Biological Assessment/Evaluation for Plants

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Biological Assessment/Evaluation for Plants BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT/EVALUATION FOR PLANTS, BOTANY REPORT, AND WEED RISK ASSESSMENT FOR OAK GLEN/BANNING HAZARDOUS FUELS REDUCTION PROJECT Front Country Ranger District, San Bernardino National Forest Prepared by: __/s/ Debra Nelson_______________________ April 9, 2010 Debra Nelson, District Botanist Date Contact Person: Debra Nelson Phone: (909) 382-2858 e-mail: [email protected] 1 SUMMARY The Oak Glen/Banning Hazardous Fuels Project involves creating and/or maintaining fuelbreaks to reduce wildfire risk to the communities of Oak Glen, Banning, Yucaipa, Forest Falls and Mountain Home Village in San Bernardino and Riverside counties, California. The purpose of this document is to evaluate the Oak Glen/Banning Community Protection Project in sufficient detail to determine its effects on Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, Sensitive, or other plant species of interest such as Management Indicator Species (MIS) as identified in the San Bernardino National Forest (SBNF) Land Management Plan (LMP). This report is prepared in accordance with the legal requirements set forth under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act [19 U.S.C. 1536 (c)], and follows the standards established in the Forest Service Manual direction (FSM 2672.42). DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS – SUMMARY No Federally threatened or endangered plant species are known from within the project area. No designated or proposed critical habitat for T/E plants is present within the Project Area. No candidate species are known nor expected in the Project area. Modeled habitat for six endangered species, Berberis nevinii (E), Dodecahema leptoceras (E), Poa atropurpurea (E), Sidalcea pedata (E), Taraxacum californicum (E), and Thelypodium stenopetalum (E) has been mapped within the project area, however no suitable or occupied habitat was found during field surveys of the proposed activity areas. Therefore, the determination of effects for T/E species is: No Effect. Section 7 Endangered Species Act Consultation with USFWS is not required. Threatened or endangered plant species: It is my determination that implementation of the proposed action as described will not affect any threatened or endangered plant species. Section 7 Endangered Species Act Consultation with USFWS is not required. Critical habitat, candidate plant species, and proposed critical habitat: It is my determination that implementation of the proposed action as described will not affect designated critical habitat proposed species or proposed critical habitat as none are present in the project area. Endangered Species Act Section 7 Conferencing with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is not required. Forest Service sensitive plant species: It is my determination that implementation of the proposed action as described may affect individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability of any sensitive plant species. Forest Service Watch list plants: Implementation of the proposed project may have some short- term impacts to watch list species however the project will not interfere with maintaining viable populations well distributed across the forest (36 CFR 219.19). 2 Contents SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 2 DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS – SUMMARY ................................................................... 2 PART I – INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 5 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 5 2.0 METHODS ........................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Species Considered and Species Accounts ....................................................................... 5 2.2 Pre-field Reviews .............................................................................................................. 5 2.3 Botanical Methods and Surveys........................................................................................ 6 3.0 CURRENT MANAGEMENT DIRECTION ....................................................................... 7 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ......................................................................... 7 4.1 Best Management Practices: .......................................................................................... 11 4.2 Resources Design Criteria: ............................................................................................ 13 5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................. 22 5.1 Project Area Description ................................................................................................. 22 6.0 CONNECTED ACTIONS Past, Current, and Reasonably Foreseeable Events Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis..................................................................................................... 23 7.0 EFFECTS OF NO ACTION .............................................................................................. 25 PART II – BOTANY REPORT ...................................................................................... 26 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 26 2.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND EFFECTS – GENERAL .......................................... 26 2.1 General Project Impacts to Plants ................................................................................... 26 3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND EFFECTS - WATCH LIST SPECIES .................... 