DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for Herbicide Use Within Authorized Power Line Rights-Of-Way on National Forest System Lands in Arizona

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for Herbicide Use Within Authorized Power Line Rights-Of-Way on National Forest System Lands in Arizona United States Department of Agriculture Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for Herbicide Use within Authorized Power Line Rights-of-Way on National Forest System Lands in Arizona Forest Service Southwestern Region Apache-Sitgreaves, Coconino, Kaibab, Prescott, and Tonto National Forests December 2018 Page intentionally left blank For More Information Contact: Thomas Torres, P.E. Deputy Forest Supervisor Tonto National Forest 2324 East McDowell Road Phoenix, Arizona 85006 Phone: 602.225.5203 Email: [email protected] 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. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected]. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender. Page intentionally left blank Environmental Assessment for Herbicide Use within Authorized Power Line Rights-of-Way on National Forest System Lands in Arizona Table of Contents CHAPTER 1. Purpose and Need for Action ............................................................................... 1 1.1 Location of the Proposed Project Area ......................................................................................... 1 1.2 Background ................................................................................................................................... 8 1.3 Need for the Proposal .................................................................................................................... 9 1.4 Public Involvement and Issues ...................................................................................................... 9 1.5 Decision Framework ................................................................................................................... 10 1.6 Relationships to Statutes, Regulations, and Other Plans ............................................................. 10 CHAPTER 2. Alternatives .......................................................................................................... 13 2.1 Alternative A - No Action Alternative ........................................................................................ 13 2.2 Alternative B - Proposed Action ................................................................................................. 22 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Analysis ................................................. 39 CHAPTER 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ............................. 41 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 41 3.2 Resources Considered for Analysis ............................................................................................ 41 3.3 Soils............................................................................................................................................. 41 3.4 Water Resources and Quality (Drinking/Surface/Groundwater) ................................................ 49 3.5 Wetlands and Riparian Areas ...................................................................................................... 60 3.6 General Vegetation ..................................................................................................................... 65 3.7 Federally Listed Species ............................................................................................................. 89 3.8 Forest Service Sensitive Species ............................................................................................... 121 3.9 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act ..................................................................................... 140 3.10 Migratory Birds and Important Bird Areas ............................................................................... 142 3.11 Forest Service Management Indicator Species ......................................................................... 149 3.12 Rangeland Health ...................................................................................................................... 156 3.13 Fire and Fuel Management ....................................................................................................... 159 3.14 Human Health and Safety ......................................................................................................... 164 CHAPTER 4. Cumulative Impacts .......................................................................................... 169 4.1 Geographic and Temporal Scope of Analysis ........................................................................... 169 4.2 Timeframe of Effects ................................................................................................................ 171 4.3 Past and Present Actions ........................................................................................................... 171 4.4 Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions ................................................................................... 171 4.5 Cumulative Impacts on Resources ............................................................................................ 171 4.6 Soils........................................................................................................................................... 173 4.7 Water Resources and Quality (Drinking/Surface/Groundwater) .............................................. 174 4.8 Wetlands and Riparian Areas .................................................................................................... 176 4.9 General Vegetation ................................................................................................................... 177 4.10 Federally Listed Species ........................................................................................................... 