DOCSLIB.ORG

LOUISIANA BLACK BEAR MANAGEMENT PLAN Ursus Americanus Luteolus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
LOUISIANA BLACK BEAR MANAGEMENT PLAN Ursus Americanus Luteolus LOUISIANA BLACK BEAR MANAGEMENT PLAN Ursus americanus luteolus January 2015 LOUISIANA BLACK BEAR MANAGEMENT PLAN Ursus americanus luteolus Prepared by: Maria Davidson, Sean M. Murphy, Kenny Ribbeck, Fred Kimmel, and Jeffrey Duguay Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries 2000 Quail Drive, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA With input from Deborah Fuller and the United States Fish & Wildlife Service January 2015 For further information, please contact: Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries P.O. Box 98000 Baton Rouge, LA 70898 (225) 765-2800 Recommended citation: Davidson, M., S. M. Murphy, K. Ribbeck, F. Kimmel, and J. Duguay. 2015. Louisiana Black Bear Management Plan. Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, 74 pp. Front cover: Louisiana black bear ( Ursus americanus luteolus ). Photo by John Flores ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank Secretary Robert Barham and Assistant Secretary Jimmy Anthony (Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries) for their support and guidance with the development of this document. We also thank Robert Gosnell (Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries) for his experienced insight and review. We thank Duck Locascio, Tommy Tuma, Cody Cedotal, David Breithaupt, Paul Link, Sutton Maehr, and Venise Ortego (Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries) for their contributions and reviews of this document. We are especially grateful for the research conducted by Joseph Clark (United States Geological Survey), Jared Laufenberg (University of Tennessee), and the numerous biologists, technicians, graduate students, and university researchers that have provided LDWF with the necessary data for conservation and management of the Louisiana black bear. We also thank Deborah Fuller and Robert Greco (United States Fish & Wildlife Service) for their insight and supply of the necessary information for the development of this document. For their cooperation and assistance, we thank the numerous private landowners of Louisiana that have helped with recovery of the Louisiana black bear. Finally, we thank the following supporting partners for their assistance, cooperation, and efforts towards conservation and management of the Louisiana black bear: United States Fish & Wildlife Service, United States Geological Survey, United States Department of Agriculture (Natural Resources Conservation Service and Wildlife Services), United States Army Corps of Engineers, University of Tennessee, Louisiana State University, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Stephen F. Austin State University, Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, & Parks, Arkansas Game & Fish Commission, Texas Parks & Wildlife Department, i Black Bear Conservation Coalition, Appalachian Bear Rescue, RoyOMartin Products, The Nature Conservancy, and Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ v LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... vi FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................ vii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 Mission Statement ....................................................................................................................... 1 Management Objective for the Louisiana Black Bear ................................................................ 2 History of the Louisiana Black Bear ........................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER 2: BIOLOGICAL BACKGROUND .......................................................................... 8 Species Description ..................................................................................................................... 8 Subspecies Description ............................................................................................................ 8 Louisiana Black Bear Biology .................................................................................................... 9 Reproduction ......................................................................................................................... 10 Habitat Use and Home Range ............................................................................................... 11 Food Habits............................................................................................................................ 13 Mortality ................................................................................................................................ 15 Ecological Significance of Bears .............................................................................................. 16 Land Use and Bears................................................................................................................... 17 CHAPTER 3: CONSERVATION ............................................................................................... 19 Post-Delisting Monitoring Plan ................................................................................................. 19 LDWF Bear Conservation Goal and Strategies ........................................................................ 