DOCSLIB.ORG

Meesia Longiseta

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Meesia Longiseta SPECIES: Scientific [common] Meesia longiseta (long-stalked thread moss) Forest: Salmon–Challis National Forest Forest Reviewer: Jessica M Dhaemers; Brittni Brown; John Proctor Date of Review: 10/12/2017; 26 February 2018; 30 March 2018 Forest concurrence (or YES recommendation if new) for inclusion of species on list of potential SCC: (Enter Yes or No) FOREST REVIEW RESULTS: 1. The Forest concurs or recommends the species for inclusion on the list of potential SCC: Yes_ X No___ 2. Rationale for not concurring is based on (check all that apply): Species is not native to the plan area _______ Species is not known to occur in the plan area _______ Species persistence in the plan area is not of substantial concern _______ FOREST REVIEW INFORMATION: 1. Is the Species Native to the Plan Area? Yes_X_ No___ If no, provide explanation and stop assessment. 2. Is the Species Known to Occur within the Planning Area? Yes_X_ No___ If no, stop assessment. Table 1. All Known Occurrences, Years, and Frequency within the Planning Area Year Number of Location of Observations (USFS Source of Information Observed Individuals District, Town, River, Road Intersection, HUC, etc.) 1995 No data Allan Lake; ca 0.4 mi S of Allan IDFG Element Occurrence Mountain EO Number: 1 EO_ID: 1151 North Fork Ranger District a. Are all Species Occurrences Only Accidental or Transient? Yes___ No_X_ If yes, document source for determination and stop assessment. b. For species with known occurrences on the Forest since 1990, based on the number of observations and/or year of last observation, can the species be presumed to be established or becoming established in the plan area? Yes_X_ No___ If no, provide explanation and stop assessment c. For species with known occurrences on the Forest predating 1990, does the weight of evidence suggest the species still occurs in the plan area? Yes___ No___ Provide explanation for determination Not applicable. Species occurrences have been documented since 1990. If determination is no, stop assessment d. Map 1, Long-stalked thread moss range in Idaho (NRCS 2017) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2017. Plants Profile for Meesia longiseta. Internet website: https://plants.usda.gov/core/profile?symbol=MELO70. Accessed on September 18, 2017. Map 2, Long-stalked thread moss observations on the Salmon–Challis National Forest (IDFG. 2017. Idaho Fish and Wildlife Information System, Species Diversity Database, Idaho Natural Heritage Data. Accessed on February 27, 2017.) 3. Is There Substantial Concern for the Species’ Capability to persist Over the Long-term in the Plan Area Based on Best Available Scientific Information? Table 2. Status summary based on existing conservation assessments Entity Status/Rank (include definition if Other) Global Rank G4? Apparently Secure (Uncommon but not rare; some cause for long-term concern due to declines or other factors)1 State Rank S1– Critically Imperiled (At very high risk of extinction due to extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer populations), very steep declines, or other factors.)1 USDA Forest Region 1: Idaho Panhandle National Forest (Known)2 Service Region 4: Not listed3 USDI FWS Not listed as a candidate species4 Other Idaho Native Plant Society: 2016 – on list, not yet ranked5; 2011 - SP1 Critically Imperiled (At very high risk of extinction due to extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer populations), very steep declines, or other factors.)6 BLM: Not listed7 1. Idaho Natural Heritage Program. 2016. IDNHP Tracked Plant Species 2016. On file. Accessed January 12, 2018 2. USFS Region 1. 2011. 2011 Sensitive Species List Idaho and Montana. Website: http://fsweb.r1.fs.fed.us/wildlife/wwfrp/TESnew.htm. Accessed January 10, 2017. 