HomeMy WebLinkAboutMS 08-03; NOLAN DEVELOPMENT; BIOLOGICAL TECHNICAL REPORT; 2005-09-01I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
U
U
I
I
I
BIOLOGICAL TECHNICAL REPORT
FOR
NOLAN PROPERTY
IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD
(APN 223-211-18)
PREPARED FOR:
Frank and JoAnn Nolan
7331 Las Brisas Court
Carlsbad, CA 92009
PREPARED BY:
Robin Church
RC Biological Consulting, Inc.
9621 Campo Road, Suite C
Spring Valley, CA 91977
(619) 463-1072
September 2005
i R&b(n CJULh Robin Church
Principal Biologist
I
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
1.0 SUMMARY
2.0 INTRODUCTION 2
3.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY 2
4.0 RESULTS 5
4.1 Vegetation 5
4.2 Wildlife 7
4.3 Sensitive Resources 7
4.3.1 Sensitive Habitats 7
4.3.2 Sensitive Plants 7
4.3.3 Sensitive Animals 8
5.0 ANTICIPATED PROJECT IMPACTS 8
5.1 Proposed Project and Potential Impacts 9
5.2 Significance of Direct Impacts 9
5.3 Indirect Impacts 10
6.0 PROPOSED MITIGATION 10
7.0 LITERATURE CITED 12
8.0 CERTIFICATION 13
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map 3
Figure 2 Project Location 4
Figure 3 Biological Resources 6
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Plants Observed
Appendix B Wildlife Observed
Appendix C Sensitivity Codes
1.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
I The proposed project is the subdivision of a 1.06 acre parcel into 3 residential lots. The
1.06 acre project area is located in northwestern portion San Diego County within the
City of Carlsbad. The address of the project area is 7331 Las Brisas Court. The project is
limited to the 1.06 acre proposed project area and does not include off-site improvements.
This report provides information regarding existing conditions and performs an impact
I analysis based on the current site design. This report also identifies mitigation measures
to reduce any impacts to below a level of significance.
I A general biological survey was performed onsite. The biological resources on-site
include three habitat types: coastal sage scrub, ruderal and developed. No state or
federally listed plant or animal species were observed on-site. No sensitive plant or
I animal species have the potential to occur onsite due to the lack of habitat.
The proposed project is the subdivision of a parcel and proposes 100 percent impacts to I the habitats found on-site. Ruderal and developed habitat are not considered sensitive
habitats and do not require mitigation. The coastal sage scrub habitat on-site is 0.05 acres
I in size and composed of remnant shrubs that do not function has habitat anymore. The
impacts to the coastal sage scrub on-site are deminimus and therefore are not significant.
Since no significant impacts will occur, no mitigation is required.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I RC Biological Consulting, Inc. 1 Nolan Subdivision
September 2005 APN 223-211-18
I
2.0 INTRODUCTION
I The proposed project is the subdivision of a 1.06 acre parcel into 3 residential lots. The
1.06 acre project area is located in northwestern portion San Diego County within the
City of Carlsbad (Figure 1). It is located on west and southwest facing slopes in an urban
I residential area. The address of the project area is 733 1 Las Brisas Court. The project is
limited to the 1.06 acre proposed project area and does not include off-site improvements.
I Topography, Soils, Land Use
The project area is shown on the Rancho Sante Fe USGS 7.5' Quadrangle (Figure 2). The
I property is located on west and southwest facing slopes with an elevation range from 380
to 420 feet above mean sea level (MSL).
I The project area includes San Miguel-Exchequer series soils (Bowman 1973). The San
Miguel series consists of well-drained, shallow to moderately deep silt loams that have a
clay subsoil. These soils are derived from metavolcanic rock. They are in mountainous
I areas and have slopes of 9 to 30 percent. In a representative profile, the surface layer is
light yellowish-brown and very pale brown, medium acid and strongly acid silt loam
about 8 inches thick. The subsoil is strong-brown and yellowish-brown, strongly acid I and very strongly acid clay and gravelly clay. At a depth of about 23 inches is hard
metavolcanic rock. Rocks cover about 10 percent of the surface.
Current land uses consist of an existing residence and developed habitat in the eastern
portion of the property. The remainder of the property is ruderal habitat. There is a small
section of coastal sage scrub that occurs on the north side of the property. Approximately
0.50 acres of coastal sage scrub habitat occur north of the proposed project off-site, but
the coastal sage scrub on-site does not function as habitat due to it's location within
development. The remainder of the site is surrounded by developed lands.
