Appendix D.1 - Biological AssessmentAppendix D.1
Biological Assessment
MBI, 2022
Travertine SPA
Draft EIR
SCH# 201811023
Technical Appendices
October 2023
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA
Biological Resources Assessment
Prepared For:
TRG LAND, INC.
898 Production Place
Newport Beach, California 92663
Contact: Mark Rogers
949.340.2562
Prepared By:
MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500
Santa Ana, California 92707
Contact: Richard Beck, PWS, CERP, CPESC
949.855.3687
March 2022
JN 182517
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA
Biological Resources Assessment
The undersigned certify that the statements furnished in this report and exhibits present data and information
required for this biological evaluation, and the facts, statements, and information presented is a complete
and accurate account of the findings and conclusions to the best of our knowledge and beliefs.
Tom Millington
Senior Biologist
cutt-ePto,
Arthur Popp
Senior Biologist
Ag,,,
Richard Beck, PWS, CPESC, CERP
Vice President
March 2022
JN 182517
Table of Contents
Section 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Project Location 1
1.2 Project Description 1
Section 2 Methodology 7
2.1 Literature Review 7
2.2 Field Survey/Habitat Assessment 8
2.3 Vegetation Communities 9
2.4 Plants 9
2.5 Wildlife 9
2.6 Other Studies 10
2.6.1 Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 10
Section 3 Results 11
3.1 Topography and Soils 11
3.2 Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types 11
3.2.1 Lan -ea tridentata shrubland 22
3.2.2 Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland 22
3.2.3 Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland 24
3.2.4 Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland 24
3.2.5 Ambrosia Salsola — Bebbia juncea Shrubland 24
3.2.6 Former Agriculture 24
3.2.7 Active Agriculture 25
3.2.8 Ornamental 25
3.2.9 Disturbed/Developed 25
3.2.10 Developed 25
3.3 Wildlife 25
3.3.1 Fish 25
3.3.2 Amphibians 26
3.3.3 Reptiles 26
3.3.4 Birds 26
3.3.5 Mammals 28
3.4 Migratory Corridors and Linkages 28
3.5 State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 28
3.5.1 United States Army Corps of Engineers 29
3.5.2 Regional Water Quality Control Board 29
Travertine Project
Biological Resources Assessment
Table of Contents
3.5.3 California Department of Fish and Wildlife 29
3.6 Special -Status Biological Resources 30
3.6.1 Special -Status Plant Species 31
3.6.2 Special -Status Wildlife Species 31
3.6.3 Special -Status Vegetation Communities 32
3.7 Critical Habitat 32
3.8 Coachella Valley MSHCP/NCCP 34
Section 4 Project Impact Analysis 36
4.1 Impacts to Special -Status Species 36
4.1.1 Special -Status Plant Species 37
4.1.2 Special -Status Wildlife Species 37
4.2 Impacts to Sensitive Vegetation Communities 38
4.3 Impacts to Wetlands 39
4.4 Impacts to Wildlife Movement and Nursery Sites 40
4.5 Impacts to Local Policies and Ordinances 40
4.6 Impacts to Habitat Conservation Plans 40
4.7 Indirect Impacts 41
4.7.1 Drainage 41
4.7.2 Toxics 41
4.7.3 Lighting 41
4.7.4 Noise 42
4.7.5 Invasives 42
4.7.6 Barriers 42
4.8 Cumulative Impacts 42
4.9 Mitigation Measures 42
4.9.1 Special -Status Wildlife Species 43
4.9.2 Jurisdictional Waters and Sensitive Natural Communities 45
4.9.3 Indirect Impacts 46
Section 5 References 48
Travertine Project
Biological Resources Assessment
Table of Contents
FIGURES
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Figure 4:
Figure 5:
Figure 6:
Figure 7:
Figure 8:
Figure 9:
Figure 10:
TABLES
Table 1:
Table 2:
Regional Vicinity 2
Site Vicinity 3
Project Site 4
Conceptual Design Plan 6
USDA Soils 12
Vegetation Communities and Other Land Cover Types 13
California Sensitive Natural Communities 23
Special -Status Species Observations 27
Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Critical Habitat 33
Coachella Valley MSHCP/NCCP 35
Survey Dates, Timing, Surveyors, and Weather Conditions 8
Vegetation Communities/Land Cover Types and Proposed Impacts 22
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Site Photographs
Plant and Wildlife Species Observed List
Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
USFWS Biological Opinion
CVCC Final Joint Project Review
Overall Wall Plan
Travertine Project iii
Biological Resources Assessment
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
° F degrees Fahrenheit
amsl above mean sea level
BLM Bureau of Land Management
BO Biological Opinion
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDNPA California Desert Native Plants Act
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFGC California Fish and Game Code
CIRP California Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database RareFind 5
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CRPR California Rare Plant Rank
CVAG Coachella Valley Association of Governments
CVCC Coachella Valley Conservation Commission
CVMSHCP Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community
Conservation Plan
CVWD Coachella Valley Water District
CWA federal Clean Water Act
DDWW Desert Dry Wash Woodland
FESA federal Endangered Species Act
FE federally Endangered
FP Fully Protected
FT federally Threatened
GIS Geographic Information System
IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation Project Planning Tool
JPR Joint Project Review
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Michael Baker Michael Baker International
mph miles per hour
OCH Other Conserved Habitat
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
PA Planning Area
project Travertine Project
PWS Professional Wetland Scientist
Travertine Project iv
Biological Resources Assessment
Acronyms and Abbreviations
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SAA Streambed Alteration Agreement
SE State Endangered
SRSJM Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains
SSC Species of Special Concern
ST State Threatened
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
WDR Waste Discharge Requirements
WEAP Worker Environmental Awareness Program
WL Watch List
WoS waters of the State
WoUS waters of the U.S.
Travertine Project v
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 1 Introduction
This report contains the findings of Michael Baker International's (Michael Baker) biological resources
assessment for the proposed Travertine Project (project or project site). Michael Baker biologists conducted
a field survey/habitat assessment on February 17 and 24, 2022, and again on March 03, 2022. The field
surveys were conducted to characterize existing site conditions and assess the potential for special -status'
biological resources to occur within the project site that could pose a constraint to implementation of the
proposed project. Special attention was given to the suitability of habitats within the project site and their
potential to support special -status biological resources that were identified during reviews of the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database RareFind 5 (CNDDB;
CDFW 2022a), the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of
California (CIRP; CNPS 2022), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) online Information for
Planning and Consultation Project Planning Tool (IPaC; USFWS 2022a), and other databases as potentially
occurring in the vicinity of the project site.
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is generally located north of the Martinez Mountains and south of Avenue 58 in the City of
La Quinta, County of Riverside, California (refer to Figure 1, Regional Vicinity). The project site is depicted
in the northeast quarter of the United States Geological Survey's (USGS) Martinez Mountain, California
7.5 -minute quadrangle in Section 32, 33, and 34 of Township 6 South, Range 7 East and in Section 4, 5,
and 5 of Township 7 South, Range 7 East (refer to Figure 2, Project Vicinity). The project site is located
adjacent to the Martinez Rockslide and the Santa Rosa Mountains and is comprised of undeveloped land
and a historic vineyard including unimproved dirt roads (refer to Figure 3, Project Site).
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment covers an area of approximately 969 acres. The proposed project
will be comprised of a variety of land uses. Residential land uses will range from low density (1.5 to 4.5
dwelling units per acre) to medium density (4.5 to 8.5 dwelling units per acre) and total 1,200 residential
units. A resort/spa facility located in Planning Area (PA) 1 will serve residents, tourists and recreational
visitors and feature a 45,000 -square -foot boutique hotel with a 175 -seat restaurant, 97,500 square feet of
resort lodging to allow 100 villas. An 8,700 square foot spa and wellness center will offer activities to
include yoga, tennis, walking and hiking trails. Additional associated features associated with the project
include a well field and substation, described herein.
As used in this report, "special -status" refers to species that are either federally -/State -listed, proposed, or candidates; species
that have been designated a California Rare Plant Rank by the California Native Plant Society; species designated as Fully
Protected, Species of Special Concern, or Watch List by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife; State/locally rare
vegetation communities; or species covered under the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural
Communities Conservation Plan.
Travertine Project 1
Biological Resources Assessment
7\GIS\APRX\
z
SEVEN PALMS
VALLEY
D
A e prrb
�F y Rn
1alm Sprinyc,
rings -jTntl Airport
rr r, Ro Thousand P,ln,
Cathedral City
Bermuda
Dunes
Airport
Rancho
Mirage
P▪ alm Desert
111 o
La Quints
4Y
SANTA ROSA
RESER 'VAPON'
5 A N r 4
SANTA
ROSA
MOUNTAIN
P xtGg
•• y 4. „7 r
/ ti FLAT
SANTA
• ROSA
Coachella
±c queline-.0 ochran
R9nl Airport
9
ME C
HILL
r.lecca
TORRES-IAARTINEz '
;7
Lr
Gra fruit Bivu
1656 m
_ -o U_$
A i -1V
sup
-1---A'i
c
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
oma
2018 m
Salton
yl I
I
IMPERIAL
0
2
'r 9
SANTA ROSA
MOUNTAINS
STATE
T SPRINGS
UNTAIN
LOS
COYOTES
R O
Borrego
4 0
1
I
1 Rs no
I
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL
O 0
2.5
5
Miles
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Source: ArcGIS Online, 2018
Regional Vicinity
Figure 1
Legend
I I
Project Site (969.02 acres)
�++■ Federal Boundary
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL
O 0
0.38
0.75
Miles
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Source: USGS 7.5 -Minute topographic quadrangle maps: Martinez Mountain, California (2018)
Site Vicinity
Figure 2
SEE INSET
MAP
r
;AC191111r'i
w
P11
4. i_
♦ M •y1212
•
P�13
\ i
♦` .4# f
,p
Not a Part
A
•
0i
P14
<•
Thomas Levy Groundwater -..
Replenishment Facility
•
I
1
1
1
I
P15
•
:.;.•std►• -- -1111„w..,
i•.sae.jt� geF Jv..
R3
•
\
'
•
•
•
•
-71
11�
II
1,
11
/1
�•P�� �• •
%/
.11
33.584164
-116.249242
141
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
•
Photograph Point and Direction
Reference Point
Permanent Impact Area (553.14 acres)
Temporary Impact Area (123.59 acres)
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL O
0
400
800
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Project Site
Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP, 2018)
Figure 3
Section 1 — Introduction
A 4 -hole golf practice facility with clubhouse is located in PA -11 adjacent to a banquet and restaurant
facility that will be shared with the wedding garden facilities. The private golf training academy is located
in the southeastern corner of the project area. A public driving range, putting course with restaurant and
bar, pro -shop and tracking bays will serve the daily needs of the community and its visitors in PA -19 (refer
to Figure 4, Conceptual Design Plan). The project components shall include:
• 1,200 Dwelling Units of varying types
o 758 Low Density Units and 442 Medium Density Units
o Estate Homes, Single Family Luxury Homes, Single Family Mid Homes, Single Family
Entry Homes, Patio Homes, Single Family Attached Units
• Golf training facility with public Driving Range, 4 -hole practice facility, and private golf training
academy
• Putting course with restaurant and bar
• Wedding garden and banquet facilities
• 100 -villa resort
• Wellness Spa
• Tourist serving recreational facilities and amenities including restaurants, small shops, spa
facilities, lounge and activity rooms, outdoor activities, tennis, yoga, etc.
• Bike lanes throughout community, including Class II bike lanes located along both sides of
Jefferson Street
• Pedestrian walkways and a Travertine community trail — a network of trails suitable for pedestrian
use planned throughout the community
• Recreational Open Space uses, including picnic tables, barbeques, golf practice facilities, a tot lot
playground, and staging facilities for the regional interpretive trail
• Two community parks for residents
• One staging area located to the south of the Avenue 62 extension with parking
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) Well Sites (quantity to be determined by CVWD)
• Future 5 -acre substation will be located off-site within a 2.5 -mile radius of the project area.
• Perimeter flood protection barrier along the western and southern boundaries to manage alluvial
fan flows. The barrier will consist of a raised edge condition with a slope lining to protect against
scour and erosion.
• Two booster stations. One facility located on Avenue 62 and Monroe, and the second to be located
within the project site.
Travertine Project 5
Biological Resources Assessment
33.612921
-116.272715
R.1ND LAWN
)\1'I -RC COMMUNITY CENTER
E:15TENIRA
6.11T1,
PrLRCOMM 1NIII
SEE INSET
MAP
•OIL
•♦
f ►r
T.
1RAIl ?
GOLF AC
- BANQUETFCIL
FOUR HO!_ PRA
1 1
11.AR I I\t RC1C I,i•ElPi
.4
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres) 1--1 Permanent Impact Area (553.14 acres)
Reference Point Temporary Impact Area (123.59 acres)
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL O
0
400
800
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Conceptual Design Plan
Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP, 2018), HSA Design Group (2021)
Figure 4
Section 2 Methodology
Michael Baker conducted thorough literature reviews and records searches to determine which special -
status biological resources have the potential to occur on or within the general vicinity of the project site
prior to conducting the field surveys. General habitat assessments or field surveys were conducted to
document existing conditions and determine the potential for special -status plant and wildlife species to
occur within the project site.
2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW
Prior to conducting the field surveys, literature reviews and records searches were conducted for special -
status biological resources2 potentially occurring on or within the vicinity of the project site. Special -status
plant and wildlife occurrence records within the USGS Indio, La Quinta, Martinez Mtn, and Valerie,
California 7.5 -minute quadrangles were identified through a query of the CNDDB (CDFW 2022a), CIRP
(CNPS 2022), and the Calflora Database (Calflora 2022), and for the project region through a review of
IPaC (USFWS 2022a). Additionally, those species covered under the Coachella Valley Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) were identified and
reviewed.
The current regulatory/conservation status of special -status plant and wildlife species was verified through
lists and resources provided by the CDFW, specifically the Special Animals List (CDFW 2022b), State and
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California (CDFW 2022c), Special Vascular
Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List (CDFW 2022d), and State and Federally Listed Endangered,
Threatened, and Rare Plants of California (CDFW 2022e). USFWS-designated Critical Habitat for species
listed under the federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) was reviewed online via the Critical Habitat
Mapper (USFWS 2022b).
In addition to the databases referenced above, Michael Baker reviewed available reports, survey results,
and literature detailing the biological resources previously observed on or within the vicinity of the project
site to understand existing site conditions, confirm previous species observations, and note the extent of
any disturbances, if present, that have occurred in the project site that would otherwise limit the distribution
of special -status biological resources. Standard field guides and texts were reviewed for specific habitat
requirements of special -status and non -special -status biological resources. Aerial photography was also
reviewed prior to the field survey to locate potential natural corridors and linkages that may support the
movement of wildlife through the area.
2 As used in this report, "special -status" refers to species that are either federally -/State -listed, proposed, or candidates; species
that have been designated a California Rare Plant Rank by the California Native Plant Society; species designated as Fully
Protected, Species of Special Concern, or Watch List by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife; State/locally rare
vegetation communities; or species covered under the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.
Travertine Project 7
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 2 - Methodolo
On-site and adjoining soils were researched prior to conducting the habitat assessment using the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Custom Soil Resource Report for Anza-Borrego Area, California
and Riverside County, Coachella Valley Area, California (USDA 2022). In addition, a review of the local
geological conditions and historical aerial photographs (Google, Inc. 2022) was conducted to assess the
ecological changes and disturbances that may have occurred within the project site.
The literature review provided a baseline from which to inventory the existing biological resources and
evaluate the suitability of the project site to support special -status biological resources. Additional
occurrence records of those species that have been documented on or within the vicinity of the project site
were derived from database queries. The CNDDB was used in conjunction with GIS ArcView software to
identify the locations of special -status species occurrence records identified within the USGS Indio, La
Quinta, Martinez Mtn, and Valerie, California 7.5 -minute quadrangles. Refer to Section 5 for a complete
list of technical references that were reviewed by Michael Baker.
2.2 FIELD SURVEY/HABITAT ASSESSMENT
Michael Baker biologists and regulatory specialists conducted a biological field survey/habitat assessment
on February 17, 2022, to document existing conditions and assess the potential for special -status biological
resources to occur within the boundaries of the project site. Additional field surveys were conducted by
Michael Baker on February 24 and March 3, 2022. All field surveys were conducted in accordance with
applicable protocols and in a way to maximize the detectability of special -status species that may be present
within the project site during the time of the survey. No limitations or access restrictions were encountered
by Michael Baker during the field surveys. Based on a review of the survey requirements set forth in the
CVMSHCP, results of previous biological studies, and coordination with the USFWS, focused surveys for
special -status species, including desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii; federally and State Threatened [FE;
ST] species), Peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsoni; federally Endangered [FE], ST and State
Fully Protected [FP] species), and burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia; State Species of Special Concern
[SSC]), were not conducted. Refer to Table 1 below for a summary of specific field survey dates, times,
surveyors, and weather conditions.
Table 1:
Survey Dates, Timing, Surveyors, and Weather Conditions
Date
Time
(start / finish)
Surveyors
Weather Conditions
(start / finish)
Temperature
(°F)
Wind Speed
(mph)
02/17/2022
0800 / 1500
Trina Ming, April Nakagawa,
Lauren Mapes, Tim Tidwell
63 / 73
3 - 10
02/24/2022
0900 / 1430
Trina Ming, April Nakagawa,
Lauren Mapes, Tom Millington
57 / 74
l - 4
03/03/2022
0800 / 1515
Trina Ming, April Nakagawa,
Lauren Mapes, Tom Millington
67 / 83
1 - 2
Travertine Project
Biological Resources Assessment
8
Section 2 - Methodolo
Vegetation communities preliminarily identified on aerial photographs during the literature review were
verified in the field by walking meandering transects through the vegetation communities and along
boundaries between vegetation communities. Naturally -vegetated areas typically have a higher potential to
support special -status plant and wildlife species than areas that are highly disturbed or developed, which
have lower quality and/or reduced amounts of suitable habitat for plants and wildlife. All plant and wildlife
species observed during the field surveys, as well as dominant plant species within each vegetation
community, were recorded in a field notebook. In addition, site characteristics such as soil condition,
topography, hydrology, anthropogenic disturbances, indicator species, and the overall condition of on-site
vegetation communities were recorded.
2.3 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES
Vegetation communities occurring within the project site were delineated on an aerial photograph during
the field surveys and later digitized using the ArcView Geographic Information System (GIS) software to
quantify the area of each vegetation community in acres. Vegetation communities occurring within the
project site were classified in accordance with descriptions provided in the Manual of California Vegetation
(Sawyer et al. 2009). For communities that did not meet membership rules within the Manual of California
Vegetation, natural community descriptions from the CVMSHCP were used. Additionally, any vegetation
communities occurring on-site that are listed by CDFW as a California Sensitive Natural Community
(CDFW 2021) are identified in the vegetation community descriptions provided in Section 3.2 of this report.
2.4 PLANTS
Plant species observed during the field surveys were identified by visual characteristics and morphology in
the field and recorded in a field notebook. Unfamiliar plants were photographed in the field and later
identified in the laboratory using taxonomic guides. Plant nomenclature used in this report follows the
Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition (Baldwin et al. 2012). In this report,
scientific names are provided immediately following common names of plant species (first reference only).
2.5 WILDLIFE
Wildlife species detected during the field surveys by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other types of evidence
were recorded in a field notebook. Field guides used to assist with identification of species during the habitat
assessment included The Sibley Guide to Birds (Sibley 2014) for birds, A Field Guide to Western Reptiles
and Amphibians (Stebbins 2003) for herpetofauna, and A Field Guide to Mammals of North America (Reid
2006). Although common names of wildlife species are well standardized, scientific names are provided
immediately following common names of wildlife species in this report (first reference only). To the extent
possible, nomenclature of birds follows the most recent annual supplement of the American Ornithological
Union's Checklist of North American Birds (Chesser et al. 2019), nomenclature of amphibians and reptiles
follows Scientific and Standard English Names of Amphibians and Reptiles of North America North of
Mexico, with Comments Regarding Confidence in Our Understanding (Crother 2017), and nomenclature
Travertine Project 9
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 2 - Methodolo
for mammals follows the Bats of the United States and Canada (Harvey et al. 2011) and Revised Checklist
of North American Mammals North of Mexico (Bradley et al. 2014).
2.6 OTHER STUDIES
2.6.1 DELINEATION OF STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
Michael Baker certified wetland delineators Josephine Lim, Professional Wetland Scientist (PWS), and
Tim Tidwell, PWS, conducted a jurisdictional delineation for the proposed project on February 2, 3, 10, 19,
and 24, 2021 to identify and map the extent of waters of the U.S. (WoUS), including potential wetlands,
and waters of the State (WoS) within the boundaries of the project site. During the field delineation, Michael
Baker utilized the methods outlined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version 2.0 (United States Army Corps of Engineers [USACE]
2008) to document the presence and extent of jurisdictional features that would fall under the regulatory
authority of the USACE, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the CDFW. The results
of Michael Baker's jurisdictional delineation are provided within the Delineation of State and Federal
Jurisdictional Waters for the Travertine Project (Michael Baker 2021), prepared under separate cover, and
summarized in Section 3.5 of this report.
Travertine Project 10
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 3 Results
The project site is located within the southeast corner of the City of La Quinta, north of Martinez Rock
Slide and the Santa Rosa Mountains. The project site is approximately 969 acres in size and is mainly
comprised of undeveloped land and a historic vineyard including unimproved dirt roads. The topography
of the project site is generally flat with rolling hills and desert washes that include natural communities
comprised of rocky soils. The project site is surrounded by steep, rocky slopes to the south and west, and a
small rocky outcropping to the north. Based on a review of Google Earth historical aerial imagery, there
has been no change within the project site since 1985 (Google, Inc. 2022). Representative photographs
taken throughout the project site are included in Appendix A, with the location and direction of each
photograph depicted on Figure 3, Project Site. Land uses surrounding the project site to the south and west
consist primarily of vacant land that transitions into the Martinez Rock Slide and the Santa Rosa Mountains.
Vacant land under the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) management occurs along the western border
and the existing Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility and residential developments occur
along the northeast border of the project site.
3.1 TOPOGRAPHY AND SOILS
On-site surface elevation ranges from approximately -80 to 425 feet above mean sea level (amsl) and
generally slopes to the east. Most of the project site is generally flat with rolling hills and desert washes
that encompasses natural communities comprised of rocky soils. According to the Custom Soil Resource
Report for Anza-Borrego Area, California and Riverside County, Coachella Valley Area, California
(USDA 2022), the project site is underlain by the following soil units: Carrizo stony sand, 2 to 9 percent
slopes (CcC); Carsitas gravelly sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes (CdC); Carsitas cobbly sand, 2 to 9 percent
slopes (ChC); Gilman fine sandy loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes (GbB); Indio fine sandy loam (Ip); Indio fine
sandy loam, wet (Ir); Myoma fine sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes (MaB); rock outcrop (RO); rubble land (RU).
Refer to Figure 5, USDA Soils, for a depiction of soil units within the project site.
3.2 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES AND LAND COVER TYPES
Five (5) natural vegetation communities were observed and mapped within the boundaries of the project
site: Larrea tridentata Shrubland, Parkinsonia Florida — Olneya tesota Woodland, Atriplex polycarpa
Shrubland, Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland, and Ambrosia Salsola — Bebbia juncea Shrubland. In
addition, the project site contains five (5) land cover types classified as former agriculture, active
agriculture, ornamental, disturbed/developed, and developed. These vegetation communities and land cover
types are depicted on Figure 6, Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses, and described in further
detail below. The area of vegetation communities and land cover types identified within the project site and
the impacts proposed to each are presented in Table 2 below. In addition, refer to Appendix B for a complete
list of plant species that were observed within the project site during the field surveys.
Travertine Project 11
Biological Resources Assessment
•
Coral
Mountain
-GliB
%.4.4GaB,
•••
• -•-•••14s.‘7.4,1-.
;MaB
Not a Part
Thomas Levy Groundwater
Replenishment Facility
CdC
4.
111400000v
Martinez
Rock Slide
NOTCOM
Att •
ChC
• •
•
SEE INSET
MAP
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
ED Reference Point
1=1
13.0
€1:121
CdC
Carrizo stony sand,
2 to 9 percent slopes
Carsitas cobbly sand,
2 to 9 percent slopes
Carsitas gravelly sand,
0 to 9 percent slopes
GbB
GaB
07
Pr.
Gilman fine sandy loam,
2 to 5 percent slopes
Gilman loamy fine sand,
0 to 5 percent slopes
Indio fine sandy loam
Myoma fine sand,
0 to 5 percent slopes
CID
Rock outcrop
Rubble land
W Water
itiO5C.(IM
No Digital Data Available
Michael Baker
CI,
INTERNATIONAL
0
400
800
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
USDA Soils
Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP, 2018), USDA (2019)
Figure 5
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL
Source: Nearmap (September 2021)
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
I I
-I Permanent Impact Area
(553.14 acres)
• Temporary Impact Area
- - ' (123.59 acres)
Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia
juncea Shrubland (Ambrosia
salsola - Larrea tridentata
Association, 20.96 acres)
Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland
(Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 9.68 acres)
Larrea tridentata Shrubland
(Larrea tridentata
Association, 617.02 acres)
Parkinsonia florida — Olneya
tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia
florida Association,
68.89 acres)
Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa
Shrubland (Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 3.96 acres)
Active Agriculture
(6.56 acres)
Former Agriculture
(224.71 acres)
Ornamental
(4.52 acres)
Disturbed/Developed
(6.83 acres)
Developed
(5.89 acres)
® Reference Point
A . B
..r
C D
E F
G H
0
0
150
300
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses
Figure 6A
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONALI
Source: Nearmap (September 2021)
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
I I
1
-I Permanent Impact Area
(553.14 acres)
• Temporary Impact Area
- - ' (123.59 acres)
Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia
juncea Shrubland (Ambrosia
salsola - Larrea tridentata
Association, 20.96 acres)
1 Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland
(Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 9.68 acres)
Larrea tridentata Shrubland
(Larrea tridentata
Association, 617.02 acres)
Parkinsonia florida — Olneya
tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia
florida Association,
68.89 acres)
Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa
Shrubland (Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 3.96 acres)
Active Agriculture
(6.56 acres)
Former Agriculture
(224.71 acres)
Ornamental
(4.52 acres)
Disturbed/Developed
(6.83 acres)
Developed
(5.89 acres)
Reference Point
Centerlines
C
B
D
E F
)H
0
0
150
300
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses
Figure 6B
m
i.
�77 ! •}i '� JET?•ex'i �i ' i• ••'• :. ..• + Y�
.w ,k ��g" •�7' .f. ,• r�pc• _ ill; w.�}.,• 4 f• _ • S. Ln'•w-1 % LK4
•
- 4r. :k11'i!-•.r.. ' ; 1 '. r.'}.� �� y,..r 11 ■. " .'.:. _f: •y. 5 0 p �'. 0.. ;}! w a •r.. 4
t:i''ti.4�r .4'r fir. • { *k' ►• . # ; w1 �::'
�•'`-. k •��: 't:a• ..�•, ��:. • r.f *.S''=. ..`Nk••- •rr • •:;47,...t.':-.....11
F"i� r of -L �+ i•e `r ` - • �` .tis�r. frr.:. i
y.:..: ••i' .!Le, `ir«••5�
•
7.•„,-1!•40 R.: �• w� -:.'.., - yam`'•'/'''•.
i M, a t. ��•
►Rrr M•.:
3/28/2022 JN C:\Users\ryan.phaneuFlOneDrive - Michael Baker International \ Documents \GIS \182517 - Travertine \GIS\APRX\TravertineBio\TravertineBio.aprx
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
I I
1-1 Permanent Impact Area
(553.14 acres)
Temporary Impact Area
(123.59 acres)
Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia
juncea Shrubland (Ambrosia
salsola - Larrea tridentata
Association, 20.96 acres)
Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland
(Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 9.68 acres)
Larrea tridentata Shrubland
(Larrea tridentata
Association, 617.02 acres)
Parkinsonia florida — Olneya
tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia
Florida Association,
68.89 acres)
Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa
Shrubland (Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 3.96 acres)
Active Agriculture
(6.56 acres)
Former Agriculture
(224.71 acres)
Ornamental
(4.52 acres)
Disturbed/Developed
(6.83 acres)
Developed
(5.89 acres)
® Reference Point
- AI
I B
C
D
E
F
-hkG'H
0
U
150
300
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses
Source: Nearmap (September 2021)
Figure 6D
r172
E
- h •'x.52
•
fes
a
& t :0...:..k ,44t
4
vglixtf
,x,4• • 4
�pe
dN ��'-fr~r6-r*k•�a T Lt-'
"
` '_; te
• F its 4•r.Nylvl1:,-.,;•;-
• ;';',..,`..6,_..c: �;,
y 4• •: x.p -•.- �.. ,fir• • P•
Jrkk
_,.� . 4ir 1.' -. a'!r; "T l f ►'• .' 1 r�'.io. •tiM1S�,`,f•l+e. t!�=�• S`' ,.
Ir `.-iJ. '1". * F,.•.;s ., 1 `- .s'4' .j '•-..e�'.11,= ai `" a{.N' . %•.yi* rJ. da .,e, ..,•° ' �r
`' ` -. ,r, �.4,•i yr .. 4t,;4.....
t,; .•.":14..x '3 *y',i►•} .a:-. f•M.%q:�•ri:#'• {iy.:. <^ • Rti ;.'••••-••;'
•;' •
= r.;yr. .r'+y, r ary1cC ^ :1•17
r�"Si •' � ;�,• -4 "• ■_ --..•. "'tk-.,,...+h'r i" x il►• . 1 -
,Y�rw4.'� % N!f Y -a-••.• .- r .•`.�:/ati-). 4,-•^i• rt' •• ..,........„,,....:.:.......r ; r r•�`4f► 4 "ly a........
[. Ar • y� ter; '''.--•'.-,. 1 ha li•4 -� fi�r. -44i..4'.Lin y' -ti ..-r•.'..A• •.. -.
�r 4�r.'1..y �'.lr -Y./ al ; . ','''!^' 'LTq'. r-",; ~1. 4 � r '4''� . ;4. :. ,,,,r„y:
1 rs q-�t"'•'f ,�'P`. . C i?t• AAA. , I� .: 0.!yi'�• • ■�••'rY M• •. -�1 1..,a .5....'Y,.`.-„•
•
0
14,!_. •
L4 -r,1 , rT•
4.4
..-
y y
�_ '�'•i•. ".
:g
.;••••. x
::1•, �ti�+-�.:` •::.r.r■ �'►'r `a. 4►r.:
s a...�.—�� F-
3i
fry;
sl !t
t��• .,,''+Y. Y ..Kr .ZK. •`''S,�"':.rY,.,. 4i��i•• �t•'.J-M.`ma--ya-•.��'•�;#J"c:>
',,��r .. -.rte
�y +.sa
r •�.�1x
,
"• t Ar •
.••R�; ',
.i. 'r a... •a7,
�L,�
--�i -�:� • r+k�:Y� � •.h. '•.�•
•
1 'r,t
4.
: .
W•
r`{
t.� ��, '4r t '!F'4'• . •`f •-•., • qtYa11.1,a • •r.•Y ! �1 Y,
".ir..
4.
4.
. �••
RSP.,11.10'6-4' ,Q,,,yyyy�����S _ 3 ,.
r'
- " •' i' - �,uPg�h- �>*�
1
0.
1
1
•iii-� 4►*
•' �r � ifM•■ r.ra , iiS• a-1 •..-• yy �.� - •1 �• - .1. ;.'f -f" a. .,
,•
a
r
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
I I
1-1 Permanent Impact Area
(553.14 acres)
Temporary Impact Area
(123.59 acres)
Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia
juncea Shrubland (Ambrosia
salsola - Larrea tridentata
Association, 20.96 acres)
Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland
(Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 9.68 acres)
Larrea tridentata Shrubland
(Larrea tridentata
Association, 617.02 acres)
Parkinsonia florida — Olneya
tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia
Florida Association,
68.89 acres)
Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa
Shrubland (Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 3.96 acres)
Active Agriculture
(6.56 acres)
Former Agriculture
(224.71 acres)
Ornamental
(4.52 acres)
Disturbed/Developed
(6.83 acres)
Developed
(5.89 acres)
® Reference Point
0
U
150
300
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses
Source: Nearmap (September 2021)
Figure 6E
33.598475
-116.260311
r
Agior-.r t
p � ,•'••••*.
;•
•
•
0.
N
• 'f '-C--4 fr L.' .¢ !� ^ •[,•,
k
4 •.
8,1
-
kr
•
ii�ke<:.=,ham
•
1A4N411-11.11 Oh?
A
•
{yam=k-•+..:
�.i•t •�r ~e a �;c, -
•
.14
• ..
•r
•4
3r"&..1
.i
3r M
•.L
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
I I
1-1 Permanent Impact Area
(553.14 acres)
Temporary Impact Area
(123.59 acres)
Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia
juncea Shrubland (Ambrosia
salsola - Larrea tridentata
Association, 20.96 acres)
Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland
(Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 9.68 acres)
Larrea tridentata Shrubland
(Larrea tridentata
Association, 617.02 acres)
Parkinsonia florida — Olneya
tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia
Florida Association,
68.89 acres)
Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa
Shrubland (Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 3.96 acres)
Active Agriculture
(6.56 acres)
Former Agriculture
(224.71 acres)
Ornamental
(4.52 acres)
Disturbed/Developed
(6.83 acres)
Developed
(5.89 acres)
® Reference Point
A B
C l D
I I
E
_._
G I H
0
U
150
300
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses
Source: Nearmap (September 2021)
Figure 6F
X
0
a
v,
EE
2
3/28/2022 JN C:\Users\ry
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONALI
Source: Nearmap (September 2021)
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
I I
-I Permanent Impact Area
(553.14 acres)
• Temporary Impact Area
' (123.59 acres)
Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia
juncea Shrubland (Ambrosia
salsola - Larrea tridentata
Association, 20.96 acres)
Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland
(Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 9.68 acres)
Larrea tridentata Shrubland
(Larrea tridentata
Association, 617.02 acres)
Parkinsonia florida — Olneya
tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia
florida Association,
68.89 acres)
Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa
Shrubland (Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 3.96 acres)
Active Agriculture
(6.56 acres)
Former Agriculture
(224.71 acres)
Ornamental
(4.52 acres)
Disturbed/Developed
(6.83 acres)
WDeveloped
(5.89 acres)
® Reference Point
0
U
150
300
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses
Figure 6G
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL
Source: Nearmap (September 2021)
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
I I
1-1 Permanent Impact Area
(553.14 acres)
Temporary Impact Area
(123.59 acres)
Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia
juncea Shrubland (Ambrosia
salsola - Larrea tridentata
Association, 20.96 acres)
Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland
(Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 9.68 acres)
Larrea tridentata Shrubland
(Larrea tridentata
Association, 617.02 acres)
Parkinsonia florida — Olneya
tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia
Florida Association,
68.89 acres)
Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa
Shrubland (Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 3.96 acres)
Active Agriculture
(6.56 acres)
Former Agriculture
(224.71 acres)
Ornamental
(4.52 acres)
Disturbed/Developed
(6.83 acres)
Developed
(5.89 acres)
Reference Point
A' B
C I D
I I
E F
G LH
0
U
150
300
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses
Figure 6H
onal\Documents\GIS\182517 - Travertine \GISWPRX\TravertineBio\TravertineBio.aprx
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONALI
Source: Nearmap (September 2021)
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
I I
-I Permanent Impact Area
(553.14 acres)
• • Temporary Impact Area
- - ' (123.59 acres)
Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia
juncea Shrubland (Ambrosia
salsola - Larrea tridentata
Association, 20.96 acres)
Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland
(Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 9.68 acres)
Larrea tridentata Shrubland
(Larrea tridentata
Association, 617.02 acres)
Parkinsonia florida — Olneya
tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia
florida Association,
68.89 acres)
Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa
Shrubland (Atriplex polycarpa
Association, 3.96 acres)
Active Agriculture
(6.56 acres)
Former Agriculture
(224.71 acres)
Ornamental
(4.52 acres)
Disturbed/Developed
(6.83 acres)
Developed
(5.89 acres)
Reference Point
Centerlines
0
0
200
400
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses
Figure 61
Section 3 -Results
Table 2:
Vegetation Communities/Land Cover Types and Proposed Impacts
Vegetation Community/Land Cover Types
Acreage
Total Within
Project Site
Proposed Impacts
Permanent
Temporary
Larrea tridentata Shrubland
617.01
301.72
68.57
Parkinsonia florida - Olneya tesota Woodland
68.89
15.48
10.82
Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland
9.68
2.47
5.77
Disturbed Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland
3.96
1.42
2.55
Ambrosia salsola - Bebbia juncea Shrubland
20.96
7.92
13.04
Former Agriculture
224.71
215.94
8.70
Active Agriculture
6.56
0.47
6.09
Ornamental
4.52
0.05
4.47
Disturbed/Developed
6.83
3.61
1.76
Developed
5.89
4.06
1.83
TOTAL
969.1
553.14
123.6
Native Vegetation Communities
This category includes vegetation communities dominated by plant species native to California.
3.2.1 LARREA TRIDENTATA SHRUBLAND
Approximately 617.01 acres of Larrea tridentata Shrubland is located generally along the northern portions
of the project site. Creosote bush (Larrea tridentata) is the dominant species providing a majority of the
vegetative cover in this alliance. Additional species present include burrow weed (Ambrosia dumosa),
cheesebrush (Ambrosia salsola), branched pencil cholla (Cylindropuntia ramossissima), California barrel
cactus (Ferocactus cylindraceus), catclaw (Senegalia greggii), Yuma sandmat (Euphorbia setiloba), wand
holdback (Hoffmannseggia microphylla), and brittlebush (Encelia farinosa).
3.2.2 PARKINSONIA FLORIDA - OLNEYA TESOTA WOODLAND
Approximately 68.89 acres of Parkinsonia florida - Olneya tesota Woodland is located throughout the
project site in areas associated with drainages or within areas of discontinuous sheet flow. Predominant
vegetation cover consists of blue paloverde (Parkinsonia florida) trees ranging 10 to 20 feet in height and
crown diameter, with smaller quantities of catclaw, smoke tree (Psorothamnus spinosus), jojoba
(Simmondsia chinensis), and desert lavender (Condea emoryi) intermixed.
Parkinsonia florida - Olneya tesota Woodland is not formally listed as a California Sensitive Natural
Community by CDFW; however, the Parkinsonia florida Association under this Alliance is currently listed
as a California Sensitive Natural Community (CDFW 2021). Impacts to sensitive natural communities need
to be addressed in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental review processes and
its equivalents. The extent of this sensitive natural community is depicted on Figure 7, California Sensitive
Natural Communities.
Travertine Project 22
Biological Resources Assessment
X
K
Q_
•
-116.272715
Coral
Mountain
w
• - NA.. +1
Not a Part
homas Levy Groundwater ,..
IR p nishment Facility •
SEE INSET
MAP
•
••
\
•
•
•
Martinez
Rock Slide
33.584164
-116.249242
Legend
Project Site (696.02 acres) 1--1 Permanent Impact Area (553.14 acres) 1--1 Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland
(Parkinsonia florida Association, 68.89 acres)
Reference Point Temporary Impact Area (123.59 acres)
I I
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL0
0
400
800
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
California Sensitive Natural Communities
Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP, 2018)
Figure 7
Section 3 -Results
3.2.3 ATRIPLEX POLYCARPA SHRUBLAND
Approximately 9.68 acres of Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland is located along the northeastern portion of the
project site and is dominated by allscale saltbush (Atriplex polycarpa). Additional species in lesser
quantities observed in this community include blue paloverde trees, cheesebrush, and creosote bush. In
addition, salt cedar (Tamarix ramosissima) is present along the northern perimeter of this community that
experiences periods of discontinuous sheet flow during storm events.
3.2.4 DISTURBED ATRIPLEX POLYCARPA SHRUBLAND
Approximately 3.96 acres of disturbed Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland is located in two areas within the
northeastern and eastern portions of the project site. These areas are composed of graded slopes, dirt roads,
and levee construction and consist of bare, disturbed soils sparsely vegetated with allscale saltbush.
Additional species observed within this community include occasional creosote bush and dyebush
(Psorothamnus emoryi) shrubs.
3.2.5 AMBROSIA SALSOLA — BEBBIA JUNCEA SHRUBLAND
Approximately 20.96 acres of Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia juncea Shrubland is located along two areas
within the northern portion of the project site. These areas are dominated by sweetbush (Bebbia juncea)
with lower quantities of creosote bush and burrow weed.
