SU0007861 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Page IV.F-31 Forward Inc. Landfill 2014 Expansion Project California horned lark to less than significant levels because impacts to nesting birds would be avoided. Impact F.6. Impacts to Migratory Bird Species. Pursuant to the MBTA, it is unlawful at any time,by any means or in any manner to pursue, hunt, take, capture,kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill any migratory bird, any part,nest, or eggs of any such bird is defined as "take". Construction-related activities could result in direct mortalities of bird species protected under the MBTA. This is a potentially significant impact. In addition, implementation of bird control program described in the Land Use section, the periodic use of trained falcons to chase away seagulls could inhibit nesting and foraging activities of Swainson's hawk, golden eagle, white-tailed kite,burrowing owl, loggerhead shrike and/or California horned lark. The individual Swainson's hawks and other special status bird species that pass over or near the landfill are not expected to be affected by the control program because the active landfill does not support suitable habitat for these species, and the trained falcons are trained to focus on gulls and do not chase other bird species. In the rare instance that a trained falcon is observed to chase a Swainson's hawk or other special status bird species, this could result in a direct or indirect impact. Because of the likely infrequent occurrence of this potential conflict and because the falcon handler would monitor the birds to avoid this conflict, this impact is considered less than significant. Mitigation Measure F.6.Preconstruction surveys, consistent with the MBTA and the SJMSCP, shall be conducted for nesting birds during the nesting season(i.e., February 1 —September 1). Appropriate measures to avoid impacts to nesting birds shall be determined through consultation with the USFWS Migratory Bird Treaty Office and CDFW. This mitigation measure would reduce these potential impacts to less than significant levels because impacts to nesting birds would be avoided. Impact F.7. Temporary Impacts to Foraging Special-status Bat Species. No active bat roosts are expected to occur within the project footprint. The project does not include the removal of trees,but several buildings would be removed from the existing composting facility. However, these buildings are not expected to support an active bat roost because they are actively used and are subject to high baseline noise conditions from ongoing landfill operations. Although no bat roost are expected to occur, species such as pale big-eared bat, California mastiff bat, western red bat, small-footed myotis, long-eared myotis, fringed myotis, and long-legged myotis may forage over the South Branch of the South Fork of Littlejohn's Creek. Relocation of the South Branch of the South Fork of Littlejohn's Creek could result in a temporary reduction in foraging habitat and a disruption in foraging behavior by special-status bat species such as red bat. However, abundant foraging habitat similar to that being affected is available in the immediate project vicinity. In addition, the proposed project, which includes the relocation of 3,000 feet and restoration of 3,200 feet of South Branch of the South Fork of Littlejohn's Creek,is expected to result in a net increase in the quantity and quality of wetland habitat onsite, therefore increasing suitable foraging habitat for special-status bat species. This impact is considered less than significant and no mitigation is required. Impact F.B. Loss of Nonnative Annual Grassland and Ruderal Vegetation,and Freshwater Emergent Wetland. The project-related loss of wildlife habitat would minimal. All construction activities and associated habitat conversions would occur within the boundary of the existing landfill. The proposed northeast landfill development area is regularly disked and was devoid of vegetation at the time of the 2014 site visit; in this condition it provides little wildlife habitat value. This area would be replaced with an active, then capped landfill, which ultimately would provide similar or improved wildlife habitat value. The property owner has already paid the