Oak Woodland Management Plan

Transcription

1 Oak Woodland Management Plan The Trees at Darkhorse ±883-Acre Site Nevada County, California Prepared for: Asian Pacific Group August 10, 2017 Prepared by: 2017

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction Regulations and Project background County General Plan and Tree Ordinance Project-Specific Documents Methods Results and Discussion Surveyed Trees Impacts from Proposed Project Tree Preservation Recommendations Mitigation, Maintenance, and Monitoring Mitigation Maintenance and Monitoring Maintenance Monitoring References List of Tables Table 1 Tree Rating System... 4 Table 2 Number of Landmark Trees by Health and Structure Ratings... 6 Table 3 Mitigation Maintenance Schedule... 9 List of Figures Figure 1 Site and Vicinity Figure 2 Landmark Trees and Impacts to Oak Canopy List of Appendices Appendix A Surveyed Tree Data THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP OAK WOODLAND MANAGEMENT PLAN I FOOTHILL ASSOCIATES 2017

3 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a survey of the composition and quality of the oak woodlands in the proposed development areas of The Trees at Darkhorse (Project Site) and assesses impacts to Landmark trees and Landmark groves within these areas. This report also advises on mitigation measures and long-term maintenance procedures per Section C.3 of the Nevada County Tree Ordinance as well as evaluates the proposed additional tree impacts in relation to the mitigation plan prepared for the original project. The Project Site is located along Combie Road and Darkhorse Drive, approximately two miles from the junction of Combie Road and State Route 49 between Lake of the Pines and Lake Combie in Nevada County, California. The Project Site is located within Township 14 North, Range 8 East, Sections 25, 26, 35 and 36 of the Auburn USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle (Figure 1). The approximate location of the center point of the Project Site is North and West. The Darkhorse Golf Course and Residential Community Project (Project), which was approved in 1998, consists of an 18-hole championship public golf course, a three-hole golf academy, a clubhouse, 223 residential lots, and permanent open space on approximately 800 acres. Additionally, 250 acres in the northeast corner were preserved as large lot rural residential development. The Project was scheduled to be constructed in four phases (King Engineering 2002): Phase I included the construction of the golf course and associated facilities. This phase has been completed; Phase II includes 117 residential lots in the central and northern end of the Project Site. The roads and some houses have been constructed within Phase II; Phase III consists of 83 residential lots in the northeast corner and along the west boundary of the Project Site. Roads and some houses have been constructed within Phase III; and Phase IV consists of 23 residential lots at the south end of the Project Site. No work has been completed within Phase IV. The purpose of this report is to document the Landmark trees, Landmark groves, and oak woodland composition on the Project Site, and to assess the impacts to them from the proposed development within the surveyed limits of disturbance (Figure 2). For the purposes of this report, it is assumed one hundred percent tree removal within the limits of disturbance. As part of this Oak Woodland Management Plan, discussion is included regarding protection of trees during construction, mitigation options, long-term maintenance procedures, and an evaluation of the proposed additional impacts in relation to the mitigation plan prepared for the original project. THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 1 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

4 2.0 REGULATIONS AND PROJECT BACKGROUND The Nevada County General Plan and Nevada County Tree Ordinance, and available Projectspecific records in the County s files were reviewed and are summarized below County General Plan and Tree Ordinance Chapter 13, Vegetation and Wildlife, of the Nevada County General Plan was last updated in It establishes two objectives related to oak tree and oak woodlands: Objective 13.7 to identify and preserve heritage and landmark trees and groves where appropriate and Objective 13.8 to minimize removal or disturbance of low elevation oak habitat. These objectives are supported by two polices related to the preservation of Heritage and Landmark trees and groves. Policy 13.8 requires projects to minimize disturbance of heritage and landmark trees and groves. Policy 13.9 requires that development in the vicinity of significant oak groves be designed to maximize the preservation of native oak trees as well as the adoption of regulations to protect native oaks. Nevada County protects Landmark and Heritage trees and groves under Section II of the County Code. Landmark trees are defined as any oak with a trunk diameter of 36 inches or more at breast height (48 above grade). Landmark groves are hardwood groves with a minimum of 33 percent canopy closure or groves that are marked for preservation by the County, State, or federal government. The Board of Supervisors may also designate Heritage trees and groves. Mitigation is required for the removal of Landmark and Heritage trees or groves Project-Specific Documents Prior to project approval, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and approved by Nevada County in As part of the EIR, mitigation measures were developed to address impacts to oak trees and oak woodlands. Mitigation Measures and require the preparation of plans for replacement of trees removed from oak woodlands and Landmark groves and require mitigation for all removed Landmark trees that are not diseased or deemed a threat to public safety. In response to these mitigation measures, the Final Landmark Oak Tree Mitigation and Monitoring Program and Final Landmark Oak Tree Mitigation and Monitoring Program were prepared in 2000 by Westech Company (Westech Plans). The Westech Plans detail mitigation requirements for both the golf course and residential development phases of the Project. However, no copies of these reports are on file with the County nor are they stored at the Darkhorse Golf Club. Westech Company could not be located in an internet search and is no longer in operation, at the time this report was prepared. In 2002, the Final Oak Woodland Mitigation and Monitoring Program for Phase II Final Map (2002 Mitigation Plan) was prepared by May & Associates, Inc. The 2002 Mitigation Program built on the Westech Plans, clarified procedures on oak impacts associated with residential development, selection of oak planting areas, mitigation implementation, and monitoring and THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 2 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

