DOCSLIB.ORG

Project Design Features (Pdfs) That Will As Applicable to the Site- Reduce Environmental Effects to Specific Environmental Resources of Concern

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Project Design Features (Pdfs) That Will As Applicable to the Site- Reduce Environmental Effects to Specific Environmental Resources of Concern C United States Department of the Interior a li fo Bureau of Land Management r n i a • S t at e Off NEPA# DOI-BLM-CA-9000-2018-0002-EA ice Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment HAZARD REMOVAL AND VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECT February 2019 Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment Hazard Removal and Vegetation Management Project Table 1. Hazard Removal and Vegetation Management Programmatic EA: At a Glance Project Information/ What is not included in the What is included in the pEA Proposed Action(s) pEA Programmatic EA Analyzes a suite of treatments near critical The pEA does not authorize (pEA) infrastructure to address mortality, forest site-specific treatments, and woodland health, and excess fuel FOs must complete a DNA loadings. Field Offices (FO) may use the or tiered, site-specific analysis in the pEA after completing a analysis and complete a Determination of NEPA Adequacy (DNA) Decision Record (DR) or tiered, site-specific analysis, if the before authorizing ground- proposed action in is consistent with the disturbing activities. activities analyzed in the pEA, and appropriate cultural resource and biological surveys are completed. Geographic Scope Forest and woodlands in the northern The Geographic Scope California and Central California BLM excludes designated Wilderness Districts with the exception of the Bishop Areas and Wilderness Study Field Office. Treatments in special Areas (WSAs). Western juniper designations, such as Areas of Critical and pinion juniper types are Environmental Concern (ACECs), excluded. The California National Monuments, National Desert District and the Bishop Conservation Areas, and Wild & Scenic Field Office is not included in Rivers will be included only if they are the project area. consistent with the values for which the area was designated, and consistent with the protections prescribed by the Resource Management Plan (RMP). Project area is approximately 551,000 acres. Riparian Areas/ Where riparian areas/reserves intersect Does not propose removing Riparian Reserves critical infrastructure, dead tree large wood critical to falling/removal and thinning may be instream complexity – that implemented when beneficial to meeting wood will be left to meet aquatic conservation strategies, water these objectives. quality, and to protect the riparian from Wood in excess of what is high intensity wildfire. needed for in-stream complexity could be removed. Dead/Dying Trees Proposes dead and dying tree felling in Neither action alternative both action alternatives. Both action would require retention of alternatives also propose removal of dead standing dead trees near wood in excess of what is needed for critical infrastructure because coarse woody debris targets. The of the public safety. definition of a dead/dying tree is a The second action alternative standing tree that has been damaged by would not allow for the felling forces such as fire, wind, ice, insects, and/or removal of green trees. disease, or drought, and that in the judgment of an experienced forester, is likely to die within a few years. ii Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment Hazard Removal and Vegetation Management Project Project Information/ What is not included in the What is included in the pEA Proposed Action(s) pEA Green Tree Thinning First action alternative allows for Green tree thinning requires dead/dying tree removal and green tree retaining a minimum of 40% thinning to achieve canopy retention canopy cover, so the pEA does levels of 40 to 60 percent depending upon not allow for the complete the size of the residual trees. Second removal of vegetation near action alternative does not allow for any critical infrastructure green tree removal, only dead/dying tree (powerlines, roads, etc.). FOs felling and removal. BLM retains the can choose to retain higher authority within rights-of-way to approve canopy closure to meet other green tree thinning prescriptions. resource objectives. If a proposed action does not maintain 40% canopy cover, additional environmental review and authorization will be required. Prescribed Fire First action alternative analyzes the use of Neither action alternative understory burning and pile burning. would authorize prescribed fire Second action alternative analyzes for pile without a written, approved burning only. Prescribed Fire Plan. Rights-of-way Proposed actions and analysis of effects to No policy or guidance is streamline proactive vegetation provided within the pEA management projects to