1

Fernandez, Irvin

From: Cooper, KevinSent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 4:42 PMTo: Della_Snyder-Velto@fws.govCc: Fernandez, IrvinSubject: Piru BA updateAttachments: SWFLCHAnalysis_PiruRange.docx

Hi Della, I left a message regarding the Piru allotment and some changes in critical habitat that we would like to have captured before we sign off the NEPA docs at the end of the month.    

Your office sent a letter of concurrenc in March 2009 for the BA sent to you in May 2009 for the Piru allotment. 

On Sept. 15, 2010, we sent an update to the BA to correct some minor changes in the allotment boundary and some minor clarifications to the original  BA.   The determinations in the original BA did not change.  We did ask for an acknowledgement of reciept of this letter which we do not have yet, but would like for our records 

In September 2011 we have received notice of the proposed southwestern willow flycatcher critical habitat, a portion of which occurs near the Piru allotment.   There will be about 10 head of cattle herded through this proposed CH up to 4 times a year, but this is a controlled event that was covered in the original BA bec ause of the arroyo toad and red‐legged frog habitat here.  Because the southwestern willow flycatcher habitat is marginal at this crossing and because of the protections in place already, we feel that the original proposed action will not affect the proposed sw willow flycatcher habitat.   Attached is our analysis. 

The critical habitat for the red‐legged frog and arroyo toad is now finalized.   We analyzed the affects on the proposed CH for these species on the allotment and  our determinations of no affect has not changed for the final CH, which is nearly identical to the proposed CH.  See the attached discussion. 

 Could you please review the attached discussion, and if you agree with our no affect determination, contact me and also respond in writing for our records?  We would like very much to sign this NEPA document by the end of September, 2011, but would like to have our no affect determination for these critical habitats reviewed by you beforehand.  Thanks so much Della.  Kevin 

2011 CRITICAL HABITAT ADDENDUM TO THE BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT LOWER PIRU RANGELANDS PROJECT August 24, 2011

1 | P a g e   

Southwestern willow flycatcher proposed critical habitat On August 15, 2011, proposed critical habitat (CH) was designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for southwestern willow flycatcher (SWFL) for the Santa Clara Management Unit in Piru Creek (26 mi.) from Frenchman’s Flat south of Pyramid Dam to the confluence with the Santa Clara River. For the Lower Piru Rangelands Project (project), proposed CH is adjacent to the project, but no proposed CH is within the Piru, Pothole, and Temescal Allotments. Canton Canyon Road crosses proposed SWFL CH and Piru Creek north of the Piru Reservoir. This road is utilized to access the Piru Allotment and range management activities (EA at Figure 1-2.1b and 3.2-1).

Canton Canyon Road to the Piru Allotment has existed for more than 50 years. On May 13, 2009, FWS concurred with the determinations of Los Padres National Forest regarding the maintenance and use of the Piru Creek crossing for the arroyo toad, California red-legged frog, least Bell’s vireo, and southwestern willow flycatcher, as well as critical habitats for arroyo toad and California red-legged frog. Minimization measures were established to avoid impacts to federally listed species and their habitats (UDSI May 2009 and USDA Biological Assessment Nov. 2008). These minimization measures will apply to protect proposed CH for SWFL. The Piru Allotment permittee will notify the U.S. Forest Service three days prior to the use of the Piru Creek crossing, so it can be checked by a qualified biologist for arroyo toads and California red-legged frogs. During that time, the crossing and proposed SWFL CH will be monitored. Fencing along allotment boundaries will be maintained and installed to avoid livestock access into the Piru Creek corridor and proposed CH. Additionally, trimming of riparian vegetation and road maintenance within Canton Canyon Road creek crossing prism will only occur outside the breeding season of SWFL (Oct. to Feb.) and monitored by a qualified biologist. “If animals (any life stage) are found in or near the crossing, its use will be deferred until they disperse from or move out of the crossing on their own. (USDA BA 2008)”

Section VIII of the 2008 Biological Assessment describes the SWFL status, history, distribution, habitat, occurrence with the project area, and threats. South near the Canton Creek confluence and further north of the creek crossing, suitable SWFL habitat exists and site records were documented at these locations in 1999 (LPNF GIS Database). To date, there are no records of occupancy by SWFL at this crossing. The BA states, “Although the woody riparian habitat along Piru Creek does model out as potentially suitable (100-8000 feet in elevation, less than 2 percent gradient, surface water present during at least during part of the nesting season) for the flycatcher, none is currently suitable due to small patch size and lack of sufficient density for nesting especially amongst the willows. Now that cattle will be excluded from Piru Creek, I believe the habitat in several locations along the creek does have the potential to recover and eventually provide suitable nesting habitat for flycatchers.” At the Canton Canyon Road crossing of Piru Creek, the riparian vegetation can be characterized as small patches of marginal SWFL habitat. The crossing is characterized by single story willows that grow in linear strips along the creeks edge. Because Piru Creek (35’) at the Canton Canyon Road crossing is narrow and the adjacent creek banks, riparian vegetation, and floodplains are not wide, the development of suitable SWFL habitat is less likely at this location.

2011 CRITICAL HABITAT ADDENDUM TO THE BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT LOWER PIRU RANGELANDS PROJECT August 24, 2011

2 | P a g e   

Livestock would ingress and egress the Piru Allotment across the Piru Creek crossing 2-4 times per year. During the year-long grazing season, Piru Allotment management and permittee ingress and egress would cross the creek by vehicle weekly or monthly to monitor livestock and maintain improvements. Livestock would move through the crossing and riparian corridor in a very short time period (<10 minutes). Livestock would be restricted to the road prism and would be prevented from moving upstream or downstream. Vehicles would cross the creek in shorter time. Maintenance of the road bed and corridor will not occur annually. Maintenance is required when flood events alter the road crossing and prevent vehicles from driving in and out of the creek crossing. Heavy equipment will be used to improve the road transition in and out of the creek, which will be conducted from the creeks edge and out towards the uplands. Vegetation trimming will occur annually to remove overhanging vegetation in the road corridor. Direct and indirect effects analysis of southwestern willow flycatcher proposed critical habitat – The proposal will not have meaningful direct or indirect effects upon flycatcher habitat. Some sparse riparian habitat (several willow plants trimmed) will be impacted by the work in the stream crossings, but it should be minor in scope as compared to the total amount of habitat in the creek that will not be altered. The impacts will be further mitigated by conducting the work outside the breeding season and the work will be directed and monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure implementation of minimization measures and best management practices. Determination for the southwestern willow flycatcher – Because of the above information and rationale it is determine that the proposal to issue a term grazing permit for the Piru, Pothole, and Temescal will have “No Effect” on SWFL federally proposed critical habitat. No additional analysis for SWFL individuals is required and the determination remains as “May Affect, But Not Likely To Adversely Affect” for the project.

California red-legged frog critical habitat

On March 17, 2010, the designation of critical habitat was finalized for California red-legged frog. The 2010 critical habitat unit (VEN-2) in Piru Creek adopts the 2006 critical habitat unit (VEN-3), which was analyzed in the November 2008 Biological Assessment for the Lower Piru Rangelands Project. For the project, the determination of no effect to California red-legged frog critical habitat does not change with the 2010 critical habitat designation.

Arroyo toad critical habitat

On February 9, 2011, the designation of critical habitat was finalized for arroyo toad. The 2011 critical habitat Unit 5b was refined from the proposed 2005 critical habitat subunit 5b, which was analyzed in the November 2008 Biological Assessment for the Lower Piru Rangelands Project. Between 2005 and 2011 designations, the acres within the Piru and Pothole Allotments decreases. In 2005, the Piru and Pothole Allotments included 11 and 6 acres, respectively. In the 2011, the acres decreased to 6 and 1 acres, respectively. For the project, the determination of no effect for arroyo toad critical habitat does not change with the 2011 critical habitat designation.

United States Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Los Padres National Forest

Supervisor’s Office 6755 Hollister Ave., Suite 150

Goleta, CA 93117 (805) 968-6640 TDD: (805) 968-6790

Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper

File Code: 2670 Date: September 15, 2010

Diane Noda Field Supervisor US Fish & Wildlife Service 2493 Portola Road, Suite B Ventura, CA 93003 Dear Ms. Noda: Please find attached an effects analysis for access routes and a slight boundary change for the Lower Piru Rangelands Environmental Assessment. These additions were not covered in the original biological assessment submitted to your staff for informal ESA Section 7 review in March 2009. In May 2009, your office sent the Los Padres National Forest a letter of concurrence (Reference Number 2009-I-0217) in regards to the determinations in the biological assessment. The attached analysis also clarifies and/or corrects several items in the biological assessment identified during public scoping for the proposal. The additions are the inclusion of access routes to be used and maintained by the permittee to administer the grazing permit, and an allotment boundary change adding 441-acres of Federally designated critical habitat for the endangered California condor to the Rodeo Flat Unit of the Temescal Allotment. We have determined in our updated analysis the access routes and additional acres “May Affect, but are Not Likely to Adversely Affect” the endangered California condor, will “Not Affect” its designated critical habitat ,and will “Not Affect” other ESA listed wildlife or habitats. These determinations are the same as were rendered for the California condor and its critical habitat and of a lesser determination of effects (“No Affect” as opposed to “May Affect but Not Likely to Adversely Affect”) on the other ESA listed species and habitats covered in the original biological assessment. We feel it is reasonable to conclude if these additions had been included in the original biological assessment the determinations would have been the same for all species and habitats covered in the analysis. Therefore, we believe the completed informal consultation for the Lower Piru Rangelands Environmental Assessment should cover those made in the attached effects analysis. However, if your staff wishes to provide an amended letter of concurrence per the new determinations, please do so. Otherwise, please provide a letter you are in receipt of this new information. I look forward to your response in this matter.

If you have questions or need further information, please contact Assistant Forest Biologist John Brack at (805) 967-3481, ext 246, or Ojai Ranger District Resource Officer Irvin Fernandez at (805) 646-4348, ext 312. Sincerely, /s/ Kenneth E. Heffner (for): PEGGY HERNANDEZ Forest Supervisor cc: John Brack Kevin C Cooper Katherine Worn

ADDENDUM AND ERRATA2008 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

LOWER PIRU RANGELANDS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

AUTHORIZED ROADS AND TRAILSEFFECT ANALYSES AND DETERMINATIONS FOR ESA LISTED WILDLIFE AND HABITATS

Prepared by,

___________

Date:________hn W. Brack

Assistant Forest Biologist

This document is prepared in conformance with the legal requirements set forth under Section 7 of the

Endangered Species Act, as amended [19 U.S.C.1536 (c)], and follows the direction established in Forest

Service Manual section 2672.4 through 2672.42.

FOREST SERVICE SYSTEM ROADS AND TRAILS

Piru Canyon Road (FS Road 4N13.3): Outside the allotment boundaries, the 5.3 miles of Piru CanyonRoad utilized for this project lies between Dominguez Canyon Road (FS Road 4N14) and Canton Canyonauthorized road. This National Forest System (NFS) road has existed prior to the 1938 establishment ofthe Los Padres National Forest. The first 2.3 miles is a Ventura County maintained road. The remaining3 miles (2 miles on private land) is managed as a NFS road. Surrounding habitat types (CaliforniaWildlife Habitat Relationships types) include mixed chaparral, barren, annual grassland, coastal scrub,coastal oak woodland, and urban. After the 2003 Piru Fire anti 2005 floods, the damages to the NFSroad were repaired to Forest standards.• USE: Primarily a Ventura County and NFS public road, Piru Canyon Road will be utilized regularly as

a passenger vehicle thoroughfare. Specific to this assessment, this road segment will be used forcattle ingress and egress to the allotments, access for allotment management by the permittee andaccess for resource management and monitoring by the Forest Service. Access to NFS lands fromthe entrance kiosk is managed in cooperation with the Lake Piru Recreation Area.

• MAINTENANCE: Because the road was repaired in 2007, no current road maintenance is required.In the future the road will be maintained in accordance with the Transportation SystemMaintenance Handbook (FSH 7709.58).

• TIMING OF MAINTENANCE: Regular maintenance administered by the Forest Service officerfollowing Forest Service Handbook standards, guidelines, and Best Management Practices (BMP5).

• IRA, RIPARIAN, TES HABITAT, AND WILDERNESS: The NFS road is not within Inventoried RoadlessArea (IRA) or wilderness. No riparian habitats exist along the road; however numerous culverts anda low water crossing exist along this 5.3 mile length. The upper portions of the road are withinarroyo toad critical habitat (CH - 1.8 miles of road) and California red-legged frog CH (0.7 miles ofroad).

• ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS: None.

Effects Analysis for ESA Listed Wildlife and Habitat-Piru Canyon Road (FS Road 4N13.3)Since the road itself is not a habitat constituent for either the arroyo toad or California red-legged frogits presence and occasional use by the permittee will not affect critical habitat for either species. Theoccasional use of the road by the permittee to move cattle or for other reasons should not have anydirect effect upon frog individuals because no occupied habitat exists adjacent to the road. Also, it isthought the frog may no longer exist in lower Piru Creek because there are no recent records for thatsection of the creek and resent surveys for the species have be negative. The situation for the toad issimilar in that there is no occupied habitat directly adjacent to this segment of Piru Canyon road formost of its length. However, where it terminates at the Canton Creek road a very short section, perhaps50 yards, does have occupied toad habitat directly adjacent to it. Although toads have not beenencountered on this short section of Piru Canyon road, it is possible that foraging adult toads from theadjacent occupied habitat in the creek do sometimes visit the road at night. If for some reason thepermittee used the road at night when toads are active (May-September) there is a very remotepossibility one might be present on the road at the same time and suffer displacement, injury or death.However, if this did occur its effect upon the status of local population should be minimal since recentsurveys have found the population to be rather robust and possibly trending upward.

Determinations — Because of the above information and rationale I determine that the permittee use ofthe subject road segment will have “No Affect” on ESA Listed wildlife and habitats to include Californiared-legged frog and its critical habitat and arroyo toad critical habitat but “May Affect but Not Likely to

Adversely Affect” arroyo toad individuals. Unless an emergency, I recommend the permittee use of theroad be restricted to daylight hours.

Dominguez Canyon Road (FS Road 4N14I: One mile north of the Lake Piru Recreation entrance kiosk,Dominguez Canyon Road begins just outside the Temescal Allotment boundary at Piru Canyon Road (FSRoad 4N13.3). This earthen road extends 3.9 miles (0.9 miles of private land) through the Reasoner andRodeo Flat Units to the Sespe Wilderness boundary where it ends. This road has existed since theprivate landowner homesteading in the late 1800s. The NFS road portion is managed as a rangepermitted NFS road, The habitat types (California Wildlife Habitat Relationships types) include coastalscrub, mixed chaparral, coastal oak woodland, annual grassland, valley oak woodland, and montaneriparian. After the 2003 Piru Fire and 2005 floods, the fire and flood damaged road was improved toreduce private property and watershed risks.• USE: This road is a private property access road and range allotment management road that is

gated and closed to public access. The NFS road sections are utilized by high clearance vehicles forcattle ingress and egress to the allotments. As well, the road provides access for allotmentmanagement by the permittee and for resource management and monitoring by the Forest Service.Public use of the road and trail will not be allowed.

• MAINTENANCE: The present road condition does not require heavy maintenance. Less than a halfmile of road requires road surface and drainage maintenance. Road maintenance done after thePiru Fire improved the road condition to meet Forest standards. The road will be maintained inaccordance with the Transportation System Maintenance Handbook (FSH 7709.58). Periodic heavyequipment road surface, drainage, and roadway maintenance is required to continue road access.All such maintenance will be reviewed and approved by the Forest Service officer to ensurecompliance with resource mitigations identified in this document, and that the maintenanceachieves or contributes to reaching a desired condition.

• TIMING OF MAINTENANCE: Regular maintenance administered by the Forest Service officer andTransportation Manager following Forest Service Handbook standards and guidelines, BMP5, BAresource protection measures, and a permittee maintenance agreement as per the terms andconditions of the term grazing permit.

• IRA, RIPARIAN, TES HABITAT, AND WILDERNESS: The NFS road is not within IRA or wilderness.Dominguez Canyon Creek is an intermittent drainage and goes dry annually. Riparian habitat existsalong the road. There are 9 creek crossings on NFS lands (5 culvert crossings and 4 low watercrossings). A low water crossing exists at the beginning of the road. The last 1.9 miles of the rangeauthorized road is within California condor critical habitat.

• ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS: The Forest Service requires landowner permission to cross privatelands to enter NFS lands on Dominguez Canyon Road.

Effects Analysis for ESA Listed Wildlife and Habitats - Dominguez Canyon Road (FS Road 4N14)As mentioned above the only ESA issue associated with use of this road is it does pass through Californiacondor critical habitat for its final 1.9 miles. This habitat is used primarily for foraging by the condor. Asdescribed, use of the road by the permittee will be occasional and as such will not affect the adjacentforaging habitat or the condors themselves if they happen to be in the area when the use occurs.

Determination — Because of the above information and rationale I determine that use of DominguezCanyon Road by the permittee as described will have “No Affect” on ESA Listed wildlife or habitatsincluding the California condor and its critical habitat.

Lime Canyon Road (FS Road 4N14A): Inside the Reasoner Unit of the Temescal Allotment, this rangepermitted NFS road begins 0.5 miles down Dominguez Canyon Road (FS Road 4N14). This earthen roadcrosses Dominguez Canyon Creek and travels south 1.4 miles (0.1 miles on private land) to the southernForest Boundary. This road was established prior to the 1940s for access to rangelands on NFS andprivate lands to the south. The habitat types (California Wildlife Habitat Relationships types) includecoastal oak woodland, mixed chaparral, chamise, and coastal scrub. Prior to 2003 the road wasaccessible and maintained by the permittee. No access exists presently via Lime Canyon Road, becauseof the damage caused by the 2003 Piru Fire and the 2005 floods.• USE: Vehicle access along this range permitted road is limited to high clearance vehicles. Annual

use includes ingress and egress of cattle and access for allotment management by the permittee andfor resource managemeflt and monitoring by the Forest Service. The authorized range route is forthe range permittee only. Access to this route is prohibited by the private property gate at theentrance to Dominguez Canyon. Public use of the road will not be allowed.

• MAINTENANCE: The road will be maintained in accordance with the Transportation SystemMaintenance Handbook (FSH 7709.58). The road will be maintained as a primitive route suitable forintermittent access with high clearance vehicles. The current road condition requires heavyequipment to repair the road surface, drainage, and roadway to Forest Service standards.Thereafter, periodic road surface, drainage, and roadway maintenance is required to continue roadaccess. All such maintenance will be reviewed and approved by the Forest Service officer to ensurecompliance with resource mitigations identified in this document, and that the maintenanceachieves or contributes to reaching a desired condition.

• TIMING OF MAINTENANCE: Regular maintenance administered by the Forest Service officerfollowing Forest Service Handbook standards and guidelines, BMPs, and a permittee maintenanceagreement as per the terms and conditions of the term grazing permit.

• IRA, RIPARIAN, TES HABITAT, AND WILDERNESS: The range permitted NFS road is not within IRA orwilderness. Dominguez Canyon Creek is an intermittent drainage and goes dry annually. Riparianhabitat exists at Dominguez Canyon Creek crossing. An additional low water crossing exists near theend of the road at Lime Canyon Creek, an intermittent drainage.

• ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS: None.

Effects Analysis for ESA Listed Wildlife and Habitat- Lime Canyon Road (FS Road 4N14A)As described above, this road does not pass through or offer access to any federally designated criticalhabitat or habitat occupied by ESA listed wildlife.

Determination — Because of this information and rationale I determine that use by the permittee of theLime Canyon Road as proposed will have “No Affect” upon ESA listed wildlife or habitat.

Pothole Trail (FS Trail 18W04): On Piru Canyon Road (FS Road 4N13.3), the Pothole Trail begins 5.5miles north the Lake Piru Recreation Area entrance kiosk. Before reaching the Pothole Allotment, thetrail travels north and west 0.2 miles across private land, and then enters the allotment. Open to publicaccess, the trail is 4.3 miles in length (0.3 miles on private land) within the Pothole Allotment. It leavesthe allotment and continues north to the Agua Blanca Trail (FS Trail 19W10). The first 1.9 miles (notincluding the 0.3 mi. private land trail) is within the Lisk Unit and Sespe-Frazier Inventoried RoadlessArea (IRA). Entering the Pothole Unit, the trail extends 2.1 miles across the Unit and the SespeWilderness. The habitat types (California Wildlife Habitat Relationships types) include coastal scrub,

annual grassland, barren, mixed chaparral, chamise, and blue oak woodland. The Pothole Trail has beena National Forest System (N ES) trail for more than 60 years.• USE: Primarily a NES public access trail, it will be utilized occasionally as a non-motorized use trail

for allotment management by the permittee and for resource management and monitoring by theForest Service. Primarily, the permittee will utilize the Reichenbach routes for ingress and egress ofcattle.

• MAINTENANCE: Presently, no maintenance is necessary for the occasional range permittee use.Regular trail maintenance has been occurring over the last 7 years following damage from wlldlandfire suppression activities and heavy rain events. The trail will be maintained in accordance with theTrails Management Handbook (ESH 2309.18-4).

• TIMING OF MAINTENANCE: Regular maintenance to be administered by the Forest Service officerfollowing Forest Service Handbook standards and guidelines, BMPs, and resource minimizationmeasures.

• IRA, RIPARIAN, TES HABITAT, AND WILDERNESS: The NFS trail lies within the Sespe-Frazier IRA andSespe Wilderness (see above description). No riparian habitat exists along the trail. 2.9 miles of theupper extent of the system trail is within California condor critical habitat (CH). Within the Lisk Unit,0.2 miles of discontinuous trail segments lie within California red-legged frog CH. At the trailsbeginning on private land, less than <0.1 mile of trail exists in Arroyo Toad CH outside the allotmentboundary.

• ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS: None.

Effects Analysis for ESA Listed Wildlife and Habitat- Pothole Trail (FS Trail 18w04)As mentioned above the trail does pass through critical habitat for California red-legged frog, arroyotoad and California condor. Occasional non-motorized use (horseback, hiking) of the trail by thepermittee will have little or no affect on the adjacent habitats or their inhabitants. The upper sectiondoes pass with a mile of a historic California condor nest site, which if active should not be affectedbecause it is not visible from the trail and its use by the permittee will be rare and nonintrusive (nonoise).

Determination — Because of the above information and rationale I determine that use of the PotholeTrail as proposed will have “No Affect” upon ESA listed wildlife and habitat.

N( RANGE AUTHORIZED ROADS AND TRAILS

Reichenbach authorized road and trail: Reichenbach road begins at Piru Canyon Road (ES Road 4N13.3)on private land and leads to the Lisk Unit (Pothole Allotment), where 2.4 miles of range permitted roadleads to the ridgeline. At the ridgeline between the Lisk and Pothole Units, the road becomes a ridgelinefuelbreak and range permitted trail (0.8 miles) until it intersects with the Pothole Trail (ES Trail 18W04).(See Map) The road and trail lies entirely within the Sespe-Frazier IRA, with the trail bordering the SespeWilderness. The private road, which is gated and closed to public access, begins in grasslands and oakwoodland, then transitions to chamise, chaparral, and coastal sage scrub at the FS boundary andcontinues to the intersection with the Pothole Trail (FS Trail 18W04). This private road and permitted ESroad and trail have been used for more than 50 years to access the Pothole Allotment. The ridgelinefuelbreak and trail has also been used as a District horse patrol route and a wildland fire contingencyfuelbreak. The fuelbreak does not appear to have been used as a road. The ES range road and ridgelinetrail were recently utilized during fire suppression activities during the 2006 Day Fire and served as a

contingency fuelbreak. Prior to the Day Fire, the road and trail routes had been used and maintained bythe permittee for allotment management. With a 16’-18’ road width along its length, the beginning ofthe FS range road requires high clearance vehicles for access. Much of the upper sections of the roadare passable by two-wheeled drive vehicles due to a stable and low incline roadbed. Natural vegetationis encroaching along the routes. After the 2007 winter, several dry crossings along the road becameimpassable by vehicles. No perennial water courses exist along the routes.• USE: Vehicle access along the road to the Pothole Unit would be limited to high clearance vehicles,

4WD, OHV, and horseback. The continuing ridgeline trail would be maintained as a non-motorizeduse trail. Annual use includes ingress and egress of cattle and access for allotment management bythe permittee and for resource management and monitoring by the Forest Service. The authorizedrange routes are for the range permittee only. Public use of the road and trail will not be allowed.

• MAINTENANCE: The road to the Pothole Unit will be maintained as a primitive route suitable forintermittent access with high clearance vehicles. The continuing ridgeline trail will be maintained asa non-motorized trail route suitable for horse and foot traffic. Along the road, six dry road crossingsrequire maintenance for safe access. The ridgeline trail presently has vegetation encroaching alongits course. Regular road/trail surface, drainage, and roadway/trallway maintenance is required tocontinue access as a road and trail. Periodic heavy equipment maintenance will be required for roadsurface, drainage, and roadway maintenance. For the trallway, hand tools and chainsaws will beused for vegetation removal. Primarily hand tools will be utilized for trail surface and drainagerepair. All such maintenance will be reviewed and approved by the Forest Service officer to ensurecompliance with resource mitigations identified in this document, and that the maintenanceachieves or contributes to reaching a desired condition including consistency with the roadlesscharacter of the area.

• TIMING OF MAINTENANCE: Year-round, following Forest Service Handbook standards andguidelines, BMP5, BA resource protection measures, and a permittee maintenance agreement as per

the terms and conditions of the term grazing permit.• IRA, RIPARIAN, TES HABITAT, AND WILDERNESS: The routes lie within the Sespe-Frazier IRA. No

riparian habitats exist along the road and trail. The upper 0.6 miles of the road and the entire trail iswithin California condor critical habitat and borders the Sespe Wilderness and the Pothole Unit ofthe Pothole Allotment.

• ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS: Authorization is needed to cross private land to gain access to NFSlands and Reichenbach routes.

Effects Analysis for ESA Listed Wildlife and Habitats - Reichenbach Authorized Road and Trail: As

mentioned above no sensitive aquatic or riparian habitat features will be affected via the use and

maintenance of this route by the permittee. Whereas the upper half of the route does pass through

California condor critical habitat, no other critical habitat or listed species occur along the route.

In regards to condor critical habitat, the upper portion of the route does pass within ‘/2 mile southwest of

a known nest site located on a north facing cliff in upper Pothole Canyon. This site has been active in

recent years. Standard 28 in the Design Criteria portion of the 2005 LRMP Los Padres National Forest

that states “Avoid or minimize disturbance to breeding and roosting California condors by prohibiting

or restricting management activities and human uses within 1.5 miles of active California condor nest

sites and within 0.5 miles of active roosts”. Although the nest site is located below and facing away

from the route, which will only be used occasionally, it still passes within the 1.5 mile restricted zone.

For this reason Standard 28 does apply and will be implemented as follows:

The Forest Service will stay informed as to the status of the nest site via its continuing annual contacts

with the FWS Condor Recovery Program (CRP). During years when the site is active the permittee will

notify the Forest Service at least two weeks prior to the proposed use of the route so that the CRP can

be notified and the necessary coordination completed. Use will only be granted with concurrence of

the FWS.

Determination for California condor and its Critical Habitat: Because of the above information and

rationale I have determined the proposed Reichenbach overland route ‘May Affect, but Not Likely to

Adversely Affect” the California condor and its federally designated critical habitat. This determination

is the same as was rendered for the condor and its critical habitat in the 2008 biological assessment for

the Lower Piru Rangelands Environmental Assessment. The FWS concurred with this determination

during informal consultation conducted in early 2009 (Attached).

Canton Canyon and Devil Ridge authorized roads: The Canton Canyon road, which is gated and closedto public access, begins 0.5 miles south of the Bluepoint area at Piru Canyon Road (FS Road 4N13.3). Ittravels east across Piru Creek up Canton Canyon to its terminus beyond a private inholding. CantonCanyon road extends 2.2 miles (0.3 miles of private land) up Canton Canyon. Devil Ridge roads extend 7miles from Canton Canyon south to Devil Ridge, and then continue east and west along the ridgetop.Additionally, a spur road extends to a FS water right and range water development in the southeastcorner of the Piru Allotment. (See Map) From Piru Canyon Road, the vegetation is montane riparian,barren, annual grassland, coastal scrub, mixed chaparral, coastal oak woodland, and chamise. FromCanton Canyon, the vegetation going uphill is chaparral, chamise, and oak woodland, then transitionsnear the ridge-top to grasslands, coastal sage scrub, and chaparral. The permittee has been utilizingthese range permitted roads to access the Piru Allotment since before the 1950’s. These overlandroutes have been used as roads since the early 1900’s and has been an access road to Townsend Peak(Angeles National Forest) and Interstate 5 near Paradise Ranch. Private land (310 acres) exists on theridge-top, of which the permittee owns 80 acres. After the 1969 floods, the Devil Ridge road becamedamaged and access has been limited. The Canton Canyon road access and intersection with PiruCanyon Road was damaged in the 2005 floods, but has since been repaired. The Canton Canyon roadhas been used continuously for allotment management since before the 1950s. The Devil Ridge roadhas a 14’-16’ roadbed in some locations, the route is 6’-8’ wide in many locations due to encroachingvegetation and limited maintenance. Vegetation and several washouts exist that prevent overlandaccess for the permittee and Forest Service allotment management. Except at the Piru Creek crossing,no perennial water courses exist along the routes.

• USE: Vehicle access along the range permitted road would be limited to high clearance vehicles,

4WD, OHV, and horseback. Annual use includes ingress and egress of cattle and access for

allotment management by the permittee and for resource management and monitoring by theForest Service. The authorized range routes are for the range permittee only. Public use of the road

will not be allowed.• MAINTENANCE: The roads will be maintained as a primitive route suitable for intermittent access

with high clearance vehicles. Currently, the Canton Canyon Road does not require maintenance.Devil Ridge roads require vegetation removal for 6 of the 7 miles. Because of current limited accessto the Devil Ridge roads, 4 of the 7 miles require heavy equipment maintenance to the road surface,drainages, and roadway. Thereafter, periodic heavy equipment maintenance will be required forroad surface, drainage, and roadway maintenance. Annual maintenance with heavy equipment may

be required for ephemeral road crossings. All such maintenance will be reviewed and approved bythe Forest Service officer to ensure compliance with resource mitigations identified in this

document, and that the maintenance achieves or contributes to reaching a desired conditionincluding consistency with the roadless character of the area.

• TIMING OF MAINTENANCE: Year-round, following Forest Service Handbook standards andguidelines, BMPs, and a permittee maintenance agreement as per the terms and conditions of theterm grazing permit.

• IRA, RIPARIAN, TES HABITAT, AND WILDERNESS: None

• ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS: Authorization is needed to cross private land to gain access to NFSlands along the route. Permittee owns private land on Devil Ridge.

Effects Analysis for ESA Listed Wildlife and Habitats —Canton Canyon & Devil’s Ridge authorized roads:

As stated above this route does not pass through or near any sensitive aquatic or riparian habitats and

there are no known occurrences of ESA protected wildlife or critical habitat along or near the route.

Effects to ESA listed wildlife and habitats from permittee use of the Canton Creek road crossing of Piru

Creek (occupied arroyo toad critical habitat and California red-legged frog critical habitat) were covered

and mitigated in the 2008 biological assessment.

Determination: Because of the above information and rationale I determine that use by the permittee

of the Canton Canyon Road (excluding the Piru Creek crossing) and Devil’s Ridge Road authorized roads

as proposed will have “No Affect” upon ESA listed wildlife or critical habitats.

Reasoner Canyon authorized road and trail - Reasoner Canyon road is the access to the permittee’sbase property and home. It begins on private land at the Dominguez Canyon Road (FS Road 4N14)intersection and continues up Reasoner Canyon to NFS lands. Beyond the private land portion ofReasoner Canyon road, the range permitted road is 0.4 miles and the permitted non-motorized trail is0.8 miles. The range permittee road leads to a water development on NFS lands, which is used in themanagement of the allotment. The continuing trail leads to fencing areas established to protect SWWFhabitat. Vegetation along the road and trail includes oak woodland, montane riparian, desert wash,coastal sage scrub, and chaparral. The road has been used by the permittee since before the 1940s toaccess the range allotment and to maintain the water development. The road to the waterdevelopment was last maintained in early 2000s. The recent fires and 2005 floods have altered thecrossings along Reasoner Creek. There are 3 creek crossings on the road to the water development and8 creek crossings on the trail. The roadbed is 12’-16’ wide depending upon the location. ReasonerCreek is primarily perennial but is often dry during the summer and fall seasons.• USE: Vehicle access along the road would be limited to high clearance vehicles, 4WD, OHV, and

horseback. The continuing trail would be maintained as a non-motorized use trail. Annual useincludes ingress and egress of cattle and access for allotment management by the permittee and forresource management and monitoring by the Forest Service. The authorized range routes are forthe range permittee only. Public use of the road and trail will not be allowed.

