Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3190; Properties in the Southwest Quadrant Fieldstone/La; Properties in the Southwest Quadrant Fieldstone/La Costa; 1995-06-08Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Appendix B Profile of HCP/OMSP Species of Concern A. Plants 7 1. Ashy Spike-moss 7 *• 2. Blochman's Dudleya 7 «. 3. California Adder's-tongue 8 ^ 4. California Adolphia 9 5. Cliff Spurge 10 *• 6. Coast Barrel Cactus 11 mm 7. Del Mar Manzanlta 12 8. Del Mar Sand Aster 15 9. Encinitas Baccharis 15 10. Engelmann Oak 16 ^ 11. Nuttall's Scrub Oak 17 12. Orcutt's Brodiaea 18 13. Orcutt's Hazardia : 20 14. Orcutt's Spinefiower 21 15. Palmer's Grappiinghook 21 *" 16. San Diego Ambrosia 23 — 17. San Diego County Viguiera 24 ^, 18. San Diego Golden Star 24 19. San Diego Marsh Elder 26 20. San Diego Sagewort 27 w 21. San Diego Thornmint 28 22. Southwestern Spiny Rush 29 23. Sticky-leaved Liveforever 29 24. Summer holly 30 ^. 25. Thread-leaved Brodiaea 31 26. Wart-stemmed Ceanothus 36 27. Western Dichondra 37 B. Invertebrates 39 28. Harbison's Dun Skipper .~ 39 29. Hermes Copper 42 30. Quino Checkerspot 45 Final 6-95 B-1 'mm Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ C. Amphibians 49 ** 31. California Red-legged Frog 49 "* 32. Westem Spadefoot 50 m D. Reptiles 51 33. Coastal Rosy Boa 51 m 34. Coastal Westem Whiptail 51 m 35. Coast Patch-nosed Snake 54 36. Coronado Skink 55 ^ 37. Northern Red Diamond Rattlesnake 56 38. Orange-throated Whiptail 58 39. San Diego Banded Gecko 62 * 40. San Diego Horned Lizard 63 "* 41. San Diego Ringneck Snake 67 at 42. Silvery Legless Lizard 67 ^ 43. Southwestern Pond Turtle 68 44. Two-striped Garter Snake 69 •» m E. Birds 70 45. Bell's Sage Sparrow 70 * 46. Burrowing Owl 75 47. California Horned Lark 81 _ 48. Coastal California Gnatcatcher 82 49. Cooper's Hawk 97 50. Least Bell's Vireo 98 51. Loggerhead Shrike 99 52. Northern Harrier 102 53. San Diego Cactus Wren 103 «• 54 Southern California Rufous-crowned Sparrow 104 55. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher 108 56. Tricolored Blackbird 109 • 57. Yellow-breasted Chat 111 «» 58. Yellow Warbler Ill m F. Mammals 116 59. California Mastiff Bat 116 ^ 60. Dulzura California Pocket Mouse 116 61. Northwestern San Diego Pocket Mouse 117 62. Pacific Pocket Mouse 120 63. San Diego Black-tailed jackrabbit 121 64. San Diego Desert Woodrat 122 65. Southern Grasshopper Mouse 122 • 66. Townsend's Western Big-eared Bat 123 in m G. References 125 m B-2 Final 6-95 B m Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Table B-1 Names and Listing Status of HCP/OMSP Species of Concern m ID# Species Common and Scientific Name Federal Listing Status State Listing State Other Status PlanU m A-1 Ashy spike-moss Selaginella cinerascens none none CNPS4 B-1 Blochman's dudleya Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae none none CNPSIB, NCCP, OSS A-2 California adder's-tongue Qp/)fogiossum californicum C3c none CNPS4 A-3 California adophia Adolphia californica none none CNPS2, NCCP, OSS <MI B-2 Cliff spurge Euphorbia misera none none CNPS2, NCCP, OSS MM B-3 Coast barrel cactus ferocactus v/ricfescens C2* none CNPS2, NCCP, OSS mm A-4 Del Mar manzanita Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. aassifolia FPE* none CNPSIB, T mm B-4 Del Mar s^d aster Coret/irogyne filaginifolia var. linfolia FPT none CNPSIB, NCCP, T mm B-5 Encinitiis baccharis Baccharis vanessae FPE* SE CNPSIB, T mm A-5 Engelmann oak Quercus enge/manni( none none CNPS4, OSS mm A-6 Nuttall's scrub oak Quercus dumosa none none CNPSIB. OSS M A-7 Orcutt's brodiaea Brodiaea orcuttii C2* nOTie CNPSIB, T •K VP B-6 Orcutt's hazardia Hazardia orcuttii C2 none CNPSIB, NCCP B-7 Orcutt's spinefiower Chorizant/ie orctrttiana FPE" SE CNPSIB, NCCP A-8 Palmer's grappiinghook Harpagonella palmeri none none CNPS2, NCCP, OSS •en* B-8 San Diego ambrosia Ambrosia pumila C2* none CNPSIB, NCCP «M A-9 San Diego County viguiera Viguiera laciniata none none CNPS4, NCCP «•> A-10 San Diego golden star Muilla clevelandii C2* none CNPSIB, NCCP, T •Ml A-11 San Diego marsh elder /va hayesfana C2 none CNPS2, NCCP, OSS B-9 San Diego sagewort Artem/5(a palmeri none none CNPS2, NCCP, OSS im B-10 San Diego thornmint Acant/iomintha ilicifolia CI* SE CNPS1B, NCCP, T w A-12 Southwestern spiny rush Junctus actus var. leopoldii none none CNPS4, OSS A-13 Sticky-leaved liveforever Dudleya viscida CI* none CNPSIB, NCCP,OSS A-14 Summer holly Comarostap/iy/fs diversifolia ssp. diversifoUa C2 none CNPSIB, T A-15 Thread-leaved brodiaea 1 Brodiaea filifoHa CI" SE CNPSIB, T Final 6-95 B-3 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Table B-1 (continued) Names and Listing Status of HCP/OMSP Species of Concern ID# Species Common and Scientific Name Federal Listing Status State Listing State other Plants continued A-16 Wart-stemmed ceanothus Ceanothus verrucosus C2 none CNPS2, T A-17 Westem dichondra Dichondra occidentalis C3c none CNPS4, NCCP, OSS Invertebrates B-11 Harbison's dun skipper Euphyes vestris harbinsoni C2 none T B-12 Hermes copper tycaena hermes C2* none OSS B-13 Quino checkerspot Euphydras editha quino CI* none OSS Amphil tans B-14 Calrfomia red-legged frog Rana aurora draytonii FPE* CSC OSS A-18 Westem spadefoot toad 5pea hammondii none CSC NCCP, T Reptiles A-19 Coastal rosy boa Lichanura trivirgata rosafusca C2 CSC NCCP, OSS A-20 Coastal westem whiptail Cnemidophorus tigris multiscutatus C2 CSC NCCP, OSS B-15 Coast patch-nosed snake Salvadora hexalepis virgultea C2 CSC NCCP, OSS B-16 Coronado skink Eumeces skiltonianus interparietal is C2 CSC NCCP, OSS A-21 Northern red diamond rattlesnake Crotalus ruber ruber C2 CSC NCCP, OSS A-22 Orange-throated whiptail Cnemidophorus hyperythrus beldingi C2 CSC NCCP, T B-17 San Diego banded gecko Coleonyx variegatus abbotti C2 CSC NCCP, OSS A-23 San Diego homed lizard Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei C2 CSC NCCP, T B-18 San Diego rinpieck snake Diadophis punctatus simHis C2 CSC OSS B-19 Silvery legless lizard Anniella nigra argentea none CSC OSS B-20 Southwestern pond turtle Clemmys marmorata pallida CI* CSC NCCP, OSS B-21 Two-striped garter snake Thamnophis hammondii C2 CSC OSS Birds ' A-24 Bell's sage sparrow Amphispiza belli belli C2 CSC NCCP, MBTA, OSS A-25 Burrowing owl Speotyto cunicularia none CSC MBTA, T B-22 California homed lark Eremophila alpestris actia C2 CSC MBTA, NCCP, OSS ' A-26 Coastal Califomia gnatcatcher Polioptila californica californica FT CSC MBTA, NCCP, T i B-4 Final 6-95 Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix 6 I" Table B-1 Names and Listing Status of HCP/OMSP Species of Concern ID# Species Common and Scientific Name Federal Listing Status State Listing State other Status Birds cc ntimied A-2 7 Cooper's hawk Accipiter cooper/ none CSC MBTA, T B-23 Least Bell's vireo Wreo bellii pusillus FE SE MBTA, T A-28 Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus C2 CSC MBTA, NCCP, OSS A-29 Northern harrier Circus cyaneus none CSC MBTA, T B-24 San Diego cactus wren Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus couesi C2 CSC NCCP,T A-30 Southern Califomia rufous-crowned sparrow Aimophila ruficeps canescens C2 CSC MBTA, NCCP,T B-25 Southwestem willow flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus FPE SE FSS, MBTA, T A-31 Tricolored blackbird Age/a/us tricolor C2 CSC MBTA, NCCP, T A-32 Yellow-breasted chat Icteria virens none CSC MBTA, OSS A-33 Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia brewsteri none CSC MBTA, OSS Mammals B-26 Califomia mastiff bat Eumops perotis californicus C2 CSC T B-27 Dulzura California pocket mouse Chaetodipus californicus femora/is C2 CSC T A-34 Northwestem San Diego pocket mouse Chaetodipus fallax fallax C2 CSC NCCP, T B-28 Pacific pocket mouse Perognathus hngimemhris pacificus FEE CSC NCCP, OSS A-35 San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit Lepus californicus bennettii C2 CSC NCCP, OSS A-36 San Diego desert woodrat Neotoma iepida intermedia C2 CSC OSS B-29 Southern grasshopper mouse Onychomys torridus ramona C2 CSC NCCP, OSS B-30 Townsend's westem big-eared bat P/ecotus townsendii townsendii C2 CSC T Final 6-95 B-5 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP m Table B-1(continued) Names and Listing Status of HCP/OMSP Species of Concern Codes A- B- C1 C2 C3c CNPS CSC FE FEE FPE FPT FSS FT MBTA NCCP OSS ST T Species observed or assumed to occur In one or both plan area components Species potentially occuaing in one or both plan area components Category 1 candidate for federal listing Category 2 candidate for federal listing Category 3c candidate for federal listing Listed by the California Native Plant Society as: (18) rare or endangered in California and elsewhere (2) rare or endangered in Califomia and more common elsewhere (4) plants of limited distribution Identified by CDFC as a species of special concern in Califomia Listed as endangered under the federal ESA Emergency listed as endangered under the federal ESA Proposed for federal listing as endangered Proposed for federal listing as threatened Identified by federal agencies as a sensitive species Listed as threatened under the federal ESA Protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act On the list of sensitive species for the NCCP program "Other Sensitive Species" identified in draft Carlsbad HMP Listed as threatened under the Califomia ESA Target species for Carlsbad HMP and North County MHCP On the list of species covered by a settlement agreement between USFWS and environmental groups who filed suit regarding the timely listing of CI and C2 species. m m m m h m m m m Ik P m p m B-6 Final 6-95 Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B A. Plants 1. Ashy Spike-moss Selaginella cinerascens Status USFWS: None CDFC: None CNPS: List 4, 1-2-1 OTHER: None PLAN ID: A-1 Range It occurs in San Diego County and adjacent Baja California, Mexico. In San Diego County it ranges from about Rancho Bernardo south to the international border. This species was reported from Arroyo la Costa, Airport Business Center, Woolley Annexation Project, Carlsbad Highlands, Rancho Carrillo, and Evans Point (MBA and Dudek & Associates, Inc. 1992). Habitat It occurs on flat mesas below 965 feet. It is one of the most common understory plants in the Diegan coastal sage scrub and coastal chaparral habitats. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 510 acres (40%) of this species' habitat will be conserved within the plan area, and approximately 760 acres (60%) are in areas designated for development. The species may potentially benefit from the proposed offsite habitat conservation. The HCP/OMSP will contribute to the long term preservation of this species which is still locally abundant throughout San Diego County. Conservation/Management Measures This species will benefit from the control of access and exotic species. 2. Blochman's Dudleya Dudleya blochmaniae spp. blochmaniae Status USFWS: None CDFC: None CNPS: List IB, 1-2-2 OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: B-1 Final 6-95 B-7 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP "* — ^ Mt Range * m This subspecies is known to occur from San Luis Obispo County, south of Baja California (Smith and Berg 1988). In San Diego County this subspecies is * reported from Stuart Mesa, Camp Pendleton, Las Flores, La Costa, La Jolla, and • Pacific Beach (Beauchamp 1986). B-8 Habitat Blochman's dudleya occurs atop coastal bluffs below 350 feet. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no expected impacts to this species because it has a low probability of * occurrence and was not detected within the plan area. As such, there are no conservation benefits to this species from the HCP/OMSP. There are no other records for this species in Carlsbad. * m Conservation/Management Measures m Because this species most likely does not occur within the plan area, there are no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. m 3. California Adder's-tongue ^ Opbioglossum californicum IP Status ** USFWS: Candate (Category 3c) J CDFC: None * CNPS: List 4, 1-2-2 OTHER: None ^ PLAN ID: A-2 m Range « California adder's-tongue ranges from Monterey to San Diego south through Baja California (Munz 1974). The subspecies is reported to occur from W Escondido, Olivenhain, Valley Center, Encinitas, Grossmont College, Lake m Jennings, Mount Soledad, Kearny Mesa, Balboa Park, East San Diego, El Cajon Mountain, Lee Parkway, and Point Loma (Beauchamp 1986). p Habitat • This species occurs within grassland and vernal pools below 3 000 feet P (Beauchamp 1986). ' 11 m m Final 6-95 W m Car/sbad-flCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 100 individuals (100%) of this species will be conserved in the plan area; no Individuals occur in areas designated for development. No other specific records for this species are known from within the City. Because of the widespread distribution of this species, the HCP/OMSP would be only a minor contribution to the long term preservation of the species. Conservation/Management Measures This species would indirectly benefit from measures to control access and exotic pests. 4. California Adolphia Adolphia californica Status USFWS: None CDFC: None CNPS: List 2,1-2-1 OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-3 Morphology, Taxonomy and Evolution California adolphia is a spiny green shrub found in coastal sage scrub vegetation in southern California and northwestern Baja California, Mexico. ** Califomia adolphia is an intricately branched, approximately three feet high shrub with opposite divaricate (widely divergent) spinose (bearing spines) twigs which are articulated (jointed) with the stems. The branches are short- w pubescent, green, stiff, striate and spinescent (spine tipped). The leaves are opposite, small, mostly caducous (early deciduous), with stipules, oblong or obovate, entire or nearly so, 1-4 inches long, short-petioled, and puberlent. The flowers are inconspicuous, solitary or in a few flowered axillary clusters. The five sepals are pubescent and greenish-white; the five hooded petals are white and approximately one inch long. The fruit is a three-loculed, three-lobed globose (spherical) capsule, the lower third of which is surrounded by, but mostly free from, the cuplike calyx-base Oepson 1936; Munz 1974). Habitat This species occurs on dry coastal and foothill slopes below 1,000 feet and is generally associated with coastal sage scrub. This species is considered to be an edaphic (influenced by soil rather than climate) endemic as it has a high affinity to clay soils (Beauchamp 1986). Final 6-95 B-9 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP m m m Historical and Current Distribution California adolphia is known from coastal San Diego County and from the international border to the vicinity of jaraguay (Smith and Berg 1988; Beauchamp 1986; Wiggins 1980). Reported localities in the County include Morro Hill, Cerro de la Calavera, Agua Hedionda, Rancho Santa Fe, Mount Soledad, Bernardo, Chollas Valley, Barrett Junction, Proctor Valley, and Otay • (Beauchamp 1986). It is reported from numerous localities within the City of Ml Carlsbad, including Arroyo La Costa, Airport Business Center, Santa Fe Clens, La Costa Northeast Annexation, Woolley Annexation Project, Carlsbad |p Highlands, the east end of Dove Drive, western portion of Rancheros, Rancho Carrillo, Lake Calavera, Evans Point, and Camino Hills Mobile Home Park (Dudek & Associates and MBA 1992). Any extant populations that occur within the Mount Soledad City of San Diego Park would be considered protected. m Endangerment m California adolphia is threatened by habitat loss due to urbanization (Smith and * Berg 1988). ^ Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP m Approximately 3,100 individuals (317o) of this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 6,900 individuals (637a) are In areas designated for development. The species may potentially benefit from the proposed offsite habitat conservation. Because such a large number of individuals and proportion of the population will be impacted, the HCP/OMSP cannot be viewed as beneficial to this species even though the plant is known from * numerous areas of Carlsbad. m Conservation/Management Mes^ures * m Additional opportunities may be available for preservation by the use of this species for onsite restoration. Access and exotic pest control management 1i measures will also benefit this species. Ml 5. Cliff Spurge Euphorbia misera Status m USFWS: None CDFC: None » CNPS: List 2, 2-2-1 M OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: B-2 m m ^-''0 Final 6-95 P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Range Cliff spurge ranges from Corona del Mar, Orange County to San Diego, San Clemente, and Catalina Islands and creosote bush scrub at Whitewater, in the Colorado Desert (Munz 1974). The species is known to occur from Carlsbad, Point Loma, San Diego, Sweetwater Valley, Otay Mesa, San Ysidro, and Tijuana Hills (Beauchamp 1986). Habitat Cliff spurge occurs on coastal bluffs in coastal sage scrub habitat below 480 feet (Beauchamp 1986). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no expected impacts to this species because it has a low probability of occurrence and was not detected in the plan area. As such, there are no conservation benefits to this species from the HCP/OMSP. This shrub is known from only one locality in Carlsbad. Conservation/Management Measures Because this species most likely does not occur within the plan area, there are no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. 6. Coast Barrel Cactus Ferocactus viridescens Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFC: None CNPS: List 2, 1-3-1 OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: B-3 Range It is found from Oceanside in San Diego County, south to northwest Baja California and the foothills of the Sierra Juarez (Beauchamp 1986; Wiggins 1980). Reported locations in San Diego County include Del Mar, Poway, Kearny Mesa, Rose Canyon, National City, Point Loma, Casa de Oro, Sunnyside, and Otay Mesa (Beauchamp 1986). Habitat Coast barrel cactus occurs in chaparral, coastal sage scrub, maritime succulent scrub, and valley and foothill grassland habitats. F/na/6-95 B-11 ^P^"<i'x B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP m There are no expected impacts to this species because it was not detected and is not expected to occur within the plan area. As such, there are no conservation * benefits to this species from the HCP/OMSP. There are no records for this • species within the City limits. m Conservation/Management Measures Because this species most likely does not occur w. - ^n the plan area, there are m no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. ^ 7. Del Mar Manzanita • Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp, crassifolia ** Status * USFWS: Proposed Endangered CDFC: None CNPS: List IB, 3-3-2 * OTHER: T PUN ID: A-4 IP Del Mar manzanita is a member of the Heath Family (Ericaceae). Because of some previous debate and taxonomic uncertainty, Del Mar manzanita was considered but rejected from the California Native Plant Society's Inventory of ^ Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants (Smith and Berg 1988). It has been included in the draft Inventory which Is currently being circulated for ^ comments. In the draft it is considered rare or endangered in California and elsewhere. |i Morphology, Taxonomy and Evolution Del Mar manzanita is a low, prostrate, woody evergreen shrub that reaches a height of between two and 3.5 feet, with crooked branches with smooth thin » red exfoliating bark (Munz 1974). The leaves are simple, alternate, coriaceous ^ (leathery in texture, tough), ovate to lance-ovate, dull gray-green or subglaucous (covered with a usually whitish or bluish, waxy or powdery film that Is sometimes easily rubbed off) (Wells 1986; Munz 1974). This subspecies is not at all glandular in any of its parts but is setose (clothed with bristles) with long * white hairs on petioles, twigs, rachises, and bracts; pedicels and ovary white- tomentose; and bracts leafy. The populations are dimorphic with respect to * setosity: about half the individuals lacking setose hairs, except sometimes on bracts, the balance of the population at least sparsely setose or hispid (rough with stiff or bristly hairs) on twigs, petioles, rachises, and bracts (Wells 1986). The corolla (petals) is urn-shaped and white; the fruit berry-like, depressed (low, ^ as if flattened from above), globose (spherical or rounded), and reddish-brown! At an early age Del Mar manzanita forms a basal burl or enlarged rootcrown from which sprouting takes place after fire (Munz 1974). P B-12 m m Final 6-95 P m Urn Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Del Mar manzanita was first described by Willis Jepson in 1922 Oepson 1922; Knight 1981; Wells 1990). In 1981, Walter Knight concluded that this taxon has no validity based upon herbarium specimens, historical data and field information. Knight felt that the non-glandular collections made in the Del Mar area were hybrids between Arctostaphy/os glandulosa ssp. glandulosa and other species of the genus within the vicinity (Knight 1981). In 1986 Philip Wells reevaluated the taxonomy of the A. glandulosa group and concluded that De! Mar manzanita was indeed a valid subspecies and will be included as such in the new Jepson Flora of California (Wells 1986; Wells, pers. comm.). The absence of glandular forms along the immediate coast makes Del Mar manzanita one of the most consistent and well-defined taxa within the variable Afctostap/jy/os glandulosa complex and ssp. crassifolia has a discrete distribution, allopathic from other taxa (Wells 1986). Historical and Current Distribution The distribution of Del Mar manzanita is strictly coastal and largely restricted to siliceous sandstone of Eocene age that outcrops in coastal bluffs from Oceanside (south of San Luis Rey River) south to La jolla (with Torrey pines) southward along the immediate coast of Baja California to Cabo Colnett (about 200 km south of the Mexican border). Reported localities in San Diego County include Encinitas, Rancho Santa Fe, Del Mar, Torrey Pines State Reserve, and Carlsbad (Beauchamp 1986; Dudek and MBA 1992). Areas in Carlsbad that are known to support Del Mar manzanita include Creen Valley, Arroyo La Costa, Northwest, the County of San Diego property northeast of the Palomar Airport Road/El Camino Real intersection, Shelley Property, Rice Property, Aviara, Zone 20 and Zone 21, among others. Huffman (CDFC 1982) describes 24 populations of Del Mar manzanita from Carlsbad, Encinitas, Rancho Santa Fe, Lomas Santa Fe, Solana Beach, Carmel Valley, Torrey Pines North, Camiel Mountain West and East, and Scripps Ranch. Of these 24 populations, 22 are extant, 2 are extinct, 11 have been impacted and nine are intact. These original 24 populations constituted 302 subpopulations of 17,137 individuals. Based on Huffman's original estimates, there are 137 extant subpopulations totaling 7,160 individuals. A more recent range-wide assessment of the Del Mar manzanita by SEB (Sweetwater Environmental Biologists) (unpublished data), estimates that approximately 3,019 individuals (34.8% of the remaining population) occur in public lands either preserved as permanent open space or likely to be preserved. This includes Torrey Pines State Park (approximately 1,034 individuals in the northern extension and 200 individuals in the southern park area), Crest Canyon County Park (approximately 1,075 individuals). Oak Crest County Park (approximately 25 individuals; C. Baird pers. obs.), San Dieguito County Park (approximately 138 individuals), and approximately 530 Individuals on County of San Diego property just northeast of the Palomar Airport Road/El Camino Real intersection. F/na/6-95 B-13 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Remaining populations pccur on private land holdings including 1,383 individuals on the Ecke property in Encinitas, 200 individuals on the Green Valley property in Carlsbad, 775 individuals on Arroyo La Costa, and approximately 500 in Zones 20 and 21 of Carlsbad. Habitat Features Del Mar manzanita is one of the prime indicator species of the sensitive habitat, southern maritime chaparral. Southern maritime chaparral is a low to medium height, dense to fairly open chaparral that is dominated by a combination of species that are characteristic of southern mixed chaparral and other species that have a more coastal distribution. Southern maritime chaparral occurs on weathered siliceous sandstone of Eocene sandstone formations (rough broken land, loamy alluvial land-Huerhuero complex, and terrace escarpments) and lies within the coastal fog belt (up to three miles inland from the Pacific Ocean). Besides Del Mar manzanita, other characteristic species of southern maritime chaparral may include coast white lilac (Ceanothus verrucosus), chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), scrub oak (Quercus dumosa), Del Mar sand aster (Corethrogyne filaginifolia ssp. linifolia), Encinitas baccharis {Baccharis vanessae), and summer-holly {Comarostapbylis diversifolia ssp. diversifolia). Only Del Mar manzanita, summer holly and scrub occur on Northwest. £n(/a/iger/ne/?f The range-wide assessment of Del Mar manzanita prepared by SEB indicates that approximately 35 percent of the individuals comprising this species lie in public ownership areas currently protected or likely to be protected as public open space. Forty-one percent of the individuals lie within five properties that have approved or pending land use plans that propose to preserve 36 percent of the species rangewide. Four additional sites that have existing or proposed land * use plans represent an additional 14 percent of the species, eight percent of P which are proposed for preservation. Based on this assessment, these areas alone would preserve approximately 80 percent of the species, including at least "i 80 percent of each of the largest populations, even if no additional areas outside ^ of these 16 areas are preserved. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Control of access and exotic pests are management measures which will benefit this species. m m m m Approximately 795 individuals (75%) of this species will be conserved in the ^ plan area, and approximately 261 individuals (25%) are in areas designated for development. The species is not likely to benefit from the proposed offsite * habitat conservation. Because of the high number of individuals and proportion of this population preserved in contiguous, viable open space, the HCP/OMSP • is expected to benefit this species. ^ Conservation/Management Measures m m m m m m ^••''^ F/na/6-95 » ii Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B 8. Del Mar Sand Aster Corethrogyne filaginifolia var, linifolia Status USFWS: Proposed Threatened CDFC: None CNPS: List IB, 3-2-3 OTHER: NCCP, T PLAN ID: B-4 Range This species is endemic to coastal San Diego County, California, where it has been reported from Carlsbad, Encinitas, Del Mar, Del Mar Heights, Torrey Pines State Reserve, Fort Rosecrans, and San Diego Bay (Beauchamp 1986). Habitat Del Mar sand aster is found on bluffs and brushy slopes near the ocean in Diegan coastal sage scrub and chaparral. According to Beauchamp (1986) it is occasional in sandy and disturbed places below 480 feet and only along the coast. It is often found in open/disturbed areas on terrace escarpment soils (RECON unpublished data). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no expected impacts to this species because it was not detected is not expected to occur within the plan area. As such, there are no conservation benefits to this species from the HCP/OMSP. Specific localities in Carlsbad include Green Valley and Zone 20. Conservation/Management Measures Because this species most likely does not occur within the plan area, there are no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. 9. Encinitas Baccharis Baccharis vanessae Status USFWS: Proposed Endangered CDFC: Endangered CNPS: List IB, 2-3-3 OTHER: T PLAN ID: B-5 Final 6-95 B-15 '^PP^"^^ ^ Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Range Encinitas baccharis is endemic to San Diego County. It is known to occur from Encinitas, Mira Mesa, Poway, Mount Israel, and Del Dios (Beauchamp 1986). This species has recently been discovered at the lower end of Devil Canyon in the San Mateo Canyon Wilderness Area of the Cleveland National Forest (Steve Boyd 1992). Habitat mt- Encinitas baccharis occurs coastally in chaparral habitat on alluvial land- huerhuero complex soils in coastal locations, and San Miguel-Exchequer, and * Cieneba soil series at the inland sites (Beauchamp 1986). ' ^ Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no expected impacts to this species because it has a low probability of occurrence and was not detected within the plan area. As such, there are no conservation benefits to this species from the HCP/OMSP. There are no records for this species in Carlsbad. * Conservation/Management Measures m Because this species most likely does not occur within the plan area, there are m no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. 10. Engelmann Oak Quercus engelmannii ^ Status USFWS: None * CDFC: None m CNPS: List 4, 1-2-2 OTHER: OSS • PLAN ID: A-5 ^ Range pi This species ranges from the Pasadena region inland to San Dimas, south to east San Diego County and into Baja California (Munz 1974). Engelmann oak is known to occur from San Margarita Mountains, Fallbrook, Mesa Grande, Volcan Mountains, Lost Valley, Banner, Descanso, Rancho Bernardo, Dulzura, El Nido, Alpine, and Buckman Spring (Beauchamp 1986). Habitat m m Englemann oak occurs in canyons and on open slopes below 4,000 feet (Beauchamp 1986). It is associated with oak woodlands. m ^"^^ Final 6-95 P Car/5bad-fiCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP The only individual detected within the plan area will be impacted. As such, the HCP/OMSP will not benefit this species. This oak species is known from only one area of Carlsbad. Conservation/Management Measures Since there will not be any extant individuals subsequent to development, there will be no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. MM 11. Nuttall's Scrub Oak Quercus dumosa Status USFWS: None CDFG: None CNPS: List 1B (anticipated in the new version of CNPS Inventory) OTHER: OSS PLAN ID: A-6 Range Nuttall's scrub oak is found along the coast of southern California from near Point Conception in Santa Barbara County south into northern Baja California. Since this taxon has only been recently differentiated from the closely related scrub oak, Q. berberidifolia (Hickman 1993), with which it frequently hybridizes, it is not possible to list specific localities in San Diego County recorded in earlier works (e.g. Beauchamp 1986); records found in that work are for a broader definition of Q. dumosa, which included Q. berberidifolia. Habitat According to Hickman (1993), Nuttall's scrub oak is generally found in areas with sandy soils near the coast, or on sandstone substrate, in chaparral (southern maritime) or coastal sage scrub vegetation. It is also generally found below 640 feet. Morphology, Taxonomy and Evolution Nuttall's scrub oak is hard to distinguish from the more widely distributed scrub oak as many of the morphological features overlap. The diagnostic features that are most readily observed are differences in the texture of the acorn cap and the proportions of the acorn as a whole. In scrub oak, the acorn cap is strongly tubercled (i.e. with wart-like projections), while in Nuttall's scrub oak, the acorn cap is weakly tuberculate. The acorn in Nuttall's scrub oak is generally more elongate and slender compared to scrub oak. Lastly, the new leaves of Q. dumosa are borne on thin reddish branches and the acorn caps are rust colored. Final 6-95 B-17 ^PP^"'^'^^ Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of the HCP/OMSP " m Approximately 640 of 1,350 individuals (47%) of this species will be conserved on Northwest, and approximately 710 inidivduals (53%) are in areas designated * for development. This species may potentially benefit from the proposed offsite * habitat conservation. Additional populations may exist in the southern mixed chaparral near the eastern boundary of Northwest, but because of the small size ^ of this community, significant populations of Nuttall's scrub oak are not m expected. This species also was observed in Rancheros-Southeast II but has not been mapped or estimated as to population. Approximately 35 acres (13%) of m the species' habitat will be conserved in Rancheros-Southeast It, and approximately 150 acres (81 %) is assumed taken. "* Conservation/Management Measures * m This species would benefit from access control and the control of exotic species. ^ 12. Orcutt's Brodiaea Brodiaea orcuttii m Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: None CNPS: List IB, 1-3-2 Other: T PLAN ID: A-7 Morphology The taxonomic and evolutionary information for Orcutt's brodiaea is essentially the same as for thread-leaved brodiaea presented in the previous discussion. B-18 Final 6-95 P P m p p For discussions of corm, leaf, inflorescence, and flower morphology, please see the discussions under thread-ieaved brodiaea. Only significant differences in * morphology are discussed below. m leaf Morphology m P The leaves of Orcutt's brodiaea are erect. Inflorescence and Flower Morphology J The flowering period for Orcutt's brodiaea is from April to July. The inflorescence is a pseudo-umbel and the pedicels (stalks of the individual * flowers) are one to three inches in length. The mature scape of Orcutt's • brodiaea is 5-10 inches in length but the length varies according to the amount of moisture available during the growing season. There are three stamens per • flower. Staminodia are lacking in Orcutt's brodiaea (Munz 1974). ^ Taxonomy and Evolution p P P Car/sfaad-FlCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B The base number of chromosomes for this genus appears to be n-6. Orcutt's brodiaea , a polyploid, has n-12, and is most likely an autoploid (a polyploid in which several chromosome sets are derived from the same species, as opposed to being derived from two species i.e. a hybridization event). Historical and Current Distribution Orcutt's brodiaea occurs from the northern Sierra Juarez in Baja California through San Diego, southwestern Riverside and southwestern San Bernadino counties (Wiggins 1980; Smith and Berg 1988). Reported localities in San Diego County include Santa Margarita Mountains, San Marcos, Poway, Henshaw Dam, Santa Ysabel, Cuyamaca Mountains, Cuyamaca Lake, Miramar Naval Air Station, Linda Vista, Ramona, Buschalaugh Canyon, JapatuI Valley, Woodwardia Canyon, and Lower Otay Reservoir (Beauchamp 1986). Bauder (1986) reports Orcutt's brodiaea from vernal pool complexes in Tierrasanta, Mira Mesa north, Mira Mesa central, Mira Mesa south, Kearny Villa south, Kearny Villa north, Penasquitos north, Miramar Industrial, Montgomery Field, Landmark, South Miramar NAS, West Miramar NAS, West Gate Miramar NAS, East Miramar NAS, Miramar NAS Interior, and Amaya Drive. Orcutt's brodiaea is reported from Cuyamaca Lake (Beauchamp 1986). Any extant populations from there would be preserved within Rancho Cuyamaca State Park. Preserved population(s) of Orcutt's brodiaea also occur within Mission Trails Regional Park (Dames and Moore 1991). Approximately 10 individuals of Orcutt's brodiaea occur on Arroyo La Costa (STA Planning 1989), two populations of five individuals each were deteaed in Carlsbad in the area of the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road realignment (Cotton/Beland and Associates 1991). A population of ten individuals occur on the Santa Fe Creek Property near Escondido Creek west of Lake Hodges (MBA 1991). Approximately several thousand individuals of Orcutt's brodiaea were observed at the vernal pool complex between Pacific Street and Las Posas Road in San Marcos (SEB unpublished data). Another 200+ individuals were observed across Las Posas around another vernal pool complex and approximately 50 individuals were observed in yet another vernal pool complex in San Marcos southwest of the intersection of Linda Vista Drive and Bent Avenue (SEB unpublished data). Approximately 10,000 individuals of Orcutt's «• brodiaea were detected in a drainage in Elfin Forest (SEB unpublished data). - Habitat Orcutt's brodiaea occurs in ephemeral streams and vernal pools and seeps. «• Associated vernal pool species may include other sensitive vernal pool plant species such as: San Diego mesa mint (Pogogyne abramsii), Cleveland's golden star (Mu///a clevelandii), California adder's tongue {Opbioglossum ^ californicum), and thread-leaved brodiaea {Brodiaea filifoHa) (Bauder 1986). *" Endangerment This species is primarily threatened by urbanization (Smith and Berg 1988). mm Final 6-95 B-19 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP m Two populations of five individuals each will be impacted (100 percent). Since the entire population of this species within the plan area will be impacted, the * HCP/OMSP will not benefit this species. This species is known from two other locations, in Carlsbad: Arroyo La Costa and Encinitas Creek. Conservation/Management Measures m Since the entire population within the plan area will be extirpated, there will be • no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. ^ 13. Orcutt's Hazardia • Hazardia orcuttii • Status " USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: None ^ CNPS: List IB, 3-3-2 m OTHER: NCCP PLAN ID: B-6 m m Range P Orcutt's hazardia is known in San Diego County from one population in Encinitas (Beauchamp 1986). Habitat This species is known to occur only in chaparral (Beauchamp 1986). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP m m p There are no expected impacts to this species because it was not detected and is not expected to occur within the plan area. As such, there are no conservation • benefits to this species from the HCP/OMSP. No records for this species exist within the Carlsbad boundaries. » Conservation/Management Measures Because this species most likely does not occur within the plan area, there are m no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. P P P P P ^-20 Final 6-95 P Car/sbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B 14. Orcutt's Spinefiower Chorizanthe orcuttiana ^ Status USFWS: Proposed Endangered CDFG: Endangered CNPS: List IB, 3-3-3 OTHER: NCCP PLAN ID: B-7 Range Orcutt's spinefiower is endemic to San Diego County. It is known from Encinitas, Del Mar, Point Loma, and Kearny Mesa (Beauchamp 1986). The species was considered extinct until its recent (1991) rediscovery in Oakcrest Park, Encinitas. Habitat Orcutt's spinefiower occurs on exposed sandy soils in southern maritime chaparral habitat below 500 feet (Beauchamp 1986). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no expected impacts to this species because it has a low probability of occurrence and was not detected within the plan area. As such, there are no conservation benefits to this species from the HCP/OMSP. This species is not known from within Carlsbad. Conservation/Management Measures Because this species most likely does not occur within the plan area, there are no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. 15. Palmer's Grappiinghook ID. r. Harpagonella palmeri m Status m ^ USFWS: None CDFG: None - CNPS: List 2, 1-2-1 OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-8 Morphology, Taxonomy and Evolution Palmer's grappiinghook is a small annual within the family Boraginaceae. This monotypic genus is characterized by flowers that are in a leafy-bracted false Final 6-95 B-21 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP • MM raceme with pedicels that are twisted and laterally deflexed at maturity. The corolla is subrotate (slightly wheel-shaped), white, less than 0.25 inch long, and slightly exceeding the calyx (fused sepals). The flowers are on short pedicels which in fruit become strongly recurved and rigid. This species blooms from • March to April. The calyx lobes are slightly unequal, with three narrowly m distinct lobes and two lobes which are fused for 3/4 of their length, accrescent (increasing in size with age) and indurate (hardened) to form a galeate (a helmet- m like upper lip in certain bilabiate corollas) structure enclosing the upper part of ^ one nutlet and armed dorsally with 5-9 soft hooked spines. The fruit is two nutlets which are dissimilar. The. nutlet that is enclosed by the two united lobes ^ of the bur-like calyx is fertile, round and glabrous except where it is flattened on the inner surface to form a margined strigose (clothed with sharp and stiff appressed straight hairs) areole (small area on the surface of a structure that lies between veins). The naked nutlet is angled, completely strigose and usually * infertile (Munz 1974; Jepson 1943; Beauchamp 1986). m The stem has a few to several diffuse strigose disarticulating (separating joint m from joint at maturity) branches from at or near the base. The branches are from 3-8 inches long, the leaves are strigose and narrowly linear or very narrowly lanceolate and approximately 0.5-1.5 inches long. Habitat m P P I Palmer's grappiinghook occurs on dry slopes and burns in the hills and clay depressions on the mesas between 200 and 1500 feet in elevation in chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and grassland habitats (Munz 1974; Jepson 1943; Beauchamp 1986). P - P Historical and Current Distribution P This species is reported from: Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Diego ^ counties, Baja California and Arizona (Smith and Berg 1988; Roberts 1989; Beauchamp 1986; Wiggins 1980). Reported localities of Palmer's grappiinghook include Santa Catalina Island, Murietta in southwest Riverside County, Dehesa School in Sweetwater Valley, Otay, southwestern San Diego County, Box Canyon, Mason Valley, Guajome Mesa, Rancho Santa Fe, Olivenhain, Poway Grade, Kearny Mesa, Emerald Hills, Mission Gorge, Rice Canyon, and Table Mountain Oepson 1943; Beauchamp 1986). In Baja this *• species is reported from Mexicali to midpenisula (Wiggins 1980). Less than 100 individuals of Palmer's grappiinghook occur within the North ^ Oceanside Annexation Area (WESTEC 1988). Eight populations of 3,000, 2,500, 1,000, 500, 200, 30, 25, and 20 individuals respectively were detected m on Northwest in Carlsbad (SEB 1992a). Several populations are also known w from Rancho Carrillo (RECON 1992). Palmer's grappiinghook is known from Mission Trails Regional Park and The ^ Nature Conservancy's McGinty Mountain Preserve (Dames and Moore 1991; ^ Brown and Weir 1992). Any extant population(s) from these preserves would be protected. P B-22 F»na/ 6-95 p P ^ Car/$faad-f LO\ HCP/OMSP Appendix B m ^ Endangerment NH Palmer's grappiinghook is threatened by habitat loss due to urbanization. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 3,500 individuals (48%) of this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 3,775 individuals (52%) are in areas designated for development. Despite the widespread distribution of this species, the HCP/OMSP will contribute to the long temi preservation of this species through the preservation of nearly half of the large onsite population. The species also potentially will benefit from the proposed offsite habitat conservation. This plant «» species is known from only one other location in the City. ** Conservation/Management Measures «•> This species will benefit from control of access, weed control, and erosion ** control measures. 16. San Diego Ambrosia Ambrosia pumila «• Status *" USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFC: None CNPS: List IB, 3-2-2 OTHER: NCCP PLAN ID: B-8 mm M Range • San Diego ambrosia is known from San Diego County and Baja California (Munz 1974). This species occurs in valleys (usually floodplains) and is known from the Lake Hodges, San Luis Rey, and Bonsall areas (Beauchamp 1986). m Habitat m In San Diego County, San Diego ambrosia occurs coastally below 500 feet elevation, primarily in the watersheds of the San Diego and Sweetwater rivers and with several populations along the San Luis Rey River. San Diego ambrosia appears to be associated with the upper floodplain zone of rivers and is found in a variety of habitats and disturbance regimes. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no expected impacts to this species because it was not detected and is not expected to occur within the plan area. As such, there are no conservation benefits to this species from the HCP/OMSP. There are no specific records of this species occurring within Carlsbad. Final 6-95 B-23 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ Conservation/Management Measures Because this species most likely does not occur within the plan area, there are ^ no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. m 17. San Diego County Viguiera Viguiera laciniata m Status w USFWS: None * CDFC; None m CNPS: List 4, 1-2-1 OTHER: NCCP PLAN ID: A-9 ^ Range This species occurs in San Diego County southward through Baja California ^ Mexico (Munz 1974). ' m Habitat m It occurs on dry slopes below 2,500 feet elevation in chaparral and coastal sage scrub (Munz 1974). P Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP MB Alt 75 individuals within the plan area will be conserved. There are no specific records of this species occurring elsewhere within Carlsbad, however this species is still locally abundant in southern San Diego County. Because of the population in the plan area is small and disjunct population, the HCP/OMSP is not expected to contribute to the long term preservation of this species. Conservation/Management Measures Control of access and exotic pests are management measures which will benefit this species. 18. San Diego Golden Star Muilla clevelandii Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFC: None CNPS: List IB, 2-2-2 OTHER: NCCP, T PLAN ID: A-10 ^'^^ Final 6-95 • P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Morphology, Taxonomy and Evolution San Diego golden star is a member of the family Amaryllidaceae. As a perennial herb, new vegetative and floral growth arises each spring from an underground corm that has a fibro-membranous coat (expanded basal portions of the leaves). The scape arises from this corm bearing an inflorescence that is an umbel that is subtended by scarious acuminate bracts. The pedicels (stalks of the individual flowers) are slender but not jointed, one to 1.5 inches long. The perianth (petals and sepals) is subrotate (fused corolla that is wheel shaped), persistent, of six subequal slightly united, lance-oblong segments. The perianth segments are less than 0.5 inch long, yellow with a greenish stripe. There are six stamens that are inserted near the base; the filaments are less than 0.25 inch long with oblong appendages that are even shorter. The fruit is a three-angled loculicidal capsule less than 0.25 inch long. San Diego golden star was initially included in the genus Bloomeria. Ingram (1953) in his monograph on Muilla and Bloomeria treated this species as such along with previous workers. Hoover (1955) was the first to assign San Diego golden star to the genus Muilla where it remains today. Muilla differs from Bloomeria in the larger number of leaves which are neither keeled nor channeled, in having a short style no longer than the ovary, not having pedicels that are jointed, and in not having the lower portion of the filaments terminate in a cup-like insertion for the upper portion. This last morphological feature is the best diagnostic characteristic for distinguishing between San Diego golden star and golden stars (6/oomer/a crocea), a common spring ephemeral that is very similar in appearance to San Diego golden star. Historical and Current Distribution San Diego golden star is known from coastal San Diego County to the extreme northwest of Baja California (Beauchamp 1986; Wiggins 1980). Historical localities in San Diego County include Rancho Santa Fe, Lopez Canyon, Miramar, Mission Hills, Linda Vista, Montezuma Mesa, Murray Dam, Grossmont, Foster, San Diego, San Miguel Mountain, Otay Mesa, and Otay Mountain (Beauchamp 1986). Bauder (1986) reports San Diego golden star from vernal pool complexes in Tierrasanta, Mira Mesa north, Mira Mesa central, Kearny Villa south, Kearny Villa north, Penasquitos north, Miramar Industrial, Montgomery Field, Landmark, South Miramar NAS, West Miramar NAS, West Gate Miramar NAS, East Miramar NAS, Miramar NAS Interior, Otay Mesa, Mission Village, Grossmont College, and Amaya Drive. Approximately 1,950 individuals of San Diego golden star occur in three areas within the area proposed for the Rancho Santa Fe Road realignment (Cotton/Beland and Associates 1991). Tens of thousands of individuals of San Diego golden star occur on the Santa Fe Creek Property, south of Escondido Creek, west of Lake Hodges (MBA 1991). Approximately 25,000 individuals of San Diego golden star occur on the southeast slopes of Mother Miguel Mountain (SEB unpublished data) San Diego golden star is known from Mission Trails Regional Park and Otay Mountain (U.S. Department of the Interior Wildlife Preserve) (Beauchamp 1986; Dames and Moore 1991). Because of the status of these two areas, any extant populations within these areas are considered to be preserved. Final 6-95 B-25 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Habitat San Diego golden star occurs on clay soils and is considered an edaphic endemic (Beauchamp 1986). It occurs on dry mesas and slopes and is * associated with the mima mound topography of vernal pools; annual and native grasslands; and coastal sage scrub. The population on the Santa Fe Creek Property is associated with coastal sage scrub, the population southeast of Mother Miguel Mountain is associated with mima mound topography around m vernal pools where there is a high purple needle grass (St/pa pulchra) component to the grassland community. ^ Endangerment San Diego golden star is threatened by illegal dumping, off-road vehicles, and * urbanization (Smith and Berg 1988). ** Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP "* •ft Approximately 400 individuals (21%) of this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 1,500 individuals (797o) are in areas designated • for development. It should be noted that the preserved areas border on m developed areas that may have a detrimental effect on the viability of the .preserved plants. The species could potentially benefit from the proposed P offsite habitat conservation. Because 79% of the onsite population would be ^ eliminated, the HCP/OMSP will not be beneficial to the long-term preservation of this species. The only populations of this species known from Carlsbad occur g| within the plan area. Nk Conservation/Management Measures ^ The remaining extant population will benefit from control of access and exotic pests. «* 19. San Diego Marsh Elder • Iva hayesiana m P Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: None CNPS: List 2, 2-2-1 OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-11 • Range * m This species occurs in southwestern San Diego County and northern Baja California (Munz 1974, Smith and Berg 1988). It has a fairly restricted range in • San Diego County, but is more widespread to the south, ranging into central P Baja California (Wiggins 1980). A large, population of this species occurs along San Marcos Creek where it flows between rancheros and the Road Project. m ^'^^ Final 6-95 P m Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Habitat it grows in low-lying, moist or alkaline places along intermittent streams in coastal areas. San Diego marsh-elder often grows in association with spiny rush and other indicators of wetland habitat (Reed 1988). it can be a dominant understory plant in disturbed floodplain situations such as that in the Otay River Valley (MBA and Dudek & Associates, Inc. 1992). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP A large population (in the 1,000's) within the San Marcos creek riparian corridor will be conserved in the plan area, and less than 100 indivduals are in areas designated for development. The onsite conservation will benefit the long-term preservation of this species. There are no specific records for this species' occurrence elsewhere n Carlsbad. Conservation/Management Measures Water quality control and access control measures will provide long-term habitat quality assurances. 20. San Diego Sagewort Artemisia palmeri Status USFWS: None CDFG: None CNPS: List 2, 2-2-1 OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: B-9 Range This species is restricted in distribution to San Diego County and Baja California, Mexico, In San Diego County, it has been reported from Del Dios, Ramona, Mount Woodson, Poway and several sites from Tecolote Canyon, south to the international border and 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 (MBA and Dudek & Associates, Inc. 1992). Habitat San Diego sagewort occurs in ravines and moist areas. It typically occurs at low elevations (below 2,123 feet) along intermittent streams and arroyos. Final 6-95 B-27 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no expiected impacts to this species because it was not detected within the plan area and has only a low to moderate probability of occurrence. ^ As such, there are no conservation benefits to this species from the HCP/OMSP. The only record for this species in Carlsbad is that listed above. m Conservation/Management Measures ^ Because this species most likely does not occur within the plan area, there are » no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. ^ 21. San Diego Thornmint Acanthomintha ilicifolia • Status * m USFWS: Candidate (Category 1) CDFG: Endangered * CNPS: List IB, 2-3-2 m OTHER: NCCP, T PLAN ID: B-10 •« m Range m This species is restricted to San Diego County and Baja California, Mexico. In ^ San Diego County, it is known to occur from Encinitas and San Marcos south to Sweetwater and Otay Lakes (Beauchamp 1986). ^ Habitat San Diego thornmint occurs in clay soils on coastal mesas and valleys below 965 feet elevation. It is associated with Diegan coastal sage scrub, chaparral, •* and grasslands. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no expected impacts to this species because it was not detected and has a low probability of occurrence within the plan area. As such, there are no conservation benefits to this species from the HCP/OMSP. This species Is known from several areas of the City. P Conservation/Management Measures Because this species most likely does not occur within the plan area, there are no conservation or management measures directed towards this species. B-28 Final 6-95 P M Car/sbad^FiCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B m « 22. Southwestern Spiny Rush M Juncus acutus var. leopoldii Sfafus USFWS: None CDFG: None CNPS: List 4, 1-2-2 OTHER: OSS m PLAN ID: A-12 •* Range This species has a wide distribution from San Luis Obispo County south to Baja mm California and east to Imperial County and Arizona. In Carlsbad this species was recorded from La Costa Development, Batiquitos Polnte Site, west side of *" Batiquitos Lagoon, Lake Calavera, Buena Vista, Evans Point, Buena Vista Creek, ^ and other locations (MBA and Dudek & Associates, Inc. 1992). Habitat • It is encountered frequently in alkaline seeps and marshes or in areas adjacent «w to these. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP A large population (in the 1,000's) along San Marcos Creek will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 100 individuals are m areas designated for development. Because of the size of the conserved population, the HCP/OMSP will benefit the long-term preservation of this species. This plant has a number ^ of known locations in Carlsbad. Conservation/Management Measures Water quality control measures will provide long-term habitat quality assurances. 2 23. Sticky-leaved Liveforever Dudleya viscida mm (M Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 1) CDFC: None CNPS: List IB, 3-2-3 ^ OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-13 Final 6-95 B-29 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Range This species occurs from near San Juan Capistrano, Orange County to near Oceanside, San Diego County (Munz 1974). Beauchamp (1986) found it in Escondido Creek, Several large populations occur within the rock outcrops above Sah Marcos Creek between Rancheros and the Road Project. Habitat Sticky-leaved liveforever is found on dry rocky areas with coastal sage scrub in coastal areas below 1,200 feet elevation. It is often associated with rocky banks along drainages (RECON unpublished data). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Several large populations within the San Marcos Creek riparian corridor will be conserved in the plan; no populations occur in the areas designated for development. The HCP/OMSP will benefit the long-term preservation of this species by protecting large populations in San Marcos Creek. There are no Carlsbad records other than those within the plan area. m Conservation/Management Measures P This species will be protected by controlling access to the steep slopes which p presently are being degraded by foot traffic. P 24. Summer holly » Comarostapbylis diversifolia ssp. diversifolia p Status * USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) * CDFG; None • CNPS: List IB, 2-2-2 OTHER: T P PLAN ID: A-14 m Range m m Summer holly is found in scattered locations from the Pacific coast in San Diego County south into Baja California, Mexico, Reported localities in the County m 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, MBA and Dudek & Associates, Inc. 1992. In Carlsbad this S species was reported from Arroyo La Costa, Airport Business Center, and * Rancho Carrillo (MBA and Dudek & Associates, Inc. 1992), P B-30 Final 6-95 H m nil Car/sbad-flCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Habitat It generally occurs on north-facing canyons and slopes and in sandy washes in chaparral and foothill habitats below 2,297 feet. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 460 individuals (42%) will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 635 individuals (58%) are in areas designated for development. The species is not likely to benefit from the proposed offsite habitat conservation. However, the HCP/OMSP will benefit this species by preserving a large coastal population of summer holly In a contiguous block open space. This species is known from several localities in the vicinity of Northwest. Conservation/Management Measures This species will benefit from the control of access and exotic pests. 