Publications:

Literature Review

Coachella Valley Fringe-toed Lizard

Uma inornata

USFWS: Threatened
CDFG: Endangered

Conservation Goals:

Ensure species persistence in the plan by conserving significant populations and essential habitat across the range of this species.  Secure habitat quality through protection and management actions.

Conservation Strategy

Conserve and manage populations in multiple habitat cores to provide for species persistence within the Plan area.  Habitat cores shall each contain populations of sufficient size to be considered viable independent of the other cores.  Monitor impacts to or changes in habitat quality.  Implement adaptive management actions to secure and enhance habitat quality and provide for population increase.  These actions should include identifying and then reducing or eliminating negative impacts such as off-road vehicle activity.

Summary of Findings and Conditions for Coverage

Findings.  The Plan will contribute to the continued existence of the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard and will contribute to the conservation of this species provided that the following minimum conditions are met:

1.                  Core habitat is conserved in the Snow Creek-Windy Point area, the Whitewater Floodplain Reserve, the Willow Hole-Edom Hill Reserve/ACEC, and the Coachella Valley Preserve.

2.                  The dynamics of the aeolian sand ecosystem are protected such that sand sources, sand corridors, and dune areas are connected without barriers to sand movement.

3.                  All conserved populations are adequately managed to eliminate deleterious impacts of anthropogenic origin such as off-road vehicle activity, feral pets, and urban development.

Background

Distribution, Abundance and Trends.  The Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard is restricted to the Coachella Valley and was found historically from near Cabazon at the northwestern extreme to near Thermal at the southeastern extreme.  It is associated with a substrate of aeolian (wind-blown) sand to which it has developed morphological and behavioral adaptations (Heifetz 1941, Stebbins 1944, Norris 1958), and it occurs wherever there are large patches of the appropriate substrate (England and Nelson 1976, LaPre and Cornett 1981, Turner et al. 1981, England 1983, Barrows 1997).  As development of the Coachella Valley progressed, fringe-toed lizard habitat declined from roughly 171000 acres historically (The Nature Conservancy 1985; herein referred as HCP) to 63360 acres in 1980 (Federal Register 1980) to 27206 acres estimated by the model in 2000.

Trépanier and Murphy (2001) analyzed nine populations of Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizards using mitochondrial DNA and found them to be nearly identical.  They found the species to be most similar to its nearby congener, the Colorado Desert fringe-toed lizard, confirming earlier analyses of anatomical characters (Norris 1958, de Querioz 1989) and display behavior (Carpenter 1963).  But genetic differences among the nine populations are considerably less than genetic differences among populations of the Colorado Desert fringe-toed lizard, indicating a relatively recent genetic isolation.

Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard abundance, calculated as density, was estimated at several sites considered representative of habitat in the Coachella Valley by Turner et al. (1981, 1983).  These estimates, made from surveys in only one year, ranged from 11 to 45 per hectare (4 to 18 per acre) in unstabilized habitat.  However, a long-term demographic study by Muth and Fisher (in progress; pers. comm.) revealed density variations among years from 17 to 149 per hectare (7 to 60 per acre) at one site.  Availability of food resources appears causal to these fluctuations in density, as reproduction and mortality are correlated with annual rainfall.

The Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard is omnivorous, and diet changes as a function of food availability.  During normal to wet years it eats primarily flowers and plant dwelling arthropods.  During dry periods the diet shifts to primarily leaves and ants (Durtsche 1987, 1995).  The dietary content differs also between breeding and non-breeding seasons for males, but does not differ significantly for females. During late summer the diets of the two sexes are indistinguishable (Durtsche 1992).

Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizards differ sexually in their spatial use of the habitat.  Males have a significantly larger home range size than do females.   The average sizes are 1070m² (11518ft²) for males and 437m² (4704ft²) for females (Horchar 1992).  A home range is the area within which an animal conducts its normal daily and seasonal activity.  A territory, on the other hand, is a portion of a home range that is defended.  Muth and Fisher (pers. comm.) saw no evidence of territoriality in 16 years, contrary to Carpenter’s (1963) observations of captive lizards.

Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizards are active from March to mid November (and sometimes into December when the weather is accommodating), although adults are primarily active from April to October with a peak in May-June (Mayhew 1965, Muth and Fisher pers. comm.).  Springtime activity is triggered when subsurface temperatures exceed the minimum voluntary temperature at –5 cm (-2 inches) where the lizards hibernate, and end when these temperatures drop below minimum voluntary in the fall (Cowles 1941, Brattstrom 1965, Muth and Fisher 1991).  Daily activity is also associated with temperature: Mayhew (1964) found them active when their body temperatures ranged from 25.8-44.0° C (78-111 °F); the mean is 38.0° C (100 ° F).  They must have access to cool temperatures to survive midday temperatures during the hottest months.  Muth and Fisher (1991) found that surface temperatures in the shade and subsurface temperatures at –5cm in the sun exceed the critical thermal maximum for the species (Brattstrom 1965).  They must burrow 5cm in the shade or much deeper in the sun to escape these extremes.  Not all individuals are active any given day, despite appropriate temperatures.  Muth (1987) and Muth and Fisher (1991 and unpubl. data) found that, on average, only 20% of their marked population was active daily, with much individual variation.  Inactive individuals must be buried in the shade or at 10cm or deeper if in the sun.  Although Fisher and Muth (pers. comm.) watched them excavate relatively deep burrows in the sun on the hottest days, Pough (1970) states that they do not bury deeper than 3-4 cm “even under near-fatal heat stress.”

Breeding occurs from late April into August, and eggs are laid from May into September (Mayhew 1965).  This prolonged breeding season along with distinct size classes among hatchlings, the simultaneous presence of enlarged eggs in both oviduct and ovary, and the recurrence of breeding color in individual females suggest they lay multiple clutches per year when food resources are ample (Mayhew 1965, Muth and Fisher, unpubl. data).  Young of the year hatch the first week of August at Whitewater Floodplain Reserve, on average (Muth and Fisher, unpubl. data), but a week or two earlier at the Coachella Valley Preserve (C. Barrows, pers. comm.) where average temperatures are higher.  Growth rate is positively correlated with annual rainfall and young reach adult size one to two (sometimes three) years after hatching.  Fewer females breed during dry years, and they lay fewer egg clutches those years (Muth and Fisher, unpubl. data).

Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizards are known to live eight years in the wild, but annual survivorship is about 35%.  Size, sex, or age related differences in mortality are not detectable (Muth and Fisher 1991).  Known predators include larger conspecifics, leopard lizards (Gambelia wislizenii), coachwhip snakes (Masticophis flagellum), sidewinders (Crotalus cerastes), loggerhead shrikes (Lanius ludovicianus), American kestrels (Falco sparverius).  Coyotes (Canis latrans), kit foxes (Vulpes macrotis), Palm Springs ground squirrels (Spermophilus tereticaudus ssp. chlorus), red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), prairie falcons (Falco mexicanus), greater roadrunners (Geococcyx californianus), and burrowing owls (Speotyto cunicularia) utilize fringe-toed lizard habitat and are known to eat lizards.

Threats and Limiting Factors.  Primary threats are loss or degradation of habitat and the processes that drive that habitat.  Habitat is lost when urban, agricultural and other types of development replace suitable with unsuitable habitat.  Habitat is degraded by off-highway vehicle (OHV) abuse, illegal dumping, invasion by exotic weeds, etc.  The processes that drive the aeolian sand system cannot be disrupted.  Floodwaters transport sediment downstream from its source to where it is gradually sorted and the sand is then transported by wind to form dunes.  To maintain the habitat, floodwaters must not be blocked or redirected from the sorting area.  There also must be no barriers blocking the movement of wind and its sand load between the sorting area and the habitat.  These barriers impound sand and cause shielding effects which, eventually, will “extend to the downwind end of the region because of the unidirectional sand movement pattern” (HCP 1985).

Edge effects are related to urban development adjacent to habitat.  Roads, feral pets, collecting, etc. increase mortality of fringe-toed lizards, especially around the perimeter of a habitat patch.  The larger the perimeter is relative to the total area (perimeter to area ratio), the more area affected by adjacent development.

Special Considerations.  Other target species whose habitat overlaps with that of the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard include the flat-tailed horned lizard (Phrynosoma mcallii), Coachella Valley milkvetch (Astragalus lentiginosus var. coachellae), Palm Springs pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris bangsi), Palm Springs ground squirrel (Spermophilus tereticaudus chlorus), Coachella Valley giant sand treader cricket (Macrobaenetes valgum), Coachella Valley Jerusalem cricket (Stenopalmatus cahuilaensis), and the burrowing owl (Speotyto cunicularia).  

