DOCSLIB.ORG

Estimating Resistance and Resilience of Military Lands Using Vegetation Indices

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Estimating Resistance and Resilience of Military Lands Using Vegetation Indices 12 - 17 - ERDC/CERL TR ERDC/CERL Integrated Climate Assessment for Army Enterprise Planning Estimating Resistance and Resilience of Military Lands Using Vegetation Indices Ryan R. Busby, Dick L. Gebhart, Steven J. Oxley, May 2017 William D. Tarantino, and Wade A. Wall Engineering Construction Construction Laboratory Research Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. The U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) solves the nation’s toughest engineering and environmental challenges. ERDC develops innovative solutions in civil and military engineering, geospatial sciences, water resources, and environmental sciences for the Army, the Department of Defense, civilian agencies, and our nation’s public good. Find out more at www.erdc.usace.army.mil. To search for other technical reports published by ERDC, visit the ERDC online library at http://acwc.sdp.sirsi.net/client/default. Integrated Climate Assessment for Army ERDC/CERL TR-17-12 Enterprise Planning May 2017 Estimating Resistance and Resilience of Military Lands Using Vegetation Indices Ryan R. Busby, Dick L. Gebhart, Steven J. Oxley, William D. Tarantino, and Wade A. Wall Construction Engineering Research Laboratory U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center 2902 Newmark Drive Champaign, IL 61822 Final Report Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Prepared for Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Washington, DC 20314-1000 Under Program 622720896, Project 402188, “Integrated Climate Assessment for Army Enterprise Planning” ERDC/CERL TR-17-12 ii Abstract Military training inevitably leads to land degradation; however, some eco- systems have higher resistance and resilience to training based on the functional traits of existing vegetation, making them preferred for long- term use. This work estimated resistance and resilience for the continental United States using dominant plant species for numerous plant communi- ties, resistance and resilience values for plant functional groups, and na- tional community vegetation maps. Two datasets were combined to obtain greater detail and values for all land area. Results indicate that graminoid communities have the highest resistance values, and shrublands the low- est; and that eastern deciduous forests and prairies have the highest resili- ence values, and evergreen forests and shrublands the lowest. This lists the resistance and resilience values of a selection of Army installations using both datasets and a new combined metric. This new method will help the Army determine the portfolio of installations that will best meet its future training land requirements. DISCLAIMER: The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Ci- tation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. All product names and trademarks cited are the property of their respective owners. The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents. DESTROY THIS REPORT WHEN NO LONGER NEEDED. DO NOT RETURN IT TO THE ORIGINATOR. ERDC/CERL TR-17-12 iii Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................... ii Figures and Tables ........................................................................................................................................ iv Preface ............................................................................................................................................................. v 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Objective .......................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Approach ......................................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Scope ............................................................................................................................... 5 2 Resistance and Resilience in Natural Plant Communities .......................................................... 6 3 Methods and Materials ........................................................................................................................ 9 3.1 Estimation of resistance and resiliency values ............................................................. 9 3.2 Plant community data .................................................................................................. 10 3.3 Data analysis................................................................................................................. 11 4 Results and Discussion ......................................................................................................................12 4.1 General results.............................................................................................................. 12 4.2 Implications for the Army .............................................................................................. 24 5 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................... 33 Appendix A: Summary Tables ................................................................................................................... 35 Appendix B: Dominant Species’ Resistance and Resilience Values From USGS National Vegetation Classification Community Types................................................................. 39 Appendix C: Dominant Species’ Resistance and Resilience Values from Küchler Potential Vegetation Community Types ...................................................................................... 126 Appendix D: Resistance and Resilience Values from USGS National Vegetation Classification Community Types ................................................................................................... 133 Appendix E: Resistance and Resilience Values from Küchler Potential Vegetation Community Types ............................................................................................................................. 145 References ................................................................................................................................................ 148 Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................. 