Ecological monitoring plan for special status species for the purposes of wetlands restoration and

adaptive management: utilizing the Belding’s savannah sparrow as a case study

May 2011 Environmental Science and Policy 400

Project Director: Eric Zahn

Prepared By:

Max Klasky

Cory Schmillen

Kim Thompson

Environmental Science and Policy Department

California State University, Long Beach

2

Introduction

Wetlands are vital ecological systems that provide protection from storm surges, a filter for ocean-

bound pollutants, nurseries for fish, and habitat for species that can live nowhere else (California

Department of Fish and Game [CDFG] 2009, Green et. al. 2006). Human development has depleted

wetland habitats in the United States by 52 percent (Zahn 2011). More than 33% of the nation’s

threatened and endangered species live only in wetland habitats, and nearly half of them rely on

wetlands at some point in their lives (Environmental Protection Agency 2003). Efforts are underway to

salvage these lands for the ecological and economic benefits they provide.

The Los Cerritos Wetlands (LCW) have historically been home to oil activity, unregulated dump sites

for trash and dredge material, and the endpoint of miles of urban runoff (Zahn et. al. 2009b). Currently

they are heavily degraded salt marsh that have been filled with soil, mostly from nearby marine

environments, creating uninhabitable soil conditions with high salinity and raising the elevation to

prevent tidal influence (Zahn et. al. 2009b). Destruction of wetland habitat is often irreversible (Zahn et.

al. 2009b), however enhancement is possible with adapted management techniques that recognize the

complexities of ecological restoration by evaluating decisions and actions through monitoring processes

(McEachern et. al. 2006). It is recommended that restoration managers utilize monitoring programs to

survey the species for effective restoration (McEachern et. al. 2006, Thom 2000).

The Belding’s savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) is a state endangered species

since 1974 that is endemic to the wetlands of Southern California (Zembal 2002). It is unique in that it

represents one of only two wetland-dependant avian species that can only live in coastal salt marshes in

southern California (Powell and Collier 1998). The little sparrow is heavily dependent on the health of

the wetlands in Southern California, which have diminished by 90 percent (Zedler 2001). Historically

found from Santa Barbara County, California to Baja California, Mexico (Zahn et. al. 2009a), the Belding’s

savannah sparrow prefers to nest in the mid- to upper-littoral zones of coastal salt marshes (Powell and

Collier 1998) where pickleweed (Salicornia virginica), their preferred nesting plant, is plentiful (Zembal

and Hoffman 2002).

In the LCW, the habitat that is so critical to the survival of the Belding’s savannah sparrow has been

reduced from 2,400 acres in the 1920s to the miniscule 490 acres that remain today (Los Cerritos

Wetlands Authority [LCWA], 2010). According to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife survey in 2001, there were

almost 3,000 pairs of Belding’s throughout California, but only 18 pairs in the LCW. Due to the

endangered status of the Belding’s savannah sparrow, building an ecological monitoring plan for this

and other special status species of the LCW such as the: California least tern (Sterna antillarum browni),

wandering skipper (Panoquina errans), western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrines nivosus),

southern tar plant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis), salt marsh bird’s beak (Cordylanthus maritimus

ssp. maritimus), and east pacific green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas); is necessary to enable efficient,

effective, and consistent survey methods that are conducive to their endangered or threatened

statuses. Successful restoration efforts will be heavily dependent on accurate information regarding the

special status species populations already existing in the area. An effective monitoring plan for these

3

species provides this information for the conceptual restoration and long-term adaptive management of

the LCW.

Background

In Southern California, 90 percent of the coastal wetlands have been destroyed, jeopardizing the

existence of the species that rely solely on wetland habitats for survival (Zedler et. al. 2001). Aside from

human development, fragmentation, and pollution from urban runoff (Zedler et. al. 2001), coastal

wetlands are physically harsh environments where only a handful of species can tolerate to live year

round (Greenberg 2006). Compared to other temperate ecosystems, wetlands habitats support

relatively few species of birds, mammals, and reptiles, most of which are so specialized that they only

live in wetland habitats (Greenberg 2006). Due to the limited number of species that can live in the

harsh wetland conditions, their survival is essential to provide all of the necessary ecological functions

that keep the wetlands healthy (Zedler 2001). Given these circumstances, wetland restoration is critical.

Currently, restoration efforts are underway at the LCW. More than 170 acres of the 490 acres that

remain of the existing Los Alamitos Bay Wetlands complex have been purchased for restoration

purposes (LCWA 2010). The already harsh environment, coupled with the human degradation makes

planning difficult as it is plagued with uncertainties (Thom 2000). Adaptive management techniques

enable restoration managers to utilize monitoring programs to determine which project goals are being

met and adapt to work with those that aren’t (Thom 2000). Species monitoring is an important part of

this adaptive management process in wetlands restoration projects because species number, identity,

and their specific functions are especially relevant to wetland restoration (Zedler 2001).

Many of the especially relevant species in the Los Cerritos Wetlands are the special status species. Due

to the limited resources within the wetlands, most of the 25 species of vertebrates that rely solely on

wetland habitats for survival and nearly 50 subspecies from which they are derived are endangered,

threatened, or a species of concern (Greenberg et. al. 2006). Protections for these species vary from the

state level to the international level, depending on the population distributions and status’ of the

individual species. In the United States, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 provides protection

for endangered and threatened species as well as the ecosystems upon which they depend. These

protections are awarded on both state and federal levels, with state taking precedence in the event of

conflict (FWS 2006).

