DOCSLIB.ORG

Vegetation Classification Guidelines National Park Service Vegetation Inventory, Version 2.0

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Vegetation Classification Guidelines National Park Service Vegetation Inventory, Version 2.0 National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Vegetation Classification Guidelines National Park Service Vegetation Inventory, Version 2.0 Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/NRR—2011/374 ON THE COVER Upper Left: North Atlantic Low Salt Marsh, Cape Cod National Seashore, Massachusetts Upper Right: California Fan Palm Woodland, Joshua Tree National Park, California Lower Left: Subalpine Fir Woodland, Glacier National Park, Montana Lower Right: West Gulf Coastal Plain Wet Longleaf Pine Savanna, Big Thicket National Preserve, Texas. National Park Service photographs by Chris Lea. Vegetation Classification Guidelines National Park Service Vegetation Inventory, Version 2.0 Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/NRR—2011/374 Chris Lea National Park Service Vegetation Inventory P.O. Box 25287 (Academy Place) Denver, CO 80225 April 2011 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. Natural Resource Reports are the designated medium for disseminating high priority, current natural resource information with managerial application. The targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data, and whose background and expertise put them on par technically and scientifically with the authors of the information. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available from the National Park Service Vegetation Inventory website (http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/inventory/veg/index.cfm) and from the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/nrpm/). Please cite this publication as: Lea, C. 2011. Vegetation classification guidelines: National Park Service Vegetation Inventory, version 2.0. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/NRR—2011/374. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 909/107410, April 2011 ii Contents Page Figures........................................................................................................................................... vii Tables............................................................................................................................................. ix Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... xi Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................ xiii 1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purposes of Vegetation Classification ............................................................................... 1 1.2 Legal and Policy Basis for Vegetation Classification in the National Park Service ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 The Importance of a Field-based Vegetation Classification .............................................. 2 1.4 Changes from Previous Version of this Report ................................................................. 3 1.5 Key Requirements of the Park-based Classification ......................................................... 5 2.0 Vegetation Classification: Review of Approaches and Methods ............................................. 9 2.1 Skills Required and Division of Labor .............................................................................. 9 2.2 Classification Approaches ................................................................................................. 9 2.2.1 Vegetation Classification Criteria ........................................................................... 10 2.2.2 Noda and Diagnostics.............................................................................................. 12 2.3 Information Sources for Local Vegetation Type Descriptions ........................................ 15 2.3.1 Classification Plots / Local Analysis ....................................................................... 16 2.3.2 Observation Plots..................................................................................................... 16 2.3.3 Remotely Sensed Image Data................................................................................... 17 2.3.4 Regional Classification Plots / Regional Analysis................................................... 19 2.4 Information Sources for Global (National Vegetation Classification) Description............................................................................................................................. 19 2.4.1 Classification Plots / USNVC Types Database........................................................ 19 iii Contents (continued) Page 2.5 Review of Quantitative Methods for Vegetation Classification ...................................... 20 2.5.1 Cluster Analysis ....................................................................................................... 20 2.5.2 TWINSPAN .............................................................................................................. 20 2.5.3 Tabular Sorting........................................................................................................ 21 2.5.4 Indicator Species Analysis ....................................................................................... 22 2.5.5 Ordination................................................................................................................ 22 3.0 Vegetation Classification: Relationship to Map Classes ........................................................ 23 3.1 Vegetation and Unvegetated Land Cover That Are Represented by Single (Homogeneous) Map Classes ................................................................................................ 