Vegetation Alliances of Western Riverside County, California

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Vegetation Alliances of Western Riverside County, California Vegetation Alliances of Western Riverside County, California By Anne Klein and Julie Evens California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento CA, 95816 Final report prepared for The California Department of Fish and Game Habitat Conservation Division Contract Number: P0185404 August 2005 (Revised April 2006) TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................1 METHODS .......................................................................................................................................................1 Study area.................................................................................................................................................1 Figure 1. Study area in Western Riverside County within Southern California, showing ecological subsections...............................................................................................................................................3 Sampling...................................................................................................................................................4 Figure 2. Locations of field surveys within Western Riverside County.....................................................5 Existing Literature Review ........................................................................................................................7 Cluster analyses for vegetation classification...........................................................................................7 Classification and Key ..............................................................................................................................8 Description Writing....................................................................................................................................9 RESULTS.......................................................................................................................................................11 Figure 3. Example diagram from the cluster analysis showing the arrangement of a subset of chaparral surveys....................................................................................................................................................13 CLASSIFICATION ............................................................................................................................................14 CROSSWALKS TO OTHER CLASSIFICATIONS....................................................................................................14 Table 1. Final floristic classification of Western Riverside County nested within the National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS) formation hierarchy, with associated mapping classification codes. .....15 Table 2. Proposed additional plant communities that have been personally observed or included in other reports............................................................................................................................................35 KEY ..............................................................................................................................................................37 Table 3. Field key to the defined vegetation associations of Western Riverside County, California. ....38 TREE-OVERSTORY VEGETATION ....................................................................................................................63 Abies concolor-Calocedrus decurrens Alliance (White Fir – Incense Cedar) ........................................63 Abies concolor-Pinus lambertiana Alliance (White Fir – Sugar Pine).....................................................65 Alnus rhombifolia Alliance (White Alder) ................................................................................................67 Calocedrus decurrens Alliance (Incense Cedar)....................................................................................70 Eucalyptus spp. Alliance (Eucalyptus)....................................................................................................72 Pinus attenuata Alliance (Knobcone Pine) .............................................................................................73 i Pinus contorta Alliance (Lodgepole Pine)...............................................................................................75 Pinus coulteri Alliance (Coulter Pine) .....................................................................................................76 Pinus coulteri-Quercus chrysolepis Alliance (Coulter Pine – Canyon Live Oak) ...................................78 Pinus flexilis Alliance (Limber Pine)........................................................................................................80 Pinus jeffreyi Alliance (Jeffrey Pine) .......................................................................................................82 Pinus quadrifolia Alliance (Parry Pinyon) ...............................................................................................85 Platanus racemosa Alliance (California Sycamore) ...............................................................................87 Platanus racemosa-Populus fremontii Alliance (California Sycamore – Fremont Cottonwood) ............89 Populus fremontii Alliance (Fremont Cottonwood) .................................................................................91 