sierra madre habitat restoration monitoring ......sierra madre habitat restoration project –...

S I E R R A M A D R E H A B I T A T R E S T O R A T I O N M O N I T O R I N G F I N A L R E P O R T

Prepared by:

THE CHEADLE CENTER FOR BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION, UCSB

DECEMBER 2018

ContentsINTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................................3

BACKGROUNDANDGOALS..............................................................................................................................................3

NORTHERNRESTORATIONAREA..........................................................................................................................5

SUMMARY...................................................................................................................................................................5GRADINGANDSITEPREPARATION....................................................................................................................................8PROJECTDESCRIPTIONANDWORK...................................................................................................................................9

WeedControl2014-2015.....................................................................................................................................9WeedControl2015-2016...................................................................................................................................10WeedCOntrol2016-2017..................................................................................................................................11WeedControl2018............................................................................................................................................11Planting2014-2015............................................................................................................................................11Planting2015-2016............................................................................................................................................12Planting2016-2017............................................................................................................................................12Planting2018.....................................................................................................................................................12Irrigation2014-2015..........................................................................................................................................12Irrigation2015-2016..........................................................................................................................................13Irrigation2016-2017..........................................................................................................................................13Irrigation2018...................................................................................................................................................13

MONITORING.............................................................................................................................................................14VegetationMonitoring......................................................................................................................................14PhotoMonitoring...............................................................................................................................................18WildlifeObservations.........................................................................................................................................18

SOUTHERNRESTORATIONAREA........................................................................................................................20

SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................................20GRADINGANDSITEPREPARATION...................................................................................................................................21PROJECTDESCRIPTIONANDWORK.................................................................................................................................23

ErosionControl...................................................................................................................................................23WeedControl2015............................................................................................................................................23WeedControl2016............................................................................................................................................24WeedControl2017............................................................................................................................................24WeedControl2018............................................................................................................................................24Planting2015.....................................................................................................................................................24Planting2016.....................................................................................................................................................25Planting2017.....................................................................................................................................................25Planting2018.....................................................................................................................................................25Irrigation2015-2018........................................................................................................................................25

MONITORING.............................................................................................................................................................26VegetationMonitoring......................................................................................................................................26HydrologyMonitoring........................................................................................................................................30PhotoMonitoring...............................................................................................................................................30WildlifeObservations.........................................................................................................................................31

CONCLUSION.....................................................................................................................................................32

APPENDICES.......................................................................................................................................................34

APPENDIX1.LISTOFPLANTSPECIESATTHESIERRAMADREHABITATRESTORATIONPROJECTSITE..............................................34APPENDIX2.LISTOFANIMALSPECIESOBSERVEDATSIERRAMADREHABITATRESTORATIONPROJECT..........................................38APPENDICES3AND4.NORTHERNANDSOUTHERNRESTORATIONAREAPHOTOMONITORING....................................................40

3 SierraMadreHabitatRestorationProject–SecondAnnualReport(CCBER2016)

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUNDANDGOALS

TheSierraMadreHabitatRestorationProjectencompassesa totalof2.93acresofnativehabitat,including 0.33 acres of ESHA1 wetland and vernal pool habitat, and 2.6 acres of habitat buffer. Theprojectarea isdivided into twomain zones (henceforth referred toas theNorthernRestorationAreaandSouthernRestorationArea; Figure1), and is associatedwith the recent constructionof theUCSBSierraMadreVillagesApartments.TheprojectsiteislocatedtothewestofStorkeRoad,ontheeasternarmofwhatwasformerlyOceanMeadowsGolfCourse(nowNorthCampusOpenSpace),withWhittierDrivetothenorthandSierraMadreCourttothesouth.TheNorthernRestorationAreaiscomprisedof0.31acresofdelineatedwetlandhabitatand1.46acresofbufferhabitat.TheSouthernRestorationAreaconsistsof0.02acresofdelineatedwetlandsurroundedbya100ftbufferthatcovers1.14acres.

Theprojectarea lies inaregionpredominatedbyaMediterraneanclimate,which ischaracterizedby cool, sometimes wet winters, and generally warm and dry summers. Frost occasionally occursovernight incoldyears,but typicallydoesnotpersist throughout theday.Summerheatandaridity istemperedbythespringandsummerfogandcoolwesterliesassociatedwiththesite’scloseproximitytothePacificOcean.Theregionreceivesanaverageofabout17inchesofprecipitationperyear,generallyfallingbetweenthemonthsofOctoberandApril.Thereare infrequentyearsofheavier rainfall,oftenassociated with El Niño events, as well as episodic droughts. A soils engineering report prepared byEarthSystemsPacific in2011 found that thesite isdominatedby layeredsandandclay soils thatarehighlyerodible.

Prior to construction theproject sitewas recovering frombeing completelygraded in1965whentopsoilswerescrapedfromtheuplandareasandplacedintheupperarmsofDevereuxSloughtocreatetheOceanMeadowsGolfCoursewhichoperatedadjacenttothesitethrough2013.Theremovaloftopsoil reduced thewetland function in the northernwetland area by filling in a former saltmarsh andcreateddegradedwetlandsintheSouthernWetlandAreabyexposingclay-richsub-soilsthatwerethencolonizedbynon-native,disturbance followingplant species. Immediatelyprior to current restorationefforts, the Northern Restoration Area wetland was comprised of several native and non-nativefreshwater marsh species as well as several brackish plant species (Salicornia sp., Distichlis spicata).Althoughnotcurrentlytidally influenced,thecompositionofexistingplantspecies(andthesuccessofcertain salt-tolerant species during restoration efforts) indicates a salty soil composition in both thewetlandandbufferzonesoftheNorthernRestorationArea.Soilsalinitiesinthisareawereassessedbydilutingsoilindeionizedwaterataratioof3:1(soiltowater);lettingthesaltsdilutefor30minutes,andmeasuring the resulting liquid with a refractometer (13% ppt) and an electrical conductivity meter(5,000 to 6,000microsiemens/cm). Prior to restoration efforts, the wetland buffer consisted of non-native annual grasses and forbs (Festuca perennis, Plantago coronopus among others), and copiouscoverofnon-nativeturfgrass (Cynodondactylon,Pennisetumclandestinum).TheSouthernRestorationAreawasdominatedbynon-nativeannualgrassesandweedyforbs,andcontainedlittletonowetlandvegetationpriortoconstruction/restorationactivities.

1 Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area


As stated in the Habitat RestorationManagement Plan (HRMP) for the SierraMadre Apartment

Complex (prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants in 2013), the goals for habitat restorationincluded “grading to create a functioning vernal pool in the Southern Restoration Area, and severalbioswalesintheNorthernRestorationArea.Restorationactionsincluderemovalofnon-nativespecies,replantingwithnativeseedsandplants,andmonitoringandmaintenanceactivities” (SMHRMP2013).Additionally,“Becausenowetlandswillbeimpactedbytheproject,theprimarygoalofthisHRMPistorestoreandenhanceexistingwetlandhabitatsandcreatenativebufferareas,resultinginestablishmentofself-sustaininganddiversenativeplantcommunitiesrequiringminimalmaintenanceinputs.Thisgoalwillbeaccomplishedthroughminorgradingtoimprovehydrologicfunction,removalofnon-nativeplantspecies, planting native vegetation suited to the specific conditions of the two restoration sites, andmaintainingthosesitesinperpetuity”(SMHRMP2013).

Onespecialstatusplantspecies,southerntarplant(Centromadiaparryissp.australis)andnospecialstatus animal species were identified prior to development. Restoration activities include thepreservationandactivedistributionofsoutherntarplantinbothrestorationareas.

This report is a cumulative account of project activities and progress presented year by year.