23 3.1.1 Natural and Seminatural Vegetation ....................................................................... 23 3.1.3 Cultural Vegetation.................................................................................................. 24 3.1.4 Unvegetated Land (and Water) Cover and Some Problematic Vegetation Classes .............................................................................................................................. 24 3.2 Heterogeneous Map Classes (Complexes) ...................................................................... 25 3.2.1 Thematic Complexes ................................................................................................ 25 3.2.2 Mosaiced Complexes ............................................................................................... 26 3.4 Cross Walk of Local Vegetation Classes to National Vegetation Classification ......................................................................................................................... 26 3.5 Cross Walk of Local Vegetation Classes to Local Map Classes ..................................... 26 3.6 Cross Walk to Other Classifications................................................................................ 27 3.7 Representation within Spatial Database .......................................................................... 27 4.0 Vegetation Descriptions.......................................................................................................... 29 4.1 Minimum Requirements .................................................................................................. 29 4.1.1 Minimum Set of Fields for Vegetation Type Descriptions ....................................... 29 iv Contents (continued) Page 4.1.2 Optional Set of Fields for Vegetation Type Descriptions ........................................ 30 4.2 Sources for Description ................................................................................................... 30 4.2.1 Classification Plots .................................................................................................. 30 4.2.2 Observation Plots..................................................................................................... 31 4.2.3 USNVC Types Database .......................................................................................... 31 4.2.4 Map Data ................................................................................................................. 31 4.2.5 Qualitative Sources.................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Keys View They Are Closely Related the Most Diverse Vegetation Types in North America
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Desert Alyssum Joshua Tree KevsViewflw (Lepidiumfremontii) (Yucca brevifolia) Joshua Tree National Park The desert alyssum is a Seeing Joshua Tree relative of such plants National Park's as broccoli, kale, and namesake indicates brussel sprouts; they are that you are definitely all in the mustard family in the Mojave Desert, (Brassicaceae), Although the only place in the the leaves smell like green .A world where it grows. vegetables, the flowers You can't age a Joshua have an aroma of sweet honey. The leaves tree by counting its are thread-like and sometimes lobed; the growth rings because there aren't any: these seedpods are round, flat, and seamed down monocots do not produce true wood. Like all the middle. yuccas,Joshua trees are pollinated by yucca moths(Tegeticula spp.) that specialize in active pollination, a rare form of pollination mutualism.The female moth lays her Brownplume eggs inside the flower's ovary, then pollinates the flower. This 100 Feet ensures that when the larvae emerge, they will have a fresh Wirelettuce food source—the developing seeds! 30 Meters A (Stephanomeria See inside of guide for a selection of plants found on this trail. pauciflora) The Flora of Joshua Tree National Park This small shrub Desert Needlegrass Three distinct biogeographic regions converge in Joshua Tree has an intricate (Stipa speciosa) National Park, creating a rich flora: nearly 730 vascular plant branching pattern, with inconspicuous species have been documented here. Each flower of this species leaves. The pale pink to has a 1.5 inch (4 cm)long lavender flowering head The Sonoran Desert to the south and east, at elevations bristle, known as an awn;this is a composite of multiple needlelike structure has a bend less than 3000 ft(914 m), contributes a unique set of plants flowers,as with all members of the Sunflower in the middle and short white that are adapted to a bi-seasonal precipitation pattern family (Asteraceae).
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • California Vegetation Map in Support of the DRECP
    CALIFORNIA VEGETATION MAP IN SUPPORT OF THE DESERT RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN (2014-2016 ADDITIONS) John Menke, Edward Reyes, Anne Hepburn, Deborah Johnson, and Janet Reyes Aerial Information Systems, Inc. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Renewable Energy Program and the California Energy Commission Final Report May 2016 Prepared by: Primary Authors John Menke Edward Reyes Anne Hepburn Deborah Johnson Janet Reyes Report Graphics Ben Johnson Cover Page Photo Credits: Joshua Tree: John Fulton Blue Palo Verde: Ed Reyes Mojave Yucca: John Fulton Kingston Range, Pinyon: Arin Glass Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 112 First Street Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 793-9493 [email protected] in collaboration with California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program 1807 13th Street, Suite 202 Sacramento, CA 95811 and California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for this project was provided by: California Energy Commission US Bureau of Land Management California Wildlife Conservation Board California Department of Fish and Wildlife Personnel involved in developing the methodology and implementing this project included: Aerial Information Systems: Lisa Cotterman, Mark Fox, John Fulton, Arin Glass, Anne Hepburn, Ben Johnson, Debbie Johnson, John Menke, Lisa Morse, Mike Nelson, Ed Reyes, Janet Reyes, Patrick Yiu California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Diana Hickson, Todd Keeler‐Wolf, Anne Klein, Aicha Ougzin, Rosalie Yacoub California
