DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Resources Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Resources Assessment Biological Resources Assessment 1434 Grove Street Healdsburg, California Prepared For: City of Healdsburg August 20, 2019 ECORP Consulting, Inc. has assisted public and private land owners with environmental regulation compliance since 1987. We offer full service capability, from initial baseline environmental studies through environmental planning review, permitting negotiation, liaison to obtain legal agreements, mitigation design, and monitoring and compliance reporting. Citation: ECORP Consulting, Inc. (ECORP). 2019. Biological Resources Assessment for the 1434 Grove Street Project. Prepared for City of Healdsburg, California. August. Biological Resources Assessment for the 1434 Grove Street Project CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Location and Description.................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Purpose of this Biological Resources Assessment ................................................................................. 1 2.0 REGULATORY SETTING ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Federal Regulations ............................................................................................................................................ 3 2.1.1 Endangered Species Act .................................................................................................................. 3 2.1.2 Migratory Bird Treaty Act ................................................................................................................ 5 2.1.3 Clean Water Act .................................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 State and Local Regulations ........................................................................................................................... 6 2.2.1 California Endangered Species Act .............................................................................................. 6 2.2.2 Native Plant Protection Act ............................................................................................................ 6 2.2.3 California Fish and Game Code Special Protections for Birds .......................................... 6 2.2.4 Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreements ............................................................................. 7 2.2.5 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act .............................................................................................. 7 2.2.6 California Environmental Quality Act.......................................................................................... 7 2.2.7 City of Healdsburg General Plan 2030 .................................................................................... 10 3.0 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................................................ 10 3.1 Literature Review .............................................................................................................................................. 10 3.2 Field Surveys Conducted ............................................................................................................................... 11 3.3 Special-Status Species Considered for the Project ............................................................................. 11 4.0 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................................................ 11 4.1 Site Characteristics and Land Use .............................................................................................................. 11 4.2 Vegetation Communities .............................................................................................................................. 12 4.3 Soils ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12 4.4 Potential Waters of the U.S. ......................................................................................................................... 15 4.4.1 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................................. 15 4.4.2 Other Waters. .................................................................................................................................... 15 4.4.3 Wildlife ................................................................................................................................................. 15 4.5 Evaluation of Special-Status Species Identified in the Literature Search ................................... 16 4.5.1 Special-Status Plants ...................................................................................................................... 26 4.5.2 Special-Status Animals .................................................................................................................. 26 4.5.3 Birds ...................................................................................................................................................... 30 4.5.4 Mammals ............................................................................................................................................ 31 4.6 Wildlife Movement/Corridors ..................................................................................................................... 31 ECORP Consulting, Inc. August 20, 2019 i 1434 Grove Street Project 2019-040 Biological Resources Assessment for the 1434 Grove Street Project 4.7 Critical Habitat ................................................................................................................................................... 32 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... 32 5.1 Waters of the U.S. ............................................................................................................................................ 