Santa Ana Watershed Association SAWA 2010

Santa Ana Watershed Association SAWA2010

anta Ana WatershedAssociation

Mission StatementThe Santa Ana Watershed Association will develop, coordinate and implement natural resource programs that support a sustainable ecosystem and social benefits from the San Bernardino Mountains to

the Pacific Ocean.

Goals

1. Provide leadership in cooperation with other agencies, organizations and private citizens to invest the watershed constituency in

stewardship of their natural resources.

2. Assist in the development, implementation, and monitoring of effective processes to improve watershed quality and protect beneficial uses of soil, water, biological, and other natural resources of the Santa Ana River Watershed, including, but not limited to:

• Habitat restoration • Biological monitoring • Invasive plant management • Management of endangered species

3. Provide dependable and accessible scientific information to support decisions for further management actions.

4. Develop an educational program to disseminate information on the natural resources of our watershed to the public.

2


Santa Ana Watershed Association 2010 Annual Report

3

For nearly 15 years, the Santa Ana Watershed As-

sociation (SAWA) and its partners have been promot-ing a healthy Santa Ana River watershed for the wildlife and the people who inhabit it. The watershed spans nearly 3,000.square miles and ranges in el-evation from 11,500 feet to sea level through five distinctive life zones. The watershed lies in one of Earth’s 25 Biodiver-sity Hotspots—areas rich in flora and fauna that are threat-ened by human activity.

SAWA is governed by a five-member board comprised of one representative each from four resource conservation districts (RCDs) within the watershed, and one from the Orange County Water Dis-trict. The four RCDs are the Inland Empire RCD (IERCD), the San Jacinto Basin RCD (SJBRCD), the Riverside-Co-rona RCD (RCRCD) and the Elsinore-Murrieta-Anza RCD (EMARCD).

SAWA conducts environ-mental management projects, working collaboratively with governmental agencies, orga-nizations, and private citizens. SAWA implements facets of

the Santa Ana River Water-shed Program, continuously restoring natural functions and resources of the river and its tributaries.

The most notable collabo-rating agencies include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), U.S. Fish & Wild-life Service (USF&WS), Cali-fornia Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and the Re-gional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The Water-shed Program formally began in 1995, with the signing of a landmark agreement between the OCWD, USACE, and the U.S. Department of Interior for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This agreement al-lowed OCWD to conserve wa-ter behind Prado Dam but also recognized the need for water-shed restoration by allowing a portion of the project miti-gation to occur in the upper Santa Ana River watershed, many miles from the project site. Mitigation was required to offset inundation of habitat in the Prado Basin due to water conservation. Two of the ma-jor federal regulatory agencies were convinced enough of the river’s degradation to break

nually toured through the wa-tershed. Photographic docu-mentation of work progress is collected in each project area and there are regular site visits by each RCD, by the OCWD, and by regulatory agency rep-resentatives. SAWA or the local RCD is responsible for contract and contractor over-sight.

A major goal of SAWA is to restore the natural function of the watershed through the enhancement and restoration of the native riparian commu-nity. This is accomplished by the removal of exotic species and the management of exist-ing resources, including both habitat and wildlife species. The largest threat to the ripar-ian habitat within the Santa Ana Watershed is takeover by invasive species, notably Arundo donax. This exotic plant is highly aggressive and has invaded much of the wa-tershed, out-competing native vegetation and having drastic impacts on the wildlife. Re-moving Arundo is difficult and complex, requiring multiple treatments and intensive moni-toring.

away from decades of tradi-tional mitigation dictating that impact compensation was to occur within or very near the project area. Orange County Water District contributed $1 million to a fund that was the beginning of today’s efforts to restore the function of the Santa Ana River.

The Watershed Program is staffed by the partnering agen-cies. At monthly meetings, project plans and accomplish-ments are discussed. Project goals are specified in multiple-year work plans that are com-piled by SAWA with input from the other partners. The work plans are reviewed by the vari-ous partnering agency boards and the regulatory agencies for their input and eventual en-dorsement. Changes and addi-tions are made through staff-generated amendments. The work items and components of the plans are largely dictated by responsibilities inherited with the funding and the long-term commitment for follow-up. Annual achievements and audits of expenditures are re-ported each year.

In addition, the partnering agencies and regulators are an-

Promoting a Healthy Santa Ana River Watershed for Wildlife and People



removal efforts throughout the watershed. In some cases, mitigation projects are as-signed to a specific property in the watershed.

Work is performed either directly by SAWA, or through one of the RCDs. In the latter case, an individual RCD per-forms a piece of work, autho-rized through the annual work plan and within the budgetary constraints dictated therein. That RCD then invoices SAWA and it is paid out of the fund. Approved work is confined to the activities specified in cur-rent grants and to maintenance obligations. The trust fund must be kept at a level that will yield enough operating capital to continue long-term Arundo maintenance and other follow-up responsibilities.

SAWA projects are designat-ed and approved by the Board of Directors in a long-term workplan. This plan is carried out with a focus on ongoing maintenance and enhancement of river system function, even-tually leading to whole water-shed health. The work plan develops projects that further these goals.

Work accomplished on the ground through SAWA is done by SAWA staff and the part-nering agencies. The invasive species removal to date was originally accomplished by the individual Resource Conserva-tion Districts within their geo-graphic spheres of influence.

More recently, long-term and many first-time proposals are being managed directly by SAWA. This report reflects the 12-month period from Jan. 1, 2010 to Dec. 31, 2010, and supplements many other re-ports produced throughout the period for regulatory agencies.

SAWA’s comprehensive eradication efforts include identification and mapping of exotic species, initial biomass removal, post treatment, and intensive biological surveying during all stages of eradica-tion. Most importantly, SAWA monitors the removal areas long after the Arundo has been eradicated to ensure that native vegetation and wildlife are re-covering and that there is no return of the invasive species. These intensive monitoring efforts are required to prevent re-growth that can lead to total re-infestation over time and to prevent any impacts to native species.

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) originally managed the watershed fund and the resto-ration work in the upper water-shed. In 1996, the RCDs came together as SAWA, which then included the East Valley, In-land Empire West, Riverside-Corona, and San Jacinto Basin RCDs.

The Watershed Program fo-cus is dictated by the respon-sibilities that come with the public funds provided to miti-gate for typically large federal projects. These include control of invasive species, particu-larly giant reed and cowbirds, targeted for their interference with river function and re-source abundance; increas-ing wetlands and open space; managing endangered species toward recovery; and public involvement. Arundo control started in the upper watershed and continues downstream because Arundo invades by pieces washing down and sprouting in moist soil. Arun-do seeds are sterile in our area, so that the spread of giant reed has been by vegetative means.

Habitat restoration, primar-ily through Arundo control, is the current focus of the Wa-tershed Program because most of the funding obtained was earmarked for Arundo control. The work with endangered species and other wildlife is necessary for compliance with the regulatory permits to do the Arundo work. Funds are obtained from grants and miti-gation of projects on the river, and the Watershed Program took on the funds and the miti-gation responsibilities.

The projects providing funds included the Seven Oaks Dam, Prado Water Conservation, Highway 71 Improvements, Norco Bluffs Stabilization, Santa Ana River Flood Con-trol, Environmental Protection Agency Grants, and several mitigations that have been or-dered because of construc-tion impacts in the watershed.

Some of the mitigation fund-ing sources did not specify acreage requirements but did provide adequate funding for treatment of several hundred additional acres and more im-portantly, for long-term re-treatment. Beginning in 2002, there was an additional $9 mil-lion for Arundo control due to a successful grant application for Proposition 13 funds.

By early March 2003, SAWA became a 501(c) (3) nonprofit organization, and changed from fiscal year to calendar year. In January of 2004, SAWA established an In Lieu Fee Program with the Corps for invasive species removal.

This program gives develop-ers the option to mitigate for impacts in locations other than the project site. The funds generated by this program are used to support invasive plant

4

Promoting a Healthy Watershed continued...


In MeMORIAMMoses Timothy Romo, 1961-2010

SAWA Project Manager Tim Romo died after a brief ill-ness in November 2010. He was a well-loved and dedicated part of the organization for five years, managing all of our major invasive removal and control projects. SAWA is cre-ating a memorial for Tim consisting of a bench and sev-eral Coast Live Oak trees in Towngate Memorial Park in Moreno Valley, the city where his mother and several other members of his immediate family reside.

5

SAWA Biological Monitoring

Our target Endangered Species, the Least Bell’s

Vireo, has made tremendous progress toward recovery in the past 10 years. We like to think this is due in great part to the work of Santa Ana Wa-tershed Association biolo-gists and field assistants, who have worked throughout the watershed to manage habitat and cowbird parasitism to in-crease the species’ breeding success. Numbers have in-creased many-fold throughout the watershed since SAWA began monitoring in 2000. In 2000, 11 individu-al territories were documented at 2 sites outside of Prado. In 2010, more than 1,400 individual terri-tories were docu-mented. In San Timoteo Canyon, where SAWA re-moved more than 200 acres of Arun-do donax, vireo abundance has in-creased from 5 in 2000 and 2001 to 126 in 2010.

In addition to managing the Least Bell’s vireo, the SAWA biolo-gists have been

active in managing other sen-sitive species, and monitoring raptors, amphibians and rep-tiles. They are also perform-ing long-term studies on 25 acre plots to track abundance and distribution of avian spe-cies in riparian habitat affected by removal of invasive plants.

The biological staff in-cludes one lead biologist, one field biologist II, five field bi-ologists, two half-time natural resource specialists, and two field assistants.

The Least Bell’s vireo monitoring effort consists of

active nest management that requires multiple visits to sites and a less intense monitoring effort consisting of three visits during the season to smaller ri-parian habitat patches to detect the presence of vireos. Some nest monitoring occurs during these three visits based on hab-itat conditions and presence of cowbirds. Sites receiving nest management include San Timoteo Canyon, Mocking-bird Canyon, Santa Ana River at Norco, Hidden Valley, Tem-escal, and the Santa Ana Can-yon below Prado Dam. Sites

which have increased popula-tion size dramatically with the removal of invasives and cow-bird management include San Timoteo, Temescal, Mocking-bird Canyon and the Santa Ana River at Norco. Nest man-agement is also done at sites such as San Jacinto, Sycamore Canyon, and Chino Hills’ But-terfield Ranch that may not have large subpopulations but require nest management due to a history of cowbird parasit-ism.

Monitoring began in mid-March and ended in August.

Biologists walk ri-parian habitat, and territories of the endangered bird are entered into a global positioning system. Frequent trips were made to determine breed-ing status and to locate and moni-tor nests. A pair of vireos may double brood and may try up to 5 times to successfully fledge young. More than 3,200 field hours were expended moni-toring vireos in 2010. Biologists were in the field

Santa Ana Watershed Association 2010 Annual ReportJi

ll C

oum

outs

o

Jill

Cou

mou

tso

Terr

y R

eese

r

6

between dawn and late after-noon five days a week during the season. Once territories are located, birds are observed for nesting behaviors. Nests are checked approximately every seven days to remove cowbird eggs or chicks, and to document reproductive suc-cess. Biologists operate on a buddy system for safety rea-sons. Each biologist is paired with another and each checks in and out with the other each field day.

We reaped rewards for be-ginning to manage cowbirds in Lake Elsinore in 2009. Af-ter parasitism was detected in many vireo nests at Lake Elsinore we intensified our cowbird trapping efforts there. A trap was set up late in the breeding season in the Lake Elsinore West Marina and RV Resort and it was successful in trapping cowbirds. In 2010, the trap there was deployed at the beginning of the season and vireo nesting success in Lake Elsinore was improved. SAWA also worked with the Center for Natural Lands Man-agement in 2010 to monitor vireos in two of its preserves—Coyote Hills East Preserve in Fullerton, and March SKR Preserve in Riverside.

Cowbird Trapping/Man-agement Program

An integral part of the vireo management program is con-trol of the brown-headed cow-bird. Each biologist managed the cowbird trapping program at his/her vireo monitoring sites. Eight seasonal assistants were hired to service 54 traps throughout the watershed. As-sistants were college students or people interested in wild-

life. Giving people the chance to handle birds and learn about the native birds they remove from the traps usually ignites an enthusiasm for understand-ing the pressures under which our local wildlife lives. The assistants were trained in bird identification and handling. An administrative orientation was held for the seasonal em-ployees immediately after hir-ing. A safety orientation will be added in 2011.

Cowbird traps were de-ployed in late February and opened in early March, before the season began. Most of the traps were closed by the end of July; however, those traps still catching cowbirds remained open through the fall. Traps deployed at the San Jacinto dairies are kept open through-out the winter because winter trapping usually catches a few thousand cowbirds.

Traps are serviced seven days a week by agreement with US Fish and Wildlife Ser-

vice and the State of Califor-nia to ensure that all non-target birds are released back into the habitat in a timely man-ner, and to ensure that the bait cowbirds have food and water. Assistants report in at the start of the work day to the biologist and check out at the end of the day. This requirement assures the program that the traps have been serviced and provides a safety check for personnel in the field.

The success of our ex-tensive vireo and cowbird management program is due to many public and private entities that have contributed to our efforts by allowing us access to their property. Pri-vate property owners in Mock-ingbird Canyon, San Timoteo Canyon, Norco, Mira Loma, and San Jacinto allowed us to place cowbird traps on their property, which greatly aided our efforts to enhance local riparian habitat. Private com-panies and public agencies also contributed to SAWA’s cowbird management program or to its vireo management program. These included 3M, the Green River Golf Club, Paradise Knolls Golf Course, River Trails Stables in Norco, Canyon R.V. Park, KB Home, Fisherman’s Retreat in San Timoteo, Lake Elsinore West Marina and RV Resort, the County of Riverside Regional Parks and Open Space District, State of California Department of Parks and Recreation, City of Riverside Public Works De-partment, Elsinore Valley Mu-nicipal Water District, Rail-road Canyon Water Treatment Facility, Western Municipal

SAWA Biological Monitoring continued...


COWBIRDS TRAPPeD In 2010

Terry Reeser

A LeAST BeLL’S VIReO SInGInG.

7

Water District, Gage Canal, Eastern Municipal Water Dis-trict, Harbor, Beaches, and Parks, County of Orange, and the Center for Natural Lands Management.

Monitoring Invasive Plant Removal

SAWA biologists moni-tored the Arundo donax re-moval and spraying at Anza Narrows and Mission 4 Arun-do site, Goose Creek Golf Club-IERCD mitigation proj-ect, Chino Creek Integrated Project and Cleanup, and in Hidden Valley Wildlife Pre-serve along the Santa Ana Riv-er. Some sections of the site were closed to removal work

until after the vireo season due to the mix of native vegeta-tion with the invasives and the presence of breeding species at the site. Biologists worked closely with the project leader and the contractor to plan ac-cess routes to the Arundo and other invasive flora to prevent damage to native vegetation. SAWA biologists also moni-tored the Arundo and pepper weed, Lepidium latifolium, during field activities. Biolo-gists noted any new occurrenc-es or regrowth of Arundo and reported the information to the project manager for removal. The presence of pepperweed in San Timoteo was document-ed and referred to the SAWA project director for removal.

Breeding Bird and Winter Bird Surveys

Each biologist manages a bird study plot, minimum of 25 acres, on which both breeding bird and winter bird surveys are done. These sites are located where inva-sive plants have been or will be removed. Eight surveys are done at each site between mid February and the end of July. Repeated surveys dur-ing the season are necessary for determining territorial and breeding status. All birds ex-hibiting breeding behavior are mapped per the Resident Bird Count protocol of the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology. Results are published in the

Institutes of Bird Populations by PRBO Observatory and the Cornell Laboratory of Or-nithology. Winter bird stud-ies are also done on the study plots. Eight surveys are done from December 15 to February 15. Results include number of birds/species per 100 acres and per 100 hectares, # of times the species observed, and the highest number of individu-als/species documented. Three survey plots have been added. Two were added for the 2009-2010 winter season, one in the San Jacinto River and one on the Santa Ana River above River Rd. in Norco. Another plot was added in Hidden Val-ley Wildlife Preserve begin-ning the winter of 2010-2011.



