RPVCCA_CC_SR_2012_05_15_01_Agreement_Amendment_To_The_Preserve_Trails_PlanCITY OF
MEMORANDUM
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
HONORABLE MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
JOEL ROJAS,AICP,CO~I!y DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR ()-
MAY 15,2012
AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED PRESERVE
TRAILS PLAN (PTP)FOR THE PALOS VERDES
NATURE PRESERVE (SUPPORTS 2012 CITY COUNCIL
GOAL -TRAIL SYSTEM ENHANCEMEN1)
REVIEWED:CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER \f1-
Project Manager:Ara Mihranian,AIGP,Deputy Community Development Directo~
RECOMMENDATION
1.Name the Preserve area encompassed by the acquired Upper Filiorum property
the "Filiorum Reserve;"
2.Approve the new Trails Plan for the Filiorum Reserve;
3.Approve 13 Staff proposed amendments to the Preserve Trails Plan that was
originally approved by the City Council in 2008;
4.Receive and File the PVPLC's 2011 Preserve Annual Management Report;and,
5.Receive and File the 2012 Preserve Trails Project List
INTRODUCTION
On April 29,2008,the City Council adopted a Preserve Trails Plan (PTP)that identifies the
permitted trail routes and the permitted trail uses (pedestrian,equestrian,and bicycle)
within the then approximate 1,200 acre Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.This item is before
the City Council because the PTP needs to be amended to include approved trails for the
190-acre Filiorum property that was acquired and added to the Preserve in 2009.In
1-1
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 2
addition,as a result of City and PVPLC Staff monitoring and public input,Staff is
recommending 13 amendments to the 2008 approved PTP.Furthermore,the annual
procedural action of receiving the PVPLC's annual Preserve Management Report and
Preserve Trails Project List have been included in tonight's recommendation.
Provided below is a background summary of the milestones that led up to the Council
adopted PTP in 2008,as well as a description of each of the PTP amendments proposed
by Staff.
BACKGROUND
The City's Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP)
On August 31,2004,the City Council approved the City's Natural Communities
Conservation Planning Subarea Plan (NCCP).In summary,the City's NCCP Subarea Plan
identifies the creation of a proposed nature Preserve,how the Preserve will be assembled,
how the Preserve will be managed and how much implementation of the Plan is going to
cost.The City's current NCCP Preserve,which is known as the Palos Verde~Nature
Preserve,currently stands at approximately 1,400 acres in size (approximately 17%of the
City).While the primary purpose for creating the NCCP Preserve is for the long-term
protection and restoration of multiple species,including state and federally protected
species (plants and animals),while accommodating appropriate economic development
within the City.The City's NCCP contemplates that the Preserve will also be open to the'
public for compatible passive recreational use (multi-use trails,some picnicking,etc)and to
promote the understanding and appreciation of natural resources.Furthermore,the NCCP
states that the public use of the Preserve will ultimately be determined by the City Council
(with concurrence from the state and federal resource agencies)through the preparation of
a Preserve Public Use Master Plan or PUMP.
NCCP Preserve Management
The City's NCCP identifies the PVPLC as the designated Habitat Manager for the
Preserve.In this role,the PVPLC is responsible for preparing and implementing a Habitat
Management Plan,conducting select plant and animal species monitoring,the preparation
and implementation of a Habitat Restoration Plan,and the preparation of other associated
plans and monitoring reports.The PVPLC has also been designated to implement the
approved Preserve Trails Plan (PTP),which involves basic trail maintenance,signage
installation and fencing on an as needed basis and dependent of available resources.
Active management of the Preserve properties by the PVPLC began on January 1,2006
and continues to this day despite the City's NCCP still pending approval by the state and
federal resource agencies.On November 1,2011,the City Council approved a
comprehensive Management Agreement with the PVPLC that clarifies the management
roles of the City and the PVPLC.
NCCP Requirement for a Public Use Master Plan (PUMP)
In order to ensure that the NCCP Preserve provides the public with recreational and
educational opportunities while conserving the sensitive biological resources that exist in
1-2
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 3
the Preserve,the City's NCCP requires that the City and the PVPLC prepare a Public Use
Master Plan (PUMP)for the Preserve.The PUMP is intended to address issues germane
to the Preserve such as public access,trailhead locations,parking,trail use,fencing,and
signage to name a few.The PTP that was approved by the City Council in April 2008 is
just one component of the PUMP,albeit the biggest component.Once an updated PTP is
approved by the City Council,a finalized PUMP will be presented to the City Council for
approval.
PUMP Committee Input on the 2008 PTP
Although not required by the NCCP,on June 6,2006,the City Council formed a 15-
member PUMP Committee (plus one Ex-Officio member)to assist the City and the PVPLC
with the development of the PUMP document,particularly the PTP portion.Between July
12,2006 and January 30,2008,the PUMP Committee met 32 times,with the bulk of the
Committee's work focused on recommended trail routes and trail uses for the greater
Preserve.As part of the PTP,the Committee also identified the trails within the Preserve
that should be designated as segments of the Palos Verdes Loop Trail and the California
Coastal Trail systems pursuant to the City's Conceptual Trails Plan.The PTP ultimately
adopted by the Council on April 29,2008,reflects the PUMP Committee's trail route and
use recommendations with certain exceptions.
City Council Adoption of the PTP
Prior to the Council's adoption of the PTP,public concerns were raised regarding the
environmental degradation occurring in the Preserve without a formal trails plan in place
and appropriate enforcement.As a result,on November 20,2007,the Council imposed a
temporary "time-out"on all trail uses within certain portions of the Portuguese Bend
Reserve to allow the re-establishment of the protected habitat in areas where the most
severe degradation had occurred,and to allow time for the City to adopt a formal trails
plan.The temporary "time-out"was eventually lifted on June 6,2008 after it was
demonstrated that the installation of trail markers and the implementation of an educational
and enforcement program had occurred.Ultimately,the City Council approved the PTP on
April 29,2008.
PTP Implementation and Enforcement
Pursuant to the NCCP and the Management Agreement between the City and the PVPLC,
it is the City's responsibility to establish and enforce rules and regulations for public
activities within the Preserve.On December 1,2009,the City Council initiated a 120-day
pilot program with the Mountains Recreation &Conservation Authority (MRCA)to provide
ranger services throughout the Preserve.The MRCA Rangers are experienced and trained
California Peace officers with the authority to issue citations and make arrests.The
Rangers enforce Preserve and parkland regulations listed in the City's Municipal Code
such as the following to name a few:
•Preserve and Park Hours
•Proper use of trails
•Dogs off leash/waste pick-up
1-3
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 4
•Protection of flora and fauna
•Unauthorized motorized vehicles
•Poaching Prevention
•Removal of homeless encampments
Based on the success of the pilot program,the Council extended the service agreement to
provide on-going ranger services for the City.The Rangers provide the City with quarterly
reports summarizing their enforcement activities within the Preserve (see attachment).
It should be noted that over the past several months,field observations by the City and the
PVPLC have revealed that certain areas at the Portuguese Bend Reserve (particularly
around the Peppertree Trail)are experiencing increased off-trail activity and vandalism to
trail improvements that appears to be primarily by some bicyclists.To address this issue,
the City's rangers were asked to have focused patrols of the area.The City,in cooperation
with the PVPLC,is continuing the monitor the situation and is developing a more
aggressive enforcement plan with the rangers.
City Acquisition of the Upper Filiorum Property
On December 31,2009,the City and the PVPLC,with support from the State Coastal
Conservancy and contributions from over 700 supporters in the community,acquired 191
acres of the "Upper Filiorum"property from York Long Point Associates for inclusion into
the City's NCCP Preserve.The addition of the Upper Filiorum property into the City's
Preserve brought the total acreage of the Preserve to approXimately 1,400 acres.
Public Workshops for Trails on the Upper Filiorum Property
The addition of Upper Filiorum to the overall Preserve necessitated an amendment to the
Council adopted PTP to include trail routes and trail uses for this area.As such,City and
PVPLC Staff,with the assistance of National Park Service (NPS)facilitator,that was
competitively awarded to the PVPLC,conducted two public workshops (September 8 and
29,2010)to develop a trails plan for the 191-acre Upper Filiorum property.At these public
workshops,participants provided the City and the PVPLC with suggestions on trail routes
and uses to be considered for the Upper Filiorum Trails Plan.Based on the public
workshop comments,the City and the PVPLC prepared a draft Trails Plan for the Filiorum
property that is now before the Council for approval.
State of the Trails Public Workshop on the Preserve Trails Plan
At its April 7,2009 meeting when the temporary "time-out"was lifted,the Council directed
that the PVPLC,as the Preserve manager,should conduct an annual public workshop
related to the implementation of the PUMP (specifically the PTP).Pursuant to this Council
directive,on April 30,2011,the City and the PVPLC,with the assistance of the NPS,
conducted a public workshop on the State of the Trails for the overall Preserve (not
including the Filiorum property).The purpose of the State of Trails Workshop was to
provide the community with an update on the condition of the trails and the plans for the
Preserve in the coming year.Additionally,this workshop provided the community an
opportunity to express its concerns,needs,and desires for the Preserve especially in
1-4
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGES
regards to the existing PTP as it relates to trail conditions,trail signs,and trail connections.
Public comments were accepted at the April 30 th workshop and through May 13,2011.
Based on the comments received at the workshop and during the comment period,specific
amendments that are being recommended by Staff to the 2008 Council adopted PTP are
now before the Council for approval (please refer to Staff Recommendation No.3).
DISCUSSION
The following discussion explains the following five (5)components of Staff's
recommendation.
1.Name the Preserve area encompassed by the acquired Upper Filiorum
property the "Filiorum Reserve."
To facilitate management,the 1,400-acre Palos Verdes Nature Preserve is divided into
subareas referred to as "Reserve"areas.The names of the original 10 reserve areas were
approved by the City Council back in 2008.On December 31,2009,the City acquired 191-
acres,known as the Upper Filiorum property for inclusion into the Preserve.The area
acquired was referred to as Upper Filiorum to distinguish it from the lower portion of the
same property (Lower Filiorum)owned by the same entity which is now more commonly
referred to as Point View.Given the size of this most recent acquisition parcel,Staff is
recommending that it be designated as its own preserve subarea with the name "Filiorum
Reserve,"thus resulting in 11 subarea rese,rves.This name has been supported by public
comments.As such,Staff recommends that this area formally be named the "Filiorum
Reserve."
2.Approve the New Trails Plan for the Filiorum Reserve
The acquisition of the Filiorum property resulted in over 900 contiguous acres of protected
open space and a wildlife corridor linking the Three Sisters and the Portuguese Bend
Reserves.The property contains a network of trails that have been used by the public prior
to the City's acquisition,as well as valuable habitat and stunning views of the Pacific
Ocean.In order to develop a trails plan for the Filiorum Reserve that balances public
recreation and habitat preservation,through a grant awarded to the PVPLC,the National
Park Service (NPS)assisted the City and the PVPLC in developing a trails Plan for this
property.Two public workshops,facilitated by the NPS,were held on September 8,2010
and September 29,2010.
At the September 8th workshop,the public was asked to provide input on potential trail
routes and uses within the boundary limits of the newly acquired Filiorum property,
including connections to the neighboring Three Sisters and Portuguese Bend Reserves.
The public was also instructed to consider the following key points taken from the various
legal documents under which the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve is managed,when
identifying trail routes and uses,as well as the City's Conceptual Trails Plan in identifying
potential trail routes:
1-5
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 6
•The overall goal of Preserve management is to increase local carrying capacity
by avoiding or minimizing impacts to,and restoring,Coastal Sage Scrub and
other native habitat.
•Trail construction should avoid direct access to sensitive resource areas and
major biological features and public use should be limited to specified trails
where access impacts to habitat can be minimized.
•Trail planning should rely upon existing social trails to the maximum extent
possible and avoid duplicate trails.
•No unauthorized person shall cut,break,dig up,remove,or in any manner
injure any plant,animal,structure or contents therein on any park or municipal
property.
•Manipulating or altering any natural water course is prohibited.
•The trails are considered unimproved and will stay unimproved with minimal
maintenance.
•All uses will be enforced.
Based on the public's input at the September 8th workshop,the City,PVPLC and NPS
developed a proposed Trails Plan for the Filiorum property that was presented to the public
at the second workshop on September 29,2010 (see attachment).In response to the
September 29th workshop, approximately 36 comments were received,both verbally and
.written,trom members of the public.The public comments received during this process
.were compiled and responded to by the City and the PVPLC·,with the assistance of the
NPS,and posted on the City's website (see attachment).The following is a summary of
the major points of public concern followed by the City's and the PVPLC's responses (for
more information see the attached Upper Filiorum responses to comments):
•The Trails Map should identify a connection between the Filiorum Reserve
and the Three Sisters Reserve.
Concerns were raised that the proposed Trails Plan did not identify a trail
connection between the Filiorum Reserve and the abutting Three Sisters Reserve to
the west.Since the September 29th workshop,the City and the PVPLC have
identified a trail route in this area (see attachment).Based on a recent meeting with
the property owner of the Point View property,Jim York,a trail connection was
identified that traverses Mr.York's property outside the current perimeter fence.
While Mr.York expressed no interest in adjusting the mutual property line or
granting an access easement on his property,Mr.York agreed to enter into a
permissive use agreement with the City to allow the desired trail connection
provided that the City incurs the preparation and recording costs of such an
agreement that indemnifies the property owner from any liability.Once the City
Council approves the updated Trails Plan,City Staff will work with the City Attorney
and the City Engineer,along with the PVPLC,to execute said permissive use
agreement with Mr.York.
•The Trails Plans should include the trail historically referred to as the
Matterhorn Trail
1-6
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 7
The Matterhorn Trail is a trail not identified in the City's Conceptual Trails Plan that
spurs off the McBride Trail (not in the Preserve)traversing a steep ridgeline.During
the comment process,members of the public requested that the trails plan include
the Matterhorn Trail.However,the City and the PVPLC believe that the Matterhorn
Trail is unsustainable due to the steep grades and high erosion potential.Moreover,
improving this route as a sustainable trail would require several switchbacks that
would adversely impact habitat areas,which conflicts with the intent of the NCCP.
For these reasons,it is not recommended that the Matterhorn trail be included in the
trails plan.
•The Trails Plan should include the trail historically referred to as the Brim
Trail
The requested Brim Trail is generally located between the Zote's (rhymes with
"knotty's)Cutacross Trail and the Pony Loop Trail.The Trails Plan does not include
this trail route because it is considered a redundant trail that is discouraged by the
NCCP.Additionally,based on input received from the Department of Fish and
Game,this requested trail route is considered a redundant trail that has
gnatcatchers and should be restored.As such,this trail would result in the
fragmentation of endangered species habitat and is therefore not recommended for
the Filiorum Reserve Trails Plan.
•The Trails Plan should lim(t '!lJ0r.e trails to pedestrian and equestrian use only
Some members of the public expressed concerns that there are too many trail
routes designated as multi-use.As such,they requested that more of these trails
be designated for pedestrian and equestrian use only in order to enhance the
quality of the trail experience and reduce the potential for incidents between the
three user groups.Most of the trails proposed for the Filiorum Reserve are
designated as multi-use.The proposed Trails Plan identifies two trails for hikers
and equestrians only (Gary's Gulch Trail and Eucalyptus Trail)because these trails
lead to trails within the Portuguese Bend Reserve with a similar trail use designation
(pedestrian and equestrian)and because the area that these two trails are located
support a serene and relaxing environment that is typically desired by both
pedestrians and equestrians.
•The Trails Plans should allow bicyclists on the Eucalyptus Trail
The Eucalyptus Trail is designated as pedestrian/equestrian because it leads to
trails within the Portuguese Bend Reserve with a similar trail use designation,and
because of the serene and relaxing area.Bicyclists are not precluded from
experiencing this trail provided that a bicyclist walks with their bike.Bikes are
allowed on "no bike"trails when they are walked.
1-7
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15, 2012
PAGES
•The Trails Plans should discourage public access through the Portuguese
Bend Community and other Private Property
After consulting with the Portuguese Bend Community Association regarding
concerns with public access between the Preserve and the Portuguese Bend
Community,in areas where a trail terminates at the City boundary line or at private
property,the final Council adopted trails plan will include a note and a symbol that
indicates access is prohibited unless permission is obtained.Additionally,signs will
be posted at the termination of Preserve trails indicating that the Preserve trail ends
here.
In summary,based on the above discussion,Staff recommends that the City Council
approve the trail routes,trail uses,and trail names depicted on the attached trails plan for
the Filiorum Reserve which are summarized as follows:
• 8 Trail routes resulting in 3.5 miles of trails (that will result in a total of 31.3 miles of
trails throughout the Preserve).Of the 8 proposed trail routes,
o 6 trails are multiuse;and,
o 2 trails are pedestrian and equestrian only
The Wildlife Agencies have reviewed and approved this proposed Trails Plan as being
consistent with the City's NCCP.
3.Approve 13 recommended amendments to the Preserve Trails Plan that
was originally approved by the City Council in 2008
The current PTP for the Preserve (excluding the Filiorum Reserve)identifies 27.8 miles
of public trails which are broken down as follows:
•7.9 miles of pedestrian only trails
•5.1 miles of pedestrian/equestrian only trails
•12.6 miles of multi-use trails
On April 30,2011,the City and the PVPLC,with the assistance of the NPS,held a State of
the Trails workshop that was attended by approximately 40 persons.At the public
workshop,comments from the bicycle community were submitted requesting that many of
the existing pedestrian/equestrian trail designations in the Preserve be changed to include
bicyclists.Many other trail users,such as hikers and equestrians,requested that the trail
use designations remain as is or that certain existing multi-use trails be changed to
pedestrian/equestrian trails only.Based on these public comments,the City and the
PVPLC reviewed and researched these requests and are of the opinion that with all things
considered,such as habitat protection,user experience,and trail connectivity to name a
few,the following 13 revisions are recommended to the 2008 City Council adopted
Preserve Trails Plan:
A.Abalone Cove Reserve
•Via de Campo Trail -Change the use designation from pedestrian to
1-8
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 9
pedestrian/bicycle.
•Chapel View Trail-Change the use designation from pedestrian/equestrian to
multi-use.
•Beach School Trail -Change the use designation from pedestrian to
pedestrian/bicycle.
•Harden Trail -Eliminate this trail from the PTP and close this trail because
rerouting the trail to address erosion issues will result in impacts to habitat.
•Portuguese Bend Loop Trail -Change the use designation from pedestrian to
pedestrian/bicycle.
•Sea Dahlia Trail -In light of the recent Coastal Conservancy grant awarded to
the City for the implementation of the City's segment of the Coastal Trail,this
trail was repaired to be more sustainable.
It should be noted hat the attached PTP indicates that the Cave Trail will be
removed from the plan and closed.However,after further investigation,this trail is
now proposed to remain open with added trail markers to prevent spur and social
trails from emerging.
B.Three Sisters Reserve
•Three Sisters Trail·A multiuse trail connection has been identified between the
Three Sisters and Filiorum Reserves.
C.Portuguese Bend Reserve
•Landslide Scarp Trail Change the use designation from
pedestrian/equestrian only to multi-use.The City and the PVPLG received a
request from a few members of the public that this trail's designation not be
changed to include bicycles because of inadequate trail tread and poor line-of-
sight that may potentially lead to user conflicts.Based on the City's and the
PVPLC's observations,as well as feedback received from the City's rangers,
City and PVPLC Staff believe this trail segment is able to accommodate both
user groups,and creates a loop trail for bicyclists.
•Ishibashi Farm Trail-Change the use designation from pedestrian/equestrian
to multi-use.
•Rim Trail -The original Rim Trail inadvertently traversed a portion of private
property in the City of Rolling Hills.As such,the PVPLC,through a grant was
able to reroute this trail segment so that it is entirely within the City's Preserve
boundary limits.As such,the trails map needs to be amended to reflect the
current trail route.
•Burma Road Overlook -At the top of the Burma Road Trail,a multiuse trail is
proposed to connect to a popular overlook.
D.San Ramon Reserve
•San Ramon Trail -This trail is intended to connect this Reserve to Friendship
Park.However,since this is the area of the active Tarapaca Landslide,a viable
trail route cannot be identified at this time.Therefore,the San Ramon Reserve
1-9
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 10
Trails Plan has been clarified to note that a future trail connection between the
San Ramon Reserve and Friendship Park will occur when feasible to do so.
E.Ocean Trails Reserve
•Sagebrush Walk Trail -Change the use designation from pedestrian to
pedestrian/bicycle between the picnic node and the East Boundary Trail only.
The segment of this trail that extends to shore will remain pedestrian only.
Bicycle racks at the picnic node will be provided when funding becomes
available.
The Wildlife Agencies have reviewed and approved the proposed amendments to the PTP
as being consistent with the City's NCCP.
4.Receive and File the 2011 PVPLC Annual Preserve Management Report
According to the NCCP and the current Management Agreement between the City and the
PVPLC,the PVPLC is required to submit an annual preserve management report on the
Preserve to the City Council.The PVPLC has submitted the 2011 Annual Report which
covers the period between January 1,2011 and December 31,2011 (see attachment).
The Annual Report describes the PVPLC's management activities relating to habitat
enhancement and restoration,property maintenance and monitoring,vegetation and
wildlife monitoring,facility improvement projects (Le.trail improvements),and volunteer
involvement.The 2011 PVPLC Annual Report includes the following sub-reports (see
attachment):
•Habitat Restoration Monitoring
•Targeted Exotic Removal Program for Plans (TERPP)
•Research and Monitoring
•Volunteer Program
•Future Trails Projects List
•Post-Fire Survey Report for Portuguese Bend
According to the attached letter from PVPLC Executive Director Andrea Vona (see
attachment),the Annual Report is consistent with the reporting requirements ofthe NCCP
and raises no significant issues or concerns with regards to the routine management of the
Preserve.Staff has reviewed the Annual Report and agrees that it is consistent with
PVPLC's preserve management responsibilities as required by the City Council approved
2004 NCCP and the current management agreement between the City and the PVPLC.
On April 30,2012,the 2011 PVPLC Annual Report was posted on the City's website and a
list-serve message was issued announcing its availability.
Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the 2011 PVPLC Annual Report.
5.Receive and File the 2012 Preserve Trail Project List
Based on comments from the public and on site monitoring,the PVPLC develops an
annual list of potential trail projects to be completed by the PVPLC within the Preserve
1-10
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 11
based on available funding opportunities,such as grants and volunteer events.The
majority of the work is typically conducted outside the bird breeding season (February 15
through August 31),except for work that will not impact habitat.The trail projects
completed in 2011 are listed on Page 18 of the 2011 Annual Report and include erosion
repair,trail delineation,and fence removal projects to name a few.Projects on the list that
are not completed are carried over to the following year.Attached for the Council's review
is the 2012 Preserve Trail Project List,which is also located in Appendix E of the 2011
Annual Report.
Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the 2012 Preserve Trail Project
List.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Finalization of the PUMP
As noted earlier,the PTP is one component of the PUMP.Once the City Council approves
the PTP,Staff will complete the PUMP document and present it to the Wildlife Agencies for
the review and approval,which then will be presented to the City Council.The process for
future amendments to the PTP will be specified in the PUMP document that is scheduled
to be considered by the City Council this coming summer.
Trail Users and Adjoining Private Communities
Concerns have been expressed to City and PVPLC Staff from neighboring communities .
regarding trail users accessing areas that are outside the Preserve.The Portuguese Bend
Community Association is concerned with public access between the Preserve and their
private streets/neighborhoods.Additionally,representatives from the City of Rolling Hills
and the Rolling Hills Community Association have also expressed to the City and the
PVPLC,that their community is concerned with trail users accessing their community from
the Fire Station Trail,the Rim Trail and the Burma Road Trail (beyond the Barn Owl Trail).
Both City and PVPLC Staff have been speaking to representatives from these communities
to develop a strategy to prevent trail users from wandering off the designated Preserve
trails.Based on these conversations and the resources available,the following tools are
being implemented to minimize trail users from entering these private communities:
•Installing signs informing trail users that the Preserve Trail ends here.
•Amending the PTP to include a note and a symbol that indicates access is
prohibited unless permission is obtained.
•Increased ranger patrol at these areas to advise trail users that the Preserve Trails
terminate.
•Increased public outreach and education on the Preserve Trail Routes
Both the City and the PVPLC believe that the above tools will help minimize trail users from
entering these private communities.
Preserve Trails Plan Relationship to the Conceptual Trails Plan and the Open Space Task
Force Recommendations
1-11
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 12
On November 27,1984,the City Council adopted the City's Trails Network Plan intended
to serve as an advisory tool for the City decision makers for the implementation and
funding of City trails.As a means of implementing the Trails Network Plan,on January 22,
1990,the City Council adopted the Conceptual Trails Plan (CTP)and Conceptual
Bikeways Plan (CBP),as two separate documents.Collectively,the CTP and CBP serve
as the City's Trails Network Plan (TNP).
In 2002,the City Council formed the Open Space Planning and Recreation &Parks Task
Force.One ofthe tasks was to update the CPT.Shortly after its formation,the Task Force
broke itself into a series of subcommittees and the assignment of reviewing the CPT was
given to the four-member Open Space Subcommittee.The Open Space Subcommittee,
that included Councilman Knight,spent a considerable amount of time reviewing existing
City documents,conducting site visits to study actual conditions in the field and preparing
specific recommendations to update the CPT.The Subcommittee submitted its draft
recommendations to the Task Force on May 12,2004.One of the four Subcommittee
recommendations endorsed by the City Council was to update the City's Trails Network
Plan consisting of the CTP and the CBP based on eleven specific recommendations
regarding the format and composition of a revised Trails Network Plan (see attachment).
The City's CTP identifies trail routes through what is now the Preserve.With this in mind,
the 2008 Council adopted PTP now supersedes the 1993 Council adopted CTP for the
trails located within the Preserve.Likewise,the amended PTP will also supersede.the
1993 CTP for trails located in the Preserve.However,the CTP still applies to trails located
outside of the Preserve.A major update to the TNP is being processed by the Community
Development Department and will proceed this summer.Information relating to the update
to the TNP plan can be found on the City's website.Those interested in following the
update of the TNP are encouraged to subscribe to the listserve.
Pursuant to the 2005 Council directive relating to the Open Space Subcommittee's eleven
recommendations when reviewing the TNP update,Staff reviewed the PTP including the
proposed recommend amendments for compliance with these eleven recommendations.
Based on Staff's review,the PTP complies with the recommendations with the exception of
the recommendation that the trail use determinations be left unrestricted.As depicted in
the attached PTP,the all the trail routes include use designations intended to address
issues pertaining to habitat protection,line-of-sight,user experience,and trail connectivity
to name a few.
Public Notification
In order to ensure the public is adequately informed regarding the May 15th City Council
meeting on this agenda item,a listserve message was issued on April 15th announcing
tonight's meeting and the items to be considered by the City Council.Moreover,a notice
was published in the Peninsula News on Thursday,May 3,2012 along with a follow-up list
serve message that included a link to the notice posted on the City's website.Once this
Staff Report is made available to the public,City Staff will issue a Iistserve message
announcing the availability of the May 15th Staff Report with a link to access the Staff
Report.
1-12
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 13
Public Comments
At this time,the City has received 36 comments letters from the public dating back to
October 2011 (see attachment).The comments received thus far range in sentiment from
supporting stricter restrictions on public access,specifically pertaining to bicyclists,to those
requesting increased bicycle access to all trails.The Comment letters are attached for
Council's review.If additional comments are received before the May 15th City Council
meeting,Staff will provide these comment letters to the Council at the meeting.
FISCAL IMPACTS
The approval of the recommended amendments to the PTP will not result in fiscal impacts
on the City's General Fund since the Plan solely establishes the management tools for the
Preserve but does not actual approve any projects.Actual implementation of the various
components identified in the PTP,such as trail improvements,signs,enforcement,etc.will
require separate funding.However,approval of the PTP increases the chances of
receiving public and private grants for implementing the PTP.It has been Staff's past
experience with grant funding that projects that are a part of a City approved plan,such as
the PTP,have a much better chance of being funded.Receipt of such grant funds would
help offset any future costs borne by the City with project implementation,including the
construction and maintenance of such improvements.
CONCLUSION
Based on the discussion in this Staff Report,Staff recommends that the City Council:
1)Name the Preserve area encompassed by the acquired Upper Filiorum property
as the "Filiorum Reserve;"
2)Approve the new Trails Plan for the Filiorum Reserve;
3)Approve recommended amendments to the Preserve Trails Plan that was
originally approved by the City Council in 2008;
4)Receive and File the PVPLC's 2011 Annual Report;and,
5)Receive and File the 2012 Preserve Project List
ALTERNATIVES
In addition to the Staff recommendations,based on information considered at the meeting,
including public testimony,the City Council may wish to continue the discussion on the
PTP so that further research can be conducted priorto rendering a decision.In this case,
Staff would request specific direction on the items of Staff's recommendation that the
Council believes warrants further research.
ATTACHMENTS
•Filiorum Reserve Trails Plan
•Filiorum Responses to Comments
•Proposed Trail Connection Between Filiorum and Three Sisters Reserves
•Recommended amendments to the 2009 Preserve Trails Plan
1-13
PALOS VERDES NATURE PRESERVE
MAY 15,2012
PAGE 14
•State of the Trails Workshop Responses to Comments
•PVPLC Cover Letter on the 2011 PVPLC Annual Preserve Management Report
•2011 PVPLC Annual Preserve Management Report
•PVPLC 2012 Trail Project List
•Ranger Quarterly Reports (2011-2012)
•Open Space Task Force Subcommittee Recommended Changes to the City's
Trails Network Plan
•Public Comments
1-14
Filiorum Reserve Trails Plan
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-1
##
#
Upper Filiorum ReserveDraft Trail Map
Updated May 22, 2011Ü00.50.25 Miles
Three Sisters
Portuguese Bend
McBride Trail Easement
Upper Filiorum Reserve
PV Nature Preserves
Multiuse Trail
Pedestrian & Equestrian Only
Multiuse Trail
Pedestrian & Equestrian Only
Proposed Uses
Current Uses
Ratt
l
e
s
n
a
k
e
T
r
Zote's Cutacross
Ga
r
y
'
s
G
u
l
c
h
T
r
Kelvin Canyon Tr.Fo
r
d
T
r
.
Pony (Loop) Trail
Eucalyptus Tr.![![
!F
![
Reserve Access
Vista Lookout
!F
!F
!F
Jac
k
'
s
H
a
t
T
r
.
#Stream Crossing
Private CommunityAccess Only
Potential Connection
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
2
Proposed Trail Connection between
the Filiorum and Three Sisters
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-3
TR
A
I
L
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
B
E
T
W
E
E
N
F
I
L
I
O
R
U
M
AN
D
T
H
R
E
E
S
I
S
T
E
R
S
R
E
S
E
R
V
E
S
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
T
r
a
i
l
R
o
u
t
e
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
T
r
a
i
l
R
o
u
t
e
Attachments 1-4
Filiorum Reserve Trails Plan
Responses to Comments
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-5
Upper Filiorum Trails Workshop
Responses to Comments
September 8 – 29, 2010
Upper Filiorum Trails Workshop - General Comments Summary
CONNECTION TO THREE SISTERS
The City and the PVPLC intend to identify and pursue a connection between Three Sisters and
Upper Filiorum. Currently, there is no funding available to create an appropriate and sustainable
connection (i.e. footbridge or engineered trail work). The PVPLC and the City will seek grant
opportunities to seek funding to construct such a connection. The Trails map will be updated
to show a clouded area where future possible connections can occur.
TRAIL IDENTIFICATION PROCESS
Trail considerations provide the framework for the trail identification process. As a result, the
current trail configurations are a result of historic social trail usage. Some trails were removed
from the trail plan because they were considered duplicate trails, unsustainable trails, or they
were located in sensitive habitats. This includes the Matterhorn trail, which is considered
unsustainable in its current state due to its steep grade and high erosion potential. The
Matterhorn trail cuts through sensitive species habitat, such as coastal sage scrub supporting
gnatcatchers and cactus wrens, and its use should be discontinued to preserve this habitat.
TRAIL USAGE DECISIONS
Trails were designated as multi-use unless trail steepness or line-of-sight issues were thought to
create unsafe conditions, or if erosion was considered a problem.
The draft plan identifies an area for hikers and equestrians only (i.e. Gary Gulch). The
Eucalyptus trail was designated pedestrian/equestrian because it leads to trails with this
designation in the Portuguese Bend Reserve, and for its value as a serene and relaxing area.
Bicyclists will have access to pedestrian/equestrian trails such as the Eucalyptus trail by walking
their bikes. Bikes are allowed on “no bike” trails when they are walked.
ACCESS THRU PORTUGUESE BEND COMMUNITY AND OTHER PRIVATE PROPERTY
The City and the PVPLC has consulted with the Portuguese Bend Community Association
regarding trail access between the Preserve and the Portuguese Bend community. The access
point will be identified as leading to a private community on the trails map. Regarding the PV
loop trail, the City is updating its master trail plan and will examine options for locating the
loop trail in the general area that will not involve traversing private property.
TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS
The City and PVPLC will continue to seek grant opportunities to improve trails, including
adding erosion control devices at stream crossings. When funding becomes available, stream
crossings will be assessed, prioritized, and improved when feasible.
Constructing an overlook off the Kelvin Canyon trail (existing trail in one) will be considered.
1
Attachments 1-6
ADDRESSING CONCERNS OF ALL USER GROUPS
All user groups were encouraged to voice their concerns through a variety of processes,
including two widely publicized public workshops, a blog site, and email. Care was made to
consider all comments received.
USER CONFLICT
It is expected that trail usage at Upper Filiorum may increase because of the connection with
Three Sisters and Portuguese Bend resulting in the possibility of increased user conflicts. The
draft trails plan intends to create an environment that is comfortable and safe for all trail users
while minimizing user conflicts.
Techniques will be implemented to minimize user conflict on the trails such as utilizing rangers
to enforce respectful trail use and trail signs. Signs will be placed to indicate proper trail
behavior. Additionally, the City and the PVPLV are exploring educational opportunities to raise
awareness such as a “Share the Trail” workshop.
The PVPLC and the City are in the process of conducting a wayfinding and signage inventory to
determine what signs need to be removed, replaced or added.
EROSION
If the PVPLC and the City consider a trail to be severely eroding, consideration would be given
to close or reroute the trail.
The following comments (indicated in bold black italics) were presented at the trail workshop
and during the public comment period on the draft Upper Filiorum Trails Plan and responded
to by PVPLC and RPV staff (indicated in purple).
1. Q – What percentage of riders are technical? [Question from DFG]
R: Percentage data on the skill level of trail users does not exist.
2. Q – What is the miles of trails within the preserve? [Question from DFG]
R: There are approximately 3.17 miles (16,756 ft) of trails in the Draft Upper Filiorum Trails
Map. This count does not include the McBride Trail easement located outside of the Preserve.
The Portuguese Bend Reserve contains 10.5 miles of trails and there are a total of 31.37 miles
of trails open to the public within the overall Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.
CONNECTION TO THREE SISTERS
3. Q – There is a canyon connection between Three Sisters and Upper Filiorum along the
chain link fence without “No Trespassing” sign that may be used for a trail. Where is
the Preserve boundary line?
2
Attachments 1-7
R: The City is undertaking a survey of the property line. Upon completion of the survey, the
City and the PVPLC will determine whether a connection can be made.
4. Q - Will there be an official trail connection made between Portuguese Bend and
Three Sisters?
R: The City and the PVPLC intend to identify and pursue a connection between Three Sisters
and Upper Filiorum. Currently, there is no funding available to create an appropriate and
sustainable connection (i.e. footbridge or engineered trail work).
The PVPLC and the City will seek grant opportunities to provide funding for the connection.
5. Q – If a trail is not included in the current plan, is it likely that it will not ever be
included. Consider indicating where a future route should be located.
R: The map will be updated to show a clouded area with future possible connections.
OTHER TRAIL ACCESSIBILITY
6. Q – The Matterhorn trail was a well used social trail for years and provides skill
level/enjoyment without maintenance. Blog comment: I like to hike really steep trails like
the one that goes straight down from the houses (we assume this comment is referring to
Matterhorn Trail). I know it's kind of messed up but why was it taken out? We need at
least a few tough trails too. As far as who can go on the trails I don't see any problems.
You never meet anyone there anyway.
R: The Matterhorn Trail is considered unsustainable in its current state due to its steep grade
and high erosion potential. Improving this trail would require cutting several switchbacks into
undisturbed habitat areas, which is not desired and in conflict with the Natural Communities
Conservation Plan (NCCP). In its current state, the Matterhorn trail cuts through sensitive
species habitat, such as CSS, gnatcatcher, and cactus wren and its use should be discontinued.
7. Q - Sustainability – The Cactus trail in Forrestal more steep than Matterhorn trail –
with work by a trail expert it was restored and is currently in use (the comment is likely
referring to the Flying Maine trail or Dauntless trail at Forrestal)
R: See response #6.
8. Q – Why was the Brim Trail (leading up to Jack’s Hat) eliminated? It is an easier ride
compared to the steeper Jack’s Hat Trail and has great views of Vanderlip Canyon. It
was said the trail was eliminated because the canyon below has a gnat catcher
population. Was that decision based on a recent or older 2004 survey? Is it possible to
keep the trail until a new survey is conducted? Is it feasible to reroute the trail to avoid
gnat catcher encroachment (included link to website)? The Brim would also provide
firefighters with a path to drag hose while fighting any fire from the canyon below.
R: Decisions to eliminate trails are based on a policy of reducing redundant trails and
fragmentation to endangered species habitat. These are based on best available scientific
3
Attachments 1-8
evidence. The presence of California gnatcatcher habitat and its historical presence in the area
indicate that this is habitat that is available to the species, whether or not it is currently
occupied.
Disturbance from trail usage increases the number of times a bird is flushed in a day, which
decreases the amount of time to feed, which leads to decreased survival and increased risk of
predation. Increased disturbance during the breeding season leads to decreased adult survival
and increased nest failure. Trails may decrease many species’ dispersal ability, and some species,
particularly snakes, are sometimes killed or injured.
9. Q –Can you walk bikes on pedestrian/equestrian trails?
R: Yes. Bikes are allowed on “no bike” trails when they are walked.
10. Q – Why can’t the trail off of Pacifica/McBride be widened as a fire road?
R: Now that the property is under City ownership and PVPLC management, the fire
department will be consulted to determine proper fire access into the property. Then, if
needed, appropriate actions will be taken to widen approved fire roads .
11. Q - Comment from P.B. community member that there is no legal bike access into
Three Sisters (i.e. Gary’s gulch)
R: The Portuguese Bend Homeowners Association has expressed concern regarding traffic
through the community with the designation of Gary’s Gulch Trail as multi-use. We therefore
recommend the pedestrian/equestrian designation. The access point will be identified as leading
to a private community on maps.
12. Q – Can erosion control devices at stream crossings be added?
R: The City and the PVPLC will continue to seek grant opportunities to fund these types of
improvement projects. When funding becomes available, stream crossings will be assessed,
prioritized, and improved when feasible.
13. Q – The City’s conceptual trails plan designates trails as easy, intermediate and
difficult. The Palos Verdes Loop Trail is included the City’s Conceptual Trails Plan and
includes connections that aren’t being shown on the trails.
R: The City is updating its trails network plan and one component will include the Palos Verdes
Loop Trail within the Preserve. The trails cannot traverse private property.
14. Q - There is an existing social trail that connects to Eucalyptus trail that doesn’t
connect to the Gulch trail.
R: Inclusion of this social trail will create too many duplicate trails in this area. Bicyclists have
access to Eucalyptus trail by walking their bikes.
15. Q – Would it be possible for an overlook to be constructed off the Kelvin Canyon
trail.
R: This comment has been noted and a possible overlook location will be identified on the final
trails map.
4
Attachments 1-9
16. Q - Residents of Portuguese Bend (Narcissi Rd.) have no cycling access to the trails,
and hopefully something will be opened up for them. Why should horses and walkers
have multiple access points and cyclists none at all?
R: See Comment #9, 11.
USER CONFLICT
17. Q - The Ranger representative attended the workshop and made the following
comments:
• Trail conflicts are common in open space areas;
• Palos Verdes is ideal mountain bike terrain due to its topography;
• Will take more education to get all user groups to understand that the Preserve is not a
free-for-all;
• It appears that there is a small core group of mountain bikers and other trail users that
need better education; and,
• Trail users need to be patient with each other.
18. Q – There is a silent group of people on Peninsula not being represented who say
that multi use = downhill biking and people are afraid to speak up due to ground rules
(i.e. – don’t want confrontation)
R: The City and the PVPLC have designed these workshops to encourage public participation
so that people come out and address their concerns. The workshops were advertised in the
newspaper and posted on the City’s and PVPLC’s websites. Furthermore, a blog was provided;
comments could be emailed to the City or the PVPLC; there was facilitation from NPS; and an
open dialogue was encouraged. Care was made to consider all comments received. Other
options were available for people who did not feel comfortable discussing issues at the public
meeting, such as submitting written comments to the City or the PVPLC.
19. Q - How is user conflict mitigated along steep crossings?
R: The City has hired a ranger to enforce respectful trail use and trail signage. It is also the
intent to put up signs to indicate proper trail behavior and exploring an educational opportunity
through a “Share the Trail” workshop.
20. Q - I would like the draft map which includes some trails that are
pedestrian/equestrian only.
• Support DFG’s comments to reduce trails for habitat protection
• Majority of group present at workshop are mountain bikers
• Please recognize that the majority voice is not necessarily the true majority
• Experienced personal user conflict
R: See Response to Comment #18 about reaching out to the user community.
21.Q - In small breakout groups it was hard to get share alternate views.
R: The City and the PVPLC may consider having at future workshops break-out groups
designated as mountain biking, pedestrian and equestrian.
5
Attachments 1-10
22. Q - “Assuming the risk mentality” of multi-use trails is an uncomfortable situation to
preserve users.
R: This term was explored and was meant to assess one’s personal fitness before choosing a
trail, and not to mean that you would be subject to risk by other trail users.
23.Q - Need yield signs such as in Santa Monica Mountains for multi-use trails. Multi-
purpose is assumed risk. There is a risk to each sport.
R: The PVPLC and the City are in the process of conducting a wayfinding and signage inventory
to determine what signs need to be removed, added or modified. A sign program for the
overall Preserve will be included in the Public Use Master Plan (PUMP).
24. Q – Who is the authority regarding locating trails to avoid erosion?
R: Trail considerations provide the framework for the trail identification process. As a result,
the current trail configurations are a result of historic social trail usage. If the PVPLC and the
City consider a trail severely eroding, consideration would be given to close or reroute the
trail.
25. Q - Consider using angle elevation on maps for discussion. Ex. Coastal Sage Scrub on
slopes.
R: All trails were ground-truthed based on site visits conducted by the City and the PVPLC.
26. Q – A member of the bicyclist community commented that using land three times a
month and rarely sees people using area. (i.e. low usage)
R: Now that the Upper Filiorum property is open for the public to enjoy, user frequency is
expected to increase. Increased usage may also occur because of the connection with Three
Sisters and Portuguese Bend.
27. Q - When courteous, folks talk to each other (different user groups) CORBA self
polices and educates.
R: CORBA is encouraged to continue to self-police and educate.
28. Q -The term “user conflict” may not include trail encounters that do not result in a
confrontation. Perhaps a better survey question, or additional one, ought to be “have
you even been startled, scared, or hit?”
R: The PVPLC and the City have surveyed and ground-truthed the trails that are coded as
multi-use to assure that line of sight and steepness will not impact pedestrian and equestrian
users. Signage and enforcement will be set up to reduce the likelihood of the types of situations
mentioned.
