DOCSLIB.ORG

Kenai Fjords National Park Vascular Plant Inventory Final Technical Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kenai Fjords National Park Vascular Plant Inventory Final Technical Report KENAI FJORDS NATIONAL PARK VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY KENAI FJORDS NATIONAL PARK VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT Matthew L. Carlson, Robert Lipkin, Michelle Sturdy, & Julie A. Michaelson Alaska Natural Heritage Program Environment and Natural Resources Institute University of Alaska Anchorage 707 A Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 National Park Service Southwest Alaska Network Inventory & Monitoring Program NPS Report: NPS/AKR/SWAN/NRTR-2004/02 December 2004 Cooperative Agreement No. 1443CA991000013 Funding Source: National Park Service, Inventory & Monitoring Program i KENAI FJORDS NATIONAL PARK VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY ii KENAI FJORDS NATIONAL PARK VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY ABSTRACT In 2003 the Alaska Natural Heritage Program (AKNHP) conducted vascular plant field inventories in Kenai Fjords National Park in accordance with a cooperative agreement with the National Park Service. The primary goal was to document greater than 90% of the vascular plant species expected to occur within the Park and significantly improve our understanding of current species distributions. The inventory targeted diverse habitat types and poorly-sampled areas. The AKNHP staff visited the primary ecogeographic regions and sampled intensively within these regions from early July to early August, 2003. A total of 561 specimens were collected, recorded, and pressed. Duplicate or triplicate sheets are present for many of the specimens. Three hundred twelve (312) unique taxa are represented, and 201 are new records for the Park. Prior to 2003, 217 taxa were known from an estimated expected total of 543. Thus, ca. 40% of the expected taxa were previously known. After the 2003 field season, the number of known taxa nearly doubled to 418. This represents 77% of vascular plant taxa expected in the Park. A number of finds were significant range extensions or taxa of conservation concern. Collections were made of four globally or regionally rare species: a rare scurvy grass, Cochlearia cf. sessilifolia (G1Q-S1); a rare bog orchid, Platanthera chorisiana (G3-S3); a rare poppy, Papaver alboroseum (G3G4-S3); and two rare sedges, Carex phaeocephala (G4-S1S2), and Carex lenticularis var. dolia (G5T3Q-S3). Twelve minor range extesions were found, representing new records for the Kenai Peninsula. Cerastium fontanum (mouse-ear chickweed) and Poa annua (annual blue grass) were the only introduced plants collected in the Park. iii KENAI FJORDS NATIONAL PARK VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY iv KENAI FJORDS NATIONAL PARK VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT. ................................................................................................................................................. iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................... vii INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................... 1 Ecological and Geological Background. ................................................................................................. 1 MATERIALS AND METHODS. .................................................................................................................. 2 Expected and Known Taxa...................................................................................................................... 2 Floristic History of KEFJ. ....................................................................................................................... 3 Sampling Design. .................................................................................................................................... 4 Site Descriptions. .................................................................................................................................... 5 Coastal Fjord Region........................................................................................................................ 6 Nuka River Pass Region................................................................................................................... 9 Resurrection River Region............................................................................................................. 11 Field Methods........................................................................................................................................ 12 Vouchers and Curation.......................................................................................................................... 13 RESULTS..................................................................................................................................................... 14 Collections............................................................................................................................................. 14 Coastal Fjord Region...................................................................................................................... 14 Nuka River Pass Region................................................................................................................. 14 Resurrection River Region............................................................................................................. 15 DISCUSSION. ............................................................................................................................................. 16 Range Extensions to the Kenai Peninsula. ............................................................................................ 16 Antennaria friesiana ssp. alaskana. ............................................................................................... 16 Arnica angustifolia......................................................................................................................... 16 Carex bicolor. ................................................................................................................................ 17 Crassula aquatica. ......................................................................................................................... 17 Draba fladnizensis. ........................................................................................................................ 17 Draba glabella. .............................................................................................................................. 17 Euphrasia disjuncta. ...................................................................................................................... 