DOCSLIB.ORG

E-979 White-Tailed Deer Habitat Evaluation and Management Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
E-979 White-Tailed Deer Habitat Evaluation and Management Guide E-979 White-tailedWhite-tailedWhite-tailed DeerDeerDeer HabitatHabitatHabitat EvaluationEvaluationEvaluation andandand ManagementManagementManagement GuideGuideGuide Oklahoma State University Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service White-tailedWhite-tailedWhite-tailed DeerDeerDeer HabitatHabitatHabitat EvaluationEvaluationEvaluation andandand ManagementManagementManagement GuideGuideGuide Terrence G. Bidwell Professor and State Extension Specialist Rangeland Ecology and Management Dwayne R. Elmore Assistant Professor and State Extension Specialist Wildlife Ecology and Management Erik M. Bartholomew Big Game Biologist Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation Acknowledgement: The White-tailed Deer Habitat Evaluation and Management Guide was originated by Dr. Billy Teels, while he was State Biologist for the USDA-Soil Conservation Service (now NRCS) in Oklahoma. The authors greatly appreciate Dr. Teels’ efforts in initiating the habitat evaluation concept in Oklahoma and the friendship and leadership he provided while working here. Additionally, while serving as the OSU Extension Wildlife Specialist, Dr. Ron Masters, coauthored an amended version of the White-tailed Deer Habitat Evaluation and Management Guide. This document thus represents the 3rd edition and relies heavily on the earlier versions with a few minor changes and additions. Cover photos: Front cover courtesy Colin Berg, ODWC. Back cover courtesy Eric Hiner. We are always striving to better serve our stakeholders’ needs. Please provide us feedback about this NREM document by completing a brief survey on the website: http://www.dasnr.okstate.edu/nremsurveys/ned. It should only require a couple of minutes of your time, and no identifying information will be asked of you. Your comments will be used to provide a higher quality of service in the future. Thank you. Oklahoma State University, in compliance with Title VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Executive Order 11246 as amended, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and other federal laws and regulations, does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, age, religion, disability, or status as a veteran in any of its policies, practices, or procedures. This includes but is not limited to admissions, employment, financial aid, and educational services. Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Robert E. Whitson, Director of Cooperative Extension Service, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma. This publication is printed and issued by Oklahoma State University as authorized by the Vice President, Dean, and Director of the Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources and has been prepared and distributed at a cost of $2.28 per copy. 0611 GH Revised. White-tailed Deer Habitat Evaluation and Management Guide Overview of White-tailed Deer Habitat Management ............................................. 1 Was it Ever Good White-tailed Deer Habitat? .......................................................................................................................... 1 Is the Land in Question Still White-tailed Deer Habitat? ........................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 2 Home Range and Carrying Capacity ........................................................................ 2 Habitat Requirements ............................................................................................. 2 Protective Cover .................................................................................................................................................2 Protective Cover Criteria ................................................................................................................................................. 2 Food..................................................................................................................................................................3 Food Criteria .................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Water ................................................................................................................................................................4 Water Criteria ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Other Requirements ................................................................................................ 5 Interspersion .....................................................................................................................................................5 References Cited ..................................................................................................... 5 Important Deer Foods in Oklahoma ........................................................................ 7 General Instructions ............................................................................................. 12 Instructions for Completing the White-tailed Deer Habitat Evaluation Form ...... 13 Protective Cover ...............................................................................................................................................13 Food Criteria ....................................................................................................................................................13 Food Quantity ...............................................................................................................................................................13 Soil Potential .................................................................................................................................................................15 Light Intensity ..............................................................................................................................................................15 Food Variety .................................................................................................................................................................15 Food Use ......................................................................................................................................................................15 Water ...........................................................................................................................................................15 Water Persistence .........................................................................................................................................................15 Interspersion ...................................................................................................................................................15 Interspersion Index .......................................................................................................................................................15 Habitat Proportion Index ...............................................................................................................................................15 White-tailed Deer Habitat Evaluation Form .......................................................... 