Species Protective Laws & Regulations When

Southern Tarplant (Centromadia parryi australis)

Inventory of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants of California by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) and the Caifornia Coastal Act of 1972

Listed 1994

Salt Marsh Bird’s Beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus)

Endangered Species Act of 1973, California Endangered Species Act of 1970, California Native Plant Society ranking of 1B.2 (Rare and fairly endangered)

1978, 1979, and 1974 respectively

4

Coulter’s Goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri)

California Native Plant Society ranking of 1B.1 (Rare and seriously endangered)

1994

East Pacific Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia mydas) *Sometimes referred to as Black Sea Turtles due to smaller size and darker coloration

Endangered Species Act of 1973, Marine Turtle Conservation Act of 2004, Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora 1975 (CITES) Appendix I, Endangered-World Conservation Union (IUCN) Red List, Inter-American Convention for the Protection and Conservation of Sea Turtles (IAC)

1978, 2004, 1981, 1982 and 2001 respectively

Wandering Skipper (Panoquina errans)

World Conservation Union (IUCN) Red List

Vulnerable 1983-1994, Near threatened 1996

California Least Tern (Sterna antillarum browni)

Endangered Species Preservation Act of 1966, Endangered Species Act of 1973, and California Endangered Species Act of 1970

Federally endangered in 1970 and state endangered in 1971

Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrines nivosus)

Endangered Species Act of 1973 Endangered 1993

Belding’s Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi)

California Endangered Species Act of 1970, Category 2 candidate for federal listing

Endangered 1974

Chart courtesy of Alli Goldman

Figure 1: List of the special status species of the Los Cerritos Wetlands with the protections that have been allotted to them.

Sources: {CDFG} California Department of Fish and Game. 2011. State and federally listed endangered and threatened animals in California.

Department of Fish and Game, Biogeographic Data Branch. URL: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/TEAnimals.pdf

{CNPS} California Native Plant Society. 2011. Inventory of rare and endangered plants. California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2011. Retrieved from: http://cnps.site.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi, IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 12 May 2011. {OPR} National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Marine Turtles. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Protected Resources. 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/turtles/,

5

Southern Tar Plant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis)

The southern tar plant, also known as the southern

tarweed (NatureServe 2010) is an annual herbaceous

plant species characterized by its brilliant yellow flowers

that bloom May through November (CNPS 2011). The

plant has a preference for alkali and peripheral salt

marsh habitats (Reiser 1994) and can be found in

Southern California and Baja California, Mexico. It has

been specifically documented in San Diego, Ventura, Orange, Santa Barbara, and Los Angeles Counties

as well as Catalina Island (CNPS 2011). Due to the specific needs of the southern tar plant, habitat loss

from urbanization, human disturbance, animal grazing, and competition with invasive species appear to

be responsible for the loss of approximately 30% of the species and threatening another 40% (CNPS

2011, Leipzig and Murray 2011). Today, the Hellman Ranch area of LCW contains a medium-sized (1,000-

5,000 individuals) population of the species (EPA 2007).

Salt Marsh Bird’s Beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp.

maritimus)

The salt marsh bird’s beak, is an annual, hemi parasitic

herbaceous plant that blooms from May to October (CNPS

2011). When in bloom, the bird’s beak subspecies takes

water and nutrients from neighboring plants and grasses to

extend its growth season if needed (FWS 1985). Although it

has been spotted in both, areas of both constant flooding

and with no tidal influence, the salt marsh bird’s beak

prefers middle to high marsh zone where tidal influence

occurs, but not on a daily basis (FWS 1985). It is only found

in salt marshes and coastal dunes in Southern California and Baja California, Mexico (CNPS 2011).

Habitat loss due to urbanization and agricultural growth, invasive species, sea level rise, hydrological

shifts, and human disturbances have all played a part in the California and federal ESA listings as well as

a ranking of rare and fairly endangered by the California Native Plant Society (CPC 2010). Monitoring of

this species is critical in the LCW so that proper habitat can be restored and enhanced to accommodate

this species.

Photo Credit: Peter Bryant (Newportbay.org)

Photo Credit: ccber.ucsb.edu

6

Coulter’s Goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata ssp.

coulteri)

Coulter’s Goldfields is an annual herb that

blooms from February to June, growing in

sprawling patches throughout wetland habitats

(CNPS 2011). The goldfields inhabit coastal salt

marshes, beaches, and vernal pools (CNPS 2011)

in the uppermost areas of tidal inundation

(Sierra Club 1994). This rare plant is found from

California into Baja, Mexico with the bulk of

known populations in Southern California salt

marsh (CNPS 2011).

The main threats to Coulter’s goldfields are urban sprawl, agriculture, human disturbance, drought,

and extreme weather have contributed to its current status as rare and seriously endangered by the

California Native Plant Society (CNPS 2011). Previous speculation was that the Coulter’s goldfields were

extirpated in Los Angeles County (NatureServe 2010), however it was recently observed on the Hellman

Property in the LCW during the monitoring of the Belding’s savannah sparrows.

East Pacific Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia mydas)

East Pacific green sea turtles play an important

role in the shaping and regulation of coastal marine

communities. Primarily herbivores, the turtles

impact seagrass and algae productivity and

abundance that enable an essential trophic

pathway over expansive coastal marine habitats

(Southwest Fisheries Science Center [SWFSC] 2006).

They have been observed from Baja California,

Mexico to Alaska. They are often referred to as

black sea turtles due to their darker pigmentation

and smaller size, which sets them apart from the general green sea turtles population (Alvarado and

Figueroa 1990).

