DOCSLIB.ORG

Natural Resource Condition Assessment, John Muir National Historic Site

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Natural Resource Condition Assessment, John Muir National Historic Site National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Natural Resource Condition Assessment John Muir National Historic Site Natural Resource Report NPS/JOMU/NRR—2014/897 ON THE COVER Mount Wanda, Muir Nature Trails, John Muir National Historic Site Photograph courtesy of John Muir National Historic Site/NPS/2006 Natural Resource Condition Assessment John Muir National Historic Site Natural Resource Report NPS/JOMU/NRR—2014/897 David M. Stoms Frank W. Davis Patrick A. Jantz Donald Bren School of Environmental Science & Management University of California Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131 This report was prepared under Task Agreement J8C07080005 of the Californian Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (Cooperative and Joint Venture Agreement between the National Park Service and University of California Santa Barbara H8C07080001). December 2014 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data, and whose background and expertise put them on par technically and scientifically with the authors of the information. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available from the San Francisco Bay Area Network Inventory and Monitoring Program (http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/sfan/index.cfm) and the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/NRPM). To receive this report in a format optimized for screen readers, please email [email protected]. Please cite this publication as: Stoms, D. M., F. W. Davis, and P. A. Jantz. 2014. Natural resource condition assessment: John Muir National Historic Site. Natural Resource Report NPS/JOMU/NRR—2014/897. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 426/127560, December 2014 ii Contents Page Figures............................................................................................................................................. v Tables .............................................................................................................................................. x Commonly Used Abbreviations .................................................................................................... xii Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... xiii Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................ xxi Prologue ....................................................................................................................................... xxi Chapter 1 NRCA Background Information .................................................................................. 1 Chapter 2. Park Resource Setting / Resource Stewardship Context ............................................... 5 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 5 Natural Resources .................................................................................................................. 11 Resource Stewardship ............................................................................................................ 36 Chapter 3. Study Approach ........................................................................................................... 39 Preliminary Scoping .............................................................................................................. 39 Study Resources and Indicators ............................................................................................. 41 Study Methods ....................................................................................................................... 46 Chapter 4. Natural Resource Conditions ...................................................................................... 51 Regional/Landscape Context ................................................................................................. 51 Summary of stressors ............................................................................................................. 71 Resource Briefs ...................................................................................................................... 71 Air and Climate Level 1 Category ......................................................................................... 72 Water Level 1 Category ......................................................................................................... 88 Biological Integrity Level 1 Category ................................................................................... 94 Landscapes (Ecosystem Pattern and Processes) Level 1 Category ..................................... 118 iii Contents (continued) Page Summary of resource assessments ....................................................................................... 143 Chapter 5. Discussion and Conclusions ...................................................................................... 148 Answers to Management and Research Questions .............................................................. 148 Key Emerging Issues and Data Gaps ................................................................................... 151 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................... 154 Appendix ..................................................................................................................................... 165 A-1. Native Vascular Plants of JOMU ................................................................................ 165 A-2. Target Non-Native Species of JOMU ......................................................................... 171 A-3. Birds of JOMU ............................................................................................................ 173 A-4. Butterflies of JOMU .................................................................................................... 176 A-5. Moth Species List of JOMU ........................................................................................ 177 A-6. Bees of Mount Wanda (JOMU) .................................................................................. 182 A-7. GIS data layers created for the assessment .................................................................. 