Final Report on Land Cover Mapping Methods: Map Zones 8 and 9

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Final Report on Land Cover Mapping Methods: Map Zones 8 and 9 The Pacific Northwest Regional Gap Analysis Project Final Report on Land Cover Mapping Methods: Map Zones 8 and 9 1 May, 2006 Institute for Natural Resources Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA USDA-PNW Forest Sciences Laboratory, Corvallis, OR, USA This report represents the land cover portion of the final project report for Map Zones 8 and 9 of the Pacific Northwest Regional Gap Analysis Project i Final Report on Land Cover Mapping Methods: Map Zones 8 and 9, Pacific Northwest ReGAP Authors: James S. Kagan.a* Janet A. Ohmannb* Mathew J. Gregoryc Claudine Tobalsked John C. Hakd Jeremy Friede a Institute for Natural Resources, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA b Pacific Northwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Corvallis, Oregon c Forest Science Department, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon d Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center, Oregon State University, Portland, Oregon e Pacific Northwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Portland, Oregon Recommended Citation: Kagan, J.S., J.A. Ohmann, M.J. Gregory, C. Tobalske, J.C. Hak, and J. Fried. 2006. Final Report on Land Cover Mapping Methods, Map Zones 8 and 9, PNW ReGAP. Institute for Natural Resources, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. Acknowledgements Much of this report is taken directly from the Southwest Regional Gap Analysis final report, by J.H. Lowry et al. (2006). The authors greatly appreciate their willingness to share their work. The work here was based on previous projects developed with other key individuals. Steve Knick and Steve Hanser of the USGS Snake River Field Station in Boise, both managed and facilitated the SageMap project, which provided the foundation of most of the vegetation data incorporated. SageMap relied heavily on the 15 year ESI project coordinated by the Burns District of the BLM, vegetation mapping by all the eastern Oregon and Washington National Forests, and shrub steppe mapping done by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Finally, Rex Crawford of the Washington Natural Heritage Program had a critical part in assuring the Washington portion of the map was not terrible. We gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the USGS BRD, Gap Analysis Program, without which completion of this project could not have been possible, and in particular, would also like to thank Jocelyn Aycrigg and Todd Sajwaj for their patience and support. ii Abstract For more than a decade the USGS Gap Analysis Program has focused considerable effort on mapping land cover to assist in the modeling of wildlife habitat and biodiversity for large geographic areas. The GAP Analysis Program has been traditionally state-centered; each state having the responsibility of implementing a project design for the geographic area within their state boundaries. The Northwest Regional Gap Analysis Project (NW ReGAP) is the third formal GAP project designed at a regional, multi-state scale, building off the work developed by the Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project (SW ReGAP). A land cover map was generated for USGS Map Zones 8 and 9, covering most of Eastern Washington and Eastern Oregon, parts of western Idaho, and most of northern Nevada. The map was derived from two primary components. The first was a combination of two large regional datasets: SageMap covering eastern Oregon and Washington, and southern Idaho and SW ReGAP, covering the northern Nevada portion of the Map Zone 9. These used regionally consistent geospatial data (Landsat ETM+ imagery and DEM derivatives), similar field data collection protocols, a standardized land cover legend, and a common modeling approach (decision tree classifier). The second was a Gradient Nearest Neighbor (GNN) modeling effort developed for the forests, based on the network of forest vegetation plots in the region. This report presents an overview of the process and methodologies used to create the land cover dataset and results and lessons learned from the different methodologies used. iii Table of Contents Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 Land Cover Map Development....................................................................................................... 