Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1a_Appx A1_BUOW Focused Survey Report_2024_02_08 APPENDICES  APPENDIX A1 BURROWING OWL FOCUSED SURVEY REPORT FOCUSED BURROWING OWL SURVEY REPORT FOR THE WESTGATE SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT PLANNING AREA 27 CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: City of Fontana Planning Department Gia Kim, Public Works Director 16489 Orange Way Fontana, CA 92335-3528 Telephone: 909.350.6655 PREPARED BY: 16431 Scientific Way Irvine, CA 92618 Phone: (949) 788-4900, Fax: (949) 788-4901 UEI Project No. 7170G FEBRUARY 8, 2024 This page intentionally left blank. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page i February 2024 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Location ........................................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Project Description .................................................................................................................................. 3 1.2.1 Approved Project ...................................................................................................................... 4 1.2.2 Modified Project ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.0 BUOW Natural History ........................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Appearance ................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Habitat Preferences................................................................................................................................. 4 2.3 Status ............................................................................................................................................................. 5 2.4 California Distribution ........................................................................................................................... 6 3.0 Study Methods .......................................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Literature Review .................................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Field Survey Methods ............................................................................................................................. 7 3.2.1 BUOW Habitat Assessment .................................................................................................. 8 3.2.2 Focused BUOW Surveys ......................................................................................................... 8 4.0 Results ...................................................................................................................................................... 10 4.1 Environmental Setting ......................................................................................................................... 10 4.2 Soils .............................................................................................................................................................. 10 4.3 Habitat Assessment ............................................................................................................................... 10 4.3.1 Caltrans Landscaping ............................................................................................................ 10 4.3.2 Developed .................................................................................................................................. 11 4.3.3 Disturbed ................................................................................................................................... 11 4.3.4 Eucalyptus Groves .................................................................................................................. 12 4.3.5 Vineyard/Disturbed Fiddleneck-Phacelia Fields ...................................................... 12 4.4 Plants ........................................................................................................................................................... 13 4.5 Wildlife ....................................................................................................................................................... 13 4.6 BUOW Survey Results .......................................................................................................................... 13 4.6.1 Planning Area 27..................................................................................................................... 13 4.6.2 Planning Area 31 (Buffer Area of PA 27) ...................................................................... 13 5.0 Potential Impacts of the Project ...................................................................................................... 14 6.0 Conservation Measures ...................................................................................................................... 15 6.1 MM D-2: Burrowing Owls (Westgate Specific Plan FEIR; PCR, 2015b) ........................... 15 6.2 MM D-5: Nesting Birds (Westgate Specific Plan FEIR; PCR, 2015b) ................................. 15 6.3 CDFW Staff Report General Measures ........................................................................................... 16 6.3.1 Buffer Zones .............................................................................................................................. 16 6.4 CM BIO-1 Workers Environmental Awareness Program ...................................................... 17 6.5 CM BIO-2 Burrowing Owl Mitigation and Monitoring Plan .................................................. 18 6.6 CM BIO-3 Pre-Construction Burrowing Owl Surveys ............................................................. 19 6.7 CM BIO-4 Biological Monitor ............................................................................................................. 19 6.8 CM BIO-5 Visual and Sound Screening .......................................................................................... 21 Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page ii February 2024 6.9 CM BIO-6 Species Mortality ............................................................................................................... 21 7.0 Literature Cited and References ..................................................................................................... 22 TABLES Table 3-2 - Field Survey Information ............................................................................................................................. 9 Table 4.3 – Acreage of Mapped Land Cover Types................................................................................................. 11 Table 4.6 - Burrowing Owl Survey Results ................................................................................................................ 14 Table 6.3 - Recommended Restricted Activity Dates and Buffer Distances ................................................ 17 APPENDICES Appendix A Figures • Figure 1 – Project Vicinity • Figure 2 – Project Boundary and Biological Study Area • Figure 3 – Burrowing Owl Locations • Figure 4 – USDA Soils • Figure 5 - Land Cover Types Appendix B Site Photographs Appendix C Soils Report Appendix D Species Observed Appendix F Field Notes Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page iii February 2024 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS Acronym/ Abbreviation Term BUOW Burrowing Owl BSA Biological Study Area CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database ESA Endangered Species Act ft. feet GIS Geographic Information System GPS Global Positioning System MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service PA Planning Area project Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 UltraSystems UltraSystems Environmental Inc. USDA United States Department of Agriculture USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS United States Geological Survey WEAP Worker Environmental Awareness Program WSP Westgate Specific Plan Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 1 February 2024 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY UltraSystems Environmental Inc. (UltraSystems) prepared this focused burrowing owl survey report for the proposed Planning Area (PA) 27 Project in Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. The project site is located within Planning Area 27 of the Westgate East community area, surrounded by vacant land opposite San Sevaine Road to the east and South Highland Avenue to the south; a utility corridor to the west; and SR-210 to the north (Google Earth Pro, 2023). The modified project covers approximately 17.5 acres and would be developed with a medical office building complex, surface parking areas for patients and staff, and landscaping. Additionally, the project would feature a storm water detention basin with an area of 1.1 acre (6.2 percent of the project site). This basin will be fully enclosed by security fencing and will not be accessible by the public. The project site, where construction activities are anticipated to occur, is located within the range of the burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia; BUOW) and contains suitable habitat to support BUOWs; therefore a habitat assessment and BUOW surveys were required by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). UltraSystems conducted a literature review, habitat assessment, and BUOW surveys of the project site and within a zone 500 feet out from the project site; these define the biological study area (BSA). The BSA includes all areas that could potentially be impacted by the project plus a buffer to accommodate changes to project limits and project design that may occur during project development. Surveys were conducted in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the CDFW in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (Staff Report; CDFG, 2012). Focused BUOW surveys were conducted within the BSA during the BUOW’s breeding season and non- breeding season. The purpose of the surveys was to determine if BUOWs are foraging or nesting on or adjacent to the project site. This report documents the methods and results of the literature review and the surveys. It summarizes information regarding the BUOW’s natural history, the habitat of the survey area, and the habitat’s suitability for BUOWs. The report also assesses the potential presence of BUOW onsite, and analyzes the potential impacts to BUOWs from project development. Finally, this report recommends, as appropriate, BMPs, avoidance and protection measures, and mitigation measures to reduce or avoid potential impacts. Due to the high density of BUOWs in San Bernardino County, it is plausible that a BUOW could move through the BSA to forage, shelter, rest, breed, or nest, prior to construction. Survey results may also change during times of migration or if resident BUOWs change burrow locations and choose to occupy a location within the BSA. As of this date, BUOWs were observed within PA 27, and in other areas within its BSA, during the December 5, 2023 and January 17, 2024 surveys; suitable burrow complexes, with potential for BUOW occupation, were observed during all surveys. It is the opinion of the UltraSystems’ biologists that this project would significantly impact BUOW. 1.0 INTRODUCTION UltraSystems Environmental Inc. (UltraSystems) prepared this focused burrowing owl survey report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area (PA) 27 (project). The project site is an approximately 17.5-acre site located within the Westgate East community area. The project site is currently vacant and is bounded by San Sevaine Road on the east, State Route (SR) Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 2 February 2024 210 on the north, an electric transmission utility corridor on the west, and South Highland Avenue on the south. The project site is located within the range of the burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia, [BUOW]) and contains suitable habitat to potentially support BUOWs; therefore a habitat assessment and BUOW surveys were required. UltraSystems conducted a literature review, habitat assessment, and BUOW surveys of the biological resources potentially associated with the project site and within a zone 500 feet out from the project site; these define the biological study area (BSA). The BSA includes all areas that could potentially be impacted by the project plus a buffer to accommodate changes to project limits and project design that may occur during project development. Surveys were conducted in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (Staff Report; CDFG, 2012). These guidelines are the CDFW-recommended methodology for surveying this species. As of this date, two of the four focused BUOW surveys have been conducted in the BSA during the BUOW’s breeding season, the season in which BUOWs are more easily detectable. In addition, three focused surveys were conducted during the non-breeding season to detect BUOW that may utilize the project site during that period. The purpose of the surveys was to determine if BUOWs are foraging or nesting on or adjacent to the project site. This report documents the methods and results of the literature review and the breeding season BUOW surveys. It summarizes information regarding the BUOW’s natural history, habitat of the survey area, and the habitat’s suitability for BUOWs. The report also assesses the potential presence of BUOW onsite, and analyzes the potential impacts to BUOWs from project development. Finally, this report recommends, as appropriate, conservation measures to minimize or avoid potential impacts to BUOW. 1.1 Project Location The project site is located in southwestern San Bernardino County in the City of Fontana (City), and lies within the United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-Minute Topographic Map Devore Quadrangle (USGS 2015; see Appendix A Figure 1 Project Vicinity). The project is located south of Interstate 210 (I-210; Foothill Freeway) and east from Cherry Avenue (Google Earth Pro, 2023). South Highland Avenue borders PA 27 on the south. The Westgate Specific Plan (WSP; FORMA Designs, Inc., 2022) includes 302.4 acres of Mixed‐Use and Retail uses (City of Fontana, 2017) These uses are located adjacent to SR-210 (Foothill Freeway) and Interstate 15 (I-15; Ontario Freeway) corridors and comprise approximately 31 percent of the 964‐ acre total Specific Plan area. The WSP area is located in northwest Fontana, in the northern section of the WSP area (see Appendix A Figure 2 Project Boundary and Biological Study Area [BSA]). Planning Area 27 is part of the WSP. The project site is on the USGS Devore 7.5-minute Quadrangle Map in Township 1 North, Range 6 West, Section 35. The approximate center of the project site is 34.134776° -117.482446° (Google Earth Pro, 2023). Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 3 February 2024 The project site is located in the jurisdiction of the following resource agency field offices: • United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Palm Springs Fish and Wildlife Office 777 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 208 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Phone: (760) 322-2070 • California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW Inland Desert Region 6 3602 Inland Empire Boulevard, Suite C-220 Ontario, CA 91764 Phone: (909) 484-0167 • United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Los Angeles District 915 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 980 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Phone: (213) 452-3908/3333 • Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB Santa Ana Region (Region 8) 3737 Main Street, Suite 500 Riverside, CA 92501-3339 Phone: (951) 782-4130 • City of Fontana Planning Department: Environmental Programs Division (County EPD) 8353 Sierra Avenue Fontana, CA 92335 Phone: (909) 350-6718 1.2 Project Description The Westgate East portion of the Westgate Specific Plan is intended to complement existing development within the Westgate East Specific plan Area, as well as proposed projects and existing development within the Westgate East Community Area, which would include mixed use residential, commercial, and school uses in addition to parks and other areas intended for recreational purposes. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 4 February 2024 1.2.1 Approved Project The Westgate Specific Plan (WSP) area encompasses 964 acres in the northwestern portion of the City of Fontana (City). The WSP site is approximately five miles north and west of downtown Fontana, ten miles west of Downtown San Bernardino, and is adjacent to the I-15 and Route 210 freeways (JHA Consulting, 2017, p. 1-1). The WSP is composed of four community areas, from north to south: Falcon Ridge, Westgate Central, Westgate East, and Westgate West. Additionally, each community area is divided into planning areas (PAs), which are areas that have a specific type of development planned. The WSP area also includes the full width of public roadway rights-of-way abutting each of the four community areas. 1.2.2 Modified Project The modified project site is located within Planning Area 27 in the north part of the Westgate East community area, surrounded by vacant land opposite San Sevaine Road to the east and South Highland Avenue to the south; a utility corridor to the west; and SR-210 to the north (Google Earth Pro, 2023). The modified project covers approximately 17.5 acres and would be developed with a medical office building complex, surface parking areas for patients and staff, and landscaping. Additionally, the project would feature a storm water detention basin with an area of 1.1 acre (6.2 percent of the project site). This basin will be fully enclosed by security fencing and will not be accessible by the public. 2.0 BUOW NATURAL HISTORY 2.1 Appearance BUOW is a small, crepuscular (active at dusk and dawn), ground-inhabiting owl that is found largely throughout the southern United States. Its overall length is about seven to ten inches. Coloring is sandy brown on its head, back and upper wings, with noticeable white spotting on its back and upper wings (Sibley, 2000). Adults are barred on their breast, while juveniles are buffy with a white collar. The brown and white mottling helps to provide camouflage in their dry habitats. BUOWs have yellow eyes, long legs, a short tail, with relatively long, narrow wings and a flat, round head (Sibley, 2000). Their long legs help them to see over grasses and short vegetation and aid them in catching their prey. 2.2 Habitat Preferences Typical BUOW habitat is open, dry, flat ground or low rolling hills with sparse vegetation and available burrows (Gallagher, 1997). BUOWs spend most of their time on the ground or on low perch sites such as fence posts and dirt mounds. They are generally found in open country, where tree or shrub canopies cover less than 30% of the habitat. Typical habitats include annual and perennial grasslands, shortgrass prairies, open agricultural areas (particularly rangelands), desert floors, and vacant lots in residential areas and university campuses. Other habitats include oak savannah; grass, forb, and open shrub stages of pinyon-juniper and ponderosa pine habitat; sandy beaches and coastal dunes; and river bottom lands. BUOWs inhabiting urban landscaped areas may live in vacant fields/lots, pastures, airports, athletic fields, golf courses, cemeteries, city parks, road shoulders, drainage sumps, railroad beds, irrigation ditches, and road cuts (Center for Biological Diversity et al., 2003). The BUOW is primarily a dry grassland species, but it persists and can even thrive in some Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 5 February 2024 landscapes that are highly altered by human activity, such as agricultural areas in the Central and Imperial valleys (Shuford et al., 2008). They require large open expanses of sparsely vegetated areas on gently rolling or level terrain with an abundance of active small mammal burrows (Shuford et al., 2008). Vegetation cover and height that prevents the owl from observing approaching predators places the BUOW at a severe disadvantage (Center for Biological Diversity et al., 2003). They are the only small owl likely to be seen perched in the open daylight (Sibley, 2000). Nest and roost burrows of the BUOW in California are most commonly dug by California ground squirrels (Spermophilus beecheyi), but they may use American badger (Taxidea taxus), coyote (Canis latrans), and fox dens or holes (CDFG, 2012). If the ground is soft enough with a hard overlay, some BUOWs may dig their own burrows, but they generally prefer to enlarge and adapt existing mammal burrows. BUOWs often use the small holes of ground squirrels (Xerospermophilus spp.) and Botta’s pocket gophers (Thomomys bottae), but they also can dig their own burrows in the soft banks of irrigation canals and ditches (Shuford et al., 2008). Where burrows are scarce, man-made structures, such as culverts, piles of concrete, rubble, or debris, pipes, asphalt, artificial nest boxes, and openings beneath cement or asphalt pavement also are used as nest sites (CDFG, 2012). Both natural and artificial burrows provide protection, shelter, and nest sites. Nest burrows are usually three to nine feet long, with a downward slope, a “J” or “U” shaped bend, and an enlarged nest chamber at the end. Usually the immediate area about the burrow is barren and devoid of vegetation. Adults usually return to the same burrow or a nearby area each year. Adult males often use one or more “satellite” burrows near the nest burrow during the nesting period (Center for Biological Diversity et al., 2003). Both sexes prepare the burrow for nesting using their feet, beaks, and wings to scrape out dirt. BUOWs often nest in loose colonies and members can alert each other to the approach of predators and join in harassment of them. During the nesting season, adult males forage over home ranges 0.8 to 1.16 square miles (2 to 3 square kilometers) and the ranges of neighboring males may overlap considerably (Shuford et al., 2008). A small territory around the nest burrow is aggressively defended against intrusions by other BUOWs, squirrels, and predators. Nesting season for the BUOW in California (courtship and egg laying) occurs between February 1 and August 30 (CDFG, 2012). Actual breeding occurs anywhere from March through August, with the peak activity in April and May. The peak of the breeding season occurs between April 15 and July 15 and is the period when most BUOWs have active nests (eggs or young; CDFG, 2012). Suitable BUOW habitat must also support the primary prey items for BUOWs, such as insects and small mammals. BUOWs are opportunistic predators preying primarily on a broad array of arthropods (centipedes, spiders, beetles, crickets, and grasshoppers), and small rodents, but they also eat birds, amphibians, reptiles, and carrion. They may hunt from a perch, hover, hawk, run, walk, dive or hop after prey. 2.3 Status BUOW is designated by CDFW as a species of special concern (SSC). This status is given a species, subspecies, or distinct population of an animal (fish, amphibian, reptile, bird and mammal) native to California that currently satisfies one or more of the following (not necessarily mutually exclusive) criteria: is extirpated from the state 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 Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 6 February 2024 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. The goal of designating species as species of special concern is to halt or reverse their decline by calling attention to their plight and addressing the issues of concern early enough to secure their long term viability. Species of special concern is an administrative designation and carries no formal legal status; however these species should be considered during the environmental review process. CEQA requires state agencies, local governments, and special districts to evaluate and disclose impacts from projects in the state. Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines clearly indicates that species of special concern should be included in an analysis of project impacts if they can be shown to meet the criteria of sensitivity outlined therein. BUOW is listed in the USFWS’ 2021 Birds of Conservation Concern report (USFWS 2021). The report identifies species, subspecies, and populations of all migratory and non-migratory bird species (beyond those already designated as federal threatened or endangered) that, without additional conservation actions, are likely to become candidates for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). While all of the bird species included in the report are priorities for conservation action, the list makes no finding with regard to whether they warrant consideration for ESA listing. 2.4 California Distribution In California, the BUOW’s range extends throughout the lowlands from the northern Central Valley to the U.S./Mexico border, with about two-thirds of the population occupying the Imperial Valley, near the Salton Sea (CEC, BLM, CDFW, and USFWS 2014). Breeding BUOWs are generally absent from the coast north of Sonoma County and from high mountain areas, such as the Sierra Nevada and the Transverse Ranges extending east from Santa Barbara County to San Bernardino County (CEC, BLM, CDFW, and USFWS 2014). Northern populations of the BUOW are migratory, leaving their breeding grounds in the fall, and returning to the same or nearby burrows each spring (Shuford et al., 2008). Migrants from other parts of western North America may augment resident lowland populations in winter (Shuford et al., 2008). BUOW nests have been found from 200 feet below sea level at Death Valley up to 12,000 feet above mean sea level at the Dana Plateau in Yosemite. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 7 February 2024 3.0 STUDY METHODS This section describes the study methods used by biologists for evaluating the biological resources associated with the BSA and project vicinity. Studies began with a review of relevant literature and databases (literature review). This effort was followed by on-site field surveys. The purpose of the field surveys was to determine whether BUOWs occur or could potentially occur within the BSA. The methods used to determine their occurrence are defined and described in the following subsections. 3.1 Literature Review UltraSystems conducted a search of readily available information, including relevant literature, databases, agency web sites, reports and management plans, Geographic Information System (GIS) data, maps, and aerial imagery obtained from public domain sources. Existing information was collected in order to document conditions within the project vicinity. To identify and subsequently avoid or minimize potential impacts to biological resources, the literature review was conducted prior to field surveys to identify expected natural resource issues in the BSA, as well as potential habitat and known occurrences of BUOW in the project vicinity. The results of the literature review provided information on habitats and BUOWs potentially located in and near the BSA. Prior to field surveys, biologists reviewed maps, such as the USGS 7.5-Minute Topographic Map Devore Quadrangle topographic maps (USGS, 2015) and current aerial imagery (Google Earth Pro, 2023) to gain a perspective of the topographic and physical features associated with the BSA and project vicinity. Information obtained from this review included locations of city and county boundaries and jurisdictions; valleys, hills, and mountain ranges; park boundaries; natural and man- made drainages, and open waters (lakes, ponds, reservoirs, etc.); vegetation community boundaries; land use such as developed land, agriculture, and natural open space; important landmarks; roads, highways, paths, and trails; and potential wildlife movement corridors. The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) is a CDFW Natural Heritage Division species database that maintains inventories, status, and locations of sensitive habitats, special-status plants, and special-status wildlife in California. The CNDDB was used to determine if and to what extent the BUOW occurs on or adjacent to the project site. Records corresponding to the USGS 7.5-Minute Devore, Cucamonga Peak, Guasti, and Fontana Quadrangles topographic maps were obtained. CNDDB records are generally used as a starting point when determining what special-status species, if any, may occur in a particular area. 3.2 Field Survey Methods Biologists used binoculars, pertinent regional flora and fauna field guides, and topographic and aerial maps during field surveys to identify and record vegetation communities, potential BUOW burrows, BUOWs, and other special-status species, to help direct them in the field and to assist in identifying habitats and physical features. In addition, biologists used Global Positioning System (GPS) units and other GIS and survey-related techniques, hardware and software to collect data and populate all attributes required by the relevant agencies. Digital color photographs were taken during the field surveys to record existing site conditions at the time of the field surveys. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 8 February 2024 3.2.1 BUOW Habitat Assessment Biologists characterized existing habitat to ascertain site conditions and identify habitat areas that could be suitable for BUOWs. Vegetation communities observed by biologists were identified and mapped in the field by marking their limits on a color aerial map and/or with the use of a GPS unit. The BSA boundary was digitized by UltraSystems GIS staff and placed on the aerial map prior to surveys. Descriptions of vegetation types and habitats within the survey areas were based on dominant perennial species. Generally, classifications of habitat types or vegetation communities were based on Holland’s Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Communities of California (Holland, 1986), A Manual of California Vegetation Second Edition (Sawyer et al., 2009), and the California Natural Community List (CDFW, 2023), with modifications to better represent existing site conditions. Topography, soil characteristics, substrates, rock formations, wetlands, riparian/riverine, and vernal pools were also components of the habitat assessment. Following the field mapping, UltraSystems GIS staff took the habitat boundaries from the aerial map and/or downloaded the data from the GPS unit and digitized the boundaries into an ArcGIS file. Once in ArcGIS, the acreage of each plant community and non-vegetated feature present within the BSA was then calculated. 3.2.2 Focused BUOW Surveys The habitat assessment determined that the project site contains habitat to potentially support the BUOW; therefore, focused BUOW surveys were required. As of this date, two of the four required breeding season surveys, as set forth by the CDFW in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (Staff Report; CDFG, 2012), have been conducted. These surveys were conducted at least three weeks apart between April 15 and July 15, 2023, with at least one visit after June 15th. All biologists who conducted the focused BUOW surveys are knowledgeable about BUOW habitat, natural history, ecology, behavior, and field identification of the species and BUOW sign. Field surveys were conducted as described in Table 3.2-1, Burrowing Owl Survey Results. The surveys were conducted in accordance with the guidelines set forth by CDFW in the Staff Report (CDFG, 2012). These guidelines are recommended by CDFW as a methodology for surveying this species. Surveys were conducted in accessible portions of the BSA that were identified as containing BUOW essential habitat (nesting, foraging, wintering, and dispersal habitat), with the exception of previously-surveyed areas. Biologists walked straight-line transects spaced no more than 20 meters apart to allow 100 percent visual coverage of the survey area, and examined entrances of potential burrows and suitable man-made structures for BUOW tracks, molted feathers, cast pellets,1 prey remains, eggshell fragments, BUOW whitewash, nest burrow decoration materials (e.g., paper, foil, plastic items, livestock or other animal manure), possible BUOW perches, and other signs of BUOWs (CDFG, 2012). In addition, transect spacing was adjusted to account for differences in terrain, vegetation density, ground surface visibility, and boundary of sites that were recently surveyed for adjacent projects. Each transect was walked at a pace that allowed careful observations along the transect route and the vicinity. Biologists used binoculars from strategic vantage points to survey areas of private property with no access rights. Methods used to detect and identify BUOW included sight and vocalizations and key signs identified by the Staff Report (CDFG, 2012), as described above. Burrows were assumed active if evidence of use by BUOWs was observed, or if at least one BUOW was observed in the vicinity. Biologists 1 Defined as one to two inches long brown to black regurgitated pellets consisting of non-digestible portions of the owls’ diet, such as fur, bones, claws, beetle elytra, or feathers, Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 9 February 2024 identified, recorded, and mapped with a GPS unit all BUOWs, burrows with potential BUOW sign, and occupied burrows. All wildlife species encountered visually, audibly, or by sign during field surveys were identified and recorded in field notes. All BUOWs and special-status wildlife species encountered were identified, recorded in field notes, and mapped on an aerial map and/or with a GPS unit Table 3-2 FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION Survey Date Survey Time Temperature (oF) Weather Surveyors June 12, 2023 7:30 a.m.-2:00 p.m. 58-69 Overcast (100%) M. Sutton, Z. Jackson, Z. Neider July 10, 2023 6:30 a.m.-1:45 p.m. 63-97 Clear (0%) M. Sutton, Z. Jackson, J. Mak October 19, 2023 7:10 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. 71 – 95 Clear Z. Jackson November 2, 2023 11:40 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. 76 – 80 Clear H. Flores & M. Sutton December 5, 2023 7:40 a.m. – 1:30 p.m. 68 – 78 Clear Z. Jackson & M. Sutton December 6, 2023 7:30 a.m. – 11:45 a.m. 58 – 75 Clear Z. Jackson January 17, 2024 7:15 a.m. – 2:45 p.m. 48 – 60 Cloudy M. Sutton, H. Flores, A. McNamara January 18, 2024 7:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. 49 – 63 cloudy M. Sutton, H. Flores, A. McNamara . Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 10 February 2024 4.0 RESULTS This section describes the results of the literature review and the BSA’s existing conditions at the time the focused BUOW surveys were conducted (environmental baseline). Locations of suitable and occupied BUOW burrows and complexes observed as of this date are represented in Appendix A Figure 3 Burrowing Owl Locations. Representative photographs of the BSA can be found in Appendix B, Site Photographs. Common names of plants and wildlife vary between references; therefore, scientific names are included upon initial mention of each species, and common names are used afterward. 4.1 Environmental Setting The topography of the project site is generally flat, exhibiting little variation in slope, with elevations ranging from approximately 1,379 feet to 1,434 feet above mean sea level (amsl; Google Earth, 2023). The project site has been under cultivation with vineyards since at least 1938 (NetrOnline 2023). At the time of the BUOW surveys, the majority of undeveloped land in the Planning Areas east of the Southern California Edison (SCE) transmission line right-of-way (ROW) are vineyards. These vineyards are regularly maintained with disking and mowing activities. 4.2 Soils The USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey shows two mapped soil units within the BSA: Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes (HaC) and Tujunga gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes (TvC), which are depicted on Appendix A Figure 4 USDA Soils and described in the Soils Report (Appendix C, Soils Report). These soils are typically found on alluvial fans (Soil Survey Staff 2023). 4.3 Habitat Assessment This section describes the land cover types (plant communities and non-vegetated features) determined to be present within the BSA as determined by the literature review and field surveys. Three land cover types were observed and mapped within the BSA. Table 4.1, Acreage of Mapped Land Cover Types, lists the land cover types with approximate acreages mapped during the 2023 surveys. Appendix A Figure 5 Land Cover Types depicts the location and size of each plant land cover type. Classifications of plants are based on Holland’s Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Communities of California (Holland, 1986) and A Manual of California Vegetation Second Edition (Sawyer et al., 2009), with modifications to better represent existing conditions. 4.3.1 Caltrans Landscaping The Caltrans landscaping land cover occurs in landscaped sections between on- and off-ramps of SR- 210, north of the project site (see Appendix A, Figure 5, Land Cover Types). The tree species used in this landscaping include kurrajong (Brachychiton populenus), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), and Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii). While coast live oak and Fremont cottonwood are both native species, kurrajong is a non-native ornamental. The understory consists of native shrubs, such as California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), deerweed (Acmispon glaber), Pomona milkvetch (Astragalus pomonensis), Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 11 February 2024 TABLE 4.3 ACREAGE OF MAPPED LAND COVER TYPES Land Cover Type Total Area Mapped within BSA (Acres) Total Area Mapped within Project Site (Acres)* Caltrans landscaping 8.2 0.1 Developed 22.7 0 Disturbed 20.1 3.6 Eucalyptus groves 0.8 0.02 Vineyard/disturbed fiddleneck-phacelia fields 35.9 13.8 Total 87.6 17.5 and doveweed (Croton setiger). Acacia (Acacia sp.), a non-native ornamental species, has also been planted within the shrub layer. Various herbaceous weeds such as telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora) and stinkwort (Dittrichia graveolens) occur within these sites as well. The trees in this land cover type are sparsely distributed, covering approximately ten percent of the area. There is dense shrub cover in most areas of this land cover. This land cover is not considered sensitive (CDFW, 2023). Caltrans landscaping land cover occupies approximately 8.2 acres of the BSA; 0.1 acre of this land cover was mapped within the project site (see Appendix A Figure 5 Land Cover Types). 4.3.2 Developed Developed land cover primarily consists of man-made structures, paving and other impermeable surfaces that cannot support vegetation. Developed lands also include ornamental and non-native landscaping around buildings and homes. Onsite developed lands consist of paved streets, paved access roads, parking lots, driveways, sidewalks, and other permanent structures. These developed areas provide virtually no habitat for wildlife species. Landscaped (ornamental trees, shrubs, turf, etc.) areas associated with the developed lands within the BSA provide virtually no habitat for wildlife species; however, birds could use the ornamental trees for foraging and nesting. This land cover is not considered sensitive (CDFW, 2023). Developed land cover occupies approximately 22.7 acres of the BSA; this land cover was not mapped within the project site (see Appendix A Figure 5 Land Cover Types). 4.3.3 Disturbed Disturbed land cover type is characterized by areas that are either barren, and thus completely lacking vegetation (e.g., dirt/gravel roads or gravel-covered staging areas), or low-lying ruderal vegetation including native and non-native shrubs, forbs, and/or grasses. Many areas in the Disturbed land cover type, such as the dirt/gravel service road of the transmission line towers and other dirt access roads interspersed throughout the vineyards and uncultivated fields within the BSA, contain highly compacted soils, which do not support vegetative cover. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 12 February 2024 Weed abatement activities such as disking and mowing throughout vegetated areas of Disturbed land cover adversely affect habitat value by reducing vegetative cover. Vegetation within Disturbed land cover primarily consists of non-native annual grass and forb species. Disturbed land cover within the BSA does not fit any classification described in A Manual of California Vegetation Second Edition (Sawyer et al., 2009) or Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Communities of California (Holland, 1986). This land cover type is not considered a sensitive habitat (CDFW, 2023). Disturbed land cover occupies approximately 20.1 acres of the BSA and approximately 3.6 acres of the project site (see Appendix A Figure 5 Land Cover Types). 4.3.4 Eucalyptus Groves Eucalyptus groves are characterized by eucalyptus trees (Eucalyptus spp.) which dominate the tree canopy. These species were originally planted as individual trees, groves, and windbreaks, later becoming naturalized on uplands, bottomlands, and adjacent to stream courses, lakes, or levees. Stands in this alliance occur in agricultural and urban land use areas as well as widely beyond these, typically in disturbed areas including roadside verges and upper terraces of floodplains (CNPS, 2023). This land cover is not considered sensitive (CDFW, 2023). In the BSA, eucalyptus groves are located along the west side of San Sevaine Road. The eucalyptus groves land cover type contains red gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis). This land cover occupies approximately 0.8 acre of the BSA and approximately 0.02 acre of the project site (see Appendix A Figure 5 Land Cover Types). 