Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8-7-2020 Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project_CAGN Surveys 2020_TE-88331A-2 August 7, 2020 178669 City of Diamond Bar Contact: Mr. Ryan Wright 21810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 SUBJECT: Results of Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Surveys for the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California Dear Mr. Wright: Michael Baker International (Michael Baker) is pleased to submit this report to the City of Diamond Bar (City) documenting the results of coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica; CAGN) and cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus; CACW) focused surveys conducted for the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project (project or project site) located in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Surveys occurred during the 2020 field season, when Michael Baker was contracted by the City to perform CAGN and CACW surveys in suitable habitat within 500 feet of the proposed project. Project Location The survey area include the project site plus suitable CAGN and CACW habitat within a 500-foot buffer, and is generally located south of State Route 60, east of State Route 57, north of Grand Avenue, and west of Chino Hills Parkway in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California (refer to Figure 1, Regional Vicinity, in Attachment A). The survey area is depicted in Sections 11 and 14 of Township 2 south, Range 9 west, on the United States Geological Survey’s (USGS) San Dimas, California 7.5-minute quadrangle (USGS 1981). Specifically, the survey area is located along the Canyon Loop Trail within Summitridge Park (refer to Figure 2, Survey Area, in Attachment A). Project Description The City of Diamond Bar proposes to implement a series of improvements to the existing Canyon Loop Trail. The intent of the project is primarily to realign the trail, improve drainage to minimize erosion of the trail, enhance the use of the trail where the gradients are steep, re-grade cross slopes, and consider amenities such as directional and interpretive signage, rest areas with benches, small shade shelters, climbing steps with cobblestone swale channelization, and water diverting improvements where necessary. Such trail improvements will reward hikers and visitors with 360-degree views of open space. Regulatory Framework Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 As defined within the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (FESA), an endangered species is any Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project 2 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results animal or plant listed by regulation as being in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its geographical range. A threatened species is any animal or plant that is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its geographical range. Without a special permit, Federal law prohibits the “take” of any individuals or habitat of Federally-listed species. Under Section 9 of the FESA, take is defined as “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” The term “harm” has been clarified to include “any act which actually kills or injures fish or wildlife, and emphasizes that such acts may include significant habitat modification or degradation that significantly impairs essential behavioral patterns of fish or wildlife.” Enforcement of FESA is administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Under the definition used by the FESA, “Critical Habitat” refers to specific areas within the geographical range of a species that were occupied at the time it was listed that contain the physical or biological features that are essential to the survival and eventual recovery of that species and that may require special management considerations or protection, regardless of whether the species is still extant in the area. Areas that were not known to be occupied at the time a species was listed can also be designated as Critical Habitat if they contain one or more of the physical or biological features that are essential to that species’ conservation and if the occupied areas are inadequate to ensure the species’ recovery. If a project may result in take or adverse modification to a species’ designated Critical Habitat and the project has a Federal nexus, the project proponent may be required to provide suitable mitigation. Projects with a Federal nexus may include projects that occur on Federal lands, require Federal permits (e.g., Clean Water Act Section 404 permit), or receive any Federal oversight or funding. If there is a Federal nexus, then the Federal agency that is responsible for providing funds or permits would be required to consult with the USFWS under the FESA. Species Background Coastal California Gnatcatcher CAGN is a Federally threatened species with restricted habitat requirements, being an obligate resident of sage scrub habitats, particularly—but not exclusively—those that are dominated by California sagebrush (Artemisia californica). This species generally occurs below 750 feet elevation in coastal regions and below 1,500 feet inland. It ranges from Ventura County south to San Diego County and northern Baja Califo rnia and is less common in sage scrub with a high percentage of tall shrubs. CAGN is considered a short-distance disperser through contiguous, undisturbed habitat (USFWS 2010). However, juveniles are capable of dispersing long