Revegetation Plan Final 2-6-06 - smcgov.org · FINAL Revegetation Plan May & Associates, Inc. San Bruno Mtn. Gorse Control and 730 Clementina Street Revegetation Project San Francisco,

FINAL REVEGETATION PLAN

San Bruno Mountain Gorse Control and Revegetation Project

Prepared for: County of San Mateo Environmental Services Agency San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Division 455 County Center, 4th Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1646 Contact: Sam Herzberg 650-363-1823 Prepared by: May & Associates, Inc. 730 Clementina Street San Francisco, CA 94103 Contact: Jennifer Zarnoch 415-391-1000 [email protected]

JUNE 2006

Table of Contents

FINAL Revegetation Plan May & Associates, Inc. San Bruno Mtn. Gorse Control and 730 Clementina Street Revegetation Project San Francisco, CA 94103 415.391.1000

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1

1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................................1 1.2. RESTORATION SITE LOCATION.............................................................................................................1

2.0 SITE CONDITIONS ..........................................................................................................2

2.1 HISTORIC CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................2 2.2 CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................2

2.2.1 Soils........................................................................................................................................................2 2.2.2 Hydrology................................................................................................................................................3 2.2.3 Vegetation ..............................................................................................................................................3

3.0 HABITAT RESTORATION GOALS.................................................................................5

3.1 RESTORATION GOALS ..............................................................................................................................5 3.2 RESTORATION STRATEGY .......................................................................................................................5

4.0 CONCEPTUAL RESTORATION PLAN..........................................................................6

4.1 INVASIVE NON-NATIVE PLANT CONTROL..........................................................................................6 4.1.1 Cape Ivy (Delairia odorata). ...................................................................................................................6 4.1.2 Purple Velvet Grass (Holcus lanatus). ....................................................................................................6 4.1.3 Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum). ...................................................................................................6 4.1.4 Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus discolor). .................................................................................................6 4.1.5 Other Secondary Invasive Species. ............................................................................................................7

4.2 SITE PREPARATION...................................................................................................................................7 4.3 SITE LAYOUT AND PLANTING PALETTE ..............................................................................................7 4.4 PLANT INSTALLATION..............................................................................................................................9 4.5 PLANT MAINTENANCE.............................................................................................................................9 4.6 SCHEDULE OF RESTORATION ACTIVITIES ...........................................................................................9

5.0 SUCCESS CRITERIA AND ANNUAL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA ......................... 10

5.1 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA......................................................................................................................10

6.0 MONITORING PLAN ......................................................................................................11

6.1 SELECTION OF MONITORING SITES....................................................................................................11 6.2 BASELINE MONITORING........................................................................................................................11 6.3 ANNUAL MONITORING..........................................................................................................................12 6.4 SCHEDULE OF MONITORING ACTIVITIES ..........................................................................................13 6.5 DESCRIPTION OF POSSIBLE REMEDIAL ACTIONS ............................................................................13

7.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 14

7.1 PRINTED REFERENCES...........................................................................................................................14 7.2 PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS.............................................................................................................14

Table of Contents


LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1A. NATIVE VEGETATION OBSERVED AT RESTORATION SITE ....................................................3 TABLE 1B. NON-NATIVE VEGETATION OBSERVED AT RESTORATION SITE..........................................4 TABLE 2. PLANTING LIST ...................................................................................................................................8 TABLE 3. SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES................................................................................................................9 TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF ANNUAL AND OVERALL SUCCESS CRITERIA .....................................................10 TABLE 5. SCHEDULE OF MONITORING ACTIVITIES ...................................................................................13

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1. STUDY AREA VICINITY FIGURE 2. RESTORATION SITE LOCATION FIGURE 3. SOIL MAP FIGURE 4. CONCEPTUAL RESTORATION PLAN FIGURE 5. WETLAND MONITORING LOCATIONS

