DOCSLIB.ORG

Forty-First Breeding Bird Census

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Forty-First Breeding Bird Census Forty-first Breeding Bird Census Edited by Willet T. Van Velzen In keepingwith the trend of the past few The total numberof speciesrecorded per plot years,this year'stotal of 179 censusreports is rangedfrom 0 to 66 andaveraged 19.6. an all-time record, representing35 states/ Typicalof pastyears, 52% of the studies were provinces.An amazing total of 48 censuses new, 65% havebeen done 1 or 2 yearsand 81% werereported from California, more than twice have been done from 1 to 5 times. the numbergenerally reported for the highest Two weather factors were frequently men- state total in other years. West Virginia was tionedas affectingthe resultsof thisyear's cen- secondhighest, with 13 censuses,and North sus; the extreme drought conditions that Dakota third, with 11. occurredthroughout much of the Midwest and In additionto havingthe highesttotal, this West and the severe winter weather of 1976-77, year's censuscovered the greatestvariety of which apparentlydecimated populations of habitatsever studied by the BreedingBird Cen- speciessuch as the CarolinaWren in muchof sus.The widerange of newhabitats sampled in its northernrange throughoutthe East. It will Californiaalone represents a uniquevariety of be interestingto follow the recoveryof these desertand scrub types. birds in followingyears. A tremendousamount of effort was givento A specialword of thanksis extendedto all thisyear's census, totaling 4630 man-hoursof thoseworkers who took suchcare in preparing censuswork alone, not to mention the addi- their manuscriptsand submittedthem ahead tionaltime spentin settingup and measuring of the deadline date. plots.This effort,averaging 25.6 hoursper cen- The deadlinefor 1978is September1. susplot, was appliedto a total area of 2704 hectaresof habitat(an averageof 14.9 ha/plot). -- 21510 45th St., S.E. Bothell WA 98011 List of Censuses State or Hec- Pairsper Hrs. Spe- Yrs of Habitat Province tares sq. krn. Obs. cies Study A. Eastern-Deciduous Forest 1. Birch-- Maple -- Oak Forest Connecticut 13.9 445 16 30 2 2. Second-growthHardwood Forest Connecticut 10.1 806 17 36 11 3. LowlandOak -- Beech-- Maple Forest New York 8.1 1544 20 26 2 4. Maple -- Oak Forest New York 72.8 292 40 60 1 5. Mature Red Oak -- SugarMaple Forest New York 8.1 877 13 28 1 6. YoungRed Maple -- GrayBirch Forest New York 8.1 1248 13 33 2 7. YoungWhite Ash-- BasswoodForest New York 8.1 1285 18 37 2 8. Birch-- Maple -- Oak Forest Pennsylvania 9.0 662 30 25 4 9. MountainTop, Oak -- Maple Forest Pennsylvania 6.1 461 13 21 4 10. Oak -- Maple Forest Pennsylvania 6.1 255 7 11 1 11. Locust-- CherryWoodland West Virginia 6.1 288 14 22 1 12. Oak -- HickoryForest WestVirginia 6.1 239 11 19 3 13. Oak -- Hickory-- LocustForest West Virginia 6.1 395 10 16 1 14. Oak -- Hickory -- Red Maple Forest West Virginia 6.1 231 22 19 1 15. Oak -- Maple -- Birch Forest West Virginia 6.1 198 8 15 1 16. Red Oak -- Maple -- Birch Forest West Virgmia 6.1 297 8 17 1 17. Second-growthOak -- Maple Forest West Vir mia 6.1 297 12 15 1 18. Deciduous Forest with Pond and Brook New Jersey 16.2 290 10 30 14 19. Hickory-- Oak -- AshFloodplain Forest Maryland 18.4 1073 27 42 6 20. Mature DeciduousFloodplain Forest Maryland 7.6 929 34 22 25 21. Mature Ttflip-tree -- Oak Forest Maryland 14.6 813 23 22 4 22. Mixed Hardwood Forest Maryland 11.3 1403 22 54 15 Volume32, Number 1 49 Stateor Hec- Parrsper Hrs Spe- Yrs of Habitat Province tares sq. km. Obs. cies Study 23 SelectivelyLogged Mature Tulip-tree-- Oak Forest Maryland 14.2 1119 28 35 3 24 UplandTulip-tree -- Maple -- Oak Forest Maryland 12.0 826 20 36 7 25 Mixed Upland Habitat Dist. of Columbia 14.2 946 41 25 18 26 CoastalDisturbed Floodplain Virginia 8.1 198 19 24 2 27 Upland Oak -- Hickory Forest Virginia 11.0 718 69 22 5 28 FloodplainForest North Carolina 13.0 797 23 24 1 29 Mixed Deciduous Forest North Carolina 12.6 590 26 26 2 30 Mixed Deciduous Forest North Carolina 8.8 618 20 24 5 31 Mountain Ravine Mixed Forest Georgia 5.9 855 58 26 9 32 Mixed Forest Ontario 10.1 435 50 28 1 33 WoodedCity Ravine Ontario 20.0 245 19 18 8 34 Aspen-- Birch Forest Minnesota 20.5 234 18 21 1 35 Mature Aspen-- NorthernHardwoods Forest Minnesota 17.0 256 17 20 1 36 Upland Maple-- Oak Forest Wisconsin 5.4 509 20 21 1 37 Mature Mixed Hardwood Forest Michigan 9.3 820 18 31 4 38 Oak -- Hickory-- Maple Forest Illinois 13.0 242 14 26 2 39 Upland DeciduousForest Illinois 6.2 501 15 24 2 40 Black Oak -- Sassafras Woods Indiana 22.2 229 68 17 4 41 PoorlyDrained Mixed Oak Forest Indiana 11.1 398 15 26 2 42 Mixed HardwoodRegenerating Ohio 20.2 242 27 49 1 43 Mixed MesophyticForest Ohio 101.2 161 40 52 2 44 Virgin Beech-- Maple Forest Ohio 6.1 1285 30 32 5 45 Virgin ScrubOak Foothills Oklahoma 16.2 293 21 28 3 B. Eastern-- Coniferous-Deciduous(Mixed) 46 Deciduous-- ConiferousSecond-growth Northwoods Vermont 15.0 317 31 23 6 47 Maple-- Pine -- Oak Second-growth Forest Massachusetts 11.8 504 26 28 2 48 Climax Hemlock -- White Pine Forest with Transition Hardwoods Connecticut 10.5 841 21 33 11 49 Upland Mixed Pine-- Spruce-- Hardwood Plantation New York 16.6 518 16 31 4 50 Mountain Top, Mixed Hardwood-- White Pine Forest Pennsylvania 6.1 502 18 20 4 51 Oak-- Pine Forest West Virginia 6.1 346 10 20 1 52 Oak--PincForcst WestVirginia 6.1 329 7 22 1 53 Oak -- Pine -- Hickory Forest West Virginia 6.1 148 8 16 1 54 Oak-- Pine Woodland WestVirginia 6.1 214 13 16 1 55 Central Hardwood Forest with Scattered Pine Dist. of Columbia 26.3 293 82 21 18 56 Mixed Oak -- Pine and SwampForest North Carolina 10.1 257 34 11 2 57 TamarackBog and Hardwood Michigan 8.5 235 9 18 2 58 Mixed Pine-- Hardwood Forest Texas 6.3 475 8 13 4 C. Eastern -- Coniferous 59 Upland ScotchPine Plantation New York 9.3 1042 22 23 9 60 YoungSpruccForcst Maine 5.1 860 20 23 1 D. Eastern -- Mixed Habitats 61 Mixed Forest, Old Field and Homesite Vermont 10.9 1400 22 49 4 10.9 1135 22 44 5 62 AbandonedNursery with Hedgerows Connecticut 14.2 778 25 27 1 63 Mixed Upland Habitat and Swamp Connecticut 14.2 886 39 30 10 64 Upland BrushyPasture Connecticut 8.5 1247 16 31 11 65 AbandonedPasture-- Young Mixed Forest New York 3.4 552 5 20 1 3.4 610 5 22 2 66 Mixed Upland Habitat Penns•vania 7.8 1081 26 30 1 67 MountainTop Bogwith Mixed Hardwood and EvergreenEdge Pennsylvania 6.1 593 14 25 4 68 Old Field-- Meadow and Primary Deciduous