distances (up to 14 miles) across fragmented and highly disturbed sage scrub habitat (USFWS 2010). CAGN prefers habitat with more low-growing vegetation (< 3 feet high). CAGN breeds between mid-February and the end of August, with peak activity from mid-March to mid-May. Population declines are attributed to loss of sage scrub habitat due to development, as well as brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) nest parasitism. Federally designated Critical Habitat for CAGN is not located within or directly adjacent to the survey area. The primary constituent elements essential to support the biological needs of foraging, reproducing, rearing of young, intra-specific communication, dispersal, genetic exchange, or sheltering for CAGN are: 1) Dynamic and successional sage scrub habitats and associated vegetation (Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, coastal sage-chaparral scrub, etc.) that provide space for individual and population growth, normal behavior, breeding, reproduction, nesting, dispersal and foraging; and Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project 3 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results 2) Non-sage scrub habitats such as chaparral, grassland, and riparian areas in proximity to sage scrub habitats that provide linkages to help with dispersal, foraging, and nesting (USFWS 2007). The survey area provides abundant suitable habitat for CAGN, although there are large sections of the survey area that are highly disturbed by non-native plants. Cactus Wren CACWs are a somewhat common avian species found within arid and semi-arid regions of southern California. The subspecies coastal cactus wren (C. b. sandiegensis; CCAWC) is found within a very limited range of southern California and is designated by CDFW as a Species of Special Concern (SSC). CCACW has more heavily spotted underparts more closely blending into the dark breast spot, less of a cinnamon- buff wash to the underparts, and extensive white in the interior tail feathers, as opposed to the continental desert subspecies and subspecies along the Los Angeles County coast, C.b. anthonyi, which has finer belly spotting more demarcated from the prominent breast spot, a heavier cinnamon-wash buff to the underparts, and white generally restricted to the outermost tail feather (rectrix 6) and occasionally onto rectrix 5 (the next feather in from the outside) (Rea and Weaver 1990). CCACW have a range which extends from extreme northwestern Baja California north at least through the coastal lowlands of San Diego County (Shuford and Gardali 2008). The actual northern limit of its range is uncertain because of the lack of specimens from northwestern San Diego County and most of Orange County. However, observations made in the field based on differences in song (slower frequency and lower pitch) and visual assessments suggest approximately the vicinity of State Route 74 (Ortega Highway) in Orange County may be the northern limit of CCACW, and this is apparently the range limit accepted by CDFW (Shuford and Gardali 2008). CACWS breed from early March through July and are mainly restricted to thickets of chollas (Cylindropuntia prolifera) or prickly-pear cacti (i.e., Opuntia littoralis, O. oricola) large enough to protect from predation. Suitable habitat conditions are normally found on south-facing slopes, at bases of hillsides, or in dry washes. Territories have been recorded as occurring at elevations below 1,500 feet above mean sea level (amsl) and averaging three (3) acres in size (Shuford and Gardali 2008). CACWs forage on the ground primarily for insects such as beetles, ants, wasps, grasshoppers, butterflies, and spiders. The survey area provides several distinct patches of the undisturbed coast prickly pear scrub habitat that is essential nesting habitat for this species. However, the survey area is well outside of the apparent geographic range for the coastal sandiegensis subspecies, which ends around State Route 74 based on CDFW mapping and distribution descriptions in Rea and Weaver (1990). The local subspecies found throughout Los Angeles County is C. b. anthonyi, although birds on the coastal slope often show some characteristics of the sandiegensis subspecies (such as more white in the tail than is otherwise expected for this subspecies). Environmental Setting The survey area for this effort encompasses suitable CAGN and CACW habitat within 500 feet of the existing Canyon Loop Trail. It is located in the southeastern corner of Los Angeles County less than 0.5 mile west of the boundary with San Bernardino County. The survey area represents a small subset of the entire 500-foot buffer around the Canyon Loop Trail and is approximately 30.24 acres in size. It is generally associated with preserved open space, although many areas within it, particularly the southeast portion of it, are disturbed with high proportions of non-native plant species as well. An unnamed ephemeral drainage runs roughly east to west through the center of the survey area. Areas immediately surrounding the survey area consist of residential developments to the east and west, and undeveloped land to the north and south. Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project 4 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Topography and Soils The topography of the survey area is generally steep slopes with associated public trails along hilltops and other stabilized surfaces. The survey area is located at an elevation of approximately 970 to 1,310 feet amsl. According to the Custom Soil Resource Report for Los Angeles County, California, Southeastern Part (USDA 2020), the survey area is underlain by the following soil units: Urban land-Sorrento-Arbolado complex, 2 to 9 percent slopes (1136), Gaviota-Chumash-Rock outcrop complex, 20 to 55 percent slopes (1145), and Counterfeit-Urban land complex, 10 to 35 percent slopes, terraced (1232). Vegetation Communities Several terrestrial vegetation communities were identified on-site during the field survey. Vegetation classification was based on A Manual of California Vegetation (Second Edition) (Sawyer et al. 2009) and cross-checked with Holland (1986). The vegetation communities and land uses present within the survey area are depicted on Figure 3, Vegetation Communities, in Attachment A, and described in further detail below. Figure 3 and the descriptions below only include those communities that are suitable habitat for CAGN and CACW and do not include all vegetation communities or land uses within 500 feet of the project. All of the following vegetation communities are associated with what would be considered coastal sage scrub (CSS) habitat. California Sagebrush – Black Sage Scrub (Holland Equivalent: Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub; Code: 32500) Approximately 2.13 acres of California sagebrush – black sage scrub vegetation is located within the survey area. The majority of this vegetation community is dominated by California sagebrush (Artemisia californica) and black sage (Salvia mellifera) with other shrubs such as white sage (Salvia apiana), deerweed (Acmispon glaber), and California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum) occurring as less frequent sub-dominants. Due to the high density of shrubs within the vegetation community, little to no herbaceous cover is present. Disturbed California Sagebrush – Black Sage Scrub (Holland Equivalent: Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub; Code: 32500) Approximately 17.76 acres of disturbed California sagebrush – black sage scrub vegetation is located throughout the survey area. This vegetation community is similar in composition and generally in close proximity to the California sagebrush – black sage scrub found within the survey area but also contains black mustard (Brassica nigra) and tocalote (Centaurea melitensis) as co-dominant species, in many areas completely dominating the ground cover between native shrubs. California Buckwheat Scrub (Holland Equivalent: Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub; Code: 32500) Approximately 0.45 acre of California buckwheat scrub vegetation is located within the western portion of the survey area. This vegetation community is entirely dominated by California buckwheat, and appears to be part of a previous restoration effort. Coast Prickly Pear Scrub (Holland Equivalent: Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub; Code: 32500) Approximately 9.90 acres of coast prickly pear scrub vegetation is located within the survey area. Coast prickly pear (Opuntia littoralis) is dominant within this vegetation community, with sticky monkeyflower (Diplacus aurantiacus) prominently interspersed throughout the area. California buckwheat and California sagebrush are also present, but in lower proportions compared to coast prickly pear and sticky monkeyflower. Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project 5 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Methods Literature Review Prior to conducting the focused surveys, Michael Baker performed a detailed literature review and record search of the project site, vicinity, and region for CAGN and CACW records. The literature search included a review of any existing biological and focused CAGN survey reports from the project vicinity, as well as records reported in the CNDDB (CDFW 2020), the USFWS online Critical Habitat Mapper (USFWS 2020), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology’s eBird database (eBird 2020), and a letter written to the City of Diamond Bar by Hamilton Biological (Hamilton Biological 2019). Focused Surveys Protocol surveys for CAGN and CACW were conducted concurrently along, and in areas of suitable habitat within 500 feet of, the existing Canyon Loop Trail in 2020. All surveys were conducted by Michael Baker biologists Ryan Winkleman (USFWS recovery permit TE-88331A-2), Ashley Spencer, and Tom Millington between May and July 2020 (refer to Table 1, Survey Dates, Surveyors, Time, and Weather Conditions). The surveys followed the CAGN guidelines described in the USFWS protocol Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) Presence/Absence Survey Guidelines, February 28, 1997 (USFWS 1997) and the CACW guidelines described in Mr. Winkleman’s CDFW scientific collecting permit (SC-182750017). A total of six (6) surveys were conducted between May 26 and July 1, 2020. Table 1: Survey Dates, Surveyors, Time, and Weather Conditions Date Surveyors Time (start/finish) Weather Conditions Temperature (°F) (start/finish) Wind Speed Range (miles per hour) 5/26/20 Ryan Winkleman 0751 / 1222 64 / 83 0-1 6/3/20 Ryan Winkleman, Ashley Spencer 0713 / 1146 65 / 87 0-8 6/10/20 Ryan Winkleman, Ashley Spencer 0720 / 1150 69 / 93 0-3 6/17/20 Ryan Winkleman, Tom Millington 0729 / 1149 62 / 68 0-1 6/24/20 Ryan Winkleman, Ashley Spencer 0729 / 1142 62 / 76 0-3 7/1/20 Ryan Winkleman, Ashley Spencer 0730 / 1130 62 / 67 0-1 During each survey, the biologist(s) walked areas of suitable habitat for CAGN and/or CACW within the survey area and