environmental assessment for trail...

FINAL

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

FOR

TRAIL CONSTRUCTION AND

MAINTENANCE

OF THE

BARON RIDGE TRAIL

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

FOREST SERVICE

LOS PADRES NATIONAL FOREST

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

SUPPORTED BY

THE SANTA BARBARA COUNTY TRAILS COUNCIL

APRIL 2015

USDA Forest Service Baron Ridge Trail

EA for the Baron Ridge Trail Page i

April 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

SECTION 1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................ 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1

1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED ................................................................................................. 3 1.3 DECISION FRAMEWORK ........................................................................................... 4 1.4 PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT ...................................................................... 4

SECTION 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES .. 5

2.1 PROPOSED ACTION................................................................................................... 5

2.2 PROPOSED ACTION ROUTE ....................................................................................... 5 2.2.1 Project Components .................................................................................... 8

2.2.2 Trail Access and Use ................................................................................ 10

2.3 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES........................................................................................ 12 2.4 MITIGATIONS AND BMPS APPLICABLE TO ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES ............... 13

SECTION 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES .......................... 17

3.1 ISSUES ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS .................................................... 17 3.1.1 Air Quality ................................................................................................ 17

3.1.2 Noise ......................................................................................................... 18 3.1.3 Environmental Justice ............................................................................... 18 3.1.4 Socioeconomics ........................................................................................ 18

3.1.5 Hazardous Materials and Wastes .............................................................. 19

3.2 VISUAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................... 19 3.2.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................... 19 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action ............................. 20

3.2.3 Environmental Consequences of the Project Alternative ......................... 21 3.2.4 Environmental Consequences of the No-Action Alternative.................... 21

3.3 LAND USE .............................................................................................................. 22 3.3.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................... 22

3.3.2 Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action ............................. 25 3.3.3 Environmental Consequences of the Project Alternative ......................... 26 3.3.4 Environmental Consequences of the No-Action Alternative.................... 27

3.4 VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE ................................................................................. 28

3.4.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................... 28 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action ............................. 34 3.4.3 Proposed Biological Best Management Practices..................................... 38


3.5 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ......................................................................................... 40 3.5.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................... 40 3.5.2 Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action ............................. 41 3.5.3 Proposed Erosion and Sedimentation Best Management Practices .......... 43


EA for the Baron Ridge Trail Page ii

April 2015

3.5.4 Environmental Consequences of the Project Alternative ......................... 44

3.5.5 Environmental Consequences of the No-Action Alternative.................... 44 3.6 WATER RESOURCES ............................................................................................... 44

3.6.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................... 44


3.7 CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES.............................................................. 47 3.7.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................... 47


3.8 FIRE HAZARDS ....................................................................................................... 51

3.8.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................... 51 3.8.2 Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action ............................. 51


3.9 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC SERVICES ............................................................. 52 3.9.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................... 52 3.9.2 Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action ............................. 54


3.10 RECREATION .......................................................................................................... 55 3.10.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................... 55 3.10.2 Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action ............................. 59

3.10.3 Environmental Consequences of the Project Alternative ......................... 60

3.10.4 Environmental Consequences of the No-Action Alternative.................... 60

SECTION 4.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .............................................................................. 61

4.1 KEY FACTORS IN EVALUATING CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ......................................... 61

4.2 PLANNED PROJECTS IN THE VICINITY .................................................................... 61 4.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .......................................................................................... 63

SECTION 5.0 SOURCES ........................................................................................................... 64

SECTION 6.0 REPORT PREPARERS .................................................................................... 68


EA for the Baron Ridge Trail Page iii

April 2015

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1. Proposed Implementation of Forest Service Trail Design Standards ............................ 8 LPNF Santa Barbara Front – Land Management Strategy ........................................................... 22 Table 3-1. Land Ownership and Use Under the Proposed Action ................................................ 25

Table 3-2. Land Ownership and Use Under the Project Alternative ............................................ 26 Table 3-3. Erosion and Sedimentation Trail Design Features ...................................................... 43

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1. Project Location Map and Regional Setting ................................................................ 2

Figure 2-1. Proposed Baron Ridge Trail Project Area .................................................................... 6 Figure 2-2. Connecting Trails ....................................................................................................... 11

Figure 3-1. Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the Proposed Baron Ridge Trail ...................... 23 Figure 3-2. Recreational Uses in the Vicinity of the Proposed Baron Ridge Trail ...................... 57

APPENDICES

Appendix A Interested Federal, State, Local Agencies, and Public

Appendix B Biological Resources Technical Report for Trail Construction and

Maintenance of the Baron Ridge Trail


EA for the Baron Ridge Trail Page iv

April 2015

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AIRFA American Indian Religious

Freedom Act

ARPA Archaeological Resources

Protection Act

BC Back Country

BMP Best Management Practice

CDFG California Department of Fish and

Game

CDFW California Department of Fish and

Wildlife

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CNDDB California Natural Diversity

Database

CNPS California Native Plant Society

CWA Clean Water Act

dB decibel

DNL day-night average sound level

EA Environmental Assessment

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EO Executive Order

ESA Endangered Species Act

ESU Evolutionarily Separate Unit

FEMA Federal Emergency Management

Agency

FICUN Federal Interagency Committee on

Urban Noise

LPNF Los Padres National Forest

MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act

msl mean sea level

NAGPRA Native American Graves

Protection and Repatriation Act

NEPA National Environmental Policy

Act

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NPS National Park Service

NRHP National Register of Historic

Places

p-line preliminary trail line

ROS Recreation Opportunity Spectrum

RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control

Board

SBTC Santa Barbara Trails Council

SOPA Schedule of Proposed Actions

spp. species

SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention

Plan

US United States

USC United States Code

USDA United States Department of

Agriculture

USEPA US Environmental Protection

Agency

USFS United States Forest Service

USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife

Service

USGS United States Geological Survey

var. a group of organisms within a

species that differs from similar

groups


EA for the Baron Ridge Trail Page 1

April 2015

SECTION 1.0

PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The Santa Barbara Trails Council (SBTC)

proposes to construct and maintain a 3.5-mile

extension of the existing Santa Barbara

County Baron Ranch Trail, primarily onto and

across land under the management of the Los

Padres National Forest (LPNF). The proposed

trail would extend from the existing Baron

Ranch Trail up to and along a ridgeline to the

crest of the Santa Ynez Mountains. The

project would be the first new trail constructed

to the crest of the Santa Ynez Mountains in

the Santa Barbara Front Country of LPNF in

more than 30 years. The proposed trail would enhance non-motorized public access to an area of

LPNF that is currently inaccessible via any established route, and would be one of only two

Front County trails to provide access to LPNF land in the 26 mile reach of the Forest west of

California State Route 154. The Trail would provide connections to the West Camino Cielo

jeepway within LPNF, and to Gaviota State Park trails to the west, creating a 14.9-mile-long trail

system across county, state, and federal land.

The proposed project is located on the Gaviota Coast in Santa Barbara County, California,

approximately 2.5 miles northwest of Refugio State Park (Figure 1-1). The proposed trail would

link the existing Baron Ranch Trail, owned and maintained by Santa Barbara County, with lands

under the management of LPNF. Short segments of the proposed new ridgeline trail route would

cross the County-owned Baron Ranch, and the Arroyo Hondo Preserve, owned and operated by

the Land Trust for Santa Barbara County.

The SBTC proposes to construct and maintain this trail at little or no direct cost to the United

States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. The SBTC has obtained grants to fund

project construction and environmental review and proposes to open an account to cover the

expenses of Forest Service staff review of trail design and construction issues. The SBTC also

proposes to enter into a formal agreement with the Forest Service to maintain the proposed trail

and to open an account dedicated solely to funding future trail maintenance.

The proposed Baron Ridge Trail would rise approximately

1,700 feet over 3.5 miles, crossing a variety of habitats to

the crest of the Santa Ynez Mountains



April 2015

Figure 1-1. Project Location Map and Regional Setting



April 2015

1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED

The purpose of the proposed Baron Ridge

Trail is to provide non-motorized recreational

access to an area of LPNF that is currently

largely inaccessible to the public. The

proposed project would also improve

recreational opportunities and connectivity

between existing trails on County-owned land

and Gaviota State Park, and to land within the

LPNF, furthering interagency cooperation on

provision of public recreational opportunities.

The need for the proposed action stems from the very limited access to and recreational

opportunities available on LPNF land within the Gaviota area of the Santa Ynez Mountains; this

area has been recognized as appropriate for semi primitive non-motorized recreation (USDA

Forest Service 2005). Presently, only the rustic West Camino Cielo jeepway provides access to

the Gaviota portion of the Santa Ynez Mountains in the 26 miles of the LPNF west of California

State Route 154.

This limited access renders large areas of LPNF inaccessible to non-motorized recreation and

increases demand for and user conflicts on the limited number of Front Country trails east of

California State Route 154, such as the Tunnel, Romero Canyon, and Cold Springs Trails.

Existing and potential access to this section of the LPNF Front Country is severely constrained

due to the limited number of public roads that border or traverse LPNF land in this area; private

lands, including active agricultural operations in the foothills located between public roads (e.g.,

US Highway 101, Refugio Road) and LPNF-managed land; and areas of steep topography.

These constraints limit public access to LPNF lands in this 26 mile segment of the LPNF Front

Country and present challenges with regard to completion of new public trails that would provide

access to the LPNF in most of this Front Country area. Because a continuous band of public and

quasi-public land (i.e., Arroyo Hondo Preserve) extends from US Highway 101 to LPNF land in

this area, the proposed project route is one of very few locations in the region where completion

of a trail to provide access to LPNF land from a public road across primarily public land is

feasible. In addition, the project would foster interagency cooperation in meeting recreational

demand by linking a County-owned and operated trail to LPNF lands and connecting via the

West Camino Cielo jeepway to trails within Gaviota State Park, approximately 5 miles to the

west.

The proposed Baron Ridge Trail would provide access to an

area of LPNF that is currently largely inaccessible to non-

motorized public recreation.



April 2015

1.3 DECISION FRAMEWORK

The Environmental Assessment (EA) discloses the environmental consequences of implementing

the Proposed Action, the Project Alternative, and the No-Action Alternative. The responsible

official will review the EA and make a decision whether to authorize final design, construction,

and maintenance of the 3.0-mile portion of the Baron Ridge Trail in LPNF lands under the

jurisdiction of the USDA Forest Service. A separate Decision Notice and Finding of No

Significant Impact, signed by the responsible official, explains the management and

environmental rationale for selecting an alternative to be implemented. If a decision is made to

authorize the trail, then required permits will be issued in compliance with the decision.

1.4 PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT

The Forest Service invited public participation in decision-making on new proposals through the

environmental impact analysis process. Several methods were used to solicit comments from

members of the public, agencies, tribes, adjacent property owners, and organizations (refer to

Appendix A for a list of contacted parties). The project was listed in the LPNF Schedule of

Proposed Actions (SOPA) online. A scoping letter was mailed to potentially interested parties,

and a notice of a scoping meeting was placed in the Santa Barbara News-Press on 29 February

2012. A scoping meeting was held at Forest Service-LPNF Headquarters on 13 March 2012.

Scoping letter responses were received from the County of Santa Barbara Resource Recovery

and Waste Management Division and the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians (see

Appendix A).

All comments from the scoping process have been analyzed and addressed as appropriate either

in the document or by direct correspondence. Comments received during the 30-day notice and

comment period have been incorporated and included in the Final EA. A list of individuals and

groups who submitted comments through the planning process, their comments, and USDA

Forest Service consideration of comments have been assembled and updated throughout

development of the EA (Appendix A).



April 2015

SECTION 2.0

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES

2.1 PROPOSED ACTION

The proposed Baron Ridge Trail would be an extension of Santa Barbara County’s Baron Ranch

Trail. The proposed extension, approximately 3.5-miles long, would provide improved

connectivity between existing trails on County land, Gaviota State Park, and land within LPNF.

The Proposed Action consists of construction, maintenance, and use of this trail extension.

2.2 PROPOSED ACTION ROUTE

The proposed trail extension would extend for

approximately 3.5 miles from the northern end of a

tributary of Arroyo Quemado Creek to the ridgeline that

separates this watershed from that of Arroyo Hondo

Creek to the west and along this ridgeline to the crest of

the Santa Ynez Mountains (Figure 2-1). A preliminary

trail line (p-line) was developed by the SBTC in 2010.

Initial design focused on identifying a direct, scenic route

from the existing Baron Ranch Trail to the West Camino

Cielo jeepway and thereby providing a connection

between lands under County ownership, those within the

LPNF, and the existing Gaviota State Park trails network

to the west. The proposed 3.5-mile-long Baron Ridge

Trail would begin along the existing County Baron Ranch

Trail, approximately 2.5 miles north of US Highway 101

in Arroyo Quemado Canyon located on the Baron Ranch.

The Baron Ranch is owned by Santa Barbara County and is managed by the County Public

Works Department’s Resource Recovery & Solid Waste Division. The Baron Ranch Loop Trail

was recently completed and opened to the public in December 2010, and is currently use-

restricted to foot traffic only; mountain bikes, dogs and equestrians are currently prohibited,

although such restrictions may be reviewed and reconsidered over the long term (Santa Barbara

County Board of Supervisors, Resolution 09254; 15 September 2009). The existing Baron Ranch

Trail provides an approximately 6-mile-long loop from the trailhead on the frontage road that

parallels the north side of US Highway 101. Future users of the proposed Baron Ridge Trail

The proposed Baron Ridge Trail would

provide expansive views of the Pacific Ocean

and Channel Islands.



April 2015

Figure 2-1. Proposed Baron Ridge Trail Project Area



April 2015

are anticipated to use the existing Baron Ranch trailhead and trail to access the proposed Baron

Ridge Trail; a minority of users would access the trail from Gaviota State Park and the West

Camino Cielo jeepway and exit via the Baron Ranch Trail.

The proposed trail would spur from a section

of the Baron Ranch Trail approximately

0.4 miles beyond a crossing of Arroyo

Quemado Creek, where it would climb a

canyon tributary to Arroyo Quemado Creek

to the west gaining about 300 feet in

elevation over 0.20 miles across County-

owned land to a saddle on the ridge that

divides the Arroyo Quemado and Arroyo

Hondo watersheds. From this saddle, the trail

would climb steeply to the northwest along

the ridgeline for 0.30 miles on the Arroyo Hondo Preserve and follow switchbacks up the west

side of and around the face of a 400-foot-high knoll and onto land under Forest Service

management. Once on top of this knoll the trail would continue for approximately 3 miles on

land under Forest Service management to 2,550 feet in elevation at the crest of the Santa Ynez

Mountains. Leaving the knoll, the trail would cut diagonally back to the northeast rising in a

series of relatively gentle steps for the next 600 feet over a number of sandstone ridges. Because

the flanks of the ridge and top of the ridgeline are relatively gentle, the route continues along

relatively level segments of the ridgeline with several areas of long switchbacks that curve

around the steeper knoll faces, avoiding the sandstone and climbing uphill at grades averaging 8-

9 percent to a 2,100-foot elevation. Approximately 0.2 miles from the mountain crest, the ridge

narrows and steepens and a series of short switchbacks are proposed to climb this segment. The

trail would terminate at the existing West

Camino Cielo jeepway that runs along the

Santa Ynez Mountain crest on lands under the

management of the LPNF. The trail would

have a total elevation gain of approximately

1,760 feet from the existing Baron Ranch Trail

to the mountain crest at an average grade of 9

percent.

The existing West Camino Cielo jeepway in

this area is under federal ownership, with lands

Switchbacks would be constructed along steeper portions of

the proposed route.

Oak woodlands provide shade at several locations along the

proposed route



April 2015

managed by the LPNF extending for 4.5 miles to the west of the proposed trail terminus.

Although no improvements to the jeepway are proposed as part of this project, completion of the

Baron Ridge Trail would provide a continuous trails system of approximately 14.9 miles, with

the potential for an overnight stay at the informal Squat Camp, which includes access to a spring

box, a structure engineered to protect and provide potable natural spring water.

2.2.1 Project Components

The proposed Baron Ridge Trail project would entail the final route design, construction, and

maintenance of a 3.5-mile segment of trail extending off the existing Baron Ranch Trail. Trail

construction and maintenance activities would occur in accordance with USDA Forest Service

(1996) Standard Specifications for Construction and Maintenance of Trails, EM-7720-103 (refer

to Table 2-1). Mitigation measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) would also be

implemented to minimize potential environmental effects, as summarized in Section 2.4. Trails

design and construction would be wholly funded by grants obtained by the SBTC.