Thickets Penns•vania 10.1 361 25 21 4 69 OvergrownField WestVirginia 6.1 354 17 19 1 70 Wooded Pasture WestVirginia 6.1 255 5 19 1 50 AmericanBirds, January 1978 State or Hec- Patrs per Hr$ Spe- Yrs of Habitat Provtnce tares sq. km. Obs. cies Study 71 DisturbedOak -- HickoryForest, Pine Stand,Edge, and Pond Ohio 14.2 593 35 39 39 72 Mixed Habitat Ohio 28.3 462 35 52 2 73 Railroad,Lightly Used Ohio 8.6 746 3O 21 1 74 Hackberry--Blue Ash -- ChestnutOak Savannahand Old Fields Ontario 28.3 17 24 75 MixedSwamp and Abandoned Field Ontario 4.9 947 28 38 76 Old Fieldwith DeciduousRegrowth and YoungConifer Plantations Ontario 42.0 338 33 39 77 AspenClearcut Minnesota 10.4 851 29 27 78 Mixed Wetland with Tamarack and Aspen Groves,Shrubland and Fen Wisconsin 16.9 702 21 28 79 DeciduousClearcut Tennessee 20.2 262 13 17 80 Pastureswith Brush,Wooded Stripsand Scattered Trees Tennessee 8.7 517 21 81 DeciduousClearcut Georgda 6.9 320 21 8 E. Central -- Prairie 82 DisturbedMixed Prairie Illinois 16.0 206 104 18 83 KentuckyBlue Grass Prairie NorthDakota 4.8 83 2 6 4.8 62 2 5 84 Mixed Prairie I North Dakota 10.0 215 7 13 85 Mixed Prairie II North Dakota 6.1 82 2 7 86 Mixed Prairie III North Dakota 6.1 90 2 7 6.1 49 2 6 87 Mixed Prairie IV North Dakota 6.1 98 3 8 88 Mixed Prairie V North Dakota 6.1 123 3 10 89 Mixed Prairie VIII North Dakota 8.7 75 3 7 90 SandhillPrairie Kansas 32.4 162 35 18 F. Central -- Disturbed Habitats 91 Mixed Habitat--Disturbed Bottomland Oklahoma 40.5 326 45 41 G. Western -- Deciduous 92 FloodplainCottonwood Forest Colorado 9.7 1776 37 29 93 FloodplainCottonwood Forest Colorado 52.2 312 19 23 94 Sycamore--Coast Live Oak Riparian Woodland California 6.8 1500 62 32 95 Sycamore--Coast Live Oak Riparian Woodland California 7.2 861 26 21 96 WillowRiparian California 3.7 1285 32 8 97 WillowRiparian I California 2.3 3208 32 13 98 WillowRiparian II California 3.9 1829 53 20 H. Western-- Coniferous-Deciduous(Mixed) 99 OpenAspen Grove-- Scattered Conifers Colorado 14.0 446 22 37 100 PonderosaPine -- ScrubOak -- Mahogany Woodland Colorado 8.1 383 43 14 10 101 California-Bay-- BishopPine -- Mixed Forest California 11.7 605 21 26 102 Douglas-fir-- Oak -- MixedEvergreen Forest Californi a 7.9 678 21 I. Western -- Coniferous 103 PonderosaPine Forest Colorado 8.1 469 15 11 14 104 Pinyon--Juniper--PonderosaPine Ecotone New Mexico 36.9 176 32 19 105 WhiteFir -- Douglas-firForest Utah 30.0 304 48 17 106 BishopPine Forest California 10.5 613 23 25 107 DisturbedBishop Pine Forest California 12.0 928 26 26 108 LimberPine Forest California 21.0 196 53 13 109 LoggedDouglas-fir Reseeded with Monterey Pine California 8.2 1107 30 34 110 NorthernPinyon Pine Woodland California 27.8 194 50 11 111 Pinyon-- JuniperWoodland California 9.0 100 24 13 I.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • California Vegetation Map in Support of the DRECP