Conservation Analysis 

Conservation Area Configuration Issues.  The Proposed Conservation Areas include the most viable habitat known for the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard.  In addition to preserving Habitat Cores, habitat supporting smaller populations is protected in sand-source areas. The patchy distribution and relatively small area of the habitat in the sand-source areas may preclude their supporting viable populations.  To ensure long-term viability of the species, multiple Core Habitats were delineated that contained the best known habitat and that were of the appropriate size and shape.

Verification of Core Habitat Sufficiency.  The SAC selected Core Habitat from the habitat model for this species using the following four criteria:  First, each core is sufficiently large that it can support a viable population independent of other cores.  The SAC aimed for population sizes of 5,000 to 10,000 individuals for this species. Second, a core is not fragmented by development, including roads.  Although lightly traveled two-lane roads that have no potential for expansion (e.g. Snow Creek Road ) are not barriers to this species, two-lane roads with heavy traffic (e.g. Indian Ave ) form significant barriers.  Third, each core has intact processes including sand source and sand delivery systems.  And fourth, each has a discrete sand source to minimize the chance that a catastrophic event (severe storm, extended drought) will adversely affect all these cores.  The SAC identified and assessed the sufficiency of the following Core Habitats

1) Whitewater Floodplain Reserve (WWR).

WWR is located in Palm Springs between Indian Avenue and Gene Autry Trail, south of the Southern Pacific railroad and north of the flood control dike that forms the southern edge of the Whitewater River channel.  Sand for the reserve is supplied primarily by the Whitewater River and its major tributary the San Gorgonio River, which deposit sand in the flood plain west of WWR.  From there the sand is transported onto and across the reserve by wind.  A secondary source is Mission Creek, which enters the floodplain at about the midpoint of the northern border.  It augments the sand stock in the eastern half of WWR.

The WWR contains the population of Uma studied most intensively in the Coachella Valley .  Allan Muth and Mark Fisher initiated a long-term demographic study of the species in 1985.  They constructed a 2.25-hectare (5.56 acre) plot that lays approximately midway along the east-west axis of WWR.  They enumerated all Uma on the site, revealing the annual population size from 1985 through 2000.  From these data the geometric mean  (= logarithmic mean) density was calculated as 57.6 Uma per hectare (approximately 23 per acre).  Given that the total area of the WWR is 498 hectare (1,230 acre; The Nature Conservancy 1985), then the geometric mean population size of the WWR is 28,684 Uma.  This population size exceeds greatly that proposed by Thomas (1990) as a minimum target (5,500).

The Muth and Fisher study encompassed a severe drought of a magnitude experienced only once before in the102-year history of climatological data from Palm Springs (U.S. Climatological Records, 1898-2000).  The population size at the study site dropped to 38 individuals (16.9/ha).  That population size, even from the most severe drought of the last century, gave an estimate of 8,410 for WWR.

Assumptions:  Calculating the geometric mean population size of WWR involved the following assumptions:

1.      The aeolian sand habitat at WWR is homogeneous so lizard densities at the study plot will be identical to those throughout WWR.  This is not true.  The eastern portions of WWR have more blowsand than do western portions; hence lizard densities are probably greater in those eastern portions.  But placing the study plot midway along the east-west axis of the WWR should average these differences in the long-term.

2.      All individual Uma seen on the site in a year occupied only the 2.25-hectare study plot, so the density estimates are accurate.  The study site population was not closed; individuals immigrated and emigrated.  Thus the densities may represent an overestimate of true densities.  They are, however, the best available data for this species.  But to err on the side of caution, a very conservative estimate is that the actual density is one-half the density of individuals seen each year on the study plot (M. Fisher pers. comm.).  This more conservative method gives a geometric mean density of 28.8 per hectare and 14,342 Uma at WWR (95% C.I. = 9,636-21,364 Uma).  When using this conservative method even the minimum population size seen during the most extreme drought in a century results in an estimated 4,205 Uma at WWR.  This is well above the criterion recommended by Thomas (1990) that the population size should fall to about 100 individuals no more than once a century.

1a) WWR east of Gene Autry Trail.

