DOCSLIB.ORG

Tenaya Lodge Explorer Cabins Biotic Report Addendum

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tenaya Lodge Explorer Cabins Biotic Report Addendum Tenaya Lodge Explorer Cabins Biotic Report Addendum Fish Camp, Mariposa County, California Project #3540-05 Prepared for: Blair, Church & Flynn 451 Clovis Ave, Suite 200 Clovis, CA 93612 Prepared by: H. T. Harvey & Associates February 2016 7815 N. Palm Ave., Suite 310 Fresno, CA 93711 Ph: 559.476.3160 F: 559.476.3170 Table of Contents Section 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Section 2. Project Description ...................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Background............................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Project Location ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Key Concepts ........................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.4 Project Components ............................................................................................................................................... 5 2.4.1 Parking and Access ......................................................................................................................................... 5 2.4.2 Clubhouse Building ......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.4.3 Cabins and Utilities ......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.4.4 Landscaping ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 2.4.5 Snow Storage .................................................................................................................................................... 7 2.4.6 Residential Parcel Dedication ........................................................................................................................ 7 Section 3. Methods ......................................................................................................................................................... 8 Section 4. Results ............................................................................................................................................................ 9 4.1 Biotic Habitats ......................................................................................................................................................... 9 4.2 Special-Status Plant and Wildlife Species and Designated Critical Habitat.................................................... 9 4.2.1 Jepson’s Dodder (Cuscuta jepsonii) ................................................................................................................ 10 4.2.2 Oval-leaved Viburnum (Viburnum ellipticum) ............................................................................................. 10 4.2.3 Yosemite Popcornflower (Plagiobothrys torreyi var. torreyi) ........................................................................ 11 4.2.4 Sierra Nevada Mountain Beaver (Aplodontia rufa californica) .................................................................... 11 4.3 Tree Inventory ....................................................................................................................................................... 11 4.4 Sensitive Natural Communities ........................................................................................................................... 12 Section 5. Direct and Indirect Effects ....................................................................................................................... 17 5.1 Criterion A: Adverse Effects on Candidate, Sensitive, or Special-Status Species ....................................... 18 5.1.1 Special-Status Plants ...................................................................................................................................... 18 5.1.2 Special-Status Wildlife .................................................................................................................................. 18 5.2 Criterion B: Adverse Effects on Sensitive Natural Communities ................................................................. 23 5.3 Criterion C: Adverse Effects on Federally Protected Wetlands, as Defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act ...................................................................................................................................................................... 23 5.4 Criterion D: Adverse Effects on the Movement of Any Native Resident or Migratory Fish or Wildlife Species or with Established Native or Migratory Wildlife Corridors, or the Use of Native Wildlife Nursery Sites ................................................................................................................................................................................ 24 5.5 Criterion E: Conflict with Any Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources, Such as a Tree Preservation Policy or Ordinance .................................................................................................................... 24 5.6 Criterion F: Conflict with an Adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or Other Approved Local, Regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan ............................................... 24 Section 6. Cumulative Impacts ................................................................................................................................... 25 Section 7. References ................................................................................................................................................... 27 Tenaya Explorer Cabins Project H. T. Harvey & Associates i Biotic Report Addendum February 2016 Figures Figure 1. Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Proposed Site Plan ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3. Biotic Habitats .............................................................................................................................................. 13 Figure 4. CNDDB Map ............................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 5. Tree Inventory .............................................................................................................................................. 