DOCSLIB.ORG

Ashland Watershed Assessment & Action Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ashland Watershed Assessment & Action Plan AAsshhllaanndd WWaatteerrsshheedd AAsssseessssmmeenntt && AAccttiioonn PPllaann December, 2007 Bear Creek Watershed Council PO Box 1548, Medford, Oregon 97501 Funded by the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board OWEB Grant #204-281 Bear Creek Watershed Council PO Box 1548, Medford, Oregon 97501 (541) 840-1810 www.bearcreek-watershed.org PROJECT SUMMARY Ashland is a venerable village with a postcard-like setting; an urban center stretched along a narrow terrace at the base of very steep ridges and erodible canyons that periodically funnel warm rain and snow melt down from the mile of mountain rising above town. Stormwater from a dozen flood-prone creeks challenges the resources of the City and homeowners as it rushes across the Ashland Terrace. However, the Ashland Watershed Assessment demonstrates that these creeks can be a valued community asset, providing a great opportunity for individual landowners, homeowner associations, and the City to cooperatively improve watershed health and function. We found that many of the small streams have perennial summer flows due to augmentation from summer irrigation. This condition promotes streamside vegetation that can stabilize stream banks, filter runoff, reduce erosion, and provide riparian corridors, green ribbons of habitat for birds and other urban wildlife connecting Bear Creek’s flood plain to the forested slopes above. The associated vegetation canopy helps keep water cool to carry more oxygen for fish and aquatic life. The City recognizes that these streams add value to the watershed and encourages increased landowner participation in riparian corridor and wetland protection. We found the City has engaged consultants to recommend improved stormwater management practices, to quantify infrastructure needed to address runoff and erosion issues, and to assess the impact from high development areas on existing facilities. A pro-active policy for constructing wetlands that filter stormwater and detain storm surges continues to show favorable results. We noted coho salmon have been found in several creeks, and steelhead and steelhead fry are present in Lithia Park near City Hall - clear evidence that Ashland’s efforts to protect salmonids and remove fish passage barriers has brought results. Stream surveys identified several fish barriers at irrigation diversions and a need for late season flow restoration in Neil Creek. Action Plan priorities identified in this assessment include 14 habitat and restoration projects, 5 stormwater management projects, 8 fish passage barrier projects, and a series of informational and educational activities. Outreach during the assessment process has shown that there is community interest in practices that control sediment, pollution, and soil erosion; tours and workshops to see what has worked and how to get results, and monitoring to verify progress. These projects and activities help build community commitment and sustained public support while assuring a well-functioning and productive watershed. i TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I – Introduction and Watershed Issues OWEB Process and Project Team ........................................................................ I -1 Watershed Ownership and Neighborhoods ........................................................... I - 3 Community Involvement and Issues ...................................................................... I - 3 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... I -10 CHAPTER II – Historic Conditions Pre-settlement Vegetation (Pre-1850) ................................................................... II - 3 Native Americans .................................................................................................. II - 5 Early Settlement Vegetation 1850 to 1900 ............................................................ II - 6 Vegetation Change after 1900 ............................................................................... II - 6 Fish Population ..................................................................................................... II - 7 Comparing “Before and After” Photos ................................................................... II - 8 Timeline of Human Activities Affecting Streams .................................................... II - 19 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... II - 21 CHAPTER III – Stream Channel Classification Introduction ........................................................................................................... III - 1 Climate .................................................................................................................. III - 2 Geology ................................................................................................................. III - 2 Stream Channel Classification .............................................................................. III - 3 Urban Stream Classification .................................................................................. III - 6 General Application to the Ashland Assessment Project ....................................... III - 6 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... III - 8 CHAPTER IV – Hydrology & Water Use Sources of Water .................................................................................................. IV - 1 Water Losses ........................................................................................................ IV - 9 Water Use ............................................................................................................. IV - 10 Critical Questions .................................................................................................. IV - 13 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... IV - 14 CHAPTER V – Riparian and Wetlands Assessment Bird Populations in Riparian Areas ........................................................................ V - 7 Other Wildlife......................................................................................................... V - 11 Wetlands ............................................................................................................... V - 11 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... V - 13 CHAPTER VI – Sediment Source Assessment Geology ................................................................................................................. VI - 1 Sediment Production Processes............................................................................ VI - 1 Sediment Sources ................................................................................................. VI - 2 Oregon DEQ Total Maximum Daily Load................................................................. VI - 6 Sediment Production Rates and Monitoring .......................................................... VI - 9 ii Supplemental Information: Critical Questions ........................................................ VI - 11 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... VI - 12 CHAPTER VII – Channel Modification Assessment Impervious Surfaces.............................................................................................. VII - 1 Dams .................................................................................................................... VII - 1 Roads ................................................................................................................... VII - 2 Storm Drains ......................................................................................................... VII - 2 Culverts ................................................................................................................. VII - 2 Irrigation Canals .................................................................................................... VII - 2 Issues Related to Channel Modification................................................................. VII - 3 Critical Questions .................................................................................................. VII - 5 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... VII - 8 CHAPTER VIII - Water Quality Assessment 2007 Bear Creek Watershed TMDL ...................................................................... VIII - 1 Potential Point Sources of Thermal Pollution ......................................................... VIII - 2 1992 Bear Creek TMDLs ....................................................................................... VIII - 9 Quality of Ashland’s Drinking Water ...................................................................... VIII - 11 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... VIII -14 CHAPTER IX – Fish and Aquatic Wildlife Introduction ........................................................................................................... IX - 1 Note on Anadromy ................................................................................................ IX - 1 Aquatic Species Found in the Ashland Watershed Assessment Area....................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • South Fork of Little Butte Creek Area Naming Proposals
    South Fork of Little Butte Creek Area Naming Proposals Presented by Dr. Alice G. Knotts INTRODUCTION We begin by thanking the Oregon Geographic Names Board for its careful work exhibited and accomplished in recent years for naming geographical features in the State of Oregon. We have identified some physical features in the area of the South Fork of Little Butte Creek located in Jackson County and put forth name suggestions and proposals. We believe that most of them are located on public lands of the U.S. Forest Service or the BLM, but the Knotts Cliff is on private land. 1 Naming Proposals for the South Fork of Little Butte Creek Area Identified in geographic order of approach from Medford, the road up the South Fork of Little Butte Creek and the Soda Springs trail 1009 that follows upstream Dead Indian Creek that is proposed to be named Latgawa Creek. 1. Hole-in-the-Rock Name a rock arch located on top of a hill NW of Poole Hill. Hole-in-the-Rock has been recorded on a BLM map but not with GNIS. 2. Pilgrim Cave Name a rock shelf with ancient campfire smoked walls. A shelter for travelers for thousands of years. 3. Knotts Bluff Name a cliff that defines the northern side of a canyon through which runs the S. Fork of Little Butte Creek. 4. Ross Point Name a prominent point on Knotts Cliff above the cave. 5. Latgawa Pinnacles Name a group of rocky pinnacles located near Camp Latgawa. 6. Marjorie Falls Name a water slide on Latgawa Creek upstream from the soda springs.
