DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix G - Ecosystems and Species Diversity Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix G - Ecosystems and Species Diversity Report Appendix G - Ecosystems and Species Diversity Report Land Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement This page intentionally left blank National Forests in Mississippi Appendix G Table of Contents APPENDIX G - ............................................................................... ECOSYSTEMS AND SPECIES DIVERSITY REPORT .......................................................................................................................................................................... G-1 G.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... G-1 G.1.1 VIABILITY EVALUATION PROCESS .................................................................................................................... G-2 G.1.2 FORESTWIDE ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY ........................................................................................... G-2 G.1.3 ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY CHARACTERISTICS..................................................................................... G-5 Relative Abundance ........................................................................................................................................... G-5 Non-native Invasive Species ............................................................................................................................... G-5 Structure (old-growth forest) ............................................................................................................................. G-6 Structure and Tree Age Diversity ....................................................................................................................... G-6 Fire Regime ........................................................................................................................................................ G-7 Remoteness (road and trail density) .................................................................................................................. G-7 G.2 ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS ............................................................................................................................ G-7 G.2.1 UPLAND LONGLEAF PINE FOREST AND WOODLAND ........................................................................................... G-7 Upland Longleaf Pine Forest and Woodland Ecological System Characteristics ............................................... G-7 Upland Longleaf Pine Forest and Woodland Desired Ecological Condition ....................................................... G-8 Upland Longleaf Pine Forest and Woodland Management Strategy ................................................................ G-9 Upland Longleaf Pine Forest and Woodland Key Ecological Attributes ............................................................. G-9 G.2.2 SHORTLEAF PINE-OAK FOREST AND WOODLAND ............................................................................................ G-10 Shortleaf Pine-Oak Forest and Woodland Ecological System Characteristics.................................................. G-10 Shortleaf Pine-Oak Forest and Woodland Desired Ecological Condition ......................................................... G-11 Shortleaf Pine-Oak Forest and Woodland Management Strategy .................................................................. G-11 Shortleaf Pine-Oak Forest and Woodland Key Ecological Attributes ............................................................... G-11 G.2.3 LOBLOLLY FOREST ..................................................................................................................................... G-12 Loblolly Forest Ecological System Characteristics ............................................................................................ G-12 Loblolly Forest Desired Ecological Condition.................................................................................................... G-12 Loblolly Forest Management Strategy ............................................................................................................. G-13 Loblolly Forest Key Ecological Attributes ......................................................................................................... G-13 G.2.4 SOUTHERN LOBLOLLY-HARDWOOD FLATWOODS............................................................................................. G-14 Southern Loblolly-Hardwood Flatwoods Ecological System Characteristics .................................................... G-14 Southern Loblolly-Hardwood Flatwoods Desired Ecological Condition ........................................................... G-14 Southern Loblolly-Hardwood Flatwoods Management Strategy .................................................................... G-14 Southern Loblolly-Hardwood Flatwoods Key Ecological Attributes ................................................................. G-14 G.2.5 SLASH PINE FOREST ................................................................................................................................... G-15 Slash Pine Forest Ecological System Characteristics ........................................................................................ G-15 Slash Pine Forest Desired Ecological Condition ................................................................................................ G-15 Slash Pine Forest Management Strategy ......................................................................................................... G-16 Slash Pine Forest Key Ecological Attributes ..................................................................................................... G-16 G.2.6 NORTHERN DRY UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST ............................................................................................... G-17 Northern Dry Upland Hardwood Forest Ecological System Characteristics ..................................................... G-17 Northern Dry Upland Hardwood Forest Desired Ecological Condition ............................................................ G-17 Northern Dry Upland Hardwood Forest Management Strategy...................................................................... G-17 Northern Dry Upland Hardwood Forest Key Ecological Attributes .................................................................. G-18 G.2.7 SOUTHERN DRY UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST ............................................................................................... G-18 Southern Dry Upland Hardwood Forest Ecological System Characteristics ..................................................... G-18 Southern Dry Upland Hardwood Forest Desired Ecological Condition............................................................. G-19 National Forests in Mississippi G-i Appendix G - Ecosystems and Species Diversity Report Southern Dry Upland Hardwood Forest Management Strategy ...................................................................... G-19 Southern Dry Upland Hardwood Forest Key Ecological Attributes .................................................................. G-19 G.2.8 SOUTHERN LOESS BLUFF FOREST ................................................................................................................. G-20 Southern Loess Bluff Forest Ecological System Characteristics ........................................................................ G-20 Southern Loess Bluff Forest Desired Ecological Condition ............................................................................... G-21 Southern Loess Bluff Forest Management Strategy ........................................................................................ G-21 Southern Loess Bluff Forest Key Ecological Attributes ..................................................................................... G-22 G.2.9 SOUTHERN MESIC SLOPE FOREST ................................................................................................................. G-22 Southern Mesic Slope Forest Ecological System Characteristics ...................................................................... G-22 Southern Mesic Slope Forest Desired Ecological Condition ............................................................................. G-22 Southern Mesic Slope Forest Management Strategy ...................................................................................... G-23 Southern Mesic Slope Forest Key Ecological Attributes ................................................................................... G-23 G.2.10 NORTHERN MESIC HARDWOOD FOREST ........................................................................................................ G-24 Northern Mesic Hardwood Forest Ecological System Characteristics ............................................................. G-24 Northern Mesic Hardwood Forest Desired Ecological Condition ..................................................................... G-24 Northern Mesic Hardwood Forest Management Strategy .............................................................................. G-24 Northern Mesic Hardwood Forest Key Ecological Attributes ........................................................................... G-25 G.2.11 FLOODPLAIN FOREST ................................................................................................................................. G-25 Floodplain Forest Ecological System Characteristics ....................................................................................... G-25
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE
    Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE LILIACEAE de Jussieu 1789 (Lily Family) (also see AGAVACEAE, ALLIACEAE, ALSTROEMERIACEAE, AMARYLLIDACEAE, ASPARAGACEAE, COLCHICACEAE, HEMEROCALLIDACEAE, HOSTACEAE, HYACINTHACEAE, HYPOXIDACEAE, MELANTHIACEAE, NARTHECIACEAE, RUSCACEAE, SMILACACEAE, THEMIDACEAE, TOFIELDIACEAE) As here interpreted narrowly, the Liliaceae constitutes about 11 genera and 550 species, of the Northern Hemisphere. There has been much recent investigation and re-interpretation of evidence regarding the upper-level taxonomy of the Liliales, with strong suggestions that the broad Liliaceae recognized by Cronquist (1981) is artificial and polyphyletic. Cronquist (1993) himself concurs, at least to a degree: "we still await a comprehensive reorganization of the lilies into several families more comparable to other recognized families of angiosperms." Dahlgren & Clifford (1982) and Dahlgren, Clifford, & Yeo (1985) synthesized an early phase in the modern revolution of monocot taxonomy. Since then, additional research, especially molecular (Duvall et al. 1993, Chase et al. 1993, Bogler & Simpson 1995, and many others), has strongly validated the general lines (and many details) of Dahlgren's arrangement. The most recent synthesis (Kubitzki 1998a) is followed as the basis for familial and generic taxonomy of the lilies and their relatives (see summary below). References: Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (1998, 2003); Tamura in Kubitzki (1998a). Our “liliaceous” genera (members of orders placed in the Lilianae) are therefore divided as shown below, largely following Kubitzki (1998a) and some more recent molecular analyses. ALISMATALES TOFIELDIACEAE: Pleea, Tofieldia. LILIALES ALSTROEMERIACEAE: Alstroemeria COLCHICACEAE: Colchicum, Uvularia. LILIACEAE: Clintonia, Erythronium, Lilium, Medeola, Prosartes, Streptopus, Tricyrtis, Tulipa. MELANTHIACEAE: Amianthium, Anticlea, Chamaelirium, Helonias, Melanthium, Schoenocaulon, Stenanthium, Veratrum, Toxicoscordion, Trillium, Xerophyllum, Zigadenus.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 76 Tuesday, No. 192 October 4, 2011 Pages 61249–61554