Land Cover Types
This category includes non -vegetated or sparsely vegetated areas with species generally not native to
California.
3.2.6 FORMER AGRICULTURE
Approximately 224.71 acres of lands formerly used for agriculture are generally located within the central
portion of the project site. This land cover type consists of compacted dirt roads surrounding plots of former
vineyards, currently composed of disturbed soils and abandoned structures used for the agriculture
operations. Revegetation by native species has occurred since vineyard operations have ceased, primarily
by blue paloverde trees which comprise approximately one (1) to two (2) percent of absolute cover.
Additional native species present in small quantities include fanleaf crinklemat (Tiquilia plicata), small
datura (Datura discolor), cheesebrush, creosote bush, climbing milkweed (Funastrum cynanchoides var.
hartwegii), sweetbush, allscale saltbush, coyote gourd (Cucurbita palmata), white -stemmed milkweed
(Asclepias albicans), and desert pine (Peucephyllum schottii). Non-native species observed across the
former agricultural lands include saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima) and orange wattle (Acacia saligna).
Travertine Project 24
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 3 -Results
3.2.7 ACTIVE AGRICULTURE
Approximately 6.56 acres of active agriculture is located along the eastern portion of the project site. This
land cover type currently consists of disturbed, bare soils utilized for agriculture bordered by ornamental
plantings that function as windbreaks. These ornamental plantings consist of tamarisk (Tamarix sp.),
oleander (Nerium oleander), and Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis).
3.2.8 ORNAMENTAL
Approximately 4.52 acres of ornamental landscaping associated with a golf course occurs along the eastern
portion of the project site. Ornamental vegetation consists of non-native Jerusalem thorn (Parkinsonia
aculeata) and eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.) trees intermixed with native big saltbush (Atriplex lentiformis)
shrubs.
3.2.9 DISTURBED/DEVELOPED
Approximately 6.83 acres of disturbed/developed land are located throughout the project site and consist
primarily of compacted bare ground along paved roadways sparsely vegetated with non-native and native
ruderal species, including cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), London
rocket (Sisymbrium irio), and Spanish needles (Palafoxia arida).
3.2.10 DEVELOPED
Developed areas consisting of paved roadways and a water tank storage facilty comprise approximately
5.89 acres of the project site. These areas have been physically altered to a degree that native vegetation is
no longer supported.
3.3 WILDLIFE
Natural vegetation communities provide foraging habitat, nesting/denning sites, and shelter from adverse
weather or predation. This section provides a general discussion of those wildlife species that were observed
during the field surveys or that are expected to occur based on existing site conditions. The discussion is to
be used as a general reference and is limited by the season, time of day, and weather conditions in which
the field surveys were conducted. Wildlife detections were based on calls, songs, scat, tracks, burrows, and
direct observation. Refer to Appendix B for a complete list of wildlife species observed during the field
surveys.
3.3.1 FISH
No fish or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., perennial creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) with frequent sources
of water that would be sufficient to support populations of fish were observed in the project site during the
field survey. Therefore, no fish are expected to occur within the project site.
Travertine Project 25
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 3 -Results
3.3.2 AMPHIBIANS
No amphibians or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., perennial creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) that would
provide suitable breeding habitat for amphibians were observed within the project site during the field
survey. Therefore, no amphibians are expected to occur within the project site.
3.3.3 REPTILES
Western side -blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana elegans), southern desert horned lizard (Phrynosoma
platyrhinos calidiarum), and western zebra -tailed lizard (Callisaurus draconoides rhodostictus) were the
only species of reptiles observed during the field surveys. Habitat within the project site is also suitable for
a number of other common reptilian species known from the region, such as northern desert iguana
(Dipsosaurus dorsalis dorsalis), Great Basin whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris tigris), and red racer (Coluber
flagellum piceus).
3.3.4 BIRDS
Common bird species that were observed within or adjacent to the project site included blue -grey
gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), Say's phoebe (Sayornis saya), violet -
green swallow (Tachycineta thalassina), black -throated sparrow (Amphispiza bilineata), Costa's
hummingbird (Calypte costae), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), common raven (Corvus corax), and
red -railed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). In addition, four (4) special -status bird species were observed within
or adjacent to the project site during the field surveys: black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura; State
Watch List [WL] species), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus; State SSC), long-eared owl (Alio otus;
State SSC), and osprey (Pandion haliaetus; State WL species). Refer to Appendix B for a full list of
observed species, and Figure 8, Special -Status Species Observations, for a depiction of special -status bird
observations within and adjacent to the project site.
Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 and the
California Fish and Game Code3 (CFGC). No active bird nests or birds displaying nesting behaviors were
observed within the project site during the field surveys. However, the Parkinsoniaflorida — Olneya tesota
Woodland, Larrea tridentata Shrubland, Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland, and ornmanetal vegetation
communities within the project site provide suitable nesting opportunities for a variety of resident and
migratory bird species, including those birds that nest on open ground or within cacti (e.g., burrowing owl,
cactus wren [Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus]).
3
Section 3503 makes it unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided
by CFGC or any regulation made pursuant thereto; Section 3503.5 makes it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the
orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds -of -prey); and Section 3513 makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory non -
game bird except as provided by the rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the MBTA,
as amended (16 U.S.C. § 703 et. sq.).
Travertine Project 26
Biological Resources Assessment
lit !EJ.��c !'Coral
Mountain
Thomas Levy Groundwater ..
Replenishment Facility
Martinez
Rock Slide
Legend
Project Site (696.02 acres) I -I
Reference Point
Permanent Impact Area (553.14 acres)
Temporary Impact Area (123.59 acres)
rj
Black -tailed Gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura)
General Sighting Location
Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus)
General Sighting Location
Long-eared Owl (Alio otu)
General Sighting Location
Osprey (Pandion haliaetus)
General Sighting Location
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL O
0
400
800
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Special -Status Species Observations
Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP, 2018)
Figure 8
Section 3 -Results
3.3.5 MAMMALS
The project site has the potential to support a variety of mammalian species; however, most mammalian
species in the region are nocturnal and are difficult to observe during a diurnal habitat assessment. Black -
tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus) and white-tailed antelope squirrel (Ammospermophilus leucurus)
were the only species directly observed during the field surveys. Coyote (Canis latrans), domestic dog
(Canis lupis familiaris), and horse (Equus sp.) tracks/sign were observed within the project site.
There is no suitable roosting habitat for bat species (Order Chiroptera) within the project site, due to a lack
of hollow trees, mines, caves, rock outcrops, deep rock crevices, and man-made structures (i.e., bridges,
tunnels, and buildings) which may provide suitable bat roosting habitat. Although there are palm trees in
the surrounding residential and commercial landscape, they are frequently trimmed and maintained,
reducing their value as bat roosting habitat compared to palm trees that are unmaintained and retain dead
palm fronds. Additionally, rock outcrops and deep rock crevices more suitable for bat roosting are likely
present in the surrounding mountain landscape. However, because of the open vegetation landscape, the
project site does have the potential to provide suitable foraging habitat for various species of bats.
3.4 MIGRATORY CORRIDORS AND LINKAGES
Wildlife corridors and linkages are key features for wildlife movement between habitat patches. Wildlife
corridors are generally defined as those areas that provide opportunities for individuals or local populations
to conduct seasonal migrations, permanent dispersals, or daily commutes, while linkages generally refer to
broader areas that provide movement opportunities for multiple keystone/focal species or allow for
propagation of ecological processes (e.g., for movement of pollinators), often between areas of conserved
land.
Residential uses/urban areas adjoin the project site to the west. Wildlife movement, especially Peninsular
bighorn sheep, potentially occurs within this open conservation area adjacent to the project site. Areas to
the east and north of the project site primarily consist of residential and commercial land uses, and while
some land to the west/northwest consists of BLM land. Any wildlife currently utilizing the project site and
adjacent areas for dispersal and movement are likely adapted to disturbances associated with urban
environments. Project activities are not expected to significantly impede wildlife movement through the
area, as the project site does not coincide with or function as a significant wildlife movement corridor. Open
conservation areas to the south and west would continue to provide opportunities for local wildlife
movement and function as a corridor for highly mobile wildlife species.
3.5 STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
There are three key agencies that regulate activities within inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in
California. The USACE Regulatory Branch regulates discharge of dredged or fill material into "waters of
the United States" pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and Section 10 of the
Rivers and Harbors Act. Of the State agencies, the RWQCB regulates discharges to surface waters pursuant
Travertine Project 28
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 3 -Results
to Section 401 of the CWA and Section 13263 of the California Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act
and the CDFW regulates alterations to streambed and associated vegetation communities under Section
1600 et seq. of the CFGC.
As documented in the Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters (Michael Baker 2021), five
(5) drainage features were documented within the boundaries of the project site (Drainage Area A through
Drainage Area E). Refer to the following sections for a summary of jurisdictional features documented
within the project site and impacts that are expected to occur as a result of the proposed project.
3.5.1 UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Evidence of an OHWM was noted within the boundaries of the project site. However, aquatic features
within the project site are considered ephemeral and do not meet the definition of a WoUS pursuant to the
latest USACE guidelines established in 2015 for the mapping of WoUS, including wetlands. Therefore, on-
site aquatic features would not be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the CWA and would not fall
under USACE' jurisdiction.
3.5.2 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
The on-site aquatic features are considered ephemeral and therefore would not meet the definition of a
WoUS. However, the on-site features qualify as WoS under RWQCB jurisdiction, consisting of
approximately 90.96 acres of non -wetland WoS.
Based on a review of project design plans, the proposed project would temporarily impact approximately
12.15 acres and permanently impact 53.15 acres of non -wetland WoS (Michael Baker 2021). In the absence
of a Section 404 permit issued from the USACE, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification is not applicable.
However, a Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) issued from the RWQCB would be required prior to
commencement of any construction activities within RWQCB jurisdictional areas. The RWQCB also
requires that CEQA compliance be obtained prior to issuance of the final WDR. Further, an application fee
is required, which is based on both total temporary and permanent impact acreages (as applicable).
3.5.3 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
The on-site drainage features exhibit a clear bed and bank and qualify as a CDFW jurisdictional streambed.
Based on the results of the field investigations, a total of approximately 90.96 acres of CDFW jurisdictional
streambed occurs within the boundaries of the project site. In addition, the on-site Parkinsonia florida —
Olneya tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia florida Association) community, also identified as Desert Dry Wash
Woodland habitat (DDWW; Michael Baker 2021), is considered CDFW jurisdiction totaling 55.98 acres,
approximately 20.56 acres of which coincides with the 90.96 acres of CDFW jurisdictional streambed and
an additional 35.42 acres of DDWW habitat is associated with the CDFW jurisdictional streambed.
Based on a review of project design plans, the proposed project would temporarily impact approximately
12.15 acres and permanently impact 53.15 acres of CDFW jurisdictional streambed. In addition, the
Travertine Project 29
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 3 -Results
proposed project would temporarily impact approximately 2.67 acres and permanently impact 10.73 acres
of DDWW habitat under CDFW jurisdiction. Approximately 1.26 acres of temporary impacts and 5.82
acres of permanent impacts to DDWW habitat occurs within the CDFW jurisdictional streambed and the
remaining 1.41 acres of temporary impacts and 4.91 acres of permanent impacts to DDWW habitat is
associated with the CDFW jurisdictional streambed. Therefore, prior to alteration of CDFW jurisdictional
features, the project proponent must acquire a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA) prior
to the initiation of project construction. This would include a formal SAA notification to, and subsequent
authorization of a SAA from CDFW. The CDFW also requires that compliance with CEQA is completed
prior to issuing a final SAA. In addition, a notification fee is required, which for a standard SAA is
calculated based on anticipated cost of the project.
3.6 SPECIAL -STATUS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The CNDDB and CIRP were queried for reported locations of special -status plant and wildlife species as
well as special -status natural vegetation communities in the USGS Indio, La Quinta, Martinez Mtn, and
Valerie, California 7.5 -minute quadrangles. The habitat assessment was conducted to assess and evaluate
existing condition of the habitats within the boundaries of the project site to determine if the existing
vegetation communities, at the time of the field surveys, have the potential to provide suitable habitat for
special -status plant and wildlife species. Additionally, the potentials for special -status species to occur
within the project site were determined based on the reported locations in the CNDDB, CIRP, and Calflora
databases using the following guidelines:
• Present: the species was observed or detected within the project site during the field surveys.
• High: Recent occurrence records (within 20 years) indicate that the species has been known to
occur on or within one mile of the project site and the site is within the normal expected range of
this species. Intact, suitable habitat preferred by this species occurs within the project site and/or
there is viable landscape connectivity to a local known extant population(s) or sighting(s).
• Moderate: Recent occurrence records (within 20 years) indicate that the species has been known
to occur within one mile of the project site and the site is within the normal expected range of
this species. There is suitable habitat within the project site, but the site is ecologically isolated
from any local known extant populations or sightings.
• Low: Recent occurrence records (within 20 years) indicate that the species has been known to
occur within five miles of the project site, but the site is outside of the normal expected range of
the species and/or there is poor quality or marginal habitat within the project site.
• Not Expected: There are no occurrence records of the species occurring within five miles of the
project site, there is no suitable habitat within the project site, and/or the project site is outside of
the known or expected range for the species.
The literature search identified thirty-six (36) special -status plant species, twenty-seven (27) special -status
wildlife species, and one (1) special -status vegetation community as having the potential to occur within
Travertine Project 30
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 3 -Results
the USGS Indio, La Quinta, Martinez Mtn, and Valerie, California 7.5 -minute quadrangles. Special -status
plant and wildlife species were evaluated for their potential to occur within the project site based on habitat
requirements, availability and quality of suitable habitat, and known distributions. Special -status biological
resources identified during the literature review as having the potential to occur within the vicinity of the
project site are presented in Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources,
provided in Appendix C.
3.6.1 SPECIAL -STATUS PLANT SPECIES
Thirty-six (36) special -status plant species have been recorded within the USGS Indio, La Quinta, Martinez
Mtn, and Valerie, California 7.5 -minute quadrangles. Each species' special -status ranking, preferred
habitats, and potential to occur within the project site are provided in Appendix C. Based on the results of
the literature review and field surveys, the following special -status plant species were determined to have
a moderate to high potential to occur within the project site: California avenia (Avenia compacta; California
Rare Plant Rank [CRPR] 2B.3), glandular ditaxis (Ditaxis claryana; CRPR 2B.2), California ditaxis (ditaxis
serrata var. californica; CRPR 3.2), pink velvet -mallow (Horsfordia alata; CRPR 4.3), and Newberry's
velvet -mallow (Horsfordia newberryi; CRPR 4.3). All other special -status plant species either have a low
potential to occur or are not expected within the project site based on existing site conditions and a review
of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions (refer to Appendix C).
Although not considered a special -status plant species, California barrel cactus, Gander's buckhorn cholla
(Cylindropuntia ganderi), Englemann's hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus engelmannii), cottontop cactus
(Echinocactus polycephalus), beavertail cactus (Opuntia basilaris), branched pencil cholla, ocotillo
(Fouquieria splendens), catclaw, blue paloverde, and smoke tree were observed throughout the project site
and are regulated under the California Desert Native Plants Act (CDNPA). Pursuant to the CDNPA, these
species may not be harvested except under a permit issued by the commissioner of the County of Riverside.
3.6.2 SPECIAL -STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
Twenty-seven (27) special -status wildlife species have been recorded within the USGS Indio, La Quinta,
Martinez Mtn, and Valerie, California 7.5 -minute quadrangles. Each species' special -status ranking,
preferred habitats, and potential to occur within the project site are provided in Appendix C. Based on
Michael Baker's literature review and results of the field surveys, the following special -status wildlife
species were determined to be either be present or have a moderate to high potential to occur within the
project site: black -tailed gnatcatcher, loggerhead shrike, long-eared owl, osprey, burrowing owl, prairie
falcon (Falco mexicanus; State WL species), Le Conte's thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei; State SSC), and
Peninsular bighorn sheep. All other special -status wildlife species identified during the literature review
either have a low potential to occur or are not expected within the project site based on existing site
conditions and a review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions (refer
to Appendix C).
Travertine Project 31
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 3 -Results
3.6.3 SPECIAL -STATUS VEGETATION COMMUNITIES
One (1) special -status vegetation community has been reported within the USGS Indio, La Quinta, Martinez
Mtn, and Valerie, California 7.5 -minute quadrangles by the CNDDB: Desert Fan Palm Oasis Woodland.
Based on the result of field surveys, this community is not present within the project site. There were no
special -status vegetation communities tracked in the CNDDB observed within the project area.
Although not identified in the CNDDB during the literature search, the Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota
Woodland (Parkinsonia florida Association) is currently listed as a California Sensitive Natural
Community (CDFW 2021). Impacts to sensitive natural communities need to be addressed in the CEQA
environmental review processes and its equivalents. Approximately 68.89 acres of Parkinsonia florida —
Olneya tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia florida Association) is located throughout the project site (refer to
Figure 7, California Sensitive Natural Communities).
3.7 CRITICAL HABITAT
Under the definition included in the FESA, designated Critical Habitat refers to specific areas within the
geographical range of a species that were occupied at the time it was listed and that contain the physical or
biological features that are essential to the survival and eventual recovery of that species. Areas of Critical
Habitat 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 include those that occur on federal lands, require federal permits (e.g., CWA
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
pursuant to the FESA.
The project site does not coincide with any USFWS-designated Critical Habitat; however, Critical Habitat
for Peninsular bighorn sheep is adjacent to the southern border of the project site and within approximately
700 feet of the western boundary (refer to Figure 9, Peninsular bighorn sheep Critical Habitat).
Travertine Project 32
Biological Resources Assessment
tt. 1. F .. COral
Mountain
r
w
44,
kiPfr
rt `L'
/el
Not a Part
•
Thomas Levy Groundwater -..
Replenishment Facility
•
IV
SEE INSET
MAP
•
s +"ae• jt-y�etsr Fv ..
/
•
\
•
•
•
•
'
•
�1� _------------- —
1I
/I
/I
•
\
I /
%/ '---f•
U
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres) 1--1 Permanent Impact Area (553.14 acres) 1--1 Peninsular Bighorn Sheep
(Ovis canadensis nelsoni)
Reference Point Temporary Impact Area (123.59 acres)
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL O
0
400
800
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Critical Habitat
Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP, 2018), USFWS (2022)
Figure 9
Section 3 -Results
3.8 COACHELLA VALLEY MSHCP/NCCP
The CVMSHCP or Plan was prepared for the entire Coachella Valley and surrounding mountains to address
current and potential future FESA and CESA issues in the Plan Area. A Memorandum of Understanding
("Planning Agreement") was developed to govern the preparation of the CVMSHCP. In late 1995 and early
1996, under the auspices of the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), the cities of
Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, Palm Springs,
and Rancho Mirage; County of Riverside; USFWS; CDFW; BLM; U.S. Forest Service; and National Park
Service signed the Planning Agreement to initiate the planning effort. Subsequently, California Department
of Transportation, CVWD, Imperial Irrigation District, Riverside County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District, Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District, Riverside County Waste
Resources Management District, California Department of Parks and Recreation, and Coachella Valley
Mountain Conservancy decided to participate in the Plan.
The CVMSHCP balances environmental protection and economic development objectives in the Plan Area
and simplifies compliance with endangered species related laws. The CVMSHCP is intended to satisfy the
legal requirements for the issuance of permits that will allow the Take of species covered by the Plan in the
course of otherwise lawful activities. The CVMSHCP will, to the maximum extent practicable, minimize
and mitigate the impacts of the taking and provide for conservation of the covered species.
The CVMSHCP includes the establishment of a Reserve System, setting Conservation Objectives to ensure
the conservation of the covered species and conserved natural communities in the CVMSHCP Reserve
System, provisions for management of the CVMSHCP Reserve System, and a Monitoring Program, and
Adaptive Management. The CVMSHCP Reserve System will be established from lands within 21
Conservation Areas. Because some Take Authorization is provided under the Plan for development in
Conservation Areas, the actual CVMSHCP Reserve System will be somewhat smaller than the total acres
in the Conservation Areas. When assembled, the Reserve System will provide for the conservation of the
covered species in the Plan Area.
Project activities that occur within or adjacent to CVMSHCP Conservation Areas are required to implement
applicable measures identified in Section 4.5, Land Use Adjacency Guidelines, and Section 4.4, Required
Avoidance and Minimization Measures, of the CVMSHCP, of the CVMSHCP. Further, if a project would
encroach into the CVMSHCP Conservation Areas, a Joint Project Review (JPR) would be required as
described in Section 6.6.1.1, Joint Project Review Process within Conservation Areas, of the CVMSHCP.
The JPR process would be instituted by the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC), for all
projects under the Local Permittees' jurisdiction in a CVMSHCP Conservation Area that would result in
disturbance to covered species, habitat, natural communities, biological corridors, or essential ecological
processes.
The proposed project occurs within the boundaries of the CVMSHCP. In addition, the southwest portion of
the project site is located within the CVMSHCP Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains (SRSJM)
Conservation Area (refer to Figure 10, Coachella Valley MSHCP/NCCP).
Travertine Project 34
Biological Resources Assessment
e
Air
f
Not a Part
Thomas Levy Groundwater
Replenishment Facility
Aor-
ra.
«
.% .4 •
Legend
Project Site (969.02 acres)
® Reference Point
Coachella Valley Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan Boundary
San Jacinto and Santa Rosa
Mountains Conservation Area
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL! O
0
400
800
Feet
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Coachella Valley MSHCP/NCCP
Source: National Agricultural Inventory Project (NAIP, 2018), CVMSHCP (2016)
Figure 10
Section 4 Project Impact Analysis
Direct impacts are considered to be those that involve the loss, modification or disturbance of plant
communities, which in turn, directly affect the flora and fauna of those habitats. Direct impacts also include
the destruction of individual plants or animals, which may also directly affect regional population numbers
of a species or result in the physical isolation of populations thereby reducing genetic diversity and
population stability.
Indirect impacts pertain to those impacts that result in a change to the physical environment, but which is
not immediately related to a project. Indirect (or secondary) impacts are those that are reasonably
foreseeable and caused by a project but occur at a different time or place. Indirect impacts can occur at the
urban/wildland interface of projects, to biological resources located downstream from projects, and other
off-site areas where the effects of the project may be experienced by plants and wildlife. Examples of
indirect impacts include the effects of increases in ambient levels of noise or light; predation by domestic
pets; competition with exotic plants and animals; introduction of toxics, including pesticides; and other
human disturbances such as hiking, off-road vehicle use, unauthorized dumping, etc. Indirect impacts are
often attributed to the subsequent day-to-day activities associated with project build -out, such as increased
noise, the use of artificial light sources, and invasive ornamental plantings that may encroach into native
areas. Indirect effects may be both short-term and long-term in their duration. These impacts are commonly
referred to as "edge effects" and may result in a slow replacement of native plants by non-native invasives,
as well as changes in the behavioral patterns of wildlife and reduced wildlife diversity and abundance in
habitats adjacent to project sites.
Cumulative impacts refer to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are
considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. A cumulative impact can occur
from multiple individual effects from the same project, or from several projects. The cumulative impact
from several projects is the change in the environment resulting from the incremental impact of the project
when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects.
Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place
over a period of time.
4.1 IMPACTS TO SPECIAL -STATUS SPECIES
Appendix G(a) of the CEQA guidelines asks if a project is likely to "have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service."
Travertine Project 36
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
4.1.1 SPECIAL -STATUS PLANT SPECIES
The proposed project will not impact any federal or State listed plant species, as none are expected to occur
within the project site (refer to Appendix C). However, the proposed project has a potential to impact the
following non -listed, special -status plant species: California avenia (CRPR 2B.3), glandular ditaxis (CRPR
2B.2), California ditaxis (CRPR 3.2), pink velvet -mallow (CRPR 4.3), and Newberry's velvet -mallow
(CRPR 4.3). Each of these plant species are considered rare in California but are more common elsewhere.
There are no occurrence records of these plant species within the project site, but each has a moderate to
high potential to occur based on existing site conditions, occurrence records, and known distributions.
However, due to the low sensitivity of the species, limited potential for impact, along with participation
with the CVMSHCP, any impacts to these species, if present, would be less than significant without
mitigation being required.
4.1.2 SPECIAL -STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
The proposed project has a potential to impact the following special -status wildlife species and/or their
habitat: Peninsular bighorn sheep (FE, ST, and State FP species), black -tailed gnatcatcher (State WL
species), loggerhead shrike (State SSC), long-eared owl (State SSC), osprey (State WL species), burrowing
owl (State SSC), prairie falcon (State WL species), and Le Conte's thrasher (State SSC).
In 2004, the BLM and Bureau of Reclamation initiated consultation with USFWS under Section 7 of the
FESA regarding the effects of the project on ten (10) federally -listed species that were identified in a
regional species list generated by USFWS in 2003. Evaluations of the site's suitability to support the ten
species were conducted and it was determined that seven of the species did not have potential to occur on
or adjacent to the project site and were eliminated from further review. Evaluations conducted for triple -
ribbed milk -vetch (FE and CRPR 1B.2 species) and desert tortoise indicated that the proposed project is
unlikely to affect these two species; however, USFWS concluded that the proposed project could affect
Peninsular bighorn sheep and its designated Critical Habitat. On December 7, 2005, USFWS issued a
Biological Opinion (BO; USFWS 2005) addressing this species and its Critical Habitat (refer to Appendix
D).
With Conservation Measures to 1) reconfigure the project's footprint to reduce potential effects of the
project on Peninsular bighorn sheep and its critical habitat, 2) acquire lands adjacent to the project to
permanently protect Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat, and 3) provide funds for additional habitat
acquisition upon approval of the CVMSHCP, USFWS concluded in the BO that the proposed project and
its cumulative effects are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species, or adversely modify
designated critical habitat for the species.
The BO further describes that direct take of Peninsular bighorn sheep would not occur, but that project
construction, habituation by bighorn sheep to human activities at the initially unfenced golf course, and
disturbances by recreational trespass from the proposed trail and improved public access to the project area,
could reasonably result in incidental take of one individual bighorn sheep. For the proposed project, take is
Travertine Project 37
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
also quantified by the permanent loss or alteration of 267 acres of designated critical habitat containing one
or more primary constituent elements that support bighorn sheep populations. However, with
implementation of the conservation measures included in the BO, incidental take would be minimized
Further, through avoidance of Critical Habitat areas and additional lands to the west and south, the loss of
potential habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep would be less than significant.
The proposed project has the potential to result in the direct loss of the following special -status bird species
and/or their habitat: black -tailed gnatcatcher, loggerhead shrike, long-eared owl, osprey, burrowing owl,
prairie falcon, and Le Conte's thrasher. In addition, construction -related disturbance may have an adverse
impact on these species, especially during the breeding season when individuals may be attempting to
incubate eggs or raise young within or adjacent to the project site. The permanent and temporary loss of
these species and/or their habitat would be potentially significant.
Although burrowing owl and Le Conte's thrasher are the only covered species under the CVMSHCP, the
loss of all special -status bird species identified above and/or their habitat would be reduced to below a level
of significance through the permanent protection of avoided habitat on the project site and additional habitat
on lands to the west and south through a formal conservation instrument (e.g., easement), and
implementation of measures provided in CVCC's Final JPR (CVCC 2021; refer to Appendix E) and Section
4.9 below.
4.2 IMPACTS TO SENSITIVE VEGETATION COMMUNITIES
Appendix G(a) of the CEQA guidelines asks if a project is likely to "have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service."
The following natural vegetation communities occur within the boundaries of the project site: Larrea
tridentata Shrubland, Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia florida Association),
Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland, disturbed Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland, and Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia
juncea Shrubland. In addition, the project site contains five (5) land cover types classified as former
agriculture, active agriculture, ornamental, disturbed/developed, and developed.
The Larrea tridentata Shrubland, Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland, disturbed Atriplex polycarpa Shrubland,
and Ambrosia salsola — Bebbia juncea Shrubland are not listed as a California Sensitive Natural Community
by CDFW. However, the Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia florida Association)
is currently listed as a California Sensitive Natural Community (CDFW 2021) and totals approximately
68.89 acres of Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia florida Association) is located
throughout the project site (refer to Figure 7, California Sensitive Natural Communities). The proposed
project would result in approximately 15.48 acres of permanent impacts and 10.82 acres of temporary
impacts to Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland (Parkinsonia florida Association).
Travertine Project 38
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
The permanent and temporary loss of this sensitive natural community would be potentially significant
prior to mitigation. However, the permanent protection of avoided jurisdictional resources on the project
site and additional habitat on lands to the west and south through a formal conservation instrument (e.g.,
easement), and implementation of measures provided in the BO (refer to Appendix D), CVCC's Final JPR
(refer to Appendix E), and Section 4.9 below, impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance.
4.3 IMPACTS TO WETLANDS
Appendix G(c) of the CEQA guidelines asks if a project is likely to "have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means."
The project site does not contain any State or federally protected wetlands. As described in Section 3.5
above, aquatic features within the project site are considered ephemeral and do not meet the definition of a
WoUS pursuant to the latest USACE guidelines established in 2015 for the mapping of WoUS, including
wetlands. Therefore, on-site aquatic features would not be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the
CWA and would not fall under USACE' jurisdiction. However, the on-site features qualify as WoS under
RWQCB jurisdiction, consisting of approximately 90.96 acres of non -wetland WoS. Of this, the proposed
project would temporarily impact approximately 12.15 acres and permanently impact 53.15 acres of
RWQCB non -wetland WoS (Michael Baker 2021).
Additionally, the on-site drainage features exhibit a clear bed and bank and qualify as a CDFW
jurisdictional streambed. Approximately 90.96 acres of CDFW jurisdictional streambed within the
boundaries of the project site. In addition, the on-site Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland
(Parkinsonia florida Association) community, also identified as DDWW habitat (Michael Baker 2021), is
considered CDFW jurisdiction totaling 55.98 acres, approximately 20.56 acres of which coincides with the
90.96 acres of CDFW jurisdictional streambed and an additional 35.42 acres of DDWW habitat is
associated with the CDFW jurisdictional streambed. Of this, the proposed project would temporarily impact
approximately 12.15 acres and permanently impact 53.15 acres of CDFW jurisdictional streambed, as well
as temporarily impact approximately 2.67 acres and permanently impact 10.73 acres of DDWW habitat
under CDFW jurisdiction. Approximately 1.26 acres of temporary impacts and 5.82 acres of permanent
impacts to DDWW habitat occurs within the CDFW jurisdictional streambed and the remaining 1.41 acres
of temporary impacts and 4.91 acres of permanent impacts to DDWW habitat is associated with the CDFW-
jurisdictional streambed.
Permanent and temporary loss of RWQCB and CDFW jurisdiction described above would be potentially
significant prior to mitigation. However, the permanent protection of avoided jurisdictional resources on
the project site and additional habitat on lands to the west and south through a formal conservation
instrument (e.g., easement), and implementation of measures provided in the BO (refer to Appendix D),
CVCC's Final JPR (refer to Appendix E), and Section 4.9 below, impacts would be reduced to below a
level of significance.
Travertine Project 39
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
4.4 IMPACTS TO WILDLIFE MOVEMENT AND NURSERY SITES
Appendix G(d) of the CEQA guidelines asks if a project is likely to "interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites."
The proposed project will generally impact the movement of wildlife from the Santa Rosa Mountains to the
west and south through the project site to the east. However, the proposed project through implementation
of its proposed conservation/avoidance will still allow wildlife to move around the project site to the north
and south. In addition, as noted above the USFWS determined that the proposed project will not adversely
affect the Peninsular bighorn sheep.
The proposed project has the potential to impact active bird nests if vegetation is removed during the nesting
season. Impacts to nesting birds are prohibited by the MBTA and CFGC. Therefore, a project -specific
mitigation measure is provided in Section 4.9 of this report to avoid impacts to nesting birds.
4.5 IMPACTS TO LOCAL POLICIES AND ORDINANCES
Appendix G(e) of the CEQA guidelines asks if a project is likely to "conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance."
The proposed project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources.
4.6 IMPACTS TO HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANS
Appendix G(f) of the CEQA guidelines asks if a project is likely to "conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan."
As noted in Section 3.8 above, proposed project occurs within the boundaries of the CVMSHCP including
portions of the SRSJM Conservation Area (refer to Figure 10, Coachella Valley MSHCP/NCCP). However,
the CVMSHCP identifies the Travertine Specific Plan as a Covered Activity. The Travertine development
was in the planning stages at the time that the CVMSHCP was adopted, and the original BO (USFWS 2005)
for the proposed project had been issued when the CVMSHCP was being developed. The majority of the
project footprint is located outside of the SRSJM Conservation Area. However, approximately 59.39 acres
of the project footprint (12.25 acres of permanent impacts and 47.14 of temporary impacts) would occur
within the SRSJM Conservation Area.
Since the proposed project would result in impacts to the SRSJM Conservation Area, the JPR process,
whereby the CVCC and Wildlife Agencies (USFWS and CDFW) review the proposed project to ensure
consistency with the CVMSHCP, was completed by the CVCC on March 31, 2021, and the proposed
project was found to be consistent conditioned upon adherence to Avoidance and Minimization Measures,
Travertine Project 40
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
Land Use Adjacency Guidelines, and project -specific financial requirements, as outlined by CVMSHCP
plan documents (refer to Appendix E). As such, the proposed project will not conflict with the CVMSHCP.
4.7 INDIRECT IMPACTS
In the context of biological resources, indirect effects are those effects associated with developing areas
adjacent to adjacent native open space. Potential indirect effects associated with development include water
quality impacts associated with drainage into adjacent open space/downstream aquatic resources; lighting
effects; noise effects; invasive plant species from landscaping; and effects from human access into adjacent
open space, such as recreational activities (including off-road vehicles, hiking, rock climbing), pets,
dumping, etc. Temporary, indirect effects may also occur as a result of construction -related activities. As
such, the proposed project will implement measures to address the following: drainage, toxics, lighting,
noise, invasive, and barriers.
4.7.1 DRAINAGE
Projects in proximity to conservation areas shall incorporate measures, including measures required through
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements, to ensure that the quantity
and quality of runoff discharged to conservation lands is not altered in an adverse way when compared with
existing conditions. Stormwater systems shall be designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals,
petroleum products, exotic plant materials or other elements that might degrade or harm biological
resources or ecosystem processes within adjacent conservation areas through the use of a variety of methods
including natural detention basins, grass swales or mechanical trapping devices. Regular maintenance shall
occur to ensure effective operations of runoff control systems. The proposed project will develop a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to address runoff and water quality during construction.
4.7.2 TOXICS
Land uses proposed in proximity to conservation areas that use chemicals or generate bioproducts that are
potentially toxic or may adversely affect wildlife species, habitat or water quality shall incorporate measures
to ensure that application of such chemicals does not result in discharge to adjacent conservation areas.
Measures such as those employed to address drainage issues shall be implemented. The proposed project
will implement a SWPPP that will address runoff during construction.
4.7.3 LIGHTING
Night lighting shall be directed away from adjacent conservation areas to protect wildlife from direct night
lighting. If night lighting is required during construction, shielding shall be incorporated to ensure ambient
lighting adjacent conservation areas are not increased. Refer to Section 4.9 for project -specific light spillage
reduction measures.
Travertine Project 41
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
4.7.4 NOISE
Proposed noise generating land uses with the potential to affect adjacent conservation lands shall
incorporate setbacks, berms or walls to minimize the effects of noise on wildlife pursuant to applicable
rules, regulations and guidelines related to land use noise standards. Refer to Section 4.9 for project -specific
noise reduction measures.
4.7.5 INVASIVES
Projects adjacent to conservation lands shall avoid the use of invasive plant species in landscaping. Refer
to Section 4.9 for project -specific invasive prevention measures.
4.7.6 BARRIERS
Proposed land uses adjacent to conservation lands shall incorporate barriers, where appropriate in individual
project designs to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass or
dumping within conservation lands. Such barriers may include native landscaping, rocks/boulders, fencing,
walls, signage and/or other appropriate mechanisms. Refer to Section 4.9 for a description of project -
specific barriers.
4.8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Cumulative impacts are defined as the direct and indirect effects of a proposed project which, when
considered alone, would not be deemed a substantial impact, but when considered in addition to the impacts
of related projects in the area, would be considered potentially significant. "Related projects" refers to past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects, which would have similar impacts to the
proposed project.
Through consultation with the USFWS and CVCC, the proposed project has been designed to avoid impacts
to Peninsular bighorn sheep by incorporating project -specific design features, including an 8 -foot wildlife
fence and siting of features that may otherwise be attractive to Peninsular bighorn sheep within the interior.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep individuals.
Through the implementation of measures included in Section 4.9, and through consistency with the BO
(refer to Appendix D) and CVCC's Final JPR (refer to Appendix E), the proposed project will not result in
considerable cumulative impacts.
4.9 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following sections provide project -specific mitigation measures for potential direct and indirect
impacts to biological resources.
Travertine Project 42
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
4.9.1 SPECIAL -STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
Eighteen measures were included in the BO to avoid direct take of Peninsular bighorn sheep, limit habitat
loss, and avoid indirect construction -related and post -construction -related impacts to Peninsular bighorn
sheep, and to achieve consistency with the CVMSHCP in regard to Peninsular bighorn sheep. These
measures focus on trail locations, habitat acquisition and long-term management, funding of research,
future evaluations for the need of a wildlife fence, project design considerations, prohibition of invasive
non-native plant species in project landscaped areas, noise reduction, the prevention of light spillage into
open space and the SRSJM Conservation Areas, and provision of educational interpretive materials located
along the proposed trail system. The following measures are recommended to avoid direct and indirect
impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep and to ensure consistency with the BO (refer to Appendix D) and
CVCC's Final JPR (refer to Appendix E):
BIO -1: An 8 -foot -tall wildlife fence constructed of tubular steel and painted to blend in with the desert
environment will be installed where the project interfaces with Coral Mountain along the
northern boundary and extend southward along the western and southern boundary of proposed
development to minimize Peninsular bighorn sheep from entering the project. The fence will
extend to where Avenue 62 intersects with the eastern project boundary (refer to Appendix F,
Overall Wall Plan).
BIO -2: A Community Grand Loop Trail will be located along the outer perimeter of the proposed
development, providing an additional buffer between the trail edge and the natural open space
associated with the adjacent alluvial fan and the Santa Rosa Mountain foothills, including the
Martinez Rock Slide. This trail system will incorporate educational elements highlighting
native desert ecology and floral and faunal species, including Peninsular bighorn sheep.
BIO -3: All lighting located within the development footprint with the potential to illuminate the
adjacent open space will be down -shielded to prevent light spillage. The trail separating the
project from undeveloped native desert areas will only have four lights at each main loop trail
rest area, and these will be 2 -foot -tall path downlights. Where a community open space is
against the project's perimeter, there will be only 2 -foot -tall path lights in areas approved for
human activities. Shade structures associated with community spaces adjacent to undeveloped
native desert areas will not have lighting. All 2 -foot -tall lights will be on a master timer will be
turned off between 10:00 p.m. and civil morning twilight. The project will adhere to the City's
Outdoor Lighting Ordinance.
B1O-4: Where the project is located adjacent to the SRSJM Conservation Area along its western edge,
a minimum buffer of 74 feet will be incorporated between undeveloped native desert areas and
private homeowner parcels and public gathering areas. Each private homeowner parcel along
this western edge will have fencing at the top of slope with Lexan panels to dampen noise to
an appropriate level. In addition, the project will adhere to the City's Noise Ordinance.
Travertine Project 43
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
BIO -5: All plant species identified as invasive by the CVMSHP, or that are known to be toxic to
Peninsular bighorn sheep, will be prohibited from inclusion in project landscaping. A project -
specific list of prohibited plant species will be prepared by a qualified biologist for use in
developing the Project Landscape Plan.
The project site contains suitable habitat for burrowing owls and Le Conte's thrasher. Pursuant to the
CVMSHCP, take avoidance surveys are required prior to construction to avoid the direct harm to burrowing
owls and Le Conte's thrasher. The following measure is recommended to avoid direct impacts to burrowing
owls and to ensure consistency with the CVMSHCP:
BIO -6: A Qualified Biologist will prepare and present to each employee (including temporary,
contractors, and subcontractors) a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) prior
to the initiation of work. They will be advised of the special -status wildlife species in the project
site, the steps to avoid impacts to the species and the potential penalties for taking such species.
