HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - Appendix E Part 3BIOLOGICAL TECHNICAL REPORT
APPENDIX E
BURROWING OWL SURVEY REPORT
.�OnTernq
C O N S U L T I N G
July 17, 2009
PASADENA COSTA MESA
T: (714) 444 -9199 F: (714 ) 444 -9599 1 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E -200
w .BonTerroConsulting.com Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Ms. Sharon Wood VIA EMAIL
Assistant City Manager swood @city.newport - beach.ca.us
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92663
Subject: Results of Focused Burrowing Owl Surveys for the Newport Banning Ranch Project
Site, Orange County, California
Dear Ms. Wood:
This Letter Report presents the results of focused surveys for the western burrowing owl
(Athene cunicularia hypugaea) on the Newport Banning Ranch project site (hereafter referred to
as the "project site "). The purpose of the surveys is to determine the presence or absence of
winter resident (non- breeding) as well as breeding western burrowing owl on the project site.
The surveys were conducted in accordance with guidelines provided in the California Burrowing
Owl Consortium survey protocol for this species (1993).
Project Location and Description
The project site is approximately 401 acres (Exhibit 1). Approximately 40 acres of the project
site are located within the incorporated boundary of the City of Newport Beach; the remainder of
the project site is within unincorporated Orange County, in the City of Newport Beach's adopted
Sphere of Influence. The project site is located north of West Coast Highway, east of the Santa
Ana River, south of 19'" Street and Talbert Regional Park, and west of existing residential and
commercial uses. The property has been used as an active oil field for over 50 years and
ongoing oil operations along with remnant oil wells and pipelines occur throughout the project
site. The proposed project is a phased development that includes single - family and multi - family
residences, commercial development, and a coastal inn. The project will provide approximately
243 acres of open space that includes habitat preservation and restoration, and public trails. Of
the 243 acres, approximately 19.3 acres would be used for interim oil operations at which point
the acreage would be used for open space. Additionally, approximately 45 acres would be used
for park and recreational activities.
The project site is located on the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS's) Newport Beach 7.5- minute
quadrangle, at Township 6S, Range 10W, Sections 20, 21, and 29 (Exhibit 2). Topography on
the project site varies, with relatively flat areas, bluffs, and drainages. Elevations on the project
site range from approximately sea level to 100 feet above mean sea level (msl). The project site
is generally bound on the north by Talbert Nature Preserve /Regional Park in the City of Costa
Mesa and residential development in the City of Newport Beach; on
the south by West Coast Highway and residential development in
Newport Beach; on the east by residential, light industrial, and
office development in Costa Mesa and Newport Beach; and
on the west by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
wetlands restoration area and the Santa Ana River. The City
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Ms. Sharon Wood
July 17, 2009
Page 2
of Huntington Beach is west of the Santa Ana River. At its nearest point, the project site is less
than 0.25 mile inland from the Pacific Ocean. A variety of vegetation types occur on the project
site including marsh, riparian forest, scrubland, grassland, ornamental, and ruderal vegetation in
addition to disturbed and developed areas.
Background
The western burrowing owl is a grassland specialist distributed throughout western North
America, where it occupies open areas with short vegetation and bare ground within shrub,
desert, and grassland environments. Burrowing owls use a wide variety of and and semi -arid
environments, with well- drained, level to gently sloping areas characterized by sparse
vegetation and bare ground (Haug et al. 1993; Dechant et al. 2003). Burrowing owls in Florida
excavate their own burrows, but western burrowing owls are dependant upon the presence of
burrowing mammals, whose burrows are used for roosting and nesting (Haug et al. 1993). The
presence or absence of colonial mammal burrows (e.g., California ground squirrels
[Spermophilus beecheyr]) is often a major factor that limits the presence or absence of
burrowing owls. Where mammal burrows are scarce, burrowing owls have been found
occupying man -made cavities, such as buried and non - functioning drain pipes, stand - pipes, and
dry culverts. Burrowing mammals may burrow beneath rocks, debris, or large, heavy objects
such as abandoned cars, concrete blocks, or concrete pads. Large, hard objects at burrow
entrances stabilize the entrance from collapse, and may inhibit excavation by predators.
Burrowing owls often use "satellite ", or non - nesting burrows, moving chicks into them from the
nesting burrow presumably to reduce the risk of predation (Desmond and Savidge 1998) and
possibly to avoid nest parasites ( Dechant et al. 2003). One pair may use up to ten satellite
burrows (James and Seabloom 1968). Individual burrowing owls have a moderate to high site
fidelity to previously used burrow complexes and often use the same burrows for nesting year
after year.
The western burrowing owl was once abundant and widely distributed within coastal Southern
California, but it has declined precipitously in Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Riverside, and
San Bernardino Counties. A recent petition was submitted to list the California population of the
western burrowing owl as an Endangered or Threatened species (Center for Biological Diversity
et al. 2003). The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) declined to list the burrowing
owl as either Threatened or Endangered in consideration of its overall population throughout the
state. The western burrowing owl is considered locally rare in Southern California and is
considered a California Species of Special Concern.
A wintering burrowing owl was reported by the California Natural Diversity Database north of the
project site in Fairview Park (CDFG 2008). Wintering burrowing owls are known to occur on the
project site.
Survev Methodolo
The Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines prepared by the California
Burrowing Owl Consortium (CBOC) (CBOC 1993), which the CDFG has adopted, details a
sequence of surveys based on the findings of each previous level of survey. These surveys are
done in three phases: (1) a habitat assessment; (2) burrow surveys; and (3) focused owl
surveys.
Ms. Sharon Wood
July 17, 2009
Page 3
Winter (non - breeding) Surveys
Surveys for burrowing owl were conducted during the winter season (December 1 —
January 31). The first step of the survey protocol is a habitat assessment to determine whether
or not suitable habitat for burrowing owl exists on the project site. BonTerra Consulting Ecologist
Allison Rudalevige conducted the habitat assessment on January 22, 2009. In addition, a site
overview was conducted with Ms. Rudalevige, BonTerra Consulting Senior Botanist Sandy
Leatherman and Associate Principal Gary Medeiros, and biologists from Glenn Lukos
Associates, Inc. Suitable habitat for burrowing owl was observed during the survey, and focused
surveys were initiated.
A focused burrow survey was conducted on January 22, 2009 by Ms. Rudalevige and on
January 23 and 26, 2009 by Ms. Rudalevige and BonTerra Consulting Ecologist Lindsay
Messett. The burrow survey was conducted by walking transects at regularly spaced intervals to
achieve 100 percent visual coverage of all potential habitat on the project site. The burrow
survey was not conducted within five days of rain, which could have washed away potential
sign. All natural or man -made cavities large enough to allow burrowing owl entry were inspected
for evidence of occupation. Evidence of occupation may include prey remains, cast pellets,
white -wash, feathers, and observations of owls adjacent to burrows. Photographs of potential
burrow locations were taken during the survey (Exhibit 3). Survey times and weather conditions
are summarized in Table 1 below.
TABLE 1
SURVEY DATA
a x
�s i
Wind
Temp
;kVisrt __r,
Date
t= TrmeZSuryeY6r.4AWeather(mp_h),
Habitat Assessment
1/22/2009
0730 -1100
Rudalevige
Cloudy
0 -5
60
Burrowing owl
observed
Burrow Survey
1/22/2009
1245 -1500
Rudalevige
Partly Cloudy
0-5
60
No owls
observed
Burrow Survey
1/23/2009
0830 -1030
Rudalevige
Cloudy, Light
0-7
58
No owls
Messett
Showers
observed
Burrow Survey
1/26/2009
0900 -1200
Rudalevige
Clear
0 -3
67
No owls
1300 -1715
Messett
observed
Winter
1/27/2009
0630 -0900
Rudalevige
Clear
0 2
47
Burrowing owl
Crepuscular Survey 1
Messett
observed
Winter
1/28/2009
0630 -0905
Rudalevige
Clear
0 1
48
Burrowing owl
Crepuscular Survey 2
Messett
observed
Winter
Crepuscular Survey 3
1/29/2009
1515 -1745
Rudalevige
Messett
Clear
0-13
77
No owls
observed
Winter
1/30/2009
1530 -1810
Rudalevige
Clear
0 -9
68
No owls
Crepuscular Survey 4
Messett
observed
Spring
5/11/2009,
0530 -0645,
Rudalevige
Cloudy, Clear
2 -5
60
No owls
Crepuscular Survey 1
5/13/2009
1820 -1900
0 -5
66
observed
Spring
5/20/2009
0700 -0910,
Messett
Cloudy, Clear
0-3
64
No owls
Crepuscular Survey 2
1800 -1945
Rudalevige
0-5
70
observed
Spring
5/21/2009
0515 -0745
Messett
Cloud y
0 -5
61
No owls
Crepuscular Survey 3
Rudalevige
observed
Spring
Crepuscular Survey 4
5/26/2009
0515 -0845
Messett
Partly Cloudy
0-3
62
No owls
observed
Ms. Sharon Wood
July 17, 2009
Page 4
A crepuscular (dawn or dusk) owl survey was conducted because potential burrows were
observed during the burrow survey. Morning crepuscular surveys were conducted from one
hour before sunrise to two hours after sunrise, and evening crepuscular surveys were
conducted from two hours before sunset to one hour after sunset. Crepuscular surveys were
conducted only when there was enough light to observe potential flights of burrowing owls. Four
crepuscular surveys of each potential burrow were conducted as required by the protocol.
Surveys were conducted on January 27, 28, 29, and 30, 2009, by Ms. Rudalevige and
Ms. Messett. All potential habitat on the project site was surveyed to achieve 100 percent visual
coverage of the area (Exhibit 4).
Spring (breeding) Surveys
Surveys for burrowing owl were also conducted during the spring (breeding) season (February 1
— August 31). Crepuscular surveys were conducted in all areas of suitable habitat on the project
site. Surveys were conducted on May 11, 13, 20, 21, and 26, 2009, by Ms. Rudalevige and
Ms. Messett. These surveys were conducted from either one hour before sunrise to two hours
after, or from two hours before sunset to one hour after. All potential habitat on the project site
was surveyed to achieve 100 percent visual coverage of the area.
Survey Results
Suitable habitat for burrowing owl is present in the non - native grassland, ruderal, and disturbed
areas on the project site (Exhibit 4). Vegetation in these areas was low in stature at the time of
the surveys. The majority of suitable habitat (i.e., flat, open areas) is located in the southern
portion of the project site. California ground squirrel burrows were observed scattered
throughout the project site, though primarily in the southern portion of the site (Exhibit 4).
Burrows were scattered in open, flat areas and along bluffs and berms. Rock and debris piles
were also located on the project site and surveyed.
Winter (non - breeding) Surveys
One burrowing owl was observed during the habitat assessment and winter crepuscular surveys
of the project site (Exhibit 4). This owl was observed perched on a berm at the eastern edge of
the project site. White -wash and cast pellets were also observed around a burrow on this berm.
Spring (breeding) Surveys
No burrowing owls or owl sign (i.e., cast pellets, white -wash, feathers, prey remains) were
observed on the project site during the spring crepuscular surveys. A list of wildlife species
observed during the owl surveys is provided in Attachment A of this Letter Report.
Recommendations
Although the burrowing owl was not observed during the spring surveys, it was observed during
winter surveys and one could move into the survey area prior to future work. A qualified
Biologist should conduct a pre - construction survey for this species within 30 days prior to any
ground disturbance activity; pre - construction surveys can be conducted year- round.
If an active burrow is observed during the non - nesting season, a qualified Biologist will monitor
the nest site; when the owl is away from the nest, the Biologist will exclude the owl from the
burrow and then remove the burrow so the burrowing owl cannot return to the burrow.
Ms. Sharon Wood
July 17, 2009
Page 5
If nesting activity is present at an active burrow, the active site will be protected until nesting
activity has ended to ensure compliance with Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game
Code. Peak nesting activity for the burrowing owl normally occurs between April and July. To
protect the active burrow, the following restrictions to construction activities will be required until
the burrow is no longer active (as determined by a qualified Biologist): (1) Clearing limits will be
established within a 500 -foot buffer around any active burrow, unless otherwise determined by a
qualified Biologist and (2) Access and surveying will be restricted within 300 feet of any active
burrow, unless otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist. Any encroachment into the buffer
area around the active burrow will only be allowed if the Biologist determines that the proposed
activity will not disturb the nest occupants. Construction can proceed when the qualified
Biologist has determined that fledglings have left the nest.
BonTerra Consulting appreciates the opportunity to assist with this project. Please contact
Stacie Tennant at (714) 444 -9199 if you have questions or comments.