    [Show full text]
  • Ashland Ranger District Rogue River National Forest APPENDICES
    'L-JCUMENU A 13.66/2: B 42x/APP./c.4 I V 0) C) oa)4e EN D\ Ashland Ranger District Rogue River National Forest APPENDICES APPENDIX A: KEY ISSUES & KEY QUESTIONS APPENDIX B: FIRE Identification of Specific Vegetation Zones for the Bear Watershed Analysis Area Fire Behavior Fuel Model Key Fuel Model Assignments Chronology of Events APPENDIX C: GEOLOGY, GEOMORPHOLOGY & SOILS Geology and Geomorphology of the Bear Watershed Analysis Area Characteristics of Soil Productivity APPENDIX D: HYDROLOGY What Sort of Debris is Transported Stream Classification Bibliography of Water Quality Studies Map: Drainageways Crossed Map: Dominant Precipitation Patterns APPENDIX E: FISHERIES Historic and Current Miles of Fish Habitat River Mile Index APPENDIX F: AQUATIC AND RIPARIAN HABITAT Habitat Comparison Chart Relative Comparison of Stream Gradients With Coarse Woody Debris Historic and Current Conditions for Aquatic Processes and Functions Maps: Reach Breaks of Neil Creek, West Fork & East Forks of Ashland Creek Table: Processes & Human Influences on Aquatic and Riparian Ecosystems Map: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Surveyed Wetlands Map: Supplemental Water Distribution System Broad Level Delineation of Major Stream Types (Rosgen) Delineative Criteria for Major Stream Types (Rosgen) APPENDIX G: HERITAGE RESOURCES Cultural Uses in the Bear Watershed Analysis Area Chronology of Important Dates APPENDIX A I KEY ISSUES & KEY QUESTIONS Key Questions IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: These questions drive the analysis for Chapter II: Historic and Current Conditions and Future Trends. CLIMATE Identification of the atmospheric/climate regimes under which the ecosystem of the Bear Watershed Analysis Area have developed is important to this analysis. Attributes to be discussed in this analysis include periods of flood and drought, storm patterns in the winter and summer, occurrence of severe lightning and wind storms, rain on snow events, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Temperatures Cool by Shading the Stream from Solar Radiation. These
    Chapter 3 Affected Environment Conde Shell temperatures cool by shading the stream from solar radiation. These trees and shrubs also contribute nutrients to the system as coarse organic material that is crucial to the macroinvertebrate communities that support fish and other aquatic organisms. Large wood has been identified as a limiting factor in Dead Indian and Conde Creek systems.5 The effects of large wood on stream form and function are positive, creating pools, trapping sediment, providing cover for fish and other aquatic species, and stabilizing banks during high flow events. Beaver have historically contributed wood in the form of beaver dams, to these systems. Beaver dams are present in the upper section of Dead Indian but absent in Conde Creek. Two dams were observed on Dead Indian Creek, below the confluence with Conde Creek.6 South Fork of Little Butte Creek and tributaries have been identified by Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) (1994) as water quality limited under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. From the mouth to Beaver Dam Creek, South Fork of Little Butte Creek is water quality limited due to flow modification, habitat modification, sediment, and summer temperature. Dead Indian and Conde Creeks are limited by summer high temperatures, exceeding the maximum 7-day average for temperature (>64 F). Temperature monitors placed throughout Conde Creek and upper Dead Indian Creek during the summer of 1998 found water temperatures ranging from 65 - 77 F in late July. 7 The geology of an area plays an important role in describing fish habitat through the physical processes driving a system.
    [Show full text]
  • Little Butte Creek Watershed Assessment
    Little Butte Creek Watershed Assessment Little Butte Creek Watershed Council August 2003 Abstract The Little Butte Creek Watershed Assessment has been prepared for the Little Butte Creek Watershed Council with funding from the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB). The Assessment was prepared using the guidelines set forth in the Governor’s Watershed Enhancement Board’s 1999 Oregon Watershed Assessment Manual. The purpose of this document is to assess the current conditions and trends of human caused and ecologic processes within the Little Butte Creek Watershed and compare them with historic conditions. Many important ecological processes within the watershed have been degraded over the last 150 years of human activity. This Assessment details those locations and processes that are in need of restoration as well as those that are operating as a healthy system. The Assessment was conducted primarily at the 5th field watershed level, that of the entire Little Butte Creek Watershed. List and describe field watershed levels below. Where possible, the analyses was refined to the smaller 6th field watershed level, thirteen of which exist within the Little Butte Creek Watershed. The assessment also notes gaps in data and lists recommendations for future research and data collection. It is intended that this document, and the Little Butte Creek Watershed Action Plan be used as guides for future research and watershed protection and enhancement over the next decade. The document was developed using existing data. No new data was collected for this project. Where data was lacking, it was detailed for future work and study. Acknowledgements This assessment was compiled and written by Steve Mason.