promote healthy regarding routine operations forest and woodland structure within and and maintenance that is already near various rights-of-way types such as authorized under individual roads, powerlines, substations, rights-of-way grants. The pEA geothermal and oil/gas facilities, has no effect on these pipelines, communication towers, and authorizations. weather stations (see Table 2-1). Project Design The pEA includes a substantial list of FOs must follow the PDFs Features project design features (PDFs) that will as applicable to the site- reduce environmental effects to specific environmental resources of concern. review for an individual action. As part of adaptive management, PDFs may be modified in the future to reduce environmental effects and may or may not result in a lower level of effects than disclosed in this pEA. iii Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment Hazard Removal and Vegetation Management Project TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Purpose and Need for Action .............................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Purpose and Need for Action ..................................................................................... 1-3 1.3 Decision to be Made .................................................................................................. 1-3 1.4 Conformance with Land Use Plans............................................................................ 1-4 2. Proposed Actions .................................................................................................................. 2-5 2.1 Alternative 1 (No Action) .......................................................................................... 2-5 2.2 Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) ................................................................................ 2-5 2.3 Alternative 3 (Reduced Proposed Action) ............................................................... 2-11 2.4 Project Design Features ........................................................................................... 2-11 3. Affected Environment ......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Resources Dismissed from Analysis .......................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Resources Fully Analyzed ......................................................................................... 3-1 3.4 Forest Structure and Fuel Loading ............................................................................. 3-2 3.5 Vegetation and Native Plants ..................................................................................... 3-5 3.6 Invasive Plants and Weeds......................................................................................... 3-7 3.7 Soils (Compaction, Erosion and Sedimentation) ....................................................... 3-9 3.8 Fish and Wildlife...................................................................................................... 3-12 3.9 Federally Listed Species .......................................................................................... 3-17 3.10 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................... 3-22 3.11 Paleontological Resources ....................................................................................... 3-26 3.12 Recreation ................................................................................................................ 3-27 3.13 Lands with Wilderness Characteristics .................................................................... 3-27 4. Environmental Effects ......................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 4-1 4.2 Forest Structure and Fuel Loading ............................................................................. 4-2 4.3 Vegetation and Native Plants ..................................................................................... 4-8 4.4 Invasive Plants and Weeds....................................................................................... 4-14 4.5 Soils (Compaction, Erosion and Sedimentation) ..................................................... 4-21 4.6 Fish and Wildlife (including Migratory Birds) ........................................................ 4-25 4.7 Federally Listed Species .......................................................................................... 4-34 4.8 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................... 4-40 4.9 Paleontological
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Partial Flora Survey Rottnest Island Golf Course