Sincerely,
BONTrRA C TING
Ann M. Johns
Principal, Biological Services
Attachments: Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and 4
Attachment A — Wildlife Compendium
R: roje 'Newport1OISWec nical Report BiolBWW Rpt -071709.cloc
References
Stacie A. Tennant
Senior Project Manager /Biologist
California Burrowing Owl Consortium (CBOC). 1993. Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and
Mitigation Guidelines, Alviso, CA: CBOC. http: / /www.dfg.ca.gov /hcpb /species/stds —gdV
bi rd_sg/boconsortium.pdf.
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2008. California Natural Diversity Database.
Records of Occurrence for Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) in the Newport Beach
7.5- minute quadrangle. Sacramento, CA: CDFG, Natural Heritage Division.
Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, California State Park Rangers Association,
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society, San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society, and
Tri- county Conservation League (Center for Biological Diversity et al.). 2003. Petition to
the State of California Fish and Game Commission and Supporting Information for
Listing the California Population of the Western Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia
hypugaea as an Endangered or Threatened Species under the California Endangered
Species Act. Oakland, CA: Center for Biological Diversity et al.
Dechant, J.A., M.L. Sondreal, D.H. Johnson, L.D. Igl, C.M. Goldade, P.A. Rabie, and B.R.
Euliss. 2003. Effects of Management Practices on Grassland Birds: Burrowing Owl.
Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. hup: / /www.npwrc.usgs.gov/
resource/literatr/grasbird/buow/buow.htm.
Ms. Sharon Wood
July 17, 2009
Page 6
Desmond, M.J. and J.A. Savidge. 1998. Burrowing Owl Conservation in the Great Plains (page
9). Abstracts of the Second International Burrowing Owl Symposium. Ogden, Utah.
Haug, E.A., B.A. Millsap, and M.S. Martell. 1993. Burrowing Owl (Speotyto cunicularia). The
Birds of North America, No. 61. (A. Poole and F. Gill, Eds.). Philadelphia, PA and
Washington, D.C.: The Academy of Natural Sciences and the AOU (respectively).
James, T.R. and R.W. Seabloom. 1968. Notes on the Burrow Ecology and Food Habits of the
Burrowing Owl in Southwestern North Dakota. Blue Jay 26:83 -84.
Regional Location
Newport Banning Ranch
N
w�E 10 5
5
10
9 Miles
Exhibit 1
C O Nf/I / fit
-i
C
OProject Boundary
r
�-
/ eii
Sx _.
Sell
1 r lI q0 %:f
P-
Ia
i
s9 1 9T_M I�� 11�
g•..I �_ a warm
-L
Ulm
�.:1�1 I. I s•
JI r
r
TraUer�`� •-
Park'
TaAkS
as
P
l
v
x
♦ � yr, L � ss
Jr y}�xf 1'
aaw
I � z
Source: USGS 7.5- Minute Quadrangle
Newport Beach, CA
Local Vicinity Exhibit 2
Newport Banning Ranch
N
2.000 1,000 0 2,000 c.I /s•a
gY Feet C O N S U L T I N G
a %vrgect4New JOISIGepmwiBird_apU _N_Quaa osozospdr
Suitable burrowing owl habitat in the northeastern corner
of the project site.
Suitable burrowing owl habitat at owl location on the
eastern edge of the project site. The burrowing owl is
observed on the right side of the berm.
Site Photographs
Newport Banning Ranch
Suitable burrowing owl habitat in the southeastern portion
of the project site.
Active burrowing owl burrow on the eastern edge of the
project site.
Exhibit 3
�
OI! Gj
C O N S U L T I N G
IP
v --
±v
L
�i
n
I It
1
Potential Burrow Locations
Newport Banning Ranch
AN
wd �e 600 300 0 600
ps Feet
s
IJ
IL
�Y~ ?a
1
ALr b
c-
r S
I ,
Y r
i wb' L 7
Ai1q i '.
I I
R
s, �
1
Ii
a
J
Exhibit 4
CON$
e 1w O 1 4 BUOW pdf
ATTACHMENT A
WILDLIFE COMPENDIUM
Newport Banning Ranch Project
WILDLIFE COMPENDIUM
WMIN-10
PHRYNOSOMATIDAE - ZEBRA - TAILED, FRINGE -TOED,
SPINY, TREE, SIDE - BLOTCHED, AND HORNED LIZARDS
Sceloporus occidentalis
western fence lizard
ANATIDAE - WATERFOWL
Anas plalyrhynchos
mallard
ARDEIDAE - HERONS
Ardea herodias
great blue heron
Ardea alba
great egret
CATHARTIDAE - NEW WORLD VULTURES
Cathartes aura
turkey vulture
ACCIPITRIDAE - HAWKS
Accipiter coopen*i
Cooper's hawk
8uteo jamaicensis
red - tailed hawk
FALCONIDAE - FALCONS
Falco sparverius
American kestrel
CHARADRIIDAE- PLOVERS
Charadrius vociferus
killdeer
LARIDAE - GULLS & TERNS
Larus occidentalls
western gull
COLUMBIDAE - PIGEONS & DOVES
Columba livia
rock pigeon
Zenaida macroura
mourning dove
STRIGIDAE - TRUE OWLS
Athena cunicularia
burrowing owl
TROCHILIDAE - HUMMINGBIRDS
Calypte anna
Anna's hummingbird
Selasphorus sasin
Allen's hummingbird
Sayornis nigricans
black phoebe
Sayornis saya
Say's phoebe
Tyrannus vociferans
Cwsin's kingbird
RAProj c 'NewporW015 \Technical RepoftOw\BUOW Apt - 071708.000 A -1 Wildlife Compendium
Ranch
WILDLIFE COMPENDIUM (Continued)
Ass**N�1,1- W,
0:0-13-w-WEN "IMM M,
Tyrannus; verficafis
western kingbird
CORVIDAE - JAYS & CROWS
Aphefocoma cafifornica
western scrub-jay
Corvus brachyrhynchos
American crow
Contus corax
common raven
HIRUNDINIDAE - SWALLOWS
Tachycineta bicolor
tree swallow
Tachycineta thalassina
violet-green swallow
Stelgidoplei,yx serr*nnia
northern rough-winged swallow
Petrochefidon pyrrhonota
cliff swallow
Hirundo rustica
barn swallow
AEGITHALIDAE - BUSHTITS
Psaltriparus minimus
bushtit
SYLVIIDAE - GNATCATCHERS
Polloptila calffibmica
California gnatcatcher
MIMIDAE - THRASHERS
mimus polyglottos
northern mockingbird
STURNIDAE - STARLINGS
Sturnus vulgans, *
European starling
MOTACILLIDAE - PIPITS
Anthus tubescens
American pipit
PARULIDAE - WARBLERS
Geothtypis hichas
common yellowthroat
EMBERIZIDAE - SPARROWS & JUNCOS
Pipilo maculatus
spottedtowhee
Pipilb crissalls
California towhee
ICTERIDAE - BLACKBIRDS
Agelarus tricolor
tricolored blackbird
Stumella neglacta
western meadowlark
Icterus cucullatus
hooded oriole
H1Pr0*M\Nft"0A101MTechniCa1 RePWSOoMOW RPI- 71709.dw A-2 Wildlife Compendium
Newport Banning Ranch Project
WILDLIFE COMPENDIUM (Continued)
NFAVI K-m,- M SrrdsEi(Contmued)�`�_��"'
FRINGILLIDAE - FINCHES
Carpodacus mexicanus
house finch
Carduelis psalina
lessergoldfinch
v-
:�Mammalst., -arm'
LEPORIDAE - HARES & RABBITS
SyMlagus audubonii
desert cottontail
SCIURIDAE - SQUIRRELS
Spermophilus beecheyi
California ground squirrel
GEOMYIDAE - POCKET GOPHERS
Thomomys bottae
Botta's pocket gopher
CANIDAE - WOLVES & FOXES
Canis latrans
coyote
introduced species
R:Nroje 'NewporNOISTmhniml ReportstBiOBUOW Rpt- D]1]09.cloc A-3 Wildlife Compendium
BIOLOGICAL TECHNICAL REPORT
APPENDIX F
COASTAL CALIFORNIA
GNATCATCHER SURVEY REPORT
1
July 17, 2009
COSTA MESA PASADENA TEmECULA
T: (626) 351 -2000 F: (626( 351 -2030 1 3452 E. Foothill Blvd., Suite 420
www.BonTerroConsulting.com I Pasadena, CA 91107
Ms. Sandy Marquez VIA EMAIL AND MAIL
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sandy_marquez @fws.gov
6010 Hidden Valley Road
Carlsbad, California 92011
Subject: Results of Coastal California Gnatcatcher Surveys for the Newport Banning Ranch
Project Site, Orange County, California
Dear Ms. Marquez:
This Letter Report presents the results of focused surveys for the coastal California gnatcatcher
(Polioptila californica californica) on the Newport Banning Ranch project site (hereafter referred
to as the project site). The purpose of the surveys was to determine the presence or absence of
the coastal California gnatcatcher on the project site. Surveys were conducted according to
guidelines established by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) by a biologist holding the
required federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) survey permit.
The site is approximately 401 acres (Exhibit 1). Approximately 40 acres of the project site are
located within the incorporated boundary of the City of Newport Beach; the remainder of the
project site is within unincorporated Orange County, in the City of Newport Beach's adopted
Sphere of Influence. The project site is located north of Pacific Coast Highway, east of the
Santa Ana River, south of 19th Street and Talbert Regional Park, and west of existing residential
and commercial uses. The property has been utilized as an active oil field for over 50 years and
ongoing oil operations along with remnant oil wells and pipelines occur throughout the project
site. The proposed project is a phased development that includes single - family and multi - family
residences, commercial development, and a coastal inn. The project will provide approximately
243 acres of open space that includes habitat preservation and restoration, and public trails of
the 243 acres, approximately 19.3 acres would be used for interim oil operations. Upon
termination of oil operations, this acreage would be retained in open space. Additionally
approximately 45 acres would be used for parks and recreational uses. The project site is
located within the Newport Beach U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5- minute quadrangle map
(Exhibit 2).
Backaround
Ms. Sandy Marquez
June 25, 2009
Page 2
Mountains to Claremont (Atwood 1990). The coastal California gnatcatcher is now rare in the
northern part of its range with only a handful of sightings from Santa Clarita to Tujunga Wash,
though a small population persists near the City of Moorpark in Ventura County.
Only a few isolated populations of the coastal California gnatcatcher persist in the Los Angeles
Basin, such as on the Palos Verdes Peninsula where annual surveys found 51, 56, 26, 39, and
38 breeding pairs from 1993 to 1997 (Atwood et al. 1998a). Since the nearest populations are
found approximately 45 kilometers (km) away near Montebello, Los Angeles County, and near
Fullerton and Newport Beach, Orange County, through almost continuous urban habitats
unsuitable for coastal California gnatcatchers, immigration to the Palos Verdes Peninsula was
considered to be "impossible or extremely unlikely' (Atwood et al. 1998a). Although not currently
supporting breeding populations, the coastal California gnatcatcher has been found in recent
years at Huntington (Beach) Central Park (one pair bred in 2002 and 2003), Bolsa Chica (one
pair bred in 2005 and 2006), and the Los Angeles River in Long Beach (no breeding
documented but three recent observations: September 14, 2002; April 16, 2006; and
February 7, 2009). These occurrences and the distance between the Palos Verdes Peninsula
and the Los Angeles River in Long Beach (approximately 9 km) indicate that the Palos Verdes
Peninsula may not be completely or "impossibly' isolated from other populations of the coastal
California gnatcatcher.
The coastal California gnatcatcher has been recorded from sea level to approximately
3,000 feet above mean sea level (msl) ( USFWS 2003); however, greater than 90 percent of
gnatcatcher records are from elevations below 820 feet ms] along the coast and below
1,800 feet above msl inland (Atwood and Bolsinger 1992). Recent estimates by the USFWS
regarding the population size of the coastal California gnatcatcher in southern California have
been about 3,000 pairs (Atwood and Bontrager 2001).
The coastal California gnatcatcher typically occurs within coastal and inland sage scrub
vegetation types. Sage scrub often occurs in a patchy distribution pattern throughout the range
of the gnatcatcher. Coastal California gnatcatchers also use chaparral, grassland, and riparian
habitats that are in proximity to sage scrub. These non -sage scrub habitats are used for
dispersal and foraging (Atwood et al. 1998b, Campbell et al. 1998, USFWS 2003). Availability of
these non -sage scrub areas is essential during certain times of the year, particularly during
drought conditions, or for dispersal, foraging, or nesting ( USFWS 2003).
The coastal California gnatcatcher was designated a Threatened species by the USFWS on
March 25, 1993. A Special Rule was issued that would allow incidental take of coastal California
gnatcatcher under Section 9 of the federal ESA if the take results from activities conducted in
accordance with the State's Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) Act ( USFWS 1993).