Final Trail Design

The majority of the proposed trail route would follow

the ridge, which, when constructed properly (i.e.,

using sustainable erosion control practices), would be

easier to maintain than side-slope routes where

erosion and sloughing of soil and rock can obstruct

trails, particularly after fires and heavy rains. Further,

vegetation grows more sparsely on ridge tops,

substantially reducing maintenance requirements

related to repeated trail corridor vegetation clearing.

The final trail route would be adjusted to avoid known sensitive resources to limit potential

impacts to sensitive plant species and habitats. For example, the trail corridor would generally

skirt the edge of existing oak woodlands or larger trees, providing users with views of these

scenic trees but minimizing limbing of oaks and disturbance to oak woodland understory. Known

locations of rare plants such as the Refugio manzanita (Arctostaphylos refugioensis) and late-

flowering mariposa lily (Calochortus fimbriatus) would be avoided.

Table 2-1. Proposed Implementation of Forest Service Trail Design Standards

Trail Corridor: Vegetation cleared to a width

of 5 feet with 10 foot overhead clearance.

Tread: 3 foot width using the full bench

construction method.

Grade: 8-10 percent average with short

grades not exceeding 15 percent.

Classification: Pack-and-Saddle class capable

of safe multiple use.

The final trail design would be routed to avoid

sensitive species identified during biological

surveys, such as this late-flowering mariposa lily.



April 2015

Consistent with the Forest Service Trail Design Manual, the proposed trail tread would average

3 feet in width. Trail grade would average 8 to 9 percent resulting in relatively little earth

disturbance along gently sloping ridgelines. In areas where the trail traverses the face of steep

knolls, construction of wide switchbacks would require disturbing a corridor of 5 to 8 feet to

create a level tread and to permit construction of cut or fill slopes and retaining structures

(e.g., constructed rock walls). The trail would be designed as a multi-use trail, with width and

stability sufficient to provide safe access for a variety of users, including hikers, equestrians, and

mountain bikers (Class 3 standard).

Trail Construction

The trail would be constructed in a manner consistent with Forest Service Guidelines (Forest

Service 1996). Although segments of the proposed trail would pass through relatively open

areas, trail construction would require clearing a corridor of approximately 10 feet in width,

which would remove up to 1.52 acres of existing vegetation. Clearing limits for trimming

vegetation are defined generally in Section 911 of EM-7720-103, and include provisions for

vertical clearance, upslope and downslope limits based upon the steepness of slope, and are

generally restricted to areas within 1 foot of the fill and backslope catch points. A limited

amount of grading and earthwork would also be necessary to create an average trail tread width

of 3 feet. According to established trail management objectives, the standard clearing limit is 10

feet in height, 72 inches in width. These specifications may be exceeded depending on slope and

terrain, but would fall within the trail class design parameters at FSH 2309.18 chapter 20. Trail

construction equipment would include a 36-inch-wide Kubota K-008 tractor, a 4x4 small haul

truck, compressors, hammer drills, shovels, pickaxes, chainsaws, loppers, pry bars, pulaskis, and

other standard trail construction equipment. Construction would be performed by four

experienced trail cutters and would occur over approximately 20 working days.

Trail construction would be scheduled to occur in late fall, winter or early spring while the soil is

still workable and outside the primary rain and fire seasons (e.g., November-March) and outside

of the primary migratory bird breeding season, to the extent feasible. Vegetation debris would be

placed away from the trail corridor to the extent feasible to reduce fire hazard.

The proposed trail would be constructed to incorporate features that minimize erosion, limit

downstream sedimentation, and reduce ongoing maintenance requirements utilizing erosion

control and minimization BMPs that control water flow down and across the trail. Design would

also include features to minimize conflicts between different user groups and enhance user

safety. In addition, trail construction would include weed eradication and control practices to

minimize the spread of non-native species along the trail corridor.



April 2015

Trail Maintenance

Trail maintenance is an ongoing requirement

on any trail but is particularly vital during the

first 3 years after a new trail is established.

Maintenance requirements would be reduced

via measures taken during initial construction

(refer to Table 2-1). However, maintenance in

accordance with Forest Service Standards

would occur on approximately 5-year cycles,

with annual maintenance required during the

first 3 years as the trail adjusts to prevailing

conditions. Maintenance would focus on trail tread repair, erosion control, trail slumping and

removal of slides, but would also include targeted removal of invasive weed species.

The SBTC proposes to enter into a formal maintenance agreement with the Forest Service to

assume full responsibility for all trail maintenance activities for the proposed Baron Ridge Trail.

Trail maintenance would be performed by experienced trail crews supplemented by SBTC

volunteers. Trail maintenance would also continue on portions of the existing Baron Ranch Trail

within LPNF. The SBTC would also establish a fund under the administration of the Forest

Service for the sole purpose of funding maintenance on the proposed Baron Ridge Trail.

For any substantial trail repairs (e.g., regrading) appropriate resource monitors would be engaged

to participate to ensure sensitive resources are avoided and protected appropriately.

2.2.2 Trail Access and Use

The proposed Baron Ridge Trail would be accessible from two points: from the south via the

Baron Ranch Loop Trail; and from the north via the West Camino Cielo jeepway, which also

connects to Squat Camp and Gaviota Peak approximately 2.8 miles and 5 miles to the west,

respectively. Future users of the proposed Baron Ridge Trail are anticipated to primarily use the

existing Baron Ranch trailhead on the Calle Real frontage road north of US Highway 101 and the

Baron Ranch Trail to access the proposed Baron Ridge Trail; a minority of users would access

the trail from Gaviota State Park and the West Camino Cielo jeepway and exit via the Baron

Ranch Trail (Figure 2-2).

The SBCTC would fund and perform routine maintenance of

the Baron Ridge Trail.



April 2015

Figure 2-2. Connecting Trails

The existing Baron Ranch Trail is currently use-restricted to foot traffic only; mountain bikes,

dogs and equestrians are currently prohibited. In addition, public access is limited to Saturdays,

Sundays, and Mondays, although such restrictions may be reviewed and reconsidered over the

long term (Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, Resolution 09254; 15 September 2009).

These use restrictions are marked at the Baron Ranch trailhead. It is anticipated that the majority

of future Baron Ridge Trail users would access the proposed trail via the Baron Ranch Trail;

therefore, the use of the proposed trail by equestrians and mountain bikers is anticipated to be

minimal. For those potential users that would access the Baron Ridge Trail from West Camino

Cielo or Gaviota State Park, signage would be placed at the top of the trail to notify of use

restrictions applicable to the Baron Ranch Trail. In addition, a sign would also be placed at the

junction of the Baron Ridge Trail and the Baron Ranch Trail indicating where the Baron Ranch

Trail restrictions become applicable. The sign would also include fire hazard information,

indicating the risks of trail usage.

The relative remoteness and difficulty of access to the proposed trail would somewhat limit the

number of users. The Baron Ridge Trail would essentially function as a wilderness trail,

providing enhanced recreational opportunities to long-distance day hikers and backpackers. If the



April 2015

County opens the existing Baron Ranch Trail to multiple users, mountain bikers and equestrians

may also take advantage of this extended route to access Gaviota Peak or the West Camino Cielo

jeepway. Although the number of trail users is difficult to estimate, it is anticipated that the trail

would experience light to moderate use, which would potentially alleviate some congestion

encountered on other Santa Barbara County Front Country trails.

2.3 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

A unique feature of the proposed Baron

Ranch Trails system (i.e., existing Baron

Ranch and proposed Baron Ridge Trails)

would be the creation of a trail system that

extends from US Highway 101 to the Santa

Ynez Crest almost entirely on public land. As

discussed in Section 1.2 (Purpose and Need)

opportunities to construct such trails face

many challenges, not the least of which is the

belt of private land that separates public land

in the LPNF from public roads such as US

Highway 101 and Refugio Road. This makes

identification of feasible alternative routes challenging. Only the El Capitan State Park location 5

miles to the east offers similar potential for completion of a highway to mountain crest tail (refer

to Figure 1-1). Mountain crest trail options on El Capitan State Park are under investigation, but

face some private land issues as well as topographic barriers.

Over the course of a 15-month exploration of potential routes for a trail to the Santa Ynez Crest

at Baron Ranch, SBTC explored a number of abandoned and existing jeep roads and fire breaks

within the Baron drainage and on both the east and west ridges on either side of the drainage. As

is the case along the entire Gaviota Coast, Baron Ranch is characterized by steep, rugged terrain,

thick layers of vertical sandstone and heavy chaparral-dominated brush. This limits potential trail

routes to one other feasible location. In addition, land north and east of the Baron Ranch is under

private ownership (refer to Figure 2-1).

East Ridge

Near the upper end of the Baron Ranch Loop Trail, an overgrown jeep road leads northeast to the

East Ridge of the Arroyo Quemado Creek Watershed (see Alternate Route on Figure 2-1). At the

point the jeep road reaches the private property boundary, the jeep road becomes open and

Steep topography and private land holdings constrain the

feasibility of alternate routes on the Gaviota Coast.



April 2015

passable and leads to the Santa Ynez crest. This alternative would also reach a privately owned

segment of the West Camino Cielo jeepway; however, because 80 percent of the route passes

through private property and reaches a private segment of the West Camino Cielo jeepway, it

would require acquisition of easements from private property owners both for the proposed trail

and for approximately 0.25 miles along the jeepway to the west to reach federal land. Use of

private lands for the Baron Ridge Trail would require cooperation of existing owners and would

likely result in added costs; both potential barriers to the construction of the trail.

No-Action Alternative

Pursuant to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Council on Environmental Quality

(CEQ) regulations, the No-Action Alternative may be considered to provide a comparative

baseline analysis. With selection of the No-Action Alternative, the proposed trail would not be

constructed. This alternative would limit the capability of the Forest Service to provide adequate

recreational facilities in this portion of the Gaviota Coast.

2.4 MITIGATIONS AND BMPS APPLICABLE TO ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES

This section summarizes mitigations and BMPs that apply to all action alternatives. These

measures would be applied prior to, during, and after construction, as applicable, to reduce or

avoid environmental disturbance to the greatest extent feasible during trail construction,

maintenance, and use.

Trail Construction and Maintenance Related BMPs

To the extent possible, trail construction and maintenance would occur from August 1

to March 14, outside of the migratory bird breeding season.

Since the bird breeding season dates vary from year to year, these dates can be

adjusted based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist within one week prior to

trail construction.

Workers should receive training concerning Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate

federally listed and for Forest Service Sensitive species prior to performing project

activities.

Workers should avoid direct-interaction with wildlife while performing project

activities.

All vehicles operated within the Proposed Action area will be properly maintained to

ensure that no inadvertent discharges occur within the Arroyo Quemado watershed.

Vegetation removal should never exceed the prescribed clearing limits defined in the

established Forest Service standards (i.e., more is not better, as vegetation removal

outside the trail prism is essentially pointless habitat alteration).



April 2015

The limits of the Proposed Action area would be conspicuously defined and all

activities would be strictly limited to this area.

All Proposed Action activities, including ground clearing and trail construction

activities would be conducted during daylight hours.

Wildlife Habitat Protection BMPs

Implement BMPs from the Soil and Water Conservation Handbook and agency water

quality policy.

The proposed trail corridor would be sited and designed to avoid known locations of

sensitive plants and wildlife.

No specimen native trees would be removed during ground clearing and trail

construction related activities.

Strict erosion control measures would be included in the implementation of the

Proposed Action, as described in the Project Description and Table 3-3.

Following the implementation of the Proposed Action, signs would be posted at

trailheads to limit visitors’ direct and indirect disturbance of wildlife.

Noxious Weeds BMPs

Trail workers would be instructed in weed prevention management practices such as

entering the project area with clean boots and tools prior to conducting project

activities. Care should be taken to clean tools and boots when moving from a trail

segment with invasive weeds to and area without weeds. Maintain staging areas and

landings in a weed-free condition.

Monitor and – to the extent feasible – record the distribution and abundance of

encountered weeds to determine if additional weed control measures are needed. If

occurrences of noxious weeds are detected after project implementation, initiate

control measures immediately and attempt to eradicate any incipient infestations.

Proposed ground clearing and trail construction activities would include the removal

of highly invasive species within and immediately adjacent to the Proposed Action

area.

Following the implementation of Proposed Action, periodic maintenance, including

weeding and eradication of invasive species, would occur in order to promote the

reestablishment of native species.

Erosion and Water Quality BMPs

The following sections outline BMPs that should be implemented during clearing, grubbing, and

any other modifications with the Proposed Action area.

Maintain trail surfaces to dissipate intercepted water in a uniform manner along the

road by outsloping with rolling dips, insloping with drains, or crowning with drains.



April 2015

Where feasible and consistent with protecting public safety, utilize outsloping and

rolling the grade (rolling dips) as the primary drainage technique.

Adjust surface drainage structures to minimize hydrologic connectivity by:

o Discharging road runoff to areas of high infiltration and high surface

roughness.

o Armoring drainage outlet to dissipate energy dissipater and to prevent gully

initiation.

Clean ditches and drainage structure inlets only as often as needed to keep them

functioning. Prevent unnecessary or excessive vegetation disturbance and removal on

features such as swales, ditches, shoulders, and cut and fill slopes.

Minimize diversion potential by installing diversion prevention dips that can

accommodate overtopping runoff.

Place diversion prevention dips downslope of crossing, rather than directly over the

crossing fill, and in a location that minimizes fill loss in the event of overtopping.

Armor diversion prevention dips when the expected volume of fill loss is significant.

Address risk and consequence of future failure at the site when repairing trail failures.

Use vegetation, rock, and other native materials to help stabilize failure zones.

Maintain trail surface drainage by removing berms, unless specifically designated

otherwise.

Install and preserve markers to identify and protect drainage structures that can be

damaged during maintenance activities (that is, culverts, subdrains, and so forth).

Use and maintain surfacing materials suitable to the trail site and use to withstand

traffic and minimize runoff and erosion. Pay particular attention to areas where high

wheel slip (curves, acceleration, and braking) during motorized use generates loose

soil material.

Cultural Resources BMPs and Mitigations

Construction activities would not result in clearance of vegetation or ground

disturbance directly adjacent to the resource, with construction occurring a minimum

of six feet away from the resource (i.e., no construction would occur on the resource

side of the barbed-wire fence).

In the event that archaeological resources are discovered, construction would be

temporarily suspended until the Los Padres Heritage Program Manager, or delegated

Heritage Program personnel have been contacted to evaluate the nature and

significance of the find. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the

area may resume.



April 2015

Fire Hazard BMPs

The risk of fire would be substantially reduced by implementation of construction

between November and April, when the vegetation is most lush and the risk of fire is

typically at its lowest.

The trail maintenance crew would carry fire retardant during the use of mechanical

equipment and Santa Barbara County Fire Department and Los Padres Hotshots

would be notified prior to trail construction activities.

To reduce the risk of fire during trail operation, fire hazard signage would be placed

at the trailhead indicating the risks of trail usage.



April 2015

SECTION 3.0

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES

This section of the EA describes relevant existing environmental conditions for resources

potentially affected by the Proposed Action, Project Alternative, and No-Action Alternative. In

compliance with NEPA, CEQ regulations (Section 1502.15), and 36 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) 220.7, the description of the affected environment focuses on only those

aspects potentially subject to impacts. Resources eliminated from further analysis in this section

include air quality, noise, environmental justice, socioeconomics, and hazardous materials and

wastes. Baseline data were compiled from surveys and documentation prepared for the Proposed

Action, consultation with Forest Service personnel, and queries of resource-specific databases.

Resource descriptions focus on the following areas: visual resources, land use, vegetation and

wildlife, geologic conditions, water resources, cultural and historic resources, fire hazards,

transportation and public services, and recreation.

3.1 ISSUES ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS

Based on the scope of the Proposed Action, the Project Alternative, and the No-Action

Alternative, and as a result of preliminary analyses, the Forest Service eliminated the following

issues from further analysis.

3.1.1 Air Quality

The Proposed Action is located in Santa Barbara County. Santa Barbara County is currently in

attainment for all federal air quality standards. The County is in non-attainment for the state

8-hour ozone standard and the state standard for particulate matter less than 10 microns in

diameter (PM10). Since Santa Barbara County is in attainment for all federal air quality

standards, the General Conformity Rule does not apply to Proposed Action.