The main nesting sites for East Pacific green sea turtles are found in Michoadan, Mexico and in the

Galapagos Islands. While there are no known nesting sites in the U.S., small aggregations have been

observed in U.S. estuaries and bays. The most studied of these U.S. populations are the year-round

residents of San Diego Bay. The continuous juvenile sightings suggest that the turtles are continuing to

Photo Credit: wildwhales.org

Photo Credit: Cory Schmillen

7

migrate into the bay (NMFS and FWS 2008). A similar phenomenon has been informally observed in the

San Gabriel turtle population (Lawson et. al. 2011).

Overharvesting of turtle eggs in nesting sites in Mexico coupled with boat collisions and marine debris

in U.S. waters have led to severe declines in East Pacific Green Turtle populations over the last 30 years.

According the NMFS and FWS, determination of recovery criteria for these federally and internationally

endangered populations will require identification of key foraging grounds for each stock. Designation of

foraging areas will be provided by formal observations that determine U.S. East Pacific green sea turtle

population size and status (NMFS and FWS 2008). To date, there is no formal protocol for monitoring

the San Gabriel River population of green turtles. The NMFS began to informally observe this population

in 2008 after confirming a string of observations that were reported by local citizens (Lawson et. al.

2011).

East Pacific green sea turtles are believed to have established a resident population in the San Gabriel

River (Lawson et. al. 2011). Due to their endangered status, both foreign and domestic, and their

proximity to the wetlands, the population status of these turtles could have great implications for

restoration efforts in the LCW. Should restoration plans require change in tidal influence from the river,

any information about this population and the potential impacts that changing water conditions may

have on them will be essential.

Wandering Skipper (Panoquina errans)

The wandering skipper, sometimes referred to as the

salt marsh skipper, is a dark brown butterfly with cream

colored spots on its forewings (Orsak 1977) that can be

found in coastal areas from Central California to Baja

California, Mexico and mainland mexico (NatureServe

2010). This species of skipper only lays eggs on seashore

saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) and therefore is limited to

coastal areas that support the grass (Orsak 1977).

Wandering skippers spend their larval stages inside the saltgrass and can be seen from their emergence

in March to until November. Habitat loss due to urbanization, insecticides, and human disturbance has

caused wandering skipper populations to dwindle (NatureServe 2010). The presence of seashore

saltgrass in the LCW provides valuable habitat for the wandering skipper.

Photo Credit: Peter J. Bryant (pjbryant@uci.edu)

8

California Least Tern (Sterna antillarum browni)

Like most terns, the California least tern has the black cap, a black-

tipped bill, orange legs, and black-tipped wings, but it is distinctly

charachterized by its white forehead. About 9 inches long with a 20

inch wingspan, the California least tern is a migratory species that

spends its nesting season, April to September, on the beaches and

wetlands of California and Baja California, Mexico (FWS 1985). As of

2000, there were approximately 30 breeding colonies spanning from

Baja California, Mexico to southern Washington with the bulk of the

colonies found in the San Diego, Orange, and Los Angeles counties

of Southern California (Patton 2002). California least terns prefer to

nest on sand and dune beaches, however they will also nest in dirt or dried mud (FWS 1985) and have

been found nesting in odd open spaces such as airports and landfills (Patton 2002). They lay their eggs in

small depressions which they make themselves in the sand and rely on previously made depressions in

disturbed habitat (FWS 1985).

Urbanization, habitat depletion, predation, and human disturbance have all contributed to protections

under the federal and state ESAs (FWS 1985). California least tern populations have since been on the

rebound with an increase from 624 pairs in California in 1973 to and an estimated 4,182 pairs in 1998

(Patton 2002). Least terns hunt close to shore, preferring wetlands habitats to feed on shallow water

species of fish (FWS 1985). Upon restoration, the LCW could provide valuable feeding and nesting

grounds for the endangered California least terns.

Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus)

The western snowy plover is a sparrow-sized shorebird, which has

black and tan coloring with darker patches behind its eyes, on its

forehead, and on either side of its neck (Fancher et. al. 2007). The

coastal western snowy plover population consists of individuals that

nest adjacent to or near tidal waters, including all nesting colonies

on the mainland coast, peninsulas, offshore islands, adjacent bays,

and estuaries. Their breeding season extends from March 1 through

September 15 in territories that extend along coastal beaches from

the southern portion of Washington State to southern Baja

California, Mexico (Fancher et. al., 2007).

Western snowy plover nests are on the ground and consist of a shallow depression scraped in the

substrate, sometimes lined with plant parts, small pebbles, or shell fragments. For an average of 27

days, both sexes will incubate the eggs, usually 3 eggs per nesting couple. Once hatched, the chicks

leave the nest within hours of hatching in search of food, receiving only the minimum of care from their

Photo Credit: C. Mayne

Photo Credit: sanelijo.org

9

parents in the form of guidance to foraging areas, danger warnings, and thermo-regulation assistance.

Broods do not spend much time in the vicinity of the nests and are able to fly within approximately 31

days of hatching. Both chicks and adults forage for invertebrates in intertidal areas as well as dry sand

above the high tide mark (Fancher et. al. 2007).

California and Gulf of Mexico populations of western snowy plovers are federally protected as

threatened species under the ESA (CDFG 2008). Similar to least terns, snowy plovers prefer to nest on

above the high tide mark on wide, sparsely vegetated dune beaches, salt pans, disposed dredged

materials, beach creek and river mouths, and levees around salt evaporation ponds (Wilson-Jacobs and

Dorsey 1985, FWS 2007), and are associated with Southern California wetlands (Powell 1995). Of the

1,719 snowy plovers spotted in California during the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 2006 coastal U.S.

western snowy plover breeding season survey, about 360 of the birds were discovered south of Ventura

County and 62 of those were present at Bolsa Chica (Fancher et. al. 2007), the only known nesting site in

Orange County. Most of the Southern California nesting sites are found in San Diego and there are no

nesting sites in Los Angeles County (Powell and Dorsey 2000).