would stop at strategic locations and use taped playback to attempt to lure the target species into view. All recordings were obtained from xeno-canto.org (2020) and were played with a Pixel 3XL smartphone amplified with a MIFA F10 portable Bluetooth speaker. In each instance the biologist(s) would position themselves in an area of suitable habitat and wait up to one (1) minute to see if the target species could be incidentally detected. If no birds were detected, Mr. Winkleman would play a short recording or short portion of a recording, followed by approximately one (1) minute of silence before playing another Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project 6 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results recording or continuing the same recording. Recordings were cycled rather than repeated to more realistically mimic birds making variable vocalizations. In areas where both species could feasibly be present, the CAGN and CACW recordings were played alternately. If birds responded aurally or flew into view, all playback was stopped while the biologist(s) observed the bird(s) from a distance and took notes on age, sex, and behavior. Territory boundaries were mapped in the Avenza smartphone application while in the field and updated as necessary to record the approximate boundaries over the six surveys. If nesting behavior was observed, the biologists watched from a safe distance and, if found, plotted the nest location as accurately as possible using Global Positioning System (GPS) technology and then watched for updates on subsequent surveys from a safe distance. Photographs were periodically taken during the surveys (refer to Figure 2, Survey Area, in Attachment A, as well as to Attachment B). Results A total of forty-seven (47) wildlife species were observed within the CAGN survey area during the CAGN focused surveys including four (4) reptiles, seventy-six (76) birds, and five (5) mammals. A complete list of wildlife species observed during the focused survey is included in Attachment C. Coastal California Gnatcatcher Based on information in the CNDDB (CDFW 2020), eBird (eBird 2020), and from a local expert (Benson personal communication 2020), CAGN is a rare and local resident in the coastal slope of Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. Populations are somewhat widespread but persistent in the project vicinity in Los Angeles County, spanning across the Chino Hills, San Jose Hills, and Puente Hills. In San Bernardino County, which is located immediately to the east of the project site, CAGN persists in only four or five populations in the entire county, including in Chino Hills State Park. Farther to the south, CAGN is reasonably common in the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains in Orange County. The project site is not located within designated Critical Habitat (USFWS 2007). A minimum of five (5) CAGN territories were mapped during the focused surveys (refer to Figure 4, Coastal California Gnatcatcher Results, in Attachment A). Four (4) nests were found in two (2) of these territories, one (1) of which successfully led to chicks fledging. Of the minimum five territories, four (4) territories (Territories 1, 3, 4, and 5) had chicks fledge in them. The boundaries of Territories 3 and 5 expanded over time due to post-breeding dispersal, with Territory #5 potentially undergoing two separate instances of dispersal to two areas where no CAGN had been previously detected. A more detailed summary of CAGN activity in each territory during each survey is provided in Table 2 below. Cactus Wren Similar to CAGN, CACW is a rare and local resident on the coastal slope of Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. In Los Angeles County the species is better off but declining, with populations known from the Chino Hills, San Jose Hills, Puente Hills, and foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains. In adjacent San Bernardino County, the only known populations are in the upper Santa Ana River wash near Redlands/Mentone/Highland and near the confluence of Cajon and Lytle Creeks, both far from the survey area (Benson personal communication 2020). This species is much more common in Orange County in the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains and less so in the San Joaquin Hills. Birds in Los Angeles County are considered to be of the non-sensitive subspecies C.b. anthonyi, although it should be noted that many of the birds on the coast, including the ones in the survey area, show characteristics, such as the extent of white barring in the tail feathers, typically associated with the sensitive CCACW. Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project 7 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Table 2: CAGN Survey Results Date Territories Territory #1 Territory #2 Territory #3 Territory #4 Territory #5 5/26/20 Adult male present and foraging solitarily. Adult male present and foraging, territorial against juvenile CACW. Adult female briefly observed. CAGN incidentally heard, but not seen. Adult male present and foraging. Family unit with two adults and at least two juveniles present. 