29. We've (bicyclists) spent years educating cyclists about trail etiquette, and the Park
Rangers comments show it's paid off for us all. Trail segregation builds resentment, when
the daunting volume of work needed in the Reserves demands cooperation. We have
much in common: love of the outdoors, and support for conservation with our money
and our volunteering. Let's work together.
R: The PVPLC and City strive to give all users their desired experience, which involves
designating some trails with restricted use.
6
Attachments 1-11
POSSUM/EUCALYPTUS TRAIL ACCESS
30. Q - Bikers do use Eucalyptus/Possum trail.
R: Bicyclists can continue to use this trail if designated for pedestrian/equestrian use by walking
their bicycles.
31. Q - Data from previous PUMP survey shows that little user conflict exists. Biking
group wants to continue to educate
R: This survey was done years ago. CORBA is encouraged to continue to educate.
32. Q - Multi-use trails are the only way to get to enjoy all trails
R: Everyone is allowed on pedestrian only trail. See response to Comment #9.
33. Q - Eucalyptus/Possum trail slow and a different experience which was excluded
from Portuguese Bend and would like to keep this experience.
From multi-use family – important that all trails be multi-use (Possum/Euc trail).
Eucalyptus trail should be multi-use. Possum/Eucalyptus trail should be available for all.
R: See Response to Comment #9, 29.
34. Q - The rugged terrain makes it more difficult to avoid user conflicts. A potential
solution is to eliminate steep trails and trails that offer technical challenge to bikes.
R: Steep trails are being reevaluated to see if they should have “walk bike” sections.
35. Q - It isn’t fair to relegate those who seek a quiet experience to one little trail in
U.F., especially since that type of experience was the PVPLC vision for initiating and
facilitating the acquisition of the Preserve lands. I rarely hear others in positions of
authority speak up for that Preserve experience which the large majority of Preserve
users seek.
R: The City and the PVPLC have set aside trails for more quiet experience, particularly at
Portuguese Bend Reserve. In most trail situations bicyclists do not unduly disturb the peace.
36. Q - Didnt hear a logical reason why Possum Trail is not designated multi-use. It
would be unfair to discriminate against a specific user group (i.e. biker riders) based
solely on the preference of another group.
R: See response to #9, 29.
37. I have been there at least a 100x's on a bike and I have never, ever encountered
anyone else on the trail. It is a perfect, slow traveling, fun turning between the trees and
easy resting spot and best of all, totally shaded. Line of sight is never a problem and I
heard that mentioned by Malisa (NFS) at last meeting. I also could never imagine a
horse going through there due to lower tree branches.
R: See response to #9, 29.
7
Attachments 1-12
8
USER REPRESENTATION AT MEETING
38. Q - Echo that bike community is very well organized and vocal, hikers not so multi-
use tends to lead to a few bikers taking over unless strong controls. Bikers not
compatible with other uses.
R: See Response to Comment #18.
39. Q - Bikers present at public meeting are the ones that will follow the rules.
• Bikers also enjoy the lands and natural features too (seems to be underlying
assumption that bikers are only there to ride downhill)
• Bikers do self police
• Concept that bikers race/”bomb” downhill is incorrect.
R: PVPLC and rangers have noted that there are violations of preserve rules by all user groups,
including off-trail hikers and off-leash dogs, etc.
40. Q - TRAIL USAGE: Needs to be a place for hikers and equestrians only.
R: The draft plan identifies an area for hikers and equestrians only (Gary Gulch) that is designed
to be comfortable and safe for all trail users.
41. Q - The same people are continually represented at these public workshops.
R: See response to Comment #18.
42. I want to thank those involved in creating the new Filiorum trails plan workshop format. The
inclusion of experienced National Park Service moderators, Department of Fish & Game
representatives, and RPV park rangers has helped neutralize distorted habit protection claims
and inflated user conflict assertions made to justify narrow views on trail use. It is imperative for
us to use clear and measurable data to determine what trails will be kept and who will be
allowed to use them. In the absence of specific justification we should keep all of the main social
trails and designate them multiuse. In cases where concerns are expressed but lack specific
details we should not make permanent changes until the appropriate evaluation is complete.
Fact based decisions will result in a plan that both protects and enhances habitat while providing
appropriate recreational opportunities for everyone.
R: Decisions to maintain or remove trails have been made based on our commitment to
provide recreational opportunities while managing for wildlife habitat. This includes reducing
redundant trails, to reduce fragmentation within the reserves.
Decisions on usage are based on safety criteria, and care to provide enjoyable recreational
opportunities for different user groups.
Attachments 1-13
Proposed Amendments to the 2008
Council Adopted PTP
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-14
Change Via de Campo Trail from
Pedestrian only to Ped/Bike
Change Chapel View Trail
from Ped/Equonly to Multi-use
Change Lower Beach School Trail
from Pedestrian only to Ped/Bike
Change Portuguese Point Loop Trail
from Pedestrian only to Ped/Bike
Close Harden and Cave Trails
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
1
5
Area of future trail
connecting Three Sisters
and Filiorum Reserves
Change Reserve name from
Upper Filiorum to Filiorum
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
1
6
Create multi-use
trail to overlook
Change Landslide Scarp
Trail from Ped/Equonly
to Multi-use
Change Ishibashi Farm
Trail from Ped/Equonly
to Multi-use
Rim Trail rerouted
Private community.
Access by
permission only
Change name of Reserve
from Upper Filiorum to
Filiorum Reserve
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
1
7
Area of future trail
connection between
San Ramon and
Friendship Park
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
1
8
Change Sagebrush Walk Trail from
Pedestrian only to Ped/Bike (only from
Shoreline Park Trail to picnic bench)
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
1
9
State of the Trails Public Workshop
Responses to Comments
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-20
1
State of the Trails Workshop
April 30, 2011 at Point Vicente Interpretive Center
General Preserve-wide Comments
Signage, Maps and Outreach
1. Better/more signage and public information should be provided
a. Signage needed to identify transitions between Preserve areas, at
private property, at City boundary (i.e. City of Rolling Hills trails), etc.
b. Consider signage without clutter
c. Educational signage and more information at trail head
d. Yield signs
e. Dangerous condition signs (cliff)
f. Improve signage: no smoking; reckless trail use is illegal and wrong;
leash pets for safety and habitat protection; leave no trace: pick up pet
waste and pack it out; preserve is closed one hour after sunset; Palos
Verdes Nature Preserve—a real treat, so treat it well!
g. Readability of trail signs: consider placing arrows above trail name and
uses; it makes it easier to understand which trail the arrow refers to
The City of RPV, with the assistance of the PVPLC, is currently working on developing a
Parks and Preserve Master Sign Plan with the intent to update all parks and Preserve
signs for uniformity and comprehensiveness. The PVPLC will implement the updated
Parks and Preserve Master Sign Plan for the Preserve properties once finalized as
funding becomes available.
2. Improve maps
a. need better color definitions (currently hard to differentiate trail
usage)
b. maps should be coordinated with non-preserve trails for connectivity
c. show amenities adjacent to reserves
d. identify true trailheads differently from other access points
e. Standardize nomenclature between maps (i.e. trail use symbols)
The PVPLC intends to update the existing trail maps when funding becomes available.
Improvements will consist of showing trail connectivity between and outside of
reserves, better symbolizing trail designations, amenities and other features.
3. Develop trail etiquette brochures for distribution at bike shops, hike outlets,
etc.
At the time the trail maps are updated, information on trail etiquette will be added to
the leaflets. Map improvements, brochures and signs recommendations will be
considered as funding is secured, and must be approved by the City.
Attachments 1-21
2
4. Install ¼ mile designation reminder signs, closure signs, habitat/animal
education signs
The City has a policy to minimize the proliferation of signs to prevent visual pollution,
so any new/improved signs will be situated at key locations. These types of signs will be
considered in the development of an Parks and Preserve Master Sign Plan described
above in Response No. 1.
5. Signs are too easy to break. Need to be more robust and durable (bullet
proof).
Carsonite posts were chosen because they blend well with the natural landscape, and
are flexible as well as strong under rough weather conditions. However, PVPLC is
currently working with National Park Service to re-evaluate the materials used for
Preserve signs, among other sign related issues.
Trail Use and Designations
6. Keep current trail use designations as is.
The Preserve Trails Plan recommended by the PUMP Committee was reviewed and
adopted by the City Council in 2008 with some modifications. At the time the Council
adopted the Preserve Trails Plan, the Council directed Staff to conduct regular reviews
of the trail system to examine any issues over time. The purpose of the State of the
Trails workshop is to consider public feedback among other considerations (i.e. user
experience, habitat impacts, connectivity, etc) in its review of the Preserve Trails Plan.
Recommendations pertaining to the Preserve Trails Plan will be presented to the City
Council at a public meeting in fall 2011.
7. Expand all trails to multi-use; provide more multi-use trails throughout the
coastal zone.
See Response No. 6.
8. Provide a variety of trails to suit all users
It is important to provide some trail access to all user groups, but not all trails to all
users. This helps provide a quiet experience for hikers and equestrians, while still
offering opportunities for bicyclists to enjoy the Preserve. City Council will consider all
recommendations to the Preserve Trails Plan at a public meeting in fall 2011.
9. Multi-use of trail can be monitored on a trial basis by the City’s park rangers.
City Council will consider whether changes to the Preserve Trails Plan are warranted.
Furthermore, they will consider if there should be a trial period during which the
rangers will monitor use of the Preserve trails.
Attachments 1-22
3
10. Standardize guidelines related to designations and trail clearing
At the time the PUMP committee developed the Preserve Trails Plan it was determined
that trail standards would not be applied as the determinant of use designations since
the trails were pre-existing through historic use, and also factored in many other
considerations, including user experience, and minimizing redundant trails.
11. Trail usage should not only be based upon topography.
Use designations were not based on topography, but were based on many factors as
listed above (historic use, user experience).
12. Widen trails for multi-use.
Widening trails to accommodate increased access by various user groups will lead to
habitat impacts that would require mitigation to minimize impacts and is directly in
conflict with the intent of the NCCP (as vetted in the PUMP processes).
13. Use standardized criteria to designate trail usage (i.e. physical
characteristics, width, height, etc.)
The City and the PVPLC cannot designate trail usage based on standards of trail
specifications because trails are adapted from historic use and are unimproved, and also
involve other considerations towards habitat impacts, erosion, and
accessibility/connectivity.
14. Allow some specific trails to downhill bicyclists only.
The Preserve Trails Plan does offer multi-use downhill trails but not solely for bicyclist
use.
15. Trail closures are disappointing
Closures of certain social trails are necessary to alleviate impacts on habitat and
duplicate trails are considered inconsistent with the NCCP. Criteria for closing trails
include eliminating redundant or parallel trails, for trail rerouting, temporary habitat
disturbances (fire recovery). The NCCP tries to insure access to all areas of the
Preserve while balancing habitat protection.
16. Create loops of trails for users
The existing trails plan does provide loops for all user groups.
17. Open more miles trails to reduce the number of people on the trails.
Attachments 1-23
4
Creating new trails or duplicating trails for different user groups contradicts the
NCCP’s prime directive to provide suitable habitat for listed species of concern.
18. Trails can support additional use designations
Use designations are based on the criteria as stated above.
19. Restrict use after rains for everyone
a. Restrict horse use after rain as hooves make nasty impressions and
destroy trails (sprained ankles, etc).
b. Signage for restrictions after rains and warning signs for dangerous
temporary conditions
Posting signs for trail closures after significant rains will be considered policy. The
Public Use Master Plan (PUMP) document will establish protocols for closing trails after
rains, fires, landslides, etc. There is currently a policy of closing trails for 3 days after a
rain event, but the PUMP document will detail protocol for future disturbances.
Education of set policies will then be disseminated to the public.
AMENITIES
20. More trash bins on trails
The City is in the process of installing new/additional trash bins in areas easy to access
for maintenance. All trail users should carry out all trash they bring in.
21. Bathrooms needed at major trail heads
The City will identify locations to look into installing additional restroom facilities and
will seek funding opportunities, such as grants.
HABITAT CONCERNS
22. Reserves were purchased for protection of wildlife and habitat
This is true.
23. Each trail has an edge effect on habitat
This is an accurate statement and was considered in the development of the Council
adopted Preserve Trails Plan.
24. Vegetation fuel load is a fire danger. More controlled weeding.
Fuel modification zones have been established by the Fire Department, and the City
implements the fuel modification on an annual basis and spends a significant effort
controlling weeds in restoration areas (dictated by funding) and along trails.
Attachments 1-24
5
OTHER PRESERVE-WIDE ISSUES
25. Reduce pet waste
Pet waste is directly the responsibility of the pet owner. Community doggie-bag
dispensers may be found at certain locations within the Preserve. Moreover, the city will
consider installing more doggie bag stations at key entrances to the Preserve as funding
sources become available.
26. Rangers are good. They should use ATVs for more mobility to enforce trail
use compliance.
The use of ATVs within the Preserve may contradict Preserve policy of no motorized
vehicles other than service vehicles. Currently, Rangers drive into accessible areas with
vehicles and walk trails for enforcement. Many trails are not designed for ATV use.
27. Extend hours after sunset until 10:00 pm or consider 24-hour usage.
Current preserve hours are one hour before sunrise to one hour after sunset, per RPV
City Municipal Code 12.16.030. Recently, the City Council established permitting
process for accessing the Preserves for night hikes. Requests to change the permitted
hours will have to be considered by the City Council.
28. East Boundary Trail in Shoreline Park should provide connection to adjacent
residential area outside City.
The Trail map for the Ocean Trails Reserve does identify a trail connection to the trail
outside of Reserve in the City of Los Angeles and a trail connection exists that may
need to be improved. The PVPLC will update the trails map to better identify this
connection.
29. There is little traffic on many of the existing trails.
Comment noted
30. More research needed on use patterns, types of users, maintenance and
their impacts when presented to the City Council, quantitative usage data
should be provided:
a. High volume vs. low volume
b. Soil impact, use, maintenance – collect real data
c. Document trail user interface/conflict. Trails should be open until
conflicts are documented.
d. There have been reports of trail conflicts between hikers, equestrians
and bikers
Attachments 1-25
6
A trail user survey was taken in 2007 to assist the PUMP Committee in its development
of the Preserve Trails Plan. At this time, funding and resources are not available to
conduct another formal trail user survey. However, PVPLC KEEPERS do report a
monthly snapshot of number of Preserve users, and the City and the PVPLC rely on the
reporting of the Rangers for quality of user experiences.
31. The City’s trails should be marketed to and through local businesses (i.e.,
Starbucks, etc.)
The City and the PVPLC conduct outreach, via website announcements and postings,
volunteering, special events, news coverage, and more to raise the public’s awareness of
the Preserve and its trails system.
32. Headphones should not be allowed so that users can communicate to avoid
conflict.
The RPV Municipal Code does not prohibit the use of headphones in the Preserve by
any user groups. Such requests would have to be considered by the City Council in
order to be codified.
33. Install bike racks at trail heads and trail use changes to encourage
compliance with trail designations
The City and the PVPLC will look into funding opportunities to install bicycle racks at
certain key trailhead locations, as well as at trail segments designated for pedestrians
only.
ABALONE COVE RESERVE
Trail Configurations, Use and Designations
34. Consider opening all trails to bike access.
It is important to provide some trail access to all user groups, but not all trails to all
users. Limiting certain trails to pedestrians and equestrians only helps provide a higher
quality experience for such user groups, while still offering opportunities for bicyclists to
enjoy other areas of the Reserves.
35. Change the following to PED/BIKE because trails are family friendly for
biking, not steep so kids can ride there. In general are wide enough for multi-
use. Also allows access to tide pools for bikers who come from the
Portuguese Bend Reserve:
a. Chapel View
b. Beach School
c. Sea Dahlia
d. Portuguese Point Loop
Attachments 1-26
7
e. Sacred Cove View
f. Cliffside
g. Via de Campo
The City and the PVPLC have reviewed and researched this request and are of the
opinion that with all things considered, such as habitat protection, line-of- sight, user
experience, access, etc. that the designations for the following trails will be
recommended to be changed to pedestrian/bicyclists at the City Council meeting in fall
2011:
a. Chapel View: good line of sight
b. Beach School: good line of sight, wide, paved
c. Portuguese Point Loop: flat, wide, good line of sight
d. Via de Campo: flat, wide, good line of sight
36. Rugged and challenging nature of trails here is enjoyable.
Comment noted
37. Reroute steep end of Sea Dahlia Trail to provide safer and clearer access to
the beach
Topography limits the ability to reroute this trail, but erosion control measures may be
implemented by the PVPLC volunteer Trail Crew. This request will be added to the
“Preserve Project List” for future consideration.
38. Please retain the PUMP committee trail use designations. They were
derived by extensive deliberation of a large user community. Keep all
present use designations for trails at Abalone Cove.
See comment 35.
39. Hardin Trail has condition problems related to drainage
The drainage issue will be investigated by PVPLC to determine whether repairs or
closure are warranted and will be added to the Trail Project List if appropriate.
40. There are hazardous conditions with emerging social trails from the beach
up to Portuguese Point Loop (east side of point) which should be addressed
These trails have not been improved, but will be investigated by PVPLC for safe
connectivity or closure. Unapproved trails will be closed by PVPLC.
41. Trail standards are not consistent with use restrictions
Please see Response numbers 6 and 8 regarding the complexity of factors considered in
trail designations and trail standards.
Attachments 1-27
8
42. Trails on Inspiration Point are underutilized
Comment noted
43. Existing trails are family-friendly: wide, not too steep, etc
Comment noted
Amenities
44. Area south of archery range/east of Bow and Arrow Trail should be opened
as a bike park with jumps and opportunities to provide safe, off-street bicycle
trails for children. This would limit radical riders from other trail and save a
place for uses to enjoy. This was once brought up in a city meeting as a
possibility.
A recreation area as described is not consistent with “compatible uses” under the
NCCP and would require mitigation for habitat loss.
45. Provide parking for trailhead access near the archery range
Public parking is not allowed at the Archery Range. In order to provide increased
parking opportunities for Preserve trail users, the City and the PVPLC obtained a grant
from the California Coastal Conservancy, as part of the City’s segment of the California
Coastal Trail, to construct a dirt parking lot at Gateway Park off Palos Verdes Drive
South. When completed, this parking lot will provide users access to the Portuguese
Bend Reserve, Forrestal Reserve, and Abalone Cove Reserve.
AGUA AMARGA RESERVE
46. Nice Reserve – keep as is
Comment noted
ALTA VICENTE RESERVE
47. Keep as is – nice reserve
Comment noted
48. Trails need better trail markers, signs, brush clearance; reconsider
revegetation efforts to minimize weeds
The suggested trails improvements will be added to the “Preserve Project List” for
future consideration as funding resources become available. Additionally, the PVPLC
Attachments 1-28
9
Volunteer Trail Crew or Stewardship staff will evaluate what repairs are warranted to
improve access and user experience. PVPLC is currently restoring 10 acres of habitat at
Alta Vicente Reserve.
FORRESTAL RESERVE
49. Area appears to be well managed and “working” well. Management should
be replicated at other reserves
a. Long history of maintenance and community involvement
b. Little conflict
c. Enforcement
d. Lots of self-policing as a result of high level of attention
Comment noted
Trail Configurations, Use and Designations
50. Change to multi use and/or change to PED/BIKE only:
a. Quarry – was a personal favorite that I’ve done much trail work on.
This trail is the most rideable to connect up to Flying Mane and
Mariposa. Pirate and Dauntless are climbs that only elite, physically fit
riders can use. Even Quarry has a very steep section toward the end
but Forrestal is a low-use area for bikes because of steep inclines.
Cyclists have done much repair on this trail. Wide enough to bike.
Lightly used and little congestion.
This is one of four trail segments (there are a total of 22 trails) within the Forrestal
Reserve designated for pedestrian use only to provide hikers with a quiet and
tranquil experience. The trail designations at Forrestal were reviewed by the City
Council numerous times. The trails system at Forrestal was designed to provide a
few loop opportunities to bicyclists.
b. Exultant – very unused. Easiest route to/completes the Dauntless
Trail. Wide enough to bike.
This trail was designated as pedestrian only because of the terrain, narrow width
(adjacent to a storm drain), habitat protection, and user experience to name a few.
This is one of four trails at Forrestal designated for pedestrian use only. There are a
total of 22 trails at Forrestal,
c. Cristo Que Viento should be multi-use – seldom used
This trail is too steep through delicate habitat and erosive tread.
d. Other pedestrian/bike trails seem to work well.
Attachments 1-29
10
Comment noted
51. Pirate and Dauntless are too steep for riding up.
Bikes can be walked up trail or user can choose alternate route (i.e., the Conqueror
Trail)
52. Modify the lower portion of the Packsaddle Trail to intersect the Flying
Mane Trail about 100 ft east of the current intersection. The first part of the
existing track is dangerous to traverse. Minor brushing will provide a much
better route. The lower portion of Packsaddle is difficult to traverse
This trail section is unsustainable in its current state and will be evaluated for
realignment. The City and the PVPLC will follow up on this trail conditions to determine
if it’s a suitable for a Preserve Trails Project.
53. At two locations, one along Flying Mane (near the lower west end) and the
other from Packsaddle (about 50 yards up from the beginning) there are new
unauthorized trails leading to overviews of Klondike Canyon. If there are no
habitat constraints, one or both of these trails should lead to observation
points from which to view the Klondike Canyon.
The City and the PVPLC will investigate these two spur trails to determine whether
they should be closed or recommended to be an official trail to an overlook. Such a
determination will consider potential impacts to valuable canyon and riparian habitat.
54. All Forrestal trails will never be crowded because the steepness dissuades all
but the fittest bikers and hikers
Comment noted
55. Good experiences at Forrestal – seems less populated and no bad
experiences between bikers and other users.
Comment noted
56. Trails well maintained and well marked signage
Comment noted
57. Exultant Trail has a spur trail from the top of the hill to the end of Intrepid
Dr. that should be closed
The PVPLC is working to develop ways to effectively close spur trails like this one.
58. Mariposa Trail has an erosion issue at the bridge and needs work
Attachments 1-30
11
The City and the PVPLC are researching solutions to repair the bridge that is being
undermined. If a new bridge is required, funding sources such as grants will be needed
to cover costs for the bridge’s repair or replacement.
59. Explore trail linkages (i.e. Packsaddle Trail)
There is a long-term plan to connect Forrestal, via the Cristo Que Viento Trail, to the
common open space area adjacent to the Rancho Palos Verdes Estates Residential
Tract. The Packsaddle Trail connects to the City of Rolling Hills which requires a
permit to access its trails.
60. Access through Forrestal is the only access to southern portion of
Portuguese Bend
See Response No. 45. Additional trails that would connect Forrestal to Portuguese
Bend may adversely impact habitat and is discouraged by the NCCP. In order to
enhance access to both Forrestal and Portuguese, a parking lot will be created at
Gateway Park and provide an alternative entrance into Portuguese Bend Reserve.
61. Natural widening of trails should prompt usage changes
Trail width is not the sole factor to consider in trail designations, and should not be the
determinant of use changes. Other factor to consider is the ability of all Reserve trails
to provide a desired experience for all users as well as habitat protection and minimizing
impacts. See Responses Nos. 6 and 8.
62. “Observatory Trail” at end of Cool Heights Street cul-de-sac with a reroute
to connect to Cristo Que Viento Trail to create a loop to remain in RPV on
reserve
a. Ped/bike designation
b. Cool Heights residents would support – investigate with petition
The trail issues relating to the “observatory” was addressed at great length by the City
Council in 2004 as part of residential development project at the end of the Coolheights
Drive cul-de-sac. Based on all information presented to the City Council, it was
determined that duplicate trails along both ridges were not ideal, resulted in erosion
impacts, traversed private property, and impacted habitat to name a few. It was agreed
to relocate the “observatory” off the official Cristo Que Viento trail, which was
completed by the PVPLC soon after the Council’s decision in 2004.
63. Keep trail designations as is
Comment noted
Signage
Attachments 1-31
12
64. The intersection of the Packsaddle Trail and Flying Mane Trail has not had a
trail sign for a long time. Many people don’t know where Packsaddle is
located. The vegetation along Packsaddle is particularly nice.
Trail signage in this location will be verified. It should be noted that the Packsaddle Trail
leads to the City of Rolling Hills which restricts entry by permit only.
65. Two trails reach the boundary between Rancho Palos Verdes and Rolling
Hills:
a. The top end of the Packsaddle trail has a sign posted by the Rolling
Hills Homeowners Association stating their restrictions on trail use. It
should also have a sign at the end of the Packsaddle trail (one side
indicating the trail end and the other side giving the standard trail
information.
Appropriate signage will be evaluated under the City’s Parks and Preserve
Master Sign Plan and implemented accordingly.
b. At the top end of Cristo que Viento Trail there is an intersection with
a path into Rolling Hills and closed Forrestal path down the ridge east
of Cristo que Viento. When people descend down this eastern ridge
they end up traversing a closed portion of the Forrestal Reserve and
crossing private property owned by Joe Nassari. Place a trail sign at
the upper end of the Cristo que Viento Trail telling users that they
have reached the end of the Forrestal Reserve trail. It should also
inform hikers which is the proper trail to descend. It would be a
courtesy to Joe Nassari if a trail sign at the top of the eastern ridge
directed hikers onto Cristo que Viento, rather than having them
decide to head down the closed eastern ridge onto the Nassari
property.
See Response above and No. 62. This duplicate spur trail was closed by the City
Council in 2004. PVPLC staff is currently reviewing trail signage and markers, and
will consider this sign request.
66. Dauntless trail sign gets knocked over at Canyon Trail
PVPLC crews reinstall signage when they are broken off, and has been replaced. It is
recommended that trail users notify the PVPLC immediately of any missing or damaged
signs.
67. Signage needed to mark end of public access on Cristo Que Viento and
Packsaddle – “Public Trail Ends Here”
Attachments 1-32
13
This sign issue will be addressed at the time the City develops its Parks and Preserve
Master Sign Plan.
68. Indicate Vista Point at end of Basalt Trail (on map)
Comment noted and will be included when maps are updated next.
69. Fossil hill: signage to clarify trail [designation]
The PVPLC will reevaluate the placement of existing trail markers and signage in this
area for clarification.
70. Revegetation perceived positively. Should have signage to explain
restoration efforts.
Comment noted and will be evaluated when funding is available. It should be noted that
the proliferation of signs within the Preserve is discouraged. However, interpretive signs
in limited areas that increase public awareness can be supported.
71. Signage needed at end of Intrepid Drive (kiosk?)
There is a Preserve Welcome sign at the entry points to the Preserve that identifies
rules, as well as a trail map brochure box. Improvements to this trailhead will be
explored based on available funding opportunities such as grants
Other Trail Issues
72. Control weeds before they seed along trails (Flying Mane)
The PVPLC crews mitigate weeds on an as needed basis.
73. Stone wall needs map (on Forrestal Dr. at gate entrance)
A Preserve Trails Map will be installed on the stone wall as funding sources become
available. In the past, the City has applied for grants to improve the trailhead including
the installation of a trail map on the stone wall.
74. Revisit moving gate farther north/west to improve access to parking
Relocating the access gate at Forrestal has been part of an overall trailhead project the
City has tried to obtain funding for through grant opportunities. The City and the
PVPLC will continue to explore funding opportunities to complete the trailhead project
including relocating the entry gate.
75. Explore increased usage – Would that impact positive user experiences?
Attachments 1-33
14
See Response Nos. 30 and 31.
76. Exultant trail erosion issue
It is assumed that this comment refers to the spur trails that bisect the Exultant Trail.
The City and the PVPLC will continue to make an effort to close spur trails to curb
damage to soils and habitat. It should be noted that a few years back, the City repaired
the drainage swales to minimize erosion impacts to the slope and related trails.
OCEAN TRAILS RESERVE
77. Change the following trails to PED/BIKE:
a. Sagebrush Walk (up to the picnic bench from Shoreline Trail) – wide,
good line-of-sight, and seems silly a bicycle can’t ride out to the point.
Low user density. Bike rack in place.
The City and the PVPLC has reviewed this request and is of the opinion that the
portion of the Sagebrush Walk Trail between the picnic bench and the East
Boundary Trail is suitable for bicyclists because of the trail tread, line-of-sight,
and minimal impacts to habitat. As such, a recommendation will be made to the
City Council in fall 2011 to re-designate this portion of the Sagebrush Trail to
pedestrian/bicycle.
b. Sunrise Trails (view point; up to the picnic bench) – allows access to
ocean, wide trail, low user density.
There are bike racks at the top of the trail and it’s just a short walk to enjoy the
beach. Line of sight, steep topography, erosive trail tread and heavy pedestrian
use prohibits the riding of bicycles down to the beach.
78. Trail signage unclear
a. Need clarification of sign for bikes. Was not aware of two trails only
tarmac’d along cliff top that is signed no bikes
Comment noted and will now be addressed because the management
responsibilities for this Reserve have not yet been passed over to the PVPLC.
b. Trail signage should include maps
Comment noted
79. Keep all present use designations as is
Comment noted
Attachments 1-34
15
80. West Bluff Trail down to the beach should either be fully developed or
blocked off
The West Bluff Trail does not access the beach below and any spur trails will be closed
by PVPLC when the Reserve is incorporated into the PVNP.
PORTUGUESE BEND RESERVE
Trail Designations and Alignment
81. Some of the closed and ped-only trails should be open as multiuse for bikes
Comment noted and will be evaluated among the considerations discussed previously
(see response to comments 6 and 8).
82. Every trail should be multi-use because it’s easier to enforce
Trail designations should not be based on the ease of enforcement. As previously
indicated, various factors are considered when designated trail uses such as habitat
protection mandated by the NCCP and user experience. In regards to enforcement,
the Rangers are well equipped with the understanding of various trail designations and
deal with the same situations elsewhere (i.e. Santa Monica Mountains).
83. Multi-use trial period (1-3 years) to collect data
PVPLC does not have the capacity or funding to conduct extensive trail user impact
surveys. Designations are made with several factors to consider including user
experience, habitat protection and more. A request to consider a trial period may be
made to the City Council.
84. Trail users should be responsible for making the right decision about their
abilities
Comment noted
85. The following trails should be multi-use:
a. Grapevine – was approved by PUMP committee for multiuse but changed by
City Council. Most popular and creates separation of users. Density is low.
Good line of sight. Wants it reopened to bikes.
There is no way to allow bike access to this trail without changing other trail
designations in this area.
b. Landslide Scarp – allows a connection to Burma Road. Also lightly used as
Toyon Trail too steep for most riders. More rideable for recreational biking.
Good line of sight. Easiest from PV Drive South.
Attachments 1-35
16
The City and the PVPLC will make the recommendation to change to bike usage
to provide an accessible biking loop.
c. Vanderlip and Water Tank – fire roads with good visibility, allows
connection to Filiorum from Garry’s Gulch and to other Bend Trails. Creates a
cycling loop.
No change recommended because it’s heavily used by equestrians.
d. Ishibashi Farm – so unused, grass growing on trail bed. Mostly fire road, and
fire roads should be available for multi use. Single track arm is “unhorse-able”
according to equestrians. Good line of sight.
The City and PVPLC will make the recommendation to change to bike usage to
provide bicycle access to the Reserve from Palos Verdes Drive South.
e. Paintbrush – is a fire road mostly, and is slated for improvement. For an added
cycling loop.
No change recommended.
f. Rim – great values, lightly used because of steepness. For an added cycling loop.
Realign of avoid Rolling Hills. Adds variety.
i. Reroute Rim Trail so it doesn’t go into Rolling Hills
No change recommended to maintain a quiet hiking experience in northeastern
portion of the Reserve and because of erosive soil tread in this area.
g. Peacock Flats
No change recommended.
h. Any fire road should be multi-use, but some are not.
See response to comments 6 and 8.
86. Confusions on what trails are open and what is not
a. Particularly at Del Cerro Trail head – trail adjacent to fire road looks
open
Trail markers are placed at trail junctions to identify the official trail routes.
Furthermore, the trail maps found on the PVPLC’s and the City’s websites
identify the official trails. Efforts will be made to close parallel spur trails.
b. Habitat doesn’t seem significant in that general area
The habitat in this area is considered significant in that the slopes off Burma
Road host many native annuals and patches of recovering coastal sage and cactus
scrub habitats.
Attachments 1-36
17
87. Please retain the PUMP committee trail use designations. They were
derived by extensive deliberation of a large user community.
The Preserve Trails Plan recommended by the PUMP Committee was reviewed and
adopted by the City Council in 2008 with some modifications. At the time the Council
adopted the Preserve Trails Plan, the Council directed Staff to conduct regular reviews
of the trail system to examine any issues over time. The purpose of the State of the
Trails workshop and the upcoming City Council meeting in fall 2011 is to provide an
overview of the Preserve Trails Plan.
88. A sustainable Ishibashi Trail route is needed to slow traffic and reduce risk
to users, edge effects, and cutting between switchbacks.
The City and the PVPLC will evaluate the Ishibashi Trail route to determine what
measures need to be implemented to reduce user risks, edge effects, and the creation of
spur trails.
89. Close Ishibashi Trail to bikes or realign the blind curve to avoid horse-bike
conflict
The PVPLC plans to close spur trails off the Ishibashi Trail in fall 2011. The Ishibashi
Trail was designated as multiuse to provide a loop trail for all user groups. The
suggestion to realign the blind curve will be evaluated by the PVPLC/City in the near
future to determine if the realignment should be included on the “Preserve Trail
Project” list.
90. Rename Burma Road Trail due to negative war connotations
Trail names were designated through the PUMP process and formally accepted by the
City Council. Suggested name changes could be presented to the City Council for its
consideration at the upcoming fall 2011 meeting.
91. Rename Ishibashi Farm Trail to avoid confusion with Ishibashi Trail.
See #90.
92. Toyon and Garden trail area need speed limits to keep people on the trail
and keep other users and wildlife safe
The Preserve Trails Plan does not include speed limits because it was the general
consensus of the PUMP Committee that speed limits are difficult to enforce. The City
and the PVPLC will seek input from the Rangers regarding speed limits.
93. Some spur trails have been effectively blocked and these efforts should be
extended.
Attachments 1-37
18
The PVPLC will continue to close spur trails in priority with other restoration efforts
when time is available or when addressed by the PVPLC volunteer Trail Crew.
94. Anxious to see improved way of informing users about closed trails, or more
effort to plant barriers on closed trails. Important starting point for good
foundation of people getting used to what changed.
The PVPLC will continue to close spur trails and will investigate improved practices for
closing spur trails, and will include a combination of educational and interpretive signage,
barriers and revegetation.
95. A sustainable Rim Trail route should be identified to minimize spur trail
damage to pillow lava area and to avoid Rolling Hills.
The PVPLC has conducted trail improvements to upper Rim Trail and plans to address
needs on the on lower Rim Trail in the near future.
Signage
96. Many users are confused by trail signage. There should be a prominent sign
at the trail head indicating only designated trails are open.
The City and the PVPLC are working together to inventory and update all signs in the
Preserve. These issues will be taken into consideration during this process, and will be
implemented to assist navigation, trail closures, and safety. See Response No. 1
97. Improved signage with rules and warning needed.
See Response Nos. 1 and 96.
98. Signage needed directing traffic uphill on Ishibashi Trail and Rim Trail (from
Burma Road).
See Response Nos. 1 and 96.
99. Replace <-trail-> directional/closure signs with “area closed” to avoid
directing users down the closed trail
See Response Nos. 1 and 96.
100. Trail signage for Ishibashi, Toyon and Garden trails.
See Response No. 1 and 96.
101. Pillow lava area needs better signage
See Response Nos. 1 and 96.
Attachments 1-38
19
Other reserve issues
102. Bike jumps built up from dirt should be removed promptly to discourage
trail modifications for private purposes.
The PVPLC has removed spur trails and bike jumps, and will continue to close spur
trails, including bike jumps.
103. Lots of thistle
As part of the NCCP, the PVPLC targets introduced species annually, based on a set of
criteria (Targeted Exotic Removal of Plants). In addition, the PVPLC crews weed whip with
priority along trails and in restoration areas.
104. Protect pillow lava area
Signs may help educate trail users on unique rock formations under preservation by
reminding trail users to stay on trails. Such interpretive signs will be considered in the
City’s sign inventory and development of the Parks and Preserve Master Sign Plan. See
Response Nos. 1 and 96.
105. Update maps to establish access to Upper Filiorum Reserve
The existing Preserve Trails Maps will be updated when funding becomes available.
Upper Filiorum map will be created when trails are approved by City Council, and will
show connectivity to adjacent reserves. The City Council will consider the proposed
trails plan for Upper Filiorum in fall 2011 at a public meeting.
106. The ranger presence appears to be partially effective in improving
compliance. A presence on smaller trails (without SUVs) would be helpful.
Comment noted. The Rangers are assigned with the task of patrolling the Preserve,
among other open space areas within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, in order to
ensure compliance with the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code and the Council
adopted Preserve Trails Plans. The Rangers patrol the trails regardless of the size of the
trail.
107. More parking access
a. Open dirt parking lot off PV Drive South. Can be shared with road
maintenance. Let us not wait for Gateway Park.
b. Create parking for horse trailers at sandbox area
See Response No. 45. The City intends to provide parking and access to lower
Portuguese Bend and Forrestal through Gateway park improvements.
Attachments 1-39
20
San Ramon Reserve
108. Switchback Trail -- establish trail markers and vegetation clearing
The requested trail improvements will be added to the “Trails Project List” for future
implementation by Stewardship and the volunteer Trail Crew. The PVPLC will install, if
not already installed, the appropriate trail markers.
109. Interest in developing route to Friendship Park and check the City’s
Conceptual Trail Plan about restoring connections.
The Preserve Trails Plan for San Ramon will be updated in the future to show
connections to adjacent trails, including adjacent Friendship Park.
110. Marymount Trail needs vegetation clearing (iceplant)
The PVPLC crews will conduct the necessary vegetation clearing based on priority along
trails and in restoration areas. This project could also be taken on by a PVPLC volunteer
trail crew.
111. Need access from Marymount Trail to Palos Verdes Dr. East
The City and the PVPLC will add the suggested improvements to the “Trails Project
List” and will complete the necessary trail repairs or improvements based on priority
and as funding sources become available. Such trail work is typically completed by the
PVPLC Stewardship and the PVPLC volunteer Trail Crew.
112. Make lower Palos Verdes Drive East Trail more accessible
The City and the PVPLC will add the suggested improvements to the “Trails Project
List” and will complete the necessary trail repairs or improvements based on priority
and as funding sources become available. Such trail work is typically completed by the
PVPLC Stewardship and the volunteer Trail Crew.
THREE SISTERS RESERVE
113. Make connection to/from Upper Filiorum Reserve in lower section
The City and the PVPLC are examining options and seeking funding opportunities to
implement trail connections to Upper Filiorum for adjacent Reserves. This will be
added to the “Trails Project List.”
Attachments 1-40
21
114. Make trails multi-use
According to the Council adopted Preserve Trails Plan, all the existing trails at Three
Sisters Reserve are multiuse.
115. Thistle problem on Barkentine Trail
Weeds are an issue in most of the Reserves, and the PVPLC Above our requirements to
strategically target certain invasive plant species, PVPLC strives to maintain vegetation
along trails as resources allow. Work is completed based on priority and available
resources.
116. Reroute Upper Barkentine Trail to avoid soil loss due to erosion
The trails at Three Sisters, including the Barkentine Trail, are intended to be
unimproved. Repairs to these trails are addressed by the volunteer Trail Crew based
on priority and available funding. Repairs to the Barkentine Trail will be added to the
“Trails Project List” for future repairs to be prioritized among other Preserve trails.
Rerouting this trail is unlikely due to adjacent high quality habitat.
117. Drainage and erosion issues
See Response No. 116.
VICENTE BLUFFS RESERVE
118. Great walk around the bluffs. Trails at Vicente Bluffs have a lot of casual
walkers, possible conflicts if bicycle use is allowed there.
Comment noted.
119. Better (quicker) maintenance for rain erosion would be appreciated
The City and the PVPLC strives to respond to trail maintenance as quickly as possible.
However, PVPLC has a limited budget to address these. See Response No. 19.
120. Fishing Access is too steep for bicyclists; do not change designation
Comment noted. The existing Preserve Trails Plan for Vicente Bluffs does not allow
bicycle use on the Pescadero Trail adjacent to the Fishing Access.
121. There is a need for consistent naming and labeling of trails at Vicente Bluffs
(on maps)
Comment noted and will be considered when revising the trail maps.
Attachments 1-41
22
VISTA DEL NORTE RESERVE
122. There is a small homeless encampment in the north edge of the reserve.
Other homeless have been sleeping elsewhere in this reserve. I previously
notified the Lomita Sheriffs Dept, but it is difficult for them to continuously
police. I live across the street from this reserve and like to hike with my
family, but am afraid.
When encampments are brought to the attention of PVPLC, staff notifies the City, who
in turn notifies the Rangers. The public is encouraged to notify the rangers directly. A
Ranger hotline is being developed and will be available in November.
123. Make trails multiuse and add more trail signs on Indian Peak Loop Trail
Comment noted. The trails were recommended by the PUMP Committee and
accepted by the City Council to be designated as pedestrian only because of various
factors including line-of-state, user experience, adjacent land uses, and connectivity to
name a few.
Attachments 1-42
PVPLC Cover Letter on the
2011 PVPLC Annual Report
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-43
PRESERVING LAND AND RESTORING HABITAT FOR THE EDUCATION AND ENJOYMENT OF ALL
916 SILVER SPUR ROAD # 207. ROLLING HILLS ESTATES. CA 90274-3826 T 310.541.7613 WWW.PVPLC.ORG
April 11, 2012
Joel Rojas
Community Development Director
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275-5391
Re: Palos Verdes Nature Preserve Annual Report for January 2011 to December 31, 2011 for
the Rancho Palos Verdes Draft Natural Communities Conservation Plan and Habitat
Conservation Plan
Dear Mr. Rojas,
This letter is to confirm that eight copies (paper and CDs) of the 2011 Palos Verdes Nature
Preserve Annual Report for the Rancho Palos Verdes Draft Natural Communities Conservation
Plan and Habitat Conservation Plan were delivered to Rancho Palos Verdes City Hall.
An additional appendix needed in the Report, which the City of Rancho Palos Verdes should
provide, is the habitat tracking matrix.
Please contact us with any questions.
Thank you!
