san francisco bay tidal marsh project annual report 2003

SAN FRANCISCO BAY TIDAL MARSH PROJECT

ANNUAL REPORT 2003

Distribution, abundance, and reproductive success of tidal marsh

birds

December 31, 2003

Prepared by: Hildie Spautz, Jill Harley, Nadav Nur Ph.D., and Nils Warnock Ph.D.

PRBO Conservation Science 4990 Shoreline Highway

Stinson Beach, CA 94970 415-868-1221 www.prbo.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Human impacts on tidal salt marshes of San Francisco Bay have drastically reduced and

degraded this important habitat. Tidal marshes are biologically productive, and are an

integral part of the proper functioning of the overall bay ecosystem. They are also home

to a number of state and federal listed endangered or threatened species of plants and

animals. Recognizing the importance of this habitat in the San Francisco Bay, many

agencies and organizations have planned or completed wetland restoration projects in

the Bay. Restoring wetlands to functioning tidal marsh habitat requires monitoring

measures to assess the health and success of restoration sites relative to natural

marshes.

Many bird species depend on tidal marsh habitat to nest and raise their young.

Populations of these tidal marsh dependant birds have declined significantly due to the

loss of habitat around the Bay. A number of these birds have special conservation

status, such as the federally Endangered Clapper Rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus),

State of California Threatened Black Rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus), and four

State Species of Special Concern: Alameda Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia

pusillula), San Pablo Song Sparrow (M. m. samuelis), Suisun Song Sparrow (M. m.

maxillaris), and Salt Marsh Common Yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa).

Although these birds have been well studied, little is known of the long-term trends of

their populations because of the lack of long-term monitoring studies.

PRBO Conservation Science (formerly the Point Reyes Bird Observatory) began a long-

term monitoring project in 1996 to study the tidal marsh birds of the San Francisco Bay.

Combined data from point count surveys and demographic data from nest monitoring

has allowed PRBO to understand how tidal marsh birds respond to both physical and

biological processes. This report presents the results of our 2003 breeding season

studies in the San Francisco Bay.

We conducted point count surveys at 39 marshes in the 2003 breeding season (March

through July). The point count method makes it possible to compare yearly bird

population data at fixed points, and to assess patterns of abundance. Trained observers

recorded birds detected by sight and sound within five minutes during two rounds of

surveys at each site. Cumulative species richness (total number of species detected)

December 30, 2003 2

was calculated across both rounds of surveys. A density index for each focal taxon

(Song Sparrow, Common Yellowthroat, Marsh Wren (Cistothorus palustris), and Black

Rail) was calculated for each point and each round using detections within 50m of the

observer; the mean at each site for each round was then averaged to produce a single

density index for each site. Similarly derived data from 2000 and 2001 were included for

comparison with 2003 data. Black and Clapper Rail data were included in the above

data summaries, although point count surveys generally do not detect all rails present.

Black Rails were detected during the breeding season at a total of 21 sites, while

Clapper Rails were detected at 8 sites. Song Sparrows were the most abundant of our

focal species, detected at all except one site. Density indices for 2003 in all three bays

were higher for Song Sparrows than in 2000 and 2001. Common Yellowthroats seem to

prefer sites with tall vegetation, and in 2003 abundances were highest in Suisun Bay

(although lower than both 2000 and 2001), but relatively low in San Francisco and San

Pablo Bays (although higher than both 2000 and 2001). Similarly, Marsh Wrens prefer

tall vegetation for breeding, and their abundances followed the same trend as the

Common Yellowthroats. At restoration sites (not included in the abundance indices

discussed above), the trends varied by site.

Nests were monitored at two sites using standardized methodology that includes

techniques to minimize disturbance to the birds and habitat. Nest monitoring allows

measurement of reproductive success and therefore is an indication of population

health. Nest survival probability was calculated both by basic proportion of successful

nests, and by the Mayfield method, that calculates success based on average daily

survival probability. Observers who used behavioral clues to estimate territory

boundaries mapped breeding territories. The number of territories in the study area can

be used to calculate the density of breeding birds at each marsh.

Analysis of 2003 data indicates that, relative to previous years, nest success for our

focal species breeding in San Francisco Bay tidal marshes was relatively high. A total of

371 nests of 10 species were found in 2003 at the two nest monitoring sites, China

Camp and Benicia. Of these, 338 were Song Sparrow nests. Since this species is the

most abundant breeding species in SF Bay, Song Sparrows are used as an indicator

species for trends in reproductive success, assuming similarities across taxa at each

site. Previous years have shown that nests in San Pablo Bay are more successful than

Suisun. However, in 2003 the success rate was higher in Suisun (Benicia) than San

December 30, 2003 3

Pablo Bay (China Camp). Reproductive success of Song Sparrows derived using the

Mayfield method was 21.9% at China Camp (27.6% using raw proportions), and 35.8%

at Benicia (42.9% raw proportions).

December 30, 2003 4

INTRODUCTION Throughout the world, tidal salt marshes have faced and continue to endure threats from

humans (Adam 2002). The tidal marshes of San Francisco Bay, since their

establishment approximately 10,000 years ago (Atwater 1979, Atwater et al. 1979,

Josselyn 1983), have played an important role in maintaining proper functioning of the

Bay ecosystem. During the last 200 years, however, the system has been altered and

broken down through human induced habitat conversion and loss (Nichols et al. 1986).

Habitat losses in San Francisco Bay include a 79% reduction of tidal marsh habitat and

42% reduction of tidal flat habitat (Goals 1999).

Over the past ten years, tidal marsh habitat acreage in San Francisco Bay has seen a

resurgence through an unprecedented period of wetland acquisition and restoration. In

1994, the Cargill Salt Company, owner and operator of almost all salt ponds around the

Bay, sold over 4,000 ha of its salt pond complex in the North San Francisco Bay

(hereafter, North Bay) to the State of California (Siegel and Bachand 2002). In March

2003, Cargill sold over 6,000 additional ha of salt pond operations in the South San

Francisco Bay (hereafter, South Bay) to the State of California and the federal

government (Sample 2003). In addition to the salt ponds, many other wetland

restoration projects have been completed or planned in the Bay (see

http://www.wetlandtracker.org), with a wide range of management plans, performance

criteria, and monitoring activities. Most of the habitat that was sold or that is being

restored is slated for restoration back to some form of tidal marsh habitat.

A dominant feature of the coastal tidal marsh habitat in San Francisco Bay is its avian

community (Bollman et al. 1970, Josselyn 1983). How this community has changed in

light of the changes in habitat of the Bay is unknown, since historical data on bird

numbers in the Bay are lacking until the latter part of the 1900s. Undoubtedly, numbers

of tidal marsh dependent birds have declined significantly given the massive loss of their

habitat (Marshal and Dedrick 1994, see also Nichols et al. 1986). For instance, by 1927,

Grinnell and Wythe (1927) reported that the Clapper Rail, formerly a common resident in

the Bay, was rare. This loss of tidal marsh habitat currently is reflected by the number of

San Francisco Bay tidal marsh dependent birds of special conservation status such as

December 30, 2003 5

http://www.wetlandtracker.org/

the Clapper Rail, Black Rail, Alameda Song Sparrow, San Pablo Song Sparrow, Suisun

Song Sparrow, and Salt Marsh Common Yellowthroat (Nur et al. 1997, Goals Project

2000, Spautz and Nur 2002).

These different populations and species of birds have been the focus of various studies

(e.g. Clapper Rail - Harvey 1988, Albertson 1995, Garcia 1995; Black Rail - Manolis

1978, Evens et al. 1989, 1991; Song Sparrow - Marshall 1948, Johnson 1956, Chan and

Arcese 2002; Salt marsh Common Yellowthroat - Marshal and Dedrick 1994), yet little of

this work has been long-term. Because of the lack of long-term monitoring, few

quantitative data exist on the trends of tidal marsh birds for San Francisco Bay.