APPENDICES APPENDIX A. BUDGET

1.0 Introduction


1

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description The San Bruno Gorse Control and Revegetation Project was initiated in fall 2004, and intends to remove 31 acres of gorse (Ulex europaeus), an invasive non-native plant, from San Bruno Mountain. The objectives of the project are to remove 31 acres of mature gorse, control resprouts and seedlings following initial removal, reduce the overall spread of gorse in the area, and increase the health and size of native vegetation that provides essential habitat for several endangered butterfly species. Following gorse removal, in 2004 and 2005, a small pilot revegetation project will be initiated. Funding for this 4-year effort is provided by a grant from the Proposition 12 bond fund. Site restoration is part of a holistic restoration endeavor on San Bruno Mountain to restore a healthy, functional ecosystem comprised of a mix of coastal terrace prairie, coastal scrub, and riparian habitat, while reducing ongoing pressure from exotic species invasion. Restoration under this project will focus on a pilot wetland revegetation project, which will include both weed control and native species outplanting, using existing intact native communities as a template for revegetation. Revegetation of Mission blue butterfly and Callippe silverspot habitat may be implemented in optimal grassland and scrub habitat, if site conditions and resources allow. However, due to the intensive regime of gorse retreatment, outplanting of butterfly host plant species will not be included under this plan. Revegetation within the wetland habitat will focus on the establishment of dominant wetland species currently found in the project vicinity and adjacent headwaters of Colma Creek. Revegetation will most likely commence in winter 2006/spring 2007. All planting will occur in the winter season to reduce the need for supplemental watering. This report describes the baseline conditions, restoration goals and objectives, restoration approach, success criteria, and monitoring methods that will be undertaken to help ensure success of the restoration effort. Revegetation will be conducted over a two year period, with an emphasis on treating secondary exotic species (such as purple velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), radish (Raphanus sativas), and mustard (Brassica rapa) in the area.

1.2. Restoration Site Location The site is located on San Bruno Mountain in San Mateo County (see Figure 1). The wetland restoration project site is located in the Saddle area of San Bruno Mountain, roughly 90 meters south of the intersection of the Old Guadalupe Trail and the Saddle Trail, on the eastern side of the Old Guadalupe Trail (see Figure 2). If additional revegetation of Callippe silverspot and Mission blue butterfly habitat is undertaken, sites will be identified in future planning phases during field assessments.

s

Figure 1. Project Area Location

1 0 1 2 3 40.5Miles

Figure1_Project_Location_Map.mxd

May & Associates, Inc. 730 Clementina Street ~ San Francisco, CA 94103 (415) 391-1000 ~ www.mayandassociatesinc.com

4 Aug 2005 (J. Zarnoch)

Project Area Location

Sadd

le

Trail

Old Gu

adal

upe

Trai

l

1

2

3

E1

E2

A

F

D

B1

B2 C

Gua

dalu

pe C

anyo

n Parkway

Wetland Restoration SiteGorse Removal Area25 ft. contour line ²

Figure 2. Wetland Restoration Site & Gorse Removal Areas within the Project Area

0 90 180 270 36045Meters

SBM_Reveg_Site_Location.mxd


4 Aug 2005 (J.Zarnoch)

2.0 Site Conditions


2

2.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2.1 Historic Conditions The vegetation on San Bruno Mountain was historically dominated by perennial bunch grass grassland, intermixed with oak woodlands, coastal scrub, and wetland seeps. Grassland habitat was likely maintained through predation by large wildlife species, as well as natural and controlled fire utilized by the Ohlone Indians prior to the arrival of Spanish settlers in the late 1700’s. Following Spanish settlement, the introduction of cattle grazing probably replaced the role of fire and predation in maintaining native grassland habitat and reducing pressures from encroaching scrub and invasive species. The cessation of grazing, paired with disruption of predation pattern and suppression of fire, facilitated the encroachment of exotic species including non-native annual grasses and other dominating, quick-spreading invasives such as Gorse (Ulex europaeus) and blue gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus). Additionally, it has allowed for the unchecked spread of native coastal scrub, dominated by coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis). This has had a particularly deleterious effect on endangered butterfly species which require open grassland habitat for their host plants. The Saddle area of San Bruno Mountain was historically comprised of a mix of coastal terrace prairie, coastal scrub, and seep.