Danielle LeFer Andrea Vona
Conservation Director Executive Director
Attachments 1-44
2011 PVPLC Annual
Preserve Management Report
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-45
Land Conservancy Palos Verdes Peninsula
Annual Report
January 2011-Dec. 2011
For the
Rancho Palos Verdes Draft Natural
Communities Conservation Plan and
Habitat Conservation Plan
April 2, 2012
PO Box 3427
Palos Verdes Peninsula,
California 90274
T 310-541-7613
F 310-541-7623
www.pvplc.org
Attachments 1-46
Page | i
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1
Site Description ................................................................................................................................ 2
2 HABITAT RESTORATION .......................................................................................................... 5
Habitat Management Plan ............................................................................................................... 5
Alta Vicente Reserve ............................................................................................................... 5
Portuguese Bend Reserve ....................................................................................................... 8
Additional Restoration .................................................................................................................... 10
3 MONITORING .................................................................................................................................... 15
Restoration Monitoring ................................................................................................................... 15
Covered Species ............................................................................................................................... 15
Vegetation Mapping .......................................................................................................................... 16
4 TARGETED EXOTIC REMOVAL PROGRAM FOR PLANTS .................................... 16
5 BRUSH CLEARANCE ..................................................................................................................... 16
6 SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND WILDLIFE MONITORING ........................................ 16
7 TRAIL MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING ................................................................... 17
Filiorum Reserve Trail Workshops .............................................................................................. 17
State of the Trails Meeting ............................................................................................................. 17
Trail Management ............................................................................................................................. 17
Trail Monitoring ................................................................................................................................ 17
Trail Markers and Decals ................................................................................................................ 18
Trail Repair ........................................................................................................................................ 18
Future Trail Projects ........................................................................................................................ 19
Ranger Program ................................................................................................................................ 19
8 VOLUNTEER INVOLVEMENT .................................................................................................. 19
OFFICERS AND STAFF .................................................................................................................... 20
Attachments 1-47
Page | ii
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
TABLES
1. Reserve Names of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve .................................................... 3
2. Restoration Project Schedule for Alta Vicente Reserve Phases 1 and 2 ..................... 6
3. Restoration Project Schedule for Portuguese Bend Reserve Phases 1-3 .................... 8
4. Restoration Project Schedule for Additional Restoration in Palos Verdes Nature
Preserve ...................................................................................................................................... 13
FIGURES
1. Map of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve with Associated Reserves Locations ...... 4
2. Map of Restoration Areas at Alta Vicente Reserve .......................................................... 7
3. Map of Restoration Areas at Portuguese Bend Reserve ................................................. 9
4. Site map for All Restoration Projects in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve ............. 14
APPENDICES
A. Restoration Monitoring
B. 2011 Targeted Exotic Removal Program for Plants
C. Research and Monitoring
D. Volunteers
E. Future Trails Projects List
F. Post-fire Survey Report for Portuguese Bend
Attachments 1-48
Page | 1
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
1 INTRODUCTION
The 2011 Palos Verdes Nature Preserve Report for the Rancho Palos Verdes Natural
Community Conservation Plan provides annual submittal requirements by the Palos Verdes
Peninsula Land Conservancy (PVPLC) on the status of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
(Preserve). Additionally this report details stewardship activities, research, funding, and
community involvement in the Preserve during the period January 1, 2011 through December
31, 2011.
PVPLC serves as the management agency for the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve (Preserve) for
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (RPV). The Preserve encompasses approximately 1,400 acres
and is located on the southern side of the Palos Verdes Peninsula in the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes, California. The Preserve was formed under a Draft Natural Community Conservation
Plan (NCCP) to “maximize benefits to wildlife and vegetation communities while
accommodating appropriate economic development within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
and region pursuant to the requirements of the NCCP Act and Section 10(a) of the ESA (URS
2004a).” As a primary component of the NCCP, a Preserve design was proposed to conserve
regionally important habitat areas and provide habitat linkages in order to benefit sensitive
plants and wildlife. PVPLC manages the Preserve under an operating agreement with RPV.
The primary focus of management for the Preserve is to maintain or restore habitat for the
covered plant and animal species listed in the draft NCCP. A Habitat Management Plan was
adopted in 2007 that outlines the restoration of 5 acres per year for a total of 15 acres over a
3-year period. This plan also outlined the methodology for removal of exotic plant species, a
predator control plan, and the monitoring of covered plant and animal species. PVPLC attempts
to seek additional funding when possible, to perform restoration on more than the minimum 5
acres per year required in the NCCP. Several opportunities of this nature occurred during the
reporting period that will enable PVPLC to conduct additional restoration over the next 3 years
(2012-2014).
PVPLC also facilitates scientific research and trail maintenance projects in the Preserve.
Volunteers make up a large component of the management strategies for the Preserve. They
assist in monitoring the properties, wildlife, and habitat as well as help restore habitat and
maintain trails. Partnering with regional high schools and colleges allows for scientific research
that expands our understanding of the Preserve.
The Management Agreement with RPV requires that PVPLC submit an annual report to the
RPV City Council describing management activities with respect to habitat enhancement and
restoration, property maintenance and monitoring, vegetation and wildlife monitoring, and
efforts on targeted exotic plant removals. This report provides annual submittal requirements
Attachments 1-49
Page | 2
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
on the status of the Preserve for the period of January 1, 2011-December 31, 2011. It is
accompanied by a status report for the Targeted Exotic Removal Program for Plants (TERPP).
Volunteer involvement and support and student-based scientific research are also described in
this report.
The NCCP Implementing Agreement has not been signed by the regulatory agencies, and
therefore, the NCCP is technically not officially executed. However, because it is anticipated
that this agreement will be signed in the near future, this annual report was provided to satisfy
the requirements of both the Management Agreement with RPV and the reporting
requirements of the Draft NCCP. Annual reporting requirements for the Draft NCCP are
detailed below. Additionally, once every three years, a Comprehensive report is required. The
most recent Comprehensive Report covered the period 2007 through 2009.
Annual submittals (included in this report)
1. A monitoring report on habitat restoration areas using standard monitoring
protocol as detailed in the Preserve Habitat Restoration Plan
2. Report on Targeted Exotic Plant Removal Efforts
3. Report on trail maintenance projects.
Site Description
The Preserve is located on the southern side of the Palos Verdes Peninsula in the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes, California (Figure 1). The approximately 1,400-acre Preserve has been
divided into ten areas referred to as Reserves (Figure 1).
Attachments 1-50
Page | 3
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
Table 1: Reserve Names of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve. See Figure 1 for locations.
Abalone Cove Reserve San Ramon Reserve
Agua Amarga Reserve Three Sisters Reserve
Alta Vicente Upper Filiorum Reserve
Forrestal Reserve
Portuguese Bend Reserve
Vicente Bluffs Reserve
Vista del Norte Reserve
The topography of the Preserve is diverse, ranging from relatively flat lowland areas above
steep coastal bluffs in the south, to very steep slopes, ridgelines and gullies on the slopes to the
north. Elevations range from approximately sea level along the coastal edges of Vicente Bluffs,
Abalone Cove, and Ocean Trails to approximately 1,300 feet above mean sea level at the
northern most parcel, vista del Norte. Adjacent land uses include single-family residences on
most sides, open space associated with neutral lands on the Peninsula, the Pacific Ocean to the
south and west, and the Los Verdes and Trump National golf courses near the western and
eastern ends of the Preserve area.
Attachments 1-51
Pa
g
e
|
4
Pa
l
o
s
V
e
r
d
e
s
P
e
n
i
n
s
u
l
a
L
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
|
Fi
g
u
r
e
1
:
Ma
p
o
f
t
h
e
P
a
l
o
s
V
e
r
d
e
s
N
a
t
u
r
e
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
w
i
t
h
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
s
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
J
~
~\(
\(
I 0
P.o
o
I
o
x
v ..
.
.
.
.
.
N.
I
W
.
p,
.
u
"
,
.
bo
u
n
d
a
r
.
.
I
~
~'-
-
-
=
O
"
5
:
-
-
J
,
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
'
~
We
s
(
Y
a
p
11
0
1
u ..
.
.
a ..
.
.
:w
20
1
1
Al
l
Attachments 1-52
Page | 5
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
2 HABITAT RESTORATION
Habitat Management Plan
The initial Preserve Habitat Management Plan (PHMP) for the Draft NCCP was created in 2007.
A component of the PHMP was the Habitat Restoration Plan for the restoration of 5 acres per
year for a total of 15 acres over the first 3-year period. This plan was completed in April 2007
and concluded that Alta Vicente Reserve in the Preserve ranked the highest in terms of site
suitability for an immediate restoration project. The Habitat Restoration Plan for Alta Vicente
Reserve outlines appropriate revegetation locations and methodology to adequately comply
with the Preserve Management requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes NCCP.
The Habitat Restoration Plan for Alta Vicente Reserve provides guidelines for the establishment
of coastal sage scrub (CSS), coastal cactus scrub (CCS), and butterfly habitat on a total of 15
acres during 3 consecutive years at the Alta Vicente Reserve. However, since a fire occurred at
Portuguese Bend Reserve in August 2009, plans were adapted to focus immediate restoration
at Portuguese Bend, and only Phase 1 and 2 (10 acres) were implemented at Alta Vicente.
The following provides a brief description of work done to fulfill the NCCP during the
reporting period. Table 2 provides the implementation schedule for Phase 1 and Phase 2 at Alta
Vicente and Portuguese Bend.
Alta Vicente Reserve
The habitat restoration at the Alta Vicente Reserve consists of two 5-acre phases, with one
phase initiated each year. The first 5 acres of restoration (Phase 1) began with site preparation
during the fall of 2007. Phase 1 plants were installed and hydroseeded during the winter of
2009/2010. Site preparation for Phase 2 began in Fall 2008. In December 2010, staff removed
Acacia cyclopsis and completed planting and seeding in the Phase 2 area. In 2011, staff weeded
and maintained Phase 1 and 2. In Spring 2012, additional container plants will be installed to fill
in the space.
Draft NCCP annual reporting requirements include a monitoring report on habitat restoration
areas using a standard monitoring protocol for years 1, 2, 3 and 5 during the 5-year
maintenance and monitoring period that follows plant installation. Monitoring at Alta Vicente
began in 2010.
Attachments 1-53
Page | 6
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
Table 2: Restoration Project Schedule for Alta Vicente Reserve Phases 1 and 2. This table has
been modified from its original content in the 2007 Habitat Restoration Plan to reflect activities
only in Phase 1 and 2.
P
H
A
S
E
1
Task Date
Site clearing and soil preparation Fall 2007, Fall 2008
Installation of temporary irrigation system Fall 2008
Weed/exotic removal and grow-kill cycles Fall 2008-Spring 2009
Planting container stock Early Winter 2009/2010
Hydroseed application Winter 2009/2010 (following planting)
Completion of installation/assessment of site
installation
Following completion of installation and seeding
and 120 day maintenance period
5-year biological monitoring and maintenance Spring 2010-Spring 2014
Phase one completion 2014, end of Year 5
P
H
A
S
E
2
Site clearing and soil preparation Fall 2008, Fall 2009
Installation of temporary irrigation system Fall 2008, Fall 2009
Weed/exotic removal and grow-kill cycles Fall 2008, Fall 2009,-Spring 2010
Planting container stock Winter 2010/2011
Seed application Winter 2010/2011 (following planting)
Completion of installation/assessment of
site installation
Following completion of installation and seeding
and 120 day maintenance period
5-year biological monitoring and
maintenance Spring 2011-Spring 2015
Phase two completion 2015, end of Year 5
Attachments 1-54
Page | 7
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
Figure 2: Map of Restoration Areas at Alta Vicente Reserve. Phase 3 has been postponed to
implement burn recovery at Portuguese Bend.
Attachments 1-55
Page | 8
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
Portuguese Bend Reserve
A restoration plan for Portuguese Bend Reserve was completed July 2010, and can be found in
the Comprehensive Management and Monitoring Report 2007-2009. The July 2010 restoration
plan subdivided the restoration area into 3 polygons to be completed in 3 phases. The total
area of these polygons was 21 acres, to permit the selection of focal areas within these
polygons.
Site preparation at Portuguese Bend began in February 2010. Field staff weeded
(hand/herbicide) the burn area, and targeted fennel with herbicide. In February, 2011, goats
were deployed in the NCCP area to clear vegetation. Since then, staff has been controlling
weeds, with plans for “grow and kill” cycles in 2012 to reduce weed density prior to planting in
Fall 2012. Due to the high density of weeds, an additional year of weeding was implemented,
and 10 acres will be installed in Fall 2012. In 2012, PVPLC will install container plants on all of
the Phase 1 site described in the Restoration Plan (8 acres) and the cactus scrub portion of
Phase 2 site described in the Plan (2 acres), totaling 10 acres of restoration.
PVPLC obtained permission to install irrigation on 8 acres to enable “grow and kill” prior to
plant installation, and improve seed and plant survival after planting. Two acres of cactus scrub
will be planted in a non-irrigated area.
Table 3: Restoration Project Schedule for Portuguese Bend Reserve Phases 1, 2 and 3, based
on the Portuguese Bend Reserve Habitat Restoration Plan.
PH
A
S
E
1
a
n
d
P
H
A
S
E
2
(ca
c
t
u
s
s
c
r
u
b
)
Task Date
Begin site preparation, weed removal Fall 2010
Install irrigation Winter 2012
Final site preparation: weed and thatch
removal Fall 2012
Installation: Seeding and planting Fall 2012-Early Winter 2013
Maintenance weeding Winter 2013-Spring 2014
Fill-in planting, as needed Fall 2013-Fall 2014
5-year biological monitoring and maintenance Spring 2013-Spring 2017
Phase one and two completion 2017, end of Year 5
P
H
A
S
E
3
Site preparation, weed removal Fall 2012-Fall 2013
Final site preparation: weed and thatch
removal Fall 2013
Installation: Seeding and planting Fall 2013-Early Winter 2014
Maintenance weeding Winter 2014-Spring 2015
Remedial seeding, as needed Fall 2014-Fall 2015
5-year biological monitoring and maintenance Spring 2014-Spring 2018
Phase three completion 2018, end of Year 5
Attachments 1-56
Pa
g
e
|
9
Pa
l
o
s
V
e
r
d
e
s
P
e
n
i
n
s
u
l
a
L
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
|
Fi
g
u
r
e
3
.
M
a
p
o
f
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
e
a
s
a
t
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
.
N Ao
75
15
0
30
0
Fo
.
.
--
~
-
'
'
o
..;;.
;
;
:
_
;
;
~
.
~
_
"'"
*
"
'
I
e
o
o
l
_
C
'
..
.
.
.
.
-
.
.-
..-.
_
-
-
C
·
.
_
..
_
_
""
...
'"
I"
f
o
.
p
H
M
I
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
H
_
1"
G
'
t
u
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"
I
~
_
"
"
_
--
-
-
.
-
.
""
"
-
-
_
..
.
.
.
"
-
"
_
-
.
.
Attachments 1-57
Page | 10
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
Additional Restoration
PVPLC attempts to seek additional funding when possible, to perform restoration on more than
the minimum 5 acres per year required in the NCCP. Several opportunities of this nature
occurred during the reporting period. Table 4 shows the timeline for each additional
restoration project.
Three Sisters
In January 2007, Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) provided funding to conduct twenty-one
acres of coastal sage scrub and perennial grassland restoration in the Three Sisters Reserve as
part of mitigation for the Southwest Airfield at Los Angeles International Airport. A restoration
plan was completed in 2008. In January 2009, the PVPLC began implementation of the first
season of weed control, including the use of 250 goats for grazing. Acacia trees (300) were
treated with a glyphosate herbicide, using the “drill and kill” method, and removed from the
site. Staff systematically removed weeds such as fennel, mustard and non-native annual grasses
through mechanical, hand removal, and herbicide application. An irrigation system was installed
in September 2009. In December 2009, 7,930 container plants of coastal sage scrub species
were planted, and the site was seeded with coastal sage scrub and native grass seeds from local
sources. In Fall 2011, an additional 8,665 container plants were installed, and 4 acres of
grassland were drill-seeded to increase germination success.
McCarrell’s Canyon
In June 2008, a grant agreement was signed with the State Coastal Conservancy to provide
restoration to seven acres of coastal sage scrub and riparian habitats at McCarrell’s Canyon,
which is the western boundary of Three Sisters Reserve. Due to a State funding freeze,
restoration was delayed until 2010. A final restoration plan commissioned by PVPLC for all
activities performed under the grant. To implement the restoration plan, staff contracted with
Nakae & Associates to remove 5 acres of non-native acacia trees. In Nov 2010, PVPLC staff
began weeding the restoration site, including the highly invasive Euphorbia terracina, and hauled
out debris. In summer 2011, the Los Angeles Conservation Corps (LACC) removed another 12
acacia trees. PVPLC staff continued to weed nonnative annual grasses to prepare the site for
planting in Fall 2011. In Fall 2011, one acre of riparian habitat and 3 acres of coastal sage scrub
were planted. The site will be seeded in January 2012.
Pelican Cove/Fishing Access
In June 2008, a grant agreement was signed with the State Coastal Conservancy to provide
restoration to three acres at the Fishing Access area of Vicente Bluffs Reserve. Due to a funding
freeze, restoration was delayed until 2010. An updated habitat restoration plan for Fishing
Access was commissioned by PVPLC. Site preparation and planting began in December 2009.
One acre of acacia, pampas grass and ice plant were removed from the Fishing Access portion
of Vicente Bluffs, and planted with coastal bluff scrub and El Segundo blue butterfly host plants.
Portuguese Bend
On August 27, 2009, the Palos Verdes Fire burned approximately 165 acres of the Portuguese
Bend Reserve, affecting both native and non-native vegetation and known nesting sites of the
threatened coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) and the special status
Attachments 1-58
Page | 11
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus). To address the impacts of the fire, PVPLC
created a Fire Recovery Plan in October 2009 (PVPLC 2009).
A Department of Fish and Game Local Assistance Grant funds restoration in the burn area at
Portuguese Bend. The grant provides funding to restore native habitat through non-native plant
control and removal, provide supplemental native planting in areas of historic cactus scrub, and
perform post-fire monitoring for California gnatcatchers and cactus wrens. Invasive species
removal and planting was implemented from Fall 2010 to Fall 2011. A total of three (3) acres of
cactus scrub was installed (see map).
In March 2010, the City of El Segundo provided funding to conduct 9.5 acres of coastal sage
scrub and perennial grassland restoration at Portuguese Bend as part of mitigation for the Plaza
El Segundo Development. The restoration site is on the upper portion of the Ishibashi Trail.
Staff worked with the California Conservation Corps Weed Strike Team to clear
approximately 5 acres of mustard and fennel in the burn area. In Fall 2010, the 9.5 acre-site was
seeded with native grasses and coastal sage scrub. Low germination occurred at the site, most
likely due to low rainfall. Therefore, in Fall 2011, container plants were installed in 5 foot-wide
strips, separated by 10-foot buffers. This technique will allow the buffer area to fill in with
native plants over time. Dri-water gel was installed with the container plants.
Figure 4 provides a site map for each restoration project, including the restoration at Alta
Vicente and Portuguese Bend Reserves that fulfills the requirements of the NCCP Habitat
Restoration Plan.
Attachments 1-59
Pa
g
e
|
12
Pa
l
o
s
V
e
r
d
e
s
P
e
n
i
n
s
u
l
a
L
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
|
Fi
g
u
r
e
4
.
S
i
t
e
m
a
p
f
o
r
a
l
l
2
0
1
1
r
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
i
n
t
h
e
P
a
l
o
s
V
e
r
d
e
s
N
a
t
u
r
e
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
.
V ic
e
n
t
e
B
l
u
f
f
s
Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Mc
C
a
r
r
e
l
l
’
s
Ca
n
y
o
n
Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Th
r
e
e
S
i
s
t
e
r
s
Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Po
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
A lt
a
V
i
c
e
n
t
e
Re
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
(
Il
l
.
"
l
u
i
l
I
I
l
d
_
M/
2
1
1
1
1
AS
Attachments 1-60
Page | 13
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
Table 4: Restoration project schedule for additional restoration in Palos Verdes Nature
Preserve.
Th
r
e
e
S
i
s
t
e
r
s
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
21
A
c
r
e
s
Task Date
Seed collection Winter 2008-Spring 2009 (again in second year if
necessary)
Initial site preparation/weeding Winter 2008-Spring 2009, Fall 2009
Final site preparation(mowing/thatch
removal) Fall 2009
Seeding and container planting Fall 2009
Irrigation installation Summer 2009
Maintenance Winter 2009-Spring 2010
Remedial seeding Fall 2010 (if needed)
3-year monitoring (horticultural and
performance) Winter 2008-Spring 2011
Mc
C
a
r
r
e
l
l
’
s
C
a
n
y
o
n
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
4
A
c
r
e
s
Task Date
Site clearing and soil preparation Winter 2008/2009-Fall 2009
Planting container stock Winter 2009/2010
Seeding application Winter 2009/2010 (following planting)
Completion of
installation/assessment of site
installation
Following completion of installation and seeding and
120 day maintenance period.
3-year monitoring and maintenance To begin upon successful installation of restoration
work
Vi
c
e
n
t
e
B
l
u
f
f
s
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
4
A
c
r
e
s
Task Date
Site clearing and soil preparation Winter 2009/2010
Planting container stock Winter 2010/2011
Seeding application Winter 2010/2011 (following planting)
Completion of
installation/assessment of site
installation
Following completion of installation and seeding and
120 day maintenance period.
Po
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
El
S
e
g
u
n
d
o
G
r
a
n
t
9.
5
a
c
r
e
s
Task Date
Site preparation and weed control Spring 2010-Fall 2010
Seeding Winter 2010/2011
Completion of
installation/assessment of site
installation
Following completion of installation and seeding and
120 day maintenance period.
3-year monitoring and maintenance To begin upon successful installation of restoration
work
Attachments 1-61
Page | 14
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
Po
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
Be
n
d
L
o
c
a
l
As
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
Gr
a
n
t
(
L
A
G
)
Task
Date
Invasive species removal Fall 2010-Mar 2011
Native planting Fall 2010-Mar 2011
Attachments 1-62
Page | 15
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
3 MONITORING
RESTORATION
PVPLC staff performed annual photo point monitoring. The photo point records now
document several years of changing site conditions, and public use. PVPLC’s stewardship staff
conducted a variety of surveys at the restoration sites throughout the preserves. Vegetation
transect surveys were conducted using standardized methods that provide data on the cover of
native and non-native plants in the habitat. In 2011, restoration monitoring was completed at
Alta Vicente Reserve. The plants in the restoration area are healthy, and success criteria are
being met. Detailed results are in Appendix A.
COVERED SPECIES
The NCCP/HCP requires updated surveys for covered plants and animals on the Preserve
every three years. Results for the 2010-2012 survey period will be covered in the
Comprehensive Management and Monitoring report, in March 2013.
The draft NCCP/HCP includes a total of six covered plant species. They are aphanisma
(Aphanisma blitoides), south coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica), Catalina crossosoma (Crossosoma
californicum), island green dudleya (Dudleya virens ssp. insularis), Santa Catalina Island desertthorn
(Lycium brevipes var. hassei) and woolly seablite (Sueda taxifolia). In March 2011, surveys were
conducted for aphanisma and south coast saltscale in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.
Surveys were conducted for the El Segundo blue butterfly at Vicente Bluffs and Abalone Cove
Reserves (see attached report). The 2011 survey was conducted as a good faith follow-up from
the 2010 triennial survey where only two ESB were observed. Surveys were conducted at 13
sites possessing host plant, twelve that were surveyed in 2010 and one additional site where
host plant were discovered. Weekly surveys were conducted from June 7 through July 28, with
a hiatus during June 11 and 20. Only one ESB was observed in the survey areas, an individual
flying from Terranea Resort to Fishing Access across the parking lot. A visual assessment
indicated that host plant numbers were low, which could explain the low number of ESB. A
number of factors could affect host plants, including slope failure, competition from non-native,
invasive plants, and sea water inundation at the bottom of the bluffs. The restoration at Vicente
Bluffs in 2011 should benefit the butterfly. The next survey will take place during the next
triennial monitoring period in Summer 2013.
Surveys for California gnatcatcher and coastal cactus wren were conducted at Portuguese Bend
Reserve. A detailed report of the bird monitoring surveys is located at the end of this Annual
Report. Post-fire surveys took place in 2010 and 2011. The biologist followed the routes
previously established for 2006 and 2009 surveys, in order to make results comparable. Results
indicate that both species are still using the site, possibly in similar numbers as pre-fire. One
major stand of cactus that had wrens burned, and has not recovered, but wrens may have
moved to another part of the site. Based on two years of data (2010 and 2011), the site
continues to support numbers of both the cactus wren and the California gnatcatcher, although
one of the two known active territories of cactus wren present in 2009 was apparently lost to
Attachments 1-63
Page | 16
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
the fire, which destroyed nearly the entire cactus patch that was being used by the birds.
Surveys in 2011 found both species slightly more widely than those in 2010, suggesting that
each may still be attempting to recolonize (or at least travel through) areas burned in 2009.
VEGETATION MAPPING
PVPLC staff completed vegetation mapping in the burned portion of Portuguese Bend Reserve,
and created updated vegetation maps, as part of a Dept. of Fish and Game Local Assistance
Grant.
4 TARGETED EXOTIC REMOVAL PROGRAM FOR PLANTS
The Targeted Exotic Removal Program for Plants (TERPP) is an element of the Preserve
Habitat Management Plan for the Draft NCCP that requires the annual removal of exotic plant
species of twenty individual populations or five acres found in the Preserve. The TERPP
provides protocol for ranking the degree of threat to native vegetation, the feasibility of
eradication, and the invasiveness of each exotic species found in the Preserve. Populations of
exotic plant species are then targeted for removal based on the results of the ranking outcome.
The 2011 TERPP Report documents PVPLC’s effort during the reporting period to fulfill the
requirements of the TERPP plan. It details the methods of assessing the threat of individual
exotic species to native vegetation, field methods for removal, and provides site-specific
documentation related to every completed removal. The complete 2011 TERPP Report can be
found in Appendix B of this report.
5 BRUSH CLEARANCE
Brush clearance is the clearing or minimizing of vegetation in areas that occur immediately
adjacent to residential structures and roads. RPV is responsible for ongoing maintenance of
brush clearance within the Preserve, to provide an appropriate level of fire protection,
emphasizing the protection of life, public safety, and property values in the urban-wildlife
interface areas while minimizing environmental impacts of fire suppression and control. A
portion of the Agua Amarga Reserve is owned by PVPLC and falls under their responsibilities to
maintain brush clearance requirements. All of these requirements were met in May and June
2011. No other fuel modification areas within the Preserve fall under the responsibility of
PVPLC.
6 SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND WILDLIFE MONITORING
The Preserve is an ideal setting for an outdoor laboratory, because it provides scientists and
students with access to a variety of habitat. A report of 2011 research is located in Appendix C.
Attachments 1-64
Page | 17
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
7 TRAIL MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING
Filiorum Reserve trail workshops
Trail recommendations, based on 2010 public workshops and comments, were incorporated
into a recommended trail design with trail user designations, for review by City Council in
2012. Trail recommendations were posted on a blog, the City and PVPLC websites.
State of the Trails meeting
In 2011, 40 people participated in a workshop for the entire Preserve, titled the “State of the
trails” workshop. Groups of participants rotated through six stations covering groups of
reserves, and shared ideas for improved trails, signs and maps. An additional table presented
educational information on habitat and wildlife of the Preserve. Participants’ comments were
then considered, and incorporated into recommendations to the City Council. At the City
Council meeting, users will have another opportunity to voice their concerns and preferences.
Trail Management
One of the directives of the draft NCCP was to minimize the number of trails within the
Preserve, to ensure the conservation of habitat, while continuing to provide public access. In
2006, the Public Use Master Plan Committee was formed to provide recommendations for
naming of the Preserve, forming a Preserve Trails Plan and reviewing other guidelines for public
use of the Preserve. The Preserve Trails Plan was brought before the RPV City Council over
the course of several meetings during early 2008. The Preserve Trails Plan for the Palos Verdes
Nature Preserve was approved in February 2008 and City Council directed the PVPLC to
initiate several management tools. Among these were the development of educational materials
to alert the public to the new approved trail system and the sensitivity of the habitat and to
install signage throughout the Reserve indicating trail names and uses.
PVPLC continues to place trail maps for the whole PVNP, created in 2010, at major trailheads,
and post them on PVPLC’s website.
PVPLC staff continues to maintain trail markers, close unauthorized trails, and provide trail
brochures.
In 2011, PVPLC completed a Preserve-wide signage inventory and is collaborating with City
staff on improving and standardizing signage throughout the Preserve and Parks.
Trail Monitoring
PVPLC stewardship staff or volunteers from the Keeping an Extra Eye on the Preserve for
Environmental Review and Stewardship (Keepers) Program conducted all trail monitoring
during the reporting period. The Keepers program is described in detail in the Volunteer
Involvement section of the report (Appendix D). Monitoring was typically limited to overall trail
conditions such as erosion, hazards, and vegetation overgrowth.
Attachments 1-65
Page | 18
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
Trail Markers and Decals
In 2011, staff replaced and repaired trail signage (21 decals, 7 carsonite sign posts) and
removed graffiti on signs throughout the Preserve.
Trail Repair
A PVPLC volunteer trail crew assists in much of the trail work on the Preserve. A complete
summary of the PVPLC Volunteer Trail Crew Program can be found in the Community
Involvement section of the report (Appendix D). PVPLC staff or RPV Public Works department
were also involved in trail enhancements.
Two grants have permitted additional trail work on the Preserve. A Habitat Conservation Fund
grant provided funding for trail restoration, spur trail closure, and improved signage at
Portuguese Bend Reserve. A grant from the Coastal Conservancy is funding development of the
California Coastal Trail through the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, including a section through
the Preserve.
The following lists the trail projects that were conducted in 2011.
Abalone Cove
The volunteer trail crew repaired trail tread on Sacred Cove Trail.
Forrestal
The Volunteer Trail Crew visited Forrestal on five occasions, working on the Dauntless Trail,
completing a trail assessment, and repairing grade dips on Flying Mane Trail.
Portuguese Bend
The volunteer trail crew completed a class on tread work at Portuguese Bend.
The volunteer trail crew dismantled a bike jump on Ishibashi Trail.
In October 2011, PVPLC contracted with Bellfree Contractors to better define the Ishibashi
Trail route, and close several spur trails in the area.
In October 2011, staff met with Rolling Hills Community Association and property owners at
Rolling Hills who desired closing the loop connecting the Rim trail to the Fire Station Trail.
City and PVPLC informed trail users of the change on their websites, and placed signage at
trailheads and the Portuguese Bend kiosk.
Upper Filiorum
The volunteer trail crew cleared the Cutacross Trail, and completed a canyon crossing
assessment.
Vicente Bluffs
The LACC planted cactus and bluff plants along a fenced spur trail at Pelican Cove, to
discourage use.
Attachments 1-66
Page | 19
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
Future Trail Projects
Future trail projects are listed in Appendix E.
Ranger Program
The City has continued contracting with the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority
(MRCA) to provide rangers at the Preserve.
8 VOLUNTEER INVOLVEMENT
PVPLC is a non-profit organization that relies heavily on the support of community involvement
to perform many of the tasks necessary to manage the Preserve. The Volunteer Annual Report
for January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2011 is located in Appendix D.
Attachments 1-67
Page | 20
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy |
2011 Officers
Ken Swenson, President
Bruce Biesman-Simons, Exec. Vice President
Susan McKenna, Secretary
Marc Crawford, Treasurer
2011 Board of Directors
Bill Ailor, President Emeritus
Allen Franz
Cassie Jones
Henry Jurgens
Elizabeth Kennedy
Mike Kilroy
Leslie McShane
Jess Morton
Joseph Platnick
Anke Raue
Jack Smith
John Spielman
William Swank
Grace Wallace
Pam Westoff
2011 Staff
Executive Director Land Stewardship
Andrea Vona Danielle LeFer, Conservation Director
Cristian Sarabia, Stewardship Manager
Office Administration Adrienne Bosler, Stewardship Associate
Ann Dalkey, Stewardship Associate (Research)
Hazel Martinez, Office Administrator
Jill Wittman, Administrative Assistant
Sue Cody, Accountant
Daniel Feldman, Stewardship Technician
Damian Morando, Stewardship Technician
Hugo Moralez, Stewardship Technician
Humberto Calderon, Stewardship Technician
Neli Gonzalez, Nursery Technician
Education Program
Kristina Ellis, Education Director (January to May
2011)
Siegrun Storer, Education Director (August 2011 to
present)
John Nieto, Education Manager
Development
Nancy Young, Development Director
Louise Olfarnes, Communications Manager
Mary Lopes, Donor Relations
George F. Canyon Nature Center
Loretta Rose, Manager/Naturalist
Laurie Morgan, Assistant Naturalist
White Point Nature Education Center
Roxanne Roberts, Naturalist
Jessy Melowicz, Naturalist
Attachments 1-68
APPENDIX A
2011 RESTORATION MONITORING
REPORT
Attachments 1-69
Page |A 1
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy –
Transect monitoring at restoration sites took place at Alta Vicente on May 5, 2011. Locations of
photo points are on Figure 1. Results of the Alta Vicente surveys are provided below.
1 SURVEY RESULTS
Phase 1
Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS)
Native plant cover in the CSS site (AV1) in 2010 was about 10%, the performance standard for year
1 (10%) (see Photo 1). The container plants were healthy. Recruitment from seed was very low.
Recommendations were to continue weed control and monitor for seedling recruitment.
Native plant cover in 2011 in the CSS site (AV1) was approximately 15%, slightly lower than the
performance standard of 20% for year 2 (See Photo 2). Container plants were healthy, but there was
still very little recruitment from seed. Recommendations were to continue weeding, and to fill-in
plant in Fall 2011 to make up for the lack of recruitment from seed.
Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly Habitat (PVB)
No photos were taken of the native plant cover in the PVB site (AV2) in 2010, but visual inspection
indicated that cover was approximately 10%, the performance standard for year 1 (10%). The
container plants were healthy. Recruitment from seed was very low. Recommendations were to
continue weed control and monitor for seedling recruitment.
PVB vegetation cover in Phase 2 was approximately 10%, lower than the performance standard of
20% for year 2 (See Photo 3). Some plants had died back, but were releafing from the base.
Recommendations were to continue weeding, and to fill-in plant in Fall 2011 to compensate for the
lack of recruitment from seed.
Phase 2
Cactus Scrub
Native plant cover in the cactus scrub site (AV3) in 2011 was approximately 15% (see Photo 4). The
container plants were healthy. Recruitment from seed was observed. Recommendations were to
continue weed control.
Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS)
Native plant cover in the CSS site (AV4) in 2011 was approximately 10% (see Photo 5). The container
plants were healthy. Recruitment from seed was observed. Recommendations were to continue
weed control.
Attachments 1-70
Page |A 2
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy –
Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly Habitat (PVB)
Native plant cover in the PVB habitat (AV5) in 2011 was approximately 40% (see Photo 6). The
container plants were healthy. Seedling recruitment was observed. Recommendations were to
continue weed control.
PLANT INVENTORY
A plant inventory conducted during the monitoring in 2010 and 2011 identified 11 native species
(Table 1). Plants were identified on either side (within one meter) of a 50 meter transect in Phase 1
and Phase 2.
Table 1. Plant inventory at Alta Vicente, 2010 and 2011.
Species
Artemisia californica
Astragalus trichopodus
Cylindropuntia prolifera
Encelia californica
Eriogonum cinereum
Eriogonum parvifolium
Heteromeles arbutifolia
Isomeris arborea
Leymus condensatus
Lupinus succulentus
Opuntia littoralis
2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Container plants in the Phase 1 restoration area are surviving and growing. However, recruitment
from seed has been low. Fill-in planting in 2011, and recruitment from seeds from mature plants, will
increase native cover in the future.
The Phase 2 restoration is meeting success criteria for year 1, and native plant cover will continue to
increase as container plants mature, and seedlings germinating from seed increase in size.
Attachments 1-71
Phase 1Phase 2
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy Alta Vicente Site Map
0 0.02 0.040.01 Miles ´
Access Road
Butterfly Habitat Restoration
Coastal Sage Scrub Restoration
Southern Cactus Scrub Restoration
Palos Verdes
D
r
i
v
e
S
o
u
t
h
Hawthorne Bl
v
d
.
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
7
2
4/4/2012
1
1. Phase 1: CSS 2010 (Yr 1) (AV1)
2. Phase 1: CSS 2011 (Yr 2) (AV1)
Attachments 1-73
4/4/2012
2
3. Phase 1: PVB habitat 2011 (Yr 2) (AV2)
Attachments 1-74
4/4/2012
3
4. Phase 2: Cactus scrub 2011 (Yr 1)(AV3)
5. Phase 2: CSS 2011 (Yr 1) (AV4)
Attachments 1-75
4/4/2012
4
6. Phase 2: PVB habitat 2011 (Yr 1) (AV5)
Attachments 1-76
APPENDIX B
ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE TARGETED
EXOTIC REMOVAL PROGRAM FOR
PLANTS (TERPP)
Attachments 1-77
Page |B 1
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – |
1 INTRODUCTION
The Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (PVPLC), as manager of the Palos Verdes
Nature Preserve (PVNP), conducts strategic weed control activities throughout the year as
part of the Targeted Exotic Plant Removal Plan for Plants (TERPP). As directed in the draft
Rancho Palos Verdes Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP), PVPLC selects five
acres or 20 small sites of exotic plants for removal each year. The overall goal of this
program is to systematically target invasive species throughout the PVNP to increase the
success of native plant growth and create greater habitat opportunities for wildlife.
The TERPP is an element of the NCCP that includes a specific protocol for ranking exotic
species populations and strategically removing those species over time (Appendix B-G). The
2011 TERPP Report documents PVPLC’s effort over the past year to remove exotic plant
species that threaten native vegetation in the PVNP. It details the methods of assessing the
threat of individual exotic species to native vegetation, field methods for removal and
provides site-specific documentation related to every completed removal site.
As of the writing of this report, the NCCP is still in draft format and the regulatory agencies
have not yet signed the final plan. However, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and PVPLC
currently perform the responsibilities outlined in the draft NCCP, including fulfillment of the
TERPP requirements.
2 SITE ASSESSMENT
Invasive species control is included in PVPLC’s annual conservation planning strategy where
Stewardship staff prioritize potential TERPP sites and assess best practice methods for
removal. Guided by the NCCP, which ranks known PVNP exotic species based on State and
Federal guidelines, PVPLC staff locate TERPP sites to target for the calendar year, assess the
best method for eradication, photo document and map the population/s, and conduct weed
removal accordingly.
The PVPLC weighs potential areas for exotic species control based on several criteria:
1. Threat to native vegetation, particularly populations of NCCP-covered species;
1.
2. Feasibility of eradication, which includes limiting disturbance to native habitat and
ease of access, and;
3. Invasiveness of exotic species, using a synthesized rating system drawn from plant
invasiveness rankings from both the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) and
the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA).
Attachments 1-78
Page |B 2
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – |
Through regular property reviews and viewing fine scale imagery through the Geographic
Information System (GIS), ArcGIS, PVPLC plans for exotic species control across the entire
NCCP area.
Staff primarily documents completed TERPP sites on the TERPP field form. Appendix A
contains a sample TERPP form. The forms provide basic information about the species
targeted, including site identification number and property, approximate location, removal
methods used, and general comments related to the removal activities. PVPLC also includes
photo documentation: staff photographs the sites before work takes place and after the
removal of the individual or population of exotic species. Photo documentation not only
confirms completion of the work, but also provides a snapshot of the surrounding
environment at the time of the TERPP-related activities. This record helps to create a
historical record of the presence of non-native plant species on the sites, which may inform
future restoration efforts.
Each TERPP site is tracked via GIS, a tool that aids planning and monitoring efforts. Since
2006, PVPLC has treated 68 TERPP sites, and the program is ongoing. Every year, tracking,
documenting and planning for the following year becomes more complicated as more sites
are added. Use of GIS allows staff not only to look at the land within the NCCP boundaries,
but to view the Palos Verdes Peninsula at a landscape level. While the most common
approach to managing invasions of exotic species may be to target individual species, a more
comprehensive approach is to identify major pathways for invasion that will influence more
efficient and economic management of the exotic species.
3 FIELD METHODS
PVPLC staff uses best practice, the most effective and least intrusive, methods at all times
when conducting TERPP-related activities. High priority areas may occur near rare or
endangered biological populations. Care is taken to minimize soil erosion, fire risk,
disturbance to surrounding native vegetation and further dispersal of the exotic species.
PVPLC utilizes a combination of methods to conduct exotic species removal, generally
limited to the following:
Mechanical removal - staff may use tools with motorized blades to fell larger species;
Hand removal - staff conduct most removals by hand pulling and/or with small hand
tools for pruning and cutting;
Chemical control - trained staff applies herbicides at the appropriate phase of
vegetative
Growth and seed maturation, and;
Disposal - City of Rancho Palos Verdes staff coordinate with waste companies to
supply green waste and trash containers.
Attachments 1-79
Page |B 3
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – |
Qualified Licensed Applicator(s) develop all recommendations for chemical pest control and
senior staff supervises field staff and contractors in sensitive areas. Additionally, field staff has
an integral role in the TERPP and often have crucial, site-specific knowledge related to the
sites.
4 2011 TERPP
In 2011, PVPLC treated 20 populations of Euphorbia terracina (Geraldton spurge, Euphorbia),
in addition to treating approximately 5 acres of Euphorbia at the San Ramon Reserve (Figure
1). Euphorbia grows rapidly in disturbed areas, is a prolific seeder and is rapidly expanding its
distribution in southern California. Invaded areas show reduced ecological quality and
inferior habitat quality compared to un-invaded areas. Continued spread of this species
throughout California seems possible and even likely if action is not taken immediately.
Euphorbia shows a broad habitat tolerance in southern California, invading both cool coastal
areas and hot, dry, interior areas. The Euphorbia eradication on the Preserve has been part
of the twice funded (2008, 2010) Los Angeles County Weed Management Area (WMA)
Euphorbia Grant. The project’s goal is to control populations of Euphorbia occurring
throughout the Peninsula.
In addition, PVPLC removed two populations of Arundo donax (Table 1).
Attachments 1-80
Fi
g
u
r
e
1
:
Eu
p
h
o
r
b
i
a
t
e
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
s
i
t
e
s
2
0
0
8
t
o
2
0
1
1
.
-'"
..
,
...
.
'
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
~
E
u
p
h
o
r
b
i
a
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
~
T
r
e
a
t
e
d
S
i
t
e
s
"-
1
0
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
'-
'
n
..
.
.
~
d
c"
"
"
..
.
..
.
.
,
e _..
.
.
.
.
.
I.
'
I
•I
\l
o
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
c
.
.
.
I
t
~b
i
o
.
.
-
.
.
.
d
.
.
20
1
1
a
Eu
p
n
o
r
b
i
o
.
.
.
.
x
e
d
in
20
1
0
~
~
u
u
t
e
d
in
20
0
9
•
~
cr
e
a
e
d
in
10
0
8
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
Attachments 1-81
Ta
b
l
e
I:
20
1
1
TE
R
P
P
tr
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
s
.