Pseudotsuga macrocarpa Alliance (Bigcone Douglas-fir) ......................................................................94 Quercus agrifolia Alliance (Coast Live Oak)...........................................................................................96 Quercus chrysolepis Alliance (Canyon Live Oak) ..................................................................................99 Quercus engelmannii Alliance (Engelmann Oak).................................................................................101 Quercus kelloggii Alliance (Black Oak).................................................................................................104 Salix gooddingii Alliance (Black Willow) ...............................................................................................106 Salix laevigata Alliance (Red Willow) ...................................................................................................109 SHRUB-OVERSTORY VEGETATION................................................................................................................111 Adenostoma fasciculatum Alliance (Chamise) .....................................................................................111 Adenostoma fasciculatum-Arctostaphylos glandulosa Alliance (Chamise – Eastwood Manzanita) ....114 Adenostoma fasciculatum-Arctostaphylos glauca Alliance (Chamise – Bigberry Manzanita) .............116 Adenostoma fasciculatum-Ceanothus crassifolius Alliance (Chamise-Hoaryleaf Ceanothus) ............118 Adenostoma fasciculatum-Ceanothus cuneatus Alliance (Chamise – Wedgeleaf Ceanothus)...........120 Adenostoma fasciculatum-Ceanothus greggii Alliance (Chamise – Cupleaf Ceanothus)....................122 Adenostoma fasciculatum-Salvia apiana Alliance (Chamise - White Sage) ........................................124 Adenostoma fasciculatum-Salvia mellifera Alliance (Chamise – Black Sage) .....................................126 Adenostoma fasciculatum-Xylococcus bicolor Alliance (Chamise – Mission Manzanita)....................128 Adenostoma sparsifolium Alliance (Redshank) ....................................................................................130 Adenostoma sparsifolium-Adenostoma fasciculatum Alliance (Redshank – Chamise).......................133 Adenostoma sparsifolium-Cercocarpus betuloides Alliance (Redshank – Birchleaf Mountain- mahogany)............................................................................................................................................135 Arctostaphylos glandulosa Alliance (Eastwood Manzanita) .................................................................137 Artemisia californica Alliance (California Sagebrush)...........................................................................139 Artemisia californica-Eriogonum fasciculatum Alliance (California Sagebrush – California Buckwheat) ..............................................................................................................................................................141 Artemisia californica-Salvia apiana Alliance (California Sagebrush – White Sage).............................143 ii Artemisia californica-Salvia mellifera Alliance (California Sagebrush – Black Sage)...........................145 Artemisia tridentata Alliance (Big Sagebrush)......................................................................................147 Baccharis salicifolia Alliance (Mulefat) .................................................................................................149 Ceanothus crassifolius Alliance (Hoaryleaf Ceanothus) ......................................................................151 Ceanothus cuneatus Alliance (Wedgeleaf Ceanothus)........................................................................153 Ceanothus integerrimus Alliance (Deerbrush)......................................................................................155 Ceanothus leucodermis Alliance (Chaparral Whitethorn) ....................................................................157 Ceanothus
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...

327 pages remaining, click to load more.

Recommended publications
  • California Vegetation Map in Support of the DRECP
    CALIFORNIA VEGETATION MAP IN SUPPORT OF THE DESERT RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN (2014-2016 ADDITIONS) John Menke, Edward Reyes, Anne Hepburn, Deborah Johnson, and Janet Reyes Aerial Information Systems, Inc. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Renewable Energy Program and the California Energy Commission Final Report May 2016 Prepared by: Primary Authors John Menke Edward Reyes Anne Hepburn Deborah Johnson Janet Reyes Report Graphics Ben Johnson Cover Page Photo Credits: Joshua Tree: John Fulton Blue Palo Verde: Ed Reyes Mojave Yucca: John Fulton Kingston Range, Pinyon: Arin Glass Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 112 First Street Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 793-9493 ais@aisgis.com in collaboration with California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program 1807 13th Street, Suite 202 Sacramento, CA 95811 and California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for this project was provided by: California Energy Commission US Bureau of Land Management California Wildlife Conservation Board California Department of Fish and Wildlife Personnel involved in developing the methodology and implementing this project included: Aerial Information Systems: Lisa Cotterman, Mark Fox, John Fulton, Arin Glass, Anne Hepburn, Ben Johnson, Debbie Johnson, John Menke, Lisa Morse, Mike Nelson, Ed Reyes, Janet Reyes, Patrick Yiu California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Diana Hickson, Todd Keeler‐Wolf, Anne Klein, Aicha Ougzin, Rosalie Yacoub California
