DOCSLIB.ORG

Spruce Mountain Restoration

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Spruce Mountain Restoration B L U.S. Department of the Interior M Bureau of Land Management Spruce Mountain Restoration PREPARING OFFICE U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Wells Field Office 3900 E. Idaho St. Elko, Nevada 89801 United States of America (775) 753–0200 Spruce Mountain Restoration : Environmental Assessment: This page intentionally left blank Spruce Mountain Restoration iii Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1. Identifying Information: ................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1. Location of Proposed Action: ................................................................................ 1 1.1.2. Name and Location of Preparing Office: ............................................................... 1 1.2. Purpose and Need for Action: .......................................................................................... 1 2. Proposed Action and Alternatives ............................................................................................ 3 2.1. Alternative A — Proposed Action .................................................................................... 5 2.1.1. Proposed Project Procedures ................................................................................ 14 2.2. Alternative B ................................................................................................................... 20 2.3. Alternative C ................................................................................................................... 20 2.4. Alternative D ................................................................................................................... 20 2.5. No Action Alternative ..................................................................................................... 21 2.6. Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed in Detail ...................................................... 21 2.6.1. Hand Thinning Only on Treatments .................................................................... 21 2.6.2. Sagebrush Mowing and Dixie Harrow ................................................................ 21 2.7. Conformance ................................................................................................................... 22 3. Affected Environment: ............................................................................................................ 23 3.1. Air Quality and Climate .................................................................................................. 25 3.2. Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................... 26 3.3. Fire Management ............................................................................................................ 26 3.4. Forestry and Forest Products .......................................................................................... 30 3.5. Hydrology and Riparian/Wetland ................................................................................... 31 3.6. Invasive, Non-Native Species ......................................................................................... 33 3.7. Migratory Birds ............................................................................................................... 33 3.8. Native American Religious Concerns ............................................................................. 45 3.9. Public Health and Safety ................................................................................................. 45 3.10. Lands with Wilderness Characteristics ......................................................................... 46 3.11. Livestock Grazing ......................................................................................................... 46 3.12. Recreation ..................................................................................................................... 47 3.13. Soils ............................................................................................................................... 48 3.14. Special Status Species ................................................................................................... 49 3.15. Vegetation ..................................................................................................................... 58 3.16. Visual Resource Management ....................................................................................... 59 3.17. Wilderness Study Areas ................................................................................................ 60 3.18. Wild Horses ................................................................................................................... 61 3.19. Wildlife ......................................................................................................................... 61 4. Environmental Effects: ........................................................................................................... 69 4.1. Air Quality ...................................................................................................................... 72 4.2. Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................... 73 Table of Contents iv Spruce Mountain Restoration 4.3. Fire Management ............................................................................................................ 77 4.4. Forestry and Forest Products .......................................................................................... 83 4.5. Hydrology and Riparian/Wetland ................................................................................... 88 4.6. Invasive, Non-Native Species ......................................................................................... 89 4.7. Migratory Birds ............................................................................................................... 92 4.8. Native American Religious Concerns ............................................................................. 97 4.9. Public Health and Safety ................................................................................................. 98 4.10. Livestock Grazing ......................................................................................................... 99 4.11. Recreation ................................................................................................................... 104 4.12. Soils ............................................................................................................................. 105 4.13. Special Status Species ................................................................................................. 108 4.14. Vegetation ................................................................................................................... 117 4.15. Visual Resource Management ..................................................................................... 125 4.16. Wilderness Study Areas .............................................................................................. 125 4.17. Wild Horses ................................................................................................................. 