While PRBO Conservation Science (formerly Point Reyes Bird Observatory) has been

studying San Francisco Bay's tidal marsh birds since the early 1980s, in 1996 PRBO

began a long-term monitoring project focusing on San Francisco Bay's tidal marsh birds.

Using a combination of yearly point count data from over 60 sites in the Bay and yearly

demographic data collected at up to 5 sites in the Bay (Fig. 1a,b), PRBO has been able

to develop a picture of how tidal marsh birds respond to the combined heterogeneity of

physical and biological processes and, ultimately, landscape in the Bay. Here, we report

on the 2003 results of our San Francisco Bay tidal marsh research.

METHODS

Point count surveys

Variable circular plot point count surveys (Reynolds et al. 1980; Ralph et al. 1995; Nur et

al. 1999) were conducted at 39 marshes during spring 2003 (Fig. 1a,b; Table 1).

Surveys were conducted within 4 hours of sunrise, one or two times between March 25

and June 1. Successive rounds were conducted at least 3 weeks apart.

PRBO field biologists with extensive knowledge of songs and calls of the birds in the

area conducted all censuses. Survey points were placed 150 to 200 m apart, with one

to 12 points per site depending on marsh size. The smallest marsh fragments were

completely surveyed from one point. At each point, the observer recorded all birds

detected by sight and sound for five minutes. For detections within 100 m from the

observer, distance was estimated within 10 m bands; detection type (visual or auditory)

December 30, 2003 6

was also recorded for each bird. Because passive point counts have lower detection

rates of Black and Clapper Rails than counts using tape playbacks of rail calls,

observers also recorded any spontaneous detections of these species at survey

marshes between point counts.

To estimate of the minimum number of individuals present at each marsh site during the

breeding season, detections within 100 m of the point count of each focal species and of

all species detected were totaled for the first round of surveys. Most surveys cover only

a portion of a site and thus counts are usually incomplete. We then calculated the

cumulative species richness (total number of species detected) across both breeding

season surveys.

A density index (birds per ha) for each focal taxon (including rails) at each survey point

was calculated separately for each round of surveys using detections within 50 m of the

observer; we averaged these means for each site at each round and then calculated the

mean of the two surveys to produce a single density index for each site. Since some

point count sites were not surrounded by continuous tidal marsh habitat, the percent

area of marsh within 50 m of each point was derived using existing GIS data (SFEI

1998) and visually confirmed for each point. The density index was adjusted by the

actual area of marsh.

We compared mean density indices of Song Sparrow, Common Yellowthroat, Marsh

Wren, and Black Rail by bay (excluding restoration sites) with abundances of these taxa

in 2000 and 2001. The same point count survey methods were used in these earlier

years. In 2001 we conducted standardized surveys for Black Rails for a more accurate

estimate of their density; we compared these results with the point count data. The 2001

Black Rail surveys were conducted following the tape call-back/response protocol used

by Evens et al. (1991; Nur et al. 1997). The protocol involves listening passively for 1-

min at each point, then broadcasting tape-recorded black rail vocalizations. Detection

data were recorded for all Black Rails and other rail species heard during the 6-min

period. The mean density index was calculated using the methods described above for

point count data (i.e., birds per hectare using detections within 50 m of each point).

December 30, 2003 7

We also looked at the trends across time in focal species abundance at several of our

restoration monitoring sites for which we had sufficient data to compare among years:

Petaluma River Marsh (Carl’s Marsh), Greenpoint Centennial, Pond 2A, and White

Slough.

Reproductive success

Nest monitoring allows measurement of reproductive success (e.g., clutch size, number

of broods, number of nesting attempts) in specific habitats and provides information on

population health (Martin and Geupel 1993).

Field biologists searched for and monitored nests at China Camp State Park, Marin

County; and Benicia State Park, Solano County (points 13 and 14 in Fig. 1a, Table 1) in

tidal marsh habitat during the breeding season (March 1 to July 30, 2003). Nests have

been monitored by PRBO at these two sites yearly since 1996. We monitored nests of

the following species and subspecies: Samuels Song Sparrow, Suisun Song Sparrow,

Salt Marsh Common Yellowthroat, Marsh Wren, California Black Rail, Red-winged

Blackbird (Agelaius phoniceus), and other species as nests were encountered (Table 2).

Song Sparrows are the taxa on which much of the reproductive success monitoring is

focused because these nests are the most abundant and the most easily found. We

assume that the trends in reproductive success, including predation rates, are similar

across taxa; thus Song Sparrows act as an indicator species.

At each site, four focal study plots each containing at least 10 pairs of Song Sparrows

were established; within these areas as many nests as possible of all species were

located and monitored using standardized methodology (Martin and Geupel 1993).

More than 30 specific pairs of Song Sparrows at each marsh were tracked throughout

the season so that all nesting attempts could be found. Nests were located at all stages

(construction, egg-laying, incubation, and nestling periods, as well as after use). Nests

were checked every 2 to 4 days, with careful attention given to minimizing human

disturbance. These precautionary measures included keeping visits brief, minimizing

disturbance to the area around a nest, and staying clear of nest sites when predators

were detected nearby. Nest contents were recorded at each visit and the ultimate

outcome of each nest was decided based on nest condition and behavior of the breeding

December 30, 2003 8

pair. Nestlings were banded on the 7th or 8 th day with USGS numbered bands and a

unique combination of colored leg bands to facilitate field identification after fledging.

The proportion of nests surviving the nesting period was calculated in two ways:

1) The proportion of successful nests, which is defined as the number of successful

nests divided by the total number of nests of known outcome of that species

observed active in each marsh

2) A widely used method developed by Mayfield (1975), which takes into account the

number of days each nest was observed to be active. This method reduces the bias

due to successful nests being active longer and therefore easier to detect while failed

nests that fail quickly are more difficult to detect. Thus this method is preferred to

one which calculates success based on the observed proportion of nests that are

successful. The average daily survival rate (the probability of a nest surviving one

day) is first calculated and then raised to the power equal to the number of days in

the nest cycle for an estimate of the probability of a nest surviving for the nest period.

Survival may vary between egg laying, incubation, and the nestling period, so we

calculated values for each phase separately as well as for the entire nest cycle. We

follow Johnson (1979) in carrying out simple statistical tests of Mayfield-calculated

nest success values (see Nur et al. 1999).

Territory mapping

Breeding territories were mapped of all individuals of all species breeding within a

defined area within each nest-monitoring site. Territory mapping involves observing the

behavior of each pair, particularly singing and territory defense behavior, to define the

approximate territory boundary. The region mapped included the territories where nests

were monitored (where territory boundaries were the most accurately discerned), but

also included additional adjacent habitat as defined in previous years. A minimum of

four visits were made to the entire mapped area, twice during the first half of the season

to produce mid-season maps (before May 1) and at least twice during the late season,

between May 1 and June 30. Although territories boundaries are dynamic, and

individuals commonly appear or disappear during the season (PRBO unpubl. data), the

best possible estimates of territory locations and the locations of color-banded birds

were made by combining data at mid-season and at late season. Here we only present

data from the late season, because by that time highly inconspicuous individuals are

December 30, 2003 9

usually detected and territory boundaries are probably more accurately mapped than

earlier in the season. We only present territory maps of Song Sparrow, which was the

most thoroughly mapped species.

We counted the number of territories in each study area within each marsh and divided it

by the area studied to derive a calculation of the density of breeding birds for each

marsh. This number can be compared with the density index derived from point count

surveys to determine the accuracy of the survey sampling methods.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Our preliminary analyses indicate that 2003 was a relatively good year for the tidal

marsh bird species we studied in the San Francisco Bay; populations appear to be

stable, at least on the scale that we examined. Song Sparrow nest success was

relatively high, and abundances of all focal taxa appear to be at least as high as they

were in 2000 and 2001.