    Vol. 76 Tuesday, No. 192 October 4, 2011 Pages 61249–61554 OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER VerDate Mar 15 2010 20:01 Oct 03, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\04OCWS.LOC 04OCWS sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES II Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 4, 2011 The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records PUBLIC Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 202–741–6005 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–741–6005 Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Checklist of the Missouri Flora for Floristic Quality Assessment
    Ladd, D. and J.R. Thomas. 2015. Ecological checklist of the Missouri flora for Floristic Quality Assessment. Phytoneuron 2015-12: 1–274. Published 12 February 2015. ISSN 2153 733X ECOLOGICAL CHECKLIST OF THE MISSOURI FLORA FOR FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT DOUGLAS LADD The Nature Conservancy 2800 S. Brentwood Blvd. St. Louis, Missouri 63144 [email protected] JUSTIN R. THOMAS Institute of Botanical Training, LLC 111 County Road 3260 Salem, Missouri 65560 [email protected] ABSTRACT An annotated checklist of the 2,961 vascular taxa comprising the flora of Missouri is presented, with conservatism rankings for Floristic Quality Assessment. The list also provides standardized acronyms for each taxon and information on nativity, physiognomy, and wetness ratings. Annotated comments for selected taxa provide taxonomic, floristic, and ecological information, particularly for taxa not recognized in recent treatments of the Missouri flora. Synonymy crosswalks are provided for three references commonly used in Missouri. A discussion of the concept and application of Floristic Quality Assessment is presented. To accurately reflect ecological and taxonomic relationships, new combinations are validated for two distinct taxa, Dichanthelium ashei and D. werneri , and problems in application of infraspecific taxon names within Quercus shumardii are clarified. CONTENTS Introduction Species conservatism and floristic quality Application of Floristic Quality Assessment Checklist: Rationale and methods Nomenclature and taxonomic concepts Synonymy Acronyms Physiognomy, nativity, and wetness Summary of the Missouri flora Conclusion Annotated comments for checklist taxa Acknowledgements Literature Cited Ecological checklist of the Missouri flora Table 1. C values, physiognomy, and common names Table 2. Synonymy crosswalk Table 3. Wetness ratings and plant families INTRODUCTION This list was developed as part of a revised and expanded system for Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA) in Missouri.
    [Show full text]
  • Illustration Sources
    APPENDIX ONE ILLUSTRATION SOURCES REF. CODE ABR Abrams, L. 1923–1960. Illustrated flora of the Pacific states. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA. ADD Addisonia. 1916–1964. New York Botanical Garden, New York. Reprinted with permission from Addisonia, vol. 18, plate 579, Copyright © 1933, The New York Botanical Garden. ANDAnderson, E. and Woodson, R.E. 1935. The species of Tradescantia indigenous to the United States. Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Reprinted with permission of the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University. ANN Hollingworth A. 2005. Original illustrations. Published herein by the Botanical Research Institute of Texas, Fort Worth. Artist: Anne Hollingworth. ANO Anonymous. 1821. Medical botany. E. Cox and Sons, London. ARM Annual Rep. Missouri Bot. Gard. 1889–1912. Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis. BA1 Bailey, L.H. 1914–1917. The standard cyclopedia of horticulture. The Macmillan Company, New York. BA2 Bailey, L.H. and Bailey, E.Z. 1976. Hortus third: A concise dictionary of plants cultivated in the United States and Canada. Revised and expanded by the staff of the Liberty Hyde Bailey Hortorium. Cornell University. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York. Reprinted with permission from William Crepet and the L.H. Bailey Hortorium. Cornell University. BA3 Bailey, L.H. 1900–1902. Cyclopedia of American horticulture. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York. BB2 Britton, N.L. and Brown, A. 1913. An illustrated flora of the northern United States, Canada and the British posses- sions. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York. BEA Beal, E.O. and Thieret, J.W. 1986. Aquatic and wetland plants of Kentucky. Kentucky Nature Preserves Commission, Frankfort. Reprinted with permission of Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Calopogon Multiflorus Lindley Other Commonly Used Names
    Common Name: MANY-FLOWERED GRASS PINK Scientific Name: Calopogon multiflorus Lindley Other Commonly Used Names: none Previously Used Scientific Names: Calopogon barbatus (Walter) Ames var. multiflorus (Lindley) Correll Family: Orchidaceae (orchid) Rarity Ranks: G2G3/SH State Legal Status: Special Concern Federal Legal Status: none Federal Wetland Status: FACW Description: Perennial herb with 1 - 2 grass-like leaves at the base of the stem, 1 - 6 inches (3 - 15 cm) long and usually less than inch (9 mm) wide. Stem 7 - 20 inches (17 - 50 cm) tall, leafless, with 2 - 15 dark pink, fragrant flowers crowded at the top of a dark reddish-brown stalk; most flowers are open at the same time. Flowers with 2 spreading petals, an erect lip petal, and 3 spreading sepals. Petals widest above the middle, with a narrow base and bluntly pointed tip. Lip petal as wide as long, with a crest of yellow-orange bristles. Middle sepal usually less than inch (1.7 cm) long; lateral sepals spreading but not reflexed backwards. Fruit an erect capsule, ½ - inch (1.3 - 2.2 cm) long. Similar Species: Bearded grass pink (Calopogon barbatus) petals are widest below the middle and its flowers are not fragrant; it occurs in wet flatwoods. Tuberous grass pink (C. tuberosus) leaves are wider than 3/8 inch, the middle sepal is longer than ¾ inch (2 cm), and the petals are widest below the middle. Pale grass pink (C. pallidus) flowers are white or pale pink (rarely dark pink), and the lateral sepals are flexed backwards. Related Rare Species: Oklahoma grass pink (Calopogon oklahomensis) was last seen in Calhoun County in 1947.