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Technical Report for the Nichols Mine Project
    Biological Technical Report for the Nichols Mine Project June 8, 2016 Prepared for: Nichols Road Partners, LLC P.O. Box 77850 Corona, CA 92877 Prepared by: Alden Environmental, Inc. 3245 University Avenue, #1188 San Diego, CA 92104 Nichols Road Mine Project Biological Technical Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................1 1.1 Project Location ..................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Description ..............................................................................................1 2.0 METHODS & SURVEY LIMITATIONS .................................................................1 2.1 Literature Review ................................................................................................1 2.2 Biological Surveys ..............................................................................................2 2.2.1 Vegetation Mapping..................................................................................3 2.2.2 Jurisdictional Delineations of Waters of U.S. and Waters of the State ....4 2.2.3 Sensitive Species Surveys .........................................................................4 2.2.4 Survey Limitations ....................................................................................5 2.2.5 Nomenclature ............................................................................................5 3.0 REGULATORY
    [Show full text]
  • Pima County Plant List (2020) Common Name Exotic? Source
    Pima County Plant List (2020) Common Name Exotic? Source McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abies concolor var. concolor White fir Devender, T. R. (2005) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abies lasiocarpa var. arizonica Corkbark fir Devender, T. R. (2005) Abronia villosa Hariy sand verbena McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abutilon abutiloides Shrubby Indian mallow Devender, T. R. (2005) Abutilon berlandieri Berlandier Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) Abutilon incanum Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abutilon malacum Yellow Indian mallow Devender, T. R. (2005) Abutilon mollicomum Sonoran Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) Abutilon palmeri Palmer Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) Abutilon parishii Pima Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Abutilon parvulum Dwarf Indian mallow Herbarium; ASU Vascular Plant Herbarium Abutilon pringlei McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Abutilon reventum Yellow flower Indian mallow Herbarium; ASU Vascular Plant Herbarium McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia angustissima Whiteball acacia Devender, T. R. (2005); DBGH McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia constricta Whitethorn acacia Devender, T. R. (2005) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia greggii Catclaw acacia Devender, T. R. (2005) Acacia millefolia Santa Rita acacia McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia neovernicosa Chihuahuan whitethorn acacia Devender, T. R. (2005) McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Acalypha lindheimeri Shrubby copperleaf Herbarium Acalypha neomexicana New Mexico copperleaf McLaughlin, S. (1992); DBGH Acalypha ostryaefolia McLaughlin, S. (1992) Acalypha pringlei McLaughlin, S. (1992) Acamptopappus McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Rayless goldenhead sphaerocephalus Herbarium Acer glabrum Douglas maple McLaughlin, S. (1992); DBGH Acer grandidentatum Sugar maple McLaughlin, S. (1992); DBGH Acer negundo Ashleaf maple McLaughlin, S.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F3 Rare Plant Survey Report
    Appendix F3 Rare Plant Survey Report Draft CADIZ VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION, RECOVERY, AND STORAGE PROJECT Rare Plant Survey Report Prepared for May 2011 Santa Margarita Water District Draft CADIZ VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION, RECOVERY, AND STORAGE PROJECT Rare Plant Survey Report Prepared for May 2011 Santa Margarita Water District 626 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213.599.4300 www.esassoc.com Oakland Olympia Petaluma Portland Sacramento San Diego San Francisco Seattle Tampa Woodland Hills D210324 TABLE OF CONTENTS Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery, and Storage Project: Rare Plant Survey Report Page Summary ............................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................2 Objective .......................................................................................................................... 2 Project Location and Description .....................................................................................2 Setting ................................................................................................................................... 5 Climate ............................................................................................................................. 5 Topography and Soils ......................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018