    CALIFORNIA VEGETATION MAP IN SUPPORT OF THE DESERT RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN (2014-2016 ADDITIONS) John Menke, Edward Reyes, Anne Hepburn, Deborah Johnson, and Janet Reyes Aerial Information Systems, Inc. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Renewable Energy Program and the California Energy Commission Final Report May 2016 Prepared by: Primary Authors John Menke Edward Reyes Anne Hepburn Deborah Johnson Janet Reyes Report Graphics Ben Johnson Cover Page Photo Credits: Joshua Tree: John Fulton Blue Palo Verde: Ed Reyes Mojave Yucca: John Fulton Kingston Range, Pinyon: Arin Glass Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 112 First Street Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 793-9493 [email protected] in collaboration with California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program 1807 13th Street, Suite 202 Sacramento, CA 95811 and California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for this project was provided by: California Energy Commission US Bureau of Land Management California Wildlife Conservation Board California Department of Fish and Wildlife Personnel involved in developing the methodology and implementing this project included: Aerial Information Systems: Lisa Cotterman, Mark Fox, John Fulton, Arin Glass, Anne Hepburn, Ben Johnson, Debbie Johnson, John Menke, Lisa Morse, Mike Nelson, Ed Reyes, Janet Reyes, Patrick Yiu California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Diana Hickson, Todd Keeler‐Wolf, Anne Klein, Aicha Ougzin, Rosalie Yacoub California
    [Show full text]
  • IP Athos Renewable Energy Project, Plan of Development, Appendix D.2
    APPENDIX D.2 Plant Survey Memorandum Athos Memo Report To: Aspen Environmental Group From: Lehong Chow, Ironwood Consulting, Inc. Date: April 3, 2019 Re: Athos Supplemental Spring 2019 Botanical Surveys This memo report presents the methods and results for supplemental botanical surveys conducted for the Athos Solar Energy Project in March 2019 and supplements the Biological Resources Technical Report (BRTR; Ironwood 2019) which reported on field surveys conducted in 2018. BACKGROUND Botanical surveys were previously conducted in the spring and fall of 2018 for the entirety of the project site for the Athos Solar Energy Project (Athos). However, due to insufficient rain, many plant species did not germinate for proper identification during 2018 spring surveys. Fall surveys in 2018 were conducted only on a reconnaissance-level due to low levels of rain. Regional winter rainfall from the two nearest weather stations showed rainfall averaging at 0.1 inches during botanical surveys conducted in 2018 (Ironwood, 2019). In addition, gen-tie alignments have changed slightly and alternatives, access roads and spur roads have been added. PURPOSE The purpose of this survey was to survey all new additions and re-survey areas of interest including public lands (limited to portions of the gen-tie segments), parcels supporting native vegetation and habitat, and windblown sandy areas where sensitive plant species may occur. The private land parcels in current or former agricultural use were not surveyed (parcel groups A, B, C, E, and part of G). METHODS Survey Areas: The area surveyed for biological resources included the entirety of gen-tie routes (including alternates), spur roads, access roads on public land, parcels supporting native vegetation (parcel groups D and F), and areas covered by windblown sand where sensitive species may occur (portion of parcel group G).