4.3.5 Vineyard/Disturbed Fiddleneck-Phacelia Fields Vineyards are the dominant vegetation and covers most of the project site and BSA. This vineyard includes cultivated grapes (Vitis vinifera; a non-native vine or shrub), which are planted in rows spaced approximately 10 feet apart. The vineyard/disturbed fiddleneck-phacelia fields land cover contains land that is used as a vineyard to grow grapes (agriculture) without supplemental irrigation. The vineyards have been cultivated since at least 1938 (NetrOnline 2023). Cultivated grape is the dominant shrub and its cover varies from approximately 10 percent in the late fall and winter in its deciduous state to approximately 75 percent in late summer when its foliage matures. Annual forbs and grasses characteristic of the disturbed fiddleneck-phacelia fields land cover establish within the vineyard rows and the understory of the vines, forming a dense vegetative cover of approximately 90 percent, while the grapes are in their dormant state in the late winter and early spring. The dominant forb species during this period are the native common fiddleneck (Amsinckia menziesii) and annual grass species such as foxtail brome (Bromus madritensis) and soft brome (Bromus hordeaceus). Co-dominant and common forb and annual grass species observed during this period include oat species (Avena spp.), London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), and short-podded mustard (Hirschfeldia incana). Much of the non-target vegetation within the vineyard rows is disturbed by cultivation practices during the late winter to early summer as described below. Vineyard maintenance crews were observed conducting monthly disking and blading of all the vineyard rows, both north-to-south and west-to-east rows, between late January and June. As a result, the only vegetation other than the grape vines that persists in the late growing season is the vegetation that grows beneath the vine’s canopies. This land cover is not considered sensitive (CDFW, 2023). Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 13 February 2024 The vineyard/disturbed fiddleneck-phacelia fields land cover occupies approximately 35.9 acres of the BSA and 13.8 acres of the project site (see Appendix A Figure 5 Land Cover Types). 4.4 Plants To see the list of plants observed during the surveys as of this date, refer to Appendix E Species Observed. 4.5 Wildlife To see the list of wildlife observed during the surveys as of this date, refer to Appendix E, Species Observed. 4.6 BUOW Survey Results Biologists did not observe any BUOW or BUOW sign within the BSA of PA 27 during the two of the four breeding season surveys conducted as of this date, between June 12, 2023 and July 10, 2023; however, they observed BUOW and BUOW sign at five different sites (19, 20.1, 20.2, 25 and 26), three of which were within the project site (19, 20.1 and 25), during the three non-breeding season surveys conducted between October 19, 2023 and January 18, 2024 (see Table 4.6). Two additional breeding season surveys will be conducted in early March 2024 and after April 15, 2024 in accordance with the Staff Report (CDFG, 2012). The results of the surveys on the project site (PA 27) and other areas within the BSA are detailed below. 4.6.1 Planning Area 27 Biologists did not observe any BUOW or BUOW sign within PA 27 during the breeding season surveys as of this date; however, they observed BUOW and BUOW sign at three different burrow complexes (19, 20.1 and 25) during the non-breeding season surveys, two on December 5, 2023 (19 and 20.1), and one on January 17, 2024 (25). There was whitewash observed at all three of the occupied complexes and pellets were observed at one of the occupied complexes (25). Two of the occupied complexes (19 and 25) occurred within the vineyards, and all of the burrows with sign within those complexes were observed at the base of grape vines. One occupied complex (20.1) was located within a small area of discarded concrete slabs and other debris along a disturbed strip of land separating the vineyards from South Highland Avenue. The burrows with sign occurred at the base of the concrete slabs. 4.6.2 Planning Area 31 (Buffer Area of PA 27) Biologists did not observe any BUOW or BUOW sign within the section of PA 31 that lies within the BSA of PA 27 during the breeding season surveys as of this date; however, they observed BUOW but no BUOW sign at two different locations (20.2 and 26) during the non-breeding season surveys. One BUOW was observed on December 5, 2023, standing in the vineyard, approximately 400 feet southwest of the northeast corner of PA 31. No burrow was observed in the vicinity of where the BUOW at site 20.2 was standing. Another BUOW was observed peering above a burrow apron of burrow 26, at the base of a grape vine. Burrow 26 is located approximately 100 feet south of South Highland Avenue and approximately 1,300 feet east of Cherry Avenue. The biologists did not approach burrow 26 to avoid flushing or otherwise disturbing the BUOW. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 14 February 2024 Table 4.6 BURROWING OWL SURVEY RESULTS Burrow / Complex ID Highest Status1 Planning Area # (Project Location)2 Burrow or Complex (Number of Burrows) Number and Age of Occupants Sign3 Discovery Date 19 OWS 27 Complex (2) 1 Adult FL, W 2023-12- 05 20.1 OWS 27 Complex (3) 1 Adult FL, W 2023-12- 05 20.2 OWL 31 No burrow 1 Adult FL, W 2023-12- 05 25 OWS 27 Complex (5) 1 Adult FL, P, W 2024-01- 17 26 OWL 31 Solitary 1 Adult OWL 2024-01- 18 1. Statuses of BUOW Burrows/Complexes are abbreviated as follows: OWS = owl present, sign observed; OWL = owl present; BSO = burrow with sign of owl (pellet, feathers, whitewash, etc.). 2. The following project locations are represented: BSA = BUOW burrows/complexes that occur within the Biological Study Area (BSA) of the project. 3. Types of BUOW sign are abbreviated as follows: B = bones, EXC = excrement, EXO = invertebrate exoskeleton, F = feather, None =no sign. P = pellet, PE = pellet w/invertebrate exoskeleton, W=whitewash. FL = BUOW flushed 5.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT BUOW was observed during the December 5, 2023 and January 17 and 18, 2024 surveys. Suitable burrow complexes exhibiting signs of BUOW were observed during all surveys. It is the opinion of the UltraSystems’ biologists that this project is anticipated to significantly impact BUOW. The FEIR mitigation measures and the conservation measures CM BIO-1 through CM BIO-7 are designed to reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant level. Implementation of these measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Please note that a negative survey finding does not preclude a BUOW’s occupation of any location within the BSA at any future time. It must be noted that due to the fragmented suitable habitat and decreasing forage capacity of BUOW’s in western San Bernardino County, it is plausible that an unknown number of BUOW could move through the BSA to forage, shelter, rest, breed, or nest, prior to or during construction. Finally, survey results may also change during times of migration or if resident BUOWs change burrow locations and choose to occupy a location within the BSA. Please see Section 6.0 Conservation Measures. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 15 February 2024 6.0 CONSERVATION MEASURES The following conservation measures summarize both the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Westgate Specific Plan (PCR 2015) and the subsequent requirements relevant to the Westgate PA27 Medical Center Addendum #6 project. The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Westgate Specific Plan (PCR 2015) contains a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) that stipulates measures to be taken to mitigate resource impacts resulting from development of the project to a level that is less than significant. The FEIR MMRP requires the following mitigation measures to minimize or avoid impacts to burrowing owl. The measures applicable to burrowing owl mitigation from both the FEIR and the Staff Report (CDFW, 2012), are described below. 6.1 MM D-2: Burrowing Owls (Westgate Specific Plan FEIR; PCR, 2015b) Focused surveys for burrowing owl shall be conducted during the breeding season prior to vegetation clearing or ground disturbing activities by a qualified biologist with experience conducting surveys for this species. Surveys shall be conducted in suitable habitat as determined by the qualified biologist based on a field assessment of site conditions at the time of the survey, including habitats such as the Ruderal and Non‐native Grassland plant communities observed during the 2012 survey. The survey methodology shall follow the protocol provided as Appendix D of the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation published by [California] Department of Fish and Wildlife (March 7, 2012). Pursuant to this protocol four survey visits are required, including at least one site visit between February 15 and April 15, and a minimum of three survey visits at least three weeks apart between April 15 and July 15 (with at least one visit after June 15). The results of the focused surveys are typically considered valid for one year after completion. If burrowing owls are determined present following focused surveys, occupied burrows shall be avoided to the greatest extent feasible, following the guidelines in the 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation including, but not limited to, conducting preconstruction surveys, avoiding occupied burrows during the nesting and nonbreeding seasons, implementing a worker awareness program, biological monitoring, establishing avoidance buffers, and flagging burrows for avoidance with visible markers. If occupied burrows cannot be avoided, acceptable methods may be used to exclude burrowing owl either temporarily or permanently, pursuant to a Burrowing Owl Exclusion Plan [i.e., Mitigation Plan] that shall be prepared and approved by CDFW. The Burrowing Owl Exclusion Plan shall be prepared in accordance with the guidelines in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. 6.2 MM D-5: Nesting Birds (Westgate Specific Plan FEIR; PCR, 2015b) This measure satisfies the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) for burrowing owls, however, please refer to dates and survey timing in the burrowing owl mitigation elsewhere in this section. The FEIR states, Prior to the issuance of any grading permit that would all removal of habitat containing raptor and songbird nests, the project applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City of Fontana that either of the following have been or will be accomplished. 1. Vegetation removal activities shall be scheduled outside the nesting season (September 16 to February 14 for songbirds; September 16 to January 14 for raptors) to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 16 February 2024 2. Any construction activities that occur during the nesting season (February 15 to August 31 September 15 for songbirds; January 15 to August 31 September 15 for raptors) will require that all suitable habitat be thoroughly surveyed for the presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist before commencement of clearing or ground disturbance activities. Surveys should be conducted within three (3) days prior to commencement of clearing or ground disturbance activities to the greatest extent feasible. Surveys may be required outside of the typical nesting season if the project biologist determines the potential for nesting activities. If any active nests are detected, a buffer of at least 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) will be delineated, flagged, and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete as determined by the biological monitor to minimize impacts. The project biologist may also recommend additional measures based on project‐ specific conditions to ensure compliance with all federal, state and local laws pertaining to nesting birds and birds of prey. 6.3 CDFW Staff Report General Measures Avoidance and minimization measures that will be implemented in order to protect BUOW during construction activities associated with the project are described below. A fundamental goal for this project is to take all necessary measures to avoid negative impacts, both seasonally and spatially, to burrowing owls, their eggs, or their nests, in accordance with the 2012 CDFW Staff Report (CDFW, 2012). These measures include: • Avoid disturbing occupied burrows during the burrowing owl nesting period, from 1 February through 31 August. (and during the non-breeding season, both require CDFW approval) • Delimit burrow locations using a marking system clearly visible to the project proponent, contractors, and stakeholders, but obscured from the BUOWs to the extent practicable. These visible markers would ensure that farm equipment and other machinery do not collapse burrows. (establish buffers) • Develop and implement a worker awareness program to increase the on-site worker’s recognition of and commitment to burrowing owl protection. • Do not fumigate, use treated bait or other means of poisoning nuisance animals in areas where burrowing owls are known or suspected to occur (e.g., sites observed with nesting owls, designated use areas). To minimize impacts to established burrowing owls resident within the project area, CDFW makes the following statement: If burrowing owls and their habitat can be protected in place on or adjacent to a project site, the use of buffer zones, visual screens or other measures while project activities are occurring can minimize disturbance impacts. Conduct site-specific monitoring to inform development of buffers (CDFW, 2012). 6.3.1 Buffer Zones If burrowing owls occupy the site or adjacent areas, buffer zones extending from the burrow or burrow complex location(s) must be established using the distances below. In unoccupied areas outside of buffer zones, where BUOW are not found, construction may proceed without further mitigation. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 17 February 2024 6.3.1.1 Breeding season “no work” buffer 1. If project activities occur during the breeding season (February 1 to August 31) and nesting BUOW are present, a qualified biologist will minimize disturbance impacts by establishing a “no work” buffer zone surrounding all occupied burrows by flagging, fencing, or otherwise visibly demarcation of the avoidance areas in accordance with required the buffer distances provided by the Staff Report (see Table 6.3). The primary goal will be to reduce disturbance to BUOW and their burrows. The buffer size will be determined in consultation with CDFW and based on the tolerance of the BUOW to construction activities. 2. With agency approval, these buffer zone distances may be reduced by a CDFW-approved qualified biologist, in consultation with CDFW, for buffer reduction and documentation requirements. Nesting bird avoidance, minimization, and monitoring will be implemented in accordance with project guidance documents and agreements. Table 6.3 RECOMMENDED RESTRICTED ACTIVITY DATES AND BUFFER DISTANC ES Location Time of Year Level of Disturbance and Buffer Distances (meters) Low Medium High Nesting Sites Apr 1 – Aug 15 200 m 500 m 500 m Nesting Sites Aug 16 – Oct 15 200 m 200 m 500 m Nesting Sites Oct 16 – Mar 31 50 m 100 m 500 m SOURCE: Staff Report (CDFW 2012) 6.3.1.2 Non-breeding season buffer In the event that an active BUOW burrow is detected during the non-breeding season (September 1 to January 31), a buffer will be flagged and/or fenced for avoidance in all project areas within the vicinity of the burrow according to the buffer distances recommended by the Staff Report. With CDFW and USFWS approval, these buffer distances may be reduced by a CDFW and USFWS approved qualified biologist in consultation with CDFW for buffer reduction and documentation requirements. 6.4 CM BIO-1 Workers Environmental Awareness Program Prior to project construction activities, a qualified biologist will prepare and conduct a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) to describe the biological constraints of the project. a. All personnel who will work within the project site will attend the WEAP prior to performing any work. The WEAP will include, but not be limited to: results of BUOW surveys; description of BUOW potentially present and potentially present within the project site; legal protections afforded to BUOW; mitigation and avoidance measures for protecting BUOW (i.e., restrictions, avoidance, protection, and minimization measures); and individual responsibilities associated with the project. The program will also include the reporting requirements if workers encounter BUOW (i.e., notifying the biological monitor or the construction foreman, who will then notify the biological monitor). b. A condition shall be placed on grading permits requiring a qualified biologist to conduct a training session for project personnel prior to mobilization, clear and grub, grading, excavation or other ground-disturbing work. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 18 February 2024 c. The qualified biologist will conduct a WEAP session for project personnel prior to grading, stockpiling and excavation adjacent to the “no work” buffer zones. d. Training materials will be language-appropriate for all construction personnel. Upon completion of the WEAP, workers will provide their signature on a sign-in sheet stating that they attended the program, understand all protection measures, and will abide all the rules of the WEAP. A record of all trained personnel will be kept with the construction foreman at the project field construction office and will be made available to any resource agency personnel. If new construction personnel are added to the project after the initial WEAP training, the construction foreman will ensure that new personnel receive training before they may begin work on the project site. The biologist will provide written hard copies of the WEAP and general identification photos of BUOW and its sign to the construction foreman. 6.5 CM BIO-2 Burrowing Owl Mitigation and Monitoring Plan The Burrowing Owl Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP; UltraSystems 2023; Burrowing Owl Exclusion Plan) shall be prepared and approved by CDFW and outlines measures that will be implemented by the Project Applicant and their contractors to protect BUOW prior to construction of the PA27 Medical Center project (Addendum #6). The MMP shall include: a. number and location of occupied burrow sites, b. acres of burrowing owl habitat that will be impacted, c. details of site monitoring, d. details on proposed buffers and other avoidance measures if avoidance is proposed, e. detail required monitoring and reporting requirements, f. If impacts to occupied burrowing owl habitat or burrow cannot be avoided, the MMP shall also describe exclusion and relocation actions that will be implemented, with the approval of CDFW. Proposed implementation of burrow exclusion and closure should only be considered as a last resort after all other options have been evaluated, as exclusion is not in itself an avoidance, minimization, or mitigation method and has the possibility to result in take. If impacts to occupied burrows cannot be avoided, information shall be provided regarding adjacent or nearby suitable habitat available to owls along with proposed relocation actions. The ultimate goal of the MMP is to relocate the owls as far away from active construction and development (present and future) or other conflicting land uses as feasible, but as close to the burrows being removed as possible. The MMP will identify mitigation requirements including, but not limited to, acceptable types of artificial burrow structures (ABS), revegetation, and signage to notify the public that the area is off limits. If impacts to occupied burrowing owl habitat or burrow cannot be avoided, mitigation lands for BUOW must be dedicated to BUOW mitigation and protected in perpetuity. The MMP will describe avoidance and minimization measures, passive exclusion and relocation procedures, and identify and prioritize potential mitigation lands owned by the Project Applicant that: Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 19 February 2024 • Are within an acceptable distance from the original BUOW burrow locations; • Are in habitat similar to existing BUOW habitat; • Provide necessary structure of prey source, burrowing structure, perching structure, without high overhead perches for predators; • The MMP will also determine, in consultation with CDFW, which ABS design is most appropriate for the project site, including whether they should be above or below ground. The project proponent shall implement the MMP only after receiving CDFW and USFWS review and approval. Implementation of the CDFW-approved Burrowing Owl Mitigation and Monitoring Plan would avoid or minimize impacts to burrowing owl that would result from development of the project. 6.6 CM BIO-3 Pre-Construction Burrowing Owl Surveys After implementation of the passive exclusion and relocation measures described in the Programmatic Burrowing Owl Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP), burrowing owls may repopulate the project site prior to construction. Therefore, pre-construction burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days prior to the start of project-related activities and within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance, including but not limited to vegetation, security fencing, and staging activities, in accordance with the Staff Report. Preconstruction surveys should be performed by a qualified biologist following the recommendations and guidelines provided in the Staff Report. The survey may detect changes in BUOW presence such as colonizing BUOWs that have recently moved onto the project site, migrating BUOWs, resident BUOWs changing burrow use, or young of the year that are still present and have not dispersed (CDFG, 2012). Following the completion of the pre-construction BUOW survey, the biologist would prepare a letter report in accordance with the instructions described in the Staff Report, summarizing the results of the survey. The report would be submitted to the City of Fontana and CDFW prior to initiating any ground disturbance activities. If no BUOWs or signs of BUOWs are observed during the survey and concurrence is received from CDFW, project activities may begin and no further mitigation would be required. If BUOWs or signs of BUOWs are observed during the survey, the project site would be considered reoccupied, and project activities shall be immediately halted. The biologist would contact the City of Fontana and CDFW to assist in the development of avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures, prior to commencing project activities. 6.7 CM BIO-4 Biological Monitor A qualified biological monitor is required onsite to ensure the appropriate avoidance, minimization, and protection measures, including no work zone buffers are adhered to by the project proponent and all contractors. a. When construction activities commence adjacent to the buffer area, a qualified biologist will be present onsite daily during all construction activities to monitor the behavior of BUOW for the duration of construction adjacent to the buffer of an active burrow. b. The qualified biologist will have the authority to increase the setback distance, halt construction activities, and/or require a visual barrier if there are signs of disturbance, such as changes in behavior as a result of construction or other indications of distress by Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 20 February 2024 BUOW. If the type of construction activity adjacent to the buffer increases in intensity, then the buffer distance may be increased or a reduction in construction type, activity, and duration near the burrow should be implemented. Monitoring will continue to ensure the buffer is adequate under the changed circumstances. c. Conversely, it may be appropriate to reevaluate and potentially reduce the buffer if construction disturbance levels diminish substantially. If a buffer reduction is implemented, monitoring will be conducted on a daily basis during construction activities by a CDFW-approved qualified biologist until the qualified biologist has determined that the young have fledged or until one week after construction ends within the reduced buffer/work area (whichever occurs first). d. Project activities occur during the breeding season and BUOW are present, reducing the work periods and type of activity near the burrow and buffer zone may reduce risk of disturbance to the burrowing owl(s). As BUOW are actively hunting near dawn and dusk, reducing work near the burrow during those time periods can reduce risk to BUOW. Additionally, stockpiled materials and parked vehicles should be kept away from an active burrow to reduce BUOW disturbance in those areas. e. The qualified biologist will determine whether there are suitable natural burrows outside the impact footprint but within 500 feet that would be appropriate for BUOW to take refuge in during relocation. f. The biological monitor will install wildlife cameras at each active burrow during the monitoring phase. Trail cameras are used to capture diurnal, nocturnal and crepuscular activities to help determine the number of owls using a burrow and determine if subadults are dependent on adults. The biologist will monitor the behavior of the owls in terms of number of owls together, foraging behavior, indicators of dependence between young adults and adults, and location and use of satellite burrows. Using these observations, the photos captured by the trail cameras, as well as results of previous surveys, the qualified biologist will determine which burrows are occupied by burrowing owls, and whether the burrowing owls are independent. Only after the qualified biologist determines the number of owls using the burrow and confirms that young adults are no longer dependent on adults would exclusion activities begin. If the qualified biologist determines that young burrowing owls are not yet independent, exclusion would be postponed. g. Camera will be placed on a stationary stake, at a height of 1- to 2 feet. h. Camera will remain deployed and continue to document during the implementation of one-way exclusionary doors (1 day). i. No pets / animals allowed onsite to reduce risk to BUOW and BUOW burrows. If feral cats or dogs are observed in the area, they will be captured and removed, or otherwise kept offsite. j. Avoid the use of fumigants, treated bait, or any other type of poison or traps to control nuisance animals on the project and / or where BUOW are known or suspected to occur. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 21 February 2024 6.8 CM BIO-5 Visual and Sound Screening Visual screening / fencing. A visual screen/barrier may be utilized to further reduce visual impact. A visual screen can be created by using chain-link fencing and shade cloth, prefabricated sand drift fencing with shade cloth, prefabricated drift fencing with additional stakes to provide strength, or something similar, or a more substantial structure built with stacked weed-free straw bales or soil berm. Sound screening. A sound screen/barrier may be utilized to reduce the impacts of sound. A sound screen/barrier is typically built with stacked weed-free straw bales, or may also be already present landscape features such as a dirt berm (Chambers Group Inc., 2016). 