SAWA WInTeR BIRD SuRVey 2009-2010

8

Other study plots are located in San Timoteo, Mockingbird Canyon, the Santa Ana River at Van Buren Blvd., in Norco at Hwy 15, and Featherly Re-gional Park in Orange County.

Sensitive Species

Because of the success of the vireo management program (i.e., the increasing abundance and distribution of the species and the lower cowbird parasit-ism rates), SAWA biologists have cut back on the extent of vireo nest monitoring to dedi-cate more time to monitoring sensitive species in the water-shed. While not listed, many species are declining due to habitat loss or degradation. These species are listed by the State of California as Species of Concern and by the West-ern Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Program as Focal Species. In 2010, SAWA biologists contin-ued to document the presence of these species in the water-shed during the vireo monitor-ing efforts and with the breed-ing and winter bird surveys. Sensitive species detected in 2010 include the Yellow War-bler, Dendroica petechia, and the Yellow-breasted Chat, Icte-ria virens. A minimum of 603 Yellow Warblers and 255 Yel-low-breasted Chats were de-tected in the watershed outside of the Prado Basin. Tadpoles and egg masses of Spadefoot toad, Spea hammondii, were found in March SKR Preserve. We continued to map the pres-ence of these sensitive species in the watershed, including the Burrowing Owl, Athene cu-nicularia, and the San Diego Coast Horned Lizard, Phry-

nosoma coronatum blainvillii. Additionally, we contracted with Ginny Short, an expert in the Burrowing Owl, to survey parts of the watershed. Field work was done on the Moun-tain Plover, Charadrius mon-tanus, the Loggerhead Shrike, Lanius ludovicianus, the Ru-fous-crowned Sparrow, the Golden Eagle, Aquila chrys-aetos, and the Greenest Tiger Beetle, Cicindela tranqaebar-ica viridissima. To supple-ment field work, cameras were placed at various sites to iden-tify wildlife use of habitat. One of these field cameras was lost in the January rain storms. The camera, located on the river in Norco had identified

the presence of bobcat at the site. SAWA biologists partici-pate in multi-agency working groups for Tri-colored Black-bird, Agelaius tricolor. Mel-ody Aimar, Biologist II, leads the Riverside/San Bernardino sub-working group for the re-covery of the Cactus Wren, Camphylorphynchus brunnei-capillus.

In 2010, SAWA biologists participated in field work on focal species with the Multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan biologists. Activities included small mammal, and surveys for the Loggerhead Shrike, Lanius ludovicianna, Engelmann Oak, Quercus en-gelmannii, the Western Pond

Turtle, Actinemys marmorata, Quino Checkerspot, Euphy-dryas editha quino, Arroyo chubb, Gila orcuttii, and am-phibian stream surveys, vernal pool surveys, and rare plant and vegetation assessments.

Herpetological Program

SAWA’s herpetological program continued its survey of the presence and distribu-tion of amphibians and rep-tiles in the watershed with a 12-month study in Riverside County. Biologist Melody Aimar leads the herp program. Herp arrays were installed in Sycamore Canyon and March SKR Preserve in 2010. Re-sults from herpetological stud-ies at March SKR Preserve and Sycamore Canyon, Riverside, California are shown at left.

SAWA is also working with the California Depart-ment of Fish and Game and other organizations, including IEUA, to develop a relocation program for displaced native Western Pond Turtles.

Santa Ana Sucker

SAWA biologists partici-pated in the feasibility study for the restoration of Sunny-slope Creek as a Santa Ana Sucker, Catostomus santaanae breeding habitat. We contin-ued work at the SAWA native fish stream where staff assisted with the collection of the suck-ers for pit tagging. SAWA biologists and field assistants also participated in the an-nual “Riverwalk.” This study originated with SAWA in 2006 and is currently run by the Santa Ana Sucker Conserva-tion Team. A major problem



2010 HeRPeTOLOGICAL STuDIeS

9

in the recovery of the sucker is the loss of cobble substrate in the river, which is a major silt trap. Riverwalk participants walk the Santa Ana River and document type of substrate to establish changes to sucker habitat.

Raptor Surveys

Driving raptor surveys continued in San Timoteo Can-yon, San Jacinto, Cajon, and Lake Perris. Biologist Allyson Beckman heads up SAWA’s raptor study program. See the table of results below. In ad-dition to these raptor surveys, we surveyed Chino Hills State Park for the Golden Eagle.

California Least Tern Monitoring

At the request of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, SAWA biologists took over monitoring of the California Least Tern, Sterna antilla-rum browni, nesting colony at Huntington Beach in 2008. In 2010, we monitored 433 nests. It is estimated that ap-proximately 400 pairs of Least Terns nested in the colony and produced 298 fledglings. The Army Corps of Engineers Least Tern Island at the Santa Ana Marsh, across the river from the Huntington Beach Tern Colony, was monitored

but no nesting terns were de-tected.

Wetlands Monitoring

Santa Ana Watershed As-sociation biologists also sup-port biological activities at the Chino Creek Wetlands Park (CCP) at the Inland Empire Utilities Agency. SAWA biol-ogist Jill Coumoutso performs monthly bird surveys in the park and keeps current a CCP Bird Checklist, available at the reception desk at the CCP. A milestone was reached when a Least Bell’s Vireo successfully nested in the park. A second vireo was also documented. Breeding was confirmed for

Yellow Warblers, Dendroica petechia, Blue Grosbeaks, Guiraca caerulea, and Song Sparrows, Melospiza melodia. Biologist David McMichael monitored 28 Tree Swallow, Tachycineta bicolor, nesting boxes at the ponds in the park in 2010. Seventeen boxes were used for a 61% utiliza-tion rate. Nesting success was 92% and a minimum of 106 fledglings was confirmed. In-stallation of bat boxes at the park is also planned. SAWA also studies native small mam-mal presence and absence in the constructed wetlands at the Chino Creek Wetlands Park. Biologist Nicole Housel leads



2010 Roadside Raptor Survey Results(Number of detections, not individuals)

COMMON NAMESCIENTIFIC

NAME

NUMBER OF RAPTORS OBSERVED (In Taxonomic Order)

San Timoteo (9 surveys)

Cajon(3 surveys)

San Jacinto (10 surveys)

Lake Perris (8 surveys)

TOTAL PER

SPECIESTurkey Vulture Cathartes aura 3 9 12

OspreyPandion haliaetus 3 10 13

White-tailed Kite Elanus leucurus 5 1 3 9

Bald EagleHaliaeetus leucocephalus 1 8 9

Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus 6 8 14

Sharp-shinned HawkAccipiter striatus 1 1

Cooper’s HawkAccipiter cooperii 2 2 5 9

Red-shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus 7 1 1 9

Swainson’s HawkButeo swainsoni 60 60

Red-tailed HawkButeo jamaicensis 87 15 178 83 363

Ferruginous Hawk Buteo regalis 6 8 6 20

Golden EagleAquila chrysaetos 1 1

American KestrelFalco sparverius 34 2 69 29 134

MerlinFalco columbarius 4 4

TOTAL PER SITE 144 17 334 163 658

10

this study supported by biolo-gist Talula Barbee. Five small mammal species were trapped including Harvest Mouse, Reinthrodonomys megalotis, House Mouse, Mus musculus, Deer Mouse, Peromyscus ma-niculatus, California Meadow Vole, Microtus californicus, and Roof Rat, Rattus rattus. One bird species, Song Spar-row, was enticed into the traps by the bait seed and they were released unharmed.

SAWA also tackled the problem of a major infesta-tion of the African Clawed Frog, Xenapus laevis. Un-der the direction the Califor-nia Department of Fish and Game, and SAWA biologist Melody Aimar, SAWA tested a protocol for the eradication of the exotic frog by introduc-ing chlorine in a IEUA deten-tion pond. While over 10,000 frogs were removed, some did survive. The full report on the experimental protocol is avail-able on the SAWA Web site.

During the work, three Bur-rowing Owls were found at the detention pond and they were closely monitored during the eradication work.

Biologists had booths at the IEUA/SAWA Bird Festi-val in the fall with information

on local resident and migra-tory birds and local bats. Live hawks, the Northern Goshawk, Accipiter gentilis, and a Harris Hawk, Parabuteo unicinctus, were on display.

Santa Ana River Levee


Surveys SAWA and OCWD bi-

ologists conduct bird counts twice a year along 11 miles of the Santa Ana River in the cit-ies of Yorba Linda, Anaheim, and Orange. This portion of the Santa Ana River is chan-nelized by cement levees on both sides but with soft bot-tom and water management it still provides important habi-tat, particularly for ducks and wading birds. In the winter, biologists record bird species and the number of each spe-cies seen on the river and in the upland habitat next to the river. Binoculars and spot-ting scopes are used to help biologists properly identify birds. In the spring and sum-mer, during nesting season, bi-ologists record breeding birds, those birds that are paired for breeding, have nests, or have young. These surveys are im-portant in showing what type of birds and how many birds use the river for food, habitat,


A GRAnITe SPIny LIzARD SPOTTeD DuRInG A SuRVey neAR ARLInGTOn FALLS.

Lee

Ree

der

11

and nesting sites. Also, data from the water bird surveys highlight how human activity as well as changing physical features along the river can have an effect on the presence of avian life in the river.

Bluebird Box Program

Giovanni Arechavaleta led the effort to deploy Tree Swal-low/Bluebird boxes at appro-priate vireo monitoring sites. Species that used the boxes included Tree Swallows, West-ern Bluebirds, Sialia mexi-cana, House Wrens, Troglo-dytes aedon, Ash-throated Flycatchers, Myiarchus cin-erascens, and House Finches, Carpodacus mexicanus.

Bat Program

SAWA’s Bat Program in-cluded activities to detect the presence of bats at the Chino Creek Wetlands Park at In-land Empire Utilities Agen-cy (IEUA). We continue to monitor bat presence at Green River Golf Club in support of the Army Corps of Engineers stabilization project. We are developing plans to install bat boxes at the IEUA and at the Green River Golf Club. Biolo-gist Jill Coumoutso is leading the bat activities for SAWA.

Publications

Biologists continued to write fact sheets on the sta-tus and distribution of endan-gered, threatened, or other sensitive species. They are being developed for com-munity outreach to educate the public on the presence and the needs of wildlife in

the watershed. New accounts completed in 2010 include the Southern Rubber Boa, Cha-rina umbratica, Delhi Sand-loving Fly, Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis, Tiger Beetle, Cicindela tranquebar-ica viridissima, and the pest African Clawed Frog. Fact sheets on other species can be found on the SAWA Web site, wwww.sawatershed.org, and include the Orange-throated Whiptail, Southwestern Wil-low Flycatcher, Empidonax traillii extimus, Cactus Wren, Tri-colored Blackbird, Coo-per’s Hawk, Accipter coope-rii, Loggerhead Shrike, Lanius ludovicianus, Osprey, Pandion haliaetus, Yellow Warbler, Rufous-crowned Sparrow, San Diego Horned Lizard, Arroyo Toad, Bufo californicus, West-ern Spade foot Toad, Spea hammondii, Western Red Bat, Lasiurus blossevillii, and Ste-phen’s Kangaroo Rat, Dipodo-mys stephensi, A fact sheet on the noxious weed, bladder flower, Araujia sericifera, is also available.

SAWA biologists also provided biological support for SAWA’s member agen-cies. Biologists did general bird surveys and assisted with amphibian and SEP programs for the Riverside-Corona Re-source Conservation District. We assisted the Inland Empire Resource Conservation Dis-trict with a project at Goose Creek Golf Course in Norco, surveys to identify rubber boa mitigation sites and wetlands creation sites, and monitored star-thistle eradication sites.

Support to Agencies

SAWA biologists continue to provide information and ad-vice to agencies and project developers. SAWA is often called by government agen-cies and consulting firms for information on whether the vireo or other listed species are present at specific sites. We continue to work with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to mitigate the project to re-inforce the Santa Ana River downstream of Prado Dam.



When originally planned this section of river contained few vireo territories. In the inter-vening years the quality of the cottonwood-willow forest has dramatically increased with a commensurate increase in the number of vireo territories. Terry Reeser is leading this project. We continue to work with the developers at Mock-ingbird Canyon Estates II to protect the riparian corridor adjacent to its construction zone. We are working with the Inland Empire RCD, Cali-fornia Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the Goose Creek Golf Club to develop a mitigation plan. Biologist Ter-ry Reeser communicates with the City of Chino Hills regard-ing city projects.

Education

Safety in the field was emphasized this year given the continuing presence of il-legal activities in natural areas. Melody Aimar coordinated a presentation by Riverside County Sheriff’s Department on safety in the field attended by SAWA and MSHCP biolo-gists among other interested parties. SAWA biologists also participated in SAWA’s Educa-tion Program including Earth Day celebrations and Bird Festival. Staff also assisted with environmental education for high school students at the Prado Wetlands. Biologists participated in professional so-ciety activities and community public outreach. We assisted “Keep America Beautiful” in its annual cleanup work in Temescal by providing infor-mation on the presence of en-dangered birds in the cleanup area.

SAWA FIeLD BIOLOGIST nICOLe HOuSeL FInDS A SAn DIeGO GOPHeR SnAke In A HeRP ARRAy neAR MARCH AIR ReSeRVe BASe.

Jill

Cou

mou

tso



Conferences and Meetings

Biologists presented two abstracts at the poster session at the joint American Ornithologists/Cooper Society/Cana-dian Field Ornithologist Society meeting in San Diego held February 2010. The posters were on our vireo management program and our raptor surveys. They also participated in conferences on the status of the Southwestern Willow Fly-catcher, the Least Bell’s Vireo, the California Least Tern, and southern Californian Habitat Conservation Plans. SAWA biologists attended the monthly Multispecies Habitat Conservation Plan meetings for reserve land managers and the Wildlife Society Western Section meeting.

In 2011, SAWA biologists plan to increase field time spent investigating sensitive species, leading to the implemen-tation of adaptive management strategies to improve their status. They will continue their vireo and cowbird manage-ment programs and continue to work with public and private agencies to resolve issues dealing with wildlife manage-ment. Issues that need to be addressed include vegetation management during the breeding season and off-road vehicle use. SAWA will continue to work to educate the public on wildlife needs.

12

SAWA LeAST BeLL’S VIReO AnD RAPTOR POSTeR PReSenTATIOnS

SAWA presented two abstracts that were accepted for poster presentations in February 2010 at the joint Ameri-can Ornithologists/Cooper Society/Canadian Field Ornithologist Society meeting in San Diego. One presentation showed the results of SAWA’s management of the Least Bell’s vireo since its inception. The other presentation highlighted roadside raptor surveys conducted from 2005 to 2009.


SAWA Reaches Out and educates

SAWA’s Education and Public Outreach de-

partment experienced great change and growth during 2010. The education de-partment consists of an Ed-ucation Coordinator, 2 full time naturalists, and a part time naturalist.

Our new Education Co-ordinator, Carrie Bryant, joined SAWA in August. Carrie has been active in the field of Environmental Edu-cation since 1997 and brings experience and creativity to SAWA. Carrie is currently the Southern Chair of the Association for Environ-mental and Outdoor Educa-tion in California and is an active member of California Science Teachers Associa-tion, North American As-sociation of Environmental Education, and Riverside County Master Composters.

Also new to the depart-ment in 2010, Naturalist Annie Yennie has a degree in biology and 8 years of experience in field biology. Naturalist Samantha Demp-ster has been with SAWA since 2003.

Brett Mills, SAWA Bio-logical Technician, now also assists with the education department on an as needed basis.