178 4.11 Forest Service Sensitive Species ............................................................................................... 180 4.12 Rangeland Health ...................................................................................................................... 181 4.13 Fire and Fuel Management ....................................................................................................... 182 4.14 Human Health and Safety ......................................................................................................... 183 CHAPTER 5. Finding of No Significant Impact ..................................................................... 185 CHAPTER 6. List of Preparers and Reviewers ...................................................................... 189 6.1 List of Preparers and Reviewers ............................................................................................... 189 CHAPTER 7. Glossary ............................................................................................................. 193 CHAPTER 8. References ......................................................................................................... 205 i Apache-Sitgreaves, Coconino, Kaibab, Prescott, and Tonto National Forests List of Tables Table 1.1-1. Miles of Electrical Lines and Acres of ROW ........................................................................... 1 Table 2.2-1. Forest Service-Approved Herbicides List Proposed for Use .................................................. 23 Table 2.2-2. Forest Service-Approved Herbicides List with Vegetation Treatment Application and Use Descriptions ...................................................................................................................... 25 Table 3.3-1. Acres of Soil Orders within APS ROW ................................................................................. 43 Table 3.3-2. Soil Orders Properties within ROW ......................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Response of Selected Plants to Fire on White Sands
    Session D—Ecology of Fire on White Sands Missile Range—Boykin Response of Selected Plants to Fire on 1 White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico 2 Kenneth G. Boykin Abstract Little was known about the ecology, impacts, effects, and history of fire related to many plants and communities within White Sands Missile Range. I began by identifying the known aspects and the gaps in knowledge for White Sands Missile Range. I analyzed existing data available for the Installation taken from the Integrated Training and Area Management (ITAM) program for 1988 to 1999. Burn plots were identified at 34 sites with fires occurring sometime within that 11 yr span. Selected plant species were analyzed to identify the response to fire including change in frequency, cover, and structure. Analysis of data indicated varied responses to fire and identified a need for long term monitoring to account for natural variability. Introduction Fire is a major factor influencing the ecology, evolution, and biogeography of many vegetation communities (Humphrey 1974, Ford and McPherson 1996). In the Southwest, semi-desert grasslands and shrublands have evolved with fires caused by lightning strikes (Pyne 1982, Betancourt and others 1990). Fires have maintained grasslands by reducing invading shrubs (Valentine 1971). The impact these fires have on the ecosystem depends not only on current biological and physical environment but also on past land use patterns (Ford and McPherson 1996). Fires impact communities by affecting species diversity, persistence, opportunistic invading species, insects, diseases, and herbivores. Plant species diversity often increases after fires and some communities are dependent on fire to maintain their structure (Jacoby 1998).
    [Show full text]
  • GOOSEBERRYLEAF GLOBEMALLOW Sphaeralcea Grossulariifolia (Hook
    GOOSEBERRYLEAF GLOBEMALLOW Sphaeralcea grossulariifolia (Hook. & Arn.) Rydb. Malvaceae – Mallow family Corey L. Gucker & Nancy L. Shaw | 2018 ORGANIZATION NOMENCLATURE Sphaeralcea grossulariifolia (Hook. & Arn.) Names, subtaxa, chromosome number(s), hybridization. Rydb., hereafter referred to as gooseberryleaf globemallow, belongs to the Malveae tribe of the Malvaceae or mallow family (Kearney 1935; La Duke 2016). Range, habitat, plant associations, elevation, soils. NRCS Plant Code. SPGR2 (USDA NRCS 2017). Subtaxa. The Flora of North America (La Duke 2016) does not recognize any varieties or Life form, morphology, distinguishing characteristics, reproduction. subspecies. Synonyms. Malvastrum coccineum (Nuttall) A. Gray var. grossulariifolium (Hooker & Arnott) Growth rate, successional status, disturbance ecology, importance to animals/people. Torrey, M. grossulariifolium (Hooker & Arnott) A. Gray, Sida grossulariifolia Hooker & Arnott, Sphaeralcea grossulariifolia subsp. pedata Current or potential uses in restoration. (Torrey ex A. Gray) Kearney, S. grossulariifolia var. pedata (Torrey ex A. Gray) Kearney, S. pedata Torrey ex A. Gray (La Duke 2016). Seed sourcing, wildland seed collection, seed cleaning, storage, Common Names. Gooseberryleaf globemallow, testing and marketing standards. current-leaf globemallow (La Duke 2016). Chromosome Number. Chromosome number is stable, 2n = 20, and plants are diploid (La Duke Recommendations/guidelines for producing seed. 2016). Hybridization. Hybridization occurs within the Sphaeralcea genus.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • A Reciprocal Transplant Experiment with Winterfat (Krascheninnikovia Lanata) Melanie Barnes
