DOCSLIB.ORG

Camas NWR Ecological Integrity Assessment, Watershed Analysis and Habitat Vulnerability Climate Change Index

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Camas NWR Ecological Integrity Assessment, Watershed Analysis and Habitat Vulnerability Climate Change Index NatureServe Camas NWR Ecological Integrity Assessment, Watershed Analysis and Habitat Vulnerability Climate Change Index Gwen Kittel, Don Faber-Langendoen and Pat Comer 12/11/2012 Left to right: Sagebrush Steppe, Wet Meadow and Riparian Shrubland habitats at Camas NWR. This project was made possible through a USFWS I&M grant # F11PX04463 This report is the second part of a vegetation mapping project for Camas NWR, the first report is: Miewald, Tom, G. Kittel and E. Stockenberg. 2012. Vegetation and Habitat Mapping: Lessons Learned from Camas National Wildlife Refuge. Internal Report to Region 1 USFWS Inventory and Monitoring Program. Acknowledgements: NatureServe would like to thank Tom Miewald and Erin Stockenberg for their comments of earlier manuscripts. Full citation: Kittel, G., Don Faber-Langendoen and Pat Comer. 2012. Camas NWR: Ecological Integrity Assessment, Watershed Analysis and Habitat Vulnerability Climate Change Index. Report to USFWS under contract # F11PX04463. Prepared by NatureServe, Boulder, CO. ii Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 5 2 Ecological Integrity Assessment ............................................................................................................ 5 2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 Rating Ecological Integrity ............................................................................................................. 7 2.3 Methods ........................................................................................................................................ 8 2.4 Level-2 Condition Metric Definitions and Score Criteria ............................................................ 10 2.5 Individual Site EIA Condition Score ............................................................................................. 10 2.6 Wetland Complex Ecological Integrity Assessment .................................................................... 10 2.7 Level-1 Landscape, Buffer & Hydrology Metrics ......................................................................... 12 2.8 Wetland Complex EIA Overall Score ........................................................................................... 12 2.9 Results and Discussion ................................................................................................................ 13 2.9.1 Individual Assessment Sites ................................................................................................ 13 2.9.1.1 Wetlands ......................................................................................................................... 13 2.9.1.2 Uplands ........................................................................................................................... 19 2.9.2 Wetland Complex Assessments -- Results and Discussion ................................................. 21 2.9.2.1 Camas Creek & Floodplain EIA Score and Discussion ..................................................... 23 2.9.2.2 Big Pond Wetland Complex EIA Score and Discussion .................................................... 25 2.9.2.3 Center Pond Wetland EIA Score and Discussion ............................................................. 27 2.9.2.4 Ray’s Lake Wetland Complex EIA Score and Discussion ................................................. 29 2.10 Summary EIA Findings ................................................................................................................. 31 3 Camas NWR Watershed Analysis ........................................................................................................ 32 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 32 3.2 Methods ...................................................................................................................................... 32 3.3 Results ......................................................................................................................................... 33 3.4 Discussion .................................................................................................................................... 39 4 Habitat Climate Change Vulnerability ................................................................................................. 41 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 41 4.1.1 Defining Climate-Change Vulnerability and Adaptation Strategies .................................... 41 4.1.2 Climate change adaptation strategies ................................................................................ 42 4.1.3 Scales of Ecological Organization ........................................................................................ 43 iii 4.2 Overview of Methodology for Vulnerability Assessment ........................................................... 44 4.2.1 Index Framework ................................................................................................................ 45 4.2.1.1 Numerical and Categorical Summaries of Vulnerability ................................................. 