127 4.18. Wildlife ....................................................................................................................... 131 5. Tribes, Individuals, Organizations, or Agencies Consulted: ............................................. 145 6. List of Preparers ..................................................................................................................... 149 Appendix A. Spruce Mountain Restoration Treatments ........................................................ 153 Appendix B. Cumulative Effects Study Areas (CESAs) ......................................................... 169 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 183 Table of Contents Spruce Mountain Restoration v List of Figures Figure A.1. Spruce Mountain Restoration Proposed Treatment Types ....................................... 154 Figure A.2. Basco Chaining Maintenance/Expansion ................................................................. 155 Figure A.3. Brush Creek .............................................................................................................. 156 Figure A.4. Coyote Basin Bottom ................................................................................................ 157 Figure A.5. Coyote East ............................................................................................................... 158 Figure A.6. Coyote North Bowl ................................................................................................... 159 Figure A.7. Demonstration .......................................................................................................... 160 Figure A.8. East Spruce Ridge ..................................................................................................... 161 Figure A.9. Honeymoon Chaining Maintenance/Expansion ....................................................... 162 Figure A.10. Indian Creek ..........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States
    Jump to Navigation Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States As of January 12, 2017, the USGS maintains a limited number of metadata fields that characterize the Quaternary faults and folds of the United States. For the most up-to-date information, please refer to the interactive fault map. Butte Valley fault zone (Class A) No. 1276 Last Review Date: 2000-11-30 citation for this record: Redsteer, M.H., compiler, 2000, Fault number 1276, Butte Valley fault zone, in Quaternary fault and fold database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website, https://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults, accessed 12/14/2020 02:16 PM. Synopsis The Butte Valley fault zone is defined by a series of down-to-the- east scarps and lineaments, southwest of the Cherry Creek Range. Fault movement is described as of possible Holocene age (<10 ka). Reconnaissance photogeologic mapping and limited analysis of range-front morphology are the sources of data. Trench investigations and detailed studies of scarp morphology have not been completed. Name Refers to the southern fault of two defining the Butte Valley fault comments zone of dePolo (1998 #2845). Also mapped by Dohrenwend and others (1992 #2480). It extends about 15 km from Thirtymile Wash on the western side of the Butte Mountains, across Butte Valley to Hunter Point, the southern end of the Cherry Creek Range. Fault ID: Refers to fault number EY8B of dePolo (1998 #2845). County(s) and WHITE PINE COUNTY, NEVADA State(s) Physiographic BASIN AND RANGE province(s) Reliability of Good location Compiled at 1:100,000 scale.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Nevada, Reno Igneous and Hydrothermal Geology of The
    University of Nevada, Reno Igneous and Hydrothermal Geology of the Central Cherry Creek Range, White Pine County, Nevada A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geology by David J. Freedman Dr. Michael W. Ressel, Thesis Advisor May, 2018 THE GRADUATE SCHOOL We recommend that the thesis prepared under our supervision by DAVID JOSEPH FREEDMAN entitled Igneous and Hydrothermal Geology of the Central Cherry Creek Range, White Pine County, Nevada be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Michael W. Ressel, PhD, Advisor John L. Muntean, PhD, Committee Member Douglas P. Boyle, PhD, Graduate School Representative David W. Zeh, PhD, Dean, Graduate School May, 2018 i Abstract The central Cherry Creek Range exposes a nearly intact, 8-km thick crustal section of Precambrian through Eocene rocks in a west-dipping homocline. Similar tilts between Eocene volcanic rocks and underlying Paleozoic carbonates demonstrate that tilting and exhumation largely occurred during post-Eocene extensional faulting, thus allowing for relatively simple paleo-depth determinations of Eocene intrusions and mineral deposits. The study area is cored by the Cherry Creek quartz monzonite pluton (35 km2 exposure; ~132 km2 coincident magnetic anomaly), which was emplaced into Precambrian and Cambrian meta-sedimentary strata between 37.9-36.2 Ma and is exposed along the east side of the range. The pluton and overlying Paleozoic strata are cut by abundant 35.9-35.1 Ma porphyritic silicic dikes. A range of polymetallic mineralization styles are hosted by the intrusive rocks along two deeply-penetrating, high-angle faults and their intersections with favorable Paleozoic units.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Plan for the Great Basin National Heritage Area Approved April 30, 2013
    Management Plan for the Great Basin National Heritage Area Approved April 30, 2013 Prepared by the Great Basin Heritage Area Partnership Baker, Nevada i ii Great Basin National Heritage Area Management Plan September 23, 2011 Plans prepared previously by several National Heritage Areas provided inspiration for the framework and format for the Great Basin National Heritage Area Management Plan. National Park Service staff and documents provided guidance. We gratefully acknowledge these contributions. This Management Plan was made possible through funding provided by the National Park Service, the State of Nevada, the State of Utah and the generosity of local citizens. 2011 Great Basin National Heritage Area Disclaimer Restriction of Liability The Great Basin Heritage Area Partnership (GBHAP) and the authors of this document have made every reasonable effort to insur e accuracy and objectivity in preparing this plan. However, based on limitations of time, funding and references available, the parties involved make no claims, promises or guarantees about the absolute accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of this document and expressly disclaim liability for errors and omissions in the contents of this plan. No warranty of any kind, implied, expressed or statutory, including but not limited to the warranties of non-infringement of third party rights, title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, is given with respect to the contents of this document or its references. Reference in this document to any specific commercial products, processes, or services, or the use of any trade, firm or corporation name is for the inf ormation and convenience of the public, and does not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the GBHAP or the authors.