    PARTIAL FLORA SURVEY ROTTNEST ISLAND GOLF COURSE Prepared by Marion Timms Commencing 1 st Fairway travelling to 2 nd – 11 th left hand side Family Botanical Name Common Name Mimosaceae Acacia rostellifera Summer scented wattle Dasypogonaceae Acanthocarpus preissii Prickle lily Apocynaceae Alyxia Buxifolia Dysentry bush Casuarinacea Casuarina obesa Swamp sheoak Cupressaceae Callitris preissii Rottnest Is. Pine Chenopodiaceae Halosarcia indica supsp. Bidens Chenopodiaceae Sarcocornia blackiana Samphire Chenopodiaceae Threlkeldia diffusa Coast bonefruit Chenopodiaceae Sarcocornia quinqueflora Beaded samphire Chenopodiaceae Suada australis Seablite Chenopodiaceae Atriplex isatidea Coast saltbush Poaceae Sporabolis virginicus Marine couch Myrtaceae Melaleuca lanceolata Rottnest Is. Teatree Pittosporaceae Pittosporum phylliraeoides Weeping pittosporum Poaceae Stipa flavescens Tussock grass 2nd – 11 th Fairway Family Botanical Name Common Name Chenopodiaceae Sarcocornia quinqueflora Beaded samphire Chenopodiaceae Atriplex isatidea Coast saltbush Cyperaceae Gahnia trifida Coast sword sedge Pittosporaceae Pittosporum phyliraeoides Weeping pittosporum Myrtaceae Melaleuca lanceolata Rottnest Is. Teatree Chenopodiaceae Sarcocornia blackiana Samphire Central drainage wetland commencing at Vietnam sign Family Botanical Name Common Name Chenopodiaceae Halosarcia halecnomoides Chenopodiaceae Sarcocornia quinqueflora Beaded samphire Chenopodiaceae Sarcocornia blackiana Samphire Poaceae Sporobolis virginicus Cyperaceae Gahnia Trifida Coast sword sedge
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Weeds of Coastal Plains and Heathy Forests Bioregions of Victoria Heading in Band
    Advisory list of environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria Heading in band b Advisory list of environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria Heading in band Advisory list of environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria Contents Introduction 1 Purpose of the list 1 Limitations 1 Relationship to statutory lists 1 Composition of the list and assessment of taxa 2 Categories of environmental weeds 5 Arrangement of the list 5 Column 1: Botanical Name 5 Column 2: Common Name 5 Column 3: Ranking Score 5 Column 4: Listed in the CALP Act 1994 5 Column 5: Victorian Alert Weed 5 Column 6: National Alert Weed 5 Column 7: Weed of National Significance 5 Statistics 5 Further information & feedback 6 Your involvement 6 Links 6 Weed identification texts 6 Citation 6 Acknowledgments 6 Bibliography 6 Census reference 6 Appendix 1 Environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria listed alphabetically within risk categories. 7 Appendix 2 Environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria listed by botanical name. 19 Appendix 3 Environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria listed by common name. 31 Advisory list of environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria i Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment Melbourne, March2008 © The State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment 2009 This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix G. Wildlife and Plant Species at the Sacramento River National Wildlife Refuge and Vicinity (Red Bluff to Colusa)
    Appendix G.
    [Show full text]
  • Botanical Resources and Wetlands Technical Report
    Chapter 1 Affected Environment Figure 1-3g. Sensitive Biological Resources Between Shasta Dam and Red Bluff Pumping Plant 1-45 Draft – June 2013 Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation Biological Resources Appendix – Botanical Resources and Wetlands Technical Report This page left blank intentionally. 1-46 Draft – June 2013 Chapter 1 Affected Environment Figure 1-3h. Sensitive Biological Resources Between Shasta Dam and Red Bluff Pumping Plant 1-47 Draft – June 2013 Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation Biological Resources Appendix – Botanical Resources and Wetlands Technical Report This page left blank intentionally. 1-48 Draft – June 2013 Chapter 1 Affected Environment Figure 1-3i. Sensitive Biological Resources Between Shasta Dam and Red Bluff Pumping Plant 1-49 Draft – June 2013 Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation Biological Resources Appendix – Botanical Resources and Wetlands Technical Report This page left blank intentionally. 1-50 Draft – June 2013 Chapter 1 Affected Environment Figure 1-3j. Sensitive Biological Resources Between Shasta Dam and Red Bluff Pumping Plant 1-51 Draft – June 2013 Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation Biological Resources Appendix – Botanical Resources and Wetlands Technical Report This page left blank intentionally. 1-52 Draft – June 2013 Chapter 1 Affected Environment 1 Valley Oak Woodland This habitat type consists of an open savanna of 2 valley oak (Quercus lobata) trees and an annual grassland understory. Valley 3 oak is typically the only tree species present and shrubs are generally absent 4 except for occasional poison oak. Canopy cover rarely exceeds 30–40 percent in 5 valley oak woodland. This community occupies the highest portions of the 6 floodplain terrace where flooding is infrequent and shallow.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plant Species with Documented Or Recorded Occurrence in Placer County