45 4.2.1.2 Spatial and Temporal Dimensions for Documenting Vulnerability ................................. 47 4.2.2 Climate Exposure in the Snake River Plain Ecoregion ......................................................... 48 4.2.2.1 Describing Climate Stress and its Direct Effects.............................................................. 52 4.2.2.2 Climate Stress Index ........................................................................................................ 53 4.2.2.3 Dynamic Process Forecasts ............................................................................................. 53 4.2.3 Accounting for the Indirect Effects of Climate Stress ......................................................... 55 4.2.3.1 Landscape Condition ....................................................................................................... 56 4.2.3.2 Dynamic Process Alterations .......................................................................................... 59 4.2.4 Adaptive Capacity for Responding to Climate Stress .......................................................... 59 4.2.4.1 Diversity within characteristic functional groups ........................................................... 60 4.2.4.2 Characteristic Elevation Range ....................................................................................... 60 4.2.4.3 Dealing with Uncertainty ................................................................................................ 61 4.3 Results ......................................................................................................................................... 61 4.3.1 Habitat Vulnerability Climate Change Index for NVC Group G521 Vancouverian & Rocky Mountain Montane Wet Meadow Group aka “Wet Meadow Habitat” ............................................. 64 4.3.2 Habitat Vulnerability Climate Change Index for NVC Group G303 Intermountain Dry Tall Sagebrush Shrubland & Steppe Group aka “Sagebrush Steppe Habitat” ........................................... 70 4.3.3 Habitat Vulnerability Climate Change Index for NVC Group G518 Western North American Temperate Interior Freshwater Marsh Group aka “Marsh Habitat” .................................................. 75 4.3.4 Habitat Vulnerability Climate Change Index for NVC Group G526 Rocky Mountain & Great Basin Lowland & Foothill Riparian & Seep Shrubland Group aka “Riparian Shrubland Habitat” ....... 81 4.4 Discussion .................................................................................................................................... 87 5 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 88 6 Literature Cited ................................................................................................................................... 89 7 Appendix A. Crosswalk of NVC, NatureServe Ecological Systems and USFWS Habitat Types. ........... 97 8 Appendix B. Ecological Integrity Assessment Metric Definitions and Criteria.................................... 99 9 Appendix C. Example EIA Field Forms ................................................................................................. 99 10 Appendix D. Landscape Condition Model ........................................................................................... 99 iv List of Figures Figure 1. General conceptual model for Ecological Integrity Assessments (EIA). ........................................ 7 Figure 2. Camas 2009 and 2011 sample locations. ....................................................................................... 9 Figure 3. Map of Wetland Complex areas (A) and Landscape scale metrics (B)......................................... 11 Figure 4. Sample locations color coded to their EIA rank score. ............................................................... 14 Figure
Load more

Recommended publications
  • <I>Elymus Lanceolatus</I>
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU Forage and Range Research Laboratory Publications Forage and Range Research Laboratory 11-22-2018 Comparison of Space-Plant Versus Sward Plot Selection in Thickspike Wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus) Joseph G. Robins Utah State University, [email protected] Kevin B. Jensen Utah State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/forage_pubs Part of the Agriculture Commons, and the Plant Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Robins JG, Jensen KB. Comparison of space‐plant versus sward plot selection in thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus). Plant Breed. 2018;00:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12662 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Forage and Range Research Laboratory at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Forage and Range Research Laboratory Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Received: 28 August 2018 | Revised: 1 October 2018 | Accepted: 7 October 2018 DOI: 10.1111/pbr.12662 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Comparison of space‐plant versus sward plot selection in thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus) Joseph G. Robins | Kevin B. Jensen USDA Forage and Range Research Laboratory, Utah State University, Logan, Abstract Utah Thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus [Scribn. & J.G. Sm.] Gould) is an important Correspondence native perennial grass species used for rangeland revegetation in North America. Joseph G. Robins, USDA Forage and Range Plant breeding efforts relying on space‐plant evaluations have resulted in limited Research Laboratory, Utah State University, Logan, UT. improvement in this species.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Survey of a Prairie Landscape in Montana's Glaciated