At a minimum, the WEAP will include the following topics: occurrence of the listed and
sensitive species in the area, their general ecology, sensitivity of the species to human activities,
legal protection afforded to these species, penalties for violations of federal and State laws,
reporting requirements, and project features designed to reduce the impacts to these species
and promote continued successful occupation of habitats within the project area. Included in
this WEAP will be color photographs of the listed species, which will be shown to the
employees. Following the WEAP, the photographs will be posted in the contractor and resident
engineer office, where they will remain through the duration of the project. The contractor,
resident engineer, and the Qualified Biologist will be responsible for ensuring that employees
are aware of the listed species. If additional employees are added to the project after initiation,
they will receive instruction prior to working on the project.
BIO -7: Prior to construction, the construction area and adjacent habitat within 500 feet of the
construction area, or to the edge of the property if less than 500 feet, will be surveyed by a
Qualified Biologist for burrows that could be used by burrowing owl. Two (2) surveys will be
conducted, with one survey to be conducted between 14 and 30 days prior to site disturbance,
and a second survey to be conducted within 24 hours of site disturbance, following methods
described in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and
Game 2012). If a burrow is located, the Qualified Biologist will determine if an owl is present
in the burrow. If the burrow is determined to be occupied, the burrow will be flagged and a
160 -foot buffer during the non -breeding season and a 250 -foot buffer during the breeding
season, or a buffer to the edge of the property boundary if less than 500 feet, will be established
around the burrow. The buffer will be staked and flagged. No construction will be permitted
within the buffer until the young are no longer dependent on the burrow.
If the burrow is unoccupied, the burrow will be made inaccessible to burrowing owls, and
construction activities may proceed. If either a nesting or escape burrow is occupied, burrowing
owls shall be relocated pursuant to accepted protocols and in coordination with the Wildlife
Travertine Project 44
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
Agencies (CDFW and USFWS). A burrow is assumed occupied if records indicate that, based
on surveys conducted following protocol, at least one burrowing owl has been observed
occupying a burrow on site during the past three years. If there are no records for the site,
surveys must be conducted to determine, prior to construction, if burrowing owls are present.
Determination of the appropriate method of relocation, such as eviction/passive relocation or
active relocation, shall be based on the specific site conditions (e.g., distance to nearest suitable
habitat and presence of burrows within that habitat) in coordination with the Wildlife Agencies.
Active relocation and eviction/passive relocation require the preservation and maintenance of
suitable burrowing owl habitat determined through coordination with the Wildlife Agencies.
BIO -8: Prior to the start of construction activities during the nesting season (January 15 through June
15) in modeled Le Conte's thrasher habitat in the SRSJM Conservation Area, surveys will be
conducted by a Qualified Biologist on the construction site and within 500 feet of the
construction site, or to the property boundary if less than 500 feet. If nesting Le Conte's
thrashers are found, a 500 -foot buffer, or to the property boundary if less than 500 feet, will be
established around the nest site. The buffer will be staked and flagged. No construction will be
permitted within the buffer during the breeding season (January 15 through June 15) or until
the young have fledged.
Habitats and vegetation within and surrounding the project site have the potential to support nesting black -
tailed gnatcatcher, loggerhead shrike, long-eared owl, osprey, prairie falcon, and other common birds.
Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the MBTA and CFGC. As such, the following measure is
recommended to avoid impacts to nesting birds:
BIO -9: As feasible, vegetation clearing should be conducted outside of the nesting season, which is
generally identified as February 1 through September 15. If avoidance of the nesting season is
not feasible, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey within three days
prior to any disturbance of the site, including disking, demolition activities, and grading. If
active nests are identified, the biologist shall establish suitable buffers around the nests, and
the buffer areas shall be avoided until the nests are no longer occupied and the juvenile birds
can survive independently from the nests.
4.9.2 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS AND SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITIES
As stated in Section 4.3 above, the proposed project would temporarily impact approximately 12.15 acres
and permanently impact 53.15 acres of RWQCB non -wetland WoS. In addition, the proposed project would
the proposed project would temporarily impact approximately 12.15 acres and permanently impact 53.15
acres of CDFW jurisdictional streambed, as well as temporarily impact approximately 2.67 acres and
permanently impact 10.73 acres of DDWW habitat (Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland
[Parkinsonia florida Association]) under CDFW jurisdiction. Approximately 1.26 acres of temporary
impacts and 5.82 acres of permanent impacts to DDWW habitat occurs within the CDFW jurisdictional
streambed and the remaining 1.41 acres of temporary impacts and 4.91 acres of permanent impacts to
Travertine Project 45
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
DDWW habitat (Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland [Parkinsonia florida Association]) is
associated with the CDFW jurisdictional streambed. As such, the following mitigation measures are
recommended:
BIO -10:
Prior to initiating any impacts to jurisdictional waters as a result of any components of the
proposed project, the project proponent will obtain a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration
Agreement from CDFW and will notify the RWQCB pursuant to WDR.
BIO -11: Impacts to RWQCB jurisdictional WoS and CDFW jurisdictional streambed, including
DDWW habitat (Parkinsonia florida — Olneya tesota Woodland [Parkinsonia florida
Association]) resulting at the project site will be mitigated through a combination of preserving
existing jurisdictional waters within the project footprint, acquiring additional lands containing
jurisdictional waters, and/or purchasing mitigation credits through an approved mitigation
bank. The specific mitigation has not yet been identified, although it is expected to include the
approximately 68.24 acres of jurisdictional waters identified by the 2021 delineation (Michael
Baker 2021) to be avoided by the project and additional mitigation opportunities to be identified
through coordination with CDFW and RWQCB either during the permitting process or
potentially through early coordination with those agencies. Impacts to non -riparian waters will
be mitigated at a minimum 1.1 ratio. Impacts to riparian vegetation will be mitigated at a
minimum 2:1 ratio.
4.9.3 INDIRECT IMPACTS
As noted above in Section 5.9, the proposed project has the potential to result in indirect effects to sensitive
resources, including Peninsular bighorn sheep, particularly along the western and southern edges of the
project footprint. In general, the proposed project will include design features and other measures to avoid
or minimize indirect effects as the result of drainage, toxics, artificial lighting, noise, invasive plant species,
and/or unauthorized access to adjacent open space and SRSJM Conservation Area.
BIO -12: Drainage and Toxics: The project will drain away from the open space and SRSJM
Conservation Area, and so is not expected to result in impacts to sensitive resources as a result
of drainage, including toxics that be generated on site. Regardless, the project will develop a
SWPPP to address runoff and water quality during construction, and the proposed project is
designed to address water quality post -construction.
BIO -13:
Artificial Lighting: Night lighting shall be directed away from adjacent open space and SRSJM
Conservation Area to protect wildlife from direct night lighting. Light fixtures adjacent to open
space will be shielded and utilize low intensity lighting. If night lighting is required during
construction, shielding shall be incorporated to ensure ambient lighting adjacent conservation
lands are not increased.
Travertine Project 46
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 4 — Project Impact Analysis
BIO -14:
BIO -15:
Noise: The project will incorporate setbacks, berms, and/or walls as applicable to minimize the
effects of noise on wildlife pursuant to applicable rules, regulations and guidelines related to
land use noise standards.
Invasive Plants: Landscaping areas adjacent to proposed open space will not include invasive
plant species, including plants identified as invasive by the California Invasive Plant Council
(Cal -IPC) and the CVMSHCP.
BIO -16: Unauthorized Access: The project will incorporate barriers to avoid/minimize unauthorized
access to adjacent open space, including fencing, gates, or other effective barriers.
Travertine Project 47
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 5 References
AMEC Earth & Environment, Inc. 2010. City of La Quinta General Plan Update: Biological Resources.
Report dated June 2010.
Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, Editors. 2012. The
Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition. University of California Press,
Berkeley, CA.
Bierregaard, R. 0., A. F. Poole, M. S. Martell, P. Pyle, and M. A. Patten (2020). Osprey (Pandion
haliaetus), version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology,
Ithaca, NY, USA. Available online at: https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.osprey.01
Bradley, D.R., Ammerman, L.K., Baker, R.J., Bradley, L.C., Cook, J.A., Dowler, R.C., Jones, C., Schmidly,
D.J., Stangl Jr., F.B., Van Den Bussche, R.A., and B. Wiirsig. 2014. Revised Checklist of North
American Mammals North of Mexico, 2014. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Texas Tech
University. 327. 1-27.
Calflora. 2022. Information on California plants for education, research and conservation. [web
application]. Berkeley, California: The Calflora Database [a non-profit organization]. Accessed
online at: https://www.calflora.org/.
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. State
of California Natural Resources Agency. 34 pp.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2021. California Sensitive Natural Communities List.
Dated August 18, 2021. Accessed online at: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-
Communities.
CDFW. 2022a. California Natural Diversity Data Base RareFind 5. Data base report on threatened,
endangered, rare or otherwise sensitive species and communities for the Indio, La Quinta, Martinez
Mtn, Valerie, California USGS 7.5 -minute quadrangles.
CDFW. 2022b. Special Animals List. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA.
CDFW. 2022c. State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California. California
Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA.
CDFW. 2022d. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. Quarterly publication. 140 pp.
CDFW. 2022e. State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA.
Travertine Project 48
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 5 - References
Chesser, R. T., K. J. Burns, C. Cicero, J. L. Dunn, A. W. Kratter, I. J. Lovette, P. C. Rasmussen, J. V.
Remsen, Jr., D. F. Stotz, and K. Winker. 2019. Check -list of North American Birds (online).
American Ornithological Society. http://checklist.aou.org/taxa.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) 2022. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California
(online edition, v8-03 0.39). Accessed online at: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/.
Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). 2007. Final Recirculated Coachella Valley
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community Conservation Plan.
September 2007. Available online at: http://www.cvmshcp.org/.
Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC). 2021. Final Joint Project Review for CVCC 20-006
Travertine Development Project. Dated March 31, 2021.
Crother, B. I. (ed.). 2017. Scientific and Standard English Names of Amphibians and Reptiles of North
America North of Mexico, with Comments Regarding Confidence in Our Understanding pp. 1-102.
SSAR Herpetological Circular 43.
Dechant, J.A., M.L. Sondreal, D.H. Johnson, L.D. Igl, C.M. Goldade, P.A. Rabie, and B.R. Euliss. 1999
(revised 2002). Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Burrowing Owl. Northern
Prairie Wildlife Research Center. Jamestown, ND.
Dunn, J. and J. Alderfer. 2011. National Geographic Field Guide to the Birds of North America, Sixth
Edition. The National Geographic Society: Washington, D.C.
Google, Inc. 2022. Google Earth Pro Historical Aerial Imagery Version 7.3.8.8248. Build date 07/16/2021.
Aerial Imagery dated 1985 through 2021.
Harvey, M. J., J. S. Altenbach, and T.L. Best. 2011. Bats of the United States and Canada. John Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.
Haug, E. A. and Didiuk, B. A. 1993. Use of Recorded Calls to Detect Burrowing Owls.
Marks, J. S., D. L. Evans, and D. W. Holt (2020). Long-eared Owl (Asio otus), version 1.0. In Birds of the
World (S. M. Billerman, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. Available online
at: https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.loeow1.01
Michael Baker International (Michael Baker). 2021. Delineation of Jurisdictional Waters for the Travertine
Project. Report dated July 2021.
Reid, F.A. 2006. A Field Guide to Mammals of North America, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin
Company, New York, New York.
Travertine Project 49
Biological Resources Assessment
Section 5 - References
Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler -Wolf, and J. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation (Second Edition).
California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California, USA.
Sibley, D.A. 2014. The Sibley Guide to Birds, Second Edition. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, New
York.
Stebbins, R.C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin
Company, New York, New York.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V.
Noble. ERDC/EL TR -08-28. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development
Center.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2022. Custom Soil Resources Report for Anza-Borrego Area,
California and Riverside County, Coachella Valley Area, California. Accessed online at:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2005. Endangered Species Consultation on the Proposed
Travertine Project, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California, FWS-ERIV-2735.3. Dated
December 7, 2005.
USFWS. 2022a. Information for Planning and Consultation Project Planning Tool. Accessed online at:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/.
USFWS. 2022b. ECOS Environmental Conservation Online System: Threatened and Endangered Species
Active Critical Habitat Report. Accessed online at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-
habitat.html.
Travertine Project 50
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix A Site Photographs
Appendix A — Site Photographs
Photograph 1: Standing in the center of the project site, facing northeast.
Photograph 2: Standing in the center of the project site, facing west.
Travertine Project A-1
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix A — Site Photographs
Photograph 3: Standing in the center of the project site, facing south.
Photograph 4: Standing in the south corner of the project site, facing west.
Travertine Project A-2
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix A — Site Photographs
Photograph 5: Standing at middle of the south boundary of the project site, facing east.
Photograph 6: Standing at the middle of the south boundary of the project site, facing south.
Travertine Project A-3
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix A — Site Photographs
Photograph 7: Standing at the wash near the southwest corner of the project site, facing
southwest.
Photograph 8: Standing near southwest corner of the project site, facing northeast.
Travertine Project A-4
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix A — Site Photographs
Photograph 9: Standing at the west spur of the project site, facing northeast.
Photograph 10: Standing at the west spur of the project site, facing south.
Travertine Project A-5
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix A — Site Photographs
Photograph 11: Standing at the middle of north boundary of the project site, facing west.
Photograph 12: Standing at the middle of north boundary of the project site, facing north.
Travertine Project A-6
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix A — Site Photographs
Photograph 13: Standing at the middle of north boundary of the project site, facing southwest.
Photograph 14: Standing north of agricultural portion of the project site, facing west.
Travertine Project A-7
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix A — Site Photographs
Photograph 15: Standing at the northeast of agricultural portion of the project site, facing west.
Photograph 16: Standing at the center of the northeast spur of the project site, facing north.
Travertine Project A-8
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix A — Site Photographs
Photograph 17: Standing at the center of the northeast spur of the project site, facing south.
Photograph 18: Standing at the center of east spur of the project site, facing west.
Travertine Project A-9
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix A — Site Photographs
Photograph 19: Standing at the center of east spur of the project site, facing east.
Photograph 20: Standing at the east corner of the eastern spur of the project site, facing west.
Travertine Project A-10
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix B Plant and Wildlife Species Observed
List
Appendix B — Plant and Wildlife Species Observed List
Table B-1: Plant and Wildlife Species Observed List
Scientific Name*
Common Name
Cal -IPC Rating**
Special -Status Rank***
Plants
Acacia saligna*
orange wattle
Moderate
Allionia incarnata
windmills
Ambrosia dumosa
burrobush
Ambrosia Salsola
cheesbrush
Asclepias albicans
white -stemmed milkweed
Atriplex lentiformis
big saltbush
Atriplex polycarpa
allscale saltbush
Bebbie juncea
sweetbush
Brickellia desertorum
desert brickellia
Condea emoryi
desert lavender
Croton californicus
California croton
Cryptantha sp.
cryptantha
Cucurbita palmata
coyote melon
Cylindropuntia gander
Gander's buckhorn cholla
Cylindropuntia ramosissima
branched pencil cholla
Dalea mollissima
soft prairie clover
Datura discolor
small datura
Ditaxis lanceolata
lance leaved ditaxis
Echinocactus polycephalus
cottontop cactus
Echinocereus engelmannii
Engelmann's hedgehog cactus
Encelia farinosa
desert brittlebush
Eriogonum thomasii
Thomas eriogonum
Eriogonum inflatum
desert trumpet
Eucalyptus sp. *
eucalyptus
Euphorbia polycarpa
smallseed sandmat
Euphorbia setiloba
Yuma sandmat
Fagonia pachyacantha
sticky fagonia
Ferocactus cylindraceus
California barrel cactus
Fouquieria splendens
ocotillo
Funastrum cynanchoides var. hartwegii
Hatweg's twinevine
Hibiscus denudatus
rock hibiscus
Hirschfeldia incana*
shortpod mustard
Moderate
Hoffmannseggia microphylla
wand holdback
Krameria erecta
little leaved ratany
Justicia californica
chuparosa
Larrea tridentata
creosote bush
Malva parviflora
cheeseweed
Nerium oleander*
oleander
Opuntia basilaris
beavertail cactus
Palafoxia arida
Spanish needle
Travertine Project
Biological Resources Assessment
B-1
Appendix B — Plant and Wildlife Species Observed List
Table B-1: Plant and Wildlife Species Observed List
Scientific Name*
Common Name
Cal -IPC Rating**
Special -Status Rank***
Parkinsonia aculeata*
Jerusalem thorn
Parkinsonia florida
blue paloverde
Petalonyx thurberi
sandpaper plant
Peucephyllum schottii
desert pine
Phoenix canariensis
Canary Island date palm
Psorothamnus emoryi
dyebush
Psorothamnus spinosus
smoke tree
Senegalia greggii
catclaw
Simmondsia chinensis
jojoba
Sisymbrium irio*
London rocket
Moderate
Tamarix ramosissima*
salt cedar
High
Tidestromia suffruticosa
honeysweet
Tiquilia palmeri
Palmer's crinklemat
Tiquilia plicata
fan -leaved tiquilia
Psora sp.
pink scale lichen
Reptiles
Callisaurus draconoides rhodostictus
western zebra -tailed lizard
Phrynosoma platyrhinos calidiarum
southern desert horned lizard
Uta stansburiana elegans
western side -blotched lizard
Birds Mr
Amphispiza bilineata
black -throated sparrow
Asio otus
long-eared owl
SSC
Auriparus flaviceps
verdin
Aythya affinis
lesser scaup
Bucephala albeola
bufflehead
Buteo jamaicensis
red-tailed hawk
Callipepla gambelii
Gambel's quail
Calypte costae
Costa's hummingbird
Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus
cactus wren
Cathartes aura
turkey vulture
Columba livia
rock pigeon
Corvus brachyrhynchos
American crow
Corvus corax
common raven
Dryobates scalaris
ladder -backed woodpecker
Falco sparverius
American kestrel
Geococcyx californianus
greater roadrunner
Junco hyemalis
dark -eyed junco
Lanius ludovicianus
loggerhead shrike
SSC
Mareca strepera
gadwall
Melozone aberti
Abert's towhee
Pandion haliaetus
osprey
WL
Travertine Project
Biological Resources Assessment
B-2
Appendix B – Plant and Wildlife Species Observed List
Table B-1: Plant and Wildlife Species Observed List
Scientific Name*
Common Name
Cal -IPC Rating**
Special -Status Rank***
Polioptila caerulea
blue -gray gnatcatcher
Polioptila melanura
black -tailed gnatcatcher
WL
Salpinctes obsoletus
rock wren
Sayornis nigricans
black phoebe
Sayornis saya
Say's phoebe
Setophaga coronate
yellow-rumped warbler
Streptopelia decaocto
Eurasian collared -dove
Tachycineta thalassina
violet -green swallow
Thryomanes bewickii
Bewick's wren
Tyto alba
barn owl
Zenaida macroura
mourning dove
Mammals
.
Ammospermophilus leucurus
white-tailed antelope squirrel
Lepus californicus
black -tailed jackrabbit
* Non-native species
**
***
California Invasive Plant Council (Cal -IPC) Ratings
High These species have severe ecological impacts on physical processes, plant and animal communities, and
vegetation structure. Their reproductive biology and other attributes are conducive to moderate to high rates of
dispersal and establishment. Most are widely distributed ecologically.
Moderate These species have substantial and apparent—but generally not severe—ecological impacts on physical
processes, plant and animal communities, and vegetation structure. Their reproductive biology and other attributes
are conducive to moderate to high rates of dispersal, though establishment is generally dependent upon ecological
disturbance. Ecological amplitude and distribution may range from limited to widespread.
Special -Status Rank
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
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.
Travertine Project B-3
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix C Potentially Occurring Special -Status
Biological Resources
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential t
SPECIAL -STATUS PLANT SPECIES
Abronia villosa var.
aurita
chaparral sand-
verbena
1B.1
G5T2?
S2
No
Annual herb. Occurs on sandy
soils within chaparral, coastal
scrub, and desert dunes. Grows in
elevations ranging from 245 to
5,250 feet above mean sea level
(amsl). Blooming period is
(January) March through
September.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Astragalus
lentiginosus var.
borreganusS4
Borrego milk -vetch
4.3
G5T5?
No
Annual herb. Grows on sandy soils
within Mojavean desert scrub and
Sonoran Desert scrub habitats.
Grows in elevations ranging from
100 to 2,935 feet amsl. Blooming
period is February through May.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Astragalus
lentiginosus var.
coachellae
Coachella Valley
milk -vetch
FE
1B.2
G5T1
S1
Yes
Annual/perennial herb. Occurs on
dunes and sandy flats along
disturbed margins of sandy washes
and on sandy soils along roadsides
adjacent to existing sand dunes.
May also occur on sandy
substrates in creosote bush scrub.
Found at elevations ranging from
130 to 2,150 feet amsl. Blooming
period is February through May.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Astragalus preussii
var. laxiflorus
Lancaster milk -vetch
1B.1
G4T2
S1
No
Perennial herb. Occurs on alkaline
clay soils in flat, gravelly or sandy
washes in chenopod scrub. Found
at elevations ranging at or around
2,295 feet amsl. Blooming period
is March through May.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species and
there are no occurrence
records within five miles of
the project site.
Astragalus
sabulonum
gravel milk -vetch
2B.2
G4G5
S2
No
Annual/perennial herb. Associated
with sandy, sometimes gravelly
flats, washes, and roadsides.
Habitats include desert dunes,
Mojavean desert scrub, and
Sonoran Desert scrub. Found at
elevations ranging from -195 to
3,050 feet amsl. Blooming period
is February through June.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species and
there are no occurrence
records within five miles of
the project site.
Astragalus
tricarinatus
triple -ribbed milk-
vetch
FE
1B.2
G2
S2
Yes
Perennial herb. Found on sandy or
gravelly soils within Joshua tree
woodland and Sonoran Desert
scrub habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 1,475 to 3,905 feet
amsl. Blooming period is February
through May.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-1
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
£
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Ayenia compacta
California ayenia
2B.3
G4
S3
No
Perennial herb. Grows on rocky
canyon bottoms within Mojavean
desert scrub and Sonoran Desert
scrub habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 490 to 3,595 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from
March to April.
No
Moderate: The project site
is located outside of the
known elevation range.
However, the project site
does project suitable habitat
and there are recent
occurrence records for this
species within one mile of
the project site.
Bursera microphylla
little -leaf elephant tree
2B.3
G4
S2
No
Perennial deciduous tree. Occurs
in rocky environments found in
Sonoran Desert scrub habitat.
Found at elevations ranging from
655 to 2,295 feet amsl. Blooming
period is June through July.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range and
there are no occurrence
records within five miles of
the project site.
Chorizanthe
leptotheca
Peninsular
spineflower
4.2
G3
S3
S3
No
Annual herb. Occurs on granitic
soils in chaparral, coastal scrub,
lower montane coniferous
forest habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 985 to 6,235 feet
amsl. Blooming period is May
through August.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range and
there are no occurrence
records within five miles of
the project site.
Chorizanthexanti
var. leucotheca
white-bracted
spineflower
1B.2
G4T3
S3
No
Annual herb. Occurs on sandy or
gravelly soils in coastal scrub,
Mohave desert scrub, and pinyon
and juniper woodland habitats.
Found at elevations ranging from
985 to 3,935 feet amsl. Blooming
period is April through June.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range and
there are no occurrence
records within five miles of
the project site.
Cryptantha ganderi
Gander's cryptantha
1B.1
G1G2
S1
No
Annual herb. Occurs in desert
dunes and within sand soils in
Sonoran Desert scrub habitats.
Found at elevations ranging from
525 to 1,310 feet amsl. Blooming
period is February through May.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range and
there are no occurrence
records within five miles of
the project site.
Cylindropuntia
munzii
Munz cholla
1B.3
G3
S1
No
Perennial stem succulent. Occurs
in gravelly or sandy soil in
Sonoran Desert scrub habitats.
Found at elevations ranging from
490 to 1,970 feet amsl. Blooms
during the month of May.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range and
there are no occurrence
records within five miles of
the project site.
Ditaxis claryana
glandular ditaxis
2B.2
G3G4
S2
No
Perennial herb. Occurs on sandy
soils in dry washes and on rocky
hillsides in Mojavean desert scrub
and Sonoran Desert scrub habitats.
Found at elevations ranging from 0
to 1,525 feet amsl. Blooming
period is October to March.
No
High: The project site
provides suitable habitat for
this species and there are
recent occurrence records for
this species within one mile
of the project site.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-2
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
la
Observed
On-site
Potential t
Ditaxis serrata var.
californica
California ditaxis
3.2
G5T3T4
S2?
No
Perennial herb. Occurs on sandy
washes and alluvial fans of the
foothills and lower desert slopes in
Sonoran Desert scrub habitat at
elevations ranging from 100 to
3,280 feet amsl. Blooming period
is March through December.
No
Moderate: The project site
provides suitable habitat for
this species and there are
recent occurrence records for
this species within five miles
of the project site.
Eriastrum harwoodii
Harwood's eriastrum
1B.2
G2
S2
No
Annual herb. Found in desert dune
habitats. Occurs at elevations
ranging from 410 to 3,000 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from
March to June.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Funastrum crispum
wavyleaf twinvine
2B.2
G4
S1
No
Perennial herb. Grows within
chaparral and pinyon and juniper
woodland. Found at elevations
ranging from 3,820 to 6,035 feet
amsl. Blooming period is May
through August.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species and there are no
occurrence records within
five miles of the project site.
Horsfordia alata
pink velvet -mallow
4.3
G5
S4
No
Perennial shrub. Grows on rocky
soils within Sonoran Desert scrub.
Found at elevations ranging from
330 to 1,640 feet amsl. Blooming
period is February through
December.
No
High: The project site
provides suitable habitat and
is within the known elevation
range for this species.
Further, there are recent
occurrence records within
one mile of the project site.
Horsfordia newberryi
Newberry's velvet-
mallow
4.3
G5
S4
No
Perennial shrub. Grows on rocky
soils within Sonoran Desert scrub.
Found at elevations ranging from
10 to 2,625 feet amsl. Blooming
period is February through
December.
No
High: The project site
provides suitable habitat and
is within the known elevation
range for this species.
Further, there are recent
occurrence records within
one mile of the project site.
Jaffueliobryum raui
Rau's jaffueliobryum
moss
2B.3
G4
S2
No
Moss. Occurs on carbonate dry,
openings, and rock crevices within
alpine dwarf scrub, chaparral,
Mojavean Desert scrub, and
Sonoran Desert scrub habitat.
Found at elevations found from
1,610 to 6,890 feet amsl.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species.
Johnstonella costata
ribbed cryptantha
4.3
G4G5
S4
No
Annual herb. Grows on sandy soils
within desert dunes in Mojavean
Desert scrub, and Sonoran Desert
scrub habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from -195 to 1,640 feet
amsl. Blooming period is February
through May.
No
Not Expected: There are no
recent occurrence records
within five miles of the
project site.
Johnstonella
holoptera
winged cryptantha
4.3
G4G5
S4
No
Annual herb. Found in Mojavean
desert scrub and Sonoran Desert
scrub habitats. Grows in elevations
ranging from 330 to 5,545 feet
amsl. Blooming period is March
through April.
No
Not Expected: There are no
recent occurrence records
within five miles of the
project site.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-3
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
£
Observed
On-site
Potential t
Juncus acutus ssp.
leopoldii
southwestern spiny
rush
4.2
G5T5
S4
No
Perennial rhizomatous herb.
Occurs within coastal dunes
(mesic), meadows and seeps
(alkaline seeps), and marshes and
swamps (coastal salt). Found at
elevations ranging from 10 to
2,955 feet amsl. Blooming period
is (March) May through June.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species and
there are no occurrence
records within five miles of
the project site.
Leptosiphon
floribundus ssp. hallii
Santa Rosa Mountains
leptosiphon
1B.3
G4T1T2
S1 S2
No
Perennial herb. Occurs within
pinyon and juniper woodland and
Sonoran Desert scrub habitat.
Found at elevations ranging from
3,280 to 6,560 feet amsl. Blooming
period is May through July
(November).
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species.
Linanthus maculatus
ssp. maculatus
Little San Bernardino
Mountains linanthus
1B.2
G2
S2
Yes
Annual herb. Occurs in sandy soils
within desert dune, Joshua tree
woodland, Mojave Desert scrub,
and Sonoran Desert scrub habitats.
Found at elevations ranging from
460 to 4,005 feet amsl. Blooming
period is March to May.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species and there are no
occurrence records within
five miles of the project site.
Lupinus albifrons
var. medius
Mountain Springs
bush lupine
1B.3
G4T2T3
S2
No
Perennial shrub. Occurs in pinyon
and juniper woodland and Sonoran
Desert scrub habitats. Found at
elevations ranging from 1,395 to
4,495 feet amsl. Blooming period
is March through May.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species.
Marina orcuttii var.
orcuttii
California marina
1B.3
G2G3T1T2
S2?
No
Perennial herb. Occurs on rocky
soils within chaparral, pinyon and
juniper woodland, and Sonoran
Desert scrub habitats. Found at
elevations ranging from 3,445 to
3,805 feet amsl. Blooming period
is May through October.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species.
Mateleaparvifolia
spear -leaf matelea
2B.3
G5
S3
No
Perennial herb. Occurs on rocky
soils within Mojavean desert scrub
and Sonoran Desert scrub habitats.
Found at elevations ranging from
1,445 to 3,595 feet amsl. Blooming
period is March through May
(July).
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species.
Mirabilis tenuiloba
slender -lobed four
o'clock
4.3
G5
S4
No
Perennial herb. Occurs within
Sonoran Desert scrub habitat.
Found at elevations ranging from
755 to 3,595 feet amsl. Blooming
period is (February) March
through May.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-4
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Nemacaulis denudata
var. gracilis
slender cottonheads
2B.2
G3G4T3?
S2
No
Annual herb. Occurs in coastal
dunes, desert dunes, and Sonoran
Desert scrub habitats. Found at
elevations ranging from -165 to
1,310 feet amsl. Blooming period
is (March) April through May.
No
Not Expected: There are no
occurrence records within
five miles of the project site.
Phaseolus filiformis
slender -stem bean
2B.1
G5
S1
No
Annual herb. Occurs within
Sonoran Desert scrub habitat.
Found at elevations ranging from
at or around 410 feet amsl. Blooms
during the month of April.
No
Not Expected: There are no
occurrence records within
five miles of the project site.
Pseudorontium
cyathiferum
Deep Canyon
snapdragon
2B.3
G4G5
S1
No
Annual herb. Grows on rocky soils
within Sonoran Desert scrub
habitat. Found at elevations
ranging from 0 to 2,625 feet amsl.
Blooming period is February
through April.
No
Not Expected: There are no
occurrence records within
five miles of the project site.
Salvia greatae
Orocopia sage
1B.3
G2G3
S2S3
Yes
Perennial shrub. Occurs in Mojave
Desert scrub and Sonoran Desert
scrub habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from -130 to 2,705 feet
amsl. Blooming period is March
through April.
No
Not Expected: There are no
occurrence records within
five miles of the project site.
Selaginella
eremophila
desert spike -moss
2B.2
S2S3
G4
No
Perennial rhizomatous herb.
Found in chaparral and Sonoran
Desert scrub habitats on gravelly
or rocky soils. Found at elevations
ranging from 655 to 4,250 feet
amsl. Blooming month is (May)
June (July).
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species.
Senna covesii
Cove's cassia
2B.2
G5
S3
No
Perennial herb. Found on dry,
sandy desert washes and slopes
within Sonoran Desert scrub
habitat. Found at elevations
ranging from 740 to 4,250 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from
March to June (August).
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species.
Stemodia durantifolia
purple stemodia
2B.1
G5
S2
No
Perennial herb. Occurs on sandy
soils and mesic sites within
Sonoran Desert scrub. Found at
elevations ranging from 591 to 984
feet amsl. Blooming period is from
(January) April to December.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located outside of the
known elevation range for
this species.
Xylorhiza cognata
Mecca -aster
1B.2
G2
S2
Yes
Perennial herb. Occurs in creosote
bush scrub. Found at elevations
ranging from 65 to 1,310 feet amsl.
Blooming period is January to
June.
No
Not Expected: There are no
occurrence records within
five miles of the project site.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-5
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential t
SPECIAL -STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
SSC
G4
S3
Yes
Yearlong resident of Califomia.
Primarily a grassland species, but
it persists and even thrives in some
landscapes highly altered by
human activity. Occurs in open,
annual or perennial grasslands,
deserts, and scrublands
characterized by low -growing
vegetation. Also known to occur in
along flood control channels,
disturbed lots, and other lands
devoid of vegetation. The
overriding characteristics of
suitable habitat appear to be the
presence of suitable burrows for
roosting and nesting in areas with
relatively short vegetation with
only sparse shrubs and limited
taller vegetation.
No
Moderate: The project site
provides suitable foraging
habitat, but marginal nesting
habitat for this species due
on-site soil conditions (i.e.,
rocky) and minimal number
of suitable burrows. Further,
multiple burrowing owls
were observed during
surveys conducted in 2003
near to the northeast corner
of the project site (AMEC
2010).
Batrachoseps major
aridus
desert slender
salamander
FE
SE
G4T1
SI
No
Known only from Hidden Palm
Canyon (2,800 feet amsl) and
Guadalupe Creek on the eastern
slope of the Santa Rosa Mountains
in Riverside County. Inhabits year-
round seeps and moist cliffs with
limestone sheets, rocks, and talus,
shaded by California fan palms
and willow trees.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Buteo regalis
ferruginous hawk
WL
G4
S3S4
No
Common winter resident of
grassland habitats and agricultural
areas in southwestern California.
Frequents open grasslands,
sagebrush flats, desert scrub, low
foothills surrounding valleys, and
fringes of pinyon juniper habitats.
This species does not breed in
California.
No
Not Expected: There is no
suitable habitat for this
species within the project
site. Further, this species
does not nest within
California and only occur
during the winter.
Chaetodipus fallax
pallidus
pallid San Diego
pocket mouse
SSC
G5T3T4
S3S4
No
Common resident of sandy
herbaceous areas, usually in
association with rocks or course
gravel in southwestern Califomia.
Occurs mainly in arid coastal and
desert border areas in eastem San
Diego County. Habitats include
coastal scrub, chamise-redshank
chaparral, mixed chaparral,
sagebrush, desert wash, desert
scrub, desert succulent shrub,
pinyon juniper, and annual
grassland.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species and
there are no occurrence
records within five miles of
the project site.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-6
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
iii_
Observed
On-site
Potential t r
Crotalus ruber
red -diamond
rattlesnake
SSC
G4
S3
No
Found in southwestern California,
from the Morongo Valley west to
the coast and south along the
peninsular ranges to mid Baja
California. It can be found from
the desert, through dense chaparral
in the foothills (it avoids the
mountains above around 4,000 feet
amsl), to warm inland mesas and
valleys, all the way to the cool
ocean shore. It is most commonly
associated with heavy brush with
large rocks or boulders. Dense
chaparral in the foothills, boulders
associated coastal sage scrub,
oak/pine woodlands, and desert
slope scrub associations; however,
chamise and red shank
associations may offer better
structural habitat for refuges and
food resources for this species than
other habitats.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Cyprinodon
macularius
desert pupfish
FE
SE
Gl
S1
Yes
Historically occurred in several
springs, seeps, and slow-moving
streams in the Salton Sink Basin,
as well as in backwaters and
sloughs along the lower Colorado
River. Currently, natural
populations of desert pupfish
occur in the Salton Sea and nearby
shoreline pools, freshwater ponds,
and irrigation drains, as well as in
portions of creeks/washes that are
tributary to the Salton Sea. The
desert pupfish tolerates an extreme
range of environmental conditions:
salinities ranging from freshwater
to 68-90 parts per thousand, water
temperatures as high as 108 °F and
as low as 40 °F.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Danaus plexippus
(California
overwintering
population)
monarch butterfly
FC
G4T2T3
S2S3
No
Winter roost sites extend along the
coast from northern Mendocino to
Baja California, Mexico. Roosts
are located in wind -protected tree
groves (eucalyptus, Monterey
pine, cypress), with nectar and
water sources nearby.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Based on maps of known
wintering roosts for this
species, there are no known
roosts in this area (Xerces
Society 2022).
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-7
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
£
Observed
On-site
Potential t
Dinacoma caseyi
Casey's June beetle
FE
G1
S1
No
Only two known populations in a
small area of southern Palm
Springs. Found in sandy soils
within desert wash and Mojavean
desert scrub habitat; the females
live underground and only come to
the ground surface to mate.
No
Not Expected: The project
site is located more than 5
miles away and separate
from the species known
populations.
Empidonax traillii
extimus
southwestern willow
flcatcher
y
FE
SE
GST2
S1
Yes
Uncommon summer resident in
southern California primarily
found in lower elevation riparian
habitats occurring along streams or
in meadows. The structure of
suitable breeding habitat typically
consists of a dense mid -story and
understory and can also include a
dense canopy. Nest sites are
generally located near surface
water or saturated soils. The
presence of surface water, swampy
conditions, standing or flowing
water under the riparian canopy
are preferred.
No
Not Expected: There is no
suitable habitat within the
project site and there are no
occurrence records for this
species within five miles of
the project site.
Eumops perotis
californicus
western mastiff bat
SSC
G4G5T4
S3S4
No
Primarily a cliff -dwelling species,
roost generally under exfoliating
rock slabs. Roosts are generally
high above the ground, usually
allowing a clear vertical drop of at
least 10 feet below the entrances
for flight, in crevices in cliff faces,
high buildings, trees, and tunnels.
In California, it is most frequently
encountered in broad open areas.
Its foraging habitat includes dry
desert washes, flood plains,
chaparral, oak woodland, open
ponderosa pine forest, grassland,
and agricultural areas.
No
Low: The project site
provides marginal foraging
habitat for this species.
However, suitable roosting
habitat is not present and
there are no recent
occurrence records within
five miles of the project site.
Falco mexicanus
prairie falcon
WL
G5
S4
No
The prairie falcon is associated
primarily with perennial
grasslands, savannahs, rangeland,
some agricultural fields during the
winter season, and desert scrub
areas, all typically dry
environments of western North
American where there are cliffs or
bluffs for nest sites. The species
requires sheltered cliff ledges for
cover and nesting which may
range in height from low rock
outcrops of 30 feet to vertical, 400
feet high (or more) cliffs and
typically overlook some treeless
country for hunting. Open terrain
is used for foraging.
No
High: The project provides
suitable foraging habitat.
However, there is no suitable
nesting habitat within the
project site.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-8
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential t
Gopherus agassizii
desert tortoise
FT
ST
G3
S2S3
Yes
Can be found in a wide variety of
habitats, such as alluvial fans,
desert washes, canyons, and
saltbush plains; most tortoises in
the Mojave Desert are usually
associated with creosote bush
scrub on alluvial fans and bajadas.
Wildflowers, grasses, and in some
cases, cacti make up the bulk of
their diet. Some of the more
common forbs consumed by the
tortoise include desert dandelion,
primrose, gilia, desert plantain,
milkvetches, desert marigold,
Mojave lupine, phacelia, desert
wishbone bush, forget -me -knots,
lotus, goldfields, California
coreopsis, white -margin sandmat,
and the introduced red stemmed
filaree.
No
Not Expected: The project
site contains suitable habitat
for this species. However,
there are no occurrence
records within five miles of
the project site and the
project site is not connected
to any known populations.
Lanius ludovicianus
loggerhead shrike
SSC
G4
S4
No
Yearlong resident of California.
Prefers open habitats with bare
ground, scattered shrubs, and areas
with low or sparse herbaceous
cover including open -canopied
valley foothill hardwood, riparian,
pinyon -juniper desert riparian,
creosote bush scrub, and Joshua
tree woodland. Requires suitable
perches including trees, posts,
fences, utility lines, or other
perches. Nests in branches up to 14
feet above the ground frequently in
a shrub with thorns or with tangled
branching habitats.
Yes
Present: The project site
provides suitable nesting and
foraging habitat, and the
species was observed during
field surveys.
Lasiurusxanthinus
western yellow bat
SSC
G4G5
S3
Yes
Uncommon m California, known
only m Los Angeles and San
Bernardino Counties. Occurs in
valley foothill riparian, desert
riparian, desert wash, and palm
oasis habitats. Prefers to roost and
feed in, and near, palm oases and
riparian habitats. Commonly
found in the southwestern U.S.
roosting in the skirt of dead fronds
in both native and non-native palm
trees.
No
Low: The project site
provides marginal foraging
habitat for this species.
