Photo by Chris Giorni
|
|
Froggy went a-missin'? While government biologists have not seen this endangered frog, photographed at Wavecrest, they have found frog habitat. And that could be just as significant.
|
Biologists didn’t see any California red-legged frogs on a visit to the Wavecrest Village site on July 29, but they weren’t looking for frogs. Although the Review reported they found “nary a frog”, that’s not the end of the story. From the Review:
The four scientists searched the area for the threatened species. But after spending most of the afternoon poking through all areas that could serve as potential frog habitat, what they found was nary a red-legged frog.
US Fish and Wildlife Service biologist Mary Hammer, who was there, described it as a “casual site visit”. A California red-legged frog survey would have involved an intensive review of the site, including daytime and nighttime observations. “It would have been surprising to find a frog there in the middle of the day,” said California Coastal Commission staff biologist John Dixon, who was at the visit. One biologist has already reported a frog sighting to the California Department of Fish and Game.
What they found, according to Hammer, was frog habitat. And frog habitat is enough to get Fish and Wildlife involved in the development process. “Frog habitat could also indicate the San Francisco garter snake,” according to Hammer. The SF garter snake is a federally-protected endangered species.
What’s unclear is what the next steps would be. The Fish and Wildlife Service is conferring internally, as well as with their colleagues in other agencies, about what to do next. Meanwhile, developer Wavecrest Village LLC has an issue that it must deal with before it can begin construction.
“It’s a concern and we’ll be waiting to see what the wildlife agencies think about it and how significant they think it is.” said Coastal Commission biologist Dixon.
The frog habitat may not prevent construction. There are other ways to deal with what the folks at FWS call a “take” than simply preserving the site as it exists. A habitat conservation plan may be necessary. I talked Pat Fitzgerald of Wavecrest Village, LLC, and he says he’s waiting to hear from the Coastal Commission and US Fish & Wildlife.
Also unclear at this point is the impact of the existence of frog habitat on the permitting process with the county or with the California Coastal Commission.