153 Report Documentation Page (SF 298) ................................................................................................ 155 ERDC/CERL TR-17-12 iv Figures and Tables Figures 1 Bailey Ecoregion Divisions ............................................................................................................. 3 2 Küchler vegetation resistance and resilience map for the United States. High values denote resistance and resilience to trampling and vehicular disturbance .............. 13 3 NatureServe vegetation resistance and resilience map for the United States. High values denote resistance and resilience to trampling and vehicular disturbance ................................................................................................................................... 14 4 Average vegetation resistance and resilience values based on the Combined Küchler and NatureServe Vegetation maps ............................................................................. 15 5 Küchler vegetation resistance and resilience maps for the United States. High values denote resistance to trampling and vehicular disturbance ....................................... 17 6 NatureServe vegetation resistance and resilience maps for the United States. High values denote resistance to trampling and vehicular disturbance .............................. 20 7 Combined Küchler and NatureServe Vegetation resistance and resilience maps. High values denote resistance to trampling and vehicular disturbance .............................. 22 8 Correlation between the Küchler and NatureServe RRVAL and the ecosystem resilience values as estimated using subject matter expert opinion in Doe et al. (1999). Numbers refer to Bailey Ecoregions (Bailey 1980: See Fig. 1). Correlation is 0.39. After the removal of three outlier ecoregions (3, 4, and 13; data not shown.) correlation was 0.83 ..................................................................................................... 25 9 Average vegetation resistance and resilience values for Fort Benning Military Reservation (Georgia). Separate resistance and resilience values are included in Appendices D and E ..................................................................................................................... 29 10 Combined Küchler and NatureServe Vegetation resistance and resilience maps for Fort Benning Military Reservation (Georgia) ....................................................................... 30 Tables 1 Resilience and resistance values assigned to plant functional groups .................................. 9 2 Mean RRVAL for the Küchler, NatureServe, and Combined vegetation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hazard Mitigation Plan Draft
    MITIGATION ACTION PLAN Five Year Update RED RIVER COUNTY TEXAS INCORPORATED AND UNINCORPORATED AREAS 1 Table of Contents SUBJECT PAGE/S Cover Table Of Contents SECTION I Purpose Plan Organizational Structure The Planning Process Map: Red River County State Location Map: Red River County County Government Economic Considerations Resource Information Table: Important Dates Table: Red River County Team Members Background and Contributions Table: Identified Stakeholders Public Participation SECTION II Hazard Identification and Assessment Table: Areas of Risk: Hazards Identified Table: Natural Hazards Most Likely to Occur in red River County Table: Hazards Listed in the Texas Hazard Mitigation Plan Not Included in the Red River Plan Table: Potential Severity of Impacts Table: Probability of Future Events Table: Warning Time Table: Duration Table: Priority Risk Index Table: Hazard Vulnerability Table: Red River County Damage Assessment Hazard Analysis Flood Map: Clarksville Floodplains Map: Avery Floodplains Map: Avery Floodplains Map: Annona Floodplains Map: Bogata Floodplains Map: Detroit Floodplains History of Flooding in Red River County Table: National Flood Insurance Program Participation Table: Red River County Flood Risk Table: Extent Table: Estimated Property Loss Location, Extent, Impact, Probability, Vulnerability, Summary 2 Tornadoes Description Map: Wind Zones in the United States Table: Enhanced Fujita Scale Table: Red River County Tornadoes Table: Probability/Severity Table: Red River County Tornado Risk Table: Estimated Property
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Opinion Regarding the Issuance of an Endangered Species Act of 1973, As Amended, (Act) Section 10(A)(1)(B) Permit
    Biological Opinion for TE-065406-0 This document transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) biological opinion regarding the issuance of an Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, (Act) Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit. The federal action under consideration is the issuance of a permit authorizing the incidental take of the federally listed endangered Houston toad (Bufo houstonensis) under the authority of sections 10(a)(1)(B) and 10(a)(2) of the Act. Boy Scouts of America, Capitol Area Council No. 564 (BSA/CAC) has submitted an application for an incidental take permit under the Act for take of the Houston toad. An Environmental Assessment/Habitat Conservation Plan (EA/HCP) has been reviewed for mitigation acceptability. The implementing regulations for Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, as provided for by 50 CFR 17.22, specify the criteria by which a permit allowing the incidental "take" of listed endangered species pursuant to otherwise lawful activities may be obtained. The purpose and need for the Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit is to ensure that incidental take resulting from the proposed construction and operation of a “High Adventure” camp on the 4,848-acre Griffith League Ranch in Bastrop County, Texas, will be minimized and mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, and that the take is not expected to appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of this federally listed endangered species in the wild or adversely modify or destroy its federally designated critical habitat. The two federally listed species identified within this EA/HCP include the endangered Houston toad (and its designated critical habitat) and the threatened bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus).