• MAINTENANCE: The road will be maintained as a primitive route suitable for intermittent accesswith high clearance vehicles. The continuing trail will be maintained as a non-motorized trail routesuitable for horse and foot traffic. Fallen trees are the primary vegetation maintenance required onthe road and trail. Currently, road maintenance is required for the creek crossings, with lessmaintenance required for the upland road/trail sections. Periodic road/trail surface, drainage, androadway/trailway maintenance is required to continue access as a road and trail, Initialmaintenance will require heavy equipment to stabilize and re-establish drainage along the road andtrail width. From thereafter, periodic tread maintenance and vegetation removal is required tomaintain access as a road and trail. Along the road, the creek crossings may require occasional

maintenance with heavy equipment, especially following major winter flood events. For thecontinuing trail, the creek crossing will require mostly moving large rocks to allow safe trail access.All such maintenance will be reviewed and approved by the Forest Service officerto ensurecompliance with resource mitigations identified in this document, and that the maintenanceachieves or contributes to reaching a desired condition including consistency with the roadlesscharacter of the area.

• TIMING OF MAINTENANCE: Maintenance to occur during the dry months, following Forest ServiceHandbook standards and guidelines, BMPs, BA resource protection measures, and a permitteemaintenance agreement as per the terms and conditions of the term grazing permit.

• IRA, RIPARIAN, TES HABITAT, AND WILDERNESS: The permitted range road and trail are entirelywithin the Sespe-Frazier IRA. Riparian habitat exists at most of the creek crossings. Some of thecrossings exhibit more of a dry wash depending upon the location. No ESA critical habitat existsalong the route. SWWF habitat exists on private land in Reasoner Canyon and at the northernterminus of the range permitted trail. Habitat for southwestern pond turtle and two-striped gartersnake may exist at or near the road crossings along the permitted road and trail.

• ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS: Permittee is required to maintain fencing around SWWF habitatper the terms and conditions of the term range permit.

Effects Analysis for ESA Listed Wildlife and Habitats - Reasoner Canyon authorized road and trail: The

only ESA wildlife issue associated with this proposal is the existence of several patches of suitable

southwestern willow flycatcher habitat along Reasoner Creek. Otherwise there are no ESA listed species

or critical habitat located along or near the route. The largest patch of flycatcher habitat is

approximately 20 acres in size and located on private land in the lower section of the creek. This habitat

is currently not suitable due to damage from a recent flood event but is recovering and should reach

suitable condition in a few years. To enhance its recovery, the permittee has agreed to exclude cattle

from this habitat per issuance of a new grazing permit. The other patch is approximately 2 acres in size

and is located on Forest Service land in the middle section of the creek. As part of a previous agreement

with the permittee, this small patch is fenced to exclude cattle. This route will be used by the permittee

to conduct annual inspections and repair of this exclosure. To date, there are no records of occupancy

by flycatchers of these sites. The proposal will not affect this habitat because the route is either located

on the adjacent upper stream terrace as is the case of the lower patch or at its terminus as is the case

with the upper patch. Some sparse riparian habitat will be impacted by the work in the stream

crossings, but it should be minor in scope as compared to the total amount of habitat in the creek that

will not be altered. The impacts will be further mitigated by conducting the work when the creek is dry

or during low water years and the work will be directed and monitored by a qualified Forest Service

officer to insure implementation of the appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP5).

Determination: Because of the above information and rationale it is my determination that the

Reasoner Canyon authorized road and trail proposal will have “No Affect” upon ESA listed wildlife or

critical habitats.

Rodeo Flat authorized roads - The range permitted road (0.1 ml.) begins at the intersection ofDominguez Canyon Road (FS Road 4N14) and continues north to the permittee’s land. Continuingseveral hundred yards on private land, a spur range permitted road travels west on private land to NFS

lands and suitable rangelands within the Sespe Wilderness. This range management road is 0.25 mileslong. The habitats along the range roads on NFS lands are oak woodland and annual grassland. Becausethe cattle water on the adjacent private land, the cattle spend limited time in the wilderness portion ofthis allotment. These range routes have existed since before the 1940’s to access the private propertyand to manage cattle on authorized range allotments. The tread condition on the roads is stable. Theyare maintained regularly by the permittee under the existing Term Range Permit. The roadbed androute width are 14’48’ depending upon the location. Because of stable soils and regular road use,maintenance is not needed annually. Maintenance needs include repairs of smaller rills, ruts, anddrains. There are no perennial water courses along the road and routes.• USE: Vehicle access along the range permitted road would be limited to high clearance vehicles,

2WD, 4WD, OHV, and horseback. Annual use includes ingress and egress of cattle and access forallotment management by the permittee and for resource management and monitoring by theForest Service. The authorized range routes are for the range permittee only. Public use of the roadand trail will not be allowed.

• MAINTENANCE: The road will be maintained as a primitive route suitable for intermittent accesswith high clearance vehicles. No maintenance is currently needed for these range permitted roads.With heavy equipment, regular road surface, drainage, and roadway maintenance is required tocontinue future route access. All such maintenance will be reviewed and approved by the ForestService officer to ensure compliance with resource mitigations identified in this document, and thatthe maintenance achieves or contributes to reaching a desired condition.

• TIMING OF MAINTENANCE: Year-round, following Forest Service Handbook standards andguidelines, BMP5, BA resource protection measures, and a permittee maintenance agreement as perthe terms and conditions of the term grazing permit.

• IRA, RIPARIAN, TES HABITAT, AND WILDERNESS: The roads are not within an IRA. No riparianhabitat exists along the roads. Both roads are within California condor critical habitat. The westernspur road is within the Sespe Wilderness. No additional TES species or habitats are within the travelroutes.

• ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS: None.

Effects Analysis for ESA Listed Wildlife and Habitats — Rodeo Flat authorized roads: As stated above

there are no aquatic or riparian habitats along or near this route. It only passes through various upland

types (chaparral, annual grassland, oak woodland). However, it does pass through federally designated

critical habitat for the endangered California condor (see next paragraph) and can best be described as

foraging habitat. Otherwise there are no ESA listed wildlife or habitats along or near this route. Since

use of the route by the permittee will be infrequent and maintenance needs minimal or not necessary

most years, condors foraging over this area should not be affected by the activity. Finally, since condors

in Southern California are somewhat habituated to human activities on the ground, occasional human

activity in the area should not alter their natural foraging behavior.

During the public scoping period in September 2009, a mapping error was discovered by the permittee

that changed the western boundary of the Rodeo Flat Unit of the Temescal Allotment. This boundary

correction added 441 acres to the analysis area for the Temescal Allotment. These new acres were

mentioned in the 2008 biological assessment but were not discussed in any detail in the effect analysis.

The new acres are all within the Sespe Wilderness and California condor Sanctuary and as such are

federally designated critical habitat for the endangered California condor. As far as use by the condor

this area can best be described as foraging habitat. Of the total, 56 acres are classified as secondary

range and only 5 acres as primary range in terms of suitability for permitted cattle grazing. Suitability is

based upon slope and the availability of water and forage. Because only a small portion of the total area

is suitable for grazing only a few cattle visit the area most years. This translates into a use pattern that is

light and scattered and not harmful to the habitat in terms of condor foraging. In fact, some cattle use

may a benefit in that it may keep certain areas open and suitable for the foraging condors. Another

possible benefit may be cattle mortality providing a source of carrion that would otherwise not be

available to the condors.

Determination for California condor and its Critical Habitat: Because of the above information and

rationale I have determined that cattle grazing as proposed in these acres and use of the access route

“May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect” the endangered California condor and “No Affect’

upon its federally designated critical habitat. These determinations are the same as was rendered upon

the condor and critical habitat in the 2008 biological assessment. Subsequent informal consultation with

FWS per these determination resulted in concurrence (Attached).

Lime Canyon authorized spur roads - These two range permitted roads exist as spurs from Lime CanyonRoad (ES Road 4N14A) about 1 mile south of Dominguez Canyon Road (ES Road 4N14). Both travelsouth about 0.4 miles from ES Road 4N14A. They access a water development and an intermittentwaterway. The area is surrounded by chaparral habitat. These access routes have existed for more than70 years by the permittee to manage cattle. Because the routes are located in chaparral with limitedslope, the tread is stable. The tread width is 12’-14’. Vegetation encroachment and tread maintenanceis required for these spur routes. No access exists presently via Lime Canyon Road, because of the 2003Piru Fire and the 2005 floods. No perennial waterways exist along the two routes.• USE: Vehicle access along these range permitted spur roads would be limited to high clearance

vehicles, 4WD, OHV, and horseback. Annual use includes ingress and egress of cattle and access forallotment management by the permittee and for resource management and monitoring by theForest Service. The authorized range routes are for the range permittee only. Public use of the roadand trail will not be allowed.

• MAINTENANCE: The road will be maintained as a primitive route suitable for intermittent accesswith high clearance vehicles. Currently, limited road surface maintenance is required. Periodic roadsurface, drainage, and roadway maintenance is required to continue road access. Heavy equipmentmay be utilized for maintenance every few years.

• TIMING OF MAINTENANCE: Year-round, following Forest Service Handbook standards andguidelines, BMPs, and a permittee maintenance agreement as per the terms and conditions of theterm grazing permit.

• IRA, RIPARIAN, TES HABITAT, AND WILDERNESS: None.• ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS: None.

Effects Analysis for ESA Listed Wildlife and Habitats - Lime Canyon Authorized spur roads: As stated

above, the routes only pass through or near various chaparral habitat types and that there are no known

ESA listed wildlife or critical habitats along the routes. I concur with that conclusion.

Determination: Because of the above information and rationale I determine that the Lime Canyon

authorized spur roads proposal will have “No Affect” upon ESA listed wildlife or critical habitats.

ERRATA CORRECTIONS TO THE 2008 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

Please change the sentence in the effects analysis for arroyo toad that reads “But with theimplementation of the stated precautions, I believe the magnitude of the affect should not represent athreat to the viability of the population” to “But with the implementation of the stated precautions, Ibelieve the magnitude of the affect should not represent a threat to the population”.

In the minimization measures section the need for a “qualified” biologist is stated. To clarify, qualified

means the person is approved by the FWS to handle ESA listed wildlife via the lOa Permit issuance

process.

United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office

2493 Portola Road, Suite B Ventura, California 93003

IN REPLY REFER TO: 2009-I-0217

May 4, 2009 Peggy Hernandez, Forest Supervisor Los Padres National Forest U.S. Department of Agriculture 6755 Hollister Avenue, Suite 150 Goleta, California 93117 Subject: Piru Allotments Grazing Permit Issuance, Ojai Ranger District, Los Padres

National Forest, Ventura County, California Dear Ms. Hernandez: We are responding to your request, dated March 3, 2009, and received in our office on March 9, 2009, for our concurrence with your determination that continued livestock grazing on the Piru Allotments is not likely to adversely affect the federally endangered California condor (Gymnogyps californianus), least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillas), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), or arroyo toad (Bufo californicus), and the federally threatened California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) (collectively, “the Listed Species”). Additionally, you have made the determination that continued grazing activities would not affect federally listed vernal pool invertebrates, proposed critical habitat for the California red-legged frog, or designated critical habitat for the California condor and arroyo toad. Your request and our response are made pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The Ojai Ranger District of the Los Padres National Forest is proposing to issue a 10-year term grazing permit for the Piru, Pot Holes, and Temescal grazing allotments. The allotments would be managed in a yearlong rotation system that would involve no more than 45 animal units (cow per calf or adult bull) per year. The three allotments are located in the lower Piru Creek watershed approximately 10 miles east of the town of Fillmore in Ventura County, California. The Piru Allotment is approximately 2,700 acres and is defined by the Canton Creek sub-watershed, which trends southwest and enters Piru Creek from the east about 1 mile above Piru Lake. The Pot Holes Allotment is approximately 3,420 acres and includes most of the Pot Holes sub-watershed. It enters Piru Creek from the west about 0.5 mile above Piru Lake. The Temescal Allotment is approximately 3,240 acres in area and incorporates most of the Domingas and the middle portion of the Reasoner sub-watersheds. Both watersheds enter directly into Piru Lake from the west. You have determined the project area would include U.S. Forest Service-administered lands, private property, and United Water Conservation-administered lands within the three allotments, as well as a section of Piru Creek from the upper end of Piru Lake upstream

Peggy Hernandez 2 to Agua Blanca Creek. California condors are known to occasionally forage within the project area from the adjacent Sespe Condor Sanctuary and Hopper Mountain Wildlife Refuge. Potential nesting habitat occurs within the several cliff complexes near the northern boundary of the Pot Holes Allotment and the southwest boundary of the Piru Allotment. During the winter and early spring of 2004-2005, a pair of California condors attempted to nest on a cliff face that overlooked Piru Lake. The nest attempt was abandoned for unknown reasons. Approximately 2,515 acres of designated critical habitat for the California condor exists within the Piru Allotments. Least Bell’s vireos are not known to occur within the project area and no recent surveys have been conducted for this species in the project area; however, suitable habitat exists within the project area. The nearest known population of nesting least Bell’s vireos occurs in the Santa Clara River, approximately 5 miles south of the project area. Southwestern willow flycatchers are not known to occur within the three allotments and no recent surveys have been conducted; however, they were detected 11 times along Piru Creek between Piru Lake and Agua Blanca in the late Spring of 1999. No nests were found despite the presence of suitable breeding habitat within this reach of Piru Creek. A 12th record for southwestern willow flycatchers was observed on June 7, 1992, when two individuals were observed engaging in typical breeding behaviors (i.e., singing and calling), as well as carrying food, but no nest was found. There is also suitable habitat for this species in Reasoner Canyon within the Temescal Allotment. The suitable habitat in Reasoner Canyon has not been surveyed. Arroyo toads are known to occur and breed within Piru Creek (Cameron 2008). Suitable habitat also occurs within lower Canton Creek; however, surveys conducted by the U.S. Forest Service for arroyo toads have not detected this species there. Designated critical habitat for the arroyo toad is not present within the three subject allotments. California red-legged frogs have been reported from Piru Creek (Sanders 1950); however, no recent surveys have been completed in this area for this species. Approximately 498 acres of critical habitat for the California red-legged frog occurs within the northern end of the Pot Holes Allotment Lisk Unit. However, the 498 acres of critical habitat that occurs within the Lisk Unit are considered xeric or mesic at best, and Pot Holes Creek, which traverses the Lisk Unit, is an ephemeral creek. Furthermore, the geography in this portion of the Lisk Unit is very steep and rocky. Therefore, the 498 acres of critical habitat lacks the primary constituent elements of critical habitat for the California red-legged frog. Minimization and avoidance measures that would be undertaken to avoid effects of the project on the Listed Species include: 1. The Piru Allotment Permittee will notify the U.S. Forest Service 3 days prior to the use of

Canton Creek crossing so that it can be checked for arroyo toads or California red-legged frogs by a qualified biologist. If arroyo toads or California red-legged frogs (any life stage) are found in or near the crossing, its use will be deferred until the arroyo toads or

Peggy Hernandez 3

California red-legged frogs disperse from or move out of the crossing on their own. Near refers to arroyo toads or California red-legged frogs not actually in the crossing but close enough to be considered by the biologist to be at risk from use of the crossing. If requested by the permittee, the biologist may try to find an alternative crossing not occupied by arroyo toads or California red-legged frogs.

2. The U.S. Forest Service will devise a method (e.g., fencing herds) that will restrict cattle

from wandering into Piru Creek, including its riparian corridor. If a preventive method cannot be devised, the allotment will be considered unsuitable for grazing and closed for that purpose.

3. Fencing will be constructed or re-constructed along the eastern boundary of the Pot Holes

Allotment (Lisk Unit) to prevent permitted cattle from straying into the sensitive aquatic and riparian habitats associated with Piru Creek.

4. Existing drift fences in upper Pot Holes (Lisk Unit) and middle Reasoner Creeks will be

inspected annually and repaired as necessary prior to cattle entry. 5. The approximately 20-acre patch of suitable southwestern willow flycatcher habitat

located along lower Reasoner Creek will be fenced to prevent cattle entry. 6. A drift fence will be constructed across Canton Creek where it narrows approximately 0.5

mile above its confluence with Piru Creek. This will prevent cattle from entering Piru Creek and protect arroyo toad habitat in lower Canton Creek.

