September 12, 2018

PORT COMMISSION AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018 AT 7:00PM
FOUR POINTS SHERATON BALLROOM
1050 SCHOONER DRIVE, VENTURA, CA
A Closed Session of the Board will be held at 5:30PM at the
Four Points Sheraton Captain’s Room located at 1050 Schooner Drive, Ventura to discuss the
items on the Attachment to Agenda-Closed Session Conference with Legal Counsel.
The Board will convene in Open Session at the Four Points Sheraton Ballroom
located at 1050 Schooner Drive , Ventura for its Regular Meeting at 7:00PM.
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA:
CALL TO ORDER: By Chair Everard Ashworth
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: By Chair Everard Ashworth.
ROLL CALL: By the Clerk of the Board.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA (3 minutes)
Consider and approve, by majority vote, minor revisions to agenda items and/or attachments and any
item added to, or removed/continued from the Port Commission’s agenda. Administrative Reports relating
to this agenda and materials related to an item on this agenda submitted after distribution of the agenda
packet are available for public review at the Port District’s office located at 1603 Anchors Way Drive,
Ventura, CA during business hours as well as on the District’s website – www.venturaharbor.com. Each
item on the agenda shall be deemed to include action by an appropriate motion, resolution or ordinance
to take action on any item.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES (3 minutes)
The Minutes of the July 25, 2018 Regular Meeting and August 22, 2018 Special Meeting will be
considered for approval.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS (3 minutes)
The Public Communications period is set aside to allow public testimony on items not on today’s agenda.
Each person may address the Commission for up to three minutes or at the discretion of the Chair.
1
CLOSED SESSION REPORT (3 minutes)
Closed Sessions are not open to the public pursuant to the Brown Act. Any reportable actions taken by
the Commission during Closed Session will be announced at this time.
BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (5 minutes)
Port Commissioner’s may present brief reports on port issues, such as seminars, meetings and literature
that would be of interest to the public and/or Commission, as a whole. Port Commissioner’s must provide
a brief summary and disclose any discussions he or she may have had with any Port District Tenants
related to Port District business.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS (5 minutes)
Ventura Port District Staff will update the Commission on important topics if needed.
LEGAL COUNSEL REPORT (5 minutes)
CONSENT AGENDA: (5 minutes)
Matters appearing on the Consent Calendar are expected to be non-controversial and will be acted upon
by the Board at one time, without discussion, unless a member of the Board or the public requests an
opportunity to address any given item. Approval by the Board of Consent Items means that the
recommendation is approved along with the terms set forth in the applicable staff reports.
A) Approval of Out of Town Travel Requests
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve the out of town travel request for Electrician,
John Collins.
B) Approval of New Restaurant Lease Agreement for Baja Bay Surf Taco
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve a new Restaurant Lease Agreement between
the Ventura Port District dba Ventura Harbor Village and Baja Bay Surf Taco for the premises
located at 1567 Spinnaker Drive #104 consisting of a total of 773 square feet (623 patio) for a
two (2) year term.
C) Approval of New Retail Lease Agreement for Barefoot Boutique
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners:
a) Approve by motion the termination of a lease agreement, dated November 16, 2015, for
the premises located at 1575 Spinnaker Drive #106 A&B, consisting of 1,545 square feet
(65 square feet storage); and
b) Approve by motion a new retail lease agreement for the premises located at 1575
Spinnaker Drive #106 A&B, consisting of 1,545 square feet (236 square foot storage
room) between the Ventura Port District dba Ventura Harbor Village and Elizabeth
Marino dba Barefoot Boutique, LLC for a five-year term with one four-year option.
D) Approval of New Office Lease for Julianne Martin, Psy.D. and Gregory Gray, M.D.
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve a new Office Lease Agreement between the
Ventura Port District dba Ventura Harbor Village and Julianne Martin, Psy,D. and Gregory Gray,
M.D. for the premises located at 1575 Spinnaker Drive #207 and #208 consisting of a total of
840 square feet for a one (1) year term with a one (1) year option.
2
STANDARD AGENDA:
1) Approval of Financial Statements and Checks for October through December 2017
Recommended Action: Roll Call Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners adopts Resolution No. 3360 to:
a) Accept the following financial statements for the Quarter ended December 31, 2017;
and
b) Review the payroll and regular checks for October through December 2017.
2) Approval of Professional Services Agreement with White Nelson Diehl Evans
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners:
a) Approve the three year Professional Services Agreement with White Nelson Diehl
Evans LLP to perform the District’s financial audit of the fiscal years ending June 30,
2018, June 30, 2019 and June 30, 2020; and
b) Appoint an Audit Liaison to work with staff and White Nelson Diehl Evans LLP
throughout the audit process.
3) Approval of New Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Code
Recommended Action: Roll Call Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners adopt Resolution No. 3361 to approve the new Conflict
of Interest Code Policy and rescind Resolution No. 3317.
4) Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Site Selection
Recommended Action: Information.
That the Board of Port Commissioners receive an informational report on the VSE site selection
process with the anticipation of a final site recommendation with related permit applications,
studies and reports on September 26, 2018.
REQUEST FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
ADJOURNMENT
This agenda was posted on Friday, September 7, 2018 by 5:00 p.m. at the Port District Office
and online at www.venturaharbor.com – Port District Business – Meetings and Agendas.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the Ventura Port District at (805) 642-8538. Notification 48 hours before the
meeting will enable the District to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility.
(28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II)
3
ATTACHMENT TO PORT COMMISSION AGENDA
CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
1. Conference with Real Property Negotiators – Per Government Code Section 54956.8:
a) Property:
Negotiating Parties:
Under Negotiation:
Federal Authorized Sea Bottom
Oscar Peña, Brian Pendleton, Roland Trinh
Leasing or Permits for VSE Aquaculture Purposes
b) Property:
Negotiating Parties:
Under Negotiation:
1583 Spinnaker Drive #104B, #105
Oscar Peña, Brian Pendleton, Roland Trinh
Potential New Retail Lease with Health Minded, Corp. dba
Frenchies Modern Nail Care
c) Property:
Negotiating Parties:
Under Negotiation:
1567 Spinnaker Drive #104
Oscar Peña, Brian Pendleton, Roland Trinh
New Restaurant Lease with Baja Bay Surf Taco
d) Property:
Negotiating Parties:
Under Negotiation:
1575 Spinnaker Drive #106A&B
Oscar Peña, Brian Pendleton, Roland Trinh
New Retail Lease with Barefoot Boutique
e) Property:
Negotiating Parties:
Under Negotiation:
1575 Spinnaker Drive #207 & #208
Oscar Peña, Brian Pendleton, Roland Trinh
New Office Lease with Julianne Martin, Psy.D. and Gregory
Gray, M.D.
2. Conference with Legal Counsel – Pending Litigation per Government Code Section
54956.9(d)(1): Rosemary Lazard vs. Ventura Port District; Case No. 56-2017-00500990-
CU-PO-VTA. (Verbal Report)
3. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Significant exposure to
litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: Three Cases.
(Verbal Report)
4
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
JULY 25, 2018 REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 22, 2018 SPECIAL MEETING
5
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
MINUTES OF JULY 25, 2018
The Regular Meeting of the Ventura Board of Port Commissioners was
called to order by Chairman Everard Ashworth at 7:09PM at the Ventura
Port District Administration Office, 1603 Anchors Way Drive, Ventura,
CA 93001.
Commissioners Present:
Everard Ashworth, Chairman
Jim Friedman, Secretary
Jean Getchell
Commissioners Absent:
Brian Brennan, Vice Chairman
Chris Stephens
Port District Staff:
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Gloria Adkins, Accounting Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Richard Parsons, Consultant
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Jessica Rauch, Clerk of the Board
Legal Counsel:
Andy Turner
Dominic Nunneri
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER: By Chairman Everard Ashworth at 7:09PM.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: By Commissioner Friedman.
ROLL CALL: Commissioner Brennan and Stephens were absent.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ACTON: Commissioner Getchell moved, seconded by Commissioner Friedman and
carried by a vote of 3-0 to adopt the July 25, 2018 agenda.
6
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Minutes of July 11, 2018 Regular meeting were considered as follows:
ACTION: Commissioner Friedman moved, seconded by Commissioner Getchell and
carried by a vote of 3-0 to approve the minutes of the July 11, 2018 regular
meeting.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS: Vikki Brock spoke about the Pine tree between National Park
Visitor Center and Parcel 8. She feels it did not need to be cut down, but could be trimmed
appropriately to accommodate whatever needs it was hindering.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT: Mr. Turner stated that the Board met in closed session;
discussed and reviewed all items on the closed session agenda. Staff was given instructions on
how to proceed as appropriate and there was no action taken that is reportable under The
Brown Act.
BOARD COMMUNICATIONS: Commissioner Ashworth reported that he was fortunate to have
attended the Change of Command Ceremony for the Army Corps of Engineers.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS: Mr. Pendleton reported to the Board that ATE had done their
vehicle survey in Harbor Village.
LEGAL COUNSEL REPORT: None.
CONSENT AGENDA:
A) Approval of Out of Town Travel Requests
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve the out of town travel requests for the following
employees:
A) Facilities Manager, Joe Gonzalez to attend the CA JPIA Risk Management
Educational Forum;
B) Harbormaster, John Higgins to attend the CA JPIA Risk Management Educational
Forum;
C) Consultant, Richard Parsons to attend the CMANC Fall Meeting;
D) Commissioner, Brian Brennan to attend the CMANC Fall Meeting;
E) Deputy General Manager, Brian Pendleton to attend the PCSGA Annual Shellfish
Conference;
F) General Manager, Oscar Peña to attend the PCSGA Annual Shellfish Conference.
ACTION: Commissioner Friedman moved, seconded by Commissioner Getchell and
carried by a vote of 3-0 to approve the out of town travel requests for the
following employees:
A) Facilities Manager, Joe Gonzalez to attend the CA JPIA Risk Management
Educational Forum;
B) Harbormaster, John Higgins to attend the CA JPIA Risk Management
Educational Forum;
C) Consultant, Richard Parsons to attend the CMANC Fall Meeting;
D) Commissioner, Brian Brennan to attend the CMANC Fall Meeting;
E) Deputy General Manager, Brian Pendleton to attend the PCSGA Annual
Shellfish Conference;
7
F) General Manager, Oscar Peña to attend the PCSGA Annual Shellfish
Conference.
B) Approval of Professional Services Agreement with Motionloft, Inc.
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve a three year professional services agreement
with Motionloft, Inc. for pedestrian and vehicle analytics in the amount of $31,338.00.
ACTION: Commissioner Friedman moved, seconded by Commissioner Getchell and
carried by a vote of 3-0 to approve a three year professional services
agreement with Motionloft, Inc. for pedestrian and vehicle analytics in the
amount of $31,338.00.
STANDARD AGENDA:
1) Adoption of Resolution No. 3357 Authorizing the Execution and Delivery by the District
of an Installment Sale Agreement and Authorizing the Execution of Other Necessary
Documents and Related Actions for the Ventura Harbor Marina Dock Replacement
Project
Recommended Action: Roll Call Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners adopt Resolution No. 3357:
a) Authorizing the execution and delivery by the District of an Installment Sale Agreement
Ventura Harbor Marina Dock Replacement Project; and
b) Authorizing the execution of other necessary documents and related actions for the
Ventura Harbor Marina Dock Replacement Project.
ACTION: Commissioner Getchell moved, seconded by Commissioner Friedman and
carried by a vote of 3-0 to adopt Resolution No. 3357 authorizing the
execution and delivery by the District of an Installment Sale Agreement
Ventura Harbor Marina Dock Replacement Project; and authorizing the
execution of other necessary documents and related actions for the
Ventura Harbor Marina Dock Replacement Project.
2) Approval of a Professional Services Agreement for Bidding and Construction Phases
of the Ventura Harbor Village Marina Dock Replacement Project
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve a Professional Services Agreement with Noble
Consultants in the amount of $93,365 to provide engineering services during the bidding and
construction phases of the Ventura Harbor Village Marina Dock Replacement Project.
ACTION: Commissioner Friedman moved, seconded by Commissioner Getchell and
carried by a vote of 3-0 to approve a Professional Services Agreement with
Noble Consultants in the amount of $93,365 to provide engineering
services during the bidding and construction phases of the Ventura Harbor
Village Marina Dock Replacement Project.
8
3) Approval of a New Retail Lease Agreement for Commissioned Desserts, LLC dba Top
This Chocolate
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve a new Retail Lease Agreement between the
Ventura Port District dba Ventura Harbor Village and Commissioned Desserts, LLC dba Top
This Chocolate for the premises located at 1559 Spinnaker Drive #109 consisting of a total of
1,381 square feet for a three (3) year term with two separate three (3) year options.
ACTION: Commissioner Friedman moved, seconded by Commissioner Getchell and
carried by a vote of 3-0 to approve a new Retail Lease Agreement between
the Ventura Port District dba Ventura Harbor Village and Commissioned
Desserts, LLC dba Top This Chocolate for the premises located at 1559
Spinnaker Drive #109 consisting of a total of 1,381 square feet for a three
(3) year term with two separate three (3) year options.
Public Comment: Owner, Shana Elson introduced herself and explained her business concept.
4) Consider Possible Award of Contract to the Garland Company, Inc. for the Fish Pier
Deck Resurfacing Project
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners consider possible award of a Fish Pier Deck Resurfacing
Contract to the Garland Company, Inc., subject to Legal Counsel’s final approval of the contract
documents.
ACTION: Commissioner Getchell moved, seconded by Commissioner Friedman and
carried by a vote of 3-0 to continue this item to a future meeting.
AGENDA PLANNING GUIDE AND REQUEST FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: None.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:57PM.
________________________________
Secretary
9
\VENTURA PORT DISTRICT
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
MINUTES OF AUGUST 22, 2018
The Special Meeting of the Ventura Board of Port Commissioners was
called to order by Chairman Everard Ashworth at 6:49PM at the Ventura
Port District Administration Office, 1603 Anchors Way Drive, Ventura,
CA 93001.
Commissioners Present:
Everard Ashworth, Chairman
Brian Brennan, Vice Chairman
Jim Friedman, Secretary
Chris Stephens
Jean Getchell
Commissioners Absent:
None.
Port District Staff:
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Gloria Adkins, Accounting Manager
Richard Parsons, Consultant
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Jessica Rauch, Clerk of the Board
Legal Counsel:
Timothy Gosney
Dominic Nunneri
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER: By Chairman Everard Ashworth at 6:49PM.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: By Commissioner Brennan.
ROLL CALL: All Commissioners were present.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ACTON: Commissioner Stephens moved, seconded by Commissioner Getchell and
carried by a vote of 5-0 to adopt the August 22, 2018 agenda.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS: Sam Sadove would like to receive the information the
Commission asked for on the ridership of the trolley. He would also like to know why it has
stopped coming to the Rhumb Line.
10
CLOSED SESSION REPORT: Mr. Gosney stated that the Board met in closed session;
discussed and reviewed all items on the closed session agenda. Staff was given instructions on
how to proceed as appropriate and there was no action taken that is reportable under The
Brown Act.
BOARD COMMUNICATIONS: Commissioner Ashworth reported that the VSE has been
working hard on the application that will be coming to the Board for approval on September 12th.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS: Mr. Peña thanked Mr. Pendleton on his hard work in getting the
VSE application finished. He also reported that Andria’s sent a letter reporting that in 2017 their
sales exceeded $4M.
STANDARD AGENDA:
1) Approval of SEIU-Local 721 MOU Representing Full-Time Harbor Patrol
Recommended Action: Roll Call Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners:
a) Adopt Resolution No. 3358, approving the Memorandum of Understanding Collective
Bargaining Agreement between the Ventura Port District and the Service Employees
International Union, SEIU-Local 721, representing all regular full-time employees
classified as the Harbor Patrol; and
b) Adopt Resolution No. 3359 between Ventura Port District and the California Public
Employment Retirement System (PERS) ratifying the change to the Employer Paid
Member Contribution (EPMC) to reflect the Service Employees International Union,
SEIU-Local 721 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Harbor Patrol
employees.
ACTION: Commissioner Friedman moved, seconded by Commissioner Getchell and
carried by a vote of 5-0 to adopt Resolution No. 3358, approving the
Memorandum of Understanding Collective Bargaining Agreement between
the Ventura Port District and the Service Employees International Union,
SEIU-Local 721, representing all regular full-time employees classified as
the Harbor Patrol; and adopt Resolution No. 3359 between Ventura Port
District and the California Public Employment Retirement System (PERS)
ratifying the change to the Employer Paid Member Contribution (EPMC) to
reflect the Service Employees International Union, SEIU-Local 721
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Harbor Patrol employees.
2) Approval of Pipeline License Agreement between Ventura Port District and ARTPS, LLC
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve the License Agreement by and between the
Ventura Port District, a California Port District, (Licensor) and ARTPS, LLC, a Texas Limited
Liability Company (Licensee) to operate and utilize a 22 inch diameter pipeline and the
appurtenances thereto that run 6,643 linear feet through, along, across and underneath the
surface of a portion of the District’s property for the transport of oil.
ACTION: Commissioner Brennan moved, seconded by Commissioner Stephens and
carried by a vote of 5-0 to approve the License Agreement by and between
the Ventura Port District, a California Port District, (Licensor) and ARTPS,
LLC, a Texas Limited Liability Company (Licensee) to operate and utilize a
11
22 inch diameter pipeline and the appurtenances thereto that run 6,643
linear feet through, along, across and underneath the surface of a portion
of the District’s property for the transport of oil, contingent upon the Public
Utilities Commission’s (PUC) approval and if any changes per the PUC,
Legal Counsel and General Manager review.
3) Award of Contract to the Garland Company, Inc. for the Fish Pier Deck Resurfacing
Project
Recommended Action: Voice Vote.
That the Board of Port Commissioners:
a) Award the Fish Pier Deck Resurfacing Contract to the Garland Company, Inc., in the
amount of $499,950, subject to Legal Counsel’s final approval of the contract
documents; and
b) Approve an increased appropriation for the Fish Pier Resurfacing Project of $175,000
bringing the total project cost to $575,000.
ACTION: Commissioner Stephens moved, seconded by Commissioner Getchell and
carried by a vote of 5-0 to award the Fish Pier Deck Resurfacing Contract to
the Garland Company, Inc., in the amount of $499,950, subject to Legal
Counsel’s final approval of the contract documents; and approve an
increased appropriation for the Fish Pier Resurfacing Project of $175,000
bringing the total project cost to $575,000.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:10PM.
________________________________
Secretary
12
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
CONSENT AGENDA ITEM A
APPROVAL OF OUT OF
TOWN TRAVEL REQUESTS
13
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM A
BOARD COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: September 12, 2018
TO: Board of Port Commissioners
FROM: Oscar F. Peña, General Manager
SUBJECT: Out of Town Travel Requests
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve by motion the following out of town travel requests
for:
A) Electrician, John Collins to travel to Ontario, California to participate in the California
Building Officials Education Week (CALBO) on October 14 – 17, 2018. Attending this
conference will allow Mr. Collins to keep up with continuing education units for Port District
property inspections. Estimated cost for the travel is as follows:
Registration $830.00
Lodging $410.40
Meals $475.00
Mileage $113.77
TOTAL $1,829.17
14
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
CONSENT AGENDA ITEM B
APPROVAL OF NEW RESTAURANT
LEASE AGREEMENT FOR BAJA BAY
SURF TACO
15
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM B
BOARD COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: September 12, 2018
TO: Board of Port Commissioners
FROM: Robin Baer, Property Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of New Restaurant Lease Agreement for Baja Bay Surf Taco
1567 Spinnaker Drive #104
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve a new Restaurant Lease Agreement between
the Ventura Port District dba Ventura Harbor Village and Baja Bay Surf Taco for the premises
located at 1567 Spinnaker Drive #104 consisting of a total of 773 square feet (623 patio) for a
two (2) year term.
SUMMARY:
Baja Bay Surf Taco has been a Tenant since May 2007. Staff has re-negotiated with this tenant
who will now be signing a two-year term lease. He will be updating his outside and inside
furniture, painting the interior of the restaurant and adding desserts to the menu.
BACKGROUND:
After visiting Ensenada, a city on the Pacific coast of Mexico’s Baja California, Mr. Rangel’s
vision was to bring to the Harbor his experience of Mexican cuisine. He has been a chef for over
twenty years and specializes in fish tacos, burritos and tostadas along with the traditional
Mexican dishes for lunch, dinner and desserts.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This new lease reflects current market rental rates for restaurant space in the complex. The
annual occupancy cost for the first year of this lease is approximately $25,000. The minimum
rent over the two year term is adjusted annually by 3%. The District will be contributing $5,000
towards paint, interior modifications and replacing the kitchen fan.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
16
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
CONSENT AGENDA ITEM C
APPROVAL OF NEW RETAIL LEASE
AGREEMENT FOR BAREFOOT
BOUTIQUE
17
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM C
BOARD COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: September 12, 2018
TO: Board of Port Commissioners
FROM: Robin Baer, Property Manager
SUBJECT: Termination of Agreement and Approval of New Retail Lease Agreement for
Elizabeth Marino dba Barefoot Boutique LLC, 1575 Spinnaker Drive #106 A&B
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Port Commissioners:
a) Approve by motion the termination of a lease agreement, dated November 16, 2015, for
the premises located at 1575 Spinnaker Drive #106 A&B, consisting of 1,545 square feet
(65 square feet storage); and
b) Approve by motion a new retail lease agreement for the premises located at 1575
Spinnaker Drive #106 A&B, consisting of 1,545 square feet (236 square foot storage
room) between the Ventura Port District dba Ventura Harbor Village and Elizabeth
Marino dba Barefoot Boutique, LLC for a five-year term with one four-year option.
SUMMARY:
Ms. Marino has been a tenant since June 2013. Staff has re-negotiated with this tenant who will
now be signing a five-year lease term with one four-year option.
BACKGROUND:
Barefoot Boutique opened in 2013 in a 609 square foot unit. In November 2015, to better serve
her customer base, she expanded to a unit with 1,545 square feet. She specializes in hip and
trendy clothing that reflects the fun and active lifestyle of California. She also carries unique
local, artisan jewelry and soaps. Ms. Marino’s success is surpassing her expectations and she
looks forward to a continued profitable future in Ventura Harbor Village.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This new lease reflects current market rental rates for retail space in the complex. The annual
occupancy cost for the first year of this lease is approximately $43,488. The minimum rent over
the five year term is adjusted annually by 3%. There are no improvements to this space that the
District will be contributing.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
18
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
CONSENT AGENDA ITEM D
APPROVAL OF NEW OFFICE LEASE
AGREEMENT FOR JULIANNE MARTIN,
PSY.D. AND GREGORY GRAY, M.D.
19
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM D
BOARD COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: September 12, 2018
TO: Board of Port Commissioners
FROM: Robin Baer, Property Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of New Office Lease Agreement for Julianne Martin, Psy.D. and
Gregory Gray, M.D.
1575 Spinnaker Drive #207 & #208
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Port Commissioners approve a new Office Lease Agreement between the
Ventura Port District dba Ventura Harbor Village and Julianne Martin, Psy,D. and Gregory Gray,
M.D. for the premises located at 1575 Spinnaker Drive #207 and #208 consisting of a total of
840 square feet for a one (1) year term with a one (1) year option.
SUMMARY:
Staff has re-negotiated with this tenant who will now be signing a one-year term lease, with one
year option. They are looking to retire soon, but don’t know quite when. No improvements are
required for this space.
BACKGROUND:
Julianne Y. Martin, Psy.D. (Psychologist) and Gregory E. Gray, M.D. (Psychiatrist) has been a
Harbor Village tenant since September 2015. Between the two, they have over 38 years of
experience in their fields. They relocated from Channel Islands Harbor to the Ventura Harbor
and previously signed a one year lease in 2015. In 2016, a two year leased was signed. They
have enjoyed the Village and would like to continue tenancy.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This new lease reflects current market rental rates for office space in the complex. The annual
occupancy cost for year one will be approximately $19,000 for year one. The option year will be
increased by 3%.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
20
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
STANDARD AGENDA ITEM 1
APPROVAL OF FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND CHECKS FOR
OCTOBER THROUGH DECEMBER
2017
21
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT STANDARD AGENDA ITEM 1
BOARD COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: September 12, 2018
TO: Board of Port Commissioners
FROM: Gloria Adkins, Accounting Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of Financial Statements and Checks for January through March 2018
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Port Commissioners adopts Resolution No. 3360 to:
a) Accept the following financial statements for the Quarter ended March 31, 2018; and
b) Review the payroll and regular checks for January through March 2018.
SUMMARY:
Attached for the Board’s review are the financial statements for the quarter ended March 31,
2018 and the check registers for January through March 2018.
BACKGROUND:
The financial statements consist of Statement of Revenue and Expenses, Budget Analysis
Notes, Annual Budget Compared to Year-to-Date Expenditures, Balance Sheet, Cash Flow
Statement, Distribution of Cash, Comparison of Lease Rents, and a Three Year Comparative
Statement of Revenue and Expenses.
The financial statements for the Aquaculture Grant Fund are included here as Attachment 3.
Operational Disbursements
The accounts payable check registers for January through March are located after all the
financial statement documents as Attachment 4. The registers include a brief description of the
purpose for each check.
I have explained some of the major accounts payable check expenditures below. (Regular
payments such as monthly service contracts, utilities, legal services, etc. are not shown below
as they are recurring each month.):
January 2018 –
 Ventura Harbor Storage was paid $12,226 for the December and January fisherman’s
storage area rental. This monthly fee is reimbursed back to the District as per the lease
with Karen Dupuy dba Harbor Boat & Storage.
 Garland/DBS, Inc. was paid $299,006 on 1/11/18 as a progress payment on the Village roof
project.
 Viola Inc. was paid $38,789 on 1/16 and $40,000 on $1/24 as progress payments on the
Phase 3 Carousel Courtyard renovation project.
 Downtown Ventura Partners was paid $8,200 on 1/25, $8,000 was advertising on the trolley
as per trolley partnership for the period January thru June 2018 and $200 was for Big Belly
advertising.
 Noble Consultants Inc. was paid $61,345 on 1/25, $44,305 for services related to the Village
dock renovation of slips C, D, G & H; $12,930 related to the condition inspection of the fish
pier and $4,110 related to the purchasing of the new fish pier crane.
22
 Seaworthy Marine Products was paid $13,569 on 1/26 for a replacement boat engine and
miscellaneous parts.
 ID Plans Corporation was paid $13,600 on 1/25 for updated ‘as built’ floor plans for existing
spaces in Harbor Village.
 Marcos Ramos Painting was paid $10,305 on 1/25 for ten separate jobs throughout the
Village including dry rot repair, doorway entry features, restroom and equipment room, and
upstairs hand rails.
February 2018 –
 Downtown Ventura Partners was paid $12,400 on 2/08, $12,000 was as per the trolley
partnership for the January thru June 2018 period and $400 was for Big Belly advertising.
 Marcos Ramos Painting was paid $10,150 on 2/08 for six separate jobs throughout the
Village including window frame dry rot repair, inner courtyard stairs, and pressure wash and
paint retainer walls.
 West Coast Air Conditioning was paid $9,580 on 2/08 for a replacement air conditioning unit
at 1691 National Park Service suite and the quarterly HVAC maintenance contract for units
in the Village and the District headquarters.
 Cal Coast Motorsports was paid $24,488 for the two replacement personal watercraft crafts
used by Patrol in water rescues.
 Kratos Construction was paid $12,350 on 2/08 for office suite renovations at 1575 Spinnaker
#205.
 Noble Consultants was paid $11,206 on 2/21, $1,875 for services related to the Village dock
renovation of slips C, D, G & H; $133 related to the condition inspection of the fish pier and
$9,198 related to the purchasing of the new fish pier crane.
 ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corp was paid $43,808 on 2/21 as the final payment on the elevator
modernization project in the 1583 Spinnaker building located behind the Boatyard Pub suite.
March 2018 –
 Sparky’s Electric Inc. was paid $16,535 on 3/08 for the electrical upgrades and fire alarm
box replacements in the 1583 elevator as part of the modernization project.
 Ventura County Air Pollution Control District was paid $18,335 on 3/08 for the annual
environmental permit renewal as needed for dredging.
Details reflecting purchases made through the District’s Chase Bank credit cards for January
through March 2018 are included as Attachment 5.
Payroll Disbursements
The District has 26 bi-weekly pay periods per year; ten months of the year will have two regular
payroll periods and two months will have three regular pay periods. January and February
contained two regular pay periods each. The payroll for the month of March is higher than
normal because it contains three payroll periods and the quarterly accrued compensation hours
pay-off run.
23
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Statement of Income and Expenses reflects a positive ‘Change in Net Position’ of
$1,114,106 for the period ended March 31, 2018.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 3360
Attachment 2 – Statement of Income Expenses – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018
Attachment 3 – Aquaculture Fisheries Grant Fund Financial Statements at March 31, 2018
Attachment 4 – Accounts Payable Check Registers January – March 2018
Attachment 5 – Chase Credit Card Charges January – March 2018
24
ATTACHMENT 1
25
Ventura Port District
Statement of Income and Expenses
For the Period Ended March 31, 2018
< - - - - - - - - Quarter (3 mos) - - - - - - - - > < - - - - - - - Year-to-Date - - - - - - - >
Budget Activity Variance Budget Activity Variance
OPERATING REVENUES
Parcel Lease Income $ 1,065,500 $ 1,071,930 $ 6,430 $ 2,803,500 $ 2,813,552 $ 10,052
Dry Storage Income 30,000 31,425 1,425 90,000 93,492 3,492
Fisherman’s Storage 18,360 18,652 292 55,460 55,330 (130)
Parking Income 11,000 4,552 (6,448) 50,000 39,379 (10,621)
Miscellaneous Income/Rentals 2,395 2,495 100 42,985 43,320 335
Village Income
Harbor Village Lease Income 559,000 597,881 38,881 1,917,000 1,970,792 53,792
Commercial Fishing 96,300 109,507 13,207 302,200 327,025 24,825
Miscellaneous Income 1,395 1,412 17 4,135 7,357 3,222
Harbor Event Fees 7,200 3,184 (4,016) 21,700 14,840 (6,860)
Marketing Booth/Vendor Income 4,200 2,188 (2,012) 6,800 3,453 (3,347)
Co-Op Advert/Sponsorship 3,501 500 (3,001) 10,503 13,120 2,617
Merchants Promo Fund 26,700 25,333 (1,367) 78,000 76,807 (1,193)
Slip Rentals 219,000 233,023 14,023 646,000 660,075 14,075
Dock Electrical Income 10,000 6,507 (3,493) 19,000 15,798 (3,202)
C A M Income 84,000 83,926 (74) 250,500 251,190 690
Total Oper. Revenues $ 2,138,551 $ 2,192,515 $ 53,964 $ 6,297,783 $ 6,385,530 $ 87,747
OPERATING EXPENSES
Personnel Expenses
Salaries & Wages
Regular Salaries $ 590,415 $ 595,510 $ (5,095) $ 1,686,915 $ 1,674,797 $ 12,118
Part-time Help 19,900 19,739 161 56,900 50,145 6,755
Overtime Pay 21,900 19,567 2,333 77,300 71,809 5,491
Holiday Pay 11,500 12,430 (930) 34,250 27,557 6,693
Total Salaries & Wages $ 643,715 $ 647,246 $ (3,531) $ 1,855,365 $ 1,824,308 $ 31,057
Other personnel expenses
Retirement Contributions/Exp $ 128,560 $ 122,179 $ 6,381 $ 367,310 $ 369,179 $ (1,869)
Payroll Taxes 11,796 11,267 529 40,856 32,955 7,901
Worker’s Comp Ins. 42,990 42,990 0 128,970 128,970 0
OPEB Liability 31,239 30,633 606 93,717 92,103 1,614
Medical & Life Ins. 70,734 70,009 725 212,202 207,332 4,870
Optional Benefit Plan 57,495 55,593 1,902 172,485 160,932 11,553
Uniforms & Tool Allowances 7,245 8,149 (904) 21,735 21,541 194
Total – Other Personnel Expenses $ 350,059 $ 340,820 $ 9,239 $ 1,037,275 $ 1,013,012 $ 24,263
Total Personnel Expenses $ 993,774 $ 988,066 $ 5,708 $ 2,892,640 $ 2,837,320 $ 55,320
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
1
ATTACHMENT 2
26
Ventura Port District
Statement of Income and Expenses
For the Period Ended March 31, 2018
< - - - - - - - Quarter (3 mos) - - - - - - - > < - - - - - - - Year-to-Date - - - - - - - >
Budget Activity Variance Budget Activity Variance
General Expenses
Advertising $ 1,749 $ 1,999 $ (250) $ 9,247 $ 9,141 $ 106
Leasing & Real Estate 4,998 3,968 1,030 14,994 13,914 1,080
Auto Mileage & Allowance 3,495 3,392 103 10,485 9,992 493
Auto/Boat Equip & Maint 39,895 30,707 9,188 113,985 81,804 32,181
Bad Debt 0 449 (449) 0 914 (914)
Bank Fees & Other Misc 3,900 1,647 2,253 11,650 7,282 4,368
Building Maintenance 102,255 96,219 6,036 284,765 268,373 16,392
Communications 11,250 9,455 1,795 33,750 27,559 6,191
Conferences & Training 20,880 9,070 11,810 49,960 22,843 27,117
Dock Maint. & Repair 11,100 5,941 5,159 32,400 14,887 17,513
Village Enhancements 7,500 0 7,500 22,500 0 22,500
Equipment Rental 3,375 2,696 679 10,125 10,518 (393)
General Insurance 66,498 66,498 0 199,494 199,494 0
Grounds Maintenance 34,505 25,378 9,127 120,515 106,240 14,275
General Harbor Maintenance 900 300 600 2,700 300 2,400
Janitorial Supplies 13,750 11,572 2,178 46,250 40,497 5,753
Land/Building Rental Expense 18,360 18,652 (292) 55,460 55,152 308
Marketing & Promotions 62,875 52,432 10,443 214,350 197,320 17,030
Memberships & Subscriptions 998 2,682 (1,684) 20,494 21,716 (1,222)
Office Supplies & Equipment 10,122 6,337 3,785 29,866 20,922 8,944
Computer Equip & Supplies 10,248 3,452 6,796 30,744 21,158 9,586
Operating Supplies 14,700 5,590 9,110 46,200 27,768 18,432
Other Equipment & Repairs 10,880 10,601 279 34,620 30,260 4,360
Professional Services – Legal 63,900 45,460 18,440 200,700 176,640 24,060
Professional/Outside Services 124,850 101,985 22,865 427,450 335,058 92,392
Prof. Serv.-VSE Aquaculture 24,000 14,045 9,955 77,000 54,774 22,226
Utilities 86,230 75,794 10,436 296,020 270,506 25,514
Dredging Related Expenses 87,555 72,247 15,308 184,945 158,631 26,314
Total General Expenses $ 840,768 $ 678,568 $ 162,200 $ 2,580,669 $ 2,183,663 $ 397,006
Total Operating Expenses $ 1,834,542 $ 1,666,634 $ 167,908 $ 5,473,309 $ 5,020,983 $ 452,326
Oper. Income(Loss) Before Deprec.$ 304,009 $ 525,881 $ 221,872 $ 824,474 $ 1,364,547 $ 540,073
Depreciation $ 273,000 $ 251,108 $ 21,892 $ 687,000 $ 663,152 $ 23,848
Operating Income (Loss) $ 31,009 $ 274,773 $ 243,764 $ 137,474 $ 701,395 $ 563,921
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
2
ATTACHMENT 2
27
Ventura Port District
Statement of Income and Expenses
For the Period Ended March 31, 2018
< - - - - - - - Quarter (3 mos) - - - - - - - > < - - - - - - - Year-to-Date - - - - - - - >
Budget Activity Variance Budget Activity Variance
NON-OPERATING REVENUES
General
Investment Income (Loss) $ 15,000 $ 36,707 $ 21,707 $ 45,000 $ 92,716 $ 47,716
Tax Income 15,000 19,922 4,922 695,000 727,903 32,903
Intergov’t Revenue 0 0 0 0 20,284 20,284
Sale of Fixed Assets 0 0 0 0 1,320 1,320
Total General Non-Oper. Income $ 30,000 $ 56,629 $ 26,629 $ 740,000 $ 842,223 $ 102,223
Special Funding
DBAW Grants-Misc $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
DBAW Grant-Equipment 15,000 0 (15,000) 15,000 0 (15,000)
Total Special Funding $ 15,000 $ 0 $ (15,000) $ 15,000 $ 0 $ (15,000)
TOTAL NON-OPER. REVENUES $ 45,000 $ 56,629 $ 11,629 $ 755,000 $ 842,223 $ 87,223
NON-OPERATING EXPENSES
Interest Expense $ 206,910 $ 205,497 $ 1,413 $ 431,300 $ 429,512 $ 1,788
Total Non-Oper. Expenses $ 206,910 $ 205,497 $ 1,413 $ 431,300 $ 429,512 $ 1,788
Non-Operationing Income (Loss) $ (161,910) $ (148,868) $ 13,042 $ 323,700 $ 412,711 $ 89,011
CHANGES IN NET POSITION $ (130,901) $ 125,905 $ 256,806 $ 461,174 $ 1,114,106 $ 652,932
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
3
ATTACHMENT 2
28
Supplementary Notes to Statement of Income and Expenses Continued for the quarter ending March 31,
2018 – Budget to Actual Analysis
Supplemental Notes to Financial Statements, Page 1 of 3
Please note staff makes an attempt to follow seasonal patterns when distributing the annual budget by month
whenever it is feasibly possible. Many line items are divided equally through the year.
Operating Income:
Harbor Village Lease Income – (exceeds budget 53,792) This category reflects Retail, Restaurant, Office and
Charters. This is increase is primarily in the Restaurant and Charters categories. Restaurant income to the District
is up 7% over the same period last year and Charters are up 12%. Boatyard Pub’s sales are up 58% from this
period last year. Island Packers sales are up 55%. Staff did not budget for this high of increases for these tenants.
Commercial Fishing – (exceeds budget $24,825) This category is up 61% over the same period last year. $16,000
of this income was due to a onetime lease processing fee paid by Del Mar Seafood. The offloading of squid has
been sporadic. October, November and December 2017 was better than anticipated. Commercial Fishing is
actually up 53% for this period when you remove the onetime fee discussed above.
Operating Expenses:
Personnel Expenses – (under budget $55,320)
 Salaries and wages were under budget thru March by $31,057. As with the previous year, the budget
includes contingencies for MOU obligations, vacation buyouts, shift coverages, and merit increases. These
contingencies were spread out equally over all the pay periods. The Harbor Patrol were still in negotiations
on their MOU at the end March, therefore no wage increases have been implemented. Also, the
Maintenance Department was not able to fill their vacant custodian position until September thereby
reducing the actual wages for two months of the custodian wage for that department.
 The other personnel expense categories are under budget by $24,263. This variance is spread out over
retirement contributions, payroll taxes (including unemployment), medical insurance, and the optional
benefit plan. The wage related items listed above have a direct relation to these other personnel categories
which contribute to the variances.
o Retirement Contributions are over budget primarily due to the Harbor Patrol MOU still in progress
at March 31. The budget reflects the Patrol employees paying 6% of their PERS employee
contribution. They will continue to pay 4% until negotiations for the MOU are completed in August
2018.
o Payroll taxes are under budget due to unemployment tax not being as high as anticipated.
o Optional benefit plan is under budget primarily due to two things. 1) Vision insurance was included
in the FY1718 budget but did not actually begin until July 2018. This cost would be approximately
$7,900 thru March 2018 and 2) Employees who participate in the ‘medical expense reimbursement’
plan have not submitted any requests for reimbursement for fiscal year 2018 at 3/31/18.
Auto/Boat Equip & Maint – (under budget $32,181) This variance primarily reflects the Harbor Patrol department.
$18,000 of the variance represents boat maintenance, $9,000 represents boat fuel purchases and $2,600
represents maintenance to the patrol vehicles. The remaining $2,500 variance reflects the vehicles in the
Maintenance Department. The Harbormaster reports that he is having an unusually high amount of boat
maintenance problems this fiscal year and that the boats were all down at different times; thereby reducing fuel
consumption. Also due to the high maintenance problems with the boats, the budgeted plumbing conversion and
general maintenance needed on fire boat 1 and the non-skid decking repairs needed on boat 19 were postponed.
Conferences & Training – (under budget $27,117) This variance is primarily in the Administration and Harbor
Patrol Departments, $13,000 and $10,000, respectively. The conference budget for the Administration Department
is divided equally by 12 periods. The CMANC conferences for February & March came in under budget by about
$9,000 and a contingency was put in budget for miscellaneous trainings and meetings . The Harbormaster was
unable to attend one of his larger conferences due to staffing constraints. Also Patrol was anticipating being funded
ATTACHMENT 2
29
Supplementary Notes to Statement of Income and Expenses Continued for the quarter ending March 31,
2018 – Budget to Actual Analysis
Supplemental Notes to Financial Statements, Page 2 of 3
by a grant to add more training opportunities. This grant did not come through for this year, so some of the training
budget will not be utilized.
Dock Maint. & Repair – (under budget $17,513) This line item is more of a contingency factor rather than specific
budget repairs. These funds will be utilized if needed. A specific repair was not identified for FY2017-18.
Village Enhancements – (under budget $22,500) This category primarily reflects tenant awnings and signage.
These enhancements are pending the final plans on the Village painting project.
Marketing and Promotions – (under budget $17,030) Marketing’s monthly expenditures can vary greatly from the
monthly budget distribution based on many factors. The budget is distributed based on scheduled events and
advertising promotions. About $4,000 of this variance is in web site design, development and maintenance; $8,700
is in event production; and $4,000 in joint advertising. Web site costs are bit less than anticipated for this fiscal year.
Event production and joint advertising should be used in the next three months as staff prepares for Pirate Days
event.
Professional/Outside Services – (under budget $92,392) In this category, items that can be readily identified as
to when they will be expensed are placed in their appropriate budget months. For example, we know exactly when
the Trolley partnership is due to be paid, July and January. All remaining funds are spread out evenly over the
twelve month budget cycle.
 Approximately $47,000 of this variance is related to the Administration department. The following
services were not utilized at 3/31/18:
o $15,000 for an HR manual review (quote as per LCW) – deferred
o $10,000 for ATE parking survey’s (in FY18-19 budget) – deferred
o $5,000 contingency for possible lease finding fees
o $5,000 miscellaneous contingency
o $10,000 accounting assistance
 Approximately $38,500 of the outside services variance is related to the Maintenance department. The
following services were not utilized:
o $5,000 boat salvage costs
o $20,000 cost increases for janitorial services were over budgeted
o $10,000 contingency built into budget
Utilities – (under budget $25,514) This category consists of water, electricity, gas and trash expenses. Electricity
represents the largest portion of this variance. Staff anticipated higher rate increases in the water and electricity
categories when we were creating the FY17-18 budget. We are happy to report that the increase in the electricity
rates were not as high as expected. Trash services have been increased throughout the year to keep up with the
demand in the Village and the beaches. The gas budget was increased to accommodate the new fire pit in the
Carousel courtyard for FY17. We budgeted a bit a high.
 Water is under budget by $1,924,
 Electricity is under budget by $18,468,
 Gas under budget by $4,798 and
 Trash under budget by $324.
ATTACHMENT 2
30
Supplementary Notes to Statement of Income and Expenses Continued for the quarter ending March 31,
2018 – Budget to Actual Analysis
Supplemental Notes to Financial Statements, Page 3 of 3
Non-operating Revenue:
Investment Income – (exceeds budget $47,716) This budget item is very conservative. LAIF continues to earn
higher than anticipated rates.
Tax Income – (exceeds budget $32,903) The quarter ending 3/31/18 brought in more County taxes than expected.
The District has not seen the anticipated property tax loss that the County informed the District may happen.
Intergov’t Revenue – (exceeds budget $20,284) This category reflects the income received from the County based
on the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) for the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund (RPTTF)
allocation to the District. This is not a category budgeted by the District.