19 Population Status and Conservation .......................................................................................... 21 iii Status of Individual Subpopulations ...................................................................................... 25 Tensas River Basin Subpopulation (TRB) ......................................................................... 25 Repatriated Subpopulation (REPAT) ................................................................................ 27 Upper Atchafalaya River Basin Subpopulation (UARB) .................................................. 28 Lower Atchafalaya River Basin Subpopulation (LARB) .................................................. 29 LDWF Population Conservation Actions .............................................................................. 32 Habitat Status and Conservation ............................................................................................... 34 CHAPTER 4: MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................. 41 Public Support for Black Bear Conservation and Management ............................................... 42 Education and Outreach ............................................................................................................ 42 Human-Bear Conflict ................................................................................................................ 48 Large Carnivore Conflict Response Team ............................................................................ 50 Law Enforcement .................................................................................................................. 51 Communities .......................................................................................................................... 51 Bear Management Areas (BMA) .............................................................................................. 52 Harvest ...................................................................................................................................... 55 Laws and Regulations ............................................................................................................... 56 CHAPTER 5: ANTICIPATED IMPACTS ................................................................................. 60 Economic Impacts ..................................................................................................................... 60 Ecological Impacts .................................................................................................................... 62 Social Impacts ........................................................................................................................... 63 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 64 iv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. The historic range of the Louisiana black bear ( Ursus americanus luteolus ) prior to European settlement (Hall 1981). Modified from U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (2013). Figure 1.2. The historic range (prior to European settlement [Hall 1981]) and current breeding range* of the Louisiana black bear ( Ursus americanus luteolus ). Modified from U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (2013). * Current Breeding Range is defined as the areas where reproductively active adult female bears have been documented. Figure 3.1. Locations of extant Louisiana black bear subpopulations in Louisiana, USA (2014). Figure 3.2. Locations of Louisiana black bear live-captures, known natal dens, and confirmed sightings and reports in Louisiana, USA (1992–2014). Figure 3.3. Proportional population ancestries for 556 black bears from Minnesota (MINN), western Mississippi (MISS), southeast Mississippi (G7), White River Basin in Arkansas (WRB), and Tensas River Basin (TRB), Repatriated subpopulation (TRC; referred to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Lost Sabals
    The Lost Sabals Article and photos by Justen Dobbs, Riverside, CA In California, palmetto palms are not seen very often, whereas in Florida and the Carolinas , they are everywhere. The Mexican fan palm ( Washingtonia robusta ), which is native to Mexico, is our version of the palmetto palm (Sabal palmetto ). However, the Mexican Fan is much faster growing and a little neater looking, which destined it for landscape use in Southern California. Only a palm collector could tell them apart ; to the general public, they’re both fan palms. The palmetto is more cold -hardy than the Mexican fan, but in Southern California this isn’t a necessary feature. I have grown Sabal minor, S . mexicana, S. uresana, S. uresana x mexicana, S . causiarum, S . rosei, and S. bermudana . I knew long before I began growing them that they were notoriously slow. In general, my seedlings take about 6 months to germinate and 3-4 years to get to a 1 gallon size. Compare that to a Mexican fan , which can reach a one-gallon size in a year , it becomes obvious why palmettos haven’t become popular in California. Not all Sabals are slow growers though; Sabal “blackburniana ” (an invalid name and one impossible to apply to recognized species) has a reputation for being a Left - Sabal “blackbur - niana” growing in Southern California. Although this is an invalid name that cannot be linked to a recognized species, Sabals labeled with this name have a reputation for being relatively fast growing. Above - A closeup of seeds on a mature Sabal “blackburniana”.
