HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-210
1
RESOLUTION NO. 96-210
2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING THE
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING
3 PROGRAM AND DIRECTING THE FIRE CHIEF TO PROCEED WITH IMPLEMENTATION
AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
4
WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino has historically suffered
5
the loss of lives, homes and property due to wildland fires
6
spreading into its northern wildland-urban interface; and
7
WHEREAS, current conditions including vegetation growth,
8
climate and topography combine to make the potential for another
9
local-area wildland fire extremely high; and
10
WHEREAS, the City's Fire Department, as lead agency with the
11
California Department of Forestry (CDF) and the United States
12
Forest Service (USFS) submitted a grant application to the Federal
13
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for a vegetation management
14
program to mitigate the potential for a local-area wildland fire
15
through prescribed burning of approximately 4500 acres of wildland
16
interface over a five-year period; and
17
WHEREAS, FEMA subsequently awarded $315,147 to fund the
18
vegetation management project; and
19
WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino's 25 percent contribution
20
to the grant project will be satisfied through in-kind
21
contributions of labor and equipment; and
22
WHEREAS, on July 24, 1995, the Mayor and Common Council
23
authorized the Fire Chief to accept and administer the FEMA
24
Vegetation Management Program grant as the lead agency in
25
cooperation with CDF and USFS; and
26
WHEREAS, the City determined that the Vegetation Management
27
Program was subject to the California Environmental Quality Act
28
RES 96-210
1 (CEQA); and
2 WHEREAS, the City Fire Department held a joint public scoping
3 meeting with CDF and USFS on March 12, 1996 to solicit public
4 comment on the preparation of the Initial Study; and
5 WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared on May 2, 1996 and
6 reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) who determined
7 that the Vegetation Management Program would not have a significant
8 effect on the environment and therefore, recommended that a
9 Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted; and
10 WHEREAS, the Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative
11 Declaration were made available to the public, responsible agencies
12 and other interested persons for their review and comment from May
13 10, 1996 to June 10, 1996, in compliance with CEQA; and
14 WHEREAS, all comments relative thereto have been reviewed by
15 the ERC and the Mayor and Common Council in compliance with CEQA
16 and local regulations; and
17 WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council fully reviewed and
18 considered the Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative
19 Declaration for the Vegetation Management Program and ERC
20 recommendations; and
21 WHEREAS, the proposed Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program
22 was reviewed by the ERC in compliance with CEQA; and
23 WHEREAS, the adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
24 and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program is deemed in the
25 interest of the City.
26 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
27 SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
28 SECTION 1. That once the mitigation measures have been
IRES 9/i-?10
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
implemented, the Vegetation Management Program will have no
significant effect on the environment, and the Mitigated Negative
Declaration heretofore prepared by the Environmental Review
Committee as to the effect of this proposed project is hereby
ratified, affirmed and adopted. The Initial Study is attached
hereto (Attachment A) and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 2. That the Mitigation MonitoringlReporting Program is
hereby ratified, affirmed and adopted. The Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation MonitoringlReporting Program reflect the
independent review and analysis and the independent judgement of
the City of San Bernardino. The Mitigation MonitoringlReporting
Program is attached hereto (Attachment B) and incorporated herein
by reference.
SECTION 3. The Planning Division is hereby directed to file
a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of the County of
San Bernardino certifying the City's compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act in preparing the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation MonitoringlReporting Program.
SECTION 4. The Fire Chief is hereby authorized and directed
to proceed with administration and implementation of the Vegetation
Management Program as lead agency, in cooperation with the CDF and
USFS.
III
III
III
III
III
III
REll <!(;_''In
1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING THE
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING
2 PROGRAM AND DIRECTING THE FIRE CHIEF TO PROCEED WITH IMPLEMENTATION
AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
3
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly
4
adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
5
Bernardino at a regular
meeting thereof, held on the
1st
6
day of July , 1996, by the following vote, to wit:
7
8 Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN }l.Rc:I<NT'
9 NEGRETE x
10 CURLIN x
11 ARIAS x
12 OBERHELMAN x
13 DEVLIN x
14 ANDERSON x
15 MILLER x
16
19
of
The foregoing resolution is
Julv , 1996
~l~
hereby approved this~ day
~!tIt/z~
Tom MinC>'t, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
17
18
20
21
22 Approved as to
form and legal content:
23
24
JAMES
City
F. PENMAN,
ttorney J
l'V'tCl -7 j e1~1-,
25
By:
26
27
28
IRES 96-210
. -
City of San Bernardino
Initial Study
Foothill Vegetation Management Plan
Prepared For:
City of San Bernardino
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Prepared By:
Tom Dodson & Associated
463 North Sierra Way
San Bernardino, CA 92410
Independently reviewed and analyzed by the Environmental Review Committee on
M~ 'L I \ 'l '\{g , pursuant to Section 21082 of the California EnvironmentliJ!,
Quality Act.
Verified by: ~~
ATTACHMENT A
RES 96-210
,I
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
The first page (s) will contain the folloowing in text or list
format, as applicable:
APPLICATION NUMBER AND NAME
Not Applicable
OWNER/APPLICANT
City of San Bernardino
Fire Department
Disaster Preparedness
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:See Attached Environmental Assessment/Initial
study
LOCATION: See Attached Environmental Assessment/ Initial Study
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, including CONSTRAINTS:
Environmental Assessment/Initial Study
See
Attached
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Hillside Management Overlay, ..low density
,.. .
residential and public facilities
SUMMARY: Based on the review contained in the attached
Environmental Assessment/Initial Study, the proposed Vegetation
Management Program can be implemented without significant adverse
environmental impacts.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A Mitigated Negative Declaration is
recommended for adoption by the City of San Bernardino Common
Council.
CITY CONTACT AND PHONE NUMBER:
Valerie Ross, (909) 384-5057
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 2
8/94
RES 96-210
. I
.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial study,
The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect
on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
JL
The proposed project could have a significant effect on
the environment, although there will not be significant
effect in this case because the mitigation measures
described above have been added to the project. A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. is
required.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
~J.tAPA1- PtMJN~
Name and Title
~V.~
Signature
~ 1--, '''1(,
Date
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 3
8/94
RES 96-210
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explain "Yes" and "Maybe" answers on a separate
attached sheet. "No" answers are explained on this checklist. See
Attachment "A" Preliminary Environmental Description Form, where
necessary.
1.
Earth Resources: Will the proposal
result in:
Yes
No
Maybe
a. Earth movement (cut and/or fill)
on slopes of 15% or more based on
information contained in the
Preliminary Environmental
Description Form No. D. (3)?
x
b. Development and/or grading on a
slope greater than 15% natural
grade based on review of General
Plan HMOD map, which designates
areas of 15% or greater slope in
the city?
x
c. Development within the Alquist-
Priolo Special Studies Zone as
defined in Section 12.0-Geologic
& Seismic, Figure 47, of the
City's General Plan?
x
d. Modification of any unique geologic
or physical feature based on field
review?
x
e. Development within areas defined
for high potential for water or
wind erosion as identified in
Section 12.0-Geologic & Seismic,
Figure 53, of the City's General
Plan?
x
f. Modification of a channel, creek
or river based on review of
USGS Topographic Map (Name)
?
x
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 4
8/94
RES 96-210
g. Development within an area
subject to landslides, mudslides,
subsidence or other similar
hazards as identified in Section
12.0-Geologic & Seismic,
Figures 48, 51, 52 and 53 of the
City's General Plan?
Yes
No
Maybe
x
h. Development within an area
subject to liquefaction as shown
in Section l2.0-Geologic &
Seismic, Figure 48, of the
City's General Plan?
x
i. Other? No
Please refer to the attached "Environmental Assessment/initial Study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management Project" study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 14-16
and 38-40.
2. Air Resources: Will the proposal
result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or an
effect upon ambient air quality
as defined by South Coast Air Quality
Management District, based on
meeting the threshold for significance
in the District's, "CEQA Air Quality
Handbook"?
x
b. The creation of objectionable
odors based on information
contained in Preliminary
Description Form, No. G. (3)?
x
c. Development within a high wind
hazard area as identified in
Section 15.0-Wind & Fire, Figure
59, of the City's General Plan?
x
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 5
8/94
RES 96-210
Please refer to the attached ~Environmental Assessment/initial Study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management Project" study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 27-33
and 44.
3.
Water Resources: Will the proposal
result in:
Yes
No
Maybe
a. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate
and amount of surface runoff
due to impermeable surfaces
that cannot be mitigated by
Public ,Works Standard
Requirements to contain and
convey runoff to approved
storm drain based on review
of the proposed site plan?
x
b. Significant alteration in the
course or flow of flood waters
based on consultation with
Public Works staff?
x
c. Discharge into surface waters
or any alteration of surface
water quality based on
requirements of Public Works
to have runoff directed to
approved storm drains?
x
d. Change in the quantity or
quality of ground water?
x
e. Exposure of people or property
to flood hazards as identified
in the Federal Emergency
Management Agency's Flood
Insurance Rate Map, Community
Panel Number 060281,
and Section 16.0-Flooding,
Figure 62, of the City's General
Plan?
x
f. Other? No
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 6
8/94
RES 96-210
Please refer to the attached ~Environmental Assessment/initial Study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management Project" study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 16-23
and 40 and 41.
4.
Biological Resources: Could the
Proposal result in:
Yes
No
Maybe
a. Development within the Biological
Resources Management Overlay, as
identified in Section 10.0-
Natural Resources, Figure 41,
of the City's General Plan?
x
1. Change in the number of any
unique, rare or endangered
species of plants or their
habitat including stands of
trees based on information
contained in the Preliminary
Environmental Description
Form No. B. (1) and verified
by on-site survey/evaluation?
x
2. Change in the number of any
unique, rare or endangered
species of animals or their
habitat based on information
contained in the Preliminary
Environmental Description
Form No. E. (8) and verified
by site survey/evaluation?
x
3. Impacts to the wildlife
disbursal or migration corridors?
b. Removal of viable, mature trees
based on site survey/evaluation
and review of the proposed site
plan? (6" or greater trunk
diameter at 4' above the ground)
x
c. Other?
x
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 7
8/94
RES 96-210
To be completed.
5. Noise: Could the proposal result in:
Yes
No
Maybe
a. Development of housing, health
care facilities, schools,
librarie~, religious facilities
or other noise sensitive uses
in areas where existing or
future noise levels exceed an
Ldn of 65 dB(A) exterior and an
Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior as
identified in Section 14.0-Noise,
Figures 57 and 58 of the City's
General Plan?
x
b. Development of new or expansion
of existing industrial,
commercial or other uses which
generate noise levels above an Ldn of
65 dB (A) exterior or an Ldn of
45 dB(A) interior that may affect
areas containing housing, schools,
health care facilities or other
sensitive uses based on
information in the Preliminary
Environmental Description Form
No. G. (1) and evaluation of
surrounding land uses No. C., and
verified by site survey/evaluation?
x
c. Other? No
Please refer to the attached uEnvironmental Assessment/initial Study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management Project" study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 23-26
and 41 and 42.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 8
8/94
RES 96-210
6.
Land Use: Will the proposal result in: Yes
No
Maybe'
a. A change in the land use as
designated based on the review
of the General Plan Land Use
Plan/Zoning Districts Map?
x
b. Development within an Airport
District as identified in the
Air Installation Compatible Use
Zone (AICUZ) Report and the Land
Use Zoning District Map?
x
c. Development within Foothill Fire
Zones A & B, or C as identified
on the Development Code Overlay
Districts Map?
x
d. Other? No
Please refer to the attached uEnvironmental Assessment/initial study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management Project" study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 23, 37,
38, 41, 49 and 50.
7. Man-Made Hazards: Based on
information contained in Preliminary
Environmental Description Form,
No. G. (1) and G. (2) will the project:
a. Use, store, transport or dispose
of hazardous or toxic materials
(including but not limited to
oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation)?
x
b. Involve the release of
hazardous substances?
x
c. Expose people to the potential
health/safety hazards?
x
d. Other? No
Please refer to the attached "Environmental Assessment/initial Study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management Project" study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 26, 42
and 43.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 9
8/94
RES 96-210
8.
Housing: Will the proposal: Yes
a. Remove existing housing as verified
by a site survey/evaluation?
No
Maybe
x
b. Create a significant demand for
additional housing based on the
proposed use and evaluation of
project size?
x
c.
other?
No
Please refer to the attached "Environmental Assessment/initial Study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management Project" study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 36 and
48.
9.
Transportation/Circulation: Could
the proposal, in comparison with the
Circulation Plan as identified in
Section 6.0-Circulation of the City's
General Plan and based on the
conclusions of the City Traffic
Engineer and review of the Traffic
Study if one was prepared, result in:
Yes
No
Maybe
a. A significant increase in traffic
volumes on the roadways or
intersections or an increase that
is significantly greater than the
land use designated on the
General Plan?
x
b. Use of existing, or demand for
new, parking facilities/
structures?
x
c. Impact upon existing public
transportation systems?
x
d. Alteration of present patterns
of circulation?
x
e. Impact to rail or air traffic?
x
f. Increased safety hazards to
vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
x
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 10
8/94
RES 96-210
,
.
g. A disjointed pattern of roadway
improvements?
x
h. Other? No
Please refer to the attached "Environmental Assessment/initial Study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management ProjectH study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 36/47.
10. Public Services: Based on the
responses of the responsible
agencies or departments, will the
proposal impact the following
beyond the capability to provide
adequate levels of service?
Yes
No
Maybe
a. Fire protection?
x
b. Police protection?
x
c. Schools (i.e., attendance,
boundaries, overload, etc.)?
x
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
x
e. Medical aid?
x
f. Solid Waste?
x
g. Other? No
Please refer to the attached "Environmental Assessment/initial Study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management projectH study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 37, 48
and 49.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 11
8/94
RES 96-210
11. Utilities: Will the proposal:
Yes
No
Maybe
a. Based on the responses of the
responsible Agencies,
Departments, or Utility Company,
impact the following beyond the
capability to provide adequate
levels of service or require the
construction of new facilities?
1. Natural gas?
x
2. Electricity?
x
3. Water?
x
4. Sewer?
x
5. Other? No
b. Result in a disjointed pattern
of utility extensions based on
review of existing patterns
and proposed extensions.
x
Please refer to the attached "Environmental Assessment/initial Study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management ProjectH study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 35, 36,
46 and 47.
12. Aesthetics:
a. Could the proposal result in the
obstruction of any significant or
important scenic view based on
evaluation of the view shed
verified by site survey/
evaluation?
x
b. Will the visual impact of the
project create aesthetically
offensive changes in the
existing visual setting
based on a site survey and
evaluation of the proposed
elevations?
x
c. Other? No
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 12
8/94
RES 96-210
Please refer to the attached "Environmental Assessment/initial study San'
Bernardino Vegetation Management ProjectH study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 34, 35,
45 and 46.
13. Cultural Resources: Could the
proposal result in:
Yes
No
Maybe
a. The alteration or destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site by
development within an
archaeological sensitive area
as identified in Section 3.0-
Historical, Figure 8, of the
City's General Plan?
x
b. Alteration or destruction of
a historical site, structure
or object as listed in the
City's Historic Resources
Reconnaissance Survey?
x
c. Other? No
Please refer to the attached "Environmental Assessment/initial Study San
Bernardino Vegetation Management projectH study which provides detailed
responses to these issues. These issues are addressed on pages 27, 43,
and 44 and Appendix 3.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 13
8/94
RES 96-210
14. Mandatory Findings of Significance (Section 15065)
The California Environmental Quality Act states that if any of the
following can be answered yes or maybe, the project may have a
significant effect on the environment and an Environmental Impact
Report shall be prepared. Based on this Initial study:
a. Does the project have the
potential to degrade the
quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Yes
No
Maybe
x
b. Does the project have the
to the disadvantage of long-
term, environmental goals? (A
short-term impact on the
environment is one which
occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time
while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.)
x
c. Does the project have impacts
which are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable?
(A project may impact on two
or more separate resources where
the impact on each resource is
relatively small, but where the
effect of the total of those
impacts on the environment is
significant. )
x
d. Does the project have
environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
x
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 14
8/94
RES 96-210
.
B. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary.)
See the Attached Environmental Assessment/Initial Study for the San
Bernardino Vegetation Management Program.
City of San Bernardino
Environmental Impact Checklist
Page 15
8/94
-
RES 96-210
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR TIIE ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . 1
A Introduction....................................................... 1
B. Purpose and Need for the Proposed Project ............................... 1
C. EnvrronIllentalCon&derations ........................... .... ..........3
II. PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
A. Preferred Alternative, Controlled Burns .................................. 3
B. Mechanical Vegetation Manipulation .......... - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
1. Fuel Thinning ..... " . . , . . . . . . .. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . 13
2. Fuel Breaks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3. FuelBreakMaintenance .......................................14
C. No Project .......................................... - . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
ill. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ............................................ 15
A. Geology, Soils and Geologic Hazards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Soils ...................................................... 15
2. Geologic Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
B. Surface Runoff and Flood Hazards. . . . . .. .. . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . .. . . 17
C. Fire Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
D. Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
E. Aviation Safety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
F. HazardouslRadioactive Materials ...................................... 27
G. Biological Resources ............................................... 27
H. CulturalJPaleontologic Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . 29
I. Air Quality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Meteorology .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . 29
Ambient Air Quality ........................................................ 31
RegionalAirQuality .......................... _.......................31
Attainment Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Local Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . 33
Regulatory Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
1. Water Supply/Water Quality .... _ . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . 36
K Open Space/Recreation/Visual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
L. Mineral Resources ................................... - . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
M. UtilitieslInfrastructure ..................................... - . . . . . . . . 37
N. Transportation/Circulation . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
O. Hou&ngnoernograpmc~Socioecononrics ....................... .........39
P. Public Services .... . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Q. Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
RES 96-?Jn
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVES,
AND MITIGATION MEASURES ... _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
A. Geology, Soils and Geologic Hazards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Impacts of the Proposed Project. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Hazards ...................................................... 42
Impacts of the No Project Alternative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 43
C. Fire Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Impact of the Proposed Project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Impacts of the No Project Alternative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
D. Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Impact of the Proposed Project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Impacts of the No Project Alternative.: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 44
E. Aviation Safety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Impacts of the Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Impact of the No Project Alternative ................................ 45
F. HazardouslRadioactive Materials ...................................... 45
Impacts of the Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Impacts of the No Project Alternative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
G. Biological Resources ............................................... 45
Impacts of the Proposed Project ................................... 45
Impact of the No Project Alternative ................................ 48
H. CulturalJPaleontologicResources...................................... 48
Impacts of the Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Impact of the No Project Alternative ................................ 49
I. Air Quality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Impacts of the Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Impacts of the No Project Alternative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
J. Water Supply/Water Quality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Impacts of the Proposed Project _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Impact of the No Project Alternative ................................ 50
1<. Open Space/RecreationfVisual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Impacts of the Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ _ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Impacts of the No Project Alternative. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
L. Mineral Resources ................................................. 51
Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Impact of the No Project Alternative ..................... _ . . . . . . . . . . 51
M. Utilities Infrastructure .............................................. 51
Impacts of the Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Impacts of the No Project Alternative. . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
N. Transportation/Circulation .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Impacts of the Proposed Project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Impacts of the No Project Alternative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
O. Housingnoernograpmc~Socioecononrics ................................ 53
Impacts of the Proposed Project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
RES 96-210
Impacts of the No Project Alternative _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
P. Public Services .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Impacts of the Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Impacts of the No Project Alternative. . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Q. Land Use ..... _ . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Impacts of the Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Impacts of the No Project Alternative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
R. Cumulative Impacts ................................................ 55
V. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION. . . . . . . . . 55
A. Scoping ............. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
B. Ongoing Consultation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
C. Persons and Agencies Contacted or Consulted .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . 56
VI. LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................ 56
VII. REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . _ . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . 57
IX. LIST OF MITIGATION MEASURES .................................... 57
X. LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES. ...................................... 58
XI. APPENDIX 1 - PRESCRIBED FIRE BURNING LESSON PLAN
XII. APPENDIX 2 - SOIL SURVEY OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
Xm. APPENDIX 3 - ARCHEOLOGICAL RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS
XIV. APPENDIX 4 - GENERAL BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
RES 96-210
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/INITIAL STUDY
FOOTHILL VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECf
1. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE ACTION
A Introduction
Tills EnvrronIllental Assessment and Initial Study (EAlIS) has been prepared by the City of San
Bernardino as the environIllental documentation to support implementation of the Foothill Vegetation
Management Project (FVMP or Project). A grant application was subnritted to the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) With the objective of &gnificantly reducing the threat of
a wildland fire spreading into the northern San Bernardino/Highland urban area. The urban/suburban
development in these communities is located directly adjacent to the Wildland fire hazard area that
exists in the San Bernardino Mountain foothills. The FEMA grant requires that the proposed Project
complete appropriate envrronIllental documentation to comply With the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) prior to initiating the
vegetation management program described in this document. The purpose of this EAlIS is to provide
the envrronIllental documentation required to comply With NEPA and CEQA before initiating the
vegetation management program in 1996_
Tills EAlIS descn'bes the proposed action and alternatives con&dered; identifies the affected
environIllental resources that occur Within the 4,500 of the 9,000 acre Wildland/urban interface in
which vegetation management is proposed to be implemented; identifies the potential impacts of the
proposed action and alternatives; and identifies mitigation measures designed to reduce potential
adverse impacts to a level of non significance. As required for all actions wmch are funded by the
federal government and carried out by a local governmental agency, tills EAlIS evaluates the effects
of the proposed alternatives to determine whether they will cause additional or different significant
adverse impacts on the envrronment if they are implemented in place of the proposed Project.
B. PulllOse and Need for the Proposed Project
The purpose of the proposed Project is to significantly reduce the threat of a wildland fire spreading
into the northern San Bernardino/Highland urban area. The San Bernardino Valley foothills have a
long history of disastrous fires. The most notable fires in recent times are the Bear Fire of 1970 and
the Panorama Fire of1980. The Bear Fire burned 53,100 acres and destroyed 51 homes and 11
structures. The Panorama Fire took four lives, consumed 23,600 acres, destroyed 325 homes and
damaged 55 other homes. Direct costs for the Panorama Fire were $40 million in property damage,
$12 million in natural resource loses, and $6 million in suppres&on efforts.
Today, local conditions, wmch include vegetation, climate and topography, combine to make the
potential for another devastating fire extremely mgh. First, about fifteen years of vegetation growth
provide the fuel for such a fire. The most common vegetation in the San Bernardino Mountain
1
1l1'!: q/;-?ln
foothills is chaparral which includes chanllse, m.n7"nita, scrub oak, and sagebrush. As tills chaparral
ages the percentage of dead material Within plants increases and the oil content of the leaves
combined With the dead fuel make these plants mghly flammable during mgh fire hazard conditions.
The present vegetation condition in the 9,000 acre wildland/urban interface interacts With the local
Mediterranean climate conditions and steep topography to intensifY the local wildland fire hazards.
The long-dry summers followed by strong Santa Ana winds in the fall create extreme fire hazards.
The steep topography contributes to local fire hazards by assisting in the rapid spread of Wildland fires
because as heat rises from a fire, it dries out and preheats upslope fuels. The steep topography also
makes it very difficuh for firefighters and fire apparatus to deliver adequate suppremon resources to
the fire front. These local conditions place an estimated 10,000 homes valued at over $1 billion at
risk from Wildland fire hazards.
Given the above known Wildland fire hazards Within the Project area, the fundamental purpose of
and need for the proposed vegetation management program is the removal of 40-70% of the
vegetative cover to reduce the wildland fire hazard along the local Wildland/urban interface. Based
on the experience With the Forest Service vegetation management programs, including prescnoed
bums, the following objectives will also be fulfilled by implementing the proposed vegetation
management program:
.Create vegetation mosaics which reduce fire hazards and promote habitat and wildlife diversity.
.Protect against large destructive wildfires that could cause high increases of sedimentation within watersheds
in a very short time. In sensitive watersheds, vegetation removal percentages on the order of30% will be sought
to protect such watersheds from catastrophic wildfires..
.Manage to attain age-class diversity in chaparral with an optimum acreage of young (<10 years) chaparra1 to
provide quality and distribution offorage for wildlife.
.Provide protection to riparian areas, oak and conifer stands by reducing fire hazards created by adjacent old
chaparral stands.
In addition to providing enhanced protection from future uncontrolled wildland fires, the proposed
Project is a joint effort by the City of San Bernardino, California Department of Forestry and the U.
S. Forest Service. Thus, the Project will promote the type of training and interaction necessary to
coordinate response to any actual wildland fire in the local area.
2
RES 96-210
C. EnvironIllental Considerations
This EAlIS considers the following issues as areas of environIllental concern. The following topics
are addressed in this document.
1. Geology, Soils, md Geologic Hazards
2. SuIface Runoff md Flood Hazards
3. Fue Hazards
4. Noise
S. Aviation Safety
6. HazardouslRadioactive Materials
7. Biological Resources
8. Cultural/Paleontologic Resources
9. Air Quality
10. Waler SupplylWater Quality
11. Open SpacolRecreationalNisua1
12. Mineral Reso""",s
13. Utiliti.sllnfrastruclure
14. TrmsportationlCirculation
IS. Housing/DemographicslSocioeconomic
16. Public Services
17. Lend Use
2. PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
The following text provides a description of the action proposed by the City of San Bernardino, City
ofllighlond, the California Department of Forestry and the Forest Service. In snmmo'Y, FEMA has
granted the City approximately $315,000 to work With these agencies (''project proponents") to
conduct vegetation management Within an area of approximately 9,017 acres of land at the
wildland/urban interface at the San Bernardino Mountain foothills to reduce potential wildland fire
hazards. An EnvrronIllental AssesSInentlInitial Study must be prepared that evaluates the
environmental consequences of conducting this vegetation management program Within the project
area as shown in Figures 1 and 2, the regional and &te locations of the proposed Project. In addition
to the preferred alternative of controlled burns and mechanical vegetation manipulation, a no project
alternative is also presented for consideration.
2.A. Preferred Alternative, Controlled Burns
Approximately 4,500 acres of the 9,000 acres are proposed to undergo vegetation management under
the direction of the project proponents. The acreage Within the project area consists of about 4,176
acres of private and public lands Within the City of San Bernardino, about 741 acres of private and
public lands within the City ofHigbland, about 91 acres within California Department of Forestry and
Fire Protection jurisdiction, and about 4,009 acres of land under the U. S. Forest Service's
jurisdiction (San Bernardino National Forest). The areas proposed for controlled burns are shown
on the attached Figures 3 through 8.
The preferred vegetation management technique for the project area is to perform controlled burns
within the project area. Alternative methods of vegetation management, such as mechanical removal,
will be considered as alternatives to the preferred project, i.e. controlled burns.
Controlled bums conducted by the Forest Service and the Department of Forestry con&st of several
steps which ultimately lead to the conduct of a controlled burn at a preselected time and under
defined environmental conditions. The first step in the process is the preparation of a prescribed fire
(bum) plan by the team that will manage the controlled burn in the field. The bum plan consists of
3
I
c::,:=:::"::'" '-'"
.-....-...-....----.--.-...-.. -, ,,^
4-.....,
,
)!,
..:1:
~-- '::::':';,~
Project Vicinity Map
Source; USGS San Bemardino, Califomia
I :250,000 quadrangle
4
)''',..' /.1'-1'\
'." ~., ,,,.....,., ~
\
Tom Dodson & Assnciates
enviromnental cOllSultallls
FIGURE 1
RES 96-210
~
0\
0\
.....
,
....
'->
~
.~
~
Q:
....
-
..
<:.l
~
~
\:.0
~ ~
t: tl
~ ~
l:: t-..
~ .....
~ '=>
~Q\
III
~
:::::
~
-
..
...
~
...
~
l::
...
<:.l
CQ
-
..
~
V:l
.1
Project Vicinity Map
~
.
~
"
"
...
~~
~ ~
;:~
, -
. ~
.~.,g
~~
tt~
g ~~
Q ii: tI:
~ ~ E
......t t-~
~ ~-'6 g
. -0.
.5::;~ -t
,!t'<.~.~
III . Q C
f~ ~~
rq:i~5
...~Q i
r..:i::::~1&.;
~~s~
<><>"''''
CiO~~
m
i
~
~
,~. ,.
~1
~. ,. ~ ~
G~ f.~
~;:,' ill;
7705
Tom Dodson & Associates
envirollluental consultants
Source: City of San Bernardino Fire Department I Disaster Preparedness Division
FIGURE 2
5
.
,
to
.....
.~
'$.""-
Proposed Burn Areas
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consultants
FIGURE 3
6
Proposed Burn Areas
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consultants
FIGURE 4
7
77ii;
,
." ""
~
j
!J
:
...... .':; !......~
. "
Proposed Burn Areas
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consultants
FIGURE 5
8
" .
0.. .
.~
'\
Proposed Burn Areas
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consullanls
FIGURE 6
9
~ ~D-LIU
Proposed Burn Areas
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consultants
FIGURE 7
10
RES 96-210
Proposed Burn Areas
Tom Dodson & Associates
cnvironmcntal consultants
FIGURE 8
11
RES 96-210
developing a series of management actions and thresholds used to achieve the demed fire behavior
during a controlled burn. These management actions, such as the type of equipment, and
management thresholds, such as weather factors and fuel conditions are used to create a prescnoed
fire plan, ie. a controlled burn scenario, that will be implemented in the field by the controlled burn
crew. A discus&on of the contents ofprescnoed fire plan is provided in Appendix 1. The prescribed
fire plan will be prepared by the three participating agencies, the Forest Service, Department of
Forestry, and City Fire Department. This step of the project consists of planning and management
actions prior to field activities, such as review of maps and &te vi&ts, wmch have little or no potential
to affect the envrronIllent. When the prescribed fire plan is completed for a given portion of the
project area, the next step is implementation by the plan in the field by the management agencies.
Once the prescnoed fire plan is completed for conducting a controlled burn on a portion of the project
area, the actual burn is conducted -duringa'preselected.perlod'when.theenvironrnental conditions
meet the prescribed fire plan environIllental conditions. As an example, the area selected for a
controlled burn is defined by the existing topography (steepness and aspect), natural and man-made
barriers, age of the vegetation, volume of dead and live vegetation, and the moisture content of the
live and dead vegetation which selVes as the fuel for the controlled burn. The weather conditions will
define the "window" in which the controlled burn can be conducted. Hunridity has to be Within a
certain range and wind velocities need to be light (about 5 nriles per hour) in order to disperse the
smoke from the fire, but less than 10 nriles per hour to prevent spread of the fire out&de of the
controlled burn area. Most controlled burns are conducted during the spring or fall when light winds
are forecast to occur, usually over a two-day time window, and when humidity conditions are suitable
for conducting a burn. The spring period is preferred for controlled burns because it allows
revegetation to begin Within the burned area Without exposure to heavy rains. If actual conditions
fall out&de of the prescribed fire plan burn "window", the controlled burn is not conducted and the
agencies must bear the costs of mobilizing the field burn managernent resources, which can be
substantial.
A controlled burn field team is comprised of three separate groups. An incident commander oversees
these three groups which consist of a firing group managed by the firing supervisor; the holding group
managed by the holding officer; and the mop-up team managed by the mop-up supervisor. The
incident commander ensures all the required resources for the controlled burn are available and
determines whether the environmental conditions defined for the specific controlled burn effort have
been met. The firing team carries out the initiation of the fire in the controlled burn area under the
direction of the firing supervisor. The holding team has sufficient fire suppression resources (fire
fighters and equipment) to suppress and contain the fire Within the boundaries established for the
controlled burn. The mop-up team monitors the area that has been burned until the potential for an
accidental fire on adjacent land is elinrinated. At the end of the controlled burn the agencies will
conduct a field evaluation of the burned area to verify that the goals of the prescribed fire plan have
been fulfilled (see the project objectives outlined above).
In preparing to conduct a burn for a specific area Within the project boundaries, the firing team will
establish the control lines in the field based upon natural barriers (bedrock outcrops), existing man-
12
RES 96-210
made barriers (roads or firebreaks), or man-made fire control lines established for areas where no
natural or existing man-made boundaries exist. The size of each burn area will vary depending upon
the season, the topography, the age of the vegetation and other parameters. Burn areas as small as
100 acres may be selected, or in some cases areas a large as 500-1,000 acres may be control burned.
Man-made fire control lines can be constructed mechanically, by removing vegetation With labor or
equipment, such as a dozer. Altematively a srnalllinear burn can be conducted under very controlled
conditions to create a fire control line. Both methods may be used during the implementation of this
project.
Typically, the fire crew plans to conduct the controlled burn for a specific area Within a 24-hour
window. Tills reduces the amount of scarce firefighting manpower and equipment cOrnnlltted to non-
emergency fire managemen~ activities; After establishing theme contIollines, a typical 150 acre bum
may utilize the following manpower and equipment resources: one engine crew, three water tankers
or more, two fire line crews With approximately 40 personnel total, the team managers, and where
pos&ble a helicopter. Other resources, such as dozers and other equipment are available if required.
A controlled burn is initiated by u&ng drip torches (containing three parts diesel and one part
gasoline), fusees or flares, or a helitorch which drops a flammable alurnagel material similar to napalm
at the exact locations de&red to start the fire. The burn is controlled by the fire crew and on&te
equipment. Following the burn the mop-up crew will monitor the burn area until any potential for
reignition is elinrinated.
Based on past experience, the burn areas rapidly regenerate new growth from the crowns of shrubs
and re&dual grass seeds that remain in the area. The purpose of conducting a controlled burn is to
prevent a disastrous fire that burns so hot that all vegetation is elinrinated. In fire climax
communities, such as the mixed chaparral and coastal sage community wmch occur Within the project
area, a controlled burn will leave substantial re&dual plant material wmch will lead to rapid
revegetation. Under this circumstance, the only restoration proposed will be along access routes
where water bars will be installed to prevent severe erosion developing. If erosion becomes a
problem in controlled bum areas, erosion control measures, such as regrading, reseeding, and/or use
of erosion control blankets, mats or web mesh, can be implemented.
2.B. Mechanical Vegetation Manipulation
1. Fuel Thinning - Several locations Within the project area contain groves of planted trees, such as
eucalyptus, which pose a severe local fire hazard. In these locations, cutting and removal of the trees
could substantially reduce the fire hazards Within the project area. Tills alternative can be
implemented independent of the controlled burn preferred alternative or in conjunction With this
program. Based on prelinrinary estimates, up. to 200 acres ofland Within the project area could be
subject to fuel thinning activity wmch would consist of a crew removing trees, making the wood
available for firewood, chipping the re&duallirnbs and debris, and spreading the chipped material at
the site. Where groves of trees are located on private land pernris&on would have to be obtained
from property owners prior to initiating fuel thinning activities. Tills alternative would locally reduce
fire hazards, but if implemented in place of the proposed project, the severe fire hazards along the
13
RES 96-210
urban-wildland interface would not be reduced sufficiently to prevent a future catastropmc fire.
2. Fuel Br...ah - U&ng a hand crews and support equipment additional fire breaks can be constructed
through the project area With the goal of providing some reduction in fuel, breaks that can reduce the
burn process itseH: and better access for fighting a fire when it occurs. As in the case With fuel
thinning, fuel breaks can be constructed independent of or in conjunction With the controlled burn
preferred alternative. The construction of fuel breaks can reduce fire hazards but will not serve to
elinrinate fire hazards from a major fire in the same manner as the proposed controlled burns which
reduces the fuel load sufficiently to prevent a catastropmc burn over large areas.
3. Fuel Break Maintenance - Many of the fuel breaks Within the project area have not been
maintained and are overgrown. The agencies have indicated that maintenance of these fuel breaks
With hand crews and support equipment can enhance fire fighting capability&nllIar to construction
of new fuel breaks. The activities are generally the same and the effectiveness of this alternative is
!lornparable to installing new fuel breaks.
2.C. No Project
The no project alternative would elinrinate any vegetation management program for the urban-
wildland interface. The effects of taking no action to reduce fire hazards will be examined as part of
this document. Under this altemative the natural vegetation communities would continue to age and
accumulate more a greater volume of live and dead fueL Based on the region's fire history, a major
or catastrophic Wildland fire is forecast to occur at some point in the future and the effects of such
a fire on the plant communities and wildlife habitat, on the urban community and on fire suppres&on
resources will be described.
This concludes the description of the Foothill Vegetation Management Project, including the
preferred alternative as proposed by the participating agencies. When the controlled burns are
completed, a vegetation mosaic will exist which can substantially reduce the fire hazards for man-
made facilities located at the urban-wildland interfaces in the northern portion of the City of San
Bernardino. Completion of the proposed Project will allow the participating agencies to meet the
project objectives identified at the beginning of this section of the EA/IS. These objectives
conform with the mission of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and their grant program
for reducing potential large scale emergencies that could require federal disaster aid.
14
RES 96-210
m. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
& Geology Soils and Geologic Ha7J'lrds
1. Soils
The soils that occur throughout the proposed vegetation management area is identified as part of
the Cieneba Soil Series. specifically the Cieneba-Rock outcrop complex (Cr). Cieneba soils
evolve on steep slopes in upland areas in material weathered from granitic rock. Slopes range from
30-50 percent and often contain as much as 30 percent granitic rock outcrops. Cieneba soils have
a shallow profile. and support chaparral. coastal.sage"and introduced grassland plant communities.
These are rapidly permeable soils with low available water capacity. Runoff in unvegetated areas
is rapid and.the hazard of erosion is identified as being moderate in such areas. Engineering
properties of Cieneba soils are shown in Appendix 2 to this document.
Soils in stream channels within the project area primarily consist of frequently flooded alluvial
material (sand, gravel, and rocks) termed Psamments or Fluvents. These areas have little
opportunity to develop an actual soil profile as they are reworked annually by stream flows.
Where these deposits are thick enough to support vegetation, they have rapid permeability and are
subject to high erosion hazard, due to the lack of soil structure and presence of flowing water.
'Locations of areas subject to high erosion hazard in the City of San Bernardino is shown on Figure
9, which was abstracted from the City of San Bernardino General Plan Background Report (1988).
The data presented in this figure remain accurate at the present time.
Data for this section were abstracted from the "Soil Survey of San Bernardino County
Southwestern Part, California", published by the Soil Conservation Service in 1979 and the City
General Plan (1989) and General Plan Update Technical Background Report (1988).
2. GeoLogic Resources
The project area is located in the foothill portion of the San Bernardino Mountains where the
topography and geology makes an abrupt transition at the San Andreas Fault. On the mountain
side of the fault, topography is steep, ranging from 30-50 percent slopes, and bedrock outcrops
on the ground surface or is located under shallow soil near the surface. On the valley side of the
fault, the slopes range from 2-10 percent and alluvial deposits, both recent and older, underlies
the surface soils. The bedrock that occurs within the project area consists of the granitic core of
the San Bernardino Mountains (Cretaceous or Jurassic quartz monzonite), metamorphic gneiss,
and the sedimentary Potato Sandstone formation. The combination of bedrock near the surface
and streams running out of the mountains has created a corrugated topography consisting of ridges
interspersed with canyons carved by streams. This is the predominant physical setting which is
found within the project area. The ridges have slopes ranging from 25-50% angles which prevents
direct access to these areas with equipment over most of the area.
15
-
RES 96-210
0: 0:
0
-;;; 0
e -;;;
w e
~ w
., '0
;;; 0:
~ ~
.E .E 'E
~ ~ ..
E
'E 'E 't:
.. '" ..
<; <; 0..
c.. c.. '"
c
'" '" '" "0
Z '" '"
:;: :;: "a>
0 ;;;0>
S '0 '0 u;~
.. .. "D~
.. ...
51 .. .. ...:>
~ <: .--
::; < 0::>
:>.~
'" 1) ~-
...J ~ ..'"
0 ~ =<
<-
'" _0
.
-~
-'
".-
U'IUI'"
1$1""'1'
<:
c:
"'-
<:'
c-
Ci
Q
'"
8
~
(,
J
(j
>
;;-
w:;
;:')1
, "':J$:
.--.! \iX"
I C$
I .....
O -,
, ,
, 0 ,
- ,
Jtc, -If I
,
..'
'.1' ,.'f'
,
I~: _I
,',
'-
I ,4,
, 1,-
:C;J
--~
~
,__f
",
,
U'{'''',IU U. j
"-:'1-
I ,,_..
, "
" '
..'......IIN,
,
,
\
----..,
'"
~.,.,,",_.."VJ
.' -~.
, .
'1' I..,.....:,"
, -.
,
,"
.
,
to. "'~I_
-i"
"
,
~
:1
-,
.1
'.
':1
- j I
..~-- 1 I
. --
:. -
=i ..
oil ~.
IS'"U,,,
.'
...;.:~....
.."....
Soils Limitations Map
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consultants
Sourcc; Sage Assoeiates
FIGURE 9
16
I RES 9~-;;~
The San Andreas Fault traverses the whole project area and much of the project area is contained
within this Fault's Alquist Priolo Special Study Zone. Ground rupture and severe ground shaking
can occur within this area. Two small areas of liquefaction hazards are identified as occurring
within the project area, both along existing major creek channels in Devil's Canyon and Waterman
Canyon. The site does lie outside of the area identified as having a potential for subsidence in the
San Bernardino Valley. Although the topography is steep, slope stability is considered generally
good based on the data contained in the City's General Plan and Technical Background document.
Two known landslides are identified as occurring -within the project area.
Graphics abstracted from the General Plan illustrate these geological constraints and are provided
as Figures 10-13 of this document. Data for this section were abstracted from four publications:
Fault Activity Map ,of California and Adjacent Areas (1994),. Geologic Map of the San Bernardino
Quadrangle (1986), Geologic and Hydrologic Features, San Bernardino Area, California (1963),
and the City of San Bernardino General Plan Update Technical Background Report (1988).
B.... Surface Runoff and Flood Hazards
As noted in the geologic resources discussion above, the project area consists of two primary
landforms, ridges and intervening stream canyons. Figures 3-8 illustrate the project area
topography and the location of the ridges and stream channels within the project area. Beginning
with Meyers Canyon on the far northwest and extending through Elder Gulch on the southeast,
an estimated 23 streams exit the San Bernardino Mountain foothills into the valley floor within
the project area. Each stream occupies a stream canyon that varies in size from the small canyon
associated with Sycamore Creek to the large canyon created at the confluence of Waterman Creek
and East Twin Creek. The named stream canyons exiting the foothills within the project area,
from northwest to southeast include: Meyers Canyon, Bailey Canyon, Devil Canyon, Badger
Canyon, Sycamore Canyon, Waterman Canyon, Borea Canyon, Little Sand Canyon, Sand
Canyon, City Creek Canyon, Cook Canyon and Elder Gulch.
The two resource issues of concern in this section are surface runoff and flood hazards. Flood
hazard areas have been defined by the City for the canyons located within the project area. Figure
13 of the City of San Bernardino's General Plan Background Report portrays the lOO-year flood
hazard areas within the City, including those along the foothills. Each of the major canyons is
within the City are shown in Figure 14 and the extent of the lOG-year flood area is also depicted.
A similar graphic, Figure 15, is provided for the City of Highland that shows the City Creek
lOO-year floodplain within the project area. Note the scale of this map is different than in Figure
14.
The stream channels and floodplains within the project area contain riparian vegetation and
wetland areas that are generally located within the l00-year floodplains. Some of the streams flow
all-year most years, i.e. they are perennial (Waterman Canyon and City Creek), but most of the
small streams dry up during the late summer and should be considered ephemeral, or periodic,
streams. The ground water table is high at the mouths of the streams where they exit the foothills,
17
~. QI;_"'l(\
..
,...
.. ~'t:>-
'u -8.",
~ .- >..
8. ell &: ~ '0
tIl ~~8. "
.2 en
.2 0:2," ~
~ u
0.. '2".... .,
(f) ]i '" " 0.
W .,~ 0 tIl
Z &- :: c: 0
0 u...,-B ~
< E., '"
N E e.s~ 0..
~ ,g 'C:'E=c ]i
" .215 ig "
=> .2 -c:u.cv SZ
It: ~ B.~~~ <
'0
-' ..J Cii':~.~ t "
<( "'u> :;::C'g7ii .2
0 iijo. :J cu_ C ..
0 lL'" 8:."c CI).2 ~-
-' .,::! Cii!:=
a: - ., """ '":g .!!;:!
'"" 1ijCijEcu ~~
0 Eo E<'>ccn
..., 'XN 'g~~'2 "w-
<( e~ .... u (1).- e l(l
::; c." 8:8."'5- 8:"
0._ <tIl8~
<tIl <~
><
><
...