    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire Adaptations of Some Southern California Plants
    Proceedings: 7th Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference 1967 Fire Adaptations of Some Southern California Plants RICHARD J. VOGL Department of Botany California State College at Los Angeles Los Angeles, California SHORTLY after arriving in California six years ago, I was asked to give a biology seminar lecture on my research. This was the usual procedure with new faculty and I prepared a lecture on my fire research in Wisconsin (Vogi 1961). These seminars were open to the public, since the college serves the city and sur­ rounding communities. As I presented my findings, I became con­ scious of the glint of state and U. S. Forest Service uniforms in the back rows. These back rows literally erupted into a barrage of probing questions at the end of the lecture. The questions were somewhat skeptical and were intended to discredit. They admitted that I almost created an acceptable argument for the uses and effects of fire in the Midwest, but were quick to emphasize that they were certain that none of these concepts or principles of fire would apply out here in the West. I consider this first California Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Con­ ference a major step towards convincing the West that fire has helped shape its vegetation and is an important ecological factor here, just as it is in the Midwest, Southeast, or wherever in North 79 RICHARD J. VOGL America. I hope that southern Californians attending these meetings or reading these Proceedings are not left with the impression that the information presented might be acceptable for northern California but cannot be applied to southern California because the majority of contributors worked in the north.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversidad Y Distribución De La Familia Asteraceae En México
    Taxonomía y florística Diversidad y distribución de la familia Asteraceae en México JOSÉ LUIS VILLASEÑOR Botanical Sciences 96 (2): 332-358, 2018 Resumen Antecedentes: La familia Asteraceae (o Compositae) en México ha llamado la atención de prominentes DOI: 10.17129/botsci.1872 botánicos en las últimas décadas, por lo que cuenta con una larga tradición de investigación de su riqueza Received: florística. Se cuenta, por lo tanto, con un gran acervo bibliográfico que permite hacer una síntesis y actua- October 2nd, 2017 lización de su conocimiento florístico a nivel nacional. Accepted: Pregunta: ¿Cuál es la riqueza actualmente conocida de Asteraceae en México? ¿Cómo se distribuye a lo February 18th, 2018 largo del territorio nacional? ¿Qué géneros o regiones requieren de estudios más detallados para mejorar Associated Editor: el conocimiento de la familia en el país? Guillermo Ibarra-Manríquez Área de estudio: México. Métodos: Se llevó a cabo una exhaustiva revisión de literatura florística y taxonómica, así como la revi- sión de unos 200,000 ejemplares de herbario, depositados en más de 20 herbarios, tanto nacionales como del extranjero. Resultados: México registra 26 tribus, 417 géneros y 3,113 especies de Asteraceae, de las cuales 3,050 son especies nativas y 1,988 (63.9 %) son endémicas del territorio nacional. Los géneros más relevantes, tanto por el número de especies como por su componente endémico, son Ageratina (164 y 135, respecti- vamente), Verbesina (164, 138) y Stevia (116, 95). Los estados con mayor número de especies son Oaxa- ca (1,040), Jalisco (956), Durango (909), Guerrero (855) y Michoacán (837). Los biomas con la mayor riqueza de géneros y especies son el bosque templado (1,906) y el matorral xerófilo (1,254).
    [Show full text]
  • IP Athos Renewable Energy Project, Plan of Development, Appendix D.2
    APPENDIX D.2 Plant Survey Memorandum Athos Memo Report To: Aspen Environmental Group From: Lehong Chow, Ironwood Consulting, Inc. Date: April 3, 2019 Re: Athos Supplemental Spring 2019 Botanical Surveys This memo report presents the methods and results for supplemental botanical surveys conducted for the Athos Solar Energy Project in March 2019 and supplements the Biological Resources Technical Report (BRTR; Ironwood 2019) which reported on field surveys conducted in 2018. BACKGROUND Botanical surveys were previously conducted in the spring and fall of 2018 for the entirety of the project site for the Athos Solar Energy Project (Athos). However, due to insufficient rain, many plant species did not germinate for proper identification during 2018 spring surveys. Fall surveys in 2018 were conducted only on a reconnaissance-level due to low levels of rain. Regional winter rainfall from the two nearest weather stations showed rainfall averaging at 0.1 inches during botanical surveys conducted in 2018 (Ironwood, 2019). In addition, gen-tie alignments have changed slightly and alternatives, access roads and spur roads have been added. PURPOSE The purpose of this survey was to survey all new additions and re-survey areas of interest including public lands (limited to portions of the gen-tie segments), parcels supporting native vegetation and habitat, and windblown sandy areas where sensitive plant species may occur. The private land parcels in current or former agricultural use were not surveyed (parcel groups A, B, C, E, and part of G). METHODS Survey Areas: The area surveyed for biological resources included the entirety of gen-tie routes (including alternates), spur roads, access roads on public land, parcels supporting native vegetation (parcel groups D and F), and areas covered by windblown sand where sensitive species may occur (portion of parcel group G).