    [Show full text]
  • Arctostaphylos Photos Susan Mcdougall Arctostaphylos Andersonii
    Arctostaphylos photos Susan McDougall Arctostaphylos andersonii Santa Cruz Manzanita Arctostaphylos auriculata Mount Diablo Manzanita Arctostaphylos bakeri ssp. bakeri Baker's Manzanita Arctostaphylos bakeri ssp. sublaevis The Cedars Manzanita Arctostaphylos canescens ssp. canescens Hoary Manzanita Arctostaphylos canescens ssp. sonomensis Sonoma Canescent Manzanita Arctostaphylos catalinae Catalina Island Manzanita Arctostaphylos columbiana Columbia Manzanita Arctostaphylos confertiflora Santa Rosa Island Manzanita Arctostaphylos crustacea ssp. crinita Crinite Manzanita Arctostaphylos crustacea ssp. crustacea Brittleleaf Manzanita Arctostaphylos crustacea ssp. rosei Rose's Manzanita Arctostaphylos crustacea ssp. subcordata Santa Cruz Island Manzanita Arctostaphylos cruzensis Arroyo De La Cruz Manzanita Arctostaphylos densiflora Vine Hill Manzanita Arctostaphylos edmundsii Little Sur Manzanita Arctostaphylos franciscana Franciscan Manzanita Arctostaphylos gabilanensis Gabilan Manzanita Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. adamsii Adam's Manzanita Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. crassifolia Del Mar Manzanita Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. cushingiana Cushing's Manzanita Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. glandulosa Eastwood Manzanita Arctostaphylos glauca Big berry Manzanita Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp. hearstiorum Hearst's Manzanita Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp. hookeri Hooker's Manzanita Arctostaphylos hooveri Hoover’s Manzanita Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. howellii Howell's Manzanita Arctostaphylos insularis Island Manzanita Arctostaphylos luciana
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Alliances of Western Riverside County, California
    Vegetation Alliances of Western Riverside County, California By Anne Klein and Julie Evens California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento CA, 95816 Final report prepared for The California Department of Fish and Game Habitat Conservation Division Contract Number: P0185404 August 2005 (Revised April 2006) TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................1 METHODS .......................................................................................................................................................1 Study area.................................................................................................................................................1 Figure 1. Study area in Western Riverside County within Southern California, showing ecological subsections...............................................................................................................................................3 Sampling...................................................................................................................................................4 Figure 2. Locations of field surveys within Western Riverside County.....................................................5 Existing Literature Review ........................................................................................................................7 Cluster analyses for vegetation classification...........................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Detection of the Fine Scale Outcomes from Prescribed Fire Relevant to the Endangered Houston Toad (Bufo Houstonensis) Within the Lost Pines Ecosystem of Texas
    FINAL PERFORMANCE REPORT As Required by THE ENDANGERED SPECIES PROGRAM TEXAS Grant No. TX E-114-R-1 Endangered and Threatened Species Conservation Detection of fine scale outcomes from prescribed fire relevant to the endangered Houston toad (Bufo houstonensis) within the Lost Pines ecoregion of Texas Prepared by: Mike Forstner Carter Smith Executive Director Clayton Wolf Director, Wildlife 8 November 2012 INTERIM PERFORMANCE REPORT STATE: ____Texas_______________ GRANT NUMBER: ___ TX E-114-R-1_ GRANT TITLE: Detection of fine scale outcomes from prescribed fire relevant to the endangered Houston toad (Bufo houstonensis) within the Lost Pines ecoregion of Texas REPORTING PERIOD: ____1 Sep 09 to 28 Feb 13_ OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the fine scale effects of prescribed