6.9 CM BIO-6 Species Mortality Any burrowing owl injuries, mortalities, or other unforeseen circumstances with potential to negatively affect burrowing owls will be reported to CDFW within 24 hours. Additionally, all mortalities detected will be reported to the CDFW via their online health monitoring laboratory. Take of individual burrowing owls and their nests is prohibited by Fish and Game Code § 86 and §§ 3503, 3503.5, and 3513. Take is defined in Fish and Game Code Section 86 as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture or kill.” Burrowing owl presence and burrows on the site indicate that project activities will impact the species, and will result in disruption of natural burrowing owl breeding behavior, the loss of foraging (essential rodent, insect, reptiles, and other prey items), wintering, and breeding habitat for the species, and /or direct or indirect burrowing owl injury or mortality. Mortality can occur due to loss of habitat (which includes but is not limited to loss of forage/prey items, loss of burrowing animals, and nest/burrow destruction), entrapment, predation, ingestion of toxic materials including poisoned bait, vehicle strike, window, fence, and other structure strike or entanglement. Disturbance near burrows can cause unnecessary energy expenditure when a BUOW is disturbed or flushed, and may lead to the BUOW being preyed upon by nearby predators, or vehicle, fence, or equipment strike. Disturbance near burrows also limits BUOW’s ability to forage successfully and may lead to a loss of nest potential / young. Project activities may result in crushing or filling of active owl burrows, thus causing the death or injury of adults, eggs, and young. Project impacts would contribute to statewide population declines for burrowing owl. . Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 22 February 2024 7.0 LITERATURE CITED AND REFERENCES CDFG (California Department of Fish and Game). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. State of California, Natural Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game. March 7, 2012. CDFW. 2023. California Natural Community List. Retrieved from https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities. Accessed on April 26, 2023. FORMA Designs, Inc. 2022. Westgate Specific Plan, Fontana, California. Amendment 2. Prepared for the City of Fontana. Gallagher, Sylvia. 1997. Atlas of Breeding Birds, Orange County, California. Sea and Sage Audubon Press, Irvine, CA. Google Earth. 2023. Version 7.3.6.9345 (December 29, 2022). Imagery date November 9, 2022. 34.133799° -117.483266°. Eye altitude 7,912 feet. ©2023 Google. Accessed on July 1, 2023. Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Nongame Heritage Program, California Department of Fish & Game, Sacramento, Calif. 156 pp. NetrOnline. 2023. Historic Aerials Viewer. Available at https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. Accessed on July 3, 2023. PCR (PCR Services Corporation), 2015a. WSP Draft EIR, Westgate Specific Plan. Accessed online at https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/38282/Westgate-Specific-Plan-Draft- EIR on February 6, 2023. PCR (PCR Services Corporation), 2015b. WSP Final EIR, Westgate Specific Plan. Accessed online at https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/3828 3/Westgate-Final-EIR on March 27, 2023. Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society Press. Sacramento, CA. Shuford, W.D., and Gardali, T., editors. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. Sibley, David Allen. 2000. National Audubon Society, The Sibley Guide to Birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. Soil Survey Staff (Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture). 2023. Web Soil Survey. Available at https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Accessed on July 3, 2023. UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. 2023. Programmatic Burrowing Owl Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Westgate West Planning Areas 43, 44, 45, 45, 50, 54, 57, 65, 66, 67; and Westgate Focused Burrowing Owl Survey Report for the Westgate Specific Plan Project, Planning Area 27 Page 23 February 2024 East Planning Areas 27 and 31, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for City of Fontana Planning Department. USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2021. Birds of Conservation Concern List 2021. Available at https://www.fws.gov/media/birds-conservation-concern-2021. Downloaded on June 21, 2023. USGS, 2015. USGS 7.5 Minute Series Map Devore Quadrangle. Available at https://prd- tnm.s3.amazonaws.com/StagedProducts/Maps/USTopo/PDF/CA/CA_Devore_20150317_T M_geo.pdf. Accessed on October 2, 2023.  APPENDICES  APPENDIX A FIGURES Legend November 29, 2023 Westgate Specific PlanPlanning Area 27 UNINCORPORATED UNINCORPORATED CITY OFRIALTO CITY OFFONTANA CITY OFFONTANA CITY OFRANCHOCUCAMONGA CITY OFONTARIO Project Location Project Location SanBernardinoCounty Kern County Los AngelesCounty RiversideCountyOrangeCounty San Diego County ¯Project Vicinity 0 0.5 1 Miles 0 0.55 1.1 Kilometers Scale: 1:63,360 Path: \\GISSVR\gis\Projects\7170G_Westgate_PA27\MXDs\7170G_PA27_3_0_Project_Vicinity_2023_11_29.mxdService Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, andthe GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors; County of San Bernandino, June 2019, March 2022; UltraSystems Environmental, Inc., 2023. Disclaimer: Representations on this map or illustration are intended only to indicate locations of project parameters reported in the legend. Project parameter information supplied byothers (see layer credits) may not have been independently verified for accuracy by UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. This map or illustration should not be used for, and does notreplace, final grading plans or other documents that should be professionally certified for development purposes. Planning Area 27 P a c i f i cO c e a n Figure 1 November 24, 2023 Ch e r r y A v e ElkhornDr South HighlandAve Sa n S e v a i n e R d Ga b e l s C r e s t W y Ro y a l C r e s t C t Foothill Fwy PrestonDr Project Location SanBernardinoCounty Kern County Los AngelesCounty RiversideCountyOrangeCounty Project Boundary andBiological Study Area (BSA) Key Map ¯0 137.5 275 Feet 0 30 60 Meters Path: \\GISSVR\gis\Projects\7170G_Westgate_PA27\MXDs\BIO\7170G_PA27_4_4_BSA_2023_11_24.mxdService Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS UserCommunity; Intex Properties Corporation, 2023; UltraSystems Environmental, Inc., 2023. P a c i f i cO c e a n Legend Figure # 2 Scale: 1:3,300 Disclaimer: Representations on this map or illustration are intended only to indicate locations of project parameters reported in the legend. Project parameter information supplied by others (see layer credits) may not have been independently verified for accuracy by UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. This map orillustration should not be used for, and does not replace, final grading plans or other documents that should be professionally certified for development purposes. Westgate Specific PlanPlanning Area 27 Community Area Boundary Specific Plan Community Areas Falcon Ridge Westgate Central Westgate East Westgate West Planning Area 27 500ft Biological Study Area (BSA) Ch e r r y A v e Elk ho rnDr So uthHig hl an dAv e Sa n Se v a i n e Rd Ga b e l s C r e s t W y Ro y a l C r e s t C t Hig hl an d Av e Pre st onDr Community Areas Key Map Planning Areas 27 & 31 February 08, 2024 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !!!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!! !!!! !!! !!!!!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! D D D D 3936 30 31 29 28 27 14 26 H i g h l a n d C h a n n e l 20.1 25 19 20.226 Burrowing Owl Locations Key Map ¯0 125 250 Feet 0 40 80 Meters Path: \\gissvr\GIS\Projects\7170G_Westgate_PA27\MXDs\BIO\7170_G_BUOW_PA27_2024_02_08.mxdService Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS UserCommunity; Intex Properties Corporation, August 2022; UltraSystems Environmental, Inc., 2024 Legend Figure 3 Scale: 1:3,000 Disclaimer: Representations on this map or illustration are intended only to indicate locations of project parameters reported in the legend. Project parameter information supplied by others (see layer credits) may not have been independently verified for accuracy by UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. This map orillustration should not be used for, and does not replace, final grading plans or other documents that should be professionally certified for development purposes. Westgate Specific PlanPlanning Area 27 Planning Areas (PAs)BSAChannels !BUOW (Burrow with Owl, Sign) !BUOW (Burrow with Owl) !BUOW (Suitable Burrow)BUOW (Complex with Owl, Sign)BUOW (Suitable Complex) November 29, 2023 SouthHighlandAve Sa n S e v a i n e Rd Ga b e l s C r e s t W y Foothill Fwy PrestonDr HaC TvC Project Location SanBernardinoCounty Kern County Los AngelesCounty RiversideCountyOrangeCounty USDA Soils Key Map ¯0 110 220 Feet 0 30 60 Meters Path: \\GISSVR\gis\Projects\7170G_Westgate_PA27\MXDs\BIO\7170G_PA27_4_4_Soil_2023_11_29.mxdService Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS UserCommunity; USDA, 2022; UltraSystems Environmental, Inc., 2023. P a c i f i cO c e a n Legend Figure # 4 Scale: 1:2,640 Disclaimer: Representations on this map or illustration are intended only to indicate locations of project parameters reported in the legend. Project parameter information supplied by others (see layer credits) may not have been independently verified for accuracy by UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. This map orillustration should not be used for, and does not replace, final grading plans or other documents that should be professionally certified for development purposes. Westgate Specific PlanPlanning Area 27 Planning Area 27 500ft Biological Study Area(BSA) USDA Soil Map Unit HaC:Hanford coarse sandyloam, 2 to 9 percent slopes TvC:Tujunga gravelly loamysand, 0 to 9 percent slopes November 29, 2023 SouthHighlandAve Sa n Se v a i n e Rd Ga b e l s C r e s t W y Ro y a l C r e s t C t Foothill Fwy PrestonDr Project Location SanBernardinoCounty Kern County Los AngelesCounty RiversideCountyOrangeCounty Land Cover Types Key Map ¯0 137.5 275 Feet 0 30 60 Meters Path: \\GISSVR\gis\Projects\7170G_Westgate_PA27\MXDs\BIO\7170G_PA27_4_4_LandCover_2023_11_29.mxdService Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS UserCommunity; Intex Properties Corporation, 2023; UltraSystems Environmental, Inc., 2023. P a c i f i cO c e a n Legend Figure # 5 Scale: 1:2,640 Disclaimer: Representations on this map or illustration are intended only to indicate locations of project parameters reported in the legend. Project parameter information supplied by others (see layer credits) may not have been independently verified for accuracy by UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. This map orillustration should not be used for, and does not replace, final grading plans or other documents that should be professionally certified for development purposes. Westgate Specific PlanPlanning Area 27 Planning Area 27 500ft Biological Study Area (BSA) Land Cover Types Developed Disturbed Caltrans Landscaping Eucalyptus Grove Vineyard/Disturbed fiddleneck-phacelia fields Foothill Fwy  APPENDICES  APPENDIX B SITE PHOTOGRAPHS PHOTO 1. BUOW complex 19, located at base of dormant grape vine in the NW corner of PA 27. Adult owl flushed when biologists approached (12/05/2023) PHOTO 2. BUOW burrow 19, whitewash near opening. Burrow opening approximately 4” diameter. (12/05/2023) PHOTO 3. BUOW complex 20.1, burrows located at base of concrete slabs. Adult owl flushed when approached (12/05/2023) PHOTO 4. BUOW burrow 20.1, burrow opening approximately 5” diameter. Whitewash near opening (12/05/2023) 20.1 20.1 PHOTO 5. Overview of dormant vineyard, from near the center of PA 27 (12/05/2023) PHOTO 6. Overview of dormant vineyard, from Eastern border of PA 31. (01/18/2024) PHOTO 7. BUOW complex 25, burrows located at base of grape vines. Adult owl flushed when approached (01/17/2024) PHOTO 8. BUOW burrow 25.3 within complex 25, burrow opening approximately 5” diameter. Whitewash and pellets near opening (01/17/2024) PHOTO 9. Owl that flushed south of Site 25 (01/17/2024)PHOTO 10. Owl at site 20.2 within PA 31 and within BSA of PA 27. No burrow was found near the owl. (12/05/2023) PHOTO 11. BUOW complex 26, burrows located within PA and within BSA of PA 27. Adult owl perched at burrow entrance, did not flush (01/17/2024) PHOTO 12. BUOW perched in entrance of site 26 (01/17/2024)  APPENDICES  APPENDIX C SOILS REPORT United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California Natural Resources Conservation Service November 29, 2023 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map..................................................................................................................8 Soil Map (7170G PA 27).......................