    [Show full text]
  • Elicitoren Der Duftstoffemission Von Rainfarnpflanzen
    Elicitoren der Duftstoffemission von Rainfarnpflanzen Dissertation zur Erlangung des Dr. rer. nat. der Fakultät für Biologie, Chemie und Geowissenschaften der Universität Bayreuth vorgelegt von Dipl.-Biochem. Lienhard Mack aus Hamburg Bayreuth, im Januar 2012 Die vorliegende Arbeit wurde in der Zeit von September 2007 bis Januar 2012 unter Betreuung von Herrn Prof. Dr. Karlheinz Seifert am Lehrstuhl für Organische Chemie der Universität Bayreuth angefertigt. Vollständiger Abdruck der von der Fakultät für Biologie, Chemie und Geowissenschaften der Universität Bayreuth genehmigten Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doktors der Naturwissenschaften (Dr. rer. nat.). Dissertation eingereicht am: 16. 1. 2012 Zulassung durch die Prüfungskommission: 18. 1. 2012 Wissenschaftliches Kolloquium: 16. 4. 2012 Amtierender Dekan: Prof. Dr. Beate Lohnert Prüfungsausschuss: Prof. Dr. Karlheinz Seifert (Erstgutachter) PD Dr. Stefan Dötterl (Zweitgutachter) Prof. Dr. Carlo Unverzagt (Vorsitz) PD Dr. Gregor Aas Abkürzungsverzeichnis °C Grad Celsius ATP Adenosintriphosphat ADP Adenosindiphosphat bzw. beziehungsweise CDP Cytidyldiphosphat CLSA Closed-Loop-Stripping-Analysis ESI Elektrospray-Ionisation eV Elektronenvolt FG Frischgewicht FPP Farnesylpyrophosphat GPP Geranylpyrophosphat h Stunde HPLC High Preformance Liquid Chromatography Hz Hertz IPP Isopentenylpyrophosphat Me Methyl- mech. mechanisch MEP Methylerythritolphosphat MVA Mevalonat NADP+ Nicotinsäureamidadenindinucleotidphosphat (oxidierte Form) NADPH Nicotinsäureamidadenindinucleotidphosphat
    [Show full text]
  • Conceptual Design Documentation
    Appendix A: Conceptual Design Documentation APPENDIX A Conceptual Design Documentation June 2019 A-1 APPENDIX A: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN DOCUMENTATION The environmental analyses in the NEPA and CEQA documents for the proposed improvements at Oceano County Airport (the Airport) are based on conceptual designs prepared to provide a realistic basis for assessing their environmental consequences. 1. Widen runway from 50 to 60 feet 2. Widen Taxiways A, A-1, A-2, A-3, and A-4 from 20 to 25 feet 3. Relocate segmented circle and wind cone 4. Installation of taxiway edge lighting 5. Installation of hold position signage 6. Installation of a new electrical vault and connections 7. Installation of a pollution control facility (wash rack) CIVIL ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS The purpose of this conceptual design effort is to identify the amount of impervious surface, grading (cut and fill) and drainage implications of the projects identified above. The conceptual design calculations detailed in the following figures indicate that Projects 1 and 2, widening the runways and taxiways would increase the total amount of impervious surface on the Airport by 32,016 square feet, or 0.73 acres; a 6.6 percent increase in the Airport’s impervious surface area. Drainage patterns would remain the same as both the runway and taxiways would continue to sheet flow from their centerlines to the edge of pavement and then into open, grassed areas. The existing drainage system is able to accommodate the modest increase in stormwater runoff that would occur, particularly as soil conditions on the Airport are conducive to infiltration. Figure A-1 shows the locations of the seven projects incorporated in the Proposed Action.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Plants of Round Valley Regional Preserve Common Name Version
    Wild Plants of Round Valley Regional Preserve Common Name Version A Photographic Guide Sorted by Form, Color and Family with Habitat Descriptions and Identification Notes Photographs and text by Wilde Legard District Botanist, East Bay Regional Park District New Revised and Expanded Edition - Includes the latest scientific names, habitat descriptions and identification notes Decimal Inches .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 .5 2 .5 3 .5 4 .5 5 .5 6 .5 7 .5 8 .5 9 1/8 1/4 1/2 3/4 1 1/2 2 1/2 3 1/2 4 1/2 5 1/2 6 1/2 7 1/2 8 1/2 9 English Inches Notes: A Photographic Guide to the Wild Plants of Round Valley Regional Preserve More than 2,000 species of native and naturalized plants grow wild in the San Francisco Bay Area. Most are very difficult to identify without the help of good illustrations. This is designed to be a simple, color photo guide to help you identify some of these plants. This guide is published electronically in Adobe Acrobat® format so that it can easily be updated as additional photographs become available. You have permission to freely download, distribute and print this guide for individual use. Photographs are © 2014 Wilde Legard, all rights reserved. In this guide, the included plants are sorted first by form (Ferns & Fern-like, Grasses & Grass-like, Herbaceous, Woody), then by most common flower color, and finally by similar looking flowers (grouped by genus within each family). Each photograph has the following information, separated by '-': COMMON NAME According to The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition (JM2) and other references (not standardized).