SAWA, in a partnership with IEUA, facilitates the Water Discovery Program at the Chino Creek Wetlands and Educational Park. This field trip program is free to

schools and organizations throughout the watershed area. From a selection of 12 stations, teachers select the 3 stations that best meet their needs. The stations are customized to ensure they are age appropriate and aligned to the appropriate state science standards for each class that attends. In 2010, 16 schools and orga-nizations attended the Water Discovery Program for a total of 802 students. A bus grant was offered to teach-ers beginning in September of 2010. Six schools applied for the grant in 2010 and were all approved.

SAWA education staff also conduct guided tours through the park. The tours last 45 minutes to 2 hours depending on the needs of the group. In 2010, SAWA gave 8 scheduled tours for a total of 150 participants.

Events in the Chino Creek Wetlands and Educa-

tional Park included the 2nd Annual Bird Festival. The Bird Festival was held on November 6, 2010. There were 18 booths at the fes-tival. SAWA biologists displayed information on sensitive species, hosted a booth on bats, and displayed live raptors. Education staff hosted 3 booths with edu-cational games that taught about bird banding, threats to native birds, and bird migration. SAWA mem-ber organizations OCWD, IERCD, and RCRCD had booths at the festival. Oth-er organizations that were present included Califor-nia Regional Environmen-tal Education Community (CREEC), Top Sail, Mary Vagle Nature Center, IEUA, Healthy Chino, San Ber-nardino Stormwater, and Gordon Outheir with Wood Duck information. We re-ceived a generous donation of food for volunteers and

participants from Empanan-das To Go. A total of 26 volunteers helped with the event.

The education staff participated in a variety of events throughout the wa-tershed area. In March, SAWA education staff par-ticipated in OCWD’s Water Education Festival. SAWA supported this event as a title sponsor. Over 6,000 students attended the event.

The Earth Day Celebra-tion at Chino Creek Wet-lands and Educational Park on April 22 was co-orga-nized by SAWA. SAWA biologists hosted booths and SAWA education staff had a Bird Mask booth. Atten-dance at the event was ap-proximately 600.

Naturalist Samantha Dempster led a Bluebird walk in the San Jacinto Wildlife Area on April 24. This event was coordinat-ed with the Friends of the Northern San Jacinto Val-ley. Participants learned about bluebirds, bluebird boxes, and enjoyed the guided walk.

Other events SAWA at-tended included Butterfly days at the Louis Rubidoux Nature Center, National Public Lands Day at the Mary Vagle Nature Center, Kids Day at Oakmont Park, WildFire Awareness Fair in Chino Hills and the Pecan Festival at the Louis Rubi-doux Nature Center.

SAWA eDuCATIOn COORDInATOR CARRIe BRyAnT (LeFT) TeACHeS STuDenTS ABOuT THe SAnTA AnA WATeRSHeD uS-InG An enVIROSCAPe® WATeRSHeD MODeL.

13


Education staff had the opportunity to participate in a variety of professional development opportunities. Carrie Bryant attended the NAAEE national confer-ence in Buffalo. Saman-tha Dempster attended the NAI National Workshop in Las Vegas. Staff attended a Wetlands education work-shop hosted by the Califor-nia Coastal Commission. The entire education staff visited the Wildlands Con-servancy Outdoor Discov-ery Program in Oak Glen to observe their naturalists and get ideas and advice from their staff. The SAWA staff also visited the Envi-ronmental Nature Center

(ENC) in Newport Beach for a tour and a presenta-tion about the growth of the ENC.

A SAWA e-newsletter was designed at the end of 2010 to be launched in Jan-uary of 2011. The quarterly e-news will be an ongoing way to let subscribers know about educational events, biological monitoring, and restoration projects. Biolo-gists articles, photos of the watershed, and an event calendar will be featured in each issue.

SAWA expanded into the world of social net-working with the debut of a SAWA Facebook page in

2010. In this format, staff can instantly post pictures of events and information about projects, job oppor-tunities with SAWA, and related information. At the Bird Festival we had attend-ees who heard of the event because of the Facebook page.

In 2011, the Education and Public Outreach de-partment plans to continue to grow. New locations for field trips are being ex-plored and should be added in by the fall of 2011. Pub-lic Outreach publications on Arundo, endangered spe-cies, and general SAWA information will be com-

pleted. Education staff will begin to offer a speakers bu-reau with talks on Arundo, sensitive species, and the natural history of the wa-tershed available for orga-nizations or schools. SAWA will be represented at new events including Compost Awareness Week at IEUA, Diamond Valley Lake Wa-ter Festival, Frontier Proj-ect Earth Day Celebration, and the Idyllwild Earth Fair. Four professional develop-ment workshops for educa-tors are planned for 2011, which will include training on the Project Learning Tree and Project WET curricu-lum guides.

SAWA education and Outreach continued...

The SAWA Education Web site (www.sawaedu.org) was reformatted by Annie Yennie during 2010. An on-line form allows educators to schedule field trips from the site. Events are updated on the Web site with links to flyers and additional information. Staff bios on the site allow program participants to learn more about our educators. Annie also redesigned the main SAWA Web site.

SAWA’S InTeRneT SITeS ReVAMPeD FOR IMPROVeD PuBLIC OuTReACH

14

15


Chino Creek Wetlands and educational Park

A FIeLD TRIP CLASS In THe InTeRPReTIVe CenTeR

Chino Creek Wetlands and Educational Park

(CCWP) was the hub of SAWA’s educational activi-ties in 2010. In collabora-tion with Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA), SAWA established an inter-pretative center at CCWP in 2007, which facilitates environmental education programs for children. This park encompasses 22 acres of drought-tolerant, native flora that comprise four dif-ferent local habitat types.

Among the highlighted features of the park are an observation tower, waterfall bridge, pipe garden and an amphitheatre. Local natural history and agricultural de-velopment are showcased in the park. The interpretive center also acts as an office for SAWA’s educational and biological staff.

During the past four years, the park has flour-ished and has become a home for native birds and other wildlife. SAWA’s bi-

ologists help to monitor and manage wildlife there.

The programs offered at the interpretive center cover topics including water con-servation, watershed, and wildlife ecosystem health, which follow the Califor-nia standards for public schools. Hands-on activi-ties were incorporated into the curriculum to provide a fun, interactive learning ex-perience.

Stations are set up to ad-dress specific issues, such as stormwater education, and are placed throughout the park, utilizing the available features and signage. The interactive methods used are meant to engage students and encourage lifelong commitments to a healthy watershed. In addition to the free school programs of-fered, the educational staff members conduct guided public tours.

Photos on this page show some of the activities and natural beauty of SA-WA’s educational home.

nATuRALIST SAMAnTHA DeMPSTeR TeACHeS BIRD I.D.

SAWA Habitat Restoration efforts


The SAWA Restoration Department, consisting

of a Project Manager and three Restoration Techni-cians, is responsible for keep-ing former major invasive plant removal project areas under control and managing current mitigation projects. Once a cutting and spraying contract ends or a mitigation term expires, the SAWA crew continues, using mitigation funds for ongoing restora-tion, to monitor sites to en-sure that invasive weeds do not recover, and that natural, native habitat continues to develop.

Mockingbird Canyon

Mockingbird Canyon is a 2,429 acre, 8-mile long drain-age in Riverside County. The canyon is characterized by a variety of willow species and native understory species.

Arundo removal began in summer 2003 on 170 acres throughout the canyon and was completed in October

2003. A five-year manage-ment plan was implemented in 2003 and subsequent her-bicide applications were con-ducted by spray contractors.

SAWA crews acquired management of this project in June 2008. Re-growth of Arundo was minimal and the focus for herbicide applica-tions was on tamarisk and pepperweed.

Mockingbird Canyon had very little re-growth of gi-ant reed in 2010. The SAWA spray crew treated approxi-mately 2 acres of giant reed throughout the entire canyon. Perennial pepperweed has started to show up in the can-yon and is now the major fo-cus of the SAWA spray crew. Perennial pepperweed has been documented to have ex-plosive invasive potential and it is important to try and stop its spread before it infests the entire canyon. In addition to the pepperweed, bull thistle and milk thistle have started showing up in low numbers. They are treated while moni-

toring to prevent them from becoming widely established as well. The cost to manage Mockingbird Canyon in 2010 was $6,432.

Golden Star

There was very little re-growth of giant cane at the Golden Star location in 2010. There was approximately 350 castorbean plants treated in 2010 along with approxi-mately 150 canes of Arundo. The major non-native species of concern at this location is castorbean. Future monitor-ing and treatments are sched-uled to prevent this non-na-

tive from taking over the site. The total amount to pro-

vide ongoing maintenance in the Golden Star project in 2010 was $547.

Temescal Canyon

Temescal Canyon is a 15-mile-long major drainage into the Santa Ana River. In the winter of 2001, 220 acres of Arundo and 70 acres of tamarisk were removed, fol-lowed by a five-year man-agement plan. In 2006, the management plan for this project are was turned over to SAWA for continued con-trol and monitoring. Annu-

16

Tim

Rom

o

Former Arundo infestation on the Santa Ana River Mainstem

GOLDen STAR CReek PROjeCT AReA

SAWA Habitat Restoration efforts continued...ally, SAWA crews walk this site upstream to downstream, canyon wall to wall and ap-ply spot treatments to Arun-do, tamarisk, castor bean and pepperweed and other inva-sive species.

Perennial pepperweed has recently started spreading throughout Temescal Wash. It is currently isolated to the lower portion of the canyon just above where it is chan-nelized at Magnolia. There is scattered tamarisk through-out the wash which is treated while monitoring the canyon. Giant reed has had very little re-growth in the last year and the minimal amount encoun-tered is treated annually to prevent it from getting re-established.

Santa Ana River Main-stem

Several removal and resto-ration mitigations have been assigned to the Santa Ana River mainstem upstream from Riverside County Parks’ mitigation areas and SAWA’s major Prop 50 Arun-do removal project. More than 1,200 man hours with the SAWA crew were spent removing, treating and haul-ing giant cane from this proj-ect in 2010.

SAWA divides the main-stem project into two areas: Riverside and San Bernardi-no.

Mainstem (San Bernardino) This project runs from

the 215/10 interchange up-stream to Highway 210 in Redlands. There was a large amount of giant cane growth that has since been removed

17

and treated at this location. In addition to the treated gi-ant cane the following were also encountered and treated during that removal process: approximately 1,600 castor bean plants, 600 tamarisk plants and minimal amounts of tree tobacco, bull thistle and tree of heaven.

Mainstem (Riverside) This project runs from

Mission Blvd downstream to the landfill. There has been a new emergence of perennial pepperweed at this location. In addition to the pepper-weed there is approximately 5% cover of new small tama-risk growth that looks to be coming from upstream seed sources. There is a portion of this stretch that has large patches of giant cane that Riverside County Parks and Open Space District has since contracted for removal. All other areas are being treated by the SAWA spray crew to enhance the native habitat and prevent the non-natives from dominating the site.

Total cost to control in-vasives on the Santa Ana

River mainstem in 2010 was $25,058.

Santiago Creek

Several in-lieu fee miti-gation projects in Santia-go Creek are managed by SAWA. Modjeska Canyon is a project at the upper reach of Santiago Creek heading downstream to Irvine Lake. The second project is farther downstream starting at the Prospect Road channelized drainage in the City of Or-ange heading downstream to Tustin Ave. The third proj-ect starts at Tustin Ave., in the City of Santa Ana, head-

ing downstream to the merge with the Santa Ana River.

All three projects, which were previously managed by Inland Empire RCD, are managed by SAWA and will be consolidated as one proj-ect for reporting.

Santiago was hit hard in late 2010 by severe flood-ing damage. Santiago Creek has very steep tributaries that feed it and when the rains hit after the recent fires there was a tremendous amount of water and mud that damaged the Silverado and Modjeska communities. As a result there has been a lot of scour-ing along the creek opening up the access. There is a very minimal amount of giant reed that still comes back through-out this area. In the lower portion of Santiago Creek near the 55 freeway there was a minimal amount of eu-calyptus and tree of heaven that were treated in 2010. Behind the Chapman Medi-cal Center there is a minimal amount of castor bean and gi-ant reed that were also treated in 2010. Total cost to monitor and treat the project area in 2010 was $1,798.


TyPICAL SAnTIAGO CReek ARunDO STAnD BeFORe ReMOVAL

nORCO BuRn PROjeCT AReA AFTeR DeCeMBeR FLOOD


SAWA Habitat Restoration efforts continued...

18

HH Hamner

This project is located on the Santa Ana River, down-stream of Hamner Ave, in the City of Corona. This project was 26 acres of Arundo re-moval that began in January 2007 and completed late Feb-ruary, of 2007. A two-year management plan ensued and was carried out by spray con-tractors. The spray contrac-tor applied herbicide treat-ments every other month in 2008.

In 2009, SAWA acquired the management for this project. This site has had a moderate amount of giant cane coming back since it was first removed. Since the giant reed was removed there has been an increase in the pres-ence of tree tobacco and bull thistle. In 2010, approximately 4.75 acres of giant reed were treated. Other non-natives that were treated in 2010 included: an approxinately 1,000 square-foot patch of perennial pepper-weed, scattered tree tobacco and bull thistle. The site will continue to be monitored and the non-natives will be treated by the SAWA spray crew un-til the native vegetation is able to re-establish. SAWA is also considering planting some na-tive pole cuttings to help limit the amount of space for non-natives and to help the native habitat establish. Total amount to monitor an treat the area in 2010 was $1,657.

La Sierra/Woodcrest

This project is located with-in the La Sierra Watershed and an unincorporated area in Woodcrest in Riverside

County. Thirty acres of in-vasive species were removed here in 2001. Herbicide ap-plications were managed suc-cessfully by spray contrac-tors until 2006, when SAWA crews acquired the manage-ment of this project. Natu-ral revegetation and control management in this area are highly successful.

This project site has had very little re-growth of giant reed since the initial removal and spray contracts expired. In 2010 approximately 350 canes of giant reed and 45 castor-bean plants were treated. The SAWA spray crew will con-tinue to monitor and treat the invasives as they appear. The total cost to monitor and treat this area in 2010 was $198.

Carbon Canyon

A fire burned through Car-bon Canyon in November 2008. Just over 11 acres of Arundo burned, along with other invasive species. One

week after the fire, Arundo began to re-sprout and grew quickly to two feet tall; how-ever, an unusual dry season slowed down the growth. SAWA sent out letters to landowners to gain access and permission to control Arundo on their properties. SAWA also applied for a Cal-trans right of way permit and was granted permission to control Arundo in their ease-ments. This project site starts at the San Bernardino/Orange County line and heads down-stream into Orange County to State Parks property. Her-bicide applications began in early 2009 on private prop-erty and Caltrans rights-of-way. This is a cooperative ef-fort among SAWA, the Chino Hills Fire Safe Council and Hills for Everyone.

This site runs from Sleepy Hollow downstream to the Carbon Canyon Regional Park. There is one pocket of giant cane that has not been removed that lies just below

the Samsung Presbyterian Church in Olinda. The SAWA spray crew treated 9 acres of giant cane in Carbon Canyon in 2010. In addition to the gi-ant cane there was 10 eucalyp-tus trees treated and .5 acre of castor bean. Ongoing main-tenance, monitoring and her-bicide applications will take place in 2011 to prevent the non-natives from dominating the site and allowing the native vegetation to recover.

In April, SAWA crews applied herbicides to re-sprouting Arundo on pri-vate properties and Caltrans easements, totaling just over eight acres. Subsequent to heavy re-growth, control ef-forts began in late May and continued into June. Castor bean plants were starting to sprout and were spot treat-ed. Approximately 1/3 acre of castor bean was treated. Once again in December, treatments to private proper-ties and Caltrans easements occurred totaling 3 acres of arundo and 1/4 of an acre of castor bean. Milkweed was also spot treated, totaling 150 plants.

