DOCSLIB.ORG

Supplemental Rare Plant Survey for the Proposed Harvest Operations Corp

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Supplemental Rare Plant Survey for the Proposed Harvest Operations Corp Harvest Operations Corp. #2100, 330 – 5th Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta T2P 0L4 August 25, 2011 Anne-Marie Erickson Secretary of the Board National Energy Board 444 Seventh Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta T2P 0X8 Dear Ms. Erikson, RE: Supplemental Rare Plant Survey for the Proposed Harvest Operations Corp. (as 1057533 Alberta Ltd.) Gething Source Water Pipeline (NEB File: OF-Fac-OtherComm-Z027-2011-01 0101) Please find attached the following supplemental report for the proposed Harvest Operations Corp. (as 1057533 Alberta Ltd.) Gething Source Water Pipeline: • Supplemental Rare Plant Survey for the Proposed Harvest Operations Corp. (as 1057533 Alberta Ltd.) Gething Source Water Pipeline (August 2011). Please contact me by telephone at 403-233-6667 or by email at [email protected] if you have any questions. Sincerely, 1057533 Alberta Ltd. Daryl Baxandall Manager, Facilities 1057533 Alberta Ltd. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Harvest Operations Corp. Page 1 SUPPLEMENTAL RARE PLANT SURVEY FOR THE PROPOSED HARVEST OPERATIONS CORP (AS 1057533 ALBERTA LTD.) GETHING SOURCE WATER PIPELINE August 2011 7172 Prepared for: Prepared by: Harvest Operations Corp. TERA Environmental Consultants 2100, 330 - 5th Avenue S.W. Suite 1100, 815 - 8th Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta T2P 3P2 Calgary, Alberta T2P 0L4 Ph: 403-265-2885 Harvest Operations Corp. Supplemental Rare Plant Survey Gething Source Water Pipeline August 2011 / 7172 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 METHODS ....................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Rare Plant Survey ............................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Non-Native and Invasive Species ....................................................................................... 3 2.3 Forest Pests ........................................................................................................................ 3 3.0 KNOWN SPECIES OF CONCERN ................................................................................................. 4 3.1 Federal Species of Concern ............................................................................................... 4 3.2 Provincial Species of Concern ............................................................................................ 4 4.0 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Survey Limitations ............................................................................................................... 5 4.2 Rare Plants and Rare Ecological Communities .................................................................. 5 4.3 Non-Native and Invasive Species ....................................................................................... 5 4.4 Forest Pests ........................................................................................................................ 5 5.0 DISCUSSION AND MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 6 5.1 General Vegetation Recommendations .............................................................................. 6 6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................. 7 6.1 Literature Cited .................................................................................................................... 7 6.2 GIS Data and Mapping References .................................................................................... 8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Aerial View .......................................................................................................................... 2 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Observed Plant Species – By Type and Common Name ................................................... 9 Page i Harvest Operations Corp. Supplemental Rare Plant Survey Gething Source Water Pipeline August 2011 / 7172 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1057533 Alberta Ltd. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Harvest Operations Corp. (Harvest) based in Calgary, Alberta. Harvest has applied to the National Energy Board (NEB) under Section 58 of the NEB Act for approval to construct and operate approximately 6.6 km of 168.3 mm (6 inch) outside diameter (O.D.) pipeline to transport non-potable (saline) water from a new source water well in 12-11-111-12 W6M near Rainbow Lake in northwest Alberta to the existing Harvest Hay Pad site located at a-61-H/94-I-9 in northeast British Columbia (BC) (Figure 1). The 12-11-111-12 W6M location was chosen since it is the closest, most promising location for a significant source of injection water. The purpose of the source water pipeline is to provide additional water injection capacity at the a-61-H/94-I-9 pad site for reservoir pressure maintenance to enhance the Hay Pad site production. The additional water injection volumes are needed to replace current injection water shortages from the existing area water supply wells. The proposed source water pipeline will be constructed within a 15 m wide right-of-way aligned adjacent to Harvest's existing all-weather access road and a proposed powerline easement within Alberta and directly adjacent to Harvest's all-weather access road within BC. Construction will be conducted off of the existing all-weather access road and the proposed powerline easement, with the exception of two 10 m by 30 m areas of temporary workspace that will be required on both sides of a crossing of the Little Hay River in BC. Subject to regulatory approval, construction of the source water pipeline will commence during dry, nonfrozen conditions in fall 2011 or frozen conditions in late 2011 or early 2012. Construction is expected to last approximately five weeks with operation start-up planned upon completion. Harvest is planning to conduct a trenchless crossing of the Little Hay River immediately upon approval. As part of the NEB Section 58 Application, an Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment (ESA) was prepared by TERA Environmental Consultants (TERA) (TERA 2011a). To support the application, TERA was commissioned by Harvest to conduct rare plant field work along the proposed pipeline route. TERA conducted a rare plant habitat assessment on October 21, 2010 and the results were presented in the Rare Plant Habitat Assessment report (TERA 2011b). To supplement the field work conducted in October 2010, TERA conducted a supplemental rare plant survey along the proposed pipeline route in July 2011. The following report provides the results of the supplemental rare plant survey. For ease of description, the proposed pipeline route is described using Kilometre Posts (KPs), from the source water well in 12-11-111-12 W6M (KP 0.0) to the existing Harvest Hay Pad site in a-61-H/94-I-9 (KP 6.6) (Figure 1). 1.1 Objectives The objectives of the supplemental rare plant survey were to: • identify any rare plant species and rare ecological communities along the proposed route as defined by the Species at Risk Act (SARA), the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), the Alberta Wildlife Act, the BC Wildlife Act, the BC Identified Wildlife program, the Alberta Conservation Information Management System (ACIMS) and the BC Conservation Data Centre (CDC); • identify any uncommon sites or habitat features along the proposed route with high potential to support rare plant species; • record the abundance and distribution of non-native, invasive species; and • provide mitigation recommendations in the event that rare plants, rare ecological communities or invasive species infestations are observed. Page 1 20 111-12-6 21 111-12-6 22 A 111-12-6 I AUGUST 2011 B ¯ FIGURE 1 M AERIAL VIEW U A L SUPPLEMENTAL 71 T O RARE PLANT SURVEY R FOR THE C E PROPOSED HARVEST B H OPERATIONS CORP. GETHING L S SOURCE WATER PIPELINE I A T 7172 I e r R i v B R Proposed Well Site a y L H i t t l e ! Existing Well Site Existing Well Site 61 17 a-61-H/94-I-9 111-12-6 16 !. Kilometre Post 111-12-6 15 111-12-6 14 )!! !. 111-12-6 Proposed Pipeline KP 6.6 Existing Pipeline KP 6 Existing Access Road !. Provincial Boundary 51 SCALE: 1: 30,000 m 94I9H 0 200 400 600 (ALL LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE) Proposed Water Source Well 12-11-111-12 W6M KP 5 8 KP 4 9 !. 111-12-6 KP 3 !. 111-12-6 KP 2 !. !. )! !. !.KP 0 41 11 10 111-12-6 111-12-6 ! Date of Imagery: November 5, 2010; SPOT 5 Satellite Imagery 2010 CNES, Licensed by ! Iunctus Geomatics Corp., www.TerraEngine.com; Existing Well Sites and Pipelines, Access Roads: IHS Inc., 2011; Hydrology: IHS Inc, 2004. Although there is no reason to believe that there are any errors associated with the data used to generate this product or in the product itself, users of these data are advised that errors in the data may be present. 31 PROJECT AREA 5 111-12-6 4 111-12-6 3 ALBERTA 111-12-6 2 Edmonton 111-12-6 21 Calgary t7172_Veg_Overview_Figure1_Landscape.mxd Harvest Operations Corp. Supplemental Rare Plant Survey Gething Source Water Pipeline August 2011 / 7172 2.0 METHODS The proposed pipeline traverses the Central Mixedwood Natural Subregion of Alberta and the Boreal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Vascular Plants at Fort Ross State Historic Park