2 Land Cover Mapping and GNN Modeling Results ...................................................................... 28 Results........................................................................................................................................... 34 Land Cover Map Validation ......................................................................................................... 38 Discussion..................................................................................................................................... 42 Literature Cited ............................................................................................................................. 50 Tables Table 1. Hierarchical structure of the U.S. NVC with ecological systems..................................... 7 Table 2. Number of forest condition plots used in GNN modeling in map zones 8 and 9........... 20 Table 3. Number of forest condition plots by Ecological Systems and GNN modeling regions.21 Table 4. Environmental and spectral variables used in GNN gradient models of forest composition................................................................................................................................... 22 Table 5. Area in hectares of Systems for Map Zone 8 sorted by Abundance.............................. 34 Table 6. Area in hectares of Systems for Map Zone 9 sorted by Abundance.............................. 36 Table 7. Error matrix for forest Ecological Systems* in map zones 8 and 9. ............................. 40 Table 8. Kappa statistics for forest Ecological Systems* in GNN Mapping Region 1 ............... 41 Table 9. Accuracy Assessement and Sample Size by Region for SageMap and PNW ReGAP . 42 Figures Figure 1. Mapping zone boundaries for SWReGAP land cover mapping effort........................... 3 Figure 2. Mapping zone boundaries for SageMap and NWGAP land cover mapping effort........ 4 Figure 3. SageMap Plot Samples: Collected: 5,000, Existing: 16,000, Total: 21,000. ................. 6 Figure 4. SWReGAP area showing Landsat ETM+ scenes........................................................... 9 Figure 5. NW Re GAP and SageMap area showing Landsat ETM+ scenes ............................... 11 Figure 6. SageMap area showing Landsat ETM+ scenes............................................................ 12 Figure 7. Overview of the NW ReGAP Mapping Process .......................................................... 18 Figure 8. Gradient Nearest Neighbor (GNN) modeling regions in map zones 8 and 9............... 25 Figure 9. Box Plot of 6 classes of overall shrub cover ............................................................... 31 Appendices Appendix A. Ecological Systems of Map Zones 8 and 9 Appendix B. Description of Core Set of Vegetation Variables for Forests Imputation Appendix C. Key to Classification of Plots to Ecological Systems Appendix D. Summary of Mapping Results iv Introduction In its "coarse filter" approach to conservation biology (Jenkins 1985, Noss 1987) gap analysis relies on maps of dominant land cover as the most fundamental spatial component of the analysis for terrestrial environments (Scott et al. 1993). For the purposes of GAP, most of the land cover of interest can be characterized as natural or semi-natural vegetation defined by the dominant plant species. Vegetation patterns are an integrated reflection of physical and chemical factors that shape the environment of a given land area (Whittaker 1965). Often vegetation patterns are determinants for overall biological diversity patterns (Franklin 1993, Levin 1981, Noss 1990) which can be used to delineate habitat types in conservation evaluations (Specht 1975, Austin 1991). As such, dominant vegetation types need to be recognized over their entire range of distribution (Bourgeron et al. 1994) for beta-scale analysis (sensu Whittaker 1960, 1977). Various methods may be used to map vegetation patterns on the landscape, the appropriate method depending on the scale and scope of the project. Projects focusing on smaller regions, such as national parks, may rely on aerial photo interpretation (USGS-NPS 1994). Mapping vegetation over larger regions has commonly been done using digital imagery obtained from satellites, and may be referred to as land cover mapping (Lins and Kleckner 1996). Generally, land cover mapping is done by segmenting the landscape into areas of relative homogeneity that correspond to land cover classes from an adopted or developed land cover legend. Technical methods to partition the landscape using