10nal mxd-JP ff lllX ' ~ ke Wohlford ~ Escondido .I Lake Ramona ~ Lake~Poway l:D ,.. Poway ~ Sutherland ,q_:;servoir @ _ LJan Vice~te _\.~/ Reservmr ......... Miramar Resetvoir ~_;p" ~ Loveland Reservoir /Barrett Lake ~~- ( Otay Reservoir tr- &~:,-----... UNITED ~f,!~!.-•-•-•-•-•-•-•--~-•-•-•-MEXICO -----·-· ~--·-· Regional Location Map HAGEY PARCEL Figure 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I OCEANSIDE ---------------, I I I /81 I I l I I r I l I 1 I '' 11 I I I I I ' I 1 I I I 1 I ,.-e I I W-E s 2,000 1,000 0 Job No: HAG-01 Date: 12/22/06 2,000 Feet I \ArcGIS\l l\HAG-01 Hagey\Map\BIO\Ex1slCondttions\F1g2_Locauon.mxd •JP ff lllX Project Location Map HAGEY PARCEL Figure 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LEGEND -C) Southern Willow Scrub* Non-native Grassland Eucalyptus Woodland --Non-native Vegetation Developed • Sample Plot @ 100-Foot Setback from Lagoon Vegetation for Deed Restricted Open Space I • I I • • f t ..... j • Buena ~ · Vista · lagoon 75 37.5 . ·t . ,.,,. -., . .-... ,...,,., Job No: HAG-0 I Date: 05/25/07 75 Feet l:\ArcGlS\I-NlACi--01 ltlg~bp\BIO&istConditionNi&J _ Vtj:tU.tion mxd ·JP H l llX Note: This map is based on silc conditions as obSCl"\'ed at the time of our field invcsugation.1. The information presented herein was developed by visual inspection and/or aeriaJ photograph interpretation. Note that both site c-0nditions and applicable rtgulatory requirements may change. Vegetation Map HAGEY PARCEL Figure 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LE GEND -0 Southern Willow Scrub* Non-native Grassland Eucalyptus Woodland ---• Non-native Vegetation Developed Sample Plot ,,.:;, Proposed 25' Wide Access Easement • CDFG and Coastal Commission jurisdictional habitat. 40 #1• 20 • 4 • ,- 100' from Southern Willow Scrub 40 Feet Note: Job No: HAG-01 Date: 01/30/07 This map is based on ~itc conditions as observed a1 the time of our field investig_alions. The 1nformauon presented herein wa;; llcvelnpt:ll by vi~ual inspeclion and/or aerial phutogr.tph inlerprclation. Note that both SilC conditions and applicable rcpulatory requirements may change. ,, ..... ··--·· '.t;: ,.r t: ,.,,, ,.• ·1=: 11 f..~ 't== J·\An,{ilS\JN-IAG-01 l·laiey\Map\BJO\Ex1SICondiuoosih g4_ VcgSttePlan m:,i;d ·JP ftl l lX Vegetation Map and Site Plan HAGEY PARCEL Figure 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FAMILY Asteraceae Aizoaceae B rassicaceae Chenopodiaceae Cucurbitaceae E uphorbiaceae Fabaceae Malvaceae M yoporaceae Myrtaceae Oxalidaceae Salicaceae Solanaceae Tamaricaceae Tropaeolaceae Poaceae Attachment A PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED SCIENTIFIC NAME* Ambrosia psilostachya Gnaphalium bicolor Osteospermum sinuata* Carpobrotus edulis* Brassica nigra* Raphanus sativus* Chenopodium album* Salsola tragus* Cucurbita foetidissima Ricinus communis* Acacia longifolia* Malva parviflora* Myoporum laetum* Eucalyptus sp. Oxalis pes-caprae* Salix lasiolepis Datura wrightii* Nicotiana glauca* Tamarix parviflora* Tropaeolum majus* Avena fatua* Bromus diandrus* Cynodon dactylon* COMMON NAME western ragweed cudweed passion mixed hottentot-fig black mustard wild radish pigweed Russian thistle calabazilla castor-bean golden wattle cheeseweed myoporum eucalyptus Bermuda-buttercup arroyo willow jimsonweed tree tobacco small-flowered tamarisk garden nasturtium wild oat common ripgut grass Bermuda grass *Non-native species HABITAT NNG NNG sws NNV,EW DH NNG,NNV DH DH,NNG NNG DH, NNG, NNV, SWS, DEV NNV NNG NNV EW NNG sws NNG NNV DEV sws SWS,NNG SWS,NNG NNG tHabitat Acronyms: DEV=developed; DH=disturbed habitat; EW=eucalyptus woodland; NNG= non-native grassland; NNV=non-native vegetation; SWS=southern willow scrub. A-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Attachment B