The decline of nesting sites in Southern California has been attributed to degradation and habitat loss

due to urban sprawl, introduced beach grass (Ammophila spp.), harsh weather, and expanding predator

populations (Page et. al. 1991, FWS 2007, Fancher et. al. 2007). To monitor breeding and wintering

populations on the Pacific coast is among the criteria for determining the progress of recovery for the

western snowy plover (FWS 2007). Given their association with wetland habitats in Southern California

(Powell 1995), restoration efforts in the LCW could provide suitable habitat to attract nesting and

wintering populations, making it necessary to provide a monitoring plan for the western snowy plover in

the LCW.

Belding’s Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis

beldingi)

The Belding’s savannah sparrow is a state endangered

species that is endemic to the wetlands of Southern

California (Zembal 2002). It is a small brown sparrow with

fine streaks across the head and face, a pale beige or white

belly, and often has a dark central breast spot. Possibly its

most distinguishing characteristic is the yellowish color of

the lores (area between the bill and eyes) (Massey 1979).

This rare subspecies of savannah sparrow is one of the few

species of birds that reside year-round in the coastal salt marshes of Southern California (Zembal, 2010).

Belding’s savannah sparrow historically range from as far north as Goleta in Santa Barbara County,

California to as far south as el Rosario in Baja California, Mexico (American Ornithologists Union 1983,

Grinnel and Miller 1944, Van Rossen 1947). Due to increasing human population and impacts, over 75%

of the coastal wetland habitats within this range have been lost or highly degraded (Wiley and Zembal

Photo Credit: Larry Wan (wanconservancy.org)

10

1989). Statewide censuses of this non-migratory subspecies reveal wide fluctuations in local population

sizes, along with local extinctions occurring in some of the years (Zembal et al. 1988). Reductions in

both quality and quantity of suitable habitat are a direct factor in population decline.

According to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service survey in 2001, there were almost 3000 pairs of Belding’s

savannah sparrows ranging throughout California, but only a mere 18 pairs existing in the Los Cerritos

Wetlands. Belding’s savannah sparrows are ecologically associated with dense pickleweed, particularly

Salicornia virginica, where nesting sites are found (Zembal 2006). Much of the remaining salt marshes in

California where pickleweed exists, have been altered dramatically due to human development and

decreased tidal circulation. Reduction in tidal flow can have negative effects on vascular plant

community structures and can directly influence bird use within the habitat (Zedler et al. 1992). The

effect of habitat modification and altered hydrology has been detrimental to the Belding’s savannah

sparrow, which depends on the pickleweed for nesting and shelter.

The Belding’s savannah sparrows prefer to nest in the mid to upper-littoral zones of coastal salt

marshes (Powell and Collier 1998) where pickleweed (Salicornia virginica) is plentiful (Zembal and

Hoffman 2002). Breeding territories can be small and they nest semi-colonially, or locally concentrated

within a larger block of habitat, all of which may appear generally suitable (Zembal 2006). Belding’s

savannah sparrows forage for food across the marsh and even along the shoreline, with individuals

often seen along the beach (Zembal et al. 1987). Males affirm their territoriality by singing, perching,

chasing, and actual physical sparring with other Belding’s. Nesting season occurs during the months of

March through May. Territoriality is most intense during these months due to the absence of the other

Savannah sparrow races as well as their nesting habits (James and Stadtlander 1991). In the winter,

individuals are relatively secretive and inconspicuous and form flocks (Massey 1979). Two other races of

Savannah sparrow, nevadensis and rostratus, can also be found in Southern California salt marshes

during this time (James and Stadtlander 1991).

Given this background on the wetlands, monitoring for adaptive management, and specifically

monitoring the Belding’s savannah sparrows, a monitoring plan for the special status species of the Los

Cerritos Wetlands will be used to determine the following: Where are Belding’s Savannah Sparrows

breeding in Los Cerritos Wetlands, how many are there, and how do we monitor their populations and

those of other special status species most effectively for the purposes of adaptive management? Which

of the special status species, if not all, could benefit from habitat restoration?

Objectives

The objective of this research was to determine the parameters for surveying the special status species

that reside in Los Cerritos Wetlands so that they can be monitored and managed appropriately. Once

the parameters have been set for these species, restoration efforts can be designed to avoid violation of

the regulations that protect them as well as enhance and protect suitable habitat for them to thrive.

These monitoring protocols will also aid in the long-run because they will become a critical tool for the

adaptive management strategies, which is one of the most significant developments in aquatic system

restoration management (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 2011). Since the

11

Belding’s savannah sparrow is the case study for the overall monitoring plan, determining the

population size of the sparrows in the LCW is also an objective.

Study Area

The monitoring protocols created and followed for the Belding’s savannah sparrows and the

adaptations for the other special status species in this report were created specifically for the Los

Cerritos Wetlands complex. The resulting protocols should be executed at the Steamshovel Slough,

Campgrounds, Zedler Marsh, and Hellman portions of the LCW. It is critical that private property be

taken into account when developing monitoring routes.

Map Courtesy of the LCWA

Figure 2: Property lines in the LCW that should be considered when mapping out monitoring routes.

12

Methodology

Breeding pairs of Belding’s savannah sparrows were counted in the Los Cerritos wetlands of coastal

southern California on April 4, 5, 7, 11, 12, and 26 in the year 2011 (April 4th was a dry run in the

afternoon). An accurate count of the nesting potential was done by reporting those individuals

manifesting breeding or territorial behavior. Manifestations of such behavior were interpreted as

singing, scolding, extended perching, or aerial chases. Individuals that were perched high, fully exposed

in the pickleweed, and regularly spaced were all counted as territory holders. Birds foraging, flying, or

displaying other non-territorial behaviors were not counted.