ATTACHMENT 2
31
Ventura Port District
Budget Analysis
For the Period Ended March 31, 2018
Current Current Prior Year Prior Year
Annual YTD Remaining % Annual YTD Remaining %
Budget Activity Budget Remaining Budget Activity Budget Remaining
INCOME
Operating Income
Parcel Lease Income 3,590,000 2,813,552 776,448 22 4,540,000 3,788,818 751,182 17
Dry Storage Income 120,000 93,492 26,508 22 110,000 91,542 18,458 17
Fisherman’s Storage 74,000 55,330 18,670 25 70,000 59,490 10,510 15
Parking Income 72,000 33,614 38,386 53 70,000 37,532 32,468 46
Miscellaneous Income/Rentals 46,000 43,285 2,715 6 46,000 53,655 (7,655) (17)
Village Income
Harbor Village Lease Income 2,580,000 1,970,792 609,208 24 2,355,000 1,862,083 492,917 21
Commercial Fishing 340,000 327,025 12,975 4 230,000 203,647 26,353 11
Miscellaneous Income 5,500 13,158 (7,658) (139) 5,500 16,091 (10,591) (193)
Harbor Event Fees 29,000 14,840 14,160 49 34,500 17,844 16,656 48
Marketing Booth/Vendor Income 7,500 3,453 4,047 54 7,500 2,089 5,411 72
Co-Op Advert/Sponsorship 14,000 13,120 880 6 14,000 10,255 3,745 27
Merchants Promo Fund 105,000 76,807 28,193 27 95,000 74,330 20,670 22
Slip Rentals 865,000 660,075 204,925 24 880,000 663,369 216,631 25
Dock Electrical Income 25,000 15,798 9,202 37 30,000 23,791 6,209 21
C A M Income 335,000 251,190 83,810 25 305,000 253,537 51,463 17
Total Operating Income $ 8,208,000 $ 6,385,531 $ 1,822,469 22 % $ 8,792,500 $ 7,158,073 $ 1,634,427 19 %
Non-operating Income
Investment Income 50,000 92,716 (42,716) (85) 25,000 59,208 (34,208) (137)
Tax Income 1,160,000 727,903 432,097 37 1,090,000 677,665 412,335 38
Intergov’t Revenue 0 20,284 (20,284) 0 0 13,348 (13,348) 0
Sale of Fixed Assets 0 1,320 (1,320) 0 0 0 0 0
DBAW Grants-Misc 15,000 0 15,000 100 24,000 0 24,000 100
DBAW Grant-Equipment 15,000 0 15,000 100 55,000 0 55,000 100
City of Ventura 0 0 0 0 0 1,133 (1,133) 0
Total Non-Operating Income $ 1,240,000 $ 842,223 $ 397,777 32 % $ 1,194,000 $ 751,354 $ 442,646 37 %
TOTAL INCOME $ 9,448,000 $ 7,227,754 $ 2,220,246 23 % $ 9,986,500 $ 7,909,427 $ 2,077,073 21 %
EXPENSES
Personnel Expenses
Salaries & Wages 2,410,500 1,824,309 586,191 24 2,310,000 1,719,618 590,382 26
Retirement Contributions 477,500 369,179 108,321 23 500,500 373,243 127,257 25
Payroll Taxes 51,000 32,955 18,045 35 40,500 31,573 8,927 22
Worker’s Comp Ins. 172,000 128,970 43,030 25 185,000 147,534 37,466 20
OPEB Liability 124,956 92,103 32,853 26 124,280 91,898 32,382 26
Medical & Life Ins. 283,000 207,332 75,668 27 273,000 197,949 75,051 27
Other Employee Benefits 230,000 160,932 69,068 30 194,000 138,305 55,695 29
Uniforms & Tool Allowances 29,500 21,541 7,959 27 30,500 17,003 13,497 44
Total Personnel Expenes $ 3,778,456 $ 2,837,321 $ 941,135 25 % $ 3,657,780 $ 2,717,123 $ 940,657 26 %
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
1
ATTACHMENT 2
32
Ventura Port District
Budget Analysis
For the Period Ended March 31, 2018
Current Current Prior Year Prior Year
Annual YTD Remaining % Annual YTD Remaining %
Budget Activity Budget Remaining Budget Activity Budget Remaining
General Expenses
Advertising 31,000 23,055 7,945 26 28,000 20,287 7,713 28
Auto Mileage & Allowance 14,000 9,992 4,008 29 11,500 7,292 4,208 37
Auto/Boat Equip & Maint 200,500 81,804 118,696 59 134,500 41,624 92,876 69
Bad Debt 18,000 914 17,086 95 25,000 1,960 23,040 92
Bank Fees & Other Misc 15,500 7,282 8,218 53 15,500 6,433 9,067 58
Building Maintenance 431,000 268,373 162,627 38 288,000 181,440 106,560 37
Bldg Maint-Tenant Improvments 42,000 0 42,000 100 500,000 67,444 432,556 87
Accessibility Improvements 0 0 0 0 60,000 6,700 53,300 89
Communications 45,000 30,078 14,922 33 50,000 35,940 14,060 28
Conferences & Training 65,000 22,843 42,157 65 59,000 19,294 39,706 67
Dock Maint. & Repair 44,500 14,887 29,613 67 44,500 25,177 19,323 43
Equipment Rental 19,500 10,518 8,982 46 21,500 8,952 12,548 58
General Insurance 266,000 199,494 66,506 25 224,000 177,999 46,001 21
Grounds Maintenance 156,000 106,240 49,760 32 154,000 97,908 56,092 36
General Harbor Maintenance 4,000 300 3,700 92 4,000 2,679 1,321 33
Janitorial Supplies 61,000 40,497 20,503 34 57,000 32,403 24,597 43
Land/Building Rental Expense 74,000 55,152 18,848 25 70,000 53,729 16,271 23
Marketing & Promotions 289,000 197,320 91,680 32 285,000 170,987 114,013 40
Memberships & Subscriptions 21,500 21,716 (216) (1) 23,000 19,245 3,755 16
Office Supplies & Equipment 39,500 20,922 18,578 47 39,500 21,531 17,969 45
Computer Equip & Supplies 41,000 21,158 19,842 48 23,000 6,047 16,953 74
Operating Supplies 61,000 25,249 35,751 59 65,000 32,454 32,546 50
Other Equipment & Repairs 45,500 30,260 15,240 33 42,000 41,640 360 1
Professional Services – Legal 265,000 176,640 88,360 33 225,000 196,261 28,739 13
Professional/Outside Services 640,000 389,832 250,168 39 498,500 280,219 218,281 44
Utilities 406,500 270,506 135,994 33 378,000 249,771 128,229 34
Dredging Related Expenses 244,500 158,631 85,869 35 236,000 155,528 80,472 34
Total General Expenses $ 3,540,500 $ 2,183,663 $ 1,356,837 38 % $ 3,561,500 $ 1,960,944 $ 1,600,556 45 %
Non-operating Expenses
Interest Expense 440,000 429,512 10,488 2 440,000 429,652 10,348 2
Boat Motor Replacement 0 0 0 0 55,000 0 55,000 100
Total Non-Oper. Expenses $ 440,000 $ 429,512 $ 10,488 2 % $ 495,000 $ 429,652 $ 65,348 13 %
TOTAL EXPENSES $ 7,758,956 $ 5,450,496 $ 2,308,460 30 % $ 7,714,280 $ 5,107,719 $ 2,606,561 34 %
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
2
ATTACHMENT 2
33
Ventura Port District
Budget Analysis
For the Period Ended March 31, 2018
Current Current Budget
Annual YTD Funds
Budget Activity Remaining
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS/EQUIPMENT
Automotive $ 51,000 $ 11,182 $ 39,818
Watercraft & Equipment 30,000 29,091 909
Assets -Fish Pier Crane/Hoist 150,000 14,076 135,924
Assets-Beach Brick Walls 20,000 0 20,000
Assets-Pay&Display machine 45,000 0 45,000
Assets-Building Improve-Replace 145,000 129,073 15,927
Assets-Village roof system 680,000 523,154 156,846
Assets-HVAC 1583 Marketing Offi 18,000 9,200 8,800
Assets-VHV Fish Pier Improv 400,000 21,993 378,007
Assets-Vlg Parkinglot Trash Enclos 65,000 0 65,000
Assets-Village Painting 60,000 9,286 50,714
Assets-1583 Spinnaker 110,000 107,740 2,260
Assets-HVAC System 1691 Bldg 10,000 8,960 1,040
Assets-Beach Refurbish Showers 25,000 0 25,000
Assets-Parkinglot repairs&slurry 400,000 198,854 201,146
Assets-BS Tap Room Renovation 350,000 0 350,000
Assets-Carousel Bldg-Renovation 300,000 0 300,000
Assets-ADA Restroom Improv-159 65,000 188 64,812
Assets-AirCon Unit-Lost Socks 10,000 0 10,000
Assets-NPS Seismic Evaluation 20,000 0 20,000
Assets-BS Tap Room-Utility Upgra 104,000 0 104,000
Assets-Carousel Courtyard/Prome 500,000 329,184 170,816
Assets-VHV Marina Part G&H Doc 75,000 105,619 (30,619)
Total Capital Improvements $ 3,633,000 $ 1,497,600 $ 2,135,400
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
3
ATTACHMENT 2
34
Ventura Port District
Balance Sheet
For the Period Ended March 31, 2018
CURRENT ASSETS CURRENT LIABILITIES
Cash in Banks 3,064,210 Accounts Payable 231,801
Accounts Receivable 412,243 Accrued Interest Payable 174,630
Intercompany Receivable-Grant Fund 120,000 Current Portion of Long Term Debt 829,100
Notes Receivable 0 Current Portion OPEB Liability 10,962
Taxes Receivable 62,522 Accrued Liabilities 57,702
Interest Receivable 42,522 Current Portion of Compensated Absences 170,963
Prepaid Expenses 176,202 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES $1,475,158
Inventory of supplies 51,892
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS $3,929,591 LONG TERM DEBT
ltd – Notes Payable 11,367,300
RESTRICTED ASSETS TOTAL LONG TERM DEBT $11,367,300
Cash – Dredging 3,023,913
Cash – Improvement 5,497,429 OTHER LIABILITIES
Cash – Fisheries Complex 151,468 OPEB Liability-Long Term 702,221
TOTAL RESTRICTED ASSETS $8,672,810 Compensated Absences-Long Term 73,885
Net Pension Liability 3,183,350
FIXED ASSETS Unearned Revenue 168,555
Land 2,342,629 Security Deposits 284,060
Harbor Improvements 37,772,143 TOTAL OTHER LIABILITIES $4,412,071
Equipment 1,652,912
41,767,684 TOTAL LIABILITIES $17,254,529
Accumulated depreciation (16,737,790)
NET FIXED ASSETS $25,029,894
EQUITY
Contributed Capital 4,632,128
Retained Earnings-Reserved 645,536
Retained Earnings- Unreserved 15,085,015
Current Year Retained Earnings 1,114,106
TOTAL ASSETS $37,632,295 TOTAL EQUITY $21,476,785
DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Deferred amount on refundings 248,135 DEFERRED INFLOW OF RESOURCES
Deferred amount on pension plan 1,077,912 Deferred amount from pension plan 227,028
TOTAL DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES $1,326,047 TOTAL DEFERRED INFLOW OF RESOURCES $227,028
TOTAL ASSETS AND DEFERRED TOTAL LIABILITIES, EQUITY, AND
OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES $38,958,342 DEFERRED INFLOW OF RESOURCES $38,958,342
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
ATTACHMENT 2
35
Ventura Port District
Cashflow Statement
As of March 31, 2018
Enterprise Fund (Includes Grant Fund)
Operating Income 6,458,571
Non-Operating Income 842,223
Total Income $ 7,300,794
Operating Expenses 5,757,176
Non-Operating Expenses 429,512
Total Expenses $ 6,186,688
Change in Net Position-Accrual Basis $ 1,114,106
Cashflows for Capital and Financing Activities:
Principle paid on debt (829,100)
Deferred amount on refundings 19,925
Acquisitions/Retirements of Capital Assets (1,497,600)
Net Cash provided (used) by Capital & Financing $ (2,306,775)
Operating Income Adjustments:
Depreciation 663,152
(Increase)decrease in receivables (66,087)
(Increase)decrease in prepaid Items 190,860
Increase(decrease) in payables (321,594)
Increase(decrease) in unearned revenue (43,403)
Increase (decrease) in tenant deposits 1,576
Net Cash provided by Operating Activities $ 424,504
NET Increase (Decrease) in Cash $ (768,165)
Add: Beginning Cash 7/1/17 $ 12,552,144
Ending Cash at 3/31/18 $ 11,783,979
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
ATTACHMENT 2
36
Ventura Port District
Distribution of Cash as of
March 31, 2018
Enterprise Fund Current
Balance
Cash
Cash on Hand (undeposited) 1,608
Cash in Checking (Wells Fargo Bank) 426,258
Cash in County Treasury 17,171
Total Cash Available for Normal Operations $ 445,037
Investments Unrestricted Reserves
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) 2,619,173
Total Investments Unrestricted Reserves $ 2,619,173
Dredging Reserves
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) 3,023,913
Total Dredging Reserves $ 3,023,913
Capital Improvement Reserves
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) 5,497,429
Total Capital Improvement Reserves $ 5,497,429
Fisheries Complex Reserves
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) 151,468
Total Fisheries Complex Reserves $ 151,468
Aquaculture Grant Funds
Cash in Checking (Wells Fargo Bank) 46,959
Total Aquaculture Grant Funds $ 46,959
TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS $ 11,783,979
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
ATTACHMENT 2
37
Ventura Port District
Comparison of Lease Rent
Year to Date Year to Date
Ended Ended Increase
3/31/2018 3/31/2017 (Decrease)
Parcel Leases
Ventura Harbor Marine Assoc 161,757 135,696 26,061 19%
Dave’s Fuel Dock 8,696 8,008 688 9%
Sheraton 4 Points-Harbortown 397,852 362,029 35,823 10%
Harbortown Point 71,344 70,725 619 1%
Oceans West Marina 239,511 228,524 10,987 5%
Ventura Isle Marina 572,504 500,573 71,931 14%
Ventura Marina Mobile Park 336,496 329,713 6,783 2%
Ventura West Marina 398,401 381,030 17,371 5%
Ventura Yacht Club 93,274 91,047 2,227 2%
Vta Harbor Boatyard 308,717 322,723 (14,006) -4%
Portside Partners Ventura Harbor 225,000 156,250 68,750 44%
Total Parcel Lease 2,813,552 2,586,318 227,234 9%
Appreciation rent & Option Fee – 1,202,500 (1,202,500)
Total Parcel Leases 2,813,552 3,788,818 (975,266) -26%
Ventura Harbor Village
Retail Rents 381,694 370,938 10,756 3%
Restaurant Rents 821,346 769,707 51,639 7%
Office Rents 476,898 461,952 14,946 3%
Charters 290,854 259,486 31,368 12%
Total Village 1,970,792 1,862,083 108,709 6%
Commercial Fishing 327,025 203,647 123,378 61%
TOTAL 5,111,369 5,854,548 (743,179) -13%
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
ATTACHMENT 2
38
Ventura Port District
Three Year Comparative
For the Current Quarter and Year to Date
Quarter Ending March 31st Year-To-Date March 31st
2015-16 2016-17 Current 2015-16 2016-17 Current
% change
FY16-17 to
Current Yr
Operating Income
Parcel Leases 981,417 1,028,649 1,071,930 2,459,026 2,588,818 2,813,552 9%
Option Fee 1,200,000
Dry Storage 29,100 29,478 31,425 83,292 91,542 93,492 2%
Other Operating 35,813 35,198 25,699 174,198 160,759 138,029 -14%
Harbor Village Leases 527,899 525,468 597,881 1,768,788 1,862,083 1,970,792 6%
Commercial Fishing 30,588 57,541 109,507 152,564 203,647 327,025 61%
Slips 207,701 216,823 233,023 667,026 663,369 660,075 0%
CAM 78,929 84,804 83,926 228,215 253,537 251,190 -1%
Marketing 22,547 25,097 25,333 65,344 74,330 76,807 3%
Electrical Slips 9,693 10,302 6,507 24,895 23,791 15,798 -34%
Other Operating 11,927 7,117 7,284 61,903 36,197 38,770 7%
Total Operating Income 1,935,614 2,020,477 2,192,515 5,685,251 7,158,073 6,385,530 -11%
Operating Expenses
Harbor Patrol 280,719 286,891 308,309 921,871 881,437 958,061 9%
Maintenance 440,689 289,689 314,289 1,341,912 855,565 917,309 7%
Administration 406,035 459,491 503,098 1,352,552 1,395,585 1,524,855 9%
Marina 162,032 167,001 170,093 489,456 493,757 504,426 2%
C A M 183,662 173,432 187,898 616,951 582,539 594,430 2%
Marketing 124,021 113,176 110,700 355,186 313,655 363,271 16%
Dredging 200,823 70,193 72,247 295,232 155,528 158,631 2%
Total Operating Expenses 1,797,981 1,559,873 1,666,634 5,373,160 4,678,066 5,020,983 7%
NET OPERATING INCOME 137,633 460,604 525,881 312,091 2,480,007 1,364,547 -45%
Non-operating Income
Interest 22,902 22,747 36,707 33,212 59,208 92,716 57%
Taxes 17,185 16,857 19,922 646,409 677,665 727,903 7%
Other 97,444 – – 97,444 14,481 21,604 49%
Total Non-operating Income 137,531 39,604 56,629 777,065 751,354 842,223 12%
Non-Operating Expenses
Depreciation 242,442 211,908 251,108 722,752 639,050 663,152 4%
Debt Service 207,182 218,974 205,497 644,166 429,652 429,512 0%
Other 22,000 – – 40,000 – –
Total Non-operating Expenses 471,624 430,882 456,605 1,406,918 1,068,702 1,092,664 2%
NET NON-OPER. INCOME ( 334,093) ( 391,278) ( 399,976) ( 629,853) ( 317,348) ( 250,441) -21%
NET CHANGE IN POSITION ( 196,460) 69,326 125,905 ( 317,762) 2,162,659 1,114,106 -48%
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
ATTACHMENT 2
39
Ventura Port District
Aquaculture Fisheries Study Grant Fund
Balance Sheet
For the Period Ended March 31, 2018
CURRENT ASSETS CURRENT LIABILITIES
Cash in Banks 46,959 Accounts Payable 0
Accounts Receivable-Grant 73,041 Intercompany Payable-Enterprise Fund 120,000
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS $120,000 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES $120,000
LONG TERM ASSETS EQUITY
Long Term Assets 0 Retained Earnings –
TOTAL LONG TERM ASSETS 0 Current Year Retained Earnings 0
TOTAL EQUITY $0
TOTAL ASSETS $120,000 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY $120,000
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
ATTACHMENT 3
40
INCOME
VSE Grant Reimbursment 73,041
Total Income 73,041
EXPENSES
Legal-VSE Grant 11,525
Professional Services 61,516
Total Expenses 73,041
CHANGE IN NET POSITION –
Ventura Port District
Aquaculture Fisheries Study Grant Fund
Statement of Income, Expense and Change in Net Position
For the Period Ended March 31, 2018
Monthly Report
(Unaudited)
ATTACHMENT 3
41
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
47429 01/04/18 42430 Jade Hendrix-Roach Marketing Village entertainment 250.00
47430 01/08/18 5945 Office Depot Credit Plan office chair mat & postage machine ink 130.44
47431 01/08/18 7434 Southern Calif. Edison ** Voided ** Check stub used to list invoices 0.00
47432 01/08/18 7434 Southern Calif. Edison Utilities 1 1,678.21
47433 01/08/18 8251 Ventura Water ** Voided ** Check stub used to list invoices 0.00
47434 01/08/18 8251 Ventura Water Utilities 3 5,908.97
47435 01/10/18 3781 The Holly Workshop Harbor seasonal décor setup/take down 2 3,900.00
47436 01/10/18 7032 Alliant Insurance Services Annual marine/docks/boat liability insurance premiums 5 7,582.00
47437 01/11/18 1045 ADT Security Services NPS alarm monitoring 179.85
47438 01/11/18 1060 AFLAC Salary reduction benefit 1,381.03
47439 01/11/18 1282 Arjay’s 1567 Spinnaker # 201 window coverings 955.00
47440 01/11/18 1378 BC Tree Service Inc Xmas tree decorating & diseased tree removal 8,500.00
47441 01/11/18 1440 Beacon Marine Chandlery Inc Village dock repair parts 99.31
47442 01/11/18 1625 Byrd Locksmithing Inc. Service call / repair locks – 1567 Spinnaker # 201/202 145.00
47443 01/11/18 1663 Burons Preferred Pumping Inc. Quarterly grease trap/main sewer line maintenance 1,895.00
47444 01/11/18 1676 Carquest Auto Parts Truck parts 197.70
47445 01/11/18 1725 CED (Consolidated Electrical Distributers)-1567 Spinnaker #201-internet box 100.35
47446 01/11/18 1731 C.A.H.M.P.C. (CA Assoc Harbor Masters & Port Captains)-2018 membership 300.00
47447 01/11/18 1915 Cintas Corp Uniform rental/cleaning, door mats, rags 1,038.72
47448 01/11/18 1918 CCI Central Postage machine supplies 58.36
47449 01/11/18 1925 City Of S. Buenaventura Trash service 100.00
47450 01/11/18 2065 Certified Credit Reporting Inc Credit report for potential tenant 105.00
47451 01/11/18 2100 CyberCopy Inc. Blue print copies 18.21
47452 01/11/18 2174 Dan Harding Marketing-advertising 175.00
47453 01/11/18 2202 Dave’s Patrol boat fuel-November 2017 1,239.60
47454 01/11/18 2331 Dial Security Inc Dockmaster/security coverage 1,320.00
47455 01/11/18 2446 DocuProducts Copier maintenance fees 260.46
47456 01/11/18 2604 E.J. Harrison & Sons Inc. Trash service 6,847.22
47457 01/11/18 2751 Empire Cleaning Supply Janitorial supplies 1,852.96
47458 01/11/18 2935 Farmer Bros. Co Coffee supplies 348.15
47459 01/11/18 2936 Fast Signs Village accessibility route marker signage 512.78
47460 01/11/18 2980 Fausset Printing, LLC Marketing-event production 674.00
47461 01/11/18 2986 Ferguson Enterprises Inc. 1559 Spinnaker-restroom repair parts 68.36
47462 01/11/18 3050 All That’s Fit to Print Marketing-ad production 2,315.00
47463 01/11/18 3100 Flooring 101 Flooring for three Village office suites 1 3,881.26
Accounts Payable Check Register – January 2018
January 2018, Check register, Page 1 of 6
ATTACHMENT 4
42
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – January 2018
47464 01/11/18 3155 Franchise Tax Board Payroll deduction 833.70
47465 01/11/18 3490 Grainger Inc. Lantern batteries, Village restroom parts 496.78
47466 01/11/18 3492 Green Thumb International Landscape equipment parts and plants 748.98
47467 01/11/18 3592 Hansen’s Plumbing, Inc. 1691 Spinnaker – water heater laundry & shower facilities 6,800.00
47468 01/11/18 4057 Health & Human Resource Center Employee Assistance Program (EAP) 177.14
47469 01/11/18 4247 Jani-King of CA Inc. Janitorial Service in Village and VPD headquarters 5,710.63
47470 01/11/18 4421 Johnsons-Batteries Plus 1591 Spinnaker key system battery 58.08
47471 01/11/18 4742 Kratos Construction 1567 Spinnaker #202-door installation; electrical upgrades 440.00
47472 01/11/18 4897 PORAC Legal Defense Fund Patrol-salary reduction benefit 168.00
47473 01/11/18 5013 Los Angeles Magazine Marketing-advertising 4,790.00
47474 01/11/18 5016 Lowe’s Xmas lighting decor; building maintenance materials 1,698.63
47475 01/11/18 5190 Matilija Water Reverse osmosis water system-December 2017 45.00
47476 01/11/18 5210 McCormix Corp. Maintenance vehicle fuel 474.51
47477 01/11/18 5213 McMaster-Carr HVAC filters; 1567 Spinnaker #203-electrical box 725.52
47478 01/11/18 5505 Muzicraft Inc. Ambient music in Village 329.50
47479 01/11/18 5625 ReadyRefresh Bottled water service 22.48
47480 01/11/18 5995 Ojai Valley News Inc. Marketing-advertising 200.00
47481 01/11/18 6178 PERS Long Term Care Program Salary reduction benefit 448.74
47482 01/11/18 6201 Pamela Griffin Wellness program 80.00
47483 01/11/18 6284 Peace Officers Research Assoc. (PORAC)-Quarterly membership-salary reduction benefit 138.00
47484 01/11/18 6361 Pitney Bowes Postage meter lease/Vlg office 34.72
47485 01/11/18 6409 Plauche & Carr VSE Aquaculture 165.00
47486 01/11/18 6850 R P Barricade Caution tape, delineator rentals & ‘lot full’ signage-POL 309.87
47487 01/11/18 6865 Rasmussen & Associates Inc Village roof project & ADA Restroom Rehab.-1591 Spinnaker 1,450.63
47488 01/11/18 7221 SWRCB/AFRS (State Water Resources Control Board)-Marina Permit/Dredging permit 2,340.00
47489 01/11/18 7411 Smogies Smog Shop Vehicle smog fees: H10, M42,M43,M40, M28 243.75
47490 01/11/18 7536 Sparkey’s Electric Inc. Deposit on electrical work for elevator modernization project 1,690.00
47491 01/11/18 7572 Standard Insurance Company Group Term Life/Long-term Disability 3,379.20
47492 01/11/18 7761 The Gas Company Utilities 34.35
47493 01/11/18 7762 The Home Depot Christmas décor, gangway trash cans, door hardware 2,003.20
47494 01/11/18 7777 The Signal Marketing-advertising 395.00
47495 01/11/18 7818 TOTALFUNDS Postage 500.00
47496 01/11/18 8228 Ventana Monthly Marketing-advertising 495.00
47497 01/11/18 8233 Venco Power Sweeping, Inc Monthly Village parking lot & fish pier sweeping- December 2017 545.38
47498 01/11/18 8239 Ventura County Reporter Marketing-advertising 1,345.00
January 2018, Check register, Page 2 of 6
ATTACHMENT 4
43
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – January 2018
47499 01/11/18 8244 Ventura Harbor Storage Fishermen’s storage/net repair area-December/January 1 2,226.02
47500 01/11/18 8250 Ventura Visitors & Convention Marketing-advertising-promotions 800.00
47501 01/11/18 8263 Ventura Pest Control Village service-December 2017 348.00
47502 01/11/18 8453 Virtual Pacific Networks IT Services 6,290.00
47503 01/11/18 8519 Western Dredging Association Membership 150.00
47504 01/11/18 8531 Whisenhunt Communication Public relations services 112.50
47505 01/11/18 8551 Williams Automotive Inc. Maintenance vehicle-radiator M-42 298.10
47506 01/11/18 8552 Village Carousel Marketing-event production – Carousel rides 100.00
47507 01/11/18 11570 Amazon Capital Services Marketing-event production 365.00
47508 01/11/18 12300 AT&T Business Services Fiber/Wi-Fi services VPD HDQ 45.23
47509 01/11/18 12945 Assurant Employee Benefits Dental insurance premiums 1,591.06
47510 01/11/18 15751 Bob’s Towing Service Tow for repairs – Patrol H10B and Maintenance M41 170.00
47511 01/11/18 17582 California Travel Media Marketing-advertising 1,500.00
47512 01/11/18 20200 CoStar Realty Information, Inc Leasing marketing data software 952.72
47513 01/11/18 22900 Destination Creative Group LLC Marketing-advertising 2,126.00
47514 01/11/18 32750 Garland/DBS, Inc Progress payment on the Village roof renovation project 2 99,005.85
47515 01/11/18 42471 JaniTek Cleaning Solutions Janitorial service for National Park Service Offices 157.50
47516 01/11/18 50071 LoopNet Internet leasing advertising 369.95
47517 01/11/18 51731 Marcos Ramos Painting 1575, 1567 Spinnaker – painting 5,630.00
47518 01/11/18 61954 Pacific Marine Repair Engine repair – Fire boat 1 312.50
47519 01/11/18 61991 P & R Paper Supply Co. Janitorial supplies 1,687.58
47520 01/11/18 62810 Peter Holguin Construction Inc 1567 Spinnaker # 203 – Windows 2,200.00
47521 01/11/18 70281 Ring Central Inc Phone service 1,889.36
47522 01/11/18 74343 Sommerville Associates Marketing public relations services 2,000.00
47523 01/11/18 77921 Tom’s Towing Relocation of 50 vehicles as necessary for paving project 2,000.00
47524 01/11/18 82201 Valley Scene Magazine Marketing-advertising 1,344.00
47525 01/11/18 82471 Ventura Rental Party Center Marketing-event production 187.27
47526 01/11/18 82562 Ventura West Marina Reimburse film event fee permit 300.00
47527 01/11/18 PM OneTime Aimee Quemuel Security deposit refund 600.00
47528 01/11/18 PM OneTime Cipriano Olivo Key deposit refund 25.00
47529 01/11/18 PM OneTime COASTWIDE CORPORATION Security deposit refund 1,989.00
47530 01/16/18 84600 Viola Inc. Progress payment-Phase 3 – Carousel Courtyard & Fire pit 3 8,789.30
47531 01/24/18 84600 Viola Inc. Progress payment-Phase 3 – Carousel Courtyard & Fire pit 4 0,000.00
47532 01/25/18 1036 Accurate First Aid Services Replenish first aid stations 241.47
47533 01/25/18 1037 Acorn Newspapers Marketing-advertising 1,275.60
January 2018, Check register, Page 3 of 6
ATTACHMENT 4
44
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – January 2018
47534 01/25/18 1178 American Office Products Wall planner, tape cartridges 71.26
47535 01/25/18 1492 Big Brand Tire Company Tires – 2014 Toyota Tacoma 323.80
47536 01/25/18 1676 Carquest Auto Parts Truck parts 423.66
47537 01/25/18 1725 CED (Consolidated Electrical Distributers)-shop stock-lighting materials 706.19
47538 01/25/18 1820 CE Solutions Online medical training – Harbor Patrol 1,161.00
47539 01/25/18 1844 Certex USA Inc. Hoist repair 160.00
47540 01/25/18 1915 Cintas Corp Uniform rental/cleaning, door mats, rags 531.94
47541 01/25/18 1925 City Of S. Buenaventura Trash service 100.00
47542 01/25/18 2093 Cumulus Broadcasting Inc. Marketing-advertising 2,880.00
47543 01/25/18 2202 Dave’s Patrol boat fuel-December 2017 1,361.15
47544 01/25/18 2331 Dial Security Inc Dockmaster/security coverage 800.00
47545 01/25/18 2448 Downtown Ventura Partners Marketing-Trolley and Big Belly Ads 8,200.00
47546 01/25/18 2604 E.J. Harrison & Sons Inc. Trash service 7,029.58
47547 01/25/18 2751 Empire Cleaning Supply Janitorial supplies 1,231.77
47548 01/25/18 2936 Fast Signs Village accessibility route marker signage 791.36
47549 01/25/18 2980 Fausset Printing, LLC Marketing-event production 269.50
47550 01/25/18 2986 Ferguson Enterprises Inc. 1591 Spinnaker-restroom repair parts 389.31
47551 01/25/18 3050 All That’s Fit to Print Marketing-ad production 862.50
47552 01/25/18 3155 Franchise Tax Board Payroll deduction 416.85
47553 01/25/18 3490 Grainger Inc. Miscellaneous truck & restroom parts 551.51
47554 01/25/18 3492 Green Thumb International Landscape equipment parts and plants 57.22
47555 01/25/18 3592 Hansen’s Plumbing, Inc. Village sewer, waterline and backflow repairs 2,931.81
47556 01/25/18 4295 Jensen Design & Survey Inc. Services on the pavement repair and slurry seal project 48.49
47557 01/25/18 4852 Lagerlof Senecal Gosney Legal services 1 6,647.58
47558 01/25/18 5071 Luners Production Services Marketing-event production 210.11
47559 01/25/18 5190 Matilija Water Reverse osmosis water system-January 2018 45.00
47560 01/25/18 5210 McCormix Corp. Maintenance vehicle fuel 888.22
47561 01/25/18 5213 McMaster-Carr Shop tools 138.53
47562 01/25/18 5505 Muzicraft Inc. Ambient music in Village 329.50
47563 01/25/18 5744 Noble Consultants Inc. Services pertaining to Village docks & fish pier inspection 6 1,345.47
47564 01/25/18 6178 PERS Long Term Care Program Salary reduction benefit 224.37
47565 01/25/18 6194 Pacific Oil Company Used oil pick-up 597.75
47566 01/25/18 6470 LegalShield Salary reduction benefit 166.40
47567 01/25/18 6850 R P Barricade Barricade rental for use on fish pier 1,338.00
47568 01/25/18 7000 Richard W. Parsons Dredging/Project Management services 8,998.09
January 2018, Check register, Page 4 of 6
ATTACHMENT 4
45
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – January 2018
47569 01/25/18 7240 AT&T Harbor Patrol emergency land line 54.33
47570 01/25/18 7294 Service-Pro Fire Protection Fire Extinguishers – annual service 768.78
47571 01/25/18 7299 Seaworthy Marina Products Boat parts/Engine replacement 1 3,569.44
47572 01/25/18 7410 Smith Pipe & Supply Inc. Village landscaping 323.15
47573 01/25/18 7434 Southern Calif. Edison ** Voided ** Check stub used to list invoices 0.00
47574 01/25/18 7434 Southern Calif. Edison Utilities 1 3,435.49
47575 01/25/18 7608 Susan Bogue Expense reimbursement 44.35
47576 01/25/18 7719 Teamsters Local No. 186 Union dues for Dockmasters 160.00
47577 01/25/18 7761 The Gas Company Utilities 623.57
47578 01/25/18 7777 The Signal Marketing-advertising 484.00
47579 01/25/18 8233 Venco Power Sweeping, Inc Monthly Village parking lot – January 2018 415.38
47580 01/25/18 8239 Ventura County Reporter Marketing-advertising 545.00
47581 01/25/18 8241 ** Voided ** Check lost per vendor – reissued payment March 2018 1,912.98
47582 01/25/18 8250 Ventura Visitors & Convention Marketing-space rent and advertising 225.00
47583 01/25/18 8254 Ventura Harbor Storage Ent LLC Fishermen’s storage/net repair area-annual property tax 313.30
47584 01/25/18 8263 Ventura Pest Control Village service-January 2018 348.00
47585 01/25/18 8530 White Nelson Diehl Evans LLP Progress payment on Financial Audit-FY16-17 2,100.00
47586 01/25/18 8551 Williams Automotive Inc. Truck repairs 82.80
47587 01/25/18 10444 Adam Yox Patrol expense reimbursement 41.40
47588 01/25/18 11413 Alec Ledbetter Marketing-entertainment 250.00
47589 01/25/18 11415 Alertline Communications Elevator emergency phone service-quarterly 630.00
47590 01/25/18 12300 AT&T Business Services Fiber/Wi-Fi services VPD HDQ 109.00
47591 01/25/18 12851 Arion Global, Inc. Recycle lights and batteries 260.50
47592 01/25/18 12945 Assurant Employee Benefits Dental insurance premiums 1,548.48
47593 01/25/18 14580 Blake Stok VSE Aquaculture 1,020.00
47594 01/25/18 20175 Complete Paperless Solutions Laserfishe support renewal 400.00
47595 01/25/18 24350 Dog Waste Depot Operating supplies-mutt mitts 775.67
47596 01/25/18 25351 Dudek VSE Aquaculture 312.52
47597 01/25/18 36521 Herc Rentals Inc. Marketing-event production-tower lights 762.35
47598 01/25/18 39701 ID Plans Corporation Updated ‘as built’ plans for existing spaces in the Village 1 3,600.00
47599 01/25/18 43451 Jim McKewon Inc. 1567 Spinnaker – 1st floor conception design 4,800.00
47600 01/25/18 51731 Marcos Ramos Painting 1691, 1567,1575,1583, 1591 Spinnaker – painting 1 0,305.00
47601 01/25/18 61991 P & R Paper Supply Co. Janitorial supplies 842.42
47602 01/25/18 70075 Ricoh USA, Inc. Copier lease 1,483.82
47603 01/25/18 70281 Ring Central Inc Phone service 947.61
January 2018, Check register, Page 5 of 6
ATTACHMENT 4
46
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – January 2018
47604 01/25/18 76013 Suncat Creations Marketing-event production 150.00
47605 01/25/18 85219 West Marine Pro External boat speakers 64.61
47606 01/25/18 PM OneTime Ed Anderson Key deposit refund 25.00
47607 01/25/18 PM OneTime Todd Riffel Key deposit refund 25.00
47608 01/25/18 2986 Ferguson Enterprises Inc. 1591 Spinnaker-restroom repair parts 121.65
47609 01/25/18 42471 JaniTek Cleaning Solutions Janitorial service for National Park Service Offices 1,282.05
Total Check Register $ 835,891.33 $ 1,912.98
Wells Fargo Grant Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
1054 01/25/18 25351 Dudek VSE Aquaculture Grant 3,475.53
1055 01/25/18 76013 ** Voided ** Printing error 150.00
Total Check Register $ 3,475.53 $ 150.00
January 2018, Check register, Page 6 of 6
ATTACHMENT 4
47
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
47610 02/08/18 1045 ADT Security Services NPS Alarm monitoring 179.85
47611 02/08/18 1049 Adams Printing & Graphic Marketing-brochures 741.31
47612 02/08/18 1060 AFLAC Salary reduction benefit 1,381.03
47613 02/08/18 1154 Alejandra’s Nursery VHV landscaping 378.80
47614 02/08/18 1178 American Office Products Miscellaneous office supplies 94.41
47615 02/08/18 1182 SiteOne Landscape Supply, LLC 1591 Spinnaker-building stucco material 86.10
47616 02/08/18 1377 B & R Tool Supply Co. Small tools: bit sets, screw extractor 297.14
47617 02/08/18 1679 Carpi & Clay Washington lobbyist (2 months) 10,000.00
47618 02/08/18 1725 CED (Consolidated Electrical Distributers)-replacement staircase light fixtures at 1567 Spinnaker 1,880.68
47619 02/08/18 1915 Cintas Corp Uniform rental/cleaning, door mats, rags 555.74
47620 02/08/18 2029 Cover 2 Cover Music Inc. Marketing Village entertainment 320.00
47621 02/08/18 2174 Dan Harding Marketing-advertising 50.00
47622 02/08/18 2331 Dial Security Inc Dockmaster/security coverage 1,200.00
47623 02/08/18 2448 Downtown Ventura Partners Trolley partnership Jan-Jun2018 & Marketing advertising 12,400.00
47624 02/08/18 2604 E.J. Harrison & Sons Inc. Trash service 448.29
47625 02/08/18 2751 Empire Cleaning Supply Janitorial supplies 697.13
47626 02/08/18 2935 Farmer Bros. Co Coffee supplies 337.90
47627 02/08/18 2936 Fast Signs Village accessibility route marker signage 242.44
47628 02/08/18 2980 Fausset Printing, LLC Marketing-event brochures-ribbon cutting 220.00
47629 02/08/18 3050 All That’s Fit to Print Marketing-ad production 885.00
47630 02/08/18 3155 Franchise Tax Board Payroll deduction 33.94
47631 02/08/18 3203 Fuller Paint & Glass 1431 Spinnaker-emergency board up 607.07
47632 02/08/18 3490 Grainger Inc. Raingear, boat parts, small tools, shop stock 722.17
47633 02/08/18 3491 The Greek Mediterranean Steak Marketing-advertising 50.00
47634 02/08/18 3592 Hansen’s Plumbing, Inc. Backflow repair@ D dock; 1691/1559 Spinnaker sewer lines 4,584.22
47635 02/08/18 3602 Happenings Magazine Marketing-advertising 739.00
47636 02/08/18 4057 Health & Human Resource Center Employee Assistance Program (EAP) 177.14
47637 02/08/18 4939 Life-Assist Inc. Medical supplies 158.28
47638 02/08/18 5016 Lowe’s 1567 Spinnaker #201 interior doors; window coverings 893.87
47639 02/08/18 5050 MailFinance VPD Office postage machine rental – quarterly 401.23
47640 02/08/18 5188 Matthew Bender & Co. Inc. Patrol reference/code books 246.14
47641 02/08/18 5210 McCormix Corp. maintenance vehicle fuel 478.92
47642 02/08/18 5213 McMaster-Carr VPD shop stock 631.20
47643 02/08/18 5625 ReadyRefresh Bottled water service 165.77
47644 02/08/18 5945 Office Depot Credit Plan Copy paper, toner/ink, file folders & envelopes, misc supplies 921.08
Accounts Payable Check Register – February 2018
February 2018, Check register, Page 1 of 5
ATTACHMENT 4
48
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – February 2018
47645 02/08/18 6178 PERS Long Term Care Program Salary reduction benefit 224.37
47646 02/08/18 6283 Petty Cash Fund Launch ramp parking refunds; coin counting fees; notary service 370.17
47647 02/08/18 6446 PowerHouse Construction Inc. Dry Storage facility entry gate repair 345.00
47648 02/08/18 6865 Rasmussen & Associates Inc Village roof project 492.50
47649 02/08/18 7000 Richard W. Parsons Hotel reimbursement -CMANC winter meeting 400.32
47650 02/08/18 7240 AT&T Harbor Patrol land line 44.94
47651 02/08/18 7245 Santa Barbara Family Life Marketing-advertising 798.00
47652 02/08/18 7294 Service-Pro Fire Protection Fire extinguisher service/maintenance 322.50
47653 02/08/18 7572 Standard Insurance Company Group Term Life/Long-term Disability 3,534.42
47654 02/08/18 7581 Steve Stafford Marketing Village entertainment 250.00
47655 02/08/18 7719 Teamsters Local No. 186 Union dues for Dockmasters 160.00
47656 02/08/18 7768 ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corp Quarterly elevator maintenance service 4,776.14
47657 02/08/18 7777 The Signal Marketing-advertising 384.00
47658 02/08/18 7818 TOTALFUNDS Postage 46.72
47659 02/08/18 8233 Venco Power Sweeping, Inc Monthly fish pier sweeping-January 2018 130.00
47660 02/08/18 8250 Ventura Visitors & Convention Marketing-space rent and advertising 225.00
47661 02/08/18 8251 Ventura Water Utilities 293.30
47662 02/08/18 8267 Ventura Harbor Marina & Yacht Boat maintenance 422.65
47663 02/08/18 8455 Vortex Construction Final retainer on Village window replacement project 6,423.16
47664 02/08/18 8501 Warren Distributing Inc. Service lube for maintenance vehicles 142.08
47665 02/08/18 8531 Whisenhunt Communication Public relations services 1 ,162.50
47666 02/08/18 14580 Blake Stok VSE Aquaculture 3,175.00
47667 02/08/18 16161 Brian Brennan Mileage reimbursement -Winter meeting 95.48
47668 02/08/18 19252 City of Ventura Semi annual entertainment permit 311.36
47669 02/08/18 19800 Coffee Dock & Post Harbor special events-ribbon cutting ceremony 150.00
47670 02/08/18 20200 CoStar Realty Information, Inc Leasing marketing data software 952.72
47671 02/08/18 24481 Downtown Ventura Organization Donation – Thomas Fire 150.00
47672 02/08/18 42471 JaniTek Cleaning Solutions Janitorial service/supplies-National Park Service Offices 1,439.55
47673 02/08/18 42605 Jaycie Lafrican Marketing-event production 50.00
47674 02/08/18 50071 LoopNet Internet leasing advertising 369.95
47675 02/08/18 51731 Marcos Ramos Painting Six miscellaneous paint & rot repair projects throughout Village 10,150.00
47676 02/08/18 61954 Pacific Marine Repair Boat repair/maintenance 743.70
47677 02/08/18 61991 P & R Paper Supply Co. Janitorial supplies 1,331.44
47678 02/08/18 64100 PRAXAIR Distribution, Inc Medical supplies-Harbor Patrol 221.88
47679 02/08/18 70061 Rich Thompson Marketing Village entertainment 150.00
February 2018, Check register, Page 2 of 5
ATTACHMENT 4
49
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – February 2018
47680 02/08/18 70075 Ricoh USA, Inc. Copier page charges: Admin/Marketing 79.76
47681 02/08/18 74343 Sommerville Associates Marketing public relations services 2,000.00
47682 02/08/18 75712 Stacey Reed Petrides Marketing-event production 60.00
47683 02/08/18 82351 Ventura Breeze Marketing-advertising 625.00
47684 02/08/18 85219 West Marine Pro Switches, parts for boats 118.48
47685 02/08/18 85261 West Coast Air Conditioning Replace HVAC-1691 Spinnaker (NPS); preventive maint. services 9,580.00
47686 02/08/18 PM OneTime Kenneth Jones Refund security deposit 410.00
47687 02/14/18 2658 Eishun Fukui Marketing Village entertainment 250.00
47688 02/14/18 8453 Virtual Pacific Networks IT Services 4,682.35
47689 02/14/18 22113 Dave Werneburg Reimbursement for DM Radio 129.29
47690 02/14/18 44200 JV Custom Iron Deposit on stainless steel handrails fabrication and install-Village 2,000.00
47691 02/14/18 70075 Ricoh USA, Inc. Copier lease 741.91
47692 02/14/18 84600 Viola Inc. Progress payment-Phase 3 – Carousel Courtyard & fire pit 6,672.19
47693 02/15/18 17565 Cal Coast Motorsports 2 Yamaha VXR personal water craft-Harbor Patrol Rescue 24,487.78
47694 02/21/18 1036 Accurate First Aid Services Replenish first aid stations 179.80
47695 02/21/18 1282 Arjay’s 1567 Spinnaker #201 – Window coverings 955.24
47696 02/21/18 1440 Beacon Marine Chandlery Inc Block cleats, lettering kit 46.15
47697 02/21/18 1676 Carquest Auto Parts Vehicles maintenance supplies 11.80
47698 02/21/18 1886 Channel Watch Marine, Inc. Survey for docks D, G, & H 100.00
47699 02/21/18 1892 Chemsearch Janitorial supplies 1,163.97
47700 02/21/18 1915 Cintas Corp Uniform rental/cleaning, door mats, rags 498.70
47701 02/21/18 2100 CyberCopy Inc. Project plan copies 16.16
47702 02/21/18 2174 Dan Harding Marketing-advertising 70.00
47703 02/21/18 2202 Dave’s Patrol boat fuel-January 2018 1,072.19
47704 02/21/18 2331 Dial Security Inc Dockmaster/security coverage 800.00
47705 02/21/18 2604 E.J. Harrison & Sons Inc. Trash service 571.60
47706 02/21/18 2751 Empire Cleaning Supply Janitorial supplies 214.45
47707 02/21/18 2980 Fausset Printing, LLC Marketing-advertising-posters 280.00
47708 02/21/18 3050 All That’s Fit to Print Marketing-ad production 1,853.10
47709 02/21/18 3328 George Kabris Reimbursement for EMT renewal 182.00
47710 02/21/18 3490 Grainger Inc. Miscellaneous lighting stock 397.70
47711 02/21/18 3492 Green Thumb International Landscape equipment parts and plants 138.61
47712 02/21/18 4247 Jani-King of CA Inc. Janitorial service 5,150.63
47713 02/21/18 4613 Kelly Cleaning and Supplies Janitorial supplies 485.00
47714 02/21/18 4742 Kratos Construction 1575 Spinnaker #205 – office refurbishment 12,350.00
February 2018, Check register, Page 3 of 5
ATTACHMENT 4
50
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – February 2018
47715 02/21/18 4852 Lagerlof Senecal Gosney Legal services 17,920.00
47716 02/21/18 4943 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Legal services 420.00
47717 02/21/18 5190 Matilija Water Reverse osmosis water system 45.00
47718 02/21/18 5213 McMaster-Carr Boat parts – Fire boat 1 44.68
47719 02/21/18 5744 Noble Consultants Inc. Services pertaining to Village docks D,G,H; inspect fish pier; crane 11,205.89
47720 02/21/18 6178 PERS Long Term Care Program Salary reduction benefit 448.74
47721 02/21/18 6201 Pamela Griffin Wellness program 80.00
47722 02/21/18 6361 Pitney Bowes Postage meter lease/Vlg office 34.72
47723 02/21/18 6409 Plauche & Carr VSE Aquaculture 1,677.50
47724 02/21/18 6470 LegalShield Salary reduction benefit 166.40
47725 02/21/18 7000 Richard W. Parsons Dredging/Project Management services 9,999.00
47726 02/21/18 7029 Robert Weinerth Reimbursement for work shoes 155.15
47727 02/21/18 7299 Seaworthy Marina Products Boat parts 149.99
47728 02/21/18 7410 Smith Pipe & Supply Inc. Landscape repair parts throughout harbor 708.81
47729 02/21/18 7434 Southern Calif. Edison ** Voided ** Check stub used to list invoices 0.00
47730 02/21/18 7434 Southern Calif. Edison Utilities 11,100.47
47731 02/21/18 7581 Steve Stafford Marketing Village entertainment 250.00
47732 02/21/18 7719 Teamsters Local No. 186 Union dues for Dockmasters 160.00
47733 02/21/18 7768 ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corp Final payment on contract for elevator modernization project 43,808.00
47734 02/21/18 8233 Venco Power Sweeping, Inc Monthly fish pier sweeping-February 2018 130.00
47735 02/21/18 8235 Ventura Chamber Of Commerce Annual fee for Connection Breakfast Slide ad 180.00
47736 02/21/18 8241 Ventura County Star Marketing-advertising 744.50
47737 02/21/18 8243 Ventura Harbor Boat Yard Boat supplies 27.13
47738 02/21/18 8244 Ventura Harbor Storage Fishermen’s storage/net repair area 6,113.01
47739 02/21/18 8263 Ventura Pest Control Village service 348.00
47740 02/21/18 8501 Warren Distributing Inc. Service parts: Harbor Patrol boats 17/19 368.92
47741 02/21/18 8534 HDS White Cap Const. Supply Dock repair supplies 184.83
47742 02/21/18 16150 Brendan Daly Photography Marketing-event photos 225.00
47743 02/21/18 25351 Dudek VSE Aquaculture 828.45
47744 02/21/18 42419 Jack Peck ** Voided ** Entertainment venue cancelled 250.00
47745 02/21/18 51731 Marcos Ramos Painting 1575 Spinnaker #205-office refurbishment; dry rot repair 7,860.00
47746 02/21/18 61991 P & R Paper Supply Co. Janitorial supplies 460.75
47747 02/21/18 70281 Ring Central Inc Phone service 947.70
47748 02/21/18 70650 SWCA, Incorporated (Soil and Water Conservation Assist)-testing as necessary for dredging 6,891.61
47749 02/21/18 72419 SBR Signs & Graphics Metal signs for parking lots 1,548.00
February 2018, Check register, Page 4 of 5
ATTACHMENT 4
51
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – February 2018
47750 02/21/18 75712 Stacey Reed Petrides Marketing-event production 67.50
47751 02/21/18 75910 Stringer Appliance Repair, Inc Washer/dryer repair in 1691 Spinnaker building 338.67
47752 02/21/18 79652 Traffic Technologies LLC Temporary parking signs 210.97
47753 02/21/18 82201 Valley Scene Magazine Marketing-advertising 730.00
47754 02/21/18 82471 Ventura Rental Party Center Advertising-event production 640.06
47755 02/21/18 12945 Assurant Employee Benefits Dental insurance premiums 1,569.77
47756 02/22/18 1440 Beacon Marine Chandlery Inc Rope, screws, clamps, fasteners 140.19
47757 02/22/18 2604 E.J. Harrison & Sons Inc. Trash service 448.29
47758 02/22/18 7622 Sweet Pea Flowers & Gifts Employee sympathy gift 98.00
47759 02/28/18 7761 The Gas Company Utilities 650.85
47760 02/28/18 8251 Ventura Water ** Voided ** Check stub used to list invoices 0.00
47761 02/28/18 8251 Ventura Water Utilities 31,466.20
Total Check Register $ 323,411.31 $ 250.00
Wells Fargo Grant Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
1056 02/08/18 72760 Scott Lindell VSE Aquaculture Grant 11,454.66
1057 02/21/18 25351 Dudek VSE Aquaculture Grant 9,208.27
Total Check Register $ 20,662.93 $ –
February 2018, Check register, Page 5 of 5
ATTACHMENT 4
52
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
47762 03/08/18 1060 AFLAC Salary reduction benefit 1,381.03
47763 03/08/18 1154 Alejandra’s Nursery Village planters-refresh plants 1,123.20
47764 03/08/18 1213 Andria’s Seafood Marketing-event production-Chowder Fest tickets 150.00
47765 03/08/18 1321 Avalon Door & Windows Inc. Door hardware 34.48
47766 03/08/18 1378 BC Tree Service Inc Trim palm trees along Anchor Way Drive 1,920.00
47767 03/08/18 1440 Beacon Marine Chandlery Inc Miscellaneous parts & supplies 168.50
47768 03/08/18 1676 Carquest Auto Parts Supplies; battery M-45; shop tool; parts 497.34
47769 03/08/18 1725 CED (Consolidated Electrical Distributers) Shop stock; fire pit parts 282.37
47770 03/08/18 1755 California Electrical Supply 1575 Spinnaker #205 – light fixtures 713.83
47771 03/08/18 1915 Cintas Corp Uniform rental/cleaning, door mats, rags 502.20
47772 03/08/18 2099 Custom Embroidery Uniforms 77.56
47773 03/08/18 2174 Dan Harding Marketing-advertising 60.00
47774 03/08/18 2331 Dial Security Inc Dockmaster/security coverage 1,412.00
47775 03/08/18 2604 E.J. Harrison & Sons Inc. Trash service 6,644.92
47776 03/08/18 2751 Empire Cleaning Supply Janitorial supplies 921.06
47777 03/08/18 2936 Fast Signs Village accessibility route marker signage 195.57
47778 03/08/18 2980 Fausset Printing, LLC Printing Marketing-printing services/advertising 383.00
47779 03/08/18 2986 Ferguson Enterprises Inc. Building maintenance and restrooms parts 368.02
47780 03/08/18 3050 All That’s Fit to Print Marketing-ad production 542.50
47781 03/08/18 3457 Gov’t Finance Officers Assoc. (GFOA) Subscription renewal 50.00
47782 03/08/18 3490 Grainger Inc. Parts; restroom supplies; rain gear 628.73
47783 03/08/18 3491 The Greek Mediterranean Steak Marketing-event production-Chowder Fest tickets 150.00
47784 03/08/18 3592 Hansen’s Plumbing, Inc. 1575 Spinnaker restroom plumbing services 625.00
47785 03/08/18 3602 Happenings Magazine Marketing-advertising 506.00
47786 03/08/18 3752 HLI Systems Internet/Email services 150.00
47787 03/08/18 4057 Health & Human Resource Center Employee Assistance Program (EAP) 177.14
47788 03/08/18 4247 Jani-King of CA Inc. Janitorial service in Village, VPD headquarters 5,150.63
47789 03/08/18 4295 Jensen Design & Survey Inc. VPD Survey easement review parcels 5 & 8 4,790.00
47790 03/08/18 5016 Lowe’s Office suite exterior/interior doors & maintenance supplies 2,140.85
47791 03/08/18 5071 Luners Production Services Marketing-event production 91.59
47792 03/08/18 5210 McCormix Corp. Maintenance vehicle fuel 787.21
47793 03/08/18 5213 McMaster-Carr Parts – VPD truck # 28; Hose bib; dock clamps 218.12
47794 03/08/18 5505 Muzicraft Inc. Ambient music in Village 329.50
47795 03/08/18 5625 ReadyRefresh Bottled water service 114.83
Accounts Payable Check Register – March 2018
March 2018, Check register, Page 1 of 5
ATTACHMENT 4
53
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – March 2018
47796 03/08/18 6030 3Digit Media Marketing-advertising 955.00
47797 03/08/18 6201 Pamela Griffin Wellness program instructor 60.00
47798 03/08/18 6361 Pitney Bowes Postage meter lease/Vlg office 34.72
47799 03/08/18 7011 Robin Baer Mileage reimbursement – ICSC conference 106.38
47800 03/08/18 7240 AT&T Harbor Patrol land line 44.46
47801 03/08/18 7294 Service-Pro Fire Protection Quarterly inspection & elevator fire sprinkler repairs 961.00
47802 03/08/18 7410 Smith Pipe & Supply Inc. Village landscaping repairs 505.96
47803 03/08/18 7434 Southern Calif. Edison Utilities 33.56
47804 03/08/18 7536 Sparkey’s Electric Inc. Elevator-electrical and fire alarm system, alarm box 16,535.00
47805 03/08/18 7572 Standard Insurance Company Group Term Life/Long-term Disability 3,400.59
47806 03/08/18 7777 The Signal Marketing-advertising 484.00
47807 03/08/18 7818 TOTALFUNDS Postage 500.00
47808 03/08/18 8232 Ventura County APCD (Air Pollution Control District)-annual permit renewal as needed for dredging 18,335.28
47809 03/08/18 8233 Venco Power Sweeping, Inc Monthly Village parking lot-February 2018 415.38
47810 03/08/18 8239 Ventura County Reporter Marketing-advertising 275.00
47811 03/08/18 8241 Ventura County Star Marketing-advertising 1,912.98
47812 03/08/18 8241 Ventura County Star Marketing-advertising 124.34
47813 03/08/18 8250 Ventura Visitors & Convention Marketing-space rent and advertising 325.00
47814 03/08/18 8251 Ventura Water Utilities 529.87
47815 03/08/18 8453 Virtual Pacific Networks IT Services 3,980.00
47816 03/08/18 8501 Warren Distributing Inc. Parts M-44, service lubes for all patrol boats 187.77
47817 03/08/18 8531 Whisenhunt Communication Public relations services 2 ,150.40
47818 03/08/18 13831 Baja Bay Surf and Taco Marketing-event production-Chowder Fest tickets 150.00
47819 03/08/18 14580 Blake Stok VSE Aquaculture 5,472.50
47820 03/08/18 15732 Boatyard Pub Marketing-event production-Chowder Fest tickets 150.00
47821 03/08/18 16231 Brophy Brothers Marketing-event production-Chowder Fest tickets 150.00
47822 03/08/18 18861 Chantel Durelli Marketing-event production 1,675.00
47823 03/08/18 19252 City of Ventura Trash Service – Harbor Cove 100.00
47824 03/08/18 20021 Coastal View News Marketing-advertising 1,656.00
47825 03/08/18 20200 CoStar Realty Information, Inc Leasing marketing data software 952.72
47826 03/08/18 24481 Downtown Ventura Organization Marketing-advertising 400.00
47827 03/08/18 26591 805 Bar & Grilled Cheese Marketing-event production-Chowder Fest tickets 150.00
47828 03/08/18 42471 JaniTek Cleaning Solutions Janitorial service/supplies-National Park Service Offices 1,695.10
47829 03/08/18 42919 Jessica Howard Marketing Village entertainment 50.00
March 2018, Check register, Page 2 of 5
ATTACHMENT 4
54
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – March 2018
47830 03/08/18 44150 Joe Beraldo Marketing Village entertainment 450.00
47831 03/08/18 48542 Le Petit Cafe and Bakery Marketing-event production-Chowder Fest tickets 100.00
47832 03/08/18 48601 Latitudes Fine Art Gallery Licensing fee-harbor images 300.00
47833 03/08/18 50071 LoopNet Internet leasing advertising 369.95
47834 03/08/18 51731 Marcos Ramos Painting 1575,1583 Spinnaker – painting 5,130.00
47835 03/08/18 61991 P & R Paper Supply Co. Janitorial supplies 1,338.81
47836 03/08/18 70075 Ricoh USA, Inc. Copier additional charges: Admin/Marketing 222.80
47837 03/08/18 72345 Sara Stutt Marketing Village entertainment 230.00
47838 03/08/18 74343 Sommerville Associates Marketing public relations services 2,000.00
47839 03/08/18 82201 Valley Scene Magazine Marketing-advertising-February 2018 630.00
47840 03/08/18 82351 Ventura Breeze Marketing-advertising 625.00
47841 03/08/18 84600 Viola Inc. Progress payment-Phase 3 – Carousel Courtyard & fire pit 5,085.50
47842 03/08/18 84850 Wahoo International, Inc Two water life sleds for Patrol’s personal water craft 4,603.12
47843 03/08/18 PM OneTime Alan Perry Key deposit refund 25.00
47844 03/08/18 PM OneTime Mark Andrade Key deposit refund 25.00
47845 03/08/18 PM OneTime Sam Logan Key deposit refund 30.00
47846 03/22/18 1036 Accurate First Aid Services Replenish first aid stations 164.20
47847 03/22/18 1326 Ayalas Backflow Services VPD,VHV annual backflow testing, repair 2,230.00
47848 03/22/18 1440 Beacon Marine Chandlery Inc Parts 7.40
47849 03/22/18 1679 Carpi & Clay Washington lobbyist 5,000.00
47850 03/22/18 1915 Cintas Corp Uniform rental/cleaning, door mats, rags 527.87
47851 03/22/18 2029 Cover 2 Cover Music Inc. Marketing Village entertainment 320.00
47852 03/22/18 2174 Dan Harding Marketing-advertising 75.00
47853 03/22/18 2331 Dial Security Inc Dockmaster/security coverage 800.00
47854 03/22/18 2604 E.J. Harrison & Sons Inc. Trash service 370.86
47855 03/22/18 2924 FMP Uniform Co. Logo/name embroidery services 24.78
47856 03/22/18 2935 Farmer Bros. Co Coffee supplies 244.45
47857 03/22/18 2936 Fast Signs Village accessibility route marker signage 411.68
47858 03/22/18 3050 All That’s Fit to Print Marketing-ad production 476.74
47859 03/22/18 3100 Flooring 101 Vinyl install 1575 Spinnaker #205 & 1583 Elevator 7,686.77
47860 03/22/18 3490 Grainger Inc. Trash cans; shop stock; VPD safety supplies 376.11
47861 03/22/18 3592 Hansen’s Plumbing, Inc. Village restrooms plumbing services 790.00
47862 03/22/18 3752 HLI Systems Internet/Email services 69.00
47863 03/22/18 4057 Health & Human Resource Center Employee Assistance Program (EAP) 177.14
March 2018, Check register, Page 3 of 5
ATTACHMENT 4
55
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – March 2018
47864 03/22/18 4404 Jonathan Freeman EMS certification renewal 91.00
47865 03/22/18 4742 Kratos Construction 1575, 1567, 1559 Spinnaker – electrical/fiber optic refurbish 8,150.00
47866 03/22/18 4852 Lagerlof Senecal Gosney Legal services 13,560.00
47867 03/22/18 4897 PORAC Legal Defense Fund Salary reduction benefit-Patrol 168.00
47868 03/22/18 5016 Lowe’s Village suite improvements & misc. operating supplies 1,560.48
47869 03/22/18 5190 Matilija Water Reverse osmosis water system 45.00
47870 03/22/18 5210 McCormix Corp. Maintenance vehicle fuel 606.01
47871 03/22/18 5213 McMaster-Carr Shop stock; fire pit parts 122.37
47872 03/22/18 5505 Muzicraft Inc. Ambient music in Village 329.50
47873 03/22/18 5632 MJP Technologies, Inc IT services for SPAM filtering 110.00
47874 03/22/18 5744 Noble Consultants Inc. Services pertaining to Village docks & fish pier inspection 1,470.00
47875 03/22/18 6178 PERS Long Term Care Program Salary reduction benefit 448.74
47876 03/22/18 6194 Pacific Oil Company Pickup / disposal of used oil/rags 617.00
47877 03/22/18 6284 Peace Officers Research Assoc.(PORAC) Salary reduction benefit-Patrol 138.00
47878 03/22/18 6409 Plauche & Carr VSE Aquaculture 1,842.50
47879 03/22/18 6470 LegalShield Salary reduction benefit 166.40
47880 03/22/18 7000 Richard W. Parsons Dredging/Project Management services 11,040.66
47881 03/22/18 7294 Service-Pro Fire Protection Automatic fire sprinkler repairs & hydrant repair 1,218.58
47882 03/22/18 7296 Searle Creative Group Marketing-social media web site design 312.50
47883 03/22/18 7346 Shell Fleet Plus Patrol vehicle fuel 650.57
47884 03/22/18 7410 Smith Pipe & Supply Inc. Sand bags; landscape supplies; sprinkler repair parts 260.39
47885 03/22/18 7434 Southern Calif. Edison ** Voided ** Check stub used to list invoices 0.00
47886 03/22/18 7434 Southern Calif. Edison Utilities 11,297.58
47887 03/22/18 7719 Teamsters Local No. 186 Union dues for Dockmasters 160.00
47888 03/22/18 7762 The Home Depot VHV landscaping, building improvement supplies 1,008.70
47889 03/22/18 7768 ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corp Maintenance – emergency repair call 1,401.00
47890 03/22/18 8233 Venco Power Sweeping, Inc Monthly Village parking lot & fish pier sweeping-March 2018 545.38
47891 03/22/18 8244 Ventura Harbor Storage Fishermen’s storage/net repair area 6,113.01
47892 03/22/18 8250 Ventura Visitors & Convention Marketing-advertising 100.00
47893 03/22/18 8530 White Nelson Diehl Evans LLP Progress payment on Fiscal Year 17 financial audit 6,000.00
47894 03/22/18 8551 Williams Automotive Inc. Auto parts 70.41
47895 03/22/18 16161 Brian Brennan Reimburse- CMANC DC trip-Mileage, Flight 1,308.55
47896 03/22/18 16181 Brian Pendleton Reimburse- CMANC DC trip-Mileage, Flight 571.07
47897 03/22/18 25351 Dudek VSE Aquaculture 736.33
March 2018, Check register, Page 4 of 5
ATTACHMENT 4
56
Ventura Port District 4/12/2018
Wells Fargo Enterprise Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
Accounts Payable Check Register – March 2018
47898 03/22/18 36079 Harold Lloyd Wyckoff Marketing Village entertainment 250.00
47899 03/22/18 44132 Joseph M. Ramieri Marketing Village entertainment 250.00
47900 03/22/18 46531 Troy LeDuc Marketing Village entertainment 75.00
47901 03/22/18 51731 Marcos Ramos Painting 1575, 1591, 1559 Spinnaker – painting 6,200.00
47902 03/22/18 51891 Matthew Relis Marketing Village entertainment 250.00
47903 03/22/18 61955 Pacific Coast Shellfish Grower Allied member dues 475.00
47904 03/22/18 61991 P & R Paper Supply Co. Janitorial supplies 356.51
47905 03/22/18 64721 Proforma Harbor Patrol supplies-large & small decals 1,305.93
47906 03/22/18 70075 Ricoh USA, Inc. Copier lease 741.91
47907 03/22/18 70281 Ring Central Inc Router replacement for large conference room 1,046.48
47908 03/22/18 70650 SWCA, Incorporated(Soil and Water Conservation Assist) Harbor water monitoring 1,241.94
47909 03/22/18 72805 Sean L Wiggins Marketing Village entertainment 250.00
47910 03/22/18 74343 Sommerville Associates Marketing public relations services 2,000.00
47911 03/22/18 82201 Valley Scene Magazine Marketing-advertising-March 2018 630.00
47912 03/22/18 85219 West Marine Pro Boat parts, replacement running lights -Fireboat #1 317.83
47913 03/22/18 85445 William Schneider Marketing Village entertainment 300.00
47914 03/22/18 85601 Zero Waste USA Operating supplies-mutt mitts 775.67
47915 03/22/18 8266 Ventura Harbor Marine Fuel Vehicle supplies 17.19
Total Check Register $ 227,365.56 $0.00
Wells Fargo Grant Fund
Voided
Check Date Payee Name Description Amount Amount
1058 03/22/18 25351 Dudek VSE Aquaculture Grant 8,183.46
Total Check Register $ 8,183.46 $0.00
March 2018, Check register, Page 5 of 5
ATTACHMENT 4
57
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Oscar Peña 1/25/2018 DUN & BRADSTREET Service Credit Builder Plus 1,599.00
Total General Manager’s Expenses 1,599.00
Brian Pendleton 1/18/2018 THE BOATYARD INC Business meal Meeting with Commissioner Valance 28.11
Brian Pendleton 1/20/2018 DOUBLETREE HOTELS Conference CMANC winter meeting hotel 464.07
Total Deputy General Manager’s Expenses 492.18
Jessica Rauch 01/24/18 YLP* SHOP@YELP.COM Business meal Closed session Board meeting dinner 158.83
Jessica Rauch 01/04/18 VENTURA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Conference Pendleton refund for Poinsettia Awards (45.00)
Jessica Rauch 01/12/18 ACT*California Marine Conference Brennan CMANC WDC registration 445.00
Jessica Rauch 01/12/18 ICSC Conference Baer ICSC registration 95.00
Jessica Rauch 01/15/18 PRICELINE.COM Conference Brennan CMANC winter meeting hotel 86.64
Jessica Rauch 01/23/18 ACT*California Marine Conference Pendleton CMANC WDC registration 450.00
Jessica Rauch 01/23/18 ACT*California Marine Conference Parsons CMANC WDC registration 450.00
Jessica Rauch 01/25/18 ACT*California Marine Conference Brennan CMANC WDC registration 450.00
Jessica Rauch 01/30/18 VIRGIN AMER 9842152924585 Conference Brennan CMANC WDC airline 356.60
Jessica Rauch 01/18/18 CA SECRETARY OF STATE WEB Miscellaneous E-filing for Statement of Info for VPD 20.00
Jessica Rauch 01/24/18 AATRIX SOFTWARE Miscellaneous Sage accounting software-payroll tax filing 0.25
Jessica Rauch 01/17/18 CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICT Training Harassment training-Managers 495.00
Jessica Rauch 01/23/18 CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICT Training Rauch CSDA webinar 65.00
Total Administrative Assistant’s Expenses 3,027.32
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
January 2018
January 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 1 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
58
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
January 2018
Robin Baer 01/10/18 SQ *VENTURA SANDWICH COMPANY Business meal Closed session Board meeting dinner 142.02
Robin Baer 01/17/18 VENTURA COIUNTY STAR Subscription Online subscription 4.35
Robin Baer 01/18/18 Dropbox*V25PVM6ZXYRN Subscription Online subscription-file transfer software 1,200.00
Total Property Manager’s Expenses 1,346.37
Joe Gonzalez 01/09/18 VENTURA TOYOTA Auto maintenance M-49 – Tire liner 92.83
Joe Gonzalez 01/10/18 HALDEMAN INC Equipment maintenance Elevator room miscellaneous parts 149.30
Joe Gonzalez 01/23/18 IN *AVENUE WELDING AND SUPPLY Equipment maintenance Landscaping trailer repair (welded parts) 250.00
Joe Gonzalez 01/31/18 LANDSCAPE LIGHTING WORLD Grounds maintenance VHV low voltage landscaping lighting. 1,420.52
Total Facilities Manager’s Expenses 1,912.65
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/12/18 MILANO’S ITALIAN RESTAURANT Advertising Sunsets & Sips Contest 25.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/12/18 805 BAR & GRILL CHEESE Advertising Sunsets & Sips Contest 25.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/17/18 SPROUT SOCIAL Advertising Social Media calendar 99.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/30/18 LE PETIT CAFE & BAKERY Advertising Social Media promotion 33.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/30/18 GREEK MEDITERRANEAN STEAK Advertising Sunset & Sips Contest 25.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/31/18 COFFEE DOCK & POST Advertising Visit CA / Visit Ventura FAM 30.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/12/18 PAYPAL *ALLTHATSFIT Brochures Rack cards Tall Ship/Mermaid Event 137.60
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/22/18 COFFEE DOCK & POST Business meal Meeting with bride 4.50
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/30/18 GREEK MEDITERRANEAN STEAK Business meal Tenant meeting 40.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/30/18 VENTURA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Business meal Connection Breakfast 60.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/12/18 LUIGIS AT THE BEACH Conference SD Travel & Adventure Show 22.74
January 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 2 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
59
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
January 2018
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/13/18 GASLAMP UKT Conference SD Travel & Adventure Show 19.69
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/13/18 SAN DIEGO CONV CTR CONC 0 Conference SD Travel & Adventure Show 4.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/14/18 BAHIA HOTEL Conference SD Travel & Adventure Show 479.68
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/14/18 SAN DIEGO CONV CTR CONC 0 Conference SD Travel & Adventure Show 6.75
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/14/18 STARBUCKS STORE 23916 Conference SD Travel & Adventure Show 5.95
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/15/18 BAHIA HOTEL Conference SD Travel & Adventure Show (16.45)
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/09/18 CTC*CONSTANTCONTACT.COM E-Advertising Harbor Views 20.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/20/18 FS *AngelCam E-Advertising Web CAM 20.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/21/18 MAILCHIMP *MONTHLY E-Advertising Enewsletter 75.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/31/18 FACEBK *PYKMQG2SY2 E-Advertising Boosted ad posts 33.70
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/31/18 FACEBK *QYKMQG2SY2 E-Advertising Boosted ad posts 18.30
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/29/18 LAKESHORE LEARNING #38 Event production Bubble product return (12.33)
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 01/29/18 VITAROCK.COM Miscellaneous Ribbon cutting gifts 360.50
Total Marketing Manager’s Expenses 1,516.63
Frank Locklear 01/04/18 ATT*BILL PAYMENT Communications Integrated network internet 240.17
Frank Locklear 01/09/18 LOGMEIN*GOTOMEETING Communications Port District teleconference charge 49.00
Frank Locklear 01/12/18 FRY’S ELECTRONICS # 44 Computer supplies Various network components 350.88
Frank Locklear 01/09/18 LOADITY.COM Miscellaneous Disputed charge 1 855-728-0977 39.99
Frank Locklear 01/03/18 WAL-MART #3650 Office supplies Coffee maker Marketing / Marina office 117.45
Frank Locklear 01/14/18 DTV*DIRECTV SERVICE Operating supplies Direct TV service *Harbor Patrol 19.99
Total Marina Manager’s Expenses 817.48
January 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 3 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
60
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
January 2018
John Higgins 01/31/18 CBI*WINZIP Computer supplies HM computer software 59.95
John Higgins 01/08/18 BOATUS ONLINE Conference Online AIS/DSC registration 25.00
John Higgins 01/13/18 MARINA RECREATION Conference Marina Recreation Conference 169.00
John Higgins 01/17/18 CALIFORNIA PEACE OFFICER Membership Harbormaster membership 125.00
John Higgins 01/20/18 USLA Events Membership Group membership 510.00
John Higgins 01/10/18 COSTCO GAS #0420 Miscellaneous Mistake-employee reimbursed District with cash 39.01
John Higgins 01/09/18 WWW COSTCO COM Operating supplies Engine hoist 366.34
John Higgins 01/10/18 SIGNARAMA Operating supplies Vehicle logo final payment 608.80
John Higgins 01/10/18 SIGNARAMA Operating supplies Credit card use fee 6.14
John Higgins 01/15/18 APL* ITUNES.COM/BILL Operating supplies Patrol #1 phone storage 0.99
John Higgins 01/15/18 APL* ITUNES.COM/BILL Operating supplies Patrol #2 phone storage 0.99
John Higgins 01/25/18 SIGNARAMA Operating supplies Vehicle logo deposit 614.94
John Higgins 01/19/18 BAJA FRESH 50312 Training Training 36.16
John Higgins 01/08/18 VENTURA HARBOR MARINE FUEL Uniforms Rain boots (Part-time employee uniforms) 187.46
John Higgins 01/09/18 WGD*ARAMARK CORP NORWL Uniforms Uniforms 1,112.77
John Higgins 01/11/18 WGD*ARAMARK CORP NORWL Uniforms Uniforms 328.43
John Higgins 01/12/18 WGD*ARAMARK CORP NORWL Uniforms Uniforms 694.74
Total Harbormaster’s Expenses 4,885.72
Total Chase Credit Card Expenses $ 15,597.35
January 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
61
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Oscar Peña 02/22/18 LAZY DOG RESTAURANT 14 Business meal Meeting with Commissioner Ashworth 40.39
Total General Manager’s Expenses 40.39
Brian Pendleton 02/17/18 THE BOATYARD INC Business meal Meeting with Commissioner Valance 44.81
Total Deputy General Manager’s Expenses 44.81
Jessica Rauch 02/14/18 TOPPERS PIZZA PLACE 6 ONL Business meal Closed session Board meeting dinner 152.59
Jessica Rauch 02/16/18 VCNVENTURACO*SERVICE FEE Miscellaneous Fictitious Business Name Filing-Fee 2.50
Jessica Rauch 02/16/18 VENTURACORECORDERCTR*V Miscellaneous Fictitious Business Name Filing 53.00
Total Administrative Assistant’s Expenses 208.09
Robin Baer 02/21/18 RUTH’S CHRIS STEAK HOUSE Conference ICSC Conference-meal 11.70
Robin Baer 02/22/18 HILTON HOTELS Conference ICSC Conference-Anaheim 166.98
Robin Baer 02/15/18 VENTURA COIUNTY STAR Subscription Online subscription 4.35
Total Property Manager’s Expenses 183.03
Joe Gonzalez 02/21/18 CARROLL EMERSON Equipment repairs Heater Knobs for 1567 Suite 205 26.95
Joe Gonzalez 02/05/18 LANDSCAPE LIGHTING WORLD Grounds maintenance VHV Landscaping low voltage lighting 2,333.25
Joe Gonzalez 02/02/18 SIGNARAMA Signage Event parking signs 650.34
Total Facilities Manager’s Expenses 3,010.54
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
February 2018
February 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 1 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
62
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
February 2018
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/08/18 PAYPAL *ALLTHATSFIT Ad Production Rack cards / Tall Ship & Mermaid Event 201.18
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/06/18 CANVA FOR WORK YEARLY Advertising Annual renewal for design software 119.40
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/12/18 COFFEE DOCK AND POST Business meal Tour with Ventura County Coast ED 14.50
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/16/18 GREEK MEDITERRANEAN STEAK Business meal Media visit to Harbor 35.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/09/18 CTC*CONSTANTCONTACT.COM E-Advertising Harbor Views Enewsletter 20.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/17/18 SPROUT SOCIAL E-Advertising Annual renewal for social post tracking 99.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/20/18 FS *AngelCam E-Advertising Harbor Entrance Web CAM 20.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/22/18 MAILCHIMP *MONTHLY E-Advertising Village Enewsletter 75.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/28/18 FACEBK *GURRYEJSY2 E-Advertising Boosted ad posts 10.19
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/28/18 FACEBK *93Q75FSJW2 E-Advertising Boosted ad posts 10.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/28/18 FACEBK *FURRYEJSY2 E-Advertising Boosted ad posts 39.81
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/05/18 PAYPAL *ALLTHATSFIT Event production Mermaid month promo magnets 168.66
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/05/18 PAYPAL *ALLTHATSFIT Event production Tall Ship promo magnets 168.66