29 3.1 Watch List Plants ............................................................................................................ 29 PART III: BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF EFFECTS - FOREST SERVICE SENSITIVE SPECIES ...................................................................................................................... 32 1.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND EFFECTS FOR SENSITVE SPECIES ................... 32 1.2 Sensitive Plants -General ................................................................................................ 33 1.3 Sensitive plants by species .............................................................................................. 33 2.0 SUMMARY OF DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS FOR FS SENSITIVE SPECIES .... 41 PART IV: BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS TO THREATENED, ENDANGERED, PROPOSED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES -PLANTS. ................................................. 41 1.0 CONSULTATION TO DATE ............................................................................................ 41 1.1 Species list ...................................................................................................................... 41 1.2 Modeled habitat ............................................................................................................. 41 2.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND EFFECTS - THREATENED, ENDANGERED, PROPOSED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES........................................................................... 41 3.0 DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS FOR TEPC SPECIES ............................................... 47 PART V: MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES ....................................................... 47 1.0. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 47 2.0. MIS SELECTED FOR PROJECT ANALYSIS ................................................................ 47 3.0. MIS ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS ........................... 47 6.0 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 52 3 PART VI: INVASIVE WEEDS RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................... 52 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 52 2.0 MANAGEMENT DIRECTION ......................................................................................... 53 3.0 METHODS ......................................................................................................................... 53 4.0 SURVEY RESULTS AND RISK ASSESSMENT ........................................................... 56 4.1 Weeds that pose severe to moderate risks ....................................................................... 56 4.2 Risk Assessment for Soil Disturbance Impacts ............................................................. 58 4.3 Risk of Transporting New Infestations into Project Area .............................................. 58 APPENDIX A: THREATENED, ENDANGERED, PROPOSED, SENSITIVE, and WATCHLIST PLANTS on the SAN BERNARDINO N.F. ................................................................... 59 APPENDIX B: MANAGEMENT DIRECTION AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS ............ 64 1.0. JURISDICTIONS ............................................................................................................. 64 2.0 FEDERAL LAWS .............................................................................................................. 65 3.0 AGENCY DIRECTION ..................................................................................................... 66 4.0 SAN BERNARDINO NATIONAL FOREST POLICY, DIRECTION, LEGAL OBLIGATIONS .......................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Conservation Science W
    Conservation Science W. Aust. 9 (2) : 181–200 (2014) The status and distribution of alien plants on the islands of the south coast of Western Australia MT LOHR 1 AND G KEIGHERY 2 1 Department of Parks and Wildlife, Woodvale Research Centre, PO Box 51, Wanneroo WA 6946, Australia 2 Department of Parks and Wildlife, Keiran McNamara Conservation Science Centre, 17 Dick Perry Avenue, Technology Park, Western Precinct, Kensington WA 6151, Australia email: [email protected] ABSTRACT Alien plants pose a substantial threat to island ecosystems in Australia and worldwide. A better understanding of weed distributions is necessary to more effectively manage natural resources on islands. To address this need for Western Australian islands, we created a database of all available records of alien plants on these islands. Here we report on records from all islands located along the south coast of Western Australia. From 789 individual records, a total of 116 alien plant species were recorded on the 43 islands with existing weed records. A disproportionately large number of weed species were recorded on estuarine islands and islands with a history of intensive human activity. Some of the species are known to be serious environmental weeds, including bridal creeper (Asparagus asparagoides), pig’s ear (Cotyledon orbiculata), sea spurge (Euphorbia paralias), cleavers (Galium aparine), African boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum), tree mallow (Malva arborea), arum lily (Zantedeschia aethiopica), and the annual grasses Avena, Bromus, Ehrharta, Hordeum, Lolium and Vulpia. Developing management plans to address these species, as well as surveying islands adjacent to known infestations, should be a conservation priority for south coast islands.