    Biological Survey of a Prairie Landscape in Montanas Glaciated Plains Final Report Prepared for: Bureau of Land Management Prepared by: Stephen V. Cooper, Catherine Jean and Paul Hendricks December, 2001 Biological Survey of a Prairie Landscape in Montanas Glaciated Plains Final Report 2001 Montana Natural Heritage Program Montana State Library P.O. Box 201800 Helena, Montana 59620-1800 (406) 444-3009 BLM Agreement number 1422E930A960015 Task Order # 25 This document should be cited as: Cooper, S. V., C. Jean and P. Hendricks. 2001. Biological Survey of a Prairie Landscape in Montanas Glaciated Plains. Report to the Bureau of Land Management. Montana Natural Heritage Pro- gram, Helena. 24 pp. plus appendices. Executive Summary Throughout much of the Great Plains, grasslands limited number of Black-tailed Prairie Dog have been converted to agricultural production colonies that provide breeding sites for Burrow- and as a result, tall-grass prairie has been ing Owls. Swift Fox now reoccupies some reduced to mere fragments. While more intact, portions of the landscape following releases the loss of mid - and short- grass prairie has lead during the last decade in Canada. Great Plains to a significant reduction of prairie habitat Toad and Northern Leopard Frog, in decline important for grassland obligate species. During elsewhere, still occupy some wetlands and the last few decades, grassland nesting birds permanent streams. Additional surveys will have shown consistently steeper population likely reveal the presence of other vertebrate declines over a wider geographic area than any species, especially amphibians, reptiles, and other group of North American bird species small mammals, of conservation concern in (Knopf 1994), and this alarming trend has been Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • ISTA List of Stabilized Plant Names 7Th Edition
    ISTA List of Stabilized Plant Names th 7 Edition ISTA Nomenclature Committee Chair: Dr. M. Schori Published by All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be The Internation Seed Testing Association (ISTA) reproduced, stored in any retrieval system or transmitted Zürichstr. 50, CH-8303 Bassersdorf, Switzerland in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior ©2020 International Seed Testing Association (ISTA) permission in writing from ISTA. ISBN 978-3-906549-77-4 ISTA List of Stabilized Plant Names 1st Edition 1966 ISTA Nomenclature Committee Chair: Prof P. A. Linehan 2nd Edition 1983 ISTA Nomenclature Committee Chair: Dr. H. Pirson 3rd Edition 1988 ISTA Nomenclature Committee Chair: Dr. W. A. Brandenburg 4th Edition 2001 ISTA Nomenclature Committee Chair: Dr. J. H. Wiersema 5th Edition 2007 ISTA Nomenclature Committee Chair: Dr. J. H. Wiersema 6th Edition 2013 ISTA Nomenclature Committee Chair: Dr. J. H. Wiersema 7th Edition 2019 ISTA Nomenclature Committee Chair: Dr. M. Schori 2 7th Edition ISTA List of Stabilized Plant Names Content Preface .......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Symbols and Abbreviations ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • W a Sh in G to N Na Tu Ra L H Er Itag E Pr Og Ra M
    PROGRAM HERITAGE NATURAL Conservation Status Ranks of Washington’s Ecological Systems Prepared for Washington Dept. of Fish and WASHINGTON Wildlife Prepared by F. Joseph Rocchio and Rex. C. Crawford August 04, 2015 Natural Heritage Report 2015-03 Conservation Status Ranks for Washington’s Ecological Systems Washington Natural Heritage Program Report Number: 2015-03 August 04, 2015 Prepared by: F. Joseph Rocchio and Rex C. Crawford Washington Natural Heritage Program Washington Department of Natural Resources Olympia, Washington 98504-7014 .ON THE COVER: (clockwise from top left) Crab Creek (Inter-Mountain Basins Big Sagebrush Steppe and Columbia Basin Foothill Riparian Woodland and Shrubland Ecological Systems); Ebey’s Landing Bluff Trail (North Pacific Herbaceous Bald and Bluff Ecological System and Temperate Pacific Tidal Salt and Brackish Marsh Ecological Systems); and Judy’s Tamarack Park (Northern Rocky Mountain Western Larch Savanna). Photographs by: Joe Rocchio Table of Contents Page Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ ii Tables ............................................................................................................................................. iii Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Methods..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny of Elymus Ststhh Allotetraploids Based on Three Nuclear Genes