ANIMAL SPECIES OBSERVED OR DETECTED SCIENTIFIC NAME INVERTEBRATES Butterflies Vannessa annabella VERTEBRATES Buteo lineatus Calypte anna Corvus brachyrhynchos Dendroica coronata Fulica americana Pipilo crissalis Psaltriparus minimus Mammals Canis familiaris Spermophilus beecheyi Thomomys bottae B-1 COMMON NAME west coast lady red-shouldered hawk Anna's hummingbird American crow yellow-rumped warbler American coot California towhee bushtit domestic dog (scat) California ground squirrel Botta' s pocket gopher I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Attachment C LISTED OR SENSITIVE PLANT SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR SPECIES STATUS* POTENTIAL TO OCCUR San Diego thornmint FT/SE Very low. Occurs in heavy clay soils near vernal (Acanthomintha ilicifolia) CNPS List lB. l pools, in grasslands, and in chaparral and coastal sage scrub. Would have been observed if present. California adolphia --/--Low. Occurs in clay soils in coastal sage scrub, (Adolphia californica) CNPS List 2.1 chaparral, and grassland habitats. San Diego ambrosia FE/--Very low. Would have been observed if present. (Ambrosia pumila) CNPS List lB.l Del Mar manzanita FE/--Very low. Occurs in southern maritime chaparral on (Arctostaphylos glandulosa CNPS List lB.l sandy mesas and bluffs. No suitable habitat on site. ssp. crassifolia) Encinitas baccharis FT/SE Very low. Would have been observed if present. (Baccharis vanessae) CNPS List lB. l Thread-leaved brodiaea FT/SE Very low. A plant that is associated with vernal (Brodiaea filifolia) CNPS List lB. l pools. No suitable habitat on site. Orcutt's brodiaea --/--Very low. Occurs in vernal pools and ephemeral (Brodiaea orcuttii) CNPS List lB. l streams and seeps. Would have been observed if present. No suitable habitat on site. Del Mar mesa sand aster --/--Very low. Coastal chaparral, primarily in sandy ( Corethrogyne filaginifolia CNPS List lB. l openings between chamise. No suitable habitat on var. linifo/ia) site. Orcutt's spineflower FE/SE Very low. Found only in sandy areas on mesas in the ( Chorizanthe orcuttii) CNPS List lB.1 coastal region. Generally associated with coastal sage scrub or chaparral. No suitable habitat present. San Diego button-celery FE/SE Very low. Occurs in vernal pools and marshes. No (Eryngium aristulatum var. CNPS List lB.1 suitable habitat on site. parish it) Blochman's dudleya --/--Very low. Dry, stony places associated with coastal (Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. CNPS List lB.1 sage scrub. Not observed. blochmaniae) Sticky dudleya --/--Very low. A conspicuous succulent perennial that (Dudleya viscida) CNPS List lB.2 grows on steep, north-facing slopes and is associated with coastal sage scrub and chaparral. Would have been observed if present. Orcutt's hazardia FC/ST Very low. Occurs in chaparral. No suitable habitat (Hazardia orcuttii) CNPS List lB.1 on site. San Diego goldenstar --/--Very low. Occurs in grasslands and open sage scrub. (Muilla clevelandii) CNPS List lB.1 Open areas on site are too disturbed to support the species. Little mousetail --/--Very low. Occurs in vernal pools and alkaline (Myosurus minimus ssp. CNPS List 3.1 marshes. No vernal pool or alkaline marsh habitat on apus) site. C-1 Attachment C (cont.) . LISTED OR SENSITIVE PLANT SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR SPECIES STATUS* POTENTIAL TO OCCUR Mud nama (Nama --/--Low. Occurs along lake shores and intermittently stenoc~r/Jum) CNPS List 2.2 wet areas. Prostrate navarretia --/--Very low. Occurs in vernal pools. No suitable (Navarretia /Jrostraia) CNPS List lB.1 habitat on site. California Orcutt gr~ss FE/SE Very low. Occurs in or near vernal pools. No (Orcuttia californica) CNPS List lB.1 suitable habitat on site. * A listing and