However, suitable roosting
habitat is not present and
there are no recent
occurrence records within
five miles of the project site.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-9
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
£ Distribution Affinities
+
Observed
On-site
Potential t
Nyctinomops
femorosaccus
pocketed free -tailed
bat
SSC
S3 S4
S3
No
Often found in pinyon juniper
woodlands, desert scrub, desert
succulent shrub, desert riparian,
desert wash, alkali desert scrub,
Joshua tree woodland, and palm
oasis habitats. The species roosts
primarily in crevices of rugged
cliffs, high rocky outcrops, and
slopes. May also roost in
buildings, caves, and under roof
tiles.
No
Low: The project site
provides marginal foraging
habitat for this species.
However, suitable roosting
habitat is not present and
there are no recent
occurrence records within
five miles of the project site.
Ovis canadensis
nelsoni pop. 2
Peninsular bighorn
sheep DPS
FE
ST
FP
G4T3Q
32
Yes
Eastern slopes of the Peninsular
Ranges below 4,600 feet asml.
This DPS of the subspecies
inhabits the Peninsular Ranges in
southern California from the San
Jacinto Mountains south to the US-
Mexico International Border.
Optimal habitat includes steep
walled canyons and ridges
bisected by rocky or sandy washes,
with available water. Alluvial fans
and washes m flatter terrain are
also used for foraging and water.
Peninsular bighorn sheep in
particular avoid higher elevations
that support chaparral.
No
Moderate: The native
Vegetation communities
within the southern portions
of the project site provide
suitable foraging habitat for
this species, but the project
site is unlikely to be used for
lambing. In addition, Critical
Habitat is designated for this
species is located along the
southern boundary and
adjacent to the western
boundary of the project site.
Further, there are recent
occurrence records for this
species within one mile of
the project site.
Perognathus
longimembris bangsi
Palm Springs pocket
mouse
SSC
G5T2
S2
Yes
Known from various vegetation
communities, including creosote
scrub, desert scrub, and grasslands,
generally occurring on loosely
packed or sandy soils with sparse
to moderately dense vegetative
cover. No longer occur on the
valley floor from Palm Springs to
the Salton Sea in areas developed
for urban and agricultural land
uses.
No
Not Expected: There is no
suitable habitat within the
project site and there are no
occurrence records for this
species within five miles of
the project site.
Phrynosoma mcallii
flat -tailed horned
lizard
SSC
G3
S2
Yes
Restricted to desert washes and
desert flats in desert dunes,
Mojavean desert scrub, and
Sonoran Desert scrub. Critical
habitat element is fme sand with
high density of harvester ants and
fine windblown sand, but do not
normally occur in habitats
characterized as marshes and
tamarisk-arrowweed thickets, or
agricultural and developed areas.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-10
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
•
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential t r
Polioptila melanura
black -tailed
gnatcatcher
WL
G5
S3 S4
No
In Mojave, Great Basin, Colorado
and Sonoran Desert communities,
prefers nesting and foraging in
densely lined arroyos and washes
dominated by creosote bush and
saltbush, with scattered bursage,
ocotillo, saguaro, barrel cactus,
prickly pear cactus, and cholla.
Yes
Present: The project site
provides suitable nesting and
foraging habitat, and the
species was observed during
field surveys.
Pyrocephalus rubinus
vermilion flycatcher
SSC
G5
S2S3
No
Occurs in a variety of open habitats
including open woodland,
clearings, desert scrub, savannah,
agricultural land, golf courses, and
recreational parks. The species
tends to stay near water, often
occurring in riparian vegetation
characterized by Fremont
cottonwoods, mesquite, willows,
and California sycamores.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Rallus obsoletus
[ 4ongirostrisJ
yumanensis
Yuma Ridgways
(clapper) Rail
FE
Yes
Consistently found in freshwater
marshes that are composed of
bulrush and cattail with an average
height greater than 6 feet tall.
No
Not Expected: The project
site does not provide suitable
habitat for this species.
Taxidea taxus
American badger
SSC
G5
S3
No
Occupies a wide variety of habitats
including dry, open grassland,
sagebrush, and woodland habitats.
Require dry, friable, often sandy
soil to dig burrows for cover, food
storage, and giving birth.
Occasionally found in riparian
zones and open chaparral with less
than 50% plant cover.
No
Low: The project site
provides marginal habitat for
this species. Additionally,
there are no known sightings
within five miles of the
project site.
Toxostoma crissale
Crissal thrasher
SSC
G5
S3
Yes
Common yearlong resident in
southern California. Occupies arid
habitats including desert washes,
riparian brush, and mesquite
thickets at lower elevations and
dense scrub in arroyos at higher
elevations. Nests in dense
vegetation along streams/washes
dominated by mesquite,
screwbean mesquite, ironwood,
catclaw, acacia, arrowweed,
willow.
No
Not Expected: There is no
suitable habitat for this
species within the project
site.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-11
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank*
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
£
Observed
On-site
Potential t
Toxostoma lecontei
Le Conte's thrasher
SSC
G4
S3
Yes
Common yearlong resident in
southern California. Primarily
occurs in open desert wash, desert
scrub, alkali desert scrub, and
desert succulent shrub habitats;
also occurs in Joshua tree habitat
with scattered shrubs. Habitats
with a high proportion of one or
more species of saltbush and/or
cylindrical cholla cactus is
preferred. The ground is generally
bare or with sparse patches of
grasses and annuals forming low
ground cover. Commonly nests in
a dense, spiny shrub or densely
branched cactus in desert wash
habitat, usually 2 to 8 feet above
ground.
No
Moderate: The project site
provides suitable foraging
habitat, but marginal nesting
habitat for this species.
However, there are no
occurrence records for this
species within five miles of
the project site.
Uma inornata
Coachella Valley
fringe -toed lizard
FT
SE
G1Q
S1
Yes
Sparsely vegetated and areas with
fine wind-blown sand, including
dunes, washes, alkali scrub, and
flats with sandy hummocks
formed around the bases of
vegetation. Requires fine, loose,
wind-blown sand for burrowing.
No
Not Expected: There is no
suitable habitat within the
project site.
Vireo bellii pusillus
least Bell's vireo
FE
SE
SSC
G5T2
S2
Yes
Summer resident in southern
California. Breeding habitat
generally consists of dense, low,
shrubby vegetation in riparian
areas, and mesquite brushlands,
often near water in arid regions.
Early successional cottonwood -
willow riparian groves are
preferred for nesting. The most
critical structural component of
nesting habitat in California is a
dense shrub layer that is 2 to 10
feet above ground. The presence of
water, including ponded surface
water or moist soil conditions, may
also be a key component for
nesting habitat.
No
Not Expected: There is no
suitable habitat within the
project site and there are no
occurrence records for this
species within five miles of
the project site.
Xerospermophilus
tereticaudus chlorus
Palm Springs round-
tailed ground squirrel
SSC
G5T2Q
S2
Yes
Prefers open, flat, grassy areas in
fine -textured, sandy soil. Habitats
include mesquite- and creosote-
dominated sand dunes, creosote
bush scrub, creosote-paloverde,
and saltbush/alkali scrub.
Substrates include wind-blown
sand, coarse sand, and packed silt
with desert pavement.
No
Not Expected: Although
there is creosote dominated
habitats there is little to no
sandy soils, grasses, or flat
open areas which this species
prefers. Additionally, there
are no occurrence records
within five miles of the
project site.
Travertine Development
Biological Resources Assessment
C-12
Appendix C — Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-
Status
Rank *
CVMSHCP
Covered
Species
Habitat Preferences and
Distribution Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential t
SPECIAL -STATUS VEGETATION COMMUNITIES
CNDDB/Holland
G3
N/A
Found at elevations ranging from
No
Absent: This vegetation
(1986)
S3.2
328 to 2,952 feet amsl in desert
springs in canyon waterways or
along fault lines where
underground water is continuously
available. The USFWS Wetland
community does not occur
within or adjacent to the
project site.
Desert Fan Palm Oasis
Woodland
MCV (1995)
Fan Palm Series
NVCS (2009)
Inventory (1996 national list)
recognizes Washingtonia filifera
as a FACW plant. Washintonia
filifera is dominant or co -dominant
in the tree canopy with white alder
(Alnus rhombifolia), Arizona ash
(Fraxinus velutina), California
sycamore, Fremont cottonwood,
honey mesquite (Prosopis
glandulosa), screwbean mesquite
Washingtonia filifera
seasonally flooded
woodland alliance
(Prosopis pubescens), narrow
leaved willow (Salix exigua),
Goodding's black willow (Salix
gooddingii), and arroyo willow
(Salix lasiolepis). Trees are less
than 98 feet tall; canopy is open to
continuous. Shrubs include
saltbush, willow baccharis
(Baccharis salicina), brittlebush
(Encelia farinose), arrowweed,
bush seepweed (Suaeda nigra) or
tamarix. Herbaceous layer is open
to continuous.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
FE Endangered — any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
FT Threatened — any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
SE Endangered — any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant which is in serious danger
of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range due to one or more causes, including loss of habitat,
change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, or disease.
ST Threatened — any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that, although not presently
threatened with extinction, is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special
protection and management efforts required under the California Endangered Species Act.
FP Fully Protected — any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, or reptile that were determined by the
State of California to be rare or face possible extinction.
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
Travertine Development C-13
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix C – Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources
do not yet meet SSC criteria, but for which there is concern and a need for additional information to clarify status.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) California Rare Plant Rank
1B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere.
2B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere.
3 Plants about which more information is needed – Review List.
4 Plants of limited distribution – Watch List.
Threat Ranks
.1 Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree any immediacy of threat).
.2 Moderately threatened in California (20 to 80 percent of occurrences threatened/moderate degree and
immediacy of threat).
.3 Not very threatened m California (less than 20 percent of occurrences threatened/low degree and immediacy
of threat or no current threats known).
NatureServe Conservation Status Rank
The Global Rank (G#) reflects the overall condition and imperilment of a species throughout its global range. The Infraspecific Taxon Rank
(T#) reflects the global situation of just the subspecies or variety. The State Rank (S#) reflects the condition and imperilment of an element
throughout its range within California. (G#Q) reflects that the element is very rare but there are taxonomic questions associated with it; the
calculated G rank is qualified by adding a Q after the G#). Adding a ? to a rank expresses uncertainty about the rank.
Gl /T1 Critically Imperiled – At very high risk of extinction due to extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer populations), very steep declines,
or other factors.
G2/T2 Imperiled— At high risk of extinction due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines,
or other factors.
G3/T3 Vulnerable— At moderate risk of extinction due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent
and widespread declines, or other factors.
G4/T4 Apparently Secure— Uncommon but not rare; some cause for long-term concem due to declines or other factors.
G5/T5 Secure – Common; widespread and abundant.
S1 Critically Imperiled – Critically imperiled in the state because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer occurrences) or because of
some factor(s) such as very steep declines making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the State.
S2 Imperiled – Imperiled in the State because of rarity due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer),
steep declines, or other factors making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the nation or State.
S3 Vulnerable – Vulnerable in the State due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and
widespread declines, or other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation.
S4 Apparently Secure – Uncommon but not rare; some cause for long-term concern due to declines or other factors.
Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
Yes – Fully Covered.
No – Not Covered.
Travertine Development C-14
Biological Resources Assessment
Appendix D USFWS Biological Opinion
United States Department of the Interior
In Reply Refer To:
FWS-ERIV-2735.3
Memorandum
FISH I AND 'W ILDLIFI3 SERVICE
Ecological Scniccs
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office
6010 Hidden Valley Road
Carlsbad, California 92011
DEC 0 7 ZOOS
To: Field Manager, Bureau of Land Management, Palm Springs, California
Area Manager, Bureau of Reclamation, Yuma Area Office, Yuma, Arizona
From: AssistantieldSupervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, California
Subject: Endanger d Species Consultation on the Proposed Travertine Project, City of La
Quinn, Riverside County, California
This biological opinion responds to your request to initiate consultation under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended D6 U.S.C. 1531 et seq., (Act)]. Your request
dated June 25, 2004, was received by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on June 28,
2004. At issue are the effects of the subject project on the Peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis
canadensis) and its designated critical habitat.
After receipt of a regional species list from the Service dated February 3, 2003, representatives
of the Service, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), and
Travertine Corporation further assessed the suitability of the project site and environs to support
the ten listed species included in the list. Based on this review, the Service agreed that seven of
the species were unlikely to be found on or adjacent to the project site but that a more refined
assessment was needed for the remaining three species. Travertine then sponsored a habitat
assessment for the endangered triple -ribbed milk -vetch (Astragalus tricarinatus). In a letter
from Dr. Andrew Sanders, dated September 16, 2003, the author concluded that the species was
unlikely to be present based on a map/photograph that was provided for his review. Travertine
also sponsored a field survey for the threatened desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii), which was
conducted in September 2003 largely following Service protocol but did not detect any tortoise
or tortoise sign (letter from Ecological Ventures California, Inc., dated September 12, 2003).
Based on numerous site visits by Service personnel, reconfiguration of project boundaries, and
results of species surveys and habitat assessments, the Service agrees that the proposed project is
unlikely to affect the milk -vetch or tortoise, which will not be addressed further in this opinion.
This biological opinion is based on (1) she Biological Assessment of the Impacts to Peninsular
Bighorn Sheep, Desert Tortoise, and Triple -ribbed milk -vetch for the Proposed Travertine
Development, City of la Quinla, Riverside County, California, dated June 2004; (2) an
addendum to the biological assessment, entitled Addendum to Biological Assessment for the
TAKE PRI17E` I.
INAMERICA{
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 2
Area Manager, BOR
Travertine Development, La Quinta, CA, dated February 2005; (3) another addendum to the-
biological
hebiological assessment, entitled Section 5 Addendum to Travertine Biological Assessment,
transmitted by email on September 29, 2005; (4) various email and verbal communications
between representatives of the project proponent, Service, California Department of Fish and
Game, BOR, BLM, and City of La Quinta (City); and (5) the scientific literature, unpublished
data, various maps, file materials, and meeting notes.
CONSULTATION HISTORY
Or ginally, BLM requested on April 8, 1997, initiation of a conference on Peninsular bighorn
sheep pursuant to 50 CFR 402.10. However, based on a memo from the Service dated June 18,
1998, the conference was not completed. Subsequently, after meeting with prospective partners
and their representatives with an interest in the project, and learning that a right -of -use
application had been submitted to the AOR for access across Federal ]ands, the Service wrote
BOR on March 12, 2002, requesting project- related information and initiation of formal
consultation. This request led to a series of meetings involving representatives of the permit
applicant, BOR, BLM, Service, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), Coachella
Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), and City. On March 21, 2003, BOR requested
initiation of consultation but the Service responded on June 2, 2003, and deferred initiation
pending completion of a biological assessment per 50 CFR 402.1(c)(6), After numerous
additional meetings among the interests listed above, and reviews of several draft biological
assessments, BLM requested initiation of consultation with submittal of the biological
assessment on June 25, 2004, which was received by the Service on June 28, 2004. Numerous
additional meetings were held, primarily between the permit applicant and Service, and an
addendum to the biological assessment was received by the Service on March 12, 2005.
Following another series of meetings, Travertine submitted the Section 5 Addendum to the
Travertine Biological Assessment. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on
File in the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The proposed Travertine development is located in the City of La Quinta (City) at the base of the
Santa Rosa Mountains in the Coachella Valley, Riverside County, California, The project area is
in T6S, R7E, Section 33, and T7S, R7E, Sections 3, 4, and 5, San Bernardino Base Meridian
(Figure 1). About one section of land within the current Travertine project site was acquired into
private ownership through the Toro Canyon land exchange in a trade for public acquisition of
about five sections of land within the Santa Rosa Mountains National Scenic Area by BLM. In
addition to the public interest benefits of acquiring in -holdings within the National Scenic Area,
the Toro Canyon exchange was to have a positive impact on management of public lands
that also provided habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep. Once the land exchange was approved,
the City annexed the project site and adjoining areas from the County in 1993, and the site was
incorporated into the City as Low Density Residential (LDR, 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) and
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 3
Area Manager, BOR
Open Space. In 1995, the proposed Travertine development (Specific Plan 94-026) and
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 94112047) were approved by the
City through adoption of Resolution 95-39. In 1999, the City approved an indefinite time
extension of the final specific plan by adoption of Resolution 99-061.
The original project area was 906 acres but Travertine Corporation currently has acquired an
additional 35 acres in Section 5 immediately adjacent to Travertine's western boundary for
conservation of bighorn sheep habitat and golf course expansion. Travertine continues to
investigate the acquisition of additional lands in Section 5 for conservation of bighorn sheep.
Additional lands not to exceed about 150 acres in Section 33 along the project's northeastern
comer outside of designated critical habitat may also be added to the project site. This increase
in acreage would potentially accommodate larger lot sizes with the total number of residential
units not exceeding 2,000 units and an additional nine holes of golf to bring the total to 36 holes.
The proposed Travertine development is a master -planned resort community that would include
a variety of land uses, including residential, recreational/open space, commercial, and resort
hotellconference center. At least three proposed residential types, including estate homes, resort
homes, and villas, would be oriented around up to 36 holes of golf and a driving range. A
neighborhood commercial site is proposed to provide local services. A resort hotel/conference
center will include the opportunity for a tennis facility, which may provide additional
recreational opportunities for both residents and visitors to the Travertine community.
The project would be developed in multiple phases over a number of years. The anticipated
project phases are depicted in Table 1. After construction of the golf course, phasing of project
area development would be driven primarily by the construction of the two water reservoirs,
each of which would serve a different portion of the development. At build -out, the project
would result in impacts to approximately 826 acres, of which about 267acres are in designated
critical habitat. The total acreage of Travertine could increase as described above, in
consultation with the Service. This information is from the Travertine Specific Plan and exhibits
prepared by The Keith Companies (1995a, 1995b, 1999) and Travertine Corporation.
Table 1. Proposed Phasing of the Travertine Development, City of La Quinta,
Riverside County, California.
Phase Description
1 Selective grading of project site, and construction of Madison Street
from Avenue 60 to Avenue 62.
2 Construction of lower contour water reservoir, water mains, sewer, &
other backbone infrastructure.
3 Golf course development (driving range & first 18 holes around southern
perimeter).
Field Manager, BLM (PWS-ERIV-2735.3) 4
Area Manager, BOR
4 Phase 1 of residential development of approximately 500 units and
construction of Jefferson Street.
5 Clubhouse construction.
6 Phase 2 of residential development of approximately 500 units.
7 Golf course development (second 18 holes).
8 Phase 3 of residential development of approximately 500 units.
9 Construction of upper water reservoir.
10 Phase 4 of residential development of approximately 500 units.
11 Construction of Resort Hotel & associated facilities.
12 Construction of Commercial Site & associated facilities.
13 Construction of Connector Trail & Trail User Parking Lot (to connect
CVRPD, Madison Street, and Dike #4 Trail, with Boo Hoff Trail).
Residential Land Use: The project could include a total of 2,000 home sites, consisting of
multiple residential land uses consistent with local concepts of Estate Homes, Resort Homes, and
Villas. This land use concept provides for a variety of residential housing and lot sizes. The
combination of lot numbers, sizes, and residential acreage is the best projection available based
on current market conditions. The actual combination at the time of development will be
determined through the entitlement process with the City.
Commercial Land Use: The neighborhood commercial site would be approximately 10 acres in
size, although the exact size has not been determined at this time. The commercial site will
provide local services such as a dry cleaner, a convenience store, and restaurants.
Resort Hotel & Tennis Facility: The project includes an approximately 25 -acre, 500 -room resort
hotel with associated visitor facilities, including tennis club and spa. (The exact number of
rooms and the exact size of these facilities have not been determined at this time.)
Recreational/Open Space: Encompassing about 298 acres, the desert -style golf facilities will
consist of up to 36 holes and a driving range. Associated with the golf facility will be a single
clubhouse and related uses, including a driving range and maintenance facilities that would
encompass an additional 4 acres. The desert golf course design will maximize retention of native
open space that will naturally merge into the adjoining desert scrub and woodland. A 100 -foot
wide recreational trail corridor and the golf course will front the project: habitat edge, providing
a minimum 200 -foot wide buffer between residential units and desert habitat proposed for
conservation. These setback measures provide additional buffer between the development and
bighom sheep habitat. Together, natural and artificial open space uses, including golf course
and intermixed desert open space, trail corridor, and conserved habitat for bighorn sheep, total
approximately 413 acres.
The trail corridor proposed along the golf course perimeter is intended to connect with other trail
segments on adjoining properties that would link the Coachella Valley Recreation and Park
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 5
Area Manager, BOR
District's (CVRPD) Dike #4 Trail with the Boo Hoff Trail. This altered alignment of the City's
General Plan trail network was agreed to by Travertine, the City, BLM, BOR, and the Service.
The Travertine connector trail, to be located along the Madison Street alignment south of
Avenue 62, will provide public access for viewing of the Martinez Rockslide, a prominent
geological feature adjacent to Travertine and is hereafter referred to as the Rockslide Access
Trail. Unauthorized trails currently in use on Travertine's property will be closed to minimize
impacts to bighorn sheep.
The proposed Rockslide Access Trail begins on Dike #4 at Avenue 62 and proceeds south on the
Madison Street alignment, as requested by the City to the development: habitat edge, , where it
then roughly follows the golf course alignment to the base of the Martinez Rockslide. The trail
then follows the base of the rockslide until it veers in a northwesterly direction toward the
junction of sections 4, 5, 32 and 33, again following along or through the golf course. The Trail
would then parallel the section line between Section 32 and Section 33 on the west side of the
proposed Jefferson Street (i.e.„ until it connects with the Boo Hoff Trail. Parking for trail users
will be located on the project site at two locations: one at Madison Street and Avenue 62, and
the other approximately 0.75 miles south of there near the southern terminus of the proposed
Madison Street extension.
Support Facilities: All project infrastructures will be designed and constructed to serve only the
Travertine project or lands east of Travertine, No additional capacity will be installed to provide
service for potential projects in Section 5. Support facilities for the Travertine development
would entail two gravity -distribution water reservoirs, Imperial Irrigation District Energy (TIDE)
is the local electric power provider to the project. Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) is
the local water and sewer services provider to the project site. Currently, domestic water service
lines exist in the area of the intersection of Avenue 61) and Madison Street.
Electrical Power: IIDE plans to provide electrical power to the Travertine project. Travertine
anticipates that the electrical power lines will be located within Madison Street and possibly
within Avenue 62. All distribution lines would be under -grounded. Section 5 landowners other
than Travertine will be solely responsible for providing utilities, adequate utility system
capacities, and any associated system upsizing for potential developments there. Please refer to
the Section 5 Addendum to the Travertine Biological Assessment for a detailed discussion of the
impacts of the Travertine project on Section 5.
Reservoirs: CVWD plans to provide the Travertine project with water by dividing Travertine
into two pressure zones, each of which will be served by a separate reservoir. CVWD has
determined that the only locations suitable for the two proposed water reservoirs are in Section 5,
with one placed at the 332 -foot elevation and the other at the 405 -foot elevation. Both reservoirs
will be depressed and screened to the greatest extent possible. Any above -ground tank
appurtenances will be painted with non -reflective paint colored to blend with the surrounding
habitat. The post -construction footprint of the reservoirs and access road is expected to be about
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ER1V-2735.3) 6
Area Manager, BOR
6 acres and all areas temporarily disturbed during construction will be revegetated using locally
endemic native plant species/materials. Access would be strictly limited to CVWD personnel
and maintenance vehicles. An access road would be constructed with an all-weather, typical
Class 2 road base of compacted gravel. An access gate will be constructed to prevent public use
and proliferation of unauthorized trailheads. Electrical power to the reservoirs will be under -
grounded and no night -lighting will be used.
Federal Action
To access and develop the proposed project site, Travertine Corporation requires three ROW
permits, two from BOR and one from BLM. Specifically, Travertine requires a new ROW
permit from BOR for an extension of Madison Street, and an amendment to an existing permit
for expansion of Avenue 62 across BOR Levee No. 4 and adjacent BOR ]ands. Madison Street
would provide primary access to the development. The Avenue 62 permit is required by the City
to provide access for local traffic from the east. From BLM, Travertine requires a ROW permit
for an extension of Jefferson Street across BLM-managed lands. Jefferson Street would provide
secondary access to the development. The Madison Street and Jefferson Street ROW permits are
also needed because the Riverside County Fire Marshal requires two all-weather public access
roads at separate locations to and from the Travertine project site. Details regarding these
roadway extensions are provided below.
The need for these ROW permits arises from the fact that the property is virtually surrounded by
Federal lands. Without the permits, the Travertine property would remain landlocked, with no
access via public roads. Also, acquisition of the ROW permits is required as a condition of
approval imposed by the City for approval of the land use entitlements sought by Travertine.
Madison Street: The Madison Street ROW, which would provide primary access to the project
area, would extend across BOR Levee No. 4 between Avenue 60 and Avenue 62, located along
the section line between Sections 33 and 34 (Figure 2b). This stretch is designated as a
secondary arterial street in the City's General Plan. By agreement with BOR, the Madison Street
ROW will be in the form of a recorded easement. The ROW that Travertine is requesting would
be approximately 2,600 feet long and 100 feet wide. The ultimate ROW will include a 12 -foot
parkway with sidewalk, curb and gutter, a six-foot wide bike lane (each side), painted median,
and two 12 -foot wide travel lanes. There will also be additional slope and drainage easements,
since Madison Street must cross Dike No. 4 between Avenue 60 and Avenue 62. These
easements will be needed as part of the proposed street improvements.
All construction staging would take place from nearby privately owned lands. Buried utilities
planned within the access road easement would include water and sewer, electric distribution
tines, and storm drains sized for the Travertine project only. Dry utilities (e.g., cable television,
telephone, and gas lines) would also be buried within the ROW. After construction of this
portion of Madison Street is completed, BOR will require that the ROW be conveyed to the City,
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 7
Area Manager, BOR
who will be responsible for long-term operation and maintenance of the roadway and
appurtenances.
Jefferson Street: The Jefferson Street ROW, which would provide secondary access to the
development site, would extend across BLM-managed lands located in the northeast corner of
Section 32 {Figure 2b). The ROW would consist of four lanes (two lanes in either direction).
Buried utilities planned within the access road easement would include water, sewer, electric
distribution lines, and storm drains sized for the Travertine project only. Dry utilities (e.g., cable
television, telephone, and gas lines) would also be buried within the ROW. The ROW would be
approximately 1,600 feet long and 100 feet wide. All construction staging would take place
from nearby privately owned lands. After the construction of this portion of Jefferson Street is
completed, BLM will assign the ROW license to the City, who will be responsible for operation
and maintenance of the roadway and appurtenances.
Avenue 62: BOR and Travertine Corporation are parties 10 a ROW agreement, which allows
vehicular traffic across Levee No, 4 at the Avenue 62 alignment {Figure 2b). The Riverside
County Fire Department has indicated to Travertine Corporation that it may be necessary to use
this access point for fire and other public safety vehicles. Avenue 62 is also designated as a
public street in the City's General Plan for local traffic to and from the east. As in the other
rights-of-way above, any utilities and infrastructure would be restricted in size to meet the needs
only of Travertine. This proposed use would expand the current authorized use of the existing
ROW. Therefore, Travertine Corporation requires BOR approval to expand the scope of the
existing ROW permit. The existing loose gravel road would be improved to conform to the
City's standards for public asphalted streets.
Conservation Measures
Following several meetings in 2002 and 2003 with the Service and CDFG, the development plan
was extensively modified and reconfigured to remove development in bighom sheep habitat
from the southern portion of the Travertine property, specifically in Sections 4 and 5 in the
vicinity of the Martinez Rockslide. Based on these discussions, the project boundary was
established on May 1, 2003, during a field visit with Travertine, Service, and CDFG, which was
depicted in the draft Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, dated
October 15, 2004 (CVMSHCP). Subsequent meetings with the Service in 2005 refined the
project boundary to encompass approximately 170 acres of conserved habitat within Travertine's
original land holdings (Figure 1). This area to be conserved as bighorn sheep habitat lies in the
southern portion of the project site adjacent to the Martinez Rockslide and would be preserved in
perpetuity through a deed restriction consistent with California Civil Code Section 815, et seq.,
as approved by the Service, prior to recording the first final map for the project. The only
project -related development within this area of conserved habitat would be the two subterranean
water reservoirs located in Section 5, and associated access roads, which would encompass about
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ER1V-2735.3) 8
Area Manager, BOR
6 acres. These conserved ]ands would become part of the habitat reserve system proposed by the
CVMSHCP, if that plan is adopted.
In addition to the lands subject to Specific Plan 94-026, Travertine has acquired 35 acres
additional acres in Section 5, of which 14.4 acres would be used for the proposed golf course and
about 19.7 acres would be permanently protected as bighorn sheep habitat. These parcels are
strategically located to make development in Section 5 beyond the Travertine ownership more
difficult (see the Section .5 Addendum to the Travertine Biological Assessment for more details).
Travertine also has committed to acquire an additional approximately 100 acres of bighorn sheep
habitat in Section 5 that is strategically located to fragment larger blocks of land into smaller
units with significantly reduced development potential (Figure 1).
Travertine Corporation proposes a variety of additional conservation measures to avoid and
minimize potential impacts to bighorn sheep, based on discussions with the Service, BLM, BOR,
and the City. The following measures augment the conservation commitments described in the
BA, which may contain more detail in certain instances:
(1) Relocation of the City's General Plan trails out of the centra] portions of Sections 5 and 32, to
the Rockslide Access Trail along the golf course buffer zone of the Travertine project. The final
design and location of the Rockslide Access Trail will be approved by the Service and the City to
minimize disturbance to bighorn sheep. If necessary, the southern and/or western boundaries of
the trail and golf course alignments will be fenced, as described in Conservation Measure 5
below.
Unauthorized trails currently in use on Travertine's property will be closed to minimize impacts
to bighorn sheep and replaced with the Rockslide Access Trail described above. Other than this
trail, no additional trails would be proposed or allowed as part of the Travertine development. A
variety of other measures will be implemented to restrict human access to surrounding hills,
including: (a) placement of "no trespass" signs at legally enforceable intervals along the trail and
habitat/development interface, with legally enforceable language; (b) development of CC&Rs
and educational materials that explain to residents and members the ecology of bighorn sheep
and the rules concerning unauthorized hiking into sheep habitat; (c) the strategic location of
select golf holes outside (i.e., south) of the Rockslide Access Trail at certain points to serve as
passive restraints to inhibit users of the trail from venturing into the canyons situated on east and
west sides of the rockslide; and (d) implementation of a program to train golf course marshals
and other personnel to monitor and control human access to adjacent hills.
(2) Strategic acquisition of land in Section 5. In addition to the lands subject to Specific Plan 94-
026, Travertine has acquired 35 acres in Section 5, of which 14.4 acres would be used for the
proposed golf course and 19.7 acres would be permanently protected as bighorn sheep habitat.
Due to recent escalation in land values, Travertine accelerated the purchase and acquisition of
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 9
Area Manager, BOR
these lands to make development in Section 5 beyond the Travertine ownership more difficult
due to economic, topographic, regulatory, and land planning constraints.
Prior to recording the first final map, Travertine also has committed to acquire an additional
approximately 100 acres of bighorn sheep habitat in Section 5 that also are strategically located
to fragment larger blocks of land into smaller units with reduced development potential. Ml
lands proposed for conservation in Section 5 will be approved by the Service and protected in
perpetuity consistent with California Civil Code Section 815, et seq. For more detail, please
refer to the Section 5 Addendum to the Travertine Biological Assessment,
In addition, if the CVMSHCP is adopted, Travertine has agreed to loan $2 million to CVAG or
Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC), as specified at Section 4.3.21 of the
CVMSHCP and per separate agreement between the parties. CVAG/CVCC would be obligated
per the terms of the CVMSHCP to use the loan to acquire additional bighorn sheep habitat within
Section 5, and would guarantee repayment of the $2 million loan without interest to Travertine or
its successor if the CVMSHCP is adopted.
(3) Establishment of a $500,000 endowment with the Center for Natural Lands Management
(CNLM) to be managed by the Service to assist with the long-term management of bighorn
sheep. Of this total, $100,000 will be provided upon issuance of the first grading permit on the
Travertine site with the balance of $400,000 paid in installments of $100,000 per year over the
next four years.
(4) Provision of an additional $100,000 to the CNLM endowment above to support the gathering
of information on the effects of the regional trails system on bighorn sheep, including trails in
and around the Travertine development.
(5) Because fences could block wildlife movement, fences will not be used as an initial deterrent
to unauthorized access; however, a fencing contingency plan is needed to address potential
indirect effects of the project. To avoid complications with the installation of any future fence,
Travertine will (1) provide appropriate wildlife fence easements that will be Located at the
exterior boundary of either the golf course or the trail corridor, whichever is the outer most
perimeter of the project; (2) create a Home Owners Association (HOA) as the legally responsible
party for such installation; and (3) provide or identify a dedicated source of funds to construct the
fence, all to be completed prior to recording the first final map. Following formation of the HOA
and prior to completion of the habitat interface golf course, Travertine Corporation will establish
and convene a three-person committee consisting of a representative from the HOA, the Service,
and CDFG, which will be charged with the responsibility to assess the need for a buffer fence
between the development and adjoining habitat to keep bighorn sheep off the project site and
control human access to sheep habitat. Based on these two criteria, the committee will cooperate
in good faith in determining a need for the fence, and agreeing on its design and specific
location. The committee members shall have access to the habitat -urban interface areas on the
project site to monitor sheep activity through various means, including interviews with residents
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 10
Area Manager, BOR
and staff, and the use/collection of any scientific information. If available information suggests
that either of the above two criteria has been met, the committee may decide to conduct further
studies on the extent of the problem, funded by the HOA, before voting on whether to require the
HOA to construct an 8 -foot fence (or functional equivalent) between the development and the
adjoining habitat. Though the Service may decide in its sole discretion whether a fence is
required, it will not require construction of a fence without evidence that either of the above
criteria have occurred. Prior to construction of any fence, the committee shall coordinate and
solicit views on fence design issues with local interests and only approve a given design after a
meeting with residents of the Travertine project. The committee shall exist for ten years from
the date of creation of the HOA, but the committee may be extended indefinitely if
recommended by any of the committee members. Violators of CC&Rs and club rules will be
subject to increasingly severe penalties Travertine will consult with the Service during the
drafting of the initial set of Rules and Regulations concerning appropriate rules and regulations
to protect the bighom sheep. With Travertine's consent, the Master Declaration of Conditions,
Covenants and Restrictions for the entire Travertine project will incorporate certain rules and
regulations specifically addressing the bighorn sheep, which rules and regulations may be
modified, amended or deleted only with the express written consent of the Service.
(6) The Jefferson Street extension through Section 32 will be constructed using active and
passive design features to prevent public roadside parking and foot access into bighorn sheep
habitat (e.g., boulders, k -rail, berm, narrow road shoulder, bar ditch, and restrictive signage),
subject to review and approval by the Service.
(7) Within the project boundary, approximately 100 yards at the west end of the newly
constructed Jefferson Street Loop in the southwest corner of Section 33, where it connects with
the Avenue 62 alignment, will be left as undeveloped desert. This design feature, in combination
with enhanced native landscaping, will discourage unauthorized vehicle access into bighorn
sheep habitat in Section 5 adjacent to the Travertine project boundary.
(8) The golf course will be designed in a desert/links-style to minimize loss of native plants and
wildlife (compared to conventional golf courses) and reduce potential impediment to movement
wildlife movement. The golf course design will use a locally endemic native plant species
palette for restoration of any areas that may be disturbed during development.
(9) No exotic plants known to be toxic to Peninsular bighorn sheep, or invasive in desert
environments, will be used in project landscaping.
(10) All internal streets would be separated from the hillsides by golf holes and home sites (i.e.,
there would be no direct public access from internal streets to hillside sheep habitat).
(11) The Martinez Rockslide Access Trail and golf holes will form the southern and western
perimeters of the Travertine project.
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 11
Area Manager, BOR
(12) Berms will be located at various points on the golf course to deter bighorn sheep access to
the project site. Natural landscaping and berms around residential areas and golf courses would
reduce noise, light, and visual impacts on surrounding hills.
(13) The best management practices will be used to preclude the establishment of potential
disease vectors at open water features (i.e., water bodies will be designed with steep, unvegetated
slopes and deep enough water to prevent establishment of emergent wetland vegetation).
(14) CC&R's, Specific Plan conditions, and club rules will prohibit activities that emit noise
above specified levels (not to exceed 60 dB(A) for sensitive receptors or 75 dB(A) for non-
residential receptors (per City Ordinance 9.100.210 Noise Control). For example, Travertine
will require that only quiet electric golf carts will be used for service, maintenance, and play.
Whenever possible, automobiles, gasoline -powered golf carts, and gasoline -powered leaf -
blowers will be prohibited from the completed golf course.
(15) Outdoor lighting will be down -shielded and directed away from the hillsides in accordance
with the City municipal code.
iii,(16) To increase public awareness regarding the sensitivity of Peninsular bighorn sheep in the
region, educational materials will be provided to homeowners and made available to users of the
public facilities within the Travertine development. This material will be prepared in
cooperation with the Service and CDFG. In addition, Travertine will provide within the project
an area dedicated as an interpretive center concerning the bighorn sheep.
(17) The two water reservoirs will be constructed of steel or concrete and buried underground to
the extent possible. Any tank appurtenances (e.g., valves) remaining above -ground will be
painted with non -reflective paint colored to blend with the surrounding habitat and to prevent
light from being reflected toward sheep habitat in the Santa Rosa Mountains.
(18) Dogs and other pets are not allowed within the National Monument and Travertine will
install appropriate signage at the designated trailhead parking areas and any other access points
to prohibit dogs along the Rockslide Access Trail. Travertine project homeowner CC&Rs and
club rules will require pets to remain on a leash while outside enclosed areas, and will prohibit
pets from entering the hills at any time. Compliance with the local "leash law" will also be
enforced pursuant to City ordinance and the project's Specific Plan conditions.
STATUS OF THE SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT
Legal/Listing Status: The Peninsular bighorn sheep was federally listed as endangered on March
18, 1998 (63 FR 13134). A recovery plan was approved in October 2000 and 844,897 acres of
critical habitat were designated on February 1, 2001 (66 FR 8649). The decision to list the
Peninsular bighorn sheep was made because of declining population numbers and continuing
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERN-2735.3) 12
Area Manager, BOR
habitat toss, degradation, and fragmentation throughout a significant portion of bighorn sheep
habitat within the Peninsular Ranges. In addition, periods of depressed recruitment, likely
associated with disease, and high predation, coincided with low population numbers endangering
the continued existence of these animals in southern California. The California Fish and Game
Commission listed bighorn sheep inhabiting the Peninsular Ranges as "rare" in 1971. In 1984,
the designation was changed to "threatened" by the CDFG to conform with the terminology in
the amended California Endangered Species Act.
Species Description: Bighorn sheep inhabiting the Peninsular Ranges were once considered a
separate subspecies (Ovis canadensis cremnobates) and were one of the 4 desert subspecies (0.
c. nelsoni, D. c. mexicana, O. c. cremnobates, and O. c.weemsi) recognized by Cowan (1940).
The validity of these subspecies delineations was questioned and reassessed. Based on
morphometric and genetic results, Wehausen and Ramey (1993) placed Peninsular bighorn
within the O. c. nelson/ subspecies, which is the current taxonomy.
The overall range of the subspecies extends from the San Jacinto Mountains near Palm Springs,
California south to Vo]can Tres Virgenes near Santa Rosalia, Baja California, Mexico.
However, only the distinct vertebrate population segment within the United States is listed as
endangered and addressed in this document. For a population to be listed under the Act as a
distinct vertebrate population segment, three elements are considered (61 FR 4722): 1) the
discreteness of the population segment in relation to the remainder of the species to which it
belongs; 2) the significance of the population segment to the species to which it belongs, and 3)
the population segment's conservation status in relation to the Act's standards for listing. Within
the United States, the range extends along the Peninsular Ranges from the San Jacinto Mountains
of southern California south to the United States - Mexico border. Bighorn sheep habitat in the
Peninsular Ranges is restricted to the east facing, lower elevation slopes typically below 4,600
feet along the northwestern edge of the Sonoran Desert.
Distribution: An examination of past records and current data suggests that the distribution of
bighorn sheep has been altered during the past 25 years. Ewe groups along the Mexican border
and in the northern San Jacinto Mountains (north of Chino Canyon) have disappeared since the
1980's. DeForge et al. (1997) suggested disturbance and habitat fragmentation were the primary
factors driving the changes in bighorn distribution in the northern San Jacinto Mountains. Ewes
ceased occupying the northern San Jacinto Mountains about 20 years after construction of the
Palm Springs Aerial Tramway in Chino Canyon, though rams still occasionally cross Chino
Canyon and use the area formerly occupied by the ewe group. Lass of the border population was
poorly documented, but the construction of interstate 8 in the mid -1960's, railroad activity,
livestock grazing, poaching, and fire suppression appear to be the most likely factors
contributing to the isolation and decline of bighorn sheep in the area (Rubin et al. 1998).