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf Clickbook Booklet
    Checklist of the Vascular Flora of Plum Canyon, Anza-Borrego Desert State Park # Family Scientific Name (*) Common Name #V #Pls Lycopods 1 Selagi Selaginella bigelovii Bigelow's spike-moss 99 2 Selagi Selaginella eremophila desert spike-moss 99 Ferns 3 Pterid Cheilanthes covillei beady lipfern 2 13 4 Pterid Cheilanthes parryi woolly lipfern 5 99 5 Pterid Cheilanthes viscida sticky lipfern 1 6 Pterid Notholaena californica ssp. californica^ California cloak fern 1 7 Pterid Pellaea mucronata var. mucronata bird's-foot fern 1 Gymnosperms 8 Cupres Juniperus californica California juniper 1 99 9 Ephedr Ephedra aspera Mormon tea 2 99 10 Ephedr Ephedra californica desert tea 2 Eudicots 11 Acanth Carlowrightia arizonica Arizona carlowrightia 15 12 Acanth Justicia californica chuparosa 7 99 13 Amaran Amaranthus fimbriatus fringed amaranth 99 14 Apiace Apiastrum angustifolium wild celery 2 15 Apiace Lomatium mohavense Mojave lomatium 8 16 Apocyn Matelea parvifolia spearleaf 1 16 Acamptopappus sphaerocephalus var. 17 Astera goldenhead 1 sphaerocephalus 18 Astera Adenophyllum porophylloides San Felipe dogweed 2 99 19 Astera Ambrosia dumosa burroweed 1 99 20 Astera Ambrosia salsola var. salsola cheesebush^ 1 99 21 Astera Artemisia ludoviciana ssp. albula white mugwort 25 22 Astera Baccharis brachyphylla short-leaved baccharis 70 23 Astera Bahiopsis parishii Parish's viguiera 2 99 24 Astera Bebbia juncea var. aspera sweetbush 1 99 California spear-leaved 25 Astera Brickellia atractyloides var. arguta 11 brickellia 26 Astera Brickellia frutescens shrubby brickellia 1 40 27 Astera Chaenactis carphoclinia var. carphoclinia pebble pincushion 5 28 Astera Chaenactis fremontii Fremont pincushion 1 99 29 Astera Encelia farinosa brittlebush 1 99 30 Astera Ericameria brachylepis boundary goldenbush^ 99 31 Astera Ericameria paniculata blackbanded rabbitbrush 20 32 Astera Eriophyllum wallacei var.
    [Show full text]
  • Southern California Edison
    PROPOSED GENERAL RETAIL STORE PROJECT DRAFT GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT LANDERS, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA USGS 7.5’ YUCCA VALLEY NORTH QUADRANGLE TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, SECTION 27 APN 0629-051-62 Prepared for Owner/Applicant: Dynamic Development Company, LLC 1725 21st Street Santa Monica, CA 90404 Office: (310) 315-5411 x 119 Contact: Jon Tanury Project Manager Prepared by: AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 3120 Chicago Avenue, Suite 110 Riverside, California 92507 Office: (951) 369-8060 Principal Investigator: John F. Green, Biologist Biologists Who Performed Fieldwork On-Site: John F. Green February 2013 AMEC Project No. 1355400526 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 2.1 Project and Property Description ......................................................................... 1 3.0 METHODS ...................................................................................................................... 2 3.1 Literature Review and Records Search ............................................................... 2 3.2 General Biological Resources Assessment ......................................................... 2 4.0 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................... 3 4.1 Literature Review and
    [Show full text]
  • ASTERACEAE Christine Pang, Darla Chenin, and Amber M
    Comparative Seed Manual: ASTERACEAE Christine Pang, Darla Chenin, and Amber M. VanDerwarker (Completed, April 17, 2019) This seed manual consists of photos and relevant information on plant species housed in the Integrative Subsistence Laboratory at the Anthropology Department, University of California, Santa Barbara. The impetus for the creation of this manual was to enable UCSB graduate students to have access to comparative materials when making in-field identifications. Most of the plant species included in the manual come from New World locales with an emphasis on Eastern North America, California, Mexico, Central America, and the South American Andes. Published references consulted1: 1998. Moerman, Daniel E. Native American ethnobotany. Vol. 879. Portland, OR: Timber press. 2009. Moerman, Daniel E. Native American medicinal plants: an ethnobotanical dictionary. OR: Timber Press. 2010. Moerman, Daniel E. Native American food plants: an ethnobotanical dictionary. OR: Timber Press. Species included herein: Achillea lanulosa Achillea millefolium Ambrosia chamissonis Ambrosia deltoidea Ambrosia dumosa Ambrosia eriocentra Ambrosia salsola Artemisia californica Artemisia douglasiana Baccharis pilularis Baccharis spp. Bidens aurea Coreopsis lanceolata Helianthus annuus 1 Disclaimer: Information on relevant edible and medicinal uses comes from a variety of sources, both published and internet-based; this manual does NOT recommend using any plants as food or medicine without first consulting a medical professional. Achillea lanulosa Family: Asteraceae Common Names: Yarrow, California Native Yarrow, Common Yarrow, Western Yarrow, Mifoil Habitat and Growth Habit: This plant is distributed throughout the Northern Hemisphere. It is native in temperate areas of North America. There are both native and introduced species in areas creating hybrids. Human Uses: This plant has a positive fragrance making it desired in gardens.