2.2 Current Site Conditions

2.2.1 Soils The wetland restoration site is currently covered with a layer of 3-4 inches of gorse mulch following gorse removal that was undertaken in fall 2004. Based on USDA soil maps, underlying soil conditions are a combination of the following two soil classifications (See Figure 3):

1. Barnabe-Rock Outcrop Complex, 15 To 75 Percent Slopes, Derived From Sandstone. Soil characterized by very gravelly, sandy loam and 40% rock outcrop. Soil is shallow and well drained, with moderate permeability and low available water capacity. Soil type is typically found on coastal uplands, with native vegetation consisting of low coastal brush and forbs with scattered annual grasses.

2. Typic Argustolls, Loamy-Urban Land Association, 5 To 15 Percent Slopes. Soil is a loamy, deep, well-drained soil with low water permeability, and high water availability. Soil type is found on coastal terraces. On the lower side slopes of San Bruno Mountain, this classification contains a higher clay content that in other coastal terrace locations. Native vegetation occurring on this soil type is typically comprised of annual grasses, forbs, and scattered brush.

Extant grasslands in the project area have relatively thin soils, particularly in outcrop areas. Installation of Lupine container plantings around rock outcrops on the Mountain have had limited success due to soil deficiencies. Soil conditions in the remainder of the site are thicker, and generally suitable for planting, due to the fabaceous invasive (gorse) species increasing nitrogen and hummic matter content (pers. comm. M. Heath).

110

106

130

125

122

124

124

124

124122Figure 3. Soil Classifications within the Project Area

Soil Symbol and Unit Name106 - Barnabe -Rock outcrop complex, 15- 75% slopes

110: Candlestick-Kron_Buriburi complex, 30-75% slopes

122: Orthents, cut and fill 15-75% slopes

124: Orthents, cut and fill-Urban land complex, 5-75% slopes

125: Pits and Dumps

126: Reyes clay, 0-1% slopes

130: Typic Argiustolls, loamy-Urban land association, 5-15% slopes

0 50 100 150 200 250 30025Meters

²Proposed Wetland Revegetation Site

Gorse Control Area


San Bruno Soil Map.mxd ~ J.Zarnoch 12/30/05

2.0 Site Conditions


3

Deficiencies in soil nutrients or texture are not anticipated however, if survivorship is poor, subsequent infill planting may include the use of fertilizer tabs or compost during planting.

2.2.2 Hydrology The restoration site currently supports a seasonal seep. Based on existing remnant riparian vegetation, and observations of saturated soil during 2004-05, it is assumed that the seep is roughly 0.3 acre (1,214 sq. meters) in area. However, additional seep area is likely present under the adjacent remaining infestation of dense gorse to the north and east. This seep appears to be inundated and saturated to the surface during winter and spring, with pooling water present (roughly 10 sq. meters). In the summer months, pooling water recedes at the site, but soil remains fairly moist throughout the dry months, supporting wetland vegetation such as rushes, willow, and sedges. 2.2.3 Vegetation The wetland revegetation site remains bordered on three sides with mature gorse plants greater than 6 feet tall, with scattered gorse resprouts present within the site. Due to recent removal of more than 90% of the gorse cover, current vegetation conditions are changing. Areas that were inundated with water during the winter rains, showed higher levels of vegetation cover, with dense layers of sedges (Carex sp.) emerging, as well as patches of rushes (Juncus sp.). Additional native vegetation observed at the site is outlined in Table 1a.

Table 1a. Native Vegetation Observed at Restoration Site

The following secondary invasive plant species were observed at the wetland revegetation site (Table 1b):

Scientific Name Common Name Achillea millefolium Yarrow Aster chilensis California aster Brodiaea sp. Brodeia Bunch grass Carex sp. Sedge Epilobium sp. Willow herb Heracleum lanatum Cow parsnip Juncus sp. Juncus Salix sp. Willow Salix sp. Willow Sanicula crassicaulis Pacific blacksnakeroot

3.0 Habitat Restoration Goals


4

Table 1b. Non-Native Vegetation Observed at Restoration Site Scientific Name Common Name Annual grass Caarduus pynocephalus Italian thistle Conium maculatum Poison hemlock Delairia odorata Cape ivy Geranium molle Crane’s bill geranium Holcus lanatus Purple velvet grass Hypocharis radicata Hairy cat’s ear Lotus sp. Lotus Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry Rumex acetosella Sheep sorrel Rumex crispus Curly dock Ulex europaeus gorse Vicia sp. Vetch

Secondary invasive species should be considered for removal during site maintenance and monitoring.

