David Magney Environmental Consulting - California Native Plant ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Comments on Draft EIR for Newhall Ranch Mission Village Development DMEC Project No. 10-0181 1/3/2011 Page 2 D:\DMEC\Jobs\Friends_SantaClaraRiver\Newhall-MissionVillage\DMEC_comments_on_Newhall_MissionVillage_DEIR-20110103.doc DMEC Restoration Activities within Preserve Areas .................................................................................... 34 Monitoring Activities............................................................................................................................ 35 The Spineflower Monitoring Program.............................................................................................. 35 Qualitative Monitoring Activities within Preserve Areas .................................................................. 35 Spineflower Introduction Program........................................................................................................ 36 Seed Collection................................................................................................................................. 36 Conservation of the Seed Bank......................................................................................................... 37 Spineflower Information Center........................................................................................................ 37 Funding ................................................................................................................................................ 37 SCP is Inadequate to Mitigation Impacts to SFVS................................................................................... 38 Lack of Adequate Data......................................................................................................................... 39 1. Failure of Reintroduction as a Viable Spineflower Mitigation Strategy ........................................ 40 2. Lack of Knowledge About Genetics ............................................................................................ 40 3. Pollination Not Fully Understood and Existing Data Not Used..................................................... 41 4. Seed Dispersal............................................................................................................................. 42 5. Soils............................................................................................................................................. 42 6. Elevation, Slope, and Aspect ....................................................................................................... 43 7. Competition................................................................................................................................. 43 8. Predators...................................................................................................................................... 43 9. Climate........................................................................................................................................ 44 Locally Rare Plants Not Adequately Assessed............................................................................................. 46 Special-status Wildlife in the DEIR......................................................................................................................... 51 Special-status Mollusks in the DEIR ................................................................................................................... 51 Loss of Local Biodiversity Not Assessed................................................................................................................. 56 Vegetation Classification......................................................................................................................................... 57 Grasslands........................................................................................................................................................... 57 Impacts to “Common” Plant Communities.......................................................................................................... 58 Inadequacy of Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................................... 59 Inadequacy of the RMDP/SCP & EIS/EIR.............................................................................................................. 59 Exotic Wildlife Species Control Plan....................................................................................................................... 60 Wetlands ..................................................................................................................................................................... 60 Appropriate Taxa for Mitigation Plant Palettes....................................................................................................... 61 Definition of “Self-sustaining” for Monitoring Success Needed .............................................................................. 62 Eliminate Loophole for Modifying Mitigation Success Criteria............................................................................... 62 Inappropriate Use of Invasive Exotic Species as Habitat Creation Mitigation......................................................... 63 Use of Restoration Areas as Mitigation Banks ........................................................................................................ 63 Establishing Accounting System for Wetland Mitigation Requirements.................................................................. 63 Improper Impact Assessment of “Giant Reed” Habitat ........................................................................................... 63 Impacts to Santa Clara River and Inadequacy of Wetland Mitigation Measures.................................................... 64 EPA Recommends Denial of the RMDP/SCP Project ............................................................................................ 64 Potentially Significant Impacts the Santa Clara River and Tributaries................................................................. 65 Mitigation Rule Not Followed ............................................................................................................................. 65 Jurisdictional Waters Not Properly Assessed....................................................................................................... 65 Proposed Buffered Size Inadequate...................................................................................................................... 66 Inadequate Attention Paid to Federal Floodplain Development Policy in Analyzing Project Alternatives ........... 68 Inadequate Mission Village Wetland Mitigation Measures.................................................................................. 69
Comments on Draft EIR for Newhall Ranch Mission Village Development DMEC Project No. 10-0181 1/3/2011 Page 3 D:\DMEC\Jobs\Friends_SantaClaraRiver\Newhall-MissionVillage\DMEC_comments_on_Newhall_MissionVillage_DEIR-20110103.doc DMEC A very important part of CEQA, which is often ignored or overlooked is that of legislative intent. CEQA § 21001. Additional Legislative Intent, states: “The Legislature further finds and declares that it is the policy of the state to: (a) “Develop and maintain a high-quality environment now and in the future, and take all action necessary to protect, rehabilitate, and enhance the environmental quality of the state. (b) “Take all action necessary to provide the people of this state with clean air and water, enjoyment of aesthetic, natural, scenic, and historic environmental qualities, and freedom from excessive noise. (c) “Prevent the elimination of fish or wildlife species due to man’s activities, insure that fish and wildlife populations do not drop below self-perpetuating levels, and preserve for future generations representations of all plant and animal communities and examples of the major periods of California history.” The intent of CEQA must be considered concerning a project’s impacts on the environment. The health, vitality, and viability of the ecosystem is the foundation of the well-being of the human environment, which is why the legislature, when it enacted CEQA, made a point to delineate those aspects of CEQA that where not delineated expressly elsewhere in the Act. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The assessment of biological resources is addressed in Section 4.3 of the DEIR. Issues reviewed below include the feasibility and reasonableness of wildlife guilds, assessment, or lack of assessment, of terrestrial mollusks and locally rare plants, unfounded bases for take and preservation of the San Fernando Valley Spineflower (Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina), and endangered species, and inadequate mitigation for the SFVS and Slender Mariposa Lily (Calochortus clavatus var. gracilis). Also addressed is the inadequate assessment of special-status vascular plants, locally rare species, wildlife, wetlands, and assessment of impacts on common wildlife species. Unlike most project EIRs, the Newhall Ranch project, including the Mission Village project DEIR, relies heavily on previous EIRs, even those that had not been certified at the time of their publication. This comment letter regularly refers to previous related Newhall Ranch project EIRs and supporting documents, and includes those as part of the record in support of these comments on the Mission Village DEIR. Wildlife Guilds as Assessment Method Page 4.3-413 of the DEIR talks about common wildlife “guilds”, which are category buckets designed to address impacts without looking at impacts directly on unprotected species. Whether these buckets meaningfully capture impacts on the species of wildlife with no special protective status is discussed below. The methodology of the assessment through the use of guilds is not addressed in the methods section. The first mention of this assessment approach occurs on page 4.3-313 in discussing the cumulative impacts.
Page 1: David Magney Environmental Consulti
Page 5 and 6: Comments on Draft EIR for Newhall R
Page 53 and 54:
Comments on Draft EIR for Newhall R
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
show all

David Magney Environmental Consulting - California Native Plant ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?