SAWA received a grant for $25,000 from the City of Brea for Arundo control. The total cost to monitor and treat this area in 2010 was $198. Major efforts to control and re-move arundo in Carbon Can-yone will take place in 2011 as the PAR project is expanded into this area and Brea and Fire Safe Council grant funds are used to remove all of the Arundo biomass in the canyon and treat the areas.

SAWA CReW ReMOVeS CARBOn CAnyOn ARunDO BIOMASS.

Sycamore Canyon

The project area for this site is seven acres in the city of Riverside. Natural reveg-etation has been successful including one acre of 200 cuttings of willow and mule fat that were planted in 2000 by the Riverside Corona Re-source Conservation District.

In Sycamore Canyon there has been very little re-growth of giant reed since the initial contracts there expired. All re-growth has and will continue to be monitored and treated by the SAWA spray crew.

San Timoteo Canyon

There were several mitiga-tion projects in San Timoteo Canyon, totaling over 200 acres of Arundo removal from 1997 to 2001. When removal was complete, long-term management was imple-mented and carried out by contractors until 2006 when SAWA acquired the task of managing this project.

There has been very little re-growth of giant cane in re-cent years. The new and larg-est concern of SAWA in the canyon is the new emergence of perennial pepperweed, yel-low starthistle and bull thistle. Treatments began on all three of these species in 2010 and more widespread efforts are being coordinated for 2011.

A separate report for San Timoteo work was created for the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Army Corps.

El Prado

This project runs from River Road along OCWD’s diver-

treated in 2010. Other species that were treated at this loca-tion included: 3.5 acres of gi-ant cane, 3 acres of tree tobac-co, 2 acres of tamarisk, 5 acres of milk thistle, .25 acre of bull thistle and 2 acres of perennial pepperweed. The project site was inundated with flood wa-ters at the end of 2010.

The total amount to man-age the Highway 71 project in 2010 was $6,048. A sepa-rate report was created for this project for the Army Corps and the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Raceway Ford

This site had very little giant cane re-growth in 2010. Ap-proximately 380 canes were removed and treated at this location in 2010. In addition to the giant cane there was ap-proximately .25 acre of tama-risk and .10 of an acre of tree tobacco treated. Future moni-toring is scheduled to ensure the site is able to recover back to a healthy native state.

The total amount to manage the Raceway Ford project in 2010 was $1,217.

sion channel down to their groundwater recharge basins. There are numerous non-natives that were treated in 2010. The following species and acreages were treated at this location in 2010: ap-proximately 50 acres of gi-ant cane, 3 acres of perennial pepperweed, .25 acres of cas-tor bean plants, .25 acres of tree tobacco, .25 acre of milk thistle, .25 acres of bull this-tle, and 1 acre of tamarisk. There is still a large amount of giant cane in the Prado ba-sin that is slated for removal as funds become available. Continued herbicide treat-ments are scheduled to pre-vent the non-natives from re-establishing in the same areas that were treated in 2010. The cost to treat this area during 2010 was $8,934.

San Jacinto Basin

San Jacinto Basin consists of several ongoing restora-tion projects and locations, Mystic Lake Northwest Phase l and ll, Davis Road East, Lambs Canyon, and San Jacinto River (Sanderson downstream to Davis Rd).

Mystic Lake projects are 229 acres in total size. These areas were managed mostly by spray contractors and in part by SAWA crews, every month in 2008. Mystic Lake Phase ll was managed by contractors until May 2009, when SAWA crews acquired management of this project.

San Jacinto River is a 7.5-mile long reach that starts at Highway 79 and heads down-stream to Davis Rd, near the San Jacinto Wildlife Ref-

19


uge. San Jacinto Basin The San Jacinto River has mostly scattered tamarisk throughout the riparian corridor. There is little to no re-growth of giant cane in this region. Most of the tamarisk is approximately 4 to 8 inches in diameter at base height and is in patches of 10 to 30 stalks.

In 2010 SAWA placed two City of Moreno Valley mitiga-tions in the river in the San Ja-cinto area. However, because of major flood control projects slated for the area, SAWA was asked to move those mitiga-tions.

In the Mystic Lake area, SAWA surveys have found that regrowth ot tamarisk is at less than 1 percent. Separate reports for the Mystic Lake area are being created for the Fish and Wildlife Service by SAWA.

Highway 71

The Highway 71 project made great progress in 2010. There was approximately 1 acre of dense eucalyptus that was treated. In addition to that one acre another 200 trees were

SAWA Habitat Restoration efforts continued...

PART OF THe HIGHWAy 71 PROjeCT In OCTOBeR 2010.


20

Proposition 50 Arundo Removal (PAR) Project

Hidden Valley Wildlife Area is a Riverside

County park and an impor-tant reach of the Santa Ana River with a diversity of wildlife, some threatened and endangered. The park also consists of walking trails, horse trails, bike paths and an educational inter-pretive center. This area is imperiled by invasive plant species competing with na-tive species for water and vital nutrients.

Proposition 50 Arundo Removal (PAR), is a SAWA restoration project to remove approximately 770 acres of invasive plant species within 995 acres of Hidden Valley Wildlife Area in Riverside, and maintain restoration of 11 acres in Carbon Canyon that was once infested with Arundo. Some of the target species are Arundo, tama-risk, castor bean and peren-nial pepperweed.

The PAR project began in February 2008, and has been expanded from its orginal scope of removing 500 acres of invasives because of cost-effective management by SAWA.

Carefully planned herbi-cide applications for several years to control re-growth will be vital, assuring resto-ration of native habitat. It is estimated that 2,400 acre-feet of water will be restored annually as a result of the removal efforts when this project is complete.

Proposition 50 was passed on the Nov. 5, 2002 Califor-

nia ballot designed to fund a variety of water projects. Grants for water manage-ment and quality improve-ment projects such as the Integrated Regional Water Management Grant, imple-mented by the State Water Resource Control Board,

to the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority, is how this project is funded.

Total cost to manage PAR for 2010 was $415,786 for a total of $725,871 in expe-ditures for the project since inception to December 31,

2010. SAWA also provided $23,425 in matching servic-es during 2010 to bring the match total to date for the project to $589,962. With the match, the total proj-ect costs through 2010 total $1,315,833.

Major stands of Arundo donax are seen above along the main channel of the Santa Ana River in Riverside before the start of SAWA’s Proposition 50 Arundo Removal Project. Below is a photo that shows the same area after much of the invasive, water-hogging giant reed had been removed and was being controlled.

Chino Creek Integrated Project and Cleanup

21


In October 2009 SAWA signed a subcontracting

agreement with Inland Empire Utilities Agency for the Chino Creek Integrated Project and Cleanup. Under the agreement, SAWA is removing 50 acres of invasive plants, including eucalyptus and arundo, and replanting native plants in up-land areas along Mill and Chi-no creeks.

As of December 2010 SAWA has expended $70,249.42 of the $1,000,000 project budget. The project is approximately 4-percent complete.

SAWA worked with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and San Bernardino County for ac-cess and permissions on proj-ect sites.

SAWA Restoration Depart-ment personnel removed infes-tations of small- to medium-size eucalyptus in the Prado Basin, providing more light and room for established na-tive plants that were growing in the area.

During 2010 SAWA was able to procure a large amount of Coast Live Oaks (Quercus agrifolia) at a deeply discount-ed price for replanting areas around Pigeon Hill on OCWD property and in upland areas of the Prado Basin leased by San Bernardino County Parks.

SAWA created a bid pro-posal for the project and con-ducted two bid walks. The cotract was awarded to Wash-burn Grove Management after a second bid process that con-formed to DBE subcontracting guidelines and incorporated changes in the project necessi-tated by delays in Army Corps approval for restoration in the Prado Basin.

SAWA biologists and project managers monitor all exotic treatment areas to assess the potential for impacts to endan-gered or sensitive species and avoid them. If these species are present, the assigned biolo-gist monitors work activities onsite to ensure that there are no impacts to the species or to the habitat that supports them.

Since the beginning of the project in October 2009 SAWA has experienced de-lays in approval to commence work from the Army Corps of Engineers. An Environmental Assessment for a plan to con-vert all of the invasive euca-lyptus forest in the basin to na-tive riparian has been on hold for more than a year. Invasive removal and replanting work was therefore delayed.

In the meantime SAWA worked to gain access to, and approval to do work on, an ad-jacent area on Orange County Water District property as a contingency in case approval was not granted with enough time to finish the project.

However, because of receiv-ing late approval, the work was delayed until extraordi-nary flooding hit all of South-ern California in December 2010. The entire project area was inundated, forcing SAWA to wait to start the removal operations until the water re-ceded. SAWA requested and received an extension of the project from March 2011 to March 2012 because of these unexpected delays.

SAWA plans to catch up to the schedule by accomplish-ing the bulk of removal and planting operations in 2011.

Tim

Rom

oTi

m R

omo

euCALyPTuS In THe PROjeCT AReA BeFORe ReMOVAL.

THe SAMe AReA AFTeR InVASIVe euCALyPTuS ReMOVAL.

THe MAIn PROjeCT AReA WAS InunDATeD In DeCeMBeR.

Lee

Ree

der


Reach 3B Mitigation Project, San Timoteo Canyon

In June 2001, the United States Fish and Wildlife

Service issued a Biological Opinion in response to the San Timoteo Creek Reach 3B Flood Control Project pro-posed in July 2000 by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The Service’s Bio-logical Opinion was crafted in re-sponse to the pre-dicted impacts of project construc-tion on multiple species, includ-ing the endan-gered least Bell’s vireo, Vireo bellii pusillus, the en-dangered south-western willow flycatcher, Empi-donax traillii ex-timus, the threat-ened California gnatcatcher, Poli-optila californica californica, and its designated crit-ical habitat, and the endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat, Dipodomys mer-riami parvus, and its proposed critical habitat.

In response to the quanti-fied habitat losses resulting from the channel improve-ments, USACE opted to pro-vide compensation to offset unavoidable impacts to habitat through physical restoration of 34.56 acres of riparian acreage as required in the Biological Opinion. USACE chose the Santa Ana Watershed Associa-tion as the organization to take on the mitigation assignment and transferred $1.62 million to SAWA’s Santa Ana River

Trust Fund. Since then, the mitigation monies have been used for tasks mandated in the Memorandum of Understand-ing recorded between SAWA and the USACE in October 2003. The tasks involved in-clude, but are not limited to, the restoration, protection,

and/or creation of habitat along the San Timoteo Creek riparian system.

SAWA was required to ac-quire, create, restore, protect, and achieve functional val-ues equivalent to 34.56 acres of riparian/wetland habitat along San Timoteo Creek and its watershed. This outcome would be attainable through restoration work completed in an area defined as immedi-ately upstream of the Reach 3B project to the Interstate 10 crossing along San Timoteo Creek. The tasks included:

the removal of non-native, in-vasive vegetation; the reveg-etation of former removal sites with species of native riparian plants; providing habitat for the endangered least Bell’s vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher as well as for other dependent species; the re-

moval of the parasitic brown-headed cowbird, Molothrus ater; and the identification and potential acquisition of lands suitable for restoration and/or preservation. SAWA was also required to perform regular fi-nancial and operational report-ing, to responsibly manage funds remitted by the USACE for the Reach 3B Project work, and also to accept responsibil-ity for completion of the terms of this mitigation as outlined in the aforementioned Biologi-cal Opinion and Memorandum of Understanding.

The lead member of SAWA for management of the Reach 3B mitigation project is Inland Empire Resource Conserva-tion District (IERCD) because the project area lies complete-ly within the IERCD’s bound-aries.

Removal of invasive, non-native vegeta-tion is among the steps required for the restoration of biological func-tionality of habi-tat. These species are often removed because they have little to no habi-tat value, they consume copious amounts of water, and compete with native vegetation for elements es-sential for surviv-al. Many of these species of non-native plants have been identified in the San Timo-teo Creek region. Those targeted as the highest prior-ity for removal in

previous project years include giant cane, Arundo donax, cas-tor bean, Ricinus communis, and tamarisk, Tamarix ramo-sissima. In the 2010 report-ing year, work continued on eradication of these species, in addition to newly targeted spe-cies including tree of heaven, Ailanthus altissima, perennial pepperweed, Lepidium latifo-lium, and yellow starthistle, Centaurea solstitialis.

In 2010 SAWA also con-tinued the process of revege-tating former eradication sites with native species in the miti-

22

Reach 3B Mitigation Project, San Timoteo Canyon, continued...


gation area in order to ensure that acreages formerly infested with invasive species are not recolonized by other species of non-native plants

Another key objective in the Reach 3B mitigation proj-ect is the documentation of the stabilization of existing and recruitment of additional pop-ulations of native species of wildlife. Species targeted for this mitigation task include the least Bell’s vireo and south-western willow flycatcher, both of which are tracked in territories throughout the San Timoteo Creek region through surveying, mapping, and data collection. Biological surveys for both species were conduct-ed between the dates of March 15 and Sept. 15, 2010. The data collected from these sur-veys demonstrated a signifi-cant improvement in the health of the local populations of both species, as evidenced by increases in territories, number of vireo pairs, total new fledg-lings, and overall nesting and reproductive success rates.

To further increase the chances of a successful boost in native wildlife popula-tions, SAWA staff also com-pleted tasks directed toward reducing the presence of the brown-headed cowbird. This non-native species engages in brood parasitism, dispro-portionately affecting native birds that construct open nests, such as the least Bell’s vireo and the southwestern willow flycatcher. From March 15 to Sept. 15, 2010, SAWA field biologists and cowbird assis-tants operated a series of traps aimed at capturing the brown-headed cowbird. These traps have been actively placed and

Beginning in 2005, the tasks performed in con-

junction with this objective have been summarized in one concise table, allowing for continual tracking of funds expended by year as well as overall monies spent in conjunction with the Reach 3B Project. The following table summarizes project tasks performed in the 2010 Reporting Period, as well as respective amounts spent re-sulting from the completion of those tasks.

Careful accounting for all project monies has been performed since the original receipt of the funds, in order to ensure compliance with the terms of the mitigation work. The main method of

ensuring careful tracking of these project monies was the establishment of a segregated account within the Santa Ana River Trust Fund, designated solely for Reach 3B funds. This separation of money has allowed professional ac-counting staff working on behalf of SAWA to accurate-ly track all funds received as well as those paid out to member agencies for work done on behalf of this project. All original monies as well as interest generated must be employed solely for tasks performed in this section of San Timoteo Creek, in order to remain compliant with the terms of the mitigation. Out-going funds are monies paid to SAWA employees, mem-

ber agencies, and outside contractors for tasks done in accordance with the Reach 3B project. Member agen-cies and outside contractors fund the initial work, which is then reimbursed monthly to these entities.

The USACE Reach 3B mitigation funds did not fund the ongoing maintenance of previously removed non-na-tive plants from January 2005 to December 2008. This break in billing resulted from the receipt of federal funds by the IERCD, earmarked for the restoration of native hab-itats in San Timoteo Creek and surrounding sub-regions of the Santa Ana Watershed. The IERCD’s supplemental funding source for the ongo-ing maintenance contracts has enhanced opportunities for land acquisition and res-toration beyond the acreage required in the Biological Opinion and Memorandum of Understanding.

The contribution of sig-nificant funding from the IERCD allowed the money deposited by the USACE to gain considerable interest in the period of 2006-07, when interest rates were gener-ally much higher than those experienced in 2010. This circumstance has resulted in the retention of the original funds provided for the proj-ect, which will allow for the extended maintenance and monitoring of the San Timo-teo Creek sub-watershed. As of the end of 2010, the fund contains approximately $1.68 million.

San Timoteo Creek Reach 3B Task Report for 2010

Fund Expenditures and Management

23


$700,000 originally earmarked for the land acquisition re-sponsibility within this mitiga-tion. In most cases, the sheer size of the historic properties coupled with presence of de-sirable riparian habitat has kept them at least $500,000 out of SAWA’s reach. In order to bypass this issue, SAWA is working closely with staff of the IERCD to actively pursue opportunities to acquire land in fee title, through conserva-tion easements, or through binding agreements that will commit landowners to al-low the wildlife management efforts, endangered species monitoring, invasive control, and habitat restoration that are part of the Reach 3-B mitiga-tion undertaking.

