DOCSLIB.ORG

Central Appalachians FLN 2015 Year in Review

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Central Appalachians FLN 2015 Year in Review Fire Learning Network Central Appalachians FLN Notes from the Field 2015 Year in Review Over the last decade, the Central Appalachians FLN has built strong, Landscapes of the Central Appalachians FLN diverse partnerships and demon- Heart of the Appalachians Virginia / West Virginia strated the synergistic effect this level of collaboration can have in Keystone Appalachians Pennsylvania restoring the role of fire to an eco- Cumberland River Kentucky logically significant scale. Potomac Headwaters Maryland / West Virginia Good Fire Despite a wet start to the 2015 collaboration in Pennsylvania’s The success of this crew led prescribed fire season in many parts Keystone Appalachians landscape the chapter to again contract with of the region, landscape partners also allowed for burning across WRI, this time through a participat- were able to burn nearly 8,700 acres Pennsylvania Game Commission, ing agreement funded by a Forest in the Heart of the Appalachians, Fort Indiantown Gap, PADCNR and Service Supplemental Wildland Fire 12,900 acres in the Keystone Ap- Conservancy lands. Hazardous Fuels (WFHF) project, to palachians and 6,200 acres in the provide a four-person module for the Cumberland River landscapes this spring of 2016. With additional fund- year. Achieving 28,000 acres of ing from the Forest Service Region good fire across the network can be 8, two more modules will be sup- attributed to the increased coordi- ported in the Southern Blue Ridge nation among partners making the FLN. The three modules—based in most of small burn windows. Virginia, North Carolina/Tennessee Among the highlights was the 400- and Georgia/South Carolina—will be acre Summers Mountain burn in the available for three months, for work Highland Wildlife Management Area. spanning state, federal, local and Thanks to the FLN’s role in helping private lands. develop a new prescribed fire policy Partners burning in the Cumberland River landscape. Photo: Chris Minor/TNC for the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) and MOUs between all partners, this was Tackling Capacity Barriers both the largest burn in DGIF history A frequently identified barrier to and the first in Virginia where U.S. prescribed fire implementation is in- Forest Service staff have burned on sufficient capacity. To help mitigate DGIF lands. that challenge, the Conservancy’s Excellent cross-boundary co- Virginia chapter, funded through a ordination was also evidenced by Scaling-up to Promote Ecosystem The Nature Conservancy staff from Resiliency (SPER II) grant, con- Maryland assisting the U.S. Fish & tracted with Wildland Restoration Wildlife Service and Pennsylvania International (WRI) to provide a Department of Conservation and four-person fire module in the spring Natural Resources (PADCNR) with of 2015. The module helped prep The leader of the Wildland Restoration Inter- national module conducting ignitions at the Bear the Underwood Trail Burn near State and implement controlled burns on Loop burn unit on Warm Springs Mountain Pre- College, while Conservancy staff 2,942 acres in the Heart of the Ap- serve in April 2015. Also pictured is one of the from Pennsylvania were assisting palachians landscape and prepped interpretive signs developed by the FLN, which carries information about the role of fire—includ- the Pennsylvania Game Commis- another 1,344 acres for upcoming ing prescribed fire—in the landscape. sion with another burn. Successful burns. Photo: Marek Smith/TNC Continuous Collaboration Natural Lands Trust, National Park Service, Pennsylvania Bureau of In western Maryland, development Forestry, Pennsylvania Department of a new FLN landscape—the of Military and Veterans Affairs, Potomac Headwaters FLN landscape Pennsylvania Game Commission, —was initiated in early November. Sustainable Solutions (a natural Staff from the Maryland Department resource consulting company) and of Forestry, Maryland Department the Conservancy’s Pennsylvania of Natural Resources, National Park chapter. Service and the Conservancy’s Maryland and Virginia chapters The Virginia Wildland Fire Acad- emy, coordinated by the Virginia spent two days discussing project Ben Jones addressed participants at one of the goals and touring prospective burn