Construction would involve the use of limited emission-producing equipment that would include

a 36-inch-wide Kubota K-008 tractor, a 4x4 small haul truck, compressors, hammer drills, and

chainsaws. These would be utilized over a period of approximately 20 days. Ground disturbance

for the Proposed Action and Project Alternative would result in approximately 1.52 acres of

vegetation removal, which would result in minimal dust generation. Due to the nature of the

project site, the minimal construction equipment needed to accomplish construction work at the

project site, as well as air quality regulations as they relate to the project area as a whole, the

Forest Service determined that project construction would not adversely affect air quality and did

not conduct further analysis for air quality impacts.



April 2015

3.1.2 Noise

The definition of noise for this analysis is undesirable sound that interferes with speech

communication and hearing, or is otherwise annoying (i.e., unwanted sound). In June 1980, the

Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise (FICUN) published guidelines (FICUN 1980)

relating day-night average sound level (DNL) values to compatible land uses. Since their

issuance, Federal agencies have generally adopted these guidelines for noise analysis. Most

agencies have identified 65 decibels (dB) DNL as a criterion that protects those most affected by

noise and that can often be achieved on a practical basis.

Trail construction would result in a minor, short-term increase in the vicinity of the trail corridor.

Trail construction equipment would include a 36-inch-wide Kubota K-008 tractor, a 4x4 small

haul truck, compressors, hammer drills, shovels, pickaxes, chainsaws, loppers, pry bars, pulaskis,

and other standard trail construction equipment. Since no major ongoing construction efforts are

proposed, and no sensitive receptors are located in the vicinity of the Project Area, a short-term

increase in ambient noise levels from project construction would not cause significant adverse

impacts, and the ambient noise level would return to its normal level following construction. A

negligible increase in ambient noise is anticipated to result from recreational use of the proposed

trail. In addition, maintenance activities would be infrequent, and would result in only minor,

short-term noise increases. Therefore, the Forest Service eliminated noise from further

consideration in the EA.

3.1.3 Environmental Justice

Executive Order (EO) 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority

Populations and Low-Income Populations, assures that Federal agencies focus attention on the

potential for a proposed Federal action to cause disproportionately high and adverse health

effects on minority populations or low-income populations. There are no environmental justice

areas of low-income and/or minority populations located in the vicinity of the project site, and

site construction would not adversely impact low-income and/or minority populations.

Consequently, the Forest Service has eliminated environmental justice from detailed evaluation

in this EA.

3.1.4 Socioeconomics

Project construction would be performed by the volunteers with the SBTC, and therefore would

not result in additional benefits to local employment. Cost estimates for materials, transport, and

installation would constitute a negligible beneficial impact within the region during the

construction period. Consequently, the Forest Service has determined that the socioeconomic



April 2015

impact from this project does not warrant further evaluation and eliminated it from further

consideration in this EA.

3.1.5 Hazardous Materials and Wastes

The Proposed Action would not occur in an area where any hazardous materials are stored,

transported, or utilized. During project construction, the potential for a spill from vehicles and

construction equipment would be negligible. Further, a weed management plan, which would

cover any pesticide and/or herbicide use, would be put into place prior to any trail construction

or trail maintenance activities. Consequently, the Forest Service has determined that the potential

for hazardous materials and wastes impact from this project do not warrant further evaluation

and eliminated it from further consideration in this EA.

3.2 VISUAL RESOURCES

3.2.1 Affected Environment

The proposed project is located on the

Gaviota Coast in Santa Barbara County,

California, approximately 2.5 miles

northwest of Refugio State Park (see

Figure 1-1). The Gaviota Coast is

generally defined as the approximately

20-mile stretch of east-west trending

coastline between the western boundary

of the City of Goleta and the Gaviota

Tunnel on U.S. Highway 101. The

dominant character of the Gaviota Coast

is a rural landscape consisting of grazing

or orchard uses and large areas of undeveloped land. Coastal bluffs and terraces merge into

rolling hills that rise into the Santa Ynez Mountains. The proximity of the hills and mountains to

beaches, park lands, open space, and agricultural lands give the Gaviota Coast its unique visual

character. According to the LPNF Final Land Management Plan, the Gaviota Coast is one of the

‘Key Places’ representing some of the most picturesque national forest locations (Forest Service

2005).

The proposed Baron Ridge Trail would extend from the existing Baron Ranch Trail up to and

along a ridgeline to the crest of the Santa Ynez Mountains. The existing Baron Ranch Trail is

primarily composed of an active agricultural road that serves avocado and cherimoya orchards

The existing Baron Ranch Trail winds along dirt roads through

avocado and cherimoya orchards, oak and riparian woodlands

along Arroyo Quemado Creek and coastal sage scrub and

chaparral habitats to an elevation of 1,216 feet.



April 2015

for the first 1.5 miles, before rising along a less maintained road into oak woodlands and foothill

habitats. The trail remains low in Arroyo Quemado Canyon, the sides of which rise steeply to the

east and west of the trail, gently winding up towards Santa Ynez Mountains that rise to the north.

Arroyo Quemado Creek runs adjacent to much of the existing trail. Views in the foreground from

the first 1.5 miles of trail are primarily of orchards, interspersed with areas of mature oaks and

sycamore trees associated with riparian habitats of Arroyo Quemado Creek.

At the proposed trailhead of the Baron Ridge Trail, orchards have given-way to undeveloped

habitats, including extensive areas of oak and sycamore forest. The proposed trail would climb a

canyon tributary to Arroyo Quemado Creek to the west gaining about 300 feet in elevation to a

saddle on the ridge that divides the Arroyo Quemado and Arroyo Hondo watersheds. Views

along this portion of trail include areas of oak woodland, rising to chaparral, coyote brush, and

grassy vegetation.

From this saddle, the trail would climb steeply to the northwest along a ridgeline on the Arroyo

Hondo Preserve. The ridgeline affords expansive views of Arroyo Hondo Canyon to the east, as

well as views to the west of Arroyo Quemado Canyon. The trail would continue to the top of a

knoll, where the trail would cut diagonally back to the northeast rising in a series of relatively

gentle steps with several areas of long switchbacks that curve around the steeper knoll faces to a

2,100-foot elevation. Sections of this trail are composed of a variety of habitats that include

groves of oak woodlands, dense chaparral, coyote brush, and low-lying scrub and grasses.

Expansive views of the Santa Ynez foothills, Pacific Ocean, and Channel Islands are afforded for

substantial sections of the trail, and are only obscured by occasional areas of dense vegetation.

The trail would terminate at the existing West Camino Cielo jeepway that runs along the Santa

Ynez Mountain crest on lands managed by the LPNF. Views from the West Camino Cielo

jeepway are extensive, providing 360 degree views of the winding ridgeline to the east and west,

the Pacific Ocean to the south, and canyons and ridges of the Santa Ynez Mountains backcountry

to the north.

No structures or sensitive land uses are located in the vicinity of the proposed project. Views of

the project site are limited due to the project site’s distance from US Highway 101 and other

publicly accessible areas; however, portions of the proposed route would occur on hillsides that

are visible from US Highway 101 (County of Santa Barbara 2002).

3.2.2 Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action

Visual changes associated with the Proposed Action include the cutting of a trail in an area that

currently contains few man-made improvements. The majority of the proposed trail route would



April 2015

follow a ridgeline, where vegetation grows more sparsely, substantially reducing trail corridor

vegetation clearing and minimizing the visual changes that would occur due to vegetation

clearance. Visual disruption would be greatest during and immediately following trail

construction, when raw earth used for cut and fill to create the trail tread would contrast existing

vegetation. In several areas, switchbacks would be constructed along the trail, which would

potentially result in more visible disruption; however, since the Proposed Action involves the

construction of a dirt trail, with limited earthwork and vegetation clearance, the visual disruption

would be minor. It is anticipated that disturbed areas along the trail would quickly be

revegetated.

Limited, brief views of the Proposed Action would be afforded from US Highway 101. In

addition, distant views of the site would potentially be available from the Arroyo Hondo

Preserve. Due to the distance from sensitive receptors, the minor levels of construction with no

permanent structures involved, and the benign nature of the project, the Proposed Action would

have no significant detrimental direct or indirect impacts to visual resources. Further, the

proposed Baron Ridge Trail would provide non-motorized recreational access to an area of

LPNF that is currently largely inaccessible to the public. The provision of public recreational

opportunities in this previously inaccessible area would expand the availability for the public to

enjoy the unique and highly scenic Gaviota Coast. Therefore, the Proposed Action would result

in beneficial impacts to the visitor experience of visual resources.

3.2.3 Environmental Consequences of the Project Alternative

Visual changes associated with Alternative 1 would be similar in nature to the Proposed Action

however, under Alternative 1, less trail cut and fill would be required as the proposed route

would occur on an existing overgrown jeep road. Since Alternative 1 would occur largely along

an area that has been previously improved, visual impacts would be minor. Similar to the

Proposed Action, views of the trail from offsite locations would be limited and beneficial visual

impacts would be realized through increased public access to this portion of the Gaviota Coast.

3.2.4 Environmental Consequences of the No-Action Alternative

Under the No-Action Alternative, the Baron Ridge Trail would not be constructed. Vistas

afforded from the proposed trail would remain unavailable to the public. Very limited public

access to LPNF land within the Gaviota Coast area of the Santa Ynez Mountains would continue.

Visual characteristics of the project area would remain the same as described in Section 3.2,

Visual Resources, and neither direct nor indirect impacts to the visual setting would occur.



April 2015

3.3 LAND USE


The project area is located within unincorporated Santa Barbara County in the Santa Barbara

Front place of the LPNF. While the project area is designated for agriculture, no active

agricultural development occurs within the project area, and the area is generally of low

agricultural value, due to steep slopes and distance to water. Active orchards are located within

the lower portions of the Baron Ranch, outside of the project area. While the Proposed Action

would occur on land under the jurisdiction of Forest Service, this Alternative 1 would occur

outside of their jurisdiction; therefore, land use activities and policies for areas outside of Forest

Service jurisdiction are provided for informational purposes (Figure 3-1).

Forest Service

The Santa Barbara Front place of LPNF encompasses much of the steeper portions of the Santa

Ynez Mountains on the Gaviota Coast. Current management direction for LPNF is described

under the Forest Land Management Plan (LMP) for the four southern California National Forests

(Forest Service 2005). Part 3 of the LMP covers design criteria and establishes the standards,

guidelines, laws, and policy directions for National Forest lands. Most of the Santa Barbara Front

place is managed as a Developed Area Interface Zone while keeping the natural scenic backdrop

for the south coast communities. The desired condition is that the scenic qualities of the

landscape and biological diversity are maintained and recreational facilities meet standards and

provide high-quality recreation experiences and public services.

LPNF Santa Barbara Front – Land Management Strategy

Continue cooperative efforts with the Native American community, permit holders, and volunteers

to preserve cultural and historic sites; Mitigate impacts to threatened, endangered, proposed,

candidate, and sensitive species when they occur; Eliminate or reduce the spread of noxious weeds

during fire suppression (i.e., using washing stations), post wildland fire Burned Area Emergency

Rehabilitation efforts (i.e., weed monitoring and removal), volunteer weed removal projects, and

project-specific activities; Implement communication site plans; Continue to reduce special-use

permit backlog; Coordinate fire prevention and watershed protection programs with private

landowners, national forest visitors, city and county agencies and volunteer fire departments;

Complete and maintain fuel breaks and community defense zones through these cooperative

efforts; Improve public access as opportunities occur by developing, maintaining, and managing

Front Country trails and OHV routes, minimize trail conflicts, and promote user education through

cooperative efforts; Work with the recreational target shooting community to resolve issues;

Reduce illegal actions through cooperation with city and county law enforcement agencies.

Source: Forest Service 2005



April 2015

Figure 3-1. Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the Proposed Baron Ridge Trail



April 2015

County of Santa Barbara

The southern portion of the project area and the existing Baron Ranch Trail is located within land

under ownership and management by the County Public Works Department’s Resource

Recovery & Solid Waste Division. The property has a land use designation of Agriculture II,

minimum parcel size 100 acres (A-II-100) and is zoned for 100-AG-O. The property is utilized

for open space and orchard agriculture, including approximately 90 acres of avocados and

7 acres of cherimoya. Agriculture is concentrated around Arroyo Quemado Creek and lower

portions of adjacent tributary canyons. Canyon walls and upper portions of the Baron Ranch are

undeveloped and managed as open space. In addition, the Arroyo Quemado Creek corridor on

the property is under restoration for the endangered California red-legged frog under the

Tajiguas Landfill California Red-legged Frog Management Plan (refer to Section 3.4, Vegetation

and Wildlife).

The existing Baron Ranch Trail is currently use-restricted to foot traffic only; mountain bikes,

dogs and equestrians are currently prohibited, although such restrictions may be reviewed and

reconsidered over the long term (Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, Resolution 09254;

15 September 2009).

Land Trust for Santa Barbara County

The Arroyo Hondo Preserve, which is owned and managed by the Land Trust for Santa Barbara

County, is located adjacent to the west of the project area. The property has a land use

designation of Agricultural Commercial (AC) and is zoned for AG-II-100. Agricultural II zone is

applied to agricultural areas within the Rural Area, and the intent is to preserve these lands for

long-term agricultural use. The property is currently managed under Williamson Act Contract,

with public access available on a limited basis (California Department of Conservation [CDOC]

2010).

Private Holdings

The land in the northeastern portion of the project area is under ownership of private

landholders: Vistas Infinites. The area contains an unimproved road, but is otherwise

undeveloped. The parcel has a land use designation zoned for Agriculture II, minimum parcel

size 100 acres (A-II-100). The property is currently managed under a Williamson Act Contract

(CDOC 2010). The habitable dwelling nearest to the affected project area is located more than 1

mile east of the proposed terminus of the trail extension.



April 2015


Under the Proposed Action, the trail would extend over land under ownership of Santa Barbara

County, the Land Trust for Santa Barbara County, and the Forest Service. The trail would begin

along the existing Baron Ranch Trail, which was recently completed and opened to the public in

December 2010. The proposed trail would climb a canyon tributary to Arroyo Quemado Creek to

the west over 0.20 miles across County-owned land to a saddle on the ridge that divides the

Arroyo Quemado and Arroyo Hondo watersheds. From this saddle, the trail would climb steeply

to the northwest along the ridgeline for 0.30 miles on the Arroyo Hondo Preserve and follow

switchbacks up onto land under Forest Service Management. The trail would continue on for

approximately 3.0 miles on land under USFS ownership to the crest of the Santa Ynez

Mountains, as presented Table 3-1.

Table 3-1. Land Ownership and Use Under the Proposed Action

Land Owner Trail Length Land Use Designation Zoning

County of Santa Barbara 0.20 A-II-100 100-AG-O

Land Trust for Santa Barbara County 0.30 AC AG-II-100

USFS 3.00 A-II-100 U

Private Holdings N/A N/A N/A

Implementation of the Proposed Action would be consistent with the LPNF Land Management

Plan, which recognized the project area as appropriate for semi-primitive, non-motorized

recreation (Forest Service 2005).

The Proposed Action would not remove existing farmland from operation, and the passive

recreational use of the trail would not impact ongoing agricultural practices adjacent to the

existing Baron Ranch Trail. While the project area is not located within or adjacent to active

agriculture, the project would likely result in increased use of the Baron Ranch Trail, which is

within an active agricultural operation, potentially exposing users to hazards associated with

active agriculture (e.g., pesticide spray, heavy machinery, etc.). However, the number of

additional users that would access the Baron Ranch Trail due to construction of the Baron Ridge

Trail is anticipated to be limited, and would not result in significant agriculture-recreation

conflicts along the Baron Ranch Trail.

Due to the type of development and the minimal grading involved, development of the trail

within AG-II-100 and AC would not require permits from the County of Santa Barbara prior to

construction. Improvements under the Proposed Action would be consistent and compatible with

existing land use goals and priorities of the Forest Service. Therefore, implementation of the



April 2015

Proposed Action would have no direct or indirect significant impacts to land use. Finally, as

described previously, the nearest private development is located more than 1 mile east of the

proposed terminus of the trail extension. Therefore, there would be no impact to private land use

activities (e.g., residential).