Figure1.SierraMadreHabitatRestorationProject


NORTHERNRESTORATION AREA

SUMMARY

As of December 2018, the 1.77 acre Northern Restoration Area at Sierra Madre, shown brokendownintoitsconstituentsub-zonesinFigure2,hasundergonefouryearsofactiverestorationbyCCBERstaff. Grading and site preparation took place in the first project year, followed by installation of anabove-ground irrigation system, native seed collection, weed control using a variety of techniques,installationofapproximately15,000plants,andtheestablishmentofavegetationmonitoringsystemtomeasure restoration success. Vegetation surveys in 2015 showed significant increases in native plantcoveranddecreasednon-nativecoverinlinewiththegoalsfortherestorationplan.

Thesecondyearofproject implementation(betweenNovember2015andOctober2016) involvedmoreintensiveweedingeffortsacrossthesite,resumptionofplantingintheNorthFlatzonelateintheyear,irrigation,annualvegetationmonitoring,andinitiationofabirdmonitoringprogram.InNovember2016, thetotalnativeplants installed intheNorthernRestorationAreareachedapproximately18,000plants.2016vegetationmonitoringshowedthatnativeandnon-nativeplantcovercontinuedtotrendfavorablytowardstheultimateprojectgoals.

The third year of project implementation (November 2016 to December 2017) involved rigorousweedingeffortsinthewakeofarobustrainyseasonthatledtotheexplosionofinvasiveannualplants,and floodedout and rotted someperennial nativesplants in theNorth Flat Zonedue to flooding. InDecember2017,thetotalnativeplantsinstalledintheNorthernRestorationAreareachedover20,000plants.2017vegetationmonitoringshowedanotherincreaseinnativecoverto72%whichexceedstheyearthreeperformancecriteriaof50%,andisinlinetoachievethefinalsuccesscriteriaof80%nativecoverbyyear5ofprojectimplementation.

The fourth and final year of project implementation (January 2018 to December 2018) involvedcontinued extensive weeding efforts, and the planting of 1,000 additional plants to replace thoseimpacted by flooding in the previous year of the project. 2018 vegetation monitoring showed adecreaseinnativeandnon-nativecoverduetowidespreaddroughtwithrainfallintheareabeingunder50%ofaveragefortheyear.However,whencombinedwiththeSouthernRestorationArea(whichsawasignificantuptick innativevegetationcover)andconsideringtherewasan increase inrelativecover(due to a marked decrease in non-native cover), the project achieved final success criteria overallheadingintothemaintenancephaseoftheproject.


Figure2.SierraMadreNorthernRestorationAreasubzones.


INITIALCONDITIONS

Prior to sitegradingandgrubbing, theNorthernRestorationAreawasheavilydominatedbynon-nativegasses,forbs,andturfgrassinalluplandareas(NorthFlat,SouthFlat,Bioswale,andSlopesub-zones).ExoticspeciesfoundatthetimeoftheinitialsurveyperformedbySWCAConsultantsincluded:Festuca perennis, Cynodon dactylon, Helminthotheca echioides, Phalaris aquatica, Pennisetumclandestinum,Plantagocoronopus,andPlantagolanceolata,amongothers(SMHRMP2013).

While thepresenceof nativeplants in all upland areaswas limitedprior to grading activities,wenotedtheexistenceofthespecial-statusspecies,Centromadiaparryissp.australis(Figure3),aswellasasizablepatchofCressatruxillensis in thenortheastcornerof thesite.Thewetlandareacontainedamix of native and non-native plants, butwasmostly dominated by native plants prior to restorationactivities. Notable species included:Eleocharismacrostachya, Xanthium strumarium, Cuscuta sp., andPersicaria lapathafolia. Figure 4 is a picture of the site before any restoration activity. Appendix 1containsthecurrentlistofallplantspeciesCCBERhasrecordedattheSierraMadreHabitatRestorationProject.ThislistincludesspeciesthatCCBERplantedsubsequenttogradingactivities.

Figure3.SouthernTarplant(Centromadiaparryissp.australis),12/10/12.


GRADINGANDSITEPREPARATION

InSeptember2014,gradingactivitieswereperformedbytheconstructioncontractorinpreparationfor CCBER restoration efforts (Figure 5). In order to recover some of the former saltmarsh function,approximately6inchesofsoilwerescrapedoffofalluplandareasheavilydominatedbyexoticturfgrass.Thegoalwastoreducetheamountoffillandlessentheabundantexoticseedbankinthoseareas,andto scrapeout the rhizomesof certain noxious species (particularlyCynodondactylon andPennesitumclandestinum)whicharehistoricallydifficulttoeliminatewithouttheheavyuseofherbicide.Theonlynotableuplandarealeftunscrapedwasinthenortheastcornerofthenorthflatsub-zone(Figure2).ItwasleftunscrapedbecauseofanexistingsizableCressatruxillensispatchlocatedamongexoticannualsthere.

Figure4.NorthernRestorationAreapriortograding;dominatedbynon-nativerhizomatousgrass.


PROJECTDESCRIPTIONANDWORK

WEEDCONTROL2014-2015

Even though much of the existing non-native vegetation was scraped off with the soil in the

NorthernRestorationArea,weedcontrolwasthemostfrequenttaskperformedbyCCBERrestorationpersonnelin2014-2015.Evenwithlimitedraininthewinterof2014,exoticplantspeciesimmediatelystartedsproutinginallareasoftherestorationsiteaftertheinitialgrading.Hence,weedcontrolquicklybecameapriority.Thegradingeffortsdidaneffective jobeliminatingmostof theprolificamountsofrhizomatous turfgrass, but did not completely remove all weeds from the seed bank. Most prolificamongtheexotics thatgerminatedwereAtriplexsemibaccata (in thenorthandsouth flatsaswellasthe slope), Plantago coronopus (north and south flats), Festuca perrenis (north flat and bioswale),Rumex crispus (north flat and wetland), Helminthotheca echioides (wetland), and Cynodon dactylon(sporadicallythroughoutthesite).Theprimarymethodemployedtoeliminatetheseweedswasmanual

Figure5.SierraMadreNorthernRestorationAreascrapingandgrading,9/11/2014.


removal.Hulahoes,handpicks,andsoilkniveswereusedto removemostspecies,particularly in theslope and south flat sub-zones. Additionally, gas powered weed-wackers were used throughout thegrowingseasontopreventtheseedingofnon-nativeannualplantsthat floweredbeforestaffhadtheopportunitytoremovethembyhand.ThismethodwasparticularlyusefulintheCressaTruxillensisareathatwasn’tscraped,becausetheprostrateCressawas leftunharmedwhenCCBERstaffcamethroughand chopped down the abundant Festuca perrenis growing tall above it. Another method widelyemployedonthesitewassolarization.CCBERstaffplacedlargesheetsofblackplastic,weigheddownbysandbagsthroughoutthenorthflatsub-zone(exceptfortheCressaarea).Thismethodofweedcontrolkillsthenon-nativeplantsbyheatingthemtounbearabletemperaturesaswellaseliminatingtheirlightsource.Thiswasaneffectivemethodofcontrolforthenorthflatbecauseitcoveredalargerareamorequickly thanmanual removal,which gave CCBERworkers the chance to spendmore time intensivelyhandweeding the south flat and slope sub-zones to prepare them for planting. The finalmethod ofweedcontrolemployedin2014-2015washerbicideapplication.CCBERstafftrainedintheproperuseofherbicide applied Roundup Custom (a wetland approved herbicide) to many upland areas of theNorthernRestorationAreathathadre-sproutsofCynodondactylon.Herbicidewasusedsparinglyonlyon species that are ineffective to remove using manual removal techniques (i.e. Cynodon dactylon,Pennisetumclandestinum).


