DOCSLIB.ORG

A Status Review of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Status Review of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat A Status Review of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat New Mexico •- September 1993 Prepared for. Prepared by: U.5. Fish and Wildlife Service Paul J. Knight 3530 Pan American Highway, NE Marron Taschek Knight, Inc. Albuquerque, NM 87107 2615 Rio Rancho Blvd. Corrales, NM 87048 CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION. .. 1 1 .1 Background and History ............. .-................ 1 1.2 Research Approach and Data Acquisition. .. 1 2.0 DISTRIBUTION AND CURRENT STATUS OF POPULATION SITES .. 3 2.1 Distribution and Current Status of Population Sites . .. 3 2.2 Summary and Discussion of Distribution and Status of Populations. 11 3.0 DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS ............................... 12 3. 1 General Overview . .. 12 3.2 Demography and Population Trends . .. 12 3.3 Summary and Discussion of Demographic Trends from Plots I, 2 & 3 . .. 22 4.0 POPULATION SIZE AND DENSITY ........................ 28 4.1 General Overview. .. 28 4.2 Summary and Discussion of Population Size and Density. .. 32 5.0 LAND OWNERSHIP, PATENTS, AND LAND CLAIMS. .. 34 5.1 General Overview ................................... 34 5.2 Summary and Discussion of Land Ownership of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat Populations .....................37 6.0 STATUS OF POTENTIAL THREATS TO GYPSUM WILD BUCKWHEAT FROM MINERAL EXPLORATION, CLAIMS, AND GAS LEASES . .. 40 6. 1 General Overview . .. 40 6.2 Mineral Deposits, Claims, Oil and Gas Leases . .. 40 6.3 Summary and Discussion of Mineral Deposits, Claims, Oil and Gas Leases ........................... 47 7.0 STATUS OF POTENTIAL THREATS TO GYPSUM WILD BUCKWHEAT BY CATTLE GRAZING, ORV USE, AND BRANTLEY RESERVOIR . .. 51 7. 1 General Overview . .5 1 7.2 Status of Cattle Grazing ...............................51 7.3 StatusofORVTraffic ................................ 52 7.4 Status of Brantley Reservoir . .53 7.5 Summary and Discussion of Potential Impacts and Threats of Grazing Pressure, ORV Traffic, and Brantley Reservoir ........ 54 8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND COMMENTS 1 FIGURES 1 Known Populations of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat . .. 2 2 Known Distribution of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat . .4 3 Estimated Occupied Habitat of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat . .5 4 Seven River Hills Population of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat ......... 6 5 Black River Population of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat ............. 8 6 Ben Slaughter Draw Population of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat . .10 6a Physiographic Distribution of Monitoring Plots at Seven River Hills. .13 7 Size Class in cm of Plot 1 1987, 1988, 1989, and 1993 . .15 8 Size Classes of Eriogonum gypsophilum Plot 1 1987 and 1993 . .16 9 Size Classes of Eriogonum gypsophilum Plot 2 1987-1993 . .18 10 Size Classes of Eriogonum gypsophilum Plot 2 1987 and 1993 . 19 11 Size Class of Eriogonum gypsophilum Plot 3 1987-1993 .........20 12 Size Class of Eriogonum gypsophilum Plot 3 1987 and 1993 ...... 21 13 Size Class of Plots 1, 2. and 3 1987-1993 . .23 14 Median Size Class Values 1987-1993 ......................24 15 Average Size Classes Plots 1.2, and 3 in 1987 and 1993 vs. Plot 4 .. 26 16 Total Number of Plants in Monitoring Plots 1987-1993 and Average Number of Plants Per Square Meter in Monitoring Plots 1987-1993 ..........................29 17 Habitat Categories Utilized in Calculating Population Size of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat at Seven Rivers Hills ............. 31 18 Estimated Population Size of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat ..........33 19 Land Status at the Seven Rivers Hills Gypsum Wild Buckwheat Population Site . .. 35 20 Land Status in the Ben Slaughter Draw Population of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat . .36 21 Black River Gypsum Wild Buckwheat Population Ownership Map ..38 22 Estimated Population Size and Land Ownership of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat. .39 23 Known Distribution of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat . .41 24 Chemical Analysis of Castille Formation Gypsum Yeso Hills ..... .43 25 Oil and Gas Leases at the Seven Rivers Hills Gypsum Wild Buckwheat Population Site . .45 26 Oil and Gas Leases at the Ben Slaughter Draw Population of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat . .46 27 Black River Gypsum Wild Buckwheat Population Oil and Gas Leases ..........................48 28 Oil and Gas Leases at Gypsum Wild Buckwheat Population Sites .. .50 29 Brantley Lake Floodpool Impact .........................55 30 Status of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat .......................59 Appendix A Mineral Claim Information Pocket Maps 1,2 and 3 ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION In the summer of 1993, the C.