25. Thread-leaved Brodiaea Brodiaea filifoHa Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 1) CDFG: Endangered CNPS: List IB, 3-3-3 OTHER: T PLAN ID: A-15 Corm Morphology The corm is the principal means by which plants of the genus Brodiaea perpetuate themselves from one growing season to another. Dormancy begins in early summer when the corm has become an enlarged organ filled with starch. The stored starch enables the plant to commence rapid growth in the fall when dormancy is broken. At the beginning of the growing season in September the corm shows activity in its apical region prior to the first fall rains. The corms begin growing after the first significant fall rains, when the soil surrounding the corm is moistened to or nearly to field capacity. The leaves begin to elongate, and root tips protrude from the basal root plate. Further growth occurs after the first heavy rainfall in which rainwater penetrates to the level of the corm. The starch stored in the corm is rapidly metabolized by root and leaf growth activities and decreases in volume; the corm becomes severely withered after several months. A new corm begins to form at the base of the new leaves about a month after the growing season starts. It Is mature before flowering and usually occupies the same position as the previous corm. At maturity of the new corm the only remnant of the old corm is a thin membranous layer of dead tissue under the new corm. The new corm of mature plants often produces two to fifteen smaller cormlets adjacent to it. The cormlets are produced in the axils of the old leaf bases on the mature corm (Niehaus 1971). Reproduction appears to be primarily asexual by clonal corm Final 6-95 B-31 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP MR MR reproduction rather than by seed, although seeds are produced. Most of corms do not produce a flowering scape which means that most population estimates based on the number of inflorescences are underestimates (R. Taylor, pers. comm.). Leaf Morphology m The leaves of this species begin growth in late summer before the first heavy «» rainstorm. Leaf growth is slow at first, probably because of low winter temperatures. During February and March, when temperatures become higher, m the leaves reach their full length (shorter than or nearly as long as the scape and are less than 1/4 inch in width). The leaf number of all species varies from two to six. The leaves of thread-leaved brodiaea are ascending. The leaf consists of two distinct parts: an expanded basal portion which surrounds (the corm coat) and the aerial portion, referred to as the leaf proper (Niehaus 1971). Inflorescence and Flower Morphology Hk m The flowering period for thread-leaved brodiaea is narrow, generally coinciding with the month of May. The inflorescence is a pseudo-umbel and the pedicels (stalks of the individual flowers) are one to two inches in length. The perianth (petals and sepals) is violet with a waxy cuticle (Keator 1989). The flower shape is salverform (fused corolla with a slender greenish tube and an abruptly spreading flat limb) (Niehaus 1980; Munz 1974). The perianth consists of three narrow outer segments and three broader inner segments. The lower portions of all six are fused into a light-green tube, with stripes of violet-purple continuing toward the base from the free portion of the perinath (Niehaus 1971). m P P The pedicels borne at the apex of the scape (the stem of the plant) are subtended by scarious bracts, as is typical for all members of Amaryllidaceae. The scape grows from the apex of the corm and first appears at the soil surface in January, three to four months after the start of the growing cycle. The mature scape of |pi thread-leaved brodiaea is 8-15 inches in length but the length varies according to the amount of moisture available during the growing season. In drier years scape length may be reduced by 50 percent or more. The apex of the scape is enlarged where the pedicels and their subtending bracts are attached (Niehaus 1971). HI m m m There are three stamens and three staminodia (sterile stamens) per flower. The staminodia, which are the prime diagnostic character of this species, are acute (sharp pointed) and plane (Munz 1974). Staminodia occur opposite the three outer perianth segments. These structures are flat, horn-shaped, slightly hooded, and short-lanceolate, or may be lacking in some species. In position the ^, staminodia are either appressed, leaning inward, or distant from the stamens. The staminodium in thread-leaved brodiaea is reduced to a short filiform flap of _ tissue. In the Section Filifoliae, the staminodia range from partially reduced structures in San Clemente Island brodiaea {B. kinkiensis), to completely •* obsolete in Orcutt's brodiaea (6. orcuttii) with thread-leaved brodiaea intermediate to both (Niehaus 1971). " B-32 Final 6-95 • •M ^ Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B iM» The gynoecia of Brodiaea species are quite similar morphologically. The ovary is green in all species with the exception of mesa brodiaea {B. jolonensis) In which it is purplish. The fruit of this genus is a loculicidal capsule which matures in mid- or late summer. The scape and pedicel enters.a month or more of senescence prior to capsule maturation. The perianth tube of thread-leaved brodiaea surrounding the capsule dries into a thin membrane which is hyaline (clear) which splits as the capsule enlarges (Niehaus 1971). The stigma of the M genus has three lobes, which recurve a short way as wings (Keator 1989). Taxonomy and Evolution m Thread-leaved brodiaea belongs to the Section Filifoliae along with San MM Clemente Island brodiaea and Orcutt's brodiaea. The base number of chromosomes for this genus appears to be n-6. Thread-leaved brodiaea, a polyploid, has n-12, and is most likely an autoploid (a polyploid in which several chromosome sets are derived from the same species, as opposed to being derived from two species, i.e. a hybridization event). Mitotic chromosome size shows progressive reduction from San Clemente Island brodiaea to thread-leaved brodiaea to Orcutt's brodiaea. The reduction in size of the mitotic chromosomes seems to be an evolutionary advanced character (Niehaus 1971). Section Filifoliae is characterized by small flowers with a thin perianth tube which splits easily in fruit; staminodia are reduced or lacking in one species. Thread-leaved brodiaea and San Clemente Island brodiaea are closely related and may have been derived from the same ancestor. Staminodia are somewhat reduced in San Clemente Island brodiaea and even more so in thread-leaved brodiaea. Both Orcutt's brodiaea and San Clemente Island brodiaea grow on old terrace soils which were previously submerged by the sea until rather recently. Thread-ieaved brodiaea also occurs on a recent alluvial soil (heavy clay soils of the Altamont, Auld and Diablo soil series). If the species of Section Filifoliae are recently evolved members of the genus Brodiaea, the availability of new habitats has allowed the colonization and evolution of thread-leaved brodiaea, San Clemente Island brodiaea, and Orcutt's brodiaea. Schizoendemics (recently evolved taxa derived from more widespread taxa) are the result of gradual speciation or more or less simultaneous divergence from a known parent. Thread-leaved brodiaea, San Clemente Island brodiaea, and Orcutt's brodiaea seem to have diverged from the same or closely related ancestors; all three grow on recently available habitats in southern California (Niehaus 1971). Historical and Current Distribution Thread-leaved brodiaea historically ranged from the base of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains in Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties, south to western Riverside and San Diego counties. Twenty-three natural thread- leaved brodiaea populations remain. Six of these have been discovered in the last four years (CDFG 1991; SEB unpublished data). iMt Final 6-95 B-33 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP San Bernardino County The two reported localities from San Bernardino County are from the Arrowhead Springs area in the San Bernardino Mountains and are presumed to "* be extirpated due to agriculture (CDFG 1991). Riverside County m There are seven known localities for thread-leaved brodiaea from western Riverside County. Three populations and a portion of a fourth are protected pi within The Nature Conservancy's Santa Rosa Plateau Preserve. A population of less than 12 individuals occurs at Santa Rosa Springs, a small population occurs in a seep on the northern slope of Mesa de Colorado, a population occurs one mile north of Mesa de Colorado along Cole Creek and the largest population "* (tens of thousands of individuals) covers approximately 60 percent of the Mesa «t de Colorado at the Preserve. The four populations total approximately 12,500 individuals. A few hundred to two thousand individuals of thread-leaved brodiaea occur just outside of the Santa Rosa Plateau Preserve and The Nature Conservancy is attempting to acquire that land (CDFC 1991). Two populations in the vicinity of Perris, Riverside County have been eliminated for agriculture (CDFC 1991), San Diego County Two populations were discovered during surveys for the Riverside County Flood Control Project. One population is part of the San Jacinto River Improvement Project area, in Railroad Canyon near Kalbian Park. These two populations total approximately ^,600 individuals. The second population is located west of the San Jacinto River flood control, channel. Another new population (over 50 P individuals) is located in western Riverside County between Winchester and Hemet(CDFG 1991). P P P an There are 12- reported or known populations of thread-leaved brodiaea from ^' northwestern San Diego County. Ten of these populations are recorded in the P Natural Diversity Data Base as of September 18, 1992. The other two were recorded subsequent to the preparation of the latest draft of the status report for P this species (SEB 1992a,b). Seven of these populations are presumed to be MI extant, five of these populations are presumed to be extirpated, and one natural population is extirpated but a transplanted population as mitigation is extant (CDFG 1991). The extant populations include The Northwest Property of the Fieldstone Company in Carlsbad (approximately 7,000 individuals) (SEB 1992b), the Shelly Property in Carlsbad (approximately 45 individuals) (SEB 1992a), a Carlsbad population at the southeast corner of the junction of La Costa Avenue and Rancho Santa Fe Road, a Carlsbad population just north of Palomar Airport (300 individuals), one population on Carrillo Ranch south of Palomar Airport Road, one population north of the Carlsbad dragstrip, two native San Marcos populations and one extant transplanted population just north of Palomar College. The populations that are presumed to be extirpated are: a Carlsbad population 2.5 miles north of the dragstrip, a population near Landes Park near Vista, a population from Melrose Ave. in Vista, and a population from Brengle Terrace Park in Vista (R. Taylor, pers. comm.). Of these four populations P in P w m P p ^-^"^ Final 6-95 » ii m P ii Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B believed to be extirpated, only one of the Vista populations is listed as extirpated in the CDFC status report (CDFG 1991). Orange County A recently discovered location of thread-leaved brodiaea is at Orange County's Ronald W. Caspers Wilderness Park. The population of approximately 24 individuals has been monitored each year since its discovery in 1989 (CDFG 1991). Los Angeles County There are four extant populations known from Los Angeles County. A population of approximately 600 individuals was discovered in Glendora Hills and three populations totaling approximately 1,050 Individuals occurs along the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains (CDFC 1991). Habitat Thread-leaved brodiaea generally occurs in heavy clay soils of grasslands and on the edges of vernal pools and floodplains. In San Diego, thread-leaved brodiaea occurs with San Diego button celery {Eryngium ariswlatum var. parishii), San Diego thornmint (Acanthomintha ilicifolia), and Orcutt's brodiaea (Brodiaea orcuttii) when associated with vernal pools. When thread-leaved brodiaea occurs in grasslands, the associated species include purple needle grass (5t/pa pulchra), blue-eyed grass {Sisrynchium bellum), golden stars {Bloomeria crocea), and various non-native, annual grasses (SEB unpublished data). The four most recent Carlsbad populations discovered occur on Diablo and Altamont clay soils (CDFG 1991; SEB 1992a, b; RECON 1992). In Riverside County, thread-leaved brodiaea occurs in annual grasslands, alkali sink scrub, and southern interior basalt flow vernal pools. In Los Angeles County, thread-leaved brodiaea occurs in a mixed grassland surrounded by coastal sage scrub and chaparral communities. The Orange County population occurs in a grassland community (CDFG 1991). Endangerment The majority of the thread-leaved brodiaea sites are privately owned and vulnerable to development. Major threats to privately owned occurrences of thread-leaved brodiaea are urbanization and off-road vehicles. Cattle are threats to a few Riverside County populations, and flooding for a municipal project could threaten the Railroad Canyon population there (CDFG 1991). Urbanization has already caused the experimental transplantation of four populations. Several populations have recently been discovered in botanical surveys for new housing developments. One Los Angeles County population, one Riverside population, and several populations in San Diego County were discovered during development surveys in the last few years. Some of the populations were experimentally transplanted but a few are preserved in open space at their original locations as mitigation for development (CDFG 1991). Since it occurs in a horse pasture, grazing is a threat to the newly discovered Final 6-95 B-35 Range Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Riverside County population. Also, the Riverside population that does not fully occur on the Santa Rosa Plateau Preserve is grazed outside preserve boundaries by cattle. In San Diego County, the northern population near Carlsbad is in a pasture that did not appear grazed when it was discovered, but it had been * previously grazed (CDFC 1991). The Riverside County Flood Control Project on the San Jacinto River could effect the Railroad Canyon population of thread-leaved brodiaea in two ways. The bulbs will either be dug up and moved to another location, or they will be removed with the topsoil when the channel is dredged, and replaced later when the project is finished. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, Riverside County Flood Control and private consultants are working to develop the best solution (CDFG 1991). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 5,800 individuals (83%).of this species will be conserved in the " plan area, and approximately 1,190 individuals (17%) are in areas designated n for development. Because of the high number of individuals and proportion of the population(s) protected onsite, the HCP/OMSP will benefit the preservation of this species. The proposed offsite habitat conservation is not likely to benefit ^ this species. This species is known from two other sites in Carlsbad, Conservation/Management Measures This species will benefit from control of access and habitat management _ measures. " Ml 26. Wart-stemmed Ceanothus p Ceanothus verrucosus m. Status ^ tm USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFC: None p CNPS: List 2, 1-2-1 ^ OTHER: T PLAN ID: A-16 m m mil Beauchamp (1986) reports this species from Agua Hedionda, Encinitas, Leucadia, Torrey Pines State Reserve, Kearney Mesa, Lake Hodges, and Point Loma. In Baja California, Mexico wart-stemmed ceanothus ranges from the Pacific coast to the foothills of the Sierra Juarez and Sierra San Pedro Martir W (Wiggins 1980). This species was reported from several areas in the City of P Carlsbad, including Arroyo la Costa, Rancho La Costa and the south end of Batiquitos Drive (MBA and Dudek & Associates, Inc. 1992). m m p B-36 Final 6-95 W m Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B mm ^ Habitat m It occurs on dry hills and mesas in coastal and mixed chaparral habitats below 965 feet elevation in western San Diego County and adjacent Baja California, Mexico. VP Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP ii All of the 155 individuals within the plan area will be preserved; the species does not occur in areas designated for development. Because of the low number m of individuals within the plan area, the HCP/OMSP will not contribute to the long-term preservation of this species. The species is not likely to benefit from the proposed offsite habitat conservation. This plant is recorded from several ^ localities in the City. mm Conservation/Management Measures This species will benefit from the control of access and exotic pests. 27. Western Dichondra Dichondra occidentalis mm »- Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 3c) ta CDFC: None CNPS: List 4, 1-2-1 OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-17 Aw Range This species is found in coastal San Diego and Orange counties, on some of the Channel Islands, and in northern Baja California, Mexico. In San Diego County, western dichondra is frequently found in undisturbed vegetation from Del Mar to Agua Hedionda, south to the international border. Because of its fairly wide distribution and relative abundance in San Diego County and elsewhere, this species is not considered at this time to be highly sensitive. In Carlsbad, this species was reported from Airport Business Center, Evans Point and Carlsbad Highlands (Michael Brandman Associates and Dudek & Associates, Inc. 1992). Habitat Western dichondra is a small perennial herb which generally occurs on dry slopes as an understory plant in Diegan coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and oak woodland. It often proliferates on recently burned slopes. Final 6-95 B-37 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP, Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 40 percent on the onsite populations will be conserved in the p, plan area, and approximately 60 percent of the populations occur in areas designated for development. Because of the small population sizes within the " plan area, the HCP/OMSP is not expected to contribute to the long-term preservation of this species. The species could potentially benefit from the proposed offsite habitat conservation. This species is recorded from three other mi areas of Carlsbad. IP Conservation/Management Measures ^ This species will benefit from management measures to control access and m exotic pests. IW m m JH Ml ill P •HI w m m m m m m m m m p B-38 Final 6-95 9 m Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B B. Invertebrates 28. Harbison's Dun Skipper Euphyes vestris harbinsoni Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) ^ CDFG: None OTHER: T PLAN ID: B-11 Harbison's dun skipper is a local endemic subspecies of the wide ranging and m polytypic Euphyes vestris. It is restricted to areas where f>erennial sources of water provide adequate support for its larval host plant (San Diego sedge [Carex sp/ssa]) (Brown 1991). Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy This butterfly is a member of the large family Hesperiidae (skippers) and is typical in terms of size and wing shape. The wings are rather elongate and angled apically; they are usually held up over the body when at rest. This species is the only member of the genus Euphyes found in Southern California. Appearance The wings of the dun skipper are brown on both surfaces. The males have a diagonal darker brown band on the forewings, while the females have several small light spots in place of the brown band. In appearance, this butterfly comes nearest to the salt marsh skipper {Panoquina errans), another sensitive species known from the narrow coastal strand of San Diego County. The larvae are distinctive due to the constriction behind the head, a common feature with skipper caterpillars. The head of the caterpillar is cream-color with dark m longitudinal stripes. The body is translucent green and is covered with fine white hairs. m m m IM Taxonomy This subspecies was apparently recognized as distinct for a number of years before it was described by Brown & McCuire (1983), judging by the comments found in Emmel & Emmel (1973). It is distinct from other populations of E. vestris found in Arizona and northern California (Santa Cruz and Mendocino counties). Distribution This species is known from southern Orange County to the Mexican border; it has yet to be found in Baja California (Brown 1991). Final 6-95 B-39 ^^ndixB Car/sbad^flCA HCP/OMSP ^ mm It is difficult to assess historic distribution without consulting the locality data on museum specimens. The information given at the time of description (Brown & McCuire 1983) and previously by Brown (1982) provide an adequate picture of the range of this butterfly. The dun skipper Is not recorded from Baja California (Brown, et al. 1992). It has probably been extirpated due to the impact of cattle grazing in riparian habitats brought on by the habit of Mexican farmers who burn habitat to clear vegetation for agriculture (D. K. Faulkner, pers, comm.). •* Orange County nm Orsak (1977) recorded this butterfly from the Santa Ana Mountains; no specific localities are given by Brown (1991), *' San Diego County *" Localities include Adobe Falls in Mission Valley, vicinity of Dulzura, Old Viejas Grade, Otay Mountain, Flinn Springs, Tecate Peak, Fallbrook, east of Valley Center, Ramona, and near San Pasqual. ^ Current Distribution No recent survey has been conducted, but several localities can be added or subtracted from the lists per recent general publications on sensitive butterflies in California (Murphy 1990, Brown 1991). Orange County Murphy (1990) recorded this species at Silverado Canyon in southern Orange County. San Diego County The development and associated disturbances at Adobe Falls undoubtedly eliminated the larval foodplant (Brown 1991). The development of Flinn Springs County Park has reduced the butterfly population due to the removal of a large portion of the original host plant population. Population and Density Estimates There appears to occur a number of localized populations, as this species exists in small isolated colonies. No estimates of population size or density are available. Habitat Requirements and Territory Size The dun skipper typically occurs in partially-shaded, riparian oak woodland habitats in a matrix of chamise chaparral or southern mixed chaparral where a seep or spring provides perennial water for the larval host plant, San Diego B-40 Final 6-95 MT m A systematic search of localities that were the source for herbarium specimens of San Diego sedge indicated that the butterfly was present at nearly all San Diego County localities where the plant was found in notable numbers (Brown * 1982). HI «« ^ Car/sbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B P MB P m m ML sedge. Territories are necessarily small and restricted to the vicinity of the host plant populations. The males patrol the area around the host plant, but do not venture more than 50 to 75 feet; females commonly perch on the host plant, basking in the late morning and early afternoon sun (Brown & McCuire 1983; M Brown, pers. comm.). Life History This insect is single brooded (one generation per year) and the adult flight period generally extends from late May to late July (Brown & McCuire 1983). Eggs are laid singly on the underside of the leaf blades near the base of the host plant. The caterpillars (larvae) feed on the foliage of the host plant and undergo successive moults as the size increases. There is a hibernating phase during larval development that usually occurs in either the third or fourth instar. The caterpillar constructs a silk-lined chamber by attaching two to four leaf blades; a second such chamber is constructed for pupation. Pupation takes from between 18 to 21 days. Foraging Ecology The adults can be found nectaring on various red and yellow flowers within the narrowly defined use areas. Records of preferred flowers include morning glory iCalystegia macrostegia ssp. tenuifolia), red thistle {Cirsium occidentale), loosestrife (lythrum californicum), golden yarrow {Eriophyllum conferlifoUum var. confertifolium), and black mustard {Brassica nigra) (Brown & McCuire 1983). Decline Factors This species appears to be especially sensitive due to the obligate relationship m with and specific physical requirements of San Diego sedge, the larval host plant. As mentioned above, several historic localities have been impacted by development and the colonies have been reduced or eliminated. Because of the rough terrain that many extant colonies are currently known from and because many others are found in mainly rural areas, most populations of this butterfly ^ are currently somewhat protected from the impacts associated with and peripheral to development. In ^ Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no records of this species occurrence in Carlsbad, and the potential for its occurrence in the plan area is low. Approximately 45 acres (96%) of the potential habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan in San Marcos m Creek, and less than approximately 2 acres (4%) of the potential habitat occur in areas designated for development. Additionally riparian restoration is proposed in for wetland impacts and may enhance additional potential habitat. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, exotic weed control, riparian restoration, water quality control measures, and inclusion of appropriate habitat in open space. Final 6-95 B-41 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP 29. Hermes Copper Lycaena hermes Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: None OTHER: OSS PLAN ID: B-12 The Hermes copper is one of the most famous local butterflies, being endemic to San Diego County and adjacent Baja California (Thome 1963, Brown 1980). Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy The Hermes copper (Lycaena hermes) belongs to the type genus of the butterfly family Lycaenidae. These butterflies are generally small to medium in size, often with iridescent wing colors, and are distinctive because of the reduction of the forelegs in males (Emmel & Emmel 1973). Coppers are so named because of the iridescent coppery reflections of the upper surface of the wings. The Hermes copper and one other species occuring in San Diego County have distinctly tailed hindwings; however, the second species (the Arota copper, Lycaena arota arota) is extremely rare in the County and generally only found in the southern extremes of the Santa Ana Mountains. The underside of the Hermes copper is a golden or mustard color whereas the other local Lycaenas are gray underneath. The larvae are flattened and sluglike. The mature larva is apple-green, with an upper surface band of darker green bordered by yellow; the head is soiled yellow. On each side there are two indistinct longitudinal bands, interrupted at each segment. The body is sparingly covered with minute, silvery white, rounded projections. The region just beyond the head has a distinctive, double diamond shape and is brown. The pupae are grass green in color, with a narrow yellow stripe and faint yellow diagonal bars. The Hermes copper is so different from its local "relatives" that it was once put into a different genus (Hermelycaena by Miller & Brown 1979), but is currently recombined with others in the genus Lycaena. Distribution JM m w p The known distribution in the United States includes only part of San Diego County, extending 50 miles north of the Mexican border almost to Fallbrook to and east about 45 miles from the coast to Pine Valley and Cuatay. Thome (1963) provided a map of localities known at that time and discussed the known m distribution in terms of a refugium, since the butterfly is apparently limited by factors not clearly linked with a more broadly distributed host plant. B-42 f(na/6-95 P P Car/sfaad-FLO\ HCP/OMSP Appendix B Historic Distribution San Diego County ^ Historically, this butterfly has been found at numerous locations within the County including El Cajon, Suncrest, Mission Gorge, Dulzura, Cuatay, and Old Viejas Grade. The largest, most accessible colony of the Hermes copper occurred in Mission Gorge but was destroyed by a fire in 1982 (Brown 1991). IMP iW Baja California It occurs south of the border almost 100 miles to about 18 miles south of Santo Tomas in northern Baja California. Current Distribution San Diego County Brown (1991) wrote that the Hermes copper is now known to occur throughout the chaparral belt and into the transitional zone at the western edge of the Laguna Mountains. Baja California Brown, et al. (1992) list several localities in the north coastal part of the peninsula; these are not particularly recent records, but no indication is given of recent attempts to find this species south of the border. Population and Density Estimates The population density of this butterfly is locally high due to the restricted and closely confined behavior exhibited by members of the individual colonies. Thorne (1963) wrote that the population per colony was probably in the hundreds. Habitat Requirements and Territory Size This species has an exceedingly restricted range, both in terms of distribution and individual territories, and is found only in southern mixed chaparral and coastal sage scrub communities where the larval host plant, redberry (Rhamnus crocea), occurs (Brown 1991). The males are somewhat territorial and perch to await females (Scott 1986). Life History The eggs are laid on stems of spiny redberry where they overwinter. Two-thirds of the life cycle is spent as an aestivating or hibernating ovum (Thorne 1963). The developing caterpillars (larvae) feed on the foliage of the host plant and undergo several moults as their size increases. The larva transforms into a chrysalis (pupa) on the host plant and the pupae are supported by a strand of silk that acts as a harness to hold each pupa in place. The adults emerge from late May to late June, whereafter they feed until mating and subsequent egg- laying occurs. The peak flight occurs about June 20, with the males peaking on Final 6-95 B-43 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ m June 10 and females on June 20 (Thome 1963). A complete description of the life history was presented by Comstock and Dammers (1935). * Thorne (1963) stated that there is no observable tendancy in Hermes to migrate, to "hilltop," or otherwise stray from their colonies, although there may be inter- colony movement by males. He further wrote that there has been no specific work on population variation or genetics to determine if there is gene flow • between colonies. Foraging Ecology The Hermes copper is restricted to vegetation where spiny redberry {Rhamnus crocea), the larval host plant, occurs. The adults are found most frequently neaaring on flowers, especially flat-top buckwheat {Eriogonum fasciculatum) from late May to late July (Thorne 1963). Decline Factors This butterfly apparently shows no tendency to wander as the known colonies are mostly confined to the immediate vicinity of the larval host plant. Therefore, continued loss and further fragmentation of suitable habitat will pose the greatest continued threat to this species. Fire, which is an integral element in the succession of chaparral and coastal sage scrub vegetation communities, poses a threat to this species by the elimination of its host plant, redberry (Brown 1991). Even after the recovery or regeneration of the larval host plant, the sedentary behavior of this butterfly may slow recoIonization, especially where sources of potential colonists have been extirpated either by the fire or by previous disturbances (Brown 1991). Wright (1930) wrote that "Its trysting places are being rapidly taken over by realtors and the species may soon become extinct, unless colonies yet undiscovered are located in other regions." While numerous colonies of the Hermes copper are extant in San Diego County, the butterfly is found in less than half of its former range. Efforts should be made to avoid any impacts to specific colonies, especially those islotated in areas thought to be at the edge of the known distribution. General habitat disturbance and removal of the larval host plant ard the main factors causing an incremental loss of this species. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are not records of the occurrence of this species in Carlsbad, and the potential for its occurrence in the plan is low. Approximately 515 acres (58%) of the species' potential habitat will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 380 acres (42%) occur in areas designated for development. Specific impacts to this species are unknown due to a lack of data on potential population size and concentration of the required foodplants. Based on preservation of coastal sage scrub and chaparral habitat, the HCP/OMSP, including the proposed offsite habitat conservation, may benefit the species. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, fire management, and inclusion of habitat in open space. B-44 Final 6-95 m m m m P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B iM ^ 30. Quino Checkerspot Euphydras editha quino mm ^ Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 1) ^ CDFC: None OTHER: OSS mm PLAN ID: B-13 The Quino checkerspot Is the southernmost subspecies of a widely distributed ^ butterfly (f. editha). This butterfly was formerly widespread and has declined in recent years due to incremental development and habitat loss; what remains of >• the subspecies now exists as small isolated populations. Murphy (1990) stated that "£. editha quino is experiencing the most well documented downhill march ^ toward extinction" and may have been one of the most abundant butterflies in ^ Southern California prior to the development boom 50 years ago. Museum records of this species support such a hypothesis. Throughout most of southern mm California the native habitats of this butterfly have disappeared incrementally as development has progressed. Murphy (1990) listed £. e. quino among a small group of sensitive California butterfly species that were "in immediate need of ^ protective measures." * Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy This species belongs to the large family Nymphalidae (brush-footed butterflies) •m and is one of two species of true checkerspots to inhabit San Diego County. »~ Checkerspots are so-named due to the checkerboard-tike pattern on the wings. ^ The Quino checkerspot has wings with black and yellow patches, dominated by brick red patches in contrast to the much darker and mostly black wing coloration of £. chalcedona, the only other true checkerspot to occur in San Diego County. The head and legs of the larvae are black and the prolegs are dull orange. The body is black, speckled with minute orange dots; the bristly tubercles are orange except for the first three and the last, which bear black tubercles; and the bristles are black (Howe 1975). P This subspecies has been somewhat confused in the scientific literature and this confusion persists in the popular literature, environmental consulting industry, ^ and resource agencies. For many years this butterfly was known as Wright's checkerspot {Euphryas ed/tha wrighti) (Emmel & Emmel 1973). The name M "quino" had been used for a desert form of E. chalcedona; Scott (1981) described this situation in detail and proposed a new name for the desert "* subspecies. Distribution P This subspecies formerly occurred as scattered, localized populations within the coastal mesas and foothills of westem Riverside, Orange, and San Diego counties and south into northern Baja California. Brown, et al. (1992) described the distribution in Baja as occuring in the northern half of the Califomian Final 6-95 B-45 , m Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ Province from the Pacific coast to the northern end of the Sierra Juarez and to ^ the western edge of the Colorado Desert at Valle de Trinidad. ^ Historic Distribution m Orange County P Previously known from Orange County Park and the hills above Hidden Ranch, ^ Black Star Canyon in the Santa Ana Mountains (Orsak 1977). Riverside County m Apparently restricted to a small portion in the southwestern part of the county, this butterfly was known from areas along Highway 71 near Elsinore and * Cavilan Hills (Emmel & Emmel 1973). P San Diego County p Historical localities in San Diego County include Lake Hodges, Rancho Santa Fe, Kearney Mesa, Dehesa, Dulzura, Proctor Valley, Dictionary Hill (Shields ^ 1967), San Miguel Mountain, Sweetwater Canyon, Otay Lakes, near Brown Field, and Chula Vista. Emmel and Emmel (1973) reported that many of the populations known from San Diego had been extirpated by development. Baja California m Several specific localities from northern Baja were given by Brown & Faulkner • (1984) under the name Euphydryas editha wrighti. ^ Current Distribution m Orange County •wmk Orsak (1977) stated that the insect was locally extinct in Orange County by 1977. Riverside County ** m A small population was discovered at an undisclosed locality in Riverside County in 1989 (Brown 1991). ii San Diego County Ml John Brown (pers. comm.) observed adults on the lower western slopes of Otay Mountain in 1982 and Dennis Murphy found several dozen adults on the "* southeast slopes of Dictionary Hill in 1983 (Murphy 1990); no more recent records are known. Baja California . m In the spring of 1991, another population was found at the northem end of the m Sierra de Juarez of Baja California (Brown 1991). B-46 Final 6-95 P P Car/sbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B __ — Population and Density Estimates Brown (1991) stated that "extreme fluctuations in numbers make accurate quantitative assessment of populations virtually impossible." According to P Ehriich, et al. (1975), factors controlling annual population size include winter rainfall, density of edible host plants, and competition. The Quino checkerspot *^ became increasingly rare through the 1980s; for several years no adults were ^ observed throughout the entire range and it was feared extinct. Most populations of £. editha exhibit extremely low vagility, while studies by Ehriich, et al, (1975) indicated that some individuals of £. e. quino may disperse long distances in drier years. Population explosions, such as the one witnessed in 1977 (Murphy and White 1984), are rare events but result in a mass dispersal of individuals. The consequences of such dispersals may be recolonization of m areas that have recovered from previous habitat bums or temporary disturbances that fomierly eliminiated the butterfly. Murphy (1990) suggested that the human-induced decline in the distribution and abundance of E. e. quino is ^ exacerbated by the complex "metapopulatlon dynamics" which affect the persistence of this butterfly. A metapopulatlon is a "population of populations" mi which is dependent on a persistent "reservior population" to provide colonists to habitats supporting "satellite populations" which will frequently go extinct due to natural environmental causes such as drought or fire. The extirpation of a single, large reservoir population of £. e. quino may effectively deny other habitats necessary migrants, creating a ripple effect of irreversible longterm I* extinctions (Murphy and White 1984). The loss of particular satellite populations may interrupt the natural "stepping stone" recolonization process to other outlying populations and this very situation in Orange County may have ^ caused the countywide extinction perceived by Orsak (1977). The extinction/recolonization cycle has some obvious implications for conservation efforts aimed at E. e. quino. Ehriich, et al. (1980) reported a phenomena in Northern California where Euphydryas species use annual larval host plants, which nearly disappeared due to drought rather than defoliation, forcing small f. editha populations to extinction. Murphy and White (1984) suggested that the long-term status of larger populations of Plantago and Euphydryas in southern California appears to be little affected by host plant defoliation, larval starvation, and adult distribution. IM Habitat Requirements and Territory Size This species was formerly widespread in coastal sage scrub, open chaparral, grasslands, and vernal pool habitats in southern California and northern Baja California. Life History The species is single brooded (i.e. one generation per year or univoltine) with the adults active from late February until early May. An unusual set of climatic events or rainfall from a Mexican tropical storm can sometimes stimulate adult emergence in the fall. Murphy (1990) wrote that £. e. quino was associated with Plantago insularis across virtually all coastal mesa tops in grasslands, broken chaparral, and particularly around vernal pools. According to Ehriich, et Final 6-95 B-47 m m Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ m al, (1975), the primary larval host plants in San Diego County are Plantago insularis and P. erecta. Brown, et al. (1992) said that this subspecies likely uses Castrlleja and other scrophulareaceous plants as hosts in northern Baja. This species is an active "hilltopper," i.e. one that uses the summit of a hill as a • rendezvous prior to mating (Shields 1967). The males generally emerge several days before the females and perch on or near the female pupae so as to mate as *• soon as the females emerge (Brown, pers. comm.). Once mating has taken place, the males return to hilltopping behavior and search for additional mates. Foraging Ecology Orsak (1977) recorded adults from the flowers of chia {Salvia columbariae) in Orange County. The adults are apparently not specific in their flower preferences and are likely to be found on many different species of flower with flattops, e.g. Eriogonum, Eriophyllum, etc. (Brown, pers. comm.). Decline Factors The impression of most local experts is that this species has been extirpated from San Diego County. Certainly it has not been seen within the County boundaries since 1983. While there has been much loss of appropriate habitat through development and urbanization, extensive enough tracts of land still exist in open space to suggest other factors are at play in causing the decline of this butterfly. The long term drought and annual nature of the larval host plant are quite possibly incompatible and have most probably compounded the separate negative effects to push this species beyond its tolerance and towards extinction. Orsak (1977) cited a conversation with the late Chris Henne, a renowned amateur lepidopterist from Pearblossom, Los Angeles County. Henne told Orsak that the larvae of the Qutno butterfly may diapause for several years and theorized that this may explain the extreme fluctuations in populations and adult emergence. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP ^ There are no records of this species' occurrence in Carlsbad, and the species is m not expected to occur in the plan area. No specific statement of possible impacts to this species can be made as it is presumed to be extinct within the * County. However, the HCP/OMSP provides for the conservation of 52 percent (670 acres) of potential habitat, which may benefit this species should it reoccur in the area. The proposed offsite habitat conservation also may provide additional benefit to this species. m Conservation/Management Measures m Management measures that pertain to the potential habitat include fencing, • access control, exotic weed control, and inclusion of habitat in open space. ^ m m p m B-48 Final 6-95 P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B C Amphibians m .M0 tm 31. California Red-legged Frog Rana aurora draytonii *• Sfafus USFWS: Proposed Endangered CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER: OSS PLAN ID: B-14 Range Excluding the Central Valley and deserts of California, the red-legged frog ranges west of the Cascade/Sierra Nevada from British Columbia to north-western Baja California, Mexico (Altig and Dumas 1974 in Simpson 1992). In California, it occurs at elevations below 3,900 feet in the coast ranges along the length of the state (Zeiner, et al. 1990 in Simpson 1992). Habitat The red-legged frog is found in moist forests and riparian habitats (Nusbaum, et al. 1983 in Simpson 1992) where it occupies slow moving creeks and ponds (Burry and Com 1988 in Simpson 1992). Key habitat components are dense vegetation close to water level (Hayes and Jennings 1988 in Simpson 1992) that provide surfaces for egg attachment (Nusbaum, et al, 1983 in Simpson 1992) and shading of the water (Hayes and Jennings 1988 in Simpson 1992). Little or no water flow is required for reproduction (Nusbaum, et al. 1983 in Simpson 1992). Strong evidence suggests that in some areas, the red-legged frog is found in intermittent streams as the result of habitat restriction by aquatic predators such as introduced bullfrogs (Hayes and Jennings 1988 in Simpson 1992). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no records of the occurrence of this species in Carlsbad, and it is not expected to occur in the plan area. The riparian habitat onsite is currently occupied by bullfrogs and large-mouth bass which would preclude the frog's occurrence. The only area where this species might be expected is in the San Marcos Creek canyon, a majority of which will not be disturbed. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, water quality control measures, and onsite management by a habitat manager. Final 6-95 B-49 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP 32. Western Spadefoot Spea hammondii Range This species is found in central northern California, the Great Valley and south through the coast ranges from San Francisco to Baja California, Mexico (Stebbins 1985). Habitat The westem spadefoot is primarily a species of the lowlands, frequenting washes, floodplains of rivers, alluvial fans, alkali flats, temporary ponds and vernal pools. It prefers areas of open vegetation with sandy or gravely soil (Stebbins 1985). m Status USFWS: None "* CDFG: Species of Special Concern ^ OTHER: NCCP, T PLAN ID: A-18 m P P P Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP 0 The distribution of western spadefoot onsite is not well known and it is only ^ recorded from one other site within the City (MBA 1992). This species is likely to be impacted in some areas but is also expected to be preserved onsite. Approximately 565 acres (35%) of potential habitat for the species will be conserved in the plan, and approximately 1,040 acres (65%) are in areas designated for development. The proposed offsite habitat conservation could potentially benefit the species, and the overall impact of the HCP/OMSP is likely be beneficial. This species has been recorded from only one locality within Carlsbad. m Conservation/Management Measures M Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control p through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through ^ preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, water quality control measures, and onsite management by a habitat manager, ^ m P B-50 Final 6-95 Car/sbad^FlO\ HCP/OMSP Appendix B — — D. Reptiles 33. Coastal Rosy Boa Lichanura trivirgata rosafusca «r Sfafus USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) ^ CDFG; Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-19 Range •mm Coastal rosy boa occurs from southwestern California southward into Baja California (Behier and King 1979) and is widespread throughout the County. Habitat <m Coastal rosy boa can be found in dry rocky brushlands and desert habitats, •~ usually near rock outcrops and intermittent streams, but does not require (w permanent water. It is secretive and chiefly nocturnal and best surveyed for at night. However, it can often be found on the surface during overcast days in the spring. It is declining as a result of habitat alteration. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 510 acres (40%) of the species' habitet will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 760 acres (60%) occurs in areas designated for development. The proposed offsite habitat conservation potentially would *" benefit the species. Overall effects of the HCP/OMSP are likely to be beneficial. Conservation/Management Measures m Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. 34. Coastal Western Whiptail Cnemidophorus tigris multiscutatus Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFC: Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-20 f/na/6-95 B-51 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP m m m The following description of the coastal westem whiptail is from the Multi- species Habitat Conservation Plan for Southwestem Riverside County, California (1992). Mr Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy m The coastal western whiptail is one of twelve recognized subspecies of Cnemidophorus tigris. It has a long tail, which often exceeds twice its body ^ length (Turner, et al. 1969, Pianka 1986). The length from its snout to vent ranges between 3.2 and 3.5 inches, but its overall dimension may exceed 11 inches fTumer, et al. 1969, Fitch 1970, Case 1983a, 1983b, Pianka 1986). Most biologists agree that there is little or no sexual dimorphism in the coastal western whiptail (Benes 1969, Turner, et al. 1969, Fitch 1970), but Case (1983b) reported that females were eight percent larger in Baja California, Mexico. 4» Distribution m The coastal westem whiptail is found in semi-arid regions of southern California and western Baja Califomia, Mexico (Fitch 1970, Claser 1970, Pianka 1966, P 1970). It occurs near the coast of southern California from Ventura south to western Baja California, Mexico (Stebbins 1985). * Population and Density Estimates Local abundance of this species seems to be highly correlated with precipitation ^ patterns, with higher annual rainfall resulting in greater population densities (Pianka 1970,1983), and consequently greater food resources. Density estimates range from 0.5 to 5.0 animals per acre, with several reports of over 12 animals per acre after several consecutive years of abundant rainfall (Turner, et al. 1966, Paricer 1972). The survival rate for adult coastal western whiptails is between 54 and 60 percent per year with some animals living as long as 6 or 7 years (Turner, et al. 1969, Pianka 1986). Habitat Requirements and Territory Size Whiptails are active lizards that prefer open habitats shrub or grassland habitats (Benes 1969, Fitch 1970, Pianka 1966,1970,1986). This lizard inhabits coastal sage scrub, chaparral and open woodlands. It requires areas with loose soils for burrowing (Stebbins 1975). In a study of 1,801 animals, Pianka (1986) found that almost half were associated with open areas of little vegetation and that virtually all favored sunny microhabitats. Milstead (1957) reported similar results although he observed some temporal differences in habitat usage. During mid-afternoon, when soil temperatures exceeded 122° F, he observed whiptails resting in the shade of rocks or bushes. They became active again when soil temperatures dropped to tolerable levels. Such behavioral adaptations permit ectotherms to regulate body temperature of 103.1° F (Milstead 1947, Pianka and Pianka 1970). Mf 1% m m P ^"^2 Final 6-95 ^ Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B 0k 0^ P m m Burrowing Behavior and Hibernation Teiid lizards commonly dig burrows that are used nocturnally as a predator refuge and as a hibernaculum. Animals may be active for as little as four months of the year, emerging in early April or May and retreating in late summer (McCoy and Hoddenbach 1966, Bennes 1969, Turner, et al. 1969, Fitch 1970, Pianka 1970, 1986), Emergence dates are geographically variable, with animals from northem areas hibernating for longer periods of time (McCoy and Hoddenbach 1966, Pianka 1970). Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success Although some populations of whiptails are parthenogenetic, this species is bisexual (Wright and Lowe 1968, Fitch 1970). Coastal western whiptails typically lay one or two clutches consisting of two to four eggs between April and August (Milstead 1957, McCoy and Hoddenbach 1966, Turner, et al. 1969, Fitch 1970, Pianka 1970, 1986, Parker 1972, Stebbins 1985). Whiptails have an adaptive reproductive strategy in which clutch size varies in response to food resources and geographic location (McCoy and Hoddenbach 1966, Pianka 1970, 1986). In northern latitudes, animals typically produce a single clutch with a mean size of 3.4 eggs (Fitch 1970, Pianka 1970, 1986), while in more southern latitudes, such as Texas, they produce several clutches per year with a mean clutch size is 2,2 (Fitch 1970, McCoy and Hoddenbach 1966, Turner, et al, 1966, Pianka 1970,1986). It seems likely that temporal and not physiological constraints hinder reproductive output (Turner, et al. 1969). During wet years egg production increases significantly (Pianka 1970, 1986). Additionally, it has been demonstrated that larger females produce more eggs CTurner, et al. 1969, Turner 1970, Parker 1972, Pianka 1986), and older females produce on average more eggs than do younger ones (Fitch 1970, Parker 1972, Pianka 1986). Incubation takes 45 to 60 days (Milstead 1957). At emergence, young measure between 1.5 and 1.6 inches from snout to vent (Parker 1972). Foraging Ecology The dietary habitats of whiptails have been well characterized. Studies report consumption of a variety of arthropods, including termites, wasps, ants, sow bugs, spiders, scorpions, snails, and other opportunistic foods (Milstead 1957, Benes 1969, Turner, et al, 1969, Pianka 1966, 1970, 1986, Case 1983a, Regal 1983. Termites, in particular, are apparently a favored food item and can comprise almost 80 percent of the diet (Milstead 1957, Case 1983a, Pianka 1970, 1986). The western whiptail is an active forager, moving almost constantly during its activity period and probing, digging and tasting objects (Pianka 1966, Regal 1983). Milstead (1957) called the western whiptail a "nervous and wary" lizard that makes rapid and jerky motions while foraging. He reported movements in excess of 541 feet during a thirty minute period, including vertical jumps of up to one inch. Whiptails will apparently turn over sticks and rocks using their nose. If a mud encasement (castle) of termites is found, they will flick it into the air and eat insects that escape from the wreckage (Milstead 1957). Final 6-95 B-53 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Seasonal and age differences in foraging and feeding patterns have been reported (Benes 1969). As one might expect, prey size is influenced by the body size of the lizard (Case 1983). Additionally, the diversity of food items eaten appears to vary inversely with recent precipitation (Pianka 1970, 1986). Thus a larger variety of foods are ingested during dry years and greater numbers of insect larvae, beetles (Coleoptera) and grasshoppers are taken (Pianka 1970, 1986). Olfaaory and visual cues are primarily used initially to locate potential prey. Once captured, the animal will test food by touching it with its tongue, occasionally rejecting unpalatable items (Bennes 1969). Decline Factors Loss of its habitat is the primary cause of decline of the coastal western whiptail. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 510 acres (40%) of suitable habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 760 acres (60%) are in areas designated for development. The actual distribution of coastal whiptail onsite is not known, and it also has not been recorded from within the City. The overall impact of the HCP/OMSP would likely be beneficial, due to the onsite preservation of coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and woodlands onsite; the species also would potentially benefit from the proposed offsite habitat conservation. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. ii m m m m p 35. Coast Patch-nosed Snake Salvadora hexalepis virgultea Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Species of Special Concern m OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: B-15 The coast patch-nosed snake occurs in coastal California from San Luis Obispo _ south into northwestern Baja California, Mexico (Behier and King 1979). g Habitat w This subspecies mhabits sandy and rocky areas within grassland, chaparral, sagebrush, and desert scrub habitats. P B-54 Final 6-95 ^ P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 510 acres (40%) of suitable habitat for this species will be conserved onsite, and approximately 760 acres (60%) are in areas designated for development. No specific estimates of this species' population are available, so the expected direct impacts are unknown. Onsite conserved habitat will contribute to the species' long term preservation, and the species may potentially benefit from the proposed offsite habitat conservation. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. 36. Coronado Skink Eumeces skiltonianus interparietalis Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: B-16 Range The Coronado skink ranges from San Diego County into northern Baja California (Behier and King 1979). Ha^ifaf It is found in open woodlands and grassy areas, especially where rocks are abundant (Behier and King 1979). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 585 acres (34%) of suitable habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 1,130 acres (66%) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation potentially would include this species' habitat and therefore could be beneficial. Onsite and potentially offsite conservation of habitat will contribute to the long-term preservation of this species. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. Final 6-95 B-55 Appendix 6 Car/sbad-f LCA HCP/OMSP 37. Northern Red Diamond Rattlesnake Crotalus ruber ruber Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFC: Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-21 m The following description of the coastal northem red diamond rattlesnake is from the Multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan for Southwestern Riverside gm County (1992). P Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy m All Crotalus species are characterized by a unique adaptation in which the terminal scales are not shed and dry into "rattles." With successive moults the specialized scales accumulate, but eventually many fall off under normal wear. In captivity, animals with as many as 29 rattles have been reported (Parker P 1965). The red diamond rattlesnake is large (29 to 64 Inches) and rose colored. P Distribution ^ Rattlesnakes are a wide spread genus inhabiting much of North and Central m America, from Canada to tropical South America, and reaching their highest ^ diversity in the southwestern United States (Paricer 1965, Fitch 1970, Stebbins 1954, 1985). The northern red diamond rattlesnake occurs in San Diego, San ^ Bernardino, and Riverside counties within California, and extends well into Baja California, Mexico (Stebbins 1954, 1985, Glaser 1970, Case 1978), It is also present on nine islands in the Gulf of California. On two of the islands (Santa Catalina and San Lorenzo), the species no longer develops rattles (Case 1978). P p Population and Density Estimates Density estimates are very scarce for rattlesnakes. Closely related species average greater than one to three acres with adult survivorship approximately 75 to 85 percent. Reportedly, diamondback rattlesnakes can live up to 21 years (Parker and Plummer 1987). There is little evidence to suggest that snakes are territorial (Gillingham 1987, Gregory, et at. 1987), although they may be dominant within a particular spatial region, and relatively subordinate outside this area (Gillingham 1987). Gregory, P et al. (1987) suggest that snakes maintain an "individual distance" that changes with environmental conditions. High overlap in space use is reported, especially if resources are clumped (Gregory, et al. 1987). Normally, however, snakes avoid each other using olfactory cues. Presumably such avoidance prevents foraging in areas that have already been depleted of accessible p resources (Gregory, et al. 1987). P B-56 Final 6-95 P m ^ Car/sbad^FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B MB Movement patterns are highly erratic (Fitch and Shirer 1971, Keenlyne 1972, *• Gregory, et al. 1987) and rattlesnakes seldom return to a specific point. Fitch and Shirer (1971) observed average daily movements of 148 feet but on 50 ^ percent of the days no activity was detected at all. During ten percent of the M tracking time, rediotelemetred red diamond rattlesnakes traveled distances greater than 500 feet. Gregory, et al, (1971) suggests that many snakes follow a "loop" migration pattern. This species is considered one of the most docile ^ rattlesnakes, and aggression has been observed only in rare instances, and then among captive animals (Gillingham 1987). Habitat Requirements and Territory Size P The northern red diamond rattlesnake prefers mesic regions of dense chaparral in the foothills and brush covered boulders or cactus patches within the coastal p sage scrub community (Stebbins 1954,1985, Fitch 1970). *" Behavior and Hibernation P Like many crotalids, red diamond rattlesnakes hibernate gregariously during the P winter (Fitch 1970, Keenlyne 1972, Gillingham 1987, Gregory, et al. 1987, Seigel and Ford 1987). It is not clear whether this is due to a requirement for water conservation or thermoregulation, or f>erhaps to facilitate mating in spring ^ (Fitch 1970, Gillingham 1987, Seigel and Ford 1987). There is some evidence that gravid females are gregarious as well (Fitch 1970). This has been attributed ^ to the greater protection afforded by a group when females are slow and immobile (Fitch 1970). Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success ** Rattlesnakes are viviparous, giving birth to live young in July or August (Perkins ^ 1943, Stebbins 1954, 1985, Fitch 1970, Seigel and Ford 1987). Mating occurs at the spring emergence or from fall aggregates (Fitch 1970, Gillingham 1987, Mr Seigel and Ford 1987). Males leave the hibernaculum first and then court ^ females for several days or weeks as they arouse (Gillingham 1987, Seigel and Ford 1987). Timing of emergence and hence courtship seem to be correlated ^ with temperature, presumably as an adaptation to ensure optimal thermal conditions during gestation (Seigel and Ford 1987). Male rattlesnakes can locate females by following their pheromone trail (Gillingham 1987). * Clutch size and mass vary geographically and with the body size of the female m (Fitch 1970, Case 1983a, Seigel and Ford 1987). Females generally reach reproductive age between three and seven years (Parker and Plummer 1987), m and reproduce biennially thereafter depending on their foraging success and fat ^ body production (Seigel and Ford 1987). Gestation averages between 139 and 152 days and the number of young range from 3 to 20, with a mean of slightly ^ more than eight (Perkins 1943, Stebbins 1954, 1985, Fitch 1970). First year survivorship is approximately 40 to 46 percent (Parker and Plummer 1987). *•* Little or no parental care occurs among species of Crotalus (Seigel and Ford 1987), although there are some reports of hatchling prairie rattlesnakes remaining within 16 feet of their mother for the first two hours after birth M (Gillingham 1987). Final 6-95 B-57 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Foraging Ecology ^ The red diamond rattlesnake is an opportunistic forager and eats small rabbits, ^ birds, ground squin-els, kangaroo rats, and other rodents as they are encountered CTevis 1943, Stebbins 1954, 1985, Cowles and Phelan 1958, * Reinert, et al. 1984). The facial pit or heat-receptor sense organ is located between the nostril, and eye on each side of the head and is very accurate. * Amazingly, it is able to detect temperature variations as low as 0.2 degrees C P and allow the snake to determine both the direction of and distance to potential prey (Paricer 1964). m Decline Factors m Loss of its habitat due to development and habitat or some other descriptor type conversion resulting from fire is the primary cause of decline of the northern diamond rattlesnake. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 510 acres (40%) of suitable habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 760 acres (607o) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation potentially would benefit the species. Onsite conservation of suitable habitat and P potentially offsite conservation will contribute to the long-term preservation of ^ the species. m Conservation/Management Measures ^ Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control ^ through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, i\re management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. The public education program is especially important for this species. ^ 38. Orange-throated Whiptail Cnemidophorus hyperythrus beldingi ^ Sfafus m USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) ** CDFG: Species of Special Concern p OTHER: NCCP, T PLAN ID: A-22 P The orange-throated whiptail is a small active lizard that occurs from extreme ^ southwestern California southward to the Cape Region of Baja California, Mexico. Relatively little has been published on the distribution and ecology of this species. p P m B-58 Final 6-95 * P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy ^pearance The orange-throated whiptail has a rich reddish to dark brown dorsal color, usually with five pale yellow stripes. The mid-dorsal stripe is usually forked at both ends. The belly is white, often with bluish slate or gray and is washed with orange in adults, especially ^luring the breeding season (Stebbins 1985). The throat and chest of adult males is bright orange. This coloration becomes brighter and more extensive during the breeding season. The young have bright blue tails. The orange-throated whiptail is unique among whiptails in that most individuals have an undivided frontoparietal scale. Size The orange-throated whiptail is a relatively small whiptail species with a snout- vent length of 2-2.75 inches. The tail, if unbroken, is about three times the snout-vent length. TaxcHiomy The orange-throated whiptail is a member of the New World lizard family Teiidae. Cnemidophorus is the largest genus in this family and the only one occurring naturally in the United States. There are 50 species of whiptails ranging collectively from the central United States to southern Brazil, Seventeen species occur in the United States with the greatest diversity occurring in Arizona, southern New Mexico and western Texas. This complex genus is divided into a number of species groups. The orange-throated whiptail is a member of the deppii species group. A number of the species of whiptails in the southwest reproduce by parthenogenesis (populations of these species consist of only female individuals). There are two species of whiptails in California, the wide-spread western whiptail (C. tigris) and the orange-throated whiptail (Stebbins 1965). Whiptails are relatively uniform in general appearance, being slender long-tailed lizards with small granular body scales, large symmetrical plates on the head and large squarish belly scales that occur in regular lengthwise and transverse rows. The tail is covered with large squarish keeled scales. Distribution within the United States Within the United States, the orange-throated whiptail ranges from the United States to the Mexican border, north to the vicinity of the City of Riverside, in the interior, and along the coast to Corona Del Mar in Orange County. Historic Distribution Orange County This lizard occurs in the southern portion of the County, in the San Joaquin Hills and southern Santa Ana Mountains southward Into San Diego County. Final 6-95 B-59 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP UN Riverside County The orange-throated whiptail occurs from the east slopes of the Santa Ana Mountains, south of the City of Corona, east to the area around Lake Mathews, the Perris Valley and Hemit southward to the Riverside-San Diego County border (Claser 1970). ii San Diego County ^ This species ranges from the coastal zone inland to the vicinity of Oak Grove, m Ramona, JapatuI Valley, and Tecate. m Current Distribution The orange-throated whiptail is still present at almost all the historic localities where suitable habitat remains. m Population and Density Estimates The population density of these lizards varies spatially and temporally. * Population size at a given locality tend to peak during the late summer when m young are emerging. Adult lizards apparently disperse from year to year, e.g. a local area may support a relatively dense population one year and few lizards m the next, many of the individuals having moved to another area (Brattstrom, pers. comm.). Habitat Requirements and Territory Size m These lizards require habitats which provide a diverse thermal environment, i.e. ^ open sunny areas of basking, shady areas and burrows as well as an abundant insect prey base, i.e. western subterranean termite (Reticu/itermes hesperus), the primary food item. Orange-throated whiptails occur in open coastal sage scrub, maritime succulent, scrub chaparral, riparian woodlands, and along washes. * These lizards also frequently occur in disturbed habitat and along dirt roads m traversing dense chaparral or coastal sage scrub. at Little work has been conducted on the territory size of these lizards. Bostic (1965) reported a mean home range of 0.11 acre in a study involving 11 adults. Data from this study also suggest that females have larger home ranges than ^ males. ^ m Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success A clutch of one to four eggs is laid during late June to mid-July. Adults two •* years or older apparently lay two clutches a year; yearlings lay one clutch (Bostic 1964). Bostic (1964) reported that areas of friable, well-drained soils •» exposed to direct sunlight and near areas of short grass and annuals were used as nesting sites. Foraging Ecology ^ There are two major types of foraging behavior exhibited by lizards: "sit-and- ^ wait" and "widely foraging." While these two tactics are the extremes of a suite m B-60 Final 6-95 • m Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B of foraging behaviors, most species of lizards tend towards one or the other tactic (Pianka 1986, Regal 1983). Whiptails as a group exhibit the "widely foraging" tactic, moving through their environment with rapid jerky movements, covering large areas and frequently protruding their forked tongue. These lizards seek much of their prey through chemoreception, digging in the soil and in leaf-litter under shrubs for insects. The orange-throated whiptail is typical of most whiptails In its foraging ecology. Decline Factors The most important factor in the decline of the orange-throated whiptail is habitat loss from urban and agricultural development. As noted above these lizards are still common throughout their range where suitable habitat remains. Habitat Loss and Fragmentation Habitat loss is the primary cause of decline in this species. Near the coast where extensive development has occurred (e.g. City of San Diego) extensive areas of former habitat are gone; however, the orange-throated whiptail is still present in areas of natural habitat which have long been isolated by urban development (e.g. Florida Canyon, Pt. Loma). Habitat Degradation Orange-throated whiptails can be fairly common in disturbed coastal sage scrub and chaparral. This does not appear to be a major factor in the decline of this species. Conclusions The orange-throated whiptail does not appear to be common within the project area. Most of the population that is present on the Northwest site will probably be extirpated because the proposed development impacts the areas where these lizards were seen. This species was not observed on the Rancheros site during the field work. If this lizard is present in this area it is currently rare. From the available data it appears that little of the orange-throated whiptail population present within the project area will be preserved in the proposed open-space. It should be noted however that there is some data that suggests that local populations may "shift around" from area to area (Brattstrom pers. com.) and there is at least a possibility that the species could be present in the Rancheros open-space in the future. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 510 acres (40%) of suitable habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 760 acres (60%) are in aresa designated for development. Preserved areas include coastal sage scrubm chaparral, riparian woodland, and floodplain scrub. Proposed offsite habitat conservation could potentially benefit the species. Onsite and offsite conservation under the HMP/OMSP will contribute to the long-term preservation of the species. Final 6-95 B-61 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. •to 39. San Diego Banded Gecko Coleonyx variegatus abbotti Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: B-17 Range This subspecies occurs in San Diego and Orange counties south into Baja California and may extend into parts of Los Angeles and Riverside counties (Stebbins 1985). m Habitat m It is found in chaparral habitat with rocky soils and boulder outcroppings and is P associated with riparian habitat. It is normally found under rocks, boards, and debris. HI P P The distribution of coastal banded gecko onsite is not well known due to its nocturnal habits. Approximately 515 acres (58%) of suitable habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 380 acres (427.) are in areas designated for development. The onsite conserved habitat includes ^ a majority of the best habitat, i.e. rock outcrops, for this species. The proposed offsite habitat conservation potentially will be beneficial. Onsite and offsite habitat conservation under the HCP/OMSP will be contribute to the long-term P preservation of this species. ^ P P P P B-62 Fina/6-95 • P Car/sbad^FtCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B 40. San Diego Horned Lizard Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP, T PLAN ID: A-23 The San Diego horned lizard is endemic to southern California and Baja California. Little information has been published on the ecology of the San Diego horned lizard. An excellent overview of the many unique aspects of horned lizard ecology Is provided by Pianka and Parker (1975). Scherbrooke (1981) presented a more popular account with excellent photographs of all of the species of horned lizards occurring in the United States. Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy San Diego horned lizards are dorso-ventrally flattened, spiny lizards with a circle of large spines or "horns" around the sides and rear margin of the head. In addition these lizards have a fringe of long pointed scales around the edge of the body and along the sides of the tail. These morphological characteristics are typical of all species of horned lizards; however the length of the head spines varies greatly from species to species. San Diego horned lizards vary in color from yellowish, reddish, brown, to gray. Their basic ground color often closely matches the local substrate. There are wavy dark blotches or bands on the back and a pair of large dark blotches on the neck. The underside is cream to bright yellow often with numerous dark spots (Stebbins 1985). Males have enlarged postanal scales. These lizards range in size from 2.5-4 inches in snout-vent length. The tail varies in proportion but averages approximately one half the snout-vent length. The horned lizards are members of the North American lizard family Phrynosomatidae (Frost and Etheridge 1989). There are 14 species in the genus Phynosoma which range from southwestern Canada south to Guatemala and from western Arkansas to the Pacific Coast (Stebbins 1985). There are four species of horned lizards in California but the California and San Diego horned lizards do not occur sympatrically with any of the other species. The subspecies P. c. blainvillii and P. c. frontale are not recognized by Stebbins (1985) but they are listed in the most recent edition of Collins' checklist (1990). The species relationships in the genus Phrynosoma have been investigated by several workers (e.g. Montanucci 1987, Preset 1969). Distribution within the United States The San Diego horned lizard ranges from the Transverse Ranges south, west of the deserts, to approximately Latitude 32: N. in Baja California, Mexico (Klauber 1936). These lizards occur from sea level to around 6500 feet above mean sea level in elevation. Final 6-95 B-63 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Historic Distribution Los Angeles County This species probably once occurred throughout Los Angeles County, exclusive of the deserts and the higher mountain areas. Orange County San Diego horned lizards probably, occurred throughout Orange County in areas of adequate habitat. Riverside County ^ This lizard probably occun-ed throughout western Riverside County with the exception of the higher mountain areas. San Diego horned lizards do not occur in the desert areas of the County but they are present at higher elevations in western Joshua Tree National Monument (Miller and Stebbins 1964). P Riverside County ^"^ Final 6-95 P P m m m San Bernardino County The San Diego horned lizard occurs in the southwestern portion of the San Bernardino County including the north-slope of the San Bernardino Mountains but exclusive of the higher areas of this range. San Diego County This lizard occurs from the upper desert slopes east to the desert. Current Distribution p p Los Angeles County Ml San Diego horned lizards are still found in many localities supporting relatively large areas of suitable habitat. Vast areas of former habitat in the Los Angeles *" Basin, San Fernando Valley, and other areas in Los Angeles County have been ^ converted to urban development, P Orange County P These lizards still occur in the Santa Ana Mountains and other areas supporting P relatively large tracts of suitable habitat; however, as in Los Angeles County, vast areas of former habitat in the lowlands have been converted to urban development. P m m San Diego horned lizards are still relatively common in many lowland areas; however urban and agricultural development are impacting large areas of habitat in the inland valleys west of the San Jacinto Mountains. • P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B San Bernardino County This species is probably still relatively common in areas supporting good ^ habitat; however most of the lowland areas within this species range in the IM county have been lost to urban development. IM San Diego County San Diego horned lizards are relatively common in many areas where suitable habitat remains. Large areas of habitat occur on public lands in the foothill zone of San Diego County. Population and Density Estimate Population and density are difficult to estimate because of the naturally tow densities that these lizards are presumed to occur in and they are difficult to find due to their cryptic coloration and behavior. During any given activity period, apparently only a portion of the population will be active (Brattstrom, pers. comm.). Long-term mark and recapture studies need to be undertaken to determine densities; however no such studies have been published to date. Habitat Requirements and Territory Size San Diego horned lizards require habitats with open areas for basking, scrub cover and mammal burrows for shelter and good populations of harvester ants (Pogonomyrmex spp.), their primary food. These lizards occur in coastal sage scrub, chaparral, open pine forest, and along washes and the edges of riparian woodland. Little is known concerning the size of the home range of the San Diego horned lizard. However, horned lizards in general appear to be relatively sedentary (Pianka and Parker 1975) Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success Egg Laying Little has been recorded on the specific egg laying sites and nest site characteristics of San Diego horned lizards. However, soil moisture, drainage, and ventilation as well as exposure to sun light are important factors for IM successful incubation (Sherbrook 1981). The eggs of horned lizards are laid in a burrow dug by the female. San Diego horned lizards apparently lay only one * clutch per year (Sherbrook 1981). Reproductive Success and Survivorship mm Horned lizard reproduction strategies are unusual among lizards (Pianka and *• Parker 1975). They typically lay large clutches of eggs or have large numbers of young. The amount of clutch or litter weights in relationship to female body are typically large compared to most other lizard species. There appears to be a Mi relatively high survival rate among adults but a high mortality of young. Little specific reproductive information has been published on the San Diego horned lizard. Stebbins (1985) reports clutch sizes ranging from 6-21 eggs laid from Final 6-95 B-65 m Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ———————————— April to June. Horned lizards apparently reach sexual maturity during the late summer of their first year but do not reproduce until the following spring (Pianka and Parker 1975). m Foraging Ecology m Horned lizards, including the San Diego horned lizard, are primarily "sit and •* wait" predators (Pianka 1986) that specialize on ants, especially harvester ants, m Some species of horned lizards specialize on certain species of harvester ants (Rissing 1981, Whitford and Bryant 1979). It is unknown if the San Diego Rp horned lizard specialize on a specific harvester ant species. Horned lizards have a large stomach volume compared to other lizards (Pianka and Parker *" 1975) and this is related to their specialized diet (i.e. ants) which is low in caloric value, * aw Decline Factors p The primary cause of decline in numbers of San Diego horned lizard is * undoubtedly habitat loss. Earlier in the century there was a demanded for "stuffed" horned lizards as curios and this lead to population decline in some P areas (e.g. Los Angeles basin) but this is not currently a factor in the decline of this lizard (Jennings 1987). Habitat Loss and Fragmentation P m As noted above, habitat loss is currently the major reason for declines in this species. Fragmentation of habitat is also probably important as well because of the naturally low population densities of San Diego horned lizards. Habitat Degradation p Ml San Diego horned lizards do not seem to tolerate the presence of human habitations in their area. These lizards are often absent near developments even m if good habitat is still present. The loss of harvester ant colonies from the areas surrounding developments due to human disturbance, pesticide use, etc., may '* be an important factor. P Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP • The San Diego horned lizard is widespread within the County but has only been * recorded from within Carlsbad at two localities. Approximately 510 acres (40%) P of suitable habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 760 acres (60%) are in areas designated for development, f Preserved habitat includes coastal sage scrub, chaparral, riparian woodland, and p floodplain scrub. Proposed offsite habitat conservation could potentially benefit the species. Onsite and potentially offsite conservation under the HCP/OMSP m will be contribute to the long-term preservation of the species. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management. P P P ^"^^ Final 6-95 P m m Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B non-native plant control (ice plant), and onsite management by a habitat manager. 41. San Diego Ringneck Snake Diadophis punctatus similis Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFC; Species of Special Concern OTHER: OSS PLAN ID: B-18 Range This snake occurs from southwestern San Bernardino County south Into Baja California, Mexico (Behier and King 1979). Habitat It prefers moist habitats and can be found in woodlands, forest, chaparral, farms and gardens. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no known records for this snake within Carisbad. Approximately 1,130 acres (66%) of potential habitat will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 585 acres (34%) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation also potentially could benefit the species. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management. •i and onsite management by. a habitat manager. 42. Silvery Legless Lizard Anniella nigra argentea mm ^ Sfafus ^ USFWS: None CDFG: Species of Special Concern *- OTHER: OSS PLAN ID: B-19 Final 6-95 B-6 7 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Range This species has a spotty distribution and ranges from near Antioch, Contra Costa County south along the Coast-Transverse and Peninsular ranges into Baja California, Mexico. Habitat This lizard occurs in leaf litter and loose soil in coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and open riparian habitats. It prefers sandy washes and beach dunes for burrowing. Logs and leaf litter are used for cover and feeding. Bush lupine {Lupinus iongifolius) is a good indicator of potential habitat (Stebbins 1985). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no records of this species' occurrence in Carlsbad. Approximately 110 acres (26%) of potential habitat for the species will be conserved In the plan area, and approximately 315 acres (74%) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation potentially would benefit the species. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing,.access control, small predator control through maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, water quality control measures, and onsite management by a habitat manager. 43. Southwestern Pond Turtle Clemmys marmorata pallida Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 1) CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: B-20 Range This subspecies is found from San Francisco Bay to northern Baja California, Mexico and west of the Sierra Nevada range (Stebbins 1985). Habitat It occurs in ponds, small lakes, marshes, slow moving streams, reservoirs, and sometimes brackish water. It is found most frequently in areas with dense vegetation and sunning areas around the water's edge (Stebbins 1985). P P P P P ^•^^ Final 6-95 P P .p m m Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 45 acres (96%) of potential habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and up to 2 acres (4%) are in areas designated for development. The HCP/OMSP could be beneficial to the species due to the preservation of majority of the riparian woodland habitat onsite and could contribute to ithe species' long-term preservation. There are no specific records for the turtle within the City. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control, riparian restoration, water quality control, and onsite management by a habitat manager. 44. Two-striped Garter Snake Thamnophis hammondii Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFC: Species of Special Concern OTHER: OSS PLAN ID: B-21 Range It ranges along coastal California from Salinas In Monterey County to northwest Baja Califomia. Ha6/faf The two-striped garter snake often occurs near permanent freshwater streams with rocky bottoms and riparian vegetation. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 45 acres (96%) of potential habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and up to 2 acres (4%) are in areas designated for development. The HCP/OMSP could be beneficial to the species due to the preservation of majority of the riparian woodland habitat onsite and could contribute to ithe species' long-term preservation. Final 6-95 B-69 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP £ Birds m P P 45. Bell's Sage Sparrow Amphispiza belli belli Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER: MBTA, NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-24 Sage sparrows are distributed across the western United States and Baja Califomia, Mexico. Bell's sage sparrow {Amphispiza belli belli) is one of five currently recognized subspecies of sage sparrow (johnson and Marten 1992). Bell's sage sparrow occurs along the coastal zone of California south of Marin County and northwestern Baja California. The four other subspecies occur on San Clemente Island {A. b. clementeae), within the foothill and mountain zone of Califomia (A. b. canescens), in central Baja California (A. b. cinerea), and throughout the western United States (A. b. nevadensis). for this section, all ^ references to the "sage sparrow" will refer to the sensitive Bell's subspecies. P Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy P P The sage sparrow is a member of family Emberizidae and subfamily Emberizinae. This sub-family includes 281 species currently placed in 69 m genera and has a worldwide distribution excepting extreme southeast Asia and Australia, although they have been introduced in New Zealand (Perrins and *" Middieton 1985). Members of genus Amphispiza are separated from other ^ genera in their subfamily by certain morphological differences. Some of the distinguishing physical characteristics include small bill, long tail, gray to brown coloration on upper surfaces, and a blackish tail with somewhat conspicuous white or light-colored edging (Ridgway 1901). Mi Appearance and Vocalizations p Sage sparrows have a gray-brown head, white eye-ring, white lore spot or ^ eyebrow and a broad white whisker stripe. Their underparts are white with a dark breast spot while their back is usually a dusty brown. The wings usually are buffy-brown and have faint wing bars. The juveniles are dull and dusky brown with heavy streaking. Sage sparrows generally have overall dari<er coloration than the other subspecies. Sage sparrows have a jumbled, finch-like song and they often twitch and wave their tail when singing. A characteristic habit Is to cock the tail quickly, then lower it slowly. They also have a call which consists of thin rising notes (NGS 1983). P P B-70 Final 6-95 P P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Size The sage sparrow is a medium-large sparrow about 4,8-5.6 inches in body length (Ridgway 1901). The average wing length (2.6 in) is slightly longer than the average tail length (2.5 in). Since the tail length averages around half of the total body length, the sage sparrow often has a well proportioned look. Taxonomy The sage sparrow and other congeneric species in our area are readily distinguishable from one another. Taxonomic work for the species was originally completed in 1852 by John Cassin. The subspecific identities of the sage sparrow were then subsequently reported (Ridgway 1901; Grinnell 1905; Mayr and Short 1970). The subspecies in our area is resident and sedentary and for the most part geographically isolated from its two closest neighbors, A. fa. clementeae of San Clemente Island and A. b. canescens of the San Joaquin Valley and northern Mojave Desert. During the nesting season, some sympatry of A. b. canescens and A. fa. fae//i does occur although the two subspecies have not been observed to interbreed Oohnson and Marten 1992). Recent taxonomic work (Johnson and Marten 1992) included an extensive genetic analysis on A. fa. fae//i/, A. fa. canescens, and A. fa. nevadensis. Their study found that the three subspecies are genetically isolated from each other and that A. fa. fae//ii and A. fa. canescens are the most closely related subspecies. Distribution within the United States Bell's sage sparrow occurs from the foothills of the California and northern Baja California coast ranges to the western slope of the central Sierra Nevada in California. Records of the past and present distribution of Bell's sage sparrow were gleaned from Willet (1912), Willet (1933), Crinnel and Miller (1944), Sexton and Hunt (1979), Garret and Dunn (1981), Unitt (1984), and Gray and Bramlet (1991). Specimen collection citings are from the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology in Los Angeles. Historic Distribution Ventura County Localities of record include Mt. Pinos and Santa Paula. They were also locally resident on the chaparral covered hills of the Los Padres National Forest and western Santa Monica Mountains. Los Angeles County Specimens were collected from Newhall and the San Fernando Valley. Recorded observations had been made in Claremont and the Los Angeles Basin, They were also locally resident within the western Santa Monica Mountains, and mentioned as a common breeding bird in the Simi Valley. Orange County Recorded locations are limited to the coastal slopes of the San Joaquin Hills. Final 6-95 B-71 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Riverside County Recorded locations include the vicinity of Riverside and the Jurupa Mountains east to the vicinity of Sunnymead and Beaumont. They were also recorded in the foothills of the San Jacinto Mountains in the vicinity of Cabezon, Kenworthy, and as high in elevation as Tahquitz Valley and Round Valley. San Bernardino County Recorded localities are mostly from the Pacific slope of the San Bernardino Mountains. Eggs were collected from Colton in 1906, and breeding individuals were observed around San Bernardino close to the same time, San Diego County Recorded localities include Julian, Campo, Ocean Beach, Poway, Escondido, the mouth of the Tijuana River and the vicinity of El Cajon. They also had a spotty distribution in the coastal zone and extended up Palomar Mountain and east to Banner Grade, Scissors Crossing, and Hipass. Current Distribution Since no recent intensive studies have been coordinated to assess current distribution for Bell's sage sparrow, data is not available for most counties. Ventura County No current data available, but large tracts of land where it historically'resided still remain. The Simi Valley has been the most developed and the species decline is probably most significant in this region. •Los Angeles County They have probably been extirpated from the Los Angeles Basin and much of the San Fernando Valley due to urban development. No current distributional information is available for the still undeveloped areas of its historic range in this county. Orange County Current assessments record the status of Bell's sage sparrow as locally rare. This county is a major center for urban growth and although the population may have a few strongholds left, much of its historic range has probably been converted from preferred habitat by development. Riverside and San Bernardino Counties No current data is available, but Bell's sage sparrows probably still inhabit much of their historical range. However, much habitat conversion has occurred within these counties in the past 50 years and some localized populations may be extirpated. m m P P m m m m p P ^•72 Final 6-95 P Car/sbad-fiCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B San Diego County The coastal population of sage sparrows is nearly lost but the foothill population is largely intact. The foothill zone, where they were most numerous in the past, has remained largely undeveloped and so sage sparrows are probably still thriving throughout this part of their range. Population and Density Estimates No current population and density estimates have been published. Habitat Type and Distribution Sage sparrows inhabit chaparral and sage scrub in dry and sunny stands. They may also occasionally be found in other arid shrubby habitats such as cismontane juniper woodland and alluvial fan scrub. These habitats are distributed widely over much of the foothill and coastal lowland zone in all of the counties discussed above (CDFG 1988). Sage sparrow populations are spotty and infrequent and there are large tracts of seemingly suitable habitat in which they are not present. Territory Size No actual spatial data have been compiled for the size of sage sparrow territories. Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success The information presented below comes from the work of Ehriich, et al. (1988) and NGS (1983). The sage sparrow is monogamous. Like most passerines, new pair-bonds are formed and last through the entire breeding season. Nests are usually placed in sagebrush. Nests are constructed from a variety of materials including twigs, grass, forbs, bark, and other fine materials. The nest is cup-shaped and placed up to 3,3 feet high in a shrub or less frequently on the ground. No data is available about whether one or both individuals in a mated pair help to build the nest. The clutch size is two to four and the eggs are bluish-white marked with dark browns or black. Incubation takes 13 to 16 days and it is unknown which sex, if either, is the primary incubator. Nestlings are born altricial, and usually will fledge in 9 to 11 days. It is unknown whether one or both parents help to rear the fledglings. The young are fed insects. The sage sparrow is an uncommon host for the brown headed cowbird {Molothrus ater). Due to their nesting close to the ground, they probably are more susceptible to mammal and snake predation. At this time, no data are available concerning reproductive productivity. Final 6-95 B-73 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ Foraging Ecology The sage sparrow feeds on insects primarily, including spiders, but may ^ occasionally forage for seeds (Ehriich, et al. 1988). It generally feeds on the ground but may also glean its food from the foliage of nearby plants. Typical plant species associated with this bird's foraging habitats include chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum) and California sagebrush (Artemes/a californica). * mm Decline Factors m Habitat Loss and Fragmentation ^ Conversion of large tracts of habitat into urban centers and agriculture is the m main threat to this species. Southern California, particularly the coastal foothill zone, has been heavily impacted by development. The resulting fragmentation and elimination of local populations may eventually lead to this species decline. Due to its spotty distribution, and sedentary habits, it is assumed that loss of habitat will result in fragmentation and reduction of populations. This may in turn threaten population viability throughout its range. m Habitat Degradation This does not seem to be a major factor in the apparent decline of this species, p since they exhibit strong site tenacity even in the face of disturbances. ^ P Cowbird Parasitism Since favored sage sparrow habitat is generally far removed from cowbird foraging habitat, cowbird brood parasitism probably will continue to have only a minor impact on this species. m Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP m Approximately 510 acres (40%) of suitable habitat for this species will be ^ conserved in the plan area, and approximately 760 acres (60%) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation could be m beneficial to the species. Onsite and potentially offsite conservation under the ^ HCP/OMSP/OMSP would contribute to the long-term preservation of this species. P Conservation/Management Measures ** Management measures include fencing, access control, maintenance of healthy W coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity • offsite, cowbird removal, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. p P B-74 Fina/6-95 P P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B 46. Burrowing Owl Speotyto cunicularia Status USFWS: None CDFG; Species of Special Concern OTHER: MBTA, T PLAN ID: A-25 The burrowing owl (Speotyto cunicularia hypugaea) of North America was, prior to 1976, placed within the monotypic genus Speotyto but because of its close morphological and ecological similarities to the Old World little owl (Athene nocta) it was reclassified to the genus Athene (A.O.U. 1976). Genetic karyotypic studies conducted during the mid-1980s suggest that the burrowing owl and the Old World little owl are genetically distina, thus, the burrowing owl was once again placed within Speotyo by the American Ornithologists' Union (Schmutz, Maker, and Schmutz 1989; A.O.U. 1991). The burrowing owl is fossorial (underground) which makes it unique among all other owl species of the world. In North America the burrowing owl is generally restricted to flat, open expanses of short grass-prairies, semi-desert, coastal plains, and more recently, farmlands, fallow fields, airports, and golf courses. Current and historical geographical distribution of burrowing owls in North America is from the interior Canadian plains south to southern Louisiana and Central America, and extending west to several small islands off the coast of California and Baja California, Mexico. Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy The burrowing owl is a member of the "typical owl" (Strigidae) family which consist of all North American owl species with the-exception of the barn owl (Tyto alba). Characteristics of the "typical owl" family include a raptor-like predatory life style, large head, immobile eyes, and a feather structure that enables them to achieve nearly soundless flight. Unlike the other "typical owls", burrowing owls are primarily diurnal (day active) and crepuscular (dawn and dusk) hunters (Thomsen 1971). Approximately 18-20 subspecies occur within the single species Speotyto cunicularia and all exhibit plumage of similar color and pattern, bulbous nostrils, and long slender tarsi which are sparsely covered with short hair-like feathers. Appearance and Vocalizations Because of its diurnal life style and open expanse habitats, burrowing owls are one of the easiest North American owls to observe. These owls are often seen standing erect on a fence post, raised mounds of dirt, or near the entrance to one of their burrows. Their attentive large yellow eyes, rounded head, long naked legs, and dull brown and white barred and spotted plumage is distinctive among all other North American owls. Final 6-95 B-75 p Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP » Seven different vocal field communications were described by Thomsen (1971) * in her three year study of a burrowing owl colony near the Oakland airport and * correspond to vocalizations noted by Coulumbe's (1971) study of burrowing owls in Imperial County, California. • Chuck: A sharp single note given in conjunction with a profound bow This vocalization was used when the owl was flushed away from its burrow and is P believed to function as a means of drawing a potential predator's attention away p form the nest burrow. The "chuck" is also thought to function as a warning contact signal to a mate and/or its young. ip Chuck<hatter: A series of 2-6 chucks given in conjunction with a profound bow and followed immediately by a chatter of 5-8 notes and repeated up to eight times. This vocalization is given under circumstances of increased agitation * requiring somewhat more than a "chuck" call. Chatter: A rapid series of "chuck" notes used to warn the young of an P approaching intruder. The pitch and frequency of the chatter call increases as m the intruder comes closer to the nest burrow. This call usually coincides with the emergence of young from the nest. 1^ Primary song: A mellow, flute-like "Whea-woo-who-woo-who" given * exclusively by the male. This call is heard most often during the early morning hours, and is used as a territorial call and/or to attract a prospective mate. * Rasp: A sound similar to radio static is used by the female during courtship, as an all clear signal to the young, and as a contact location call after the young P have left the burrow. ^ Rattlesnake: A sound which mimics the warning rattle of rattlesnakes (Crotalus •» spp.). This call is given by both adults and juveniles when threatened in the nest. This call is believed to act as a deterrent to potential predators. Warble: A series of mellow, liquid notes, sounding like a northern flicker ** (Colaptes auratus). This call was believed to used as a greeting between *" burrowing owl pairs. m Size ^ The burrowing owl is the only North American owl exhibiting reversed sexual p size dimorphism, with the male averaging approximately 103-105 percent body ^ weight (4-6.5 oz), 101 percent wing length, 103 percent tail, 102 percent bill, 105 percent tarsus greater than an average female (Thomsen 1971). In general, mm the tail is short (3.0-3.5 in), and wings are large with the male averaging 6.6 inches and females 6.5 inches (Earhart and Johnson, 1970). Taxonomy P Throughout both North and South America there are currently 18-20 recognized subspecies of Speotyto cunicularia, but only two subspecies (5. c. hypugaea, S. c. floridana) are found in North America. Research is currently underway to determine if burrowing owls restricted to the Pacific Coast are a distinct subspecies (Collins pers. comm.). There appears to be no intersubspeclfic genetic flow with burrowing owl populations east of the Rocky Mountains. P P P P ^•^^ Fina/6-95 P P Car/sfaad-FiCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Banding studies conducted near the Oakland airport suggest that migration among the west coast populations may actually represent seasonal movements and not typical migration (Thomsen 1971). Evidence in support of at least minimal migration within the coastal population reported that two burrowing owls banded at the Seal Beach location in Orange County were subsequently recovered in Ensenada and San Quintin in Baja California (Collins pers. comm.). The nearest relative to the burrowing owl is the Old World little owl which is only partially terrestrial. In North America, the elf owl (Micrathene whitneyi) is the burrowing owl's closest relative. Distribution within the United States Three distinct populations of burrowing owls occur within the continental United States; the small and isolated population of the Florida subspecies; the great plains population that extends from Manitoba Canada, south to Louisiana and west to the Rocky Mountains; and the population which extends from the arid southern interior of British Columbia, east to the Rocky Mountains and south to the Arizona and California Mexican border. Distribution of burrowing owls is restricted to essentially flat, open country with suitable nest sites. With the exception of the Florida subspecies, which digs its own burrow, the North American burrowing owl acquires its burrows from various burrowing mammals, either through abandonment or eviction. In California, burrowing owls are restricted to the central valley extending from Redding south to the Grapevine, east through the Mojave Desert and west to San Jose, the San Francisco Bay area, the outer coastal foothills area which extend from Monterey south to San Diego and the Sonoran desert. Historical Distribution The largest western burrowing owl population occurred within the Great Plains. This large population corresponded to the vast expanses of prairie inhabited by black-tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus) whose burrows formed the primary nest sites of burrowing owls. One of these prairie dog towns in Texas allegedly extended over 39,000 square miles and contained over 100 million prairie dogs. In Oklahoma, two prairie dog towns once covered over one million acres, but in 1968 these two prairie dog towns covered less than 9,522 Ml acres or one percent of the original area (Butts 1973). Similar trends exist throughout the rest of the Great Plains burrowing owl population. ^ In California, burrowing owl populations were probably never as numerous as in the Great Plains area, but according to historical reports, burrowing owls ^ prior to 1945 were considered common to abundant (Crinnel and Miller 1944). No exact numbers are available, but museum collections clearly indicate a *•* much wider California geographical distribution than occurs today (Crinnel and Miller 1944). MM Current Distribution *" A three year intensive burrowing owl population survey is being conducted by ^ The Institute for Bird Populations. This study of the current burrowing owl population as well as population trends since 1970 was begun in 1991 and will mm be completed in 1993. The 1991 population study focused on the Central Final 6-95 B-77 PI p ^PP^"<^'^^ Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Valley, the outer coast of central California and the San Francisco Bay area. Thrs focus area was chosen due to the large concentrated population historically found in this region of the State. Results of the first year study indicate a 61.7 percent population decline since 1970 with complete extirpation from Sonoma, * Marin, Santa Cruz, and Napa counties (DeSante, et al. 1992). Population P estimates from southern California indicate that breeding burrowing owl populations have been extirpated from Los Angeles and Orange counties p (DeSante pers, comm.). In recent years, the inland desert areas of San ||| Bernardino, Riverside and Imperial counties have shown similar population declines (DeSante pers. comm.). No data currently exists for the burrowing owl populations in Mexico, but it is generally believed that its numbers have also L declined here (Collins pers. comm.). In San Diego County, population estimates range between 12 and 24 with a stable population being successfully managed on the U.S. Naval Air Station located in the City of Coronado (Winchell pers. comm.). p Population and Density Estimates P P According to the results of the central California 1991 burrowing owl census, the estimated population for the entire central California area was 1,088 pairs • (DeSante, et al. 1992). According to anecdotal information, population C declines and current estimates for the remainder of the State are significantly lower. This is primarily related to the fact that historical populations in southern California being lower than those in central California, and the greater loss of P suitable habitat through development. • Habitat Requirements and Territory Size " p In general, burrowing owl habitat is composed of large open expanses of short grass or sparsely vegetated areas on gently rolling or level terrain with an * abundance of active small mammal burrows. These areas may include cut banks, irrigation dikes, arroyos, grasslands, prairies, farmlands, fallow fields, and empty urban lots. mm Territory size is directly proportional to the available habitat and more specifically burrow availability. Territory boundaries varied, but were generally ^ found to be at a distance approximately half way between occupied nest burrows ahomsen 1971). Territorial defense is greatest during the nesting season and continues until the young have successfully fledged. The male is the more vigorous territorial defender, but physical contact with an intruder is rarely • employed. Defense of the nesting territory against intruders was limited to the immediate area around the active nesting burrow. In contrast, the home range and foraging areas (which could range up to 1.5 miles away from the nesting territory) was shared with other burrowing owls without any territorial display (Butts 1971). P Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success m Pair Formation P Migratory burrowing owls of the Great Plains form pairs upon arrival at the * nesting grounds in March or April (Martin 1973). Non-migratory burrowing owls of California fonn pairs in December and most of the breeding owls P P ^•^^ Final 6-95 P P Car/sfaad-FiCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B complete pair formation by late February (Thomsen 1971). In Martin's (1973) study of migratory burrowing owls in New Mexico, none of the returning banded owls retained their original mates. This suggested that migratory burrowing owls do not form permanent pairs. In contrast, the non-migratory burrowing owls studied by Thomsen (1971) in the Oakland, California area did not maintain rigid pair bonds, but approximately 50 percent of the returning owls did retain the previous years' mate. Burrow Selection and Nest Building Burrow selection begins shortly after pair formation or upon arrival on to breeding grounds In the case of the migratory burrowing owl. Burrow selection activities are carried out at dusk or during the night. Usually several burrows are selected for renovation, but only one is selected for use as the nest. The satellite burrows are usually found within the immediate vicinity of the nest burrow within the owls defended territory. Burrows used in previous years are commonly reused after minor renovation. The most important aspect in burrow selection is the presence of abundant active small mammal burrows within the area. Selected burrows were renovated by the removal of loose dirt and material from the floor and sides. Burrow excavation is accomplished by moving through the burrow with outstretched wings, backward scratching with the feet, and bill- digging (Best 1969; Martin 1973; Thomsen 1971), Burrow entrances are always slightly sloped at a 15 to 50 percent slope. Burrow dimensions were essentially the same with the tunnel entrance being approximately 4,7 inches high and 4.7 inches wide, four feet long, and the nest chamber 9.8 inches wide, 3.9 to 5.9 inches high and roughly circular or oblong (Butts 1971). The nest chamber is lined with cow, horse, or other shredded mammal dung or as in the burrows located near a golf course in Oakland grass divots (Butts 1971; Thomsen 1971), Egg Laying Egg laying occurs from late March to early May with the majority of burrowing P owls having completed egg laying by the middle of May. Clutch size varies from six to eleven with an average of seven to nine. Incubation begins after the * first egg is laid and lasts approximately four weeks. The female develops the ^ brood patch and is entirely responsible for the incubation process. The male remains near the burrow entrance, protecting the nesting territory against M potential predators and bringing food to the female (Butts 1971; Coulombe 1971; Thomsen 1971; Martin, 1973). ^ Fledging Ml Of the average of seven to nine eggs per burrowing owl pair, the average number juveniles that are successfully fledged is 3.2 (Thomsen 1971). At approximately two weeks after hatching, the young can be observed being fed ^ by the adults at the burrow entrance. At three weeks the owlets become very active, preening, stretching, wing flapping, and practice prey killing by m pouncing on dead insects. At four weeks, the owlets have begun to fly and have become proficient enough to accompany the adults on foraging trips (Martin 1973). Final 6-95 B-79 m Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ Nest and Fledgling Predation IM Nestling and fledgling mortality ranges from 19 to 35 percent, with the surviving young usually being the heavier of the fledglings (Thomsen 1971). Potential * predators of both adults and fledglings include skunks (Mephitis spp.), badgers P (Taxidea taxus), coyotes (Canis latrans), bobcats (Lynx rufus), weasels {Mustela spp.), domestic cats and dogs, barn owls (Tyto alba), red-tailed hawks (Buteo P yamaicensis), prairie falcons (Faico mexicanus), Swainson's hawk (Buteo ^ swa/nsoni), ferruginous hawks (Buteo regalis), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), golden eagels (Aquila chrysaetos), great horned owls (Bufao virg/nianus), gopher gp, snakes {Pltuophis catenifer), and rattlesnakes (Crotalus spp.). m Foraging Ecology ^ Foraging occurs primarily just prior to and just after sunrise or sunset. During • the nesting season when young owls are still being fed, the adult owls have another foraging peak just prior to mid-day and during the night. Foraging techniques include ground foraging which consists of short flights and running m along the ground; observation foraging, which utilizes an elevated perch from where prey is spotted and dropped upon; hovering, which utilizes a kiting type p of stationary flight from where prey is dropped upon; and on rare occasions the flycatching technique (Thomsen 1971). The burrowing owl's prey base includes a wide variety of invertebrates, small mammals, juvenile birds, lizards, small snakes, frogs, crayfish, juvenile desert tortoise, and even fledgling burrowing owls. The burrowing owl prey base changes according to seasonal availability, with invertebrates forming the bulk of their diet during the winter and small vertebrates forming the dietary bulk during the spring and early summer (Robinson 1954; Coulumbe 1971; Marti 1974). P P P Decline Factors »>*> Burrowing owls were once abundant throughout their North American range, but the cumulative loss of habitat secondary to agriculture and development, and intensive government sanctioned small mammal eradication programs, have resulted in significant burrowing owl population declines. Habitat Loss, Fragmentation, and Degradation *" The availability of numerous small mammal burrows is a major factor in determining whether an area with apparently suitable habitat will support burrowing owls (Coulumbe 1971). This situation is particularly evident in the P Great Plains where intensive government sanctioned black-tailed prairie dog eradication programs have had dramatic impacts on the once prolific prairie dog p populations (Zarn 1974). This eradication has also seriously decreased the populations of animals like the black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) and burrowing owl that are dependent on these rodents for food and shelter. The West Coast burrowing owl habitats have been similarly reduced by large scale eradication of ground squirrel (Spermophilus spp.) populations. The primary impact to the West Coast burrowing owl populations has been the conversion of large tracts of previously occupied habitat to agriculture, and industrial and residential development. As stated above, recent burrowing owl census of the central California populations indicate a 61.7 percent decrease since 1970. At this rate of decline (three percent per year) the remaining population of B-80 Final 6-95 P P P Car/sfaad-FiCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B burrowing owls will become extirpated from the West Coast in less than 50 years (DeSante 1992). Natural Occurrences Natural declines in burrowing owl populations include natural predation as mentioned above under "Nest and Fledgling Predation" and natural population cycles. These natural population cycles may be influenced by periodic fluctuations in food availability, climatic extremes, or parasitic infestation and disease. As the burrowing population continues to decline, such natural populations impacts could potentially accelerate the species into extirpation or even extinction in a very short time. Conclusions Within the plan area, the exact status of the burrowing owl population is unknown. Burrowing owl sign (fresh pellets and recently occupied burrows) were observed on the Northwest site in the vicinity of ruderal fields and an offsite agricultural area. No birds were observed and the site is likely used only during migration. This area is currently not part of the planned open space and all of the burrowing owl habitat onsite will be impacted. The exact number of burrowing owls using this area is not known, but given the size of the area (less than 10 acres) not more than one pair of burrowing would be expected. If the current population estimates for San Diego County are accurate at no more than 24 pair (Unitt pers. comm.), the loss of the one pair on the Northwest site would represent a loss of four percent of the County's remaining burrowing owl population. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 55 acres (16%) of the habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 280 acres (84%) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation may yield some additional benefits for this species. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, cowbird removal, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. 