Ecesis Newsletter, Summer 2008

8/9/2019 Ecesis Newsletter, Summer 2008

1/12

Ecesis is published quarterly by

the California Society for

Ecological Restoration, a

nonprofit corporation, as a

service to its members.

Newsletter contributions of all

types are welcome and may be

submitted to any of theregional directors (see p. 2).

Articles should be sent as a

word processing document;

and accompanying images

sent as jpg or tif files.

ABOVE Native riparian habitat

patches with a dense

understory like this will be

connected through habitat

restoration along the

Stanislaus River on the San

Joaquin NWR. (see page 5).

In this issue:Design Considerations

when RestoringRiparian Habitat1... Riparian Restoration for

Wildlife in the Central Valley

5... Life on the Floodplain

9... Ten Years at Beehive Bend

Plus2... SERCAL Contacts

10-11... Membership

Ecesisecesis \I-se-sus, i-ke-sus\ noun [from Greekoikesis meaning inhabitation]: the establishment of an animal or plant in a new habitat.

The Quarterly Newsletter of the California Society for Ecological RestorationSummer Solstice Volume 18, Issue 2

Considerations for DesigningRiparian Restoration for Wildlife

in Californias Central ValleyBy Dan Efseaff, Stacy Small and Nick Pacini, River Partners

I. Introduction

California riparian areas host some of the highest animal biodiversity in the state. While the number of

plant species that line lowland rivers may be relatively few, the vegetative patterns are complex. Trees,shrubs, vines, and herbaceous plants combine to make a unique and extraordinary vegetative structurefound nowhere else. In addition, physical characteristics such as flood events, heterogeneous soils,

abundant water, multi-level terraces and other factors produce a complex mosaic across the landscape,with dense forest abutting open grasslands. In short, many wildlife populations depend on healthyriparian corridors.

By the 1980s, only a small percentage of historic riparian forests remained in the Central Valley.Conversion of forest to agricultural lands, urban development, water diversions, dams, and other

human influences have all conspired to remove forests and degrade the remaining habitat (Katibah1984). Not surprisingly, the loss of forest has precipitated the decline in a host of riparian-dependent

wildlife. A variety of creatures from Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) to Yellow-billedCuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis) to the valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus

continued next page

This field was once planted as row crops. Agricultural techniques have been employed

on a large scale to restore it back to native riparian habitat. Here, native grasses are

being drill-seeded in to establish an herbaceous understory. With good site conditions

and proper maintenance, horticultural success can be achieved in a short period of time.


2/12

2 Ecesis Summer 2008 Volume 18, Issue 2

SERCALBoard of Directors

PRESIDENT Karen Verpeet H.T. Harvey & Associates

[email protected]

PRESIDENT-ELECT Pending

PAST PRESIDENT Mark Tucker Tucker & [email protected]

SECRETARY Paul Kielhold [email protected]

TREASURER Bo Glover Environmental Nature Center

[email protected]

Directors

REGION 1 Open NORTHERN INTERIOR (Lassen, Modoc, Shasta,

Siskiyou, Trinity)

REGION 2 Harry Oakes ICF-Jones & Stokes-Sacramento

[email protected] SACRAMENTO VALLEY (Butte, Colusa,Glenn, Lake, Sacramento, Sutter, Tehama, Yolo, Yuba)

REGION 3 Regine Miller [email protected]

BAY AREA (Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco,

San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma)

REGION 4 Carl Jensen Wildlands, Inc. [email protected]

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY (Amador, Calaveras, Fresno, Kern, Kings,

Mariposa, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tulare,

Tuolumne)

REGION 5 Mark Tucker Tucker & Associates

[email protected] SOUTH COAST (Los Angeles,

Orange, San Diego, Ventura)

REGION 6 Matt James Coastal Restoration Consultants

[email protected] CENTRAL COAST (Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo,

Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz)

REGION 7 Nick Pacini River Partners [email protected] NORTH COAST (Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino)

REGION 8 Michael Hogan Integrated Environmental Restoration

Services, Inc. [email protected] SIERRA (Alpine, El Dorado,

Inyo, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sierra)

REGION 9 Paul Kielhold [email protected] SOUTHERN INTERIOR(Imperial, Riverside, San Bernardino)

Guild Chairs

COASTAL HABITAT Vince Cicero California Department of Parks &

Recreation [email protected]

EDUCATION Karen Verpeet H.T. Harvey & Associates

[email protected]

UPLAND HABITAT Margot Griswold EARTHWORKS Restoration, Inc.