In the northern Santa Rosa Mountains, the number and distribution of bighorn sheep is
substantially reduced from the 1980's, with formerly important use areas, such as Carrizo and
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 13
Area Manager, BOR
Dead Indian Canyons, currently supporting few animals (DeForge and Scott 1982; DeForge et
al. 1995; Bighorn Institute 1998, 1999). Rubin et al. (1998) suggested that in portions of the
range, roads or increased traffic have contributed to fragmentation by restricting ewe movement,
as evidenced by 4 ewe groups having home ranges delineated by roadways. In the 1970's, ewes
were observed to cross Highway 74 in the Santa Rosa Mountains (V. Bleich, pers. comm.; D.
Jessup, in 1itt. 1999). No radio -collared ewes were observed to cross this road from 1993 to
2001. California Department of Transportation records indicate that Highway 74 traffic has
approximately tripled since 1970. In addition, bighorns use significantly less of the Santa Rosa
Mountains since the construction of the Dunn Road (DeForge in lift. 1997).
The Peninsular Ranges of California are northern extensions of the mountain ranges of Baja
California, Mexico, and the majority of Peninsular bighorn sheep are located in Mexico.
Peninsular bighorn sheep are found along steep, east -facing escarpments in the desert regions of
the Baja Peninsula, south to the Las Virgenes Mountains near the town of San Ignacio. The
mountain ranges of Baja are remote and rugged, thus obtaining accurate population estimates is
very difficult. Biologists currently estimate that approximately 2,500 Peninsular bighorn sheep
inhabit northern Baja, much less than the estimates of over 28,000 from the turn of the century.
The problems facing Peninsular bighorns in Baja are different than the challenges facing them in
the United States. Habitat loss resulting from housing, resort, and golf course development does
not currently pose the same level of threat present in the United States, but poaching,
competition with domestic and feral livestock, predation, and diseases introduced from domestic
livestock continue to impact these herds (DeForge et al. 1999).
Habitat Affinities: Bighorn sheep in the Peninsular Ranges have important habitat requirements
that relate to topography, visibility, water availability, and forage quality and quantity. Bighorn
sheep evolved predator evasion behaviors that depend critically on the use of escape terrain,
which is generally defined as steep, rugged slopes (Hansen 1980c, Cunningham 1989). Escape
terrain is important because bighorn sheep typically do not outrun their predators, but depend
upon their climbing abilities to escape their enemies (Geist 1971, McQuivey 1978). When ewes
are ready to give birth they will typically seek out the most precipitous terrain, where their lambs
will presumably be safest (Geist 1971). The presence of such steep terrain for predator evasion
and lambing is, therefore, a crucial component of bighorn sheep habitat. Variation in slope and
aspect also help bighorn sheep to survive in a hatch environment, During hot weather, desert
bighorn seek shade under boulders and cliffs, or may move to north facing slopes (Merritt 1974,
Andrew 1994). During inclement weather they may again seek protected caves or overhangs, or
move to sunny, south facing slopes (Andrew 1994), or slopes that are protected from strong
winds.
In addition to mountainous terrain, other types of habitat are crucial to bighorn sheep
populations. Areas of flat terrain, such as valley floors, serve as important linkages between
neighboring mountainous regions, thereby providing bighorn sheep temporary access to
resources (e.g., forage, water, or lambing habitat) in neighboring areas, and allowing gene flow
Field Manager, BLi14 (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 14
Area Manager, BOR
to occur between subpopulations (Krausman and Leopold 1986, Schwartz et al. 1986, Bleich et
al. 1990a, 131eich et al. 1996). Low rolling terrain and washes seasonally provide an important
source of high quality forage, with a greater diversity of browse species than steeper terrain
(Leslie and Douglas 1979). In summer, washes also provide a source of high quality browse
longer than other areas (Andrew 1994). Leslie and Douglas (1979) noted that these areas
became increasingly important to bighorn sheep not only in summer, but during any period of
limited forage availability.
The predator evasion behavior of bighorn sheep depends on the ability to visually detect danger
at a distance. Bighorn sheep will avoid habitat in which dense vegetation reduces visibility
(Risenhoover and Bailey 1985, Etchberger et al. 1989). This appears to be the case in the
Peninsular Ranges, where bighorn sheep usually remain below the elevation of chaparral and
other dense vegetation associations. In the Peninsular Ranges, bighorn sheep habitat occurs
along the east -facing desert slopes, typically below approximately 1,400 -meter (4,600 -foot)
elevations (Jorgensen and Turner 1975, DeForge et al. 1997). The elevational patterns of
vegetation associations in the Peninsular Ranges, in combination with bighorn sheep predator
avoidance behavior, result in habitat use patterns that are more restricted to lower elevations than
in most other bighorn populations. The available habitat of Peninsular bighorn sheep can,
therefore, be visualized as a long, narrow band that runs north -south along the lower elevations
of the Peninsular Ranges.
In hot, arid deserts, water is an important resource for bighorn sheep (Jones et al. 1957, Blong
and Pollard 1968, Leslie and Douglas 1979, Turner and Weaver 1980, Elenowitz 1984,
Cunningham and Ohmart 1986). A number of studies have shown that desert bighorn sheep will
concentrate around water sources in the summer, with most animals found within a 3- to 5 -
kilometer (2- to 3 -mile) radius of water (Jones et al. 1957, Leslie and Douglas 1979,
Cunningham and Ohmart 1986). During periods of high rainfall, sheep distribution is less
coincident with permanent water sources (Leslie and Douglas 1979). Apparently, bighorn sheep
obtain enough water from forage to meet their requirements during wetter portions of the year.
Lactating ewes and lambs appear to be more dependent on free-standing water and arc often
found closer to water sources (Blong and Pollard 1968, Leslie and Douglas 1979, Bleich et al.
1997). Water sources are most valuable to bighorn sheep if they occur in proximity to adequate
escape terrain with good visibility. Therefore, the juxtaposition of open escape terrain to water
sources is an important factor in their utilization (Cunningham 1989, Andrew 1994).
The critical importance of free-standing water to bighorn sheep has been questioned (Krausman
and Leopold 1986, Broyles 1995), and some small populations apparently exist without free-
standing water (Krausman et al. 1985, Krausman and Leopold 1986, Broyles 1995). However,
in most populations, bighorn sheep will drink regularly when water is available and concentrate
near water sources during the warmer months.
In the Peninsular Ranges, bighorn sheep use a wide variety of plant species as their food source
(Weaver et al. 1968, Jorgensen and Turner 1973). Turner (1973) recorded the use of at least 43
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-•ERIV-2735.3) 15
Area Manager, BOR
species, with browse being the food category most frequently consumed. Cunningham and
Ohmart (1986) determined that the bighorn sheep diet in Carrizo Canyon (at the south end of the
U.S. Peninsular Ranges) consisted of 57 percent shrubs, 32 percent forbs, 6 percent cacti, and 2
percent grasses. Scott (1986) and Turner (1976) reported similar diet compositions at the north
end of the range. Diet composition varied among seasons (Cunningham and Ohmart 1966, Scott
1986), presumably because of variability in forage availability, selection of specific plant species
during different times of the year (Scott 1986), and seasonal movements of bighorn sheep.
The time period surrounding late gestation, lambing, and nursing is very demanding in terms of
the energy and protein required by bighorn ewes. Failure to acquire sufficient nutrients during
late gestation and during nursing adversely affects the survival of newborn ungulates (Thome er
al. 1976, Julander er al. 1961, Holl er al. 1979). Crude protein and digestible energy values of
early green -up species are usually much higher than those of dormant forages during the critical
late gestation, lambing, and rearing seasons. With their high nutrient content, even minor
volumes of these forages within the overall diet composition may contribute important
nutritional value at critical life stages (Wagner 2000). However, during the reproductive season,
due to the varied topography of bighorn sheep habitat, these forages typically are concentrated
on specific sites, such as alluvial fans and washes, where more productive soils support greater
herbaceous growth than steeper, rockier soils. Furthermore, forage green -up follows an
elevational gradient with lower elevations beginning spring growth earlier than higher elevations
(Wehausen 1980, Berger 1991). Access to a range of elevations provides bighorn sheep
enhanced opportunities to acquire nutrients during critical seasons.
Life History: The movement pattems and habits of ewes are learned by their offspring (Geist
1971). By following older animals, young bighorn sheep gather knowledge about escape terrain,
water sources, foraging areas, and lambing habitat (Geist 1971). As young rams reach 2 to 4
years of age, they hegin to follow older rams away from their natal group (Geist 1971, Festa-
Bianchet 1991). Because, bighorn sheep rely on vigilance to detect predators, they benefit from
gregariousness and group alertness (Geist 1971, Berger 1970.
The adult sexes tend to loosely segregate during much of the year, coming together primarily
during the rut (Geist 1971, Bleich et al. 1997), which typically peaks from August through
October in the Peninsular Ranges (Rubin et al. 2000), During the rut, rams join the ewe groups
and compete to breed with receptive ewes. The largest rams presumably are the most successful
breeders, but smaller rams have been reported to breed as well (Hogg 1964). During the period
of sexual segregation, ewes and their lambs are typically found in steeper, more secure habitat,
while rams may be found in less steep or rugged terrain (Geist 1971, Bleieh cr al. 1997).
Desert bighorn sheep are primarily diurnal (Krausman et al. 1985) but may be active at any time
of day or night (Miller et al. 1984). Their daily activity pattern includes alternating feeding and
resting/ruminating periods. Forage quality influences activity patterns because when forages are
low in digestibility, bighorn sheep must spend more time ruminating and digesting forage.
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ER1V-2735.3) 16
Area Manager, BOR
Consequently, bighorn sheep may establish a cycle of feeding and ruminating that reflects forage
quality and optimizes nutrient intake (Wagner and Peck 1999, Wagner 2000).
Size of individual or group home range depends on the juxtaposition of required resources
(water, forage, escape, or lambing habitat) and, therefore, varies geographically. Home range
size also is affected by forage quantity and quality, season, sex, and age of the animal (Leslie
1977, McQuivey 1978). Although most desert bighorn sheep do not seasonally migrate along
elevational gradients like many populations in higher latitude mountain ranges, they do exhibit
seasonal differences in habitat use pattems. In many populations, animals will have a smaller
home range in summer (McQuivey 1978, Leslie and Douglas 1979, Elenowitz 1983),
presumably due to their limited movement away from permanent water sources. During the
cooler or wetter months of the year, bighorn sheep often exhibit an expanded range as animals
move farther from water sources (Simmons 1980). Ewes generally display a higher degree of
philopatry to their seasonal home ranges than do rams. Rams tend to range more widely, often
moving among ewe groups (Boyce et al. 1997, Del urge et al. 1997, Rubin et al. 1998). In most
populations of desert bighorn sheep, ram home ranges have been found to be larger than those of
ewes (Simmons 1980, DeForge et al. 1997).
The gregarious and philopatric behavior of ewes limits their dispersal and exploratory abilities
relative to those of rams (Geist 1967, 1971). Geist (1971) theorized, however, that a young ewe
might switch to a new ewe group if she encountered neighboring sheep and followed them away
from her natal ewe group. In the Peninsular Ranges, movement of radio -collared ewes between
ewe groups is rare, however, inter -group movement does occasionally occur. During a 3 -year
study, one ewe moved over 30 kilometers (18.6 miles) and temporarily joined another ewe group
(Rubin et al. 1998). No emigration of ewes has been observed even though radio -collared
animals have been regularly monitored in the northern Santa Rosa Mountains since 1981
(Ostermann et al. 2001) and throughout the range since 1993 (E. Rubin, pers. comm.; DeForge et
al. 1997). Genetic analyses reflect a low rate of ewe dispersal across the Peninsular Ranges in
the evolutionary past (Boyce et al. 1999).
An important consideration in the conservation of Peninsular bighorn sheep is their behavioral
response to humans and human activity. Bighorn have been considered a wilderness species,
because they do not thrive in contact with human development (Leopold 1933). The impacts of
human development extend beyond the urban edge into bighorn sheep habitat. A growing
human population and increased activity adjacent to and within bighorn sheep habitat have the
potential to adversely affect bighorn sheep. Numerous researchers have expressed concem over
the impact of human activity on Peninsular bighorn sheep (Jorgensen and Turner 1973, Hicks
1978, Olech 1979, Cunningham 1982, DeForge and Scott 1982, Gross 1987, Sanchez et al.
1988), as well as on sheep in other areas (Graham 1980, Gionfriddo and Krausman 1986, Smith
and Krausman 1988). A variety of human activities such as hiking, mountain biking, hang
gliding, horseback riding, camping, hunting, livestock grazing, dog walking, and use of aircraft
and off -road -vehicles have the potential to disrupt normal bighorn sheep social behaviors and use
Field Manager, BLM (PWS-ERN-2735.3) 17
Area Manager, BOR
of essential resources, and cause bighorn sheep to abandon traditional habitat (McQuivey 1978,
MacArthur ei al. 1979, Olech 1979, Wehausen 1979, Leslie and Douglas 1980, Graham 1980,
MacArthur et al. 1982, Bates and Workman 1983, Wehausen 1983, Miller and Smith 1985,
Krausman and Leopold 1986, Krausman et al. 1989, Goodson 1999, Papouchis et al. 1999).
Etchberger et al. (1989) found that habitat abandoned by bighorn sheep in the Pusch Ridge
Wildemess had greater human disturbance than currently occupied habitat. Etchberger and
Krausman (1999) observed the abandonment of lambing habitat while construction activities
were ongoing within the home range of the ewe group. Ewes eventually returned to the area
following cessation of construction activities.
Although cases have been cited in which bighorn sheep populations did not appear to be greatly
affected by human activity, numerous researchers have documented altered bighorn sheep
behavior in response to anthropogenic disturbance. Even when bighorn sheep appear to be
tolerant of a particular activity, continued and frequent human use of an area can cause them to
avoid the area, eventually interfering with use of resources, such as water, mineral licks, lambing
or feeding areas, or use of traditional movement routes (Jorgensen and Tumer 1973, McQuivey
1978, Graham 1980, Leslie and Douglas 1980, DeForge and Scott 1982, Hamilton et al. 1982,
Krausman and Leopold 1986, Rubin et al. 1998). In addition, disturbance can result in
physiological responses, such as elevated heart rate, even when no behavioral response is
discernable, and the cumulative energetic cost of such responses may potentially affect the
nutritional status of individuals potentially populations (MacArthur et al. 1979, 1982).
Bighorn response to human activity is variable and depends on many factors, including but not
limited to: the type and predictability of the activity, presence of domestic dogs, the animal's
previous experience with humans, size or composition of the bighorn sheep group, location of
bighorn sheep relative to the elevation of the activity, distance to escape terrain, and distance to
the activity (Weaver 1973; McQuivey 1978; Hicks 1977, 1978; Hicks and Elder 1979;
MacArthur et al. 1979, 1982; Wehausen 1980; Hamilton et al. 1982; Whitacker and Knight
1998; Papouchis et al. 1999). Ewes with lambs typically are more sensitive to disturbance (Light
and Weaver 1973, Wehausen 1980). Responses can range from cautious curiosity to immediate
flight or abandonment of habitat. Bighorn sheep use of an area within the Peninsular Ranges
was reduced by 50 percent when off-road vehicle use was allowed (Jorgensen 1974). Cardiac
and behavioral responses of bighorn sheep to an approaching human were determined to be
greatest when a person was accompanied by a dog or approached from over a ridge (MacArthur
et al. 1979, 1982). Though the effect of human activity in bighorn sheep habitat is not always
obvious, human presence or activity in many cases has been found to detrimentally alter normal
behavioral and habitat use patterns. Bighorn sheep have evolved to deal with occasional stress,
such as the presence of a predator. However, long-term chronic stress may cause physiological
reactions that impair immune function, endocrine regulation, and growth and development
(Desert Bighorn Council 1991). Bighorn sheep prevented from using their normal range by
frequent human disturbance or dogs may be subject to nutritional deprivation, which can also
adversely affect the immune system (Festa-Bianchet 1988).
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-27353) 18
Area Manager, BOR
Desert bighorn sheep have fared poorly when urban areas have expanded around and within their
ranges. In the Sandia Mountains of New Mexico and the Santa Catalina Mountains of Arizona,
two populations of desert bighorn sheep faced situations very similar, to the one now challenging
the bighorn sheep inhabiting she Peninsular ranges of California. The bighorn sheep population
in the Sandia Mountains has declined to extinction, and the population in the Santa Catalina
Mountains appears to be extinct (Krausman et al. 2001). Factors, such as predation or disease,
do not appear to have played a significant role in tither of the above extinctions. Instead, in both
cases the level of human activity appears to have been too great for bighorn sheep to survive. In
the Sandia Mountains human activity doubled from 1975 to 1990, as hiking trails, ski areas,
restaurants, and a tramway were built (Krausman et al. 2001). In she Santa Catalina Mountains,
real estate developments directly eliminated bighorn sheep habitat (Krausman 1993), hiking
activity, dog use, and other recreational activities increased in more remote areas (Schoenecker
1997), and fire suppression allowed the vegetation in some areas to become too dense for
bighorn sheep (Gionfriddo and Krausman 1985, Krausman et al. 1996). In San Bernardino
National Forest, California, Light and Weaver (1973) studied the reaction of bighorn sheep to
human activities when ski areas and other developments were built in their habitat. They
concluded bighorns abandoned suitable habitat to ostensibly remain out-of-sight.
The breeding period, or rut, occurs in the We summer and fall months. In the Peninsular
Ranges, ewes estimated to be between 2 and 16 years of age have been documented to product
lambs (Rubin et al. 2000, Ostcrmann et al. 2001). As parturition approaches, ewes seek isolated
sites with shelter and unobstructed views (Turner and Hansen 1980), and seclude themselves
from other females while finding sites to bear their lambs (Elchberger and Krausman 1999).
Lambs are born after a gestation of approximately 6 months-171 to 185 days (Turner and Hansen
1980, Shackleton et al. 1984, Hass 1995). During a 4-year (1993 to 1996) study conducted in
the Peninsular Ranges south of the San Jacinto Mountains, the lambing season extended from
February through August; however, 87 percent of the lambs were born from February to April,
and 55 percent of the lambs were born in March (Rubin et al. 2000). DeForge et al. (1997) and
Cunningham (1982) reported a similar onset of the lambing season in the San Jacinto Mountains
and in Carrizo Canyon, respectively. In the San Jacinto and northers Santa Rosa Mountains, ewe
groups, the lambing season begins in January during some years (Bighorn Institute 1997),
Lambs usually are weaned by 6 months of age (Hansen and Deming 1980, Wehausen 1980).
From 1993 to 1996, the reproductive patterns of five ewe groups (Carrizo Canyon, south San
Ysidro Mountains, north San Ysidro Mountains, Santa Rosa Mountains [Deep Canyon], and
northern Santa Rosa Mountains) were monitored and annual Iamb production averaged 77
percent (0.77 Iambs bona per "ewe-year") for the 4-year period (E. Rubin, pers. comm.). Using a
fecal-based enzyme immunoassay, Borjcsson et al. (1996) determined that in the fall of 1992, at
least 85 percent of sampled adult ewes were pregnant. Both of these observations suggest that
conception rates arc not currently limiting population growth in die Peninsular Ranges.
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ER1V-2735.3) 19
Area Manager, BOR
Lamb survival (to 6 months of age) was variable among groups and across years. A year of high
lamb survival in one group was not necessarily a high survival year in another group (Rubin et
al. 2000). Of the four groups studied, the northern Santa Rosa Mountains group typically had
the lowest lamb survival, while the neighboring Deep Canyon group, located less than 8
kilometers (5 miles) away, had the highest lamb survival. Researchers working in the northern
portion of the Santa Rosa Mountains have expressed concern over the low Iamb recruitment
observed in this area since approximately 1977 (DeForge et al. 1982, DeForge and Scott 1982,
Turner and Payson 1982). Periods of low lamb to ewe ratios, as well as clinical signs of
pneumonia among lambs, have occasionally been observed in Anza-Borrego Desert State Park
(Jorgensen and Turner 1973, Jorgensen and Turner 1975, Hicks 1978), but years of high lamb to
ewe ratios (Cunningham 1982; M. Jorgensen, pers. comm.) have been observed in these areas as
well (Rubin et al. 2000).
Wehausen (1992) suggested that periods of low recruitment may not warrant alann because
long-lived animals such as bighorn sheep can exist in viable populations if periods of low
offspring recruitment are interrupted by periodic pulses of high offspring recruitment. Most ewe
groups in the Peninsular Ranges appear to have exhibited such pulses of high recruitment but
declining population trends suggest that they have not been sufficient to balance adult mortality
over longer time periods.
In mminants, reproductive success is related to the mother's body weight, access to resources,
quality of home range, and age (Etchberger and Krausman 1999). Survival of offspring also
depends on birth weight and parturition date. Festa-Bianchet and Jorgenson (1996) found that
female sheep reduce the care of lambs when resources are scarce to favor their own nutritional
requirements over their Iamb's development. Ewes that fail to acquire a minimum level of
energy reserves (i.e., body weight) may not conceive (Wehausen 1984) or will produce smaller
offspring with a poorer chance of survival (Price and White 1985). Several studies have
documented a positive relationship between winter precipitation and lamb recruitment in the
following year (Douglas and Leslie 1986, Wehausen et al. 1987). However, the relationships
between climate, lamb recruitment, and population trends likely differ among different bighorn
sheep populations, and are not fully understood (Rubin el al. 2000).
Lamb and yearling age classes experience high mortality rates relative to adult bighorns. After
reaching adulthood at two years of age, most bighorn sheep survive high until ten years of age
(Hansen 19806), or until shortly before the age of ecological longevity (Cowan and Geist 1971).
However, observed values of annual adult survivorship in the Peninsular bighorn sheep appear
low relative to other reported desert populations. During November 1992 to May 1998,
survivorship of 113 adult radio -collared bighorn sheep (97 ewes and 16 rams) was monitored
between Highway 74 (in the Santa Rosa Mountains) and the U.S.-Mexico border. During this
period, overall annual adult survival was 0.79, with no significant difference among three age
classes of adults (Hayes et aI. 2000). Annual survivorship of individual ewe groups ranged from
0.70 to 0.87, and a year of high survivorship in one group was not necessarily a year of high
Field Manager, BLM (PWS-LRIV-2735.3) 20
Area Manager, BOR
survivorship in other groups (Rubin et al. 1998). In the northern Santa Rosa Mountains ewe
group, adult survivorship was monitored during a 14 -year period (1985 to 1998), and was found
to range between 0.50 and 1.00 annually (Ostermann et al. 2001). In the San Jacinto Mountains,
DeForge et al. (1997) monitored the survival of adult (2 or more years of age) radio -collared
bighorn sheep during 1993 to 1996 and estimated annual adult survival to be 0.75.
Survival of desert bighorn sheep in greater southeastern California averaged 0.91 (Andrew
1994), 0.86 or greater in northwest Arizona (when highway mortalities were excluded,
(Cunningham and deVos 1992), 0.82 in New Mexico (Logan et al. 1996), and 0.85 or greater for
four populations studied in the Mojave Desert (Wehausen 1992).
Population Trends; Bighorn sheep have been documented in the Peninsular Ranges since early
explorers, such as Anza, observed them in the 1700's (Bolton 1930). Grinnell and Swarth (1913)
described the arca of Deep Canyon in the southern Santa Rosa Mountains, "...well worn trails,
footprints, and feces were plentiful. In places it looked as though a herd of domestic sheep had
been over the region." Rangewide population estimates were not made until the 1970's.
Published estimates were as high as 971 in 1972 (Weaver 1972), and 1,171 in 1974 (Weaver
1975).
Recent range -wide population estimates were 570 in 1988 (Weaver 1989), 400 in 1992 (U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service 1992), and between 327 and 524 in 1993 (Torres et al. 1994). Starting
in 1994 biennial helicopter census were conducted throughout the Peninsular Ranges using
radio -collared animals to correct for visibility bias. The population estimates were 347, 276,
334, and 400 for the years 1991-2000, respectively. From the historic highs of the 1970's,
population estimates declined to a low of 276 adults in 1996 (Service 2000); since that low, the
population has apparently increased. Currently, at least 8 ewe groups exist in the range, and the
population trajectory of each ewe group appears to be determined independently (Rubin et al.
1998). Climatic patterns arc correlated across the Peninsular Ranges, suggesting that other local
factors specific to ewe groups play important roles in determining long-term abundance trends
(Rubin et al. 1998). Independent population trends also were observed among ewe groups in the
Mojave Desert (Wehausen 1992).
In the southern pan of the San Jacinto Mountains, a ewe group currently consists of 29 adult
male and female bighorn sheep, with only 4 native adult ewes and 6 captive -released ewes. The
subpopulation has remained approximately stable (17-26 individuals) from 1992-2000, but the
unbalanced sex ratio causes concern (Bighorn Institute 2000). The three Santa Rosa Mountain
ewe groups declined 69 percent from 1984 to 1990, remained stable at 115-120 individuals from
1990-1995, until declining in 1996 to approximately 95 adults, Currently, these 3 ewe groups
total approximately 129 adults (CDFG 2004 helicopter surveys, unpublished data). The ewe groups
in the northern Santa Rosas and southern San Jacinto Mountains continue to receive intensive
monitoring from the Bighorn Institute, and have periodically been augmented with captive -
reared individuals.
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 21
Area Manager, BOR
Helicopter surveys south of the Santa Rosa Mountains, indicated a 28 percent decline in ewe
numbers in a recent 2 -year period (from an estimate of 141 females in 1994 to 102 females in
1996; Rubin et al. 1998), and a statistically non-significant increase (from approximately 102 to
112 females) from 1996 to 1998 (Rubin et al. 1999). Ewe groups in Coyote Canyon, North San
Ysidro Mountains, and South San Ysidro Mountains currently average approximately 36
individuals each, with the number of ewes ranging from 17 to 27. The 2000 helicopter survey
indicated that the Vallecitos Mountains and Carrizo Canyon (southern) ewe groups have
increased significantly since 1996.
Bighorn sheep are relatively long-lived animals that have the potential to reproduce over an
extended period of time (2-16 years). Therefore, periods of above average recruitment may
compensate for periods of low recruitment (Wehausen 1992). Forage quality and quantity vary
with environmental conditions, and thus female condition, and conception, parturition and lamb
survival rates reflect this natural variation. However, if mortality agents begin impacting adult
survival, then subpopulation levels may drop dramatically, endangering the existence of a ewe
group. Consequently, a ewe group's persistence is always vulnerable to disease outbreaks, high
levels of predation, mortality caused by urbanization, and habitat loss from human disturbance
and development.
Threats: Cause specific mortality in the San Jacinto Mountains was studied from 1992 to 1998.
During this period, five mortalities were attributed to mountain lion (Puma concolor) predation,
two were attributed to bobcat or mountain lion predation, and three died of unknown causes
(DeForge et al. 1997; Bighorn Institute 1997, 1998).
In the northern Santa Rosa Mountains, artificially irrigated vegetation attracts bighorn sheep and
creates a hazard for them. Though often thought to be the product of releasing captive -reared
animals into the wild, behavioral habituation to urban sources of food and water began when
urbanization started encroaching into bighorn habitat in the 1950's, several decades before
population augmentation began in 1985 (Tevis 1959, DeForge and Scott 1982, Ostermann et al.
in press, V. Bleich, pers. comm.). A study of cause -specific mortality conducted from 1991 to
1996 revealed that predation accounted for 28 percent of 32 adult bighorn sheep mortalities (25
percent due to lion predation and 3 percent due to either lion or bobcat predation) and 34 percent
were directly caused by urbanization (DeForge and Ostermann 1998b), The remaining
mortalities were due to disease (3 percent) and undetermined causes (34 percent). Of the 11
adult mortalities attributed to urbanization, 5 were due to automobile collisions, 5 were caused
by exotic plant poisoning, and 1 bighorn ram was strangled in a wire fence. An additional four
bighorn sheep were struck but not killed by vehicles. Toxic plants causing mortality included
oleander (Nerium oleander) and laurel cherry (Prunus sp.) (Bighorn Institute 1995, 1996).
Preliminary results from an ongoing study of radio collared Iambs indicate that urbanization is
also affecting lamb survival in this ewe group. Eight of nine deaths occurred within 300 meters
(980 feet) of the urban interface (Bighorn Institute 1999). Of the nine lamb mortalities recorded
in 1998 and 1999, five were attributed to coyote or bobcat predation, one to mountain lion
Field Manager, BLM (PWS-LRIV-2735.3) 22
Arca Manager, BOR
predation, and three to the direct and indirect effects of urbanization (automobile collision and
drowning in a swimming pool). Dogs also have been observed to chase bighorn ewes and their
Iambs near residential areas (E. Rubin, pers. comm.), and dogs likely caused the death of 2
yearlings in April 2001 (J. DeForge, pers. comm.).
Though mule deer (Odocoileus hemio us) are the primary prey of mountain lions in North
America (Anderson 1983), and the range of bighorn sheep in the Peninsular Ranges largely
avoids overlap with mule deer, lion predation may threaten individual ewe groups in the
Peninsular Ranges (Hayes et al. 2000), and has the potential to affect population recovery. From
November 1992 to May 1998, Mayes et al. (2000) found the primary cause of death of radio-
collared adult bighorn sheep between Highway 7'l (in the Santa Rosa Mountains) and the U.S.-
Mexico border was predation by mountain lions. Lion predation accounted for at least 69
percent of the 61 adult mortalities and occurred in tach of the ewe groups in this portion of the
range (Hayes ea al. 2000). Annually, lion predation accounted for 50 to 100 percent of the
bighorn sheep mortality, and did not exhibit a decreasing or increasing trend during 199310
1997. Lion predation appeared to show a seasonal pattern, with the majority of incidents
occurring during the cooler and wetter months of the year. A bighorn sheep's risk of predation
did not appear to be related to its age. 1t is unknown, however, how current levels of lion
predation observed throughout the Peninsular Ranges compare to historic levels. Reported
incidents of lion predation were not common in the past and predation was not considered to be a
serious risk to bighorn shccp (Weaver and Mensch 1970, Jorgensen and Turner 1975,
Cunningham 1982). 11 is important to note that the increase in the number of radio-collared
bighorn sheep since 1993 has greatly increased the detection of such mortalities, and it is
possible that other factors influencing Peninsular bighorn sheep and alternate prey species have
altered the proportion of mortalities caused by lion predation. Bighorn sheep evolved in the
presence of predators, and developed effective physical and behavioral mechanisms for dealing
with them. Similar to other desert bighorn populations, sheep in the Peninsular Ranges have
likely experienced varying levels of lion predation for thousands of years. However, when other
factors, such as drought, habitat loss and fragmentation due to urbanization, diseases, and other
mortality factors reduce populations to low levels and/or alter the abundance and distribution of
alternate prey species, such as mule deer, then the influence of predation on population dynamics
may increase (Logan and Swcanor 2001).
In areas of the Peninsular Ranges beyond the Coachella Valley, past field observations and
records documented mortalities resulting from predation (of Iambs) by coyotes (Canis iatrans)
(Weaver and Mensch 1970, Jorgensen and Turner 1975, DeForge and Scott 1912), train
collisions (Jorgensen and Turner 1973), automobile collisions (Turner 1976, Ricks 197g),
poaching (Jones et al. 1957, Jorgensen and Turner 1973, Cunningham 1982), and accidental falls
('Turner 1976). Golden eagles (Aquila cluysaeros) and bobcats (Lynx nefas) arc also potential
predators.
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 23
Area Manager, BOR
The westward spread of Europeans and their domestic livestock across North America was
thought to play a significant role in reducing the distribution and abundance of bighorn sheep
due to the introduction of new infectious diseases (Spraker 1977, Onderka and Wishart 1984). In
particular, domestic sheep have been repeatedly implicated in Pasteurella pneumonia die -offs of
bighorn sheep. It has been hypothesized that disease has played an important role in the
population dynamics of bighorn sheep in the Peninsular Ranges (DeForge et al. 1982, DeForge
and Scott 1982, Turner and Payson 1982, Wehausen et al. 1987). Numerous pathogens have
been isolated or detected by serologic assay from bighorn sheep in these ranges. These
pathogens include bluetongue virus, contagious ecthyma virus, parainfluenza -3 virus, bovine
respiratory syncy9iai virus, Anaplasma, Chlamydlia, Leptospira, Pasteurella, Psoroptes, and
Dermacentor (DeForge et al., 1982; Clark et al. 1985, 1993; Mazet et a1. 1992; Elliott et al.
1994; Boyce 1995; Crosbie et al., 1997, DeForge era/. 1997).
DeForge et al. (1982) found multiple pathogens (contagious ecthyma virus, blue tongue,
Pas/cure/1a, and parainfluenza virus) and low lamb recruitment in association with overall
population declines. Between 1982 and 1998, 39 lambs showing signs of illness (lethargy,
droopy ears, nasal discharge, and lung consolidation) were collected from the Santa Rosa
(northern and southern), Jacumba, and In -Ko -Pah Mountains for disease research and
rehabilitation at the Bighorn Institute (Ostermann et al. 2001). Additionally, DeForge et al.
(1995) documented a population decline throughout the Santa Rosa Mountains during 1983 to
1994, resulting from inadequate recruitment. Although a cause and effect relationship between
disease and population decline has not been clearly established in the Peninsular Ranges, results
from several studies provide support for this hypothesis (DeForge et al. 1952, Clark et al. 1985,
Wchausen et al. 1987, Clark et al. 1993, Elliot et al. 1994, DeForge et al. 1995). Analysis of
spatial variation in pathogen exposure among bighorn sheep sampled between 1978 to 1990
showed that Peninsular bighorn sheep populations and other populations in southern California
have higher levels of pathogen exposure than other populations of bighom sheep in the State
(Elliott et aL 1994). The presence of feral goats in portions of the Santa Rosa Mountains until
the late 1970's to early 1980's may have contributed to exposure of wild bighorn to disease
during this period of population decline (D. Jessup, in lilt. 1999). All evidence indicates that the
influence of disease in the Peninsular Ranges has subsided in recent years. For example, recent
sampling and examination of bighorn sheep throughout the range indicated that most animals
were clinically normal (Boyce 1995; DeForge et al. 1997; Bighorn Institute 1997, 1998, 1999).
Additional research is necessary to better understand the relationship between disease and
population trajectories. Furthermore, it appears that risk of disease and parasites might differ
among ewe groups based on their exposure and habitat use patterns, therefore future research
should address these questions at the level of the ewe group and population. Although an
epizootic docs not currently appear to be occurring in the Peninsular Ranges, diseases pose a
threat that could potentially occur at any time, especially if sheep experience chronic levels of
disturbance (Geist 1971, Hamilton et al. 1982, Spraker et al. 1984, King and Workman 1986,
Festa-Bianchet 1988, Desert Bighom Council 1992),
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ER1V-2735.3) 24
Arca Manager, BOR
Habitat loss is a leading cause of current species extinctions and endangerment worldwide
(13urgman et al. 1993), It represents a particularly serious threat to Peninsular bighorn sheep,
because they live in a narrow band of lower elevation habitat that represents some of the most
desirable real estate in the California desert, and it is being developed at a rapid pace. At least
7,490 hectares (18,500 acres or about 30 square miles) of suitable habitat has been lost to
urbanization and agriculture within the range of the three ewe groups that occur along the urban
interface between Palm Springs and La Quinta. Within the narrow band of habitat, bighorn
sheep make use of sparse and sometimes sporadically available resources found within their
home ranges. As humans encroach into this habitat, these resources are eliminated or reduced in
value, and the survival of ewe groups is threatened. Bighorn sheep are also sensitive to habitat
loss or modification because they are poor dispersers (Geist 1967, 1971), largely learning their
ranging patterns from older animals. When habitat is lost or modified, the affected group is
likely to remain within their familiar surroundings but with a reduced likelihood of population
persistence, due to the reduced quantity and/or quality of resources.
Encroaching urban development and anthropogenic disturbances have the dual effect of
restricting animals to a smaller area and severing connections between ewe groups.
Fragmentation poses a particularly severe threat to species with a metapopulation structure
because overall survival depends on interaction among suhpopulations. The movement of rams
and occasional ewes between ewe groups maintains genetic diversity and augments populations
of individual ewe groups (Brown and Kodric-Brown 1977, Soule 1980, Krausman and Leopold
1986, Schwartz er al. 1986, Burgman et al. 1993). "Temporary moves by females between
neighboring ewe groups could also provide new habitat knowledge facilitating future range
expansion (Geist 1971). Increased fragmentation reduces such possibilities.
Beyond physical barriers to movement, fragmentation also can result from less obvious forms of
habitat modification. Increased traffic on roads apparently make bighorn sheep, especially ewes,
hesitant to cross these roads (Rubin er al. 1998). Animals that do cross suffer an additional risk
of mortality from automobile collisions (Turner 1976, McQuivey 1978, Cunningham and deVos
1992, DeForge and Osterntann 1998b, Bighorn Institute 1999), with the result that a group
whose range is bisected by a road can have reduced viability in the long term (Cunningham and
deVos 1992). Human disturbance along trails can cause sheep to avoid those areas (Papouchis et
al. 1999), potentially affecting bighorn sheep movement and habitat use, thereby fragmenting
bighorn sheep distribution, although the habitat appears to be intact.
Development and human populations along the eastern slope of the Peninsular Ranges continue
to grow at a rapid pace at the lower and upper elevational boundaries of Peninsular bighorn
sheep habitat. The Coachella Valley Association of Governments anticipates that by the year
2010, the human population in the Coachella Valley will increase from 227,000 to over 497,000,
not including 165,000 to 200,000 seasonal residents. Bighorn population declines typically have
been most pronounced in ewe groups adjoining the urban interfact in the Coachella Valley.
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ER1V-2735.3) 25
Arca Manager, BOR
Similar to predation, prolonged drought is a natural factor that can have negative impacts on
desert bighorn sheep populations, either by limiting water sources or by affecting forage quality
(Rosenzweig 1968, Hansen 1980a, Monson 1980, Douglas and Leslie 1986, Wehausen et al.
1987). During drought years, the concentration of bighorn sheep near remaining water sources
may increase competition for forage as well as water, thereby limiting population growth through
density dependent regulation (Caughley 1977, Gotelli 1995). In addition, increased density
potentially renders animals more susceptible to diseases or parasites (Anderson and May 1979,
May and Anderson 1979).
Domestic livestock and feral animals can reduce the availability and quality of resources (water
and forage) required by bighorn sheep, and can function as potential vectors for diseases such as
bluetongue virus (Mullens et al. 1986). In portions of the range, water has been pumped from
aquifers and diverted away from springs for use by ranches and private residences, reducing and
eliminating the water sources upon which bighorn sheep depend (Tevis 1961; Blong 1967;
Turner 1976; M. Jorgensen, pers. comm., Anza-Borrego State Park).
In the Peninsular Ranges, the presence of tamarisk (Tamarix sp.), also known as saltcedar,
represents a serious threat to bighorn sheep. This exotic plant consumes large amounts of water
and has rapid reproductive and dispersal rates (Sanchez 1975, Lovich et al. 1994), enabling it to
out compete native plant species in canyon bottoms and washes. It has the following negative
effects on bighorn sheep: 1) it reduces or eliminates the standing water on which bighorn sheep
depend, 2) it out competes plant species on which bighorn sheep feed, and 3) it occurs in thick,
often impenetrable stands that block access to water sources and provide cover for predators.
Fire suppression can influenee the distribution and habitat use patterns of bighorn sheep by
causing avoidance of areas with low visibility (Risenhoover and Bailey 1985, Wakelyn 1987,
Etchberger et al. 1989, Etehberger et al. 1990, Krausman 1993, Krausman et al. 1996). Long-
term fire suppression results in taller, denser stands of vegetation, thereby reducing openness and
visibility making bighorn sheep more susceptible to predation (Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep
Interagency Advisory Group 1997). In addition, Graf (1980) suggested that fire suppression
reduces forage conditions in some bighorn sheep ranges. In the Peninsular Ranges, changes in
vegetation succession are evident in some portions of bighorn sheep range, primarily in higher
elevation chaparral and pinyon -juniper habitats, and have apparently decreased bighorn sheep
use of certain canyons and springs (M. Jorgensen, pers. comm.).
Disease problems have periodically caused die -offs of bighorn sheep herds throughout their
range, and the Peninsular Ranges have not escaped this problem (DeForge et al. 1982, DeForge
and Scott 1982, Tumer and Payson 1982, Wehauscn et al. 1987). The most virulent pathogens
appear to originate from domestic livestock, and are not endemic to bighorn sheep.