><
><
-Si
1$1."'1f
=K
~:I
~I
21
<(I
6
8:
o
o
~
o
o
S
~
"""UIl
-..
"
,
.!~
;;
.
~
I IS ..u.~
'__1
~
.
-
Major Local Fault Zone Map
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consultants
Source: Envicom Corporalion
FIGURE 10
18
I
V
,
" \
iI -1 \
I --,-I /'
I \:....... .. I
I L<-......~,.~.-......
,--jt'f"--- '\:r:) I
~I_J 1'- JI /
,I I ....~V~ ,....
,.I ' ,. -~ '-. I, ,
_I . I ,. .'~ ___.. ~ I
_1 'It"... I I ." .: ....-r
1....- ....l' }...... i J.... ': -: ...
I I 'I ,.... i = "'l.
I . ...__1 ~'- i: :: !IJi
I ,...,.'::-._............... - t
-, ...: .:,
... ) : :I:
1"--' /' /. :z::
\, I .........
t~...,_",.... , ....;.~....
- ' /......
C:"--
C.I :r:...-
I i.......
..'1..:'
'"1ES 96-2
~
:;9
~ ~o.
::; <8
CD o~
i= 1:;(1)
Q.. .Q c::
w c;.2
o go
U) -'~
::> ,,"
III _"
""'"
is e:J
...- )(.c
00>
uC5.3:
ii:~
w
:J l\
o 1:1:1-
::i I I
-.
~
o
. ~ C:c
.~ ca;.Q~o'o
"':::4Jftin;C'CI:~
o:C~;:l:g:t~c=
U1~ -:J:::Qi1:JN'C::tns::J
1lOC'CI .!!U;~..oC 5tTCI)C'CI
GJ"':J :J . o.c: GJu.
...GJ _C"CUlOCU...t:,cCU
<"O?:- ~g 5~ Ca.E OlCG-:. O'i
_0._ ..oOOns _.ClJ c
o:E:a ::J~ ...'O=:o~.!! E eO ;0-
co".: "'CllOC=>O.c~ co
0-0. fO:J"C:J.cO-'-cnl"O 0'1
=.c:cu 0"4>>0." O"C>.CJ....
C'CIc:nu U1=OaJ_tQ.l~(I):J c:' '-,
0-- en CQ ::t - 010 U
~;.~ ~~~~'~~~5~~ ~ l-~]'\I
.2~g :J.2ctl~o~EU.;; 0 I I
EC'CI',::, cuo.24JoGJ=')(:;c"C I !!;
__4;0 .c~t;"cNrn'?C'CIGJca c I ~
X'D.!: o-.!!'C>.ftj.ce"'"e co I ~.....
eOGJ -oGJC'CI:E"'~_'gcu -= "T::j<;:' X
~::J-GJ::s -&II u<__ 't~4.i
~CT OClCTQ).oCIl:Il: CI) fQ I It
<:o:,:j 2:o=JJ-=oofQll:>-~ 1
.- "0 C,.._ "'cu'" ----..
,-, ..:: Cb_ cu:::'lJ en",...1 ,'1/1
I CLlO:U:lO'lJCLlQ,j = CUI ~I
'2' 'OlU..cO.cnc:cn.>cu:J =..__, ,P,
.J:l Z a~.c::JocolU.c:rc <.1 .....
121 cn...cncnO.o__LL _ 1
1
I,
"
1------
,
,
,
I
1--1
,
r.."..............u....1.1
:" ';
: "r-;=.
: '':::..~~-
t---- ...:-""i (II
~=:" ':I:!
..' ~ I
: ~ ~
,
,
,
-i
=K
. .
~z
~
o
>=:
~
o
&
o
o
~
8
:;;
~
,
,
"
,
15"0"'1'
- .
~
:;:
:r:
;:;:
(;:,
. \
('.
I., ")~'II
--(
"
,
-,,--
~I
115""'4
'__1
;;
.
Liquefaction Susceptibility
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consultants
SOW'CC: Sage Associates
FIGURE 11
19
RES
'"
<
W
IX:
<
..
1!~
- ..
r:::'O
~u;
0'<>
0.."
-'"
0'0
..r:::
.. "
..0
<0
w
o
:z
w
o
'"
CD
::>
'"
..J
<
~I
II
I ---I
1 "'-_....
,
,.--- 1----,
'"I ,_J I
" ,
I_I I
.'
.'
,,-
,
,
,
-\
,
,'''--''
,
,
"..-....~
,
,
l.._~_
,
,
,
"
"
,------
,
,
,
I
,__I
I
re.4.........__...L.
: \..
. .
: r-;-
: --,-'
t-------r-, ;;
I.. !
I .::
I ~
,
,
, .
, of
10_- ~
i ~
{ ; 14
"--, , z
I "_J"
L.
E
..
'0
r:::
..
g. .E
"CS'C
~O~
:;~ :;
'O:z:U
~ .. g
.g~~
.. >..
C5,!!,c
Q,)~~
~coE
C):tCDai
C1)'OUCI)
Or::: r:::..~
"..
we:2Q)
~ cn~ i5
o C:)..o
ZOcnra
,
"
.,
,
,
,
,
"'
,...
'"
~
~
..
.r:::
(;
'0
r:::
..
.!!
ii:
~
~
:5.
,-,
I_I ~
....... II
1i I' -
I " I
, "
...-_1 ..
.... ,,' :............
, ~
.......
..':"=':-:~.......
.....~...
..'
.'
:........
.....:
Potential Subsidence Areas
Source; Sage Associates
.
_0
S
=H
-.
,.,
1_,"',
l--~ 'I
, '
, ",
- ,
, ,
, ,
-l'te :
,
,
r---"
,
,--,
~z
~
Q
""
~
o
8:
8
~
o
l.>
S;
as
,
~II _I
'~;l' -.!,
.... ~.~! ,'..'
~v
-~.
IShl1~l.t
''''.'11
IS "~4'"
;;
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consultants
FIGURE 12
20
RES 96-21n
1
,
,/"'--'
\ .
,
~(,...-...'"
',.
~
or 0;-
,...
.~ . en
~j "
'" >- .0 :i! .~
W I- 0 ~
0 ::; " ,,- ~1i
::; or <..,
'" iii ~ ~5 ~:a Sj
0 ;:: ~ 2 :; o .
= '0
Z "- 0 .;g .. <
.. w ~ .!:I.S ..
-' u " !!'~ ~ E
'" '0 ",.!!!"ii .., 0 ...
0: => 't: ~.9'fJ ~'ll ,...
0 en b
'" ~-S~~ <0. ~
-., .02 .
.. w ~;oE~ C
::; 0 ~ H ~ 0 Bg-J !!.
0 :::; .... -oa ~ . ~ < :;
z w Vl "i 2'c.2 iiiF-e ::!
.. "- 0 ~!!8~
0 ;; Z E . . ;;
~ ~ c {II >-:0 ';;h
-' e .. u
'" "iQ g III E e . E
. ;; -' c .... e 8 ~
::; Olifi= oj! !t< . 0
iii w=-~ we 8~~" -"":'2 !!!.
N!l.c ...Ill:....
.. N" ~:o -g :i ~~{!;
I- :::;~ :F -'8 E :I ... .., o . <
'" <!E .nEl!':; < '" .
.. -- .0-
w o:oo~ a:::9 ;::;-g=~ o.!!i5
0.. UJ co III m W.t":;N:... UY"'l',j
0 z~!fi z ~ IIS-Vl.Qo'O;:
'-' w." w.o<~<.g
C)':'5~ "
'" <:).02:.:0=..-0 .
(--' '."1".)'11
I' I~
, , .=-
," I.! ,
.., W!!O,.
,
1_[--,
__I
;; ---
,
~ 1_
,
,-
I- ,
.'-
"'
,
".
15''''1'IY
;;
~:
<:"
'"
o
"'-
'"
o
(j
::E
n
<.,
::;;
<=
'"
.
.:. i
.
!
.
..
"
_I
-,
I
..,.."".,. U.
1\
.... L
I ,,_..
I "
" .
..,......".
,
,
\
.---- .'
.,
, _ ~.., nW"A'"
,
,-
I
"
." '~)~III
.
..~:_ i ,
. '
..../iim.y~r" .:.
. .. .!: ...
..... ~ -: :i
.... .. .1 ~:
.0 :.
~,
-i"
"
,
,
~__ 1 : ISltU...
i~ ~--
oii 5.
.
.
.'
.~_."..
a_ ......
.;."
:'.,e"
Slope Stability and Major Landslides
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consullants
Source: Sage Associates
FIGURE 13
21
RES
~--,
".
1..\.
"
, I
'.
. .
-u
=H
-01
~z
<:
0
;:::
~
0
8:
0
(j
.. ~
0
IS""q'I' (j
S
0 ~
-
'I
I
,
,;"--~
,
,
f....._..."
"
l.._!_
c
..
E
..
",-
'" '"
Z ..'0 "'<>.
'" '"
< '" 0 ::1;::1;
..J O~ >-~
0- ~ :. V '"
.S2 "'0:
0 "," ..
"'..
0 ..>- ~ u
~'O .. "
0 <.. E '"
..J 'O~ W ;;
U. 0'0 '" '-,
0" ;;;" 1_,"',
0: - " :u:;;
u.:c . "
< '00 .---
W .. 0 . ,
u. _ !!:
>- , ..u. .
.. >-
u V.
<> ;; '"
<> 0 ..
Vl'"
-<
,
"
1------
---,
I '
'i:?
I \ I
-l-F- .., .~'~'1I
I-i.
lnj .-" ,
100 - Year Floodplain
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consultants
Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Flood Insurance Rate Maps
FIGURE 14
22
RES 96-210
.............nn..
L.....ml)'.-
-..-.-..-..-..-..Jj
i
i
i
i
i
i
:-o--.-....i
..."
."
i
i
~
',l~ ~. .Jf' ...J
o"ldo'
~.n :
i'II r
~ll
--'l1-..
II
II
'-U.s'
, ,
~--,
UJ
'"
""
CD
UJ
U
'"
o
u.
'"
"
ti
....
a:
o
z
Flood Hazard Areas/Hydrology
Highland General Plan
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consultants
Source: CastanedaITakala Associates
FIGURE 15
23
RES 96-210
."
and springs are common in the project area, especially where the San Andreas Fault serves as a
dam to ground water flow and the water table is forced to the surface on the northern side of the
fault. Spring areas commonly support riparian and wetland vegetation at spot locations as opposed
to the linear riparian/wetland vegetation pattern associated with streams.
Although the stream channel areas are subject to significant erosion hazard due to concentration
of surface flows and high volumes of runoff in the stream channels, the slope of the channels,
with some exceptions, is not greater than 5-10%. The steeper ridge slopes transport less flow than
the streams, primarily as sheet wash and small rivulets, but due to the steep angle of slope,
ranging up to 50% or more, the potential for erosion is high where residual soils overlay near-
surface bedrock. Based on field observations, the project area does not exhibit significant active
erosion damage, even though portions of the project area have experienced fires in the recent past,
including the Panorama fire.
Data for this section of the report were abstracted from the City of San Bernardino General Plan
Update Technical Background Report and field visits to the project area.
c.. Fire H~7>lTlls
The project area contains high to extreme wildland fire hazards based on a combination of type
and age of the fuel, proximity to urban areas, and climatic factors, particularly Santa Ana winds
during the fall and winter. Historic burn areas are shown in Figure 16 and those areas with high
and extreme fire hazards are shown in Figure 17. The fire history and factors identified above
clearly demonstrated that this area of urban/wildland interface is exposed to very significant fire
hazards that require management, in one form or another, to prevent significant loss of life and
property, as was experienced in the Panorama Fire in 1980.
Data for this section of the report were abstracted from the City of San Bernardino General Plan
Update Technical Background Report.
D.... ~
The project area is located along the urban/wildland interface from the Community of Devore in
the northwest to the City of Highland in the southeast. Background noise levels are dictated by
local human activities and transportation related noise. Typical low density residential suburban
noise levels average around 55 dBA on the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise
measurement methodology. Most of the noise generating activities in the area occur during the
day when traffic volumes are higher and residents are active. Nighttime noise levels are low due
to a lack of activity and no major stationary noise sources are located in the project area.
In the Devore area, rail and motor vehicle activities in the Cajon transportation corridor serve as
the major sources of noise. Rail traffic generates noise levels of approximately 75 dBA CNEL
at 200 feet from the tracks and Interstate 215 generates comparable noise levels in the project area.
24
,~i:7~ii'i"""-
,,-
'... J _
";:: ...> . .... ,.
-ooi ....
. ~
RES 96-210
2:- 2:- 2:- 2:-
'" '" '" '"
(fl "0 "0 "0 "0
<( C C C C
" " " "
W 0 0 0 0
c: <D <D <D CJ
<( '" '" '" '"
'" '" '" C>
Z .:;: .:;: .:;: <
c: c E c c
::J - ~ ~
" "
CD <D CJ <D CJ
W ~ ~ e e
c: u: u: u: u:
u: 0 en 0 co
0 a:> r-. r-. M
en en en en
a: - - - -
0
f-
(fl
5:
"'-
" "
_u
~~
"'..
"",
..-
- '"
"c ~
::>0
.."-
"
~
:>
o
!:?
~
~
9
Historic Fire Burn Areas
Source: United Slates Forest Service
25
",
..... ,,,.
IS'.lqll'
ray '11'UI~ I
I~ ":,
,
,.1
1=-
,
U, -III""
,
1- __I
--.
-,
,
M ,-- ;;
<< .-
- ,-
,-
,
-:..-
:'
U,"'''''IU
, \
-"IL
I "-"'"
" .
"Y.'."I'Jil
,
,., I
,
.
,-
,
,
10, '~ht.
," -..
, , "
, , ,
,
..I": :1--~' : IS"U,.
;;
. . --
. -
~ " -
it 5: .
-~
=~
-0
""Z
<:
o
;::
(;i
o
2:
8
~
o
u
s
iE
'I
'I
\
~
Tom Dodson & Associates
cnviroWllcnlal consullanls
FIGURE 16
RE
~
N
'"
J::
..
E
.r;
><
OJ
I
<
~
N
'" ..
J:: ~
CD it Q:l
m .<=
~ -"'-0
IU .Q1'C
'8 J:::a
::;; "'N
I ~ ctl
o OJ::
~
:;j
:x:
~
J::
,
'"
'"
<
OJ
a:
<
o
a:
<
N
<
J:: EE . .~'j,,~:~,,:
UJ ........
0: .;:::;:::::::::;
- ...............
LL. ::::::::::::::::
,-
'..
..'
Fire Hazard Areas
Source: Foothill Community Protective "Greenbelt" Program
26
,"
,.,
. .
E -'
~ -
'" -
~
'" '"
~ e
"c. _5
E . "
E""
o '"
O-g ~.
IS '" ,,=
.c '"
- ~
oel <=
o.
IJ,. '" 0
.. > ;:::
1%):;:: ~
" "
~ '"
,,- 0
0 0
'" ~ &
~c.
0
l)
. . ~
0
IS "'''qll' l)
S;
<=
o..u
-
""1111'"
M
c
f'Y'I"IJ
" I..
r
,J
1=-
,
u, .....1
,
1- -_I
--,
.,
,
urn...". U
"
"i.,I_
.-,
, "
" '
..,11.",,_
1--" /
.,
,
\
---\
M -ru 0;;:
. .-
- ,-
,-
{.-
:'
,,'
't'
I:
,
,
v.
,',
, ,
,
,
IU'''~''A1ft
\ ;:f
I
I
f'-,. ...."...
"
,
:~__l, : lSI.4~,..
:1 J--
3 :i
c, .
';1
.!l
s
.
~I
.
Tom Dodson & Associates
environmental consullants
FIGURE 17
RES 96-210
The Route 30 freeway and Highland A venue generate noise levels in the 70 dBA CNEL range in
the eastern portion of the project area. Measurements on local roads in the project vicinity taken
for the Paradise Hills Specific Plan EIR indicated CNEL values ranging from near 65 dBA CNEL
on Northpark and University to slightly over 70 dBA at Kendall and University. These noise
sources are attenuated over the mile plus distance that the noise travels from source to the project
area, but in the evening when other noise background sources have abated, the freeway and rail
transportation activities produce an audible sound, albeit not a significant one.
The further away from the urban/wildland interface that one moves the quieter the noise
environment. A measurement at the mouth of Badger Canyon for the Paradise Hills Specific Plan
indicated a CNEL value of 46 dBA. This should be typical of the majority of the area contained
within the vegetation management plan boundaries.... ..
Data for this section of the report were abstracted from the City of San Bernardino General Plan
Update Technical Background Report and the Paradise Hills Specific Plan EIR..
E... Aviation Safety
No airports or avigation easements are located within the project area. High altitude flyovers
occur for planes inbound to Ontario International Airport from northern California and areas to
the northeast, such as Las Vegas. The Forest Service has an approved launch point for hang
gliders in Crestline which allows the hang gliders to overfly the western portion of the project
area. No other aviation activities are known to occur within the project area.
Data for this section of the report were abstracted from the City of San Bernardino General Plan
Update Technical Background Report and field observations.
E.. Hazardous/Radioactive Materials
The majority of the project area has not been disturbed by human activities that would result in
the use or storage of hazardous materials or wastes. A review of the City's known hazardous
waste sites indicates that no sites are known to occur within the project area. No major pipelines
that transport hazardous materials are known to traverse the project area. The nearest known
source of contamination is Camp Ono and the old San Bernardino Airport, which are located about
'12 mile south of the project boundary in the vicinity of the college and Northpark areas.
The Data for this section of the report were abstracted from the City of San Bernardino General
Plan, General Plan Update Technical Background Report, and the 1990 "Identified Hazardous
Waste and Substances Sites" compiled by San Bernardino County.
G.... Biological Resources
The biological resources the occupy the project area were determined through field surveys
27
RES 96-210
.'
conducted during March and April, 1996. In addition high quality, current aerial photos of the
area were utilized in identifying the plant communities located within the project area and the
Natural Diversity Data Base (NDDB) was reviewed for the presence of sensitive plant/animal
species. The detailed biological assessment is provided in Appendix 4 which describes the plant
communities and biological resources located within the project area. A summary of this
assessment is provided in the following discussion.
The project area extends over ten miles along the urban/wildland interface and a total of 18
locations have been identified as possible prescribed burn site. Although the majority of the area
has not been directly impacted by direct human activities, the majority of the project area has
experienced historic fire damage, most often from uncontrolled, severe wildland fires. With the
exception of the riparian habitats located along the numerous streams that traverse the project area
as well defined linear features, the four plant communities that occur in the project area are
considered fire adapted. In fact, a majority of the project area has been burned since 1970 (see
Figure 16) and has returned to its current plant community status over the past 25 years. These
four plant communities are: Chamise Chaparral, Coastal Sage Scrub, Southern Oak Woodland,
and disturbed grassland. Of the five plant communities located within the project area, the Coastal
Sage Scrub and riparian habitats are considered to be sensitive communities identified by the
NDDB. In order to minimize potential for erosion and water quality impacts, a decision has
already been made to exclude, Le. avoid, all riparian habitat and transition areas from the
proposed project's vegetation management activities
The list of sensitive plant species that may occur within these plant communities includes (see
Appendix 4 for the scientific nomenclature): Hall's Monardella, Hot Springs Fimbristylis, Marsh
Sandwort, Nevin's Barberry, Parry's Spineflower. Plummer's Mariposa Lilly, San Bernardino
Mountains Owl's-clover, Santa Ana River Woollystar, Slender-horned Spineflower, and Thread-
leaved Brodiaea. Of these sensitive plants, only the Parry's Spineflower, Plummer's Mariposa
Lilly, and Thread-leaved Brodiaea were judged to occur within the project area plant communities
that are proposed for prescribed burns.
The sensitive wildlife species that may occur with the plant communities located within the project
area include (see Appendix 4 for the scientific nomenclature): Andrew's Marble Butterfly, Coastal
California Gnatcatcher, California Red-legged Frog, California Mastiff Bat, Least Bell's Vireo,
San Diego Horned Lizard, Santa Ana Sucker, Southern Rubber Boa, and White-eared Pocket
Mouse. The habitat within the project area that may be impacted by the project (excluding
riparian areas as noted above) include the Coastal California Gnatcatcher and San Diego Horned
Lizard.
Other common mammals that are known to or may occur in the project area include: deer, coyote,
skunk, ground squirrels (various species). opossum, bobcat, jackrabbits, and mountain lion. Birds
common to the project area include: American kestrel, California quail, various hummingbirds,
ravens, finches, Mourning dove, woodpeckers, and a variety of raptors.. Reptiles and
amphibians common in the project area include Western toads, California treefrog, Pacific
'28
RES 96-210
treefrog, common kingsnake, gopher snake, Rosy boa, Southern Pacific rattlesnake, Western
fence lizard, side-blotched lizard, and others.
R. CulturalJPaleontologic Resources
An archaeological records search was conducted for the project area by CRM Tech. The records at
the San Bernardino County Museum Archaeological Information Center were searched to determine
the type and scope of resources that may occur Within the 9,017 acre project area. A total of31
recorded or pending &!es were identified, none of which have been evaluate for the National Register
of Historic Places.. .Withinthe,bounds.oftheproposed :v.egetation.managernent areas, ie. burn areas,
seven recorded &tes were identified along With one pending &te.
A copy of the CRM Tech Report is attached as Appendix 3. The information for this section was
abstracted from this report.
1.. Air Ouality
The City of San Bernardino is in the San Bernardino County portion of the South Coast Air Bam
(SCAB), a 6,600-square-nllle area encompassing Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los
Angeles, River&de, and San Bernardino Counties. Bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the
San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto mountains to the north and east, its topography and
climate make the SCAB particularly conducive to the formation and retention of air pollution.
Meteorology
The strength and location of a senriperrnanent, subtropical mgh pressure cell over the Pacific Ocean
primarily controls the SCAB's climate. Climate is also affected by the moderating effects of
differential heating between the land area of California and the adjacent Pacific Ocean. Warm
summers, nrild winter, infrequent rainfall, moderate daytime onshore breezes, and moderate
hunridities characterize local climatic conditions.
Because oftopograpmc features and distance from the ocean, various nricroclimates exist Within the
overall climate of the SCAB. Since the moderating marine influence decreases With distance from
the coast, monthly and annual spreads between temperatures are greatest inland. Precipitation is
highly variable seasonally. Summers are often completely dry throughout the SCAB. There are
frequent periods of four to five months with no rain. In winter storm front (low pressure systems)
periodically sweep across the Pacific Ocean bringing rain. Annual rainfall is lowest in the coastal
plain and inland valleys, mgher in the foothills, and mghest in the surrounding mountains.
The climate of the proposed project area is less affected by the moderating effects of the Pacific
Ocean than are coastal areas in Los Angeles and Orange counties. Therefore, differences between
29
'--IiEs96-210
.-
summer and winter temperatures are more extreme. Average temperatures in and near San
Bernardino range from a minimum of37 degrees F in January to an average maximum of97 degrees
F in July. During a 91-year reporting period ending in 1980, annual rainfall at San Bernardino
averaged 16.57 inches, With a maxinmrn annual rainfiill of21.69 inches and a minimum of7.36 inches.
The project area receives slightly mgher volumes of rain due to the change in topography. About 20
inches of rain falls on the project area on the average.
Winds across the project area control both the initial dilution rate oflocally generated air pollutant
emissions and their regional trajectory. In general, average wind speeds are lower in the inland
valleys than along the coast because seas breezes are weaker by the time they reach the project area.
Wind speeds measured at Norton Air Force Base over a 26-year period averaged four nllles per hour.
Winds occur from all directions, With more than 43% corning from the west, west southwest, or
southwest. Wmds from this direction 'Occur-during the-day: At'night;'the wind 1I.owpattern reverses,
With an offshore flow generally corning from the east or northeast. Night winds are slower than
daytime breezes off the ocean. Onshore breezes are strongest in summer and nighttime drainage
winds are stronger in winter than in summer.
Predorninant Wind patterns are broken by occasional Winter storms and episodes of Santa Ana Winds.
The latter are strong northerly or northeasterly dry Winds that originate from the desert or the Great
Basin, primarily during September through March. Highest wind speeds in the project area occur at
this time \Wen the clockwise Wind circulation in the system produces a north or northeast flow as the
air is pushed southward over the San Bernardino Mountains and funneled through the passes. Over
the 26-year monitoring period at Norton Air Force Base, the average of the mghest gust recorded
each year was 57 nllles per hour. Santa Ana Wind conditions occur about five to ten times per year,
With each occurrence lasting for a few hours to a few days.
Localized meteorological conditions can create areas of high pollutant concentrations by hindering
dispersal. Temperature inver&ons, wmch are temperatures that increase With altitude instead of
decreasing, hamper dispersion by trapping air pollutants in a linrited volume of airspace near the
ground. For example, the mghest concentrations of carbon monoxide occur during Winter when
temperature inversions are lower and stronger (more resistant to dis&pation by ground heating).
Formation of high ozone concentrations requires adequate sunshine, early morning stagnation in
source areas, mgh surface temperatures, strong and low morning inversions, greatly restricted vertical
nrixing during the day, and daytime subsidence that strengthens the inversion layer. Because of
ozone's long formation time in the atmosphere, ozone concentrations are substantially affected by
wind transport patterns.
High nitrogen dioxide levels usually occur during the autumn or winter on days With summer-like
weather conditions, but when sunlight is not sufficiently intense to fuel the photochenrical reactions
between oxides of nitrogen and reactive organic compounds that form ozone. Particulate
concentrations vary seasonally With the summer months having mgh concentrations of secondarily-
formed particulates due to chenrical interactions driven by intense sunlight, and winter inversions
30
RES 96-210
trapping primary enritted particulates. Violations occur during all seasons, With the mghest
concentrations in the summer.
Ambient Air Quality
Contanrinant levels in air samples are compared to national and state standards, shown in Table I, to
deternrine ambient pollutant concentrations. Air quality standards are set by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARD) at levels to protect public
health and welfare With an adequate margin of safety. There are national and state standards for
ozone (O,),-carbonmonoxide(CO),nitrogendioxide(N02)' PMIO (suspended particulate matter 10
nricrons or less in diameter), sulfur dioxide (S02)' and lead (Pb). The South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) also measures for compliance With two other state standards:
sulfates and visJ."ility.
Ozone (0,), a colorless toxic gas which forms in the atmosphere through a photochemical reaction
of reactive organic compounds and nitrogen oxide, irritates the lungs and damages formation of
ozone. PM'o is small particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter. Carbon monoxide
(CO) is a colorless gas which interferes with the transfer of oxygen to the brain. Nitrogen dioxide
(N02) is a reddish-brown gas which can cause breathing difficulties at high concentrations and
which also contributes to the that causes a greater health risk than larger particulate matter since
fine particles more easily penetrate the defenses of the human respiratory system and cause
irritation by themselves and in combination with gases.
4.2.1.3 Regional Air Quality
The SCAQMD samples ambient air at monitoring stations in and around the South Coast and
Southeast Desert Air Basins that are within its jurisdiction. National and state standards for
ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and PMIO and state standards for visibility are
regularly exceeded in the SCAB. In 1993, the peak ozone reading in the SCAB was almost three
times the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Los Angeles urban area exceeds
this standard more frequently than any other area in the United States, and also records the highest
peak readings.
Standards for carbon monoxide are exceeded in more densely populated Los Angeles and Orange
counties, but not in Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Los Angeles County was the only
area in the nation which exceeded the national annual nitrogen dioxide standard, but the SCAB
was determined to be in compliance with the federal nitrogen dioxide standard, i.e. attainment,
in 1995. The state nitrogen dioxide one hour standard is exceeded in both Los Angeles and
Orange counties. The number of readings over the state standard fluctuates from year to year,
depending on weather patterns.
31
RES 96-210
.-
TABLE 1
Ambient Air Quality Standards
California Federal
Air PoUutant Standard Primary Secondary
Own< > 0.09 ppm, I-hr. avg > 0.12 ppm, I-hr. avg. 0.12 ppm, I-hr. avg.
Carbon Monoxide 2. 9.1 ppm, 8-hr. avg 2. 9.5 ppm, 8-hr. avg 2. 9.5 ppm, 8-hr. avg
> 20 ppm, I-hr. avg > 35 ppm, I-hr. avg > 35 ppm, I-hr. avg.
Nitrogen Dioxide > 0.25 ppm, I-hr. avg > 0.053 ppm, annua1 > 0.053 ppm, annual
avg. ., avg. '
Sulfur Dioxide > .25 ppm I-hr. avg 0.03 ppm, annua1 avg. > 0.50 ppm, 3-hr. avg.
2. 0.05 ppm, 24-hr. avg > 0.14 ppm, 24-hr. avg.
with 2. 0.10 ozone or
with 24-hr. TSP 2. 100
uglm'
Suspended avg; > 50 uglm', 24-hr. avg > 150 uglm', 24-hr. avg. > 150 uglm',24-hr. avg.
> 50 uglm' annual Paniculate Matter > 30 uglm' annual > 30 uglm' annual
(pM''')
geometric mean arithmetic mean arithmetic mean
Sulfates 2. 25 ug/m', 24-hr. avg
Lead 2. 1.5 uglm', monthly > 1. 5 uglm', calendar > 1.5 uglm'
avg. quaner
Hydrogen Sulfide > 0.03 ppm, I-hr. avg.
Vinyl Chloride 2. 0.010 ppm, 24-hr.
avg.
Visibility-Reducing In sufficient amount 10
Panicles reduce prevailing
visibility 10 less than 10
miles al relative humidity
less than 70 %, I
observation.
Note: ppm = parts per million by volume
ug/m' = micrograms per cubic meter
> = greater than
> - greater than or equal to Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District t 993
PMIO levels regularly exceed national and state standards in Los Angeles, Riverside, and San
Bernardino counties, and state standards in Orange County. Sulfur dioxide and lead levels in all
areas of the Basin are below national and state standard limits.
32
RES 96-210
4.2.1.4 Attainment Areas
The CARB divides the state into air basins, based upon similar meteorological conditions. The
SCAQMD maintains monitoring stations throughout the South Coast Air Basin and the portions
of the Southeast Desert Air Basin that it administers to record ambient levels of regulated
pollutants. If any monitoring station in an air basin records concentrations of an air pollutant
which exceed state or federal air quality standards, the entire basin is generally determined to be
a non-attainment area for that pollutant. As long as no violation of an ambient air quality standard
occurs, a basin is determined to be in attainment. Carbon monoxide, a pollutant where highest
ambient air concentrations occur in the immediate vicinity of the source of emissions, is now
treated somewhat differently by the CARB: designation of attainment and non-attainment areas
for carbon monoxide are"by subarea', not air'basin;' insomecases.EPA and CARB have
designated the entire South Coast Air Basin, which includes all of Orange County and the non-
desert portions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside counties, as federal and state non-
attainment areas for ozone and fine particulate matter (PMIO). The SCAB is in attainment with
the federal nitrogen oxide standard but continues to violate the state standard. Both ozone and
nitrogen dioxide are regional pollutants in that they are created when pollutants combine in the
atmosphere at some distance from where they are initially emitted. PMIO also forms in the
atmosphere through chemical reactions with other pollutants, as well as occurring naturally in very
fine soil. man-made particles, and sea spray.
San Bernardino and Riverside counties are designated as attainment areas for both state and federal
carbon monoxide standards. Only the Los Angeles and Orange County portions of the Basin are
designated as federal and state non-attainment areas for CO. Weather-adjusted CO concentrations
in the SCAB declined by 47% between 1976 and 1990, and are projected to decline further
because of new CO standards on vehicles and use of oxygenated fuels in winter. The federal one-
hour standard has not been exceeded anywhere in the Basin for more than five years, but the more
stringent state-one hour standard is occasionally exceeded and the state and federal eight-hour
standards are frequently exceeded throughout Los Angeles and Orange counties. Highest
concentrations of CO and the most exceedances occurred in Lynwood in Los Angeles County over
the past five years.
Local Air Quality
Ambient air quality in the project area is measured at the SCAQMD monitoring station located
at 24302 San Bernardino Avenue, South #62 in the City of San Bernardino. The San Bernardino
station monitors ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, lead, sulfate, total suspended
particulates, and PMIO. Table 2 lists the air quality readings at the station from 1989 through 1993
for pollutants for which the South Coast Air Basin has been designated a federal non-attainment
area. State and national lead and sulfur dioxide standards were met throughout the monitoring
period. There is no longer a state or federal standard for total suspended particulates (TSP), but
the measured TSP concentration is shown for comparison to the PMIO concentrations at the site.
33
RES 96-210
TABLE 2
Summary of Air Quality Data
San Bernardino Air Monitoring Station
PoUul8Dt Sl8DdanIs 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
Ozone (Os)
State standard (1-hr.avg>O.09ppm)
Federal standard (1-hr.avg>O.12ppm)
Maximum concentration' .30 .29 .25 _28 .21
No. of days state standard exceeded 159 129 127 141 132
No. of days federal standard exceeded 115 78 79 85 65
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
S..te standard (l-hr.avg>2Oppm)
Federal standard (l-hr.avg>0.12ppm)
State standard (8-hr.avg29.1ppm)
Federal standard (8-hr.av1l29.5ppm)
Maximum concentration I-hr. period II 9 8 7 7
Maximum concentration 8-hr. period 8.1 6.0 7.0 5.9 6.0
No. of days state I-hr.standard exceeded 0 0 0 0 0
No. of days federal1-hr.standard exceeded 0 0 0 0 0
No. of days state &-hr.standard exceeded 0 0 0 0 0
No. of days federal 8-hr.standard exceeded 0 0 0 0 0
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO,)
S..te ,..ndard (I-hr.avg > 0.25ppm)
Federal standard (0.0534 AAM in ppm)
Annual arithmetic mean .0409 .0343 .0355 .0356 .0376
Maximum I-hr. concentration .18 .20 .16 .13 .15
No. of days stale I-hr. standard exceeded 0 0 0 0 0
% federal standard exceeded 0 0 0 0 0
Total Suspended Panicnlates (TSP)
Maximum 24-hr. concentration 327 289 215 217 139
62.7
0
Suspcoded Particulates (PM1')
State standard (24-hr.avg > 50 ug/m))
Federal standard (24-hr.avg> 150 ug/m')
Maximum 24~hr. concentration 271 235 163 136
Percent samples exceeding state standard 74.5 58.3 68.3 60
Percent samples exceeding federal standard 5.1 3.3 1.7 0
AAM = Annual Arithmetic Mean NA = Not Applicable
ppm = pans per million ug/m' = micrograms per cubic meter
Source: South Coast Air Quality M......em...t District Air Qualitv Data - 1989 throW!b 1993
"34
RES 96-210
Peak pollutant concentrations vary from year to year, depending on meteorological conditions.
Ozone concentrations and numbers of exceedances have fluctuated at the San Bernardino station
over the past five years, although the running average number of days over the state standard has
decreased substantially over the five-year period. As in the rest of the Basin, CO concentrations
have declined. Nitrogen dioxide levels have remained approximately the same, with some decline
over 1989 levels. PM,. concentrations show substantial decreases, but they have not been adjusted
for weather patterns and such concentrations can vary substantially because of weather.
4.2.1.6 Regulatory Setting
The SCAQMD regulates stationary sources of pollution throughout the SCAB and has authority
under the California Clean Air Act to manage transportation activities as indirect (nonstationary)
sources, which are facilities that do not directly emit substantial amounts of pollution but attract
large numbers of mobile sources of pollution. Direct emissions from motor vehicles are regulated
by the California Air Resources Board.
Both the California and federal Clean Air Acts require designated agencies in the SCAB, which
is the nation's only "extreme" ozone non-attainment area, to prepare plans documenting actions
to meet air quality standards. The SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) are the designated planning agencies. As required by the California Clean
Air Act, the SCAQMD revised the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) in 1994 to address
measures needed to attain state standards. The 1994 AQMP also includes measures to reduce
toxic emissions and compounds which contribute to global warming. Attainment of the federal
ozone standard was projected for the year 2010, a three-year extension from the attainment date
in the 1989 AQMP.
The federal attainment deadlines in this region are 2010 for ozone, 2000 for carbon monoxide,
and 2001 for PM,.. The most recently adopted plan that addressed federal requirements was
adopted on March 17, 1989, and approved by the California Air Resources Board in August 1989,
prior to adoption of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. The 1994 AQMP was adopted in
September 1994 and it addresses procedural requirements of the 1990 Amendments, as well as the
three-year review requirements of the California Clean Air Act.
Open burning for wildland vegetation management is controlled by the SCAQMD under Rule 444,
Open Fires. Rule 444 requires the proponent of a wildland vegetation management project under
the jurisdiction of a fire protection agency to submit an "implementation plan" which must be
approved by the Executive Officer of the District. Once approved, the agency carrying out the
burn plan can proceed under the guidelines contained in the plan, with one exception. Under Rule
701, upon declaration of any predicted Stage 2 or Stage 3 episode for any pollutant, usually ozone
concentrations greater the 0.35 ppm, all vegetative management burning is prohibited. Also,
under declaration of an attained Stage 2 or 3 episode, all vegetative management burning, if
already ignited, shall be terminated.
35
RES 96-210
The data for this section of the document were abstracted from the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality
Handbook, the Santa Fe "A" Yard EIR and the District's Rules and Regulations.
L Water Supply/Water Quality
The water supply serving the project area is provided by two water purveyors, the City of San
Bernardino Municipal Water Department and the East Valley Water District. These two agencies
derive the majority of their water supply from the Bunker Hill ground water basin, with minor
quantities of surface water being captured and utilized from the streams flowing out of the San
Bernardino Mountains, including the Santa Ana River and Devil Canyon creek. An average of
about 50 million gallons of water is used per day within the service area of these two agencies,
and 90% + of this supply is derived from ground water sources. Water is supplied to the urban-
wildland interface through the highest pressure zones operated by the water agencies and a
backbone system of 12" lines extends to the urban-wildland interface. Many water storage
reservoirs are located within or directly adjacent to the project area.
Most of the streams that flow through the project area are derived from runoff at higher elevations
on the slopes of the San Bernardino Mountains. Surface water quality of several streams has been
measured and determined to be "good" for Cajon Creek, City Creek and Plunge Creek according
to data contained in MWD's Inland Feeder Project EIR. A special study prepared for the stream
in Devil Canyon from which the City obtains a small volume of surface water indicated that the
water quality is good, and with one exception the stream water quality is better than the maximum
contaminant levels (MCL) permitted in drinking water. This exception is iron, and one anomalous
reading was obtained for this chemical parameter with all other readings being below the MCL.
The data indicate that, except during periods of high flow when suspended sediment may be high,
overall water quality of those streams that have been monitored is considered to be good within
the project area.
The final issue of concern related to water quality is the role that the project area plays as a
portion of the watershed of each of the streams flowing through the project area. The ridges
between the stream channels comprise a small portion of the drainage basins which generate the
surface runoff which flows down the streams. The proportional contribution to each stream varies
widely, but in all instances is less than 25 % of the total drainage basin based on a review of the
topographic maps for the project area.
The data for this section was abstracted from the General Plan Technical Background Report, the
1994 Annual Water Quality Reports for the City Water Department and the East Valley Water
Department, the "Devil Canyon Watershed Sanitary Survey", and the MWD Inland Feeder EIR.
K.. Open Space/Recreation/Visual
The project area primarily consists of the chaparral covered foothills that form the visual
background for the Cities of San Bernardino and Highland. The majority of the project area is
36
RES 96-210
not developed and has been designated by the two cities for low to very low density residential
development under Hillside overlay restrictions that further reduce density. Limited portions of
the project area designated for flood control protection. Recreation on the private land is limited
due to trespass constraints and most of the area presently serves as passive, Le. visual open space,
for the residents and travelers through the area.
The San Bernardino National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan portion of the project
area is identified as the "Front Country" management area. The National Forest on the western
portion of the project area is designated in the Plan with an emphasis on watershed management.
The National Forest on the eastern portion of the project area is designated in the Plan with a joint
emphasis on watershed and wildlife management. Those portions of the project area within the
National Forest also serve, primarily' as passive open space, i.e. visual open space. What little
recreation that may occur in this area appears limited to hiking and hunting due to the limited
access to the National Forest in the project area.
The data for this section were abstracted from the City General Plan and the San Bernardino
National Forest Land and Resources Management Plan.
L.. Mineral Resources
Very little mineral development has occurred within the project area. A review of the Forest
Service data indicate that no major mineral claims occur within the project area and very few
known commercially viable deposits of minerals have been identified in the area. The southern
edge of the project area borders on known construction aggregate deposits. These deposits lie just
outside the project area in the Cajon Creek alluvial fan on the west and the City Creek alluvial fan
on the east. The City opposed designation of construction aggregate sectors by the California
Division of Mines and Geology on the northeast side of Interstate 215 and the area north and east
of State Highway 330 and Highland Avenue. Overall the mineral potential within the project area
is considered low to very low.
The data for this section were abstracted from the City General Plan and the San Bernardino
National Forest Land and Resources Management Plan.
M... UtilitieslInfrastructure
Utilities infrastructure connections are available at the southern edge of the project area boundary.
The following agencies maintain utility infrastructure and provide service to the project area:
I. Wastewater Collection and Treatment: Tbe San Bernardino regional wastewater treatment plant serves lbe
project area and it is operated by tbe City's San Bernardino MwlicipaJ Water Depanment. The collection system
is operated by the City of San Bernardino Mwlicipal Water Depanment and East Valley Water District. Very
few sewer lines enter lbe project area because of a historic lack of demand. Connections are available on lbe
southern edge of lbe area.
37
RES 96-210
.
.'
2. Water Supply: Water is available to the project area from either the San Bernardino Municipal Water
Department or East Valley Water District. Adequate supplies are available, but very few water lines currently
extend into the project area. Warer currently used for fire fighting purposes is provided by water tankers driven
to fire lines that generally fill up at nearby fire hydrants. A few surface reservoirs near the project area also
serve to provide water for helicopters used in fighting fires, such as the recreational lake at East Highlands
Ranch.
3. Storm Drains and Flood Control Facilities; The storm drainlflood control infrastructure that serve the project
area are developed and administered by the Cities of San Bernardino and Highland, the County Flood Control
District, and the Army Cotps of Engineers. Numerous natural stream channels pass through the project area,
gerernlly from north to south, and only a few man-made storm drain/flood control facilities are located within
the project area, such as debris basins at the mouths of several canyons where streams leave the project area
(wildlands) and enter the urbanized portions of the Cities.
4. Solid Waste: Management of solid waste. is provided by the City of San Bernardino and private garbage haulers
that collect waste and deliver it to regionallandfi1ls operated by San Bernardino County. Since the project area'
bas very few residents or other uses with human occupancy, very little solid waste is generated from the project
area. Waste from the project area would be hauled to the Mid-Valley. Colton, or San Timoteo landfills.
5. Electricity: Electricity throughout the wbole project area is provided by Southern California Edison. Power 1ines
extend to the project area's southern boundary, and in a few instances imo the project area to serve isolated
residences or other facilities (such as the old Arrowhead Springs Hotel complex). No major electric
transmission 1ines extend through the project area, but smaller distribution lines do cross the project area from
north to south.
6. Natural Gas: Southern California Gas provides natural gas to the whole project area. Natural gas 1ines extend
to the project area's southern boundary, and along Highway 18 a major gas line, 8--12" extends through the
project area to mountain communities.
7. Telecomnnmications: Gereral Telephone Company and Pacific Bell provide land line phone service to the project
area. Service connections are available at the southeru boundary of the project area and service lines extend in
and through the project area on existing electricity distribution lines. Cellular service is available throughout
the project area and cable television service is provided in the project area by private companies under license
from the cities.
The data for this section were abstracted from the General Plans of the City of Highland and San
Bernardino and the City of San Bernardino General Plan Technical Background Report.
N... Transportation/Circulation
Access to the project area is available from many existing paved roads, and a few graded roads
on private property and designated Forest Routes. Only two paved roads pass through the project
area, State Highways 18 and 330. Adequate access exists to the whole length of the southern
boundary of the project area from existing paved roads, but many areas within the project area are
inaccessible to motor vehicles and, due to dense chaparral vegetation, are also not accessible on
foot.
The data for this section were abstracted from the General Plans of the two Cities, the Forest Land
and Resource Management Plan, and the Forest Visitor Map for the San Bernardino National
38
RES 96-210
Forest.