expfanation of status and sensitivity codes is provided in Attachment E. C-2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Attachment D LISTED OR SENSITIVE ANIMAL SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR SPECIES STATUS* POTENTIAL TO OCCUR INVERTEBRATES San Diego fairy shrimp FE/--Not expected. Suitable habitat (vernal pools and (Branchinecta sandiegoensis) depressions) does not occur on site. Riverside fairy shrimp FE/--Not expected. Suitable habitat (vernal pools and (Streptocephalus wootonf) depressions) does not occur on site. Hermes copper --/--Not expected. Occurs in southern mixed chaparral (Lycaena hermes) and coastal sage scrub. Suitable habitat and its larval host plant, spiny redberry (Rhamnus crocea), are absent on and adjacent to the site. VERTEBRATES Reptiles Silvery legless lizard --/CSC Low. Prefers fine, sandy soils and leaf litter. Some (Anniella pulchra pulchra) habitat exists at the base of the slope. Belding's orange-throated --/CSC Very low. Prefers open sage scrub and chaparral, whiptail which are not found on site. Known from project ( Cnemidophorus hyperythrus beldinf!.i) vicinity but there is no habitat on site. Red-diamond rattlesnake --/CSC Very low. Common species in coastal sage scrub, ( Crota!us exsul) typically in vicinity of rock outcrops. Appropriate habitat does not occur on site. Coronado skink --/CSC Very low. Found in coastal sage scrub and areas with. (Eumeces skiltonianus interjJarietalis) sufficient leaf litter to provide shelter. Coast horned lizard --/CSC Very low. Favored prey, harvester ants (Phrynosoma coronatum) (Pogonomyrmex sp.) were not observed. Site is too disturbed, and habitat is limited on site. Western patch-nosed snake --/CSC Very low. Found among preferred habitats of (Sa!vadora hexa!epis virgultea) whiptails, its favored prey. Habitat is limited on site. Birds Cooper's hawk --/CSC Very low. Foraging habitat is limited in the area. (Accipiter coo-Peri) Southern California rufous---/CSC Very low. Found in coastal sage scrub, which is not crowned sparrow present on site. (Aimophila ru{iceps canescens) Bell's sage sparrow --/CSC Very low. Found in coastal sage scrub and chaparral, (Amphispiza belli befit) which are not present on site. Burrowing owl --/CSC Very low. Prefers grassland and agricultural lands, (Athene cunicu!aria) where it inhabits ground squirrel burrows. Use of burrows would have been detected if present. San Diego cactus wren --/CSC Very low. Native cactus tickets do not occur on site. ( Campy!orhynchus brunneicapil!us sandiegensis) D-1 Attachment D (cont.) LISTED OR SENSITIVE ANIMAL SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR SPECIES STATUS* POTENTIAL TO OCCUR VERTEBRATES (cont.) Birds (cont.) · Wes tern snowy. plover FT/CSC Low. Needs sandy, gravelly or friable soils for (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus) nesting. Although the species historically bred along the lagoon shores, it has not been recorded in several decades (CNDDB 2006). Northern harrier --/CSC Very low. Foraging habitat is limited in the area .. (Circus cyaneus) Yellow warbler --/CSC Low. Southern willow scrub patch is too small and (Dendroica Petechia brrwstert) disturbed to support this species. White-tailed kite Nesting; --Very low:. Foraging habitat is limited in the area. (Elanus leucurus) /Fully Protected Southwestern willow flycatcher FE/SE Very low. Southern willow scrub does not contain (Empidonax trail/ii ex#mus) the appropriate characteristics to support this species. California horned lark --/CSC Low. Found on sandy beaches, agricultural fields, (EremoPhila alPestris actia) grassland, and ooen areas. Yellow-breasted chat --/CSC Low. Southern willow scrub patch is too small and (Icteria virens) disturbed to support this