18 Gentianella propinqua ssp. aleutica. ............................................................................................. 18 Gentianella tenella......................................................................................................................... 18 Minuartia biflora ........................................................................................................................... 19 Pedicularis sudetica ssp. interior................................................................................................... 19 Ruppia maritima............................................................................................................................. 20 Invasive Species. ................................................................................................................................... 20 Cerastium fontanum....................................................................................................................... 20 Poa annua. ..................................................................................................................................... 21 Other Invasive Species Known in KEFJ. ....................................................................................... 21 Species of Conservation Concern.......................................................................................................... 21 Cochlearia sessilifolia.................................................................................................................... 22 Platanthera chorisiana................................................................................................................... 22 Papaver alboroseum. ..................................................................................................................... 23 Carex phaeocephala....................................................................................................................... 24 Carex lenticularis var. dolia........................................................................................................... 25 Recommendations. ................................................................................................................................ 25 AKNOWLEDGEMENTS. ........................................................................................................................... 28 LITERATURE CITED................................................................................................................................. 28 APPENDICES Appendix I - List of 2002 Confirmed and Expected Taxa in Kenai Fjords National Park ...................... A - 1 Appendix II - List of 2003 Plant Collections in Kenai Fjords National Park......................................... A - 11 v KENAI FJORDS NATIONAL PARK VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY Appendix III - Rare Plant Species Collected in Kenai Fjords National Park . ......................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Crassula Peduncularis and C. Saginoides (Crassulaceae), Newly Naturalized in Japan, and Their Genetic Differences from C
    ISSN 1346-7565 Acta Phytotax. Geobot. 70 (2): 119–127 (2019) doi: 10.18942/apg.201818 Crassula peduncularis and C. saginoides (Crassulaceae), Newly Naturalized in Japan, and their Genetic Differences from C. aquatica 1,* 2 3 3 Shinji Fujii , TadaShi YamaShiro , Sachiko horie and maSaYuki maki 1Department of Environmental Science, University of Human Environments, Okazaki, Aichi, 444-3505, Japan. * [email protected] (author for correspondence); 2Division of Bioscience and Bioindustry, Graduate School of Technology, Industrial and Social Sciences, Tokushima University, Tokushima 770-8513, Japan; 3Botanical Gardens, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi 980-0862, Japan Recently, we found two species of Crassula newly introduced into central Japan. Based on their mor- phology, we identified them asCrassula peduncularis and C. saginoides, native to the New World. They closely resemble C. aquatica, which is indigenous to Japan. Here, we describe the morphological distinc- tions among the three species in detail. In addition, we examined genetic differences among the three species based on sequence variations in the nuclear ribosomal ITS region and three chloroplast inter- genic regions. Although C. saginoides was considered to be an inland form of C. aquatica and had been treated as a synonym of C. aquatica, the degree of genetic differentiation was relatively large, suggesting that these two taxa should be considered to be independent species. Key words: Crassula aquatica, Crassula peduncularis, Crassula saginoides, genetic differentiation, morphology, naturalized Crassula L. (Crassulaceae) is a large genus of guished from C. aquatica by the pedicels of the mostly terrestrial succulent plants, but also con- former that tend to elongate in fruit while those of tains annual, aquatic or semi-aquatic species the latter remain less than 1 mm long.
    [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]
  • Draba Fladnizensis
    SPECIES: Scientific [common] Draba fladnizensis - Wulfen [Austrian Draba] Forest: Salmon–Challis National Forest Forest Reviewer: Jessica M Dhaemers; Brittni Brown; John Proctor Date of Review: 09/25/2017; 14 February 2018; 19 March 2018 Forest concurrence (or YES recommendation if new) for inclusion of species on list of potential SCC: (Enter Yes or No) FOREST REVIEW RESULTS: 1. The Forest concurs or recommends the species for inclusion on the list of potential SCC: Yes_X__ No___ 2. Rationale for not concurring is based on (check all that apply): Species is not native to the plan area _______ Species is not known to occur in the plan area _______ Species persistence in the plan area is not of substantial concern _______ FOREST REVIEW INFORMATION: 1. Is the Species Native to the Plan Area? Yes _X_ No___ If no, provide explanation and stop assessment. 2. Is the Species Known to Occur within the Planning Area? Yes _X _ No___ If no, stop assessment. Table 1. All Known Occurrences, Years, and Frequency within the Planning Area Year Number of Location of Observations (USFS Source of Information Observed Individuals District, Town, River, Road Intersection, HUC, etc.) Date First Not Challis National Forest, Lost IDFG Element Occurrence EO Observed: reported for River Ranger District Number: 1 1987 1987. About EO_ID: 771 75 plants Kane Lake Cirque proposed Old EO_ID: 2661 Date Last observed in Special Interest Botanical Area: Observed: 1991. northern end of the Pioneer July 26, Mountains, about 13 air miles 1991 NE of Ketchum. Mesic bottom and mid-slopes, flat and N-aspects; sandy sites on gneiss parent material.
