DOCSLIB.ORG

Bay Harbour Luxery Apartments

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bay Harbour Luxery Apartments Babcock Ranch Community First Annual Mitigation Monitoring Report Mitigation Areas A2 – A5 (SFWMD Application No. 181026-6, Permit No. 08-100822-P) (USACE Permit No. SAJ-2006-06656) Submitted to: South Florida Water Management District & U.S. Army Corps of Engineers October 2020 Prepared for: Babcock Property Holdings 42850 Crescent Loop Babcock Ranch, Florida 33982 Prepared by: 2122 Johnson Street Fort Myers, Florida 33901 20192108-000 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND ............................................................ 1 2.0 MITIGATION PLAN FOR AREAS A2-A5 ................................................. 1 2.1 Land Management Activities ................................................................... 2 2.2 Monitoring Plan ....................................................................................... 4 2.3 Monitoring Methodology ......................................................................... 5 3.0 MONITORING RESULTS & SUMMARY .................................................. 5 3.1 Mitigation Areas A2-A5 First Annual Assessment ................................. 5 4.0 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................ 10 5.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 10 TABLES Table 2-1. Management Summary for Mitigation Areas A2-A5 .............................. 2 Table 2-2. Upland Plantings for Mitigation Areas A2, A4, and A5.......................... 3 Table 2-3. Mitigation Work Schedule for Areas A2-A5 ........................................... 4 Table 3-1. Wildlife Species Observed in Mitigation Areas A2-A5 .......................... 9 FIGURES Figure 3-1. Hydrograph of Monitoring Well MA-103 located in Mitigation Area A4 .................................................................................. 8 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 Conservation Easement Location Map Attachment 2 Planting Receipts from Earth Tech Environmental Attachment 3 Mitigation Monitoring Map for Mitigation Areas A2-A5 Attachment 4 BRC Mitigation Plan Success Criteria Attachment 5 First Annual Monitoring Data Sheets for Mitigation Areas A2-A5 Attachment 6 First Annual Monitoring Photos for Mitigation Areas A2-A5 Attachment 7 Photo Documentation of Status and Health of Supplemental Plantings ii Babcock Mitigation Areas A2 – A5 First Annual Monitoring Report October 2020 1.0 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND The Babcock Ranch Community (BRC) Mitigation Plan involves eleven different areas (Mitigation Areas A-K), as approved through the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) conceptual Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) (Application No. 070330-5; Permit No. 08-0004-S-05) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) permit (SAJ-2006-06656). Please refer to Attachment 1 for illustration of the subject mitigation areas. As development phases within the BRC go to construction, portions of the mitigation plan are implemented to stay current or ahead of development impacts. To date, portions of Mitigation Areas A, C, E, and H have been implemented. Each mitigation area has its own credit ledger, with available credits based on management activities implemented to date. As each phase of development receives a construct-operate ERP from the SFWMD, a specific mitigation area is identified to offset development impacts and the associated mitigation ledger is debited accordingly. This mitigation monitoring report is being provided to specifically address first annual conditions (conducted August 26, 2020) within portions of Mitigation Area A (A2-A5), as the mitigation plan for these areas is being implemented to help offset wetland impacts associated with a phase of development known as Babcock National (SFWMD Construct/Operate Application No. 181026-6; Permit No. 08-100822-P; consistent with SAJ-2006-06656). Babcock National is now owned and being developed by the Lennar Corporation. Although the mitigation plan for Mitigation Areas A2- A5 is being implemented under the Babcock National permit, their respective conservation easements were recorded as a requirement of Application No. 181001-872, Permit No. 08-00004-S-05 for the Village 3 Boardwalk (see discussion below). The conservation easement for Mitigation Area A11 was recorded as required by the Babcock National permit. The ownership and responsibility for all mitigation areas within the BRC is retained by the BRC Independent Special District (ISD). To facilitate pedestrian and golf cart access for the Babcock National project (fka Village 3), a boardwalk was permitted by Babcock Property Holdings (BPH) across a portion of Mitigation Area A11 in December 2018. Consistent with the conceptual trail location portrayed in the original approvals for the BRC, the SFWMD authorized construction of the boardwalk under Application No. 181001-872. As a condition of boardwalk approval, pre-and post-construction photos were required to document field conditions within the alignment across Mitigation Area A11. These conditions were met through the combined report presented in September 2019 and will no longer be reported moving forward. 