    [Show full text]
  • Exhibit 3067.Pdf
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1: Overview Goals, Guidelines 1 Introduction 1 Statement of Purpose Goals and Objectives Institutional Framework 2 Development Process 3 1999 Water Resources Plan 2006 Water Resources Plan Relationship to Other Plans County and Community Plans 4 State Water Plan Other Resource Management Plans, Planning Documents 5 CHAPTER 2: White Pine County Economic Trends, Projections And Water Use 7 Introduction 7 Economic History Historic Water Demand 8 Current Economic Conditions 9 Mining, Industrial Activity Agriculture 10 Tourism, Travel, Retirement and Leisure Employment Patterns Population 11 Current Water Demand and Commitments On-Going Economic Development and Population Growth, 2006-2056 15 Potential Economic Development, 2006-2056 21 Primary Basins 22 Steptoe Valley Spring Valley 24 Snake Valley 25 Butte Valley 25 White River Valley 26 Secondary Basins 26 CHAPTER 3: Water Resources Issues, Goals and Objectives Recommendations, and Policies 29 Issues 29 Physical Environment/Hydrogeological Setting Climate Legal and Regulatory Framework 30 Available Data Planning Context 30 Economic Development Trends, Strategies, White Pine County 31 Factors Outside White Pine County 32 Goals and Objectives 32 Objectives and Strategies Policies 33 Water Quality, Public Health and Safety Conservation and Reuse 35 Drought Conditions 36 Water Supply and Allocation Designated Basins Inter-Basin Transfers Monitoring and Mitigation 37 Administrative Structures 39 Recommendations 41 Evaluation and Implementation
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Resources of the Goshute Canyon Wilderness Study Area, Elko and White Pine Counties, Nevada
    Mineral Resources of the Goshute Canyon Wilderness Study Area, Elko and White Pine Counties, Nevada U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1725-E Chapter E Mineral Resources of the Goshute Canyon Wilderness Study Area, Elko and White Pine Counties, Nevada By FORREST G. POOLE, MAYA ELRICK, ROBERT E. TUCKER, ROBERT N. HARRIS, and HOWARD W. OLIVER U.S. Geological Survey FREDRICK L JOHNSON U.S. Bureau of Mines U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1725 MINERAL RESOURCES OF WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS- NORTHEASTERN NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1988 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Mineral resources of the Goshute Canyon Wilderness Study Area, EIko and White Pine counties, Nevada. (Mineral resources of wilderness study areas northeastern Nevada ; ch. E) (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1725-E) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.3:1725-E 1. Mines and mineral resources Nevada Goshute Canyon Wilderness. 2. Goshute Canyon Wilderness (Nev.) I. Poole, F. G., (Forrest Graham), 1929- . II. Series. III. Series: U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1725-E. QE75.B9 no. 1725-E 557.3 s [553'.09793'16] 87-600464 [TN24.N3] STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to conduct mineral surveys on certain areas to determine the mineral values, if any, that may be present.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconstructions of Cenozoic Extensional Faulting Within the Southern Ruby Mountains Metamorphic Core Complex and Adjacent Areas, Northeastern Nevada