For those not participating in the state's NCCP, any activity that may result in the take of coastal
California gnatcatcher requires formal consultation with the USFWS under Sections 7 or 10 of
the federal ESA. The County of Orange and the City of Newport Beach are participants in the
NCCP program.
On December 19, 2007, the USFWS published a Final Rule that revised critical habitat and
designated 197,303 acres of land in San Diego, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino,
Los Angeles, and Ventura counties as critical habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher
( USFWS 2007). The project site is located inside the designated critical habitat for the coastal
California gnatcatcher.
Ms. Sandy Marquez
July 17, 2009
Page 3
Survey Methodology
The USFWS coastal California gnatcatcher survey protocol recommends six visits to all
potentially occupied habitat areas for surveys conducted entirely within the breeding season,
which extends from March 15 to June 30 (USFWS 1997a, 1997b). All visits must take place
during the morning hours, and no more than 80 acres of suitable habitat may be surveyed per
visit. Vegetation surveys of the project site identified less than 80 acres of coastal sage scrub
habitats; therefore, a total of six visits were considered sufficient for this survey. Following the
USFWS protocol for the species, BonTerra Consulting Senior Biologist Brian Daniels (USFWS
Permit #TE- 821401 -3) conducted surveys for the coastal California gnatcatcher on March 25;
and April 1, 9, 16, 23, and 30, 2009. The survey covered all potentially suitable habitats for the
coastal California gnatcatcher on the project site.
Weather conditions met the USFWS survey protocol requirements for optimal gnatcatcher
detection. Weather conditions that were too cold (below 55 degrees Fahrenheit), too hot (above
95 degrees Fahrenheit), or too windy (wind speed greater than 15 miles per hour) were avoided.
Surveys were conducted by slowly walking through all appropriate habitats while listening and
watching for gnatcatcher activity. A combination of taped recordings of gnatcatcher
vocalizations and "pishing" sounds were used in an attempt to elicit responses from any
gnatcatchers that might be present. The frequency of vocalization playback and "pishing" varied
depending on conditions, such as habitat patch size and topography in each area. All bird
species detected during the survey were recorded, including notable observations of special
status birds or other wildlife species.
Survey Results
A total of 17 coastal California gnatcatcher territories consisting of 16 breeding pairs and
1 solitary male were present on the project site during the surveys (Exhibits 3a and 3b). As
Exhibits 3a and 3b show, the coastal California gnatcatchers were distributed throughout the
project site. All pairs, except for the one solitary male ( #8 on Exhibits 3a and 3b), exhibited
behavior consistent with breeding which was confirmed by locating either an active nest (Pairs 1
and 9) or by observing adults feeding fledglings (Pairs 5, 7, and 11). Coastal sage scrub
vegetation on the project site is variable but the dominant species is California encelia (Encelia
californica). California buckwheat (Erigonum fasciculatum) and bladderpod (Isomeris arborea)
are fairly common on the project site, but California sagebrush (Artemisia californica) is
decidedly uncommon. Other scrub species used by the coastal California gnatcatcher on the
project site include coyote brush (Baccharis pflularis), mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), California
boxthorn (Lycium californicum), and coastal goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii). Two cacti
species, the coast cholla (Opuntia prolifera) and prickly pear (Opuntia littoralis), are also present
throughout the project site and are used by the coastal California gnatcatcher. California Natural
Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) forms will be submitted to the California Department of Fish and
Game (CDFG). Site photos are included as Exhibits 4 and 5.
Additional Sensitive Species
Two cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus) territories consisting of one breeding pair
and one solitary male were present on the project site during the surveys (Exhibit 3b). The
solitary male advertised persistently throughout the surveys from slopes in the northeast part of
the project site but shifted between two locations about 1,000 feet apart (see Exhibit 3b). The
breeding pair had an active nest in a large clump of prickly pear that failed, apparently, due to
an infestation of Argentine ants (Linepithema humile).
Ms. Sandy Marquez
July 17, 2009
Page 4
Please contact Ann Johnston or Brian Daniels at (714) 444 -9199 if you have questions or
comments.
Sincerely,
BONTERRA NSULTING
Ann M. Johnsto
Principal, Biological Services
UUUBrian E. Daniels
Senior Biologist/Ornithologist
I certify that the information in this survey report and enclosed exhibits fully and accurately
present my work.
�/dn[-''�-7z -_6
Z'-'Z
n E. Daniels
Senior Biologist/Ornithologist
(TE- 821401 -3)
cc: Sharon Wood, City of Newport Beach
Attachments: Exhibits 1, 2, 3a, 3b, 4, and 5
R. \ProjeclMewport 015\TechnicM Report Bio \CAGN RpF071709.doc
REFERENCES
Atwood, J.L. and S.B. Lerman. 2006. Family Polioptilidae (Gnatcatchers) (pp. 350 -377).
Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol. 11: Old World Flycatchers to Old World
Warblers (J. del Hoyo, A. Elliott, and D.A. Christie, Eds.). Barcelona, Spain: Lynx
Ediciones.
Atwood, J.L. and D.R. Bontrager. 2001. California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica). The Birds
of North America, No. 574 (A. Poole and F. Gill, Eds.). Philadelphia, PA: The Academy
of Natural Sciences.
Atwood, J.L., S.H. Tsai, C.A. Reynolds, and M.R. Fugagli. 1998a. Distribution and Population
Size of California Gnatcatchers on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, 1993 - 1997. Western
Birds 29: 340 -350. San Diego, CA: Western Field Ornithologists.
Atwood, J.L., D.R. Bontrager, and A.L. Gorospe. 1998b. Use of Refugia by California
Gnatcatchers Displaced by Habitat Loss. Western Birds 29: 406 -412. San Diego, CA:
Western Field Ornithologists.
Ms. Sandy Marquez
July 17, 2009
Page 5
Atwood, J.L. and J.S. Bolsinger. 1992. Elevational Distribution of the California Gnatcatchers in
the United States. Journal of Field Ornithology 63(2):159 -168. Waco, TX: Ornithological
Societies of North America.
Atwood, J.L. 1990. Status Review of the California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica).
Manomet, MA: Manomet Bird Observatory.
Campbell, K.F., R.A. Erickson, W.E. Haas, and M.A. Patten. 1998. California Gnatcatcher Use
of Habitats Other Than Coastal Sage Scrub: Conservation and Management
Implications. Western Birds 29: 421 -433. San Diego, CA: Western Field Ornithologists.
Mellink, E. and A.M. Rea. 1994. Taxonomic Status of the California Gnatcatchers of
Northwestern Baja California, Mexico. Western Birds 25: 50-62. San Diego, CA:
Western Field Ornithologists.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007 (December 19). Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California
Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica); Final Rule. Federal Register 72(243):
72009 - 72213.
2003 (April 24). Designation of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher
(Polioptila californica californica) and Determination of Distinct Vertebrate Population
Segment for the California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica); Proposed Rule. Federal
Register, Vol. 68, No. 79: 20228 - 20312.
1997a (February 28). Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica).
Presence /Absence Survey Guidelines. Washington, D.C.: USFWS.
1997b (July 28). Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica)
Presence /Absence Survey Protocol. Washington, D.C.: USFWS.
1993 (March 30). Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Determination of
Threatened Status for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher; Final Rule and Proposed
Special Rule. Federal Register 58(59): 16742- 16757. Washington, D.C.: USFWS.
Regional Location
Newport Banning Ranch
N
w�E 10 5
5
10
9 Miles
Exhibit 1
C O Nf/I / fit
-i
C
OProject Boundary
r
�-
/ eii
Sx _.
Sell
1 r lI q0 %:f
P-
Ia
i
s9 1 9T_M I�� 11�
g•..I �_ a warm
-L
Ulm
�.:1�1 I. I s•
JI r
r
TraUer�`� •-
Park'
TaAkS
as
P
l
v
x
♦ � yr, L � ss
Jr y}�xf 1'
aaw
I � z
Source: USGS 7.5- Minute Quadrangle
Newport Beach, CA
Local Vicinity Exhibit 2
Newport Banning Ranch
N
2.000 1,000 0 2,000 c.I /s•a
gY Feet C O N S U L T I N G
a %vrgect4New JOISIGepmwiBird_apU _N_Quaa osozospdr
:-
k.t
f
mv
I jlII
X3i
y
id !
$
0 Project Boundary
California Gnatcatcher Locations
o Pair
O Solitary Male
aP
}7 _ r�u.r —�,
v • v
Z1rwp
Ba.
e r
! r
1 _
Source: USGS 7.5- Minute Quadrangle
Newport Beach, CA
Survey Results Exhibit 3a
Newport Banning Ranch
N
2.000 1,000 0 2,000
gY Feet C O N S U L T I N G
a: /Pqe NNev WJotvcraphi�ffilmRpvEu bra suNey_osozo9 quae Nf
OISPU L
-Park
P
g +
LLB
0 Project Boundary
California Gnatcatcher Locations
o Pair
O Solitary Male
aP
}7 _ r�u.r —�,
v • v
Z1rwp
Ba.
e r
! r
1 _
Source: USGS 7.5- Minute Quadrangle
Newport Beach, CA
Survey Results Exhibit 3a
Newport Banning Ranch
N
2.000 1,000 0 2,000
gY Feet C O N S U L T I N G
a: /Pqe NNev WJotvcraphi�ffilmRpvEu bra suNey_osozo9 quae Nf
Survey Results Exhibit 3a
Newport Banning Ranch
N
2.000 1,000 0 2,000
gY Feet C O N S U L T I N G
a: /Pqe NNev WJotvcraphi�ffilmRpvEu bra suNey_osozo9 quae Nf
Survey Results
Newport Banning Ranch
AN
w Z_J- E 600 300 0 600
Feet
1.1 y
Exhibit 3b
C o O N�
View 1
View 2
Photo Locations
Newport Banning Ranch
Exhibit 4
Iftp
C O N S U L T I N G
R:IProjec Newpor J0151Gmphic /Bird_RpUEx4_pholosA_061009.pdf
`s""'�'
View 3
View 4
Photo Locations Exhibit 5
Newport Banning Ranch
C O N S U L T I N G
R:IProjec Newpor J0151GmphicslBird_RpUEx5 _ pholosB_061009.pdf
BIOLOGICAL TECHNICAL REPORT
APPENDIX G
LEAST BELL'S VIREO/
SOUTHWESTERN WILLOW
FLYCATCHER REPORT
C O N S U L T I N G
September 21, 2009
PASADENA COSTA MESA
T: (714( 444 -9199 F: (7141444-9599 1 151 Kolmus Drive, Suite E -200
w .eonTerroConsulting.com Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Ms. Sandy Marquez VIA EMAIL AND MAIL
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sandy_marquez @fws.gov
6010 Hidden Valley Road
Carlsbad, California 92011
Subject: Results of Southwestern Willow Flycatcher and Least Bell's Vireo Surveys for the
Newport Banning Ranch Project Site, Orange County, California
Dear Ms. Marquez:
This Letter Report presents the results of focused surveys conducted in 2009 for the
southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) and least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellh
pusillus) at the Newport Banning Ranch project site (hereafter referred to as the "project site ") in
the City of Newport Beach and the City's Sphere of Influence in Orange County, California
(Exhibit 1). The purpose of the surveys was to determine the presence or absence of these
species on the project site. Surveys were conducted according to guidelines established by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) by a Biologist holding the required federal Endangered
Species Act (ESA) Section 10(a) survey permit.
The project site is located north of Pacific Coast Highway (PCH), east of the Santa Ana River,
south of 19th Street and Talbert Regional Park, and west of existing residential and commercial
uses west of Whittier Avenue. The project site is located on the U.S. Geological Survey's
(USGS's) Newport Beach 7.5- minute quadrangle at Township 6S, Range 10W, Sections 20, 21,
and 29 (Exhibit 2). Topography on the project site varies with relatively flat areas, bluffs, and
drainages; however, the northwestern and western portions of the project site are generally
lower in elevation than the mesa on the eastern portion of the project site. Elevations on the
project site range from approximately sea level to 100 feet above mean sea level (msl).
The project site has been used as an active oil field for over 50 years, and ongoing oil
operations along with remnant oil wells and pipelines occur throughout the project site. A variety
of vegetation types occur on the project site, including willow riparian forest/scrub, mule fat
scrub, and alkali marsh in the western portion of the project site (i.e., the "lowlands ") and in
scattered drainages. Portions of the vegetation types are considered disturbed because they
are heavily invaded by ruderal or invasive exotic species, especially pampas grass (Cortaderia
selloana), and because of ongoing oil field activities. A network of roads in the lower portion of
the project site divides habitat into patches; often ruderal, ornamental, and invasive exotic
species are present along the roads. Ornamental vegetation occurs in patches throughout the
project site, including patches interspersed with native riparian vegetation types.