32 5.2 Special-Status Plants ....................................................................................................................................... 32 5.3 Special-Status Invertebrate .......................................................................................................................... 34 5.4 Special-Status Fish ........................................................................................................................................... 34 5.5 Special-Status Amphibians ........................................................................................................................... 34 5.6 Special-Status Reptiles ................................................................................................................................... 35 5.7 Special-Status Birds and MBTA-Protected Birds (including Raptors).......................................... 35 5.8 Special-Status Mammals ............................................................................................................................... 35 5.9 Tree/Riparian Impacts .................................................................................................................................... 36 6.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................................ 37 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Potential Waters of the U.S. ......................................................................................................................................... 15 Table 2. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Species ........................................................................................................ 16 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project Location and Vicinity ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2. Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Types ......................................................................................... 13 Figure 3. Aquatic Resources Delineation ................................................................................................................................. 14 Figure 4. Site Plan .............................................................................................................................................................................. 33 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment A – Representative Site Photographs Attachment B - Plant List Attachment C – Special-Status Species Searches (9-Quad CNPS Search, 9-Quad CNNDB Search, and Project Area IPaC Search) ECORP Consulting, Inc. August 20, 2019 ii 1434 Grove Street Project 2019-040 Biological Resources Assessment for the 1434 Grove Street Project LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ARD Aquatic Resources Delineation BRA Biological Resources Assessment CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Archival Study for the Fish Habitat Flows and Water Rights Project
    APPENDIX D Archival Study for the Fish Habitat Flows and Water Rights Project An Archival Study for the Fish Habitat Flows and Water Rights Project Mendocino and Sonoma Counties, California Eileen Barrow, M.A. June 6, 2016 An Archival Study for the Fish Habitat Flows and Water Rights Project Mendocino and Sonoma Counties, California Prepared by: _________________________________ Eileen Barrow, M.A. Tom Origer & Associates Post Office Box 1531 Rohnert Park, California 94927 (707) 584-8200 Prepared for: Sonoma County Water Agency 404 Aviation Santa Rosa, California 95407 June 6, 2016 ABSTRACT Tom Origer & Associates conducted an archival study for the Fish Habitat Flows and Water Rights Project, as requested by the Sonoma County Water Agency. This study was designed to meet requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Per the findings of the National Marine Fisheries Service (2008), the Sonoma County Water Agency is seeking to improve Coho salmon and steelhead habitat in the Russian River and Dry Creek by modifying the minimum instream flow requirements specified by the State Water Resources Control Board's 1986 Decision 1610. The current study includes a ⅛ mile buffer around Lake Mendocino, Lake Sonoma, the Russian River from Coyote Valley Dam to the Pacific Ocean, and Dry Creek from Warm Springs Dam to the Russian River. The study included archival research at the Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University (NWIC File No. 15-1481); archival research at the Museum of Paleontology, University of California, Berkeley; examination of the library and files of Tom Origer & Associates; and contact with the Native American community. Documentation pertaining to this study is on file at the offices of Tom Origer & Associates (File No.
    [Show full text]
  • Macroevolutionary Patterns of Glucosinolate Defense and Tests of Defense-Escalation and Resource Availability Hypotheses
    Research Macroevolutionary patterns of glucosinolate defense and tests of defense-escalation and resource availability hypotheses N. Ivalu Cacho1,2, Daniel J. Kliebenstein3,4 and Sharon Y. Strauss1 1Center for Population Biology, and Department of Evolution of Ecology, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA; 2Instituto de Biologıa, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Circuito Exterior, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico; 3Department of Plant Sciences, University of California. One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA; 4DynaMo Center of Excellence, University of Copenhagen, Thorvaldsensvej 40, DK-1871 Frederiksberg C, Denmark Summary Author for correspondence: We explored macroevolutionary patterns of plant chemical defense in Streptanthus (Brassi- N. Ivalu Cacho caceae), tested for evolutionary escalation of defense, as predicted by Ehrlich and Raven’s Tel: +1 530 304 5391 plant–herbivore coevolutionary arms-race hypothesis, and tested whether species inhabiting Email: [email protected] low-resource or harsh environments invest more in defense, as predicted by the resource Received: 13 April 2015 availability hypothesis (RAH). Accepted: 8 June 2015 We conducted phylogenetically explicit analyses using glucosinolate profiles, soil nutrient analyses, and microhabitat bareness estimates across 30 species of Streptanthus inhabiting New Phytologist (2015) 208: 915–927 varied environments and soils. doi: 10.1111/nph.13561 We found weak to moderate phylogenetic signal in glucosinolate classes