5 success criteria. The 2002 Mitigation Plan specifically dealt with the potential impacts from the 117 lots in Phase II of the residential development. In order to estimate potential impacts from the residential lots, the existing oak trees on 20 lots, consisting of 4 lots in Landmark groves and 16 lots with sparser oak coverage, were surveyed. The 2002 Mitigation Plan estimates an average of 31 trees per acre on the residential lots. Replacement tree planting is required at a 2:1 ratio for trees removed in non-landmark grove areas and on an inch-for-inch basis for trees removed from Landmark groves. Using these ratios, the 2002 Mitigation Plan concludes that an average replacement rate of 79 trees per acre would be required for mitigation, resulting in an overall ratio of 2.55 mitigation trees for every one tree removed. Under the 2002 Mitigation Plan, mitigation trees will be planted in the designated open space on the eastern edge of the property to connect existing oak groves and restore oak woodland canopy cover that had been reduced by historic management activities. The mitigation is considered successful once at least 65 percent of the planted trees are successfully established following 10 years of required monitoring. A separate Mitigation Plan was not prepared for Phase III and Phase IV of the residential development. Since Phase III abuts Phase II, it is assumed that the estimates and assumptions contained in the 2002 Mitigation Plan will also apply to Phase III. No improvements have been made in the Phase IV area; therefore, there are no existing impacts or mitigation for this area (Foothill Associates 2016). THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 3 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

6 3.0 METHODS The Project Site was surveyed by International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborists Meredith Branstad (WE-6727A) and Zachary Neider (WE-11615A) on March 1 and 2, 2017 to identify all Landmark trees, Landmark groves, and general oak woodland conditions within the limits of disturbance on each section of the Project Site. Landmark trees are defined under the Nevada County Tree Ordinance as any Quercus species with a single trunk of 36 inches or greater diameter at breast height (DBH) or multi-trunked trees with a total trunk diameter of at least 36 inches. Landmark groves are hardwood groves with a minimum of 33 percent canopy closure or groves that are marked for preservation by the County, State, or federal government. The Project Site was systematically surveyed on foot to ensure total search coverage. All existing Landmark trees were closely examined to determine their species type and DBH. A diameter tape or calipers were used to verify each trunk diameter at the industry standard of 54 inches above grade. The measurement from the trunk to the end of the longest lateral limb was used as the dripline radius (DLR). Recommendations for removal or suitability for preservation were noted for each tree. The health and structural condition of each tree was rated according to Table 1 below. The health rating considers factors such as the size, color, and density of the foliage; the amount of deadwood within the canopy; bud viability; evidence of wound closure; and the presence or evidence of stress, disease, nutrient deficiency, and/or insect infestation. The structural rating reflects the trunk and branch configuration; canopy balance; the presence of included bark and other structural defects such as decay; and the potential for structural failure. In cases where conditions fall between the good, fair, and poor ratings, intermediate ratings fair-good and fairpoor were used. TABLE 1 TREE RATING SYSTEM Rating Good Fair Tree Health There is an average or below-average amount of deadwood/dieback with respect to the tree s size and growing environment; leaf size, color, and density are typical for the species; buds are normal size, viable, abundant, and uniform throughout the canopy; current and past growth increments are generally average or better; any callusing is vigorous. This health rating indicates that there is very little, if any, evidence of stress, disease, nutrient deficiency, and/or insect infestation. There is an above-average amount of deadwood/dieback with respect to the tree s size and growing environment; leaf size, color, and density may be below what is typically expected for the species; buds are normal size and viable, but slightly sparse throughout the canopy; current and past growth increments may be below average; tree may be slow to callus around old wounds. This health rating indicates that there is moderate evidence of stress, disease, nutrient deficiency, and/or insect infestation. THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 4 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