    Reticulate Evolutionary History of a Complex Group of Grasses: Phylogeny of Elymus StStHH Allotetraploids Based on Three Nuclear Genes Roberta J. Mason-Gamer*, Melissa M. Burns¤a, Marianna Naum¤b Department of Biological Sciences, The University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America Abstract Background: Elymus (Poaceae) is a large genus of polyploid species in the wheat tribe Triticeae. It is polyphyletic, exhibiting many distinct allopolyploid genome combinations, and its history might be further complicated by introgression and lineage sorting. We focus on a subset of Elymus species with a tetraploid genome complement derived from Pseudoroegneria (genome St) and Hordeum (H). We confirm the species’ allopolyploidy, identify possible genome donors, and pinpoint instances of apparent introgression or incomplete lineage sorting. Methodology/Principal Findings: We sequenced portions of three unlinked nuclear genes—phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase, b-amylase, and granule-bound starch synthase I—from 27 individuals, representing 14 Eurasian and North American StStHH Elymus species. Elymus sequences were combined with existing data from monogenomic representatives of the tribe, and gene trees were estimated separately for each data set using maximum likelihood. Trees were examined for evidence of allopolyploidy and additional reticulate patterns. All trees confirm the StStHH genome configuration of the Elymus species. They suggest that the StStHH group originated in North America, and do not support separate North American and European origins. Our results point to North American Pseudoroegneria and Hordeum species as potential genome donors to Elymus. Diploid P. spicata is a prospective St-genome donor, though conflict among trees involving P. spicata and the Eurasian P.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Morphological Variation Within Pseudoroegneria Spicata
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Jack Revnold Carison for the degree of Master of Science in Crop Science presented on March 2O 1986 TITLE: . !st St f p soicata (Pursh) A. L&ve (Poaceae: TriticeaeJ Abstract Approved: Signature redacted for privacy. Robert J. Metzger Chromosome counts were determined for 152 accessions of Pseudo- roegneria spicata (Pursh) A. L6ve and, combined with existing count data, used to plot the distribution of diploid and tetraploid popula- tions. Morphological variation of 55 characters was examined in five groups totaling 205 operational taxonomic units (OTU's), using cluster, principal factor, and discriminant analyses. The five groups included diploid and autotetraploid spicata, an allotetraploid pre- viously included in spicata, a control group including four Old World Pseudoroegneria species, and a small control sample of Elymus lanceolatus (Scrib. and Smith) Gould. The analyses were not able to separate diploid from autoploid spicata nor identify any clear sub- groupings within the dip].ojds. However, the alloploid was separated from spicata and aligned with Elymus lanceolatus based on glume and spike characters. This study recommends the alloploid be included in lanceolatus as a new subspecies, Elymus lanceolatus ssp. wawawai. The chromosome count data indicate it is distributed in the canyons and tributaries of the lower Salmon and Snake Rivers of northern Idaho, northeastern Oregon, and southeastern Washington. The new subspecies keys to Elymus lanceolatus based on glume characters and is separated from subspecies .ianceolatus and albicans by its cespitose growth habit. A S11LPY OF MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION WITHIN PSELVOROEGNERIA SPICATA (PURSH) A. LOVE (POACEAE: TRITWEAE) By Jack Reynold Carison A THESIS Submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Completed March 20, 1986 Commencement June, 1986 APPROVED: 1' Signature redacted for privacy.
    [Show full text]
  • Disturbance and Recovery in a Changing World; 2006 June 6–8; Cedar Figure 2—Clip-Plot Transect in Unburned Area with 35 City, UT
    Trout Creek 1999 Burn Sherel Goodrich Abstract—A small prescribed fire near the mouth of Trout Creek All standing crops of herbaceous species were clipped to in Strawberry Valley, Wasatch County, Utah, on the Uinta Na- ground level. However, sagebrush production was clipped and tional Forest provided an opportunity to compare production and weighed from parts of some of the plots and the remainder vascular plant composition in unburned and burned areas. At four was estimated based on the percent clipped. Thus production years post burn, production of herbaceous plants was about four of herbaceous species is based on 100 percent clipping, and times greater in the burned area than in the unburned area. Most sagebrush production is based on partial clipping. plants found in the unburned area were found in the burned area Samples of clipped material of various species were placed at four years post burn. in paper bags. These samples were weighed in the field and left in the cab of a vehicle for a few days to dry where temperatures went well over 90 degrees Fahrenheit in the day. After a few warm days, they were weighed again to Study Area and Methods ____________ determine air-dry weight. Production values listed in table 1 are based on air-dry weight. In 1999 a prescribed fire near the mouth of Trout Creek, Strawberry Valley on the Uinta National Forest was con- trolled after it burned about 20 acres. This fire burned in a mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana) community. The fire consumed fuels including sagebrush stems to ground level.