3. USFS Region 4. 2016. Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species List. On file. Accessed January 11, 2017. 4. USFWS. 2017. Candidate species believed to or known to occur in Idaho. Website: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp0/reports/species-listed-by-state-report?state=ID&status=candidate. Accessed January 12, 2018. 5. Idaho Native Plant Society. 2016. INPS Rare Plant List May 2016. https://idahonativeplants.org/rare-plants-list/ Accessed January 10, 2018. 6. Idaho Native Plant Society. 2011. Results of the twenty-fifth Idaho Rare Plant Conference – The Idaho Native Plant Society rare plant list. Website: https://idahonativeplants.org/rpc/pdf/2011_Results_IRPC_v2.2.pdf. Accessed on January 11, 2018. 7. BLM. 2016. Bureau of Land Management Idaho Special Status Plants List Aug 2016. On file. Accessed 15 January, 2018. Table 3. Status summary based on best available scientific information. Species (Scientific and Common Name): Meesia longiseta (long-stalked thread moss) Criteria Rank Rationale Literature Citations 1 A1 This species is known from a single occurrence on SCNF. A population of IDFG. 2017. Idaho Fish and Wildlife Distribution on M. longiseta was observed at Allan Lake in Allen Mountain RNA, Information System, Species Diversity Salmon–Challis approximately 0.4 miles south of Allan Mountain in the North Fork Database, Idaho Natural Heritage National Forest Ranger District (IDFG 2017). Species-specific surveys have not been Data. Accessed on February 27, 2017. conducted on SCNF and the distribution of this species is currently unknown. The boggy forest and calcareous fen habitat that this species occupies is scarce throughout SCNF and there is a strong potential for extirpations and little likelihood of recolonization (Rank A1). Confidence in Rank: High, Medium, or Low 2 B This moss is known from Greenland to Alaska and south to Idaho Consortium of Pacific Northwest Distribution in (historical there), Illinois, Ohio, and New York, where it is only known Herbaria. 2017. Meesia longiseta. surrounding historically (NatureServe 2017). In general, M. longiseta is a rare, but Internet website: geographic area widespread moss, with a circumboreal distribution occasionally http://www.pnwherbaria.org/data/res extending into the arctic (Abramova 1956 in Favreau and Bassard 2011.). ults.php?DisplayAs=WebPage&Exclude Cultivated=Y&GroupBy=ungrouped&S The nearest documented occurrence to SCNF is in Okanogan County, ortBy=Year&SortOrder=DESC&SearchA Washington, over 300 miles from the SCNF occurrence (CPNWH 2017). llHerbaria=Y&QueryCount=1&Genus1= meesia&Species1=longiseta&IncludeSy This species is not restricted to SCNF and has widespread circumboreal nonyms1=Y&Zoom=4&Lat=55&Lng=- distribution but the nearest occurrence is a significant distance from 135&PolygonCount=0. Accessed on SCNF (Rank B). September 19, 2017. Confidence in Rank: High, Medium, or Low Favreau, M. and G.R. Brassard. 2011. An analysis of Meesia (Meesiaceae, Musci) in arctic North America and Greenland. – Carnets de bryologie 1: 2- 9. 1. Internet website: http://www.societequebecoisedebryol ogie.org/Carnets/Carnets1/Carnets1_F Species (Scientific and Common Name): Meesia longiseta (long-stalked thread moss) Criteria Rank Rationale Literature Citations avreau_Brassard_Meesia.pdf. Accessed on September 19, 2017. NatureServe. 2017. Comprehensive Species Report. Meesia longiseta. Internet website: http://explorer.natureserve.org. Accessed on September 18, 2017. 