    RECONSTRUCTIONS OF CENOZOIC EXTENSIONAL FAULTING WITHIN THE SOUTHERN RUBY MOUNTAINS METAMORPHIC CORE COMPLEX AND ADJACENT AREAS, NORTHEASTERN NEVADA by James Russell Pape A Prepublication Manuscript Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2010 Abstract This study presents five detailed cross-sectional restorations of Cenozoic upper-crustal extensional faulting in a ~150 km transect across northeastern Nevada in the vicinity of the Ruby Mountains-East Humboldt Range core complex, Eocene Carlin-type gold deposits, and Tertiary petroleum accumulations. The transect includes, from west to east, the Emigrant Pass area, the Piñon Range/Pine Valley area, Huntington Valley and the southern Ruby Mountains, the Medicine Range, and Spruce Mountain. These detailed cross-sectional restorations integrate data from new field observations and preexisting surface geologic maps, seismic reflection profiles, and exploratory oil wells to provide new insights into the Cenozoic structural evolution of the southern Ruby Mountains and the surrounding ranges. Upper crustal extension within the study area has been partitioned into zones of high and low extensional strain, and local extensional strains calculated from the rigorously reconstructed cross sections range from ~10% to greater than 100%. Synthesis of these restorations into a more schematic regional cross section leads to a regional estimate of ~32 km or ~50% upper crustal extension across the study area. Most of this regional extensional strain is accommodated by the west-dipping fault systems that exhumed the central and southern Ruby Mountains. Extensional strain at Emigrant Pass, the Medicine Range, and Spruce Mountain has been accommodated by numerous closely-spaced “domino style” normal faults.
    [Show full text]
  • Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States
    Jump to Navigation Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States As of January 12, 2017, the USGS maintains a limited number of metadata fields that characterize the Quaternary faults and folds of the United States. For the most up-to-date information, please refer to the interactive fault map. Taylor Peak fault zone (Class A) No. 1707 Last Review Date: 2000-06-27 citation for this record: Rowley, P.C., Anderson, R.E., and Redsteer, M.H., compilers, 2000, Fault number 1707, Taylor Peak fault zone, in Quaternary fault and fold database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website, https://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults, accessed 12/14/2020 02:26 PM. Synopsis This distributed zone of partly aligned, mostly north-striking, down-to-the-west normal faults bounds the western front of the Cherry Creek Range. It extends from just north of Taylor Canyon in south to Flint Spring Canyon. The block-bounding faults juxtapose bedrock against Quaternary alluvium and have moderately well defined scarps. Based on the age of displaced deposits or surfaces along a short parts of the fault at the north end and at the south end, the latest movement on the fault zone is considered late Pleistocene (<130 ka). Name This fault zone was named by Schell (1981 #2843); it juxtapose comments the western Cherry Creek Range and the basin beneath Butte Valley on the west. The fault zone consists of discontinuous but partly aligned and partly en-echelon, mostly north-striking faults that are separated by surficial deposits that form "intermediate-age alluvial fans" (15-700 ka).