7 Poor Good Fair Poor There is an extreme amount of deadwood/dieback with respect to the tree s size and growing environment; leaf size, color, and density are clearly compromised; very few viable buds are present throughout the canopy; current and past growth increments are meager; no evidence of callusing around old wounds. This health rating indicates that there is widespread evidence of stress, disease, nutrient deficiency, and/or insect infestation. Tree Structure No wounds, cavities, decay, or indication of hollowness are evident in the root crown, trunk, or primary and secondary limbs; no anchor roots are exposed; no codominant branching or multiple trunk attachments are present; very little included bark at branch attachments exists; no dead primary or secondary limbs are present in canopy; there have been no major limb failures; limbs are not overburdened; branching structure is appropriate for species; any decay is limited to small dead branches/stubs. This structure rating represents a low potential for failure. With respect to the size of the tree, small to moderate wounds, cavities, decay, and indication of hollowness may be evident in the root crown, trunk, and/or primary and secondary limbs; some anchor roots may be exposed; codominant branching or multiple trunk attachments may be present, but included bark does not exist or is not well developed; minor to moderate amounts of included bark at branch attachments may exist; there may be small to moderate amounts of large dead limbs in canopy, but there is no evidence of large limb failures; limbs may be slightly overburdened; branching structure and/or canopy balance may be moderately altered by the tree s growing environment. This structure rating represents a moderate potential for failure. With respect to the size of the tree, significant wounds, cavities, decay, and/or indication of hollowness may be evident in the root crown, trunk, and/or primary and secondary limbs; anchor roots may be exposed and/or the tree may have lost anchorage; codominant branching or multiple trunk attachments may be present; significant amounts of included bark may exist in trunk and branch attachments; there may be significant amounts of large dead limbs in the canopy; there may be evidence of trunk or large limb failures; limbs may be severely overburdened; branching structure and/or canopy balance may be drastically altered by the tree s growing environment. This structure rating represents a high potential for failure. THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 5 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

8 Structure 4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1. Surveyed Trees A total of 31 individual Landmark trees were inventoried on the Project Site consisting of 17 interior live oaks (Quercus wislizeni), 11 black oaks (Quercus kelloggii), and three (3) blue oaks (Quercus douglasii). In addition, approximately 3.08 total acres of Landmark groves exist within the Project Site and approximately 1.86 acres of these are within impacted areas. Inventoried trees with existing tags are generally labeled by the tag number (with the exception of #5 and #6), and inventoried trees without existing tags are labeled from #1 to 19, and #24 and were not tagged. Detailed data on the surveyed trees is included in Appendix A. Approximate locations of surveyed trees, Landmark groves, and extent of oak woodland habitat are shown on Figure 2. The average number of trees per acre within Landmark groves was confirmed to be approximately 31, based on the 2002 Mitigation Plan. However, in the areas of mixed oak/conifer woodland, the average number of trees per acre is approximately 18, as conifers occupy much of these areas. In general, the inventoried trees are in fair to good health with respect to tree vigor and live canopy density. However, three (3) of the surveyed trees (#15, #16, and #24) were assessed as not meeting the criteria of a Landmark tree despite their DBH due to their poor condition. These trees do not require mitigation. Table 2 shows the number of surveyed trees by health and structure ratings. Appendix A includes the data collected for each inventoried tree. TABLE 2 NUMBER OF LANDMARK TREES BY HEALTH AND STRUCTURE RATINGS Health Good Fair-Good Fair Poor-Fair Poor Total Trees Good Fair-Good Fair Poor-Fair Poor Total Trees Impacts from Proposed Project The proposed project is expected remove eight (8) Landmark trees within the impact areas, one (1) of which is within a Landmark grove and seven (7) of which are outside of Landmark groves. In addition, based on the average of 31 trees per acre from the 2002 Mitigation Report, the proposed project is expected remove approximately 58 other oak trees within Landmark groves. THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 6 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