BACKGROUND
The southwestern willow flycatcher and least Bell's vireo were
formerly more common and widespread, but are now rare,
local summer residents of Southern California's lowland
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING I RESOURCE: MANAGEMENT
Ms. Sandy Marquez
September 21, 2009
Page 2
riparian woodlands (Grinnell and Miller 1944; Garrett and Dunn 1981). The substantial
population declines of these two avian species over the latter half of the twentieth century is
attributable to the loss and degradation of riparian habitats and brood parasitism by the brown -
headed cowbird (Molothrus ater). As a result, the least Bell's vireo was listed by the California
Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) as Endangered on October 2, 1980, and by the USFWS
as Endangered on May 2, 1986. The CDFG listed all three subspecies of willow flycatcher that
breed in California (E. t. brewsteri, E. t. extimus, and E. t. adastus) as Endangered on
January 3, 1991. The USFWS listed the southwestern willow flycatcher as Endangered on
February 7, 1995 (USFWS 1995).
Least Bell's Vireo
Bell's vireo is a Neotropical migrant that breeds in central and southwestern North America from
northern Mexico to Southern California, Nevada, and Utah; east to Louisiana; and north to North
Dakota, Wisconsin, and Indiana in the central United States (AOU 2006). Although not well
known, the winter range of the Bell's vireo is believed to be the western coast of Central
America from southern Sonora south to northwestern Nicaragua, including the cape region of
Baja California, Mexico (Brown 1993). Of the four Bell's vireo subspecies, only two breed in
California: the least Bell's vireo and the Arizona Bell's vireo (V. b. arizonae), which breeds in the
Colorado River Valley (Garrett and Dunn 1981; Rosenberg et al. 1991). Though the least Bell's
vireo was formerly considered a common breeder in riparian habitats throughout the Central
Valley and other low- elevation riverine systems in California and Baja California, Mexico
(Franzreb 1989), presently, the least Bell's vireo has been eliminated from much of its historical
range (Franzreb 1989; Brown 1993).
The breeding habitat of the least Bell's vireo is primarily riparian dominated by willows with
dense understory vegetation; shrubs such as mule fat and California rose (Rosa californica) are
often a component of the understory (Goldwasser 1981). The least Bell's vireo is often found in
areas that include trees such as willow (Salix sp.), western sycamore or cottonwood (Populus
sp.), particularly where the canopy is within or immediately adjacent to an understory layer of
vegetation (Salata 1983). The least Bell's vireo generally nests in early successional stages of
riparian habitats, with nest sites frequently located in willows that are between four and ten feet
high (RECON 1988; Franzreb 1989). The most critical factor in habitat structure is the presence
of a dense understory shrub layer from approximately two to ten feet above ground (Goldwasser
1981; Salata 1983; Franzreb 1989).
On February 2, 1994, the USFWS issued their final determination of critical habitat for the least
Bell's vireo (USFWS 1994), identifying approximately 37,560 acres as critical habitat in Santa
Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, San' Bernardino, Riverside, and San Diego counties. The
survey area is not located in the designated critical habitat area for this species.
Southwestern Willow Flycatcher
The willow flycatcher is a Neotropical migrant that breeds in the west from northern Baja
California, Mexico to central British Colombia, and generally east through the northern half of
the United States to the Atlantic coast (AOU 2006). Depending on the authority, there are four
or five recognized subspecies of willow flycatcher (Sedgwick 2000). The breeding range of
southwestern willow flycatcher includes Southern California, Arizona, New Mexico, western
Texas, and the extreme southern parts of Nevada and Utah (USFWS 1993). In California, the
southwestern willow flycatcher breeds along the coast south of the San Fernando Valley and
north in the interior to about Independence, Inyo County (Unitt 1987). The largest breeding
populations of southwestern willow flycatcher in California are located at the South Fork of the
Ms. Sandy Marquez
September 21, 2009
Page 3
Kern River in Kern County and on the Santa Margarita River in Camp Pendleton in San Diego
County ( Unitt 1987). The range -wide population of southwestern willow flycatcher is estimated
at between 300 and 500 pairs ( USFWS 1997). The population of southwestern willow flycatcher
in California is estimated to be about 70 pairs ( USFWS 1993). More recent estimates for
California include a total of 200 territories in 2004 (Durst et al. 2005), which indicates that the
California population may slowly be recovering.
The southwestern willow flycatcher breeds in willow- dominated riparian habitats that are similar
to least Bell's vireo nesting habitats. The southwestern willow flycatcher differs from least Bell's
vireo in that it shows a stronger dependency on willow thickets for all its requirements (Grinnell
and Miller 1944). In addition, the southwestern willow flycatcher appears to have a preference
for sites with surface water in the vicinity, such as along streams, on the margins of a pond or
lake, and at wet mountain meadows (Grinnell and Miller 1944; Flett and Sanders 1987; Harris et
al. 1987). In Arizona, the southwestern willow flycatcher invariably nests near surface water
(Phillips et al. 1964). Recently, the southwestern willow flycatcher has adapted to introduced
vegetation present in riparian communities, such as tamarisk (Tamarix sp.) and Russian olive
(Elaeagnus angustifolia) ( USFWS 1993).
The willow flycatcher is a common migrant in the interior of California and a rare -to- uncommon
migrant along the coastal slope, with most birds moving through Southern California between
May 15 and June 20 (Garrett and Dunn 1981; Unitt 1987). The spring southwestern willow
flycatcher migration is earlier than that of the northern subspecies ( Unitt 1984; USFWS 1993).
As a result, the presence of more abundant subspecies that migrate through the range of the
southwestern willow flycatcher during its breeding season complicates surveys for nesting
southwestern willow flycatchers.
On October 19, 2005, the USFWS published a final rule designating critical habitat for the
southwestern willow flycatcher ( USFWS 2005). This final rule designated 120,824 acres in
Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah as critical habitat. Of that, 17,212 acres
were designated in Kern, Santa Barbara, San Bernardino, and San Diego counties, California.
The survey area is not located in designated critical habitat for this species.
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
A total of ten surveys for the least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher were
conducted on April 13 and 24; May 4, 14, and 25; June 4, 15, and 25; and July 3 and 9, 2009.
All surveys followed the recommended USFWS guidelines for both species. The survey protocol
for the SWF was revised in July 2000 and now requires a total of five surveys instead of the
three surveys recommended in the previous protocol. The first survey should be conducted
between May 15 and May 31, with a subsequent survey conducted between June 1 and June
21, and three surveys between June 22 and July 17. Updated guidelines for least Bell's vireo
surveys were issued on April 8, 1999, and require that at least eight surveys be conducted from
April 10 to July 31 with a ten -day interval between each site visit. All surveys were conducted by
BonTerra Consulting Senior Biologist Brian E. Daniels ( USFWS permit number TE- 821401 -3).
The riparian habitats of the project site's "lowlands" (i.e., the "flat land" between the Santa Ana
River and the mesa area on the eastern side of the project site) and the drainages on the mesa
area were systematically surveyed by walking slowly and methodically along their margins.
Taped vocalizations of southwestern willow flycatcher were used on May 25; June 15 and 25;
and July 3 and 9, 2009 to elicit a response from any potentially territorial southwestern willow
flycatcher. If no southwestern willow flycatchers were detected after the initial tape playing, the
recording was replayed where appropriate. As the least Bell's vireo survey protocol does not
Ms. Sandy Marquez
September 21, 2009
Page 4
require the playback of least Bell's vireo vocalizations, no taped vocalizations of least Bell's
vireo were used during these surveys. All surveys were conducted under optimal weather
conditions and during early morning hours when bird activity is at a peak. Numbers were
recorded for all bird species detected during the survey, including any notable observations of
special status species or other birds, such as brown - headed cowbird.
SURVEY RESULTS
Two solitary male least Bell's vireos were present during these 2009 surveys in the riparian
habitats of the lowlands of the project .site (Exhibit 3). Solitary male # 1 was first detected on
May 14, 2009, along the northern perimeter of the project site, and was last observed in the
same area on June 25, 2009. This male sang persistently over the course of its stay on the
project site from the same location, an approximate 100 -foot stretch of willows with an
understory of mule fat and blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana) that paralleled the northern
boundary fence of the project site. Solitary male # 1 was consistently observed in this localized
stretch except for on June 25, 2009, when it was observed about 500 feet to the south within the
northern part of the solitary male # 2 territory. While within the territory of solitary male # 2,
solitary male # 1 was generally quiet but did sing its primary song at least a few times and
eventually returned to its territory where it resumed singing at its more usual frequent rate.
Solitary male # 2 was first detected on June 4, 2009, at the southern end of the willows on the
project site's lowlands. Thereafter, it was observed more consistently about 300 feet to the north
in about the middle of this willow woodland although it wandered more widely than solitary male
# 1. Solitary male # 2 was last detected on July 4, 2009. These results are consistent with the
results of previous surveys conducted by Glenn Lukos Associates (GLA) in 2006 and 2007
(GLA 2009). The two vireo locations observed in 2006 and 2007 by GLA were in the same
location as observed during the current survey. Representative site photos are included in
Appendix A.
No southwestern willow flycatchers were present and no migrant willow flycatchers (of any
subspecies) were observed during these 2009 surveys of the project site. This is consistent with
the results of previous surveys conducted by GLA in 2006 and 2007 (GLA 2009). Except for one
leaking water pipe in the willow woodland of the project site lowlands, no standing or surface
water was present during the current surveys. Many of the willows on the project site lowir�ds
did not leaf -out until relatively late in the season.
A list of all bird species recorded during the 2009 avian surveys of the project site is included in
Appendix B. The list includes several species listed by the CDFG as Species of Special
Concern (Shuford and Gardali 2008). California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) forms will
be submitted to the CDFG for those species that showed evidence of breeding on the project
site. These species included northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), least Bell's vireo, coastal cactus
wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus), coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica
californica), and yellow- breasted chat (Icteria virens). Appendix C provides copies of all C;NDDB
forms submitted for these surveys.
Brown - headed cowbirds were detected on all survey dates with a high count of ten birds on
April 24, 2009, and an average of approximately six cowbirds per survey date in 2009.
Ms. Sandy Marquez
September 21, 2009
Page 5
Please contact Ann Johnston or Brian Daniels at (714) 444 -9199 if you have questions or
comments.
Sincerely,
BONTERRA CONSULTING
eN'nn MJohnstoon Brian E. Daniels
Principal, Biological Services Senior Biologist/Ornithologist
I certify that the information in this survey report and enclosed exhibits fully and accurately
present my work.
r Daniels ?ls
Senior Biologist/Ornithologist
(TE- 821401 -3)
cc: Sharon Wood, City of Newport Beach
Attachments: Exhibits 1, 2, and 3
Appendix A — Site Photos
Appendix B —Wildlife Compendium
Appendix C — CNDDB Forms
RAProjects\New o1W015 \SWFLBV RpL092109.doc
REFERENCES
American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 2006. Check -list of North American Birds (7`" ed., as
revised through 47`h Supplement). Washington, D.C.: AOU.
http://www.aou.org/checklist/index.php3.
Brown, B.T. 1993. Bell's Vireo (Vireo bellh). The Birds of North America, No. 35 (A. Poole, P.
Stettenheim, and F. Gill, Eds.). Philadelphia, PA and Washington, D.C.: The Academy of
Natural Sciences and AOU (respectively).
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2009 (September 4, 2009). California Natural
Diversity Database. Records of Occurrence for USGS Newport Beach 7.5- minute
quadrangle. Sacramento, CA: CDFG, Natural Heritage Division.
Durst, S.L., M.K. Sogge, H. English, S.O. Williams, B.E. Kus, and S.J. Sferra. 2005.
Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Breeding Site and Territory Summary — 2004 (Report to
the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation). Flagstaff, AZ: USGS Southwest Biological Science
Center, Colorado Plateau Research Station.
Ms. Sandy Marquez
September 21, 2009
Page 6
Flett, M.A. and S.D. Sanders. 1987. Ecology of a Sierra Nevada Population of Willow
Flycatchers. Western Birds 18(1): 37 -42. San Diego, CA: Western Field Ornithologists.
Franzreb, K.E. 1989. Ecology and Conservation of the Endangered Least Bell's Vireo
(Biological Report 89[1]). Sacramento, CA: USFWS, Endangered Species Office.
Garrett, K. and J. Dunn. 1981. Birds of Southern California: Status and Distribution. Los
Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Audubon Society.
Glen Lukos Associates (GLA). 2009 (April 21). Biological Technical Report for the Newport
Banning Ranch Property Newport Beach, California (prepared for Newport Banning
Ranch, LLC). Lake Forest, CA: GLA.
Goldwasser, S. 1981. Habitat Requirements of the Least Bell's Vireo (Final Report, Job IV-
38.1). Sacramento, CA: CDFG.
