SFPUC 2001 Alameda Watershed Management Plan

III. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND IMPACTSE. NATURAL RESOURCESImplementation of the Grazing Resource Management ElementGrazing is currently allowed on the Watershed. Policies governing the implementation of theGrazing Resources Management Element of the Management Plan would significantly reduce therisk of fire and enhance ecological resources. However, if not managed properly, grazing coulddamage vegetation, increase invasive plant species, and increase erosion (Falk, 1992).Table III.E-7 links the activity that could result in physical effects on vegetation with the fullrange of management actions that could be required to reduce the potential impacts. In the caseof grazing, the management actions would reduce the potential impacts associated withimproperly managed grazing. These grazing management actions (Actions gra1 through gra14)include implementation of grazing management controls and structural protection measures thatwould enhance the health of riparian zones and reservoir margins by reducing the risk of viablepathogen discharges into streams and reservoirs. Additionally, these management actions wouldmaintain and improve ecological resources by controlling vegetative growth, implementingspecific criteria for lessee selection and lease requirements, implementing improvements to thethree divided geographic Watershed protection areas (San Antonio, Calaveras, and AlamedaCreeks), obtaining funding for improvements, and implementing monitoring to ensure adherenceto program plans and activities.Implementation of the Grazing Resources Management Element, as described above and inSection IV.E, would reduce the potential physical effects from overgrazing by livestock to a lessthan significant level. Therefore, mitigation measures are not required.Changes to Gravel Mining OperationsUnder the Management Plan, gravel mining is proposed north of I-680, and gravel extractionoperations would continue and expand under two separate options south of I-680. The followingdiscussion applies to both continuing mining operations and proposed options.• As described earlier in this document, actions proposed in the Alameda Watershed ManagementPlan for mining north of I-680 would take place substantially in accordance with limits andmitigations set forth in the conditions of approval for Alameda County’s SMP-32. TheManagement Plan incorporates SMP-32 conditions of approval and proposes modification in thetiming and sequencing of mining (shortening the completion date for water storage pits) andmining reclamation. These modifications may require amendment of the existing permit andcould bring about new (but mitigable) natural resources impacts beyond those disclosed andmitigated in the EIR prepared for SMP-32, as described below. Alameda County’s conditions ofapproval for SMP-32 include requirements for revegetation and restoration, as well as controls tobe implemented during mining operations, that ensure impacts from mining would be less thansignificant.As described in the SMP-32 EIR, vegetation within the SMP-32 permitted area north of I-680(Action sun1) consists of ruderal non-native grassland, barley hay field, a vineyard and orchard.The non-cultivated areas of the site are highly disturbed, possibly due to disking. California groundNOP 96.223E: Alameda Watershed Management Plan III.E-35 ESA / 930385January 2001