47. California Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris actia Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG; Species of Special Concern OTHER: MBTA, NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: B-22 Final 6-95 B-81 Appendix B Car/sbad^FLCA HCP/OMSP J Range * MR The California homed lark occurs in the coastal lowlands and foothills west of the mountains in southern Califomia. A resident population breeds in southern * California, and there is a large migrating winter population (Unitt 1984). This • bird is known to occur along the northern edge of Batiquitos Lagoon in Carlsbad. m Habitat The California horned lark occurs in sandy, ocean or bay shores, on bare ground, or among low herbaceous plants on mesas or disturbed areas in grassland and open agricultural land. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 55 acres (177o) of the habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 275 acres (84%) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation may yield some additional benefits for this species. There will be a limited and incremental loss of foraging habitat for this species on Northwest and no impacts to the foraging habitat on Rancheros-Southeast II. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, maintenance of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, cowbird removal, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. 48. Coastal California Gnatcatcher Polioptila californica californica Status USFWS: Threatened (with Special 4(d) Rule) CDFC: Species of Special Concern OTHER: MBTA, NCCP, T PLAN ID: A-26 P P P P P P P Ml P P P P P P ii P IM P P The coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) is one of three currently recognized subspecies of California gnatcatcher and the only one that occurs in the United States. The other two subspecies-(P. c. afafareviata and P. c. margaritae) occur in the central and southern portions of the Baja peninsula, respectively (American Ornithologists' Union [AOU] 1957; Atwood * 1988, 1990; United States Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1991). For • purposes of this report, all further reference to the "California gnatcatcher" is to the subspecies proposed for Federal listing unless otherwise noted. P P P P ^"^^ Final 6-95 P P Car/5bad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy The genus Polioptila is a distinqtive, easily recognized group of small long-tailed songbirds that are associated with the thrush family Muscicapidae. The plumage of birds in this genus is predominantly gray, with varying amounts of black on the head and white on the outer tail feathers. The genus shows little phenetic divergence among its component species (Atwood 1990). Appearance and Vocalizations The California gnatcatcher is a small passerine with dark blue-gray plumage above and grayish white below. Its tail is mostly black above and below. The male has a distinctive black cap which is absent during the winter. Both sexes have a distinctive white eye-ring. Vocalizations include a call consisting of a rising and falling series of three kitten-like mew notes (National Geographic Society 1983). Atwood (1988) found vocal differences to be important in maintaining reproductive isolation between the California gnatcatcher and the black-tailed gnatcatcher {Polioptila melanura) in the few areas where they come into geographic contact with one another. Atwood's (1991) more detailed description of the plumage coloration of the California gnatcatcher is as follows: The underparts are dark gray becoming slightly paler on the throat, the center of the abdomen, and undertail coverts. The upperparts, including hindneck, back, scapulars, lesser wing coverts, and rump, are very dark gray. The wings are dark and brownish. The leading edges of the primaries and secondaries are edged with pale gray. The crown is a uniform glossy black. A white eye-ring, which is incomplete and usually limited to the area below the eye, is present. The upper tall coverts and rectrices one through four are black. Rectrix five is mainly black, tipped with approximately one millimeter (mm) of white and with the outer vane showing very limited or no white edging. Rectrix six is mainly black, tipped with approximately .08 inches of white and the outer 50 percent of the outer vane is white. The tail spot on rectrices five and six is shaped such that the length of the white from the feather tip along the shaft is less than from the feather tip along the inner vane. Atwood (1991) also described the coloration of the soft parts of the California gnatcatcher. The maxilla are black, with the tip of the mandible being black and becoming paler gray at the base. The tarsus is a blackish color, and the foot pad is a pale brownish gray. The coastal California gnatcatcher is distinguished from the other two subspecies, P. c. afafareviata and P. c. margaritae, by having darker body plumage, less white on rectrices five and six, and a longer tail (Atwood 1991). Size The California gnatcatcher weighs approximately 0.2 ounce (USFWS 1991). The mean body dimensions of the adult gnatcatcher are body plus tail length, 4.3 inches; wing length, 1.8 inches; tail length, 1.9 inches ; exposed culmen. Final 6-95 B-83 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP 9.9 0.4 inches; and tarsus plus middle toe, 1.04 inches (USFWS 1991; Atwood 1991). Taxonomy The California gnatcatcher is morphologically quite similar to the black-tailed gnatcatcher of the desert regions of the southwest United States and Mexico. Only recently have the two species been shown conclusively to be specifically distinct (Atwood 1988). The California gnatcatcher was originally described as a distinct species (Brewster 1881). However, despite recognition (Grinnell 1904) that the vocalizations of the Califomia gnatcatcher and the black-tailed gnatcatcher are very different, Grinnell (1926) proposed that the two forms were conspecific based upon morphological similarity of birds from the Cape region of Baja California, Mexico, to those from the desert regions of Arizona and southeastern California, The fourth and fifth editions of the AOU checklist (AOU 1931, 1957) followed Grinnell's 1926 treatment and considered the California gnatcatcher to be a subspecies of the black-tailed gnatcatcher. Rea (1983) and Unitt (1984) both alluded to the possibility that the California gnatcatcher and the black-tailed gnatcatcher were distinct species based on their vocal differences, but provided no in-depth taxonomic analysis. Based on a rigorous examination of vocalization, morphological, and phenotypic data, Atwood (1988) concluded that the California gnatcatcher was specifically distinct from the black-tailed gnatcatcher. This conclusion was subsequently adopted by the AOU Check-List Committee (AOU 1989) and represents the presently accepted scientific opinion regarding the taxonomic status of the California gnatcatcher (Atwood 1990; USFWS 1991). Although the California gnatcatcher and the black-tailed gnatcatcher occur , sympatrically in limited areas of northeastern Baja California (Atwood 1988), the ranges of the two species are quite distinct geographically. The California ' gnatcatcher is distributed from coastal southern California south in the lowland areas of Baja California south to Cabo San Lucas. The black-tailed gnatcatcher ' occurs in the Sonoran and Chihuahuan deserts of the southwestern United States, northeastern Baja California, and mainland Mexico (Atwood 1990). The fifth edition of the AOU checklist (AOU 1957) recognized three subspecies within the range of gnatcatchers now considered representative of the California gnatcatcher. Atwood (1988) suggested that only two subspecies of California gnatcatcher should be recognized: P. c. californica, distributed from southern California south to the Cape region of Baja California, and P. c. margaritae, distributed south of approximately 28 degrees north latitude. However, Atwood's (1988) conclusion concerning subspecies' limits in the California ' gnatcatcher was based on a flawed statistical treatment (Banks 1989; Johnson > 1989) and has been retracted by Atwood as a result of further analysis (Atwood 1990) . Atwood (1991) recommends that the distribution limits and naming of the California gnatcatcher revert to that initially proposed by Grinnell (1926) and be , described as follows. B-B4 Final 6-95 * p Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Polioptila c. californica resides from coastal southern California south into northwestern Baja California to approximately 30 degrees north latitude (El Rosario). P. c. margaritae resides in central Baja California from 30 degrees north latitude south to approximately 24 degrees north latitude (La Paz). P. c. afafareviata resides in southern Baja California from 24 degrees north latitude south throughout the Cape region. Distribution within the United States In the United States, the California gnatcatcher is restricted to the arid coastal plain of southern California, where it occurs in remnant patches of coastal sage scrub located below 2,000 feet elevation (Atwood 1980, 1988). The underlying cause of this restriction to lowland areas is unknown, but probably involves changes in the floristic composition of the sage scrub communities that occur near 820 feet in coastal areas (Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego counties) and near 1,640 feet in inland localities (Riverside County (Atwood 1990). Historic Distribution The estimated historic range of the California gnatcatcher in the United States represents approximately 41 percent of the subspecies' total latitudinal distribution and approximately 50 percent of the linear extent of the subspecies' range when crudely measured along the coastlines of southern California and Baja California (Atwood 1990). Comparison of the actual extent of the historic distribution of the California gnatcatcher in southern California versus Baja California can only be approximate because the subspecies' habitat has always been somewhat discontinuous (Grinnell and Miller 1944; Atwood 1980). Regardless of the current abundance or distributional limits of the California gnatcatcher in the United States versus Mexico, there is strong evidence that most of the subspecies' historic range was located in southern California rather than Baja California (Atwood 1990). Using the 800 feet contour line as an approximate upper boundary delineating those areas that might potentially have supported the California gnatcatcher prior to human development, a geographic information system (CIS) analysis (Atwood 1992) indicates that approximately 65 percent of the historic range of the California gnatcatcher may have occurred in the United States as opposed to Mexico. Ventura County Few records of the California gnatcatcher exist from Ventura County. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, egg sets and specimens were collected along the Santa Clara River drainage near the towns of Santa Paula, Ventura, and Fillmore, as well as in the Simi Valley (Atwood 1990). Los Angeles County The California gnatcatcher was once common and widespread from the San Fernando Valley east along the base of the San Gabriel Mountains to Claremont and at the lower elevations of the San Jose, Los Coyotes, and Palos Verdes hills. No California gnatcatcher records are known from the Santa Monica Mountains Final 6-95 B-85 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP despite the fact that coastal sage scrub occurs throughout this region (Atwood 1990). Orange County Historic (pre-1960) records of the California gnatcatcher in Orange County are few, being limited to the West Coyote Hills and Laguna. However, observations made since 1960 suggest that the species was historically m distributed throughout much of Orange County at elevations less than 820 feet (Atwood 1990). ^ Riverside County Historic occurrences of the California gnatcatcher in Riverside County include * Corona, Riverside, Menifee Valley, Mockingbird Canyon, Pedley, Cabazon, "» Valle Vista, Banning, and the Jurupa and Box Springs Mountains (Atwood 1990). m Several specimen records of the California gnatcatcher were obtained in the early 1900s from Palm Springs, suggesting that the subspecies may have li regularly passed over the San Gorgonio Pass and into this area, where the black- tailed gnatcatcher Is common (Grinnell 1904; Atwood 1988). Although Palm ** Springs has probably never been part of the California gnatcatcher's regular _ geographic range, the occasional appearance of the California gnatcatcher on the eastern side of San Gorgonio Pass may reflect historically higher population levels near Banning, Cabazon, and the San Jacinto Valley (Atwood 1990). San Bernardino County ^ Historic records of the California gnatcatcher in San Bernardino County are known from the vicinities of Colton, Reche Canyon, and San Bernardino near Lytle Creek Wash. All of these localities occur between 820 and 1,640 feet elevation (Atwood 1990), ^ San Diego County ^ The California gnatcatcher was historically distributed throughout most of the lowland areas of San Diego County west of the Laguna Mountains. Early records were concentrated near San Diego (including Point Loma), National City, the San Pasqual Valley, La Mesa, El Cajon, Bonita, and Escondido (Atwood 1990). Current Distribution The distribution of the California gnatcatcher in the United States was somewhat localized even prior to the agricultural and uri^an development of southern California (Atwood 1990) probably due to the patchy nature of sage scrub habitat. This patchy distributional pattern of sage scrub and the California gnatcatcher has been accentuated by the agricultural and urban development of southern California. Ml P P P IM The California gnatcatcher has been extirpated from at least 42 sites of its former distribution. Declines have been most dramatic in Ventura, Los Angeles, San p P B-86 F/na/6-95 P P HI Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Bernardino, and Riverside counties. Populations have also been diminished in Orange and San Diego counties, but the vague locality descriptions of historic sites of populations in these counties make it difficult to confidently identify areas where local extinctions have taken place (Atwood 1990). Ventura County There are no confirmed records of the California gnatcatcher occurring in Ventura County since 1924. A slight possibility exists that very small numbers of California gnatcatchers persist in the Santa Clara River drainage of Ventura County; with the complete or near complete extirpation of the subspecies from inland Los Angeles County, pairs that may exist in Ventura County are fully isolated from other southern California populations (Atwood 1990). Los Angeles County Actual population levels of the California gnatcatcher in Los Angeles County prior to the region's urban development are unknown. However, the magnitude of the subspecies' decline in the county is probably reflected by the fact that over 96 percent of the total low-elevation (less than 820 feet) acreage in Los Angeles County that might historically have supported the CaHfornia gnatcatcher has been largely or entirely developed. There are no confirmed, post-1985 records of the species from San Fernando, Azusa, or Claremont (Atwood 1990). The only major California gnatcatcher population known to remain in Los Angeles County is located on the Palos Verdes peninsula. All known California gnatcatcher populations presently remaining in Los Angeles County are fully isolated from other portions of the subspecies' range in southern California. Even on a local level the Palos Verdes peninsula populations are highly fragmented, with most remnant patches of coastal sage scrub in this area being completely surrounded by housing developments (Atwood 1990). Orange County In Orange County, recent (1960-1984) and current (1985-1990) observations are concentrated near Irvine, Mission Viejo, Dana Point, and Orange; however, the California gnatcatcher probably occurs throughout much of the remaining undeveloped lowland areas of Orange County (Atwood 1990). Riverside County In Riverside County, the California gnatcatcher has been extirpated from the cities of Riverside, Banning, Cabazon, and Valle Vista (Atwood 1980). Recent (1960-1984) and current (1985-1990) records are concentrated south and west of Lake Mathews and northwest of Perris. Observations of the California gnatcatcher in Riverside County generally show the distribution to be between 250 and 500 m elevations. San Bernardino County The California gnatcatcher has been largely or entirely extirpated from San Bernardino County. Recent confirmed observations of the California gnatcatcher in San Bernardino County are limited to a single bird seen in 1990 near the confluence of Cajon Wash and Lytle Creek Wash. Extremely small Final 6-95 B-87 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP numbers may remain in the Lytle Creek Wash area and, possibly, near the Jurupa Mountains on the border between San Bernardino and Riverside counties. Like any California gnatcatchers that may persist in Ventura County or inland Los Angeles County, remnant populations in San Bernardino, if they exist at all, are completely isolated from larger source populations and therefore extremely vulnerable (Atwood 1990). San Diego County The California gnatcatcher still occurs in many areas of San Diego County. However, sites of known recent occurrence are rapidly shrinking and becoming increasingly isolated from one another (Atwood 1990). Population Estimates Estimates of population sizes of small passerines that may vary in density throughout a geographically extensive range are difficult to make. Previously, Atwood (1980) speculated that the number of Califomia gnatcatchers remaining in the United States was no more than 1,000 to 1,500 pairs, with specific estimates of 30 pairs in Ventura County, 130 pairs in Los Angeles County, 50 pairs In San Bernardino County, 325 pairs in Orange County, 400 pairs in Riverside County, and 400 pairs in San Diego County. These preliminary and speculative values were derived from reports of various observers, limited fieldwork conducted by Atwood in different portions of the subspecies' range, and visual estimates of habitat availability in different areas (Atwood 1980). A CIS analysis of the extent of undeveloped lowland in coastal southern California, coupled with density indices derived from recent surveys of Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base and Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station, indicates that 1,811 to 2,291 pairs of California gnatcatchers remained in the United States in the late 1970s. Various assumptions inherent in this analysis imply that these values are inflated and that the subspecies' current population size in the United States cannot significantly exceed 2,000 pairs (Atwood 1992), Using a preliminary estimate for Riverside County and more accurate estimates for San Diego, Orange, and Los Angeles counties, Michael Brandman Associates (MBA 1988) (conservatively) estimated that the population of the California gnatcatcher in the United States is approximately 1,645 to 1,880 pairs, with specific estimates of 20 to 30 pairs in Los Angeles County, 325 to 350 pairs in Orange County, 300 to 400 pairs in Riverside County, and 1,000 to 1,100 pairs in San Diego County. Habitat Requirements and Uses In the United States, the California gnatcatcher is ecologically restricted to the coastal sage scrub plant community (Atwood 1980,1988). Woods (1928) noted that probably no other California bird is as strictly confined to the brush-lands as the California gnatcatcher, which "almost invariably turns back when it reaches the limits of the natural vegetation." m B-88 Final.6-95 ^ m Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Habitat Type and Distribution The southernmost limit of coastal sage scrub is found at El Rosario (30 degrees north latitude) in Baja California (O'Leary 1990), which is also the likely southern distributional boundary of the coastal California gnatcatcher. Although coastal sage scrub occurs as far north as San Francisco, the range of California gnatcatchers has not, in historic times, extended beyond southern Ventura County (Atwood 1990). Unlike evergreen sclerophyllous chaparral, coastal sage scrub species are characterized by malacophyllous subshrubs whose leaves abscise during summer drought and are replaced by a lesser number of smaller leaves (Westman 1981a; Gray and Schlesinger 1983). During cool spring periods with sufficient moisture, high transpiration and carbon-assimilation rates allow for rapid growth, flowering, and fruiting (Harrison, et al. 1971). Most of the dominant species are drought evaders by virtue of their facultatively deciduous habitat and are thus better adapted to prolonged summer-fall drought in areas of lower rainfall. Coastal sage scrub also contrasts with chaparral in being lower in stature (0.5 to 1.5 m versus 2.0 to 3.0 m for chaparral), having shallower root systems, different component species, and comparatively open canopies. The more open nature of coastal sage scrub permits the occurrence of a greater herbaceous component of forbs, grasses, and succulents than is usually associated with dense stands of chaparral. Evergreen sclerophyllous shrubs such as laurel sumac {Malosma laurina), lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia), and sugar bush (Rhus ovata) are often patchily distributed throughout (O'Leary 1990). Coastal sage scrub vegetation is composed of relatively low-growing drought- deciduous and succulent species such as coastal sagebrush (Artemisia californica), several species of sage (black sage [Salvia melUfera], purple sage [5. leucophylla], and white sage [5. apiana]), coast encelia (Encelia californica), and flat-top California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum) (O'Leary 1990). At least four major floristic associations have been recognized within coastal sage scrub: Diablan (San Francisco region south to northern Santa Barbara County), Venturan (northern Santa Barbara County south through central Los Angeles County), Riversidean (inland Los Angeles County, western Riverside County, and inland San Diego County), and Diegan (Orange County and coastal San Diego County south into northwestern Baja California) (Holland 1986; O'Leary 1990). The distribution of the California gnatcatcher is limited to the Venturan, Riversidean, and Diegan associations of coastal sage scrub, but not all areas within each of these broad associations support the California gnatcatcher (Atwood 1990). . Few quantitative studies of the habitat requirements of the California gnatcatcher have been done and all have been of limited geographic scope. At each of the study sites, coastal sagebrush was a major component of the plant community. However, in the single inland study, located in Riverside County, coastal sagebrush was poorly represented (Atwood 1990). There is no clear indication that the California gnatcatcher is dejDendent on any particular plant species belonging to the coastal sage scrub community, but certain floristic combinations may represent habitats that are marginal or unsuitable for the California gnatcatcher (Atwood 1990). For instance, there is Final 6-95 B-89 Appendix B ' Car/sbad^FLCA HCP/OMSP some indication that the species may be absent from or occurs in lower densities in areas dominated by black sage (Mock, et al. 1990; Atwood 1990). However, recent studies have documented the occurrence of California gnatcatcher pairs In black sage and Munz's sage (5a/via munzii) (RECON 1992; ERCE 1991). Vegetation structure, including both density and height, may also be important. Atwood's (1990) impression is that the California gnatcatcher avoids dense and/or tall stands of coastal sage scrub that otherwise resemble, in floristic composition, nearby areas that are used by the birds. Dominant plant species recorded in mapped territories of the California gnatcatcher were generally one meter high or less (Atwood 1990), In a study of seven California gnatcatcher territories located near El Cajon, San Diego County, ERCE (1990a) found an average of 38.1 percent gap in the shrub canopy of the California gnatcatcher territories. Tattersall (1988) reported that California gnatcatcher territories in a Riverside County study were located in areas of coastal sage scrub that have burned eight or nine years previously. More recently burned areas, as well as older, unburned habitat, were unoccupied. Territory/Habitat Use Area Size The California gnatcatcher is a pemrianent resident and may retain the same mate and territory/habitat use area from year-to-year (Atwood 1990). Reported sizes territories/use areas for the California gnatcatcher show pronounced variability, possibly related to differences in habitat quality and/or differences in methodology used by various investigators. Most investigators have reported p that California gnatcatcher territories/use areas range from two to seven acres in size. These results have been primarily based on short-term studies of p unmariced birds (Atwood 1990). Sweetwater Environmental Biologists (1986) found that the movements of one pair of California gnatcatchers encompassed approximately 14.2 acres between March 1985 and March 1986. WESTEC Services, Inc. (1987) estimated minimum territory sizes of five to ten acres. More extensive studies of color-banded individuals by ERCE (1990a) indicated even larger territories (13.3 to 39.2 acres). P P P P One explanation for the larger territories/use areas reported by Sweetwater Environmental Biologists (1986), WESTEC Services, Inc. (1987), and ERCE (1990a, 1990b) may be that they reflect the effects of recent, extreme drought conditions in southern California (Atwood 1990). Insect abundance in coastal sage scrub appears to show annual declines that are related to reduced moisture availability (Roach 1989). Because of the current drought conditions in southern California, California gnatcatcher food resources may be depressed at the present time, thus requiring more extensive movements than normal (Zach and Falls 1975). Mock, et al. (1990) suggested that the size of California gnatcatcher breeding territories was larger in study sites located further distances from the coast, possibly reflecting differences in habitat quality between lush P coastal stands of sage scrub and the relatively sparse vegetation that often characterizes more inland regions. Thus, large tracts of coastal sage scrub located in inland regions may be needed to sustain the same number of pairs found on relatively small parcels of coastal land (Atwood 1990). P Final 6-95 * m Car/sfaad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Many species of small, resident passerines reduce their territoriality following the nesting season, thereby using areas that are more extensive than those occupied while breeding. Similarly, Atwood and McKernan (Atwood 1990) have found non-breeding California gnatcatchers foraging in alternate vegetation types located adjacent to typical stands of coastal sage scrub, including chaparral dominated by chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum) or narrow riparian corridors dominated by willows (5a/ix spp.). Because food resources in coastal sage scrub may be limited during dry periods of the year, the nearby availability of alternative, more mesic vegetation types may be important to California gnatcatcher survival. Current available information indicates that previous estimates of territory size for the California gnatcatcher may be substantially too low. Thus, the size of areas required for maintenance of the species may be much larger than previously thought. Additionally, the fact that breeding birds may expand their territories during the non-breeding season to encompass areas and vegetation types not used during nesting suggests that effective habitat protection must exceed the area required by breeding individuals. As a result, mitigation requirements should not be based merely on studies conducted during the nesting season (Atwood 1990). Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success Detailed studies of California gnatcatcher breeding biology are unavailable. Limited information indicates that breeding territories may be unusually large for a small, insectivorous passerine (Atwood 1990). Nest Building The breeding season for the California gnatcatcher extends from late February through July (Atwood 1990). Based on analysis of museum egg colleaion data, May 5 appears to be the mean date for nest initiation (Atwood 1988). Because re-nesting after initial failure is common, the actual peak for the initial surge of breeding activity probably precedes the calculated mean date for nest initiation. Most initial nesting attempts by the California gnatcatcher probably occur mid to late March and early April (Roach 1989). Atwood (1980) found, based on egg collection data from various areas in southern California, that coastal sagebrush was the plant most frequently used for nesting, followed. In order of frequency, by white sage, black sage, chamise, and Opuntia sp. Roach (1989) found 33 percent of 30 nests to be located In buckwheat, and 17 percent in San Diego County viguiera (Viguiera laciniata). Atwood (1988) proposes that the plants most frequently used for nest sites are those plants which are most abundant within the territory. Both members of the pair contribute to nest construction, which early in the breeding season may be protracted over an approximately 10-day period. Nest building may occur as rapidly as four to five days late in the season (Atwood 1990). Nests may be construaed and then abandoned, prior to laying, for no apparent cause (Woods 1949). Materials from these abandoned nests, or from nests that have been disturbed by predators, are frequently recycled in construction of subsequent nests (Woods 1949; Roach 1989). Final 6-95 B-91 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP California gnatcatcher nests are composed of grasses, bark strips, small leaves, spider webs, down, and other miscellaneous materials (Woods 1949). The' outer dimensions of the nest measures approximately 2.0 inches wide and 2.4 inches deep. The internal depth of the nest cup is approximately 1.6 inches' (Roach 1989). , Nest height is probably somewhat affected by the structure of vegetation > available within a given breeding territory. California gnatcatcher nests are generally located slightly below the surrounding canopy (Atwood 1990). Using egg collection data from a variety of southern California localities, Atwood (1988) calculated a mean nest height of 3.4 feet. Studies conduaed in more geographically restricted areas have yielded mean nest heights of 2.2 feet' (Roach 1989, near Rancho San Diego), 2.85 feet (Tattersall 1988, near Perris), 2.6 feet (ERCE 1990a, near El Cajon), and 2.0 feet (Atwood 1990, Palos Verdes ' peninsula). , Egg Laying i Using egg collection data obtained throughout southern California, the' calculated mean clutch size for the California gnatcatcher is 3.84 eggs (range , two to five) (Atwood 1990). Near Rancho San Diego, Roach (1989) found a similar mean clutch size of 3.67 eggs. Clutches initiated prior to May 1 did not' differ significantly in size from those started later in the nesting season, nor did clutches found In inland areas (Riverside and San Bernardino counties) differ' significantly from those found coastally (Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, and San i Diego counties) (Atwood 1990). I Both pair members incubate the eggs, which measure approximately 0.4 to 0.5 , inch and weigh approximately one gram (Hanna 1934). During incubation under moderate temperature regimes, only the head and tail of the parent bird , protrude above the rim of the deep nest cup; under high ambient temperatures, adults may stand over the eggs, sometimes with their wings spread, to provide ' shade (Woods 1928; Tattersall 1988). The mean incubation period of California gnatcatcher eggs is approximately 14 days, followed by an approximately 16-' day period when both parents care for the nestlings (Woods 1949; Tattersall • 1988; Roach 1989). Fledging Woods (1949) stated that fledglings are tended to by the parents for a period of, about three weeks. ERCE (1990b) saw similar behavior for most birds, but observed color-banded juveniles fledged in early May that remained with their' parents through mid-September. Although California gnatcatchers may occasionally produce two broods in one year, many such observations (e.g.. Woods 1928) have been based on unmarked individuals and have not followed the survivorship of juveniles produced during the first nesting attempt. It is therefore possible that some instances of apparent second broods may be iP undocumented cases of juvenile mortality that occurred soon after fledging. ^ Nest Predation and Parasitism m Available data suggest that up to 40 percent of the California gnatcatcher nests may be destroyed by predators (Atwood 1990). Various native species which seem to be likely predators of California gnatcatcher eggs or nestlings include B-92 Final 6-95 m Car/sfaad-FlCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B scrub jay {Aphelocoma coerulescens), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), m common raven (Corvus corax), opossum (Didelphis marsupialis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum), striped racer (Masticophis lateralis), gopher snake (Pituophis ^ catenifer), coastal rosy boa (Lichanura trivirgata roseofuca), common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getulus), and southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata). mm In areas located near human development, California gnatcatcher nests are probably taken by house-based or feral domestic cats (Fe//s catus). Rodents (wood rats, Neotoma spp.; deer mice, Peromyscus spp.; Norway rats, i^attus norvegicus; and house mice, Mus musculus) may also disrupt California Ml gnatcatcher nesting attempts, either as predators or by usurping the nest cup itself (Langen, et al. n.d.; Atwood 1990). Anecdotal observations have indicated *• that rodents impact California gnatcatcher nests and Norway rats are known egg ^ predators fully capable of displacing (or killing) an incubating six g adult California gnatcatcher (Atwood 1990). wm The rate of nest predation has been shown to increase as fragmentation decreases the size of the habitat (Wilcove 1985; Small and Hunter 1988). Soule, et al. (1988) noted that coyotes (Canis latrans) disappear from small, ^ isolated patches of chaparral (Including coastal sage scrub) and speculate that •• the absence of these large predators allows increased population levels of smaller "bird predators" such as foxes, opossums, or domestic cats. These authors suggest that increased predation pressures resulting from the absence of ^ coyotes may contribute to local extinctions of bird species that occur in small, fragmented patches of scrub vegetatiori. Brood parasitism of the California gnatcatcher by the brown-headed cowbird ^ {Molothrus ater) may also exacerbate population declines associated with habitat loss. Parasitism of the California gnatcatcher by the brown-headed cowbird has been noted for many years (Woods 1930; Friedmann 1934; Hanna m 1934). California gnatcatchers are able to rapidly re-nest following the loss of eggs or juveniles to predators (Woods 1928; Bontrager 1990). However, based on the duration of the incubation, nestling, and fledgling periods of brown-headed pn cowbirds (Bent 1958; Harrison 1978), a single event of cowbird parasitism that proceeds to fledging of a cowbird may occupy at least 40 days, or (assuming a potential breeding season of March 20 to June 15) approximately 42 percent of the total nesting season. It is unknown whether a California gnatcatcher that successfully raises a brown-headed cowbird juvenile(s) will attempt a P subsequent nesting effort during that season (Atwood 1990). Work in eastern deciduous forests has demonstrated that rates of cowbird ^ parasitism are greater in small fragments of forest than in large, continuous tracts of habitat (Temple and Gary 1988; Robinson 1988). Assuming that the mm California gnatcatcher is, like most species of small, temperate zone passerines, relatively short-lived, the compounded effects of annual breeding failures due to nest predation and cowbird parasitism may reduce the lifetime reproductive ^ output of any California gnatcatcher below that needed to sustain a stable population (Atwood 1990). Final 6-95 B-93 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Reproductive Success and Suvivorship Defense of the nest and young is conducted by both the female and male California gnatcatcher (Woods 1949). Quantitative studies of reproductive success in California gnatcatchers are limited and therefore difficult to assess; however, rates of nest failure appear to be relatively high. Based on intensive observations of color-banded birds in Orange County, Bontrager (1990) concluded that the nesting success rate for the California gnatcatcher is very low. Atwood (1990) found that only five of twelve intensively followed pairs of California gnatcatchers (42 percent) successfully fledged young, and for the most part, this was only after several nesting attempts. The average number of nests built per pair was 3.6. One pair had seven nest failures, never achieving a successful nest (Atwood 1990). Most temperate zone passerines are relatively short-lived. Johnston's (1956a, 1956b) study of resident song sparrows (Melospiza melodia) indicated that approximately 80 percent of fledglings died before their first breeding season, with an approximately 43 percent annual mortality thereafter. In the absence of more detailed infomnation. It is probably safe to assume that California gnatcatchers are characterized by similar survivorship curves (Atwood 1990). Foraging Ecology Ml m m m Little information is available regarding Califomia gnatcatcher foraging ecology. *" The bird is an insectivore which feeds directly from foliage rather than while in P flight (Woods 1949). Woods (1949) reports that over 98 percent of the California gnatcatcher diet is made up of beetles, wasps, bugs, and caterpillars, P with a few flies, grasshoppers, and spiders. ^ Coastal sagebrush and buckwheat both appear to be important foraging ^ substrates, although this conclusion is based on studies of relatively narrow geographic scope. Other plant species, such as black sage, may be avoided by foraging California gnatcatchers (Atwood 1990). Several recent studies have provided preliminary information regarding details «- of California gnatcatcher foraging ecology. Roach (1989) found that both sexes fed primarily on arthropods gleaned from two plant species, buckwheat and ^ coastal sagebrush. ERCE (1990a) also found that the California gnatcatcher ^ foraged most frequently on coastal sagebrush and buckwheat. Coastal sagebrush was used more often than buckwheat in comparison to the two cp species' relative abundances on the study site. This study also found that San Diego County viguiera and chaparral broom {Baccharis sarothroides) were underutilized by the California gnatcatcher relative to their occurrence on the study site. Mock, et al. (1990) similarly reported that black sage was avoided by ^ foraging Califomia gnatcatchers. * Impact Sciences, Inc. (1990) observed that a single pair of California P gnatcatchers in the Palos Verdes Peninsula in Los Angeles County fed primarily ^ in coastal sagebrush but gave no indication of the relative abundance of other coastal sage scrub plant species at the site. While all of these data suggest that p coastal sagebrush is of major importance for foraging to the California gnatcatcher and that some coastal sage scrub species may be avoided, B-94 F/na/6-95 m Ml Mb Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B interpretation of the results suffers from the narrow geographic limits and small sample sizes of these studies (Atwood 1990), Decline Factors Both the habitat and the range of the California gnatcatcher have been greatly reduced. Population declines of the California gnatcatcher and loss of its requisite coastal sage scrub habitat were described in the early 1900s (Atwood 1990) . Habitat Loss and Fragmentation The California gnatcatcher is threatened by habitat loss and fragmentation occurring in conjunction with urban and agricultural development (USFWS 1991) . All of the published literature on the status of coastal sage scrub vegetation in California supports the conclusion that this plant community is one of the most depleted habitat types in the United States (Kirkpatrick and Hutchinson 1977; Axelrod 1978; Klopatek, et al. 1979; Westman 1981b, 1981c, 1987; Mooney 1977; O'Leary 1990; Keeler-Wolf 1991). Various plant ecologists have noted the decline of coastal sage scrub during historic times. Klopatek, et al. (1979) conclude that the coastal sage scrub present in 1967 showed a 37 percent decrease relative to its "potential" area. Hanes (1976) states that "the coastal sage scrub community is the most endangered vegetative type in southern California due to the pressures of urbanization, flood control projects and rock quarries." Kirkpatrick and Hutchinson (1977) describe coastal sage scrub as "one of the least known and fastest disappearing types of vegetation in California." Axelrod (1978) states that the coastal sage scrub community Is "rapidly disappearing under spreading urbanization." Mooney (1977) notes that coastal sage scrub "often occupies choice development sites and is being destroyed over large areas of the state." Westman (1981a) calculates that coastal sage scrub in California has been reduced to between 10 and 15 percent of its former extent. Because this calculation presumably includes the Diablan association that occurs in the comparatively undeveloped portion of coastal California north of Ventura County, the relative degree of coastal sage scrub loss in the southern Califomia range of the California gnatcatcher may be even higher, Westman (1987) bel ieves coastal sage scrub to be "one of the most endangered habitat types in the nation" and O'Leary (1990) concludes that "the present decade likely represents an 'eleventh-hour' period" for the "imperiled" plant community. Keeler-Wolf (1991) states that "we can expect the fragments [of coastal sage scrub] to become so small as to be incapable of supporting viable populations of many of the endemic plants and animals of this ecosystem." Further proof that coastal sage scrub is severely threatened throughout southern California was provided by Atwood and Shields (Atwood 1990). They documented that out of 56 sites that supported coastal sage scrub and California gnatcatchers in 1980 (located in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Diego counties), 18 (32 percent) had been completely destroyed by urban development by 1990 and 15 (27 percent) were partially impacted by current construction projects. Final 6-95 B-95 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP The California gnatcatcher is generally distributed below 800 feet elevation in ^ Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego counties and below 1,640 feet elevation in Riverside County. These regions of southern California are subject to intense development pressures, and the Califomia gnatcatcher has already been eliminated from many areas of former occurrence. There are no recent records from Ventura County, and only a single individual has been reported in recent years from San Bernardino County (Atwood 1990). m Published estimates indicate that 85 to 90 percent of coastal sage scrub vegetation in California has been lost as a result of urban and agricultural development (Westman 1981a, 1981b). This represents a reduction from 2.5 million acres to 250,000 to 375,000 acres. A recent quantitative analysis of coastal sage scrub status in Riverside County revealed an 81 percent loss (from 410,000 acres to 79,000 acres) associated with urban and agricultural development over the 60-year period from 1930 to 1990 (USFWS 1991). The m historical distribution of coastal sage scrub encompasses most of southern Los Angeles and northwestern Orange counties (Kuchler 1977). These areas are •* almost completely urbanized as of 1991. In the late 1970s, it was estimated that 70 percent of the historic acreage of coastal sage scrub in San Diego County had been lost as a result of urban and agricultural development (Oberbauer 1979), About 124,000 acres of coastal sage scrub remain in San Diego County (USFWS 1991). Habitat Degradation In addition to catastrophic losses of habitat caused by urban and agricultural development or fire, there are indications that more subtle factors such as grazing and air pollution also adversely impact the coastal sage scrub community. O'Leary and Westman (1988) noted that prolonged periods of grazing and high summer air pollution affect successional patterns of coastal sage scrub following fire. The deterioration of habitat quality due to the current drought conditions (which are also conducive to destructive wildfires) may also be adversely influencing the viability of some California gnatcatcher populations (USFWS 1991). Soule, et al.(1988) suggests that fragments of chaparral (in which he includes coastal sage scrub) are more fragile and hence more vulnerable to faunal collapse than fragments of temperate forest by stating that "whereas the destruction of a forest usually requires considerable energy, the effects of traffic alone in chaparral habitat can cause the replacement of a patch of scrub with grassland or other exotic, xeric adapted species." Natural Occurrences The small body size of the California gnatcatcher may render it more vulnerable to short-term perturbations in weather conditions or resource availability than larger species. Mock observed substantial disappearances of color-banded California gnatcatchers following a several-week period of cold, rainy weather and attributed these disappearances to weather-related mortality (Atwood 1990). These preliminary data suggest that short-term weather fluctuations may occasionally be an important factor affecting the population dynamics of the California gnatcatcher. UK B-96 Final 6-95 W m C^lsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP ^ Approximately 445 acres (47%) of suitable habitat and up to 18 gnatcatcher pairs will be conserved in the plan area; approximately 505 acres of suitable P habitat (537o) and up to 31 pairs are in areas designated for development. Up 240 acres of suitable habitat will be conserved in offsite locations. With the *^ onsite and offsite preservation of coastal sage scrub in a viable open space m networic, the HCP/OMSP will provide the basis for this species' long-term preservation within the plan area and contribute to its preservation on a M citywide and regional scale. Mt Conservation/Management Measures m ^ Management measures include fencing, access control, maintanence of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity ^ offsite, cowbird removal, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. m 49. Cooper's Hawk to Accipiter cooper/ — Sfafus USFWS: None CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER: MBTA, T *" PLAN ID: A-27 Range M Widespread throughout the U.S. and southern Canada, south through the mountains of western Mexico. Cooper's hawk disperses widely outside its breeding season, which is from late March through June. It has declined as a breeding species in California because of destruction of riparian woodland and P possible habitat contamination with pesticides. m m Habitat Cooper's hawks nest primarily in oak woodland but occasionally in willows and eucalyptus. They forage over a variety of habitats including coastal sage scrub, chaparral, open woodlands, and urban areas supporting groves of trees. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 100 acres (22%) of primarily foraging habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 345 acres (78%) are in areas designated for development. Preserved habitat includes approximately 95 percent of the riparian woodland habitat in the plan area. The proposed offsite habitat conservation may provide additional benefit to this species. Final 6-95 B-97 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, maintanence of healthy coyote anb bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, periodic enhancement as necessary, M and onsite management by a habitat manager. m 50. Least Bell's Vireo Vireo bellii pusillus m Status USFWS: Endangered CDFG: Endangered OTHER: MBTA, T PLAN ID: B-23 nm Range ^ Formerly common and widespread in California and northwestern Baja A California. This subspecies currently ranges from the Santa Ynez Basis southward into northwestern Baja California. The largest populations are p present along coastal drainages in San Diego County. Haf>ifaf It is restricted to riparian woodland and is most frequent in areas that combine an understory of dense young willows or mulefat with a canopy of tall willows. Decline Factors The vireo's decline is due to loss of riparian habitat combined with parasitism by the brown-headed cowbird, which lays its eggs in vireo nests, thereby reducing the vireo's reproductive success. To reconcile conservation of the vireo and its habitat with demands for development, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) has prepared a Comprehensive Species Management Plan (CSMP) in cooperation with the state and federal wildlife agencies, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Caltrans, environmental groups, property owners, and sand miners. If the plan is approved it will guide land-use decisions within drainages supporting this species. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP This endangered species is known from only two locations within Carlsbad. Approximately 45 acres (96%) of potential habitat for the vireo will be conserved in the plan area, and up to 2 acres (4%) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation could benefit the species if the sage scrub is suitable for vireo foraging. Overall, the HCP/OMSP could be beneficial to the least Bell's vireo since most of the potential onsite vireo habitat would be preserved and enhanced in open space. B-98 Final 6-95 M Carlshad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Conservatioh/Manag^^t Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, cowbird monitoring/control, small predator control, riparian restoration, water quality control, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management by a habitat manager. 51. Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER; MBTA, NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-28 The following description of the loggerhead shrike is from the Multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan for Southwestern Riverside County (1992). Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy The loggerhead shrike is part of an Old World group of 74 carnivorous songbirds that reaches its greates diversity in tropical Africa. Only two species inhabit the temperate regions of North America (Weathers 1983). Distribution Within the western hemisphere, shrikes are found from southern Canada through parts of both mainland and Baja California (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Weathers 1983, Fraser and Luukkonen 1986, Ehriich, et al. 1988). In California the subspecies of loggerhead shrike is especially common in the central valley and throughout coastal southern regions (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Grinnell and Miller 1984, Unitt 1984), although it is also found in eastern Oregon, parts of Washington and Idaho, the northern part of the Great Basin desert, and possibly on some islands off the shore of Upper and Lower California (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Garrett and Dunn 1981, Grinnell and Miller 1984, Phillips 1986). Population and Density Estimates Loggerhead shrikes are migratory in the northem latitudes (38 to 40 degrees North), but tend to be permanent residents to the south (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Grinnell and Miller 1986). Densities may be seasonally dependent, especially if migrarory birds add to the resident population. At Deep Canyon near Palm Springs, California, mean annual density was between 1.8 and 3.2 birds/98 acres (Weathers 1983), Although not directly comparable, Christmas bird counts at 664 sites across the United States gave an estimate of 2.8 individual spotted per hour (Root 1988). Final 6-95 B-99 Mi Appendix B Car/sfaad-FiCA HCP/OMSP Regardless of whether migratory or r^ident, shrikes establish and aggressively defend exclusive territories. Males, in particular, demonstrate strong territory' fidelity, and migratory birds will retum to the same area repeatedly (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Smith 1973, Fraser and Luukkonen 1986, Ehriich, etal.1988). Size of the territory appears to be labile (Bent 1950). Estimates in California range from 35 to 50 acres in the Mojave (Miller 1931) to 50 acres at Deep Canyon (Weathers 1983). Bent (1950) felt that territory size was dependent not only on habitat characteristics, but also on the local abundance of prey. Shrikes share space only during the breeding season, and are exclusively solitary the remainder of the year (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Weathers 1983). Somewhere within their domain (not necessarily centrally located) is what has been euphemistically termed a "headquarters" that usually contains the roost or nest (Miller 1931, Bent 1950). It is from this vantage point that shrikes maintain a lookout for intruders (Bent 1950), Shrikes will defend their territories, but generally only through ritualized displays; little physical contact actually occurs (Smith 1973). Habitat Requirements and Territory Size Shrikes are almost exclusively associated with open areas that have scattered bushes, trees or man-made objects for perches, and studiously avoid dense chaparral or brush that would obscure their prey (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Harrison 1978, Garrett and Dunn 1981, Weathers 1983, Unitt 1984, Grinnell * and Miller 1986, Bohall-Wood 1987, Ehriich, et al.l988). Weathers (1983), for example, found that population densities at Deep Canyon were greatest on P open rocky slopes that contained scattered ocotillo and palo verde trees, ii Traditional forms of agriculture employing hedgerows probably provided excellent habitat (Bent 1950), and even today roadside areas containing barbed m wire fences, power lines, or telephone poles are preferred habitats (Bent 1950, Grinnell and Miller 1986, Bohall-Wood 1987). Bohall-Wood (1987) reported that of 1661 birds observed, more than 82 percent were perched on man-made ^ items, with the great majority (61 percent) on power lines. Mb Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success The shrike breeding season is earlier than most passerines. Birds may begin to <• pair as early as mid-November in southern regions (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Weathers 1983). During courtship the male will exhibit flight displays and feed P the female. Mock pursuits may also occur (Bent 1950, Ehriich, et al.1988). Double broods are common, and triples sometimes occur as well, depending on the geographic range (Miller 1931, Harrison 1978, Weathers 1983, Ehriich, et al. 1988). Construction of a cup-like nest takes place during late February to early April and is primarily engineered by the female (Bent 1950, Harrison 1978, Weathers 1983, Fraser and Luukkonen 1986, Ehriich, et al. 1988). It is normally built three to 30 feet up in the crotch of a large tree limb with overhanging vines or other vegetation to hide it (Bent 1950, Ehriich, et al. 1988). Shrikes are not finicky, and so nest materials consist of whatever is most abundant locally (Bent 1950). Twigs, grasses, forbs and even sheep wool are all utilized (Bent 1950, harrison 1978, Ehriich, etal.1988). ^ m B-100 Final 6-95 W Car/sfaad-FLO\ HCP/OMSP Appendix B Eggs begin appearing by late March in southern latitudes (Bent 1950, Unitt 1984), and possibly again In July (Bent 1950). Normally, five to six grayish eggs constitute a brood (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Harrison 1978, Weathers 1983, Ehriich, et al. 1988). Eggs weigh approximately 0.16 ounce and are approximately one inch long and 0.7 Inch wide (Bent 1950). Incubation begins before the last egg is laid and consequintly, the last chick is always smaller than its siblings (Miller 1931, Harrison 1978, Weathers 1983). Female shrikes incubate their eggs for 16 days, during which time the male provides food (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Applegate 1977, Harrison 1978, Weathers 1983, Ehriich, et al. 1988). Hatchlings are bright orange at birth (Bent 1950) and are cared for by both parents. The male, however, furnishes the bulk of the food. Fledging occurs at about three weks, but the parents continue to feed the young for an additonal period, sometimes up to three or four more weeks (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Applegate 1977, Ehriich, et al. 1988). Family groups begin to disintegrate starting in early July, when parents drive off their young and refuse to feed them (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Weathers 1983). Foraging Ecology Loggerhead shrikes have a unique habit of impaling prey items (such as birds, lizards, and mice) on thorns, barbed wire fences, yucca blades or other sharp objects. Although many hypotheses have been proposed to explain this behavior, it is mosL likely an adaptation for consumption of large prey items and not primarily a caching behavior (Bent 1950, Weathers 1983). Apparently the birds' feet are too weak to hold the prey while it is being torn apart. Loggerhead shrikes have been characterized as having a indiscriminate taste for "all sorts of animal matter" (Bent 1950). They are certainly catholic in their feeding habitats and consume rodents, birds, reptiles, and snakes (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Slack 1975, Craig 1978, Morrison 1980, Fraser and Luukkonen 1986, Grinnell and Miller 1986). Their main food source, however, appears to be insects(Bent 1950). Shrikes have a distinctive foraging strategy. They sit immobile on a perch and scan the immediate area for potential prey items. If nothing is seen within a few minutes, they hop to another perch and repeat the process (Bent 1950, Morrison 1980). This technique is apparently used successfully to prey upon nestling gnatcatchers, vireos and other birds (Miller 1983, Weathers 1983). Decline Factors Numerous reasons have been cited as causing the decline of the loggerhead shrike, including habitat loss and pesticides (Tate 1981, USFWS 1985, Fraser and Luukkonen 1986, Robbins, etal. 1986). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 549 acres (36%) of suitable habitat for the species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 950 acres (64?a) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation could be beneficial to the species. Onsite and potentially offsite conservation under the HCP/OMSP will contribute to the species' long-term preservation. Final 6-95 B-101 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ _ „ Ml Conservation/Management Measures ^ Management measures include fencing, access control, maintanence of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity * offsite, cowbird removal, public education, fire management, and onsite P management by a habitat manager. m 52. Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus ^ Sfafus * USFWS; None * CDFC; Species of Special Concern *• OTHER: MBTA, T PLAN ID: A-29 • Ml Range r This raptor ranges throughout California, The northern harrier is common in P San Diego County during the winter as a migrant and winter visitor. It is a rare summer resident and is known to breed only in coastal valleys and possibly p Borrego Valley (Unitt 1984). ^ JM HaAifaf ^ It occurs in grasslands, open fields, and salt and freshwater marshes. * Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Approximately 505 acres (40%.) of the foraging habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 770 acres (60%) are in areas designated for development. The preservation of foraging habitat onsite would contribute to the species' long term preservation and yield additional potential breeding sites. Proposed offsite habitat conservation could provide additional benefits for the species. B-102 Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, maintanence of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, public education, fire management, periodic enhancement as necessary, and onsite management by a habitat manager. Final 6-95 m m p p P P p p m P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B 53. San Diego Cactus Wren Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus couesi Status USFWS; Candidate (Category 2) CDFC: Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP, T PLAN ID: B-24 Range Because the taxonomic status of the cactus wren in coastal southern California is unclear at this time, the entire coastal southern California population of the cactus wren will be addressed. The range of the cactus wren extends from the coastal lowlands from Ventura County south to northwestern Baja California. This species was once widespread in San Diego County, however by 1990 it had been reduced to fewer than 400 pairs in about 55 colonies. Habitat This subspecies is found only in coastal sage scrub with extensive stands of tall prickly pear or cholla cacti. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are records for San Diego cactus wren having occurred at Batiquitoes and Agua Hedionda lagoons. However, it does not currently occur In the plan area nor is there suitable nesting habitat for the species. However, approximately 445 acres (477o) of potentially suitable habitat will be conserved in the plan area, approximately 505 acres (53%) are in areas designated for development. The addition of cactus plantings in the plan area could benefit this species by creating additional habitat. Proposed offsite habitat conservation also could benefit the species. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, maintanence of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, cowbird removal, public education, fire management, and onsite management by a habitat manager. Final 6-95 B-103 '^P''^"^" ^ Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP * P 54. Southern California Rufous-crowned Sparrow Aimophila ruficeps canescens Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER: MBTA, NCCP, T The Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps canescens) is one of three subspecies that occur in Califomia. Rufous-crowned sparrows are widely distributed residents throughout the western United States and Texas. The Southern California rufous<rowned sparrow inhabits coastal southern California from Santa Barbara to the northwestern corner of the Baja Peninsula. Aimophila r. obscura on four of the channel islands and A r ruficeps occur throughout the coastal slope and Sierran foothills south of the 39th parallel. For this section, all references to rufous-crowned sparrow refer to the sensitive supspecies A. r. canescens. Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy The rufous<rowned sparrow is a member of family Emberizidae and subfamily Emberizinae. This subfamily includes 281 species classified within 69 genera and has a worldwide distribution excepting extreme Southeast Asia and Australasia, although they have been introduced in New Zealand (Perrins and Middieton 1985). They are small to medium-sized sparrows with a tail about equal to or longer than the wing. Their backs tend to be streaked with grayish- brown and their underparts tend to be without streaks except sometimes on the sides and flanks (Ridgway 1901). Appearance and Vocalizations m B-104 The most outstanding features of rufous-crowned sparrows include a gray head with a dark rufous crown, white eye-ring, whitish eyebrow and single black whisker-stripe on both sides. The back and wings are brown and the wings * have no obvious wing-bars. Male and female adults look alike, but juveniles tend to have a streaky brown head, slightly streaked breast, sometimes faint * wmg-bars, and overall fainter distinctive markings. Southern California rufous- P crowned sparrow tends to be darker in coloration and have longer primaries than the other subspecies (Ridgway 1901). pi The most often heard vocalization of the rufous-crowned sparrow is a nasal * whistle, generally made more than once. The song is a twittering series of chip « notes. ^ m Size P The rufous<rowned sparrow is a medium to large sparrow averaging P approximately six inches in total body length (Kaufmann 1990- NGS 1983) They are heavy bodied with flat appearing heads and long, rounded tails P Final 6-95 P P Car/sfaad^FLO\ HCP/OMSP Appendix B mm Taxonomy *m The rufous<rowned sparrow and it congeners are fairly easy to distinguish from *" one another. The first authoritative work on this genus was completed in 1852 ^ by Cassin. The subspecific identity of the Southern California rufous<rowned sparrow was reported 70 years later (Todd 1922). Rufous<rowned sparrows are *•* resident, sedentary, and geographically isolated from the two other California subspecies, A. r. obscura and A. r. ruficeps. To date, no genetic studies have ^ been conducted to confirm the subspecific rankings of rufous-crowned ^ sparrows. Distribution within the United States ** The Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow occurs on the coastal slope m and inland valleys of California from Santa Barbara, Ventura County across to Los Angeles County and southeast through Orange, Riverside, and San Diego counties to northwestern Baja California. mi Historic Distribution Where not otherwise cited, historical locality information is from various sources (Carpenter 1907, Willet 1912, Willet 1933, Crinnel and Miller 1944, ^ Sexton and Hunt 1979, Unitt 1984, Garret and Dunn 1981). Historical locality information is not intended to present a full distribution of the species' range, * but rather to give a list of some areas with representative habitat. Ventura County Localities of record are limited to Sespe, where eggs were collected in 1927, and the western Santa Monica Mountains. Los Angeles County mm Localities of record include Eagle Rock (Esterly 1920), Castaic Canyon, Arroyo * Seco, Santa Monica, Santa Monica Mountains and Whittier. ^ Orange County The San Joaquin Hills and the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains are the only ^ localities of record. Riverside County Records are from Upper Trabuco Canyon, the southern San Bernardino Mountains and the northern San Jacinto Mountains. *" San Bernardino County im The only records are from Crafton Hills, east of Redlands and Colton. f;na/6-95 B-105 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP San Diego County Recorded localities include Rancho Santa Fe, Escondido, San Diego, Jacumba, and Dulzura. Current Distribution B-106 P Population and density estimates of rufous-crowned sparrows have not been compiled as yet. Habitat Requirements and Territory Size p mm Rufous-crowned sparrow populations have been reduced as habitat became ^ converted to agriculture and development In all of the counties throughout its range. In Ventura County the species probably still occurs in the habitat of the — Santa Monica Mountains and undeveloped areas in and around Sespe. Undoubtedly it has been extirpated from much of its range in Los Angeles and *• San Bernardino counties due to development, and is limited to sections of habitat mostly in the few remote areas where habitat is appropriate. In Orange, • Riverside and San Diego counties it is considered an uncommon resident' P localized to what remains of its historic habitat. m Population and Density Estimates ^ P m The following information is from Bariow (1902), NGS (1983), and Ehriich et * al. (1988). m Habitat Type and Distribution M> Rufous<rowned sparrows inhabit open chaparral and sage scrub on rocky hillsides and canyons. They seem to prefer sage scrub to chaparral and they are ^ generally not found within dense, contiguous stands of chaparral. What remains of these habitats is distributed widely over much of the foothill and mm coastal lowland zone in all of the counties discussed above (CDFC 1988). Territory Size IM Rufous-crowned sparrows tend to have clumped territories, concentrated in P their preferred rocky habitat. Territory size data has not been collected to date. m Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success m The following information is from NGS (1983) and Ehriich, et al. (1988). P Nest Building Nests are constructed by a variety of materials including grass, twigs, forbs, ^ bark, and hair. The nest is cup shaped and most of the time is placed in shallovv depressions on the ground. Occasionally nests are placed low in shrubs. It is unknown whether male, female or both are the primary nest builders. Rufous- * crowned sparrows are very secretive in their nestbuilding activities. P Final 6-95 p P Car/sfaad^FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Egg Laying Clutch size ranges from three to four eggs that are usually an unmariced pale bluish white in color. Little is known about the incubation time required for nestlings to hatch, or whether male, female, or both incubate the eggs. Fledging Nestlings are born altricial. Little is known about how long nestlings take to fledge. Once nestlings fledge, both parents share equally in the task of feeding them a diet predominantly of insects. Nest Predation and Parasitism As far as can be determined, rufous<rowned sparrows are not suitable cowbird hosts. Since these birds nest most frequently on the surface of the ground they are probably susceptible to high amounts of predation by reptiles and mammals. Reproductive Success and Survivorship Productivity data are not currently available. Foraging Ecology Rufous-crowned sparrows feed on insects primarily, but may occasionally forage for seeds and berries (Ehriich, et al. 1988). They generally forage on the ground but may also glean food from the foliage of nearby plants. Primary foraging substrates include plants typically associated with this species such as California sagebrush (Artemis/a californica), chamise (Adenostoma fascicu/atum), black sage (5a/via mellifera), and other chaparral species. Decline Factors Habitat Loss and Fragmentation Conversion of large tracts of habitat into urban centers and agriculture is the main threat to this species. Southern California, particularly the coastal foothill zone, has been heavily impacted by development. The resulting fragmentation and elimination of local populations may eventually lead to this species' decline. Due to its habitat requirments and sedentary habits, each habitat lost is a loss to species population. Such losses may in turn threaten the population's viability throughout its range. Habitat Degradation Small amounts of habitat degradation that produce a more open vegetation structure may not be beneficial to the rufous<rowned sparrow, which prefers more open habitat. However, a large degree of degradation could be detrimental. Fina/6-95 B-107 ^Per^dixB Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Conclusions P p m The rufous^rrowned sparrow is found on Southeast II and Rancheros. Since it was not observed on Northwest, it is assumed to not currently be using the site. The current development plan will result in a loss of more than half of the P existing habitat for the rufous-crowned sparrow on Southeast II and Rancheros, while on Northwest the plans will result in a total loss of all existing habitat! P The number of rufous<rowned sparrow pairs using the site has not been assessed, but given the size of the potential habitat, between 20 and 30 pairs could occur within the plan area. However these sparrows tend to have a ^ spotty distribution throughout their range, and tend not to be present in many areas where habitat seems appropriate. Therefore the actual number of * individuals using the site could be lower (10 to 20 individuals). Considering the amount of undeveloped habitat remaining, especially in the foothill zone, the * loss of populations on the three sites would likely amount to less than one •* percent of San Diego County's remaining rufous<rowned sparrow population. m Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP m Approximately 445 acres (47%) of suitable habitat for this species will be P conserved in the plan area, and approximately 505 acres (53%) are in areas designated for development. Onsite preservation of coastal sage scrub in open space, especially the preferred rock outcrops and steep slopes, will contribute to the long-term preservation of this species. The proposed offsite habitat conservation also may benefit the species. Conservation/Management Measures p m Management measures include fencing, access control, maintanence of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity * offsite, cowbird removal, public education, fire management, and onsite mm management by a habitat manager. MM 55. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus ^ wp Sfafus USFWS: Proposed Endangered ^ CDFG; Endangered * OTHER: FSS, MBTA, T PLAN ID: B-25 • m Range It is a spring and fall transient to San Diego County. This subspecies is known m to breed in only seven locations in San Diego County: four along the Santa Margarita River and the remainder along the San Luis Rey and Tijuana rivers P (Unitt 1984). ^"""OB Final 6-95 p tM Car/sfaad-fiCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Habitat Southwestern willow flycatcher is restricted to mature willow thickets in riparian woodland for breeding. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There is one specific record for this species within the City limits, along Encinitas Creek (Brian Mooney Assoc. 1992), Approximately 45 acres (96%) of potential habitat for the species will be conserved in the plan area, and up to 2 acres (4%) are In areas designated for development. The proposed offsite habitat conservation would not likely benefit the species. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, maintanence of healthy coyote and bobcat populations through preservation of good connectivity offsite, cowbird removal, water quality control measures, and periodic habitat enhancement as necessary. The habitat manager will review management objectives for this species and others to insure that the objectives do not conflict. 56. Tricolored Blackbird Agelaius tricolor Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER: MBTA, NCCP, T Tricolored blackbirds have distributed a sparse in southwestern Oregon, and throughout the valleys of California and northwestern Baja California. Over the past 40 years, this species has declined throughout regions where it formerly had firm strongholds. Since the species is virtually endemic to California and has declined from several coastal southern Califomia counties, this decline prompted listing as a candidate for proposed listing as threatened or endangered. However the tricolored blackbird was recently removed from this list based on the preliminary results of joint study by California Department of Fish and Game and University of California Davis (Ron Shlorff pers. comm.). Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy The tricolored blackbird is a member of family Emberizidae and the subfamily Icterinae. This sub-family includes 94 species placed in 24 genera and Is limited in distribution to North and South America. Most blackbirds occur in the tropical zone, within 20 degrees north and south of the equator. The only members of the genus Agelaius occurring in our area include the tricolored blackbird and red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus). Members of genus Agelaius are small to medium sized icterids with the bill shorter than the head. F/na/6-95 B-109 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP^ pointed wings, a rounded tail slightly shorter than the wing length, and they * exhibit sexual dimorphism. Males are always black with colored lesser wing* coverts while the females are smaller and conspicuously streaked P Appearance and Vocalizations ^ Male tricolored blackbirds are glossy black in color with red shoulder patches P tipped with white. Females are dull and sooty colored with varying amounts of L red on the shoulder, very similar In appearance to the related female red-winged blackbird. Often the females of the two species are indistinguishable under normal field conditions. P P Tricolored blackbirds give a wide variety of calls, again similar to those of the red-winged blackbird. The tricolored blackbird's song has been described as I* "less musical" than that of the red-winged blackbird. m Size IM The adult mate has a total body length of 7.8 to 9.0 inches, has a wing length of 4.3 to 4.7 inches, and has a tail length of 3,1 to 3.5 inches. Females are slightly smaller all over (total body length 7.0 to 7.8 inches; wing 3.9 to 4.3 inches; tail 2.7 to 3.1 inches). " Taxonomy P ' P The tricolored blackbird is readily distinguishable from other members of its genus and there are no known subspecies. • P P Distribution within the United States Tricolored blackbirds occur in and around marshes, wet meadows, rice fields, and agricultural lands within California's Central Valley and throughout the lowland regions west of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Records of the past and present distribution of the tricolored blackbird are from Ridgway (1901), Sharp (1907), Willet (1912), Crinnel (1915), Willet (1933), Crinnel and Miller (1944), Neff (1937), Garret and Dunn (1981), and Unitt (1984). m Historic Distribution m Historic distributional information comes from Neff (1937) and Willet (1933). Ventura County P Individuals were sighted during the nesting season, but nesting colonies were IL never found. The specific,recorded locations were the Santa Clara River Valley in the vicinity of Piru, Matilija Ranch near Ojai, and near Ventura. ^ Los Angeles County MI A nesting colony that produced 500 nests was recorded within the riverine P habitat near East Kemp Station, possibly the same as that recorded for San P Fernando Reservoir. P P B-nO Fina/6-95p P Car/sfaad^LCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Orange County There is one recorded locality of a nesting population near Laguna Beach that produced 250 nests. Riverside County The only recorded locality is a flock of about 35 that were sighted foraging near Murrieta. San Bernardino County The species is recorded to have nested here, however no specific locality is given. San Diego County Recorded localities of breeding colonies include the mouths of San Onofre Creek and/or San Mateo Creek, Whalen Lake, San Luis Rey, San Pasqual, Sweetwater, Lakeside, Lake Hodges, and eastern Chula Vista. Current Distribution De Haven, et al. (1975) censused the breeding population of tricolored blackbirds in California, spending almost exactly the same number of man-days devoted to searches as did Neff (1937). Despite improvments in transportation, and better access to colonies, they found 36 percent fewer colonies than Neff (164 as opposed to 256). Part of the reason for the decrease is the loss of suitable nesting habitat in local areas due to reclamation and drainage. In Ventura, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles counties, no current information is available on population size. Orange County The species is described as irregular and nomadic but locally common most of the year near marshes, croplands, and rangelands. It nests in small numbers at San Joaquin Marsh, as well as other localized marshy areas. San Diego County A common but localized resident. Recent locations of breeding colonies include Tijuana River Valley, Guajome Lake, and Otay River Valley. Population and Density Estimates Current estimates have been completed, but were not available at the time of this effort. Due to the nomadic nature of the species, population estimates and locality reports are often obsolete soon after they are published. Final 6-95 B-111 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP * Habitat Requirements and Territory Size Habitat Type and Distribution Ml P Nomenclature and distribution of habitat types is from The Guide to Wildlife ^ Habitats (CDFC 1988). Tricolored blackbirds forage in pasture, cropland, lakeshores, and irrigated grassy areas (NGS 1983; Ehriich, et al. 1988). Fifty-two p percent of pasture in the State occurs in the Central and Imperial valleys, while another six percent occurs in coastal counties. Imperial County has the biggest acreage, followed by Siskiyou, Merced, Stanislaus and Modoc Counties. _ Cropland is located in every county except San Francisco County. Lakeshores and irrigated grassy areas occur throughout the state in the form of man-made reservoirs, golf courses, parks and other recreational areas. w Tricolored blackbirds nest in fresh emergent wetlands, mostly marshes, with a m floral composition including cattails, tules, willows, mulefat and tamarisk. This habitat occurs throughout the State at almost all elevations. The largest m expanses of fresh emergent wetlands occur in the Klamath Basin, Sacramento ^ Valley, San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Imperial Valley- Salton Sea. ^ Territory Size Since these blackbirds are highly gregarious, nesting in colonies of up to * 20,000, they do not form individual territories. Neff (1937) stated that nests are m placed so close to each other that one could reach six of them from the same vantage point. IM PP Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success The following information is from Ehriich, et al. (1988). Pair Formation and Nest Selection ^ Tricolored blackbirds are polygynous. In a breeding display, the male perches *^ on high emergent vegetation spreads the tail, droops wings, raises shoulders to display color patches, fluffs feathers, leans downward, and sings. * m Nest Building am The nestbuilding is done exclusively by the female. The nest is cup-shaped, constructed of forbs, sedges, grasses and rushes. Nests are usually placed near of over open water in emergent vegetation, but sometimes also in agricultural crops. Egg Laying Average clutch sizes are three to four eggs. The eggs are pale green and marked with browns and black; the female incubates them from 11 to 13 days. P m P m P ^•""^^ Final 6-95 P P f P m m Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Fledging Nestlings are born altricial and fledge anywhere from between 11 to 14 days. Both parents help to rear the fledglings, with the female taking the primary role. Nest Predation and Parasitism Tricolored blackbirds are susceptible to cowbird brood parasitism. Little is known about the predation rates of these blackirds. Reproductive Success and Survivorship Not much is known regarding productivity of this species. Foraging Ecology The tricolored blackbird feeds on insects, seeds, grain, and occasionally clams. It generally feeds directly on the ground but may occasionally glean food from vegetation. They also practice a foraging method known as gaping. In gaping, the beak is used to pry vegetation or other foraging substrate material apart. This method exposes food hidden in rotting wood, curled leaves, clumps of grass, soil and other objects. References to this aspect of blackbird ecology are Beecher (1951), NGS (1983, and Ehriich, et al. (1988). Decline Factors In 1975, De Haven, et al, (1975) estimated that tricolored blackbird populations in the Central Valley had declined by "perhaps more than 50 percent." Remsen (1978) suggested that further study would be needed to determine whether the decline is continuing. This species' populations tend to be erratic and nesting colonies often do not occur in the same places from year to year. Conclusions Tricolored blackbirds have not been historically reported to breed near the planning area of the HCP/OMSP. During the surveys, one individual was sighted at Northwest, but this was probably an individual dispersing to a more suitable breeding area. The species has a low potential for occurance at the Southeast II and Rancheros sites. Development plans do not remove any of the existing marsh habitat, and so there is no impact to the species in the proposed plan. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP This species probably does not occur regulary onsite; the marshlands where one transient bird was sighted will be preserved on Northwest. Approximately 55 acres (17%) of potential habitat for the species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 275 acres (83%) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite conservation is not likely to benefit the species. By preserving potential habitat, the HCP/OMSP could have a beneficial effect on the long-term preservation of this species. Fina/6-95 B-113 ^P^"^^^ ^ Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP^ Conservation/Management Measures * p Management measures include fencing, access control, cowbird monitoring/control, small predator control, riparian restoration, water quality P control, periodic habitat enhancement as necessary, and onsite management by P a habitat manager. m 57. Yellow-breasted Chat p Icteria virens ^ Status * USFWS; None * CDFC; Species of Special Concern OTHER: MBTA, OSS PLAN ID; A-32 Mi Range This is a spring and summer resident along the coastal strip throughout California. m Habitat _ Ml This bird inhabits dense brush and thickets of riparian woodlands. «i Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP ^ There are no previous records of this species from the Carlsbad area. Approximately 45 acres (96%) of potentially suitable habitat for this species will •* be preserved in the plan area, and up to 2 acres (4%) are in areas designated for development. The HCP/OMSP could be beneficial to this species because it ** would preserve the riparian woodland habitat onsite and thereby would •» contribute to species' long-term preservation. m Conservation/Management Measures ^ Management measures include fencing, access control, cowbird p monitoring/control, small predator control, riparian restoration, water quality ^ control, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management. P m 58. Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia brewsteri B-114 Sfafus p USFWS; None P CDFG: Species of Special Concern m OTHER: MBTA, OSS PLAN ID: A-33 p Final 6-95 p P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Range This subspecies is a summer resident throughout California. Habitat The yellow warbler occurs in riparian woodland habitat. Yellow warblers are found most commonly in shrubby vegetation along river edges. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no previous records of this species from the Carlsbad area. Approximately 45 acres (96%.) of potentially suitable habitat for this species will be preserved in the plan area, and up to 2 acres (4%) are in areas designated for development. The HCP/OMSP could be beneficial to this species because it would preserve the riparian woodland habitat onsite and thereby would contribute to species' long-term preservation. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, cowbird monitoring/control, small predator control, riparian restoration, water quality control, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management by a habitat manager. Final 6-95 B-115 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP F. Mammals I p 59. California Mastiff Bat » Eumops perotis californicus m Status Mt USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) • CDFG: Species of Special Concern ^ OTHER: T PLAN ID; B-26 ip Range It occurs from central California southward to central Mexico. In California, it * has been recorded from Butte County southward in the western lowlands through the southern California coastal basins and the western portions of the southeastern desert region (Williams 1986). This subspecies is rare in San * Diego County. Mi Habitat » The mastiff bat favors rugged, rocky areas where suitable crevices are available for day-roosts. It also frequently roosts In buildings (Williams 1986). • IM Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP m There are no records for this species within Carlsbad's boundaries, and roost sites were not detected in the plan area. The only anticipated impacts to this ** species would be due to the loss of foraging habitat. Approximately 110 acres ^ (25%) of potential foraging habitat will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 325 acres (75%) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation may have benefits for the species. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control, * fire management, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management by m a habitat manager. m 60. Dulzura California Pocket Mouse Chaetodipus californicus femoralis ^ Status • USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) * CDFC; Species of Special Concern ^ OTHER: T PLAN ID: B-27 P B-116 P Final 6-95 p P Car/sbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Range It has been recorded from the mouth of the Santa Margarita River south into northern Baja California, Mexico. In San Diego County it ranges east to the desert transition zone. Habitat The Dulzura California pocket mouse is associated with mature chaparral. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP No records exist for this species in Carlsbad, and it species was not detected within the plan area; therefore direct impacts are not expected. Approximately 100 acres (19%) of potential habitat for the species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 425 acres (81%) are In areas designated for development. The proposed offsite habitat conservation could potentially benefit the species. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control, fire management, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management by a habitat manager. 61. Northwestern San Diego Pocket Mouse Chaetodipus fallax fallax Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFC: Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP,T PLAN ID: A-34 The northwestern San Diego pocket mouse is a small rodent which is restricted to southwestern California within the United States portion of its range. Physical Characteristics and Taxonomy Appearance This rodent generally has a rich brown pelage flecked with a dark fulvous color. The body hair is course and there are long spine-like hairs on the rump and flanks. The underparts are a yellowish white and there is a fulvous line or stripe along the side. The San Diego pocket mouse has small ears (less than 0.4 in.) with long black and white (approximately 75 % of ear length) ear hairs. The tail is bicolored with a crest at the tip. Final 6-95 . .. B-117 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP^ — iM Size * m The head and body range from 3.2-3.5 inches and the tail from 3.5-4.8 inches. P Taxonomy ^ The San Diego pocket mouse is a member of the New World rodent family p Heteromyidae which includes, in addition to several genera of pocket mice, kangaroo rats and kangaroo mice. There are two subspecies of the San Diego pocket mouse in California, the coastal subspecies C f fallax and the pale desert slope subspecies C. /. pallidus (Huey 1960) ** Historic Distribution w Los Angeles County Mk This species is only found along the eastern boundary of the County (e.g. P vicinity of Claremont). Orange County ^ The San Diego pocket mouse is found in the southeastern portion of the County. Riverside County ** «• This mammal occurs throughout the western portion of the County from the desert base of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains and the higher areas of P Joshua Tree National Monument (Miller and Stebbins 1964) west to and p including the eastern slope of the Santa Ana Mountains. San Bernardino County |^ The San Diego pocket mouse is found in the southeastern portion of the County from the southern margin of the Mojave Desert on the north slope of the San ^ Bernardino Mountains south and west to the borders of Los Angeles, Orange •* and Riverside counties. San Diego County ^ The San Diego pocket mouse is found from the eastern portions of the County p west to the Pacific Coast. The distribution of this species in San Diego County is ^ reviewed by (Bond 1977) * Current Distribution P Los Angeles County P There is little current information available on the status of this species in the P County. However, much of the historic range of this species In Los Angeles County is now occupied by urban development and the San Diego pocket P mouse is certainly much less common and widespread than it formerly was. ^ P P B-nS Fina/6-95p P Car/sbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Orange County The current status of this species in Orange County is not well known. Several, relatively large natural areas in the County (e.g. Santa Ana Mountains, San Joaquin Hills) support good habitat where the San Diego pocket mouse is probably still common. San Bernardino County There is little current Information in the literature on the status of this species in the County. Much of the historic range of the San Diego pocket mouse, south of the San Bernardino Mountains is now occupied by urban development; however there are large areas of good habitat within the County on public lands where this mammal is probably still common. San Diego County There is little current information on the status of the San Diego pocket mouse in San Diego County. Large areas of natural habitat in the coastal lowlands have been converted to urban development and this species is undoubtedly much less wide-spread in this area than in previous years. However there are still large areas of suitable habitat (much of it on public lands) present within the County where this species is probably relatively common Population and Density Estimates No data is available in the literature. Habitat Type and Distribution The San Diego pocket mouse inhabits open coastal sage scrub, open chaparral, weedy areas and grassland. On the desert slope these pocket mice are found in habitats with open scrub cover and also along washes. San Diego pocket mice occur primarily in areas where the substrate is sandy or gravely. Territory Size San Diego pocket mice were studied in the Claremont, Los Angeles County and had territories ranging from 0.5-1.12 acres (MacMillen 1964). Males had larger territories than females. Breeding Behavior and Reproductive Success No published information is available. Foraging Ecology Little is known concerning the foraging ecology of the San Diego pocket mouse. This species feeds mainly on seeds. One study (Meserve 1976) reported that this species prefers grass seeds and had a lower preference for the seeds of shrubs and forbs. These mice (as is typical for pocket mice) transport seeds in their fur-lined cheek pouches, which they store in their burrows. Final 6-95 B-119 Appendix B CaWsfaad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Decline Factors The primary cause for decline in this species is habitat destruction by urban development. Though this species Is undoubtedly less wide-spread in southern Califomia than in previous years, because of extensive urban development in lowland areas, there is still a relatively large amount of habitat present (much of it on public lands) in interior areas. Conc/us/oiis The San Diego pocket mouse is a common element of the small mammal fauna on both the Northwest and the Rancheros sites. This species occurs in non- native grassland, Diegan coastal sage scrub, and chaparral within the project area. If 60% of the Diegan sage scrub is preserved in open space, a fairly good population of this species will probably be preserved as well. It should be noted however, that the small mammal community (including the San Diego pocket mouse population) within this open space may be degraded over time through indirect impacts from human activities, their pets, and non-native rodents associated with human developments, e.g. house mice. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP Up to approximately 600 acres (33 percent) of habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area; approximately 1,215 acres (67%) are in areas designated for development. The species will benefit from the retention of habitat onsite and potentially from the proposed offsite habitat conservation. P Conservation/Management Measures » Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control, ^ fire management, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management by P a habitat manager. m 62. Pacific Pocket Mouse Perognathus longimembris pacificus ^ Status * USFWS: Endangered (Emergency Listed) CDFC; Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: B-28 Range The species' range is limited to the coast of southern California; only eight localities are known. Habitat It occurs in chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and grassland with sandy substrate. m m P ^-120 Final 6-95 p P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B ** Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no records of this species' occurrence In Carlsbad, and it is not ** expected to. occur in the plan area, which appears to be outside the known M» existing range of the species. Consequently, onsite conservation and development is not likely to affect the species directly or indirectly. It also is unlikely that the proposed offsite habitat conservation would benefit the species. Mi Conservation/Management Measures m Managenient measures include fencing, access control, small predator control, fire management, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management by ^ a habitat manager. 63. San Diego Black-tailed Jackrabbit *" Lepus californicus bennettii Ml Sfafus USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFC: Species of Special Concern OTHER: NCCP, OSS PLAN ID: A-35 tm ^ Range ** This subspecies ranges from southern Santa Barbara • County, California ^ southward on the coastal slope to the vicinity of San Quintin, Baja California, Mexico, Localities on the eastern edge of its range include Jacumba and the San Felipe Valley both in San Diego County. In San Diego County it is known from San Marcos, Escondido, San Diego, Jamul Creek and the Laguna Mountains ^ (Hall 1981). MB Ha6ifaf imm ^ It prefers open sage scrub, chaparral and grassland habitats as well as cropland and open disturbed areas providing there is some scrub cover present. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP ^ Approximately 540 acres (36%) of habitat for this species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 950 acres (64%) are in areas designated for development. The preserved onsite areas and potentially the proposed offsite conserved habitat would contribute to the long-term preservation of the species. m Conservation/Management Measures — Management measures include fencing, access control, fire management, public ^ education, adjacent land use planning, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management by a habitat manager. Final 6-95 B-121 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP * 64. San Diego Desert Woodrat Neotoma Iepida intermedia Status m USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) • CDFG: Species of Special Concern ^ OTHER: OSS PLAN ID: A-36 IP Range p It is restricted to the coastal slope of southern California. It occurs from San Luis Obispo County southward into coastal northwest Baja California. In San Diego County, it is known from Bonsall, Mission San Luis Rey, Mission Gorge, ^ Murphy Canyon and San Diego (Bond 1977). m Habitat W The San Diego desert woodrat inhabits areas with heavy vegetation growth such P as dense coastal sage scrub, chaparral, cactus or rock crevices. It generally favors xeric habitats. p 4M Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP P Approximately 510 acres (40%) of habitat for this species will be conserved in ^ the plan area, and approximately 760 acres (60%) are in areas designated for development. Onsite habitat conservation and potentially the proposed offsite conservation will contribute to the long-temi preservation of this species. Conservation/Management Measures ^ Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control, fire management, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management by a habitat manager. m 65. Southern Grasshopper Mouse ^ Onychomys torridus ramona ^ Status p USFWS; Candidate (Category 2) * CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER; NCCP, OSS * PLAN ID: B-29 •» Range • This subspecies ranges from northern Los Angeles County, south along the coastal slope to extreme northwest Baja California. P P ^••'22 Final 6-95 p Car/sbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Habitat It occurs in a wide variety of arid habitats including various types of scrub. There is some evidence that the southern grasshopper mouse is at least sometimes associated with clumps of cactus or yucca. Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP This uncornmon rodent has not been recorded from other locations in the City and was not detected in the plan area. No direct impacts or benefits are expected under the HCP/OMSP. Approximately 505 acres (40%) of potential habitat for the species will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 770 acres (60%) are in areas designated for development. Onsite conservation of potential habitat and potentially the offsite habitat may benefit the species' long-term perservation. Conservation/Management Measures Management measures Include fencing, access control, small predator control, fire management, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management by a habitat manager. 66. Townsend's Western Big-eared Bat Plecotus townsendii townsendii Status USFWS: Candidate (Category 2) CDFG: Species of Special Concern OTHER; T PLAN ID: B-30 Range This subspecies occurs in the coastal humid regions of California. Habitat It is found in a variety of communities including coastal conifer and broad-leaf forests, oak and conifer woodlands, arid grasslands and deserts and high- elevation forests and meadows. Throughout most of its geographic range, it is most common in mesic sites (Kunz and Martin 1982, and Williams 1986). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP/OMSP There are no records for this species within Carlsbad's boundaries, and roost sites were not detected in the plan area. The only anticipated Impacts to this species would be due to the loss of foraging habitat. Approximately 110 acres (25%) of potential foraging habitat will be conserved in the plan area, and approximately 325 acres (757o) are in areas designated for development. Proposed offsite habitat conservation may have benefits for the species. Finai 6-95 B-123 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Conservation/Management Measures Management measures include fencing, access control, small predator control, fire management, inclusion of habitat in open space, and onsite management by a habitat manager. P P P P P P IM P B-124 F/na/6-95 P P Car/sfaad-FiCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B C. References Alberts, A, C, A. D. Richman, Y. Tran, R. Sanvajot, C. McCalvin and D. T. Boger. n.d. Effects of habitat fragmentation on species diversity of native and exotic plants in southern California coastal sage scrub. Unpublished manuscript. American Ornithologists' Union 1931 Check-list of North American birds. 4th ed. American Omithologists' Union, Lancaster, Pennsylvania. 1957 Check-list of North American birds. 5th ed. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. 1976 Thirty-third supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-listof North American Birds. Auk 93:875-879. 1989 Thirty-seventh supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American birds. Auk 106:532-538. 1991 Thirty-eighth supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds. Auk 108:752. Atwood, J. L. 1980 The United States distribution of the California black-tailed gnatcatcher. Western Birds 11:65-78. 1985 Studies of four sensitive species at Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base, California. Phase II (1984). Prepared for Natural Resources Branch, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, San Bruno, California. February. 1988 Speciation and geographic variation in black-tailed gnatcatchers. Ornithol. Monogr. No. 42. 1990 Status review of the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica). Unpublished technical report, Manomet Bird Observatory, Manomet, Massachusetts. 79 pp. 1991 Subspecies limits and geographic patterns of morphological variation in California gnatcatchers (Polioptila californica). Bull. S. Calif. Acad. Sci. 90: in press, 1992 A maximum estimate of the California gnatcatcher's population size in the United States. Western Birds, 23:1-9. Final 6-95 B-125 Appendix B Caf/Sfaad^FLO\ HCP/OMSP Audubon, J. 1839 Audubon's Ornithological Biography. Vol. V, p. 1. •* Axelrod, D. ' . • 1978 The origin of coastal sage vegetation, Alta and Baja California. Am. m J. Bot. 65:1117-1131. Banks, R, C. ^ 1989 Review: Speciation and geographic variation in black-tailed gnatcatchers. Wilson Bull, 101:360-362. PP Barlow, C. 1902 Some observations on the Rufous-crowned Sparrow. Condor 4: 107-111 P HI Bauder, E. T. 1986 San Diego vernal pools. Recent and projected losses; their p condition; and threats to their existence, 1979-1990. vols. 1&2. Report and Appendices 1-9. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Game, Endangered Plant Project. ^ Beauchamp, R. M. 1986 A Flora of San Diego County, California. Sweetwater River Press, National City, California. m Beecher, W. J, 1951 Adaptations for food getting in the American blackbird. Auk P 68:411^40. ^ Behier, J. Land F.W.King ^ 1979 The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Reptiles and Amphibians. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 743pp. ~ Bent, A. C. *' 1958 Life histories of North American blackbirds, orioles, tanagers, and allies. U.S. Natl. Museum Bull. No. 211. Mi Best, R. ^ 1969 Habitat, annual cycle, and food of the Burrowing Owls in southwestern New Mexico. Unpub. M.S. Thesis, New Mexico State Univ., Las Cruces. 34 pp. m Bond, S, I. 1977 An annotated list of the mammals of San Diego County, California. * Trans. San Diego Soc. Nat. Hist. 18:229-248. Bontrager, D. R. m 1990 Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) TACA « EIR 3 for the Foothill Transportation Corridor (FTQ. Letter to Mr. Steve Letterly, Transportation Corridor Agencies, Costa Mesa, p California. October. P P B-126 Final 6-95 P P Car/sfaad^FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Bostic D. L. 1964 The Ecology and behavior of (Cnemidophorus hyperthrus beldingi) Cope fc(Sauria:Teiidaie) 1-112. Masters Thesis. San Diego State College. 1965 Home range of the teiid lizard (Cnemidophorus hyperthrus beldingi). Southwest Naturalist 10; 278-281. 1966 A preliminary report of reproduction in the teiid lizard (Cnemidophorus hyperythrus beldingi). Herpetologica 22: 81-90. Brewster, W. 1881 On the affinities of certain Polioptilae, with a description of a new species. Bull. Nuttall Ornithol. Club 6:101-107. Brown, J. W. 1980 Hermes Copper. Environmental Southwest 491:23. 1982 Only where the Carex grows. Environmental Southwest 498:22. 1991 Sensitive and declining butterfly species in San Diego County, Califomia. Manuscript. Available from Dudek and Associates, Inc. Brown, J. W. and D. K. Faulkner 1984 Distributional records of certain Rhopalocera in Baja California, Mexico, with the description of a new subspecies of Papilio (Heraclides) astyalus (Godart) (Lepidoptera: Herperiidae). Bulletin of the Allyn Museum 83:1-9. Brown, J. W. and W. W. McCuire 1983 A new subspecies of Euphyes vestris (Boisduval) from Southern Califomia (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae). Trans. San Diego Soc. Nat. Hist. 20:57-68. Brown, J. W., H. G. Real, and D. K. Faulkner 1992 Butterflies of Baja California: Faunal Survey, Natural History, Conservation Biology. The Lepidoptera Research Foundation, Inc. 129 pp. + 8 pi. Brown, J. and H. Weir 1992 Vegetation and Flora of McGinty Mountain San Diego County, California. 60 pp. Burt, Charles E. 1931 A study of the teiid lizards of the genus Cnemidophorus, with special reference to their phylogenetic relationships. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus. No. 154, pp. 1-286, figs. 1-38. Butts, K.O. 1971 Observations on the ecology of Burrowing Owls in westem Oklahoma. A preliminary report. Proc. Okla. Ai:ad. Sci. 51:66- 74. Final 6-95 B-127 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP California, State of 1980 At the crossroads; A report on the status of California endangered •» and rare fish and wildlife. Department of Fish and Game. Ml 1981 Summary report for Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. crassifolia. ^ Department of Fish and Game Endangered Plant Program. m 1982 Analysis of Tom Huffman's locality data for Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp, crassifolia circa. California Department of Fish and Game Endangered Plant Program. ^ 1986 Endangered, rare, and threatened animals of California. » Department of Fish and Game. 1987 Designated endangered or rare plants. Summary list from section 1904 Fish and Came Code (Native Plant Protection Act). Department of Fish and Came. MI 1988 A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California. Sacramento. 166 pp. "* Califomia Deptartment of Fish and Game. ^ 1989 Wildlife Habitat Relationship System. (Database program). *• Department of Fish and Came. m 1990 .1989 Annual report on the status of California's state listed m threatened and endangered plants and animals. Department of Fish and Came. March. pi 1991a Special Animals. Natural Diversity Data Base. Department of Fish and Game. April. ^ 1991b Draft Status Report for Brodiaea filifoHa, September 18, 1991. California Department of Fish and Game Endangered Plant Program. •* Carpenter, N. K. 1907 The Rufous<rowned Sparrow in San Diego County, California. •» Condor 9:158-159. mm- Cassin, J. ^ 1852 Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Science Vol.6, p. 144. m Collins, J. T. 1990 Standard common and current scientific names for North American ^ amphibians and reptiles (3rd Edition). Society for the Study of P Amphibians and Reptiles, Herpetologica I Circular No. 19, 44 pp. P Comstock, J. A. and C. M. Dammers ^ 1935 Notes on the early stages of three butterflies and six moths from California. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of _ Sciences 34:211-225. P Ml B-128 Final 6-95 p P Car/sfaad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Cotton/Beland and Associates 1991 Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass Grading, Draft Environmental Impact Report. Prepared for the City of Carlsbad, Coulumbe, H.C. 1971 Behavior and population ecology of the Burrowing Owl, Speotyto cunicularia, in the Imperial Valley of California. Condor 73:162- 176. Dames and Moore 1991 Biological Assessment; Proposed Ordnance Clearance Project, Mission Trails Regional Park. DeHaven, R., F. Crase, and P. Woronecki 1975 Breeding status of the Tricolored blackbird, 1969-1972. Calif. Fish and Came 61(4): 166-180. DeSante, D.F. et al, 1992 The First Annual Report from A Census of Burrowing Owls in California. The Institute For Bird Populations, Point Reyes Station, California. 29pp. Dudek & Associates and MBA 1992 Draft Biological Resources and Habitat Analysis, City of Carlsbad, California. 89 pp. Earhart, CM. and N.K. Johnson 1970 Size diamorphism and food habits of North American owls. Condor 72:251-264. Ehriich, P., D. Dobkin, and D. Wheye 1988 The Birder's Handbook. Simon & Schuster, New York. Ehriich, P. R., D. D. Murphy, M. C. Singer, C. B. Sherwood, R. R. White, and I. L. Brown 1980 Extinction, reduaion, stability, and increase: The responses of checkerspot butterfly populations to the California drought. Oecologia 46: 101-105. Ehriich, P. R., R. R. White, M. C. Singer, S; W. McKechnie, and L. E. Gilbert 1975 Checkerspot butterflies: a historical perspective. Science 188: 221- 228. Emmel, T. C. and J. F. Emmel 1973 The Butterflies of Southern Califomia. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science series 26:1-148. ERCE 1989 Focused California gnatcatcher mapping of the La Costa planning sub-areas. Prepared for The Fieldstone Company. Unpublished job report. Final 6-95 B-129 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ m 1990a Phase I report. Amber Ridge Califomia gnatcatcher study. Prepared for Weingarten, Siegel, Fletcher Group, Inc., San Diego, California. * April 5, Unpublished job report. 1990b Phase II report, Amber Ridge California gnatcatcher study. » Prepared for Weingarten, Siegel, Fletcher Group, Inc., San Diego, California, September. Unpublished job report. •» 1990c Focused California gnatcatcher mapping of the La Costa planning sub-areas. Prepared for The Fieldstone Company. Unpublished job report. m 1991 Rancho San Miguel general development plan draft environmental impact report EIR-90-02. Prepared for the City of Chula Vista. * December. Unpublished job report. m Esterly, C. O. m 1920 A plague of Rufous<rowned Sparrows. Condor 22: 154. ^ Friedmann, H. 1934 Birds victimized by the cowbird. Wilson Bull. 4(5:25-36. m Frost, D. R., and R. Etheridge 1989 A Phylogenetic Analysis and Taxonomy of Iguanian Lizards * (Reptilla: Squamata). The University of Kansas Museum of Natural P History. Misc. Publ. #1, 65pp + figures and appendices. Garret, K. and J. Dunn 1981 Birds of Southern California, Status and Distribution. Los Angeles Audubon Society, Los Angeles, Calif. 408 pp. Geupel, G. R. and D. F. DeSante 1990 Incidence and determinants of double brooding in Wrentits. Condor 92:67-75. Glaser, H. S. R. 1970 The Distribution of Amphibians and Reptiles in Riverside County, California. Natural History Series #1, Riverside Museum Press, Riverside, California. Cray, J. and D. Bramlet 1991 Species of Special Interest Natural Resources Geographic Information System (CIS) Project. Unpub. rept. for the County of Orange Environmental Management Agency. Gray, J. T. and W. H. Schlesinger 1983 Nutrient use by evergreen and deciduous shrubs in California. Section II. Experimental investigations of the growth, nitrogen uptake and nitrogen availability. J. Ecology 71:43-56. P P B-130 Final 6-95 P P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Grinnell, J. 1904 Midwinter birds at Palm Springs, Califomia. Condor 6:40-45. 1905 The California Sage Sparrow. Condor 7: 18-19. 1915 Birds of California. Pacific Coast Avifauna No. 11. 1926 A critical inspection of the gnatcatchers of the Californias. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. (4th ser.), 16:493-500. Grinnell, J. and A. H. Miller 1944 The distribution of the birds of California. Pac. Coast Avif. 27. Hanes, T. L. 1976 Vegetation types of the San Gabriel Mountains. Pp, 65-76 in J. Lating (ed.). Plant communities of Southern California. California Native Plant Society Spec. Publ. No. 2. Hanna, W. C. 1934 The black-tailed gnatcatcher and the dwarf cowbird. Condor 36:89. Harrison, A. T., E. Small, and H. A. Mooney 1971 Drought relationships and distribution of two Mediterranean- climate California plant communities. Ecology 52:869-875. Harrison, C. 1978 A field guide to the nests, eggs and nestlings of North American birds. William Collins Sons, Glasgow, Great Britain. Hickman, J. C. (Ed.) 1993 The Jepson Manueal, Higher Plants of Califoria. Univesity of California Press, Berkeley, 1400 pp. Holland, Robert F. 1986 Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Nongame-Heritage Program, California Department of Fish and Game. October. Hoover, R. F. 1955 Further observations on Brodiaea and some related genera. Plant Life (Herbertia ed.) 11:13-23. Howe, W. H. 1975 The Butterflies of North America. Doubleday & Co., Inc., Garden City, New York, 633 pp. + 97 color pi. Huey, L. M. 1960 Comments on the pocket mouse, Perognathus fallax, with descriptions of two new races from Baja California, Mexico. Trans. San Diego Soc. Nat. Hist. 12(25):413-420. Final 6-95 B-131 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Impact Sciences, Inc. * 1990 California gnatcatchers (Polioptila californica) at the Subunit 1 Rancho Palos Verdes site. Thousand Oaks, California. May. Unpublished job report. Ingram, J. 1953 A monograph of the genera Bloomeria and Muilla. Madrono 12: m 19-27.1953. HI Jennings. 1987 Impact of the curio trade for San Diego horned lizards (Phrynosoma * coronatum blainvillii) from the Los Angeles Basin. California: •» 1185-1930, j. Herpetology, 21: m Jepson, W. L. ^ 1925 A Flora of California. Associated Students Store. University of California Berkeley California, Vol. I, 749 pp. ip 1936 A Flora of California. Associated Students Store. University of California Berkeley California. Vol. II, 684 pp. ^ 1943 A Flora of California. Associated Students Store. University of California. Berkeley, California. Vol. 3 (lI):129-464. Mk Johnson, N. K. ^ 1989 Review: Speciation and geographic variation in black-tailed gnatcatchers. Auk 106:347-349. ^ Johnson, N. and J. A. Marten * 1992 Macrogeographic patterns of morphometric and genetic variation in ^ the Sage Sparrow complex. Condor 94(1): 1-19. KM. Johnston, R. F. 1956a Population structure in salt marsh song sparrows. Parti. Condor** 58:24-44. ^ 1956b Population struaure in salt marsh song sparrows. Part 2. Condor » 58:254-272. IM. Jones, B.L, ^ 1991 A report on the cowbird removal program on the Sweetwater, San Diego and Santa Clara Rivers, and Santa Ysabel and Dulzura "* Creeks, San Diego and Ventura Counties, California. Unpublished report prepared for California Department of Fish and Game. * Mb Kaufmann, K. 1990 Advanced Birding. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. Keator, C. * 1989 The brodiaeas. Four Seasons. Vol.8 No. 3 Dec. 1989. pp. 4-11. « B-132 F/na/6-95 p P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Keeler-Wolf, T. 1991 Recent changes in the extent of coastal sage scrub, San Diego County, California. Natural Diversity Data Base, California Department of Fish and Came. March. Keeley,J. £. 1982 Reproductive cycles and fire regimes. Pp. 231-277 in H. A. Mooney, T. M. Bonnicksen, N. L. Christensen, J. E. Lotan, and W. A. Reiners (eds.). Proceedings of the conference on fire regimes and ecosystem properties. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Report WO-26, Kirkpatrick, J. B., and C. F. Hutchinson 1977 The community composition of California coastal sage scrub. Vegetation 35:21-33. Klauber, L. M. 1936 The horned toads of the coronatum suoup. Copeia, No. 2 pp. 103- 110. Klopatek, J. M., R. J. Olson, C. J. Emerson, and J. L. Jones 1979 Land-use conflicts with natural vegetation in the United States. Environ. Conservation 6:191-199, Knight, W. 1981 Status of Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. crassifolia (Ericaceae). Four Seasons 6 (3): 19-26. Aug. 1981. Kuchler, A. W. 1977 Natural vegetation of California (map) In Terrestrial vegetation of California, M. G. Barbour and J. Major, eds. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Kunz, T. H. and R. A. Martin 1982 Plecotus townsendii. Mammalian Species 175:1-6. Langen, T. A,, D. T. Bolger, and T. J, Case n.d. Predation on artificial bird nests in chaparral fragments. Unpublished manuscript. MacMillen, R. E. 1964 Population ecology, water relationships, and social behavior of a southern California semidesert rodent fauna. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool. 71:1-59. Malanson, CP. and J. F. O'Leary 1982 Post-fire regeneration strategies of California coastal sage shrubs. Oecologia 53: 355-358. Mantanucci, R. R. 1987 A phyiogenectic study of the horned lizards. Genus Phrynosoma based on skeletal and external morphology. Contribution Science, No. 390 pp. 1-36 Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County 1987. Final 6-95 B_133 Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ P Marti, CD. 1974 Feeding ecology of four sympatric owls. Condor 73:162-176. "* Martin, D.J. 1973 Selected aspects of Burrowing Owl ecology and behavior. Condor •» 75:446-456. P McCurty, B. M. ^ 1980 Preliminary review of the status of the San Diego Horned lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum blainvellei), and the orange-throated ^ whiptail. (Cnemidophorus hyperythrus beldingi). Unpublished report prepared for Calif. Fish and Came. Ml Meserve, P. L. 1976 Food relationships of a rodent fauna in a California coastal sage scrub community. J. Mammal. 57:300-319. m- Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. ^ 1988 A rangewide assessment of the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica). July 23. Unpublished job report. gp 1991a Biological assessment for Draft EIR for the Rancho Santa Fe Road realignment and mass grading. ^ 1991b Report on California gnatcatcher and sensitive plants of the Santa Fe Creek Property, San Diego County, California. P Michael Brandman Associates and Dudek & Associates, Inc. m 1992 Draft Biological Resources and Habitat Analysis City of Carlsbad, California. May 14. Unpublished job report. MI Miller, L. D. and F. M. Brown 1979 Revision of the North American coppers: Bulletin of the Allyn ^ Museum 51:1-27. Miller, A. H. and R. C. Stebbins 1964 The lives of Desert Animals in Joshua Tree National Monument. University of California Press, Los Angeles. •» Mock, P. J., B. L. Jones, M. Crishaver, J. Konecny, and D. King Ml 1990 Home range size and habitat preferences of the California ^ gnatcatcher in San Diego County. Unpublished abstract, American Ornithologists' Union Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, California. ^ Mooney, H. A. • 1977 Southern coastal scrub. Pp. 471-489 in M. G. Barbour and J. Major (eds), Terrestrial vegetation of California. California Native Plant P Society Spec. Publ. No. 9. P Munz, P. A. m 1974 A Flora of Southern California. University of California Press, ^ Berkeley. 1086 pp. P P B-'I34 F/na/6-95 P P Car/5faad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Murphy, D, D. 1990 A report on the California butterflies listed 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. Murphy, D. D. and R. R. White 1984 Rainfall, resources, and dispersal in southern populations of Euphydryas editha (Lepidoptera; Nymphalidae). Pan-Pacific Entomologist 60: 350-354. National Geographic Society 1983 Field guide to the birds of North America, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 464 pp. Neff, J. 1937 Nesting distribution of the Tricolored red-wing. Condor 39: 61-81. Niehaus, T. F. 1971 A biosystematic study of the genus Brodiaea. Univ. Cal. Publ. Bot. 60: 1-66. 1980 The Brodiaea complex. Four Seasons 6(1): 11-21. Oberbauer, T. A. 1979 Distribution and dynamics of San Diego County grasslands. Unpublished M.A. thesis, San Diego State University, San Diego. 1991 Comparison of Pre-European and 1988 Vegetation Coverage for San Diego County. Jn; Abbott, P. and B. Elliot. Ceol. Soc. North Amer., So. Calif. Reg., Sympos. Oct. 21-24, 1991. San Diego, California. O'Leary,]. F. 1990 California coastal sage scrub: general characteristics and considerations for biological conservation. Pp, 24-41 in A. S. Schoenherr (ed.). Endangered plant communities of southern California, Southern California Botanists Spec. Publ, No. 3. O'Leary, J. F. and W. E. Westman 1988 Regional disturbance effects on herb succession patterns in coastal sage scrub. J. Biogeogr. 15:775-786, Orsak, L. J. 1977 The Butterflies of Orange County, Californla. Center for Pathobiology: Misc. Publ. 3 and Museum of Syst. Biolo,: Res. Ser. 4. University of California, Irvine. 349 pp. Perrins, C. and L. A. Middieton 1985 Songbirds. Torstar Books Inc., New York. Pianka, E. R. 1986 Ecology and Natural History of Desert Lizards. Princeton University Press. 208 pp. Final 6-95 B-135 Appendix B Carlshad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Pianka, E. R, and W. S. Parker 1975 Ecology of Homed Lizards: A Review With Special Reference to Phrynosoma platyrhinos. Copeia 1975: 141-162. ^ Presch, W. MI 1969 Evclutionary osteology and relationships of the horned lizard genus Phrynosoma (family Iguanidae). Copeia 1969 (2); 250-275. HI Ransorn, J. E. 1981 Harper and Row's Complete field guide to North American m Wildlife. Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc. Assembled by Jay Ellis Ransom. • Rea, A. M. • 1983 Once a river: bird life and habitat changes on the Middle Gila. • University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona. Ml RECON ^ 1992 Draft biological technical report for Montana Mirador in San Diego, California. Prepared for Newland California. April 30. pi Unpublished job report. ^ 1992 Draft biological technical report for the Rancho Carrillo master ^ plan area and adjacent improvement areas. Prepared for City of Carlsbad. Unpublished job report. Reed, P.B. P 1988 National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: California P (Region O). Biological Report 88(26.10). United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. m Regal, P.J. 1983 The adaptive zone and behavior of lizards. In: Lizard Ecology: |p Studies of a model organism, ed. R. B. Hues, E. R. Dianka and T. W. Schoener. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press. * Remson, J. V. P 1978 Bird Species of Special Concern in California. Calif. Dept. Fish and Ito Game Wildlife Manage. Br. (Sacramento, Calif.), Admin. Rep, 78-1. •I Ridgway, R. ^ 1901 The birds of North and Middle America. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 50. Rissing, S. W. 1981 Prey preferences in the desert horned lizard: influence of prey foraging method and aggressive behavior. Ecology 62(4): 1031-40, Roach, J. D. 1989 The influence of vegetation structure and arthropod abundance on the reproductive success of California black-tailed gnatcatchers Polioptila melanura californica. Unpublished M.A. thesis, San Diego State University, San Diego, California. ^"''^^ Final 6-95 Ml m ii Car/sfaad^FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Roberts, F. 1989 A checklist of the vascular plants of Orange County, California. Museum of Systematic Biology. University of California, Irvine, California. Research Series No. 6. 58pp, Robinson, R.S. 1954 Cannibalism by a Burrowing Owl. Wilson Bull. 66:72. Robinson, S. K. 1988 Reappraisal of the costs and benefits of habitat heterogeneity for nongame wildlife. Pp. 145-155 in Transactions of the Fifty-third North American Wildlife and Natural Resource Conference. San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) 1990 Comprehensive species management plan for the least Bell's vireo. May. 212 pp. San Diego Herpetological Society 1980 Survey and Status of Endangered and Threatened Species of Reptiles Natively Occurring in San Diego County. Sands, S. 1990 Aliso Viejo weed abatement raises concerns. Los Angeles Times, November 11. Schmutz, S.M., J. Maker, and J.K. Schmutz 1989 Abstracts of Annual Meeting of the Genetic Society of Canada, Canadian Society for Plant Molecular Biology, Univ. of Calagary, June 1989, p. 54. Scott, J. A. 1981 New Papilionidae and Hesperioidea from North America. Papilio (new series) 1:1-12. 1986 The Butterflies of North America, a Natural History and Field Guide. Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif. 583 pp. Sexton, C. and C. Hunt 1979 An Annotated Checklist of the Birds of Orange County, California. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, U.C Irvine, California. Sharp, C. S. 1907 The breeding birds of Escondido. Condor 9: 84-91. Sherbrooke, W. C. 1981 Horned Lizards: Unique reptiles of Western North America. Southwest Parks and Monument Association, Globe, Arizona. Shields, O. 1967 Hilltopping; an ecological study of summit congregation behavior of butterflies on a southern California hill. Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera 6(2): 69-178. Final 6-95 B-137 p Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP _ Small, M. F., and M. L, Hunter ^ 1988 Forest fragmentation and avian nest predation in forested landscapes. Oecologia 76:62-64. Smith, H. M. MI 1946 Handbook of lizards, Ithaca, N, Y.: Comstock Publishing Company, Inc., xxi + 557 pp. m Smith, J. P., and K, Berg Inventory c Native Pla Sacramento, California. 1988 Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. California « Native Plant Society Special Publication No. 1, 4th edition. Soule, M. E., D. T. Bolger, J, Wright, M. Sorice, and S. Hill * 1988 Reconstructed dynamics of rapid extinctions of chaparral-requiring P birds in urban habitat islands. Conservation Biology 2:75-92. IM STA Planning Inc ^ 1989 Arroyo La Costa Master Plan Environmental Impact Report. Stebbins, R. C, ^ P 1954 Amphibians and reptiles of western North America. McGraw-Hill, New York, 536pp, 1972 California amphibians and reptiles. Univ. California Press, P Berkeley, California. 152pp. P 1985 A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Houghton p Mifflin Co., Boston, Mass. Mi Storer, R. W. 1955 A preliminary study of the sparrows of the genus Aimophila. Condor 57: 193-201. Sweetwater Environmental Biologists 1986 Fuerte Knolls California black-tailed gnatcatcher study. Summary of the first year of field work. Prepared for the Collings Co., inc., " Newport Beach, California. Unpublished job report. M 1992a Biological Resources Study for the Northwest Site- Carisbad, m California. Prepared for The Fieldstone Company. August 25, 1992. 1992b Biological Resources Report for the Shelly Property- Carlsbad, "* California. Prepared for M.F. Ponseggi and Associates. August 5, • 1992. m Tattersall, E. ^ 1988 The California black-tailed gnatcatcher. University of California, Riverside. Unpublished senior thesis. m Temple, S. A.,.and J. R. Gary "* 1988 Modelling dynamics of habitat-interior bird populations in _ fragmented landscapes. Conserv. Biol. 2:340-347. Ml B-138 Finai 6-95 P Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Thomsen, L. 1971 Behavior and ecology of burrowing Owls on the Oakland Municipal Airport. Condor 73:177-192. Thorne, F. 1963 The distribution of an endemic butterfly, Lycaena hermes. The Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera 2:143-150. Todd, W. E. 1922 A new sparrow from Southern California. Condor 24:126-127. United States Fish and Wildlife Service 1987 Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: Federal Register 50 CFR 17.11 and 17.12. 1991 Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: proposed rule to list the coastal Califomia gnatcatcher as endangered. Federal Register 56(180); 47,053-47,060. Unitt, P. 1984 The birds of San Diego County. San Diego Soc. Nat. Hist. Memoir 13. Van Denburgh, J. 1922 The reptiles of western North America. An account of the species known to inhabit California and Cregon, Washington, Idaho, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, British Columbia, Sonora, and tower California. Calif. Acad. Sci., Occ. Pap. (10); 1-1028. Wells, P. 1968 New taxa, combinations and chromosome numbers in Arctostaphylos (Ericaceae). Madrono 19 (6): 193-210 1986 The leafy-bracted, crown-sprouting manzanitas, an ancestral group in Arctostaphylos. Four Seasons 7 (4): 5-27. 1990 The naming of the manzanitas. Four Seasons, 8: 46-70. WESTEC Services, Inc. 1986 Biological resources analysis of the La Costa planning sub-areas: La Costa, Northwest, Rancheros, La Costa Southeast, La Costa Southwest. Prepared for Lay O, Round and Associates. September. 1987 Biological resources report and impact analysis, Rancho San Diego Specific Plan. Prepared for Mooney-Levine and Associates, San Diego, California. July. Unpublished job report. 1988 Biological survey report for the North Oceanside Annexation Area. Prepared for the City of Oceanside. Final 6-95 B-139 IP Appendix B Carlsbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP ^ Westman, W. E. 1981a Seasonal dimorphism of foliage in California coastal sage scrub. Oecologia 51:385-388. IM 1981b Diversity relations and succession in California coastal sage scrub, MI Ecology 62:170-184. VP 1981c Factors influencing the distribution of species of ^ Californian coastal sage scrub. Ecology 62:439-455. Ml 1982 Coastal sage scrub succession. In C. E. Conrad and W. C, Oechel (eds.). Proceedings of the symposium on dynamics and management of Mediterranean-type ecosystems, pp. 21-99. Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experimental Station Gen. Tech. " Report PSW-58, Berkeley, California. m. 1987 Implications of ecological theory for rare plant conservation in coastal sage scrub. Pp. 133-140 in T. S. Ellas (ed.). Proceedings of ^ the Conference on Conservation and Management of Rare and Endangered Plants.California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. m Whitford and Bryant 1979 Behavior of a predator and its prey: the horned lizard (Phrynosoma cornutum) and harvester ants (Pogonomyvmex spp.). Ecology 60: 686-695. m Wiggins, 1. L. P 1980 A Flora.of Baja Califomia. Stanford University Press. ^ Wilcove, D. iH 1985 Nest predation in forest tracts and the decline of migratory songbirds. Ecology 66:1211-1214. •* Willet, G. 1912 Birds of Southern California. Pacific Coast Avifauna No. 7. ^ 1933 Birds of Southwestern California. Pacific Coast Avifauna No. 21. Williams, D.F. 1986 Mammalian species of special concern in California. The m Resources Agency, California Department of Fish and Game. Wildlife Management Division Administrative Report 86-1. June. Woods, R. S. ^ 1928 Nesting of the black-tailed gnatcatcher. Condor 30:139-143. • 1930 Two more victims of the cowbird. Condor 32:126. * 1949 Black-tailed gnatcatcher. Pp. 374-381 in A. C. Bent (ed.). Life histories of North American thrushes, kinglets, and their allies, p U.S. National Mus. Bull. 196. B-140 F/na/6-95 P P Car/sbad-FLCA HCP/OMSP Appendix B Wright, W. S. 1930 An annotated list of the butterflies of San Diego County, California. Transactions of the San Diego Society of Natural History 6:1-40, Zach, R., and J. B. Falls 1975 Response of the ovenbird (Aves: Parulidae) to an outbreak of spruce budworm. Can J. Zool. 53:1669-1672. Zarn, M. 1974 Burrowing Owl, Speotyto cunicularia hypugaea. Report 11. habitat Management Series for unique or endangered species. Bureau of Land management, Denver. 25 pp. Final 6-95 B-141 First Addendum City of Carlsbad/Fieldstone/La Costa Associates Habitat Conservation Plan/ Ongoing Multi-Species Plan for Properties in the Southeast Quadrant of the City of Carlsbad, CaHfornia Final June, 1995 City of Carlsbad Fieldstone/La Costa Associates California Department of Fish and Game United States Fish and Wildlife Service CONTENTS • CITY OF CARLSBAD STATEMENT OF ENDORSEMENT » CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME LETTER TO CITY OF CARLSBAD • CONSERVATION CONTEXT • EVALUATION OF THE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN/ONGOING MULTI- SPECIES PLAN IN RELATION TO REGIONAL PLANNING EFFORTS • FIELDSTONE HCP INCREASED PRESERVE ACREAGE STUDY - FINANCIAL ANALYSIS • NORTHWEST OFFSITE MITIGATION PROGRAM • SOUTHERN MARITIME CHAPARRAL AND ARROYO SECTION 7 CLARIFICATION LETTER TO US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE REGARDING SOUTHERN MARITIME CHAPARRAL • ESTIMATED MANAGEMENT COSTS FOR THE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN/ONGOING MULTI-SPECIES PLAN FOR PROPERTIES ON THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD • FUEL MODIFICATION ZONE/FIRE SUPPRESSION REQUIREMENTS • SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN Final 6-95 CITY OF CARLSBAD STATEMENT OF ENDORSEMENT Final 6-95 City of Carlsbad Community Development July 19, 1994 Dr. Larry Eng Califomia Department of Rsh and Game 1416 9th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Mr. Gail Kobetich U.S. Rsh and Wildlife Service 2730 Loker Avenue West Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Sirs: This letter of support for the Reldstone/Rancho Santa Fe Road Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) is intended to explain how the HCP is consistent with the draft Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The Ci^ recognizes that the consistency issue is a central one for the reviewing agencies and will carry a great deal of weight in the final decision. In view of this, the City wishes to make it unequivocally clear that the HCP is, in fact, fully consistent with both the letter and spirit of the HMP. Background The HCP and HMP were begun almost simultaneously and have evolved together. Both programs have as their goal the reconciliation of conservation mandates with economic needs and realities. Early in both efforts it was recognized that although the habitat lands in Carlsbad have been hi^ly fragmented by past agriculture and urbanization, some areas are still sufficiently intact and of good qualify to warrant onsite conservation. The HMP identified Reldstone's Southeast II and Rancheros properties to be important core areas in which onsite conservation to the maximum extent practicable would be pursued. To a lesser extent, the Northwest property was also identified as a potential core area. As new biological data and policy statements have been provided by tiie NCCP program and the MHCP, both the HMP and HCP have incorporated tiie new material in a coordinated manner. This has been accomplished by frequent communication between Reldstone, Cify staff, FWS and DFQ staff, and the MHCP consultant team. Although some NCCP policy statements have proven very difficult to implement in practice, even if given the most tcteal possible circumstances, Reldstixie and tfie Cify have diligently worked to incorporate those policy statements into tiie draft plans. Fortimately, a draft HMP document is now available for reference. In addition, tiie MHCP consultant team has released tiie Biological Cae and Linkage Area map and the Biological Goals, Standards and Guidelines for Multiple Habitat Preserve Design. These materials, if used witii tiie caveats indicated by the authors, should facilitate your review of the subregionai Final 6-95 2075 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad. California 92009 • (619) 438-1161 July 19,1994 Paggi and subarea consistency issue. General Observations bv tiie Citv The negotiations which ted to the initial Points of Consensus have convinced tiie City tiiat tiie level of conservation proposed by Reldstone is in fact the maximum conservation tiiat can be achieved while still retaining tiie economic viability of Reldstone's project The HCP proposal also maintains tiie feasibiiify of financing tiie widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road, which is a vital City priori^. Subsequent economic analyses have contirmed ttiat additional onsite conservation would entail an unacceptable economic cost for minimal conservation gains. The City's conclusion is tiiat tiie Reldstone HCP is not only consistent with tiie HMP, it serves as a model for property owner cooperation in habitat planning. Reldstone's circumstances are unique in several ways, combining tiie highest habitat values witii tiie highest land costs in tiie City. For tiiis reason, many of tiie specifics of tiie HCP are not directiy ti'ansferrable. However, tiie fundamental tiiemes of cooperative, proactive planning are applicable titroughout tiie Cify and tiie region. Reldstone has supported tiie HMP, MHCP, and NCCP processes from tiieir inception. They have freely shared tiieir biological and financial data witii all interested parties, even tiiose who would oppose tiieir project They have offered a "cross-project corridor" tiiat meets all stated regional standards and guidelines. They have offered to phase tiieir grading to minimize impacts over time, and tiiey have explored tiie potential for options \o purchase additional acreage if funding should become available. Coastal Sage Scrub and Califomia Gnatcatcher Conservation of coastal sage scrub and California gnatcatchers is a very high priority in the HMP, and it is tiie top priority for tiie HCP. The HCP document speaks for itself regarding the adequacy of tiie proposed conservation. We will add only two points at tiiis time. Rrst, Appendix F of tiie draft HMP is a California Gnatcatcher Assessment prepared by Dr. Phil Behrends of Dudek and Associates. The assessment is valuable primarily in indicating tiiat tiie viability of tiie entire gnati;atcher population in Carlsbad, estimated at between 100 and 160 pairs, depends upon the adequacy of dispersal corridors botii witiiin Carlsbad and to areas outside of Carlsbad. Thus, tiie key factor in long-term survival of tiie gnatcatcher in Carlsbad is more likely tiie conservation provided by ottier land owners and developers, ratiier tiian tiie relative amounts of conservation and take by Reldstone. Our second point is tiiat additional coastal sage scrub conservation onsite would be exfaordinarily expensive, whetiier it is achieved by exaction or by acquisition. Reldstone commissioned tiie preparation of an economic analysis of additional conservation alternatives at tiie request of tiie Endangered Habitats League. The analysis looked at four scenarios for enlarging tiie primary onsite coastal sage scrub preservation area. The least costiy alternative, which would add 56 acres of habitat and would conserve Finai 6-95 July 19, 1994 PaggJ two additional pairs of gnatiratchers, would cost approximately $8.7 million. These costs are tiie result of substantial private investinent which will have to be recovered or absorbed. Gven tiie results of tiie gnatcatcher assessment, as well as tiie limitations on what can be achieved tiirough exaction and tiie practical limitations on funding for acquisition, tiie City does not view additional conservation by Reldstone as eitiier necessary or feasible. Soutiiem Maritime Chaoarral Anotiier aspect of the HCP which we know tii be of interest to tiie Service is conservation of Del Mar manzanita and soutiiern maritime chaparral generally. The Service has recommended to tiie City tiiat tiie HMP indicate a ttireshold for tiiis sub-type of chaparral, and this has recentiy been done. The MHCP vegetation database provides an ^timate of tiie total amount of soutiiern maritime chaparral remaining in Nortii County. This estimate has been reviewed witii Fred Roberts of FWS. The database indicates approximately 590 acres of soutiiern maritime chaparral in Carlsbad, all of it located witiiin designated Preserve Planning Areas. After analyzing tiie opportunities for conservation, tiie -HMP consultant team arrived at a southern maritime chaparral tiireshold of 360 acres. In ottier words, of ttie 1,000 acre chaparral tiireshold, at least 360 must be souttiern maritime chaparral. This tiireshold assumes 28.9 acres conserved onsite on ttie Nortiiwest property, as proposed in tiie HCP. The tiireshold of 360 acres represents approximately 61% conservation of tiie remaining acreage of soutiiern maritime chaparral in Carlsbad. The actiial acreage conserved will likely be higher because 360 acres is tiie minimum acceptable amount The precise location of tiie conserved soutiiern maritime chaparral will be determined by the review process described in tiie draft HMP. The process involves an impartial HMP biologist reviewing proposed plans for conservation and development based on explicit design guidelines which emphasize conservation of tiie highest quality habitat in large, connected blocks. The City and its biological advisors believe tiiat tiiis level of conservation, along with tiie prescribed design process and required management activities to maintain natjral processes, will presen/e significant populations of Del Mar manzanita, wart-stemmed ceonotiius, summer holly, Nuttall's scrub oak, and otiier sensitive plant species in perpetuity. Conclusions The Carlsbad City Council, at its meeting of June 21,1994, auttiorized tiie submittal of tiie HCP as a joint application of tiie City and Reldstone. In taking tiiis action, tiie councilmembers offered a number of comments regarding ttie innovative nahjre of tiie project Reldstone's leadership witiiin tiie development industiy, and tiie very positive message tiiat can be broadcast by approval of ttie HCP. Approval will indicate ttiat different levels of govemment can work cooperativety witii tiie private sector to solve seemingly inti-actable conflicts. It would signal tiiat tiie costs of conservation, attiiough substantial, need not jeopardize ttie survival of private businesses or public agencies. All parties involved in large scale habitat planning need to hear ttiese messages soon if our fragile partiiership is to succeed. Finai 6-95 July 19,1994 Page 4 Dr. John Kirlin has written, in a policy study commissioned by tiie Departinent of Rsh and Game, 'If private property owners and proponents of project are to be enlisted in tiie effort to conserve species, they need incentives to do so and compensation for voluntary ecosystem conservation."* This statement is only one of number of policy recommendations by Dr. Kirlin ti) tiie Departinent for improving tiie protection of and planning for species, habitats and ecosystems. The City views Dr. Kiriin's statement as especially appropriate for tiie Reldstone/Rancho Santa Fe Road HCP. We urge you ti) consider tiiis information as you give due deliberation to ttie application before you. Don Rideout Senior Management Analyst c: Michael Holzmiller, Planning Director John Barone, Reldstone Co. 'Conservation and Cooperation: sti'ategies for making endangered species taws work. John J. Kirlin and Associates, 1993. Final 6-95 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME LETTER TO CITY OF CARLSBAD Final 6-95 .TE OF CAUFORNfA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WUSON, Governor EPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAA\E 6 NINTH STREET . BOX 944209 :RAMENT0, CA 94244-2090 (916) 653-7556 March 29, 1994 The Honorable Claude (Bud) Lewis Mayor, City of Ceurlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 Dear Mayor Lewis: I understand that on April 5, 1994, the Carlsbad City Council will consider a notion to release the City of Carlsbad/Fieldstone La Costa Habitat Conservation Plan (Plan) for public and agency review. This letter is to support a release on that date. Since July of 1991, when the Department of Fish and Game signed a Memorandum of Agreement with the city of Carlsbad, we have dedicated valuable time and effort to plan for the conservation of sensitive habitat on this property. We have worked informally with the city, The Fieldstone Company, other agencies, and concerned citizens, negotiating the details of this project and its consistency with Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan and the North San Diego County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan. Decisions reached on this project are important to the overall Natural Communities Conservation Planning (NCCP) program. Release of the draft plan will enable the Department to complete its formal review. Our comments on this Plan will likely assist the city and other NCCP Subarea jurisdictions in their NCCP planning programs. We look forward to wrapping up the informal review process and evaluating a formally submitted document. My recommendation that the document be released for formal review does not constitute an endorsement of the Fieldstone La Costa Project at this time. Our interest is to receive a document that will enable us to finalize decisions concerning the Plan and establishing its consistency with the NCCP planning process. Final 6-95 The Honorable Claude (Bud) Lewis March 29, 1994 Page Two Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please contact me, or Dr. Larry Eng, (916) 653-9767, if you have questions or comments. Sincerely, Original signed by JOHN H. SULLIVAN John H. Sullivan Chief Deputy Director cc: John Barone The Fieldstone Company San Diego Mr. Gail Kobetich U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Larry L. Eng, Ph.D Department of Fish and Game Sacramento Finai 6-95 CONSERVATION CONTEXT Fih. :/ 6-95 CONSERVATION CONTEXT ^ Introduction M The Habitat Conservation Plan/Ongoing Multiple Species Plan (HCP) was prepared based upon facilitated discussions extending more than three years between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Califomia Department of Fish and Game (DFG), City of Carlsbad M (Carlsbad), representatives of local environmental groups and Fieldstone/La Costa Associates (Fieldstone). This section highlights key &ctors setting the context of the Fadlitation Team's conclusions regarding the HCP. mt First, the Fieldstone/Carlsbad HCP considers that current conservation planning efforts address a broad, range-wide view of wildlife issues to provide a framework for site specific solutions. Second, it highlights key findings pertinent to the HCP. These factors present the context in ^ v/bich the HCP accomplishes, within the scope of endangered species law, both preservation of wildlife and the economic viability of the proposed project. The result is that the HCP offers the best possible conservation for species and does so to the extent required by law. Conservation Context - Ranye-wide Perspective in Evaluating HCPs: ^ Southern Califomia conservation planning has advanced to a level quite (Afferent firom typical project-by-project mitigation. Traditional approaches are mitigation oriented, generally without assurances for the long-term viability of the mitigation or the survivability of the species. — Current approaches are ecosystem oriented. Considerable science is devoted to determine the long-term preserve design for species within habitat types and their ecosystems outside the boundaries of the project. The design of the range-wide preserve is conceived before project IM specific mitigation is proposed to ensure that the mitigation benefits regional conservation ^ planning. Project planning is encouraged to provide for multiple species protection even before many of the species are listed under the Endangered Species Act. Evaluation of impacts to in species leads to mitigation measures that contribute to establishing a viable, regiomd, multi- «H species preserve w This new approach was applied in the creation of the Fieldstone/Carlsbad HOP. This is evident m throughout the Initial Points of Consensus and the formally submitted HCP. The HOP was initiated before the Califomia gnatcatcher, or any species occurring on the property, were listed as threatened or endangered, and before final development plans were approved by the City of m Carisbad. This provided the flexibility needed to concurrendy plan for both conservation and development land uses. The best avalUble scientific information was considered u^g range- * wide and subregionai scientific data. This information was compiled and analyzed by more than * eight expert biologists to determine the long-term preserve criteria. Biological mapping of ^ coastal sage scrub and other habitats from Carisbad to Poway established the regional context for 1 finai 6-95 the s^tive resources onsite. The information and mapping demonstrated that the property contained one of the largest contiguous blocks of coastal sage scrub within the City of Carisbad. It also showed that the property was likely a westem extension of a potential preserve area for North San Diego County (Figure 2). The property also provided an east-west link for the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan (HMP) to a potential preserve system in San Dieguito River Valley Park located southeast of the project. It was concluded that the Fieldstone property is strategically located within any North San Diego County preserve system. This determination became a key consideration in the final design of the HCP. Conservation Context - Findings pertinent to the HCP In addition to the range-wide perspective discussed above, three major fiictors were considered in development of the plaa One, extensive biological surveys concluded that the property contains valuable biological resources, particulariy with respect to coastal sage scmb habitat. Two, the propoty is one of the most cosdy properties in San Diego County, if not nationally. Three, other than development of the project, no other fimding could be rdied upon. These three points are discussed below: 1) Biological resources: The Fieldstone property, comprising 1940 acres, has significant biological value. Several sensitive habitat types are found on the property. One of the most sensitive habitats consists of 955.2 acres of hi^ quality Diegan coastal sage scrub, host to several sensitive species including 48 pairs of Califomia gnatcatchers. The Northwest parcel contains 123 acres (of the total 9SS.2 acres) of coastal sage scmb habitat including several isolated patches. Several sensitive plant species occupy the Northwest parcel including one of the largest populations of Del Mar manzanita. A complete Inventory of Resources and Evaluation of the Habitat is presented in Section 3 of the HCP. 2) Cost of the Property and the HCP: The property is within a highly urbanized setting and is planned for urban re^dential development. The total property, inclu<ting some land located outside the HCP boundaries, was purchased in 1988 at an initial cost of S180 million. This high cost reflects the &ct that this is one of the last large undeveloped pieces of coastal land in San Diego County. In addition to high initial cost, the cost of providing required public fiicilities, pursuant to Carisbad's Growth Management Plan is substantial. Facility uid infiitstructure costs on the project exceed $300 million dollars. As an example, Rancho Santa Fe Road, scheduled to be improved as a regional transportation fiicility, is estimated to cost more than S60 million. A si^iificant share of this fiu^ty is fimded by the development project. This roadway is a critical Final 6-95 elemem of Carlsbad's Growth Management Plan and must be financially assured before the private development program can proceed. Economic analyses of multiple alternatives were considered to assure that Fieldstone would mitigate to the maximum extent practicable. These analyses are included in this document and demonstrate the extremely high cost of additional incremental conservation. It was concluded that the cost to Fieldstone to create and implement the HCP is approximately $25 million dollars. Fieldstone could not bear additional cost without jeopardi:ang fUnding to implement the HCP and feasibility of the development project. 3) Funding Sources: Federal Endangered Species Law requires that the HCP be adequately fiinded. This means that a reliable fiinding source must be identified. While it is appropriate that local, state and federal fimding participate in the conservation of this habitat, there is no outside fiinding available from any of these sources. Revenues derived from the developing the project are the sole source of fimding to prepare and implement the HCP, and establish its role in the re^onal-wide Phm. Results These fectors were deliberated extensively by the Facilitation Team. Several biologists, USFWS and DFG agency representatives, City of Carlsbad staf^ local environmental groups and the property owner considered these issues. Multiple alternatives were evaluated to optimize the best possible solution for the HCP. Included was an alternative which would have mitigated almost entirely offsite. (see Alternatives to the Taking, section 4.B.2 of the HCP). The Facilitation Team concluded that the property provides the primary connection between the City and the San Dieguito River Valley area. This connection is essential to the long-term conservation of wildlife within the City of Carlsbad and an important element to a fiilly diverse North County Multiple Habitat Conservation PUn (MHCP). Also, the Team con^dered it important to preserve, onsite, certain species of senative plants on the Northwest pared. The result of this analyas concluded that while the Fieldstone property was extremely expensive, it was essential to: 1) Preserve as much onsite coastal sage scmb habitat as possible withm the Rancheros-Southeast II area, 2) Protect onsite sensitive plant species in the Northwest, 3) Acquire ofisite coastal sage scmb habitat for impacts to coastal sage scmb resulting from development of Northwest, and 4) Do this in a configuration that enhances connectivity between the City of Carlsbad's remaining wildlife resources and the remaining potential Nortii County preserve areas. Final 6-95 While impacts to spedes and their habitat will result from development of the project, the HCP accomplishes the ^ve criteria and forms the nucleus of a major North County wildlife preserve within the Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP). The specific impacts are described in Section 4 of the HCP and illustrated in Tables 11 and 12. The HCP development activities impacts 507.2 of 9SS.2 onsite acres of coastal sage scmb habitat and impacts S79.S acres of 741.9 acres of other sensitive habitat Cmcluding chaparral, grassland and riparian scmb/woodland). These impacts were deemed acceptable because: 1) Biological goals for the property were met induding the preservation of 850.4 acres of sensitive habitat. 2) Fiddstone mitigated to the maximum extent practicable. 3) The HCP is an important component of the City's HMP and the North San Diego County MHCP. The HCP contributes to the conservation objectives of both these phms. 4) The HCP is 100% privately fiinded. Devdopment of the project provided the only reliable source of fimding for the conservation actions set forth in the HCP. 5) The HCP was consistent with the other requirements of Endangered Spedes Laws induding the requirement under Federal ESA Section 10 that the plan does not appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival or recovery of ai^ of the spedes in the wild. Rdnforcement of the Consensus Decisions The above conclusions led to the preparation of a document called the Initial Points of Consensus (IPC). This document was prepared in June 1992 and acknowledged by USFWS, DFG, City of Carlsbad and Fiddstone to summarize the key points of agreement and serve as the basis for preparation of the formal HCP. Since then, the consensus decisions have been reinforced by sdentific information, legal protection and regional planning. For example, since the consensus ded^on: 1) With respect to the California gnatcatcher and its habitat, a) NCCP and federal listing of the spedes are providing more certainty of protection than could be relied upon at the time. b) The populations of Califomia gnatcatchers in the City of Carisbad and range-wide have been demonstrated to be consistent with, or exceed, those known at the time of the IPC. c) Antidpated prelisting losses of the bird and its habitat did not occur. d) Subsequent HMP and MHCP scientific studies rdnforce the validity of the data base and the HCP design conclusions. 2) The HMP, which was conceptual at the time of the IPC, has now identified Final 6-95 preserve areas within the City. The HMP has been released for public review and has incorporated the HCP as a key component of its program. 3) The MHCP, not under way at the time of the IPC, has advanced in its design and provides a framework consistent with the HCP. 4) The City of Carisbad formally endorsed the HCP. (See Don Rideout letter dated July 19, 1994). 5) Subsequent onsite surveys and research on range-wide information have confirmed the occurrence of sensitive plants on the Northwest parcel and the appropriateness of the proposed mitigation measures arrived at in consultation witii DFG. 6) The proposed NCCP program is formally adopted by state and federal agreements and planning efforts are under way throughout southem Califomia. 7) Further economic studies demonstrated the prohibitive cost of additional incremental on-site conservation. Summarv The Fiddstone/Carisbad HCP preserves as much high quality habitat onsite as possible. Additionally it provides for ofi&ite acquisition of up to another 240 acres of si^uficant habitat resources. Configuration of the preserve dedgn complements, and does not predude, preparation of a final subregionai wildlife preserve system. The HCP is consistent with, and establishes the initial component of the City of Carload HMP and the MHCP. It provides conservation of key preserve areas and allows for the progressive creation of both subregionai plans. In summary, the HCP considers the range-wide context, the value of the onsite resources, the economics of the project, and the fimding sources available. It offers the best possible conservation for the spedes, without appreciably reducing the likelihood of survival and recovery of the spedes in the wild and does so to the extent required by law. Final 6-95 EVALUATION OF THE HABrPAT CONSERVATION PLAN/ONGOING MULTI-SPECIES PLAN IN RELATION TO REGIONAL PLANNING EFFORTS Final 6-95: EVALUATION OF THE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN/ONGOING MULTI-SPECIES PLAN IN RELATION TO REGIONAL PLANNING EFFORTS INTRODUCTION The Habitat Conservation Plan/Ongoing Multi-Species Plan (HCP/OMSP) is located within two larger scale biological resource-based planning efforts: The Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP) being implemented by Uie San Diego Association of Governments; and the City of Carlsbad's Habiut Management Plan (HMP). The goal of the HCP/OMSP is to be consistent with these larger scale planning efforts. Both plans are designed to assist City and regional planners with the development of open space reserve systems tiiat provide adequate preservation of a suite of target species, including die coastal Califomia gnatcatcher {Polioptila californica californica), while facilitating viable economic growth for the region. The HCP/OMSP was initiated prior to tiie start of the HMP and MHCP. Both of these subsequent planning efforts have been proceeding concurrendy with completion of tiie HCP/OMSP. An extensive data base has been compiled for both plans. Data layers of numerous biotic and abiotic factors such as habitat type, presence of sensitive species, corridor value, slope, patch size, and others were compiled for use in the development of these plans. Land use planning data were also compiled including zoning, degree of protection, and others. Computer models based on the extensive databases discussed above have been developed to serve as tools for use in regional planning and for prioritizing lands for acquisition and preservation. They provide a regional perspective for site-specific biological assessments. The results of these models are the development of Habitat Evaluation Maps which rank habitat polygons as low. moderate, high, or "very" high quality, based on these factors. MHCP RESULTS In looking regionally at the MHCP, several observations are apparent. With tiie exception of the large block of chaparral west of Escondido, most of the remaining habitat west of Interstate 15 and soutii of State Route 78 tiiat occurs in large contiguous blocks was ranked as "very" high quality habitat The Rancheros-Southeast II parcel is part of one of ttiese contiguous blocks of sage scmb (Figure 1). Table 1 summarizes tfie HCP/OMSP based on tiie MHCP Habitat Evaluation Models Composite Model analysis dated August 10. 1993. It should be noted that ttiese maps are developed at a gross scale with oitiy limited field verification, and are not intended to assess areas at a project-specific level. According to the model, a large majority of both Rancheros- Southeast n and Nortiiwest are ranked as "very" high value habitat The only areas not ranked as "very" high value habitat on the Rancheros-Southeast n parcel occur on the slopes on either side of San Marcos Creek (high), the northem portion of the Rancheros site (moderate), and along the northem edge of Southeast II (low and moderate). Essentially all of the Northwest parcel is ranked as "very" high, with only scattered disturbed areas being ranked as high or moderate. -1-Final 6-95 Table 1 Summary of Habitat Value Rankings for tiie Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe and Northwest Parcels Rancheros-Rancho SEI^ Northwest (%) Disturbed Medium High "Very" High 5 11 8 _Z6 2 2 1 _2S 100 100 HMP RESULTS The HMP results were very consistent witti the MHCP modeling. Over 70 percent of all of the undeveloped lands not currentiy mapped as agricultural lands in the City of Carlsbad are mapped as "very" high value. An additional 15 percent is mapped as high value. Only approximately 14 percent of the natural lands remaining in tiie City were not mapped as high or "very" high value. As part of ttie analysis for tiie HCP/OMSP, gnatcatcher locations were plotted for a significant portion of the City based on existing information in environmental documents, as well as additional focused surveys conducted on behalf of The Fieldstone Company on all lands where access was available. These and otiier sensitive resource data were provided to tiie City for use in the HMP. and provided a significant portion of tiie overall data base for ttie HMP. A total of approximately 120 locations were identified as part of tiie HCP/OMSP analysis. Subsequent additions, especially from data of smaller patches of sage scmb within the City, have increased the number of gnatcatcher locations to as many as 150. The HMP has incorporated tiie HCP/OMSP design into tiieir reserve planning. The HCP/OMSP represents tiie first phase of implementing tiie HMP. Including tiie proposed development within the HCP/OMSP. between 75 and 95 gnatcatcher pairs would be preserved within tiie City HMP. Based on this design, a Population Viability Analysis (PVA) prepared for the coastal Califomia gnatcatcher indicates that tiiere is a 98 percent probability of persistence over a 200 year planning horizon witiiin tiie City of Carisbad. The high probability of persistence was based on the assumption that connectivity was retained witiun tiie reserve system. The HCP/OMSP open space configuration placed connectivity as a priority. While PVA's can jdefmitely assist in assessing ttie relative values between preserve planning options, extreme caution should be used in relying too heavily on ttieir finite results to "prove" that a given open space system functions for a given species. There is still much debate among professional biologists as to the appropriate values to be used as assumptions in PVA's. including tiie PVA prepared for tiie gnatcatcher. The probability of persistence figure noted in the previous paragraph should be viewed in light of this. In addition to the gnatcatcher. both ttie MHCP and HMP address numerous additional "target" species or HMP "species of concern", including 60 of the 66 species identified as "species of concern" in tiie HCP/OMSP. The intent of tiie MHCP and HMP are to address all of tiiese species witiiin tiie regional planning context using a habitat based approach for preservation. The HCP/OMSP is completely consistent witii tiiese objectives. -2-Final 6-95 being accomplished entirely witti private funding. Both the HMP and MHCP will require significant local, state and federal funding if they are to be successful. The HCP/OMSP, as currentiy proposed, will help achieve the regional biological, economic, and planning goals for the region without public sector funding. m m Final 6-95 mi HCP/OMSP CONSISTENCY The results of tiie MHCP and HMP Habitat Evaluation Models are consistent witti ttie assumptions made during tiie development of ttie HCP/OMSP. These are listed below. 1. Both ttie Rancheros-Soutiieast II and Northwest parcels support high quality sage scmb vegetation; although, ttie sage on the Northwest parcel is somewhat fragmented. 2. The Rancheros-Southeast II parcel is part of a large contiguous band of high quality sage scmb extending from wittiin the City of Carlsbad to ttie San Dieguito River Valley. 3. Connectivity from Rancheros-Southeast n to Northwest is restricted based on existing development 4. The Northwest has limited connectivity to the north. Connectivity to the west is restricted by ttie existing El Camino Real. 5. Northwest is a high value site because of the presence of a number of sensitive plant species; in particular, sensitive plants occurring in native grassland and southern maritime chaparral. These assumptions resulted in a plan ttiat accomplished the following. 1. The first priority for ttie Rancheros-Southeast II parcel was to preserve existing habitat on site, and to insure viable connectivity with the larger block of high value habitat to tiie southwest This has been accomplished through on-site preservation and provision for two wildlife corridors: the cross-project corridor and the San Marcos Creek corridor. 2. Habitat preservation on Northwest was to focus on protection of sensitive plant species and their habitat, and a provision for connectivity, primarily to the northeast. This has been accomplished by preservation of a significant majority of the Del Mar manzanita (Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. crassifolia), thread-leaved brodiaea {Brodiaea filifolia), and several otiier sensitive plant species and their habitats, and by providing a wildlife movement corridor along the eastern edge of the golf course and mnning north and east off site. 3. Because of the fragmented nature of the sage scmb on ttie Northwest parcel, sage scrub mitigation was to focus on am acquisition program enhancing off-site connectivity within tiie study area. This will be accomplished as part of the implementation of the plan. SUMMARY In summary, the HCP/OMSP properties were identified early in ttie process as being of high habitat value by tiie HCP/OMSP project team. Additionally, ttie regional significance of ttie project, in relation to preserve planning in northem San Diego County, was emphasized throughout the planning process. This assessment has been confirmed by the MHCP habitat evaluation mapping completed for the region. The project planning process has incorporated these two primary concerns into the final reserve design for the project with ttie results being ttie project as proposed. Because of ttiis planning, ttie project will serve as ttie initial phase in the successful implementation of tiie HMP and MHCP. More importantiy. ttiis phase is -3- Final 6-95 FIELDSTONE HCP INCREASED PRESERVE ACREAGE STUDY - FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Final 6-95 4y7W (!Uv. 4/37^) ML FIELDSTONE HCT - SOUTHEAST H Increased Preserve Acreage Study Attached is an economic study prepared by Dr. Jun Onaka of the City of Carlsbad HMP preparation team. Hie stud^ analyzes increases in master development costs to Fieldstone resulting from additional preservation of open space, including coastal sage scrub, OS Fieldstone's Southeast II property. Four alternatives were evahiated. The increased costs and resultant increased acreage preservation are summarized below. Noted in parenthesis are the number of gnatcatcher pairs preserved with each alternative. Increased Acreage Alternative Increased Cost Milk ) Preservation fPairs^ 1. 8.7 56 (2) MM H. 28.8 211 (5) MM in. 36.7 262 (7) m IV. 503 360 (10) Increased cost per acre ranges from $136,000 to $155,000. When consistent methodology is applied to evahiate the cost impact of the existing preserve ^tem in Southeast n, the resuhant cost is approximately $19.0 Million. Tlie following are conclusions which can be drawn from the results of the analysis. 1. The existing HCP represents mitigation to the maximum extent practicable. 2. Significant additional mitigation is financially infeasible. 