A relatively small patch of habitat (150 acres; 371 acres) lies east of Gene Autry Trail and was historically connected with habitat at WWR.  The two-lane road has heavy traffic and is already scheduled for widening.  The habitat can be connected to WWR via a bridge or large culverts.  The SAC recommends against this measure for the following reasons: First, the patch is too small by itself for the Uma population to meet the minimum size criterion, thus long-term viability is uncertain.  The area of the habitat patch will support an average 4,320 Uma, calculated using the conservative estimate of geometric mean density.  Second, the habitat patch has a high perimeter to area ratio. High edge effects increase mortality, so the habitat patch will support a lower population density than similar habitat at WWR.  Third, this increased mortality may cause a source and sink situation.  High mortality at the small patch results in more available resources, encouraging Uma to emigrate from the source habitat at WWR.  The long-term loss of Uma from WWR will be deleterious to the WWR population rather than beneficial.  Thus the potential risk to the viability of the WWR population outweighs the benefits of adding that small habitat patch.

1b) WWR west of Indian Ave.

Immediately west of the WWR on the west side of Indian Ave there are about 1,214 hectare (3,000 acre) modeled as Uma habitat.  Wind velocities are greater here than further east and, following a depositional event, sand is transported away from here faster than it can be replaced by the next event (Turner et al. 1981).  Because of this there is normally less actual habitat than is modeled for most of this area.  This ephemeral nature led the SAC to decide against Core Habitat status for this area; it will, instead remain protected as a sand source.  There are, however, some patches of perennial habitat particularly in the northern portion of this area.  These patches extend to the west where they connect with habitat at Snow Creek-Windy Point.  They are isolated from WWR for this and the other target animals by Indian Avenue , which is currently under consideration for widening because of high traffic volume.  A bridge or very large culverts, installed at the point where the Whitewater River normally flows across Indian Avenue , will allow animal and sand movement below the road while keeping the road open to traffic during flood events. 

2) Coachella Valley Preserve at Thousand Palms (CVP).

Floodwaters carry sand-containing sediment from sources in the Indio Hills and in the Little San Bernardino Mountains (via Thousand Palms Canyon ) and deposit the sediment on the alluvial fans upwind from CVP.  Strong winds sort and transport sand, forming the active dune fields in the CVP.  Weaver, in the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard habitat conservation plan (The Nature Conservancy 1985; herein referred as HCP), refined estimates from Turner et al. (1980) of sand contribution to the aeolian system by flood events.  He determined that the majority of aeolian sand within the CVP area originated from floodwaters that flowed through Thousand Palms Canyon .  Conversely, more recent studies reexamined these sources and determined that portions of the Indio Hills west of Thousand Palms Canyon contribute the majority (Lancaster et al. 1993, Meek and Wasklewicz 1993, Wasklewicz and Meek 1995, Barrows 1996).  The Plan will protect both sources, the Indio Hills source aided by a flood control project designed to deliver sediment-laden water to the sorting region upwind from CVP.

There are no long-term demographic studies for this species at CVP, but there are a series of strip transects that give relative abundance of Uma (Cameron Barrows pers. comm.).  Data from these transects allowed for habitat quality distinctions with the best habitat labeled herein as primary (1°), lower quality habitat as secondary (2°), and all other as non-habitat.  Uma abundance in 2° habitat is approximately 1/5 to 1/2 that of 1° habitat (Cameron Barrows pers. comm.).  Measurements from satellite photographs (2000) show approximately 283 – 364 hectares (700 – 900 acres) are 1° habitat and an additional 405 hectares (1,000 acres) are 2° habitat.  Transects are poor estimators of actual density because they are essentially 2-dimensional, and lizards are not marked individually to allow the use of mark-recapture techniques.  But the density estimate of Turner et al. (1981) of 45.5 Uma per ha on 1° habitat at CVP is nearly identical to their estimate (45.0) for a site at WWR.  Their WWR site is the same as that used by Muth and Fisher.  Thus it can be assumed that the distribution of annual densities in 1° habitat at CVP does not differ from the distribution of annual densities seen by Muth and Fisher at WWR.  Using this assumption and the more conservative density estimates from WWR, above, the population size for 1° habitat at CVP, calculated from the geographic mean density, is 8,150 – 10,483 Uma.  The population size for 2° habitat is calculated likewise to be 2,333 – 14,400 Uma.  Combined the geometric mean population size for CVP is 10,483 – 24,883 Uma.

Assumptions: 

1.      The distribution of annual densities in 1° habitat at CVP does not differ from the distribution of annual densities seen by Muth and Fisher at WWR.  This may not be true.  Relative abundance data from transects at both sites indicate that Uma reproduce as a response to climatic conditions that differ between the sites.  There are, however, no data suggesting that the magnitude of variation differs between the two sites.