In 2010, SAWA and IERCD spent a considerable amount of time working with the Riverside Land Conser-vancy (RLC), a non-profit land trust in possession of multiple parcels throughout San Ber-nardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties. The RLC is currently engaged in nego-tiations for land acquisition in San Timoteo Canyon in order to add acreage to open space that is already preserved, the majority of which is classi-fied as part of the state park system. SAWA first met with the RLC in 2004 and has con-tinued to meet with key RLC staff through the 2010 report-ing period. An agreement was reached to work together in seeking additional oppor-tunities to preserve acreages, either through direct acquisi-tion of deeds, or through con-servation easements. Because of the sensitive nature of the negotiations and the large size of the holdings, RLC has tak-

been a hallmark of this miti-gation effort. In 2011, SAWA will continue this work in the form of biological monitoring of species, non-native plant re-moval, native plant revegeta-tion, and continued progress toward land acquisition and protection in perpetuity.

Land Acquisition

In 2010, SAWA and IERCD worked to advance the goal of land acquisition within the project area. In areas immediately adjacent to the central riparian zone of the San Timoteo Creek wa-tershed, multiple parcels have been identified as appropri-ate to for acquisition. Due to the manner in which parcels were historically drawn and exist today, there are multiple properties which descendents of original owners are willing to sell, particularly in light of the lower overall value caused by projected development con-straints in the area.

Unfortunately for SAWA, several potential parcels still are priced well above the

most notable is the increase in least Bell’s vireo territo-ries since the implementation of the accepted management plan for this project, from 29 in 2004 to 126 in 2010. Each individual documented terri-tory is made up of a minimum of two acres; therefore, the 29 territories recorded in 2004 represented a total of 56 acres of functional riparian habitat, and the 126 territories docu-mented in 2010 represents an enormous increase, to 252 acres of functional habitat. According to the terms of the requirements of the MOU, SAWA needed to establish 34.56 acres of valuable habi-tat, suitable for sustaining de-pendent species. The numbers for vireo alone demonstrate that this goal has been met and exceeded. While this can be defined as a circuitous method to track achievement, it does demonstrate quantifiable res-toration success.

In 2010, SAWA contin-ued to prepare for and execute tasks required for the contin-ued achievement of the res-toration successes that have

monitored in the region since 2001; since then, they have been responsible for the suc-cessful trapping of approxi-mately 1,660 brown-headed cowbirds in the project area.

This restoration work has been accompanied by identify-ing parcels of land within the San Timoteo Creek project area that are appropriate for long-term preservation. Since the inception of this mitigation assignment, SAWA has been working to coordinate with the Riverside Land Conservancy and the Redlands Conservan-cy, both of which have knowl-edge of and access to local habitat. In 2009, SAWA staff completed tasks aimed at prep-aration for actual property ac-quisition to take place in 2010. These included remote sens-ing, map creation, and on-the-ground verification of avail-able functional native habitat. In 2010, SAWA continued to advance the land acquisition process by partnering with the RLC in pursuit of the Holmes Brothers site—a historic fami-ly-owned property in excess of 100 acres. Tasks completed in 2010 included meetings with the RLC and Redlands Conser-vancy, conducting an appraisal of the desired property, site as-sessments, and working with local regulatory agencies and other non-profits to determine actual and potential available funding.

The success of the restora-tion work performed in con-junction with this mitigation project can be measured in the quantifiable improvements in populations of native wildlife, particularly the least Bell’s vir-eo, whose status is often seen as an indication of the level of local riparian health. Perhaps


24

A HuGe PuRe STAnD OF ARunDO IS ReMOVeD By CReWS In SAn TIMOTeO CAnyOn AS PART OF THe MITIGATIOn.


en the lead on land purchase, while SAWA has worked to develop legal language that would allow for in-perpetuity conservation easements to be recorded over property pur-chased by the RLC.

In 2010, both RLC and IERCD continued to pursue land acquisition, but were un-able to close on any properties in the Reach 3-B Project Area within the 2010 reporting pe-riod, due to lack of sufficient funds. An appraisal ordered by these agencies confirmed the value of the most sought-after property, which was the Holmes Brothers site, coming in at a value of just under $1.25 million. Both SAWA and the RLC are working to find a so-lution to this issue, which has thus far included talks with the owners, as well as seek-ing out additional entities to potentially share the burden of cost, or possibly assist with the local of additional grant or other preservation funds. The California Department of Fish and Game and Redlands Land Conservancy, another lo-cal non-profit, have both been to the site and have provided oversight to SAWA and the IERCD in the search for po-tential additional funding.

Protection Needs and Habitat Monitoring

SAWA staff has realized that additional threats to local biological functionality also exist, primarily due to un-monitored human influence. Activities associated with un-checked human influence upon the creek and surrounding habitat that have been found to be contrary to SAWA’s res-toration work include but are not limited to the use of off-road vehicles, illegal dumping of household and hazardous waste, periodic fire, and the use of paintball guns and ac-cessories.

In response to these de-structive elements, SAWA and IERCD monitor all activity in and around San Timoteo Creek, in cooperation with California State Parks, Western Riverside County Multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan, Redlands Conservancy, Riverside Land Conservancy and any other entities with specific interest within the Reach 3-B Project Area. The Redlands Conser-vancy maintains a consistent presence in the creek through a variety of outreach activities including hikes and clean-ups

scheduled annually outside of nesting seasons. The volunteer base of the conservancy has grown greatly in the past two years, and their continual pres-ence in areas adjacent to the creek may be a factor in deter-ring illegal dumping. In 2010, the IERCD participated in a series of community outreach events in conjunction with the Redlands Conservancy, aimed at increasing stewardship and decreasing biologically harm-ful activities. These events resulted in large local turnouts, and the volunteer trash clean-up of the passive park just north of the riparian area in southeast Redlands drew more than 50 volunteers who picked up refuse and recycling and re-moved encroaching tamarisk and tree of heaven.

Paintball has ceased to be a major issue, but in previous reporting years, it has result-ed in damage to several large trees, and consequent elimina-tion of habitat utilized by na-tive birds. IERCD responded by partnering with SAWA, the California Department of Fish and Game, and California State Parks to remove paint-ball debris including refuse and makeshift barriers. State Parks also installed a gate at one location to deter unauthor-ized vehicles. There was some evidence of paintballers pres-ent after the enforcement but the activity seemed to decrease in response to the removal of the debris.

Other potentially danger-ous activities in this area in-clude unauthorized bonfires, which pose an extreme fire hazard, and branch removal along trails. Staff from SAWA will continue to monitor the riparian area for signs of dam-

age from activities in the creek that are proven to be detrimen-tal to dependent species, in-cluding but not limited to the use of off-road vehicles, play-ing paintball, and the removal of sensitive species.

Invasive Species Control and Restoration

One of the cornerstones of this mitigation assignment has been and continues to be the removal and follow-up mainte-nance and monitoring of proj-ect zones infested with species of harmful invasive vegeta-tion. To track them, SAWA uses maps created with GIS software, which track multiple categories of vegetation. These include former removal sites being maintained/monitored, recent removal sites requiring active re-treatment with herbi-cide, and sites of current infes-tation in need of active remov-al and follow-up maintenance and monitoring. In 2010, the IERCD field ecologist per-formed site assessments within the project area on the follow-ing dates: 1/6, 1/14, 2/3, 2/11, 4/19, 4/26, 5/4, 5/10, 5/20, 6/7, 6/29, 7/1, 7/19, 8/4, 8/19, 9/29, 10/7, 10/19, 11/2, 12/9, 12/28.

Historically, the removal of the highly aggressive Arun-do plant has been the main focus of restoration techni-cians working on the Reach 3B project. However, recent trends in local and statewide invasive plant spreading have required the addition of mul-tiple species that SAWA works to control. The following de-scriptions detail work that has been done or will be done in connection with species of in-vasive vegetation identified or suspected to be present within


25

RIPARIAn HABITAT In SAn TIMOTeO CAnyOn In SPRInG.

Lee

Ree

der


the 15-acre, approximately 80% infested site in a three-day span. Following this ini-tial removal, there will be ad-ditional treatment, follow-up maintenance and monitoring for a minimum of two years at the site.

The IERCD field ecologist and SAWA project manager will continue to identify acre-ages of invasive vegetation for potential removal within the Reach 3-B project site. While the majority of the giant cane has been eradicated from the area, there are additional spe-cies of concern, including but not limited to perennial pep-perweed, tree tobacco (Nico-tiana glauca), and tree of heav-en. In 2010, the IERCD Field Ecologist continued working to secure the proper permits in order to access properties within the Reach 3B Project site to ensure continued abil-ity to carry out invasive veg-etation eradication. Partners included the Riverside Land Conservancy, the California State Parks System, and the Yucaipa Valley Water District. Additional partners and inva-sive acreages will continue to be identified and treated in the 2011 reporting year.

Habitat Restoration

The San Timoteo Creek sub-watershed region is re-flective of trends emerging regionally on a smaller scale; these include rapid population growth, expansion of urban areas, proliferation of impervi-ous surface, and increases in nuisance flows from an ever-growing number of residents. These dynamic elements, in combination with global cli-mate change, increasing de-

tion located adjacent to the ri-parian system was thought to be most problematic, all group-ings of starthistle were mapped and slated for removal as soon as possible. This removal planning included research, budgeting, and the develop-ment of all methodologies, and was completed in December of 2009. Entry agreements and landowner permission letter development, as well as final project scheduling, was com-pleted in February and March of 2010. Initial landowner resistance to this project was significant enough to warrant calls between SAWA and af-fected residents; however, ulti-mately, area homeowners gave permission for the project and it proceeded as planned.

In March 2010, SAWA be-gan final project preparation, which involved field staff col-laborating with biologists in order to determine absence of breeding birds including the least Bell’s vireo. Once this was completed, an EPA-ap-proved herbicide was applied to all affected areas. A mix of 2 % glyphosate and 1% LI-700 surfactant was used in treating

San Timoteo Creek.

Yellow Starthistle One of the main species added to SAWA’s treatment list in 2010 was yellow starthistle (Cen-taurea solstitialis). The addi-tion was made due to the risks posed by the species, which include crowding out of native species, depleting soil mois-ture which prevents future col-onization by other plants, and toxicity to horses. Currently, it is estimated that there are 10 million to 15 million acres of land in California that are infested with yellow starthis-tle. Unlike other less aggres-sive vegetation, this species spreads rapidly and cannot be eliminated with a single treat-ment. Instead, multiple treat-ments including seed suppres-sion must be performed.

In fall 2009, the IERCD’s Field Ecologist began discov-ering isolated patches of this species throughout the City of Yucaipa, in the eastern end of the San Timoteo Creek sub-watershed area. Since the ini-tial discovery, additional pop-ulations have been confirmed in Cherry Valley as well as in Calimesa. While the popula-

the project area.Arundo donax: SAWA

technical and professional staff members continue to work to monitor the 209 acres of land in the project area within which infestations of giant cane and tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) were removed. Removal of Arundo has been proven to increase local water supply, reduce the risk of fire and flooding, and allow for reestablishment of native vegetation capable of supporting native wildlife. Following the removal, the SAWA project manager has worked annually to survey the 209 acres for re-growth of in-vasive species. In 2010, there was periodic re-growth of gi-ant cane, but applications of wetlands-approved herbicide such as glyphosate eliminated the shoots before they were able to spread downstream.

Tree of Heaven. In 2009, the IERCD field ecologist worked with staff from SAWA in order to identify populations of the invasive tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) plant, in order to plan for the removal of the maximum acreage pos-sible of this detrimental spe-cies. One landowner within Reach 3-B allowed the IERCD to access his property for the removal of a population of tree of heaven of approximately one acre in size. The removed biomass was mulched on-site, with the resulting woodchips ultimately transported for dis-posal at an approved green-waste facility. Following that removal, the field ecologist re-treated the 1-acre site for re-growth on three occasions. These treatments were espe-cially critical in light of the lo-cal of the removal zone, which sits immediately adjacent to


26


mand for water, and the re-quired on-site mitigation, have mandated the need to conserve and restore existing riparian and wetland habitat for the benefit of dependent species. The restoration and creation of desired habitat within the San Timoteo Creek sub-watershed aids in the recruitment of func-tional riparian species, and the existence of such property in perpetuity for use by and sus-tenance of other species.

Continued monitoring and control of the non-native plant species that invaded the creek has led to recovery of sev-eral sites that formerly houses populations of invasive veg-etation. Quantifying acreage is difficult because it is inter-spersed throughout the can-yon, particularly at invasive removal sites; however, it can be stated that creek processes have returned to a more natu-ral regime in the absence of the once overwhelming presence of giant cane and other species of invasive plants. One vis-ible example of this recovery can be seen in the aftermath of the 2004/2005 winter floods, which removed significant portions of understory along the creek. By 2007, the re-moval of the aggressive giant came plant had encouraged populations of native species to recolonize those areas blown out by those floods, which ul-timately assisted in increas-ing the local population of the endangered least Bell’s vireo. The creek’s natural function of planting and renewing the ri-parian habitat after high winter flows is only possible because 209 acres of former invasion by weeds is under control and management and a growing infestation of invasive is no

longer an issue on San Timo-teo Creek.

From the aforementioned example, one can look to the increase in the least Bell’s vireo population as one meth-od of quantifying the restora-tion work performed in San Timoteo Creek by and on be-half of SAWA, as this species is an accepted indicator spe-cies for riparian health. Each vireo territory is comprised of a minimum acreage of two acres (USFWS, 1989; Ecology and Conservation of the En-dangered Least Bell’s Vireo;

USFWS, DOI, Biological Re-port 89(1), 17pp), and in 2010, there were 126 vireo territories detected, up from the 105 de-tected in 2009. From this data, it can be extrapolated that healthy riparian vegetation increased at least from 210 acres to 252, allowing for the sustenance of increased pairs of this endangered bird. Man-agement of least Bell’s vireo in San Timoteo Creek has al-lowed the birds to exceed re-placement level reproduction which has not occurred prior to management. This increase in healthy, functional riparian

habitat exceeds the original project goal of 34.56-acres.

In 2010, SAWA began working to formalize its meth-odology for the active revege-tation of former removal sites. This work involved the identi-fication of candidate sites for removal, as well as the final-ization of protocols processes involved in this work, includ-ing plant propagation and pal-ette planning, site preparation, planting technique, follow up maintenance and monitoring, and methods for determination of individual site success.

Potential Restoration Habitat Types

Riparian communities typ-ically consist of one or more deciduous tree species with an assorted understory of shrubs and herbs. They are succes-sional in nature, meaning that a multitude of associations and subassociations are capable of existing within close proxim-ity to one another. Currently, the Reach 3B Project area has been identified as supporting or capable of supporting mul-tiple communities of riparian

forest/woodland/scrub asso-ciations, including riparian forest, riparian scrub, southern willow scrub, southern cotton-wood/ willow riparian forest, and southern sycamore/alder riparian woodland. These de-scriptions are from the River-side County Integrated Project:

Riparian Forest. Riparian forest can include any combi-nation of the following species along stream channel banks: box elder (Acer negundo), big-leaf maple (A. macrophyllum), Valley oak (Quercus lobata), coast live oak (Q. agrifolia), white alder (Alnus rhombi-folia), Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), California dogwood (Cornus californica), Califor-nia bay (Umbellularia cali-fornica), sycamore (Platanus racemosa), Fremont’s cot-tonwood (Populus fremontii), California walnut (Juglans californica), and several spe-cies of willow (Salix lasian-dra, S. lasiolepis, S. laeviga-ta, S. gooddingii, S. exigua), Mexican elderberry (Sambu-cus mexicana), wild grape (Vi-tis girdiana) and poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum). Where the stream channel re-ceives perennial flows in some years but intermittent flows in other years, alder species drop out of the vegetation. Where the stream channel receives only intermittent flow, the wil-low and cottonwood species become less common and the sycamore, coast live oak and California bay tend to move down into the channel. Along ephemeral stream channels, coast live oak and California walnut can grow within the channel as a continuum or ec-otone from uplands on north-facing slopes.