3. Even minimum losses in developable area in this project have substantial financial consequences. Final 6-95 7/15/94 HELDSTONE HCP INCREASED PRESERVE ACREAGE STUDY HNANCIAL ANALYSIS Financial analyses were performed by Dr. Jun Onaka of the Carlsbad HMP preparation team to determine the financial cost impacts to Fieldstone resulting from both the existing HCP preserve design and additional conservation. Both the Southeast II and Northwest parcels were considered. The HCP is 100% funded by Fieldstone. The total cost impacts to Fieldstone for the existing HCP preserve exceed $25.0 million. Of this amount, approximately $3.5 million has been spent to date in preparation of the plan. In general, the impacts of additional conservation range from $136,000 to $155,000 per acre. By comparison, typical open space values in San Diego County range from $4,000 to $15,000 per acre. It is our conclusion that the current HCP represents minimization and mitigation to the maximum extent practicable. Additional incremental conservation is extremely costiy and will render the development of the project infeasible from a financial standpoint. Detailed analyses follow. Final 6-95 FIELDSTONE HCP - SOUTHEAST II INCREASED PRESERVE ACREAGE STUDY I. SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES II. HNANCIAL ANALYSIS - ASSUMPTIONS III. HNANCIAL ANALYSIS - RESULTS IV. DISCUSSION Final 6-95 4/7/94 Fieldstone HCP- SE II Increased Preserve Acreage Study Summary of Alternatives — The HCP team met on February 18, 1994 regarding alternatives to increase preserve acreages ^ beyond ttie current HCP, for tiie Southeast II area. Dr. Phil Behrends (HCP/MHCP Biologist) and Biologist Barry Jones attended the February 18th meeting. The alternatives ^ were created based on biological criteria. The area south of the current 1,000 foot preserve ^ corridor within the SE n area was determined to be the best area for increased preservation. Areas north of the corridor were eliminated from consideration because of lower habitat values. The alternatives were based on preservation of various combinations of geographical hi areas. The geographical areas were generally divided along the future alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road, future Melrose Avenue South, and an east-west SDG&E corridor. mm *• It should be noted that all alternatives described in ttiis summary would require major land use dedsions and changes in policy by the Carlsbad City Council. At this time there is no " guarantee that the City will adopt such changes. It should also be noted that the amount of •* development lost witti each alternative could not be recovered through densification of land uses. This is due to physical site constraints, conflicts with the City's General Plan, and conflicts with existing land uses. Alternative I ^ Alternative I would add ttie area north of ttie SDG&E easement and east of ttie future alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road to the current preserve design. With the elimination of tiiis area from development, it would be necessary to relocate/redesign Melrose Avenue Soutti, a planned Prime Arterial in ttie City's General Plan Circulation Element, to ttie soutti of ttie SDG&E easement. The road would have to be downgraded to a Major Arterial in M order to meet engineering curve radius requirements. It is assumed that Rancho Santa Fe Road would continue to be located in its proposed alignment. m With this alternative, intersection spacing will not meet City requirements. The required spacing for intersections along a prime arterial, such as Rancho Santa Fe Road, is 2,400 feet. With ttie realignment of Melrose Avenue South, the distance between the proposed access to the MAG property and Melrose Avenue South would be approximately 1,150 feet. In addition, ttie distance between the access to the development area west of Rancho Santa Fe Road adjacent to ttie 1,000 foot corridor and Melrose Avenue Soutti would be approximately "• 1,350 feet. The realignment of Melrose Avenue Soutti would require a variance to ^ engineering standards. This issue would need to be resolved witti the City. Final 6-95 4/7/94 A fire station site and a community facilities site within Fiddstone's property would also be eliminated with this alternative. These sites would be required by the City to be rdocated dsewhere wittiin Fieldstone's property. The rdocation of ttie fire station site is contingent upon approval by the City. In order to provide adequate response times to emergencies, the fire department will likely have certain minimum locational criteria. This would need to be studied in more detail. This alternative adds 53 acres of Coastal sage scrub and two (2) gnatcatcher pairs to the preserve. Alternative n Alternative n would require the complete elimination of Melrose Avenue South and would add to the preserve the area described in Alternative I, plus an additional area to the south of the SDG&E powerline easement and east of future Rancho Santa Fe Road. Because of the configuration of this additional conserved land and the elinunation of any access through Fiddstone's property, it is assumed tiiat the Shelly property (+/- 80 acres) would also need to be acquired. This property is located primarily south of the SDG&E powerline easement and to ttie east of Fiddstone's property. This alternative would have the same impacts to roads, the fire station site, and the community facility site as Alternative I, except that Melrose Avenue would be completely eliminated. This alternative adds 138 acres of Coastal sage scrub and five (5) gnatcatcher pairs to ttie preserve. AUgrnativg Ul Alternative in would require that Rancho Santa Fe Road is widened in its existing location. This alternative would preserve the same area as described for Alternative n and, in addition, the area north of the powerline easement and east of the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road. As with Alternative n, Melrose Avenue South would not be constructed. Again, this alternative assumes tiiat ttie Shelly property (+/- 80 acres), east of Fiddstone's property, would need to be acquired. This alternative assumes that, in order to maximize the benefit of the additional land in the preserve, Rancho Santa Fe Road could be widened in its existing alignment. Feasibility of widening along the current alignment is subject to verification by an engineer. Also, there are political and safety ramifications from the widening of existing Rancho Santa Fe Road. The currentiy planned alignment is the result of numerous studies, workshops, and hearings. Significant opposition to widening along the current alignment has been experienced from Final 6-95 4/7/94 large numbers of area residents in tiie recent past, and can be antidpated in the future. A change in the currentiy planned alignment would also require a change of current City Council policy. This alternative adds 178 acres of Coastal sage scrub and seven (7) gnatcatcher pairs to the preserve. Alternative TV Alternative IV would preserve all areas described in Alternative III and in addition, ttie remaining Fiddstone and MAG properties to ttie soutti of ttie powerline easement. Again, ttus would assume ttiat Rancho Santa Fe Road would be widened along its current alignment, ttiat Melrose Avenue South would not be constmcled, and that ttie +/- 80 acre Shelly property would need to be acquired. The ramifications of widening Rancho Santa Fe Road in its current alignment arc discussed under Alternative m. This alternative adds 249 acres of Coastal sage scrub and ten (10) gnatcatcher pairs to ttie preserve. Final 6-91 LEGEND HCP PRESERVE AREAS PRESERVE BOUNDARY [•''"•'•'I NON-FLCA PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING ROADWAY FUTURE ROADWAY SOUTHWEST SECTION 7 PRESERVE AREAS 30(r SWATH Prepared By: Hofman Planning Associates NTS Southeast II - Existing Preserve Design Final 6-95 HP LEGEND PRESERVE AREAS ADDmONAL PRESERVE AREAS PRESERVE BOUNDARY NON-FLCA PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING ROADWAY FUTURE ROADWAY Prepared By: Hofman Planning Associates NTS Southeast II -Alternative I Preserve Final 6-95 LEGEND PRESERVE AREAS ADDITIONAL PRESERVE AREAS NON-FLCA PARCELS TO BE ACQUIRED* PRESERVE BOUNDARY NON-FLCA PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING ROADWAY FUTURE ROADWAY * Propwty wouM not hm acxass and th«rafor« wouM DMd to b« act^ Prepared By: Hofman Planning Associates NTS Southeast II -Alternative II Preserve f/na/6-95 LEGEND PRESERVE AREAS ADDPTIONAL PRESERVE AREAS NON-FLCA PARCELS TO BE ACQUIRED* PRESERVE BOUNDARY NON-FLCA PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING ROADWAY * Prop»rty would not hava aeeau and tharatara would naad to ba acquirad. Prepared By: Hofman Planning Associates NTS Southeast n -Alternative HI Preserve Final 6-95 LEGEND PRESERVE AREAS ADDITIONAL PRESERVE AREAS NON-FLCA PARCELS TO BE ACQUIRED* PRESERVE BOUNDARY NON-FLCA PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING ROADWAY • Proparty would not hava accats and ftarafora would naad to ba acquirad. Prepared By: Hofman Planning Associates Mrs Southeast n -Alternative IV Preserve HELDSTONE HCP - SOUTHEAST II INCREASED PRESERVE ACREAGE STUDY m HNANCIAL ANALYSIS II. ASSUMPTIONS «• A. The study determines the estimated shortfall in the funding of master development costs that could occur as a result of increasing preserve acreage *• beyond the current HCP levels and reducing dwelling unit yield. When MAG and Shelfy properties are included in the preserve, estimates of value are used for these properties. wm B. The estimates of unfunded master development costs do not include reduced profit, equity or overhead earnings resulting from the dwelling unit reduction. The analysis, therefore, understates Fieldstone*s true total cost and ignores foregone opportunity cost ** C. Costs considered include Rancho Santa Fe Road-CFD, Rancho Santa Fe mm Road-Outside Lanes, Melrose Avenue, HCP planning and mitigation costs ^ and acquisition and development loan costs. — D. Whenever possible, costs are based upon public information or, if unavailable, developer's internal budgets. £. Costs are allocated based upon the most appropriate allocation base utilizing the equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) approach, similar to that employed by the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road CFD. FFEM ALLOCATION BASE RSF Road - CFD Zones 11 and 12 RSF Road - Outside Lanes SE II Only Fieldstone Land Loan Payoff Southwest, SE II, Rancheros, Northwest Meh-ose South (TFC Portion) SE II Only (Excluded for Alternatives IMV) HCP Planning and Mitigation Costs SE II, Rancheros, NW F. The Shelly property is assumed to be 57 dwelling units for Alternatives II-IV per preliminary planning documents for Rancho Santa Fe Road CFD. G. Units assumed lost cannot be recaptured by densification of land uses in other areas because of physical site constraints, conflicts with the City's General Plan and conflicts with existing land uses. H. MAG property net acreage (62.8) is per preliminary planning documents for Rancho Santa Fe Road CFD. .IM Final 6-95 I I i t » i I t i £ r } I t f ) I f I t I I I FIELDSTONEHCP- SOUTHEASTII INCREASED PRESERVE ACREAGE STUDY FINANCIAL ANALYSIS III. RESULTS Alternative I n* III* IV Gnatcatcher Pairs 2 5 7 10 (+3) (+2) (+3) Acres Preserved - CSS Only 53 138 178 249 (+82) (+40) (+71) Units Lost 145 524 660 700 (-379) (-136) i-40) Commercial Acres Lost 0 0 0 62.8 Financial Impact ($ Millions) 8.7 28.8 36.7 50.5 Per Acre - C(}astal Sage Scrub $164,151 $208,696 $206,180 $202,811 Total Increased Acreage (Including CSS) *** 56 211 262 360 Per Acre $155,357 $136,493 $140,076 $140,278 * Includes acreage for Fieldstone and Shelly properties. * * Includes acreage for Fieldstone, Shelly and MAO properties. * * * Includes other habitat types, previously dtstwbed areas, etc. nELDSTONE HCP - SOUTHEAST II INCREASED PRESERVE ACREAGE STUDY nNANCLU- ANALYSIS rV. DISCUSSION A. The Financial Impact does not necessarily reflect the price at which the land *" could be acquired. B Financial impacts range from $8.7 million up to $50.5 million with a per acre ** range of $164,000 to $203,000 (CSS only) and $136,000 to $155,000 (total increased acreage). C. In general, conservation acquisition opportunities within San Diego County range from $4,000 to $15,000 per acre. The 110 acre Kelly property in ^ Carlsbad recentiy sold for $13,000 per acre. Following is a comparison of tiie increased preserve acreage which could be obtained on Fieldstone property versus other acquisition opportunities using the same alternatives analysis financial impact dollars. Other acquisition is assumed to cost $13,000 per acre. ^ Alternative S^Millions'^ Fieldstone Acreage Other Acreage I $8.7 56 669 — II $28.8 211 2,215 m $36.7 262 2,823 IV $50.5 360 3,885 D. The substantial dwelling unit losses in each alternative could cause additional economic and planning impacts including loss of public facility fee revenue, reduced planning options and loss of flexibility to provide affordable housing. ana E. Alternatives III and TV assume the widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road along *" its existing alignment It is highly likely tiiat significant public opposition — would render these alternatives infeasible. ^ F. In determining the most appropriate use of acquisition doUars, biological — priorities v^rill need to be set. These will include examining the tradeoffs between incremental acquisition of single site preserve acres versus applying dollars to strengthen connectivity and viability of entire preserve systems. Final 6-95 7A5/94 '3M FIELDSTONE HCP - NORTHWEST Increased Preserve Acreage Study Below are the results of an economic study prepared by Dr. Jun Onaka of the City of Carlsbad HMP preparation team. The study analyzes the increases in master development costs to Fieldstone resuking from additional preservation of open space, primarily Southem Maritime Chaparral, on Fieldstone's Northwest property. The study area is shown on the attached exhibit. The increased cost resulting from the preservation of an additional 63 acres is approximately $9.7 million. The increased cost per acre is approximately $154,000. This cost does not necessarily reflect the price at which the land could be acquired. Resultant dwelling unit losses could cause additional economic and planning impacts including loss of public facility fee revenue, reduced planning options and loss of flexibility to provide affordable housing. The following are conclusions which can be drawn from the results of the analysis. 1. The existing HCP represents mitigation to the maximum extent practicable. 2. Significant additional mitigation is financially infeasible. 3. Even minimum losses in developable area in this project have substantial financial consequences. Final 6-95 7/15/94 FIELDSTONE HCP - NORTHWEST INCREASED PRESERVE ACREAGE STUDY FINANCLVL ANALYSIS II. ASSUMPTIONS A. The study determines the estimated shortfall in the funding of master development costs that could occur as a result of increasing preserve acreage beyond the current HCP levels and reducing dwelling unit yield. B. The estimates of unfunded master development costs do not include reduced profit, equity or overhead earnings resulting from the dwelling unit reduction. The analysis, therefore, understates Fieldstone's true total cost and ignores foregone opportunity cost. C. Costs considered include master improvement costs, HCP planning and mitigation costs and acquisition and development loan costs. D. Whenever possible, costs are based upon public information or, if unavailable, developer's internal budgets. E. Costs are allocated based upon the most appropriate allocation base utilizing the equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) approach, similar to that employed by the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road CFD. F. Units assumed lost cannot be recaptured by densification of land uses in other areas because of physical site constraints, conflicts with the City's General Plan and conflicts with existing land uses. m m Final 6-95 Final 6-95 NORTHWEST OFFSITE MITIGATION PROGRAM Final 6-95 NORTHWEST OFFSITE MITIGATION PROGRAM Given the location and configuration of the coastal sage scrub habitat on the Northwest subarea of the HCP, it was determined that offsite mitigation would be most appropriate. It is contemplated that most, if not all, of the gnatcatcher pairs and coastal sage scrub on this site will be taken by development. The HCP contemplates a mitigation program using a habitat based approach rather than simple pair-for-pair replacement. Under this approach up to 240 acres of high quality habitat will be acquired, with an emphasis on coastal sage scrub. To the extent possible, 50% of the mitigation will occur within the City of Carlsbad's HMP area and 50% wiU occur in a corridor area linking Carlsbad and the Southeast II parcel to the San Dieguito River Park. The final acquisition program will be developed jointly with the City of Carlsbad, USFWS and CDFG and will be subject to agency approval prior to acquisition. In general, the following criteria will apply: a. Biological^ viable coastal sage scrub habitat or other appropriate biological open space as approved by CDFG/USFWS; b. Biodiversity and populations of other species of concern other than the gnatcatcher (especially plant or animal species impacted by development on the Northwest development); c. Connectivity to other coastal sage scrub habitat or appropriate biological open space; d. Significant ecosystem values and opportunities for regional planning; e. Potential for enhancement of plant or animal populations or revegetation of low quality or degraded habitat; f. Long-term management potential; g. Compatibility with surrounding land uses; h. Acceptabihty as biological open space by local jurisdictions. Alternative locations may be considered if CDFGAJSFWS deem those locations a higher priority for acquisition. Final 6-95 SOUTHERN MARITIME CHAPARRAL AND ARROYO SECTION 7 OLARIFICAtlON Final 6-95 Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc. 3838 Camino c3e! Rio North, Suite 270, San Diego. California 92108 (619) 624-2300 Fax (6'9) 624-2301 tow MEMORANDUM To: John Barone Ed Sauls Mike McCoUum *" Lindell Marsh From: Barry Jones Date: July 15. 1994 Subject: Southem maritime chaparral and Arroyo Section 7 clarification Per your request. I am providing you with clarification on the take of Southem maritime «• chaparral and a summary of the Arroyo Section 7 and its relationship to the HCP. Take of Southem Maritime Chaparral The take assessment and conservation assessment in the HCP/OMSP is separated out by botii habitat and individual sensitive plant species occupying those habitats. The assessment does not discuss species and habitats in combination however. This discussion is intended to clarify the relationship between the two for southem maritime chaparral. Approximately 120 acres of southern maritime chaparral occur on Northwest, Impacts to southem maritime chaparral habitat total 91.1 acres, with 28.9 acres (24 percent) conserved on-site. «... Conservation of these 28.9 acres were selected to maximize preservation of the individual sensitive species on-site, especially Del Mar manzanita. As a result. 795 of the 1,056 individuals (77 percent) of Del Mar manzanita will be preserved. Additionally, 640 of the 1.350 Nuttall's scrub oaks (47 percent), 460 of 1.095 individuals of summer holly (42 percent), and all of the wart-stemmed ceanotiius will be conserved. Relationship of the Armvn La Co.sta Section 7 and HrP/OMflP The Arroyo La Costa project, located in the southem portion of the City of Carlsbad is also a Fieldstone property, but was not included in the assessment of tiie HCP/OMSP. A formal Section 7 consultation for tiie coastal Califomia gnatcatcher was completed on the project as part of the 404 permitting requirements under the Clean Water Act for impacts to wetiand habitats. Additionally, a Section 7 informal conference was completed for Del Mar Manzanita occurring on the site, in anticipation of the listing of the species (A copy of the Biological Opinion on tiie project is available at the Carlsbad Field Office of the Service). Up to three pairs of gnatcatchers were assumed to be taken by the proposed project. Approximately 1,200 individuals of Del Mar manzanita (out of 2.000 on tiie site) will be taken by the project as proposed. The mitigation measures outiined in the consultation and conference included both on-site conservation measures including preservation of 800 Del Mar manzanita individuals, as well as off-site conservation witiiin the areas covered by die HCP/OMSP. Because the gnatcatcher is a formally listed species, the mitigation is required. Because the Del Mar manzanita is not currently listed, die mitigation measures provided in Final 6-95 biological studies • wildlite rnonagemenr • hoDitaf resrorction • environmental research • regulatory complfonce resource planning, ossessment, cno mitigation • revegetation planning, implementation, and monitoring WW WW John Barone July 15,1994 The Fieldstone Company Page 2 of 3 the Section 7 conference are not required unless die Del Mar manzanita is listed as threatened or endangered. i.» The mitigation for die coastal California gnatcatcher that relates to tiie HCP/OMSP is as follows: Mill • Within one year of any sage scrub removal at the proposed construction site, the Corps shall assure the preservation of off-site coastal sage scrub habitat. This includes Parcel C (15.8 acres) and die 300 ft. wide swatii (8 to 9 acres). •« • The Corps shall assure that conserved lands shall be protected in perpetuity by an appropriate mechanism (e.g.. conservation easement). The mechanism shall be approved by die Service. • The Corps shall assure that a coastal sage scrub revegetation plan is prepared and implemented for the on-site and off-site coastal sage scmb habitat to be preserved as open space. This shall occur witiiin 6 montiis of tiie issuance of tiie Corps permit. The revegetation plan shall be approved by tiie Service, and shall include specific information regarding: 1) site preparation; 2) planting plan; 3) plant species to be used in revegetation; 4) planting schedule and metiiods; 5) irrigation plan; 6) maintenance criteria including weed abatement measures; 7) performance criteria and remedial measures; 8) monitoring methods; and 9) annual reports. HIM • The Corps shall assure that a management plan is developed, funded and implemented for the management of on-site and off-site coastal sage scmb and southem maritime chaparral habitat areas to be preserved. The management plan shall be completed within 6 months of the issuance of the Corps permit. An appropriate management entity shall be identified witiiin the management plan. This plan and the management entity shall be approved by the Service. •liH The mitigation for ttie Del Mar manzanita as it relates to tiie HPC/OMSP is as follows: • Within one year the Corps shall assure the preservation of off-site southem maritime chaparral habitat. 40 acres of this habitat on the northwest parcel as delineated by the Applicant in correspondence to the Service on December 23. 1993. • The Corps shall assure that a fire management plan is developed, funded, and implemented for the management of on-site and off-site southem maritime chaparral mitigation lands (40 acres on Northwest, and approximately 15 acres in the westem portion of Arroyo La Costa) to be preserved. The fire management plan shall be „^ completed witiiin 6 monttis of ttie issuance of the Corps permit. This plan shall specifically address the management of Del Mar manzanita, and shall be approved by the Service. • The Corps shall assure ttiat tiie applicant contribute $20,000 to ttie City of Carlsbad HMP, which may be designated for the conservation of Del Mar manzanita or other sensitive species or habitats, subject to the approval of the Service. Final 6-95 John Barone July 15^ 1994 The Fieldstone Company Page 3 of 3 The full 404/Section 7 Biological Opinion for ttie Arroyo La Costa Project is available from ttie Carlsbad office of ttie U.S. Fish and Wildlfie Service. Attachments: Soutiiem Maritime Chaparral Impacts figure from Hofman Planning Associates Conserved Habitat on Rancheros-southeast II figure from SEB, Final 6-95 tan im mil dm WH mm MM ttM WN «IW IHH NM Final 6-95 MM WM WM ttiit Final 6-95 LETTER TO US FISH AND WILDUFE SERVICE REGARDING SOUTHERN MARmME CHAPARRAL Final 6-95 tm tm ^auls December 30, 1993 LA/uUMIliy Mr. Gail Kobetich Field Office Supervisor U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2730 Loker Avenue West Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Request for data and comments regarding the proposed rule to list Arctostaphylos urn glandulosa ssp. crassifolia (Del Mar manzanita) (DMM), 50 CFR Part 17 51302- 51311 (Proposed Rule). I MM «»• Dear Gall, una On behalf of The Fieldstone Company (Fieldstone), we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments and suggestions on the above referenced Proposed Rule. Fieldstone also appreciates the time and effort expended by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in reviewing the status of this plant species, especially considering the pressing nature of court supervised settlement agreements and the oppressive workload at the field level. As a major landowner in San Diego County, and as an active participant in the landscape- scale habitat conservation programs throughout Southern California, we would like to share not only scientific data gathered in the course of these pursuits, but also our opinion as to the need for Federal listing at this time in light of existing regulatory and ^,m voluntary conservation efforts. Based upon the facts discussed in detail below, The Fieldstone Company believes that the FWS must arrive at three important conclusions with respect to the proposed listing of DMM. First, Fieldstone believes the FWS must conclude that listing Del Mar Manzanita as an endangered, or threatened species is ggt warranted. This conclusion is based upon the extensive biological field survey data submitted with this letter, which adds significantly to the best available scientific information that FWS must consider under Section 4 of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) in order to list a species. This range-wide assessment estimates that 82% of DMM is, or will be, preserved. The conclusion that listing is not warranted is also based on the fact that existino reoulatorv mechanisms are adequate for the protection of DMM and that federal listing will provide little, if any, regulatory control. In fact, it is anticipated that listing DMM will have a negative effect on the current multi-soecies conservation olannino programs which cover the entire range of this species. Second, the issue of whether DMM is a viable subspecies subject to protection under Final 6-95 Page 2, DMM ESA is significant and yet is unsubstantiated in the Proposed Rule. This is especially true since FWS published on September 27, 1985 (50 F.R. 39526) a determination that DMM did not represent a distinct taxa subject to protection under ESA. Despite this determination, FWS to date has not published an evaluation of conflicting scientific opinions on the subspecies issue nor supported its recent change of position on the subspecies issue. Fieldstone requests that a qualified neutral oartv perform scientific n^Pr repysLto clearly reconcile the scientific classification issue. Without such ari evaluation" relying on notions of who is more commonly "accepted" will not adequately conclude the issue and protection of the plant will be hindered. Third, FWS should extend the public commpnt pprinH tn enable proper communications on this critically important information. Closure of the comment period would preclude dialogue under restrictions on ex parte communications. Discussions should take place to facilitate state and local regulatory agencies working with FWS to address the protection of this plant species within the existing regulatory mechanisms and the cooperative framework of the Natural Community Conservation Plan program (NCCP) Detailed, site specific data form the basis of the scientific information presented with this letter and it wnfljcts significantly .with data published by FWS. Current planning programs, existing regulatory controls and this scientific information must be pursued without the constraint of the public comment period being closed. I. LISTING DMM IS NOT WARRANTED Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA sets forth the criteria to determine whether a species is an endangered species or a threatened species. Of the five reasons to list a species [4(a)(1)(A)-(D)] only (A). (D) and (E) are cited in the Proposed Rule. These include: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; (E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence. Section 4(b) of the ESA sets forth the basis for determining a listing to include the best scientific information available taking into account those efforts being made by a State or any subdivision of a State to protect such species. The following information reviews the Section 4 criteria and concludes that listina of DMM is not warranted. A. Scientific Data Does Not Support the Conduy^inn of the Prnnosed Rule. It^ is apparent from the Proposed Rule that current understanding of the status, distnbution, conservation and threats to survival of these species is poorly underr*- Final 6-95 Page 3, DMM To facilitate a better understanding of this species, a range-wide assessment was conducted by Sweetwater Environmental Biologists (Assessment). This Assessment of DMM is based upon updated field survey data and published information. The report indicates that based on the best available scientific information, DMM is not in danger of present or threatened destruction, modification or curtailment of its habitat throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Most of the known populations of DMM will be protected as open space. This data supports the conclusion that listing DMM is scientifically unsupportable and must be considered by the Secretary. As presented in the Assessment, 82% of the remaining DMM is proposed for conservation. Public lands comprise 34.8% of the existing population, alt of which are either preserved as permanent open space or are expected to be in dedicated preserves. Private lands comprise the balance of the DMM populations (65.2%) and are expected to conserve more than 48% of the remaining populations. No populations of DMM are known to exist on federally nwnfiri lqnri«; When considering significantiy sized populations (over 500 individuals) the following findings are evident. Seven separate locations are identified as having populations of 500 individuals or more. These seven locations comprise 76% of the total DMM population and 92% of these populations are anticipated as being preserved. These significantly sized populations provide conservation for 70% of the entire DMM species. In summary, this information does not support the conclusion that DMM is in danger of present or threatened destruction, modification or curtailment of its habitat throughout all or a significant portion of its range. B. Listing DMM Would not Provide any Significant Protection Bevond Existing Reoulatorv Mechanisms The proposed rule asserts that state and local regulatory controls are inadequate to protect the subject plant species. Two cases of apparent disregard for the welfare of the plants are provided, and it is likely that more could have been cited. However, listing would not have provided any additional mandatory protection in these cases. ESA does not directly protect listed plant species on private lands. It only directly protects listed plant species on federal lands and DMM is not known to exist on any federal lands. Since California state law merely requires salvage notification for land use change, and these plants rarely occurs in situations of Federal action or approval, federal listing would have been academic in the cases cited. Conferring the status of listing would not likely have changed the outcome of the examples cited or others of this type. Indeed, in the Final 6-95 Page 4, DMM case of non-wetland plant species within California, federal listing does not really augment state, local, or private protection. Rare plant protection is augmented in these cases by recently adopted Resource Protection Ordinances and the enhancement of municipal and private interest in establishing predictability, both for the biota and quality community development. Habitat conservation planning is an historically recent development but the FWS has an obligation to consider the positive effects such planning is having on current land use decisions and legitimately contrast this with the rate of historical loss up to now. The plant species will gain further protection not from the attendant effects of federal listing, but rather from project specific conservation decisions made within the framework of voluntary, unregulated, multiple species/habitat consen/ation planning. Such planning efforts foster local phde in self-determined compromises that provide certain comprehensive plant species protection. Listing, on the other hand, reduces the chances that the diverse interests at the planning table can come to general agreement by moving community focus away from broad issue resolution and toward highly localized controversy over what landowners are entitled to do with individual plants. Lasting protection and recovery of rare plant species occurring on private lands would not be served well by federal listing. The only effective tool remaining is the publicly appealing, and more biologically effective approach of locally driven conservation decisions made within the context of information generated from multiple species habitat conservation plans currently in production. C. Current Reoulatorv Controls Provide Adequate Protection for DMM and Historic Losses Do Not Substantiate Current Threats. Existing regulations, including the California Environmental Quality Act, City and County of San Diego Resource Protection Ordinances (RPOs) and other controls provide adequate protection for DMM. These regulatory mechanisms are significantly more protective than controls that existed when historical losses occurred. For example, RPOs were enacted in 1991 and now provide a level of protection in the City and unincorporated County of San Diego unavailable to this plant species when the greater level of losses occurred. The proposed rule tries to build the case that historical losses exemplify future losses. The question however, is what are the species' present or threatened (not historical) destruction of its habitat or range. Historic losses only provide information which sets the context for understanding current or potential threats to the species. Final 6-95 m. 3HJ Page 5, DMM Even then, historical losses did not occur because of inadequate regulatory mechanisms. Historic losses have occurred in great part as a result of the scientific classification of DMM. Between 1975 and the present, there was a complete absence of consensus within the scientific community regarding the status of DMM. Until recently, the scientific community classified DMM as not being a separate subspecies. For example, the California Native Plant Society as recent as 1988 rejected DMM from their Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants (Smith and Berg 1988). The FWS itself determined on September 27, 1985 (50 F.R. 39526) that DMM did not represent a distinct taxa subject to protection under ESA. In view of the lack of Federal recognition of DMM prior to this notice, and in view of the lack of consensus in the scientific community, it is not surprising that impacts to the species have been allowed. In fact, it is difficult to understand the Proposed Rule's assertion that historical losses occurred to a subspecies who's taxonomy is still unsubstantiated. It seems inappropriate for the proposed rule to conclude that current regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to protect the species. In summary, the Proposed Rule cites historical losses but it misinterprets the reasons for the losses. The Proposed Rule fails to recognize the adequacy of existing regulatory controls and its conclusion that federal listing is warranted, is unsubstantiated. II. THE PROPOSED RULE DOES NOT ADEQUATELY SUBSTANTIATE THE FWS REVISED SCIENTIFIC CLASSIFICATION OF DMM. As described above, the classification of DMM is at best, unclear. Most readers will likely remain unconvinced that science substantially weighs in favor of Wells classification over Knight's conclusion that DMM is not a separate subspecies. Fieldstone suggests that rigorous refereeing is needed by a qualified neutral party relying on more than notions of who is more commonly "accepted" than whom or who the "leading authority" is at a particular time. FWS has not adequately supported the rationale for agreeing with Wells regarding the taxonomy of DMM. Walter Knight's review (1985) concluded that Del Mar manzanita should not be recognized as a subspecies. Knight stated that Del Mar manzanita was a product of hybridization between Arctostaphylos glandulosa and other Arctostaphylos species in the area, FWS agreed with Knight in 1985. FWS states that two years later Philip Wells (1987) refuted portions of Knight's arguments for not recognizing the subtaxon. FWS now sides with Wells but fails to support their conclusion on anything other than Well's reputation. Additionally, both categorizations are based upon morphological variants and it would seem that other means of determining subspecies classification should be considered to resolve the apparent conflict. Further, FWS references a discrepancy as to the subspecies classification of DMM near Miramar Reservoir. However FWS does not definitively conclude as to what the classification should be. Based upon the proposed rule, a reader cannot Final 6-95 Page 6, DMM conclude whether or not the FWS intends to enforce protection of these plants near the Miramar Reservoir, When FWS scientifically justifies their classification, it should be made clear to the public what their conclusion is. Finally, FWS's determination should be republished for public comment. 111. FWS SHOULD EXTEND THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD TO PROVIDE FOR UNRESTRICTED COMMUNICATIONS ON THESE AND OTHER ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE RULE. The scientific information presented in this letter and the review of existing regulatory mechanisms supports the conclusion that an endangered listing of DMM is not warranted. Full consideration of this material necessitates communication with biologists participating in the NCCP programs and with local regulatory agencies to confirm the accuracy of this information. It is recommended that FWS extend the public comment period to facilitate essential review and avoidance of restrictions on ex parte communications. In summary, the proposed rule contends that the threats to Del Mar manzanita are the result of fire control and development activity. It reviews these threats and the species' historic losses but inappropriately concludes that the species must be listed as endangered. The facts do not support the Proposed Rule's conclusion. Scientific data presented with this letter and a review of existing regulatory mechanisms conclude that federal listing will not significantly benefit DMM and that existing regulatory mechanisms adequately protect this plant species. It is our hope that the FWS will abide by its commitment to take into consideration these comments and additional status information. Cleariy, listing of this species based on current FWS understanding would be scientifically questionable and would lack any real attributable benefit to the species. Thank you for your consideration of this data and comments. The Fieldstone Company would be pleased to review these findings with you at your eariiest convenience. Sincerely, Edwin G. Sauls Consultant to The Fieldstone Company Final 6-95 Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc. 3S15 Camino ael Rio South. Suite D. San Diego. Californio 92108 (619) 2aJ-':it5 FAX 2M-4216 Description , Status, Distribution, and Conserv ation of Del Mar Manzanita {Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. crassfolia) Status USFWS: Proposed Endangered CDFG: None Del Mar manzanita is a member of tiie Heatii Family (Ericaceae). Because of some previous debate and taxonomic uncertainty, Del Mar manzanita was considered but rsjecied from the Califomia Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants (Smitii and Berg 1988). It has been included in tiie draft Inventory which is currently being circulated for comments. In tiie draft it is considered rare or endangered in Califomia and elsewhere. l)Morphology, Taxonomy and Evolution Del Mar manzanita is a low, prostrate, woody evergreen shrub that reaches a height of between two and 3.5 feet, witii crooked branches with smooth thin red exfoliating bark (Munz 1974). The leaves are simple, alternate, coriaceous (leathery in texture, tough), ovate to lance-ovate, dull gray-green or subglaucous (covered with a usually whitish or bluish, waxy or powdery film tiiat is sometimes easily nibbed ofO (Wells 1986; Munz 1974). This subspecies is not at all glandular in any of its parts but is setose (clotiied witii bristies) witii long white hairs on petioles, twigs, rachises, and bracts; pedicels and ovary white-tomentose; and bracts leafy. The populations are dimorphic with respect to setosity: about half the individuals lacking setose hairs, except sometimes on bracts, the balance of tiie population at least sparsely setose or hispid (rough witii stiff or bristiy hairs) on twigs, petioles, rachises. and bracts (Wells 1986). The corolla (petals) is um-shaped and white; the fmit berr>'-like, depressed (low. as if flattened from above), globose (spherical or rounded), and reddish- brown. At an early age Del Mar manzanita forms a basal burl or enlarged rootcrown from which sprouting takes place after fire (Munz 1974). Del Mar manzanita was first described by Willis Jepson in 1922 (Jepson 1922; Knight 1981; Wells 1990). In 1981. Walter Knight concluded that tiiis taxon has no validity based upon herbarium specimens, historical data and field information. Knight felt that the non- glandular collections made in tiie Del Mar area were hybrids between Arctostaphylos ^glandulosa ssp. glandulosa and other species of tiie genus within the vicinity (Knight 1981). In 1986 Philip Wells reevaluated the taxonomy of the A. glandulosa group and concluded tiiat Del Mar manzanita was indeed a valid subspecies and will be included as such in the new Jepson Flora of California (Wells 1986; Wells, pers. comm.). The absence of glandular forms along the immediate coast makes Del Mar manzanita one of the most consistent and well-defmed taxa within the vznAhXt Arctostaphylos glandulosa complex and ssp. crassifolia has a discrete distribution, allopatric from other taxa (Wells 1986). Final 6-95 Dioogicoi STuoiej • wuaiiie moriagement • ncofio: fesTorciion • envwonpnenTO resMrcri • resuiaiorv comotc.-.ce resource oionnms. asiesirT*'«. ana mmganon • reveoeio^ion pKsnnmg, nToe-Bentcrion. cr^S maniroa-ig 2) Historical and Current Distribution The distribution of Del Mar manzanita is sirictiy coastal and largely restricted to siliceous sandstone of Eocene age tiiat outcrops in coastal bluffs from Oceanside (south of San Luis Rey River) soutii to La Jolla (with Torrey pines) soutiiward along tiie immediate coast of Baja Califomia to Cabo Colnett (about 200 km soutii of tiie Mexican border). Reported localities in San Diego County include Encinitas. Rancho Santa Fe, Del Mar. Torrey Pines State Reserve, and Carlsbad (Beauchamp 1986; Dudek and MBA 1992). Areas in Carlsbad that are known to suppon Del Mar manzanita include Green Valley. Arroyo La Costa. Northwest, the County of San Diego property northeast of the Palomar Airpon Road/El Camino Real intersection, Shelley Property, Rice Property, Aviara. Zone 20 and Zone 21. among others. Huffman (CDFG 1982) describes 24 populations of Del Mar manzaniu from Carlsbad. Encinitas, Rancho Santa Fe, Lomas Santa Fe. Solana Beach, Carmel Valley. Torrey Pines North, Carmel Mountain West and East, and Scripps Ranch. Of these 24 populations. 22 are extant, 2 are extinct, 11 have been impacted and nine are intact. These original 24 populations constituted 302 subpopulations of 17,137 individuals. Based on Huffman's original estimates, there axe 137 extant subpopulations totaling 7,160 individuals. A more recent range-wide assessment of die Del Mar manzanita by SEB (Sweetwater Environmental Biologists) (unpublished data), estimates that approximately 3,019 individuals (34.8% of tiie remaining population) occur in public lands either preserved as permanent open space or likely to be preserved. This includes Torrey Pines State Park (approximately 1.034 individuals in the northem extension and 200 individuals in the southern park area). Crest Canyon County Park (approximately 1,075 individuals). Oak Crest County Park (approximately 25 individuals; G. Baird pers. obs.), San Dieguito County Park (approximately 138 individuals), and approximately 530 individuals on County of San Diego property just northeast of the Palomar Auport Road/El Camino Real intersection. Remaining populations occur on private land holdings including 1.383 individuals on the Ecke property in Encinitas, 200 individuals on the Green Valley property in Carlsbad. 775 individuals on Arroyo La Costa, and approximately 500 in Zones 20 and 21 of Carlsbad. 3) Habitat Features Del Mar manzanita is one of the prime indicator species of the sensitive habitat, southem maritime chaparral. Southem maritime chaparral is a low to medium height, dense to fairly open chapan^ that is dominated by a combination of species that are characteristic of southem mixed chaparral and other species that have a more coastal distribution. Southem maritime chaparral occurs on weathered siliceous sandstone of Eocene sandstone formations (rough broken land, loamy alluvial land-Huerhuero complex, and ten-ace escarpments) and lies within the coastal fog belt (up to three miles inland from the Pacific Ocean). Besides Del Mar manzanita, other characteristic species of southem maritime chaparral may include coast white lilac (Ceanothus verrucosus), chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), scrub oak (Quercus dumosa), Del Mar sand aster (Corethrogyne filaginifolia ssp. linifolia), Encinitas baccharis (Baccharis vanessae), and summer-holly (Comarostaphylis diversifolia ssp. diversifolia). 4) Endangerment The ranse-wide assessment of Del Mar manzanita prepared by SEB indicates that approximately 35 percent of tiie individuals comprising this species lie in areas cuireniiy Final 6-95 protected or likely to be protected as public open space. Fony-one percent of the individuals lie within five properties that have approved or pending land use plans tiiat propose to preserve 36 percent of the species. Four additional sites tiiat have existing or proposed land use plans represent an additional 14 percent of the species, eight percent of which are proposed for preservation. Based on this assessment, these areas alone would preserve approximately SO percent of die species, including at least 80 percent of each of die largest populations, even if no additional areas outside of these 16 areas are preserved (Table 1). Expected Impacts/Conservation Benefits of HCP Approximately 301 individuals out of a total of 1,096 (23 percent) individuals witiiin the Plan Area will be impacted. Approximately 795 (77 percent) individuals within the Plan Area will be preserved. Because of the high number of individuals and proportion of this population preserved in contiguous, viable open space, the HCP is expected to benefit this species. Conservation/Management Measures Control of access and exotic pests are management measures which will benefit tiiis species. Attachments: Table 1 References for Del Mar Manzanita Table Final 6-95 References for Del Mar Manzanita Table Localities and References used 1-5: For these localities, information was based upon Huffman's original estimates and maps which were provided by tiie State's Endangered Plant Program. It was assumed that since tiiese localities were in public open space (parks and reserves), that these populations were extant Recent aerial photographs were used to verify that there was no encroachment since the time of Huffman's original estimates (ca, 1981). 6: Estimates of population size based upon surveys by Gladys Baird for tiie Oak Crest Park EIR. There has been encroachment in tiiis park since Huffman's original estimates. 7: Results based upon Huffman's original estimates and brief site visits by SEB in 1992 and 1993. 8: SEB conducted a brief windshield survey in 1993. Results based upon Huffman's original information and recent aerial photograph. 9: Results based upon Biological Resources Report for the Ton-ey View Site, San Diego, Califomia (SEB 9-8-93). 10: Results based upon tiie Biotechnical Report for Encinitas Ranch, Encinitas Califomia (SEB 11-11-93); Biological Technical Report for Green Valley (SEB 9-7-93). 11: Results based upon surveys for Del Mar manzanita conducted by SEB biologist Robert Faught on Arroyo La Costa for Fieldstone (Winter 1993.) 12: Results based upon tiie Carlsbad-Fieldstone/La Cosu Habitat Conservation Plan (3-8- 93). 13: Results were based upon Hufman's original estimates and maps which were provided by the State's Endangered Plant Program. It was assumed that since this locaUty was in private ownerships and recent aerial photographs indicated no encroachment since the time of Huffman's original estimates (ca. 1981), that these populations were extant 14: Results based upon tiie Biological Resources Report for the Shelly Property Carlsbad, Califomia (SEB 12-3-92). Results of die Rice Property based upon Hufman's original estimates and maps which were provided by the State's Endangered Plant Program, and a recent aerial photograph. 15: Results were based upon Hufman's original estimates and maps which were provided by the State's Endangered Plant Program and brief site visits by SEB in 1992 and 1993. 16: Results were based upon Hufman's original estimates and maps which were provided by tiie State's Endangered Plant Program data compiled for tiie City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan, and brief site visits by SEB in 1992 and 1993. 17: Results of Subarea HI and "east of El Camino Real" based upon Hufman's original estimates and maps which were provided by tiie Stale's Endangered Plant Program ^.1 F(na/6-95 and a recent aerial photograph. Results of Neighborhood 10 based upon Biological Technical Report for Cannel Valley Neighborhood 10 Precised Plan and Parkview Tentative Map in San Dieco Califomia (Recon 12-2-92). "Northeast of I5/ViUa de la Valle intersection" andVeicand site results are based upon Hufmans original estimates and maps which were provided by the State's Endangered Plant Program, a recent aerial photograph and brief site visit by SEB in 1993. Sienna CanyonH-chang Prooertv sites results are based upon Hufman's original estimates and maps which were provided by the State's Endangered Plant Program and a recent aerial photograph. Literature Cited Beauchamp. R.M. 1986. A Rora of San Diego County, Califomia. Sweetwater Press. National City, Califomia. Califoniia Department of Fish and Game. Endangered Plant Program. Analy^s of Tom Huffman's locality data for Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. crassifolia circa 1982. Dudek & Associates; and MBA. 1992. Draft Biological Resources and Habitat Analysis, City of Carlsbad. Califomia. 89 pp. Jepson. W.L. 1922. A flora of Califomia. Associated Students Store. University of California Berkeley California. 749 pp. KniohtW 1981. SWMS of Arctostaphyuos glandulosa ssp. crsssifalia (Enc^ctzt). The Four Seasons. Vol 6 No. 3 pp. 19-26. Aug. 1981. Munz. P. 1974. A flora of soutiiem Califonua. University of Califomia Press. Berkeley California. 1086 pp. Wells. Phillip. Personal communication. Wells, Phillip. 1990. The naming of tiie manzanitas. Four Seasons. 8:46-70. Wells, Phillip. 1986. The leafy-bracted. crown-sprouting manzanitas, an ancestral group in Arctostaphylos. Four Seasons 1986 7(4): 5-27. A-2 Fina/6-95 I I t 1 1 I I 1 I ] I i I I I I I ! I S t I I 1 f 1 > ^ ' I 1 1 lI'ltM 1 ,........| I0Q1 1 ...„Iilv IV,.r(.,li.,n lltcsnlLs of SI'Il's CcMSllS 1 I"'"'*'- 1 IV"^'' 1 IMJIII.ir OPKNSI'ACK \ l oircy I'iiics Science Park *3 »mt jusi iinilh of llicic. 17 idcnlificd liy llufrinan. Did not survey; assume lo l>c exl;inl. 17 17 • \ I'orrcy I'iiics Slate Hcscrvc (l'ro|)cr) Ixss than 2(X) idcntincd hy lliiffinaii. Did not survey; assume lo l>c cxiaiil. 200 200 + ' 7 luticy Pines Slate Reserve (Norili Tjilciisiui)) 103-1 identified by llurfman. Did not survey; assume lo IK exianl. 1034 1.034 4 7 C-rcsl Canyon 1075 idcnlificd by llufrman. Did not survey; assume to be extant. 1075 1.075 + 7 Sati Dicgiiilo Ctoiiiily Pink 138 iilcnlificd by llnffinnn. Assume exianl. 138 138 + 7 Oak Ctcst County Paik Park lias l)ceii dcvcloi»cd since original cslimalc. Ixss (ban 25 individuals exianl (G llaird jwis. obs.). 25 25 • 7 Ninllicjsl of Paloiniir Airiwil Hoad/I'i Caininu Itcal iiilcrscciion Slill's survey in 1992 was consistent. 530 individuals nulod by Huffman. Identified as pari of Cily of Carlsbad HMP core preserve area. 530 530 X 7 Tnhil Piihlic Oiwii Kixicc 3019 34.8% 3019 34 8% I'HIVATK I'UOrOSKD/Ari'HOVICU rilOJKClS 8 ') in M 12 l:asl of 1-5; Wcsl of HI Camino Real, Norlh of "mat! whicU is just iioilli of Del Mar llcighls." Most of llic mesa b.ts been dcvcloi>cd. Slo|>es facing San Dicguilo River Valley slill intact. SI-.U surveyed from road, fewer Iban 10 individuals observed. 150 of original population may still be Ibcre but unlikely. 150 150 8 ') in M 12 liiricy View 15 to 8 ') in M 12 l:ncinilas Itaiicli and Giccn Valley siles 1,383 individuals observed during Slill's 1992-93 surveys of lincinilas Ranch. 200 imiividiials observed during Slill s 1993 survey of Green Valley. 1383 200 1.246 200 • 1 ' 8 ') in M 12 Arioyo 1 a Cosia 1.950 individuals observed during Slill's 1993 survey prior lo devclopincul of the site. 775 iclaiiietl in o|Kn space. 775 775 • 8 ') in M 12 Nnilliwcsl 1.026 individuals observed dining Sl-H's 1991-92 surveys of the sile. 1026 765 2( 8 ') in M 12 Ttiliil I'rlvnle rrniHisctl/Aliliruvcd PrnlccU 3549 40 9% 3146 36 3TI 4( i»HiVA iV7n i lll..ll PIlOIKrrS/ARKAS il M 16 l.iix Caiiyuii Assume ext.inl. Assume 50 (Krceiil preservation. 161 80 0 il M 16 Shulley anJ Uicc IVo|)ciiics 275 individuals may slill IK extant in isolated canyon. 171 indiv. in open spaces Inilwccn houses assumed lo Iw extant. 436 individuals on Rice and Shelley properties assume cxiirpaled (based on recent aerial photos and SI'IVs 1991 survey of Shelley sile). 446 171 0 il M 16 I'vans PoinI Unknown. Less than ICQ indiv. likely. Assume 50 iwrcent preservation. 100 50 0 » il M 16 Zone 2(V21 Cai.Isbad Area has been greatly impacted since Huffman surveys. SHU observed 500 individuals in cursory survey. 500 400 0 II il M 16 I'olal Privnlc/Ollicr ProlccL^Arcas 1207 13.9% 701 8.1%. M I <n Al. OI IIICR KNOWN PROJICCIS M 17 Subarea III, casi of lil Camino Ileal. Nciglitxirliood 10. NcigliborhooJ 8a, NorlhcasI of I-SA'illa Jc la Valle iiilcrseclion. Sienna Canyon and Tcliang IVoitcrlv. and Wcicand Stie. Assume 75 jwrcunl t.tke. Actual nund>crs may be significantly less. »28 207 6. 17 1 ll.|-^l.J. g _ Tdtul Other Known Projccb 828 9.5% 207 2,4% 6: ^ I ICHANDTOrAL 8603 100% I 7073 82% \ 15 + [kdicatcd Oj»cn Space • Projwsed Opoii Space x Public Ownership-Polenlial Oi)cn Space 0 l-slimalc of Potcnlial Numbers Preserved % Represents perceni of population total of 8,673 individuals. ESTIMATED MANAGEMENT COSTS FOR THE HABti, CONSERVATIONPLAN/ONGOING MULTI-SPECIES PLAN FOR Ppcj# SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE CITY OF CARLS MANAGEMENT COST ASSUMPTIONS FOR THE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN/ONGOING MULTI-SPECIES PLAN FOR PROPERTIES ON THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD Management costs for the Habitat Conservation Plan/Ongoing Multi-Species Plan (HCP/OMSP) have been estimated based on die assumption diat the HCP/OMSP is part of a larger management program such as the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan. Funding is provided for a portion of the salary for both a preserve manager and staff biologist, as well as necessary support staff, office space, equipment, and other essential needs. A flat estimate of $50 per acre was assumed for '^management costs." This could include weed abatement, restoration, trash removal, and other incidental costs. The $50 per acre flguie is based on input from individuals experienced in habitat management, including The Nature Conservancy and The Center for Natural Lands Management Additionally, fencing costs are based on the assumption that the entire fence will need to be replaced once every 20 years and diat fencing will cost $10 per linear foot The fencing requirements are estimates and will change once the final project plans are developed. Based on diese assumptions, the annual cost to manage die HCP/OMSP is approximately $100,000, It is estimated tiiat die annual fencing costs will be $6,750. Start-up costs were assumed at $9,000, Final 6-95 IM STAFF + 30% BENEFITS Preserve Manager - .10 @ $65,000 .30 Biologist - .30 @ $45,500 Support Staff - .10 @ $26,000 Total Staff $ 6.500 13.650 $ 22,750 tea OFFICE 1,000 square foot-cover 0.3 year of cost Storage Expenses Reserve for Equipment Total Office $ 3,600 500 6.000 1..W $11,600 -CONSULTANTS $ 5,000 mm VEHICLE 0.3 year (4x4) 20k miles/year $ 9.000 (M IM •M «• CLEAN UP/MAINTENANCE ($50 PER ACRE) Southeast n Rancheros Northwest Offsite Total Annual Maintenance $ 18,000 8,100 6,200 12.000 $ 44,300 *M OVERHEAD S 4,000 MB ANNUAL REPORTS AND BUDGETS $ 3,000 IM TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS $99,650 •M START-UP COSTS Office Supplies Cowbird Traps (5 @ $500) Field Equipment Total Start-Up Costs $ 4,500 2,500 2.000 $ 9,000 IH FENCING (ASSUMES SlO/FT) mm mm m Southeast n Rancheros Northwest Offsite Total Fencing $ 50,000 40,000 40.000 5.000 $135,000 ANNUAL FENCING COSTS (ASSUMES REPLACE EVERY 20 YEARS) $ 6.750 •Subject to verification upon finalization of development plans. Final 6-95 FUEL MODIFICATION ZONE/FIRE SUPPRESSION REQUIREMENTS Final 6-9S FUEL MODIHCATION ZONE/FIRE SUPPRESSION REQUIREMENTS The following is an analysis of the Carlsbad Fire Suppression requirements and their relationship to the Conserved Habitat area identified in the Habitat Conservation Plan/Ongoing Multi-Species Plan (HCP/OMSP). This analysis is based on current Carlsbad Planning and Fire Department requirements and policies. Any future changes by the City of Carlsbad or the Fire Department may affect the requirements as specified in this analysis. The final fire suppression/habitat management program for the Conserved Habitat will be developed joinUy by the Carlsbad Fire Department, the City of Carlsbad, the Califomia Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the land owner as an initial component of the management plan for the HCP/OMSP. Many of the homes that are planned to be constructed on the properties identified as Rancheros, La Costa Southeast n and La Costa Northwest will be adjacent to native vegetation. In order to secure the protection of both the Conserved Habitat Area as well as the homes adjacent to this habitat area, compliance with the requirements as set forth by the HCP/OMSP and the Carlsbad Fire Department must be maintained. Based on current fire suppression policies, few impacts to the Conserved Habitat are anticipated. However, in the event that fure protection measures must encroach into Conserved Habitat as presented in Exhibit 1. the following discussion sets forth likely mitigation measures to offset such impacts. The City of Carlsbad fire suppression criteria for native slope conditions are described below: NATIVE SLOPES FIRE SUPPRESSION* (Exhibit: "Condition B" - Native Slopes) The City of Carlsbad requires a setback of a minimum 60* horizontally between structures and undisturbed native vegetation. This distance is divided into three sections, B-1, B-2, and B-3. Section B-1 extends from the outiying edge of the structure to a horizontal distance of 20*. Section B-2 extends from the outiying edge of section B-1 to a horizontal distance of 20'. Section B-3 extends from the outiying edge of section B-3 to a horizontal distance of 20' for a minimum horizontal distance of 60* from the structure(s). The following conditions are required by the City of Carlsbad where removal of environmentally sensitive native vegetation is restricted within the fire sections. * See section IV.F of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. Final 6-95 SECTION B-1 1, Removal of "high fuel and moderate hazard species" 2. Planting with ground cover or low growing species, less than 3' in height, known to have fire retardant qualities. 3. No trees or shrubs allowed. 4, Irrigated. SECTION B-2 1. Removal of "high fuel species" 2. Removal by selective pruning of up to 60% of the volume of the "moderate fuel species" 3. Replanting with naturalizing low fuel species. 4. Tiees and large tree form shrubs (eg Oaks, Sumac, Toyon) which are being retained shall be pruned to provide clearance equal to three times the height of the surrounding understory plant material or 6*, whichever is higher. Dead and excessively twiggy growth shall also be removed. 5. Irrigated. SECTION B-3 1. Removal of "high fuel species". 2. Removal by selective pruning of up to 40% of the volume of the "moderate fuel species" 3. Trees and large tree form shrubs (eg Oaks, Sumac, Toyon) which are being retained shall be pruned to provide clearance equal to three times the height of the surrounding understory plant material or 6*, whichever is higher. Dead and excessively twiggy growth shall also be removed. 4. Non-irrigated As a rule, the above requirements can be met entirely outside of Uie boimdaries of the Conserved Habitat Area and therefore no impacts to the habitat area will occur. However, there may be limited occasions when encroachment into Uie Conserved Habitat for fire suppression purposed would be necessary. The following describes an exaipple where a lot may be proposed adjacent to the habitat area and encroachment into die habitat area is needed to meet the landscape fire protection requirements. Exhibit 1 Exhibit 1 depicts a situation where a graded lot is at the same elevation as the adjacent Habitat Conservation Area (See Exhibit 1 as provided). The fire protection measures will be similar to those provided in the Carlsbad Landscape Manual, Chapter IV.F Section F.3-2 and as shown in Appendix F.2-2. Final 6-95 A total of 60 feet of buffer area will be provided. The 60 foot buffer area, as shown in Exhibit 1, will comply with the requirements of the Carlsbad Landscape Manual, Chapter IV.F by removing the required vegetation within each of the 20 foot buffer sub-areas. The buffer sub-areas are described as follows: Moving from the graded lot into the habitat area, the first 15 feet will be located on the graded lot, the next 5 feet will be located within the habitat area and be devoid of the natural vegetation, the following two 20 foot buffer sub- areas will also be located within the habitat area and will follow the requirements of the Carlsbad Landscape Manual as previously specified. Due to the required removal and pruning of high fuel species within the encroachment area, mitigation can be provided by planting low fuel species on manufactured slopes or by the enhancement of existing habitat. The low fiiel species shall be compatible with the adjacent habitat. This scenario and the above requirements may be used in cases where the lot is adjacent to the habitat area with up slope, down slope or at grade conditions. At such encroachment areas, the applicant would attempt to limit the encroachment to the Conserved Habitat as much as possible and in accordance with the HCP/OMSP Section S.C.l.g.. The applicant will also minimize the effects of the encroachment by providing the minimum fire suppression required by the City of Carlsbad and by mitigating the encroachment using one of the following: 1. Enhance degraded habitat within the preserve area; or 2. Revegetate areas outside, but contiguous to, the conserved habitat area. These mitigation measures as well as other alternative designs and mitigation measures may be permitted subject to die approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Califomia Department of Fish and Game, the City of Carlsbad and the Carlsbad Fire Department. Final 6-95 CONS£'/?V£D ft -/CO"- 5- =1— /5' ^111 [1 Hofman Planning Associates Exhibit 1 f/na/ 6-95 II II II II II II II II II II t I I 1 11 II II II II II « I > •D -n ^ II SECTION irrigation planting B-1 20' YES - FIRE RETARDANT NO TREES OR SHRUBS REMOVAL OF HIGH FUEL SPECIES B-2 20' YES. TEMPORARY LOW FUEL SPECIES SELECTIVE PRUNING OF 60% OF THE MODERATE FUEL SPECIES VOLUME 100% REMOVAL OF HIGH FUEL SPECIES B-3 20" NO NONE SELECTIVE PRUNING OF 40% OF THE MODERATE FUEL SPECIES VOLUME 100% REMOVAL OF HIGH FUEL SPECIES NATIVE (UNDISTURBED) N/A "CONDITION B" -NATIVE SLOPES fire sections • CLEARANCE 3X HEIGHT OF UNDER STORY SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN Fi.:l i\ 3 Co Final 6-95 i( ili^^^ili^^^ii^^iiii^iiiiiiliililiiiiiiiiiiiiii 7 Up 1 ccnttnuad a i8Name& ana (Ns13) Habitat Typa{s) Rangewids fJtstribiition of Spedes Occurrence of Speciee vnthin Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fs Road Subarea Occurrence of Species witfnn Northwest Subarea Cansen/ation Planning Consideretions Sased on Knovm Dtstnbution of Species Degree d Exisdngn^rcposea Protection \os Speciee {without Plan} Senelits of Plan to S'lecies ki PUin Area Contrbutjon of Plan to Long* Term Preservation c4 Species Highest Potential Take in Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fa Road Si^area Highest Potential Take in Northwest Subarsa Addiboniil Comments an 3. CNPS2, NCCP. jccura wnfwi moMor alkaHrw dralraQM. CoaaUiSanOago county lo contra! Ba)a CaWomla. A larga popJatton tlOOO*) occur* kn wtHow'aycamora woodland along tha San Marco* CraaK hparlan corridor. Not dMcdad, low to iTfodaral* prottablUty tor occurr*nc*. The population alortg San Marco* Craak r*pr***nt* a sIgnHlcanI population at th* northam pariphtry ot Ih* rang*. Wetland prot*ctlon law* prcwida lor aom* protection throughout rang*: occura on public lartds auch a* Tonay Piras SlMa Reserve; also ocoxs In araaa covered by draS HCPt lor Sweetwater River and San Diego River*. Marcos Creek riparian corrklor vrotid preaenn a large population. Will be pan ol conliguoua open span rea*rve. Wal*r quality control maaauras will provKla k>nQ-term habitat quality amxancoa. Nearly all habitat p.