[email protected]

WETLAND & RIPARIAN Max Busnardo H.T. Harvey & Associates

[email protected]____________________

ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR Susan Clark [email protected]

2701 20th St., Bakersfield 93301

tel. 661.634.9228 fax 661.634.9540

NEWSLETTER EDITOR Julie St. John [email protected]

WEBMASTER Steve Newton-Reed [email protected]

californicus dimorphus), depend on riparian zones for food, shelter, and cover in

sometimes complex ways that are still being investigated.

In response to these imperiled wildlife populations, agencies and organizationsinitiated efforts to acquire and protect existing riparian habitat along theSacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. Yet looking across the fragmented slivers of

remaining habitat, conservationists recognized that stable wildlife populationswould require far more effort than the preservation of existing habitat. They

soon realized that recovery of wildlife populations needed to be considered assuccess criteria for riparian restoration. In this article we will discuss ourexperience in the Central Valley with riparian habitat restoration along the

Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers

Why do we need to actively restore these areas?

On the Sacramento River, after the completion of Shasta Dam, the threat of

damaging floods initially appeared to be greatly diminished, and floodplains

were cleared for agriculture. Soils along the Sacramento River and other majorrivers of California are some of the richest in the state. Abundant soil moisture,

good drainage, and favorable weather make them extremely attractive tofarmers, and while these areas may be productive, they are always at risk of

flooding. Flood events may have been somewhat tamed but many areas close tothe river still flood, with serious consequences for agriculture. Floods bring in

sand, sediment, and pathogens, and drown out crops. With changes in the farmeconomy and crop patterns, farming on these flood-prone parcels becameextremely costly and were often abandoned.

Initial efforts to protect riparian habitat focused on preserving the largest blocksof existing habitat available from willing sellers. Many of these sites included

former agricultural fields, no longer economical to farm due to flooding. The

flooding and proximity to existing riparian habitat encouraged many resourcemanagers to initially believe that riparian plants would reclaim these fallowfields. In low-lying areas that experience frequent flooding this can be the case,

but our experience with areas cleared for agriculture is that they are goodcandidate sites for active restoration. Areas that are close to the river and exposedfully to river processes may be synchronized with riparian plant life cycles and

need little intervention (except for occasional weed control). These former agfields are still exposed to the impressive forces of the river that shape plant

communities, but a little distance or relative elevation is enough to mute theseforces. Furthermore, dams and diversions have altered river hydrographs,

diminishing the ability of some native riparian plants to become established.Weed competition often precludes widespread native plant recruitment.

Therefore, these fallow fields can remain without significant native riparian

plants for decades.

Dams and floodplain barriers have altered the patterns of flood timing,frequency, duration, and magnitude that native plant species have evolved with,preventing succession on these fallow fields. For example, flood-dependent

plants such as Fremont cottonwood require bare soil (typically either scoured ordeposited from a flood event), minimal competition, and slowly receding

floodwaters so thirsty cottonwood roots can tap into deeper soil moisture beforethe onslaught of another hot, dry Central Valley summer arrives.

Considerations for Designing Riparian Restorationfor Wildlife in Californias Central Valley continued


3/12

Volume 18, Issue 2 Summer 2008 Ecesis 3

Because river hydrographs are now soaltered from historic patterns to whichplant populations have adapted, native

plant recruitment on fallow ag fields canbe minimal, despite seemingly ideal

conditions like the cessation ofagricultural practices, frequent flood

events, and availability of nearby seedsources. As adverse hydrologic conditionspersist, non-native plants (such as black

mustard, Johnson grass, perennialpepperweed, and yellow star-thistle) are

likely to colonize and dominate fordecades. Over time, native plants (mainly

coyote brush, elderberry, and occasionallynative grasses) may recruit on site, buttheir recruitment rate is likely to remain

slow. Perhaps worse, invasive woodyspecies such as tamarisk, arundo, and tree

of heaven may also colonize the site. At

high numbers, these species provideextremely poor wildlife habitat anddiminish floodwater conveyance.