15 Figure 6. Potential Impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities ............................................................................ 16 Figure 7. Special-Status Plant Occurrence Map ....................................................................................................... 22 Appendices Appendix A. Project Site Plans ................................................................................................................................. A-1 Appendix B. Special-status Plant and Animal Species with Potential to Occur ............................................... B-1 Appendix C. Full Text of Mitigation Measures ...................................................................................................... C-1 Preparers Brian Boroski, Ph.D., Vice President Amy Sparks, J.D., Associate Regulatory Specialist Susan V. Christopher, Ph.D., Senior Wildlife Ecologist, Project Manager Ethan Barnes, M.S., Plant Ecologist Jacquelyn Maher, M.S., Wildlife Ecologist Colin Wilkinson, B.S., Plant Ecologist James Merk, Technical Editor Mark Lagarde, Senior GIS Specialist Cissy Fu, GIS Specialist Tenaya Explorer Cabins Project H. T. Harvey & Associates ii Biotic Report Addendum February 2016 Section 1. Introduction On behalf of Blair, Church & Flynn, H. T. Harvey & Associates performed a desktop review and reconnaissance survey of environmental conditions and biological resources for the revised site plan for the Tenaya Lodge Explorer Cabins Project, in Fish Camp, Mariposa County (Figure 1). This report, which serves as an addendum to the project’s biotic report (H. T. Harvey & Associates 2014), presents a supplemental analysis of impacts within new areas encompassed by the revised site plan (Appendix A) for incorporation into the primary analysis prepared for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This report also provides an update to the project description (Section 2.0). In summary, the project site was revised to include a utility corridor between the proposed Explorer Cabins site and existing Tenaya Lodge facilities, improvements to a portion of Highway 41, and a half-acre dedicated parcel (Parcel 2) that would remain a residential lot (Figure 2, Appendix A). The utility corridor would have water lines and containment structures, sewer lines connecting to the Tenaya Lodge wastewater treatment system, and telecommunications lines.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sierra Nevada Framework FEIS Chapter 3
    table of contrents Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment – Part 4.6 4.6. Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Fungi4.6. Fungi Introduction Part 3.1 of this chapter describes landscape-scale vegetation patterns. Part 3.2 describes the vegetative structure, function, and composition of old forest ecosystems, while Part 3.3 describes hardwood ecosystems and Part 3.4 describes aquatic, riparian, and meadow ecosystems. This part focuses on botanical diversity in the Sierra Nevada, beginning with an overview of botanical resources and then presenting a more detailed analysis of the rarest elements of the flora, the threatened, endangered, and sensitive (TES) plants. The bryophytes (mosses and liverworts), lichens, and fungi of the Sierra have been little studied in comparison to the vascular flora. In the Pacific Northwest, studies of these groups have received increased attention due to the President’s Northwest Forest Plan. New and valuable scientific data is being revealed, some of which may apply to species in the Sierra Nevada. This section presents an overview of the vascular plant flora, followed by summaries of what is generally known about bryophytes, lichens, and fungi in the Sierra Nevada. Environmental Consequences of the alternatives are only analyzed for the Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive plants, which include vascular plants, several bryophytes, and one species of lichen. 4.6.1. Vascular plants4.6.1. plants The diversity of topography, geology, and elevation in the Sierra Nevada combine to create a remarkably diverse flora (see Section 3.1 for an overview of landscape patterns and vegetation dynamics in the Sierra Nevada). More than half of the approximately 5,000 native vascular plant species in California occur in the Sierra Nevada, despite the fact that the range contains less than 20 percent of the state’s land base (Shevock 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Terr–3 Special-Status Plant Populations
    TERR–3 SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT POPULATIONS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During 2001 and 2002, the review of existing information, agency consultation, vegetation community mapping, and focused special-status plant surveys were completed. Based on California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2001a), CDFG’s Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB; CDFG 2003), USDA-FS Regional Forester’s List of Sensitive Plant and Animal Species for Region 5 (USDA-FS 1998), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Species List (USFWS 2003), and Sierra National Forest (SNF) Sensitive Plant List (Clines 2002), there were 100 special-status plant species initially identified as potentially occurring within the Study Area. Known occurrences of these species were mapped. Vegetation communities were evaluated to locate areas that could potentially support special-status plant species. Each community was determined to have the potential to support at least one special-status plant species. During the spring and summer of 2002, special-status plant surveys were conducted. For each special-status plant species or population identified, a CNDDB form was completed, and photographs were taken. The locations were mapped and incorporated into a confidential GIS database. Vascular plant species observed during surveys were recorded. No state or federally listed special-status plant species were identified during special- status plant surveys. Seven special-status plant species, totaling 60 populations, were identified during surveys. There were 22 populations of Mono Hot Springs evening-primrose (Camissonia sierrae ssp. alticola) identified. Two populations are located near Mammoth Pool, one at Bear Forebay, and the rest are in the Florence Lake area.