9 Tree Preservation Recommendations The following tree protection measures should be integrated into the Project construction documents for trees surrounding or overhanging the impact areas: Install Tree Protection Fencing around trees to remain within 50 feet of the work site, staging and storage areas, or any other areas of grading or ground disturbance; Tree Protection Fencing, consisting of a minimum 4-foot tall high-visibility fence (orange plastic snow fence or similar), shall be placed around the perimeter of the tree protection zone (TPZ) (dripline radius +1 foot) for the tree to remain. The TPZ is the minimum distance for placing protective fencing, but tree protection fencing should be placed as far outside of the TPZ as possible. Signs shall be placed along the fence at approximately 50 foot intervals. Each sign shall be a minimum of 2-feet by 2-feet and shall include the following: TREE PROTECTION ZONE DO NOT MOVE OR RELOCATE FENCE UNTIL PROJECT COMPLETION WITHOUT PERMISSION OF PROJECT ARBORIST OR THE COUNTY OF NEVADA If permanent site improvements (e.g. paving, buildings, and structures) encroach into the TPZ, install fence at limit of work. If temporary impacts (e.g. grading, utility installation) require encroachment into the TPZ, move fence to limit of work during active construction of item and return to edge of the TPZ once work is completed; For trees located around the perimeter of the work site, tree protection fencing may be placed only on the side of the tree facing the project area; Tree protection fencing shall not be moved without prior authorization from the Project Arborist or the County of Nevada or as detailed on approved plans; Avoid paving within the TPZ. If paving cannot be avoided, porous materials will be used; No parking, portable toilets, dumping or storage of any construction materials, including oil, gas, or other chemicals, or other infringement by workers or domesticated animals is allowed in the TPZ; No signs, ropes, cables, metal stakes, or any other items shall be attached to a protected tree, unless recommended by an ISA-Certified Arborist; Grading, excavation, or trenching within the TPZ of existing native oaks should be avoided to the greatest extent possible. Under no circumstances should fill soil be placed against the trunk of an existing tree to remain; THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 7 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

10 Any grading or ground disturbance within 20 feet of the edge of the TPZ shall be supervised by an ISA-Certified Arborist; Underground utilities should be avoided in the TPZ, but if necessary shall be bored or drilled. No trenching is allowed within the TPZ unless specifically approved by the Project Arborist or the County of Nevada; Drains shall be installed according to County of Nevada specifications to avoid harm to existing oak trees due to excess watering; Pruning of living limbs or roots shall be done under the supervision of an ISA-Certified Arborist. All pruning should be done by hand, air knife, or water jet, in accordance with ISA standards using tree maintenance best practices. Climbing spikes should not be used on living trees. Limbs should be removed with clean cuts just outside the crown collar; Cover exposed roots or cut root ends in trenches with damp burlap to prevent drying out; Minimize disturbance to the native ground surface (grass, leaf, litter, or mulch) under preserved trees to the greatest extent feasible; Native woody plant material (trees and shrubs to be removed) may be chipped or mulched on the Project Site and placed in a 4- to 6-inch deep layer around existing trees to remain. Do not place mulch in contact with the trunk of preserved trees; Appropriate fire prevention techniques shall be employed around all trees to be preserved. This includes cutting tall grass, removing flammable debris within the TPZ, and prohibiting the use of tools that may cause sparks, such as metal-bladed trimmers or mowers; No open flames shall be permitted within 15 feet of the tree canopy; and Damage to any protected tree to remain during construction shall be immediately reported to County of Nevada. Damage shall be corrected as required by the County representative Mitigation, Maintenance, and Monitoring Mitigation All impacted Landmark trees (within and outside of Landmark groves) and other oak trees with a DBH of greater than six (6) inches within Landmark groves will continue to be mitigated under the previously described 2002 Final Oak Woodland Mitigation and Monitoring Program for Phase II Final Map (2002 Mitigation Plan) prepared by May & Associates, Inc. in response to Mitigation Measures and of the EIR. Replacement planting is required at a 2:1 ratio for trees removed outside of Landmark groves and on an inch-for-inch basis for trees removed within Landmark groves. Using these ratios, the 2002 Mitigation Plan calculated an average replacement number of 2.55 mitigation trees for every Landmark tree and oak tree THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 8 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