Monitoring was mostly done in the early morning, around 7 a.m. and lasted into late morning, around

10 a.m. or 11 a.m. Prior to conducting counts, a predetermined route was mapped. Site specific

monitoring routes were conducted in a loop so as to not count the same bird twice as well as to

minimize our disturbance on the birds and vegetation (Zembal 2010). Conducting our routes along

coyote trails and old fence lines helped to mitigate our impact on both. Due to private property rights in

Steam Shovel Slough, the team was forced to complete the site’s survey on a small watercraft on April

26th.

The authors of the following research conducted the monitoring throughout the Los Cerritos Wetlands

under the advice and guidance of Senior Wetland Ecologist Eric Zahn. Surveys were completed in all

coastal wetlands stewarded by the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust, including Hellman Ranch,

Campgrounds, Steam Shovel Slough, and Zedler Marsh. Special emphasis was given to monitoring

Hellman Ranch, as this property has been newly acquired for conservation and a count of the breeding

population of Belding’s has never been conducted there. The total observation time expended surveying

was approximately 20 hours. Adapted monitoring methods for the Belding’s Savannah Sparrow and

other special status species of the LCW were conceived from this and the accumulated research of

others and are more completely described within the results.

Results

Plants

Monitoring of special status plants in the LCW should be performed by trained ecologists or botanists

for the purposes of positive identification. Surveyors should walk a pre-determined, pre-disturbed

pathway similar to the ones used in the Belding’s savannah sparrow surveys to minimize impacts.

Locations of the specific plant sightings should be marked on a map by the surveyor/s. Special attention

should be given to heavy or lengthy rainfall and/or flooding.

Southern Tar Plant

Monitoring for the southern tar plant will take place two times a year between the months of May and

November. Special attention should be paid to the peripheral areas of the LCW as this is the preferred

habitat of the southern tar plant.

Salt Marsh Bird’s Beak

13

Monitoring of the salt marsh bird’s beak will take place twice a year, sometime between May and

October, when the plant is in bloom. Close attention should be paid to areas with occasional flooding.

Coulter’s Goldfields

Coulter’s goldfields will be surveyed once a month from February to March, with special attention

after significant rainfall. Due to their limited bloom, it is recommended that patches of goldfields be

flagged upon being spotted so their whereabouts is known.

Reptiles

Green Sea Turtle

Informal observations by employees of the NMFS, local citizens, and Aquarium of the Pacific

volunteers have observed turtle activity at the 3 Haynes Generating Plant and 3 Alamitos Generating

Station outfalls, as well as the Zedler, Hellman, Calloway, and Orange County Retention Basin outfalls

within the San Gabriel River.

Given these locations, the protocol will require 10 observers, one for each outfall site, at the same

date and time. Previous research and observations indicate that the best results will be obtained

between the hours of noon and 3 p.m. once a month. The observation areas should be marked by small

flags that are spread out on the north bank of the river in 100 foot increments. If 100 feet is too much

and the observation areas intersect, then adjust the markers accordingly. There should be no

intersection of observation areas. If adjustments are made, all survey areas must be adjusted to the

same distance.

All observers will begin counting; using a clicker (to be handed out before dispersal to his/her

designated site) at the same allotted time for a total of 30 minutes. Every time a turtle surfaces within

the flagged observation area, the observer will click once. Results should be handed to project

supervisor in a designated spot once the 30 minutes is up. The NMFS should be notified of each

monitoring session as well as the results. Dan Lawson has been the lead principle of investigation for the

NMFS Office of Protected Resources and should be the primary contact.

Insects and Birds

Monitoring routes should be predetermined to follow pathways, similar to those of the Belding’s

savannah sparrow surveys, along trails already established within the LCW. Such routes are best mapped

as a loop, following coyote trails, historic fence lines, and other pre-disturbed walkways in order to

minimize impact on the wildlife and vegetation. Routes must also adhere to site specific property

boundaries, making sure all monitoring is conducted on Los Cerritos Wetland Land Trust or public

property. Pace along the monitoring routes should be slow yet steady as to not stay in one place for too

long. Potential raptor perches, such as telephone poles, should also be considered when mapping the

monitoring route. Following the predetermined monitoring routes, the observer/s should use

binoculars to scan for the species being monitored. The following are specifics for each of the special

status insects and birds:

14

Wandering Skipper

Monitoring of the wandering skipper should take place once a week from March to November. Given

its affinity for seashore saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) (Orsak 1977), it is advised that observers locate the

grass along a path that is consistent with those utilized for the Belding’s savannah sparrow surveys. The

saltgrass is most likely to be found in alkali soils in areas that experience flooding, but are not

submerged all the time (Orsak 1977). Observers should utilize a clicker to get a count as they make their

way through the pre-determined path.

California Least Tern

California least terns should be monitored once a week from April to September. Special attention

should be paid to shallow flooding areas, as the least terns like to feed on shallow water fish. A clicker

should be utilized to account for each individual spotted, however special note should be taken if the

birds are seen flying or parading on the ground holding a fish, but not eating it. This is a sign of courtship

behavior and close attention should be paid to the area if such behavior occurs (USFWS 1985).

Western Snowy Plover

Preliminary monitoring of western snowy plovers will be conducted twice a week from mid-March to

late September (Fancher et. al. 2007, Powell and Collier 2000). Sites do not have to be monitored

simultaneously, therefore it is possible to monitor with just one observer, however sites can be divided

up among 2 to three observers since monitoring will take place a couple of times a week during the

breeding season. Given time and resources, monitoring should also be conducted on potential wintering

populations from late September to mid-march as well (Powell and Collier 2000).