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/07/18 OTC BRANDS INC Event production Tall Ship scavenger hunt prizes 57.16
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/13/18 GREEK MEDITERRANEAN STEAK Event production Tall Ship crews welcome reception 160.95
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/14/18 MICHAELS STORES 4800 Event production VIP Tall Ship gift bags 51.42
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/14/18 MICHAELS STORES 4800 Event production VIP Tall Ship gift bags 35.51
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/14/18 MICHAELS STORES 4800 Event production Return on event items (65.40)
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/15/18 PARTY CITY Event production Bubbles for Village machine 34.40
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/16/18 ANDRIA’S SEAFOOD Event production Meal for roaming pirates on 2/17 75.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/16/18 BROPHY BROS RESTAURANT Event production Sunset & Sips photo contest prize 25.00
February 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 2 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
63
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
February 2018
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/16/18 GREEK MEDITERRANEAN STEAK Event production Meal for roaming pirates on 2/18 75.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/22/18 MICHAELS STORES 4800 Event production Spring / Easter / Mother’s Day-selfie board 341.26
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/27/18 ETSY.COM Event production Mermaid promo selfie backdrop 205.65
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/28/18 TARGET 00002980 Event production Bubbles for Village machine 36.84
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/28/18 LAKESHORE LEARNING #38 Event production Mermaid event crafts 34.44
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/07/18 OTC BRANDS INC Miscellaneous Ribbon cutting-gift bags / napkins /fish Promo 436.07
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/11/18 MICHAELS STORES 4800 Miscellaneous Ribbon cutting-vases / gift giveaways 141.56
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/13/18 SMARTNFINAL39010103901 Miscellaneous Ribbon cutting-drinks / Tall Ship gift bags 68.50
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/14/18 SPROUTS FARMERS MAR Miscellaneous Tenant bereavement gift 9.99
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/15/18 HARBOR MARKET AND LIQUOR Miscellaneous Ribbon cutting-ice/ sweatshirt for gift bag 36.57
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 02/15/18 WNPA CHANNEL ISLANDS Miscellaneous Ribbon cutting-gift bag giveaway 33.34
Total Marketing Manager’s Expenses 2,774.66
Frank Locklear 02/09/18 LOGMEIN*GOTOMEETING Communications Port District teleconference charge 49.00
Frank Locklear 02/23/18 FRY’S ELECTRONICS # 44 Computer supply Computer / TV hookup cables, etc. for small conference room 65.47
Frank Locklear 02/14/18 DTV*DIRECTV SERVICE Operating supplies Direct TV service *Harbor Patrol 19.99
Total Marina Manager’s Expenses 134.46
February 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 3 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
64
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
February 2018
John Higgins 02/05/18 VISAT FORD OF OXNARD-Service Auto maintenance Install door lock keypad 126.45
John Higgins 02/27/18 AVNGATE*X1 SEARCH Computer supply Computer software 69.90
John Higgins 02/27/18 EASTERN MARINE Equipment maintenance Trailer maintenance parts 741.04
John Higgins 02/12/18 AMERICAN SHORE AND BEACH Membership Association membership 75.00
John Higgins 02/02/18 FRY’S ELECTRONICS # 44 Operating supplies Operating supplies 71.62
John Higgins 02/04/18 COSTCO WHSE #0420 Operating supplies Miscellaneous truck and operating supplies 445.98
John Higgins 02/15/18 APL* ITUNES.COM/BILL Operating supplies Patrol #1 phone storage 0.99
John Higgins 02/15/18 APL* ITUNES.COM/BILL Operating supplies Patrol #2 phone storage 0.99
John Higgins 02/25/18 COSTCO WHSE #0420 Operating supplies Flashlights & operating supplies 165.81
John Higgins 02/20/18 GOLD COAST RECYCLING Salvage Vessel disposal 28.50
John Higgins 02/06/18 ARAMARK*87621356 Uniform Uniform return (135.66)
John Higgins 02/22/18 DVOR.COM Uniform Uniform pants 454.00
Total Harbormaster’s Expenses 2,044.62
Total Chase Credit Card Expenses 8,440.60
February 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
65
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Oscar Peña 03/15/18 LE PETIT CAFÉ & BAKERY Business meal Meeting with Commissioners 35.09
Oscar Peña 03/16/18 LAZY DOG RESTAURANT 14 Business lunch Meeting with Commissioners 45.41
Total General Manager’s Expenses 80.50
Brian Pendleton 03/05/18 SQ *TRANSPORTATION SERVIC Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 17.41
Brian Pendleton 03/05/18 UBER *TRIP 3NARZ Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 63.18
Brian Pendleton 03/05/18 SQ *UVC Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 11.07
Brian Pendleton 03/06/18 PP*TAXI CAB Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 11.09
Brian Pendleton 03/06/18 DUBLINER Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 19.84
Brian Pendleton 03/06/18 SQ *BAY CAB Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 9.83
Brian Pendleton 03/06/18 UBER *TRIP RRMEA Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 4.69
Brian Pendleton 03/07/18 DIRKSEN NORTH 11202637 Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 8.05
Brian Pendleton 03/07/18 TAXI SVC WASHINGTON Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 9.01
Brian Pendleton 03/08/18 THE PARKING SPOT 215 Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 102.80
Brian Pendleton 03/08/18 THE LIAISON CAPITOL HILL Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 1,512.14
Brian Pendleton 03/08/18 CARVING ROOM Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 29.85
Brian Pendleton 03/08/18 UBER *TRIP R4F7E Conferences CMANC Washington DC-March2018 30.06
Total Deputy General Manager’s Expenses 1,829.02
Jessica Rauch 03/01/18 THE BOATYARD INC Business meal Closed session Board meeting dinner-2/28 152.23
Jessica Rauch 03/15/18 ANDRIA’S SEAFOOD Business meal Closed session Board meeting dinner-3/14 142.80
Jessica Rauch 03/28/18 VENTURA CHAMBER OF COMMER Business meal Pena – State of the City meeting 45.00
Jessica Rauch 03/19/18 VCNVENTURACO*SERVICE FEE Miscellaneous County Filing Fee – Notice of Completion – 1583 Elevator 2.50
Jessica Rauch 03/19/18 VENTURACORECORDERCTR*V Miscellaneous County Filing – Notice of Completion – 1583 Elevator 99.00
Total Administrative Assistant’s Expenses 441.53
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
March 2018
March 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 1 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
66
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
March 2018
Robin Baer 03/15/18 VENTURA COIUNTY STAR Subscriptions Online Subscription 4.35
Total Property Manager’s Expenses 4.35
Joe Gonzalez 03/01/18 www.windrangers.com Grounds maintenance Coast Pneumatics, Inc-Fire pit wind monitor system 987.93
Joe Gonzalez 03/06/18 COAST PNEUMATICS INC Grounds maintenance Coast Pneumatics, Inc-Fire pit wind monitor system 93.74
Joe Gonzalez 03/07/18 LANDSCAPE LIGHTING WORLD Grounds maintenance VHV Landscaping low voltage lighting 466.88
Joe Gonzalez 03/28/18 DIVERSIFIED LIGHTING SUP Grounds maintenance VHV Landscaping low voltage lighting 1,010.26
Joe Gonzalez 03/08/18 BUILDING SAFETY CTY SAN Operating supplies City of Ventura-annual maintenance permit 577.96
Joe Gonzalez 03/16/18 AMERICAN FIREGLASS Operating supplies VHV Fire Pit beads 338.83
Joe Gonzalez 03/23/18 AMERICAN FIREGLASS Operating supplies VHV Fire Pit beads 338.83
Joe Gonzalez 03/29/18 APPLIED PWR805-9811991 Operating supplies NPS Sign (powder coating) 332.25
Total Facilities Manager’s Expenses 4,146.68
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/17/18 SPROUT SOCIAL Advertising Social Media Programming 99.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/25/18 GOOGLE *LOOPSURVEY APP Advertising Marketing advertising tool 99.99
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/13/18 LE PETIT CAFE & BAKERY Business meal Tenant meeting 52.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/14/18 GREEK MEDITERRANEAN STEAK Business meal Tenant meeting 48.10
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/28/18 VENTURA BOAT RENTALS Business meal Media visit 23.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/06/18 FS *AngelCam E-Advertising New Live Web CAM – Sunset 30.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/09/18 CTC*CONSTANTCONTACT.COM E-Advertising Harbor Views Enewsletter 20.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/19/18 ICONOSQUARE E-Advertising Annual Fee for Instagram Analytics 351.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/20/18 FS *AngelCam E-Advertising Harbor Entrance Web CAM 20.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/21/18 MAILCHIMP *MONTHLY E-Advertising Village Enewsletter 75.00
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/31/18 FACEBK *CS488FWJW2 E-Advertising Boosted ad posts 8.50
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/31/18 FACEBK *LR488FWJW2 E-Advertising Boosted ad posts 1.50
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/31/18 FACEBK *YG387FSSY2 E-Advertising Boosted ad posts 51.70
March 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 2 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
67
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
March 2018
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/31/18 FACEBK *XG387FSSY2 E-Advertising Boosted ad posts 137.44
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/03/18 CVS/PHARMACY #09235 Event production Golden Eggs for spring promotion 6.95
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/06/18 OTC BRANDS INC. Event production Mermaid Month 26.02
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/06/18 OTC BRANDS INC. Event production Mermaid Month 152.30
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/06/18 LOWES #01734* Event production Clips for Mermaid Month 13.75
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/13/18 OTC BRANDS INC Event production Credit from Mermaid Month (26.99)
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/15/18 PARTY CITY Event production Bubbles 27.95
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/20/18 TARGET 00002980 Event production Golden Eggs for spring promotion 42.10
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/21/18 OTC BRANDS Event production Harbor is Hopping Easter Sunday Eggs 26.95
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/21/18 MICHAELS STORES 4800 Event production Mermaid parade Items 52.80
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/28/18 LAKESHORE LEARNING #38 Event production Bubbles 37.66
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/28/18 THE HOME DEPOT 1040 Event production Spring selfie / experience board-tarp 12.37
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/28/18 MICHAELS STORES 4800 Event production Flowers for spring selfie board 21.55
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/28/18 MICHAELS STORES 4800 Event production Flowers for spring selfie board 32.33
Jennifer Talt-Lundin 03/28/18 MICHAELS STORES 4800 Event production Return of Spring flowers (36.04)
Total Marketing Manager’s Expenses 1,406.93
March 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 3 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
68
Chase Credit Card holders
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
Jessica Rauch, Administrative Assistant/Clerk
Robin Baer, Property Manager
Joe Gonzalez, Facilities Manager
Jennifer Talt-Lundin, Marketing Manager
Frank Locklear, Marina Manager
John Higgins, Harbormaster
Staff Trans Date Vendor Category Description Amount
Ventura Port District
Chase Business Credit Card Charges
March 2018
Frank Locklear 03/06/18 ATT*BILL PAYMENT Communications Internet connection – Marina / Marketing office 79.00
Frank Locklear 03/09/18 LOGMEIN*GOTOMEETING Communications Port District teleconference charge 49.00
Frank Locklear 03/09/18 REALVNC LIMITED Computer supply Remote computer access 110.00
Frank Locklear 03/09/18 FRY’S ELECTRONICS # 44 Computer supply (4) Cyber Power ComputerAPC’s 249.85
Frank Locklear 03/21/18 AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS Computer supply Marina office label maker 81.99
Frank Locklear 03/29/18 FRY’S ELECTRONICS # 44 Computer supply Replace Maintenance Supervisor’s computer 629.26
Frank Locklear 03/29/18 PCDESTINATION LLC Computer supply Microsoft Office for Maintenance Supervisor’s computer 149.97
Frank Locklear 03/27/18 Amazon Prime Membership Membership Annual fee for Amazon Prime 106.67
Frank Locklear 03/02/18 AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS Office supplies Plantronics telephone headset for Property Manager 203.63
Frank Locklear 03/14/18 DTV*DIRECTV SERVICE Operating supplies Direct TV service *Harbor Patrol 19.99
Total Marina Manager’s Expenses 1,679.36
John Higgins 03/27/18 BILLS TRAILER HITCH AND S Equipment maintenance Jet Ski trailer parts 51.72
John Higgins 03/15/18 FYF*FROMYOUFLOWERS Miscellaneous Paul Korber Memorial Wreath 224.08
John Higgins 03/15/18 APL* ITUNES.COM/BILL Operating supplies Patrol #1 phone storage 0.99
John Higgins 03/15/18 APL* ITUNES.COM/BILL Operating supplies Patrol #2 phone storage 0.99
John Higgins 03/20/18 AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS Operating supplies Jet Ski dolly/shop cart 369.98
John Higgins 03/27/18 AIRGAS WEST Operating supplies Miscellaneous supplies 3.53
John Higgins 03/29/18 Amazon.com Operating supplies ATN Laser Ballistics range finder & cell phone accessories 285.04
John Higgins 03/07/18 GOLD COAST RECYCLING & TR Salvage Vessel disposal 173.80
John Higgins 03/06/18 VENTURA COUNTY EMS Training EMT renewal (3 employees) 273.00
John Higgins 03/23/18 NATIONAL EMBLEM Uniform Uniform patch 814.41
Total Harbormaster’s Expenses 2,197.54
Total Chase Credit Card Expenses 11,785.91
March 2018, Chase credit card charges, Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENT 5
69
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
STANDARD AGENDA ITEM 2
APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WHITE
NELSON DIEHL EVANS
70
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT STANDARD AGENDA ITEM 2
BOARD COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: September 12, 2018
TO: Board of Port Commissioners
FROM: Gloria Adkins, Accounting Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of Professional Services Agreement with White Nelson Diehl Evans
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Port Commissioners:
a) Approve the three year Professional Services Agreement with White Nelson Diehl
Evans LLP to perform the District’s financial audit of the fiscal years ending June 30,
2018, June 30, 2019 and June 30, 2020; and
b) Appoint an Audit Liaison to work with staff and White Nelson Diehl Evans LLP
throughout the audit process.
SUMMARY:
Attached for the Board’s review is the scope of work for White Nelson Diehl Evans (WNDE) to
conduct an audit of the District’s financial statements for the fiscal year’s ending June 30, 2018,
June 30, 2019 and June 30, 2020. Staff is also requesting a Commissioner be chosen as an
audit liaison to work with staff throughout the current fiscal year audit process.
BACKGROUND:
The District has contracted with White Nelson Diehl Evans to perform the District’s annual
financial audit for the past seven years. Five of those years was through a joint contract with
the City of Ventura. The District’s joint contract with the City expired after the completion of the
audit for fiscal year 2015. After the joint contract expired, the City extended their service
agreement with WNDE for three years, fiscal years 15-16, 16-17 and 17-18. The City is
completing the final year of their extension and has entered into a new 3 year extension of their
PSA for fiscal years 18-19, 19-20 and 20-21. At this time the City is unable to include the
District in their service agreement extensions, so the District desires to contract directly with
WNDE for the audit of the District’s financial records for the next three fiscal years.
The audit for the first year of the requested PSA will begin in October 2018, with an expected
completion date no later than January 31, 2019. The audit of the remaining two years will begin
in August, with an expected completion date no later than November 30 of each year.
The District is very appreciative of the past opportunities to be included in the City’s Audit
Request for Proposal (RFP) process and is hopeful this collaborative arrangement may be
continued at a future date when the City is ready to solicit for an audit RFP.
In previous years the Chairman has appointed a Commissioner to communicate with staff and
the audit firm throughout the audit process. Commissioner Friedman served as the District’s
audit liaison for the fiscal year 2017 audit process. Appointing a liaison also provides the
opportunity for the Commissioner and the auditor to candidly discuss audit related matters and
concerns apart from management.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total cost for the three year audit services will be approximately $64,500. This total cost is
broken down as follows:
Fiscal Year Ending 2018 2019 2020
District Audit $20,500 $21,500 $22,500
71
These costs will be paid annually. WNDE will notify the District of any additional costs should
there be unforeseen circumstances that may require additional services in advance of
performing the service.
ATTACHMENT:
Attachment 1 – Scope of Work Letter, dated August 24, 2018
72
2875 Michelle Drive, Suite 300, Irvine, CA 92606 • Tel: 714.978.1300 • Fax: 714.978.7893
Offices located in Orange and San Diego Counties
1
August 24, 2018
Mr. Oscar Peña
General Manager
Ventura Port District
1603 Anchors Way Drive
Ventura, CA 93001
Dear Mr. Peña:
We are pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide Ventura Port District
(the District) for the three years ending June 30, 2020. We will audit the financial statements, including
related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the basic financial statements of
the District as of and for the years ending June 30, 2018, 2019, and 2020. Accounting standards
generally accepted in the United States of America provide for certain required supplementary
information (RSI), such as management’s discussion and analysis, to supplement the District’s basic
financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required
by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial
reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or
historical context. As part of our engagement, we will apply certain limited procedures to the District’s
RSI in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. These
limited procedures will consist of inquiries of management regarding the methods of preparing the
information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our
inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic
financial statements. We will not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information
because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or
provide any assurance. The following RSI is required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
and will be subjected to certain limited procedures, but will not be audited:
1) Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
2) Schedule of Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability and Schedule of Contributions for the
Defined Benefit Pension Plans.
3) Defined Benefit Plan Schedules required by GASB Statement No. 75, Accounting and Financial
Reporting for Postemployment Benefits Other than Pensions – An Amendment of GASB
Statement No. 45.
ATTACHMENT 1
73
Mr. Oscar Peña
Ventura Port District
August 24, 2018
Page 2
Audit Objectives
The objective of our audit is the expression of an opinion as to whether your financial statements are
fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the
United States of America and the standards for financial audits contained in Government Auditing
Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and will include tests of the
accounting records of the District and other procedures we consider necessary to enable us to express
such an opinion. We will issue a written report upon completion of our audit of the District’s financial
statements. Our report will be addressed to the Board of Port Commissioners of the District. We cannot
provide assurance that an unmodified opinion will be expressed. Circumstances may arise in which it
is necessary for us to modify our opinion or add emphasis-of-matter or other-matter paragraphs. If our
opinion is other than unmodified, we will discuss the reasons with you in advance. If, for any reason,
we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to form or have not formed an opinion, we may
decline to express an opinion or issue reports, or may withdraw from this engagement.
We will also provide a report (that does not include an opinion) on internal control related to the
financial statements and compliance with the provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant
agreements, noncompliance with which could have a material effect on the financial statements as
required by Government Auditing Standards. The report on internal control and on compliance and
other matters will include a paragraph that states (1) that the purpose of the report is solely to describe
the scope of testing of internal control and compliance, and the results of that testing, and not to
provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the District’s internal control on compliance, and (2) that the
report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in
considering the District’s internal control and compliance. The paragraph will also state that the report
is not suitable for any other purpose. If during our audit we become aware that the District is subject to
an audit requirement that is not encompassed in the terms of this engagement, we will communicate to
management and those charged with governance that an audit in accordance with U.S. generally
accepted auditing standards and the standards for financial audits contained in Government Auditing
Standards may not satisfy the relevant legal, regulatory, or contractual requirements.
Audit Procedures – General
An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be
examined and the areas to be tested. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of
accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We will plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement, whether from (1) errors, (2) fraudulent financial reporting, (3) misappropriation
of assets, or (4) violations of laws or governmental regulations that are attributable to the District or to
acts by management or employees acting on behalf of the District. Because the determination of abuse
is subjective, Government Auditing Standards do not expect auditors to provide reasonable assurance
of detecting abuse.
ATTACHMENT 1
74
Mr. Oscar Peña
Ventura Port District
August 24, 2018
Page 3
Audit Procedures – General (Continued)
Because of the inherent limitations of an audit, combined with the inherent limitations of internal
control, and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that
material misstatements may exist and not be detected by us, even though the audit is properly planned
and performed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted auditing standards and Government
Auditing Standards. In addition, an audit is not designed to detect immaterial misstatements or
violations of laws or governmental regulations that do not have a direct and material effect on the
financial statements. However, we will inform the appropriate level of management of any material
errors, any fraudulent financial reporting, or misappropriation of assets that come to our attention. We
will also inform the appropriate level of management of any violations of laws or governmental
regulations that come to our attention, unless clearly inconsequential, and of any material abuse that
comes to our attention. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by our audit and
does not extend to later periods for which we are not engaged as auditors.
Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the
accounts, and may include tests of physical existence of inventories, and direct confirmation of
receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, funding
sources, creditors, and financial institutions. We will request written representations from your
attorneys as part of the engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the
conclusion of our audit, we will require certain written representations from you about your
responsibilities for the financial statements; compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grant
agreements; and other responsibilities required by generally accepted auditing standards.
Audit Procedures – Internal Control
Our audit will include obtaining an understanding of the District and its environment, including
internal control, sufficient to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements and to
design the nature, timing, and extent of further audit procedures. Tests of controls may be performed to
test the effectiveness of certain controls that we consider relevant to preventing and detecting errors
and fraud that are material to the financial statements and to preventing and detecting misstatements
resulting from illegal acts and other noncompliance matters that have a direct and material effect on the
financial statements. Our tests, if performed, will be less in scope than would be necessary to render an
opinion on internal control and, accordingly, no opinion will be expressed in our report on internal
control issued pursuant to Government Auditing Standards.
An audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify significant deficiencies
or material weaknesses. However, during the audit, we will communicate to management and those
charged with governance internal control related matters that are required to be communicated under
AICPA professional standards and Government Auditing Standards.
ATTACHMENT 1
75
Mr. Oscar Peña
Ventura Port District
August 24, 2018
Page 4
Audit Procedures – Compliance
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we will perform tests of the District’s compliance with the provisions of applicable laws,
regulations, contracts, agreements, and grants. However, the objective of our audit will not be to
provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express such an opinion in our report on
compliance issued pursuant to Government Auditing Standards.
Other Services
We will also assist in preparing the financial statements and related notes of the District in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles based on information provided by you. These
nonaudit services do not constitute an audit under Government Auditing Standards and such services
will not be conducted in accordance with Government Auditing Standards. We will perform the
services in accordance with applicable professional standards. The other services are limited to the
financial statements and related notes services previously defined. We, in our sole professional
judgment, reserve the right to refuse to perform any procedure or take any action that could be
construed as assuming management responsibilities.
Management Responsibilities
Management is responsible for designing, implementing, and maintaining effective internal controls,
including evaluating and monitoring ongoing activities, to help ensure that appropriate goals and
objectives are met; following laws and regulations; and ensuring that management is reliable and
financial information is reliable and properly reported. Management is also responsible for
implementing systems designed to achieve compliance with applicable laws, regulations, contracts,
and grant agreements. You are also responsible for the selection and application of accounting
principles, for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements and all accompanying
information in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, and for compliance with
applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and grant agreements.
Management is also responsible for making all financial records and related information available to us
and for the accuracy and completeness of that information. You are also responsible for providing us
with (1) access to all information of which you are aware that is relevant to the preparation and fair
presentation of the financial statements, (2) additional information that we may request for the purpose
of the audit, and (3) unrestricted access to persons within the government from whom we determine it
necessary to obtain audit evidence. Because of the importance of oral and written management
representations to the effective performance of our services, the District releases and indemnifies our
firm and its personnel from any and all claims, liabilities, costs and expenses attributable to any
misrepresentation by management and its representatives.
ATTACHMENT 1
76
Mr. Oscar Peña
Ventura Port District
August 24, 2018
Page 5
Management Responsibilities (Continued)
Your responsibilities include adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements and
for confirming to us in the written representation letter that the effects of any uncorrected
misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period
presented are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a
whole.
You are responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to prevent and detect
fraud, and for informing us about all known or suspected fraud affecting the District involving
(1) management, (2) employees who have significant roles in internal control, and (3) others where the
fraud could have a material effect on the financial statements. Your responsibilities include informing
us of your knowledge of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the District received in
communications from employees, former employees, grantors, regulators, or others. In addition, you
are responsible for identifying and ensuring that the District complies with applicable laws,
regulations, contracts, agreements, and grants and for taking timely and appropriate steps to remedy
fraud and noncompliance with provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, or grant agreements, or abuse
that we report.
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining a process for tracking the status of audit
findings and recommendations. Management is also responsible for identifying and providing report
copies of previous financial audits, attestation engagements, performance audits or other studies related
to the objectives discussed in the Audit Objectives section of this letter. This responsibility includes
relaying to us corrective actions taken to address significant findings and recommendations resulting
from those audits, attestation engagements, performance audits, or other studies. You are also
responsible for providing management’s views on our current findings, conclusions, and
recommendations, as well as your planned corrective actions, for the report, and for the timing and
format for providing that information.
You agree to assume all management responsibilities relating to the financial statements and related
notes and any other nonaudit services we provide. You will be required to acknowledge in the
management representation letter our assistance with preparation of the financial statements and
related notes, and with the calculation of the net pension liability, and that you have reviewed and
approved the financial statements and related notes prior to their issuance and have accepted
responsibility for them. Further, you agree to oversee the nonaudit services by designating an
individual, preferably from senior management, with suitable skill, knowledge, or experience; evaluate
the adequacy and results of those services; and accept responsibility for them.
With regard to the electronic dissemination of audited financial statements, including financial
statements published electronically on your website, you understand that electronic sites are a means to
distribute information and, therefore, we are not required to read the information contained in these
sites or to consider the consistency of other information in the electronic site with the original
document.
ATTACHMENT 1
77
Mr. Oscar Peña
Ventura Port District
August 24, 2018
Page 6
Engagement Administration, Fees, and Other
Noted below is a listing of some work required by District staff to assist in the audit:
1. Preparation of trial balances for all funds, after posting of all year-end journal entries.
2. Preparation of supporting schedules for all material balance sheet accounts, and selected revenue
and expenditure accounts.
3. Typing of all confirmation requests.
4. Pulling and refiling of all supporting documents required for audit verification.
5. Assistance with the preparation of the financial statements and notes to the financial statements.
6. Preparation of the management’s discussion and analysis.
Mr. Robert J. Callanan is the engagement partner and is responsible for supervising the engagement
and signing the report or authorizing another individual to sign it. Our fees for these services will be as
follows:
Fiscal Year Ending 2018 2019 2020
District Audit $ 20,500 $ 21,500 $ 22,500
The aforementioned audit fees include assistance with the preparation of the District’s financial
statements and the net pension liability calculations.
The annual fee stipulated herein contemplates that conditions satisfactory to the normal progress and
completion of the examination will be encountered and the District’s accounting personnel will furnish
the agreed upon assistance in connection with the audit. However, if unusual circumstances are
encountered which make it necessary for us to do additional work; we shall report such conditions to
the responsible District officials and provide the District with an estimate of the additional accounting
fees involved.
We will provide copies of our reports to the District; however, management is responsible for
distribution of the reports and the financial statements. Unless restricted by law or regulation, or
containing privileged and confidential information, copies of our reports are to be made available for
public inspection.
The audit documentation for this engagement is the property of White Nelson Diehl Evans LLP and
constitutes confidential information. However, subject to applicable laws and regulations, audit
documentation and appropriate individuals will be made available upon request and in a timely manner
to grantor agencies or their designees, a federal agency providing direct or indirect funding, or the
U.S. Government Accountability Office for purposes of a quality review of the audit, to resolve audit
findings, or to carry out oversight responsibilities. We will notify you of any such request. If requested,
access to such audit documentation will be provided under the supervision of White Nelson Diehl
Evans LLP personnel. Furthermore, upon request, we may provide copies of selected audit
documentation to the aforementioned parties. These parties may intend, or decide, to distribute the
copies or information contained therein to others, including other governmental agencies.
ATTACHMENT 1
78
Mr. Oscar Peña
Ventura Port District
August 24, 2018
Page 7
Engagement Administration, Fees, and Other (Continued)
In accordance with our firm’s current record retention policy, all of your original records will be
returned to you at the conclusion of this engagement. Our audit documentation files will be kept for a
period of seven years after the issuance of the audit report. All other files will be kept for as long as
you retain us as your auditors. However, upon termination of our service, all records will be destroyed
after a period of seven years. Physical deterioration or catastrophic events may further shorten the life
of these records. The audit documentation files of our firm are not a substitute for your original
records.
We expect to begin our audits in August and to issue our reports no later than November 30. For the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2018, we expect to begin the audit in October 2018 and issue our reports no
later than January 31, 2019.
Government Auditing Standards require that we provide you with a copy of our most recent external
peer review report and any letter of comment, and any subsequent peer review reports and letters of
comment received during the period of the contract. Our most recent peer review report accompanies
this letter.
To ensure that White Nelson Diehl Evans LLP’s independence is not impaired under the AICPA Code
of Professional Conduct, you agree to inform the engagement partner before entering into any
substantive employment discussions with any of our personnel.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the Ventura Port District and believe this letter
accurately summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you have any questions, please let
us know. If you agree with the terms of our engagement as described in this letter, please sign and date
below and return the signed copy to us.
Very truly yours,
ACCEPTED:
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT
By
Name
Title
Date
ATTACHMENT 1
79
ATTACHMENT 1
80
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
STANDARD AGENDA ITEM 3
APPROVAL OF NEW CONFLICT OF
INTEREST AND DISCLOSURE CODE
81
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT STANDAR AGENDA ITEM 3
BOARD COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: September 12, 2018
TO: Board of Port Commissioners
FROM: Jessica Rauch, Clerk of the Board
SUBJECT: Approval of New Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Code
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Port Commissioners adopt Resolution No. 3361 to approve the new Conflict
of Interest Code Policy and rescind Resolution No. 3317.
SUMMARY:
It has been necessary from time to time to amend the District’s Conflict of Interest Code to
conform its disclosure obligations to recent changes in the law, and to identify new positions
within the District for which the job duties entail the making of decisions having a potential
financial impact on the District, such that employees holding such positions are required to file
disclosure statements under the District’s Code. The District recently added the new position of
Deputy General Manager. Exhibit A to the proposed Resolution identifies all designated
positions and the disclosure categories they file under.
Once the Board adopts Resolution No. 3361, approving the new Conflict of Interest and
Disclosure Code, it will be transmitted to the County of Ventura, along with a form of
Certification signed by the Secretary of the Board.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 3361
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
STANDARD AGENDA ITEM 4
VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE
SITE SELECTION
92
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT STANDARD AGENDA ITEM 4
BOARD COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: September 12, 2018
TO: Board of Port Commissioners
FROM: Everard Ashworth, Chairman
Oscar Peña, General Manager
Brian Pendleton, Deputy General Manager
SUBJECT: Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Site Selection
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Port Commissioners receive an informational report on the Ventura Shellfish
Enterprise (VSE) site selection process with the anticipation of a final site recommendation with
related permit applications, studies and reports on September 26, 2018.
SUMMARY:
As a result of the Board’s actions regarding VSE project siting on November 15, 2017, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Ocean Service (NOS)
prepared a Coastal Aquaculture Siting and Sustainability (CASS) Technical Report – Ventura
Shellfish Enterprise: Aquaculture Siting Analysis Results (Attachment 1).
As stated in the CASS Report, spatial planning for aquaculture operations, wherein spatial data
representing key environmental and use conflicts are synthesized to identify areas with the
highest likelihood for compatibility with aquaculture operations, is a critical first step to ensure
environmentally and economically sustainable aquaculture development. The CASS Report for
the VSE project studied an area of 20,000 acres in federal waters proximate to Ventura Harbor,
known as an Area of Interest (AOI).
On June 28, 2018, NOAA and the VSE team co-hosted an Inter-Agency Pre-Application
Meeting in Long Beach with federal and state regulatory staff. NOAA presented the preliminary
draft CASS Report and the VSE team provided information concerning the status of the project
and related studies. On July 9, 2017, VSE team members met with the Commercial Fishermen
of Santa Barbara (CFSB) to discuss the project and status of permit applications.
As a result of the CASS Technical Report, the VSE team has identified two new alternatives,
known as CASS Report Alternative 1 and 2 (Attachment 2-3) and Dudek, the project’s
environmental consulting firm, has prepared a draft application to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) (Attachment 4) and is currently preparing a California Coastal Commission
(CC) application. These two new alternatives are consistent with the Board’s prior site selection
both in terms of size (2,000 acres) and location in federal waters. The exact GPS coordinates of
these two alternatives are included in the CASS Technical Report. The permit applications with
preferred siting will be formally considered for approval by the Board on September 26, 2018.
BACKGROUND:
On November 15, 2017, the Board of Port Commissioners authorized the General Manager to
prepare and submit all applications to local, state and federal agencies as required for the VSE
project and prepare all necessary surveys, studies, reports and federal environmental review
documents as directed by local, state and federal agencies. NOAA’s CASS Technical Report
has allowed the VSE team to evaluate the proposed siting and refine these permit locations and
configurations in consultation with aquaculture experts prior to submission of the permit
applications.
93
Project Goals
Increasing the supply of safe, sustainably produced domestic seafood is a priority of the State
Legislature, NOAA and the U.S. Department of Commerce. The VSE project is a multi-party
initiative that seeks to permit twenty 100-acre plots for growing the Mediterranean mussel
(Mytilus galloprovincialis) via submerged long lines within the Santa Barbara Channel near
Ventura Harbor. The Ventura Port District received a substantial NOAA Sea Grant sub-award of
$300,000 in 2015 for the proposed project in support of these goals. As part of the 2015 grant,
the VSE team developed a Strategic Permitting Plan previously provided to the Board and made
available to stakeholders and the public. This Strategic Permitting Plan provides a great deal of
information about project goals, objectives and regulatory requirements and can be found online
at venturashellfishenterprises.com. The proposed project furthers several of the District’s
fundamental mission and objectives, as summarized below:
 Maintaining a safe and navigable harbor;
 Diversification of commercial fishing opportunities to benefit the fishing industry and local
and regional economies;
 Continued priority (as a commercial fishing harbor) for federal funding appropriations for
annual dredging of the federal harbor entrance.
Public Outreach
The VSE team hosted a series of public educational workshops in 2017 regarding the proposed
project. In total, there were 10 educational and site selection workshops. Of these, three
workshops were held to engage with stakeholders to identify the location of twenty 100 acre
parcels within a broader area of interest that was identified through use of a spatial planning tool
developed by the Bren School of Environmental Science and Management at UC Santa
Barbara (UC Bren School). The focused site selection workshops were held at the Four Points
Sheraton Hotel in our Harbor on July 11th and 13th and the final workshop was held on August
9th of 2017. While in-person participation was strongly encouraged, individuals who were not
able to attend the meetings were provided the opportunity to comment on site selection through
SeaSketch linked to venturashellfishenterprise.com. Notice of the site selection workshops was
mailed out to over 500 commercial fishing vessel owners between Goleta and Port Hueneme;
additionally, the VSE team coordinated with NOAA representatives and commercial fishermen
to encourage their attendance. The team also contacted all of the individuals that have
registered through the VSE website. This marine spatial planning opportunity was available
through Wednesday, August 9th 2017, the date of the final site selection meeting. The
venturashellfishenterprise.com website continues to be used to communicate with interested
parties who registered on the website.
During and after the site selection workshops, the Board of Port Commissioners received written
and oral reports on the site selection process at four public meetings held in 2017 on July 26th,
September 13th and 27th, and October 11th. At a fifth public meeting on November 15, the Board
authorized the General Manager to proceed with the preparation of all necessary permit
applications, surveys, studies, reports for a site in federal waters known as Alternative 8.
Initial Candidate Area Considerations
The initial candidate area in state waters was selected by the VSE with the assistance of
analysis prepared by the UC Bren School. The selection of the initial candidate area was
detailed in the Strategic Permitting Plan; however some key considerations are summarized
here. They included suitability of the candidate growing area for mussels such as water depth
and ocean bottom; location in State waters near Ventura Harbor for product landing; avoidance
of potential pollution sources; and avoidance of conflicts with existing subsurface leases for oil
and gas pipelines, etc. Stakeholder considerations are discussed below.
94
Subsequent to identification of the initial candidate area, the District received information from
local halibut trawlers that the proposed State waters candidate area was located in one of two
areas statewide designated by CDFW as halibut trawl grounds. Further, additional information
was provided by aquaculture specialist Scott Lindell, associated with Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution, that the minimum depth to support the mussel growing activities
should be adjusted from 60 feet to 80 feet. This minimum depth is consistent with the only
permitted mussel farms that can sell Mediterranean Mussels in Southern California, Santa
Barbara Mariculture (which is located in 80 feet of water off Hope Ranch), and Catalina Sea
Ranch (which is located in depths between 138 and 150 feet, approximately 6.1 miles from the
shore off the coast between Long Beach and Huntington Beach). The minimum of 80’ reduces
exposure to various predator species (i.e. ducks) and potential storm surge, while the upper-end
range of approximately 115’ provides opportunities to scale operations.
2017 Siting Considerations and Expanded Candidate Area
With high levels of stakeholder engagement, ranging from existing users of the candidate area
to prospective grower producers and aquaculture industry experts, the VSE team, with Board
concurrence, expanded its site search to include areas in federal waters near Ventura Harbor.
Specifically, the expanded candidate area comprises 200,000 acres in both state and federal
waters in Blocks 651, 652, 664, 665, 666. To understand this scale, the proposed VSE project
represents 2,000 acres or 1% of this 5 block area.
Additionally, the VSE team established criteria on which to evaluate and prioritize each siting
alternative. As a result, the VSE team constructed a siting decision matrix to quantify the
benefits of each potential siting configuration, and assist the Board in its decision-making
process last November. The stakeholder engagement process supported the identification of
key factors upon which to assist siting configuration decision making. Each of the criteria was
assigned a weight based on perceived relative importance to achieving optimal operational
capacity and minimizing potential user conflicts and environmental impacts. Siting alternatives
were then scored using a rating system that corresponds to preferences identified by the VSE
team. These criteria include:
 Approximate water depth
 Potential adverse water pollution sources
 Potential visual effects from shore
 Potential interaction with commercial and recreational fishing interests
 Subleasing or sub-permitting complexities
 Potential overlap with subsurface leases
 Environmental review complexity
 Contiguous siting
 Distance from Harbor
Quantification of the eight siting configuration alternatives revealed significant advantages for
locating the VSE project in federal waters, and specifically for siting as was depicted and
described as Alternative 8 in Block 665. Additionally, the VSE analyzed fish catch data for the 5
block area over a 5-year period. In this 200,000 acre area the data showed that the average
annual wholesale value from 2012-2016 was approximately $2.96M.
A siting configuration in Federal waters is similar to any alternative in the original identified
candidate area in terms of water column depth and bottom substrate. However, Alternative 8
maintained additional advantages over any alternative in CA state waters because of a reduced
95
level of interference with commercial fishermen; potential improved water and product quality;
relative proximity to Ventura Harbor; resulting minimal visual impacts to the near shore
environment; and potential to realize economies of scale. These factors led to the Board’s
decision on November 15th of last year.
The VSE team projects that use of 2,000 or 1% of that expanded area for the proposed project
at full build out and operation could generate $45M-$55M in annual wholesale value. Many
factors will ultimately determine actual revenue including project size, growing conditions,
operational interruptions, time period to full build out, market conditions, project and operational
costs, etc. In applying a factor of 50% to these preliminary estimates, the project could still
potentially generate $22.5M -$27.5M in annual wholesale value.
In identifying the appropriate location in federal waters, the VSE project team also sought to
further minimize interaction with existing commercial fisheries. Based upon the workshops and
public outreach conducted in 2017, the commercial halibut trawl fishery was identified as the
primary commercial fishery potentially affected by the project. To determine the potential impact,
the VSE team reviewed actual CDFW trawl data from 2010 through 2016, which provided the
location (i.e. latitude and longitude) of where each trawl started and stopped.
 The total trawl length within the Santa Barbara Channel during that time period was
40,480 nautical miles.
 The total trawl length within the Area of Interest was 1,508 nautical miles.
 The total trawl length within CASS Report Alternative 1 was 145 nautical miles.
Therefore, based upon CDFW trawl data, the project will require the existing commercial
trawling fishery to relocate approximately 0.4% of their total trawls within the Santa Barbara
Channel. It is speculative as to whether this relocation will have a negative or positive impact on
the overall catch for the halibut fishery but, given the small amount of existing usage, the impact
is considered to be likely negligible.
2018 NOAA CASS Technical Report
As a result of the Board’s actions regarding VSE project siting on November 15, 2017, NOAA’s
NOS prepared a Coastal Aquaculture Siting and Sustainability (CASS) Technical Report –
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise: Aquaculture Siting Analysis Results. The report is helpful to District
staff in making final recommendations to the Board about project siting, but will also be helpful
to inform federal and state regulatory agencies in conducting appropriate environmental review
under the National Environmental Policy Act and evaluating permit applications, and other
stakeholders and interested parties.
NOS obtained quantitative requirements for the project from the VSE team. These requirements
included information regarding preferred project parameters: spatial boundaries of region of
interest, preference for state or federal waters, preferred project location coordinates,
approximate proposed project size, preferred port, the maximum distance from preferred port,
species to be cultivated, acceptable depth range, acceptable seawater temperature range,
acceptable current velocity range, maximum allowable wave energy, and additional comments
or specifications. These quantitative requirements are contained in the CASS Technical Report
and the basis from which a new 20,000 acre Area of Interest (AOI) in federal waters in Blocks
664-665 was developed.
All potential environmental and use factors that could constrain the siting of the VSE project
were first plotted and mapped to compare against the identified AOI for the VSE project. These
interactions included military, industry, commercial fishing, navigation, and natural resources.
96
NOS determined that oil and gas, commercial fisheries, navigation, and submarine cables and
wrecks and obstructions were all uses that intersected with the AOI. This led to a final suitability
assessment, where the northern portion of the AOI was determined to have the highest
likelihood of compatibility with the proposed project and avoid/minimize interactions with the
other user groups. Based on the results of the suitability analysis, NOS identified two alternative
site configurations based on VSE parameters that maximize likelihood of compatibility with
existing uses in the region. The primary difference between the two CASS Report Alternative
sites is the configuration of the individual 100-acre cultivation areas.
Importantly, the two sites overlap with the federal waters alternative site (SeaSketch Alternative
8) identified in the UCSB Bren School spatial planning analysis and previously approved by the
Board (Attachment 5), indicating the area has been shown by two independent studies to have
the fewest conflicts with other uses and sensitive environmental resources. The draft permit
application to USACE has identified CASS Report Alternative 1 as the preferred project site,
given that it has greater operational flexibility, and Alternative 2 as a project alternative.
Seafood Inspection Program (SIP)
At the inception of the VSE project, there was not a clear pathway for compliance with the
National Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP) guidelines for shellfish grown in federal waters.
However, a pathway for NSSP compliance in federal waters has been adopted through an
interim program adopted by the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference and the NSSP to
enable harvest and sale of safe and healthy shellfish products in interstate commerce. Through
a collaborative and coordinated effort with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and NOAA’s
Seafood Inspection Program (SIP) in January 2017, they developed a pathway to implement the
interim program for NSSP compliance for molluscan shellfish in federal waters. This pathway for
NSSP compliance in federal waters is now being successfully implemented by another offshore
mussel aquaculture project in southern California. The compliance pathway covers both preand
post-harvest elements of the NSSP Model Ordinance and can serve as a template for
further adaptation to the VSE project goals and needs. Such adaptations will take into
consideration the public-private nature of the VSE enterprise, the participation of multiple
grower-producers, its scale and ultimate location, and other factors. VSE team member Coastal
Marine Biolabs (CMB) is committed to establishing a centralized, federally approved, Ventura
Harbor-based testing facility to meet the testing requirements articulated in the NSSP. This
process can be initiated independently of implementing the NSSP compliant interim program for
federal waters and concurrently with the permit application process.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff has completed the 2015 NOAA Sea Grant and is awaiting formal announcement of two
additional grant applications from the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC) and
2018 NOAA Sea Grant to help fund the next steps of the entitlement process. Additionally the
Board approved $80,000 in FY18/19 for project related professional services. Staff will return to
the Board with any announcements regarding grant applications, related agreements and
professional services as necessary.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – NOAA Coastal Aquaculture Siting and Sustainability (CASS) Technical Report –
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise: Aquaculture Siting Analysis Results
Attachment 2 – CASS Report Alternative 1
Attachment 3 – CASS Report Alternative 2
Attachment 4 – Draft USACE Application
Attachment 5 – SeaSketch Alternative 8
97
CASS Technical Report
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise:
Aquaculture Siting Analysis Results
Seth J. Theuerkauf, Ph.D.1, Virginia Crothers, M.S.1, and James A. Morris, Jr., Ph.D.2
1CSS, Inc. for NOAA NOS/NCCOS, Beaufort, NC
2NOAA NCCOS, Beaufort, NC
INTRODUCTION
Spatial planning for aquaculture operations, wherein spatial data representing key environmental and
space use conflicts are synthesized to identify areas with the highest likelihood for compatibility with
aquaculture operations, is a critical first step to ensure environmentally and economically sustainable
aquaculture industry development. Aquaculture siting analyses involve the use of geospatial analytical
tools (e.g., GIS – Geographic Information Systems) to integrate pertinent spatial data and generate
map-based products that can be used to inform policy and permitting decisions regarding where
aquaculture operations can be located.
The Ventura Shellfish Enterprise (hereafter ‘VSE’) is a multi-party initiative seeking to permit twenty
100-acre plots of ocean space for aquaculture production of the Mediterranean mussel (Mytilus
galloprovincialis) via submerged long lines in federal waters within the Santa Barbara Channel,
proximate to Ventura Harbor, California, USA. The key participants in the VSE, including Coastal
Marine Biolabs, The Cultured Abalone Farm, and the Ashworth Leninger Group, have worked with
the Ventura Port District to develop a “Strategic Permitting Plan,” with a suite of other resources and
project related information and tools that can be found on the VSE website:
venturashellfishenterprise.com, or by contacting the VSE Co-Project Managers, Everard Ashworth at
EAshworth@algcorp.com or Brian Pendleton at BPendleton@venturaharbor.com.
NOAA’s Coastal Aquaculture Siting and Sustainability (CASS) Program conducted a comprehensive
and objective siting analysis for the proposed VSE project, which is the subject of this technical report.
This siting analysis utilized the best available, high-resolution spatial data to represent key potential
environmental and space use conflicts that constrain the siting of an aquaculture operation within the
Santa Barbara Channel region of interest. This siting analysis was guided by quantitative input
provided by VSE regarding specific project requirements and was iteratively developed with input
provided by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Los Angeles District, NOAA
(including the National Marine Fisheries Service and the National Ocean Service), the State of
California Aquaculture Coordinator, the California Coastal Commission, and the VSE team.
The Coastal Aquaculture Siting and Sustainability (CASS) program supports works to provide science-based
decision support tools to local, state, and federal coastal managers supporting sustainable aquaculture
development. The CASS program is located within the Marine Spatial Ecology Division of the National Centers
for Coastal Ocean Science, National Ocean Service, NOAA.
To learn more about CASS and how we are growing sustainable marine aquaculture practices visit
https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/research/marine-spatial-ecology/aquaculture/ or contact Dr. James Morris at
James.Morris@noaa.gov.
98
METHODS
Data Inventory
A comprehensive spatial data inventory was developed for the Santa Barbara Channel region to inform
the VSE siting analysis. Specifically, the data inventory included data layers from the following
categories: military, industry and recreation, commercial fishing, navigation, natural resources, and
oceanographic / biophysical. We conducted an exhaustive search and survey to identify web-based
resources and contacts to obtain pertinent data resources. A broad suite of state and federal agencies
(e.g., NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Defense, Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management, California Department of Fish and Wildlife) and academic institutions (e.g.,
University of California at Santa Barbara) contributed spatial data. Data was checked for completeness
and quality to ensure that the most authoritative source was used. The complete data inventory
generated for this siting analysis can be found in Table 1.
Project Requirements
We obtained quantitative requirements for the VSE project directly from the technical coordinator for
the VSE team. These requirements included a request for the following items of information regarding
preferred project parameters: 1) spatial boundaries of region of interest, 2) preference for state or
federal waters, 3) preferred project location coordinates (if available), 4) approximate proposed project
size, 5) preferred port, 6) maximum distance from preferred port, 7) species to be cultivated, 8)
acceptable depth range, 9) acceptable seawater temperature range, 10) acceptable current velocity
range, 11) maximum allowable wave energy, and 12) additional comments or specifications. This
information was obtained from the VSE team via a Google Form. All fields were optional.
Spatial Analytical Approach
The spatial analysis for the VSE project was conducted within ArcMap 10.5 (Esri 2016), and is a type
of spatial multi-criteria analysis known as suitability analysis. Suitability analyses allow for integration
of multiple spatial data layers to identify areas of highest suitability, or areas with the highest
likelihood of compatibility. When utilized within an aquaculture spatial planning context, suitability
analyses integrate data representing environmental or space-use constraints to identify areas that
minimize potential conflicts and have the highest likelihood for compatibility with aquaculture
operations. Within a suitability analysis, each individual spatial data layer is re-scaled according to a
defined suitability relationship (e.g., locations associated with the highest vessel traffic are assigned a
score of ‘0’, locations of lowest vessel traffic are assigned a score of ‘1’). Each re-scaled spatial data
layer can be subsequently assigned a weight (all weights must sum to 100%; higher weights = more
important conflict considerations), and all data layers can be integrated within the spatial analysis to
identify locations with the highest likelihood for compatibility across all factors considered within the
analysis. It is important to note that while weights can be assigned to individual spatial data layers,
each layer can also be assigned an equivalent weight such that no individual factor has a greater
impact on the final scores and output of the spatial analysis.
Based upon the project requirements criteria defined by VSE, we established a boundary for the ‘area
of interest’ (hereafter ‘AOI;’ Figure 1). We subsequently established a uniform grid within this
boundary with a grid cell size of 10 acres (Figure 2). This grid cell size was selected based on the
spatial resolution of the available data and the proposed size of the VSE project. Utilizing the
comprehensive data inventory we had previously developed for the Santa Barbara Channel region, we
projected each spatial data layer to visualize and assess which layers were contained within the AOI.
99
Spatial data layers not contained within the AOI were not considered further within the VSE suitability
analysis, but were mapped for visualization purposes within this report. Spatial data layers contained
within the AOI were subsequently converted onto the previously established grid using a custom
Python script. For example, total vessel traffic density was projected onto the established grid wherein
each grid cell was assigned a value corresponding to the vessel traffic density for a given cell’s
location. After projection of each spatial data layer onto the grid, individual grid cell values were rescaled
according to a pre-defined rule (e.g., locations associated with the highest vessel traffic are
assigned a score of ‘0’, locations of lowest vessel traffic are assigned a score of ‘1’). Re-scaling of
each spatial data layer was essential to ensure each factor was on a common scale (0 – less compatible,
to 1 – more compatible). Within GIS, the overall suitability of each cell (Sj) for siting the VSE
aquaculture operation was calculated as:
= ∙

=1
where Sj is the cumulative value of cell j calculated as the product of the suitability score L of cell j
and the associated weight W for factor x summed across all factors. It is important to note that within
this analysis, all factors were considered to have equivalent weighting. After calculation of overall
suitability scores using the function described above, a secondary calculation was conducted to
remove (i.e., assign a score of ‘0’) grid cells that received a score of ‘0’ for any individual factor. This
second-order calculation was necessary to ensure that grid cells associated with locations of known
incompatibility were removed from further consideration. On a scale of 0 to 1, grid cell suitability
scores for siting the VSE operation were ranked from highest (most suitable) to lowest (least suitable).
Identification of Alternative Sites
Multiple alternative sites for siting of the proposed VSE project were identified within the overall
AOI. The final suitability grid that incorporated all identified constraining factors was used to guide
the identification and delineation of two specific alternative locations and configurations for the
proposed VSE project. Specifically, the highest scoring grid cells (i.e., most compatible locations
across all criteria considered) were used to guide delineation of two alternative locations and
configurations of the twenty 100-acre parcels associated with the proposed VSE project. In addition to
the proposed project’s siting criteria (i.e., within federal waters of a suitable depth for mussel long-line
gear, see ‘Project Requirements’ below) the twenty 100-acre parcels were also configured and
delineated so that the long-lines (or the side of the parcel facing shore) run parallel to the shoreline to
maximize longshore currents.
Additional Considerations
Certain spatial criteria (e.g., cetacean density and distribution along the California coast), while
relevant to understanding the broader regional context and setting of the proposed VSE project, were
inappropriate for inclusion within the siting analysis given the coarseness of the resolution of spatial
data representing these criteria (e.g., kilometer-scale spatial resolution). Protected cetacean species, for
example, are highly mobile and create complex set of spatial and temporal considerations. While we
describe these factors and considerations to the greatest extent possible given the best available spatial
data to represent them within the ‘Discussion’ section below, it is important to consult with regional
experts regarding these considerations prior to final site selection.