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) sponsored a study to evaluate the current status of Eriogonum gypsophilum (Gypsum wild buckwheat). The purpose of the study was to conduct a status survey of all known populations of gypsum wild buckwheat, and its scope included determination of the current status and distribution of the species, demographic trends, and an evaluation of the threats to the species. The study was conducted in southeast New Mexico in coordination with the Carlsbad Resource Area office of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department. 1.1 Backeround and Historv Eriogonum gypsophilum was originally collected in 1909 and was first published by Wooton and Standley (1915). For nearly 70 years the plant was known from only the type locality at the Seven Rivers Hills, just north of Carlsbad, New Mexico (Figure 1). The gypsum wild buckwheat was listed by the USFWS as a threatened species on January 19, 1981. At that time the plant was still known only from the type locality at the Seven Rivers Hills. Critical habitat was designated for the species. The recovery plan stated that the plant was stable but was threatened by off-road-vehicle (ORV) use of the habitat, trampling or grazing by cattle, and the raised water level resulting from establishment of the nearby Brantley Reservoir. In 1987 two new population sites were reported for gypsum wild buckwheat. Both of these sites are located over 30 miles south of the Seven Rivers Hills, in the Yeso Hills of Eddy County, New Mexico. The northernmost of the sites is located along the Black River just south of Black River Village. The southern site is located in the drainage of Ben Slaughter Draw just north of the Texas border. Between 1988 and the present, all three population sites have been the subject of a number of studies and surveys which have contributed greatly to the body of knowledge of this species. 1.2 Research Approach and Data Acquisition This study began in July of 1993 with a review of all of the literature on gypsum wild buckwheat. The next phase of the study required the compilation of all available data on land use and potential development in the area. Data on land ownership, mineral claims, and oil and gas leases were acquired at the BLM Office in Santa Fe, N.M., the Carlsbad Resource Area office in Carlsbad, N.M., and the County Court House in Carlsbad. Data were also collected at the University of New Mexico Herbarium and from consultation with Dr. Richard Spellenberg (NMSU) and Robert Sivinski (New Mexico Department of Energy, Mineral and Natural Resources). Alex Sanders (a mining engineer with extensive knowledge of gypsum mining) and the BLM biologists in the Carlsbad Resource Area office were also consulted during this study. Field evaluations occurred in August and September of 1993. 1 New Mexico Seven Rivers Hill s Black F!iver Ben Slaughter o 50 Draw Miles I Figure 1. Known PopuJations of Gypsum Wild Buckwheat 2.0 DISTRIBUTION AND CURRENT STATUS OF POPULATION SITES 2.1 Distribution and Current Status of Population Sites Gypsum wild buckwheat is currently known from three locations in Eddy County, New Mexico (Figure 2). The first is in the Seven Rivers Hills, approximately 9 miles north of Carlsbad at T20S, R25E, S24 and T20S, R26E, S 19 (Map I-see rear pocket). The population here is estimated to cover approximately 109 acres (Figure 3). The second population site is located just south of Black River Village at T24S, R26E S35 and T25S, R26E, Sections 2 and 3 (Map 2). It contains the largest of the populations, estimated to cover approximately 288 acres (Figure 3). The last population is located in the drainages of Ben Slaughter Draw and Hay Hollow at T26S, R26E Sections 16,17,18 and T26S, R25E, Sections 24 and 25 (Map 3). It is the smallest of the populations, estimated to cover approximately 80 acres (Figure 3). Seven Rivers Hills The Seven Rivers Hills population is located on the lowlands, lower slopes, steep slopes, and hilltops of the eastern end of the Seven Rivers Hills (Figure 4, Map 3). Its estimated 109 acres of occupied habitat are distributed into two large, irregularly shaped segments, surrounded by a half dozen smaller isolated enclaves of plants. The Seven Rivers Hills is northernmost of the population sites and has the widest range of topographic and physiographic variation of any of the the sites where gypsum wild buckwheat occurs. The plants range from 3290 feet to approximately 3600 feet in elevation. They are distributed in several different habitats: on the lowland areas where gypsum material from the steep hillsides has eroded to form a bajada of unconsolidated gypsum, on the steeper hillsides (particularly in areas subjected to past erosion or disturbance), and on the tops of the hills (most abundant near the crest of the hill where the gypsum substrate has eroded to form a looser soil). The plants prefer areas where the gypsum bedrock has eroded, forming a looser, less rocky materiaL These sites are generally on flat lands or on gentle slopes, The rocky hillsides are the poorest habitats. The hard gypsum bedrock on many portions of the slopes does not afford sites for establishment of the plants. Gypsum wild buckwheat plants on steep slopes are generally restricted to either drainages or depressions or along trails where the gypsum bedrock has weathered to produce loose gypsum soiL The Seven Rivers Hills habitat occurs in Chihuahuan Desert. The areas surrounding the hills are dominated by creosote bush and occasionally mesquite.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Federal Register/Vol. 82, No. 4/Friday, January 6, 2017/Proposed
    Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1665 Required Determinations PART 17—ENDANGERED AND March 7, 2017. Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Clarity of the Rule THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS Portal (see ADDRESSES), the deadline for We are required by Executive Orders ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 submitting an electronic comment is 12866 and 12988 and by the continues to read as follows: 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on this date. Presidential Memorandum of June 1, Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– We must receive requests for public 1998, to write all rules in plain 1544; 4201–4245, unless otherwise noted. hearings, in writing, at the address language. This means that each rule we ■ 2. Amend § 17.12(h) by removing the shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION publish must: entry for ‘‘Eriogonum gypsophilum’’ CONTACT section below by February 21, (1) Be logically organized; 2017. (2) Use the active voice to address from the List of Endangered and readers directly; Threatened Plants. ADDRESSES: Written comments: You may ■ (3) Use clear language rather than 3. Amend § 17.96(a) by removing the submit comments by one of the jargon; critical habitat entry for ‘‘Family following methods: (4) Be divided into short sections and Polygonaceae: Eriogonum gypsophilum (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal sentences; and (Gypsum Wild Buckwheat).’’ eRulemaking Portal: http:// (5) Use lists and tables wherever Dated: December 22, 2016. www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, possible. Daniel M. Ashe, enter FWS–R2–ES–2016–0138, which is If you feel that we have not met these Director, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Eriogonum Visheri A
    Eriogonum visheri A. Nelson (Visher’s buckwheat): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project December 18, 2006 Juanita A. R. Ladyman, Ph.D. JnJ Associates LLC 6760 S. Kit Carson Cir E. Centennial, CO 80122 Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Ladyman, J.A.R. (2006, December 18). Eriogonum visheri A. Nelson (Visher’s buckwheat): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/ projects/scp/assessments/eriogonumvisheri.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The time spent and help given by all the people and institutions listed in the reference section are gratefully acknowledged. I would also like to thank the North Dakota Parks and Recreation Department, in particular Christine Dirk, and the South Dakota Natural Heritage Program, in particular David Ode, for their generosity in making their records, reports, and photographs available. I thank the Montana Natural Heritage Program, particularly Martin Miller, Mark Gabel of the Black Hills University Herbarium, Robert Tatina of the Dakota Wesleyan University, Christine Niezgoda of the Field Museum of Natural History, Carrie Kiel Academy of Natural Sciences, Dave Dyer of the University of Montana Herbarium, Caleb Morse of the R.L. McGregor Herbarium, Robert Kaul of the C. E. Bessey Herbarium, John La Duke of the University of North Dakota Herbarium, Joe Washington of the Dakota National Grasslands, and Doug Sargent of the Buffalo Gap National Grasslands - Region 2, for the information they provided. I also appreciate the access to files and assistance given to me by Andrew Kratz, Region 2 USDA Forest Service, and Chuck Davis, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Biological Assessment
    RECLAMATION Managing Water in the West Brantley and Avalon Reservoirs Resource Management Plan Amendment FINAL BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Albuquerque Area Office Albuquerque, New Mexico Eddy County, New Mexico January 2011 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Prepared by: BIO-WEST, Inc. 1063 West 1400 North Logan, Utah 84321-2291 435.752.4202 www.bio-west.com Revised Brantley and Avalon Reservoirs RMPA Final Biological Assessment January 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT BACKGROUND........................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................................................................. 1 PROPOSED FEDERAL ACTION ................................................................................................. 4 NEED FOR THE ACTION ........................................................................................................ 5 PURPOSE FOR THE ACTION ................................................................................................. 5 DESCRIPTION
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 82, No. 4/Friday
    Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1657 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail including any additional population or hand-delivery to: Public Comments locations, and; Fish and Wildlife Service Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2016– (3) New information regarding 0119; Division of Policy, Performance, Eriogonum gypsophilum life history, 50 CFR Part 17 and Management Programs; U.S. Fish ecology and habitat use. and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC; 5275 Please note that submissions merely [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–0119; Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA stating support for, or opposition to, the FXES11130900000 178 FF09E42000] 220411–3803. action being considered, without We request that you send comments providing supporting information, RIN 1018–BB87 only by the methods described above. although noted, will not be considered in making a determination, as the Act Endangered and Threatened Wildlife We will post all comments on http:// (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) section and Plants; Removing Eriogonum www.regulations.gov. This generally 4(b)(1)(A) directs that determinations as gypsophilum From the Federal List of means that we will post any personal to whether any species is an endangered Endangered and Threatened Plants information you provide us (see Information Requested, below, for more or threatened species must be made AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, information). ‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific Interior. Copies of Documents: This proposed and commercial data available.’’ Prior to issuing a final rule on this ACTION: Proposed rule and 12-month rule and supporting documents are proposed action, we will consider all petition finding; request for comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Assessment for The
    DRAFT Environmental Assessment for the Renewable (Wind and Solar) Energy, Power Line, and Communication Tower Habitat Conservation Plan and Incidental Take Permit for the Lesser Prairie-Chicken LPC Conservation LLC Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas December 2020 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arlington Ecological Services Field Office 2005 Northeast Green Oaks Boulevard, Suite 140 Arlington, Texas 76006 Estimated Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing this EA: $64,683.00 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RENEWABLE ENERGY, POWER LINE, AND COMMUNICATION TOWER PROPOSED HCP AND ITP FOR LESSER PRAIRIE-CHICKEN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND ...............................................................1 1.1 Introduction and Background ..................................................................................1 1.1.1 Permit Structure ...........................................................................................3 1.1.2 Plan Area and Permit Area ..........................................................................3 1.2 Regulatory Background ...........................................................................................3 1.2.1 Endangered Species Act ..............................................................................3 1.2.2 National Environmental Policy Act .............................................................4 2 PURPOSE AND NEED .......................................................................................................5 2.1 Purpose
    [Show full text]
  • Eriogonum Exilifolium Reveal (Dropleaf Buckwheat): a Technical Conservation Assessment
    Eriogonum exilifolium Reveal (dropleaf buckwheat): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project January 27, 2006 David G. Anderson Colorado Natural Heritage Program Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523-8002 Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Anderson, D.G. (2006, January 27). Eriogonum exilifolium Reveal (dropleaf buckwheat): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/ projects/scp/assessments/eriogonumexilifolium.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The helpfulness and generosity of many people, particularly Chuck Cesar, Janet Coles, Denise Culver, Georgia Doyle, Walt Fertig, Bonnie Heidel, Mary Jane Howell, Lynn Johnson, Barry Johnston, Jennifer Jones, George Jones, Ellen Mayo, Ernie Nelson, John Proctor, James Reveal, Richard Scully, and William Weber, are gratefully acknowledged. Their interest in the project and time spent answering questions were extremely valuable, and their insights into the threats, habitat, and ecology of Eriogonum exilifolium were crucial to this project. Richard Scully and Mary Jane Howell spent countless hours as volunteers surveying for E. exilifolium in Larimer, Jackson, Grand, and Albany counties in 2004 and 2005, and much credit goes to them for expanding our knowledge of this species. The quality of their work has been excellent. John Proctor provided valuable information and photographs of this species on National Forest System lands. Thanks also to Beth Burkhart, Greg Hayward, Gary Patton, Jim Maxwell, Kimberly Nguyen, Andy Kratz, Joy Bartlett, and Kathy Roche, and Janet Coles for assisting with questions and project management. Vernon LaFontaine, Wendy Haas, and John Proctor provided information on grazing allotment status.