The Project Alternative would begin near the upper end of the Baron Ranch Loop Trail on an

overgrown jeep road that leads northeast to the east ridge of the Arroyo Quemado Creek

Watershed. Approximately 0.2 miles up the jeep road, the trail would reach the private property

boundary, where the jeep road becomes open and passable and leads to the Santa Ynez crest over

approximately 1.5 miles (Table 3-2). The private holdings are under a Williamson Act Contract;

however, trails are acceptable uses on properties under such contracts. Because 90 percent of the

route passes through private property and reaches a private segment of the West Camino Cielo

jeepway, it would require acquisition of easements from private property owners both for the

proposed trail and for approximately 0.25 miles along the jeepway to the west to reach federal

land.

Similar to the Proposed Action, recreational use is not precluded in agriculture zones, and the

County of Santa Barbara Environmental Thresholds Manual identifies rural recreation and open

space as a compatible use with agriculture. Due to the type of development and the minimal

grading involved, development of the trail within AG-II-100 would not require permits from the

County of Santa Barbara prior to construction. Implementation of the Project Alternative would

be consistent with County of Santa Barbara and LPNF plans and policies; however, procurement

of easements would require cooperation of existing owners and would likely result in added

costs, both potentially significant barriers. Impacts to land use under the Project Alternative are

Table 3-2. Land Ownership and Use Under the Project Alternative

Land Owner Trail Length Land Use Designation Zoning

County of Santa Barbara 0.20 A-II-100 A-II-100

Land Trust for Santa Barbara County N/A N/A N/A

Forest Service N/A N/A N/A

Private Holdings 1.50 AC A-II-100



April 2015

greater than those under the Proposed Action; however, impacts would remain less than

significant.


Under the No-Action Alternative, the Baron Ridge Trail would not be constructed. Land use

within the project area would remain the same as described in Section 3.3.1, Land Use.



April 2015

3.4 VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE

The following sections discuss the potential direct and indirect impacts associated with the

implementation of the Proposed Action. The significance of potential impacts to sensitive

biological resources as well as the mitigation required to reduce these impacts is dependent on

the sensitivity and associated legal status of the species in accordance with the guidelines set

forth in the NEPA. These potential impacts as they relate to the Endangered Species Act (ESA),

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and NEPA are discussed in detail below.


The Gaviota Coast is considered among the top

15 most biologically diverse locations in the

world (National Park Service [NPS] 2004).

More than 1,400 plant and animal species

depend on the habitat provided by the Gaviota

Coast, including 60 fish species and 195 bird

species (NPS 2004). The area contains at least

24 federally or state-listed threatened or

endangered plant and animal species as well as

60 rare species or species of special concern

(NPS 2004).

The rich biodiversity of the Gaviota Coast is a product of at least three factors: 1) its location at

the boundary of two distinct biogeographic regions where plant and animal assemblages overlap;

2) its connection to large, interior wildlands, which allows wildlife to move freely in and out of

the area; and 3) the largely undisturbed character of the various habitats, particularly the more

than 30 stream corridors with their riparian forests (Gaviota Coast Conservancy 2007). These

conditions provide shelter for large mammals such as black bears (Ursus americanus), mountain

lions (Felis concolor), and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), as well as small fish and wildlife

such as tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi), southern steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss),

coast horned lizard (Phyrnosoma blanvilli), and pond turtles (Emys spp.) (Gaviota Coast

Conservancy 2007). Additionally, Gaviota’s riparian habitats harbor the highest richness of bird

species of anywhere in California (Gaviota Coast Conservancy 2007).

The proposed trail extension would extend for approximately 3.5 miles from the northern end of

a tributary of Arroyo Quemado Creek to the ridgeline, which separates this watershed from that

or Arroyo Hondo Creek to the west. Arroyo Quemado Creek, much like most drainages in Santa

Coast horned lizard is one of a variety of reptile species

potentially encountered along the trail.

(Photo courtesy of R. Ford, Santa Barbara Trails Council)



April 2015

Barbara County, is relatively dry during the summer and fall months. Consequently, significant

aquatic habitat is only present during the winter and spring, due to runoff from heavy rain events.

However, important terrestrial habitat in this watershed includes documented monarch butterfly

(Danaus plexippus) roost sites in blue gum (Eucalyptus globules) groves at the mouth of Arroyo

Quemado (Meade 1999). Additionally, important vegetation communities, such as chaparral and

coast live oak alliances occur in the higher elevation reaches of this watershed.

In contrast to Arroyo Quemado Creek, Arroyo Hondo Creek is a perennial stream, with

continuous flows and aquatic habitats occurring in at least parts of its stream bed throughout the

year. The Arroyo Hondo Preserve, which covers 316 acres, comprises approximately thirty

percent of the Arroyo Hondo Watershed. Important habitats within this area include a relatively

intact riparian corridor and coastal lagoon, supporting a number of federally listed species

including southern steelhead, tidewater goby, and California red-legged frog.

Vegetation Communities

A vegetation mapping, habitat assessment, and a rare plants survey, was conducted in the

Proposed Action area on July 19, 2011. In addition to the survey, literature and data reviews

were conducted in order to identify the historic and current occurrence of sensitive plant species

in the vicinity of the Proposed Action area. This research included a review of historic and

current aerial photographs, United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps, and

USDA soil survey maps. Further, this research included a review of the California Natural

Diversity Database (CNDDB) to identify known occurrences of federally listed Threatened,

Endagered, and Proposed wildlife species and Forest Service listed sensitive wildlife species

within the Proposed Action area. In addition, relevant documents for the nearby Tajiguas

Landfill Expansion were reviewed for information relevant to sensitive plants species and

vegetation communities occurring within the vicinity of the Proposed Action area.

Eleven vegetation communities or habitat associations were documented within the Study Area,

which includes the Proposed Action area as well as a 200-foot buffer encompassing the

immediate area surrounding the proposed trail corridor. The communities in the Study Area

include, chaparral, chamise chaparral, Ceanothus megacarpus chaparral, chaparral/interior live

oak woodland/scrub oak, chaparral/scrub oak, coast live oak woodland, coast live oak

woodland/Ceanothus megacarpus chaparral, disturbed/developed, interior live oak scrub, interior

live oak woodland, Venturan coastal sage scrub. These vegetation communities as well as the

sensitive botanical species identified in the surveys are described, as well as provided in

Appendix B.



April 2015

No federally or state-listed plant species are known to occur in the Study Area. However, two

plant species which are considered sensitive by the USDA Forest Service were identified.

Refugio manzanita (Arctostaphylos refugioensis) and late-flowered mariposa lily (Calochortus

fimbriatus) were documented within the Study Area during the rare plant survey.

Refugio Manzanita

Refugio manzanita is a CNPS List 1B species. It is a local endemic evergreen shrub, which is

generally found in sandstone substrates (Hickman 1993). This plant flowers between December

and May at elevations between 1,000-2,300 feet (Hickman 1993).

Late-Flowered Mariposa Lily

Late-flowered mariposa lily is a CNPS List 1B species. This species is known to occur in the San

Marcos Pass of the Santa Ynez mountain range (Hunt and Associates 2001). Late-flowered

mariposa lily is a perennial herb found in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and riparian

woodland with serpentine soils. This plant flowers between June and August at elevations

ranging from 900 to 3,000 feet (Hickman 1993).

Wildlife

A wildlife survey, which included a wildlife habitat assessment, was conducted in conjunction

with the vegetation survey in the Proposed Action area on July 19, 2011. In addition to the

survey, literature and data reviews were conducted in order to identify potential current and

historic occurrence of sensitive wildlife species located in the vicinity of the Proposed Action

area. This research also included a review of the CNDDB to identify known occurrences of

sensitive wildlife species. In addition, relevant documents for the nearby Tajiguas Landfill

Expansion were reviewed for information relevant to wildlife present in the vicinity of the

Proposed Action area.

Federal and Forest Service Listed Species

Habitat communities in the Proposed Action area include: chaparral, chamise chaparral,

Ceanothus megacarpus chaparral, chaparral/interior live oak woodland/scrub oak,

chaparral/scrub oak, coast live oak woodland, coast live oak woodland/Ceanothus megacarpus

chaparral, disturbed/developed, interior live oak scrub, interior live oak woodland, Venturan

coastal sage scrub. No riparian habitat was identified within the Proposed Action area. Due to the

nature of habitats identified and historic occurrence of sensitive wildlife species located in the

vicinity of the Proposed Action area, it is considered unlikely that any federally listed or Forest

Service-listed sensitive wildlife would be effected within the project area. Federally listed or



April 2015

Forest Service-listed sensitive species are known to occur in the vicinity of the Proposed Action

area are associated with riparian or aquatic habitats and are therefore not likely to occur within

the immediate vicinity of project, but are discussed due to the presence of these federally listed

species in the nearby Arroyo Quemado Creek.

Southern Steelhead

The southern steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) is an evolutionarily significant unit of

steelhead trout that is federally listed, by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), as

endangered. Southern steelhead habitat ranges from the Santa Maria River in San Luis Obispo

County to San Mateo Creek in San Diego County. Steelhead typically migrate to marine waters

after spending two years in fresh water, depending on the rainfall pattern and stream flow

(USFWS 1997). They enter the river and stream systems between early November and June,

with peak numbers in January and February. Because spawning occurs in the upper reaches of

tributaries, suitable streams and rivers must be free of barriers to migration. Suitable spawning

areas also contain gravel beds and are free of heavy sedimentation. Spawning begins in January

and continues through early June, peaking February through March. Adult southern steelhead

feed on aquatic and terrestrial insects, mollusks, crustaceans, fish eggs, minnows, and other small

fishes (including other trout) while juveniles feed mainly on zooplankton (Cadwallader and

Backhouse 1983).

Southern steelheads have not been detected within the Arroyo Quemado Creek watershed and

are not expected due to significant barriers to migration1. However, the species is known to occur

in Arroyo Hondo Creek to the west of the project area and significant efforts have been made to

enhance populations within the Arroyo Hondo Preserve through the elimination of barriers to

fish passage. Although the project area supports the very upper reaches or headwaters of several

intermittent tributaries to Arroyo Hondo Creek, this species was not observed and is not expected

due to lack of perennial flow and highly intermittent nature of the headwater tributaries within

the Proposed Action Area.

1 As part of its habitat restoration efforts along Arroyo Quemado Creek, the County of Santa

Barbara is removing barriers to fish passage on Baron Ranch; however, barriers to fish passage

would remain downstream at US Highway 101.



April 2015

California Red-legged Frog

The California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) was federally listed as threatened in 1996. A

final Recovery Plan for the species was published in 2002 and critical habitat was designated in

2006. The critical habitat designation includes Arroyo Quemado Creek on the Baron Ranch, but

does not appear to include Arroyo Hondo Creek to the west where this species is also known to

occur.

The distribution of the California red-legged frog ranges from Redding in Shasta County south

into Baja California at elevations between sea level and 5,000 feet amsl (Jennings and Hayes

1994). This species can be found in both permanent and ephemeral streams, but populations are

unlikely to persist in ephemeral streams (Jennings and Hayes 1994, USFWS 1996). California

red-legged frogs are found in a range of aquatic and riparian habitats, preferring deep-water

pools with overhanging willows (Salix spp.), cattails (Typha spp.), and bulrushes (Scirpus spp.)

at the margins of the pools. They require specific parameters for breeding sites and also rely on

adequate uplands and riparian areas for foraging and dispersal. California red-legged frogs

typically breed between November and April, with earlier breeding periods recorded in more

southern localities. Creeks and ponds where California red-legged frogs are found most often

have dense growths of woody riparian vegetation (Hayes and Jennings 1994). This species is

known to travel up to approximately one mile from breeding ponds and streams.

The California red-legged frog was not observed during the field survey conducted in the Study

Area, which does not support suitable habitat (i.e., perennial streams and pools). This species is

known to occur within both Arroyo Quemado and Arroyo Hondo creeks. As part of its mitigation

efforts in response to impact analyses conducted in support of the proposed expansion of

Tajiguas Landfill, Santa Barbara County has undertaken extensive habitat restoration efforts

along Arroyo Quemado Creek and has relocated California red-legged frogs from Cañada de la

Pila to Arroyo Quemado Creek; this creek is now known to support a healthy population of

California red-legged frogs with no documented occurrences of bull frogs (Rana catesbeiana) (J.

Leipner Pers. Observ.).

The project area is well removed from suitable California red-legged frog habitat. While the

project area is separated from breeding habitat by hot, dry vegetation communities and elevation

differences of several hundred feet to over 1,500 feet amsl, limited potential exists for roaming

individuals to travel up intermittent drainages or through other habitats to reach the trail corridor.

Two-striped Garter Snake



April 2015

The two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii) is a CDFW species of special concern.

This snake occurs along the California coast from Monterey County to northern Baja California

(Jennings and Hayes 1994, California Herps 2008). Two-striped garter snakes are found in or

near permanent or intermittent freshwater, often along streams with rocky beds bordered by

willows or other streamside growth (Stebbins 2003). The two-striped garter snake is highly

aquatic, and is primarily active from spring to late fall. The snake is primarily active at dusk or

night, but can be found during the day (Stebbins 2003). Two-striped garter snakes breed between

March and April and live young are born from July to August. Their diet consists of amphibian

larvae, small fish, and worms (Jennings and Hayes 1994). The two-striped garter snake has a

variety of predators such as raptors, herons, raccoons, and coyotes as well as introduced exotic

species. A major threat to the species has been the reduction of its wetland habitat (Jennings and

Hayes 1994).

The two-striped garter snake was not observed during the field survey, but this species has been

observed within adjacent watersheds in the vicinity of the project area. While there is no suitable

riparian and perennial stream habitat within the Proposed Action area, perennial riparian areas in

the vicinity of the Proposed Action area may provide some suitable habitat. The two-striped

garter snake has low potential to occur within intermittent tributaries in the project area and is

unlikely to be found in the dryer habitats of the project area.

Raptors and Other Sensitive Bird Species

The USFWS maintains a list of birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of

1918 (16 US Code [USC] 703-712), as amended, and EO 13186. The Proposed Action area is

located within the migratory bird route known as the Pacific Flyway. Birds protected under the

MBTA include raptors, common songbirds, waterfowl, shorebirds, seabirds, and wading birds.

Following an executive order (EO 13186) issued on January 10, 2001 by President Clinton, a

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was developed between the USFWS and the USFS

concerning the conservation of Migratory Bird populations within Bird Conservation Regions

(BCR) across the country (USDA-USDI 2001). A second MOU was created in 2008 (USDA-

USDI 2008) further developing the conservation areas and providing additional support for

analysis of migratory bird communities as integrated conservation units. USFWS developed

further supplemental documents supporting analysis of migratory bird communities by providing

a revised species list (USFWS 2010) and a list of birds of management concern and focal species

(USFWS 2011).



April 2015

Bird species that were reviewed with regard to the potential for impacts to result from

implementation of this project include all birds currently on the LPNF list of priority bird species

relevant to the MBTA (67 species), as well as bird species that could occur within the project

area that are on USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list (USFWS 2008) and focal

species that are on the Birds of Management Concern (BMC) list (USFWS 2011). The USFWS

identified focal species from the BMC list that need enhanced protection because they: 1) have

high conservation needs, 2) are representative of a broader group of species sharing the same or

similar conservation needs, 3) act as a potential unifier for partnerships, and/or 4) have a high

likelihood that factors affecting status can be realistically addressed. Birds which could

potentially be affected are allocated in the ground-nesting, ground-gleaning and shrub-nesting

resource-use guilds (Appendix B).

During the biological survey associated with the Proposed Action, raptors were evaluated in

terms of their potential to occur within the Study Area. Of the 67 priority species which may

occur on LPNF, 24 species could possibly be affected by project activities. These species are

discussed in greater detail in Appendix B.


Impacts on Vegetation Communities

The Proposed Action would result in direct permanent impacts to a total of approximately 1.5

acres of common as well as sensitive vegetation communities within the Proposed Action area.

Approximately 0.09 acre of chaparral, 0.62 acre of Ceanothus megacarpus chaparral, 0.28 acre

of chamise chaparral, 0.06 acre of chaparral/interior live oak and scrub oak, 0.01 acre of

chaparral/scrub oak, 0.01 acre of coast live oak woodland, 0.05 acre of coast live oak/Ceanothus

megacarpus chaparral, 0.02 acre of interior live oak woodland, 0.39 acre of Venturan coastal

sage scrub, and 0.01 acre of disturbed land, would be impacted directly by the Proposed Action

during vegetation clearing and trail construction activities supporting the proposed trail.