stops on the Dry Oak and Fire Workshop field Department of Forestry, held its first tour. Photo: Patrick McElhenny/TNC units in Catoctin Mountain Park and NWCG Prescribed Fire Course, Green Ridge State Forest. While Rx310 Fire Effects, in 2015. The partners from Maryland have long course was co-hosted by the Vir- participated in the Central Appala- Training Modules ginia Prescribed Fire Council. This chians FLN, they had not yet devel- significant milestone was met with An S-219 Fire Operations course enthusiasm: a sold out classroom, oped a large landscape upon which was held in July in State College they could collaboratively implement and tremendous participation by (PA) under the sponsorship of the essentially every land manage- cross-boundary projects. With this Pennsylvania Game Commission. now underway, partners in the new ment agency in the state as well as There were 28 participants, includ- from many private landowners and landscape are planning for a work- ing students and instructors from the shop later in 2016. contractors. In the coming year, the Pennsylvania Department of Military Academy will continue its support of In Kentucky this fall, a Cumberland and Veterans Affairs, Pennsylvania prescribed fire training by offering River FLN landscape workshop Game Commission and the Conser- Rx341 Prescribed Fire Plan Prepa- was attended by 12 people from the vancy’s Pennsylvania chapter. ration. Kentucky Department of Fish and An RX-310 Fire Effects course was Wildlife Resources, Kentucky Heart- sponsored by the Pennsylvania Pre- Outreach Efforts wood, The Nature Conservancy scribed Fire Council in July as well. Educational outreach targeting and the U.S. Forest Service. Three The 26 participants in the week- visitors to areas where prescribed subcommittees were formed—to long course included students and fire is part of the landscape continues focus on funding, research and out- instructors from Arcadia University, to be a focus of the network. reach—to better manage upcoming opportunities. Plans for the next six months include hosting a local FLN Shared-Learning Field Day where key people in FLN partner agencies will have the opportunity to hear about recent research, see treat- ment sites, and address concerns or fire adapted landscape is an area created and maintained by fire. Some trees Combined with PRAIRIE SAVANNA and other plants benefit from fire, as it reduces excess woody debris from Photo by Photo by controlled burning, Chris Minor Julian the forest floor, promotes seed germination, and reduces competition. Campbell mechanical thinning issues around controlled burning in Many areas within Kentucky’s forests used to be much more open than they are now. can speed up the rairie, savanna, woodland, and forest are general terms used to describe restoration process. the area. different habitat types defined by the density of trees in a given area. A mixture of different habitat types across a landscape add to plant and wildlife diversity. In Pennsylvania, the Prescribed Fire WOODLAND FOREST This photo was taken here prior to treatment. Photo by Allison Coons. Photo by Photo by Council’s Dry Oak and Fire workshops Chris Minor Chris Minor hinning allows less desirable trees to be harvested and the understory to be opened up. is provides more sunlight were well attended, drawing 128 to the forest floor and encourages more plants to grow. participants from 18 organizations and agencies, including state and he photos above provide a visual of the different habitat types federal agencies, traditional NGOs, represented in our forests. Many wildlife species are in decline due to lack of their associated habitat type. academia, forestry associations, forestry products companies, con- Photo by Chris Minor. he right (east) side of 5010, and the south of KY 90 represent two treatment areas. Both areas will be mechanically thinned with one receiving onitoring plots are located throughout this area. Data is sulting foresters and hunters. They an early spring or late fall controlled burn while the other receives a late collected, including plant species, species occurrence, spring, summer, or late summer controlled burn. Pre- and post-burn data will be tree size, and fuel load. is allows the impact of discussed prescribed fire and man- collected, and results will guide future management decisions. treatments to be better defined and