    [Show full text]
  • Eriogonum Brandegeei Rydberg (Brandegee's Buckwheat)
    Eriogonum brandegeei Rydberg (Brandegee’s buckwheat): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project February 27, 2006 David G. Anderson Colorado Natural Heritage Program Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523-8002 Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Anderson, D.G. (2006, February 27). Eriogonum brandegeei Reveal (Brandegee’s buckwheat): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http:// www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/eriogonumbrandegeei.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The helpfulness and generosity of many experts, particularly Erik Brekke, Janet Coles, Carol Dawson, Brian Elliott, Tom Grant, Bill Jennings, Barry Johnston, Ellen Mayo, Tamara Naumann, Susan Spackman Panjabi, Jerry Powell, and James Reveal, are gratefully acknowledged. Thanks also to Greg Hayward, Gary Patton, Jim Maxwell, Andy Kratz, and Joy Bartlett for assisting with questions and project management. Carmen Morales, Kathy Alvarez, Mary Olivas, Jane Nusbaum, and Barbara Brayfield helped with project management. Susan Spackman Panjabi provided data on the floral visitation of Eriogonum brandegeei. Annette Miller provided information for the assessment on seed storage status. Karin Decker offered advice and technical expertise on map production. Ron Hartman, Ernie Nelson, and Joy Handley provided assistance and specimen label data from the Rocky Mountain Herbarium. Nan Lederer and Tim Hogan provided assistance at the University of Colorado Herbarium, as did Janet Wingate at the Kalmbach Herbarium and Jennifer Ackerfield and Mark Simmons at the Colorado State University Herbarium. Shannon Gilpin assisted with literature acquisition. Thanks also to my family (Jen, Cleome, and Melia) for their support.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a – Location Maps
    Appendix A – Location Maps Figure 1. Looking east along south edge of the proposed Eagle 34 G Federal 88 well pad, existing caliche road and north edge of the existing Eagle 34 G Federal 13 well pad. Figure 2. Looking south-southwest across proposed Eagle 34 G Federal 88 well pad, from northwest corner stake Appendix A - 1 Appendix A - 2 Appendix A - 3 Appendix A - 4 Appendix A - 5 Appendix A - 6 Appendix A - 7 Appendix B – Plats Appendix B - 1 Appendix B - 2 Appendix B - 3 Appendix B - 4 Appendix B - 5 Appendix B - 6 Appendix B - 7 Appendix B - 8 Appendix B - 9 Appendix C – Plant Survey Report Lime Rock Resources II-A, L.P. Proposed Eagle 34 G Federal 88 Well and Surface Flow Lines SW/NE, Section 34, Township 17 South, Range 27 East, Eddy County, New Mexico Plant Survey Report Prepared by Robyn W. Tierney, Permits West, Inc., Santa Fe, New Mexico April 22, 2016 INTRODUCTION Lime Rock Resources II-A, L.P. (Lime Rock) has filed an Application to Drill (APD) one vertical well (Eagle 34 G Federal 88). Lime Rock also proposes to construct 2,418.98 feet of new surface three-inch O.D. SDR 7 poly flow lines (1 gas and 1 production) in a 30-foot wide corridor from the proposed Eagle 34 G Federal 88 well to the existing Eagle 33/34 Federal Tank Battery. The proposed project is located on BLM lands (Lease No. NMNM-557370) in the SW/4 NE/4, Section 34, Township 17 South, Range 27 East, Eddy County, New Mexico (Spring Lake, NM, 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle), approximately nine miles southeast of Artesia, New Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Conserving North America's Threatened Plants
    Conserving North America’s Threatened Plants Progress report on Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation Conserving North America’s Threatened Plants Progress report on Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation By Andrea Kramer, Abby Hird, Kirsty Shaw, Michael Dosmann, and Ray Mims January 2011 Recommended ciTaTion: Kramer, A., A. Hird, K. Shaw, M. Dosmann, and R. Mims. 2011. Conserving North America’s Threatened Plants: Progress report on Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation . BoTanic Gardens ConservaTion InTernaTional U.S. Published by BoTanic Gardens ConservaTion InTernaTional U.S. 1000 Lake Cook Road Glencoe, IL 60022 USA www.bgci.org/usa Design: John Morgan, [email protected] Contents Acknowledgements . .3 Foreword . .4 Executive Summary . .5 Chapter 1. The North American Flora . .6 1.1 North America’s plant diversity . .7 1.2 Threats to North America’s plant diversity . .7 1.3 Conservation status and protection of North America’s plants . .8 1.3.1 Regional conservaTion sTaTus and naTional proTecTion . .9 1.3.2 Global conservaTion sTaTus and proTecTion . .10 1.4 Integrated plant conservation . .11 1.4.1 In situ conservaTion . .11 1.4.2 Ex situ collecTions and conservaTion applicaTions . .12 1.4.3 ParameTers of ex situ collecTions for conservaTion . .16 1.5 Global perspective and work on ex situ conservation . .18 1.5.1 Global STraTegy for PlanT ConservaTion, TargeT 8 . .18 Chapter 2. North American Collections Assessment . .19 2.1 Background . .19 2.2 Methodology . .19 2.2.1 Compiling lisTs of ThreaTened NorTh American Taxa .