16 Summary of Limiting Factors for White-tailed Deer ............................................. 18 Land Management Practices to Correct Limiting Factor(s) .................................. 19 Notes ..................................................................................................................... 20 Duck and Fletcher Map ................................................................. Inside Back Cover Overview of White- sites (soils that produce similar native plant communities) using information from the Soil Survey or Ecological Site tailed Deer Habitat Guides to determine the potential of each Ecological Site to make good white-tailed deer habitat. Management On historically forested or woodland sites, use the Forest/Woodland Site Index number. Site Index is defined The Habitat Evaluation section that starts on page as the height a tree will grow in a specific time. It is 16 will help you identify specific limitations of the habitat on considered with ecological factors that reference capacity your property for white-tailed deer. However, there are some to produce forests or other vegetation; the combination of preliminary observations that can aid in accessing a property’s biotic, climatic, and soil conditions of an area (Society of potential for good white-tailed deer habitat. The following will American Foresters 1958). help in assessing the potential for white-tailed deer. Note that a site index is specific to a particular tree species. A site index based on one age cannot be converted Was it Ever Good White-tailed Deer to another base according to any simple numerical relationship. For example, site index 60 for post oak on a Habitat? 50-year basis (post oak can grow 60 feet tall in 50 years) is Some landowners have purchased land for the purposes not the same thing as site index 120 for bald cypress on a of managing white-tailed
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pima County Plant List (2020) Common Name Exotic? Source
    Pima County Plant List (2020) Common Name Exotic? Source McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abies concolor var. concolor White fir Devender, T. R. (2005) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abies lasiocarpa var. arizonica Corkbark fir Devender, T. R. (2005) Abronia villosa Hariy sand verbena McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abutilon abutiloides Shrubby Indian mallow Devender, T. R. (2005) Abutilon berlandieri Berlandier Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) Abutilon incanum Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abutilon malacum Yellow Indian mallow Devender, T. R. (2005) Abutilon mollicomum Sonoran Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) Abutilon palmeri Palmer Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) Abutilon parishii Pima Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Abutilon parvulum Dwarf Indian mallow Herbarium; ASU Vascular Plant Herbarium Abutilon pringlei McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Abutilon reventum Yellow flower Indian mallow Herbarium; ASU Vascular Plant Herbarium McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia angustissima Whiteball acacia Devender, T. R. (2005); DBGH McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia constricta Whitethorn acacia Devender, T. R. (2005) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia greggii Catclaw acacia Devender, T. R. (2005) Acacia millefolia Santa Rita acacia McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia neovernicosa Chihuahuan whitethorn acacia Devender, T. R. (2005) McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Acalypha lindheimeri Shrubby copperleaf Herbarium Acalypha neomexicana New Mexico copperleaf McLaughlin, S. (1992); DBGH Acalypha ostryaefolia McLaughlin, S. (1992) Acalypha pringlei McLaughlin, S. (1992) Acamptopappus McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Rayless goldenhead sphaerocephalus Herbarium Acer glabrum Douglas maple McLaughlin, S. (1992); DBGH Acer grandidentatum Sugar maple McLaughlin, S. (1992); DBGH Acer negundo Ashleaf maple McLaughlin, S.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plants and a Brief History of the Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands
    United States Department of Agriculture Vascular Plants and a Brief Forest Service Rocky Mountain History of the Kiowa and Rita Research Station General Technical Report Blanca National Grasslands RMRS-GTR-233 December 2009 Donald L. Hazlett, Michael H. Schiebout, and Paulette L. Ford Hazlett, Donald L.; Schiebout, Michael H.; and Ford, Paulette L. 2009. Vascular plants and a brief history of the Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS- GTR-233. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 44 p. Abstract Administered by the USDA Forest Service, the Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands occupy 230,000 acres of public land extending from northeastern New Mexico into the panhandles of Oklahoma and Texas. A mosaic of topographic features including canyons, plateaus, rolling grasslands and outcrops supports a diverse flora. Eight hundred twenty six (826) species of vascular plant species representing 81 plant families are known to occur on or near these public lands. This report includes a history of the area; ethnobotanical information; an introductory overview of the area including its climate, geology, vegetation, habitats, fauna, and ecological history; and a plant survey and information about the rare, poisonous, and exotic species from the area. A vascular plant checklist of 816 vascular plant taxa in the appendix includes scientific and common names, habitat types, and general distribution data for each species. This list is based on extensive plant collections and available herbarium collections. Authors Donald L. Hazlett is an ethnobotanist, Director of New World Plants and People consulting, and a research associate at the Denver Botanic Gardens, Denver, CO.