3 A Specific studies for the dispersal capability of this species have not been Dillingham, C. 2005. Conservation Dispersal conducted. However, some generalization are made from bryophytes in Assessment for Meesia triquetra (L.) Capability general and applied to this species. Aongstr. (three-ranked hump-moss) and Meesia uliginosa Hedwig (broad- Asexual reproduction is common in most bryophytes and dispersal nerved hump-moss) in California with a focus on the Sierra Nevada distances may be limited even in those that reproduce through spores. Bioregion. Internet website: (Stoneburner et al. 1992). Although bryophytes are capable of being https://www.fs.fed.us/vms/local- transported hundreds of miles, successful establishment is the exception resources/documents/Meesia_CA.pdf. and not the rule (Pocz and van Zanten 1981). Plant competition has also Accessed on September 18, 2017. been cited as the most important factor in preventing the successful colonization of an area (Pocz and Van Zanten 1981). Populations of Pocz T., van Zanten B.O. 1981. Meesia have been noted to not recolonize areas readily and to have Distribution and dispersal of limited outcrossing opportunities (Dillingham 2005). bryophytes. Adv. Bryol. 1:479-562. Internet website: The fen habitat for this species is also uncommon. The availability of this https://www.researchgate.net/publica type of habitat would severely limit the dispersal capability of this tion/290842887_Distribution_and_dis persal_of_bryophytes. Accessed on species. September 19, 2017. This species has a very limited dispersal ability due to reproductive Stoneburner A, Lane D.M., Anderson constraints and habitat availability (Rank A). L.E. 1992. Spore dispersal distances in Atrichum angustatum Confidence in Rank: High, Medium, or Low (Polytrichaceae). Bryologist 95:324- 328. Internet website: Species (Scientific and Common Name): Meesia longiseta (long-stalked thread moss) Criteria Rank Rationale Literature Citations https://www.jstor.org/stable/3243491 ?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. Accessed on September 18, 2017. 4 D The population density of this species has not been documented for this Abundance on the species (Rank D). Salmon–Challis National Forest Confidence in Rank: High, Medium, or Low 5 D The population trend for this species has not been studied on SCNF (Rank Population Trend D). on the Salmon– Challis
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2.10 Meesia Longiseta HEDW. Code: 1389 Anhang: II
    2.10 Meesia longiseta HEDW. Code: 1389 Anhang: II KLAUS WEDDELING, GERHARD LUDWIG & MONIKA HACHTEL, Bonn Namen: D: Langstieliges Schwanenhalsmoos, Langstieliges Meesemoos, Gestreckte Langborste E: Long-stalked Thread Moss, Long-shafted Swan Moss, F: – Systematik/Taxonomie: Bryophyta, Bryopsida, Bryidae, Splachnales, Meesiaceae. Synonyme: Amblyodon longisetus (HEDW.) P. BEAUV. Kennzeichen/Artbestimmung: Meesia longiseta ist ein 4–8 (–10) cm hohes, akrokarpes, unverzweigtes Laubmoos von grün-schwärzlicher Färbung. Die Art wächst in lockeren, weichen Rasen (Abb. 2.9). Das Stämmchen ist bis in die Spitze wurzelhaarig und im Moose Querschnitt dreikantig. Die Blättchen sind mehr oder weniger deutlich in 3 oder 6 Rei- hen angeordnet und vom Stämmchen abgespreizt. Die 2–3,5 mm langen, spitzen Blätt- chen laufen deutlich am Stämmchen herab, sind oberwärts gekielt, ganzrandig oder an der Spitze etwas gezähnt. Ihre deutlich entwickelte Rippe endet unterhalb der Blattspitze. Der Blattrand ist flach. Die Laminazellen sind rechteckig bis rhombisch und etwa 14 µm breit. Die rötlichen, gedrehten Seten der synözischen Art können über 10 cm lang wer- den. Die langbirnenförmige, aufrechte Kapsel hat einen deutlichen Hals. Bei der Spo- renreife im Juni und Juli werden die mit 36–44 µm Durchmesser recht großen Sporen frei- gesetzt. Die Chromosomenzahl ist nicht bekannt (FRITSCH 1991). Differenzierende Merkmale zu den ähnlichen Arten Meesia uliginosa und M. hexasticha sind der nicht ein- gerollte Blattrand, die kleineren Sporen und der Rippenquerschnitt mit kleinen, inneren Zellen (zusammengestellt nach CRUM & ANDERSON 1981, FRAHM 1979, LIMPRICHT 1895). Abbildungen der Art finden sich bei CRUM & ANDERSON (1981, Fig. 296, 297, S. 628, 629: Blättchen, Blattspitze, Habitus, Kapsel) und FRAHM (1979, Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Moss Occurrences in Yugyd Va National Park, Subpolar and Northern Urals, European North-East Russia