    [Show full text]
  • Charles T. Bryson Daniel A. Skojac, Jr.1
    AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF THE VASCULAR FLORA OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI 1 Charles T. Bryson Daniel A. Skojac, Jr. USDA, ARS USDA, FS, Southern Region Crop Production Systems Research Unit Chattahoochee NF Stoneville, Mississippi 38776, U.S.A. 3941 Highway 76 Chatsworth, Georgia 30705, U.S.A. ABSTRACT Field explorations have yielded 271 species new to Washington County, Mississippi and Calandrinia ciliata (Ruiz & Pav.) DC. and Ruellia nudiflora (Engelm. & .A. Gray) Urban new to the state. An annotated list of 809 taxa for Washington County is provided and excludes 59 species that were reported from counties adjacent and included in the 1980 Washington County and environs flora, but have yet to be docu- mented from Washington County. RESUMEN Exploraciones de campo han dado como resultado 271 especies nuevas para Washington County, Mississippi y Calandrinia ciliata (Ruiz & Pav.) DC. y Ruellia nudiflora (Engelm. & .A. Gray) Urban nuevas para el estado. Se aporta una lista anotada de 809 taxa para Washington County y se excluyen 59 especies que estaban citadas de condados adyacentes e incluidas en la flora de 1980 de Washington County y alre- dedores, pero que no se han documentado aún para Washington County. INTRODUCTION The flora of Mississippi, especially the Yazoo-Mississippi River Alluvial Plain, is poorly reported (Bryson & Carter 1994; Skojac et al. 2007) compared to other physiographic regions of Mississippi and of adjacent states. Lowe’s Plants of Mississippi (1921) still remains the only effort at a comprehensive flora of the state. Several county floras have been compiled, mostly by graduate students at various universities; however, comprehen- sive floras are lacking for more than 80% of Mississippi’s 82 counties.
    [Show full text]
  • Alabama Inventory List
    Alabama Inventory List The Rare, Threatened, & Endangered Plants & Animals of Alabama Alabama Natural August 2017 Heritage Program® TABLE OF CONTENTS ALABAMA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM® ........................................................................... 1 CHANGES FROM ALNHP TRACKING LIST OF AUGUST 2015 .................................................. 3 DEFINITION OF HERITAGE RANKS ................................................................................................ 5 DEFINITIONS OF FEDERAL & STATE LISTED SPECIES STATUS ......................................... 10 VERTEBRATES ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Birds....................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Mammals ............................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Amphibians ............................................................................................................................................................................ 21 Reptiles .................................................................................................................................................................................. 23 Lizards, Snakes, and Amphisbaenas .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystems and Species Diversity Report
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Region Appendix G - Ecosystems and Species Diversity Report Prepared for Land Management Plan Revision December 2012 The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Land Management Plan Revision Environmental Impact Statement Table of Contents G.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ G-1 G.1.1 Viability Evaluation Process ............................................................................................................... G-2 G.1.2 Forestwide Ecological System Sustainability ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coefficients of Conservatism Values and the Floristic Quality Index for the Vascular Plants of South Florida
    U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Coefficients of Conservatism Values and the Floristic Quality Index for the Vascular Plants of South Florida Coefficients of Conservatism Values and the Floristic Quality Index for the Vascular Plants of South Florida Steve Mortellaro1, Mike Barry 2, George Gann3, John Zahina4, Sally Channon5, Charles Hilsenbeck6, Douglas Scofield7, George Wilder8 and Gerould Wilhelm9 1U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1339 20th Street, Vero Beach FL 32960 2U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Naples, FL (Formerly) 2Institute for Regional Conservation, 22601 S.W. 152 Ave., Miami, FL 33170 (Currently) 3Institute for Regional Conservation, 22601 S.W. 152 Ave., Miami, FL 33170 4 South Florida Water Management District, 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, FL 5Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management, 2300 North Jog Rd, 4th Floor, West Palm Beach, FL 33411 6 17516 Birchwood Drive, Boca Raton, FL 33487 7University of California, Los Angeles, 1509 Life Sciences, Box 951786, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1786 8Naples Botanical Garden, 4820 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 9Conservation Design Forum, Inc., 375 W. First Street, Elmhurst, IL 60126 January 2009 South Florida Ecological Services Field Office Vero Beach, Florida Table of Contents ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Missouri Species and Communities of Conservation Concern Checklist (Checklist) and the Wildlife Code of Missouri (Code)