    University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Biology ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations 12-1-2009 The effect of plant source location on restoration success: a reciprocal transplant experiment with winterfat (Krascheninnikovia lanata) Melanie Barnes Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/biol_etds Recommended Citation Barnes, Melanie. "The effect of plant source location on restoration success: a reciprocal transplant experiment with winterfat (Krascheninnikovia lanata)." (2009). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/biol_etds/4 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biology ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The effect of plant source location on restoration success: a reciprocal transplant experiment with winterfat (Krascheninnikovia lanata) BY Melanie G. Barnes B.A., Biology, Reed College, 2001 DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Biology The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico December, 2009 DEDICATION In memory of my mother, Georgene Grace Barnes. The completion of this dissertation is also dedicated to my friends and family who have supported me in this endeavor and who taught me many things about life that gave me the perspective I needed to complete this work. I would like to thank Heather Simpson, Jerusha Reynolds, Terri Koontz, Nathan Abrahamson, Jeremy Barlow, Brittany Barker, Laura Calabrese, Jennifer Hollis, Maureen Peters, Helen Barnes, and Tom Barnes. Finally, I want to thank Lisa for her love and emotional support; it means the world to me.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Habits of Rodents Inhabiting Arid and Semi-Arid Ecosystems of Central New Mexico." (2007)
    University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Special Publications Museum of Southwestern Biology 5-10-2007 Food Habits of Rodents Inhabiting Arid and Semi- arid Ecosystems of Central New Mexico Andrew G. Hope Robert R. Parmenter Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/msb_special_publications Recommended Citation Hope, Andrew G. and Robert R. Parmenter. "Food Habits of Rodents Inhabiting Arid and Semi-arid Ecosystems of Central New Mexico." (2007). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/msb_special_publications/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Museum of Southwestern Biology at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Special Publications by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SPECIAL PUBLICATION OF THE MUSEUM OF SOUTHWESTERN BIOLOGY NUMBER 9, pp. 1–75 10 May 2007 Food Habits of Rodents Inhabiting Arid and Semi-arid Ecosystems of Central New Mexico ANDREW G. HOPE AND ROBERT R. PARMENTER1 Special Publication of the Museum of Southwestern Biology 1 CONTENTS Abstract................................................................................................................................................ 5 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Study Sites ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Open Space Master Plan for Louisville Owned Parcels
    CITY OF LOUISVILLE OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN covering the following properties: AQUARIUS CTC DAUGHENBAUGH DAVIDSON MESA LAKE PARK NORTH TAMARISK WAREMBOURG LEON A. WURL WILDLIFE SANCTUARY MISCELLANEOUS January 2004 City of Louisville Department of Land Management and Louisville Open Space Citizens Advisory Board TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF MAPS ...............................................................................................................................2 SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................................3 CLASSIFICATION SUMMARY CHART OF OPEN SPACE LANDS........................................4 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................5 1.1 Report Organization.................................................................................................6 2.0 RELEVANT GOALS AND POLICIES..............................................................................6 3.0 MANAGEMENT GOALS AND PROTOCOL ..................................................................6 4.0 LANDSCAPE SETTING AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS.................................8 4.1 Location ....................................................................................................................8 4.2 Climate ......................................................................................................................9 4.3 Topography...............................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Winterfat Tested Class of Natural Germplasm
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE BRIDGER, MONTANA and MONTANA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BOZEMAN, MONTANA and WYOMING AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION LARAMIE, WYOMING NOTICE OF RELEASE OF OPEN RANGE WINTERFAT TESTED CLASS OF NATURAL GERMPLASM The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Montana and Wyoming Agricultural Experiment Stations announce the release of a ‘Tested Class Germplasm’ of winterfat (Krascheninnikovia lanata [Pursh] Guldenstaedt, syn. Ceratoides lanata [Pursh] J.T. Howell, syn. Eurotia lanata [Pursh] Moq.), a low growing, shrub, native to the northern Great Plains and Intermountain Desertic Basin. Winterfat has also been referred to as whitesage, lambstail, or sweetsage. This release was evaluated and selected by the USDA-NRCS Plant Materials Center (PMC) at Bridger, Montana. Collection Site Information: Open Range Tested Class Germplasm of winterfat is a composite of three accessions: 9039363 collected near Terry, Montana (Custer County), by D. Grandbois (1985), 9039365 collected near Bridger, Montana (Carbon County), by B. Thompson (1985), and 9039416 collected near Rawlins, Wyoming (Carbon County), by R. Baumgartner (1985). Description: The Open Range release is typical of the species, having the same general morphological and physiological characteristics. Winterfat is a half-shrub measuring 0.3 to 0.75 meters (1.0 to 2.5 ft.) tall. From a woody base, the plants produce numerous erect, annual branches. The stems and leaves are covered with soft, woolly hairs that give the plants a whitish to gray-green appearance. The sessile to short-petioled, lanceolate leaves have enrolled edges and persist through the winter season. The plants are monoecious.