    19005 Coast Highway One, Jenner, CA 95450 ■ 707.847.3437 ■ [email protected] ■ www.fortross.org Title: Vascular Plants at Fort Ross State Historic Park Author(s): Dorothy Scherer Published by: California Native Plant Society i Source: Fort Ross Conservancy Library URL: www.fortross.org Fort Ross Conservancy (FRC) asks that you acknowledge FRC as the source of the content; if you use material from FRC online, we request that you link directly to the URL provided. If you use the content offline, we ask that you credit the source as follows: “Courtesy of Fort Ross Conservancy, www.fortross.org.” Fort Ross Conservancy, a 501(c)(3) and California State Park cooperating association, connects people to the history and beauty of Fort Ross and Salt Point State Parks. © Fort Ross Conservancy, 19005 Coast Highway One, Jenner, CA 95450, 707-847-3437 .~ ) VASCULAR PLANTS of FORT ROSS STATE HISTORIC PARK SONOMA COUNTY A PLANT COMMUNITIES PROJECT DOROTHY KING YOUNG CHAPTER CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY DOROTHY SCHERER, CHAIRPERSON DECEMBER 30, 1999 ) Vascular Plants of Fort Ross State Historic Park August 18, 2000 Family Botanical Name Common Name Plant Habitat Listed/ Community Comments Ferns & Fern Allies: Azollaceae/Mosquito Fern Azo/la filiculoides Mosquito Fern wp Blechnaceae/Deer Fern Blechnum spicant Deer Fern RV mp,sp Woodwardia fimbriata Giant Chain Fern RV wp Oennstaedtiaceae/Bracken Fern Pleridium aquilinum var. pubescens Bracken, Brake CG,CC,CF mh T Oryopteridaceae/Wood Fern Athyrium filix-femina var. cyclosorum Western lady Fern RV sp,wp Dryopteris arguta Coastal Wood Fern OS op,st Dryopteris expansa Spreading Wood Fern RV sp,wp Polystichum munitum Western Sword Fern CF mh,mp Equisetaceae/Horsetail Equisetum arvense Common Horsetail RV ds,mp Equisetum hyemale ssp.affine Common Scouring Rush RV mp,sg Equisetum laevigatum Smooth Scouring Rush mp,sg Equisetum telmateia ssp.
    [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]
  • Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plant List
    UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plants Below is the most recently updated plant list for UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve. * non-native taxon ? presence in question Listed Species Information: CNPS Listed - as designated by the California Rare Plant Ranks (formerly known as CNPS Lists). More information at http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/ranking.php Cal IPC Listed - an inventory that categorizes exotic and invasive plants as High, Moderate, or Limited, reflecting the level of each species' negative ecological impact in California. More information at http://www.cal-ipc.org More information about Federal and State threatened and endangered species listings can be found at https://www.fws.gov/endangered/ (US) and http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/ t_e_spp/ (CA). FAMILY NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME LISTED Ferns AZOLLACEAE - Mosquito Fern American water fern, mosquito fern, Family Azolla filiculoides ? Mosquito fern, Pacific mosquitofern DENNSTAEDTIACEAE - Bracken Hairy brackenfern, Western bracken Family Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens fern DRYOPTERIDACEAE - Shield or California wood fern, Coastal wood wood fern family Dryopteris arguta fern, Shield fern Common horsetail rush, Common horsetail, field horsetail, Field EQUISETACEAE - Horsetail Family Equisetum arvense horsetail Equisetum telmateia ssp. braunii Giant horse tail, Giant horsetail Pentagramma triangularis ssp. PTERIDACEAE - Brake Family triangularis Gold back fern Gymnosperms CUPRESSACEAE - Cypress Family Hesperocyparis macrocarpa Monterey cypress CNPS - 1B.2, Cal IPC
    [Show full text]
  • Do Weeds Hinder the Establishment of Native Plants on a Reclaimed North American Boreal Mine Site?