    MISSOURI SPECIES AND COMMUNITIES* OF CONSERVATION CONCERN Checklist Longnose Darter Topeka Shiner Goldstripe Darter Arkansas Darter Swamp Darter Redfin Darter Taillight Shiner Crystal Darter Sabine Shiner Illustrations from Fishes of Missouri, 3rd ed (in prep), by David A. Neely, Ph.D. JANUARY 2020 *Terrestrial Natural Communities. Does not include aquatic, geologic, or cave communities. SCI077 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.........................................................................................................................................................2 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................................................3 TERMS AND DEFINITIONS ..................................................................................................................................................4 SPECIES CHANGES ................................................................................................................................................................8 TERRESTRIAL NATURAL COMMUNITIES .....................................................................................................................9 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES IN MISSOURI....................................................................................12 SPECIES AND STATUSES LICHENS...................................................................................................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • Update of TVA's Natural Resource Plan Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
    Document Type: EIS-Administrative Record Index Field: Draft SEIS Project Name: Natural Resource Plan Project Number: 2009-60 UPDATE OF TVA’S NATURAL RESOURCE PLAN DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia Prepared by: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Knoxville, Tennessee May 2019 This page intentionally left blank Cover Sheet COVER SHEET Update of TVA’s Natural Resource Plan Proposed action: The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) has prepared this Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to assess the potential environmental, social, and economic impacts associated with implementing an updated Natural Resource Plan. Type of document: Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Lead agency: Tennessee Valley Authority To request information, contact: Matthew Higdon Tennessee Valley Authority 400 W. Summit Hill Drive WT-11B Knoxville, TN 37902 Phone: 865.632.8051 E-Mail: [email protected] Comments due date: July 8, 2019 Abstract: TVA proposes to make changes to the structure of and programs identified in its Natural Resource Plan (NRP), completed in 2011. TVA developed the NRP to guide its natural resource stewardship efforts. The existing NRP addresses TVA’s management of biological, cultural, and water resources; recreation; reservoir lands planning; and public engagement. The NRP also guides TVA in achieving the objectives of its Environmental Policy for a more systematic and integrated approach to natural resource stewardship. In the 2011 NRP, TVA committed to reviewing the NRP every five years and updating the plan to ensure it remains relevant and current. In 2016, as part of the update process, TVA staff began a holistic review of the NRP and determined that the 2011 NRP does not encompass all of the resource stewardship programs managed by TVA.
    [Show full text]
  • Coefficient of Conservatism Database Development for Wetland Plants Occurring in the Southeastern United States
    Southeast Wetland Plant Coefficient of Conservatism Database Development Coefficient of Conservatism Database Development for Wetland Plants Occurring in the Southeastern United States By Kristie Gianopulos, M.S. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Water Resources: Wetlands Branch Supported by EPA Region IV Wetland Program Development Grant #CD 96488511-0 Contributing Botanists: Quinton “Guy” Anglin, Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection Julian Campbell, Bluegrass Woodland Restoration Center S. Lee Echols, North American Land Trust L. Dwayne Estes, Austin Peay State University Derick Poindexter, University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill Milo Pyne, NatureServe Michael Schafale, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Al Schotz, Alabama Natural Heritage Program Ed Schwartzman, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Bruce Sorrie, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Dan Spaulding, Anniston Museum of Natural History Bob Upcavage, University of South Florida & Environmental Consultants, LLC. Alan Weakley, University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill Deborah White, Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission Wendy Zomlefer, University of Georgia Citation for this document: Gianopulos, K. 2014. Coefficient of Conservatism Database Development for Wetland Plants Occurring in the Southeast United States. North Carolina Dept. of Environment & Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources: Wetlands Branch. Report to the EPA, Region 4. Southeast Wetland Plant Coefficient of Conservatism Database Development
    [Show full text]