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Site R042XC013NM Gyp Hills
    Natural Resources Conservation Service Ecological site R042XC013NM Gyp Hills Accessed: 09/25/2021 General information Provisional. A provisional ecological site description has undergone quality control and quality assurance review. It contains a working state and transition model and enough information to identify the ecological site. Figure 1. Mapped extent Areas shown in blue indicate the maximum mapped extent of this ecological site. Other ecological sites likely occur within the highlighted areas. It is also possible for this ecological site to occur outside of highlighted areas if detailed soil survey has not been completed or recently updated. Table 1. Dominant plant species Tree Not specified Shrub Not specified Herbaceous Not specified Physiographic features This site occurs on hills, escarpments and breaks between higher and lower plains or terraces, and canyon sides between deep desert drainageways. Slopes range from 10 to 30 percent. Direction of slope varies, the northern exposures having cooler and more moist soils, and the southern exposures having hotter and drier soils in general. Elevations range from 2,800 to 4,000 feet. Table 2. Representative physiographic features Landforms (1) Hill (2) Canyon Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 853–1,219 m Slope 10–30% Water table depth 0 cm Aspect N, S Climatic features The frost free season ranges from 180 to 221 days between early April and late October. The optimum growing season of the major native warm season plants coincides with the summer rains during June, July, August, and September. However, plants can make some growth at any time during the frost free period when moisture is available and minimum daily temperatures stay above 51 degrees F.
    [Show full text]
  • Removing Eriogonum Gypsophilum from the Federal List Of
    Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1657 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail including any additional population or hand-delivery to: Public Comments locations, and; Fish and Wildlife Service Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2016– (3) New information regarding 0119; Division of Policy, Performance, Eriogonum gypsophilum life history, 50 CFR Part 17 and Management Programs; U.S. Fish ecology and habitat use. and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC; 5275 Please note that submissions merely [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–0119; Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA stating support for, or opposition to, the FXES11130900000 178 FF09E42000] 220411–3803. action being considered, without We request that you send comments providing supporting information, RIN 1018–BB87 only by the methods described above. although noted, will not be considered in making a determination, as the Act Endangered and Threatened Wildlife We will post all comments on http:// (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) section and Plants; Removing Eriogonum www.regulations.gov. This generally 4(b)(1)(A) directs that determinations as gypsophilum From the Federal List of means that we will post any personal to whether any species is an endangered Endangered and Threatened Plants information you provide us (see Information Requested, below, for more or threatened species must be made AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, information). ‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific Interior. Copies of Documents: This proposed and commercial data available.’’ Prior to issuing a final rule on this ACTION: Proposed rule and 12-month rule and supporting documents are proposed action, we will consider all petition finding; request for comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Spatial Data to Improve Recovery Under the Endangered Species Act
    Using Spatial Data to Improve Recovery Under the Endangered Species Act Consultants Assessing the Recovery of Endangered Species (CARE) CONS680 (Spring 2014) Kimmy Gazenski Rachel Lamb Robb Krehbiel May 14, 2014 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 5 Problems with Species Recovery Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) ............................ 5 The Role of Spatial Data in Improving the Recovery Planning Process ..................................... 5 Primary Objectives of CARE’s Study ......................................................................................... 7 Objective 1: Assess the Incorporation of SCB Recommendations .......................................... 7 Objective 2: Determine the Feasibility of a Spatial Tool for All Species ............................... 8 Objective 3: Create a Proof-of-Concept Spatial Tool ............................................................. 8 Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 8 Objective 1: Assess the Incorporation of SCB Recommendations ............................................. 8 Objective 2: Determine the Feasibility of a Spatial Tool for All Species ................................... 9 Objective 3:
    [Show full text]