    diversity Article Do Weeds Hinder the Establishment of Native Plants on a Reclaimed North American Boreal Mine Site? Kaitlyn E. Trepanier *, Brea Burton and Bradley D. Pinno * Department of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, 442 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB T6G 2E3, Canada; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] (K.E.T.); [email protected] (B.D.P.) Abstract: The majority of plant diversity in the boreal forest of northern Alberta, Canada is comprised of native understory plant species that are continuously facing competition from other species, including both undesirable native and weedy species. In oil sands mine reclamation, cover soils rich in organic matter are used to cap overburden materials. The aim of this study is to understand the role of weeds on different reclamation cover soils (forest floor-mineral mix and peat-mineral mix) and determine if they hinder the establishment of the native plant community. This study was conducted four growing seasons after site establishment in June 2019. At that time, both soil types had approximately 45% total cover, had 21 species per plot, and were composed of mainly native vegetation. Competition from non-native forbs (11% average cover, mainly Sonchus arvensis and Melilotus alba) did not seem to impact the development of the native vegetation community on either soil type given the high cover and richness of native forbs. However, native graminoids (predominantly Calamagrostis canadensis) were associated with reduced native forb cover and richness at graminoid cover greater than 17%. Overall, non-native forbs appeared to have little impact on the native forb community on either soil type while native graminoids had a negative influence.
    [Show full text]
  • Floristic Quality Assessment Report
    FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT IN INDIANA: THE CONCEPT, USE, AND DEVELOPMENT OF COEFFICIENTS OF CONSERVATISM Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) the State tree of Indiana June 2004 Final Report for ARN A305-4-53 EPA Wetland Program Development Grant CD975586-01 Prepared by: Paul E. Rothrock, Ph.D. Taylor University Upland, IN 46989-1001 Introduction Since the early nineteenth century the Indiana landscape has undergone a massive transformation (Jackson 1997). In the pre-settlement period, Indiana was an almost unbroken blanket of forests, prairies, and wetlands. Much of the land was cleared, plowed, or drained for lumber, the raising of crops, and a range of urban and industrial activities. Indiana’s native biota is now restricted to relatively small and often isolated tracts across the State. This fragmentation and reduction of the State’s biological diversity has challenged Hoosiers to look carefully at how to monitor further changes within our remnant natural communities and how to effectively conserve and even restore many of these valuable places within our State. To meet this monitoring, conservation, and restoration challenge, one needs to develop a variety of appropriate analytical tools. Ideally these techniques should be simple to learn and apply, give consistent results between different observers, and be repeatable. Floristic Assessment, which includes metrics such as the Floristic Quality Index (FQI) and Mean C values, has gained wide acceptance among environmental scientists and decision-makers, land stewards, and restoration ecologists in Indiana’s neighboring states and regions: Illinois (Taft et al. 1997), Michigan (Herman et al. 1996), Missouri (Ladd 1996), and Wisconsin (Bernthal 2003) as well as northern Ohio (Andreas 1993) and southern Ontario (Oldham et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Plant List CITY of OREGON CITY 320 Warner Milne Road , P.O