    [Show full text]
  • High Biological Species Diversity in the Arctic Flora
    High biological species diversity in the arctic flora Hanne Hegre Grundt*, Siri Kjølner*, Liv Borgen*, Loren H. Rieseberg†‡, and Christian Brochmann* *National Centre for Biosystematics, Natural History Museum, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1172, Blindern, NO-0318 Oslo, Norway; and †Department of Biology, Indiana University, Jordan Hall 142, 1001 East Third Street, Bloomington, IN 47405-3700 Communicated by Peter R. Crane, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, United Kingdom, November 28, 2005 (received for review August 11, 2005) The arctic flora is considered to be impoverished, but estimates of r ϭ 0.41 for D. nivalis; P Ͻ 0.00001). Likewise, weaker but species diversity are based on morphological assessments, which significant correlations were observed between F1 sterility and may not provide accurate counts of biological species. Here we genetic distance in both D. fladnizensis (r ϭ 0.32) and D. nivalis report on crossing relationships within three diploid circumpolar (r ϭ 0.29) (Fig. 3). Geographic distance was strongly correlated plant species in the genus Draba (Brassicaceae). Although 99% of with F1 sterility (r ϭ 0.60) in D. fladnizensis but not in D. nivalis parental individuals were fully fertile, the fertility of intraspecific (Fig. 3). crosses was surprisingly low. Hybrids from crosses within popula- tions were mostly fertile (63%), but only 8% of the hybrids from Discussion crosses within and among geographic regions (Alaska, Greenland, Our results indicate that numerous cryptic biological species Svalbard, and Norway) were fertile. The frequent occurrence of exist within D. fladnizensis and D. nivalis; 92% of the within- and intraspecific crossing barriers is not accompanied by significant among-region crosses resulted in sterile or semisterile hybrids morphological or ecological differentiation, indicating that numer- despite the full fertility of parental plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Okanogan County Plant List by Scientific Name
    The NatureMapping Program Washington Plant List Revised: 9/15/2011 Okanogan County by Scientific Name (1) Non- native, (2) ID Scientific Name Common Name Plant Family Invasive √ 763 Acer glabrum Douglas maple Aceraceae 3 Acer macrophyllum Big-leaf maple Aceraceae 800 Alisma graminium Narrowleaf waterplantain Alismataceae 19 Alisma plantago-aquatica American waterplantain Alismataceae 1155 Amaranthus blitoides Prostrate pigweed Amaranthaceae 1087 Rhus glabra Sumac Anacardiaceae 650 Rhus radicans Poison ivy Anacardiaceae 1230 Berula erecta Cutleaf water-parsnip Apiaceae 774 Cicuta douglasii Water-hemlock Apiaceae 915 Cymopteris terebinthinus Turpentine spring-parsley Apiaceae 167 Heracleum lanatum Cow parsnip Apiaceae 1471 Ligusticum canbyi Canby's lovage Apiaceae 991 Ligusticum grayi Gray's lovage Apiaceae 709 Lomatium ambiguum Swale desert-parsley Apiaceae 1475 Lomatium brandegei Brandegee's lomatium Apiaceae 573 Lomatium dissectum Fern-leaf biscuit-root Apiaceae Coeur d'Alene desert- Lomatium farinosum Apiaceae 548 parsley 582 Lomatium geyeri Geyer's desert-parsley Apiaceae 586 Lomatium gormanii Gorman's desert-parsley Apiaceae 998 Lomatium grayi Gray's desert-parsley Apiaceae 999 Lomatium hambleniae Hamblen's desert-parsley Apiaceae 609 Lomatium macrocarpum Large-fruited lomatium Apiaceae 1476 Lomatium martindalei Few-flowered lomatium Apiaceae 1000 Lomatium nudicaule Pestle parsnip Apiaceae 1477 Lomatium piperi Piper's bisciut-root Apiaceae 634 Lomatium triternatum Nine-leaf lomatium Apiaceae 1528 Osmorhiza berteroi Berter's sweet-cicely