184 iv Figures Page Figure 1. John Muir National Historic Site (green outline) in relation to the San Francisco and east San Francisco Bay Area. ................................................................................................... 7 Figure 2. A map showing the open space areas surrounding Martinez and JOMU. ....................... 8 Figure 3. JOMU within the network of San Francisco Bay Area Ecological Subregions. JOMU lie within the East Bay Hills - Mount Diablo ecological sub-region. ............................... 12 Figure 4. Map of Strentzel Watershed (outlined in red) at JOMU (yellow outline) looking northwest. Martinez is on the right-hand side. .............................................................................. 13 Figure 5. Top graph shows the average monthly minimum (blue) and maximum (red) temperatures (in C°) for Martinez, CA. ........................................................................................ 15 Figure 6. The Soils species and topography found within JOMU and just outside of park boundaries. .................................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 7. Map of JOMU (yellow) and the Strentzel Creek sub-watershed (green) in relation to the Alhambra Creek Watershed (blue) ..................................................................................... 19 Figure 8. Geomorphology graph of Strentzel Watershed (Moore 2006). ..................................... 21 Figure 9. An approximation of the Strain Ranch property within the Mount Wanda parcel. ...... 23 Figure 10. Biodiversity Hotspots in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lepidoptera of North America 5
    Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera by Valerio Albu, 1411 E. Sweetbriar Drive Fresno, CA 93720 and Eric Metzler, 1241 Kildale Square North Columbus, OH 43229 April 30, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration: Blueberry Sphinx (Paonias astylus (Drury)], an eastern endemic. Photo by Valeriu Albu. ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Abstract A list of 1531 species ofLepidoptera is presented, collected over 15 years (1988 to 2002), in eleven southern West Virginia counties. A variety of collecting methods was used, including netting, light attracting, light trapping and pheromone trapping. The specimens were identified by the currently available pictorial sources and determination keys. Many were also sent to specialists for confirmation or identification. The majority of the data was from Kanawha County, reflecting the area of more intensive sampling effort by the senior author. This imbalance of data between Kanawha County and other counties should even out with further sampling of the area. Key Words: Appalachian Mountains,
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves
    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera of Albany Hill, Alameda Co., California
    LEPIDOPTERA OF ALBANY HILL, ALAMEDA CO., CALIFORNIA Jerry A. Powell Essig Museum of Entomology University of California, Berkeley and Robert L. Langston Kensington, CA November 1999; edited 2009 The following list summarizes observations of Lepidoptera (moths and butterflies) at Albany Hill, Alameda Co., California, during 1995-1999. Data originate from about 75 daytime and crepuscular visits of 0.5 to 3.5 hrs, in all months of the year. All of the butterfly species and some of the moths were recorded by RLL, most of the moth species and their larval host plants by JAP. A total of 145 species is recorded (30 butterflies, 115 moths), a modest number considering the extent and diversity of the flora. However, many of the potential larval host plants may be present in too small patches to support populations of larger moths or butterflies. Nonetheless, we were surprised that colonies of some of the species survive in a small area that has been surrounded by urban development for many decades, including some rare ones in the East Bay region, as annotated below. Moreover, the inventory is incomplete. A more comprehensive census would be accomplished by trapping moths attracted to ultraviolet lights. In a habitat of this size, however, such survey would attract an unknown proportion of species from surrounding areas. Larval collections are indicated by date-based JAP lot numbers (e.g. 95C37 = 1995, March, 37th collection). Larval foods of most of the other species are documented in other populations. Host plants are recorded at Albany Hill for 75 species (65% of the moths, 52% of the total); the rest were observed as adults only.
    [Show full text]
  • JAVELIN WG® Spray Must Be Deposited at the Larval Feeding Site
    For Control of Insect Pests of Vegetables, Fruit and Field Crops ACTIVE INGREDIENT: Bacillus thuringiensis, subspecies kurstaki strain SA-11 solids, spores, and Lepidopteran active toxins* .............................................................................. 85.0% OTHER INGREDIENTS: ........................................................................................ 15.0% TOTAL 100.0% * The percentage active ingredient does not indicate product performance and potency measurements are not federally standardized. KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN CAUTION See additional precautionary statements EPA REG. NO.: 70051-66 Lot No. EPA EST. NO.: Net Contents: Manufactured by: Certis USA LLC ESL 20160825 9145 Guilford Road, Suite 175 rev20191112 Columbia, MD 21046 This is a Specimen Label. It may not reflect the most-recent approved label for use in your state. Always refer to the label on the product packaging for approved use instructions. Please contact your Certis sales representative for more information. Page 1 of 17 PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS CAUTION. Harmful if absorbed through skin. Avoid contact with skin, eyes or clothing. Wash thoroughly with soap and water after handling and before eating, drinking, chewing gum, using tobacco, or using the toilet. Remove and wash contaminated clothing before reuse. Harmful if inhaled. Avoid breathing spray mist. Prolonged or frequently repeated skin contact may cause allergic reactions in some individuals. FIRST AID If on skin or clothing: Take off contaminated clothing. Rinse skin immediately with plenty of water for 15-20 minutes. If in eyes: Hold eye open and rinse slowly and gently with water for 15-20 minutes. Remove contact lenses, if present, after the first 5 minutes, then continue rinsing eye. If inhaled: Move person to fresh air.