100
RESULTS
Project Requirements
We received the following project requirements from the VSE team. Note that all fields were optional.
1. Spatial Boundaries of Region of Interest: Santa Barbara Channel
2. Preference for State or Federal Waters: Federal Waters
3. Preferred Project Location Coordinates: empty
4. Approximate Proposed Project Size: 20 x 100-acre plots (2,000 acres total)
5. Preferred Port: Ventura Harbor
6. Maximum Distance from Preferred Port: 9 nautical miles
7. Species to be Cultivated: Mytilus galloprovincialis
8. Acceptable Depth Range: 25 – 37 m
9. Acceptable Seawater Temperature Range: 5 – 30 degC, optimal 20 degC
10. Acceptable Current Velocity Range: 0.025 – 0.1 m-s
11. Maximum Allowable Wave Energy: (depth range selected due to wave climate)
12. Additional Comments or Specifications: (communicated through email), longlines
are proposed for use for mussel cultivation
Based on the project requirements received from the VSE team, we identified an overall ‘area of
interest’ (AOI) for the VSE project of ~20,000 acres within 9 nm of the Port of Ventura within federal
waters between 25 and 37 m depth (Figure 1). A grid containing ~2,000 10-acre grid cells was
established within the AOI (Figure 2).
Spatial Analysis Development
All potential environmental and space use factors that could constrain the siting of the VSE project for
which an authoritative spatial data source was identified for (Table 1) were first plotted and mapped to
compare against the identified AOI for the VSE project.
Military Interactions – No interactions were identified between the AOI and existing military space
uses, inclusive of the Point Mugu Sea Range and existing danger zones and restricted areas (Figure 3).
Industry Interactions – An interaction was identified between the AOI and active oil and gas leases,
drilling platforms, pipelines, and submarine cables (Figure 4). Active oil and gas leases intersect the
central and southern portions of the AOI; oil and gas pipelines and submarine cables intersect the
central and southernmost portion of the AOI; a single drilling platform is located in the southern
portion of the AOI. However, no interaction was identified between the AOI and ocean disposal sites.
Commercial Fishing Interactions – Commercial fishing, including trawl and squid fisheries,
interactions were identified with the AOI (Figure 5); these interactions were further examined at the
regional scale for trawl fisheries (Figure 6) and the squid fishery (Figure 7). Trawl fishery interactions
occur throughout the AOI (Figure 6) and were examined in more detail in the subsequent suitability
analysis. Squid fishery interactions are more prevalent in the southern and central portions of the AOI,
with some identified interactions in the northernmost portion of the AOI (Figure 7).
Navigation Interactions – Navigation space use interactions were identified within the AOI,
including vessel traffic and wrecks and obstructions interactions (Figure 8). Aids to navigation,
artificial reefs, maintained channels and designated shipping lanes do not intersect the AOI. Vessel
101
traffic (based on total vessel count for 2013, determined to be representative of modern vessel traffic
for the region) is most significant in the central and southern portions of the AOI. Wrecks and
obstructions are present in the southern portion of the AOI.
Natural Resource Interactions – Multiple levels of natural resource interactions for which
authoritative spatial data was available were examined. Cetacean distribution and density data was
examined, but the coarse spatial resolution of these data precluded their ability to be incorporated
(Figure 9). Hardbottom habitat and deep-sea coral distribution does not interact with the AOI, but does
occur within its proximity (Figure 10).
Interactions Incorporated within the Spatial Analysis – Based on examination of the broad suite of
potential interactions for which authoritative spatial data were available to represent, we were able to
identify which factors do not intersect the AOI and thus were not incorporated within the spatial
analysis (Figure 11), and those factors that do intersect the AOI and thus were incorporated (Figure
12). Specific interactions that were subsequently incorporated within the spatial analysis included the
following: 1) oil and gas, 2) commercial fisheries, 3) navigation, and 4) submarine cables and wrecks
and obstructions.
Spatial Analysis Output and Identification of Alternative Sites
Oil and Gas Suitability – The following rules were applied to develop the oil and gas suitability grid:
a score of ‘0’ was assigned to grid cells intersecting oil and gas drilling platforms and pipelines
(including areas within a 500-m radius of these features), a score of ‘0.5’ was assigned to grid cells
intersecting the active lease area due to the increased coordination required to site and manage the
proposed project within the active lease area, and a score of ‘1’ was assigned to grid cells outside of
leases and not intersecting oil and gas platforms or pipelines. This restricted the most suitable
locations based on oil and gas interactions to the northernmost and central-eastern portions of the AOI
(Figure 13).
Commercial Fishing Suitability: Trawl Fishery – Compatibility with trawl fisheries was determined
by assigning a relative rank from low-to-high (scores ranging from ‘0’ to ‘1’) to grid cells with low-tohigh
densities of trawl tracks. Trawl track densities for each grid cell were calculated by summing the
total number of trawl track lines that passed through a given grid cell. The highest suitability was
identified in western and central portions of the AOI, while lower suitability was identified in the
northeastern and southern portions of the AOI where higher levels of interaction with the trawl fishery
occur (Figure 14).
Commercial Fishing Suitability: Squid Fishery – Compatibility with the squid fishery was
determined by assigning a relative rank from low-to-high (‘0’ to ‘1’) to grid cells corresponding with
low-to-high total squid landings by California Department of Fish and Wildlife reporting microblock.
The highest suitability was identified in the western and central portions of the AOI, while lower
suitability scores were identified in the southern and northernmost portions of the AOI (Figure 15).
Vessel Traffic Suitability – A relative rank from low-to-high (‘0’ to ‘1’) was assigned to grid cells
based on level (low-to-high) of interaction with vessel traffic (i.e., total vessel density for 2013 based
on automatic identification system, ‘AIS,’ vessel density data for cargo, tanker, fishing, passenger and
pleasure/sailing vessels). The highest suitability was identified in the northern portions of the AOI,
while lower suitability scores were identified in the central portion of the AOI, and the lowest
suitability scores were identified in the central and southernmost portions of the AOI (Figure 16).
102
Submerged Cables and Wrecks and Obstructions Suitability – The following rule was applied to
develop the submerged cables and wrecks and obstructions suitability grid: a score of ‘0’ was assigned
to grid cells intersecting submarine cables or wrecks and obstructions and the areas within 500 m of
these features, a score of ‘1’ was assigned to all other grid cells outside of these areas. Application of
this rule yielded identified areas of incompatibility in the central and southern portions of the AOI.
Final Suitability Results – The final suitability grid incorporated all major identified interactions to
identify locations (grid cells) with the highest likelihood of compatibility. All identified interactions
were considered with equal weighting within the analysis. Specifically, the following weights were
assigned to individual suitability grids to calculate the final suitability grid: 1) oil and gas suitability –
33%, 2) commercial fishing suitability – 33% (16.5% for trawl fishery and squid fishery, each), 3)
vessel traffic suitability – 33%. As the submerged cables and wrecks and obstructions grid included
scores of only ‘0’ and ‘1,’ this grid was not weighted, but was included in the analysis as a binary
factor. As described within the ‘Methods’ section above, if a given grid cell was assigned a score of
‘0’ for any individual factor, it was assigned a score of ‘0’ in the overall final suitability grid.
Based on the outcome of the final suitability calculation, the areas of highest identified suitability
occur in the northern portion of the AOI (i.e., scores > 0.66; Figure 18). Areas in the southern and
central portion of the AOI were generally identified as less suitable. The maximum observed
suitability score for any given grid cell within the AOI was 0.90, meaning that all grid cells interacted
with one or more factors within the suitability analysis.
Identified Alternative Sites – The proposed alternative site configurations for the twenty 100 acre
plots (2000 acres total) were developed based on two farm configurations proposed by VSE, and were
located within the areas corresponding with the highest observed suitability. Importantly, these
alternative configurations do not change the amount of total area, gear, or the number of mussel longlines
included within each of the proposed farm parcels, but rather dictate how the long-lines would be
arranged into rows within the parcels.
The first configuration considered (Alternative #1, Figure 19) was based on the initial configuration
proposed by the VSE project team. This configuration includes 20 farm parcels of a 1,900’ by 2,300’
size that are configured and clustered based on optimized suitability scores from this analysis. The 20
parcels are divided across 2 blocks of 10 parcels each with a 600-ft wide navigational corridor
between the blocks of parcels. This configuration allows for two long lines across each row and 12
rows (24 long lines total) per parcel, with 150’ spacing between each row. The average suitability
score within the 2,000 acres that this configuration covers was 0.813.
The second configuration considered (Alternative #2, Figure 20) was based on the alternative
configuration proposed by the VSE project team. This configuration includes 20 farm parcels of a
1,175’ by 3,707’ size that are configured and clustered based on optimized suitability scores from this
analysis. The 20 parcels are condensed within a single block with no navigational corridor needed. No
navigational corridor is needed because this configuration allows for only two rows of parcels, where
every parcel has vessel access along the perimeter of the site. This configuration allows for one
longline across each row, with 24 rows per farm parcel (24 long lines total) and 150’ spacing between
each row. The average suitability score within the 2,000 acres that this configuration covers was 0.809.
The corner coordinates associated with each alternative are depicted in map and table form in
Appendices 1-4.
103
Caveats – The suitability analysis described here for the proposed VSE project incorporated the best
available, authoritative spatial data as of August 2018 to represent major potential interactions based
on a thorough review of available resources (Table 1). While all efforts were made to incorporate the
best available data, it is important to recognize that for some interactions (e.g., protected species),
spatial data is unavailable or exists at an inappropriate scale for consideration within this analysis.
DISCUSSION
The siting analysis described here represents an objective, data-driven approach to identify the
locations with the highest likelihood for compatibility with the proposed Ventura Shellfish Enterprise
(VSE) project. Through mapping available modern, authoritative spatial data associated with major
identified environmental and space use interactions, this siting analysis provides essential information
needed to inform the permitting decision-making process for the proposed VSE project. The results of
this siting analysis indicate that the northern portion of the area of interest (AOI) has the highest
likelihood of compatibility given equal consideration of existing space use conflicts (Figures 18-20).
We identify and describe two alternative configurations within the northern portion of the area of
interest with the highest likelihood for compatibility given the various interactions considered within
this analysis.
Across all identified space use conflicts that were incorporated within the siting analysis, the northern
portion of the AOI has the highest likelihood of compatibility with the proposed project (Figures 18-
20). Oil and gas, vessel traffic, and submarine cables and wrecks and obstructions interactions are
minimized or non-existent within the northern portion of the AOI (Figures 13, 16, and 17).
Commercial fishing interactions are present within the northern portion of the AOI, with increased
trawl fishing interactions in the northwestern portion of the AOI in the areas nearest to the statefederal
waters boundary (Figure 14) and some interactions with the squid fishery in the northernmost
portion of the AOI (Figure 15). Importantly, as evident in the final suitability grid, the location (grid
cells) with the highest likelihood for compatibility that minimize these interactions are located in the
northwestern portion of the AOI (Figure 18). Despite minimization of potential interactions, the
highest possible score in the final suitability grid was 0.90, indicating that even the grid cell locations
with the highest likelihood for compatibility had some level of interaction with at least one factor.
Locations within the central portion of the AOI have more substantial interactions with oil and gas
(Figure 13), vessel traffic (Figure 16) and submerged cables and wrecks and obstructions (Figure 17).
Within the southern portion of the AOI, interactions exist with oil and gas, vessel traffic, submerged
cables and wrecks and obstructions, and both the trawl and squid fisheries (Figures 14 and 15).
Importantly also, the southern portion of the AOI also borders closely to the designated shipping lane
and known areas of hardbottom habitat and deep-sea corals (Figure 11).
As shown in Figure 6, the northern portion of the AOI does interact with areas of known trawl fishery
activity. Importantly, the known area of highest trawl fishery intensity occurs in the portion of the
Santa Barbara Channel to the northwest of the AOI. For the squid fishery, the southern portion of the
AOI, and areas further south of the AOI, represent the most substantial intensity and volume of
landings. It is important to note that while these data represent the best available, authoritative data to
represent these fisheries, there remains a need for discussion with commercial fishery stakeholders
regarding spatial compatibility.
Based on the results of the suitability analysis, we identified two alternative configurations for the
proposed VSE project that maximize likelihood of compatibility with existing space uses in the region.
The first alternative (Figure 19) and second alternative (Figure 20) do not differ substantively in
104
average suitability score (0.813 and 0.809, respectively). Within the first alternative, the configuration
of the farm parcels requires a navigational corridor (600 feet) to allow access to the center farm
parcels. The configuration of the farm parcels within the second alternative is such that a navigational
corridor is not required to access the individual parcels. In developing the alternative sites, contiguous
sites and those with a more uniform shape were preferred over other dispersed alternatives. During the
process of obtaining criteria from the VSE project team, it was expressed that in previous stakeholder
engagements, a preference was indicated by local fishermen and other ocean users for a design that
was clustered to minimize navigational challenges.
Additional Considerations
This siting analysis serves as an authoritative resource to inform the permitting decision-making
process regarding where the proposed VSE project is most likely to be compatible from an
environmental and space-use perspective. However, additional factors should be the subject of
consideration during the permitting decision-making process that are beyond the scope of this siting
analysis, including consideration of potential protected species entanglement risks, carrying capacity
limitations, and farm design specifications. Below, we provide additional detail regarding
engagements with state and federal government agencies to obtain the best available data for protected
species for this siting analysis.
Regarding carrying capacity limitations, the environmental conditions corresponding with the
proposed VSE project’s AOI generally appear favorable for the species and gear combination
proposed. The annual average surface current velocity in relation to the AOI is generally within the
optimal range for blue mussels of 0.025 and 0.10 m/s (Appendix 1)1. Sufficient current velocity is
essential to ensure adequate food (i.e., naturally occurring phytoplankton) delivery to the cultivated
species (i.e., Mediterranean mussels), and also to ensure adequate dispersal of waste products. With
regards to chlorophyll a, which is a proxy for the availability of naturally occurring phytoplankton, the
optimal range for chlorophyll a for blue mussels of 0.5 – 40 μg/l corresponds with the annual average
chlorophyll a concentration for the AOI (Appendix 2)2. The mean water temperature in the area
immediately adjacent to the proposed project AOI is within the acceptable water temperature range of
3 – 29 degrees Celsius, and remains near the optimal water temperature of 20 degrees Celsius for
nearly half of the year (Appendix 3)3,4,5. Carrying capacity considerations are likely to be most
dependent upon the final farm design selected rather than environmental limitations. Furthermore,
farm design considerations are critical to minimize entanglement risks to cetaceans and sea turtles. A
recent review of documented cases of marine animal entanglements in mussel aquaculture gear
identified mussel spat collection ropes as yielding the greatest risk of entanglement.6 Careful attention
must be paid to ensure the farm design, gear, and associated activities minimize the risk of protected
species entanglement.
1 Longdill, P.C., Healy, T.R., and Black, K.P. 2008. An integrated GIS approach for sustainable aquaculture management
area site selection. Ocean and Coastal Management 51, 612-624.
2 Sara, G., Manganaro, A., Cortese, G., Pusceddu, A., and Mazzola, A. 1998. The relationship between food availability
and growth in Mytilus galloprovincialis in the open sea (southern Mediterranean). Aquaculture 167, 1-15.
3 Widdows, J. 2009. Combined effects of body size, food concentration and season on the physiology of Mytilus edulis.
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 58, 109-124.
4 Newell, R.I.E. 1989. Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates
(North-Mid Atlantic): Blue Mussel. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers report TR EI-82-4.
5 Almada-Villela, P.C., Davenport, J., and Gruffydd, L.D. 1982. The effects of temperature on the shell growth of young
Mytilus edulis. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 59, 275-288.
6 Young, M.O. 2015. Marine animal entanglements in mussel aquaculture gear: Documented cases from mussel farming
regions of the world including first-hand accounts from Iceland. M.S. Thesis, University of Akureyri.
105
The best available data to represent potential protected species interactions with the proposed VSE
project were obtained from state and federal government agencies. Regarding pinniped species, spatial
data from the NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Center (Mark Lowry) were unavailable to represent
California sea lions and Pacific harbor seals as ongoing observation efforts are land-based.
Loggerhead sea turtle aerial survey and satellite telemetry data were cross-referenced with the
proposed project’s AOI, and no sightings or tracks as recorded by NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries
Service (Jeffrey Seminoff and Tomo Eguchi) intersected the area. In both cases, with regards to
pinnipeds and sea turtles (including monitored loggerhead, as well as green turtles and leatherbacks
that are not monitored), it was acknowledged that the lack of data representing interactions does not
preclude the potential for the proposed project’s AOI to interact with these protected species.
Habitat-based predicted density and distribution models for multiple cetacean species for the
California coast, including: beaked whales (multiple species), blue whales, dolphins (multiple species),
Dall’s porpoise, fin whales, humpback whales, and sperm whales was obtained from NOAA National
Marine Fisheries Service (Pers. Comm., Karin Forney and Elizabeth Becker). Cetacean species with
the highest likelihood for potential interaction with the proposed VSE project based on this data
include: blue whales and bottlenose dolphins (Appendix 8), long-beaked common dolphins (Appendix
9), and Rissos and short-beaked common dolphins (Appendix 10). There is a lower likelihood for
potential interaction with Baird’s beaked whales and beaked whales (Appendix 8), Dall’s porpoises
and humpback whales (Appendix 9), northern right whale dolphins and Pacific white sided dolphins
(Appendix 10), and sperm whales and striped dolphins (Appendix 11). It is important to note that these
data represent predicted distribution of these species and do not preclude the potential for interaction
with any species.
106
TABLES
Table 1. Data layers integrated within the comprehensive data inventory developed for the Santa Barbara Channel region to inform the siting
analysis for the proposed Ventura Shellfish Enterprise (VSE) project.
Data Layer: Description: Source:
Military
Danger Zones and
Restricted Areas
These data represent the location of Danger Zones and Restricted Areas within coastal and
marine waters, as outlined by the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and the Raster
Navigational Charts (RNC). The CFR defines a Danger Zone as: “A defined water area (or
areas) used for target practice, bombing, rocket firing or other especially hazardous
operations, normally for the armed forces. The danger zones may be closed to the public
on a full-time or intermittent basis, as stated in the regulations.”
Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) and
the Raster Navigational
Charts (RNC)
Unexploded Ordnances Unexploded ordnances are explosive weapons (bombs, bullets, shells, grenades, mines,
etc.) that did not explode when they were employed and still pose a risk of detonation,
potentially many decades after they were used or discarded. Sea disposal of munitions was
an accepted international practice until 1970, when the Department of Defense prohibited
the practice, and Congress followed up by passing the Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act in 1972, generally banning sea disposal.
NOAA Office of Coast
Survey (OCS)
Point Mugu Sea Range Point Mugu Sea Range is the world’s largest instrumented over-water range encompassing
up to 220,000 square miles of ocean space. It provides extensive test and training
capabilities for the U.S. Navy and allied forces and is located adjacent to the Santa Barbara
Channel.
U.S. Navy
San Pedro Channel
Operating Area
Offshore military operating area within the San Pedro Channel for the U.S. Navy and
allied forces.
U.S. Navy
Industry and Recreation
Oil and Gas Drilling
Platforms, Pipelines and
Active Leases
Infrastructure for oil and gas offshore activities including drilling platforms for extracting
minerals, particularly oil and gas, pipelines for transporting to onshore facilities, and the
active leases, which include a portion of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lease Blocks
that are currently leased to private entities for oil and/or gas mining rights. Importantly,
active leases include those that are exploratory, non-producing, and producing.
Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM)
NOAA Charted
Submarine Cables
These data depict the occurrence of submarine cables in and around U.S. navigable waters. NOAA Office of Coast
Survey (OCS)
107
Data Layer: Description: Source:
Ocean Disposal Sites Ocean disposal sites, including both active and discontinued or historical sites. Nearly all
material ocean dumped today is dredged material (sediments) removed from the bottom of
waterbodies in order to maintain navigation channels and berthing areas.
NOAA Office of Coast
Survey (OCS)
Wind and Marine
Hydrokinetic Planning
Areas
Planning areas for renewable energy, such as wind and marine hydrokinetic (MHK)
development, as defined by the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM).
Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM)
Marine Minerals and Sand
Resource Blocks
This layer contains Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) block outlines and delineated polygons
containing sediment resources and areas of disposal.
Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM)
Administrative Kelp Beds Kelp beds open to state-managed commercial harvest within the state waters of California. California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Existing Aquaculture
Areas
The presence and location of aquaculture sites were derived from multiple state websites
and include only those in coastal and marine saltwater areas. The following states are
included in this layer: Alaska, California, Connecticut, Florida, Louisiana, Maine, New
York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Virginia.
NOAA Office for
Coastal Management
(OCM) & other state and
federal agencies
Commercial Fishing
Trawl Fishery Track Lines Logbook-derived state-managed trawl fishery track lines; inclusive of all state-managed
trawl fisheries between 2010 and 2016 (connected line between start and stop location for
trawls).
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Squid Landings by Micro-
Block
Total squid landings (in short tonnes) by microblock (~700 acres) for the period of 2012-
2017.
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Fishery Landings Receipt
Data by Block
Total landings by fishery landings block, inclusive of multiple (20+) commercial fisheries
species (e.g., halibut, spiny lobster, squid, etc.).
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Navigation
Principal Ports Principal Ports are defined by port limits or US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
projects, these exclude non-USACE projects not authorized for publication. The
determination for the published Principal Ports is based upon the total tonnage for the port
for the particular year; therefore the top 150 list can vary from year to year.
U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE)
Shallow Draft Ports National database of shallow draft ports, or ports accessible by small commercial and/or
recreational vessels.
U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE)
Aids to Navigation Structures intended to assist a navigator to determine position or safe course, or to warn of
dangers or obstructions to navigation. This dataset includes lights, signals, buoys, day
beacons, and other aids to navigation.
U.S. Coast Guard
Environmental Sensors
and Buoys
Buoys or structures, often near the surface of the water column, intended to collect water
quality or other environmental data.
NOAA National Data
Buoy Center
108
Data Layer: Description: Source:
Artificial Reefs An artificial reef is a human-made underwater structure, typically built to promote marine
life in areas with a generally featureless bottom.
NOAA Office for
Coastal Management
(OCM) & other state and
federal agencies
Wrecks and Obstructions In 1981, NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS) implemented the Automated Wreck and
Obstruction Information System (AWOIS) to assist in planning hydrographic survey
operations and to catalog and store a substantial volume of reported wrecks and
obstructions that are considered navigational hazards within U.S. coastal waters. AWOIS
is not a comprehensive record of wrecks in any particular area.
NOAA Office of Coast
Survey (OCS)
Maintained Channels This layer shows coastal channels and waterways that are maintained and surveyed by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE)
Shipping Lanes Shipping zones delineate activities and regulations for marine vessel traffic. Traffic lanes
define specific traffic flow, while traffic separation zones assist opposing streams of
marine traffic.
NOAA Office of Coast
Survey (OCS)
AIS Vessel Count
(including total count and
by vessel type)
Automatic Identification Systems (AIS) are a navigation safety device that transmits and
monitors the location and characteristics of many vessels in U.S. and international waters
in real-time. This dataset represents vessel counts by vessel type for 2013. Vessel count
raster data layers were created by CASS Spatial team and are derived from vessel density
raster data layers generated from raw AIS data.
Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM)
Anchorage Areas An anchorage area is a place where boats and ships can safely drop anchor. NOAA Office of Coast
Survey (OCS)
Natural Resources
Deep-Sea Corals The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Deep Sea Coral Research
and Technology Program (DSCRTP) have developed a National Database for Deep-Sea
Corals and Sponges (database).
NOAA National Centers
for Coastal Ocean
Science (NCCOS)
Hardbottom Habitat Distribution of known hardbottom habitat within the Santa Barbara Channel region.
Hardbottom habitat generally occurs in the ocean where rocks or other hard surfaces are
exposed from bottom sand or mud; this structure can serve as habitat for fish and
invertebrate species.
California Geological
Survey and Moss
Landing Marine Lab /
UC Santa Barbara
Cetacean Predicted
Density and Distribution
Habitat-based predicted density and distribution models for multiple cetacean species,
including: beaked whales (multiple species), blue whales, dolphins (multiple species),
Dall’s porpoise, fin whales, humpback whales, and sperm whales.
NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service
109
Data Layer: Description: Source:
Seagrass Aquatic vascular vegetation beds dominated by submerged, rooted, vascular species or
submerged or rooted floating freshwater tidal vascular vegetation. This is not a complete
collection of seagrasses on the seafloor, nor are the locations to be considered exact.
NOAA Office for
Coastal Management
(OCM) & other state and
federal agencies
Essential Fish Habitat /
Habitat Areas of
Particular Concern
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) represent important habitat areas for every life stage of
federally managed species. Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) are discrete
subsets of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) that provide extremely important ecological
functions or are especially vulnerable to degradation.
NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service
(NMFS)
Marine Protected Areas The MPA Inventory is a comprehensive catalog that provides detailed information for
existing marine protected areas in the United States.
NOAA National MPA
Center
Oceanographic and Biophysical
Bathymetry (water depth) High-resolution bathymetry data was obtained from NOAA’s National Geophysical Data
Center (NGDC). This bathymetric data is a composite of various sources, including
NGDC, U.S. National Ocean Service (NOS), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and other federal, state, and local government
agencies, academic institutions, and private companies. DEMs are referenced to the
vertical tidal datum of Mean High Water (MHW) and horizontal datum of World Geodetic
System 1984 (WGS84).
NOAA National
Geophysical Data Center
(NGDC)
Water Temperature MODIS Global Level 3 Mapped SST (via MGET) mean/min/max climatologies for 20
year period 1997 – 2016.
NASA MODIS Aqua
Current Velocity and
Direction
Surface current velocity and direction data from HYCOM + NCODA Global 1/12 Degree
Reanalysis, experiments 19.1 (1995-2012). Directional data are represented by U and V
vector data.
HYCOM
Salinity Salinity data from HYCOM + NCODA Global 1/12 Degree Reanalysis, experiments 19.1
(1995-2012).
HYCOM
Significant Wave Height Significant wave height (SWH or Hs) is defined traditionally as the mean wave
height (trough to crest) of the highest third of waves (H1/3).
AVISO
Chlorophyll a NASA GSFC OceanColor L3 SMI (via MGET) mean/std dev climatologies for 10 yr
period 2007 – 2016.
NASA OceanColor
Administrative Boundaries
Federal / State Waters
Boundary
The Submerged Lands Act (SLA) boundary line (also known as State Seaward Boundary
or Fed State Boundary) defines the seaward limit of a state’s submerged lands and the
landward boundary of federally managed OCS lands.
Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM)
110
Data Layer: Description: Source:
Channel Islands National
Marine Sanctuary
Boundary
Boundary for the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary. NOAA Office of
National Marine
Sanctuaries (NMS)
111
FIGURES
Figure 1. Map of the ‘area of interest’ for the proposed Ventura Shellfish Enterprise (VSE) project based on project requirements provided by
VSE. The primary constraining criteria defined by VSE included: 1) federal waters only, 2) maximum 9 nautical mile distance from the Port of
Ventura, and 3) a required depth range of 25 – 37 meters for the proposed Mediterranean mussel (Mytilus galloprovincialis) cultivation gear.
The defined ‘area of interest’ is represented by the light green polygon denoted as ‘Acceptable Depth’ in the map legend. Note that the VSE
project is seeking 2,000 acres within the ~20,000 acres within the overall ‘area of interest’.
112
Figure 2. Grid established within the proposed Ventura Shellfish Enterprise (VSE) ‘area of interest’ for use in the siting analysis. A grid cell
size of 10 acres was determined to be appropriate for use in the spatial analysis. The grid contains 1,953 grid cells, equivalent to 19,530 acres
total. Note that the VSE project is seeking 2,000 acres within the ~20,000 acres within the overall ‘area of interest’ described by the grid.
113
Figure 3. Military space use within the Santa Barbara Channel region in relation to the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise (VSE) ‘area of interest’. No
military interactions occur within the ‘area of interest’.
114
Figure 4. Industry space use within the Santa Barbara Channel region in relation to the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise (VSE) ‘area of interest’.
Oil and gas infrastructure (active leases, drilling platforms, and pipelines) and submarine cables interactions occur within the ‘area of interest’.
115
Figure 5. Commercial fishery space use within the Santa Barbara Channel region in relation to the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise (VSE) ‘area of
interest’. Commercial trawl and squid fishery interactions occur within the ‘area of interest’.
116
Figure 6. Regional perspective of commercial trawl fisheries within the Santa Barbara Channel region. Note that trawl fishery interactions
occur within the ‘area of interest,’ however, the highest density of trawl fishery activity occurs northwest of the ‘area of interest’.
117
Figure 7. Regional perspective of the commercial squid fishery within the Santa Barbara Channel region. Note that trawl fishery interactions
occur within the ‘area of interest,’ however, the highest density of trawl fishery activity occurs northwest of the ‘area of interest’.
118
Figure 8. Navigation space use within the Santa Barbara Channel region in relation to the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise (VSE) ‘area of interest’.
Vessel traffic and wrecks and obstructions interactions occur within the ‘area of interest’.
119
Figure 9. Cetacean (i.e., humpback whale) predicted density in relation to the VSE ‘area of interest. Note that due to the coarse spatial
resolution of this data, it was inappropriate for use within the VSE suitability analysis. The inset map (upper right) shows the large-scale,
regional trends of cetacean (i.e., humpback whale) distribution.
120
Figure 10. Distribution of hardbottom habitat and deep-sea corals in relation to the VSE ‘area of interest’. Note that records of deep-sea corals
and hardbottom habitat occur within proximity of the VSE ‘area of interest,’ but not within it.
121
Figure 11. Distribution of all major spatial data layers representing potential space-use conflicts (e.g., military, navigation, natural resources)
that were considered, but do not intersect the VSE ‘area of interest’ and were thus not incorporated within the suitability analysis.
122
Figure 12. Distribution of all major spatial data layers representing potential space-use conflicts that intersect the VSE ‘area of interest’ and
were incorporated within the suitability analysis. These include: (1) oil and gas leases, drilling platforms, and pipelines, (2) submarine cables,
(3) commercial trawl and squid fisheries, (4) wrecks and obstructions, and (5) vessel traffic.
123
Figure 13. Oil and gas suitability layer incorporated within the overall VSE suitability analysis. Areas within a 500 meter radius of active oil
and gas pipelines and drilling platforms were assigned a score of ‘0’ (least compatible), areas within an active oil and gas lease were assigned a
score of ‘0.5’ (moderately compatible), and those outside of active oil and gas interests were assigned a score of ‘1’ (most compatible).
124
Figure 14. Commercial trawl fishery suitability layer incorporated within the overall VSE suitability analysis. Areas corresponding to the
highest density of trawl track line intersections were assigned a score of ‘0’ (least compatible) and areas of lowest density of trawl track line
intersections were assigned a score of ‘1’ (most compatible). Continuous scores between ‘0’ and ‘1’ were assigned for all other grid cells across
the low-to-high density gradient.
125
Figure 15. Commercial squid fishery suitability layer incorporated within the overall VSE suitability analysis. Areas corresponding to the
highest total squid landings by microblock were assigned a score of ‘0’ (least compatible) and areas of lowest total squid landings by
microblock were assigned a score of ‘1’ (most compatible). Continuous scores between ‘0’ and ‘1’ were assigned for all other grid cells across
the low-to-high total squid landings by microblock gradient.
126
Figure 16. Vessel density suitability layer incorporated within the overall VSE suitability analysis. Areas corresponding to the highest total
vessel density were assigned a score of ‘0’ (least compatible) and areas of lowest total vessel density were assigned a score of ‘1’ (most
compatible). Continuous scores between ‘0’ and ‘1’ were assigned for all other grid cells across the low-to-high density gradient.
127
Figure 17. Submerged cables and wrecks and obstructions suitability layer incorporated within the overall VSE suitability analysis. Areas
within a 500-meter radius of submerged cables and wrecks and obstructions were assigned a score of ‘0’ (least compatible) while areas outside
of a 500-meter radius of submerged cables and wrecks and obstructions were assigned a score of ‘1’ (most compatible).
128
Figure 18. Final suitability grid generated through integration of all individual suitability layers (i.e., oil and gas, commercial trawl fishery,
commercial squid fishery, vessel traffic, and submerged cables and wrecks and obstructions). Note that all layers were assigned equal weights
within the analysis.
129
Figure 19. Alternative 1. The first alternative site for VSE was created using their initial configuration, in which the farm parcel design is a
1,900’ by 2,300’ plot. The alternative site contains 20 parcels, clustered into two blocks, with a 600’ navigational corridor between the two
blocks. The alternative site was positioned within the ‘area of interest’ based on optimizing suitability.
130
Figure 20. Alternative 2. The second alternative site for VSE was created using their alternative configuration, in which the farm parcel design
is a 1,175’ by 3,707’ plot. The alternative site contains 20 parcels, clustered in one contiguous block. A navigational corridor was not needed
since all parcels can be reached on the perimeter of the site. The alternative site was positioned within the ‘area of interest’ based on optimizing
suitability.
131
APPENDIX
Appendix 1. Corner points associated with Alternative #1 for the proposed VSE project. Note that the labelled points correspond with the
latitude and longitude coordinates described in Appendix 2.
132
Appendix 2. Corner points and associated latitudes and longitudes for Alternative #1 for the proposed
VSE project.
Corner ID Latitude Longitude
1 34° 15′ 17.528″ N 119° 23′ 56.582″ W
2 34° 15′ 6.837″ N 119° 23′ 37.972″ W
3 34° 14′ 56.145″ N 119° 23′ 19.363″ W
4 34° 14′ 45.452″ N 119° 23′ 0.755″ W
5 34° 14′ 34.759″ N 119° 22′ 42.149″ W
6 34° 14′ 24.064″ N 119° 22′ 23.544″ W
7 34° 14′ 58.821″ N 119° 24′ 12.166″ W
8 34° 14′ 48.130″ N 119° 23′ 53.557″ W
9 34° 14′ 37.439″ N 119° 23′ 34.949″ W
10 34° 14′ 26.747″ N 119° 23′ 16.342″ W
11 34° 14′ 16.054″ N 119° 22′ 57.736″ W
12 34° 14′ 5.361″ N 119° 22′ 39.132″ W
13 34° 14′ 40.113″ N 119° 24′ 27.749″ W
14 34° 14′ 29.423″ N 119° 24′ 9.140″ W
15 34° 14′ 18.733″ N 119° 23′ 50.532″ W
16 34° 14′ 8.041″ N 119° 23′ 31.926″ W
17 34° 13′ 57.349″ N 119° 23′ 13.321″ W
18 34° 13′ 46.656″ N 119° 22′ 54.718″ W
19 34° 14′ 35.223″ N 119° 24′ 31.808″ W
20 34° 14′ 24.533″ N 119° 24′ 13.199″ W
21 34° 14′ 13.843″ N 119° 23′ 54.592″ W
22 34° 14′ 3.151″ N 119° 23′ 35.986″ W
23 34° 13′ 52.459″ N 119° 23′ 17.381″ W
24 34° 13′ 41.766″ N 119° 22′ 58.777″ W
25 34° 14′ 16.514″ N 119° 24′ 47.388″ W
26 34° 14′ 5.826″ N 119° 24′ 28.780″ W
27 34° 13′ 55.136″ N 119° 24′ 10.173″ W
28 34° 13′ 44.445″ N 119° 23′ 51.568″ W
29 34° 13′ 33.754″ N 119° 23′ 32.964″ W
30 34° 13′ 23.061″ N 119° 23′ 14.361″ W
31 34° 13′ 57.806″ N 119° 25′ 2.966″ W
32 34° 13′ 47.118″ N 119° 24′ 44.359″ W
33 34° 13′ 36.428″ N 119° 24′ 25.753″ W
34 34° 13′ 25.738″ N 119° 24′ 7.148″ W
35 34° 13′ 15.048″ N 119° 23′ 48.544″ W
36 34° 13′ 4.356″ N 119° 23′ 29.942″ W
133
Appendix 3. Corner points associated with Alternative #2 for the proposed VSE project. Note that the labelled points correspond with the
latitude and longitude coordinates described in Appendix 4.
134
Appendix 4. Corner points and associated latitudes and longitudes for Alternative #2 for the proposed
VSE project.
Corner ID Latitude Longitude
1 34° 15′ 21.520″ N 119° 23′ 42.518″ W
2 34° 15′ 1.105″ N 119° 23′ 5.841″ W
3 34° 14′ 40.687″ N 119° 22′ 29.169″ W
4 34° 15′ 11.867″ N 119° 23′ 50.309″ W
5 34° 14′ 51.453″ N 119° 23′ 13.633″ W
6 34° 14′ 31.035″ N 119° 22′ 36.962″ W
7 34° 15′ 2.214″ N 119° 23′ 58.101″ W
8 34° 14′ 41.801″ N 119° 23′ 21.425″ W
9 34° 14′ 21.384″ N 119° 22′ 44.755″ W
10 34° 14′ 52.561″ N 119° 24′ 5.891″ W
11 34° 14′ 32.148″ N 119° 23′ 29.217″ W
12 34° 14′ 11.731″ N 119° 22′ 52.547″ W
13 34° 14′ 42.908″ N 119° 24′ 13.682″ W
14 34° 14′ 22.495″ N 119° 23′ 37.008″ W
15 34° 14′ 2.079″ N 119° 23′ 0.339″ W
16 34° 14′ 33.254″ N 119° 24′ 21.471″ W
17 34° 14′ 12.842″ N 119° 23′ 44.798″ W
18 34° 13′ 52.427″ N 119° 23′ 8.130″ W
19 34° 14′ 23.601″ N 119° 24′ 29.261″ W
20 34° 14′ 3.189″ N 119° 23′ 52.588″ W
21 34° 13′ 42.775″ N 119° 23′ 15.921″ W
22 34° 14′ 13.947″ N 119° 24′ 37.050″ W
23 34° 13′ 53.536″ N 119° 24′ 0.378″ W
24 34° 13′ 33.122″ N 119° 23′ 23.711″ W
25 34° 14′ 4.293″ N 119° 24′ 44.838″ W
26 34° 13′ 43.883″ N 119° 24′ 8.167″ W
27 34° 13′ 23.470″ N 119° 23′ 31.501″ W
28 34° 13′ 54.639″ N 119° 24′ 52.626″ W
29 34° 13′ 34.230″ N 119° 24′ 15.956″ W
30 34° 13′ 13.817″ N 119° 23′ 39.290″ W
31 34° 13′ 44.985″ N 119° 25′ 0.413″ W
32 34° 13′ 24.576″ N 119° 24′ 23.744″ W
33 34° 13′ 4.164″ N 119° 23′ 47.079″ W
135
Appendix 5. Annual average surface current velocity (m/s) in relation to the area of interest for the proposed VSE project. The optimal current
velocity range for blue mussel (Mytilus galloprovincialis) longlines is between 0.025 and 0.10 m/s (Longdill et al., 2008), which generally
corresponds with annual average current velocity for the area of interest.
136
Appendix 6. Annual average chlorophyll a concentration (in micrograms per liter) in relation to the proposed VSE project. The optimal
chlorophyll a range for blue mussels (Mytlius galloprovincialis) is between 0.5 and 55 μg/l (Sara et al., 1998), which corresponds with the
annual average chlorophyll a concentration for the area of interest.
137
Appendix 7. Mean water temperature over a 5-year period as measured by the NOAA data buoy adjacent to the proposed VSE project area of
interest. The acceptable water temperature range for blue mussels (Mytlius galloprovincialis) is between 3 and 29 degrees Celsius, with an
optimal temperature of 20 degrees Celsius (denoted by the dashed red line in the figure above; Widdows 1978, Newell 1989, and Almada-
Villela et al. 1982).
138
Appendix 8. Predicted habitat-based density and distribution models for multiple cetacean species, derived from NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service’s CetSound database. Light blue colors indicate low predicted densities whereas purple colors indicate elevated predicted
densities. Note that these maps represent predicted density, but do not necessarily correspond with actual distribution or definitive probability of
encountering these species.
139
Appendix 9. Predicted habitat-based density and distribution models for multiple cetacean species, derived from NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service’s CetSound database. Light blue colors indicate low predicted densities whereas purple colors indicate elevated predicted
densities. Note that these maps represent predicted density, but do not necessarily correspond with actual distribution or definitive probability of
encountering these species.
140
Appendix 10. Predicted habitat-based density and distribution models for multiple cetacean species, derived from NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service’s CetSound database. Light blue colors indicate low predicted densities whereas purple colors indicate elevated predicted
densities. Note that these maps represent predicted density, but do not necessarily correspond with actual distribution or definitive probability of
encountering these species.
141
Appendix 11. Predicted habitat-based density and distribution models for multiple cetacean species, derived from NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service’s CetSound database. Light blue colors indicate low predicted densities whereas purple colors indicate elevated predicted
densities. Note that these maps represent predicted density, but do not necessarily correspond with actual distribution or definitive probability of
encountering these species.
142
ATTACHMENT 2
143
ATTACHMENT 3
144
145
146
147
148
9250 1
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
18. Nature of Activity
Through this application, the Ventura Port District (VPD) seeks to permit twenty 100-acre plots
of ocean space for aquaculture production of the Mediterranean mussel (Mytilus
galloprovincialis) via submerged longlines in federal waters within the Santa Barbara Channel,
proximate to Ventura Harbor.1
Project Description
The project consists of twenty 100-acre plots (total of 2,000 acres) located in open federal waters
of the Santa Barbara Channel (Channel) in the Southern California Bight (SCB), northwest of
Ventura Harbor, with approximate depths at the project site ranging from 80 to 114 feet below
sea level, with an average depth of 98 feet. The plot locations are shown in Figure 1, with latitude
and longitude coordinates for the outer corners indicated. Each of the 20 plots are 2,299.5 feet
by 1,899.5 feet, for an average plot size of 100.27 acres. Each plot will contain up to 24 lines
(12 end-to-end pairs), with each line consisting of 575 feet of backbone length and 250 feet of
horizontal scope on each end. There will be a 50 foot setback on each end of the pairs (for a total
of 100 feet of spacing between lines of adjacent parcels) and 50 foot spacing between the two
center pins. Parallel lines will be spaced 150 feet apart, with a 125 foot setback at each of the
long sides (for a total of 250 feet of spacing between lines of adjacent parcels).
The sites will be used for growing the Mediterranean mussel (Mytilus galloprovincialis) via
submerged long lines (see Figure 2). The mussels will be grown and harvested by
grower/producers who would sub-permit the plots from Ventura Port District, and the mussel
product will be landed at Ventura Harbor.
Site Location
The project’s twenty 100-acre plots are approximately 3.53 miles from the shore. The closest
distance from the plots to the 3-mile nautical line is a minimum of 2,900 feet, with an average
closest distance of over 3,000 feet. The closest distance from the growing area to the City of
Ventura city limit is 4.5 miles. Ventura Harbor is 4.1 miles from the closest plot (8 miles from
the most distant plot). The sub-permit sites are located on sandy bottom habitat outside of any
1 The VPD also acknowledges the critical assistance of its other key participants who have contributed time, resources,
and information to assist with this application, including the Cultured Abalone Farm, Coastal Marine Biolabs, and
Ashworth Leininger Group, as well as other participants including Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of
California San Diego, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries West Coast Region,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and Marine Science
Institute, Bren School of Environmental Science & Management, University of California Santa Barbara.
149
9250 2
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
rocky reef habitat, as evaluated in Gentry et al. 2017 and illustrated by NOAA United States
West Coast nautical charts (NOAA 2017a).
Site Selection
The project was initially proposed to be located in waters of the State of California, i.e., within the
3-mile limit. The VPD, in collaboration with its key participants (collectively the “VSE”)
undertook extensive site selection public outreach that culminated in the decision to instead locate
the project in federal waters so as to minimize conflicts with commercial halibut trawlers based in
Ventura and Santa Barbara Harbors.
Site Selection Process Summary
The VSE team hosted a series of seven public educational workshops regarding the proposed
project. (See http://venturashellfishenterprise.com/index.html – About VSE, scroll down to “Get
Involved” and click on “Workshop Archive.”)
After these introductory workshops, VSE hosted three site selection workshops to engage with
stakeholders to identify the location of the twenty 100-acre parcels within a broader area of interest
identified through use of a spatial planning tool developed by researchers at University of
California, Santa Barbara, Bren School of Environmental Science and Management (UCSB Bren
School). While in-person workshop participation was strongly encouraged, individuals who were
not able to attend the meetings were provided the opportunity to comment on site selection through
a UCSB Bren School SeaSketch digital mapping and communication portal linked to the VSE
website. Notice of the site selection workshops was mailed out to a list of over 500 commercial
fishing vessel owners between Goleta and Port Hueneme identified by the California Department
of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW); additionally, VSE coordinated with NOAA representatives and
commercial fishermen to encourage their attendance. VSE also contacted all of the individuals
who registered interest in the proposed project through the VSE website. During and after the site
selection workshops the VPD Board of Port Commissioners received written and oral reports on
the site selection process at four public meetings held in summer and fall of 2017.
The initial candidate area in state waters was selected by VSE based on marine spatial planning
analysis prepared by the UCSB Bren School (Gentry et al., 2017). The site selection analysis
included numerous factors related to the suitability of the candidate growing area for mussels;
location in State waters near Ventura Harbor for product landing; avoidance of potential pollution
sources; and avoidance of conflicts with existing subsurface leases for oil and gas pipelines, etc.
Through the stakeholder engagement process and consultation with its aquaculture specialist, Scott
Lindell of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, it became clear that location of the project in
State waters posed certain issues. Most importantly, VPD received information from local halibut
trawlers that the proposed State waters candidate area was located in one of two areas statewide
150
9250 3
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
designated by CDFW as halibut trawl grounds. Further, Mr. Lindell advised that a minimum 80’
bottom depth (versus the initial criterion of 60’ bottom depth) would reduce exposure to various
mussel predator species (e.g., diving ducks) and potential storm surge. Following a November
2017 public hearing, the VPD Board of Commissioners selected a federal waters alternative
location, which was identified based on further refinement of the spatial planning analysis by the
UCSB Bren School.
Subsequently, NOAA Fisheries Southwest District Aquaculture Coordinator, Diane Windham,
connected VSE with NOAA’s National Ocean Service staff, which undertook a second siting study
focused on federal waters proximate to Ventura Harbor. (See “Coastal Aquaculture Siting and
Sustainability Technical Report, Ventura Shellfish Enterprise: Aquaculture Siting Analysis
Results” prepared by Coastal Aquaculture Siting and Sustainability Program, within the Marine
Spatial Ecology Division of the National Centers for Coastal and Ocean Science, National Ocean
Service, NOAA, dated September 6, 2018, copy attached.) The siting analysis represents an
objective, data-driven approach to identify the locations within federal waters with the highest
compatibility with the proposed project. The results of this siting analysis identify two alternative
sites (CASS Report Alternatives 1 and 2) proximate to Ventura Harbor given equal consideration
of existing use conflicts, including:
 Existing vessel traffic corridors,
 Oil and gas production,
 Commercial fishing (specifically trawl and squid fisheries), and
 Obstructions, including submerged cables and wrecks.
The two CASS Report Alternatives are both situated in the northern portion of the siting analysis
study area, which was determined to have the smallest potential overlap with conflicting uses.
The primary difference between the two CASS Report Alternative sites is the configuration of
sub-permit areas (Figures 3 and 4). Importantly, the two sites overlap with the federal waters
alternative site identified in the UCSB Bren School spatial planning analysis, indicating the area
has been shown by two independent studies to have the fewest conflicts with other uses and
sensitive environmental resources (Figure 5). Following a public hearing in September 2018, it is
anticipated the VPD Board of Commissioners approved CASS Report Alternative 1)(also shown
in Figure 1) as the preferred project site. CASS Report Alternative 2 (shown in Figure 4) is
shown as an alternate site location.
Project Construction
Installation of anchors, longlines, and buoys will be performed by grower/producers in compliance
with all permit requirements and VPD sub-permit conditions which will incorporate approved best
management practices (BMPs). Submerged longlines consist of a horizontal structural header line,
or “backbone,” that is attached to the seafloor by helical screw anchors drilled into the sandy
151
9250 4
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
bottom at each end and is marked and supported by a series of buoys along the central horizontal
section, as shown in Figure 2. Helical screw anchors have been shown to exhibit superior holding
power as compared to other anchoring systems and can be removed or cut below the surface at
project decommissioning. Helical screw anchors for mussel farms in open ocean habitats have
been installed all over the world, including offshore of Catalina Island, California. Helical screw
anchors will be installed by a hydraulic drill with a drill head that operates from a rig lowered to
the ocean floor. The helical screw anchors will be screwed approximately 10 to 20 feet deep into
the sandy bottom ocean floor. Each 100-acre plot will contain up to 48 anchors for a total of 960
anchors at full project build out.
It is anticipated that the potential noise impacts from the installation of the sand screw anchors
using a hydraulic drill will be minimal. The screw anchors are drilled into the seabed using a
hydraulic auger controlled at the surface. The drill is submersible and is lowered with the anchor.
Noise levels are very low in the water, with a relatively small (50 hp) hydraulic power pack on the
installation vessel (Fielder Marine Services, New Zealand, pers.comm.). Rotation speeds are very
low, which minimizes entanglement of marine species. The anchor installation disturbs less than
1 square meter of seabed on installation and once installed no rope or chain touches the sea floor,
which also minimizes seabed disturbance (Fielder Marine Services, New Zealand, pers.comm.).
Marine wildlife, especially cetaceans, is known to be sensitive to noise effects (e.g., NMFS 2007a).
However, construction noise levels will be well within acceptable thresholds for both marine
mammals and fish (ICF Jones & Stokes and Illingworth and Rodkin, Inc. 2009; NMFS 2007a).
Due to the minimal noise level and area of disturbance on the sea floor, an action area of 100 feet
is sufficient.
Buoys marking the corners of each parcel will identify the cultivation area for navigational safety
and will comply with all regulations for height, illumination, and visibility, including radar
reflection. As shown in Figure 2, permanent surface buoys for each longline will consist of two
16-inch surface corner buoys (one corner buoy supporting and marking either end of the
backbone), as well as one 16-inch buoy supporting and marking the center pickup line, for a total
of three surface buoys per longline. Simulated views of parcel arrays at the surface and underwater
are provided in Figures 6 through 9. All surface buoys will be marked with the grower/producer
name and phone number. Buoys attached to the central horizontal portion of the backbone line
support the line, provide a means of lifting the backbone line to access the cultivation ropes, and
determine the depth of the submerged backbone, which will vary seasonally from 15 to 45 feet
below the surface. Additionally, a combination of surface and submerged buoys attached to the
backbone line will be used during the mussel production cycle to maintain tension on the structural
backbone line as the weight of the mussel crop increases. These will consist of 24-inch (or
equivalent, with greater than 200 L buoyancy) buoys attached at required intervals along the
152
9250 5
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
surface and connecting to the backbone line, in combination with smaller submerged buoys affixed
directly to the backbone line. The combination of surface and submerged buoyancy is designed to
create a tensioned but flexible structure that is capable of responding dynamically to surface waves
and storms.
The longlines that will be utilized are thick (1-inch diameter), tensioned (to approximately 800
pounds) rope that is not conducive to wrapping around or entangling protected species. The
longline configuration produces a fairly rigid tensioned structure from which the cultivation ropes,
or “fuzzy ropes” are attached. Fuzzy ropes are characterized by extra filaments that provide
settlement substrate for mussels to attach. Fuzzy ropes may be attached to and suspended from the
backbone rope either as individual lengths or as a continuous looping single length that drapes up
and down over the backbone. The length of each section or loop of fuzzy rope will be
approximately 20 feet but the actual length depends on the lifting capacity of the servicing vessel.
The length of the central horizontal section of backbone line will be approximately 575 feet, which
will support approximately 8,000 feet of fuzzy cultivation line.
The shape of each 100-acre cultivation parcel will be a function of the geometry of the submerged
backbone lines and anchoring system. Each horizontal section of the longline will be
approximately 575 feet and will require an anchor scope of approximately 2.5 times depth.
Therefore, in 100 feet of water depth, scope from the horizontal section of backbone to the helical
screw anchor will require 250 feet on each end of the line, making a total length of 1,075 feet from
anchor screw to anchor screw. A 100-acre parcel with rectangular dimensions of 1,899.5 feet by
2,299.5 feet will therefore accommodate up to 24 individual longlines (Figures 10 and 11). The
submerged longline growing gear configuration will be specifically engineered for open ocean
conditions with respect to size and strength of all lines, anchoring, hardware, and buoyancy.
Construction in each individual growing plot will take place only after VPD approval of a subpermits
(or other form of agreement) with the individual grower/producer. While project
development is dependent on market demand, VPD estimates that full build out would occur within
three to five years after project approval.
Project Operation/Cultivation Methods
The mussels will be grown and harvested by grower/producers under individual sub-permits (or
other form of agreement) with VPD that incorporate all project permit conditions and BMPs. All
grower/producers will be required to land their mussels at Ventura Harbor. Spat will be purchased
from onshore hatcheries certified by CDFW. At the hatcheries, spat are settled on the fuzzy ropes,
which is rope woven with additional loops of fiber to create additional settlement substrate and is
standard industry practice. When the spat are firmly settled to the ropes, the ropes are covered with
153
9250 6
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
cotton socking material to protect them from shaking off the ropes during transport to the offshore
growing site and deployment. The socks hold the spat next to the rope while the mussels naturally
attach with their byssal threads, by which time the cotton material naturally degrades. These ropes
are then attached to the longlines and buoys, either as single sections of line or as a continuous
looping strand attached in intervals.
The mussel grow-out ropes will grow to be stiff with attached mussels encasing the rope core, thus
making them very unlikely sources of entanglement. As an additional precaution against
entanglement, grow ropes will be attached to the head rope with a low-breaking-strength line,
which will facilitate rapid detachment in the unlikely event of any interaction with the longline.
To further minimize entanglement potential, a breakaway link will be installed between the surface
buoys and vertical lines, similar to strategies used to mitigate potential entanglement in trap
fisheries in the northeastern United States (NOAA 2008). Buoy lines between the surface and head
rope are generally under tension partially equivalent to their full buoyancy and breakaway link
ratings will be specific to buoy size.
Cultivated mussels grow by filtering naturally occurring phytoplankton from the ocean. Juvenile
mussels will grow on lines until an intermediate size where the density of mussels on the fuzzy
rope becomes limiting to further growth. At this point, a servicing vessel will lift the backbone line
in order to access the fuzzy rope stocked with juvenile mussels and pull the fuzzy rope through
vessel-based equipment designed to strip the mussels from the fuzzy rope, and then clean, separate,
and grade the juvenile mussels by size. Juvenile mussels then will be restocked to clean fuzzy rope
and covered with naturally-dissolving cotton socking at a reduced density for their second stage of
grow out to market size. All these intermediate mussel-tending steps take place on the servicing
vessel.
Maintenance and inspection of the longlines will be carried out at least on a monthly basis and
consist of lifting the longlines out of the water and adding additional buoys as necessary to account
for increased mussel weight. Inspections of the anchor ropes, anchors, and connecting ropes will
be carried out monthly for the first two years following deployment, and in the event there are no
marine wildlife entanglements within the first two years, may be reduced to quarterly inspections
thereafter. Inspections can include a variety of techniques: recordings by depth/fish finder;
remotely operated vehicle (ROV) surveys of lines; and/or monitoring performed by SCUBA
divers.
Gear and planted ropes will be inspected regularly as part of a comprehensive monitoring plan,
but generally the planted ropes will only be manipulated during initial stocking, intermediate
harvest and restocking, and final harvest. Inspection will involve monitoring the all hardware and
154
9250 7
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
rigging and surface buoys and their tension, and checking for escaped gear and potential
entanglements. Examples of possible observations that would trigger concern and further
investigation are (1) gaps or tangling of dropper ropes detected on depth finder or other structural
anomalies, (2) fouling by objects or other marine debris detected in support buoys or buoy
deployment lines, and (3) loss of function or damage to devices related to navigational safety.
Harvesting involves separating the mussels from the ropes, followed by cleaning, sorting, and
bagging. When the mussels reach market size, which is expected to occur after about one year of
total production time, the submerged backbone lines again will be lifted in order to access the
fuzzy cultivation ropes, and mussels again will be stripped from the line, cleaned, and separated,
and this time size-graded and bagged for landing at the Ventura Harbor as market-ready product.
The bagged mussels will be transported to Ventura Harbor for offloading, sale, and distribution.
All husbandry activities related to harvesting, grading, and restocking of mussels to cultivation
lines will occur onboard the servicing vessel using specialized equipment for that purpose.
Watercraft used for planting, inspections, and harvesting will be home ported at Ventura Harbor.
At full project build out 20 to 40 vessels will be traveling to the specific sub-permit sites to conduct
these activities. The maximum distance traveled between the harbor and the farthest potential subpermit
area will be approximately 8 miles. Once constructed, it is projected that each sub-permit
site will generate an estimated 150 trips per year to accomplish the tasks outlined above.
Landed product will comply with all testing and labeling regulations as part of the California
Department of Public Health (CDPH) Shellfish Sanitation Plan and the National Shellfish
Sanitation Program (NSSP) guidelines for shellfish grown in federal waters. NOAA-Seafood
Inspection Program (NOAA-SIP), in collaboration with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
(FDA), recently began the process of developing NSSP-compliant sanitation protocols for bivalve
shellfish cultivated in federal waters.
Organization and Governance
VPD proposes to make mussel growing area sub-permits available to a variety of
grower/producers, anticipated to include existing commercial fishermen, existing commercial
shellfish businesses, and startups that otherwise would be disinclined to embark on the lengthy and
expensive mandatory regulatory pathway. As a requirement of their participation, grower/
producers will be obligated to operate under robust environmental monitoring guidelines and
BMPs incorporated into the proposed project’s entitlements. While all grower/producers will be
held accountable for compliance with these requirements, VPD is ultimately responsible for
compliance with all permit conditions and required BMPs. All grower/producer responsibilities
would be spelled out as conditions in grower/producer sub-permits with VPD, thus establishing
155
9250 8
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
VPD enforcement authority for those conditions. VPD anticipates further discussions with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) concerning the proposed sub-permitting process once the
USACE has had an opportunity to review the application.