3.0 Habitat Restoration Goals


5

3.0 HABITAT RESTORATION GOALS

3.1 Restoration Goals The goal of the wetland restoration project is to establish 0.55 acres of self-sustaining emergent marsh and upland habitat within the pilot revegetation project area. A secondary goal of the project is to enhance Mission blue butterfly habitat within the gorse removal area. However, due to the intensive treatment regime for controlling gorse within the project area, outplanting of butterfly host plant species in grassland areas will not be implemented under this plan. 3.2 Restoration Strategy To accomplish this goal within the limited timeframe of the grant-funded project is challenging. This short time frame may necessitate that the monitoring and/or maintenance aspects described in this plan be performed by volunteers or others after grant funding ends. The restoration strategy is outlined below:

• Control existing target invasive species (gorse, Himalayan blackberry) populations within the revegetation project area;

• Reduce secondary invasive species population size; • Plant densely spaced native wetland plants in seep area and scrub species in upland area,

following invasive plant control; and • Establish sufficient cover of native wetland and upland plants such that the mature plants

can, over time, are able to compete with non-native species.

4.0 Conceptual Restoration Plan


6

4.0 CONCEPTUAL RESTORATION PLAN The conceptual restoration plan contains the following elements, described in more detail below:

• Invasive non-native plant control; • Site preparation; • Site layout and planting palette; • Plant installation; and • Planting maintenance.

4.1 Invasive Non-Native Plant Control The first step towards wetland restoration is to clear the immediate area within the revegetation project area of invasive species, and to establish a buffer area between the restoration site and adjacent invasive plant populations. Both primary invasive plants (gorse & Himalayan blackberry) and secondary invasive plants (described below) shall be targeted during this effort. However, the majority of primary invasive species present within the site will be treated as part of the larger gorse control project. The following addresses secondary invasive species present within the site. A schedule for invasive plant control activities is provided in Table 3.

4.1.1 Cape Ivy (Delairia odorata). A population of Cape Ivy, roughly 260 sq. meters, is present within the project area. It is likely that the Cape Ivy emerging on site was mulched in the gorse removal project. Adjacent populations exist within the patch of gorse between the project site and the Old Guadalupe Trail, and on the opposite side of the Trail.

Cape ivy is a climbing perennial vine which reproduces predominantly vegetatively by rooting from stem, stolon, or petiole. The major growth period for the species is from February to June. Preferred removal requires cutting a containment line around the population – in this case, a containment line should be cut adjacent to the remaining gorse stand lining the Old Guadalupe Trail, where an established population of Cape Ivy persists – then cut and treat with herbicide, or hand grub. All material should be bagged and disposed of off site – generally January – April. 4.1.2 Purple Velvet Grass (Holcus lanatus). Purple velvet grass is present in at least 50% of the site in a dense, continuous patch. This species reproduces both vegetatively via underground tillers growing off of the main culm of a plant (stimulated by cutting) and by seed dispersal. Purple velvet grass appears to contain alleopathic compounds, which inhibit growth of native plant species. Typically the species dominates an area, forming dense patches with thick thatch. Control for this species will include mowing the populations of purple velvet grass, followed by herbicide treatment. Populations should be treated prior to seed set (early summer) to prevent further colonization.

4.1.3 Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum). Poison hemlock is emerging throughout the site. Poison hemlock can be effectively controlled using both hand removal (when soil is moist) and herbicide treatment. Due to the timeframe and budget of this project, poison hemlock will be controlled using foliar spray herbicide treatment. Treated should be conducted prior to seed set – generally August-September. 4.1.4 Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus discolor). Himalayan blackberry, once established, creates dense stands of impenetrable vegetation. Emerging small plants should be hand pulled



7

or cut at the time of flowering (June-August). Established plants should be cut and rootballs grubbed out of soil, or treated with herbicide.

4.1.5 Other Secondary Invasive Species. Other secondary invasive species should be treated (i.e. hand removal or herbicide) as they emerge, in an attempt to reduce pressure on emerging native species.