    A PPENDIX II Vascular Plant Species with Documented or Reported Occurrence in Placer County APPENDIX II. Vascular Plant Species with Documented or Reported Occurrence in Placer County Family Scientific Name Common Name FERN AND FERN ALLIES Azollaceae Mosquito fern family Azolla filiculoides Pacific mosquito fern Dennstaedtiaceae Bracken family Pteridium aquilinum var.pubescens Bracken fern Dryopteridaceae Wood fern family Athyrium alpestre var. americanum Alpine lady fern Athyrium filix-femina var. cyclosorum Lady fern Cystopteris fragilis Fragile fern Polystichum imbricans ssp. curtum Cliff sword fern Polystichum imbricans ssp. imbricans Imbricate sword fern Polystichum kruckebergii Kruckeberg’s hollyfern Polystichum lonchitis Northern hollyfern Polystichum munitum Sword fern Equisetaceae Horsetail family Equisetum arvense Common horsetail Equisetum hyemale ssp. affine Scouring rush Equisetum laevigatum Smooth horsetail Isoetaceae Quillwort family Isoetes bolanderi Bolander’s quillwort Isoetes howellii Howell’s quillwort Isoetes orcuttii Orcutt’s quillwort Lycopodiaceae Club-moss family Lycopodiella inundata Bog club-moss Marsileaceae Marsilea family Marsilea vestita ssp. vestita Water clover Pilularia americana American pillwort Ophioglossaceae Adder’s-tongue family Botrychium multifidum Leathery grapefern Polypodiaceae Polypody family Polypodium hesperium Western polypody Pteridaceae Brake family Adiantum aleuticum Five-finger maidenhair Adiantum jordanii Common maidenhair fern Aspidotis densa Indian’s dream Cheilanthes cooperae Cooper’s
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Classification, Descriptions, and Mapping of The
    Vegetation Classification, Descriptions, and Mapping of the Clear Creek Management Area, Joaquin Ridge, Monocline Ridge, and Environs in San Benito and Western Fresno Counties, California Prepared By California Native Plant Society And California Department of Fish and Game Final Report Project funded by Funding Source: Resource Assessment Program California Department of Fish and Game And Funding Source: Resources Legacy Fund Foundation Grant Project Name: Central Coast Mapping Grant #: 2004-0173 February 2006 Vegetation Classification, Descriptions, and Mapping of the Clear Creek Management Area, Joaquin Ridge, Monocline Ridge, and Environs in San Benito and Western Fresno Counties, California Final Report February 2006 Principal Investigators: California Native Plant Society staff: Julie Evens, Senior Vegetation Ecologist Anne Klein, Vegetation Ecologist Jeanne Taylor, Vegetation Assistant California Department of Fish and Game staff: Todd Keeler-Wolf, Ph.D., Senior Vegetation Ecologist Diana Hickson, Senior Biologist (Botany) Addresses: California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 California Department of Fish and Game Biogeographic Data Branch 1807 13th Street, Suite 202 Sacramento, CA 95814 Reviewers: Bureau of Land Management: Julie Anne Delgado, Botanist California State University: John Sawyer, Professor Emeritus TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................. 1 BACKGROUND...........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ardenwood Plants
    Ardenwood Plants A photographic guide to wild plants of Ardenwood Historic Farm Sorted by Scientific Name Photographs by Wilde Legard Botanist, East Bay Regional Park District Revision: February 23, 2007 More than 2,000 species of native and naturalized plants grow wild in the San Francisco Bay Area. Most are very difficult to identify without the help of good illustrations. This is designed to be a simple, color photo guide to help you identify some of these plants. The selection of plants displayed in this guide is by no means complete. The intent is to expand the quality and quantity of photos over time. The revision date is shown on the cover and on the header of each photo page. A comprehensive plant list for this area (including the many species not found in this publication) can be downloaded at the East Bay Regional Park District’s wild plant download page at: http://www.ebparks.org. This guide is published electronically in Adobe Acrobat® format to accommodate these planned updates. You have permission to freely download, distribute, and print this pdf for individual use. You are not allowed to sell the electronic or printed versions. In this version of the guide, the included plants are sorted alphabetically by scientific name. Under each photograph are four lines of information, based on upon the current standard wild plant reference for California: The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California, 1993. Scientific Name Scientific names revised since 1993 are NOT included in this edition. Common Name These non-standard names are based on Jepson and other local references.