    [Show full text]
  • VEGETATIVE GUIDE for IDENTIFYING FOUR NATIVE WHEATGRASSES in MONTANA and WYOMING Bluebunch Wheatgrass, Pseudoroegneria Spicata (Pursh) À
    United States Department of Agriculture NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE Plant Materials Technical Note No. MT-119 August 2017 PLANT MATERIALS TECHNICAL NOTE VEGETATIVE GUIDE FOR IDENTIFYING FOUR NATIVE WHEATGRASSES IN MONTANA AND WYOMING Bluebunch wheatgrass, Pseudoroegneria spicata (Pursh) À. Löve Slender wheatgrass, Elymus trachycaulus (Link) Gould ex Shinners Thickspike wheatgrass, Elymus lanceolatus (Scribn. & J.G. Sm) Gould Western wheatgrass, Pascopyrum smithii (Rydb.) À. Löve Robert Kilian, Range Management Specialist, NRCS Plant Materials Center, Bridger, Montana Figure 1. Thickspike wheatgrass (All images USDA-NRCS unless noted). INTRODUCTION Wheatgrasses are cool-season grasses and key components of many rangeland plant communities (Figure 1). Given the approximately 15 different species of native and introduced wheatgrasses found in Montana and Wyoming, as well as their morphological and anatomical similarities, identification of some species is difficult. This Technical Note describes the distinguishing vegetative features of each of four common native wheatgrass species. The distinguishing vegetative characteristics for bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus), thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus), and western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii) are depicted in Figures 3 through 8. The distinct features of mature plants include auricles, ligules, seedheads (inflorescences), spikelets, and florets. NRCS−Montana−Technical Note−Plant Materials−MT-119 1 Please note that distinguishing vegetative features may or may not be present or evident due to numerous environmental factors such as climatic conditions (intervals of cool and wet versus hot and dry), soil type, and herbivory, to name a few. When identifying wheatgrass species, examine and assess multiple features and plant specimens if possible. Always consider the collection location and verify that the prevailing ecological conditions support the species in question.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterton Lakes National Park • Common Name(Order Family Genus Species)
    Waterton Lakes National Park Flora • Common Name(Order Family Genus species) Monocotyledons • Arrow-grass, Marsh (Najadales Juncaginaceae Triglochin palustris) • Arrow-grass, Seaside (Najadales Juncaginaceae Triglochin maritima) • Arrowhead, Northern (Alismatales Alismataceae Sagittaria cuneata) • Asphodel, Sticky False (Liliales Liliaceae Triantha glutinosa) • Barley, Foxtail (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Hordeum jubatum) • Bear-grass (Liliales Liliaceae Xerophyllum tenax) • Bentgrass, Alpine (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Podagrostis humilis) • Bentgrass, Creeping (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Agrostis stolonifera) • Bentgrass, Green (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Calamagrostis stricta) • Bentgrass, Spike (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Agrostis exarata) • Bluegrass, Alpine (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa alpina) • Bluegrass, Annual (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa annua) • Bluegrass, Arctic (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa arctica) • Bluegrass, Plains (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa arida) • Bluegrass, Bulbous (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa bulbosa) • Bluegrass, Canada (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa compressa) • Bluegrass, Cusick's (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa cusickii) • Bluegrass, Fendler's (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa fendleriana) • Bluegrass, Glaucous (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa glauca) • Bluegrass, Inland (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa interior) • Bluegrass, Fowl (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa palustris) • Bluegrass, Patterson's (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa pattersonii) • Bluegrass, Kentucky (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa pratensis) • Bluegrass, Sandberg's (Poales
    [Show full text]
  • Dissertation Indaziflam
    DISSERTATION INDAZIFLAM: A NEW CELLULOSE BIOSYNTHESIS INHIBITING HERBICIDE PROVIDES LONG-TERM CONTROL OF INVASIVE WINTER ANNUAL GRASSES Submitted by Derek James Sebastian Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Spring 2017 Doctoral Committee: Advisor: Scott Nissen George Beck Paul Meiman Todd Gaines Copyright by Derek James Sebastian 2017 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT INDAZIFLAM: A NEW CELLULOSE BIOSYNTHESIS INHIBITING HERBICIDE PROVIDES LONG-TERM CONTROL OF INVASIVE WINTER ANNUAL GRASSES Invasive winter annual grasses such as downy brome (Bromus tectorum L.) are a threat to native ecosystems throughout the US. These invasive grasses exploit moisture and nutrients throughout the fall and early spring before native plants break dormancy. This results in decreased native species abundance and development of monotypic stands. Short-term downy brome management has been shown to be effective; however, the soil seed reserve has often been overlooked although it’s the mechanism responsible for rapid re-establishment. While glyphosate, imazapic, and rimsulfuron are herbicides commonly recommended to control invasive, annual grasses, their performance is inconsistent, and they can injure desirable perennial grasses. Indaziflam is a recently registered cellulose-biosynthesis inhibiting herbicide, providing broad spectrum control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds. Indaziflam (Esplanade®, Bayer CropScience) is a cellulose biosynthesis inhibiting (CBI) herbicide that is a unique mode of action for resistance management and has broad spectrum activity at low application rates. At three sites, glyphosate and rimsulfuron provided less downy brome control than indaziflam one year after treatment (YAT). Percent downy brome control with imazapic decreased significantly 2 YAT (45-64%), and 3 YAT (10-32%).