Riparian Scrub. This hab-


27


staff will plant will ensure monitoring of cuttings on at least a weekly basis. Under-story vegetation will be pur-chased from appropriate area native plant nurseries, and will be planted directly at the miti-gation site, as they will be of a size no smaller than 1-gal-lon. This will allow for direct placement in the ground upon purchase, and will require little additional care beyond initial watering.

Maintenance Work

Following the installation of cuttings, SAWA field and bi-ological staff will work togeth-er in order to ensure maximum site success. Work performed in conjunction with this goal will include trash abatement, restriction of human presence, and continual control of inva-sive vegetation. Site success will be determined using:

• Regular monitoring using established GPS locations, photo docu-mentation, and data recordation

• Establishment of baseline condition of site at time of planting

• Quantitative Health Determination using CRAM assessment and point-intercept sampling method

Performance standards in addition to plant palette selec-tion will be done in accordance with the terms outlined in the San Timoteo Creek Reach 3B Plan of Action, dated May 2003.

The revegetated site be-gun in 2009 was monitored and maintained in 2010, but poor performance of cuttings

the best manner in which to install seeds, cuttings, and/or container plants.

Plant Materials

The IERCD will procure all plant materials from an ex-perienced/established native plant nursery, or will propa-gate plants from locally col-lected seeds and/or cuttings. The IERCD and SAWA will work together to create an on-site native plant nursery if possible; however, if vandal-ism or other forms of human interference disallow this es-tablishment, then the plants may be stored and cared for at an educational institution within one mile of the project site. In either location SAWA will be able to store and care for planted cuttings on-site, us-ing water in order to coax them into developing roots substan-tial enough for survival in the mitigation process.

If using cuttings, they will be planted and spaced ac-cording to individual species’ needs as well as elements of soil, water, and nutrient avail-ability determined prior to planting. SAWA and IERCD

(Quercus spp.) and sycamores or, at higher elevations, will include white alder.

Southern Sycamore/Al-der Riparian Woodland. Be-low 2,000 m sycamore and alder often occur along sea-sonally-flooded banks; cot-tonwoods and willows also are often present. Poison oak, mugwort, elderberry and wild raspberry (Rubus spp.) may be present in the understory. Sycamore and alder are both able to withstand long periods of flooding. The distribution of white alder is restricted to per-manent streams and consistent saturation of the root zone by well-aerated, cool water.

Site Considerations

Following identification of the appropriate target riparian association or subassociation, SAWA staff will work with partner agencies to determine soil types present on-site, as well as the location of ground-water height. These two ele-ments are particularly crucial in setting up site success, as they will shape the proper wa-tering method and frequency, and will assist in determining

itat type has the same potential species composition as ripari-an forest, but at a younger suc-cessional stage, either because of a more recent disturbance or more frequent flooding. In addition to the species listed in the description of riparian forest, riparian scrub also may include mulefat.

Southern Willow Scrub. Southern willow scrub is dominated by willow trees and shrubs (Salix spp.) and also may contain gooseberry (Ri-bes spp.) and elderberry. When disturbance is high within this Habitat type, the dominant species typically is sandbar willow (Salix exigua). When disturbance is less, the domi-nant species typically is Good-ding’s black willow (Salix gooddingii). Willows are fast-growing and can reproduce vegetatively from root sprouts. Red willow (Salix laevigata) occupies fast-flowing peren-nial streams at elevations up to 1,200 m and often occurs with yellow willow.

Southern Cottonwood/Willow Riparian. Southern cottonwood and willow ripar-ian Habitat is dominated by cottonwood (Populus spp.) and willow (Salix spp.) trees and shrubs. Understory spe-cies may include mugwort (Ar-temisia douglasiana), sting-ing nettle and wild cucumber (Marah macrocarpus). This riparian Habitat is consid-ered to be an early succes-sional stage as both species are known to germinate almost ex-clusively on recently deposited or exposed alluvial soils. Like the willow, the cottonwood can reproduce vegetatively from roots. In the absence of disturbance, this Habitat type will transition to include oaks


28

A SAWA CReWMeMBeR SPRAyS PeRennIAL PePPeRWeeD.


derailed plans for additional cuttings and other expan-sion of the restoration zone. IERCD and SAWA staff will continue monitoring the site in 2011 and will actively attempt to increase survival rates to those required according to the terms of the San Timoteo Creek Reach 3B Plan of Ac-tion, dated May 2003.

In 2011, the IERCD and SAWA will continue to iden-tify areas which are candidates for re-vegetation, as well as to conceptualize and execute these projects. The encourage-ment of the presence of native species in regions that former-ly housed invasive vegetation discourages re-invasion by these non-native plants. It also provides sustenance for native wildlife and increases overall habitat functionality.

Methodology

Biological staff from the Santa Ana Watershed Asso-ciation provides support to the technical/removal staff in a va-riety of ways. First, these em-ployees are working within the Reach 3-B habitat up to five days per week during breeding bird season, in order to gather sensitive species data. During these hours, biologists observe the surrounding habitat, and document location, species, and invasion percentage of any populations of non-natives, as well as taking GPS points in order to ensure that the popu-lation can be later located for treatment. This information is then communicated to the SAWA project manager, who performs a quick site assess-ment before deciding upon the method and timeline for treat-ment.

In winter months, one to two biologists cover the San Timoteo Creek area and are there on a weekly basis. While doing winter-bird and herpeto-logical surveys, the biologists also search for exotic species in need of re-treatment, suc-cess of natural revegetation and recommendations for ac-tive replanting as well.

GIS Mapping and Reports

The annually updated GIS maps for San Timoteo Canyon are attached. SAWA uses a GeoExplorer GPS unit to col-lect data in the field, and will soon begin additional data col-lection with a 2011 Trimble unit to be purchased by the IERCD. This will function in a similar fashion to previous equipment in that data will be transferred to ArcGIS which allows maps to be generated and data to be analyzed. As reported above, the attached maps show the invasive spe-cies awaiting control, least Bell’s vireo territories, and brown-headed cowbird trap locations.

In May of 2011, there will be a GIS training offered to IERCD and SAWA staff in order to improve methods in-volved in data collection and storage, map creation, and georeferencing site photos to corresponding actual map lo-cations. The training will im-prove the quality and quantity of maps able to be produced by SAWA in the process of this mitigation.

The Santa Ana Watershed Association in cooperation with the Inland Empire Re-source Conservation District continues to conduct the miti-gation tasks required in the

Plan of Action for the Reach 3B mitigation project. SAWA has been responsible for activities outlined in the Management Plan for San Timoteo Creek and its Watershed since 2004 and will continue conducting and documenting these activi-ties for at least 15 additional reporting periods. Activities conducted within the scope of the Management Plan include but are not limited to surveys for federally listed species, trapping of cowbirds, removal of invasive vegetation, revege-tation of former removal sites, and actively pursuing oppor-tunities for acquisition of land for in-perpetuity preservation within the Reach 3-B Project Area

The success of the afore-mentioned activities can be seen in a variety of ways within the natural system of San Timoteo Creek. There has been a dramatic rise in the pop-ulation of the endangered least Bell’s vireo, from 29 docu-mented breeding pairs in 2004 to 126 documented breeding pairs in 2010. This increase in viable pairs can be attributed to aggressive monitoring by SAWA, as well as increased availability of functional ri-parian habitat, of which two acres at a minimum is required for each established territory. The riparian zone of the San Timoteo Creek watershed has also experienced natural reco-lolonization by native riparian species of vegetation; these include but are not limited to mulefat, Baccharis salicifolia, cottonwood trees Populous fremontii, a variety of willow trees, Salix spp., and Califor-nia wild grape, Vitus califor-nica. Active revegetation has assisted in the reestablishment

of native vegetation, as has the removal of dangerous invasive species including arundo and tree of heaven.

In the 2011 reporting pe-riod, the IERCD and SAWA staff will continue to shift fo-cus in the direction of expan-sion of the area in which in-vasive vegetation is targeted and removed in order to en-sure continued riparian health. They will also focus on meth-ods outlined in this 2010 report for successful establishment of revegetated areas in light of the poor performance of the 1-acre site restore during the 2009 reporting period. Mul-tiple sites will be selected for active restoration in the 2011 reporting period and all tasks will be performed according to the terms of this document as well as those steps outlined in the May 2003 San Timoteo Creek Reach 3B Plan of Ac-tion.

Despite the success mea-surable by the dramatic in-crease in viable least Bell’s vireo, Vireo bellii pusillus, ter-ritories, SAWA and the IERCD will continue to use the funds set aside for the long-term res-toration and preservation of the San Timoteo Creek Watershed. SAWA will work to implement conservation measures in the San Timoteo Creek Watershed aimed at continued stabiliza-tion of the LBV population; however, they will also con-tinue work toward the removal of noxious invasive vegeta-tion, the reestablishment of na-tive riparian species capable of supporting local wildlife, and the prevention of human activity deemed to be a threat to the biological functional-ity of the creek. The health of Reach 3-B is essential to the


29


destruction increased through-out the canyon in 2008 and increased in 2010. Also, be-ginning in 2009, an increased amount of illegal activities were detected in the creek causing further habitat degra-dation and a new safety threat. Due to this new threat, SAWA biologists were forced to travel in pairs and monitoring was often interrupted because of police activities.

Brown-headed Cowbird Trapping

Brown-headed cowbird trapping has occurred in San Timoteo Canyon since 2001, and a total of 1,660 cowbirds have been removed from San Timoteo during this time. In 2010, the parasitism rate was at an all time low of 8% (3 of 37 nests). This low rate remains a marked decrease from a high of 75% in 2001. Although par-asitism by cowbirds still oc-curs, at a rate of 28% over ten years (106 of 375 nests), only 7% of nests (25 of 375) have failed due to parasitism. There

continued throughout the nest-ing season. The vireo adja-cent to construction activities suffered an unusually low re-productive success rate (0.86) due to high depredation (50%, n=14) and reproductive failure (21%, n=14) rates, and have negatively skewed the overall success rate for vireo in San Timoteo this year. Five hun-dred and five field hours were spent on vireo monitoring; 503 field hours were spent on cow-bird management .

Although the riparian ar-eas are protected under exist-ing laws, residential and util-ity development continues in San Timoteo Canyon. Current threats to the riparian habitat include removal of vegeta-tion by landowners and county agencies, human encroach-ment (i.e. paintball and all terrain vehicle activities), and sheep and cattle grazing. Dur-ing 2008, a new threat arose in the form of feral pig rooting. While it has long been know that feral pigs were present in the canyon, their growing presence and resulting habitat

location, behavior, reproduc-tive status, etc. Other sensi-tive species encountered were also documented throughout the canyon.

Least Bell’s Vireo Moni-toring

The vireo population in San Timoteo Canyon has in-creased dramatically over the past 10 years, from five terri-tories in 2000 to 126 territories in 2010, an overall increase of over 2400%. This increase can be attributed to the re-moval of invasive species and subsequent restoration of native vegetation, nest moni-toring, and cowbird manage-ment. San Timoteo originally contained many invasive plant species, most notably arundo and tamarisk. SAWA removed 239 acres of invasive plants from 1997 to 2001, and contin-ues a maintenance program to control re-growth. Restoration of the native plant community through natural recruitment has taken place throughout the canyon resulting in a healthy riparian under-story, effects of natural storm cycles notwith-standing.

In 2010, 126 vireo terri-tories were detected, up 20% from the 105 territories found in 2009. Ninety-five known pairs and 137 fledglings were detected. Nesting success was 62% in 2010, down from 65% in 2009. Nest losses were pri-marily due to predation (27%); however 11% were lost due to reproductive failure compared to only 1% in 2009. Twenty-four well-monitored pairs had a 2.8 reproductive success rate. The Edison El Casco Project construction activities in Norton Younglove Preserve

functionality of the larger San-ta Ana Watershed, and SAWA and all employed on its behalf will continue to work diligent-ly to ensure maintenance and improvement of current bio-logical conditions.

Endangered Species Monitoring and Manage-ment

Annual surveys were con-ducted for the endangered least Bell’s vireo and Southwestern willow flycatcher and manage-ment efforts were employed to aide in their recovery. The pri-mary purpose of this monitor-ing was to locate all vireos and flycatchers to determine their breeding status and enhance their breeding output through management.

Surveys for the least Bell’s Vireo and Southwestern wil-low Flycatcher were conduct-ed in San Timoteo between the dates of March 15 and September 14, 2010. Pres-ence/absence surveys for both species were conducted as prescribed by the USFWS or more frequently so that prob-lems could be monitored and managed, for example, inter-vention when egg parasitism was observed. Nest monitor-ing and data analysis of vireo followed the protocol of Pike et al. (1999).

Vireo were monitored from the headwaters of Coo-per’s Creek downstream to the ACOE flood control basins; however some areas were not accessible due to private land-owner restrictions. All po-tential habitats were carefully and slowly traversed along the edges and open trails. Nest-ing and territorial vireos and flycatchers were noted as to


30

A BROWn-HeADeD COWBIRD eGG FOunD By SAWA AnD ReMOVeD FROM A VIReO neST neAR SAn TIMOTeO CReek.


was no failure of nests due to parasitism in 2010. This low failure rate is primarily a result of intensive nest monitoring ef-forts. Although cowbird trap-ping has occurred since 2001, parasitism rates remained very high through 2006. Literature suggests that cowbirds have different regional dialects and female cowbirds tend to prefer older males that use local flight whistles, to younger males or older males that have a foreign dialect (O’Loghlen and Roth-stein 1995 and O’Loghlen 1995). In 2007, we experi-mented by removing the origi-nal bait birds after local birds were captured. We kept local, second-year male birds in the traps for the remainder of the season. Additionally, with as-sistance from a local resident, we placed a trap in a new lo-cation near Live Oak Canyon in 2008. This one particular trap caught the majority of cowbirds throughout the can-yon (50%) in 2008 and 2009, and 35% in 2010. We contin-ued this protocol in 2010 and added three more traps in lo-cations where parasitism was localized in prior years. On-going trapping efforts incor-porating this new protocol will hopefully continue to control the rate of parasitism through-out the canyon. In the last four years, the parasitism rate has been below 20%, which may be a result of these additional efforts.

Sensitive Species

SAWA biologist’s docu-mented incidental sightings of sensitive species in San Timo-teo Canyon during regular monitoring activities in 2010. Sensitive species observed include those listed by state

and federal agencies as endan-gered, threatened or species of concern, as well as species covered by the Western Riv-erside County Multiple Spe-cies Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Species detected include yellow warblers, Den-droica petechia, (n=74), yel-low-breasted chats, Icteria vi-rens, (n=15), Cooper’s hawks Accipiter cooperii, (n=2 pair), ferruginous hawks, Buteo re-galis (n=3), white-tailed kites, Elanus leucurus (n=1+ pair) and a seasonal pond with over 100 western spadefoot toad (Spea hammondii) tadpoles.


31

A 10-DAy-OLD LeAST BeLL’S VIReO neSTLInG.

Winter Raptor Surveys

A 14.1-mile raptor survey route was demarked along San Timoteo Canyon Road from the intersection with In-terstate 10 downstream to the point where the road crosses San Timoteo Creek (near Fern Ave). Each census consisted of a driver and observer re-cording all raptors seen while slowly driving with the un-aided eye. When necessary, binoculars were used to make a positive identification. A total of seven raptor species were observed in San Timoteo

Canyon during 2010 through-out eight surveys. The range of detections was between 4 – 28 individuals per survey. The most abundant raptor species observed was the red-tailed hawk, with 77 total observa-tions, followed by the Ameri-can kestrel with 31 observa-tions over the survey period (Table 1). Four of the species detected are “covered spe-cies” in the Western Riverside County MSHCP.