Weed control continued to be the primary activity performed by CCBER staff in the NorthernRestoration Area during the 2015-2016 year. The same methods (hand-weeding, weed-whacking,solarization,herbicide)wereemployedinremovalofthesamevariousinvasivespeciesthatoccurredintheprioryear.Thesouthernflatsub-zonewasmostlyvegetatedwithnativeplantsestablishedtheprioryear,sohandweedingwasthepreferredmethod.Additionalproblematicnon-natives inthesouthernflatzoneincluded:Parapholisincurva,Medicagopolymorpha,Cotulacoronopifolia,andSpergulariasp.Solarizationwascontinuedinthenorthernflatzone.Severalsheetsofblackplasticwererotatedaroundthe zone to cover as much area as possible. In the dry months of the year, some of the areas notcoveredinblackplasticwerelightlyirrigatedusingdriplinestoencouragegerminationofthenon-nativeseeds in the seed bank, initiating a grow-kill cycle. Erodium citcutarium, Lepidium didymium, andPortulaca oleracea were the most common species on the north flat. One notable area that wassolarized was the northeastern corner of the site, which supports a dense population of the nativeCressa truxillensis.Many weeds were interspersed with the C. truxillensis, and the patch was handweededandweed-whacked in the firstyearof restoration.However,much like the invasiveBermudagrassandKikuyugrass,Cressahasarobustundergroundsystemofrootsandrhizomes.TheresiliencyofthesespeciesinresponsetosolarizationattemptssuggestedthatCressawouldwithstandthetreatmentas well. Thus, CCBER workers placed black plastic over the Cressa patch, predicting the non-nativespecieswouldperishandtheCressawouldsurvive.Thishypothesiswasconfirmedseveralweekslaterupontheremovaloftheplastic.Thoughpaleincolorduetolackofphotosynthesis,theCressawasalivewhilethenon-nativespeciespresentwerekilled.Overthefollowingmonths,thedensityoftheCressapopulationincreaseddramatically,likelyduetotheabsenceofcompetition.Elsewhere,weed-whackingwas performed across the site as needed on flowering/seeding weeds to postpone seed dispersal,especially on Cotula coronopufolia andMedicago polymorpha. Herbicide was used on re-emergingrhizomatousgrassesonlyasneeded.



Becausetheprojectreceived7moreinchesofrainthantheannualmean,plantgrowthacrosstheprojectwasvigorousduringthe2016-2017growingseason.Asaresult,CCBERstaffspentamajorityoftheirtimeweedingintheNorthernRestorationAreain2016-2017.Whilemanyoftheweedcontrolmethodsemployedintheprevioustwoyearswereimplementedonceagain,theestablishmentofnativeplantsthroughoutthesiteledtoadecreaseintheuseofblackplasticforsolarization(whichwaslimitedtotheC.truxillensispatch)andherbicidetocontrolselectspeciesbecausethesemethodsarelessselectivethanhandweedingandmechanicalcontrols.Effortswerelargelysuccessfuloverall,especiallywhencomparedtotheunmanagedgrowthofexoticplantsintheadjacentparceltothewestoftheproject.Onenotableexception,however,wasthesouthflatsubzonewhichwasdominatedbyparticularlydenseanddifficulttocontrolpatchesofFestucamuyros,Parafolisincurva,andPlantagocoronopus.Vegetationmonitoringtransect4,whichrunsthroughthiszone,indicated40%non-nativecoverageinthesouthflat.CCBERplanstoimplementaflameweedingprogramearlyinthe2017-2018growingseasontocombatthespreadofthesenoxiousspecies.

WEEDCONTROL2018

Rainfallduringthefourthyearoftheprojectwaswellbelowtheyearlyaverageatjustovernineinches.Althoughonewouldexpectthistoleadtoamarkeddecreaseinthegrowthofnon-nativeplants,therealitywasthatweedspeciesthatwerepresentduringthedroughtyear2015-2016madeacomebackintheplaceofextensiverain-lovingweedsthatproliferatedduring2016-2017.Non-nativespeciesthatpresentedparticularproblemsin2018includedMedicagopolymorpha,Cotulacoronopifolia,Erodiumbotrys,Erodiumcicutarium,Crypsisschoenoides,Rumexcrispus,andAtriplexsemibaccatainadditiontotheperennialproblemspresentedbyParafolisincurvaandPlantagocoronopus.Asaresultofthisexplosioningrowth,themajorityofworktimewasspentperformingweedcontrolonceagain.Handweeding(includingtheuseofscufflehoes)wasthepreferredmethodofcontroloverall,butavarietyofweedcontroltechniqueswereusedtocombatparticularoutbreaks.Forexample,theextensiveuseofgreenflameinthesouthflattocontrolthedensepatchesofFestucamuyrosandParafolisincurvathatbecameapparentin2017waskeytoareductionofthosespecies.Additionally,solarizationwasusedtocontroltheemergenceofCotulacoronopifoliainthesouthflataswellasErodiumcicutarium,Atriplexsemibaccata,Erigeronbonariensis,andotherweedsintheC.truxillensispatchofthenorthflat.Astheprojecttransitionsintothemaintenancephase,weedcontrolwilllikelybewherethemajorityofrestorationeffortswillbespent.

PLANTING2014-2015

Theplants installedin2014-2015attheNorthernRestorationAreawerepropagatedintheCCBERnursery from seed (or cuttings) collected from local populations of native plants. Particular attentionwas paid by CCBER staff to only collect seeds and cuttings of native species at nearby CoalOil PointReserve (COPR)orEllwoodMesa (EM).For species thatdon’toccuronCOPRorEM,acollectionareawithin a 10-mile radius of the project site was used. As of November 2015, 15,000 plants had beeninstalledintheslopeandsouthflatsub-zones,withplanstoplantthenorthflatandbioswalesub-zonesinthenexttwoyears.CCBERmadethedecisiontoplanttheslopesub-zoneasafirstprioritytomitigatethepotentialforerosiononthesite.Oneofthemainplantingissuesfacedin2014-2015wasthedie-offof numerous species planted in the central part of the north flat sub-zone (Mirabilis laevis, Elymusglaucus,Frankeniasalina,StipaPulchra).Subsequentsoilanalysisofthisareashowedanelevatedsaltcontent (e.g. 13 ppt). Consequently, CCBER installed salt tolerant natives to replace the dead plants


(Extriplexcalifornica,Distichlisspicata,Suaedataxifolia),andthereplacementsareflourishing.Alloftheplantsinstalledintheslopesub-zonehavedonewell,andtheonlyotherareatohaveplantingproblemsisasmallsectionofHordeumbrachyantherumssp.brachyantherumthatwasplantedinlateSeptemberon the south edge of the north flat sub-zone. After initially looking robust and healthy, these plantsbecame infestedwith aphids, andmany have died. It is unclearwhether these pests came from thenurseryorproliferatedbecauseoftheunseasonablywarmtemperaturesexperiencedatthesiteupuntilearly November. Whatever the reason, CCBER staff will keep an eye on the performance of futureHordeum brachyantherum ssp. brachyantherum plantings, and will take steps to ensure a similarinfestationdoesn’toccuragain (i.e.making sure toplantduringperiodsof coolerweather, andmorecloselyinspectplantsatthenurserybeforetransplantingtotherestorationsite).

PLANTING2015-2016

Plantingresumed intheNorthernRestorationarea inthenorthflatsub-zone inAugust2016.Thiszonewasreservedforplantingasitunderwentmultipleweedgrow-killsolarizationtreatmentsearlierintheyear.Severaldifferentspecieshavebeenplanted,includingEriogonumparvifolium,Mirabilislaevis,Stipapulchra,Atriplexcalifornica,Grindeliacalifornica,andothers.Thesoilofthenorthflathasamuchhighersandcontentthansoilsofthesurroundingzones.Plantresponsestothissoilwillbemonitoredand noted for use in guiding future species placement. All plantswere locally sourced and grown inhouse at CCBER. ByNovember 2016, 2,837 plants have been installed on the north flat, bringing thetotalfortheNorthernRestorationAreatonearly18,000.