    Native Plant List CITY OF OREGON CITY 320 Warner Milne Road , P.O. Box 3040, Oregon City, OR 97045 Phone: (503) 657-0891, Fax: (503) 657-7892 Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Type Wetland Riparian Forest Oak F. Slope Thicket Grass Rocky Wood TREES AND ARBORESCENT SHRUBS Abies grandis Grand Fir X X X X Acer circinatumAS Vine Maple X X X Acer macrophyllum Big-Leaf Maple X X Alnus rubra Red Alder X X X Alnus sinuata Sitka Alder X Arbutus menziesii Madrone X Cornus nuttallii Western Flowering XX Dogwood Cornus sericia ssp. sericea Crataegus douglasii var. Black Hawthorn (wetland XX douglasii form) Crataegus suksdorfii Black Hawthorn (upland XXX XX form) Fraxinus latifolia Oregon Ash X X Holodiscus discolor Oceanspray Malus fuscaAS Western Crabapple X X X Pinus ponderosa Ponderosa Pine X X Populus balsamifera ssp. Black Cottonwood X X Trichocarpa Populus tremuloides Quaking Aspen X X Prunus emarginata Bitter Cherry X X X Prunus virginianaAS Common Chokecherry X X X Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas Fir X X Pyrus (see Malus) Quercus garryana Garry Oak X X X Quercus garryana Oregon White Oak Rhamnus purshiana Cascara X X X Salix fluviatilisAS Columbia River Willow X X Salix geyeriana Geyer Willow X Salix hookerianaAS Piper's Willow X X Salix lucida ssp. lasiandra Pacific Willow X X Salix rigida var. macrogemma Rigid Willow X X Salix scouleriana Scouler Willow X X X Salix sessilifoliaAS Soft-Leafed Willow X X Salix sitchensisAS Sitka Willow X X Salix spp.* Willows Sambucus spp.* Elderberries Spiraea douglasii Douglas's Spiraea Taxus brevifolia Pacific Yew X X X Thuja plicata Western Red Cedar X X X X Tsuga heterophylla Western Hemlock X X X Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Type Wetland Riparian Forest Oak F.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Iowa Plant Species List
    !PLANTCO FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUE: IOWA DATABASE This list has been modified from it's origional version which can be found on the following website: http://www.public.iastate.edu/~herbarium/Cofcons.xls IA CofC SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME PHYSIOGNOMY W Wet 9 Abies balsamea Balsam fir TREE FACW * ABUTILON THEOPHRASTI Buttonweed A-FORB 4 FACU- 4 Acalypha gracilens Slender three-seeded mercury A-FORB 5 UPL 3 Acalypha ostryifolia Three-seeded mercury A-FORB 5 UPL 6 Acalypha rhomboidea Three-seeded mercury A-FORB 3 FACU 0 Acalypha virginica Three-seeded mercury A-FORB 3 FACU * ACER GINNALA Amur maple TREE 5 UPL 0 Acer negundo Box elder TREE -2 FACW- 5 Acer nigrum Black maple TREE 5 UPL * Acer rubrum Red maple TREE 0 FAC 1 Acer saccharinum Silver maple TREE -3 FACW 5 Acer saccharum Sugar maple TREE 3 FACU 10 Acer spicatum Mountain maple TREE FACU* 0 Achillea millefolium lanulosa Western yarrow P-FORB 3 FACU 10 Aconitum noveboracense Northern wild monkshood P-FORB 8 Acorus calamus Sweetflag P-FORB -5 OBL 7 Actaea pachypoda White baneberry P-FORB 5 UPL 7 Actaea rubra Red baneberry P-FORB 5 UPL 7 Adiantum pedatum Northern maidenhair fern FERN 1 FAC- * ADLUMIA FUNGOSA Allegheny vine B-FORB 5 UPL 10 Adoxa moschatellina Moschatel P-FORB 0 FAC * AEGILOPS CYLINDRICA Goat grass A-GRASS 5 UPL 4 Aesculus glabra Ohio buckeye TREE -1 FAC+ * AESCULUS HIPPOCASTANUM Horse chestnut TREE 5 UPL 10 Agalinis aspera Rough false foxglove A-FORB 5 UPL 10 Agalinis gattingeri Round-stemmed false foxglove A-FORB 5 UPL 8 Agalinis paupercula False foxglove
    [Show full text]
  • Color and Common Name Prairie Plant List
    Native or Likely Color Common Name Scientific Name Family Introduced to See Orange N Butterflyweed Asclepias tuberosa var. interior Asclepiadaceae X Orange N Michigan Lily Lilium michiganense Liliaceae Pink I Alsike Clover Trifolium hybridum Fabaceae X Pink N American Vetch Vicia americana Fabaceae X Pink I Bouncing Bet Saponaria officinalis Caryophyllaceae X Pink I Bull Thistle Cirsium vulgare Asteraceae X Pink I Canada Thistle Cirsium arvense Asteraceae X Pink N Canada Tick Trefoil Desmodium canadense Fabaceae X Pink I Catnip Nepeta cataria Lamiaceae X Pink N Common Milkweed Asclepias syriaca Asclepiadaceae X Pink I Crownvetch Coronilla varia Fabaceae X Pink N Dotted Blazing Star Liatris punctata var. punctata Asteraceae X Pink N Great Blazing Star Liatris pycnostachya var. pycnostachya Asteraceae X Pink N Heart-Leaved Four O'Clock Mirabilis nyctaginea Nyctagenaceae X Pink N Hill's Thistle Cirsium pumilum var. hillii Asteraceae Pink N Northern Plains Blazing Star Liatris ligulistylis