Q.. Housinl'lDemographicsfSocioeconomics
With the exception of a few isolated residences and structures, the project area is comprised of
native and non-native vegetation communities that can be characterized as dependent upon periodic
fires to govern the pattern of vegetation. Accordingly, the population is small within the project
area, consisting of fewer than 100 residents. Aside from these few residences, the only
functioning economic or social activities are those religious activities conducted at the old
Arrowhead Springs Hotel. Otherwise the project area consists of private and public owned land
that has not been developed. As noted above, the private land within the project area would
permit residential land uses at low density as controlled hy Hillside overlay requirements. Forest
Service land is designated for watershed and wildland management which does not currently
include any economic or social activities within the project area, except limited grazing leases.
The data for this section were abstracted from the General Plans of the two Cities and the Forest
Land and Resource Management Plan.
F... Public Services
Law enforcement service is provided to the project area by the City of San Bernardino Police
Department, the County Sheriff (both independently and under contract to the City of Highland),
and the California Highway Patrol. On National Forest land, cooperative law enforcement
agreements with local law enforcement agencies is used to assist Forest Officers in dealing with
criminal activities on public land in the National Forest. No information on the level of criminal
activity within the project area is available, but due to lack of facilities and difficulty of access,
the amount of law enforcement demand is expected to be low at the present time.
Fire protection service is provided by three agencies: the City of San Bernardino Fire Department,
the California Department of Forestry (under contract to the County and the City of Highland),
and the Forest Service. Mutual aid agreements between these agencies and others statewide
provide the resources necessary to respond to large wildland fires. As described in the project
description, the project area is considered to be a very high fire hazard zone due to the type of
vegetation, topography, and urban interface. The project area has been burned several times since
the turn of the century and wildland fires occur within the general area each year. The last major
fire within the project area was the Panorama Fire in 1980. In 1979 and 1980 disastrous fires
burned the majority of project area as shown in Figure 16.
The Forest Service is conducting small prescribed burns as part of a Forest-wide vegetation
management program. The most recent prescribed burn was in the Bailey Canyon area, on about
100 acres located in the northwest portion of the project area.
The data for this section were abstracted from the General Plans of the two Cities, the San
39
RES 96-210
.'
"
Bernardino General Plan Technical Background Report, and the Forest Land and Resource
Management Plan.
Q.. Land 1I se
The land use designations within the project area and current land use has already been described.
The land use designations on private land consist of low density residential uses that must comply
with Hillside overlay requirements. Public flood control uses are also established within some of
the larger stream channels on private land. The National Forest designation for the project area
consists of watershed and wildlife management. The vast percentage of the land within the project
area consists of native and non-native vegetated areas with grazing being permitted on a portion
of the public land within the project area. Development consists of a few isolated residences,
public facilities (such as roads, power distribution lines; flood control facilities, State Aqueduct
facilities, and water supply facilities and storage reservoirs), and the old Arrowhead Springs Hotel
complex.
The data for this section were abstracted from the General Plans of the two Cities, the San
Bernardino General Plan Technical Background Report, the Forest Land and Resource
Management Plan, and field observations.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF PROPOSED ACTION, ALTERNATIVES,
AND MITIGATION MEASURES
A... Geology Soils and Geologic Ha7ards
Impacts of the Proposed Project
I. Soils
The proposed project will consist of controlled burns and/or mechanical vegetation management
activities on approximately 4,500 acres over a period of five or more years. The areas selected
for vegetation management are generally depicted on Figures 3 through 8 of this document. The
overall effect of these management activities will be to reduce, but not eliminate, the dense cover
of chaparral shrubs that pose the greatest fire hazard within the project area. The following
impacts to soil resources are forecast to occur if the proposed project is implemented:
The soil surface will experience some crusting as a result of controlled burns. Based on past
experience with controlled burns, this crusting will not be permanent or pervasive. By conducting
a controlled burn under prescribed conditions, rather than allowing an intense burn associated with
a major wildfire, the chaparral plants can sprout from the crown above the soil. Experience with
controlled burns indicates that annuals and shrubs will begin to grow immediately following the
next rain and a new vegetation cover will be established. The soil crust does not last for more
than one season and the soil experiences a nominal benefit from the minerals returned from the
40
RES 96-210
ash layer over the soil.
The biggest soil impact is the potential for erosion of soil following the controlled burn. In
particular, the Forest Service has developed a set of best management practices to control erosion
following a controlled burn. These measures include limiting the area burned so that length of
slope for accumulation of surface runoff is limited, maintaining vegetation surrounding the burn
area to capture any sediment in transport and act as a seed bank for revegetation, installing water
bars on disturbed soils, and maintaining substantial organic matter at the burn site because of the
burn conditions. These best management practices have been successful for controlled burn areas
so that overall erosion potential is minimized to a manageable level in contrast to the severe
erosion that follows a major wildfire where all organic matter is destroyed by combustion, no
limits are established ,on accumulation of surface runoff, and no vegetation is left to capture
sediment from burned areas.
If erosion exceeds acceptable levels based on past experience, remedial actions can be undertaken
to reseed areas, restore eroded slopes and remove sediment accumulations within stream channels.
The following measure will be implemented if required:
IV_A. I. Remedial erosion con/rol measures as outlilled above will be implemented if inspections followillg the first three
stonrrs of the rainy seasoll indicate significant erosioll damage and/or downstream sediment dmnage to the tnilill
stream in the local draiMge.
The CienebalRock outcrop soil complex is adapted to and supports the fire climax chaparral plant
community. It is not considered suitable for agriculture purposes and is a poor soil for
development because it is shallow and includes outcrops of bedrock at or near the surface. The
proposed project is not forecast to cause loss of significant productive soils. Past experience
demonstrates that the chaparral plant community will emerge from a controlled burn to
reestablished itself and to protect the continued formation of soil over the long term. No
mitigation is required.
For areas that will undergo mechanical vegetation management (including removal of vegetation,
maintenance of established fire/fuel breaks. and creation of new fire/fuel breaks), the agencies
have indicated that large equipment will not be used for such programs. Field crews with
appropriate equipment, such as backhoes, chain saws and similar equipment, will be used to
conduct these vegetation management activities. Aside from foot and vehicle traffic over such
areas, no additional soil disturbance is proposed and no potential for significant impact to soils in
areas maintained with mechanical means is forecast to occur. Use of standard best management
practices along fire/fuel breaks can prevent the inception of erosion and since complete vegetation
removal will not occur, the ground cover will remain in place to minimize raindrop erosion and
wind erosion.
Overall, the effects to soil of implementing the proposed vegetation management program is not
forecast to cause significant damage to soil resources. One mitigation measure has been proposed
41
I RES 96-210
to control erosion/sedimentation effects if the standard best management practices are not
successful in controlling this soil impact.
2. Geology and Geologic Hazards
No direct ground disturbance is forecast to occur as a result of implementing the proposed project,
and no potential for damage to existing geologic resources is forecast to occur. Of all the geologic
hazards, the proposed vegetation management actions have no potential to be affected by or to
affect any geotechnical hazard of those that occur in the project area. A careful review of the
proposed controlled burn locations (Figure 3-8) indicates that none of them are proposed on areas
with known landslides. It should be noted that the proposed controlled burn areas have been
burned in the past and have not demonstrated any landslide potential based on existing
information. Since all the'proposed action will'affectonly the area 'above ground surface, no
geologic or geologic hazard impacts are forecast to occur if the project is implemented and no
mitigation is proposed.
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
The no project alternative would elinrinate any controlled burn or other vegetation management
activities. Adverse soil and geologic resource impacts would be elinrinated and short-term potential
for soil ero&on would also be elinrinated. The long-term effect of not implementing any vegetation
management program in the project area would be a catastropmc burn at some undefined point in the
future With related &gnificant damage to the soil from elinrinating all vegetation cover over a large
area, damage from heavy equipment used to control a wildfire, crusting the soil, expo&ng long slopes
to raindrop ero&on, and subsequent downstream ero&on and sedimentation from larger volumes of
surface runoff The net effect of adopting the no project alternative would be to incur significant soil
impacts. Impacts to geologic resources and hazards would not be &gnificant, unless the loss of
vegetation cover in areas prone to landslides contributed to initiation of new landslides. The effects
of the no project alternative over the long-term are considered to be &gnificant and more adverse to
soil resources than the effects of implementing the proposed project.
Ii. Surface Runoff and Flood Hazards
Several of the proposed controlled bum areas are shown as encompassing stream channels which are
subject to identified flood hazards. The agencies managing the controlled burns and the mechanical
vegetation management efforts have indicated at public meetings that areas With riparian habitat will
not be included in any future areas subject to vegetation management. For this reason all vegetation
management areas will be excluded from flood hazard areas associated With streams passing through
the project area. The following measure will be implemented by the agencies:
IVB.I All stream channels will be excluded from the vegetation management program, and boundaries for the areas
selected for controlled burns or mechanical vegetation management will be selected to minimize any direct or
indirect effect on stream channels and related riparian vegetation.
42
RES 96-210
Through implementation of tills measure all direct impacts of the proposed project to or from flood
hazards can be elinrinated.
Surface runoff from the larger areas subject to controlled burns will generate additional runoff
because the vegetation cover will be reduced. For this reason the size of controlled burn area will
be linrited to pernrit the surface runoff from increa&ng to the point that &gnificant ero&on damage
occurs. The standard best management practices will be implemented by the agencies, and nritigation
measure IV.A.l will also be implernented if the increased surface runoff over the short-term causes
&gnificant ero&on damage. Based on past experience, the revegetation of the control burned areas
with a chaparral plant community after one or two years will ensure that no long-term ero&on impacts
are caused. No other adverse impacts from the vegetation management program effects on surface
runoff are forecast to .occur.,
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
As in the case with soils and geology, the selection the no project alternative will elinrinate any short-
term exposure of managed areas to flood hazard and increased nmof[ Over the long-term the project
area will experience catastrophic fires that can burn riparian areas, elinrinating the riparian vegetation
communities, and &gnificantly increase the potential for ero&on and sediment damage in areas
downstream of such catastropmc burn areas. The effects of the no project alternative over the long-
term are con&dered to be significant and more adverse than the effects on surface water and flood
.hazards of implementing the proposed project.
c.. Fire Hazards
Impact of the Proposed Project
The proposed project will reduce wildland fire hazards. Based on the program outlined in this
document, the vegetation management program will significantly reduce wildland fire hazards at the
urban/wildland interface throughout the project area. Tills is the purpose of the program and it is
con&dered a significant benefit of the project.
Questions have been raised regarding the potential for a controlled burn to escape and cause a larger,
more damaging fire. Such a potential does exist, but it is very remote given the planning effort
outlined in the project description and given the fire management resources maintained at a controlled
burn site. If a controlled burn does escape from its established boundaries, the management agencies
must provide the resources required to suppress the fire. Any damage claims resulting from such a
circumstance would be negotiated With the agencies, either directly or through the court system.
Based on the intense planning effort that must precede a controlled burn, the proposed vegetation
management program is not forecast to cause a significant fire hazard. The mechanical vegetation
activities pose little or no fire hazard, partially because of the type of activities and partially because
of the presence of fire suppression equipment With the hand crews.
43
RES 96-210
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
Implementation of the no project alternative will contnllUte to greater future wildland fire hazards and
the potential to damage urban development at the urban wildland interface. If the mghly combustible
vegetation located Within the project area is not managed through controlled burns and mechanical
means, at some point in the future the failure to create and maintain fire/fuel breaks, reduce vegetation
loadings at the interface, and to create a vegetation mosaic that as&sts in suppres&on of wildland fires
will lead to a catastropmc fire that will damage both the wildland habitat and the urban facilities
located at the urbanlwildland interface. Tills is con&dered to be a &gnificant adverse effect of the no
project alternative. Tills conclusion is not to imply that catastrophic Wildland fires will not occur in
the future on the front of the San Bernardino Mountains. What is forsaken by not implementing the
proposed project, i.e. implementing the no project alternative, is the ability to better contain and
preventcatastropmc fires in the future Within the project area."
D... Noise
Impact of the Proposed Project
Implementation of the proposed project will not cause any increase in permanent background'noise
levels Within the project area. On a day when a controlled burn or mechanical vegetation
management activities are being conducted, local noise levels will be increased by vemcles and
possibly helicopters. The number ofvemcles is small, less than 20, and the period when noise levels
will be increased is very short. Vegetation management activities involving use of chain saws may
cause some annoyance over short periods, but these activities would be restricted to daylight hours.
Given the linrited number of vemcIes and the very short duration of the activities, no potential for
significant noise impacts Within the project area are forecast to occur.
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
The no project alternative would elinrinate the short-term noise associated With conducting the
vegetation management program Over the long-term, more noise could be generated in responding
to a catastropmc wildland fire, but even when such an event occurs the noise from activities is short-
term and is not forecast to cause a &gnificant noise impact to the residences located near the project
area.
E... Aviation Safety
Impacts of the Proposed Project
It is pos&ble that controlled burns could affect hang-gliding activities at the Crestline launch point,
and when any controlled bwns are conducted in tills area, the launch point should be closed or hang-
gliding organizations should be informed of the activities. Other than tills direct effect, the only
aviation safety issue related to the proposed project would be use of helicopters to assist With ignition
44
RES 96-210
of the controlled burns. A remote potential exists for a support helicopter to experience a forced
landing, but such a random occurrence is not possible to forecast. Such an event can be anticipated
and adequate resources can be made available to respond to such a circumstance, such as pre-
identiJying landing areas. No potential for significant aviation safety effects is forecast if the project
is implemented.
Impact of the No Project Alternative
Implementation of the no project alternative would elinrinate potential short-term aviation safety
impacts. However, the same and greater hazards would result when a catastropmc fire occurs in the
future. More aircraft would be used to suppress an uncontrolled Wildfire and the potential for safety
hazards to aircraft would be greater,under such a clrcwnstance. No &gnificant aviation safety issues
would be created by implementing tills alternative.
E.. HazardouslRadioactive Materials
Impacts of the Proposed Project
No radioactive materials would be used in support of this project, therefore, no potential impacts
from radioactive materials can occur if the project is implemented. The ouly hazardous materials used
in conducting the vegetation management program will be petroleum fuels and any incendiary devices
used to start the fires. Equipment used for controlled burns or for access to areas being mechanically
treated will be fueled at staging locations, not Within the proposed burn area. However, should an
accidental release of petroleum material occur, the following nritigation measure will be implemented:
IV.F.) If a hazardous or toxic substance is released during implementation a/the vegetation management program,
the agencies shall properly c/ean~up and remove any contaminated soil or other material; restore the affected
area /0 background condilio", or to regulatory threshold levels for the contaminant(s) released; and deliver the
contaminated material to an appropriate treatment, recycling. or landfill facility in accordance with the
regulatio", for the type of contaminant accidentally released and col/ected for management.
With implementation of tills measure, the potential for &gnificant damage from use of hazardous
materials at the project site are considered nonsignificant.
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
Implementation of the no project alternative would remove any potential for release of hazardous
materials over the short-term. When a catastropmc fire occurs in the future, the potential for
accidental releases will also occur and poses a comparable level of impact to the proposed project.
Q.. Biological Resources
Impacts of the Proposed Project
45
RES 96-210
.
Extensive research has been conducted on use offire, and other, vegetation management techniques.
In developing its fire management prescriptions for chaparral areas Within the San Bernardino
National Forest, the adopted Land and Resource Management Plan included actions to create "A
mosaic of age classes in chaparral....by the fifth decade, primarily through prescribed burn treatments.
The intensive integrated chaparral treatments provide resources benefits for wildlife, watershed, and
range, in additional to fire protection." (Page II-57, FEIS) The Final Environmental Impact
Statement on the San Bernardino National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan concluded
that "Opportunities exist to improve the diversity of the chaparral type over the next fifty years
through prescribed fire treatments. Tills can be accomplished through coordination With the
California Department ofFish and Game, the California Department of Forestry, and county or other
local jurisdictions. "
Further, on page IV-I8' of the FEIS the'folloWing conclusion is Teached: ''Chaparral can' be managed
with prescnbed fire and other treatments to produce a more demable fuel arrangement, to produce
forage for range animal.., to enhance wildlife habitat, and to provide for healthy, vigorous ecosystems
and watersheds over time. The benefits are particularly &gnificant in sen&tive watersheds such as
those which are sources of municipal water, Wild trout streams and mgh Wildlife productivity." And
on page IV-19, ''In addition to the resource benefits derived from chaparral management, scientists
believe that the adverse effects of huge, mgh-inten&ty Wildfires in chaparral can be reduced by
managing the arrangement of young stands and preventing old stands from developing in large,
continuous expanses of even-aged vegetation. .....Therefore, a watershed that contains a variety of
age classes will not be completely denuded in each wildfire event, thus reducing the potential for
downstream flood damage." And finally, on page IV-I 0 I, the EIS concludes: "Direct wildlife habitat
improvement would average 3,900 acres treated per year. Most of this would be the result of
prescribed burning in chaparral vegetation."
Two concepts are essential to an understanding the potential environIllental effects of the proposed
vegetation management plan. These are: I) fires will vi&t the project area at some time in the future,
either under controlled or uncontrolled conditions; and 2) most of the plant communities are fire
adapted and when these communities are protected for extended periods (20-25 years), the plant
diversity diminishes and Wildlife habitat value declines. Additionally, when a catastropmc wildland
fire bums through an even aged stand of chaparral the potential for type conver&on (chaparral to
grassland) is greater because the heat and damage from the fire can cause the loss of rootstock and
the loss of resources to replenishment the original habitat. When these factors are considered, the
weight of the evidence clearly indicates that the proposed vegetation management program, including
both prescnbed burns and mechanical treatments, will enhance plant community diversity and wildlife
habitat value in these fire adapted communities. Thus, from an overall standpoint, the proposed
vegetation management program is not considered an adverse impact to the biological resources
Within the project area.
Given tms broad picture, it is also clear that certain specific habitats contain and support sensitive
plant and animal resources in their present condition that are not fire adapted communities, or wmch
may be currently occupied by sensitive animal and plant species. As previously stated, riparian areas
46
RES 96-210
will be excluded from any project vegetation management activities. Through avoidance of tills
sensitive habitat which occurs throughout the project area, the &gnificant riparian habitat values
Within the project area will be protected and retained for future.
The most difficult plant community, and related biological issues, to address Within the project area
is also the most extensive, Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS). Tills community is fire adapted and in some
locations it has become so mature as to be senescent. Where the age class of CSS is uniform, some
of its habitat value will be dimini.hed. Further, if an uncontrolled wildland fire burns through this
habitat, all habitat values will be lost and natural regeneration will be dimini.hed by pos&ble
destruction of seeds and roots due to the inten&ty of such a fire or due to the lack of adjacent source
areas for seeds and vegetative material.
This habitat contains the majority of sen&tive plant and animal species, including the federally listed
coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica). Several areas Within the project
area are identified as having the appropriate habitat (plants and community structure) necessary to
support this small bird. The understanding of the Gnatcatcher's habitat requirements is not sufficient
to evaluate and forecast whether the proposed vegetation management program's effects on the
habitat will benefit, or adversely impact, it. In a recent publication by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, "A Status Review of the California Gnatcatcher" (Salata March 1991) it was noted that
"recent fires consumed 6,500 acres of coastal sage scrub vegetation occupied, in part, by California
gnatcatcher. High fire frequency and the lag period associated With recovery of the vegetation may
significantly reduce the viability of affected subpopulations." (Page 7) Although &gnificant
populations of this bird are not known to occur within the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains,
the potential exists to adversely impact it by implementing the proposed vegetation management
program.
It is assumed that, where the Gnatcatcher forages and nests in the project area CSS habitat, such
areas must be avoided to ensure that no incidental take of tills bird will occur. Recent data indicates
that the Gnatcatcher is not a routine inhabitant of the project area. A review of recent biological
studies in surrounding areas have included some &tings over the past five years, but no nesting or
permanent occupancy has been verified.
No Coastal California Gnatcatchers have been observed in the project area, but it has not been
possible to conduct an investigation throughout the project area in accordance With U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) survey protocols. Most important at tills stage of review is that habitat
capable of supporting tms bird has been identified Within the project"area and until a field survey in
accordance With the FWS protocols is conducted, no controlled burn will be allowed Within the
coastal sage scrub habitat. Tills avoidance of CSS will not be permanent, but will be implemented
by the fire management agencies implementing the vegetation management program as long as an area
is occupied (passing through, foraging, inhabiting or nesting) by the Gnatcatcher.
Based on the existing management data and in conformance with the assumption that the project area
will experience an uncontrolled wildland fire at some point in the future, it is assumed that creation
47
RES 96-210
.
of vegetation mosaics Within the CSS plant community will not adversely impact any local population
because of the benefit attained through reducing the potential of a catastropmc, uncontrolled Wildfire
that could destroy all or a majority of the CSS community Within the project area. Creation of a
mosaic pattern of different ages ofCSS represents the best opportunity to prevent the significant fire
damage in the area and has a potential to enhance overall habitat quality in a manner comparable to
that for the Chanrise Chaparral plant community. Under this assumption, the fire agencies will
implement either of the following programs to nritigate direct impacts on occupied habitat while
undertaking vegetation management actions de&gned to enhance Gnatcatcher habitat and reduce
&gnificant Wildland fire hazards over the long term:
IV.G.I At the beginning of each subsequent yea" planning period (assume January of each new year), the fire agencies
shall identifY the areas that are proposed to undergo prescribed bums. For those areas that cOn/ain Coastal
Sage Scrub that is suitable habitat for the.gnatcatcher. a survey conforming to the FWS protocols shall be
performed. If inhabited, no prescribed bums shall be conducted in the proposed bum area. until afier the
nesting season. September I of each year. If uninhabited, the prescribed bum shall be conducted afier the
completion of surveys to the satisfaction of the FWS. The decision to proceed with a prescribed bum shall be
implemented only afier conferring with the FWS and receipt of approval to proceed.
IV.G.2 For areas of immediate fire hazard concern, such as Location #?, the fire agencies shall consider creating a
buffer area through mechanical vegetation management, such as mowing or hand removal of vegetation. This
mechanical vegetation management shall be conducted following the nesting season and shall be reviewed and
approved by the FWS prior to action.
Based on the data available for the biological resources that occur Within the project area, the
implementation of the proposed vegetation management program, in conformance With the nritigation
measures outlined above, will not cause &gnificant adverse biological resource impacts.
Impact of the No Project Alternative
Implementation of the no project alternative would elinrinate potential short-term effects from loss
of habitat following a controlled burn or mechanical vegetation treatment. The plant community
diversity and Wildlife habitat benefits of the proposed program would be lost by implementing this
alternative. In addition, the same and greater impacts to all of the biological resources discussed in
this section would result when a catastropmc fire occurs in the future. Based on the data literature
available regarding fire adapted communities, this alternative could cause significant biological
resource impacts if implemented.
H. CulturalJPaleontologic Resources
Impacts of the Proposed Project
The cultural resources evaluation of the project area identified linrited cultural resources Within the
project area and most of these were associated With the stream canyons that pass through the project
area. As noted in the discus&on on flood hazards, these areas will be avoided wmch further reduces
the potential to damage cultural resources. The proposed vegetation management program is not
48
RES 96-210
forecast to &gnificantly impact cultural resources due to the linrited ground disturbance that will
occur, generally low cultural resource value Within the project area, and avoidance of those areas
wmch have the highest potential for resources. Based on the data provided in Appendix 3, the
potential cultural resource impact of the proposed project is forecast to be non&gnificant.
Impact of the No Project Alternative
The short-term effect of implementing the no project alternative would be to avoid the pos&bility of
adversely affecting an unknown cultural resource Within a vegetation management area. Over the
long-term future fires would affect the project area and could ,adversely ,effect riparian areas where
a mgher potential for cultural resources exists.
1.. Air Ouality
Impacts of the Proposed Project
In 1994 the California Air Resources Board (CARD) published the "Forest Management Bunring
Handbook" wmch outlines the conditions under wmch controlled burns can be implemented while
minimizing adverse air quality impacts. According to this pamphlet, the smoke from a fire con&sts
. of carbon dioxide, water vapor, particulates, including particulates that contain volatile organic
compounds, and carbon monoxide. As noted the affected environIllent discussion, controlled bunring
in the South Coast Air Ba&n (SCAB) is governed by Rule 444, Open Fires. Controlled bunring is
a pennitted activity when an implementation plan has been subnritted to and approved by the South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD or District). Pernrissive burn days are established
by the CARB and the District and represent days on wmch meteorologists have determined that
weather conditions will allow the smoke to rise up and disperse. Since controlled burns must be
conducted on such days, it is presumed that controlled burns will not cause a significant adverse
impact. Further, &nee the implementation plan nrust include a definition of acceptable controlled burn
meteorology and this plan nrust be approved prior to conducting a burn under Rule 444, no additional
nritigation is required to ensure that adverse health impacts are not caused by conducting the
controlled burns. Given the few vemcles, approximately 20, wmch drive to the burn site which
usually involves less than 20 nriles of travel per vehicle (400 nriles during a day), enrission from
vehicles is not considered to pose a &gnificant impact to air quality as it would fall well below the
thresholds contained in the District's CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
The short-term effect of implementing the no project alternative is to elinrinate the smoke enris&ons
from the controlled burns and mobile source enrissions from support vemcles. Over the long-term,
a catastropmc fire creates uncontrolled smoke enrissions wmch have a much mgher probability to
significantly affect not only local air quality, but air quality throughout thl; SCAB. The long-term air
49
RES 96-210
..
.'
quality impacts of the no project alternative are con&dered &gnificantly adverse.
L Water SupplylWater Ouality
Impacts of the Proposed Project
No controlled burns are proposed in Devil Canyon wmch is the ouly major surface water supply in
the project area being utilized by the water pUlVeyors in the project area. The potential to adversely
impact surface water supplies is con&dered non&gnificant. Controlled burns allow the creation of
a vegetation mosaic that prevents catastropmc burns that can eliminate much or all of the vegetation
within a drainage ba&n. The linrited amount of ash that gets washed into surface water runoff from
a controlled bum &te is not con&dered to &gnificantly deteriorate surface water quality. The de&gn
of a controlled . burn minimi7.esdistances over'which surface-runoff can -accumulate so the transport
of ash from a controlled bum &te is linrited due to the small size of such &tes and to the management
controls used to minimi7.e the volume surface runoff Based on the proposed burn areas shown in
Figures 3-8 and the de&gn requirements for such area, the potential for water quality impacts is
con&dered to be non&gnificant.
Impact of the No Project Alternative
The short-term effect of implementing the no project alternative is to eliminate the potential for
degrading water quality and adversely affecting surface water supplies from the controlled burn areas.
Over the long-term, a catastropmc fire creates uncontrolled fire damaged areas wmch have a much
higher probability to significantly affect water quality in surface streams pas&ng through a burned
area. The long-term water supply and quality impacts of the no project alternative are considered
significantly adverse.
K. Open Space/Recreation/Visual
Impacts of the Proposed Project
Controlled bums will create bum scars on the lower foothills which form the backdrop for the Cities
of San Bernardino and Highland. Such scars naturally heal quickly Within the chaparral plant
community and because fires occur each year, they are a part of the visual mosaic setting which
comprises the project area. Within a short time after the rain season begins grasses grow and the
chaparral plants sprout from the root system which is not destroyed by a relatively cool burning
controlled burn. The proposed controlled burns will be conducted over a several year period With
linrited acreage being bumed each year at different locations Within the project area. The vegetation
management program effect on the visual setting is not forecast to be significantly adverse based on
the existing visual setting, the size of proposed controlled burns and mechanical vegetation
management activities, and the length of time over wmch these activities will be conducted.
Open space values of the project area will not be altered by conducting the controlled burns. No
50
RES 96-210
changes in land use are proposed or associated With the proposed vegetation management program.
No new access roads will be constructed in support of these activities. Recreation potential of the
project is linrited due to difficulty of access and it will not be altered by the proposed project. Overall
effect of the proposed project will be to retain managed portions of the project area as visual (passive)
open space and to maintain the project area as a linrited access, hiking and hunting area.
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
The no project alternative would elinrinate the short-term scarring from controlled burns. The
existing visual setting would not be altered. The access to areas proposed for vegetation management
would decline gradually liS the den&ty of vegetation would increase over time making inaccessible
areas that are currently accessible. Over the long-term the visual scarring associated' With a
catastropmc fire would be much more &gnificant that the proposed project. As demonstrated by
natural revegetation of the Panorama Fire area, this scarring is a short-term impact that would be
&gnificant ouly due to the scope and extent of the area on the mountain exhI'biting scarring. Since
the majority of the project area con&sts of chaparral plant community wmch is adapted to fire, the
long-term visual impact of even a catastropmc is not con&dered &gnificant.
L. Mineral Resources
Impacts of the Proposed Project
The project area is located out&de of any significant mineral resource zones, so the proposed project
has no potential to adversely effect such resources.
Impact of the No Project Alternative
The short- and long-term effect of implementing the no project alternative is con&dered
non&gnificant. No mineral resources would be adversely impacted by implementing tills alternative.
M. Utilities Tnrrastructure
Impacts of the Proposed Project
The vast majority of the project area does not contain significant utility infrastructure systems. Within
the proposed controlled burn areas, the only utility infrastructure that may be impacted includes some
water lines and some electric power distribution lines. The following measure shall be implemented
to ensure that existing infrastructure systems are not adversely impacted by the proposed project:
lV.M.l Prior tofinalizing prescribed burn plam, the agencies shall identify all utility resources that are located within
a proposed controlled burn or mechanical vegetation management area. The agencies 3haJ/ confer with the
respomible utility regarding the infrastructure and if the infrastructure may be damaged by the proposed
vegetation management program, the area shall be excluded from the management area. Alternatively, revising
51
RES 96-210
..
.'
the management plan to ensure that the infrastructure w/l/ not be damaged to the satisfaction of the utility would
al/ow the vegetation management plan to proceed.
An example ofa revised vegetation management plan would be to substitute mechanical removal of
vegetation beneath a power line rather than including the area in a controlled burn. With
implementation of the above measure, damage to utility infrastructure Within the project area can be
avoided.
A&de from u&ng linrited volumes of water (four water tankers With 5,000 gallons apiece would
typically be available for an individual controlled burn), the proposed project would not place any
demand upon other utility infrastructure (i.e., wastewater collection and treatment, solid waste,
electricity, natural gas, or telecotmmmications systems). The consumption of20,000 of water several
times per. year would.not add significantly to the. existing cumulative demand,Wifuin the project area
wmch consumes an average of 50 nrillion gallons per day.
One possible exception to the utility system impact would be to the storm drain/flood control
facilities. Sedimentation from uncontrolled ero&on could adversely impacts such facilities.
Mitigation measure IV.A 1 is designed to ensure that no &gnificant damage to such facilities results
from the vegetation management program. Any &gnificant erosion or sedimentation that affects a
storm drain or flood control facility would be nritigated by the agencies. With implementation of
these measures, the potential direct or indirect impacts to utility systems is forecast to be
nonsignificant.
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
In the short-term the no project alternative can not impact the existing infrastructure in the project
area and will not place any demand on infrastructure. Over the long-term a catastropmc wildland fire
can damage infrastructure systems Within the fire's area of impact due to the uncontrolled nature of
such fires. Demand for water resources during an uncontrolled fire at the urban/wildland interface
would be substantially greater than for the proposed project, although still nonsignificant in the
overall scheme of water consumption Within the region. Also, storm drain/flood control facility
impacts could be significantly from a future uncontrolled Wildland fire and no agency would have
assumed responsibility for nritigation such impacts as is the case for the proposed project.
R Tran!lPortation/Circulation
Impacts of the Proposed Project
No transportation/circulation effects will result from implementing the proposed project. The
proposed controlled burns do not encompass important routes of travel that are used every day and
no new roads or routes of access are proposed to be created by the vegetation management program
The orderly flow of vemcles to the controlled burns ensures that emergency response vemcles will
not cause a significant effect on traffic flow.
52
RES 96-210
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
No short- or long-term transportation/circulation impacts are forecast to occur if the project is
implemented at proposed. It is possible that a catastropmc wildland fire could disrupt traffic, and
llistorical1y has disrupted traffic, on State Highways 330 and 18 in the project area. However, these
impacts are short-term and are not considered significant transportation/circulation impacts.
Q.. HousinglDernog:rl\Pmc~Socioecononrics
Impacts of the Proposed Project
The benefit to the community from implementing thepropasedvegetation management program is
the protection from destruction of housing and other resources in and adjacent to Wildlands due to
a catastropmc fire. The total expenditure for the project is estimated to amount to about $425,000.
Tills provides protection to re&dents for an extended period of time (about 15 years) and elinrinates
the potential for &gnificant loss of homes and related infrastructure. Tills project will not alter the
potential for development ofhou&ng Within the project area. The Hill&de development standards
Within both cities will remain the same and the fire hazard nritigation requirements are a part of each
City's Development Code. The proposed project is a form of preventative maintenance that is
forecast to have a &gnificant socioecononric benefit to the affected communities over the next decade
and a half by providing protection from incur&ons of a catastropmc wildland fire. No adverse
socioecononric impacts are forecast from implementing the proposed project.
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
The no project alternative does not provide any protection from catastrophic wildland fire hazard.
Until a catastrophic wildland fire on the order of the Panorama Fire (1980) occurs, the no project
alternative will not have any adverse impact on the socioecononric fabric of the communities. It is
when a disastrous fire occurs that these houses and residents Within the project area and immediately
south will incur &gnificant, perhaps devastating, socioecononric impacts. The no project alternative
does not incorporate any preventative maintenance component that can reduce the future wildland
fire hazards to residences in the project area and immediately south of it. Relative to the proposed
project, the no project alternative does not cause, but does allow, continued exposure to &gnificant
wildland fire hazards.
P. Public SeIVices
Impacts of the Proposed Project
The proposed project does not affect any public service resources except fire protection because the
proposed project will not place any demand on these services (law enforcement, schools, recreation,
etc.). Implementation of the proposed project allows the local fire agencies to implement Wise
managrnent to reduce or eliminate the risk of a catastropmc Wildland fire across the urban/Wildland
53
RES 96-210
interface in the Cities of San Bernardino and Highland. Tills management effort is one component
offulfilling the respon&bility if the local fire suppression agencies. Use of the resources cornnritted
to the proposed project represents a benefit to the communities, not a negative or adverse
environIllental impact.
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
The no project alternative would place no demand on any public service in the short-term Over the
long-term a catastropmc wildland fire could place &gnificant demand on the fire protection resources
ofloca1, state and federal agencies. During a disastrous fire, substantial demands are also placed on
law enforcement services to control access into fire damaged areas and to control the flow of traffic
and activity in threatened areas. The long-term effects on public services are con&dered significant,
particularly because the resources cornnritted to protect areas during a major wildland fire can reduce
response capability Within the communities due to lack of fire suppres&on resources or budget
constraints following such emergency responses.
Q.. Land Use
Impacts of the Proposed Project
The proposed project is the implementation of a vegetation management plan by the local fire
agencies With responsibility for the project area. No changes in land use de&gnation are proposed
and the initiation of actions to minimi7e the wildland fire hazard at the urban/wildland interface along
the front of the San Bernardino Mountains is consistent With the General Plans of both Cities.
At the public scoping meeting numerous comments were made regarding the possibility that the
implementation of the vegetation management plan would alter the fire hazards and enhance the
development potential of the private property along the wildland/urban interface in the City of San
Bernardino. In fact tms cannot occur as a result of implementing the proposed project.
fundamentally, the fire management agencies have only one primary goal from initiating this program
and that is to reduce the potential for public health and safety risks associated With wildland fire
hazards at the transition between the urban (actually suburban) development and chaparral covered
foothills with little or no development, i.e. wildlands. Tills high wildland fire hazard zone is codified
in the City's 1989 General Plan, Figure 61, which identifies ''Extreme'' and "High" fire hazard areas.
The constraints on land use at tms interface are discussed under Goal 15B of the General Plan
(including objectives, policies and implementation programs) and in the Hillside Management Overlay
District. At this time these land use management tools in the General Plan specifically control
development, and regardless of whether the vegetation management program is implemented,
residential development can be proposed, reviewed, and approved by the City's decision-makers
Within the project area in accordance with the land use guidelines contained in the General Plan. The
proposed project will not alter tms situation and, more importantly, it will not alter the fire hazard
54
RES 96-210
de&gnations and maps Within the City General Plan. The fire hazard is and will remain extreme or
high throughout the project area and the proposed vegetation management program's ouly
consequence will be to reduce the severity of fire hazard to wmch existing residential areas in the
north end of the City will be exposed. The City of Highland has &nlllar General Plan requirements
outlined under Health and Safety Element Goal 1 and Objective 1.3.
No potential for &gnificant land use impact is forecast to occur if the proposed vegetation
management program is implemented.
Impacts of the No Project Alternative
The no project alternative is not forecast to have any impact on land use over the short- or long-term.
R. Cumulative Impacts
The proposed vegetation management program does not contribute to any identified significant
cumulative impacts as outlined in the discussions above. Over a period of about five years an
estimated 4,500 acres may undergo controlled burns or mechanical vegetation management. The
vegetation management program will be restricted to the chaparral fire climax community. This
community restores itself after approximately three to four years and this plant community is
forecast to return to its present condition over a 15-year period. No potential for significant
cumulative loss of this plant community is forecast to occur based on the proposed vegetation
management program.
V. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION
A.. Scoping
A public scoping meeting was held in the City of San Bernardino on March 12, 1996. The
meeting was noticed in the local newspaper with a display advertisement and notices sent to
agencies and property owners in the vicinity of the project. The meeting was attended by
approximately 20 persons, including private residents and agency participants. Comments
presented at the scoping meeting were considered in this EA/IS. No written comments were
received in response to the notice.
Ii.. Ongoing Consultation
Ongoing consultation has proceeded with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad office,
and the U. S. Forest Service, San Bernardino National Forest.
55
RES 96-210
c... Persons and Agencies Contacted or Consulted
Ms. Valerie Ross, City of San Bernardino Planning and Building Services Department
Mr. Michael Conrad, U. S. Forest Service, San Bernardino National Forest
Mr. Dan Snow, U. S. Forest Service, San Bernardino National Forest
Mr. Steven Lowe, U. S. Forest Service, San Bernardino National Forest
Mr. Doug Forrest, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
Mr. James Burns, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Mr. Richard McGreevy, City of San Bernardino Fire Department
Mr. Al Bailey, City of San Bernardino Fire Department
Mr. Robert Ferry, California Office of Emergency Services
Mr. Bruce Love, CRM TECH
Mr. Steve Laughlin, Federal Emergency'Management Agency, Region IX
Mr. Leo Levenson, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region IX
VI. LIST OF PREPARERS
Tom Dodson
Lisa Kegarice
VII. REFERENCES
City ofHigbland. 1990. Interim General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Rc:port for the City
of Highland.
City of San Bernardino. 1989. City of San Bernardino General Plan.
City of San Bernardino. 1989. City of San Bernardino General Plan U.pdate Technical Background
Report.
City of San Bernardino. 1991. Paradise Hills Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Rc:port.
City of San Bernardino. 1995. Santa Fe "A" Yard Final Envrronmental ITl1pact Rc:port.
City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department. 1994. "Annual Water Quality Report".
City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department. 1992. Devil Canyon Watershed Sanitary
SUlvey.
Division of Mines and Geology. 1994. Fault Activity Map ofCalifomia and Adiacent Areas.
.56
IRES 9b-2ro
Division of Mines and Geology. 1986. Geologic MllP of the San Bernardino Quadrangle. Scale
1'250 000.
Dutcher and Garrett. 1963. Geologic and Hydrologic Features of the San Bernardino Area
California. Geological Survey Water-Sqpply Paper 1419.
East Valley Water District. 1994. "Annual Water Quality Report".
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. 1993. Inland Feeder PrQject Final
Environmental Tnwact Rc:port and Environmental Assessment.
Soil Conservation Ser:vice. 1980. Soil Survey of San Bernardino County Southwestern Part
California
South Coast Air Quality Managrnent District. 1993. CEOA Air Duality Handbook.
South Coast Air Quality Management District. Current. Rules and R~gulations.
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1987. San Bernardino National Forest T .and and
Resource Management Plan.
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1987. San Bernardino National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement.
VIII.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
To be provided
IX. LIST OF MITIGATION MEASURES
Prelinrinary:
IV.A.I. Remedial erosion control meosures os outlined above will be implemellled if inspections following the first three
stonns of the rainy seoson indicate significalll erosion damage and/or downstream sediment damage to the main
stream in the local drai1U1ge.
IVR.I All stream channels will be excluded from the vegetation management program, and boundaries for the areas
selec/edfor controlled burns or mechanical vegetation management will be selected to minimize any direct or
indirect effect on stream channels and related riparian vegetation.
IVAI I Prior to finalizing prescribed bum plans, the agencies shall identifY all utility resources that are located within
a proposed control/ed burn or mechanical vegetation management area. The agencies shall confer with the
responsible utility regarding the infrastructure and if Ihe infraslructure may be damaged by the pro!,osed
vegetation managemelll program, the area shall be excluded from the management area. Alternatively, revising
57
RES 96-210
the management plan to emu", that the infrastructure will not be damaged to the satisfaction of the utility would
allow the vegetalion management plan to proceed.
X. LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure I
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17
Table 1
Table 2
Project Vicinity Map...................._...................................................Page 4
Project Vicinity Map........................................................................Page 5
Proposed Burn Areas.......................................................................Page 6
Proposed Burn Areas.......................................................................Page 7
Proposed Burn Areas.......................................................................Page 8
Proposed Burn Areas.......................................................................Page 9
Proposed Burn Areas... .........'.... ... ........ ..... ....... ...... ._.. ...... ....... ...... ...Page 10
Proposed Burn Areas.......................................................................Page 11
Soils Limitations Map...................... ............. ......... ................. ........ .Page 16
Major Local Fault Zone Map...........................................................Page 18
Liquefaction Susceptibility.............................................................. .Page 19
Potential Sub&dence Areas..............................................................Page 20
Slope Stability and Major Landslides..........................,.....................Page 21
100 - Year Floodplain......................................................................Page 22 ,
Flood Hazard Area~ydrology - Highland General Plan..................Page 23
Historic Fire Burn Areas..................................................................Page 25
Fire Hazard Areas.......... .......... ................ ........... .............. ......... ......Page 26
Ambient Air Quality Standards........................................................Page 32
Summary of Air Quality Data - San Berdo. Air Monitoring Station..Page 34
58
RES 96-210
APPENDIX 1
WASHINGTON INSTITUTE - LESSON OU1UNE
DATE: March 27, 1989
COURSE: Principles of Prescribed Fire
INSTRUCTOR: Gordon Schmidt
UNIT:
LESSON: Prescribed Fire Planning, The Plan, Process, and Objectives
SUGGESTED TIME: 2.0 hours
OBJECTIVES: Upon successful completion of this ,lesSon the. student will be, able to:
1. Describe the major components of a prescribed fire plan.
2. Describe the major steps in preparing a prescribed fire plan.
3.
Recognize an acceptable prescribed fire planning document.
'-
I.
IN1RODUCTION
. .h
: :~ .
A
Informal discussion about a plan.
1. Ask questions at any time.
~:J
-1-'"
1,!l: !,
B.
Review objectives of the lesson.
"
..~ .'
/
C. Introduce major reference source, Plannin!! and Evaluatinl! Prescribed Fires - A
Standard Procedure. William C. Fischer, USDA, FS, GTR nn-43.
II. COMPONENTS OF A PRESCRIBED FIRE PLAN
A Definition of a plan
1. Review of this mornings discussion.
a. A problem solving document
B. Elements of a Rx Fire Plan
1. Treatment Area and Objectives
2. Fire Prescription
3. Burning Plan
4. Report
5. We will dissect each of these and look at them in depth.
III. TREATMENT AREA AND OBJECTIVES
1
RES 96-210
A Generalities
1. Purpose and Area Descriptions.
a. These are standard components of all plans and vary by the
project. The purpose of the plan is generally the same, to
provide guidance to the project. The treatment area of course is
described by the location and size of the area.
2. Land Management Objectives and Treatment Constraints.
a. I have seen these go sour many times. They may look like
motherhood and generalities, but pay close attention to them.
(1) It is in the disregard for these that management
inconsistencies are found. I have seen many burns which
have violated the constraints and objectives established for
land management in the area.
(a) Look to the EA- and LMP, especially the EA Do
what it says, and don't do what it says not to do.
i) We will look at an example of competing
objectives and constraints later on.
3. Treatment Objectives
a. This is a tricl.:y one. Generally, the objectives for treatment will
be of an interdisciplinary nature.
(1) So many plRnting spots per acre, so much brush killed, so
much resprouted, etc. And you might even hav:.> a fire
hazard reduction objective stated here, like reduce
flammability.