Over the years, as resource managersstruggled with efforts to reduce the

burden of maintenance on these fallow field properties andprovide high quality habitat, a new paradigm arose the use ofagricultural techniques to plant and establish native plants and set

in motion a new successional trajectory that favored nativeriparian plants and provided wildlife habitat within a short period

of time.

How do we restore riparian habitats?Large scale (over 50 acres) riparian restoration was pioneered onthe Sacramento River in the early 1990s. This approach blends

local agricultural practices with ecological theory in a cost-effective manner. Since then this model has also been applied to

the San Joaquin and other rivers.

With just a fraction of the original riparian forest left, large-scale

restoration has become a very attractive option to fill in the gapsbetween fragmented forests, increase the connectivity of wildlife

habitat corridors, provide breeding and foraging sites, andessentially provide a life support system for riparian wildlifepopulations until more sufficient areas are protected and river

management is more in sync with riparian life cycles. In light ofhuman population encroachment, the areas set aside for habitat

will become increasingly important, and it is critical that therestoration on a site maximizes the investment.

The initial projects implemented with this approach served asdemonstration projects to test the feasibility of utilizing

agricultural practices to establish native riparian plants. As thesetechniques have become increasingly sophisticated, the scale has

increased to projects that exceed 800 acres at a time, and theapproach now includes more refined objectives for wildlife and

other societal benefits, such as flood management and recreation.

Clearly the first priority is to develop planting designs that match

site-specific conditions (soils, hydrology, existing vegetation, etc.),and reference sites are certainly useful in this process. However,

an equally important concern is that restoration projects benefitwildlife. Therefore, restoration designs must consider historic

natural communities, but also take a pragmatic approach toconsider current conditions and habitat requirements of wildlifespecies the projects are intended to benefit.

Wildlife habitat restoration requires a deep understanding ofwildlife species life histories. Identifying appropriate wildlife

target species and restoration sites requires an understanding ofthe species range (current and historic), annual cycle, habitat

requirements (sometimes at multiple spatial scales), competitorsand predators. Working with wildlife ecologists and consulting

published natural history accounts, species recovery plans, andpeer-reviewed scientific literature is all part of the process ofdeveloping an effective habitat restoration plan.

In order to represent a wide cross-section of habitat needs, RiverPartners selects a suite of focal species (or target species) that

the restoration project is intended to benefit over time. Althoughother species are likely to benefit as well, this approach allows us

to design projects with specific habitat features in mind. Forexample, Least Bells Vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) nests in shrubby

early successional riparian habitat, often near water. The riparianbrush rabbit inhabits dense thickets of riparian shrubs onfloodplains. Juvenile Chinook salmon benefit from woody debris

On the US Army Corps of Engineers McHenry Recreation Area, along the Stanislaus River,River Partners designed and implemented a restoration project that formed a complex

habitat structure after only three growing seasons. This site was a fallow field of weeds

four years ago; it now hosts dense native vegetation used by breeding and wintering

songbirds including Song Sparrows, Common Yellowthroats, and Black-headed Grosbeaks.

continued next page


4/12


and shaded habitat provided by trees and

shrubs growing over the water. Habitatrequirements for multiple species can

often be accommodated in an ecologicalrestoration plan that considers habitatstructure in addition to plant survival. As

new research and monitoring informationaccumulates, we strive to perfect these

designs and incorporate new features thatlend themselves to becoming testable

hypotheses. Our success criteria haveshifted from a primary emphasis on plantsurvival to include wildlife use. For

example, a nesting pair of Least BellsVireos successfully fledged young using

one of our restoration projects at the SanJoaquin National Wildlife Refuge. This

event signified the return of this once-common species to the Central Valley, after a long 60 years

absence. Although they certainly may be related, the detection ofthis species nesting on a restoration site may be a better indicatorof success than high overall plant survivorship.