3.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY
The site was surveyed on foot and habitat mapped (Figure 3). Wildlife species were
identified directly by sight or by vocalizations, and indirectly by scat, tracks, or burrows.
Field notes were maintained throughout the surveys and species of interest were mapped.
Surveys focused on sensitive plant and wildlife species and all species observed were
noted. The presence or absence of suitable habitat for sensitive species was also
identified. The site was surveyed on September 9, 2005 from 11:15 to 12:00 by Andrew
Drummond, Associate Biologist. Weather conditions consisted of mostly cloudy skies, a
temperature of 69° Fahrenheit, and a light breeze.
I
I
RC Biological Consulting, Inc. 2 Nolan Subdivision
September 2005 APN 223-211-18 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
fl
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Li
I
I
I
I
I
A
iFeel
0 1,000 2,000
Figure 2
Project Location
source: USUS I.' Kamona Quadrangle
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Li
Nomenclature for this report conforms to Hickman (1993) for plants, Holland and Keil
(1995) for plant communities and habitat types, American Ornithological Union (AOU
1982) for birds, Jennings (1983) and Stebbins (1985) for reptiles and amphibians, Jones
(1992) for mammals, and Powell (1979) for insects.
4.0 RESULTS
The following discussion summarizes the existing biological resources on-site including
habitats, vegetation and wildlife. Habitats are depicted on Figure 3.
4.1 Vegetation
Habitat descriptions are based on Holland and Keil's (1995) "California Vegetation".
Three habitat types occur within the project site coastal sage scrub, ruderal and
developed. The habitats are depicted in Figure 3. A complete list of plant species
observed on-site is included in Appendix A.
Coastal Sage Scrub
Coastal sage scrub habitat is considered sensitive by the City of Carlsbad, CDFG,
USFWS, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This habitat regionally
supports a number of state and federally endangered, threatened, and rare plants and
animals which are currently listed or are being considered as possible candidates for
listing. It is estimated that 70 to 90 percent of the original acreage of this habitat in the
state has been lost as a result of urban expansion in coastal areas (Atwood 1990). Even if
in a disturbed condition, coastal sage scrub habitat may be considered sensitive by the
resources agencies since it may still serve as habitat for wildlife and may be regenerating
to higher quality coastal sage scrub habitat. There is approximately 0.05 acres of coastal
sage scrub habitat on-site. The property to the north contains approximately 0.50 acres of
coastal sage scrub. This represents a remnant island of coastal sage scrub within urban
development that no longer functions as coastal sage scrub habitat.
Ruderal
Holland and Keil defines ruderal communities as assemblages of plants that thrive in
waste areas, and similar disturbed sites in towns and cities and along rural roadways.
Hard-packed soils of roadsides, parking lots, footpaths, etc. support ruderal communities.
Approximately 0.53 acres of this habitat occurs onsite. It is associated with a dirt road
running through the west side of the property, and an un-maintained portion of the
property.
Developed
The developed portion of the site consists of the home and landscaped areas.
Approximately 0.48 acres of this habitat occurs onsite.
RC Biological Consulting, Inc. 5 Nolan Subdivision
September 2005 APN 223-211-18
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
U
I
I
Legend:
/ \
. .... .........
111
. . . .................
4 ,
Ruderal - 0.53 acres
I -- I
Developed - 0.48 acres
1
Coastal Sage Scrub - 0.05 acres
1
ZWVP,~,,
Biological Consulting
Biological Resources Map - Nolan Property
APN 223-211-18
Figure
3
4.2 Wildlife
I Wildlife observed onsite was limited in both abundance and diversity due to the lack of
habitat. A complete list of wildlife species observed on-site is included as Appendix B.
Species observed on-site included American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), California
I towhee (Pip/lo crissalis), scrub jay Aphebocoma calijornica), Anna's hummingbird
(Calypie anna), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), and bushtits (Psaitriparus
mininius).
1 4.3 Sensitive Resources
I Sensitive or special interest plant and wildlife species and habitats are those which are
considered rare, threatened, or endangered within the state or region by local, state, or
federal resource conservation agencies. Sensitive habitats, as identified by these same
I groups, are those which generally support plant or wildlife species considered sensitive
by these resource protection agencies or groups. Sensitive species and habitats are so
called because of their limited distribution, restricted habitat requirements, particular
I susceptibility to human disturbance, degradation due to development or invasion by non-
native species, or a combination of all of these factors.
I The following were used in the determination of sensitive biological resources: U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (USFWS 2001); California Department of Fish and Game
I
(CDFG) (CDFG 1999, 2000 and 2001); and California Native Plant Society (CNPS
2003). An explanation of the sensitivity codes used in this report is included in Appendix
C.