6/3/20 Family unit with two adults and two juveniles present. Adult male present and foraging, territorial against juvenile CACW. No activity observed. Family unit with at least one juvenile present. Adult male present, no other birds seen. 6/10/20 Adult male present with two female- type birds, could not see well enough to determine age. Adult pair present, Nest #1 found. Male observed perched over nest in a shading action. Family unit present with at least two juveniles in a new post- breeding dispersal area where not previously found. Adult pair present and foraging, no other birds seen. Adult pair present, Nest #1 found. Both male and female observed incubating and shading the eggs. 6/17/20 Adult male present with a single female- type bird, not aged. Nest #1 failed. Adult pair periodically seen throughout territory but no indications of nesting. Family unit in the post-breeding dispersal area again. Adult male present and foraging. Possible female seen but not confirmed. Adult pair observed feeding chicks in Nest #1. Chicks too small to count from afar. 6/24/20 Adult male present with a single female- type bird, not aged. Adult pair present and nearly finished building Nest #2. Two female-type birds present in the post-breeding dispersal area, including the adult female carrying off food. Adult male present and foraging. Adult pair present feeding chicks in Nest #1. Four chicks visible in nest. Two juvenile birds found to the north, up the hillside above the territory in mustard, assumed to be the juveniles from 5/26 in a post- breeding dispersal area, although not previously found here despite weekly playback. 7/1/20 Four birds flew in together to playback and then went out of sight. Later observed the adult pair bringing food to juveniles. Nest #2 failed. Adult male observed building a new nest, Nest #3. One bird heard- only, one female-type bird briefly seen in the post-breeding dispersal area. Adult male present and foraging. Nest #1 empty and nesting territory abandoned. Four birds, including at least one adult (male), found in the 6/24 post-breeding dispersal area. Up to three separate birds found approximately 250 meters to the east. Possibly more Territory #5 dispersal. Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project 8 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results A total of five (5) CACW territories were mapped during the focused surveys (refer to Figure 5, Cactus Wren Results, in Attachment A). No attempts were made to find CACW nests, although one (1) nest was incidentally found outside of any apparently active territories. Although no nests were found in the territories, all five territories fledged young. Of these, Territory #5 is the only one that had an obvious instance of post-breeding dispersal into a new area during the surveys, with all other families utilizing the same territories that they had evidently nested in. A more detailed summary of CACW activity in each territory during each survey is provided in Table 3 below. Table 3: CACW Survey Results Date Territories Territory #1 Territory #2 Territory #3 Territory #4 Territory #5 5/26/20 Adult pair present. Independent juvenile bird to the west either from Territory #1 or Territory #3. Adult male singing. Adult pair present. Adult pair with two juveniles present. One bird heard only. Cooper’s hawk suppressed activity. 6/3/20 Adult pair present. Independent juvenile bird to the west either from Territory #1 or Territory #3. Adult male singing. Adult bird present. At least three birds present. Food exchange witnessed between adult and one of the juveniles. One bird heard only. Cooper’s hawk suppressed activity. 6/10/20 Two adults present. Three adults and one juvenile present. Adult male singing. Two adults and two juveniles present. Two adults and two juveniles present together. 6/17/20 Two adults and three juveniles present. Two adults and two juveniles present. Adult male singing. At least four birds present. Family unit moved slightly north to a post- breeding dispersal area. 6/24/20 One bird present, did not take notes on age. Three birds present, did not take notes on age. Two adults present. Five birds present together. All four birds seen together in the post- breeding dispersal area. 7/1/20 Two adults seen in territory. All four birds seen in territory. One adult with two juveniles observed. First evidence of nesting. Five birds present in a group together. No birds found in the post-breeding dispersal area. Two adults and one juvenile found in the original territory. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the results of the focused surveys, at least five (5) CAGN and five (5) CACW territories were found to be present within the 500-foot survey area. Four (4) CAGN pairs and all five (5) CACW pairs Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project 9 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results successfully fledged young in 2020 as evidenced by firsthand observations by Michael Baker biologists during the surveys. Many of the territories were directly adjacent to, crossed over, or were at least in close proximity to proposed trail improvement areas. Of the nests that were found, the closest nest (CAGN Territory #2 Nest #1) was approximately 70 feet from the Canyon Loop Trail. Although a variety of trail improvements are proposed for this project, most of the improvements are widening the existing trail in the southern half of the survey area. This would result in loss of suitable habitat for these species, particularly for CAGN. Based on project plans, the length of proposed trail widening is currently estimated at approximately 1,942 feet, or approximately 0.37 mile. The trail is proposed to be widened to five feet total width, which means on average based on field observations during the surveys it would be widened an additional one to two feet from its current width at these