PLANTING2016-2017

Anadditional2,000plantswereinstalledinthebioswaleandnorthflatsubzonesbetweenJanuaryandNovember2017tofillintheremainingunplantedareasofthesite.Thebioswalewasplantedwithfreshwaterseasonalwetlandspeciesincluding:Juncuspatens,Anemopsiscalifornica,Schoenoplectuspungens,andDistichlisspicataamongothers.ThenorthflatwasreplantedwithsalttolerantspeciessuchasAtriplexcalifornicaandDistichlisspicatainareasthatexhibitedpoorsignsofnativegrowthfromthepreviousyear.PlantingintheNorthernRestorationAreaisnearlycomplete,andwillconsistoffillinginsmallgapsorreplantingareaspreviouslycoveredbyexoticspeciesintheensuingyears.

PLANTING2018

Approximately1,000additionalplantswereinstalledintheNorthFlatin2018bringingthetotalforplantsinstalledintheNorthernRestorationAreato21,000.

IRRIGATION2014-2015

ApproximatelyonemonthaftergradingwascompletedinSeptember2014,CCBERstaffinstalleda1.5 inch PVC irrigation line running the length of the project with quick coupler valves to provideirrigationaccessfornewplantingsatthesite(Figure6).Thelinerunsabovegroundandwillberemovedwhen irrigation is no longer necessary. Irrigation was a major concern in 2014-2015 because of theongoingdroughtinGoletaandCaliforniaingeneral.Theoriginalplantoirrigatethesiteusingoverheardsprinklers was scrapped to save water and to comply with the city of Goleta’s stage II droughtrestrictions.Mostof theplantingsat theNorthernRestorationAreawere installedduringwhatwouldnormallybetherainyseasonbetweenJanuaryandAprilof2015,andwerewateredusingacombinationofdripirrigationandhandwatering.Plantsweretypicallywateredtwotimesperweekfor6-10weeksafterplanting,withoccasionalwateringasnecessarytoensuresurvival.


IRRIGATION2015-2016

Minimal irrigationwas requiredon theNorthernRestorationArea for themajorityof theyear,asthe southern flat and slope sub-zones were well established with native vegetation by 2015. Onceplanting began on the north flat, newly installed plantswerewatered using drip irrigation aswell ashandwatering.Theplantingofthisareaisongoing,andwillrequirelessirrigationwiththepossiblerainduring the following winter months. However, the California drought is also ongoing, thus irrigationcould become a more demanding and challenging task. Under the established drought restrictions,hand-watering cannot be done between 10:30am and 4:00pm. Staff time must be allocated forirrigationappropriately.

IRRIGATION2016-2017

Becauserainfallwas50%abovetheannualmeanfortheareaoftheprojectsiteduringthe2016-2017growingseason,irrigationwasonlynecessaryinnewlyplantedareastoensureestablishmentandreduceplantstress.HandwateringwillcontinueintheNorthernRestorationAreaincompliancewithGoletaWaterDistrictstageIIIdroughtrestrictionsasnecessaryuntilthelastroundofnativeplantingsreachmaturity.

IRRIGATION2018

DripirrigationandoccasionalhandwateringwasusedtoestablishnewplantingsincompliancewithGoletaWaterDistrictstageIIIdroughtrestrictions.

Figure6.SierraMadreNorthernRestorationAreairrigationinstallation,10/21/14.


MONITORING

VEGETATIONMONITORING

Aseriesofsix linetransects,shown inFigure7,wereestablishedforvegetationmonitoringatthe Northern Restoration Area in January of 2014 to measure baseline plant conditions beforerestorationefforts,andtorecordrestorationprogressduringthelifeoftheproject.ExperiencedCCBERstaff identify all plant speciesobserved in a 1 x 1meter quadrat placed at every thirdmeterof eachtransect, estimating percent cover for each species. CCBER conducts these surveys each year in latespringtoearlysummer.TheresultsofthemonitoringforallyearsoftheprojectaresummarizedbelowandshownintheFigures8-12.Theyincludechangesinnativeandnon-nativecover,bareandthatchcover,andspeciesrichnesspertransectandonaveragethroughoutthesite.

2014-2015

First year monitoring was conducted in May 2015. Results were generally positive in terms ofrestorationsuccess.Basedontheperformancecriteriaforyearoneoftheproject,standardshavebeenmet,asaveragenativecoverwentupfrom31.5%duringbaselinemonitoringto41.35%duringyearonemonitoring, andnon-native cover fell from48%duringbaselinemonitoring to17.5%during yearonemonitoring.Theinterimsuccesscriteriaforyearonestipulatedthatnativecovershouldbeatorabove25%andthatnon-nativecovershouldbeatorbelow20%.

1

2

3

4

5

6

Figure 8. Northern Restoration Area Vegetation Transects Figure7.SierraMadreNorthernRestorationAreavegetationtransects.


2015-2016

Second year monitoring was conducted in June 2016. The survey results revealed an overallcontinuationofthetrendsobservedinthefirstyear.Siteaveragenativecoverincreasedfrom41.4%to58.1%, and average non-native cover decreased from 17.5% to 13.5% in 2016. The interim successcriteriaforyeartwooftheprojectrequiresaveragenativecoveratorabove35%,andnon-nativecoveratorbelow15%.Bothofthesecriteriaweremet.

2016–2017

Thirdyearmonitoringwasconducted in June2017. Thesurveyresults revealedacontinuationofthe upward trend of native cover observed in the vegetation surveys from years one and two. Siteaverage native cover increased from 58.1% to 72.8%, while average non-native cover also increasedfrom13.5%in2016to18.7%in2017.Theinterimsuccesscriteriaforyearthreeoftheprojectrequiresaveragenativecoveratorabove50%andnon-nativecoveratorbelow15%.Whiletheinterimsuccesscriteriafornon-nativecoverwasnotmetinyearthree,thedifferenceisalmostcompletelyattributedtotheoutgrowthofdifficult tocontrolspecies intransect4,notedabove. Aredoublingofeffortsandanewweedcontrolapproach(flameweeding)inthisareaareexpectedtoreversethistrendinthenextyear.

2017-2018

Fourth year vegetation monitoring was conducted in June 2018. The survey results revealed adecrease in absolute native cover and non-native cover from 72.8% to 67% and 18.7% to 14%respectively. Whileabsolutenativecoverwentdown,therelativenativecoverremainedhighat78%,which, when combinedwith the relative native cover of the Southern Restoration Area, is in line toachieve the final success criteria of 80% site-wide native cover outlined in the management plan.Relative cover is a betterway tomeasure success in this case because of the continuation of severedroughtconditionsinSantaBarbaraCountywhichledtoamarkeddecreaseinvegetationcoveroverall.


Figure 8. Relative cover at Northern Restoration Area

Figure 9. Native species richness recorded in the Northern Restoration Area survey per year.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Ramo

ofN

amve:ExomcVegetam

veCoverage

ShareofVegetam

veCover

Year

NORTHERNRESTORATIONAREA

NamveShareofVegetamveCoverExomcShareofVegetamveCoverNamve:ExomcCoverRamo


Figure 10. Average percent native cover in the Northern Restoration Area.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1 2 3 4 5 6 SITEMEAN

MeanPe

rcen

tCover

TransectYear

NaAveCover

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 2 3 4 5 6 SiteMean

MeanPe

rcen

tCover

TransectYear

Non-NaAveCover

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 11. Average percent non-native cover in the Northern Restoration Area.


PHOTOMONITORING

Photomonitoring pointswere established and subsequently rearrangeddue to road andbuildingconstruction changes. The present distribution and direction of photos points in the NorthernRestoration Area are displayed in Figure 13. The monitoring photos collected since the points wereestablishedareincludedinAppendixIIIofthisreport.