    [Show full text]
  • Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny
    Outline of angiosperm phylogeny: orders, families, and representative genera with emphasis on Oregon native plants Priscilla Spears December 2013 The following listing gives an introduction to the phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants that has emerged in recent decades, and which is based on nucleic acid sequences as well as morphological and developmental data. This listing emphasizes temperate families of the Northern Hemisphere and is meant as an overview with examples of Oregon native plants. It includes many exotic genera that are grown in Oregon as ornamentals plus other plants of interest worldwide. The genera that are Oregon natives are printed in a blue font. Genera that are exotics are shown in black, however genera in blue may also contain non-native species. Names separated by a slash are alternatives or else the nomenclature is in flux. When several genera have the same common name, the names are separated by commas. The order of the family names is from the linear listing of families in the APG III report. For further information, see the references on the last page. Basal Angiosperms (ANITA grade) Amborellales Amborellaceae, sole family, the earliest branch of flowering plants, a shrub native to New Caledonia – Amborella Nymphaeales Hydatellaceae – aquatics from Australasia, previously classified as a grass Cabombaceae (water shield – Brasenia, fanwort – Cabomba) Nymphaeaceae (water lilies – Nymphaea; pond lilies – Nuphar) Austrobaileyales Schisandraceae (wild sarsaparilla, star vine – Schisandra; Japanese
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of Portulacineae Marked by Gene Tree Conflict and Gene Family Expansion Associated with Adaptation to Harsh Environments
    Supplementary Figures Evolution of Portulacineae marked by gene tree conflict and gene family expansion associated with adaptation to harsh environments Ning Wang, Email: [email protected] Stephen A. Smith, E-mail: [email protected] Dendroscope view Limeaceae_Limeum aethiopicum Montiaceae_Phemeranthus parviflorus Basellaceae_Anredera cordifolia Anacampserotaceae_Anacampseros kurtzii Portulacaceae_Portulaca amilis Cactaceae_Leuenbergeria lychnidiflora Cactaceae_Stenocereus yunckeri Cactaceae_Maihuenia poeppigii Cactaceae_Opuntia bravoana Cactaceae_Pereskia grandifolia Talinaceae_Talinum paniculatum A Didiereaceae_Portulacaria afra PhyloPlot view Limeaceae_Limeum aethiopicum Montiaceae_Phemeranthus parviflorus Basellaceae_Anredera cordifolia Anacampserotaceae_Anacampseros kurtzii 0.008 Portulacaceae_Portulaca amilis 0.992 0.118 Cactaceae_Leuenbergeria lychnidiflora Cactaceae_Stenocereus yunckeri 0.24 0.146 0.76 Cactaceae_Maihuenia poeppigii 0.854 0.882 0.364 Cactaceae_Opuntia bravoana 0.636 Cactaceae_Pereskia grandifolia B Talinaceae_Talinum paniculatum Didiereaceae_Portulacaria afra FIG. S1. The phylogenetic network inferred using MPL method in PhyloNet. Taxa were selected from each plant family based on their gene occupancy statistics. A: network visualized in Dendroscope, and B: the same network with inheritance probabilities between hybridization lineages visualized by PhyloPlot that implemented in PhyloNetworks (Solís-Lemus et al. 2017). Anacampserotaceae Basellaceae Anacampseros A. kurtzii Talinopsis frutescens Anredera cordifolia Basella alba filamentosa Bese 400 4000 4000 3000 3000 200 2000 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 Portulacaceae Portulaca amilis P. cryptopetala P. grandiflora P. molokiniensis P. oleracea P. pilosa 300 500 800 800 200 200 300 150 400 400 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 Talinaceae P.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Future Role of the University of California Natural Reserve System for Sensitive Plant Protection Under Climate Change
    Evaluating the Future Role of the University of California Natural Reserve System for Sensitive Plant Protection under Climate Change ERIN C. RIORDAN* AND PHILIP W. RUNDEL DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90095 USA *EMAIL FOR CORRESPONDENCE: [email protected] WINTER 2019 PREPARED FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESERVE SYSTEM Executive Summary Description Protected areas are critical for conserving California’s many sensitive plant species but their future role is uncertain under climate change. Climate-driven species losses and redistributions could dramatically affect the relevance of protected areas for biodiversity conservation this century. Focusing on the University of California Natural Reserve System (NRS), we predicted the future impact of climate change on reserve effectiveness with respect to sensitive plant protection. First, we evaluated the historical representation of sensitive plant species in the NRS reserve network by compiling species accounts from checklists, floras, and spatial queries of occurrence databases. Next, we calculated projected climate change exposure across the NRS reserve network for the end of the 21st century (2070–2099) relative to baseline (1971–2000) conditions under five future climate scenarios. We then predicted statewide changes in suitable habitat for 180 sensitive plant taxa using the same future climate scenarios in a species distribution modeling approach. Finally, from these predictions we evaluated suitable habitat retention at three spatial scales: individual NRS reserves (focal reserves), the NRS reserve network, and the surrounding mosaic of protected open space. Six reserves—Sagehen Creek Field Station, McLaughlin Natural Reserve, Jepson Prairie Reserve, Landels-Hill Big Creek Reserve, Sedgwick Reserve, and Boyd Deep Canyon Desert Research Center—were selected as focal reserves for analyses.