Si
t
e
nu
m
b
e
r
Sp
e
c
i
e
s
Da
t
e
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
si
z
e
M
e
t
h
o
d
P
h
e
n
o
l
o
g
y
1
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
A
b
a
l
o
n
e
C
o
v
e
a
n
d
P
V
D
r
i
v
e
s
o
u
t
h
1
0
p
u
l
l
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
1
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
A
b
a
l
o
n
e
C
o
v
e
a
t
P
V
D
r
i
v
e
s
o
u
t
h
10
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
2
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
A
b
a
l
o
n
e
C
o
v
e
C
a
n
y
o
n
1
0
0
0
p
u
l
l
/
s
p
r
a
y
a
l
l
s
t
a
g
e
s
2
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
A
b
a
l
o
n
e
C
o
v
e
c
a
n
y
on
1
7
5
p
u
l
l
/
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
3
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
A
b
a
l
o
n
e
C
o
v
e
O
l
m
s
t
e
a
d
t
r
a
i
l
1
5
0
p
u
l
l
/
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
3
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
A
b
a
l
o
n
e
c
o
v
e
,
O
l
m
s
t
e
a
d
10
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
4
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
A
g
u
a
A
m
a
r
g
a
75
s
p
r
a
y
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
4
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
A
g
u
a
A
m
a
r
g
a
75
s
p
r
a
y
F
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
5
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
A
l
t
a
V
i
c
e
n
t
e
1
2
5
0
s
p
r
a
y
a
l
l
s
t
a
g
e
s
6
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
A
l
t
a
V
i
c
e
n
t
e
2
1
0
0
s
p
r
a
y
a
l
l
s
t
a
g
e
s
7
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
A
l
t
a
V
i
c
e
n
t
e
p
h
a
s
e
3
1
p
u
l
l
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
8
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
F
o
r
r
e
s
t
a
l
a
t
F
o
r
r
e
s
t
a
l
D
r
i
v
e
2
5
p
u
l
l
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
9
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
F
o
r
r
e
s
t
a
l
a
t
Q
u
a
r
r
y
T
r
a
i
l
3
0
p
u
l
l
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
9
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
F
o
r
r
e
s
t
a
l
P
i
r
a
t
e
t
r
a
i
l
h
e
a
d
15
p
u
l
l
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
10
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
V
i
c
e
n
t
e
B
l
u
f
f
s
2
0
0
s
p
r
a
y
a
l
l
s
t
a
g
e
s
10
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
V
i
c
e
n
t
e
B
l
u
f
f
s
10
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
10
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
V
i
c
e
n
t
e
B
l
u
f
f
s
10
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
11
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
V
i
c
e
n
t
e
B
l
u
f
f
s
c
u
l
v
e
r
t
17
5
s
p
r
a
y
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
11
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
V
i
c
e
n
t
e
B
l
u
f
f
s
c
u
l
v
e
r
t
1
2
5
s
p
r
a
y
s
p
o
u
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
11
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
V
i
c
e
n
t
e
B
l
u
f
f
s
c
u
lv
e
r
t
1
0
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
Attachments 1-82
Pa
g
e
|
B
6
Pa
l
o
s
V
e
r
d
e
s
P
e
n
i
n
s
u
l
a
L
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
– |
12
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
Po
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
a
t
I
s
h
i
b
a
s
h
i
t
r
a
i
l
40
sp
r
a
y
fl
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
13
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
Po
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
N
C
C
P
s
i
t
e
10
0
sp
r
a
y
sp
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
13
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
,
N
CC
P
1
0
0
p
u
l
l
/
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
14
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
Po
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
a
t
K
u
b
o
t
a
t
r
a
i
l
25
sp
r
a
y
fl
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
14
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
,
K
ub
o
t
a
2
0
p
u
l
l
/
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
15
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
a
t
P
e
p
p
e
r
t
re
e
75
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
15
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
P
e
p
p
e
r
t
r
e
e
t
r
a
i
l
1
7
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
16
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
a
t
P
V
D
r
i
v
e
s
o
u
t
h
1
0
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
16
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
a
t
P
V
D
r
i
v
e
So
u
t
h
30
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
16
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
a
t
P
V
D
r
i
v
e
S
o
u
t
h
50
h
a
n
d
p
u
l
l
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
16
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
a
t
P
V
D
r
iv
e
s
o
u
t
h
3
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
17
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
I
s
h
i
b
a
s
h
i
F
a
r
m
t
r
a
i
l
3
5
0
s
p
r
a
y
s
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
17
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
I
s
h
i
b
a
s
h
i
F
a
r
m
T
r
a
i
l
50
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
17
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
,
I
s
h
i
b
a
s
h
i
F
a
r
m
3
0
0
p
u
l
l
/
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
18
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
,
s
a
n
d
b
ox
1
1
5
0
p
u
l
l
/
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
18
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
S
a
n
d
b
o
x
1
2
0
0
s
p
r
a
y
a
l
l
s
t
a
g
e
s
19
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
P
o
r
t
u
g
u
e
s
e
B
e
n
d
S
a
n
d
b
o
x
2
2
0
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
s
e
e
d
i
n
g
24
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ap
r
/
J
u
n
e
20
1
1
Sa
n
R
a
m
o
n
5
a
c
r
e
s
sp
r
a
y
al
l
s
t
a
g
e
s
24
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
S
a
n
R
a
m
o
n
>
8
,
0
0
0
p
u
l
l
/
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
24
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
S
a
n
R
a
m
o
n
,
c
a
n
y
o
n
g
r
as
s
l
a
n
d
7
5
0
h
a
n
d
p
u
l
l
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
20
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
T
h
r
e
e
S
i
s
t
e
r
s
(
B
a
r
k
e
n
t
i
n
e)
5
0
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
s
p
r
o
u
t
i
n
g
20
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
No
v
/
D
e
c
2
0
1
1
T
h
r
e
e
S
i
s
t
e
r
s
,
B
a
r
k
en
t
i
n
e
4
0
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
/
s
p
r
o
u
t
Attachments 1-83
Pa
g
e
|
B
7
Pa
l
o
s
V
e
r
d
e
s
P
e
n
i
n
s
u
l
a
L
a
n
d
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
– |
21
E.
te
r
r
a
c
i
n
a
Ja
n
/
M
a
r
2
0
1
1
T
h
r
e
e
S
i
s
t
e
r
s
(
e
n
d
o
f
O
c
e
a
n
T
e
r
r
a
c
e
)
10
0
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
22
A.
do
n
a
x
Ju
n
e
-
N
o
v
A
g
u
a
A
m
a
r
g
a
/
L
u
n
a
d
a
C
a
n
y
o
n
1,
6
0
0
s
q
fe
e
t
c
u
t
/
s
p
r
a
y
f
l
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
23
A.
do
n
a
x
Ju
n
e
-
N
o
v
Ab
a
l
o
n
e
C
o
v
e
10
0
s
q
f
e
e
t
cu
t
/
s
p
r
a
y
fl
o
w
e
r
i
n
g
Attachments 1-84
5 REFERENCES
California Invasive Plant Council 2006. California Invasive Plant Inventory. February.
California Invasive Plant Council: Berkley, CA.
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy 2007a. 2007 Targeted Exotic Removal Plan for
Plants for the Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve For the Rancho Palos Verdes Draft
Natural Community Conservation Plan and Habitat Conservation Plan. April.
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy 2008. 2008 Annual Report for the Targeted
Exotic Removal Program for Plants for the Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve For the
Rancho Palos Verdes Draft Natural Community Conservation Plan and Habitat
Conservation Plan. September.
State of California 2007. Department of Food and Agriculture Division of Plant Health
& Prevention Services Noxious Weed Ratings. Retrieved September 2007, from:
<http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/ipc/encycloweedia/pdfs/noxiousweed_ratings.pdf>.
URS 2006. City of Rancho Palos Verdes Draft Natural Community Conservation Plan
and Habitat Conservation Plan. June 9.
Attachments 1-85
Page |B 9
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – |
Appendix A: SAMPLE TERPP FORM
Property: Year selected:
Exotic vegetation type:
Access:
Reason for removal:
Method of removal:
Method of disposal:
Surrounding native vegetation type:
Results:
Before Photo Date: After Photo Date:
Attachments 1-86
Page |B 10
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – |
Appendix B: Flowchart for High Priority Threat to Native Vegetation
Priority Ranking For Control of Exotic Species
1-3= Low priority 4-7= Medium priority 8-10= High priority
High priority where exotic species poses immediate
threat
Eradication of exotic
species very possible
Suppression of exotic
species possible
Suppression of exotic
species unlikely
Exotic Highly
Invasive
10
Exotic
Moderately
Invasive
9
Exotic Highly
Invasive
8
Exotic
Moderately
Invasive
7
Exotic Highly
Invasive
6
Exotic
Moderately
Invasive
5
Attachments 1-87
Page |B 11
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – |
Appendix C: Flowchart for Medium Priority Degree of Threat to Native Vegetation
Priority Ranking For Control of Exotic Species
1-3= Low priority 4-7= Medium priority 8-10= High priority
Medium priority where exotic species poses threat
within 1-2 years
Eradication of exotic
species very possible
Suppression of exotic
species possible
Suppression of exotic
species unlikely
Exotic Highly
Invasive
8
Exotic
Moderately
Invasive
7
Exotic Highly
Invasive
6
Exotic
Moderately
Invasive
5
Exotic Highly
Invasive
4
Exotic
Moderately
Invasive
3
Attachments 1-88
Page |B 12
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – |
Appendix D: Flowchart for Low Priority Degree of Threat to Native Vegetation
Priority Ranking For Control of Exotic Species
1-3= Low priority 4-7= Medium priority 8-10= High priority
Low priority where exotic species does not pose
threat for at least 2 years
Eradication of exotic
species very possible
Suppression of exotic
species possible
Suppression of exotic
species unlikely
Exotic Highly
Invasive
6
Exotic
Moderately
Invasive
5
Exotic Highly
Invasive
4
Exotic
Moderately
Invasive
3
Exotic Highly
Invasive
2
Exotic
Moderately
Invasive
1
Attachments 1-89
Page |B 13
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – |
Appendix E: Highly Invasive Species
Genus species Common name
Arundo donax Giant reed
Asparagus asparaagoides Bridal creeper
Avena barbata Slender oat
Avena fatua Wild oat
Brachypodium distachyon False brome
Brassica nigra Black mustard
Bromus diandrus Ripgut grass
Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens Red brome
Carpobrotus edulis Hottentot fig
Caesalpinia spinosa Spiny holdback
Centaurea melitensis Tocalote
Chrysanthemum coronarium Garland chrysanthemum
Cortaderia selloana Pampas grass
Cynodon dactylon Bermuda grass
Euphorbia terracina Spurge
Foeniculum vulgare Fennel
Malva nicaeensis Bull mallow
Malva parviflora Cheeseweed
Malva sylvestris Mallow
Mesembryanthemum crystallinum Annual iceplant
Nicotiana glauca Tree tobacco
Pennisetum clandestinum Kikuyu grass
Pennisetum setaceum Fountain grass
Picris echioides Bristly ox-tongue
Pistacia atlantica Pistachio
Pittosporum undulatum Pittosporum
Raphanus sativus Wild radish
Ricinus communis Castor bean
Salsola tragus Russian thistle
Silybum marianum Milk thistle
Sonchus asper Prickly sow thistle
Sonchus oleraceus Sow thistle
Spartium junceum Spanish broom
Tamarix species Tamarisk
Tropaeolum majus Garden nasturtium
Attachments 1-90
Page |B 14
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – |
Appendix F: Moderately Invasive Species
Genus species Common Name Genus species Common Name
Acacia cyclops Acacia
Acacia species Acacia
Aegilops cylindrica Jointed goat grass
Ageratina adenophorum Eupatory
Atriplex semibaccata Australian saltbush
Bassia hyssopifolia Five-Hook bassia
Bromus hordeaceus (mollis) Soft brome
Bromus catharticus Rescue grass
Cakiel maritime Sea rocket
Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle
Carpobrotus aequilaterus Sea Fig
Carpobrotus chilensis Fig-Marigold iceplant
Conium maculatum Poison hemlock
Convolvulus arvensis Bindweed
Erodium cicutarium Red stem filaree
Eucalyptus camaldulensis Red gum tree
Eucalyptus globulus Blue gum tree
Eucalyptus species Gum tree
Hirschfeldia incana Annual mustard
Hordeum murinum leporinum Foxtail barley
Hordeum vulgare Common barley
Lactuca serriola Compass plant
Lathyrus tangianus Tangier pea
Limonium perezii Sea lavender
Limonium sinuatum Sea lavender
Lobularia maritima Sweet alyssum
Lolium multiflorum Italian rye
Lolium perenne Perennial ryegrass
Marrubium vulgare Horehound
Medicago polymorpha Bur clover
Medicago sativa Alfalfa
Melilotus albus White sweet clover
Melilotus indicus Yellow sweet clover
Myoporum laetum Myoporum
Olea europea Olive
Oxalis pes-caprae Bermuda buttercup
Pelargonium zonale Zonal geranium
Phalaris minor Phalaris
Phoenix canariensis Phoenix palm
Piptatherum miliacea Smilo grass
Pittosporum undulatum Pittosporum
Plantago lanceolata English plantain
Polygonum aviculare Knotweed
Polypogon monspessulensis Rabbitsfoot
Pyracantha sp. Firethorn
Rumex crispus Curly dock
Schinus molle Mexican pepper
Schinus terebinthifolius Brasilian pepper
Sisymbrium irio London rocket
Trifolium hirtum Rose clover
Washington robusta Mexican fan palm
Vicia sativa Spring vetch
Vulpia myuros varhirsuta Annual fescue
Vulpia myuros var myuros Rattail fescue
Attachments 1-91
Page |B 15
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – |
Appendix G: Exotic, Non-invasive Species
Scientific Name Common Name Genus species Common Name
Amaranthus albus Tumbleweed
Anagallis arvensis Pimpernel
Apium graveolens Celery
Aptenia cordifolia Baby sun-rose
Atriplex glauca Saltbush
Bidnes pilosa Common beggar-ticks
Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepherd's purse
Centranthus rubber Red valerian
Ceratonia siliqua Locust bean tree
Chamaesyce maculata Spotted spurge
Chenopodium album Lamb’s quarters
Chenopodium ambrosioides Mexican tea
Chenopodium murale Nettleleaf goosefoot
Conyza canariensis Horseweed
Coronilla valentina Coronilla
Cyperus involucratus Umbrella plant
Digitaria sanguinalis Hairy crabgrass
Echium fastuosum Pride of madeira
Erodium botrys Long-beaked filaree
Euphorbia lathyris Gopher plant
Euphorbia peplus Petty spurge
Filago gallica Narrow-leaf filago
Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash
Gazania species Gazania
Geranium carolinianum Geranium
Gnaphalium luteo-album White cudweed
Koehlreuteria species Koehlreuteria
Lamarckia aurea Goldentop
Lantana montevidensis Lantana
Lathyrus odoratus Sweet pea
Lycium species Lycium
Lycopersicon esculentum Garden tomato
Malephora crocea Mesemb
Melaleuca species Melaleuca
Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum Iceplant
Osteoapermu fruticosum African daisy
Oxalis corniculata Woodsorrel
Paspalum dilatatum Dallis grass
Pinus halepensis Alepppo pine
Plantago major Plantain
Poa annua Bluegrass
Polygonum arenastrum Knotweed
Senecio vulgaris Groundsel
Silenle gallica Common catchfly
Triticum aestivum Cultivated wheat
Urtica urens Dwarf nettle
Veronica anagallis-aquatica Water speedwell
Yucca species Spanish bayonet
Attachments 1-92
Euphorbia terracina Control Jan – Mar 2011
Site 11. Vicente Bluffs (In culvert)
Date: Jan 27 2011, Mar 28 2011
Amount of Plants: 175
Phenology: Sprouting
Control method: Sprayed with Roundup ProMax 2%
Site 9. Forrestal Nature Preserve‐ Pirate Trail Head
Date: Jan 27 2011
Amount of Plants: 15
Phenology: Sprouting
Control Method: Hand pulled and disposed off site
Attachments 1-93
Site 24. San Ramon
Date: Feb 15 – 18 with California Conservation Corp, Feb. 24,
Amount of plants: >8,000, Over 2,000 lbs
Phenology: Flowering
Control Method: Hand Pulled and disposed off site, and Sprayed with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Site 7. Alta Vicente (phase 3)
Date: Mar 7 2011
Amount of plants: 1
Phenology: Flowering
Control Method: Hand Pulled and disposed off site
Attachments 1-94
Site 16. Portuguese Bend at PV Drive South
Date: Mar 8 2011
Amount of plants: ~300
Phenology: Flowering and sprouting
Control Method: Sprayed with Roundup ProMax 2%
Site 15. Portuguese Bend at Peppertree Trail
Date: Mar 17 2011
Amount of plants: ~75
Phenology: Flowering and sprouting
Control Method: Sprayed with Roundup ProMax 2%
Attachments 1-95
Site 17. Portuguese Bend (Ishibashi Farm Trail)
Date: Mar 17 2011
Amount of plants: ~500
Phenology: Flowering and sprouting
Control Method: Sprayed with Roundup ProMax 2%
Site 4. Agua Amarga
Date: Feb 3 2011, Mar 8 2011
Amount of Plants: ~75
Phenology: Sprouting
Control Method: Sprayed with Roundup ProMax 2%
Attachments 1-96
Site 1. Abalone Cove at PV Dr south
Date: Mar 28 2011
Amount of plants: ~10
Phenology: Flowering and sprouting
Control Method: Sprayed with Roundup ProMax 2%
Site 21. Three Sisters
Date: Jan 31 2011, Mar 8 2011
Amount of plants: ~500
Phenology: Flowering and sprouting
Control Method: Sprayed with Roundup ProMax 2%
Attachments 1-97
Site 20. Three Sisters (Barkentine)
Date: Jan 26 2011, Feb 24 2011,
Amount of plants: ~100
Phenology: flowering
Control method: Sprayed with Roundup ProMax2%
Site 10. Vicente Bluffs
Date: Jan 26 2011, Mar 8 2011, Mar 28 2011
Amount of Plants: ~100
Phenology: sprouting and flowering
Control method: Sprayed with Roundup ProMax 2%
Attachments 1-98
Euphorbia terracina Control April 1 – August, 2011
Site 19. Portuguese Bend Sandbox area
Date: May 26, June 8,
Amount of Plants: 200 plants
Phenology: All stages
Control Method: Spot spray with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Site 18. Portuguese Bend Sandbox trail
Date: May 25
Amount of Plants: 200 plants
Phenology: Flowering and Seeding
Control Method: Spot spray with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Attachments 1-99
Site 5. Alta Vicente Phase 1
Date: May 25, June 2,
Amount of Plants: 250 plants
Phenology: All stages
Control Method: Spot sprayed with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Attachments 1-100
Site 6. Alta Vicente Phase 2
Date: May 25
Amount of Plants: 100 plants
Phenology: All stages
Control Method: Spot spray with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Attachments 1-101
Attachments 1-102
Site 3. Abalone Cove Olmstead Trail
Date: April 28, May 19, June 10
Amount of Plants: 15 then 150
Phenology: Flowering
Control Method: Hand Pulled and disposed of off‐site. Spot spray with Roundup Pro max 2%
Site 11. Vicente Bluffs (In culvert)
Date: June 10
Amount of Plants: 125 plants
Phenology: Sprouting and Flowering
Control Method: Spot spray with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Attachments 1-103
Site 2. Abalone Cove Canyon
Date: May 19, June 10
Amount of Plants: 1000 then 200 plants
Phenology: All stages
Control Method: Spot sprayed with Roundup Pro Max 2%. Hand weeded beetween natives and disposed
of off‐site
Site 17. Portuguese Bend at Ishisbashi Farm Trail
Date: May 25, June 27
Amount of Plants: 350 then 200 plants
Phenology: Sprouting and Flowering
Control Method: Spot sprayed with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Attachments 1-104
Site 15. Portuguese Bend at Peppertree Trail
Date: May 25, June 27
Amount of Plants: 80 then 169 plants
Phenology: Flowering
Control Method: Spot sprayed with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Site 16. Portuguese Bend at PV drive south
Date: May 26
Amount of Plants: 100 plants
Phenology: Flowering
Control Method: Spot spray with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Attachments 1-105
Site 8. Forrestal at Forrestal Drive
Date: April 18
Amount of Plants: 25 plants
Phenology: Flowering
Control Method: Hand pulled and disposed of off‐site
Site 9. Forrestal at Quarry Trail
Date: June 6,
Amount of Plants: 30 plants
Phenology: Sprouting
Control Method: Hand pulled and disposed of off‐site
Attachments 1-106
Attachments 1-107
Site 10. Vicente Bluffs
Date: June 10
Amount of Plants: 200 plants
Phenology: All stages
Control Method: Spot spray with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Site 1. Abalone Cove at PV drive south
Date: May 19
Amount of Plants: 10 plants
Phenology: Sprouting and Flowering
Control Method: Hand pulled and disposed of off‐site
Attachments 1-108
Site 12. Portuguese Bend at Ishibashi trail
Date: June 27
Amount of Plants: 40
Phenology: Flowering
Control Method: Spot sprayed with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Attachments 1-109
Site 14. Portuguese Bend at Kubota trail
Date: May 16, June 27,
Amount of Plants: 25 then 15
Phenology: Flowering
Control Method: Spot sprayed with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Site 13. Portuguese Bend NCCP site
Date: May 16, June 8, June 27
Amount of Plants: 100 then 25 plants
Phenology: Sprouting and Flowering
Control Method: Spot spray with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Attachments 1-110
Site 24. San Ramon: 5acres
Date: April 15, April 18, April 20, April 22, May 24, May 25, June 6,
Amount of Plants: 5 acres
Phenology: All stages
Control Method: Spot sprayed with Roundup Pro Max 2%
Attachments 1-111
Other Invasives
Site 22. Agua Amarga: Lunada Canyon: Arundo donax
Date: July 21, Aug 1, Aug 13, Sept. 14, Nov 10
Amount of Plants: 1,600 square feet
Phenology: flowering
Control Method: Cut, and stump treatment (Roundup Pro Max 2%)
Site 23. Abalone Cove canyon: Arundo donax
Date: July 21, Aug. 13, Sept. 14
Amount of Plants: 100 square feet
Phenology: flowering
Control Method: Cut, and stump treatment (Roundup Pro Max 2%)
Attachments 1-112
Appendix C
Research and Education Program
Attachments 1-113
Page |C 1
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – February 28, 2011 | introduction
1. Science Advisory Panel
Dr. Philip Rundel, Distinguished
Professor at UCLA, describes the
research he and his students are
conducting in Southern California
native plant habitats, which includes
preserves on the Palos Verdes
Peninsula.
1 INTRODUCTION
The Research and Education Program at the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (PVPLC)
began in 2006 with a generous two-year grant from Alcoa Foundation and Alcoa Fastening Systems.
The grant funded the Research, Education, and Community Involvement Program for the
Environment (RECIPE), was renewed for two more years in 2008 and concluded in May 2010.
Alcoa’s support enabled PVPLC to develop a robust research program centered on improving our
conservation efforts while extending learning opportunities within our community.
Since the conclusion of the Alcoa Grant, PVPLC has worked toward insuring continuity of the
program. Identified needs include strengthening collaborative relationships with universities and
organizations, and seeking new funding sources. It was equally important to continue integrating
young students and researchers to maintain the spirit of RECIPE. In 2011, two grants provided
dedicated funds for research: one from the Long Family Foundation for supporting educational
research and one from the State of California’s Department of Food and Agriculture for supporting
the Three Sisters Bird Survey.
The Land Conservancy’s research program is designed to engage students from elementary through
university level to foster sound scientific education for youth, as well as provide research
opportunities for academia. A tiered approach, accommodating various skill levels, provides the
framework for the research program, and includes middle and high school students, university
undergraduate students, graduate students, and professors, PVPLC staff, and community volunteers
(Box 2).
University professors are crucial for the success of
research, because they provide expertise and technical
guidance, including managing several research projects.
Land Conservancy staff provides access to the preserves as
well as technical support to participants. Over 30 scientists
participate in PVPLC’s Science Advisory Panel which
supports the research by providing their expertise as
needed for research projects on the preserves. In 2011, the
Science Advisory Panel participated in a “Notes from the
Preserves”, an event that allowed the public learn about the
research taking place on the preserves (Box 1).
This report covers the Research and Education Program’s
activities via the major categories, starting with the
successful Science Advisory Panel event:
Notes from the Preserves
Research Education
Community Researchers, and
Applied Research. '--------------------_.....
Attachments 1-114
Page |C 2
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – February 28, 2011 | Notes from the Preserves
2 NOTES FROM THE PRESERVES
The Conservancy hosted members of its Science Advisory Panel in a public forum discussion their
research conducted in the preserves. Poster and demonstrations ranged from crawling critters
collected at a restoration site, searching for birds, investigations of lemonade berry growth, soil
studies, invasive species, wild animals, and more.
Highlighting the event was UCLA Distinguished Professor Dr. Philip Rundel’s talk on “California Sage
Scrub: Its Past, Present, and Potential Future”, Dr. Robert Douglas, Chairman of the Abalone Cove
Landslide Abatement District, “Rainfall, Dewatering Wells, and Creepy Landslides”, CSULB’s Dr.
Gregory Holk “The Geochemical Hydrogeology of the Abalone Cove Landslide”, and the Conservancy’s
Dr. Danielle Lefer “Improving Restoration through Research”.
From the posters and lectures, all found that these varied disciplines combine to provide a better
understanding of our preserves. Additionally, it was clear that continued investigations will help
improve our knowledge along with providing many educational opportunities for students.
2. List of research projects currently ongoing in the preserves.
Research Managed by PVPLC
Three Sisters Bird Survey – A bi-monthly survey to study the bird community’s response to a 21-acre restoration
effort within the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.
Wild Animal Surveys – High school and college students track coyote and fox use of the preserves and their
diets.
Managed by University Researchers
Archeology at Abalone Cove – CSU Fullerton students, under their professor’s guidance, conduct a professional
dig at the preserve for Native American artifacts.
Biomass of Encelia californica and Salvia leucophylla – The third year for a project to develop a measure of
plant material (biomass) contained within an acre of coastal sage scrub utilizing high school and university
students.
Effects of grazing on habitat and non-native plants – A long-term project initiated by a professor from CSU
Dominguez Hills with the purpose of providing research experience for undergraduates.
Effects of Mycorrhizae – A study on the effects of the addition of AM fungi (mycorrhizae) on native and non-
native species germination in CSS by students from UCLA’s Environmental Science Senior Practicum.
Genetic diversity of California crossosoma (Crossosoma californicum) – A professor from the University of
South Dakota investigating the genetic variation of the plants within the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve and
comparing them to plants found on Santa Catalina and San Clemente Islands.
Geosciences Diversity Enhancement Program (GDEP) – Led by CSU Long Beach geography and geology
professors, this project seeks to increase the diversity of students in the disciplines of geography, anthropology,
geology, and biology.
Kelvin Canyon Springs Monitoring – Under guidance from retired USC Geologist Dr. Robert Douglas, high
school students monitor the flow of the springs as part of the Abalone Cove Landslide Abatement District’s
efforts to slow the Abalone Cove landslide.
Multi-Agency Rocky Intertidal Network (MARINe) – A long-term monitoring site was added to the nationally-run
MARINe program, managed by a CSU Long Beach marine biology professor and his students.
Microclimate on the Preserves – High school and college students participate in monitoring habitat temperature
and humidity trends for different plant species.
Attachments 1-115
Page |C 3
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – February 28, 2011 | Research Education
4. High school research
High school researcher Shreya Ramayya
and Rachel Dokko collect plant samples
for their research project investigating
biomass within the habitat on the
preserves under the direction of UCLA
Research Dr. Rasoul Sharifi.
3 RESEARCH EDUCATION
High school and college students are important elements in PVPLC’s field research. By participating
in PVPLC’s research program with professionals and university researchers, students obtain field and
analytical skills in the natural science fields. Additionally, students increase their appreciation of
nature while expanding their awareness of opportunities that the natural science fields have to offer.
As a result, PVPLC students often win top honors in science fairs and are able to leverage their
experience for gaining entrance into top
universities, satisfying course credits, or obtaining paid
internships (Boxes 3 and 4).
4 COMMUNITY RESEARCHERS
Volunteers are an important for PVPLC, not only helping
with growing plants, habitat restoration, guiding walks, and
special events, but also with science research and
education. Our volunteers are terrific and travel from
throughout the Peninsula and surrounding areas to help
out.
The 5-year Three Sisters Bird Survey, conducted in
conjunction with the Palos Verdes/South Bay Audubon
Chapter, has been a highly successful effort. Starting in July
2008, volunteers have participated in bimonthly surveys
3. 2011 Science Fair Results
PVPLC High School Researchers
CATEGORY STUDENT AWARD PROJECT TITLE
Botany Yurika Yoneda First Place Determining the biomass of Eriogonum fasciculatum
Botany Jacqueline Lin Honorable Mention Biomass analysis of Eriogonum cinereum
Botany Dawool Huh Honorable Mention How certain factors affect coastal sage scrubs
Earth & Space Peter Smolke First Place The effects of wildlife on coyote and fox visitation to
Portuguese Bend Preserve
Earth & Space Akari Sunaga
Lauren Nguyen
Third Place and
Association for
Women Geoscientists
Award
The origin of the Kelvin Canyon Spring
Environmental
Science
Christine Chen Honorable Mention Assessing Polioptila californica population in differing
Artemisia californica habitats
Environmental
Science
Tasneem Islam Honorable Mention Adaptability of native birds to local restoration sites
Environmental
Science
Albert Liu Honorable Mention Cause of the influx of Forficula auricularia in Alta
Vicente Reserve
Attachments 1-116
Page |C 4
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – February 28, 2011 | Applied Research
designed to monitor the bird community’s response to
the Land Conservancy’s 21-acre restoration effort at the
site (Box 5). This project attracted funding to cover the
research from the State in 2011. During the summer in
2011, following two years of restoration work, we found
that California gnatcatchers began using the new habitat.
Also, Western meadowlarks are frequently seen at the
site where they were previously absent.
5 APPLIED RESEARCH
Activities conducted under the applied research umbrella
support our on-going efforts to grow native plants,
conduct habitat restoration, and stay on the forefront of
restoration science. College students, serving as
volunteer interns, are important participants in this
research. They provide crucial support for the projects
while gaining valuable and relevant experience for their education and future careers. Many students
utilize this research for meeting classroom field requirements or obtaining course credit.
PVPLC’s stewardship staff conducted a variety of surveys throughout the preserves for assessing
habitat quality as well as documenting the progress of our restoration efforts (Box 6). Due to the
plentiful winter rains in 2011, staff documented the presence south coast saltbush (Atriplex pacifica)
and aphanisma (Aphanisma blitoides), two rare plants in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve. Both plants
are annuals, so finding them is difficult. Staff collected seeds from the plants for culture in the nursery
and eventual out-planting in the preserves. Also, PVPLC staff conducted surveys of two endangered
butterflies present on the Peninsula in 2011, the Palos Verdes blue butterfly and El Segundo blue
butterfly. Additional information about these results can be found in Chapter Stewardship.
6. List of monitoring programs in 2011.
Vegetation Surveys
Alta Vicente Reserve – On-going surveys on 10 acres of habitat restoration
Defense Fuel Supply Point – Surveying habitat used by the Palos Verdes blue butterfly
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve – Monitoring for special status plant species
Portuguese Bend Reserve – A rapid vegetation assessment of the area burned in 2009 was surveyed to
determine changes resulting from the fire.
Three Sisters Reserve – Surveys on a 21-acre habitat restoration
Upper Filiorum Reserve – CSULB’s Environmental Science and Policy Capstone Project class conducted a multi-
discipline survey for the course and for PVPLC
Endangered Butterfly Surveys
Linden H. Chandler Preserve – Surveys were conducted for the Palos Verdes blue butterfly where progeny from
the 2009 release were observed.
Vicente Bluffs and Abalone Cove Reserves – Surveys were conducted for the El Segundo blue butterfly, including
areas where PVPLC is actively improving the habitat for the butterfly.
5. Community research
Volunteers for the bimonthly Three
Sisters Bird Survey hike to an observation
site in the restoration area. Although the
plants have been in the ground for only
two years, many birds are using the new
habitat, including California gnatcatchers.
Attachments 1-117
Page |C 5
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – February 28, 2011 | Applied Research
6. Applied research
Stewardship Associate Adrienne Bosler
conducts a vegetation survey at the Alta
Vicente Reserve to obtain data on the
results of the restoration sites. These
data are important for managing the
restoration that will provide crucial
habitat for California gnatcatchers,
cactus wrens, and Palos Verdes blue
butterflies.
Attachments 1-118
Appendix D
Volunteer Program
Attachments 1-119
Page |D 1
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Introduction and Summary
1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
1.1 Volunteer Programs
This Annual Report describes each of the individual programs included within the larger Volunteer Program
that serviced the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve. Specific activities are detailed for the reporting period
January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011. The PVPLC continues to work to implement grants geared toward
improving this program.
Since 1988, volunteers have played an essential role in fulfilling the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy’s
(PVPLC) mission to preserve land and restore habitat for the education and enjoyment of all. PVPLC is a non-
profit organization that relies heavily on the support of community involvement to perform many of the tasks
necessary to manage the Nature Preserves. Volunteers donate thousands of hours each year to help with
office assistance, event planning, community education, habitat restoration, trail maintenance, and much more.
This report divides the various volunteer programs into two categories: Community Involvement Volunteers
and Stewardship Volunteers.
The first category, Community Involvement Volunteers, supports volunteer activities that focus on friend
making, fundraising, and recommendations to staff on a variety of topics. This category is further divided into
four sections which are detailed within the report:
Board of Directors
Committees and Advisory Boards
Special Events and Office Assistance
Education Docents and Nature Walk Leaders
The second category, Stewardship Volunteers, supports activities that are performed on the land to assist with
management of the Preserves. In all, there are six programs within this category that are described in more
detail in the Stewardship Volunteer section of this report. The backbone of the program is our regularly
scheduled Saturday outdoor workdays that are open to participation by all and require no long-term
commitment. Periodically, there are also individuals or groups that contact the PVPLC and arrange to
complete stewardship projects outside of the normally scheduled outdoor workdays. Boy Scouts and Girls
Scouts interested in obtaining their final awards are two such groups. There are also several Stewardship
Volunteer opportunities that require long term commitments. The six programs are listed below:
Outdoor Volunteer Workdays
Team Leaders
Habitat and Ecological Restoration Organization (HERO) Club
Scout Awards
Trail Crew
Keeping an Extra Eye on the Preserve for Environmental Review and Stewardship (KEEPERS)
In 2011, volunteers provided a grand total of 12,115 hours of support and service towards PVPLC programs
(Table 1). According to the Independent Sector, volunteer time in California is valued at $23.42 per hour
(based on Dollar Value of a Volunteer Hour, by State: 2009, Independent Sector), thus generating a total of
$283,733 of in-kind services. The amount of volunteer hours donated at each Reserve or for a specific
volunteer category depends on the size of property or specific projects that transpired during the reporting
period.
Attachments 1-120
Page |D 2
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Community Involvement
Table 1. Distribution of volunteer hours.
2 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
2.1 Board of Directors
PVPLC is driven and supported by an eighteen-member volunteer board, which meets on a regular basis to
strategize and direct the organization’s mission. This year, the board contributed over 2400 hours in serving
the Land Conservancy’s mission.
2.2 Committees and Advisory Boards
The PVPLC maintains numerous committees and advisory boards for the following purposes:
To provide review and recommendations regarding organizational plans and policies
To provide assistance with the operations of the organization
To provide community input for PVPLC activities
To provide a training and evaluation ground for potential members of the Board of Directors
Committee volunteers donated a total of 824 hours, with many committees meeting on a quarterly basis.
Hours for committee-involved board members are compiled with their board volunteer time. The committees
that were active during the reporting period are listed below:
Audit Committee
Finance Committee
Fundraising Committee
Investment Committee
Science Advisory Panel
Special Events Committee(s)
Governance Committee
Executive Committee
Education Committee
2011 Vollunteer Hours
Docents &Nature Walk
Leaders
KEEPERS
217
Stewardship
6417
Attachments 1-121
Page |D 3
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Community Involvement
2.3 Special Events and Office Assistance Volunteers
The PVPLC relies on individual volunteers and organized groups, such as the National Charity League (NCL),
Los Hermanos, and Assisteens, to assist PVPLC staff with all major fundraising and friend-raising events. We
have built very strong and fulfilling relationships with these groups and strive to provide an environment that
lets volunteers know they are indispensable and an integral part of our organization.
Fundraising and special events supported by committees and volunteers this year included the Edge of LA, Fall
for White Point, and the Trump Wine and Beer Festival. Volunteers contributed 496 hours towards this
effort.
In the office, volunteers handle routine tasks such as labeling newsletters, stuffing envelopes, assembling event
materials, planning and preparation for special events, and much more. During the 2011 reporting year, office
volunteers, many from the Palos Verdes Chapter of NCL, donated 317 hours of assistance.
2.4 Educational Programs
Volunteers assist with education-based programs to inform community members of all ages about natural
spaces on the peninsula. Education is provided to the public through Third Grade Docents Program and
monthly Nature Walks.
2.4.1 Third Grade Docents
The Third Grade Docents volunteered a total of 128 hours in 2011. Since the start of the program, the
docents have served over 18,000 students. The docent group is comprised of a diverse group of retired
professionals and active volunteers from all over the Peninsula with backgrounds range from law and
engineering to nursing, chemistry and education. This team of dedicated people is trained by Third Grade
Program Manager, John Nieto, who began running the program in 2000. He is directly responsible for the
management and coordination of the entire program. While John Nieto and the docents are paid for their
time in the classroom, they donate many additional hours to make the program a success.
In addition to learning the academic information required to give lessons in the classroom, docent’s also
volunteer extra time to developing techniques for the trail by attending various training hikes and observing
other docents teaching the program.
Prior to the field trip, each docent visits his or her school’s third grade classrooms and conducts four weekly
lessons covering such topics as birds, invertebrates, geology, Tongva indigenous culture, reptiles, mammals
and plants. One of the main goals embedded in this standards-based curriculum is to help students understand
the difference between native and non-native species present in the coastal sage scrub community of the Palos
Verdes Peninsula. The docents meet yearly at the end of the semester to discuss accomplishments of the year
and possible new activities for the upcoming school year.
2.4.2 Nature Walks
Nature Walk Leaders donated a total of 307 hours in 2011. Former PVPLC Board of Directors member Anke
Raue coordinates this group of dedicated volunteers and each prospective walk leader must have a high level
of knowledge the local ecosystem, particularly the native and non-native plants found on the Peninsula.
Attachments 1-122
Page |D 4
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Stewardship Volunteers
Leaders must go through extensive training and be willing to research and learn about local history, geology,
flora and fauna. Continued research and exploration serves to add to a walk leader’s knowledge base,
preparing them to give accurate and in-depth presentations to the public.
Walks are held all over the Peninsula, from the edge of the coast to deep within the canyons. Each leader
designs his or her presentation to include special attributes and stories particular to a site. Nature walks
occur once a month throughout the year, featuring a different location every time (Appendix 1).
3 STEWARDSHIP VOLUNTEERS
Stewardship volunteers play an integral part in helping PVPLC staff exceed our goals for restoring all managed
open spaces. Outdoor volunteer workdays provide an opportunity for public volunteers to contribute to
habitat and trail restoration efforts lead by Team Leaders, the Trail Crew class builds skills for volunteers to
maintain the trail system, and KEEPERS help “keep an eye” on the Reserves on a monthly basis. Scout
projects, local HERO Club chapters and nursery volunteers are also Stewardship volunteers that support
Conservancy restoration efforts.
Summary of accomplishments in 2011:
6,417 hours of outdoor stewardship volunteer time in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
$15,000 REI grant to support volunteer programs and trails development
Facilitated the volunteering effort of several organizations and corporate give-back events
3.1 Outdoor Volunteer Workdays
The PVPLC holds outdoor volunteer days nearly every Saturday of the year, held from 9am-12pm, excluding
holiday weekends and during the month of August. The focus of these events is to restore native habitat,
maintain the trail system, and do general clean-ups. The intended demographic is focused on individuals of all
ages, organized groups such as Boy Scouts and the National Charity League, and employee volunteer days for
corporations. All age groups are encouraged to participate. There is a particular focus on getting young people
involved as a mechanism to ensure education and stewardship on the Preserves in perpetuity. We work with
local schools and colleges to have teachers bring groups of students or give incentives such as extra credit and
service-learning hours for students who participate on the Saturday workdays.
A detailed account of workdays found below. Events are listed chronologically by Preserve with the Palos
Verdes Nature Preserve (PVNP) further separated by Reserve.
3.1.1 Palos Verdes Nature Preserve (PVNP)
Abalone Cove Reserve
July 16 – 203 Boeing volunteers removed trash along the shoreline as a part of the company’s annual day
of service with support from the LA Conservation Corps.
September 17 – 253 volunteers removed marine debris as a part of the annual Coastal Cleanup Day
facilitated by the Los Serenos and City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Agua Amarga Reserve
October 22 – Seventeen volunteers used loppers to cut fennel from the canyon.
Alta Vicente Reserve
April 2 – 22 volunteers planted 40 coastal sage scrub plants and weeded around fledgling seedlings.
Attachments 1-123
Page |D 5
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Stewardship Volunteers
Figure A
Above: Removing the densely-grown fennel stalks revealed
many hidden native shrubs (January 2011).
Below: Overview of the affectionately-termed “fennel
forest” in December 2011 – one year after beginning the
irradiation.
May 7 – 29 volunteers weeded non-native plants around establishing native species.
June 25 – Thirteen volunteers continued to weed out invasive species in the Phase 1 restoration area.
Fishing Access
March 26 – 33 volunteers removed 70 bags of trash from along the shoreline and removed weeds from a
recently-planted area on top of the bluffs.
Portuguese Bend Reserve
The volunteer efforts at Portuguese Bend in 2011 were very focused on removing fennel (Foeniculum vulgare)
along the north-facing side of the Eagle’s Nest hill around Ailor Trail along Burma Road (Figure A).
Approximately one acre of fennel was cleared. Herein is a list of the events and number of participants that
contributed to this outstanding effort.
January 8 – 30 volunteers
February 12 – 67 volunteers
March 5 – 25 volunteers
March 12 – 34 volunteers
April 16 – 39 volunteers including employees
from the So Cal Gas Company
October 29 – 63 volunteers
November 19 – 53 volunteers
December 12 – 55 volunteers
Three Sisters Reserve
January 22 – Eleven volunteers removed
weeds from around natives previously
planted.
June 11 – six volunteers weeded around
native plants.
October 15 – Nineteen volunteers installed
about 100 coastal sage scrub plants.
3.1.2 Native Plant Nursery
Activities in the Native Plant Nursery include
transplanting seedlings from flats into individual
containers, removing weeds from the
containers. Over 3200 plants were
transplanted by volunteers this year. On rare
occasion, groups help maintain the shade
structure, build plant benches and repair the
weed barrier cloth. The following dates detail the nursery’s volunteer effort this year:
January 29 – 26 volunteers transplanted 126 Eriogonum fasciculatum and 504 Artemisia californica seedlings.
Attachments 1-124
Page |D 6
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Stewardship Volunteers
Figure C
Team Leaders like these from the Peninsula High
School HERO Club provide necessary oversight and
guidance during Outdoor Volunteer Days.
March 19 – 29 volunteers transplanted 230 A. californica seedlings
April 9 – 22 volunteers transplanted 200 Nassella spp. and 200 Rhus integrifolia seedlings.
May 21 – 26 volunteers sowed seeds in 306 Nassella pulchra and 400 Eriogonum parvifolium seeds into
containers.
June 18 – Fifteen volunteers sowed 400 Isomeris arborea seeds into containers and transplanted 80 mixed
native species.
September 3 – Ten volunteers transplanted 328 E. parvifolium and 139 Isocoma menziesii seedlings as well as
removed weeds from other plant containers.
October 8 – Eighteen volunteers transplanted seedlings and filled pots with soil for future seeding.
November 5 – 22 volunteers transplanted 280 Rhus integrifolia and seeded 200 containers with I. arborea.
December 10 – 21 volunteers transplanted 425 Encelia californica seedlings
3.2 Team Leader Program
The Team Leader program was started in 2007 in response to the growing number of volunteers that were
attending the Outdoor Volunteer Workdays. Team Leaders are volunteers, sixteen years or older, who assist
in supervising the Saturday outdoor volunteer activities. They ensure that volunteers have adequate
instruction and the tools necessary to complete the task. They also assist in educating the public about the
PVPLC.
The program requires that interested volunteers go through an application and interview process. Candidates
then attend a half-day weekend workshop where they learn the skills necessary to motivate and supervise
volunteers during Saturday Outdoor Volunteer Days. Training involves practicing leadership skills and
communicating restoration techniques. Team Leaders commit to working at least four volunteer days within
one year. The goal of the PVPLC is to hold two Team Leader workshops each year during the spring and
train a minimum of six new Team Leaders at each
one. In 2011, only one workshop was held at White
Point Nature Reserve in October which trained 20
new Team Leaders (February training was rained
out).
The Team Leader Program has helped develop
leadership skills in participants and has greatly
contributed to the success of our Outdoor
Volunteer Workdays. The quality of work from
regular volunteers has increased with the guidance of
Team Leaders. In addition to local adult participants,
many of the Team Leaders attend local high schools
and universities. During the reporting period, the
program has allowed these students to build
leadership skills that they will find useful in their
future.