    [Show full text]
  • Big Creek Lepidoptera Checklist
    Big Creek Lepidoptera Checklist Prepared by J.A. Powell, Essig Museum of Entomology, UC Berkeley. For a description of the Big Creek Lepidoptera Survey, see Powell, J.A. Big Creek Reserve Lepidoptera Survey: Recovery of Populations after the 1985 Rat Creek Fire. In Views of a Coastal Wilderness: 20 Years of Research at Big Creek Reserve. (copies available at the reserve). family genus species subspecies author Acrolepiidae Acrolepiopsis californica Gaedicke Adelidae Adela flammeusella Chambers Adelidae Adela punctiferella Walsingham Adelidae Adela septentrionella Walsingham Adelidae Adela trigrapha Zeller Alucitidae Alucita hexadactyla Linnaeus Arctiidae Apantesis ornata (Packard) Arctiidae Apantesis proxima (Guerin-Meneville) Arctiidae Arachnis picta Packard Arctiidae Cisthene deserta (Felder) Arctiidae Cisthene faustinula (Boisduval) Arctiidae Cisthene liberomacula (Dyar) Arctiidae Gnophaela latipennis (Boisduval) Arctiidae Hemihyalea edwardsii (Packard) Arctiidae Lophocampa maculata Harris Arctiidae Lycomorpha grotei (Packard) Arctiidae Spilosoma vagans (Boisduval) Arctiidae Spilosoma vestalis Packard Argyresthiidae Argyresthia cupressella Walsingham Argyresthiidae Argyresthia franciscella Busck Argyresthiidae Argyresthia sp. (gray) Blastobasidae ?genus Blastobasidae Blastobasis ?glandulella (Riley) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.1) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.2) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.3) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.4) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.5) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.6) Blastobasidae Holcocera gigantella (Chambers) Blastobasidae
    [Show full text]
  • Horticultural Pests Ytotec UK Offer a Wide Range of Semiochemical Attractants for Pests of Horticultural F Crops
    Horticultural Pests ytotec UK offer a wide range of semiochemical attractants for pests of horticultural F crops. The table below lists the insect pests that we are able to provide attractant lures and traps for. Please contact us if you require lures or traps for any horticultural pests not included below, as we may be able to offer a product or solution. Moth Pests Common Name Semiochemical Dispenser Amblyptilia acanthadactyla Plume Moth Pheromone Rubber Septum Autographa gamma Silver Y Pheromone Rubber Septum Cacoecimorpha pronubana Carnation Tortrix Pheromone polyvial Chrysodeixis chalcites Tomato Looper Pheromone Rubber Septum Clepsis spectrana Cabbage Leaf Roller Pheromone Rubber Septum Cnephasia asseclana (interject- Flax Tortrix Pheromone Rubber Septum ana) Cnephasia longana Omnivorous Leaf Tier Pheromone Rubber Septum Duponchelia fovealis European Pepper Moth Pheromone Rubber Septum Epichoristodes acerbella African Carnation Tortrix Pheromone Rubber Septum Epiphyas postvittana Light Brown Apple Moth Pheromone Rubber Septum Helicoverpa armigera Cotton Boll Worm Pheromone Polyvial / Rubber Septum Helicoverpa assulta Oriental Tobacco Bud Pheromone Polyvial / Rubber worm Septum Helicoverpa zea Corn Ear Worm Moth Pheromone Polyvial / Rubber Septum Heliothis virescens Tobacco Bud worm Pheromone Polyvial / Rubber Septum Keiferia lycopersicella Tomato Pin Worm Pheromone Rubber Septum Leucinodes orbonalis Eggplant Fruit Borer Pheromone Rubber Septum Mamestra oleracea Bright-Lined Brown Eyed Pheromone Rubber Septum Mamestra brassicae Cabbage
    [Show full text]
  • 3.4 Biological Resources for the Purpose of This EIR, Biological Resources Comprise Vegetation, Wildlife, Natural Communities, and Wetlands and Other Waters
    Impact Analysis Alameda County Community Development Agency Biological Resources 3.4 Biological Resources For the purpose of this EIR, biological resources comprise vegetation, wildlife, natural communities, and wetlands and other waters. Potential biological resource impacts associated with the program and the two individual projects are analyzed. Potential impacts are described quantitatively and qualitatively in Section 3.4.2, Environmental Impacts. This section also identifies specific and detailed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for potentially significant impacts on biological resources, where necessary. 