    [Show full text]
  • A Visitor's Guide to the Sierra National Forest
    Sierra Traveler A Visitor’s Guide to the Sierra National Forest Photo by Joshua Courter by Joshua Photo Anne Lake, Ansel Adams Wilderness - Sierra National Forest What are you interested in doing in the Sierra? Can we help you find what you want to do in the Sierra? Visit Your National Forest! Destinations ......................................................................................................... 2 Sierra National Forest Supervisors Office Camping Guide .................................................................................................. 3 1600 Tollhouse Rd. Clovis, CA 93611 Helpful Hints ........................................................................................................ 4 (559) 297-0706 Merced River Country ...................................................................................... 5 Yosemite South/Highway 41 .......................................................................... 6 High Sierra Ranger District Bass Lake ............................................................................................................... 7 29688 Auberry Rd. Prather, CA 93651 Mammoth Pool Reservoir ............................................................................... 8 (559) 855-5355 San Joaquin River Gorge Management ..................................................... 9 Bass Lake Ranger District Sierra Vista National Scenic Byway ...................................................... 10-12 57003 Road 225 North Fork, CA 93643 Dinkey Creek/McKinley Grove ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SOPA) 10/01/2015 to 12/31/2015 Sierra National Forest This Report Contains the Best Available Information at the Time of Publication
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 10/01/2015 to 12/31/2015 Sierra National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact Projects Occurring in more than one Region (excluding Nationwide) Sierra Nevada Forest Plan - Land management planning On Hold N/A N/A Donald Yasuda Amendment (SNFPA) 916-640-1168 EIS [email protected] Description: Prepare a narrowly focused analysis to comply with two orders issued by the Eastern District Court of California on November 4, 2009. Correct the 2004 SNFPA Final SEIS to address range of alternatives and analytical consistency issues. Web Link: http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/snfpa/2010seis Location: UNIT - Eldorado National Forest All Units, Lassen National Forest All Units, Modoc National Forest All Units, Sequoia National Forest All Units, Tahoe National Forest All Units, Lake Tahoe Basin Mgt Unit, Carson Ranger District, Bridgeport Ranger District, Plumas National Forest All Units, Sierra National Forest All Units, Stanislaus National Forest All Units, Inyo National Forest All Units. STATE - California, Nevada. COUNTY - Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Inyo, Kern, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yuba, Douglas, Esmeralda, Mineral. LEGAL - Along the Sierra Nevada Range, from the Oregon/California border south to Lake Isabella as well as lands in western Nevada. Sierra Nevada National Forests. R5 - Pacific Southwest Region, Occurring in more than one Forest (excluding Regionwide) Inyo, Sequoia and Sierra - Land management planning In Progress: Expected:01/2017 01/2017 Michael Dietl National Forests Land NOI in Federal Register 707-562-9121 Management Plans Revision 08/29/2014 [email protected] EIS Est.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.6 Biological Resources
    MADERA COUNTY SIERRA MEADOWS ESTATES SUBDIVISION EIR 5.6 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The purpose of this Section is to identify existing biological resources on-site and in the local area, analyze potential Project-related impacts to these resources (including sensitive species) and recommend mitigation measures to avoid or reduce the significance of impacts that are identified. Information in this Section is based on analysis conducted by Foothill Associates. Appendix 15.6, Biological Technical Report includes technical information from Foothill Associates and Live Oak Associates Inc. This Section describes the biological character of the site in terms of vegetation, flora, wildlife, and wildlife habitats and analyzes the biological significance of the site in view of Federal, State and local laws and policies. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK The following describes federal, state, and local environmental laws and policies that are relevant to the CEQA review process. Federal Endangered Species Act and California Endangered Species Act The United States Congress passed the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) in 1973 to protect those species that are endangered or threatened with extinction. The State of California enacted a similar law, the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) in 1984. The Federal and State Endangered Species Acts are intended to operate in conjunction with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to help protect the ecosystems upon which endangered and threatened species depend. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is responsible for implementation of the FESA, while the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) implements the CESA. Section 7 of the FESA and its implementing regulations outline procedures for Federal interagency cooperation to conserve Federally listed species and designated critical habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • L.Fish Camp Biotic Report 12122014
    Tenaya Lodge Explorer Cabins Biotic Report Project #3540-02 Prepared for: Blair, Church & Flynn Consulting Engineers Isaac Wedam 451 Clovis Ave., Suite 200 Clovis, CA 93612 Prepared by: H. T. Harvey & Associates December 2014 7815 North Palm Avenue, Suite 310 Fresno, CA 93711 Ph: 559.476.3160 F: 559.476.3170 Executive Summary H. T. Harvey & Associates (HTH) has prepared this biotic report to: 1) document the existing environmental conditions and biological resources on a parcel (the Project site) that has been proposed as the location of a high end camping facility consisting of Explorer Cabins (the Project); 2) identify the impacts of the Project on these resources; and 3) recommend mitigation measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate Project impacts. HTH followed the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines (State CEQA Guidelines) during the assessment of the level of significance of the Project’s potential impacts on biological resources. We proposed mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts to less-than-significant levels, when those impacts cannot be avoided. This report is intended to support the Project Proponent’s compliance with CEQA. The Project site encompasses approximately 24.23 acres in Fish Camp, Mariposa County, California. The Project site is undeveloped, and is within the main timber belt of the central Sierra Nevada dominated by lower montane coniferous forest. Elevations on the Project site range from approximately 4970 to 5050 feet (ft) above sea level. The Project will include 34 prefabricated cabins, a clubhouse, a swimming pool, paved parking areas and roads, and campfire pits. The site plan has been designed to avoid wetlands, meadows, a pond, rock formations, and significant vegetation, and incorporates existing roads and clearings.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 10/01/2016 to 12/31/2016 Sierra National Forest This Report Contains the Best Available Information at the Time of Publication