    [Show full text]
  • NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment
    APPENDIX E Biological Resources Assessment This page intentionally left blank. NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment June 2017 Prepared by Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Watershed Resources Group NORTH HAIWEE DAM NO. 2 PROJECT Biological Resources Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 PURPOSE................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION ................................................................................................. 2 1.3 PROJECT OVERVIEW................................................................................................. 4 1.3.1 NORTH HAIWEE DAM NUMBER 2 ......................................................................... 4 1.3.2 LOS ANGELES AQUEDUCT REALIGNMENT ............................................................ 7 1.3.3 CACTUS FLATS ROAD REALIGNMENT .................................................................. 7 1.4 BORROW SITES ........................................................................................................ 8 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ............................................................................................ 8 2.1 REGIONAL SETTING .................................................................................................. 8 2.2 LOCAL SETTING ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Full Issue, Vol. 56 No. 2
    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 56 Number 2 Article 16 4-29-1996 Full Issue, Vol. 56 No. 2 Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation (1996) "Full Issue, Vol. 56 No. 2," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 56 : No. 2 , Article 16. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol56/iss2/16 This Full Issue is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. T H E GREAT BASIN naturalistNATURALtstIST A VOLUME 56 n2na 2 APRIL 1996 BRIGHAM YOUNG university GREAT BASIN naturalist editor assistant editor RICHARD W BAUMANN NATHAN M SMITH 290 MLBM 190 MLBM PO box 20200 PO box 26879 brigham young university brigham young university provo UT 84602020084602 0200 provo UT 84602687984602 6879 8013785053801 378 5053 8013786688801 378 6688 FAX 8013783733801 378 3733 emailE mail nmshbllibyuedunmshbll1byuedu associate editors MICHAEL A BOWERS PAUL C MARSH blandy experimental farm university of center for environmental studies arizona virginia box 175 boyce VA 22620 state university tempe AZ 85287 J R CALLAHAN STANLEY D SMITH museum of southwestern biology university of department of biology new mexico albuquerque NM university of nevada las vegas mailing address box 3140 hemet CA 92546 las vegas NV 89154400489154 4004 JEFFREY J JOHANSEN PAUL T TUELLER
    [Show full text]
  • Amargosa River Expert Bioblitz April 7-9 , 2017 Final Report
    Amargosa River Expert BioBlitz April 7-9th, 2017 Final Report Photo credit: Janine Knapp Please cite this document as: Parker, S.S., B.S. Cohen, N. Fraga, B. Brown, J. Cole, W. Chatfield-Taylor, K. Guadalupe, G.B. Pauly, D. Cooper, and M. Ordeñana. 2017. Amargosa River Expert BioBlitz. Unpublished Report. The Nature Conservancy. Los Angeles, California. 