    [Show full text]
  • Northwest Regional Conference Brochure
    The Oregon Trail State Volkssporting Association and Rogue Oregon Trail State Volkssporting Valley Walkers proudly invite you to attend the 25-28 June 2020 Northwest Regional Conference in Medford, Oregon. This fun event Association and Rogue Valley Walkers will provide a daily featured walk in Ashland, Jacksonville, Medford, Proudly present the 25-28 June 2020 and Casey State Park. Also offered are 3 self-guided challenge hikes Northwest Regional Conference in the Rogue River Gorge, Grizzly Peak, and Mount Ashland Meadows, a peaceful bike along the Bear Creek Greenway and a in Medford, Oregon swim. To enhance your experience, the Rogue River Walkers will ➢ 4 Featured Walks/3 Challenge Hikes/Bike/Swim have all 12 of their year round event directions and stamps available • Forest Therapy with Shakespeare, Ashland at the Inn throughout the conference. All sporting events are open to • Gold Mining Trails and Town, Jacksonville the public for a small $3.00 participation fee. No dogs allowed in • Medford Regional Director’s Meander, Medford Ashland’s Lithia Park. Wear hats, sunscreen and take water with you. • Casey State Park Caper Registration: Pre-registration required by 31 May 2020. Pre- • 3 Challenge Hikes in Rogue River Gorge, Grizzly Peak, registered walkers will be able to check in after noon on Wed, 24 Jun and Mount Ashland Meadows 2020 in the lobby of the Inn at the Commons. All other registration will • Bike along Bear Creek Greenway/Swim at pool be 7:00-4:00 Thu-Sat, 7:00-noon Sun. ➢ 12 nearby Rogue River Valley year round events ➢ Meet and Greet Social (Thursday) Meet and Greet: Thu, 25 Jun 2020, 4:30-6:00, light appetizers, and ➢ 4 Training Sessions (Friday) no host bar in The Meadows, Inn at the Commons.
    [Show full text]
  • Inland Rogue Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan
    Inland Rogue Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan Developed by the: Inland Rogue Local Advisory Committee Oregon Department of Agriculture With support from the: Jackson, Two Rivers, and Illinois Valley Soil and Water Conservation Districts February 28, 2018 Oregon Department of Agriculture Water Quality Program 635 Capitol Street NE Salem, Oregon 97301 Phone: (503) 986-4700 oda.direct/AgWQPlans Jackson SWCD 89 Alder St., Central Point, OR 97502 (541) 664-1070 https://jswcd.org/ Two Rivers (Josephine) SWCD 1440 Parkdale Drive, Grants Pass, OR 97527 (541) 474-6840 Illinois Valley SWCD PO Box 352 102 S Redwood Highway Cave Junction, OR 97523 (541) 592-3731 http://www.ivstreamteam.org/ Inland Rogue Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan February 6, 2018 Table of Contents Acronyms and Terms Used in this Document ............................................................................... i Foreword .................................................................................................................................................. ii Required Elements of Area Plans .................................................................................................... ii Plan Content ............................................................................................................................................ ii Chapter 1: Agricultural Water Quality Management Program Purpose and Background ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 79/Monday, April 24, 2000/Notices
    Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Notices 21787 OREGON WISCONSIN location, form, and style of the cultural Jackson County Door County items are all consistent with Navajo history, sacred objects, and objects of Big Elk Guard Station, (US Forest Service Zahn, Albert, House, 8223 WI Trunk Hwy. Historic Structures on the Rogue River 57, Baileys Harbor, 00000492 cultural patrimony. National Forest MPS), FS Rd. 3706 approx. Based on the above-mentioned 5 mi. N. of Dead Indian Memorial Rd., Sheboygan County information, officials of the Utah Ashland, 00000462 Garton Toy Company, 746, 810, 830 N. Water Museum of Natural History have Parker Meadows Shelter, (US Forest Service St., 1104 Wisconsin Ave., Sheboygan, determined that, pursuant to 43 CFR Historic Structures on the Rogue River 00000493 10.2 (d)(3), these 16 cultural items are National Forest MPS), Near Forest Rd. 37 A Request for Removal has been made for specific ceremonial objects needed by approx. 15 mi. NE. of Butte Falls, Butte the following resources: traditional Native American religious Falls, 00000466 leaders for the practice of traditional MINNESOTA Star Ranger Station Building, (US Forest Native American religions by their Service Historic Structures on the Rogue Goodhue County River National Forest MPS), 6941 Upper present-day adherents. Officials of the Applegate Rd., Jacksonville, 00000460 Hall, Dr. Orrin I., House, 206 W. 3rd St., Utah Museum of Natural History have Willow Prairie Cabin, (US Forest Service Zumbrota, 80002066 determined that, pursuant to 43 CFR Historic Structures on the Rogue River Kanabec County 10.2 (d)(4), these 16 cultural items have National Forest MPS), FS Rd.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Objects of Scientific Interest in the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument: Status, Threats and Management Recommendations