locations. The on-site CACW is not believed to be the sensitive CCACW protected by the CDFW as a SSC; regardless, impacts to this species can be addressed through a nesting bird clearance survey (see below), with additional benefits imparted via CAGN protections. Although this area is not designated as Critical Habitat, loss of vegetation directly supporting known populations of CAGN would constitute “take” of CAGN under Section 9 of the FESA. Because the project will not have a Federal nexus to allow for FESA Section 7 consultations, an incidental take permit (ITP) would instead be granted by the USFWS under Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the FESA. This typically entails the project proponent agreeing to a habitat conservation plan (HCP), an extensive process that can take years to complete. However, the USFWS also has a category of HCPs for projects that will otherwise have minor impacts on listed species, called a “low-effect HCP.” These HCPs pertain to projects involving (1) minor or negligible effects on federally listed, proposed, or candidate species and their habitats covered under the HCP; and (2) minor or negligible effects on other environmental values or resources. Under low-effect HCPs, the permitting process is more streamlined and take can generally be authorized under a series of strict avoidance and minimization measures. Therefore, it is recommended that the City consult with USFWS and pursue a low-effect HCP to permit removal of habitat suitable for and/or used by CAGN on the project site. To avoid indirect impacts and take of CAGN or CACW, it is recommended that all project-related construction occur outside of the general breeding season (February 15 – September 15). Timing the construction to be outside of this window of time would avoid impacts to CAGN or CACW nests. If it is not possible to construct the project outside of this time period, it is recommended that a nesting bird survey be conducted within seven (7) days prior to the start of construction in a 500-foot buffer from the project. The survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist with demonstrable experience identifying CAGN and CACW nesting behavior and finding their nests, and who has been approved by the USFWS to conduct a CAGN nesting survey. If an active CAGN or CACW nest is found during the survey, no project-related construction will be allowed within 500 feet of an active CAGN nest or 300 feet of an active CACW nest, or within an alternative safe distance as determined by the qualified biologist based on topography, visual shielding, nest progress, and the type of construction and associated disturbance, until the active nest has been determined by the qualified biologist to have failed or to have successfully gone to completion (i.e. the nestlings have fledged and are no longer reliant on the nest). Results of the nesting bird survey, should one be required, shall be compiled in a memorandum and submitted to the City and to the USFWS for the project record. Please do not hesitate to contact me at (949) 533-0918 or ryan.winkleman@mbakerintl.com should you Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project 10 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results have any questions or require further information regarding the information presented in this report. Sincerely, Ryan Winkleman Senior Biologist Natural Resources and Regulatory Permitting Attachments: A. Figures B. Site Photographs C. Wildlife Species Observed List D. References Attachment A Figures SA N B E R N A R D I N O C O U N T Y RI V E R S I D E C O U N T Y LOS ANGELES COUNTY ORANGE COUNTY Regional Vicinity Figure 1 °0 52.5 Miles7/30/2020 JN H:\pdata\178669\GIS\MXD\Focused Bird Surveys\Fig 01 Regional Vicinity.mxd RPCANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER AND CACTUS WREN FOCUSED SURVEY RESULTS Source: ArcGIS Online, 2018 ^_Project Site ^ Project Location !"a$ %&g(%&q( %&l( ?» ?l ?£?q !"^$ !> !> """"""""""""""""""Dare CtPeakCt WindsongCtSteep Ca n y o n R d BarkerDr Clear Creek CanyonDrBreckenridgeCtWynnewoodDrM o n u m e n t C a n y o n D r GrubstakeDrMeanderingCreekDr SummitridgeDrP1 P2 P3 P4 P5P6 P7P8 P9P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 P16 P17 P18 34.007148-117.794138 34.000846-117.805472 Survey Area7/30/2020 JN H:\pdata\178669\GIS\MXD\Focused Bird Surveys\Fig 02 Survey Area.mxd RPSource: Nearmap, 2020 Figure 2 0 270135 Feet CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER AND CACTUS WREN FOCUSED SURVEY RESULTS ° Legend Project Site Survey Area (Suitable Habitat within 500 Feet)"Photograph Point and Direction !>Reference Point !> !>Dare CtPeakCt WindsongCtSteep Ca n y o n R d BarkerDr Clear Creek CanyonDrBreckenridgeCtWynnewoodDrM o n u m e n t C a n y o n D r GrubstakeDrMeanderingCreekDr SummitridgeDr34.007148-117.794138 34.000846-117.805472 Vegetation Communities7/30/2020 JN H:\pdata\178669\GIS\MXD\Focused Bird Surveys\Fig 03 Vegetation Communities.mxd RPSource: Nearmap, 2020 Figure 3 0 270135 Feet CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER AND CACTUS WREN FOCUSED SURVEY RESULTS ° Legend Project Site Survey Area (Suitable Habitat within 500 Feet) California Buckwheat Scrub (0.45 acre) California Sagebrush - Black Sage Scrub (2.13 acres) Coast Prickly Pear Scrub (9.90 acres) Disturbed California Sagebrush - Black Sage Scrub (17.76 acres) Unnamed Drainage !>Reference Point !> !> ( ( ( !! ! ! ! ! ! ! (( ( ( ( ( ( ( k kk j jj !( !( !( !