documented. agement of dry oak and oak-pine communities, covering issues rang- ing from maintaining oak forests to Partners in the Cumberland River FLN landscape continued work on interpretive signs restoring woodlands, savannas and for the Stearns Ranger District of the Daniel Boone National Forest. The signs are part of driving tour being developed with support from the Consortium of Appalachian Fire Man- scrub oak-pitch pine barrens with agers and Scientists. The tour will have eight to ten stops and feature messages about combinations of fire, timber harvest the historic role of fire in the Appalachians; fire effects monitoring; plant, wildlife and fuel and other methods. reduction benefits of controlled burns; and fire teams and safety. Sharing Nationally overstory basal area. Preliminary results show a significant increase in Pat Sheridan (USFS) represented open canopy and increases in forb the Central Appalachians
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]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM LIST OF THE RARE PLANTS OF NORTH CAROLINA 2012 Edition Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist and John Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org Table of Contents LIST FORMAT ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 NORTH CAROLINA RARE PLANT LIST ......................................................................................................................... 10 NORTH CAROLINA PLANT WATCH LIST ..................................................................................................................... 71 Watch Category
    [Show full text]
  • NJ Native Plants - USDA
    NJ Native Plants - USDA Scientific Name Common Name N/I Family Category National Wetland Indicator Status Thermopsis villosa Aaron's rod N Fabaceae Dicot Rubus depavitus Aberdeen dewberry N Rosaceae Dicot Artemisia absinthium absinthium I Asteraceae Dicot Aplectrum hyemale Adam and Eve N Orchidaceae Monocot FAC-, FACW Yucca filamentosa Adam's needle N Agavaceae Monocot Gentianella quinquefolia agueweed N Gentianaceae Dicot FAC, FACW- Rhamnus alnifolia alderleaf buckthorn N Rhamnaceae Dicot FACU, OBL Medicago sativa alfalfa I Fabaceae Dicot Ranunculus cymbalaria alkali buttercup N Ranunculaceae Dicot OBL Rubus allegheniensis Allegheny blackberry N Rosaceae Dicot UPL, FACW Hieracium paniculatum Allegheny hawkweed N Asteraceae Dicot Mimulus ringens Allegheny monkeyflower N Scrophulariaceae Dicot OBL Ranunculus allegheniensis Allegheny Mountain buttercup N Ranunculaceae Dicot FACU, FAC Prunus alleghaniensis Allegheny plum N Rosaceae Dicot UPL, NI Amelanchier laevis Allegheny serviceberry N Rosaceae Dicot Hylotelephium telephioides Allegheny stonecrop N Crassulaceae Dicot Adlumia fungosa allegheny vine N Fumariaceae Dicot Centaurea transalpina alpine knapweed N Asteraceae Dicot Potamogeton alpinus alpine pondweed N Potamogetonaceae Monocot OBL Viola labradorica alpine violet N Violaceae Dicot FAC Trifolium hybridum alsike clover I Fabaceae Dicot FACU-, FAC Cornus alternifolia alternateleaf dogwood N Cornaceae Dicot Strophostyles helvola amberique-bean N Fabaceae Dicot Puccinellia americana American alkaligrass N Poaceae Monocot Heuchera americana
    [Show full text]
  • Environmentally Sensitive Areas Guidance Document
    New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Release Prevention ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS GUIDANCE DOCUMENT Revised September 2014 Introduction This guidance on environmentally sensitive areas is intended for use as a reference and a guide when gathering information to be used in preparing the topographical maps for Discharge Prevention, Containment and Countermeasure (DPCC), and Discharge Cleanup and Removal (DCR) Plans. It gathers in one place all the citations listed in N.J.A.C. 7:1E-1.8, which establishes the definition of environmentally sensitive areas (ESA) for the purpose of developing the DPCC/DCR plan. The areas described in this document are by no means the only ESA in New Jersey, but represent those most likely to be adversely affected by a discharge of a hazardous substance. When used in conjunction with the requirements of N.J.A.C. 7:1E-4.10, Mapping criteria, it will prove useful in preparing the topographical maps and the offsite response measures that are required as part of the DCR plan. Additional information concerning the certification of ESA information is available in A Guide to the Preparation of Discharge Prevention, Containment and Countermeasure (DPCC) and Discharge Cleanup and Removal (DCR) Plans and Plan Renewals, available on the Bureau of Release Prevention website at http://www.nj.gov/dep/rpp/brp/dp/index.htm. N.J.A.C. 7:1E-4.2(b)9 requires that topographical maps be included in the DPCC plan, while N.J.A.C. 7:1E-4.10(d) requires that these maps cover all surrounding areas which could be affected by a discharge from the facility, including ESA.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY
    Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackerfield, J., and J. Wen. 2002. A morphometric analysis of Hedera L. (the ivy genus, Araliaceae) and its taxonomic implications. Adansonia 24: 197-212. Adams, P. 1961. Observations on the Sagittaria subulata complex. Rhodora 63: 247-265. Adams, R.M. II, and W.J. Dress. 1982. Nodding Lilium species of eastern North America (Liliaceae). Baileya 21: 165-188. Adams, R.P. 1986. Geographic variation in Juniperus silicicola and J. virginiana of the Southeastern United States: multivariant analyses of morphology and terpenoids. Taxon 35: 31-75. ------. 1995. Revisionary study of Caribbean species of Juniperus (Cupressaceae). Phytologia 78: 134-150. ------, and T. Demeke. 1993. Systematic relationships in Juniperus based on random amplified polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs). Taxon 42: 553-571. Adams, W.P. 1957. A revision of the genus Ascyrum (Hypericaceae). Rhodora 59: 73-95. ------. 1962. Studies in the Guttiferae. I. A synopsis of Hypericum section Myriandra. Contr. Gray Herbarium Harv. 182: 1-51. ------, and N.K.B. Robson. 1961. A re-evaluation of the generic status of Ascyrum and Crookea (Guttiferae). Rhodora 63: 10-16. Adams, W.P. 1973. Clusiaceae of the southeastern United States. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 89: 62-71. Adler, L. 1999. Polygonum perfoliatum (mile-a-minute weed). Chinquapin 7: 4. Aedo, C., J.J. Aldasoro, and C. Navarro. 1998. Taxonomic revision of Geranium sections Batrachioidea and Divaricata (Geraniaceae). Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 85: 594-630. Affolter, J.M. 1985. A monograph of the genus Lilaeopsis (Umbelliferae). Systematic Bot. Monographs 6. Ahles, H.E., and A.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Carex of New England
    Field Guide to Carex of New England Lisa A. Standley A Special Publication of the New England Botanical Club About the Author: Lisa A. Standley is an environmental consultant. She obtained a B.S, and M.S. from Cornell University and Ph.D. from the University of Washington. She has published several articles on the systematics of Carex, particularly Section Phacocystis, and was the author of several section treatments in the Flora of North America. Cover Illustrations: Pictured are Carex pensylvanica and Carex intumescens. Field Guide to Carex of New England Lisa A. Standley Special Publication of the New England Botanical Club Copyright © 2011 Lisa A. Standley Acknowledgements This book is dedicated to Robert Reed, who first urged me to write a user-friendly guide to Carex; to the memory of Melinda F. Denton, my mentor and inspiration; and to Tony Reznicek, for always sharing his expertise. I would like to thank all of the people who helped with this book in so many ways, particularly Karen Searcy and Robert Bertin for their careful editing; Paul Somers, Bruce Sorrie, Alice Schori, Pam Weatherbee, and others who helped search for sedges; Arthur Gilman, Melissa Dow Cullina, and Patricia Swain, who carefully read early drafts of the book; and to Emily Wood, Karen Searcy, and Ray Angelo, who provided access to the herbaria at Harvard University, the University of Massachusetts, and the New England Botanical Club. CONTENTS Introduction .......................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Field Trip Database (.Pdf)