50 pp. ii Report Contributors: Sophie S. Parker The Nature Conservancy [email protected] Brian S. Cohen The Nature Conservancy [email protected] Naomi Fraga Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden [email protected] Brian Brown Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County [email protected] Jeffrey Cole Pasadena City College [email protected] Will Chatfield-Taylor [email protected] Kevin Guadalupe Nevada Department of Wildlife [email protected] Gregory B. Pauly Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County [email protected] Daniel Cooper Cooper Ecological Monitoring, Inc. [email protected] Miguel Ordeñana Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County [email protected] iii Acknowledgements We thank our agency partners at the Bureau of Land Management, particularly C. Otahal, who co-organized the Amargosa River BioBlitz. We also thank the Amargosa Conservancy for supporting the collection efforts, and private land owners B. Brown of China Ranch and S. Sorrells of Shoshone Village for hosting volunteers on their property. iv Table of Contents I. Introduction and Context: Amargosa Watershed Conservation .............................................. 1 II. What is an Expert BioBlitz? ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Checklist of the Vascular Plant Flora of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument Phase II Report
    Annotated Checklist of the Vascular Plant Flora of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument Phase II Report By Dr. Terri Hildebrand Southern Utah University, Cedar City, UT and Dr. Walter Fertig Moenave Botanical Consulting, Kanab, UT Colorado Plateau Cooperative Ecosystems Studies Unit Agreement # H1200-09-0005 1 May 2012 Prepared for Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument Southern Utah University National Park Service Mojave Network TABLE OF CONTENTS Page # Introduction . 4 Study Area . 6 History and Setting . 6 Geology and Associated Ecoregions . 6 Soils and Climate . 7 Vegetation . 10 Previous Botanical Studies . 11 Methods . 17 Results . 21 Discussion . 28 Conclusions . 32 Acknowledgments . 33 Literature Cited . 34 Figures Figure 1. Location of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 5 Figure 2. Ecoregions and 2010-2011 collection sites in Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 8 Figure 3. Soil types and 2010-2011 collection sites in Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 9 Figure 4. Increase in the number of plant taxa confirmed as present in Grand Canyon- Parashant National Monument by decade, 1900-2011 . 13 Figure 5. Southern Utah University students enrolled in the 2010 Plant Anatomy and Diversity course that collected during the 30 August 2010 experiential learning event . 18 Figure 6. 2010-2011 collection sites and transportation routes in Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 22 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page # Tables Table 1. Chronology of plant-collecting efforts at Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument . 14 Table 2. Data fields in the annotated checklist of the flora of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument (Appendices A, B, C, and D) .
    [Show full text]
  • HYMENOCLEAS ARE AMBROSIAS (COMPOSITAE) Author(S): John L
    HYMENOCLEAS ARE AMBROSIAS (COMPOSITAE) Author(s): John L. Strother and Bruce G. Baldwin Source: Madroño, Vol. 49, No. 3 (JULY-SEPTEMBER 2002), pp. 143-144 Published by: California Botanical Society Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41425458 Accessed: 10-03-2020 22:41 UTC REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41425458?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms California Botanical Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Madroño This content downloaded from 146.244.88.155 on Tue, 10 Mar 2020 22:41:18 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Madroño, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 143-144, 2002 HYMENOCLEAS ARE AMBROSIAS (COMPOSITAE) John L. Strother University Herbarium, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-2465 [email protected] Bruce G. Baldwin Jepson Herbarium and Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-2465 Abstract Inclusion of Hymenoclea within the taxonomie circumscription of Ambrosia necessitates new combi- nations: Ambrosia monogyra, A. xplatyspina, A.