Asteraceae Pink N Obedient Plant Physostegia virginiana var. virginiana Lamiaceae X Pink N Prairie Phlox Phlox pilosa var. fulgida Polemoniaceae X Pink N Prairie Rose Rosa arkansana Rosaceae X Pink N Prairie Smoke Geum triflorum Rosaceae X Pink N Prairie Wild Onion Allium stellatum Liliaceae Pink I Rabbit's Foot Clover Trifolium arvense Fabaceae X Pink I Red Clover Trifolium pratense Fabaceae X Pink N Rough Blazing Star Liatris aspera Asteraceae X Pink I Spotted Knapweed Centaurea stoebe subsp. micranthos Asteraceae X Pink N Spreading Dogbane Apocynum androsaemifolium Apocynaceae X Pink N Swamp Milkweed Asclepias incarnata var. incarnata Asclepiadaceae X Pink I Tartarian Honeysuckle Lonicera tatarica Caprifoliaceae X Pink N Wild Bergamot Monarda fistulosa Lamiaceae X Pink N Wild Garlic Allium canadense var.
    [Show full text]
  • Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Volume 2
    Appendix F Species List Appendix F: Species List F. Species List F.1 Lists The following list and three tables denote the bird, mammal, fish, and plant species known to occur in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (Arctic Refuge, Refuge). F.1.1 Birds of Arctic Refuge A total of 201 bird species have been recorded on Arctic Refuge. This list describes their status and abundance. Many birds migrate outside of the Refuge in the winter, so unless otherwise noted, the information is for spring, summer, or fall. Bird names and taxonomic classification follow American Ornithologists' Union (1998). F.1.1.1 Definitions of classifications used Regions of the Refuge . Coastal Plain – The area between the coast and the Brooks Range. This area is sometimes split into coastal areas (lagoons, barrier islands, and Beaufort Sea) and inland areas (uplands near the foothills of the Brooks Range). Brooks Range – The mountains, valleys, and foothills north and south of the Continental Divide. South Side – The foothills, taiga, and boreal forest south of the Brooks Range. Status . Permanent Resident – Present throughout the year and breeds in the area. Summer Resident – Only present from May to September. Migrant – Travels through on the way to wintering or breeding areas. Breeder – Documented as a breeding species. Visitor – Present as a non-breeding species. * – Not documented. Abundance . Abundant – Very numerous in suitable habitats. Common – Very likely to be seen or heard in suitable habitats. Fairly Common – Numerous but not always present in suitable habitats. Uncommon – Occurs regularly but not always observed because of lower abundance or secretive behaviors.
    [Show full text]
  • Coefficients of Conservatism for the Vascular Flora of the Dakotas and Adjacent Grasslands
    (200) B565i no. 2001 -1 mt of the Interior al Survey c.1 Coefficients of Conservatism for the Vascular Flora of the Dakotas and Adjacent Grasslands Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR- 2001 -0001 ~USGS science for a changing world Cover art: Penstemon nitidus courtesy of Dorothy E. Mushet. U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Coefficients of Conservatism for the Vascular Flora of the Dakotas and Adjacent Grasslands By The Northern Great Plains Floristic Quality Assessment Panel Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR- 2001 -0001 OCT 1 G 2.001 U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2001 Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Cop ies of th is publication are available from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Spring­ field, Virginia 22161 (1 -800-553-6847 or 703-487 -4650). Copies also are available to registered users from the Defense Technical Information Center, Attn .: Help Desk, 8725 Kingman Road, Suite 0944, Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060-6218 (1 -800 -225-3842 or 703 -767 - 9050). Suggested citation: The orthem Great Plain Floristic Quality Assessment Panel, 200 I, Coefficient of conservatism for the vascular flora of the Dakotas and adjacent grasslands: U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Divi ion, Lnformation and Technology Report USGS/ BRD/lTR- 200 1-0001, 32 p. Contents Page Ab tract ...........