11 over six (6) inches in DBH removed. All trees within each of the impact areas are assumed to be proposed for removal. Based on the calculated mitigation rate of 2.55 replacement trees for each tree removed and an average of 31 trees per acre within the impacted Landmark groves, 148 trees will be required to replace the approximately 58 trees removed. Seven (7) Landmark trees were surveyed outside of the Landmark groves that would be impacted by the Project, and based on the same calculated rate, 18 trees will be required to replace these. Mitigation trees will be planted in the designated open space on the eastern edge of the property to connect existing oak groves and restore oak woodland canopy cover that had been reduced by historic management activities. Alternatively, replacement trees can also be planted in areas of the property that are not subject to future development (2002 Mitigation Plan) Maintenance and Monitoring Maintenance Under the 2002 Mitigation Plan, maintenance of the mitigation trees is required for ten years. Maintenance will be most intensive in the first five years to establish the trees. General maintenance recommendations are shown below in Table 3. Additional specific recommendations will be provided in the annual monitoring reports. Supplemental water should be provided as noted below during the dry season, which is typically May through October, but may vary depending on the rainfall in any given year. TABLE 3 MITIGATION MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE Year Planting One Two Three Four Maintenance Activities Plant trees between October and December, after the first significant rain event, to allow initial establishment during the winter wet season. Water as needed to ensure survival if rain is inconsistent. Clear weeds around tree planting area and place 6 -deep layer of bark mulch/ wood chips in a 4-foot diameter circle surrounding tree. Water trees weekly (~15 gallons per week) with supplemental watering as needed if temperatures are over 100 degrees for multiple days in a row. Replenish bark mulch in spring. Remove weeds from planting area as needed. Remove support stakes in spring. Prune out sucker growth and as needed to develop strong structure. Do not cut leader or remove small feeder twigs along trunk. Water trees weekly (~15 gallons per week) with supplemental watering as needed if temperatures are over 100 degrees for multiple days in a row. Replenish bark mulch in spring. Remove weeds from planting area as needed. Water trees as needed if temperatures are over 100 degrees for multiple days in a row, but do not water more often than twice per month. Apply approximately 30 gallons per watering. Replenish bark mulch in spring. Remove weeds from planting area as needed. Water trees as needed if temperatures are over 100 degrees for multiple days in a row, but do not water more often than twice per month. Apply approximately 30 gallons per watering. Replenish bark mulch in spring. Remove weeds from planting area as needed. Prune lightly for structure as needed. THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 9 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

12 Five Year Six End Maintenance Activities Water trees monthly (~15 gallons per month). Replenish bark mulch in spring. Remove weeds from planting area as needed. Discontinue supplemental water. Replenish mulch and remove weeds from planting area annually as needed. Prune lightly to improve structure as needed in Year Monitoring The 2002 Mitigation Plan requires a total survival rate of 65 percent at the end of the monitoring period for the mitigation to be considered successful. Mitigation planting shall be monitored annually in September by an ISA-Certified Arborist to assess tree condition and overall mitigation success. The condition of each tree should be evaluated and given a rating according to the tree health table (Table 1) described previously in this report. Only trees ranked fair or higher will be considered successful. The annual monitoring report will evaluate the success of the mitigation efforts and provide recommendations for additional maintenance and replanting efforts needed in the following year to meet the success criteria. The annual report will be submitted annually to County of Nevada. THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 10 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

13 5.0 REFERENCES County of Nevada Nevada County General Plan. Prepared with assistance of Harland Bartholomew & Associates, Inc. Amended in 2008, 2010, and Available at: Plan.aspx. County of Nevada Notice of Conditional Approval Development/ Use Permit & Tentative Map Applications [for the DarkHorse Golf Course and Residential Community Project]. March 28, Foothill Associates Darkhorse Golf Course and Residential Community [for the] Oak Woodland Mitigation and Monitoring Program Report, Nevada County, California. March 3, GoogleEarth. Aerial Photographs. Dates ranging from 1993 to Helm Biological Consulting Fourth Year Oak Woodland Revegetation Monitoring Report for DarkHorse Golf Course. Prepared for DarkHorse Golf Course. December 11, King Engineering, Inc Amended Vesting Tentative Map/ Master Plan for Dark Horse. May 17, May & Associates, Inc Darkhorse Golf Course and Residential Community Final Oak Woodland Mitigation and Monitoring Program for Phase II Final Map (FM97-008). Prepared for Nevada County Planning Department. August 2002 (Revised September 12, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (photo revised 1980). Auburn, California. 7.5-minute series topographic quadrangle. United States Department of Interior. THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE 11 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