    [Show full text]
  • Plants Aquarius Milkvetch (Astragalus Newberryi Var
    Arizona BLM Sensitive Species List (October, 2005) AZ-100 AZ-200 AZ-310 AZ-410 AZ-320 AZ-420 AZ-330 Key: V=Verified Occurrence Arizona Phoenix Kingman Safford Yuma Tucson Lake X=Probable/Possible Occurrence Strip Havasu Plants Aquarius milkvetch (Astragalus newberryi var. aquarii) V Aravaipa woodfern (Thelypteris puberula var. sonorensis) V V Aravaipa sage (Salvia amissa) V Arizona Sonoran rosewood (Vauquelinia californica ssp sonorensis) V Bartram stonecrop (Graptopetalum bartramii) V Black Rock daisy (Townsendia smithii) V Blue sand lily (Triteleiopsis palmeri) V California flannelbush (Fremontodendron californica) V V Chisos Mountains coralroot (Hexalectris revoluta) X Cliff milkvetch (Astragalus cremnophylax var.myriorraphus) V Clifton rock daisy (Perityle ambrosiifolia) V Dalhouse spleenwort (Asplenium (Ceterach) dalhousiae) V Diamond Butte milkvetch (Astragalus toanus var.scidulus) V Fish Creek fleabane (Erigeron piscaticus) X Gentry indigo bush (Dalea tentaculoides) X Giant sedge (Carex spissa var. ultra) V V V Grand Canyon rose (Rosa stellata var.abyssa) V Huachuca golden aster (Heterotheca rutteri) V Huachuca milkvetch (Astragalus hypoxylus) X Kaibab pincushion cactus (Pediocactus paradinei) V Kearney sumac (Rhus kearneyi ssp kearneyi) V Kofa Mt barberry (Berberis harrisoniana) X X X Marble Canyon Milkvetch (Astragalus cremnophylax var. hevronii) V Mt Trumbull beardtongue (Penstemon distans) V Murphey agave (Agave murpheyi) V Paria Plateau fishhook cactus (Sclerocactus sileri) V Attachment 1 - 1 Arizona BLM Sensitive Species
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vascular Flora of the Upper Santa Ana River Watershed, San Bernardino Mountains, California
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281748553 THE VASCULAR FLORA OF THE UPPER SANTA ANA RIVER WATERSHED, SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS, CALIFORNIA Article · January 2013 CITATIONS READS 0 28 6 authors, including: Naomi S. Fraga Thomas Stoughton Rancho Santa Ana B… Plymouth State Univ… 8 PUBLICATIONS 14 3 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Available from: Thomas Stoughton Retrieved on: 24 November 2016 Crossosoma 37(1&2), 2011 9 THE VASCULAR FLORA OF THE UPPER SANTA ANA RIVER WATERSHED, SAN BERNARDINO MOUNTAINS, CALIFORNIA Naomi S. Fraga, LeRoy Gross, Duncan Bell, Orlando Mistretta, Justin Wood1, and Tommy Stoughton Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden 1500 North College Avenue Claremont, California 91711 1Aspen Environmental Group, 201 North First Avenue, Suite 102, Upland, California 91786 [email protected] All Photos by Naomi S. Fraga ABSTRACT: We present an annotated catalogue of the vascular flora of the upper Santa Ana River watershed, in the southern San Bernardino Mountains, in southern California. The catalogue is based on a floristic study, undertaken from 2008 to 2010. Approximately 65 team days were spent in the field and over 5,000 collections were made over the course of the study. The study area is ca. 155 km2 in area (40,000 ac) and ranges in elevation from 1402 m to 3033 m. The study area is botanically diverse with more than 750 taxa documented, including 56 taxa of conservation concern and 81 non-native taxa. Vegetation and habitat types in the area include chaparral, evergreen oak forest and woodland, riparian forest, coniferous forest, montane meadow, and pebble plain habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Supplement II December 2014
    The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Supplement II December 2014 In the pages that follow are treatments that have been revised since the publication of the Jepson eFlora, Revision 1 (July 2013). The information in these revisions is intended to supersede that in the second edition of The Jepson Manual (2012). The revised treatments, as well as errata and other small changes not noted here, are included in the Jepson eFlora (http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html). For a list of errata and small changes in treatments that are not included here, please see: http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/JM12_errata.html Citation for the entire Jepson eFlora: Jepson Flora Project (eds.) [year] Jepson eFlora, http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html [accessed on month, day, year] Citation for an individual treatment in this supplement: [Author of taxon treatment] 2014. [Taxon name], Revision 2, in Jepson Flora Project (eds.) Jepson eFlora, [URL for treatment]. Accessed on [month, day, year]. Copyright © 2014 Regents of the University of California Supplement II, Page 1 Summary of changes made in Revision 2 of the Jepson eFlora, December 2014 PTERIDACEAE *Pteridaceae key to genera: All of the CA members of Cheilanthes transferred to Myriopteris *Cheilanthes: Cheilanthes clevelandii D. C. Eaton changed to Myriopteris clevelandii (D. C. Eaton) Grusz & Windham, as native Cheilanthes cooperae D. C. Eaton changed to Myriopteris cooperae (D. C. Eaton) Grusz & Windham, as native Cheilanthes covillei Maxon changed to Myriopteris covillei (Maxon) Á. Löve & D. Löve, as native Cheilanthes feei T. Moore changed to Myriopteris gracilis Fée, as native Cheilanthes gracillima D.
    [Show full text]
  • Palouse Forbs for Landscaping
    More Palouse Forbs for Landscaping. by David M. Skinner, Paul Warnick, Bill French, and Mary Fauci November, 2005 The following is an additional list of native forbs which may be found in the Palouse region. These forbs may be less suitable for the landscape because of growth habit, aggressiveness, difficulty in propagating and growing, rarity, or it simply may be that we haven’t yet tried to do anything with them. For a list of Palouse forbs which may be more suitable for landscaping and about which we have more information to share, please see “Characteristics and Uses of Native Palouse Forbs in Landscaping.” Nomenclature used in this document also follows Hitchcock, C. Leo, and Arthur Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Univ. of Washington Press. Seattle, WA. In order to facilitate searching for a particular species, we have included some common names and alternate scientific names, but this is by no means intended to be a comprehensive source of common names or synonyms. Detailed information on propagation of many native species can be found at <http://nativeplants.for.uidaho.edu/network/search.asp?SearchType=Continental> Agastache urticifolia is probably too large a plant for a small garden. Requires a moist site. Easy to grow from seed. Plants have a minty smell and a very interesting flower. Common names include nettle-leafed giant hyssop, horsemint. Agoseris grandiflora is not a particularly attractive plant, it looks rather like a weed. Short-lived and attracts rodents, which eat the taproot and kill the plants. Easy to grow from seed, which is wind-borne and goes everywhere.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plant List
    UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plants Below is the most recently updated plant list for UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve. * non-native taxon ? presence in question Listed Species Information: CNPS Listed - as designated by the California Rare Plant Ranks (formerly known as CNPS Lists). More information at http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/ranking.php Cal IPC Listed - an inventory that categorizes exotic and invasive plants as High, Moderate, or Limited, reflecting the level of each species' negative ecological impact in California. More information at http://www.cal-ipc.org More information about Federal and State threatened and endangered species listings can be found at https://www.fws.gov/endangered/ (US) and http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/ t_e_spp/ (CA). FAMILY NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME LISTED Ferns AZOLLACEAE - Mosquito Fern American water fern, mosquito fern, Family Azolla filiculoides ? Mosquito fern, Pacific mosquitofern DENNSTAEDTIACEAE - Bracken Hairy brackenfern, Western bracken Family Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens fern DRYOPTERIDACEAE - Shield or California wood fern, Coastal wood wood fern family Dryopteris arguta fern, Shield fern Common horsetail rush, Common horsetail, field horsetail, Field EQUISETACEAE - Horsetail Family Equisetum arvense horsetail Equisetum telmateia ssp. braunii Giant horse tail, Giant horsetail Pentagramma triangularis ssp. PTERIDACEAE - Brake Family triangularis Gold back fern Gymnosperms CUPRESSACEAE - Cypress Family Hesperocyparis macrocarpa Monterey cypress CNPS - 1B.2, Cal IPC