Point count surveys

The total number of breeding birds of all taxa detected ranged from 20 to approximately

500 birds per site, depending on marsh size and marsh characteristics (Table 3).

Species richness likewise ranged from 1 to 27 species per site across the region (Table

3).

Song Sparrows were the most abundant of the focal species detected during surveys at

all except one site (Pond 2A, where Marsh Wrens were more abundant), and were

detected at virtually every site. All other focal taxa were present at some sites and

absent from others (Table 3 & 4). Song Sparrow densities were highest at some of the

smaller marshes including China Camp marsh fragments and Petaluma River Marsh

(Carl’s Marsh); this could be because those sites have a large proportion of upper marsh

and edge habitat which Song Sparrows favor (PRBO unpubl. data). Song Sparrows

appear to have been more abundant in 2003 than in 2000 and 2001 (Fig. 2a). Mean

detections in 2003 appeared to be similar to those in 1996 (Nur et al. 1997), for sites that

were surveyed in both years.

December 30, 2003 10

Black Rails were detected at two sites in San Francisco Bay where they are not known

to breed on a regular basis: Newark Slough and Faber Laumeister Tract; but these

detections were not verified by biologists with more experience identifying rails. Black

Rails are typically detected during the breeding season at most sites in San Pablo Bay.

This year they were not detected in San Pablo Bay at Corte Madera Ecological Reserve,

Greenpoint Restoration, Carl’s Marsh, Point Pinole, or Tolay Creek (sites where they are

usually detected). Overall rail density indices (using point count data) in Suisun and San

Pablo Bay appeared to be lower in 2003 than in 2000 and 2001 (Fig. 2b). As evidenced

by the large difference in 2001 between density indices estimated with point counts and

rail tape-response surveys (the latter numbers were 3 to 4 times higher than the former),

point counts are not likely to give an accurate count; and thus it is difficult to estimate

true trends with point count data.

Clapper Rails were detected at eight marshes (Table 3). They were not detected during

point counts at many sites where they have been detected in previous years, including

Dumbarton, Hayward or Palo Alto Baylands; or in San Pablo Bay at Black John Slough,

Black Point, or White Slough. All other sites where rails were not detected (including

Alameda Creek, Emeryville Crescent, Ravenswood and Whaletail marshes in San

Francisco Bay; all sites in Suisun Bay; and Mare Island Lower Tubbs, Petaluma Marsh

and Point Pinole in San Pablo Bay) are not sites where they are usually found.

However, these results are not definitive because Clapper Rails were not surveyed using

tape playbacks.

Common Yellowthroats are typically absent from sites lacking tall vegetation (PRBO

unpubl. data), and 2003 was no exception. Abundances were relatively low in San

Francisco Bay and San Pablo Bay, and highest in Suisun across all years surveyed

(Tables 3 & 4). In Suisun Bay, abundances in 2003 were lower than in 2000 and 2001;

in San Pablo and San Francisco Bay, abundances were slightly higher (Fig. 2c).

Marsh Wrens are similar to Common Yellowthroats in that they require tall vegetation for

breeding (PRBO unpubl. data). In San Francisco Bay, Marsh Wrens were most


abundant at the sites with the highest invasion of smooth cordgrass, Spartina

alterniflora, including Alameda Creek and Hayward Regional Shoreline; in San Pablo

and Suisun they were associated with marshes containing large proportions of Scirpus

spp. (bulrush) (Table 3 & 4). In all three years, Marsh Wrens were most abundant in

Suisun Bay. Numbers were lower in Suisun and higher in the remaining bays in 2003

than in 2000 and 2001 (Fig 2d).

Restoration sites

Changes across years in bird abundances would be expected to be more pronounced at

early restoration sites (sites where vegetation is changing rapidly) than at older sites.

Song Sparrow densities increased only at Carl’s Marsh (Fig. 3a-d), where marsh

vegetation is rapidly becoming established. Marsh Wrens were also more abundant in

2003 at Greenpoint and Petaluma River Marsh, but numbers appeared to be stable at

White Slough (Fig. 3a-d). Common Yellowthroat numbers were low at restoration sites;

abundance increased slightly at only White Slough and Pond 2A (Fig. 3a-d), both sites

with significant cover of Scirpus, and where habitat is not changing rapidly.

Reproductive success

A total of 371 nests of 10 species were found in 2003 at the two study sites (China

Camp and Benicia; Table 2). The most abundant species in the marsh, Song Sparrow,

was also the species for which the most nests were found; in 2003 we found 338 nests.

Of these nests, 243 were found when active, and were used for Mayfield and

proportional nest success calculations (Table 5). Overall Mayfield reproductive success

at China Camp was 21.9% (27.6% using raw proportions). Song Sparrows were more

successful at Benicia where overall 42.9% of nests were successful, or 35.8% using

Mayfield calculations. This difference was not statistically significant (z test)

Reproductive success varies from year to year and between bays: nests tend to be more

successful in San Pablo than Suisun sites (Fig. 4.) However, in 2003 the success rate

was higher in Benicia (Suisun) than at China Camp (San Pablo Bay). Benicia’s nest

success was higher in 2003 than it was during any of the years we have monitored since

1996, but China Camp was about average.


Territory density

Song Sparrow territory densities varied among marshes and among study sites within

each marsh (Table 6). Densities were higher at China Camp than at Benicia State

Park. At both sites, densities in the intensive areas were higher than the overall

densities. Potential reasons for this include: 1) a bias in selecting the intensive plots in

the densest areas of Song Sparrows; and/or 2) fewer inconspicuous birds were detected

and counted in the non-intensive areas because less time was spent there.

As expected, true densities of Song Sparrow individuals at these two study sites,

assuming each territory was made up of two breeding adults, were higher than the

density indices calculated using point count survey methods. Spot mapping is more

accurate in determining true population sizes than are point count methods. In fact,

point count survey methods, unless they use distance-sampling, are not assumed to

determine “true population sizes”, but provide an index of population density. However,

we can refine our estimates using DISTANCE software (Buckland et al. 2001), which

models detection functions and allows an estimate of true density (see Nur et al. 1997

and Spautz and Nur 2002 about use and interpretation of DISTANCE).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Field work in 2003 was conducted by biologists Christopher Lucas, Pamela

Roberts Brandon, Charles Neil Holcomb, Jessica O’Connell, Viola Toniolo, Jennifer

Roberts, and volunteers Robin Leong and Wally NeVille. Diana Stralberg, Viola Toniolo,

and Lars Pomara gave GIS assistance. This work was made possible by grants from:

Bernard Osher Foundation, Community Foundation Sonoma County, Richard Grand

Foundation, Mary A. Crocker Trust, and CALFED Bay/Delta Program. Permission to

work with California State Species of Special Concern, and State Threatened and

Endangered Species, was given to PRBO by California Dept Fish and Game

Memorandum of Understanding dated March 14, 2003. This is contribution 1088 of

PRBO Conservation Science.


Literature Cited Adam, P. 2002. Saltmarshes in a time of change. Environmental Conservation 29:39-

61.

Albertson, J. D. 1995. Ecology of the California Clapper Rail in south San Francisco

Bay. M.Sc. thesis, San Francisco State University.

Atwater, B. F. 1979. Ancient processes at the site of Southern San Francisco Bay:

movement of the crust and changes in sea level. Pages 31-45 in T. J. Conomos,

editor. San Francisco Bay: the urbanized estuary. American Association for the

Advancement of Science, San Francisco.

Atwater, B. F., S. G. Conrad, J. N. Dowden, C. W. Hedel, R. L. MacDonald, and W.