Although not detected during the roadside surveys, two other species were ob-served during other biological monitoring activities includ-ing barn owl, Tyto alba, and sharp-shinned hawk, Accipiter striatus.

Breeding Bird Surveys

Breeding bird surveys were conducted from February 15, 2010 through July 15, 2010 in San Timoteo Canyon. The survey area on San Timoteo Creek is on the outskirts of the City of Redlands, located be-tween the 60 and 10 freeways, Riverside County. The USGS California Quadrangle loca-tion is Redlands. The study plot is located between the

Raptor Survey Results in San Timoteo Canyon, 2010

Common Name Scientific Name Number of SightingsRed-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis 77American Kestrel Falco sparverius 31Red-Shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus 4White-tailed Kite* Elanus leucurus 5Cooper’s Hawk* Accipiter cooperii 2Osprey* Pandion haliaetus 3Ferruginous Hawk* Buteo regalis 4

TOTAL 126Table 1. 2010 raptor survey results. Listed in order of abundance. *MSHCP covered species.

Terry Reeser



32

UTM coordinates of 0487864, 3760565, and 0488562, 3760357. The riparian canopy is composed mostly of peren-nials and mature trees. Steep, tall canyon walls enclose the study plot. The canyon on this 30.3-acre plot is relatively narrow with the exception of two wide terraces. The plot is approximately 1 mile long and varies in width. The sur-rounding areas consist of some upland habitat, but mostly non-native grasslands used for grazing and agriculture. There is also a highly traveled rail-road system paralleled by a two-lane canyon road.

Habitat within the plot comprises a well-developed cottonwood/mulefat commu-nity with an associated upland component on the low terraces within the floodplain. Site dis-turbance includes historical grazing and other human-re-lated activities (e.g. all-terrain vehicles). Surveys are con-ducted by slowly walking the plot and mapping the occur-rence of all birds while noting any breeding behavior. Breed-ing territories are derived by the resulting data and depicted in Table 2.

Table 2:San Timoteo Breeding Bird Survey, 2010Common Name Scientific Name Breeding # Terr/

Territories 100 acSong Sparrow Melospiza melodia 20 66Bewick’s Wren Thryomanes bewickii 16 52.8Spotted Towhee Pipilo maculates 14 46.2California Towhee Melozone crissalis 14 46.2Northern Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis 12 39.6Lesser Goldfinch Carduelis psaltria 11 36.3Least Bell’s Vireo* Vireo belli pusillus 9.5 31.4Bushtit Psaltriparus minimus 9 29.7Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura 8 26.4Anna’s Hummingbird Calypte anna 8 26.4Yellow Warbler* Dendroica petechia 6 19.8House Finch Carpodacus mexicanus 6 19.8Black-chinned Hummingbird Archilochus alexandri 4 13.2Black Phoebe Sayornis nigricans 4 13.2Oak Titmouse Baeolohus inornatus 4 13.2House Wren Troglodytes aedon 4 13.2Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas 4 13.2Black-headed Grosbeak Pheucitcus melanocephalus 4 13.2California Quail Callipepla californica 3 9.9Nuttall’s Woodpecker Picoides nuttallii 3 9.9Ash-Throated Flycatcher Myiarchus cinerascens 3 9.9American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 3 9.9Phainopepla Phainopepla nitens 3 9.9American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 3 9.9Yellow-breasted Chat* Icteria virens 2.5 8.3Barn Owl Tyto alba 2 6.6Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus 2 6.6Common Raven Corvus corax 2 6.6Western Bluebird Sialia mexicana 2 6.6California Thrasher Toxostoma redivivum 2 6.6European Starling Sturnus vulgaris 2 6.6Bullock’s Oriole Icterus bullockii 2 6.6Cooper’s Hawk* Accipiter cooperii 1 3.3Red-shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus 1 3.3Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis 1 3.3Downy Woodpecker* Picoides pubescens 1 3.3White-tailed Kite* Elanus leucurus 0.5 1.7American Kestrel Falco sparverius 0.5 1.7Blue Grosbeak Guiraca caerulea 0.5 1.7Total 197.5 651.8

Table 2. 2010 Breeding bird survey results. In order of abundance. *MSHCP covered species.



33

Table 2:San Timoteo Breeding Bird Survey, 2010Common Name Scientific Name Breeding # Terr/

Territories 100 acSong Sparrow Melospiza melodia 20 66Bewick’s Wren Thryomanes bewickii 16 52.8Spotted Towhee Pipilo maculates 14 46.2California Towhee Melozone crissalis 14 46.2Northern Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis 12 39.6Lesser Goldfinch Carduelis psaltria 11 36.3Least Bell’s Vireo* Vireo belli pusillus 9.5 31.4Bushtit Psaltriparus minimus 9 29.7Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura 8 26.4Anna’s Hummingbird Calypte anna 8 26.4Yellow Warbler* Dendroica petechia 6 19.8House Finch Carpodacus mexicanus 6 19.8Black-chinned Hummingbird Archilochus alexandri 4 13.2Black Phoebe Sayornis nigricans 4 13.2Oak Titmouse Baeolohus inornatus 4 13.2House Wren Troglodytes aedon 4 13.2Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas 4 13.2Black-headed Grosbeak Pheucitcus melanocephalus 4 13.2California Quail Callipepla californica 3 9.9Nuttall’s Woodpecker Picoides nuttallii 3 9.9Ash-Throated Flycatcher Myiarchus cinerascens 3 9.9American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 3 9.9Phainopepla Phainopepla nitens 3 9.9American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 3 9.9Yellow-breasted Chat* Icteria virens 2.5 8.3Barn Owl Tyto alba 2 6.6Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus 2 6.6Common Raven Corvus corax 2 6.6Western Bluebird Sialia mexicana 2 6.6California Thrasher Toxostoma redivivum 2 6.6European Starling Sturnus vulgaris 2 6.6Bullock’s Oriole Icterus bullockii 2 6.6Cooper’s Hawk* Accipiter cooperii 1 3.3Red-shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus 1 3.3Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis 1 3.3Downy Woodpecker* Picoides pubescens 1 3.3White-tailed Kite* Elanus leucurus 0.5 1.7American Kestrel Falco sparverius 0.5 1.7Blue Grosbeak Guiraca caerulea 0.5 1.7Total 197.5 651.8

Table 2. 2010 Breeding bird survey results. In order of abundance. *MSHCP covered species.

Table 3: San Timoteo Winter Bird Survey, 2009-2010Plot size: 30.3 acres

Common Name Scientific Name # of Birds /100AcBushtit Psaltriparus minimus 82.5Lesser goldfinch Carduelis psaltria 70.1House finch Carpodacus mexicanus 61.1Yellow-rumped warbler Dendroica coronate 60.2Song sparrow Melospiza melodia 52.8White-crowned sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys 49.9Bewick’s wren Thryomanes bewickii 40.8Spotted towhee Pipilo maculates 33.4American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 30.5Mourning dove Zenaida macroura 30.1Ruby-crowned kinglet Regulus calendula 26.8Common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas 25.6European starling Sturnus vulgaris 25.2California towhee Melzone crissalis 25.2Common Raven Corvus corax 23.9Northern Rough-winged swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis 22.3American goldfinch Carduelis tristis 21.5Cedar waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum 19Anna’s hummingbird Calypte anna 15.7House wren Troglodytes aedon 14.4Black phoebe Sayornis nigricans 9.1Western bluebird Sialia mexicana 8.3American robin Turdus migratorius 7.8Oak titmouse Baeolohus inornatus 6.6Phainopepla Phainopepla nitens 5.8Nuttall’s woodpecker Picoides nuttallii 5.4California thrasher Toxostoma redivivum 4.1Says phoebe Sayornis saya 3.3Northern flicker Colaptes auratus 2.5Orange-crowned warbler Vermivora celata 2.1White-tailed kite* Elanus leucurus 1.2Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus 1.2Downy woodpecker* Picoides pubescens 1.2Cassin’s kingbird Tyrannus vociferans 1.2Hermit thrush Catharus ustulatus 1.2Lark sparrow Chondestes grammacus 1.2Barn owl Tyto alba 0.8Cooper’s hawk* Accipiter cooperii 0.4Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis 0.4American kestrel Falco sparverius 0.4

Table 3. 2009-2010 winter bird survey results. In order of most abundant species. *MSHCP covered species.

Winter Bird Surveys. Winter bird surveys were conducted from December 15, 2009 through February 15, 2010 in San Timoteo Canyon. Survey location and methodology is the same as used during breeding bird surveys. However, all species are listed without breeding information. Results are depicted in Table 3.

Inland empire Resource Conservation District

On July 1, 2005, the for-merly independent Inland

Empire West Resource Con-servation District and the East Valley Resource Conservation District were consolidated by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), in an effort to reduce overhead and improve financial strength, resource planning and project coordination. The consolida-tion resulted in the creation of

the Inland Empire Resource Conservation District, head-quartered in the City of Red-lands and comprising 823,390 acres of property in San Ber-nardino and Riverside coun-ties. The IERCD service area includes 27 cities and several unincorporated areas within these two counties, consisting of multiple habitats and depen-dent species due to consider-able variations in topography and climatic conditions.

The board and staff of the Inland Empire RCD work to preserve the original mission of the authors of the Soil Con-servation Act, while simul-taneously integrating work involving additional current resource issues. The district accomplishes this in a variety of ways, with perhaps the most

important being maintenance of a close relationship with the Natural Resources Conserva-tion Service (NRCS). This partnership allows the district to address the agricultural needs of the IERCD service area residents are being met, which has been challenging to ensure in the increasingly ur-ban area of the Inland Empire RCD.

In addition to this relation-ship, the district also works to maintain functioning partner-ships with multiple agencies specializing in resource con-servation issues; these include the United States Forest Ser-vice, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Cali-fornia Department of Fish and Game, and many preservation-minded non-profits and com-

munity organizations. The recognition of the need

to address multiple, at times competing, resource needs is a challenge, but not one that the board and staff of the Inland Empire Resource Conserva-tion District are unprepared to address. District business is discussed among Board, staff, and interested members of the public on the second Wednesday of each month. Any member of the public is welcome to attend these meet-ings, although advanced notice to district staff is appreciated in order to ensure all desiring to attend are fully accommo-dated.

For more information, please visit the district’s Web site at www.iercd.org

34


The Orange County Wa-ter District (OCWD) was

formed in 1933 by a special act of the California State Legisla-ture to protect Orange Coun-ty’s rights to water in the Santa Ana River. OCWD’s primary responsibility is managing the vast groundwater basin under northern and central Orange County that supplies water to more than 20 cities and water agencies, serving more than 2.3 million Orange County residents. Since 1933, OCWD has replenished and main-tained the groundwater basin at safe levels while more than doubling the basin’s annual yield. This important source of water provides local ground-water producers with a reliable supply of high-quality water.

OCWD primarily recharg-es the basin with water from the Santa Ana River and, to a lesser extent, with imported water purchased from the Met-ropolitan Water District of Southern California. OCWD currently holds rights to all Santa Ana River flows reach-ing Prado Dam. Water enters the groundwater basin via settling or percolation ponds in the cities of Anaheim and Orange. Behind Prado Dam (constructed and owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for flood prevention), OCWD owns 2,400 acres in Riverside County, which the District uses for water conservation, water quality improvement and envi-ronmental enhancement.

OCWD monitors the groundwater taken out each year to ensure that the basin is not overdrawn; refills the ba-sin; and carries out an assess-ment program to pay for oper-

Orange County Water DistrictSanta Ana Watershed Association 2010 Annual Report

ating expenses and the cost of imported replenishment water. The groundwater basin holds millions of acre-feet of wa-ter (an acre-foot satisfies the needs of two families for one year). The groundwater basin provides more than half of all water used within the district. Protection, safety and en-hancement of groundwater are OCWD’s highest priorities. With one of the most sophisti-cated ground-water protec-tion programs in the country, OCWD uses more than 700 wells provid-ing more than 1,400 sampling points—from which OCWD takes more than 18,000 water samples and conducts more than 350,000 analyses every year. OCWD’s monitoring program looks for more than 330 constituents—

far more than the 122 required by the regulatory agencies.

OCWD is leading the way in purification of waste-water for reuse to provide a reliable, new, drought-proof high-quality source of water. The Groundwater Replenish-ment System, a joint project of OCWD and the Orange Coun-ty Sanitation District, went on-line in January 2008 and can

produce enough near-distilled quality water for 500,000 people.

O C W D efforts to in-crease local water supplies also include expanding the

capacity of the existing per-colation facilities, treating poor quality water to make it useable, studying methods to extend the life of filtration membranes, improving ad-

vanced purification technolo-gies, using bacteria to remove contaminants, and studying the quality of Santa Ana River water and other water-related issues. Other OCWD ground-water management and water quality activities focus on ex-panding the Prado wetlands, groundwater treatment at well heads, computer modeling of the groundwater basin and conservation of endangered or threatened species.

As a member of SAWA, OCWD has contributed mil-lions of dollars in mitigation funding to further the restora-tion mission and complemen-tary goals of SAWA. OCWD personnel assist SAWA with its watershed-wide biological monitoring and reporting. The district plays a pivotal role in SAWA’s relationships with regulatory and funding agen-cies, and helps support SA-WA’s work in the Prado Basin and in Orange County.

35

PRADO BASIn FROM THe DAM LOOkInG TOWARD CHInO HILLS

Samantha Dempster

36

Vireo Monitoring, Prado Basin

Orange County Water Dis-trict signed several agree-

ments in the early 1990s with the U.S. Army Corps of Engi-neers and U.S. Fish and Wild-life Service to enact emergency conservation of water behind Prado Dam. Subsequently, the environmental documentation was certified for formalizing water conservation to an eleva-tion of 505 ft in spring and 498 ft in winter when the retention of the water does not interfere with the primary purpose and first priority of the operation of Prado Dam, which is flood control. Project commitments by OCWD and the terms and conditions in several Biologi-cal Opinions issued by the Ser-vice to the Corps laid out the environmental responsibilities taken on by OCWD and part-ners for which funding was al-located in one-time payments. Biological Opinion #s 1-6-93-F-7, 1-6-94-F-47, 1-6-95-F-28, and 1-6-99-F-75 were the most pertinent.

The committed funding was to be managed in an en-dowment to fund habitat res-toration and vireo monitoring in the basin for the life of the Water Conservation Program. OCWD and the County of Orange provided $450,000 each for vireo monitoring and support in 1991 and for habi-tat restoration. The Nature Conservancy acted as the fi-duciary and habitat manager at that time and when they left the program to OCWD and SAWA, the fund had grown to $1,631,953. This amount was deposited in the Watershed Trust Fund with OCWD and

then on to SAWA in 2006, with the transfer of the entire Trust Fund balance.

Currently, OCWD is re-quired to furnish two vireo monitors in the basin with these funds, provide vehicles and logistical support, and pay for cowbird trapping and seeds for the traps. The Dis-trict has split one of the moni-tor positions between two joint SAWA/OCWD staffs and the other monitor is a contractor.

OCWD pays these em-ployees and then is reimbursed by SAWA for the cost of the contractor and one-half the cost of each of the two split employees. Those total costs in 2010 were $160,497.