    Biodiversity Data Journal 7: e32307 doi: 10.3897/BDJ.7.e32307 Data Paper Moss occurrences in Yugyd Va National Park, Subpolar and Northern Urals, European North-East Russia Galina Zheleznova‡, Tatyana Shubina‡, Svetlana Degteva‡‡, Ivan Chadin , Mikhail Rubtsov‡ ‡ Institute of Biology of Komi Scientific Centre of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Syktyvkar, Russia Corresponding author: Tatyana Shubina ([email protected]) Academic editor: Yasen Mutafchiev Received: 10 Dec 2018 | Accepted: 25 Mar 2019 | Published: 01 Apr 2019 Citation: Zheleznova G, Shubina T, Degteva S, Chadin I, Rubtsov M (2019) Moss occurrences in Yugyd Va National Park, Subpolar and Northern Urals, European North-East Russia. Biodiversity Data Journal 7: e32307. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.7.e32307 Abstract Background This study produced a dataset containing information on moss occurrences in the territory of Yugyd Va National Park, located in the Subpolar and Northern Urals, European North- East Russia. The dataset summarises occurrences noted by long-term bryological explorations in remote areas of the Subpolar and Northern Urals from 1943 to 2015 and from studies published since 1915. The dataset consists of 4,120 occurrence records. The occurrence data were extracted from herbarium specimen labels (3,833 records) and data from published literature (287 records). Most of the records (4,104) are georeferenced. A total of 302 moss taxa belonging to 112 genera and 36 families are reported herein to occur in Yugyd Va National Park. The diversity of bryophytes in this National Park has not yet been fully explored and further exploration will lead to more taxa.
    [Show full text]
  • Action C.5 Milestone: Bryophyte Ex Situ Conservation Scheme Feb 2017
    ESCAPE – UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI Action C.5 Milestone Bryophyte ex situ conservation scheme Sanna Laaka-Lindberg & Xiaolan He 2/28/2017 Monitoring Meesia longiseta reintroduction site in 2016. Photo: Sanna Laaka-Lindberg An ex situ conservation scheme is presented on the basis of compiled results of the ESCAPE project as a model for bryophyte conservation. ESCAPE LIFE+2011 BIO/FI/917 Action C.5 Milestone Bryophyte ex situ conservation scheme Introduction Ex situ conservation is a species conservation method used as a compliment to the primary conservation tool in situ conservation, a process of protecting an endangered species in its natural habitat. Ex situ conservation is targeted to species in most serious threat, especially when the conservation measures in nature are not adequate for species survival. There are basically two different types of ex situ conservation tools: 1) tools aimed at storing and securing the species and its genetic variation e.g. on national or even on wider (global) level, and 2) tools aimed at increasing species survival ability in nature. The ultimate goal of ex situ conservation is to provide support for the survival of species in their natural environments. Conservation of biodiversity is a continuous and long-term assignment, so the decisions on ex situ conservation to a species need to be made on a solid basis. This involves thorough investigation on conservation priorities, background knowledge of the biology and ecology of the species to be conserved, and the feasibility of the conservation plan. In the ESCAPE project, a priority list was compiled for vascular plants (see Ryttäri 2013), but no such list is made for bryophytes.