WILDLIFEOBSERVATIONS

BirdSurvey

CCBER conductedamonthlybird surveyof the SierraMadreRestoration site in January2016whichran for justoveroneyear,concluding inMarch2017.Surveysbeganapproximately15minutesbeforesunrise,whenthereisasurgeinbirdactivity,andconsistedofoneortwoknowledgeableCCBERstaffmembers,equippedwithbinoculars,recordingvisualandauditoryobservationsofallindividualsofeach species present. Because the Northern Restoration Area is relatively small in terms of birdmonitoring,itispossibletoattemptafullcensusofthepopulationswithintheboundsofthesite,ratherthan to extrapolate sample data using transect methods. As of March 2017, 29 bird species weredocumented within the Northern Restoration Area during these surveys, including locally commonsongbirds,waterfowl,shorebirds,andraptors.AllspeciesarelistedinAppendixII.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 SITEMEAN

MeanPe

rcen

tCover

TransectYear

Bare/ThatchCombinedCover

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 12. Average percent bare/thatch cover in the Northern Restoration Area.


Figure13.SierraMadreNorthernRestorationAreaphotopoints.

Figure14.GreatblueheronattheNorthernRestorationArea,3/5/2015.

OtherWildlife

While no formalwildlifemonitoring is being conducted at the site at this time, the SierraMadreRestorationProject has a notebook inwhich all employees are encouraged to recordnotablewildlifeobservationsaspartoftheirjob.Severalspeciesofmammalsandherptileshavebeendocumentedonsite, listed inAppendix II.Notable invertebratesobserved include at least one speciesof unidentifiedparasitoidwasp(possiblyCompsocryptussp.),andaspeciesoforbweaverspiderthatisabundantintheStipapulchragrasslandatthenorthwetlandslopesub-zone.


Figure15.Unidentifiedparasitoidwaspandorbweaverspider.

SOUTHERNRESTORATION AREA

SUMMARY

Restoration activities commenced in the Southern Restoration Area in June 2015 after the initialgrading and removal of vegetation and the amending of the clay-rich sub-soils that were exposedthereafter. By November 2015, 1,300 plants had been installed in the area, and non-natives weresparse.In2016,CCBERfocusedplantingeffortsonthehighprofileSouthernRestorationArea,installinganadditional24,326plantsasofNovember2016.Priortotheestablishmentoftheseplantings,effortsweremadetoreducetheriskoferosiontothebaresoilbyconstructingrockoutflowsandcheckdamsbefore the rainy season.Weed control was a minor time commitment through the first full year ofrestoration.VegetationmonitoringwasconductedinJune2016,theresultsofwhichindicatedpositiveprogress towards restoration goals. In 2017, CCBER spent the majority of time in the SouthernRestorationAreaweedinginvasivespeciesthatcroppedupthroughoutthesiteinresponsetothehigherthananticipatedrainsof2016-2017. Additionalplantingwasalsodoneinthiszone,bringingthetotalnumberofplantsinstalledto27,238.CCBERstaffalsospentadditionaltimeinoculatingthegrasslandssurroundingtheweltandareawithwildflowerseedsinlate2017.VegetationmonitoringwasconductedinJune2018theresultsofwhichindicatedexcellentprogresstowardachievingthefinalsuccesscriteriaoutlinedintheHRMP.


Figure16.Re-gradingofspillwaybetweenvernalpoolandoverflowdrainbyCCBERstaff,10/12/2015.

GRADINGANDSITEPREPARATION

In June of 2015, the UCSB contractor prepared the site for restoration activities by grading thevernalpooltoadepthofapproximately18inches,spreadingmulchamendmentinallbufferareas,andrippingtheamendmenttoadepthofapproximatelysixinchesintothesoil.Noneofthesoilinthebasinof the vernal pool was ripped in order to assure that it retained water-holding capability. Soilamendment was ripped into the buffers for two reasons: 1) to add an organic component to thenutrient poor sub-soils at the site, and2) to loosen thehard clay soil tomakeplanting easier and toallowforfasterintegrationofthesoilwiththeamendment.Figure17displaysthespreadingandrippingprocess.WhiletheSMHRMPstatedthatthemaximumpondingdepthofthepoolwassupposedtobe18inches,threemonthsaftergrading,CCBERstaffdiscoveredthatthepoolwouldlikelyholdatleast24inchesofwater.Inordertoreducethedepth,CCBERusedasmalltractortoscrapeawaysoilandlowerthelevelofthespillwaybetweenthevernalpoolandthestormdrain(Figure16).


(a)

(b)

Figure17.(a)Soilrippingand(b)intergrationofArgimixsoilamendmentinSouthernRestorationArea.


PROJECTDESCRIPTIONANDWORK

EROSIONCONTROL

TheinitialconditionoftheSouthernRestorationAreaasitwaspresentedtoCCBERinSummer2015wasbareground.Lackofvegetationishighlyconducivetosevereerosionduringrainfallevents.Inorderto prevent erosion of the upland areas and sedimentation into the basin of the vernal pool, CCBERinstalledafewdevicesinanticipationoftherainyseason.Firstwastheinstallationofstrawwattleatthehighwatermarkaroundthevernalpool.Thewattlewasdugintoashallowtrenchandsealedwithsoilto act as a barrier to inflowing sediment. Second, sandstone boulders were used to construct flow-dampening basins below 25 hardscape outflows on the eastern side of the site. Remaining boulderswereusedtoconstructcheckdamsalongasmallswaleinthenorthuplandarea.Thesefeaturesweretested in early January by a significant rain event and appeared to suffice until vegetation wasestablished.TheyareshowninFigure18.

WEEDCONTROL2015

As previously stated, only a minimal amount of weed control was necessary because almost noweedssproutedin2015.

Figure 18. Rock outflows, check dams, and straw wattle at the Southern Restoration Area.


WEEDCONTROL2016

Weeding continued tobe aminor task at the SouthernRestorationArea in 2016. Becauseof theinitialgradingandremovaloftheseedbank,non-nativegerminantsweresparse.Manyspeciesthatdidoccurwerelikelydispersedfromsurroundingareasorimportedwiththevernalpoolinoculum.Theareawas hand weeded when non-natives approached maturity or when conspicuous patches appeared.SmallamountsofherbicidewerealsousedonBermudaandKikuyugrass.

WEEDCONTROL2017

WeedcontrolbecametheprimaryfocusofrestorationactivitiesintheSouthernRestorationAreain2017.WithextensiverainsstartinginNovember2016,theresultingescalationinweedabundanceledto a focus on hand weeding supplemented by the occasional use of herbicide on small patches ofCynodondactylon. PopulationsofMedicagopolymorpha,Sonchus oleraceus,Festucamuyros,Salsolatragus,andPlantagolanceolatadottedtheuplandareasofthesite,whileCrypsisschoenoideswastheprimaryinvasiveinthevernalpoolzone.

WEEDCONTROL2018

Weedcontrolactivitiescontinuedtobethefocusofrestorationactivityin2018.Sonchussp,Festucamuyros,Brassicanigra,andErodiumcicutariumwerethechieftargetsoftheuplandarea,whileLythrumhyssopifoliawasthemostproblematicinthevernalpoolzone.

PLANTING2015

As of November 30th, 2015, 1284 plants in 2-inch pots had been installed at the SouthernRestoration Area. In addition, hundreds of directly cut and rooted rhizomes had been planted in theswale, in between the vernal pool and the drainage box. While some of the plantings have beensuccessful (particularly the directly rooted Distichlis spicata rhizomes), there have been die-offs orstuntedgrowth in a largepercentageof theplants installed so far. Themost likely reason is that theagrimixmulchthatwasrippedintothesoilatthesitehasn’thadsufficienttimetobreakdown,integratewiththesoil,andprovidenutrientstotheplants.Theresultisthatplantsarestrugglingtosurviveinthenutrientpoor,inorganicsub-soilsthatcomprisethesite.Toaddressthisissue,CCBERstaffpurchasedanorganicsoilconditioner/fertilizercalledFirstGreen,producedbythecompanyLiveEarth,tosupplementthemulchamendment.Thisconditionerwasusedasatemporarysolutionuntiltheamendmenthadachancetofullyintegratewiththesoil.