Grinnell, J. and A.H. Miller. 1944. The Distribution of the Birds of California. Pacific Coast
Avifauna No.27. Albuquerque, NM: Cooper Ornithological Society.
Harris, J.H., S.D. Sanders, and M.A. Flett. 1987. Willow Flycatcher Surveys in the Sierra
Nevada. Western Birds 18(1): 27 -36. San Diego, CA: Western Field Ornithologists.
Phillips, A.R., J. Marshall, and G. Monson. 1964. The Birds of Arizona. Tucson, AZ: University
of Arizona Press.
RECON Regional Environmental Consultants (RECON). 1988. Draft Comprehensive Species
Management Plan for the Least Bell's Vireo (Prepared for the San Diego Association of
Governments). San Diego, CA: RECON.
Rosenberg, K.V., R.D. Ohmart, W.C. Hunter, and B.W. Anderson. 1991. Birds of the Lower
Colorado River Valley. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.
Salata, L.R. 1983. Status of the Least Bell's Vireo on Camp Pendleton, California: Report on
Research Done in 1983. Laguna Niguel, CA: USFWS.
Sedgwick, J.A. 2000. Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii). The Birds of North America, No.
533 (A. Poole and F. Gill, Eds.). Philadelphia, PA: The Academy of Natural Sciences.
Shuford, W.D. and T. Gardali (Eds). 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked
assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate
conservation and concern in Calfornia. Studies of Western Birds 1. Camarillo, CA and
Sacramento, CA: Western Field Ornithologists and CDFG, respectively.
Unitt, P. 1987. Empidonax traillii extimus: An Endangered Subspecies. Western Birds. 18(3):
137 -162. San Diego, CA: Western Field Ornithologists.
1984. The Birds of San Diego County (Memoir 13). San Diego, CA: San Diego Society
of Natural History.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2005 (October 19). Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Southwestern Willow
Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus). Federal Register 70(201): 60885- 61009.
Washington, D.C.: USFWS.
Ms. Sandy Marquez
September 21, 2009
Page 7
1997. A Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Natural History Summary and Survey Protocol
(Technical Report NPS /NAUCPRS /NRTR- 97/12, prepared for National Park Service and
Department of the Interior). Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University, Colorado Plateau
Research Station.
1995 (February 27). Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Final Rule,
Determining Endangered Status for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher. Federal
Register. 60(38): 10693-10715. Washington, D.C.: USFWS.
1994 (February 2). Endangered and
Critical Habitat for the Least Bell's
Washington, D.C.: USFWS.
Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Vireo. Federal Register 59 (22): 4845 -4867.
1993 (July 23). Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Rule to List
the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher as Endangered With Critical Habitat. Federal
Reoister58(140): 39495 - 39522. Washington, D.C.: USFWS.
1986 (May 2). Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination o1
Endangered Status for the Least Bell's Vireo. Federal Register 51(85):16474- 16482.
Washington, D.C.: USFWS.
Regional Location
Newport Banning Ranch
N
w�E 10 5
5
10
9 Miles
Exhibit 1
C O Nf/I / fit
-i
C
OProject Boundary
r
�-
/ eii
Sx _.
Sell
1 r lI q0 %:f
P-
Ia
i
s9 1 9T_M I�� 11�
g•..I �_ a warm
-L
Ulm
�.:1�1 I. I s•
JI r
r
TraUer�`� •-
Park'
TaAkS
as
P
l
v
x
♦ � yr, L � ss
Jr y}�xf 1'
aaw
I � z
Source: USGS 7.5- Minute Quadrangle
Newport Beach, CA
Local Vicinity Exhibit 2
Newport Banning Ranch
N
2.000 1,000 0 2,000 c.I /s•a
gY Feet C O N S U L T I N G
a %vrgect4New JOISIGepmwiBird_apU _N_Quaa osozospdr
::. �..iF 3✓ f �-..a1�f_ _ '�1i'i r t ,� 4-Jc ;Y�Ati
r $ 1 r rYQ%`I�f i' Md$. q il•
;c
P40
• ! 'P40
`r m
a Ir 8 -''•Fp -'a ��
. , . 1:
jf.`
0.i l F°xk
' i'er�i:, : • ^ Y r � � ^! At0 fIN M tT�s f—a.
mtF
S
ir
1 1t : f• may, yV� �i /F.t
lz
tit
Iry 1
i <
.1
/F
`r
•
-�-
all •� • ,••
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOS
m
w
3
N
z
0
R
View of willow riparian forest where solitary male # 1 least Bell's vireo was observed.
View of willow riparian forest where solitary male # 1 least Bell's vireo was observed.
Site Photographs
Newport Banning Ranch
Exhibit A -1
C O N S U L T I N G
R:lPmjecs/N.p.,YJ0151Graphic LBV- SWF/ExA1_sp_092109.pdf
P
View of willow riparian forest where solitary male # 2 least Bell's vireo was observed.
1
View of willow riparian forest where soliiary male # 2 least Bell's vireo was observed.
Site Photographs
Newport Banning Ranch
Exhibit A -2
C O N S U L T I N G
R:/ Projects /NewpoNJ0151GmphicslLBV -SW FIExA2_sp2_092109.pdf
M.
WILDLIFE COMPENDIUM
Ranch
BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED ON NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
APRIL -JULY 2009
Species
ANATIDAE -WATERFOWL
Anas platyrhynchos
mallard
ARDEIDAE - HERONS
Ardea herodias
great blue heron
Ardea alba
great egret
Nycticorax nycticorax
black- crowned night -heron
CATHARTIDAE - NEW WORLD VULTURES
Cathartes aura
turkey vulture
ACCIPITRIDAE - HAWKS
Pandion haliaetus
osprey
Circus cyaneus
northern harrier
Accipiter striatus
sharp- shinned hawk
Accipiter cooperii
Cooper's hawk
Buteo lineatus
red - shouldered hawk
Buteo jamaicensis
red - tailed hawk
FALCONIDAE - FALCONS
Falco sparverius
American kestrel
CHARADRIIDAE - PLOVERS
Charadrius vociferus
killdeer
SCOLOPACIDAE - SANDPIPERS & PHALAROPES
Numeniusphaeopus
whimbrel
LARIDAE - GULLS & TERNS
Larus califomicus
California gull
COLUMBIDAE - PIGEONS & DOVES
Columba livia
rock pigeon'
Zenaida macroura
mourning dove
STRIGIDAE -TRUE OWLS
Bubo virginianus
great horned owl
APODIDAE - SWIFTS
Aeronautes saxatalis
white - throated swift
HAProj.M\N w nW015 \SWF_LBV RpF092109.doc B -1 Appendix B
Ranch
BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED ON NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
APRIL —JULY 2009
(Continued)
Species
TROCHILIDAE - HUMMINGBIRDS
Archilochus alexandri
black- chinned hummingbird
Calypte anna
Anna's hummingbird
Selasphorus rufus
rufous hummingbird
Selasphorus sasin
Allen's hummingbird
PICIDAE -WOODPECKERS
Picoides nuttallii
Nuttall's woodpecker
Picoides pubescens
downy woodpecker
TYRANNIDAE - TYRANT FLYCATCHERS
Contopus sordidulus
western wood -pewee
Empidonax difficilis
Pacific -slope flycatcher
Sayornis nigricans
black phoebe
Sayornis saya
Say's phoebe
Myiarchus cinerascens
ash - throated flycatcher
Tyrannus vociferans
Cassin's kingbird
Tyrannus verticalis
western kingbird
VIREONIDAE - VIREOS
Vireo bellii pusillus
least Bell's vireo
Vireo cassinii
Cassin's vireo
Vireo huttoni
Hutton's vireo
Vireo gilvus
warbling vireo
CORVIDAE - JAYS & CROWS
Corvus brachyrhynchos
American crow
CONUs corax
common raven
HIRUNDINIDAE - SWALLOWS
Stelgidopteryx serripennis
northern rough- winged swallow
Petrochelidon pyrrhonota
Cliff swallow
Hirundo rustics
barn swallow
HAProj.M\N w nW015 \SWF_LSV RpF092109.doc B -2 Appendix B
Ranch
BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED ON NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
APRIL —JULY 2009
(Continued)
Species
AEGITHALIDAE - BUSHTITS
Psaltriparus minimus
bushtit
TROGLODYTIDAE - WRENS
Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus
cactus wren
Troglodytes aedon
house wren
REGULIDAE - KINGLETS
Regulus calendula
ruby- crowned kinglet
SYLVIIDAE - GNATCATCHERS
Polioptila californica
California gnatcatcher
TURDIDAE - THRUSHES & ROBINS
Catharus ustulatus
Swainson's thrush
MIMIDAE - THRASHERS
Mimus polyglottos
northern mockingbird
STURNIDAE -STARLINGS
Sturnus vulgaris
European starling'
PARULIDAE -WARBLERS
Vermivora celata
orange- crowned warbler
Vermivora ruficapilla
Nashville warbler
Dendroica petechia
yellow warbler
Dendroica coronata
yellow - rumped warbler
Dendroica nigrescens
black- throated gray warbler
Dendroica townsendi
Townsend's warbler
Wilsonia citrinia
hooded warbler
Wilsonia pusilla
Wilson's warbler
Icteria virens
yellow- breasted chat
THRAUPIDAE - TANAGERS
Piranga ludoviciana
western tanager
HAProj.M\N w nW015 \SWF_LBV RpF092109.doc B -3 Appendix B
Ranch
BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED ON NEWPORT BANNING RANCH
APRIL —JULY 2009
(Continued)
Species
EMBERIZIDAE - SPARROWS & JUNCOS
Pipilo maculatus
spotted towhee
Pipilo crissalis
California towhee
Passerculus sandwichensis
savannah sparrow
Melospiza melodia
song sparrow
Melospiza lincolnii
Lincoln's sparrow
Zonotrichia leucophrys
white - crowned sparrow
Zonotrichia atricapilla
golden- crowned sparrow
CARDINALIDAE - GROSBEAKS & BUNTINGS
Pheuticus melanocephalus
black- headed grosbeak
Passerina caerulea
blue grosbeak
Passerina amoena
lazuli bunting
Passerina cyanea
indigo bunting
ICTERIDAE - BLACKBIRDS
Molothrus ater
brown- headed cowbird
Icterus cucullatus
hooded oriole
Icterus bullockii
Bullock's oriole
FRINGILLIDAE - FINCHES
Carpodacus mexicanus
house finch
Carduelis psaltria
lesser goldfinch
Carduelis tristis
American goldfinch
ESTRILDIDAE - MANNIKINS
Lonchura punctulata
nutmeg mannikin **
* introduced species
** exotic species
HAProj.M\N w nW015 \SWF_LBV RpF092109.doc B -4 Appendix B
APPENDIX C
CNDDBFORMS
Mail to:
California Natural Diversity Database
Department of Fish and Game
1807 13Y' Street, Suite 202
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: (916) 324 -0475 email: CNDDB @dfg.ca.gov
Date of Field work (mmlddiyyyy): 06/04/2009
For Office Use Only
Source Code Quad Code
Elm Code Occ. No.
EO Index No. Map Index No.
Reset I California Native Species Field Survey Form Send Form
Scientific Name: Circus C,yaneus
Common Name: Northern Harrier
Species Found? ❑ ❑ Reporter: Brian E. Daniels
Yes No If not why? Address: 3452 E. Foothill Blvd., Suite 420
Total No. Individuals Iwo Subsequent Visit? ❑yes ❑no Pasadena, California 91107
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence? []no +❑ unk.
Yes. Occ. At E -mail Address: bdaniels @bonterraconsulting.com
Collection? If yes: Phone: (626) 351 -2000
Number Museum /Herbarium
Plant Information Animal Information
2
Phenology: % °� °�^ # aouas #Juveniles # larvae # egg masses # unknown
vegetative flowering fruiting
Il ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
breeding wintering burrow site rookery nesting other
Location Description (please attach map AND/OR fill out your choice of coordinates, below)
Adult male and female observed interacting in flight while vocalizing at northwestern comer of the project site near Santa Ana River, then disappeared
north into fields of Talbert Regional Park. Adult male observed on previous surveys (April and May) foraging over mesa area of project site.
County: Orange County Landowner / Mgr.: Newport Banning Ranch property
Quad Name: Newport Beach Elevation: 2 meters
T_ R_ sec 44 of Y4, Meridian: H❑ MD S❑ Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map & type): GoogleEarth
T_ R_ Sec _, _ Y. of Y4, Meridian: H❑ M❑ SO GPS Make & Model
DATUM: NAD27 ❑ NAD83 ❑ WGS84 ❑ Horizontal Accuracy meters/feet
Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10 ❑ UTM Zone 11 ❑ OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) ❑�
Coordinates: 117'57'02.25"W 33038'32.01"N
Habitat Description (plant communities, dominants, associates, substrates/soils, aspectslslope):
The scrub and ruderal (weedy) fields of the project site and adjacent Talbert Regional Park provide suitable nesting habitat for this
species.