In addition, the Proposed Action would result in indirect temporary impacts including increased

potential introduction of invasive or weedy species, fugitive dust, soil erosion, and runoff which

may potentially compromise plant respiration, photosynthesis, and growth in adjacent vegetation

communities that are not directly removed within the Proposed Action area. The Proposed

Action would also contribute in a very limited manner to cumulative impacts resulting from

changes in local vegetation alongside the trail, but this would likely not affect the overall

character of vegetation communities affected by the Proposed Action.



April 2015

Under NEPA, impacts to disturbed lands are not considered significant. Impacts to common

vegetation communities are generally considered adverse but less than significant as the

Proposed Action is not expected to reduce these vegetation communities below self-sustaining

levels. Direct permanent and indirect temporary impacts to sensitive vegetation communities are

considered adverse and significant according to NEPA, which states that cumulative impacts to

these resources should be minimized to the greatest extent feasible. The Proposed Action would

not substantially affect the coverage, species composition, or overall quality of sensitive

vegetation communities within and in the vicinity of the Proposed Action area. Therefore,

impacts to vegetation communities resulting from the Proposed Action are considered to be less

than significant.

Impacts to Sensitive Plant Species

Sensitive plant species were evaluated for their potential to occur within the Study Area and

Proposed Action Area. As described in Section 3.4.1, the following two Forest Service special

status species were documented within the Study Area: Refugio Manzanita and late-flowered

mariposa lily. While these documented special status species occur within the immediate vicinity

of the proposed trail corridor, the proposed trail would be routed in such a way that it would

avoid these populations (refer to Section 3.4.3).

The Forest Service list of sensitive plant species known to occur with the Santa Barbara Ranger

District portion of LPNF includes eight other species that have a moderate/ low potential to

occur. These species were not detected within the Proposed Action area during a rare plant

survey conducted during the appropriate respective blooming periods. As these species were not

documented no affect to these species are expected within the Proposed Action area.

Cutting, clearing and leveling the Proposed Action area to prepare the site for trail modifications

has the potential to permanently remove these known and potentially occurring sensitive plants

within the Proposed Action area. However, the proposed trail would be sited and designed to

minimize impacts to visible extant species (e.g., Refugio Manzanita) and overall changes in

habitat composition and type would be minimal, allowing for these species to persist outside of

the three to five foot proposed trail corridor. Additionally, the Proposed Action is likely to

positively impact some species such as the late-flowered mariposa lily, which is anticipated to

benefit from removal of shrub over story and is also projected to colonize trail cast off on

shoulders of turns along the proposed trail. Further, focused preconstruction surveys would be

conducted to locate and avoid or potentially salvage sensitive plants prior to any ground clearing

activities. Further, the Proposed Action includes a trail reconfiguration best management practice

to avoid individuals or populations of sensitive plant species. Consequently, the Proposed Action



April 2015

is anticipated to have no affect on sensitive plant species or lead toward reduced populations

below self-sustaining levels. Therefore, impacts to sensitive species are anticipated to be

insignificant.

Impacts to Federally Listed or Forest Service Sensitive Wildlife Species

There are no known occurrences of federally listed Threatened, Endangered, or Proposed

wildlife species, or Forest Services listed Sensitive wildlife species wildlife within the project

area. The Proposed Action would likely reduce by a small amount the habitat available to

wildlife species since there would be clearing and cutting of native vegetation communities

within the trail corridor associated with project implementation, which would create conditions

unsuitable to most wildlife species. Additionally, there would be small modifications to the three

affected drainages, with the addition of some boulders to allow ease in crossing, where the

proposed trail corridor would cross ephemeral drainages. Due to the nature of habitats identified

and historic occurrence of sensitive wildlife species located in the vicinity of the Proposed

Action area, it is considered unlikely that any federally listed or Forest Service-listed sensitive

wildlife would be effected within the project area.

California red-legged frog critical habitat designation includes Arroyo Quemado Creek on the

Baron Ranch. California red-legged frog was not observed during wildlife surveys supporting the

Proposed Action, and based on a radio telemetry study conducted on the Santa Ynez River,

California red-legged frogs do not typically travel more than 20 meters from the water’s edge

(personal communication with V. Hubbartt 2014). Due to its distance from riparian areas,

California red-legged frogs are not anticipated to occur within of the Proposed Action area.

Additionally, due to this separation distance, no sedimentation or other impacts to habitats that

could adversely affect southern steelhead or two-stripe garter snakes are anticipated to occur.

The long-term impacts of recurring trail maintenance to wildlife and wildlife habitats are

considered to be essentially neutral. The potential impacts to wildlife directly attributable to

maintenance of the trail systems is viewed as being inconsequential and indistinguishable in the

context of the recreational usage of the trail systems by the public. Public use of the proposed

trail would result in minor disturbance to habitats and species in the immediate vicinity of the

trail; however, given the large areas of similar habitat in the vicinity, low to moderate public use

of the trail is not anticipated to adversely affect sensitive species. Consequently, the Proposed

Action is anticipated to have no affect on sensitive wildlife species or lead to reduced

populations below self-sustaining levels.

Impacts to Migratory Birds



April 2015

Pursuant to the requirements of the MBTA which provides legal protection for many breeding

migratory bird species occurring in the US, the Proposed Action would be required to avoid

impacts to nesting birds in accordance with the Forest Service’s MOU with the USFWS

regarding the protection of MBTA species. To avoid impacts to nesting migratory species, the

Proposed Action would include measures to minimize potential take or disturbance to nesting

species, to the extent practicable. These measures would include performing trail construction

and maintenance from August 1 to March 14 to the extent feasible, outside the breeding season

for species protected under the MBTA.

The primary risk to migratory birds resulting from project activities would be threats to

incubating/brooding adults, eggs, and nestlings during the reproductive process. Adult birds may

be flushed off the nest during the incubation or brooding stages of reproduction, which could

result in decreased reproductive success. Disturbed or damaged nests may result in mortality to

either eggs or nestlings. Additionally, project activities may indirectly affect reproductive

success through increased depredation resulting from scent trails or from loss of cover and

concealment at the nest site due to vegetation removal.

Overall, the relative risk of individuals being injured/damaged or killed is considered low. The

possibility of nests being disturbed within the trail exists, but in most cases the incubating/

brooding adult would flush off the nest and return after the source of disturbance is gone. In such

cases where a flushing adult is observed, work crews should quickly complete project activities

in the area and move on. The event of a nest actually being damaged/destroyed resulting in direct

mortality is unlikely, and impacts to migratory birds at a population level is not considered a

statistical possibility due to a series of unlikely events which would need to occur.

Foraging adult birds and fledglings (ground-gleaning birds) would typically move away from

work crews and recreational users of the trail. Their response would be to either seek cover in

nearby vegetation or to seek other available foraging habitat. The event of individuals suffering

injury or mortality as a result of project activities is considered improbable, and the probability

of birds being affected at a population level is considered a statistical impossibility. Therefore,

impacts to migratory birds would be less than significant.

Impacts to Habitat Connectivity and Wildlife Corridors

No impacts to habitat connectivity and wildlife corridors are expected to result from

implementation of the Proposed Action. The majority of the land within the Proposed Action

area is considered a wildlife travel route because as provides habitat for wildlife moving between

the coastal foothills and the Santa Ynez Mountains. Implementation of the Proposed Action



April 2015

would encroach somewhat on existing travel routes; however, trails can also act as travel

corridors. Increased visitation may affect daylight travel along the ridgeline by some species and

expand use by others. Recreational use of the trail is anticipated to be minimal after dark, during

which time many species are most active, which would further limit potential impacts to wildlife

corridors. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Action would result in less than significant

impacts to wildlife travel.

Impacts to Management Indicator Species

The LPNF Forest Plan contains goals to maintain or improve habitat conditions to sustain

healthy populations of Management Indicator Species (MIS) in LPNF. MIS were selected

because their population changes are believed to indicate the effects of management activities

and to serve as a focus for monitoring (USDA Forest Service 2005). MIS in the Study Area

include mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), mountain lion (Puma concolor), and song sparrow

(Melospiza melodia). Song sparrow, mule deer, and mountain lion that may be present during

construction and maintenance may be temporarily displaced but would return soon after the work

is complete. Recreational use and trail maintenance would result in minor disturbance to these

species occurring in the vicinity of the project area; however, such disturbance would not

constitute a reduction in habitat and would not be anticipated to result in a reduction in the

population of these species. Therefore, impacts to MIS would be less than significant.

3.4.3 Proposed Biological Best Management Practices

Under the Proposed Action, BMPs are proposed to ensure that any negative potential impacts to

biological resources remain less than significant. The following sections outline mitigation

measures that should be implemented during clearing, grubbing, and any other modifications

with the Proposed Action area.

Trail Construction and Maintenance Related BMPs

To the extent possible, trail construction and maintenance would occur from August 1

to March 14, outside of the migratory bird breeding season.

Since the bird breeding season dates vary from year to year, these dates can be

adjusted based on surveys conducted by a qualified biologist within one week prior to

trail construction.

Workers should receive training concerning Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate

federally listed and for Forest Service Sensitive species prior to performing project

activities.

Workers should avoid direct-interaction with wildlife while performing project

activities.



April 2015

All vehicles operated within the Proposed Action area will be properly maintained to

ensure that no inadvertent discharges occur within the Arroyo Quemado watershed.

Vegetation removal should never exceed the prescribed clearing limits defined in the

established Forest Service standards (i.e., more is not better, as vegetation removal

outside the trail prism is essentially pointless habitat alteration).

The limits of the Proposed Action area would be conspicuously defined and all

activities would be strictly limited to this area.

All Proposed Action activities, including ground clearing and trail construction

activities would be conducted during daylight hours.

Wildlife Habitat Protection BMPs

Implement BMPs from the Soil and Water Conservation Handbook and agency water

quality policy.

The proposed trail corridor would be sited and designed to avoid known locations of

sensitive plants and wildlife.

No specimen native trees would be removed during ground clearing and trail

construction related activities.

Strict erosion control measures would be included in the implementation of the

Proposed Action, as described in the Project Description and Table 3-3.

Following the implementation of the Proposed Action, signs would be posted at

trailheads to limit visitors’ direct and indirect disturbance of wildlife.

Noxious Weeds

Trail workers would be instructed in weed prevention management practices such as

entering the project area with clean boots, tools, and vehicles, prior to conducting

project activities. Care should be taken to clean tools and boots when moving from a

trail segment with invasive weeds to and area without weeds. Maintain staging areas

and landings in a weed-free condition.

Monitor and – to the extent feasible – record the distribution and abundance of

encountered weeds to determine if additional weed control measures are needed. If

occurrences of noxious weeds are detected after project implementation, initiate

control measures immediately and attempt to eradicate any incipient infestations.

Proposed ground clearing and trail construction activities would include the removal

of highly invasive species within and immediately adjacent to the Proposed Action

area.

Following the implementation of Proposed Action, periodic maintenance, including

weeding and eradication of invasive species, would occur in order to promote the

reestablishment of native species.



April 2015


Under the Proposed Action Alternative, a trail would be constructed along the East Ridge of the

Arroyo Quemado Creek Watershed. This alternative is less desirable as it would require the

acquisition of easements from private property owners both for the proposed trail as well as for

approximately 0.25 mile along the jeepway to the west in order to reach federal land. Further, a

biological study along this proposed trail corridor has not been conducted. However, due to the

proximity of the proposed trail and the proposed alternative trail it can be assumed that the

vegetation communities and wildlife in the vicinity would be similar. The proposed alternative

trail would require ground clearing and trail construction activities similar to those analyzed in

Section 3.4.2. However, as the proposed alternative trail is relatively shorter in distance, the total

area of disturbance to vegetation and wildlife would be reduced. Additionally, the BMPs

described in Section 3.4.3 would also be applied to any ground clearing or trail construction

activities associated with the implementation of the Proposed Alternative Action. Therefore,

implementation of the Proposed Alternative Action would be expected to have a less than

significant impact on biological resources within and in the vicinity of the proposed alternative

trail.


Under No-Action Alternative, no ground clearing or new trail construction would occur.

Consequently, vegetation and wildlife habitat within or in the vicinity of the Proposed Action

area would not be modified or removed. Vegetation communities and wildlife would remain as

described in Section 3.4.1. Selection of the No-Action Alternative would have neither direct nor

indirect negative impacts on vegetation or wildlife in the area.

3.5 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS


The project site is located in a geologically complex and seismically active region. This region is

within the Transverse Ranges Geomorphic Province, a generally mountainous region that

extends some 310 miles in an east-west direction which is in contrast to the prevailing

northwesterly structural grain of California. These ranges, stretching from Point Arguello on the

west to the Pinto and Eagle Mountains in eastern California, are in aggregate only 10 to 63 miles

wide in a north-south direction (Dibblee 1966). The province is unique in that its east-west

structural grain extends across the northwest-southeast trending San Andreas Fault, a major

dislocation of the earth’s crust that extends roughly 750 miles from the east side of the Salton

Sea to its offshore intersection with the Mendocino Fracture near Eureka, California. The San



April 2015

Andreas Fault is the primary structural boundary between the Pacific and North American

tectonic plates. Santa Barbara County is situated to the southwest of the San Andreas Fault. The

Santa Ynez Mountains and northern Channel Islands form the westernmost part of the

Transverse Ranges and are actively rising as a result of the oblique plate collision process.

The major east-west fault occurring in the vicinity of the project area is the Santa Ynez Fault. It

extends from near Jameson Lake on the upper Santa Ynez River to near Gaviota Pass,

approximately five miles from the project area, where it branches: the south branch of the Santa

Ynez fault strikes out to sea near the mouth of Alegria Canyon a few miles west of Gaviota

Beach; the other branch continues westward to join the Pacifico fault. This fault system can be

characterized as a high angle, oblique slip fault with appreciable left lateral slip (County of Santa

Barbara 2010).

Due to the steep slopes present throughout the Santa Ynez Mountains and the nature of the soils

present (see Soils discussion, below), the risk of landslide is high. Shallow landslides have been

reported on natural slopes in the vicinity of the project area (County of Santa Barbara 2009).

Soils

Soils in the vicinity of the project area are primarily composed of Maymen-Rock Outcrop

Complex, a soil type within the Maymen-Rock Outcrop Association. This Association is

characterized by moderately steep to extremely steep, well drained stony fine sandy loams and

excessively drained rock outcrop on mountain sides (USDA Soil Conservation Service 1981).

The soils formed in material weathered from sandstone, conglomerate, and shale bedrock.

Permeability is moderate.

The Maymen-Rock Outcrop Complex is characterized as very steep to extremely steep, located

in the highest parts of the Santa Ynez Range. It consists of about 45 percent Maymen soil; 40

percent Rock outcrop; 5 percent Lodo and Gaviota soils and small scattered areas that have soils

6 to 15 inches deep on soft fractured shale; and 10 percent soils similar to Maymen, but that have

a depth to bedrock of less than 10 inches. Runoff is very rapid and the hazard of erosion is very

high (USDA Soil Conservation Service 1981).

No soils within the project area are considered prime farmland (CDOC 2009).




April 2015

The proposed project consists of a trail that

may be exposed to damage from geologic

processes; however, no habitable structures

are involved and the potential for future

trail users to be exposed to geologic

hazards is considered minimal.

The proposed trail would be constructed in

a manner consistent with Forest Service

Guidelines. Although segments of the

proposed trail would pass through relatively

open areas, trail construction would require

clearing a corridor of approximately 10 feet

in width and removal of up to 1.52 acres of existing vegetation, which would expose soils to

wind and water erosion. A limited amount of earthwork would also be necessary to create an

average trail tread width of 3 feet. Construction would be performed by four experienced trail

cutters and would occur over approximately 20 working days. Trail work would be scheduled to

occur in late fall, winter or early spring while the soil is still workable and outside the primary

rain and fire seasons (i.e., November through April).

The proposed Baron Ridge Trail would be designed and developed to adhere to Forest Service

Specifications for Construction and Maintenance of Trails (Forest Service 1996). Consistent with

the Forest Service Trail Design Manual, the proposed trail tread would average 3 feet in width.

Trail grade would average 8 to 9 percent resulting in relatively little earth disturbance along

gently sloping ridgelines. The majority of the proposed trail route would follow a ridge, which,

when constructed properly (i.e., using sustainable erosion control practices), would be easier to

maintain than side-slope routes where erosion and sloughing of soil and rock can obstruct trails,

particularly after fires and heavy rains. In areas where the trail traverses the face of steep knolls,

construction of wide switchbacks would require disturbing a corridor of 5 to 8 feet to create a

level tread and to permit construction of cut or fill slopes and retaining structures (e.g.,

constructed rock walls).