digital imagery-based methods vary. Unsupervised approaches involve computer-assisted delineation of homogeneity in the imagery and ancillary data, followed by the analyst assigning land cover labels to the homogenous clusters of pixels (Jensen 2005). Supervised approaches utilize representative samples of each land cover class to partition the imagery and ancillary data into clusters of pixels representing each land cover class. Supervised clustering algorithms assign membership of each pixel to a land cover class based on some rule of highest likelihood (Jensen 2005). Supervised- unsupervised hybrid approaches are common and often offer advantages over both approaches (Lillesand and
Recommended publications
  • ANTC Environmental Assessment
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-B010-2013-0024-EA Telecommunication Facilities at Kingston, Dyer, and Hickison Summit July 2013 Applicant: Arizona Nevada Tower Corporation 6220 McLeod Drive Ste. 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89120 Battle Mountain District Bureau of Land Management 50 Bastian Road Battle Mountain, Nevada 89820 Table of Contents Page Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Background 1 1.3 Identifying Information 2 1.4 Location of Proposed Action 2 1.5 Preparing Office 2 1.6 Case File Numbers 2 1.7 Applicant 2 1.8 Proposed Action Summary 3 1.9 Conformance 3 1.10 Purpose & Need 3 1.11 Scoping, Public Involvement & Issues 4 Chapter 2 Proposed Action & Alternatives 11 2.1 Proposed Action 11 2.1.1 Best Management Practices 13 2.2 No Action Alternative 13 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis 14 Chapter 3 Affected Environment & Environmental Consequences 15 3.1 Project Site Descriptions 15 3.2 Issues 16 3.2.1 Air Quality 18 3.2.1.1 Affected Environment 18 3.2.1.2 Environmental Consequences 18 3.2.2 Cultural/Historical Resources 18 3.2.2.1 Affected Environment 18 3.2.2.2 Environmental Consequences 18 3.2.3 Noxious Weeds/Invasive Non-native Plants 19 3.2.3.1 Affected Environment 19 3.2.3.2 Environmental Consequences 20 3.2.4 Native American Religious Concerns 20 3.2.4.1 Affected Environment 20 3.2.4.2 Environmental Consequences 20 3.2.5 Migratory Birds 21 3.2.5.1 Affected Environment 21 3.2.5.2 Environmental Consequences 22 3.2.6 Solid/Hazardous
    [Show full text]
  • Resemblance and Camouflage in Graeco-Roman Antiquity 169
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Institutional Research Information System University of Turin Sign Systems Studies 38(1/4), 2010 1 2 3 4 5 6 Resemblance and camouflage 7 in Graeco-Roman antiquity 8 Massimo Leone 9 Department of Philosophy, University of Turin 10 Via S. Ottavio 20, 10124, Torino, Italy 11 e-mail: [email protected] 12 13 Abstract. In the twenty-eighth book of the Naturalis Historia Pliny the Elder 14 claims that, if a chameleon’s left leg is roasted together with a herb bearing the 15 same name, and everything is mixed with ointment, cut in lozenges, and stored in 16 a wooden little box, this will bestow on those who own it a perfect camouflage. 17 The ring of Gyges (Plato, etc.), that of Midas (Pliny), the heliotropium (Pliny), the 18 dracontitis (Philostratus): ancient cultures abound with references to objects, 19 recipes, and techniques able to bestow different kinds of invisibility, meant as a 20 perfect resemblance with the environment. At the same time, these same cultures 21 also teem with references to how to avert the perfect camouflage: for instance, by 22 being endowed with a pupula duplex, a double pupil (Ovid). 23 The paper explores such vast corpus of texts from the point of view of a 24 semiotics of cultures, in order to track the roots of a conception of camouflage 25 that, from these ancient cultures on, develops through intricate paths into the 26 contemporary imaginaires (and practices) of invisibility.
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Hampton-Seabrook Estuary Habitat Restoration Compendium Alyson L