    [Show full text]
  • The Naturalized Vascular Plants of Western Australia 1
    12 Plant Protection Quarterly Vol.19(1) 2004 Distribution in IBRA Regions Western Australia is divided into 26 The naturalized vascular plants of Western Australia natural regions (Figure 1) that are used for 1: Checklist, environmental weeds and distribution in bioregional planning. Weeds are unevenly distributed in these regions, generally IBRA regions those with the greatest amount of land disturbance and population have the high- Greg Keighery and Vanda Longman, Department of Conservation and Land est number of weeds (Table 4). For exam- Management, WA Wildlife Research Centre, PO Box 51, Wanneroo, Western ple in the tropical Kimberley, VB, which Australia 6946, Australia. contains the Ord irrigation area, the major cropping area, has the greatest number of weeds. However, the ‘weediest regions’ are the Swan Coastal Plain (801) and the Abstract naturalized, but are no longer considered adjacent Jarrah Forest (705) which contain There are 1233 naturalized vascular plant naturalized and those taxa recorded as the capital Perth, several other large towns taxa recorded for Western Australia, com- garden escapes. and most of the intensive horticulture of posed of 12 Ferns, 15 Gymnosperms, 345 A second paper will rank the impor- the State. Monocotyledons and 861 Dicotyledons. tance of environmental weeds in each Most of the desert has low numbers of Of these, 677 taxa (55%) are environmen- IBRA region. weeds, ranging from five recorded for the tal weeds, recorded from natural bush- Gibson Desert to 135 for the Carnarvon land areas. Another 94 taxa are listed as Results (containing the horticultural centre of semi-naturalized garden escapes. Most Total naturalized flora Carnarvon).
    [Show full text]
  • A Conservation Assessment for Castilleja Grisea (San Clemente Island
    ¬ RANCHO SANTA ANA BOTANIC GARDEN OCCASIONAL PUBLICATIONS NUMBER 17 A CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT FOR CASTILLEJA GRISEA (SAN CLEMENTE ISLAND PAINTBRUSH, OROBANCHACEAE) SULA VANDERPLANK, KIMBERLY O’CONNOR, BRYAN MUNSON AND DAWN LAWSON Published by Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden, 1500 North College Avenue, Claremont, California 91711 2019 RANCHO SANTA ANA BOTANIC GARDEN OCCASIONAL PUBLICATIONS NUMBER 17 A CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT FOR CASTILLEJA GRISEA (SAN CLEMENTE ISLAND PAINTBRUSH, OROBANCHACEAE) SULA VANDERPLANK, KIMBERLY O’CONNOR, BRYAN MUNSON AND DAWN LAWSON RANCHO SANTA ANA BOTANIC GARDEN OCCASIONAL PUBLICATIONS RANCHO SANTA ANA BOTANIC GARDEN OCCASIONAL PUBLICATIONS (ISSN 1094-1398) are published at irregular intervals in volumes of various sizes. This series of publications is designed to feature results of original botanical research by members of the Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden staff, or by botanists who have collaborated in a Garden program. Proceedings of symposia sponsored by the Garden may also be published in this series. The RANCHO SANTA ANA BOTANIC GARDEN OCCASIONAL PUBLICATIONS series is published by Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden, 1500 North College Avenue, Claremont, California 91711-3157. For information about orders for RANCHO SANTA ANA BOTANIC GARDEN OCCASIONAL PUBLICATIONS, contact Irene Holiman at the address above or via e-mail: [email protected] or fax at (909) 626-7670. For all other inquiries, contact Vanessa Ashworth at [email protected]. General information about the Garden and its programs can be obtained at www.rsabg.org. (Cover photograph by Sula Vanderplank) PUBLICATION DATA A Conservation Assessment for Castilleja grisea (San Clemente Island Paintbrush, Orobanchaceae). September 2019. Sula Vanderplank, Kimberly O’Connor, Bryan Munson and Dawn Lawson.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of American Science 2013;9(5)
    Journal of American Science 2013;9(5) http://www.jofamericanscience.org Life forms and rangeland for many habitats of Jarjar oma in Al- Jabal Al- Akhdar on Mediterranean sea Abusaief, H. M. A. Agron. Fac. Agric., Omar Al-Mukhtar Univ. [email protected] Abstract: The present study was carried out during 2010 to 2011 to determine the important plants of in Jarjar oma in Al- Jabal Al- Akhdar-Libya, which includes about 179 species belonging to 51 families and 144 genera. They are represented by 75 perennial, 101 annual and 3 biennial species. Most characteristic families are Asteraceae containing 28 species, the dominance of Asteraceae indicates the range deterioration and dominance of unpalatable