    [Show full text]
  • An Ecological and Distributional Analysis of Great Basin Bristlecone Pine (Pinus Longaeva)
    An Ecological and Distributional Analysis of Great Basin Bristlecone Pine (Pinus longaeva) Gregory Watson Taylor A thesis submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Steven L. Petersen, Chair Loreen A. Flinders Stanley G. Kitchen Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences Brigham Young University Copyright © 2018 Gregory Watson Taylor All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT An Ecological and Distributional Analysis of Great Basin Bristlecone Pine (Pinus longaeva) Gregory Watson Taylor Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences, BYU Master of Science Understanding the impacts of climate change is critical for improving the conservation and management of ecosystems worldwide. Ecosystems vary along a precipitation and temperature gradient, ranging from tropical jungles to arid deserts. The Great Basin is a semi- arid eco-region that is found within the western United States. Plant communities within the Great Basin range from sagebrush valleys to sub-alpine conifer forests found at high elevation areas. It is predicted that the Great Basin will experience prolonged periods of drought, more intense fires, and greater variability in average annual and monthly precipitation, all in response to changes in climate patterns. At the lower elevations, sagebrush communities are expected to experience less suitable habitat conditions, however, less is understood about vegetation response at upper elevations. Understanding forest composition and structure at these upper elevations within the Great Basin will help us better understand potential impacts from climate change. In chapter 1, we characterized Pinus longaeva (Great Basin bristlecone pine D.K. Bailey) forest structure and composition. We mapped this tree species distribution and characterized forest structure and composition using a sampling protocol that included both biophysical variables and individual tree characteristics.
    [Show full text]
  • New Investigations of Pleistocene Glacial and Pluvial Records in Northeastern Nevada
    fl d021-01 1st pgs page 1 The Geological Society of America Field Guide 21 2011 New investigations of Pleistocene glacial and pluvial records in northeastern Nevada Jeffrey S. Munroe Geology Department, Middlebury College, Middlebury, Vermont 05753, USA Benjamin J.C. Laabs Department of Geological Sciences, State University of New York–Geneseo, Geneseo, New York 14454, USA ABSTRACT The Great Basin of the western United States offers tremendous potential for exploring the response of mountain glaciers and lowland lakes to climate changes during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM, MIS-2, ca. 22–18 ka B.P.) and subsequent glacial-interglacial transition. The combination of well-distributed alpine moraine records and pluvial lake deposits offers an unparalleled opportunity to develop a more precise understanding of temperature and precipitation changes during the lat- est Pleistocene and into the Holocene. This fi eld trip provides an overview of recent and ongoing work illuminating aspects of the glacial and pluvial history of northeast- ern Nevada from the LGM to the present. The route of this trip involves three full days of stops separated by two nights in Elko, Nevada. The fi rst day focuses on glacial deposits at the type locality for the LGM Angel Lake Glaciation on the eastern side of the East Humboldt Range. The second day explores the geomorphic record of pluvial Lakes Franklin and Clover on the east side of the Ruby–East Humboldt Mountains and describes recent efforts to develop a chronology for the late Pleistocene regression of these lakes. The fi nal day again focuses on glacial geology, starting with the type locality of the pre-LGM Lamoille Glaciation on the west side of the Ruby Mountains, and ending with several stops along the scenic drive up Lamoille Canyon.
    [Show full text]
  • Visitors Guide Final Web.Pdf