    [Show full text]
  • Illustrated Flora of East Texas Illustrated Flora of East Texas
    ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS IS PUBLISHED WITH THE SUPPORT OF: MAJOR BENEFACTORS: DAVID GIBSON AND WILL CRENSHAW DISCOVERY FUND U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION (NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, USDA FOREST SERVICE) TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT SCOTT AND STUART GENTLING BENEFACTORS: NEW DOROTHEA L. LEONHARDT FOUNDATION (ANDREA C. HARKINS) TEMPLE-INLAND FOUNDATION SUMMERLEE FOUNDATION AMON G. CARTER FOUNDATION ROBERT J. O’KENNON PEG & BEN KEITH DORA & GORDON SYLVESTER DAVID & SUE NIVENS NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY OF TEXAS DAVID & MARGARET BAMBERGER GORDON MAY & KAREN WILLIAMSON JACOB & TERESE HERSHEY FOUNDATION INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT: AUSTIN COLLEGE BOTANICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF TEXAS SID RICHARDSON CAREER DEVELOPMENT FUND OF AUSTIN COLLEGE II OTHER CONTRIBUTORS: ALLDREDGE, LINDA & JACK HOLLEMAN, W.B. PETRUS, ELAINE J. BATTERBAE, SUSAN ROBERTS HOLT, JEAN & DUNCAN PRITCHETT, MARY H. BECK, NELL HUBER, MARY MAUD PRICE, DIANE BECKELMAN, SARA HUDSON, JIM & YONIE PRUESS, WARREN W. BENDER, LYNNE HULTMARK, GORDON & SARAH ROACH, ELIZABETH M. & ALLEN BIBB, NATHAN & BETTIE HUSTON, MELIA ROEBUCK, RICK & VICKI BOSWORTH, TONY JACOBS, BONNIE & LOUIS ROGNLIE, GLORIA & ERIC BOTTONE, LAURA BURKS JAMES, ROI & DEANNA ROUSH, LUCY BROWN, LARRY E. JEFFORDS, RUSSELL M. ROWE, BRIAN BRUSER, III, MR. & MRS. HENRY JOHN, SUE & PHIL ROZELL, JIMMY BURT, HELEN W. JONES, MARY LOU SANDLIN, MIKE CAMPBELL, KATHERINE & CHARLES KAHLE, GAIL SANDLIN, MR. & MRS. WILLIAM CARR, WILLIAM R. KARGES, JOANN SATTERWHITE, BEN CLARY, KAREN KEITH, ELIZABETH & ERIC SCHOENFELD, CARL COCHRAN, JOYCE LANEY, ELEANOR W. SCHULTZE, BETTY DAHLBERG, WALTER G. LAUGHLIN, DR. JAMES E. SCHULZE, PETER & HELEN DALLAS CHAPTER-NPSOT LECHE, BEVERLY SENNHAUSER, KELLY S. DAMEWOOD, LOGAN & ELEANOR LEWIS, PATRICIA SERLING, STEVEN DAMUTH, STEVEN LIGGIO, JOE SHANNON, LEILA HOUSEMAN DAVIS, ELLEN D.
    [Show full text]
  • Floristic Surveys of Saguaro National Park Protected Natural Areas
    Floristic Surveys of Saguaro National Park Protected Natural Areas William L. Halvorson and Brooke S. Gebow, editors Technical Report No. 68 United States Geological Survey Sonoran Desert Field Station The University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona USGS Sonoran Desert Field Station The University of Arizona, Tucson The Sonoran Desert Field Station (SDFS) at The University of Arizona is a unit of the USGS Western Ecological Research Center (WERC). It was originally established as a National Park Service Cooperative Park Studies Unit (CPSU) in 1973 with a research staff and ties to The University of Arizona. Transferred to the USGS Biological Resources Division in 1996, the SDFS continues the CPSU mission of providing scientific data (1) to assist U.S. Department of Interior land management agencies within Arizona and (2) to foster cooperation among all parties overseeing sensitive natural and cultural resources in the region. It also is charged with making its data resources and researchers available to the interested public. Seventeen such field stations in California, Arizona, and Nevada carry out WERC’s work. The SDFS provides a multi-disciplinary approach to studies in natural and cultural sciences. Principal cooperators include the School of Renewable Natural Resources and the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at The University of Arizona. Unit scientists also hold faculty or research associate appointments at the university. The Technical Report series distributes information relevant to high priority regional resource management needs. The series presents detailed accounts of study design, methods, results, and applications possibly not accommodated in the formal scientific literature. Technical Reports follow SDFS guidelines and are subject to peer review and editing.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to Native Plants for the Santa Fe Landscape