4.2 Site Preparation Prior to active revegetation, invasive species control will be conducted within the site for two years. All initial invasive plant removal will be conducted prior to the onset of winter rains in November 2006. Any necessary erosion control measures such as straw waddles, or weed-free rice straw, will be installed prior to the winter rains and start of planting; however, none is anticipated for this project. Signage will be installed adjacent to the trail to inform visitors of the revegetation project, and prevent trampling of new plantings. Prior to installation, signage will be approved by the San Mateo County Department of Parks and Recreation. 4.3 Site Layout and Planting Palette Once invasives are controlled and the site has been prepared for planting, the exact locations of plants to be installed should be established prior to site planting. For example, wetland plants such as rushes that require regular inundation shall be placed nearest to the seep area while riparian tree species should be clustered along the edges of the seep/upland interface. A conceptual restoration plan is included as Figure 4. A list of recommended planting materials by planting zone is presented as Table 2. However, because site conditions may change over time, final planting densities and locations should be ‘field fit’ during installation. Plants shall be established in a naturalistic pattern (not in straight line configurations) and at planting densities that will allow plants to reach mature heights and widths anticipated for each species. Following plant installation, pin flags will be installed to facilitate locating planted species for subsequent survivorship monitoring. Minimum planting densities recommended for this project are relatively high- a minimum of 0.5 feet on-center to encourage rapid establishment of a very dense vegetative cover of native species to ‘shade out’ and compete against invasive non-native species.

Old

Gua

dalu

pe T

rail

Anticipated Upland Habitat (773 sq. m)

Anticipated Wetland Seep Habitat (1,033 sq. m)

2 Meter Buffer for Weed Control (estimate)

Wetland Restoration Site Boundary (0.55 acre)

²Figure 4. Conceptual Wetland Revegetation Plan

!

")

")

")

")

10

Figure 5. Wetland Monitoring Locations

²

0 2512.5Meters

0 2512.5Meters

Note: Photopoint 10 depicted on map is from site wide photo-documentation. Additional site specific photopoints will be added following baseline photo-documentation of revegetation site.

") Transect End/Quadrat

Monitoring Transect

! Photopoint

Revegetation Project Area Boundary


2 Jan 2006 (J.Zarnoch)



8

Table 2. Planting List This planting list assumes sufficient groundwater to support wetland species. Should site hydrology evidence insufficient water table to support a dominance of wetland species, species relative percentages will change accordingly. Additional changes may be made to the planting list based on site conditions and propagule availability during implementation.

Scientific Name Common Name Plug vs. Pole/ Cutting

Estimated Relative Percentage of

Species for Outplanting**

Notes

Species for wetter areas: Carex barbarae Santa Barbara sedge Plug 0% if available Carex densa dense sedge Plug 0% if available *Carex obnupta slough sedge Plug 0% if available

Juncus phaeocephauls rush

Plug

3%

if available, uncommon species

Juncus balticus rush Plug 25% *Juncus effusus bog rush Division 25% *Juncus patens spreading rush Division 25%

Juncus xiphioides rush

Plug

3%

if available, uncommon species

Mimulus gutatus seep monkey flower Plug 3% *Salix lasiolepsis Arroyo willow Pole cutting 4% Total 88% Species for upland/buffer areas: *Achillea millefolium yarrow Plug 6% *Aster chilensis Chilean aster Plug 8% Festuca rubra red fescue Plug 6% Grindelia hirsutula gumplant Plug 2% * Heracleum lanatum cow parsnip seed 4% Hordeum brachyantherum meadow barley

plug 5%

Iris longipetala coast iris Plug/divisions 4% Leymus triticoides Creeping wild rye Plug/divisions 15% Nasella pulchra purple needle grass Plug 5% Ranunculus californicus California buttercup Plug 2%

Rhanmnus californica California coffee berry

Plug 7%

Sambucus racemosa Coast red elderberry Plug 5% Sisynchrium bellum blue eyed grass plug/seed 3% Total 72% * already observed on site in restoration area **Actual planting percentages will be determined in the field, based on changing site condition to maintain site diversity. Note: An appropriate mix of the above species will be outplanted as deemed appropriate based on changing site conditions and propagule availability.