Inadditiontothe2-inchpotandrhizomeplantings,CCBERstaffspreadinoculuminthevernalpoolarea, andCentromadia parryi ssp. australis seed (mixed in withDeinandra fasciculata seed) into theupland zones of the site as per the SierraMadre HRMP. Approximately 15 gallons of inoculum wascollected,spreadandcompactedintothesoilsinthevernalpoolzone.Thisincludedinoculumthatwascollectedfromavarietyofvernalpoolreferencesitesonor inthevicinityoftheUCSBcampus.Thesesitesinclude:ManzanitaVillage,DelSolandCaminoCortovernalpools,andStorkeRanchvernalpool.Inordertoensureproperadhesionoftheinoculumtothesoil,CCBERstaffpreparedthesitebywateringthesoilsothatitheldmoisturebutwasn’tmuddy.CCBERemployeesthenwentthroughandrakedthesubstrate,spreadtheinoculumevenlybyhand,andlightlytampeddowntheinoculumusinghandtools.CCBERstaffalsocollectedalargeamountofCentromadiaparryissp.australisfromanabundantsourceattheNorthParcelRestorationProject,andspreaditbyhandorrakeditintoalloftheuplandareasoftheSouthernRestorationArea.


PLANTING2016

PlantingconstitutedthebulkoftheworkdoneattheSouthernRestorationAreainitsfirstfullyearofactiverestoration.Anadditional25,626plantsin2and4inchpotswereplantedfromDecember2015throughNovember2016,bringingthetotalnumberofnativeplantsinstalledto26,910.Mostoftheareawas planted with perennial bunchgrasses like Stipa pulchra and Elymus glaucus with the intent ofcreating grassland habitats interspersedwith various native forbs and shrubs. Lower elevation zoneswere planted with wetland and wetland-edge species such as Hordeum brachyantherum, Rumexcrassus, and various species of Juncus. The vernal pool basin was planted with the rhizomatousperennialwetlandspeciesEleocharismacrostachya. Plantings have been largely successful despite one setback. The direct seeding of the southerntarplant,Centromadiaparryi ssp.australis, thatoccurred inNovember2015wasextremely successfuland exceeded expectations. Large amounts of seedlings germinated in early spring, primarily in theeasternandsouthernareasofthesite,whichhadbeenmostlyunplantedatthatpoint.CCBERcontinuedtoplantthroughoutthetarplant-populatedzones,beingcarefulnottodisruptthespecialstatusspecies.However, inthefollowingmonths,theCentromadiapopulationappearedtoout-competethegrasses,growinglargeandrobustwhilemostoftheplantingswerestuntedorperished.Concernforthesuccessof the plantings and for the diversity of the site’s plant community led to the ultimate decision toremove all of the large tarplant individuals after the onset of seed production. The tarplants weremovedtoanotherCCBERsitetobeusedforseeddispersalontheNorthCampusOpenSpaceproject.TheaffectedareasoftheSouthernRestorationAreawerere-plantedasneededandarebeingirrigatedtorevivetheremnantsoftheoriginalplantings.Centromadiaparryissp.australiswillcontinuetobeaprominent feature of the Southern Restoration Area because of the large amount of seed that wasproducedduringthefirstyearofgrowth.

PLANTING2017

Withthesitealmostfullyplantedbytheendof2016,plantingactivitiesattheSouthernRestorationareaconsistedmostlyofspreadingannualseedandinstallingfill-inplantingswherepreviousplantingshadfailed.Almost1000plantswereinstalledbetweenNovember2016andNovember2017,bringingthetotalnumberofplantingsupto27,238.Anyfutureplantingsatthesitewillbegearedtowardincreasingplantdiversityorfillinginfailedareas.

PLANTING2018

Anadditional816plantswereinstalledin2018bringingthesitetotalupto28,054notincludingtheadditionalseedandrhizomesthatwereinstalledonthesiteinvariouslocations.Anyfutureplantingwillbeminimal,butmaybenecessaryintheunlikelyeventthatanyareasexperiencesignificantdie-offintheupcomingyears.

IRRIGATION2015-2018

The plantings currently installed at the site have been watered through a combination of handwateringanddrip irrigationwithpotablewatertoensureestablishment. Thistypicallytakesbetweenoneandthreemonths,atwhichpointtheplantingsnolongerrequirewatering.Becauseofthedrought,there are currently no plans to water any plants using sprinklers, and once planting activities haveconcluded,nofurtherirrigationwillbenecessary,andtheirrigationsystemwillberemoved.


Figure19.(a)vernalpoolinoculum,(b)Centromadiaparryissp.australisseed,(c)and(d)CCBERstaffapplyingvernalpoolinoculum.

MONITORING

VEGETATIONMONITORING

ThebaselineconditionattheSouthernRestorationAreawasbareground.Fourvegetationtransects(Figure20)wereestablishedandmonitoringwasconductedannuallyininlateSpringorearlysummerinconjunctionwith theNorthern Restoration Areamonitoring. The surveymethod for both restorationareasisthesame.ResultsofthevegetationsurveysareshowninFigures21-25.2016 Monitoringin2016tookplaceinlateJune.Becauseofthebaregroundbaselinecondition,surveysresultsshowedagreatincreaseinnativecoveroverthesite.Averagenativecoverincreasedfrom0%in2015 to35.5% in2016.Averagenon-nativecoveralso increased,butonlyup to1.15%at the timeofmonitoring.Thissmallamountofcoverreflectstheinitialabsenceofweedsandinsubstantialnon-nativeseedbank.Thesevaluesexceedthecriteriaforinterimsuccessafter2yearsofprojectimplementationofatleast35%nativecoverandnomorethan15%non-nativecover.

(b)

(a) (c)

(d)


2017 Monitoring in 2017 took place in early June. The survey results revealed a continuation of theupwardtrendofnativecoverobservedinthevegetationsurveyfrom2016. Siteaveragenativecoverincreasedfrom35.5%to55.3%,whileaveragenon-nativecoverremainedstagnantat1%.Theinterimsuccess criteriawasachieved foryear threeof theproject,which requiredaveragenativecoveratorabove50%andnon-nativecoveratorbelow15%.2018 Monitoringin2018tookplaceinlateJune.Thesurveyresultsrevealedacontinuedupwardtrendinnativecover,a levelingoffofnon-nativecover,andacontinueddecrease inbare/thatchcover. Mostnotably,relativenativecoverintheSouthernrestorationareawas95%in2018,whichmeantthatthesuccesscriteriaoutlinedinthemanagementplanof80%orhighernativecoverwasachieved.

Figure20.SierraMadreSouthernRestorationAreavegetationmonitoringtransects


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2015 2016 2017 2018

ShareofVegetam

veCover

YearVegetamonType

SouthernRestoraAonArea

Namve Exomc

0

38 3739

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

2015 2016 2017 2018

Num

bero

fSpe

cies

Year

NaAveSpeciesRichness

Figure 21. Relative cover at Southern Restoration Area.

Figure 22. Number of native species recorded at baseline and in subsequent years.


0102030405060708090

100

1 2 3 4 SITEMEAN

MeanPe

rcen

tCover

TransectYear

NaAveCover

2015 2016 2017 2018

012345678910

1 2 3 4 SITEMEAN

MeanPe

rcen

tCover

TransectYear

Non-NaAveCover

2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 23. Average percent native cover over four transects in Southern Restoration Area.

Figure 24. Average percent non-native cover over four transects in Southern Restoration Area.