fire on Houston toad habitat selection and reproductive success over three years based on integrated study of terrestrial and aquatic systems. Segment Objectives: Task 1. Aug 2009-Aug 2011 (monthly). Hydroperiod monitoring. Task 2. Mar-Apr (annually). Daily amphibian trapping using Y-shaped arrays. Task 3. Mar-Apr (annually). Amphibian call surveys and Houston toad breeding activity and success monitoring. Task 4. Aug-Sept (annually). Terrestrial habitat sampling. Task 5. Sep-Nov (annually). Aquatic habitat sampling. Task 6. Nov-Jan (annually under design see Figure 1). Prescribed burn. Task 7. Nov-Jan (annually). Immediate post-burn aquatic habitat sampling. Task 8. Nov-Jan (annually). Immediate post-burn terrestrial habitat sampling. Task 9. July-Aug (annually). Analysis of outcomes, particularly short term results and effects. Significant Deviations: None. Summary Of Progress: See pdf file, attached. Location: Bastrop County, Texas. Cost: ___Costs were not available at time of this report.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of Vascular Plants Endemic to California
    Humboldt State University Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University Botanical Studies Open Educational Resources and Data 3-2020 A Checklist of Vascular Plants Endemic to California James P. Smith Jr Humboldt State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Smith, James P. Jr, "A Checklist of Vascular Plants Endemic to California" (2020). Botanical Studies. 42. https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/botany_jps/42 This Flora of California is brought to you for free and open access by the Open Educational Resources and Data at Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Botanical Studies by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A LIST OF THE VASCULAR PLANTS ENDEMIC TO CALIFORNIA Compiled By James P. Smith, Jr. Professor Emeritus of Botany Department of Biological Sciences Humboldt State University Arcata, California 13 February 2020 CONTENTS Willis Jepson (1923-1925) recognized that the assemblage of plants that characterized our flora excludes the desert province of southwest California Introduction. 1 and extends beyond its political boundaries to include An Overview. 2 southwestern Oregon, a small portion of western Endemic Genera . 2 Nevada, and the northern portion of Baja California, Almost Endemic Genera . 3 Mexico. This expanded region became known as the California Floristic Province (CFP). Keep in mind that List of Endemic Plants . 4 not all plants endemic to California lie within the CFP Plants Endemic to a Single County or Island 24 and others that are endemic to the CFP are not County and Channel Island Abbreviations .
    [Show full text]
  • Golf Courses Lack
    CENTRAL TEXAS Golf Guide Independence Title LEARN MORE IndependenceTitle.com PUBLIC COURSES Blackhawk Golf Club 18 | Par 72 2714 Kelly Ln, Pflugerville | blackhawkgolf.com Measuring more than 7,000 yards from the championship tees, the course and slope ratings are 74.5 and 125 respectively. Blackhawk features a links-style layout that has proven tough enough to host several professional mini-tour events. Bluebonnet Hill Golf Club 18 | Par 72 9100 Decker Lane, Austin | bluebonnethillgolf.com Bluebonnet Hill Golf Course offers players of all skill levels a challenging and enjoyable round of golf. The course is laid out over the rolling hills just 15 minutes east of downtown Austin on Decker Lane. The course is in excellent shape with impeccable 328 Bermuda greens. Butler Park Pitch & Putt 9 | Par 27 201 Lee Barton Dr, Austin | butlerparkpitchandputt.com Butler Park Pitch and Putt is a nine hole, par 3 course near downtown Austin, the Hike and Bike Trail, and Lady Bird Lake. This is a golf course for everyone, from beginner golfers to pro's like Ben Crenshaw. It features large, shady pecan trees, water and grass traps, challenging holes, a very diverse clientèle, and friendly and helpful employees. Falconhead Golf Club 18 | Par 72 15201 Falconhead Blvd, Austin | falconheadaustin.com Falconhead Golf Club opened in 2003, an incredible addition to Austin golf. Laid out by the experts from the PGA Tour Design Center, this public daily-fee course offers golfers a taste of quality golf. Grey Rock Golf Club 18 | Par 72 7401 Texas Hwy 45, Austin | greyrockgolfclub.com Towering oaks provide the perfect runway on every drive.