I 4.3.1 Sensitive Habitats
I
One sensitive habitat occurs on-site, coastal sage scrub. Coastal sage scrub is considered
sensitive by the City of Carlsbad, CDFG, USFWS, and the EPA. Coastal sage scrub
habitat regionally supports a number of state and federally endangered, threatened and
I rare plants and animals which are currently listed or being considered as possible
candidates for listing. However, remnant patches of coastal sage scrub located within
urban development do not function as coastal sage scrub habitat.
I 4.3.2 Sensitive Plants
I Sensitive or special interest plant species are those which are considered rare, threatened,
or endangered within the state or region by local, state, or federal resource conservation
agencies. Sensitive plant species are so called because of their limited distribution,
I restricted habitat requirements, or particular susceptibility to human disturbance, or a
combination of these factors. Sources used for the determination of sensitive plant
species include: County sensitive plant list, CDFG (1999) and the California Native Plant
I Society Electronic Inventory (CNPS 2003).
No rare, sensitive or listed plant species were observed onsite. No sensitive plant species
I have the potential to occur onsite due to the lack of habitat on-site and proximity to
development.
I RC Biological Consulting, Inc. 7 Nolan Subdivision
September 2005 APN 223-211-18
I
4.3.3 Sensitive Animals
I Sensitive or special interest wildlife species and habitats are those which are considered
rare, threatened, or endangered within the state or region by local, state, or federal
resource conservation agencies. Sensitive species are so called because of their limited
I distribution, restricted habitat requirements, or particular susceptibility to human
disturbance, or a combination of these factors. Sources used for the determination of
sensitive biological resources include: USFWS (USFWS 2001), CDFG (CDFG 2000 and
I 2001). Additional species receive federal protection under the Bald Eagle Protection Act,
Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds and
I
Animals.
The CDFG also lists species as threatened or endangered, or candidates for listing as
I
threatened or endangered. Lower sensitivity animals may be listed as "species of special
concern" (CDFG 2000). The CDFG further classifies some species under the following
categories: "fully protected", "protected furbearer," "harvest species," "protected
- amphibian," and "protected reptile." The designation "protected" indicates that a species
I may not be taken or possessed except under special permit from the CDFG; "fully
protected" indicates that a species can be taken only for scientific purposes. The
I
designation "harvest species" indicates that take of the species is controlled by the state
government.
I
No rare, threatened, or endangered animal species were observed on-site. No sensitive
species have the potential to occur onsite due to the lack of habitat.
I 5.0 ANTICIPATED PROJECT IMPACTS
I This section addresses potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to biological
resources that would result from implementation of the proposed project, and provides
analyses of significance for each potential impact.
I Direct Impacts are immediate impacts resulting from the permanent removal of habitat.
I Indirect Impacts result from changes in land use adjacent to natural habitat and
primarily result from adverse "edge effects;" either short-term indirect impacts related to
construction or long-term, chronic indirect impacts associated with urban development.
I During construction of the project, short-term indirect impacts include dust and noise
which could temporarily disrupt habitat and species vitality or construction related soil
erosion and run-off. Long-term indirect impacts may include intrusions by humans and
I domestic pets, noise, lighting, invasion by exotic plant and wildlife species, use of toxic
chemicals (fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and other hazardous materials), soil erosion,
I
litter, fire, and hydrological changes (e.g., groundwater level and quality).
Cumulative Impacts refer to incremental individual environmental effects of two or
more projects when considered together. These impacts taken individually may be
I minor, but collectively significant as they occur over a period of time.
RC Biological Consulting, Inc. 8 Nolan Subdivision
September 2005 APN 223-211-18
I
Thresholds of Significance
The evaluation of whether or not an impact to a particular biological resource is
significant must consider both the resource itself and the role of that resource in a
regional context. Substantial impacts are those that contribute to, or result in, permanent
loss of an important resource, such as a population of a rare plant or animal. impacts
may be important locally because they result in an adverse alteration of existing site
conditions, but considered not significant because they do not contribute substantially to
the permanent loss of that resource regionally. The severity of an impact is the primary
determinant of whether or not that impact can be mitigated to a level below significant.
Generally, there are three levels of adverse impacts associated with biological resources:
significant, locally important, and not significant.
5.1 Proposed Project and Potential Impacts
The proposed project is the subdivision of a 1.06 acre parcel into 3 residential lots. The
proposed project proposes 100 percent impacts to the habitats on-site.
5.2 Significance Of Direct Impacts
Generally, there are three levels of adverse impacts associated with biological resources:
significant, locally important, and not significant. These levels of impacts were applied to
the project site and are used below in the discussion of specific potential impacts. Figure
3 details the proposed impact areas.