Attachments 1-125
Page |D 7
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Stewardship Volunteers
Figure D
Scout project support PVPLC’s land
stewardship through focus projects which often
involve construction.
Kyle Salzman (fourth from the right) and
volunteers stand behind the newly-
reconstructed entry gate to Agua Amarga
Reserve on Posey Way.
3.3 Habitat and Ecological Restoration Organization (HERO) Club
The HERO Club participates in about eight Outdoor Volunteer Day events a year, striving to host one event
every month. The HERO Club coordinators also participate in the Team Leader training program in an effort
to learn more about habitat restoration and leadership to help facilitate the Outdoor Volunteer Days.
The HERO Club started at to local high schools – Peninsula High School and the Palos Verdes High School –
in September 2007 when a group of students partnered with the PVPLC to help the environment through
volunteering and help the PVPLC in their mission to preserve land and restore habitat. The club coordinates
with PVPLC and their Outdoor Volunteer Workday schedule to recruit student volunteers during several
Saturday HERO Club workday events a year. Their efforts have received much community support and
praise.
3.4 Scout Projects
The PVPLC encourages Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts who are
looking for projects to complete their final awards, Eagle
Awards for Boy Scouts and Gold Awards for Girl Scouts, by
providing them with opportunities to complete their
projects on preserves the PVPLC manages. This
collaboration is beneficial to the scout groups, the PVPLC,
and the public that uses the preserves. Scouts work under
the mentorship of one of the PVPLC staff to complete their
projects and are steered toward objectives that meet the
PVPLC stewardship goals. In 2011, scout projects have
accumulated over 700 hours of volunteer service and are
detailed below:
Aric Belsito – Aric organized his troop to plant coastal sage
scrub species at Three Sisters Reserve
Nicholas Bishop – Nicholas worked with his troop to clear
Acacia and other vegetation overgrowing
the Nike Trail at Alta Vicente Reserve.
Sam Pond – Sam worked with his troop to repaint the inside
of the nursery’s office bungalow.
Kyle Salzman – Kyle constructed new plant benches for the nursery as well as rebuilt the entry gates for Agua
Amarga Reserve (Figure D).
Jack Dulzo – Jack’s troop worked to construct new plant benches at the native plant nursery and filled pots
with soil to prepare them for seeds.
3.5 Trail Crew Volunteer Program
This year, the volunteer Trail Crew donated a contributed a total of 502 hours to maintaining the Preserve’s
trail system. The Volunteer Trail Crew class offered is based on the Basic Trail Maintenance class developed
by Frank Padilla, Jr. (retired California State Parks Supervisor), and Kurt Loheit. Originally started in 1992, the
class focused on both volunteer and agency skill building. Adopted by the Los Angeles District of California
Attachments 1-126
Page |D 8
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Stewardship Volunteers
Table 4. KEEPERS for each Reserve
Reserve # of Keepers
Abalone Cove Reserve 4
Agua Amarga Reserve 4
Alta Vicente Reserve 1
Forrestal Reserve 2
Portuguese Bend Reserve 4
Three Sisters Reserve 1
Vicente Bluffs Reserve 1
Number of Keepers assigned to each property for
monthly monitoring.
Table 3. Trail Crew training classes
Date # Volunteer
Hours
Location Project/Skill Learned
January 58 White Point Introductory Class
February 39 Forrestal Trail assessment skills
March 35 Portuguese Bend Tread skills
April 42 Forrestal Tread skills
May 36 Upper Filiorum Trail clearing and assessment
June 40 White Point Introductory Class
July 57 Forrestal Erosion mitigation – grade dips
August 32 Portuguese Bend Trail assessment
September 20 Abalone Cove Tread skills – Sacred Cove Trail
October 28 White Point Introductory Class
November 44 Forrestal Tread skills
December 39 Portuguese Bend Trail psychology and spur closure on Ishibashi Trail
State Parks and later the Southern California Trails Coalition, it became the first step in advanced classes for
crew leader training and design and construction classes, allowing a structured path for participants to build
skills associated with trails from basic maintenance to highly advanced techniques. The class is a combination
of classroom and hands-on training to familiarize the participants in all aspects of trail maintenance. The course
emphasizes safety, assessments, basic maintenance skills, water control, erosion sources, terminology, proper
tool use, basic survey skills, resource considerations, and user experience and maintenance value. Volunteers
who demonstrate proficiency in each learned skill and fulfill a yearly indoctrination will maintain status as a
qualified Trail Crew member.
Participants must be at least 18 years old and must first take the introductory course. The 50-hour course
can be taken at the participant’s own pace and it is estimated to take about a year to complete. There are
scheduled Trail Crew Skills Classes that coordinate with the trail instructor’s availability and the PVPLC
Outdoor Volunteer Workday schedule.
To date, seven volunteers have completed the training program about a dozen other participants are close to
completing their 50 hours of required training and could be expected to take the yearly indoctrination in
2012.
3.6 Keeping an Extra Eye on the Preserves Stewardship (KEEPERS) Program
The KEEPERS program was developed in April of 2007 to help staff monitor the nearly 1600 acres of land that
is managed by the PVPLC. Keepers are volunteers who
monitor an area within a preserve and fill out monthly
property review forms. These forms are reviewed by
staff and consolidated into a monthly report that is
sent to all of the current Keepers.
The property review form is a one page form that
requires some knowledge of basic trail maintenance
and plant identification. The skills needed to fill out
these forms are provided in a training session with a
PVPLC staff person and are continually developed with
an ongoing relationship between the volunteer, the
Attachments 1-127
Page |D 9
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Grants
PVPLC staff, and regular visits to the preserve being monitored. This volunteer opportunity is a one year
commitment (a total of 12 visits) to the chosen preserve area. The person or group that accepts this
responsibility also helps, if necessary, to train the following year’s replacement volunteer Keeper. Currently,
there is no term limit.
Some of the properties managed by the PVPLC are large enough to require more than one Keeper to monitor
them. We will be looking for two to four Keepers to monitor the newly-acquired Upper Filiorum Reserve
beginning in spring or fall of 2011.
4 GRANTS
In August 2011, REI awarded the PVPLC with a $15,000 grant to facilitate the implementation of a Restoration
Naturalist to independently lead the Saturday Outdoor Volunteer Days, which provided staff more flexibility
and time to support other programs including the Trail Crew and Team Leader programs. PVPLC also
partnered with PV/South Bay Audubon in a $35,000 TogetherGreen Innovation grant to enhance the Audubon
YES (Youth Environmental Service) and Team Leaders programs.
5 FUTURE PLANS
The past year has focused on improving the existing volunteer programs so they operate smoothly and
sustainably. Further improvements can be made in retaining, focusing and motivating Team Leaders of all ages
and so future recruitment may be focused toward environmentally-minded college students and active
community residents. Additionally, the same goals can be applied towards the Trail Crew program’s capacity
to recruit new members and motivate graduated volunteers to develop and execute trail projects
independently. We will continue to pursue grant opportunities to help develop and sustain all volunteer
programs.
6 APPENDIX
Attachments 1-128
Page |D 10
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Appendix
Malaga Cove
January 8,9-1I am
Walk the trail from the bluffs below Malaga
Cove down to the shore at RAT Beach
(Right After Torrance).View the spectacular
landscape along the way including the
historic Olmstead House.Moderate.PVE
Forrestal
April 9.9-1 1 am
This ISS-acre Preserve offers some of the
best wildflowers in the spring.See geological
formations that form dramatic cliffs,including
faults,folds,sedimentary bedding and igneous
intrusions.Moderate to strenuous.RPV
Alta Vicente
July 9,4-6 pm
Walk the former Nike missile site from RPV
City Hall to preserves below being actively
restored by the Conservancy.With luck,you
might hear and see California gnatcatchers
and Cactus wrens in their native habitat
Moderate.RPV
Frascati Canyon -NEW!
October 8.9-11 am
Explore this beautiful canyon,one of three
on the east side of the Peninsula.overlooking
the harbor with some steep trails.Moderate
to strenuous.RPV
Bluff Cove
February 12,4-6 pm
This wide open cove offers shoreline hiking
down to a rocky beach and magnificent tide
pools.A popular spot for surfers.
Moderate.PVE
White Point
May 14,9-1 I am
Enjoy the trails at thiS Preserve located
across from Royal Palms Beach in San
Pedro.Walk from the Nature Center to
the historic military gun emplacements
above to view spectacular ocean vistas.
Moderate.LA
Lunada Canyon
August 13.4-6 pm
Walk the trail in this quiet neighborhood
canyon in the Agua Amarga Reserve.A gift
from the Zuckerman Family,this is one of
the first lands owned by the Conservancy.
Moderate.RPV
Sacred Cove
November 12,3-5 pm
Situated between Portuguese Point and
Inspiration Point,this small cove features
wonderful rock formations edged with tide
pools and a channel into a sea cave.
Strenuous.RPV
Defense Fuel Supply Point
March 12.9-1 I am
Discover the trails behind PVPLC's native
plant nursery,site of the PV blue butterfly
rediscovery!Reservations are required for
security entry.Moderate.LA
Portuguese Bend
June 11.9-11 am
Walk Burma Road to Ishibashi Trail.part of
the newly established 1400-acre Palos Verdes
Nature Preserve.Discuss the fire recovery
plans on the site of the lBO-acre wildfire of
August 2009.against a stunning ocean
backdrop.Moderate.RPV
Portuguese Bend Landslide -NEW!
September 10.4-6 pm
Hear about the history and future of this
infamous landslide and take a close look at
various formations caused by the land
movement Moderate.RPV
Ocean Front Estates
December 10.9-1 1 am
Take a delightful walk from PointVicente
Interpretive Center along the bluff top to
the western parking lot and back.Discover
California gnatcatchers and other birds
flourishing in native habitat.Moderate.RPV
Madrona Marsh
January 14.2012.9-11 am
Visit an oasis for birds and other wildlife in
the City ofTorrance.This former oil field
is now an easily accessible ecological jewel.
Easy.TOR
White Point
Ranger Walks
WHITE POINT NATURE
EDUCATION CENTER &PRESERVE
1600 W Paseo Del Mar
San Pedro.CA 90731
Tel,(310)561-0917
Hours:Wed,Sat &Sun lOam -4pm
Ranger Walks:Every Saturday e)(cept
holidays 10 am-I 2 noon (free -prOVided by
City of los Angeles)
First Saturday BirdWalks:9 -II am (Binoculars proVided;slow,easy and quiet walk -Free)
First Saturday Walks:GUided walks through the canyon:1-3 pm ($3 person)
Full Moon Night Hike:Friday or Saturdays on or near a full-moon.Must be age 9 and up
($10 person.Please call for exact dates and times.)
The land Conservancy is a nonprofit 501 (c)(3)organization dedicated to
open space preservation and habitat restoration throughout the Peninsula.
Where indicated.walks are co-sponsored by Palos Verdes Estates (PVE),
Rancho PalosVerdes (RPV),Rolling Hills Estates (RHE),City of los Angeles
(LA),orTorrance (TOR).
PALOS VERDES PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY
PO Box ]427,Palos Verdes Peninsula,CA 90274 Tel:(]I 0)541-761]
Web:WWW.PVPLC.ORG
Attachments 1-129
Page |D 11
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Appendix
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy
NATURE WALKS
Come enjoy year-round outdoor walks for families,
groups and individuals.Led by volunteer and staff
naturalists,historians and geologists.all walks are
family-oriented,although some are strenuous and
most are on dirt trails.
Nov 12th,3 pm -Sacred Cove·Abalone Cove
Shoreline Park·5970 PalosVerdes Dr South across
from Wayfarers Chapel.Parking fee waived.
Dec 10th,9 am -Ocean Front Estate·Park
near lighthouse at Point Vicente Interpretive Center
31501 PalosVerdes DrWest.
Jan 14th,9 am -Madrona Marsh -Meet in
parking lot of Nature Center·3201 Plaza del Amo
in Torrance,between Madrona and Maple St.
Wear walking shoes with good traction and sun
protection.Bring water.In case of heavy rain,walks
are cancelled -not rescheduled.No reservations
required unless indicated.For more info call:
(310)541·7613 or go to:www.pvplc.org
Georre E Canyon (GEC)-First Saturdays
Bird Walks at 9am and Canyon Walks at Ipm.
Parking at George F Canyon Nature Center
27305 Palos Verdes Dr East,Rolling Hills Estates.
GEC Ni£ht Hikes Times vary with full moon.
Call for time and to RSVP.Parking -see above.
Ngture Walks -Second Saturdays
Jan 8th,9 am -Malaga Cove -On Palos Verdes
Dr West just past Malaga Cove Plaza turn onto Via
Almar toward ocean.right on Via Arroyo.then right
on Paseo del Mar and park.
Feb 12th,4 pm -Bluff Cove -As above.At Paseo
del Mar turn left and park along the road about
Yl mile beyond the Neighborhood Church.
Mar 12th,9 am -Defense Fuel Supply Point
3171 N Gaffey Street,south of Anaheim St.Enter the
gates at security checkpoint.Reservations required.
Apr 9th,9 am -Forrestal -Park at Ladera Linda
Community Center·3220 I Forrestal Dr in RPV.or
along Forrestal Dr.Meet near gate.
May 14th,9 am -White Point -At southern end
of Western Ave turn left onto Paseo del Mar and
drive 112 mile to enter gate on left and park.
Jun 11th,9 am -Portuguese Bend -Park along
the street at the south end of Crenshaw Blvd in RPv.
Meet at gate on dirt road.
Jul 9th,4 pm -Alta Vicente·Park at Rancho
Palos Verdes City Hall -30940 Hawthome Blvd.
Aug 13th,4 pm -Lunada Canyon -On
Hawthorne tum west onto Verde Ridge Rd,right on
EI Rodeo,left on King Harbor Rd.Park on street
and meet near Posey Way.
Sep 10th,4 pm -Portuguese Bend Landslide
Enter gated parking area on Palos Verdes Dr South,
halfway (1/4 mile)between Peppertree and
Schooner Lanes on uphill side.
Oct 8th,9 am -Frascati Canyon -Park at
Miraleste Kindergarten.6245 Via Canada.Meet at
Palos Verdes Dr East and Picardie.
PAlm V£RDB PENINSULA 0 ire c t ion 5
&Parking
December
123
4 5 6 7 a 9 10
11121314151617
18192021122324
25262728293031
August
2 3 4 5 6
8910111213
14 1$ 16 17 1819 20
2122 23242526 27
28293031
April
M T W T 5
2
34567 9
1011121314 IS 16
1718192021 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
March
MTWTFS
I 2 3 4 5
6789101112
13 1415 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
2728293031
July
2
]45679
10111213141516
1718 19 2021 22 2]
24 25 26 27 28 29 ]0
31
November
I 2 3 4 S
6789101112
1314 15 16 17 18 19
2021 2223242526
27282930
W.urson SL
PACIFIC OCEAN
GFC Walks Nature Walks GFC Night HikesColorkey:
I
2345678
9 10 II 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
3031
October
June
I 2 3 -4
5 6 7 8 9 10 II
1213 14 1$ 16 17 18
1920212223 24 25
262728 19 30
T
N
January February
S M T W T S M T WT ,S
I 1 2 3 4 5
2 3 4 7 8 6 8 ,10 II 12
,10 111113141$13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1617 18 19 20 21 22 20 21 22 2324 25 26
13 24 25 26 27 28 19 2728
3031
September
1 2
45678910
II t2 13 14 151617
18192021222324
25 26 27 18 29 30
January 1012
234567
9 10 II 12 13 14
15 16 17 18192021
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
May
1234567
8 9 10 II 11 13 14
1516 1718 19 20 21
11 23 24 15 26 27 18
2930 31
2011
PALOS VERDES PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY PO Box 3427,PalosVerdes Peninsula,CA 90274 Tel:(310)541·7613 Web;WWW.PVPLC.ORG
Attachments 1-130
Page |D 12
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Appendix
Winter 2011
OUTDOOR VOLUNTEER DAYS
Are you interested in odler volunteer opportunities?
Vi,it ou,w.b<it•••www....!I?k.oq:forma..inlormotion.
1I.""'......ion••Iw.y._~(i••..,bu."''I'Ii''''lor Nu"•..,<loy ..
Coo'o<'Jill Wittmo.n ()I 0)5~1_7613 xlO I
.,.. ....jt.m.l.nllPIpl<..,..••o .i~n u~
All ~...from 9ilOl-l1pm "",""otl><rwi<.<j>K_.W<ri.<lll'urx_.,....-Illn"
Ck»«l ....,<ho<,.'"'<qUir<d.l""l p<nt>...mo '<q<J1I'«l1or troiI wort<...."'"'
H.rO <tJWOfI our (OO-,.<ion <1'Jort by bringinc ,.,...""'"........to r<doce w.,to ~the ......
febNory 11·_HelO figll.the wee<!",,<ion ..f'ortug<Ie<e 6erxI Re>eNe.
Mor<h 11·
Mor<h 19"
Mor<h 10·
Th:onk you.o REI for your IUppO'"wit!>our SteW3rd,hip Volun.e...P,ogr3ml1:'1 <=_1>'071">0'0
Attachments 1-131
Page |D 13
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Appendix
~
f
;
~
_
.
~
H
I
,
I
L
,
'
-
,
-
~
:
'
.
-
-
<
!
~
.
-
l
'
j
[
I
-
~
"
.
v
'
l
l
I
.
§
>
-
~
<
l
C
'
"
w
w
f
-
Z
:
:
:
>
.
.
.
J
~
'
"
o
o
C
f
-
:
:
:
>
o
.
!
.
:
-
:
:
:
:
:
I
I
i
i
"
~
H
i
,
~
~
.
!
<
I
'
,
.
,
!
'
'
<
,
!
,
I
'
I
'
I
,
;
1
1
•
~
~
!
,
1
i
l
d
i
H
H
I
l
j
i
!
!
!
~
,
I
I
!
~
,
.
~
I
i
'
l
i
,
1
f
i
l
,
,
'
l
!
~
1
:
U
P
"
{
I
r
I
,
H
E
'
e
5
~
!
I
n
'
:
:
~
:
S
"
-
I
~
.
,
~
•
I
q
I
I
I
~
.
,
f
j
~
~
~
t
I
I
I
~
.
,
,
'
l
.
1
>
~
:
:
l
~
H
H
i
I
,
.
I
f
i
I
i
l
,
'
,
'
1
1
i
-
•
.
,
'
~
;
g
,
t
i
l
j
,
I
•
i
l
l
•
.
t
'
1
I
1
j
J
i
l
l
~
~
~
~
I
i
o
z
l
>
~
~
O
l
S
1
1
:
,
I
t
~
/
.
.
.
~
;
,
;
!
'
l
f
f
f
f
~
I
.
t
t
f
s
,
~
I
~
•
I
t
i
l
~
1
;
-
l
;
i
'
I
'
.
i
i
I
·
.
,
,
'
f
i
i
!
_
I
I
~
:
;
:
,
e
t
!
0
1
1
.
'
I
'
,
.
,
1
.
.
.
~
1
J
~
E
~
~
Q
~
s
i
o
1
t
t
t
,
!
.
.
'
"
'
"
,
.
.
-
-
"
i
i
i
i
1
1
D
!
!
i
.
I
~
I
-
~
1
j
~
I
j
i
i
i
•
•
•
~
.
.
•
,
>
.
.
.
2
.
e
-
•
,
i
•
•
;
.
I
'
.
i
!
.
'
~
•
•
-
.
<
•
•
I
'
·
'
~
.
~
-
'
j
i
l
:
,
.
.
,
I
•
·
'
•
•
~
l
t
·
,
.
•
•
•
f
-
•
•
•
•
"
i
8
8
,
I
.
,
.
•
I
;
~
Attachments 1-132
Page |D 14
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Appendix
l
!
1
1
'
r
E
t
'
I
~
'
l
i
i
i
1
1
I
'
l
!
f
l
!
.
l
j
<
l
l
j
J
i
"
l
H
U
h
i
l
h
1
1
h
I
i
!
1
~
l
l
r
I
E
l
l
!
-
.
,
r
n
i
l
l
'
;
I
I
"
,
I
i
I
'
j
r
i
l
'
I
"
f
l
j
f
~
!
l
l
l
l
l
i
I
j
!
.
1
0
1
1
•
n
I
l
.
l
.
t
,
j
t
l
t
I
l
'
!
,
I
j
~
'
.
,
1
.
·
c
1
I
'
"
'
I
I
.
.
"
i
'
.
1
f
l
~
I
.
•
I
<
i
I
I
'
\
.
.
;
'
j
i
l
L
H
I
]
1
H
f
l
j
1
i
i
l
I
I
I
.
I
l
d
1
!
,
~
]
'
!
i
'
~
'
r
~
f
j
·
i
l
l
I
I
I
I
I
,
Z
o
I
l
~
!
i
~
.
:
:
:
'
.
.
.
!
Z
.
.
,
f
!
S
f
I
l
l
"
:
~
i
l
l
.
.
t
·
j
t
.
I
I
"
,
!
"
,
!
t
l
,
1
j
1
1
1
J
l
1
1
i
i
1
f
j
I
,
1
.
I
j
l
!
I
1
j
I
,
'
.
J
;
~
;
I
I
I
I
!
h
]
1
1
h
I
l
t
]
!
;
J
h
f
h
i
t
j
1
~
~
!
l
i
'
;
!
I
!
l
i
q
1
f
l
j
'
l
i
t
g
i
l
i
~
t
l
j
~
j
t
J
d
.
~
~
!
I
'
l
l
l
l
i
l
l
!
l
L
,
j
d
!
l
l
i
l
H
l
I
n
I
I
I
I
I
m
i
H
I
!
h
f
b
l
J
i
I
Attachments 1-133
Page |D 15
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Appendix
TEAM LEADER
Volunteer Program
TRAINING WORKSHOP on October I"from 9am-12pm
Help the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy
lead volunteers during outdoor workdays.
Learn skills associated with habitat restoration,
native plant propagation and trail maintenance.
o Some experience in outdoor volunteering or restoration i,desired
o You must be at least 16 years old to participate
o You must be committed to help at 4 volunteer days during the year ahead
o Opportunity to eun ,ervice-Iearning hour,
o lunch and tee-,hirt'will be provided during the workshop
AJI9liution.found on www,Dyplc,orgareduebySeptember IS ....
Submit chern to Adrienne BOIler at abosler@DYDlc.org.
Di.-e.:tiom .nd om.r detail,will be ~d .«q>t.,j.
III ",---
Th:mk.to REI for supporting our
Steward,hip Volunteer Program.,.
Attachments 1-134
Page |D 16
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Appendix
Volunteer Trail Crew
Training
Schedule of Classes available through May 20 I I:
~January 8"'@ Whit~Point Education Cen.....9pm-Ipm -Intr<>CI."
»Fd>""")'12"@ Fo~tal,9pm-12pm - T rU A,.es>menl ;::-,,,,-,.
»Morch 12"@ P~,e B..nd,'Iam-Jpm -Alignment Skill.
~AJ>I"I9"'@ FOI"...,....~9.m-12pm -T...,ad Skill,
~Noy I~"@ lJweo'F~iorvn,9arn-12pm-Rod<Won.Skill,
Thio i<•11ft P""'C"""'for _~..lRnWIt lbout .....~-.m-lriIiI
"..............,n u..Polo<v.......Ibliib""LoDd C<lr»<n>ocy"'p<~'~
Thr tr procrom _""l'"'5e<';0 """'"at d ...room ........ind _~.'-I by IriIiI
IU"l K toheit.~to _olop "'">kjl<nrcrssory to p<rlorm I'OUbI<trlli 1I'IiintorIon«.
COO.".,OO,of 1M procrom is •~for -............,wish to contftI<_n l>«oornrt:
•.....-_lniI~crew looder wilh mi'WnoIorno......-_
•Thr nred 101""Ie lniIl
•R~protoction._-·,-
•SIoIch ond b<ml
•Gn<l<~
•!lnIWrt:.....pnri"It
.~
•TniI~
•T.....r.oIoc'·-"..~:·-~·""""""'·~-•R<unoc~
-..01>mq -....to~in.."."'til<'fI<Cili<_t>UIdi'lC ox<r<io«.~to ~..
in ilflIl'"O"'ed tl'OiI ~"""""-oM _.mu<l ...~on<!d<mon<tr>t«I .........
50 """'"of "......
Attachments 1-135
Page |D 17
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy – 2011 | Appendix
Volunteer Trail Crew
Training
Schedule of Classes available through December 20 I I:
)-June II @Whju,Poot Na,u",C~"'c 9om-1 pm Intra Cia",
~July 9@ F""""...I 9am-12pm
~Augun I]@ p~Bend 9.m-l2pm
>Sq>tem~c 1O@ Aba!"""Co.~9om-III""
)-Oc,obe<IS@Wh""P"'"Na,u",ee..tec'hm-lpm-Intro CI:us
)-Novem~c 12 @ F~tal9am-I2pm
>Dec:....-.ber 10 @ PO<t~Bend 9.m-12pm
Thi>i>.rr...~lor _......-in -..:_ond ~-'-!TOiI ~
in""'_V....,.._Und~'~~_
TIl<triOlIin&procnm ~5e5 50 hDIn 01 e1m,oom ""'''*'I:ind _~....,bJ !nil pv.
Kurt toheit.~to _oIDp lhr _n<c<>>rf to p<rf<>ml _tnlI ................Coo''l'k'li<>'01
_procrom is •~lor vokrot=>who wi<h to oonlilt>o Jurt!l<o"in I>«oornrt:•quol_~
....i ....~crrw o<no~_
•TIl<noed lor ....lJ'U>
•RoKHrc<protft.1ion•"'="""""·,-
•Slou(h ond berm
•Gr>d<dip>
•1InJ<hioIt .....pnNoc.-
•Tnil <Urty•T.........,.,.,•_tn~............-..-e:
•WOU!J'bon
.~
·--·~""""""'"'
_....,""""""to ~..any 01 "'"""'*_buildiol ..__t<>"",if)'..on
oppn>"«IlrliI .....~.-iII'UIl .......""~.....~._~50 hoIn
oItnnrc-
Attachments 1-136
APPENDIX E: Future Trails Project List (2012)
The following is a list of trail projects based on priority and funding opportunities. This list is intended to
outline potential projects but may be amended. Projects not completed will carry over to the following
year. In addition to the list below, smaller‐scale projects may be accomplished by the Volunteer Trail
Crew or Scout projects on an as‐needed basis.
Reserve Name Trail Name Project Type Priority
Abalone Cove
Sacred Cove (to beach)Erosion repair Low
Bow and Arrow Erosion repair on eastern portion Low
Sea Dahlia Erosion control and closure of
unauthorized spur trails with signage
and fill‐in planting
High
Portuguese loop connector Create a connector trail between
Portuguese Bend Loop trail to Sacred
Cove View trail by delineating
current foot path to Palos Verdes
Drive South
High
Agua Amarga
Lunada Canyon Trail Delineation with vegetation
trimming and signage
Low
Alta Vicente
North Spur Trail delineation with vegetation
trimming and signage
High
Prickly Pear Erosion repair and trail delineation
with vegetation trimming and
signage
Medium
Forrestal
Quarry Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Low
Dauntless Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Low
Mariposa Bridge and trail repair Medium
Vista Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Medium
Intrepid Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill
Low
Exultant Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Low
Cristo Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill
Medium
Packsaddle Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Medium
Flying Mane (west)Fill sinkholes along trail High
Attachments 1-137
Reserve Name Trail Name Project Type Priority
Portuguese Bend
Burma at Panorama Install grades and dips to decrease
water flow onto Panorama Trail
High
North Sandbox Trail Repair Medium
Ishibashi Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting;
bicycle jump closure
High
Rim trail north of Burma Road End‐point delineation High
Peppertree Trail erosion repair Medium
Barn owl Trail erosion repair Medium
San Ramon
Switchback Delineate trail with signage and
vegetation trimming
Low
Three Sisters
Barkentine Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Medium
Connector between Three sisters
and Upper Filiorum
Erosion Repair Medium
Vista del Norte
Indian peak loop Trail Delineation with vegetation
trimming and signage
Low
Attachments 1-138
1
Post-fire Survey for the California Gnatcatcher and the Cactus Wren at the
Portuguese Bend Reserve, Palos Verdes Peninsula (Final)
California gnatcatcher habitat dominated by quailbush Atriplex lentiformis and coyotebush Baccharis pilularis in
lower portion of Portuguese Bend Reserve, 23 June 2010 (ph. by Daniel S. Cooper)
Prepared by:
Daniel S. Cooper
Cooper Ecological Monitoring, Inc.
5850 W. 3rd St., #167
Los Angeles, CA 90036
Prepared for:
Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy
916 Silver Spur Rd., Suite 207
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
August 12, 2010
Attachments 1-139
2
Summary
We report on a spring 2010 survey of two sensitive bird species, the (coastal) California
gnatcatcher Polioptila californica californica ("CAGN"; Federally Threatened), and the coastal-
slope population of the cactus wren Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus ("CACW"; formerly a
Candidate for federal listing; now treated as a California Bird Species of Special Concern1), at
the Portuguese Bend Reserve (c. 400 acres; Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy). Our
intent was to assess the distribution and approximate population size of both taxa following
a large (165-acre) wildfire in August 2009 that affected most of the northern area of the
reserve, leaving the slopes above Palos Verdes Dr. South, and Klondike Canyon in the
southeast, intact (Figure 1). Our survey replicates previous surveys for these two birds
conducted at the site in 2006 and 2009 (Dudek 2006, Hamilton 2009), and suggests that the
site has lost one of the two pairs of cactus wren that were present in 2009 (up to four
territories were found in 2006). The overall distribution of California gnatcatcher remained
unchanged from 2009, but our estimated numbers of birds/territories were roughly half of
those from 2006. In addition, we mapped locations of three sensitive plant species (all CNPS
4.2 species) encountered during the survey, Hubby's phacelia Phacelia hubbyi, South Coast
branching phacelia Phacelia ramossissima var. austrolitoralis, and Catalina mariposa-lily Calochortus
catalinae, and took notes on other bird and wildlife species, as well as patches of unburned
vegetation within the 2009 burn area.
Introduction
The Portuguese Bend site is located at the southwestern tip of the Palos Verdes Peninsula,
and includes rugged ridges and slopes between the southern end of Crenshaw Dr. and Palos
Verdes Dr. South, running along the top of coastal bluffs. The unburned habitat is a mix of
naturally-occurring coastal sage scrub with a strong component of ashyleaf buckwheat
Eriogonum cinereum, as well as sumac scrub (with lemonadeberry Rhus integrifolia and toyon
Heteromeles arbutifolia) on more mesic/poorly-drained sites, interspersed with large areas of
non-native vegetation (incl. tocolote Centaurea mellitensis, wattle Acacia sp.). Significant areas
of dense, monotypic expanses of quailbush Atriplex lentiformis and patches of coast
buckwheat Eriogonum fasciculatum and (non-native) statice Limonium perezii are found in the
southern area of the reserve, closest to Palos Verdes Dr. South. During our surveys, we
found regrowth in the 2009 burn area to be generally sparse, and dominated by coastal lotus
Lotus salsuginosus and, on the April visit, by arroyo lupine Lupinus succulentus and sticky
phacelia Phacelia viscida.
1 In 2008, coastal populations of the cactus wren north of southern Orange County were deemed distinct from
those in southern Orange County (termed C. b. sandiegensis) by the most recent publication of California Bird
Species of Special Concern (Shuford and Gardali 2008). However, this view is not widely held within the
ornithological community, and due to their extreme isolation and a life history that is essentially identical with
coastal-slope populations to the south into San Diego County, we, as well as regulatory agencies like the Calif.
Dept. of Fish and Game (CDFG; L. Comrack, pers. comm., April 2008), treat the Palos Verdes birds as a
sensitive species under state law. In addition, CDFG requires that all playback surveys for the cactus wren in
coastal-slope Los Angeles Co. (and Ventura Co.) be conducted under a Memorandum of Understanding
reserved for special-status species.
Attachments 1-140
3
Figure 1. Trail map, Portuguese Bend Reserve. Dashed line marks the northern/southern boundary used by
this survey as well as by Hamilton (2009). Red polygon denotes rough boundary of 2009 fire zone.
Northern area
Southern area
Stro~t Parking
Trailhead
1!BI Po'1able est'oom
'v\'a1Xlr Tank
11 VISta Pomt
-Surma Road Muttl seT I
JI Tra
Pedl}S1rJ3r On:y
P{ldes1l'13 &-Jestrian On
-RoadoReserve 80Jndary
2)ft.ConlOur Uncs
III
Attachments 1-141
4
Following past efforts (Hamilton 2009), we divided the Portuguese Bend site into two areas,
northern and southern, using the lower portion of a dirt utility road ("Burma Road Trail") as
the dividing line between the two areas (Figure 1). This utility road rough corresponds to the
boundary of the August 2009 fire, with the area uphill of the road mostly burned, and that
downhill mostly unburned.
Methods
Surveys were conducted by Daniel S. Cooper over four visits from 26 April to 14 July 2010,
under federal permit TE100008-12. All surveys were conducted between 6:00 a.m. and 12:00
p.m. to conform with protocol for presence/absence surveys of the California gnatcatcher
(USFWS 1997). The northern area (see "Site Description" above) was surveyed on 26 April
and 23 June; the southern area, which held all of the known territories of our two target bird
species, was surveyed on 03 May, 23 June and 14 July (Table 1)3. Robert A. Hamilton
(TE799557) accompanied Cooper on the 26 April and the 03 May survey, and we attempted
to replicate the methods and survey route used by Hamilton (2009) as faithfully as possible.4
Hamilton's route was walked slowly and deliberately, and recorded calls of the California
gnatcatcher and the cactus wren were broadcast occasionally. In subsequent visits (23 June
and 14 July), no recordings of either species were played; however, I would periodically
"pish", or imitate a typical songbird alarm call, at stops along the route, which seemed
helpful in eliciting calls of both the gnatcatcher and the cactus wren. Visual scans (using
Leica 8x42 Ultravid binoculars) were made of all cactus scans for cactus wren nests, and any
sightings of the brown-headed cowbird Molothrus ater, a known parasite of songbird nests,
were recorded as well. Basic weather conditions were recorded at the start and end of each
visit (Table 1).
Table 1. Summary and description of survey effort, 2010.
Date Time Temp.
start
Temp.
end
Sky Wind Area
covered
Max. #
CAGN
Max. #
CACW
26 April 08:10-10:30 60 67 Overcast <3 mph North 0 0
03 May 08:50-11:40 63 70 Clear <3 mph South 6 2
23 June 07:10-11:10 63 71 Overcast <3 mph Both 6 1
14 July 07:35-11:15 70 76 Clear <3 mph South 18 0
2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife protocol (USFWS 1997) requires that presence/absence surveys for the California
gnatcatcher on NCCP lands (including habitat on the Palos Verdes Peninsula) be conducted a minimum of
three times between Feb. 15 and Aug. 30; in addition, the southern portion of the site exceeded the
recommended 100-acre limit for daily surveys outlined in the USFWS protocol. However the surveys
performed herein were non-protocol surveys intended simply to quickly assess the status of known
populations, and not to determine presence/absence at the site.
3 Though Hamilton (2009) only made two visits each to each area (northern and southern), we added a third
visit (14 July) to the southern area improve our confidence in our estimate of the 2010 California gnatcatcher
population.
4 Cooper's permit was under renewal at the time of the first two surveys and therefore technically inactive.
Playback surveys for the cactus wren were conducted under Hamilton's Memorandum of Understanding with
the California Dept. of Fish and Game.
Attachments 1-142
5
All observations of our two target birds, as well as locations of sensitive plant species and
notable vegetation, were recorded on an aerial photo, and these observations were
transferred onto digital maps using Google Earth. We kept day lists of all other bird species,
as well as mammal and reptile species.
Part I. Target bird surveys (California gnatcatcher, cactus wren)
Results
California gnatcatcher
We detected the California gnatcatcher on three of the four visits, and on each of the three
visits to the southern area of the site (Figure 2). All gnatcatchers observed were within the
southern area, with the exception of three birds - possibly a family group, located along the
southern border of the northern area (just inside the 2009 burn zone) on 14 July. Our two-
three visits were insufficient to estimate population size, reproductive success, or even
territory location; however, we attempted to estimate a maximum territory number and their
approximate locations based on the three visits, for comparison purposes to previous
surveys, which was seven (7) active territories in 2010 (Figure 3). Of course, the actual
number could be lower than this, as not all individuals or even pairs were necessarily holding
territories (or were different from individuals/pairs seen elsewhere on the site).
Figure 2. Map of all 2010 California gnatcatcher (CAGN) sightings. Green pins represent sightings and are
marked according to date with either a diamond (03 May), a circle (23 June) or a star (14 July); dimmed green
pin with black star (at upper left) was a single bird on 14 July.
Attachments 1-143
6
Figure 3. Schematic map of 2010 California gnatcatcher (CAGN) territories, estimated from sightings.
Territories are numbered arbitrarily. Green circles correspond to locations where one or more birds were seen
on two or three dates; yellow circles are of locations with sightings from just one date.
Cactus wren
We found cactus wren in just one small area of the site, in dense, cactus-rich coastal sage
scrub at the extreme eastern edge of the southern area, within the Klondike Canyon drainage
adjacent to the Forrestal Reserve. Two birds, an apparent pair, were detected here on 03
May, and a single bird was here on 23 June. In addition, we (Hamilton and Cooper) clearly
heard (but could not see) a calling cactus wren ("chugga-chugga" call) from a slope near the
center of the southern area (see Figure 4) on 03 May, possibly coming from a small, isolated
cactus patch within non-native grassland. While what was possibly this bird was heard very
briefly on 14 July (by Cooper), no visual confirmation was obtained, and due to the distance
at which this sound was heard, and the prevalence of the northern mockingbird Mimus
polyglottos here, a known mimic of cactus wren calls, we do not consider this a cactus wren
territory. Therefore, we estimate a maximum of one (1) cactus wren territory at the
Portuguese Bend Reserve for 2010.
Attachments 1-144
7
Figure 4. Map of 2010 cactus wren (CACW) sightings, which suggest a single territory in the southeastern
corner of the reserve.
Discussion
Table 2 compares survey effort and results of the 2010 survey with previous surveys.
Overall, 2010 results for California gnatcatcher conform to those founds in 2009, with an
estimated 7 territories, all in the southern area. However, one of the two cactus wren
territories found in 2009 was absent in 2010, and likely lost due to complete destruction of
the birds' cactus patch by the August 2009 fire. Counts of brown-headed cowbird were
similar in 2010 as in 2009 (zero in both years). A year-to-year comparison is provided in
more detail below.
Attachments 1-145
8
Table 2. Comparison of 2010 results and effort with prior surveys.
Dudek 2006 Hamilton 2009 Cooper 2010
Date range 15 June - 18
Aug.
1 Apr. - 15 May 26 Apr. - 14 July
# Days 6 4 4
# Hours (total) 29:50 18:55 12:30
# California gnatcatcher
territories
145 76 7
# Cactus wren territories 47 2 1
# Brown-headed cowbird ? 0 0
California Gnatcatcher
When compared to survey effort in 2006 and 2009, our 2010 survey was comparable to the
number of visits in 2009, but fewer than those in 2006 (Table 2). The brevity of the 2010
survey was in part due to the dearth of vegetation in the northern section owing to the 2009
burn, which resulted in much quicker surveys there. The timing of the three surveys was also
slightly different; the 2010 surveys were also conducted during a somewhat later window
than in 2009, but ended earlier than in 2006. It is possible that the late dates of some of the
2006 surveys may have inflated the final estimate of the number of gnatcatcher territories on
the site that year, as we found young-of-the-year (closely resembling adult birds) to be
common here by mid-July, and the 2006 surveys extended into mid-August, when first-year
birds would have been foraging independently of adult birds, and possibly behaving like
adults.
None of the three California gnatcatcher territories reported by Dudek in the northern area
in 2006 was observed in either 2009 or 2010 (CCG1, CCG2, and CCG14; see Table 3). Of
the 14 territories of California gnatcatcher reported (site-wide) by Dudek in 2006, one was in
an area not visited by Cooper in 2010 (CCG3, near the "Vanderlip Trail" in the far west), so
its 2010 status cannot be assessed. However, of the ten territories found in 2006 in the
southern area that were re-visited, we found at least one individual California gnatcatcher at
or near all of them during at least one visit in 2010, suggesting that the overall distribution of
gnatcatchers from 2006 might not be appreciably different today, even if the estimate of
territory numbers - a much more subjective process - differed.
Year-to-year comparisons of total pairs and territories are especially difficult to make
because neither Dudek (2006) nor Hamilton 2009 reported dates of each sighting, but rather
lumped them all together on the same map; for example, four gnatcatcher pairs found in the
southern area by Dudek in 2006 were within 200 meters of each other in continuous coastal
sage scrub habitat (CCG5, 6, 7 and 8), but because there were no dates or times associated
with them, it is impossible to know if these represent duplicate counts of the same pairs, or
5 Two of these territories (incl. pairs and family groups) were within 200 meters of other territories, and may
represent duplicate counting. One territory found by Dudek (2006) was in an area not visited by Cooper (2010).
6 Reported by Hamilton (2009) as "7 territories"; however, a review of the maps in the report shows a four
paired birds and 3 "lone adults", which Hamilton also considered territories (pers. comm.).
7 Reported by Dudek (2006) as "four lone adult" birds, at least some of which were probably actually paired, or
at least involved males attempting to hold territories (see Hamilton 2009).
Attachments 1-146
separate territories. If they were duplicates, this would reduce the total number of 2006 territories in
the southern area from 11 down to seven (i.e., comparable to the estimate in 2009 and 2010).
Therefore, while it seems clear that territories have been lost in the northern area since 2006 (no
gnatcatchers were found here in either 2009 or 2010), it is less clear that they have declined in the
southern area; our three visits were simply too few to confirm this.
Interestingly, two "new" territories reported by Hamilton and/or Cooper in 2009 and 2010 (CAGN
"C"/CAGN 2 and CAGN 5) were in areas where no birds were found in 2006,1 and two birds found
by Cooper in 2010 (mapped as CAGN 4) were in an area where unrecorded by Hamilton the year
before, but where Dudek recorded a family group in 2006 (CCG10). While this suggests that usage
locations may shift around from year to year, with so few visits, and many so late in the breeding
season, it is difficult to conclude that each sighting of a pair or even a family group represents a
definite breeding territory at the point of observation.
As for the effects of the 2009 fire, although most of the northern area burned in August 2009 (i.e.,
between the surveys by Hamilton and Cooper), the fact that Hamilton did not find gnatcatchers in
the northern area in early 2009 suggests that these territories had become inactive prior to the fire;
or, it is possible that the sightings from 2006 were transient/post-breeding individuals and not actual
breeding territories.
1 The survey route used by Dudek (2006) in the southern area differed from that of Hamilton (2009) and Cooper (this
study); comparably little coverage was made in 2006, presumably because the southernmost section of the reserve area is
outside the legal boundaries of PVPLC ownership.
Attachments 1-147
10
Table 3. Summary of individual pairs/likely territories of CAGN found by Dudek (2006) vs.
Hamilton/Cooper
Pair name Description Area Trail Hamilton
2009
Cooper 2010
CCG1 Pair North Peacock Flats Tr. Not found Not found
CCG2 Pair North Burma Rd./Ailor Tr. Not found Not found
CCG3 Pair/nest South Vanderlip Tr. Not found Not visited
CCG4 Pair South Landslide Scarp Tr. Lone adult
(CAGN "F")
nearby
Lone adult on 14
July
CCG5 Pair + 3 juvs South Burma Rd. @ Sandbox
Tr.
Pair/family
(CAGN "A")
and lone adult
(CAGN "G")
nearby
"CAGN 7" (pair)
nearby on 03 May
CCG69 Pair + 1 juv South Burma Rd. east of
Sandbox Tr.