    Protecting Objects of Scientific Interest in the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument: Status, Threats and Management Recommendations Compiled and Edited by Dennis C. Odion Odion Botanical Consulting and University of California, Santa Barbara and Evan J. Frost Wildwood Environmental Consulting Ashland, OR December 2002 1 Protecting Objects of Scientific Interest in the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument: Status, Threats and Management Recommendations Compiled and Edited by Dennis C. Odion Odion Botanical Consulting, and University of California, Santa Barbara and Evan J. Frost Wildwood Environmental Consulting Ashland, OR Prepared for the World Wildlife Fund Klamath-Siskiyou Regional Program Ashland, OR This project was supported by funds generously provided to the World Wildlife Fund from the Wyss Foundation, Bullitt Foundation, and Wilburforce Foundation Protecting Objects of Scientific Interest in the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . .3 Summary Table . 5 I. Plant Species and Communities Vegetation Patterns, Rare Plants and Plant Associations, by Richard Brock . 8 Mixed Conifer Forests, with an Emphasis on Late-Successional / Old-Growth Conditions, by Dominick A. DellaSala . 25 Chaparral and Other Shrub-Dominated Vegetation, by Dennis C. Odion . 38 II. Fish and Wildlife Species Birds of the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument, by Pepper W. Trail . 42 Peregrine Falcons, by Joel E. Pagel . 53 Butterflies and Moths, by Erik Runquist . 57 Aquatic Environments and Associated Fauna, by Michael S. Parker . 69 III. Key Ecosystem Processes Fire as an Object of Scientific Interest and Implications for Forest Management, by Evan J. Frost and Dennis C. Odion . 76 Landscape and Habitat Connectivity as an Object of Scientific Interest, by Dominick A.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Districts
    GEOLOGY OF THE DISTRICTS The Hilt and Colestin Fire Districts are located south of the jagged crest of the Siskiyou Mountains along the watershed divide between the Rogue and Klamath River drainages. The district boundaries lie within the Klamath Mountain geologic province and are largely drained by the main and east forks of Cottonwood Creek and their tributaries. The Klamath Mountains are steep, rugged mountains consisting mainly of metamorphic and igneous rocks that formed beneath the ocean and subsequently collided with the North American continent about 150 million years ago. Complexly folded and faulted rocks are bounded by belts of sparsely vegetated bands of serpentine. Rocks, including igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary types, are very diverse and interspersed. The Klamath Mountains were formed, in part, by the rotation and westward movement of what was once the northern Sierra Nevada Mountains. Other rock types, including limestone and serpentine, formed under the ocean floor, were uplifted, and attached to the continent. Still other rocks (granites) formed from the melting and subsequent uplift caused by the sinking of the Pacific plate under the North American plate. The Klamath Mountains are irregular and do not form well defined ranges. Most of the short ranges which do occur in the Klamath Mountains run east-west, an unusual characteristic for mountains in North America. The northern portion of the Klamath range is known as the Siskiyou Mountains They extend in an east-west arc for approximately 100 mi (160 km) from east of Crescent City, California northeast along the north side of the Klamath River into Josephine and Jackson counties in Oregon.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Draft of Trails Master Plan Document