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of the Alpine Vascular Flora of the Teton Range, Wyoming, with Notes on Biology and Habitat Preferences
    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 41 Number 2 Article 11 6-30-1981 A checklist of the alpine vascular flora of the Teton Range, Wyoming, with notes on biology and habitat preferences John R. Spence Utah State University Richard J. Shaw Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Spence, John R. and Shaw, Richard J. (1981) "A checklist of the alpine vascular flora of the Teton Range, Wyoming, with notes on biology and habitat preferences," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 41 : No. 2 , Article 11. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol41/iss2/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. A CHECKLIST OF THE ALPINE VASCULAR FLORA OF THE TETON RANGE, WYOMING, WITH NOTES ON BIOLOGY AND HABITAT PREFERENCES Shaw^ John R. Spence''^ and Richard J. Abstract.— A checkHst of the vascular flora of the alpine zone (treeless vegetation above 9500 feet or 2900 m) of the Teton Range is presented. For each of the 216 species, si.x attributes are listed: flower color and shape, pollina- tion mode, life form, habitat preference, and whether each species is found in the Arctic. White and yellow flowered species are most common, and zoophilous species greatly predominate over anemophilous and apomictic species. Perennial/biennial herbs are the most common life form.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Carpathian Red List of Forest Habitats
    CARPATHIAN RED LIST OF FOREST HABITATS AND SPECIES CARPATHIAN LIST OF INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES (DRAFT) PUBLISHED BY THE STATE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC 2014 zzbornik_cervenebornik_cervene zzoznamy.inddoznamy.indd 1 227.8.20147.8.2014 222:36:052:36:05 © Štátna ochrana prírody Slovenskej republiky, 2014 Editor: Ján Kadlečík Available from: Štátna ochrana prírody SR Tajovského 28B 974 01 Banská Bystrica Slovakia ISBN 978-80-89310-81-4 Program švajčiarsko-slovenskej spolupráce Swiss-Slovak Cooperation Programme Slovenská republika This publication was elaborated within BioREGIO Carpathians project supported by South East Europe Programme and was fi nanced by a Swiss-Slovak project supported by the Swiss Contribution to the enlarged European Union and Carpathian Wetlands Initiative. zzbornik_cervenebornik_cervene zzoznamy.inddoznamy.indd 2 115.9.20145.9.2014 223:10:123:10:12 Table of contents Draft Red Lists of Threatened Carpathian Habitats and Species and Carpathian List of Invasive Alien Species . 5 Draft Carpathian Red List of Forest Habitats . 20 Red List of Vascular Plants of the Carpathians . 44 Draft Carpathian Red List of Molluscs (Mollusca) . 106 Red List of Spiders (Araneae) of the Carpathian Mts. 118 Draft Red List of Dragonfl ies (Odonata) of the Carpathians . 172 Red List of Grasshoppers, Bush-crickets and Crickets (Orthoptera) of the Carpathian Mountains . 186 Draft Red List of Butterfl ies (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea) of the Carpathian Mts. 200 Draft Carpathian Red List of Fish and Lamprey Species . 203 Draft Carpathian Red List of Threatened Amphibians (Lissamphibia) . 209 Draft Carpathian Red List of Threatened Reptiles (Reptilia) . 214 Draft Carpathian Red List of Birds (Aves). 217 Draft Carpathian Red List of Threatened Mammals (Mammalia) .