    A Guide to Native Plants for the Santa Fe Landscape Penstemon palmeri Photo by Tracy Neal Santa Fe Native Plant Project Santa Fe Master Gardener Association Santa Fe, New Mexico March 15, 2018 www.sfmga.org Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ii Chapter 1 – Annuals and Biennials ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Chapter 2 – Cacti and Succulents ........................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 3 – Grasses ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 4 – Ground Covers .................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 5 – Perennials......................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 6 – Shrubs .............................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tobusch Fishhook Cactus Species Status Assessment - Final
    Tobusch Fishhook Cactus Species Status Assessment - Final SPECIES STATUS ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR TOBUSCH FISHHOOK CACTUS (SCLEROCACTUS BREVIHAMATUS SSP. TOBUSCHII (W.T. MARSHALL) N.P. TAYLOR) February, 2017 Southwest Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, NM Tobusch Fishhook Cactus Species Status Assessment - Final Prepared by Chris Best, Austin Ecological Services Field Office, Suggested citation: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. Species status assessment of Tobusch Fishhook Cactus (Sclerocactus brevihamatus ssp. tobuschii (W.T. Marshall) N.P. Taylor). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southwest Region, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 65 pp. + 2 appendices. i Tobusch Fishhook Cactus Species Status Assessment - Final EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Tobusch fishhook cactus is a small cactus, with curved “fishhook” spines, that is endemic to the Edwards Plateau of Texas. It was federally listed as endangered on November 7, 1979 (44 FR 64736) as Ancistrocactus tobuschii. At that time, fewer than 200 individuals had been documented from 4 sites. Tobusch fishhook cactus is now confirmed in 8 central Texas counties: Bandera, Edwards, Kerr, Kimble, Kinney, Real, Uvalde, and Val Verde. In recent years, over 4,000 individuals have been documented in surveys and monitoring plots. Recent phylogenetic evidence supports classifying Tobusch fishhook cactus as Sclerocactus brevihamatus ssp. tobuschii. It is distinguished morphologically from its closest relative, S. brevihamatus ssp. brevihamatus, on the basis of yellow versus pink- or brown-tinged flowers, fewer radial spines, and fewer ribs. Additionally, subspecies tobuschii is endemic to limestone outcrops of the Edwards Plateau, while subspecies brevihamatus occurs in alluvial soils in the Tamaulipan Shrublands and Chihuahuan Desert. A recent investigation found genetic divergence between the two subspecies, although they may interact genetically in a narrow area where their ranges overlap.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant List for MARSHALL County, Oklahoma
    Plant List for MARSHALL County, Oklahoma Family Genus Species Common Name Acanthaceae Justicia americana American water-willow Acanthaceae Ruellia humilis fringeleaf wild petunia Acanthaceae Ruellia strepens limestone wild petunia Aceraceae Acer negundo boxelder Agavaceae Yucca glauca soapweed yucca Alismataceae Alisma subcordatum American water plantain Alismataceae Echinodorus berteroi upright burrhead Alismataceae Sagittaria brevirostra shortbeak arrowhead Alismataceae Sagittaria latifolia broadleaf arrowhead Amaranthaceae Amaranthus albus prostrate pigweed Amaranthaceae Amaranthus palmeri carelessweed Amaranthaceae Amaranthus retroflexus redroot amaranth Amaranthaceae Amaranthus tuberculatus roughfruit amaranth Amaranthaceae Froelichia floridana plains snakecotton Amaranthaceae Froelichia gracilis slender snakecotton Anacardiaceae Rhus aromatica fragrant sumac Anacardiaceae Rhus copallinum flameleaf sumac Anacardiaceae Rhus glabra smooth sumac Anacardiaceae Rhus trilobata skunkbush sumac Anacardiaceae Toxicodendron radicans eastern poison ivy Apiaceae Ammoselinum butleri Butler's sandparsley Apiaceae Ammoselinum popei plains sandparsley Apiaceae Bifora americana prairie bishop Apiaceae Chaerophyllum tainturieri hairyfruit chervil Apiaceae Cicuta maculata spotted water hemlock Apiaceae Cryptotaenia canadensis Canadian honewort Apiaceae Daucus pusillus American wild carrot Apiaceae Eryngium leavenworthii Leavenworth's eryngo Apiaceae Eryngium prostratum creeping eryngo Apiaceae Eryngium yuccifolium button eryngo Apiaceae Eurytaenia texana