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Monophyly and Biogeography of Cryptantha (Boraginaceae)
    Systematic Botany (2018), 43(1): pp. 53–76 © Copyright 2018 by the American Society of Plant Taxonomists DOI 10.1600/036364418X696978 Date of publication April 18, 2018 Evaluating the Monophyly and Biogeography of Cryptantha (Boraginaceae) Makenzie E. Mabry1,2 and Michael G. Simpson1 1Department of Biology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California 92182, U. S. A. 2Current address: Division of Biological Sciences and Bond Life Sciences Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211, U. S. A. Authors for correspondence (MMabry44@gmail.com; msimpson@mail.sdsu.edu) Abstract—Cryptantha, an herbaceous plant genus of the Boraginaceae, subtribe Amsinckiinae, has an American amphitropical disjunct distri- bution, found in western North America and western South America, but not in the intervening tropics. In a previous study, Cryptantha was found to be polyphyletic and was split into five genera, including a weakly supported, potentially non-monophyletic Cryptantha s. s. In this and subsequent studies of the Amsinckiinae, interrelationships within Cryptantha were generally not strongly supported and sample size was generally low. Here we analyze a greatly increased sampling of Cryptantha taxa using high-throughput, genome skimming data, in which we obtained the complete ribosomal cistron, the nearly complete chloroplast genome, and twenty-three mitochondrial genes. Our analyses have allowed for inference of clades within this complex with strong support. The occurrence of a non-monophyletic Cryptantha is confirmed, with three major clades obtained, termed here the Johnstonella/Albidae clade, the Maritimae clade, and a large Cryptantha core clade, each strongly supported as monophyletic. From these phylogenomic analyses, we assess the classification, character evolution, and phylogeographic history that elucidates the current amphitropical distribution of the group.
    [Show full text]
  • Guideline 410 Prohibited Plant List
    VENTURA COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 165 DURLEY AVENUE CAMARILLO, CA 93010 www.vcfd.org Office: 805-389-9738 Fax: 805-388-4356 GUIDELINE 410 PROHIBITED PLANT LIST This list was first published by the VCFD in 2014. It has been updated as of April 2019. It is intended to provide a list of plants and trees that are not allowed within a new required defensible space (DS) or fuel modification zone (FMZ). It is highly recommended that these plants and trees be thinned and or removed from existing DS and FMZs. In certain instances, the Fire Department may require the thinning and or removal. This list was prepared by Hunt Research Corporation and Dudek & Associates, and reviewed by Scott Franklin Consulting Co, VCFD has added some plants and has removed plants only listed due to freezing hazard. Please see notes after the list of plants. For questions regarding this list, please contact the Fire Hazard reduction Program (FHRP) Unit at 085-389-9759 or FHRP@ventura.org Prohibited plant list:Botanical Name Common Name Comment* Trees Abies species Fir F Acacia species (numerous) Acacia F, I Agonis juniperina Juniper Myrtle F Araucaria species (A. heterophylla, A. Araucaria (Norfolk Island Pine, Monkey F araucana, A. bidwillii) Puzzle Tree, Bunya Bunya) Callistemon species (C. citrinus, C. rosea, C. Bottlebrush (Lemon, Rose, Weeping) F viminalis) Calocedrus decurrens Incense Cedar F Casuarina cunninghamiana River She-Oak F Cedrus species (C. atlantica, C. deodara) Cedar (Atlas, Deodar) F Chamaecyparis species (numerous) False Cypress F Cinnamomum camphora Camphor F Cryptomeria japonica Japanese Cryptomeria F Cupressocyparis leylandii Leyland Cypress F Cupressus species (C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Supplement II December 2014