Project Decommissioning
The project will include a decommissioning plan, which will provide for the removal of all
equipment and structures in each sub-permit area associated with project activities when activities
in that sub-permit are terminated. The decommissioning plan will be a requirement of each subpermit.
Financial assurances to guarantee implementation of the decommissioning plan will be
required of each grower/producer and reviewed periodically.
156
9250 9
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
19. Project Purpose
Objectives of the proposed project are:
1. To increase the supply of safe, sustainably produced, and locally grown shellfish while
minimizing potential negative environmental impacts;
2. To enhance and sustain Ventura Harbor as a major west coast fishing port and support the
local economy;
3. To provide economies of scale, pre-approved sub-permit area, and technical support to
include small local producers who would not otherwise be able to participate in shellfish
aquaculture;
4. To provide an entitlement and permitting template for aquaculture projects state-wide;
5. To enhance public knowledge and understanding of sustainable shellfish farming practices
and promote community collaboration in achieving VSE objectives;
6. To advance scientific knowledge and state of the art aquaculture practices through research
and innovation.
1. To increase the supply of safe, sustainably-produced, and locally-grown shellfish while
minimizing potential negative environmental impacts
The proposed project will serve to diversify the catch and stabilize the commercial fishing fleet
home-ported at Ventura Harbor. The proposed project also will provide a locally cultivated,
sustainably raised food source, and significantly advance state and national goals and objectives for
increased domestic aquaculture and a secure food supply. The proposed project is supported, in part,
through the NOAA Sea Grant program, the goal of which is to contribute to “a safe, secure and
sustainable supply of seafood to meet public demand.”
Ventura Harbor is home to one of the top fisheries off-loading harbors in the state. One of the core
goals of the VSE project is to enhance the Ventura Harbor working waterfront with a sustainable
and dependable seafood harvest. The project will help meet state and federal goals for the growth
of domestic shellfish aquaculture to better serve the U.S. population demands for new, sustainably
grown protein sources. This is consistent with the VPD’s goal of upgrading infrastructure,
equipment and facilities for a modernized, efficient and safe working harbor. A 2007 California
Sea Grant Extension Program report titled “Commercial Fisheries of the Santa Barbara Channel
and Associated Infrastructure Needs” noted that diversification of fishing operations through the
development of new fisheries could provide new business opportunities.
The proposed project offers a number of other benefits related to food supply, because at present
the mussel market in the United States and locally is dominated by imports from Canada, Chile,
New Zealand, and Europe. California is the third-largest consumer of shellfish in the United
States, and current state production lags far behind demand. Shortfalls are met by importation,
157
9250 10
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
which contributes to the state and national seafood deficit and increases our carbon footprint by
the need to transport shellfish into the state from around the world.
This project will supply a locally grown mussel product to an established market with the
potential for expansion. Mussels provide a high-protein, low-fat source of human nutrition.
Compared with other cultivated protein sources (e.g., beef, pork, chicken), mussels are a more
environmentally sustainable food source, require no added feed or water, have significantly
lower associated greenhouse gas emissions, and use ocean areas rather than land for production
(see Table 1). The proposed project at build out would produce 9,000 to 11,000 tons of mussels
for market per year. Further, by serving as a template for additional offshore shellfish-growing
projects, this proposed project aims to increase the efficiency of shellfish permitting and thus
provide a template to promote additional shellfish growing operations offshore of California.
Table 1
Comparison of Sustainability Indicators among Animal Production Systems
Animal
Type
Food
Conversion
(kg feed/kg
edible
weight)
Protein
Efficiency
(%)
Nitrogen
Emissions
(kg/ton
protein
produced)
Phosphorous
Emissions
(kg/ton
protein
produced)
Land
(tons
edible
product
per HA)
Consumptive
Freshwater
Use
(m3/ton)
Beef 31.7 5 1,200 180 0.24–
0.37
15,497
Chicken 4.2 25 300 40 1.0–1.20 3,918
Pork 10.7 13 800 120 0.83–
1.10
4,856
Finfish
(average)
2.3 30 360 48 0.15–
3.70
5,000*
Bivalve
mollusks
Not fed Not fed -27 -29 0.28–20 0
Source: Aquaculture Workshop 2015.
Notes: kg = kilogram; HA = hectare; m3/ton = cubic meters per ton.
* Consumptive water use is difficult to compare across finfish aquaculture production systems
because of variability in feed sources and depending on whether the system is freshwater or
saltwater.
To minimize conflicts with other ocean uses and ensure location away from pollution sources, the
proposed location was selected after multiple stakeholder workshops and consultations, noticed public
meetings of the Ventura Port Commission, and utilization of two different marine spatial planning
tools. (See “18. Nature of Activity” discussion.)
158
9250 11
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
The proposed project is consistent with California’s Aquaculture Development Act (California
Public Resources Code, Sections 826–828), which encourages the practice of aquaculture to
augment food supplies, expand employment, promote economic activity and protect and better
use the land and water resources of the state, and Assembly Joint Resolution 43 (2014), wherein
the State Legislature states its support “to protect existing shellfish beds and access to additional
acreage for shellfish farming and restoration.” The proposed project is also consistent with
NOAA’s National Shellfish Initiative (NOAA 2013) and National Marine Aquaculture Policy
(NOAA 2011), which seek to increase populations of bivalves in coastal waters through
commercial aquaculture production and acknowledge the multiple benefits of shellfish
aquaculture, including providing new jobs and business opportunities, meeting the growing
demand for seafood, and providing habitat for important species. Finally, the proposed project
furthers the goals of the National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan (National Ocean Council
2013), one of which is to increase efficiencies in the permitting process and encourage agency
coordination to facilitate additional marine aquaculture development.
2. To enhance and sustain Ventura Harbor as a major west coast fishing port and support the
local economy
The proposed project is very important to the future of Ventura Harbor. The harbor’s status as a
robust commercial fishing port is vital to VPD qualifying for USACE harbor dredging funds since
the harbor is not a deep water port and does not house a U.S. Coast Guard station. Absent USACE
dredging funds the harbor will silt up and close.
Integral to the VPD’s mission is to provide a safe and navigable harbor that benefits fisherman.
Included amongst the VPD’s goals is to maintain and enhance a safe and navigable harbor by:
 Securing federal funding to support the USACE operation and maintenance program at the
harbor federal entrance;
 Dredging the Inner Harbor and preserving infrastructure;
 Providing superior Harbor Patrol, Maintenance, and related Port District services;
 Upgrading infrastructure, equipment and facilities for a modernized, efficient and safe working
harbor
To meet its mission and goals the VPD allocates annual revenues to operations, maintenance and
capital improvements. In FY18-19 operating revenues were approximately $10 million and operating
expenses were approximately $8.7 million. However capital improvements totaled $5.2M, causing the
VPD to utilize approximately $3.9 million in unrestricted reserve funds. Due to VPD reserve fund
policies, this is not sustainable at this level annually. This means that some combination of increased
revenues or revenue sources and alternative methods to finance some capital infrastructure projects is
159
9250 12
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
necessary. Specific to the commercial fishing industry, the VSE project can play a vital role in VPD
annual revenue generation that can be leveraged for the financing of commercial fishing infrastructure
while creating other positive economic impacts and maintaining dredging priorities as discussed
further below.
The VPD, which is an independent special district, receives approximately 88-90% of its revenues
from commercial leases, boat slip fees and fish off-loading charges. The remaining funds are local
property tax revenues accounting for approximately 10-12% of revenues. These property tax revenues
have consistently been allocated to public safety for Harbor Patrol but do not cover these operational
costs. Additionally, the VPDis expanding Harbor Patrol operations to “24-7” due to increased demand
for services which further increases annual operating expenses for public safety functions.
Dredging
The VPDis completely dependent upon the USACE for the annual maintenance of the harbor’s federal
entrance system, and the unloading of commercially harvested seafood at the harbor is a primary
justification for this federal support. Without diversified fisheries delivering consistent fish offloading
necessary to justify federal funding to USACE for Ventura Harbor dredging, the Harbor risks future
entrance closures.
The entrance system includes the following components:
1. A 1,750 foot entrance channel
2. A 600,000 cubic yard sand trap
3. A 1,800 foot offshore breakwater
4. A 1,550 foot north jetty
5. A 250 foot middle jetty
6. A 600 foot south beach groin
The annual maintenance dredging of the entrance channel and sand trap currently require between
$5,000,000 and $7,000,000 per year. The cost of maintaining the rock structures (i.e. breakwater, jetties
and groin), while not occurring on an annual basis, has nonetheless averaged about $1,280,000 per
year over the last 15 years. Were it not for the federal assumption of these maintenance needs, the
harbor’s federal entrance channel would simply shoal to closure, and all of the maritime interests in
the harbor, both commercial and recreational would lose ocean access.
In order to avoid that possibility, in March 2012, when federal funding was inadequate for the USACE
to complete the necessary dredging of the harbor entrance area, the VPD was compelled to utilize
$1,500,000 of its limited reserves to finish the dredging. It was only possible for the VPD to take that
160
9250 13
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
action, however, because the USACE had already absorbed the contractor’s $1,000,000 equipment
mobilization cost. Even under such limited conditions, it is simply not sustainable for the VPD to
financially support the federal dredging program.
Infrastructure
One of the core goals of the VSE project is to enhance the Ventura Harbor working waterfront with a
sustainable and dependable seafood harvest. This is consistent with the VPD’s goal of upgrading
infrastructure, equipment and facilities for a modernized, efficient and safe working harbor. The
existing commercial fishing businesses generate direct revenue to the VPD in the form of commercial
boat slips and fish offloading fees. These fees generate approximately $1.2M in annual revenue that
supports marina operations and some infrastructure needs. The commercial boat slip fees are highly
dependent upon a stable commercial fishing fleet, which depends largely upon the ongoing success of
the California Market Squid industry along with other smaller fisheries. This industry has proven
resilient but unpredictable from year to year due to a variety of impacts from weather, water
temperatures, and market forces, including more recently imposed tariffs on international seafood
products. For example, the VPDhas had years where 60 million pounds or more in squid was offloaded
at the Harbor while other years the VPD has had less than 20 million pounds offloaded at the Harbor.
The VPD’s off-loading fees are generated largely by the squid industry; however, these fees only
represent 10% of the $1.2M in total revenue identified above (approximately $120,000 annually).
The VPD, as part of its annual budget, prepares a 5-year capital improvement plan (CIP) which
anticipates large scale projects that are necessary to maintain a modernized, efficient and safe working
harbor. These needs are particularly pressing given the harbor’s age, with many facilities 35-55 years
in age. The scale of these projects necessitates capital financing, since annual revenues are largely
utilized for ongoing operations and pay just a portion of capital improvements.
For example, a current project receiving capital financing is the Village Commercial dock replacement.
This $4.6 million project seeks to replace the dilapidated dock system, which is used primarily by 42
purse seiners and related commercial fishing vessels such as 20 light boats for the California Market
Squid fleet. The project financing requires that ongoing annual VPD revenues be used to support the
debt service.
In the next five to ten years, the VPD will need to finance a substantial amount of new infrastructure
construction and likely dredge the inner harbor for commercial fishing boat needs and revetment
maintenance, neither of which is a USACE-funded activity because it is not part of the Harbor’s federal
entrance. Other projects may include future replacement of an older fisheries building, reconstruction
of a fish pier, replacement or addition of fish offloading cranes, modernization of fish handling
facilities, worksite improvements, fish equipment storage and fleet parking needs. It is conceivable that
161
9250 14
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
the VPD could finance $20M or more in commercial fishing infrastructure costs to support ongoing
operational needs. This is in addition to the $4.6 million in debt discussed above. For illustrative
purposes only, if the VPD were to borrow $20 million over 30 years at current interest rates, the annual
debt service costs to the VPD for this debt would be approximately $1.2 million.
The VPD is subject to significant due diligence and financial “tests” in order to borrow capital project
funds. While the VPD continues to meet these borrowing requirements, and maintains a strong
financial position, it is clear that the VPD must seek to diversify its fisheries to support commercial
fishing operational and infrastructure costs. Annual boat slip and offloading fees are used to fund
ongoing fisheries and marina operations but do not provide the necessary funding to complete largescale
capital projects. Thus, the implementation of new fisheries and resulting revenues is of major
importance to the VPD.
The VSE project anticipates wholesale market values of $2.76Mper 100-acre parcel or $55.2Mat full
build-out of 20, 100-acre parcels. Many factors will ultimately determine actual revenue, with the most
critical factor being the size of the approved project, as well as growing conditions, operational
interruptions, time period to full build out, market conditions, project and operational costs, etc.
However, in utilizing these initial projections the VPD is evaluating potential revenue sharing models
as discussed below.
The VPD is evaluating a new revenue approach with the VSE project. The VPD will be the project
permittee. As such, the VPD may consider implementing a participation fee (e.g. 3-5% of gross
wholesale value) for future private grower producers, rather than just rely on fish offloading and slip
fees to help fund infrastructure needs. For example, an operating fee of 3% of the gross wholesale
value at full build-out as described above could generate annual revenues to the VPD of approximately
$1.65M. These funds generated will be used to support the VPD’s project administration costs and
could help support future debt issued for commercial fishing infrastructure (e.g. $1.2M annual debt
service as described above). A project of a lesser scale would directly impact future VPD annual
revenues that can be used in part to support the financing of ongoing commercial fishing infrastructure
and harbor needs.
3. To provide economies of scale, pre-approved sub-permit area, and technical support to
include small producers who would not otherwise be able to participate in shellfish
aquaculture
Designed economies of scale will maximize the previously described direct and indirect secondary
benefits of the proposed project. Significant expenses are associated with permitting,
162
9250 15
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
environmental review, compliance with shellfish health regulations, and environmental
monitoring; therefore, leasing and permitting the proposed project as one will provide economies
of scale and eliminate a significant impediment to market diversification and participation by small
shellfish companies or new investors. By permitting all the growing areas as a single proposed
project, individual grower/producers benefit from the collective upfront permitting efforts of VPD.
As a specific example of a regulatory economy of scale, monitoring requirements such as
implementation of a sediment quality monitoring plan are more efficiently handled at the VPD
project scale as opposed to separate efforts by individual grower/producers. VPD, acting as the
responsible party for BMP compliance, can use collective funds to monitor sediment conditions
within the larger project area, offering technical sampling and reporting consistency, along with
facilitating collection of a larger data set, which will offer greater opportunities to track overall
project impacts. Collective sampling and reporting will also yield efficiencies in compliance
review for the agencies, as VPD can act as a clearinghouse for information, handling the initial
screening and vetting of information before it is transmitted to the appropriate regulatory agencies.
Project grower/producers will have access to a pooled, centralized and comprehensive monitoring
and reporting program for all the growing plots. All necessary permits and entitlements will
already have been obtained by VPD, making participation by the grower/producer “turn-key.” The
costs to the grower/producer associated with ongoing water quality sampling and monitoring will
be reduced by the efficiency of a centralized pooled program, which will in turn reduce operating
costs and increase the direct benefit to the grower/producer.
Further, grower/producers will also have access to technical expertise and the accepted BMPs
developed through the permitting process and described below. Similarly, grower/producers will
enjoy access to centralized marketing and branding of a Ventura-specific premium seafood product
grown and harvested in the proposed area.
Each of these elements of the project design contributes cumulatively to a total package, which in
turn contributes positively, and materially to the ongoing operational health and vitality of the
Ventura Harbor community. The costs associated with the proposed project (i.e. permitting and
monitoring) would be too high for a small operation. In order for the sub-permits to be affordable
for individual grower/producers, the proposed project must be a large scale project.
4. To provide an entitlement and permitting template for aquaculture projects state-wide
A major goal of the proposed project is delineation of a streamlined strategic permitting pathway
that will not only facilitate the establishment of a Ventura Harbor-based shellfish operation
promoting sustainable economic development, but that will more generally serve as a model to
163
9250 16
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
help other entities address regulatory barriers and planning challenges that currently create
impediments to the expansion of the shellfish aquaculture industry in California.
The proposed project is a unique approach to developing environmentally and economically
sustainable shellfish commerce with product landed at the Ventura Harbor. This initiative is novel
in several ways.
 The project proposes to produce bivalve shellfish in the offshore marine environment using
cultivation practices that, although well-established worldwide, are in their infancy in the
United States, particularly on the West Coast.
 The proposed project is a cooperative and collaborative effort taking place in an opensource
format with state and federal regulators to establish a template for additional future
shellfish growing operations in California.
 The proposal to permit a group of twenty 100-acre growing plots allows for participation
by potential grower/producers who might otherwise be precluded from participation in
aquaculture because of the significant regulatory burden of obtaining the required
government approvals.
 The scale of the proposed project allows the individual grower/producers to benefit from
centralized environmental monitoring, product safety testing, and product marketing.
 This proposed project as it is scaled will bolster the working waterfront in Ventura Harbor,
providing economic benefits to VPD, its tenants, and the community.
The proposed project seeks to significantly improve the interagency review and permitting process
for offshore shellfish aquaculture and create a comprehensive and efficient permitting process that
is cost effective for both review agencies and applicant alike. In doing so, the overarching objective
is to establish a viable and replicable permitting pathway model that satisfies the requirements of
the review and permitting agencies and may be used by any prospective shellfish grower/producers
to facilitate project design and aid in the evaluation of future offshore aquaculture proposals.
5. To enhance public knowledge and understanding of sustainable shellfish farming practices
and promote community collaboration in achieving VSE objectives
Realizing the vision of an improved permitting process requires coordinated planning among all
stakeholders to attain the full environmental and economic benefits. VPD and key VSE
participants are committed to transparency, open communication, and comprehensive public
education and outreach efforts. To this end, VPD and key VSE participants hosted an ongoing
164
9250 17
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
series of informational public meetings to discuss the social, economic, environmental, scientific,
and technological variables encompassed by the proposed project. These interactive, workshopstyle
meetings provided a forum for open dialog among all interested members of the general
public, state and federal agency representatives, shellfish industry leaders, and environmental and
scientific leaders to discuss the policy, planning, and scientific issues surrounding the
establishment of a Ventura Harbor-based offshore shellfish aquaculture operation. This was a
critical first step toward productive collaboration and ultimately, overall project success.
6. To advance scientific knowledge and state of the art aquaculture practices through research
and innovation
The project is envisioned to include both research and education components. The project includes
as additional participants, researchers and educators with the following institutions:
 UCSB Bren School
 University of California, San Diego, Scripps Institution of Oceanography
 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
 NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region
The project will serve an in situ working laboratory for improving shellfish aquaculture techniques
and will be used as an open-water classroom. Qualified researchers affiliated with universities (i.e.,
UCSB Bren School, or University of Southern California, etc.), or qualified marine research
institutes (i.e., Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, etc.)
will have access to aquaculture plots to conduct research and monitoring approved by the VPD;
however, access may be limited in certain circumstances to respect grower/producer proprietary
data or technology or to accommodate a grower/producer’s operational and logistical needs in
operating the farm. VPD will review and approve research projects in consultation with USACE,
NMFS, NOAA, and any affected grower/producers. Grower/producers will be fairly compensated
for the use of their vessels, equipment, and fair market value of any mussels produced or generated
as part of approved research projects.
165
9250 18
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
23. Description of Avoidance, Minimization, and Compensation
Avoidance of User Conflicts
As described previously, the size of the proposed project was determined based on needing to meet
the project objectives, primarily Objectives 2 and 3:
2. To enhance and sustain Ventura Harbor as a major west coast fishing port and support
the local economy;
3. To provide economies of scale, pre-approved sub-permit area, and technical support to
include small local producers who would not otherwise be able to participate in shellfish
aquaculture.
To meet its mission and goals the VPD allocates annual revenues to operations, maintenance and
capital improvements. As stated in Section 19, Project Purpose, the VPD had a negative cash flow
of approximately $3.9 million in FY18-19, which was funded by use of unrestricted reserves, but
is not sustainable at this level annually. As such, a combination of increased revenues or revenue
sources and alternative methods to finance some capital infrastructure projects is necessary.
Specific to the commercial fishing industry, the VSE project can play a vital role in VPD’s annual
revenue generation that can be leveraged for the financing of commercial fishing infrastructure
while creating other positive economic impacts and maintaining dredging priorities. See Section
19 for further discussion of these issues.
There is a strong nexus between the continued receipt of federal support and the vitality of the
harbor’s commercial fishing operations and landings. In order to ensure that dredging continues,
the harbor needs to increase the tonnage landed at Ventura Harbor in a sustainable manner. As
other forms of commercial fishing are not currently a viable or sustainable option, the proposed
project will significantly increase and diversify the catch landed at Ventura Harbor. A smaller
scale fishery is unlikely to provide enough tonnage to ensure dredging continues.
Similarly, it is not feasible to provide economies of scale to small, local producers without a large
scale operation. The operation costs, such as monitoring, permitting, and technical support, would
be far too high with a smaller size. In order to have a sustainable fishing operation with a
recognizable product, the proposed project needs to be a larger operation.
166
9250 19
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
Siting Analysis
Once the size of the proposed project was determined, spatial planning guided the VPD in
determining which area was most suitable for longline mussel cultivation with the lowest impact
on existing marine uses. The initial candidate area in state waters was selected by VSE with the
assistance of analysis prepared by the UCSB Bren School (using SeaSketch software), and focused
on the Southern California Bight. The factors evaluated in the analysis included suitability of the
candidate growing area for mussels considering water depth and ocean bottom; location in State
waters near Ventura Harbor for product landing; avoidance of potential pollution sources; and
avoidance of conflicts with existing subsurface leases for oil and gas pipelines, etc. The report
identified areas where conflicts with or impacts by aquaculture development had to potential to
affect stakeholders, the environmental health of the marine benthos, quality of ocean views, and
the risk of disease spread among fish farms. Thousands of spatial plans were considered. The
spatial plans indicated that for various locations within the Southern California Bight, mussel
aquaculture can achieve considerable value while minimizing impacts to the existing sectors (0-
5% impact). As a result of the UCSB Bren School spatial planning analysis, eight SeaSketch
alternatives were identified, including an alternative in federal waters.
 SeaSketch Alternative 1 – 20 lease sites located along the 80’ contour at 45-degree angle
 SeaSketch Alternative 2 – 20 lease sites along 80’ contour with contiguous straight-line
outer edge
 SeaSketch Alternative 3 – 20 lease sites along 80’ contour with 2X2 configuration
extending toward the middle of candidate area
 SeaSketch Alternative 4 – 20 lease sites along 3nm State waters line, six sites south of Pitas
Pt. extended towards the middle of the candidate area
 SeaSketch Alternative 5 – 20 lease sites that follows 3 nm line intuitively
 SeaSketch Alternative 6 – 20 lease sites at 3nm line arranged in a 2X2 configuration
 SeaSketch Alternative 7 – 20 lease sites intuitively following the 3nm State waters line in
a 2X2 configuration
 SeaSketch Alternative 8 – 20 lease sites outside of the 3nm State waters line, in Federal
waters, arranged in two, ten parcel 2X2 configurations slightly offset.
The VSE team established criteria on which to evaluate and prioritize each siting alternative. As a
result, the VSE team constructed a siting decision matrix to quantify the benefits of each potential
siting configuration, and assist the VPD Board of Commissioners in its decision-making process.
The stakeholder engagement process supported the identification of key factors upon which to
assist siting configuration decision-making. Each of the criteria was assigned a weight based on
perceived relative importance to achieving optimal operational capacity and minimizing potential
user conflicts and environmental impacts. Siting alternatives were then scored using a rating
system that corresponds to preferences identified by the VSE team. These criteria included:
 Approximate water depth
 Potential adverse water pollution sources
167
9250 20
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
 Potential visual effects from shore
 Potential interaction with commercial and recreational fishing interests
 Subleasing or sub-permitting complexities
 Potential overlap with subsurface leases
 Environmental review complexity
 Contiguous siting
 Distance from Harbor
Through the stakeholder engagement process and consultation with its aquaculture specialist, Scott
Lindell of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, it became clear that location of the project in
State waters posed certain issues. Most importantly, VSE received information from local halibut
trawlers that the proposed State waters candidate area was located in one of two areas statewide
designated by CDFW as halibut trawl grounds. Further, Mr. Lindell advised that a minimum 80’
bottom depth (versus the initial criterion of 60’ bottom depth) would reduce exposure to various
mussel predator species (e.g., diving ducks) and potential storm surge. Following a November
2017 public hearing, the VPD Board of Commissioners selected a federal waters alternative
(SeaSketch Alternative 8) location.
Subsequently, NOAA Fisheries Southwest District Aquaculture Coordinator, Diane Windham,
connected VSE with NOAA’s National Ocean Service staff, which undertook a second siting study
focused on federal waters proximate to Ventura Harbor. (See “Coastal Aquaculture Siting and
Sustainability Technical Report, Ventura Shellfish Enterprise: Aquaculture Siting Analysis
Results” prepared by Coastal Aquaculture Siting and Sustainability Program, within the Marine
Spatial Ecology Division of the National Centers for Coastal and Ocean Science, National Ocean
Service, NOAA, dated September 6, 2018, copy attached.) The siting analysis represents an
objective, data-driven approach to identify the locations within federal waters with the highest
compatibility with the proposed project. The results of this siting analysis identify two alternative
sites proximate to Ventura Harbor given equal consideration of existing use conflicts, including:
 Designated shipping fairways,
 Areas of high vessel density and wrecks and obstructions,
 Sensitive habitats,
 Military uses,
 Existing vessel traffic corridors,
 Oil and gas production,
 Commercial fishing (specifically trawl and squid fisheries), and
 Obstructions, including submerged cables and wrecks.
Other important considerations were the distance from Ventura Harbor and depth (25-37m).
Slightly less influential parameters included wind speed and direction, wave height, surface
current, and chlorophyll a.
168
9250 21
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
The two CASS Report Alternatives are both situated in the northern portion of the siting analysis
study area, which was determined to have the smallest potential overlap with conflicting uses. The
primary difference between the two sites is the configuration of sub-permit areas (Figures 3 and
4). In CASS Report Alternative 1, each sub-permit area has two shorter lines in parallel, and is
represented in Figure 3. CASS Report Alternative 2, shown in Figure 4, was designed as a longer
“stack” of single lines within each sub-permit area, which was found to be less flexible. Since
varying oceanic patterns may necessitate more design flexibility, CASS Report Alternative 1 was
determined to be the most compatible configuration. CASS Report Alternative 1 will have 20 plots,
each with a dimension of 2,299.5 feet by 1,899.5 feet, and an average water depth of 98 feet.
Importantly, the two CASS Report Alternative sites overlap with the federal waters alternative site
(SeaSketch Alternative 8) identified in the UCSB Bren School spatial planning analysis, indicating
the area has been shown by two independent studies to have the fewest conflicts with other uses
and sensitive environmental resources (Figure 5). Following a public hearing in September 2018,
it is anticipated the VPD Board of Commissioners approved CASS Report Alternative 1)(also
shown in Figure 1) as the preferred project site. CASS Report Alternative 2 (shown in Figure 4) is
shown as an alternate site location.
Measures to minimize impacts to the waters of the U.S.
The proposed project has been designed to minimize direct and indirect impacts to waters of the
U.S. to the maximum extent practicable through implementation of the following measures. Please
see Table 2 for details of the BMPs, the responsible party, and the enforcing agency of each
measure.
Measures to minimize debris and impacts to water quality
1. Sediment Quality Monitoring Plan. A Sediment Quality Monitoring Plan shall be
developed requiring monitoring of sediment conditions within the project area, including
monitoring the quantity, type, and distribution of biological materials (such as shellfish,
shell material, and fouling organisms) that accumulate on the seafloor. Monitoring will
also include an evaluation of any changes to oxygen demand of benthic infaunal and
epifaunal communities, and changes to the chemical and biochemical conditions of
seafloor sediments along with a description of performance standards to meet.
If performance standards are not met, corrective actions will be outlined. The Plan will
include reporting requirements, including annual report submittals to NOAA and NMFS
for review. If performance standards are met for a period of time, the plan will provide for
appropriately scaling down monitoring and intervals over time.
2. Spill Prevention and Response. Discharges of feed, pesticides, or chemicals (including
antibiotics and hormones) in ocean waters are prohibited. Fuel, lubricants and chemicals
must be labeled, stored and disposed of in a safe and responsible manner, and marked with
warning signs. Precautions shall be taken to prevent spills, fires and explosions, and
procedures and supplies shall be readily available to manage chemical and fuel spills or
169
9250 22
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
leaks. Each grower/producer shall comply with the Spill Prevention and Response Plan
(SPRP) for vessels and work barges that will be used during project construction and
operations. Each grower/producer operating in the project area shall be trained in, and
adhere to, the emergency procedures and spill prevention and response measures specified
in the SPRP during all project operations. The SPRP shall provide for emergency response
and spill control procedures to be taken to stop or control the source of the spill and to
contain and clean up the spill. The SPRP shall include, at a minimum: (a) identification of
potential spill sources and quantity estimates of a project specific reasonable worst case
spill; (b) identification of prevention and response equipment and measures/procedures that
will be taken to prevent potential spills and to protect marine and shoreline resources in the
event of a spill. Spill prevention and response equipment shall be kept onboard project
vessels at all times; (c) a prohibition on at-sea vessel or equipment fueling/refueling
activities; and (d) emergency response and notification procedures, including a list of
contacts to call in the event of a spill; (e) assurance that all hydraulic fluid to be used for
installation, maintenance, planting, and harvesting activities shall be vegetable based.
3. Aquaculture Gear Monitoring and Escapement Plan. Include in overall management plan
an aquaculture gear monitoring and escapement plan. Any farm gear that has broken loose
from the farm location shall be retrieved. The farm site shall be visited at minimum twice
per month to examine the aquaculture gear for potential loss or non-compliant deployment,
including inspections for fouling organisms. Any organisms that have a potential to cover
the sea floor will be removed and disposed of at an identified upland facility. A Marine
Debris Management Plan shall also be prepared that includes (a) a plan for permanently
marking all lines, ropes, buoys, and other facility infrastructure and floating equipment
with the name and contact information of the grower/producer; (b) a description of the
extent and frequency of maintenance operations necessary to minimize the loss of materials
and equipment to the marine environment resulting from breakages and structural failures;
and (c) a description of the search and cleanup measures that would be implemented if loss
of shellfish cultivation facility materials, equipment, and/or infrastructure occurs.
4. Decommissioning Plan. A decommissioning plan for the timely removal of all shellfish,
structures, anchoring devices, equipment, and materials associated with the shellfish
cultivation facility and documentation of completion of removal activities will be a
requirement of each permit or sub-permit. Financial assurances to guarantee
implementation of the plan will be in place and reviewed periodically.
Measures to prevent spread of invasive species
1. Cultivation of Spat Offsite. Only hatchery-reared mussel spat grown at a facility certified
by CDFW will be used in order to ensure that spat are free of introduced invasive species,
parasites, and pathogens; however, natural mussel spat collected on farm grown-out lines
and buoys may also be harvested and cultivated.
170
9250 23
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
2. Invasive Species. Grower/producers operating in the project area shall be required to
receive training from NMFS to identify potential invasive species and how to properly
dispose of such invasive species if discovered.
Measures to prevent navigational impacts
1. Update NOAA Charts. VPD to submit to the NOAA Office of Coast Survey: (a) the
geographical coordinates of the facility boundaries obtained using a different geographic
position unit or comparable navigational equipment; (b) as-built plans of the facility and
associated buoys and anchors; (c) each grower/producer’s point of contact and telephone
number; and (d) any other information required by the NOAA Office of Coast Survey to
accurately portray the location of the shellfish cultivation facility on navigational charts.
2. Notice to Mariners. No less than 15-days prior to the start of in-water activities associated
with the installation phase of the project, VPD shall submit to (a) the U.S. Coast Guard (for
publication in a Notice to Mariners); and (b) the harbormasters (for posting in their offices
of public noticeboards), notices containing the anticipated start date of installation, the
anticipated installation schedule, and the coordinates of the installation sites. During
installation, VPD shall also make radio broadcast announcements to the local fishers’
emergency radio frequency that provide the current installation location and a phone
number that can be called for additional information.
Measures to prevent impacts to threatened or endangered species
The enclosed Biological Assessment evaluates the potential effects of the VSE project on
federally protected species. In addition to the BMPs identified below, the Biological Assessment
identifies certain design features that minimize potential impacts, including marine mammal
entanglement. With the incorporation of appropriate avoidance and minimization measures, a
preliminary determination has been made that the project may affect, but is not likely to
adversely affect any federally-listed threatened or endangered species, or cause adverse
modification to federally designated critical habitat.
1. Marine Wildlife Entanglement Plan. No less than once per month, each grower/producer
operating on a VPD lease shall visually inspect all ropes, and equipment via depth/fish
finders to determine if any entanglement of a marine mammal has occurred and to ensure
that (a) no lines have been broken, lost or removed; (b) all longlines, anchor lines, and buoy
lines remain taught and in good working condition; and (c) any derelict fishing gear or
marine debris that collects in the growing gear is removed and disposed of at an identified
onshore facility. All equipment and materials accidentally released or found to be missing
from the facility during monthly inspections, including buoys, floats, lines, ropes, chains,
cultivation trays, wires, fasteners, and clasps, shall be searched for, collected, properly
disposed of onshore, and documented in the annual inspection report. Monitoring shall
occur monthly for the first two years following deployment and, in the event that there are
171
9250 24
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
no marine wildlife entanglements within the first two years, may be reduced to quarterly
inspections thereafter.
Inspections shall include recordings by depth/fish finder or ROV surveys of lines and/or
monitoring performed by SCUBA divers. Recorded video shall be provided along with the
annual report described above. Any maintenance issues including wear, loosening, or
fatigue of materials shall be remedied as soon as possible. All incidents of observed whale
entanglement shall be immediately reported to SOS WHALe. Any other marine wildlife
(i.e., other marine mammals, turtles) observed to be entangled will be immediately reported
to NOAA Fisheries Marine Mammal Stranding Network Coordinator, West Coast Region,
Long Beach Office. Only personnel who have been authorized by NOAA Fisheries and
who have training, experience, equipment, and support will attempt to disentangle marine
wildlife. If possible, the grower/producer shall document and photograph entangled
wildlife and the entangling gear material.
2. Predator Control. Potential predator species will be identified. Specified humane methods
of predator deterrence will be utilized, favoring non-lethal methods. No controls, other than
non-lethal exclusion, shall be applied to species that are listed as threatened or endangered.
3. Marine Wildlife Observer. A Marine Wildlife Observer shall be present on each project
construction vessel during all construction activities, including the installation of long lines
and anchoring systems. The observer shall monitor and record the presence of all marine
wildlife (marine mammals and sea turtles) within 100 yards of the work area. The observer
shall have the authority to halt operations if marine wildlife are observed or anticipated to
be near a work area and construction activities have the potential to result in injury or
entanglement of marine wildlife. In addition, all work (including vessel motors) will be
halted if a cetacean is observed within the monitoring area or if a pinniped or sea turtle is
observed within 50 yards of the work area. Work may commence after the observed
individuals have moved out of the monitoring area.
Observers’ reports on marine mammal monitoring during construction activities shall be
prepared and submitted to NOAA Fisheries on a monthly basis. Reports shall include such
information as the (1) number, type, and location of marine mammals observed; (2) the
behavior of marine mammals in the area of potential sound effects during construction; (3)
dates and times when observations and in-water project construction activities were
conducted; and (4) dates and times when in-water construction activities were suspended
because of marine mammals.
VPD shall prepare a list of qualified marine wildlife observers who meet the following
minimum qualifications: visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible) sufficient to
discern moving targets at the water’s surface with ability to estimate target size and
distance; (2) use of binoculars or spotting scope may be necessary to correctly identify the
target; (3) advanced education in biological science, wildlife management, mammalogy,
or related fields (bachelor’s degree or higher is preferred); (4) experience and ability to
conduct field observations and collect data according to assigned protocols (this may
172
9250 25
DUDEK AUGUST 2018
include academic experience); (5) experience or training in the field identification of
marine mammals (cetaceans and pinnipeds) and sea turtles; and (6) ability to communicate
orally, by radio or in person, with project personnel to provide real time information on
marine wildlife observed in the area, as needed.
4. Entanglement Prevention. Grow-ropes will be attached to the head rope with a lowbreaking-
strength twine (4-millimeter (0.16-inch) diameter; <1,000 pounds), which will facilitate rapid detachment in the unlikely event of any interaction with the longline. A 1,100-pound breakaway link will be installed between the surface marking buoys and the vertical lines. 5. Marine Wildlife Education. Each grower/producer will be required to provide bi-annual (twice per year) marine wildlife education to its employees regarding proper procedures relating to marine wildlife. The training curriculum will include identifying the presence of specified marine wildlife and procedures for avoiding impacts to marine wildlife during operations. These procedures will include (1) reducing speed and observing the distances from marine life specified in Wildlife-7; (2) providing a safe path of travel for marine mammals that avoids encirclement or entrapment of the animal(s) between the vessel and growing apparatus; (3) if approached by a marine mammal, reducing speed, placing the vessel in neutral and waiting until the animal is observed clear of the vessel before making way; (4) avoiding sudden direction or speed changes when near marine mammals; (5) refraining from approaching, touching or feeding a marine mammal; and (6) immediately contacting their supervisor and other identified parties/agencies identified in Wildlife-1 should an employee observe an injured marine mammal. 6. Lighting. All growing area operations shall be completed during daylight hours. No growing area operations will be conducted at night and no permanent artificial lighting of the shellfish cultivation facility shall occur, except for that associated with the use of navigational safety buoys required by the U.S. Coast Guard. 7. Vessel Management. Vessels in transit to and from the growing area shall maintain a distance of 100 yards from any observed cetacean and 50 yards between any observed pinniped or sea turtle. If cetaceans are observed within 100 yards or pinnipeds or sea turtles observed within 50 yards, the vessel shall reduce speeds to 12 knots or less until it is the appropriate distance (as required by this condition) from the particular marine life. If a cetacean is heading into the direct path of the vessel (i.e., approaching a moving vessel directly into the bow), the vessel shall shut off the engine until the cetacean is no longer approaching the bow and until a greater separation distance is observed. If small cetaceans are observed bow-riding, and the vessel is operating at speeds of 12 knots or less, the vessel shall remain parallel to the animal’s course and avoid abrupt changes in direction until the cetaceans have left the area. Each sighting of a federally listed threatened or endangered whale or turtle shall be recorded and the following information shall be provided: a. Date, time, coordinates of vessel 173 9250 26 DUDEK AUGUST 2018 b. Visibility, weather, sea state c. Vector of sighting (distance, bearing) d. Duration of sighting e. Species and number of animals f. Observed behaviors (feeding, diving, breaching, etc.) g. Description of interaction with aquaculture facility Table 2: Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Proposed Best Management Practices to Mitigate Potential Adverse Project Impacts Measure Description of Measure Responsible Party Enforcing Agency Seed supply – 1 Cultivation of Spat Offsite. Only hatchery-reared mussel spat grown at a facility certified by CDFW will be used in order to ensure that spat are free of introduced invasive species, parasites, and pathogens; however, natural mussel spat collected on farm grow-out lines and buoys may also be harvested and cultivated. Grower/Producer2 Ventura Port District (VPD) and CDFW Sediment quality – 1 Sediment Quality Monitoring Plan. A Sediment Quality Monitoring Plan shall be developed requiring monitoring of sediment conditions within the project area, including monitoring the quantity, type, and distribution of biological materials (such as shellfish, shell material, and fouling organisms) that accumulate on the seafloor. Monitoring will also include an evaluation of any changes oxygen demand of benthic infaunal and epifaunal communities, and changes to the chemical and biochemical conditions of seafloor sediments along with a description of performance standards to meet. If performance standards are not met, corrective actions will be outlined. The Plan will include reporting requirements, including annual report submittals to NOAA and NMFS for review. If performance standards are met for a period of time, the plan will provide for appropriately scaling down monitoring and intervals over time. VPD to prepare plan Third-party consultant hired by VPD to conduct monitoring NOAA and NMFS Wildlife – 1 Marine Wildlife Entanglement Plan. No less than once per month, each grower/producer operating on a VPD lease shall visually inspect all ropes, cables, and equipment via depth/fish finders to determine if any entanglement of a marine mammal has occurred and to ensure that (a) no lines have been broken, lost or removed; (b) all longlines, anchor lines, and buoy lines remain taught and in good working condition; and (c) any Grower/Producer to inspect and respond VPD to identify disposal facility VPD and NOAA Fisheries 2 Note that all Grower/Producer responsibilities will be spelled out as conditions in grower/producer sub-permits with VPD, thus establishing VPD enforcement authority for those conditions. 174 9250 27 DUDEK AUGUST 2018 derelict fishing gear or marine debris that collects in the growing gear is removed and disposed of at an identified onshore facility. All equipment and materials accidentally released or found to be missing from the facility during monthly inspections, including buoys, floats, lines, ropes, chains, cultivation trays, wires, fasteners, and clasps, shall be searched for, collected, properly disposed of onshore, and documented in the annual inspection report. Monitoring shall occur monthly for the first two years following deployment and, in the event that there are no marine wildlife entanglements within the first two years, may be reduced to quarterly inspections thereafter. Inspections shall include recordings by depth/fish finder or ROV surveys of lines and/or monitoring performed by SCUBA divers. Recorded video shall be provided along with the annual report described above. Any maintenance issues including wear, loosening, or fatigue of materials shall be remedied as soon as possible. All incidents of observed whale entanglement shall be immediately reported to SOS WHALe. Any other marine wildlife (i.e., other marine mammals, turtles) observed to be entangled will be immediately reported to NOAA Fisheries Marine Mammal Stranding Network Coordinator, West Coast Region, Long Beach Office. Only personnel who have been authorized by NOAA Fisheries and who have training, experience, equipment, and support will attempt to disentangle marine wildlife. If possible, the grower/producer shall document and photograph entangled wildlife and the entangling gear material. Wildlife – 2 Predator Control. Potential predator species will be identified. Specified humane methods of predator deterrence will be utilized, favoring non-lethal methods. No controls, other than non-lethal exclusion, shall be applied to species that are listed as threatened or endangered. VPD to identify potential predator species and deterrence methods Grower/Producer to implement identified methods as necessary Any methods of predator control are subject to prior approval of VPD, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and NOAA Fisheries Wildlife – 3 Marine Wildlife Observer. A Marine Wildlife Observer shall be present on each project construction vessel during all construction activities, including the installation of long lines and anchoring systems. The observer shall monitor and record the presence of all marine wildlife (marine mammals and sea turtles) within 100 yards of the work area. The observer shall have the authority to halt operations if marine wildlife are observed or anticipated to be near a work area and construction activities have the potential to result in injury or entanglement of marine wildlife. In addition, all work (including vessel motors) will be halted if a cetacean is observed within the monitoring area or if a pinniped or sea turtle is observed within 50 yards of the work area. Work may commence after the observed individuals have moved out of the monitoring area. VPD to identify qualified Marine Wildlife Observers and submit monthly observers’ reports Growers/Producers to assure a qualified observer is present during construction activities and that observers’ directives are heeded VPD and NOAA Fisheries 175 9250 28 DUDEK AUGUST 2018 Observers’ reports on marine mammal monitoring during construction activities shall be prepared and submitted to NOAA Fisheries on a monthly basis. Reports shall include such information as the (1) number, type, and location of marine mammals observed; (2) the behavior of marine mammals in the area of potential sound effects during construction; (3) dates and times when observations and in-water project construction activities were conducted; and (4) dates and times when in-water construction activities were suspended because of marine mammals. VPD shall prepare a list of qualified marine wildlife observers who meet the following minimum qualifications: visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible) sufficient to discern moving targets at the water’s surface with ability to estimate target size and distance; (2) use of binoculars or spotting scope may be necessary to correctly identify the target; (3) advanced education in biological science, wildlife management, mammalogy, or related fields (bachelor’s degree or higher is preferred); (4) experience and ability to conduct field observations and collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic experience); (5) experience or training in the field identification of marine mammals (cetaceans and pinnipeds) and sea turtles; and (6) ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with project personnel to provide real time information on marine wildlife observed in the area, as needed. Wildlife – 4 Entanglement Prevention. Grow-ropes will be attached to the head rope with a low-breaking-strength twine (4- millimeter (0.16-inch) diameter; <1,000 pounds), which will facilitate rapid detachment in the unlikely event of any interaction with the longline. A 1,100-pound breakaway link will be installed between surface marking buoys and the vertical lines. Grower/Producer VPD Wildlife – 5 Marine Wildlife Education. Each grower/producer will be required to provide bi-annual (twice per year) marine wildlife education to its employees regarding proper procedures relating to marine wildlife. The training curriculum will include identifying the presence of specified marine wildlife and procedures for avoiding impacts to marine wildlife during operations. These procedures will include (1) reducing speed and observing the distances from marine life specified in Wildlife-7; (2) providing a safe path of travel for marine mammals that avoids encirclement or entrapment of the animal(s) between the vessel and growing apparatus; (3) if approached by a marine mammal, reducing speed, placing the vessel in neutral and waiting until the animal is observed clear of the vessel before making way; (4) avoiding sudden direction or speed changes when near marine mammals; (5) refraining from approaching, touching or feeding a marine VPD to prepare training curriculum Grower/Producer to provide training VPD and NOAA Fisheries 176 9250 29 DUDEK AUGUST 2018 mammal; and (6) immediately contacting their supervisor and other identified parties/agencies identified in Wildlife-1 should an employee observe an injured marine mammal. Wildlife – 6 Lighting. All growing area operations shall be completed during daylight hours. No growing area operations will be conducted at night and no permanent artificial lighting of the shellfish cultivation facility shall occur, except for that associated with the use of navigational safety buoys required by the U.S. Coast Guard. Grower/Producer VPD and U.S. Coast Guard Wildlife – 7 Vessel Management. Vessels in transit to and from the growing area shall maintain a distance of 100 yards from any observed cetacean and 50 yards between any observed pinniped or sea turtle. If cetaceans are observed within 100 yards or pinnipeds or sea turtles observed within 50 yards, the vessel shall reduce speeds to 12 knots or less until it is the appropriate distance (as required by this condition) from the particular marine life. If a cetacean is heading into the direct path of the vessel (i.e., approaching a moving vessel directly into the bow), the vessel shall shut off the engine until the cetacean is no longer approaching the bow and until a greater separation distance is observed. If small cetaceans are observed bow-riding, and the vessel is operating at speeds of 12 knots or less, the vessel shall remain parallel to the animal’s course and avoid abrupt changes in direction until the cetaceans have left the area. Each sighting of a federally listed threatened or endangered whale or turtle shall be recorded and the following information shall be provided: a. Date, time, coordinates of vessel b. Visibility, weather, sea state c. Vector of sighting (distance, bearing) d. Duration of sighting e. Species and number of animals f. Observed behaviors (feeding, diving, breaching, etc.) g. Description of interaction with aquaculture facility Grower/Producer U.S. Coast Guard Wildlife – 8 Invasive Species. Grower/producers operating in the project area shall be required to receive training from NMFS to identify potential invasive species and how to properly dispose of such invasive species if discovered. Grower/Producer NMFS or entity delegated by NMFS to conduct training 177 9250 30 DUDEK AUGUST 2018 Storage and disposal of supplies – 1 Spill Prevention and Response. Discharges of feed, pesticides, or chemicals (including antibiotics and hormones) in ocean waters are prohibited. Fuel, lubricants and chemicals must be labeled, stored and disposed of in a safe and responsible manner, and marked with warning signs. Precautions shall be taken to prevent spills, fires and explosions, and procedures and supplies shall be readily available to manage chemical and fuel spills or leaks. Each grower/producer shall comply with the Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP) for vessels and work barges that will be used during project construction and operations. Each grower/producer operating in the project area shall be trained in, and adhere to, the emergency procedures and spill prevention and response measures specified in the SPRP during all project operations. The SPRP shall provide for emergency response and spill control procedures to be taken to stop or control the source of the spill and to contain and clean up the spill. The SPRP shall include, at a minimum: (a) identification of potential spill sources and quantity estimates of a project specific reasonable worst case spill; (b) identification of prevention and response equipment and measures/procedures that will be taken to prevent potential spills and to protect marine and shoreline resources in the event of a spill. Spill prevention and response equipment shall be kept onboard project vessels at all times; (c) a prohibition on at-sea vessel or equipment fueling/refueling activities; and (d) emergency response and notification procedures, including a list of contacts to call in the event of a spill; (e) assurance that all hydraulic fluid to be used for installation, maintenance, planting, and harvesting activities shall be vegetable based. VPD to prepare SPRP and provide training to growers/producers Growers/Producers to implement VPD-prepared SPRP U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, California Office of Emergency Services Storage and disposal of supplies – 2 Aquaculture Gear Monitoring and Escapement Plan. Include in overall management plan an aquaculture gear monitoring and escapement plan. Any farm gear that has broken loose from the farm location shall be retrieved. The farm site shall be visited at minimum twice per month to examine the aquaculture gear for potential loss or noncompliant deployment, including inspections for fouling organisms. Any organisms that have a potential to cover the sea floor will be removed and disposed of at an identified upland facility. A Marine Debris Management Plan shall also be prepared that includes (a) a plan for permanently marking all lines, ropes, buoys, and other facility infrastructure and floating equipment with the name and contact information of the grower/producer; (b) a description of the extent and frequency of maintenance operations necessary to minimize the loss of materials and equipment to the marine environment resulting from breakages and structural failures; and (c) a description of the search and cleanup measures that would be implemented if loss of shellfish cultivation facility materials, equipment, and/or infrastructure occurs. VPD to prepare plan Growers/Producers to implement plan VPD and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 178 9250 31 DUDEK AUGUST 2018 Storage and disposal of supplies -3 Decommissioning Plan. A decommissioning plan for the timely removal of all shellfish, structures, anchoring devices, equipment, and materials associated with the shellfish cultivation facility and documentation completion of removal activities will be a requirement of each permit or sub-permit. Financial assurances to guarantee implementation of the plan will be in place and reviewed periodically. Grower/Producer to prepare and implement approved plan VPD to approve plan U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Navigation - 1 Update NOAA Charts. VPD to submit to the NOAA Office of Coast Survey: (a) the geographical coordinates of the facility boundaries obtained using a different geographic position unit or comparable navigational equipment; (b) asbuilt plans of the facility and associated buoys and anchors; (c) each grower/producer’s point of contact and telephone number; and (d) any other information required by the NOAA Office of Coast Survey to accurately portray the location of the shellfish cultivation facility on navigational charts. VPD NOAA Navigation - 2 Notice to Mariners. No less than 15-days prior to the start of in-water activities associated with the installation phase of the project, VPD shall submit to (a) the U.S. Coast Guard (for publication in a Notice to Mariners); and (b) the harbormasters (for posting in their offices of public noticeboards), notices containing the anticipated start date of installation, the anticipated installation schedule, and the coordinates of the installation sites. During installation, VPD shall also make radio broadcast announcements to the local fishers’ emergency radio frequency that provide the current installation location and a phone number that can be called for additional information. VPD U.S. Coast Guard Monitoring Plans Conditions within the project area will be monitored throughout the proposed project’s implementation to ensure compliance with all permit requirements and to evaluate all effects, including beneficial effects, of the growing areas. Monitoring will be conducted according to a robust monitoring programs designed to evaluate the proposed project’s potential effects on the following factors:  The seafloor and benthic environment beneath and in the vicinity of the facilities, including biological, physical, and chemical conditions  Wildlife interactions including marine mammals, sea turtles, fish, and seabirds  Marine debris, including lost and broken gear As noted in Table 2, a sediment quality monitoring plan, aquaculture gear monitoring and escapement plan, and a decommissioning plan will be developed in conjunction with the permit 179 9250 32 DUDEK AUGUST 2018 review process. These plans will be developed through iterative review with the appropriate regulatory agencies. 180 9250 33 DUDEK AUGUST 2018 Figures Figure 1- Project Location Figure 2- Detailed Plan for Shellfish Longlines Figure 3- CASS Report Alternative 1 Figure 4- CASS Report Alternative 2 Figure 5- CASS Report Alternative 1 Overlaid with SeaSketch Alternative 8 Figure 6- Simulated View of Parcel Array at the Surface: 100-Acre Plot Figure 7- Simulated View of Parcel Array at the Surface Figure 8- Simulated View of the Parcel Array Underwater Figure 9- Simulated View of Parcel Array Underwater with Anchor Line Figure 10- Parcel Array Overview Figure 11- Parcel Array Overview Backbone Details Attachments Biological Assessment Essential Fish Habitat Assessment NOAA CASS Study References Dudek. 2017a. Draft Initial Study Checklist for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project. Prepared by Dudek. Prepared for Ventura Port District. September Dudek. 2017b. Draft Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Environmental Impact Report. Prepared by Dudek. Prepared for Ventura Port District. May. Dudek. 2017c. Ventura Shellfish Enterprise: Strategic Permitting Initiative to Substantially Increase Shellfish farming in Southern California. 2017 NOAA Sea Grant Aquaculture Extension and Technology Transfer. Task 1 Deliverable: Strategic Permitting Plan. Prepared by Dudek. May 26. 181 9250 34 DUDEK AUGUST 2018 Dudek. 2018a. Biological Assessment Report for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise. Prepared by Dudek. Prepared for Ventura Port District. Dudek. 2018b. Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Report for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise. Prepared by Dudek. Prepared for Ventura Port District Gentry R.R., H.E. Froehlich, D. Grimm, P. Kareiva, M. Parke, M. Rust, S.D. Gaines, and B.S. Halpern. 2017. “Mapping the Global Potential for Marine Aquaculture.” Nature Ecology & Evolution. 1:1317-1324. https://doni.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0257-9 NOAA. 2011. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Marine Aquaculture Policy. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/noaa-aquaculture-policies NOAA. 2013. National Shellfish Initiative. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/content/nationalshellfish- initiative NOAA. 2018. “Coastal Aquaculture Siting and Sustainability Technical Report, Ventura Shellfish Enterprise: Aquaculture Siting Analysis Results.” Prepared by Coastal Aquaculture Siting and Sustainability Program, within the Marine Spatial Ecology Division of the National Centers for Coastal and Ocean Science, National Ocean Service, NOAA. September 6. 182 Ventura Harbor Carpinteria Oxnard Ventura Ojai 101 101 33 224 232 1 150 126 1 192 33 150 34.254869, -119.399051 34.240018, -119.373207 34.232724, -119.41749 34.217877, -119.391651 Project Location Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project SOURCE: NAIP 2016 Date: 8/30/2018 - Last saved by: kzecher - Path: Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPDOC\Permit Application\Figure 1_Project Location.mxd Project Sites (20 100-Acre Sites) Three Nautical Mile Line FIGURE 1 V E N T U R A COU N T Y Huntington Beach Santa Ana Anaheim Brea Long Beach Compton Santa Fe Springs Whittier Culver City Malibu Industry El Monte Covina Calabasas Arcadia Pasadena Glendale San Fernando Santa Clarita Palmdale Lancaster Palos Verdes Estates Burbank Hermosa Beach Avalon Newport Beach Carpinteria Goleta Santa Barbara Port Hueneme Oxnard Ventura Moorpark Fillmore Ojai Solvang Buellton Simi Valley Los Angeles S a n t a K e r n C o u n t y B a r b a r a C o u n t y L o s A n g e l e s C o u n t y Project Site 0 6,250 12,500 Feet 183 Anchor line to next longline >185 m
4 m screw anchors
spaced 5 m apart
Two 24” submerged corner
buoys or equivalent with >
200 L buoyancy
Center Pickup Line and 16” buoy (or larger)
2 to 4 m
>10 m
~145 m of 32 cm polysteel
Mussel growing socks suspended every 1 m
3 – 5 m
15 L buoy (n= 100)
General plan for submerged longlines
16” surface corner buoy
(or larger “pencil” buoy)
1. Anchor lines should have 3:1 scope from anchor to submerged corner buoy
2. Submerged buoyancy keeps lines tight despite surface waves and storms
Detailed Plan for Shellfish Longlines
Biological Assessment for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
FIGURE 2 S :
ECRUO
PAth – Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPS\Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project Initial Study
184
Figure 1. Corner points associated with Alternative #1 for the proposed VSE project. Note that the labelled points correspond with the latitude
and longitude coordinates described in Table 1. CASS Report Alternative 1
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
FIGURE 3 SOURCE: NOAA 2018
Z:\Projects\j925000\DATA\DATA_WKG\IMG
185
Figure 2. Corner points associated with Alternative #2 for the proposed VSE project. Note that the labelled points correspond with the latitude
and longitude coordinates described in Table 2. CASS Report Alternative 2
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
FIGURE 4 SOURCE: NOAA 2018
Z:\Projects\j925000\DATA\DATA_WKG\IMG
186
Ventura
Harbor
Oxnard
Ventura
101
33
1
CASS Report Alternative 1 Overlaid with SeaSketch Alternative 8
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
SOURCE: NAIP 2016
Date: 8/30/2018 – Last saved by: kzecher – Path: Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPDOC\Permit Application\Figure 5_CASS Report Alternative 1 Overlaid with SeaSketch Alternative 8.mxd
Project Site Alternatives
(20 100-Acre Sites)
CASS Report Alternative 1
SeaSketch Alternative 8
Three Nautical Mile Line
FIGURE 5
0 3,600 7,200
Feet 187
FIGURE 6
Simulated View of Parcel Array at the Surface: 100 Acre Plot
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
SOURCE:
PAth – Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPS\Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project Initial Study
188
FIGURE 7
Simulated View of Parcel Array at the Surface
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
Date: 1/11/2018 – Last asaved by jsteffey Path: Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPDOC\Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project\Figure2_ParcelArrayOverview.ai
Surface Corner Buoy
189
FIGURE 8
Simulated View of Parcel Array Underwater
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
Date: 1/11/2018 – Last asaved by jsteffey Path: Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPDOC\Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project\Figure2_ParcelArrayOverview.ai
Surface Corner Buoy
190
FIGURE 9
Simulated View of Parcel Array Underwater with Anchor Line
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
SOURCE:
PAth – Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPS\Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project Initial Study
191
125′ SETBACK
1900′
50′ SETBACK
2300′
125′ SETBACK
150′ SPACING BETWEEN ROWS
50′ SETBACK
100′ WATER DEPTH
1
1
PARCEL ARRAY
SCALE: 1:10000
BEND
A A
B B
4
4
3
3
UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED:
TWO PLACE DECIMAL
THREE PLACE DECIMAL
OVERVIEW
DO NOT SCALE DRAWING
Parcel_v2
SHEET 1 OF 2
8/28/18
2
DRAWN OK
DB
ENG APPR.