2.0 MITIGATION PLAN FOR AREAS A2-A5 Based on the approved permits for the BRC, Mitigation Area A totals 879.38 acres and 312.66 credits (261.17 forested credits and 51.49 herbaceous credits) may be realized upon completion of all mitigation activities associated within the area after meeting level 3 success criteria for all applicable categories. Mitigation Area A is divided into twelve (12) different polygons, referred to as A1-A12, which are labeled on the Conservation Easement Location Map in Attachment 1. Two (2) control structures were installed in Curry Canal and the mitigation plan for A1 was implemented with the first phase of development on the BRC. Both of these activities have met success criteria, with sign-off having been received in April 2018. As part of the Babcock National construction approval (Application No. 181026-6, Permit No. 08-100822-P), the land management plan for Mitigation Areas A2-A5 is also being implemented to generate additional credits needed to offset the wetland 1 Babcock Mitigation Areas A2 – A5 First Annual Monitoring Report October 2020 impacts associated with that phase of development and provide additional mitigation credits for future phases of development within the BRC. Mitigation Areas A2 through A5 are comprised predominantly of wetland and upland habitats totaling 73.58 acres, inclusive of an existing trail along the perimeter of mitigation area A4. Mitigation Areas A2-A5 have all been placed under conservation easement granted to the SFWMD, with third party enforcement rights granted to the USACE. Table 2-1 provides an acreage breakdown of management classification (wetland preservation, wetland enhancement, upland preservation, upland enhancement, and trail) for Mitigation Areas A2-A5, as originally evaluated during review of the overall BRC approval. Table 2-1. Management Summary for Mitigation Areas A2-A5 (Total of 73.58 Ac.) A2 A3 A4 A5 Wetland Preservation (Acres ±) 12.17 7.54 11.54 0.18 Wetland Enhancement (Acres ±) --- --- --- 11.75 Upland Preservation (Acres ±) 9.89 4.93 4.27 2.21 Upland Enhancement (Acres ±) 0.24 --- 1.15 7.4 Trails (Acres ±) --- --- 0.31 --- TOTALS: 22.3 Ac. 12.47 Ac. 17.27 Ac. 21.54 Ac. 2.1 Land Management Activities Flora: The mitigation areas will be maintained in their natural state and kept free of refuse and debris. Category I and II invasive exotics, as defined by the current Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council’s (FLEPPC) List of Invasive Plant Species, will be controlled within the mitigation areas. Listed invasive and exotic plants within the interior of the mitigation area will either be treated in place or hand harvested. (Note: Brazilian pepper was mechanically harvested around the perimeter of the mitigation areas that had once been part of Earthsource Mine, while avoiding disturbance to the adjacent natural systems). When listed invasive exotic vegetation is removed, but the base of vegetation remains, the base will be treated with a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved herbicide with a visual tracer dye applied. All vegetative debris, including any dead standing or felled debris that results from herbicide spraying, will be physically removed from the preserve areas. The management goals for the mitigation area will be to control exotic and nuisance flora species such that mitigation areas are: (a) exotic-free immediately following maintenance activities, and (b) between maintenance events exotic and nuisance plant species shall constitute no more than 5% total coverage, with the exemption that torpedograss (Panicum repens) coverage will be maintained at no more than 10% total coverage. The BRC Independent Special District (ISD) is responsible for the perpetual maintenance of the mitigation areas. Due to portions of Mitigation Areas A2, A4, and A5 having been disturbed through past mining activities and/or having a predominance of exotic vegetation at time of original BRC permitting, a supplemental planting plan was approved for these areas through SFWMD Application No. 181026- 6, as outlined in Table 2-2. 2 Table 2‐2. Upland Plantings for Mitigation Areas A2, A4, and A5 Mitigation Area A2 Upland Enhancement = 0.24 Ac. (FLUCFCS 211 → 415) % of Area Plant Spacing, Total Area (S.F.) Total Plant Quantity Planted (FT., O.C.) TREES / PALMS 10,454.00 30.00% 15' o.c. 14 SHRUBS 10,454.00 5.00% 15' o.c. 2 HERBACEOUS 10,454.00 75.00%
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts
    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist • First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Somers Bruce Sorrie and Paul Connolly, Bryan Cullina, Melissa Dow Revision • First A County Checklist Plants of Massachusetts: Vascular The A County Checklist First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program The Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), part of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, is one of the programs forming the Natural Heritage network. NHESP is responsible for the conservation and protection of hundreds of species that are not hunted, fished, trapped, or commercially harvested in the state. The Program's highest priority is protecting the 176 species of vertebrate and invertebrate animals and 259 species of native plants that are officially listed as Endangered, Threatened or of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Endangered species conservation in Massachusetts depends on you! A major source of funding for the protection of rare and endangered species comes from voluntary donations on state income tax forms. Contributions go to the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Fund, which provides a portion of the operating budget for the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program. NHESP protects rare species through biological inventory,
    [Show full text]
  • Carex Gigantea Rudge in Florida
    ILLINOI S UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN PRODUCTION NOTE University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library Large-scale Digitization Project, 2007. c f ConservationAssessment for the Giant Sedge (Carex giganteaRudge) 31 July 2006 Steven R. Hill, Ph.D. Illinois Natural History Survey Center for Wildlife and Plant Ecology 1816 South Oak Street Champaign, Illinois 61820 ILLINOIS NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY Illinois Natural History Survey Center for Wildlife and Plant Ecology Technical Report 2006 (10) Cover photo: Carex gigantea Rudge in Florida. Photo by Shirley Denton. http://www.simple-grandeur.com/plants/native.php This Conservation Assessment was prepared to compile the published and unpublished information on the subject taxon or community; or this document was prepared by another organization and provides information to serve as a Conservation Assessment for the Eastern Region of the Forest Service. It does not represent a management decision by the U.S. Forest Service. Though the best scientific information available was used and subject experts were consulted in preparation of this document, it is expected that new information will arise. In the spirit of continuous learning and adaptive management, if you have information that will assist in conserving the subject taxon, please contact the Eastern Region of the Forest Service - Threatened and Endangered Species Program at 310 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 580 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203. 2 Conservation Assessment for the Giant Sedge (Carex gigantea Rudge) Table of Contents Acknowledgm
    [Show full text]
  • Host Specificity of Ischnodemus Variegatus, an Herbivore of West
    BioControl DOI 10.1007/s10526-008-9188-3 Host specificity of Ischnodemus variegatus, an herbivore of West Indian marsh grass (Hymenachne amplexicaulis) Rodrigo Diaz Æ William A. Overholt Æ James P. Cuda Æ Paul D. Pratt Æ Alison Fox Received: 31 January 2008 / Accepted: 17 July 2008 Ó International Organization for Biological Control (IOBC) 2008 Abstract West Indian marsh grass, Hymenachne to suboptimal hosts occurred in an area where amplexicaulis Rudge (Nees) (Poaceae), is an emer- H. amplexicaulis was growing in poor conditions gent wetland plant that is native to South and Central and there was a high density of I. variegatus. Thus, America as well as portions of the Caribbean, but is laboratory and field studies demonstrate that considered invasive in Florida USA. The neotropical I. variegatus had higher performance on H. amplexi- bug, Ischnodemus variegatus (Signoret) (Hemiptera: caulis compared to any other host, and that suboptimal Lygaeoidea: Blissidae) was observed feeding on hosts could be colonized temporarily. H. amplexicaulis in Florida in 2000. To assess whether this insect could be considered as a specialist Keywords Blissidae Á Hemiptera Á Herbivore biological control agent or potential threat to native performance Á Host quality Á Poaceae and cultivated grasses, the host specificity of I. variegatus was studied under laboratory and field conditions. Developmental host range was examined Introduction on 57 plant species across seven plant families. Complete development was obtained on H. amplexi- West Indian marsh grass, Hymenachne amplexicaulis caulis (23.4% survivorship), Paspalum repens (0.4%), Rudge (Nees) (Poaceae), is a perennial emergent Panicum anceps (2.2%) and Thalia geniculata weed in wetlands of Florida USA and northeastern (0.3%).