Our designs typically contain far more plant species diversity thanthe surrounding agricultural landscape, and we spend

considerable effort to determine the structural components of theplanting. For example, to benefit Least Bells Vireo that nest in low

growing shrub cover, we may group roses and blackberriestogether in an area planted with mugwort. To benefit Yellow-billed

Cuckoos, we may create a large stand of cottonwoods with lightgaps and a heavy shrub component.

River Partners often uses a two forest design. That is we plan formultiple successional trajectories to create quality habitat overlong periods of time. Fast growing, early successional species such

as cottonwood and willows are planted to provide rapid vegetativestructure and habitat (5-20 years). Included in the design are

slower growing species such as valley oak. Over the long term, theslower growing oaks will grow through the canopy and become

the dominant species (>25 years). In the meantime, multiplegenerations of birds can benefit from this structural development(please see the article on Beehive Bend, page 9). With this

approach, a transient successional series may dominate untilanother plant community matures.

In other cases, we may create designs in which a riparian shrubcommunity dominates a site over time for the benefit of shrub-

dependent species, such as the riparian brush rabbit (see Life on

the Floodplain article, next page). Wildlife monitoring and

adaptive feedback from land managers and wildlife specialists hasled to restoration designs that focus less on tall trees alone and

more on under- and mid-story species. Native grasses and forbsadd to the food base and cover and effectively out-competeweeds. For example, dense cover of mugwort can make a site

more resistant to weed invasions and provide important habitatfor birds, such as the Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia),

Common Yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas) or Lazuli Bunting(Passerina amoena).

ConclusionsSince its genesis over 15 years ago, the goals of riparian

restoration in Californias Central Valley have shifted from simplehorticultural success and plant survival to include wildlife

benefits, as well. Although this pragmatic approach ofmaximizing habitat features for a suite of targeted wildlife species

may not exactly replicate the original habitat found on aparticular site, success is measured by whether wildlifepopulations thrive on the restoration site and whether the

restoration efforts will have a lasting legacy to preserve imperiledwildlife.

Katibah, E. F. 1984. A brief history of riparian forests in the central valley

of California. Pages 23-36 in R. E. Warner and K. M. Hendrix, editors.

California Riparian Systems. University of California Press, Berkeley.

The true measure of success of wildlife-targeted restoration is not only plant survival, butwildlife use as well. These Least Bells Vireo chicks hatched on a restoration site on the San

Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge. This species had been absent for sixty years from

the Central Valley prior to this nesting event.

Considerations for DesigningRiparian Restoration forWildlife in CaliforniasCentral Valley continued


5/12


The world of the riparian brush rabbit (Sylvilagus bachmaniriparius) is a tangled mess, depending on whose eyes you see itthrough. This species inhabits thickets of California rose (Rosacalifornica), California blackberry (Rubinus ursinus), and sandbarwillow (Salix exigua) that are typical of historic streamsidevegetation of the Central Valley but are now so rare throughout

this species historic range. Like other brush rabbit sub-speciesdistributed throughout shrubby plant communities of California,

such as chaparral and coastal scrub, the riparian brush rabbitprefers low, woody shrub cover and creates a maze of tunnels for

travel through river bottom vegetation. It lives out its entire lifecycle without venturing far out into the open, and its compactbody is adapted to maneuver with great agility through dense

riparian thickets and, in this way, dodge coming prey.However, the dense riparian cover favored by riparian brushrabbits was just the brush least favored by landowners and leveemanagers over the past century and was therefore targeted for

clearing throughout the San Joaquin Valley. Now one of the mostendangered mammals in California, this creature is hardly ever

seen in the wild, both because of its shy, skittish nature and itsrarity.

Life on the floodplain has another set of hazards for a shrub-dwelling rabbit with limited swimming abilities. Frequent

flooding requires the riparian brush rabbit to seek high ground,

preferably a place with vegetative cover where it can wait out aflood event without starving or being preyed upon by hawks

circling above. Such vegetated high ground is in short supply inthis rabbits historic San Joaquin Valley range. The naturaltopography of riparian floodplains has been subject to leveling in

the process of agricultural conversion, which compounds theeffects of land clearing for this species.