(2) The trick comes in turning these into meaningful
prescribed fire a=mplishments and fire characteristics.
(3) To the e~1C;Jt possible, quantify these. They will be much
easier to measure later on, in monitoring and evaluation.
IV. FIRE PRESCRIPTION
A Treatment Specifications
1. Desired a=mplishment
a. Here you specify what you want to see when you are through
burning. These are a direct offshoot of the Treatment Objectives.
Sometimes it is difficult to specify these but they must come from
the objectives.
2
.J.<.t;~ ~b-ZlO
2. Desired Fire Behavior
a. Now the question is what fire behavior will create the
accomplishment I specified above? This is not as easy as it
sounds.
(1) Research
(2) Experience and judgement
3. Required Environmental Conditions
a. What environment (weather) will create the fire behavior you
desire? This one mayor may not be easy depending on which
fire characteristic you want.
B. The Concept of a Prescription
1. What is a prescription?
a. FSM 5142.1 defines it as:
(1) A fire prescription, including weather factors and fL'~1
conditions, necessary to achieve desired fire behavior.
b. Region 5, FSM Prescribed Burn Plan shows the fire prescription
as a long list of weather elements.
c. The dictionary defines prescribe as:
(1) to lay down in writing 'n a course to be followed.
d. and prescription as:
(1) written directions for remedy
e. Historically speaking prescriptions were:
(1) predominately weather elements during which a burn
would be successful.
2. Given our advanced technology and experience in the use of fire, a
prescription can now be a more holistic concept than simply weather
ele.i1ents.
a. The prescnptlon should be considered as at least, treatment
objectives, desired fire behavior, and required environmental
conditions.
b. To be within a dictionary definition, the prescription would
3
~o
include all things necessary for "complete" directions on the
project. Thus, it may very well be thought of as the entire
Prescribed Fire Plan.
C. Preburn Monitoring and Evaluation (Post Burn Monitoring).
1. Fischer includes these two in a definition of prescription. Is that
necessary? The concept is that no plan is complete (that is no directions
are complete) without consideration of monitoring, both before so you
know when to go, and after, so you know when you have finished.
V. THE BURNING PLAN
A Burning' Plan vs. Prescribed Fire Plan '
1. Note the distinction here. A Burning Plan is really the operational plan
for attaining the desired fire behavior. A Prescribed Fire Plan is the
umbrella document. The Burning Plan is the set of directions on how to
conduct the operation.
B. Elements of a Burning Plan and Their Importance
1. Preparation for Burning
a. Who, what, when, where, why, and how?
2. Preburn Monitoring
a. The real value of specifying the required environmental conditions
is to get you out from behind your desk to see if the unit will
burn!
3. Ignition Suh.plan
a. Ignition affects the fire characteristics and in some burns you may
be able to control your accomplishments by controlling the fire
through ignition sequence and types.
4. Holding Sub-plan
a. Important aspect of the Burning Plan because you begin to
estimate how many people you will need to successfully burn.
Don't forget to include necessary initial attack resources for a
spot or slop-over.
5. Mop Up Sub-plan
a. Here is an important one. Do this one correctly. Most
prescribed burns escape during mop-up, very few escape during
ignition.
4
RES 96-210
(1) Be sure to consider patrol necessary to assure no escapes.
(2) Quantify your mop-up objectives if you can, in terms"of
time to complete.
(3) Your objective should be to never have to put a fire that
will go out by itself.
(a) Recognize that you must balance this objective
against the risk of escape due to incomplete mop-
up.
b. You will need a contingency plan in this section. Basically, it is
an initial attack plan should things, go awry after mop-up has
begun.
6. Evaluation and Cost Summary
a. Define your expectations for evaluations. And estimaie your costs
for this operational Burning Plan.
VI. TIlE REPORT
A The final report on the project is documentation of a=mplishment and fire
prescriptions (a:tual conditions). It will serve as a useful future reference.
Include actual weather, fire behavior, costs, environmental conditions, and your
recommendations.
vTI. A CASE EXAMPLE OF DEVELOPING A PRESCRIBED FIRE PLAN
A Scenario - You are responsible for conducting a prescribed burn on a clearcut
area called Midlake No. 1. The EA has prescribed burning to prepare the site
for reforestation and hazard reduction, with a constraint to protect the soil from
eX"posure.
VIII. TREATMENT AREA AND OBJECITVES
A The clearcut is shown on the map handed out to you. It is of southeast
exposure, and has a 20% slope.
1. Fuels on the area are represented by a Fuel Model 12, moderate slash.
B. NOTE TO SroDENTS: You will recall that the Fire Behavior Prediction
System (and the fire spread model) assume a lot of things in their application.
A prescribed burn violates most of the assumptions in the models used, by
design.
1. For example: We control the lighting sequence so that we never reach
steady state combustion.
5
RES 96-210
However, predictions can serve as a 'Point of Departure" for us. A point from
which we can calibrate ourselves. This isn't much different than measuring '10
hour fuel sticks and determining when to burn. Fuel sticks are made of 1(2 inch
Ponderosa pine dowels. If we were burning ponderosa pine dowels, fuel sticks
would tell us exactly the fuel moisture. But we aren't. Fuel sticks serve as a
point of reference for us. We know that a 15% fuel stick means no burning,
and 6% fuel stick means trouble. The same calibration can apply to using fire
behavior predictions in prescribed fire planning and operations.
C. We have two types of objectives and one constraint from higher order plans:
1.
Reforestation Objectives (from Environmental Assessment):
plantability by providing planting spots and removing duff.
Assure
2. Protection Objectives (from FSM policy): Treat fuels to a level that is
commensurate with protection objectives (cost efficient fire program).
3. Site Productivity Constraint (from LMP Standards and Operational
Considerations): Minimize soil exposure.
IX. PRESCRIPTION - Midlake No. 1
A DESIRED ACCOMPLISHMENTS - Agreed to by the Interdisciplinary Team
that planned to timber sale. Fire management was represented on that team.
1. Review project planning flowchart to see where interdisciplinary teams
establish objectives.
2. Site preparation for reforestation
a. 380 - 400 planting spots per acre
b. 40-60% duff reduction
(1) Note the range of values, don't trap yourself by an
unreachable objective.
3. Hazard Reduction
a. Reduce fuel loads to less than 12 tons/acre
(1) 0 - 3 inch material
4. Soil Protection Constraint
a. Minimize soil exposure, no more than an additional 30% exposure
allowed.
B. DESIRED FIRE BEHAVIOR TO ATTAIN OBJECTIVES
1. Very little work has been done to tie the fire behavior from burning (or
6
RES 96-210
wildfire for that matter) to environmental effects. Fire behavior
characteristics resulting in a given desired effect is often 'known' by
experience. Professional judgement is usually applied, and the Desired
Fire Behavior stipulated from that. There are a couple of sources around
that might help though:
a. Literature
(1) Fire Effects on PNW Soils (Boyer and Dell, 1980)
(2) Washington Office Publication Series on Fire Effects.
(3) What ever else you can find in your library, or through
literature searches.
b. As mentioned, your professional judgement gained through
experience. 1ber.e . is nothing wrong with. this. Professional
judgement is responsible for getting most of the work done in fire
management.
c. Let's make some ties to our objectives!
2. Site Preparation Objectives
a. 380 - 400 planting spots/acre
(1) Here's a judgement call, although some work is being done
on estimating this. Through our experience we know that
a moderate intensity will consume a lot of the fuel, and
result in a fairly clean burn. A moderate burn will get rid
of most of the 10 hour fuels, all the 1 hour fuels, and
even zap some of the bigger stuff. We estimate we can
get the required planting spots if:
(a)
We consume at least 60% of the 1 hours and 40%
of the 10 hours.
(b)
We also know that a moderate burn is one of 5 . 7
foot flame lengths (about 200 - 350 BTUlFt-S) will
get close to our consumption. Usually a spring
burn (June) will get that intensity.
(2)
So, we now prescribe a flame length of 5 -7 feet
(fireline intensity of 200 - 350 BTUlFt-S) to meet
our planting spot objective.
(3) "PLEASE NOTE" I am using flame length only as an
illustration. In the Pacific Northwest (both east and west
side) we have much better consumption models that you
will learn about later. These models have nothing to do
with flame length, they operate on the 1000 HR fuel
moisture. It turns out that consumption is very closely tied
7
RES 96-210
to 1000 HR fuel moisture.
b. 40 - 60% Duff Reduction
(1) This one is a little different. We have researcher who has
directly correlated duff reduction with 1000 hour fuel
moisture (Sandberg). No messing around with the fire
behavior, he went straight for the Required Environmental
Condition to get to the objective. We will talk about that
when we get to the Required Environmental Conditions.
3. Hazard Reduction Objective
a. Reduce fuel loads to less than 12 Ions/acre in the 0 - 3 inch
material.
(1) Here is one we really know from our experience. If we
meet silvicultural objectives with our burn, we almost
always meet hazard reduction objectives. So, we will
prescribe the same fire behavior here, 5 -7 foot flame
lengths.
4. Soil Protection Constraint
a. This one falls in the same category as duff reduction. When
Sandberg did his work on duff reduction, he also discovered some
things about mineral soil exposure and the 1000 hour moisture.
We will cover that later too.
5. SUMMARY OF DESIRED FIRE BEHAVIOR
a. Flame lengths 5 - 7 feet
b. June or July for moderate intensity
C. REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS TO ATTAIN FIRE
BEHAVIOR
1. 5 - 7 Fr. FLAME LENGTH
a. Usually environmental conditions are stipulated in terms of
temperature, humidity, and windspeeds. Why? Because those
elements are the most easily measured by our folks. Therefore its
fairly easy to know when to light the match. So, what
temperature, humidity, and winds peed will give us the desired fire
behavior of 5 -7 flame lengths?
b. There are a multitude of possible temperature, humidity, and
windspeed combinations that produce the desired fire behavior.
8
l
RES 96-210
How do you suppose we could find some?
.'
(1) We know Fuel Model 12 represents the fuel conditions' in
the unit. We know the topography on the site. That
means we know two of the three determining factors for
fire behavior, and they are fixed.
(a) If we can find a fuel moisture range that will give
us the flame length, we can then convert it to
humidity and temperature ranges with tables.
c. BEHAVE and even nomograms, can give us a lot of help here.
By looking at graphs we can get a feel for the conditions which
lead to desired flame lengths.
(1) Flame length graph from BEHAVE
(a) Students will have table of output from FIREl in
addition.
(2) To summarize:
(a)
(b)
MWS
1 HR
2 - 4 mph
2 - 10%
(3) These are ballpark. Designed to get you in the area.
There are an infinite number of possibilities. Carlton will
show you how to narrow the possibilities on Thursday.
(4) DISCLAIMER - "ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS
OF THE FIRE SPREAD MODEL HAVE JUST
OCCURRED. Don't forget that the model predicts things
for steady state combustion. We don't have that. Or
environmental conditions will probably produce a fire that
is of less intensity than we predicted. So, we will probably
want to try to burn on the hot end of the conditions if we
can.
2. Translation of MWS, and 1 HR, to conditions ex-pected on site.
a. The conditions we have prescribed above are not easily measured,
or estimated, on the site. If we could translate the windspeed
into a 20 foot windspeed, and the 1 HR into temperature and
humidity, we could more easily guess when we are in, or close, to
being in prescription. Can we do that?
b. Again, Don will show you how to build a detailed prescription.
9
RES 96-210
D. HAUUNG CHART USE. A tool
1. Once we determine our desired fire behavior and narrow our possibilities
on conditions, we would have a good feel for our prescribed fire's worst,
and best, fire beha\~or. Let's do that. .
a. We have a flame length of 5 - 7 feet.
(1) Look at the band of possibilities for this flame length
range. There are rates of spread from 300 ch/hr all the
way down to 10 ch/hr that will give the flame lengths you
want. How can we narrow our range/
b. Our fuel moisture range was from 2 to 10.
(1) Remember we arbitrarily cut it off at 10%. It could range
all the way out to the moisture of extinction, right?
(2) These range equates to a range of heat/unit areas of 2069
to 2582. Remember that fuel moisture in any given fuel
model is equatable to heat/unit area? (Look at a
nomogram for a model 12!)
c. If we plot those on a Hauling Chart we can talk with other folks
about our fire and what might happen. A hauling chart is a good
communications tool.
d. We can also use the hauling chart to help us look at the fire.
What would happen if the wind went from 2 to 3 mph in terms
of Heat/Unit Area? H/A by the way is a good indicator of effects
to the soil.
(1) Nothing, right? H/h. is unaffected by the wind.
e. What would you expect to happen if the fog settled in and the 1
hour fuel moisture changed? Intensity would drop ofr. Adjust
lighting strip width.
2. Now we have a good feel for the prescribed fire's fire behavior. What is
one more very useful application of these data?
a. If we know what the prescribed fire is doing we could also know
what an escaped fire is doing. We know the environmental
conditions for the prescribed fire, now the question is, "What will
an escaped fire look like under those same environmental
conditions?"
(1) Thus, this stuff is also applicable, and probvably more so,
to contingency planning. You will have a couple of hours
10
RES 96-210
on that very topic later in the week.
X. THE JUMP FROM OBJECTIVES TO REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL CON-
DmONS
A Some tie directly between objectives and, a required environmental condition to
reach it, may already exist.
1. In the case of our duff reduction objective and our soil protection
constraint that is exactly the case. A fellow named Dave Sandberg
correlated duff reduction and mineral soil exposure directly with the 1000
HR fuel moisture at the nearest fire danger weather station. (Research
Paper, PNW-272, June 1980).
a. The models will be used in depth on Thursday.
2. Duff Reduction Objective - Remove 40 - 60%
a. On Sandberg's graph for predicting duff reduction, we can draw
our desired reduction range. You can see that we need a 1000
HR fuel moisture of 20 to reduce 60%, and, a 1000 HR fuel
moisture of 27 to reduce 40%.
(1) So, we can stipulate a 1000 HR fuel moisture range of 20
- 27% for our duff reduction objective.
3. Soil B:posure Constraint
a. Sandberg also has correlated mineral soil exposure with 1000 HR
fuel moisture. The handout has that graph on it also.
b. Looking at the graph if we plot our 30% maximum exposure
level, we find it corresnonds to a 1000 HR fuel moisture for
about 22%. That means we must burn when the 1000 HR
moisture is greater than 22% or else we will expose more than
30% of the soil.
c. So, we' can specify a 1000 HR fuel moisture minimum of 22% to
protect the soil.
d. Combining the duff reduction range on the 1000 HR fuel
moisture and the soil protection minimum, we can prescribe a
range from 22 - 28% on the 1000 HR fuel moisture for our burn.
4. A Chance for Conflicting Objectives
a. T'lere is a distinct possibility that the soil protection objective and
the duff reduction objective could conflict with one another. That
is, we could want more duff removed than our soil protection
11
RES 96-210
would allow.
(1) Example: In this case, from a duff standpoint, we could
have burned down to a mineral soil exposure level of
almost 40% with a fuel moisture of 20%. But that would
have compromised our soil exposure objectives.
XI. TIIE BURNING PLAN (Operations Plan)
A Ignition Sub-Plan
1. Now we have the prescription completed, we know the fire behavior we
can expect, and the weather that will get us there. It's time to burn.
Can we apply what we have planned to the actual operation?
a. We know we want a flame length of 5 -7 feet We can adjust our
lighting sequence to accommodate that flame length.
b. The minimum flame length would be around 5 feet or so. If you
can't produce a flame longer than that you should walk away from
the burn.
c. Conversely, if you can't keep it under 7 or 8 feet, walk away,
you're too hot!
(1) Of course you conduct a test before general ignition to
determine this.
B. The Holding Sub-Plan
1. We know the range of environmental conditions that the fire will escape
under, if it escapes during lighting. We can make a fire behavior
projection for that escape, and develop a contingency plan for it. More
on that by Carlton Thursday.
C. The Mop Up Sub-Plan
1. Research is working on a model that predicts burnout of large fuels.
This will ultimately lead to a good assessment of mop up needs.
XII. SUMMARY
A We have reviewed the basic elements of a complete prescribed fire plan.
B. We have followed the steps in preparing a prescribed fire plan and interjected
fire behavior predictions where we could. Let's look at what we did:
1. Specified quantifiable prescribed fire objectives.
12
RES 96-210
2. We translated those objectives into desired fire behavior characteristics
using our judgement, or, research where we could find it.
3. We translated the fire behavior characteristics into the required
environmental conditions necessary to generate the desired fire behavior.
4. Where we didn't have fire behavior tied to an objective we went straight
to environmental conditions necessary where we could, otherwise, we
applied judgement again.
5. We used our fire behavior predictions in tailoring our prescribed fire
plan, and, operations, to get the desired fire behavior by monitoring and
adjusting flame lengths.
6. We also used our prescription to help develop the contingency plan for
our burn.
7. Lastly, we plotted our fire behavior on a Hauling Chart so we could talk
to others about the fire behavior we expect.
XIII. CARLTON'S PRESENTATION
A Later on you will spend six hours putting all this together. I only wanted to '
introduce the concepts to you here.
13
RES 96-210
..,..UIlI
""Q.\ ~ f(oeen
I. Ikfltl/t Dbja.d:'i'<ILS
PROfEc.r LEVE.L FUEL APPRAISAL PROCE.)'>
l\.-fi~.. lA.d 11n""""'......'1k"
0,",)1&:'''(.10 fut Pto'..,t
utiULoE- !.-he. fl) r'r,"or.:-.:lo
.fo Dut"l"'tnLnc. 't\t;:o\rlt.Ll
llo',ctll.c {lC"Clr~ \e {'M
PO'\O"cl:.
Oat"rrlta, (ibr,n.1
l'rofu..
Oda.tlntnc. Pft.,lidul
'rof~ Ie- FD....
Ho.llQ.tjllnu,nt I\.c.tl....L\.v
Oui.n:cl
Rf,,,\dI&4L
ProHle
{'rc.cli.c.t&d. l'ost.-l\c\:."wttv
Fuc.l Prohlc.
,<:4l.<t Loodi"'l
Ilo4olLt"",
N'a,,,,'" (0 I1I4L
lIo,h..<i. ll4.ldu.
ffoftlc.
~di"C ilc.sh l(~a.t:m(l\l;s
W1tLch }..u. "",':"\;l\h\oI-
.. HAKOl'IlE
'>I^t1I\N~ P\l~
,DROM)c:,o.~T llURN
_lOP AND .CAnER
,YUM oR PUH
"010M1S' R'EI"1DVPt-l,
'OTII;:'"
3.
G, ,Ul<! r a. 1:.11.
fl.1{41'ootIVo.s
~ V("if,tTmv\c.~'\ta.t;#n
f ...HnMc.i.a.ll\rl"(\n.:4"'C"l...
If'\oni.b':'''i ~\'~t~m ~..".\ on 'O.:.(1,.:.t~;,"q I
\ I ('Und~, (o'''':I'L:
_C<"" . I
.1
I
I I
.,..._ _1,. """"114-
'1.. val:armina O'oj lLc.ritll!.S
A. fvalua:l::a-
TRADE-Off ANALYSIS PlI.OCESS
Wnl'f~lI. lRi1~tl. 3P.ill ''\Ut1l:J
Ann\'Il" f=lll-\4th<ld (p,1",l:".q:
. LOt~JirvJ r'0(,4$)-
- (n~if.."",,,t,,\ ..rr<cb
, ~so..uu. cou(lic.l:.
"'~~oui", objc.d:ivcs
'CDS~ vs be"cRb
ll'n\:-t:m:lnl::.iol'\s\.i9S wt-l'n
oful:.un: o.d:Ui\.boas 0011 ~i..t~
and in o.A):lant. areas .
... c.a1"\ SU\9fct'Slon ct-Pfcd-i.u:.r'ICl.SS"hiZ:
Incr=cl-U''''''ih of...! bl1l""';
W>O<.l,Etcr.\:ion ,,~~I<l.,q..~ ,e\:<..
, 1>1"""'''''- {w:\ n.c&.\l"') to
C\lL.O.J\t:.ih-, pcrr\ad.. 01 "ute.m.:cJ
"" J ,,,d.
. ;>0 r".. "r4\~'" ~"'~ c:.~d.
b.1.fnac. acr,z. il"tC.n:.a.~ QI1d.
<..tab:<! ..~ad;".on ,"!:\"I:, ;
I #~'$ 1>11.1) nc:.t \Ql...u4 d,.,~c
.'" tu.mu.\ali.uc affcd:., J
-.o~'
'-~$i l~dgJlli!!:I
II
, I
i 1
I
I
I
,
1
r(a.d.=~Off50 '
:lO
JJt.)~r.tJ
~~\i.,llU
rf"hl~
Nano.~QC' Mo\~,"
O"Gi.')\DrI
I I {b\;\'\c.\L !
- .
1G:>n.:.:!r!'\!>i
..~'o .,a.r-n.....
Poht\MI. (ot1('O''''n~1
"0 >
l..~aas"
~ i \ I
_~"f" ~
I
\
\
I
I
i
1
,
I
1
,
I
\
,
\
:( ?:-~1-a.r\a.d A\\::~r~a.E\J(l'S
;t(c,:,
'16 -;;2/1)
"
..
.
.
~
o
~.
,
i
.
S
J/
~-
,
8
o
,
,
:
~
"
.
,
~
i~
."
,-
-.
"
:'
"
:i
s_
:~
E,
I'
's
!~
:.~
~.~
~~
"
~~
..El
,-
13
8~
c"E
':1:
,
-.
.!':.:::
..
,t:li
i~
~.]
~~
,-
]~
-'
l:> ~ 5
.~ E"
: v,!?
.= ]~
g. t2
. .
.!: ~~
~ ::6
~~~
.~ f.~
'iOE.-;::
"
~
.
o
.
o
~
. .,
" ~ lil
- .'
l;;Ef
g.^.!!
. ,
Po]..
~ ~~
. .,
] ]:
<:l ~g
~ ,.
~ ~.~
ril ~.~
Ii.;;
..; ::i
~ J:';1
. .t
<00
~ i!
.'
:~
..
-5~
.'
0'
-8;;!
.'
"
l[
l~
,E
"
.S! ~
.
"
l~
"
'':
.s~
~;
]:i
~~
.'
E~
]!
--
00
~~
::~
'.
,,-,
~
:~
'I
J~
ti
t~
ll..!:
H
il
-;;.;'
f~
~.=
..
UE,,]
-.,;:I..1g
c3,!lr....;;;
.~
]
j
o
-5e~~.!! I
~,gtel
... a'"
I
3. ,
-5l!:.. a
e-i"]
o~ ,
,
.
J
, ,
,,-
1~,1
> .
< .
~
~
!
~
,
:~j
"
:>!...
g:s
;::'jo.::
~i!!
a.j
,<
.~
Co
1]
"
'5~
-.
=.
~,
~ ~
t ;;~];<;;
:c oS::;;zj..s
,
:~
;;;
t.
~
,
NT C'>'"
6... 6e!,
i
.
o
-;
..
'.;
tt :ft !
....,~ ~,..; ..;
] ~
:~~
! <:>
:::~ ~!: ~
'1'1'1'1'1
~!: !:~ !
cici 00 <:>
q
1':0
~1 ~~ ~
<'ON ...<tl 0
00' tic.o
~
~g ~2 ....
,!,J, 6.1, ~
,~
i~
~o og l\.
~~ ~~ ~
~1
oj!.
zC!
S
~
~:3 ~~.,
"~ ~\\ ~
oE
.,
'"
z~
8
*
888... ...
H*~ ~
I
I
I
;1
oE
",
~ti
~
~~ ~~ ~
.E
"
z;
~
88 88 8
-- -- *
<
19 '1'1 <-t
<< << -<
]
~
o 0
~ ~
<3 tl tl
~ ~.~ dtf ~
! ,I
iol 1) i
;3
:.a i ~ ! i"~
:i :.! i i e;
i1 Ii ~ ~ l]t
jol i!l'<l-. >,..c..;
rl::~ ~~ 1i~
Urn lijiij u.J ~~
: ,,".. ..~ "'~ ....,.
]~'" :!:; ~~ ;1;-
'"
~:z ^ ^ '
~
<
~ dt~ j
~. 8~~ !
u 6D~g !
~ cJ'i:g"ji ~
(J 8.<:..cJ
jf:;5..
~~~;:; ~
~~ ~
"
u
,
"
,
~
u
.
]
u
'0
,~
j
"
l
.
"
~
0;
o
*
.
Z
.
Z
7
~
~
8
*
8
~
"
o
"
<
~
w
1:1 ,i
!! !
l"~ !!
E B i ~
.11 .,,:i
~l !,J
J~ ~~
.... ~S!
~~ .q
~
.~
'iiI<
JJ
:1
,
Ii
..
~~
..;,.;
8~
~~
00
~~
..
eiei
..
zz
..
zz
~.
"
..
;0
.~
88
H
~~
;1
Ii
,
"'t?
<<
..
~~
:E~~ ,J
ww U
~
I
i
I
I
i
~
:a
~
.
,
~
~
~
lid;;lili
JJ~JJ J
,
J
I
!
!
~~~~~ \
~
.
~
.
.........,......,
~t~~t ~
...,..;,..;,..;,..;,.;
~
~
o
~~ze!: z
99999 9
=~~8:2 =
ddddd d
,
~
0;
.
~
o
o
*
000000
t~~~~ ~
...dd...d co<
~
oe.e.Oll.
"j',zz, z
.. .
z
.
z
~
.
z
"Oll.e.~ e.
~~zz~ Z
~
.
~
.
!f~Slon:e Sl
a\\~~\\ ~
.
~
~
......$on on
~~~5J~ ~
~
"
i
~~~!f~ 9
8:2 ~
~
~
~
~~~'l~ ~
.. .
00 0
o
~
!
i'"
!~
ii
9
<
'7 TT1~1'"
< <<<<< <
o 0
u u
.< .<
~ ~
Sl ~~Sl~d ~
.. i iiiil!
'. ~ ' !"",
.1l i.l.siial:
; " e.!! "'lll";.l eo1
i:i! J111, ,J!"'l 'I"U
-i11l "'~ I'" ~
j~-i Ii ~ '!~ I!l
';!d-5 :(~ t'~~l!~ fS
u a: to:= >'sto:o.s &:=
~ fi
::: ....~;:;Tlf ~:2
6 6'!'~;l;~ 6
:l
'"
J: ^
I
i
I
~
,;
~
,
i
I
~
o
j
.
j
~
~
.
.
'1
~
.i
~
~
i
J
~
.~
o
~;i
JJ
]~~j]] ]] ] j !
II
~~~ ' l~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.
Z;k
00
'i''i'
",,,!,,,!,,,,,,oq "'I.... 0.... ..,
!:!::b!!:b !:t ~:t ~
.,;.;,.;,,;..;,.;...,..; ,-
~~
dd
~~~!::!~~ ~ e ........ a
~6~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
dcidddd ci d d d ci
00
tt
......
.
i~~~i~ i ~ ~ i ~
......................,; d d ~
;;:;;:
~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;:
z
~~
~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
1j1j
::l~
o1jggSO g 0 'l I 0
~~~~~~ ~ ~ ." ~
""
""
.,..~. . ~ ~ 8 .
...."l"'i'i 6'. ,- - '1
5o.8i,5o 50 il g
~~
888.88 8 8
mm~~
~ ~ ~
~~
888888 8
~~~~~~ - ;
~ ~ 0
~
,
:0
! i~ i
\ !
,
! !
'.
rr ~"'~~1~ e: ~ ,. 1 T~ ,.
..:-< ..:<<<-<< < < < <..: <
~!
:E:E:n::E:E:E:E
",,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,,,
<30
.<0
~ ~o
..L~:E:E
U U 0
jj
~~
ii
..
..
&:&:
iii!!) i Ii
1 i i~ : i !"5 ! !
ji i-;.!j' i !..! !
e";.El1";. e :!i"g i
8"'81'" 8... 11'
,1,:\,1, '!!~ i
181.D~1 11 "g~::
JJ~.!8~~ c2 us ~
88 "S'SS 8" .. .
66 6~~6*5J 6 6 ~ ~ ~
.
^
. .
^ ^
- .
^ ^
'Ii I"
,;
ii c:i
~ : i ~5
ro:il<lcS
!loa ~5
o 0
:1 !
, ,
01
:t !
.;
. ,
':i:
.,;
~j
=ii:
,
I
o
~
,
J
~
q
;
o
l:
0;
o
.
~
~
~
8
~
~
:l
!!
I
,
J APPENDIX 2
:1::t ~
.
,
Iii
J~
~~
..
~~
.. .
:ti ~
,.;,.; ,-
8"
~~
cid
"~
~~
dd
q~
l:.
...ei
<=!"!g<=!
;;:~~;;:
"0 "
..
zZ
~~ l~
..
zz
~~ i!i
~~
8~ :-
~" ,~
~~
~~ i~
.il ,.
i
8.
*~
I
88 18
-- 1*
~~
88 i8
-- I~
II!
iii!
ii!!
!
ii
Ii
T
< ,
~, ?"i'!~
<< <<;<
,
~ i
:E,J !
dU!! ad i!
1 "ji ,
,,,, "',
na ! ii~
,]! J I~,
"'Ill" I......
Ib",Jlld
Wi8U
$"'i i
3Cl'3'
~!~ ;
:~: !
...a,
...,,,= i
"O>1!il
jL3
~ ~~ ~m
'"
:l
,
.
]
~
.
^
~
i
.;
>
E
:1
,
U
:1
E
,
;
:1
0li:-96 SID!
;(<'5 f6'-d/O
~~!.. ......."
I~ .
~-..;,;,.,
* .s
,
~
,
,
!
~
,
~
e
~
o
~-
!
.
"
,
2
~-
"
8
,
"
!
a
.
.
!
,
.
"
'i'" I
~~ p . . ;, 0 . 0 0 . p
~i
, !U' , .' . 'j, , ii
, l j~ !n ] .~ ~'l. ~ ] j
. "" ~~1 ~ "T~~
. !' ]~ . '.. li
] H itj .' " .
,. H I' . ~l I' ~i H
..= !
J~ .!.! H >l
. . . ~.. . ~ ~'
,~ /']~g "1 . i.~.~ ~3 ~~
, .h, . I!".o iEu..~ " , j~~
~.~ ll,s",.. a!:S~ ~ ~~~'Sli "0 !
, .~ a .He J1J..s: 1;;;
=.] ...'" l ]~li~ .
! J' ], fJ ~;,:;.yoi .e.-h .~-Sii ~~ 1"
3 . " ""1'- h~i'~ . ii1~~ ~t; .]
~ l 1 i! .l "':0 e-~ r~i' .f.!l ~ '81 1~.5
].. 'O.~ S..-:;3 .'-
~ . . . . . . . . .
~ .;! fl.....:, 1~' :i!._~ i~ ), .'" . t~ ,. .;
.. I" "1
. ~t! ~:~ >t'.!!o f,i.~ jIJ[ ~.!l .. . 0]
.. ....!l ::~~ 1],.
'. l~~ ~; :- .- .-
l~ ..:.9 -;s'a [m .- s'"!.' .-
!~l d. .. f!~ !W~ .. ~ 3.. ..
~~ H]'.. ~i! ~~ 1~ I!E, 1~
j ~ iI.!! t':i J~il ;I' "8:ii.lt 11_..::8;" ,. 'i!i:s.~a: ,-
> . . . . .
j~[ ~i;i , 3 i 'i;";j . ]..e<: Tf. 10
~'5] . r- ...,~ ]'P~'1it
e~] .. 1 ~:a II th i ...,;is ., ];;1
;; ii'~ '" S"iKla ~.. ~.s
~~ Z~ .].. l-s-! i:i:!j2
1 ~:h T'Z.s i ~l~J~~. h'a. .. ]1-.5
<~e ~:>. 0 !:~~,!! g-sl.!l , "
..~~ :.!!~.2~ ,so.:!i!j ..8t~ ..~:=
""'f "2"R "8.~ 1 ;;!{:'-s n-!'"
~ ~:c& ~.5< 83.!:-,i.! ~ ..;;s ~1o;;;3 8 ..!ll.. & lfil';.~ ',iEg ~;;s
. . . . . 0 . . . .
I , " Ii l:...g ,
'5]..c.... ,
~s e..s H'O. ~~3
. 1 1o:~-5~ <.0
"'.::-:~ .-
, " 1i ,~ ] ]~;;;; jj1O' 1i 1i :l ] it~ .
~ I .~ m;; m~ I I I I ']'~
~ ~ ~ ....5
, , , , , , , , ,
" ,
. -5]-51 ~...& " .
lh, .. ~..s
;s~.~ ;-:i
] , 'E..~ "_1i'5~ e;~1 ..c;;~
:l 1i jj ]~;;;s ]"~f'.s jj ] ] ]~~i
,,- '31!=l5l ]'.
I ~ I 10';; a....s .. I I I 'U~]
, , , , , , , ,
,
,
,
~
"
.
"
,
,
,I
='
~
.,
:
'r
~
~';'
~ ~~
:~i
~ '"
"'':;;0
~<.
~ ;;~
.~ se
t .~:
,,<
e '.
l'l.:t5
~-~.5
-I: ..;
0"
~..
's. ~~
s.d
---..--.-
~.. ~ i . . 3 S
Q ~.~ . .!
':19 .I :1 !J j'5~S j~e l'
2..:: ~ , !:~
] ~~ ~ I. !.!i's j~ . .
-I ;;;~~ , 1"~o . '6'
" .8'6e .,
::I:::" ua '51 I'
~ s,3 ~ '';..<lil .. ., i~ nli eli
''" .~~]~] ] , 1
~'O~ I ~ .i;~] ~3 ~~~ J",e ~3 g. g.
.. . . . 0 .
'i! ]'5 . . . , 0
1 ~] , .~!~ U~ ,. < ~!:fali
~ ~8. .! l~ . ~ ," ~ ':'.,]!. <OJ":""
; ~~ J ~1~ j.s's :;]:;! "' ~.- ~Lg..~
, 'ii~-i . -i~~ !~~.s H 't , .~];;Sli
~ ~ 5 "-' 0 "]~'''~1i 1 ~~~;=
nli 8."~ ~.5 ..t"~ c!
f-i !~ 8.2 .~!l1] .~,3lli ~ ;;3 i' ~ i,..Ih., ~.;~;;S
83 ,. 0 .
-- . . .
" . . . .
!-~ l!-3 " .:i t t u:i -:i
t'..!l1 ! ,l "' ~. ~,
~ 's.:=;
1 :~~-~ h I!:C ,
3;;;~ 0 ., , , ~I , .. ~
" '::]1 OB:.:: ~oici :1. ,
$ il , m " f"''''
! .:l..!~ ! ~~~ m , .. ~..q
. !!!,Iofo :;~"8tj: .I .I . . ~ .'
. " . . .
,; .:i ..' ! 11. j j
, . ! Ij ~, -I, ~.!'.>I J. ~.
~ . . ~. "' ~~1
. .. ", '';::; :1. ~L
. ; ,. .d
, " a~ ,,] ..I, .1] . .] " so,
.~ . ~' ~j .e~~
" 3 " " ~"'... Hs Hs :i >-& ~
, ,. ;! J >~ ~
g . ] >0 .
, , . < -:i 11 j
; . '-;5 ti .:i U'Q.
, '0 h Ii! i.!' . ~~... !s ~s
! . .t~.; "' lti- lti- h os1 -" ..i. ,
. {p '. n~ ..~ :1, " ~lll .1 Es~ nt.
,i] " 1::..... U"''''
. ! ~l~ m j1. -g:!:E ,"
. .l' ~. f]ll m ~.. ~ ~., .. >'iJ;
!:..e ~ . ,
. . . . .
. . , '. i ! , ~ ':i
, '. t -.
..10 11 1~ 1 !. " , .: I,
] '-' !..:l ~1 ,i, i~!
~.H .Hoi ~1~ ~t~ ~ . ,
0 ~ nO.
~ Jiij <. ,] , Gh
~~!i filj I!il" j ~ , m
1 ~~8. ..' J. i."S .1.
~:.;; g, ~..& J.' . . ,
. .
~ ,<=1\.. ~
,; 0 0 ~'! 'j ~
l~ ~ ~. ~8'~ .
,- ~ ~. 0 "
~ n 0 0 ll"~~.i - < 0
'. ~ 8 .. .d.o"~ p ~ g ,
J~ < jg 11 :;:::.~.. ~ ~ . 01(;-96 SIDI
'. ! ;ijtOSJl. ~ ! .~
. <
RES 96-210
APPENDIX 3
ARCHEOLOGICAL RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS
SAN BERNARDINO VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECT
San Bernardino County, California
Submitted to:
Tom Dodson, President
Dodson & Associates
463 North Sierra Way
San Bernardino, CA 92410
Submitted by:
Bruce Love, Principal
CRM TECH
126 Barret Road
Riverside, CA 92507
March 12, 1996
CRM TECH Job # 210
Approx. 9017 acres
San Bernardino North, Harrison Mtn., and Redlands Calif. 7.5' quad sheets
TlN, R3W and TlN, R4W, San Bernardino Base MeridIan
RES 96-210
."
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MANAGEMENT SUMMARy..................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................1
PRELIMINARY DETERMINA TIONS.....................................................................1
The Undertaking........... ............................ .... ....... ... ... ......................... .............1
The Area of Potential Effects .........................................................................2
RECORDS SEARCH METHODS...............................................................................2
RECORD SEARCH RESULTS ...................................................................................2
Recorded Sites in the Proposed Bum Areas ..............................................2
Pending Sites in the Proposed Burn Areas ................................................3
Recorded Sites in the Records Search Areas..............................................3
Pending Sites in the Records Search Areas................................................3
California Point of Historical Interest .........................................................4
Areas of Previous Archaeological Surveys................................................4
DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................5
Sensitivity of Project Area for Cultural Resources...................................5
ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS.............................................................6
Terrain........................... ..................................................... .......... ......................6
Previous Burns...................... ............_................. ... .......... ............... ..... ............6
CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................6
FIGURES........................................................................................................................7
APPENDIX 1: PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS.................................................21
APPENDIX 2: NADB Printout .................................................................................23
LIST OF FIGURES
F. 1 P' . . .
Igure . rOJect VICInIty.... ... ... .... ... ......_.. ............. ............. ... .......... ... ... ......... ..... .......8
Figure 2a. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (1).......9
Figure 2b. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (2).......10
Figure 2c. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (3) .......11
Figure 2d. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (4).......12
Figure 2e. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (5)......_13
Figure 2f. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (6)........14
Figure 3a. Previous cultural resources surveys in the APE (1) .........................15
Figure 3b. Previous cultural resources surveys in the APE (2).........................16
Figure 3c. Previous cultural resources surveys in the APE (3) .........................17
Figure 3d. Previous cultural resources surveys in the APE (4).........................18
Figure 3e. Previous cultural resources surveys in the APE (5).........................19
Figure 3f. Previous cultural resources surveys in the APE (6)..........................20
i
RES 96-210
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
CRM TECH has completed a cultural resources records search at the San
Bernardino County Museum Archaeological Information Center in order
to address potential impacts to cultural resources by proposed burns to be
carried out as part of the San Bernardino Vegetation Management Project.
The San Bernardino Vegetation Management Project is a combined effort
of the City of San Bernardino, the City of Highland, California Department
of Forestry and Fire Protection, and USDA Forest Service--San Bernardino
National Forest. Total acreage involved is 9,017, located in Township 1
North, Range 3 West; and Township 1 North, Range 4 West, San
Bernardino Base Meridian, as shown on the San Bernardino North,
Harrison Mtn., and Redlands, Calif. USGS topographic 7.5' quad sheets.
Within the records search areas, there are 31 recorded or pending sites,
none of which have been evaluated for the National Register of Historic
Places. Within the proposed burn areas, there are seven recorded sites and
one pending site. Within the records search areas, 10% of the land has
been adequately surveyed for cultural resources. Within the proposed
burn areas, 5% has been adequately surveyed. Based on considerations of
terrain and a history of previous burns, the potential adverse effects to
cultural resources in the proposed burn areas in considered low.
INTRODUCTION
At the request of Tom Dodson and Associates, CRM TECH has completed a cultural
resources records search at the San Bernardino County Museum Archaeological
Information Center in order to address potential impacts to cultural resources by
proposed burns to be carried out as part of the San Bernardino Vegetation Management
Project. The San Bernardino Vegetation Management Project is a combined effort of
the City of San Bernardino, the City of Highland, California Department of Forestry and
Fire Protection, and USDA Forest Service--San Bernardino National Forest (Fig. 1)_
Total acreage involved is 9,017, located in Township 1 North, Range 3 West; and
Township 1 North, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base Meridian, as shown on the San
Bernardino North, Harrison Mtn., and Redlands, Calif. USGS topographic 7.5' quad
sheets (Figs. 2a-2f). The methods, results, discussion, and conclusion are presented in
the following report.
PRELIMINARY DETERMINA nONS
The Undertaking
Due to its potential in causing alterations in the landscape, it is determined that the
proposed land development project constitutes an "undertaking," defined in part as
1
RES 96-210
"any project, activity, or program that can result in changes in the character or use of
historic properties, if any such historic properties are located in the area of potential
effects (36 CFR 800.2(0)). The current project, involving selected vegetation bums, fits
this definition.
-'
The Area of Potential Effects
The Area of Potential Effects (APE) is defined as "the geographic area or areas within
which an undertaking may cause changes in the character or use of historic properties,
if any such properties exist" (36 CFR 800.2[c]). In the current project, the APE is
determined to be composed of the areas proposed for burning along witha wider area,
or buffer (Figs. 2a-2f).
RECORDS SEARCH METHODS
The Archaeological Information Center (Ale) at the San Bernardino County Museum
provided the record search service. The San Bernardino AIC is part of the statewide
system of repositories for cultural resource records overseen by the Office of Historic
Preservation and administered under California State Department of Parks and
Recreation.
AIC staff examined maps on file for known archaeological sites and previous surveys
and reports of cultural resources within a mile radius of the study area. In addition,
AIC staff checked listings of the National Register of Historic Places, the California
Historical Landmarks, the California Points of Historical Interest, the California
Inventory of Historic Resources, the Ethnic Sites Survey for California, and the
Historical Landmarks of San Bernardino County. The results of the records search are
presented below.
RECORD SEARCH RESULTS
The following section presents the results and findings of the records search, comprised
of recorded archaeological/historic sites, pending sites (sites known to exist but are not
yet recorded), and points of historical interest. The records search also shows which
areas have been previously surveyed for archaeology and which have not.
Recorded Sites in the Proposed Burn Areas
Within the proposed bum areas, there are 8 recorded sites, listed as follows (Figs. 2a-2f);
CA-SBR-2318: Reported artifacts, no site map available, poorly described in site record.
CA-SBR-6545H: Rubble masonry irrigation canal dating from turn of the century.
2
RES 96-210
CA-SBR-6797H: Early 20th century structural remains; turn-of-the-century
reservoir / cistern and pipes; turn-of-the-century olive orchard remains, Daley
Toll Road site (Calif. Historic Landmark 579).
CA-SBR-7045H: Cisterns, rock walls, pipes; date unknown.
CA-SBR-7051H: Large ranching and irrigation complex, 20th century.
CA-SBR-8093H: Rock quarry, cement footings; date unknown.
Pending Sites in the Proposed Bum Areas
P1062-2-H: Concrete aqueduct; date unknown.
Recorded Sites in the Records Search Areas
Outside of the proposed burn areas, but inside the records search areas, the following
sites are recorded or pending (Fig. 2a-2f):
CA-SBR-2268/H: Native American site and Anglo historic site related to hot springs.
CA-SBR-2282/H: Native American village site, cemetery, ceremonial house, bedrock
mortars, house rings, midden.
CA-SBR-6544H: Rubble masonry irrigation canal dating from 1858.
CA-SBR-6546H: Rubble masonry irrigation canal dating from turn of the century.
CA-SBR-6547H: Historic road bed.
CA-SBR-6549H: Historic structural remains and trash; date unknown.
CA-SBR-6869H: Concrete foundation and trash pit from post-1930s.
CA-SBR-6870H: Concrete bridge from 1929.
CA-SBR-7018H: Remains of Noyes home, early 20th century pioneer. Concrete and
rubble foundations and footings; ditches and irrigation features.
CA-SBR-7019H: Tanks and irrigation features; dates unknown.
CA-SBR-7020H; Graded pad, retaining wall, trees; dates unknown.
CA-SBR-702lH: Piece of pipe, possibly part of old irrigation system.
CA-SBR-7022H: Rock retaining walls, landscaping; date unknown.