Prado Burn

The Prado Burn site was sanctioned by the Fish and Wildlife Service as the mitiga-tion site for the Winter Water Conservation Project. The res-toration site was 40 acres and was hit by a fire in 2001 that started in an area located just southwest of the OCWD di-

version structure. The site had some mixed native vegetation, but was highly dominated by giant reed (Arundo donax) at that time. After the fire, the area was treated with herbi-cide everywhere where Arun-do was re-sprouting. On three separate occasions herbicide was applied to the Arundo and castor bean that was returning. As of September of 2003, the area had significant re-growth of black willow, cottonwoods, mule fat, and blackberry. To-day, this project site is a mix-ture of riparian woodland and fresh water marsh. Large specimen Black Willow and Fremont’s Cottonwood domi-nate the over story with Arroyo Willow and Mulefat dominant in the under story thickets. The specific areas that had been dominated by Arundo are showing major recruitment by Arroyo Willows, Cottonwood, Grape, and Mulefat. Although the site is currently dominated by native plants, a few non-native species have also colo-nized the open areas created by the success of Arundo control efforts. For example, Poison

Hemlock and Kochio scoparia are locally abundant on the site. There has been enough recent, seasonal rain coupled with seepage that several low spots have perennial stand-ing water colonized by Cat-tails, and abundant California Grape.

Although the data are cur-rently being analyzed, there were 17 Least Bell’s Vireo ter-ritories in the Prado Burn dur-ing the 2010 breeding season (Eight of these territories were reported by John Green from AMEC, and 9 others by Bon-nie Nash.); this is up from only 5 territories in 2004 and 2005 The Prado Burn was planted beginning in 2003 with hun-dreds of pole-cuttings, most of which have taken. The initial Arundo removal and spray cost $100,000; the spray contract runs through 2012. OCWD deposited $930,000 with SAWA in 2004 to pay for the restoration work on the Prado Burn and for other ef-forts such as vireo monitoring in the Prado Basin.

Orange County Water District ProjectsSanta Ana Watershed Association 2010 Annual Report

THe OLD RIVeR ROAD BRIDGe OVeR THe SAnTA AnA RIVeR In THe PRADO BASIn

Lee Reeder

Riverside-Corona Resource Conservation DistrictSanta Ana Watershed Association 2010 Annual Report

Since 1993, the Riverside-Corona Resource Conser-

vation District (RCRCD) has worked to create a sustainable community by helping people use water, soil, wildlife, plant and air resources so they last forever. A SAWA member, RCRCD supports the manage-ment of each acre of land ac-cording to its needs.

The district is located in parts of western Riverside and San Bernardino counties, and includes cities of River-side, Corona, Norco, Canyon Lake, Grand Terrace and parts of Lake Elsinore and Colton. RCRCD personnel provide technical advice to land users and educational programs for the community. They also con-duct on-the-land conservation projects.

Technical assistance is pro-vided to land owners, "coop-erators," who are interested in conserving natural resources while using or developing property. Services provided to cooperators include:• onsite evaluation of prob-

lems, such as an inefficient irrigation systems

• conservation planning based on resource data such as soil type and crop water needs,

• design and/or specifica-tions for the installation of conservation practices, such as erosion control structures.

Natural resource manage-ment and conservation plan-ning information is provided to district cooperators with as-sistance from the USDA Natu-ral Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).

The RCRCD office provides resource data and planning tools, including soil and wa-ter testing, soil survey maps, copies of historic aerial pho-tos, and a technical guide, Best Management Practices Hand-book for Erosion and Sediment Control and Storm Water Re-tention/Detention.

Resource Educators are available to present the follow-ing programs for community groups, staff meetings, high school level students, and pub-lic events:• Help Create a Sustainable

Community• Keep our Water Clean:

Healing Waterways (Sponsored by the Cities and County of Riversides' StormWater/CleanWater Protection Program).

• Home Gardening...Sim-ple and Environmentally Friendly

• Arroyos: Sanctuaries for

Wildlife (a joint project with the Riverside Land Conservancy; developed from a State and Private Forestry Grant).

The Riverside-Corona Re-source Conservation District provides educational materials and programs free of charge to teachers, students and home-schooling families who reside or work within the RCRCD service area.

Mini-grants are available to all levels of school and youth groups to help fund outdoor conservation projects such as tree plantings, re-vegetation projects, and gardens.

The Land Use Learning Center at RCRCD is a 3½-acre educational facility that dem-onstrates land conservation methods. The purpose of the center is to foster community conservation efforts and to em-power Southern Californians to practice natural resource

stewardship at home, at work, and in the community.

The demonstrations pro-vide models to explain local resource issues, conflicts, and solutions. Displays and signs explain plantings and demon-strations depicting ways we can use land efficiently and live in more sustainable ways.

Planted areas depict three main land uses of Southern California:

• native habitats • urban areas • agricultural lands

The RCRCD conducts on-the-land rehabilitation by re-moving invasive species and reestablishing natural land-scapes to native species.

37

nATIVe FISH STReAM

The native fish stream and tanks were created in 2000

for the purpose of providing habitat for native fish in the Santa Ana River watershed and for research purposes asso-ciated with the Riverside-Co-rona Resource Conservation District’s Land Use Learning Center.

The 300-foot-long stream is currently home to three na-tive fish: the Arroyo Chub (Gila orcutti), Speckled Dace (Rhynichys osculus ssp) and Santa Ana Sucker (Catosto-mus santaanae).

The stream’s pumps carry 400 gallons of water per min-ute through three biological fil-ters and cascading aerator into pools of various depths, and three stream sections.

The stream holds between 500 and 2,500 native fish of various sizes, depending on the year’s fish species repro-duction. Native plants grown in the nursery were used to vegetate the stream and pro-

nATIVe PLAnT nuRSeRy

The native plant nursery is a one-acre facility that is

used for SAWA and RCRCD restoration and habitat en-hancement projects. The plant stock is grown in super cells, tree bands, quarts, and one-, two-, five- and 15-gallon containers. Many plants are grown from seed, field-col-lected or harvested at the Land Use Learning Center.

Native plants grown include Fremont cottonwood, mulefat, black and white sages, coast live oak, western redbud, ar-row weed, coyote bush, buck-wheat, brittlebush, blue-eyed grass, salt grass, rush grass, anamopsis, and black, sand-bar, red and arroyo willow.

Native Plant Nursery stock has been used on 18 acres of

mitigation and restoration sites throughout the RCRCD service area and on SAWA projects since 1998. The nursery has 18 sand tanks for the propagation of bare-root plants and parent stock, a 1,500-square-foot seed and cutting area, 400-square-foot potting and soil prep area and a 1,200-square-foot shade area, along with an associated sup-ply storage area.

The nursery is operated by RCRCD and conducts activi-ties year-round. Revegetation projects using NPN stock in the past have included River Road, Alessandro Arroyo, Fairmount Wilderness, Syca-more Canyon, Golden Star Creek, Highway 71, and the RIX Plant. The Native Plant Nursery currently has 1,500 pole cuttings and 10,000 plants in containers.

vide shade and cover for the native fish. This shading can-opy is important during the heat of summer in regulating temperatures. Aquatic insect species that have populated the stream naturally include mayflies, midges, stoneflies and cadis flies. No supple-mental food is provided, and only natural acclimation of the fish is allowed. SAWA costs to help operate the RCRCD fish stream in 2010 totaled $9,096.

Riverside-Corona Resource Conservation DistrictSanta Ana Watershed Association 2010 Annual Report

nATIVe FISH STReAM AnD nATIVe PLAnT nuRSeRy

SAnTA AnA SuCkeR38

39

The mission of the San Jacinto Basin Resource

Conservation District is to help people protect, conserve and restore natural resources through information, educa-tion and technical assistance programs.

RCDs are organized for the purposes of soil, water, and related natural resource conservation in open space areas, agricultural areas, ur-ban development, wildlife areas, recreational develop-ments, watershed manage-ment, the protection of water quality and the treatment of each acre of land according to its needs. The San Jacinto Basin Resource Conservation District has demonstrated success with a wide variety of resource challenges.

The San Jacinto River is in Riverside County. The river’s headwaters originate in the San Jacinto Mountains and it

flows through the San Jacinto Valley.

The lower portion of the 765-square-mile water-shed is urban and agricul-tural land and flows about 10 miles from its source to Lake Hemet, which holds 14,000 acre feet of water. Down-stream of the dam, the river

continues northeast passing though an area filled with citrus orchards and dairy and agricultural farms, until it discharges into Mystic Lake.

Overflow from the riv-er then flows southwest to Railroad Canyon Reservoir, or Canyon Lake, which has a capacity of 11,900 acre-

feet. Downstream of Rail-road Canyon Dam, the river continues flowing roughly southwest for about 3 miles until it drains into Lake El-sinore. The lake has very lit-tle outflow, but in rare cases of heavy rain events, it has overflowed into Temescal Creek which drains into the Santa Ana River near Prado.

The San Jacinto Basin RCD has managed several major SAWA invasive removal and mitigation projects in its wa-tershed, including the follow-ing:

MYSTIC LAKE AND THE SAN JACINTO WILDLIFE REFUGE

Inaugurated in 2002, the Mystic Lake East Phase proj-ect included cutting and re-moval of 85 acres of mixed Arundo and tamarisk. This removal project is located at the eastern high-water mark of Mystic Lake, just west of Gilman Springs Road.

SAWA will continue to monitor this area, since the alternate drying and wetting of this zone has led to rein-festations of both Arundo and tamarisk in past decades. Subsequent treatments with herbicides approved for wet-lands areas, shall be applied by SAWA, necessary for the 20-year restoration plan of this site.

San jacinto Basin Resource Conservation DistrictSanta Ana Watershed Association 2010 Annual Report

MYSTIC LAKE IN WINTER

SAN JACINTO SUBWATERSHED

elsinore-Murrieta-Anza Resource Conservation DistrictSanta Ana Watershed Association 2010 Annual Report

Elsinore-Murrieta-Anza Resource Conservation

District (EMARCD) is the newest member of the Santa Ana Watershed Association, joining us as a full member in December 2008. Prior to that, EMRCD was an associate member of SAWA.

The northwestern portion of the district near Lake El-sinore and a small northeastern portion of the district above Anza are located in the Santa Ana River watershed, which is also in SAWA’s area of respon-sibility.

EMARCD promotes con-servation practices of natural resources, opportunities for education and participation, and a sustainable quality of life for communities within the district. The district's ter-ritory includes 505,000 acres, or approximately 789 square miles, extending south from Scott Road to the San Diego County line, and from east of Anza west to the Orange County line. It also includes a loop around the north of Lake Elsinore. Its RCD neighbors are San Jacinto Basin RCD and Riverside Corona RCD in Riverside County and Mission RCD in San Diego County.

Conservation districts be-gan to form following federal enabling legislation in the late 1930s. In response to the terri-ble "dust bowl’ of that period, the federal Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS; then called the Soil Conserva-tion Service) was formed. It was realized that for the NRCS to function effectively, local state districts were needed as a bridge to the public. So the RCDs were formed across the

nation and continue to cooper-ate closely with the NRCS.

What EMARCD Does

Mitigation: EMARCD ac-cepts many forms of mitigation to allow projects in the District to run smoothly through the permitting process, yet fit into EMARCD’s goal of a sustain-able and healthy environment for the communities it serves.

Public Outreach: Host-ing Earth Day events, assist-ing in and presenting com-munity education programs and networking with various non-profit and governmental agencies makes EMARCD’s connection with the residents of the district grow.

Partners: By attend-ing meetings, workshops and conferences, EMARCD con-tinually keeps connected with ongoing efforts to protect and evaluate the watersheds (Santa

The board of directors of the Elsinore-Murrieta-Anza Re-source Conservation District (EMARCD) meets the sec-ond Friday of each month at: Santa Rosa Plateau Ecological Reserve Visitor Center, 39400 Clinton Keith Road, Murrieta, CA 92582.

The EMARCD office is located at 21535 Palomar Rd., Suite A, Wildomar, CA 92595-7763. The office phone num-ber is (951) 609-0066.

LAKE ELSINORE AND WESTERN EMARCD AREA

Margarita River, San Ja-cinto River and San Mateo Creek) in the district. Affili-ating with other groups and agencies allows EMARCD to work more efficiently and partner where it can.

In 2010, SAWA had no ac-tive mitigation projects with the EMARCD, but is planning to work on current mitigations that will likely involve this portion of the Santa Ana River watershed.

40


41

SAWA Funding & expenditures

The Nature Conservancy originally managed the

watershed fund and the resto-ration work in the upper Santa Ana River watershed. Since 1997, the work in the water-shed has been performed by area resource conservation districts (RCDs). The RCDs and Orange County Water District came together as the Santa Ana Watershed Associa-tion (SAWA), which includes the Inland Empire, Riverside-Corona, San Jacinto Basin and Elsinore-Murrieta-Anza RCDs.

The focus of the Watershed Program is dictated by respon-sibilities attached to the public funds provided to mitigate for large federal projects and other development impacts to the watershed.

SAWA projects include con-trol of invasive species, partic-ularly giant reed and cowbirds, which interfere with river func-tion and resource abundance; expanding wetlands and open space; managing endangered species toward recovery; and public involvement. Arundo control started in the upper wa-tershed and continued down-stream because Arundo invades by pieces washing down and sprouting in moist soil. Arundo seeds are sterile in our area, so that the spread of Arundo has been by vegetative means.

Habitat restoration, primar-ily through Arundo control, is the current central focus of the Watershed Program because most of the funding obtained was earmarked for Arundo control. The work with endan-gered species and other wildlife is necessary for compliance with the regulatory permits to do the Arundo work. Depos-

its were from grants and funds for the mitigation of projects on the river and the Watershed Program took on the funds and the mitigation responsibilities. The major projects providing funds included the Seven Oaks Dam, Prado Water Conserva-tion, Highway 71 Improve-ments, Norco Bluffs Stabiliza-tion, Santa Ana River Flood

Control, State Proposition 50 funds, Environmental Protec-tion Agency Grants, and sev-eral smaller public and private funds from various develop-ers in the region. Some of the mitigation funding sources did not specify acreage require-ments but provided the where-withal for treatment of several hundred additional acres and

more importantly, for longer term re-treatment. By 2002, there was an additional $9 mil-lion for Arundo control due to a successful grant application for Proposition 13 funds.

The Annual Work Plan guides the work of the Santa Ana Watershed Association. Changes and additions are made through staff-generated

amendments to the work plans. The work items are largely dictated by the responsibilities inherited with the funding and the long-term commitment for follow-up. Annual achieve-ments and audits of expendi-tures are reported on each year. Photographic documentation of work progress is collected in each project area and there are regular site visits by RCDs, OCWD, and regulatory agency representatives.

When an individual RCD performs an authorized piece of mitigation work, that RCD then invoices SAWA and is paid out of the trust fund. To be paid, invoices must be signed by the manager of the invoicing RCD, and the executive director of SAWA.

Approved work is confined to the activities specified in cur-rent grants and to maintenance obligations contained in mitiga-tion obligations. The trust fund must be kept at a level that will yield enough operating capital to continue long-term invasives maintenance and other follow-up responsibilities.

The next page shows the revenues and expenses of the Santa Ana Watershed Asoocia-tion for 2010.

42


SAWA Revenues 2010Santa Ana Watershed Association Annual Budget

january 1 - December 31, 20102010 Total Revenues: $2,800,088

SAWA Expenditures 2010Santa Ana Watershed Association Annual Budget

january 1 - December 31, 20102010 Total expenditures: $2,288,943

Mitigation Fees $1,442,230 Grant Income $483,031 Other Revenues $30309 Contributions Received $26 MSHCP net Income $11,185 Investment Income $853,307

Total $2,800,088

Administration $349,304 Brown-headed Cowbird $123,866 education Programs $161,450 endangered Species $604,769 Invasive Species Removal $708,539 IeRCD $90,609 RCRCD $48,612 SjBRCD $30,283 eMARCD $10,800 OCWD $160,497

Total $2,288,943

P.O. Box 219, Chino, CA 91708

Phone: 909-606-1933Fax: 909-606-2494

Santa Ana Watershed Association

SAWA2010


Santa Ana Watershed Association SAWA 2010

Documents

Transcript of Santa Ana Watershed Association SAWA 2010