Belding’s Sanannah Sparrow

Professional surveys of the Belding’s savannah sparrow will be completed every nesting cycle, at least

once a week, from late March to early June. Population counts should be taken from time of sunrise to

usually no more than 4 hours after when the peak of territorial behavior occurs (Zembal 2010). Wind,

rain, or overcast conditions may lead to prolonged Belding’s activity, in which case surveys may continue

later into the day. These conditions may also delay or even prevent morning territorial activity from

occurring, in which case monitoring for that day should be postponed.

Before any monitoring is conducted, survey techniques should be validated for consistency before

each biologist or ecologist surveys their designated area (James et. al. 1998). Unnecessary human

approaches or disturbances may cause the Belding’s savannah sparrow to abandon their nests or even

lose territories to rival males (Zahn et. al. 2009a). Once an individual is spotted, persons should

immediately confirm the individual to be a Belding’s savannah sparrow, determine the bird’s behavior,

and finally, decide whether the individual should be counted as a breeding pair. Once properly tallied,

using maps or GPS units, pace along the route is to be resumed.

Breeding pairs are to be tallied based on their observed behavior. Male Belding’s savannah sparrows

exhibiting territorial behavior will indicate a territory holder, and is presumed to be a breeding pair

15

(Zembal 2002). Manifestations of such territorial behavior are to be interpreted as singing, scolding,

extended perching, and aerial chases. Straight lined aerial chases indicate a single territory with the bird

being chased leaving the area. Circular aerial chases are a good indication of two, close by territories,

where the bird being chased holds its ground once removed from the original spot of confrontation

(Zembal 2010). Individuals perched high and fully exposed, often singing, are to be counted as a

breeding pair. Individuals in the Los Cerritos Wetlands can often be seen perching amongst the invasive

Mustard, behavior not usual for the Belding’s savannah sparrow. Individuals foraging, flying, or

displaying other non-territorial behavior should not be counted as a breeding pair (Zembal 2002).

Distances fled upon human approach can be an indication of whether or not an individual is nesting or

foraging. Flight distances of individuals actively defending territory will be short, usually with the female

following shortly after. Flight distances of foraging individuals can be great often ending out of sight.

Foraging individuals will not be counted as we are only interested in males, actively defending territories

to be counted as breeding pairs.

Our April 2011 surveys yielded the following results for each of the sites:

Figure 3: Section of the Bryant property, commonly referred to as “Campgrounds”, recorded three nesting pairs. A site specific monitoring

route begins at the corner of Studebaker Road and 2nd Street following a figure eight pattern around the site’s two major expanses of

pickleweed.

16

Figure 4: Steam Shovel Slough is a thriving ecosystem that contains a richness of life unparalleled in the Los Cerritos Wetlands. 40 breeding

pairs were recorded here. Steam Shovel Slough is not part of the LCW land trust and is located on private property owned by Bixby. Monitoring

routes should be mindful of private property rights and should stay within the intertidal zone where land remains public.

17

Figure 5: The southern-most portion of the Los Cerritos wetlands, known as the Hellman Property, was newly acquired by the Los Cerritos Land

Trust in December of 2010. In this heavily disturbed ecosystem we observed 9 breeding pairs on the first day and 11 breeding pairs on the

second, adding up to a total of 16 pairs sighted. The number of sightings is small considering the vast expanses of pickleweed throughout the

property.

Discussion

Belding’s Sanannah Sparrow

According to Richard Zembal, it is important to monitor the Belding’s savannah sparrow and it should

be done every five years (2006). Monitoring Belding’s requires timing and patience due to their secretive

nature and lack of tolerance to human interactions (James et. al. 1998, Zahn et. al. 2009a). In the winter,

individuals are relatively secretive and inconspicuous and form flocks (Massey 1979), but come March,

the territorial behavior of the males is in full swing and the birds are easier to monitor (James &

Stadtlander 1991). Their territories are tallied on the basis of observed behavior, usually territorial

behavior by the males, and reported as territories or presumed pairs (Zembal and Hoffman 2010).

In the LCW, our monitoring sessions were possibly affected by a number of factors. Occasional

overcast or windy conditions on survey dates led to delayed territorial activities. There were no sightings

on our walk-through at Zedler Marsh on April 11th, however Eric Zahn did spot a male Belding’s

18

savannah sparrow displaying territorial behavior at a later date. We also noticed that several areas of

habitat are within an immediate radius of abandoned or live telephone poles (characteristic of the

Hellman property) and likely void of any Belding’s territory or activity. Raptors native to the LCW such as

the American kestrel (Falco sparverius) and the osprey (Pandion haliaetus) have adapted to use these

telephone poles as vantage points to locate prey such as the Belding’s savannah sparrow and should be

considered when mapping the monitoring route.

Figure 6: The Hellman property has a high potential to support numbers well beyond the current population of Belding’s savannah sparrows.

The Hellman property displays a number of stresses that may contribute to the suppressed population. Noise coming from oil operations in the

northwest corner and continuous construction in the residential areas to the south may inhibit nesting behavior such as singing from occurring.

Much of the usable habitat, shown here, is under invasion by mustard, which seemingly dominates the property.