    [Show full text]
  • Flowers Southern Part of the State at Falls City
    Roadside Vegetation in Nebraska Roadside vegetation in Nebraska features plants that (NDOR) has developed a plan to promote the use of Benefits from these customized seed mixtures include: The first 12 to 16 feet off the surfaced roadway is mowed project is completed, NDOR crafts seed mixtures using are adapted to the state’s environmental conditions. native plant species that are most likely to thrive in the • Increased likelihood of the seeded plants germinating regularly during the growing season. NDOR develops a majority of native species, and uses common Conditions such as climate, soils, and topography different regions of the state. Native plants that occur in and becoming established on the roadside seed mixtures of short-growing grasses for this area agronomic practices. This results in improved soil differ from region to region across the state. Rainfall these regions within Nebraska are adapted for the specific immediately next to the pavement. Vegetation farther stabilization, reduced maintenance requirements, and a • Increased durability and permanence of the plants that varies from about 16 inches annually in the growing conditions. away from the roadway is mowed every 3 to 5 years. Seed visually-pleasing roadside. stabilize and beautify roadsides northwest at Harrison to 34 inches annually in the mixtures for these areas include taller grasses and flowers southern part of the state at Falls City. NDOR’s roadside seeding mixtures include cool- and • Active plant growth throughout the growing season that add color and texture to the roadside. warm-season grasses, legumes, and flowers. Species are • Increased control of soil erosion The plants you see along the roadside may occur selected as a roadside seed mixture according to the • Lower maintenance and mowing costs Roadside soils are compacted and nutrient-poor - - a naturally, may have been intentionally seeded, or may Nebraska region in which the NDOR project occurs.
    [Show full text]
  • Long-Awned Alkali Wild-Rye)
    STATUS OF ELYMUS SIMPLEX VAR. LUXURIANS (LONG-AWNED ALKALI WILD-RYE), SOUTHWESTERN WYOMING Prepared for Prepared for: Bureau of Land Management – State Office and Bureau of Land Management – Rock Springs Field Office P.O. Box 584 Rock Springs, WY 82902 By Bonnie Heidel Wyoming Natural Diversity Database Dept. 3381, University of Wyoming 1000 E. University Ave. Laramie, WY 82071 June 2012 Cooperative Agreement No. L10AC20123 ABSTRACT Surveys were conducted for Elymus simplex var. luxurians (long-awned alkali wild-rye) in Sweetwater and Carbon counties of southwestern and south-central Wyoming, respectively. Potential habitat was surveyed throughout the Killpecker and Ferris Dunes. This report represents the results of the first systematic surveys, documenting it throughout the Killpecker Dunes. Only the type variety is present in the Ferris Dunes. Elymus simplex var. luxurians is locally dominant and widespread in the western portion of the Killpecker Dunes (Rock Springs Uplift), and more sporadic, though sometimes still common in the eastern portion of the Killpecker Dunes (Great Divide Basin). It is present in four giant populations that are shaping and in turn shaped by Killpecker Dune succession. It is the more geographically restricted of the two varieties, though the type variety is nearly restricted to Wyoming. There is little evidence to suggest that it is affected by local land-use practices including livestock grazing, oil and gas development, and ORV traffic. Current taxonomic treatment is presented, and background information and duplicate specimen vouchers were sought for context and advancing future work. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Emma Stewart, Chicago Botanic Garden intern at Wyoming Natural Diversity Database (WYNDD) contributed many of the preparations needed for 2011 field surveys of Elymus simplex var.
    [Show full text]