Other rare taxa seen at THIS site on THIS date:
(separate form preferred)
Site Information Overall site /occurrence quality/viability (site + population): ❑ Excellent ❑ Good ❑ Fair ❑ Poor
Immediate AND surrounding land use: Santa Ana River mouth supports mix of open space, industrial, commercial, and residential land uses.
Visible disturbances:
Threats:
Comments:
Determination: (check one or more, and fill in blanks)
Photographs: (check one or more) Slide Print Di ital
❑ Keyed (cite reference):
Plant / animal ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with specimen housed at:
Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with photo / drawing in:
Diagnostic feature ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ By another person (name):
❑ Other:
May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes❑ no[]
DFWB flH7 Rev. 11n11W
Mail to:
California Natural Diversity Database
Department of Fish and Game
1807 le Street, Suite 202
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: (916) 324 -0475 email: CNDDB@dfg.ca.gov
Date of Field Work (mm/dd/yyyy): 07/04/2009
For Office Use Only
Source Code Quad Code
Elm Code Occ. No.
EO Index No. Map Index No.
Reset California Native Species Field Survey Form Send Form
Scientific Name: Vireo bellii pusillus
Common Name: Least Bell's Vireo
Species Found? ❑v ❑ Reporter: Brian Daniels
Yes No If not, why? Address: 3452 E. Foothill Blvd.
Total No. Individuals z Subsequent Visit? Ayes ❑ no Suite 420 Pasadena, CA 91107
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence? []no ❑r unk.
Yes, Oct. # E -mail Address: bdaniels @bonterraconsulting.com
Collection? If yes: Phone: (626) 351 -2000
Number Museum /Herbarium
Plant Information Animal Information
2
Phenology: % % % #adults #juveniles #larvae #eggmasses #unknown
vegetative Flowering fruiting
O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
breeding wintering burrow site rookery nesting other
Location Description (please attach map AND/OR fill out your choice of coordinates, below)
County: Orange County Landowner / Mgr.: Newport Banning Ranch property
Quad Name: Newport Beach Elevation: 2 meters
T_ R_ Sec_, _Y. of Y., Meridian: H❑ M❑ S❑ Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map & type): GoogleEarth
T R Sac_, _ % of '/4, Meridian: H❑ M❑ S❑ GPS Make & Model
DATUM: NAD27 ❑ NAD83 ❑ WGS84 ❑ Horizontal Accuracy metersffeet
Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10 ❑ UTM Zone 11 ❑ OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) El
Coordinates: 117'56'51.31"W 33038'20.80"N
Habitat Description (plant communities, dominants, associates, substrates /soils, aspects /slope):
Southern willow scrub vegetation type.
Other rare taxa seen at THIS site on THIS date:
(separate form preferred)
Site Information Overall site /occurrence quality /viability (site + population): ❑ Excellent ❑ Good El Fair ❑ Poor
Immediate AND surrounding land use:
Visible disturbances:
Threats:
Comments: Two territories consisting of solitary males, both in "lowlands" on property; one male was present from May 14 to June 25 near northern
boundary of property (next to Talbert Regional Park) and the other, where the above representative point is located, was present from June
4 to July 4.
Determination., (check one or more, and fill in blanks)
Photographs: (check one or more) Slide Print Di,9.g. 1.tal
[0 Keyed (cite reference):
Plant / animal ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with specimen housed at:
Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with photo / drawing in:
Diagnostic feature ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ By another person (name):
❑ Other:
May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes❑ no[]
UMMOBI1747 Re7. 111ITM
Mail to:
California Natural Diversity Database
Department of Fish and Game
1807 le Street, Suite 202
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: (916) 324 -0475 email: CNDDB@dfg.ca.gov
Date of Field Work (mmldd/yyyy): 07/09/2009
For Office Use Only
Source Code Quad Code
Elm Code Occ. No.
ED Index No. Map Index No.
Reset I California Native Species Field Survey Form Send Form J
Scientific Name: Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus
Common Name: Cactus Wren
Species Found? ❑r ❑ Reporter: Brian E. Daniels
Yes No If not, why? Address: 3452 E. Foothill Blvd.
Total No. Individuals 3 Subsequent Visit? []yes ❑no Suite 420 Pasadena, CA 91 107
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence? []no ❑ unk.
Yes, occ. If E -mail Address: bdaniels @bonterraconsulting.com
Collection? If yes: Phone: (626) 351 -2000
Number Museum / Herbarium
Plant Information Animal Information
2 1
Phenology: % % % # adults #juveniles #larvae egg masses #unknown
vegetative flowering Fruiting
O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
breeding wintering burrow site rookery nesting other
Location Description (please attach map AND/OR fill out your choice of coordinates, below)
County: Orange County Landowner / Mgr.: Newport Banning Ranch property
Quad Name: Newport Beach Elevation: 24 meters
T_ R_ Sec _ % of %, Meridian: H❑ MO S❑ Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map & type): GoogleEarth
T_ R_ Sec_, _'/4 of %, Meridian: HO MO SO GPS Make & Model
DATUM: NAD27 ❑ NAD83 ❑ WGS84 ❑ Horizontal Accuracy meters /feet
Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10 ❑ UTM Zone 11 ❑ OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) 0
Coordinates: 117'56-41.01"W 33037'52.53"N
Habitat Description (plant communities, dominants, associates, substrates /soils, aspectslslope).:
Coastal sage scrub vegetation type.
Other rare taxa seen at THIS site on THIS date: Coastal California Gnatcatchers (Polioptila califorrtica califomica) also present
(separate form preferred) nearby.
Site Information Overall site /occurrence quality /viability (site + population): ❑ Excellent ❑ Good ❑+ Fair ❑ Poor
Immediate AND surrounding land use: Santa Ana River mouth supports a mix of open space, industrial, commercial, and residential land uses.
Visible disturbances:
Threats:
Comments: This location had the only pair of cactus wrens on the project site this year (there was also one other solitary male present). Their first
nesting attempt resulted in loss of two nestlings (documented on April 24, 2009) believed to be the result of an Argentine ant infestation of
nest. This subsequent nesting attempt produced at least one fledgling.
Determination: (check one or more, and fill in blanks)
Photographs: (check one or more) Slide Print Di dal
❑ Keyed (cite reference):
Plant / animal ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with specimen housed at:
Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with photo/ drawing in:
Diagnostic feature ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ By another person (name):
❑ Other:
May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes[] no
DFOBDWnn Rev. 11MM
Mail to:
California Natural Diversity Database
Department of Fish and Game
1807 13'" Street, Suite 202
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: (916) 324 -0475 email: CNDDB @dfg.ca.gov
Date of Field Work (mm/dd/yyyy): 07/09/2009
For Office Use Only
Source Code Quad Code
Elm Code Occ. No.
EO Index No. Map Index No.
reset California Native Species Field Survey Form _send Form
Scientific Name: Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus
Common Name: Cactus Wren
Species Found? ❑r ❑ Reporter: Brian E. Daniels
Yes No if not, why? Address: 3452 E. Foothill Blvd.
Total No. Individuals I Subsequent Visit? []yes ❑no Suite 420 Pasadena, CA 91107
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence? []no ❑ unk.
Yes. Occ. # E -mail Address: bdaniels @bonterraconsulting.com
Collection? If yes: Phone: (626) 351 -2000
Number Museum /Herbarium
Plant Information Animal Information
1
Phenology: % % % #adults #juveniles #larvae #egg masses #unknown
vegetative flowering fruiting
o ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
breeding wintering burrow site rookery nesting other
Location Description (please attach map AND/OR fill out your choice of coordinates, below)
County: Orange County Landowner / Mgr.: Newport Banning Ranch property
Quad Name: Newport Beach Elevation: 23 meters
T_ R_ Sec _, _'/4 of _Y., Meridian: HO M❑ SO Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map &type): GoogleEarth
T_ R_ Sec _, —'/4 of Y4, Meridian: H❑ M❑ SO GPS Make & Model
DATUM: NAD27 ❑ NAD83 ❑ WGS84 ❑ Horizontal Accuracy meters /feet
Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10 ❑ UTM Zone 11 ❑ OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) El
Coordinates: 11705643.19" W 33 °38'21.32" N
Habitat Description (plant communities, dominants, associates, substrates /soils, aspects /slope):
Coastal sage scrub vegetation type.
Other rare taxa seen at THIS site on THIS date: Coastal California Gnatcatchers (Polioptila califomica californica) also present
(separate form preferred) nearby.
Site Information Overall site /occurrence quality /viability (site + population): ❑ Excellent ❑ Good 0 Fair ❑ Poor
Immediate AND surrounding land use: Santa Ana River mouth supports a mix of open space, industrial, commercial, and residential land uses.
Visible disturbances:
Threats:
Comments: This solitary male was present from late March 2009 to this date at this location. To the south was the only Cactus Wren pair on site this
year.
Determination: (check one or more, and fill in blanks)
Photographs: (check one or more) Slide Print Di dal
❑ Keyed (cite reference):
Plant / animal ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with specimen housed at:
Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with photo / drawing in:
Diagnostic feature ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ By another person (name):
❑ Other:
May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes[] no
DFGRIDBnre7 Rev. llnrMB
Mail to:
California Natural Diversity Database
Department of Fish and Game
1807 13"' Street, Suite 202
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: (916) 324 -0475 email: CNDDB@dfg.ca.gov
Date of Field Work (mm/ddlyyyy): 07/09/2009
For Office Use Only
Source Code Quad Code
Elm Code Occ. No.
EO Index No. Map Index No.
Ii
Reset i California Native Species Field Survey Form __ Send Form
Scientific Name: Polioptila californica californica
Common Name: Coastal California Gnatcatcher
Species Found? ❑r ❑ Reporter. Brian E. Daniels
Yes No If not, why? Address: 3452 E. Foothill Blvd.
Total No. Individuals 13 Subsequent Visit? []yes p no Suite 420 Pasadena, CA 91107
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence? []no 0 unk.
Yes, occ. If E -mail Address: bdaniels @bonterraconsulting.com
Collection? If yes: Phone: (626) 351 -2000
Number Museum / Herbanum
Plant Information Animal Information
33
Phonology: % % % # adults # juveniles #larvae #egg masses #unknown
vegetative flowering fruiting
breeding wintering bunow site rookery nesting other
Location Description (please attach map ANDIOR fill out your choice of coordinates, below)
Representative point below for all 17 Coastal California Gnatcatcher territories on the property. The 17 territories consisted of 16 pairs and I solitary
male.
County: Orange County Landowner / Mgr.: Newport Banning Ranch property
Quad Name: Newport Beach Elevation: 27 meters
T R_ Sec of ' /., Meridian: HO MO SO Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map & type): GoogleEarth
T_ R_ Sec_, _%of Y., Meridian: HO MO SO GPS Make & Model
DATUM: NAD27 ❑ NAD83 ❑ WGS84 ❑ Horizontal Accuracy meterstfeet
Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10 ❑ UTM Zone 11 ❑ OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) ❑+
Coordinates: 1175646.17" W 33 037'57.45" N
Habitat Description (plant communities, dominants, associates, substrates /soils, aspects /slope):
Coastal sage scrub vegetation on slopes and mesa covering eastern part of property (16 of 17 territories here) and "lowlands" to the west
(1 territory here consisting of 1 pair) bordering the Santa Ana River.
Other rare taxa seen at THIS site on THIS date:
(separate form preferred)
Site Information Overall site /occurrence quality/viability (site + population): ❑ Excellent ❑ Good ❑+ Fair ❑ Poor
Immediate AND surrounding land use:
Visible disturbances:
Threats:
Comments:
Determination: (check one or more, and fill in blanks)
Photographs: (check one or more) Slide Print Di dal
❑ Keyed (cite reference):
Plant / animal ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with specimen housed al:
Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with photo / drawing in:
Diagnostic feature ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ By another person (name):
❑ Other:
May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes[] no[]
OFGIeGBnrb Rev. 11117Mfi
Mail to:
California Natural Diversity Database
Department of Fish and Game
1807 13`" Street, Suite 202
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: (916) 324 -0475 email., CNDDB@dfg.ca.gov
Date of Field Work (mmldd/yyyy): 06/15/2009
For Office Use Only
Source Code Quad Code
Elm Code Occ. No.
EO Index No. Map Index No.
Reset I California Native Species Field Survey Form Send Form
Scientific Name. Icteria virens
Common Name: Yellow- breasted Chat
Species Found? ❑v ❑ Reporter: Brian E. Daniels
Yes No If not, why? Address: 3452 E. Foothill Blvd.,
Total No. Individuals 16 Subsequent Visit? ❑+ yes []no Suite 420 Pasadena, CA 91107
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence? [:]no l7 unk.