    06.20.06 Design Draft of Trails Master Plan Document ASHLAND, OR — PARKS & TRAILS master plan document 1 2 PREFACE A Cooperative Effort ASHLAND, OR — PARKS & TRAILS master plan document RICH VANDERWYST, ASHLAND RESIDENT AND AWTA (ASHLAND WOODLANDS AND TRAILS ASSOCIATION) BOARD MEMBER USES A MCLEOD TO PERFORM TRAIL RECONSTRUCTION IN LOWER SISKIYOU MOUNTAIN PARK ON AN AWTA TRAILS WORKDAY WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. A COOPERATIVE EFFORT BY: City of Ashland Trails Master Plan Committee Parks & Recreation Department Community Development Department Public Works Department National Park Service (Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program) Ashland Woodlands and Trails Association David R. Lewis, Consultant and Writer PHOTOGRAPHS © 2006 JEFF MCFARLAND PAGES: 3, 11, 21, 23, 27, 31, 35, 37, 41, 43, 47, 49, 57, 67, 73, PHOTOGRAPHS © 2006 MARK MULARZ PAGES: 17, 51, 63, 69, 81 3 4 Acknowledgments & Partnerships 6 PREFACE Executive Summary 8 Table of Contents Chapter 1: Trail Master Plan Process 11 Chapter 2: Trails Master Plan Vision, Goals, and Objectives 17 Chapter 3: Recommended Trail Routes - Maps and System 21 Chapter 4: Bear Creek Greenway Trail Corridor 23 Chapter 5: Central Bike Path Corridor 27 Chapter 6: TID Ditch Trail Corridor 31 Chapter 7: Wrights Creek Trail Corridor 35 ASHLAND, OR — PARKS & TRAILS master plan document Chapter 8: Ashland Creek Trail Corridor 37 Chapter 9: Roca Creek Trail Corridor 41 Chapter 10: Clay Creek & Hamilton Creek Trail Corridors 43 Chapter 11: Tolman Creek Trail Corridor 47 Chapter 12: Regional Trails
    [Show full text]
  • ECR Summary.Pdf
    ISSUES AND CONCERNS AS RELATED TO EXISTING CONDITIONS Introduction The stakeholders who participated in the scoping process, through six four hour meetings, identified over 100 issues that were of concern to landowners, educators, conservationists, farmers, foresters, recreationists, and agency representatives. These issues were categorized into fourteen groups, and from these, the Watershed Advisory Committee (WAC) defined the top ten issues and concerns for the watershed. Please note that the numbers in parentheses after each issue/concern correspond to the order in which issues were raised. They are in no way intended to indicate rank or priority. These concerns were further refined for consensus on exact wording. The top ten issues are as follows: 1. Increased population over the last ten years in the canyon and surrounding areas, as well as future growth, has increased recreational pressures in the watershed without an increased infrastructure to accommodate the use. (Note: infrastructure has not kept up with the increase in population, i.e. the number of wardens.) 2. The decline of the fisheries mainly due to water diversions and lack of screening has resulted in Endangered Species Candidate listing for the spring run Chinook salmon leading to restrictions on Sport fishing and elimination of salmon and trout fishing, and could lead to further watershed-wide restrictions for multiple uses: agriculture, timber management, recreation, urban development, and property rights. 3. The current fuel load in the watershed is at an unacceptable level due to natural response and man- made interventions. 4. Inadequate timber management regulations and practices have potential impact on water quality. 5.
    [Show full text]
  • 2011 September Newsletter
    AMERICAN PENSTEMON SOCIETY NEWSLETTER Volume No. 5, Issue No. 3 apsdev.org September, 2011 Oregon’s Siskiyou Mountains, site of the 2011 American Penstemon Society Annual Meeting and Field Trips. By Julie Shapiro CONTENTS FOR THIS ISSUE This issue of the newsletter finds us all at the end of summer, indeed, at the autumnal equinox. I hope we are all enjoying the fruits of our labors in the garden, whether edible, visual or aesthetic. We finally get reports of the annual meeting and field trips. Those of us that missed this year’s adventures will have to read about it twice. There are reports for APS programs, changes, new and old members and notices of loss. The APS 2011 Photo Contest is announced and we even see the word floriferous used in a sentence! PENSTEMONS AND THEIR PHOTOS FROM THE SISKIYOUS, 2011 Article and photos by Ginny Maffitt Despite the late-to-leave, but welcome, snow pack in the Siskiyou Mts. this year, the attendees of the 2011 Annual Meeting (66-the most in years!) found a nice collection of penstemons blooming away. One of the two trips began south of Ashland along the entry road to Mt. Ashland ski area. Only 2 miles up the road, we stopped for a double treat of P. speciosus and P. deustus var. Illinois National Wild & Scenic River By Jack Myrick suffrutescens nearby. P. speciosus (Subgenus Habroanthus) isn’t usually found at this elevation (about 4000’) but is fairly common in east-side WA, OR, CA and ID. The guides had scouted for it lower down at the California border town of Hilt, but the plants were bloomed out.
    [Show full text]