2.      The population size estimate for WWR was based on a fixed area.  Using the WWR density to estimate CVP population size assumes that the habitat areas at CVP are also fixed.  In reality the habitat at CVP changes in size and spatial distribution over time.  The population size given for CVP is based on the area of habitat as it exists today.

3) Willow Hole-Edom Hill Reserve ( Willow Hole).

Three sand source areas were identified by the HCP (1985) for Willow Hole-Edom Hill.  The Morongo Wash source supplies sand from the west, and the Willow Hole and Long Canyon Watersheds drain through the Reserve from north to south.  Morongo Creek carries sediment originating in the Little San Bernardino Mountains in Morongo Canyon .  Long Canyon also originates in the Little San Bernardino Mountains.  The Willow Hole watershed originates in the western Indio Hills and acts to redeposit sand into the Willow Hole area after being carried out by prevailing winds.  Additionally, aerial photographs reveal that the Morongo Wash source is augmented by sediment from Mission Creek, which has the San Bernardino Mountains as its source.

According to the model there are 104 hectares (256 acres) of suitable habitat at Willow Hole.  There are no long-term demographic studies, but the conservative density estimate from WWR, when applied to Willow Hole, yields a geometric mean population size of 2,995 Uma.  Although Willow Hole was established to maintain a viable population of Uma (HCP 1985), the model shows considerably less actual habitat than what was considered “occupiable habitat” by the HCP.  Occupiable habitat, as used by the HCP, includes lands that may be occupied (i.e. contain the proper habitat) when considered over geologic time.  Those additional lands at Willow Hole may eventually become habitat given the dynamic nature of the aeolian sand environment, but the population size supported by the current habitat area does not reach the minimum target size.  Thus the sufficiency of habitat to support a viable population at Willow Hole is questionable.

The Uma habitat nearest to Willow Hole is at Flattop Mountain/Stebbins Dune (97 ha; 239 ac) and along the fault line immediately west of Willow Hole (134 ha; 330 ac).  Each of these fails to reach the target population size (2,794 and 3,859 Uma, respectively).  Palm and Mountain View Drives, which are currently two- to five-lane roads, separate them from Willow Hole but the SAC feels that high traffic volume makes these roads insurmountable barriers to migration for this species.  Thus the following options remain: a) remove Willow Hole as a core area for Uma; b) retain Willow Hole along with one or both of the nearby habitats where they can be treated as independent co-reserves; c) physically connect the population at Willow Hole to one or both of those at the adjacent habitats.

The SAC believes it essential that Willow Hole be retained as core habitat for Uma for the same reasons it was designated a reserve by the HCP (1985).  First, it “exists basically as an independent system replete with its own source and dune system.”   “The long-term self-perpetuation of the…blowsand ecosystem appears probable” (HCP 1985).  Second, this sand source is discrete from other sources making it unlikely that a catastrophic weather event will destroy all these.  And third as insurance against the loss of habitat in other reserves from the effects of global climate change, Willow Hole’s geographic placement in the Coachella Valley makes it intermediate climatically to WWR and CVP.

The SAC believes it essential that at least one of the nearby habitat patches be designated as additional core habitat for Uma, doubling (or tripling) the effective size of the current Willow Hole population.  This surpasses the minimum target size when considered together, but the barrier formed by the roads necessitates their individual treatment.  In the event of a population crash from stochastic or climatic events, multiple reserves may not all be affected at the same magnitude.  Thus the likelihood of the species surviving in at least one co-reserve is increased.  The SAC recommends physically connecting Willow Hole to at least one of these co-reserves.  This would involve installing a bridge or wide culvert (= 3m wide) under the existing roadway to be used as a corridor by Uma (as well as other species).  The SAC or someone with similar expertise should be involved in the design process.  Flattop Mountain/Stebbins Dune appears a better choice to connect with Willow Hole, although the modeled habitat is less, than the fault line habitat immediately west of Willow Hole because the mesquite hummocks along the fault line are perennial habitat but are only a small portion of the habitat modeled for that area.  The remainder is made up of sand fields that appear more ephemeral (archived aerial photos) than the active sand fields of Flattop Mountain/Stebbins Dune.

4) Snow Creek/Windy Point.