HYDROLOGYMONITORING

WaterlevelsweremonitoredattheSouthernRestorationAreavernalpoolin2016todeterminethemaximumdepthofinundation,andtogainasenseofhowlongthepoolwaslikelytoholdwater.A24-inchrulerwassetup inthecenterofthepoolbasinpriortothe2015-2016rainyseason.Levelswererecordedonaweeklybasis,beginningwhenthepoolfirstheldwater,andendingwhenthepooldriedcompletely.TheSantaBarbaraAreaexperiencedbelowaveragerainfallinthe2015-2016rainyseason;UCSB received10.24 inches,whereas theannualaverage is17.14 inches.However, thewater level inthevernalpoolsurpassedtheheightoftheruleraftersomerainevents,whichdemonstratedthatthedepthofthepoolfarexceedstheidealdepthforvernalpoolfunctionalityof12-14inches.Despitethisfact, the suite of vernal pool plants that were seeded or planted have thrived. The vernal pool heldwaterfor170daysinthe2015-2016rainyseason,andtheresultsoftheweeklymonitoringareshowninFigure26.

PHOTOMONITORING

Photo monitoring points were established in December 2015. The location and direction of thepoints are represented in Figure 27. Photos taken at the points are included in Appendix IV of thisreport.

Figure 25. Average percent bare/thatch cover over four transects in Southern Restoration Area.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2 3 4 SITEMEAN

MeanPe

rcen

tCover

TransectYear

Bare/ThatchCombinedCover

2015 2016 2017 2018


WILDLIFEOBSERVATIONS

TheSouthernRestorationAreawassurveyedmonthly forbirdsbetween January2016andMarch2017 along with the Northern Restoration Area. Some bird species have made notable use of thehabitat. Ducks and shorebirds feed in the vernal pool when it holds water, a Cooper’s Hawk hasfrequentedthepooltodrink,andthelocalCliffSwallowpopulationgathersmudfornestbuildingalongthe pool’s edge. Goldfinches and sparrows have been seen feeding on large quantities of SouthernTarplantseedintheuplandareas.Theareaissmallandexposedonallsides,whichcausesittobelesshabitable for many birds. As the plant community becomes established, however, more species areexpectedtoappear.AllobservedspeciesareincludedinAppendixII.Otherwildlifeisalsosparseduetothefactthatthesiteissurroundedbydevelopmentonallsides.OthervertebrateobservationsincludeWestern Fence Lizards, Pacific Tree Frogs, and Pocket Gophers. The vernal pool has the potential tosupportadiverseinvertebratepopulationwhenitholdswater,butinvertebratesarecurrentlynotbeingmonitored.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1/8/16 2/8/16 3/8/16 4/8/16 5/8/16 6/8/16

WaterLevel(inche

s)

Date

VernalPoolWaterLevel

Figure26.SouthernRestorationAreaVernalPoolhydrologymonitoring(Depthininches)


Figure27.SierraMadreSouthernRestorationAreaphotopoints.

CONCLUSION

AfterfourfullyearsofprojectimplementationattheNorthernRestorationAreaandoverthreeyearsofimplementationattheSouthernRestorationAreathesuccesscriteriaoftheHabitatRestorationManagementPlanhavebeenmet.Withover85%relativenativecoverachieved,thesuccesscriteriaoutlinedintheHRMPhasbeenmet,andconsequentlythiswillbethefinalreportsubmittedfortheSierraMadreHabitatRestorationProject.Eventhoughtheprojectiscompletedintermsofnativecover,restorationactivitiesonthesesiteswillcontinuewiththegoalofmaintainingthisstandardforyearstocome.WeedcontrolwillcontinuetobeapriorityintheNorthernRestorationArea,andwilllikelyhaveincreasedimportanceintheSouthernRestorationAreaasnon-nativelandscapesthatinterfacewiththeprojecthavemoretimeandopportunitytospreadexoticseedtothesite.Furtherestablishmentofthe


nativeplantcommunitiesinbothareaswillcontinuetoincreasehabitatusebylocalwildlife,andvegetationsurveyswillcontinuetobeconductedontheprojectforseveralyearsattheveryleast.

Inadditiontocontinuedweedcontrol,regularremovaloftrashfromthemanysiteedgesthatinterfacewithpublicspaces,trimmingoftrailsasvegetationcontinuestobecomeincreasinglyestablished,andthemaintenanceofsignsdesignatingthesespacesasprotectedhabitatwillcontinuetobenecessary.TimeandattentionshouldbespentmaintainingthenotableCressatruxellensispatchintheNorthernRestorationAreabyannuallyapplyingblackplastictothatzoneuntilallsignsofnon-nativeplantshavedisappeared,andtheuseofgreen-flameonParafolisincurvaandFestucamuyrosinthesouthflatoftheNorthernRestorationAreaaretwotechniquesthatshouldcontinuetobeemployedontheproject.Aslongasthestandardsachievedinthefirstfouryearsaremaintained,theSierraMadrehabitatrestorationareashouldprovetobeavaluablenaturalresource,particularlyasitbecomesintegratedwiththeNorthCampusOpenSpacerestorationprojecttothewest.


APPENDICES

APPENDIX1.LISTOFPLANTSPECIESATTHESIERRAMADREHABITATRESTORATIONPROJECTSITE.

Key: (*)Denotesnon-native species, (O)Denotesornamentalplantings, (I)Denotes introducedor re-introducednative species thatwerenotpresentbeforeprojectbegan;TypicalHabitat: (CS)Coastal Strand includingdunes,(SM)Saltmarsh,(WL)Wetland,(UL)Upland

Family * Genus species Common Name Previous Name Habitat Asteraceae

Ambrosiapsilostachya ragweed

UL

Saururaceae

Anemopsiscalifornica yerbamansa

WLMyrsinaceae * Anagallisarvensis scarletpimpernel

UL

Asteraceae

Artemisiacalifornica sagebrush

ULChenopodiaceae

Atriplexcalifornica Californiasaltbush

CS/SM

Chenopodiaceae

Atriplexlentiformis bigsaltbush

CS/SM

Chenopodiaceae * Atriplexprostrata fat-henAtriplextriangularis UL

Chenopodiaceae * Atriplexsemibaccata Australiansaltbush

CS/ULPoaceae * Avenafatua wildoat

UL

Asteraceae

Baccharispilularis coyotebrush

ULAsteraceae

Baccharissalicifolia mulefat

CS

Cyperaceae

Bolboschoenusmaritimus alkalibulrush

WLPoaceae * Brachypodiumdistachyon falsebrome

Brassicaceae * Brassicanigra blackmustard Poaceae

Bromuscarinatus Californiabrome

UL

Poaceae * Bromusdiandrus ripgutbrome

ULPoaceae * Bromushordeaceus softbrome

UL

Brassicaceae * Capsellabursa-pastoris shepherd'spurse Cyperaceae

Carexpraegracilis Fieldsedge

WL

Asteraceae

Centromadiaparryissp.australis southerntarplant

Hemizoniaparryissp.Australis UL

Chenopodiaceae

Chenopodiumcalifornicum soaproot

UL

Asteraceae

Cirsiumoccidentale cobwebthistle Onagraceae

Clarkiapurpurea purpleclarkia

Asteraceae

Corethrogynefilaginifolia commonsandaster

Lessingiafilaginifolium UL

Asteraceae * Cotulaaustralis

Australianbrassbuttons

WL

Crassulaceae

Crassulaaquatica aquaticpygmyweed

WLConvolvulaceae

Cressatruxillensis alkaliweed

SM

Euphorbiaceae

Crotonsetigerus doveweed

CSPoaceae * Crypsisschoenoides swampgrass

Convolvulaceae

Cuscutasalina saltmarshdodder

SMPoaceae * Cynodondactylon Bermudagrass

UL



Cyperaceae

Cyperuseragrostis TallCyperus Asteraceae

Deinandrafasciculata Clusteredtarweed

Convolvulaceae * Dichondramicrantha Asianponysfoot Poaceae

Distichlisspicata saltgrass

CS/UL

Poaceae * Echinochloacrus-galli barnyardgrass Cyperaceae

Eleocharisacicularis Needlespikerush

WL

Cyperaceae

Eleocharismacrostachya commonspikerush

WLPoaceae

Elymusglaucus bluewildrye

UL

Poaceae

Elymustriticoides wildrye

ULAsteraceae

Enceliacalifornica bushsunflower

UL

Onagraceae

Epilobiumcanum Californiafuchsia Asteraceae

Erigeroncanadensis horseweed Conyzacanadensis

Polygonaceae

Eriogonumparvifolium seaclifffbuckwheat

CS/UL

Asteraceae

Eriophyllumconfertiflorum goldenyarrow

CS/UL

Geraniaceae * Erodiumbotrys broadleaffilaree Geraniaceae * Erodiumcicutarium redstemfilaree