    [Show full text]
  • Abutilon Mosaic
    Plant Disease June 2008 PD-39 Abutilon Mosaic Scot C. Nelson Department of Plant and Environmental Protection Sciences butilon mosaic is an interesting and spectacular vi- digenous species (Abutilon incanum), but the mosaic ral disease of certain Abutilon species, most notably symptoms are observed only in the introduced peren- AbutilonA striatum. This mosaic is an example of a so- nial Abutilon pictum, known as lantern ‘ilima. (Photos called “beneficial plant disease,” owing to the desirable of some native Abutilon species in Hawai‘i can be seen effects of the unusual and beautiful mosaic patterns found at www.botany.hawaii. edu/FACULTY/CARR/abutilon. on affected leaves. The disease has negligible effects on htm). plant growth, vigor, and flowering. Abutilon striatum is a shrub in the mallow family Host (Malvaceae) known as flowering maple, parlor maple, Abutilon striatum is a robust, evergreen, upright shrub or Indian mallow and sometimes sold as an ornamental with three- to five-lobed, serrated, rich green, heavily plant with the cultivar names ‘Thompsonii’ or ‘Gold yellow-mottled leaves and yellow-orange flowers with Dust’. Hawai‘i is home to endemic Abutilon species crimson veins. It is native to Brazil and naturalized in (eremitopetalum, menziesii, and sandwicense) and in- South and Central America. Typical symptoms of abutilon mosaic on Abutilon striatum: heavily bright whitish to yellow-mottled leaves; a yellow mosaic resembling variegation. The yellow patches are sharply delimited by leaf veins, giving them an angular appearance. Symptoms may vary seasonally depending on light intensity. The plants were found for sale at a farmers’ market in Hilo, Hawai‘i, in 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • The Seed Plants, Ferns, and Fern Allies of the Austin Region
    University of Texas Bulletin No. 2065: November 20, 1920 The Seed Plants, Ferns, and Fern Allies of the Austin Region By Mary Sophie Young, Ph.D. PUBLISHED BY THB UNIVERSITY OF TBXAS AUSTIN : Publications of the University of Texas Publications Committee Frederic Duncalf C. T. Gray Killis Campbell E. J. Mathews D. B. Casteel C. E. Rowe F. W. Graff A. E. Trombly The University publishes bulletins six times a month, so numbered that the first two digits of the number show the year of issue, the last two the position in the yearly series. (For example, No. 1701 is the first bulletin of the year 1917.) These comprise the official publications of the University, publications on humanistic and scientific sub- jects, bulletins prepared by the Bureau of Extension, by the Bureau of Government Research, and by the Bureau of Eco- nomic Geology and Technology, and other bulletins of gen- eral educational interest. With the exception of special num- bers, any bulletin will be sent to a citizen of Texas free on request. All communications about University publications should be addressed to University Publications, University of Texas, Austin. 12-29-20-1357-6274-lm University of Texas Bulletin No. 2065: November 20, 1920 The Seed Plants, Ferns, and Fern Allies of the Austin Region By Mary Sophie ^ oung, Ph.D. PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY SIX TIMES A MONTH, AND ENTERED AS] SECOND-CLASS MATTER AT THE POSTOFFICE AT AUSTIN. TEXAS. UNDBR THE ACT OF AUGUST 24, 1912 v i |1*o The benefits of education and of useful knowledge, generally diffused through a community, are essential to the preservation of a free govern- ment.