Monitoring in the LCW

The LCW are a thriving yet severely depressed salt marsh containing several acres of suitable habitat

for the Belding’s savannah sparrow. It is crucial for the development of a monitoring plan to be adapted

to the geographical, historical, and biological specificities unique to the LCW. Best management

practices for monitoring the Belding’s were derived from past studies, however adapted management

was required to construct a monitoring plan specific to the needs of the LCW. Adapted management is a

broad concept that acknowledges our insufficient information base for decision making. In light of such

19

scientific uncertainty, it was absolutely critical to fit our experiment to the specificities of the LCW,

rather than trying to force our site to fit the experiment (Zedler 2001).

It is recommended that citizen scientists and Aquarium of the Pacific volunteers be utilized in the

primary monitoring processes. The use of volunteers is not conducive to every survey, but for primary

surveys to determine raw numbers for species such as the sea turtles, California least terns, snowy

plovers, and wandering skippers, volunteers could be a useful commodity.

Southern Tar Plant, Salt Marsh Bird’s Beak, and Coulter’s Goldfields

Most of the previous literature for monitoring plant species recommends minimal surveys, usually

twice a year. Given the infant stages of restoration at LCW, especially in the newly acquired Hellman

portion, it would be beneficial to survey these species once in the beginning of the blooming season and

once towards the end. In the case of the goldfields, we saw them in the field after a significant period of

rain and within a few weeks, they were gone. If surveys require observers to veer off of the pre-

disturbed paths, special care must be taken when observing in May to steer clear of potential Belding’s

savannah sparrow nests as it is the end of their breeding season.

East Pacific Green Sea Turtle

According to unpublished data from the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), turtles are

most often sited midday, around noon (NMFS and FWS 1998). These observations, coupled with those

of Dan Lawson from NOAA’s Office of Protected Resources make time of day a significant factor for

creating the monitoring plan. Also, the turtles surface every few minutes to breathe when active, versus

every two hours when resting, enabling more accurate observations this time of day (North Fisheries

Science Center [NEFSC] 2011). While the informal observations show that May is the peak time for turtle

sightings (Lawson et. al. 2011), the NMFS and FWS recommend regular surveys in U.S. waters to

determine population size and status so they can identify and protect primary foraging areas (NMFS and

FWS 1998). That said, monthly monitoring sessions are recommended if resources are available.

The most consistent sightings have been at the Department of Water and Power’s Haynes Water

Plant outflow pipe #2 (Lawson et. al. 2011). Early speculations suggest that the turtles stick around to

forage in the warm water that is injected into the San Gabriel from this point. They also suggest that the

majority of this potential population is juveniles (Lawson et. al. 2011). Answers provided by this primary

monitoring protocol to determine population abundance in the San Gabriel River should lead to more

detailed monitoring regimes to determine what the turtles are doing there, where else are they going,

and how all of this information can be utilized to protect them (Lawson et. al. 2011).

California Least Terns and Western Snowy Plovers

There are currently no known California least tern or western snowy plover populations in the LCW

(Fancher et. al. 2007, Powell and Dorsey 2000). Based on previously mentioned habitat preferences, it is

logical that, once the restoration efforts get into more developed stages, these birds will come to call

the LCW home. If primary surveys determine that the birds are coming to the LCW, the monitoring plans

20

should be adjusted to answer more specific questions such as what are they doing there? If nesting,

where are the nests?

The ecological monitoring protocol for the special status species of the Los Cerritos Wetlands is a

valuable tool for the conceptual restoration planning and the long-term adaptive management of the

habitat. The surveys conducted on the California endangered Belding’s savannah sparrow will give

restoration managers valuable insight into the existing parameters they have to work with. This protocol

will serve as a useful tool for the purposes of restoration and enhancement in the Los Cerritos Wetlands

for years to come.

21

References Cited:

American Ornithologists’ Union. 1983. Check-list of North American Birds. 6th Edition. Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas. {CDFG} California Department of Fish and Game. 2008. California bird species of special concern. California Department of Fish and Game Resource Management. 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/ssc/docs/Table1_FIN.pdf {CDFG} California Department of Fish and Game. 2009. California MLPA master plan science advisory team background information on wetland and eelgrass restoration activities in the MLPA south coast study region. California Department of Fish and game. URL: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/pdfs/binders_sc/b2n.pdf

{CDFG} California Department of Fish and Game. 2011. State and federally listed endangered and

threatened animals in California. Department of Fish and Game, Biogeographic Data Branch. URL:

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/TEAnimals.pdf

{CNPS} California Native Plant Society. 2011. Inventory of rare and endangered plants. California Native

Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2011. Retrieved from: http://cnps.site.aplus.net/cgi-

bin/inv/inventory.cgi

Center for Plant Conservation. 2010. CPC national collection plant profile: cordylanthus maritimus ssp.

maritimus. 2011. Retrieved from:

http://www.centerforplantconservation.org/collection/cpc_viewprofile.asp?CPCNum=1054.

Fancher, J. P. 2007. Western snowy plover nesting at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California. Carlsbad,

California: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. URL:

http://www.fws.gov/arcata/es/birds/WSP/documents/siteReports/California/WSPBolsaChica06.pdf.

Grinnell, J. and A.H. Miller. 1944. The distribution of the birds of California. Pacific Coast Avifauna No. 27. Greenberg, R., J.E. Maldonado, S. Droege, and M.V. McDonald. 2006. Tidal marshes: a global perspective on the evolution and conservation of their terrestrial vertebrates. BioScience 56(8): 675—685. IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 12 May 2011. James, R., A. Hoecker, K. Linder, and W. Miller. 1998. 1998 survey for the Belding’s savannah sparrow in the Bolsa Chica Wetlands. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. James, R. and D. Stadtlander. 1991. A survey of the Belding's savannah sparrow. Nongame Bird and Mammal Section Report. State of California Department of Fish and Game.