    [Show full text]
  • Hierarchical List of Natural Communities with Holland Types
    September 2010 Global and State Rank CaCode CNDDB Code 1. Mesomorphic Tree Vegetation (Forest and Woodland) 1.C. Temperate Forest 1.C.1. Warm Temperate Forest 1.C.1.c. Madrean Forest and Woodland MG009. California Forest and Woodland Mixed North Slope Forest G4 S4 CTT81500CA Mixed North Slope Cismontane Woodland G3 S3.2 CTT71420CA *Aesculus californica (California buckeye groves) Alliance G3 S3 *75.100.00 *Aesculus californica *75.100.03 *Aesculus californica - Umbellularia californica / Diplacus aurantiacus *75.100.02 *Aesculus californica - Umbellularia californica / Holodiscus discolor *75.100.06 *Aesculus californica / Datisca glomerata *75.100.04 *Aesculus californica / Lupinus albifrons *75.100.05 *Aesculus californica / Toxicodendron diversilobum / moss *75.100.01 *Juglans californica (California walnut groves) Alliance G3 S3 *72.100.00 California Walnut Woodland G2 S2.1 CTT71210CA Walnut Forest G1 S1.1 CTT81600CA *Juglans californica - Quercus agrifolia *72.100.08 *Juglans californica / annual herbaceous *72.100.03 *Juglans californica / Artemisia californica / Leymus condensatus *72.100.04 *Juglans californica / Ceanothus spinosus *72.100.05 *Juglans californica / Heteromeles arbutifolia *72.100.06 *Juglans californica / Malosma laurina *72.100.07 *Lyonothamnus floribundus (Catalina ironwood groves) Special Stands G2 S2 *77.000.00 Island Ironwood Forest G2 S2.1 CTT81700CA Quercus agrifolia (Coast live oak woodland) Alliance G5 S4 (some associations are of 71.060.00 high priority for inventory) Coast Live Oak Woodland G4 S4 CTT71160CA
    [Show full text]
  • Forests, Woodlands and Savannas
    DRAFT DESCRIPTIONS OF SYSTEMS, MAPPING SUBSYSTEMS, AND VEGETATION TYPES FOR PHASE I Lee Elliott 25 February 2009 The following descriptions cover the systems that have been identified for the legend for Phase I of the Ecological Systems Classification and Mapping Project in support of the Texas Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. Many of these descriptions were drafted from System descriptions available from NatureServe (http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/). Most System descriptions were modified, and all Vegetation Type descriptions were generated from discussions regarding these cover types. These brief narratives generally focus on ‘typical’ type concepts, and mapped vegetation types often circumscribe more variation on the ground than what is described here. For each system, a number of cover types, or “Vegetation Types” were described. A common name is given for each Vegetation Type, and this name is used in the table of contents and for the map legend. Additionally, a second name is provided which more directly ties the Vegetation Type to the system of which it is a part. A numeric identifier is also provided. This identifier represents the identifier used by NatureServe for the system. For the Vegetation Type, a digit suffix is provided to distinguish the various cover types within the system. In parentheses directly following the common name of the Vegetation Type, a number is provided. This number represents the numeric code used to track the Vegetation Types during the mapping process. Significant input was provided by all partners (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, NatureServe, Missouri Resource Assessment Partnership, and The Nature Conservancy) during development of these descriptions.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 BIODIVERSITY REPORT City of Los Angeles
    2018 BIODIVERSITY REPORT City of Los Angeles Appendix A Prepared by: Isaac Brown Ecology Studio and LA Sanitation & Environment Appendix A Ecological Subsections Description Appendix A1 p1 Appendix A1 p2 Appendix A1 p3 Appendix A1 p4 Appendix A1 p5 Appendix A1 p6 Appendix A1 p7 Appendix A1 p8 Appendix A1 p9 Appendix A2 Sensitive Biological Resources C. Biological Resources Planning Exhibit C-1 Consultants Habitat-Oriented Biological Research Assessment Planning Zones City of Los Angeles L.A. CEQA Thresholds Guide 2006 Page C-10 Appendix A2 p1 C. Biological Resources Exhibit C-7 SENSITIVE SPECIES COMPENDIUM - CITY OF LOS ANGELES1 KEY State Status - California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) SE State Listed Endangered ST State Listed Threatened CSC Species of Special Concern2 SCE State Candidate Endangered SCT State Candidate Threatened SFP State Fully Protected SP State Protected SR State Listed Rare Federal Status - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) FE Federally Listed Endangered FT Federally Listed Threatened FCH Federally Listed Critical Habitat FPE Federally Proposed Endangered FPT Federally Proposed Threatened FPCH Federally Proposed Critical Habitat FPD Federally Proposed Delisting FC Federal Candidate Species EXT Extinct _______________ 1 This list is current as of January 2001. Check the most recent state and federal lists for updates and changes, or consult the CDFG's California Natural Diversity Database. 