We concur with your determination that authorization of continued grazing activities is not likely to adversely affect the California condor, least Bell’s vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, arroyo toad, and California red-legged frog because: (1) cattle exclosure fencing would prevent cattle from disturbing suitable habitat for the Listed Species; and (2) cattle grazing in the three allotments may have an indirect benefit to foraging condors in that areas that would be otherwise overgrown with vegetation would be more open for condors to detect dead animals to feed upon. Additionally, dead cattle may provide foraging opportunities for California condors. Furthermore, we concur with your determination that authorization of continued grazing activities would not affect vernal pool invertebrates, critical habitat for the California red-legged frog, California condor, and arroyo toad because: (1) no vernal pool habitat complexes are known to exist in the project area; (2) the topography and lack of forage in the 498 acres of California red-legged frog critical habitat within the upper Pot Holes (Lisk Unit) allotment precludes cattle from entering Pot Holes Creek; (3) the 498 acres of California red-legged frog critical habitat within the northern Pot Holes (Lisk Unit) allotment lacks the primary constituent elements; (4) critical habitat for the California red-legged frog in Piru Creek would be fenced from intruding cattle; and (5) critical habitat for the arroyo toad is not designated within the project area.

Peggy Hernandez 4 Lastly, because no primary constituents elements were described in the designation of critical habitat for the California condor (42 Federal Register 47840), we rely on the habitat requirements described in the recovery plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996) for this species to determine if critical habitat would be affected. The California condor recovery plan (1996) states that California condors require suitable habitat for nesting, roosting, and foraging. Nest sites are located in cavities in cliffs, in large rock outcrops or large trees. Traditional roosting sites maintained on cliffs or large trees often near feeding sites. Foraging occurs mostly in grasslands including potreros within chaparral areas, or in oak savannahs. Because the grazing would continue to occur in the grasslands and California condors forage on dead animals (i.e., they would not need the vegetation for forage), we concur with your determination that authorization of continued grazing activities would not affect designated critical habitat for the California condor. Consequently, further consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, is not required. If the proposed action changes in any manner or if you become aware that the Listed Species or their proposed and designated critical habitat, have been adversely affected by grazing activities, we recommend that you suspend all grazing and contact us as soon as possible to assess the need for further consultation. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Della Snyder-Velto or Chris Dellith of my staff at (626) 574-5254, and (805) 644-1766, extension 227, respectively.

Sincerely, /s/: Roger P. Root Roger P. Root Assistant Field Supervisor cc: Jesse Grantham, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

REFERENCES

Cameron, S. 2008. 2008 middle Piru Creek arroyo toad (Bufo californicus) survey. Prepared

for United Water Conservation District, Santa Paula, California. Prepared by Ecological Sciences, Inc. Santa Paula, Calfornia. January 29, 2009.

Sanders, R. B. 1950. A herpetological survey of Ventura County, California. Unpubl. M.A.

thesis, Stanford Univ. 140 pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. California condor recovery plan. Third edition. Portland,

Oregon. 62pp.

United StatesDepartment ofAgriculture

ForestService

Los PadresNational Forest

Supervisor's Office6755 Hollister Ave., Suite 150Goleta, CA 93117(805) 968-6640TDD: (805) 968-6790

File Code: 2670Date: March 3, 2009

Diane NodaField SupervisorUnited States Fish and Wildlife Service2493 Portola RoadSuite BVentura, CA 93003

Dear Ms. Noda:

We are requesting informal concurrence for the "May Affect, But Not Likely to AdverselyAffect" determination for the California condor, least Bell's vireo, southwestern willowflycatcher, arroyo toad and California red-legged frog and the "No Affect" determination forvernal pool invertebrates, California red-legged frog critical habitat (proposed) and arroyo toadcritical habitat for the Piru Allotments Rangeland Analysis, Ojai Ranger District, Los PadresNational Forest. We have attached the biological assessment and appendices.

The purpose of the range land analysis was to determine if the allotments can sustain a continuedprogram of permitted livestock grazing, while at the same time maintaining the ecologicalintegrity of the affected public lands within the Piru, Temescal and Pot Holes GrazingAllotments. We believe the proposal meets this purpose: sensitive and protected habitat andspecies are conserved or enhanced, while at the same time the permittee is provided anopportunity to meet his needs per the allotments.

If you or your staff have questions or require additional information, please contact South ZoneBiologist John Brack at (805) 967-3481, ext 246; or Assistant Resource Officer Irvin Fernandezat (805) 646-434, ext 312. We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

:f~zForest Supervisor

cc: John Brack, Irvin J Fernandez

e Caring for the Land and Serving People~

Printed on Recyded Paper ••• ,

Biological Assessment For Wildlife

Piru Allotments (Piru, Pot Holes and Temescal)

Grazing Permit Issuance Ojai Ranger District, Los Padres National Forest

November 2008

Prepared By, /S/ JOHN BRACK Date: 11/18/08 John Brack, South Zone Biologist Los Padres National Forest Reviewed By, /S/ KEVIN COOPER Date: 12/01/08 Kevin Cooper, Forest Wildlife Biologist Los Padres National Forest Reviewed By, /S/ JOHN BRIDGWATER Date: 11/10/08 John Bridgwater, District Ranger Ojai Ranger District, Los Padres National Forest This document is prepared in conformance with the legal requirements set forth under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and standards established in Forest Service direction located in Manual Section 2672.4 through 2672.42.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION III. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

IV. CONSULTATIONS TO DATE V. CURRENT MANAGEMENT DIRECTION

VI. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND MINIMINZATION MEASURES

VII. SPECIES OF POTENTIAL OCCURRENCE VIII. EFFECTS ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATIONS BY SPECIES

LITERATURE CITED

APPENDICES

Appendix A. TES Wildlife List for Los Padres National Forest Appendix B. Project and TES Maps Appendix C. Detailed Description of the Proposed Action by Allotment Appendix D. Draft Cowbird Study

I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to determine what affect the proposed action will have on threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate (TEPC) wildlife and their habitats, including federally designated critical habitat. Minimization and avoidance measures designed to reduce or eliminate potential adverse affects to TEPC species or habitat have been incorporated into the final design of the proposed action. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The Ojai Ranger District, Los Padres National Forest (LPNF) is proposing to issue a 10-year term grazing permit for the Piru, Pot Holes and Temescal C&H Grazing Allotments. The allotments will be managed in a yearlong rotation system that will involve no more than 45 animal units (cow/calf pair or adult bull). A detailed description of the proposed action including the rotation system, season of use, livestock numbers and necessary drift and allotment boundary fence construction is provided in Appendix C (Project Description). This grazing system was formulated in November 2006 by an interdisciplinary team (ID Team) that convened at the Ojai Ranger District for that purpose. III. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT Affected Area/Project Area - The three allotments are located in the lower Piru Creek watershed (Map) approximately 10 miles east of the town of Fillmore, Ventura County, California. The Piru Allotment (ca 2700 acres) is defined by the Canton Creek sub-watershed, which trends southwest and enters Piru Creek from the east about a mile above Piru Lake. The Temescal Allotment (ca 3240 acres) incorporates most of the Domingas and the middle portion of the Reasoner sub-watersheds. Both enter directly into Piru Lake from the west. The Pot Holes Allotment (ca 3420 acres) includes most of the Pot Holes sub-watershed. It enters Piru Creek from the west about ½ mile above Piru Lake. Elevations range from ca 1600 feet along Piru Creek to ca 3300 feet in the western highlands of the Temescal and Pot Holes Allotments. With the exception of a very short section at the Canton Creek Crossing, Piru Creek along with its riparian corridor where it is adjacent to the Piru Allotment is owned and managed by United Water District (UWD) of Fillmore, California (Map). There are fairly extensive areas of private property within and adjacent to all three allotments, most represents the “base” private property to which the proposed grazing permit is administratively linked. For the purpose of this analysis the “project area” includes the Forest Service lands, private property and UWD administered lands within the three allotments, plus that section of Piru Creek from the upper end of Piru Lake upstream to Agra Blanca Creek.

Potentially Affected Habitats – Piru Creek is the only perennial (year round) stream within or near the project area. Otherwise most of the drainage channels (Reasoner, Domingas and Canton) are largely ephemeral. There is a very short section (ca 200 meters) of Reasoner Creek near its mouth where perennial flow from several springs maintains a rather well developed willow riparian patch of habitat. This area is privately owned and part of the base property for the grazing permit. Due to its size (length and magnitude) and perennial nature, Piru Creek supports one of the most ecologically significant riparian and aquatic corridors in southern California. Where Piru Creek runs through the project area (Map) it supports a mid-elevation woody riparian woodland consisting primarily of young to mature arroyo willow and Freemont cottonwood situated in patches of various sizes to single trees. There is also a gallery type stand of mature to decadent cottonwoods and willows on the upper terrace along the east side of Piru Creek that extends some distance up Canton Creek. The aquatic habitat varies from shallow rock lined to sandy pools to slow riffles with adjacent open sand and gravel bar habitat. There is also a rather well developed stringer of woody riparian habitat along the lower section of Reasoner Creek. Both of these habitat areas are located mostly on private land. Otherwise riparian and/or aquatic habitat is restricted to a few isolated springs (Map) or as open stringers along the more mesic portions of the main canyons such as in the middle section of Canton Canyon and the middle and lower sections of Reasoner, Domingas and Pot Holes Creeks. With the exception of a small amount along the immediate margin of Piru Creek and associated with several seeps, there is no mesic or hydric meadow habitat in the effected area. The uplands are vegetated with an assortment of chaparral, oak woodlands and annual grassland. Coast sagebrush dominates many south and west facing slopes especially near the south boundaries of the Piru and Temescal Allotments. Large areas of xeric and mesic chaparral exist on south and north slopes such as the northern portion of the Temescal and all of the Pot Holes Allotments. Coast live woodland exists in small to large stands in the upper basins of all three allotments. An especially large stand exists in upper Domingas Canyon. Coast live oaks line most of the deeper canyons throughout. Open grasslands are scarce with some present in the upper section of Pot Holes Allotment and in the western mid slopes of the Temescal Allotment, where native species do remain as important constituents of the grassland community. Otherwise, introduced exotics dominate most grassland habitats, especially where they are associated with oak woodlands. In late October and early November, 2003 much of the upper sections of the Temescal and Pot Holes Allotments burned in the Piru wildfire incident. Most of the effected area burned at a light to moderate intensity with recovery to at least moderate natural potential expected within five to eight years. High intensity burning occurred primarily on the upper slopes and basins of Domingas Creek in the Temescal Allotment, where large areas of open to dense live-oak woodland burned with up to 50 percent mortality. Recovery in this area is expected to require many years. Only a small amount of woody riparian habitat was affected by the incident. Some scattered willows were burned in upper Reasoner Creek where the intensity was moderate and recovery expected to occur

rapidly, while in Domingas Creek a high intensity burn killed many of the sycamore, cottonwood and willows that are scattered along the creek (Piru Wildlfire Incident BAER Report, November 2003). Most of the suitable (<60% slope, forage production >200 lbs residual dry matter/acre, accessible and control of livestock feasible) range (Map) in the three allotments is located in the upper basins of the main watersheds (Canton, Pot Holes, Domingas and Reasoner). Lesser amounts of suitable range is located on the stream terraces in the middle and lower sections of the main canyons and in the private base property located in the eastern portion of the Pot Holes Allotment. Current Habitat Conditions (as related to cattle use over time) – The habitat conditions described below are based upon interpretation of allotment inspection reports and photographs in the 2210 Range Planning and Evaluation files at the Ojai Ranger District, conversations with knowledgeable persons (Al Hess, Ojai RD Resource Officer, Terry Austin, Ojai RD Resource Assistant and Valerie Hubbartt, Santa Barbara RD Resource Assistant) and personal opinion based upon visits to Reasoner and Domingas Canyons in the Temescal Allotment, lower section of Canton Canyon in the Piru allotment and the Piru Creek riparian corridor from the Canton Creek crossing downstream about ½ mile. As is the case in much of southern California, native herbaceous (grasses, forbs and perennials) vegetation has largely been replaced within the project area by exotic annuals. To some extent the exotic flora is duplicating the habitat features (forage, cover, nesting sites etc.) that were provided by the native flora. Having said that, most upland areas in the project area can be considered functioning at near their natural potential. As expected, some poor habitat conditions (reduced plant cover, exposed soil, undesirable exotics increasing) do exist in those areas immediately associated with sites where cattle congregate such as watering sites (man-made and natural), along drift fences and salting locations. However, the total area involved is negligible when the compared to the entire project area and none are located in sensitive habitat. With several exceptions (See Part VI) riparian habitat conditions and related wildlife issues can also be described as fair to good, with most habitat components at or near natural potential for the site. Personal inspections in Reasoner, Domingas and Canton Canyons revealed a history of light to moderate use (hedging, trampling, depressed or missing sapling stage, not easily detected) by cattle on woody riparian habitat (willows, cottonwoods etc.) and little evidence of bank trampling except near trailing routes. In the middle and upper sections of Canton Canyon some hedging and over-utilization (>50%) of herbaceous species (riparian graminiods) does occur in scattered locations, but overall the habitat is functioning near natural potential for the site.

IV. CONSULTATIONS TO DATE The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and LPNF coordinate quarterly in regards to which taxa are considered in biological assessments and evaluations. The most recent update, April 2008, is reflected in the Appendix A (Checklist of Federally Listed Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Wildlife). Public and agency scoping concerning the proposal was conducted through the Forest-wide Schedule of Proposed Environmental Actions for Los Padres National Forest (SOPA) process, where projects are disclosed to the public and interested agencies (i.e., FWS, California Fish and Game). Additional disclosure was accomplished through public notices in newspapers of record and mailing lists. The resulting comments or concerns were considered during the NEPA planning process for the proposal. V. CURRENT MANAGEMENT DIRECTION

The three allotments are located within in the Ojai-Piru Front Country Place, as described in the Revised Los Padres National Forest Land and Resource Plan (LMRP) that became effective in October 2005. Program emphasis for this Place specifies control and/or eradicating invasive weeds, maintaining visual and sensitive wildlife habitat quality, and wildfire protection and prevention. Issuance of a term grazing permit for the three allotments as described in the proposed action (Appendix C) is compatible with the management objectives and desired conditions for this Place. The proposal was evaluated for compatibility with Forest Goals in the LMRP that pertain to livestock grazing. Goal 3.1 specifies recovery of federally listed species and the conservation of federally listed and sensitive species’ habitat. Goal 5.1 is to improve watershed conditions so they are healthy, dynamic and resilient to natural and human caused disturbances. Goal 5.2 is to improve riparian conditions so watercourses are functioning properly and support healthy populations of riparian dependent species that are able to recover after natural events. Application of Riparian Conservation Areas and standards (design criteria) would limit the extent and duration of any adverse environmental effects, while recognizing that there may be some short-term adverse effects in order to achieve long-term benefits. Goal 6.2 is to provide ecological conditions to sustain viable populations of native and desired nonnative species.

The proposal was evaluated for compatibility with Forest Program Strategies and Tactics in the LMRP that pertain to livestock grazing. Wildlife 1 - Manage habitat to move listed species toward recovery and prevent future listings.