To counteract historic land use impacts on this and otherriparian-associated species, River Partners has been collaborating

with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and theEndangered Species Recovery Program (ESRP) at CSU Stanislaus

to design and implement habitat restoration projects for the

benefit of reintroduced riparian brush rabbit populations on theSan Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge. The primaryrecovery goal for the riparian brush rabbit is to establish threenew self-sustaining sub-populations that can survival stochastic

events. To attain this goal, extensive habitat restoration, inconjunction with ESRPs captive breeding and reintroduction

program, is required.

Following recommendations from ESRP and USFWS, we have

taken a three-part approach to this restoration: 1) planting

Life on the Floodplain:Habitat Restoration for the riparian brush rabbit and otherriparian-associated wildlife in the northern San Joaquin ValleyStacy L. Small, River Partners

A radio-collared riparian brush rabbit is ready to be released into the wild on the San

Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge by the Endangered Species Recovery Program.

continued next page


6/12


shrubby riparian habitat near rabbitreintroduction areas; 2) re-vegetating

natural high ground and Refuge leveesas flood escape corridors; and 3)

constructing new high-ground floodrefugia on Refuge floodplains to restoretopography to formerly leveled fields. In

the process, we seek to provide multi-species benefits through our planting

and flood refugia designs.

To date, we have planted over 1,000

acres of riparian habitat on the SanJoaquin River National Wildlife Refuge(10 miles west of Modesto) and

vegetated 20,000 linear feet of leveeswith native shrubs, with financial

support from USFWS, CaliforniaDepartment of Water Resources,

CalFed, Bureau of Reclamation, WildlifeConservation Board, and the ResourcesAgency. Lately, we have focused on

restoring natural high ground andconstructing earthen mounds and berms that are planted with

native shrub cover for flood refugia sites. Our plantingcomposition for the brush rabbit is high in shrub species,

including California rose, California blackberry, coyote brush(Baccharis pilularis) and sandbar willow, with some blue

elderberry (Sambucus mexicana) and valley oaks (Quercus lobata)included.

Wildlife species that typically co-occur in riparian brush rabbithabitat include Spotted Towhee (Pipilo maculatus), Song Sparrow

(Melospiza melodia) and several species of wintering sparrows,Wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), California Quail (Callipeplacalifornica), and the endangered San Joaquin riparian woodrat(Neotoma fuscipes riparia). Wrentits, Spotted Towhees and SongSparrows nest in dense shrub cover. Riparian woodrats inhabit

areas with willows beneath valley oaks. We also expectNeotropical migrant songbirds, such as Yellow Warblers

(Dendroica petechia) and Black-headed Grosbeaks (Pheucticus

melanocephalus), to nest and forage in the willow patches

incorporated into our most recent designs. Mexican elderberryprovides an important food source for foraging birds and isthe host plant for the endangered valley elderberry

longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus).

We anticipate benefits for salmonid populations, as well.Creating high-ground flood refugia for terrestrial wildlife

will enable the Refuge to eventually be restored tofunctional floodplain habitat for juvenile salmonid rearing.Also, by planting riparian vegetation near eroding river

banks, we will slow erosion, strengthen river banks, andprovide shade, shelter, and a food supply for aquatic

organisms.

The riparian brush rabbits life history is intricately linked

to floodplains, riparian habitat, and river processes, and itsrecovery will depend upon the restoration of vigorous,

native riparian corridors. Effective restoration for thisspecies is likely to result in a thriving, diverse riparian

wildlife community for the northern San Joaquin Valley.

Life on the Floodplaincontinued

A rabbits-eye view of riparian shrub habitat. Recent restoration designs have been based

on reference habitat like this on the San Joaquin River NWR.