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans, and Space PREP Reports & Publications (EOS) 2009 Hampton-Seabrook Estuary Habitat Restoration Compendium Alyson L. Eberhardt University of New Hampshire - Main Campus, [email protected] David M. Burdick University of New Hampshire - Main Campus, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/prep Part of the Marine Biology Commons Recommended Citation Eberhardt, Alyson L. and Burdick, David M., "Hampton-Seabrook Estuary Habitat Restoration Compendium" (2009). PREP Reports & Publications. 102. https://scholars.unh.edu/prep/102 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans, and Space (EOS) at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in PREP Reports & Publications by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Hampton-Seabrook Estuary Habitat Restoration Compendium Alyson L. Eberhardt and David M. Burdick University of New Hampshire This project was funded by the NOAA Restoration Center in conjunction with the Coastal Zone Management Act by NOAA’s Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management in conjunction with the New Hampshire Coastal Program and US Environmental Protection Agency’s National Estuary Program through an agreement with the University of New Hampshire Hampton-Seabrook
    [Show full text]
  • Perennial Pepperweed Lepidium Latifolium L
    perennial pepperweed Lepidium latifolium L. Synonyms: Cardaria latifolia (L.) Spach, Lepidium affine Ledebour, L. latifolium ssp. affine (Ledebour) Kitagawa, L. latifolium var. affine (Ledebour) C. A. Meyer, L. latifolium ssp. sibiricum Thellung, L. sibiricum Schweigger (1812), not Pallas (1776). Other common names: broadleaved pepperweed, broadleaved peppergrass, peppergrass mustard, perennial peppercress, tall whitetop, Virginia pepperweed Family: Brassicaceae Invasiveness Rank: 71 The invasiveness rank is calculated based on a species’ ecological impacts, biological attributes, distribution, and response to control measures. The ranks are scaled from 0 to 100, with 0 representing a plant that poses no threat to native ecosystems and 100 representing a plant that poses a major threat to native ecosystems. Description Perennial pepperweed grows from a widely spreading root system. Stems are numerous, erect, and 30 ½ to 91 cm tall. Basal leaves are entire to evenly toothed, up to 30 ½ cm long, and 5 to 7 ½ cm wide. Petioles are nearly equal to the blades in length. Stem leaves are reduced in size and lack petioles. Plants form dense clusters of flowers in pyramidal panicles. Flowers are white, very small, and approximately 1.5 mm long. Each fruit (silicle) contains 2 seeds (Douglas et al. 1998, Renz 2000, Whitson et al. 2000). Basal rosettes of Lepidium latifolium L. Photo by L. Mehrhoff. Ecological Impact Impact on community composition, structure, and interactions: Perennial pepperweed creates large, monospecific stands that displace native plants and animals (Corliss 1993, Renz 2000). Stands of perennial pepperweed increase the salt content of surrounding soil, favoring halophytes and eliminating other species. Infestations change plant species composition and diversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Oriental Bittersweet Orientalcelastrus Bittersweet Orbiculatus Controlcontrol Guidelinesguidelines
    Oriental bittersweet OrientalCelastrus bittersweet orbiculatus ControlControl GuidelinesGuidelines NH Department of Agriculture, Markets & Food, Division of Plant Industry, 29 Hazen Dr, Concord, NH 03301 (603) 271-3488 Common Name: Oriental Bittersweet Latin Name: Celastrus orbiculatus New Hampshire Invasive Species Status: Prohibited (Agr 3800) Native to: Japan, China, Korea Photos by: Douglas Cygan Description: Deciduous vine reaching heights of 40-60'. Bark: Tannish, furrowed. Leaves: Alternate, ovate, bluntly toothed, 3-4'' long by 2/3’s as wide, tapered at the base. Flowers: Small, greenish, blooming in spring. Fruit: Yellow dehiscent capsule surrounding an orange-red aril. Fruits occur in the axils of the stems whereas native bittersweet (Celastrus scandens) fruits at the ends. Zone: 4-8. Habitat: Disturbed edges, roadsides, fields, forests and along rivers and streams. Spread: Birds and humans. Comments: Very aggressive, climbs up and over trees and smothers them. Do not buy wreaths made of these vines. Controls: Difficult to manage. Cutting, pulling, or recommended herbicide use applied to foliage, bark, or cut-stump. General Considerations The introduction of Oriental bittersweet to non infested areas is generally associated with birds and small mammals feeding on the abundant fruits in the fall and excreting the seeds as they move from one area to another. Dispersal is also associated with human activities where earth moving activities occur or when the vines and fruits are collected in the fall for ornamental wreathes and decorations (which is prohibited) and then carelessly discarded. Seed viability and germination rate is relatively high at 90% in the spring of the subsequent growing season, but drops off significantly the following year.