    LIBS Field Trips (Published 2/18/2012) An updated version may be available at www.libotanical.org PAGE 1 of 12 Plant list Date Location (as listed in newsletter) Leader Description Co sponsored by availability To see Arethusa bulbosa and Helianthemum dumosum in flower. A later-reported highlight: found a new 6/8/1986 Montauk Bob Zaremba population of Schizaea,which had not been seen on Long Island since about 1981. 7/13/1986 Sunken Forest, Fire Island 8/3/1986 North Fork and South Fork Joe Beitel Orchid tour (north and south fork) Canoe trip. Follow-up report: The most interesting aspect of this trip is in observing the rather small but continuous change in ecological zonation (that is, the transition from fresh to salt water) and the very tidal nature of the river. Among the plants seen were Chelone glabra, Lobelia cardinalis, Vernonia noveboracensis, Lilium superbum, Sagittaria latifolia, Peltandra virginica, Pluchea purpurascens, 9/13/1986 Caleb Smith State Park, Smithtown Jim Romansky Samolus parviflora, Mikania scandens, Acnida cannabina, Acorus calamus, Spartina cynosuroides and Scirpus validus. In addition we saw two species known historically from the area but now considered rare: Lilaeopsis chinensis and Hydrocotyle sp. Fern walk. Follow-up observation: Our fall trip to Smithtown located the second extant population of SB 10/26/1986 Caleb Smith State Park Joe Beitel Botrychium oneidense in New York State. (fern/allies only) 11/22/1986 Blydenburgh Park, Smithtown Ray Welch nature ramble 2/22/1987 Cathedral Pines east, Brookhaven Louise Harrison, Betty Winter twig identification. 5/16/1987 Montauk Point Joe Beitel collecting trip A walk in the Long Island wet pine barrens, looking for sedges (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest Draft EIS April 2011
    Appendix F - Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest Draft EIS April 2011 U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Region Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest April 2011 Appendix F - Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest Draft EIS April 2011 Table of Contents Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... i 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5 2.0 Species Diversity..................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Ecosystem Context for Species ............................................................................................ 5 2.2 Identification and Screening of Species ............................................................................... 6 3.0 Threatened and Endangered Species ................................................................................... 7 3.1 Threatened and Endangered Species List ............................................................................ 7 3.2 Threatened and Endangered Species Descriptions and Plan Components .......................... 8 3.2.1 Indiana Bat ........................................................................................................................ 8 3.2.2 Virginia Big-Eared Bat ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Variable Sedge & Endangered Species Carex Polymorpha Muhl
    Natural Heritage Variable Sedge & Endangered Species Carex polymorpha Muhl. Program www.mass.gov/nhesp State Status: Endangered Federal Status: None Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Variable Sedge is a vigorous, grass-like herbaceous perennial plant that grows from large rhizomes (rooting underground stems) into dense, spreading colonies. The stems stand 30-60 cm (12-24 in.) tall with long and narrow, 3-5 mm (1/8- 1/4 in.) wide leaves extending from their base. Each flowering culm has one or two pistillate spikes, which bear 12 to 25 female flowers, and one to three staminate spikes. On the pistillate spikes are bright green, egg- shaped perigynia (seed sacs) with long, slightly curved beaks with obviously oblique tips. Subtending the perigynia are much smaller ovoid scales, dark purplish brown with green centers. In mid-May during the flowering season the plants look bluish green, whereas by September the leaves have turned tawny yellow. SIMILAR SPECIES: Variable Sedge can be easily confused with Velvet-fruited Sedge (Carex vestita), a species that grows in similar habitats. Whereas Velvet- fruited Sedge has densely hairy perigynia, those of Variable Sedge are smooth. The female spikes of Variable Sedge can be 1 to 2 inches as opposed to ½ to 1 inch, and the stems lack the continuous network of veins Photos by Jennifer Garrett, NHESP which encircle the stems of Velvet-fruited Sedge. Distribution in Massachusetts Variable Sedge often appears bluish in color, due to 1984-2009 small bumps or papillae on its leaf surfaces; Velvet- Based on records in fruited Sedge appears uniformly green.