Consequently, bighorns have not evolved with these pathogens and have little resistance
compared to domestic livestock. The threat of novel strains of previously experienced pathogens
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 26
Area Manager, BOR
and entirely new ones is always present. Potential vectors for disease transmission vary from
domestic livestock and insects to other native wild ungulates. For example, if the current foot
and mouth disease being experienced in Europe eventually reaches North America, then white-
tailed deer and mule deer may become infected. This scenario could eventually lead to a serious
problem for all North American ungulates. Chronic wasting disease is currently a problem
within commercial cervid operations and currently exists within wild cervid populations in the
central Rocky Mountains. This disease could potentially spread westward, and its ecosystem
level effects could cause major problems for all native wild ungulates.
The number of illegal immigrants entering the U.S. from Mexico continues to increase despite
the efforts of the U.S. Border Patrol. Some of these immigrants travel through the Peninsular
Ranges and camp at water sources where they may occasionally kill and consume bighorn sheep,
or displace them. The Border Patrol is responding by increasing its activity along the border and
in the southern Peninsular Ranges. Consequently the level of human disturbance in the area is
increasing. This scenario may cause bighorn sheep to avoid areas they once utilized.
Synopsis of Status/Critical Habitat
Since listing in 1998, biennial range -wide surveys have estimated that the Peninsular bighorn
sheep population has increased from about 280 adult and yearling sheep to about 700 sheep in
2004 (CDFG unpubl. data). Over this time frame, mountain lion predation has become less
pronounced in the Anza-Borrego Desert State Park area compared to predation rates observed in
the mid-1990s (Hayes et al. 2000). The apparent absence of major disease outbreaks in the same
area has benefited recruitment of lambs into the breeding population. This combination of
improved adult survivorship and lamb recruitment appear to be the primary factors contributing
to population expansion in the southern ranges. In the Santa Rosa Mountains, ewe
subpopulations generally have increased as well, though in part for different reasons, since ewe
group population dynamics are typically independent from each other (Rubin et al. 1998). In the
northern Santa Rosa Mountains, the recent population expansion appears largely attributable to
completion of a barrier fence that has improved survivorship of adults and lambs by eliminating
formerly high levels of urban related mortality, including death from vehicle collisions,
strangulation in fences, drowning in swimming pools, ingestion of toxic plants, etc (DcForge and
Osterman') 1998). fn the San Jacinto Mountains, the population has fluctuated at low numbers
(approximately 20-30 adult bighorn) since 1993 (DeForge et al. 1997; Bighorn Institute 1998-
2004 annual reports). As in the northern Santa Rosas, population augmentation through the
release of captive -reared sheep has been an important contributing factor to the maintenance and
recovery of the population. Of the 10 ewes currently extant in the San Jacintos, six sheep arc
captive releases. Incidence of disease has been relatively quiescent in sheep subpopulations in
the Coachella Valley, which also has contributed to overall population growth. However, a
disease outbreak of unknown cause and origin was documented in the Santa Rosa Mountains in
the summer of 2005, and may have reduced the population in the northern Santa Rosa Mountains
by about 38 percent (Bighorn Institute, unpubl. data).
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 27
Area Manager, BOR
The 844,897 acres of designated critical habitat were primarily based on the prior delineation of
essential habitat in the Recovery Plan (Service 2000). At the time of listing and preparation of
the Recovery Plan, the Peninsular bighorn sheep population was near its historic low point and
one of the primary considerations in preparation of the Recovery Plan was protecting sufficient
space to support population growth needed to support the recovery objectives of maintaining
subpopulations of at least 25 adult ewes within each of nine designated recovery regions of
delineated essential habitat and an overall population level of 750 adults and yearlings. The
critical habitat designation was intended to maintain connectivity across the nine recovery
regions so that the metapopulation dynamics among these subpopulations would be allowed to
continue. Within the critical habitat designation, the primary constituent elements included
space for the normal behavior of groups and individuals; protection from disturbance;
availability of various native desert plant communities found on different topographic slopes,
aspects, and landforms, such as steep slopes, rolling foothills, alluvial fans, and canyon bottoms;
a range of habitats that provide forage, especially during periods of drought; steep, remote
habitat for lambing, rearing of young, and escape from disturbance and/or predation; water
sources; and suitable linkages allowing individual bighorn to move freely between ewe groups
and maintain connections between subpopulations. These constituent elements were recognized
as essential to meet the biological needs of feeding, resting, reproduction and population
recruitment, dispersal, connectivity, and isolation from detrimental disturbances.
ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE
The area affected directly and/or indirectly by the proposed project includes all areas that would be
developed or conserved areas on the project site, as well as the adjoining sections 5 and 32, and is
hereinafter referred to as the action area.
Two major native vegetation communities occur on the project site (Thomas Olsen Associates,
Inc.1994): Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub and Desert Dry Wash Woodland. These two
communities encompass approximately 680 acres or about 75 percent of the project site. The
remainder of the project site, 226 acres or about 25 percent, is a cultivated vineyard. Native
vegetation community types described below follow Holland (1986).
Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub: This vegetation community is similar to the Mojave Creosote
Bush Scrub but has a greater diversity of plant species and growth forms, likely due to warmer
temperatures and a seasonally split rainfall regime, The dominant woody perennial shrub in the
project area is creosote bush (Lerma tridentate). Other plants found onsite include pencil cholla
(Opuntia ramosissima), indigo bush (Psorothamnus fremontii), sweetbush (Bebbia sp.),
brittlebush (Encelia farinosa), desert lavender (Hyptis emoryi), white bursage (Ambrosia
dumosa), and ocotillo (Fouquieria splendens). A variety of annual forbs, which typically flower
in late February and March, are also found in the project area. This vegetation community
occurs on slopes, fans, and valleys with high soil salinity and winter temperatures usually above
freezing.
A
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ER1V-2735.3) 28
Area Manager, BOR
Desert Dry Wash Woodland: Desert Dry Wash Woodland is associated with sandy or gravelly
washes and arroyos of the lower Mojave and Colorado deserts and occurs mainly in frost -free
areas. This vegetation community is a drought deciduous, microphyllous xeroriparian thorn
scrub woodland dominated by various trees and shrubs of the legume family, including blue pato
verde (Cercidium floridum), smoke tree (Psorothamnus spinosus), sweetbush, desert lavender,
brittlebush, and catclaw acacia (Acacia greggii). Compared to the Sonoran Creosote Bush
Scrub, vegetation in this community is more abundant. During a field survey after summer rains,
a desert seep was observed at the confluence of two large ephemeral washes in the narrow linear
portion of the property near the southwestern corner of Section 3 (Ecological Ventures
California, Inc. 2003).
Existing structures and disturbances on the project site include a cultivated vineyard,
groundwater wells, a mobile home compound, and dumping sites (SFC Consultants 1998).
These are discussed in greater detail below. Existing roads on the property consist of dirt and
gravel tracks in and around the vineyard. Dirt roads or vehicle trails also lead southward toward
the Martinez Rockslide, and generally crisscross the site. The vineyard is located entirely
outside the boundaries of critical habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep, where grapes have been
cultivated since at least 1981.
Though bighorn sheep in the action area have not been the focus of intensive study, sheep have
been documented consistently on the mountain slopes south and west of the project site during
annual surveys (Bighorn Institute, unpubl. data). Consistent observations over time of sheep in
the same general area typically indicate habitation as part of a home range of one or more sheep.
CDFG surveys (K. Brennan, in lift.) also have documented sheep use (two rams and one ewe) in
alluvia] habitat near the vineyard, over 0.5 miles from the closest escape terrain. In addition,
data are available for one radio -collared ewe with a GPS unit, which showed regular use in the
main canyon draining into the southwestern portion of the project site. Consultants hired by the
project proponent also documented sheep sign on the property in this area (S. Deiateur, pers.
comm., P. Krausman, in list.).
The project site encompasses about 457 acres of designated critical habitat for Peninsular
bighorn sheep. Of this about 267 acres would be developed and abouttaNcres would be
permanently conserved on and off-site in sections 4 and 5. The primary function and particular
constituent elements in the action area include foraging habitat and water sources, escape terrain,
isolation from human disturbance, and lambing and rearing habitat. Compared to critical habitat
areas farther north along the urban interface, critical habitat in the action area is not as heavily
disturbed by human activities, and therefore, provides greater sanctuary for the resident sheep
population. This relative lack of disturbance and habitat loss is related to the extensive and
undeveloped alluvial fan system that has functioned in absorbing and curtailing sources of
disturbance beyond the limits of established sheep home ranges largely centered along the
bordering mountain sides, and absence of recognized trails and high recreational use levels, to
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3)
Area Manager, BOR
date. As an apparent result, sheep population levels in this ewe group have been more stable,
without the dramatic declines observed in more urbanized areas to the north.
Err✓ECTS OF THE ACTION
29
Direct Effects
For the purposes of this analysis, all references to bighorn sheep habitat below also pertain to
designated critical habitat for Peninsular bighom sheep; in other words, loss of lands outside
critical habitat were not considered to represent a loss of bighom sheep habitat because the
critical habitat designation in this area was sufficiently robust to capture those areas typically
expected to be used by bighorn sheep.
The proposed project would directly eliminate about 267 acres of designated critical habitat for
Peninsular bighorn sheep and permanently conserve a minimum of about 290 acres of on-site
and off-site critical habitat in sections 4 and 5. The reconfiguration of the project footprint
discussed above under the project description was designed to avoid the most biologically
valuable portions of the project site and reduce the intrusion of development into bighorn sheep
habitat. By scaling back the project along its southern boundaries on the eastern and western
sides of the Martinez Rockslide, the revised project boundary now largely avoids the canyon
mouths with alluvial fan plant communities (primarily desert dry wash woodland), thereby
maintaining a portion of this habitat type available to bighorn sheep in the project area. Radio -
collar data indicate that the alluvial habitat avoided in the southwestern corner of the project site
occurs within the northernmost portion of a ewe home range that otherwise extends over the
rockslide south into Martinez Canyon. Field work by biological contractors of the project
proponent also located bighorn sign in this area, as referenced above.
The loss of desert dry wash woodland would primarily affect bighorn sheep by further reducing
the seasonal availability of nutritious forage found in this increasingly scarce alluvial fan plant
community. However, the extent to which this area has been used by bighorn sheep is not
known because of the limited amount of field work on sheep that has been conducted in the
project vicinity. CDFG data (K. Brennan, in litt) documented sheep use in the northwestern
corner of Section 4, which indicates that sheep occasionally venture far into the fan, well away
from the closest escape terrain. Extensive use of alluvial slopes distant from escape terrain also
has been documented repeatedly in portions of Anza-Borrego Desert State Park, which suggests
that regular use in areas without nearby escape terrain can be expected in remote areas with a
general absence of human -related disturbance. Though this loss of foraging habitat represents a
reduction in ecological value for bighorn sheep in the general area, redesign of the project
configuration, as discussed above, retained about 110 acres of alluvial habitat on-site for the
benefit of sheep, which would continue to help meet the nutritional needs of current and future
sheep generations inhabiting the project area, provided that cross-country hiking and
proliferation of trails are effectively prevented so that bighorn sheep will continue to feel secure
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 30
Area Manager, BOR
in using these foraging areas more distant from available escape cover (see the Indirect Effects
section below for more detail).
Travertine's stated off-site habitat conservation strategy of acquiring discontinuous parcels in
Section 5 also is designed to protect valuable alluvial foraging habitat, as well as indirectly
protecting even more such habitat on intervening parcels by reducing their development potential
through fragmentation of land into smaller units with reduced economic development potential.
To date, Travertine has acquired over 20 acres of scattered parcels for conservation of bighorn
sheep critical habitat and has committed to purchase an additional approximately 100 acres in
some of the more developable portions of Section 5. In addition, Travertine has agreed to loan
CVAG or CVCC $2 million for additional habitat acquisition in Section 5 if the CVMSHCP is
approved. When combined with a recent parcel acquisition by the Friends of the Desert
Mountains, BLM and Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy land acquisition programs, and
grant -in -aide funding from the Service through CDFG for acquiring bighorn sheep habitat, the
emerging pattem of conservation in Section 5 can be expected to continue. Please see below for
expanded discussion on this topic.
Indirect Effects
For the purposes of this analysis, indirect effects are defined as those that are caused by the
proposed action and are later in time but still are reasonably certain to occur (50 CFR 402.02).
We anticipate three potential types of indirect effects from the proposed project that likely would
be minimized and partially avoided by die various conservation measures agreed to by the
project proponent: (1) construction/operation-related disturbance, (2) potential maladaptive
behaviors associated with bighorn sheep attraction to artificial sources of food and water on the
proposed golf course, and (3) inducement of future development on private lands in Section 5
adjoining the project site on the west.
The project reconfiguration discussed above was designed to minimize impacts to sheep use in
adjoining habitat. Nonetheless, project construction activities likely would disrupt sheep
behavior in surrounding areas by causing sheep to avoid using portions of their home ranges and
alluvial fan foraging habitat, on a temporary basis. Avoidance behavior would potentially
expose sheep to higher predation risk if sheep movement is restricted to smaller use areas. If
dust control measures during construction are not adequate or properly applied, airborne
particulates could be inhaled by bighorn sheep and cause adverse pulmonary reactions and health
effects, However, the project's construction must comply with the PM 10 regulations controlling
all grading activity in the Coachella Valley. Airborne dust from a major construction activity is
thought to have led to an all -age die -off of sheep in the Rocky Mountains (Spraker et al. 1984).
The proposed conservation measures of using passive design features, such as berms,
juxtaposition of golf and trail components to prevent off -trail excursions by recreationists, and
monitoring/trespass enforcement by golf course marshals should curtail most human disturbance
levels in adjoining bighorn sheep habitat, though some harassment of sheep by noncompliant
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 31
Area Manager, BOR
individuals may be unavoidable. Overall, the proposed project design, including contingency
fencing measures, would effectively manage edge effects of the project to a level that would not
appreciably detract from sheep use in adjoining habitats, except for a typical pattern of apparent
avoidance of disturbance that is evident in the compilation of sheep data along the existing urban
interface north of the project site.
The fencing contingency plan also would minimize exposure of bighorn sheep to the hazards
associated with artificial sources of food and water on the golf course that fronts adjacent habitat.
Though sheep in this ewe group have not generally habituated to urban settings, a bighorn ewe
with a rumen full of green grass was recently found drowned in the Coachella Canal adjoining
PGA West (CDFG, unpubl. information). Thus, the initially unfenced golf course would pose a
risk of habituation and exposure to disease and parasite hazards that have been documented
elsewhere (DeForge and Ostermann 1998, as cited in Service 2000). However, we anticipate
that if sheep begin to habituate to on-site urban environments, the fencing committee (composed
of HOA, CDFG, and Service representatives) would oversee construction of a sheep -proof fence
along a predetermined easement with a funding source created prior to project construction, as
described in Conservation Measure 5.
A fence also would be constructed if recreational trespass occurs along the Rockslide Access
Trail into bighorn sheep habitat in the canyons bordering the east and west edges of the
rockslide, or creates spur trails upslope into the canyons west of the project site.
The last and potentially most damaging indirect effect of the project would be the extension of
(1) legal access across BLM and BOR lands that connects with an existing 30 -foot wide
easement along the northern boundary of sections 4 and 5 (Avenue 62), and (2) physical access
to a point in Section 4 about 100 yards east of the corner of sections 4, 5, 32, and 33. Currently.
there is no all-weather road access into Section 5, without which, development in Section 5
would not be possible. With access provided by the proposed rights-of-way across BLM and
BOR lands, the economics of delivering utilities and related infrastructure, and associated effects
to projected return on investment, would likely influence, as one of many development
considerations, future development patterns in Section 5.
As described above, legal access for Section 5 lies within an existing 30 -foot wide public right-
of-way easement along the northern border of Section 5. About 100 yards east of the
northwestern corner of Section 4, the easement largely lies in the main wash along Avenue 62
where it turns to Jefferson Street. Any future all-weather roadway to City standards within this
easement would have to be constructed in the bottom of that wash for about 0.25 mile due west
before the wash bends south out of the easement, at which point the access road would have to
be graded up the north cut bank of the wash.lf a construction design were physically and
economically feasible, which may be questionable, given the uneven terrain and hydrological
challenges of designing a roadway to City standards in a deeply incised major wash, a Streambed
Alteration Agreement with CDFG and a section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 32
Area Manager, BOR
Engineers would be needed. Among other requirements, CDFG would typically examine the
effects on threatened and endangered species and the U.S. Army Corps would require a section 7
consultation with the Service. Moreover, both agencies typically require the loss of desert
washes and microphyllous woodland to be mitigated by the acquisition of equivalent value
habitat at a 3:1 acreage ratio. Access to individual parcels across the dissected surface of the
alluvial fan would require the crossing of numerous other washes as well. Any road construction
to the north of this existing easement in Section 32 would require BLM approval, as Section 32
is BLM ]and. Any road construction to the south of this easement would require approval of the
various owners of parcels within Section 5. Travertine owns several of these parcels and has
committed to not provide approval for right-of-way access rights outside of the existing
easement.
Associated with the potential growth inducement associated with its proposed action, Travertine
Corporation assessed the feasibility of residential construction in Section 5 by conducting an
investigation into the economic and regulatory logistics of delivering necessary infrastructure to
this section (Section 5 Addendum to the Travertine Biological Assessment), including roads,
water, sewer, electricity, gas, and telephone/cable. Because Travertine has agreed not to provide
additional capacity or discretionary hookups to meet potential infrastructural needs in Section 5,
any future development would have to tap into utility trunk lines down-slope from Travertine,
more than 1.5 miles away, or potentially north of Travertine in the Green Specific Plan area,
about 1 mile way. The estimated costs of extending infrastructural capacity from the valley
floor, through Travertine, and up to the eastern boundary of Section 5, and of extending Avenue
62 from Section 4 into Section 5 by 1,100 and 2,350 lineal feet, totaled about $8.8 and $11.9
million, respectively. Prorated over a hypothetical 80 -unit subdivision, these off-site
infrastructural costs added about $148,000 per house. If only 40 units are built, these off-site
cost double to nearly $300,000 per lot. This estimate does not include the substantial costs
related to development of on-site water retention, water improvements, sewer improvements, off-
site drainage and hillside grading. By agreeing not to provide infrastructural capacity for
additional development beyond the needs of Travertine itself, the proposed project likely would
partially subsidize possible development in Section 5 for transportation (legal and physical
access) costs only, but would increase the other development costs, due to the need for re -
excavation and installation of greater capacity within utility easements that already would have
been installed for the proposed Travertine project.
Whether this partial transportation subsidy would tip the economic balance in favor of
development in Section 5, despite the other substantial development costs involved, is arguable.
All else being equal, a reduction in transportation -related costs would be an appreciable
inducement to development. However, as discussed in the Section 5 Addendum to the Travertine
Biological Assessment, numerous other substantial economic and regulatory issues would
remain. Legal access along the possible extension of Avenue 62 into Section 5 would be
constrained to an existing 30 -foot wide public right-of-way easement, given Travertine's
commitment to not grant access to prospective developers. However, a subdivision would
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 33
Area Manager, BOR
typically require a collector street (74 feet wide) or a secondary arterial (88 feet wide) (La Quinta
Municipal Code 13.24.070 Street Design—Generally, & Table 13.24.060). But since the
potential Avenue 62 extension is not a General Plan street, the City typically would not use
eminent domain to condemn private property in Section 5 to provide a developer with a right-of-
way wide enough to meet City codes. Therefore, assuming a developer could not obtain
necessary additional right-of-way width from certain landowners in Section 5, such a developer
would likely seek a right-of-way expansion into Section 32 and initiate a grant application with
BLM. However, with legal access already provided on private lands in Section 5, BLM would
not be under a legal obligation to grant a license on public lands. If BLM were so inclined to
grant a right-of-way easement, BLM would be required to consult with the Service under section
7 of the Act. Such consultation likely would incur a variety of minimization, conservation, or
compensation measures to offset adverse effects. Thus, the commitment of Travertine to not sell
or otherwise provide approval on its lands for an expanded easement, would appear to restrict
future development in Section 5 to an unknown but limited number of units that could be safely
served under the existing 30-foot wide easement. Considering the extraordinary infrastructural
costs needed to meet City codes for residential development, the regulatory delays and cost to
comply with CDFG and the Corps requirements, and the strategic conservation acquisitions
proposed by Travertine to breakup large blocks of potentially developable lands, any
development that might still occur likely would be substantially less than current City zoning.
Regardless, even a few residences if constructed at the mid- to upper elevations of Section 5, would
render most or all down-slope habitat largely unusable because bighorn sheep typically avoid areas
separated by sources of disturbance from the nearest escape terrain. This avoidance reaction by
sheep would also eliminate most or all habitat value on the approximately 120 acres of conserved
lands acquired by Travertine for the benefit of sheep in Section 5. Moreover, the urban interface
design of the Travertine project that prevents human intrusion into bighorn sheep habitat, and sheep
from accessing urban sources of food and water, would prove largely pointless and ineffective if
incremental development were permitted in Section 5.
A scenario where exclusive homes on large lots are scattered across the hillsides of Section 5
would extend the familiar pattern found along much of the urban interface to the north, where
trails would proliferate off vehicular access points (in this case the extension of Avenue 62),
creating an unplanned network up the numerous canyons and ridgelines along the toe of slope,
which provide essential lambing, rearing and escape habitat, seasonal/perennial water, and other
vital resources for sheep. As a result, sheep home ranges would withdraw upslope as human
disturbance dramatically increased along lower elevation canyons and ridgelines, thereby
diminishing seasonal/perennial resources essential to sustain stable population levels.
Sheep populations in the Deep Canyon and Martinez Canyon areas have been stable over the
known past, in contrast to the ewe groups in the northern Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains
that declined to near extinction but were then rescued by release of captive-reared animals. This
pattern of population decline in ewe groups where development encroaches to the toe of slope
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERN-2735.3) 34
Area Manager, BOR
and consequently results in extensive cross country hiking and trails proliferation, likely would
be repeated in this area as well, unless Section 5 is protected with more space for sheep at the
lower elevations of their home ranges along the alluvial fan up to the western edge of the
Travertine project. As Krausman et al. (2003) have observed, "Avoiding extinction for the
northern Santa Rosa population and other mountain sheep populations faced with urban
expansion will require aggressive management. If encroachment is unavoidable because of
political or economic pressures, then every action should be taken to minimize mountain sheep
and human encounters When development occurs adjacent to and in mountain sheep habitat,
the sheep eventually decline and ultimately become extinct. Society is faced with a difficult
choice: either restrict suburban expansion and control human activities within sheep habitat or
accept the reality that sheep and expanding developments are simply not compatible."
As explained in detail in the Section 5 Addendum to the Travertine Biological Assessment, the
combined effects of Travertine's targeted conservation acquisitions in Section 5, the high cost to
bring road access and utilities up the slope into Section 5 west of Travertine's development
boundary, and the numerous regulatory requirements, arguably would not make future
development in Section 5 more likely as a result of the Travertine project. Were it not for
Travertine's proposed strategic conservation acquisitions, a developer potentially could assemble
enough acreage in the areas outside of La Quinta's Hillside Conservation Overlay District over
which to spread the costs of development and still leave the project economically viable.
Consequently, the development potential of Section 5 has been significantly diminished. Thus,
as reconfigured through this section 7 consultation, the Travertine project would minimize the
potential growth-inducing effects in Section 5 and potentially accelerate the dynamics for
permanent conservation of this area for bighorn sheep.
Summary: All the effects to bighorn sheep described in the above analysis pertain to areas
designated as critical habitat. Therefore, the various direct and indirect effects, together with the
associated conservation measures in the proposed action that would avoid, minimize, and
compensate for adverse effects to bighorn sheep, also pertain to designated critical habitat.
Overall, the direct elimination of about 267 acres of critical habitat was designed in a way that
retained most of the foraging habitat in close proximity to escape habitat. Thus, the conservation
strategy agreed to by the project proponent was to protect those foraging areas used most
frequently by bighorn sheep, and to allow the loss of those foraging areas farthest from escape
terrain that are used the least by sheep. By reconfiguring the project design in this way, the
primary role and function of critical habitat on and adjacent to the project site can be conserved
without appreciably diminishing the carrying capacity for bighorn sheep in the project area.
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 35
Area Manager, BOR
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
Cumulative effects include the effects of future State, tribal, local, or private actions that are
unrelated to the proposed action and reasonably certain to occur in the action area considered in
this biological opinion, Future Federal actions that are unrelated to the proposed action are not
considered in this section because they require separate consultation pursuant to section 7 of the
ESA.
We are aware that CVWD is intending to construct water percolation basins behind the existing
dike to the east of the Travertine project site; however, these sites occur outside critical habitat
and per our understanding of how they would be constructed and maintained, likely would not
adversely affect bighorn sheep.
If the CVMSHCP is approved, any potential development within Section 5 would be regulated
under what is termed under the CVMSHCP as the HANS process, which is designed to
determine whether all or parts of individual parcels are needed to meet the various conservations
goals and objectives of the plan, and to provide an acquisition mechanism for those parcels
needed for conservation. For the reasons discussed above, Section 5 west of the proposed
Travertine site is essential for the conservation of Peninsular bighorn sheep, and therefore, would
need to be conserved under the CVMSHCP.
CONCLUSION
After reviewing the current status and environmental baseline of the species, effects of the
proposed action, and cumulative effects, it is our biological opinion that the proposed action is
not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Peninsular bighorn sheep, or adversely
modify designated critical habitat. This biological opinion does not rely on the regulatory
definition of "destruction or adverse modification" of critical habitat at 50 CFR 402.02. Instead,
we have relied upon the statutory provisions of the Act to reach these conclusions, which are
based on the following reasons:
1. The proposed project design has been substantially altered to better protect important
habitat features and primary constituent elements of critical habitat on the project site.
2. The numerous conservation measures would (a) minimize human intrusion into adjoining
critical habitat, (b) strategically acquire conservation lands to fragment otherwise
developable, larger blocks of land in Section 5, thereby temporarily/indirectly protecting
additional critical habitat from development until conservation funding becomes
available to permanently conserve these intervening private lands, (c) permanently
protect 290 acres of critical habitat, and (d) provide funding for bighorn sheep recovery
implementation.
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERN-2735.3)
Area Manager, BOR
3. The proposed project site is located along the edge of designated critical habitat, and
consequently would not fragment habitat, disrupt connectivity, or displace individual
sheep from current home ranges.
INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT
36
Sections 7(b)(4) and 7(o)(2) of the Act do not apply to the incidental take of listed plant species.
However, protection of listed plants is provided in that the Act to the extent that removal or
reduction to possession of endangered or threatened plants from Federal lands requires a Federal
permit. it is unlawful for any person to remove, cut, dig up, damage or destroy a listed plant
species in knowing violation of any law or regulation of any state or in the course of any
violation of a State criminal trespass law [section 9(a)(2)(B) of the Act].
Sections 4(d) and 9 of the Act, as amended, prohibit taking (harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct) of listed species
of fish and wildlife without a special exemption. Hann is further defined to include significant
habitat degradation or modification that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly
impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering, Harass is defined as
actions that significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns which include, but are not limited to,
breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Incidental take is any take of listed animal species that results
from, but is not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity conducted by the
Federal agency or the applicant.
The measures described below are non -discretionary, and must be undertaken by the BLM and
BOR for the exemption in 7(o)(2) to apply. The BLM and BOR have a continuing duty to
regulate the activity covered by this incidental take statement. If the BLM and BOR fail to
assume and implement the terms and conditions, the protective coverage of 7(o)(2) may lapse.
To monitor the impact of the incidental take, the BLM and BOR must report the progress of the
action and its impact on species to the Service as specified in this incidental take statement [50
CFR 402.14(i)(3)].
Amount or Extent of Take
Though we do not anticipate that any Peninsular bighorn sheep would be directly injured or
killed as a result of the proposed project, we do anticipate that sheep in the vicinity of the project
would be harmed as a result of (1) project construction, (2) potential habituation to the initially
unfenced golf course, with consequent health and safety effects, and (3) disturbance by
recreational trespass from the proposed trail and improved public access to the site. Harm would
result from sheep avoiding and withdrawing from these sources of disturbance and noise
associated with the project and project -associated recreational -associated disturbance within
sheep habitat. Avoidance reactions and habituation to the same stimulus can both occur within a
given population of bighorn sheep due to behavioral variances among individuals. The scientific
Field Manager, BLM (FWS-ERIV-2735.3) 37
Area Manager, BOR
literature shows that not all bighorn sheep react in the same way to human disturbance, and a
portion of the individuals in the same population do not react as strongly and can habituate to
certain human activities (see for example 1-Iicks and Elder 1979, Leslie and Douglas 1980,
Papouchis et al, 2001); therefore it is not possible to quantify to number of individuals that
would he affected, but it is reasonable to conclude that it would be at least one, Take is given in
acres of disturbed habitat. Two hundred and sixty seven acres containing one or more primary
constituent elements of designated critical habitat will be permanently lost or altered due to the
proposed project and associated edge effects.
Reasonable ar:d Prudent Measures
This reasonable and prudent measure, with its accompanying term and condition, arc necessary
and appropriate to minimize the impact of the incidental take associated with the proposed
project.
BLM and 13OR shall ensure that the conservation obligations described in the biological
opinion are fully implemented over the life of the project.
Terms and Conditions
To be exetnpt from the prohibitions of section 9 of the Act, BLM and BOR must comply with
the following terms and condition, which implements the reasonable and prudent measure
described above. This term and condition is non -discretionary and requires that implementation
details are subject to the continuing oversight and concurrence of the Service.
BLM and BOR shall require in all access approvals crossing Federal lands that Travertine
Corporation and successors, and/or City of La Quinta, as appropriate (1) implement the
project description and conservation measures as described in this biological opinion, and
(2) submit all project design drawings, trail alignments, landscape plans, and grading
plans along the development: habitat edge, for Service review and approval, and ensure
that any Service -required modifications to these plans be incorporated into the final
approvals before the beginning of each phase of project constriction. BLM and BOR
shall immediately notify the Service of any noncompliance with adherence to the project
description and conservation measures described in the biological opinion. BLM and
BOR shalt require corrective measures where direct jurisdiction exists. Where direct
BLM and BOR jurisdiction does not exist, BLM and 1308 shall direct the City to rectify
any compliance issues. if not rectified per the above, noncompliance shall be regarded as
new information or a project modification that requires reinitiation of formal consultation
under 50 CFR 402.16.
These incidental take measures and conditions are designed to minimize the impact of incidental
take that might otherwise result from the proposed action. If during the course of the action, the
Field Manager, BINE (FW S-ERIV-2735.3) 38
Area Manager, BOR
level of take is exceeded or the terms and conditions are not complied with, these circumstances
would constitute new information requiring reinitiation of consultation and review of the
reasonable and prudent measures. I3LM and 13OR must immediately provide an explanation for
the causes of the taking or noncompliance with the terms and conditions and review with the
Service the need for possible modification of the reasonable and prudent measures.
RE]NITIATION NOTICE
This concludes formal consultation on the proposed action. As provided in 50 CFR 402.16,
reinitiation of formal consultation is required where discretionary Federal agency involvement or
control over the action has been retained (or is authorized by law) and if: (1) the amount or
extent of incidental lake is exceeded; (2) new information reveals effects of the agency action
that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a inanner or to an extent not considered in this
opinion; (3) the agency action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the
listed species or critical habitat not considered in this opinion; or (4) a new species is listed or
critical habitat designated may be affected by the action
If you have any questions regarding this biological and conference opinion, please contact Pete
Sorensen at (760) 431-9440.
Attachment (Figure 1)
LITERATURE CITED
The literature cited in this biological opinion is available upon request to the Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office.
ilhq
® ; O
-a o -o -o
[� j 7 O 0 0
_ 0 O O O
c- C 2 N ▪ N
Q� 0.) a a a Tj
6, ° n o 0 CLT
CD0 m ; v o C CD
o 0 jT
a o o
m 3 m 2 O
a m 0 E7 a) 1:3
m p p 3 0
o a C. = a
O R
m O a 0 W
0 Q7 CD 0
N y W
{ ds m�oc c -
m a-, Q�,oN-Nn g "C
d0 �Si n'Kn' z 0•
or 0 IdN n
RR g -Das . -
n_ �� No m
34 q a� m
�� N' c
c< RE n
ca a m
nw 11.:
I
rye
...-.4:-.-.:" s
~iA
O
0 O
Appendix E CVCC Final Joint Project Review
COACHELLA VALLEY CONSERVATION COMMISSION CVCC
Cathedral City ° Coachella ° Desert Hot Springs ° Indian Wells ° Indio ° La Quinta ° Palm Desert
° Palm Springs ° Rancho Mirage ° County of Riverside ° Coachella Valley Water District ° Imperial Irrigation District
31 March 2021
Cheri Flores
Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
760.777.7067
RE: Final Joint Project Review for CVCC 20-006 Travertine development project
Dear Ms. Flores:
The Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) has completed its Joint Project Review
(JPR) as required by section 6.6.1.1 of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) for the Travertine development project proposed by TRG Land,
Inc.
The project is located partially within the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Conservation Area and
proposes an 855 -acre mixed use development to include low and medium density residential
housing, hospitality and commercial services, and recreation, open space, and natural areas. The
project will impact 6.5 acres with the conservation area, but does not overlap with any modeled
habitat. A further 2.25 acres of disturbance within the Conservation Area will occur on land owned
by the Bureau of Land Management, who is not a permittee under the CVMSHCP and is therefore
not reviewed in this report.
The Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Conservation Area contains Essential Habitat for Peninsular
bighorn sheep, a species fully protected by the State of California. A separate Biological Opinion
provided by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service covers federal permitting for that species,
but neither that document nor this JPR allow for the take of any individual. The Conservation Area
also contains habitat for desert tortoise and Le Conte's thrasher.
A draft JPR was submitted to the US Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and
Wildlife, and the project applicant on 2 February 2021. Agency comments, and any response, are
summarized in the JPR and included in full as an Appendix.
This JPR has found the project as proposed consistent with the CVMSHCP if conditioned on the
implementation of required Avoidance and Minimization Measures and applicable Land Use
Adjacency guidelines as described in the Plan documents. The Travertine project also has
specific financial requirements that must be met prior to its implementation, furhter described in
Plan documents.
COACHELLA VALLEY CONSERVATION COMMISSION CVCC
Cathedral City ° Coachella ° Desert Hot Springs ° Indian Wells ° Indio ° La Quinta ° Palm Desert
° Palm Springs ° Rancho Mirage ° County of Riverside ° Coachella Valley Water District ° Imperial Irrigation District
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at psatin@cvag.org, or
760.346.1127.
Sincerely,
Peter Satin
Regional Planner
CC: Carly Beck, CDFW
Jacob Skaggs, CDFW
Heather Pert, CDFW
Alicia Thomas, USFWS
Jenness McBride, USFWS
Mark Rogers, TRG Land, Inc
Attachments:
JPR 20-006: Travertine
Appendix A: Applicant project description
Appendix B: Agency comments
Appendix C: Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures and Land Use Adjacency
Guidelines
JPR Application
CVCC
Coachella Valley Conservation Commission
Draft Joint Project Review
Submitted 31 March 2021
Project Summary
Applicant
TRG Land, Inc
CVCC ID
20-006
Permittee(s)
City of La Quinta
APN
753040014, 753040016, 753040017, 753050007,
753050013,
753050029, 753060003, 753070005, 753080003,
753080005,
753080006, 764280057, 764280059, 764280061,
766110002,
766110003, 766110004, 766110005, 766110007,
766110009,
766120001, 766120002, 766120003, 766120006,
766120015,
766120016, 766120018, 766120021, 766120023
Total Acreage
855.4 acres
Conservation Area
Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains
Conservation Area
6.5 acres
Disturbance Acreage
Introduction
The Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) is a joint powers authority tasked with
overseeing the implementation of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(CVMSHCP or Plan). Among other responsibilities, CVCC is tasked with conducting the Joint Project
Review (JPR) process as defined in section 6.6.1.1 of the Plan for any potential development taking place
in a Conservation Area that may impact Conservation Objectives. The JPR process allows CVCC to
facilitate and monitor the implementation of the CVMSHCP and to assist Local Permittees in meeting the
Conservation Goals and Objectives of the Plan. The intention of this JPR document is to inform
Permittee(s) whether a proposed development project complies with Plan requirements, and in no way
limits their land use authority.
The JPR process is designed to streamline appropriate development projects while maintaining adequate
time for regulatory review. Within 30 days of receipt of project information from a Local Permittee, CVCC
will conduct a geospatial analysis of how the project may impact Conservation Area Conservation
Objectives and Required Measures as described in section 4.3, rough step parameters as described in
section 6.5, and Covered Species Goals and Objectives as described in section 9. CVCC will prepare
their findings for comment and submit them to the Local Permittee, the project applicant, and the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
(collectively, Wildlife Agencies). The Wildlife Agencies will provide any comments to CVCC within 30
days, after which CVCC will finalize its recommendation regarding project compliance and submit to the
Local Permittee. Additional consultation between CVCC, the project applicant, and the Local Permittee
may be required if inconsistencies with Plan requirements are identified.
1
•/4r1•,rr-- r
f /it —f
i
- Yuma :'alley
a n R f to A•i , r h u ar +. a F+ 70 I n .a
Twera ynlrx
Palnrs
• Irlredrat •
*V. ay
v?......._
fid _ iL F".II�� I aaLti.
CVCCY
" ' Project site
CVMSHCP boundary
L__ J City of La Quinta Boundary
CVM SHCP Conservation Areas
Figure 1: Project location with the Coachella Valley.
Disclaimer: Maps and data are b be used for reference
purposes only. Map features are approximate, and are not
necessarily accurate to surveying a engineering standards.
CVCC, the appl icant, and the County of Riverside mace no warranty
a guarantee as to the content (the source is often thid party
accuracy, timeliness, er completeness of any of the data provided,
and assumes no legal responsibility fa the information corrtained on
this map Any use of this product with respect to accuracy and
Recision shall be the sole responsibility d the user.
2
Project Description
The proposed Travertine project (Project) is located primarily within the boundaries of the City of La
Quinta and will impact land within the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area
(SRSJM) (Figure 1). A small portion of the project will impact land owned by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) within SRSJM (Figure 2); however, because the BLM is not a signatory to the
CVMSHCP and BLM land is not covered, that portion will not be reviewed here. The Project proposes an
855 -acre mixed use development to include low and medium density residential housing, hospitality and
commercial services, and recreation, open space, and natural areas. A full project description provided
by the applicant is included as Appendix A.
The proposed Project warrants special consideration under the CVMSHCP. Prior to the approval of state
and federal permits for the Plan, the Project had initiated Section 7 consultations with USFWS. As
detailed in section 4.3.21 of the CVMSHCP under Required Measures for the SRSJM Conservation Area,
any species issued permits through the USFWS Biological Opinion for this Project would not require take
authorization through the Plan. Any conservation measures listed for those species would not apply
unless incorporated into the Biological Opinion. For those Covered Species not included in the Biological
Opinion, the Project constitutes a Covered Activity governed by special provisions.
Project Impacts and Proposed Conservation Measures
The impacts subject to this review involve the construction of two water tanks and associated
infrastructure resulting in disturbance of 6.51 acres of land within SRSJM (Figure 2). No additional areas
for fuel modification zones are anticipated for the development. As noted in the findings section of this
report, this 6.5 acres of disturbance does not impact the conservation objectives for Peninsular bighorn
sheep, desert tortoise, or Le Conte's thrasher. The proposed trail plan for Travertine has been revised in
consultation with the CVCC to relocate trail routes to avoid entry into the Conservation Area. As depicted
in Figure 2, portions of the trail now abut the Conservation Area, but the trail does not enter into it. With
this change, the trail plan is no longer subject to the JPR process.
As required by the Biological Opinion, the Project applicant will permanently conserve through deed
restriction 294.75 acres of on-site property, with 147.75 acres occurring within SRSJM. An additional
10.75 acres of off-site conservation also falls within the Conservation Area. Since this is required
mitigation acreage, it cannot be counted toward the Conservation Objectives of the Plan.
The Biological Opinion further requires a fencing contingency plan to be drafted by the applicant and for
fencing easements to be granted to the appropriate agency along the outermost perimeter of the project.
This conservation measure supersedes required measure 11 of section 4.3.21 of the CVMSHCP
describing similar actions.
The portion of the project on BLM land and not subject to this review is projected to disturb 2.25 acres.