Wildlife 2 - Maintain and improve habitat for fish, wildlife, and plants. All Standards and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing in the revised LMRP that apply to fish and wildlife habitat and TEPC management will be implemented during the development of the Allotment Management Plans (AMP) for the three allotments. Other sources of management direction as related to range management are contained Forest Service Manuals and Handbooks (FSM &FSH 2200), the Los Padres National Forest Riparian Conservation Strategy of 1994 and the terms and conditions of the Biological Opinion on Riparian Obligate Species. All of these documents contain management direction and guidelines aimed at avoiding or minimizing effects of grazing on proposed or listed species and critical habitat. The consultations listed above are included by reference as part of this assessment. Management Direction for Biological Assessments and Evaluations - Forest Service Manual FSM 2670.31(4) provides direction to "Avoid all adverse impacts on threatened or endangered species and their habitats except when it is possible to compensate adverse effects totally through alternatives identified in a biological opinion rendered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service". FSM 2670.32 also provides direction on Sensitive Species to "avoid or minimize impacts to species whose viability has been identified as a concern and line officer decisions must not result in loss of species viability or create significant trends toward federal listing". Both of these Manual sections are directed at complying with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Several Forest Service Manual standards state that the U.S. Forest Service must “give preferential consideration to riparian dependent resources when conflicts among land use activities occur" (FSM 2526.03-2). VI. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND MINIMINZATION MEASURES As mentioned earlier a majority of the habitat, both upland and riparian, in the project area is in relatively good condition as determined by key vegetative components such as woody riparian, shrub age diversity (chaparral types) and ground cover (litter and plant) in oak woodlands and open grasslands (potreros). That being said there are three locations in the project area where habitat and/or TEPC issues need to be addressed in relation to the proposed action. They are:

1) The Canton Creek crossing of Piru Creek, located on forest service land just north of the UWD land boundary (Map). Due to their fragile nature, even occasional use by vehicles or cattle can cause harm to the riparian and aquatic habitats in and downstream of the crossing. 2) The riparian/aquatic corridor and gallery forest (= the corridor) along Piru Creek where it is adjacent to the Piru Allotment. Concentrated use by cattle has over time reduced or eliminated the under and mid-story components of the gallery forest and adversely impacted the corridor so that it is functioning below natural potential for such a site. This statement is based upon lack of pool habitat, sloughed and trampled stream-banks and a stressed riparian plant community where desirable species such as sedges and young willows are becoming scarce and undesirable species such as tamarisk are increasing (personal observations). Most of the impacted riparian habitat along Piru Creek is on land administered by United Water District (UWD). In the past few years some recovery of the poor habitat conditions in the corridor has occurred because cattle that previously were permitted to graze UWD lands have been absent. In about 2000, UWD withdrew (cancelled) a grazing permit that had been in effect for many years for the UWD lands along Piru Creek, including the corridor. At about the same time the permittee for the Piru Allotment applied for and was granted a “non-use” waiver for the allotment. Prior to cancellation of the UWD permit, the UWD land and Piru Allotment were grazed as a single unit with most of the use occurring in and near Piru Creek and around Piru Lake due to the presence of water and riparian forage. The non-use waiver for the Piru Allotment is still in affect. Although cattle are currently not permitted in the Piru Allotment some still stray into the corridor and Piru Creek further upstream through an unfenced boundary on the east side of the Pot Holes Allotment. 3) Lower Canton Canyon. As part of a recent effort to re-designate critical habitat for the arroyo toad, Los Padres National Forest, FWS (Ventura Field Office) and Sam Sweet (UCSB toad expert) met to identify suitable habitat for the toad on the LP using criteria that was previously agreed to by the parties. They decided that Canton Canyon from its confluence with Piru Creek upstream to the 40acre private land parcel, approximately one mile, did meet the suitability criteria (within the general range of the toad, less than 2 percent gradient, below 4500 feet, no barriers to occupied habitat and enough moisture some years to provide breeding or foraging habitat). In 2002, the Forest Service conducted surveys for the toad in Canton Creek. None were found. To date there are no records of arroyo toad in Canton Creek. The Forest Service cannot permit, approve or fund activities or actions that cause or permit unacceptable resource conditions regardless of the ownership of the land where the impacts occur. In the effects section of this document it is disclosed that the riparian/aquatic corridor in Piru Creek (Exception 1 and 2 above) does provide suitable and occupied habitat for a number of wildlife species that are protected by the 1973 Endangered Species Act, as amended (ESA). These include: Southwestern willow

flycatcher, least Bell’s vireo, arroyo toad (all federally endangered) and California red-legged frog (federally threatened). In addition, Piru Creek including the corridor and some adjacent uplands have recently been designated as critical habitat for the toad and frog. Lower Canton Creek (Exception 3) is suitable for arroyo toad. Minimization/Avoidance Measures (MM) - These are designed to allow all or part of the proposed action to go forward by reducing identified or potential adverse affects to TEPC species and federally designated critical habitat and to support the species-specific affects determinations in this document. Through the ID Team process the two (2) MMs to follow have been incorporated into and are now part of the proposed action (Appendix C). 1) Use of the Canton Creek road crossing of Piru Creek (Forest Service administered land) for permit administration purposes will be held to a minimum. The crossing does impact habitat for the species listed above. Of special concern is the arroyo toad, which has reproduced in or near the crossing and may do so again in the future. Although parts of Piru Creek are considered suitable (steep sided pools at least 18 inches deep with abundant emergent aquatic vegetation) for California red-legged frog, the area near the crossing is currently too shallow and open to be considered suitable for the frog. To date, no frogs regardless of life stage have been found in this area. However since stream systems are dynamic as are species populations this could change in the future. To avoid adverse affects to the arroyo toad and California red-legged frog regardless of life stage, the Piru Allotment permittee will notify the forest service three days prior to use of the Canton Creek crossing so that it can be checked for animals by a qualified biologist. If animals (any life stage) are found in or near the crossing its use will be deferred until they disperse from or move out of the crossing on their own. Near refers to animals not actually in the crossing but close enough to be considered at risk by the biologist. As an example, cattle being herded across Piru Creek into the Piru Allotment might stray out of the crossing and trample nearby eggstrings/masses or other life stages. If requested the biologist may work with the permittee to try and locate a suitable alternate crossing not occupied by arroyo toads or California red-legged frogs. If animals not protected by ESA (a special permit is needed to handle ESA listed species) such as southern Pacific pond turtle or two-striped garter snake are found in the alternate crossing they can be moved by the biologist out of harms way to a safe location. 2) Prior to grazing permit issuance, devise a method (i.e., fencing, herding) so that cattle permitted to graze in the Pot Holes and Piru Allotments remain there and do not drift or wander into Piru Creek, including the corridor. If a preventive method cannot be devised, then the allotments should be considered unsuitable for livestock grazing and closed for

that purpose. To address this issue and several others (see below and further on in the document) the following have been incorporated into the final proposal (Appendix C): Fencing - New Construction, Re-construction and Maintenance: A) Fencing will be constructed/re-constructed along the eastern boundary of the Potholes Allotment (Lisk Unit) to prevent permitted cattle from straying into the sensitive aquatic and riparian habitats associated with Piru Creek. B) Existing drift fences in upper Potholes (Lisk Unit) and middle Reasoner Creeks will be inspected annually and if necessary repaired prior to cattle entry into the effected areas. C) The 20 acre patch of suitable flycatcher habitat on private property in lower Reasoner Creek will be fenced to prevent cattle entry. D) A drift fence will be constructed across Canton Creek where it narrows about ½ mile above its confluence with Piru Creek. This will prevent cattle permitted to use the Piru Allotment from entering Piru Creek. This fence also protects suitable arroyo toad habitat in lower Canton Creek (next paragraph). 3) The lower portion of Canton Creek, from its confluence with Piru Creek upstream to a private land parcel (ca 1 mile), has been determined to be suitable for arroyo toads (Map). Although Canton Creek is intermittent during the dry season, it does flow during and after wet season rains (ca November-May). If flows occur during the breeding season (March through June), toads from Piru Creek proper could disperse into Canton Creek for that purpose. Further, if wet or damp conditions continue into the summer and fall, foraging toads (metamorphs through adults) could be present until they disperse into their winter retreats in fall, usually by mid-November. To date it has not been determined if toads from Piru Creek follow this scenario in Canton Creek. But the distance is not prohibitive (ca ¼ mile) and there are no barriers to prevent toads from wandering into the lower section of Canton Creek from Piru Creek. In the summer of 2004 Al Hess, Resource Officer, Terri Austin, Assistant Resource Officer and I visited Canton Creek. Our main purpose was to determine if and where a fence could be constructed to prevent cattle entering the corridor and lower Canton Creek from the Piru Allotment. We agreed that a fence could be effective for that purpose and that the most efficient location would be where Canton Creek narrows about ½ mile above its confluence with Piru Creek. The length of fence at this location will be about ¼ mile. One concern we had with the narrows location was the necessity of crossing Canton Creek with the fence with the possibility of damage to the fence during flood events. However, we agreed that a “drop down” type of construction would be a solution for this concern (See “D” above).

VII. SPECIES OF POTENTIAL OCCURRENCE The attached Checklist (updated in November 2007) of Federally Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Wildlife (Appendix A) discloses the wildlife species considered for this analysis, their regulatory status, and rationale (reasons) used to determine which have a potential to be affected by the proposal (Y or P in the project effects column) or conversely, no potential to be affected (N in the effects column). The following criterion was used to determine if a species warranted further analysis in the document:

Species information (see next paragraph) indicates suitable habitat exists in or near the effected area and distributional and/or survey information suggests or confirms the habitat is occupied and the life cycle and behavior (habitat use) of the species suggest it might be susceptible to impacts in relation to the proposed activities (in this case permitted cattle grazing) and their timing (season of year and time of day). Suitable habitat is considered occupied unless surveys conducted using Forest Service approved protocols determine the species is absent. Occurrence and suitable habitat information for each species was found in databases such as WILDVIEW and other sources in the resource files of Los Padres National Forest (Map). Information concerning habitat requirements, preference and additional distribution was found in (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999), (Stebbins 1985), (Burt and Grossenheider 1964) and when available, recovery plans, conservation assessments and species-specific web sites. This information was used in conjunction with personal knowledge and that of others (Maeton Freel, Resources Staff LPNF, and Jamie Uyehara, Southern California Province TES Coordinator) to assess each species in relation to the selection criterion. The following species were determined to have a potential to be affected by the proposal and therefore will receive further analysis in this document. California condor Gymnogyps californianus (endangered) Least Bell’s vireo Vireo bellii pusillus (endangered) Southwestern willow flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus (endangered) California red-legged frog Rana aurora draytoni (threatened) Arroyo toad Bufo californicus (endangered) Designated and Proposed Critical Habitat - Critical habitats are areas specified by the FWS as essential to the conservation of a federally listed threatened or endangered species. Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act prohibits destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. To follow are critical habitat designations or proposed designations that are in or near the project area (= the three allotments, private in-holdings, and UWD lands along Piru Creek):

California condor - The extreme western edge of the Temescal Allotment and the northern one third of the Pot Holes Allotment include portions of the “protected zones” of 3 historic California condor nest sites. Additionally, both allotments overlap slightly on their western edges with the Sespe Condor Sanctuary (Map). California red-legged frog – Much of Piru Creek including the “corridor” adjacent to the Piru Allotment had formally been designated as critical habitat for the frog. However, court action rescinded that designation. Subsequently the FWS submitted a modified proposal to designate critical habitat for the frog. This proposal was finalized in April 2006 and does include the riparian corridor along Piru Creek as well as some of the adjacent uplands. Arroyo toad – Again the original designation of critical habitat that included the Piru Creek “corridor” was rescinded by court order. The FWS again submitted a modified proposal to designate critical habitat for the toad. The new designations were finalized in 2005 and include the “corridor” section of Piru Creek as will as some adjacent uplands and lower Canton Creek. Least Bell’s vireo and Southwestern willow flycatcher - There is no federally designated critical habitat for the flycatcher on LPNF. The only critical habitat for least Bell’s vireo on the LPNF is located in the upper Santa Ynez watershed on the Santa Barbara Ranger District. Vernal Pool Habitat – There are no known vernal pool habitat complexes in the project area. There are some seasonal pools in the western highlands of the Pot Holes Allotment known locally as “the Pot Holes”. It is not known if this habitat is suitable and/or occupied by federally protected invertebrates (fairy and tadpole shrimps). However due to steep terrain and lack of forage cattle seldom visit this area. The nearest federally designated critical vernal pool habitat to the project area is located in Lockwood Valley on the Mount Pinos Ranger District. VIII. EFFECTS ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATIONS BY SPECIES Cumulative Effects – Cumulative effects under ESA are those projects or activities on State or private lands, not involving Federal actions or funding, that are reasonably certain to occur within the Federal action area that may be subject to Section 7 consultation. Future Federal actions within the action area will be analyzed through separate section 7 consultations. The action area subject to consultation in this analysis is the entire area bounded by the three allotments, including the private land holdings. Other than what has been disclosed previously, there are no known projects or other activities planned to take place on private or State lands within in the consultation action area.

California condor (Gymnogyps californianus) Status - Federal and State Endangered History and Distribution - The California condor was federally listed as an endangered species in 1967. In 1987, after years of steady population declines the last nine wild condors were captured on the LPNF and brought into captivity. Since that time successful captive breeding programs have been ongoing at the Los Angeles Zoo, San Diego Wild Animal Park, and the World Center for Birds of Prey in Boise, Idaho (AZA 2003). In January 1992, the first two California condors were reintroduced into the Sespe Condor Sanctuary of the LPNF along with two Andean condors. A total of 13 California condors were released into the Sespe Condor Sanctuary from 1992 to 1994. Five of these birds died, four from collisions with power lines and one from ingestion of ethylene glycol, a poisonous ingredient of antifreeze (AZA 1995). The remaining eight were recaptured in March 1995 because of their tendency to use power line poles for day perches and overnight roosts. Since that time an aversive conditioning program has been used prior to release to train the condors to avoid utility poles. Alternative release sites, in more remote locations, have also been used. Release sites in the southern portion of the LPNF include the Sierra Madre Mountains and the Castle Crags area as well as Hopper Mountain National Wildlife Refuge (HMNWR) (AZA 1995). There is also a release site in the northern part of LPNF in the Ventana Wilderness. All free-flying condors are radio-monitored and managed primarily by the placement of carcasses for food. Currently there are approximately 40 condors occurring on the Los Padres National Forest. These birds range over the entire Los Padres National Forest and the western half of the Angeles National Forest. At any one time up to three quarters of these birds can be present in the Sespe Condor Sanctuary and Hooper Mountain National Wildlife Refuge. California condors are capable of extended flights (greater than 100 miles in a day), and the birds from the Ventana, Lion Canyon, and Sespe release sites in California often intermingle then return to their release areas (M. Freel, pers. comm.). Habitat - The entire Los Padres National Forest is modeled habitat for California condors. Condors are habitat generalists, foraging over open country and utilizing mountain updrafts for soaring. Nesting sites are typically located in caves or crevices on steep cliffs or large rock formations within chaparral, coniferous forests, or oak woodland communities. Traditional roosting sites include cliffs, large trees and snags, and are often near feeding and nesting areas (USDI Fish and Wildlife Service 2001). In particular isolated stands of tall trees such as Big-cone Douglas fir and Jeffery pine on high ridgelines are often used for roosting. There have been several nesting attempts on Los Padres National Forest the past few years. The first was in Hopper Canyon in December 2001 when a pair produced 3 eggs. The same pair produced a single egg at the same location in March 2002. A different pair of condors initiated breeding at Pole Canyon, with 1 egg found in 3/1/02 and 2 eggs found in 12/13/01. Historical nest sites existed along Alder Creek about 3 miles south of the project area (1966), at the eastern end of Pyramid Lake about 3.5 miles southeast of

the project area (1979), and at Sycamore Creek about 7 miles southwest of the project area (1966). Threats - The loss of large tracts of open country limits the availability and accessibility of natural foods, such as large sized deer, cattle, or sheep carrion. Reintroduced California condors have died from lead poisoning (resulting from ingestion of fragments of bullets and shot found in hunter-killed animals); collision with overhead transmission lines; ingesting toxins such as ethylene glycol (a primary ingredient of antifreeze); bullet wounds; predation by coyotes and golden eagles; ingestion of trash (bottle caps, aluminum pull tabs etc.); and unknown causes (Species Accounts, USDA 2005). In 2002, the three condor chicks that hatched in the wild on Los Padres National Forest died. At least one is known to have died from being fed too many garbage fragments by its parents. Another chick, hatched in the wild in 2003, was found distressed and under nourished. It was captured for analysis and recovery, and also had a stomach full of garbage fragments. It has since been released and is now the only condor fledged in the wild that is flying free in southern California. Potential threats to California condors from resource management activities on National Forest System lands include modification or loss of habitat (such as large trees), and behavioral or nesting disturbance by vegetation treatment activities, facilities maintenance (including roads), or recreation (Species Accounts, USDA 2005). Occurrence within the Project Area - Condors do on occasion forage over the project area. A majority of these birds probably wander into the project area from the adjacent Hopper Mountain NWR where the FWS maintains a feeding program. There are several cliff complexes near the northern boundary of the Pot Holes Allotment and the southwest boundary of the Piru Allotment that probably do harbor potential nest sites. In fact, during the winter and early spring of 2004/5 a pair did attempt to nest just south of the Piru Allotment on a steep cliff face that overlooked Lake Piru. For unknown reasons after about two months the pair abandoned the attempt. Direct Effects from the Proposal - None Indirect Effects of the Proposal – Cattle grazing in the three allotments may have an indirect benefit to foraging condors in that areas that would otherwise be overgrown with vegetation might be kept open enough so that dead animals would be more easily detected from above by condors. This attribute should be especially evident in and around loafing grounds, watering locations (troughs and springs) and salt licks. Another possible indirect benefit would be the potential sources of carrion provided by cattle mortalities as well as the afterbirths that result from the calving process. Cumulative Effects – Same as described in indirect effects. Determination for California Condor – Because of the above information and rationale I determine that the proposal to issue a term grazing permit for the Pot Holes, Temescal and Piru Allotment “May Affect, But Not Likely To Adversely Affect ” the California condor and will have “No Affect” on its federally designated critical habitat.