    The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Supplement II December 2014 In the pages that follow are treatments that have been revised since the publication of the Jepson eFlora, Revision 1 (July 2013). The information in these revisions is intended to supersede that in the second edition of The Jepson Manual (2012). The revised treatments, as well as errata and other small changes not noted here, are included in the Jepson eFlora (http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html). For a list of errata and small changes in treatments that are not included here, please see: http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/JM12_errata.html Citation for the entire Jepson eFlora: Jepson Flora Project (eds.) [year] Jepson eFlora, http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html [accessed on month, day, year] Citation for an individual treatment in this supplement: [Author of taxon treatment] 2014. [Taxon name], Revision 2, in Jepson Flora Project (eds.) Jepson eFlora, [URL for treatment]. Accessed on [month, day, year]. Copyright © 2014 Regents of the University of California Supplement II, Page 1 Summary of changes made in Revision 2 of the Jepson eFlora, December 2014 PTERIDACEAE *Pteridaceae key to genera: All of the CA members of Cheilanthes transferred to Myriopteris *Cheilanthes: Cheilanthes clevelandii D. C. Eaton changed to Myriopteris clevelandii (D. C. Eaton) Grusz & Windham, as native Cheilanthes cooperae D. C. Eaton changed to Myriopteris cooperae (D. C. Eaton) Grusz & Windham, as native Cheilanthes covillei Maxon changed to Myriopteris covillei (Maxon) Á. Löve & D. Löve, as native Cheilanthes feei T. Moore changed to Myriopteris gracilis Fée, as native Cheilanthes gracillima D.
    [Show full text]
  • Adenostoma Sparsifolium Torr. (Rosaceae), Arctostaphylos Peninsularis Wells (Ericaceae), Artemisia Tridentata Nutt
    66 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY Ceanothus greggii A. Gray (Rhamnaceae), Adenostoma sparsifolium Torr. (Rosaceae), Arctostaphylos peninsularis Wells (Ericaceae), Artemisia tridentata Nutt. (Asteraceae), Quercus chrysolepis Liebm. and Q. dumosa Nutt. (Fagaceae), and Pinus jefferyi Grev. & BaH. (Pinaceae). On 27 and 29 October 1989 the unmated females were caged at a site in the vicinity of Mike's Sky Ranch in the Sierra San Pedro Martir, approximately 170 km south of the international border. Despite sunny weather and at a similar elevation and floral com­ munity, no males were attracted. Two males were deposited as voucher specimens in both of the following institutions: Universidad Autonoma de Baja California Norte, Ensenada, Mexico, and the Essig Mu­ seum of Entomology, University of California, Berkeley. Eleven specimens are in the private collection of John Noble, Anaheim Hills, California; the remaining 22 specimens are in the collection of the author. RALPH E. WELLS, 303-8 Hoffman Street, Jackson, California 95642. Received for publication 10 February 1990; revised and accepted 15 March 1991. Journal of the Lepidopterists' SOCiety 45(1), 1991, 66-67 POSITIVE RELATION BETWEEN BODY SIZE AND ALTITUDE OF CAPTURE SITE IN TORTRICID MOTHS (TORTRICIDAE) Additional key words: North America, biometrics, ecology. Earlier I reported a positive correlation between forewing length and altitude of capture site in the Nearctic tortricid Eucosma agricolana (Walsingham) (Miller, W. E. 1974, Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 67:601-604). The all-male sample was transcontinental, with site altitudes ranging from near sea level on east and west coasts to more than 2700 m in the Rocky Mountains. Altitudes of capture came from labels of some specimens, and from topographic maps for others.