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment a - Biological Review, Report of Site Visit & Species Inventory
    Attachment A - Biological Review, Report of Site Visit & Species Inventory From August 31 – September 2, 2014, Charles Britt conducted a pedestrian survey for all diurnal faunal and floral species along the proposed fiber optic line route for WNMT. Approximately 18 miles of cable to be placed. The project begins at milepost 28.28 on NM Highway 1, crosses NM Highway 1 at milepost 25.37, and crosses I-25 at milepost 116.572. It continues on State Route 107 at milepost 0 and ends at milepost 15.37. All three days had clear skies. Surveyor recorded all faunal and floral species observed within the Project Area/Action Area, taking photographs, and noting any features that may present potential impediments for the project The route traversed across six ecological sites. The Nolam gravelly sandy loam, 1 to 7 percent slopes (655) soil map unit is found in the R042XB035NM Gravelly Loam ecological site. This site usually occurs on nearly level to rolling piedmont slopes, hill slopes, fan remnants, or alluvial fans. Slopes range from 0 to 15 percent and occasionally reach 30 percent but average 4 to 9 percent. Elevations range from 4,300 to 5,000 feet. This site is not influenced by water from wetlands or streams. This ecological site is frequently associated with gravelly ecological sites. The historic plant community type is assumed to have exhibited dominance by black grama (Bouteloua eriopoda) and secondarily by bush muhly (Muhlenbergia porteri), Arizona cottontop (Digitaria californica) and/or cane bluestem (Bothriochloa barbinodis). Creosotebush (Larrea tridentata) and mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa) occur but are not co-dominants with grasses.
    [Show full text]
  • Population, Distríbutlon, Habitat Use and Natural History of Ord's Kangaroo Raf
    The Untuersity of Manftoba Population, distríbutlon, habitat use and natural history of Ord's kangaroo raf. (Dipodomys ordil in the sand hill areas of / south-western Saskatchewan and south-eastern Al berta. by Raymond J. L. Kenny A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies in partlal fulfillment of the requirements for the degreee of Master of Science. Zoology Depar-tment Winnipeg, Manitoba March 1989 National Library Bibliothèque nationale w@w of Canada du Canada Canadian Theses Service Service des thèses canadiennes Ottawa, Canada t(1 A 0N4 The author has granted an irrevocable non- L'auteur a accordé une licence irrévocable et exclusive licence allowing the National Library non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque of Canada to reproduce, loan, distribute or sell nationale du Canada de reproduire, prêter, copies of his/her thesis by any means and in distribuer ou vendre des copies de sa thèse any form or format, mak¡ng this thesis available de quelque manière et sous quelque forme to interested persons. que ce soit pour mettre des exemplaires de cette thèse à la disposition des personnes intéressées. The author retains ownership of the copyright L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur in his/her thesis. Neither the thesis nor qui protège sa thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantial extracts from it may be printed or substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être otherwise reproduced without his/her per- imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son mission. autorisation. rsBN 0-31-5-5168t-x CaNaadää POPULATION, DISTRIBUTION' HABITAT USE AND NATURAL HISTORY oF ORD'S KANGAROO RAT (Dipodoøys ordi) IN THE SAND HILL AREAS OF SOUTH-I,TESTERN SASKATCHEI4IAN AND SOUTH-EASTERN ALBERTA BY RAYMOND J.L.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C: Vegetation Management Biozones See District-Specific Posters for More Detailed Biozone Location Information