The proposed trail would be constructed to incorporate features that minimize erosion, limit

downstream sedimentation, and reduce ongoing maintenance requirements utilizing erosion

control features that control water flow down and across the trail (Table 3-3).

Portions of the trail would be routed along ridgelines, which

tend to be more sparsely vegetated and can reduce erosion and

required trail maintenance.



April 2015

Table 3-3. Erosion and Sedimentation Trail Design Features

Outsloping the trail 5-8 percent to allow water

to flow off the trail rather than down/along it.

Use of grade reversals to create ups and downs

along the trail so water has to flow off the trail

every 25-40 yards.

Use of rolling grade dips rather than water

bars to create larger basins for the water to

drain off the trail.

Construction of retaining or crib walls along

sections that need reinforcing.

Step-outs along the trail with added width for

passing.

Speed control through the use of choke points

especially along trail sections with more

dangerous dropoffs, poor lines of sight, and

steeper grades.

With incorporation of BMPs, impacts to soils and geology would be less than significant.

3.5.3 Proposed Erosion and Sedimentation Best Management Practices

Under the Proposed Action, BMPs are proposed to ensure that any negative potential impacts

associated with erosion and sedimentation to remain less than significant. The following sections

outline BMPs that should be implemented during clearing, grubbing, and any other modifications

with the Proposed Action area.

Maintain trail surfaces to dissipate intercepted water in a uniform manner along the

road by outsloping with rolling dips, insloping with drains, or crowning with drains.

Where feasible and consistent with protecting public safety, utilize outsloping and

rolling the grade (rolling dips) as the primary drainage technique.

Adjust surface drainage structures to minimize hydrologic connectivity by:

o Discharging road runoff to areas of high infiltration and high surface

roughness.

o Armoring drainage outlet to dissipate energy dissipater and to prevent gully

initiation.

Clean ditches and drainage structure inlets only as often as needed to keep them

functioning. Prevent unnecessary or excessive vegetation disturbance and removal on

features such as swales, ditches, shoulders, and cut and fill slopes.

Minimize diversion potential by installing diversion prevention dips that can

accommodate overtopping runoff.

Place diversion prevention dips downslope of crossing, rather than directly over the

crossing fill, and in a location that minimizes fill loss in the event of overtopping.

Armor diversion prevention dips when the expected volume of fill loss is significant.

Address risk and consequence of future failure at the site when repairing trail failures.

Use vegetation, rock, and other native materials to help stabilize failure zones.

Maintain trail surface drainage by removing berms, unless specifically designated

otherwise.



April 2015

Install and preserve markers to identify and protect drainage structures that can be

damaged during maintenance activities (that is, culverts, subdrains, and so forth).

Use and maintain surfacing materials suitable to the trail site and use to withstand

traffic and minimize runoff and erosion. Pay particular attention to areas where high

wheel slip (curves, acceleration, and braking) during motorized use generates loose

soil material.


The geologic conditions, including soils, within the vicinity of the Project Alternative are the

same as those found within the Proposed Action area. The trail would be routed primarily along

an existing, but poorly maintained, dirt road, which would reduce the need for cut and fill during

construction; however, some ground disturbance would be required. With incorporation of

erosion control BMPs that minimize erosion, limit downstream sedimentation, and reduce

ongoing maintenance requirements, impacts to geologic conditions would be less than

significant.


Under the No-Action Alternative, the Baron Ridge Trail would not be constructed. Geologic

conditions of the project area would remain the same as described in Section 3.5.1, and neither

direct nor indirect impacts would occur.

3.6 WATER RESOURCES


Precipitation

The Mediterranean climate of the project area is typified by long, hot summers, and wet, mild

winters. According to the Central Coast (Region 3) Regional Water Quality Control Board

(RWQCB), the project site is located within the South Coast Hydrologic Unit, which generally

includes the area south of the Santa Ynez Mountains between Carpinteria and Point Arguello.

Rainfall in the region is highly variable and can range from less than 7 inches to over 40 inches

per year. In addition, drought cycles can extend over a period of a few to several years such as

the periods 1946 to 1952, 1970 to 1978, and 1984 to 1991. The average precipitation in the South

Coast Hydrologic Unit is approximately 18 inches (County of Santa Barbara 2008).



April 2015

Groundwater

Groundwater from the Santa Ynez Mountains and foothills generally flows south within the local

watersheds toward the coast at a steep hydraulic gradient. Groundwater recharge to the local

watersheds is primarily derived from infiltration of rainfall. Using measurements and estimates

of stream flow during dry periods (base flows) it has been estimated that the annual groundwater

outflow for the entire Ellwood-Gaviota area averages 5,000 acre feet. Accounting for

evapotranspiration, underflow to the ocean, and pumping of groundwater, the total annual

recharge to groundwater in the region is estimated to be 6,000 acre feet per year (Miller and

Rapp 1968).

The Baron Ranch currently uses groundwater resources to irrigate approximately 90 acres of

avocados, 7 acres of cherimoyas, as well as for the ranch domestic water supply (County of

Santa Barbara 2009).

Surface Water

According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the project site is located

within the Tajiguas Creek-Frontal Santa Barbara Channel Subwatershed (Hydrologic Unit Code

180600130105). This subwatershed comprises 31,057 acres and extends approximately from El

Capitan State Beach in the east to Gaviota State Park in the west (USEPA 2012).

The project site is located within the Arroyo Quemado Watershed, which comprises

approximately 1,940 acres. Arroyo Quemado Creek is the primary surface water feature in the

vicinity of the project area. Springs or “base flow” provide year-round surface water in the

stream system, which are the primary result of surfacing groundwater. No permanent surface

water features occur within the project vicinity. Ephemeral streams occur in some areas of the

project site during and immediately following rain events

No designated wild and scenic rivers are located in the vicinity of the project area. In addition,

there are no floodplains (Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] Map Panel IDs:

06083C1305F; 06083C1285F) or wetlands located within the project area (FEMA 2008; US Fish

and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 2012).

Water Quality

Water quality in the US is regulated under the Clean Water Act (CWA), which outlines

procedures intended to facilitate the monitoring of water quality, protection of pristine water

bodies, and rehabilitation of water bodies that have already been polluted. This is accomplished



April 2015

through the establishment of numerous monitoring, permitting and funding programs that work

in conjunction with each other to provide a mechanism for protecting water quality in the US.

The County of Santa Barbara no longer regularly tests water quality of Arroyo Quemado Creek

under Environmental Health Services. Testing was done regularly between 1998 and 2004,

where the Creek flowed into the Pacific Ocean. During this time, the water quality improved

substantially. In 1998, of 35 samples collected, 86 percent were in exceedance of water quality

thresholds; however, by 2004, of 52 samples collected, only 4 percent were in exceedance

(personal communication with Willie Brummett, County of Santa Barbara Environmental Health

Service, 6 April 2012). According to County of Santa Barbara Environmental Health Services,

this water quality improvement was largely the result of seagull reduction efforts at the Tajiguas

Landfill (i.e., utilization of a falconer), which reduced pathogens that were the leading cause of

exceedances (personal communication with Willie Brummett, County of Santa Barbara

Environmental Health Service, 5 April 2012). No water quality concerns are presently known to

occur in Arroyo Quemado Creek.


Water resource issues associated with the Proposed Action would primarily be those from short-

term construction-related impacts associated with grading and development and associated

potential for sedimentation and, to a lesser extent, long-term trail maintenance. Surface water is

not expected to be present during construction, as construction would occur primarily outside of

the rainy season. If surface water is present, it would be diverted away from the work area limits.

The primary source of potential water quality impacts would be the clearing and grubbing of up

to 1.52 acres of vegetation. Due to the Proposed Action site’s distance from Arroyo Quemado

Creek, runoff of storm water from the construction area is unlikely to transport sediment and

other pollutants to the creek.

Discharge into surface waters may reduce water quality resulting in toxic effects to aquatic life.

Heavy equipment (e.g., Kubota K-008 tractor, a 4x4 small haul truck, compressors, hammer

drills, and chainsaws) used within the project site may develop leaks and discharge small

amounts of lubricants, hydraulic fluid, or fuel; however such risk is minimal. In addition, heavy

equipment would be fueled off-site. With implementation of erosion and sedimentation BMPs,

(refer to Section 3.5.3) the potential for direct or indirect impact during construction would be

minimal. In addition, since disturbance would be greater than 1 acre, the SBTC would develop a

Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to construction consistent with USEPA

guidelines.



April 2015

Over the long term, no operations that would affect regional hydrology or local surface water

resources are anticipated. Impacts to water resources under the Proposed Action would be less

than significant.


Similar to the Proposed Action, no surface water, wetlands or floodplains occur in the Project

Alternative area. The trail would be routed primarily along an existing, but poorly maintained,

dirt road, which would reduce the need for cut and fill during construction; however, some

ground disturbance would be required. With incorporation of erosion control BMPs that

minimize erosion, limit downstream sedimentation, and reduce ongoing maintenance

requirements, impacts to water resources would be less than significant.


Under the No-Action Alternative, the Baron Ridge Trail would not be constructed. Water

resources of the project area would remain the same as described in Section 3.6.1, and neither

direct nor indirect impacts would occur.

3.7 CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES


Cultural resources represent and document activities, accomplishments, and traditions of

previous civilizations and link current and former inhabitants of an area. Depending on their

condition and historic use, cultural resources may provide insight into the living conditions of

previous civilizations and may retain cultural and religious significance for modern groups.

Cultural resources are defined as follows:

Historic properties as defined by the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA);

Cultural items as defined by the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation

Act (NAGPRA);

Archeological resources as defined by the Archaeological Resources Protection Act

(ARPA);

Sacred sites as defined in EO 13007 to which access is afforded under the American

Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA); and

Collections and associated records as defined in 36 CFR 79.

The term “historic properties” refers to cultural resources that meet specific criteria for eligibility

for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); historic properties need not be



April 2015

formally listed on the NRHP. According to the Forest Management Plan (S60), until full and

appropriate evaluation has occurred, known heritage resource sites shall be afforded the same

consideration and protection as those properties evaluated as eligible for inclusion on the NRHP.

Prehistory

The local prehistoric chronology is divided into four major periods: Paleo-Indian, Early Period,

Middle Period, and Late Period. It is generally accepted that humans entered the New World

during the latter part of the Wisconsin glaciation between 40,000 and 20,000 years before present

(B.P.). The earliest unquestioned evidence of human occupation in southern Santa Barbara

County is dated to between 10,000 to 8,000 B.P. (Erlandson and Colten 1991). Paleo-Indian

groups during this time focused on hunting Pleistocene megafauna, including mammoth and

bison. Plants and smaller animals were undoubtedly part of the Paleo-Indian diet as well, and

when the availability of large game was reduced by climatic shifts near the end of the

Pleistocene, the subsistence strategy changed to a greater reliance on these resources.

Post-Pleistocene changes in climate and environment are reflected in the local archaeological

record by approximately 8,000 B.P., the beginning of the Early Period, as defined by Chester

King (1981, 1979, 1974). The Early Period of the Santa Barbara Channel mainland was

originally defined as the “Oak Grove” Period. The diagnostic feature of this period is the mano

and metate milling stones, which were used to grind hard seeds such as sage for consumption.

Toward the end of the Early Period, sea mammal hunting appears to have supplemented

subsistence strategies (Glassow et al. 1990).

The Middle Period (3,350 to 800 B.P.) is characterized by larger and more permanent

settlements, related to a generally wetter environment. Materials from Middle Period sites reflect

a greater reliance on marine resources and include marine shells, fish remains, and fishhooks. A

major shift in vegetable food exploitation occurred, as the mano and metate milling stones were

replaced by stone mortars and pestles. This indicates a transition from seed gathering to oak tree

acorn gathering and processing, a result of cooler temperatures and more expansive oak

woodland habitats. Toward the end of this period, the plank canoe was developed, making ocean

fishing and trade with the Channel Islands safer and more efficient (Arnold 1987). Terrestrial

resources continued to be exploited as evidenced by the presence of contracting-stemmed and

corner-notched projectile points from Middle Period sites (Bamforth 1984).

The Late Period (800 to 150 B.P. or approximately A.D. 1150 to 1800) was a time of increased

social and economic complexity. The increased number of permanent and semi-permanent

villages clustered along the Santa Barbara Channel and on the Channel Islands, and the diversity



April 2015

of environmental settings in which sites have been identified, indicates a substantial increase in

prehistoric population. Intensified use of terrestrial and marine resources occurred. Acorns

continued to be processed, and land mammals were hunted with the bow and arrow, rather than

exclusively by spear. Trade networks, probably controlled by village chiefs, expanded and

played an important part in local Chumash culture, reinforcing status differences and

encouraging craft specialization. Shell beads, found throughout the Early and Middle Periods,

increased in number and variety, related to status and social value. The protohistoric culture of

the Chumash was terminated by the arrival of a Spanish expedition led by Gaspar de Portola in

1769. Chumash culture changed dramatically with the establishment of the Missions of Santa

Barbara, Santa Ynez, and La Purísima.

History

The historic occupation of the project vicinity can be divided into three settlement periods: the

Mission Period (A.D. 1769 – 1830), the Rancho Period (circa A.D. 1830 -1865), and the

American Period (circa A.D. 1865 – 1915). Construction of Mission Santa Barbara in 1786,

Mission la Purísima Concepcíon in 1787, and Mission Santa Ynez in 1804, altered both the

physical and cultural landscape of the region. The missions were the center of Spanish influence

in the region and affected Native American patterns of settlement, culture, trade, industry, and

agriculture. Following the secularization of the Missions by the Mexican Government in 1821,

California became part of the Republic of Mexico.

Secularization of lands and a focus on animal husbandry marked the Rancho Period, where large

land grants of Mission lands were ceded to wealthy, prominent Spanish families. Native

Americans continued to work as laborers on ranchos during this period. With the establishment

of California statehood in 1850 and the advent of the American Period, farming and more

intensive land use steadily replaced raising cattle stock. Ranching was substantially curtailed by

a prolonged drought in the 1860s. Since statehood, major forces of regional change during the

last 150 years have been railroads, maritime shipping, agribusiness concerns, the oil industry,

and the college institutions.

Identified Archaeological Resources

Pedestrian survey of the proposed trail corridor resulted in the discovery of one prehistoric

resource (BRC-001); this resource is a single, previously unreported bedrock mortar (AMEC

Earth & Environmental, Inc. 2011). No associated artifacts were detected near the mortar;

however, visibility immediately around the outcrop was low due to dense chaparral and leaf-

duff.



April 2015


The resource identified during the survey is located within the project area, approximately

10 feet from trail centerline. Construction activities would not result in clearance of vegetation or

ground disturbance directly adjacent to the resource, with construction occurring a minimum of

six feet away from the resource (i.e., no construction would occur on the resource side of the

barbed-wire fence). In addition, no indirect impacts to the resource would occur, such as

disturbance from surface water runoff, due to the sites location on a rock outcrop that is elevated

approximately 6 to 8 feet above the proposed trail.

The resource would not be adversely impacted from public use of the trail due to nature of the

site, which would preclude removal of the resource and the site’s limited visibility – the site is

only minimally visible from the proposed trail, is surrounded by dense vegetation on a tall rock

outcrop, and is on the opposite side of an existing barbed-wire fence that would discourage

public trail users from approaching the site. The existing vegetation around the outcrop would

not be removed during trail construction, and the barbed-wire fence would remain in place in the

vicinity of the resource to protect against adverse impacts to the resource.

Due to the potential for archaeological resources to be unearthed during project construction, a

certified Native American monitor would be onsite during earth disturbing work.2 In the event

that archaeological resources are discovered, construction would be temporarily suspended until

the Los Padres Heritage Program Manager, or delegated Heritage Program personnel have been

contacted to evaluate the nature and significance of the find. After the find has been

appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Therefore, no adverse impacts to historic

properties are anticipated to result from implementation of the Proposed Action.


No cultural resources within vicinity of the Project Alternative were identified during the records

search of the archaeological study. No pedestrian survey of the Project Alternative route was

performed due to the route’s location on private property; however, the majority of the Project

Alternative route would occur on an existing jeep road, which would have likely previously

disturbed any cultural resources that may have been located within the proposed route. However,

due to the potential for archaeological resources to be unearthed during project construction, a

certified Native American monitor would be onsite during earth disturbing work. In the event

that archaeological resources are discovered, construction would be temporarily suspended until

2 It is important to note that LPNF does not compensate for Native American monitors and will not be liable for any

such accounting.