    [Show full text]
  • Fremontia Journal of the California Native Plant Society
    $10.00 (Free to Members) VOL. 40, NO. 3 AND VOL. 41, NO. 1 • SEPTEMBER 2012 AND JANUARY 2013 FREMONTIA JOURNAL OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY INSPIRATIONINSPIRATION ANDAND ADVICEADVICE FOR GARDENING VOL. 40, NO. 3 AND VOL. 41, NO. 1, SEPTEMBER 2012 AND JANUARY 2013 FREMONTIA WITH NATIVE PLANTS CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY CNPS, 2707 K Street, Suite 1; Sacramento, CA 95816-5130 FREMONTIA Phone: (916) 447-CNPS (2677) Fax: (916) 447-2727 Web site: www.cnps.org Email: [email protected] VOL. 40, NO. 3, SEPTEMBER 2012 AND VOL. 41, NO. 1, JANUARY 2013 MEMBERSHIP Membership form located on inside back cover; Copyright © 2013 dues include subscriptions to Fremontia and the CNPS Bulletin California Native Plant Society Mariposa Lily . $1,500 Family or Group . $75 Bob Hass, Editor Benefactor . $600 International or Library . $75 Rob Moore, Contributing Editor Patron . $300 Individual . $45 Plant Lover . $100 Student/Retired/Limited Income . $25 Beth Hansen-Winter, Designer Cynthia Powell, Cynthia Roye, and CORPORATE/ORGANIZATIONAL Mary Ann Showers, Proofreaders 10+ Employees . $2,500 4-6 Employees . $500 7-10 Employees . $1,000 1-3 Employees . $150 CALIFORNIA NATIVE STAFF – SACRAMENTO CHAPTER COUNCIL PLANT SOCIETY Executive Director: Dan Gluesenkamp David Magney (Chair); Larry Levine Finance and Administration (Vice Chair); Marty Foltyn (Secretary) Dedicated to the Preservation of Manager: Cari Porter Alta Peak (Tulare): Joan Stewart the California Native Flora Membership and Development Bristlecone (Inyo-Mono): Coordinator: Stacey Flowerdew The California Native Plant Society Steve McLaughlin Conservation Program Director: Channel Islands: David Magney (CNPS) is a statewide nonprofit organi- Greg Suba zation dedicated to increasing the Rare Plant Botanist: Aaron Sims Dorothy King Young (Mendocino/ understanding and appreciation of Vegetation Program Director: Sonoma Coast): Nancy Morin California’s native plants, and to pre- Julie Evens East Bay: Bill Hunt serving them and their natural habitats Vegetation Ecologists: El Dorado: Sue Britting for future generations.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf Clickbook Booklet
    97 Rosac Adenostoma sparsifolium red shanks X 98 Rosac Prunus fasciculata var. fasciculata desert almond X Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the White Wash Area 99 Rosac Prunus fremontii desert apricot X 99 #Plants 100 Rosac Prunus ilicifolia ssp. ilicifolia hollyleaf cherry X # Family Scientific Name (*) Common Name CR HC WW Galium angustifolium ssp. 101 Rubia narrowleaf bedstraw 3 Ferns angustifolium 1 Pteri Cheilanthes covillei beady lipfern 30 102 Rutac Thamnosma montana turpentine broom X 25 2 Pteri Pellaea mucronata var. mucronata bird's-foot fern 1 103 Salic Populus fremontii ssp. fremontii Fremont cottonwood X 20 Gymnosperms 104 Salic Salix exigua narrowleaf willow X 3 Cupre Juniperus californica California juniper X 99 105 Salic Salix exigua var. exigua narrowleaf willow 10 4 Ephed Ephedra californica desert tea X 99 106 Salic Salix laevigata red willow X 5 5 Pinac Pinus monophylla pinyon pine X 107 Salic Salix lasiolepis arroyo willow X Eudicots 108 Simmo Simmondsia chinensis jojoba X 20 6 Adoxa Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea blue elderberry X 109 Solan Datura wrightii sacred datura X 7 Anaca Rhus ovata sugar bush X 5 110 Solan Lycium andersonii Anderson's desert-thorn 1 8 Aster Adenophyllum porophylloides San Felipe dogweed X 5 111 Tamar Tamarix ramosissima *saltcedar X 1 9 Aster Ambrosia acanthicarpa bur-ragweed X 20 112 Visca Phoradendron bolleanum dense mistletoe 99 10 Aster Ambrosia salsola var. salsola cheesebush X 50 113 Visca Phoradendron californicum desert mistletoe X 15 11 Aster Artemisia dracunculus wild tarragon X 114 Zygop Larrea tridentata creosote bush X 99 12 Aster Artemisia tridentata big sagebrush X Monocots 13 Aster Baccharis salicifolia ssp.
    [Show full text]