    [Show full text]
  • Supplemental Table 1 the Phenology of Chasmogamous (CH) and Cleistogamous (CL) Flower Production by Life History (Annual Or Perennial) and Genus
    Supplemental Table 1 The phenology of chasmogamous (CH) and cleistogamous (CL) flower production by life history (annual or perennial) and genus. Phenology is described as sequential (no overlap in the production of CH and CL flowers), overlapping (partial overlap), or simultaneous (complete overlap in production of CH and CL flowers). Flower type initiated first indicates which flower type is produced first within a flowering season. Flower Flower type Genus (Family) phenology initiated first Reference Annuals Amphicarpaea (Fabaceae) Overlapping CL 1-2 Amphicarpum (Poaceae) Overlapping CL 3-4 Andropogon (Poaceae) Overlapping CL 5 Centaurea (Asteraceae) Overlapping CL 6 Ceratocapnos (Fumariaceae) Overlapping CL 7 Collomia (Polemoniaceae) Overlapping CL 8-9 Emex (Polygonaceae) Overlapping CL 10 Impatiens (Balsaminaceae) Overlapping CL 11-16 Lamium (Lamiaceae) Overlapping CL 17 Mimulus (Scrophulariaceae) Overlapping CL 18 Salpiglossis (Solanaceae) Overlapping CL 19 Perennials Ajuga (Lamiaceae) Overlapping CL 20 Amphibromus (Poaceae) Overlapping CL 21 Calathea (Marantaceae) Simultaneous, NA 22 year round Danthonia (Poaceae) Overlapping CL 21; 23-24 Dichanthelium (Poaceae) Sequential CH 25 Microleana (Poaceae) Simultaneous unknown 26 Oxalis (Oxalidaceae) Sequential CH 27-29 Scutellaria (Lamiaceae) Sequential CH 30 Viola (Violaceae) Sequential CH 28; 31-34 LITERATURE CITED 1. Schnee BK, Waller DM. 1986. Reproductive-behavior of Amphicarpaea bracteata (Leguminosae), an amphicarpic annual. Am. J. Bot. 73: 376–86 2. Trapp EJ, Hendrix SD. 1988. Consequences of a mixed reproductive system in the hog peanut, Amphicarpaea bracteata (Fabaceae). Oecologia 75: 285–90 3. Cheplick GP, Quinn JA. 1982. Amphicarpum purshii and the pessimistic strategy in amphicarpic annuals with subterranean fruit. Oecologia 52: 327–32 4. Cheplick GP. 1989. Nutrient availability, dimorphic seed production, and reproductive allocation in the annual grass Amphicarpum purshii.
    [Show full text]
  • New York Natural Heritage Program Rare Plant Status List May 2004 Edited By
    New York Natural Heritage Program Rare Plant Status List May 2004 Edited by: Stephen M. Young and Troy W. Weldy This list is also published at the website: www.nynhp.org For more information, suggestions or comments about this list, please contact: Stephen M. Young, Program Botanist New York Natural Heritage Program 625 Broadway, 5th Floor Albany, NY 12233-4757 518-402-8951 Fax 518-402-8925 E-mail: [email protected] To report sightings of rare species, contact our office or fill out and mail us the Natural Heritage reporting form provided at the end of this publication. The New York Natural Heritage Program is a partnership with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and by The Nature Conservancy. Major support comes from the NYS Biodiversity Research Institute, the Environmental Protection Fund, and Return a Gift to Wildlife. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... Page ii Why is the list published? What does the list contain? How is the information compiled? How does the list change? Why are plants rare? Why protect rare plants? Explanation of categories.................................................................................................................... Page iv Explanation of Heritage ranks and codes............................................................................................ Page iv Global rank State rank Taxon rank Double ranks Explanation of plant
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation of Mitochondrial-Derived Plastome Sequences in the Paspalum Lineage (Panicoideae; Poaceae) Sean V
    Burke et al. BMC Plant Biology (2018) 18:152 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-018-1379-1 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Investigation of mitochondrial-derived plastome sequences in the Paspalum lineage (Panicoideae; Poaceae) Sean V. Burke1* , Mark C. Ungerer2 and Melvin R. Duvall1 Abstract Background: The grass family (Poaceae), ca. 12,075 species, is a focal point of many recent studies that aim to use complete plastomes to reveal and strengthen relationships within the family. The use of Next Generation Sequencing technology has revealed intricate details in many Poaceae plastomes; specifically the trnI - trnL intergenic spacer region. This study investigates this region and the putative mitochondrial inserts within it in complete plastomes of Paspalum and other Poaceae. Results: Nine newly sequenced plastomes, seven of which contain an insert within the trnI - trnL intergenic spacer, were