14 }þ }þ DETAIL Yuba City AREA }þ49 }þ Rocklin Roseville Citrus Heights Orangevale Folsom Arden-Arcade Fair Oaks Sacramento Rancho Cordova 50 }þ 49 Combie Rd Magnolia Rd STUDY AREA Document Path: O:\N_Cal\T_Projects\The_Trees_Darkhorse\GIS\GIS_Project_Files\DarkHorse_SnV_ mxd USGS 7.5 Min. Auburn Quad Township 14N, Range 8E, Sections 25, 26, 35 & 36 Approximate Location: 39 1' " N 121 2' " W Datum: NAD 83 State Plane CA Zone II (US Feet) Approximate acreage: ± 57 Acres }þ49 STUDY AREA THE TREES AT DARKHORSE PROJECT SITE 80 SITE AND VICINITY 2017 THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ± Drawn By: MUB Miles QA/QC: AMP Date: 03/31/ in 1.5 miles FIGURE 1 Document Name: DarkHorse_SnV_ mxd : 3/31/2017 4:45:22 PM

15 Landmark Trees Impacted (8) Avoided (23) Impacted Oak Woodland Landmark Grove (1.86 Acres) Mixed Oak/Conifer Woodland (8.57 Acres) Avoided Oak Woodland Landmark Grove (1.22 Acres) Mixed Oak/Conifer Woodland (16.72 Acres) Other Features Impact Area Acres Study Area Acres Darkhorse Boundary Hogan Rd 2751 Darkhorse Dr Iro n wo od Ct Austin Forest Cir Austin Forest Cir is D Com bie R d 2017 THE TREES AT DARKHORSE r Landon Evan Ln Document Path: O:\N_Cal\T_Projects\The_Trees_Darkhorse\GIS\GIS_Project_Files\Darkhorse_OakWoodlandImpacts_24x36_ mxd Alex ± Aerial Imagery Date: 04/27/ Feet 1 inch 300 Feet 600 The Trees at Darkhorse Landmark Trees and Impacts to Oak Canopy Drawn By: MUB QA/QC: AMP Date: 04/04/2017 Aerial Imagery Source: Google Earth FIGURE 2 Document Name: Darkhorse_OakWoodlandImpacts_24x36_ : Date Saved: 4/4/2017

16 Appendix A Surveyed Tree Data THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883- ACRE SITE ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP

17 Appendix A Surveyed Tree Data Tree # Species Additional Tag Numbers # of trunks DBH (inches) Additional DBH (inches) DLR (feet) Height Health Structure Remove tree? Health/Sructure Notes 1 Interior Live Oak , Fair Fair No codominant, included bark, dieback, trunk rot 2 Interior Live Oak Fair Poor Fair No codominant, included bark, weighted branches, lean, trunk rot 3 Interior Live Oak , Fair Good Fair No codominant, included bark 4 Interior Live Oak Fair Fair No codominant, included bark, trunk rot 5 Black Oak Fair Fair No codominant, included bark, dieback, lean 6 Black Oak Fair Fair No codominant, included bark, lean 7 Interior Live Oak , Fair Good Fair No codominant, included bark, trunk rot 8 Black Oak 1 at least Fair Fair No significant tree, no tag 9 Blue Oak Fair Fair No significant tree 10 Interior Live Oak , 13, Fair Fair No significant tree 11 Interior Live Oak , Fair Fair No significant tree 12 Interior Live Oak Fair Fair No significant tree 13 Interior Live Oak Fair Fair No 14 Interior Live Oak Fair Poor No trunk wound, trunk rot 15 Black Oak Poor Poor No not significant tree, poor condition, trunk rot, trunk wound, trunk decay 16 Black Oak Poor Poor No not significant tree, poor condition, trunk failure, fungus 17 Interior Live Oak Fair Fair No 18 Interior Live Oak Fair Fair No significant tree 19 Interior Live Oak Fair Fair No significant tree 24 Black Oak Fair Poor Fair No not significant tree, poor condition 2475 Black Oak Fair Fair No 2476 Interior Live Oak Fair Fair No 2521 Interior Live Oak Fair Fair No 2522 Black Oak Fair Fair No 2523 Interior Live Oak Fair Fair No 2561 Black Oak Fair Fair No significant tree 2601 Interior Live Oak Fair Fair No significant tree 2751 Blue Oak Fair Fair No significant tree 3283 Blue Oak 1 at least Fair Fair No significant tree 3284 Black Oak 1 at least Fair Fair No significant tree 3332 Black Oak Fair Fair No significant tree THE TREES AT DARKHORSE ±883 ACRE SITE OAK WOODLAND MANAGEMENT PLAN PAGE A1 of A1 ASIAN PACIFIC GROUP FOOTHILL ASSOCIATES 2017