CA-SBR-7071 /H: Rock walls, landscaping, turn-of-the-century; Native American
metates also found.
CA-SBR-7171/H: Mix of historic structural remains and some Native American
artifacts.
CA-SBR-7702H: Rock walls, concrete features, piping, associated with Arrowhead
Springs; date unknown.
CA-SBR-8123H: Rock or gravel quarry, roadways; date unknown.
CA-SBR-8248H: Brick and concrete structural remains; date unknown.
Pending Sites in the Records Search Areas
Pl062-8-H: Large ranch complex from 1940s.
P1062-7-H: Connecting water ditch associated with City Creek Ditch,; 1884.
P1071-20-H: East Twin Creek water ditch; 1870s-1880s.
P1071-21-H: Stone ditch and water tunnel, 1890s.
3
RES 96-210
"
P1071-27-H: Adobe house, no longer in original state; date unknown.
.'
California Point of Historical Interest
CPHI-104: Rock and concrete water flume built by Mormons in 1850s-1860s, and
Ketchum house built 1891.
Areas of Previous Archaeological Surveys
Areas that have been previously surveyed for cultural resources are plotted on Figures
3a-3f. The San Bernardino County Museum Archaeological Information Center has
determined which surveys qualify as "adequate" and which ones are "inadequate,"
based on certain report criteria. According to the Information Center's
recommendations, only the "adequate" surveys give a true account of the presence or
absence of cultural resources on a given piece of property.
Based on the records search results, approximately 10% of the records search areas have
been previously surveyed at an adequate level. Within the bum areas proper, only
about 5% of the total land surface has been previously surveyed to standards considered
adequate for cultural resource management purposes.
All cultural resource surveys on file at the Information Center have been assigned
NADB numbers (National Archaeological Data Base). The NADB numbers for each
survey in the records search area are printed in Figures 3a-3f and are listed here with
their determination of "adequate" or "inadequate." For more complete information on
each survey report, see Appendix 2.
1060197 Inadequate 1062050 Inadequate
1060337 Inadequate 1062092 Adequate
1060382 Inadequate 1062106 Adequate
1060435 Inadequate 1062199 Adequate
1060543 Inadequate 1062212 Adequate
1060568 Inadequate 1062225 Adequate
1060625 Inadequate 1062248 Adequate
1060626 Inadequate 1062445 Adequate
1060645 Adequate 1062452 Adequate
1060715 Inadequate 1062462 Inadequate
1061124 Inadequate 1062474 Adequate
1061125 Inadequate 1062661 Adequate
1061173 Inadequate 1062716 Inadequate
1061410 Inadequate 1062761 Adequate
1061603 Inadequate 1062806 Adequate
1061728 Inadequate 1062853 Inadequate
1061761 Inadequate 1063037 Adequate
1061783 Inadequate 1063038 Adequate
1061956 Adequate 1066225 Adequate
1061958 Adequate
4
RES 96-210
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study is to identify and evaluate any archaeological/historical
properties that may exist within or adjacent to the Area of Potential Effects of the
proposed undertaking. "Historic properties," as defined by the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation, include "prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure,
or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register" (36 CFR
800.2(e)). The eligibility for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places is
determined by applying the following criteria, developed by the National Park Service
as per provision of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended:
The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology,
engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures,
and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association and
(a) that are associated with events that have made a significant
contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
(b) that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
(c) that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method
of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high
artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity
whose components may lack individual distinction; or
(d) that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in
prehistory or history. (36 CFR 60.4)
Based on the records search results, none of the 31 sites have been formally evaluated
for the National Register, therefore, the status of the various sites remains unknown.
Sensitivity of Project Area for Cultural Resources
Based on the findings of the records search, the Information Center determined the
sensitivity for the presence of cultural resources in the records search area. The
determination is as follows:
Prehistoric Archaeological Resources
Historic Archaeological Resources
Historic Resources
Moderate to High Sensitivity
High Sensitivity
High Sensitivity
This determination means that there is a high likelihood to be archaeological and
historical sites in the project area. This determination does address the potential
significance of those sites in terms of CEQA or National Register eligibility; nor does
5
RES 'lb-ZlO
this finding address potential impacts to sites or the nature of those impacts. This is a
solely a determination that the area is sensitive for the presence of cultural resources.
.'
ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS
Since 95% of the proposed bum areas have not been surveyed for cultural resources, it
is impossible to declare with certainty the potential effects of future bums. However
certain points of information may lead to a probability of low or no effect. One point is
terrain, the other is previous bums.
Terrain
Most of the proposed bum areas have very steep slopes covered with chaparral.
Traditionally, this kind of topography precludes Native American or historic use of the
land and is very low in sensitivity for cultural resources. However, some of the bum
areas include the flats around the bases of the mountains. These flat areas, especially
near streams or springs, had many early settlers and could contain remains of log cabins
or adobes that could be damaged by fire.
Previous Burns
All of the proposed bum areas have burned in historic times, and burned repeatedly in
prehistoric times. Therefore, any cultural resources present within the proposed burn
areas have already been burned in the past, and the effects of a new bum should be
minimal. Archaeological sites in general are not adversely affected by burns. Since
sites by definition are in the ground, the burning of the surface of a site in itself is not
destructive to that site. Historic sites, on the other hand, may contain buildings, objects,
or structures that could be damaged by fire. However, as just mentioned, if the areas
have already burned in the past, little new damage would be expected from a new bum.
CONCLUSION
The foregoing report provides the results of a records search on the Area of Potential
Effects. Within the records search areas, there are 31 recorded or pending sites, none of
which have been evaluated for the National Register of Historic Places. Within the
proposed bum areas, there are 7 recorded sites and 1 pending site. Within the records
search areas, 10% of the land has been surveyed for cultural resources. Within the
proposed burn areas, 5% has been surveyed. Based on considerations of terrain and a
history of previous burns, the potential adverse effects to cultural resources in the
proposed bum areas in considered low.
6
fI/ r) ,All G- E :/f- 7
RES 96-210
FIGURES
."
..
iGN 1ft"
,)
i '
I /
0"0' ,~Jtis
'HILT
,-:' r' ,_'_'.', g",
"','~' '.',Nl,......,
-~:,:: .~).?':T_~rn",-,~_
t6n' T.t'I"'ole'&;_t~...-.-~';"<:'-
Scale 1:250,000
(:;
,
::) -; :dt'.l!t' """:~,~
~.'--_.
~\
;\"
__M 1____
'S Ioi.;l'~'r.~"'\
Figure 1. Project vicinity. (Based on USGS San Bernardino, Calif., 1:250,000 quadrangle)
8
RES 96-210
~ \..{
:''''-~. , '''' ./;...
s''"" . _I' ""1:'.;
, :
.~"" ,~:f if., .!
Z i'." '>.....-~
~ ~J:~ ' .~,\.,. '., ,4 '/' "'.. '''.., ,:,f,e t
f" ;'.' ~- ;.~. . .,<;,:."..,."'i'
.0, ,'~' ,.' " J!?1f""', .........,," , .:,. _"0' if ..
I '- ,~~ ::~-:/_,_, ''>':d;e , ~~~~M-TW7d 1
'>:--, /,1;{,,~ ''''(''''. .0, 'j: W'"
'/'.. .' $~"_.,,} 4j~p~ ~,' .. '(,
, Pet 'I/'~ I lIll'; ~ !: ~" .......};O~
~ >cerl/1 ^~<-,~ 4' / -,/,,<_-~ "', ' (, ,',
~"J.' :~j"J^" ..,..;it..., ' .~'-:.'\:t'.../ ,'.. ^' . ; .' !i
. ..f'~ . /;?~~"~A!~~~'{~~,,"''''~-',---,,, .'~'
8M"\._~!l::' _,' 4 ;" /..~j:),~.....(~:,';/.."'''',. 1!-,:!rtY.;;~o"
'",.'\;~..<<~. >"1'0',<:., ,f'43:..,,',J::;;'r:~:~j}-)>' ", ~ j
''\..>:-,. ""~... _',-:: ,- V '<" ,:'~_. '<. }_, /
~ ''<<. ~" .. 1". " ,'.'/ j ""'-'_,"'_'_' (, . . _, ...~.
,/;,-"".;... <;:)3\'. ~".,-""..",.._).. .-
,"0:;;' ~ .. ,T, -. --- r.~/,_:~.~,>~-~':;" '<-\,~, 0 ''',
.. ..,.,. / ':;~>"-0.:~ .. 'Y_\" ~ rJ::
,
~~
1
,
SCALE 124 000
c
...-
.-.
I:.:-::.:~
..........-....--.-
'"".._._~._-_._-_._...-
.-"..--.--....
=--~"---,
1000
-:=..'
XXlO
)O(X)
4(0)
~.()(..:
J....~-
ro:o
nco FH-
lro-: 0
- -"'
_._~ ---T:;':;l~ ..------:--~:~:~.'7.~ KI~()MfT~P:
-'\, ," ", ;z
Figure 2a. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (1). The Area of
Potential Effects is indicated by thick gray borders; proposed burn areas are indicated
by thin dark borders. (Based on USGS San Bernardino North, Calif., 1:24,000
quadrangle)
9
RES 96-210
"
..
;: /"/"":
,,__ -~-~'C..ti(_~IlSl.allJ(,0I~7~ ,:/, ~
~~:"~,.t'~ ~~nh~,~/j>i.=,; .
\'''''~''~~:<'~' ,""'.
B.AN
..1..",-
,
j
SCALE 124 000
o
~--:::::::.::.:J;-=::,:"":"~::~-
l<XXJ }OOO 3OC>) 4()()Q
lOoe 0
~:r'-''''=---T'.:T
~<C
GOCO
1:>:0 fEr"
",
~ ''In..
: s 0
~3: .....l;.;;::::1.. 'E":'::C:,t-=._~
] KIl\"lMf!tR
-::=--.
i.:...\.....'----~..1t
,,,".,t...><,~~_
. .
~ ~.. '...
Figure 2b. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (2). The Area of
Potential Effects is indicated by thick gray borders; proposed burn areas are indicated
by thin dark borders. (Based on USGS San Bernardino North, Calif., 1:24,000
quadrangle)
10
."
RES 96-210
;"y',~tt-:o",
*
1
~".l'''-'-'''''
.
,
l~_,._,.~
._...;:;;;.;
o
400:0 ~KY; GOGO noo FEE."
.....:-r-::--._._--r-:.:.:;^ "'--~-.~:'::::':::.:::::::J
l KlI OMUER
~:::::"-':..~
I
1
7
lOOC 0
8"'~'~'
.000
1000 )1)00
~
--- -.
.,,~'_w...t::::::"'
,. ~,,'... ,..::""~ ""c'
Figure 2c. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (3). The Area of
Potential Effects is indicated by thick gray borders; proposed burn areas are indicated
by thin dark borders. (Based on USGS San Bernardino North, Calif., 1:24,000
quadrangle)
11
RES 96-210
j...,c.">"
."
*
...,MIt
C. J
I .
i!
, I ''lIl.Lt
(1.10' I +'T&tlta
'M'LS~ I
'I
Ij
,
,', .ea
Dl~LJ RG{:;A.'
'. .......
e':v~~~"; :'~;<",~~~-.2i,-~ 'C.~,~,~.
1
~""..l:."'u'''''
lOX Q
~~"1:;:.,
1
,
l~_
1000
XXlO 3OCt:
",00:) ~xx;
'U:':O:.r---" -----y::
6OCO ,,:)CO HE"
__==:J
1 Kll()IolPEFl
'~'::.",:....-.. '-!
-
;
- -~
o
I...,.:.....~".,~
",.,~~..~";;:m".
,,;
""....._~ .~'"
Figure 2d. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (4). The Area of
Potential Effects is indicated by thick gray borders; proposed burn areas are indicated
by thin dark borders. (Based on USGS Harrison Mtn., Calif., 1:24,000 quadrangle)
12
RES 96-210
~,~,;'?i;;t ~ 'o~!:p!:"'~' ~
~
[c.j'
II '
I !
I'i
c'to'l ,: 21At'Ks
JM'lS~' !
II
'I
.
i
i ~'. .';'
>w_
--~
SCALE )24 000
o
"'-'-'-F::.'~'::::::':-":.;'" ~
f'OOO 300':
1 fl'IU
..:=
I
~:.
I
;
1000 0
=-'I,;:.;;i' _
lOCO
400:0
I)I)X
-
6OCO ~JCO FEr
_:::I
1 Kll':)"'PER
:":.,L._.~
-
5 0
.............. ~_...-'T:::'---~
Figure 2e. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (5). The Area of
Potential Effects is indicated by thick gray borders; proposed burn areas are indicated
by thin dark borders. (Based on USGS Harrison Mtn., Calif., 1:24,000 quadrangle)
13
RES 96-210
,"
..
I~. 7'
I, !
0')0', ; !2'~ut~
JM'~V
, .
" "~,,.,
\\r>"
i'i~~~i/i~
"I
I,., (;,:;
~.. ,,,<,it
,
:'~ 'y ~
,
~V"
'J.:'JN;"
,.. ,o",.".^~_^_~,.,.~
- ';,~t~~!:.
CA-SBR-6850H
,
) ~
~........_l-'
1000 0
1=..'l=I"'"","l"
SCALE 1 24000
o
1 ~IL[
,.....--.......-"...-.
-~,
1000 XXlO
300C -lOO::
"iYX
.
600:0
7XC f[(7
,
: 5 0
~~~..:::::L~'';'J~::::~
1 KU ('lMflER
~
Figure 2f. Known cultural resources in the Area of Potential Effects (6). The Area of
Potential Effects is indicated by thick gray borders; proposed burn areas are indicated
by thin dark borders. (Based on USGS Harrison Mtn. and Redlands, Calif., 1:24,000
quadrangles)
14
RES 96-210
>,
~~--
It;
J;!'BJ.4
/I->'~ ~~>C""', '\
r-i..'
'0'\
'(;-'\'.
<"
41-'
.:!-
_." I
. --:F---...n_ur. I
":4eM 1;,1 to-i
&f' -,- '
,. .r.~ ""-~"'\'4 ,>
- ~ . -,;
'~~~~:>;'::'\l ::.~>. _ ,~t~_ '''~' ..
f ...~t~#~</?:'!:>::71A.,:""- '~'"'''~---_ ~ t ~",)...,
.' '. ''''>:':.::':}-'.:<<:'':''' '-T-"":~062
'.' ':), !.>~^c:_(;; ~. {!\.~? :tr, ,.,:':~AJ'
:':;';,'>0:-- - '>;-, i....
;<i.V
.1....-
,
,
.
SCALE 12~ 000
G
I ~ILI::
,
~n_""'L
=r-w
I:~-"
.'~""'-""--^"''''-'''''.
...._-_........._.~----
_..._n__....n._
lOX (;
~_HI-'
1000
JOOO
lOCo: 4(0) ~>:)::
_.~..:..:~:;;;~
<<>:0
:';),"0 FEE"
')
...-..--=...
?:I 0 . I'.I,i"lMUEP.
_ -... ... _.----'1 L__':F:'S:-'~ -.". .....;;,:;:.~
i" '" '7,
~ " t'< " +,~.,......
Figure 3a. Previous cultural resources surveys in the Area of Potential Effects (1),
identified by NADB (National Archaeological Data Base) numbers. Proposed burn
areas are outlined with thin dark borders. (Based on USGS San Bernardino North,
Calif., 1:24,000 quadrangle)
15
RES 96-210
Figure 3b. Previous cultural resources surveys in the Area of Potential Effects (2),
identified by NADB (National Archaeological Data Base) numbers. Proposed bum
areas are outlined with thin dark borders. (Based on USGS San Bernardino North,
Calif., 1:24,000 quadrangle)
16
.'
RES 96-210
"<''''<''''';:~~__~~C _
"
,
1
~
.1 .---..
,
,
o
._... un ...., ...._:=
"00:/ ~):Jl; GOCO ;om FEE.
';'::'CT:-:-===:E.::"-~--'-'~-:::-.:::r:::.:::::'-'::::::::::J
1 1(1l,:)MPEfl
':::;c;::~
LODe 0
8-'~--'~'
1000
.
, -
""'"
lOOO
___ _4 _. l..u""'~..,..~
j j", f',::~ iJ ~
Figure 3c. Previous cultural resources surveys in the Area of Potential Effects (3),
identified by NADB (National Archaeological Data Base) numbers. Proposed burn
areas are outlined with thin dark borders. (Based on USGS San Bernardino North,
Calif., 1:24,000 quadrangle)
17
RES 96-210
1
~::".l.-..-....-'
,
,
'1~:.. '..__n _~
lOX 0 1000 1COO :Y)OO 400:) ~x.'W; 6OCO ;rxo He'
f'=t..~--""'". . ":'-T~:::::':::::E""--'" . ........::::~.:::::J:
::;) I Klt0MfTEfl
-- --0 _.,' .'.;';.;..y .<_.o,t:::::::"" ~L:'~7,_..""'1
,"
"';""'-'._"-'J";\ '"'
"
I, ...."
C"J
lif
(,1.10' : '7'~U~~
J M1L~ ~ !
I,
I'
,
i
Figure 3d. Previous cultural resources surveys in the Area of Potential Effects (4),
identified by NADB (National Archaeological Data Base) numbers. Proposed burn
areas are outlined with thin dark borders. (Based on USGS Harrison Mtn., Calif.,
1:24,000 quadrangle)
18
-RES 96~210
'>...'"
"
I' ,,"'I
G" '
" I
'II!
I'
G"O' , />4A~
J M'L$~,' i
"
"
i
'.
~
. +4 ....
: :ltd'hllO" :<_ '''i
.: ..I...II!I '''':.'IlitiIIP" '",
.L'-----<~iii ",
'<\'~:
- -'
""~ '",
- ,......""
" ,....---<
I
!
SCALE 1.24000
o
l"'IL(
_.n.'
....I.:.:-:~::-:~::::.
.00: 0
=-'~l"--o
1000
'0CiJ )I)():'
.---- .
."'_n
400:'
,
~x
60.:0, lJCO FEET
__'J
1 r.Il(lM!lER
..,
r"
-,-"J
..--._.~
;
.--..,...,
o
-
.mT-'L:~_r-"
Figure 3e. Previous cultural resources surveys in the Area of Potential Effects (5),
identified by NADB (National Archaeological Data Base) numbers._Proposed burn
areas are outlined with thin dark borders. (Based on USGS Harrison Mtn., Calif.,
1:24,000 quadrangle)
19
RES 96-210
."
*
I .."
IIG" A
, I
I I
(,':0' I : ..~tfu
JM'l.Sfi /
V
0~t-(, ""'~6~!i~1;:';'
,..:'~62050~k:l~,'0\ ::. \ ';/:'~
'y_~~.j;,' _ ,'~:;;:r), -",' ~ ',' ....~. '"" ..... _ '"
'.~':: . \~\~,:;;~':::,.?,~5~1~~~ ~~:":" .".,._"
t, ~ "'.'-. ", ',' ~.""_.~.....,,,.,,_ ~_.~
fl_ I'"J.~--<>::'~,~':.:'>:;~~~: \'K~~fh~~:<~
[', ~ . v....,'~' X. . .... ",-
I '--:---:.:."J : ~<~::-\'.r ~~,~ 'O'_",:_:~ _-___~
...., ,I 'S'4, 0""",,",- "-',
.. . \~"''''::~'':'~~>'''','~',
^ ,\' >:~- -""~- -'"
/ii', .".; ['j
,--
" ...+.-.---..-., ":"
"i<' ~g~'.~J.,'l_7~
. I ;,.' ;"i ~
I ,~~ ~~~:,-;~
/::"
;''f
."':C-,'
>J':".,
1
~
..
,
i
SCALE 1 24000
,
I---~
lOX 0
Ff"",",-"""l
1000
'000
3GOC
400::'
~r:(j
~..~.
600:0
,
nco fEr
,
. .5 0
EEI::::l:~.=::c:::::E.-~'-'-I;:':;r=::::::;--'
~ K11 (')I>1fH:A
~
Figure 3f. Previous cultural resources surveys in the Area of Potential Effects (6),
identified by NADB (National Archaeological Data Base) numbers. Proposed burn
areas are outlined with thin dark borders. (Based on USGS Harrison Mtn. and
Redlands, Calif., 1:24,000 quadrangles)
20
I RES 9b-ZlU
APPENDIX 1:
PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS
\
\
\,
\.
\
\
\.
\
,
\,
,
\.
\\
\
\.
,
\
,
\.
\
\
,
\
'\
\
'\
\
'\
21
RES 96-210
OWNER AND PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Bruce Love, Ph.D., SOP A (Society of Professional Archaeologists)
CRM TECH
126 Barret Road
Riverside, CA 92507
"
Professional history
1993-
Owner and principal investigator, CRM TECH, Riverside
1990-1993
Director, Archaeological Research Unit, U.c. Riverside
Coordinator, Archaeological Information Center, U.c. Riverside
1989-1990
Coordinator, Archaeological Information Center, UCLA
1987-1990 Owner and principal investigator, Pyramid Archaeology,
Palmdale, California
1986-1987 Junior Fellow, Dumbarton Oaks Center for Pre-Columbian
Research, Washington, D.C.
1981-1986 Part-time CRM consultant while finishing doctoral program at
UCLA
Education
1986 Ph.D. Anthropology UCLA
1981 M.A. Anthropology UCLA
1976 B.A. Anthropology UCLA
1995 "CEQA Workshop," presented by Association of Environmental Professionals
1994 "Assessing the Significance of Archaeological Sites" presented by Historic Preservation Program,
University of Nevada, Reno.
1994 "CEQA 1994: Issues, Trends, and Advanced Topics" presented by UCLA Extension.
1990 "Introduction to Federal Projects and Historic Preservation Law" presented by U.S, General Services
Administration Training Center.
Memberships
Society of Professional Archaeologists (certified in field research, teaching, and
archaeological administration)
Association of Environmental Professionals
Society for American Archaeology
Society for California Archaeology
Society for Historic Archaeology
American Society for Ethnohistory
Coachella Valley Archaeological Society
22
RES 96-210
APPENDIX 2:
NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA BASE
PRINTOUT FOR RECORDS SEARCH AREA
\\
\.
\
\.
\
'\
,
\
\
\,
\\
\
\
\
\
\
\.
\.
\.
\
\\
\
,
'\
\
\\
\
,
\
\,
,
\
'\
"
23
RES 96-210
..
AREA.REP
03/07/96
SAN BERNARDINO VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECT
Area-Specific Reports
Document No.: 1060197 Unpublished Report
HARRIS, RUTH
1973 HIGHLAND HILLS COUNTRY CLUB, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SURVEY. SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTY MUSEUM ASSOCIATION, SUBMITTED TO JACK STRICKLER.
UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE,
REDLANDS, CA 92374.
La~t Update: 12/22/08 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 11/18/88
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT (II,
FOOD PROCESSING SITE (1), GROUND STONE (3), FLAKED LITHICS (3), TRANSVERSE
RANGES (4), SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD
(4), CA-SBR-231B (4), 73-12.6 (7), GRANITE (3), QUARTZITE (31
Document No.: 1060337 Unpublished Report
HARRIS, RUTH D.,
1976 ARCHAEOLOGICAL - HISTORICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF TRACT 7301, SAN
BERNARDINO. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY MUSEUM ASSOCIATION. SUBMITTED TO
GARNER, TRACADAS AND TROY, INC. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO.
MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 11/30/88 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 11/30/88
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), USGS
HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4), NO RESOURCES (4), 76-5.5 (7)
Document No.: 1060382 Unpublished Report
CUPPLES, SUE ANN
1976 ARCH~EOLOGICAL SURVEYS OF RO~D CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS ON EIGHT
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INDIAN RESERVATIONS, SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY.
SUBMITTED TO BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DIVISION.
UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B, CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE,
REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 12/15/88 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/02/88
Kl?ywllT'ds: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (I), ARCHAEOlOGIC~L RCCONN()ISS()NCE
REPORT (II, ~D08E HOUSES (1), FLAKED LITHICS (3), POTTERY (3),
INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN
7,5' QUAD (4), CA-SBR-2282/H (4), 76-8.6 (7), PENINSULAR RANGES (4),
COASTAL R~NGES (41, PENINSULAR RANGES (4), SYCUAN RESERVATION (4), BARONA
RESERVATION (4), PAUMA RESERVATION (4), LOS COYOTES RESERVATION (4), SANTA
YNEZ RESERV~TION (4), SAN MANUEL RESERVATION (41, TORRES-MARTINEZ
RESERVATION (4)
Document No.: 1060435 Unpublished Report
HEARN, JOSEPH E.
1976 ARCHAEOLOGICAL - HISTORICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF THE DEL ROSA
RESERVOIR IN SAN BERNARDINO CITY. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY MUSEUM
ASSOCIATION. SUBMITTED TO CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON
1
RES 96-210
FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374,
Last Update: 12/07/88 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/07/88
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (II, HISTORIC (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (II, INTERMONTANE VALLEY (41, SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), USGS
HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4), NO RESOURCES (4), 76-11.5 (7)
Document No.: 1060543 Unpublished Report
BROWN, DOUGLAS R.
1977 CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATIONS ON FIVE INDIAN RESERVATIONS IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. DOUGLAS R. BROWN, SUBMITTED TO NATIONAL PARK
SERVICE. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S,B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE
LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 12/19/8B Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/19/88
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT (I),
TRANSVERSE RANGES (4), SAN BERNARD I NO MOUNT A I NS (4), SAN MANUEL
RESERVATION (4), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), COACHELLA VALLEY (4),
TORRES-MARTINEZ RESERVATION (4), PENINSULAR RANGES (4), PAL A RESERVATION
(4), PAUMA RESERVATION (4), COASTAL RANGES (4), SANTA YNEZ RESERVATION
(4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4), NO RESOURCES (4), 77-8.13 (7)
Document No.: 1060568 Unpublished Report
HEARN, JOSi::P.!;l Eo
1977 ARCHAEOLOGICAL - HISTORICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF PORTIONS OF
SECS, 27 AND 34, TIN R3W, REDLANDS QUADRANGLE. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
MUSEUM ASSOCIATION, SUBMITTED TO WESTEC SERVICES, INC, UNPUBLISHED
REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, RED LANDS , CA
92374,
Last Update: 12/19/88 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/19/88
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (1), TRANSVERSE RANGES (4), SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS (4), USGS
HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4), NO RESOURCES (4), 77-11.3 (7)
Document No" 1060579 Unpublished Report
HEARN, JOSEPH E.
1977 ARCHAEOLOGICAL - HISTORICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF TENTATIVE TRACT
10102, EAST HIGHLANDS AREA. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY MUSEUM ASSOCIATION,
SUBMITTED TO CIVIL ENGINEERING. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO,
MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
L,;st Ui)(jate: 12/20/88 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/20/88
fe,words: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC <I), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (1), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (41, USGS
REDLANDS 7.S' OUAD ('.), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7,5' QUAD (4), NO RESOURCES
(4), 77-12.7 (7)
Dccument No.' 1060625 Unpublished Report
STUART, JAMES
1978 FINAL REPORT, AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF THE SAN MANUEL INDIAN
RESERVATION, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH
UNIT, UCR. SUBMITTED TO NATIONAL PARK SERVICE. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON
FILE AT S,B, CO, MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
L,;st Update: 12/21/88 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/21/88
,',eywords: PREHlsTornc (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT (I), VILLAGE (I',
2
RES 96-210
CEMETERY (I), ADOBE HOUSE SITES (I), STONE HOUSE SITES (I), WATER CANAL
(I), STONE CIRCLE (I), FIRE HEARTH (I), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN
BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), SAN MANUEL RESERVATIDN (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN
7.5' QUAD (4), CA-SBR-2282/H (4), PI062-2-H (4), PI062-4-H (41, 78-4.1A
(7)
,-
Document No,: 1060626 Unpublished Report
SPILLER, STEVEN T.
Iq7q SAN MANUEL INDIAN RESERVATION: AN EXAMINATION OF ITS HISTORY.
STEVEN T. SPILLER. SU8MITTED TO UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT RIVERSIDE,
UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE,
REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 12/21/BB Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/21/BB
Keywords: HISTORIC (I), CULTURAL HISTORY (1), ETHNOHISTORIC (II,
INTERMONTANE VALL~Y (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN
7.5' QUAD (4), NO RESOURCES (4), 7B-4.IB (7), SAN MANUEL RESERVATION (4)
Document No.: 1060645 Unpublished Report
HEARN, JOSEPH E.
1978 ARCHAEOLOGICAL - HISTORICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF EXTENDING
PIED~IONT DRIVE TO INTERSECT WITH HIGHLAND AVENUE AT 80ULDER AVENUE, SAN
8ERNARDINO AREA. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY MUSEUM ASSOCIATION. SUBMITTED TO
CITY Of-SAN BERNAR01NO. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT s,B, CO. MUSEUM,
2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 12/22/B8 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/22/88
f',"ywords: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (I), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN DERNARDINO VALLEY (4), USGS
HArlRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4), NO RESOURCES (4), 78-5.5 (7)
Document No.: 1060715 Unpublished Report
HEARN, JOSEPH E.
Iq78 CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF EAST HIGHLAND RANCH PROPERTY, SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTY MUSEUM ASSOCIATION. SUBMITTED TO WESTERN COMMUNITIES,
ltlC. WlPUElLlSHED RCPOnT ON FILC AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 202<, ORANGE TI1EE
LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374,
Last Update: 12/2B/88 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/28/88
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (1), CULTURAL HISTORY (I), STONE WALLS
, I ), WATER FLUMES (I), IRRIGATION DITCHES (1), WATER RESERVOIRS (I), STONE
BUILDING (I), ItHERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4),
TRANSVERSE RANGES (4), SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS (4), USGS REDLANDS 7,5'
QUAD (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4), NO RESOURCES; NO SPECIFIC
RESOURCES MENTIONED (4), 78-12,3 (7)
Document No.: 1061124 Unpublished Report
LERCH. MICHAEL K,
1981 CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF THE EAST HIGHLANDS RANCH, SAN
BER!'4ARD I NO COUNTY, CAL I FORN I A. SAN BERNARD I NO COUNTY MUSEU~I
ASSOCIATION. SUBMITTED TO ENVICON CORPORATION. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON
FILE AT S.B. CO, MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 04/05/89 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 03/06/89
K~ywGrd5: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (II, ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), STONC FOUNDATIONS (I), BLACKSMITH SHOP (I), HORSE BARNS (I),
3
RES 96-210
COOKHOUSE (1), BUNKHOUSE (I), RESIDENCES (1), WATER WELLS (1), WATER
DITCHES (I), STONE MONUMENT (1), STONE WALLS (I), RANCHING SITE (1),
INTERMONTANE VALLEY (I,), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN
7,5' QUAD (4), USGS REDLANDS 7.5' QUAD (4), RESOURCE NUMBERS UNKNOWN (4),
1890'S AD - PRESENT (5), 81-5.7A (7)
Document No.: 1061125 Unpublished Report
LERCH, MICHAEL K.
1986 CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF TENTATIVE TRACTS 13467, 13468, AND
13469, EAST HIGHLANDS RANCH PHASE 3, SAN 8ERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
LERCH & ASSOCIATES. SUBMITTED TO EAST HIGHLANDS RANCH, INC. UNPUBLISHED
REPORT ON FILE AT S,B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA
9237",
Last Update: 04/05/89 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 03/06/89
Keywords: HISTORIC (1), RANCHING SITE (1) ,STONE MONUMENT (1), PACKING HOUSE
(I), WATER FLUMES (1), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4),
USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4), USGS REDLANDS 7.5' QUAD (4),
RESOURCE NUM8ERS UNKNOWN (4),81-5.78 (7)
Document No,: 1061173 Unpublished Report
~IOORE, DEBORAH
1981 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11989, EAST OF
HIGHLANf}4N SAN BERNARDINO' COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH
UNIT, UCR. SU8MITTED TO BROADMOOR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY. UNPUBLISHED
REPORT ON FILE AT 5.8. CO, MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA
92374.
Last Update: 04/05/89 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 03/13/89
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (1), HISTORIC (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (1), STONE WALL (1), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (41, SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY
(~), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (I,), RESOURCE NUM8ERS UNKNOWN (4),
81-8.2 (7)
Document No.: 1061410 Unpublished Report
EAST HIGHLANDS RANCH, INC.
1983 EAST HIGHLANDS RANCH PHOTO ESSAY. RICHARD COSTALES (PHOTOGRAPHER).
SUBMITTED'TO EAST HIGHLANDS RANCH, INC. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT
5 . B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 9237".
~~st Update: 05/01/89 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 05/01/89
fEfw;;rds: HISTOfllC (1), HISTORIC STRUCTURES RECORDATION (1), INTERMONTANE
VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7,5' QUAD
(4), USGS REDLANDS 7.5' QUAD (4), RESOURCE NUMBERS UNKNOWN (4), 83-10.2
(7)
Document No.: 1061445 Unpublished Report
RECTOR, CAROL H.
1984 CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY FOR THE 1984 AND PART OF 1985
CALIFORNIA METROPOLITAN PROJECT AREA PUBLIC LANDS SALE PROGRAM. CAROL
H. RECTOR. SUBMITTED TO BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT. UNPU8LISHED REPORT ON
FILE AT 5.8, CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374,
L"st U~datE: 05/12/89 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 05/12/89
f;"l'lm.-ds: PREHISTORIC (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT (1), BEDROCK
SLICKS (1), STONE ALIGNMENTS (I), STONE CAIRN (I), FOOD PROCESSING SITES
4
RES 96-210
(I), STONE CIRCLES (I), TINNED CAN (3), POTTERY (3), FLAKED LITHICS (3),
BASALT (3), PORPHYRY (3), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), PENINSULAR RANGES (4),
USGS YUCAIPA 7,5' QUAD (4), USGS FOREST FALLS 7,5' QUAD (4), USGS SAN
BERNARDINO NORTH 7.5' QUAD (4), USGS CUCAMoNGA PEAK 7.5' QUAD (4),
CA-RIV-2786 (4), CA-RIV-2787 (4), CA-RIV-2788 (4), CA-SDI-9887 (4),
CA-SDI-9888 (4), CA-SDI-9889 (4), CA-SDI-9B90 (4), CA-SDI-9891 (4),
CA-SDI-9892 (4), 84-7.4 (7)
~
Document No.: 1061603 Unpublished Report
BARBER, RUSSELL J.
1986 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL SITE SURVEY OF THE AREA OF THE
PROPOSED SECOND AFTERBAY, DEVIL CANYON POWERPLANT, SAN BERNARDINO,
CALIFORNIA, RUSSELL J. BARBER. SUBMITTED TD DEVIL CANYON PoWERPLANT.
UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE,
REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 06/12/89 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 06/12/89
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), USGS SAN
BERNARDINO NORTH 7.5' QUAD (4), NO RESOURCES (4), 86-I1.7A-B (7)
Document No,: 1061728 Unpublished Report
BROCK, JAMES AND JOHN F. ELLIOTT
1987 HISTORICAL RESOURCES OF THE EAST HIGHLANDS RANCH: PARCELS 19 ~ 22.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY GROUP. SUBMITTED TO MOBILE LAND DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE
TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 06/28/89 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 06/28/89
f:eywords: HISTORIC (I), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT (I), WATER
DITCH (I), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), USGS
HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4), USGS REDLANDS 7.5' QUAD (4), PSBR-IO-H
(4),87-9.7 (7)
Document No.: 1061783 Unpublished Report
HORNBECK, DIW I 0 AND HOWr,RD DOTTS
1988 SEVEN OAKS DAM PROJECT: WATER SYSTEMS, AREA LOCATION SYSTEMS.
SUBMITTED TO U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. CONTRACT NO.
DACW09-86-D-0034. UNPU8LISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024
ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
L;l"t Upd.lte: 06/29/B9 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 06/29/89
f,F!iwurd'_: HISTORIC (I), HISTORIC STRUCTURES SURVEY (I), IRRIGATlON DITCHES
()), WATER TRANSPORT ION SYSTEMS (I), WATER DIVERSION BASINS ()),
RESERVOIRS (I), TUNNELS (I), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO
VALLEY (4), SANTA ANA RIVER (4), TRANSVERSE RANGES (4), SAN BERNARDINO
MOUNT A I NS ('Il, USGS REDLANDS 7.5' QUAD (4), USGS YUCA I PA 7.5' QUAD (4),
USGS fcELLER PEAK 7.5' QUAD (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4),
RESOURCE tlUMBERS UtncNOWN (Ill, 88-3,5 (7)
Documel1t No.: 1061956 Unpublished Report
HATHEWAY, ROGER G. AND ANNE DUFFIELD
1989 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL SURVEY REPORT FOR THE STERLING HEIGHTS
PROPERTY, HATHEWAY ~ ASSOCIATES. SUBMITTED TO TAHITI GROUP. UNPUBLISHED
REPORT ON FILE AT S,B. CO, MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA
5
RES 96-210
92374,
Last Update: 12/07/89 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/07/89
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (1), HISTORIC (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (1), RANCHING SITE (I), TRANSVERSE RANGES (Id, SAN BERNARDINO
~IUUNTA I NS (4), I NTEHMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARD I NO VALLEY (it!,
PI062-8-H (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7,5' QUAD (4), 89-11,2 (7)
Document No.: 1062050 Unpublished Report
MIKESELL, STEPHEN D,
1989 HISTORICAL RESOURCES EVALUATION ON REPORT - HISTORIC NORTH FORK
CANAL, HIGHLANDS CANAL AND CITY CREEK DITCH, 8-SBO-330, P.M. 28.7/30.2;
08-157901. STEPHEN 0, MIKESELL, SUBMITTED TO CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024
ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 10/04/90 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 10/04/90
Keywords: HISTORIC (1), ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVALUATION REPORT (1), CANAL (1),
INTERMONTAINE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), CA-SBR-6544H (4),
CA-SBR-6545H (4), CA-SBR-6546H (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4),
89-12.8 (7)
Document No.: 1062056 Unpublished Report
DE MUNCK, VICTOR C.
1990 ENVI'RONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION: A CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT OF A
12 ACRE TRACT DESIGNATED AS TENTATIVE TRACT NO, 14655 LOCATED IN THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL & ETHNOGRAPHIC FIELD ASSOCIATES. SUBMITTED TO JOHN
PULLIAM. UNPU8LISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE
LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 10/04/90 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 10/04/90
f:eywords: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (I), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), INTERMONTAINE VALLEY (4), SAN 8ERNARDINO VALLEY (4), NO
RESOURCES (4), USGS SAN BERNARDINO NORTH 7.5' QUAD (4), 90-1.3 (7)
Document No.: 1062092 UnpubI ished Report
LERCH, MICHAEL K,
1990 ADDENDUM TO: CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF FIVE PUBLIC WORKS
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, VERDEMONT AREA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT #987,
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA. LERCH & ASSOCIATES. SUBMITTED TO
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT 5.B. CO. MUSEUM,
2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 10/09/90 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 10/09/90
i:"iwurLis: pn[HISTOI~IC (I), HISTORIC (1), I\RCIIAEOLOl,lCAL RECONN(\lSSANCE
REPORl (I), INTER~lONTAIN[ VALLEY (it!, SAN !lERNi\I\DINO VALLEY (4), NO
RESOURCES (4), USGS SAN BERNARD I NO NORTH 7.5' QUAD (4), 90-1,.5 (7)
Document No.: 1062106 Unpublished Report
MACKO, MICHAEL E,
1990 RESULTS OF AN INTENSIVE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF PM 8751 (6,2
ACRES), CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
MACVO ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTING. SUBMITTED TO CHEELEY CHIROPRACTIC, INC.
UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT s.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE,
REDLANDS, CA 92374.
6
RES 96-210
Last Update: \0/09/90 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 10/09/90
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (\), HISTORIC (\), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (1), TRANSVERSE RANGES (4), SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS (4), NO
RESOURCES (4), USGS SAN BERNARDINO NORTH 7.5' QUAD (4), 90-6,1 (7)
.-
Document No.: 1062\99 Unpublished Report
EVERSON, DICKEN
1990 CULTURAL RESOURCe ASSESSMENT: TENTATIVe PIIRCEL 13137, SYCI\110RE
CANYON AREA OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH UNIT,
UCR. SUBMITTED TO MR. ~ MRS. EARL BRUMETT. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT
S.B. CO, MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 12/27/90 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/27/90
~:eywords: PREHISTORIC (I), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT 11),
INTERMONTAINE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), NO RESOURCES (4),
USGS SAN BERNARDINO NORTH 7.5' QUAD (41, 90-11.4 (71
Document No.: 1062212 Unpublished Report
DROVER, CHRISTOPHER E.
1990 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUIITION: AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF
PARADISE HILLS, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. CHRISTOPHER DROVEIl,
SUBMITTED TO YVONNE NEAL. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S,B. CO. MUSEUM,
2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, RED LANDS , CA 92374.
Last Update: 12/28/90 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 12/28/90
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (11, ARCHI\EOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (Il, INTERMONTAINE VALLEY (41, SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (41, NO
RESOURCES (4), USGS SAN BERNARDINO NORTH 7.5' QUAD (41, 90-7,6 17l
Document No.: 1062225 Unpublished Report
ALEXANDROWICZ, J. STEPHEN, PETER E. CARR, AND IVAN STRUDWICK
1991 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS FOR THE WOODLAND HEIGl-ITS
PROJECT, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA.
CHAMBERS GROUP, SUBMITTED TO ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS. UNPUBLISHED REPORT O~
FILE AT S.B, CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 11/02/91 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 10/09/91
Keywords: PREHISTORIC Ill, HISTORIC (11, ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), FARMING SITE (1), ROADS (11, RESERVOIR (I), WOODEN LUMBER (3),
METAL PIPE (3), TRANSVERSE RANGES (4), SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAIN (4),
CA,-SDR -3860H (ill, CA-S8R-6797H (Ill. USGS HARRISON MOUNT A I N 7,5' OUAO (Ill.
91-\.4 (7)
.
Document No.: 1062445 Unpublished Report
MACKO, MICHAEL E. AND DAVID D. EARLE
1991 CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY AND EVALUATION FOR THE WALMART CENTER
PROJECT (CUP 91-26: GPA 91-05: TPM 13892), CITY OF SAN RERNr,RDIND. SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. MACr:o ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTHJG.
SUBMITTED TO DOERKEN PROBERTIES, UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S,B, CO,
MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374,
Last Update: OS/20/92 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on OS/20/92
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (11, HISTORIC (I), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), CULTURAL HISTORY (I), RESIDENTIAL SITE II), AGRICULTURAL SITE
(1), ~1i\TER STORAGE SITE (1), REFUSE DISPOSAL SITE (I), WATCR
TRANSPORTATION SITE (1), STONE FOUNDATION (I), CERAMICS (3), METAL
7
REs-'96-2fO
HARDWARE (3), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4),
CA-SBR-7018H (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7,S' QUAD (4), 91-8.2 (7)
Document No.: 10624S2 Unpublished Report
LASKA, ROBIN E. AND MARK T, SWANSON
1991 A CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY OF A 25.8 ACRE TRACT OF LAND DESIGNATED
AS TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14473 IN CAJON PASS, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA.
RESEARCH ASSOCIATES. SUBMITTED TO BONADIMAN ENGINEERING. UNPUBLISHED
REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA
92371"
Last Update: OS/20/92 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on OS/20/92
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (I), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), WATER TRANSPORTATION SITE (I), WATER STORE AGE SITE (I),
TRANSVERSE RANGES (4), SAN 8ERNARDINO VALLEY (4), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4),
SA~J BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS (4), CA-SBR-704SH (4), USGS SAN BERNARDINO NORTH
7.S' QUAD (41, 91-9,2 (7)
Document No.: 1062462 Unpublished Report
SHINN, JUANITA R.
1991 A CULTURAL RESOURCES RECONNAISSANCE OF THE ARROWHEAD SPRINGS
PROPERTY, APPROXIMATELY 89 ACRES LOCATED IN SAN BERNARDINO, SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. RMW PALEO ASSOCIATES. SUBMITTED TO
TERRACE-PINES DEVELOPMENT CO. UNPU8LISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S,B. CO.
MUSEUM, L!024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92371"
Last Update: OS/20/92 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on OS/20/92
Keywords: PREHISTORIC (1), HISTORIC (II, ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), WATER TRANSPORTATION SITES (I), RESIDENTIAL SITES (1), WALLS
(1), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), CA-SBR-7019H (4),
C{\-S[1I1,70;~OH (I,), CA-SBR-7021H (4), CA-SBR-7022H (4), PI071-27H (Id, USGS
SAN BERNARDINO NORTH 7,5' QUAD (4), 91-B.8 (7)
Document No.: 1062474 Unpublished Report
SHINN, JUANITA R.