All disturbance acreages were determined independently by CVCC staff using impact data provided by
the applicant and controlling for acreage previously considered disturbed.
1 All acreages are rounded to the nearest quarter -acre.
3
evrei r; a 7u5 Fc,I
Mai Ave
irikrro54 kI
L. CuIPl.
ya
City of La Quinta
rid fir 535
Darrel Dr
0,45
ec
1u, Lrr
tapia caw Dr
Revised Trail Path
rte
CCC
F.1 -g•
Conservation Area boundary
�.._.._i City of La Quinta boundary
Project footprint
Novel Project disturbance
Figure 2: Project footprint and surrounding land status.
Bureau of Land Management
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Bureau of Reclamation
State of California
N
Disclaimer: Maps and data are to be used for reference
purposes only. Map features are approximate, and are nut
necessarily accurate to surveying or engineering standards.
CVCC, the applicant. and the County of Riverside main e no warranty
or guarantee as to the content {the source is after thid party,
accuracy, timelines, ar completeness of any of the date provided.
ana assumes no legal responsibilityfor theinfarmatian captained an
this map Any use of the product with respect to eccuragr and
precision shell be the sole responsibility of the user.
4
Conservation Assessment
Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area
The primary conservation focus of SRSJM is to protect essential habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep.
This Conservation Area also provides potential habitat for gray vireo and desert tortoise, although
respective occupation and population densities for these species is not well known. It also provides
migration and breeding habitat for many of the Plan's riparian species, and natural communities including
desert fan palm oases. Of note, SRSJM contains at least one occurrence of triple -ribbed milkvetch that
appears to be disjunct from other known occurrences within the CVMSHCP and numerous recorded
burrowing owl locations. Small amounts of Other Conserved Habitat (OCH) for Coachella Valley
milkvetch, Coachella Valley giant sand -treader cricket, Coachella Valley Jerusalem cricket, Coachella
Valley fringe -toed lizard, flat -tailed horned lizard, Le Conte's thrasher, Coachella Valley round -tailed
ground squirrel, and Palm Springs pocket mouse are also found in SRSJM. Hydrological processes
necessary for the maintenance of desert dry wash, desert fan palm oases, and other riparian habitats are
considered Essential Ecological Processes for the Conservation Area.
Conservation Objectives for SRSJM include the conservation of essential habitat for Peninsular bighorn
sheep, the conservation of known and potential habitat for gray vireo, the conservation of OCH for Le
Conte's thrasher and desert tortoise, and the conservation of occupied burrowing owl burrows. Natural
communities prioritized for conservation include southern willow arroyo riparian forest, desert fan palm
oasis woodland, and semi desert chaparral. Conservation Objectives are detailed more fully in section
4.3.21 of the Plan. Conservation and take authorization specific to the City of La Quinta pertain to OCH
for Le Conte's thrasher and desert tortoise, essential habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep, and desert
dry wash woodland.
Note that Peninsular bighorn sheep are fully protected by the State of California, meaning that no
individual may be taken or possessed at any time, and that no licenses or permits may be issued for their
take. Only take of habitat is permitted through the Plan and Biological Opinion.
USFWS 2005 Biological Opinion
The Project applicant initiated a Section 7 consultation with USFWS in 2004, which was finalized in 2005.
USFWS was concerned about impacts to triple -ribbed milkvetch, desert tortoise, and Peninsular bighorn
sheep. Following expert review, field surveys, and Project reconfiguration, USFWS determined that
milkvetch and desert tortoise were unlikely to be affected, and the resulting Biological Opinion applies
exclusively to Peninsular bighorn sheep. In accordance with the special provisions discussed above, the
Project applicant will not require federal take authorization through the Plan for bighorn sheep habitat.
In light of the 2005 Biological Opinion providing take for Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat, this report
applies only to federal take authorizations for OCH for Le Conte's thrasher and desert tortoise, and state
take authorizations for essential habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep, OCH for Le Conte's thrasher and
desert tortoise, and desert dry wash woodland.
Findings
Geospatial analysis of the disturbance footprint subject to review determined that the Project would have
no detrimental impact on modeled essential habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep, modeled OCH for Le
Conte's thrasher and desert tortoise, or modeled desert dry wash woodland (Table 1). A small, 0.5 -acre
5
portion of the impact from the water tanks intersects some of the modeled habitat for each of the above,
but after reviewing County of Riverside parcel data and consulting with the Project applicant, this overlap
is believed to be the result of a mapping error (Figure 3).
Rough Step Analysis
The rough step analysis, as described in section 6.5 of the CVMSHCP, is used to determine whether a
proposed disturbance would have an outsized negative impact on the availability of conservation land
within a given Conservation Area for a specific Conservation Objective. It is meant to ensure that the
potential conservation opportunities remain in "rough step" with the projected development. A positive
rough step calculation indicates a surplus of allowable disturbance acreage for a particular Conservation
Objective, while a negative rough step calculation signifies that the target habitat is being overdeveloped
by the resulting acreage. In such an instance, the planned disturbance would be outside the parameters
of the Plan and conservation actions must take place prior to the authorization of additional habitat
disturbance.
The Project as proposed maintains a positive rough step balance for each of the relevant Conservation
Objectives (Table 1).
Table 1: Project impacts per Conservation Objective for the City of La Quinta.
Conservation Objective
G
U (pca
C
UNU - M O O
N
N� (
N U) CD
▪ �,
o Q 0 • 0▪ )
(
Q°'
2 a C)
0 r c Q Q O Q O
Le Conte's thrasher — Other Conserved Habitat 0 43 15.75 0 387
Desert tortoise — Other Conserved Habitat 0 157 57.25 0 1409
Peninsular bighorn sheep — Essential Habitat (R3) 0 159 40 0 2545
Desert dry wash 0 8 2.25 0 76
'The proposed Project disturbance after subtracting existing disturbance.
2The maximum amount of disturbance allowed to be consistent with Plan requirements for the Project area.
3Rough step is calculated based on all development and conservation from 1996 to present.
4Acres of land within Conservation Area conserved by applicant.
5Target conservation acres as proposed by the Plan.
Agency Comments
A draft version of this report was submitted to the Wildlife Agencies for comment on 2 February 2021,
and CVCC received a joint comment letter on 4 March 2021. Agency comments are summarized below
and included in full in Appendix B.
Comments focused on the design of the proposed nature trail as well as design of and operations and
maintenance activities for the water tanks. Agencies further requested an updated work plan to determine
if provisions required in the Biological Opinion had been incorporated. Finally, the Wildlife Agencies
requested the addition of language pertaining to the protected status of the Peninsular bighorn sheep
and a revised trail map. Relevant comments have been incorporated into this report.
6
Conclusions
This report has found the Project as proposed consistent with the CVMSHCP, notwithstanding those
elements covered by the 2005 USFWS Biological Opinion. Projected impacts to Essential Habitat for
Peninsular bighorn sheep, Other Conserved Habitat for Le Conte's thrasher and desert tortoise, and
desert dry wash woodland are all within authorized limits for the City of La Quinta. Rough step analysis
for each of the Conservation Objectives yields a positive result, indicating development has not outpaced
conservation for the City within SRSJM. This finding assumes the Project applicant will implement all
required Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation measures (AMMs) and Land Use Adjacency
Guidelines. If, during a subsequent project review, it is identified that the Project has failed to implement
these practices, or if the disturbance footprint has changed substantially from that reviewed here, this
consistency finding shall be rendered null and void.
Project approval by the Local Permittee shall be conditioned on the incorporation of all pertinent AMMs
and Land Use Adjacency Guidelines as described in sections 4.4 and 4.5 of the Plan and included here
as Appendix C. Special consideration should be given to AMMs for burrowing owl, desert tortoise, Le
Conte's thrasher, and Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat. Special consideration should also be given the
Land Use Adjacency Guidelines as detailed in 4.5.3 and 4.5.6: lighting should be directed downward and
away from the Conservation Area, and trails should include features to deter users from entering into the
Conservation Area, as unauthorized trail development into bighorn sheep habitat is prohibited under the
Plan. Approval shall further be contingent on the applicant's fulfilment of the financial responsibilities
identified in item 2.e of the required measures for SRSJM in section 4.3.21.
As discussed above, this JPR has not identified any impacts to the modeled habitat for covered species,
natural communities, or essential ecological processes protected by the Plan. Nonetheless, CVCC
encourages the applicant to restore any temporary disturbance resulting from the construction of the
water tanks and access road, and to ensure that any operation and maintenance activities minimize
disturbance to surrounding wildlife resources. CVCC further encourages the City and the applicant to
consider design features that minimize edge effects for Peninsular bighorn sheep, especially in regard to
the water tanks and nature trail. CVCC recommends limiting trail use to daylight hours only. CVCC has
developed informational signs for use on trails that pass through bighorn sheep habitat that can be shared
with the applicant.
7
• \ ••\ �0\\;1` \°1 %tiny_
\\ 1♦\ ‘...\\\N \~ \\\
.."Ni\e
! ♦ N \ \ e ♦ \ ♦ \ \ \ 1 S
♦ ♦ ° \ i ♦ ♦ ♦ \ \ \ \ i
▪ \ ♦ e♦ \ \ \ ° ♦ ♦ ®\ 1 \ \ \
r F•
\r.
f � LM1�ti
r
See inset
Revised Trail Path if NIP
\1\ •°1\\\'i \\\`N, \\'. \ -,••
N. 1 1 1 N. \ ♦ N. ♦ N. ♦ 1 ♦ '
• 'C'�4'' e♦ 1 N,..\\\‘‘, 1 ♦ 4 4 4 1 1 e 1 i♦ 1\ 4\ 1\ 1 1 ♦ 1 1 1 1 N. X \ e 4
9p ua[ Yfl e look €- t\�e1\1\�w1\\� e\�\a°w:.\e♦�° \ \1\°\1a\°.\.°.e�.
•
6
•
L ° L •,
F.4
Le Conte's thrasher OCH" Conservation Area boundary
Desert tortoise OCH Novel Project disturbance
Bighorn sheep Essential Habitat Pralectfootprint
Desert dry wash woodland 'Other Conserved Habitat
Figure 3: Project impacts to modeled habitat
0_25 0_5 0/5
Disclaimer
Miles: N
Maps and data ate to be used far reference
purposes only. Map feetures are approximate, and are not
necessarily accurate to surveying a engineering standards.
CVCC, the appl ice nt, and the County of R wars ide rnrir e no warranty
or guarantee as to the content (the source is often th'rd party},
acctxsryy. timeliness, or completeness of any of the data provided,
and assumes no legal res pons i bility for the information contained on
this map Any use of this product with respect to accuracy and
precision shall be the sale responsibility d the user.
8
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Coachella Valley Conservation Commission
December 3, 2020
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Page 2 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Tables of Contents
Exhibit 1 - Regional Location Map 4
Exhibit 2 - Vicinity Map 5
Exhibit 3 — Site Location Map 6
1. PROPOSED PROJECT 7
1.1 Project Objectives 7
1.2 Project History 8
Exhibit 4 — City of La Quinta — Existing General Plan / 1999 Specific Plan 12
Exhibit 5 — Proposed General Plan Land Use 13
1.3 Project Description 14
Table 2: Proposed Planning Area Summary 15
1.3.1 Residential Planning Areas 16
Exhibit 6 — Planning Area Land Use Plan 17
1.3.2 Tourist Serving Recreational Facilities 18
Table 3: Proposed Uses and Amenities for Resort/Golf Planning Areas 18
1.3.3 Open Space/Recreation Planning Areas 18
1.3.4 Open Space/Natural Planning Areas 18
1.3.5 Recreational Amenities 20
Exhibit 7 — Recreation Plan 21
1.3.6 Master Planned Roads 22
Exhibit 8 — Circulation Plan 23
1.3.7 Infrastructure 24
Exhibit 9 — Grading Plan 25
Exhibit 10 — Conceptual Hydrology 26
Exhibit 11 —Conceptual Water Plan 28
Exhibit 12 —Conceptual Sewer Plan 30
Page 3 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 1 - Regional Location Map
HE DRAL CITY
c.
RANCHO MIRAGE
Ngilf.ridi o
.age
IINGS
.9. 4
0
1
rliin
PAL DESERT
I _ ,."' "'" tileflk . _
I— ( .,...,
kC` r /1We:flit, .
• -- . i \
Jr.
1-k
PO
INDIAN WELLS
Quint a
LAUINTA
er.
Au u
11[13 p an
Re s.cr
COACHELLA Therm
Little Pfr,if6ri
PROJECT SITE
3 niaRs
a ajv
611:30 tak/P4 •
;41.:‘,•
• - i
CONiFIS
7
Valley
dnio
R ivessicir
6,1n. Diego:
C
Oast s
'.4
d1P4_
. ,
i
rces: E sri, G arm in, LI Nf ll047;tw 10:
4 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 2 - Vicinity Map
INE11
INaIANiWELE•
41Q; Cifir
"
COktHELLA f
-i-
_� Santa Rosa 'FP
Mountains /_
PROJECT SITE
FSLIC
r A
'-4�''�c�tc�:-E�ri.Citi€al�IcLe.�EcEyW.Esrlh'24srGwegeFhics. CCIES.':urrrusCS
_u,c .ur.,• �em^.Aii }Fr nidi
Page 5 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 3 — Site Location Map
LEGEND
�'+I
5
Section Lines*
Section Line Numbers
Project Boundary
City of La Quinta Boundary
'The Public Land survey system (PLCs)
Section—one-square-mile block of lard. containing 640 acres, orapproximateky
o ne Ihlrly-sixth of a townshipnue to the curvature of the Earth, sections may
e ccesionally be Brightly smaller than one square mile
From uses 7.5 Minute Sanas Martinez Mountain Quadrangle, CA 2015
Page 6 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
1. PROPOSED PROJECT
1.1 Project Objectives
The Travertine Specific Plan serves as an overall framework to conscientiously guide
development of the proposed project. To ensure the functional integrity, economic viability,
environmental sensitivity, and positive aesthetic impact of this Specific Plan, planning and
development goals for the project were established and supported through an extensive analysis. This
analysis includes an examination of project environmental constraints, engineering feasibility, market
acceptance, economic viability, City General Plan goals, development phasing, and local community
goals.
The Travertine Specific Plan has identified the following Project objectives:
• To enhance the existing trail system by adding a staging and parking area and access from
the proposed extension of Jefferson.
• Provide an interpretive trail element that circumnavigates the project and identifies the
unique features both historical and current within the project setting.
• To focus the activities for the community on walking and hiking as well as providing a major
recreational facility along the eastern edge of the project.
• The primary goal of the Amendment is to reduce the overall intensity of the 1995 approved
Specific Plan.
• Establish a distinctive community character through place -making elements that embrace
and respect the site's special physical attributes, as well as authentic architecture that reflects
local heritage.
• Provide a comprehensive system of parks and recreation facilities and services that meet the
active and passive needs of all residents and visitors.
• Contribute to the preservation, conservation and management of open space lands and scenic
resources for enhanced recreational, environmental and economic purposes.
• Provide protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the community from flooding and
hydrological hazards.
The following Project objectives have been identified for the EIR:
• To contribute to the reduction of air emissions generated within the City.
• Provide a regulatory framework that facilitates and encourages energy and water
conservation through sustainable site planning, project design, and green technologies and
building materials.
Page 7 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
• Assist in the protection and preservation of native and environmentally significant biological
resources and their habitats.
• Assist in the protection and preservation of cultural resources.
• Contribute to the preservation, conservation and management of the City's open space lands
and scenic resources for enhanced recreation, environmental and economic purposes.
• Provide protection of the residents' health and safety, and of their property, from geologic
and seismic hazards.
• Provide protection of the health and safety, and welfare of the community from flooding and
hydrological hazards.
• Provide protection of residents from the potential impacts of hazardous and toxic materials.
• Provide a healthful noise environment which complements the City's residential and
Resort/Spa character.
• Provide housing opportunities that meet the diverse needs of the City's existing and
projected population.
• Provide public facilities and services that are available, adequate and convenient to all City
residents.
• Provide a circulation system that promotes and enhances transit, alternative vehicle, bicycle
and pedestrian systems.
• Provide domestic water, sewer and flood control infrastructure and services which
adequately serve the project development and the existing and long-term needs of the City.
1.2 Project History
The project site is located on an alluvial fan emanating from the Santa Rosa Mountains in the
southeast portion of the City of La Quinta. The only known land use of the site can be seen in an area
near the center of the site, see Exhibit 3; this area was used as a vineyard that included, grape vines,
irrigation lines, access roads. The vineyard is no longer active and appears to have ceased operation
sometime in 2005-2006.
In 1988-1989 the project site was part of a proposed land exchange, the Toro Canyon Land Exchange,
between the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Nature Conservancy, to dispose of public
lands that would be more suitable for development in exchange for private land further to the south
that provides important habitat for Bighorn Sheep. An EA was prepared for the land exchange. The
EA concluded that the private land offered in the exchange would now be protected as federal
resources in support of Bighorn Sheep and critical habitat. Also, as part of the land exchange, the
Travertine project site would be available for development in accordance with the land use planning
designations imposed by the City of La Quinta. The exchange consisted of the following:
• Five sections of land within the Santa Rosa Mountains, four sections owned by Travertine
property owners and one section owned by the Nature Conservancy; together comprising 3,207
acres within the Santa Rosa Mountain National Scenic Area, offered to the BLM.
Page 8 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
• One section of land owned by the BLM comprising approximately 639 acres offered to the
Travertine property owners.
• Upon approval of the Toro Canyon land exchange, the 639 acres were combined with
approximately 270 acres of adjacent acres to create the Travertine project site for a total of
approximately 909 acres of developable land.
The County of Riverside included the Travertine project site within its Eastern Coachella Valley
Community Plan (ECVCP). The ECVCP land use designation for the site's lower elevation - the
flatter portions of the site - was "Planned Residential Reserve". This designation was intended to
allow for large scale, self-contained Resort/Spa communities. The steeper portions of the site were
designated as "Mountainous Areas" in the ECVCP where limited land uses permitted in areas covered
by this designation included Open Space, limited recreational uses, limited single family residential,
landfills and resource development.
Once the Toro Canyon land exchange was approved, the City of La Quinta began annexation
proceedings with the county if Riverside for the Travertine project site. The annexation was
completed in 1993 with the project site designated as Low Density Residential (LDR, 2 to 4 du/ac)
and Open Space (1 du/ac) land uses.
In June 1995, the Travertine Specific Plan was approved and an EIR was certified by the La Quinta
City Council by adoption of Resolutions 95-38 and 95-39, subject to conditions of approval and a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Along with the Specific Plan, the
corresponding General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone were also approved. The Specific Plan
identified a number of land uses including:
• Very Low Density Residential
• Medium Residential
• Medium High Residential
• Neighborhood Commercial
• Tourist Commercial
• Golf Course Open Space
In June 1999, the La Quinta Planning Commission re -approved the Specific Plan for the Travertine
project site to allow for an indefinite extension of time by adoption of Resolution 99-061.
In June 2004, a request was submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to initiate a
Section 7 consultation regarding the impacts to the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep and its designated
critical habitat. A Biological Opinion (BO) was completed by the USFWS in December 2005 that
evaluated the biological resources on the project site in a Biological Assessments (BA). The
Travertine property owners had acquired several areas off-site to preserve open space habitat for the
Bighorn Sheep and had proposed several mitigation measures in the time between the initial Specific
Plan approval (1995) and the start of the Section 7 consultations (2005). The BO concluded that the
mitigation measures proposed by Travertine, including the setbacks from habitat and the types of
vegetation allowed near the southern and western property lines, would be appropriate for the
preservation of any critical habitat that existed in the area and that the development of the site as
Page 9 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
previously approved, would not interfere with the Bighorn Sheep or its critical habitat.
Table 1: Approved Specific Plan and Proposed Specific Plan Comparison
Previously Approved Specific Plan
Proposed Specific Plan Amendment
Bounded by Avenue 60 to the North, Avenue
64and BLM Land to the South, Madison
Street to East and Jefferson Street to the
West
909 -acres
2,300 Residential Dwelling Units
10 -acres of Commercial
500 Room Resort / Hotel
36 — Hole Golf Course
Tennis Club
Private Recreation in Individual Developments
378 -acres of Open Space Recreation (all golf
course)
Bounded by Avenue 60 to the North, Avenue 64
and BLM Land to the South, Madison
Street to East and Jefferson Street to the
West
855 -acres
1,200 Residential Dwelling Units
100 Villa Resort and Wellness Spa
Golf Facility with associated Recreational and
Commercial Elements
Tennis Club Removed
Private Recreation in Individual Developments
55.9 -acres Open Space / Recreational
301.2 Open Space Natural/ Preserved
Page 10 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
The current plan:
• Preserves 35% of the project area as permanent open space.
• Reduces the number of dwelling units by 1,100 residences or 52%
• Reduces the acreage of golf uses from 363 acres to 46.2 acres or 79%
• Reduces the number of resort rooms from 500 to 100 or 80%
Page 11 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 4 — City of La Quinta — Existing General Plan / 1999 Specific Plan
LEGEND
Law Density Residential
Medium/High Density Residential
General Commercial
Tourist Commercial
Major Community Facilities
Open Space - Recreation
Proposed Specific Plan Boundary
Existing Specific Plan Boundary
Page 12 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 5 — Proposed General Plan Land Use
LEGEND
Low Density Residential
Medium !High Density Residential
J Tourist Commercial
Open Space - Recreation
Open Space - Natural
Proposed Specific flan Boundary
Page 13 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
1.3 Project Description
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment area covers an area of approximately 855 acres. As shown
in Exhibit 5, Proposed General Plan Land Use Map, the proposed project will be comprised of a
variety of land uses. Residential land uses will range from low density (1.5 to 4.5 dwelling units per
acre) to medium density (4.5 to 8.5 dwelling units per acre). A resort/spa facility will serve residents,
tourists and recreational visitors, including a 40,058 -square -foot boutique hotel with a 175 -seat
restaurant, and 100 resort villas totaling 210,000 square -foot. The resort/spa will also allow for a
11,654 -square -foot spa and wellness center. The golf training facility with a 2,000 -square -foot
clubhouse/locker room and 46,378 -square -foot banquet facility and 15,904 square foot restaurant will
provide recreational and dining opportunities to serve the daily needs of the community and its
visitors. Table 1, Proposed Planning Area Summary, shows the land use associated with each
planning area. Exhibit 6, Planning Area Land Use Plan, shows the location of each project planning
area.
The project components shall include:
• 1,200 Dwelling Units of varying types
o 758 Low Density Units and 442 Medium Density Units
o Estate Homes, Single Family Luxury Homes, Single Family Mid Homes, Single Family
Entry Homes, Patio Homes, Single Family Attached Units
• Golf training facility
• 100 -villa resort
• Wellness Spa
• Tourist serving recreational facilities and amenities including restaurants, small shops, spa
facilities, lounge and activity rooms, outdoor activities, tennis, yoga, etc.
• Bike lanes throughout community, including Class II bike lanes located along both sides of
Jefferson Street
• Pedestrian walkways and a Travertine community trail — a network of trails suitable for
pedestrian use planned throughout the community
• Recreational Open Space uses, including picnic tables, barbeques, golf training facilities, a tot
lot playground and staging facilities for the regional interpretive trail
• One staging area located to the south of the Avenue 62 extension with parking
• CVWD Well Sites (quantity to be determined by CVWD)
• Future 5 -acre IID substation will be located off-site within a 2.5 -mile radius of the project
area.
• Perimeter flood protection barrier along the western and southern boundaries to manage
alluvial fan flows. The barrier will consist of a raised edge condition with a slope lining to
protect against scour and erosion.
• Two off-site booster stations. One on Avenue 62, east of the project site, and the second at
Avenue 58 and Dike #2, north of the project site.
Page 14 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Table 2: Proposed Planning Area Summary
PA
Land Use
Acres
Density
Range (du/ac)
Target
Density (du/ac)
Target
Units
1
Resort/Spa
Boutique Hotel (175 -seat restaurant) - 40,058 sf
Resort Villas - 210,000 sf
Spa and Wellness -11,654 sf
38.3
Section 5 Access & PA Access
1.2
100 villas
2
Medium Density Residential
25.9
4.5-8.5
7.9
205
3
Low Density Residential
29.4
1.5-4.5
2.9
85
4
Low Density Residential
9.6
1.5-4.5
2.8
27
5
Low Density Residential
16.2
1.5-4.5
1.9
31
6
Medium Density Residential
20.1
4.5-8.5
8.1
163
7
Low Density Residential
18.7
1.5-4.5
3.2
61
8
Low Density Residential
16.9
1.5-4.5
4.3
73
9
Medium Density Residential
14.8
4.5-8.5
5.0
74
10
Low Density Residential
25.6
1.5-4.5
2.9
75
11
Resort / Golf
Banquet Facility -46,378 sf
Golf Clubhouse Restaurant -15,904 sf
Golf Clubhouse Locker Room - 2,000 sf
46.2
12
Low Density Residential
52.2
1.5-4.5
2.3
107
13
Low Density Residential
26.7
1.5-4.5
1.8
48
14
Low Density Residential
39.0
1.5-4.5
1.6
65
15
Low Density Residential
33.3
1.5-4.5
2.2
70
16
Low Density Residential
50.4
1.5-4.5
2.3
116
17
Open Space Recreational
18.1
18
Open Space Recreational
14.7
19
Open Space Recreational
23.1
20
Open Space Natural
301.2
21
Master Planned Roadways
35.0
Total
855.4
1,200 DU
100 villas
Master Planned Roadways
Roadways
Acres
Jefferson Street
17.1
Loop West
9.7
Loop East
5.5
Section 5 Access & PA Access
1.2
Madison EVA
1.5
Total
35.0
Page 15 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
1.3.1 Residential Planning Areas
Residential areas account for approximately 44.2 percent of the project's total land area. The project
proposes a maximum of 1,200 dwelling units based on a range of lot sizes. Residential planning areas
would vary in density from 1.5 du/ac to 8.5 du/ac, resulting in an overall average density for the
project of 1.4 du/gross ac. Planning areas 2 through 10, and 12 through 16, totaling approximately
378.9 acres, are designated for residential land uses. (See Exhibit 6 — Planning Area Land Use Plan).
Planning Areas 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 10 and 12 through 16 will have a maximum overall density of 4.5
du/ac and Planning Areas 2, 6 and 9 would have maximum overall density of 8.5 du/ac. Based on the
target density for each residential planning area the proposed project would include 442 medium
density (4.5-8.5 du/ac) residential dwelling units and 758 low density (1.5-4.5 du/ac) residential
dwelling units. The Low -Density Residential category will be characterized by larger single-family
residential lots (6,300 to 9,600 square feet). The Medium Density Residential planning areas are
intended to provide medium density, single-family residential products to accommodate lots ranging
from 4,000 to 5,775 square feet.
In conformance with project goals, several housing styles are proposed that comply with the
maximum density for each planning area. Residential product types would vary to meet market
demand but are anticipated to include the following:
• Estate Homes
• Single Family Luxury Homes
• Single Family Mid Homes
• Single Family Entry Homes
• Patio Homes
• Single Family Attached Units
Travertine will offer a variety of housing sizes and styles designed to meet the needs of all age groups.
The Specific Plan Amendment incorporates neighborhood design and sustainability principles.
Page 16 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 6 — Planning Area Land Use Plan
LEGEND
Low Density Residential - 318.1 Ac
Medium Density Residential - 60.8 Ac
Resort - Goif Club - 84.5 Ac
Open Space 1 Recreational - 55.9 Ac
Open Space 1 Natural - 301.2 Ac
Master Planned Roadways - 35.0 Ac
Total Acreage: 855.4 Ac
Page 17 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
1.3.2 Tourist Serving Recreational Facilities
A luxury resort, wellness spa and golf training facility are planned for an approximately 84.5 -acre
site located in Planning Areas 1 and 11. These areas will consist of resort related amenities including
restaurants, small shops, spa facilities, lounge and activity rooms, outdoor activities, yoga, walking
and hiking trails. The resort planning areas are anticipated to provide 100 -villas and a golf training
facility. Table 2 Proposed Uses and Amenities for Resort/Golf Planning Areas shows additional
details.
Table 3: Proposed Uses and Amenities for Resort/Golf Planning Areas
Planning
Area
Proposed Use
Estimated Indoor
Area (Square Feet)
1
Boutique Hotel & (175 -seat restaurant)
40,058
1
Resort Villas
210,000
1
Spa and Wellness
11,654
11
Banquet Facility
46,378
11
Banquet Facility Restaurant
15,904
11
Golf Clubhouse Locker Room
2,000
1.3.3 Open Space/Recreation Planning Areas
Open Space Recreational areas include Planning Areas 17, 18, and 19, and encompass a total of
55.9 acres of the approximately 855 -acre site. Exhibit 6 shows the proposed planning area land use
locations. Exhibit 7, Recreation Plan, shows areas designated as Open Space, as well as the proposed
recreational trails.
A golf training facility is located near the southeastern entry to the project on approximately 46.2
acres (Planning Area 11). This will provide a high-end practice and training facility for both the
residents and guests.
1.3.4 Open Space/Natural Planning Areas
Open Space Natural Areas include Planning Area 20 and encompass approximately 301.2 acres. An
area of land along the southern, western and eastern boundaries of the site is restricted from
development due to various environmental constraints including biological, geological and cultural
resources.
Portions of the open space/natural area were determined to be of biological importance by the US
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) through the Biological Opinion completed in 2005 and the
subsequent federal Environmental Assessment completed in 2006.
Page 18 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Equestrian/multi-use trails are provided in the Specific Plan. This plan will incorporate access,
signage, and detailed design. The area along the southern edge of this site, adjacent to the Martinez
Rock Slide, will be limited to recreational uses. As part of the recreational plan and trail system, an
interpretive design element will provide signage and educational information to discourage
trespassing on unauthorized areas of cultural significance. A cultural resources study has been
conducted for development near the Martinez Rock Slide, and local tribes have been contacted as part
of the procedures. This area is designated as a buffer between the residential development and the
natural open space of the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains. This area will not include permanent
structures as required by the Biological Opinion completed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service in
2005.
The Conceptual Land Use Plan was developed with consideration of the environmental constraints
associated with the surrounding land, including adjacency to the Santa Rosa Mountains and
Martinez Rock Slide area to the south, Coral Mountain to the north, and the CVWD spreading
grounds to the east and northeast. Exhibit 6, Planning Area Land Use Plan shows the proposed land
use locations.
Access to the proposed water tanks will be provided from the project internal loop road, into
Planning Area 20 Open Space/Natural area and development of this area will be limited to the
project's water tanks and related infrastructure.
Page 19 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
1.3.5 Recreational Amenities
The Travertine project will offer a range of amenities that will be accessible to neighborhood
homeowners and the public. These recreational amenities include a two-mile long public trail that
will be developed around the perimeter of the project site; a central private spine trail that bisects the
residential areas of the property; on -street biking paths; preservation of natural open space; and
additional private parks located within the development areas. A golf training facility with club
facilities such as banquet facilities, will be open to residents, citizens of La Quinta and tourists. A
resort and spa with restaurants, shops and activities and a wellness facility will attract both residents and
visitors to the community.
Page 20 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 7 — Recreation Plan
-
iPROPOSED r --
JEFFERSON STREET I
CORAL -` JIF% '
+- (FUTURE).
(��'�Coral \j7
it in 44, , Mountain
+ V
AV
J
2
lg� I 1''a.
-
n
1 N `� j�
i: i L n„.
,n,rr'
;r
k. l
(���5
LEGEND
ISI
Boo Hot( Trail
Community Grand Loop Trail
Open Desert Trail
Strolling Trail
Interconnector Trail
Class H Bike Trail
1
L
Open Space /Recreational
Open Space! Natural
Parks
Trailhead
Page 21 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
1.3.6 Master Planned Roads
The development of the Travertine site provides for substantial improvements to several roadways, including
the southerly extension of Jefferson Street as a private Modified Secondary Arterial south of the proposed
Coral Mountain property and the westerly extension of Avenue 62 as a Modified Secondary Arterial. Loop
roads extended from both sides of the Jefferson Street spine via roundabout intersections.
Exhibit 8, Circulation Plan, shows the proposed alignment of Jefferson Street and the main loop road
within the project site. Access to the southwest portion of the development area (access to the proposed water
tanks) will be provided from the internal loop road. This area is Restricted Open Space, and development of
this area will be limited to the project's water tanks and related infrastructure.
Page 22 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 8 — Circulation Plan
Dike 2
AVENUE 58
11_
CORAL
CANYON
(FUTURE) /
Coral
1I Mountain Dike 4
/
Martinez
Rock Slide
AVENUE 60
AVENUE 62
0
LEGEND
Jefferson Street 1 Avenue 62
Loop Collector
J I Local Roads
101
*I
Roundabout
Gates
Access Road
Madison Street EVA
Page 23 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
1.3.7 Infrastructure
Existing infrastructure on the project site is very limited as the site has not been previously
developed. The former vineyard area was provided with water from an on-site well. In addition to
the Master Planned Roadway system, the project also includes a master plan for infrastructure
including drainage features, underground utilities and water tanks.
Grading and Drainage
The project site slopes gently in a downslope direction from west to east and is subject to two types
of drainage conditions: alluvial fan flow and incised drainage corridors along inactive fans. Existing
drainages originate in the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west. Exhibit 9, shows the proposed Grading
Plan for the project. Exhibit 10, Conceptual Hydrology, illustrates the off-site and proposed on-
site water flow., The exhibit also shows a proposed perimeter flood barrier to divert watershed flows.
The project's flood control berms will be constructed to shield and encompass the project's
developable planning areas and convey upstream flow from Devils Canyon/Guadalupe Creek,
Middle North Canyon, Middle South Canyon, and Rock Avalanche Canyon downward towards
Dike No. 4 south of the proposed Avenue 62 crossing.
The drainage plan proposes to capture on-site flows and direct them across the project to the eastern
side of the project site. The intent is to capture all flows and detain them on-site in a series of basins
that will be developed with water quality best management practices (BMPs) to treat the water before
percolation into the ground. The proposed basins are designed to detain and percolate the projected
on-site flows created from impervious surfaces. Excess water relative to existing flows will not be
released unimpeded into the adjacent CVWD groundwater recharge ponds.
Page 24 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 9 - Grading Plan
Page 25 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 10 — Conceptual Hydrology
LEGEND
_.4
Existing Major Watershed
Existing Sheet Flow
Watershed Diversion
1
Perimeter Flood Barrier
On -Site Drainage
WQMP Basin
•1
High Point
Page 26 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Water
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) currently has jurisdiction over domestic water service
to the project property illustrated in Exhibit 11, Conceptual Water Plan. Currently, domestic water
service lines exist in three areas near the project. These include the intersection of Avenue 60 and
from the Jefferson extension and Avenue 62. Water lines will be extended from Avenue 62 and the
proposed EVA to serve the project. Water lines will be connected prior to any construction.
Nine additional well sites are necessary to serve the project. One well will be constructed during
Phase I, located off the Travertine project site. The locations of the future well sites are currently
under discussion with CVWD and will be identified and analyzed in the EIR.
Additional facilities will include two water reservoirs and booster station(s) to collect well water and
store it at the appropriate elevation to provide the required water pressure for the site. Two off-site
booster stations currently exist near the project property. One booster station is located on Avenue
62, east of the project site, while the second booster station is located at Avenue 58 and Dike #2,
north of the project site. The project site will be served with a thirty -inch main line within Jefferson
Street/Madison Street alignments. Twelve -inch and smaller lines will then feed off the main line to
serve the individual developments along these public streets.
Water tanks are proposed to be developed to serve the site in Planning Area 23. The water tank
locations, including related facilities (road, pipelines, etc.), are subject to review and approval by the
USFWS. Permanent structures, with the exception of two water reservoirs, service roadway,
underground pipelines and ancillary facilities, as allowed through the consultation with the USFWS,
will be prohibited in the Restricted Open Space (Natural) area. A portion of the Open Space Natural
Planning Areas is located in a conservation area of the Coachella Valley Multiple -Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). The project will be required to undergo Joint Project Review (JPR)
for development of the water infrastructure improvements within the conservation area. During the
JPR process, the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission and other interested Wildlife Agencies
have the opportunity to comment on the proposed development. The JPR will be analyzed in the EIR.
Page 27 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 11 —Conceptual Water Plan
LEGEND
1'...'.
I
Designate Zone Separation
335 Domestic Water Main
425 Domestic Water Main
Page 28 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Sewer
The closest Coachella Valley Water District sewer connection currently exists at Monroe Street and
Avenue 62, approximately one mile east. The proposed facilities are comprised of a series of eight -
inch sewer lines serving the individual developments and flowing into the main sewer line located
within Jefferson Street/spine road alignment. The main sewer line increases in size as it extends
eastward, ranging from eight inches on the west side to 15 inches at Madison Street, where the line
exits the project site. The offsite sewer alignment and improvements will come from the east in
Avenue 62. The EIR will further analyze the impacts to sewer and the offsite extension. (See Exhibit
12, Conceptual Sewer Plan)
Utilities
Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas to the project site. Electric service to
Travertine will be provided by Imperial Irrigation District. An offsite substation will be required for
the Travertine development and will be located and constructed during Construction Phase I. The
five -acre site required by IID for a substation will be studied in the EIR.
The location of the five -acre site will be within a two-mile radius of the project. The routing of the
proposed service lines along the route to the site will be studied in the EIR.
Page 29 of 30
TRAVERTINE PROJECT
Exhibit 12 —Conceptual Sewer Plan
mil
CORAL
CANYON
(FUTURE)
Dike 2
PROPOSED
JEFFERSON STREET
•
Coral
Mountain ' .!
E
//
Dike 4N.
AVENUE 60
Imo_ --'$3=-
IN.A.P.—It
I,. \�* 4
14! ISI
5
,la 8"_L --v-
1
AVENUE 62
1
Martinez
Rock Slide
LEGEND
��►.�' I Sewer Lines
Page 30 of 30
/flS I WILII,. 1 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
SERVICE
Palm Springs Fish and Wildlife Office
777 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 208
Palm Springs, California 92262
In Reply Refer to:
FWS/CDFW-ERIV-21 TA0680
Peter Satin
Coachella Valley Conservation Commission
73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 200
Palm Desert, California 92260
CAl_IF0'RN 4
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
FISH AND WILDLIFE
Inland Deserts Region
3602 Inland Empire Blvd., Suite C-220
Ontario, California 91764
March 4, 2021
Sent Electronically
Subject: Joint Project Review 20-006 for the Travertine Residential Development, Coachella
Valley Multiple Species Conservation Plan
Dear Mr. Satin:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW), hereafter collectively referred to as the Wildlife Agencies, have reviewed the Joint
Project Review (JPR) for the Travertine Project (Project), which we received from the Coachella
Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) on February 2, 2021. In accordance with the Coachella
Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), the Wildlife Agencies are providing
the following comments to assist in your consistency determination for the subject JPR.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project is located in the City of La Quinta, within the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains
Conservation Area (Conservation Area) of the MSHCP. Features of the Project include two water
tanks, ancillary infrastructure, and an access road anticipated to result in a total of 6.5 acres of
novel disturbance within the Conservation Area. This Project is a component of the Travertine
Residential Development, a proposed 855 -acre mixed-use residential, recreational, and commercial
complex situated on a large alluvial fan at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains and Martinez
Rockslide, west of Madison Street and north of 62nd Avenue. The development's footprint includes
315 acres of land within the Conservation Area.
Prior to the implementation of the MSHCP, section 7 consultation for the Travertine Development
was initiated by the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in 2005
to analyze effects to federally listed species from the proposed issuance of three right-of-way (ROW)
grants and amendments to the Project proponents. The Service issued a Biological Opinion (BO)
on December 7, 2005 which evaluated impacts of the development's entire footprint within the
action area. JPR 20-006 evaluates the Project's consistency with MSHCP requirements for the
proposed disturbance on the private land within the Conservation Area subject to review under
section 6.6.1.1 of the MSHCP.