    [Show full text]
  • Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny
    Outline of angiosperm phylogeny: orders, families, and representative genera with emphasis on Oregon native plants Priscilla Spears December 2013 The following listing gives an introduction to the phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants that has emerged in recent decades, and which is based on nucleic acid sequences as well as morphological and developmental data. This listing emphasizes temperate families of the Northern Hemisphere and is meant as an overview with examples of Oregon native plants. It includes many exotic genera that are grown in Oregon as ornamentals plus other plants of interest worldwide. The genera that are Oregon natives are printed in a blue font. Genera that are exotics are shown in black, however genera in blue may also contain non-native species. Names separated by a slash are alternatives or else the nomenclature is in flux. When several genera have the same common name, the names are separated by commas. The order of the family names is from the linear listing of families in the APG III report. For further information, see the references on the last page. Basal Angiosperms (ANITA grade) Amborellales Amborellaceae, sole family, the earliest branch of flowering plants, a shrub native to New Caledonia – Amborella Nymphaeales Hydatellaceae – aquatics from Australasia, previously classified as a grass Cabombaceae (water shield – Brasenia, fanwort – Cabomba) Nymphaeaceae (water lilies – Nymphaea; pond lilies – Nuphar) Austrobaileyales Schisandraceae (wild sarsaparilla, star vine – Schisandra; Japanese
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited
    Literature Cited Robert W. Kiger, Editor This is a consolidated list of all works cited in volumes 19, 20, and 21, whether as selected references, in text, or in nomenclatural contexts. In citations of articles, both here and in the taxonomic treatments, and also in nomenclatural citations, the titles of serials are rendered in the forms recommended in G. D. R. Bridson and E. R. Smith (1991). When those forms are abbre- viated, as most are, cross references to the corresponding full serial titles are interpolated here alphabetically by abbreviated form. In nomenclatural citations (only), book titles are rendered in the abbreviated forms recommended in F. A. Stafleu and R. S. Cowan (1976–1988) and F. A. Stafleu and E. A. Mennega (1992+). Here, those abbreviated forms are indicated parenthetically following the full citations of the corresponding works, and cross references to the full citations are interpolated in the list alphabetically by abbreviated form. Two or more works published in the same year by the same author or group of coauthors will be distinguished uniquely and consistently throughout all volumes of Flora of North America by lower-case letters (b, c, d, ...) suffixed to the date for the second and subsequent works in the set. The suffixes are assigned in order of editorial encounter and do not reflect chronological sequence of publication. The first work by any particular author or group from any given year carries the implicit date suffix “a”; thus, the sequence of explicit suffixes begins with “b”. Works missing from any suffixed sequence here are ones cited elsewhere in the Flora that are not pertinent in these volumes.
    [Show full text]
  • Streptanthus Morrisonii</Em&G
    Butler University Digital Commons @ Butler University Scholarship and Professional Work - LAS College of Liberal Arts & Sciences 1989 Taxonomy of Streptanthus sect. Biennes, the Streptanthus morrisonii complex (Brassicaceae) Rebecca W. Dolan Butler University, [email protected] Lawrence F. LaPre Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.butler.edu/facsch_papers Part of the Botany Commons, and the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Dolan, Rebecca W. and LaPre, Lawrence F., "Taxonomy of Streptanthus sect. Biennes, the Streptanthus morrisonii complex (Brassicaceae)" Madroño / (1989): 33-40. Available at https://digitalcommons.butler.edu/facsch_papers/45 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences at Digital Commons @ Butler University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarship and Professional Work - LAS by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Butler University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Permission to post this publication in our archive was granted by the copyright holder, Berkeley, California Botanical Society, 1916- (http://www.calbotsoc.org/madrono.html). This copy should be used for educational and research purposes only. The original publication appeared at: Dolan, R.W. and L.F. LaPre'. 1989. Taxonomy of Streptanthus sect. Biennes, the Streptanthus morrisonii complex. (Brassicaceae). Madroño 36:33-40. DOI: not available TAXONOMY OF STREPTANTHUS SECT. BIENNES, THE STREPTANTHUS MORRISONll COMPLEX (BRASSICACEAE) REBECCA W. DOLAN Holcomb Research Institute and Biological Sciences Department, Butler University, 4600 Sunset Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46208 LAWRENCE F. LAPRE Tierra Madre Consultants, 4178 Chestnut Street, Riverside, CA 92501 ABSTRACT The S/reptanthus morrisonii complex is a six-taxon group of closely related ser­ pentine rock outcrop endemics from Lake, Napa, and Sonoma counties ofCalifornia, USA.