    [Show full text]
  • Approved Plant List 10/04/12
    FLORIDA The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, the second best time to plant a tree is today. City of Sunrise Approved Plant List 10/04/12 Appendix A 10/4/12 APPROVED PLANT LIST FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES SG xx Slow Growing “xx” = minimum height in Small Mature tree height of less than 20 feet at time of planting feet OH Trees adjacent to overhead power lines Medium Mature tree height of between 21 – 40 feet U Trees within Utility Easements Large Mature tree height greater than 41 N Not acceptable for use as a replacement feet * Native Florida Species Varies Mature tree height depends on variety Mature size information based on Betrock’s Florida Landscape Plants Published 2001 GROUP “A” TREES Common Name Botanical Name Uses Mature Tree Size Avocado Persea Americana L Bahama Strongbark Bourreria orata * U, SG 6 S Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum * L Black Olive Shady Bucida buceras ‘Shady Lady’ L Lady Black Olive Bucida buceras L Brazil Beautyleaf Calophyllum brasiliense L Blolly Guapira discolor* M Bridalveil Tree Caesalpinia granadillo M Bulnesia Bulnesia arboria M Cinnecord Acacia choriophylla * U, SG 6 S Group ‘A’ Plant List for Single Family Homes Common Name Botanical Name Uses Mature Tree Size Citrus: Lemon, Citrus spp. OH S (except orange, Lime ect. Grapefruit) Citrus: Grapefruit Citrus paradisi M Trees Copperpod Peltophorum pterocarpum L Fiddlewood Citharexylum fruticosum * U, SG 8 S Floss Silk Tree Chorisia speciosa L Golden – Shower Cassia fistula L Green Buttonwood Conocarpus erectus * L Gumbo Limbo Bursera simaruba * L
    [Show full text]
  • Darwin Initiative Action Plan for the Coastal Biodiversity of Anegada, British Virgin Islands
    Darwin Initiative Action Plan for the Coastal Biodiversity of Anegada, British Virgin Islands Darwin Anegada BAP 2006 Page We dedicate this document to the people of Anegada; the stewards of Anegada’s biodiversity and to Raymond Walker of the BVI National Parks Trust who tragically died after a very short illness during the course of this project. This report should be cited as: McGowan A., A.C.Broderick, C.Clubbe, S.Gore, B.J.Godley, M.Hamilton, B.Lettsome, J.Smith-Abbott, N.K.Woodfield. 2006. Darwin Initiative Action Plan for the Coastal Biodiversity of Anegada, British Virgin Islands. 13 pp. Available online at: http://www.seaturtle.org/mtrg/projects/anegada/ Darwin Anegada BAP 2006 Page 2 1. Introduction It well known that Anegada has globally important biodiversity. Indeed, biodiversity is the basis for most livelihoods; supporting fisheries and leading to the attractiveness that is such a draw to visitors. Over the last three years (2003-2006), a project was undertaken on Anegada with a wide range of activities focussing towards this Biodiversity Action Plan. From the outset it was known that the island hosts a globally important coral reef system, regionally significant populations of marine turtles, is of regional importance to birds and supports globally important endemic plants. The project arose following the encouragement of Anegada community members and subsequent extensive consultation between Dr. Godley (University of Exeter) and heads of BVI Conservation and Fisheries Department (CFD) and BVI National Parks Trust (NPT) who requested that funding be sourced for a project which: 1. Allowed the coastal biodiversity of Anegada to be assessed; 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 115 Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0 October 1997 Seattle, Washington noaa NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION National Ocean Service Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce The Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment (ORCA) provides decisionmakers comprehensive, scientific information on characteristics of the oceans, coastal areas, and estuaries of the United States of America. The information ranges from strategic, national assessments of coastal and estuarine environmental quality to real-time information for navigation or hazardous materials spill response. Through its National Status and Trends (NS&T) Program, ORCA uses uniform techniques to monitor toxic chemical contamination of bottom-feeding fish, mussels and oysters, and sediments at about 300 locations throughout the United States. A related NS&T Program of directed research examines the relationships between contaminant exposure and indicators of biological responses in fish and shellfish. Through the Hazardous Materials Response and Assessment Division (HAZMAT) Scientific Support Coordination program, ORCA provides critical scientific support for planning and responding to spills of oil or hazardous materials into coastal environments. Technical guidance includes spill trajectory predictions, chemical hazard analyses, and assessments of the sensitivity of marine and estuarine environments to spills. To fulfill the responsibilities of the Secretary of Commerce as a trustee for living marine resources, HAZMAT’s Coastal Resource Coordination program provides technical support to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during all phases of the remedial process to protect the environment and restore natural resources at hundreds of waste sites each year.