    Appendix C: Vegetation Management Biozones See District-specific posters for more detailed biozone location information. The following pages give details on each biozone. Contact Roadside Resources to receive a biozone poster if your office does not have one available. 59 CONIFER FOREST • Needleleaf evergreen trees dominate in this biozone • Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) is the most common tree species, occurring at the lower elevations • Occasionally found at the lower elevations are the deciduous trees Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii) and New Mexico locust (Robinia neomexicana). • The most common mid- elevation conifer is Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). • Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) and other spruces are found at the higher elevations of the conifer forest. Temperature • Quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) fills a 100 niche role in vegetational succession, appearing after fire or other forest 80 disturbance 60 Average Maximum Temperature (F) • Shrubs, grasses, and forbs are not common 40 in the understory, but may occur in natural Average Minimum Temperature (F) openings and at the edge of the forest 20 Freezing (F) • Mountain slopes, high plateaus, as well as 0 canyons, support conifer forest vegetation Jan Oct Apr Feb July Dec Aug Nov Mar May Sept • Soils found within this biozone include June Month andesite, basalt, granite, limestone, and Precipitation sandstone 25 • Elevations range from 3,900 to 8,300 feet • Summer precipitation (July, August, 20 Average Total September) accounts for nearly half of the Precipitation
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded and Reviewed on the State Parks’ Webpage Or Those Interested Could Request a Hard Copy
    Governor of Arizona Janet Napolitano Arizona State Parks Board William Cordasco, Chair ting 50 ting 50 ra Y Arlan Colton ra Y b e b e a William C. Porter a le le r r e e s s William C. Scalzo C C Tracey Westerhausen Mark Winkleman 1957 - 2007 Reese Woodling 1957 - 2007 Elizabeth Stewart (2006) Arizona Outdoor Recreation Coordinating Commission Jeffrey Bell, Chair Mary Ellen Bittorf Garry Hays Rafael Payan William Schwind Duane Shroufe Kenneth E. Travous This publication was prepared under the authority of the Arizona State Parks Board. Prepared by the Statewide Planning Unit Resources Management Section Arizona State Parks 1300 West Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-4174 Fax: (602) 542-4180 www.azstateparks.com The preparation of this report was under the guidance from the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, under the provisions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (Public Law 88-578, as amended). The Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, religion, national origin, age or disability. For additional information or to file a discrimination complaint, contact Director, Office of Equal Opportunity, Department of the Interior, Washington D.C. 20240. September 2007 ARIZONA 2008 SCORP ARIZONA 2008 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) Arizona State Parks September 2007 iii ARIZONA 2008 SCORP ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The 2008 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) for Arizona was prepared by the Planning Unit, Resources Management
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Vegetation Classification of the Tombstone, Arizona, Vicinity
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF EDMUNDO GARCIA-MOYA for theDOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Name) (Degree) ANIMAL SCIENCE in (RANGELAND RESOURCES) presented onfi,?,(2;2-01) / Yj) Qi (Major) (Date) Title: A PRELIMINARY VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION OF THE TOMBSTONE, ARIZONA, VICINITY Redacted for Privacy Abstract approved: C. E. Poulton The need for classifying vegetation in a more precise wayis evident.Also, there is a need to provide a hierarchicalclassification scheme that will match changes in image characteristics as one moves through the scales from spaceto conventional aerial photo- graphy.Such refined classifications of vegetation are thefirst steps toward a better understanding of the potentialities andlimitations of a specified area which help in the detection of analogousenvironmental conditions for resource allocation and management purposes.These needs become more urgent as use and competitionfor natural resources and land increases.The first approximation of a classification scheme may meet these needs for a test site inthe Tombstone, Arizona, vicinity.This classification task was accomplished by the use of a "hierarchical- polythetic-agglomerative" package using presence-absence data and standardized cover esti- mates, The following tentative associations and a variant were found upon division of the original data into groups of convenient size to meet the limitations of the programs: Association A (Panicum hirticaule/Tidestromia lanuginosa- Boerhaavia coulteri) la (a variant of Association A) Association B (Rhus microphylla-Dalea formosa)
    [Show full text]