Many thanks to our 2007 Conference Sponsors


7/12




8/12


Many thanks to our 2007 Conference Premier Sponsor



9/12


In 1991, the California Department of Fish & Game (DFG)

acquired a 269-acre parcel in rural Glenn County. The site wasnamed the Beehive Bend Unit after the name of a sweeping curve

along the Sacramento River. A new channel was blasted in theearly 1900s to shorten the distance river boats needed to take,leaving the remnant channel as an oxbow lake. Lining the old

channel was classic Sacramento River riparian forest atowering canopy of valley oak, Fremont cottonwood, Goodings

willow and western sycamore, all draped in a veil of wild grape.Oregon ash and box elder, festooned with Dutchmans pipevine

and poison oak, dominated the mid-story. The understory, likemost places on the river, was a mix of native and non-native

species.

However, in the midst of this lush habitat was approximately 60

acres that had been farmed for at least 40 years. When farming

ceased, this area lay fallow for a decade and vegetation quicklycolonized the rich soils, though few of the plants were native.

Instead, a tangle of yellow star thistle, Johnson grass, and blackmustard dominated the site, providing poor habitat and little

opportunity for forest regeneration.

In 1999, DFG contracted with River Partners to restore the

Beehive Bend Unit. This project came during a critical period inthe evolution of restoration design, and was one of the first to

incorporate a sophisticated plant design based on a mosaic ofvegetative structure designed specifically to maximize the nichesexploitable by native birds. To help evaluate the restoration, River

Partners worked with PRBO Conservation Science to monitor

breeding songbirds in both the remnant riparian and restorationarea, and the project design was developed in part with PRBOrecommendations. What began as a three-year study has now

extended into ten years of monitoring through subsequentfunding efforts. Longer term views are critical to understandingthe efficacy of restoration, as Dr. Nat Seavy of PRBO points out,

because some species do not use restored sites until about 10years after restoration. Monitoring beyond the typical three-year

period is critical for understanding whether or not restoration has

been successful in creating bird habitat.

Riparian habitats are dynamic, yet predictable patterns occur andwildlife responds accordingly. Early-successional habitat includessuch pioneering plant species as willows and blackberry that

colonize new sandbars after flood events, and this vegetativestructure is mimicked by young restoration. Some of the first

avian species to respond to this habitat include Black-headedGrosbeak, Lesser Goldfinch and Spotted Sandpiper. Because

early-successional habitat is in short supply, these birds flock torestoration sites, and have been documented abandoning longheld territories in old riparian in favor of restorations as young as

two years old.

Dams, diversions, and levees have greatly altered floods and

seasonal flows, and as a result, early-successional habitat is nowrarely created by the Sacramento River. Most of the remnant

habitat along the river is comparable to the existing riparian atBeehive Bend, or is in agricultural production. While this can

provide important habitat for some birds, many sensitive birdspecies need a different type of forest, the lush quick growth ofshrubby willows, California blackberry and other rapidly growing

native plants. In the absence of more dynamic rivers, restorationplantings provide important habitat. The trick is how to best

manage these areas for them long term, and this question canonly be answered with long-term monitoring on existing projects

so that we can accurately evaluate their impacts.

So how has Beehive Bend performed over its first decade? Trends

from the 1999-2007 point-count data suggest some interestingresults. In the existing riparian forest, avian species richness has

averaged 9.8 (species per point, over two visits per breedingseason) for the duration of the study, while richness within therestoration hovered around 3.5 over the first four years, and then

jumped to 7.5 in year five and 8.3 in year six. After a one-yearbreak due to lack of funding, the study resumed in 2006 (current

funding will take us through the 2008 field season) and PRBOfound that the restored forest now harbored a bird community

that was nearly as species rich as the existing riparian (richness =9.0 in the restoration, 9.22 in the existing riparian over the nexttwo years).

Looking at Beehive in the context of a larger study, twenty birdspecies were examined over a similar time period across ahundred-mile segment of the lower Sacramento River and twelve

were found to be increasing, while only one was decreasing. Whilethis is great news in an era when so many studies are

documenting negative trends, we must continue to work closelywith our partners to further refine and improve our restoration

designs, working toward a common goal of ensuring the longterm vitality of Californias wildlife.