species. Fabaceae represented by 22 species, Poaceae including 18 species, Asparagaceae by 7 species, Brassicaceae by 6 species, Caryophyllaceae by 6 species, Euphorbiaceae by 6 species saline and rocky. Apiaceae, Lamiaceae and Polygonaceae including 5 species. Noticed that 56.2 % of species was annuals and 42.1 % was perennials and 1.7 % was biennials. Whereas autumn and summer increase perennials to reach 100 % more than spring and winter wherein increase annuals species to attain 55 %, to display disappear biennial in autumn and summer seasons in all habitat except rocky habitat in autumn. Out of the surveyed, Kinds of Forbs gave 109 species followed shrubs by 38 species, Grass 26 species, Trees 6 species. Of the most dominant species was broad-leaved (Forbs) plant species found in the region. According to palatability 107 species were palatable and 72 species were unpalatable. For annuals, 61 species were palatable and 40 species were unpalatable, while perennial, 44 species were palatable and 31 species were unpalatable.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Report Series No. 287 Advisory List of Environmental Weeds in Victoria
    Advisory list of environmental weeds in Victoria M. White, D. Cheal, G.W. Carr, R. Adair, K. Blood and D. Meagher April 2018 Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Report Series No. 287 Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning PO Box 137 Heidelberg, Victoria 3084 Phone (03) 9450 8600 Website: www.ari.vic.gov.au Citation: White, M., Cheal, D., Carr, G. W., Adair, R., Blood, K. and Meagher, D. (2018). Advisory list of environmental weeds in Victoria. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Report Series No. 287. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Heidelberg, Victoria. Front cover photo: Ixia species such as I. maculata (Yellow Ixia) have escaped from gardens and are spreading in natural areas. (Photo: Kate Blood) © The State of Victoria Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning 2018 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence. You are free to re-use the work under that licence, on the condition that you credit the State of Victoria as author. The licence does not apply to any images, photographs or branding, including the Victorian Coat of Arms, the Victorian Government logo, the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning logo and the Arthur Rylah Institute logo. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en Printed by Melbourne Polytechnic, Preston Victoria ISSN 1835-3827 (print) ISSN 1835-3835 (pdf)) ISBN 978-1-76077-000-6 (print) ISBN 978-1-76077-001-3 (pdf/online) Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Positive Effects of Non-Native Grasses on the Growth of a Native Annual in a Southern California Ecosystem
    Positive Effects of Non-Native Grasses on the Growth of a Native Annual in a Southern California Ecosystem Gregory J. Pec*¤, Gary C. Carlton Department of Biological Sciences, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, California, United States of America Abstract Fire disturbance is considered a major factor in the promotion of non-native plant species. Non-native grasses are adapted to fire and can alter environmental conditions and reduce resource availability in native coastal sage scrub and chaparral communities of southern California. In these communities persistence of non-native grasses following fire can inhibit establishment and growth of woody species. This may allow certain native herbaceous species to colonize and persist beneath gaps in the canopy. A field manipulative experiment with control, litter, and bare ground treatments was used to examine the impact of non-native grasses on growth and establishment of a native herbaceous species, Cryptantha muricata. C. muricata seedling survival, growth, and reproduction were greatest in the control treatment where non-native grasses were present. C. muricata plants growing in the presence of non-native grasses produced more than twice the number of flowers and more than twice the reproductive biomass of plants growing in the treatments where non-native grasses were removed. Total biomass and number of fruits were also greater in the plants growing in the presence of non- native grasses. Total biomass and reproductive biomass was also greater in late germinants than early germinants growing in the presence of non-native grasses. This study suggests a potential positive effect of non-native grasses on the performance of a particular native annual in a southern California ecosystem.
    [Show full text]