    [Show full text]
  • CBD First National Report
    FIRST NATIONAL REPORT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA TO THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY July 2010 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................... 3 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 4 2. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Geographic Profile .......................................................................................... 5 2.2 Climate Profile ...................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Population Profile ................................................................................................. 7 2.4 Economic Profile .................................................................................................. 7 3 THE BIODIVERSITY OF SERBIA .............................................................................. 8 3.1 Overview......................................................................................................... 8 3.2 Ecosystem and Habitat Diversity .................................................................... 8 3.3 Species Diversity ............................................................................................ 9 3.4 Genetic Diversity ............................................................................................. 9 3.5 Protected Areas .............................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, Version 2018-07-24
    Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, version 2018-07-24 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge biology staff July 24, 2018 2 Cover image: map of 16,213 georeferenced occurrence records included in the checklist. Contents Contents 3 Introduction 5 Purpose............................................................ 5 About the list......................................................... 5 Acknowledgments....................................................... 5 Native species 7 Vertebrates .......................................................... 7 Invertebrates ......................................................... 55 Vascular Plants........................................................ 91 Bryophytes ..........................................................164 Other Plants .........................................................171 Chromista...........................................................171 Fungi .............................................................173 Protozoans ..........................................................186 Non-native species 187 Vertebrates ..........................................................187 Invertebrates .........................................................187 Vascular Plants........................................................190 Extirpated species 207 Vertebrates ..........................................................207 Vascular Plants........................................................207 Change log 211 References 213 Index 215 3 Introduction Purpose to avoid implying
    [Show full text]
  • River Flooding As a Driver of Polygon Dynamics
    EGU Journal Logos (RGB) Open Access Open Access Open Access Advances in Annales Nonlinear Processes Geosciences Geophysicae in Geophysics Open Access Open Access Natural Hazards Natural Hazards and Earth System and Earth System Sciences Sciences Discussions Open Access Open Access Atmospheric Atmospheric Chemistry Chemistry and Physics and Physics Discussions Open Access Open Access Atmospheric Atmospheric Measurement Measurement Techniques Techniques Discussions Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Open Access Biogeosciences Discuss., 10, 4067–4125, 2013 Open Access www.biogeosciences-discuss.net/10/4067/2013/ Biogeosciences Biogeosciences BGD doi:10.5194/bgd-10-4067-2013 Discussions © Author(s) 2013. CC Attribution 3.0 License. 10, 4067–4125, 2013 Open Access Open Access This discussion paper is/has been under review for the journal BiogeosciencesClimate (BG). Climate River flooding as Please refer to the correspondingof finalthe Past paper in BG if available. of the Past Discussions a driver of polygon dynamics Open Access River flooding as a driver of polygon Open Access Earth System Earth System R. Zibulski et al. dynamics: modernDynamics vegetation dataDynamics and Discussions Title Page Open Access a millennial peat record from the AnabarOpen Access Geoscientific Geoscientific River lowlandsInstrumentation (Arctic Siberia)Instrumentation Abstract Introduction Methods and Methods and Data Systems Data Systems Conclusions References 1 1,2 3 1 4 R. Zibulski , U. Herzschuh , L. A. Pestryakova , J.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.4 Biological Resources