1991 ADDENDUM TO: A CULTURAL RESOURCES RECONNAISSANCE OF THE ARROWHEAD
SPRINGS PROPERTY, APPROXIMATELY 89 ACRES LOCATED IN SAN BERNARDINO, SAN
BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA. RMW PALEO ASSOCIATES. SUBMITTED TO TERRACE
PINES DEVELOPMENT. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024
ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: OS/21/92 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on OS/21/92
f:eywo,ds: HISTORIC (1), HISTORIC STRUCTURES RECONNAISSANCE REPORT (I),
RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE (1), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY
(4). RESOURCE NUMBER UNKNOWN (4), USGS SAN BERNARDINO NORTH 7,5' QUAD (4),
91-11.4 (7)
Document No.: 1062526 Unpublished Report
RITZ, FRANK AND SUE A. WADE
1990 CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY OF MARTIN RANCH. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY.
RECON, SUBMITTED TO MONTECITO EQUITIES. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT
S,B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: OS/22/92 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on OS/22/92
f:eyword,: PREHISTORIC (1), HISTORIC (I), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), RESIDENTIAL SITES (I), GLASS BOTTLES (3), CERAMICS (3),
8
RES 96-210
INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), CA-SBR-7030H (4),
CA-SBR-703IH (4), USGS SAN BERNARDINO NORTH 7.5' QUAD (4), USGS DEVORE
7.5' QUAD (4), 90-B.16 (7)
"
Document No.: 1062661 Unpublished Report
MCKENNA, JEANETTE A.
1992 CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED CITY CREEK WATER
TREATMENT PLANT ON HIGHLAND AVENUE, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
MCKENNA ET AL. SUBMITTED TO URS CONSULTANTS. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE
AT S.B. CO, MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 01/14/93 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 01/07/93
K2ywords: PREHISTORIC (I), HISTORIC (J), ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE
REPORT (I), WATER TRANSPORTATION SITE (I), HABITATION SITE (I), REFUSE
DISPOSAL SITE (I), GLASS BOTTLES (3), TINNED CANS (3), GROUND STONE (3),
INTERMONTANE VALLEY (3), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), CA-SBR-6544H (4),
CA-SBR-717IH (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4), 92-6.3 (7)
Docum2nt No,: 1062716 Unpublished Report
JENSON, WILLIAM A.
1991 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURFACE RECONNAISSANCE OF APPROXIMATELY 25 ACRES
LOCATED ON THE SAN MANUEL INDIAN RESERVATION, NORTH OF HIGHLAND, CA.
WILLIAM A. JENSON. SUBMITTED TO HENRY DURO. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE
AT S. B.- eo. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 09/22/93 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 09/22/93
I:L'Y""O I'll '':' : ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT (I), SAN MANUEL INDIAN
RESERVATlOI~ (4), CA-SBR-22B2/H (4), CA-SBR-6545H (4), SAN BERNARDINO
MOUNTAINS (4), TRANSVERSE RANGES (4), 25 ACRES (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN
7.5' QUAD (4), SERRANO (51, HISTORIC (5), PREHISTORIC (5)
Document No.: 1062761 Unpublished Report
MCKENNA, JEANETTE A.
1993 ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING OF SEISMIC TRENCHING ACTIVITIES AT THE
CITY CREEK WATER TREATMENT FACILITY PROJECT AREA, HIGHLAND, SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. MCKENNA ET AL. SUBMITTED TO URS CONSULTANTS,
INC. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE
LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374.
I ..1'. I. tJp~1.1 Ll\: 1 n/ 1 rl/7":1 r...dd lUIJl~d by: L-Jnll Cfl O:I Ull 10/1 (1193
I:.'ywords: ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING REPORT (1), CANAL (1), TINNED CAN (3),
GLASS BOTTLE (31, CONCRETE (3), SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS (4), TRANSVERSE
RANGES (4), CA-SBR-6544H (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD (4),
HISTORIC (5), 1916-1940 (5)
Document No.: 1062806 Unpublished Report
SCHMIDT, JAMES J.
1992 CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION OF THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT
OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND US FOREST SERVICE LAND EXCHANGE PROJECT.
GREENWOOD AND ASSOCIATES. SUBMITTED TO P & D TECHNOLOGIES. CONTRACT NO.
05-12-CA-60. UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B, CD. MUSEUM, 202'. ORANGE
TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374,
L~st Upd~te: 01/18/94 C~taloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 01/18/94
I:Ey'WO,-d'.: ARCHAEDLOGIU,L RECONNAISSANCE REPORT (1), ',0 ACRES (4), SAN
BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS (41, TRANSVERSE RANGES (4), NO RESOURCES (4), USGS
9
RES 9b 210
SAN 8ERNARDINO NORTH 7.5' QUAD (4)
Document No.: 1062853 Unpublished Report
FOSTER, JOHN M" JAMES J. SCHMIDT, CARMEN A. WE8ER, GWENDOLYN R. ROMANI, AND
R08ERTA S, GREENWOOD
1991 CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION: INLAND FEEDER PROJECT, MWD O~
SOUTHERN CA. GREENWOOD ~ ASSOCIATES. SU8MITTED TO P~D TECHNOLOGIES.
UNPU8LISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.8, CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE,
REDLANDS, CA 92374.
Last Update: 04/20/94 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 04/20/94
~eywords: ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT (I), STRUCTURAL SITE (I),
FOUNDATIONS (I). BRIDGe (I). WALLS (I), WATER STORAGe SITC {11, WMCD
TRANSPORTATION SITE (I), REFUSE DISPOSAL SITE (I), DAIRY SITE (I), ~ENCe
{Il, CANAL {Il, RESIDENTIAL SITE (I), FLUME (I', 8EDROCK MORTARS (I),
RANCHING SITE (I), ORCHARD {I', AGRICULTURAL SITE (I', RAILROAD SITE (I),
WELL (11, CISTERN (1), POWER PLANT (1), CERAMICS (3), GLASS {31, METAL
(3', WAGON (3), WOOD (3), SHELL (3), FAUNAL REMAINS {31, GLASS BOTTLE (3),
POTTERY (3), CANS (3), 8RICK (3', MANO (3', TINNED CANS (3), ADOBE (3',
CONCRETE (3), 136 MILES (4), SAN 8ERNARDINO VALLEY (4', RIVERSIDE (41.
INTERMONTANE VALLEY {4', USGS SAN BERNARDINO NORTH 7.S' QUAD (4~, USGS
DEVORE 7.S' QUAD (4', USGS FONTANA 7.S' QUAD (4), USGS SAN BERNARDINO
SOUTH 7.S' QUAD (4', USGS REDLANDS 7.S' QUAD (41" USGS HARRISON 7.S' QUAD
(4), USGs YUCAIPA 7.5' QUAD (I,), CA-SBR-6086H (4), CA-S8R-b354H (4),
CA-SBR-6847H (4), CA-SBR-6848H (4', CA-SBR-6B49H (4', CA-SBR-6BSOH (41,
CA-S8R-68SIH (4), CA-SBR-6B52H (4', CA-SBR-68S3H (4), CA-SBR-6854H (4),
CA-SBR-6BSSH (4), CA-SBR-6BS6H (4), CA-S8R-68S7H (4), CA-S8R-6858H (4',
CA-SBR-68S9H (41, CA-SBR-6B60H (4', CA-S8R-6B6IH (4', CA-S8R-6B62H {41,
CA-SBR-6863H (4), CA-S8R-6864H (41, CA-SBR-686SH (41, CA-S8R-6866H (4),
CA-SBR-6B67H (4), CA-SBR-6868H (4), CA-S8R-6869H (4), CA-S8R-6870H (4',
CA-SBR-6871H (41, CA-SBR-6872H (4', CA-SBR-6940H (4), CA-S8R-702IH (4'.
CA-SBR-70S0 {4" CA-SBR-7051H (41, CA-SBR-7053H (4), CA-SBR-7054H (4).
CA-SBR-70S5H (4), CA-SBR-7702H (4), PI074-35H (4', PI071,-I24H (4',
PI063-5H {41, PSBR-20H (4), PREHISTORIC (5), HISTORIC (5', GA8~ELINO (5),
SERRANO (5), LUISENO (5)
Document No,: 1063036 Unpublished Report
STURM, BRAD, D. MCLEAN, W. MCCAWLEY, S. CONKLING, AND M. PARtTR
1995 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL INVESTIGATIONS O~ THE CRAM SCHOOL SITE
~ TENTATIVE TRACTS 13551 ~ 15554, EAST HIGHLANDS, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY,
CA. LSA. SU8MITTED TO EAST HIGHLANDS RANCH, INC. UNPU8LISHED REPORT ON
FILE AT S,B. CO, MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374,
Last Updat..: 08/25/95 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 08/25/75
K"ywords: ARCHI\EOLOGICAL TESTING REPORT {I', SCHOOL SITe (I). RANCHUIG SITE
{Il, WI\TER TRANSPORTATION SITE (1), IRRIGATION SITE (I), DITCH (I),
ORCHARD (I), REFUSE DISPOSAL SITE (I), RESIDENTIAL SITE (I), FLUME (1).
FOUNDATIONS (I), WALL (I), CONCRETE (3', BRICK (3', CESSPOOL (31, WOOD
(3), SHINGLES (3', NAILS (3', TINNED CAN (3), GLASS (3', CERAMICS (3), 25
ACRES (4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4),
CI\-SDR-651,I,H ('I), CA-SBfl-7995H {'I 1, CA-SBR-7996H (',), USGS REGLAND'. 7, ~.
QUAD (4), HISTORIC (5), AD 1882-1902 (S), AD 1902-1944 (5). AD 1944-19~8
(S), AD 1958-1990 (5), AD 1858 (5), HISTORIC STRUCTURES (6), WATER SYSTEMS
(6)
10
RES 96-210
Document No.: 1063037 Unpublished Report
MCLEAN, DEBORAH, MARl PRITCHARD-PARKER, AND BRAD STURM
1995 CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR 278.4 ACRES WITHIN EAST HIGHLANDS
RANCH, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. LSA. SUBMITTED TO EAST HIGHLANDS
RI~NCH. INC, UNPUBLISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B, CO. MUSEUM, 2021. ORANGE
TflEE U\NE, HCDLANDS, CA 9237".
Last Update: 08/30/95 Cataloged by: WRO-CA-03 on 08/30/95
Keywords: ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT (II, WATER TRANSPORTATION
SITE (1), IRRIGATION (1), DITCH (1), REFUSE DISPOSAL SITE (1), WALL (1),
FLUME (1), WATER STORAGE SITE (1), RESERVOIR (1), SHED (1), CAN (3), GLASS
(3), GLASS BOTTLE (3), JAR (3), CONCRETE (3), MORTAR (3), BRICK (3), WOOD
(3), CERAMIC (31, SHELL (3), FAUNAL REMAINS (31, METAL (31, 278.4 ACRES
(4), SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY (4), INTERMONTANE VALLEY (4), CA-SBR-7051H (4),
CA-SBR-6073H (4), CA-SBR-6544H (41, USGS REDLANDS 7.5' QUAD ("I, USGS
HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD ("l, HISTORIC (51, WATER SYSTEMS (6)
.-
Document No.: 1063038 Unpublished Report
MCKENNA, JEANETTE A.
1995 ARCHAEOLOGICAL TEST EXCAVATIONS AND EVALUATION OF RESOURCES WITHIN
CA-SBR-7171/H, AN HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE IN THE CITY CREEK AREA,
SAN BERNARDINO CO., CA. MCKENNA ET AL. SUBMITTED TO EAST VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT. UNPU8LISHED REPORT ON FILE AT S.B. CO. MUSEUM, 2024 ORANGE
TREE LANE, REDLANDS, CA 92374,
l..,.., l Updd te: 08/30/95 Cata loged by: WRo-CA-03 on 00/30/95
Keywords: ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING REPORT (1), HOMESTEADING SITE (1), WATER
TRANSPORTATION SITE (1), IRRIGATION (1), DITCH (1), WALL (II, FOOD'
PROCESSING SITE (1), CONCRETE (3), METAL (3), CAN (3), TOOLS (3), TOYS
(3l, WIRE (3), BARREL HOOP (3), CERAMIC (3), GLASS (3), GLASS BOTTLE (3),
JAR (3), LEATHER (3), CLAY SEWER PIPE (3), FAUNAL REMAINS (31, BUTTON (3),
GRANITE (31, MET ATE (3), 1 ACRE (41, SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS (4),
TRANSVERSE RANGE (4), CA-SBR-7171/H (4), USGS HARRISON MOUNTAIN 7.5' QUAD
(4), HISTORIC (5), AD 1884 (5), AD 1860 (51, AD 1916-1947 (51, AD
1880-191" (51, AD 1914-1929 (5), AD 1935-1938 (5), PREHISTORIC (5), WATER
SYSTEMS (6)
11
RES 96-210
APPENDIX 4
County of San Bernardino
Prescribed Burn Project
General Biological Assessment
of
Prescribed Burn Areas
Report
Prepared for:
Richard McGreevy
Disaster Preparedness Coordinator
City of San Bernardino
(909) 384-5115
Prepared by:
Tom Dodson & Associates
463 North Sierra Way
San Bernardino, California 92410
(909) 884-9700
April 12. 1996
RES 96-210
Introduction
Tom Dodson & Associates was contracted to conduct biological surveys of all areas which
have been identified as possible burn locations, as part of a joint prescribed burn project
between the City of San Bernardino, the County of San Bernardino, the California
Department of Forestry, and the United States Forest Service, This report provides a
general biological assessment of the plant and animal communities located at each of the
areas identified as potential burn locales, and addresses potential animal and plant
species which have historically occurred in the area.
Methodology
A California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base (NDDB) search
was conducted for both quadrangles (San Bernardino North and Harrison Mountain) in
which the project encompasses, to identify historical records of plant and animal species
of concern. Gregory E, Burchett and Lisa Kegarice of Tom Dodson & Associates
conducted field surveys on April 02 and 12, 1996 to determine precise locations of
prescribed burn areas, and the species compositions of both plant and animal communities
located at each site. Locations of the areas were first identified by transcribing initial burn
area information from the City of San Bernardino Disaster Preparedness Coordinator's
office onto a topographical map (USGS 15' San Bernardino North and Harrison Mountain
Quads), and were then located and surveyed by foot. Plant and animal species were
identified and noted, with plant communities locations identified on maps.
Results
Following is a description of the plant communities in each of the areas identified by the
City of San Bernardino Disaster Preparedness Coordinators Office as potential areas in
which may be burned as part of the prescribed burn project. These locations were all
transcribed onto topographical maps, and surveyed by foot.
Location 1 Section 25, T. 2N., R. 5W, San Bernardino North Quad. This area was
previously burned by the U.S. Forest Service on 14 November 1995. The
elevation of the burn area lies between 4000 and 4800 feet above sea level,
along Bailey Forest Road, south of Pine Flat, and lies within the San
Bernardino National Forest. The dominant vegetation type located in the
immediate vicinity is Chamise Chaparral, and is dominated by Chamise
(Adenostoma fasciculatum), Ceanothus (Ceanothus leucodermis), Manzanita
(Arctostaphylos glauca) and Scrub Oak (Quercus dumosa). Other common
species located here include White Sage (Salvia apiana) and Buckwheat
(Eriogonum fasciculatum). Location 1 is transitioned at higher elevations by
RES 96-210
Montane Chaparral, but this area was not subjected to burn, nor is identified
as a potential burn area. This area is also transitioned at lower elevations
to Location 4, described later,
Location 2 Sections 35 and 36, T, 2N., R. 5W, San Bernardino North Quad. The
elevation of this area lies between approximately 2000 and 2850 feet above
sea level, and lies within both the San Bernardino National Forest and the
City of San Bernardino. The dominant vegetation community type is
Chamise Chaparral, but also includes Southern Oak Woodland. The
chaparral species include Chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), Ceanothus
(Ceanothus leucodermis), White Sage (Salvia apiana), and Buckwheat
(Eriogonum fasciculatum). The oak lNOodland lies along a stream (identified
as a topographical blue line), and, is -dominated by Canyon Live Oak
(Quercus chryso/epis) and Coastal Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia).
Location 3 Sections 25, 35 and 36, T, 2N" R. 5W, San Bernardino North Quad, This
area lies outside the potential burn area of Location 2, but is immediately
adjacent to it, within the San Bernardino National Forest. It includes the
identified blue line stream which follows Meyers Canyon, This area includes
comprises a Riparian Woodland, dominated by CottonlNOod (Populus
fremontil), Willow (Salix sp.), Mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), and Sycamore
(Platanus racemosa),
Location 4 Section 36, T. 2N., R. 5W, San Bernardino North Quad. The elevation lies
between 2100 and 3400 feet above sea level, within both the San
Bernardino National Forest and the City of San Bernardino. This area
contains three distinct plant communities: Chamise Chaparral, Southern Oak
Woodland, and a Riparian Woodland. Species located in the Chamise
Chaparral include Chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), Ceanothus
(Ceanothus leucodermis), White Sage (Salvia apiana), Buckwheat
(Eriogonum fasciculatum), Black Sage (Salvia mellifera), Verba Santa
(Eriodictyon trichocalyx), Laurel Sumac (Ma/osma laurina), Our Lords Candle
(Yucca whipplei), and Mexican Elderberry (Sambucus mexicana). The
Southern Oak Woodland is dominated by Canyon Live Oak (Quercus
chryso/epis), The Riparian Woodland communities dominant species
include Cottonwood (Populus fremontil), Willow (Salix sp,), Mulefat
(Baccharis salicifolia), Giant Reed (Arrundo donax), and Sycamore (Platanus
racemosa). Immediately adjacent to this area, along Bailey Canyon Road,
lies an extensive Riparian Woodland Community, with dominant species
described above.
Location 5 Section 6, T. 1 N., R. 4W, San Bernardino North Quad. This area lies
immediately adjacent to the San Bernardino National Forest, within the City
of San Bernardino, and has an elevation of approximately 2000 to 2400 feet
above sea level. The plant community is a combination of Chamise
RES 96-210
Chaparral and Coastal Sage Scrub. The Chamise Chaparral community
includes Chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), Ceanothus (Ceanothus
leucodermis), White Sage (Salvia apiana), Buckwheat (Eriogonum
fasciculatum), Black Sage (Salvia mellifera), Verba Santa (Eriodictyon
trichocalyx), Laurel Sumac (Ma/osma laurina), Our Lords Candle (Yucca
whipplet), and Mexican Elderberry (Sambucus mexicana). The Coastal Sage
Scrub dominant plant species include California Sagebrush (Artemisia
californica), White Sage (Salvia apiana), Black Sage (Salvia mellifera),
Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), California Encelia (Encelia californica),
Verba Santa (Eriodictyon trichocalyx), and Laurel Sumac (Ma/osma laurina).
Location 6, Section5, T.. 1 N." R. .4W, San Bernardino North Quad. This area lies within
the San Bernardino National Forest, with only the southeastern portion of it
within the City of San Bernardino, and has an elevation of approximately
1800 to 2900 feet above sea level, The dominant plant communities include
Chamise Chaparral, Coastal Sage Scrub, and Riparian Woodlands. The
Chamise Chaparral community is dominated by Chamise (Adenostoma
fasciculatum), Ceanothus (Ceanothus leucodermis), White Sage (Salvia
apiana), Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), Black Sage (Salvia mellifera),
Verba Santa (Eriodictyon trichocalyx), Laurel Sumac (Malosma laurina), Our
Lords Candle (Yucca whipplet), and Mexican Elderberry (Sambucus
mexicana). The Coastal Sage Scrub dominant plant species include
California Sagebrush (Artemisia californica), White Sage (Salvia apiana),
Black Sage (Salvia mellifera), Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum),
California Encelia (Encelia californica), Verba Santa (Eriodictyon trichocalyx),
and Laurel Sumac (Ma/osma laurina). The areas identified as Riparian
Woodland are dominated by Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.) along the base of
the slopes.
Location 7 South of Section 5, T. 1 N., R. 4W, San Bernardino North Quad, in the
incorporated area of the City of San Bernardino, north of Cal State San
Bernardino, at an elevation of approximately 1600 to 1700 feet above sea
level. This area is dominated by Coastal Sage Scrub which includes
California Sagebrush (Artemisia californica), White Sage (Salvia apiana),
Black Sage (Salvia mellifera), Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum),
California Encelia (Encelia californica), Horehound (Maffubium vulgare),
Black-eyed Susan (Rudbeckia hirta), and Mugwort (Artemisia doglasiana).
Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.) runs along the base of the slope, Also included
is a stream (not shown on map) which is dominated by Castor Bean (Ricinus
communis), with contributions of mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), and Tree
Tobacco (Nicotiana glauca). The Coastal Sage Scrub areas have extensive
mature foliage, and this site is considered suitable habitat for the coastal
California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica). Also on the site is
a small cleared area which looks like a small airfield, some additional
cleared off land, as well as percolation basins. This area also lies next to a
RES 96-210
.-
piece of land (approximately 300 acres) which was recently burned
(adjacent to Cal State San Bernardino).
Location 8 Section 9, T. 1 N., R. 4W, San Bernardino North Quad. This area lies
between Badger Canyon and Sycamore Canyon, with elevations between
1600 and 2500 feet above sea level. Dominant plant communities include.
Coastal Sage Scrub, Chamise Chaparral, and a Riparian Woodland.
Dominant plants included in Coastal Sage Scrub include California
Sagebrush (Artemisia californica), White Sage (Salvia apiana), Black Sage
(Salvia mellifera), Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), California Encelia
(Encelia californica), Horehound (Marrubium vulgare), Black-eyed Susan
(Rudbeckia hirta), Mugwort (Artemisia doglasiana), Ceanothus (Ceanothus
leucodermis) , and Mexican Elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), There are
extensive riparian areas located in this location, with dominant species
including Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.), Arroyo Willow (Salix lasiolepus), and
Rumex (Rumex sp.). Also at the percolation basins is pond water with
associated aquatic plants and animals. This area was dominated by Broad-
leaved Cattail (Typha latifo/a) and Tamarisk (Tamarix ramosissima),
Location 9 Sections 9 and 10, T. 1N., R. 4W, San Bernardino North Quad. This area
lies to the east of Sycamore Canyon, at an elevation of 1500 to 2500 feet
above sea level. The dominant plant communities include a Coastal Sage
Scrub, Chamise Chaparral, and Riparian Woodland. The dominant species
included in the Coastal Sage Scrub are Ceanothus (Ceanothus ssp.), White
Sage (SaMa apiana), Black Sage (Salvia mellifera), Buckwheat (Eriogonum
fasciculatum), California Encelia (Encelia californica), Canyon Live Oak
(Quercus chrysolepis), Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), and
Horehound (Marrubium vulgare). The Riparian Woodland is dominated by
Sycamore (Platanus racemosa).
Location 10 Sections 10, 11, 14, and 15 T. 1N., R. 4W, San Bernardino North Quad.
This area lies adjacent to State Highway 18 in the San Bernardino National
Forest within the City of San Bernardino, at elevations from 1500 to 2100
feet above sea level. Dominant plant communities include Chamise
Chaparral, and Coastal Sage Scrub. The Chamise Chaparral community
includes Chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), Ceanothus (Ceanothus ssp.),
White Sage (Salvia apiana), Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), Black
Sage (Salvia mellifera), Verba Santa (Eriodictyon trichocalyx), Laurel Sumac
(Malosma laurina), and Our Lords Candle (Yucca whipple/). The Coastal
Sage Scrub dominant plant species include California Sagebrush (Artemisia
californica), White Sage (Salvia apiana), Black Sage (Salvia mellifera),
Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), and California Encelia (Encelia
californica).
RES 96-210
Location 11 Section 11 T, 1 N., R. 4W, San Bernardino North Quad, This area lies within
San Bernardino National Forest, adjacent to the City of San Bernardino,
along Waterman Canyon, Elevations range from 1800 to 2500 feet above
sea level. This area is located where the Campus Crusade for Christ
property intersects Waterman Canyon, at Arrowhead Hot Springs. The
dominant plant communities included here are disturbed grassland, Coastal
Sage Scrub, and a Riparian Woodland. The area is covered mostly by
disturbed grassland, dominated by Brome grasses (Bromus rubens, Bromus
diandrus). The lower elevations contain Coastal Sage Scrub, dominated by
California Sagebrush (Artemisia californica), White Sage (Salvia apiana),
Black Sage (Salvia mellifera), Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), and
California Encelia (Encelia californica). The Riparian, Woodland is
dominated by Sycamore (Platanus racemosa),
Location 12 Sections 11, 12, 13, and 14, T. 1N" R. 4W, San Bernardino Quad. This
area lies within the San Bernardino National Forest, with a portion also
within the City of San Bernardino. Elevations range from approximately
1700 to 2150 feet above sea level. This area is located east of East Twin
Creek, The dominant plant communities included here are Coastal Sage
Scrub, disturbed grassland, and a Riparian Woodland. The Coastal Sage
Scrub areas are dominated by California Sagebrush (Artemisia californica),
White Sage (Salvia apiana), Black Sage (Salvia mellifera), Buckwheat
(Eriogonum fasciculatum), and California Encelia (Encelia californica), The
grassland results from disturbance, and is dominated by Brome grasses
(Bromus rubens, B. diandrus). The Riparian Woodland is dominated by
Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.).
Location 13 Section 13, T. 1N., R. 4W, San Bernardino Quad. Sections 13, and 14, T.
1 N, R. 3W., Harrison Mountain Quad. This area lies within the San
Bernardino National Forest, with a portion also within the City of San
Bernardino. Elevations range from approximately 1800 to 2200 feet above
sea level. This area is located just west of Borea Canyon. The dominant
plant communities included here are Coastal Sage Scrub, disturbed
grassland, and a Riparian Woodland. The Coastal Sage Scrub areas are
dominated by California Sagebrush (Artemisia californica), White Sage
(Salvia apiana), Black Sage (Salvia mellifera), Buckwheat (Eriogonum
fasciculatum), and California Encelia (Encelia californica). The grassland
results from disturbance, and is dominated by Brome grasses (Bromus
rubens, B. diandrus). The Riparian Woodland is dominated by Eucalyptus
(Eucalyptus sp.).
Location 14 Sections 18, 19, and 24, T. 1 N., R. 3W, Harrison Mountain Quad. This area
lies within the San Bernardino National Forest and in the City of San
Bernardino, between Borea Canyon and Little Sand Canyon, off of Foothill
Blvd and Sterling Avenue. Elevations range from 1500 to 2900 feet above
RES 96-210
sea level. The dominant plant communities included here are disturbed
grassland, Coastal Sage Scrub, and a Riparian Woodland. This location
contains a large disturbed grassland, dominated by Brome grasses (Bromus
rubens, Bromus diandrus). The Coastal Sage Scrub areas are dominated
by California Sagebrush (Artemisia californica), White Sage (Salvia apiana),
Black Sage (Salvia me/lifera), Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), and
California Encelia (Encelia californica). The Riparian Woodland is
dominated by Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.).
Location 15 Sections 17,18,19, and 20, T, 1N., R. 3W, Harrison Mountain Quad, This
area lies in the San Bernardino National Forest, and within the City of San
Bernardino, on the east side of Little Sand Canyon and to the west of Sand
Canyon, The elevation ranges from 1800 to 2500 feet above sea level, This
area is located on and immediately adjacent to the San Manuel Indian
Reservation. The dominant plant communities located in this area are
disturbed grassland, Coastal Sage Scrub, and a Riparian Woodland, This
location contains a large disturbed grassland, dominated by Brome grasses
(Bromus rubens, Bromus diandrus). The Coastal Sage Scrub areas are
dominated by California Encelia (Encelia californica), Black Sage (Salvia
me/lifera), California Sagebrush (Artemisia californica), White Sage (Salvia
apiana), Canyon Live Oak (Quercus chrysolepis), and Buckwheat
(Eriogonum fasciculatum). The Riparian Woodland is dominated by
Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.).
Location 16 Sections 27, and 28, T. 1N., R. 3W, Harrison Mountain Quad, This area lies
within the City of San Bernardino, with a portion of it within the San
Bernardino National Forest. This location lies directly to the west of State
Highway 330, east of City Creek. The elevation of the area is between 1800
and 2100 feet above sea level. The dominant plant community located here
is Coastal Sage Scrub, including California Encelia (Encelia californica),
Black Sage (Salvia mellifera), California Sagebrush (Artemisia californica),
White Sage (Salvia apiana), Canyon Live Oak (Quercus chrysolepis),
Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), Mexican Elderberry (Sambucus
mexicana), Our Lords Candle (Yucca whipplet), and Black-eyed Susan
(Rudbeckia hirta).
Location 17 Section 27, T. 1N., R. 3W, Harrison Mountain Quad. This area lies within
the City of San Bernardino, east of City Creek. The elevation range is
between 1600 and 2000 feet above sea level. The dominant plant
community located here is Coastal Sage Scrub, including California Encelia
(Encelia californica), California Sagebrush (Artemisia californica), White
Sage (Salvia apiana), Black Sage (Salvia mellifera), Buckwheat (Eriogonum
fasciculatum), Mexican Elderberry (Sambucas mexicana), OULLords Candle
(Yucca whipplet), Canyon Live Oak (Quercus chrysolepis), and Black-eyed
Susan (Rudbeckia hirta). The areas identified on the topographical maps do
RES 96-210
not include City Creek, but the dominant plant species included in the
Riparian Woodland adjacent to the proposed burn area include Sycamore
(Platanus racemosa), and Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.).
Location 18 Sections 26, and 35, T. 1 N., R. 3W, Harrison Mountain Quad. This area lies
within the City of San Bernardino, and a portion lies within the San
Bernardino National Forest, east of Cook Canyon and including Elder Gulch.
The elevations range between 2000 and 2400 feet above sea level. The
area contains two plant communities, Coastal Sage Scrub and a Riparian
Woodland. The dominant plant species of the Coastal Sage Scrub
community include California Encelia (Encelia californica), California
Sagebrush (Artemisia californica), White Sage (Salvia apiana), Black Sage
(Salvia mellifera), Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), Mexican Elderberry
(Sambucas mexicana). and Our Lords Candle (Yucca whipplel), The
Riparian Woodlands are dominated by Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.),
RES 96-210
California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base Search
Following is a list of sensitive plant and animal species which were identified by the
California Department of Fish and Game's Natural Diversity Data Base (NDDB) as having
the potential of occurring in either the San Bernardino North or Harrison Mountain
Quadrangles.
Sensitive Vegetation
The Hall's Monardella (Monardella macrantha ssp. hallil). CNPS List: 1B; R-E-D Code:
2-1-3; State/Federal Status: None/C3. The Hall's Monardella is an annual plant species
which occurs in broad leaved upland forests, chaparral, and lower montane coniferous
forests, at elevations up to 6000 feet above sea level. Recent focused visitations (NDDB
record - 1981) to areas of historical collection (NDDB record - 1933) revealed no
individuals. Only one area within the project corridor is adjacent to the described required
habitat of the monardella, and no individuals were observed on the survey,
The Hot Springs Fimbristylis (Fimbristy/is thermalis). CNPS List: 2; R-E-D Code: 2-2-1;
State/Federal Status: None/C3, The Hot Springs Fimbristylis requires alkaline meadows,
near hot springs. It occurs at Arrowhead Hot Springs, near the mouth of Waterman
Canyon, and was last observed (NDDB record) in 1951. The site was revisited in 1983 but
no individuals were observed, nor were observed on the survey. The project will not burn
areas considered to be habitat for the fimbristylis.
The Marsh Sandwort (Arenaria pa/udico/a). CNPS List: 1 B; R-E-D Code: 3-3-3;
State/Federal Status: SE/C1. The marsh sandwort is a State Listed Endangered and
proposed Federal Endangered plant species which requires marshes and swamps, and
has been located along the Santa Ana river in San Bernardino. The required habitat is not
located on the project corridor, and no individuals were observed on the survey.
The Nevin's Barberry (Berberis nevinil). CNPS List:1B; R-E-D Code: 3-3-3; State/Federal
Status: SElC1. The nevin's barberry is a State Listed Endangered and proposed Federal
Endangered plant species, which has been collected (NDDB -1966 record) between
Arrowhead Highlands and Rimforest, at an elevation of 5200 feet above sea level.
However, the site which the specimen was collected was revisited (NDDB -1987) and no
individuals were observed.
The Parry's Spineflower (Chorizanthe parryivar parryl). CNPS List: 3; R-E-D Code: ?-2-
3; State/Federal Status: None/C2. The Parry's Spineflower is a Federal Category 2 annual
plant species which occurs on dry slopes and flats in Coastal Sage Scrub and Chaparral.
Noted as being fairly common along the Santa Ana River. Individual specimens were
observed in 1988 at the mouth of Devil Canyon (NDDB), A focused survey found no
individuals at Bailey Creek (Lilburn Corporation 1995). The project does encompass areas
RES 96-210
which have historical records of presence, but no individuals \lllere observed on our survey.
The Plummer's Mariposa Lilly (Calochortus plummerae). CNPS List: 1B; R-E-D Code:
2-2-3; State/Federal Status: None/C2. The Plummer's Mariposa Lilly is a Federal
Category 2 plant species which requires Coastal Sage Scrub, Chaparral, Grassland and
Cismontane woodland habitats. This project does encompass areas which contain the
required habitat for the lily, but no individuals were observed.
The San Bernardino Mountains Owl's-clover (Castilleja lasiorhyncha). CNPS List: 1B;
R-E-D Code: 1-2-3; State/Federal Status: None/C2. The San Bernardino Mountain's
Owl's-c1over is a Federal Category 2 plant species which requires meadows and pebble
plains in upper Montane ,Forests, ateIevations between 3,900 and 6,900 feet above sea
level. The project area does not encompass the habitat required by the clover.
The Santa Ana River Woollystar (Eriastrum densifolium sanctorum). CNPS List: 1 B; R-E-
D Code: 3-3-3; State/Federal Status: SElFE. The Santa Ana river woolystar is a Federal
and State Listed Endangered plant species, and is found primarily in sandy soils on river
floodplain, or on fluvial deposits, most notably in the Santa Ana River floodplain, It is
recognized as an early successional species, which relies on periodic disturbance due to
flooding. The areas identified as potential burn locations do not contain habitat which
support the woolystar, and no Woolystar were observed along the project corridor during
the survey.
The Slender-homed Spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras) CNPS List: 1 B; R-E-D Code:
3-3-3 ; State/Federal Status: SElFE. The slender-horned spineflower is a Federal and
State Listed Endangered annual plant species, and according to the NDDB, is restricted
(NDDB Reference - 1979) in the vicinity of the Campus Crusade for Christ facility where
Hwy 18 crosses the outwash fan. The required habitat for the species is considered to be
Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, and sandy deposited terraces and washes about 2200 feet above
sea level. The species was last observed in 1923. A focused survey was conducted in
1979, and no individuals were observed. The project area does include the historical
collection site for the slender-horned spineflower, but the projected burn site in the area
is restricted to slopes which are covered by grassland and Coastal Sage Scrub, not on
alluvial fans in the Waterman Creek channel. An NDDB search was also conducted for
the Devore Quadrangle, which lies just west of the project area, to determine if individual
spineflower's have been observed in the area. Two locations in the Devore area were
surveyed at two time periods (1984 and 1988), and the plant was not found and is
presumed extant in those areas.
The Thread-leaved Brodiaea (Brodiaea filifolia). CNPS List: 1 B; R-E-D Code:3-3-3;
State/Federal Status: SElC 1. The Thread-leaved Brodiaea is a State listed Endangered
plant species which requires valley and foothill grasslands, and vernal pools. Recent
observations (NDDB 1993) in Arrowhead Hot Springs, in the small canyons alongside and
to the west of the Hotel show that individuals are thriving in the area. The project does
plan to burn areas adjacent to these known locales, but not at these described locations.
RES 96-210
,"
California Native Plant Societv (CNPS) List
List 1 B.
Plants rare, threatened or endangered in California or elsewhere.
List 2.
Plants rare, threatened or endangered in California, but more common
elsewhere.
List 3.
Plants about which more information is needed (a review list).
List 4.
Plants of limited distribution (a watch list).
CNPS R-E-D Code
R (Rarity)
1. Rare, but found in sufficient numbers and distributed widely enough that the
potential for extinction is low at this time.
2. Occurance confined to several populations or to one extended population.
3. Occurance limited to one or a few highly restricted populations, or present
in such small numbers that is seldom reported.
E (Endangerment)
1. Not Endangered.
2. Endangered in a portion of its range.
3. Endangered throughout its range.
D (Distribution)
1. More or less widespread outside California.
2. Rare outside California.
3 Endemic to California.
RES 96-210
Federal Listings
FE = Federally listed as Endangered,
C1 = A Category 1 candidate for Federal listing. Sufficient biological information is
available to support a proposal to list taxa as Endangered or Threatened.
C2 = A Category 2 candidate for Federal listing. Threat or distribution data area
currently insufficient to support listing.
C3 = A Category 3 candidate for Federal listing. Taxa that have been proven to be more
abundant or widespread than, previously believed, or tho,se that are not subject to
any identifiable threat.
State Listinas
SE = State listed as Endangered.
ST = State listed as Threatened.
CSC= California Department of Fish and Game .Species of Special Concern",
Sensitive Wildlife
The Andrews Marble Butterfly (Euchloe hyantis andrewsl), a Federally Listed Category
2 species, requires Yellow Pine Forest vegetation, at an elevation of 5000-6000 feet. The
project area does not contain any habitat which is required for the butterfly, nor is within
the known elevational range. No individuals were observed during the survey.
The Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica), a Federally listed
Threatened Species, utilizes Coastal Sage Brush, characterized by Black Sage, California
Sage, California Encelia, and California Buckwheat. The plant species which make up
Coastal Sage Brush, the required vegetation for the California Gnatcatcher, is found on
various locations throughout the project area, Both historical (1925 - 6 miles NW of San
Bernardino) and recent (1991 Lytle Creek and Cajon Wash) observations are documented
(NDDB) in close proximity to the prescribed burn areas. The chance of the California'
Gnatcatcher occurring on some portion of the project area is high. No individuals were
observed during our initial surveys. Additional field surveys during the nesting season
would need to be conducted to make a determination regarding the actual presence or
absence of this species, There is also a related species, the Blue-gray Gnatcatcher
(Polioptila caerulea) also occurs in the general vicinity, but none were observed on the
survey.
RES 96-210
.'
The California Reg-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonil), a species which is a proposed
Federal Endangered and a CDFG "Species of Special Concern" amphibian which utilizes
lowlands and foothill at or near permanent sources of deep water. It prefers shorelines
with extensive vegetation, Historical records of individuals (NDDB 1982) north of Highland
Avenue give evidence of the frog using waters in the vicinity of the project area. There
were no individuals observed on any survey. The project corridor does run adjacent to
areas of historical utilization, but there are no plans to burn vegetated areas immediately
surrounding deep waters.
The California Mastiff Bat (Eumops perotis californicus) is a mammalian species which
is a Federal Category 2 and CDFG "Species of Special Concern", General habitat
requirements are not known at this time, and the last observation (NDDB) was in 1992 at
the Church of the Living God in Highland. No individuals were observed on the survey.
The Least Bell's Vireo (Vireo bellii pusil/us), a bird species listed as Endangered on both
the Federal and Sate level, inhabits low riparian vegetation in the vicinity of water, or in
dry river bottoms. The vegetation preferred by the vireo include Mulefat (Baccharis
salicifolia), Willow (Salix sp.), and other associated riparian plant species which provide
low vegetation close to the ground. No vireo were observed during the survey, but this is
a migratory species which may just now be arriving into the area from Mexico for its
nesting season. The vegetation located along various riparian woodland communities
along the project corridor provides the required habitat for nesting purposes for the vireo,
and focused surveys may be needed to verify presence or absence.
The San Diego Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum blainville/) is a Federal Category
2 and a CDFG "Species of Special Concern" reptilian species which inhabits Coastal Sage
Scrub and Chaparral in arid environments, especially in the presence of harvester ants
(Genus Pogonomyrmex). Preferred habitat for this species include Coastal Sage Scrub
dominated by Buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), White Sage (Salvia apiana), and
Verba Santa (Eriodictyon tricocalyx), as well as Riversidian Alluvial Fan Scrub associated
plant species (near stream beds). The horned lizard also requires soil which contains a
high proportion of gravel and sand, with vegetation density at a low level. Suitable habitat
exists along the project corridor, but no individuals were observed on the survey.
The Santa Ana Sucker (Catostomus santaanae) is a Federal Category 2 and a CDFG
"Species of Special Concern" fish species which is endemic to Los Angeles basin south
coastal streams. It is considered to be a habitat generalist, but does prefer sand, rubble
and boulder lined bottoms of clear channels, with a algae component. '
The Southern Rubber Boa (Charina bottae umbratica), a State Listed Threatened and
Federal Listed Category 2 reptilian species requires Montane forest habitats,
approximately 5000 feet above sea level. These forests provide streams or wet meadows,
very loose and moist soil, and rotting logs for protection and cover. On only one location
RES 96-210
of the project adjacent to potential habitat, at an elevation of 4800 feet above sea level.
This portion of the project area is not directly affected by the burning activity, and in
addition, does not contain any stream associations which the boa require. In reviewing the
literature and NDDB results, TDA contacted Dr. Glenn Stewart, Ph.D. (California State
Polytechnic University, at Pomona), an authority of the southern rubber boa, in regard to
potential presence of the boa above Meyers Canyon, It is of his opinion that the boa would
not occur in the area. Neither the location, habitat quality, nor elevation give indication to
the possibility of its presence at the project area.
The White-eared Pocket Mouse (Perognathus alticola alticola) is a Federal Category 2
and a CDFG .Species of Special Concern" mammalian species which has historical
records at Strawberry Peak (NDDB 1934) in the San Bernardino Mountains at elevations
of over 6100 feet above sea level. Recent trappings in the same area (NDDB -1981) gave
negative results. The project areas are not located near any historical locations, nor is at
the elevation of historical record,
Sensitive Plant Communities
Among the sensitive plant communities identified by the NDDB are Riversidian Alluvial Fan
Sage Scrub, Southern Mixed Riparian Forest, and the Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian
Woodland.
The Riversidian Alluvial Fan Scrub (State Rank S1,1) is characterized by sandy channel
deposits which are reworked by high water flows. Habitat associations are not well known
at this time. These areas are threatened by upstream flood control measures, mining, and
development.
The Southern Mixed Riparian Forest (State Rank S2.1) is characterized by Alnus
rhombifolia, Quercus chrysolepis, Populus fremontii, Platanus racemosa, Salix goodingii,
and Baccharis salicifolia. Habitat associations are not well known at this time, and
distributions need to be located in greater detail.
The Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland (State Rank S4) consists of closed
canopy Platanus racemosa and Alnus rhombifolia. Habitat associations are not well known
at this time, and distributions need to be located in greater detail.
The rankings used by NDDB to describe the plant communities are:
S1 Less than six known locations or less than 2,000 acres of habitat remaining.
S2 Occurs in six to twenty locations or 2,000 to 10,000 acres of habitat
remaining.
RES 96-210
S3 Occurs in 21-100 locations or 10,000 to 50,000 acres of habitat remaining.
S4 Apparently secure in California. This rank is clearly lower than S3 but
factors exist to cause concern - there is some threat, or somewhat narrow
habitat. No threat number.
The threat to each natural community is indicated by the number to the right of the decimal
point:
SX.1 = Very threatened.
SX.2 = Threatened.
SX.3 = No current threats known.
Potential Animal Occurance
Following is a listing of common animal species which are expected to inhabit the areas
along the proposed burn corridor (listed in alphabetical order).
Amphibians
California Treefrog
Garden Slender Salamander
Pacific Treefrog
Western Toad
Hyla cadaverina
Batrachoseps pacificus major
Hyla regilla
Buvo boreas
Birds
American Kestral
Anna's Hummingburd
Ash-throated Flycatcher
Bewick's Wren
Black-chinned Sparrow
Black-headed Grosbeak
Bushtit
California Quail
California Thrasher
California Towhee
Cliff Swallow
Common Raven
Costa's Hummingbird
Falco sparvarius
Capypte anna
Myiarchus cinerascens
Thryomanes bewickii
Spizella atrogularis
Pheucticus me/anocephalus
Psaltriparus minimus
Callipepla californica
Toxostoma redivivum
Pipilo crissalis
Hirundo pyrrhonota
Corvus corax
Calypte costae
RES 96-210
Potential Animal Occurance (continued)
Birds (cont.)