    [Show full text]
  • PLANTS IDENTIFIED at HALEY NELSON PARK Plants Were Identified by the Highland Lakes Master Gardeners
    PLANTS IDENTIFIED AT HALEY NELSON PARK Plants were identified by the Highland Lakes Master Gardeners Photo/drawing Common Name Scientific Name Agarita Berberis Trifoliolata Photo courtesy the Image Archive of Central Texas Plants, University of Texas American Germander Teucrium Canadense Photo courtesy Robert H. Mohlenbrock, U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Antelope Horns Asclepias Asperula Photo courtesy Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center Black-Eyed Susan Rudbeckia Serotina Photo courtesy Jim Stasz, U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Buffalo Bur Solanum Rostratum Photo courtesy the Image Archive of Central Texas Plants, University of Texas Buffalo Gourd Cucurbita Foetidissima Photo courtesy St. Mary’s college of California, U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Blanket Flower Gaillardia Grandiflora Photo courtesy Gary A. Monroe U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Bindweed Convolvulus Equitans Photo courtesy Larry Allain, U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Cut Leaf/Coast Germander Teucrium Photo courtesy Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center Chinese Privet Ligustrum Photo courtesy Larry Allain, U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Dove Weed Croton Glandulosus Photo courtesy Larry Allain, U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Desert Yaupon Ilex Vomitra Photo courtesy Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center Devil’s Claw Proboscibea Louisianica Photo courtesy www.robsplants.com Dewberries Rubus Trivialis Photo courtesy Larry Allain, U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Day Flower Commelina Erecta Photo courtesy Larry Allain, U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service Dwarf White Aster Chaetopappa Bellidifola Photo courtesy Ralph Arvesen, Lost Springs Ranch Engelmann’s Daisy Elgelmania Pinnatifida Photo courtesy Archive of Central Texas Plants Evening Primose Oenothera Photo courtesy Robert H.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Checklist of the Vascular Plant Flora of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument Phase II Report
    Annotated Checklist of the Vascular Plant Flora of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument Phase II Report By Dr. Terri Hildebrand Southern Utah University, Cedar City, UT and Dr. Walter Fertig Moenave Botanical Consulting, Kanab, UT Colorado Plateau Cooperative Ecosystems Studies Unit Agreement # H1200-09-0005 1 May 2012 Prepared for Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument Southern Utah University National Park Service Mojave Network TABLE OF CONTENTS Page # Introduction . 4 Study Area . 6 History and Setting . 6 Geology and Associated Ecoregions . 6 Soils and Climate . 7 Vegetation . 10 Previous Botanical Studies . 11 Methods . 17 Results . 21 Discussion . 28 Conclusions . 32 Acknowledgments . 33 Literature Cited . 34 Figures Figure 1. Location of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 5 Figure 2. Ecoregions and 2010-2011 collection sites in Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 8 Figure 3. Soil types and 2010-2011 collection sites in Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 9 Figure 4. Increase in the number of plant taxa confirmed as present in Grand Canyon- Parashant National Monument by decade, 1900-2011 . 13 Figure 5. Southern Utah University students enrolled in the 2010 Plant Anatomy and Diversity course that collected during the 30 August 2010 experiential learning event . 18 Figure 6. 2010-2011 collection sites and transportation routes in Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 22 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page # Tables Table 1. Chronology of plant-collecting efforts at Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument . 14 Table 2. Data fields in the annotated checklist of the flora of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument (Appendices A, B, C, and D) .
    [Show full text]
  • The Marble Canyon Milk-Vetch
    The Marble Canyon milk-vetch Astragalus cremnophylax var. hevronii A 10-year Monitoring Update Redwall Site, Coconino County, AZ Daniela Roth Navajo Natural Heritage Program P.O. Box 1480 Window Rock AZ 86515 INTRODUCTION The Marble Canyon milk-vetch (Astragalus cremnophylax var. hevronii) is one of three varieties of Astragalus cremnophylax, all three of which are extremely rare local endemics to the Grand Canyon area of northern Arizona. The Sentry milk-vetch, Astragalus cremnophylax var. cremnophylax, was Listed Endangered in 1990, primarily due to severe threats to known populations through trampling by park visitors of plants and habitat along the south rim of the Grand Canyon. The Cliff milk-vetch, A. cremnophylax var. myriorrhapis, is only known from the Buckskin Mountains, on the Arizona/Utah border, where it is managed both by the U.S. Forest Service and the BLM. A population of A. cremnophylax var. cremnophylax from the north rim of the Grand Canyon has shown to be genetically different from the south rim populations as well as the other varieties and may be described as a new species (Allphin et al. 2005). All three varieties are narrow endemics and are vulnerable to extinction due to their habitat specificity, limited habitat availability, low fecundity levels and the overall small number of plants in existence. The Redwall population of A. cremnophylax var. hevronii was first discovered by Bill Hevron, former botanist with the Navajo Natural Heritage Program, in 1991 and described by Rupert Barneby of the New York Botanical Garden in 1992. In 1997 the Grand Canyon National Park received a grant from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to set up monitoring plots for all three varieties of A.
    [Show full text]