3.4.1 Existing Conditions Regulatory Setting Federal Endangered Species Act Pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) have authority over projects that may result in take of a species listed as threatened or endangered under the act. Take is defined under the ESA, in part, as killing, harming, or harassing. Under federal regulations, take is further defined to include habitat modification or degradation that results, or is reasonably expected to result, in death or injury to wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering. If a likelihood exists that a project would result in take of a federally listed species, either an incidental take permit, under Section 10(a) of the ESA, or a federal interagency consultation, under Section 7 of the ESA, is required. Several federally listed species—vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi), longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna), vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi), California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), California red‐legged frog (Rana draytonii), Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus), and San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica)—have the potential to be affected by activities associated with the Golden Hills and Patterson Pass projects as well as subsequent repowering projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan 2011-2016
    Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve Management Plan 2011-2016 April 1981 Revised, May 1982 2nd revision, April 1983 3rd revision, December 1999 4th revision, May 2011 Prepared for U.S. Department of Commerce Ohio Department of Natural Resources National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Division of Wildlife Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management 2045 Morse Road, Bldg. G Estuarine Reserves Division Columbus, Ohio 1305 East West Highway 43229-6693 Silver Spring, MD 20910 This management plan has been developed in accordance with NOAA regulations, including all provisions for public involvement. It is consistent with the congressional intent of Section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, and the provisions of the Ohio Coastal Management Program. OWC NERR Management Plan, 2011 - 2016 Acknowledgements This management plan was prepared by the staff and Advisory Council of the Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve (OWC NERR), in collaboration with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources-Division of Wildlife. Participants in the planning process included: Manager, Frank Lopez; Research Coordinator, Dr. David Klarer; Coastal Training Program Coordinator, Heather Elmer; Education Coordinator, Ann Keefe; Education Specialist Phoebe Van Zoest; and Office Assistant, Gloria Pasterak. Other Reserve staff including Dick Boyer and Marje Bernhardt contributed their expertise to numerous planning meetings. The Reserve is grateful for the input and recommendations provided by members of the Old Woman Creek NERR Advisory Council. The Reserve is appreciative of the review, guidance, and council of Division of Wildlife Executive Administrator Dave Scott and the mapping expertise of Keith Lott and the late Steve Barry.
    [Show full text]
  • Macrolepidoptera Inventory of the Chilcotin District
    Macrolepidoptera Inventory of the Chilcotin District Aud I. Fischer – Biologist Jon H. Shepard - Research Scientist and Crispin S. Guppy – Research Scientist January 31, 2000 2 Abstract This study was undertaken to learn more of the distribution, status and habitat requirements of B.C. macrolepidoptera (butterflies and the larger moths), the group of insects given the highest priority by the BC Environment Conservation Center. The study was conducted in the Chilcotin District near Williams Lake and Riske Creek in central B.C. The study area contains a wide variety of habitats, including rare habitat types that elsewhere occur only in the Lillooet-Lytton area of the Fraser Canyon and, in some cases, the Southern Interior. Specimens were collected with light traps and by aerial net. A total of 538 species of macrolepidoptera were identified during the two years of the project, which is 96% of the estimated total number of species in the study area. There were 29,689 specimens collected, and 9,988 records of the number of specimens of each species captured on each date at each sample site. A list of the species recorded from the Chilcotin is provided, with a summary of provincial and global distributions. The habitats, at site series level as TEM mapped, are provided for each sample. A subset of the data was provided to the Ministry of Forests (Research Section, Williams Lake) for use in a Flamulated Owl study. A voucher collection of 2,526 moth and butterfly specimens was deposited in the Royal BC Museum. There were 25 species that are rare in BC, with most known only from the Riske Creek area.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 42, Number 2 June 2015