April 2015

a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find. After the find has

been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. Therefore, impacts to cultural

resources from implementation of the Project Alternative would be less than significant.


Under the No-Action Alternative, no trail construction, maintenance, or use would occur.

Cultural and historical resources would remain as described in Section 3.7.1. Selection of the

No-Action Alternative would not have direct or indirect impacts on cultural and historical

resources.

3.8 FIRE HAZARDS


The project area is considered to be a Very High Fire Hazard Area (California Department of

Forestry and Fire Protection 2007). The combination of steep terrain, rocky outcroppings, dense

chaparral vegetation, dry summer climate, and local Santa Ana and Sundowner winds creates the

high fire hazard environment. The Santa Ynez front country has a history of large and sometimes

devastating wildland fire events. Several fires have occurred in the immediate vicinity of the

project area within the past 10 years. The Gaviota Fire in 2004 burned 7,440 acres in the Santa

Ynez foothills on the Gaviota Coast, approximately 2 miles to the west of the project area. In

2007, the Mariposa Fire burned 176 acres, approximately 4.5 miles west of the project site.

Fire protection in the project area is provided by Santa Barbara County Fire Department within

the County and Arroyo Hondo portions of the project site, and by the Forest Service Los Padres

Hotshots for the portion of the trail that occurs within the LPNF; however, the Santa Barbara

County Fire Department has a mutual aid agreement with the Forest Service for wildland fire

protection services during the high fire hazard season. LPNF fire resources located in the vicinity

are stationed at Figueroa, San Marcos, Santa Ynez Airport Station, Los Prietos, and Foothill

(Santa Barbara Airport) (USDA Forest Service 2011).

Difficult and limited access makes Santa Ynez wildland fires extremely challenging to battle

after ignition. Several fire access roads are located within the vicinity of the project area, and

include the West Camino Cielo jeepway.


The proposed action would be developed in a high fire hazard area. Project-induced impacts may

occur from the accidental or deliberate starting of a fire during construction, maintenance, or



April 2015

operation of the trail. Therefore, the proposed trail has the potential to increase fire hazards. Fire

hazard would be greatest during construction and maintenance on the proposed trail, where

machinery or tools could ignite vegetation. The risk of fire would be substantially reduced by

implementation of construction between November and April, when the vegetation is most lush

and the risk of fire is typically at its lowest. In addition, the trail maintenance crew would carry

fire retardant during the use of mechanical equipment and Santa Barbara County Fire

Department and Los Padres Hotshots would be notified prior to trail construction activities.

Further, to reduce the risk of fire during trail operation, fire hazard signage would be placed at

the trailhead indicating the risks of trail usage. Upon implementation of these measures, impacts

to fire hazard under the Proposed Action would be less than significant.


The Project Alternative would be located in a high fire hazard area, characterized by steep slopes

and dense vegetation. The existing jeepway would potentially allow for better fire crew access in

the event of a wildland fire; however, conditions would remain extremely challenging. Similar to

the Proposed Action, the risk of fire would be substantially reduced by implementation of

construction between November and April. In addition, the trail maintenance crew would carry

fire retardant during the use of mechanical equipment and Santa Barbara County Fire

Department and Los Padres Hotshots would be notified prior to trail blazing activities.. Further,

to reduce the risk of fire during trail operation, fire hazard signage would be placed at the

trailhead indicating the risks of trail usage. With implementation of these measures, impacts

related to fire hazard under the Project Alternative would be less than significant.


Under the No-Action Alternative, no trail construction, maintenance, or use would occur. The

fire hazard would remain as described in Section 3.8.1. Selection of the No-Action Alternative

would not have direct or indirect impacts on the fire hazard.

3.9 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC SERVICES


Site Access and Parking

The proposed project is located on the Gaviota Coast in Santa Barbara County, approximately

2.5 miles northwest of Refugio State Park (refer to Figure 1-1). The proposed Baron Ridge Trail

would be accessible from two points: from the south via the Baron Ranch Loop Trail; and from



April 2015

the north via the West Camino Cielo jeepway, which also connects to Squat Camp and Gaviota

Peak trail approximately 2.8 miles and 5 miles to the west, respectively.

Transportation to the proposed trailhead is provided via US Highway 101 from the Baron Ranch

Loop Trail, and via the West Camino Cielo jeepway.

Access to the project area from the Baron Ranch

Loop Trail is via the Calle Real frontage road north

of US Highway 101. Calle Real is accessed by an

unmarked turnoff from US Highway 101

approximately 2.5 miles northwest of Refugio State

Park and 2 miles southeast of the View Point turnoff.

The Calle Real frontage ends approximately 0.75

miles from the turnoff. No signage or formal exit

occurs for the existing Baron Ranch Trail, and

travelers on US Highway 101 would likely have to

cross a paved median for either ingress or egress.

The paved median and a sign indicate where cross traffic would occur. Line-of-sight from the

turnout is consistent with California Department of Transportation guidelines. Posted traffic

speed limits are 65 miles per hour in the vicinity of the turnoff. Parking for the Baron Ranch

Loop Trail is provided on the shoulders of the road. Access to the project site from the parking

area is accessible only via hiking. Line of sight for ingress and egress to Calle Real from US

Highway 101 are considered adequate.

Access to the project area from the West Camino Cielo jeepway is provided from the west via

the Gaviota Peak Trail or from the east via approximately 20 miles of dirt road. Parking for the

Gaviota Peak Trail / Gaviota Hot Springs is accessed from US Highway 101, exiting at the

Highway 1 turnoff, and following a frontage road to the south, on the east side of US Highway

101. An established parking area provides approximately 12 spaces with additional parking

available along the roadside. Access from the east would require travel on West Camino Cielo

approximately 20 miles from the junction with State Highway 154. It is anticipated that access to

the project site from West Camino Cielo would be minimal.

Public Services

Due to the rural nature of the project area, public services are limited. Water in the vicinity is

provided by on-site wells and sewage is controlled with on-site septic systems. Fire protection is

Parking for the Baron Ranch Trail is available on

the shoulder of Calle Real frontage road, outside of

the gate to the Baron Ranch.



April 2015

provided by Santa Barbara County Fire and the Forest Service Los Padres Hotshots (refer to

Section 3.8, Fire Hazards). Electricity is provided by Southern California Edison.

Police protection is provided by the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department. Due to the

difficulty of access and the project area’s undeveloped nature, crime within the project area is

virtually non-existent. Marijuana cultivation is known to occur in LPNF; however, it is not

anticipated to occur in the vicinity of the project area, as the project area is in the vicinity of

active County of Santa Barbara operations. Growing operations tend to occur in remote canyons

with access to water.


Future users of the proposed Baron Ridge Trail are anticipated to primarily use the existing

Baron Ranch trailhead to access the proposed Baron Ridge Trail. Public access to the site would

only be to non-motorized transportation and no new parking or roadways are proposed. Although

the number of trail users is difficult to estimate, it is anticipated that the trail would experience

light to moderate use, which would not result in the need for additional parking or result in traffic

congestion. Ingress and egress to the existing Baron Ranch Trail can require crossing US

Highway 101 at an unsignalized crossing; however, the low additional traffic levels anticipated

would not result in hazardous or unsafe traffic conditions.

No facilities or structures that would require the provision of water, sewer systems, or electricity

are proposed; therefore, no impact to these public services would occur. Additional police

services potentially related to theft, trespassing, or other issues, are anticipated to be negligible.

Signs on the existing Baron Ranch Trail discourage fruit theft from agricultural operations, and

potential for increased fruit theft by users of the Baron Ranch Trail to access the Baron Ridge

Trail, is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, no long-term direct or indirect impacts to

transportation or public services would result from implementation of the Proposed Action.


The public services and transportation infrastructure within the vicinity of the Project Alternative

are the same as those found within the Proposed Action area. The Project Alternative trail would

be routed primarily along an existing, but poorly maintained, private dirt road, which is not open

for public access. Transportation and parking are the same as described under the Proposed

Action and would be adequate. Similarly, no structures requiring public utilities are proposed.

Additional concerns related to trespass on private property would result from implementation of

the Project Alternative; however, due to the rugged terrain and dense vegetation, it is not

anticipated that users would deviate from the trail. Therefore, no long-term direct or indirect



April 2015

impacts to transportation or public services would result from implementation of the Project

Alternative.



Transportation and public services would remain as described in Section 3.9.1. Selection of the

No-Action Alternative would not have direct or indirect impacts on the transportation or public

services.

3.10 RECREATION


The scenic vistas, beaches, and panoramic coastal hillsides and mesas that characterize the

Gaviota coastline are popular venues for a variety of recreational activities including hiking,

camping, swimming, picnicking, fishing, and surfing. Recreational opportunities are located

within the Gaviota Coast in areas managed by County, State, and Federal parks, as well as

several private facilities, as presented in Figure 3-2.

The Baron Ranch is owned by Santa Barbara County and is managed by the County Public

Works Department’s Resource Recovery & Solid Waste Division. The Baron Ranch Loop Trail

was opened to the public in December 2010, and is currently use-restricted to foot traffic only;

mountain bikes, dogs, and equestrians are currently prohibited. Signs have been placed at the

trailhead indicating use restrictions. In addition, signs have been posted throughout the length of

the trail to reduce the potential for conflicts between agricultural uses and recreation. Current

trail restrictions may be reviewed and reconsidered over the long term to allow a multi-use trail

(Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, Resolution 09254; 15 September 2009). The

existing Baron Ranch Trail provides an approximately 6-mile-long loop from the trailhead on the

frontage road that parallels the north side of US Highway 101.

No other County of Santa Barbara parks or recreation areas occur in the vicinity of the project

area.

State Parks

Approximately 11 miles of the Gaviota coastline, encompassing over 5,000 acres are in State

ownership. Three major state parks exist within the Gaviota Coast: Gaviota, El Capitan, and

Refugio Beach.



April 2015

Gaviota State Park, located approximately 5 miles west of the project area, makes up

2,513 acres of this total acreage, and offer 52 campsites, swimming, picnicking, and

surf fishing. A combination of hiking trails and dirt fire roads within Gaviota State

Park provide access to more than 2,000 acres of oak woodland and chaparral

backcountry.

Refugio Beach State Park, located approximately 3.5 miles east of the project area,

encompasses 93 acres and offers 85 overnight camping sites, as well as coastal

fishing, trails and picnic areas.

El Capitan State Park, located 7 miles east of the project area, is 2,634 acres and

offers 137 campsites, swimming, fishing, surfing, and picnicking.

California State Parks also manages six other properties along the Gaviota Coast: Canada del

Leon, Canada San Onofre, Canada del Molino, Canada de Guillermo, Corral Beach, and Phillips

Tajiguas West. Activities at each of the beaches are predominantly passive, such as walking and

jogging. There are no improvements at these locations, so most have insufficient parking, lack

restrooms, and are difficult to access (County of Santa Barbara 2002).



April 2015

Figure 3-2. Recreational Uses in the Vicinity of the Proposed Baron Ridge Trail



April 2015

Forest Service

The LPNF, under the management of the Forest Service, manages approximately 16,811 acres of

land in the Gaviota area. Recreational access to and recreational opportunities available on LPNF

land within the Gaviota portion of the Santa Ynez Mountains is very limited. No formal LPNF

recreational amenities are located within on the Gaviota; however, informal day-use recreation

activities, such as hiking, equestrian use, and nature study, are available. The area of the Gaviota

within the vicinity of the project has been recognized as appropriate for semi primitive non-

motorized recreation (USDA Forest Service 2005).

Existing and potential access to the Gaviota section of the LPNF Front Country is severely

constrained due to the limited number of public roads that border or traverse LPNF land in this

area. Access to LPNF owned lands are largely unavailable due to the prevalence of private lands,

including active agricultural operations, which are located between major roadways (e.g., US

Highway 101, Refugio Road) and LPNF-owned land.

Presently, only the rustic West Camino Cielo jeepway provides access to the Gaviota portion of

the Santa Ynez Mountains in the 26 miles of the LPNF west of California State Route 154. This

limited access renders large areas of LPNF inaccessible to non-motorized recreation and

increases demand for and user conflicts on the limited number of Front Country trails east of

California State Route 154, such as the Tunnel, Romero Canyon, and Cold Springs Trails.

Trails

There are few existing trails open to the public within the Gaviota Coast. Most existing public

trails, particularly the few existing vertical coastal access trails, running from shoreline inland,

are associated with the State Parks. The Bill Wallace Trail, within El Capitan State Park, extends

into the lower foothill areas of the Santa Ynez Mountains for approximately 10 miles; however,

no connectivity to other trails or LPNF lands is available from this trail. The Gaviota Peak Trail,

which begins in Gaviota State Park, extends for approximately 3 miles, rising to 2,458 feet at

Gaviota Peak, onto LPNF land. The Gaviota Peak Trail is the only formal trail that extends to the

crest of the Santa Ynez Mountains within the 26 mile stretch of the Gaviota Coast between State

Highway 154 and where US Highway 101 turns north from the coast. The West Camino Cielo

jeepway can also be utilized for long-distance hiking; however, since the jeepway lacks

connectivity to other trails, it primarily provides a route for multi-day hikes, which constrains its

utilization for recreational use.

Expansion of recreational opportunities, in particular public trails, has been studied on the

Gaviota Coast. As discussed earlier in this section, much of the Gaviota Coast is privately owned



April 2015

with restricted public access through these areas. These constraints limit public access of LPNF

lands in this 26 mile segment to the LPNF Front Country and present challenges with regard to

completion of new public trails that would provide access to the LPNF in most of this Front

Country area. In light of these constrains, numerous trail routes have been proposed, but have not

been feasible to implement; however, the process is ongoing with a Trail Subcommittee

responsible for making trail route recommendations for inclusion in the Gaviota Coast Plan,

currently under preparation.


The Proposed Action would provide connections to the West Camino Cielo jeepway within

LPNF, and to Gaviota State Park trails to the west, creating a 14.9-mile-long trail system across

county, state, and federal land. Because a continuous band of public and quasi-public land (i.e.,

Arroyo Hondo Preserve) extends from US Highway 101 to LPNF land in this area, the proposed

project route is one of very few locations in the region where completion of a trail to provide

access to LPNF land from a public road across primarily public land is feasible. In addition, the

project would foster interagency cooperation in meeting recreational demand by linking a

County-owned and operated trail to LPNF lands and connecting via the West Camino Cielo

jeepway to trails within Gaviota State Park, approximately 5 miles to the west. Further, the trail

could incrementally reduce demand for and user conflicts on the limited number of Front

Country trails east of California State Route 154, such as the Tunnel, Romero Canyon, and Cold

Springs Trails.

The Proposed Action would enhance non-motorized public access to an area of LPNF that is

currently inaccessible via any established route, which is consistent with the goals of the LPNF

Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 2005). In addition, the trail would be consistent with

County of Santa Barbara policy. The County of Santa Barbara CLUP recognizes that “… there is

a need for trails for hiking, biking, and equestrian use to provide increased opportunities for

coastal access and recreational use.” In addition, the CLUP Policy 7-18 states, “Expanded

opportunities for access and recreation shall be provided in the Gaviota Coast planning area”.

While the Proposed Action would not be located within the Coastal Zone, the proposed trail

would enact County and Forest Service goals and policy regarding the provision of recreational

opportunities in the Gaviota Coast. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Action would

result in beneficial impacts to recreation.



April 2015


The recreation opportunities, including trails, within the vicinity of the Project Alternative are

the same as those found within the Proposed Action area. The proposed trail would provide a

route to the crest of the Santa Ynez Mountains and connectivity to the Gaviota Peak Trail and

West Camino Cielo; however, the trail would be constructed primarily over private holdings.

Implementation of the Project Alternative would be consistent with County of Santa Barbara and

LPNF plans and policies. Impacts to recreation under the Project Alternative would be

beneficial; however, procurement of easements would require cooperation of existing owners

and would likely result in added costs, both potential barriers to project implementation.



Recreation would remain as described in Section 3.10.1., and would remain deficient for non-

motorized access for the Santa Ynez Front Country of the Gaviota Coast. Selection of the No-

Action Alternative would not have direct or indirect impacts on the recreation.