    4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES INTRODUCTION This section describes the existing biological resources that occur or have the potential to occur within the Project Area and vicinity. In addition, a description of applicable regulations is provided. The analysis evaluates the potential impacts to biological resources that could occur in association with the development of property in the commercial districts and the implementation of the Mobility Element. The Land Use Element/Zoning Code Amendments would modify the development regulations and no specific projects are proposed at this time. Likewise, the roadway and trail alignments are conceptual in nature. Therefore, the analysis is evaluated at a program‐level. With a programmatic study, such as this EIR, subsequent projects carried out under the proposed Land Use Element/ Zoning Code Amendments and Mobility Element Update may warrant site specific biological assessments and surveys once plans have been prepared. 1. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING a. Regulatory Framework As part of the proposed Project’s review and approval there are a number of performance criteria and standard conditions that must be met. These include compliance with all of the terms, provisions, and requirements of applicable laws that relate to Federal, State, and local regulating agencies for impacts to biological resources. The following provides an overview of the applicable regulations with regard to the biological resources that may be present within the Project Area. (1) Federal (a) Migratory Bird Treaty Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) protects individuals as well as any part, nest, or eggs of any bird listed as migratory. In practice, Federal permits issued for activities that potentially impact migratory birds typically have conditions that require pre‐disturbance surveys for nesting birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Mosses: Weber and Wittmann, Electronic Version 11-Mar-00
    Catalog of the Colorado Flora: a Biodiversity Baseline Mosses: Weber and Wittmann, electronic version 11-Mar-00 Amblystegiaceae Amblystegium Bruch & Schimper, 1853 Amblystegium serpens (Hedwig) Bruch & Schimper var. juratzkanum (Schimper) Rau & Hervey WEBER73B. Amblystegium juratzkanum Schimper. Calliergon (Sullivant) Kindberg, 1894 Calliergon cordifolium (Hedwig) Kindberg WEBER73B; HERMA76. Calliergon giganteum (Schimper) Kindberg Larimer Co.: Pingree Park, 2960 msm, 25 Sept. 1980, [Rolston 80114), !Hermann. Calliergon megalophyllum Mikutowicz COLO specimen so reported is C. richardsonii, fide Crum. Calliergon richardsonii (Mitten) Kindberg WEBER73B. Campyliadelphus (Lindberg) Chopra, 1975 KANDA75 Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus (Bridel) Kanda HEDEN97. Campylium chrysophyllum (Bridel) J. Lange. WEBER63; WEBER73B; HEDEN97. Hypnum chrysophyllum Bridel. HEDEN97. Campyliadelphus stellatus (Hedwig) Kanda KANDA75. Campylium stellatum (Hedwig) C. Jensen. WEBER73B. Hypnum stellatum Hedwig. HEDEN97. Campylophyllum Fleischer, 1914 HEDEN97 Campylophyllum halleri (Hedwig) Fleischer HEDEN97. Nova Guinea 12, Bot. 2:123.1914. Campylium halleri (Hedwig) Lindberg. WEBER73B; HERMA76. Hypnum halleri Hedwig. HEDEN97. Campylophyllum hispidulum (Bridel) Hedenäs HEDEN97. Campylium hispidulum (Bridel) Mitten. WEBER63,73B; HEDEN97. Hypnum hispidulum Bridel. HEDEN97. Cratoneuron (Sullivant) Spruce, 1867 OCHYR89 Cratoneuron filicinum (Hedwig) Spruce WEBER73B. Drepanocladus (C. Müller) Roth, 1899 HEDEN97 Nomen conserv. Drepanocladus aduncus (Hedwig) Warnstorf WEBER73B.
    [Show full text]
  • New York Natural Heritage Program Rare Plant Status List May 2004 Edited By
    New York Natural Heritage Program Rare Plant Status List May 2004 Edited by: Stephen M. Young and Troy W. Weldy This list is also published at the website: www.nynhp.org For more information, suggestions or comments about this list, please contact: Stephen M. Young, Program Botanist New York Natural Heritage Program 625 Broadway, 5th Floor Albany, NY 12233-4757 518-402-8951 Fax 518-402-8925 E-mail: [email protected] To report sightings of rare species, contact our office or fill out and mail us the Natural Heritage reporting form provided at the end of this publication. The New York Natural Heritage Program is a partnership with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and by The Nature Conservancy. Major support comes from the NYS Biodiversity Research Institute, the Environmental Protection Fund, and Return a Gift to Wildlife. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... Page ii Why is the list published? What does the list contain? How is the information compiled? How does the list change? Why are plants rare? Why protect rare plants? Explanation of categories.................................................................................................................... Page iv Explanation of Heritage ranks and codes............................................................................................ Page iv Global rank State rank Taxon rank Double ranks Explanation of plant
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 12 Productivity