    Publisher Kevin Kampman The Elko Daily Free Press Advertising Director Nancy Streets Editorial Jeffry Mullins, Managing Editor Project Coordinator Carol Mott Additional Photographs submitted by: Susan Summer Elliott, Bridgett Brandon, Jennifer Kimball, Jeffry Mullins, Joe Gill, ECVA, California Trail Interpretive Center Advertising Sales Betti Magney, Lizz Todd, & Kassidy Zaga Production & Design Matt Arroyo Elko Daily Free Press 3720 Idaho St., Elko, NV 89801 775-738-3118 Produced for and distributed by the Elko Convention and Visitors Authority 700 Moren Way, Elko, NV 89801 www.exploreelko.com 775-738-4091 or 800-248-3556 © Copyright 2019/2019 While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, neither Elko Daily Free Press nor the Elko Convention and Visitors Authority assume any responsibility for errors or omissions. All data is subject to change. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including, but not limited to, a photocopy or any information retrieval system without written permission from the publisher. 2019 Elko Visitor’s Guide 1 2 2019 Elko Visitor’s Guide AIR SERVICE Delta Air Lines: 800-221-1212 lko is located in the northeastern corner El Aero Services: 775-738-7123 of the state of Nevada, situated on the Humboldt River halfway between Reno and Salt Lake City. Interstate 80 traverses Elko HIGHWAY CONDITIONS County, making it a convenient destination if Nevada: 877-687-6237 traveling by car. California: 800-427-7623 Making your way to Elko you have several Arizona: 800-411-7623 choices — by air, car, train or bus.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Nevada Forest Conditions Report
    United States Department Forest Pest Conditions in of Agriculture Nevada 2010 Forest Service State and Private Forestry Forest Health Protection Intermountain Region R4-OFO-TR-05-00 State of Nevada Division of Forestry Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Front cover photos: (Top) Whitebark pine killed by mountain pine beetle in the Jarbidge Mountains looking down toward the town of Jarbidge, NV, July 2010 (Photo: Gail Durham); (Bottom) Pinyon pine sawfly and needle scale damage on the northeast side of the Monitor Range, August, 2009 (Photo: Gail Durham) Forest Health Specialists Forest Health Protection USDA Forest Service Valerie DeBlander, Forestry Ogden Field Office Technician Forest Health Protection Email: [email protected] 4746 S 1900 E Ogden, UT 84403 John Guyon II, Pathologist Email: [email protected] Phone: 801-476-9720 FAX: 801-479-1477 Elizabeth Hebertson, Entomologist/Pathologist Steve Munson, Group Leader Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Laura Dunning, Program Assistant Darren Blackford, Entomologist Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Nevada Division of Forestry Department of Conservation and Natural Resources State Headquarters 2478 Fairview Dr. Carson City, NV 89701 Gail Durham, Forest Health Specialist Email: [email protected] Phone: 775-684-2513 John Christopherson, Resource Program Manager Email: [email protected] Phone: 775-684-2507 ii Compiled by: Gail Durham, Forest Health Specialist, NDF DCNR Edited by Elizabeth Hebertson With Contributions from: Dick Halsey, USFS FHP GIS Sp e c i a l i st John Guyon II, USFS FHP Pathologist Jeff Knight, Nevada State Entomologist Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Wildlife Action Plan
    Nevada Wildlife Action Plan Lower Montane Woodlands & Chaparral Figure 9. Distribution of Lower Montane Woodlands & Chaparral Habitat type in Nevada. 129 | P a g e Nevada Wildlife Action Plan KEY HABITAT: LOWER MONTANE WOODLANDS AND CHAPARRAL Things to Know…. Lower montane woodlands and chaparral are found 5,000-8,000 feet in elevation and characterized by pinyon pine and juniper species mixed with shrub species, such as mountain mahogany, sagebrush, black sagebrush, and bitterbrush. Several priority species, including Pinyon Jay, Ferruginous Hawk, Dusky and Sooty Grouse,and several bat species, utilize various featrues of this habitat type. Largest habitat threat is cheatgrass invasion and uncharacteristic crown fires. In general, the lower montane habitat ecological departure will improve with climate change however, annual grassland conversion will increase. Ecoregions Southwest ReGAP 2005 Great Basin 1,895,051 hectares 4,679,139 acres Columbia 93,817 hectares 231,647 acres Mojave 173,980 hectares 429,580 acres Sierra Nevada 3,859 hectares 9,529 acres Total 2,166,707 hectares 5,349,895 acres Ecological Systems TNC Biophysical Setting SWReGAP Ecological Systems Pinyon-Juniper…………………….. S040 Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Mountain Shrub……………………. S046 Rocky Mountain Gambel Oak-Mixed Montane Shrubland Curl-leaf Mountain Mahogany.. S050 Intermountain Basins Mountain Mahogany Woodland and Shrubland Chaparral……………………………….. S053 Great Basin Semi-Desert Chaparral Juniper Savanna…………………… S075 Intermountain Basins Juniper Savanna Key Habitat Description The term “lower montane woodlands” is used to describe an association of pygmy forest types growing on unproductive soils and rock outcrops favoring long fire return intervals and that generally occur on montane slopes found between 5,000 and 8,000 feet elevation, but will reach as far down as 4,000 feet at the edge of the Mojave Desert, and as high as 10,000 feet on the White Mountains (Trimble 1989).
    [Show full text]