ULApiaceae

Eryngiumvaseyi coyotethistle

WL/UL

Papaveraceae

Eschscholziacalifornicavar.maritima Californiapoppy

CS/UL

Euphorbiaceae * Euphorbiamaculata spottedspurgeChamaesycemaculata

Euphorbiaceae

Euphorbiaserpens mattedsandmat Asteraceae

Euthamiaoccidentalis westerngoldenrod

Poaceae * Festucabromoides bromefescue Vulpiabromoides UL

Poaceae * Festucamyurosrattailsixweeksgrass

Poaceae * Festucaperennis Italianwildrye

Loliummultiflorum UL/SM

Apiaceae * Foeniculumvulgare fennel Frankinaceae

Frankeniasalina alkaliheath

SM/UL

Geraniaceae * Geraniumdissectum wildgernium Asteraceae

Grindeliacamporum gumplant

Asteraceae * Helminthothecaechioides bristlyox-tongue Picrisechioides UL

Poaceae

Hordeumbrachyantherum meadowbarley

UL/WL

Poaceae * Hordeummarinum seasidebarley

CS/ULPoaceae * Hordeummurinum foxtailbarley

Juncaceae

Juncusbufonius toadrush Juncaceae

Juncusmexicanus Mexicanrush

Juncaceae

Juncusoccidentalis slenderjuncus Juncaceae

Juncuspatens commonrush

Juncaceae

Juncuspheocephalis brown-headedrush



Asteraceae * Lactucaserriola pricklylettuce

ULBrassicaceae * Lepidiumdidymum lesserswinecress

Brassicaceae

Lepidiumnitidum peppergrass Fabaceae

Lupinusbicolor miniaturelupine

Fabaceae

Lupinussparsiflorus Coulter'slupine Fabaceae

Lupinussucculentus succulentlupine

Lythraceae * Lythrumhyssopifolia hyssoploosestrife Malvaceae * Malvaparviflora cheeseweed

ULFabaceae * Medicagopolymorpha burclover

UL

Phrymaceae

Mimulusaurantiacus stickymonkeyflower Poaceae

Muhlenbergiarigens deergrass

Onagraceae * Oenotheraspeciosa

Mexicaneveningprimrose

Poaceae * Parapholisincurva sicklegrass

SM/WLPoaceae * Paspalumdilatatum dallisgrass

Poaceae * Pennisetumclandestinum Kikuyugrass

WL/ULPolygonaceae

Persicarialapathifolia commonknotweed

Poaceae * Phalarisaquatica hardinggrass

Arecaceae * PhoenixcanariensisCanaryislanddatepalm

Boraginaceae

Plagiobothrysundulatus coastallocarya

WLPlantaginaceae * Plantagocoronopus cutleafplantain

UL

Plantaginaceae

Plantagoerecta Californiaplantain Plantaginaceae * Plantagolanceolata lanceleafplantain

ULPlantaginaceae * Plantagomajor commonplantain

WL

Poaceae * Poaannua annualbluegrass

Polygonaceae *Polygonumavicularessp.depressum prostrateknotweed

Polygonumarenastrum UL

Poaceae * Polypogoninterruptusditchrabbitsfootgrass

Poaceae * Polypogonmonspeliensis rabbit'sfootgrass

WLPortulacaceae * Portulacaoleracea purslane

Asteraceae

Psilocarphusbrevissimus dwarfwoolyheads

UL/WL

Asteraceae *Pseudognaphaliumluteoalbum Jerseycudweed

Gnaphaliumluteoalbum UL

Brassicaceae * Raphanussativus wildradish

ULAnacardiaceae

Rhusintegrifolia lemonadeberry

UL

Euphorbiaceae * Ricinuscommunis castorbean

ULRosaceae

Rosacalifornica Californiawildrose

Polygonaceae

Rumexcrassus Willowleaveddock Polygonaceae * Rumexcrispis curlydock Salicaceae

Salixlasiolepis Arroyowillow

Chenopodiaceae

Salicorniapacifica pickleweed Salicorniavirginica SM



Chenopodiaceae * Salsolatragus Russianthistle

Cyperaceae

Schoenoplectuscaliffornicus californiabulrush

WL

Caryophyllaceae * Silenegallica windmillpink Iridaceae

Sisyrinchiumbellum blueeyedgrass

Solanaceae

Solanumdouglasii Douglas'nightshade

ULAsteraceae * Sonchussp. thistles

Caryophyllaceae * Spergulariasp. spurry Poaceae

Stipapulchra purpleneedlegrass Nasselapulchra UL

Chenopodiaceae

Suaedataxifolia woollyseablite

CSAsteraceae

Symphyotrichumchilense Pacificaster

Asteraceae

Symphyotrichumsubulatum

annualsaltmarshaster Astersubulatus WL/SM

Typhaceae

Typhalatifolia commoncattail

WLAsteraceae

Xanthiumstrumarium cocklebur


APPENDIX2.LISTOFANIMALSPECIESOBSERVEDATSIERRAMADREHABITATRESTORATIONPROJECT.

SierraMadreBirdListCommonName ScientificName

Red-wingedBlackbird AgelaiusphoeniceusKilldeer CharadriusvociferusCommonYellowthroat GeothlypistrichasSongSparrow MelospizamelodiaBlue-grayGnatcatcher PolioptilacaeruleaAmericanPipit AnthusrubescensMallard AnasplatyrhynchosMourningDove ZenaidamacrouraAmericanCrow CorvusbrachyrhynchosNorthernShoveler AnasclypeataWhite-crownedSparrow ZonotrichialeucophrysCinnamonTeal AnascyanopteraRockDove ColumbaliviaTreeSwallow TachycinetabicolorWilson'sSnipe GallinagodelicataBlackPhoebe SayornisnigricansLeastSandpiper CalidrisminutillaCliffSwallow PetrochelidonpyrrhonataWesternBluebird SialiamexicanaSnowyEgret EgrettathulaSpottedSandpiper ActitismaculariusYellowlegssp. Tringasp.Willet TringasemipalmataGreatBlueHeron ArdaherodiasYellow-rumpedWarbler SetophagacoronataGreatEgret ArdeaalbaCooper'sHawk AccipitercooperiPeregrineFalcon FalcoperegrinusCaliforniaTowhee MelozonecrissalisAnna'sHummingbird CalypteannaHouseFinch HaemorhousmexicanusLesserGoldfinch SpinuspsaltriaWhite-facedIbis Plegadischihi


SierraMadreMammals/HerptilesMammals

CommonName ScientificNameBrushRabbit SylvilagusbachmaniCaliforniaGroundSquirrel SpermophilusbeechyiCoyote CanislatransPocketGopher ThomomysbottaeRaccoon ProcyonlotorStripedSkunk Mephitismephitis

HerptilesCommonName ScientificName

GopherSnake PituophiscatineferPacificTreeFrog PseudacrisregillaSouthernAlligatorLizard ElgariamulticarinataWesternFenceLizard Sceloporousoccidentailis


APPENDICES3AND4.NORTHERNANDSOUTHERNRESTORATIONAREAPHOTOMONITORING.

sierra madre habitat restoration monitoring ......sierra madre habitat restoration project –...

Documents