9

4.4 Plant Installation Plants shall be installed as follows: Plug Plantings: plug plantings will be placed in groups of 3 to 7 on 0.5-1 foot centers to mimic natural growth patterns. Wetland seep plantings will be interplanted among existing wetland species at 0.5-1 foot centers. Pole cuttings: willow pole cuttings will be planted in groups of 1-3, on 1 ft. centers. Due to the presence of brush rabbits on San Bruno Mountain, some plantings may require the installation of small plastic mesh cylinders to prevent herbivory. 4.5 Plant Maintenance The restoration site will require ongoing monitoring and maintenance for at least 3-5 years following site planting. Maintenance activities should include:

• Monitoring planting sites regularly (bi-annually) for signs of successful establishment (e.g., leaf sprouts, flower and seed set) or environmental stress (plant wilt, die-back, chlorotic leaves) and treating accordingly (e.g., water, cut back, replant).

• Assessing vegetation cover, treating as necessary to ensure a dense cover of native vegetation is establishing (i.e., hand-weed, water, reseed, etc.).

• Controlling target primary and secondary weeds in planting area as necessary to prevent re-establishment (hand weeding, herbicide, additional mechanical treatments).

If the above actions cannot be accomplished successfully within the timeframe of this grant funded project (fall 2008), some or all of the maintenance activities may have to be transferred to volunteers or others after the grant funding ends. This restoration plan assumes a natural die-off of planted material at approximately 20% over the 3 year life of the grant funded program. Anything in excess of this mortality will require supplemental plantings. This assumes sufficient groundwater is present for the establishment of wetland species. If water table is shown to be insufficient to support native wetland vegetation, planting palette will shift to predominantly upland species, and the accepted mortality rate will rise to 50%. 4.6 Schedule of Restoration Activities Table 3. Schedule of Activities

Year Activity 2005 2006 2007 2008

Baseline Monitoring X Invasive Species Control X X X Site Preparation X Outplanting X X Infill Planting (if necessary) X Survivorship Monitoring X X

5.0 Success Criteria & Annual Performance Criteria


10

5.0 SUCCESS CRITERIA AND ANNUAL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA 5.1 Performance Criteria The restoration effort seeks to control target primary invasive plants (gorse) and secondary invasives in the first two years of restoration implementation. Concurrent with control/eradication efforts, the restoration plan seeks to establish native emergent wetland vegetation and riparian scrub vegetation in the seep area. By fall 2008, monitoring data will show presence of a suite of wetland native plants naturally occurring in seep habitats. The restoration area will support a vegetative cover of native wetland plants that is similar in density to that naturally occurring in nearby similar seep habitats. Native planted vegetation shall be self sustaining over time, eventually requiring little or no active maintenance. Table 4. Summary of Annual and Overall Success Criteria

Year 1 (2004-05)

Year 2 (2005-06)

Year 3 (2006-07)

Year 4 (2007-08)

Emergent Wetland

Vegetation1 No planting No planting 90% survivorship 80% survivorship

Upland Scrub Vegetation1

No planting No planting 90% survivorship 80% survivorship

Nonnatives2

25% cover or less of targeted invasive non-

natives

20% cover or less of targeted

invasive non-natives

15% cover or less of targeted

invasive non-natives

15% cover or less of targeted invasive non-

natives

1 Survivorship levels assume sufficient ground water presence. Since no irrigation will be utilized, if the water table is shown to be insufficient to support native riparian vegetation, planting palette will be shifted accordingly, and accepted mortality rate will rise to 50%.

2 Success criteria for non-native species apply to gorse and Himalayan blackberry only. While secondary species will be controlled under this plan, they will not be held to the overall performance standards of the Gorse Control and Revegetation Project due to the presence of dense stands of non-native species surrounding 80% of the revegetation site.