species. Belding's savannah sparrow --/SE Very low. Nests in pickleweed along the margins of I . (Passerculus sandwich~nsis beldinit) tidal flats, which do not occur on site. I, White-faced ibis --/CSC Very low. Although the species is known to nest in (Plegadis chihi) the lagoon, it is not expected to occur because the I . site does not contain freshwater marsh habitat. Light-footed clapper rail FE/SE Very low. Although the species is known to nest in (Rallus longirostris levipes) the lagoon, it is not expected to occur because the site lacks marsh habitat needed for nesting. California least terr1i FE/SE Not expected. Although the species historically (Sterna antillarum browni) bred along the lagoon shores, it has not· been recorded in several decades (CNDDB 2006). Least Bell's vireo FE/SE Low. Southern willow scrub patch is likely too small (Vireo be/Iii pusillus) , and disturbed to support this species. Mammal~ Pallid bat --/CSC Very low. Roosts in caves, mines, crevices, and (Antrozous Pallidus) · abandoned buildings. San Diego pocket mouse --/CSC Very low. Prefers open, sandy land with weeds. ( Chaetodipus fa/lax /t#lax) San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit --/CSC Low. The site is too small and is surrounded by (Lepus californicus bennettii) development. Desert woodrat --/CSC Very low. Habitat is limited in the area. (Neotoma /epida intermedia) * A listing and explanation of status and sensitivity codes is provided in Attachment E. D-2 I. I 1: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I AppendixE EXPLANATION OF STATUS CODES FOR PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES F_EDERAL AND STATE CODES U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) FE Federally listed endangered FT Federally listed threatened FC Federal candidate species (former Category 1 candidates) California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) SE State listed endangered ST State listed threatened CSC California special concern species Fully Protected Fully Protected species refer to all vertebrate and invertebrate taxa of concern to the Natural Diversity Data Base regardless of legal or pr~tection status. These species may not be taken or possessed without a permit from the Fish and Game Commission and/or CDFG. OTHER CODES AND ABBREVIATIONS Habitat Management Plan (HMP) Covered Species Species covered for take under the Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP) Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP) that received final approval by the wildlife agencies in 2004. Narrow Endemic Species "Narrow Endemic" is a sensitivity rating given by the MHCP to indicate "those species considered so restricted in distribution and abundance that substantial loss of their populations or habitat might jeopardize the species' continued existence or recovery." E-1 Appendix E (cont.) EXPLANATION OF STATUS CODES FOR PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES Lists California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Codes Threat Code Extensions lA = Presumed exdnct. lB = Rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. Eligible for state listing. 2 = Rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere. Eligible for state listing. 3 = Distribution, ~ndangerment, ecology, and/or taxonomic information needed. Some eligible for state listing. 4 = A watch list, for species of limited distribution. Needs monitoring for changes in population status. Few (if any) eligible for state listing. .1 -Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat) .2 -Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened) .3 -Not very endangered in California ( <20% of occurrences · threatened or no current threats known) E-2 I I I I Ii I I I I I I I I' I: I I I I I