    [Show full text]
  • Caliente Range Checklist-03Jun19
    Checklist1 of Vascular Flora of the Caliente Range San Luis Obispo County, California (3 June 2019) David J. Keil Robert F. Hoover Herbarium Biological Sciences Department California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, California Scientific Name Common Name Family Rare n Abronia pogonantha desert sand-verbena NYCTAGINACEAE o n Acanthomintha obovata subsp. cordata heart-leaved thorn-mint LAMIACEAE 4.2 v n ❀ Achyrachaena mollis blow wives ASTERACEAE v n Acmispon brachycarpus shortpod deervetch FABACEAE v n Acmispon maritimus var. maritimus coastal deer-vetch FABACEAE v 1 Please notify the author of additions or corrections to this list ([email protected]). Some of the native plants on this list were introduced to the preserve as a part of site management and restoration. ❀ — See Wildflowers of San Luis Obispo, California, second edition (2018) for photograph. Most are illustrated in the first edition as well; old names for some species in square brackets. n — California native i — exotic species, introduced to California, naturalized or waif. v — documented by one or more specimens (Consortium of California Herbaria record; specimen in OBI; or collection that has not yet been accessioned). Some of these species are historical records and no longer occur at Sweet Springs. o — observed during field surveys; no voucher specimen known R—California Rare Plant Rank Scientific Name Common Name Family Rare n ❀ Acmispon strigosus strigose deer-vetch FABACEAE o n Acmispon wrangelianus California deervetch FABACEAE v n Agoseris heterophylla var. cryptopleura annual mountain-dandelion ASTERACEAE v n Agoseris retrorsa spear-leaved mountain- ASTERACEAE v dandelion i Ailanthus altissima tree of heaven SIMAROUBACEAE v n Allenrolfea occidentalis iodine bush CHENOPODIACEAE v n Allium diabolense Diablo onion ALLIACEAE v n Allium howellii var.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Vascular Plants of San Diego County 5Th Edition
    cHeckliSt of tHe vaScUlaR PlaNtS of SaN DieGo coUNty 5th edition Pinus torreyana subsp. torreyana Downingia concolor var. brevior Thermopsis californica var. semota Pogogyne abramsii Hulsea californica Cylindropuntia fosbergii Dudleya brevifolia Chorizanthe orcuttiana Astragalus deanei by Jon P. Rebman and Michael G. Simpson San Diego Natural History Museum and San Diego State University examples of checklist taxa: SPecieS SPecieS iNfRaSPecieS iNfRaSPecieS NaMe aUtHoR RaNk & NaMe aUtHoR Eriodictyon trichocalyx A. Heller var. lanatum (Brand) Jepson {SD 135251} [E. t. subsp. l. (Brand) Munz] Hairy yerba Santa SyNoNyM SyMBol foR NoN-NATIVE, NATURaliZeD PlaNt *Erodium cicutarium (L.) Aiton {SD 122398} red-Stem Filaree/StorkSbill HeRBaRiUM SPeciMeN coMMoN DocUMeNTATION NaMe SyMBol foR PlaNt Not liSteD iN THE JEPSON MANUAL †Rhus aromatica Aiton var. simplicifolia (Greene) Conquist {SD 118139} Single-leaF SkunkbruSH SyMBol foR StRict eNDeMic TO SaN DieGo coUNty §§Dudleya brevifolia (Moran) Moran {SD 130030} SHort-leaF dudleya [D. blochmaniae (Eastw.) Moran subsp. brevifolia Moran] 1B.1 S1.1 G2t1 ce SyMBol foR NeaR eNDeMic TO SaN DieGo coUNty §Nolina interrata Gentry {SD 79876} deHeSa nolina 1B.1 S2 G2 ce eNviRoNMeNTAL liStiNG SyMBol foR MiSiDeNtifieD PlaNt, Not occURRiNG iN coUNty (Note: this symbol used in appendix 1 only.) ?Cirsium brevistylum Cronq. indian tHiStle i checklist of the vascular plants of san Diego county 5th edition by Jon p. rebman and Michael g. simpson san Diego natural history Museum and san Diego state university publication of: san Diego natural history Museum san Diego, california ii Copyright © 2014 by Jon P. Rebman and Michael G. Simpson Fifth edition 2014. isBn 0-918969-08-5 Copyright © 2006 by Jon P.
    [Show full text]