*aer/ed. Due lo Ih* *iz* ol th* popuiatk>n of thi* species and ths quality ol the associated habitat, the plan will help lo ensure the kx^ term preeervatlon of this specie*. than 100 IndWduBl*. WHI be used m wetland raetoratlon eltort*. wMUm tpiny ruth j« r -tut var. ifot JUS) [var. dil MPS4.0SS Occur* on moitt, Mint or aUoHna •oHt. In dratnagM and watland araaa. Lot Anoatoa, San Bamadno. San Diago, Vantiffa, arxl San Liia Obttpo countiaa aoutti 10 cvniral 8a>a Call. WUIow-tycamor* riparian woodland along th* San Marco* Cr*«k conldoc tupports a •IgnHlcara population ol tH* spacias (thoutand* o< Individual*): 2S0-3W additional Indlviduala occur thfoughou tha sHa. Approx. 140 IrKllvtdual* occur In fiv* popuUllons (largatf c«. 75 ind.). Th* population alor>g San Marco* Craak r*pr***nt* a slgnAlcarH population. Soma protection provided by occivrenc* In McGlmy Mourlaln Raeerve, Miteloit Traits Reglonat Park, and AUao and Woods Canyons Regional Parte (Orange Co.). W% {«3» Indlvkjuals) preserveil. Sp*C)es will t>enetlt tiom preeervatton ot a large coastal populalkin. No Uk*. Up lo 60% (100 Individuals). rw-hoHy arc phytk d»v»r«lloUa Jhn lota]C2.CNPSlB. OccirtlnCHP andSMaC. Coaatal Orango and San DIago counltaa and northwMt Baja CalH. Not dsladtd; low potsnllal Approx. 1.100 trtdlvlduala wntiin SMaC. R«latlvaly wlda*pr*ad In coaatal San DIago Courty, but law Bignltlcani larg* population*. Wetland protection laws apply; occws on pubUc lands such a* Torrey PInac Stat* R*a*rve and MI**lon Trail* Regional Parti and in area* tor dratt Sweetwater and San Di*go RK«r HCP*. A majortty ol the IndMdual* In the large popuMton will be preserved Water quality control meaauree wll provtd* long-term habitat qjalHy aesuranct. Tha HCP wll h*v* a poaUve Mluence on king-term preaervatk>n becauee ot the size dt the populatton and tt>* quality ot associated habtMl to b* preserved. A matorltv of the Individuals will be preeerved. Not applk^bie. {Sa%) 035 Individuals. wn be used n reetorellon ftlorl*. Final 6-95 it: Table 10. Gro^P ' cortinued Final 6-95 Table 10, G/I;^D T conunued zi Name& tus (N«13) Habitalt Type(s> Rangewds Dfsinbution of Species Occurrence of Species wtthin Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subaraa Occurrwtcs of ^eciea wtthin Northwest Subarea Conservation Planning Constderatione Sased on Known Distnbution of Spedes^ Cegree of Existingr Proposed Prelection for facias (without Sertefit'Tof PI«A to Spiictes m Plar Area Contrbudon ot Plan to Long- Term Preservation of Species 1-6ghest Potential Take in RanduroS" Hancho Santa Fa Road Subarea Hignest Potential Taics in Northwest Subarea Addkional Cofnments .4rn San 3i*oo 101 (Cha*todlpu* u) 1. CSC. NCCP. T Fotndlnopao w**dy area* (D), CH>.andCSS. Souilweetem CalMorru, coaaUl siopa* d San Bemanfno, Rlverskla and San Diego courtle*. most ol Orange County and eastem Loa Angels* County. Was trapped m Ch«> and CSS along dirt roads and k\ open area*. Trapped In open SMaC. CSS. G and 0 atorv tha edges ot RW. Llttl* data throughoii rang*: tocal abundanc* suggests this moue* i» stH rslallvsly common m ui>d*veloped southwestern Calllornia. WiOe-Eprsad on coastal siopa* wh*r* devetopriMn Is constrained: larg* populattona probably pr«*en In Cleveland National For**t and In Mlescn Tralk Regtonal Park. Miramum o( 33% (600 acres) o( htibltat preserved. Preeensd populattona also will benefit from predator control menture*. Local ecosystem wlH be maintain*d with good conr>ectrvHy. Healthy populatk>n of coyotes will limit predator Impacts. 50% Ol habitat (745 aerec). 84% ot habitat (470 acres). Remetnng populaiiorw could be advwBely Impacted by prpdatkin from dorrtestic cats and tha unintent)ar.al IrvroducUon ot r>orv rtativ* rodents such as black rat* and houa* mic*. 30 ek-taii*d 4 1 ftm calHomicu* ) C2. CSC. NCCP, OSS Occur* in open habllat*; CSS. NNQ.and dMtfbed weedy area* (0). Coastal slop* ol Southern Calllornia from Sarva Barbara Comty south into rarthweslsm Ba»a California. Ob**rv*d in open CSS and NNG. OtMTwd in CSS, open CHP, andNNO. Still relalrvely common In many araaa. Some protection prowled by occurrer>ce on public landa, such as tegionsi parks, state ami national lorsstK, and military rasenrea. A minimum ot 36% (540 acres) ol habitat preserved; species alao wiU benein from predator comrot measu** triiNn preserved Itabltat. Unkrown. 55% ot habHsl (580 acres). 06% ol habitat (370 acres). R*mainir>g pooulallorw coiid b* adversely Impacted by (>redatlon from dorrwftic cats and doga. Added iMnetHs from otf-slte icquisitlon. go dee*rt woodrat -la fda IntermedU) .0 Occur* In rocky areas and dumps ol prkMy-pear cactus In CHP and CSS. Coastal stops ol southem CalHomia from San Luis Obispo County into northwestern Ba)a CaWomla. Several irtdlviduals trapped In CHP and CSS: probably uncommon and patchy In distribution. A lew Indivklua)* trapped in CS& This subspeci** does not appear to b* und*r any immediate threat bacauaa ol Its wkle rang* and because It occurs In many area* where devetopment pr***ue I* low. SorTM protection provided by occw*r>c* on public land*, such as reglortaJ parka, state and nalkinal loreets, and military reeenre*. A minimum ol 40% (510 acres) ot habitat preserved: cpecies also will beneftt from predator ctintrol maaauee wtthin preeerved habitat. Unknown. 55% Of habllat (560 acres). 80% Of habitat (200 actss). R*malnlr>g populations could be adversely Impacted by rredatton from cat* anc the introduction cl non- native rodents (black rate arvl tK>uca mice). Added benefits from off- site acquisition. Final 6-95 3! Other Spea ss Directly or Inc ireCtty Benefite d by the Habitat Conservat hnPlan Dr..ftesNaiTie& Status {N=U> Hsbftat Typo(s) Rangewide Dlstr&ution d Species Dccurrance (A Species wiihin Rancheros. Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Occurrarwe of Species within Nofthwssl Subarea Consenration Planning Considerations Based on Known Distrbution of Species Degree of :Xi8tirtg/Propose d Protection iot Species (withom Plan) Benefits of Pian 10 Spec:es in Plan Area Contrioution ol Plan to Long- teim Preservation of Species Highest Potential Take n RancheroS' Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Highest Potenttal Take in Northwest Subarea Addttbnal Comments si*rn dichortdra .hondf* occklenUtB) PS CCP.CacOSS 3cur* In undendory of >P Kid CSS. lylarta Sonoma. Sana Sarbar*. Los Ano*l**. V*nlur*. San Oi*go Dountles, San hMguel Islsnd and Ba)s CalH. 'IV* srrtall popUabons. Not detected; expected. mroughoul range. Plsn area does rat Include wtMl would be coneidered a critical portkin d the range. proposed tor protection by HMP, MSCP, and other corwenntton plannlr>g attorts. the Indhrkluala will be preserved: species alao will bendfit from nwasures to control access snd cxdto weeds. •xpeded lo be a major lador In the preeenratton. Protection ot appropriate habltata. even small area* would cortrlbut* to tha pr**enralton ot this species. population* (60%) wm be Impeded. .stt spadefoot toad «a rMmmondi) CSC, NCCP. OccwskiCSS. CHP, and a. Nonh central Calllornia to northwestern Ba)a Calttornla. w*«l of the desen. Tadpolea were tound in temporary rain poola In open CSS and Q, both east and w*«t d Rancho Sartta Fe Road. Not obeenrad; no focused survey conducted. There is habkat similar to that prsserl on R/RSF. Presence d the non-nat>ve bullfrog In these ponds probably predudee breeding area* for th* spadefoot. Mostly knvland species that haa tost substantial habltal acreage In coastal Southem Calllornia and the Certral Valey wtier* extensive agricultural and urban d«vek>pme(« haa occurred. SUI relalhrely common, although paichy In San Diego County. Sorrte protectton provided by occurrence on public lartds, such as regioful parks and miUUry resen/es. A minimum ol 35% (565 acres) cl habitat prsservnd: addittonal habitat jwtentlally preaarvnd In connection with Nc-thweel. Creatton d shaltow basins In preserved haMlal (»ukl provide breedlnfj habitat. If breeding pools are maMalned, presenwd area woiid provkle breeding habltal for this specie*. 56% (620 acres). 83% (420 acrea). proposed road* pose threet of road kllla; barrteni could be created to dired •padelods away from road. isAay benefit fror-i otf-site acquisilton ot CSS. .'•r-' rosy boa (Uchanura virt > roeeotueca) C2, C, CP. OSS Occurs in variety ot scrub typ* hablst*. IndudngCSS and CHP: prefer* rocky eubstraie. SouttMm base al Transverse Moixitaina ki Loe Angeles Courty Inlo northwest Baja Calfomia. Within San Diego County, 11 occur* from lower deeert slope* to th* coast. One Individual obeenred In CSS: expected lo occur throughout •It* In aree* with rocky substrate and good ecrub cover. Not ob*erv*d; probably pr**ertt In rocky area* supporting good shrub cover. Still reUOvely common In many arees of Its range. Som* protedton provkled by occurrertce In Cleveland Nattonal Forad. Anza Borrego D***rt Stale Park and In smaller preeerve* luch a* Th* Nature Con**rvanc/s Santa Boaa Ptat*au and McGinty Mointain Preeerve*. A minirrum of 40% (510 acres) v1 habltal wM be presenMKl, Induding som* d th* beet potential habitat; •pedes wis also benefit Irom acsees contrd measurtia, which wii mmimti ) collection d this snake. Potential habtut preeerved; publto educatton program aleo can be ueed to help explain thi* •p*cle^ role in ecosysism. 55% (500 acres). 80% (200 acree). May benell from off- site acquisilton ol CSS oa^l w**t*m whIpuK Znt dophoru* ttgri* •nOt iaiu*) C2. CSC, ccp.ces Ocon In open CSS, CHP, and woodlend*. Vantixa County south In dsnwntan* CaWomla to soum csntral Bate CaMornl*. Several Individusls were seen in CSS'and ChHP: does not appear to be common In subar*a. Several tndivkluals were ***n In CSS: doee not appear to be common In subarea. StIB common In many ar*aa d It* range where aultable habitat remain*. Found atong th* cdg** d dirt road* traversing good habitat. Habitat components Include open sunny areas lor basking, shrub cow wWi accumulated ted litter, and an abundance d Invertebrate prey, parttculady termite*. Some protedton provMed by occuranc* in •xl*nelv« areas ol NaltonsI Forest lands In southern CaWomla and In other rugged areas of the tooothU and mounuki zones where devetopment pressixs Is low. A minirvium ol 40% (510 acres) of habHat will be presennd; speclee also win benefit from aoc*** contrd m*a*uree. wt>ich will minimize collection of thlB lizard. Preservation d habitat and malntenarK* ot ecosystem wll benefll thi* specie*. Approx. 55% (580 acres) ol hablUI. 80% (200 acree) of habitat. May benefl: fram off- site acqulslkin ot CSS. Final 6-95 £5 Group 2 bte 10, GfXiixt 2 continued £ M»es Name & : ttus (NsU) HabSat Type(s) Rangewide Distr^ution of Species Cccurrencs of Species wr^hb Rancheros^ Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Occurrence of Species wrthm NoRhweet Subarea Consenration Planning Considerations Based on Known Distrtbution of Species Degree of Existing/Propose d Protection for Species (without Ban) Berafits of Plan to Spectes in flan Area Contribution of Plan to LcHig- lerm Preseivation of Sp4»des Highest Potenttal Take in Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Highest Potently Take in Northwest Subarea Adcoional Cominentfi jrtr 1 r*d dwmond itl* Ik* (Crotalu* nJb*r o«)C2.CSC, NCCP. OSS Occurs In rocky area* supporting CSS,CH», eactu*. or other ecrub commurtitie*. Southern CalK. to northern Baja Califomia. One Indlvduat obeerved; probably not comnton k) subaraa due to the lack d axlenaiv* rock outcrop*. Not ob**ry*d; H present, probably rM corrHnon In subarea due to th* lack d •xiarwiv* rock outorop*. This snake 1* etui common in many areas d Ks range even though a fair amourt d hablltf has been tost In th* coasial knvland araas. Some protedion provided by occurrence ol larg* pppUaltons wHhln the Cleveland Nattonal Forest and Anza Borrego Desert State Park and by occurrence in other rugged areas d the foothill zons where devetopment pressure is low. A mmimum ol 40% (510 acr**) ol habM will be preeenwd: speclee alao wM benefit from access controli, which will minimij:e ooliedton d the sruik*. Species wtt bensIR •mm coneervatton d hablUi: pubHc educatton program aleo can be ueed to help explain cpeciei^ role In ecosystem. 55% (560 acres). 80% (200 acres). May benkia Irom otf- slte ecqLte-lton d CSS. rar ihroal whiptail :ne lopttoms hypsrythru* jkln(^)C2, CSC. NCCP, T Occurs in CSS, CHP, RW, weedy areaa. and washes. Southem Orar>gs and San Bernardino coiaitle* lo eouth central Baja CalHomia. Not obBvrved: •uttabi* habllat Is wide-spread. S«v*r«l IrxlMdual* w*r* •een in SMaC In the norlhweetern portion. Stin common at most histoncal k>olltle* where hablUt remaine intad. Htowever, large areas ot habitat have been converted to urban arxl agricuDtfal davetopmer<. Sorr>s protedion provkled by occurrence In podion* d Cleveland Nattoral Forett and County Partes such as Mission Train Regional Park. A minimum d 40% (510 acres) d habllat will b* praservsd; specie* atso win beiiefll from acca** contrdt and predalor managament. Preeervatton d habitat and malntenarK* d ecosystem win ber>efn this specie*. 55% (560 acre*). 80% (200 acres). May beneft from ott- sRe acquisition ot csa an igo homed lizard 'hr «oma coronatum ialn-J)C2, CSC. NCCP.T Occur* In variety ol habitats Induding CSS, CHP. OW. and open conUerous woodlands In the rrtountain* up to 6.500 leet In elevation. SanU Barbara Co. to northwest Bala Call. One Indlvdual In CSS, west ot San Marcoe Creek. Several individual* observed In SMC. Speciee hee t>ecome uncommon or abeert from many lowland areaa near development: typically occurs In tow denaltl**. Important haUiai componeita Indud* good basklno sttee, adequate scrub cover, areaa d too** soil, and an abundame d hanrestar anl*. a prknary pt*y. Som* protedton provided by occurrence on extensive areaa of Nattonal Forest lands In southem Califomia and In olh*r ruggsd arsas whsre dev*topm*nt preeeure Is kw. A minlnxim ol 40% (510 actee) d habltal presenied; specie* aleo win beielH from meaaur** to control acoee* and predator*. Preeervatton d habllat and malniarwK* d ecosystem wHI berwfit this speclee. 55% of habiut (560 acres). 80% (200 acres). air kg* sparrow \mphlspiza belU belH) C2, NCCP, MBTA. 063 OccuvinCSS. CHP, cl*montan* juniper woodland, and alluvial Ian ecrub Throughout CalHorma and northem Ba|* CalHomia. Theee sparrows hsve spotty distnbutton over entire range. Estintated 13 to 20 peir*. Not observed; appropriate hatritat present. Northem and Central CalHKornla populaltons still rerrtain In larg* trad* d indevetoped habitat: Southem CalHorrUa coatf has toat much habHal. Bacaus* d limited •urv*y tim* an assumption that sage sparrow orvsHe are more •v*n)y dkKribuled, adual no. d paks ualng occupied habitat codd be tower tttan •*tlm*l*d here. Some prdedton provkled by occurence in area* *uch as Sycamore Canyon Open Space Presene, SUverwood Wiklllfe Sanctuary, and Minton Trails Regional Park and by oocurrarce In lodhlll* constrained from devetopntent. A minimum ot 40% (510 acre*) d habitet preeanvd; tpeciee aleo win benefll from revegalMk>n plans and Irom rsmoval ol norv native tpeciea. Habitat pr*«*rv*d and potantially enhanced. Six lo 10 pairs and 55% habitat (580 acres). 80% of potential habllat (200 acres). Final 6-95 ' Group 2 ra b/0 to,: Gpoup 2 continued: H )ciesNanie& itUB (NeU> l^piiiill^ Habdat Typ©(6) Rangewide Oistrfijuiion d Spectes Occun-ence of Species withBi Rancheros- Rand^Sar^a Fe Road Subarea Occurrence of Species within Northwed Subarea Cor»en/atton Planneig ConeiderBtJons Based on Known Distribution of Species Degree ot Existingr Propose d Ffoiecsion for Species {withojl Plan) Ber efits of Plan to Species in I*1an Area Contribution of PJan to Long* term Preservation of Spades Htghest Potential Take in Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Highest Potential Taken Northwest St^^ea Ad(£tlonaf Comments :>of n hawk (AcdpHar op )CSC,h«TA,T Occur In lcMrlar>d RWandRSandlr OW In proxlmtty to auilable foraging areas. Occurs throughout Ihs eontlnenlal U.S. •xdudng Alaska, parts d Montana, and most ol Ihs Dakotss. Ob**rv*d within th* OW; timing suggssts breeding on-site. S^ey* d 1001 found 1 or 2 eeperate IndMdusIs foraging on site. Consistently seen tlylrtg over and foraging in G and RS on- site during survsys d 1991. Dedinad In parts d the* rang*, but still thrlv* In larg* undistixbed trade of habitats. Since ths 1072 ban d DDT, numbers have Increased In th* Eastern U.S. Som* protectton provided by tocal ordnancec artd wetland reguialton* and by occurrerce in coastal fodhm region, where acceea Is HmHed and devetopmem is constrained. A minimum d 22% (100 acree) d toragir>g and potential breeding riabltat within plan area preserved and connected to larger open space area. Preecnratton ot the San Marcoe Creek and the upland habitat wlU help sustain a tocal prey-baa* tor thi* sped**. 66% d potential habitat (65 acres). 80% at potential habitat (280 acres). jggertteed ehrik* (Lanto* JovtdWHJ*) C^ CSC, MBTA. X3 SS Occur* in varisty of open habUals, Including 3. CSS. and D area* that hav* perching strata for the spedes to hurt Irom. Wklespread but dedinlng throughout North America, winter* south to Central America. 2 poesldy breeding pair. 2 possibly br*«dlr>g pair. Thi* sp*ci*s utiUza* pnmarlly open areae. Some protedton provided by occurence within Mission Trails Regtonai Partt. P«na»qulo* open space preeenM, and Anza Borrego Stale Park and on military lands (Uramar. Camp Pendlaton, Camp Etiiol.) A minlnnum d 36% (540 acres) d habltal preser wd, Indudlrig areas occupied by polenUal breeding pairs; speciei aleo will benetH from preeervatton d disp«rf.al corrktor*, acceei controls, cortrol d r>on-nallve planta, and reiwgeuiton •Hon*. Habllat and dispersal corridors preserved. 55% (580 acrss) d habltal. Up to 86% (370 acres). outtiern CalHomia ruloue- owned eparrow (AknophUa itor . caneecen*) CS, CSC, iBT «CP, T Occm inCSSon rocky MlWdee arvl canyor*; alao found In op*naage ecrubygrassy areas d growth. From Santa Barbara to northwestern Bate Calfomia. Occirs Infrequently above 1,500 feel and can be found to 4,000 feet. Indivkluale fairly common with CSS Not tound. deeptt* pr***ne* d apparerttly suKabto CSS. PopUaUon* In Santa Barbara and Vcntixa countiee persist m Isrgs tracts d undevetoped land Moat d rtmalnirtg habBat remain* under privat* own*r*hlp. SofTte protedton prwkled by occurence In Sycamore Canyon Open Space Preeerve, Mlseton Trails RsgionsI Park, and Psnasquilos Canyon Open Space PreeenM and In footnHI areas wNdi have remained mdeveloped due to topography. A minimum d 47% (445 acres) d habHat preeen/ed: specie* alao wHI benelR from access control, rtorvnsdve plant removal, lerclng. arxl monitoring. Preeervatton arid potential anh*nc*m*rl of habltal. Approximately 49% (405 acres) of habitat. 83% (100 acre*). Final 6-95 S ctes Name & S .us {N=14) : »k d blackbird (Agelakj* oto tZ. CSC, NCCP, 1TA.T Habdal Rangewide Distit)Ution of i Species Occurrence of Species wilhst Rancheros- RandwSarrfa Fe Road3ubarea Forage* m pasture, cropland, lake shores and trrigaled graecy ai*a*; breeds In freshwater *m*rg*rH w*tlarKla, mostly marahee, compo**d d cattail*, tulee, wlUcNv*. mutofat, and tarrtarisk. Souttiem Oregon to nonhwn Bat* CalHornia ,ik]w-breasted chat (idarta ans SC, MBTA. OSS >ltow warblsi (D*ndroica ;t*c' br*wstsrl) CSC, ST/ S3 Occurs in RW arxl RS around tt>* edge* d rivem and lacuatfirt* areai of coastal southern CalHomia. Occur* in RW and RS around th* Wge* d river* and lacustrlrw ar*a* of coastal *oulh*m CalHomia. No indivklual* **ght*d. Ttvoughoul North Amarica; a spring and •ummsr breeding residerfl In So. CalHomia Throughout North America; a spring and summer braedirq reaklent In So. CalHomia Occurrence of ' Spedes within Nortiiwest Subarea On* tran*l*t sigH*d; good foraging habHal and thin b*R of breeding habitat occw* on- sti*; br*e<fing habitat nd large enough lo st«port spedes' typlcaHy larg* breeding cotonle*. Atthough dedlning in Soiihcm CalHomia. sUII thitvss In mora r*md* section* ol Cemral and Northem CalHomia. Cons«rva&)n Piannsig Considsrations Based on IfeownDlstttbutionDf ^>eciB$ Some protedion d breeding habHat provkled by wetland egulattona; foraging habitat* (agricultural lands) stlO cccii in large acreage throughout the slate. Nona. 2 paks ki RS atong a crsek northwest of the goH cows*. None: no appropriate habitat. 3 ot 4 IndlvkJuals within RS atong a creek mrthwest ol th* goti couree. sun wide*pr*ad and common throughout rmst of Its range. SUU wkleepraad and common throughout moel ol it* rang*. Degree of £xis6ig/Propose d Proteclion for Specie* (withotj Plan) ManMAnds where one transient bird was sigltted wUl be pre**rved on Norihwect. Some protectton provided through wetlarKi artd streambed regulations; habHat Induded In proposed HCP* for Sweetwater and San Diego rtver*. Som* prdedton provkled through wetiand and Mrcambad regulation*; habHal lnclud*d In proposed HCPs f« SwMtwatet and San Diego rivers. BenafrtS of Plan .. lo Speciei in.;. Flan A-ea Ma|ority ol potential habitat preserved: speciet aleo wiU banefll Irom cowbird trapping and polenlial habHal anharKerrwrt. 42% (45 acree) d pdentliil habHat wlU b* prseerved; sp*cies also wlU benetH from cowbird irapplrx) ar>d pdential habltal enhancement. Contribution of Plan to Lorn- . .-...term Preservation of Species Pr***rvallon d habttai win contribute to sp*cl**' n**d*. Habitat preserved ar>d rteet site parasitism potentially reduced. Habitat preeen«d and nest site parasMam potentially reduced. Highest Potenttal Take n , =rc . Rancho Santa Fe Road Table iO, Group 2 continued Non*. Unkr>own. most llk*ly non*. LImllvd pdential habitat wUI be taken by the San Marco* Creek bridge. Limned pdential hebHat wtB be Uk* by th* San Marco* Cr**k brtdg*. Hi^est Td '.'^ in Northwest Stdiaraa Llimiled pdential habitat couM be tak* by a polenUal crossing through ths riparian habitat. 63% (60 acre*) Additional Comments:: A current study by CDFG and iJ.C. DM show Insutficienl data to support continued kstirq as a CSC. Tha epedee ie endemic lo CaHomla and parts of Oregon and Rs eUtu* may be again upgraded as lixlher dati are colleded. Final 6-95 s oecleix Occurring Only m Consent edHabitaiot OpenSpace jacies Name & ,lp*ijs {N=i3) Habitat Type<s) Rangewide Dislnbuiion of Spedes Occunence of Species within Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Occurrence of Species withm Northwest Subaraa Consewation Pfannmg Considerations. Based on Known DictrbutiDi of Spectes Oogrea cl Existing'PrC'pose d Pfoleciion lor Spectet (without Pian) i;;|p;Sp$K:ies jn|i:,- Piin Area :. Contribution of i;:Hlan;tp Long^';^:^;' term Presentation of Species Highesl •-|::Ppterrtiai-::v ::,y;:;Take" inf : R&richefos-^ |||;BapcH5^:;.&. Santa Fa Road Subsu^a ' : Highest '• , Potemial :;;:•::; :Ta|^e::io:::,:::v Northwest Subarea " Acidttionai If nii ddefe-tongue fern ^ um kMtlcsnlcum aUlurnkum) CNPS4. C3c Occtf * In graesy aree* and v*mal pool*. Rangee Irom Amador, Butte, Merced. Mariposa, Stanialau*. Tuohjmn*. Orange, and San Olego counties: possibly extirwt In Monterey County (SmHh and Berg 1088). Aiso In norttiweslem Baja CaHfornia. Approx. 100 iTKlividuais withm the SDSAE aaaameni east ol RSFRd. Not dateded; not expected. sua relativety abundant throughout rang*. Th* Plan area does nd repreeent what woiM b* con*kl*red a critical poriton d tfw rar^ge. Some protedton propoeed in corvwclton wHh regtorwl coneervatton planning efforts. Individuals on-site wiU be fully proleded and speciee tvUI irtdirectty benefit from measures to cortrol access and exotic woed*. Because d the wMespresd range and th* small population dstected wtthin tt>e PUn Area, ihe HCP would not contribute slgnHlcantly to tor>g-lsrm preeervatton. None. NM applicable. ii*00 County viguiwa arr- dnlata)CNPS4 Occura in CSS. Coastal San Diego County soUh lo central Baja CalHornia. Approx. 75 Indivtouals. Not deteded. not expected. The population in the plan area Is at the northem periphery d this apedetf range. Some protedN>n provided by occunence In Mieston Triale Regtonrtl Park and The Neture Convervancys McGinty Mountain Pre**rv*; areaa proposed tor prdedlon In tocal and reglortal eoneerration plan*. Irtorvkluals orvsils wiU be fuHy prolecled. Prdedton wiH contribute to specie^ contirued survlvsL. None. Not applicebto. y-l* Id Uveior*v*r •yr tcida)C1, 4B. NCCP, OSS Occur* on bluffs and rocky diffa wHhln CSS andChP. Souttiem Orange Co. south to c«ntral San Diego Co. Several large populaltons occur wtthin Ihs San Marcos Creek riparian corridor (thousands of individuals). Not deteded; not expeded. The population In San Marco* Cr**k I* one d the largest wtthin the southern periphery of thi* sp*detf distribution. Som* protedion provkled by occurranca In *l**p atop* araas where devetopmert )e conetrainad. PopUaltona in San Marcoe Creek wll be preeerved. Presenration wtH be Importart lo speciee* rangewide vigor. None. Not appik»bie. Final 6-95 11-^ V • r 1 iiiiiiiiBiBiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii^ S5pgcft9» Not BenefHed by tf» Habitat Conservation Plan p les Name & Status (NsS) HabHal Typ6(s) Rangewide CistrfOution of SpacJBS Occunwtceof Species w&im Rancneros-Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Occurrence of Spectes within Northwest Subarea Conservation Planning Considerations Based on Known Distribution of Species Degree of Existing'Propose d Protection for Species iwRiicut Pian) Benefits of Plan tt) Species in Plan Area Ccntribution of Plan to Long-term Prasarvalton of Specns Highest Potential Take m Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Highest Potential Take in Northwest Subarea Addftton^^ Comment* imann oak (Quercus m/"-11) CfPS4, OSS Occurs in coasUI live OW, eucalyptus OW, and SMsC. Coaaul and loothiU r*gton* In Lo* Angeles. Orange. Riverside, and San Diego counties south to Sierra Juarez In Ba)a CalHorma. Nd detected, not expected. One Indnndual delected wHhin the coastal Uve oak riparUn woodland. Th* pUn arsa • at th* •xtr*m* coasUI periptiery ol this species range; core popuUtiora occur on rrKir* Inland foothill* and valleys. Some prdedton provkled by occurrenc* in The Nature ConeervarK/s Santa Rosa Plateau and McGinty Mouitain Prssenrae and In sute ar>d naltonal forests. Nona. Insignificant. Not applicabi*. One irxlividual wUI be atfeded. It's brodUaa [BrodUaa li) , CNPSIB, T Occur* atong ephemsral Btrsams and vsrrtal pools. No. Sierra Juarez in Baja CalHomia Ihrougri San Diego, southwestern Riverskle and San Bernardino counties. Two populattor« of five Indnriduals each. Not deteded or expected. Much nmr* abundan in other locations m close proximtty to plan area. I.e. San Marco*. Som* protedton provided by occurrenc* In Rancho Cuyamaca Stats Parti and Mission Trails Regional Park. Nona. Nons. 100% (10 ir>di vidua Is). Nol applicable. •Ii goklen sUr (MiiUa •im X2*, CNPSIB. T An edaphto (cUy soUs) endemto on dry mesas and stopee; aseodaled wRh vernal pools; arvxial and nativ* 0; and CSS. CoasUI San Diego County to the extreme northvrest d Baja CalHornU. Approx. 1,050 Indlvkluals In thres area* wHhln the area proposed for the Rartoho SanU Fs Road realignment Not deteded. These popuutton* r*pr***nt a slgnHlcanl popuUllon al the rwrihern periprwy ot thie species' reported rsnge. Som* protedton provkled by occurrence In Misston Traila Regonal Park and OUy Mountain (U.S. Department ot the inarkir WUdH* Preeerve). 400 Indlvkluals (20%) ol lhi> pop. wlH b* preserved, bU the presiirved area border* on diivdoped areas that may iiav* a datrimenui effect on th* vUblllty ol the preeerved pop. Nons. Approx. 1.550 d the 1.950 indlvkluals (60%). Not applicable. In survey* conduded prtor to 1M1. sorrw popuUlk>ns may havs been mis-ldentHied; a 1902 vitiH luring the appropriate tlowerir>g pertod found MuilU marHlrrui Ir^tead. cw owl (Speotyto ;:^fia) CSC, MBTA, T Occura ki open grasslar>d; usss the burrows d ths CalHornia grourx] squirrsl for nest sites. Westem UnHed Stales. Canada, artd Mexico. WHhln San Diego Courty, burrowing owls are generally restricted to graesUnd* «nd agrlciitural land* atong th* coaat. Not obscnred; Inappropriat* habitat. Burowa and pellet* w*r* klentilied In ti>e norlhea*t*m corrwr Immediately north of the Itoodplatoi scrub habHat; no other approprUt* habHat exists orvsH*. Throughout th* *ntlr* range d the sped**. popuUUon decline* and to«a d pr*viou*ty occupied habHal have b**n recorded. Very scare* as a br**dlng sped** In San Diego Courty. Current populatton eatlmat** wHhln th* County ar* approx. 24 to 36 pair*. Th* only nunagement currentiy ongoing In San Diego Coixity Is occurring on Naval Air SUUon North Island, wr>*r* th* populatton ha* MabUzM) and increas*d to 10 pair*. A mit^mum d 16% (55 acred) ot habttai wUI be preserved. None In current design. 75% of habiut (60 acres). 86% of habitat (220 acres). The exad status d the burrowing uwls on tha Northwest site Is not krwwn. nei '.arrier (Circus >eu*) CSC, MBTA. T Occurs to coasUI, salt and Ireehwatar marshUnda, grasaUnds, and pralrl*. Wlntars and mlgrales throughout CalitomU. Known breedng areaa Indude Torrey Pines, ih* Tl^na Rlv*r VaHey and Camp Perxlelon. Oris mal* foraging obaerved repeatedly; not exp*ct*d to br*ed orvelt*. Lo*s d coastal wdUnds, grasaUnds, and agricullural fiskls from devetopmern has cortrlbuted to decUne. SoiTM protedton prcwkled by waUand and coasUI zone r*gulatlon*. Mltigiitton for Impads to rlpariin area* rrtay indude enhancemerl d existing habttai and may resub In better qualRy breeding hablUt for northam harrier wtthin tite HCP area. Habttai enharcemenl may yieto posKlv* efteds lo these sped**' breeding requir*m*m*. Nons; some to** of foraging habHat. Nons; som* lo*s d foraging habttai. WdUnc and coastal protedton iiuasure* rrtay help stablliz* breeding pspuUtione throughout rarig*; d*v*topm*nt of grs**Ufxl and open flekl*, r^waver, wUI oontHiue to contributa to tong-term Incremental toe* d loraglng habHiil. Final 6-95 :;||||ilj|i||ijliiip|iii|iilliii Groups Spedes Not Observed to Date in the Plan Area Species Name & Status (N=31> Habitat Tyoefsi Rangewide Dis^ution (A ^cjes Occurrence of Species witiiin Rancneros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Occurrence of ^>ecjes within hiorthwest Subarea Consenration Plannirg CcnsKderations Bated on Known Distnbution of Species Degree of Existing,'Propose d Prelection for Species (without Plan) Benefit! of Plan 10 Species m Plan Area Cc^tr^ullon of P>an 10 Long- term Prssen/ation •< Species Highest potential Take in Rancheros- RarKho Santa Fe Road Subdr«a Higher Potential Take in Nor^twesr Subarea Addition^ Comments nurts dudleya (DudMya aif^ manU* sap. btochmanUe) CNPSIB. MXP, OSS Occurs atop coasul blutf*. San Lus Obispo. Sarta Barbara, Lo* Angeles, Orangs, Ventura, and San Diego countiee: artd extreme northwest Baja Can. Not deteded: tow polenlUI. Not deteded; tow potential. Rapidy d«app*aring in Orang* and San Diego courttiee. Some protedion provkled by occurrenc* on Camp Pendldon. Not applicatt-<e unles* present. Not appiicalb* unMs* present. Not applicalbe unless present. Not applicalbe unto** present. CIM spurge (EuphorbU misera) C^'^. NCCP, CSS m a Occurs on coasUI bkjfls In CSS. Orange, Riverskle, and San Diego counties; north and central Baja, CalHorria; Guadalupe IsUnd and the IslandB in the northem GuA d CalHornia. Not ddectsd; tow potential. Not deteded: low potential. Large tocal populaliom stlH intacl. Cabrilto Nattonal Monumert artd Torrey Pine* State Reserve and Is StlH reUllvely abundant on Navy property on Point Lome PenineuU. None. Not applicable unless present. Not appitoabia unless preeent. Nol appltoalbe unless preeent. The tong-term preaanalton d this specie* may be dependent upon some of the signHlcan populattone on itte Navy Point Loma property. Coast banal cactus (Ferocadus vtrtda*c«n*) C. CNPS2. NCPP, OSS >ut Occurs on dry stopes wHMnCSSandCHP. CoasUI San Olego Courty, northwest Baja CalH.. and the todhills ol Sierra Juarez. Not deieded; not expected. Not deteded; nd expected. Still wide-spread throughout much ol Hs rartge but raptoly declining. Some protedion provided by occurrer>ce In Misston Trails Ragranal Park. Toney Pin** SUle Res«nw. and CabrHo National Monumert: and on fUv/s propsrty on Point Loma PenlnauU. Not applicalCe unless present. Not appitoade unlea* present. Not applicable unless preeent. f4ot appitoabia unUss present. Though stgnificartt popuUtton* DI :his species are Li proteded preserves and ^arka, the tong-tsrm pressrvalton ot this speclaB may b* deper>dent upon addtttortal prditdton d exunt populations. Dr'' Ur sartd aster (Corethrogyne fib ^dU var. linifolia) CNPSIB. f* .',FPT,T Occur* In sandy and disturbed pUc*s In coasUI ar*as, usually wtthin SMaC. Endemic to central, coastal San Diego County. Not deteded: nd expeded. Not deteded: not *xpect*d. SIgnHicant extar* popuUttone known from SMaC outside d plan area, east d El Camino Real hi Endnttas and alao in Gorualee Canyon. Some protedton provkled by occurence in Torrey Pins* State n***n«. Nol applicatHt unleee present. Not applicable unMes pressnl. Nd applicable unleee preeent. Nd applicable uni*** pr**enl. Ths tong-term preeervatton a thie speciee appears lo b* tha protection of eouthem maritime chaparral that occurs on very sandy susstralee. Enclnllas coyote bush (Becdwri* va? «ae)SE, CNPSIB. FPE, T Occurs in SMaC In coaatal areas and in SMC in more inland area*. Northwest and north- c*nial San Diego County. Not deieded: not expeded. Nd d«t*ded; tow poterttUI. Extremely r**tricted In range ar>d almoet extirpated Irom coaaul areaa. Som* prot*dton provkled by occurrenc* on Mount l*rad Recreation Area and on private Und norih of Lake Hodge*. Not applicable tt rtd pr***nt. Not sppltoabls H not preeent. Nol appltoabto II rtot preeertt. Not appiiCBbto H not preeent. Pertiap* d*p*ndent on pre**nralton within th* Mount Israd Recreatton Area where th* largest reported populaltons are located. 1 C< J Final 6-95 GfXAJpS Table 10 (^mtin ffficinfiruuxi S cm Name & Status (N=31) Habitat Typefsi Rangewide Distribution of Species Occun-ence of Speciss within Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Occurrence of Species wilhm Northwest Subarea Consen^^on Piannstg Considorations Based on Known Dtstnbutkjn of Species Degree of Exisung/Prcpose d ProtectKJn lor Species (without Plan) Benefits of Plan to Spe-ies m Plan Area Contrfcution of Plan lo Long- term Presen/dtion dl Species Highest Potential Take in Rancheros- Rancho Sania Fe Road Subarea Higher Potenttal Take m Norftwe^ Subarea Additional Comments -Urblaorf • dun stopper (Euphy** tt • harbMonI) C2, T Oocun In RW. RS, and OW. to aH caae*. • p*rr*nlal water •cure* 1* required lor the Urval loodpUnl (Carex spissa). SanU Ana MounUtn* in Orar>ge County south through western San Diego Coixity. WINn San Marcos Creek Canyon, exceiien que In y habttat. Low potential because d ctoce proximity to coast. Lanral foodpUnt not obeerved; m survey* done al appropriate lime d y«ar tor adult*. Krwwn exUnt populations Irom areae mucn tanner inund, even though larval loodplant known Irom coastal locattons. An apparertt attHudinal restrldton does r>ot favor popuUtton* occuring ctos*r lo tr>e coasl than approximately 20 mllea. Sonne protedton provkled by wetUnd reguUtton* and by occurrence ol popuUttorw in inaccestibi* terrain. AH pdemUl habttai preserved. Long term protedion WlH be accorded bdh the butlerily (H present) and the foodplant wtthin San Marcos Creek canyon. Take unlikely as speciee Is probably not an inhabiUnI of the sHa. Take untikely as species Is probably nd an inhabiUnl ol the Btte. N*aresl popuUtion from approximately same Utttuds is no ctoeer than San Pasqual. H*' .* copper (Lycaena herme*) C2, >S Occurs In CSS, CHP; larval loodplani Is buckthorn (Rhamnus crocsa). San Diego County soJh to rwrthern Baja CalHornU. Larval foodpum observed in CHP; preferred adult nectaring Itowera obeenred (e.g. Eriogonum): edutts not surveyed for. Lanral foodpUnt observed In CHP; preferred adult r^edarir^g ftower* ob**n/ed (e.g. Ertogonum); aduHs not survsyed lor. Has lost some ol he hisiorto locallorw to ths devetopment. but has mor* r*c«rxly been found lo InhabHat ctiaparral vegeutton higher In elevatton and further from coast than was orlgirvaily thought. Some protedion provided by occurrence of species wtthin legtonal parica, in state arxl national forests, and on milHary larKls; spedes also Included to areas propoeed tor p rot set on through MSCP. HMP. eto. 57% (515 acres) ol Gpeciee' habHat preserved. PoientUI habltal preserved. 28% (180 acres). 80% (200 acres). May ber>eflt from ofl-site acquisflton of 240 acres dCSS. Ouino ch*ck*r*poi (Euphydrya* edtha quino) Cl, OSS Occurs In CSS. Q. and v*mal pools; larval foodpUrt Is plantain (PUnlago er*da). Western Riverside, Orange, arto San Diego counties to coasUl central Baja CaWornU. Pdential habttat and Urval toodpUnl obeerved: adutts not surveyed lor. Larval foodplant not otnerved; sdutta not surveyed for. Thought lo be cxtirpaled In San Diego County; nnay only exist in Riverskle County ar>d northem Baja CalHornU. Some protedton provkled by occurence on pubbc lands, such as lagtonal parits and mlilUry resanre*. A minimum cif 34% (500 aaes) d potenui habHat preserved. Preservation of pdentUI habttat. Including Urval loodplam*, may altow for racotonlzatton fdlcMing next mete populatton •xptoaton. Unkrviwn. unlikely; moot H extirpated from tt>e County. Unknown, unlikely: mod H extirpated Irom County, May benefit from otf-sHs acquisttton of 240 acres dCSS. Ca rnU red-legg*d frog (Rana au._ j draytonii) CSC, FPE, OSS Occurs In pond*, marshee, and pode In creeks and atream*. Northem CallfornU atong westem stopee d Sierra Nevada Ihmugh Coaet Ranges lo nonhwesUm Baja CalHornU. Not lourxl orvsfle: polentUI tor occunence remote. Not found on-atte; pdentUl for 0Gcurrer>ce remote. Exilrpaled from many areae in Soutiwrn CalHornU and much d Ha rar>ge In the Sierra Nevada. Absent from even reUtively pristine habHats to th* mouitaln and foothill ar*a*. One* occurred wtthin six mile* northwest ot plan area at Agua Hedtonda Cr. Some prdedton provided by occurence in The Nalur* Con**nrancy* SanU Roae Plateau Preeen*. No beneftt* uxpeded due to remole chance of occurrence and oocupatton of riparUn habHal by bulttrogs and large-rT>outh !>ae*. Not appltoabto unUs* preeenl. Not applicabU unless present. Nd appltoabto unl**B prssent. The aquatic environrTMrX* In the area are degraded to the extert where this frog probably coi^d nd malnUIn a vUble popuUUon even H tt were reintroduced. It aUo shoukl be nd*d that th* frog ha* been ab*«nl from th* creek for many year*. Final 6-95 Grouo S Table 10, Gro upScontinued i Kiss Name & Statue (N=31) Habitat Typefsi Rangewide Distnbuiion of Species Occun-ence of Species Within Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Occurrence of Species within Northwest Subarea Consenration Planning Ccnsidarations Based on Known Distribution of Species Degree of Existing/Propose d Prcrteciion lor Species (without Plan) Benefits of Plan to SpKies m Plan Area Contri)ution of Plan lo Long- term Preservation al Species Highest Potential Take in Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Highest Pctertial Take m Nor^west Suoaiea Additbn^ Co**t paidt-noeed snak* (S adora twxaUpU virgUtea) C2, Cf NCCP,(XS Occur* primarily to CHP but aleo in CSS and Q mtxad wtth scrub. From SanU Barbara County south into northwest Baja CalHomU: from ths coast to th* desert foolNlls and up to 6,000 leet. Not found. Nd found. ^airty w)d*-*pread in areas w*st of tha deeeris: species to dlLxrut and typically obsarvabU 1 present. provided by occunerK* In rugged areas d foothlH and mountain zones where devetopmertt pressure Is tow. Addittonal protedton wUI be provkled through Ihe regtonal coneanation pUnnir^g etioris. acres) of haittat will be presenred; saecie* aleo wlH beneftt fiom eccecs contrd msariurea, whtoh will minlmlzt colled ton ot this snake. PreeervaUon d habHal and mairterurce ol ecosy*t*m will benetH this specie*. 28% (180 acres). 80% (200 acres). Cororudo skint (EiXTteee* tk " nianuB Inlerpariafalls) C2, a NCCP,oss Occurs In variety of habttat*: G, CSS, open CHP, pine.OW, arxl conHerou* forests wHh sbundart ieal-IHter or kiw herbaceaoua growth. SouttMrastern CalifoinU Irom Los Angeles County to rwrihwesl Baja CalHomU: alao occur* on several isUndi Induding tiw Los Coronados IsUnd*. Not observed: nd specHlcally sunreyed tor. Nol obsenred; not specHically surveyed for. Due 10 Ha range ot habHaU, the skink U not considered lo be under ImmedUte threat. Some protedton provided by occurrence on Nattonal Forest and Stats Park Unde: also pr***nt In rugged areas d ths fodhllls and mountains wfiere pressure Irom d«velopmer< is tow. A minimum if 34% (585 acr**| of halittat viriii be preserved: speciee also will berteitt from measure* lo control ac<*«* and predators. PopuUtion in towUnd area wUI b* proteded. 56% (620 acree). 85% (810 acres). & OUgo banded gecko (Coleonyx V* ^lus abbotti) C2. CSC, NCCP CGB Occure In CHP and CSS generally In areas d rock outcrop*. Southem stopes d Xtm San GabrUI Mourtaina through ctsmonUne and coastal Southem CalHomU to northwest Baja CaUfomU and Cedros Island. Not ob**rv*d: H present, probably rtd common due to Ih* lack ol exlensiv* rock outcrop. Nd obseraed; not expeded. Probably nd urtder any major threat becauae of habttat and dUtrtoution. Some protedton provkled by occurrence on Nattonal f or**l and Stat* Park Unds and In rugged ar*a* ol th* foothill* and tow ntounam* wtut* preeeure Irom devetoprrMm Is low. A rr»kiimum iri 57% (515 acree) of habttd wW be preserved; s|>ecies also WiH bertettt from aoc*** conlrds and predator nunagemerH. Preeenration d habHal and maintenance of ecoeyslem wU bertefH thU speciee. 28% (180 acres). 80% (200 acres). The San Marcoe Creek gorge, wHh Hs rock outcrops, ties the greatest potemui to support thU species. San Diego ringneck sruke (OUdophU pt^Kiatus sImlU*) C2, C CSS Occur* In moid habttau auch as OW and In canyon botioms; also fourxl lna.CI4>,andCSS. Southwest San Bemardlrto County southward on the coasUI stop* to northwest Baja CalHomU. Not observed; moderate potentUI lo occur wHhln CHP,CSS,otQ. Nd obeerved; moderate pdential to occia wtthin CHP, CSS orOW. Occm In rugged areas ot loothllla and low mourlaln* where pressur* Irom developmert Is tow, Some protectton provkled by occurrence on extenshr* araaa d Nattonal Fored Und* to eouthem CalHomU artd In other rugg*d area* wher* d*vetopm*nl preesurs is tow. A minimum d 34% (58S aa**) of haliHal wlH b* preserved: sf'eciee aleo WiH beneltt from meaeuree to cortrol dcc«s8 and nunag* habitat. Preeenration d habHat arxl maintenance d ecoay*t*m will b*n*IH thi* »p*ciee. 56% d hsbttat (620 acree). 85% d habHat (£10 acres). Final 6-95 BEST L ^ Groups Table 10. Group ScoiUhued Si z'nas Name & Status (N:s31) Habitat Type<$) Silvery legUe* Uzard (AnnteUa nigra .rg, M) CSC, OSS Occurs atortg washes, beaches, alkMal fans and In CHP and OW. wtth tooee sol and leal- lltler. 5outhw**t*m pond turtU Clr~my* marmorata paUtoa) Cl, 3( CCP.OSS Two-striped garter anake (Th nophi* hammondl) C2, CSC 3a Ca'" alp MB L nU horned um (EremophlU •Is actia) C2. CSC, NCCP, .OSS East d San Francisco Bay to rwrthwest Ba^ CallfomU. primarily weet of mountains; scatiared popuUttons atong western edga of CalHomia deserts. Occur* In wdland hadUts Including hwater marshes, creeks, porxls. and reservoir*. VtotnHy d Momerey. CalHomU Boulh to northwesi Baja CalllornU, prlntarily weal of mounuins. On* popuUtton atortg th* Mojavs Rivet in San Bernardino County. Occurs primarily atortg permanent creeks and streams, but also arourxl vernal pod* and imermlttent creeks; oGcaatonatty fouid In CH». Occura in open, sparaety vegeuted ar*as wHh low rtorbaceous pUnt cover, sandy b**ch*s, open me«a*. and nideral agrlcuttural Urtd*. Rangewide Distr&utioR of Species Occurence of Species within Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subaraa Nd obsenred; appropriate habHal exlsU which couto suppon this speds*. Monterey Courtty south through the coastal ranges (to 8,000 ft) to northwesi Ba)a CallfornU. CoasUI stopes and towlands d CalHomU from Sortoma County lo northern Baja. Nd observed: appropriate habUal exist* whtoh coukl support thU spedei Not observed; appropriate habHat does exist m subarea. Nd cbsenred; tow pdential atong San Marcos Creek. Not obsenwd. Occun-ence of Species withtn Northwest Subarea m Conseivato P^nmg ConsMerations Based on Known Distnbutksn of Species ReUtively common in area* Bupporting good habttai in the foothiH zones. htot observed: some marginal habHat does axUl. Artitkrlal ponda in the northern portton coukl support ihU specie*. Nd observed: nwderate polentUI In artHlclal pond* In th* northern section. Nd obeeraed. Degree of txistinsfPrcpDse d Protection for Species (without Plan) Benefits ^ Plan to Specie^ in Plan yuea Plan lo Long- temn Preservation c^Specles Some protedton pronded by tocal ordinance that treat OW aa sensRtvs habttat and by wetUnd reguUltorv. This species haa declined Ihroughout lis range. HabHal is proteded by stale and fedaral w*tUr>d reguUttons artd permBting requirements PopuUtions occta wtthin natural foraging Unds andtheSanu Rosa Plateau. Preeervatton d species' habttat uauaUy integrated wtth wetUnd coneervatton. No conduw* Inforrrtatton I* available which docurrtentt any recent rangewid* trend. A minimum d 26% (110 acres) d habllat prasarved; spocies also wiil beneftt Irom measure* to cortrol predators. Some protectton provkled by wetiand and Gtreambed reguUttons; habttai also is included to areas covered by proposed HCPs tor Sw««iwat*r artd Sen Diego river*. Sorrte protedion propoeed to connection wtth regtonal coneenratton pUnrtIng efforts. The plan will conserv* woodUnd and npanan areas used by this species. Tfi* prdedton of a scctton d Sar Marcoe Creek will prdect poleniUI habHat for this species. PotentUI habiut In Northwest [ailHtoUl ponds) WtH be preeenred H preeent, sptdes also WiH b*n*fN from meaeuree to control acceee artd norvrtallve pUnia. minimum ol 17% (55 acres) of habitat wUI b* presented. Highest Potential Take in Rancheros* Rand^D : Santa Fe Road Subarea 78% d habHat (160 acres). Prdedton d a eedton ot San Marcoe Creek, whtoh may support this specie* in ttte future couto benetH this specUs. None Majortty d potentUI habttat for this species Witt be presented. Unknown. 70% d upland habiut (155 acres). LimHed potential habHat will b* Uken by the San Marco* Creek bridge. 73% (66 acre*) Highest Potential T«d(.e»n Nordnve^:: Additional Comments None. Non*. 86% (220 acres) Final 6-95 BEST Group 5 _ . rable 10, Group 5 cortinued l^acles Name & Statue 1 HabitaATypetsj Rangewide Distrfeution of Species Occurrence of Species within Rancheros- fiancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Occunwceof Species vwlhin Northwest Subaraa Conservation Planna^g Conskserations Based on Known Distribution of Species Degree of ExistlngrPrcposo d Protection for Species (without Plan) Benefit:; of Plan to Spfcies in Plan Area Contrfeution of Plan lo Long, term Presentation at Species Highest Potential Take in Rancheros. Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Highest Potential Takem Northwest Subarea Additktr.^ Comments Le>-t B*ir* vtrao (V^ b*llll pu u•)FE.SE.MBT^T Lowland RW consisting of willows artd Cottonwood* wtth und*rslory d mulatat and vartous h*rbactous annuaU. N**t mairtly to dsns* wUtow thtokets, also in mutolat scrub or other avalUbU substrale. Soutttarn CalH., NW Ba^a CaM. None sighted; tow to moderate pdential In San Marcos Cieek canyon. Nons sightsd; tow to rrtodwat* polentUI in wlltow riparian habttat. Stoc* listing and a* a result d active nwugement (especUlly cowbird trapping), th* popuUtton ha* signHlcanlly Increased wtthin the species' range; distrlbulton d the species at present i* simiUr to that at tha timing ol listing. Erxlangered cuius provtoes fuH prdedton in aU parts d Hs range. No net toss of potential habHat; K area U recotonizsd, species wUI also benelH from habttat management measures such as cowbird Irappirtg artd predalor controls. PoMntui habttat preeerved artd mar^aged. LimHed potential habHat wUI be Uken by the San Marcos Creek bridge. Limited potential habttat coUd b* Uk«n by a crossing through the riparUn areas. PoBsibU riparian enhartcement wHI Inereaa* tit* potentUI Id racotonlzatton and will support other riparUn obligate breeders. San Olego cadua wren (C ipytomynchus brunnetoapillua) C: sc. NCCP. T Occurs to ess, deeerts, cadua patches, and thorny thickets on coacul rrtesaa arxl stopes. Cadus patchee In CSS in sotihern Orange and San OUgo courrttos aMo NW Baja CalHornU. Nd oDaenwl; no approprUte habttai. Nd ob**rv*d; no approprUt* habHal. ThU subspecies <s declining throughout lU range. Speoec U Induded on list lor Bute's NCCP program artd potentUlly proteded by several regtonal artd tocal conseraation pUmlng etlorts. Nd applicabU unMs* preeent: up lo 47% (445 acree) of potentUI habitat. Habltal wiH be craaled In fli* br*ak*. Spedes woiM bendtt H reintroduced to area. Nol applicabU unUee present. r^ot appucabu unl**s present; up to 48% (405 acres) ot potsntUI habttat. Nol applicabU unUss present, up to 83% (100 acres) of potentUI habitat. Cadus revegttaiton coukl reeuH In future esiabllshnrtent ot a population. Ther4 are ohl recorda for the Batlgultos t^cbon area. Southwestern wiitow flycaicher (E—'ktonax tralUI exUmue) FPE. St 'SS. MBTA. T Occun to RW and RS ueuaHy atong stream*, ponck or Uk**, or to canyon or drainage bottom*. Southwest U.S.: northwest Msxtoo. Not observed; tow pdentUI. Not ob**rved; moderate lo high potentUI. Eviderto* of popuUtion dectlrtes throughout rartge. Some protedton provided by wetUnd reguUtione artd occunenc* on mUttary Und*: habttat alao Induded to propo**d HCPs for Swustvrater and San Diego rtver*. All pdential habttat preserved; fl preeerd, speciee aleo wUI beneltt Irom cowbird trapping and predator controU. Preeervatton and potemial enhancement of habHat. LimHed potential habHal vrtU be taken by the San Marco* Cr**k bridge. LImtted potential habttat coUd be Uken by a crossir>g through the rIparUn areas. CalHomU mastiff bat (Eumop* pt J* caWorntoua) C2. CSC, T Foragee over a variety d habHal types. Roost sttee In rock crevlcee on steep cUff* artd maealve outcrops and to at>andon*d buikHng*. Central CalHornU lo westem Texas and northem Mexico. NM obaanMd; not surveyed for. Not ob**n*d; nd suraeysd lor. ThU specie* ha* apparenfly declined in CalHornU and rrtany hislortoal root* ar* no tonger occupied. The *Utu* U not vrell totown but U currertty under Invcstlgatton. Som* protedton provkled by occurrence on publto Unde, such a* on* roosting cotony krtown Irom Artza Boaego Deeert Suie Park. Nd applk^abie uriee* pre**nt: lo 25% (110 acrea) ol potentUI foraglrtg habHal. PoUntial beneftts from pre**fvalton of open spac* foraging areas. Not applicabU unl*** pr«**nl; up to 78% (180 acre*) d pot*nlUI loraglng habHat. Not applicabU unUas preeent; up to 72% (165 acree) ot pdentUI foraglrtg habHat. May benefit from off-sH* acquisilton. Final 6-95 i^iniin S 1 ''able 10. Group 5 continued facias Name & Status (N=31) Habitat Typefsj Rangewide Distribution of Species Occun-ence of Species withm Rancheros- Rancho Santa Fe Road Subaraa Occun-ence of Species wrthin Northwest Subarea Consewation Planning Considerations Baeed on Known Distribution of Species Degree of E)ti$tmgrPTOpo$e d Protection for Species ^without Pian) Benefits oi Plan to Species m Plan Vea Contrftiution of Plan lo Long- term Preservation of Species Highest Potential Take in Rancheros* Rancho Santa Fe Road Subarea Highest Potential Takem Northwest Siibarea Additional Ctmvnents )ul a CaHtomu pocket mouee Ch odipus caWomlcu* em» JU) C2. CSC, T Occurs mostly in CHP; aUo found in muMat scrub and dUturbed hablUts. Mouth d the Same MargarHa River to norihem Baja CallfornU. In San DIago County R ranges eart to the desert iransttton zone in a somewhat paichy distribution. Nd trapped during smaH mammal survay, smaH mamnnal sunwy. is tocated In rugged looUtlH areas where devetopment preeatf* U tow. prcwkUd by occurrartc* on public lartds. prEC*nt; a minimum d 10% (100 aces) of polsnliat hablUt pre»*nred. present from preeervatton of op*n space. unUss prssent; up to 61% (280 acre*)) d pdemut habttat. unlesa preeenl; up to 81% (145 acre*) of potertUi habHat. Pinal lake WlH be toes baeed on final »H* design. acquisttton. ^ac : IttlU pockd mouse P( )nathus tongirrtsmbrU pedltou*) CSC, NCCP. OSS Occurs in areas with sandy substrate and weedy or shrubby growth (CHP, CSS, G). Only krtown from eignt tocalilles scatiered atong the coast d Southern CalHornU. Not observed during small mammal trapping sunwys Not obssrved during smatt mamntaU trappirtg surveys. b**n extirpated from moel d the known htetorical tocaUtles; no conllnned records to over 20 yeer*. locaUtUs tor IhU species occur on protected areas Including the Tijuane River. NWRand north of the Sarta Margarita River. Not applicablii unUes pr(«*rt. No bendtte expeded beciuse of lemde chenc* d occurrertc*. AvalUbU data on speciee provkle evidence that the plan area U ouUkl) d local dittributton ot thU momnul. Not applicable unUes present. Not applicabU unless present. Nol applicabU unless preeertt. Based on the little data avalUbU on the habHats and tocalttUs Irom which IhU mammal has been recorded, Uie polentUI d tts occurence wtthin tite HCP area is very tow. Southem gras*hopp*r mouee (Of homy* lorrkJu* ramon*) C2. CS CCP.OSS Occurs In variety ot habttat types Irtoluding open countiY, graesUnds. and sagebrush. Norihem Los Angelee County south to northwestem Baja CalHomU. NM lotftd during the smaH mammal trapping survey. Not found during th* smaU mammal trappirtg aurvey. LHlU lo nothing U known. Some protedton provkled by occurrertc* on publto larxls, Irtduding sUle artd nattortal forest*. pfsaert; N prii**nl, wH benetH from praeeraetton d 40% (505 acre*) of potentUI habttat. PoiontUI benelH* tt pr***nl Irom preeervatton of open space. Not appltoabto unto** preeenl: tt presert, up to 50% (450 acres) ot habHat. Not appltoabto urlees preeent; H preeenl, up to 85% (320 acres) d habHal. One oU spedman from the CarUbad area haa no more spedfto tocaltty data. Theee rod»m* g«rt*raHy occur In low popuUtton deneniee reUtlve lo other rodent specie* and are dHficutt to trap du* to 1h*lr carnivorous habits. Towii**ods w**iem big-eared bat (PUcotu* towneendU) C2, CSC. T Forages over a variety d habttat*; requires cav*s, mtots tunneU d buildings lot roods. Throughout CalHomU and much ol tha western U.S.; dMaiU d di*trlbution are not w*H krwwn. No suttabU roost sttee an known. No euttabU roo*l stt** are knovm. This spacU* ha* marttedly declined to many area*, Induding CalHomU, during recent tlrrte*. P*stickle uee ma> be partUUy reeponslbU lor d*clln** in bat populatton*. Som* protedton provkled by occurrertce on public lartd*. A minimum d 25% (110 acre*) d foraging hsbttat pre**nred. Unkrtowm. Approx. 78% (160 acre*) ol forage habttat. Approx. 72% (165 acre*) of foraging habitat. LHtU Is known concerning thU epeciee In San Diego County. Final 6-95 Secorid Addendum City of Carlsbad/Fieldstone/La Costa Associates Habitat Conservation Plan/ Ongoing Multi-Species Plan for Properties in the Southeast Quadrant of the City of Carlsbad, California Final June, 1995 City of Carlsbad Fieldstone/La Costa Associates California Department of Fish and Game United States Fish and Wildlife Service Second Addendum to the Revised Draft for the Habitat Conservation Plan/ Ongoing Multi-Species Plan December 21, 1994 After further review of the Habitat Conservation Plan/Ongoing Multi-Species Plan (HCP) with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and Califomia Department of Fish and Game (Department), revisions were made to enhance the preserve design and to minimize and mitigate impacts to sensitive species to the maximum eictent practicable. Those revisions address and respond to issues raised by Service Staff during the review of the proposed HCP. More particularly, the revisions require the HCP to preserve more sensitive Southem Maritime Ch^jarral onsite and improve potential connectivity to habitat located west of the Northwest Parcel. The resulting design enhances multi-species preservation within the plan area, provides greater dispersal cjqjability for coastal Califomia gnatcatchers and other species of concern and allows further conservation options for the North County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan (HMP) (MHCP), and the City of Carlsbad (City) Habitat Management Plan. The actions contemplated by the HCP are therefore less likely to jq)preciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the species in the wild and will provide a significant contribution to the HMP, MHCP, and Natural Community Conservation Plan Program. Changes to the HCP are as follows: In fulfilhnent of the previously proposed offsite mitigation program (approximately 240 acres of acceptable habitat) to be required of Fieldstone by the HCP, Fieldstone shall: a. Convey the lands shown on the attached Exhibit A consisting of approximately 181.09 acres to a conservation entity specified in the HCP, a non-profit conservation organization or a public agency, approved by Service, Depwtment, and the City; and, b. Pay $1,000,000 to the City or a non-profit conservation entity approved by Service, Department, and the City to be held in trust and expended for the acquisition of lands under the HMP as approved by Service, Department, and the City. It is contemplated that the $1,000,000 payment will be utilized to acquire land that will generally meet "Northwest Offsite Mitigation Program" criteria proposed in the HCP Addendum dated July 13, 1994. Additionally, the following criteria and conditions will also ^ly: 1) the offsite mitigation proposal should substantially contribute to the long-term preservation of the gnatcatcher population within the City of Carlsbad; 2) a general resource evaluation is conducted on the proposed offsite mitigation parcel similar in detail to surveys conducted on the Northwest parcel for the HCP; and 3) funding for the long-term management plan approved by the Service for the offsite mitigation parcel will be additional to the $1,000,000 dedicated towards acquisition. No disturbance of natural habitat will occur on the Northwest Parcel until an offsite mitigation parcel is identified, approved by the Service, and is acquired. Fieldstone is responsible for contributing $1,000,000 towards the acquisition of the offsite parcel. The $1,000,000 payment will be adjusted fi^m the date of the execution of the Implementation Agreement for the HCP to the end of the month prior to the $1,000,000 payment being made based upon the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the Los Angeles/Anaheim/Riverside All Urban Consumers Index published by the U.S. Department of Labor. These changes will result in conservation of an additional 46.96 acres of southem maritime chaparral, 1.25 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrab, and 9.19 acres disturbed or ruderal habitats. A number of sensitive plant species will also see a significant increase in onsite conservation. Summer holly impacts will be reduced fix)m 635 individuals taken to approximately 10 individuals taken (1% of the total onsite); an additional 59 individuals of Del Mar manzanita will be conserved (83% conserved onsite), with all of the impacts to this species limited to impacts resulting fiom the construction of Poinsettia Lane; and an additional 380 individuals of Califomia adolphia will be conserved.