Savage. 1979. History, landforms, and vegetation of the estuary's tidal marshes.

Pages 347-386 in T. J. Conomos, editor. San Francisco Bay: the urbanized

estuary. American Association for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco.

Bollman, F. H., P. K. Thelin, and R. T. Forester. 1970. Bimonthly bird counts at

selected observation points around San Francisco Bay, February 1964 to

January 1966. Calif. Fish and Game 56:224-239.

Buckland, S.T., D.R. Anderson, K.P. Burnham, J.L. Laake, D.L. Borchers, and L.

Thomas. 2001. Introduction to Distance Sampling. Oxford University Press,

Oxford.

Chan, Y., and P. Arcese. 2002. Subspecific differentiation and conservation of Song

Sparrows (Melospiza melodia) in the San Francisco Bay region inferred by

microsatellite loci analysis. Auk 119:641-657

Evens, J. G., G. W. Page, L. E. Stenzel, R. W. Stallcup, and R. P. Henderson. 1989.

Distribution and relative abundance of the California black rail (Laterallus

jamaicensis coturniculus) in tidal marshes of the San Francisco estuary. Report

to the California Department of Fish and Game from Point Reyes Bird

Observatory.

Evens, J. G., G. W. Page, S. A. Laymon, and R. W. Stallcup. 1991. Distribution, relative

abundance and status of the California Black Rail in western North America.

Condor 93:952-966.

Garcia, E. J. 1995. Conservation of the California Clapper Rail: an analysis of survey

methods and habitat use in Marin County, California. M.Sc. Thesis, University of

California, Davis.


Goals Project. 1999. Baylands ecosystem habitat goals. A report of habitat

recommendations prepared by the San Francisco Bay Area Wetlands

Ecosystems Goals Project. Joint publication of the U. S. Environmental

Protection Agency, San Francisco, California, and San Francisco Bay Regional

Water Quality Control Board, Oakland, CA.

Goals Project 2000. Baylands ecosystem species and community profiles: Life histories

and environmental requirements of key plants, fish, and wildlife. Prepared by the

San Francisco Bay Area Wetlands Ecosystem Goals Project. P.R. Olofson,

editor. San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, Oakland, Calif.

Grinnell, J., and M. W. Wythe. 1927. Directory to the bird-life of the San Francisco Bay

region. Pac. Coast Avifauna 18.

Harvey, T. E. 1988. Breeding biology of the California clapper rail in South San

Francisco Bay. Trans. Western Sect. Wildl. Soc. 24:98-104.

Johnson, D.H. 1979. Estimating nest success: the Mayfield method and an alternative.

Auk 96:651-661.

Johnson, R. F. 1956. Population structure in salt marsh Song Sparrows. Condor 58:24-

44.

Josselyn, M. 1983. The ecology of San Francisco Bay tidal marshes: a community

profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of biological Services, FWS/OBS-

83/23. Washington D.C.:102 pp.

Manolis, T. 1978. Status of the Black Rail in central California. Western Birds 9: 151-

158.

Marshall, J. T. 1948. Ecologic races of song sparrows in the San Francisco Bay region.

Part I. Habitat and abundance. Condor 50:193-215

Marshall, J. T., and K. G. Dedrick. 1994. Endemic Song Sparrows and yellowthroats of

San Francisco Bay. Studies in Avian Biology No. 15:316-327.

Martin, T.E. and G.R. Geupel. 1993. Nest-monitoring plots: Methods for locating nests

and monitoring success. Journal of Field Ornithology 64:507-519.

Mayfield, H.F. 1975. Suggestions for calculating nest success. Wilson Bulletin. 87:456-

466.

Nichols, F. H., J. E. Cloern, S. N. Luoma, and D. H. Peterson. 1986. The modification of

an estuary. Science 231:567-573.

Nur, N., S. Zack, J. Evans, and T. Gardali. 1997. Tidal marsh birds of the San Francisco

Bay region: status, distribution, and conservation of five Category 2 taxa. Report


of the Point Reyes Bird Observatory, 4990 Shoreline Hwy., Stinson Beach, CA

94970 to USGS-Biological Resources Division.

Nur, N., S.L. Jones, and G.R. Geupel. 1999. A Statistical Guide to Data Analysis of

Avian Monitoring Programs. Biological Technical Publication, US Fish & Wildlife

Service, BTP-R6001-1999.

Ralph, C.J., J.R. Sauer, and S. Droege (Eds.). 1995. Monitoring Bird Populations by

Point Counts. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-149. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest

Research Station, USDA Forest Service.

Reynolds, R. T., J. M. Scott, and R. A. Nussbaum. 1980. A variable circular-plot

method for estimating bird numbers. Condor 82:309-313.

Sample, H. 2003. Deal to restore salt ponds to wetlands wins approval. in Sacramento

Bee, Wednesday, February 12, 2003, Sacramento, CA.

SFEI. 1998. EcoAtlas beta release, version 1.5b4. San Francisco Estuary Institute,

Oakland, CA.

Siegel, S. W., and P. A. M. Bachand. 2002. Feasibility analysis of South Bay salt pond

restoration, San Francisco Estuary, California. Wetlands and Water Resources,

San Rafael, California.

Spautz, H., and N. Nur. 2002. Distribution and Abundance in relation to habitat and

landscape features and nest site characteristics of California Black Rail

(Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus) in the San Francisco Bay Estuary. A report

to the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Available from PRBO, Stinson Beach, CA.

(http//:www.prbo.org/tm)


Figure 1a. Map of 2003 San Francisco Bay Tidal Marsh Study sites. North Bay region. See Table 1 for site names.


Figure 1b. Map of 2003 San Francisco Bay Tidal Marsh Study sites. South Bay region. See Table 1 for site names.


Figure 2. Adjusted density indices by bay of selected focal bird taxa in the San

Francisco Estuary: a comparison of 2003 data with 2000 and 2001 (see text). Natural

marsh sites only.

2a. Song Sparrow

Song Sparrow density index (birds/ha)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

San Francisco Bay San Pablo Bay Suisun Bay

2000

2001

2003

2b. Black Rail. 2003 point count data compared to 2000, 2001. Note that 2001 Black

Rail survey results were conducted with tapes.

Black Rail density index (birds/ha)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

San Pablo Bay Suisun Bay

2000

2001

2001 BLRAsurvey data2003


2c. Salt Marsh Common Yellowthroat

Common Yellowthroat density index (birds/ha)

0

1

2

3


2000

2001

2003

2d. Marsh Wren

Marsh Wren density index (birds/ha)

0

1

2

3

4

5


2000

2001

2003


Figure 3. A comparison between years of density indices of selected focal bird taxa

(see text).

3a. Greenpoint Restoration Marsh. Novato, Marin County. First surveyed in 2001.

Greenpoint Restoration Marsh

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Common Yellowthroat Marsh Wren Song Sparrow

Mea

n de

nsity

inde

x (b

irds/

ha)

2001

2003

3b. Petaluma River Marsh (Carl’s Marsh), Petaluma River Marsh, Sonoma County.

Petaluma River Marsh (Carl's Marsh)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Common Yellowthroat Marsh Wren Song Sparrow

Mea

n de

nsity

inde

x (b

irds/

ha)

2000

2001

2003

ND


3c. Pond 2A. Napa Sonoma Marsh Area. First surveyed in 2001

Pond 2A Restoration (not surveyed 2000)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

CommonYellowthroat

Marsh Wren Song Sparrow Black Rail

Mea

n de

nsity

inde

x (b

irds/

ha)

2001

2003

3d. White Slough Marsh. Vallejo, Solano County.