Peter Satin (FWS/CDFW-ERIV-21TA0680) 2
Joint Project Review Process:
The purpose of the Joint Project Review Process is to allow CVCC to facilitate and monitor
implementation of the MSHCP. The Joint Project Review Process requires that the project
application shall include, at a minimum, a project description; a map in either electronic format
compatible with CVCC's GIS or a map on a USGS 7.5 minute topographic map, indicating the
location of the proposed project, including section, township, and range; and Assessor's Parcel
Number(s). CVCC is required to provide the Local Permittee an analysis of how the proposed
project would impact: (1) the Conservation Area, and (2) Conservation Objectives and Required
Measures delineated in Section 4.3 for each Conservation Area and in Section 9 for each proposed
Covered Species' Goals and Objectives. Additionally, CVCC would analyze how the project
would affect the maintenance of Rough Step in the affected Conservation Area. The project
application information provided has insufficient information to evaluate if the Required
Measures for the Conservation Area include the Covered Species Conservation Goals and
Objectives in Section 9. These objectives include: (1) Objective lb: Ensure implementation of
avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures as described in Section 4.4, and Land Use
Adjacency Guidelines as described in Section 4.5; and (2) Objective ld: Ensure that any
development allowed does not fragment Habitat, and that edge effects from such Development
are minimized. Insufficient information has been provided to adequately review if Land Use
Adjacency Guidelines have been addressed. The Wildlife Agencies have outlined our comments
and concerns below that should be addressed such that CVCC has adequate information to
conclude the projects consistency determination.
Wildlife Agencies Project Concerns
The Wildlife Agencies have reviewed the JPR and would like to request the following items that
pertain to the development as a whole:
1. In addition to being state and federally listed, Nelson bighorn sheep [Peninsular Range
DPS; Peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsoni); bighorn sheep] have the
classification of Fully Protected by the State of California. This means that they may
not be taken or possessed at any time and no licenses or permits may be issued for their
take. Impacts to the habitat of bighorn sheep are permitted per the terms of the Service's
BO and the MSHCP. The Wildlife Agencies ask that all project documents, including
the JPR, are updated to accurately reflect this fact.
2. Please clarify if there are plans for fuel modification zones surrounding any of the
development facilities. If so, please describe these fuel modification activities and their
timing and location, and associated avoidance and minimization measures and land use
adjacency guidelines to minimize impacts on the Conservation Area, bighorn sheep and
their critical habitat.
3. Please clarify that all outdoor lighting associated with the development plan will be
down -shielded and directed away from the hillsides in accordance with the City of La
Quinta municipal code.
Peter Satin (FWS/CDFW-ERIV-21TA0680) 3
Avoidance and Minimization Measures: Water Tanks and Nature Trail
As discussed in the BO, the canyon mouth and alluvial fans extending from the southwest corner
of the project site are essential foraging habitat for bighorn sheep. Because these habitats are
located at a distance from escape habitat, bighorn sheep are cautious when foraging in these
areas, while these habitats provide forage that is important for their survival. For this reason, the
edge effects caused by the construction, operations, and maintenance of the water tanks and
nature trail should be closely considered, minimized, and documented. The Wildlife Agencies
concerns, and comments are outlined below:
Water Tanks:
The BO includes avoidance and minimization measures associated with the construction of the
water tanks including, but not limited to, depressing and screening the tanks, painting above-
ground portions of the tanks with non -reflective paint that blends with surrounding habitat,
installing access gates to the maintenance road to reduce recreational use and development of
new trails, and avoiding nighttime lighting of the water tank facilities. The JPR however, does
not identify avoidance and minimization measures. Thus, the Wildlife Agencies request
additional information, and recommend incorporation into the JPR specific avoidance and
minimization measures to reduce impacts on the nearby Conservation Area and the area's
important wildlife resources.
1. The JPR states that 6.5 acres of additional disturbance are anticipated inside the
Conservation Area for work related to the construction of two water tanks and the
associated maintenance road. The BO states that the footprint of the water tanks and
access road is expected to be 6 acres. Please clarify this discrepancy in impact acreage
and any implications for compensatory mitigation. Please update the work plan with the
anticipated timeline/phasing for the construction of the water tanks and associated road
in relation to other project components. Some conditions and measures in the BO are
expected to occur at certain points in the Project's timeline.
2. Please identify any areas where temporary impacts associated with the construction of
the water tanks and/or road will take place. This should include an exhibit of the
temporary impacts and restoration plans for these areas. Additionally, the Wildlife
Agencies recommend that habitats are restored using native plant seeds sourced from
the nearby area.
3. Please outline any operations and maintenance activities that will be required on the
water tanks or associated road. This should include details on how impacts to wildlife
resources will be avoided and/or minimized.
Nature Trail:
The BO includes avoidance and minimization measures associated with the construction and use
of the nature trail including, but not limited to, fencing to discourage off -trail recreational use,
signage on permitted uses of the trail, educational materials on bighorn sheep, and personnel to
Peter Satin (FWS/CDFW-ERIV-21TA0680) 4
monitor trail use and control access to adjacent hills. The JPR however, does not identify
avoidance and minimization measures; thus, the Wildlife Agencies are requesting additional
information, and incorporation into the JPR specific avoidance and minimization measures to
reduce impacts on the nearby Conservation Area and the area's important wildlife resources.
1. Maps provided with the JPR show that a trail enters the Conservation Area (Exhibit 7 —
Recreation Plan), and this is also reflected in the BO. Please confirm whether these trails
have since been rerouted to avoid the Conservation Area.
2. The BO (pg. 4) states there will be a 200 ft buffer between the development and bighorn
sheep habitat (100 ft buffer plus an additional 100 ft buffer associated with the nature
trail). Are these setbacks consistent with the current development plan?
3. In previous meetings, Wildlife Agencies have discussed the idea of moving the nature
trail further away from the Conservation Area. However, the Wildlife Agencies are
unable to determine if that recommendation was implemented. Thus, we recommend
that a larger buffer area is created between the nature trail and the Martinez Rockslide
to minimize edge effects.
4. Please indicate if any nighttime artificial lighting will be used in association with the
nature trail. The Wildlife Agencies recommend no nighttime artificial lighting is used
along the trail to avoid negative impacts the wildlife resources. Trail use curfews should
be clearly identified using signage and specific measures identified on how curfews
will be enforced and who is responsible for enforcement.
5. Please add additional details on the permitted uses of the nature trail as the JPR does
not clearly identify the types of use that will be allowed on the nature trail. The Wildlife
Agencies recommend the Project ensures compatibility of recreation types to avoid
and/or minimize impacts to wildlife resources. For instance, equestrian use and
mountain biking are generally not compatible on the same trail system.
6. Please clarify what enforcement mechanisms will exist to identify, control, and enforce
the construction of new trails, off -trail use, and other prohibited recreational activities.
7. In addition to fencing plans in the BO, the Wildlife Agencies recommend that a post and
cable type fencing is used along the nature trail and in other areas adjacent to conserved
areas. This type of fencing has proven helpful at keeping recreational users on the nature
trail and out of sensitive resource areas.
SUMMARY
The Wildlife Agencies are unable to complete their comments on the JPR given the outstanding
questions included in this response letter. We recommend addressing the insufficient information
identified above to make determination of consistency with the MSHCP. We appreciate the efforts
by the project applicant and CVCC to work with the Wildlife Agencies to address the concerns
regarding consistency with the MSHCP. We are available to continue to work with the project
Peter Satin (FWS/CDFW-ERIV-21TA0680) 5
applicant and CVCC to define a project that is consistent with the conservation goals and
objectives identified in the MSHCP.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on this Joint Project Review. If you have
any questions regarding our comments, please contact Alicia Thomas 1 at the Service, or Carly
Beck2 of the CDFW.
for Rollie White
Assistant Field Supervisor
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Sincerely,
DocuSigned by:
Auftux m
DF423498814B441...
for Scott Wilson
Environmental Program Manager
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
cc:
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager, City of La Quinta
1 alicia_thomas@fws.gov
Z carly.beck@wildlife.ca.gov
Appendix C
Appendix C: Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures and
land use adjacency guidelines
4.4 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures
Biological Corridors. Specific roads in Conservation Areas, where culverts or undercrossings
are required to maintain Biological Corridors, are delineated in the Section 4.3 subsections on
individual Conservation Areas.
Burrowing Owl. This measure does not apply to single-family residences and any non-
commercial accessory uses and structures including but not limited to second units on an existing
legal lot, or to O&M of Covered Activities other than levees, berms, dikes, and similar features
that are known to contain burrowing owl burrows. O&M of roads is not subject to this requirement.
For other projects that are subject to CEQA, the Permittees will require burrowing owl surveys in
the Conservation Areas using an accepted protocol (as determined by the CVCC in coordination
with the Permittees and the Wildlife Agencies). Prior to Development, the construction area and
adjacent areas within 500 feet of the Development site, or to the edge of the property if less than
500 feet, will be surveyed by an Acceptable Biologist for burrows that could be used by burrowing
owl. If a burrow is located, the biologist will determine if an owl is present in the burrow. If the
burrow is determined to be occupied, the burrow will be flagged and a 160 -foot buffer during the
non -breeding season and a 250 -foot buffer during the breeding season, or a buffer to the edge of
the property boundary if less than 500 feet, will be established around the burrow. The buffer will
be staked and flagged. No Development or O&M activities will be permitted within the buffer until
the young are no longer dependent on the burrow.
If the burrow is unoccupied, the burrow will be made inaccessible to owls, and the Covered Activity
may proceed. If either a nesting or escape burrow is occupied, owls shall be relocated pursuant
to accepted Wildlife Agency protocols. A burrow is assumed occupied if records indicate that,
based on surveys conducted following protocol, at least one burrowing owl has been observed
occupying a burrow on site during the past three years. If there are no records for the site, surveys
must be conducted to determine, prior to construction, if burrowing owls are present.
Determination of the appropriate method of relocation, such as eviction/passive relocation or
active relocation, shall be based on the specific site conditions (e.g., distance to nearest suitable
habitat and presence of burrows within that habitat) in coordination with the Wildlife Agencies.
Active relocation and eviction/passive relocation require the preservation and maintenance of
suitable burrowing owl habitat determined through coordination with the Wildlife Agencies.
Within one (1) year of Permit issuance, CVCC will cooperate with County Flood Control, CVWD
and IID to conduct an inventory of levees, berms, dikes, and similar features in the Plan Area
maintained by those Permittees. Burrowing owl burrow locations will be mapped and each of
these Permittees will incorporate the information into its O&M practices to avoid impacts to the
burrowing owl to the maximum extent Feasible. CVCC in cooperation with County Flood Control,
CVWD, and IID will prepare a manual for maintenance staff, educating them about the burrowing
owl and appropriate actions to take when owls are encountered to avoid impacts to the maximum
extent Feasible. The manual will be submitted to the Wildlife Agencies for review and comment
within two (2) years of Permit issuance. In conjunction with the Monitoring Program, the maps of
the burrowing owl locations along the above-described levees, berms, dikes, and similar features
will be periodically updated.
1
Appendix C
Covered Riparian Bird Species. This measure does not apply to single-family residences and
any non-commercial accessory uses and structures including but not limited to second units on
an existing legal lot. Riparian Habitat here refers to the following natural communities: southern
arroyo willow riparian forest, Sonoran cottonwood -willow riparian forest, desert fan palm oasis
woodland, and southern sycamore -alder riparian woodland in the Cabazon, Stubbe and
Cottonwood Canyons, Whitewater Canyon, Upper Mission Creek/Big Morongo Canyon,
Thousand Palms, Indio Hills Palms, Joshua Tree National Park, Mecca Hills and Orocopia
Mountains, Dos Palmas, Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and Delta, and Santa Rosa and
San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Areas. Covered Activities, including O&M of facilities and
construction of permitted new projects, in riparian Habitat will be conducted to the maximum
extent Feasible outside of the March 15 — September 15 nesting season for least Bell's vireo, and
the May 1 — September 15 nesting season for southwestern willow flycatcher, summer tanager,
yellow warbler, and yellow -breasted chat. If Covered Activities must occur during the nesting
season, surveys shall be conducted to determine if any active nests are present. If active nests
are identified, the Covered Activity shall not be conducted within 200 feet of an active nest. If
surveys conducted during the nesting season document that Covered nesting riparian bird
Species are not present, the Covered Activity may proceed.
Crissal Thrasher. This measure does not apply to single-family residences and any non-
commercial accessory uses and structures including but not limited to second units on an existing
legal lot, or to O&M of Covered Activities. In modeled crissal thrasher Habitat in the Willow Hole,
Thousand Palms, Indio Hills Palms, East Indio Hills, Dos Palmas, and Coachella Valley
Stormwater Channel and Delta Conservation Areas, surveys will be conducted by an Acceptable
Biologist prior to the start of construction activities during the nesting season, January 15 — June
15, to determine if active nest sites for this species occur on the construction site and/or within
500 feet of the construction site, or to the edge of the property boundary if less than 500 feet. If
nesting crissal thrashers are found, a 500 -foot buffer, or a buffer to the edge of the property
boundary if less than 500 feet, will be established around the nest site. The buffer will be staked
and flagged. No construction activities will be permitted within the buffer during the breeding
season of January 15 — June 15 or until the young have fledged.
Desert tortoise. This measure does not apply to single-family residences and any non-
commercial accessory uses and structures, including but not limited to second units on an existing
legal lot, or to O&M of Covered Activities for Permittee infrastructure facilities. Within Conservation
Areas, the Permittees will require surveys for desert tortoise for Development in modeled desert
tortoise Habitat. Prior to Development, an Acceptable Biologist will conduct a presence/absence
survey of the Development area and adjacent areas within 200 feet of the Development area, or
to the property boundary if less than 200 feet and permission from the adjacent landowner cannot
be obtained, for fresh sign of desert tortoise, including live tortoises, tortoise remains, burrows,
tracks, scat, or egg shells. The presence/absence survey must be conducted during the window
between February 15 and October 31. Presence/absence surveys require 100% coverage of the
survey area. If no sign is found, a clearance survey is not required. A presence/absence survey
is valid for 90 days or indefinitely if tortoise -proof fencing is installed around the Development site.
If fresh sign is located, the Development area must be fenced with tortoise -proof fencing and a
clearance survey conducted during the clearance window. Desert tortoise clearance surveys shall
be conducted during the clearance window from February 15 to June 15 and September 1 to
October 31 or in accordance with the most recent Wildlife Agency protocols. Clearance surveys
must cover 100% of the Development area. A clearance survey must be conducted during
different tortoise activity periods (morning and afternoon). All tortoises encountered will be moved
from the Development site to a specified location. Prior to issuance of the Permits, CVCC will
either use the Permit Statement Pertaining to High Temperatures for Handling Desert Tortoises
2
Appendix C
and Guidelines for Handling Desert Tortoises During Construction Projects, revised July 1999, or
develop a similar protocol for relocation and monitoring of desert tortoise, to be reviewed and
approved by the Wildlife Agencies. Thereafter, the protocol will be revised as needed based on
the results of monitoring and other information that becomes available.
Inactive Season Protocol. This protocol is applicable to pre -construction and construction
phases of utility Covered Activity projects occurring between November 1 and February 14. These
protocols apply only to the site preparation and construction phases of projects. The project
proponent must follow the eight pre -construction protocol requirements listed below.
1. A person from the entity contracting the construction shall act as the contact person with
the representative of the appropriate RMUC. He/she will be responsible for overseeing
compliance with the protective stipulations as stated in this protocol.
2. Prior to any construction activity within the Conservation Areas, the contact person will
meet with the representative of the appropriate RMUC to review the plans for the project.
The representative of the appropriate RMUC will review alignment, pole spacing, clearing
limits, burrow locations, and other specific project plans which have the potential to affect
the desert tortoise. He or she may recommend modifications to the contact person to
further avoid or minimize potential impacts to desert tortoise.
3. The construction area shall be clearly fenced, marked, or flagged at the outer boundaries
to define the limits of construction activities. The construction right of- way shall normally
not exceed 50 feet in width for standard pipeline corridors, access roads and transmission
corridors, and shall be minimized to the maximum extent Feasible. Existing access roads
shall be used when available, and rights -of way for new and existing access roads shall
not exceed 20 feet in width unless topographic obstacles require greater road width. Other
construction areas including well sites, storage tank sites, substation sites, turnarounds,
and laydown/staging sites which require larger areas will be determined in the
preconstruction phase. All construction workers shall be instructed that their activities shall
be confined to locations within the fenced, flagged, or marked areas.
4. An Acceptable Biologist shall conduct pre -construction clearance surveys of all areas
potentially disturbed by the proposed project. Any winter burrows discovered in the
Conservation Areas during the pre -construction survey shall be avoided or mitigated. The
survey shall be submitted to the representative of the appropriate RMUC as part of plan
review.
5. All site mitigation criteria shall be determined in the pre -construction phase, including but
not limited to seeding, barrier fences, leveling, and laydown/staging areas, and will be
reviewed by the representative of the appropriate RMUC prior to implementation.
6. A worker education program shall be implemented prior to the onset of each construction
project. All construction employees shall be required to read an educational brochure
prepared by the representative of the appropriate RMUC and/or the RMOC and attends a
tortoise education class prior to the onset of construction or site entry. The class will
describe the sensitive species which may be found in the area, the purpose of the MSHCP
Reserve System, and the appropriate measures to take upon discovery of a sensitive
species. It will also cover construction techniques to minimize potential adverse impacts.
7. All pre -construction activities which could Take tortoises in any manner (e.g., driving off
an established road, clearing vegetation, etc.) shall occur under the supervision of an
Acceptable Biologist.
8. If there are unresolvable conflicts between the representative of the appropriate RMUC
and the contact person, then the matter will be arbitrated by the RMOC and, if necessary,
by CVCC.
3
Appendix C
The following terms are established to protect the desert tortoise during utility related construction
activities in the Conservation Areas and are to be conducted by an Acceptable Biologist.
• An Acceptable Biologist shall oversee construction activities to ensure compliance with
the protective stipulations for the desert tortoise.
• Desert tortoises found above ground inside the project area during construction shall be
moved by an Acceptable Biologist out of harm's way and placed in a winter den (at a
distance no greater than 250 feet). If a winter den cannot be located, the USFWS or CDFG
shall determine appropriate action with respect to the tortoise. Tortoises found above
ground shall be turned over to the Acceptable Biologist
• No handling of tortoises will occur when the air temperature at 15 centimeters above
ground exceeds 90 degrees Fahrenheit.
• Desert tortoise burrows shall be avoided to the maximum extent Feasible. An Acceptable
Biologist shall excavate any burrows which cannot be avoided and will be disturbed by
construction. Burrow excavation shall be conducted with the use of hand tools only, unless
the Acceptable Biologist determines that the burrow is unoccupied immediately prior to
burrow destruction.
• Only burrows within the limits of clearing and surface disturbance shall be excavated.
Burrows outside these limits, but at risk from accidental crushing, shall be protected by
the placement of deterrent barrier fencing between the burrow and the construction area.
Installation and removal of such barrier fencing shall be under the direction and
supervision of an Acceptable Biologist.
• For electrical transmission line and road construction projects, only burrows within the
right-of-way shall be excavated. Burrows outside the right-of-way, but at risk from
accidental crushing, shall be protected by the placement of deterrent barrier fencing
between the burrow and the right-of-way. Installation and removal of such barrier fencing
shall be under the direction and supervision of an Acceptable Biologist.
• Tortoises in the Conservation Areas are not to be removed from burrows until appropriate
action is determined by USFWS or CDFG with respect to the tortoise. The response shall
be carried out within 72 hours.
• Blasting is not permissible within 100 feet of an occupied tortoise burrow.
During construction, contractors will comply with the mitigation and minimization measures
contained within this protocol. These measures are:
• All trenches, pits, or other excavations shall be inspected for tortoises by an Acceptable
Biologist prior to filling.
• All pipes and culverts stored within desert tortoise Habitat shall have both ends capped to
prevent entry by desert tortoises. During construction, all open ended pipeline segments
that are welded in place shall be capped during periods of construction inactivity to prevent
entry by desert tortoises.
• Topsoil removed during trenching shall be re -spread on the pipeline construction area
following compaction of the backfill. The area shall be restored as determined during the
environmental review.
• All test pump water will be routed to the nearest wash or natural drainage. The route will
be surveyed by an Acceptable Biologist. If tortoises are found in the drainage area the
Acceptable Biologist will remove the tortoises.
• Powerlines associated with water development, such as to provide power for pumps,
should be buried underground adjacent to the pipe. All above ground structures deemed
to be necessary shall be equipped with functional anti -perching devices that would prevent
their use by ravens and other predatory birds, and shall adhere to the electrical distribution
protocol which follows.
4
Appendix C
• In order to perform routine O&M of the water systems such as wells, pumps, water lines
and storage tanks, etc., employees are to be trained in the area of desert tortoise
education. This training will be performed on a regular basis by an Acceptable Biologist
for those personnel not previously trained. The training will include at a minimum the
following: identification of tortoises, burrows, and other sign; and instructions on installing
tortoise barrier fencing. During the course of basic O&M, desert tortoise will be avoided.
Untrained employees shall not perform maintenance operations within the reserve.
• All disturbance areas around poles or concrete pads will be reduced to a size just large
enough for the construction activity.
• Areas disturbed around poles or construction pads will be restored as determined during
the pre -construction process.
• Poles or other above ground structures necessary for electrical distribution development
shall be minimized as much as possible. All above ground structures shall be equipped
with functional anti -perching devices that would prevent their use by ravens and other
predatory birds.
• In order to perform routine O&M of the electrical distribution systems such as transmission
lines and poles, substations, etc., employees are to be trained in the area of desert tortoise
education. This training will be performed on a regular basis by a qualified biologist for
those personnel not previously trained. The training will include at a minimum the
following: identification of tortoises, burrows, and other sign; and instructions on installing
tortoise barrier fencing. During the course of basic O&M, desert tortoise will be avoided.
Untrained employees shall not perform maintenance operations within the non -Take
areas.
• All trash and food items shall be promptly contained and removed daily from the project
site to reduce the attractiveness of the area to common ravens and other desert tortoise
predators.
• Construction activities which occur between dusk and dawn shall be limited to areas which
have already been cleared of desert tortoises by the Acceptable Biologist and graded or
located in a fenced right-of-way. Construction activities shall not be permitted between
dusk and dawn in areas not previously graded. Active Season Protocol. This protocol
is applicable to pre -construction and construction phases of utility development projects
occurring between February 15 and November 1. It is identical to the Inactive Season
Protocol with the following additions:
• Work areas shall be inspected for desert tortoises within 24 hours of the onset of
construction. To facilitate implementation of this condition, burrow inspection and
excavation may begin no more than seven (7) days in advance of construction activities,
as long as a final check for desert tortoises is conducted at the time of construction.
• All pre -construction activities which could Take tortoises in any manner (e.g., driving off
an established road, clearing vegetation, etc.) shall occur under the overall supervision of
an Acceptable Biologist. Any hazards to tortoises created by this activity, such as drill
holes, open trenches, pits, other excavations, or any steep -sided depressions, shall be
checked three times a day for desert tortoises. These hazards shall be eliminated each
day prior to the work crew leaving the site, which may include installing a barrier that will
preclude entry by tortoises. Open trenches, pits or other excavations will be backfilled
within 72 hours, whenever possible. A 3:1 slope shall be left at the end of every open
trench to allow trapped desert tortoises to escape. Trenches not backfilled within 72 hours
shall have a barrier installed around them to preclude entry by desert tortoises. All
trenches, pits, or other excavations shall be inspected for tortoises by a biological monitor
trained and approved by the Acceptable Biologist prior to filling.
5
Appendix C
• If a desert tortoise is found, the biological monitor shall notify the Acceptable Biologist who
will remove the animal as soon as possible.
• Only burrows within the limits of clearing and surface disturbance shall be excavated.
Burrows outside these limits, but at risk from accidental crushing, shall be protected by
the placement of deterrent barrier fencing between the burrow and the construction area.
The barrier fence shall be at least 20 feet long and shall be installed to direct the tortoise
leaving the burrow away from the construction area. Installation and removal of such
barrier fencing shall be under the direction and supervision of the biological monitor.
• If blasting is necessary for construction, all tortoises shall be removed from burrows within
100 feet of the blast area.
Disposition of Sick, Injured, or Dead Specimens. Upon locating dead, injured, or sick desert
tortoises under any utility or road project, initial notification by the contact representative or
Acceptable Biologist must be made to the USFWS or CDFG within three (3) working days of its
finding. Written notification must be made within five (5) calendar days with the following
information: date; time; location of the carcass; photograph of the carcass; and any other pertinent
information. Care must be taken in handling sick or injured animals to ensure effective treatment
and care. Injured animals shall be taken care of by the Acceptable Biologist or an appropriately
trained veterinarian. Should any treated tortoises survive, USFWS or CDFG should be contacted
regarding the final disposition of the animals.
Fluvial Sand Transport. Activities, including O&M of facilities and construction of permitted new
projects, in fluvial sand transport areas in the Cabazon, Stubbe and Cottonwood Canyons, Snow
Creek/Windy Point, Whitewater Canyon, Whitewater Floodplain, Upper Mission Creek/Big
Morongo Canyon, Mission Creek/Morongo Wash, Willow Hole, Long Canyon, Edom Hill,
Thousand Palms, West Deception Canyon, and Indio Hills/Joshua Tree National Park Linkage
Conservation Areas will be conducted in a manner to maintain the fluvial sand transport capacity
of the system.
Le Conte's Thrasher. This measure does not apply to single-family residences and any non-
commercial accessory uses and structures including but not limited to second units on an existing
legal lot, or to O&M of Covered Activities. In modeled Le Conte's thrasher Habitat in all the
Conservation Areas, during the nesting season, January 15 - June 15, prior to the start of
construction activities, surveys will be conducted by an Acceptable Biologist on the construction
site and within 500 feet of the construction site, or to the property boundary if less than 500 feet.
If nesting Le Conte's thrashers are found, a 500 foot buffer, or to the property boundary if less
than 500 feet, will be established around the nest site. The buffer will be staked and flagged. No
construction will be permitted within the buffer during the breeding season of January 15 - June
15 or until the young have fledged.
Little San Bernardino Mountains Linanthus. This measure does not apply to single-family
residences and any non-commercial accessory uses and structures, including but not limited to
second units on an existing legal lot, or to O&M of Covered Activities. To avoid and minimize
impacts to this species as much as possible, the following avoidance and minimization effort shall
occur:
• Salvage: Salvage of top soil and/or seeds should occur prior to ground disturbance in
accordance with Section 6.6.1. Salvage should be conducted by or in cooperation with the
CVCC.
6
Appendix C
Mesquite Hummocks and Mesquite Bosque Natural Communities. This measure does not
apply to single-family residences and any non-commercial accessory uses and structures
including but not limited to second units on an existing legal lot, or to O&M of Covered Activities.
Construction activities in the Cabazon, Willow Hole, Thousand Palms, Indio Hills Palms, East
Indio Hills, Dos Palmas, Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and Delta, and Santa Rosa and
San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Areas will avoid mesquite hummocks and mesquite bosque
to the maximum extent Feasible.
Palm Springs Pocket Mouse. To avoid impacts to the Palm Springs pocket mouse and its habitat
in the Upper Mission Creek/Big Morongo Canyon and Willow Hole Conservation Areas, Flood
Control -related construction activities will comply with the following avoidance and minimization
measures.
• Clearing: For construction that would involve disturbance to Palm Springs pocket mouse
habitat, activity should be phased to the extent feasible and practicable so that suitable
habitat islands are no farther than 300 feet apart at any given time to allow pocket mice to
disperse between habitat patches across nonsuitable habitat (i.e., unvegetated and/or
compacted soils). Prior to project construction, a biological monitor familiar with this
species should assist construction crews in planning access routes to avoid impacts to
occupied habitat as much as feasible (i.e., placement of preferred routes on project plans
and incorporation of methods to avoid as much suitable habitat/soil disturbance as
possible). Furthermore, during construction activities, the biological monitor will ensure
that connected, naturally vegetated areas with sandy soils and typical native vegetation
remain intact to the extent feasible and practicable. Finally, construction that involves
clearing of habitat should be avoided during the peak breeding season (approximately
March to May), and activity should be limited as much as possible during the rest of the
breeding season (January to February and June to August).
• Revegetation: Clearing of native vegetation (e.g., creosote, rabbitbrush, burrobush,
cheesebush) should be followed by revegetation, including natural reestablishment and
other means, resulting in habitat types of equal or superior biological value for Palm
Springs pocket mouse.
• Trapping/Holding: All trapping activity should be conducted in accordance with accepted
protocols and by a qualified biologist who possesses a Memorandum of Understanding
with CDFG for live -trapping of heteromyid species in Southern California.
• Translocation: Should translocation between distinct population groups be necessary, as
determined through the Adaptive Management and Monitoring Program, activity should
be conducted by a qualified biologist who possesses a Memorandum of Understanding
with CDFG for live -trapping of heteromyid species in Southern California. Trapping and
subsequent translocation activity should be conducted in accordance with accepted
protocols. Translocation programs should be coordinated by or conducted by the CVCC
and/or RMOC to determine the appropriate trapping, holding, marking, and handling
methods and potential translocation sites.
Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Habitat. Completion of Covered Activities in Peninsular bighorn
sheep Habitat in the Cabazon, Snow Creek/Windy Point, and Santa Rosa and San Jacinto
Mountains Conservation Areas will be conducted outside of the January 1 - June 30 lambing
season unless otherwise authorized through a Minor Amendment to the Plan with concurrence
from the Wildlife Agencies. O&M of Covered Activities, including but not limited to refinishing the
inside of water storage tanks, shall be scheduled to avoid the lambing season, but may extend
into the January 1 — June 30 period if necessary to complete the activity, upon concurrence with
the Wildlife Agencies.
7
Appendix C
For new projects in the above listed Conservation Areas, no toxic or invasive plant species may
be used for landscaping. For existing public infrastructure facilities which have landscaping in
Peninsular bighorn sheep Habitat in the Cabazon, Snow Creek/Windy Point, and Santa Rosa and
San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Areas, the Permittees who have such facilities will, with
respect to those facilities, develop and implement a plan and schedule to remove or prevent
access to oleander and any other plants known to be toxic to Peninsular bighorn sheep. The plan
and schedule will be prepared within one (1) year of Permit issuance.
Triple -ribbed milkvetch. This measure does not apply to single-family residences and any non-
commercial accessory uses and structures including but not limited to second units on an existing
legal lot, or to O&M of Covered Activities. It is understood that O&M for infrastructure developed
as part of a private development approved in compliance with the MSHCP that is later transferred
to a public entity is included as a Covered Activity. For Covered Activities within modeled triple -
ribbed milkvetch Habitat in the Whitewater Canyon, Whitewater Floodplain, Upper Mission
Creek/Big Morongo Canyon, and Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Areas,
surveys by an Acceptable Biologist will be required for activities during the growing and flowering
period from February 1 - May 15. Any occurrences of the species will be flagged and public
infrastructure projects shall avoid impacts to the plants to the maximum extent Feasible. In
particular, known occurrences on a map maintained by CVCC shall not be disturbed.
8
Appendix C
4.5 Land Use Adjacency Guidelines
The purpose of Land Use Adjacency Guidelines is to avoid or minimize indirect effects from
Development adjacent to or within the Conservation Areas. Adjacent means sharing a common
boundary with any parcel in a Conservation Area. Such indirect effects are commonly referred to
as edge effects, and may include noise, lighting, drainage, intrusion of people, and the
introduction of non-native plants and non-native predators such as dogs and cats. Edge effects
will also be addressed through reserve management activities such as fencing. The following
Land Use Adjacency Guidelines shall be considered by the Permittees in their review of individual
public and private Development projects adjacent to or within the Conservation Areas to minimize
edge effects, and shall be implemented where applicable.
4.5.1 Drainage
Proposed Development adjacent to or within a Conservation Area shall incorporate plans to
ensure that the quantity and quality of runoff discharged to the adjacent Conservation Area is not
altered in an adverse way when compared with existing conditions. Stormwater systems shall be
designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant materials
or other elements that might degrade or harm biological resources or ecosystem processes within
the adjacent Conservation Area.
4.5.2 Toxics
Land uses proposed adjacent to or within a Conservation Area that use chemicals or generate
bioproducts such as manure that are potentially toxic or may adversely affect wildlife and plant
species, Habitat, or water quality shall incorporate measures to ensure that application of such
chemicals does not result in any discharge to the adjacent Conservation Area.
4.5. Lighting
For proposed Development adjacent to or within a Conservation Area, lighting shall be shielded
and directed toward the developed area. Landscape shielding or other appropriate methods shall
be incorporated in project designs to minimize the effects of lighting adjacent to or within the
adjacent Conservation Area.
4.5.4 Noise
Proposed Development adjacent to or within a Conservation Area that generates noise in excess
of 75 dBA Leg hourly, as measured at the property line, shall incorporate setbacks, berms, or walls,
as appropriate, to minimize the effects of noise on the adjacent Conservation Area.
4.5.5 lnvasives
Invasive, non-native plant species shall not be incorporated in the landscape for land uses
adjacent to or within a Conservation Area. Landscape treatments within or adjacent to a
Conservation Area shall incorporate native plant materials to the maximum extent Feasible;
recommended native species are listed in Table 4-112. The plants listed in Table 4-113 shall not
be used within or adjacent to a Conservation Area. This list may be amended from time to time
through a Minor Amendment with Wildlife Agencies' concurrence.
9
Appendix C
4.5.6 Barriers
Land uses adjacent to or within a Conservation Area shall incorporate barriers in individual project
designs to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass, or
dumping in a Conservation Area. Such barriers may include native landscaping, rocks/boulders,
fencing, walls and/or signage.
4.5.7 Grading/Land Development
Manufactured slopes associated with site Development shall not extend into adjacent land in a
Conservation Area.
10
Appendix C
Table 4-112: Coachella Valley Native Plants Recommended for Landscaping'
BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME
Trees
Washingtonia filifera
California Fan Palm
Cercidium floridum
Blue Palo Verde
Chilopsis linearis
Desert Willow
Olneya tesota
Ironwood Tree
Prosopis glandulosa var. torreyana
Honey Mesquite
Shrubs
Acacia greggii
Cat's Claw Acacia
Ambrosia dumosa
Burro Bush
Atriplex canescens
Four Wing Saltbush
Atriplex lentiformis
Quailbush
Atriplex polycarpa
Cattle Spinach
Baccharis sergiloides
Squaw Water -weed
Bebia juncea
Sweet Bush
Cassia (Senna) covesii
Desert Senna
Condalia parryi
Crucilllo
Crossosoma bigelovii
Crossosoma
Dalea emoryi
Dye Weed
Dalea (Psorothamnus) schottii
Indigo Bush
Datura meteloides
Jimson Weed
Encelia farinosa
Brittle Bush
Ephedra aspera
Mormon Tea
Eriogonum fasciculatum
California Buckwheat
Eriogonum wrightii membranaceum
Wright's Buckwheat
Fagonia laevis
(No Common Name)
Gutierrezia sarothrae
Matchweed
Haplopappus acradenius
Goldenbush
Hibiscus denudatus
Desert Hibiscus
Hoffmannseggia microphylla
Rush Pea
Hymenoclea salsola
Cheesebush
Hyptis emoryi
Desert Lavender
Isomeris arborea
Bladder Pod
Juniperus californica
California Juniper
Krameria grayi
Ratany
Krameria parvifolia
Little -leaved Ratany
Larrea tridentate
Creosote Bush
Lotus rigidus
Desert Rock Pea
Lycium andersonii
Box Thorn
Petalonyx linearis
Long -leaved Sandpaper Plant
Petalonyx thurberi
Sandpaper Plant
Peucephyllum schottii
Pygmy Cedar
Prunus fremontii
Desert Apricot
Rhus ovata
Sugar -bush
Salazaria mexicana
Paper -bag Bush
Salvia apiana
White Sage
Salvia eremostachya
Santa Rosa Sage
Salvia vaseyi
Wand Sage
Simmondsia chinensis
Jojoba
11
Appendix C
BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME
Sphaeralcia ambigua
Globemallow (Desert Mallow)
Sphaeralcia ambigua rosacea
Apricot Mallow
Trixis californica
Trixis
Zauschneria californica
California Fuchsia
Groundcovers
Mirabilis bigelovii
Wishbone Bush (Four O'Clock)
Mirabilis tenuiloba
White Four O'Clock (Thin -lobed)
Vines
Vitis girdiana
Desert Grape
Accent
Muhlenbergia rigens
Deer Grass
Herbaceous Perennials2
Adiantum capillus -veneris
Maiden -hair Fern (w)
Carex alma
Sedge (w)
Dalea parryi
Parry Dalea
Eleocharis montevidensis
Spike Rush (w)
Equisetum laevigatum
Horsetail (w)
Juncus bufonis
Toad Rush (w)
Juncus effuses
Juncus (w)
Juncus macrophyllus
Juncus (w)
Juncus mexicanus
Mexican Rush (w)
Juncus xiphioides
Juncus (w)
Notholaena parryi
Parry Cloak Fern
Pallaea mucronata
Bird -foot Fern
Cacti and Succulents
Agave deserti
Desert Agave
Asclepias albicans
Desert Milkweed (Buggy -whip)
Asclepias subulata
Ajamete
Dudleya arizonica
Live -forever
Dudleya saxosa
Rock Dudleya
Echinocereus engelmannii
Calico Hedgehog Cactus
Ferocactus acanthodes
Barrel Cactus
Fouquieria splendens
Ocotillo
Mamillaria dioica
Nipple Cactus
Mamillaria tetrancistra
Corkseed Cactus
Nolina parryi
Parry Nolina
Opuntia acanthocarpa
Stag-horn or Deer -horn Cholla
Opuntia bigelovii
Teddy Bear or Jumping Cholla
Opuntia basilaris
Beavertail Cactus
Opuntia echinocarpa
Silver or Golden Cholla
Opuntia ramosissima
Pencil Cholla, Darning Needle Cholla
Yucca schidigera
Mojave Yucca, Spanish Dagger
Yucca whipplei
Our Lord's Candle
Source: "Coachella Valley Native Plants, Excluding Annuals (0 ft. to approximately 3,000 ft. elevation)." Compiled by Dave
Heveron, Garden Collections Manager, and Kirk Anderson, Horticulturist, The Living Desert, May, 2000, for the Coachella
Valley Mountains Conservancy.
2 Common names for herbaceous perennials that are followed by "(w)" indicate a water or riparian species.
12
Appendix C
Table 4-113: Prohibited Invasive Ornamental Plants'
BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME
Acacia spp. (all species except A. greggii)
Acacia (all species except native catclaw
acacia)
Arundo donax (✓)
Giant Reed or Arundo Grass
Atriplex semibaccata (✓)
Australian Saltbush
Avena barbata
Slender Wild Oat
Avena fatua
Wild Oat
Brassica tournefortii (✓✓)
African or Saharan Mustard
Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens (✓)
Red Brome
Bromus tectorum (✓✓)
Cheat Grass or Downy Brome
Cortaderia jubata [syn. C. atacamensis]
Jubata Grass or Andean Pampas Grass
Cortaderia dioica [syn. C. selloana]
Pampas Grass
Descurainia sophia
Tansy Mustard
Eichhornia crassipes
Water Hyacinth
Elaegnus angustifolia
Russian Olive
Foeniculum vulgare
Sweet Fennel
Hirschfeldia incana
Mediterranean or Short -pod Mustard
Lepidium latifolium
Perennial Pepperweed
Lolium multiflorum
Italian Ryegrass
Nerium oleander
Oleander
Nicotiana glauca (.1
Tree Tobacco
Oenothera berlandieri (#)
Mexican Evening Primrose
Olea europea
European Olive Tree
Parkinsonia aculeata (V)
Mexican Palo Verde
Pennisetum clandestinum
Kikuyu Grass
Pennisetum setaceum (✓/)
Fountain Grass
Phoenix canariensis (#)
Canary Island Date Palm
Phoenix dactylifera (#)
Date Palm
Ricinus communis (.1
Castorbean
Salsola tragus V)
Russian Thistle
Schinus molle
Peruvian Pepper Tree or California Pepper
Schinus terebinthifolius
Brazilian Pepper Tree
Schismus arabicus
Mediterranean Grass
Schismus barbatus (✓/)
Saharan Grass, Abu Mashi
Stipa capensis (✓✓)
No Common Name
Tamarix spp. (all species) (✓✓)
Tamarisk or Salt Cedar
Taeniatherum caput -medusae
Medusa -head
Tribulus terrestris
Puncturevine
Vinca major
Periwinkle
Washingtonia robusta
Mexican fan palm
Yucca gloriosa (#)
Spanish Dagger
Sources: California Exotic Pest Plant Council, United States Department of Agriculture -Division of Plant Health and Pest
Prevention Services, California Native Plant Society, Fremontia Vol. 26 No. 4, October 1998, The Jepson Manual; Higher
Plants of California, and County of San Diego Department of Agriculture.
Key to Table 4-113:
# indicates species not on CaIEPPC October 1999 "Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern
in California" list
✓ indicates species known to be invasive in the Plan Area
✓✓ indicates particularly troublesome invasive species
13
Appendix F Overall Wall Plan