CHECKED
MFG APPR.
PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL
2
DWG. NO. REV BSIZE
TITLE:
NAME DATE VENTRURA SHELLFISH COMPANY
COMMENTS:
Q.A.
DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET
TOLERANCES: +-0.5FT
FRACTIONAL
ANGULAR: MACH
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF
VENTURA SHELLFISH COMPANY. ANY
REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE
WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS
PROHIBITED. Parcel Array Overview
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
FIGURE 10 SOURCE: VSE 2018
Z:\Projects\j925000\DATA\DATA_WKG\IMG
192
LOOPING DROP LINES
WITH SUBMERGED BUOYANCY FLOATS
575′
PARCEL EDGE
2300′
50′
TO
SETBACK
50′ 50′
SETBACK
TO
PARCEL EDGE
250′
100
2.5:1 SCOPE
250′
20
TITLE:
BACKBONE DETAILS
Parcel_v2
SHEET 2 OF 2
UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED:
DWG. NO. REV
B
SIZE
DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET
HELICAL SCREW ANCHORS
PENCIL BUOYS W
RADAR REFLECTOS
CORNER BUOYS LIGHTED
Backbone Details
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
FIGURE 11 SOURCE: VSE 2018
Z:\Projects\j925000\DATA\DATA_WKG\IMG
193
CONFIDENTIAL
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH
ENTERPRISE PROJECT
PREPARED FOR:
VENTURA PORT DISTRICT
1603 Anchors Way
Ventura, California 93001
Contact: Brian Pendleton
PREPARED BY:
DUDEK
621 Chapala Street
Santa Barbara, California 93101
Contact: John H. Davis IV, Senior Coastal Ecologist
jdavis@dudek.com
(805) 252-7996
SEPTEMBER 2018
194
PRINTED ON 30% POST -CONSUMER RECYCLED MATERIAL.
195
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 i
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1 Project Location ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 3
2.2 Project Actions ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4
2.2.1 Project Construction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4
2.2.2 Project Operation …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5
2.2.3 Project Decomissioning ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 7
2.3 Project Action Area ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7
3.0 REGULATORY SETTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.1 Federal Endangered Species Act (1973) …………………………………………………………………………………………… 27
3.2 Marine Mammal Protection Act (1972) ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 27
3.3 Magnuson‐Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) ……………… 28
4.0 FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.1 Federally Protected Species………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 29
4.2 Status of the Species and their Habitat in the Action Area ………………………………………………………………. 29
4.2.1 Federally-Listed Species ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 30
4.2.2 Other Non-Listed Species Protected Under the MMPA …………………………………………………….. 33
4.3 Critical Habitat …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 36
5.0 EFFECTS OF THE ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.1 Effects of the Project Actions ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 37
5.1.1 Federally-Listed Species ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 44
5.1.2 Other Non-Listed Species Protected Under the MMPA …………………………………………………….. 47
5.2 Mitigation Measures …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 50
5.3 Cumulative Effects …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 55
5.4 Compensatory Mitigation …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 55
6.0 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
7.0 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
APPENDICES
A Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
B Federally Protected Species Potential to Occur
C Phytoplankton Population Impact Calculations
196
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
PAGE
9250 i i
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
FIGURES
1 Project Location ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9
2 Detailed Plan for Shellfish Longlines …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 11
3A Parcel Array Overview …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13
3B Backbone Details …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 15
4 Simulated View of Parcel Array at the Surface: 100 Acre Plot ………………………………………………………………………. 17
5 Simulated View of Parcel Array at the Surface ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 19
6 Simulated View of Parcel Array Underwater …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 21
7 Simulated View of Parcel Array Underwater with Anchor Line ……………………………………………………………………. 23
8 Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Action Area ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 25
TABLES
1 NOAA Fisheries Acoustic Thresholds ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 41
2 Summary of Effects Determinations …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 57
197
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 1
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Biological Assessment (BA) has been prepared for the Ventura Port District (VPD, project applicant) to evaluate
the effects of the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise (VSE) Project (project) on federally protected species along with
federally designated critical habitat. The project, supported in part through the NOAA 2015 Sea Grant Aquaculture
Extension and Technology Transfer to California Sea Grant (NOAA Sea Grant Program), will establish a commercial
offshore bivalve aquaculture operation. VPD is applying for a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) authorization
under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. The Corps will act as the federal lead agency on the project. The BA
will determine whether any federally protected species or habitats are likely to be adversely affected by the project.
Pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and its implementing regulations (50 CFR § 402.01 et
seq.), this BA has been prepared to support consultation between the Corps, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS). Section 7 of the ESA insures that through consultation federal actions are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any federally protected species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat. This BA is also intended to support of the National Environmental Quality Act (NEPA) planning process as
well as the resource agency permitting of the project. An Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) assessment has also been
prepared, which analyzes how the project would affect EFH for species regulated under a Fisheries Management Plan,
pursuant to the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which requires
consultation with NMFS on all actions or proposed actions that may adversely affect EFH (Appendix A).
198
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 2
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
199
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 3
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ACTION
The project will establish a commercial offshore bivalve aquaculture operation based from the Ventura Harbor in
Ventura, California, focused on the cultivation of Mediterranean mussels (Mytilus galloprovincialis).
2.1 Project Location
The project will consist of twenty 100-acre plots (total of 2,000 acres) located in open federal waters of the Santa
Barbara Channel (Channel) in the Southern California Bight (SCB), northwest of Ventura Harbor (Figure 1), with
approximate depths ranging from 78 to 114 feet below sea level (13 – 19 fathoms) and an average depth of 98 feet.
The plots are 3.53 miles from the shore. Each of the 20 plots are 2,299.5 feet by 1,899.5 feet, for an average plot size
of 100.27 acres. Each plot will contain up to 24 lines (12 end-to-end pairs), with each line consisting of 575 feet of
backbone length and 250 feet of horizontal scope on each end. There will be a 50 foot setback on each end of the
pairs (for a total of 100 feet of spacing between lines of adjacent parcels) and 50 foot spacing between the two center
pins. Parallel lines will be spaced 150 feet apart, with a 125 foot setback at each of the long sides (for a total of 250
feet of spacing between lines of adjacent parcels). The closest distance to the 3-mile nautical line is 2,900 feet from the
plots, with an average closest distance of over 3,000 feet. The closest distance to the City of Ventura limit is 4.5 miles.
Ventura harbor is 4.1 miles from the closest plot (8 miles in distance to the most distant plot). The lease sites are
located on sandy bottom habitat outside of any rocky reef habitat, as evaluated in Gentry et al. 2017 and illustrated by
NOAA United States West Coast nautical charts (NOAA 2017a).
The project site is characterized by a gradually sloping sandy/soft bottom. The SCB is located along the curved coastline of
Southern California from Point Conception south to Cape Colnett in Baja California and includes the Channel Islands and
the Pacific Ocean. The habitats and biological communities of the SCB are influenced by dynamic relationships among
climate, ecology, and oceanography (e.g., currents) (Leet et al. 2001). The SCB provides essential nutrients and marine
habitats for a range of species and organisms. Submarine canyons, ridges, basins, and seamounts provide unique deep water
habitats within the region. The basins provide habitats for a significant number of mid-water and benthic deep-sea fish near
the Channel Islands, whereas nearshore areas provide habitats for kelp and seagrass communities. Nearshore geology
includes a variety of bottom types, including soft sediments and rocky bottoms. Hard-substrates environments, such as the
rocky intertidal, shallow subtidal reefs, and deep rock reefs, are a key component of the high productivity found near the
project area. Due to linkages among ecosystems, the impacts of ecosystem dynamics contained within the project area
extend to interactions with species in the greater Eastern Pacific Ocean. The Santa Barbara Channel is located within the
SCB and extends from Point Conception to Point Mugu.
The waters of the Santa Barbara Channel form one of the most biologically productive ecosystems found on Earth. Unlike
most of coastal California, which faces due west and the open ocean, the coastal waters of the Santa Barbara Channel are on
a south-facing coast and caught between two land masses, the South Coast and the Northern Channel Islands. The project
site is 9.1 miles from the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary, a Federal Marine Protected Area, and 13.5 miles from
the Channel Islands National Park boundary. The western section of the Santa Barbara Channel is a meeting place of the
cool Northern California Current and warm Southern California Countercurrent. This type of ecosystem is called a
200
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 4
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
“transition zone.” Transition zones are known to promote large concentrations of both biomass and species diversity, as
they are the confluence between two or more ecologically distinct systems. In addition, upwelling provides unusually high
concentrations of nutrients, especially macrozooplankton, which are one of the primary driving forces behind the Santa
Barbara Channel’s biological productivity and diversity. Wind patterns around Point Conception and in the Santa Barbara
Channel create frequent seasonal upwelling, which force deep nutrient-laden ocean waters to rise up the water column into
the biologically rich euphotic zone (Santa Barbara Channelkeeper 2017). Data from last year, for the closest oceanographic
buoy to the project site (Station 46217 Anacapa Passage), shows the following average wave action conditions for the
project area: an average wave height of 1.04 feet, with a dominant wave period of 10.1 seconds, and an average wave period
of 6.49 seconds, with surface currents generally moving in a SW (249 degrees) direction and an average temperature of 16
°C (National Data Buoy Center 2017). The Ventura area is known to be an area of high swell height, particularly in the
winter (Guza and O’Reilly 2001). Wave action is focused by the large fan of sediment deposited on the shelf from the
Ventura and Santa Clara rivers. When deep water swell comes in from a WSW direction, these bathymetric features can
focus the wave energy northward into the Ventura area. Wave action is slightly less in the summer months when the
Channel Islands block southward swells (Guza and O’Reilly 2001).
2.2 Project Act ions
2.2.1 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
The proposed plots will be used for growing Mediterranean mussels via submerged longlines (Figures 2 and 3).
Installation of anchors, longlines, and other facilities will be performed by permitted shellfish companies, in compliance
with all permit requirements. Submerged longlines consist of a horizontal structural header line, or “backbone,” that is
attached to the seafloor by sand screw anchors at each end and is marked and supported by a series of buoys along the
central horizontal section. Sand screw anchors have been shown to exhibit superior holding power as compared to other
anchoring systems and are removable. Sand screw anchors will be installed by a hydraulic drill with a drill head that operates
from a rig lowered to the ocean floor. The sand screw anchors would be screwed into the sandy bottom ocean floor
approximately 10 to 20 feet (3 to 6 meters) deep. Each 100-acre plot will contain up to 48 anchors for a total of 960 anchors
at full project build out.
Buoys marking the corners of each parcel will identify the cultivation area for navigational safety and will comply with
all regulations for height, illumination, and visibility, including radar reflection. As shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3,
surface buoys for each longline would consist of two 16 inch surface corner buoys (one corner buoy supporting and
marking either end of the backbone), as well as one 16 inch buoy supporting and marking the center pickup line, for a
total of three surface buoys per longline. Simulated views of parcel arrays at the surface and underwater are provided
in Figures 4 through 7. All surface buoys would be uniquely colored for each operator and marked with the
grower/producer name and phone number. Buoys attached to the central horizontal portion of the backbone line
support the line, provide a means of lifting the backbone line to access the cultivation ropes, and determine the depth
of the submerged backbone, which will vary seasonally from 15 to 45 feet below the surface. Additionally, a
combination of surface and submerged buoys attached to the backbone line will be used during the mussel production
201
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 5
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
cycle to maintain tension on the structural backbone line as the weight of the mussel crop increases. These will consist
of 24-inch (or equivalent, with greater than 200 L buoyancy) buoys attached at required intervals along the surface and
connecting to the backbone line, in combination with smaller submerged buoys affixed directly to the backbone line.
The combination of surface and submerged buoyancy is designed to create a tensioned but flexible structure that is
capable of responding dynamically to surface waves and storms.
The longlines that will be utilized are thick (1-inch diameter), tensioned (to approximately 800 pounds) rope that is
not conducive to wrapping around or entangling protected species. The longline configuration produces a fairly rigid
tensioned structure from which the cultivation ropes, or “fuzzy ropes” are attached. Fuzzy ropes are characterized by
extra filaments that provide settlement substrate for mussels to attach. Fuzzy ropes may be attached to and suspended
from the backbone rope either as individual lengths or as a continuous looping single length that drapes up and down
over the backbone. The length of each section or loop of fuzzy rope would be approximately 20 feet but would
depend on the lifting capacity of the servicing vessel. The length of the central horizontal section of backbone line
would be 575 feet, which would support approximately 8,000 feet of fuzzy cultivation line.
The shape of each of the 100-acre cultivation parcels would be a function of the geometry of the submerged
backbone line and anchoring. Each horizontal section of the longline will be approximately 575 feet and will require
an anchor scope of approximately 2.5 times depth. Therefore, in 100 feet of water depth, scope from the horizontal
section of backbone to the helical screw anchor will require 250 feet on each end of the line, making a total length of
1,075 feet from anchor screw to anchor screw. A 100-acre parcel with rectangular dimensions of 1,899.5 feet by
2,299.5 feet will therefore accommodate up to 24 individual longlines. The submerged longline growing gear
configuration would be specifically engineered for open ocean conditions with respect to size and strength of all lines,
anchoring, hardware, and buoyancy.
Construction in each individual growing plot will take place only after VPD approval of a sub-permits with the
individual grower/producer. While project development is dependent on market demand, VPD estimates that full
build out would occur within three to five years after project approval.
2.2.2 PROJECT OPERATION
The mussels will be grown and harvested by permitted growers/producers and landed at Ventura Harbor. Initial
plantings of juvenile seed mussels, commonly referred to as spat, will be purchased from onshore hatcheries certified
by the CDFW. At the hatcheries, mussels adhere directly to special textured ropes that promote mussel attachment
and growth. When the seed are firmly settled to ropes, the ropes are covered with cotton socking material to protect
them from shaking off the ropes during transport to the offshore growing site and deployment. The socks hold the
spat next to the rope until the mussels naturally attach with their byssal threads, after which the cotton material
naturally degrades. These ropes are then attached to the longlines and buoys, as described above.
The mussel grow-out ropes themselves are typically planted with seed 3-inches thick and may grow to be stiff with
byssus at diameters of 10-inches or more at harvest, thus making them very unlikely sources of entanglement. As an
additional precaution, grow ropes will be attached to the headrope with a low-breaking-strength twine (4-millimeter
202
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 6
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
(0.16-inch diameter), which will facilitate rapid detachment in the unlikely event of any interaction with the longline.
To further minimize entanglement potential, a 1,100 pound breakaway link will be installed between the surface buoys
and vertical lines, similar to strategies used to mitigate potential entanglement in trap fisheries in the northeastern
United States (NOAA 2008). Buoy lines between the surface and headrope are generally under tension partially
equivalent (0 to 10 kilograms (0 to 22 pounds)) to their full buoyancy (42 kilograms (93 pounds)).
Cultivated mussels grow by filtering naturally occurring phytoplankton from the ocean. Harvesting involves separating the
mussels from the ropes, followed by cleaning, sorting, and bagging. All of these activities will take place aboard the
harvesting vessel. Juvenile mussels will grow on lines until an intermediate size where the density of mussels on the fuzzy
rope becomes limiting. At this point, a servicing vessel will lift the backbone line in order to access the fuzzy rope stocked
with juvenile mussels and pull the fuzzy rope through vessel-based equipment designed to strip the mussels from the fuzzy
rope and then clean, separate, and grade the juvenile mussels by size. Juvenile mussels then will be restocked to clean fuzzy
rope at a reduced density for their second stage of grow out to market size. Maintenance and inspection of the longlines is
proposed to be carried out on a monthly basis, which consists of lifting the longlines out of the water and adding additional
buoys as necessary to account for increased mussel weight. Inspections of the anchor ropes, anchors, and connecting ropes
shall take place at a minimum of twice per month. Inspections shall include recordings by depth/fish finder or ROV
surveys of lines and/or monitoring performed by SCUBA divers.
When the mussels reach market size, which is expected to occur after about one year of total production time,
the submerged backbone lines again will be lifted in order to access the fuzzy cultivation ropes, and mussels
again will be stripped from the line, cleaned, and separated, and this time size-graded and bagged for landing at
the Ventura Harbor as market-ready product. The bagged mussels will be transported to Ventura Harbor for
offloading, sale, and distribution. All husbandry activities related to harvesting, grading, and restocking of
mussels to cultivation lines will occur onboard the servicing vessel using specialized equipment for that purpose.
Watercraft used for planting, inspections, and harvesting would be home ported at Ventura Harbor. On average,
between 20 to 40 boats would be traveling to the specific lease sites to conduct these activities on a three times per
week to daily basis. The maximum distance traveled would be between the harbor and the farthest potential lease area,
which could be up to approximately 8.7 miles. Once constructed, it is projected that each sub-permit site will generate
an estimated 150 trips per year to accomplish the tasks outlined above.
Landed product will comply with all testing and labeling regulations as part of the California Department of Public
Health (CDPH) Shellfish Sanitation plan and the National Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP) guidelines for shellfish
grown in federal waters. NOAA-Seafood Inspection Program (NOAA-SIP), in collaboration with the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), recently began the process of developing NSSP-compliant sanitation protocols for bivalve
shellfish cultivated in Federal waters.
Qualified researchers affiliated with universities (i.e., U.C. Santa Barbara – Bren School, or University of Southern
California, etc.), or qualified marine research institutes (i.e., Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Scripps Institution
of Oceanography, etc.) will have access to aquaculture plots to conduct research and monitoring approved by the
203
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 7
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
Ventura Port District; however, access may be limited in certain circumstances to respect grower/producer
proprietary data or technology or to accommodate a grower/producer’s operational and logistical needs in operating
the farm. The Ventura Port District will review and approve research projects in consultation with USACE, NMFS,
NOAA, and any affected grower/producers. Grower/producers will be fairly compensated for the use of their
vessels, equipment, and fair market value of any mussels produced or generated as part of approved research projects.
2.2.3 PROJECT DECOMISSIONING
The project will include a decommissioning plan when activities in that lease are terminated. The decommissioning plan for
the timely removal of all shellfish, structures, anchoring devices, equipment, and materials associated with the shellfish
cultivation facility and documentation of completion of removal activities will be a requirement of each permit or subpermit.
Financial assurances to guarantee implementation of the plan will be in place and reviewed periodically.
2.2.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Objectives of the proposed project are as follows:
1. To increase the supply of safe, sustainably produced, and locally grown shellfish while minimizing potential
negative environmental impacts;
2. To enhance and sustain Ventura Harbor as a major west coast fishing port and support the local economy;
3. To provide economies of scale, pre-approved sub-permit area, and technical support to include small local
producers who would not otherwise be able to participate in shellfish aquaculture;
4. To provide an entitlement and permitting template for aquaculture projects state-wide;
5. To enhance public knowledge and understanding of sustainable shellfish farming practices and promote
community collaboration in achieving VSE objectives;
6. To advance scientific knowledge and state of the art aquaculture practices through research and innovation.
2.3 Project Act ion Area
The Action Area for this project includes the project site (twenty 100-acre growing sites occupying a total project area
of 2,000 acres) and all areas within 100 feet of the Project Actions (Figure 8). This Action Area was defined based
upon several factors, including the project location and components, the potential noise impacts and disturbance areas
for project components, and the properties of underwater acoustics. It is anticipated that the potential noise impacts
from the initial installation of the sand screw anchors using a hydraulic drill will be minimal. Helical anchors for
mussel farms in open ocean habitats have been installed all over the world, including at Catalina Island. They are
drilled into the seabed using a hydraulic auger controlled at the surface. The drill is submersible and is lowered with
the anchor. Noise levels are very low in the water, with a 50 horsepower hydraulic power pack on the boat (Fielder
Marine Services, New Zealand, pers.comm.). Rotation speeds are very low, which minimizes entanglement of marine
species. The anchor installation disturbs less than 1 square meter of sea bed on installation and once installed no rope
204
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 8
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
or chain touches the sea floor which also minimizes seabed disturbance (Fielder Marine Services, New Zealand,
Pers.comm). Marine wildlife, especially cetaceans, are known to be sensitive to noise effects (NMFS 2007a). However,
construction noise levels will be well within acceptable thresholds for both marine mammals and fish (ICF Jones &
Stokes and Illingworth and Rodkin, Inc. 2009; NMFS 2007a). Due to the minimal noise level and area of disturbance
on the sea floor, we believe an action area of 100 feet is sufficient.
205
Ventura
Harbor
Carpinteria
Oxnard
Ventura
Ojai
101
101
33
224
232
1
150
126
1
192
33
150
Project Location
Biological Assessment for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
SOURCE: NAIP 2016
Date: 8/30/2018 – Last saved by: kzecher – Path: Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPDOC\Biological Assessment\Figure 1 Project Location.mxd
Project Sites (20 100-Acre Sites)
Three Nautical Mile Line
FIGURE 1
V E N T U R A
COU N T Y
Huntington Beach
Santa
Ana
Anaheim
Brea
Long Beach
Compton
Santa Fe
Springs Whittier
Culver
City
Malibu Industry
El Monte Covina
Calabasas
Arcadia
Pasadena
Glendale
San
Fernando
Santa
Clarita
Palmdale
Lancaster
Palos Verdes
Estates
Burbank
Hermosa Beach
Avalon
Newport
Beach
Carpinteria
Goleta
Santa
Barbara
Port Hueneme
Oxnard
Ventura Moorpark
Fillmore
Ojai
Solvang
Buellton
Simi
Valley
Los Angeles
S a n t a K e r n C o u n t y
B a r b a r a
C o u n t y
L o s A n g e l e s
C o u n t y
Project Site
0 6,250 12,500
Feet 206
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 10
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
207
Anchor
line to next
longline
>185 m
4 m screw anchors
spaced 5 m apart
Two 24” submerged corner
buoys or equivalent with >
200 L buoyancy
Center Pickup Line and 16” buoy (or larger)
2 to 4 m
>10 m
~145 m of 32 cm polysteel
Mussel growing socks suspended every 1 m
3 – 5 m
15 L buoy (n= 100)
General plan for submerged longlines
16” surface corner buoy
(or larger “pencil” buoy)
1. Anchor lines should have 3:1 scope from anchor to submerged corner buoy
2. Submerged buoyancy keeps lines tight despite surface waves and storms
Detailed Plan for Shellfish Longlines
Biological Assessment for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
FIGURE 2 S :
ECRUO
PAth – Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPS\Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project Initial Study
208
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 12
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
209
125′ SETBACK
1900′
50′ SETBACK
2300′
125′ SETBACK
150′ SPACING BETWEEN ROWS
50′ SETBACK
100′ WATER DEPTH
1
1
PARCEL ARRAY
SCALE: 1:10000
BEND
A A
B B
4
4
3
3
UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED:
TWO PLACE DECIMAL
THREE PLACE DECIMAL
OVERVIEW
DO NOT SCALE DRAWING
Parcel_v
SHEET 1 OF 2
8/28/18
2
DRAWN OK
DB
ENG APPR.
CHECKED
MFG APPR.
PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL
2
DWG. NO. REV BSIZE
TITLE:
NAME DATE VENTRURA SHELLFISH COMPANY
COMMENTS:
Q.A.
DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET
TOLERANCES: +-0.5FT
FRACTIONAL
ANGULAR: MACH
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF
VENTURA SHELLFISH COMPANY. ANY
REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE
WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS
PROHIBITED. Parcel Array Overview
Biological Assessment for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
FIGURE 3A SOURCE: VSE 2018
Z:\Projects\j925000\DATA\DATA_WKG\IMG
210
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 14
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
211
LOOPING DROP LINES
WITH SUBMERGED BUOYANCY FLOATS
575′
PARCEL EDGE
2300′
50′
TO
SETBACK
50′ 50′
SETBACK
TO
PARCEL EDGE
250′
100
2.5:1 SCOPE
250′
20
TITLE:
BACKBONE DETAILS
Parcel_v2
SHEET 2 OF 2
UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED:
DWG. NO. REV
B
SIZE
DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET
HELICAL SCREW ANCHORS
PENCIL BUOYS W
RADAR REFLECTOS
CORNER BUOYS LIGHTED
FIGURE 3B
Backbone Details
Biological Assessment for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
SOURCE: VSE 2018
Z:\Projects\j925000\DATA\DATA_WKG\IMG
212
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 16
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
213
FIGURE 4
Simulated View of Parcel Array at the Surface: 100 Acre Plot
Biological Assessment for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
SOURCE:
PAth – Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPS\Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project Initial Study
214
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 18
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
215
FIGURE 5
Simulated View of Parcel Array at the Surface
Biological Assessment for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
Date: 1/11/2018 – Last asaved by jsteffey Path: Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPDOC\Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project\Figure2_ParcelArrayOverview.ai
Surface Corner Buoy
216
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 20
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
217
FIGURE 6
Simulated View of Parcel Array Underwater
Biological Assessment for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
Date: 1/11/2018 – Last asaved by jsteffey Path: Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPDOC\Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project\Figure2_ParcelArrayOverview.ai
Surface Corner Buoy
218
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 22
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
219
FIGURE 7
Simulated View of Parcel Array Underwater with Anchor Line
Biological Assessment for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
SOURCE:
PAth – Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPS\Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project Initial Study
220
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 24
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
221
Port Hueneme
Oxnard
Ventura
101
126
33
1
-200
-500
0
-50
-150
-200
-300
-5 00
-600
-100
-250
-400
-350
-450
-550
Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Action Area
Biological Assessment for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project
SOURCE: ESRI ArcGIS Online: World Ocean Base
Date: 8/24/2018 – Last saved by: kzecher – Path: Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPDOC\Biological Assessment\Figure 9_Enterprise Action Area.mxd
Project Sites (20 100-Acre Sites)
Action Area (100-Foot Buffer)
Three Nautical Mile Line
Bathymetry (50-Foot Contour Interval)
FIGURE 8
0 1 2
Miles 222
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 26
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
223
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 27
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
3.0 REGULATORY SETTING
3.1 Federal Endangered Species Act (1973)
The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), as amended, is administered by the
USFWS and NMFS. This legislation is intended to provide a means to conserve the ecosystems upon which
endangered and threatened species depend and provide programs for the conservation of those species, thus
preventing extinction of plants and wildlife. The ESA defines an endangered species as “any species that is in danger
of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” A threatened species is defined as “any species that
is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range.” Under the provisions of Section 9(a)(1)(B) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), it is unlawful to “take” any
listed species. Take is defined in Section 3(19) of the ESA as, “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,
capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” A Final Rule published in the Federal Register on
November 8, 1999 (64 FR 60727–60731), further defines “harm” as any act that kills or injures fish or wildlife, and
emphasizes that such acts may include significant habitat modification or degradation that significantly impairs
essential behavioral patterns (e.g., nesting or reproduction) of fish or wildlife. Further, the USFWS, through
regulation, has interpreted the terms “harm” and “harass” to include certain types of habitat modification that result
in injury to or death of species, which therefore are defined as forms of take. These interpretations, however, are
generally considered and applied on a case-by-case basis and often vary from species to species.
In a case where a property owner seeks permission from a federal agency for an action that could affect a federally
listed plant or wildlife species, the property owner and agency are required to consult with USFWS. Take prohibitions
in Section 9 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) do not expressly encompass all plants. Property owners may take
listed plant species without violating the take prohibition if:
 The proposed development is private and does not require federal authorization or permit.
 There are no special federal regulations under Section 4(d) that prohibit take of the plant species.
 There are no state laws prohibiting take of the plant species.
Section 9(a)(2) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) addresses the protections afforded to listed plants. In addition, the
ESA provides protection to invertebrate species by listing them as threatened or endangered.
3.2 Marine Mammal Protection Act (1972)
The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA), as amended, establishes a federal responsibility for the protection
and conservation of marine mammal species by prohibiting the “take” of any marine mammal. The MMPA defines “take”
as the act of hunting, killing, capture, and/or harassment of any marine mammal, or the attempt at such. The MMPA also
imposes a moratorium on the import, export, or sale of any marine mammals, parts, or products within the U.S. The
USFWS and NMFS are jointly responsible for implementation of the MMPA; USFWS is responsible for the protection of
sea otters, and NMFS is responsible for protecting pinnipeds (seals and sea lions) and cetaceans (whales and dolphins).
224
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 28
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
Under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, an incidental harassment permit may be issued for activities other than
commercial fishing that may impact small numbers of marine mammals. An incidental harassment permit covers
activities that extend for periods of not more than 1 year, and that will have a negligible impact on the impacted
species. Amendments to the MMPA in 1994 statutorily defined two levels of harassment. Level A harassment is
defined as any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance that has the potential to injure a marine mammal in the wild.
Level B harassment is defined as harassment having potential to disturb marine mammals by causing disruption of
behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering.
3.3 Magnuson‐Stevens Fishery Conservat ion and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act)
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. Sections 1801−1884) of 1976, as
amended in 1996 and reauthorized in 2007, is intended to protect fisheries resources and fishing activities within 200
miles of shore. The amended law, also known as the Sustainable Fisheries Act (Public Law 104-297), requires all
federal agencies to consult with the Secretary of Commerce on proposed projects authorized, funded, or undertaken
by that agency that may adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). The main purpose of the EFH provisions is to
avoid loss of fisheries due to disturbance and degradation of the fisheries habitat. Managed fisheries found in the
project vicinity include, but are not limited to California halibut, ridgeback prawn, sea cucumber trawl, and rock crab
trawl fisheries, and set gill net for California halibut and white sea bass
Essential Fish Habitat is addressed in the Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Report for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise.
225
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 29
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
4.0 FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES AND
CRITICAL HABITAT
4.1 Federally Protected Species
The following resources were used to determine which federally listed, proposed, or federally recognized (i.e., NMFS
Species of Concern) species had a potential to occur in the Action Area: NOAA California Species List Tools (NOAA
2018a), NOAA Find a Species Website (NMFS 2018a, filtered for West Coast Region), Channel Islands Bird Checklist
(Collins 2011), USFWS Information for Planning and Consulting (USFWS 2018a), USFWS Environmental Conservation
Online System (USFWS 2018b), the NOAA Section 6 Program Website (NOAA 2018b), NMFS Species of Concern
(NMFS 2018), Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI 2010), and California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB; CDFW
2018). The NOAA Species List Tools (NOAA 2018a) and CNDDB (CDFW 2018) were queried for the 7.5-minute U.S.
Geological Survey quadrangle that bordered the Pacific Ocean from the Ventura County line south to Port Hueneme,
which included Pitas Point, White Ledge Peak, Ventura, Oxnard, and Oxnard OE W.
Information on species distribution, behavior, and habitat preferences was obtained from sources such as NOAA
Find a Species Website (NMFS 2018a), Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Reports (e.g., Allen and Angliss. 2014),
Marine Mammals of the World: A Comprehensive Guide to Their Identification (Jefferson et al. 2008), Point Blue
Conservation Science Whale Alert Map (PBCS 2018), Large Cetacean Analysis for the Santa Barbara Channel Region
(Cascadia 2011), Marine Mammal Commission (MMC 2007, 2018), Marine Mammal Haulouts and Rookeries (CDFW
2009), California Bird Records Committee (CBRC 2018), USFWS Recovery Plans, USFWS 5-Year Reviews and/or
Federal Registers. Additional resources are reported within the species account information.
The database searches returned a total of 68 species. Of these species, 8 cetaceans, 1 mustelid, 2 pinnipeds, 3 birds, 5
sea turtles, 2 sharks, 8 fish, and 2 invertebrates have a federal status of Endangered or Threatened. Other species that
are covered only under the MMPA (no other federal designation) include 21 cetaceans and 4 pinnipeds. Species that
are only covered under NMFS Species of Special Concern include 1 shark, 8 fish and 3 invertebrates. Although
NMFS Species of Concern designation is not protected under the ESA, this BA includes these species for a complete
analysis of species with a recognition from a federal agency.
Based on Dudek’s habitat suitability analysis, 12 species have a moderate to high potential to occur in the Action Area.
Appendix B provides Dudek’s habitat suitability analysis and an assessment of the species potential to occur in the
Action Area, including species not expected to occur or a low potential to occur. Section 4.2, below, provides species
descriptions and assessments for those species with a moderate to high potential to occur.
4.2 Status of the Species and their Habitat in the Action Are a
This section describes the status, basic life history, and potential for occurrence for federally-listed, proposed, or
federally recognized species that are identified as potentially affected by the Project Actions as described above.
226
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 30
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
4.2.1 Federally-Listed Species
4.2.1.1 Cetaceans
Gray Whale
Gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) of the Eastern North Pacific Stock were delisted from the ESA in 1994 (59 FR
31094-31095) but are protected by the MMPA. This species occurs in coastal waters along the west coast of North
America from Mexico to Alaska, and in eastern Siberia. Gray whales usually feed along the Bering, Chukchi, and
Beaufort seas during the summer, and winter along breeding and calving areas off the coast of Baja California. Calves
are born from January to February (NMFS 2018a). During their northward migration from Baja to Alaska, cow-calf
pairs stay particularly close to shore to avoid predation by orcas (Orcinus orca) (NMFS 2014). Gray whales are bottom
feeders that consume benthic amphipods (epibenthic fauna such as mysids, amphipods, polychaete tubeworms). Since
this species is a bottom feeder, gray whales are restricted to shallow continental shelf waters (Jefferson et al. 2008).
Juvenile gray whales often are found in Santa Barbara Harbor and along the coastline and have been observed in the
surf at Ventura Point (J. Davis IV, pers. obs). In Santa Barbara, gray whales are seen during their northward migration
within 3 nautical miles from shore, frequently travelling along the kelp line within close proximity to Coal Oil Point
where surveys take place for four months beginning in February (Gray Whales Count 2018). Data shows an upward
trend for gray whales over the last five years from 736 whales in 2013 to 1,052 whales in 2017. More whales means an
increase in the chance for interaction between ships and fishing gear. Ship strikes, entanglement, habitat degradation,
whale watching harassment, low-frequency noise disturbance and impacts from commercial/industrial development
are the largest threats to gray whales (NMFS 2018c). In California, ship strikes of gray whales are the most commonly
reported followed by fin, blue, humpback, and sperm whales (NOAA 2017b).
Potential for Occurrence. High potential to occur. This species is a frequent visitor to the Ventura coastline and the
Santa Barbara Channel and is commonly observed during migration, especially during the northward migration from
Baja to Alaska. Gray whales are often observed close to shore, and there have been many regular occurrences in the
Action Area on a yearly basis (PBCS 2018). The local whale watching boat, The Condor Express, has sighted 12 gray
whales within 5 miles of the project area since the start of the 2018 gray whale season in the Santa Barbara Channel
(Condor Express 2018, PBCS 2018). Whales are traveling northward at about 2.5 miles from shore as seen for
example on the local whale watching trip in Santa Barbara Channel on March 15, 2018 (Condor Express 2018). Gray
whale migration routes overlap with the Action Area and encompass the entire Santa Barbara Channel (Calambokidis
et al. 2015; NOAA 2012; NOAA 2018e).
Humpback Whale
The humpback whale (Megaptera noaengliaea) is a federally-listed endangered species and is protected by the MMPA.
Humpback whales occur throughout the North Pacific. North Pacific breeding areas fall broadly into three regions: 1)
western Pacific (Japan and Philippines); 2) central Pacific (Hawaiian Islands); and 3) eastern Pacific (Central America
and Mexico). Along the U.S. west coast, one stock is currently recognized that includes individuals that appear to be
part of two separate feeding groups, a California and Oregon feeding group and a northern Washington and southern
227
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 31
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
British Columbia feeding group. Humpbacks from both groups have been matched to breeding areas off Central
America, mainland Mexico, and Baja California. The population is estimated at approximately 1,918 animals for the
California/Oregon/Washington stock (NOAA 2015). Migrating individuals from the Central America Distinct
Population Segment (DPS) may migrate through the Action Area on their way to feeding grounds located off the
Pacific Northwest (NMFS 2018a). This species stays near the surface of the ocean when migrating and prefers shallow
waters when feeding and calving. This species can be seen close to shore when conditions allow for prey switching
from krill to small schooling fish, which inhabit nearshore areas. Humpbacks are commonly found feeding in the
Santa Barbara Channel during summer and fall, with some observations closer to shore in the Ventura Area. Typically,
humpback whales utilize predictable habitats offshore along the continental shelf break and slope where upwelling
occurs where they feed on krill (Yen et al. 2004). However, when conditions change and krill is not available,
humpback whales are known to prey switch and feed on small schooling fish, which occur in nearshore waters
(Fleming et al. 2016). In July 2017, a humpback found its way into Ventura Harbor (VC Star 2017). In addition, this
species is strongly associated with the 200 meter isobath (Cascadia 2011). Threats to humpback whales include ship
strikes, entanglement in fishing gear, whale watch harassment, and habitat impacts (NMFS 2018c). On the west coast
of the United States, ship strikes are an important cause of mortality for baleen whales, including humpback, blue, fin
and gray whales (Berman-Kowalewski et al. 2010).
Potential for Occurrence. Moderate to high potential to occur. Foraging and migration habitat is present in the
Action Area. Numerous observations of this species have been documented within the Santa Barbara Channel both
close to shore and near the Channel Islands (PBCS 2018). NOAA’s cetacean mapping tool indicates humpback whale
feeding habitat is close to the Action Area and is prevalent in the Santa Barbara Channel (NOAA 2018e). The project
area is situated near feeding Biologically Important Areas (BIAs) and encompasses moderate humpback whale
predicted densities for the Santa Barbara Channel (Calambokidis et al. 2015). Habitat-based density models show high
predicted density in the action area (Becker et al. 2016), and Becker et al. (2017) show a marked seasonal difference in
the area, with the highest predictions for this species in winter and spring for the Santa Barbara Channel.
Fin Whale
The fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus physalus) is a federally-listed endangered species and also is protected by the MMPA. Fin
whales occur worldwide, primarily in temperate to polar latitudes and are less common in the tropics. They are one of the
more commonly seen whales in the Northern Hemisphere. Its distribution is not well known, but it generally migrates
poleward to feed in the summer and to the subtropics to breed in the winter (Jefferson et al. 2008). The location of the
winter breeding grounds is unknown. Fin whales feed on krill, small schooling fish, copepods and squid (NOAA 2018a).
They are usually solitary or travel in pairs, but on feeding grounds there can be groups of up to 20, with 100 or more whales
loosely grouped (Carwardine et al. 1998). The California/Oregon/Washington stock has approximately 3,200 fin whales.
Fin whales prefer deeper, offshore waters and are a fast swimming species. This species is more commonly associated with
the 200 meter isobath, which is approximately 7.4 miles from the Action Area (Cascadia 2011). Threats to this species
include ship strikes, entanglement and ocean noise pollution (NOAA 2018a). On the west coast of the United States, ship
strikes are an important cause of mortality for baleen whales, including humpback, blue, fin and gray whales (Berman-
Kowalewski et al. 2010).
228
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 32
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
Potential for Occurrence. Moderate potential to occur. This species has been observed migrating and feeding through
the Santa Barbara Channel on many occasions with one occurrence (12 individuals) noted within 1 mile of the Action
Area in 2011 (PBCS 2018; Cascadia 2011). Resources (krill, small schooling fish and squid) are likely present in the
Action Area. The project area is situated within moderate fin whale predicted densities within the Santa Barbara
Channel (Becker et al. 2016; Calambokidis et al. 2015).
4.2.1.2 SEA TURTLES
Loggerhead Sea Turtle
The loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) is a federally-listed endangered species, and also is protected by the MMPA.
The North Pacific Ocean DPS occurs in tropical to temperate waters in the Pacific Ocean. Loggerhead sea turtles
migrate from nesting grounds in Japan and Australia to feeding grounds located along the west coast from central to
North America. Nesting occurs mainly on open beaches or along narrow bays having suitable sand, and often in
association with other species of sea turtles. They choose ocean beaches with high wave energy, narrow, steep slopes,
and coarse-grain sand for their nests. There are no known nesting locations that occur along the western seaboard of
the U.S. or Hawaii (NMFS and USFWS 1998a). The closest known loggerhead nesting beaches in the North Pacific
Ocean are located in Japan (NMFS and USFWS 2007). Baja California has the largest known aggregations of
loggerhead sea turtles. Migration occurs along nearshore coastal waters (neritic zone). Loggerhead sea turtles typically
feed on benthic invertebrates in hard bottom habitats, although fish and plants are occasionally consumed (NMFS
and USFWS 1998a). During ideal conditions (water temperature/break), this species is known to migrate along the
coast of California, including the Santa Barbara Channel. Sightings of this species along the U.S. west coast typically
are of juveniles measuring 20-60 centimeter shell length (NMFS and USFWS 1998a). Loggerhead sea turtles are
subject to several threats including loss of nesting habitat; disorientation of hatchlings by beachfront lighting;
degradation of foraging habitat; marine pollution and debris; ship strikes; disease; and incidental take from commercial
trawling, longline, and gill net fisheries (NMFS and USFWS 1998a).
Potential for Occurrence. High potential to migrate. Although there is no suitable feeding habitat (hard bottoms, benthic
invertebrates) within the Action Area, during migration they may enter the Action Area. This species has been observed at
San Clemente Island (NMFS and USFWS 2007). Loggerhead sea turtles are not expected to nest in the Action Area. No
beach habitat is present in the Action Area and the Santa Barbara Channel area is outside of nesting range.
Green Sea Turt le
The green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) is a federally-listed threatened species, and also is protected by the MMPA. The
Eastern Pacific DPS ranges from Baja California to southern Alaska. However, the green sea turtle is more common
from San Diego southward. This species forages in the open ocean when migrating as well as shallow waters of lagoons,
bays, estuaries, mangroves, eelgrass, and seaweed beds. They are herbivorous and feed primarily on seagrasses and algae.
Green sea turtles are generally found in shallow waters except when migrating. It is a regular visitor in the waters off the
southwest coast of the United States. Residents occur in the San Gabriel River, Long Beach (NMFS and USFWS 1998b).
The closest known nesting occurrences are in Mexico (NMFS and USFWS 1998b). This species requires open beaches
229
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 33
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
with a sloping platform and minimal disturbance for nesting. Green sea turtles have strong nesting site fidelity and often
make long distance migrations between feeding grounds and nesting beaches. Threats to the green sea turtle include
commercial harvesting, loss of nesting habitat; disorientation of hatchlings by beachfront lighting; nest predation by
native and non-native predators; degradation of foraging habitat; marine pollution and debris; ship strikes; and incidental
take from commercial fishing operations (NMFS and USFWS 1998b).
Potential for Occurrence. High potential to occur. They have been captured at Sterns Wharf in Santa Barbara
harbor and at the Channel Islands. This species may migrate and/or forage in the Action Area. Green sea turtles are
not expected to nest in the Action Area.
4.2.2 OTHER NON-LISTED SPECIES PROTECTED UNDER THE MMPA
4.2.2.1 Cetaceans
Common Minke Whale
The common minke whale (Balarnoptera acutorostrata) is protected by the MMPA. Minke whales are found throughout
the world in polar, temperate, and tropical waters in both coastal and offshore habitats (NMFS 2018a). They are the
smallest baleen whale in North American waters. It migrates seasonally and travels great distances. Common minke
whales are the smallest baleen whale in North American waters. Some individual minke whales are residents in
California waters. They are often solitary but sometimes travel in groups of 2-3 individuals (NMFS 2018a). This
species feeds on copepods, krill, and small schooling fish. Minke whales are a normally cryptic species but are
sometimes curious and will approach vessels (especially stationary vessels). Minke whales are subject to the following
threats including entanglement (gill nets, seine nets, herring weirs, lobster traps, driftnets, longlines, and trawls),
habitat disturbance, human interactions, noise pollution, and ship strikes (NMFS 2018a).
Potential for Occurrence. Moderate potential to occur. Foraging and migration habitat is present in the Action Area.
Minke whales feed on euphausiids, copepods and small schooling fish, which are present in the Channel. In addition,
this species has been recorded since 1988 in the Santa Barbara Channel and within 1 mile of the Action Area,
although this species is usually in slightly deeper waters (PBCS 2018). Stock reports for the
California/Oregon/Washington Stock show minke whales in close proximity to the northern Channel Islands, within
the Santa Barbara Channel (NMFS 2016c).
Common Bottlenose Dolphin
The common bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) is protected by the MMPA. Bottlenose dolphins have a worldwide
distribution ranging from 45°N to 45°S latitude and are found in temperate and tropical waters. Coastal populations
often migrate into bays, estuaries, and river mouths. Offshore populations inhabit pelagic waters along the continental
shelf. The common bottlenose dolphin, as its name suggests, is a common coastal species, and a generalist feeder
(squid, fish and crustaceans) (Jefferson et al. 2008). Common bottlenose dolphins are comprised of two subpopulations:
coastal bottlenose dolphins and offshore bottlenose dolphins. Coastal bottlenose dolphins are known to
230
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 34
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
regularly occur within 1 kilometer of shore (Carretta et al. 1998). In southern California, they are found within 500 m
of the shoreline 99% of the time and within 250 m 90% of the time (NMFS 2017g). On the other hand, offshore
bottlenose dolphins inhabit areas at distances greater than a few kilometers from the mainland (NMFS 2011a). They
may travel alone or in groups and commonly work together to herd prey. They are active at the surface and will
approach ships and even other whales to bow ride as an energy efficient mode of transportation (NMFS 2018a). They
interact with fisheries and are often seen following shrimp trawlers (Jefferson et al. 2008). Common bottlenose
dolphins are subject to the following threats including entanglement (gill nets, driftnets, longlines, and trawls), habitat
degradation, noise pollution, pollution from oil spills and chemicals, and ship strikes.
Potential for Occurrence. High potential to occur; specifically for offshore bottlenose dolphin populations. This species
has many occurrences throughout the Santa Barbara Channel and within or directly adjacent to the Action Area (PBCS
2018). Habitat-based density models show high predicted density for this species in the action area (Becker et al. 2016).
Long-beaked Common Dolphin
The long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus capensis capensis) is protected by the MMPA. Long-beaked common
dolphins are commonly found along the U.S. west coast, from Baja California (including the Gulf of California)
northward to about central California. Long-beaked and short-beaked common dolphins are similar species but have
different habitat preferences. Long-beaked common dolphins prefer coastal waters. Long-beaked common dolphins
are not as abundant as short-beaked common dolphins. They select shallower areas in tropical, subtropical, and
warmer temperate to cool waters closer to the coast (within 50-100 nautical miles (90-180 km)) and the continental
shelf (NMFS 2018a). This species will sometimes come close to shore within waters that are only a few meters deep
(Jefferson et al. 2008). Long-beaked common dolphins usually travel in pods of 100-500 individuals, but have been
seen numbering in the thousands. They are active at the surface and will approach ships to bow ride as an energy
efficient mode of transportation (NMFS 2018a). Long-beaked common dolphins are subject to the following threats:
entanglement (gill nets, driftnets, longlines, and trawls).
Potential for Occurrence. High potential to occur. Foraging resources (small schooling fish and squid) are likely
present in the Action Area. This species has been recorded multiple times and in great numbers (e.g., occurrences with
1,500 individuals) in the Santa Barbara Channel, including the Action Area (PBCS 2018). Habitat-based density
models show high predicted density for this species in the action area (Becker et al. 2016; Douglass et al. 2014).
Short -beaked Common Dolphin
The short-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis delphis) is protected by the MMPA. Short-beaked common
dolphins inhabit warm tropical to cool temperate waters that are primarily oceanic and offshore. Off the U.S. west
coast, the majority of the populations are found off California, especially during the warm-water months. This
species occurs along the continental slope in waters 650-6,500 feet (200-2,000 m) deep (NMFS 2018a). This species
is often associated with areas of upwelling and areas of steep sea-bottom, and as an offshore species they are
commonly associated with pilot whales (Jefferson et al. 2008). Short-beaked common dolphins prefer deeper,
offshore habitat. Short-beaked common dolphins travel in pods of hundreds to thousands of individuals. They are
231
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 35
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
active at the surface and will approach ships and even other whales to bow ride as an energy efficient mode of
transportation (NMFS 2018a). Short-beaked common dolphins are subject to the following threats: entanglement
(gill nets, driftnets, longlines, and trawls).
Potential for Occurrence. Moderate to high potential to occur. Foraging resources (small schooling fish and squid)
are likely present in the Action Area. This species has been recorded multiple times and in great numbers (e.g.,
occurrences with 1,500 individuals) in Santa Barbara Channel and adjacent to the Action Area (PBCS 2018). Habitatbased
density models show high predicted density in the action area (Becker et al. 2016; Douglass et al. 2014), and
indicated a marked seasonal difference in the area, with the highest predictions for this species in summer and fall for
the Santa Barbara Channel (Becker et al. 2017; Campbell et al. 2014).
Pacif ic White-sided Dolphin
The Pacific white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens) is protected by the MMPA. Pacific white-sided dolphins are
found in temperate waters in the North Pacific and they utilize waters over the continental shelf to the deep open
ocean (NMFS 2018a). In North America, in the Pacific they range from the Gulf of Alaska to the Gulf of California.
Pacific white-sided dolphins exhibit seasonal inshore/offshore and north/south movements, but are generally nonmigratory.
This species feeds mostly on cephalopods and small schooling fish in deep offshore waters but also on the
continental shelf (Jefferson et al. 2008). They are often observed working together in pod sizes of 10-100 individuals
working together to herd schools of fish. Pacific white-sided dolphins are subject to several threats: entanglement in
fishing gear (gillnets, longline), pollution, noise (will react to pingers), and ship strikes (NMFS 2018a). They will often
bow ride with vessels as a method of energetically efficient transportation.
Potential for Occurrence. Moderate potential to occur. Foraging habitat is present in the Action Area. In addition, this
species has numerous occurrences within the Santa Barbara Channel (mostly offshore, this species is commonly associated
with other deep-water cetaceans such as Risso’s dolphins and Northern right whale dolphins (NMFS 2018a)) and a few
occurrences in the Action Area (PBCS 2018). Habitat-based density models show high predicted density for this species in
the action area (Becker et al. 2016), particularly in the fall (Campbell et al. 2014; Douglass et al. 2014).
4.2.2.2 Pinnipeds
California Sea Lion
The California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) is protected by the MMPA. It inhabits the eastern North Pacific Ocean
from central Mexico to Canada. This species is present along the west coast from the Tres Marias Islands off Puerto
Vallarta, throughout the Gulf of California and the Baja peninsula, north to Alaska. Males (adults, subadults, and
juveniles) undertake a northward migration to Central California and Washington after the breeding season in
southern rookeries. They are generalist opportunistic feeders (squid and fishes in areas of upwelling) and utilize the
continental shelf and slope, but have also been observed in deeper oceanic waters (Jefferson et al. 2008). California sea
lions prefer shallow coastal and estuarine waters and sandy beaches for haul out sites but will also haul out on marina
docks, jetties, and buoys (NMFS 2018a). On land, they are wary of humans, but in the water they are curious, bold
232
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 36
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
and will approach boats looking for fish. They will take fish from commercial fishing gear, sport fishing lines, and fish
passage facilities at dams and rivers. They are less wary of people because they associate people with an easy meal.
They may also be curious about construction activities. California sea lions are subject to several threats: entanglement
in fishing gear (gillnets, longline), pollution, ship strikes and human caused injuries.
Potential for Occurrence. High potential to occur. This species has known haulouts along all of the Channel Islands
and rookeries at San Nicholas Island (CDFW 2009, NMFS 2018a).The project site is within their distribution range
(Lowry and Carretta 1999; NOAA 2018a). California sea lions mostly forage near mainland coastlines, the continental
shelf, and seamounts. Adult females feed between 10–100 km from shore (Lowry and Carretta 1999) while adult
males may forage up to 450 km from shore (Weise et al. 2006).
Pacif ic Harbor Seal
The Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) is protected by the MMPA. It is widespread in coastal areas of the Northern
Hemisphere, in temperate and polar habitats. It is generally non-migratory and inhabits areas from the coast to the
continental slope (Jefferson et al. 2008). On the U.S. west coast, this species is found in coastal and estuarine waters
from Canada to Baja California, Mexico. Harbor seals inhabit temperate coastal habitats and use rocks, reefs, beaches,
and drifting glacial ice for hauling out and pupping sites (NMFS 2018a). Diving averages less than 35 meters and they
are generalist feeders (a variety of fish, cephalopods and crustaceans) (Jefferson et al. 2008). On land, harbor seals are
very wary and shy, and will stampede into the water when disturbed. In the water, they are curious but cautious and
will peer at people/boats. Harbor seals are subject to several threats: incidental capture in fishing gear (gillnets, trawls,
purse seines, weirs), ship strikes, pollution, power plant entrainment, and harassment by humans when on land.
Potential for Occurrence. High potential to occur. Harbor seals have known haulouts and rookeries at Carpinteria
Bluffs (Santa Barbara County) and Point Mugu (Ventura County); and haulouts from Point Conception to Santa
Barbara and along all of the Channel Islands (CDFW 2009).
4.3 Crit ical Habitat
No designated critical habitat for federally-listed threatened and endangered species occurs within the Action Area
(USFWS Environmental Online System (USFWS 2018b), NOAA Critical Habitat Maps (NOAA 2018c)).
233
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 37
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
5.0 EFFECTS OF THE ACTION
5.1 Effects of the Project Actions
This section analyzes all of the potential effects to listed species from Project Actions. As described in NMFS (2009)
and 50 CFR 402.02, direct effects are those that have direct or immediate effects on the species or its habitat during
construction. These effects include temporary changes in marine wildlife behavior from construction noise; and
temporary construction disturbance to feeding habitat. Indirect effects are those that are caused by or will result
from the Project Action later in time, after completion of initial construction, but still reasonably certain to occur.
These effects include marine mammal disturbance due to inadvertent spills or introduction of chemical pollutants;
release of invasive species, parasites, and pathogens from seed stock; effects on sediment quality due to biodeposits
and changes in benthic invertebrate species; phytoplankton consumption, and fouling organisms and non-native
species. Effects that may occur both during construction (direct effects) and later in time (indirect effect) include
entanglement in aquaculture gear; vessel strikes; noise disturbance from vessels, and interference with migration or
feeding routes. Each of these effects is discussed more in detail below. In addition, further assessments and mitigation
measures aimed at avoiding, reducing, or remedying the effect of Project Actions are recommended below.
Direct and Indirect Effects (Occurring During and After Construction)
 Potential for Marine Wildlife Entanglement in Aquaculture Gear. The Project Actions may result in
marine mammal entanglement. Mussel aquaculture utilizes various ropes in the water column that may pose
an entanglement risk to cetaceans and sea turtles. In contrast to fishing gear, however, there are far fewer
documented entanglement cases in mussel aquaculture gear. Interactions and entanglements with longline
aquaculture gear worldwide are rare, and close approaches by protected species are seldom documented
(Price et al. 2016). West coast entanglement summaries for 2015 and 2016 report no entanglements from
mussel aquaculture fisheries (NOAA 2017c). There have been no reported marine mammal entanglements
associated with Santa Barbara Mariculture, which has operated a 25-acre mussel aquaculture farm in the Santa
Barbara Channel, using similar cultivation techniques, for over a decade (CDFG 2018).
Reported entanglements are predominantly from crab, gillnet and spiny lobster fisheries. Fixed fisheries gear
(e.g., pot and trap gear) is the most commonly recognized and reported gear type causing entanglements since
2000. Documented entangled animals and disentanglement efforts in the Pacific Northwest have mostly
involved gray whales and humpback whales and have involved both gill nets and crab gear. While not as
common, both fin and blue whales are sometimes entangled in gill nets and crab gear based on a few stranded
animals and scarring on live animals (NOAA 2014). More recently, from 2014 to 2017, the majority of the
whale entanglements involved humpback whales and most of the entanglements were from commercial
Californian and Washington Dungeness crab traps, and gillnet fisheries (NOAA 2017c). Large whale species
appear to be more vulnerable to entanglement than smaller cetacean species, such as dolphins and porpoises,
which are more prone to be caught as bycatch in nets due to their smaller size (Benjamins et al. 2014).
Furthermore, juveniles are more likely to be entangled due to their inquisitive nature and inexperience. The
234
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT
9250 38
DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018
proposed mussel culture techniques have some significant differences as compared to crab and fishing gear
that reduce the potential for marine mammal entanglement. As opposed to fishery gear, the mussel
aquaculture gear is stationary, the lines are larger, and the gear is not designed to catch or ensnare fish.
Further, as described below, the lines will be highly tensioned, which reduces the risk of marine mammals
being caught in slack lines. Therefore, the project design is expected to pose a much smaller risk to marine
mammal entanglement compared to longline fishing methods.
Cetaceans also have different ways in which they can perceive mussel farm lines and navigate around
them. For example, odontocetes, such as harbor porpoises, are able to use echolocation to detect the
lines (Lloyd 2003; Nielson et al. 2012), and minke whales are able to detect and avoid ropes that are
white or black (Kot et al. 2012).No entanglements have been reported for pinnipeds with this method of
mussel aquaculture (Lloyd 2003, Clement 2013).
Entanglements involving sea turtles and cetaceans have occurred in mussel aquaculture operations in
Australia, New Zealand, Iceland, South Korea and Canada (Young et al. 2015). Entanglement risk is highest
at mussel farms that employ mussel spat collecting ropes, as these ropes are thinner and more flexible making
them more conducive to entanglement (Keeley et al. 2009). The majority of entanglements have involved
these thinner mussel spat collector ropes or buoy lines connected to them. To avoid this concern, Mitigation
Measure BIO-4 requires all mussel spat to be provided by land-based hatcheries certified by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (or collected from grow-out lines) and will prohibit spat collector ropes. The
project will only utilize grow-out ropes, which are thicker and more tightly anchored and tensioned (Lindell
2014; Moore & Wieting, 1999; Price et al. 2017).