White Slough Marsh

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

CommonYellowthroat

Marsh Wren Song Sparrow Black Rail

Mea

n de

nsity

inde

x (b

irds/

ha)

2000

2001

2003

ND


Figure 4. San Francisco Bay tidal marsh Song Sparrow nesting success from 1996 to

2003. Only China Camp State Park and Benicia State Park were studied in 2003 (see

text).

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

prop

ortio

n ne

sts

fledg

ing

at le

ast o

ne y

oung

China Camp SPPetaluma River MouthBlack John SloughBenicia SPRush Ranch


Table 1. List of marsh site surveyed during the 2003 breeding season, and site characteristics. Point counts were conducted at all sites except Lower Tubbs Levee Setback restoration site.

ID # on

map Site Name Area (Ha)

Number of point count

stations Restoration

Site San Francisco Bay:

1 Alameda Creek 16.6 6 N 2 Dumbarton Marsh West 195.5 13 N 3 Emeryville Crescent 33.7 5 N 4 Faber-Laumeister tract, E. Palo Alto 73.0 7 N 5 Hayward Regional Shoreline 110.1 11 N 6 Newark Slough 43.7 7 N 7 Palo Alto Baylands 46.0 5 N 8 Ravenswood Slough 45.0 5 N 9 Whale Tail Marsh 58.5 6 N San Pablo Bay:

10 Bahia Restoration Marsh 146.5 14 Y 11 Black John Slough A 36.1 10 N 12 Black Point 59.3 8 N 13 China Camp State Park * 94.1 16 N 14 China Camp Fragments 0.8 2 N 15 Corte Madera Ecological Reserve 36.1 10 N/Y 16 Green Point Centennial Marsh 55.0 7 N 17 Green Point Restoration Marsh 23.2 6 Y 18 Lower Tubbs Island Muted Marsh 101.2 8 N 19 Lower Tubbs Levee Setback 27.7 4 Y 20 Mare Island A 78.1 10 N 21 Mare Island B 84.6 10 N 22 Napa Centennial Marsh 77.5 6 N 23 Petaluma Marsh 364.6 5 N 24 Petaluma River Marsh (Carl's Marsh) 18.6 12 Y 25 Petaluma River Mouth 136.5 10 N 26 Piper Park 8.2 5 N 27 Point Pinole Fragment 9.3 3 N 28 Pond 2A Restoration 210.9 10 Y 29 Sears Point/Route 37/121 75.2 10 N 30 Tam High School (Richardson Bay) 35.0 5 N 31 Tolay Creek 103.8 11 N/Y 32 Triangle Marsh Fragment 5.0 1 y


Table 1. List of marsh site surveyed during the 2003 breeding season, and site characteristics. Point counts were conducted at all sites except Lower Tubbs Levee Setback restoration site.

ID # on

Number of point count Restoration

map Site Name Area (Ha) stations Site 33 White Slough Marsh 109.8 5 Y Suisun Bay:

34 Bullhead Marsh 137.6 10 N 35 Goodyear B 230.7 10 N 36 Pt Edith Restoration 47.0 2 Y 37 Pt. Edith Centennial/muted 447.2 10 N 38 Rush Ranch A 65 10 N 39 Benicia State Park* 72.2 10 N

* Nest monitoring sites.


Table 2. Nests of breeding birds located during the 2003 breeding season at tidal marsh

study sites in China Camp State Park and Benicia State Park.

Species China Camp 1 Benicia 1 Total nests found

American Goldfinch2 2 (1) 0 2

Black Rail 3 (1) 0 3

Common Yellowthroat 0 2 (1) 2

Mallard3 1 (0) 2 (1) 3

Marsh Wren 0 8 (?) 8

Mourning Dove4 0 1 (?) 1

Ring-necked Pheasant5 0 1 (0) 1

Red-shouldered Hawk6 0 1 (1) 1

Red-winged Blackbird 0 12 (4) 12

Song Sparrow 191 (51) 147 (51) 338

1 Number found (number successful)

2 Carduelis tristis

3 Anas platyrhynchos

4 Zenaida macroura

5 Phasianus colchicus

6 Buteo lineatus


Table 3. Total number of birds detected during first breeding season survey; detections within 100 m, excluding flyovers (except raptors, corvids and swallows)

Site Name

Black Rail

Clapper Rail

Common Yellowthroat

Marsh Wren

Red-winged Blackbird

Song Sparrow

Species Richness

Total number of

birds San Francisco Bay:

Alameda Creek 0 0 0 14 0 36 9 122 Dumbarton Marsh West 1 0 0 1 0 126 12 280Emeryville Crescent 0 0 0 0 0 27 8 96 Faber-Laumeister tract, East Palo Alto 0* 1 2 6 0 34 16 115 Hayward Regional Shoreline 1 0 0 31 2 52 22 257 Newark Slough 0* 1 4 0 0 26 14 132 Palo Alto Baylands 0 0 3 11 1 51 27 540 Ravenswood Slough 0 0 0 0 0 29 5 76 Whale Tail Marsh 0 0 0 9 0 42 20 234

San Pablo Bay: Bahia Restoration Marsh 0 0 1 0 22 9 11 111 Black John Slough A 0* 0 8 22 0 76 11 244 Black Point 0* 0 1 0 0 65 10 169 China Camp 0* 2 0 1 1 157 14 352China Camp Fragments 0 0 0 0 0 12 8 49 Corte Madera Ecological Reserve 0 1 0 0 0 82 13 184 Green Point Centennial Marsh 0* 0* 5 36 0 73 10 277 Green Point Restoration Marsh 0 0* 0 27 0 50 13 193 Lower Tubbs Island (muted marsh) 1 0 0 24 0 48 14 175 Lower Tubbs Levee Setback 0 0 0 0 0 1 14 172 Mare Island A 0* 0 0 0 0 35 6 101


Table 3. Total number of birds detected during first breeding season survey; detections within 100 m, excluding flyovers (except raptors, corvids and swallows)

Mare Island B 1 0 0 5 0 36 8 124 Napa Centennial Marsh 0* 0 13 25 0 47 4 199 Petaluma Marsh 0* 0 0 13 0 18 22 519 Petaluma River Marsh (Carl's Marsh) 0 0 0 20 4 55 19 275 Petaluma River Mouth 0* 0* 0 0 0 51 10 134 Piper Park 0 0 0 0 0 13 13 58 Point Pinole Fragment 0 0 0 0 0 18 1 33 Pond 2A Restoration 2 0 5 78 0 52 16 277 Sears Point/Route 37/121 0* 0 0 34 23 27 17 233 Tam High School (Richardson Bay) 0 0* 0 0 5 20 10 134 Tolay Creek 0 0 2 3 0 39 9 112 Triangle Marsh Fragment 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 20 White Slough Marsh 0* 0 2 20 0 17 26 288

Suisun Bay: Bullhead Marsh 0* 0 12 38 0 57 14 251 Goodyear B 0 0 13 14 1 60 24 262 Pt. Edith 1 0 28 74 7 77 12 248 Pt. Edith Restoration 0* 0 9 10 0 13 4 33 Rush Ranch A 0** 0 12 6 0 36 7 59 Southampton Bay/ Benicia 0* 0 9 12 12 49 13 200

*Indicates a rail detection at this site other than during first point count survey or beyond 100 m

**Indicates a rail detection at this site only during the non-breeding season


Table 4. Mean relative abundance over two breeding season site visits (birds/ha); based on detections within 50 m. (standard error in parentheses)