Least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) Status: Federal and State Endangered History and Distribution - Federally listed as endangered in 1986. Habitat alteration and predation by brown-headed cowbirds are thought to be the major reasons for population declines throughout its historic range in Southern California and northern Baja California. On the Los Padres National Forest, least Bell’s vireos have been found on the upper Santa Ynez River and above Gibraltar Reservoir on Mono and Indian Creeks (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999) where there is a small nesting population. There are records of singing males along the Sisquoc River and Paradise and Oso Creeks in the lower Santa Ynez Watershed (GIS data). California Natural Diversity Database records show a nesting pair of least Bell’s vireos about 6 miles south of the project area, along the Ventura River, in 1919. In 1993, 3 banded least Bell's vireos, one male and a pair, were found on the Ventura River (Greaves and Labinger 1997). In May 2001 a nest was found along the Ventura River, but reproduction was not successful. Habitat - Breeding habitat for least Bell’s vireo is typically low elevation riparian habitats below 2800 feet, particularly broad cottonwood-willow woodlands and mule fat scrub with dense clumps of woody vegetation (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999). None of the riparian habitat within the project area fits this description at the present time. On the Los Padres National Forest all areas with 2% or less stream gradient and below 2800 feet elevation were identified as modeled habitat for least Bell’s vireo. A review of the wildlife map (Appendix B) will reveal that this assessment did not model any vireo habitat in or near the project area. However, I believe a small amount was overlooked along Piru Creek adjacent to Canton Creek. This area is the gallery forest in the riparian “corridor” described previously in the minimization measures. This area is below 2800 feet and does have a gradient of less than 2 percent and it will be protected from cattle grazing via fencing as per the proposal. Threats - Decline of the least Bell’s vireo population is mainly attributed to brown-headed cowbird parasitism and habitat loss or degradation which can result from overgrazing, off-highway vehicle activity, concentrated recreation use, water diversions, and riparian vegetation loss from fire or flooding (Species Accounts, USDA 2005). Occurrence in the Project Area - There are no known occurrences of least Bell’s vireo within the project boundaries. However, there is a small nesting population located along the Santa Clara River about 5 miles south of the project area. Direct Effects from the Proposal - None Indirect Effects from the Proposal – There will be no deleterious indirect affects from the proposal to the vireo or its habitat. However, with cattle excluded the mid and under-story components of the gallery forest should recover over time to eventually become

suitable nesting habitat for the vireo. Birds to occupy this new habitat might arrive as spring migration overshoots from the nearby population along the Santa Clara River. Being roughly 30 acres in size the recovered habitat could support up to 5 pairs of nesting birds. Cumulative Effects – Same as described for indirect effects. Determination for the Least Bell’s Vireo – Because of the above information and rationale I determine that the proposal to issue a term grazing permit for the Pot Holes, Temescal and Piru Allotments as modified by the minimization measures “May Affect, But Not Likely To Adversely Affect” the least Bell’s vireo and its habitat. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) Status: Federal and State - Endangered History and Distribution – This race of the willow flycatcher was federally listed as endangered in 1995. Its range includes southern California, Arizona, New Mexico, southern Utah and Nevada, and western Texas (USFWS 1995). Willow flycatchers have been detected at several locations on Los Padres National Forest such as the upper Santa Ynez River, Deal Creek and Rose Valley and upper and lower Piru Creek. Habitat - The southwestern willow flycatcher typically breeds in low elevation riparian habitat, with dense mid-story and canopy cover along perennial water (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999). Southwestern willow flycatchers have also been found to nest in giant reed, Arundo donax, about 5 miles south of the project area along the Santa Clara River. (www.silcom.com/~greaves/aliens_swfl.html). A review of the wildlife map (Appendix B) shows that a small amount of the woody/willow riparian habitat in the project area (the 3 allotments plus the private land located within the allotments) is considered suitable for flycatcher nesting. The largest patch is about 20 acres along lower Reasoner Creek that is located on private base property. Most of this habitat is inaccessible to cattle because it is very dense and located in a narrow steep section of the creek. However, in recent conversations with the property owner it was agreed that cattle and other livestock would be excluded from this habitat patch via fencing. The agreement to fence this area is now part of the grazing proposal for the three allotments. The only suitable habitat on Forest Service administered land is a very small patch of about 2 acres in upper Reasoner Creek. This patch of habitat is protected from livestock by an existing drift-fence. Although the woody riparian habitat along Piru Creek does model out as potentially suitable (100-8000 feet in elevation, less than 2 percent gradient, surface water present during at least during part of the nesting season) for the flycatcher, none is currently suitable due to small patch size and lack of sufficient density for nesting especially amongst the willows. Now that cattle will be excluded from Piru Creek, I believe the

habitat in several locations along the creek does have the potential to recover and eventually provide suitable nesting habitat for flycatchers. To summarize, except for the 2 acres in upper Reasoner Creek, there is no Forest Service land within the allotments that contains suitable or occupied habitat for the southwestern willow flycatcher. Because the Forest Service allotment is interconnected with grazing management on the private base property in lower Reasoner Creek, the project analysis and determination for southwestern willow flycatcher will cover the 20 acres of suitable habitat in lower Reasoner Creek that is located on private property. Apparently the FWS did not consider the suitable habitat in Reasoner Creek as essential for flycatcher recovery because it was not designated during a recent finalization of critical habitat for the flycatcher. In fact that finalization did not designate any habitat on Los Padres National Forest. Occurrence within the Project Area – There are no records of flycatchers in the three allotments, but there are eleven along Piru Creek between upper Piru Lake and the Agua Blanca Creek area, which is located about three miles north of the project area (Map). There is a twelfth record from Piru Creek, not shown on the map, from just above Agua Blanca Creek. All the mapped records are from the late spring of 1999 (LPNF GIS Data Base) and only represent the presence of a bird and not occupancy on a nesting territory. However, the unmapped (12th) record above Agua Blanca Creek is notable because on June 7, 1992 Chris Farmer noted occupancy and presumed nesting at the site when two birds were observed interacting (singing and calling) and a bird was seen carrying food. Threats: Decline of the southwestern willow flycatcher population is mainly attributed to habitat loss and brown-headed cowbird parasitism (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999). Direct Effects from the Proposal – Since cattle will be excluded from the suitable and potentially suitable habitat within the project area via fencing there is little likelihood the proposal will have a meaningful direct effect (i.e., trampling, hedging) upon flycatcher habitat. Indirect Effects from the Proposal – As mentioned above nest predation by brown-headed cowbirds is thought to be one of the reasons for the population declines that inspired listing under ESA. It was also generally thought that cattle grazing near nesting flycatchers, as well as other species (i.e., Bell’s vireo), increased the probability of predation because cowbirds attracted to the cattle would have a greater probability of finding the nest. However, in the spring of 2002 Jamie Uyehara conducted avian point counts aided by playback recordings of female cowbirds in the riparian habitat along lower Piru Creek. Her purpose was to determine the relative abundance of cowbirds as related to the distance to cattle. Her results were presented in a draft report in 2004 (Appendix E). She found a very low abundance of cowbirds compared to other areas and a low correlation to the presence and/or distance of cowbirds to grazing cattle in the study area. She concluded livestock are unlikely to have an impact on flycatchers due to cowbird parasitism. I agree with her conclusion especially when coupled with the low

cattle numbers that will be permitted to graze (no more than 40 animal units spread over three allotment). Cumulative Effects – Except for 2 acres in upper Reasoner Creek, suitable and/or occupied habitat for southwestern willow flycatcher within the analysis area is on private land. Direct, indirect and cumulative effects analysis included consideration of 20 acres of suitable habitat in lower Reasoner Creek that is located on private property. Cumulative effects to southwestern willow flycatcher are the same as those described for direct and indirect effects. Determination for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher – Because of the above information and rationale I determine that the proposal to issue a term grazing permit for the Pot Holes, Temescal and Piru Allotments “May Affect, But Not Likely to Adversely Affect” the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher. Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus) Status: Federal- endangered Distribution: Arroyo toads occur from southwestern California into Baja California, Mexico. Approximately 36 percent of occupied arroyo toad habitat occurs on National Forest System lands, with 16 percent on the Los Padres National Forest (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999). Habitat: Arroyo toads are typically found in broad floodplains along wide, shallow streams below 4,500 feet elevation (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999). Breeding generally occurs in shallow (4-8 inch deep) quiet pools with little or no detectable current (gradients between 0-2%). Substrates include sandy bottoms, mixed small gravel, and hardpan streambed with little sediment evident. Many arroyo toad populations occur along streams that do not normally flow year-round. Flood terraces and other upland streamside habitats are important foraging and over-wintering sites. Arroyo toads have been detected up to one kilometer from a watercourse. Occurrence in the Project Area – A review of the wildlife map (Appendix B) shows that the corridor along Piru Creek is suitable and occupied by the toad and that the lower section of Canton Creek is suitable but not known to be occupied by the toad. Although toads have breed in the corridor in the past they have not done so in a number of years. Recent inspections suggest that the habitat in the corridor is improving (active deposition of sediments creating the necessary shallow breeding pools) and that breeding is likely to occur again in the future. In 2002, the Forest Service conducted surveys for the toad in Canton Creek. None were found. To date there are no records of arroyo toad in Canton Creek. Threats - Arroyo toad populations are declining mainly as a result of habitat loss due to urbanization, dams and reservoirs, sand and gravel mining, military operations, and

recreational uses on public lands. Habitat loss is also caused by exotic plant invasions in riparian areas (tamarisk and giant reed, Arundo donax). Other threats include predation, competition, and disease from exotic species (bullfrogs, crayfish, catfish, and sunfish), habitat losses due to vehicles and OHVs, suction dredging, water diversions, and water releases from reservoirs. Vehicular use of steam crossings and roads immediately adjacent occupied habitat can cause toad mortality. This project is not expected to threaten arroyo toads since they have not been found in the project area and the treatment will not alter modeled or occupied habitat. Direct Effects from the Proposal –The presence of approved biological monitors as stated in Minimization Measure 1 (use of Canton Creek Crossing) and 3 (suitable habitat in lower Canton Creek) will minimize impacts to the toad, its tadpoles and egg-strings. Having said that however, there is always the chance that an affect might occur. But with the implementation of the stated precautions, I believe the magnitude of the affect should not represent a threat to the viability of the population. Finally, Minimization Measure 2 (excluding cattle from the corridor) will prevent possible trampling mortality or harm to frogs, tadpoles and/or egg-strings. Indirect Effects from the Proposal – Excluding cattle from the corridor (Minimization Measure 2) will benefit toads by allowing metamorph/sub-adult hiding cover (bank vegetation near breeding ponds) to become better established. Cumulative Effects – Same as direct and indirect effects. Determination for the Arroyo Toad – Because of the above information and rationale I determine that the proposal to issue a term grazing permit for the Pot Holes, Temescal and Piru Allotments as modified by the minimization measures “May Affect, But Not Likely to Adversely Affect” the Arroyo Toad and will have “No Affect” on Arroyo Toad Critical Habitat. California Red-legged Frog, (Rana aurora draytoni) Status: Federal - Threatened Distribution – This subspecies was federally listed as threatened in 1996. The historic range of the California red-legged frog extended along the coast from Marin County, California, southward to northwestern Baja California, Mexico. California red-legged frogs now remain in only 248 streams, having lost approximately 70 percent of their former range (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2000). Habitat - Red-legged frogs are found in streams and ponds with emergent vegetation or in-stream roots and branches upon which the frogs attach their egg masses. Critical habitat includes: (a) Essential aquatic habitat- deep pools of slow moving water, (b) associated uplands- generally the riparian area; and (c) dispersal habitat connecting essential aquatic habitat (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2001). At any time of the year,

adult California red-legged frogs may move from breeding sites. They have been found over 1.8 mile up or downstream from breeding sites. On the Los Padres National Forest, a radio tracking study found that California red-legged frogs generally stayed within about 40 feet from water in adjacent dense riparian vegetation (M. Freel, pers. comm., Uyehara 2000). During periods of wet weather, starting with the first rains of fall, some individuals may make nocturnal overland excursions through upland habitats. Occurrence in the Project Area – There are no recent records for the frog in the Piru Creek Watershed. However there are four older records from near Agua Blanca Creek and Lake Piru (Sam Sweet, UCSB, 1983 and UWD? 1949). Because of these occurrences the FWS considers Piru Creek as occupied habitat and has designated Piru Creek as critical habitat for the frog. Under the proposal cattle will not be able to access California Red-legged frog habitat except when using the Canton Creek crossing. Per Minimization Measure 1, use of the crossing will be monitored and managed by a qualified biologist. Threats - Habitat loss and alteration, over-exploitation, and introduction of exotic predators, such as bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana) and introduced predatory fishes, were significant factors in the subspecies' decline in the early-to mid-1900s (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2000). Reservoir construction, prolonged drought, and loss of stream bank habitat and plunge pools due to grazing in riparian areas, has fragmented or eliminated many populations. Isolation and habitat fragmentation within many watersheds often precluded dispersal and genetic interaction between sub-populations. Vehicular use of steam crossings and roads immediately adjacent to occupied habitat can cause frog mortality. Population sizes can vary widely from year to year. During favorable years, California red-legged frogs can experience extremely high rates of reproduction. During periods of extended drought, frogs may temporarily disappear from an area. It is, therefore, important for the long-term survival and recovery of the species to protect those sites that appear to be unoccupied, but can be re-colonized by dispersing individuals from nearby sub-populations (Semlitsch 2000 in: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2001). This project is not expected to threaten red-legged frogs since they have not been found in the project area and the proposed action will not alter suitable or occupied habitat. Direct Effects from the Proposal – The presence of approved biological monitors during the use or maintenance of the Canton Creek Crossing as in Minimization Measure 1 will minimize or eliminate impacts to the frog or its tadpoles and egg masses if in the future they become established in the Piru Creek corridor. Excluding cattle from the corridor as in Minimization Measure 2 will minimize or eliminate possible trampling mortalities or harm to frogs, tadpoles and/or egg-strings. Indirect Effects from the Proposal – Excluding cattle from the corridor (Minimization Measure 2) will benefit frogs by allowing required habitat features such as deep steep sided pools, emergent vegetation and vegetative bank cover to improve and provide more optimal habitat if and when frogs re-occupy the Piru Creek corridor.

Cumulative Effects – Same as direct and indirect effects. Determination for the California Red-Legged Frog – Because of the above information and rationale I determine that the proposal to issue a term grazing permit for the Pot Holes, Temescal and Piru Allotments as modified by the minimization measures “May Affect, But Not Likely to Adversely Affect” the frog in all its live stages and “No Affect” critical habitat in the Piru Creek corridor. Removing cattle from the Piru Creek corridor may improve the suitability of the habitat in the future. Vernal Pool Invertebrates – A mentioned earlier there are no known occurrences of federally listed vernal pool invertebrates or designated critical habitat in the project area and no known potential habitat except for the seasonal pools known as the “Pot Holes” located in the upper section of the Pot Holes watershed. It is not known if listed invertebrates occupy the Pot Holes. Due to steep terrain and lack of forage cattle seldom visit this area and it is thought that if grazing did occur the intensity would be light. In addition, several studies suggest that livestock grazing in vernal pool habitat can increase biodiversity of native species. One such study (Marty, J. T., 2004) found that species richness declined by 25% and 28% in native plants and aquatic invertebrates respectively in un-grazed vernal pool habitats as opposed to grazed vernal pool habitats and that vegetative recovery after grazing ended shortened the inundation period of vernal pools by 50 to 80% making it difficult for some endemic vernal pool organisms to complete their life cycles. Determination for Vernal Pool Habitat – Because of the above information and rationale I determine that the proposal to issue a term grazing permit for the Pot Holes, Temescal and Piru Allotments as modified by the MMs will have “No Affect” on vernal pool habitat. In fact, some light grazing may have some beneficial affects on vernal pool habitat. REFERENCES BioSystems Analysis, Inc. 1981. Cliff-Nesting Raptor Habitat Survey of the Angeles, San Bernardino, and Los Padres National Forests. Unpublished report for the Los Padres National Forest. Goleta, CA. Chapman, Joseph A. and George A. Feldhammer, editors. 1982. Wild Mammals of North America: Biology, Management, and Economics. John Hopkins University Press. Baltimore, MD. 1147 pp. Eriksen, Clyde H., and Denton Belk. 1999. Fairy Shrimps of California’s Puddles, Pools, and Playas. Mad River Press, Inc. Eureka, CA. 196 pp.