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 10/01/2016 to 12/31/2016 Sierra National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact Projects Occurring in more than one Region (excluding Nationwide) Sierra Nevada Forest Plan - Land management planning On Hold N/A N/A Donald Yasuda Amendment (SNFPA) 916-640-1168 EIS [email protected] Description: Prepare a narrowly focused analysis to comply with two orders issued by the Eastern District Court of California on November 4, 2009. Correct the 2004 SNFPA Final SEIS to address range of alternatives and analytical consistency issues. Web Link: http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/snfpa/2010seis Location: UNIT - Eldorado National Forest All Units, Lassen National Forest All Units, Modoc National Forest All Units, Sequoia National Forest All Units, Tahoe National Forest All Units, Lake Tahoe Basin Mgt Unit, Carson Ranger District, Bridgeport Ranger District, Plumas National Forest All Units, Sierra National Forest All Units, Stanislaus National Forest All Units, Inyo National Forest All Units. STATE - California, Nevada. COUNTY - Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Inyo, Kern, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yuba, Douglas, Esmeralda, Mineral. LEGAL - Along the Sierra Nevada Range, from the Oregon/California border south to Lake Isabella as well as lands in western Nevada. Sierra Nevada National Forests. R5 - Pacific Southwest Region, Occurring in more than one Forest (excluding Regionwide) Inyo, Sequoia and Sierra - Land management planning In Progress: Expected:11/2017 12/2017 Nevia Brown National Forests Land DEIS NOA in Federal Register 7075629121 Management Plans Revision 05/27/2016 [email protected] EIS Est.
    [Show full text]
  • Cover Painting by Kelly Fine an INTERPRETIVE GUIDE to THE
    AN INTERPRETIVE GUIDE TO THE NELDER GROVE AREA INCLUDING TRAIL DESCRIPTIONS AND SEQUOIA FACTS Cover painting by Kelly Fine Granddad Tree • Photo by Reid Marks Bull Buck Tree • Photo by Brenda Negley Nelder Grove - August 2011 • Page 2 CONTENTS Acknowledgements ...................................................................................4 Welcome to Nelder Grove.........................................................................5 About Nelder Grove..................................................................................6 First Inhabitants........................................................................................6 John Nelder ...............................................................................................7 Logging.....................................................................................................8 Biledo Meadow Cabins - Giant Sequoia Facts.........................................9 Sequoia vs Redwood................................................................................10 Kelley Family/Camp Beulah ...................................................................11 Names of Sequoia Trees in the Grove ............................................... 11-12 Trail Distances.........................................................................................13 Chimney Tree Trail Interpretive Information ................................... 14-15 Bull Buck and Big Ed Trails Interpretive Information...................... 16-17 Nelder Grove Map ..................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Special Status Vascular Plant Surveys and Habitat Modeling in Yosemite National Park, 2003–2004
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Special Status Vascular Plant Surveys and Habitat Modeling in Yosemite National Park, 2003–2004 Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/SIEN/NRTR—2010/389 ON THE COVER USGS and NPS joint survey for Tompkins’ sedge (Carex tompkinsii), south side Merced River, El Portal, Mariposa County, California (upper left); Yosemite onion (Allium yosemitense) (upper right); Yosemite lewisia (Lewisia disepala) (lower left); habitat model for mountain lady’s slipper (Cypripedium montanum) in Yosemite National Park, California (lower right). Photographs by: Peggy E. Moore. Special Status Vascular Plant Surveys and Habitat Modeling in Yosemite National Park, 2003–2004 Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/SIEN/NRTR—2010/389 Peggy E. Moore, Alison E. L. Colwell, and Charlotte L. Coulter U.S. Geological Survey Western Ecological Research Center 5083 Foresta Road El Portal, California 95318 October 2010 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics 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 Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations.
    [Show full text]
  • Rationales for Plant Species Considered for Species of Conservation Concern
    Rationales for Plant Species Considered for Species of Conservation Concern Sierra National Forest Prepared by: Botanists and Natural Resources Specialists Pacific Southwest Regional Office and Sierra National Forest For: Sierra National Forest June 2019 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992.
    [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]
  • A Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks Appendix 11B - Giant Sequoia Literature Review
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science A Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks Appendix 11b - Giant Sequoia Literature Review Natural Resource Report NPS/SEKI/ NRR—2013/665.11b ON THE COVER Giant Forest, Sequoia National Park Photography by: Brent Paull A Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks Appendix 11b - Giant Sequoia Literature Review Natural Resource Report NPS/SEKI/ NRR—2013/665.11b R. Wayne Harrison Senior Environmental Scientist (Ret.) California Department of Parks and Recreation August 29, 2011 [This paper was funded by a grant from the Save the Redwoods League.] June 2013 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 document contains subject matter expert interpretation of the data.
    [Show full text]