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend (7170G PA 27).......................................................................12 Map Unit Descriptions (7170G PA 27)................................................................12 San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California...................................14 HaC—Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes..........................14 TvC—Tujunga gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes.........................15 Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................17 Soil Properties and Qualities..............................................................................17 Soil Chemical Properties.................................................................................17 pH (1 to 1 Water) (7170G PA 27)................................................................17 References............................................................................................................23 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report 6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map (7170G PA 27) 37 7 6 9 0 0 37 7 7 0 0 0 37 7 7 1 0 0 37 7 7 2 0 0 37 7 7 3 0 0 37 7 7 4 0 0 37 7 7 5 0 0 37 7 6 9 0 0 37 7 7 0 0 0 37 7 7 1 0 0 37 7 7 2 0 0 37 7 7 3 0 0 37 7 7 4 0 0 37 7 7 5 0 0 455000 455100 455200 455300 455400 455500 455600 455700 455800 455900 455000 455100 455200 455300 455400 455500 455600 455700 455800 455900 34° 8' 16'' N 11 7 ° 2 9 ' 1 8 ' ' W 34° 8' 16'' N 11 7 ° 2 8 ' 3 8 ' ' W 34° 7' 54'' N 11 7 ° 2 9 ' 1 8 ' ' W 34° 7' 54'' N 11 7 ° 2 8 ' 3 8 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 0 200 400 800 1200 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:4,700 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California Survey Area Data: Version 15, Aug 30, 2023 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 17, 2022—Jun 12, 2022 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background Custom Soil Resource Report 10 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 11 Map Unit Legend (7170G PA 27) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI HaC Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes 54.3 62.0% TvC Tujunga gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes 33.3 38.0% Totals for Area of Interest 87.6 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions (7170G PA 27) The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, Custom Soil Resource Report 12 onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Custom Soil Resource Report 13 San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California HaC—Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2y8tl Elevation: 890 to 2,860 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 64 to 65 degrees F Frost-free period: 320 to 365 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Hanford and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hanford Setting Landform:Alluvial fans Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Alluvium derived from granite Typical profile A - 0 to 12 inches: sandy loam C - 12 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope:2 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:Rare Frequency of ponding:None Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R019XG911CA - Loamy Fan Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Greenfield, sandy loam Percent of map unit:10 percent Landform:Alluvial fans Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Custom Soil Resource Report 14 Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No Tujunga, loamy sand Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Alluvial fans Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Hydric soil rating: No TvC—Tujunga gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: hcl2 Elevation: 10 to 1,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 25 inches Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 64 degrees F Frost-free period: 250 to 350 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Tujunga and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Tujunga Setting Landform:Alluvial fans Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Alluvium derived from granite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 36 inches: gravelly loamy sand H2 - 36 to 60 inches: gravelly sand Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class:Somewhat excessively drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding:Rare Frequency of ponding:None Custom Soil Resource Report 15 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R019XG912CA - Sandy Fan Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Drainageways Hydric soil rating: Yes Soboba, gravelly loamy sand Percent of map unit:5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Delhi, fine sand Percent of map unit:5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 16 Soil Information for All Uses Soil Properties and Qualities The Soil Properties and Qualities section includes various soil properties and qualities displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in the selected area of interest. A single value or rating for each map unit is generated by aggregating the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This aggregation process is defined for each property or quality. Soil Chemical Properties Soil Chemical Properties are measured or inferred from direct observations in the field or laboratory. Examples of soil chemical properties include pH, cation exchange capacity, calcium carbonate, gypsum, and electrical conductivity. pH (1 to 1 Water) (7170G PA 27) Soil reaction is a measure of acidity or alkalinity. It is important in selecting crops and other plants, in evaluating soil amendments for fertility and stabilization, and in determining the risk of corrosion. In general, soils that are either highly alkaline or highly acid are likely to be very corrosive to steel. The most common soil laboratory measurement of pH is the 1:1 water method. A crushed soil sample is mixed with an equal amount of water, and a measurement is made of the suspension. For each soil layer, this attribute is actually recorded as three separate values in the database. A low value and a high value indicate the range of this attribute for the soil component. A "representative" value indicates the expected value of this attribute for the component. For this soil property, only the representative value is used. 17 18 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—pH (1 to 1 Water) (7170G PA 27) 37 7 6 9 0 0 37 7 7 0 0 0 37 7 7 1 0 0 37 7 7 2 0 0 37 7 7 3 0 0 37 7 7 4 0 0 37 7 7 5 0 0 37 7 6 9 0 0 37 7 7 0 0 0 37 7 7 1 0 0 37 7 7 2 0 0 37 7 7 3 0 0 37 7 7 4 0 0 37 7 7 5 0 0 455000 455100 455200 455300 455400 455500 455600 455700 455800 455900 455000 455100 455200 455300 455400 455500 455600 455700 455800 455900 34° 8' 16'' N 11 7 ° 2 9 ' 1 8 ' ' W 34° 8' 16'' N 11 7 ° 2 8 ' 3 8 ' ' W 34° 7' 54'' N 11 7 ° 2 9 ' 1 8 ' ' W 34° 7' 54'' N 11 7 ° 2 8 ' 3 8 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 0 200 400 800 1200 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:4,700 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons Ultra acid (ph < 3.5) Extremely acid (pH 3.5 - 4.4) Very strongly acid (pH 4.5 - 5.0) Strongly acid (pH 5.1 - 5.5) Moderately acid (pH 5.6 - 6.0) Slightly acid (pH 6.1 - 6.5) Neutral (pH 6.6 - 7.3) Slightly alkaline (pH 7.4 - 7.8) Moderately alkaline (pH 7.9 - 8.4) Strongly alkaline (pH 8.5 - 9.0) Very strongly alkaline (pH > 9.0) Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines Ultra acid (ph < 3.5) Extremely acid (pH 3.5 - 4.4) Very strongly acid (pH 4.5 - 5.0) Strongly acid (pH 5.1 - 5.5) Moderately acid (pH 5.6 - 6.0) Slightly acid (pH 6.1 - 6.5) Neutral (pH 6.6 - 7.3) Slightly alkaline (pH 7.4 - 7.8) Moderately alkaline (pH 7.9 - 8.4) Strongly alkaline (pH 8.5 - 9.0) Very strongly alkaline (pH > 9.0) Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points Ultra acid (ph < 3.5) Extremely acid (pH 3.5 - 4.4) Very strongly acid (pH 4.5 - 5.0) Strongly acid (pH 5.1 - 5.5) Moderately acid (pH 5.6 - 6.0) Slightly acid (pH 6.1 - 6.5) Neutral (pH 6.6 - 7.3) Slightly alkaline (pH 7.4 - 7.8) Moderately alkaline (pH 7.9 - 8.4) Strongly alkaline (pH 8.5 - 9.0) Very strongly alkaline (pH > 9.0) Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography Custom Soil Resource Report 19 MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California Survey Area Data: Version 15, Aug 30, 2023 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 17, 2022—Jun 12, 2022 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background Custom Soil Resource Report 20 MAP INFORMATION imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Custom Soil Resource Report 21 Table—pH (1 to 1 Water) (7170G PA 27) Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI HaC Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes 6.8 54.3 62.0% TvC Tujunga gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes 6.7 33.3 38.0% Totals for Area of Interest 87.6 100.0% Rating Options—pH (1 to 1 Water) (7170G PA 27) Aggregation Method: Weighted Average Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Interpret Nulls as Zero: No Layer Options (Horizon Aggregation Method): All Layers (Weighted Average) Custom Soil Resource Report 22 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 23 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report 24  APPENDICES  APPENDIX D SPECIES OBSERVED 1 Table 1 contains the list of vascular plant taxa recorded during the biological field survey conducted within the BSA. Plant nomenclature and taxonomic order is based on The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, second Edition (Baldwin et al., 2012), and/or the Calflora website (Calflora, 2023). Table 1 Plant Species Observed during the Field Surveys Scientific Name Common Name Cal-IPC Rating DICOTS Anacardiaceae Sumac Family Schinus molle* Peruvian pepper tree Cal-IPC: limited Borginaceae Borage Family Amsinckia menziesii common fiddleneck Brassicaceae Mustard Family Sisymbrium irio* London rocket Cal-IPC: limited Fagaceae Oak/Beech Family Quercus agrifolia coast live oak Malvaceae Mallow Family Brachychiton populenus* kurrajong Myrtaceae Myrtle Family Eucalyptus camaldulensis* red gum Cal-IPC: limited Oleaceae Olive Family Olea europaea* olive Cal-IPC: limited Salicaceae Willow Family Populus fremontii Fremont cottonwood Solanaceae Nightshade Family Datura wrightii jimsonweed Vitaceae Grape Family Vitis vinifera* common grape vine EUDICOTS Amaranthaceae Amaranth Family Amaranthus albus* pigweed amaranth Brassicaceae (Cruciferae) Mustard Family 2 Scientific Name Common Name Cal-IPC Rating Hirschfeldia incana* short-podded mustard Cal-IPC: moderate Rosaceae Rose Family Pyrus calleryana* Callery pear Cal-IPC: watch Tamaricaceae Tamarisk Family Tamarix sp.* tamarisk Cal-IPC: high Zygophyllaceae Caltrop Family Tribulus terrestris* puncture vine (goathead) Cal-IPC: limited MONOCOTS Poaceae Grass Family Avena barbata* slim oat Cal-IPC: moderate Avena fatua* wild oat Cal-IPC: moderate Bromus hordeaceus* soft brome Cal-IPC: limited Bromus madritensis* foxtail brome Cal-IPC: high Digitaria sp. crabgrass CONIFERS Pinaceae Pine Family Pinus spp. pine tree *Non-native species California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) Ratings: Cal-IPC is a nonprofit organization that is dedicated to protecting California’s lands and waters from ecologically-damaging invasive plants. Cal-IPC maintains the Cal-IPC Inventory, a comprehensive list of invasive plants based on ecological impacts and assigns the designation of High, Moderate, Limited, or Watch to species based on the criteria listed below: • 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. • Limited: these species are invasive but their ecological impacts are minor on a statewide level or there was not enough information to justify a higher score. Their reproductive biology and other attributes result in low to moderate rates of invasiveness. Ecological amplitude and distribution are generally limited, but these species may be locally persistent and problematic. • Watch: These species have been assessed as posing a high risk of becoming invasive in the future in California. 3 Table 2 contains the list of wildlife species observed and/or detected during the biological field surveys. Wildlife nomenclature and taxonomic order is based on the following treatments according to class of species: • Birds. Check-list of North American Birds. Seventh Edition and Supplements (Chesser et al., 2022) • Mammals. Complete List of Amphibian, Reptile, Bird and Mammal Species in California (CDFW, 2016). • Native Wildlife. California’s Life History Accounts and Range Maps (accessed, 10/28/2022), CDFW 2022) Table 2 Wildlife Species Observed/Detected during the Field Surveys Scientific Name Common Name Status Birds Accipitridae Accipiter Family Buteo jamaicensis red-tailed hawk Aegithalidae Bushtit Family Psaltriparus minimus bushtit Alaudidae Lark Family Eremophila alpestris horned lark Apodidae Swift Family Aeronautes saxatalis white-throated swift Bombycillidae Waxwing Family Bombycilla cedrorum cedar waxwing Charadriidae Plover Family Charadrius vociferus killdeer Columbidae Pigeon & Dove Family Columba livia* rock pigeon Zenaida macroura mourning dove Corvidae Corvid Family Corvus corax common raven 4 Scientific Name Common Name Status Falconidae Falcon Family Falco peregrinus American peregrine falcon fully protected Falco sparverius American kestrel Fringillidae Finch Family Haemorhous mexicanus house finch Spinus psaltria lesser goldfinch Spinus tristis American goldfinch Hirundinidae Swallow Family Hirundo rustica barn swallow Icteridae Icterid family Euphagus cyanocephalus Brewer’s blackbird Sturnella neglecta western meadowlark Mimidae Mimid Family Mimus polyglottos northern mockingbird Motacillidae Wagtail, Longclaw, and Pipit Family Anthus rubescens American pipit Paridae Chickadee Family Poecile gambeli mountain chickadee Parulidae New World Warbler Family Dendroica coronata yellow-rumped warbler Passerellidae New World Sparrow Family Melospiza melodia song sparrow 5 Scientific Name Common Name Status Melozone crissalis California towhee Passerculus sandwichensis savannah sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys white-crowned sparrow Picidae Woodpecker Family Colaptes auratus northern flicker Melanerpes formicivorus acorn woodpecker Regulidae Kinglet Family Corthylio calendula ruby-crowned kinglet Sittidae Nuthatch Family Sitta canadensis red-breasted nuthatch Strigidae Owl Family Athene cunicularia burrowing owl SSC, BCC Sturnidae Starling Family Sturnus vulgaris* European starling Trochilidae Hummingbird Family Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird Turdidae Thrush Family Sialia currucoides mountain bluebird Tyrannidae New World Flycatchers Tyrannus vociferans Cassin’s kingbird Sayornis nigricans black phoebe Sayornis saya Say’s phoebe Mammals 6 Scientific Name Common Name Status Canidae Canine Family Canis latrans coyote Geomyidae Gopher Family Thomomys bottae Botta’s pocket gopher Heteromyidae Pocket Mouse Family Perognathus longimembris little pocket mouse Sciuridae Squirrel Family Otospermophilus beecheyi California ground squirrel • BCC = bird of conservation concern: a bird of conservation concern is listed in the USFWS’ 2008 Birds of Conservation Concern report. The report identifies species, subspecies, and populations of all migratory and