    [Show full text]
  • How Many of Cassini Anagrams Should There Be? Molecular
    TAXON 59 (6) • December 2010: 1671–1689 Galbany-Casals & al. • Systematics and phylogeny of the Filago group How many of Cassini anagrams should there be? Molecular systematics and phylogenetic relationships in the Filago group (Asteraceae, Gnaphalieae), with special focus on the genus Filago Mercè Galbany-Casals,1,3 Santiago Andrés-Sánchez,2,3 Núria Garcia-Jacas,1 Alfonso Susanna,1 Enrique Rico2 & M. Montserrat Martínez-Ortega2 1 Institut Botànic de Barcelona (CSIC-ICUB), Pg. del Migdia s.n., 08038 Barcelona, Spain 2 Departamento de Botánica, Facultad de Biología, Universidad de Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain 3 These authors contributed equally to this publication. Author for correspondence: Mercè Galbany-Casals, [email protected] Abstract The Filago group (Asteraceae, Gnaphalieae) comprises eleven genera, mainly distributed in Eurasia, northern Africa and northern America: Ancistrocarphus, Bombycilaena, Chamaepus, Cymbolaena, Evacidium, Evax, Filago, Logfia, Micropus, Psilocarphus and Stylocline. The main morphological character that defines the group is that the receptacular paleae subtend, and more or less enclose, the female florets. The aims of this work are, with the use of three chloroplast DNA regions (rpl32-trnL intergenic spacer, trnL intron, and trnL-trnF intergenic spacer) and two nuclear DNA regions (ITS, ETS), to test whether the Filago group is monophyletic; to place its members within Gnaphalieae using a broad sampling of the tribe; and to investigate in detail the phylogenetic relationships among the Old World members of the Filago group and provide some new insight into the generic circumscription and infrageneric classification based on natural entities. Our results do not show statistical support for a monophyletic Filago group.
    [Show full text]
  • Table *. Special Status Species with Potential to Occur in the Galbreath Wildlands Preserve
    Table *. Special status species with potential to occur in the Galbreath Wildlands Preserve. We follow convention in listing plants aphabetically by family. All other species are listed alphabetically by order then family. "Quad Search" column inidicates if the species was documented as occuring in a 16 quad search of CNDDB or USFWS databases centered on the Galbreath Preserve. Species known to occur on the Preserve are marked with an "x." (Note that potential habitat evaluations were conducted for all species on this list except those showing only an MBTA or ABC listings). Status Scientific Name Common Name Quad Search Federal State CNPS Other FUNGI (LICHENS AND MUSHROOMS) Lecanoraeles Parmeliaceae G4 S4.2, USFS: Usnea longissima Long-Beard Lichen CNDDB S BRYOPHYTA (MOSSES, LIVERWORTS, HORNWORTS) Fissidentales Fissidentaceae Fissidens pauperculus Minute Pocket Moss 1B.2 Funariales Funariaceae Entosthodon kochii Koch's Cord Moss CNDDB 1B.3 Pottiales Pottiaceae Didymodon norrisii Norris' Beard Moss 2.2 LILIOPSIDA (GRASSES, LILLIES, ORCHIDS) Alismataceae Alisma gramineum Grass Alisma 2.2 Cyperaceae Carex comosa Bristly Sedge CNDDB 2.1 Carex saliniformis Deceiving Sedge CNDDB 1B.2 Lilaceae Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum Franciscan Onion CNDDB 1B.2 Calochortus raichei The Cedars Fairy-Lantern CNDDB 1B.2 Erythronium revolutum Coast Fawn Lily CNDDB 2.2 Fritillaria roderickii Roderick's Fritillary CNDDB E 1B.1 Orchidaceae Piperia candida White-Flowered Rein Orchid CNDDB 1B.2 Poaceae Dichanthelium lanuginosum var. thermale Geysers Dichanthelium E 1B.1 Glyceria grandis American Manna Grass 2.3 Pleuropogon hooverianus North Coast Semaphore Grass CNDDB T 1B.1 Potamogetonaceae Potamogeton epihydrus ssp. nuttallii Nuttall's Ribbon-Leaved Pondweed 2.2 LILIOPSIDA (GRASSES, LILLIES, ORCHIDS) Asteraceae Hemizonia congesta ssp.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY
    Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackerfield, J., and J. Wen. 2002. A morphometric analysis of Hedera L. (the ivy genus, Araliaceae) and its taxonomic implications. Adansonia 24: 197-212. Adams, P. 1961. Observations on the Sagittaria subulata complex. Rhodora 63: 247-265. Adams, R.M. II, and W.J. Dress. 1982. Nodding Lilium species of eastern North America (Liliaceae). Baileya 21: 165-188. Adams, R.P. 1986. Geographic variation in Juniperus silicicola and J. virginiana of the Southeastern United States: multivariant analyses of morphology and terpenoids. Taxon 35: 31-75. ------. 1995. Revisionary study of Caribbean species of Juniperus (Cupressaceae). Phytologia 78: 134-150. ------, and T. Demeke. 1993. Systematic relationships in Juniperus based on random amplified polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs). Taxon 42: 553-571. Adams, W.P. 1957. A revision of the genus Ascyrum (Hypericaceae). Rhodora 59: 73-95. ------. 1962. Studies in the Guttiferae. I. A synopsis of Hypericum section Myriandra. Contr. Gray Herbarium Harv. 182: 1-51. ------, and N.K.B. Robson. 1961. A re-evaluation of the generic status of Ascyrum and Crookea (Guttiferae). Rhodora 63: 10-16. Adams, W.P. 1973. Clusiaceae of the southeastern United States. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 89: 62-71. Adler, L. 1999. Polygonum perfoliatum (mile-a-minute weed). Chinquapin 7: 4. Aedo, C., J.J. Aldasoro, and C. Navarro. 1998. Taxonomic revision of Geranium sections Batrachioidea and Divaricata (Geraniaceae). Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 85: 594-630. Affolter, J.M. 1985. A monograph of the genus Lilaeopsis (Umbelliferae). Systematic Bot. Monographs 6. Ahles, H.E., and A.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Classification of the Vegetation Alliances and Associations of Sonoma County, California
    Classification of the Vegetation Alliances and Associations of Sonoma County, California Volume 1 of 2 – Introduction, Methods, and Results Prepared by: California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program California Native Plant Society Vegetation Program For: The Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District The Sonoma County Water Agency Authors: Anne Klein, Todd Keeler-Wolf, and Julie Evens December 2015 ABSTRACT This report describes 118 alliances and 212 associations that are found in Sonoma County, California, comprising the most comprehensive local vegetation classification to date. The vegetation types were defined using a standardized classification approach consistent with the Survey of California Vegetation (SCV) and the United States National Vegetation Classification (USNVC) system. This floristic classification is the basis for an integrated, countywide vegetation map that the Sonoma County Vegetation Mapping and Lidar Program expects to complete in 2017. Ecologists with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the California Native Plant Society analyzed species data from 1149 field surveys collected in Sonoma County between 2001 and 2014. The data include 851 surveys collected in 2013 and 2014 through funding provided specifically for this classification effort. An additional 283 surveys that were conducted in adjacent counties are included in the analysis to provide a broader, regional understanding. A total of 34 tree-overstory, 28 shrubland, and 56 herbaceous alliances are described, with 69 tree-overstory, 51 shrubland, and 92 herbaceous associations. This report is divided into two volumes. Volume 1 (this volume) is composed of the project introduction, methods, and results. It includes a floristic key to all vegetation types, a table showing the full local classification nested within the USNVC hierarchy, and a crosswalk showing the relationship between this and other classification systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plant Species with Documented Or Recorded Occurrence in Placer County
    A PPENDIX II Vascular Plant Species with Documented or Reported Occurrence in Placer County APPENDIX II. Vascular Plant Species with Documented or Reported Occurrence in Placer County Family Scientific Name Common Name FERN AND FERN ALLIES Azollaceae Mosquito fern family Azolla filiculoides Pacific mosquito fern Dennstaedtiaceae Bracken family Pteridium aquilinum var.pubescens Bracken fern Dryopteridaceae Wood fern family Athyrium alpestre var. americanum Alpine lady fern Athyrium filix-femina var. cyclosorum Lady fern Cystopteris fragilis Fragile fern Polystichum imbricans ssp. curtum Cliff sword fern Polystichum imbricans ssp. imbricans Imbricate sword fern Polystichum kruckebergii Kruckeberg’s hollyfern Polystichum lonchitis Northern hollyfern Polystichum munitum Sword fern Equisetaceae Horsetail family Equisetum arvense Common horsetail Equisetum hyemale ssp. affine Scouring rush Equisetum laevigatum Smooth horsetail Isoetaceae Quillwort family Isoetes bolanderi Bolander’s quillwort Isoetes howellii Howell’s quillwort Isoetes orcuttii Orcutt’s quillwort Lycopodiaceae Club-moss family Lycopodiella inundata Bog club-moss Marsileaceae Marsilea family Marsilea vestita ssp. vestita Water clover Pilularia americana American pillwort Ophioglossaceae Adder’s-tongue family Botrychium multifidum Leathery grapefern Polypodiaceae Polypody family Polypodium hesperium Western polypody Pteridaceae Brake family Adiantum aleuticum Five-finger maidenhair Adiantum jordanii Common maidenhair fern Aspidotis densa Indian’s dream Cheilanthes cooperae Cooper’s