Lines with spat or mature muscles will be freely hanging (not looping ropes), thereby allowing wildlife to
traverse through the area. These lines will likely be heavy enough and under sufficient tension to prevent
loose lines from becoming entangled and forming loops or knots along the longline. In addition, it is
anticipated that when muscles are harvested, the lines will immediately be re-seeded with spat. Project design
specifications are also proposed to minimize protected marine mammal and sea turtle entanglement. The
longlines that will be used are a thick (1-inch-diameter) tensioned (to approximately 800 pounds) rope
that is not conducive to wrapping around or entangling protected species. The mussel grow-out ropes
themselves are typically planted with seed 3 inches thick and may grow to be stiff with byssus at
diameters of 10 inches or more at harvest, thus making them very unlikely sources of entanglement. As
an additional precaution, grow-ropes will be attached to the headrope with a low-breaking-strength twine
(4-millimeter (0.16-inch) diameter; <1,000 pounds), which will facilitate rapid detachment in the unlikely event of any marine mammal interaction with the longline (see Mitigation Measure BIO-2). Other potential entanglement points include (1) two vertical lines to the surface buoys marking each end of the headrope and (2) one pull-up buoy line for servicing at the midpoint. To minimize these potential entanglements, a 1,100-pound breakaway link will be installed between these buoys and the vertical lines, similar to strategies used to mitigate potential entanglement in trap fisheries in the northeastern United States (NOAA 2008). Buoy lines between the surface and headrope are generally under tension partially equivalent 235 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 39 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 (0 to 10 kilograms (0 to 22 pounds)) to their full buoyancy (42 kilograms (93 pounds)). Overall, the longline configuration produces a fairly rigid structure under tension, with stout lines and little slack. Other mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to further minimize the potential for marine mammal entanglement. The project will incorporate a marine wildlife entanglement plan to regularly check equipment for evidence of marine mammal entanglement (MM BIO-1) and require a qualified marine wildlife observer to be present during construction activities that can halt activities if marine mammals are observed (MM BIO-3). Further details regarding these measures are found in the mitigation measures provided in Section 5. After the incorporation of these mitigation measures and given the lack of documented marine mammal entanglement incidents associated with the proposed aquaculture cultivation method, impacts associated with marine mammal entanglement are considered insignificant.  Ship Strikes Due to Increased Activity. Vessel strikes are known to be a hazard to a number of marine species, particularly whales. Project Actions may result in an additional 20 to 40 small boats traveling to lease sites on an average of 3 times per week to daily and would therefore contribute to increased boat traffic in the area during both construction and regular operations. Between 1988 and 2012, there were 100 documented large whale ship strikes along the California coast (NOAA 2017b). Large whale species are vulnerable to collisions with all vessel types, classes and sizes (NOAA 2017b); however, most collisions are associated with large container and freight ships due to their mass and the speed at which they transit the shipping lanes (Silber et al. 2010). When large vessels such as container ships are involved, the crew may be unaware a strike has occurred. As such, the number of ship strikes to whales is likely under reported. Most cases where whales were known to be severely hurt or killed occurred at vessel speeds of 14 knots or more and were caused by large ships of 80 meters or more in length (Laist et al., 2001). However, collisions with smaller boats, such as those that would be used for the aquaculture operations, do have the potential to injure or kill marine wildlife, especially when travelling at high speeds (Ritter 2012). Large container or freight ships will not be used during construction of the mussel farm nor during regular maintenance. To address this concern, the project will require continuous education regarding how to properly interact with marine mammals if encountered during operations (MM BIO-5) and include vessel management requirements if vessels observe marine mammals in close proximity to the vessel (MM BIO-6). After incorporation of these mitigation measures, impacts associated with ship strikes are considered insignificant.  Interference with Migration or Feeding Routes. The Project Actions will result in increased human activity and the establishment of aquaculture facilities across 2,000 acres. Available habitat within Southern California Bight includes 400 miles of recessed coastline from Point Conception, Santa Barbara County to Cabo Colnet, Mexico, (SCCWRP 2016) and comprises over 6 million acres. Increased human activity and facilities during construction and operation may deter marine wildlife from using previously open and unoccupied areas for feeding or migration in different spatial and temporal ways. As a result, marine wildlife may be forced to seek feeding or open migration routes outside of the Action Area, thereby causing wildlife to expend time and energy seeking these resources. The project site is within the northward migration route for gray whales but it is largely unknown how many marine species perceive and respond to man-made structures in the ocean (Price et al. 2017). Habitat exclusion can range from low to high risk depending upon 236 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 40 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 the location and density of mussel farms. Existing studies have demonstrated the potential for species to be excluded from foraging habitats. Lloyd (2003) describes how curtains of mussel growing lines may act as barriers and impede hunting behavior in dolphins (dusky, common, and Hector’s dolphins) by interfering with sonar signals for finding prey and communicating with other members of the pod. Dusky dolphins rarely enter mussel farms (Markowtiz et al. 2004). Whales and some dolphins tend to be more sensitive, while pinnipeds and both common and bottlenose dolphins seem attracted to the underwater arrays (Clement 2013). Dusky dolphins were observed foraging adjacent to mussel farms pointing to the suggestion that fish may be attracted to the structure (Price et al. 2017). Most studies were conducted in nearshore waters and it is uncertain how, or even if these results, pertain to offshore longline mussel farms in deep open ocean locations. However, this effect would be minimal due to the expansive open ranges that are open for marine wildlife in the greater region, and the project site is not located within critical habitat. Direct Effects (Construction-Related Effects)  Changes in Marine Wildlife Behavior from Construction. Disturbance to marine wildlife such as construction-related noise could occur from anchor installation and array set up. Noise effects may have a variety of indirect effects on marine wildlife species, including increased stress, weakened immune systems, altered feeding behavior, altered mother-infant relationships, displacement due to startle, degraded communication with conspecifics (e.g., masking), damaged hearing from extremely loud noises, and increased vulnerability to predators (MMC 2007; NMFS 2016c; Thomsen 2009). Another potential effect is abandonment of an area due to human disturbance which has been shown in several species (Lloyd 2003). The NOAA Fisheries criteria distinguishes between impulse sound, such as that from impact pile driving, and continuous sounds, such as that from vibratory pile driving. The Level A (injury) and Level B (disturbance) threshold levels used by NOAA Fisheries are summarized in Table 2 for cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises) and pinnipeds (seals and sea lions). NOAA is developing comprehensive guidance on sound characteristics likely to cause injury and behavioral disruption in the context of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), Endangered Species Act (FESA) and other statutes. Until formal guidance is available, NOAA Fisheries uses conservative thresholds of received sound pressure levels from broad band sounds that may cause behavioral disturbance and injury, and the criterion levels specified in Table 1 are specific to the levels of harassment permitted under the MMPA (NMFS 2018e). Project Activities will temporarily disturb and alter the seafloor habitat from the placement of screw anchors used to hold the lines, ropes, floats, and buoys. Construction-related noise with the installation of sand screw anchors is very low in the water, with only a 50 horsepower hydraulic power pack on the boat, stipulating that noise will not approach NOAA thresholds. Furthermore, rotation speeds are also very low, which minimizes entanglement of marine species. The anchor installation disturbs less than 1 square meter of sea bed on installation and once installed no rope or chain touches the sea floor which also minimizes seabed disturbance (Fielder Marine Services, New Zealand, Pers.comm). Marine species that are the focus of this assessment are highly mobile and have the ability to temporarily avoid the project site during construction activities. Therefore, noise impacts associated with installation of equipment are considered insignificant. 237 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 41 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 Table 1 NOAA Fisheries Acoustic Thresholds Criterion Criterion Definition Threshold In-Water (Excluding Tactical Sonar and Explosives) Level A PTS (injury) conservatively based on TTS 190 dB rms 1 for pinnipeds 180 dB rms for cetaceans Level B Behavioral disruption for impulsive noise (e.g., impact pile driving) 160 dB rms Level B Behavioral disruption for non-pulse noise (e.g., vibratory pile driving, drilling) 120 dB rms In-Air Level A PTS (injury) conservatively based on TTS None established Level B Behavioral disruption for harbor seals 90 dB rms Level B Behavioral disruption for non-harbor seal pinnipeds 100 dB rms Indirect Effects (After Completion of Initial Construction)  Oil Spills. Construction and harvesting operations (and the use of any heavy equipment) could result in water-quality effects due to chemical-compound pollution (fuel, oil, lubricants, inadvertent spills, and other materials) in the event of an oil spill. As with any mechanized machinery, there is a small risk of accidental discharge of fuel, lubricants, or hydraulic fluids, which could affect marine wildlife in the area and result in injury and/or mortality to wildlife in the area of the contaminant through ingestion, physical contact that reduces survival functions (e.g., oiled wildlife), or a reduction in suitable feeding habitat. Although spills of this nature are detrimental to aquatic organisms, it is expected that the impacts would be negligible because of the limited occurrence of spills and corrective actions.  Marine Debris. The project has the potential to create marine debris if aquaculture gear breaks free through poor maintenance or damage from storm or wave activity. Entanglement may occur if aquaculture gear comes loose, washes away, or otherwise escapes into the environment as a result of tide, wind, or wave action. Additional risk may occur if derelict fishing gear, lines, and other materials become entangled in the longline arrays of this project, which could compromise structural integrity and/or exacerbate the risk of marine wildlife entanglements. There is also a risk that marine debris could be ingested by gray whales and sea turtles. To address this concern, Mitigation Measure BIO-10 incorporates and aquaculture gear monitoring and escapement plan to routinely check and maintain aquaculture gear to prevent breakage and quickly retrieve any gear that breaks free. Further, Mitigation Measure BIO-11 incorporates a decommissioning plan to require timely removal of aquaculture gear once shellfish operations cease on a parcel. Upon incorporation of the proposed mitigation, impacts associated with marine debris are considered insignificant. 1 RMS refers to the sound pressure level that is square root of the sum of the squares of the pressure contained within a defined period from the initial time to the final time. For marine mammals, the RMS pressure historically has been calculated over the period of the pulse that contains 90% of the acoustical energy. 238 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 42 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018  Release of Potentially Invasive Species, Parasites, and Pathogens from Seed Stock. Mussel aquaculture practices have the potential to introduce invasive species, parasites, and pathogens into the environment via contaminated seed stock, which could have detrimental effects on the California marine ecosystem. However, this project will use spat from hatcheries certified by CDFW to not contain invasive species, parasites or pathogens of concern or will be collected directly from grow-out lines. Seed stock, other than those obtained from State waters, must be inspected and certified before planting in compliance with Sections 15201 and 15600 of the Fish and Game Code. Mediterranean mussels are a non-native, but naturalized species. In fact, this mussel is now one of the most abundant mussel species between Marin County and San Diego (Suchanek et al. 1997). Given the widespread nature of this species, the proposed mussel farm would have a negligible effect on the surrounding environment. Furthermore, benthic characteristics of the project site demonstrate a lack of available suitable substrate for any further establishment of mussels beyond the project site, as the closest substrate where mussels could establish beyond the project site is several miles away.  Disturbance/ Displacement of the Benthic Environment. Effects on sediment quality underneath shellfish aquaculture gear could be impacted from biodeposits and changes to the benthic invertebrate species composition. The Project Actions have the potential to disturb or alter the seafloor habitat by the deposition of biological materials resulting from dislodged or discharged shells, shell fragments, and deposits from the growing operation accumulating on the seafloor beneath the aquaculture structures. Such material typically includes feces and pseudofeces from the cultivated shellfish, as well as fouling organisms such as algae, barnacles, sponges, and other invertebrates that accumulate on the project equipment and subsequently become dislodged by natural processes, or due to harvesting or cleaning operations. Cultivated shellfish or shells from can also be dislodged from the structure during growth, storm events, predation by marine wildlife, and cleaning and harvesting activities. The accumulation of material including shell fragments, intact shells, fouling organisms, and feces can alter the physical and chemical characteristics of the bottom substrate, and can affect the benthic community and sediment-dwelling organisms that may be sensitive to conditions such as substrate composition and chemistry. Accumulation of material could also attract organisms that would change the composition of the benthic community. Other potential benthic impacts can include increased loads on sediment dissolved oxygen and redox conditions, and changes to nutrient cycling resulting in a decrease in benthic species abundance and sediment porosity (Pearson and Rosenberg 1978; Wilding and Nickell 2013; Wilding 2012). The effect on benthic nitrogen cycling is determined by biogeochemical and physical variables, such as water depth, current velocities, and bottom type and composition (CFGC 2018). Shellfish are able to alter the biogeochemical process in the water column by stimulating nitrification (Souchu et al. 2001).Mussel farms that are located in areas with greater water depths and current speeds, spread biodeposits over a larger area without posing the risk of enhanced sediment nutrient release (Stadmark & Conley 2011). A local mussel farm, the Santa Barbara Mariculture Company, with thirteen years in operation, conducted benthic analysis testing. This sediment analysis testing examined grain size, and levels of benthic epifaunal and infaunal biodiversity both within the farm and outside of the farm, and found no significant benthic impact (CFGC 2018). Given the conditions at the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise project site, with the significant depth, wave action and mixing, this potential impact is unlikely to be significant and bioaccumulation is expected to be dispersed over a larger area. To confirm this conclusion, Mitigation 239 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 43 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 Measure BIO-9 has been incorporated, which requires monitoring of sediment quality and composition to evaluate any benthic impacts associated with the project. Installation of the anchors proposed with the project also has the potential to displace benthic invertebrates. However, the adverse impacts to epifauna and infauna would be minimal. Each anchor would only have a footprint of less than one square meter. The total habitat area that would be disturbed by the proposed project would be small and regionally insignificant when compared to the overall amount of habitat available in the area. Further, many benthic invertebrates are mobile and would quickly recolonize the area after installation of the anchors. Therefore, impacts associated with benthic disturbance are considered insignificant.  Fouling Organisms and Nonnative Species. The submerged structures of the Project Actions can provide hard substrate habitat for invasive “fouling organisms.” Fouling organisms, such as invasive algae, sea squirts, and mussels, can pose economic and ecological risks to the marine environment. For example, the invasive carpet sea squirt (Didemnum vexillum) reproduces rapidly and fouls marine habitats (including shellfish aquaculture operations and fishing grounds), ship’s hulls, and maritime structures. Like other fouling organisms, they are found on hard substrates that include floats, moorings and ropes, steel chain and ship hulls. They overgrow other marine organisms such as tunicates, sponges, macro algae, hydroids, anemones, bryozoans, scallops, mussels, and oysters. Where these colonies occur on the seabed, they likely cover the siphons of infaunal bivalves and serve as a barrier between demersal fish (or benthic feeding grey whales) and their prey. However, the invasive carpet sea squirt is not present in the Channel Islands area. The nearest known occurrences are in Monterey Bay and Mission Bay in San Diego (Woods Hole Science Center 2007). Further, there is a lack of available substrate within or near the project site suitable for colonization by fouling organisms, as these invasive species cannot attach themselves to the sandy bottom substrate at the project site.  Carrying Capacity (Phytoplankton Consumption). Mussels feed primarily on phytoplankton filtered from the water column. Each individual is capable of filtering over 20-gallons of seawater per day (Okumus et al. 2002). Hence, in some circumstances, large concentrations of mussels found in mussel farms can remove a significant proportion of available phytoplankton from the water column in an area, causing localized phytoplankton depletion (Okumus et al. 2002). Other studies suggest that nutrient regeneration in the water column within mussel farms is high, as phytoplankton consumed by the mussels results in released nutrients supporting new phytoplankton production (CFGC 2018). Ventura Shellfish Enterprise has adopted the methodology utilized by CDFW to evaluate carrying capacity impacts associated with Santa Barbara Mariculture Company’s mussel aquaculture farm, whereby the standing stock of phytoplankton biomass outside the facility is determined and compared with the filtration/consumption rate of mussels within the farm. The results of the Santa Barbara Mariculture Company indicated that total production of the fully built-out farm would not have an adverse impact on phytoplankton in the Santa Barbara Channel (CFGC 2018). Similarly, calculations for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise mussel farm indicate that no adverse impact on phytoplankton in the Santa Barbara Channel would occur (Appendix C). 240 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 44 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 5.1.1 FEDERALLY-LISTED SPECIES 5.1.1.1 Cetaceans Gray Whale Direct Effects As described in Section 4.0, gray whales and their calves forage and travel in close proximity to shore during their northward migration. Due to their size, behavior, and occurrence close to shore, gray whales are likely to be affected by the Project Actions. The gray whale is a frequent visitor to the Santa Barbara Channel and may migrate directly along the path of the project site. As a result, gray whales may experience both direct and indirect effects from the Project Actions. If Project Actions will occur during the migration period, adults (and particularly calves) have the potential for entanglement in aquaculture gear. However, gray whales routinely swim through kelp and are adept at navigating obstacles, given they are accustomed to coastal areas. Absent mitigation, entanglement could adversely affect this species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-1 through BIO-5, the effect would be reduced. As described in Section 4.0, one of the main threats to gray whales is from ship strikes. Project Actions will involve an increase in boat traffic both within the Project Action Area and routes to and from the Ventura Harbor. Ship strike risk may also increase at nighttime when whales are resting, unaware of ship presence, and are less visible to staff onboard. Absent mitigation, the Project Actions have the potential to result in injury and/or mortality to gray whales from ship strikes, which would adversely affect this species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-6, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions have the potential to interfere with gray whale migration and feeding routes. However, the Santa Barbara Channel measures over 20 miles wide and the Project Action Area would be under 2 miles wide. Due to the expansive open ranges that are available for grey whales in the greater region, the Project Actions interference with migration and feeding routes would not adversely affect this species. Project Actions have the potential to result in changes of gray whale migration or feeding behavior during construction from noise or disturbance to benthic feeding areas. Although noise effects will be very low, gray whales may temporarily avoid construction areas. Absent mitigation, construction activities may adversely affect this species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-3, MM BIO-5 and MM BIO-6, the effect would be reduced. Indirect Effects Project Actions have the potential to result in inadvertent oil spills. Any grey whales traversing through areas that enter areas containing material from oil spills or other pollutants may experience immediate health effects. Absent mitigation, Project Activities may adversely affect this species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-7, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions have the potential to result in the release of invasive species, parasites, and pathogens. Absent mitigation, Project Activities may adversely affect this species through reducing its access to prey within the Project Area. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-4, MM BIO-8, and MM BIO-10 the effect would be reduced. 241 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 45 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 Determination of Effects Project Actions have the potential to result in direct and indirect effects to grey whale individuals and/or their migration and feeding habitats. The highest risk to this species includes entanglement in gear and vessel strikes. Construction activities are anticipated to be relatively brief (several weeks) within each plot which would cause temporary changes to grey whale feeding and migrating behavior. In addition, due to the availability of feeding habitat in the Santa Barbara Channel, Project Actions are not anticipated to interfere with gray whale migration and feeding routes. Additional Project effects to this species include the potential effects on sediment quality from aquaculture farms or fouling organisms. Measures to avoid and minimize any potential adverse effects to grey whale are discussed above and include MM BIO-1 through BIO-11. With implementation of these measures, the effects of the Project Actions would not jeopardize the continued existence of this species. As such, the Project Actions may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the grey whale. Humpback Whale and Fin Whale Humpback and fin whales are anticipated to experience similar effects as those described for grey whales, with the exception of effects to sediment quality and the fouling of organisms. As described below, these species are expected to be directly and indirectly effected by the Project Actions from entanglement, ship strikes, interference with migration or feeding routes, changes in behavior from construction activities, oil spills, and release of invasive species. Given recent reports, humpback whales may in fact be more susceptible to entanglements, given their size, large appendages relative to body size ratio, and propensity to roll when entangled (NOAA 2018f). Direct Effects Humpback and fin whales may transit directly along the path of the project site. If Project Actions occur during the migration period, individuals have the potential for entanglement in aquaculture gear. Absent mitigation, entanglement would adversely affect this species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-1 through BIO-5, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions will involve an increase in boat traffic both within the Project Action Area and routes to and from the Ventura Harbor. Ship strike risk may also increase at nighttime when whales are resting, unaware of ship presence, and are less visible to staff onboard. Absent mitigation, the Project Actions have the potential to result in injury and/or mortality to humpback and fin from ship strikes, which would adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-6, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions have the potential to interfere with humpback and fin whale migration and feeding routes. However, the Santa Barbara Channel measures over 20 miles wide and the Project Action Area would be under 2 miles wide. Due to the expansive open ranges that are available for these in the greater region, the Project Actions interference with migration and feeding routes would not adversely affect these species. Project Actions have the potential to result in changes of humpback and fin whale migration or feeding behavior during construction from noise or avoidance of suitable feeding areas. Although, noise effects will be very low, these 242 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 46 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 species may temporarily avoid construction areas. Absent mitigation, construction activities may adversely affect this species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-3, MM BIO-5 and MM BIO-6, the effect would be reduced. Indirect Effects Project Actions have the potential to result in inadvertent oil spills. Any humpback or fin whales traversing through areas that enter areas containing material from oil spills or other pollutants may experience immediate health effects. Absent mitigation, Project Activities may adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-7, the effect would be reduced. Determination of Effects Project Actions have the potential to result in direct and indirect effects to humpback and fin whale individuals and/or their migration and feeding behaviors. The highest risk to these species includes entanglement in gear and vessel strikes. Construction activities are anticipated to be relatively brief (several weeks) within each plot which would cause temporary changes to humpback and fin whale feeding and migrating behavior. In addition, due to the availability of feeding habitat in the Santa Barbara Channel, Project Actions are not anticipated to interfere with these species’ migration and feeding routes. Additional Project effects to these species include the release of invasive species, parasites, and pathogens from seed stock. Measures to avoid and minimize any potential adverse effects to the humpback and fin whale are discussed above and include MM BIO-1 through BIO-11. With implementation of these measures, the effects of the Project Actions would not jeopardize the continued existence or recovery of these species. As such, the Project Actions may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect the humpback and fin whales. 5.1.1.2 Sea Turtles Direct Effects Loggerhead and green sea turtles may traverse the Project Action Area during migration. Should marine debris (e.g., fishing nets or wire not a part of the Project Actions) become entangled on the aquaculture long lines, sea turtles may become entangled leading to injury and/or mortality. Absent mitigation, entanglement would adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-1 through BIO-5 and MM BIO-10, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions will involve an increase in boat traffic both within the Project Action Area and routes to and from the Ventura Harbor. Absent mitigation, the Project Actions have the potential to result in injury and/or mortality to sea turtles from ship strikes, which would adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-6, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions have the potential to interfere with sea turtle migration routes. However, the Santa Barbara Channel measures over 20 miles wide and the Project Action Area would be under 2 miles wide. Due to the expansive open ranges that are available for these in the greater region, the Project Actions interference with migration routes would not adversely affect these species. Project Actions have the potential to result in changes of sea turtle migrating behavior during construction from noise or avoidance of migratory routes. Although noise effects will be very low, these species may temporarily avoid construction 243 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 47 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 areas. Artificial lighting during construction activities and regular operations can be disorienting to sea turtles (as well as seabirds and migratory birds). Absent mitigation, construction activities may adversely affect this species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-3, MM BIO-5, MM BIO-6 and MM BIO-12, the effect would be reduced. Indirect Effects Project Actions have the potential to result in inadvertent oil spills. Any sea turtles traversing through areas that enter areas containing material oil spills or other pollutants may experience immediate health effects. Absent mitigation, Project Activities may adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-7, the effect would be reduced. Determination of Effects Project Actions have the potential to result in direct and indirect effects to sea turtle individuals and/or their migration behaviors. The highest risk to these species includes entanglement in fugitive nets and fishing line that may become attached to aquaculture gear. Construction activities are anticipated to be relatively brief (several weeks) within each plot which would cause temporary changes to sea turtle and migrating behavior. In addition, due to the availability of open ocean in the Santa Barbara Channel, Project Actions are not anticipated to interfere with these species’ migration routes. Additional Project effects to these species include possible ship strikes and the release of invasive species. Measures to avoid and minimize any potential adverse effects to sea turtles are discussed above and include MM BIO-1 through BIO-12. With implementation of these measures, the effects of the Project Actions would not jeopardize the continued existence or recovery of these species. As such, the Project Actions may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect the loggerhead and green sea turtles. 5.1.2 OTHER NON-LISTED SPECIES PROTECTED UNDER THE MMPA 5.1.2.1 Cetaceans The common minke whale, common bottlenose dolphin, long-beaked common dolphin, short-beaked common dolphin, and pacific white-sided dolphin are anticipated to experience similar effects as those described for humpback and fin whale. However, these dolphins are resident that may be present in the Santa Barbara Channel year-round. As described below, these species are expected to be directly and indirectly effected by the Project Actions from entanglement, ship strikes, interference with migration or feeding routes, changes in behavior from construction noise, potential oil spills, and release of invasive species, parasites, and pathogens from seed stock. There are few documented cases of interactions between cetaceans and shellfish farms. However, in Australia, studies of bottlenose dolphins indicate that they avoid mussel farms in shallow nearshore waters and the displacement of habitat causes a reduction in fecundity (Kemper et al. 2003). This study involved coastal bottlenose dolphins, and it is unknown if displacement of habitat will occur in offshore waters for offshore bottlenose dolphins. Similarly, in New Zealand, dusky dolphins were seen avoiding mussel leases in shallow waters (they utilize shallow waters for foraging) which may indicate that placing mussel farms in nearshore waters affects their ability to forage. In Chile, a bay used by Chilean dolphins was completed filled in with mussel lines and the dolphins ceased to use the area for foraging (Kemper et al. 2003). These studies occur in shallow coastal waters and for different species than those that occur on the project site but it habitat displacement may occur to offshore species as well, such as bottlenose dolphins, 244 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 48 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 common dolphins, pacific white-sided dolphins and minke whales in the project area. If these species are prevented from foraging in the project area, it would be a small reduction in their overall foraging area and would not adversely affect these species. Direct Effects The common minke whale may migrate along the Project Action Area and many dolphins are year-round residents. If Project Actions occur during the common minke whale migration period, individuals have the potential for entanglement in aquaculture gear. In addition, dolphins have the potential for entanglement year-round. Normally adept at maneuvering around objects, individuals have the potential for entanglement in loose fishing nets, debris and other ghost gear that could become attached to the mussel aquaculture gear. Absent mitigation, entanglement may adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-1 through BIO-5 and MM BIO-10, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions will involve an increase in boat traffic both within the Project Action Area and routes to and from the Ventura Harbor. Ship strike risk may also increase at nighttime when migrating common minke whales may be resting, unaware of ship presence, and are less visible to staff onboard. In addition, dolphins are known to bow-ride which may result in accidental ship strikes to these species. Absent mitigation, the Project Actions have the potential to result in injury and/or mortality, which would adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-6, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions have the potential to interfere with common minke whale migration routes. In addition, foraging areas for the common minke whale and dolphins may be disrupted from Project Actions. However, the Santa Barbara Channel measures over 20 miles wide and the Project Action Area would be under 2 miles wide. Habitat displacement could occur for these species, but it would be a small reduction in their overall foraging area. Due to the expansive open ranges that are available for these in the greater region, the Project Actions interference with migration and feeding routes would not adversely affect this species. Project Actions have the potential to result in changes of common minke whale migration along with whale and dolphin feeding behavior during construction from noise or avoidance of suitable feeding areas. These species may temporarily avoid construction areas or experience more long lasting and adverse effects, as described above. Absent mitigation, construction activities may adversely affect this species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-3, MM BIO-5 and MM BIO-6, the effect would be reduced. Indirect Effects Project Actions have the potential to result in inadvertent oil spills. Any common minke whales or dolphins traversing through areas that enter areas containing material from oil spills or other pollutants may experience immediate health effects. Absent mitigation, Project Activities may adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-7, the effect would be reduced. 245 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 49 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 Project Actions have the potential to result in the release of invasive species, parasites, and pathogens. Absent mitigation, Project Activities may adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-4 and MM BIO-8, the effect would be reduced. Determination of Effects Project Actions have the potential to result in direct and indirect effects to the common minke whale, common bottlenose dolphin, long-beaked common dolphin, short-beaked common dolphin, and pacific white-sided dolphin. The highest risk to these species includes entanglement in gear (loose fishing nets, debris, or other ghost gear that has become entangled in the aquaculture array) and vessel strikes. Construction activities are anticipated to be relatively brief (several weeks) within each plot which would cause temporary changes to whale and dolphin feeding and/or migrating behavior. In addition, due to the availability of feeding habitat in the Santa Barbara Channel, Project Actions are not anticipated to interfere with these species’ migration and feeding routes. Additional Project effects to these species include the release of invasive species. Measures to avoid and minimize any potential adverse effects to the common minke whale and dolphins are discussed above and include MM BIO-1 through BIO-11. With implementation of these measures, the effects of the Project Actions would not jeopardize the continued existence of these species. As such, the Project Actions may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect these species. 5.1.2.2 Pinnipeds Pinnipeds, including the California sea lion and Pacific harbor seal, are expected to experience similar effects as those described for small cetaceans. Similar to dolphins, pinnipeds are resident and are present in the Santa Barbara Channel year-round. As described below, these species are expected to be directly and indirectly effected by the Project Actions from entanglement, ship strikes, interference with feeding routes, changes in behavior from construction activities (disturbance), invasive species, parasites, and pathogens, altered marine food chains/habitat due to fouling the water and changes to the benthic fauna (Kemper et al. 2003). Other affects may include predator control. Direct Effects Pinnipeds may be present year round in the Project Action Area. There have been no reported interactions between pinnipeds and shellfish aquaculture (Kemper et al. 2003) indicating a very low possibility of an impact; however, individuals have the potential for entanglement in loose fishing nets, debris and other ghost gear that could become attached to the mussel aquaculture array. Absent mitigation, entanglement may adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-1 through BIO-5 and MM BIO-10, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions will involve an increase in boat traffic both within the Project Action Area and routes to and from the Ventura Harbor. Absent mitigation, the Project Actions have the potential to result in injury and/or mortality, which would adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-6, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions have the potential to interfere with pinniped feeding routes. However, the Santa Barbara Channel measures over 20 miles wide and the Project Action Area would be under 2 miles wide. Due to the expansive open ranges that are available for these in the greater region, the Project Actions interference with migration and feeding routes would not adversely affect this species. 246 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 50 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 Project Actions have the potential to result in changes of pinniped feeding behavior during construction from noise or avoidance of suitable feeding areas. These species may temporarily avoid construction areas or experience more long lasting and adverse effects, as described above. Absent mitigation, construction activities may adversely affect this species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-3, MM BIO-5 and MM BIO-6, the effect would be reduced. Predator control is unlikely to be needed for this project given the feeding preferences of pinnipeds in the area. However, if predator control is required, MM BIO-13 will be incorporated. Indirect Effects Project Actions have the potential to result in inadvertent oil spills or other pollution. Any pinnipeds traversing through areas that contain material from oil spills may experience immediate health effects. Absent mitigation, Project Activities may adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-7, the effect would be reduced. Project Actions have the potential to result in the release of invasive species, parasites, and pathogens. Absent mitigation, Project Activities may adversely affect these species. However, with incorporation of MM BIO-4 and MM BIO-8, the effect would be reduced. Determination of Effects Project Actions have the potential to result in direct and indirect effects to pinnipeds, including the California sea lion, and Pacific harbor seal. The highest risk to these species includes vessel strikes. Construction activities are anticipated to be relatively brief (several weeks) within each plot which would cause temporary changes to pinniped feeding behavior. In addition, due to the availability of feeding habitat in the Santa Barbara Channel, Project Actions are not anticipated to interfere with these species’ feeding routes. Additional Project effects to these species include the release of invasive species, parasites, and pathogens from seed stock. Measures to avoid and minimize any potential adverse effects to pinnipeds are discussed above and include MM BIO-1 through BIO-11. With implementation of these measures, the effects of the Project Actions would not jeopardize the continued existence of these species. As such, the Project Actions may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect pinnipeds. 5.2 Mitigat ion Measures MM BIO-1 Marine Wildlife Entanglement Plan. No less than once per month, each grower/producer operating on a VPD lease shall visually inspect all ropes, cables, and equipment via depth/fish finders to determine if any entanglement of a marine mammal has occurred and to ensure that (a) no lines have been broken, lost or removed; (b) all longlines, anchor lines, and buoy lines remain taught and in good working condition; and (c) any derelict fishing gear or marine debris that collects in the growing gear is removed and disposed of at an identified onshore facility. All equipment and materials accidentally released or found to be missing from the facility during monthly inspections, including buoys, floats, lines, ropes, chains, cultivation trays, wires, fasteners, and clasps, shall be searched for, collected, properly disposed of onshore, and documented in the annual inspection report. Monitoring shall occur monthly for the first two years following deployment and, in the event 247 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 51 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 that there are no marine wildlife entanglements within the first two years, may be reduced to quarterly inspections thereafter. Inspections shall include recordings by depth/fish finder or ROV surveys of lines and/or monitoring performed by SCUBA divers. Recorded video shall be provided along with the annual report described above. Any maintenance issues including wear, loosening, or fatigue of materials shall be remedied as soon as possible. All incidents of observed whale entanglement shall be immediately reported to SOS WHALe. Any other marine wildlife (i.e., other marine mammals, turtles) observed to be entangled will be immediately reported to NOAA Fisheries Marine Mammal Stranding Network Coordinator, West Coast Region, Long Beach Office. Only personnel who have been authorized by NOAA Fisheries and who have training, experience, equipment, and support will attempt to disentangle marine wildlife. If possible, the grower/producer shall document and photograph entangled wildlife and the entangling gear material so as to modify gear and avoid any future entanglements. MM BIO-2 Entanglement Prevention. Grow-ropes will be attached to the head rope with a low-breakingstrength twine (4-millimeter (0.16-inch) diameter; <1,000 pounds), which will facilitate rapid detachment in the unlikely event of any interaction with the longline. A 1,100-pound breakaway link will be installed between surface marking buoys and the vertical lines. MM BIO-3 Marine Wildlife Observer. A Marine Wildlife Observer shall be present on each project construction vessel during all construction activities, including the installation of long lines and anchoring systems. The observer shall monitor and record the presence of all marine wildlife (marine mammals and sea turtles) within 100 yards of the work area. The observer shall have the authority to halt operations if marine wildlife are observed or anticipated to be near a work area and construction activities have the potential to result in injury or entanglement of marine wildlife. In addition, all work (including vessel motors) will be halted if a cetacean is observed within the monitoring area or if a pinniped or sea turtle is observed within 50 yards of the work area. Work may commence after the observed individuals have moved out of the monitoring area. Observers’ reports on marine mammal monitoring during construction activities shall be prepared and submitted to NOAA Fisheries on a monthly basis. Reports shall include such information as the (1) number, type, and location of marine mammals observed; (2) the behavior of marine mammals in the area of potential sound effects during construction; (3) dates and times when observations and in-water project construction activities were conducted; and (4) dates and times when in-water construction activities were suspended because of marine mammals. VPD shall prepare a list of qualified marine wildlife observers who meet the following minimum qualifications: visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible) sufficient to discern moving targets at the water’s surface with ability to estimate target size and distance; (2) use of binoculars or 248 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 52 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 spotting scope may be necessary to correctly identify the target; (3) advanced education in biological science, wildlife management, mammalogy, or related fields (bachelor’s degree or higher is preferred); (4) experience and ability to conduct field observations and collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic experience); (5) experience or training in the field identification of marine mammals (cetaceans and pinnipeds) and sea turtles; and (6) ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with project personnel to provide real time information on marine wildlife observed in the area, as needed. MM BIO-4 Cultivation of Spat Off site. Only hatchery-reared mussel spat grown at a facility certified by CDFW will be used in order to ensure that spat are free of introduced invasive species, parasites, and pathogens of concern; however, natural mussel spat collected on farm grow-out lines and buoys may also be harvested and cultivated. MM BIO-5 Marine Wildlife Education. Each grower/producer will be required to provide bi-annual (twice per year) marine wildlife education to its employees regarding proper procedures relating to marine wildlife. The training curriculum will include identifying the presence of specified marine wildlife and procedures for avoiding impacts to marine wildlife during operations. These procedures will include (1) reducing speed and observing the distances from marine life specified in MM BIO-6; (2) providing a safe path of travel for marine mammals that avoids encirclement or entrapment of the animal(s) between the vessel and growing apparatus; (3) if approached by a marine mammal, reducing speed, placing the vessel in neutral and waiting until the animal is observed clear of the vessel before making way; (4) avoiding sudden direction or speed changes when near marine mammals; (5) refraining from approaching, touching or feeding a marine mammal; and (6) immediately contacting their supervisor and other identified parties/agencies identified in MM BIO-1 should an employee observe an injured marine mammal. MM BIO-6 Vessel Management. Vessels in transit to and from the growing area shall maintain a distance of 100 yards from any observed cetacean and 50 yards between any observed pinniped or sea turtle. If cetaceans are observed within 100 yards or pinnipeds or sea turtles observed within 50 yards, the vessel shall reduce speeds to 12 knots or less until it is the appropriate distance (as required by this condition) from the particular marine life. If a cetacean is heading into the direct path of the vessel (i.e., approaching a moving vessel directly into the bow), the vessel shall shut off the engine until the cetacean is no longer approaching the bow and until a greater separation distance is observed. If small cetaceans are observed bow-riding, and the vessel is operating at speeds of 12 knots or less, the vessel shall remain parallel to the animal’s course and avoid abrupt changes in direction until the cetaceans have left the area. Each sighting of a federally listed threatened or endangered whale or turtle shall be recorded and the following information shall be provided: a. Date, time, coordinates of vessel b. Visibility, weather, sea state 249 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 53 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 c. Vector of sighting (distance, bearing) d. Duration of sighting e. Species and number of animals f. Observed behaviors (feeding, diving, breaching, etc.) g. Description of interaction with aquaculture facility MM BIO-7 Spill Prevention and Response. Discharges of feed, pesticides, or chemicals (including antibiotics and hormones) in ocean waters are prohibited. Fuel, lubricants and chemicals must be labeled, stored and disposed of in a safe and responsible manner, and marked with warning signs. Precautions shall be taken to prevent spills, fires and explosions, and procedures and supplies shall be readily available to manage chemical and fuel spills or leaks. Each grower/producer shall comply with the Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP) for vessels and work barges that will be used during project construction and operations. Each grower/producer operating in the project area shall be trained in, and adhere to, the emergency procedures and spill prevention and response measures specified in the SPRP during all project operations. The SPRP shall provide for emergency response and spill control procedures to be taken to stop or control the source of the spill and to contain and clean up the spill. The SPRP shall include, at a minimum: (a) identification of potential spill sources and quantity estimates of a project specific reasonable worst case spill; (b) identification of prevention and response equipment and measures/procedures that will be taken to prevent potential spills and to protect marine and shoreline resources in the event of a spill. Spill prevention and response equipment shall be kept onboard project vessels at all times; (c) a prohibition on at-sea vessel or equipment fueling/refueling activities; and (d) emergency response and notification procedures, including a list of contacts to call in the event of a spill; (e) assurance that all hydraulic fluid to be used for installation, maintenance, planting, and harvesting activities shall be vegetable based. MM BIO-8 Invasive Species. Grower/producers operating in the project area shall be required to receive training from NMFS to identify potential invasive species and how to properly dispose of such invasive species if discovered. MM BIO-9 Sediment Quality Monitoring Plan. A Sediment Quality Monitoring Plan shall be developed requiring monitoring of sediment conditions within the project area, including monitoring the quantity, type, and distribution of biological materials (such as shellfish, shell material, and fouling organisms) that accumulate on the seafloor. Monitoring will also include an evaluation of any changes to oxygen demand of benthic infaunal and epifaunal communities, and changes to the chemical and biochemical conditions of seafloor sediments along with a description of performance standards to meet. If performance standards are not met, corrective actions will be outlined. The Plan will include reporting requirements, including annual report submittals to NOAA and NMFS for review. If performance standards are met for a period of time, the plan will provide for appropriately scaling down monitoring and intervals over time. 250 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 54 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 MM BIO-10 Aquaculture Gear Monitoring and Escapement Plan. Include in overall management plan an aquaculture gear monitoring and escapement plan. Any farm gear that has broken loose from the farm location shall be retrieved. The farm site shall be visited at minimum twice per month to examine the aquaculture gear for potential loss or non-compliant deployment, including inspections for fouling organisms. Any organisms that have a potential to cover the sea floor will be removed and disposed of at an identified upland facility. A Marine Debris Management Plan shall also be prepared that includes (a) a plan for permanently marking all lines, ropes, buoys, and other facility infrastructure and floating equipment with the name and contact information of the grower/producer; (b) a description of the extent and frequency of maintenance operations necessary to minimize the loss of materials and equipment to the marine environment resulting from breakages and structural failures; and (c) a description of the search and cleanup measures that would be implemented if loss of shellfish cultivation facility materials, equipment, and/or infrastructure occurs. MM BIO-11 Decommissioning Plan. A decommissioning plan for the timely removal of all shellfish, structures, anchoring devices, equipment, and materials associated with the shellfish cultivation facility and documentation of completion of removal activities will be a requirement of each permit or sub-permit. Financial assurances to guarantee implementation of the plan will be in place and reviewed periodically. MM BIO-12 Lighting. All growing area operations shall be completed during daylight hours. No growing area operations will be conducted at night and no permanent artificial lighting of the shellfish cultivation facility shall occur, except for that associated with the use of navigational safety buoys required by the U.S. Coast Guard. MM BIO-13 Predator Control. Potential predator species will be identified. Specified humane methods of predator deterrence will be utilized, favoring non-lethal methods. No controls, other than non-lethal exclusion, shall be applied to species that are listed as threatened or endangered. MM NAV-1 Update NOAA Charts. VPD to submit to the NOAA Office of Coast Survey: (a) the geographical coordinates of the facility boundaries obtained using a different geographic position unit or comparable navigational equipment; (b) as-built plans of the facility and associated buoys and anchors; (c) each grower/producer’s point of contact and telephone number; and (d) any other information required by the NOAA Office of Coast Survey to accurately portray the location of the shellfish cultivation facility on navigational charts. MM NAV-2 Notice to Mariners. No less than 15-days prior to the start of in-water activities associated with the installation phase of the project, VPD shall submit to (a) the U.S. Coast Guard (for publication in a Notice to Mariners); and (b) the harbormasters (for posting in their offices of public noticeboards), notices containing the anticipated start date of installation, the anticipated installation schedule, and the coordinates of the installation sites. During installation, VPD shall also make radio broadcast announcements to the local fishers’ emergency radio frequency that provide the current installation location and a phone number that can be called for additional information. 251 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 55 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 5.3 Cumulative Effects Section 7 (FESA) regulations require a federal agency taking an action to provide an analysis of cumulative effects when requesting initiation of formal consultation. Cumulative effects include the effects of future state, tribal, local, or private actions, not involving a federal action, that are reasonably certain to occur in or adjacent to the project site. Future federal actions that are unrelated to the Proposed Action are not considered in this analysis, because they require separate consultation pursuant to Section 7. Federal actions may include granting a permit for a project, authorizing funds for a project, or implementing a project. For the purposes of this BA, cumulative effects are defined as environmental change that results from the incremental effects of several projects that may be individually minor, but that become significant when considered collectively. There are no known actions (Federal, State or Tribal) slated to occur in or immediately adjacent to the project area. 5.4 Compensatory Mitigation No impacts requiring compensatory mitigation will result from implementation of the Project Actions. 252 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 56 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 253 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 57 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 6.0 CONCLUSIONS This BA forms the basis for the conclusions presented below regarding the effects of the Project Actions on thirteen species with a potential to occur in the action area. Based on a review of the current status of these species, the effects of the Project Actions, and recommended measures to avoid and minimize effects to listed species, the Project Actions may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect each of these species. Table 2 below summarizes the effects determination for the Project Actions. Table 2 Summary of Effects Determinations Federally Protected Species No Effect May Affect, But Is Not Likely to Adversely Affect Is Likely to Adversely Affect Balarnoptera acutorostrata Common Minke Whale  Balaenoptera physalus physalus Fin Whale  Caretta caretta Loggerhead Sea Turtle  Chelonia mydas Green Sea Turtle  Delphinus capensis capensis Long-beaked Common Dolphin  Delphinus delphis delphis Short-beaked Common Dolphin  Eschrichtius robustus Gray Whale  Lagenorhynchus obliquidens Pacific White-sided Dolphin  Megaptera novaeangliae Humpback Whale  Phoca vitulina Pacific Harbor Seal  Tursiops truncatus Common Bottlenose Dolphin  Zalophus californianus California Sea Lion  As noted in the Nationwide Permit (NWP) 48 Decision Document (USACE 2017) recently approved by the Corps, which considered shellfish aquaculture uses nationwide, “Compared to the disturbances and degradation caused by coastal development, pollution, and other human activities in coastal areas, commercial shellfish aquaculture activities present relatively mild disturbances to estuarine and marine ecosystems.” The Decision Document 254 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 58 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 concludes that impacts from most aquaculture projects would be de minimis on the surrounding environment. This determination is generally reaffirmed in the Corps’ 2015 Programmatic Biological Assessment (USACE 2015) that considered new and existing shellfish aquaculture in Washington State, as well as the 2016 Programmatic Biological Opinions from NOAA’s NMFS (NMFS 2012f) evaluating the same, which concluded that impacts would be minor upon imposition of identified conservation measures. Notably, the above analyses evaluated shellfish aquaculture at a larger scale than that proposed by the project. NWP 48 covers most shellfish aquaculture projects nationwide and the Programmatic Biological Evaluation evaluated environmental impacts associated with a total of 38,400 commercial aquaculture acres in Washington. With implementation of the mitigation measures identified in this BA, including measures for navigational safety MM BIO-14 and MM BIO-15, the Project Actions are not expected to directly or indirectly reduce, in any appreciable manner, the likelihood of survival or recovery of the species described above by reducing its reproduction, numbers, or distribution. The measures proposed to offset anticipated effects provide reasonable protections to avoid and minimize adverse effects of the Project Actions. Additionally, no designated critical habitat is present within the Action Area. Overall, the Project Actions would not result in permanent impacts to ESA‐listed or MMPA species, based on: (1) the nature and extent of the activities proposed to be implemented; (2) avoidance and minimization measures proposed in this BA; (3) the relative size of the Project Actions within the Santa Barbara Channel; and (4) the temporary nature of construction activities. See Dudek (2018) for an assessment of Essential Fish Habitat for this project. 255 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 59 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 7.0 REFERENCES Abramson, L., S. Polefka, S. Hastings, and K. Bor. 2010. Reducing the Threat of Ship Strikes on Large Cetaceans in the Santa Barbara Channel Region and Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary: Recommendations and Case Studies. Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series ONMS-11-01. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, Silver Spring, MD. 59pp. Allen, B.M. and R.P. Angliss. 2014. Alaska Marine Mammal Stock Assessments. NOAA-TM-AFSC-301. Accessed July 24, 2017. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/pdf/stocks/alaska/2014/ak2014_ssl-eastern.pdf. Barlow, J. and G.A. Cameron. 2003. Field Experiments Show That Acoustic Pingers Reduce Marine Mammal Bycatch in the California Drift Gill Net Fishery. Marine Mammal Science. 19(2):265-283. Baulch, S. and C. Perry. 2014. Evaluating the impacts of marine debris on cetaceans. Marine Pollution Bulletin. Accessed July 24, 2017. 80(1-2):210-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.12.050 Baumann-Pickering, S., T.M. Yack, J. Barlow, S.M. Wiggins, and J.A. Hildebrand. Baird’s beaked whale echolocation signals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 133:4321-4331. Becker, E.A., Forney, K.A., Thayre, B.J., Debich, A.J., Campbell, G.S., Whitaker, K, Douglas, A.B., Gilles, A., Hoopes, R., and J.A. Hildebrand. 2017. Frontiers in Marine Science. 4(121): 1-14. Benjamins, S., Harnois, V., Smith, H.C.M., Johanning, L., Greenhill, L., Carter, C., and B. Wilson. 2014. Understanding the potential for marine megafauna entanglement risk from renewable marine energy developments. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 791. Bennington-Castro, J. 2016. The Cost of Saving Sea Turtles from Gillnets. NOAA Fisheries. Pacific Islands Regional Office. Accessed July 24, 2017. http://www.fpir.noaa.gov/stories/04262016_the_cost_of_saving_ sea_turtles_from_gillnets.html Berman-Kowalewski, M., F.M.D. Gulland, S. Wilkin, J. Calambokidis, B. Mate, J. Cordado, D. Rotstein, J. St. Leger, P. Collins, K. Fahy, and S. Dover. 2010. Association between blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) mortality and ship strikes along the California coast. Aquatic Mammals 36: 59−66. Bullard, S.G., Lambert, G., Carman, M.R., Bymes, J., Whitlatch, R.B., Ruiz, G., Miller, R.J., Harris, L., Valentine, P.C., Collie, J.S., Pederson, J., McNaught, D.C., Cohen, A.N., Asch, R.G., Dijkstra, J, and K. Heinonen. The colonial ascidian Didemnum sp. A: Current distribution, basic biology and potential threat to marine communities of the northeast and west coasts of North America. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 342: 99-108. Accessed July 12, 2018. http://byrneslab.net/pdfs/Bullard_et_al_2007_JEMBE.pdf. 256 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 60 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 Calambokidis, J., Steiger, G.H., Curtice, C., Harrison, J., Ferguson, M.C., Becker, E., DeAngelis, M., and S.M. Van Parijs. 2015. Biologically important Areas for Selected Cetaceans Within U.S Waters- West Coast Region. Aquatic Mammals. 41(1): 39-53 California Bird Records Committee (CBRC). 2018. California Bird Records Committee Database. Accessed March 6, 2018. http://californiabirds.org/database_query.asp. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2009. Marine Mammal Haulouts and Rookeries (Map). Version 2.0. Printing date 4/13/2009. Map 3.2-1h. Accessed February 13, 2018. https://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/ pdfs/rpsc/map3_2-1h-i.pdf. CDFW. 2011. Kelp Canopy Map Data-2011-California Coast. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Marine Region. State of California Geoportal. Accessed April 15, 2018. https://map.dfg.ca.gov/arcgis/rest/services /Project_Marine/Marine_Kelp/MapServer. CDFW. 2018. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). RareFind Version 5.2.14 (Commercial Subscription). Sacramento, California: CDFW, Biogeographic Database Branch. Accessed February 12, 2018. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/mapsanddata.asp. California Fish and Game Commission (CFGC). 2018. State of California, California Natural Resources Agency, California Fish and Game Commission, Mitigated Negative Declaration for Santa Barbara Mariculture Company Continued Shellfish Aquaculture Operations on State Water Bottom Lease Offshore Santa Barbara, California. 143 pp. Campbell, G.S., Thomas, L., Whitaker, K., Douglas, A.B., Calambokidis, J., and J.A. Hildebrand. 2014. Inter-annual and seasonal trends in cetacean distribution, density and abundance off southern California. Deep-Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography. 112: 143-157. Carwardine, M., Fordyce, R.E., Gill, P., and E. Hoyt. 1998. Whales, Dolphins, and Porpoises. Fog City Press, San Francisco, California. Cascadia. 2011. Large Cetacean Analysis for the Santa Barbara Channel Region. Prepared by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary Staff and Cascadia Research Collective Staff. PARS Cetacean Analysis Attachment 1. Accessed July 24, 2018. https://nmschannelislands.blob.core.windows.net/channelislands-prod/media/archive/management/ resource/pdf/pars5_19_11.pdf Clement, D. 2013. Effects of Marine Mammals. Chapter 4 in: Ministry for Primary Industries. Literature review of ecological effects of aquaculture. Report prepared by Cawthron Institute, Nelson, New Zealand. Cornell Lab of Ornithology (CLO). 2018. eBird. Accessed February 12, 2018. https://ebird.org/home. 257 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 61 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 Collins, P.W. 2011. Channel Islands Bird Checklist. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. November 4. Condor Express. 2018. Whale Watch Report. February 2018. https://condorexpress.com/captains-blog/. Dawson, S., Northridge, S. P., Waples, D., & Read, A. 2013. To ping or not to ping: the use of active acoustic devices in mitigating interactions between small cetaceans and gillnet fisheries. Endangered Species Research (19) 201-221. Douglas, A.B., Calambokidis, J., Munger, L.M., Soldevilla, M.S., Ferguson, M.C., Havron, A.M., Cmacho, D.L., Campbell, G.S., and J.A. Hildebrand. 2014. Seasonal distribution and abundance of cetaceans off Southern California estimated from CalCOFI cruise data from 2004 to 2008. Fish. Bull. 112: 197-220. Dudek. 2017a. Draft Initial Study Checklist for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project. Prepared by Dudek. Prepared for Ventura Port District. September. Dudek. 2017b. Draft Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Environmental Impact Report. Prepared by Dudek. Prepared for Ventura Port District. May. Dudek. 2017c. Ventura Shellfish Enterprise: Strategic Permitting Initiative to Substantially Increase Shellfish Farming in Southern California. 2017 NOAA Sea Grant Aquaculture Extension and Technology Transfer. Task 1 Deliverable: Strategic Permitting Plan. Prepared by Dudek. May 26. Dudek. 2018. In Preparation. Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Report for the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise. Prepared by Dudek. Prepared for Ventura Port District. Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI). 2010. Environmental Sensitivity Index Map. Biological Resources. Southern California: Ventura. ESI map 9 and 10. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. National Ocean Service. Office of Response and Restoration. Emergency Response Division. Accessed July 20, 2018. https://response.restoration.noaa.gov/maps-and-spatial-data/environmental-sensitivity-index-esi-maps.html Fleming, A.H., C.T. Clark, J. Calambokidis, and J Barlow. 2016. Humpback Whale Diets Respond to Variance in Ocean Climate and Ecosystem Conditions in the California Current. Global Change Biolog.y 22: 1214-1224. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13171. Garrett, K. and J. Dunn. 1981. Birds of southern California: status and distribution. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Audubon Society. Gentry R.R., S.E. Lester, C.V. Kappel, C. White, T.W. Bell, J. Stevens, and S.D. Gaines. 2017. “Offshore Aquaculture: Spatial Planning Principles for Sustainable Development.” Ecology and Evolution. 7:733–743. doi: 10.1002/ece3.2637. Gray Whales Count. 2018. About Gray Whales Count. February 10, 2018. http://www.graywhalescount.org/ GWC/The_Count/The_Count.html 258 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 62 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 R. Guza and W. O’Reilly. Wave Prediction in the Santa Barbara Channel. MMS OCS Study 2001-055. Coastal Research Center, Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, California. MMS Cooperative Agreement Number 14-35-0001-30758. 8 pages. Henrique de Carvalho, R., P.D. Lacerda, S.D. Mendes, B.C. Barbosa, M. Paschoalini, F. Prezoto, and B.M de Sousa. 2015. Marine debris ingestion by sea turtles (Testudines) on the Brazilian coast: an underestimated threat? Marine Pollution Bulletin. 101(2):746-749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2015.10.002 Jefferson, T.A., M.A. Webber, MA, and R.L. Pitman. 2008. Marine Mammals of the World: A Comprehensive Guide to Their Identification. Second Edition. Academic Press. Elsevier. San Diego, California. Keeley, N., Forrest, B.M., Hopkins, G.A., Gillespie, P.A., Knight, B.R., Webb, S.C., Clement, D., and J. Gardner. 2009. Review of the ecological effects of farming shellfish and other non-finfish species in New Zealand. Cawthron Report 1476. Prepared for New Zealand's Ministry of Fisheries. Kemper, C.M., Pemberton, D., Cawthorn, M, Heinrich, S., Mann, J., Wursig, B., Shaughnessy, P. and R. Gales. 2003. Aquaculture and Marine Mammals: Co-existence or Conflict? Research Gate. 208-225 pp. Kenyon, K.W. 1971. Status of Marine Mammals in the Eastern North Pacific Ocean. Prepared for the Department of the Interior, 102 Statement Task Force B of the Task Force on Alaskan Oil Development. July 29. Kot, B. W., Sears, R., Anis, A., Nowacek, D. P., Gedamke, J., & Marshall, C. D. 2012. Behavioral responses of minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) to experimental fishing gear in a coastal environment. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 413: 13-20. Laist, D.W., Knowlton, A.R., Mead, J.G., Collet, A.S. and Podesta, M. 2001. Collisions between ships and whales. Marine Mammal Science 17(1): 35-75. Leet, W.S., C.M. Dewees, R. Klingbeil, and E.J. Larson, eds. 2001. California’s Living Marine Resources: A Status Report. The Resources Agency, California Department of Fish and Game. 592 pp. Lehman, P.E. 2018. The Birds of Santa Barbara County, California. Revised edition. Accessed March 12, 2018. https://sites.google.com/site/lehmanbosbc/ Lindell, S. 2014. Santoro Fishing Corporation mussel farm biological assessment. Supplemental information for permit application (NAE-2013-1584 Santoro) submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New England District. Lloyd, B.D. 2003. Potential effects of mussel farming on New Zealand’s marine mammals and seabirds: a discussion paper. Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand. Accessed July 10, 2018. https://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/science-and-technical/Musselfarms01.pdf 259 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 63 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 Lowry, M.S., and J.V. Carretta. 