Greater Roadrunner
Hooded Oriole
House Finch
House Wren
Lawrence's Goldfinch
Lesser Goldfinch
Loggerhead Shrike
Mourning Dove
Northern Flicker
Northern Mockingbird
Northern Oriole
Nuttal's Woodpecker
Phainopepla
Red-tailed Hawk
Rufous-sided Towhee
Scrub-Jay
Song Sparrow
White-throated Swift
Wrentit
Mammals
Black-tailed Jackrabbit
California Ground Squirrel
Cottontail Rabbit
Coyote
Gray Fox
Pacific Kangaroo Rat
Reptiles
California Whipsnake
Common Kingsnake
Gopher Snake
Long-nosed Snake
Rosy Boa
Side-blotched Lizard
Southern Alligator Lizard
Southern Pacific Rattlesnake
Western Fence Lizard
Western Whiptail
Geococcyx californianus
Icterus cucullatus
Carpodacus mexicanus
Troglodytes aedon
Carduelis lawrencei
Carduelis psaltria
Lanius ludovicianus
Zenaida macroura ,
Co/aptes auratus
Mimus polyglottos
Icterus galbula
Picoides nuttallii
Phainopepla nitens
Buteo jamaincensis
Pipilo erythrophthalmus
Aphe/ocoma coerulescens
Me/ospiza melodia
Aeronautes saxatalis
Chamaea fasciata
Lepus californicus
Spermophilus beecheyi
Sylvilagus audubonii
Canis latrans
Urocyon cineroargenteus
Dipodomys agilis
Masticophus lateralis
Lampropeltis getelus
Pituophis me/ano/eucus
Rhinocheilus lecontei
Uchanura trivurgata
Uta stansburiana
Elagna multicarinata
Crotalus viridis helleri
Sce/operus occidentalis
Cnemidophorus tigris
Es 96-210
-<
References
California Department of Fish and Game, 1994. Natural Heritage Division, Natural
Diversity Data Base.
Hickman, J.C. (Editor). 1993, The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University
of California Press, Berkeley, 1400 pp,
LaUing, J. (Editor). 1976. Proceedings - Plant Communities of Southern California.
California Native Plant Society. 164 pp,
Lilburn Corporation. 1995, Biological Survey - Bailey Creek Debris Basin and Channel.
Unpublished report for the City of San Bernardino. 12 pp., plus appendices.
National Geographical Society. 1989, Field Guide to the Birds of North America (2nd
edition). The National Geographic Society,
Neal, Y.M. 1991. Paradise Hills Specific Plan. Unpublished draft environmental Impact
Report. Prepared for the City of San Bernardino (SCH 91012055),
Page, L.M. and B.M. Burr. 1991. Peterson Field Guide - Freshwater Fishes. Houghton
Mifflin Company, Boston. 432 pp,
Stebbins, R.C. 1985. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Houghton
Mifflin Company, Boston. 336 pp.
Stewart, G.R. 4/11/96. Personal Communication. California State Polytechnic University,
Pomona.
:ES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* RANA AURORA DRAYTON II
* California Red-legged Frog
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: Special Concern *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: MOSTLY IN LOWLANDS & FOOTHILLS IN OR NEAR PERMANENT SOURCES *
OF DEEP WATER, BUT WILL DISPERSE FAR DURNING & AFTER RAIN, *
* Microhabitat: PREFERS SHORELINES WITH EXTENSIVE VEGETATION, REQUIRE 11 - 20 *
WEEKS OF PERMANENT WATER FOR LARVAL DEVELOPMENT, *
*** Element 1D: AAABH01022 ****************************************************
---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks
Federal: Proposed Endangered Global: G4T2T3
State: None State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 96
Quality: Good
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HOOVER, F, 1982 (OBS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1982/08/XX
Site: 1982/08/XX
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: WEST FORK CITY CREEK, 3,5 MILES NORTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 27s / 117d 10m 56s Township: 01N
Zone-11 N3783094 E483254 Range: 03W
NON-SPECIFIC (0 Mile) Section: 10 NW Qtr
POLYGON Meridian: S
More Information? N Acres: 41.1
25143 More Map Detail? N Elevation: 2600 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - LOCATED 0.5 MILE UPSTREAM FROM THE
CROSSING OF FOREST SERVICE ROAD 1N32. Ecological Notes -
HABITAT CONSISTS OF A SOUTH COAST MINNOW/SUCKER STREAM.
ASSOCIATED AQUATIC TAXA INCLUDE SANTA ANA SUCKER, PACIFIC
SPECKLED DACE, PACIFIC TREE FROG, AND INTRODUCED BROWN TROUT.
General Notes - AN UNKNOWN NUMBER OF RED-LEGGED FROGS WERE
OBSERVED DURING A SURVEY FOR SANTA ANA SUCKER DURING AUGUST
1982, Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information purchased: 12/28/95 Page 1
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*
*
* POLIOPTlLA CALIFORNlCA
* California Gnatcatcher
*
*
*
"
*
Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: Special Concern *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: "
General: OBLIGATE, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF COASTAL SAGE SCRUB BELOW 2500 "
FT IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, *
* Microhabitat: LOW, COASTAL SAGE SCRUB IN ARID WASHES, ON MESAS & SLOPES. *
NOT ALL AREAS CLASSIFIED AS COASTAL SAGE SCRUB ARE OCCUPIED, *
*** Element ID: ABPBJ08080 *************************"**"***********************
---------Status----------
Federal: Threatened
State: None
NDDB Element
Global: G2
State: S1
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 451
Quality: Excellent
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: WILLICK, D, 1990 (OBS)
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1990/09/06
Site: 1991/XX/XX
Location: NEAR THE CONFLUENCE OF LYTLE WASH AND CAJON WASH, BETWEEN EL
RANCHO VERDE GOLF COURSE (IN RIALTO) AND MUS COY ,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 09m 25s / 117d 22m 10s
Zone-11 N3779469 E465922
NON-SPECIFIC (2/5 Mile)
POINT
24160
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township: 01N
Range: 05W
Section: UN XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 0
Elevation: 1440 ft
Threats: THREATENED BY ORV ACTIVITY IN THE WASH,
Comments: Ecological Notes - HABITAT CONSISTS OF MATURE ALLUVIAL SAGE
SCRUB, ON A HIGH, STABILIZED BENCH IN THE CENTER OF THE WASH;
DOMINANT SPECIES INCLUDE OPEN CHAMISE, BUCKWHEAT, MALOSMA,
PRUNUS, AND YUCCA WHIPLEYI.. General Notes - A SINGLE BIRD
WITH FEMALE/IMMATURE PLUMAGE WAS OBSERVED IN 1990. SITE WAS
VISITED REPEATEDLY DURING FALL AND WINTER, BUT NO FURTHER
CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHERS WERE OBSERVED; A PAIR OF BLUE-GRAY
GNATCATCHERS WERE OBSERVED IN SPRING 1991. Owner/Manager-
UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 2
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* POLIOPTlLA CALIFORNlCA
* California Gnatcatcher
*
*
*
*
*
Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: Special Concern *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: OBLIGATE, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF COASTAL SAGE SCRUB BELOW 2500 *
FT IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, *
* Microhabitat: LOW, COASTAL SAGE SCRUB IN ARID WASHES, ON MESAS & SLOPES. *
NOT ALL AREAS CLASSIFIED AS COASTAL SAGE SCRUB ARE OCCUPIED, *
*** Element ID: ABPBJ08080 "***"*****************"****"************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Threatened
State: None
NDDB Element
Global: G2
State: S1
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 453
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HANNA, W, C, 1925 (MUS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1925/05/24
Sitel 1925/05/24
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: APPROXIMATELY 6 MILES NW OF SAN BERNARDINO,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 22s / 117d 19m 24s
Zone-11 N3783024 E470183
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
24992
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township: 01N
Range: 04W
Section: UN XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 0
Elevation: 1600 ft
Threats:
Comments: Ecological Notes - NEST WAS LOCATED ABOUT 5 FEET FROM THE
GROUND IN THE TOP OF A CHAMISE BUSH, General Notes -
HISTORICAL EGG SET COLLECTION, BOTH MALE AND FEMALE PRESENT AT
NEST; 4 EGGS COLLECTED (HANNA, SET #2055, FROM SAN BERNARDINO
COUNTY MUSEUM), Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 3
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CATOSTOMUS SANTAANAE
* Santa Ana Sucker
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Category 2 Global: G1G2 CDFG: Special Concern *
* State: None State: SlS2 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: ENDEMIC TO LOS ANGELES BASIN SOUTH COASTAL STREAMS, *
* Microhabitat: HABITAT GENERALISTS, BUT PREFER SAND-RUBBLE-BOULDER BOTTOMS, *
* CLEAR WATER, & ALGAE. *
*** Element ID: AFCJC02190 ********************"*******************************
Occurrence Number: 24
Quality: Good
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HOOVER, F, 1982 (OBS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1982/08/XX
Site: 1982/08/XX
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: WEST FORK CITY CREEK, 3,5 MILES NORTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 27s / 117d 10m 56s
Zone-11 N3783094 E483254
NON-SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
25143
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township: 01N
Range: 03W
Section: 10 NW Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 41.1
Elevation: 2600 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - LOCATED 0,5 MILES UPSTREAM FROM THE
CROSSING OF FOREST SERVICE ROAD 1N32 , Ecological Notes -
HABITAT CONSISTS OF A SOUTH COAST MINNOW/SUCKER STREAM,
ASSOCIATED AQUAATIC TAXA INCLUDE RED-LEGGED FROG, PACIFIC
SPECKLED DACE, PACIFIC TREE FROG, & INTRODUCED BROWN TROUT,
Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 4
. RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* EUMOPS PEROTIS CALIFORNICUS
" California Mastiff Bat
*
"
*
"
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NODB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Category 2 Global: G5T? CDFG: Special Concern *
* State: None State: S? Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: Not available at this time, "
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time, "
*** Element ID: AMACD02011 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 10
Quality: Poor
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: PIERSON, E, D, 1992 (OBS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1992/09/01
Site: 1992/09/01
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn. (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD, HIGHLAND, IN THE SAN BERNARDINO
MOUNTAINS,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 07m 46s / 117d 12m 15s
Zone-11 N3776347 E481170
NON-SPECIFIC (2/5 Mile)
POINT
33084
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township: 01N
Range: 03W
Section: 33 XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 0
Elevation: 1280 ft
Threats:
Comments: General Notes - 40-50 OBSERVED AT THIS SITE IN 1969 BY D.
CONSTANTINE; IN 1992, ONLY 3 WERE DETECTED ACCOUSTICALLY AND
OBSERVED LEAVING THE BUILDING, Owner/Manager - PVT
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 5
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* PEROGNATHUS ALTICOLA ALTICOLA
* White-eared Pocket Mouse
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Category 2 Global: G2TH CDFG: Special Concern *
* State: None State: SlS2 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: Not available at this time, *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time, *
*** Element ID: AMAFDOI081 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 7
Quality: None
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Possibly Extirpated
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: UNKNOWN COLLECTOR, 1920 (MUS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1934/08/08
Site: 1981/09/11
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn. (3411722), San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: E SLOPE STRAWBERRY PEAK & VIC STRAWBERRY PEAK, SAN BERNARDINO
MTNS, CA.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 13m 56s / 117d 14m 01s
Zone-11 N3787724 E478477
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03574
03574
More Information? Y
More Map Detail? N
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
02N
03W
30 XX Qtr
S
o
6153 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - AREA TRAPPED BY SULENTICH 1979-81 WITH
NEGATIVE RESULTS, General Notes - UCLA SPECIMENS #H685-H689;
COLL 9/29/20; H656-H666 COLL 9/23/20; H699-H708, H713-H717 COLL
10/1-4/20; H1132-H1134 COLL 9/30/20, LACNHM SPECS #3779-3783,
3784-3788, 3789-3793 COLL 9/6/33; #3989-3995 COLL 8/8/34, ALSO
SDNHM #6652-6653, 1927. Owner/Manager - USFS-SAN BERNARDINO
NF, PVT
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 6
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*
*
0'
*
*
*
*
* PEROGNATHUS ALTICOLA ALTICOLA
* White-eared Pocket Mouse
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Category 2 Global: G2TH CDFG: Special Concern *
* State: None State: S1S2 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: Not available at this time, *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time. *
*** Element ID: AMAFD01081 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 8
Quality: None
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Possibly Extirpated
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: BENSON, S.B, 1931 (MUS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1931/07/19
Site: 1981/09/11
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: 1-2 MI E STRAWBERRY PEAK, SAN BERNARDINO MTNS, SAN BERNARDINO
CO,5750 FT,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 14m 02s / 117d 12m 60s
Zone-11 N3787720 E480875
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03692
03692
More Information? Y
More Map Detail? N
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
02N
03W
29 XX Qtr
S
o
5750 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - AREA TRAPPED BY SULENTICH 1979-81 WITH
NEGATIVE RESULTS. General Notes - MVZ SPECIMENS #47407-47419
COLL 7/18-19/1931 AND #31831-31835 COLL 9/20 & 9/30 1920. ALSO
SDNHM SPECIMENS #21966-21968 COLL 9/30/20, Owner/Manager-
USFS-SAN BERNARDINO NF, PVT
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 7
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***"* Natural Diversity Data Base **
" *
* PEROGNATHUS ALTICOLA ALTICOLA
* White-eared Pocket Mouse
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NODB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Category 2 Global: G2TH CDFG: Special Concern *
* State: None State: SlS2 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: Not available at this time. *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time. *
*** Element ID: AMAFD01081 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 9
Quality: None
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Possibly Extirpated
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HERRON, R,B, 1893 (MUS)
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722), San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1983/09/22
Site: 1891/08/04
Location: SQUIRRELL INN, 5500 FT NEAR LITTLE BEAR VALLEY, SAN BERNARDINO
MTNS, CA.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 14m 05s / 117d 14m 41s
Zone-II N3787428 E477358
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03538
03538
More Information? Y
More Map Detail? N
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
02N
04W
25 XX Qtr
S
o
5500 ft
Threats:
Comments: General Notes - THIS IS PROBABLY THE TYPE LOCALITY, ANSP
SPECIMEN #1615; SDNHM SPECIMENS #6650-51, #21964-65, #21962-63;
LACM SPECIMENS #670-71; MVZ SPECIMENS #31836-38; UCLA SPECIMEN
#H725-32 AND #Hl140-42; ALSO AN AMNH SPECIMEN (UNK #) .
Owner/Manager - USFS-SAN BERNARDINO NF, PVT
.
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 8
96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
" *
* PHRYNOSOMA CORONATUM BLAINVILLEI
* San Diego Horned Lizard
*
"*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: Special Concern *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: INHABITS COASTAL SAGE SCRUB AND CHAPARRAL IN ARID AND "
SEMI-ARID CLIMATE CONDIT *
* Microhabitat: PREFERS FRIABLE, ROCKY, OR SHALLOW SANDY SOILS. *
*** Element ID: ARACF12021 ****************************************************
*
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: None
*
*
*
*
*
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G4T3
State: S2
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: XXXX/XX/XX
Site: xxxx/xx/xx
Occurrence Number: 34
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: SCHOENHERR, A. A, 1976 (LIT)
Quad Summary: Keller Peak (3411721), Harrison Mtn, (3411722), Lake Arrowhead
(3411732), Butler Peak (3411731)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: SHEEP CREEK,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
Threats:
34d 14m 34s / 117d 07m 24s
Zone-11 N3788888 E488641
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03928
03928
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
02N
02W
19 SE Qtr
S
o
4600 ft
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Comments: General Notes - MVZ SPECIMEN, NO DATE OR MUS # GIVEN. FROM
MCGURTY 1980 REPT TO CDFG, Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 9
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*' *
* PHRYNOSOMA CORONATUM BLAINVILLEI
* San Diego Horned Lizard
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: Special Concern *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: INHABITS COASTAL SAGE SCRUB AND CHAPARRAL IN ARID AND *
SEMI-ARID CLIMATE CONDIT *
" Microhabitat: PREFERS FRIABLE, ROCKY, OR SHALLOW SANDY SOILS, *
*** Element ID: ARACF12021 ****************************************************
*
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: None
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G4T3
State: S2
Occurrence Number: 41
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: SCHOENHERR, A. A, 1976 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 195X/XX/XX
Site: 195X/XX/XX
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: LYTLE CREEK.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
Threats:
34d 08m 48s / 117d 21m 46s
Zone-11 N3778300 E466507
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03320
03320
Township: 01N
Range: 05W
Section: UN XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 0
Elevation: 1320 ft
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Comments: General Notes - FROM MCGURTY 1980 REPT TO CDFG. ALSO OBS IN
1897 & 1952, Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 10
RES 96-210
."
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* PHRYNOSOMA CORONATUM BLAINVILLEI
* San Diego Horned Lizard
*
<.
*
"
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: Special Concern *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: INHABITS COASTAL SAGE SCRUB AND CHAPARRAL IN ARID AND *
SEMI-ARID CLIMATE CONDIT *
* Microhabitat: PREFERS FRIABLE, ROCKY, OR SHALLOW SANDY SOILS. *
*** Element ID: ARACF12021 ****************************************************
*
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: None
*
*
*
*
*
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G4T3
State: S2
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: XXXX/XX/XX
Site: 1993/04/14
Occurrence Number: 268
Quality: None
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Extirpated
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: BRODE, J, 1986 (PERS)
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: SHANDIN HILLS, NW OF SAN BERNARDINO.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
Threats:
34d 09m 30s / l17d 18m 56s
Zone-11 N3779548 E470925
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03409
03409
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
01N
04W
UN XX Qtr
S
o
1600 ft
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Comments: Ecological Notes - HABITAT WAS A GRASSLAND/SAGE MIX, IN
ALLUVIAL SOFT SAND AND GRAVELS, PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT General
Notes - MVZ SPECIMEN #39567; DATE OF COLLECTION UNKNOWN, SITE
CHECK ON 14 APRIL 1993 INDICATED THAT THIS SITE WAS LOST TO
DEVELOPMENT, Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 11
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game "**** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* PHRYNOSOMA CORONATUM BLAINVILLEI
* San Diego Horned Lizard
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: Special Concern *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: INHABITS COASTAL SAGE SCRUB AND CHAPARRAL IN ARID AND *
SEMI-ARID CLIMATE CONDIT *
* Microhabitat: PREFERS FRIABLE, ROCKY, OR SHALLOW SANDY SOILS, *
*** Element ID: ARACFl202l ************,,*********"*****************r***********
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: None
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G4T3
State: S2
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 296
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: MARSH, K,G, 1988 (OBS & MAP)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1988/07/07
Site: 1988/07/07
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (34ll723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: LYTLE CREEK WASH, ON W SIDE OF ACTIVE CHANNEL AND S OF HIGHLAND
AVENUE, RIALTO,
Lat/Long: 34d 08m 06s / 117d 20m 53s Township: OlN
UTM: Zone-ll N3776984 E467907 Range: 05W
Mapping precision: NON-SPECIFIC (l/5 Mile) Section: 36 NE Qtr
Symbol Type: POINT Meridian: S
Group Number: 03357 More Information? Y Acres: 0
Map Index Number: 03357 More Map Detail? Y Elevation: l275 ft
Threats: ROUTE 30 FREEWAY PROPOSED FOR CONSTRUCTION ON THIS SITE.
Comments: Distribution Notes - ONE JUVENILE OBSERVED, Ecological Notes -
RIVERSIDIAN ALLUVIAL FAN SAGE SCRUB, DOMINATED BY ERIOGONUM
FASCICULATUM. Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/ll/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12)28/95 Page l2
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* PHRYNOSOMA CORONATUM BLAINVILLEI
* San Diego Horned Lizard
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: Special Concern *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: INHABITS COASTAL SAGE SCRUB AND CHAPARRAL IN ARID AND *
SEMI-ARID CLIMATE CONDIT *
* Microhabitat: PREFERS FRIABLE, ROCKY, OR SHALLOW SANDY SOILS, *
*** Element ID: ARACFl2021 *******************************"********************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: None
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G4T3
State: S2
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 321
Quality: Good
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: PHILLIPS, J. R. 1990 (OBS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1990/08/23
Site: 1990/08/23
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: BETWEEN MEYERS CANYON AND CABLE CANYON, NORTH OF 1-15 AND EAST OF
THE CITY OF DEVORE,
20511
More Information? N
More Map Detail? Y
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
02N
05W
35 XX Qtr
S
o
2500 ft
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 13m 21s / 117d 22m 10s
Zone-11 N3786678 E465978
NON-SPECIFIC (3/5 Mile)
POINT
Threats: MAIN THREAT IS CONVERSION OF THIS OPEN SPACE TO RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT.
Comments: Ecological Notes - HABITAT IS COASTAL SCRUB, DOMINATED BY
ERIOGONUM FASCICULATUM SSP FOLIOSUM, SALVIA APIANA, AND
ERIODICTYON TRICOCALYX, General Notes - 3 ADULT AND 2 JUVENILE
LIZARDS OBSERVED,SITE COULD BE PROTECTED BY ANNEXATION TO SAN
BERNARDINO NATIONAL FOREST, WHICH SURROUNDS IT ON 3 SIDES.
Owner/Manager - PVT
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 13
RES 96-210
"* California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* PHRYNOSOMA CORONATUM BLAINVILLEI
* San Diego Horned Lizard
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: Special Concern *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: INHABITS COASTAL SAGE SCRUB AND CHAPARRAL IN ARID AND *
SEMI-ARID CLIMATE CONDIT *
* Microhabitat: PREFERS FRIABLE, ROCKY, OR SHALLOW SANDY SOILS. *
*** Element ID: ARACF12021 ****************************************************
*
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: None
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G4T3
State: S2
Occurrence Number: 324
Quality: Good
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: WHITE, S. 1990 (OBS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1990/XX/XX
Site: 1990/XX/XX
Quad Summary: Devore (3411724), San Bernardino North (3411723)
,County(ies): San Bernardino
Location: CAJON WASH, SE OF THE JCT OF I-1S AND I-21S, DEVORE.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 21s / 117d 22m 36s
Zone-11 N3783013 E46S304
NON-SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
Township: OIN
Range: 05W
Section: UN XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 2096,6
Elevation: 1700 ft
20072
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Threats: THREATENED BY A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND AGGREGATE MINING.
Comments: Distribution Notes - SAN DIEGO HORNED LIZARDS ARE FOUND
THROUGHOUT THIS SITE. Ecological Notes - HABITAT IS
RIVERSIDEAN ALLUVIAL FAN SAGE SCRUB. General Notes - TWO ADULT
LIZARDS AND A FEW HORNED LIZARD SCATS OBSERVED, Owner/Manager
- PVT
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 14
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
,
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, "
*** Element ID: ARADAOI011 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 1
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G. R. 1980, (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1952/07/05
Site: 1952/07/05
Quad Summary: Keller Peak (3411721), Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE "
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information purchased: 12/28/95 Page 15
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* ' *
* CHARINA BOTI'AE UMBRATICA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADAOIOll ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 4
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G. R. 1980 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: XXXX/xx/xx
Site: XXXX/XX/XX
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn. (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 16
!
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
"
*
*
*
"
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS. *
*** Element ID: ARADA010ll ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 5
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G, R. 1980 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: XXXX/XX/xx
Site: xxxx/xx/xx
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 17
RES 96-210
"* California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS. *
*** Element ID: ARADA010l1 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NODB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 8
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G, R. 1980 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: XXXX/XX/XX
Site: XXXX/XX/XX
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information. Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 18
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATICA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADA01011 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 9
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G, R, 1980 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: XXXx/xx/XX
Site: XXXX/XX/XX
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
'* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 19
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTIAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADAOIOll ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NODB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 10
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G, R. 1980 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: XXXX/xx/XX
Site: XXXX/XX/XX
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn. (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Ranse:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 20
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
"*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADA01011 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NODB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 11
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G. R, 1980 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: XXXX/XX/XX
Site: XXXX/XX/XX
Quad summary: Harrison Mtn. (3411722)
County(ies): San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 21
RES 9&-21U
** California Department of Fish and Game "**** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists~-------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADAOI011 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 12
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G, R, 1980 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: xxxx/XX/XX
Site: XXXX/XX/XX
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722), Lake Arrowhead (3411732)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 22
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*
,
*
*
*
*
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATICA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADA01011 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 13
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G, R, 1980 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: XXXX/XX/XX
Site: XXXX/XX/XX
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information purchased: 12/28/95 Page 23
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS. *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADA010ll ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 14
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G, R, 1980 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: XXXX/XX/XX
Site: XXXX/XX/XX
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn. (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 24
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
~
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: "
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADAOI011 ***********************,*****************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 15
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: KEASLER, G,L, 1981 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1981/04/24
Site: 1981/04/24
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 25
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game "**** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
"
*
*
------~-Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS. *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER, IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADA01011 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 16
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: STEWART, G, R, 1980 (LIT)
--DateE Last Seen--
Element: XXXX/xx/XX
Site: XXXX/XX/XX
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 26
-- ,. RES 96-210
"
** California Department of Fish and Game ****" Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
" CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATICA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
...
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: "
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS. *
* ** Element ID: ARADA010l1 ****-**** ** * *** * ** * * * * ** * ** ** * *** **** * ** * * **** * ** * * * *
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 53
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: BRODE, J. 1980 (PERSl
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: xxxx/xx/xx
Site: xxxx/xx/xx
Quad Summary: Keller Peak (3411721), Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 27
RES
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADAOIOll ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NODB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 58
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: KEASLER, G, L, 1981 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1981/05/02
Site: 1981/05/02
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 28
RES 96-210
.'
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*
*
~
*
*
*
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADA01011 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 59
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: KEASLER, G, L, 1981 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1981/04/17
Site: 1981/04/17
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722), San Bernardino North (3411723)
County(ies): San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 29
RES-'96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS. *
*** Element ID: ARADAOI011 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 60
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: KEASLER, G, L, 1981 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1981/04/23
Site: 1981/04/23
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Cli( 'I
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page'.
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTrAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
-..
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADA01011 **********************************************"*****
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NODB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 64
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: KEASLER, G,L. 1981 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1981/05/02
Site: 1981/05/02
Quad Summary: Keller Peak (3411721), Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE "
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 31
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* . *
* CHARINA BOTIAE UMBRATlCA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS. *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTIING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADA010l1 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NODB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 65
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: KEASLER, G.L, 1981 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1981/04/25
Site: 1981/04/25
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 32
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHARINA BOTIAE UMBRATICA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS, *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADAOI011 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NODB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 66
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: KEASLER, G, L. 1981 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1981/04/24
Site: 1981/04/24
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Departmerit of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 33
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game "**** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* ' "
* CHARINA BOTTAE UMBRATICA
* Southern Rubber Boa
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
General: RESTRICTED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN JACINTO MTNS; FOUND *
IN A VARIETY OF MONTANE FOREST HABITATS. *
* Microhabitat: FOUND IN VICINITY OF STREAMS OR WET MEADOWS; REQUIRES LOOSE, *
MOIST SOIL FOR BURROWING; SEEKS COVER IN ROTTING LOGS, *
*** Element ID: ARADAOI011 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: Threatened
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G5T2T3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 68
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: KEASLER, G.L. 1982 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1982/05/06
Site: 1982/05/06
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn. (3411722), Lake Arrowhead (3411732)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
* SENSITIVE *
Location: Locational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
More Information?
More Map Detail?
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres: 0
Elevation:
Qtr
Threats:
Comments: ocational Information Supressed - Call Local California
Department of Fish and Game Office for Details
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 34
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***"* Natural Diversity Data Base **
*
~..*
*
*
*
* RIVERSIDIAN ALLUVIAL FAN SAGE SCRUB
* Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: None Global: G1 CDFG: *
* State: None State: Sl,l Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: Not available at this time, *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time, *
*** Element ID: CTT32720CA ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 2
Quality: Fair
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HANES, TED 1980 (PERS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1986/07/01
Site: 1986/07/01
Quad Summary: Redlands (3411712), Forest Falls (3411618), Yucaipa (3411711),
Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: SANTA ANA WASH AND MILL CREEK; NORTH OF REDLANDS AND CRAFTON
HILLS.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 05m 48s / 117d 07m 49s
Zone-11 N3772705 E487961
SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
03924
More Information? Y
More Map Detail? N
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
01S
03W
12 XX Qtr
S
7259.5
1500 ft
Threats: ORV, GRAVEL PIT, PERCOLATION PONDS. THREATENED BY UPSTREAM
FLOOD CONTROL WHICH WOULD ALLOW DEVELOPMENT.
Comments: Distribution Notes - ON SOBOBA STONY LOAM SAND AND FLOOD
CHANNEL DEPOSITS; REWORKED DURING HIGH WATER, BOUNDARY PER 1985
AERIAL PHOTOS, Ecological Notes - ERIASTRUM DENSIFOLIUM,
HAPPLOPAPPUS PINIFOLOIUS, YUCCA WHIPPLEI, JUNIPERUS
CALI FORNICA , OPUNTIA OCCIDENTALIS, O.PARRYI, RHUS INTEGRIFOLIA.
General Notes - OVERALL RANK C, MUCH OF AREA OWNED BY BLM AND
SuBJECT TO GRAVEL AND SAND MINING, PORTIONS SUBJECT TO SAN
BERNARDINO VALLEY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT ACTIVITIES.
Owner/Manager - BLM, SBD VALLEY FCD, OTHERS
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 35
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*'
"
*, RIVERSIDIAN ALLUVIAL FAN SAGE SCRUB
* Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub
*
*
*
*' '
*- ---------Status---------- NODB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
'" Federal: None Global: G1 CDFG: *
* State: None State: Sl.l Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
:., General: Not available at this time. *
'" Microhabitat: Not available at this time, *
*** Element ID: CTT32720CA ****************************************************
O~currence Number: 3
Quality: Good
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Decreasing
Main Info Source: HANES, TED 1980 (PERS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1985/02/12
Site: 1985/02/12
Quad Summary :
County (ies) :
Devore (3411724), San Bernardino South (3411713), San
Bernardino North (3411723)
San Bernardino
Location: WASHES ON EITHER SIDE OF GLEN HELEN REHABILITATION FACILITYiLYTLE
CR & CAJON CYN,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 10m 05s / 117d 23m 02s
Zone-II N3780687 E464616
SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
03283
More Information? Y
More Map Detail? Y
Township: OIN
Range: 05W
Section: UN XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 9218,6
Elevation: 2000 ft
Threats: DISTURBED BY GRAVEL PITS, LEVEES, CONSTRUCTION OF HIWAY 30 MAY
DESTROY 129 PLANTS. PART PROPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT.T
Comments: Distribution Notes - BNORY PER 1985 AERIAL PHOTOS. Ecological
Notes - LARGE AREA W/ VARIED FAN SCRUB VEG. NEAR STREAM BEDS,
ABUNDANT ERIOGONUM FASCIC,HAPPLOPAPPUS PINEFOLIUS &
LEPIDOSPARTUM SQUAMATUM. SITES LESS FREQUENTLY FLOODED:
SYCAMORES, MTN MAHOGANY, YUCCA WHIPPLEI. LGE AREAS REWORKED BY
ANNUAL FLOODING General Notes - MORE SPECIES INFO IN GMF FOR
THIS OCCURENCE. ALSO SEE BIT89ROI IN NC ELF 32720.
Owner/Manager - FLOOD CONT DST. PVT, SBD NF
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 36
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*
,*
* RIVERSIDIAN ALLUVIAL FAN SAGE SCRUB
* Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: None Global: G1 CDFG: *
* State: None State: S1.1 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: Not available at this time, *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time, *
*** Element ID: CTT32720CA ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 21
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Extirpated
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HOLLAND, R, 1988 (MAP)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1985/02/13
Site: 1985/02/13
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: NORTHEAST SAN BERNARDINO; DEVELOPED WASH OF WATERMAN CANYON AND
EAST TWIN CANYON.
Lat/Long: 34d 09m 49s / 117d 16m 21s Township: 01N
UTM: Zone-11 N3780155 E474875 Range: 04W
Mapping precision: SPECIFIC (0 Mile) SectioIi: UN XX Qtr
Symbol Type: POLYGON Meridian: S
Group Number: More Information? N Acres: 843.6
Map Index Number: 03482 More Map Detail? Y Elevation: 1300 ft
Threats: EXTIRPATED PER INTERPRETATION OF 1985 AERIAL PHOTOS.
Comments: Ecological Notes - LEPIDOSPARTUM SQUAMATUM, ERIOGONUM
FASCICULATUM, ARTEMISIA CALIFORNICA AND ERIODICTYON
CALIFORNICUM PER WIESLANDER SURVEY, Owner/Manager - PVT
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 37
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* SOUTHERN MIXED RIPARIAN FOREST
* Southern Mixed Riparian Forest
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: None Global: G2 CDFG: *
* State: None State: S2.1 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
" General: Not available at this time, *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time, *
*** Element ID: CTT61340CA ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 12
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HOLLAND, R. 1988 (MAP)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1985/02/13
Site: 1985/02/13
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn. (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: CITY CREEK AND SCHENK CREEK, N OF HIGHLAND, SAN BERNARDINO MTNS,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 09m 54s / 117d 10m 49s
Zone-l1 N3780279 E483393
SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
03751
03751
More Information? N
More Map Detail? Y
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
OlN
03W
15 XX Qtr
S
267,9
1980 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - EXTANT, 1985, PER INTERPRETATION OF AERIAL
PHOTOS, AT LEAST TO LIMIT OF COVERGAE, Ecological Notes -
MAPPED BY WIESLANDER SURVEY (1935) AS CLOSED CANOPY ALNUS
RHOMBIFOLIA, QUERCUS CHRYSOLEPIS, POPULUS FREMONTII AND
PLATANUS RACEMOSA. General Notes - NEEDS FIELD VERIFICATION OF
VEGETATION CONDITION, COMPOSITION, Owner/Manager - PVT,
USFS-SAN BERNARDINO NF
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 38
RES 96-210
"
*" California Department of Fish and Game ****" Natural Diversity DataBase **
* ~"
* SOUTHERN SYCAMORE ALDER RIPARIAN WOODLAND
* Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland
"
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: None Global: G4 CDFG: *
* State: None State: S4 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: Not available at this time, *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time, "
*** Element ID: CTT62400CA *****************"*****""***************************
Occurrence Number: 162
Quality: Unknown
Type:, Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HOLLAND, R, 1988 (MAP)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1985/02/13
Site: 1985/02/13
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: WATERMAN CANYON, FROM WATERMAN CANYON STATION D/S TO TOP OF FAN,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 16s / 117d 16m 17s
Zone-11 N3782828 E474990
SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
03477
03477
More Information? N
More Map Detail? Y
Township: 01N
Range: 04W
Section: 02 XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 210.1
Elevation: 2240 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - EXTANT, 1985, BUT PATCHY, ESPECIALLY D/S
PER INTERPRETATION OF AERIAL PHOTOS, Ecological Notes - CLOSED
CANOPY PLATANUS RACEMOSA & ALNUS RHOMBIFOLIA ACCORDING TO
WIESLANDER SURVEY, General Notes - NEEDS FIELD VERIFICATION,
Owner/Manager - USFS-SAN BERNARDINO NF
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 39
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*' *
* SOUTHERN SYCAMORE ALDER RIPARIAN WOODLAND
* Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NODB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- "
* Federal: None Global: G4 CDFG: *
* State: None State: S4 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: Not available at this time. *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time, *
*** Element ID: CTT62400CA ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 163
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HOLLAND, R, 1988 (MAP)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1985/02/13
Site: 1985/02/13
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: SAND CANYON, N OF HIGHLAND, SAN BERNARDINO MTNS,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 09m 57s / 117d 13m 04s
Zone-11 N3780355 E479930
SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
03644
03644
More Information? N
More Map Detail? Y
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
01N
03W
17 XX Qtr
S
142,4
2030 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - MAPPED PER INTERPRETATION OF 1985 AERIAL
PHOTOS BUT MAY NOT EXTEND TO END OF CANYON, Ecological Notes -
CLOSED CANOPY PLATANUS RACEMOSA ACCORDING TO WIESLANDER SURVEY.
General Notes - NEEDS FIELD VERIFICATION, Owner/Manager - BIA,
USFS-SAN BERNARDINO NF
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 40
RES 96-210
.'
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* SOUTHERN SYCAMORE ALDER RIPARIAN WOODLAND
* Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland
"
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: None Global: G4 CDFG: *
* State: None State: S4 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: *
* General: Not available at this time, *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time, *
*** Element ID: CTT62400CA ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 164
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HOLLAND, R, 1988 (MAP)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1985/02/13
Site: 1985/02/13
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn. (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: ELDER GULCH, EAST HIGHLAND RESERVOIR,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 08m 10s / 117d 09m 24s
Zone-11 N3777065 E485564
SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
03812
03812
More Information? N
More Map Detail? Y
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
01N
03W
26 XX Qtr
S
112.7
2000 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - MAPPED PER INTERPRETATION OF 1985 AERIAL
PHOTOS. Ecological Notes - CLOSED CANOPY PLATANUS RACEMOSA
ACCORDING TO WIESLANDER SURVEY. General Notes - NEEDS FIELD
VERIFICATION. Owner/Manager - PVT, USFS-SAN BERNARDINO NF
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 41
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* BERBERIS NEVINII
* Nevin's Barberry
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: proposed Endangered Global: G2 CDFG: *
* State: Endangered State: S2,2 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: 1B *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 3-3-3 *
* General: CHAPARRAL, COASTAL SCRUB, ALLUVIAL FAN SAGE SCRUB, *
* Microhabitat: ON STEEP, N-FACING SLOPES OR IN LOW GRADE SANDY WASHES; *
* 900-1600 FT,THIS IS THE CA-LISTED TAXON, AKA MAHONIA IN TITLE *
* 14 *
*** Element ID: PDBER060AO ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 23
Quality: None
Type: Transplant Outside of Native Hab./Range
Presence: Extirpated
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: NISHIDA, J. 1987 (OBS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1966/04/04
Site: 1987/09/09
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722), San Bernardino North (3411723)
County(ies): San Bernardino
Location: ON N SIDE OF HWY 18 BETW ARROWHEAD HIGHLANDS & RIMFOREST.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 14m 05s / 117d 14m 41s
Zone-11 N3787428 E477358
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03538
03538
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Threats:
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
02N
04W
25 SE Qtr
S
o
5200 ft
Comments: General Notes - SPECIMEN COLLECTED HERE. YEARS LATER SITE WAS
VISITED BY WALLACE AND ROAD WIDENING HAD EXTIRPATED OCCURRENCE.
NISHIDA ALSO VISITED AREA IN 1987, BUT NO PLANTS WERE FOUND.
MAY HAVE ORIGINALLY BEEN A PLANTED OCCURRENCE OR AN ESCAPE FROM
CULT, Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 42
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* -*
* MONARDELLA MACRANTHA SSP HALLII
* Hall's Monardella
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: 1B *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 2-1-3 *
General: BROADLEAVED UPLAND FOREST, CHAPARRAL, LOWER MONTANE *
CONIFEROUS FOREST *
* Microhabitat: DRY SLOPES AND RIDGES IN OPENINGS WITHIN THE ABOVE *
COMMUNITIES; TO 6000 FT,? *
*** Element ID: PDLAM180El ****************************************************
*
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 3C
State: None
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
NODB Element Ranks
Global: G5T3
State: S3,2
Occurrence Number: 33
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: KRANTZ, T, 1981 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1933/07/12
Site: 1981/08/20
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: CITY CREEK ROAD, SAN BERNARDINO MTNS.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
Threats:
34d 11m 47s / 117d 09m 09s
Zone-11 N3783719 E485897
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03819
03819
Township: 01N
Range: 03W
Section: 01 SW Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 0
Elevation: 4750 ft
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Comments: General Notes - KRANTZ WALKED THE ROAD IN 1981 FROM 3300-5500
FT ELEVATION AND FOUND NO PLANTS. SEVERAL HISTORIC COLLECTIONS
EXIST, Owner/Manager - USFS-SAN BERNARDINO NF
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 43
llliS 9b-21O
*t California Department of Fish and Game ****" Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
* CHORIZANTHE PARRY I VAR PARRY I
* Parry's Spineflower
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Category 2 Global: G3T2? CDFG: *
* State: None State: S2,l Audubon: *
* CNPS List: 3 *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: ?-2-3 *
* General: COASTAL SCRUB, CHAPARRAL, *
* Microhabitat: DRY SLOPES AND FLATS; SOMETIMES AT INTERFACE OF 2 VEG TYPES, *
* SUCH AS CHAP AND OAK WDLAND; DRY, SANDY SOILS; 40-1705M, *
*** Element ID: PDPGN040J2 ************************"***************************
Occurrence Number: 18
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: SANDERS, A, 1992 (LIT)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1988/04/15
Site: 1988/04/15
Quad summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: ALLUVIAL FAN AT MOUTH OF DEVIL CANYON, SOUTHWEST OF BENCHMAR K
1750,
22517
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township: 01N
Range: 04W
Section: 06 SE Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 0
Elevation: 1640 ft
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 455 / 117d 19m 55s
Zone-11 N3783713 E469403
NON-SPECIFIC (1/5 Mile)
POINT
Threats:
Comments: Ecological Notes - GROWING IN COASTAL SAGE SCRUB WITH ERIGONUM
FASCICULATUM AND ARTEMISIA CALIFORNICA, General Notes - NOTED
AS BEING A FAIRLY COMMON ANNUAL IN OPEN GRAVELLY PLACES.
HERBARIUM LABEL (SANDERS & PITZER #7783 UCR #51052) IS ONLY
SOURCE OF INFORMATION FOR THIS SITE; NEEDS FIELD WORK.
Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 44
RES 96-210
.
.
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
"
,..,
* DODECAHEMA LEPTOCERAS
* Slender-horned Spineflower
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Endangered Global: Gl CDFG: *
* State: Endangered State: Sl.l Audubon: *
* CNPS List: IB *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 3-3-3 *
* General: ALLUVIAL FAN SAGE SCRUB *
* Microhabitat: FLOOD DEPOSITED TERRACES AND WASHES BELOW ABOUT 2200 FT, *
* ASSOC INCLUDE LEPIDOSPARTUM, ETC. *
*** Element ID: PDPGNOVOI0 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 15
Quality: None
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Extirpated
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: FEUDGE, J. #15 RSA (HERB)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1923/XX/XX
Site: 1979/XX/XX
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: SANDY PLAIN AT ARROWHEAD SPRINGS, SAN BERNARDINO,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 07s / 117d 15m 42s
Zone-II N3782535 E475887
NON-SPECIFIC (2/5 Mile)
POINT
03506
20089
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
01N
04W
llE
S
o
1520
Qtr
ft
Threats: ALL AVAILABLE HABITAT MODIFIED.
Comments: Distribution Notes - PRESUMABLY IN THE VICINITY OF CAMPUS
CRUSADE FOR CHRIST FACILITY WHERE HWY 18 CROSSES THE OUTWASH
FAN. Ecological Notes - SANDY PLAIN, General Notes - SPECIES
SEEN IN 1923, Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 45
RES 96-210
*t California Department of Fish and Game
*****
Natural Diversity Data Base "*
*
*
* ERIASTRUM DENSIFOLIUM SSP SANCTORUM
* Santa Ana River Woollystar
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Endangered Global: G4T1 CDFG: *
* State: Endangered State: Sl.l Audubon: *
* CNPS List: 1B *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 3-3-3 *
* General: COASTAL SCRUB (ALLUVIAL FAN) *
* Microhabitat: IN SANDY SOILS ON RIVER FLOODPLAINS OR TERRACED FLUVIAL *
* DEPOSITS, 1240-1900 FT, *
*** Element ID: PDPLM03035 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 3
Quality: Excellent
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: BOYD, S, 1983 (PERS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1988/07/07
Site: 1988/07/07
Quad summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: WEST SIDE OF LYTLE CREEK WASH, S OF HIGHLAND AVE,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 08m 01s / 117d 20m 48s
Zone-II N3776841 E468038
NON-SPECIFIC (1/5 Mile)
POINT
03361
03361
More Information? Y
More Map Detail? Y
Township: 01N
Range: 04W
Section: UN XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 0
Elevation: 1270 ft
Threats: AREA COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY TRAILER PARKS, RR, STABLES, ETC.