    [Show full text]
  • History and Status of the American Black Bear in Mississippi
    History and status of the American black bear in Mississippi Stephanie L. Simek1,5, Jerrold L. Belant1, Brad W. Young2, Catherine Shropshire3, and Bruce D. Leopold4 1Carnivore Ecology Laboratory, Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University, Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA 2Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, 1505 Eastover Drive, Jackson, MS 39211, USA 3Mississippi Wildlife Federation, 517 Cobblestone Court, Suite 2, Madison, MS 39110, USA 4Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Aquaculture, Mississippi State University, Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA Abstract: Historically abundant throughout Mississippi, American black bears (Ursus americanus) have declined due to habitat loss and overharvest. By the early 1900s, the bear population was estimated at ,12 individuals, and Mississippi closed black bear hunting in 1932. However, habitat loss continued and by 1980 suitable habitat was estimated at 20% (20,234 km2) of historic levels (101,171 km2) with the decline continuing. Although black bear abundance is currently unknown, a recent increase in occurrence reports and documented reproduction suggests the population may be increasing. There have been 21 reported nuisance complaints since 2006, of which 7 were apiary damage. Additionally, 31 bear mortalities were reported since 1972; 80% were human caused. Government and private organizations have emphasized education on bear ecology and human–bear coexistence, while habitat restoration through land retirement programs (e.g.,
    [Show full text]
  • Museum of Natural History
    p m r- r-' ME FYF-11 - - T r r.- 1. 4,6*. of the FLORIDA MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY THE COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY OF BOBCAT, BLACK BEAR, AND FLORIDA PANTHER IN SOUTH FLORIDA David Steffen Maehr Volume 40, No. 1, pf 1-176 1997 == 46 1ms 34 i " 4 '· 0?1~ I. Al' Ai: *'%, R' I.' I / Em/-.Ail-%- .1/9" . -_____- UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE Numbers of the BULLETIN OF THE FLORIDA MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY am published at irregular intervals Volumes contain about 300 pages and are not necessarily completed in any one calendar year. JOHN F. EISENBERG, EDITOR RICHARD FRANZ CO-EDIWR RHODA J. BRYANT, A£ANAGING EMOR Communications concerning purchase or exchange of the publications and all manuscripts should be addressed to: Managing Editor. Bulletin; Florida Museum of Natural Histoty, University of Florida P. O. Box 117800, Gainesville FL 32611-7800; US.A This journal is printed on recycled paper. ISSN: 0071-6154 CODEN: BF 5BAS Publication date: October 1, 1997 Price: $ 10.00 Frontispiece: Female Florida panther #32 treed by hounds in a laurel oak at the site of her first capture on the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge in central Collier County, 3 February 1989. Photograph by David S. Maehr. THE COMPARATIVE ECOLOGY OF BOBCAT, BLACK BEAR, AND FLORIDA PANTHER IN SOUTH FLORIDA David Steffen Maehri ABSTRACT Comparisons of food habits, habitat use, and movements revealed a low probability for competitive interactions among bobcat (Lynx ndia). Florida panther (Puma concotor cooi 1 and black bear (Urns amencanus) in South Florida. All three species preferred upland forests but ©onsumed different foods and utilized the landscape in ways that resulted in ecological separation.