Coastal Sage Scrub
Impacts to approximately 0.05 acres of coastal sage scrub may occur as a result of the
proposed project. The coastal sage scrub habitat on-site is composed of remnant shrubs
that do not function as habitat. The impacts to coastal sage scrub would be considered
deminimus and therefore would not be considered significant.
Ruderal
Impacts to approximately 0.53 acres of ruderal land may occur as a result of the proposed
project. This impact would not be considered significant.
Developed
Impact to approximately 0.48 acres may occur as a result of the proposed project. This
impact would not be considered significant.
Sensitive Plant and Wildlife Species
No sensitive plant or wildlife species were observed onsite nor do any have the potential
to occur onsite.
RC Biological Consulting, Inc. 9 Nolan Subdivision
September 2005 APN 223-211-18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
P
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.3 Indirect Impacts
No significant indirect impacts will occur due to the urbanized nature of the site.
6.0 PROPOSED MITIGATION
Under CEQA, mitigation is required for all significant biological impacts (i.e. impacts
within highly constrained areas). In addition, the CDFG 1600 and the ACOE 404 permit
process generally require mitigation for the loss of wetland resources. The following
mitigation measures are recommendations to locally important biological impacts.
Although mitigation measures are not often required for locally important impacts, local
jurisdictions often implement these measures to minimize cumulative impacts within the
region.
According to Appendix G of the State CEQA guidelines, the proposed project would
have a potentially significant impact to onsite biological resources if it would:
Have a substantial adverse affect, either directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means.
Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish
or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
I Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan.
I Under CEQA, mitigation is required for all significant biological impacts. Mitigation is
discussed below with corresponding level of significance after mitigation.
I
I
Direct Impacts:
RC Biological Consulting, Inc. 10 Nolan Subdivision
September 2005 AI'N 223-211-18
I
No significant direct impacts will occur as a result of the proposed project, therefore no
mitigation is required.
With implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, proposed project impacts will
be mitigated to below a level of significance.
U
I
I
I
I
I
I
[1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I RC Biological Consulting, Inc.
September 2005 11 Nolan Subdivision
APN 223-211-18
I
7.0 LITERATURE CITED
I AOU. American Ornithological Union. 1982. Thirty-Fourth Supplement to the American
Ornithologists' Union Checklist of North American Birds. A uk99(3).
I Bowman, R. H. 1973. Soil Survey, San Diego Area, Calij'brnia, Par! 1. United States
Department of Agriculture. 104 pp. + appendices.
I CDFG. California Department of Fish and Game. 1999. List of CDFG Special Status
Plants, Animals and Natural Communities of San Diego County, California Natural
I
Diversity Data Base, CDFG Natural Heritage Division, Sacramento.
-- California Department of Fish and Game. 1999. "Endangered, Threatened and Rare
Plants of California." State of California Dept. of Fish and Game, Natural Heritage
I Division, Plant Conservation Program, Sacramento. April 1999.
-- California Department of Fish and Game.2000. CDFG Natural Diversity Data Base.
I Special Animals. July 2000.
-- California Department of Fish and Game. 2001. "State and Federal Endangered, Rare,
I and Threatened Animals of California." State of California Resources Agency,
Sacramento. October 2001.
CNPS. 2003. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (sixth edition,
electronic version). Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee, David P. Tibor,
I
Convening Editor. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA
Hickman, J. C. 1993. The Jepson Manual Higher Plants of California. University of
I
California Press, Berkeley.
Holland, V.L. and David J. Keil 1995. California Vegetation. Kendall/Hunt Publishing
I
Company. Dubuque, Iowa.
Jennings, M. R. 1983. An Annotated Checklist of the Amphibians and Reptiles of
I Southern California. California Department of Fish and Game 69(3):151-171.
Jones, J.K., ET AL. 1992. Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of
I Mexico, 1991. Occasional Papers The Museum Texas Tech. University. Number
146. February 7, 1992.
I Powell, J.A., C.L. Hogue. 1979. California Insects. University of California Press,
Berkeley.
I Stebbins, R. C. 1985. Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians Houghton
Mifflin Co., Boston.
I USFWS. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001. U.S. Endangered, Threatened and
Candidate Plant and Animal Species by State and Lead Region. U.S. Department of
I RC Biological Consulting, Inc. 12 Nolan Subdivision
September 2005 AI'N 223-211-18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
the Interior. United States Fish and Wildlife Service Threatened and Endangered
Species System, 12/2001.