    Wisconsin Entomological Society N e w s I e t t e r Volume 42, Number 2 June 2015 Monitoring and Management - A That is, until volunteer moth surveyor, Steve Sensible Pairing Bransky, came onto the scene. Steve had By Beth Goeppinger, Wisconsin Department done a few moth and butterfly surveys here ofN atural Resources and there on the property. But that changed in 2013. Armed with mercury vapor lights, Richard Bong State Recreation Area is a bait and a Wisconsin scientific collector's heavily used 4,515 acre property in the permit, along with our permission, he began Wisconsin State Park system. It is located in surveying in earnest. western Kenosha County. The area is oak woodland, savanna, wetland, sedge meadow, He chose five sites in woodland, prairie and old field and restored and remnant prairie. savanna habitats. He came out many nights Surveys of many kinds and for many species in the months moths might be flying. After are done on the property-frog and toad, finding that moth populations seemed to drift fence, phenology, plants, ephemeral cycle every 3-5 days, he came out more ponds, upland sandpiper, black tern, frequently. His enthusiasm, dedication and grassland and marsh birds, butterfly, small never-ending energy have wielded some mammal, waterfowl, muskrat and wood surprising results. Those results, in turn, ducks to name a few. Moths, except for the have guided us in our habitat management showy and easy-to-identify species, have practices. been ignored. Of the 4,500 moth species found in the state, Steve has confirmed close to 1,200 on the property, and he isn't done yet! He found one of the biggest populations of the endangered Papaipema silphii moths (Silphium borer) in the state as well as 36 species of Catocola moths (underwings), them.
    [Show full text]
  • Recerca I Territori V12 B (002)(1).Pdf
    Butterfly and moths in l’Empordà and their response to global change Recerca i territori Volume 12 NUMBER 12 / SEPTEMBER 2020 Edition Graphic design Càtedra d’Ecosistemes Litorals Mediterranis Mostra Comunicació Parc Natural del Montgrí, les Illes Medes i el Baix Ter Museu de la Mediterrània Printing Gràfiques Agustí Coordinadors of the volume Constantí Stefanescu, Tristan Lafranchis ISSN: 2013-5939 Dipòsit legal: GI 896-2020 “Recerca i Territori” Collection Coordinator Printed on recycled paper Cyclus print Xavier Quintana With the support of: Summary Foreword ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Xavier Quintana Butterflies of the Montgrí-Baix Ter region ................................................................................................................. 11 Tristan Lafranchis Moths of the Montgrí-Baix Ter region ............................................................................................................................31 Tristan Lafranchis The dispersion of Lepidoptera in the Montgrí-Baix Ter region ...........................................................51 Tristan Lafranchis Three decades of butterfly monitoring at El Cortalet ...................................................................................69 (Aiguamolls de l’Empordà Natural Park) Constantí Stefanescu Effects of abandonment and restoration in Mediterranean meadows .......................................87
    [Show full text]
  • USGS DDS-43, Status of Terrestrial Vertebrates
    DAVID M. GRABER National Biological Service Sequoia and Kings Canyon Field Station Three Rivers, California 25 Status of Terrestrial Vertebrates ABSTRACT The terrestrial vertebrate wildlife of the Sierra Nevada is represented INTRODUCTION by about 401 regularly occurring species, including three local extir- There are approximately 401 species of terrestrial vertebrates pations in the 20th century. The mountain range includes about two- that use the Sierra Nevada now or in recent times according thirds of the bird and mammal species and about half the reptiles to the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System and amphibians in the State of California. This is principally because (CWHR) (California Department of Fish and Game 1994) (ap- of its great extent, and because its foothill woodlands and chaparral, pendix 25.1). Of these, thirteen are essentially restricted to mid-elevation forests, and alpine vegetation reflect, in structure and the Sierra in California (one of these is an alien; i.e. not native function if not species, habitats found elsewhere in the State. About to the Sierra Nevada); 278 (eight aliens) include the Sierra in 17% of the Sierran vertebrate species are considered at risk by state their principal range; and another 110 (six aliens) use the Si- or federal agencies; this figure is only slightly more than half the spe- erra as a minor portion of their range. Included in the 401 are cies at risk for the state as a whole. This relative security is a function 232 species of birds; 112 species of mammals; thirty-two spe- of the smaller proportion of Sierran habitats that have been exten- cies of reptiles; and twenty-five species of amphibians (ap- sively modified.
    [Show full text]