See above See above
CCG7 Pair South Klondike Cyn. Tr.
(lower)
Pair/family
(CAGN "B")
nearby
"CAGN 1" (male
03 May, 23 June)
CCG810 Pair South Klondike Cyn. Tr.
(upper)
See above See above
CCG9 Pair + 1 juv South Peppertree Tr. (lower) Pair/family
(CAGN "D")
"CAGN 3"; family
on 23 June, single
nearby on 14 July.
CCG10 Pair + 2 juvs South Peppertree Tr. (middle) Not found "CAGN 4" (2
birds) on 14 July
CCG11 Pair South11 Burma Rd. south of
Ishibashi Tr.
Lone adult
(CAGN "F")
nearby
"CAGN 6"
(family? - 3 birds)
on 14 July
CCG12 Pair South South of watertank Not found "CAGN 5" nearby;
pair on 03 May,
birds on 23 June
(2), 14 July (1)
CCG14 Pair + juv North Ishibashi Tr. (lower) Not found Not found
CCG15 Pair + 2 juvs South Ishibashi Farm Tr. @
Sandbox Tr.
Lone adult
(CAGN "E")
nearby
"CAGN 3"; family
on 14 July
N/A N/A South South of Sandbox Tr. Pair/family
(CAGN "C")
"CAGN 2"; family
on 14 July
Cactus Wren
For the cactus wren, we document a clear decline from 2006, when four territories were
estimated for the site12, to 2009 when two were estimated, to 2010 when only a single pair
9 CCG6 and CCG5 130 m apart within continuous habitat; possibly the same birds.
10 CCG7 and CCG8 180 m apart within continuous habitat; possibly the same birds.
11 This location falls on the border of the northern and southern areas, but because it is contiguous with
unburned habitat to the south (and very little habitat remained in 2010 north of here), we include with the
southern area.
Attachments 1-148
11
was encountered. One of the locations where a cactus wren was observed in 2006 and where
a pair was present on territory in 2009 (in the southern part of the northern area, just north
of the lower Burma Rd.) burned in August 2009, eliminating essentially all live cactus here by
the time of the 2010 survey (Figure 5), and we found no wrens here on any of the four visits
(Table 4)13. Interestingly, the 2006 survey did not record cactus wren in the Klondike
Canyon area where birds were present in both 2009 and 2010; it is possible that the bird(s)
found near the Barn Owl Tr. in 2006 (CCW1, CCW2) moved east to Klondike Canyon, or
that a pair from Forrestal moved slightly west. Either way, the cactus wren should be
considered nearly extirpated from the site at this point, and future sightings anywhere on the
reserve should be followed up with visits to detect new territories.
Table 4. Summary of individual pairs/territories of cactus wren, by survey year.
Pair name
(2006)
Description Area Location Hamilton
2009
Cooper 2010
CCW1 Adult South Burma Rd. no. of Barn
Owl Tr.
Not found Not found
CCW2 Adult South " " Not found Not found
CCW3 Adult North E. of Eagle's Nest Tr. CACW "A"
(pair)
Not found
(habitat burned)
CCW4 Adult North Burma Rd. @ Ailor Tr. Not found Not found
(habitat burned)
N/A N/A South Klondike Cyn. Tr.
(lower)
CACW "B"
(Pair)
Pair on 03 May,
single nearby
on 23 June (not
visited 14 July)
N/A N/A South Panorama Tr. Not found Single calling
bird on 03
May14
12 Based on the map provided by Dudek (2006), two of the four cactus wrens observed were close enough to
be considered potentially a mated pair; see Hamilton (2009) for a discussion of the challenges in interpreting
the 2006 cactus wren data.
13 Located near the border of the northern and southern areas, this cactus patch was surveyed on all four visits
in 2010.
14 Possibly heard on 14 July (twice, possibly northern mockingbird imitation)
Attachments 1-149
12
Figure 5. Burned cactus scrub (red arrow) at site of 2006 and 2009 observations of cactus wren(s), just east of
Eagle's Nest Trail (ph. 26 April 2010, D.S. Cooper).
Attachments 1-150
13
Part II. Observations of vegetation, other wildlife
Sensitive plants
Three sensitive plants (CNPS 2010) were noted incidentally during surveys, and mapped
(Figure 6). They are:
Hubby's phacelia Phacelia hubbyi (formerly Phacelia cicutaria var. hubbyi)
CNPS 4.2 (limited distribution)
This distinctive annual, with its "pigtail"
inflorescences, was found to be a common
plant on the steepest slopes of the
property, dominant along the uppermost
trail down from Crest Rd. (at left, on 26
April 2010), where it was found to form a
monoculture in late April and May.
Formerly considered a variety of the
widespread caterpillar phacelia Phacelia
cicutaria, it is now considered to be a
distinct species, with a very small range,
mainly from Santa Barbara to Los Angeles
County, including the Channel Islands, at
low elevations.
South Coast branching phacelia Phacelia ramosissima var. austrolitoralis
CNPS 4.2 (limited distribution)
This localized form of a more widespread
perennial is found in coastal environments
in southern California from Santa Barbara
County south. Two populations were
observed at Portuguese Bend, both in the
southern area. The total extent is much less
than 1 acre, but plants appeared in robust
condition and were blooming on 14 July
(when discovered, at left). This is a
common species on relict coastal dune
systems in the Los Angeles area (pers.
obs.), and probably elsewhere on sandy
soils on the Palos Verdes Peninsula.
Attachments 1-151
14
Catalina mariposa-lily Calochortus catalinae
CNPS 4.2 (limited distribution)
This lily is restricted to heavy clay soils
within a variety of open habitats on the
coastal slope from San Luis Obispo
County south. It is (or was) especially
common on the Palos Verdes Peninsula,
and large fields of several thousand plants
were observed primarily in the lower
portion of the 2009 burn area (at left, on
26 April 2010). A handful of plants were
also present along the upper portion of the
steep trail into Klondike Cyn., and are
probably more widespread on the property.
It is absent where weeds and non-natives
are dominant, and appears to strongly favor undisturbed (from grading/discing) soils,
though it can persist (and even thrive) with occasional fires.
Figure 6. Locations of sensitive plants detected incidentally at Portuguese Bend (this study), including Phacelia
hubbyi (violet), Phacelia ramossisima var. austrolitoralis (blue) and Calochortus catalinae (white).
Attachments 1-152
15
Unburned habitat remnants
While most of the northern portion of the Portuguese Bend Reserve was burned in the
August 2009 fire, several areas of unburned vegetation within the fire footprint were
documented. The largest was a southeast-facing slope near the uppermost portion of the
reserve itself, which featured high-quality coastal sage scrub habitat with ashyleaf buckwheat,
purple sage Salvia leucophylla and California sagebrush (Figure 7). While we were surprised to
not have detected the California gnatcatcher in this patch, neither prior studies detected it
here either, possibly due to its isolation from other occupied habitat.
Farther south, areas of unburned coastal sage scrub as well as "mesic scrub" (high, dense
scrub with a strong component of giant wildrye Leymus condensatus and poison-oak
Toxicodendron diversiloba) was encountered along the Burma Rd. Trail, and the southern of the
two hairpins (Figure 7). Finally, small discrete patches of coastal sage scrub persisted along
the roadside here, to the south, and to the north within the northern of the two hairpins of
Burma Rd. Trail (Figure 7). It should be noted that even within the most intensely burned
portions of the 2009 fire zone, we observed vigorous sprouting by native plants, including
annual forbs, perennial subshrubs (esp. ashyleaf buckwheat) and larger crown-sprouting
shrubs such as lemonadeberry.
Figure 7. Major areas of unburned native vegetation within Portuguese Bend Reserve, summer 2010. Large
yellow polygon denotes the most intact patch of coastal sage scrub, in the northern portion of the reserve.
Attachments 1-153
16
Wildlife and "non-target" birds
We observed one species of mammal, the Audubon's cottontail (Sylvilagus auduboni)15, which
is common to abundant in larger blocks (>100 acres) of open space in the Los Angeles
(pers. obs.). We found the western fence-lizard Sceloporus occidentalis to be common at the site,
and encountered a single individual side-blotched lizard Uta stansburiana in the large patch of
coastal sage scrub near the top of the northern area on 26 April, and a young western
rattlesnake Crotalus viridis nearby on the same day.
Figure 8. Audubon's cottontail, showing the fluffy white tail, "salt-and-pepper" pelage, and chestnut tone on
the nape and limbs that distinguishes this species from the brush rabbit, previously reported (in error).
In addition to the California gnatcatcher and the cactus wren, two bird species observed are
considered sensitive by Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game, Cooper's hawk Accipiter cooperii and
Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow Aimophila ruficeps canescens, both formerly Bird
Species of Special Concern, since "downlisted" to WatchList status. A pair of Cooper's
hawks was observed on 03 May over Klondike Canyon, and may be nesting in the area,
possibly near Forrestal Reserve. Up to three singing rufous-crowned sparrows were seen on
the site, and the species is almost certainly a breeding resident on the reserve.
We made several observations of breeding birds, including:
Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis: Occupied nest near Peppertree Tr. on 03 May (at least one
young bird heard and seen thereafter).
15 Dudek (2006) reported the brush rabbit (Sylvilagus bachmanii) and no Audubon's cottontail, clearly in error;
the brush rabbit is a rare species found in remote foothill sites at the edges of the Los Angeles Basin (e.g.,
western Santa Monica Mountains, pers. obs.).
Attachments 1-154
17
Cooper's hawk Accipiter cooperii: Pair over Klondike Cyn. (03 May).
Mourning dove Zenaida macroura: Nest-building on 23 June.
Bushtit Psaltriparus minima: Nest-building (26 April), family groups on subsequent visits.
Bewick's wren Thryomanes bewickii: Family group on 23 June.
House wren Troglodytes aedon: Adult with begging juvenile (fully-grown) on 23 June.
Common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas: Family group on 23 June, 14 July.
California towhee Pipilo crissalis: Family group on 23 June.
Song sparrow Melospiza melodia: Family groups on 23 June, 14 July.
Indigo bunting Passerina cyanea, lazuli bunting P. amoena: A mixed pair (male indigo with
female lazuli) was observed and photographed on 23 June near the center of the northern
area of the reserve. This pairing has been documented before in California (Rowe and
Cooper 1997), but is apparently unpr ecedented on the Palos Verdes Peninsula (fide K.
Larson); even lazuli bunting, the "expected" species of this species pair, is a scarce and
irregular nester on the coast of Los Angeles County.
Lesser goldfinch Spinus tristis: Family group on 23 June.
Hooded oriole Icterus cucculatus: Family groups on 23 June.
Sources Cited
California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2010. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants
(online edition, v7-10b). California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA. Accessed
on Fri, Jul. 16, 2010 from http://www.cnps.org/inventory
Dudek. 2006. 2006 Focused presence-absence California gnatcatcher survey report for the
Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Los Angeles
County, California. Report # 4979-02 prepared by Dudek, Encinitas, California, Oct.
27, 2006.
Hamilton, R.A. 2009. 2009 Focused surveys for California gnatcatchers and cactus wrens,
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve, Palos Verdes Peninsula, California. Prepared by
Hamilton Biological for Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy, Nov. 1, 2009.
Rowe, S.P. and D.S. Cooper. 1997. Confirmed nesting of lazuli bunting with indigo bunting
in Kern County, California. Western Birds 28:225-227.
Shuford, W.D. and T. Gardali, eds. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A
ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of
immediate conservation concern in California. Studies in Western Birds, No. 1,
Western Field Ornithologists and California Dept. of Fish and Game.
USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service). 1997. Coastal California Gnatcatcher
(Polioptila californica californica) Presence/Absence Survey Guidelines, February 28,
1997.
Attachments 1-155
PVPLC 2012 Trail Project List
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-156
APPENDIX E: Future Trails Project List (2012)
The following is a list of trail projects based on priority and funding opportunities. This list is intended to
outline potential projects but may be amended. Projects not completed will carry over to the following
year. In addition to the list below, smaller‐scale projects may be accomplished by the Volunteer Trail
Crew or Scout projects on an as‐needed basis.
Reserve Name Trail Name Project Type Priority
Abalone Cove
Sacred Cove (to beach)Erosion repair Low
Bow and Arrow Erosion repair on eastern portion Low
Sea Dahlia Erosion control and closure of
unauthorized spur trails with signage
and fill‐in planting
High
Portuguese loop connector Create a connector trail between
Portuguese Bend Loop trail to Sacred
Cove View trail by delineating
current foot path to Palos Verdes
Drive South
High
Agua Amarga
Lunada Canyon Trail Delineation with vegetation
trimming and signage
Low
Alta Vicente
North Spur Trail delineation with vegetation
trimming and signage
High
Prickly Pear Erosion repair and trail delineation
with vegetation trimming and
signage
Medium
Forrestal
Quarry Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Low
Dauntless Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Low
Mariposa Bridge and trail repair Medium
Vista Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Medium
Intrepid Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill
Low
Exultant Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Low
Cristo Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill
Medium
Packsaddle Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Medium
Flying Mane (west)Fill sinkholes along trail High
Attachments 1-157
Reserve Name Trail Name Project Type Priority
Portuguese Bend
Burma at Panorama Install grades and dips to decrease
water flow onto Panorama Trail
High
North Sandbox Trail Repair Medium
Ishibashi Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting;
bicycle jump closure
High
Rim trail north of Burma Road End‐point delineation High
Peppertree Trail erosion repair Medium
Barn owl Trail erosion repair Medium
San Ramon
Switchback Delineate trail with signage and
vegetation trimming
Low
Three Sisters
Barkentine Closure of unauthorized spur trails
with signage and fill‐in planting
Medium
Connector between Three sisters
and Upper Filiorum
Erosion Repair Medium
Vista del Norte
Indian peak loop Trail Delineation with vegetation
trimming and signage
Low
Attachments 1-158
2011-2012 Ranger Quarterly Report
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-159
1:~,~~--~MOUNTAINSRECREATION&CONSERVATIONAUTHORlTY~~. • .'0'::$AAHCHO Franklm Cm)'Qn Park
..~..•SIN •
.,<>::"'!l!'.:'01 "'1ll::l;R£AtlON 2600 Fr.mkJin Canyon Drive
..'.~."AHOI'Allll
"'::"~_.,'""'"~lllSnucf Beverly Hills,Calirornia 90210
••,"o••,.'!)~_Phon'(310)858-7272 Fu (3/0)858-7212
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
March 27,2012
Katie Howe
Jewel Johnson
Rancho Palos Verdes Beach Patrol Assessment
CITATIONS:Dog Off-Leash
•Shoreline Park @ Twin Harbors trailhead
• Founders Park
WARNINGS
• 3 -Hikers with dogs attempting to access beach below Shoreline Park
The main activities at Shoreline Park,Founders Park and adjacent trails are hiking,dog
walking,yoga and the beginning point for cyclists.The main access points are the
designated parking lot in the main portion of Trump National Golf Course,the La
Rotunda parking lot,and the terminus of Twin Harbors.Park visitors using the main
Trump parking lot are mainly using Founders Park and the Sunset Trail access to RPV
Beach.The park visitors coming from La Rotunda and Twin Harbors parking areas are
using Shoreline Park and the Sunrise Trail access to beach and on the beaches below
Shoreline Park.
The weekends are the busiest times,which is consistent with general park use.There
were a few days of rain and we had several cool temperatures days during the
beginning of March.Saturday and Sunday were the busiest days with a consistent flow
of park visitors throughout the day,averaging 35 people and 15 dogs with up to 60
people and 35 dogs on the few warm days.Generally,the busiest times were between
10:00am and 3:00pm.On the weekdays the park visitors were there primarily for the
beach use between 1 :OOpm -5:00pm and averaging 15 people and 15 dogs.
Founders Park saw very little use.The activity was consistent in Shoreline Park before
10:00am and after 4:00pm with hikers and hikers with dogs.This was also the time
when we observed the most dog activity on the beach below Shoreline Park.
We did not receive any reports of dog fights,injuries or major incidents.I believe we
can include the coverage of Founders Park,Shoreline Park and the adjacent trails at
our current 45 hours per week.
A Joc:u public ;Jgency aercising joint POff-as ofch~Sma Mania Mount:lins ConsO'1\2llCY,the Con~jo R~cion I!L p.wc Districr.
IUId the R,;zncho Simi RecrcJrion 8l P:u:k Districr pursumr to Scrorm 6500 ~s~.ofthe Govc:rnmenr Code.Attachments 1-160
.it..?'·:.·:..···.."..."'~~--~MOUNTAINS RECREATION &CONSERVATION AUTHORITY.~o:..~\~I ,f IIlI.llC>t:l FranklIn Canyon Park-..~.",l ~':Vi.s0-l;~_..-~l 1j"...:?f:Y.l -~~~2600 Franklin Canyon Drive~?_;,Ii ~lIISTlDl:l Beverly Hills,California 90210
~,~---~•Phone (310)858-7272 Fax (310)858-7212
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
February 3.2012
Katie Howe,City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Jewel Johnson,Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority
Ranger Services Activity Report 10101/2011 -12/31/2011
546 Patrol Hours (7 Rangers)
15 Interpretative Hours (3 Rangers)
PORTUGUESE BEND NATURE RESERVE
The reserve continues to be busy with all user groups represented.We have a clear
usage pattern of the main groups.Hikers are the dominant user group during the week
and weekends.We had good compliance with hikers with dogs but they are not picking
up after their dogs at the beginning of the main trailhead at the terminus of Crenshaw.
The issue of hikers forgetting to bring water continues to be an issue and I handed out
about 20 water bottles during the hotter days (mid-October and late-November).The
mountain bikers usually start arriving after 3pm on the weekdays but on the weekends.
the older mountain bikers like to ride in the morning and the younger mountain bikers
arrive in the afternoon.The equestrians are mainly riding in the morning during the
weekends and are rarely seen on the weekdays.We received reports of unauthorized
vehicle use (motorbikes)in the reserve.We were unable to locate but believe they are
entering the reserve from Rolling Hills and Forrestal.The following group of trails needs
clarification:
•Toyon Trail (unauthorized trails built off this trail I lack of trail markers)
•Garden Trail (unauthorized trails built off this trail I lack of trail markers)
•Landslide Scarp Trail (lack of clear trail markers I frequently vandalized)
•Rim Trail (lack of trail markers I major erosion I hikers making own trails)
•Eagle's Nest Trail (unauthorized trail built from the Harman overlook)
Transported hiker and his dog which was bitten by a rattlesnake on the Rim trail to Point
Vicente Animal Hospital.
A local public agency exercJsltlgjo;1I1 powers altlle Solita Monica Mounta/ns COIISCrI'QIJC)J,the Caneja Recrcollo1J &Park District,
and the Rancho Simi Rccrcotiotl &:Park District purslloIII 10 Seclion 6500 t!/seq.ofthe Govi!rnnU!IIt Code.
Attachments 1-161
Page 2
ABALONE COVE ECOLOGICAL RESERVE
We continue to monitor the activity at Sacred Cove.The "stone cabanas"were
dismantled in October I November.The activity moved from below Inspiration Point to
Portuguese Point.The patrols have disrupted and/or changed activity at Sacred Cove
but we observed evidence (i.e.broken branches,tissue,condoms wrappers,water bottles
and various litter)of possible lewd behavior off the trails above Portuguese Point.We
received reports that people are using the storm drain outlet in the Alta Mira Canyon.
We joined Public Works during their inspection of the outlet but were unable to
determine when and how they were using the outlet.We did find evidence (i.e.fire pits),
of after hour activity in Sacred Cove.Graffiti found and removed off rule signs at "ruins"
entrance.
POINT VICENTE INTERPRETIVE CENTER
We observed while patrolling the trails (Seascape,Terranea,Golden Cove)that someone
was feeding the rabbits with carrots.We were informed that an unknown male was
responsible but we were unable to locate this unknown park visitor.
FORRESTAL NATURE RESERVE
We received a report in November that kids were in the Quarry with bows and arrows.
We were unable to locate these park visitors but did find evidence of "air soft"pistol
activity.We continue to monitor location.The dog off leash activity has declined due to
new signage and locked gates.There is evidence they have moved to the lower soccer
fields.A park visitor reported dumping inside the dumpsters on the property.We found
trash in the dumpster from a construction site.
RANCHO PALOS VERDES BEACH
Found lifeguard platform burned and vandalized.
INTREPRETATIVE ACTIVITIES
•November 12 Night Hike -Cancelled due to rain
•December 10 Night Hike -13 Hikers
•MRCAlRPV Junior Ranger preparation
Attachments 1-162
CITATIONS ISSUED (15)
September
•Portuguese Bend Nature Reserve
o Dog off leash - 2
• Abalone Cove Ecological Reserve
o Unlawful Take (Tide pools)- 2
o Misdemeanor Filing
October
•Portuguese Bend Nature Reserve
o Dog off leash
•Point Vicente Interpretive Center
o Dog off leash
• Abalone Cove Ecological Reserve .
o Unauthorized Motorized Vehicle Use
o Fishing wlo License - 2
November
•Portuguese Bend Nature Reserve
o Mountain Bikes on unauthorized trail -4
December
• Abalone Cove Ecological Reserve (Sacred Cove)- 2
Page 3
Attachments 1-163
MOUNTAINS RECREATION &CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
500l<y Go!c(man Nalure Center
2600 FranItlin Canyon Drive
Beverly Hills.Califomia 90210
Phone (3101858·7272 Fax (3101 858·7212
MEMORANDUM
DATE:November 1,2011
TO:Katie Howe,City of Rancho Palos Verdes
FROM:Jewel Johnson,Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority
RE:Ranger Services
Park Visitor Contacts
•July 1 -September 30,2011
•599 Patrol Hours
•18 Interpretative Hours
• 7 Rangers patrolled the reserves during this period
• 3 Rangers conducted Interpretative programs
Waming Issued
JULY
•Dog off Leash
o Portuguese Bend -7
o Abalone Cove Shoreline - 5 (before they make it down to the beach)
o Forrestal-16 (Soccer Fields)
•Horses off trail
o Portuguese Bend - 1 (Peacock Flats)
AUGUST
•Dog off Leash
o Portuguese Bend - 4
o Abalone Cove Shoreline - 1
o Forrestal-4 (Soccer Fields)
o Point Vicente Interpretive Center - 3
SEPTEMBER
•Dog off Leash
o Founders Park - 2
o Portuguese Bend -4
A local public agency e:v:erdslngjDint powers ofthe Santa Monjca Mountains consen'anq:the Canejo RecreatIon &Park
District.and {be HandJC!plmj Recreation &Park Dlslrlcl pUlsuant 10 Sec.1/0n fJSOO el seq.ortIle Government code.
Attachments 1-164
MOUNTAINS RECREATION &CONSERVATION AlITHORlTY
Soo!,:y Goldman Nature Center
2600 Franklin Canyon Drive
Beverly Hills.Califomia 90210
Phone (3101 858·7272 Fax 13101 858·7212
Citations Issued
JULY
•Dog must be on Leash 112.16 ..050 RPV ORO (SACRED COVE)
•No Dogs on Beach I 17.12.290 LACO (SACRED COVE)
AUGUST
•(2)Dogs must be on leash 1 6.20.010 RPV ORO amended to 12.16.050 RPV ORO I
(SHORELINE PARK)
SEPTEMBER
•(2)Dog must be on Leash 112.16 ..050 RPV ORO (PORTUGUESE BEND)
•(2)Unlawful take in State Marine Park I Title 14 CCR 632 (a)(1)(A)
(ABALONE COVE Tide Pools)
First Aid
o Distributed bottled water (15 hikers)I Portuguese Bend Nature ReselVe (AUGUST)
a Cleaned minor wound due to fall on trail I Portuguese Bend Nature ReselVe
(AUGUST)
o Dog must be on Leash citation issued in May was found guilty (SACRED COVE)
Interpretative Programs
RPV I MRCA JUNIOR RANGER PROGRAM
o SUlVivor:Junior Ranger Style I OvelView of all session topics and Crime Scene
Deconstruction I July 23
o Graduation I Participants who have completed a minimum of three sessions,plus the
introduction session and the Nature Journal were recognized at the Graduation
Ceremony on August 27 with their Parents in attendance.11 Graduates.
RPV I MRCA JUNIOR RANGER CAMP
o Cancelled program due to lack of interest and late public notification
Nature Walk at Portuguese Bend Landslide
o Checked-In with coordinator I Good sized group I No problems with parking
A local public agenc)'exer,.CJsIngjoint powers offlw Santa Monica J\4ounralns Conservancy.tIle Conc}o Recreation &Park
DIstrict.anci Ille Ranchd Simi Reaeatlon &Park DIstrlCf pursuanllO Sec/Ion (]sOD al seq.orthe GOI'cmmenf Code.
Attachments 1-165
MOUNTAINS RECREATION &CONSERVATION AlITHORlTY
5001'y Goldman Nature Center
2600 Franklin Canyon Drive
Beverly Hills.Califomia 90210
Phone (3101 858·7272 Fax 1310)858-7212
Park Maintenance
Portuguese Bend Reserve:
o Missing "no bike"stickers I Landslide Scarp I Rim I Paintbrush trails (AUGUST)
o Located trail system above Barn OwllBunna Trails that are believed to be in Rolling
Hills or on Private property.(SEPTEMBER)
Abalone Cove Reserve:
o Sacred Cove I Fire pits (JULY)
o Sacred Cove I Stone cabanas need to be completely dismantled at bottom of Cliffside
Trail (AUGUST)
o Graffiti on Sacred Cove Cliffside Trail markers
o Graffiti on Lifeguard pole at Tide pools
o Graffiti on "Annie's Stand"
Forrestal Reserve
o Trash cans need lids
Portuguese Bend Nature Reserve
There continues to be good overall compliance in the reserve but,did see increased off-leash
activity from first time hikers.
Followed up reports of smoking and afterhour's activity at BunnalBam Owl trail with extra
after-hour patrol and found very little evidence besides 3 "old"cigarette butts near location.
Followed up reports with unauthorized motor vehicle (motorcycles)and were unable to find
evidence of entry into the reserve.
There continues to be an issue with hikers forgetting to bring enough water for themselves or
dogs.Interpretative signs at the main trailheads or in the kiosk would remind the public of the
importance of water for their hikes.
Park hours are not posted at the main Portuguese Bend Nature Reserve entry points (end of
Crenshaw Blvd or from Rolling Hills).
Forrestal Nature Reserve
We continue to wam and advised the off leash activity at the soccer fields in Forrestal and the
activity has decreased significantly during this quarter.We changed patrol hours to check
behavior in the early hours (before 8:00am)and saw very little activity on the Forrestal trails.
A local public agency e.,ercJsinUjoim pOl'vcrS ofthe Santa MonIca Moumains conservancy.r/1fJ Conejo Recreation &Park
Dls/ricr.and tile Ranchc!jslml Recreation &-Pluk DiSlrlcl pursuant 10 Seer/on 6500 01 seq.of1/1(;)Go\;emmenr Code.
Attachments 1-166
MOUNTAINS RECREATION &CONSERVATION AlITHORIlY
Sool')'Goldman Nalure Cenler
2GOO Franlilin Canyon Drive
Beveriy Hills.Califomia 90210
Phone (310)858·7272 Fa"(310)858-7212
Three Sisters Reserve
Followed up reports of encroachment with extra patrols and found no evidence
Abalone Cove Shoreline Park
Assisted LASD in removing debris from "Annie's Stand"left by a homeless man.
Recommend complete removal of "stone cabanas"in Sacred Cove due to suspected lewd
behavior.We found 6 locations above "Portuguese Point"with evidence of lewd behavior
such as used condoms.We have targeted our week day patrols at Abalone Cove due to the
continued attempts of nude sunbathing by a gro\-lP of 4-5 adult males.These group of men
have started to change their behavior by changing the location of their activities,utiliZing
lookouts that communicate through hand signals and using binoculars to track the location of
the on-duty Ranger.We have also notice more activity behind the porta-potty's and would
recommend possibly removing them .
.-\local public agency evercisingjoint pOIl'ers ofrl1e Sanra Monica Mounrains conservancy.the Cone}o Reaeallon &Park
Dls/ricl.and 111(1 RanchdSImi Recreation &Park DistriCI pursuant to Secrlon 6500 et seq.of Ihe Gol1emmenr Coc/e.
Attachments 1-167
MOUNTAINS RECREATION &<CONSERVATION AUIHORITY
Sooky Goldm:m N:lturc Ct:ntu
2600 Fr:mklin c.,nyon Driye
BCVL'TIy HiUs.C:llifomi3 90210
Phon'(310)858-7272 f",(310)858-7212
MEMORANDUM
DATE:September 22,2011
TO:Tom Odom,City of Rancho Palos Verdes
FROM:Jewel Johnson,Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority
RE:Ranger Services
Park Visitor Contacts
•April 13 -June 30,2011
•446 Patrol Hours
•79 Interpretative Hours
•Low Activity in the Reserves during the week
• 6 Rangers patrolled the reserves during this period
Warned and Advised
•Dogs on the Beach (APRIL)ABALONE COVE
•Dog off Leash (MAY)PORTUGUESE BEND
•Mountain Biker -speed (MAY)PORTUGUESE BEND
•Mountain Biker -speed (JUNE)PORTUGUESE BEND
•Commercial Dog Walker (JUNE)FORRESTAL
•Horses on prohibited trail (JUNE)ABALONE COVE
o Report of Horses on Beach below the Archery Range
Citations Issued
•Dog off Leash
o 5 -Portuguese Bend Reserve (MAY)
o 2 -Portuguese Bend Reserve (JUNE)
•Parking Citation -Blocking Emergency Access
o Abalone Cove Shoreline Park
A IOGSI public;:Jgrnc)'uCTCising fainr ran'rn ofd,,'S3nr:l IUonie N/oont.Jins GJ1)Un,.1nC)~rflr Conrjo Rrctr;man 6:P.uk Dism'cr,~d (IIr R.lIlcho Simi Rccrr3rirm 4'
."1 PJrk Dinner pUnll.lllf CI'J Seerion 6500 rr srq.of,be GOl'<'mmCIlt Cmlr.
Attachments 1-168
MOUNTAINS RECREATION &.CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
Sock)'Goldmm N:lturc Center
2600 Fr.mkJin Canyon Dri,'c
Bl:"crl}'Hills.COllifomi:l 90210
Phon'(310)858-7272 F,x (310)858-7212
First Aid
•Group of 50 hikers in Portuguese Bend Reserve (MAY)
•Gave out water to 22 hikers
•Drove 4 hikers out of Reserve -no further medical aid needed.
Administrative
•Attended "State of the Trails for the PV Nature Preserve"(APRIL)
•"City"Marathon -Abalone Cove Shoreline Park (MAY)
Court
•Guilty Verdict in Parasailing Case (12.16.045 -RPV Ord.)
•1-Year Probation
•$50 fine +court fees
•Community Service at "South Bay Volunteer Services"
Interpretative Programs
•Ranger-led Nike Hikes
o April 16 (2 participants)
o May 21 (20+participants)
•The Junior Ranger Program
o May 28 "How to Spot Wildlife Along the Trail"
o June 25 "Fire Ecology and Our Ecosystem"
•Planning for "Junior Ranger Summer Camp"
o 2 -MRCA Naturalist assisted in the planning
Park Maintenance
Portuguese Bend Reserve:
•Litter at Overlooks (Crenshaw,Eagle's Nest)
Abalone Cove Reserve:
•Remove graffiti off trash cans (APRIL)
•Dumping at gate (APRIL)
•Fire pit at Sacred Cove (APRIL)
Forrestal Reserve
•Pick up trash at trailhead and at terminus of Forrestal Road
A lot:.11 public .v:rm:T e.rcrosing joinr powers ofrllt:S3n~Alolilo A1ounr:Jins Can.Jrn";ln9~r/lr COnt:jo Rrm-;wcn 6'P:Jrk DiJlnrr,:md rile Rmdlo Simi Rrcrt:Jrion &:
:'J P.:lrk Discner plJ~u:mr to SrCTIOn 6500 rt sr!].orr/It:G01'rT.7It1IClir Code:.
Attachments 1-169
MOUNTAWS RECREATION &CONSERVATION AU1HORITY
Sooky GoIdm;tn N;\turc Ccnttt
2600 Fr.mkJin C:m)'on Dri\'c
BC\'crly Hills.C:l1ifomi"90210
Phon'(310)858-7272 F",(310)858-7212
Interpretative I Signage
o Missing trail markers (No bike)in Portuguese Bend Reserve Trails (Rim,Landslide
Scarp,Vanderlip,Kubota,Garden)
There continues to be good overall compliance but we did see an increase of dogs off leash
in Portuguese Bend Reserve.We warned and advised but cited when necessary.The off
leash activity has lessen at the soccer fields in Forrestal.We received complaints regarding
dogs off leash on the Pirate trail in Forrestal but were unable to locate the violators.There
continues to be an issue with hikers forgetting to bring enough water for themselves or dogs.
We had a large group of fifty in May who were hiking from Crenshaw to the Beach,
unfortunately twenty-two of the hikers either forgot or ran out of water,an additional four
hikers were driven back to their vehicles.Interpretative signs at the main trailheads or in the
kiosk would remind the public of the importance of water for their hikes .
.-1/001 publit:.1grne)'r-rrrciJing join.rponus urr/,t:5.1fl(.1111otllCol A10lJ/luins CoIlJ('n";1lt9~rhr Conrjo Rrctr.1rJon d'P.1rk Disma,,lnd el,e R:mdlO Simi R=Jtion 6.'
.'I P.lrk Discn'a PllrsUJllC ro Section fi500 rr Irq.ofr!lt'GOl'rmmr:nr Codr.
Attachments 1-170
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
March 23,2011
Tom Odom,City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Jewel Johnson,Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority
Ranger Services Report December 27,2010 -March 20,2011
MRCA Ranger Patrol Hours:507
Preserve Visitors:approximately 400-500 (rainy and cooler weather)
Introduction to the Junior Ranger Program
January 22 Program -12 registered /6 attended
February 26 Program -18 registered /14 attended
•What is a Ranger?Viewing of the documentary "A Thin Green Line,"What
should be in my backpack?
•Basic Trail Etiquette,Safety Practices and "Leave No Trace"Principles.
Ranger-Led Night Hike
February 19 -CANCELLED RAIN
March 19 -13 hikers (6 did not register /found out through Daily Breeze / 7 registered)
Senior Talk and Walk
February 25 -CANCELLED RAIN /reschedule TBD
Citations Issued:5
January 23,2011
February 13,2011
February 5,2011
February 20,2011
March 1,2011
Abalone Cove
Sacred Cove
Portuguese Bend
Forrestal
Abalone Cove
Dog on Beach prohibited
Dog on Beach prohibited
Dog off leash
Dog off leash
Dog on Beach prohibited/off leash
,
A Joelpublic :Jgr1/9'arrdsirJg johnpall<r::n ofthe Smt:l Monic Mounains ClJnrcn~9~che Conrjo Reac:m'on ~PiJrx Disaia;
:mJ rile RAncho SimiRtt:rC2DOn &.PM};Disair:r p~nr m S«tJOO 6500 t:t seq.ofthe GoI'I:mmClt Code.
Attachments 1-171
Page 2
COURT DATES:
•Dog off Leash /Portuguese Bend Reserve Trail /found guilty -date of violation
November 16,2010
•Defendant cancelled /found guilty -date of violation November 16,2010
,
)
Attachments 1-172
MOUNTAINS RECREATION &CONSERVATION AlJIHORITY
5001,y Goldman Nature Center
2600 Franillin Canyon Drive
Beverl\'Hills.California 90210
Pll0ne (3101858,7272 Fa'(3101858·7212
MEMORANDUM
DATE:February 15,2011
TO:Tom Odom,City of Rancho Palos Verdes
FROM:Jewel Johnson,Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority
RE:Ranger Services Invoice#B0910-05
Park Visitor Contacts
•5f;Pr.'lo,2.t>lo -De=C .2-'=>,2-0 10
•541 patrol hours
•500 -650 Park Visitors (December rain days reduced park usage)
10 Warned and Advised
• 5 Dogs off Leash (Portuguese)
• 3 Dogs off Leash (Forrestal)
• 2 Dogs not allowed on Beach (Abalone Shoreline Park -warned and advised as
they entered the trail).
7 Citations Issued
• 1 Dogs off Leash (Portuguese)
• 3 Dogs Prohibited on Beach (Sacred Cove)
• 2 Dogs off Leash (Portuguese)
• 1 Nude Sunbathing (Sacred Cove)
Park Maintenance
Portuguese Bend Reserve:
•Picked up litter around trash cans (lids needed to keep birds out)
•Picked up litter on trails (I.e.water bottles)
•Dog walkers are leaving doggie bags on the trail
•Remove graffiti off signage (see PBG photos)
•Tree fell into street due to high winds (see DCT photos)
Fbrrestal Nature Reserve
•Pick up litter around trash can at the Conqueror and Fossil Trailhead (lids needed on
trash cans)
.'\local public agency exerrjJ5ingjoim peJl1"ers of(h,~Santa Mon/eel MOLl/lIains consenlQnc.:y.the Cunc.:/o Hecrc.'allon &Pi-tri,
DlslriCI.amI tIle Hand10 Simi RecreatloJl &Pari..D/5tr1Cl pLlrsuam 10 Sec/ion 6500 et .scq.or (11("GU\fE'./111l1l?J){Curlc.
Attachments 1-173
MOUNTAINS RECREATION &CONSERVATION AlITHORlTY
Sool,y Goldman Nalure Center
2600 Franklin Can~'on Drive.
Beverll'HUls,California 902 10
PllOne 13101858·7272 Fax (3101858-7212
Park Maintenance continued
Abalone Cove Reserve:
•Remove graffiti from trash cans by lifeguard stand.(see ABCOG photos)
•Removed tagging on dumpsters and signs in Shoreline parking lot.(see ABSLG
photos)
Interpretative I Signage
•Finalize Junior Ranger Program Dates
•Abaione Cove Focus Group
•Upper Filiorum trails plan review
•Discuss sign plan I Administrative citations with Katie Howe
•Short talk with Cub scout group at Point Vicente Interpretive Center
•Schedule Full Moon hikes at Portuguese Bend Nature Reserve
•Schedule Senior Talk at Point Vicente Interpretive Center
Abalone Cove Shoreline Park -Report of possible unauthorized activity at the lifeguard
stand by professional kayakers early Saturday and Sunday mornings.Changed patrol hours
in order to make contact.No contacts.Weather and early morning low tides decreased
activity at tide pools during park hours.
Abalone Cove Reserve (Sacred Cove)-We continue to see a diverse group of people
using the cove.We issued a nude sunbathing citation and three (3)No dogs on beach.The
weather decreased activity.We have identified (3)three new locations for possible lewd
activity.We found unauthorized trails and litter Including but not limited to used condoms,
wrappers and toilet tissue.The activity has moved to the north end of sacrl3d cove,the top of
the r!'!serve and off trail at Portuguese Point.
Portuguese Bend -All user groups were present during this period.We had some rain days
In December and the park usage dropped considerably due to trail conditions.The trails on
the lower portion of reserve were damaged due to debris flow caused by the rains.(see
PBPT photos)Trail markers are unclear at Toyon/Landslide/Peppertree/Garden trail
junction.Recommend opening "Landslide Scarp"trail to mountain bikers.
Forrestal Reserve -Park usage continues to be in the early morning hours and after work
hours.Soccer fields continue to be used as off leash Dog Park.
Three Sisters -Unable to locate reported bike jumps.
Fisherman Access -No unusual activity
Torrance Superior Court -Amend Citations
I
•.\local public agent:)'eseJj::JshJII.lo;11I pOlvers of the Santa Monica Maumai/l'i COJ1se.n·"anc)'.//)e Con~o Recreal/on &Park
DistrICt.and tl1e Ral1d10 SimI RecreaTIon &Park DistrIct pursuant 10 Seer/on 6500 c/seq.ofthe GoFemment Corle.
Attachments 1-174
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
1
7
5
Attachments 1-176
Attachments 1-177
...
.-.-
".
-.
......_It'
.-.
~"".",~x/;··;
.'-:""Y1~~'::'';C;.
'.c.~_"'::-;;'.
~5.'.:.
.-',~.-.or"'.
Attachments 1-178
a..,.
.',
~-
-"".
,",.,
..
.l
....~.
''';-
.'~...:!'•
.-
_.f:
Attachments 1-179
·~::D".>
;E ';a::'-.
z ,·n;;;,t 1r:n ::E::J:J '0".
I ".
'i....c
CJ
c
'.~-.-
~Q.~.-
.~~•'';r ,
:»
r
h "Cc:.O'
"-,.
B-
p
~,
L
6 'r
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
1
8
0
Attachments 1-181
I
r\.MfttS
-\\fl1i:'
Attachments 1-182
<\.:.--:..'-="':;-j .-_1...j.
.lFlA·.MASIUE
NO SMOKING IiR OPEN mMf.~..
PERMI'HED WIl'"IN50,FEH ..-.
.\.
Attachments 1-183
Attachments 1-184
I ,,~
''''--I}
Y...t,
i
Attachments 1-185
Attachments 1-186
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
1
8
7
Open Space Task Force Subcommittee
Recommended Changes to the City’s
Trails Network Plan
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-188
-Page 1 of2
DRAFT RPV Trails Network Plan
Discussion Topics
May 12,2004
The Open Space Subcommittee of the RPV OSP and R&P Task Force
recommends that the Task Force approve or disapprove of each of the following
proposed substantive changes to the City's Trails Network Plan (TNP)prior to
the updating of the specific text:
1.Since the Conceptual Trails Plan (CTP)and the Conceptual Bikeways Plan
(CBP)were generated as Phase 1 of the TN P update,they should not appear to
be "stand alone"documents.The Introductions,Implementation Policies,
Existing Trails/Bikeways Inventories,Conceptual Trails/Bikeways and
Appendices should be inserted into the appropriate sections of the primary
document.
2.Since the policies which determine which type of trail users are precluded
from using portions of specific trails at any given time are more flexible than the
TNP and since enforcement of said policies is not addressed,said use
determinations should be left unrestricted until established by deed restriction,
emergency closure or City Council action.
3.Since the Plan includes directives to the Planning Dept.,the Recreation &
Parks Dept.,the Public Works Dept.,and the Finance Dept.,the "Definitions"
section should be expanded to include the esoteric terms of each of these
professions that are used and called:A GLOSSARY OF TERMS.
4.Since many of the trail and other landmark names used in the document
have been selected arbitrarily for purely communication purposes,a policy for
establishing names of trails should be included for use when a trail is
implemented.
5.Since the California Coastal Trail (CCT),the Palos Verdes Loop Trail (PVLT)
and bikeways in major transportation corridors extend beyond the City's
jurisdiction and plans for their implementation are being addressed by other
bodies,direction should be included to coordinate improvements and signage
with the more global concepts.
6.Since the "safety"of any given trail is determined more by the users'
capabilities than the physical infrastructure improvements,the "TYPE"of
improvements (see proposed Guidelines Matrix)should be established based on
the best user opportunities available and a direction included so that they can be
adjusted according to demand.For instance,narrow prisms should be provided
in native habitats with routine inspections so that they can be widened,rerouted
or more turnouts provided should a particular section start to become crowded ...
without having to modify the TNP.
Attachments 1-189
Page 2 of2
DRAFT RPV Trails Network Plan
Discussion Topics
May 12,2004
7.Since miscommunications have occurred about reference points,GPS points
should be included.
8.Since the recommendations in the "Categories"in the Status:factor of the
specific trail descriptions have not been implemented by Staff,language should
be added to make them more specific directives.(Proposed language has been
submitted to General Plan Update Steering Committee since this portion of the
CTP was added to the General Plan as Amendment 22.)