Yes, Occ. # E -mail Address: bdaniels @bonterraconsulting.com
Collection? If yes: Phone: (626) 351 -2000
Number Museum / Herbarium
Plant Information Animal Information
Phenology: % % % # adults # juveniles # larvae # vegetative flowering fruiting / egg masses #unknown
El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
breeding wintering burrow site rookery nesting other
Location Description (please attach map AND /OR fill out your choice of coordinates, below)
County: Orange County Landowner / Mgr.: Newport Banning Ranch property
Quad Name: Newport Beach Elevation: 2 meters
T_ R_ Sec _, _' /. of ' /., Meridian: HD MO SO Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map & type): GoogleEarth
T_ R_ Sec_, 1/4 of Y., Meridian: HO MO S❑ GPS Make & Model
DATUM: NAD27 ❑ NAD83 ❑ WGS84 ❑ Horizontal Accuracy meters /feet
Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10 ❑ UTM Zone 11 ❑ OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) El
Coordinates: 117-56'50.29"W 33-38'25.84"N
Habitat Description (plant communities, dominants, associates, substrateslsoils, aspects/slope):
Southern willow scrub vegetation type.
Other rare taxa seen at THIS site on THIS date: Least Bell's Vireo - two solitary males in same area
(separate form preferred)
Site Information Overall site /occurrence quality /viability (site + population): ❑ Excellent ❑ Good El Fair ❑ Poor
Immediate AND surrounding land use: Santa Ana River mouth supports mix of open space, industrial, commercial, and residential land uses.
Visible disturbances:
Threats:
Comments: The 16 individuals recorded on this date were represent in 10 to 12 territories in the lowlands of the project site. There was also one
yellow - breasted chat on the mesa of the project site.
Determination: (check one ormore, and fill in blanks)
Photographs; (check one or more) Slide Print Di$llet
El Keyed (cite reference):
Plant / animal El El LJ
❑ Compared with specimen housed at
Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with photo / drawing in:
Diagnostic feature ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ By another person (name):
❑ Other:
May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes❑ no[]
DFGMDBIno s... 11117MB
Mail to:
California Natural Diversity Database
Department of Fish and Game
1807 13'" Street, Suite 202
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: (916) 324 -0475 email: CNDDB@dfg.ca.gov
Date of Field Work (mm /dd/yyyy): 06/15/2009
For Office Use Only
Source Code Quad Code
Elm Code Occ. No.
EO Index No. Map Index No.
Reset 1 California Native Species Field Survey Form Send Form
Scientific Name: %Cteria virens
Common Name: Yellow- breasted Chat
Species Found? M ❑ Reporter: Brian E. Daniels
Yes No If not, why? Address: 3452 E. Foothill Blvd.,
Total No. Individuals I Subsequent Visit? IL-]yes ❑ no Suite 420 Pasadena, CA 91107
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence? []no ❑+ unk.
bdaniels bonterraconsultin corn
Yes, occ. # E -mail Address: @ g•
Collection? If yes: Phone: (626) 351 -2000
Number Museum / Herbarium
Plant Information Animal Information
#I 'Phenology: #adults uveniles #larvae #e g9 m #unknown
vegetative flowering fruiting
El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
breeding wintering burrow site rookery nesting other
Location Description (please attach map AND/OR fill out your choice of coordinates, below)
County: Orange County Landowner / Mgr.: Newport Banning Ranch property
Quad Name: Newport Beach Elevation: 7 meters
T R_ Sec '/, of ' /A, Meridian: HO MO SO Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map & type): GoogleEarth
T_ R_ Sec '/< of '/4, Meridian: HO MO SD GPS Make & Model
DATUM: NAD27❑ NAD83❑ WGS84❑ Horizontal Accuracy meters /feet
Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10 ❑ UTM Zone 11 ❑ OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) El
Coordinates: 117-56'39.53"W 3303743.69"N
Habitat Description (plant communities, dominants, associates, substrates /soils, aspects/slope):
Southern willow scrub vegetation type.
Other rare taxa seen at THIS site on THIS date:
(separate form preferred)
Site Information Overall site /occurrence quality /viability (site + population): ❑ Excellent ❑ Good 0 Fair ❑ Poor
Immediate AND surrounding land use: Santa Ana River mouth supports mix of open space, industrial, commercial, and residential land uses.
Visible disturbances:
Threats:
Comments: This yellow- breasted chat territory is located in a drainage on the mesa. There were also 10 to 12 yellow - breasted chat territories in the
lowlands below the mesa on the project site.
Determination: (check one or more, and fill in blanks)
Photographs: (check one or more) Slide Print Di dal
❑ Keyed (cite reference):
Plant / animal ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with specimen housed at:
Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ Compared with photo/ drawing in:
Diagnostic feature ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ By another person (name):
❑ Other:
May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes[] no[]
DFG1BDBl1747 RS¢ 11117106
BIOLOGICAL TECHNICAL REPORT
APPENDIX H
JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION
GI0[ _
C O N S U L T I N O ,
DRAFT JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION
REPORT
NEWPORT BANNING RANCH,
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Planning Manager: Patrick Alford
Prepared by Gary A. Medeiros, Associate Principal, Regulatory Services
BonTerra Consulting
151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E -200
Costa Mesa, California 92626
T: (714) 444 -9199 F: (714) 444 -9599
August 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Ranch
Paqe
Section1.0
Introduction ........................................................................... ..............................1
1.1 Project Location and Description ................................. ..............................1
1.2 Regulatory Authority .................................................... ..............................2
Section2.0
Methodology .......................................................................... ..............................7
2.1 Vegetation ................................................................... ..............................7
2.2 Soils ............................................................................. ..............................8
2.3 Hydrology ..................................................................... ..............................9
2.4 Literature ...................................................................... ..............................9
2.5 Jurisdictional Delineation ............................................ .............................10
Section3.0
Results .................................................................................. .............................11
3.1 Sampling Points .......................................................... .............................11
3.2 Vegetation .................................................................. .............................29
3.3 Soils ............................................................................ .............................29
3.4 Hydrology .................................................................... .............................29
Section 4.0
Jurisdictional Delineation .................................................... .............................29
4.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Determination ............ .............................29
4.2 California Regional Water Quality Control Board Determination
.............30
4.3 California Department of Fish and Game Determination .........................30
4.4 California Coastal Commission Determination ........... .............................31
Section 5.0
Conclusion of Regulatory Approval Process .................... .............................32
5.1 Regulatory Permit Requirements ................................ .............................32
5.2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers .................................... .............................32
5.3 Regional Water Quality Control Board ........................ .............................34
5.4 California Department of Fish and Game ................... .............................35
5.5 California coastal commission .................................... .............................36
5.6 Recommendations ...................................................... .............................36
Section 6.0 References
.38
RAPrq.ct. Newp.OU018UDW- 08231IA.. i Jurisdictional Delineation Report
TABLES
Table
Ranch
Pane
1 Summary of Hydrophytic Vegetation, Hydric Soils, and Wetlands Hydrology
Wetlands Indicator Status by Sample Site ......................................... .............................12
2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional "Waters of the U. S... ..... .............................30
3 California Department of Fish and Game Jurisdictional Resources ... .............................31
4 California Coastal Commission Jurisdictional Resources .................. .............................31
EXHIBITS
Exhibit Follows Page
1
Regional Location ............................................................................... ..............................1
2
Local Vicinity ....................................................................................... ..............................1
3
Project Site .......................................................................................... ..............................1
4
Soil Types ........................................................................................... ..............................9
5
National Wetland Inventory ................................................................ .............................10
6a
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Resources ................... .............................18
6b
California Department of Fish and Game Jurisdiction ........................ .............................30
6c
California Coastal Commission Jurisdiction ....................................... .............................31
ATTACHMENTS
A Conceptual Master Land Use Plan
B Site Photographs
C Wetland Determination Data Forms
D Soil Survey
RAProj.ct. Newp OU015UDW- 08231IA.. ii Jurisdictional Delineation Report
Ranch
SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Jurisdictional Delineation Report (report) was prepared for the City of Newport Beach to
provide baseline data concerning the type and extent of resources under the jurisdiction of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE), the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG),
California Coastal Commission (CCC), and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
for the Newport Banning Ranch Project, (hereafter referred to as the "proposed Project ").
The extent of USACE, CDFG, and CCC jurisdictional resources on the Project site was
determined through jurisdictional delineations conducted by BonTerra Consulting in 2009 and
Glenn Lukos and Associates (GLA) in 2007 (GLA 2008). BonTerra Consulting performed a
comparative analysis of the two jurisdictional delineations using Geographical Information
System (GIS) technology and determined that: (1) the differences between the BonTerra
Consulting and GLA assessments for CDFG and CCC jurisdictional areas were minimal and
(2) although the differences between the BonTerra Consulting and GLA assessments for
USACE were greater, the GLA assessment was based on a multi -year data collection including
jurisdictional assessments immediately following storm events to more accurately identify the
extent of hydrological resources for potential as "Waters of the U.S. ". BonTerra Consulting and
GLA reviewed the differences in the two delineation efforts in the field on September 30, 2009,
using overlays of mapped jurisdictional resources of each effort and their respective data sheets
and agreed to (1) revise portions of the two delineations based on re- evaluated data and
(2) keep some discrepancies due to variations in number of survey site visits and timing
between the two delineation efforts; in the latter case, GLA had more extensive mapped
resources due to their more intensive multi -year sampling efforts. This coordinated jurisdictional
assessment effort resulted in a refinement of both the BonTerra Consulting and GLA
Jurisdictional Delineation Reports, which will serve as the baseline for the extent of jurisdictional
resources on the Project site. Please note that the extent of CCC jurisdictional resources in the
BonTerra Consulting assessment is based solely the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. GLA
refined the CCC jurisdictional limits based on hydrology data that were not available during the
BonTerra Consulting surveys.
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The Newport Banning Ranch Project site (Project site) encompasses approximately 401 acres.
Approximately 40 acres of the Project site are located in the incorporated boundary of the City
of Newport Beach, and approximately 361 acres are in unincorporated Orange County within
the City's Sphere of Influence (Exhibit 1). The entire site is located within the boundary of the
Coastal Zone, as established by the California Coastal Act. The Project site is located on
the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS's) Newport Beach 7.5- minute quadrangle (Exhibit 2) in the
"Santiago De Santa Ana" land grant.
The Project site is generally bound on the north by the County of Orange Talbert Nature
Preserve /Regional Park in the City of Costa Mesa and residential development in the City of
Newport Beach; on the south by West Coast Highway and residential development in the City of
Newport Beach; on the east by residential, light industrial, and office development in the Cities
of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach; and on the west by the USACE wetlands restoration area
and the Santa Ana River (Exhibit 3). The City of Huntington Beach is west of the Santa Ana
River.
The proposed Project would involve the development of residential, commercial, hotel, and
recreational uses (Attachment A). The 401 -acre Project site is proposed for up to 1,375 dwelling
units (du) on approximately 97 acres. Of the 1,375 du, up to 735 du and up to 75,000 square
feet (sf) of commercial uses would be constructed on 21 acres of the Project site as a part of a
RAPrq.cts Newp.OU018UDW- 082311A.. 1 Jurisdictional Delineation Report
Regional Location
Newport Banning Ranch
AAN
V E 3 1.5
VVB
3
Miles
Exhibit 1
C OO N�ii%N
lui rwJcu ouw wary
Source: USGS 7.5- Minute Quadrangle
_, - Newport Beach, CA
Local Vicinity
Newport Banning Ranch
AN
wVE 2,000 1,000
SV 6
2,000
�J Feet
wno
Exhibit 2
Y
l4Yll..lpl �
£Ii
r
r,r
w
I'.
P'
4
x
I-U
$F "I q-
M� -� so yt
L r ki
8 `l- th Stre�
b
r
/ C y
' •fie' "��r :;�.. �" `..
� r
s
1* • Ai
`V r
•.
e �, •.y ` rip •,r
{� l
MW■
Project Site Exhibit 3
Newport Banning Ranch
w�e 600 300 0 soo
CONS
Feet
�a>=v: Src 10m 09) R wmjncwewponumslcapnacuo�.a_vsoar
Ranch
mixed -used component. Additionally, a 75 -room resort hotel and 84 du are proposed on
approximately 11 acres. Approximately 53 acres are proposed for active and passive park uses.