6.0 Monitoring Plan


11

6.0 MONITORING PLAN 6.1 Selection of Monitoring Sites The proposed restoration area will be assessed prior to implementation of restoration activities to identify localized variations in topography, hydrology, and plant composition within the restoration site. These variations will be described, then a monitoring plan layout will be developed that ensures that each of the major observed variations in the site are reflected in the layout of the monitoring transects and/or a photodocumentation stations. Generally, observed site variations would be mapped, described, then paired with a similar offsite reference sites. However, there are limited appropriate reference sites on San Bruno Mountain comparable to the proposed revegetation site. One wetland revegetation site on the east side of the mountain, Preservation Parcel, is a good example of exotics control within a wetland revegetation site, and gives some sampling of species composition. The monitoring data from this site will be used for comparison purposes. Additionally, species composition data from the Colma Creek Headwaters Project will be utilized for comparison purposes. Site monitoring for the Gorse Control Project annual monitoring include intact native habitat. Observations, within these monitoring sites, though not perfect reference sites, paired with data from Preservation Parcel, will help to allow detection of regional trends (e.g. drought cycles, wet weather cycles) that could affect changes in the onsite restoration site functioning but that are not directly attributed to restoration actions. Refer to Figure 5 for a map of selected onsite monitoring transect and photodocumentation locations. 6.2 Baseline Monitoring Baseline monitoring will be conducted prior to implementation of revegetation activities (i.e. gorse removal, weeding, site planting). Baseline monitoring is intended to document the conditions at the site immediately prior to restoration activities. Data collected is intended to document the functioning, plant species diversity and richness, and distribution and cover of invasive plants at the restoration site. Baseline data will be compared to annual monitoring data, and to data collected at the offsite reference monitoring locations to assess changes in species diversity, vegetation composition, and vegetative cover over time. Baseline vegetation monitoring data will be collected before restoration work begins at the site. Monitoring to be conducted includes:

• Establish landscape-level photodocumentation sites. A total of 2 photo points will be established to capture the greatest representation of the site.

• Establish 2, 50-meter transects within the revegetation area. The 50-meter

transects will be representatively selected to capture observed variations in site condition. The transect end points locations will be GPS’ed and marked in the field with rebar and flagging. Photographs will be taken from both end points

6.0 Monitoring Plan


12

on an annual basis. The point-intercept method will be used at 1 meter intervals along the transect to record presence/absence of gorse.

• Establish 4, 1-meter square quadrats within the revegetation area (one at each

end of the transect). Each species observed within the 1-meter square plots will be recorded and the relative abundance of dominant species recorded using ocular estimation of cover class (0-5%, 6-25%, 26-50%, 51-75%, 75-100%). Photographs will be taken at each quadrat location.

• Conduct a visual site inspection of the entire site to note observations of overall site plant species presence, abundance, and site functioning.

6.3 Annual Monitoring Following restoration activities described above, annual vegetation monitoring will be initiated at the monitoring sites. Annual vegetation monitoring will begin in the first spring following site restoration activities and will continue for three years. The results of spring vegetation monitoring will be used to assess progress toward meeting the success criteria specified in Table 4 (above). Annual vegetation monitoring will follow methods outlined above for baseline monitoring, with the overall objective to characterize the site’s species diversity, vegetation composition, and vegetative cover. Annual vegetation data will be compared to baseline monitoring data to assess site changes, determine progress towards annual success criteria, and detect trends in vegetation patterns over time that may require attention or remediation. Annual vegetation data will also be compared to reference site data to assess regional variation. Annual monitoring will follow the methods outlined above in the baseline vegetation monitoring section above. Annual vegetation monitoring data will initiated in the spring following the completion of site restoration work and will continue for three years. Work to be conducted includes:

• Conduct annual landscape-level photodocumentation.

• Conduct monitoring for presence/absence of gorse seedlings along 2, 50-meter

transects. Photographs will be taken from both end points of each transect. • Conduct quadrat monitoring of 4, 1-meter square quadrats. Record each

species 1-meter square plots and the relative abundance of dominant species recorded using ocular estimation of cover class (0-5%, 6-25%, 26-50%, 51-75%, 75-100%). Photographs will be taken at each quadrat location.

• Conduct annual survivorship monitoring of outplanted species. Species will be

marked upon outplanting with flagging or tags to facilitate easy identification during monitoring. Planted individuals will be inspected to determine whether they are alive or dead, and will be counted separately according to species and survival status to determine the overall percent survival. Naturally recruiting native plant species which were not planted will be counted separately.