Ten Years at Beehive BendMichael Rogner and Dan Efseaff, River Partners


10/12


Integrated Environmental Restoration Services, Inc. Tahoe City

Coastal Restoration Consultants, Inc. Santa Barbara

Kamman Hydrology & Engineering San Rafael

Dudek Engineering & Environment Encinitas

Native Grow NurserySan Juan Capistrano

E. Read and Associates, Inc. Orange

Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy

RECON Environmental, Inc. San Diego

Tree of Life NurseryMike Evans San Juan Capistrano

Tree of Life NurseryJeff Bohn San Juan Capistrano

Tree of Life NurseryLaura Camp San Juan Capistrano

Ecological Concerns, Inc. Santa Cruz

Hedgerow Farms WintersGrover Landscape ServicesModesto

Stover Seed CompanyLos Angeles

Pacific Coast Seed Livermore

Contributing Business $250SustainingIndividual $100

Bo Glover Environmental Nature CenterNewport Beach

Jon Shilling Shilling SeedAuburn

Business $500Pacific Restoration Group, Inc. Corona

EcoSystems Restoration Associates SanDiego/Lincoln

Many, Many Thanks to our Members



11/12


SERCAL 2008 MembershipApplication/Renewal Form

Annual Membership DuesSERCALs newsletter, Ecesis, is received with ALL rates.

INDIVIDUALS BUSINESSStudent $15 Nonprofit Organization $45

Regular $35 Contributing $250 *

Joint Individual (Discounted) Sustaining $500 *

SERCAL + Cal-IPC $65 Summit Circle $1000 *

SERCAL + CNGA $70

All 3 organizations $105 * Receive quarterly recognition

Sustaining $100 * in Ecesis

Cal-IPC is the California Invasive Plant Council andCNGA is the California Native Grasslands Association

The following members receive additional benefits:

Copies of each No. of discounted ratesCategory Ecesis issue ** at SERCAL events

Nonprofit Organization 2 1

Contributing Business 3 3

Sustaining Business 4 4

Summit Circle 6 6

**When completing this membership form, you may designate

specific individuals to be included on the mailing list.

________________________________________________________

NAME DATE

________________________________________________________COMPANY/AFFILIATION

________________________________________________________ADDRESS

________________________________________________________CITY ZIP COUNTY

________________________________________________________PHONE EMAIL

Check enclosed (please make payable to SERCAL)

Please charge my credit card: __Visa __MasterCard

_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ Exp: _ _ / _ _

Billing address (if different than address above):

________________________________________________________

Complete form and payment to SERCAL and

mail to: SERCAL Administrative Office, 2701

20th St., Bakersfield CA 93301

Welcome New Members! through 1 June 2008Sarah Hoskinson UC Davis

Don RochaSanta Clara County Parks Los Gatos

Susan Erwin Weaverville

Stan Kaufman San Francisco

Michael MurphyGarden Valley

John WilliamsAmerican Civil ConstructorsMartinez

Michael Read Burlingame

Robert D. Sanders Chico

Allegra BukojemskyBioHabitats, Inc. San

FranciscoRose Roberts Farm Stewards Healdsburg

Andrew Werner Santa Cruz

Nancy LesaCircuit Rider Productions Windsor

Arnold Thompson San Francisco

Madelyn Comer Nichols Consulting EngineersReno

Austin ParnowHealdsburg

Dorothy AbeytaCity of San Jose

Julian Meisler Laguna de Santa Rosa FoundationSanta Rosa

Ann Baker RRM Design Group Sausalito

Bree Candiloro Oakland

Gavin Archbald Romberg Tiburon Center forEnvironmental Studies, SFSU

Carol BeahanWildscape Engineering Services CorteMadera

Megan Scheeline Nichols Consulting EngineersZephyr Cove, NV

Susan Durham El Dorado National ForestPlacerville

Mark Girard Habitat Restoration SciencesEscondido

Dale Ritenour La Mesa


12/12

0120thStreet,BakersfieldCA93301-3334

ReturnServiceRequested

www.sercal.org

Checkthemailing labelforyourmembership

expirationdate

Documents

Ecesis Newsletter, Summer 2008