9.Since Category VI in the Status:factor of the specific trail descriptions does
not provide the same type of information and directives as the other categories,it
should be eliminated.The "special circumstances"presently described here
should be described in the text of the status of the specific trails that have them.
10.Since the development of certain trails have been made conditions of
proposed projects without the destinations that make the trail appropriate,an
Objectives:factor should be added to each trail description.
11.Since the change in the Status:of any given trail is not circulated "in house"
a section should be added where such changes can be posted on an ongoing
basis.(See the proposed TABLE OF CONTENTS.)
Attachments 1-190
Public Comments
Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
May 15, 2012
City Council Meeting
Attachments 1-191
Ara Mihranian
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Carolynn Petru
Wednesday.May 09,2012 7:05 PM
Ara Mihranian
Joel Rojas
FW:Comments reo approving recommended amendments to the overall Preserve Trails Plan
-----Original Message-----
From,Barry Holchin [mailto,bholchin@cox.netJ
Sent,Wednesday,May 09,2012 5,56 PM
To:cc@rpv.com
Subject:Comments reo approving recommended amendments to the overall Preserve Trails Plan
Dear RPV City Council Member,
I understand the RPV CC will be discussing expanded use of trails next Tuesday.
I have lived on The Hill for 40 years,during which time I have run,led and participated
in hikes on our trials for most of that time.During the early part of that time,I
assumed responsibility for trail building and maintenance,sometimes under Sierra Club
auspices.Believing there were more than enough trails,I stopped new trail construction -
15 -20 years ago.
Sometime thereafter,I started noticing bike tracks on the trails and in a few years,a
huge proliferation of new trails (-500%)I which I attributed to mountain bikers.This was
based on evidence I saw on the ground.
I have run and hiked hundreds if not thousands of miles on trails allover the world,and
have had plenty of opportunity to see the destruction caused by mountain bikes (I assumed
someone had been riding them).I have corne to the conclusion that there's no place for
biking on single track trails in any area purported to be a reserve (or preserve),period.
On one occasion,during a trail maintenance activity under the direction of a PLPLC
employee,volunteers were allowed to widen the trails to accommodate use of mountain
bikes,in direct opposition to previous and existing guidelines.I objected and limited my
effort to just work on constructing the rope fences to help prevent trail proliferation.
Ironically,the biking community has been forthcoming in providing trail maintenance labor
and unfortunately the hiking community has been woefully underrepresented in my opinion.
At a PUMP meeting,I actually heard a mountain biker say they (presumably as a group)are
environmentalists!Granting that many hikers don't contribute to trail maintenance and
habitat restoration,habitat restoration following on the heels of habitat destruction
does not an environmentalist make.
I have been responsible for trail maintenance on a portion of the PV Loop Trail near my
house for many years.For 10 or more years,there was never an issue wlr trail erosion or
trash along the trail.Then I started to see bike tracks and soon thereafter signs of
heavy erosion and increasing trash along the trail.Of course,that was just the
beginning.Soon there were tracks
(trails)allover,many parallel to each other to the point of complete degradation of a
wide area,involving shovel work and construction of multiple ramps,berms,etc.I believe
this was almost all,if not all,done by mountain bikers.Can I prove it?NO.But I do
know what I think of this form of "passive recreation",and I find it difficult to be
civil in my description.BTW,I recently picked up two shopping bags full of trash in that
area.Regarding the Reserve,no amount of money spent on enforcement will be adequate to
keep this type of habitat destruction and illegal trail use at bay,unless the
consequences of getting caught were onerous.It's simple -if the probability of getting
caught is low,then the consequences of getting caught need to be very high,or there's no
incentive to obey the rules.Given the influence of CORBA and the mountain biking
community,I doubt that will ever be permitted in this city.
If not a single trail were available to mountain biking,not one biker would be precluded
from using every trail -on foot.
1
Attachments 1-192
By the way,I have numerous photos which I believe confirm my contention that mountain
biking (by how many or how few,how old or how young)is deleterious to trails and
habitat.lId be more than happy to share them if anyone is interested.
Thanks.
Barry Holchin
2
Attachments 1-193
Ara Mihranian
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
SUbject:
dena friedson [dlfriedson@gmaiLcom]
Wednesday,May 09,20123:46 PM
CC@rpv.com;Ara Mihranian;Joel Rojas
dena friedson
Nature Preserve Trails --City Council Meeting on May 15,2012
To:Mayor Anthony Misetich and City council Members Brian Campbell,Susan Brooks,Jerry
Duhovic,and Jim Knight and
To:Ara Mihranian and Joel Rojas
From:Dena Friedson --(dlfriedson@gmail.com)
Re:Trails in the Palos verdes Nature Preserve --City Council Meeting on May 15,2012
Please designate some trails in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve for hikers and/or
equestrians only.Bikers should not be allowed on dangerous narrow trails with steep
unstable slopes and many twisting turns.Landslide Scarp Trail,the ToyoD Trail,and the
Ishibashi Farm Trail fit the above description.Signs at both ends of these trails should
prohibit biking.
The Na~ure Preserve was established to protect native plants,grassy habitats,
wildlife.It was not meant to be a location for competitive types of cycling.
jumping,sliding around curves,and taking short cuts cause much environmental
and
Racing,
damage.
If bikers want to ride on multi-use trails,they should be required to ride at slow or
moderate speeds only on wide paths with good lines of sight.If they wish to enjoy the
views from steeper or single track trails,they should be required to park their bikes and
hike like everyone else.
Please protect the tranquility and the beauty of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve for
everyone by wisely limiting physical usage to appropriate areas.
Thank you.
1 Attachments 1-194
Page 1 of 1
Ara Mihranian
From:Carolynn Petru
Sent:Wednesday,May 09,2012 10:44 AM
To:Ara Mihranian
Cc:Joel Rojas
Subject:FW:Support bicycle use of trails
Importance:High
From:Peter Barrett [mailto:pbarrett@ucla.edu]
Sent:Wednesday,May 09,2012 10:43 AM
To:cc@rpv.com
Cc:Barrett,Peter V.
Subject:Support bicycle use of trails
Importance:High
May 09,2012
TO
FROM
RE
RPV City Council
cc@rpv.com
Peter V.Barrett,MD
Biking in the PV Nature Preserve
We moved to the area near Ridgecrest School in 1967 because of the quality of the school system,but
also because it was close to the "Slide Area"which is now known as the PV Nature Preserve.I have
enjoyed biking in that area regularly for 45 years,and continue riding the trails several times each week
with the help of my heart pacemaker.
I have also made a substantial contribution to the Conservancy.
During my years of riding,I have seen many others enjoying the Outdoors on foot,on horse,and on
bicycles.I have not seen conflict or accidents.
The PV Nature Preserve should be available to all of our citizens.Trail restrictions for any group should
only be considered on the basis of solid information.I support CORBA's recommendations to re-open
as many trails as possible for bicycle usage.
Thank you very much.
5/9/2012 Attachments 1-195
Page 10f8
Ara Mihranian
From:Carolynn Petru
Sent:Wednesday,May 09,2012 8:23 AM
To:Ara Mihranian
Cc:Joel Rojas
Subject:FW:Palos Verdes Nature Preserve Trails Plan Recommendations
From:cicoriae@aol.com [mailto:cicoriae@aol.com]
Sent:Tuesday,May 08,2012 4:03 PM
To:cc@rpv.com
Ce:avona@pvplc.org
Subject:Palos Verdes Nature Preserve Trails Plan Recommendations
Mayor Misetich and Members of City Council,
The RPV and PVPLC staffs have done a lot to improve the condition of the Palos
Verdes Nature Preserve and the trail user experience there since adoption of the
Preserve Trails Plan in 2008.I made a comment to that effect before City Council
during a public hearing at which trails were discussed in September,2010.Just three
days later-the Friday afternoon after my statement-I was hit by a mountain biker who
was speeding down Ishibashi Trail as I was hiking there.
This has happened to others and it will continue to happen and one day,like the skate
boarding accident in San Pedro that took the life of a young man not too long ago,it
may take a life.Must we wait for tragedy before taking common sense steps to control
this activity?
I am writing to express my opposition to the recommendations of RPV and PVPLC staff
that appear on the City website in a set of maps labeled "Recommended Changes
PTP".I believe that trails that permit bicycling should be limited in the Preserve-to
protect the Preserve experience for other users,to minimize the scarring of the
landscape,and to protect plants and animals and the habitat we're expending
considerable resources to restore.
General Discussion
If you do much hiking or horseback riding,or even mountain biking,in the Palos Verdes
Nature Preserve,then you already know that bicycles are ridden in the Preserve slowly
and fast,with regard for other trail users and without regard for others,passively
enjoying nature and aggressively attacking the trails.This distinguishes bicycling from
other activities in the Preserve.
The NCCP permits only passive recreation in the Preserve,but lists bicycling as one
such activity.Common sense tells us what activity can be considered passive and what
simply cannot be.To date we have not limited bicycling in the Preserve to only permit it
in its most passive form.There are options that would help,such as setting speed limits
and prohibiting bikes with features,such as high suspension,that facilitate aggressive
riding.
5/9/2012 Attachments 1-196
Page 2 of 8
Speed Limits and Enforcement Efforts
Considering that bicycling at high speed on downhill grades is a primary problem in the
Preserve,setting speed limits seems like a reasonable solution.The Public Use Master Plan
Committee,for example,recommended a speed limit of 5 mph on Fire Station Trail.When the
Preserve Trails Plan was adopted in 2008,City staff determined that establishing speed limits in
the Preserve was unfeasible.Accordingly,City Council instead designated the trail for
pedestrian-equestrian use,only.
City Council also adopted the following ordinance in an effort to curtail the dangerous and
destructive bicycling that was going on in the Preserve:
12.16.130 -Reckless use of trails within the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve prohibited.
It shall constitute a public nuisance for any person,including pedestrians,equestrians
and bicyclists,to use any trail within the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve ("the preserve")
in a reckless manner that demonstrates a wanton disregard for the safety of other human
beings or animals or causes injury or harm to others.
Since then,to my knowledge,based on a review of MRCA ranger reports,not a single citation
has been issued,nor even a warning,for reckless activity in the Preserve.Is that because
reckless activity doesn't occur in the Preserve?If you hike,run,or ride a horse or a bike in the
Preserve,you know that it does occur regularly.If you're unfamiliar with the Preserve,the
internet is a good place to learn more and I'll provide some links and more information about
that later in this correspondence.
Specifics of What I Oppose and What I Support
•Abalone Cove Reserve Map:I oppose the recommendation to close Cave Trail because
I have never experienced a safety hazard on this pedestrian only trail and I hike it many
times each year.I am ambivalent about the recommendation to close Harden trail.I
oppose opening trails in this area to bikes because introducing bikes threatens the fragile
geology as well as other trail users.
•Three Sisters Reserve Map:I support the recommendations reflected on this map.
•Portuguese Bend Reserve Map:I support opening an overlook trail on the knoll off of
Burma Rd.,but I oppose the proposed multi-use designation and believe that this trail
should be pedestrian only.I encourage the City and PVPLC to pursue re-routing Rim
Trail as well as Fire Station Trail to approximate their original locations.I strongly
oppose the recommendations to change Landslide Scarp and Ishibashi Farm Trails to
multi-use from pedestrian-equestrian and,below,I have provided links to multiple video
clips that show that it would put hikers and equestrians at risk to permit mountain bikes
on these narrow trails that wind through dense foliage.
•San Ramon Reserve Map:I support the recommendation to pursue a route to connect
Friendship Park to San Ramon Reserve.
•Ocean Trails Reserve Map:I support,with reservations,the recommendation to change
the trail designation for the indicated segment of Sagebrush Walk Trail from pedestrian
only to pedestrian-bike.If you're going to change it,please change the name as well to
avoid confusion with Sagebrush Walk Trail,which is entirely inappropriate for bikes.
•Filiorum Reserve Map:I support the recommendation to designate Eucalyptus Tree
5/9/2012 Attachments 1-197
Page 3 of 8
Trail and Gary's Gulch Trail pedestrian-equestrian.I support the recommendations for the
other trails in Filiorum Reserve in regards to their location.I also support,with
reservations,the trail designation of multi-use for a route extending from Three Sisters
via Me Bride Trail (which is outside of the Preserve and on this map appears as a yellow
line bordering the housing development north of the Reserve)through Filiorum to
Portuguese Bend Reserve,but I oppose the extensive multi-use designation on all these
trails,which will prevent many people from accessing most of this Reserve out of fear of
bikes.
Support for my positions
The most accessible information to support what I'm saying about mountain biking in the
Preserve is on the Internet.Just search "mountain biking palos verdes"or "mountain biking del
cerro"and you'll find numerous videos that show mountain bikes speeding,jumping,and
crashing.You'll see hikers scurrying to get off the trail as bikes come upon them.You'll see
that there isn't space on many trails for hikers to get out of the way.These videos also show
the trails,revealing which trails have visibility issues,which trails are steep,which trails are
slippery due to loose soils and gravel.Much of what you'll see on these videos is illegal-bikes
on trails that don't permit bikes;bikes on trails that are not approved by the Preserve Trails
Plan;and reckless activity.A couple of the videos precede implementation of the Preserve
Trails Plan,although tracks on illegal trails and on trails that don't permit bikes,as well as a
slew of other videos,tell us (and we see it when out on the trails)that much of the activity is
ongoing today.
Take a look and think about whether you'd like to find yourself on one of these narrow trails,
such as Landslide Scarp or Ishibashi Farm Trail,alone or with a child,riding a horse or walking
a dog on a leash,when a mountain biker comes speeding out from behind a blind curve or
racing down a slippery slope,or lands out of control after catching air.
Sincerely,
Eva Cicoria
Following are links to video clips available on the Internet,that show some of the trails under
discussion.They also provide evidence of what many hikers and equestrians are saying-that many bike
riders ride so fast and out of control that they are crashing-into vegetation and into us.The videos will
give you a feel for why many of us don't want bikes permitted on more trails.
You Tube:"PV Balls Dropped"uploaded by jbowler80 on Feb 5,2011.9:26 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=AyQ70ZPQU6E
Shows:Bike rider on many of the trails we're discussing,including illegal trails.
•Starts in Forrestal Reserve where you see lots of post and rope has been installed along the trail
to protect the habitat.
•At 1:17,he comes to Conqueror Trail,still in Forrestal Reserve.
•At 1:40,the clip picks up on Panorama Trail,in Portuguese Bend Reserve.
•At 2:12,the clip switches to the top of Ishibashi Trail,far from Panorama Trail.
•At 3:18,the rider turns off Ishibashi Trail at a dirt bowl that riders have used as a jump area
despite efforts to close with vegetation and,more recently,post and cable installations.
•At 3:43,the rider is descending out ofthe dirt bowl onto an illegal trail through habitat.
5/9/2012 Attachments 1-198
Page 4 of8
•At 4:15,the rider crashes just before reaching Burma Rd.
•At 4:30,the rider has crossed Burma Rd and is heading down Toyon Trail.
•At 5:46,the rider is approaching the intersection ofToyon Trail,Peppertree Trail and Landslide
Scarp.If you pause the video here,you see Toyon Trail to the left,Peppertree to the right and
Landslide Scarp in the front.(The rider is coming off an illegal spur trail and not on any of the
Preserve Trails Plan trails at this point.)
•At 5:52,before getting to the windy,heavily vegetated part of Landslide Scarp,which other
video clips will show,the rider turns around and heads down Peppertree Trail.
•At 6:18 you may notice that he veers off the main trail onto one of many spur trails that scars up
the landscape in this area.
•At 6:21,he turns down an illegal trail.
•At 7:24,he comes off the illegal trail and onto Peppertree Trail.
•At 7:36,rather than staying on the wide,multi-use Peppertree Trail,he turns onto Ishibashi
Farm Trail (which is pedestrian-equestrian but staff is recommending a change to multi-use).
•At 8:46,he comes back out onto Peppertree Trail,through the "sandbox"or Gateway Park.
Comment:Woud you ride a horse on Ishibashi Farm Trail if you thought a mountain biker might be
coming down it?
You Tube:"Mountain bike PV 1-30-11"uploaded by motoridinfool on Jan 30,2011.5:00 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch ?featu re=player em bedd ed &v=4swKQCskOT8
Shows:
•Guys riding Crenshaw in the middle of the road,then up and over knoll,down Ishibashi Trail,
parts of Toyon Trail,Landslide Scarp Trail,and Sandbox Trail,coming out on Peppertree Trail
•Falling into habitat off Ishibashi Trail after catching air at 1:45
•Falling into habitat off Sandbox Trail at 3:50
You Tube Comments:
•OWow,those croshes looked rough!Glad you guys were ok.Kneepads next time?
•Yeah,I'm gonna look into some.I think my mx pads are a bit too bulky.I could always wear a/l
my mx gear.
Comments:Notice the proposed overlook trail up and down a narrow ridgeline and re-consider
whether bikes should be ridden here.Notice how dense the vegetation is off the sides of narrow,
winding Landslide Scarp Trail,with no place for someone to escape an oncoming cyclist.It's an
inappropriate trail for multi-use.
You Tube:"palos verdes downhill mountain biking"uploaded by graygoosender Nov 8,2010.7:52
video @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player embedded&v=Qy5d1rSkKWU
Shows:guys riding down from knoll were proposed overlook trail would descend,then Burma Rd,
Ishibashi Trail,Toyon Trail,and Landslide Scarp (pedestrian equestrian trail being proposed for multi-
use).
You Tube Comments:
5/9/2012 Attachments 1-199
Page 5 ofS
•right at 0:15 that is where my brother broke his arm ...in those rocks
•damn that sucks.I've busted myself up too on them mountains
•cool place to ride but I wish you could easily park at the bottom and shuttle back up!Pain in the
ass to climb outa there!
Comments:Notice that the riders wear protective armor,which hikers,equestrians and wildlife don't
have.Notice how they use trail features for catching air-other videos show riders falling after catching
air there.Notice them riding through grasses.We often see snakes in the grasses just off the trail.On
segments of some trails there is room off the trail for hikers to move out of the way;on other segments
there is not.Think about what will happen here when bicyclists can park a car at Gateway Park and
repeat the downhill run without riding back up.
You Tube:"Short Del Cerro Downhill Run"uploaded by squr31 on Nov 14,2011.7:20 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pe4FK6HkX7Y
Shows:
•Bike rider starts at the overlook knoll and gets going very fast down Burma Rd,then Ishibahi
Trail.
•At 3:10 he crashes on a switchback,then he crashes again at 3:35.
•At 4:48 he turns down Burma Rd from Ishibashi,passes Toyon and instead takes Sandbox Trail.
•At 6:15 he nearly runs down a hiker on Sandbox Trail.
You Tube:"PV on the Ground"uploaded by lsocal450 on Feb 20,2012.0:25 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=cxlHOnINAQM&feature=bf next&list=UU8ClrlmRVHE2b7U5aeR6Zdg
You Tube:"PV FAIl!!!"uploaded by Isocal450 Feb 20,2012.0:31 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4unhJOY7Us&feature=BFa&1ist=UU8ClrlmRVHE2b7U5aeR6Zdg
Shows:Bicyclists riding and falling on narrow trail characterized by little hills and turns.
Comment:Imagine yourself being on this trail when these guys come down it.
You Tube:"PV"uploaded by Isocal450 Feb 20,2012.3:45 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxf22JZfWfA&feature=BFa&1ist=UU8ClrlmRVHE2b7U5aeR6Zdg
Shows:Bicyclists riding down Ishibashi Trail very fast.
Comment:Is this passive recreation?Notice the traffic on Burma Rd when these bicyclists come riding
down Ishibashi Trail onto Burma Rd.Notice the bicyclists fail to slow at any point when coming upon
other users.
You Tube:"Del Cerro Park 10/16/11"uploaded by outkast 0305 on Oct 16,2011.16:39 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=n KRoXikk4m I&feature=rel mfu
Shows:
•Bike rider starting out at Del Cerro entrance to Burma Rd,taking the trail on the overlook knoll.
5/9/2012 Attachments 1-200
Page6of8
•At 1:55 bicyclist comes up behind an adult and kids who don't hear him coming until he is right
on them.
•Rider continues down Ishibashi at about 3:35 (riding more slowly than some).
•At 7:40 rider comes to Toyon Trail,when you hear screeching brakes.
•At 9:15,the rider is at the intersection of Toy on,Peppertree and Landslide Scarp.
•At 10:21 rider comes upon a snake across the Landslide Scarp Trail.(It's not clear what becomes
ofthe snake.)
•At 11:25 he comes out on Burma Rd,then rides Sandbox and Panorama Trail to Klondike Cyn
Trail and into the "sandbox"or Gateway Park.
You Tube Comment:
•Ran into a Rattle snake @ 10:21
You Tube:"palos verdes mountain biking"uploaded by Skins52 on Sep 29,2007.4:14 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=EBBpSKH n-RM&feature-player em bedded
Shows:
•Cliff riding off overlook knoll while people walk down Burma Rd below at 0:12
•Bikes going onto Burma Rd at 0:19
•Walkers on Burma Rd at 0:22
•Bikes in pillow lava area at1:26
•Crashing in pillow lava area at1:34
•Taking turns cliff jumping off illegal area off Eagles Nest Trail and onto Burma Rd at 1:46
•Jumping at the dirt bowl off of Ishibashi Trail and down illegal trails through habitat at 3:09 and
3:47
Comments:This is an older video,but shows the type of activity that was wide spread in the Preserve
before the Preserve Trails Plan and ,ranger enforcement were put in place.Notice the vulnerability of
hikers and equestrians when these riders come off the cliff sides and down illegal trails onto busy Burma
Rd.
You Tube:"Mountain Biking Del Cerro Los Burros.wmv"uploaded by mayasich on Jan 30,2011.8:18
video @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v-NJ87VFDNwvg&feature-related
Shows:Hikers scurrying out of the way as bikers ride down single track paralleling Burma Rd.after
coming down trail from overlook knoll.
Comment:Does it appear that the bike rider slows to pass others on the trail?
You Tube:"Mountain Biking in Palos Verdes"uploaded by stmrock on Dec 23,2008.5:01 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=ioAqx ek2FI&feature=related
Shows:Views of several trails,including Peppertree Trail and Ishibashi Farm Trail at 3:05 and ending at
Abalone Cove Shoreline Park.
•Mountain biker riding into brush at 2:30
•Mountain biker riding on drain pipe and falling at 2:37
•Mountain biker falling into ruts on Peppertree Trail at 4:12
5/9/2012 Attachments 1-201
Page 7 of 8
Comment:While this is an older video,it's not too dissimilar from the ones posted in the past year or
so.
You Tube:"Mountain Bike Ride,Palos Verdes,CA"uploaded by muscularmtnman on Dec 21,2011.
1:42 video @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzGDJT7bRXs&feature=player embedded#!
Shows:Bicyclist approaching Shoreline Park at Shoreline Park Trail and crashing at cliffside.
You Tube:"Kung Fu mountain bike"uploaded by motoridinfool on Jan 26,2011.7:36 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=q 7tqVZ6KrXQ&feature=player em bedded
Shows:Riders entering Preserve from Crenshaw,then riding down Burma Rd ,Ishibashi Trail,Toyon
Trail,Landslide Scarp Trail,Sandbox Trail and onto Peppertree Trail,ending with a race on Burma Rd.
They take turns jumping at 1:10.
Comments:
•Notice the steep and narrow knoll trail coming down onto Burma Rd.early in the clip.
•Notice how the riders veer off the trail over and over on Ishibashi Trail.
•Notice how one very sharp hairpin turn forces the riders to slow down at 2:28.
You Tube:"Del Cerro Park 10/29/11 Part 1"uploaded by outkast0305 on Oct 29,2011.9:46 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X el9blEyXY
Shows:Bike rider entering Preserve at Del Cerro Park,then riding across knoll overlook,down Burma
Rd and down Ishibashi.
•Rider loses control at 5:45 and again at 7:55.
You Tube Comment:
•They added a few new jumps and ate it when I landed an a saft spat 101.
You Tube:"Del Cerro Park 10/29/11 Part 2"uploaded by outkast0305 on Oct 29,2011.4:30 video@
http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=n pf27xkb iDI &feature=re Imfu
Shows:Rider going down Barn Owl Trail,then Klondike Cyn Trail.
Comment:Although steep,these trails are wide,with good visibility,except for a section of Klondike
Cyn Trail which can be hazardous.
You Tube:"Palos Verdes MTB"uploaded by kungfugreg on Jan 26,2011.3:15 video @
http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=lgSzHyUOlYO
Shows:A mish mash of clips of different trail segments.
5/9/2012 Attachments 1-202
Page S ofS
Comment:This clip highlights the differences among trails that are narrow with dense foliage making it
difficult to escape an oncoming cyclist.The cyclists shouldn't be speeding,but when they do,hikers
want to be able to get out of their way fast.Even on narrow trails with grassy,low growing vegetation,
we have to think about whether there may be snakes lurking there.
5/9/2012 Attachments 1-203
Ara Mihranian
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Carolynn Petru
Wednesday,May 09,2012 8:03 AM
Ara Mihranian
Joel Rojas
FW:Rancho Palos Verdes Trails Plan Review
-----Original Message-----
From:Brian McCarthy [mailto:mccarthb@gmail.coml
Sent,Tuesday,May 08,2012 11,03 PM
To:CC@rpv.com
Subject:Rancho Palos Verdes Trails Plan Review
City council Members,
I am writing in regard to the upcoming Rancho Palos Verdes Trails Plan Review.I fully
support the recommendations COREA Palos Verdes has made to allow bicycle access on more
trails.I contributed to the original fund to purchase the Portuguese Bend Reserve land,I
have volunteered at several trail work days in Portuguese Bend,and I regularly hike and
mountain bike in the area.Whether on my mountain bike or hiking with my 2 yr old son,I
have enjoyed the existing multi-use trails in Rancho Palos Verdes.Making more trails
multi-use will only make the various reserves better places.
Brian McCarthy
2615 W 154th St
Gardena,CA 90249
Attachments 1-204
Page 1 of2
Ara Mihranian
From:SunshineRPV@aol.com
Sent:Tuesday,May 08,20121025 AM
To:cc@rpv.com;Carolyn Lehr;Carolynn Petru;tomo@rpv.com;Dennis Mclean;Joel Rojas;Ara
Mihranian
Subject:May 15,2012 trails hearing
Attachments:TNP Motion.doc
MEMO from Sunshine
TO:RPV City Council
RE:PV Nature Preserve trails plans update hearing,May 15,2012
I urge you to postpone a decision on this Staff Recommendation until the Council has
had the opportunity to review a Staff Analysis and decide on the policies
recommended by the Open Space Subcommittee of the Open Space Planning and
Recreation &Parks Task Force (2002 to 2005).Part of their charge was to figure out
why Staff was having such a hard time implementing the RPV Parks Master Plan and
RPV Trails Network Plan.
Trails are an integral part of what The City of Rancho Palos Verdes has to offer in the
way of public access to emergency services and recreation.What the Open Space
Subcommittee discovered in their research was that these currently adopted plans
(including the RPV General Plan)assumed that Staff would look beyond the little task
assigned and consider the overall benefit to the community at large in their
recommendations.This has not been the case.
For example,one of the 11 suggestions reinforces the difference between naming
trails for planning purposes and for naming trails on user maps.The recommendation
before you proposes to continue to distribute quasi planning documents as public
education brochures.The workshop comments indicate that the public is both
confused and annoyed by this lack of professionalism.
Of more urgent importance is the suggestion that the literal designs in the Trails
Network Plan update be funded for use by the various departments at the beginning
when specific projects come up.The Community Development Department's
recommendation before you postpones the design/implementation of the trail
connections across San Ramon Canyon while the Public Works Department is
spending big bucks on designing major work in the canyon.Lack of funding or lack of
Staff time should never be used as an excuse to not consider the goals in the RPV
General Plan in with the more focused projects.
The same excuses are being used for not negotiating good,big picture,designs for 10
Chaparral and York's latest Point View proposal.It is the community which is being
robbed of the future when off road connections are allowed to be destroyed due to
poor planning.
Grant monies are being spent on a design which does not comply with the CA
Legislature's goals because the local jurisdiction gets to opt for what is "easy in the
short term"as opposed to what is "possible in the long term."
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-205
Page 2 of2
The public has been enjoying the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve and the City's parks as best
they can for a few years now.Except in the cases mentioned above,a few months of
summer without rainfall will do no harm.
Only the City Council could have nipped the problem in the bud.They did not.Public
pressure got the Annenberg Foundation to come to their senses despite Staffs support.
Now it is your turn to step up and disclose what you have in mind for RPV park's,trails and
open spaces.
I truly hope that on May 15,2012 there will be a motion and a unanimous vote to give the
whole Council the opportunity to reconsider the basis from which Staff has been making
narrowly considered recommendations.
The originals of the whole package as submitted were last seen in Matt Waters'hands.
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-206
Page 1 of2
DRAFT RPV Trails Network Plan
Discussion Topics
May 12,2004
The Open Space Subcommittee of the RPV OSP and R&P Task Force
recommends that the Task Force approve or disapprove of each of the following
proposed substantive changes to the City's Trails Network Plan (TNP)prior to
the updating of the specific text:
1.Since the Conceptual Trails Plan (CTP)and the Conceptual Bikeways Plan
(CBP)were generated as Phase 1 of the TNP update,they should not appear to
be "stand alone"documents.The Introductions,Implementation Policies,
Existing Trails/Bikeways Inventories,Conceptual Trails/Bikeways and
Appendices should be inserted into the appropriate sections of the primary
document.
2.Since the policies which determine which type of trail users are precluded
from using portions of specific trails at any given time are more flexible than the
TNP and since enforcement of said policies is not addressed,said use
determinations should be left unrestricted until established by deed restriction,
emergency closure or City Council action.
3.Since the Plan includes directives to the Planning Dept.,the Recreation &
Parks Dept.,the Public Works Dept.,and the Finance Dept.,the "Definitions"
section should be expanded to include the esoteric terms of each of these
professions that are used and called:A GLOSSARY OF TERMS.
4.Since many of the trail and other landmark names used in the document
have been selected arbitrarily for purely communication purposes,a policy for
establishing names of trails should be included for use when a trail is
implemented.
5.Since the California Coastal Trail (CCT),the Palos Verdes Loop Trail (PVLT)
and bikeways in major transportation corridors extend beyond the City's
jurisdiction and plans for their implementation are being addressed by other
bodies,direction should be included to coordinate improvements and signage
with the more global concepts.
6.Since the "safety"of any given trail is determined more by the users'
capabilities than the physical infrastructure improvements,the "TYPE"of
improvements (see proposed Guidelines Matrix)should be established based on
the best user opportunities available and a direction included so that they can be
adjusted according to demand.For instance,narrow prisms should be provided
in native habitats with routine inspections so that they can be widened,rerouted
or more turnouts provided should a particular section start to become crowded ...
without having to modify the TNP.
Attachments 1-207
Page 2 of2
DRAFT RPV Trails Network Plan
Discussion Topics
May 12,2004
7.Since miscommunications have occurred about reference points,GPS points
should be included.
8.Since the recommendations in the "Categories"in the Status:factor of the
specific trail descriptions have not been implemented by Staff,language should
be added to make them more specific directives.(Proposed language has been
submitted to General Plan Update Steering Committee since this portion of the
CTP was added to the General Plan as Amendment 22.)
9.Since Category VI in the Status:factor of the specific trail descriptions does
not provide the same type of information and directives as the other categories,it
should be eliminated.The "special circumstances"presently described here
should be described in the text of the status of the specific trails that have them.
10.Since the development of certain trails have been made conditions of
proposed projects without the destinations that make the trail appropriate,an
Objectives:factor should be added to each trail description.
11.Since the change in the Status:of any given trail is not circulated "in house"
a section should be added where such changes can be posted on an ongoing
basis.(See the proposed TABLE OF CONTENTS.)
Attachments 1-208
Page I of I
Ara Mihranian
From:
Sent:
To:
Carolynn Petru
Tuesday,May 08,2012 9:09 AM
Ara Mihranian
Cc:Joel Rojas
Subject:FW:trails in RPV
From:Steve Bacharach [mailto:sbacharach71@yahoo.com]
Sent:Tuesday,May 08,20128:59 AM
To:CC@rpv.com
Subject:trails in RPV
Hi,
I currently live in Thousand Oaks,but I grew up in RPV (my Mom Jacki was on the city council
for many years),and I lived there from 1971 to 1988.Although there is some open space on the
back side of the hill,it's really very little as compared to places like the Santa Monica,Santa
Ana,or San Gabriel Mountains.When I wanted to go on a good,long mountain bike ride from
my Folks'house,I first had to drive 45 minutes to get to Pacific Palisades.As idyllic as the Hill
is,we all know how long it takes to get to a freeway and then to get through traffic to a truly big
open space.
That is why it is so important to have as many trails in RPV open to bikes as possible.There
should be few wOlTies that more trails will mean a lot more non-residents driving in to use the
area -anyone who wants a long ride will still need to go to the places I listed before.
Good luck with this issue.I've seen (secondhand)how challenging local politics can be.
--Steve Bacharach
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-209
Page I of I
Ara Mihranian
From:
Sent:
To:
Carolynn Petru
Monday,May 07,2012819 AM
Ara Mihranian
Cc:Joel Rojas
Subject:FW MTB trails
From:Deidre Pickens [mailto:deidrepickens@gmail.com]
Sent:Sunday,May 06,2012 9:14 AM
To:CC@rpv.com
SUbject:MTB trails
City Counsel,
I have lived in Palos Verdes for most of my life and enjoyed the beautinll scenery it has to offer.
Recently I have picked up mountain biking and have fallen in love.It's a wonderful sport that
offers a grueling workout yet is still amazingly fun.The most rewarding part of mountain biking
is the amazing scenery and views offered by climbing these hills.Please keep our trails open!
There are so few places near PV we can bike,the nearest being Santa Monica or Orange County.
Thank you,
Deidre Pickens
6976 Verde Ridge Road
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-210
Ara Mihranian
From:
Sent:
To:
SUbject:
Attachments:
Teri Takaoka
Monday,May 07,2012 7:36 AM
Ara Mihranian
FW:Sierra Club Comments on Trail Use
PVNP_Trails_SC_LetterScan.pdf;Appendix A for trails letter finaL pdf
PVNP _Trails_SC_Lel Appendix A For
terScan.pdF ...trails letter F...
-----Original Message-----
From,Al Sattler [mailto,alsattler@igc.org]
Sent,Sunday,May 06,2012 12,48 AM
To:cc@rpv.com
Subject:Sierra Club Comments on Trail Use
Rancho Palos Verdes City council:
Attached are Sierra Club Comments,including a detailed Appendix,pertaining to trail use
within the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve,for the May 15 meeting of the Rancho Palos Verdes
City Council.
Sincerely 1
Alfred Sattler
Chair
Executive Committee
Palos Verdes-South Bay Regional Group
Sierra Club
1 Attachments 1-211
~~SIERRA
t~CLUB
--F"O·U"N-OED 18"2 Palos Verdes -South Bay Group /Angeles Chapter
May 5,2012
Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
Rancho Palos Verdes City Hall
30940 Hawthorne Blvd
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275
City Councilmembers:
We appreciate the time and effort that the Rancho Palos Verdes and Palos Verdes Peninsula
Land Conservancy staffs (collectively,"Staff')put into eliciting,summarizing and responding to
public comments on the state of the trails within the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.Staffs
responses to comments reflect a commendable effort to strike a balance between habitat
protection and public access across the Preserve and non-preserve parkland.We support the
Staff position that "[i]t is important to provide some trail access to all user groups,but not all
trails to all users."
Which trails should be open for bicycle use?
The International Mountain Bicycling Association (lMBA)and the Sierra Club agreed,in 1994,
"that not all non-Wilderness trails [such as those in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve]should be
opened to bicycle use."[emphasis added]The Agreement goes on to indicate that bicycle use is
not appropriate when and where it is not practiced "in an environmentally sound and socially
responsible manner."
In an effort to implement the Agreement with IMBA,the Sierra Club,in collaboration with a
Mountain Bike Task Force,established an Off-Road Bicycle Policy.The Policy provides that
trails should not permit mountain bikes unless
1.Environmental quality can be effectively maintained;
2.The safety and enjoyment of all users can be protected;
3.The trail needs minimal enforcement,for example by relying on natural barriers and
terrain features;and
4.Effective implementing regulations are in place.
Unfortunately,all too often,mountain biking in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve is practiced in
a manner that not only degrades the environment but threatens the safety and enjoyment of other
Preserve users.Moreover,the structure of particular trails contributes to these adverse impacts
to the environment and other users.Regulations,and enforcement thereof,have proven to be
inadequate.Therefore,we disagree with Staff recommendations regarding opening many
additional trails for bicycle use.In Appendix A to this letter,we address Staff
recommendations on a trail by trail basis.
P.O Box 2464 •Palos Verdes Peninsula,California 90274
@ Printed on Recycled Paper
Attachments 1-212
What should be done in problem areas that currently permit mountain bike use?
The Sierra Club Policy provides that where periodic monitoring of mountain bike use reveals
environmental damage or interference with the safety and enjoyment of other users,the
trail or area must be closed to mountain bikes "unless effective corrective regulations are
enforced."
The Staff Recommendations indicate that City Council may consider "a trial period during which
the rangers will monitor use ofthe Preserve trails."Four years have already been spent as a trial
period.No more time should be allowed.
As of March of this year,not a single citation had been issued by the MRCA rangers for
speeding or reckless bicycle use in the Preserve.Until the March 2012 ranger report,there was
not a single citation for mountain biking on trails not designated for bike use.And yet,bicycle
tracks on trails and first-hand accounts from our members provide evidence that such infractions
occur frequently.
Clearly,regulations are not enforced when it comes to bicycle use.Thus,one option for
addressing the problem is to close the problematic trails or areas to bicycle use.Other options
for addressing particular problematic areas,if the City is willing to allocate the funds to do so,
such as in the area of Ishibashi and Toyon Trails are:
•Deconstruct those features of the trails that facilitate aggressive mountain biking and
endanger others,such as inappropriate berms and banks,and restructure the trail in a
maoner that requires mountain bikes to slow down.
•Re-evaluate regulations and enforcement that appear to be inadequate to discourage
reckless bicycle riding and environmental degradation.
In Appendix A to this letter,we offer some specific suggestions to address particular trail issues.
Trail Development and Trail Closure Recommendations
We oppose the Staff recommendation to close Cave Trail and we will address that further in our
discussion of trails in the Abalone Cove Reserve in Appendix A.We support the closure of
Harden Trail.
We support the Staff recommendation to open a trail connection between San Ramon Reserve
and Friendship Park,although we are skeptical about the feasibility of a trail crossing San
Ramon Canyon without using a bridge.
We encourage developing trail connections on Fire Station Trail and Rim Trail.
We address the Staff recommendations regarding trails in Upper Filiorum Reserve in Appendix
A.
P.O Box 2464 •Palos Verdes Peninsula,California 90274
@ Printed on Recycled Paper
Attachments 1-213
Conclusion
The Sierra Club Policy acknowledges that "[s]ingle track trails present difficult management,
safety,and environmental protection issues."It also requires that "bicycle use should not be
allowed where it would cause ...danger to the safety of bicyclists or other users because of
bicycle speed,steep grades,steep terrain,sharp curves,slippery or unstable trail surfaces,or
limited visibility."
We urge City Council to consider our comments carefully and to
•reject the recommendation of Staff to open additional trails to mountain biking as long as
this use continues to degrade the environment and the Preserve experience for others;
•put a priority on restructuring those Preserve trails that currently permit bicycle use and
have repeatedly jeopardized the safety of other users;
•evaluate whether the rules governing the Preserve are adequate for ranger enforcement;
and
•insist on enforcement of rules to discourage thrill seeking by a few that endangers many.
Very truly yours,
.l(t~~dL"~
Alfred Sattler
Chair
Executive Committee
Palos Verdes-South Bay Regional Group
Sierra Club
P.O Box 2464 •Palos Verdes Peninsula,California 90274
@ Printed on Recycled Paper
Attachments 1-214
Appendix A
to the
Sierra Club Palos Verdes-South Bay Regional Group Letter to Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
State of the Trails in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve
The discussion,below,of trails in the Reserves is presented in the sequence of the maps posted on the RPV
website as Recommended Changes PTP.
ABALONE COVE RESERVE
The Palos Verdes-South Bay Group of the Sierra Club has concerns regarding the Staff recommendations to
open trails in the Abalone Cove Reserve to biking.Within Abalone Cove Reserve is the State's Abalone Cove
Ecological Reserve,which requires special protection.We distinguish between trails in Abalone Cove
Shoreline Park and those in the Abalone Cove Reserve in our comments,below.
Via de Campo:We agree that this bluff-top trail across the parkland has the potential to be wide enough for
multi-use (although we do not believe that the trail should be so wide as to detract from the natural setting)and
of course bicyclists coming off Palos Verdes Drive South should have access to this view (and bicyclists do
have access by dismounting and walking this trail).Our understanding is that this trail is planned to be ADA
accessible and,therefore,we encourage City Council to consider the ramifications of re-c1assifying this trail as
multi-use and,if inclined toward this re-c1assification,impose a 5 mph speed limit.
Chapel View,Beach School and Portuguese Point Loop Trails:We don't deny that these trails are wide and
have good line of sight.Those characteristics lend themselves to multi-use in many cases.Our greatest concern
regarding opening these trails to biking is that the experience of the past four years shows that Preserve
managers and the rangers do not have in place procedures proven to effectively curtail the mountain bikers'
damage to the environment and risk to other users.Accordingly,additional trails and additional areas of the
Preserve,especially in an area as geologically and ecologically sensitive as Abalone Cove Reserve,should
not be open to mountain biking.
The question we would raise regarding the recommendation to change the use designation of these three trails is
what population of bike riders does Staff foresee using these trails if they are opened up to bicycle use?
•Cyclists on road bikes coming off of Palos Verdes Drive South are unlikely to ride very far on dirt
trails.Road cyclists have bike access to Abalone Cove Beach from Palos Verdes Drive South via
the road,also known as Ohlmstead Trail.
•Small children have been mentioned as a possible group of riders in this area,but they are not likely
to ride bikes on these trails because access to these trails,or the trails themselves,is too steep to
retain control going down to the beach and too steep for most children to ride back up,not to
mention that we think it is unlikely that parents would bring their kids to this beach park to ride
bikes down to the beach and back.
•The remaining category is mountain bikers and we think that the area should be closed to mountain
biking in order to minimize the likelihood of destructive riding in very fragile areas.(Bike racks can
be installed to facilitate access to the beach and the views for those who arrive at this area on bikes.)
Cave Trail:We strongly oppose closing Cave Trail to hikers.We have hiked this trail for many years and,
although rugged,to our knowledge it has not proven unsafe to hikers.
Attachments 1-215
IfCity Council were to accept the recommendation to allow bicycle use on Portuguese Point Loop Trail,that
would substantially increase the likelihood that mountain bikers will ride off Portuguese Point onto the adjacent
steep.narrow trails,creating a hazardous situation.Moreover,introducing mountain bikes to this area is likely
to lead to the creation of new trails in this ecologically and geologically fragile environment.We wonder
whether Staff shares this concern and whether this concern is beh ind the Staff recommendation to close the
Cave Trail to all users.
A better result is to maintain the status quo in this area.
PORTUGUESE BEND RESERVE
Portuguese Bend Reserve is the most heavily used Reserve in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.As such,trail
use designations should be considered very carefully with regard to many variables,including bicycle speed,
steep grades,steep terrain,sharp curves,slippery or unstable trail surfaces,and/or limited visibility.
In problem areas such as Portuguese Bend Reserve,at least until Preserve managers and the Ranger have in
place procedures proven to effectively curtail the mountain bikers'damage to the environment and risk to other
users,additional trails and additional areas should not be open to mountain biking.