    [Show full text]
  • North Fork Mountain and Thorn Creek CFA Action Plan
    Action Plan for the North Fork Mountain & Thorn Creek Conservation Focus Area West Virginia Division of Natural Resources January 2021 Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction to the State Wildlife Action Plan & Conservation Focus Areas .................................................... 2 Species of Greatest Conservation Need, Habitats and Stresses ................................................................... 2 Conservation Actions .................................................................................................................................... 2 Conservation Focus Areas and Action Plans ................................................................................................. 3 Climate Change and Resilience ..................................................................................................................... 4 Monitoring and Adaptive Management ....................................................................................................... 5 Organization of this Action Plan .................................................................................................................... 6 How to use this plan ..................................................................................................................................... 7 North Fork Mountain and Thorn Creek Conservation Focus Area ..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Pocono Till Barrens: Shrub Savanna Persisting on Soils Favoring Forest1 Roger Earl Latham2, John E, Thompson, Sarah A
    Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 123(4), 1996, pp. 330-349 The Pocono till barrens: shrub savanna persisting on soils favoring forest1 Roger Earl Latham2, John E, Thompson, Sarah A. Riley and Anne W. Wibiralske3 Department of Geology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6316 LATHAM,R. E., J. E. THOMPSON,S. A. RILEYAND A. W. WIBIRALSKE(Department of Geology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6316). The Pocono 811 barrens: shrub savanna persisting on soils favoring forest. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 123: 330-349. 1996.-A previously undescribed shrub savanna community, which we refer to as the Pocono till barrens, occurs mainly on soils weathered from glacial till of Illinoian age on the southern Pocono Plateau of Pennsylvania. Unlike most "barrens" in east-central North America, its soils are not sandy or shallow to bedrock; the same deep, fine-loamy soil series underlie the barrens and nearby northern hardwoods forest. An unusual abundance of rare plant and animal species in and near the barrens has attracted the attention of scientists and biodiversity conservation professionals. In an effort to understand the ecological dynamics of the Pocono till barrens and why the barrens are different from their mostly forested surroundings, we undertook studies of vegetation history, landscape patterns, plant species distributions and water table depth. The Pocono till barrens (1) are old, pre-dating European settlement of the area; (2) have burned frequently and over large areas throughout their recorded history; (3) presently cover more than 22 krn2 adjacent to a belt of xeric ridgetop barrens totaling approximately 18 km2;(4) have in abundance plants usually found in moist or wet soil conditions living side-by-side with those normally associated with xeric habitats; and (5) include several vegetation types which are distributed on the landscape, in part, in association with a soil moisture gradient.
    [Show full text]
  • INTRODUCTION This Check List of the Plants of New Jersey Has Been
    INTRODUCTION This Check List of the Plants of New Jersey has been compiled by updating and integrating the catalogs prepared by such authors as Nathaniel Lord Britton (1881 and 1889), Witmer Stone (1911), and Norman Taylor (1915) with such other sources as recently-published local lists, field trip reports of the Torrey Botanical Society and the Philadelphia Botanical Club, the New Jersey Natural Heritage Program’s list of threatened and endangered plants, personal observations in the field and the herbarium, and observations by other competent field botanists. The Check List includes 2,758 species, a botanical diversity that is rather unexpected in a small state like New Jersey. Of these, 1,944 are plants that are (or were) native to the state - still a large number, and one that reflects New Jersey's habitat diversity. The balance are plants that have been introduced from other countries or from other parts of North America. The list could be lengthened by hundreds of species by including non-persistent garden escapes and obscure waifs and ballast plants, many of which have not been seen in New Jersey since the nineteenth century, but it would be misleading to do so. The Check List should include all the plants that are truly native to New Jersey, plus all the introduced species that are naturalized here or for which there are relatively recent records, as well as many introduced plants of very limited occurrence. But no claims are made for the absolute perfection of the list. Plant nomenclature is constantly being revised. Single old species may be split into several new species, or multiple old species may be combined into one.
    [Show full text]