Greaves, Jim and Zev Labinger. 1997. Site Tenacity and Dispersal of Least Bell’s Vireos. In, Transactions of the Western Section of the Wildlife Society 33:18-23, San Diego, CA, February 1997. Jennings, M. R. and M. P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and reptile species of special concern in California. Final report to the California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division, Rancho Cordova, CA. 255 pp. Los Padres National Forest. 2005. Revised Land and Resource Management Plan. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Los Padres National Forest, Goleta, CA. Los Padres National Forest. 1994. Riparian Conservation Strategy. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Los Padres National Forest, Goleta, CA. Marty, Jaymee T. 2004. Effects of Cattle Grazing on Diversity in Ephemeral Wetlands. Conservation Biology, Volume 19, Pages 1636-1632. National Audubon Society. 1997. Field guide to North American mammals. Chanticleer Press, Inc., New York. 937 pp. National Geographic Society. 1983. Field guide to the birds of North America. National Geographic Society. 464 pp. Stebbins, Robert C. 1966. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Peterson Field Guide Series, Houghton Mifflin Company. 279 pp. Stephenson, John R. and Gena M. Calcarone. 1999. Southern California Mountains and Foothill Assessment: habitat and species conservation issues. General Technical Report GTR-PSW-172. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 402 pp. USDA Forest Service. 1999. Southern California Mountains and Foothills Assessment; Habitat and Species Conservation Issues. General Technical Report. PSW-GTR-172. December 1999. USDA Forest Service. 2000. Southern California Conservation Strategy--Province Consultation Package for the Existing Forest Plans for the Four Southern California National Forests. Southern California Province. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Draft recovery plan for the least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus). Portland, OR: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001. Biological and Conference Opinions on the Continued Implementation of Land and Resource Management Plans for the Four Southern California National Forests, as Modified by New Interim Management Direction and Conservation Measures (1-6-00-F-773.2). Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001. Designation of Critical Habitat for the Red-legged Frog. Federal Register 66: 14625-14674. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for the California Red-Legged Frog. Federal Register 61: 25813. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Biological Opinion on the Effects of Ongoing Forest Activities that May Affect Listed Riparian Species on the Cleveland National Forest, the Los

Padres National Forest, the San Bernardino National Forest and Angeles National Forest in Southern California (1-6-99-F-21). Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule Determining Endangered Status for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher. Federal Register 60: 10694-10715. Uyehara, Jamie. 2000. Summary of findings of pit-tagged and radio telemetered California red-

legged frogs (Rana aurora draytonii) in upper Santa Ynez River, Los Padres National Forest, Santa Barbara, CA (unpublished).

Appendix A - Checklist of Federally Listed Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Wildlife Project: Piru Allotments Grazing Permit Issuance, Ojai RD Date of Analysis: January 2006, as listed November 2005 Page 1/3 Potentially Affected Habitats: Chaparral, Oak Grassland, Riparian/Aquatic Prepared by: John Brack, South Zone Biologist Range Survey Occu- Dist. to Project Effects w/in proj. w/in pied Modeled Obser- N-None (analysis complete) Common Name Status* Location** Suitable Habitat area? Area? Habitat Habitat vations Y-Yes P-Possible BIRDS EA = Effected Area

California Condor Gymnogyps californianus

S&F-E All Cliffs, open country, possibly redwoods

Yes Yes Yes Yes Extant P-Condors do forage over EA. Historic nest sites 1 mile north & 1 mile west of EA.

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus

SE & FT M, SB Lakes, reservoirs Yes No No No Extant N-On rare occasions birds visit Piru Lake and vicinity. Proposal will not affect these birds.

Brown Pelican Pelecanus occidentalis

S&F-E M Along coastline only No No No No N-Coastal only.

California Least Tern Sterna antillarum browni

S&F-E M Sandy gravelly beaches of coast, rivers, lakes

No No No No N-Coastal only.

Least Bell’s Vireo Vireo bellii pusillus

S&F-E SLO, SB & V

Low elevation (<2800’) riparian woodland

Yes Yes No Yes 10 miles SW

P-Modeled habitat exists along Piru Creek. Prob. suitable in places. No nesting known.

Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus

FT M Large old trees near coast No No No No N-Coastal only.

Western Snowy Plover Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus

FT M, SB Sandy/gravelly coastal beaches, alkali lakes

No No No No Many miles

N-No suitable habitat in or near the project area.

Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus

S&F-E All Dense riparian tree/shrub habitat

Yes Yes Yes Yes Extant P-Suitable nest habitat along Piru and Reasoner Creeks. Sightings in both areas.

Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis

FS-Sen All Coniferous forests Yes No No No 10 miles north

N-Transients may occur in or near project area. Proposal will not impact these birds.

California Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis occidentalis

FS-Sen All Dense mature mountain forests, riparian canyons

Yes No No No 5 miles west

N-No suitable nesting or foraging habitat in or near the project area.

Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainsoni

FS-Sen All Grasslands, agricultural fields with scattered trees

Yes No No No Many miles

N-No suitable nesting habitat in or near the project area.

Willow Flycatcher (northern ssp) Empidonax traillii

FS-Sen M & SLO Riparian tree/shrub habitat for nesting & migrants

Yes No No No Migrants only

N-Migrants may occur in project area, but proposal will not impact these birds.

Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus anatum

FS-Sen All Cliffs near waterfowl and forest bird habitats

Yes No No No Many miles

N-No nesting habitat near project area. Transients might occur but with no impact.

MAMMALS

San Joaquin Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis mutica

ST & FE SLO, SB, V & K

Arid grassland, scrubland, oak savanna, alkali sinks

No No No No 30 miles north

N-No suitable habitat in or near project area and outside the known range.

Southern Sea Otter Enhydra lutris nereis

FT M Marine No No No No N-Marine only

Giant Kangaroo Rat Dipodomys ingens

S&F-E SLO, SB, V & K

<2800’, flat arid areas No No No No 30 miles north

N-No suitable habitat in the project area and outside the known range.

Steller’s Sea Lion Eumetopias jubatus

FT M Marine No No No No N-Marine only

Mt. Pinos Lodgepole Chipmunk Tamias speciosus callipeplus

FS-Sen Mt. Pinos, Mt. Abel

Large patches of arid shrubs in mountains

No No No No 15 miles north

N-No suitable habitat in or near the project area and outside the known range.

Checklist of Federally Listed Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Wildlife Species Project: Piru Allotments Grazing Permit Issuance, Ojai Ranger District Page 2/3

Range Survey Occu- Dist. to Project Effects w/in proj. w/in pied Modeled Obser- N-None (analysis complete) Common Name Status* Location** Suitable Habitat area? Area? Habitat Habitat vations Y-Yes P-Possible MAMMALS, continued

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat Plecotus townsendii townsendii

FS-Sen All Caves, mines for roosting. Riparian for foraging.

Yes No ? No Extant? N-No suitable roosting habitat in project area. May forage but with no impact from proposal.

Tehachapi White-eared Pocket Mouse Perognathus alticola inexpectus

FS-Sen K Arid grass/scrub, pine woodlands, 3500’-6000’

No No No No 15 miles north

N-No suitable habitat in or near the project area.

Pallid Bat Antrozous pallidus

FS-Sen All Rock crevices, tree hollow, mines, caves, structures

Yes No ? No Extant? N-Suit. roosting & foraging hab. prob. exists in project area. No impact from proposal.

Western Red Bat Lasiurus blossevillii

FS-Sen All Riparian woodland for roosting and Foraging

Yes No ? No Extant? N-Suit. roosting & foraging hab. prob. exists in project area. No impact from proposal.

REPTILES

Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard Gambelia silus

S&F-E SLO, SB, V & K

Arid shrub in San Joaquin Valley and adj. valleys.

No No No No 30 miles NW

N-No suitable habitat in or near the project area.

Southwestern Pond Turtle Clemmys marmorata pallida

FS-Sen All <4000’, river/streams w/ deep pools

Yes Yes Yes No Extant P-Know to inhabit Piru Creek. Probably nest in adjacent river terraces.

San Diego Horned Lizard Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillii

FS-Sen V & K <7000’, open habitats with loose soil for burrowing

Yes Yes Yes No Extant P-No impacts from grazing activities. But fence or other construction might impact.

California Legless Lizard Anniella pulchra

FS-Sen All Riparian and nearby upland habitats <3,500’

Yes No Yes No Extant P-Probably occurs throughout effected area. Grazing activities might impact individuals.

Southern Rubber Boa Charina bottae umbratica

FS-Sen V, K >4,900’ moist woodland/conifer forest

No No No No 10 miles north

N-No suitable habitat in or near the project area.

Two-striped Garter Snake Thamnophis hammondii

FS-Sen SLO, SB, V & K

In and near aquatic and riparian habitats <7000’

Yes Yes Yes No Extant P-Know to inhabit riparian areas in EA. Mobile-Can avoid most impacts/

AMPHIBIANS

Arroyo Toad Bufo californicus

FE SLO, SB, & V

Low gradient reaches of perennial streams

Yes Yes Yes Yes Extant P-Suitable and occupied habitat along Piru Creek.

California Red-legged Frog Rana aurora draytoni

FT All Deep pools with vegetative bank cover <5000 feet

Historic Yes No Yes Extant? P-Suitable habitat exists in Piru Creek. Some recent sightings. Might be extirpated.

Foothill Yellow-legged Frog Rana boylii

FS-Sen M-Historic in all

Small perennial streams, highly aquatic, >2000’

Historic Yes No No 5 miles north?

N-Lower Piru not suitable Known in past from upper Piru, now thought extirpated.

Yellow-blotched Salamander Ensatina eschscholtzii croceator

FS-Sen V & K Moist mixed forests of oak and conifers

No No No No 15 miles north

N-No suitable habitat in or near the project area and outside the known range.

Tehachapi Slender Salamander Batrachoseps stebbinsi

FS-Sen V? & K? Moist middle elevation canyons, talus slopes

No No No No 10 miles north

N-No suitable habitat in or near the project area and outside the known range.

Checklist of Federally Listed Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Wildlife Species Project: Piru Allotment Grazing Permit Issuance, Ojai Ranger District Page 3/3

Range Survey Occu- Dist. to Project Effects w/in proj. w/in pied Modeled Obser- N-None (analysis complete) Common Name Status* Location** Suitable Habitat area? Area? Habitat Habitat vations Y-Yes P-Possible FISH EA–Effected Area

Tidewater Goby Eucyclogobius newberryi

FE M Coastal brackish water No No No No Many miles

N-Marine and Inter-tidal only

Southern Steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss

FE South of S.Maria R.

Perennial streams with unhindered access to sea

No Yes No No 5 miles south

N-Extirpated in upper Piru Creek due to dam construction.

Arroyo Chub Gila orcutti

FS-Sen SLO, SB, V & LA

Perennial streams with coarse gravel bottoms

Yes Yes Yes No Extant P-Introduced population in Piru Creek.

INVERTEBRATES

Smith’s Blue Butterfly Euphilotes enoptes smithi

FE M Coast prairie/shrub, coast and sea-cliff buckwheat

No No No No Many miles

N-Well outside known range and no suitable habitat in or near the project area.

Conservancy Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta conservatio

FE V Vernal pools ? No No No 20 miles NW

N-No suitable vernal pool habitat in or near the project area.

Longhorn Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta longiantenna

FE SLO, SB? Grassland vernal pools ? No No No Many miles

N-No suitable vernal pool habitat in or near the project area.

Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp Lepiduris packardi

FE Not known on Forest

Vernal pools and other seasonal ponds

? No No No Many miles

N-No suitable vernal pool habitat in or near the project area.

Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi

FT M, SLO, V, SB? & K?

Potreros, vernal pools and other seasonal ponds

? No No No 20 miles NW?

N-No suitable vernal pool habitat in or near the project area.

Status: California State list as of June 2003. FS-R5 updated Sensitive Species list as of May 2004; plus updates from FWS, Ventura Office every 90 days. F-Federal, S-State, FS- Forest Service, E-Endangered, T-Threatened, P-Proposed, Sen-Sensitive, R-Species at Risk ** K-Kern Co., M-Monterey Co., SLO-San Luis Obispo Co., SB-Santa Barbara Co., V-Ventura Co., MP-Mount Pinos Ranger District. If no specific indicator is shown to the contrary, assume occurrence in all areas.

PIRUALLOTMENT

POTHOLESALLOTMENT

LISK UNIT

TEMESCALALLOTMENT

REASONER UNIT

POTHOLESALLOTMENT

POTHOLES UNIT

TEMESCALALLOTMENT

RODEO FLAT UNIT

Appendix B - Piru AllotmentsESA Species & Critical Habitats

Condor/Historic NestSW Willow FlycatcherCA Red Legged FrogArroyo ToadProposed FenceSW Willow FlycatcherSuitable HabitatArroyo ToadCritical HabitatCA Red Legged FrogCritical HabitatAllotment Boundary

1:63,360.

PiruAllotments

November 2008

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

1

Appendix D

Brown-headed Cowbird distribution and abundance in the

southern Los Padres National Forest CHRIS FARMER JAMIE UYEHARA Southern Sierra Research Station Los Padres National Forest Weldon, CA 93283 Goleta, CA 93117

SUMMARY

The goal of this study was to determine the effect of potential feeding sites on the

distribution and abundance of Brown-headed Cowbirds (Molothrus ater) in the southern

Los Padres National Forest, California. The association between cowbirds and livestock

motivated the initiation of this study. We sought to determine the biological validity of

the interim separation of 3 miles (4,828 m) between grazing and breeding Southwestern

Flycatchers and Least Bell’s Vireos mandated by the U.S. District Court stipulation of

dismissal (No C 98-2434 SC, Southwest Center for Biological Diversity vs. G. Lynn

Sprague et al., 14 June 1998) for the southern California National Forests (Angeles,

Cleveland, Los Padres, and San Bernardino). Presumably, the court’s decision was

based upon the findings that cowbird abundance declines at distances greater than 4

km from their feeding source (Verner and Rothstein 1988, Tewksbury et al. 1999,

Curson et al. 2000).

We conducted 5-min point counts, followed by 1-min of female cowbird

playback and then an additional 5-min observation period, at 139 morning and 101

afternoon sites in 2002. Cowbirds were detected at a low abundance (0.388 males/site,

0.086 females/site) at 26.6% of morning sites. In the afternoons, cowbirds occurred at

fewer sites (6.8%), but at a higher abundance (0.614 males/site, 0.485 females/site).

There was no significant difference in cowbird occurrence between riparian and feeding

sites in the morning, but in the afternoons they were much less frequent in riparian

habitat. There was no temporal difference in feeding site usage, suggesting that

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

2

cowbirds were not commuting. Cowbirds were detected 0-14 km from grazing. We

examined the relationship between cowbirds and distance to grazing in both the

morning and afternoon using three different analysis methods. Our results did not

indicate that cowbird occurrence was higher near cattle, and one analysis suggested

that as the distance to livestock increased the probability of cowbirds occurring in the

afternoon increased.

Overall, we found that livestock are unlikely to have a negative impact on

endangered birds due to cowbird parasitism. Our results tentatively indicate that the 3

mile buffer zone is unnecessary to protect endangered host species from cowbird

parasitism. An important caution is that our study detected a higher abundance and

increased distribution compared to the 1988-1996 study. If the cowbird population is

actually increasing, changing grazing policy based upon one year’s results could be

unwarranted. Avian populations can rapidly change, as can parasitism rates (Ortega

and Cruz 1991, Trail and Baptista 1993). We only examined one, indirect way livestock

can impact the local avifauna. Before removing the three mile buffer zone the other

negative impacts of livestock need to be considered. Livestock are known to cause

degradation and loss of riparian habitat through actual grazing of the vegetation,

reduction of vegetation density in nesting habitat and physical alteration of the

watershed (Kauffman and Krueger 1984, Clary and Webster 1989, Johnson 1992, Saab et

al. 1995, Trimble and Mendel 1995, Ohmart 1996, Belsky et al. 1999, USFWS 2001b).