    [Show full text]
  • Seeds of Success Program (SOS) Has Been Collecting Native Plant Seeds in Alaska for Over a Decade
    Summary of Alaska Collections 2002-2012 AK025, AK040, AK930 A report submitted to BLM Alaska State Office 222 West 7th Avenue Anchorage AK 99501 Prepared by Alaska Natural Heritage Program University of Alaska Anchorage 707 A Street Anchorage AK 99501 and Michael Duffy Biological Consulting Services PO Box 243364 Anchorage AK 99524 Contents Introduction ……………………………………………………………… 1 Summary of collections …………………………………………………. 3 Seed storage and increase ………………………………………………… 5 Target list update ………………………………………………………… 8 Development of preliminary seed zones ………………………………… 12 Summary of collections by seed zone Arctic Alaska Seed Zone ………………………………………… 16 Interior Seed Zone ……………………………………………….. 20 West Alaska Seed Zone ………………………………………….. 26 Southwest Alaska Seed Zone …………………………………….. 32 South Central Alaska Seed Zone …………………………………. 34 Southeast Alaska Seed Zone ……………………………………… 40 Further recommendations ………………………………………………… 44 Literature cited …………………………………………………………… 45 Appendices ………………………………………………………………… 47 INTRODUCTION The Bureau of Land Management Seeds of Success Program (SOS) has been collecting native plant seeds in Alaska for over a decade. Beginning in 2002, collections have been made by staff from three offices: the Northern Field Office (whose SOS abbreviation is AK025), the Anchorage Field Office (AK040), and the Alaska State Office (AK930). Most of the AK025 and AK040 collections were made in partnership with the Kew Millennium Seed Bank Project (http://www.kew.org/science-conservation/save-seed- prosper/millennium-seed-bank/index.htm). Collecting trips over the period 2002-2007 produced 108 collections, and were made with the assistance of contract botanists from University of Alaska and the Alaska Plant Materials Center. With the conclusion of the Millennium Seed Bank partnership, the state program has focused on obtaining native plant seed to be stored and increased, with the objective of providing greater seed availability for restoration efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Spread of Non-Native Plants in Alaska Accelerating?
    Meeting the Challenge: Invasive Plants in Pacific Northwest Ecosystems IS THE SPREAD OF NON-NATIVE PLANTS IN ALASKA ACCELERATING? Matthew L. Carlson1 and Michael Shephard2 ABSTRACT Alaska has remained relatively unaffected by non-native plants; however, recently the state has started to experience an influx of invasive non-native plants that the rest of the U.S. underwent 60–100 years ago. With the increase in population, gardening, development, and commerce there have been more frequent introductions to Alaska. Many of these species, such as meadow hawkweed (Hieracium caespitosum), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), and spotted knapweed (Centaurea biebersteinii), have only localized populations in Alaska. Other species such as reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and white sweetclover (Melilotus officinalis), both formerly used in roadside seed mixes, are now very widespread and are moving into riparian areas and wetlands. We review the available literature and Alaska’s statewide invasive plant database (AKEPIC, Alaska Exotic Plant Clearinghouse) to summarize changes in Alaska’s non-native flora over the last 65 years. We suggest that Alaska is not immune to invasion, but rather that the exponential increase in non-native plants experienced else- where is delayed by a half century. This review highlights the need for more intensive detection and rapid response work if Alaska is going to remain free of many of the invasive species problems that plague the contiguous U.S. KEYWORDS: Alaska, invasion patterns, invasive plants, non-native plants, plant databases. INTRODUCTION presence of non-native plants. Recently, however, popula- Most botanists and ecologists thought Alaska was immune tions of many non-native species appear to be expanding to the invasion of non-native plants the rest of the United and most troubling, a number of species are spreading into States had experienced, and continue to experience, given natural habitats.
    [Show full text]