1999. Market Squid (Loligo opalescens) in the Diet of California Sea Lions (Zalophus californianus) in Southern California (1981-1995). CalCOFI Report 40: 196-207. Lowry, M.S., R. Condit, B. Hatfield, S.G. Allen, R. Berger. P.A. Morris, B.J. Le Boeuf, and J. Reiter. 2014. “Abundance, Distribution, and Population Growth of the Northern Elephant Seal (Mirounga angustirostris) in the United States from 1991 to 2010.” Aquatic Mammals 40: 20-31. Marine Mammal Commission (MMC). 2007. Marine Mammals and Noise. A Sound Approach to Research and Management. A Report to Congress from the Marine Mammal Commission. February 10, 2018. https://www.mmc.gov/wp-content/uploads/fullsoundreport.pdf. MMC. 2018. North Pacific Right Whale. Accessed February 10, 2018. https://www.mmc.gov/priority-topics/speciesof- concern/north-pacific-right-whale/. Markowitz, T.M., Harlin, A.D., Wursig B. and C.J. McFadden. 2004. Dusky dolphin foraging habitat: overlap with aquaculture in New Zeal-and. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Fresh-water Ecosystems 14: 133149. Miller, M.H., J. Carlson, P. Cooper, D. Kobayashi, M. Nammack, and J. Wilson. 2013. Status Review Report: Scalloped Hammerhead Shark (Sphyrna lewini). National Marine Fisheries Service. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 125 pp. Moore, K., and D. Wieting. 1999. Marine Aquaculture, Marine Mammals, and Marine Turtles Interaction Workshop 12-13 January 1999, Silver Spring, Maryland. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo NMFS-OPR-16, 60 pp. Nelson, S. K.. 1997. Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus), version 2.0. In The Birds of North America (A. F. Poole and F. B. Gill, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/ 10.2173/bna.276. National Data Buoy Center. 2017. Station 46217 - Anacapa Passage, CA (111). Center of Excellence in Marine Technology, NOAA. Accessed April 15, 2018. http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_history.php?station=46217. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2007a. Appendix B. Current Seismic Surveys Mitigation Measures in the GOM. United States Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service (MMS), Gulf of Mexico (GOM) OCS Region. OMB Control Number: 1010-0151. Accessed February 25, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/permits/boemre_appendixb.pdf. NMFS. 2007b. Bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinus). Species of Concern. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/species/bocaccio_highlights.pdf. NMFS. 2007c. Pink Abalone (Haliotic corrugata). Species of Concern. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/SOC /pinkabalone_detailed.pdf. 260 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 64 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 NMFS. 2008. Steelhead Trout (Onchorhynchus mykiss). Oregon Coast ESU. Species of Concern. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/SOC/steelhead_detailed.pdf. NMFS. 2009a. Pacific Hake (Merluccius productus). Georgia Basin DPS. Species of Concern. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/species/pacifichake_detailed.pdf. NMFS. 2009b. Cowcod (Sebastes levis). Species of Concern. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/species/cowcod_detailed.pdf. NMFS. 2009c. Status Review Report for Black Abalone (Haliotis cracherodii). NMFS Southwest Region. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/status_reviews/ other_species/blackabalone_status_review_2009.pdf. NMFS. 2009d. Green Abalone (Haliotis fulgens). Species of Concern. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/ SOC/greenabalone_detailed.pdf. NMFS. 2009e. Template for Biological Assessments & Biological Evaluations. Provided by NMFS Pacific Island Regional Office, Protected Resources Division. Revised January 2009. Accessed February 15, 2018. http://www.fpir.noaa.gov/Library/PRD/ESA%20Consultation/Final%20Action%20Agency%20Consultati on%20Package%20Files%20for%20website%201-12-09/Template%20for%20BA-BE%20-%201-12-09.pdf. NMFS. 2010. Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Central Valley Fall, Late-Fall Run ESU. Species of Concern. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed February 20, 2018: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ pr/pdfs/species/chinooksalmon_highlights.pdf. NMFS. 2011a. Common Bottlenose Dolphin. California/Oregon/Washington Offshore Stock. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed August 27, 2018. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ webdam/download/70099129 . NMFS. 2011b. Pacific Cod (Gadus microcephalus). Salish Sea Population. Species of Concern. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/species/ pacificcod_detailed.pdf. NMFS 2011c. Critical Habitat for the Southern Distinct Population Segment of Eulachon. Final Biological Report. Southwest Region Protected Resources Division.. NMFS. 2011d. Final Designation of Critical Habitat for Black Abalone. Final Biological Report. Southwest Region Protected Resources Division. 261 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 65 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 NMFS. 2014. Status Review Report for Pinto Abalone (Haliotis kamtschatkana). U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. Accessed February 22, 2018. http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/protected_species/other/ abalone_species/ pintoabsr_report_final_dec_2014.pdf . NMFS. 2015a. Southern Distinct Population Segment of the North American Green Sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris). 5- Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. National Marine Fisheries Service. West Coast Region. Accessed February 22, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/listing/southern_dps_green_sturgeon_5- year_review_2015__2_.pdf. NMFS. 2015b. ESA Recovery Plan for Snake River Sockeye Salmnon (Onchorynchus nerka). National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region, Portland, Oregon. Accessed February 20, 2018: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ pr/recovery/plans/snake_river_sockeye_recovery_plan_june_2015.pdf. NMFS. 2016a. Recovery Plan for Oregon Coast Coho Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Unit. National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region, Portland, Oregon. Accessed February 20, 2018: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/recovery/plans/final_oc_coho_recovery_plandec_20.pdf. NMFS. 2016c. Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing: Underwater Acoustic Thresholds for Onset of Permanent and Temporary Threshold Shifts. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-55, 178 p. NMFS. 2016b. 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation of Southern California Coast Steelhead Distinct Population Segment. National Marine Fisheries Service. West Coast Region. California Coastal Office. Long Beach, California. NMFS. 2016c. Minke Whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata scammoni): California/Oregon/Washington Stock. Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report. Revised August 16, 2016. Accessed February 15, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/pdf/stocks/pacific/2016/po2016_miw-cow.pdf. NMFS. 2017a. Pygmy Sperm Whale (Kogia breviceps): California/Oregon/Washington Stock. Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report. Revised February 10, 2017. Accessed February 15, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.htm. NMFS. 2017b. Dwarf Sperm Whale (Kogia sima): California/Oregon/Washington Stock. Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report. Revised February 10, 2017. Accessed February 15, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.htm. NMFS. 2017c. Striped Dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba): California/Oregon/Washington Stock. Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report. Revised February 9, 2017. Accessed February 15, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.htm. 262 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 66 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 NMFS. 2017d. Chum Salmon (Onchorhynchus keta). NOAA Fisheries. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Accessed February 15, 2018: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/fish/chum-salmon.html. NMFS. 2017e. Rockfish Recovery Plan: Puget Sound / Georgia Basin yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus) and bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinis). National Marine Fisheries Service. Seattle, WA. NMFS. 2017f. National Marine Fisheries Service Endangered Species Consultation Biological Opinion on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Nationwide Permit Program. February 2012. U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. National Marine Fisheries Service. Silver Spring, Maryland. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/consultations/ biop_acoe_permits2012.pdf. NMFS. 2017g. Common Bottlenose Dolphin (Tursiops truncatus): California Coastal Stock. Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report. Revised February 9, 2017. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ pr/sars/pdf/stocks/pacific/2016/po2016_cbd-cc.pdf. NMFS. 2018a. Find a Species Website. NOAA Fisheries. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Accessed February 20, 2018. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species. NMFS. 2018b. Species of Concern Website. NOAA Fisheries, West Coast Region, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Accessed February 20, 2018. .http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/ protected_species/species_of_concern/species_of_concern.html NMFS. 2018c. Protected Species: Marine Mammals. NOAA Fisheries, West Coast Region, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Accessed February 20, 2018. .http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/ protected_species/marine_mammals/marine_mammals.html NMFS. 2018d. Protected Species: Sea Turtles. NOAA Fisheries, West Coast Region, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Accessed February 20, 2018. ttp://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/ protected_species/sea_turtles/marine_turtles.html. NMFS. 2018e. 2018 Revisions to: Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0): Underwater Thresholds for Onset of Permanent and Temporary Threshold Shifts. U.S. Dept. of Commer., NOAA. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-59, 167 p. NMFS and USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1998a. Recovery Plan for the U.S. Pacific Populations of the Loggerhead Turtle (Caretta caretta). National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD. NMFS and USFWS. 1998b. Recovery Plan for U.S. Pacific Populations of the East Pacific Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas). National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD. 263 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 67 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 NMFS and USFWS. 1998c. Recovery Plan for U.S. Pacific Populations of the Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelys coriacea). National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD. NMFS and USFWS. 1998d. Recovery Plan for U.S. Pacific Populations of the Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata). National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD. NMFS and USFWS. 1998e. Recovery Plan for U.S. Pacific Populations of the Olive Ridley Turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea). National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD. NMFS and USFWS. 2007. Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD. August. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2008. “Gear Modification Techniques for Complying with the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan (ALWTRP).” Effective April 5, 2008. https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/nero/hotnews/whalesfr/Gear%20Modification%20Techniqu es%20for%20Complying%20with%20the%20ALWTRP_vs8.pdf. NOAA. 2011. “National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Marine Aquaculture Policy.” NOAA Fisheries. Accessed April 15, 2019. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/docs/policy/noaa_aquaculture_policy_2011.pdf. NOAA. 2009. Designation of Critical Habitat for the threatened Southern Distinct Population Segment of North American Green Sturgeon. Final Biological Report. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. U.S. Department of Commerce. Accessed July 20, 2018. http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/ protected_species/other/green_sturgeon/g_s_critical_habitat/gschd_finalbiologicalrpt.pdf. NOAA. 2011. “National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Marine Aquaculture Policy.” NOAA Fisheries. Accessed July 20, 2018. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/aquaculture/regulation-policy. NOAA. 2012. Cetacean & Sound Mapping. Metadata. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. U.S. Department of Commerce. Accessed July 20, 2018. https://cetsound.noaa.gov/metadata/ swfsc_stratified_graywhale_2012.html. NOAA. 2013a. “National Shellfish Initiative.” Fact sheet. NOAA Fisheries. Accessed March 15, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/docs/policy/natl_shellfish_init_factsheet_ summer_2013.pdf. NOAA. 2013b. Gray Whale Stranding and Marine Debris. Grey Whale Outreach Activity Informational Flyer. Accessed March 15, 2018. http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/education/ graywhalestrandingmarinedebrisactivitypacket.pdf 264 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 68 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 NOAA. 2014. U.S. west coast large whale entanglement information sharing workshop report. The National Marine Fisheries Service. West Coast Regional Office. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. U.S. Department of Commerce. Accessed July 20, 2018. http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/project_pages/ dctf/ec-meeting-10/finalentanglementwsreport.pdf. NOAA. 2017a. United States West Coast, California. Port Hueneme to Santa Barbara. Mercator Projection. Nautical Chart. Washington, DC. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, National Ocean Science, Coast Survey. 30th Ed. June 2013. Last correction 7/3/2017. NOAA. 2017b. Reducing Ship Strike Risk to Whales. Resource Protection. National Marine Sanctuaries. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Accessed February 20, 2018. https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/ protect/shipstrike/welcome.html. NOAA. 2017c. 2016 West Coast Entanglement Summary. Overview of Entanglement Data. NOAA Fisheries. West Coast Region. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. U.S. Department of Commerce. Accessed July 20, 2018. http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/mediacenter/WCR%202016%20Whale%2 0Entanglements_3-26-17_Final.pdf. NOAA. 2018a. California Species List Tools. NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/maps_data/california_species_list_tools.html NOAA. 2018b. Endangered Species Act, Section 6 Program Website. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/conservation/states/california.htm NOAA. 2018c. Critical Habitat Maps. Accessed February 20, 2018. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/criticalhabitat.htm NOAA. 2018d. Water Temperature Table of the Southern Pacific Coast. NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. Last update on March 7, 2018. Accessed February 20, 2018. https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/ dsdt/cwtg/all_meanT.html NOAA. 2018e. Cetacean and Sound Mapping. Biologically Important Areas. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Accessed May 29, 2018. https://cetsound.noaa.gov/biologically-important-area-map National Ocean Council. 2013. National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan. Accessed April 15, 2019. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/national_ocean_policy_ implementation_plan.pdf. National Park Service (NPS). 2013. Viewing Elephant Seals. Point Reyes National Seashore, California. National Park Service. Accessed February 20, 2018. https://www.nps.gov/pore/planyourvisit/wildlife_viewing_elephantseals.htm 265 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 69 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 Okumus, I., Bascinar, N., and M. Ozkan. 2002. The effects of phytoplankton concentration, size of mussel and water temperature on feed consumption and filtration rate of the Mediterranean Mussel (Mytilus galloprovincialis Lmk). Turkish Journal of Zoology. 26: 167-172. OSPAR (OSPAR Commission). 2009. Assessment of the environmental impact of underwater noise. Biodiversity Series. Prepared by F. Thomsen and the Intersessional correspondence group on underwater noise. OSPAR Commission. ISBN : 978-1-906840-76-1. Publication Number: 436/2009. Pearson, T., and R. Rosenberg. 1978. Macrobenthic succession in relation to organic enrichment and pollution of the marine environment. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review 16: 229–311. Point Blue Conservation Science (PBCS). 2018. Whale Alert Map. Point Blue Conservation Science. Accessed February 15, 2018. https://geo.pointblue.org/whale-map/index.php Price, C.S., E.Keane, D. Morin, C. Vaccaro, D. Bean, and J.A. Morris,Jr. 2016. Protected Species & Longline Mussel Aquaculture Interactions. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 211. 85 pp. Ritter, F. 2012. Collisions of sailing vessels with cetaceans worldwide: First insights into a seemingly growing problem. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 12(1): 119-127. Santa Barbara Channelkeeper. 2017. About the Santa Barbara Channel. Accessed April 14, 2017 from the ChannelKeeper website: http://www.sbck.org/about-the-santa-barbara-channel/. Silber, G.K., Slutsky, J. and Bettridge, S. 2010. Hydrodynamics of a ship/whale collision. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 391: 10-19. Stadmark J., and D.J. Conley. 2011. Mussel farming as a nutrient reduction measure in the Baltic Sea: consideration of nutrient biogeochemical cycles. Mar Pollut Bull 62:1385−1388. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP). 2016. Bight ’13 Regional Monitoring. Regional Monitoring. SCCWRP: A Public Agency for Environmental Research. Accessed August 27, 2018. http://sccwrp.org/ResearchAreas/RegionalMonitoring/Bight13RegionalMonitoring.aspx. Souchu, P, Vaquer, A., Collos, Y., Landrein, S., Deslous-Paoli, J., and B. Bibent. 2001. Influence of shellfish farming activities on the biogeochemical composition of the water column in Thau lagoon. Inter-Research. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 218: 141-152. The Orange County Register (OC Register). 2018. Rare Pilot Whale Surface off Dana Point. Written by Kelly Zhou. October 30, 2014 at 7:05am. Accessed February 20, 2018. https://www.ocregister.com/2014/10/30/rarepilot- whales-surface-off-dana-point/. 266 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 70 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2015. Programmatic Biological Assessment. Shellfish Activities in Washington State Inland Marine Waters. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle. USACE. 2017. Decision Document. Nationwide Permit 48. Sections 10 and 404. Accessed February 20, 2018. https://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Regulatory-Program-and-Permits/Nationwide- Permits/2017_NWP_FinalDD/. USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 1985. Revised California Least Tern Recovery Plan. Sterna antillarum brownii. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 112. pp. USFWS. 1997. Recovery Plan for the Threatened Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) in Washington, Oregon, and California. Portland, Oregon. 203 pp. USFWS. 2005. Recovery Plan for the Tidewater Goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi). Region 1. Ecological Services. USFWS. 2006. California least tern (Sternula antillarum browni) 5-Year Review Summary and Evaluation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, California. September. USFWS. 2011. Santa Ana Sucker (Catostomus santaanae). 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office. USFWS. 2015. Southern Sea Otter (Enhydra lutris nereis) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, Ventura, California. September 15. USFWS. 2018a. Information for Planning and Consulting. Accessed February 20, 2018. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. USFWS. 2018b. Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS). Accessed February 20, 2018. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/. USFWS. 2018c. International Affairs CITES Informational Website. Oceanic Whitetip Shark (Carcharhinus longimanus). Accessed February 20, 2018. https://www.fws.gov/international/cites/cop16/oceanic-whitetip-shark.html. USFWS. 2018d. Short-tailed albatross. Oregon Fish and Wildlife Offices. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Accessed February 20, 2018. https://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/articles.cfm?id=149489452. Ventura County Star (VCS). 2017. Humpback Whale Gets Stuck in Ventura Harbor. Ventura County Star. February 15, 2018. http://www.vcstar.com/story/news/local/communities/ventura/2017/05/20/humpback-whalestuck- ventura-harbor/101946876/. 267 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 71 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 Weise, M.J., Costa, D.P., and R.M. Kudela. 2006. Movement and diving behavior of male California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) during anomalous oceanographic conditions of 2005 compared to those of 2004. Geophysical Research Letters. 33: L22S10. Accessed July 20, 2018. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/epdf/10.1029/2006GL027113. Whale and Dolphin Conservation (WDC). 2018. Blainville’s Beaked Whale (Mesoplodon densirostris). Accessed February 20, 2018. http://us.whales.org/species-guide/blainvilles-beaked-whale. Wilding T.A., and T.D. Nickell. 2013. Changes in Benthos Associated with Mussel (Mytilus edulis L.) Farms on the West-Coast of Scotland. PLoS ONE 8(7): e68313. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0068313. Wilding, T.A. 2012. Changes in Sedimentary Redox Associated with Mussel (Mytilus edulis L.) Farms on the West- Coast of Scotland. PLoS ONE 7(9): e45159. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0045159. Woods Hole Science Center. 2007. Didemnum sp. – California Coast Locations. Marine Nuisance Species. Accessed July 20, 2018. https://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/project-pages/stellwagen/didemnum/images/pdf/page12.pdf. Yen, P.P.W., W.J. Sydeman, and K.D. Hyrenbach. 2004. “Marine birds and Cetacean Associations with Bathymetric Habitats and Shallow-Water Topographies: Implications for Trophic Transfer and Conservation.” Journal of Marine Systems. 50: 79−99. 268 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE VENTURA SHELLFISH ENTERPRISE PROJECT 9250 72 DUDEK SEPTEMBER 2018 INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 269 APPENDIX A Essential Fish Habitat Assessment 270 271 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential to Occur 272 273 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-1 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur Marine Mammals2 Cetaceans Balarnoptera acutorostrata Common minke whale MMPA Worldwide distribution. Polar, temperate, and tropical waters in both coastal and offshore habitats (NMFS 2018a). Moderate potential to occur. Foraging and migration habitat is present in the Action Area. Some individuals are residents in California waters. Minke whales feed on euphausiids, copepods and small schooling fish, which are present in the Channel. In addition, this species has been recorded since 1988 in the Santa Barbara Channel and within 1 mile of the Action Area (PBCS 2018). Balaenoptera borealis borealis Sei whale Endangered, MMPA Worldwide distribution in subtropical, temperate, and subpolar waters. This species prefers deeper waters far from the coastline (NMFS 2018a). This species’ habitat preference is the continental shelf edge and slope (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. This species may traverse through the Action Area during migration. In general, sei whales migrate annually from cool and subpolar waters in summer to temperate and subtropical waters for winter, where food is more abundant. Foraging resources (krill, copepods, small schooling fish, cephalopods) are likely present in the Action Area. Balaenoptera edeni Bryde’s whale Proposed Endangered, MMPA Prefers highly productive tropical, subtropical and warm temperate waters worldwide. Low potential to occur. This species may be found in all oceans from 40°S to 40°N; however, some populations migrate seasonally while others are resident and do not migrate (NMFS 2018). Year-round residents appear to be present along the west coast of Baja California, Mexico (Kenyon 1971). Foraging resources (krill, copepods, small schooling fish, crustaceans) are likely present in the Action Area. This species displays a preference for subtropical and tropical zones, inhabiting waters 16℃ (60℉) or warmer) (Jefferson et al. 2008). Balaenoptera musculus musculus Blue whale Endangered, MMPA Worldwide, from sub-polar to sub-tropical latitudes; generally occurs more offshore than other whales (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. This species has been observed migrating and feeding through the Santa Barbara Channel on many occasions, with several occurrences within the Action Area (PBCS 2018). In general, this species migrates poleward to feed in the summer and to the tropics to breed in the winter (Jefferson et al. 2008). Most occurrences are north of Santa Rosa and western Santa Cruz Island along the 200 meter isobath (Cascadia 2011), approximately 7.4 miles east of the Action Area. In addition, foraging resources (predominantly krill) are likely present in the Action Area. Balaenoptera physalus physalus Fin whale Endangered, MMPA Worldwide, primarily in temperate to polar latitudes and less common in the tropics. Moderate potential to occur. This species has been observed migrating and feeding through the Santa Barbara Channel on many occasions, with one occurrence (12 274 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-2 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur individuals) noted within 1 mile of the Action Area in 2011 (PBCS 2018; Cascadia 2011). This species’ distribution is not well known, but it generally migrates poleward to feed in the summer and to the subtropics to breed in the winter (Jefferson et al. 2008). Resources (krill, small schooling fish, squid) are likely present in the Action Area. This species is more commonly associated with the 200 meter isobath, which is approximately 7.4 miles from the Action Area (Cascadia 2011) Berardius bairdii Baird’s beaked whale MMPA Throughout the North Pacific Ocean and adjacent seas. This species prefers deep, cold waters of 3,000 feet (nearly 1,000 meters) or greater and may occur near shore along narrow continental shelves. Beaked whales are deep divers that prefer submarine canyons, seamounts, and continental slopes (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. Migration and distribution are poorly known (Jefferson et al. 2008). Suitable foraging resources (e.g., deep water and bottom-dwelling crustaceans, cephalopods, gadiform fish; Jefferson et al. 2008) are not likely present in the Action Area. This species prefers deep waters that are not present within the Action Area. This species has been observed far south of the Channel Islands, and west of Point Conception (Baumann-Pickering et al. 2013). Delphinus capensis capensis Long-beaked common dolphin MMPA Coastal habitats; prefers shallower tropical, subtropical, and warmer temperate to cool waters closer to the coast (within 50-100 nautical miles (90-180 km)) and the continental shelf (NMFS 2018a). High potential to occur. Foraging resources (small schooling fish and squid) are likely present in the Action Area. This species has been recorded multiple times and in great numbers (e.g., occurrences with 1,500 individuals) in the Santa Barbara Channel, including the Action Area (PBCS 2018). This species displays a habitat preference for coastal waters, sometimes coming close to shore within waters that are only a few meters deep (Jefferson et al. 2008). Delphinus delphis delphis Short-beaked common dolphin MMPA Warm tropical to cool temperate waters, primarily oceanic and offshore. Species also occurs along the continental slope in waters 650-6,500 feet (200-2,000 m) deep (NMFS 2018a). Moderate potential to occur. Foraging resources (small schooling fish and squid) are likely present in the Action Area. This species has been recorded multiple times and in great numbers (e.g., occurrences with 1,500 individuals) in Santa Barbara Channel and adjacent to the Action Area (PBCS 2018). This species is often associated with areas of upwelling and areas of steep sea-bottom (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Eschrichtius robustus Gray whale (Eastern North Pacific stock) MMPA Occurs in coastal waters along the west coast of North America from Mexico to Alaska and in eastern Siberia. Usually feeds along the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort seas during the summer, and winters along breeding and calving areas off the coast of High potential to occur. This species is a frequent visitor to the Ventura coastline and Santa Barbara Channel and commonly observed during migration, especially during the northward migration from Baja to Alaska. This species is a bottom feeder (epibenthic fauna such as mysids, amphipods, polychaete tube worms) and so are restricted 275 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-3 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur Baja California. Calves are born from January to February (NMFS 2018a). During their northward migration from Baja to Alaska, cow-calf pairs stay particularly close to shore to avoid predation by orcas (NMFS 2014). Bottom feeder that consumes benthic amphipods. to shallow continental shelf waters (Jefferson et al. 2008). Gray whales are often observed close to shore and has multiple occurrences in the Action Area (PBCS 2018). Eubalaena glacialis North Pacific right whale Endangered, MMPA Pacific Ocean between 20°N and 60°N latitude, from temperate to subpolar waters. Primarily occurs in shelf or coastal waters (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. Distribution is not well known but they appear to have a northward migration in the spring and a southward migration in the fall. This species is extremely rare with likely less than 50 individuals in U.S. waters (MMC 2018) and a scattered distribution throughout its range (NMFS 2018a). Suitable foraging resources (zooplankton) may be present within the Action Area. The most recent and closest occurrences for this species include 2 possible individuals sighted near San Miguel Island (February 2015), 10 individuals off Monterey (May 2016, PBCS 2018), and 1 individual off La Jolla (April 2017, MMC 2018). This species is historically known to inhabit offshore waters in depths sometimes greater than 2,000 m (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Grampus griseus Risso’s dolphin MMPA Temperate, subtropical, and tropical waters generally greater than 3,300 feet (1,000 m) and seaward of the continental shelf and slopes (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. Suitable foraging resources (cephalopods and crustaceans) may be present within the Action Area. This species has been observed in the Santa Barbara Channel, with many occurrences located south and northwest of the Action Area (PBCS 2018). This species prefers deeper waters on the continental shelf and slope, between 30° and 45° latitude (Jefferson et al. 2008), and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Globicephala macrorhynchus Short-finned pilot whale MMPA Prefers warmer tropical and temperate waters, typically within waters of 1,000 feet or more deep (NMFS 2018a). Not expected to occur. Once common around the Channel Islands, a strong El Nino in 1982-1983 brought changes to the ecosystem affecting prey and this species disappeared from the area (Jefferson et al. 2008). This species inhabits areas with a high density of squid, their preferred prey. The most recent documented sighting occurred in October 2014 off Dana Point, Orange County, CA (OC Register 2018). This species prefers deep waters and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Kogia breviceps Pygmy sperm whale MMPA Worldwide distribution. Prefers tropical, sub-tropical and temperate waters. Most Not expected to occur. In addition, based on shipboard surveys from 1991 to 2014, this species has only been 276 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-4 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur common along waters seaward of the continental shelf edge and slope. Mostly forages in mid- and deep-water environments (NMFS 2018a). sighted a handful of times (including unidentified Kogia sp.) off the coast of Central and Southern California (NMFS 2017a). This species prefers deep waters (outer continental shelf and beyond) and therefore is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Kogia sima Dwarf sperm whale MMPA Worldwide; prefers tropical, sub-tropical, and temperate waters. Most common along the continental shelf edge and slope (NMFS 2018a). Not expected to occur. This species inhabits warmer waters in offshore areas, and there is no evidence of migrations. Dwarf sperm whales feed on deep-water cephalopods (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Based on shipboard surveys from 1991 to 2014, Kogia sp. have only been sighted a handful of times off the coast of central and southern California (NMFS 2017b). This species prefers deep waters and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Lagenorhynchus obliquidens Pacific white-sided dolphin MMPA North Pacific Ocean; cool, temperate waters from the continental shelf to the deep open ocean (NMFS 2018a). Moderate potential to occur. Exhibits seasonal inshore/offshore and north/south movements. Foraging habitat is present in the Action Area. This species feeds mostly on cephalopods and small schooling fish in deep offshore waters but also on the continental shelf (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). In addition, this species has numerous occurrences within the Santa Barbara Channel and a few occurrences in the Action Area (PBCS 2018). Lissodelphis borealis Northern rightwhale dolphin MMPA Endemic to deep, cold temperate waters of the North Pacific Ocean from Baja California to the Gulf of Alaska; generally in waters over the continental shelf and slope colder than 66°F (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. Although foraging habitat (i.e., for market squid) is present in the Action Area, this species has several scattered observations within the Santa Barbara Channel and no known observations within the Action Area (PBCS 2018). Northern right-whale dolphins are an open ocean species and are known only to come nearshore where there are deep submarine canyons (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Mesoplodon densirostris Blainville’s beaked whale MMPA Worldwide in temperate and tropical waters; prefers deep waters (WDC 2018). Not expected to occur. Blainville’s beaked whale has the most extensive distribution of the genus and inhabits depths between 200 to 1,000 m (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008), where squid are plentiful. This species prefers deep waters and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Mesoplodon stejnegeri Stejneger’s beaked whale MMPA North Pacific Ocean; prefer cold temperate and subarctic waters; generally found in Not expected to occur. Inhabiting the North Pacific basin, this species is primarily oceanic but also inhabits the continental slope. It feeds on deep-water squid (Jefferson, 277 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-5 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur deep, offshore waters from 2,500-5,000 feet deep (NMFS 2018a). Webber and Pitman 2008). This species prefers deep waters and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Megaptera novaeangliae Humpback whale Threatened (Mexico DPS) and Endangered (Central America DPS), MMPA Worldwide distribution from the equator to sub-polar latitudes; feeding areas for the Mexico DPS occur off the coast of central California; Migrating individuals from the Central America DPS may migrate through the Action Area on their way to feeding grounds located off the Pacific Northwest (NMFS 2018a). This species stays near the surface of the ocean when migrating and prefers shallow waters when feeding and calving. This species can be seen close to shore when conditions allow for prey switching from krill to small schooling fish, which inhabit nearshore areas. Moderate to high potential to occur. Foraging and migration habitat is present in the Action Area. Numerous observations of this species have been documented within the Santa Barbara Channel both close to shore and near the Channel Islands (PBCS 2018). In addition, this species is strongly associated with the 200 meter isobaths (Cascadia 2011). Orcinus orca Killer Whale (Southern Resident DPS – consisting of pods J, K, and L, Eastern North Pacific Transient Stock, and Eastern North Pacific Offshore Stock) Endangered MMPA (all populations) The Southern Resident DPS reside for part of the year in the inland waters of Washington State and British Columbia and have been known to travel to coastal sites as far south as central California (71 FR 69054- 69070). Transient forms (Eastern North Pacific Transient Stock) of the species prefer coastal waters from Alaska through California, and offshore forms (Eastern North Pacific Offshore Stock) can be found from Mexico to Alaska (71 FR 69054- 69070). In general, this species is most abundant in colder waters and high latitudes; fairly abundant in temperate waters; lower densities in tropical, subtropical, and offshore waters (NMFS 2018a, 70 FR 69903-69912). Low potential to occur. Foraging resources (primarily fish) are present in the Action Area, which could be prey for offshore stocks that occasionally visit the area (feed primarily on sharks). Residents have only been observed as far south as Monterey Bay. However, transients (which prey on marine mammals) are more common in the Santa Barbara Channel, with more occurrences nearer to the islands than the shore (PBCS 2018). Peponocephala electra Melon-headed whale MMPA Primarily in deep waters throughout the tropical areas of the world (NMFS 2018a). Not expected to occur. The Action Area is located outside of this species’ known range. The closest habitat occurs in Baja. This species is rarely found nearshore. They feed on squid and small fish deep in the water column (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). This species prefers deep waters and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Phoceonoides dalli Dall’s porpoise MMPA North Pacific open ocean, prefers temperate to boreal waters than are more than 600 feet Low potential to occur. This species feeds on mid-water fish and squid in offshore waters, only using nearshore 278 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-6 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur (180 meters) in depth and temperatures between 36-63°F (NMFS 2018a). waters if there are deep-water features such as canyons (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Although there are many scattered observations of this species in the Santa Barbara Channel (predominantly north of Santa Cruz Island), the closest occurrences near the Action Area occurred in 2007 (PBCS 2018). This species prefers deep waters and unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Phocoena phocoena Harbor porpoise MMPA North temperate and subarctic coastal and offshore waters; commonly found in bays, estuaries, harbors, and fjords less than 650 feet deep. Along the North American coast, range from central California to the Beaufort Sea (NMFS 2018a). Not expected to occur. The Action Area is located outside of this species’ known range. The Action Area may have their preferred prey species (cephalopods and small schooling fish) but the southern range of the species extends only to Point Conception. A shallow-water species, they normally inhabit waters less than 100 m (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). In addition, the closest incidental observation of the species were located along the Gaviota coast in 1992 (PBCS 2018). Physeter catodon (=microcephalus) Sperm whale Endangered, MMPA Worldwide; prefer deep waters and consumes deep water species (e.g., squid, sharks, skates, and fish) (NMFS 2018a) Not expected to occur. A somewhat migratory species, sperm whales inhabit continental slope and oceanic waters with steep drop-offs where they prey on cephalopods (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Although a few incidental observations of this species has occurred in the Santa Barbara Channel (dated 2002, 2004, and 2016; PBCS 2018), this species prefers deep waters and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Pseudorca crassidens False killer whale MMPA Ranges in the U.S. in Hawaii, along the west coast, and mid-Atlantic coast. Prefer tropical to temperate waters deeper than 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) (NMFS 2018a). Not expected to occur. False killer whales are found in deep, offshore waters, and sometimes occur on the continental shelf (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). They feed on cephalopods and fish which are present in the Channel. However, this species prefers deep waters and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Stenella coeruleoalba Striped dolphin MMPA Mainly found seaward of the continental shelf from 50°N to 40°S latitude. Prefer highly productive tropical to warm temperate waters (52-84°F) that are oceanic and deep; often occurs in areas of upwelling and convergence zones (NMFS 2018a). Not expected to occur. Primarily a warm water species that can be associated with convergence zones. They feed on fish in pelagic zones, along the continental slope or oceanic regions (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). This species prefers open oceans, has been recorded west of the Channel Islands (NMFS 2017c), and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Steno bredanensis Rough-toothed dolphin MMPA Worldwide; found primarily in deep waters throughout tropical and warmer temperate areas. Two recognized stock occur in Hawaii and Northern Gulf of Mexico (NMFS Not expected to occur. This warm open ocean species rarely ranges north of 40º N (Jefferson, Webber and 279 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-7 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur 2018a). May be a specialist feeder on mahi mahi (Coryphaena hippurus). Pitman 2008). Suitable deep water habitats are absent in the Action Area. Tursiops truncatus Common bottlenose dolphin MMPA Worldwide ranging from 45°N to 45°S latitude; found in temperate and tropical waters. Coastal populations migrate into bays, estuaries, and river mouths. Offshore populations inhabit pelagic waters along the continental shelf. High potential to occur. A common coastal species and a generalist feeder (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). This species has many occurrences throughout the Santa Barbara Channel and within or directly adjacent to the Action Area (PBCS 2018). This species is also known to regularly occur within 1 kilometer of shore (Carretta et al. 1998). Ziphius cavirostris Cuvier’s beaked whale MMPA Worldwide in temperate, subtropical, and tropical waters; prefer deep pelagic waters (typically 3,300 feet or deeper along the continental slope and edge or deep geologic features)(NMFS 2018a). Not expected to occur. This widely distributed species is found in offshore waters, especially deep waters near the continental slope, necessary for catching deep-sea squid.(Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). This species prefers deep waters and unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Mustelids Enhydra lutris nereis Southern sea otter Threatened, MMPA North Pacific Ocean; occurs in only two areas of California: the mainland coastline from San Mateo County to Santa Barbara County, and San Nicholas Island, Ventura County (USFWS 2015). Low potential to occur. One of four disjunct remnant populations, the central/southern California population sea otters are found in shallow, nearshore waters along the coast (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). This species known range is both north and south of the Action Area and this species usually occurs within 2 kilometers (1.2 miles) of shore (USFWS 2015). However, it is possible that foraging/travelling individuals may traverse the Action Area. Pinnipeds Arctocephalus philippii townsedii Guadalupe fur seal Threatened, MMPA Tropical waters of the Southern California/Mexico region. This nonmigratory species breeds along rocky coastal habitats and associated caves (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. This species has known haulouts and breeding colonies (rookeries) along the Channel Islands, San Miguel Island (CDFW 2009), and Guadalupe Island, Mexico (where most of the known rookeries are located)(NMFS 2018a). This species travels great distances to foraging areas for lanternfish and squid and therefore may traverse and/or forage in the Action Area. They are highly pelagic species and foraging areas are not well known. They prefer far offshore to deep oceanic areas for feeding (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Callorhinus ursinus Northern fur seal MMPA (Depleted – Eastern Pacific Stock) Open ocean for foraging and rocky beaches for reproduction. Haul out habitat may include rocky or sandy beaches (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. Northern fur seals migrate from the Bering Sea southward to the North Pacific to feed in the winter. This species is known to haulout and breed at San Miguel Island (NMFS 2018a, CDFW 2009). This 280 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-8 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur species has the potential to forage on fish and squid in the Action Area, however, they are one of the most pelagic pinnipeds and their foraging is usually offshore at the edge of the continental shelf and slope (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Eumetopias jubatus Steller sea lion Endangered (Western DPS) and Delisted due to Recovery (Eastern DPS), MMPA North Pacific Ocean, mainly around coasts to outer continental shelf and slope. Prefer cold temperate to sub-arctic waters. Haulouts and rookeries usually on beaches, ledges, and rocky reefs (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. On the west coast of North America, Steller sea lions range from the Aleutian Islands to Central California (formally southern California). This species is rarely seen south of Monterey Bay (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Although foraging resources (fishes and cephalopods) are present in the Action Area, the closest known rookery is located at Año Nuevo Island off the coast of central California (Allen and Angliss 2014). Mirounga augustirostris Northern elephant seal MMPA Eastern and central North Pacific Ocean most of the year (9 months); prefer sandy beaches when on land. Range from Alaska to Mexico and typically breed in the Channel Islands or Baja California (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. This species migrates to and from their rookeries twice a year. Rookeries range from Baja to northern California (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). In addition, this species is known to haulout and breed at the Channel Islands (NMFS 2018a, Lowry et al. 2014, CDFW 2009). This species is a deep diver (300-800 meters) and prefers to forage in deeper pelagic waters, often with seamounts and other underwater features (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Foraging resources (e.g., squid, fishes) are present in the Action Area. However, when present at the Channel Islands, they are spending their time molting. Their preferred foraging areas are north of the islands. Phoca vitulina Pacific harbor seal MMPA Generally non-migratory. On the U.S. west coast this species is found in coastal and estuarine waters from Canada to Baja California, Mexico. Temperate coastal habitats and uses rocks, reefs, beaches, and drifting glacial ice for hauling out and pupping sites (NMFS 2018a). High potential to occur. This species is non-migratory and inhabits the coast to the continental slope (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Harbor seals have known haulouts and rookeries at Rincon Point (Santa Barbara County) and Point Mugu (Ventura County); and haulouts from Point Conception to Santa Barbara and along all of the Channel Islands (CDFW 2009). Diving averages less than 35 meters and they are generalist feeders (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Zalophus californianus California sea lion MMPA Eastern North Pacific Ocean from central Mexico to Canada; shallow coastal and estuarine waters; prefers sandy beaches for haul out sites but will also haul out on marina docks, jetties, and buoys (NMFS 2018a). High potential to occur. This species is present along the west coast from Puerto Vallarta to Alaska. Males (adult, subadult and juveniles) undertake a northward migration to Central California and Washington after the breeding season in southern rookeries are generalist feeders (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008).This species has 281 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-9 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur known haulouts along all of the Channel Islands and rookeries at San Nicholas Island (CDFW 2009, NMFS 2018a). California sea lions are generalist opportunistic feeders and utilize the continental shelf and slope, but have also been observed in deeper oceanic waters (Jefferson, Webber and Pitman 2008). Birds Brachyramphus marmoratus (nesting) Marbled murrelet Threatened Breeds along the coast from Santa Cruz County north to Alaska. Nests in old-growth coastal forests, sea-facing talus slopes, or cliffs (Nelson 1997). During migration and winter (mostly July to February), occurs from Baja California to Alaska during the non-breeding season, in nearshore and protected coastal waters. Usually feeds nearshore within 5 kilometers (3 miles) and in waters less than 60 meters (197 feet) deep. Dives and pursues prey (opportunistic feeder) by flying underwater. This species is opportunistic and feeds on fish, crustaceans, and squid (Nelson 1997). Low potential to feed. Suitable foraging habitat is present within the Action Area. However, while this species occurs regularly north of Point Conception, it occurs far less frequently farther south (CLO 2018, Lehman 2018, Garrett and Dunn 1991). In addition, the Action Area is located 3 miles off the coast of Ventura County, at the very edge of where this species potentially occurs. Not expected to nest. The Action Area occurs in open water, and nesting habitat is absent. Phoebastria albatrus Short-tailed albatross Endangered Nests on several isolated islands of the northwestern Pacific, but travels over much of the northern Pacific to forage in open waters for squid, fish, fish eggs, shrimp, and crustaceans. Very low potential to forage. This species forages widely throughout the North Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea (USFWS 2018e). The global population is extremely low (approximately 1,200 individuals), and this species is an extremely rare visitor to offshore waters along the California coast, with only 43 records in the state since the 1970s (USFWS 2018e, CBRC 2018). The majority of occurrences are from north of Point Conception, but several have been observed farther south, with the nearest reports being of 1 subadult at Prisoner’s Harbor, Santa Cruz Island, in July 2005, and 1 subadult at Santa Barbara Island in February and March 2002 (CBRC 2018). Not expected to nest. The Action Area occurs in open water, so nesting habitat is absent. Sternula antillarum browni (nesting colony) California least tern Endangered Breeding range extends from the San Francisco Bay Area south to Baja California, Mexico, including nesting colonies in coastal Santa Barbara and Ventura counties. May migrate coastally or over open water. Low potential to forage. The site is farther from shore and in deeper water than where this species prefers to forage. Individuals may occasionally pass through the Action Area during migration. 282 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-10 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur Forages in shallow estuaries and lagoons. During the nesting season, foraging primarily takes places within 2 miles of shore and in waters less than 60 feet deep (USFWS 2006). Nests on sandy beaches or exposed tidal flats. Not expected to nest. The Action Area is in open water, and nesting habitat is absent. Sea Turtles3 Caretta caretta Loggerhead sea turtle (North Pacific Ocean DPS) Endangered Occurs in tropical to temperate waters in the Pacific Ocean. Nesting in the Pacific basin occurs along Japan and Australia, where it nests on ocean beaches, usually with high energy, narrow, steeply slopes, and coarsegrain sand. Migrates from nesting grounds in Japan and Australia to feeding grounds located along the west coast from central to north America. Baja California has the largest known aggregations of loggerhead sea turtles. Migrates along nearshore coastal waters (neritic zone). Typically feeds on benthic invertebrates in hard bottom habitats, although fish and plants are occasionally consumed (NMFS and USFWS 1998a). High potential to feed and migrate. During ideal conditions (water temp/break), this species is known to migrate along the coast of California including the Santa Barbara Channel. Although there is no suitable feeding habitat (hard bottoms, benthic invertebrates) within the Action Area, during migration they may enter the Action Area. Sightings of this species along the U.S. west coast typically are of juveniles measuring 20-60 centimeter shell length (NMFS and USFWS 1998a). This species has also been observed at San Clemente Island (NMFS and USFWS 2007). Not expected to nest. Nesting occurs mainly on open beaches or along narrow bays having suitable sand, and often in association with other species of sea turtles. No beach habitat is present in the Action Area and the Santa Barbara Channel is outside of nesting range. There are no known nesting habitats that occur along the western seaboard of the U.S. or Hawaii (NMFS and USFWS 1998a). The closest known loggerhead nesting beaches in the North Pacific Ocean are located in Japan (NMFS and USFWS 2007). Chelonia mydas Green sea turtle (East Pacific DPS) Threatened Eastern Pacific Ocean range. This species forages in the open ocean as well as shallow waters of lagoons, bays, estuaries, mangroves, eelgrass, and seaweed beds High potential to occur. Green sea turtles are generally found in shallow waters except when migrating. They have been observed at Sterns Wharf in Santa Barbara harbor and at the Channel Islands. This species may migrate and/or forage in the Action Area. A regular visitor in the waters off the southwest coast of the US. Residents occur in the San Gabriel River, Long Beach (NMFS and USFWS 1998b). 283 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-11 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur Not expected to nest. This species requires open beaches with a sloping platform and minimal disturbance for nesting. The closest known nesting occurrences are in Mexico (NMFS and USFWS 1998b). Dermochelys coriacea Leatherback sea turtle (Western Pacific Population) Endangered Pacific Ocean pelagic marine waters; foraging habitat unknown. This population migrates from their nesting grounds in the Indo-Pacific to feeding areas off the Pacific coast of North America. Not expected to occur. This species migrates to the west coast of North America to forage on jellyfish, salps and pyrosomes. They utilize both open ocean and coastal habitats. Despite the Channel Islands area not being within the Final Critical Designated Habitat for Leatherback sea turtles, this species could nonetheless migrate and/or forage in the Action Area. This species has been observed in Monterey Bay (NMFS and USFWS 1998c). Not expected to nest. Nesting for the Western Pacific Population occurs in Indonesia. Their preferred nesting beaches are typically on continent shores and have unobstructed, often deep offshore access (NMFS and USFWS 1998c). Eretmochelys imbricata Hawksbill sea turtle Endangered Circumtropical oceans (generally 30°N to 30°S latitude), including the Pacific Ocean pelagic marine waters Not expected to occur. This species is rare to nonexistent in most localities (NMFS and USFWS 1998d) but may migrate and/or forage (specialist sponge carnivore) in Action Area. However, the Action Area is a sandy bottom habitat, and this species is typically found feeding in the vicinity of rock or reef habitats in shallow tropical waters. No sighting have been documented in recent history (NMFS and USFWS 1998d). Not expected to nest. Hawksbill sea turtles nest high up on the beach under/in dune vegetation, commonly in pocket beaches without a lot of sand. The largest remaining concentrations of nesting hawksbills occur on remote oceanic islands of Australia and the Indian Ocean. Other known nesting sites include Hawaii. American Samoa, Guam, Republic of Palau, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia (NMFS and USFWS 1998d). Lepidochelys olivacea Olive Ridley sea turtle Threatened4 Pacific Ocean pelagic marine waters; foraging habitat unknown (NMFS and USFWS 1998d). Low potential to occur. This species distribution ranges from Southern California to Northern Chile. Olive Ridley sea turtles are mostly pelagic but will also inhabit coastal areas. This species feeds on algae, lobster, crabs, tunicates, 284 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-12 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur mollusks, shrimp, and fish. Olive Ridley sea turtles may migrate and/or forage in the Action Area. This species has been observed in the Los Angeles Harbor (NMFS and USFWS 1998e). Not expected to nest. In the eastern Pacific, the largest nesting concentrations occur in southern Mexico and northern Costa Rica, with some nesting as far north as southern Baja California. This species nests on continental margins, and exhibits an unusual nesting habit called “arribada” whereby up to thousands of turtles come ashore at the same time to nest. Sharks/Rays Carcharhinus longimanus Oceanic whitetip shark Threatened Worldwide, in tropical and sub-tropical waters and found up to 30°N and 30°S latitude (USFWS 2018c). This species is pelagic, mostly offshore in open ocean or along the continental shelf. They are opportunistic feeders and top predators, and prefer fish and cephalopods (NMFS 2018a). Not expected to occur. Action Area is outside of this species known range. Cetorhinus maximus Basking shark NMFS Species of Concern Inhabits tropical and arctic waters but most commonly observed in coastal temperate waters. This species is a filter feeder, forages at the surface, and consumes zooplankton (NMFS 2018b). Low potential to occur. This species is not common, and has had a dramatic decline since the mid-1900’s from fishing and the eastern Pacific population has not rebounded (NMFS 2018b). The Action Area is located at the southernmost extent of their range. Manta birostris Giant manta ray Threatened Inhabits temperate, subtropical and temperate waters, utilizing all habitats: offshore, oceanic and coastal areas.. This species feeds mainly on zooplankton and can be found diving to depths of 10 – 1,000 meters (NMFS 2018a). Low potential to occur. Manta rays can be found in temperatures as low as 19°C (66.2ºF). Santa Barbara Channel waters are not normally warm enough for this species. Last year in Ventura waters, only the month of August was warm enough for this species (NOAA 2018d). Fish Acipenser medirostris Green Sturgeon (southern DPS) Threatened, NMFS Species of Concern Ranges from Alaska to Mexico and spawns in the Rogue River, Klamath River Basin and the Sacramento River. Spawns in deep pools in large, turbulent, freshwater rivers; adults live in oceanic waters, bays, and estuaries, feeding on benthic invertebrates (NMFS 2015a). Low potential to occur. Adults may migrate and/or forage in the project vicinity. There is very little data on green sturgeon use from Monterey south to the Mexican border. The area may be used minimally by the southern DPS (NOAA 2009). 285 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-13 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur Catostomus santaanae Santa Ana Sucker Threatened Small, shallow, cool, clear streams less than 7 meters (23 feet) in width and a few centimeters to more than a meter (1.5 inches to more than 3 feet) in depth; substrates are generally coarse gravel, rubble, and boulder (USFWS 2011) Not expected to occur. Habitat is unsuitable for this species. This species inhabits freshwater streams only. Gadus microcephalus Pacific cod (Salish Sea Population) NMFS Species of Concern This specific population inhabits Puget Sound, the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Strait of Georgia. They feed on krill, shrimp, sand lance and crabs. They are often found over sandy bottoms and eelgrass may play a role in habitat selection (NMFS 2011a). Not expected to occur. Although the Action Area is a sandy bottom substrate, no eelgrass is present at these depths. The Action Area not within the species known range. Eucyclogobius newberryi Tidewater goby Endangered Brackish water habitats along the California coast from Agua Hedionda Lagoon, San Diego County, to the mouth of the Smith River (USFWS 2005). Not expected to occur. Unsuitable habitat for tidewater goby, as they are a freshwater and brackish water species Rincon Creek, Santa Clara River and Ventura River are the closest known locations of this species to the Action Area. Merluccius productus Pacific hake (Georgia Basin DPS) NMFS Species of Concern The Georgia Basin DPS includes three stocks: the highly migratory stock that ranges from southern California to Queen Charlotte Sound, a central-south Puget Sound Stock and a Strait of Georgia stock (NMFS 2009a). Not expected to occur. The highly migratory stock range includes southern California waters were the Action Area is located. The highly migratory stock spawns in the winter in California and migrates northward to feed as far north as Vancouver Island in the summer and spring. They are found at moderate depths of up to 3,000 feet (910 meters) (NMFS 2009a). Oncorhynchus keta Chum salmon Threatened Inhabits the lowermost reaches of rivers and streams, open ocean for anadromous form. Historical distribution included as far south as Monterey, however presently major spawning populations are found only as far south as Tillamook Bay, Oregon (NMFS 2017d). Not expected to occur. The Action Area not within the species’ known range. Oncorhynchus kisutch Coho salmon (Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU) NMFS Species of Concern Inhabits streams and freshwater tributaries with gravel substrates, open ocean for anadromous form. This species distribution is from central California to Alaska (NMFS 2016a). Not expected to occur. The Action Area not within the species’ known range. Oncorhynchus mykiss Steelhead trout- Oregon Coast ESU NMFS Species of Concern Ranges from Asia, through Alaska and south to Southern California. This is a coastal species (NMFS 2008). Not expected to occur. Oceanic range is unknown. However, spawning rivers only occur in rovers basins on the coast of Oregon from the Columbia River south to Cape Blanco (NMFS 2008). 286 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-14 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus Southern steelhead- Southern California DPS NMFS Species of Concern This DPS includes watersheds from the Santa Maria River to the U.S. Mexican border, coast and inland habitats. Clean, clear, cool, well-oxygenated streams; needs relatively deep pools in migration and gravelly substrate to spawn, open ocean for anadromous form (NMFS 2016b). Low potential to occur. Adults may migrate and/or forage in project vicinity Steelhead were observed in 2017 occupying the Ventura River (A. Dransfield, pers. comm.). Oncorhynchus nerka Sockeye salmon (Snake River ESU and Ozette Lake ESU) Endangered (Snake River) and Threatened (Ozette Lake) In the U.S., these populations occur in Oregon and Washington, and critical habitat is designated for this species in Snake River and Ozette Lake. This species inhabits riverine, marine and lake environments (lakes are a requirement), and feed on aquatic insects and plankton (NMFS 2015b). Not expected to occur. The Action Area is outside of species range. Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Chinook salmon (Central Valley Fall, Late-fall run ESU) NMFS Species of Concern In the U.S., Chinook salmon ranges from Alaska to California. This ESU spawns in the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River. Chinook salmon require deeper and larger freshwater streams than other salmonids; open ocean for anadromous form. They range from Alaska to Southern California, and feed on aquatic insects, amphipods, crustaceans, and, once they are large enough, fish (NMFS 2010). Not expected to occur. The Action Area not within the species’ known range. Sebastes levis Cowcod NMFS Species of Concern The species ranges from central Oregon to central Baja California and Guadalupe Island, Mexico. Inhabits deep shelf and upper continental slope, inhabiting depths of 65 to 1,600 feet (20 to 500 meters) in rocky areas, and feeds on squid, octopus and other fish (NMFS 2009b). Low potential to occur Unsuitable habitat for cowcod, individuals may migrate through the area. Southern California has been recognized as the center of distribution of the species since the 1880s (Eigenmann and Beeson 1894). Sebastes paucispinus Bocaccio (Southern DPS) NMFS Species of Concern Ranges from Baja California to Alaska; most common between 160-820 feet in depth, but found up to 1,560 feet in depth. This species feeds on other fish species (mainly other rockfish) (NMFS 2007b). Not expected to occur. This species prefers deep waters and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. Sebastes ruberrimus Yelloweye rockfish Threatened Yelloweye rockfish range from northern Baja California to Alaska. This species is associated with rocky reefs, kelp canopies, and artificial structures like oil platforms. Not expected to occur. This species prefers deep waters, is more common from Central California northward, and is unlikely to occur in the Action Area. 287 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-15 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur Adults prefer deeper waters and rocky bottoms. This species is commonly found in depths of 300 to 590 feet (91 to 180 meters)(NMFS 2017e). Sphyrna lewini Scalloped hammerhead shark Threatened In the east Pacific, scalloped hammerhead sharks range from southern California to Ecuador. Inhabits coastal warm temperate and tropical seas, ranging from intertidal to depths of up to 1000 meters. Adults are common at seamounts (Miller et al. 2013). Low potential to occur Adults may migrate and/or forage in the project vicinity. Thaleichthys pacificus Pacific eulachon (Southern DPS) Threatened Ranges from Northern California to Alaska and into the southeastern Bering Sea. Critical habitat is designated for the Southern DPS in northern California in Mad River, Redwood Creek and Klamath River. Anadromous fish, endemic to northeastern Pacific Ocean. In the US, most euchalon production originates in the Columbia River Basin (NMFS 2011b). Not expected to occur. The Action Area is outside of this species’ known range. No records at the Channel Islands, Critical habitat extends as far south as the Mad River, Northern California (NMFS 2011b). Invertebrates Haliotis corrugate Pink abalone NMFS Species of Concern Ranges from Point Conception to Baja California. This species required sheltered waters with depths from 20 to 118 feet (6 - 36 m) (NMFS 2007c). Not expected to occur. Suitable habitat not present. Very low population numbers. Haliotis cracherodii Black abalone Endangered This species feeds predominantly on kelp and inhabits rocky, low intertidal zones up to 6 meters deep (NMFS 2009c) Their range extends from Point Area in Mendocino County to Northern Baja California. Not expected to occur. Suitable habitat not present. Very low population numbers. The nearest critical habitat to the Action Area is at Anacapa Island (NMFS 2011c). Haliotis fulgens Green abalone NMFS Species of Concern Ranges from Point Conception to Baja California. This species is found in rock crevices in shallow water on exposed coast from the low intertidal to depths of 60 feet (18 m) (NMFS 2009d). Not expected to occur. Suitable habitat not present. Very low population numbers. Haliotis kamtschatkana Pinto abalone NMFS Species of Concern Ranges from Sitka, Alaska to Point Conception. This species is usually found in the tidal zone up to 30 feet but can be at depths of up to 330 feet. Pinto Abalone are associated with kelp beds in exposed areas (NMFS 2014). Not expected to occur. Suitable habitat not present. Very low population numbers. The Action Area is not within this species known range. 288 APPENDIX B Federally Protected Species Potential To Occur 9250 B-16 DUDEK August 2018 Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status1 Distribution and Primary Habitat Associations Potential to Occur Haliotis sorenseni White abalone Endangered Open low- or high-relief rock or bolder areas interspersed with sand channels. This species inhabits rocky pinnacles and deep reefs in Southern California; especially those off the Channel Islands (Hobday and Tegner 2000). Not expected to occur. Suitable habitat not present. Observed along the coastline in Santa Barbara County and the Channel Islands. They usually occur at depths of 20- 60 meters and to be most abundant between 25-30 meters (80-100 feet)(Hobday and Tegner 2000). Notes: 1 Federal Status: MMPA = Marine Mammal Protection Act (50 CFR Part 216); Depleted species population stock is below optimum sustainable populations; NMFS Species of Concern = National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Species of Concern (not federally listed or protected under the Endangered Species Act). 2 The best potential to occur assessment has been provided given the paucity of information available for marine mammals, especially whales. Low potentials to occur do not negate the possibility of a given whale species occurring in the Action Area. 3 Sea turtles are highly migratory and much of their geographic range and/or foraging habitat in the Pacific Ocean is unknown (e.g., see NMFS and USFWS 1998a) 4 Endangered status provided to the breeding colony populations on the Pacific Coast of Mexico. 289 APPENDIX C Phytoplankton Population Impact Calculations 290 291 Appendix C PHYTOPLANKTON POPULATION IMPACT STATEMENT AND CALCULATION Adapted from Santa Barbara Mariculture Company MND calculations for estimating the maximum effect of a mussel farm on phytoplankton (CDFG 2018). Estimating the Maximum Effect of a Mussel Farm on Phytoplankton: Use estimates of maximum clearance rates of mussels, scale up to show how much water passes through mussels in the farm and using minimum flow rates assess how much phytoplankton is removed by the mussel farm. This will be a MAXIMUM estimate of the effects of a mussel farm on phytoplankton. We use the maximum clearance rate for mussels in the mariculture study of Brigolin et al., (2009). From their table 2, they use a maximum clearance rate (CR_max) of 107 liters / (day g DW). Source info for the CR_max estimates are in Brigolin et al., (2009). Table 2 also provide various conversion ratios for wet to dry weight (17.4; which includes the shell weight). Ventura Shellfish Enterprise wants to grow a maximum of 22,000,000 pounds of mussels at a time (this is the maximum amount the plots can produce, assuming all plots are leased and all arrays are at the grow-out stage simultaneously). This is equivalent to 9,979,032 kg or 573,507 kg DW (using the conversion rate above). The maximum volume of seawater flowing through mussels is 1.0e9 liters/day or ~1e6 m3 / day (=573,507 kg DW * 107 liters/(day g DW)). This assumes the mussels are filtering seawater at their maximum rate. 573,507 kg DW * 107 liters = ~61,365,249 m3/day The turnover time (how long it takes the entire volume seawater at the farm to go through mussels) is equal to: Turnover time through mussels = volume_farm / farm_clearance_rate Note: 1 ac = 4047m2 Volume_farm = Area(= 2000 acres) * Depth (=30m) = 2000 acres * 4047m2 = 8,094,000 m3/acre The turnover time is therefore equal to...= volume_farm / farm_clearance_rate = (8,094,000 m3/acre) * 30 m = 242,820,000 m3/ (61,365,249 m3/day) = 2 days So how does this 2 day turnover time compare with how long seawater is resident in the farm itself? To do this we will use a MINIMUM velocity scale (10 cm/s) to assess MAXIMUM residence time of water in the farm. The minimum flow rate estimate comes from many years of measurements off Arroyo Burro by the SBC LTER. It is the ratio of the two time scales that is important here. Max_res_time = Farm_size(sqrt(2000acres)) / Min_Speed(10 cm/s ~10 km/d) = 0.0136 km / 10 km/d = 0.00136 day = 0.03 hour = ~2 min. Note that the time scales differ by orders of magnitude (2 min & 2 d) and the mussels will not clear much of the water passing through the farm. 292 293 Ventura Harbor Oxnard Ventura 101 33 1 CASS Report Alternative 1 Overlaid with SeaSketch Alternative 8 Ventura Shellfish Enterprise Project SOURCE: NAIP 2016 Date: 8/30/2018 - Last saved by: kzecher - Path: Z:\Projects\j925000\MAPDOC\Permit Application\Figure 5_CASS Report Alternative 1 Overlaid with SeaSketch Alternative 8.mxd Project Site Alternatives (20 100-Acre Sites) CASS Report Alternative 1 SeaSketch Alternative 8 Three Nautical Mile Line FIGURE 5 0 3,600 7,200 Feet ATTACHMENT 5 294

Translate »