combined into plastome phylogenomic and divergence date analyses with 52 other species. A robust Paspalum topology was recovered, originating at 10.6 Ma, with the insert arising at 8.7 Ma. The alignment of the insert across Paspalum reveals 21 subregions with pairwise homology in 19. In an analysis of emergent self- organizing maps of tetranucleotide frequencies, the Paspalum insert grouped with mitochondrial DNA. Conclusions: A hypothetical ancestral insert, 17,685 bp in size, was found in the trnI - trnL intergenic spacer for the Paspalum lineage. A different insert, 2808 bp, was found in the same region for Paraneurachne muelleri. Seven different intrastrand deletion events were found within the Paspalum lineage, suggesting selective pressures to remove large portions of noncoding DNA. Finally, a tetranucleotide frequency analysis was used to determine that the origin of the insert in the Paspalum lineage is mitochondrial DNA.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    A Guide to the Natural Communities of the Delaware Estuary June 2006 Citation: Westervelt, K., E. Largay, R. Coxe, W. McAvoy, S. Perles, G. Podniesinski, L. Sneddon, and K. Strakosch Walz. 2006. A Guide to the Natural Communities of the Delaware Estuary: Version 1. NatureServe. Arlington, Virginia. PDE Report No. 06-02 Copyright © 2006 NatureServe COVER PHOTOS Top L: Eastern Hemlock - Great Laurel Swamp, photo from Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Top R: Pitch Pine - Oak Forest, photo by Andrew Windisch, photo from New Jersey Natural Heritage Bottom R: Maritime Red Cedar Woodland, photo by Robert Coxe, photo from Delaware Natural Heritage Bottom L: Water Willow Rocky Bar and Shore in Pennsylvania, photo from Pennsylvania Natural Heritage A GUIDE TO THE NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF THE DELAWARE ESTUARY Kellie Westervelt Ery Largay Robert Coxe William McAvoy Stephanie Perles Greg Podniesinski Lesley Sneddon Kathleen Strakosch Walz. Version 1 June 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................................................................................11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................. 12 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 13 CLASSIFICATION APPROACH..................................................................................................... 14 International Terrestrial Ecological Systems Classification
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a Renovate® 3 Label and MSDS
    Appendix A Renovate® 3 Label and MSDS J:\Govt\Projects\SePRO\Renovate-GEIS\Draft GEIS\Appendices\AppendixCovers.doc July 2006 Appendix B New York Natural Heritage Program Rare Plant Status List1 1 Appendix I (NYS DEC Protected Plant List ) of June 2005 list provided J:\Govt\Projects\SePRO\Renovate-GEIS\Draft GEIS\Appendices\AppendixCovers.doc July 2006 New York Natural Heritage Program Rare Plant Status List June 2005 Edited by: Stephen M. Young and Troy W. Weldy This list is also published at the website: www.nynhp.org For more information, suggestions or comments about this list, please contact: Stephen M. Young, Program Botanist New York Natural Heritage Program 625 Broadway, 5th Floor Albany, NY 12233-4757 518-402-8951 Fax 518-402-8925 E-mail: [email protected] To report sightings of rare species, contact our office or fill out and mail us the Natural Heritage reporting form provided at the end of this publication. The New York Natural Heritage Program is a partnership with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and by The Nature Conservancy. Major support comes from the NYS Biodiversity Research Institute, the Environmental Protection Fund, and Return a Gift to Wildlife. Appendix I: NYS DEC Protected Plant List 193.3 Protected native plants. (a) All plants enumerated on the lists of endangered species in subdivision (b) of this section, threatened species in subdivision (c) of this section, rare species in subdivision (d) of this section, or exploitably vulnerable species in subdivision (e) of this section are protected native plants pursuant to section 9-1503 of the Environmental Conservation Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Acadian-Appalachian Alpine Tundra