Cattle can even directly destroy nests when foraging (Valentine et al. 1988). Before

changes to grazing policy are implemented a full consideration of the impacts with

regards to the best management practices needs to be considered (USFS Pacific

Southwest Regional Office 2000).

The low abundance of cowbirds, and subsequently probable low parasitism rates

suggest that general cowbird control measures are unnecessary. Rothstein and Cook

(2000) provide a very useful discussion of when and where cowbird control is

appropriate, and its effectiveness as a management tool. Even when cowbird removal

occurred along the upper Santa Ynez River to protect the Least Bell’s Vireo, this

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

3

population continued to decline suggesting it was not due to cowbirds (Rothstein and

Cook 2000). The influence of additional factors such as microhabitat variation and

urban feeding opportunities could be important. Clarifying the relationship between

cowbirds, hosts, and various land usages will lead to the development and

implementation of more proactive conservation and management practices to protect

priority bird species and habitats.

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

4

ABSTRACT The goal of this study was to determine the effect of potential feeding sites on the

distribution and abundance of Brown-headed Cowbirds (Molothrus ater) in the southern

Los Padres National Forest, California. Potential cowbird feeding sites are grasslands,

with or without livestock, agricultural fields, and urban areas. We conducted 5-min

point counts, followed by 1-min of female cowbird playback and then an additional 5-

min observation period, at 139 morning and 101 afternoon sites in 2002. Cowbirds were

detected at a low abundance (0.388 males/site, 0.086 females/site) at 26.6% of morning

sites. In the afternoons, cowbirds occurred at fewer sites (6.8%), but at a higher

abundance (0.614 males/site, 0.485 females/site). There was no significant difference in

cowbird occurrence between riparian and feeding sites in the morning, but in the

afternoons they were much less frequent in riparian habitat. There was no temporal

difference in feeding site usage, suggesting that cowbirds were not commuting. We

also calculated a preliminary estimate of the cowbird parasitism threat to potential host

species. The female cowbird:host ratio was extremely low, 0.0047, suggesting a very

low parasitism rate. We found an increase in abundance, distribution and cowbird:host

ratios when compared with a 1988-1996 study. Cowbirds were detected 0-14 km from

grazing. We examined the relationship between cowbirds and distance to grazing in

both the morning and afternoon using two different analysis methods. Our results did

not indicate that cowbird occurrence was higher near cattle, and one analysis suggested

that as the distance to livestock increased the probability of cowbirds occurring in the

afternoon increased. A similar suite of analyses showed [??] relationship between

cowbirds and ungrazed grasslands, urban locations, or human density.

MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

The association between cowbirds and livestock motivated the initiation of this

study. We sought to determine the biological validity of the interim separation of 3

miles (4,828 m) between grazing and breeding Southwestern Flycatchers and Least

Bell’s Vireos mandated by the U.S. District Court stipulation of dismissal (No C 98-2434

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

5

SC, Southwest Center for Biological Diversity vs. G. Lynn Sprague et al., 14 June 1998)

for the southern California National Forests (Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres, and San

Bernardino). Presumably, the court’s decision was based upon the findings that

cowbird abundance declines at distances greater than 4 km from their feeding source

(Verner and Rothstein 1988, Tewksbury et al. 1999, Curson et al. 2000).

We found that livestock are unlikely to have a negative impact on endangered

birds due to cowbird parasitism. Our results tentatively indicate that the 3 mile buffer

zone is unnecessary to protect endangered host species from cowbird parasitism. An

additional analysis comparing cowbird occurrence at sites greater and lesser than three

miles (4,828 m), found no significant difference (morning: Mann-Whitney, U = 2303.5, p

= 0.9; afternoon: U = 1308.5, p = 0.16). An important caution is that our study detected a

higher abundance and increased distribution compared to the 1988-1996 study. If the

cowbird population is actually increasing, changing grazing policy based upon one

year’s results could be unwarranted. Avian populations can rapidly change, as can

parasitism rates (Ortega and Cruz 1991, Trail and Baptista 1993). We only examined

one, indirect way livestock can impact the local avifauna. Before removing the three

mile buffer zone the other negative impacts of livestock need to be considered.

Livestock are known to cause degradation and loss of riparian habitat through actual

grazing of the vegetation, reduction of vegetation density in nesting habitat and

physical alteration of the watershed (Kauffman and Krueger 1984, Clary and Webster

1989, Johnson 1992, Saab et al. 1995, Trimble and Mendel 1995, Ohmart 1996, Belsky et

al. 1999, USFWS 2001b). Cattle can even directly destroy nests when foraging

(Valentine et al. 1988). Before changes to grazing policy are implemented a full

consideration of the impacts with regards to the best management practices needs to be

considered (USFS Pacific Southwest Regional Office 2000).

The low abundance of cowbirds, and subsequently probable low parasitism rates

suggest that general cowbird control measures are unnecessary. Rothstein and Cook

(2000) provide a very useful discussion of when and where cowbird control is

appropriate, and its effectiveness as a management tool. Even when cowbird removal

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

6

occurred along the upper Santa Ynez River to protect the Least Bell’s Vireo, this

population continued to decline suggesting it was not due to cowbirds (Rothstein and

Cook 2000). The influence of additional factors such as microhabitat variation and

urban feeding opportunities could be important. Clarifying the relationship between

cowbirds, hosts, and various land usages will lead to the development and

implementation of more proactive conservation and management practices to protect

priority bird species and habitats.

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

7

LITERATURE CITED Belsky, A. J., A. Matzke, and S. Uselman. 1999. Survey of livestock influences on stand dynamics and

soils in upland forest of the interior West. Conservation Biology 11: 315-328. Clary, W. P. and B. F. Webster. 1989. Managing Grazing of the Riparian Areas in the Intermountain

Region. General Technical Report INT-263, USDA Forest Service Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah.

Curson, D. R., C. B. Goguen, and N. E. Mathews. 2000. Long-distance commuting by Brown-headed Cowbirds in New Mexico. Auk 117: 795-799.

Johnson, K. L. 1992. Management for water quality on rangelands through best management practices: the Idaho approach. in Watershed Management: Balancing Sustainability and Environmental Change. (R. J. Naiman, ed.). Springer-Verlag, New York, New York.

Kauffman, J. B., and C. W. Krueger. 1984. Livestock impacts on riparian ecosystems and streamside management implications… a review. Journal of Range Management 37: 430-438.

Ohmart, R. D. 1996. Historical and present impacts of livestock grazing on fish and wildlife resources in western riparian habitats. in Rangeland Wildlife. (P. R. Krausman, ed.). Society of Rangeland Management, Denver, Colorado.

Ortega, C. P., and A. Cruz. 1991. A comparative study of cowbird parasitism in Yellow-headed Blackbirds and Red-winged Blackbirds. Auk 108:16-24.

Rothstein, S. I., and T. L. Cook. 2000. Cowbird management, host population regulation and efforts to save endangered species. in Ecology and Management of Cowbirds and their Hosts. (J. N. M. Smith, T. L. Cook, S. K. Robinson, S. I. Rothstein and S. G. Sealy eds.). University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas.

Saab, V. A., C. E. Bock, T. D. Rich, and D. S. Dobkin. 1995. Livestock grazing effects in western North America. in Ecology and Management of Neotropical Migratory Birds. (T. E. Martin and D. M. Finch, eds.). Oxford University Press, New York, New York.

Tewksbury, J. J., T. E. Martin, S. J. Hejl, T. S. Redman, and F. J. Wheeler. 1999. Cowbirds in a western valley: effects of landscape structure, vegetation and host density. Studies in Avian Biology 18: 23-33.

Trail, P. W., and L. F. Baptista. 1993. The impact of Brown-headed Cowbird parasitism on populations of the Nuttall's White-crowned Sparrow. Conservation Biology 7: 309-315.

Trimble, S. W., and A. C. Mendel. 1995. The cow as a geomorphic agent - a critical review. Geomorphology 13: 233-253.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001b. Draft Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Plan, Appendix G: management of livestock grazing in the recovery of the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher. Albuquerque, New Mexico.

U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Regional Office. 2000. Water quality management for National Forest system lands in California: best management practices. http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/water_resources/waterquality/index.html

Valentine, B. A., T. A. Roberts, S. P. Boland, and A. P. Woodman. 1988. Livestock management and productivity of Willow Flycatchers in the central Sierra Nevada. Transactions Western Section, Wildlife Society 24: 105-114.

Verner, J., and S. I. Rothstein. 1988. Implications of range expansion into the Sierra Nevada by the parasitic Brown-headed Cowbird. in Proceedings of the State of the Sierra Symposium: 1985-86. (D. Bradley, ed.). Pacific Publications Company, San Francisco, California.

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

8

TABLES 1 Cowbird occurrence and abundance in the southern Los Padres National Forest using the 11-min

survey protocol. The number of total survey sites in each class are indicated in the headings. All minimums and medians were zero.

2 Mean number of cowbirds detected per count by transect. 3 Number of sites where cowbirds were detected in 1988-1996. Surveys in the same watersheds from

2002 are included for comparison. The first number in parenthesis is the number of surveys conducted in 1988-1996, and if the 2002 survey effort was different it is indicated by a second number in parenthesis.

4 Female chatter significantly increased the number sites where cowbirds were detected (Fisher’s exact

test was used in all analyses). Detections during the initial point count surveys are in the rows, and detections during chatter playback and observation periods are in the columns. The morning sample sizes are not consistent between males, females and total because the time the cowbird departed was not recorded at two sites.

FIGURES 1 The grazing allotments and private inholdings of the Los Padres National Forest. 2 Locations of 2002 survey sites in the sLP. 3 Locations of 1988-1996 survey sites in the sLP. 4 The mean number of cowbirds detected per count station, proportion of count stations where

cowbirds were detected, and total cowbird:host ratios in the southern Los Padres National Forest from 1988-1996, and those 2002 surveys in approximately the same locations. The first two results use the left-hand y-axis, while the cowbird:host ratio uses the right-hand y-axis. The two datasets used different methods, 63 10-min point counts in 1988-1996, and 29 5-min point counts in 2002. The complete 139 5-min point counts in 2002 detected 0.187 cowbird/count, 0.122% sites with cowbirds, and a total cowbird:host ratio of 0.0300.

5 The 25 most frequently detected species during morning surveys, including cowbirds. Cowbirds

detected in the 5-min point counts (BHCO-p) and in the full 11-min survey protocol (BHCO-t) are shown separately. All scientific names are in Appendix II.

6 The distance from livestock of all surveys and cowbird detections during morning and afternoon

surveys in 2002. 7 Moving average of cowbirds at various distances from livestock. The cowbird number was averaged

every 200 m from grazing, and then a moving average was calculated every five segments (0-1000, 200-1200, 400-1400, etc).

8 Proportion of survey sites where cowbirds were detected, partitioned by 400 m distance classes. APPENDICES

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

9

I. Field surveys and Brown-headed Cowbird detections in the Los Padres National Forest, 2002. II. Summary of avian biodiversity in the southern Los Padres National Forest, 2002.

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

10

Table 1. Cowbird occurrence and abundance in the southern Los Padres National

Forest using the 11-min survey protocol. The number of total survey sites in each class

are indicated in the headings. All minimums and medians were zero.

MORNING

feeding sites (n = 16) riparian sites (n = 123)

male female total male female total

n (%) 7 (44) 1 (6) 7 (44) 28 (23) 8 (7) 30 (24)

max 2 1 3 6 2 8

mean 0.50 0.06 0.56 0.32 0.09 0.41

SD 0.63 0.25 0.81 0.75 0.36 0.99

AFTERNOON

feeding sites (n = 14) riparian sites (n = 87)

male female total male female total

n (%) 3 (21) 2 (14) 3 (21) 3 (3) 3 (3) 4 (5)

max 16 10 26 35 31 66

mean 1.50 0.93 2.43 0.47 0.41 0.89

SD 4.31 2.73 7.04 3.78 3.35 7.13

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

11

Table 2. Mean number of cowbirds detected per count by transect.

watershed/ # am am # pm pm transect counts mean counts mean

Cuyama River Alamo Crk (Ozena) 1 1.00 — — Rancho Nuevo 8 0.00 8 0.00 Reyes Creek 5 2.60 4 18.50

LaBrea Creek N. Fork LaBrea Creek 8 0.12 — — S. Fork LaBrea Creek 6 0.17 5 0.00

Piru Creek Hardluck 5 0.40 5 0.00 Lower Piru Creek 7 0.14 5 0.00 Pyramid Dam 5 0.80 — — Reasoner Canyon 1 0.00 — —

Santa Barbara Canyon 12 0.75 12 0.00

Santa Clara River Little Sespe Creek 3 0.33 2 0.50 Sisar Canyon 7 0.29 7 0.00

Santa Ynez River Agua Caliente 3 0.67 3 0.00 Cachuma Creek 4 0.00 4 0.00 Lower SYR 9 0.33 5 0.00 Mono Creek 2 1.00 2 0.00 Upper SYR 8 0.50 8 1.13

Sespe River Howard Creek 2 0.50 2 0.00 Lion Canyon 1 2.00 — — Rose Valley Creek 2 1.00 1 0.00 Sespe River 2 1.00 1 0.00

Sisquoc River 6 0.17 5 5.20

Toro Canyon 4 0.75 4 0.25 Upper Piru Creek Lockwood Creek 6 0.00 6 0.00 Piru Crk (Mutau Flats) 9 0.00 5 0.00

Ventura River

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

12

Matilija Creek 4 0.00 — — N. Fk. Matilija Crk 3 0.33 — — Senior Creek 1 0.00 1 0.00 Thatcher Creek 1 0.00 1 0.00 Ventura River 4 0.75 4 0.00

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

13

Table 3. Number of sites where cowbirds were detected in 1988-1996. Surveys in the same watersheds

from 2002 are included for comparison. The first number in parenthesis is the number of surveys

conducted in 1988-1996, and if the 2002 survey effort was different it is indicated by a second number in

parenthesis.

watershed / transect 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 02

Piru Creek

Dominquez Canyon (5) 1 2 2 5 3 1 0 0 1 —

Hard Luck (5) — — — — — — — — — 1

Piru Creek (3; 7) 0 2 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 1

Pyramid Dam (4; 5) 4 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 1 1

Reasoner Canyon (1) — — — — — — — — — 0

Santa Ynez River

Agua Caliente (7; 3) 1 4 0 0 2 0 1 0 4 1

Cachuma Creek (4) 0 0 2 0 3 1 1 0 2 0

Camuesa Creek (3) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 —

Lower SYR (7; 9) 2 3 3 0 1 1 1 1 3 2

Mono Creek (2) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Oso Canyon (3) 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 —

Upper SYR (5; 8) 3 3 1 2 2 1 0 2 0 3

Sespe River

Howard Creek (2) — — — — — — — — — 1

Lion Canyon (2; 1) 1 0 2 0 1 1 1 1 0 1

Rose Valley (2) 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1

Sespe River (4; 2) 1 3 2 3 2 1 1 0 0 1

Sisquoc River

Fir Creek (4) 0 0 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 —

Ventura River

Matilija Creek (4) — — — — — — — — — 1

Murietta Canyon (3) 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 —

N. Fork Matilija (5; 3) 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 2 0 1

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

14

Senior Creek (1) — — — — — — — — — 0

Thatcher Creek (1) — — — — — — — — — 0

Ventura River (4) — — — — — — — — — 2

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

15

Table 4. Female chatter significantly increased the number sites where cowbirds were

detected (Fisher’s exact test was used in all analyses). Detections during the initial

point count surveys are in the rows, and detections during chatter playback and

observation periods are in the columns. The morning sample sizes are not consistent

between males, females and total because the time the cowbird departed was not

recorded at two sites.

MALES MORNING (p = 0.007) AFTERNOON (p < 0.001)

playback playback

absent present total absent present total

point absent 104 18 122 absent 95 2 97

count present 8 7 15 present 0 4 4

total 112 25 137 total 95 6 101

FEMALES MORNING (p > 0.1) AFTERNOON (p < 0.001)

playback playback

absent present total absent present total

point absent 130 7 137 absent 96 2 98

count present 1 1 15 present 0 3 3

total 131 8 139 total 96 5 101

TOTAL MORNING (p = 0.004) AFTERNOON (p < 0.001)

playback playback

absent present total absent present total

point absent 102 19 121 absent 94 3 97

count present 8 8 16 present 0 4 4

total 110 27 137 total 94 7 101

Cowbird distribution in sLPNF D R A F T I I Farmer and Uyehara

16