Site Name Black Rail Common

Yellowthroat Marsh WrenRed-winged

Blackbird Savannah Sparrow Song Sparrow

San Francisco Bay: Alameda Creek 0 (0) 0 (0) 3.50 (0.75) 0 (0) 0.42 (0.60) 7.11 (0.15) Dumbarton Marsh West 0.05 (0.06) 0.05 (0.06) 0.05 (0.06) 0 (0) 0.05 (0.06) 6.73 (1.03) Emeryville Crescent 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 4.59 (1.44) Faber-Laumeister tract, E. Palo Alto 0 (0) 0.36 (0.52) 0.73 (0.77) 0.91 (1.29) 0 (0) 6.01 (1.80) Hayward Regional Shoreline 0 (0) 0 (0) 1.90 (1.15) 0.19 (0.27) 0.06 (0.08) 3.79 (0.12) Newark Slough 0 (0) 0.36 (0.52) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 6.84 (0.04) Palo Alto Baylands 0 (0) 0.28 (0) 1.56 (0.80) 0.42 (0.20) 0.14 (0.20) 6.72 (1.50) Ravenswood Slough 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 5.48 (0.57) Whale Tail Marsh 0 (0) 0 (0) 0.42 (0.45) 0.05 (0.08) 0.80 (0.53) 3.93 (1.20) San Pablo Bay: Bahia Restoration Marsh* 0 0.10 0 1.18 0.59 0.78 Black John Slough A 0 (0) 0.51 (0.18) 1.40 (0.90) 0 (0) 0 (0) 6.39 (1.51) Black Point 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 7.44 (0.52) China Camp 0 (0) 0 (0) 0.05 (0.06) 0 (0) 0 (0) 8.60 (2.00) China Camp Fragments 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 10.42 (3.98)Corte Madera Ecological Reserve 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 5.16 (1.89) Green Point Centennial Marsh 0 (0) 0.72 (0.11) 3.03 (1.35) 0 (0) 0 (0) 9.24 (1.35) Green Point Restoration Marsh 0 (0) 0.11 (0.15) 5.41 (0.45) 0 (0) 0 (0) 7.43 (1.20) Lower Tubbs Island (muted marsh) 0.08 (0.11) 0 (0) 2.39 (0.45) 0 (0) 0.16 (0.23) 5.25 (0.45) Lower Tubbs Levee Setback Mare Island A 0.25 (0.36) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0.19 (0.09) 2.42 (0.54) Mare Island B 0.19 (0.09) 0 (0) 0.32 (0.45) 0.06 (0.09) 0.25 (0.36) 3.95 (1.08)


Table 4. Mean relative abundance over two breeding season site visits (birds/ha); based on detections within 50 m. (standard error in parentheses)

Common Red-winged Savannah Site Name Black Rail Yellowthroat Marsh Wren Blackbird Sparrow Song SparrowNapa Centennial Marsh 0 (0) 2.12 (0.30) 5.31 (1.50) 0 (0) 0 (0) 7.64 (0.60) Petaluma Marsh 0.12 (0.16) 0.23 (0.33) 1.80 (0.74) 0.06 (0.08) 0 (0) 4.05 (3.44) Petaluma River Marsh (Carl's Marsh) 0 (0) 0 (0) 5.15 (0.53) 1.18 (0.33) 0.14 (0.20) 10.80 (0.67)Petaluma River Mouth 0 (0) 0.11 (0.15) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 8.17 (1.65) Piper Park 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2.86 (1.82) Point Pinole Fragment 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 4.25 (1.20) Pond 2A Restoration 0.13 (0.18) 0.45 (0.63) 6.31 (8.92) 0 (0) 0 (0) 4.84 (6.85) Sears Point/Route 37/121 0.14 (0.20) 0.07 (0.10) 2.69 (2.00) 0.71 (0) 0.07 (0.10) 2.48 (0.30) Tam High School (Richardson Bay) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0.25 (0.36) 0 (0) 1.53 (0.36) Tolay Creek 0 (0) 0.21 (0) 0.32 (0.45) 0 (0) 0 (0) 5.73 (0) Triangle Marsh Fragment 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 6.37 (3.60) White Slough Marsh 0 (0) 0.76 (0.72) 5.10 (0.36) 0.13 (0.18) 0 (0) 4.08 (1.08) Suisun Bay: Bullhead Marsh 0.06 (0.09) 2.28 (1.76) 3.52 (1.03) 0.64 (0.09) 0.09 (0.13) 5.54 (1.49) Goodyear B 0 (0) 2.74 (2.25) 2.42 (1.08) 0 (0) 0.06 (0.09) 6.37 (0.90) Pt. Edith* 0 1.19 4.59 0.08 0 4.42 Pt. Edith Restoration* 0 4.46 5.73 0 0 7.01 Rush Ranch A* 0 1.53 0.76 0 0 4.26 Southampton Bay/ Benicia 0 (0) 0.45 (0.09) 1.40 (0) 0.57 (0.09) 0 (0) 4.65 (0.63)

*Site was surveyed only once.


Table 5. Song Sparrow nest survival probability: Mayfield method and proportion of nests successful. A comparison of San Pablo Bay Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia samuelis) at China Camp State Parka and Suisun Song Sparrow (M. m. maxillaris) at Benicia State Park for the 2003 field season. Overall success rate for entire nesting period is also shown in Figure 4.

Site NestPhase

Sample size

Daily Mayfield nest success 1

Mayfield nest success rate

for period 2

Mayfield period nest success

95% confidence interval

Raw Proportion

Successful 3

Rate SE Lower UpperSan Pablo Bay

overall 145 0.936 0.0061 0.219 0.162 0.294 0.276Laying 46 0.959 0.0232 0.920 0.833 1.011Incubation 129 0.939 0.0078 0.478 0.393 0.579

China Camp

Nestling 83 0.927 0.0106 0.499 0.404 0.614Suisun Bay

overall 98 0.956 0.0058 0.358 0.271 0.471 0.429Laying 37 1.00 0 1.000 1.000 1.000Incubation 85 0.953 0.0078 0.573 0.472 0.692

Benicia

Nestling 64 0.954 0.0096 0.649 0.539 0.7791 The Mayfield method of calculating nest survival probability or success takes into account the number of days each nest was

under observation (see text) 2 The success rate for each phase or period of the nest cycle is calculated as the daily survival for the period to the nth power

where n = the number of days in the period: laying = 1.996 days, incubation = 11.661, nestling = 9.145. 3 The proportion successful is the number of nests that fledged at least one young divided by the total number of active nests

found. Here the sample size includes only nests used for Mayfield calculations, i.e. nests observed while still active.


Table 6. Song Sparrow densities at nest monitoring sites, 2003. Spot-mapping method (see text). Spot map areas include the smaller intensive study areas.

marsh Subarea number of territories area (ha) density (pairs/ha) density (birds/ha)

China Camp State Park Plot A spotmap A 63 11.49 5.48 10.97 Plot B spotmap B 65 10.14 6.41 12.82 total 128 21.63 5.92 11.84China Camp intensive areas Plot A IP1 12.5 1.51 8.28 16.56

IP2 12 2.27 5.29 10.59Plot B IP1 17 1.78 9.55 19.10

IP2 12 1.32 9.12 18.24total 53.5 6.87 7.78 15.57Benicia State Park Plot A spotmap A 13 4.94 2.63 5.27

51 8.58 5.94 11.89Plot B spotmap B 29 2.88 10.06 20.12

42 11.38 3.69 7.38total 135 27.78 4.86 9.72Benicia intensive areas Plot A IP1 13 4.94 2.63 5.27

IP2 19 2.30 8.28 16.56Plot B IP1 19 2.91 6.54 13.08

IP2 12 1.85 6.50 13.00total 63 11.98 5.26 10.51


Appendices Maps describing sightings of California State Bird Species of Special Concern and other

focal species observed during San Francisco Bay tidal marsh work in 2003 and UTM

(NAD 83) coordinates of all bird nests found on surveys.

Appendix 1 A. Map of China Camp State Park: Song Sparrow territory locations.

2003.

