SFPUC 2001 Alameda Watershed Management Plan

XII. SUMMARY OF COMMMENTS AND RESPONSESB. SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSESThe Western yellow-billed cuckoo which is a federally threatened species, also. And then there’sa number of species that were presumed to be likely to be present which we know are present fora fact, Alameda whipsnake in the watershed.Calliope Silverspot butterfly has been seen nearby. California Tiger salamander, which is aspecies of concern, currently a candidate for the federal candidate species and is currently underlitigation. And the California red-legged frog. I think you have that confirmed. These are allspecial-status species. There are a number of species.” (Jeff Miller – Pleasanton Public Meeting)Comment I-26: “I am a biologist and naturalist and I notice on your list of plants and animalswhere they were rated as there’s a low potential, medium potential, or high potential of thembeing on the project plan. You did very well on the plants.So I went carefully through the list and it looks pretty much included of everything I know of itand put it in the correct potential, but the animals needs some work.There are several animals that I know for a fact that are on this property that should be switchedto high potential. So those animals are steelhead trout somebody mentioned, the Californiamonitor lizard, Pallet bat, Townsends big bat, badger and California Silverspot butterfly.” (JoanneFreemire – Pleasanton Public Meeting)Comment I-27: “It says winter and spring surveys will be conducted to confirm or deny thepresence of California Salamanders. And if the species are present, additional off-site habitatshould be preserved and/or enhanced at a one to one ratio.In other words, that means if a ratio is destroyed, if an acre somewhere else would be purchasedas habitat, well, that’s good in a way. I mean, it’s probably the best that can be done if you’regoing to build. But you can’t see it as a one for one replacement because you know that otherpiece of land that they’re buying for habitat probably already is habitat, so you’re destroying oneacre and you’re buying another acre, but really you’ve lost one of the two acres.Okay, so you’re trying your best, but it still is not preserving all the habitat possible.Anyway the last sentence then says implementation of these mitigation measures would reducethe significant impacts from proposed mine operations to a low significant level and I happen toagree with that.” (Joanne Freemire – Pleasanton Public Meeting)Response: The above comments focused on the EIR’s lack of specific species surveys,particularly for special status wildlife species. In many cases, specific species information isgiven in these comments. As was the case with special status plants, wildlife surveys recorded inthe EIR for the Management Plan were included to provide a general probability of the existenceof a given species or habitat. This level of detail was intended to provide a programmatic view ofthe plant and wildlife communities on the Watershed. Complete surveys of Watershed lands atthe level needed to support specific projects or major land use decisions would be prohibitivelyexpensive and would also be potentially out of date for specific projects proposed in the laterNOP 96.223E: Alameda Watershed Management Plan C&R.63 ESA / 930385