(Dare CtPeakCt WindsongCtSteep Ca n y o n R d BarkerDr Clear Creek CanyonDrBreckenridgeCtWynnewoodDrM o n u m e n t C a n y o n D r GrubstakeDrMeanderingCreekDr SummitridgeDrNest #1 Nest #2 Nest #3 Nest #1 34.007148-117.794138 34.000846-117.805472 Coastal California Gnatcatcher Results8/4/2020 JN H:\pdata\178669\GIS\MXD\Focused Bird Surveyst\Fig 04 Coastal California Gnatcatcher Results.mxd RPSource: Nearmap, 2020 Figure 4 0 270135 Feet CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER AND CACTUS WREN FOCUSED SURVEY RESULTS ° Legend Project Site Survey Area (Suitable Habitat within 500 Feet) !>Reference Point CAGN Territories Territory #1 Territory #2 Territory #3 Territory #3 (Post-breeding Dispersal) Territory #4 Territory #5 Territory #5 (Post-breeding Dispersal) CAGN Nests !(Successful Nest !(Failed Nest Proposed Trail Improvements Trail to be Expanded to 5' Wide Existing Trail to Remain Gabion Retaining Wall Stairs kj Wayfinding Sign Lodge Pole Fence (Shade Structure with Benches & Trash Receptacle Proposed Bench Drainage Crossing !(!( !> !> ( ( ( !! ! ! ! ! ! ! (( ( ( ( ( ( ( k kk j jj !( !( !(Dare CtPeakCt WindsongCtSteep Ca n y o n R d BarkerDr Clear Creek CanyonDrBreckenridgeCtWynnewoodDrM o n u m e n t C a n y o n D r GrubstakeDrMeanderingCreekDr SummitridgeDr5/26/20 6/3/20 34.007148-117.794138 34.000846-117.805472 Cactus Wren Results8/4/2020 JN H:\pdata\178669\GIS\MXD\Focused Bird Surveyst\Fig 05 Cactus Wren Results.mxd RPSource: Nearmap, 2020 Figure 5 0 270135 Feet CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER AND CACTUS WREN FOCUSED SURVEY RESULTS ° Legend Project Site Survey Area (Suitable Habitat within 500 Feet) !>Reference Point CACW Territories Territory #1 Territory #2 Territory #3 Territory #4 Territory #5 Territory #5 (Post-breeding Dispersal) CACW Nests !(Old Nest CACW Observations !(Solitary Juvenile Proposed Trail Improvements Trail to be Expanded to 5' Wide Existing Trail to Remain Gabion Retaining Wall Stairs kj Wayfinding Sign Lodge Pole Fence (Shade Structure with Benches & Trash Receptacle Proposed Bench Drainage Crossing !(!( Attachment B Site Photographs Attachment B – Site Photographs Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project B-1 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Photograph 1: Standing in coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN) Territory 1 facing east-northeast. Photograph 2: Standing in the CAGN Territory 2 facing south-southeast. Attachment B – Site Photographs Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project B-2 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Photograph 3: Standing in CAGN Territory 2 facing southwest. This is the most highly-disturbed CAGN territory within the survey area. Photograph 4: Standing in CAGN Territory 2 facing northeast. Attachment B – Site Photographs Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project B-3 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Photograph 5: Standing in CAGN Territory 3 facing southeast. Photograph 6: Standing in CAGN Territory 3 facing west. Attachment B – Site Photographs Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project B-4 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Photograph 7: Standing in CAGN Territory 4 facing southeast. Photograph 8: Standing in CAGN Territory 4 facing southwest. Attachment B – Site Photographs Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project B-5 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Photograph 9: Standing in CAGN Territory 5 facing northeast. Photograph 10: Standing in CAGN Territory 5 facing west. Attachment B – Site Photographs Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project B-6 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Photograph 11: Facing west toward cactus wren (CACW) Territory 1. Photograph 12: Facing north toward CACW Territory 2. Attachment B – Site Photographs Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project B-7 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Photograph 13: Standing in CACW Territory 3 facing south. Photograph 14: Standing in CACW Territory 4 facing west. Attachment B – Site Photographs Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project B-8 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Photograph 15: Facing northeast toward CACW Territory 5. Photograph 16: An adult male CAGN acts aggressively toward a lone juvenile CACW in CAGN Territory #2. Attachment B – Site Photographs Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project B-9 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Photograph 17: A CACW family gathers together in CACW Territory 5. Photograph 18: An adult male CAGN brings food for the waiting nestlings in Territory 5 Nest #1. Attachment C Wildlife Species Observed List Attachment C –Wildlife Species Observed List Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project C-1 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Table C-1: Wildlife Species Observed List Scientific Name* Common Name Special-Status Rank** Reptiles Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri coastal whiptail SSC Coluber flagellum piceus red racer Sceloporus occidentalis longipes Great Basin fence lizard Uta stansburiana elegans western side-blotched lizard Birds Accipiter cooperii Cooper’s hawk WL Aeronautes saxatalis white-throated swift Aimophila ruficeps canescens southern California rufous-crowned sparrow WL Aphelocoma californica California scrub jay Baeolophus inornatus oak titmouse Buteo jamaicensis red-tailed hawk Callipepla californica California