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan Pdf
    April 2015 VEGETATION AND BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Marin County Parks Marin County Open Space District VEGETATION AND BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAFT Prepared for: Marin County Parks Marin County Open Space District 3501 Civic Center Drive, Suite 260 San Rafael, CA 94903 (415) 473-6387 [email protected] www.marincountyparks.org Prepared by: May & Associates, Inc. Edited by: Gail Slemmer Alternative formats are available upon request TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents GLOSSARY 1. PROJECT INITIATION ...........................................................................................................1-1 The Need for a Plan..................................................................................................................1-1 Overview of the Marin County Open Space District ..............................................................1-1 The Fundamental Challenge Facing Preserve Managers Today ..........................................1-3 Purposes of the Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan .....................................1-5 Existing Guidance ....................................................................................................................1-5 Mission and Operation of the Marin County Open Space District .........................................1-5 Governing and Guidance Documents ...................................................................................1-6 Goals for the Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Program ..................................1-8 Summary of the Planning
    [Show full text]
  • Split Rock Trail Most Diverse Vegetation Types in North America
    Species List Species List National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Color Species Habit Season Color Species Habit Season Section 2, ■ • Section 1 W Ambrosia dumosa (burrobush) S C Y Opuntia chlorotica (pancake cactus) C c Joshua Tree National Park W Brickellia atractyloides (pungent brickellia) S c Y Rhus aromatica (skunk bush) s C w Caulanthus cooperi (Cooper's caulanthus) A c Y Senegalia greggii (cat's claw acacia) s H % w Chaenacf/s srew'o('c/es (Esteve's pincushion) A c Y Senna armata (desert senna) s C, H w Cryptantha barbigera (bearded forget-me-not) A c Y Tetradymia stenolepis (Mojave cottonthorn) s H w Cryptantha nevadensis (Nevada forget-me-not) A c 0 Adenophyllum porophylloides (San Felipe dyssodia) SS C, H tv w Eriogonum davidsonii (Davidson's buckwheat) A c, H 0 Sphaeraicea ambigua (apricot mallow) p C V w Eriogonum fasciculatum (California buckwheat) S C, H p Allium parishii (Parish's onion) B C \ w Eriogonum wrightii (Wright's buckwheat) SS H p Cylindropuntia ramosissima (pencil cholla) c H t Section 4 w Euphorbia albomarginata (rattlesnake weed) A C, H I p Echinocereus engelmannii (hedgehog cactus) c C P- ♦ Section 31 w Galium stellatum (starry bedstraw) SS C p Krameria erecta (littieleaf ratany) s C W/P Giliastellata (stargiiia) A C P/W Mirabilis laevis (wishbone bush) p c w Lepidium lasiocarpum (white pepperweed) A c _PJ Opuntia basilaris (beavertai! cactus) c c N w Lycium andersonii (Anderson's boxthorn) S c p Stephanomeria exigua (small wirelettuce) A C,H A w Lydum cooperi (Cooper's boxthorn) s c p Stephanomeria parryi (Parry's wirelettuce) P c w Nolina parryi (Parry nolina) s c p IStephanomeria paudflora (brownplume wirelettuce) SS c 0 500 2000 Feet w Pectocarya recurvata (arched-nut comb-bur) A c Boechera xylopoda (bigfoot hybrid rockcress) P c 0 150 600 Meters w Pecfocarya serosa (round-nut comb-bur) A c Delphinium parishii (Parish's larkspur) P c See inside of guide for plants found in each section of this map.
    [Show full text]