April 2015

SECTION 4.0

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Cumulative impacts on environmental resources result from incremental impacts of the Proposed

Action when combined with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in an

affected area. Cumulative impacts can result from minor but collectively substantial actions

undertaken over a period of time by various agencies (federal, state, or local) or persons (40 CFR

1508.7). In accordance with NEPA, the cumulative impacts resulting from projects that are

proposed, under construction, recently completed, or anticipated to be implemented in the near

future are discussed below.

4.1 KEY FACTORS IN EVALUATING CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

NEPA requires analysis of the cumulative environmental effects of a Proposed Action and other

actions not only at the project site but also in the region, recognizing that effects on biological

resources, fire hazard, recreation, and other resources might often be manifested only at that

level.

4.2 PLANNED PROJECTS IN THE VICINITY

Evaluation of potential environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Action, Project

Alternative, and the No-Action Alternative includes consideration of the effects of other actions

proposed for development in proximity to the Baron Ridge Trail within the Gaviota Coast. The

following list of projects was gathered based on past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future

actions, as identified by the County of Santa Barbara.

Tajiguas Landfill Expansion and Reconfiguration Project

The Tajiguas Landfill Expansion Project consists of the horizontal and vertical expansion of the

landfill outside of the Coastal Zone, providing 8.2 million cubic yards of additional waste

disposal capacity for a total permitted capacity of 23.3 million cubic yards. The proposed

Reconfiguration Project would modify a portion of the permitted footprint (approximately 12

acres of the 118 acre permitted footprint), but would not modify the permitted operational

parameters (e.g., waste disposal capacity, operating hours).

The projects are currently being implemented. According to the project’s Supplemental

Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the proposed Reconfiguration Project would result in:

potentially significant impacts to wetlands and riparian habitat areas not previously associated

with the approved and permitted Tajiguas Landfill Expansion Project, an increase in the



April 2015

previously identified significant impact to native coast live oak trees; and an increase in the

severity of the previously identified significant impact to the California red-legged frog which is

listed as a “Threatened” species under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

Baron Ranch Restoration Plan

The Baron Ranch Restoration Plan includes implementation of a comprehensive habitat

Restoration Plan and California Red-legged Frog Management and Monitoring Plan on the

Baron Ranch. The project is intended to compensate for the loss of native habitat and offset the

effects of the proposed Tajiguas landfill reconfiguration on the California red-legged frog. The

Baron Ranch Restoration Plan focuses on enhancement of developed and degraded portions of

the Arroyo Quemado watershed, including enhancement, restoration, and creation of marshes,

coast live oak riparian forest, chaparral, southern willow scrub, and removal of invasive plants.

The Baron Ranch Restoration Plan provides approximately 38 acres of habitat restoration, most

of which is composed of coast live oak riparian forest and expanding habitat diversity of the

existing riparian corridor along Arroyo Quemado. The Restoration Plan also includes

approximately 14.6 acres of habitat restoration as mitigation for habitat loss associated with the

approved and permitted Tajiguas Landfill Expansion Project This habitat restoration would be

comprised of 12.0 acres of coast live oak woodland and 2.6 acres of Venturan coastal sage scrub.

In addition, the plan includes implementation of a monitoring plan to ensure habitat benefits for

the California red-legged frog. The plans are currently being implemented by the Santa Barbara

County Resource Recovery and Waste Management Division.

Lower Baron Ranch Trail Project

Although still conceptual at this time, the SBTC is working with the County Public Works

Department and Park Division to realign the lower 1.5 miles of the existing Baron Ranch Trail to

an existing unpaved ranch road on the west side of Arroyo Quemado Creek in order to route its

passage around (west of) existing agricultural operations. Implementation of this project would

also involve establishment of additional parking areas, interpretive signage, and other small-scale

trailhead amenities.

Santa Barbara Ranch

The Santa Barbara Ranch project includes proposed equestrian facilities and agricultural support

buildings encompassing a 13,421 square-foot horse barn, 547 square-foot ranch office, and

equipment storage building of 5,530 square-feet. Public facilities including an access roadway to

a 30-space public auto and horse trailer parking area, public use horse stalls, 423 square-foot

public restrooms, and picnic areas with covered tables.



April 2015

Venoco Line 96 Modification Project

The Venoco Line 96 Modification Project consists of construction of an approximate 8.5 mile

processed oil pipeline from Ellwood to the Las Flores Canyon connection of the Plains Pipeline

system. Development of this project eliminated marine barging from the Ellwood Marine

Terminal. The project was built and has been operational since 2012.

4.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Due to the minimal impacts anticipated upon implementation of the Proposed Action or the

Project Alternative, the proposed project would not result in potentially cumulatively significant

impacts, such as substantial loss of habitat or impairment of water quality or other resource

areas.



April 2015

SECTION 5.0

SOURCES

AMEC Earth & Environmental, Inc. 2011. Site visit performed by Dan Gira, Benjamin Botkin,

and Andrea Bardsley, RPA. June.

Arnold, J.E. 1987. Craft Specialization in the Prehistoric Channel Islands, California.

University of California Publications in Anthropology, No. 18. Berkeley.

Bamforth, D.B. 1984. Analysis of Chipped Stone Artifacts. In Archaeological Investigations on

the San Antonio Terrace, Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, in Connection with

MX Facilities Construction. Chambers Consultants and Planners. Submitted to U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District.

BirdLife International. 2009. Accipiter cooperii. In: IUCN (International Union for Conservation

of Nature) 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. Available at:

www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed on: 15 May 2012.

California Department of Conservation. 2009. Santa Barbara County Important Farmland 2008.

Prepared by the California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource

Protection. Published August.

California Department of Conservation. 2010. Division of Land Resource Protection: Santa

Barbara Williamson Act Lands 2009: Land Enrolled in Williams Act and Farmland

Security Zone Contracts as of 01-01-2009. March.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFW). 2011. Special Animals. Available at:

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/spanimals.pdf. Accessed on: 14 May 2012.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map:

Santa Barbara County. 6 November.

County of Santa Barbara. 2002. Gaviota Coast Resource Study. June.

County of Santa Barbara. 2005. Zoning Ordinance Number 661. As amended through February

6, 1984. Republished July 2005.

County of Santa Barbara. 2008. Santa Barbara Ranch Final EIR. June.

County of Santa Barbara. 2009. Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Tajiguas

Landfill Reconfiguration and Baron Ranch Restoration Project. SCH No. 2008021052.

March.

County of Santa Barbara. 2010. Seismic Safety and Safety Element. Republished August 2010.

County of Santa Barbara. 2011. Land Use Element. Adopted 1980. Amended February 2011.

Dibblee, T.W., Jr. 1966. Geology of the Central Santa Ynez Mountains, Santa Barbara County,

California, Bulletin 166. Calif. Div. Mines and Geology. 99 pp.

Erlandson, Jon M., and Roger Colten. 1991. Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal

California. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Volume I. Edited by Jon M.

Erlandson and Roger Colten. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los

Angeles.



April 2015

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2008. Map Service Center. Accessed 14

March 2012.

Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise (FIUCN). 1980. Guidelines for Considering

Noise in Land Use Planning and Control. June.

Gaviota Coast Conservancy. 2007. President’s Message, An Irreplaceable Environment.

Coastline. Issue 11.

Glassow, M.A. 1990. Archaeological Investigations on Vandenberg Air Force Base in

Connection with the Development of Space Transportation System Facilities, Volume I.

Contributions by Jeanne E. Arnold, G.A. Batchelder, D.T. Fitzgerald, B. Glenn, D.A.

Guthrie, D.L. Johnson, and P.L. Walker.

Hickman, J.C. 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plant of California. University of California

Press. Berkley, CA.

Hollingsworth, B. and G.A. Hammerson. 2007. Phrynosoma blainvilli. In: IUCN 2011. Red List

of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed on:

15 May 2012.

Hunt and Associates. 2001. Biological Assessment: Tajiguas Landfill Expansion Project, Santa

Barbara County, California. Prepared for TRC Environmental Solutions, Irvine,

California and County of Santa Barbara Department of Public Works. May.

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, California.

Johnson, J. 1968. USDA Forest Service Archaeological Reconnaissance Report: Tip Top and

Camino-Gaviota Fuelbreaks. Report on File at Central Coastal Information Center.

King, Chester. 1974. The Explanation of Differences and Similarities Among Beads Used in

Prehistoric and Early Historic California. In Antap, California Indian Political and

Economic Organization. Edited by L.J. Bean and T.F. King. Ballena Press,

Anthropological Papers 2: 75-92.

King, Chester. 1979. Beads and Selected Ornaments. In Final Report: Archaeological Studies at

Oro Grande, Mojave Desert, California. Edited by C. Rector, J. Swenson, and P. Wilke.

Archaeological Research Unit, University of California, Riverside.

King, Chester. 1981. The Evolution of Chumash Society: A Comparative Study of Artifacts Used

in Social System Maintenance in the Santa Barbara Channel Region before A.D. 1804.

Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.

Leipner, J. 2011. Personal Communication. May.

Linzey, A.V., R. Tim, S.T. Alvarez-Castaneda, I. Castro-Arellano, and T. Lacher. 2008.

Neotoma lepida. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2.

Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed on: 15 May 2012.

Meade, D.E. 1999. Monarch butterfly overwintering sites in Santa Barbara County, California.

Prepared for the County of Santa Barbara Planning and Development Department.



April 2015

Miller, G.A., and J.R. Rapp. 1968. Reconnaissance of the Ground-Water Resources of the

Ellwood-Gaviota Area, Santa Barbara County, California. Prepared in cooperation with

the Santa Barbara County Water Agency. U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological

Survey, Water Resources Division, Menlo Park, CA. April 10.

Moore, J. and Messman, A. 1985. Phase I Archaeological Survey, Southern California Edison

Proposed 66 Kilovolt Transmission Line Gaviota-Goleta Santa Barbara California.

Report on File at Central Coastal Information Center.

National Park Service (NPS). 2004. Gaviota Coast Feasibility Study. United States Department

of the Interior. March.

Odette, C.E., R.N. Rosenfield, and J. Bielefeldt. 2006. Cooper’s Hawk (Accipiter cooperii), The

Birds of North America Onlines (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology.

Available at: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/075. Accessed on: 15 May 2012.

Poglayen-Neuwall, I. 1980. Gestation Period and Parturition on the Ringtail Bassariscus astutus

(Lichtenstein, 1830). Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde 45: 73-81.

Poglayen-Neuwall, I. and D.E. Toweill. 1988. Bassariscus astutus. Mammalian Species 327: 1-8.

Schub, L. 1989. USDA Forest Service Archaeological Reconnaissance Report: Ocean View

Jeepway/ Gaviota Road Maintenance and Continuing Use. Report on File at Central

Coastal Information Center.

Sullivan, J. 1996. Taxidea taxus. In: Fire Effects Information System. US Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory.

Available at: www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/. Accessed on: 15 May 2012.

Toweill, D.E. and D.B. Toweill. 1978. Growth and Development of Captive Ringtails

(Bassariscus astutus flavus). Carnivore 1: 46-53.

Toweill, D. and J. Teer. 1980. Home Range and Den Habits of Texas Ringtails (Bassariscus

astutus javus). In: J.A. Chapman and D. Pursley (eds), Proceedings of the Worldwide

Furbearers Conference, Frostburg, Maryland, USA.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service 1981. Soil Survey of

Santa Barbara County, California, South Coastal Part. February.

USDA Forest Service. 1996. Standard Specifications for Construction and Maintenance of

Trails. Washington, DC. September.

USDA Forest Service. 2005. Final Land Management Plan: Los Padres National Forest.

September.

USDA Forest Service. 2012. Los Padres National Forest Fire and Aviation Management

Website. Available at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsinternet/!ut/p/c5/

04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3gjAwhwtDDw9_AI8zPwhQoY6IeDdGCqCPO

BqwDLG-AAjgb6fh75uan6BdnZaY6OiooA1tkqlQ!!/dl3/d3/L2dJQSEvUUt3QS9ZQnZ3

LzZfMjAwMDAwMDBBODBPSEhWTjBNMDAwMDAwMDA!/?ss=110507&navtype

=BROWSEBYSUBJECT&cid=FSE_003853&navid=091000000000000&pnavid=null&

position=BROWSEBYSUBJECT&ttype=main&pname=Los%2520Padres%2520Nationa

l%2520Forest-%2520Home/fire/. Accessed 9 April.



April 2015

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2012. My Waters Mapper. Available

at: http://watersgeo.epa.gov/mwm/. Accessed 26 March 2012.

United States Fish and Wildlife Survey (USFWS). 1997. Southern Steelhead Oncorhynchus

mykiss Habitat Suitability Survey of the Santa Margarita River, San Mateo, and San

Onofre Creeks on Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton. Coastal California Fish and

Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. Prepared for Assistant Chief of Staff, Environmental

Security.

USFWS. 2012. National Wetlands Inventory: Wetland Mapper. Accessed 22 March.

Wiskowski, T. 1988. Sensitive Plants of Santa Barbara County. Division of Environmental

Review, Resource Management Department, County of Santa Barbara.



April 2015

SECTION 6.0

REPORT PREPARERS

This report was prepared for, and under the direction of the SBTC and Forest Service, by AMEC

Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Personnel involved with this report preparation are listed

below:

Project Management

Doug McFarling, Project Manager, QA/QC

BA, Environmental Studies

Benjamin Botkin, Deputy Project Manager/ Lead Analyst

BA, Environmental Studies

Technical Analysis

Andrea Bardsley, RPA, Cultural Resources

MA, Archaeology

Nicholas Meisinger, Environmental Analyst

BS, Environmental Studies

Marcie Martin, Technical Review

MS, Environmental Management and Industrial Hygiene

APPENDIX A

INTERESTED FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL AGENCIES, AND PUBLIC


EA for the Baron Ridge Trail Page A-1

April 2015

APPENDIX A

INTERESTED FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL AGENCIES, AND PUBLIC

DISTRIBUTION LIST

Santa Barbara Ranger District

John Smith – District Ranger

3505 Paradise Road

Santa Barbara, CA 93105

Forest Supervisor's Office

6755 Hollister Avenue

Suite 150

Goleta, CA 93117

Jeff Kuyper

Los Padres Forestwatch

P.O. Box 831


Gaviota Coast Conservancy

P.O. Box 1099

Goleta, CA 93116

Los Padres Sierra Club

P.O. Box 31241


Land Trust for Santa Barbara

P.O. Box 91830


Jeff Hunt


Planning and Development Department

123 East Anapamu Street


Claude Garciacelay


Parks Department

610 Mission Canyon Road



Resource Recovery and Waste Management

Division

130 East Victoria Street, Suite 100



Fire Department

4410 Cathedral Oaks Road


Caltrans

District 5

50 Higuera Street

San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

Lois Grunwald

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office

2493 Portola Road, Suite B

Ventura, CA 93003

California Department of Fish and Wildlife

South Coast Region

3883 Ruffin Road

San Diego, CA 92123

California State Parks Department

Channel Coast District

911 San Pedro Street

Ventura, CA 93001


EA for the Baron Ridge Trail Page A-2

April 2015

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control

District

260 North San Antonio Road, Suite A


Doreen Farr

3rd District Supervisor

Santa Barbara County

105 E. Anapamu Street


Santa Barbara Mountain Bike Trail

Volunteers

http://www.sbmtv.org/about/contact-us/

Milford Wayne Donaldson

State Historic Preservation Officer

1416 9th Street, Room 1442-7

Sacramento, CA 95814

Central Coast Regional Water Quality

Control Board

895 Aerovista Place, Suite 101


Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians

Business Committee and Elders Council

P.O. Box 517

Santa Ynez, CA 93460

Anita Klinger, President

Los Padres Trail Riders

6225 Aberdeen Avenue

Goleta, CA 93117

Bryan Conant

Director

Los Padres Forest Association

[email protected]

Winter Hawk LLC

14000 Calle Real

Goleta, CA 93117

Vistas Infinitas, LLC

1191 Huntington Drive, #10

Duarte, CA 91010

Bean Blossom, LLC

14000 Calle Real

Goleta, CA 93117

Maz Properties Inc.

14000 Calle Real

Goleta, CA 93117

Joan Antolini

120 East Hermosa Street

Santa Maria, CA 93454

Loren and Bernice Nicholson

156 Del Norte Way


Hart Family Trust

3412 State Street


Aera Energy, LLC

P.O. Box 11164

Bakersfield, CA 93389

Santa Barbara Trail Riders

Box 3011

Santa Barbara, CA

mailto:[email protected]

APPENDIX B

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT

FOR TRAIL CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE

OF THE BARON RIDGE TRAIL

environmental assessment for trail...

Documents