    Acadian-Appalachian Alpine Tundra Macrogroup: Alpine yourStateNatural Heritage Ecologist for more information about this habitat. This is modeledmap a distributiononbased current and is data nota substitute for field inventory. based Contact © Josh Royte (The Nature Conservancy, Maine) Description: A sparsely vegetated system near or above treeline in the Northern Appalachian Mountains, dominated by lichens, dwarf-shrubland, and sedges. At the highest elevations, the dominant plants are dwarf heaths such as alpine bilberry and cushion-plants such as diapensia. Bigelow’s sedge is characteristic. Wetland depressions, such as small alpine bogs and rare sloping fens, may be found within the surrounding upland matrix. In the lower subalpine zone, deciduous shrubs such as nannyberry provide cover in somewhat protected areas; dwarf heaths including crowberry, Labrador tea, sheep laurel, and lowbush blueberry, are typical. Nearer treeline, spruce and fir that State Distribution: ME, NH, NY, VT have become progressively more stunted as exposure increases may form nearly impenetrable krummholz. Total Habitat Acreage: 8,185 Ecological Setting and Natural Processes: Percent Conserved: 98.1% High winds, snow and ice, cloud-cover fog, and intense State State GAP 1&2 GAP 3 Unsecured summer sun exposure are common and control ecosystem State Habitat % Acreage (acres) (acres) (acres) dynamics. Found mostly above 4000' in the northern part of NH 51% 4,160 4,126 0 34 our region, alpine tundra may also occur in small patches on ME 44% 3,624 2,510 1,082 33 lower ridgelines and summits and at lower elevations near the Atlantic coast. NY 3% 285 194 0 91 VT 1% 115 115 0 0 Similar Habitat Types: Acadian-Appalachian Montane Spruce-Fir-Hardwood Forests typically occur downslope.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Peanutgrass
    Natural Heritage Annual Peanutgrass & Endangered Species Amphicarpum amphicarpon (Pursh) Nash Program www.mass.gov/nhesp State Status: Endangered Federal Status: None Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife DESCRIPTION: Annual Peanutgrass (Amphicarpum amphicarpon) is a medium-sized (30–80 cm; 12–31 in.), erect annual in the Grass family (Poaceae), with hairy stem and leaves. The leaves are 10 to 15 cm long, 5 to 15 mm wide, and largely clustered at the lower end of the stem, becoming more sparse and smaller on the upper part of the stem. The leaf blades and the leaf sheaths – the lower part of the leaf that clasps the stem – are covered with short hairs that make them rough to the touch. The genus name, which translates to “double fruiting,” and the common name refer to the underground flowers produced by this species in addition to the more familiar above-ground inflorescence. The 5 to 15 cm aerial inflorescence is either un-branched or has a few simple branches held close, with awnless, elliptical spikelets (4 mm) held singly. The plump underground spikelets are 6 to 7 mm, each attached singly to a slender root-like branch. Annual Peanutgrass has subterranean spikelets in addition to the above- ground inflorescence. USDA-NRCS PLANTS Database / Britton, N.L., and A. Brown. 1913. An illustrated flora of the northern United States, Canada and the British Possessions. 3 vols. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. Vol. 1: 164. AIDS TO IDENTIFICATION: Positive identification of grasses requires the use of specialized keys. The following features help to distinguish Annual Peanutgrass: .
    [Show full text]
  • Your Name Here
    EVALUATING THE LOCATION, EXTENT, AND CONDITION OF ISOLATED WETLANDS IN THE DOUGHERTY PLAIN, GEORGIA, USA by GLENN I. MARTIN (Under the Direction of Jeffrey Hepinstall-Cymerman) ABSTRACT Geographically isolated wetlands are common throughout Georgia’s Dougherty Plain physiographic district, and provide many valuable ecosystem services. However, they are currently excluded from federal and state protection. To better understand the isolated wetland resource, we created a spatially-explicit timeline of land use and land cover within Dougherty Plain, developed a spatial map of isolated wetlands, and constructed a multi-metric framework to assess the ecological condition of 40 isolated wetlands at multiple scales. We found drastic shifts in land use and land cover between 1948 and 2007. We estimate that there are approximately 11,620 isolated wetlands covering 42,431 ha within the Dougherty Plain. The ecological assessment showed strong correlation between assessment methods and scales, and indicates that a remote assessment may be suitable for future studies. Future research can use this information to identify isolated wetlands in the Dougherty Plain, explore their land cover trajectories, and assess their ecological condition. INDEX WORDS: Dougherty Plain, Georgia, ecological assessment, isolated wetland, land cover, land use, EVALUATING THE LOCATION, EXTENT, AND CONDITION OF ISOLATED WETLANDS IN THE DOUGHERTY PLAIN, GEORGIA, USA by GLENN I. MARTIN B.S., The University of Georgia, 2005 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE ATHENS, GEORGIA 2010 © 2010 GLENN I. MARTIN All Rights Reserved EVALUATING THE LOCATION, EXTENT, AND CONDITION OF ISOLATED WETLANDS IN THE DOUGHERTY PLAIN, GEORGIA, USA by GLENN I.
    [Show full text]