quail Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus cactus wren Cathartes aura turkey vulture Chamaea fasciata wrentit Contopus sordidulus western wood-pewee Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow Corvus corax common raven Dryobates nuttallii Nuttall’s woodpecker Empidonax difficilis pacific-slope flycatcher Geococcyx californianus greater roadrunner Haemorhous mexicanus house finch Icterus cucullatus hooded oriole Leiothlypis celata orange-crowned warbler Melanerpes formicivorus acorn woodpecker Melozone crissalis California towhee Mimus polyglottos northern mockingbird Molothrus ater brown-headed cowbird Myiarchus cinerascens ash-throated flycatcher Patagioenas fasciata band-tailed pigeon Petrochelidon pyrrhonota cliff swallow Phainopepla nitens phainopepla Pipilo maculatus spotted towhee Polioptila caerulea blue-gray gnatcatcher Polioptila californica californica coastal California gnatcatcher FT/SSC Psaltriparus minimus bushtit Sayornis nigricans black phoebe Sayornis saya Say’s phoebe Selasphorus sasin Allen’s hummingbird Attachment C –Wildlife Species Observed List Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project C-2 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Table C-1: Wildlife Species Observed List Scientific Name* Common Name Special-Status Rank** Sitta carolinensis white-breasted nuthatch Spinus lawrencei Lawrence’s goldfinch Spinus psaltria lesser goldfinch Stelgidopteryx serripennis northern rough-winged swallow Thryomanes bewickii Bewick’s wren Toxostoma redivivum California thrasher Troglodytes aedon house wren Turdus migratorius American robin Tyrannus verticalis western kingbird Tyrannus vociferans Cassin’s kingbird Vireo huttoni Hutton’s vireo Zenaida macroura mourning dove Mammals Neotoma sp. woodrat Odocoileus hemionus mule deer Otospermophilus beecheyi California ground squirrel Sciurus niger* eastern fox squirrel Sylvilagus audubonii desert cottontail * Non-native species ** Special-Status Rank FT Federally Threatened SSC Species of Special Concern – any species, subspecies, or distinct population of fish, amphibian, reptile, bird, or mammal native to California that currently satisfies one or more of the following criteria: - is extirpated from California or, in the case of birds, in its primary seasonal or breeding role; - is listed as Federally-, but not State-, threatened or endangered; meets the State definition of threatened or endangered but has not formally been listed. - is experiencing, or formerly experienced, serious (noncyclical) population declines or range retractions (not reversed) that, if continued or resumed, could qualify it for State threatened or endangered status; or - has naturally small populations exhibiting high susceptibility to risk from any factor(s), that if realized, could lead to declines that would qualify it for State threatened or endangered status. WL Watch List - taxa that were previously designated as “Species of Special Concern” but no longer merit that status, or which do not yet meet SSC criteria, but for which there is concern and a need for additional information to clarify status. Attachment D References Attachment D – References Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project D-1 Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Survey Results Benson, T.A. 2020. Personal communication regarding the regional status of coastal California gnatcatcher and cactus wren. California State University at San Bernardino, Instructional Support Technician. July 21, 2020. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2020. RareFind 5, California Natural Diversity Data Base, California. Data base report on threatened, endangered, rare or otherwise sensitive species and communities for Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. eBird. 2020. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance [web application]. eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Accessed online at: http://www.ebird.org. Hamilton Biological. 2019. CEQA Review, Canyon Loop Trail Project, City of Diamond Bar. Submitted to the City of Diamond Bar. October 14, 2019. Holland, R. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Rea, A.M. and K.L. Weaver. 1990. The Taxonomy, Distribution, and Status of Coastal Cactus Wrens. Western Birds 21(3): 81-126. Sawyer, J.O., Keeler-Wolf, T., and J. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation (Second Edition). California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California, USA. Shuford, W. D., and Gardali, T., editors. 2008. San Diego Cactus Wren. In California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA). 2020. Custom Soil Resource Report for Los Angeles County, California, Southeastern Part. Accessed online at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1997. Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) Presence/Absence Survey Guidelines. February 28, 1997. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica). Federal Register 72(243): 72010-72213. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010. Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) 5- Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Accessed online at: https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/SpeciesStatusList/5YR/20100929_5YR_CAGN.pdf. U.S. Geological Survey. 1981. San Dimas, California 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle Map. xeno-canto. 2020. xeno-canto: sharing bird sounds from around the world. Accessed online at: http://www.xeno-canto.org.