Appendix 1 B. Map of China Camp State Park: Song Sparrow nest locations

Appendix 1 C. Map of China Camp State Park: Black Rail territory and nest locations

Appendix 1 D. Map of China Camp State Park: Marsh Wren territory and nest locations.

Appendix 1 E. Map of China Camp State Park: Clapper Rail detections in 2003. Appendix 2 A. Map of Benicia State Park: Song Sparrow territory and nest locations.

Appendix 2 B. Map of Benicia State Park: Common Yellowthroat territory and nest

locations.

Appendix 2 C. Map of Benicia State Park: Marsh Wren territory and nest locations.

Appendix 2 D. Map of Benicia State Park: Black Rail territory and nest locations.

Appendix 3. Location of bird nests found, including California special status taxa: Black

Rail, Song Sparrow, and Common Yellowthroat. Coordinate system: UTM NAD 83.


Appendix 1 A. Map of China Camp State Park: Song Sparrow territory locations. 2003.


Appendix 1 B. Map of China Camp State Park: Song Sparrow nest locations


Appendix 1 C. Map of China Camp State Park: Black Rail territory and nest locations


Appendix 1 D. Map of China Camp State Park: Marsh Wren territory and nest locations.


Appendix 1 E. Map of China Camp State Park: Clapper Rail detections in 2003.


Appendix 2 A. Map of Benicia State Park: Song Sparrow territory and nest locations.


Appendix 2 B. Map of Benicia State Park: Common Yellowthroat territory and nest locations.


Appendix 2 C. Map of Benicia State Park: Marsh Wren territory and nest locations.


Appendix 2 D. Map of Benicia State Park: Black Rail territory and nest locations.


Appendix 3. Location of bird nests found, including California special status taxa: Black Rail, Song Sparrow, and Common Yellowthroat. Coordinate system: UTM NAD 83. Site Name Species common name Nest I. D. number Easting Northing Benicia State Park Black Rail BLRASBB01A 570848.5 4214026.1 Common Yellowthroat COYESBA04A 570650.2 4213863.0 Common Yellowthroat COYESBB01A 570675.2 4214585.0 Mallard MALLSBA03A 570674.2 4213910.4 Mallard MALLSBB01A 571107.3 4214022.8 Marsh Wren MAWRSBB01A 570725.8 4214617.6 Marsh Wren MAWRSBB02A 571041.8 4213981.2 Marsh Wren MAWRSBB03A 571044.5 4213977.9 Ring-necked Pheasant RNPHSBB01A 570966.7 4214044.9 Red-shouldered Hawk RSHASBA01A 570614.4 4215021.7 Red-winged Blackbird RWBRSBB01A 570763.7 4214593.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA01A 570741.6 4213814.0 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA01B 570751.4 4213817.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA01B 570751.4 4213817.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA01C 570734.5 4213796.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA01D 570739.6 4213806.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA02A 570694.8 4213839.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA02B 570697.3 4213851.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA02C 570692.6 4213847.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA03A 570681.7 4213784.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA03B 570676.2 4213794.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA03C 570684.0 4213796.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA04A 570757.0 4213845.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA04B 570753.5 4213847.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA04C 570752.6 4213848.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA04D 570763.2 4213837.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA04E 570758.7 4213829.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA05A 570625.6 4213864.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA05B 570645.8 4213862.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA05C 570621.5 4213863.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA05D 570627.4 4213862.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA06A 570700.0 4213885.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA06B 570697.1 4213880.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA07A 570662.5 4213866.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA07B 570646.6 4213885.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA07C 570666.0 4213866.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA07D 570657.0 4213884.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA07E 570659.3 4213881.4 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA08A 570684.2 4213828.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA08B 570691.4 4213822.4 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA09A 570750.5 4213957.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA09B 570749.9 4213960.8


Site Name Species common name Nest I. D. number Easting Northing Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA09C 570746.3 4213956.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA09D 570747.4 4213948.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA10A 570668.6 4213835.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA10B 570663.7 4213816.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA10C 570673.0 4213830.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA10D 570665.7 4213827.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA11A 570687.5 4214040.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA11B 570683.9 4214034.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA12A 570682.7 4213742.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA12A 570682.7 4213742.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA12B 570698.8 4213762.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA12C 570693.0 4213750.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA12C 570693.0 4213750.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA13A 570711.8 4213763.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA14A 570807.1 4213841.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA14B 570809.7 4213841.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA14C 570798.3 4213841.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA14D 570808.4 4213848.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA14E 570812.3 4213846.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA14F 570792.2 4213849.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA15A 570595.6 4214964.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA15B 570600.8 4214950.4 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA16A 570582.9 4215036.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA17A 570666.8 4213849.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA17B 570674.2 4213852.4 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA17C 570671.0 4213857.0 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA17D 570669.6 4213843.0 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA17E 570678.9 4213842.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA18A 570669.5 4213887.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA18B 570673.5 4213884.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA18C 570667.1 4213881.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA18D 570675.3 4213880.4 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA18E 570662.4 4213886.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA18F 570670.5 4213879.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA19A 570522.1 4215002.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA19B 570536.9 4215001.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA20A 570750.2 4213923.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA20A 570675.2 4213927.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA20B 570687.7 4213892.4 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA20B 570741.3 4213882.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA20C 570686.9 4213895.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA22A 570698.1 4213801.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA22B 570700.8 4213804.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA23A 570686.8 4213548.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA24A 570744.2 4213906.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA24B 570753.1 4213894.4


Site Name Species common name Nest I. D. number Easting Northing Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA25A 570630.1 4213907.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA25B 570631.2 4213901.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA25C 570630.6 4213904.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA26A 570652.9 4213926.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBA26A 570652.9 4213926.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB01A 570851.4 4213990.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB01B 570844.2 4214006.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB01C 570849.6 4213990.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB01D 570849.5 4214008.4 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB02A 570628.9 4214660.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB02A 570779.2 4214623.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB02B 570633.4 4214651.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB03A 570905.7 4214000.0 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB03B 570906.6 4213997.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB03C 570903.9 4214006.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB03D 570892.6 4213995.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB03E 570890.8 4213996.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB04A 570865.2 4213922.0 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB04B 570863.4 4213924.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB05A 570841.3 4213937.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB05B 570848.3 4213941.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB05C 570849.2 4213936.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB06A 570839.2 4213978.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB06B 570829.5 4213984.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB06C 570834.8 4213980.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB07A 570855.2 4213960.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB07B 570848.1 4213961.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB07C 570860.6 4213946.4 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB07D 570863.2 4213949.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB08A 570635.5 4214705.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB08B 570621.5 4214711.0 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB08C 570651.3 4214706.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB09A 570653.7 4214537.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB09B 570652.8 4214534.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB09C 570654.6 4214534.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB10A 570669.7 4214610.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB10B 570652.1 4214614.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB10C 570652.2 4214608.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB10E 570645.0 4214623.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB11A 570673.3 4214602.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB11B 570672.6 4214581.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB11C 570686.6 4214584.0 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB12A 570761.9 4214600.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB13A 570920.7 4213995.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB13B 570939.1 4213998.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB13C 570923.3 4213989.1