    [Show full text]
  • Care Sheet for Sabal Minor Or “Dwarf Palmetto” in Virginia Landscapes Fact and Care Sheet for Virginia Gardens
    Care Sheet for Sabal minor or “Dwarf Palmetto” in Virginia Landscapes Fact and Care Sheet for Virginia Gardens John A. Saia, President, The Virginia Palm Society Joseph W. Seamone, Maryland horticulturist, McFall & Berry Landscape Management, Brookeville, MD Susanne E. Zilberfarb, Virginia Cooperative Extension Master Gardener, Fairfax County, VA Reviewed by Holly Scoggins, Associate Professor, Department of Horticulture, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA Introduction Native to the Southern United States, the Sabal minor or Dwarf Palmetto is a smaller and much shorter cousin to the familiar Sabal palmetto that lines the streets and palisades of cities in the Deep South, where the fronds were once cut to make ladies’ hand fans. Part of the Dwarf Palmetto’s native range includes the extreme southeastern portion of Virginia. As a result, S. minor is one of the most cold-hardy palms that can be grown in the Commonwealth of Virginia. S. minor features evergreen, deep blue-green fanlike fronds of one to three feet in length, depending on the age of the plant. A shrubby, clumping palm, it may form short trunks of one to three feet after many years of growth. At maturity,S. minor can range from six to eight feet tall and wide. Many specimens have endured Zone 7 and lower winter temperatures and being covered in thick ice and deep snow with little or no damage. Given the proper conditions and period of establishment, S. minor should be hardy throughout all Virginia zones. (See Resources, below, to determine your USDA Zone.) 2013 Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University HORT-60NP Virginia Cooperative Extension programs and employment are open to all, regardless of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, genetic information, marital, family or veteran status, or any other basis protected by law.
    [Show full text]
  • Human-Black Bear Conflict a Review of the Most Common Management Practices
    HUMAN-BLACK BEAR CONFLICT A REVIEW OF THE MOST COMMON MANAGEMENT PRACTICES A black bear in Lake Tahoe, NV. Photo courtesy Urbanbearfootage.com 1 A black bear patrols downtown Carson City, NV. Photo courtesy Heiko De Groot 2 Authors Carl W. Lackey (Nevada Department of Wildlife) Stewart W. Breck (USDA-WS-National Wildlife Research Center) Brian Wakeling (Nevada Department of Wildlife; Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies) Bryant White (Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies) 3 Table of Contents Preface Acknowledgements Introduction . The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and human-bear conflicts . “I Hold the Smoking Gun” by Chris Parmeter Status of the American Black Bear . Historic and Current distribution . Population estimates and human-bear conflict data Status of Human-Black Bear Conflict . Quantifying Conflict . Definition of Terms Associated with Human-Bear Management Methods to Address Human-Bear Conflicts . Public Education . Law and Ordinance Enforcement . Exclusionary Methods . Capture and Release . Aversive Conditioning . Repellents . Damage Compensation Programs . Supplemental & Diversionary Feeding . Depredation (Kill) Permits . Management Bears (Agency Kill) . Privatized Conflict Management Population Management . Regulated Hunting and Trapping . Control of Non-Hunting Mortality . Fertility Control . Habitat Management . No Intervention Agency Policy Literature Cited 4 Abstract Most human-black bear (Ursus americanus) conflict occurs when people make anthropogenic foods (that is, foods of human origin like trash, dog food, domestic poultry, or fruit trees) available to bears. Bears change their behavior to take advantage of these resources and in the process may damage property or cause public safety concerns. Managers are often forced to focus efforts on reactive non-lethal and lethal bear management techniques to solve immediate problems, which do little to address root causes of human-bear conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Ecology of Black Bears in the Okefenokee-Osceola Ecosystem
    Final Report to Study Cooperators Population Ecology of Black Bears in the Okefenokee-Osceola Ecosystem Prepared by: Steven Dobey1, Darrin V. Masters2, Brian K. Scheick2, Joseph D. Clark3, Michael R. Pelton1, and Mel Sunquist2 September 30, 2002 1 Department of Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries, University of Tennessee 2 Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida 3 USGS, Southern Appalachian Field Laboratory, University of Tennessee ii Population Ecology of Black Bears in the Okefenokee-Osceola Ecosystem Abstract: We studied black bears (Ursus americanus) on 2 study areas in the Okefenokee-Osceola ecosystem in north Florida and southeast Georgia from 1995–1999 to determine population characteristics (size, density, relative abundance, distribution, sex and age structure, mortality rates, natality, and recruitment) and habitat needs. We captured 205 different black bears (124M: 81F) 345 times from June 1995 to September 1998. Overall, adult bears on Osceola were 19% heavier than those on Okefenokee (t = 2.96, df = 148, P = 0.0036). We obtained 13,573 radiolocations from 87 (16M:71F) individual bears during the period of study. Seventeen mortalities of radiocollared bears were documented on Okefenokee, with hunting mortality accounting for 70.6% of these deaths. We documented only 2 (8%) mortalities of radiocollared females from Osceola; both were illegally killed. Annual survival rates for radiocollared females were lower on Okefenokee ( x = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.80–0.93) than on Osceola ( x = 0.97, 95% CI = 2 0.92–1.00; 0.05 = 3.98, 1 df, P = 0.0460). Overall, 67 bears (51M:16F) were taken by hunters on the Okefenokee study area from 1995–1999.