8.0 CERTIFICATION
This report has been prepared by Robin Church, County Certified Biologist, and Amanda
Gabrielson, Associate Biologist.
RC Biological Consulting, Inc.
September 2005 13 Nolan Subdivision
APN 223-211-18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Li APPENDIX A
I PLANTS OBSERVED
I
I
I
H.
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED ON THE NOLAN PROPERTY
Family Name Species Name Common Name Habitat
ANGIOSPERMS: DICOTS
Aizoaceac Carpobrotus chi/ensis Sea-Fig DEV
Anaca rd iaceae Malosnu: burma Laurel Sumac CSS
Asteraceae Arten,isia calffornica Coastal Sagebrush CSS
Asteraceae Baccharis pilularis Chaparral Broom, Coyote
Brush DEV
Asteraceae Baccharis sarothroides Broom Baccharis CSS
Asteraceae Conyza canadensis Horseweed DEV
Asteraceae Deinandrafasciculata Fascicled Tarweed RUD
Asteraceae Enceliafarinosa Brittlebush, Incienso CSS
Asteraceae Plucliea odorala Salt Marsh Fleabane RUD
Asteraceae Slephanonseria virgata ssp. virgala Virgate Wreath-plant RUD
Asteraceae *Taraxac,I,,, officinabe Common Dandelion DEV
Asteraceae Viguiera Iaci,,iata 4 1-2-1 San Diego Sunflower CSS
Asteraceae Xanll,iuni siruniarium Cockelbur RUD
Brassicaceae *Brassica nigra Black Mustard DEV
Fabaceae *Acacia baileyana Cootamundra Wattle DEV
Lamiaceae Salvia me/iffera Black Sage CSS
Polygonaceae Eriogoi:unzfasciculalunz var.
fascici/atin California Buckwheat RUD, CSS
Polygonaceae *R,,n,ex crispus Curly Dock CSS
Primulaceae *Anagaiims arvensis Scarlet Pimpernel, Poor
Man's Weatherglass RUD
Sota naceae *Lycopersicon escuientum Tomato RUD
ANGIOSPERMS: MONOCOTS
Arecaceae Washingtoniafilffera California Fan Palm DEV
Poaceae *Ave,,afa/,a Wild Oat DEV
Poaceae *Cortaderia se/boaiia Selloa Pampas Grass DEV
Poaceae *poiypogo,, nionspeliensis Annual Beard Grass CSS
Non-native Plant Species
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I APPENDIX B
I WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B
WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED ON THE NOLAN PROPERTY
Common Name IScientific Name I Habitat Observed * # Observed (estimate)
Insects
Marine blue Leploles marina Ruderal 6
Birds
Anna's hummingbird Calypte anna OH I
American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos OH 2
Bushtit Psal/riparus niinimus 5+ CSS
California towhee Pipilo crissalis I Off-Site
Mourning dove
- Zenaida macroura
- OH
Scrub jay Aphelocoma calfornica CSS 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
F1
I
I
I
LI
I
APPENDIX C
SENSITIVITY CODES
I
APPENDIX C
SENSITIVITY CODES
I FEDERAL SPECIES DESIGNATIONS (USFWS 200 1)
I
Category
FE Federal Endangered species
FT Federal Threatened species
FPE Taxa proposed to be listed as Endangered.
I FPT Taxa proposed to be listed as Threatened.
SOC Species of Concern (former Candidate Species)
STATE SPECIES DESIGNATIONS (CDFG 2000)
Category
I SE State listed as Endangered.
ST State listed as Threatened.
SR State-listed Rare
I SCE State candidate for listing as Endangered.
SCT State candidate for listing as Threatened.
CSC CDFG "Species of Special Concern".
I CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY DESIGNATIONS (CNPS 2003)
U
The CNPS Lists
List I Plants of highest priority.
IA Plants presumed extinct in California.
1B Plants rare, threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere.
List 2 Plants rare, threatened or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. I List 3 Plants about which we need more information. (A Review List)
List 4 Plants of limited distribution (A Watch List).
I The R-E-D Code
R (Rarity)
I Rare, but found in sufficient numbers and distributed widely enough that the potential for
extinction is low at this time. I 2 Distributed in a limited number of occurrences, occasionally more if each occurrence is
small.
3 Distributed in one to several highly restricted occurrences, or present in such small numbers
I that it is seldom reported.
E (Endangerment)
I Not endangered.
I 2 Endangered in a portion of its range.
3 Endangered throughout its range.
D (Distribution)
More or less widespread outside California. I I
2 Rare outside California.
3 Endemic to California.
I
I
I