22

Lawson, D., C. Fahy, J. Seminoff, T. Eguchi, R. LeRoux, P. Ryono. 2011. A report on recent green sea turtle

presence and activity in the San Gabriel River and vacinity of Long Beach California. Symposium on Sea

Turtle Biology and Conservation. San Diego, California.

{LCWA} Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority. 2010. Hellman Acquisition Flyer. Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority. General information at: http://lcwetlands.org/index.html Massey, B.W. 1979. Belding’s savannah sparrow. Contract No. DACW09-78-C-0008, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District. 29 pp. McEachern, K., B. Pavlik, J. Rebman, and R. Sutter.2006. Draft multiple species conservation plan rare plant monitoring program review and revision. U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center. NatureServe. 2010. NatureServe explorer: an online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. 2011. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. {SWFSC} National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2006. Sea turtles trophic ecology. Southwest Fisheries Science Center. 2011. Retrieved from: http://swfsc.noaa.gov/textblock.aspx?Division=PRD&ParentMenuId=212&id=4396#Studying_trophic_ecology.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Coastal ecosystem restoration. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Coastal Services Center. 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.csc.noaa.gov/coastal/management/management.htm

{NEFSC} National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2011. Fish faq. Northeast Fisheries Science

Center. 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/faq/fishfaq11.html.

{OPR} National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Marine Turtles. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Protected Resources. 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/turtles/ Orsak, L.J. 1977. The butterflies of Orange County, California. Center for Pathology Miscellaneous Publication #3. University of California Press, New York. 349 pp. 2011. Retrived from: http://nathistoc.bio.uci.edu/lepidopt/hesper/wanderin.htm. Page, G. W., E. Lynne, W. Stenzel, and D. Shuford. 1991. Distribution and abundance of the snowy. Field

Ornithology. 62: 245-255.

Patton, R.T. 2002. California least tern breeding survey, 2000 season. California Department of Fish and

Game, Habitat Conservation Branch.

Powell, A. N. 1995. Western snowy plover use of state-managed lands in Southern California, 1995. San

Diego: San Diego State University.

23

Powell, A.N. and C.L. Collier. 1998. Reproductive success of Belding’s savannah sparrows in a highly fragmented landscape. Auk 115(2): 508-513pp. Powell, A.N., and C.L. Collier. 2000. Habitat use and reproductive success of western snowy plovers at new nesting areas created for California least terns. Journal of Wildlife Management 64(1):24-33. Rieser, C.H. 1994. Coulter’s goldfields *lasthenia glabrata lindl. Ssp coulteri (gray) ornduff]. 2011. Retrieved from: http://sandiego.sierraclub.org/rareplants/134.html. Thom, R.M. 2000. Adaptive management of coastal ecosystem restoration projects. Ecological Engineering. 15: 365-372. {FWS} U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985a. Revised California least tern recovery plan. {FWS} U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985b. Salt marsh bird’s beak recovery plan {FWS} U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. ESA basics: over 25 years of protecting endangered species. Endangered Species Program. Arlington, VA. URL: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/ESA_basics.pdf. {FWS} U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus). In 2 volumes. Sacramento, California. xiv + 751 pages. {FWS} U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office. 2009. Species account: California least tern. 2011. Retrieved from: http://fws.gov/sacramento/es/animal_spp_acct/ca_least_tern_kf.htm. {USGS} U.S. Geological Survey. 2006. Reproductive success of Belding’s sanannah sparrows in a highly fragmented landscape. U.S. Geological Survey, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/belding/results.htm Van Rossem, A.J. 1947. A synopsis of the Savannah sparrows of northwestern Mexico. Condor 49:97-107. Wilson-Jacobs, R., and G.L. Dorsey. 1985. Snowy plover use of Coos Bay North Spit, Oregon. The

Murrelet pp. 66: 75-81.

Zahn E. F., T. Parker, T. Stankowich, and E. Fernández-Juricic. 2009a. California's endangered Belding's savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi): tolerance of pedestrian disturbance. Avian Conservation and Ecology - Écologie et conservation des oiseaux 4(2): 1. [online] URL: http://www.aceeco.org/vol4/iss2/art1/ Zahn, E., D. Cardoza, W. Graves, K. Grkinich, C. Hervey, J. Ho, S. Hood, and C. Pomplun. 2009b. Los

Cerritos Wetlands habitat restoration plan. California State University, Long Beach. URL:

http://www.intoloscerritoswetlands.org/backend/PDF/2009_Executive-Summary.pdf

Zahn, E. 2011. What is a wetland. Environmental Science and Policy 400 Lecture. California State University, Long Beach.

24

Zedler, J.B., J.C. Callaway, and G. Sullivan. 2001. Declining biodiversity: why species matter and how their functions might be restored in Californian tidal marshes. BioScience 51(12): 1005—1007. Zedler, J. B. 2001. Handbook for restoring tidal wetlands. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA. Zembal, R., K. J. Kramer, R. J. Bransfield. And N. Gilbert. 1988. A survey of Belding’s Savannah sparrows in California. American Birds 42:1233–1236. Zembal, R., and S. M. Hoffman. 2002. A survey of the Belding’s Savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) in California, 2001. Calif. Dep. Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Planning Branch, Species Conservation and Recovery Program Report 2002-01, Sacramento, CA 12 pp. Zembal, R. and S. Hoffman. 2002. A survey of the Belding’s savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) in California 2001. Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Planning Division. Zembal, R., J. Konecny, and S. M. Hoffman. 2006. A survey of the Belding’s Savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) in California. 2006. Contract Final Report (S0150019), California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California, USA Zembal, R., J. Konecny, and S. Hoffman. 2006. A survey of the Belding’s savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) in California 2006. Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Planning Division.