The sand sources for this area include primarily the Whitewater and San Gorgonio Rivers, plus their tributaries, originating in the San Jacinto and San Bernardino Mountains .  There are 592 hectares (1,461 acres) of Uma habitat modeled here.  The geometric mean population size is unknown for this site, but in order to meet the target population size (5,500) would require a density of 9.3 Uma per hectare (3.8 Uma per acre).  This is about one-third the conservative density estimated for WWR (above) and the habitat should easily support two to four per hectare (5 – 10 per acre; Cameron Barrows and Mark Fisher, pers. comm.).  All available habitat is slated for protection under Alternative 2.

5) Big Dune.

The large sand pile that lies approximately between Date Palm and Washington Avenues, south of I-10, is referred locally as the Big Dune.  Its source was the sand areas to the west, where it served as the terminus to the westernmost aeolian sand transport systems.  Wind velocity diminishes away from the venturi formed by the San Gorgonio Pass, and on average there was much more sand deposited than was transported away (Turner et al. 1981). 

The Big Dune likely has some habitat patches that still support small populations of fringe-toed lizards (M. Fisher pers. comm.).  The area was identified by the HCP (1985, figure II-6) as a “shielded or stabilized area due primarily to urban development (roads, buildings, canals, dikes).”  The sand source is permanently blocked by development upwind, so the region is undergoing the slow process of stabilization.  In addition to the lack of an intact sand source, the region is highly fragmented by roads.  The largest undeveloped plot that is not divided by 2- to 4-lane roads is 273 hectares (674 acres).  This patch would have supported a population size of 7,862 Uma, using the conservative density estimate from WWR, before the sand source was obstructed.  An alternative sand source would require a heavy-handed management strategy to artificially disturb the upwind portion of the plot to create blowsand downwind.  But first, this would eliminate a substantial portion of Uma habitat, compromising viability.  Second, the artificial source area will eventually run out of sand.   Fringe-toed lizards here are genetically indistinguishable from those in viable core habitat elsewhere in the Coachella Valley (Trepanier and Murphy 2001) so there is no compelling reason to artificially establish core habitat for this species at the Big Dune.

6) East end of the Indio Hills

There are 443 hectares (1,094 acres) of habitat modeled at the east end of the Indio Hills which, using the conservative density estimate from WWR, contain 12,760 Uma.  The model was based on blowsand distribution in 1974 (Soil Survey of Riverside County 1974).  Today the occupied Uma habitat has dwindled to two disjunct patches that, together, account for a fraction of the habitat modeled here. Of primary concern here is the health of the sand source system.  The “formerly robust” sand source and delivery system from the west ( Whitewater River , Mission and Morongo Creeks, etc.) is no longer intact, having been blocked by development upwind.  This leaves sand sources in the adjacent Indio Hills and the Little San Bernardino Mountains to supply all the sand for this area (see Independent Science Advisors’ Review).  Because of uncertainty about the sand source and sand transport system, and because the Uma here do not differ genetically from those elsewhere in the Coachella Valley (Trepanier and Murphy 2001), the SAC could not designate this area as Core Habitat.

Effects on Population Viability and Species Recovery.  Implementation of the CVMSHCP is expected to maintain and enhance population viability of the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard as unprotected portions of its habitat, potential habitat, and ecosystem processes for the aeolian sand system will be preserved.

Special Considerations.  Conserved populations should be protected from edge effects, from off-road vehicle impacts, from feral pets that may enter conservation areas, and from any activities that may result in impacts to the aeolian sand system.

Adaptive Management Program

In addition to conserving habitat the CVMSHCP will integrate monitoring and management actions into an adaptive management program for this species.  Monitoring programs will be designed to provide feedback so that management activities can be adjusted and adapted to maximize species conservation.

Monitoring.  The utility of relating remote sensing to population health will be assessed.  See Adaptive Management and Monitoring Plan for details.

Required Conservation and Adaptive Management Actions.   The following management actions may be required to ensure species persistence and long-term viability within the Plan area if monitoring indicates that such actions are warranted and feasible to meet CVMSHCP goals (to be updated with completion of Adaptive Management Plan):

1.                  Eliminate impacts that degrade Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard habitat, including fragmentation by roads, feral pets, off-road vehicle use in protected habitat, invasive non-native plant species, and other human disturbance.

2.                  Control human access to occupied habitat as necessary.

3.                  Consider the need for perimeter fencing to keep lizards inside conservation areas and away from roadways.

4.                  Maintain aeolian sand ecosystem processes.