    [Show full text]
  • The Biological Resources Section Provides Background Information
    4.5 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The Biological resources section provides background information on sensitive biological resources within Napa County, the regulations and programs that provide for their protection, and an assessment of the potential impacts to biological resources of implementing the Napa County General Plan Update. This section is based upon information presented in the Biological Resources Chapter of the Napa County Baseline Data Report (Napa County, BDR 2005). Additional information on the topics presented herein can be found in these documents. Both documents are incorporated into this section by reference. This section addresses biological resources other than fisheries which are separately addressed in Section 4.6. 4.5.1 SETTING REGIONAL SETTING The Napa County is located in the Coast Ranges Geomorphic Province. This province is bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean and on the east by the Great Valley geomorphic province. A dominant characteristic of the Coast Ranges Province is the general northwest- southeast orientation of its valleys and ridgelines. In Napa County, located in the eastern, central section of the province, this trend consists of a series of long, linear, major and lesser valleys, separated by steep, rugged ridge and hill systems of moderate relief that have been deeply incised by their drainage systems. The County is located within the California Floristic Province, the portion of the state west of the Sierra Crest that is known to be particularly rich in endemic plant species (Hickman 1993, Stein et al. 2000). LOCAL SETTING The County’s highest topographic feature is Mount St. Helena, which is located in the northwest corner of the County and whose peak elevation is 4,343 feet.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plants of Santa Cruz County, California
    ANNOTATED CHECKLIST of the VASCULAR PLANTS of SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SECOND EDITION Dylan Neubauer Artwork by Tim Hyland & Maps by Ben Pease CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CHAPTER Copyright © 2013 by Dylan Neubauer All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written permission from the author. Design & Production by Dylan Neubauer Artwork by Tim Hyland Maps by Ben Pease, Pease Press Cartography (peasepress.com) Cover photos (Eschscholzia californica & Big Willow Gulch, Swanton) by Dylan Neubauer California Native Plant Society Santa Cruz County Chapter P.O. Box 1622 Santa Cruz, CA 95061 To order, please go to www.cruzcps.org For other correspondence, write to Dylan Neubauer [email protected] ISBN: 978-0-615-85493-9 Printed on recycled paper by Community Printers, Santa Cruz, CA For Tim Forsell, who appreciates the tiny ones ... Nobody sees a flower, really— it is so small— we haven’t time, and to see takes time, like to have a friend takes time. —GEORGIA O’KEEFFE CONTENTS ~ u Acknowledgments / 1 u Santa Cruz County Map / 2–3 u Introduction / 4 u Checklist Conventions / 8 u Floristic Regions Map / 12 u Checklist Format, Checklist Symbols, & Region Codes / 13 u Checklist Lycophytes / 14 Ferns / 14 Gymnosperms / 15 Nymphaeales / 16 Magnoliids / 16 Ceratophyllales / 16 Eudicots / 16 Monocots / 61 u Appendices 1. Listed Taxa / 76 2. Endemic Taxa / 78 3. Taxa Extirpated in County / 79 4. Taxa Not Currently Recognized / 80 5. Undescribed Taxa / 82 6. Most Invasive Non-native Taxa / 83 7. Rejected Taxa / 84 8. Notes / 86 u References / 152 u Index to Families & Genera / 154 u Floristic Regions Map with USGS Quad Overlay / 166 “True science teaches, above all, to doubt and be ignorant.” —MIGUEL DE UNAMUNO 1 ~ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ~ ANY THANKS TO THE GENEROUS DONORS without whom this publication would not M have been possible—and to the numerous individuals, organizations, insti- tutions, and agencies that so willingly gave of their time and expertise.
    [Show full text]