2 CSC - California Special Concern species. The Department has designated certain vertebrate species as "Species of Special Concern" because declining population levels, limited ranges, and/or continuing threats have made them vulnerable to extinction. The goal of designating species as "Species of Special Concern" is to halt or reverse their decline by calling attention to their plight and addressing the issues of concern early enough to secure their long term viability.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology and Radiation of Galling Aphids (Tamalia; Hemiptera: Aphididae) on Their Host Plants (Ericaceae)
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Basic and Applied Ecology 6 (2005) 463—469 www.elsevier.de/baae Ecology and radiation of galling aphids (Tamalia; Hemiptera: Aphididae) on their host plants (Ericaceae) Donald G. Miller IIIÃ Department of Biological Sciences, California State University, Chico, CA 95929-0515, USA Received 9 May 2005; accepted 8 July 2005 KEYWORDS Summary Tamalia coweni; At least two species of aphid, Tamalia coweni and Tamalia dicksoni (Hemiptera: Tamalia inquilinus; Aphididae) induce galls on the leaves of Arctostaphylos spp. shrubs (Ericaceae). These Adaptive zone; galls are frequently inhabited by at least one species of congeneric inquiline. The Key innovation; inquiline clade has branched off from the gall-inducing clade and appears to be Inquiline; radiating rapidly on different host-plants, in contrast to the gall inducers. This striking Arctostaphylos; pattern may offer insight into the factors driving speciation. Three key innovations Arbutus; present ecological opportunities for Tamalia gall-inducers and inquilines: (1) the Comarostaphylis induction of galls not only on leaf margins, but also on leaf midribs and inflorescences, both of which are novel host plant organs for Tamalia. (2) Gall-induction on well- armed host plants, otherwise protected with dense and viscous pubescence. (3) The origin of the inquiline habit in congeneric Tamalia aphids is a shift into a novel adaptive zone. Inquiline Tamalia exploit gall-inducers by competing successfully within the gall. They may have specialized along host-plant lines because of the critical need for precise timing with the plant during the gall invasion process. & 2005 Gesellschaft fu¨r O¨kologie. Published by Elsevier Gmbh. All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Alliances of the San Dieguito River Park Region, San Diego County, California
    Vegetation alliances of the San Dieguito River Park region, San Diego County, California By Julie Evens and Sau San California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento CA, 95816 In cooperation with the California Natural Heritage Program of the California Department of Fish and Game And San Diego Chapter of the California Native Plant Society Final Report August 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Study area ................................................................................................................................... 2 Existing Literature Review........................................................................................................... 2 Sampling ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 1. Study area including the San Dieguito River Park boundary within the ecological subsections color map and within the County inset map............................................................ 3 Figure 2. Locations of the field surveys....................................................................................... 5 Cluster analyses for vegetation classification ............................................................................
    [Show full text]