    Glime, J. M. 2017. Productivity. Chapt. 12. In: Glime, J. M. Bryophyte Ecology. Volume 1. Physiological Ecology. Ebook 12-1-1 sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. Last updated 18 July 2020 and available at <http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology/>. CHAPTER 12 PRODUCTIVITY TABLE OF CONTENTS Productivity .......................................................................................................................................................... 12-2 Ecological Factors ................................................................................................................................................ 12-2 Ability to Invade ........................................................................................................................................... 12-2 Niche Differences ......................................................................................................................................... 12-3 Growth ................................................................................................................................................................. 12-3 Growth Measurements .................................................................................................................................. 12-4 Annual Length Increase ................................................................................................................................ 12-8 Uncoupling ...................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Rare Bryophytes in Unique Wetland Ecosystems on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest
    Inventory of Rare Bryophytes in Unique Wetland Ecosystems on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest Photo: L. Wilson 2010 U.S.D.A Forest Service Region 6 and U.S.D.I Bureau of Land Management Interagency Special Status and Sensitive Species Program Authors Clint Emerson is a botanist, USDA Forest Service, Rogue River Siskiyou National Forest, Gold Beach and Powers Ranger Districts, Gold Beach, OR 97465 Scot Loring is a botanist, Pacific Crest Consulting, LLC, Talent, OR 97540 Introduction The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF) dissects a geographically diverse area of Oregon, creating a high level of endemism with regard to vascular plants. At this point much less is known about non-vascular plant diversity in the region so botanists on the forest proposed a project to inventory unique wetland ecosystems for Region 6 Sensitive, Strategic and Oregon Biologic Information Center (ORBIC) list 3 and 4 bryophytes (mosses, liverworts and hornworts). The project received funding from the Interagency Special Status and Sensitive Species Program (ISSSSP) for field work to begin during the 2009 field season. This report summarizes findings of the inventory. Wetland ecosystems are an uncommon feature of the steep and highly dissected Siskiyou Mountains in Southwest Oregon. They are dispersed more so within the Southern Oregon Cascade portion of the forest, but are still considered an uncommon feature on the landscape when compared to unique upland ecosystems such as prairies or rock outcrops. In comparison to northwestern Oregon and western Washington little information exists with regard to Sensitive wetland associated bryophytes in southwest Oregon. This may be due to the fact that large metropolitan areas with universities are mostly lacking from the region and therefore the expertise and funding to accomplish this type of work is not as available.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C Special-Status Species Evaluated for the Tahoe Cross-Country Lodge Replacement and Expansion Project
    Appendix C Special-Status Species Evaluated for the Tahoe Cross-Country Lodge Replacement and Expansion Project Ascent Environmental Appendix C Table C-1 Special-Status Species Evaluated for the Tahoe Cross-County Lodge Replacement and Expansion Project Regulatory Status1 Potential to Occur or Be Affected in the Proposed Project Site or Species Habitat Associations Federal/ State/ Alternative A Site2 TRPA Other Botanical Species Galena Creek rockcress SI CRPR-1B Rocky areas along edges of conifer and/or aspen Low. No known occurrences in the project vicinity. The project area is Arabis rigidissima var. demota stands. Usually found on moderate to steep northerly located below the elevation range of this species. Suitable upper aspects in moisture accumulating microsites; 7,400– montane habitat is not present on the proposed Project site or 8,400 ft. elev. Alternative A site. Threetip sagebrush — CRPR-2B Openings in upper montane coniferous forest, on Low. No known occurrences in the project vicinity. Suitable upper Artemisia tripartita ssp. tripartita rocky/volcanic soils; 7,200–8,530 ft. elev. montane habitat is not present on the proposed Project site or Alternative A site. Tiehm’s rock cress — CRPR-1B Granitic alpine boulder and rock fields; 9,700 to 12,000 None. The project area is located below the elevation range of this Boechera tiehmii ft. elev. species; no alpine rocky habitats present. Tulare rockcress — CRPR-1B Bogs and fens, meadows and seeps, marshes and None. No known occurrences in the project vicinity. Suitable alpine Boechera tularensis swamps in lower montane and upper montane and upper montane habitat is not present on the proposed Project coniferous forest; 4,200 to 10,700 ft.
    [Show full text]