RES 2026023 - Laserfiche WebLink

Sequoia Ecological Consulting, Inc. CalVTP Project-Specific Analysis and Addendum Augustin Bernal Community Park Fuel Reduction November 2025 A-78 MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICABLE? (Y/N) TIMING IMPLEMENTING ENTITY VERIFYING/ MONITORING ENTITY o These habitat features would be marked and treatments applied to the features would be designed to minimize or avoid the loss or degradation of suitable habitat for listed species during treatments. Identification and treatment of these features would be based on the life history and habitat requirements of the affected species and the most current, commonly accepted science • If it is determined during implementation of SPR BIO-1 and SPR BIO-10 that special-status wildlife with specific requirements for high canopy cover (e.g., northern goshawk, Sierra Nevada snowshoe hare) are present within a treatment area, then tree or shrub canopy cover within existing suitable areas would be retained at the percentage preferred by the species (as determined by expert opinion, published habitat association information, or other documented standards that are commonly accepted) such that the habitat function is maintained o A qualified RPF or biologist would determine if, after implementation of the impact avoidance measures listed above, the habitat function would remain for the affected species after implementation of the treatment o The qualified RPF or biologist may consult with CDFW and/or USFWS for technical information regarding habitat function • A qualified RPF or biologist with knowledge of the special-status wildlife species habitat and life history would review the treatment design and applicable impact minimization measures (potentially including others not listed above) to determine if the anticipated residual effects of the treatment would be significant under CEQA because implementation of the treatment would not maintain habitat function of the special-status wildlife species’ habitat or because the loss of special-status wildlife would substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a special-status wildlife species o If the project proponent determines the impact on special-status wildlife would be less than significant, no further mitigation would be required o If the project proponent determines that the loss of special-status wildlife or degradation of occupied habitat would be significant under