Site Name Species common name Nest I. D. number Easting Northing Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB13D 570922.5 4213989.1 SOSPSBB14A 570746.8 4214621.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB15A 571093.8 4214059.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB16A 571088.7 4214033.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB17A 571103.1 4214000.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB18A 570839.3 4213872.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB19A 570896.7 4213920.0 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB19B 570901.3 4213904.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB20A 571048.7 4213994.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB21A 571058.5 4214079.0 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB22A 570740.9 4214595.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB23A 570855.7 4213997.4 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB23B 570865.3 4214000.8 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB23C 570861.0 4213994.1 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB25A 570576.9 4214689.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB26A 570616.9 4214734.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB27A 570892.9 4213960.0 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB27B 570882.4 4213959.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB27C 570884.9 4213969.9 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB28A 570662.3 4214552.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB28B 570675.2 4214578.4 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB28C 570663.2 4214548.3 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB29A 570704.4 4214554.2 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB30A 570624.1 4214614.5 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB30A 570641.5 4214623.6 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB30C 570632.8 4214615.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB31A 570614.3 4214525.7 Suisun Song Sparrow SOSPSBB32A 570690.1 4214584.0 China Camp State Park American Goldfinch AMGOCCA01A 543840.7 4207472.3 California Black Rail BLRACCA01A 543783.3 4207386.6 California Black Rail BLRACCA01B 543740.0 4207486.7 Marsh Wren MAWRCCB01A 544456.3 4207544.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA01A 543918.8 4207555.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA01B 543906.0 4207545.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA01C 543907.0 4207552.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA01D 543919.4 4207554.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA01E 543929.2 4207545.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA02A 543907.2 4207636.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA02B 543930.0 4207646.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA02C 543917.7 4207640.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA02D 543907.2 4207639.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA02E 543912.4 4207652.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA03A 543940.0 4207608.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA03B 543937.3 4207602.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA03C 543949.5 4207605.3

Suisun Song Sparrow


Site Name Species common name Nest I. D. number Easting Northing Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA04A 543932.1 4207576.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA04B 543925.3 4207566.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA04C 543934.6 4207584.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA04D 543939.8 4207595.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA06A 543896.0 4207598.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA06B 543893.3 4207610.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA06C 543892.4 4207595.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA07A 544224.2 4207344.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA07B 544221.0 4207343.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA07C 544236.5 4207340.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA07D 544226.2 4207347.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA09A 544222.9 4207200.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA09B 544236.1 4207195.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA09C 544230.9 4207199.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA09D 544236.2 4207187.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA10A 543890.8 4207503.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA10B 543908.3 4207510.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA11A 543933.9 4207549.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA11B 543924.9 4207556.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA12A 543862.9 4207456.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA12B 543865.9 4207452.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA13A 543913.2 4207536.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA13B 543910.8 4207533.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA13C 543901.3 4207520.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA14A 543823.2 4207419.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA14B 543826.0 4207410.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA14C 543823.2 4207421.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA14D 543823.1 4207421.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA15A 543836.8 4207513.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA16A 543805.3 4207467.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA16B 543799.8 4207474.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA16C 543820.9 4207484.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA18A 544278.6 4207258.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA18B 544275.1 4207255.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA19A 544190.3 4207304.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA19B 544193.7 4207284.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA20A 544203.3 4207312.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA20B 544199.2 4207305.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA21A 543826.0 4207505.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA21B 543813.1 4207496.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA21C 543822.9 4207488.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA21D 543832.9 4207492.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA22A 543840.0 4207531.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA22B 543840.9 4207532.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA22D 543841.8 4207534.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA22E 543845.5 4207543.0


Site Name Species common name Nest I. D. number Easting Northing Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA22F 543829.0 4207539.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA23A 543831.3 4207554.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA24A 543888.3 4207592.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA24B 543880.2 4207589.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA24C 543885.9 4207579.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA24D 543893.8 4207594.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA25A 543902.0 4207619.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA25B 543901.8 4207615.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA25C 543902.6 4207625.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA25D 543913.2 4207628.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA25E 543912.4 4207625.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA26A 544251.8 4207225.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA26B 544257.9 4207225.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA26C 544260.2 4207229.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA26D 544254.6 4207226.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA27A 543849.6 4207488.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA27B 543845.8 4207465.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA28A 543883.1 4207572.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA28B 543876.2 4207566.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA28C 543880.7 4207573.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA29A 543823.8 4207447.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA29B 543823.0 4207450.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA29C 543837.0 4207459.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA29D 543832.4 4207440.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA30A 544186.6 4207275.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA30B 544190.1 4207278.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA30C 544180.7 4207262.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA30D 544172.7 4207268.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA31A 544262.8 4207299.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA31B 544261.1 4207295.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA32A 543873.9 4207555.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA32B 543854.1 4207550.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA32C 543861.3 4207548.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA33A 544289.6 4207304.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA34A 543963.2 4207606.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA34A 544251.9 4207212.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA34B 543953.3 4207612.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCA34B 544245.8 4207197.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB01A 544248.3 4207053.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB01A 544392.7 4206987.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB01B 544398.8 4206983.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB01C 544388.2 4206991.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB01D 544392.6 4206990.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB01E 544388.2 4206997.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB03A 544334.6 4207008.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB03B 544324.2 4206983.8


Site Name Species common name Nest I. D. number Easting Northing Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB03C 544335.6 4206994.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB03D 544338.2 4206997.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB03E 544325.1 4206979.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB04A 544304.0 4206984.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB04B 544297.8 4206999.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB04C 544291.7 4206992.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB04D 544300.5 4206991.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB04E 544298.7 4206984.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB05A 544382.7 4207049.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB05B 544390.6 4207043.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB05C 544384.4 4207047.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB06A 544452.5 4207291.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB07A 544342.5 4207007.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB07B 544346.0 4207017.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB08A 544425.9 4207340.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB08C 544414.6 4207310.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB09A 544463.3 4207390.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB09B 544463.4 4207379.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB09C 544461.6 4207381.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB10A 544422.1 4207389.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB10B 544413.3 4207381.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB10C 544429.2 4207377.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB10D 544414.2 4207388.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB11A 544390.4 4207239.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB11B 544379.8 4207247.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB11C 544375.5 4207243.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB12A 544427.9 4206966.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB13A 544428.5 4207008.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB14A 544385.6 4206985.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB14B 544383.9 4206976.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB14C 544387.4 4206976.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB15A 544390.5 4207222.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB15B 544394.1 4207207.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB15C 544418.2 4207293.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB15C 544391.5 4207206.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB16A 544430.7 4207409.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB16B 544441.3 4207406.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB16C 544433.4 4207406.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB16D 544425.5 4207408.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB16E 544436.9 4207402.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB17A 544451.2 4207413.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB17B 544440.4 4207414.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB17C 544447.4 4207416.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB17D 544446.5 4207413.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB18A 544308.1 4207030.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB18B 544308.2 4207018.1


Site Name Species common name Nest I. D. number Easting Northing Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB18C 544295.9 4207022.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB18D 544309.9 4207030.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB20A 544498.7 4207026.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB21A 544491.3 4206932.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB22A 544409.7 4207405.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB23A 544416.6 4207267.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB23B 544428.9 4207269.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB23C 544430.5 4207283.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB23D 544429.7 4207269.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB24A 544292.1 4207075.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB25A 544449.3 4207059.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB26A 544450.8 4207269.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB26A 544384.6 4207171.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB27A 544441.6 4207351.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB29A 544446.7 4207381.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB30A 544333.5 4207041.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB31A 544401.2 4207360.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB31B 544381.0 4207358.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB32A 544305.6 4207011.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB34A 544270.6 4206987.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB34B 544276.8 4206989.1 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB34C 544289.1 4206983.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB35A 544284.5 4207026.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB35B 544285.3 4207028.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB35C 544278.3 4207024.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB35D 544278.3 4207027.9 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB36A 544434.8 4206978.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB36B 544425.2 4206981.0 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB37A 544383.0 4206989.7 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB37B 544361.0 4207000.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB37C 544364.5 4206998.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB37D 544376.8 4206998.5 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB37E 544377.7 4206995.2 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB38A 544404.6 4207374.8 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB39A 544396.3 4207130.6 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB39B 544396.3 4207128.4 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB40A 544422.4 4207328.3 Samuels Song Sparrow SOSPCCB41A 544406.4 4207038.6


san francisco bay tidal marsh project annual report 2003

Documents