Agmt 2006 State Coastal Conservancy

Home

'- \ . ' PROJECT NAME states, 'and around the world agree that the ConserVancy should continue its aggressive actions to eradicate invasive Sparlina from the Estuary. The objective of eradication of invasive Sparlina is also specifically supported in the Goals Report and by the SFBJV. Furthermore, in the published Comprehensive Conservation Management ,Plan for the San Francisco Estuary, San Francisco Estuary Project stakeholders have identified control of invasive species as the top priority for the restoration and protection of the Estuary. 4. Location This project is located in the nine San Francisco Bay Area Counties to 'benefit the restoration of the San Francisco baylands. 5. Need: San Francisco Bay has lost up to 93 percent of its original tidal marsh habitat. Fifty~five percent of the threatened and endangered species of the Bay Area are found in the tidal marshes. Left uncontrolled, introduced Spartina threatens to convert a significant portion of the open mudflats and tidal marshes to a monoculture which will reduce habiUit' for the species endemic to the area. Without Conservancy funding, this threat would not be addressed. 6. Greater-than-local interest: Introduced Sparlina threatens to move up the delta, and down' the coast to southern California. In the San FranCisco Bay, introduced Spartina threatens to displace listed state and federal special status species, such as the endangered California clapper rail, Ca~ifornia black rail, and the 'salt marsh harvest mouse. . . Additional Criteria 7. Urgency: As confirmed at the Third International Invasive Spartina Conference, experts from the region and around the world believe that if the spread of introduced Spartina is not controlled within the next few years, the greater than exponential spread of the plants and extensive hybridization with the native Sparlina foliosa will. preclude any chance for successful control in the future. If the Conservancy and its partners can address the problem appropriately iri the short-term, long-term maintenance expenses can be avoided. 8. Readiness: CEQA compliance and Site-Specific Plans for 2005/2006 are completed for the 1,755 acres targeted for control and eradication. It is anticipated that NEPA compliance and amended and new agreements with partners will be completed in time for the 2005 treatment season that begins m July 2005. 9. Cooperation: Existing grantees (landowners and land IIlanagers) are on board forcooperating to implement the Control Program Site-Specific Plans. In addition, ongoing coordination with the regulatory agencies is expected to result :in' compliance with permits and NEP A documentation required for the 2005/2006 Contr~l Program. CONSISTENCY WITH SAN FRANCISCO BAY PLAN: The Invasive Sparlina Project: Spartina Control Program is consistent with' the San Francisco Bay Plan, Section .entitled "Marshes and Mudflats", Policy 3 (c) (page 9) that states, "the quality of existing marshes should be improved by appropriate measures whenever possible." The main purpose of this project is to remove invasive Sparlina to improve the long-term quality. of existing marsh habitat in the baylands of the San Francisco Estuary. Page 12 of 15