6.0 Monitoring Plan


13

• Conduct a visual site inspection of the entire site to note observations of overall plant species presence, abundance, and site functioning.

• Monitoring results will be reported in quarterly reports submitted to San Mateo County,

and summarized in the San Bruno Mountain Gorse Control and Revegetation Final Report.

6.4 Schedule of Monitoring Activities

Table 5. Schedule of Monitoring Activities

Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Monitoring Activity

2005 2006 2007 2008 Transect and Quadrat Monitoring in

Wetland Restoration Site Sept.-Oct. Sept.-Oct. Sept.-Oct. Sept.-Oct.

Site Photodocumentation March-April March-April March-April March-April

Survivorship Monitoring n/a n/a Sept-Oct Sept-Oct

6.5 Description of Possible Remedial Actions This section is intended to provide a description of remedial actions that could be employed in the event that annual success monitoring reveals that the restoration site is not meeting annual success criteria or is developing other undesirable attributes, such as changes in hydrological functioning or introduction of a non-native species, that were not considered in this report. This section is intended to be a broad overview of the types of activities that could be implemented to help the project meet success criteria. Actual site remediation, if required, will be determined following annual vegetation monitoring. The following types of remedial actions will be implemented as necessary to help ensure success criteria are met:

• Additional Seeding and Planting. To be implemented if the vegetative cover of native wetland plants does not meet the specified annual success criteria.

• Active Management of Restoration Plantings. This management action includes hand-weeding to reduce non-native species competition immediately around plantings, watering during plant establishment, and applications of mulch. This actions is to be implemented if plantings do not successfully establish in a timely fashion.

• Additional Non-native Species Control. This action is to be implemented if unanticipated problems arise with non-native species control or if new exotic invasive species that were not considered during this plan are located at the site. Additional Erosion Control Implementation. This action is to be implemented in the event that erosion control is ineffective or if unusually heavy storm events or other events not considered in this plan occur. Depending on the nature and amount of erosion, site-specific remedial erosion control actions will be developed and implemented.

7.0 References


14

7.0 REFERENCES 7.1 Printed References Cannon, Joe; and Heath, Mark. Colma Creek Headwaters Restoration Project, San Bruno Mountain.

Prepared for San Mateo County Environmental Services Agency. March 2005. Hickman, J. C., (ed.). 1993. The Jepson manual - higher plants of California. University of

California Press. Berkeley, CA. Holloran, Pete; Mackenzie, Anouk; Farrell, Sharon; Johnson, Doug. 2004. The Weed Workers’

Handbook: A Guide to Techniques for Removing Bay Area Invasive Plants. California: The Watershed Project and California Invasive Plant Council. 120 p.

McClintock, Elizabeth; Reeberg, Paul; and Knight, Walter. A Flora of the San Bruno Mountains.

1990. Sacramento (CA): California Native Plant Society. 223 p. Soil Conservation Service. 1993. Soil survey of San Mateo County, California. U.S. Department of

Agriculture. Washington, D.C. 7.2 Personal Communications Mike Forbert, West Coast Wildlands Mark Heath, Shelterbelt Builders, Inc.

Appendix


APPENDIX A. BUDGET

Task Shelterbelt May & Assoc. Subtotal Conduct reference site monitoring 850.00 $ 850.00 Develop revegetation plan 1,675.00 $ 1,675.00 Plant propagation 2,350.00 $ 2,350.00 Invasive species removal year 1 4,070.80 $ 4,070.80 Invasive species removal year 2 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 Invasive species removal Year 3 1,600.00 $ 1,600.00

Collect divisions, cuttings, and implement outplanting and mulching 3,755.00 $ 3,755.00 Maintain outplantings 4,050.00 $ 4,050.00 Conduct monitoring 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00

Sub Total 18,825.80 6,525.00

Total $ 25,350.80

Documents

Revegetation Plan Final 2-6-06 - smcgov.org · FINAL Revegetation Plan May & Associates, Inc. San Bruno Mtn. Gorse Control and 730 Clementina Street Revegetation Project San Francisco,