non-migratory bird species (beyond those already designated as federally threatened or endangered) that, without additional conservation actions, are likely to become candidates for listing under the ESA. While all of the bird species included in the report is priorities for conservation action, the list makes no finding with regard to whether they warrant consideration for ESA listing. • WL = watch list: this list includes birds identified in the California Bird Species of Special Concern (Shuford and Gardali, 2008) report and are not on the current CDFW species of special concern list, but were on previous lists and they have not been state-listed under CESA; were previously state or federally listed and now are on neither list; or are on the list of fully protected species • Fully protected: fully protected animal species may not be taken or possessed at any time and no licenses or permits may be issued for their take except for collecting these species for necessary scientific research and relocation of the bird species for the protection of livestock. Lists were created for fish (Fish and Game Code § 5515), amphibians and reptiles (Fish and Game Code § 5050), birds (Fish and Game Code § 3511) and mammals (Fish and Game Code § 4700). • SSC = species of special concern: a species of special concern is a species, subspecies, or distinct population of an animal (fish, amphibian, reptile, bird and mammal) native to California that currently satisfies one or more of the following (not necessarily mutually exclusive) criteria: is extirpated from the state 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; 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. *Non-native species  APPENDICES  APPENDIX E FIELD NOTES 16431 Scientific Way Irvine, CA 92618 Phone: 949-788-4900  Fax: 949-788-4901 www.ultrasystems.com BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY FORM Project #/Name:7170G BUOW Survey Br01; Bio Survey; BUOW Habitat Assessment 7170B RAISE BUOW Survey Br04 Date: 2023/06/12 Biologist(s): M. Sutton, Z. Jackson, Z. Neider Survey Conditions Time (am/pm): Temperature (°F): Cloud (%): Precip. (%): Wind (mph): Begin 7:30 am 58.5 100 0* 2.2 End 2:00 pm 69.5 100 0 1.5 Survey Type(s) (recon bio, focused, JD, tree, BUOW hab assessment, etc.) 7170B RAISE BUOW Survey Br04 7170G BUOW Survey Br01; Bio Survey; BUOW Habitat Assessment Notable Conversations (name, time, context) At approximately 7:00 a.m., M. Sutton briefly spoke with Augustin, crew leader for Galleano Winery, who drove up in a tractor with a disking attachment and asked if it was okay to weed trim within the BUOW buffers. Matthew Sutton indicated it was okay and pointed out where the surveys would happen. Land Cover and Vegetation Communities (use GPS and Field Map when possible) (dom; co-dom; sub-dom species): Disturbed field north of PA 27: There is a row of trees on northern edge and a number of trees in center and towards west edge including the following species: Pinus spp., Schinus molle, Tamarix sp., Olea europea. There were several trees on the slope beneath the 210 freeway, directly north of the field. The dominant tree species included Pyrus calleryana, and Quercus agrifolia. Most of the field was sparsely covered with ruderal species including the following: Hirschfeldia incana, Amaranthus albus, puncture vine, crabgrass, Bromus hordaceus, London rocket, Datura wrightii, Avena fatua/barbata, Bromus madritensis, Amsinckia menziesii. The field of PA 27 appears to be disked/bladed. Joe reported that this field had not been disked/bladed during this month. This field consists of grape vineyard with disked borders of approximately 150’ around the perimeter of the vineyard. There is a row of eucalyptus trees on the eastern border of PA 27, abutting San Servaine Road. Approximately 8 dead chickens and a baby goat were found adjacent to the eucalyptus grove. Most of these animals had either partially or fully severed head. The mutilation of these animals seemed to have been human-induced and done with a sharp blade, and not likely executed by predatory wildlife. There is an area in the northeastern section of PA 27 with a large area of debris and fill soil piles. There are several ground squirrel burrows located within the soil and debris and at the base of a few trees which are adjacent to these piles. Approximately 20% of the field of PA 31 was disked/bladed in north to south rows during today’s survey before the biologists requested that they cease disking so that the surveys could be conducted without active disturbances. Joe indicated that most of the vineyards east of Cherry Avenue, Between Walnut Street and Highland, had been disked/bladed during the previous weekend of June 10-11. Bio Resource Observations nest observed (active or inactive); burrows; behaviors; potential suitable habitat for specific species, etc.) *Note, a nominal amount of precipitation occurred between 7:45 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. A few drops deposited on our field forms. Three RTHA were observed at tower directly east of Cherry Avenue in PA 27. They were close to nest formed of sticks, located at the lowest “wing” of the tower, approximately 80’ above the ground. No activity was observed in the nest itself. Approximately 5 AMKE were observed in the row of eucalyptus trees in PA 27, two adult pairs and one individual. Another AMKE adult, which could have been one of the 5 abovementioned kestrel, was observed a eucalyptus tree in the field east of San Servaine Road. Begging calls of juvenile or nestling kestrel were heard in this tree. There was a crotch of branches approximately 50’ above the ground with heavy whitewash. There may be a cavity nest of kestrel where that crotch is located. We observed AMKE encountering RTHA in flight. The RTHA retreated to a tree top and fended off approaches from AMKE. There are several suitable BUOW burrows at the base of many of the eucalyptus trees in the eastern boundary of PA 27. There are others in the debris piles in the northeastern section of PA 27. There are a few suitable BUOW burrows scattered throughout the vineyard of PA 27. Fewer than 10 suitable KRAT burrows were observed in PA 27. Page | 2 We observed a very large burrow, with an opening of greater than 12” in diameter, at the base of a grape vine near the northern boundary of PA 27. We did not observe any clear sign of BUOW or mammal species at this burrow. There was a paucity of suitable BUOW or KRAT burrows observed in PA 31. Most of the ground squirrel burrows were observed occurred near the edge of the vineyard and disturbed areas. The burrows themselves were located at the base of grape vines and are obscured by the grape vine canopies. Compliance Recommendations (potential violations or concerns; illegal dumping; homeless encampments, etc.) We recommend that Intex Properties cease disking/blading of the vineyards and other regions of PAs 27 and 31 until after August 31, the end of BUOW breeding season, so that a full assessment of the biological resources can be made. Of particular importance, is the need to assess if any kangaroo rat or BUOW are using the project site. It is difficult to assess the activity of fossorial species when the area is being actively disked/bladed. 16431 Scientific Way Irvine, CA 92618 Phone: 949-788-4900  Fax: 949-788-4901 www.ultrasystems.com SPECIES OBSERVATIONS PLANT SPECIES PRESENT WILDLIFE SPECIES PRESENT specify plant layer as herb (H), shrub (S) or tree (T) specify specimen collected as (C), Land Cover. (define 4-letter code) specify observation type as aural (A), sign (S), or visual (V), describe if breeding/nesting Species Layer Land Cover Species Observation See above RTHA A, V BASW A, V AMKE A, V BLPH A YRWA A CAKI A, V WTSW A HOFI V coyote V Signature: Date: 16431 Scientific Way Irvine, CA 92618 Phone: 949-788-4900  Fax: 949-788-4901 www.ultrasystems.com BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY FORM Project #/Name: 7170G (PA 27) - NB BUOW Survey Date: 1/17/2024 Biologist(s): M. Sutton Survey Conditions Time (am/pm): Temperature (°F): Cloud (%): Precip. (%): Wind (mph): Begin 7:15 am 48 100 0 2 End 2:45 pm 60 100 0 5 Survey Type(s) (recon bio, focused, JD, tree, BUOW hab assessment, etc.) NB BUOW Survey Nb03 Notable Conversations (name, time, context) N/A Land Cover and Vegetation Communities (use GPS and Field Map when possible) (dom; co-dom; sub-dom species): The vegetation and PA 27 currently consists of one percent cover of annual sunflower, 25% cover of annual grasses, 5% cover of Erodium cicutarium; other forbs and grasses such as Ambrosia acanthacarpa, Amsinckia menziesii, Brassica tournefortii, and Eriogonum gracile. The percent cover of vegetation is approximately Bio Resource Observations nest observed (active or inactive); burrows; behaviors; potential suitable habitat for specific species, etc.) We observed a BUOW at BUOW site 25.3, and BUOW sign at sites 25.1, 25.2, and 25.3. All 3 sites occur in the northeastern section of PA 27. There was whitewash at all 3 sites and pellets at 25.3. We observed a BUOW at BUOW site 26, within PA 31, and within the BSA of PA 27. We did not approach the burrow so as not to disturb the owl. There was a moderate density of suitable BUOW burrows within PA 27, especially near the edges of vineyard areas. Compliance Recommendations (potential violations or concerns; illegal dumping; homeless encampments, etc.) N/A 50%. There’s about 50% cover of annual grasses and forbs within PA 31. Annual grass cover is approximately 30% and forb cover is approximately 20%. The vegetation inPA 31 currently consists of one percent cover of annual sunflower, 25% cover of annual grasses, 5% cover of Erodium cicutarium; other forbs and grasses such as Ambrosia acanthacarpa, Amsinckia menziesii, Brassica tournefortii, and Eriogonum gracile. The percent cover of vegetation is approximately 50%. There is a very low density of suitable BUOW burrows in PA 31. There are pocket gopher mounds, but very few ground squirrel burrows that occur in PA 31. As is typical in vineyard areas, most of the suitable burrows in PA 31 occur near the edges of the vineyards. Page | 2 SPECIES OBSERVATIONS PLANT SPECIES PRESENT WILDLIFE SPECIES PRESENT specify plant layer as herb (H), shrub (S) or tree (T) specify specimen collected as (C), Land Cover. (define 4-letter code) specify observation type as aural (A), sign (S), or visual (V), describe if breeding/nesting Species Layer Land Cover Species Observation No new species European starling A, V American pipit A Common raven A, V House finch A, V Yellow-rumped warbler A, V Cedar waxwing A Mountain chickadee A Northern flicker A, V Rock pigeon V Burrowing owl V American kestrel V Red-tailed hawk V Ruby-crowned kinglet A Signature: Date: black phoebe A mourning dove A, V white-crowned sparrow A California towhee A western meadowlark A, V Say's phoebe A, V 16431 Scientific Way Irvine, CA 92618 Phone: 949-788-4900  Fax: 949-788-4901 www.ultrasystems.com BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY FORM Project #/Name: 7170G (PA 27) and 7170H (PA 31) Date: 01/18/2024 Biologist(s): M. Sutton Survey Conditions Time (am/pm): Temperature (°F): Cloud (%): Precip. (%): Wind (mph): Begin 7:30 am 49 100 0 2 End 12:30 pm 63 100 0 4 Survey Type(s) (recon bio, focused, JD, tree, BUOW hab assessment, etc.) BUOW Survey Nb03 Notable Conversations (name, time, context) M. Sutton spoke with Augustin, the field supervisor for Galleano Winery, who mentioned that the crews will begin disking in both directions all of the rows of the vineyards south of the I-210 freeway in two weeks. He also mentioned that this week he has crews pruning the vines for vineyard maintenance. I told him that it’s acceptable for his crews to continue pruning and that UEI will confer with him later regarding protection of BUOW sites. Land Cover and Vegetation Communities (use GPS and Field Map when possible) (dom; co-dom; sub-dom species): Vegetation in the vineyards in the BSA of PA 31 is characterized by non-native grass cover of approximately 30 to 40%. Forb cover within the vineyard is approximately 15% and consists of a variety of different species, none of which has high cover. The most common forb species is Erodium cicutarium. Erodium cicutarium and other Erodium species have an approximate cover of 5 to 10%. Other species include Sahara mustard, Ambrosia acanthacarpa, Amsinckia menziesii, Erigeron canadensis, Eriogonum gracile, and other species. Bio Resource Observations nest observed (active or inactive); burrows; behaviors; potential suitable habitat for specific species, etc.) Burrowing Owl Resources: There are very few suitable BUOW burrows in the vineyard areas of the BSA of PA 31, outside of PA 31. The only suitable burrows tend to be clustered near the border of Cherry Avenue. There are gopher mounds and kangaroo rat burrows throughout the BSA of PA 31. A. McNamara observed a mouse, , Perognathus longimembris, possibly a Los Angeles pocket mouse, entering a small 1 inch burrow. We observed BUOW at three different sites (21, 27, and 28), one of which (site 27) was within PA 31, and two of which were within 200 feet of PA 31. We also observed one burrow (site S-29) near PA 31 that had BUOW sign but no BUOW. H. Flores observed a BUOW at site 27 within PA 31; there was BUOW sign at two burrows within the complex at site 27, burrows 27.1 and 27.2. The owl flushed from burrow site 27.1. Later during the survey, M. Sutton flushed a BUOW at site 28, which is approximately 250 feet south of site 27; the BUOW flushed at site 28 was not next to a burrow and may have been the same owl we flushed earlier from site 27. We also reconfirmed the presence of a burrowing owl at site 21. That BUOW flushed from the site. There were whitewash and pellets at site 21, in addition to the owl that flushed. In addition, there were owl tracks and a degraded beetle carapace near one of the burrow openings of the complex at site 21. Compliance Recommendations (potential violations or concerns; illegal dumping; homeless encampments, etc.) None