    [Show full text]
  • Adenostoma Fasciculatum Profile to Postv2.Xlsx
    I. SPECIES Adenostoma fasciculatum Hooker & Arnott NRCS CODE: ADFA Family: Rosaceae A. f. var. obtusifolium, Ron A. f. var. fasciculatum., Riverside Co., A. Montalvo, RCRCD Vanderhoff (Creative Order: Rosales Commons CC) Subclass: Rosidae Class: Magnoliopsida A. Subspecific taxa 1. Adenostoma fasciculatum var. fasciculatum Hook. & Arn. 1. ADFAF 2. A. f. var. obusifolium S. Watson 2. ADFAO 3. A. f. var. prostratum Dunkle 3. (no NRCS code) B. Synonyms 1. A. f. var. densifolium Eastw. 2. A. brevifolium Nutt. 3. none. Formerly included as part of A. f. var. f. C. Common name 1. chamise, common chamise, California greasewood, greasewood, chamiso (Painter 2016) 2. San Diego chamise (Calflora 2016) 3. prostrate chamise (Calflora 2016) Phylogenetic studies using molecular sequence data placedAdenostoma closest to Chamaebatiaria and D. Taxonomic relationships Sorbaria (Morgan et al. 1994, Potter et al. 2007) and suggest tentative placement in subfamily Spiraeoideae, tribe Sorbarieae (Potter et al. 2007). E. Related taxa in region Adenostoma sparsifolium Torrey, known as ribbon-wood or red-shanks is the only other species of Adenostoma in California. It is a much taller, erect to spreading shrub of chaparral vegetation, often 2–6 m tall and has a more restricted distribution than A. fasciculatum. It occurs from San Luis Obispo Co. south into Baja California. Red-shanks produces longer, linear leaves on slender long shoots rather than having leaves clustered on short shoots (lacks "fascicled" leaves). Its bark is cinnamon-colored and in papery layers that sheds in long ribbons. F. Taxonomic issues The Jepson eFlora and the FNA recognize A. f. var. prostratum but the taxon is not recognized by USDA PLANTS (2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Ceanothus Crassifolius Torrey NRCS CODE: Family: Rhamnaceae (CECR) Order: Rhamnales Subclass: Rosidae Class: Magnoliopsida
    I. SPECIES Ceanothus crassifolius Torrey NRCS CODE: Family: Rhamnaceae (CECR) Order: Rhamnales Subclass: Rosidae Class: Magnoliopsida Lower right: Ripening fruits, two already dehisced. Lower center: Longitudinal channeling in stems of old specimen, typical of obligate seeding Ceanothus (>25 yr since last fire). Note dark hypanthium in center of white flowers. Photos by A. Montalvo. A. Subspecific taxa 1. C. crassifolius Torr. var. crassifolius 2. C. crassifolius Torr. var. planus Abrams (there is no NRCS code for this taxon) B. Synonyms 1. C. verrucosus Nuttal var. crassifolius K. Brandegee (Munz & Keck 1968; Burge et al. 2013) 2. C. crassifolius (in part, USDA PLANTS 2019) C. Common name 1. hoaryleaf ceanothus, sometimes called thickleaf ceanothus or thickleaf wild lilac (Painter 2016) 2. same as above; flat-leaf hoary ceanothus and flat-leaf snowball ceanothus are applied to other taxa (Painter 2016) D. Taxonomic relationships Ceanothus is a diverse genus with over 50 taxa that cluster in to two subgenera. C. crassifolius has long been recognized as part of the Cerastes group of Ceanothus based on morphology, life-history, and crossing studies (McMinn 1939a, Nobs 1963). In phylogenetic analyses based on RNA and chloroplast DNA, Hardig et al. (2000) found C. crassifolius clustered into the Cerastes group and in each analysis shared a clade with C. ophiochilus. In molecular and morphological analyses, Burge et al. (2011) also found C. crassifolius clustered into Cerastes. Cerastes included over 20 taxa and numerous subtaxa in both studies. Eight Cerastes taxa occur in southern California (see I. E. Related taxa in region). E. Related taxa in region In southern California, the related Cerastes taxa include: C.
    [Show full text]
  • 2004 Vegetation Classification and Mapping of Peoria Wildlife Area
    Vegetation classification and mapping of Peoria Wildlife Area, South of New Melones Lake, Tuolumne County, California By Julie M. Evens, Sau San, and Jeanne Taylor Of California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 In Collaboration with John Menke Of Aerial Information Systems 112 First Street Redlands, CA 92373 November 2004 Table of Contents Introduction.................................................................................................................................................... 1 Vegetation Classification Methods................................................................................................................ 1 Study Area ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Figure 1. Survey area including Peoria Wildlife Area and Table Mountain .................................................. 2 Sampling ................................................................................................................................................ 3 Figure 2. Locations of the field surveys. ....................................................................................................... 4 Existing Literature Review ......................................................................................................................... 5 Cluster Analyses for Vegetation Classification .........................................................................................
    [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]