    [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]
  • OCR Document
    Abelmoschus-Allium 1 Abelmoschus manihot white-yellow to 2m 110 69 Agastache pallidiflora ssp neomexicana lavender-pink 2 Abies koreana yellow dwarf 50 x 20cm 161 45-75cm 258 3 Acaena myriophylla greenish 15-25cm 106 70 rugosa rose/violet to 120cm 253 4 sericea purple fls/silver lvs 6-25cm 62 242 71 rugosa 'Golden Jubilee' blue-purple/chartreuse lvs 100cm 236 5 Acantholimon araxanum pink 15-20cm 243 72 rugosa 'Honey Bee Blue' blue 60-90cm 130 6 armenum pink/white 10-20cm 233 73 rugosa 'Liquorice Blue' deep blue 60-75cm 130 7 capitatum pink 4-18cm 242 74 rupestris pink-orange 60cm 205 8 halophilum light pink 5-10cm 233 75 rupestris 'Apache Sunset' dp orange/rose purple 45-60cm 149 9 hohenackeri pink 5-10cm 243 76 Ageratum houstonianum white 30-80cm 227 10 kotschyi pink 5-10cm 67 77 Agoseris glauca yellow 5-60cm 67 11 litvinovii pale pink 5-15cm 242 78 grandiflora yellow 25-60cm 227 12 saxifragiforme deep pink 5-10cm 6 79 Agrimonia pilosa v pilosa yellow 30-120cm 256 13 sp white 5cm 6 80 Akebia quinata 'Variegata' cream marbled lvs to 12m 259 14 sp ex Ala Dag pink 5cm 6 81 Albuca humilis white/green 15cm 140 15 venustum pink 10-15cm 233 82 shawii yellow 30-45cm > 16 Acanthus hungaricus pink/mauve to 1.5m 56 83 sp ex JCA 15856 white/green 15cm 105 17 Acer griseum to 12m 229 84 Alcea rosea mix 2-3m 34 18 palmatum 'Sango-kaku' 6-7.5m 198 85 rosea pink 2-3m 238 19 palmatum v dissectum 'Crimson Queen' to 3m 149 86 rosea 'Nigra' dark maroon 1.5-2m 34 20 Achillea clavennae white to 25cm 51 87 rosea spp ficifolia yellow/orange to 2.25m 34 21 millefolium
    [Show full text]
  • National Wetlands Inventory Map Report for Quinault Indian Nation
    National Wetlands Inventory Map Report for Quinault Indian Nation Project ID(s): R01Y19P01: Quinault Indian Nation, fiscal year 2019 Project area The project area (Figure 1) is restricted to the Quinault Indian Nation, bounded by Grays Harbor Co. Jefferson Co. and the Olympic National Park. Appendix A: USGS 7.5-minute Quadrangles: Queets, Salmon River West, Salmon River East, Matheny Ridge, Tunnel Island, O’Took Prairie, Thimble Mountain, Lake Quinault West, Lake Quinault East, Taholah, Shale Slough, Macafee Hill, Stevens Creek, Moclips, Carlisle. • < 0. Figure 1. QIN NWI+ 2019 project area (red outline). Source Imagery: Citation: For all quads listed above: See Appendix A Citation Information: Originator: USDA-FSA-APFO Aerial Photography Field Office Publication Date: 2017 Publication place: Salt Lake City, Utah Title: Digital Orthoimagery Series of Washington Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: raster digital data Other_Citation_Details: 1-meter and 1-foot, Natural Color and NIR-False Color Collateral Data: . USGS 1:24,000 topographic quadrangles . USGS – NHD – National Hydrography Dataset . USGS Topographic maps, 2013 . QIN LiDAR DEM (3 meter) and synthetic stream layer, 2015 . Previous National Wetlands Inventories for the project area . Soil Surveys, All Hydric Soils: Weyerhaeuser soil survey 1976, NRCS soil survey 2013 . QIN WET tables, field photos, and site descriptions, 2016 to 2019, Janice Martin, and Greg Eide Inventory Method: Wetland identification and interpretation was done “heads-up” using ArcMap versions 10.6.1. US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping contractors in Portland, Oregon completed the original aerial photo interpretation and wetland mapping. Primary authors: Nicholas Jones of SWCA Environmental Consulting. 100% Quality Control (QC) during the NWI mapping was provided by Michael Holscher of SWCA Environmental Consulting.