Create Multi-use Trail to Overlook:While we support the formalization of the trail from Burma Rd to the el-
Hefni Overlook,we oppose designating the trail for bicycle use unless and until Preserve managers and the
Ranger have in place procedures proven to effectively curtail the mountain bikers'damage to the environment
and risk to other users.
Reroute Rim Trail:We are unsure what is being considered for Rim Trail.The trail has been rerouted via
Paintbrush Trail,apparently because the previous route crossed private property.The trail had been used for
decades which arguably established a prescriptive easement.
Fire Station Trail:Although not addressed on the Map,the closure of Fire Station Trail deserves attention.
Fire Station Trail has existed for decades.An easement from the fire station in Rolling Hills down to what was
to be an extension of Crenshaw Blvd.(now known as Burma Rd.),served the fire station as well as equestrians
and hikers.The trail was rerouted in the past because it crossed private property and then was reopened.
Recently,it was closed again at the request of the property owner.Effort should be made to re-open Fire
Station Trail for the connection to Rim Trail.
Landslide Scarp Trail:Much of Landslide Scarp Trail is narrow,single track with poor line-of-sight in
several places making multi-use inadvisable.Bicyclists frequently use this trail in violation of the no-bikes trail
designation and,typically coming off of Toyon Trail (or the illegal spurs off of Toyon Trail),they ride down
Landslide Scarp very fast.Thick lemonade berry along the sides of sections of this trail means there is no place
to go even if other users (hikers,equestrians,dogs on leash,etc.)were to attempt to escape the path of
oncoming cyclists.
The State of the Trails comments indicate that the argument for allowing bikes on this trail is that it provides a
connection to Burma Rd from PY Drive South because Toyon Trai I is too steep for most riders.In the past,
when the argument has been made that a trail is too steep for most bike riders and therefore should be selected
as a pedestrian only or pedestrian/equestrian trail,the response from the mountain biking community has been
that,if the hill is too steep,they can walk their bikes.
2
Attachments 1-216
If it were not for the narrow segments and poor line-of-sight on Landslide Scarp Trail,we would be inclined to
support opening Landslide Scarp Trail to mountain bike use while closing troublesome Toyon Trail to mountain
bikes.This solution has some merit in that it might make the Preserve more inviting to those bike riders who
are more likely to ride in an environmentally sound and socially responsible manner,while discouraging
Preserve use by those who abuse its privileges.However,because there are line-of sight issues on Landslide
Scarp Trail and because we are reluctant to support bicycle entry into this area of dense coastal sage scrub
habitat,we think a better solution would be to retain the existing trail use designation,pedestrian-equestrian,for
Landslide Scarp and address the trail issues presented by Toyon Trail directly.
Toyon Trail:The upper portion of Toy on Trail,
with its steep,sharp turns is a favorite with
mountain bikers seeking to attack the trail's
challenges.When it was rerouted not too long
ago,it was not graded in a manner that would have
discouraged reckless bicycling.We believe that
this attractant is in part responsible for the trail
proliferation and environmental degradation below
Toyon and Garden Trails..
Toyon Trail would be a good candidate for
installing pinch points (such as pictured here)at
strategic locations in an effort to slow down
bicycle riders.
Ishibashi Farm Trail:We oppose changing the
designation of Ishibashi Farm Trail to multi-use.The argument for the change appears in the comments to be
that it would provide bicycle access to the Preserve from PV Drive South.The Preserve map is somewhat
misleading in this area as it does not show any trail accessing the Preserve from PV Drive South.Gateway Park
is not within the Preserve,so trails that pass through Gateway Park don't appear on the Preserve map.Pepper
Tree Trail already provides multi-use access to the Preserve from Palos Verdes Drive South though Gateway
Park.Moreover,although Ishibashi Farm Trail appears in the map to be wider than Peppertree Trail,that is not
the case.Pepper Tree Trail is a wide fire road with good line of sight from one end to the other.Ishibashi Farm
Trail,on the other hand,has a single-track arm that is narrow,with a very steep section that,if re-designated to
allow bicycle use,will attract bicyclists who seek out those features for jumps and trick riding.
While it is true that Ishibashi Farm Trail is lightly used at this time,it is reasonable to expect a significant
increase in use by pedestrians and equestrians when parking is made available at or near Gateway Park and we
believe there should be a separation in uses at this entry point for the safety of all.
Paintbrush,Rim,and Peacock Flats Trails:We agree with the Staff recommendations that the trail use
designations for these trails should not be changed.
Ishibashi Trail:This trail,currently designated multi-use,is perhaps the most dangerous trail in the Preserve
due to its configuration paired with its heavy use by all user groups.It will become even more dangerous when
the dense stands of lemonade berry that were burned down in the fire of August 2009 grow back and amplify
visibility issues.Characterized by many steep grades,curves,and slippery and/or unstable surfaces this trail
otfers challenges to mountain bikers who attack the straight-aways as well as the turns at high speed.Several of
our members have been hit by mountain bikers on this trail,many others have had to leap into adjacent scrub to
3
Attachments 1-217
avoid being hit by a mountain biker.Mountain bikers regularly lose control oftheir bikes and careen off trail
and into the habitat here.
Recently,Ishibashi Trail was rerouted and efforts were made to close off multiple spur trails in the area.
Unfortunately,within months of the re-routing,the trail bed took on characteristics that enhance aggressive
mountain biking at the expense of endangering other users and increasing the potential for erosion.For
example,berms have been engineered to allow bicycles to round corners at high speed.These features must be
deconstructed for safety as well as to minimize erosion.
The diagram at right demonstrates the issue.Steep berms
encourage erosion.A well designed trail would slope
slightly toward the canyon thereby dispersing run-off over
the side of the canyon rather than down the trail.Instead,
the installed berm channels water down the trail so that its
speed will increase and accelerate erosion.A natural bank
sloped down the canyon would also prevent bicycles from
executing high speed turns.
While we doubt that pinch points will be effective at this
time on this trail because the currently low vegetation will
enable bicyclists to skirt the pinch points,thereby creating
additional damage to habitat,we believe that other
modifications can and must be made to the trail to slow
down cyclists.
SAN RAMON RESERVE
We support the recommendation to install a trail
connection between San Ramon and Friendship Park,
although we are skeptical about the feasibility of a trail
crossing San Ramon Canyon without using a bridge.
OCEAN TRAILS RESERVE
Rider
\
Berm for outside turn
Surface
slope
Sagebrush Walk (up to the picuic bench from Shoreline Trail):We concur with Staff that the portion of the
Sagebrush Walk Trail between the picnic bench and the East Boundary Trail is suitable for bicyclists because
that portion is wide,has good line-of-sight,and does not share other characteristics of the segment that connects
with Gnatcatcher Trail.We have concerns that mountain bicyclists will interpret this change in use designation
as an invitation to ride down the steep,erosion-prone segment of Sagebrush Walk Trail,however,in order to
complete a loop from Catalina and Gnatcatcher Trail down Sagebrush Walk Trail to Shoreline Park Trail.If
City Council is inclined to allow bicycling on the portion of Sagebrush Walk Trail recommended by Staff,
consider re-naming that portion to be an extension of Shoreline Park Trail.
UPPER FILIORUM RESERVE
The newly acquired Filiorum Reserve hosts several historical trails that are relatively level,have good visibility
and,at present,receive moderate usage.Several areas within the Reserve host excellent native plant
4
Attachments 1-218
commUnIties.It is important to minimize the potential for offtrail activities in these areas.Usage by all user
groups will undoubtedly increase with public awareness of the Reserve and the installation of trail markers.
Until effective controls have been demonstrated in the Portuguese Bend Reserve,the best policy is to designate
trails in Filiorum as suitable for pedestrian-equestrian use only.
The following comments reflect our recommendations for trail use designations after effective controls are in
place.
Zote's Cutacross Trail:This is the longest trail in the area and it largely traverses slopes and plains between
McBride Trail on the west and Kelvin Canyon Trail on the east.Direct proximity to native plants is minimal
from the flatlands on the west to Vanderlip Canyon.The eastward slope down into Altamira Canyon is densely
covered with seasonal natives.Downhill bicycle traffic,if allowed,must be controlled to prevent off trail
damage and for the safety of other users.The Canyon below is host to a diverse community of native plants and
deserves strong protection.If bicycles are permitted,they must be walked down the Canyon segment of the
trail.
Kelvin Canyon Trail:This trail is mostly level to the west.It becomes a steep downhill channel as it
approaches Kelvin Canyon from the west.It is extremely dangerous with respect to collisions between
pedestrians and mountain bikes.Sierra Club members have been repeatedly threatened by high speed downhill
riders in this section.Collisions are avoided by the bicyclists crashing into the vegetation to avoid pedestrians.
Cyclists should be required to walk their bikes down the steep channel going into Kelvin Canyon from the west.
Rattlesnake Trail:This moderately steep trail goes up the west side ofthe Del Cerro promontory along the
east side of Altamira Canyon,staIting from the eastern end of Zote's Cutacross.Although visibility is good on
this trail,downhill bicycle speeds are often high,representing potential danger to riders and pedestrians.
Therefore,unless and until effective physical speed barriers are in place,this trail should be designated
pedestrian only.
Ford Trail:This trail goes south from the middle of Zote's Cutacross and crosses Barkentine Canyon.Passing
through native plants in one steep section,it then goes down a very steep slope into the Canyon.The trail
challenges here will attract extreme bikers who would damage the terrain.Therefore,mountain bikes should
not be permitted on this trail,until effective downhill speed controls can be implemented.
Jack's Hat Trail:It's not clear to us which of the trail segments in this area make up part of Jack's Hat Trail
on the proposed trail map for Filiorum.Many of the segments in this area are wide with good line-of-sight.
The trail going south from the top of Jack's Hat is steep and characterized by loose soils,however,and should
not be open to bike use.
Pony Loop Trail:This trail traverses relatively open land with good visibility.Terrain ranges from level to
moderate slope.In general the trail does not pass through or near well established native plant communities,so
this would be an appropriate trail for a multi-use designation.
Eucalyptus Trail:A short stretch through a eucalyptus grove,the tranquil setting of this trail should not be
disturbed.Therefore it should be designated for pedestrian-equestrian use only,so we support the Staff
recommendation here.
5
Attachments 1-219
Page I of I
Ara Mihranian
From:Carolynn Petru
Sent:Thursday,May 03,2012 3:09 PM
To:Ara Mihranian
Cc:Joel Rojas
Subject:FW:Writing in support of mountain bike access to all trails in PV
From:Chad Flynn [mailto:chadflynn@gmail.com]
Sent:Thursday,May 03,2012 3:02 PM
To:CC@rpv.com
Subject:Writing in support of mountain bike access to all trails in PV
Hello,
As an avid hiker,mtn biker and resident of Coastal San Pedro,I would like to offer my support
for open access for all trail users in PV.I see harmony between the various users.I support
shared use trails.We,as a diverse community,will benefit from this open access.
Thanks for listening,
Chad Flynn
3423 S Denison Ave
San Pedro,CA 90731
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-220
Page 1 of 4
Ara Mihranian
From:Carla Morreale [CarlaM@rpv.com]
Sent:Monday,April 23,2012 8:01 AM
To:Ara M;Joel Rojas
Subject:FW:Old questions not yet answered.Transparency before decisions.
From:SunshineRPV@aol.com [mailto:SunshineRPV@aol.comj
Sent:Sunday,April 22,2012 7:04 PM
To:cc@rpv,com
Subject:Old questions not yet answered.Transparency before decisions.
Lady and Gentlemen:
Notice the date on the following email to the RPV City Manager.How many of the
blanks can you fill in with a current Staff Member's name?If you were given a similar
list about other citywide issues,do you know who is responsible?May 15,2012 is
coming up really soon....S
Subj:Priorities I Responsibilities
Date:6/11/2004 11 :51:21 AM Pacific Standard Time
From:
SunshineRPV
To:lese@rpv.com
CC:cc@rpv.com
File:Responsibility questions.doc (33280 bytes)DL Time (50666 bps):<1 minute
Les:
You asked another question instead of answering my question.Now,my answer has
generated more questions.They are attached so that the format transmits
correctly ....S
June 11,2004
Hi Les,
Sorry it has taken so long to get back to you about why the Task Force didn't submit
the trail priority list.Two reasons,1.Our task is updating the Parks Master Plan
(PMP)and the Trails Network Plan (TNP)which we are still working on.And,2.Trail
improvement opportunities do not happen according to a priority list.Actually,it got
lost in the shuffle of figuring out how our "work product"was supposed to be
handled.
It is my observation that a priority list is useful only when the City finds itself with
monies that it doesn't know what to do with.I haven't noticed that happening very
often.Most of the items in the PRIORITY Sections of the TNP are "pending
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-221
Page 2 of4
development",anyway.
The list I copied you on was generated to help the Open Space Subcommittee decide which
Section of the City to start with for the Trails Network Plan update.I sent it to you as an
example to find out if such a list had been submitted,Who would do anything with it?Like
you said,the responsibilities need to be more specific.What format should it be in so that
"new hires"are informed?What is the "or else"if the "responsible party"does not perform
the duty?
See pages 49 and 50 in the Trails Network Plan.Since that format didn't work,how
should the following assignments of responsibility be documented so that each party actually
does it in a timely fashion?
1.All Planners are responsible for reviewing every permit application inquiry in search of
trail improvement opportunities (i.e.look up the site in the Conceptual Networks section of
the Trails Network Plan)and for informing the Applicant and the Director of Planning ...or
_______?????when a potential trail issue is discovered.
2.All Code Enforcement Officers are responsible for reviewing every mitigation proposal in
search of trail improvement opportunities (i.e.look up the site in the Conceptual Networks
section of the Trails Network Plan)and for informing the ???and the Director of Planning ...
or ?????when a potential trail issue is discovered.
4.All Public Works Engineers are responsible for reviewing every proposed work in search
of trail improvement opportunities (i.e.look up the site in the Conceptual Networks section of
the Trails Network Plan)and for informing the Director of Public Works or
_______????when a potential trail issue is discovered.
June 11,2004,Sunshine to Les,page 2.
5.All Recreation &Parks Staff Members are responsible for reviewing every proposed work
in search of trail improvement opportunities (i.e.look up the site in the Conceptual Networks
section of the Trails Network Plan)and for informing the Director of Recreation &Parks or
_______?????when a potential trail issue is discovered.
6.All Department Directors are responsible for brainstorming with other professionals and
community resources in an effort to make the most out of every trail opportunity that is
brought to their attention.
7.The City Clerk or ???is responsible for informing the appropriate
Department Directors whenever the City records the acquisition of land,the acquisition of an
easement or a deed restriction which requires a third party to maintain facilities for public
use.
8._______???is responsible for updating the Trail Maintenance map.
9.???is responsible for requesting an adequate amount of funding in
the budget to routinely maintain all of the Category I trails (either with subcontracted labor,
volunteers or by code enforcement if a third party is responsible for doing it.)
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-222
Page 3 of 4
10.???is responsible for coordinating volunteer labor such as Boy
Scouts when they offer to improve a Category I trail.
11.__.,..-;-,,.-;.,---__???is responsible for assisting citizens who want to implement a
Category V trail.
12.???is responsible for causing obstructions to be removed when they
encroach upon trail or roadway easements or rights of way.
13.???is responsible for watching for grant opportunities.
14.???is responsible for applying for grants.
15.???is responsible for expediting offers to make an Irrevocable Offer
To Dedicate an easement to the City.
16.???is responsible for noticing that it is appropriate and causing "Trail
Closed until ??/??I??"or "Caution,Trail Unsafe"signage to be posted.
June 11,2004,Sunshine to Les,page 3.
17.???is responsible for engineering and getting cost estimates of
options when physical work can restore public access that has been lost due to Staff error.
18.???is responsible for negotiating with property owner(s)when some
agreement can restore public access that has been lost due to Staff error.
19.???is responsible for requesting an adjustment in the Budget when
some funding can restore public access that has been lost due to Staff error.
20.???is responsible for reviewing all proposed changes to drainage
courses to be sure that appropriate erosion control is provided on existing trails.
21.???is responsible for proposing to Council that the use designation
of a particular trail should be changed.
22.???is responsible for producing and promulgating trail use safety,
etiquette and code enforcement literature.
22.???is responsible for updating the map(s)of existing trail easements.
These are the "chores"that the Open Space Subcommittee's research turned up as "not
being done".The ones that are being done should also be documented.PROGRAM 1.on
page -49-is listed as "existing policy".Would you please e-mail me the actual text of that
policy.
Just to be sure we all understand,The Conceptual Trails Plan (CTP)and the Conceptual
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-223
Page 4 of 4
Bikeways Plan (CBP)were generated in Phase 1 of the TNP update.They only covered the
CONCEPTUAL TRAILS NETWORK Sections ofTNP.Their adoption did not invalidate the
rest of the TNP.I have suggested that Council be provided with copies of the TNP with their
packets for the June 29,joint meeting.Samples of our recommended format for updating
the CTP/CBT have already been provided so they don't necessarily need those whole plans.
Sunshine
PS:What have you done with the list???
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-224
Page 1 of 1
Ara Mihranian
From:Barry Bonnickson [bonnicks@pacbell.net]
Sent:Friday,April 20,2012 5:01 PM
To:Ara Mihranian;Danielle LeFer
Cc:Kurt Loheit
Subject:Cave Trail Should Not be Closed
Ara Mihranian and Danielle LeFer,
This letter is for consideration at the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday
May 15,2012,and expresses my personal opinions.It does not represent the opinions of the Sierra Club.
As a hike leader with the Palos Verdes-South Bay Group ofthe Sierra Club,I lead numerous day hikes in
the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.One of these hikes,which reoccurs every couple of months,traverses
the Cave Trail.There are routinely between ten and twenty-five participants in this popular hike,many
of them seniors like me.
When the PUMP Committee originally adopted the Cave Trail,there had been discussion ofthe
condition and suitability of this trail.At that time,Kurt Loheit,Ex Officio Advisory Trails Expert on the
PUMP Committee and subsequently,Instructor for the PVPLC Trail Crew,believed (and still believes)
that maintenance of the Cave Trail is feasible.Even with no improvements,Kurt and I,and many others,
continue to use this trail.
I urge the City to leave the Cave Trail in the Trail Plan so that we may continue to enjoy it and share it
with others.
Barry Bonnickson
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-225
Page I of I
Ara Mihranian
From:Rick Viersen [raviersen@verizon.net]
Sent:Sunday,March 25,2012 10:17 PM
To:aram@rpv.com
Cc:anthony.misetich@rpv.com;Brian.Campbell@rpv.com;susan.brooks@rpv.com;
jerry.duhovic@rpv.com;jim.knight@rpv.com
Subject:Bikers and hikers sharing trails
Ara,
I am very concerned about the bikers on the trails in the PV Land Conservacy.After
many years of enjoying hiking in this beautiful area,I feel the bikers have made it
much more difficult to enjoy.It is very scary to be hiking on a designated trail and be
almost hit by bikers.I know there are many polite bikers who follow the rules but
we have seen many off the designated trails.I am a Keeper for the Land Conservacy
and am appalled by so many of our trail signs where the "no bike"decals have been
removed or ruined.Where ropes have been used to keep bikers on the trail,they
have been removed or cut.There are trails that are closed to biking but have bike
tracks!The excessive speed ofthe bikers is the real safety problem.Hopefully,this
problem will be addressed before there is a serious injury.
Thank you for listening to my concerns.
Anne Viersen
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-226
Ara Mihranian
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Donna McLaughlin [ddmclaughlin@cox.net]
Saturday,March 24,2012 2:46 PM
Ara
anthony.misetich@rpv.com;Brian.Campbell@rpv.com;susan.brooks@rpv.com;
jerry.duhovic@rpv.com;jim.knight@rpv.com;Adrienne Bosler
PV hiking Trails
Hi Ara
I am a Keeper for the PVP Land Conservancy and wanted to express my feelings regarding the
bikers on the trails recently.Today as we were doing our Keepers report (hiking from Del
Cerro down to Abalone Cove)we were almost hit on the TOyOD trail by a biker that was
going so fast we did not hear him till he was on top of us and he could barely stop to
avoid hitting us.This is about the 5th incident I have personally experienced over the
past few months.Four incidents occurred on the Isibashi Trail with bikers coming down
that trail so fast that they are a danger to anyone hiking on them.Friday an older lady
came off the trails as were beginning our hike and said to "beware of the bikers!!
as they had almost hit her.
There are way too many blind curves on these two trails to allow bikers on them at such
speeds.Someone is going to get seriously hurt by these bikers.They speed and their
bikes are very heavy,and if a hiker got hit by them they would have serious injury.They
have shouted profanities at us when we have asked then to please slow down.
The Landslide Scarp trail also has many blind curves and should not be open to bikers.
Many go on it already and have no respect for the signage.Why should they be rewarded by
opening more trails to them when they have no respect for the trails they already have?
There needs to be separate trails on the Ishibashi Trail for hikers and bikers.
since the conservancy has closed the llillegal rr trail they were using (although some still
do go around the posts)they have been speeding down the Ishibashi Trail onto the Burma
Trail.It is very dangerous.The city needs to do some monitoring on this particular
trail as it is only a matter of time till someone is injured on this trail.
City Council should personally hike this trail on week-ends and see how they feel with a
biker speeding down behind them around a blind curve.
The bikers have a strong organization.Unfortunately,the hikers do not.We are out there
to enjoy the beauty of nature and get exercise and bring our family and friends to enjoy
the area ..Many hikers have commented that they will not even go on the trails on the
week-ends because the bikers are rude and the hikers are afraid of being run into.This
is taking away the opportunity of a person to hike the trails due to bikers that have no
consideration for others.The rights of hikers have been taken away.
I hope you,as a group,will address this problem.
Thank you.
Donna McLaughlin
1 Attachments 1-227
Page 1 of 1
Ara Mihranian
From:Judy Herman Uudyherman@cox.net]
Sent:Tuesday,March 06,2012 12:00 PM
To:CC@rpv.com;aram@rpv.com;carolynn@rpv.com;c1ehr@rpv.com
Subject:Trails
Honorable Members of the City Council and Staff:
A cover story in the Easy Reader talks about the campaign of mountain bikers to open
more trails to bikes in the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve.Here's the link.
http://www.easyreadernews.com/46928/the-price-of-preservationl
The author admits,"Mountain biking ...offers a chance for heart pounding exercise,high
rates of speed with looming dangers around every corner..."He continues,"Bikers may
have altered the landscape at Portuguese Bend but they also provided hikers with new
routes."New routes are not what we need in a nature preserve.
The article makes a glancing mention of the Public Use Master Plan (PUMP)
Committee.It fails to explain that this group of citizens (including the primary source for
the article,biking advocate Troy Braswell)met intensively over the years 2006 through
2008 to hammer out a compromise among the competing interests involved with the
Nature Preserve.
Now some bikers want to sabotage the PUMP Committee's long years of effort.Bikers
would like to have the Preserve as their playground,but the decisions of the PUMP
committee have already balanced bikers'interests against those of hikers and
equestrians who want to enjoy the Preserve peacefully and safely.
As the PUMP Committee learned,more trails are not the answer.It's true that some
trails that bikers established were eliminated,but that was essential to preserve habitat.
The more trails slicing through the rare coastal sage scrub and other vegetation the
less habitat for endangered and other animals to hide from predators.
My husband and I have barely escaped serious injury from speeding bikes numerous
times on the trails.I am disturbed that the City is considering opening more trails to
bicycle use and discarding the careful planning of the PUMP Committee to
avoid "danger around every corner."
Sincerely,
Judith B.Herman
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-228
Page 1 of3
Ara Mihranian
From:cicoriae@aol.com
Sent:Monday,March 19,201211 :31 AM
To:aram@rpv.com
Subject:Re:Trails
Ara,I was aware of this and,in fact,submitted comments on it.I didn't recall any mention of closure of
the Cave Trail in this document,but I took another look.I still haven't been able to find that.Can you?
Eva
-----Original Message-----
From:Ara M <aram@rpv.com>
To:cicoriae <cicoriae@aol.com>
Sent:Wed,Mar 7,20124:59 pm
Subject:FW:Trails
Hi Eva,
One thing I forgot to mention to you was that the City and the PVPLC prepared responses to the
comments received at the April 30 th workshop that explains the recommendations.The following is the
link to the responses to comments posted on the City's website:
http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/planning/Palos-Verdes-Nature-Preserve/SOT-Response-to-comments-
2.pdf
Let me know if you have any further questions.
Take care,
Ara
Ara Michael Mihranian
Deputy Director of Community Development
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275
310-544-5228 (telephone)
310-544-5293 (fax)
aram@rpv.com
www.palosverdes.com/rpv
~Do you really need to pnnt this e-mail?
I his t"-mall message (Dnt-ali,s I'lf()'rncl';~)fl !"~:0PGlng to the City of RanchG F'alrv,V':fd-:os.\"ihldl may be Pi l'vilegpd:COnTldf'''ltlill and!or
pIM0ct~"d fr(Jlll cJISCIOSUIE.lh"In'(W'l<1'i"r 'S Intended (;111y fOI use of til",'1'0l'.."dI12!lY entlt):named.llnauthon2£'d dISSf"n,n"trJil,
dl;,tnhllLorl,or copymg IS <,tn<:tlv \)(',1+"\,,,],If you (Pceived thiS ernoli In '.~!ror,or at,.:;not an in('::fldr(j reCIpient,pip;:se nO:lfy th,>'i'.:ndf'f
IInr;1(~(jlately,Thank jDU f0l ~ncJr ''''',!',:';'){C ,wc 1 (o()p(~ration.
From:Ara M [mailto:aram@rpv,com]
Sent:Tuesday,March 06,2012 1:02 PM
To:'cicoriae@aol.com'
Cc:'cc@rpv.com';'avona@pvplc.org'
SUbject:RE:Trails
Hi Eva,
Thanks for providing me the link to the Easy Reader article.
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-229
Page 2 of3
I understand the concerns you are expressing.
But as you may recall,at the time the Preserve Trails Plan (PTP)was adopted (April 2008)and the temporary
moratorium was lifted,the City Council directed Staff and the PVPLC to report back on the progress of the
implementation of the PTP Pursuant to the Council directive,on April 30,2011,the City and the PVPLC,with the
assistance of the National Park Service,conducted a public workshop on the State of the Trails for the Preserve.
The purpose of the State of Trails Workshop was to provide the community with an update on the condition of the
trails and the plans of the City and the PVPLC for the Preserve in the coming year Additionally,this workshop
was important for the City and the PVPLC to understand the community's concerns,needs,and desires for the
Preserve especially in regards to the existing PTP as it relates to trail conditions,trail signs,and trail connections.
In order to ensure the public had an opportunity to express its concerns,a public comment period occurred
between the April 30th workshop and May 13 th The City and the PVPLC collectively prepared responses and
recommended amendments to the PTP.The public was informed that this item will be presented to the City
Council for its consideration at a future meeting (a list-serve message will announce the Council meeting date).
This information is posted on the City's website and a list-serve message was sent to subscribers:
http:J/www.palosverdes.com/rpv/pla nning/Pa los-Verdes-Na tu re-Preserve/
The City and the PVPLC are planning on taking this item to the City Council in late April or early May.
Background information will be provided in the Council report,including a general description of the
representation at the April 30 th workshop.
I am sure this response is not exactly what you wanted to hear,but I hope you understand that it is based on the
pUblic's understanding of the process previously conveyed to the public.Any information you would like to
provide regarding this item and your concerns will be transmitted to the City Council as part of the Staff Report.
Ara
Ara Michael Mihranian
Deputy Director of Community Deveiopment
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Blvd,
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275
310-544-5228 (telephone)
310-544-5293 (fax)
aram@rpv.com
www.palosverdes.com/rpy
~Do you really need to print this e-mail?
T[1I:"e-rllail fT1CS~"lg",contains Information [)(;i(mging tf)trlE:City of Rand10 Palos Vcrd('~;,whlcll may be priVileged,confirj(;nt:?1 dnj/(JI Dtotpcted flOrn
dl!)ci(lsurv,Tlle rI1f0n11at'ofl is intcn(1,xj onlY r,jf lISC fA the mdiviclual or i:'nUly nJrrH::?(j UPiluthor:zcd dissemination,dtstnbutnn,01'lCf)yiilg is stdctly
f.;rrJtllblte-d.If you re((~IVl,d this b1klli In ("rff;r,(ij"ar('noL an IIlLclldloO reCipient,p!i;'dse "dify the sender Hnrnediatcly,Thank Y011 ;01 Y0Ul i'!ssisti:!ncl'and
((JOpc;a!loD.
From:cicoriae@aol.com [mailto:cicoriae@aol.com]
Sent:Friday,March 02,2012 12:52 PM
To:aram@rpv.com
Cc:cc@rpv.com;avona@pvplc,orq
Subject:Trails
Hi Ara,
I wonder whether you have seen the Easy Reader article on mountain biking.Here's the link.
http://www.easyreadernews.com/46928/the-price-of-preservation/
I wonder whether that gives you pause to reconsider your recommendations regarding opening up so many trails
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-230
Page 3 of3
to mountain bikers in the Preserve Trails Plan.Many of the people now in positions to make decisions regarding
trail use are,or will be,doing so without the benefit of the extensive public hearings held during the PUMP
proceedings and subsequent city council meetings.They didn't hear the dozens of hikers and horseback riders
tell of collisions and other terrifying experiences (including my own)as a result of mountain bikers speeding down
trails.They didn't see and hear the photos of mountain biking activity and it's consequences.
Is it not your responsibility to include in staff reports and discussions on these matters this history?Must the
public endure these proceedings all over again now?What a waste of our community's time,energy and money if
all the information we collected between 2006 and 2008 is now going to be ignored.
You (or your superiors)seem to want to disregard the facts when they are relayed to you by non-mountain bikers.
Now you have indisputable evidence--an admission against interest--in this Easy Reader article that the same
things that were being done 4 years ago in the Preserve are still going on now and are the objective of the
ungrateful and never-satisfied Troy Braswell and ilk.By kow-towing to mountain bikers,you are encouraging
them to push the envelope of what is acceptable behavior in the Preserve and the result is to shut the rest of us
out.
And you and the City and PVPLC are on notice of the behavior that will likely one day lead to another serious
injury or worse.I believe very strongly that supporting parks and recreation is an important government function,
but public safety is a PRIMARY government function.I urge you to make it a priority in trail use planning.
Eva Cicoria
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-231
Page 1 of 1
Ara Mihranian
From:cicoriae@aol.com
Sent:Friday,March 02,201212:52 PM
To:aram@rpv.com
Cc:cc@rpv.com;avona@pvplc.org
Subject:Trails
Hi Ara,
I wonder whether you have seen the Easy Reader article on mountain biking.Here's the link.
http://www.easyreadernews.com/46928/the-price-of-preservati onl
I wonder whether that gives you pause to reconsider your recommendations regarding opening up so
many trails to mountain bikers in the Preserve Trails Plan.Many of the people now in positions to make
decisions regarding trail use are,or will be,doing so without the benefit of the extensive public hearings
held during the PUMP proceedings and subsequent city council meetings.They didn't hear the dozens of
hikers and horseback riders tell of collisions and other terrifying experiences (including my own)as a
result of mountain bikers speeding down trails.They didn't see and hear the photos of mountain biking
activity and it's consequences.
Is it not your responsibility to include in staff reports and discussions on these matters this history?Must
the public endure these proceedings all over again now?What a waste of our community's time,energy
and money if all the information we collected between 2006 and 2008 is now going to be ignored.
You (or your superiors)seem to want to disregard the facts when they are relayed to you by non-
mountain bikers.Now you have indisputable evidence--an admission against interest--in this Easy
Reader article that the same things that were being done 4 years ago in the Preserve are still going on
now and are the objective of the ungrateful and never-satisfied Troy Braswell and ilk.By kow-towing to
mountain bikers,you are encouraging them to push the envelope of what is acceptable behavior in the
Preserve and the result is to shut the rest of us out.
And you and the City and PVPLC are on notice of the behavior that will likely one day lead to another
serious injury or worse.I believe very strongly that supporting parks and recreation is an important
government function,but public safety is a PRIMARY government function.I urge you to make it a
priority in trail use planning.
Eva Cicoria
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-232
Page 1 of 1
Ara Mihranian
From:lowell@transtalk.com [delivery@yousendit.com]
Sent:Wednesday,January 25,2012233 AM
To:aram@rpv.com
Subject:McCarroll Fire Road/Trail Erosion Survey
lowell@transtalk.com YouSendlt
McCarroll Fire Road is in danger of becoming impassible in the near future if erosion control is not
promptly implemented.The critical importance of this fire road was demonstrated on January 9,
2012.
Here is a narrated video survey of erosion control issues on the McCarroll fire road/trail in the Upper
Filiorum and Three Sisters Reserves.The survey is in five segments 2A -2E leading from the crest at
McBride Trail to the mesa near Barkentine Canyon and the Barkentine Alley entrance.
I propose a two-phase erosion control program.The first phase diverts water off the road to surface
dispersal structures to convert erosive,collected streams to percolation flows that will water the
habitat This would be done primarily with hand tools (and perhaps some small machines)at frequent
intervals,every ten yards or so,where ever feasible.
Phase 2:There are some areas where diversions are not feasible due to the terrain that surrounds
the road.Maximizing diversions above these areas will reduce the volume of flows through them,but
will not entirely eliminate the need for erosion controls within these areas.In these areas broad
terraces will need to be constructed,with agricultural-type water inlets and drainage lines leading to
dispersal structures on lower slopes.This will require some smaller construction machines (such as a
Bobcat and trenching machines),but not heavy construction equipment such as bulldozers.
In addition,key sections of the road should be gravelled to provide a more firm,more erosion
resistant surface for fire truck traffic.
This fire road will not be there when we need it if erosion is not controlled.
These files are in .mpg format You should be able to open them with Windows Media Player.The
five subsections are available in a single,continuous file if preferred.If you have difficulty playing
these files please give me a call at 31 0-704-6393 and I will try to help troubleshoot the issues.
Lowell R.Wedemeyer
5 files were sent to you:
McCarroll Erosion 2A -Crest &Upper.mpg
McCarroll Erosion 28 -Upper -Mid.mpg
McCarroll Erosion 2C -Mid.mpg
McCarroll Erosion 20 -Mesa.mpg
McCarroll Erosion 2E -Alley Entrance.mpg
Size:1.88 GB Files will be available for download unlll February 08.2012 02:32 PST
If the above !ink does not work.you can paste the following address into your browser:
https:lfrcpt yousendit com/'l352455924ff3be4ec9806612c2818a2d85a8cOOd50
YouSendlt,Inc.Privacy Policy
15)19 S Bascom Av~C;:W'lJbull CA 95008
5/8/2012
Download
",.
yOUSENDit
Attachments 1-233
Page 1 of 1
Ara Mihranian
From:cicoriae@aol.com
Sent:Thursday,October 27,2011 5:37 PM
To:dlefer@pvplc.org;aram@rpv.com
Cc:cc@rpv.com
Subject:Trails Report
Attachments:Comments re Response to Comments on Trails Report.docx;Attachment to Comments re Trails
Report.pptx
Hi Danielle and Ara,
Please see my comments on the Response to Comments from the State of the Trails Workshop,
attached.I came upon Ingrid coming off of Vanderlip Trail yesterday,She is one of the elderly women
who,during PUMP proceedings,shared their experiences in the Preserve.She was hit and seriously
injured (broken ribs and head injury)by a mountain biker on Ishibashi Trail and for a long time would not
come back to hike.She is back now and,understandably,looks for trails such as Vanderlip that are not
open to mountain bikers.Please let's not forget to put safety first.
In case this will be heard by City Council in the near future,I am copying them on it as well.
Eva
5/8/2012 Attachments 1-234
Comments to Trails Report
Hi Danielle and Ara
I read the Trails Report.It's quite thorough and all involved deserve kudos for the effort made to strike a balance between
habitat preservation and use and to facilitate enjoyable experiences for all user groups.
I have a few questions and concerns,however,which I've listed here and address in greater detail in the body of this
memo.
•Why is it that recommendations for trail use modifications are all to the advantage of mountain bikers (and
therefore to the detriment of the safety and quality of the trail experience for hikers and equestrians)?
•The recommendation to convert Ishibashi Farm Trail and Landslide Scarp to multi use is hugely disappointing and
the reasons given are not supported by the facts.
•The implication in the response to comment 92,that the PUMP Committee declined to set speed limits because
we determined speed limits would be too difficult to enforce,is simply wrong.
Recommendations for trail use modifications are all to the advantage of mountain bikers and to the detriment of
the safety and quality of the trail experience for hikers and equestrians.You've recommended that numerous trails
be converted to multi use.How many trails have you recommended closing to mountain bikers because of safety
concerns,erosion issues,or the damage we see to adjacent habitat in multi use areas?
Toyon Trail is steep and characterized by loose soils,comparable to segments of Ishibashi Trail.Arguably,those
characteristics make the trail unsuitable for mountain biking,yet there is no recommendation to prohibit that use on that
trail.The route down Ishibashi Trail,across Burma Rd and down Toyon is a favorite for technical bike riders and,
unfortunately,speeding bikes,presenting hazards to other trail users.I have personally witnessed numerous near
collisions.There is no recommendation to prohibit that use on those trails.Areas of the Preserve that attract technical
mountain biking also experience greater damage to adjacent habitat and visual blight due to out of control cyclists veering
off trail,frequent falls into the brush,spur trail creation,deep rut scarring,and quite often trail widening in response to
safety concerns,all of which negatively impacts the quality of the trail experience for other users.Yet there is no
recommendation to prohibit mountain biking in these areas.
The recommendation to convert Landslide Scarp and Ishibashi Farm Trails to multi use is contrary to PUMP
recommendations made in response to community input.The reasons given for this recommendation are not
supported by the facts.And such chanqe will have an adverse impact on the hiker and equestrian experience in
this area.
The response to comments indicates that you are recommending conversion of Ishibashi Farm Trail and Landslide Scarp
to multi use in order to give mountain bikers a loop through this area.Bikes already have a loop through this area via
Toyon and Peppertree Trail.(See map.)Per the request of the mountain biking community during PUMP proceedings,
this was the recommendation of the PUMP Committee,which in turn was adopted by the City Council.In response to
community comments provided during PUMP proceedings regarding safety issues,the route through this general area
along Garden Trail,Landslide Scarp and Ishibashi Farm Trail was designated pedestrian equestrian in order to allow
equestrians and hikers to avoid bikes in this area.
The response to comments indicates that you are recommending conversion of Ishibashi Farm Trail to multi use also in
order to give mountain bikers access to PV Drive South.Mountain bikers have access to PV Drive South via Peppertree
Trail.
I have attached photos showing some of the damage that continues in the area around Peppertree and Toyon Trails.In
addition,as noted above,the route down Ishibashi Trail,across Burma Rd and down Toyon is a favorite for technical bike
riders and,unfortunately,speeding bikes,presenting hazards to other trail users.Extending the route for bikes through
this area onto Lanslide Scarp will adversely impact the safety and quality of the hiker and equestrian experience through
this area.Please reconsider this recommendation.
The implication in the response to comment 92,that the PUMP Committee declined to set speed limits because
we determined speed limits would be too difficult to enforce,is simply wrong.Speed is the single element that
puts one trail user at risk (not to mention flora and fauna)simply to ensure that another trail user be allowed to
indulge in a particular manner of use.Therefore,setting speed limits may be an effective management tool.
Attachments 1-235
Comment 92 in the Report reflects the concern in this area of Toyon Trail:"92.Toyon and Garden trail area need speed
limits to keep people on the trail and keep other users and wildlife safe."
The response to this comment was:The Preserve Trails Plan does not include speed limits because it was the general
consensus of the PUMP Committee that speed limits are difficult to enforce.The City and the PVPLC will seek input from
the Rangers regarding speed limits.
This response is misleading.The implication of the response is that the PUMP Committee didn't recommend speed limits
in the Preserve because they would be difficult to enforce.That is simply wrong.
Danielle,you wouldn't know this,having come to PVPLC more recently,but after the PUMP Committee made its
recommendations to City Council (which,by the way,included speed limits on one trail in particular despite Committee
leadership's efforts to prevent us from imposing speed limits),City staff told City Council that it would be too difficult to
determine what would be appropriate speed limits within the Preserve and City staff recommended against speed limits
on that basis.City Council made the determination,based on the staff recommendation,to not impose speed limits,but
rather to adopt an ordinance prohibiting conduct that puts people and wildlife at risk.
That determination by staff was an about face from the message that was conveyed to the PUMP Committee--and the
message that many of us relied upon in making our determination that multi use could be an appropriate designation on
certain trails.Speed limits came up repeatedly during PUMP Committee discussions,being a very obvious solution to the
problems we heard about and experienced firsthand.The PUMP Committee was told repeatedly that it was not within the
purview of the PUMP Committee to recommend speed limits and that the Preserve manager would do so.
As a member of the PUMP Committee,I voted for multi use on certain trails,making clear that I was doing so with the
understanding that there would be speed limits.Based upon my experience with multiple near collisions with bikes (and
since then having been hit by a mountain bike),as well as testimony from many hikers and equestrians with similar
experiences including serious injuries,it would have been irresponsible to take the easy way out and assign a multi-use
designation to many trails.Speed limits seemed to be an obvious solution,since speed is the single element that puts one
trail user at risk simply to ensure that another trail user be allowed to indulge in a particular manner of use.
Excessive speed by a subset of mountain bikers within the Preserve remains one of the biggest problems in the Preserve.
It negatively impacts the safety and the tranquil experience of all user groups;it results in damage to both flora and fauna;
and it contributes to heavily erosive trail tread.We have seen many open space areas with speed limits,typically ranging
from 5 to 15 miles per hour.
As a side note,I would be interested to know how many citations have been issued under the ordinance prohibiting
conduct that puts others at risk.Based upon my experiences in the Preserve,as well as comments from others,that
ordinance is apparently difficult to enforce as well,or perhaps simply ignored.Speed limits,which are more objective,
should actually be less difficult to enforce and may be more effective at encouraging safe and responsible riding.
Please reconsider your recommendations:retain the existing trail use designations and consider setting speed limits to
improve the safety and enhance the user experience throughout the Preserve.
Eva
Attachments 1-236
Landslide Scarp Trail
a virtual tour
...
Consider the features of Landslide Scarp Trail-relatively narrow,winding
through natural habitat characterized by dense stands of Artemesia and
Lemonade Berry.It is lovely and peaceful.
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
2
3
7
Landslide Scarp Trail
a virtual tour,continued
The Trails Report
recommends converting
Landslide Scarp from
pedestrian/equestrian to
multi use.In order to do
so,safety concerns would
necessitate widening the
trail.That would destroy
the trail's character and
unnecessarily so.An
alternative route for multi
use is available down
Peppertree Trail.
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
2
3
8
Peppertree Trail
,.)/
Ishibashi Farm Trail
Ishibashi Farm Trail (above)offers a
route for pedestrians and equestrians to
escape cyclists en route to or from PV
Drive South,while a multi use
alternative is available to PV Drive South
via Peppertree Trail (photo left).
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
2
3
9
!\.
The photo above was taken at the
intersection of Landslide Scarp Trail,
foreground,Peppertree Trail,to the
left,and Toyon Trail,to the right.Peppertree Trail
The areas around multi use trails such Peppertree Trail have suffered from high impact
unauthorized use.i .>-
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
2
4
0
Toyon
Trail
Like the area
around
Peppertree
Trail,the area
around Toyon
Trail has
suffered from
high impact
use.
Landslide Scarp and Ishisbashi Farm
Trails do not suffer this type of
damage.Please help to keep it that
way by retaining their pedestrian/
equestrian use designations.
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
1
-
2
4
1