Approximately 252 acres (approximately 61 percent) of the 401 -acre site are proposed for
natural resources protection in the form of open space and third -party habitat restoration. Of
these 243 acres, 20 acres would be used for interim oil operations until this area converts to
open space.
ilIVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINxC111 WIND] NZIlh11:[U:V1�
1.2.1 SUMMARY OF REGULATIONS
U.S. Armv Coros of Enaineers
The USACE Regulatory Branch regulates activities that discharge dredged or fill materials into
"Waters of the U.S." under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and Section 10 of
the Rivers and Harbors Act. This permitting authority applies to all "Waters of the U.S." where
the material (1) replaces any portion of a "Waters of the U.S." with dry land or (2) changes the
bottom elevation of any portion of any "Waters of the U.S. ". These fill materials would include
sand, rock, clay, construction debris, wood chips, and materials used to create any structure or
infrastructure in these Waters. The selection of disposal sites for dredged or fill material is done
in accordance with the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines, which were developed by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
Waters of the United States
"Waters of the U.S." can be divided into three categories: territorial seas, tidal waters, or
non -tidal waters. The term "Waters of the U.S." includes all waters that have, are, or may be
used in interstate or foreign commerce (including sightseeing or hunting), including all waters
subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, such as those listed below:
• Wetlands.
• All other waters such as interstate lakes, rivers, or streams (including intermittent
streams); mudflats; sand flats; wetlands; sloughs; prairie potholes; wet meadows; playa
lakes; or natural ponds the use, degradation, or destruction of which could affect
interstate or foreign commerce.
• All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as "Waters of the U.S." under the
definition.
• All tributaries to navigable waters, interstate waters, and impoundments of "Waters of
the U.S. ".
• Territorial seas.
• All wetlands adjacent to waters that are not themselves wetlands.
Ordinary High Water Mark
The landward limit of tidal "Waters of the U.S." is the high -tide line. In non -tidal waters where
adjacent wetlands are absent, jurisdiction extends to the "ordinary high water mark" (OHWM). In
the absence of wetlands in non -tidal waters, the extent of jurisdictional limits is determined by
the OHWM. The OHWM is defined as "that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of
water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the
bank, shelving, changes in the character of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation,
the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of
the surrounding areas" (33 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] §328.3[e]).
RAPrq.ct. Newp.OU018UDW- 08231IA.. 2 Jurisdictional Delineation Report
Ranch
Wetlands
A wetland is a subset of jurisdictional waters and is defined by the USACE and the USEPA as
"those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances, do support a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions" (33 CFR §328.3[b]). Wetlands
generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and areas containing similar features. The definition
and methodology for identifying wetland resources was refined in the Regional Supplement to the
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (USAGE 2008b), a
supplement to the 1987 Corps Manual. The methodology contained in this supplement was used
to identify the type and extent of wetland resources within the boundaries of the survey area.
Supreme Court Rulings /Regulatory Guidance
Guidance for determining the USACE jurisdiction over "Waters of the U.S." was provided
following the consolidated cases of Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States
cases (referred to as the " Rapanos" cases). On June 19, 2006, a majority of the U.S. Supreme
Court overturned two Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decisions, finding that certain wetlands
constituted "Waters of the U.S." under the CWA. Justice Scalia argued that "Waters of the U.S."
should not include channels through which water flows intermittently or ephemerally or channels
that periodically provide drainage for rainfall. He also stated that a wetland may not be
considered "adjacent to" remote "Waters of the U.S." based on a mere hydrologic connection.
Although Justice Scalia's opinion would have greatly restricted the USACE's jurisdiction, only
three other justices shared his point of view. Justice Kennedy, who provided the fifth vote
needed to overturn the Court of Appeals' decisions, wrote a separate opinion that would narrow
the USACE's jurisdiction but not as much as Justice Scalia desired. Without a clear majority
opinion, the legal effect of this decision is uncertain. However, it does provide valuable
information about the direction the USACE will consider in defining jurisdiction over certain
bodies of water, such as man -made ditches, desert washes, and ephemeral streams.
As noted above, although Justice Kennedy sided with Justice Scalia in overturning the earlier
court rulings, Justice Kennedy did so for a different reason. Justice Kennedy indicated that he
relied on the Supreme Court's 2001 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (SWANCC) decision on wetlands features, which states that wetlands are
subject to jurisdiction only if there is a "significant nexus" between the wetland and some other
navigable water such as a stream or lake. To prove such a "significant nexus ", Justice Kennedy
stated that the USACE must show that the wetlands in question, either alone or in combination
with other similarly situated lands, significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological
integrity of other navigable waters. According to Justice Kennedy, that evidence has not been
provided in either the Rapanos v. United States or the Carabell v. United States cases.
Therefore, the case was remanded back to the lower court for reconsideration.
On June 5, 2007, the USACE published a memorandum that provides guidance to both the
USEPA regions and the USACE districts that implement the Supreme Court's decision in the
Rapanos cases (which address the jurisdiction over "Waters of the U.S." under the CWA). The
memorandum includes a chart that summarizes its key points and is intended to be used as a
reference tool along with a complete discussion of issues and guidance furnished throughout
the memorandum.
In summary, the USACE and the USEPA will assert jurisdiction over the following waters:
(1) traditional navigable waters (TNWs); (2) wetlands adjacent to TNWs; (3) non - navigable
tributaries of TNWs that are relatively permanent where the tributaries typically flow year -round
or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically three months); and (4) wetlands that
directly abut such tributaries.
RAPrq.cts Newp.OU015UDW- 082311A.. 3 Jurisdictional Delineation Report
Ranch
The USACE and the USEPA will decide jurisdiction over the following waters based on a
fact - specific analysis to determine whether they have a significant nexus with a TNW:
(1) non - navigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent; (2) wetlands adjacent to
non - navigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent; and (3) wetlands adjacent to but that
do not directly abut a relatively permanent, non - navigable tributary.
The USACE and the USEPA generally will not assert jurisdiction over the following features:
(1) swales or erosional features (e.g., gullies or small washes characterized by low volume,
infrequent, or short duration flow) and (2) ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly
within and draining only upland and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water.
The USACE and the USEPA will apply the significant nexus standard as follows:
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the
tributary itself and the functions performed by all wetlands adjacent to the tributary to
determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of
downstream TNWs.
2. A significant nexus includes consideration of hydrologic and ecological factors.
Regional Water Quality Control Board
The RWQCB is the primary agency responsible for protecting water quality within California
through the regulation of discharges to surface waters under the CWA and the
California Porter - Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter - Cologne Act). The RWQCB's
jurisdiction extends to all "Waters of the State" and to all "Waters of the U.S. ", including
wetlands (isolated and non - isolated).
Section 401 of the CWA provides the RWQCB with the authority to regulate, through a Water
Quality Certification, any proposed, federally permitted activity that may affect water quality.
Among such activities are discharges of dredged or fill material permitted by the USACE
pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA. Section 401 requires the RWQCB to provide "certification
that there is reasonable assurance that an activity which may result in the discharge to 'Waters
of the U.S.' will not violate water quality standards ". Water Quality Certification must be based
on a finding that the proposed discharge will comply with water quality standards, which contain
numeric and narrative objectives that can be found in each of the nine RWQCBs' Basin Plans.
The Porter - Cologne Act provides the State with very broad authority to regulate "Waters of the
State ", which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters. The
Porter - Cologne Act has become an important tool in the post - SWANCC and Rapanos eras with
respect to the State's authority over isolated waters. Generally, any person proposing to
discharge waste into a water body that could affect its water quality must file a "Report of Waste
Discharge" (WDR) when there is no federal nexus, such as under Section 404(b)(1) of the
CWA. Although "waste" is partially defined as any waste substance associated with human
habitation, the RWQCB interprets this to include fill discharge into water bodies.
California Department of Fish and Game
Activities of State and local agencies, public utilities and private projects are regulated under
Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code. This section regulates any work that will
(1) substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream, or lake; (2) substantially
change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake; or
(3) deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground
pavement where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake.
RiProj.ct. Newp.OU015WDW- 08231IA.. 4 Jurisdictional Delineation Report
Ranch
Because the CDFG includes streamside habitats under its jurisdiction that, under the federal
definition, may not qualify as wetlands on a particular project site, its jurisdiction may be broader
than that of the USACE. Riparian forests in California often lie outside the plain of ordinary high
water regulated under Section 404 of the CWA, and often do not have all three parameters
(wetlands hydrology, hydrophytic vegetation, and hydric soils) sufficiently present to be
regulated as a wetland. However, riparian forests are frequently within CDFG regulatory
jurisdiction under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code.
The CDFG enters into a Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA) with a project proponent and
can impose conditions on the agreement. The notification process is the completion of the
applications, which will serve as the basis for the CDFG's issuance of a Section 1602 SAA.
Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code applies to all perennial, intermittent, and
ephemeral rivers, streams, and lakes in the state.
The CDFG jurisdictional limits are not as clearly defined by regulation as those of the USACE.
While they closely resemble the limits described by USACE regulations, they include riparian
habitat supported by a river, stream, or lake regardless of the presence or absence of hydric
and saturated soils conditions. In general, the CDFG takes jurisdiction from the top of a stream
bank or from the outer limits of the adjacent riparian vegetation (outer drip line), whichever is
greater. Notification is generally required for any project that will take place within, or in the
vicinity of, a river, stream, lake, or their tributaries. This includes rivers or streams that flow at
least periodically or permanently through a bed or channel with banks that support fish, other
aquatic plant and /or wildlife species, and watercourses that have a surface or subsurface flow
that support or have supported riparian vegetation.
California Coastal Commission
The California Coastal Commission (CCC) defines wetlands under Section 30121 of the
Coastal Act:
"Wetland" means lands within the coastal zone which may be covered periodically or
permanently with shallow water and includes salt marshes, freshwater marshes, open
and closed brackish water marshes, swamps, mudflats, and fens.
The boundaries of a wetland are determined by the extent of one or more key wetland
characteristics: hydrology, hydric soils, and hydrophytic vegetation. The size and extent of CCC
wetland boundaries may also be determined by aerial photographs, national wetland inventory
maps, and soil conservation maps. Also, the CCC generally turns to the CDFG for assistance in
determining the presence and extent of wetlands subject to regulation in the coastal zone.
In addition, Section 30233 of the Coastal Act states that:
(a) The diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal waters, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes
shall be permitted in accordance with other applicable provisions of this division,
where there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative, and where
feasible mitigation measures have been provided to minimize adverse
environmental effects, and shall be limited to the following:
(1) New or expanded port, energy, and coastal- dependent industrial facilities,
including commercial fishing facilities.
(2) Maintaining existing, or restoring previously dredged, depths in existing
navigational channels, turning basins, vessel berthing and mooring areas,
and boat launching ramps.
RAProjectn NewpoOU018UDW -08231 tdoc 5 Jurisdictional Delineation Report
Ranch
(3) In open coastal waters, other than wetlands, including streams, estuaries,
and lakes, new or expanded boating facilities and the placement of structural
pilings for public recreational piers that provide public access and
recreational opportunities.
(4) Incidental public service purposes, including, but not limited to, burying
cables and pipes or inspection of piers and maintenance of existing intake
and outfall lines.
(5) Mineral extraction, including sand for restoring beaches, except in
environmentally sensitive areas.
(6) Restoration purposes.
(7) Nature study, aquaculture, or similar resource - dependent activities.
(b) Dredging and spoils disposal shall be planned and carried out to avoid significant
disruption to marine and wildlife habitats and water circulation. Dredge spoils
suitable for beach replenishment should be transported for these purposes to
appropriate beaches or into suitable longshore current systems.
(c) In addition to the other provisions of this section, diking, filling, or dredging in
existing estuaries and wetlands shall maintain or enhance the functional capacity of
the wetland or estuary. Any alteration of coastal wetlands identified by the CDFG,
including, but not limited to, the 19 coastal wetlands identified in its report entitled,
"Acquisition Priorities for the Coastal Wetlands of California ", shall be limited to very
minor incidental public facilities, restorative measures, nature study, commercial
fishing facilities in Bodega Bay, and development in already developed parts of
south San Diego Bay, if otherwise in accordance with this division. For the purposes
of this section, "commercial fishing facilities in Bodega Bay" means that not less
than 80 percent of all boating facilities proposed to be developed or improved,
where the improvement would create additional berths in Bodega Bay, shall be
designed and used for commercial fishing activities.
(d) Erosion control and flood control facilities constructed on watercourses can impede
the movement of sediment and nutrients that would otherwise be carried by storm
runoff into coastal waters. To facilitate the continued delivery of these sediments to
the littoral zone, whenever feasible, the material removed from these facilities may
be placed at appropriate points on the shoreline in accordance with other applicable
provisions of this division, where feasible mitigation measures have been provided
to minimize adverse environmental effects. Aspects that shall be considered before
issuing a coastal development permit for these purposes are the method of
placement, time of year of placement, and sensitivity of the placement area.
RAProj.ct. Newp OUCHSWDW- 08231IA.. 6 Jurisdictional Delineation Report