CONSTRUCTION OF RTE 30 FWY WOULD DESTROY MANY PLANTS,
Comments: Ecological Notes - ON SNDY SOIL IN RIVERSIDIAN ALLUVIAL FAN
SAGE SCRUB, ASSOCIATED WITH ERIOGONUM FASCICULATUM, CROTON
CALI FORNICUS, GUTIERREZIA BRACTEATA, SENECIO DOUGLASII AND
LOTUS SCOPARIUS, General Notes - 444 PLANTS SEEN IN 1988. THIS
POPULATION MAY BE A HYBRID SWARM OF E, D, SANCTORUM AND E,D.
ELONGATUM ACC TO J. WHEELER (CROSSOMA 14(3) JUNE, 1988); MORE
STUDIES NEEDED. Owner/Manager - PVT
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 46
RES 96-210
"* California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*
...
* ERIASTRUM DENSIFOLIUM SSP SANCTORUM
* Santa Ana River Woollystar
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Endangered Global: G4Tl CDFG: *
* State: Endangered State: Sl,l Audubon: *
* CNPS List: lB *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 3-3-3 *
* General: COASTAL SCRUB (ALLUVIAL FAN) *
* Microhabitat: IN SANDY SOILS ON RIVER FLOODPLAINS OR TERRACED FLUVIAL *
* DEPOSITS, 1240-1900 FT, *
*** Element ID: PDPLM03035 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 4
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: BOYD, S, 1983 (PERS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1952/XX/XX
Site: 1952/XX/XX
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: 3.8 MI NW OF JCT OF HIGHLAND AVE AND US RTE 66 (NOW HWY 215 OR
BARSTOW FWY) .
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 10m 42s / 117d 21m 18s
Zone-ll N3781804 E467276
NON-SPECIFIC (3/5 Mile)
POINT
20101
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township: 01N
Range: 05W
Section: UN XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 0
Elevation: 1520 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - WHAT IS CALLED HWY 215 ON 1988 REVISED
TOPO WAS APPARENTLY FORMERLY CALLED HWY 15 AND 1-395. General
Notes - COLL BY EVERET, BALLS, LYNN-1952, MAPPED ON CAJON BLVD,
3,8 MI NW OF JCT OF HIGHLAND & HWY 215. CAJON WASH POPS MAY BE
A HYBRID SWARM OF E.D. SANCTORUMX E.D, ELONGATUM ACC TO
WHEELER (CROSSOSOMA 14(3) JUNE, 1988) MORE STUDIES NEEDED.
Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 47
RES 96-210
*~ California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*
*
*
*
*
*
* ERIASTRUM DENSIFOLIUM SSP SANCTORUM
* Santa Ana River Woollystar
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Endangered Global: G4Tl CDFG: *
* State: Endangered State: SI,I Audubon: *
* CNPS List: IB *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 3-3-3 *
* General: COASTAL SCRUB (ALLUVIAL FAN) *
* Microhabitat: IN SANDY SOILS ON RIVER FLOODPLAINS OR TERRACED FLUVIAL *
* DEPOSITS, 1240-1900 FT, *
*** Element ID: PDPLM03035 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 18
Quality: Good
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: KRANTZ, T. 1987 (OBS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1987/05/29
Site: 1987/05/29
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County(ies): San Bernardino
Location: W SIDE OF CAJON BLVD, 0.3 MI N OF INSTITUTION RD.
Lat/Long: 34d 11m 18s / 117d 22m 08s Township: om
UTM: Zone-II N3782902 E466013 Range: 05W
Mapping precision: SPECIFIC (80m Mile) Section: UN XX Qtr
Symbol Type: POINT Meridian: S
Group Number: More Information? N Acres: 0
Map Index Number: 20006 More Map Detail? N Elevation: 1700 ft
Threats: CLOSE TO CAJON BLVD, BRUSH CLEARING ALONG SHOULDER OF RD.
Comments: Ecological Notes - MIXED CHAPARRAL, ALLUVIAL FAN SCRUB OF
CHAMISE, SCALEBROOM AND BUCKWHEAT. General Notes - ABOUT 16
SCATTERED PLANTS SEEN IN 1987. A FEW SEEDLINGS EXTENDING INTO
BRUSH-CLEARED AREA. NO MAP GIVEN; MAPPED AS PER ABOVE
DIRECTIONS. Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 48
RES 96-210
"
** California Department of Fish and Game **"** Natural Diversity Data Base **
*
.~':
* ERIASTRUM DENSIFOLIUM SSP SANCTORUM
* Santa Ana River Woollystar
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Endangered Global: G4T1 CDFG: *
* State: Endangered State: S1.1 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: 1B *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 3-3-3 *
* General: COASTAL SCRUB (ALLUVIAL FAN) *
* Microhabitat: IN SANDY SOILS ON RIVER FLOODPLAINS OR TERRACED FLUVIAL *
* DEPOSITS, 1240-1900 FT, *
*** Element ID: PDPLM03035 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 19
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: MARSH, K, 1988 (OBS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1988/07/07
Site: 1988/07/07
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: W BRANCH OF LYTLE CREEK WASH, IMMEDIATELY E OF FRISBIE PARK AND
IMMEDIATELY S OF HIGHLAND AVE,
Lat/Long: 34d 08m 07s / 117d 21m 23s Township: 01N
UTM: Zone-11 N3777021 E467134 Range: 05W
Mapping precision: SPECIFIC (80m Mile) Section: 36 NE Qtr
Symbol Type: POINT Meridian: S
Group Number: More Information? N Acres: 0
Map Index Number: 20007 More Map Detail? Y Elevation: 1300 ft
Threats: SAND AND GRAVEL MINING JUST UPSTREAM, ROUTE 30 FREEWAY EXISTING
ALIGNMENT GOES THROUGH MOST OF POPULATION.
Comments: Distribution Notes - ALONG RIALTO CORP, BDY, Ecological Notes
- SEMI-STABILIZED QLD FLOODPLAIN ON SAND LENSES CONTAINING BARS
AND LENSES OF COBBLE, GRAVEL AND SAND. WITH LEPIDOSPARTUM
SQUAMATUM, ERIOGONUM FASCICULATUM, YUCCA WHIPPLEI, ETC,
General Notes - 55 PLANTS SEEN IN 1987, 64 PLANTS SEEN IN 1988.
THIS POPULATION MAY BE A HYBRID SWARM OF E, DENSIFOLIUM
SANCTORUM AND E. D. ELONGATUM ACC TO J, WHEELER (CROSSOSOMA
14(3) JUNE, 1988). MORE TAXONOMIC WORK NEEDED. Owner/Manager-
CALTRANS?
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 49
RES 96-210
*: California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
*
*
*
*
* CASTILLEJA LASIORHYNCHA
* San Bernardino Owl's-clover
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Category 2 Global: G2 CDFG: *
* State: None State: S2. 2 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: 1B *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 1-2-3 *
* General: MEADOWS, PEBBLE PLAIN, UPPER MONTANE CONIFEROUS FOREST *
* Microhabitat: MESIC TO DRYING SOILS IN OPEN AREAS OF STREAM AND MEADOW *
* MARGINS OR OF VERNALLY WET AREAS; OCC W/MEADOW HERBS. *
*** Element ID: PDSCROD410 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 19
Quality: None
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Extirpated
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: PARISH, S, #10950 DS (HERB)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1916/06/21
Site: 1916/06/21
Quad Summary: Lake Arrowhead (3411732), Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: LITTLE BEAR VALLEY (= VIC LAKE ARROWHEAD) ,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 15m 19s / 117d 11m 03s
Zone-11 N3790281 E483043
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03739
03739
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
02N
03W
15 SW Qtr
S
o
5100 ft
Threats:
Comments: General Notes - LITTLE BEAR LAKE IS NOW UNDER LAKE ARROWHEAD
(HOWARD, 1974), Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 50
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base *~
* ,*
* CASTILLEJA LASIORHYNCHA
* San Bernardino Owl's-clover
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Category 2 Global: G2 CDFG: *
* State: None State: S2. 2 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: lB *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 1-2-3 *
* General: MEADOWS, PEBBLE PLAIN, UPPER MONTANE CONIFEROUS FOREST *
* Microhabitat: MESIC TO DRYING SOILS IN OPEN AREAS OF STREAM AND MEADOW *
* MARGINS OR OF VERNALLY WET AREAS; OCC W/MEADOW HERBS, *
*** Element ID: PDSCROD410 ***********************"****************************
Occurrence Number: 34
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: DETMERS, F, #17876 UCR (HERB)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1929/06/17
Site: 1929/06/17
Quad Summary: Lake Arrowhead (3411732), Harrison Mtn. (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: HILL SLOPE N OF GOLF COURSE, LAKE ARROWHEAD, SAN BERNARDINO MTNS.
Lat/Long:
UI'M:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 15m 23s / 117d 13m 43s
Zone-11 N3790412 E478951
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03591
03591
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
02N
03W
18 SE Qtr
S
o
5500 ft
Threats:
Comments: Owner/Manager - PVT IN USFS-SAN BERNARDINO NF
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 51
RES 96-210
*t California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* *
*
*
*
*
* CASTILLEJA LASIORHYNCHA
* San Bernardino Owl's-clover
* ---------Status---------- NODB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Category 2 Global: G2 CDFG: *
* State: None State: S2,2 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: 1B *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 1-2-3 *
* General: MEADOWS, PEBBLE PLAIN, UPPER MONTANE CONIFEROUS FOREST *
* Microhabitat: MESIC TO DRYING SOILS IN OPEN AREAS OF STREAM AND MEADOW *
* MARGINS OR OF VERNALLY WET AREAS; OCC W/MEADOW HERBS, *
*** Element ID: PDSCROD410 ************************"***************************
Occurrence Number: 35
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: ANONYMOUS SN LAM (HERB)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1890/07/07
Site: 1890/07/07
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722), San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: STRAWBERRY VALLEY (=STRAWBERRY FLAT NEAR LAKE ARROWHEAD?) .
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 14m 05s / 117d 14m 41s
Zone-11 N3788720 E478154
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03538
03538
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
02N
03W
19 SW Qtr
S
o
5480 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - REPORTED FROM "STRAWBERRY VALLEY IN SBD
COUNTY." MAPPED AT STRAWBERRY FLAT. Owner/Manager - PVT IN
USFS-SAN BERNARDINO NF
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 52
RES 96-210
** California Department of Fish and Game "**** Natural Diversity Data Base *i
* '.
* FIMBRISTYLIS THERMALIS
* Hot Springs Fimbristylis
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Category 3B Global: G4 CDFG: *
* State: None State: S2? Audubon: *
* CNPS List: 2 *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 2-2-1 *
* General: ALKALINE MEADOWS. *
* Microhabitat: NEAR HOT SPRINGS; OVER 500M, *
*** Element ID: PMCYPOBONO ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 1
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: ROOS, J, C, #5197 UCR (HERB)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1951/08/25
Site: 1983/07/XX
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: ARROWHEAD HOT SPRINGS, NEAR THE MOUTH OF WATERMAN CANYON.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 10s / 117d 15m 48s
Zone-II N3782633 E475726
NON-SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
21481
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township: 01N
Range: 04W
Section: 11 E Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 20.7
Elevation: 2000 ft
Threats:
Comments: Ecological Notes - IN SUN IN MOIST SOIL AT SEEPS, WITH
ANDROPOGON GLOMERATUS, General Notes - NOTED BY ROOS AS BEING
A COMMON PERENNIAL IN 1951, SITE REVISITED BY A,C. SANDERS IN
1983 AND WAS NOT FOUND. Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Comme~cial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 53
RES 96-210
"
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversiy Data Base **
* *
* BRODIAEA FILIFOLIA
* Thread-leaved Brodiaea
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NDDB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Proposed Threatened Global: G2 CDFG: *
* State: Endangered State: S2.1 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: 1B *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 3-3-3 *
* General: VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, VERNAL POOLS *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time. *
*** Element ID: PMLILOC050 ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 7
Quality: Fair
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: SANDERS, A, 1994 (PERS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1993/XX/XX
Site: 1993/XX/XX
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: ARROWHEAD HOT SPRINGS, SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 13s / 117d 15m 47s
Zone-11 N3782683 E475703
SPECIFIC (80m Mile)
POINT
03506
03506
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
01N
04W
llE
S
o
1900
Qtr
ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - RIGHT ALONGSIDE THE HOT SPRINGS IN SMALL
CANYON JUST WEST OF THE HOTEL, Ecological Notes - GROWING IN
OPEN AREAS WHICH ARE FAIRLY UNDISTURBED. CLAYEY SOILS WHICH
HAVE BEEN HYDROTHERMALLY ALTERED. SITE IS PROBABLY INUNDATED
WITH WARM WATER EARLY IN THE SEASON, General Notes -
APPROXIMATELY 1000 PLANTS OBSERVED IN 1993, FOUR PRIOR KNOWN
OBSERVATIONS IN THIS VICINITY INCLUDING SPENCER #1139 IN 1919,
GRANT #6631 IN 1906, PARISH #186 IN 1881, AND PARISH & PARISH
#362 IN 1880, Owner/Manager - PVT
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 54
RES 96-210
:-
"* California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base *~
* r.
* BRODIAEA FILIFOLIA
* Thread-leaved Brodiaea
*
*
*
*
* ---------Status---------- NODB Element Ranks --------Other Lists--------- *
* Federal: Proposed Threatened Global: G2 CDFG: *
* State: Endangered State: S2.1 Audubon: *
* CNPS List: IB *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 3-3-3 *
* General: VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, VERNAL POOLS *
* Microhabitat: Not available at this time. *
*** Element ID: PMLILOCOSO ****************************************************
Occurrence Number: 8
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: SANDERS, A. 1994 (PERSl
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1993/XX/XX
Site: 1993/XX/XX
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: WATERMAN CANYON STREAMBED, NEAR ARROWHEAD HOT SPRINGS, SAN B
ERNARDINO MTNS.
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 14s / 117d 16m 13s
Zone-II N3782752 E475129
NON-SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
03435
03435
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township:
Range:
Section:
Meridian:
Acres:
Elevation:
01N
04W
llW
S
47
1900
Qtr
ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - SANDERS OBSERVED PLANTS ON EAST SIDE OF
CANYON NEAR HOT SPRINGS, VERY NEAR TO WHERE OLD RESORT
BUILDINGS WERE, PRIOR TO BEING TORN DOWN. General Notes - FEW
DOZEN PLANTS SEEN BY SANDERS IN 1993, AREA ALSO KNOWN FROM TWO
EARLIER COLLECTIONS; NAKASHIMA SN IN 1971 (FORMER DET, B.
ORCUTTII) AND STONE #317 IN 1953, STONE GIVES 4000' ELEV. BUT
HIS DIRECTIONS SUGGEST MUCH LOWER COLLECTION SITE,
Owner/Manager - PVT
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 55
RES 96-210
...
"
*t, California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base **
* "
* CALOCHORTUS PLUMMERAE
* Plummer's Mariposa Lily
*
*
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: 1B *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 2-2-3 *
General: COASTAL SAGE SCRUB, CHAPARRAL, GRASSLAND, CISMONTANE *
WOODLAND, LOWER MONTANE CONIFEROUS FOREST, GRASSLAND, *
* Microhabitat: OCCURS ON ROCKY AND SANDY SITES, USUALLY OF GRANITIC OR *
ALLUVIAL MATERIAL; 305-1700M, *
*** Element ID: PMLILOD150 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: None
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G2G3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 16
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: HOWELL #2770 CAS, RSA (HERB)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1927/07/10
Site: 1927/07/10
Quad Summary: Harrison Mtn, (3411722)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: ON CITY CREEK ROAD BELOW "INSPIRATION POINT", SAN BERNARDINO
MOUNTAINS.
03819
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township: 01N
Range: 03W
Section: 01 XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 0
Elevation: 5000 ft
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 47s / 117d 09m 09s
Zone-11 N3783719 E485897
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - MAPPED ALONG HIGHWAY 330 ABOUT 2-3 MILES
WEST OF RUNNING SPRINGS BASED ON THE ELEVATION GIVEN ON THE
COLLECTION LABEL (5000'). THE NEAREST "INSPIRATION POINT" IS
ABOUT 4-5 AIR MILES TO THE NORTHEAST NEAR GREEN VALLEY LAKE.
Ecological Notes - CHAPARRAL. General Notes - S. WHITE (1992)
REPORTS THAT HE HAS OBSERVED C. PLUMMERAE ALONG CITY CREEK; THE
EXACT LOCATION AND DATE OF OBSERVATION IS UNKNOWN.
Owner/Manager - USFS-SAN BERNARDINO NF
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 56
RES 96-210
'I'
** California Department of Fish and Game ***** Natural Diversity Data Base *~
" ~
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: 1B *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 2-2-3 *
General: COASTAL SAGE SCRUB, CHAPARRAL, GRASSLAND, CISMONTANE *
WOODLAND, LOWER MONTANE CONIFEROUS FOREST, GRASSLAND. *
* Microhabitat: OCCURS ON ROCKY AND SANDY SITES, USUALLY OF GRANITIC OR *
ALLUVIAL MATERIAL; 305-1700M, *
*** Element ID: PMLILOD150 ***********************"****************************
* CALOCHORTUS PLUMMERAE
* Plummer's Mariposa Lily
*
*
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: None
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
NODB Element Ranks
Global: G2G3
State: S2S3
Occurrence Number: 19
Quality: Good
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: WHITE, S, 1993 (OBS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1993/06/10
Site: 1993/06/10
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: NORTHEAST OF CSU, SAN BERNARDINO NEAR MOUTH OF BADGER CANYON ,
ABOUT 1.2 MILES SSW OF MARSHALL PEAK,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 57s / 117d 18m 45s
Zone-II N3784126 E471188
SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
Township: 01N
Range: 04W
Section: 05 SE Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 10.3
Elevation: 2300 ft
26660
More Information? N
More Map Detail? Y
Threats: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT,
,Comments: Distribution Notes - THREE COLONIES MAPPED NEAR DIRT ROADS IN
VICINITY OF MINE, Ecological Notes - OPEN CHAPARRAL PRIMARILY
COMPOSED OF ADENOSTOMA FASCICULATUM AND SALVIA MELLIFERA. VERY
STEEP SLOPES, LOS ANGELES POCKET MOUSE (PEROGNATHUS
LONGIMEMBRUS BREVINASUS) OCCURS IN THIS AREA, General Notes -
5 PLANTS OBSERVED IN THREE COLONIES IN 1993. THE PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT WILL DESTROY AT LEAST 3 OF THE 8 KNOWN PLANTS IN
THIS VICINITY, OPEN SPACE INCLUDED IN THE PLAN MIGHT PROTECT
THE REMAINING PLANTS. Owner/Manager - PVT
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 59
RES 96-210
*'
Natural Diversity Data Base '
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: 1B *
* ---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 2-2-3 *
General: COASTAL SAGE SCRUB, CHAPARRAL, GRASSLAND, CISMONTANE *
WOODLAND, LOWER MONTANE CONIFEROUS FOREST, GRASSLAND. *
* Microhabitat: OCCURS ON ROCKY AND SANDY SITES, USUALLY OF GRANITIC OR *
ALLUVIAL MATERIAL; 305-1700M, *
*** Element ID: PMLILOD150 ****************************************************
.
** California Department of Fish and Game *****
* CALOCHORTUS PLUMMERAE
* Plummer's Mariposa Lily
*
*
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: None
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G2G3
State: S2S3
*
*
*
*
*
*
Occurrence Number: 20
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: possibly Extirpated
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: WOGLUM, R,S, #2171 RSA #377427 (HERB)
Quad Summary: San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: RIALTO, NORTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 08m 48s / 117d 21m 46s
Zone-11 N3778300 E466507
NON-SPECIFIC (1 Mile)
POINT
03320
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Threats: DEVELOPMENT,
*
*
*
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1938/06/21
Site: 1992/XX/XX
Township: 01N
Range: 05W
Section: UN XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 0
Elevation: 1450 ft
Comments: Distribution Notes - MAPPED IN VICINITY OF WHERE CAJON WASH
MERGES WITH MILL CREEK WASH, General Notes - ONLY KNOWN
SIGHTING IN THIS AREA IS 1938 COLLECTION BY WOGLUM, S, WHITE
(1992) REPORTS THAT THIS SITE IS PRESUMABLY EXTIRPATED DUE TO
DEVELOPMENT. Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
cs057
Date of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 60
RES 96-210
'f
* California Department of Fish and Game "**** Natural Diversity Data Base **'
CALOCHORTUS PLUMMERAE
Plummer's Mariposa Lily
* ,:-~
*
*
*
--------Other Lists--------- *
CDFG: *
Audubon: *
CNPS List: 1B *
---Habitat Associations--- CNPS RED Code: 2-2-3 *
General: COASTAL SAGE SCRUB, CHAPARRAL, GRASSLAND, CISMONTANE *
WOODLAND, LOWER MONTANE CONIFEROUS FOREST, GRASSLAND. *
Microhabitat: OCCURS ON ROCKY AND SANDY SITES, USUALLY OF GRANITIC OR *
ALLUVIAL MATERIAL; 305-1700M, *
** Element ID: PMLILOD150 ****************************************************
---------Status----------
Federal: Category 2
State: None
NDDB Element Ranks
Global: G2G3
State: S2S3
ccurrence Number: 21
Quality: Unknown
Type: Natural/Native occurrence
Presence: Presumed Extant
Trend: Unknown
Main Info Source: SANDERS, A, 1992 (PERS)
--Dates Last Seen--
Element: 1990/05/24
Site: 1990/05/24
uad Summary: Devore (3411724), San Bernardino North (3411723)
County (ies) : San Bernardino
Location: CAJON PASS AREA; 0,25 MILE NORTH OF INSTITUTION ROAD,
Lat/Long:
UTM:
Mapping Precision:
Symbol Type:
Group Number:
Map Index Number:
34d 11m 04s / 117d 22m 28s
Zone-11 N3782500 E465462
NON-SPECIFIC (0 Mile)
POLYGON
26659
More Information? N
More Map Detail? N
Township: 01N
Range: 05W
Section: UN XX Qtr
Meridian: S
Acres: 97.7
Elevation: 1650 ft
Threats:
Comments: Distribution Notes - NEAR LATITUDE 34 10N AND LONGITUDE 117
22W. Ecological Notes - RIVERSIDIAN ALLUVIAL FAN SAGE SCRUB
WITH CERCOCARPUS BETULOIDES, ERIOGONUM FASCICULATUM, OPUNTIA
LITTORALIS, AND MANY WEEDY SPECIES, General Notes - ONLY
SOURCE OF INFORMATION FOR THIS SITE IS 1990 COLLECTION BY WHITE
AND MONTIJO SN (UCR) , Owner/Manager - UNKNOWN
;057
lte of Report: 04/11/96
Commercial Client
Date Information Purchased: 12/28/95 Page 61
RES 96-210
MITIGA TION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE
FOOTHILL VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN
Introduction
This mitigation monitoring and compliance program has been prepared for use by the City of San
Bernardino as it implements mitigation measures for the Foothill Vegetation Management Plan, This
Program has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and the State and City CEQA Guidelines.
CEQA Section 21081.6 requires adoption of a reporting and/or monitoring program for those
measures or conditions imposed on a project to mitigate or avoid adverse effects on the environment.
The law states that the monitoring or reporting program shall be designed to ensure compliance
during project implementation,
This Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program (MMRP or Program) contains the following
elements:
1) The mitigation measures are recorded with the action and procedure necessary to ensure
compliance. Each mitigation measure contained within the Initial Study for implementation
by the City is listed on a separate sheet.
2) A procedure for compliance and verification has been outlined for each mandatory mitigation
action, This procedure designates who will take the action, what action will be taken and
when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported,
3) The Program contains a separate Mitigation Monitoring and Compliance Record for each
action, On each of these record sheets, the pertinent actions and dates will be logged, and
copies of permits, correspondence or other data relevant to verifYing mitigation
implementation will be attached, Copies of the records will be retained by the City of San
Bernardino as part of its project files,
4) The Program has been designed to be flexible, As monitoring progresses, changes to
compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible
for the Program, If changes are made, new monitoring compliance procedures and records
will be developed and incorporated into the Program,
The individual measures and the accompanying monitoring/reporting actions follow, They are
numbered in the same sequence as presented in the Project Initial Study.
ATTACHMENT B
RES 96-210
MITIGATION MEASURE
IV.A.I.
Remedial erosion control measures as outlined in the Initial Study will be
implemented if inspections following the first three storms of the rainy season
indicate significant erosion damage and/or downstream sediment damage to the
main stream in the local drainage.
IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION
The City Fire Department shall inspect and verify in writing the status of erosion in areas that have
undergone prescribed burning, The Department inspector shall place copies of the field inspection
notes in the project file, If remedial erosion control measures are implemented, the Department will
identify the agent that implements the erosion control measures and place a copy of filed inspection
notes in the file verifying that the measures have been successful.
COMPLIANCE RECORD
WHEN REQUIRED: The written verification and initial inspection notes shall be placed in the
project file immediately following the inspection. If required, he note
verifying successful implementation of erosion control measures shall be
placed in the project file immediately following the inspection,
FIELD INSPECTION NOTE(S) PREPARED BY:
DATE FILED:
EROSION CONTROL INSPECTION NOTE(S) PREPARED BY:
DATE FILED:
FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED/COMPLETED:
RES 96-210
MITIGATION MEASURE
IV.B.1
All stream channels will be excluded from the vegetation management program,
and boundaries for the areas selected for controlled burns or mechanical
vegetation management will be selected to minimize any direct or indirect effect
on stream channels and related riparian vegetation,
IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION
Within each prescribed burn plan, the City shall include a section verifYing that stream channels with
riparian vegetation have been avoided and direct or indirect effects on channels and related riparian
vegetation have been minimized,
COMPLIANCE RECORD
WHEN REQUIRED: The require discussion shall be incorporated into each prescribed burn plan
prepared and/or implemented by the City under this project. A copy of the
prescribed burn plan shall be incorporated into the project file prior to
initiating the prescribed burn.
PRESCRIBED BURN PLAN PREPARED BY:
DATE PREPARED AND REVIEWED:
DATE PLACED IN PROJECT FILE:
DATE PRESCRIBED BURN INITIATED:
FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED/COMPLETED
RES 96-210
MITIGATION MEASURE
IV.F.1 If a hazardous or toxic substance is released during implementation of the vegetation
management program, the agencies shall properly clean-up and remove any
contaminated soil or other material; restore the affected area to background conditions
or regulatory threshold levels for the contaminant(s) released; and deliver the
contaminated material to an appropriate treatment, recycling, or landfill facility in
accordance with the regulations for the type of contaminant accidental released and
collected for management.
IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION
When a hazardous substance is released, the City Fire Department shall prepare an incident report
that identifies the substance, the method of clean-up and residual conditions of the site, and the
location of ultimate disposal or management. A copy of this incident report shall be retained in the
project file,
COMPLIANCE RECORD
WHEN REQUIRED: Incident report shall be prepared immediately following discovery and
completion of site remediation. The copy of the incident report shall be
placed in the project file when it is completed,
INCIDENT REPORT PREPARED BY:
DATE PREPARED:
DATE NOTE PLACED IN PROJECT FILE:
FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED/COMPLETED
RES 1r-iiii
MITIGATION MEASURE
IV.G.1
At the beginning of each subsequent years planning period (assume January of
each new year), the fire agencies shall identify the areas that are proposed to
undergo prescribed burns. For those areas that contain Coastal Sage Scrub that
is suitable habitat for the gnatcatcher, a survey conforming to the FWS
protocols shall be performed. If inhabited, no prescribed burns shall be
conducted in the proposed burn area until after the nesting season, September
1 of each year. If uninhabited, the prescribed burn shall be conducted after the
completion of surveys to the satisfaction of the FWS. The decision to proceed
with a prescribed burn shall be implemented only after conferring with the FWS
and receipt of approval to proceed.
IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION
An annual plan or list identifYing areas for prescribed burning shall be compiled and placed in the
project record as required above, The gnatcatcher survey results shall be placed in the project file,
and the response from the FWS shall be retained in the project file,
COMPLIANCE RECORD
WHEN REQUIRED: The annual plan shall be compiled prior to initiating prescribed burns on any
areas each year, The gnatcatcher survey results shall be completed and placed
in the project file prior to initiating prescribed burns on any Coastal Sage
Scrub areas each year, The FWS response shall be placed in the project file
prior to initiating prescribed burns on any Coastal Sage Scrub areas each year,
ANNUAL PLAN PREPARED BY:
DATE PLAN PLACED IN PROJECT FILE:
DATE OF FIRST PRESCRIBED BURN EACH YEAR:
GNATCATCHER SURVEY PREPARED BY:
DATE FILED AND SUBMITTED TO FWS:
DATE FWS RESPONSE RECEIVED BY CITY:
FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED/COMPLETED:
RE~ 96-'1/\
"
MITIGATION MEASURE
IV.G.2
For areas of immediate fire hazard concern, the fire agencies shall consider
creating a buITer area through mechanical vegetation management, such as
mowing or hand removal of vegetation. This mechanical vegetation
management shall be conducted following the nesting season and shall be
reviewed and approved by the FWS prior to action.
IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION
If mechanical vegetation management is selected for Coastal Sage Scrub areas requiring immediate
attention, the City shall identifY the area and retain a copy of the mechanical vegetation management
plan in the project file. The response from the FWS shall be retained in the project file.
COMPLIANCE RECORD
WHEN REQUIRED: The mechanical vegetation management plan shall be compiled prior to and
placed in the project file prior to initiating the action in any given year. The
FWS response shall be placed in the project file prior to initiating any
mechanical vegetation management plan activities on any Coastal Sage Scrub
areas each year.
MECHANICAL VEGETATION PLAN PREPARED BY:
DATE PLAN PLACED IN PROJECT FILE:
DATE FILED AND SUBMITTED TO FWS:
DATE FWS RESPONSE RECEIVED BY CITY:
FOLLOW-UP REQUIRED/COMPLETED:
RES 96-210
MITIGATION MEASURE
IV.M.l
Prior to finalizing prescribed burn plans, the agencies shall identify all utility
resources that are located within a proposed controlled burn or mechanical
vegetation management area. The agencies shall confer with the responsible
utility regarding the infrastructure and, if the infrastructure may be damaged
by the proposed vegetation management program, the area shall be excluded
from the management area. Alternatively, revising the management plan to
ensure that the infrastructure will not be damaged, to the satisfaction of the
utility, would allow the vegetation management plan to proceed.
IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION
The utility survey and contacts with the utilities shall be documented and a copy placed in the project
file by the City. Areas deleted or specific alterations to the vegetation management plans shall be
retained in the project file.
COMPLIANCE RECORD
WHEN REQUIRED: The utility survey and contact data must be placed in the project file prior to
initiating a vegetation management plan activity. Copies of prescribed bum
plan modifications shall also be placed in the project file prior to initiating any
vegetation management plan activity.
UTILITY SURVEY AND CONTACT DATA PREPARED BY:
DATE DATA PLACED IN PROJECT FILE:
DATE PLAN MODIFICATION INFORMATION PLACED IN PROJECT FILE:
DATE OF PRESCRIBED BURN AFFECTED BY MODIFICATION:
FOLLOW -UP REQUIRED/COMPLETED:
RES 96-'210
,
2-3
(cont)
2-5
2-6
Pj':!.
[~ ~~ r;;./lA1r-c-~c-c~. 7~- 7Ujd.-c-
~ ~ ~ p~~/. ~4~L
:;ft: .~ - .......kd ~ J~' ~ ~ e?,,;z'-
~ d tfVI:7J ~ ~. g Y l?, ~~
~ ~ tL ~~ 7U-J~ ~~.
74 fJ~~A;oA<7:.if ~ ~ ~~~~':/
~~ '-n.- ~ ..-B'~~~ ~ ~ E ...7./<..
~,",?~ ~ ~. ~ AL!lCA~'
.15~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ yp,~
~~~~~~~C<-
~~ ~ ~ ~-5 -r-~ ~r "
~ . .. '-w-:e.- IVU., ~ C~~
./C~4 ff LL ~ ~ ~ L 7Y'M-<-
::z5IL JJ~ .~.d ~ ~ ~
.A--. ,rC ~ fi- /-=th.;// ~ ~ ..z&L
~ d4 ~ cv ~ 5n--L-'} ~ ~
/~Lv~ ~ ~~ ~ Jrr.L- ~ ~
.~ ~.. h"- ~,0..d /~~
~ ..~~a k -/4 ~-(d
~'^- ~ ~.,d .-d /U-lZ t'~ ~ t;l
~ ~ ~ .A..- ~ ~;t- /~
~ ;{.~_ ~ ~ ~ /n- ()~.
~ .zfIf (]4f ~ Ya~ 7JJU~ ~f
I .?f.>~ ~--d/ ~ ~ ~ CZff~
d lj /1~-h . ~~-u-i ~
~ $r;:;:z ~ ~ -tvd/-T~-
cfu- ~. /Uj)r T~.
r..Q J.r- /'.r- ~ >?\. 1~
[~4~~ 7L-'Z4-t~
c~?
T A.c~'/ Y tJ-U- .-
-/~. '7/ u-:T-72 u..lL
'1- 7'" s- "?1-,,( ~
JJ! IM-b'fr I ca. q~ ~ v"7
c:v c~ ~.
RES 96-2l0
2-5 At least four public meetings will have been held prior to making any decision on the
proposed project. At this point no significant impacts have been identified that cannot be
mitigation through effective planning for the prescribed bums, or through identified
mitigation measures. The net effect of this project over the long-term, including the
biological resources, is considered to be beneficial.
2-6 Your comments are noted and will be provided to the decision-makers for consideration
prior to the final decision being made for this project.
RES 96-210
Foothill Vegetation
Management Plan
ENVIRONMENT AL COMMENTS
AND STAFF RESPONSES
EXHIBIT 2
illiit96-210 ;W:"07~;~";'"F'RI 11:44 ID:
.. ...
,,,.., "'V"'<;>UI~. If" ------
TEL NO: 1909-384-5155
tl851 P02
TRANSPORTATION/FLOOD CONTROL
DEPARTMENT - COUNTY SURVEYOR
COUIITY III' UII UllNAllOlNO
I'IlILlC WORK' CIllOUP
1ft In! ThIrlI..... . .... ............ ell. 12411.a31 . IlOl1 317.2100
F.. N~. (1081 M7.ze07
KEN A. MILLER
Dllftlor
ffi P' :~, j'2 !i \Ii 7 ;'5 001 ij
o .? -11'" ;E !, '.; 1..
'. ..." t
In.. ,JUN 0 7 i~:,;3 '-
File: 2..00012.00, 2-00018.01
JlIDe 6, 1996
"II'Y Oi' SAI~ a<RI,o\tli~1NO
n~f'.~F~iMl;:'.n OP P;.ANt';/~'~~ {',
~IJII.O:I'I~ 5r."IV;C53
Mr. Micbael R. Finn
As&ociate Planner
City of San BerDardino
Department of Planning & Building Services
300 North "I)" StRIet
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Subject: City of San Bernardino Foothill Vegetati.on Management Plan (Initial Study #96-10)
Dear Mr. Finn:
. In accordance with correspondence and the Initial Study package received by this Department
from you on May 9, 1996, the Department has reviewed the subject Initial Study and bas the
following comments:
1.) Since vegetation management measures will be performed in part over vllliollS III'CIlS
encumbered by Flood Control District right of way and/or ellll"""ents, it will be the
rcsponslblUty of the City to obtain all ne<:ess8Iy permits from the District and other
jurisdictional agencies involved prior to initiating said measures. Please contact the San
Bernardino County Flood Control District, Field Engineering Division, Flood Control
Pmnits Section at 825 East Third StIeet, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0835. The Flood
Control PCIIIJ.its Engineer is Mr. Ken Eke and hiI telephone number is (909) 387-2633.
1-1
r
1-2
f3T
1-3 L
It Is possible that controlled burns will result in flooding, and ~cumu1ation of excessive
amounts of debris and sedimentation in various District channels and basin facilities
downstream from affected burned watershed areas. Appropriate measures shall be
provided in place by the City prior to the advent of the rainy sellSon to preclude such
occum:nces. A detennlnation shall be made as to who will reimblll'Se the District for any
costs incurred in the event it becomes necessary to remove excessive debris and
sedimentation from said fac;:i1ities which may be attributable to controlled bum actions by
the City.
The controlled burns should be limited to no more than 25% of an individual watershed in
any one year. Proposed bum areas 6,7, 9, 10, 13, l4 and l8 (pases 6-10, of said Initial
Study), may need to be revised to meet this criteria.
... ;'1' ~
RES 96-2l0
RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
LETTER #l
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION/FLOOD CONTROL DEPARTMENT/
COUNTY SURVEYOR
1-1 Mitigation contained in the proposed Negative Declaration requires all public agencies
with infrastructure, structures, easements and rights-of-way to be contacted prior to
conducting a prescribed bum. When Flood Control easements are affected, the agencies
will need to obtain appropriate rights-of-way or easements in accordance with your
comment.
1-2 Best management erosion control measures are required as part of the prescribed burn
process. Such measures have been implemented in the past as part of Forest Service
prescribed bums and because these controlled fires leave organic matter and butTers within
and around be burn area, little erosion damage has occurred in the past. Mitigation
measures identified in the proposed Negative Declaration require remediation for any
erosion/sedimentation damage that results from the proposed program. This is consistent
with your comment.
1-3 Your comment is noted and it provides a very constructive suggestion. As individual
bums are programed for implementation, this criterion will be given careful consideration
and, where appropriate, the District will be consulted for its input.
'1tWU'9'6':~ld' ,
,.'..
, :'1'. ~
.::. \:' ~i
; ,,'
~ ~
Mr. Mic:baDI. R. Finn
City of San Benwdino
lme 6, 1996
Paae 2
1-4 ~ All existing District structures which may be vulnerable must be protected in place.
If you have any questions regarding the above, you may c:all me at (909) 387-2634.
Sina:re1y ,
w~.:..~.~.~
WILLIAM M. COLLINS, P .E., Chief
Field Operations Division
WMC:JBM:bfb
~: Mike Fox
Lou l:udin
Ken BIte
Gail Cotupa, EMD
Joe More
KAMlFVCIRF
RES 96-2l0
1-4 Please refer to response to comment 1-1. Structures in place will be protected by the
proposed program.
RES 9(;-210
.'
r.5 7
c~ ~ .ic-- 73~lf4z-Jt r~.d.~,,~~~ 2k-
1),,-- YY? /7" _ . "ZS #Cj,{-tJ I
~ 11Vl.,. 7:.,.,r..,vn.-
2-2
~ --IL'a..~ ~ ~ ~ ...c.. .4~
?'~~~..~~~
C<./Iu( ~___ -a- ~~ ~~ d
CArr~ cn..... A-- ~~ /;{l-7~~'
.--/ ~ ?-bK-. ~;yJ. X ?? vl!' c.--~
~ C171- .~ .I hd .f~ 7'~
~ ~~ C~/7J~rJ
~C~~~~R~.
" C~ o.-..cZ ..L ~ <!t. /lp<,t ~
/~'Zv-~' ~ 7'" ~ ~J;f~
~a:wd~. ;V~ ~ ~ ..d-
/?1vd- ~ ..d. ~~ .---f 71. .!TV7o'-C'-~
r..l:[j~ ?na.,~ p~ ,V- ~
'0 ..a... ~ n~L' -/::- ~ A- -r~'
~d ~G4~J/~~~
~.d- /~/ ~~:7f
~ ?~ ~~
~ .dt ~/~~ .~ ya-<<-~ ~
~"~ ~~~'J~' ~
~ V~ ~ " 'fJ ~X ~. L:.-.- ~
../4 /~hdI ~ ~ ~..-<- ~
~ .~ ~ 7)~- ~t- v/ ~~
~ ~ ~ ~~ .A>- kjL7~"-
.~~ ~;u-~ ~...'.~ .
CQAr.L-- ct.-\.. n tr" ~~-<- ,4::. -?'n-L- ~ ~
2-3 ~ ~ /____ &v JA<"..-r- /~ 7CM/?
~.~ ~ ~ -r~-&~...J
rl~ - g- de{ ~ fi r2 ~~-
7' ~ ~~ ~'-e.;t ~ --? J'...i~~44
2-1
RES 96-2l0
RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
LETTER #2
JANE HUNT-RUBLE
2-1 Your comments are noted. In fact, your conclusion that the vegetation management
program is not needed is incorrect. It appears that you have not reviewed the biology
section of the Initial Study, nor the discussion of the rationale for the project. The bum
history of the area demonstrates that future fires will burn the foothill areas. This can
occur as a catastrophic burn, where all living things are destroyed because of the heat and
devastation of the fire, or as controlled burns where the roots and adjacent habitat will
ensure earlier restoration of the coastal sage scrub and chaparral habitats. These habitats
will benefit from creation of different age classes and the reduction in fire hazard can
significantly reduce the potential for catastrophic fires that can cause devastation beyond
the wildland/urban interface into existing urbanized areas.
2-2 The land use section of the Initial Study discusses the land use issues. The wildland/urban
interface is a reality and good management of this existing situation is an essential
responsibility of the participating fire agencies. No land use decisions are affected by this
proposed project and the fire hazard zones, as delineated in all three ofthe land use
jurisdictions (County and Cities of Highland and San Bernardino), remain the same for
future planning purposes.
2-3 Your comment is incorrect. All of the major catastrophic wildland fires in California have
been associated with the extreme weather conditions you identified as being rare for the
Panorama Fire. The most recent catastrophic fires of this type occurred in Laguna,
Malibu, and Oakland fires. The choices are to wait for a catastrophic fire and experience
the severe erosion, flooding and other damage associated with such fires, or to conduct
controlled burns that minimize the potential for erosion and long-term habitat damage. If
an effective vegetation age mosaic existed prior to the Panorama Fire, there would not
have been the severe destruction experienced in that fire because insufficient fuel would
have been available to sustain the severity of the fire.
RES 6,2l0
, u"
,
r'l. )
~a. .:#t ~, / ~ r.c-e.4~ ~ ~~~
~ .d- ~y Y7J.I)/~A4G.#!r~tvL~~
a-d r- ~.ft.- pa~!j:~ -/ I~J-o>
~ ~.~ er/ ~ ?'U.d. .u ?(k~
r;:~ AA ~ tJ ~~ .~ UI.L ~
.d.d- ~~~ ~U- ~ ~ ~
~:~nt). ~ ~ ~ '~14~..-... ~~
7 ~ ~~ ~ .~./ -/~. ~
~ ~ ~ ;m.n,...~~ ~ 74.. 2.~7TlPUr~
;... .k~ ......- A. ;"' t' .~ ~;J.L ~--" ~
ovz..e.,.... L ~ ~ d ~ ~"'- ~.~~ ~
~..u ~ /.-e-e-- ~ .v .:d ~
~-t<Lt ~ c~J ~ &~""J .LL-.
1J~ ~. ~H1- ~ ,,~4 ~
~ ~ ~. .,..<Y ~ 7"~;-d r-vL.k..,
r--= ~ 74... -Jf ~ ~ t'..,,:;,- ~ ~
I f y='~ k~ ~ ~ ~k d-~/
I ~. 6e- 0... _AA.~a-::r IP~ .~-c;:/- ~
I . d. ~:-G./(.A,~d- ;:u 7z.;:t' ~~CJ d
, ~ ~ -?.6' ~L :L~~cU.-z..
~U/L. (~~ ~ c:-~ ~ --/.:ZL
,/?~~.~ ~",-~7~~
I -c;t;, c ~--f P-j-'!.- 7/ ~ ~ ..,~-r!Z
2-4 I.~~. ~. ~d- ~ ,4t-~
I ~ z'? P/Z7~ 7~ CV~ ~
I~~~~~
I ~" ~L.. .L' ;;u,Z1~ .~. ft C~
~~C4.J~~ ?~7<~~(2) i
A ~ c~~ ~/ r. ~ [/) ~..4 ,4~ ~
r"J;r~ r:h.;.t/ ~/:4 ~ P~~7
~ ~t>hu.,( -d ~~ .~ -I ~
~ .~. ~ ~...vv~ ~z ~
/uJ b ~ ~ ...,; ./L ~. v-/
RES 96-210
2-4 As noted in the document, the goal is to prevent an even aged stand of more that 12-15
years of age for the chaparral and coastal sage scrub habitats. If funds are available in the
future, controlled burning over this period should allow maximum habitat value and
minimal erosion and flood hazard damage, contrary to your comment. As for sensitive
species, controlled bums allow the faunal population to migrate from a fire into adjacent
habitat and to reoccupy it within one season. After a catastrophic fire, several years may
pass, including severe erosion and soil damage, before a plant community reestablishes
itself. All of the sensitive plant habitat will be protected in accordance with consultations
with the appropriate biological resource management agency requirements as is required in
the mitigation measures.