    [Show full text]
  • Abundance and Density of Florida Black Bears in Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge and Osceola National Forest
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 5-2002 Abundance and Density of Florida Black Bears in Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge and Osceola National Forest Steven T. Dobey University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Animal Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Dobey, Steven T., "Abundance and Density of Florida Black Bears in Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge and Osceola National Forest. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2002. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/4533 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Steven T. Dobey entitled "Abundance and Density of Florida Black Bears in Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge and Osceola National Forest." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Wildlife and Fisheries Science. Michael R. Pelton, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Gary McCracken, Lisa Muller, Joseph Clark Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Steven T.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation and Management of Black Bears in Mississippi
    Conservation and Management of Black Bears in Mississippi Prepared by: Brad W. Young Black Bear Biologist Mississippi Museum of Natural Science Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks August, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..........................................................................................................................1 JUSTIFICATION ..........................................................................................................................................2 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................3 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ....................................................................................................................5 CONSERVATION STATUS ..........................................................................................................................7 State Status ..............................................................................................................................................7 Federal Status ..........................................................................................................................................7 BLACK BEAR ECOLOGY ..........................................................................................................................8 Physical Description ................................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Sabal Minor (Arecaceae): a New Northern Record of Palms in Eastern North America
    CASTANEA 71(2): 172–177. JUNE 2006 Sabal minor (Arecaceae): a New Northern Record of Palms in Eastern North America ERIN A. TRIPP and KYLE G. DEXTER* Duke University, Department of Biology, Science Drive, Durham, North Carolina 27708-0338 ABSTRACT We report a new Sabal minor county record for North Carolina that represents the furthest known northern population of the largely tropical family Arecaceae in eastern North America. We give a brief introduction to Sabal and explain why this S. minor population may represent a northward range expan- sion in response to climate warming in northeast North Carolina. Finally, we discuss the usefulness of both historical herbarium specimens and modern day botanical collections to research on climate change and plant population responses. INTRODUCTION The genus Sabal Adans. (Arecaceae) comprises 16 species distributed along the coastal plains of the southeastern United States, eastern and western mainland Mexico, northwestern South America, and a number of Caribbean islands (Zona 1990). Sabal minor (Jacq.) Pers., known commonly as the dwarf or swamp palmetto, is native to the southeastern United States (North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Texas). A disjunct population was discovered by Goldman (1999) in the Sierra Madre Oriental, west of Linares in Nuevo Leo´n, Mexico. It is the southernmost population of this species and likely represents a previously undiscovered or unrecognized population (Goldman 1999; D. Goldman, pers. comm.). Other extant Sabal species native to the continental United States include S. etonia Swingle ex Nash (Florida), S. mexicana Mart. (Texas and Louisiana), and S. palmetto (Walt.) Lodd.
    [Show full text]