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands 1996
    National List of Vascular Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary Indicator by Region and Subregion Scientific Name/ North North Central South Inter- National Subregion Northeast Southeast Central Plains Plains Plains Southwest mountain Northwest California Alaska Caribbean Hawaii Indicator Range Abies amabilis (Dougl. ex Loud.) Dougl. ex Forbes FACU FACU UPL UPL,FACU Abies balsamea (L.) P. Mill. FAC FACW FAC,FACW Abies concolor (Gord. & Glend.) Lindl. ex Hildebr. NI NI NI NI NI UPL UPL Abies fraseri (Pursh) Poir. FACU FACU FACU Abies grandis (Dougl. ex D. Don) Lindl. FACU-* NI FACU-* Abies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt. NI NI FACU+ FACU- FACU FAC UPL UPL,FAC Abies magnifica A. Murr. NI UPL NI FACU UPL,FACU Abildgaardia ovata (Burm. f.) Kral FACW+ FAC+ FAC+,FACW+ Abutilon theophrasti Medik. UPL FACU- FACU- UPL UPL UPL UPL UPL NI NI UPL,FACU- Acacia choriophylla Benth. FAC* FAC* Acacia farnesiana (L.) Willd. FACU NI NI* NI NI FACU Acacia greggii Gray UPL UPL FACU FACU UPL,FACU Acacia macracantha Humb. & Bonpl. ex Willd. NI FAC FAC Acacia minuta ssp. minuta (M.E. Jones) Beauchamp FACU FACU Acaena exigua Gray OBL OBL Acalypha bisetosa Bertol. ex Spreng. FACW FACW Acalypha virginica L. FACU- FACU- FAC- FACU- FACU- FACU* FACU-,FAC- Acalypha virginica var. rhomboidea (Raf.) Cooperrider FACU- FAC- FACU FACU- FACU- FACU* FACU-,FAC- Acanthocereus tetragonus (L.) Humm. FAC* NI NI FAC* Acanthomintha ilicifolia (Gray) Gray FAC* FAC* Acanthus ebracteatus Vahl OBL OBL Acer circinatum Pursh FAC- FAC NI FAC-,FAC Acer glabrum Torr. FAC FAC FAC FACU FACU* FAC FACU FACU*,FAC Acer grandidentatum Nutt.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plant List
    UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plants Below is the most recently updated plant list for UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve. * non-native taxon ? presence in question Listed Species Information: CNPS Listed - as designated by the California Rare Plant Ranks (formerly known as CNPS Lists). More information at http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/ranking.php Cal IPC Listed - an inventory that categorizes exotic and invasive plants as High, Moderate, or Limited, reflecting the level of each species' negative ecological impact in California. More information at http://www.cal-ipc.org More information about Federal and State threatened and endangered species listings can be found at https://www.fws.gov/endangered/ (US) and http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/ t_e_spp/ (CA). FAMILY NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME LISTED Ferns AZOLLACEAE - Mosquito Fern American water fern, mosquito fern, Family Azolla filiculoides ? Mosquito fern, Pacific mosquitofern DENNSTAEDTIACEAE - Bracken Hairy brackenfern, Western bracken Family Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens fern DRYOPTERIDACEAE - Shield or California wood fern, Coastal wood wood fern family Dryopteris arguta fern, Shield fern Common horsetail rush, Common horsetail, field horsetail, Field EQUISETACEAE - Horsetail Family Equisetum arvense horsetail Equisetum telmateia ssp. braunii Giant horse tail, Giant horsetail Pentagramma triangularis ssp. PTERIDACEAE - Brake Family triangularis Gold back fern Gymnosperms CUPRESSACEAE - Cypress Family Hesperocyparis macrocarpa Monterey cypress CNPS - 1B.2, Cal IPC
    [Show full text]
  • Spiranthes Diluvialis) and for Designated Weeds
    2000 Survey of BLM-Managed Public Lands in Southwestern Wyoming for Ute Ladies Tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) and for Designated Weeds Report Prepared for the BLM Rock Springs Field Office by George P. Jones, Wyoming Natural Diversity Database (University of Wyoming) in partial fulfillment of Cooperative Agreement K910A970018, Task Order TO-13 April 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT.........................................................................................................................i BACKGROUND................................................................................................................. 1 METHODS.......................................................................................................................... 1 RESULTS............................................................................................................................ 2 SPIRANTHES DILUVALIS .................................................................................. 2 WEEDS ................................................................................................................... 2 DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................................... 2 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................... 3 APPENDIX 1: DESCRIPTIONS OF STREAM SEGMENTS .........................................8 APPENDIX 2: ABUNDANCE OF THE DESIGNATED WEEDS IN EACH STREAM SEGMENT........................................................................................................................18
    [Show full text]