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Rank List.Xlsx
    FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME S RANK Aceraceae Acer ginnala Amur Maple SNA Aceraceae Acer negundo Manitoba Maple S5 Aceraceae Acer negundo var. interius Manitoba Maple S5 Aceraceae Acer negundo var. negundo Manitoba Maple SU Aceraceae Acer negundo var. violaceum Manitoba Maple SU Aceraceae Acer pensylvanicum Striped Maple SNA Aceraceae Acer rubrum Red Maple SNA Aceraceae Acer spicatum Mountain Maple S5 Acoraceae Acorus americanus Sweet Flag S5 Acoraceae Acorus calamus Sweet‐flag SNA Adoxaceae Adoxa moschatellina Moschatel S1 Alismataceae Alisma gramineum Narrow‐leaved Water‐plantain S1 Alismataceae Alisma subcordatum Common Water‐plantain SNA Alismataceae Alisma triviale Common Water‐plantain S5 Alismataceae Sagittaria cuneata Arum‐leaved Arrowhead S5 Alismataceae Sagittaria latifolia Broad‐leaved Arrowhead S4S5 Alismataceae Sagittaria rigida Sessile‐fruited Arrowhead S2 Amaranthaceae Amaranthus albus Tumble Pigweed SNA Amaranthaceae Amaranthus blitoides Prostrate Pigweed SNA Amaranthaceae Amaranthus hybridus Smooth Pigweed SNA Amaranthaceae Amaranthus retroflexus Redroot Pigweed SNA Amaranthaceae Amaranthus spinosus Thorny Amaranth SNA Amaranthaceae Amaranthus tuberculatus Rough‐fruited water‐hemp SU Anacardiaceae Rhus glabra Smooth Sumac S4 Anacardiaceae Toxicodendron rydbergii Poison‐ivy S5 Apiaceae Aegopodium podagraria Goutweed SNA Apiaceae Anethum graveolens Dill SNA Apiaceae Carum carvi Caraway SNA Apiaceae Cicuta bulbifera Bulb‐bearing Water‐hemlock S5 Apiaceae Cicuta maculata Water‐hemlock S5 Apiaceae Cicuta virosa Mackenzie's
    [Show full text]
  • Photosynthetic Pathways in Aquatic Plants
    _31_0_________________ NEWSANDVIEWS-----------N_A_ru_RE_v_oL_.304_28_JU_Lv_1983 are required for splicing at a downstream recognition that could apply, if only in plants found in a variety of pools and lakes, A-G. It will be interesting to see whether altered form, to higher organisms. D ranging from oligotrophic to eutrophic, this analogy will extend further. One diffi­ and have found only two species which culty is that A-G has been seen at positions S.M. Mount is in the Department ofMolecular showed overnight accumulation of acids. -5, -4 in two vertebrate intronsll,14 . Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University These are Crassula aquatica, a plant of the School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street, New A second possibility, advocated by Haven, Connecticut 06510. margins of temporary ponds, and the Rosbash's laboratory, is that UACUAAC, shoreweed, Littorella uniflora, found present in the mRNA precursor, plays a I. Langford, C. &Gallwitz, D. Ce//33, 519 (1983). mainly along the gravelly edges of nutrient­ part in 5' splice-site recognition. They have 2. Ng, R. & Abelson, J. Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 77, poor lakes with fluctuating water levels. 3912 (1980). The authors interpreted their results as sup­ observed that UACUAAC is itself a site of 3. Gallwitz, D. &Sures, I. Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 11, cleavage. In trying to understand this result 2546 (1980). port for the hypothesis that aquatic plants 4. Teem, J.L.& Rosbash, M. Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. can increase their efficiency of carbon they noticed that the 5' end of the Ul RNA, 80 (in the press).
    [Show full text]
  • Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, Version 2018-07-24
    Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, version 2018-07-24 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge biology staff July 24, 2018 2 Cover image: map of 16,213 georeferenced occurrence records included in the checklist. Contents Contents 3 Introduction 5 Purpose............................................................ 5 About the list......................................................... 5 Acknowledgments....................................................... 5 Native species 7 Vertebrates .......................................................... 7 Invertebrates ......................................................... 55 Vascular Plants........................................................ 91 Bryophytes ..........................................................164 Other Plants .........................................................171 Chromista...........................................................171 Fungi .............................................................173 Protozoans ..........................................................186 Non-native species 187 Vertebrates ..........................................................187 Invertebrates .........................................................187 Vascular Plants........................................................190 Extirpated species 207 Vertebrates ..........................................................207 Vascular Plants........................................................207 Change log 211 References 213 Index 215 3 Introduction Purpose to avoid implying
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Introductions to South Australia Prior to 1840 P.M
    J. Adelaide Bot. Gard. 7(3): 217-231 (1985) PLANT INTRODUCTIONS TO SOUTH AUSTRALIA PRIOR TO 1840 P.M. Kloot 4 South Australian Department of Agriculture, G.P.O. Box 1671, Adelaide, S.A. 5001 tTh Abstract Selected historical data from 1802 to 1840 are presented to illustrate the extent of European plant introductions in both pre-colonial South Australia and the early years of official settlement. Some other effects such as land clearing and the early movement of weeds are briefly discussed. Introduction South Australia was proclaimed a colony of the British Crown on 28 December 1836 when the first Governor, Captain John Hindmarsh RN, hoisted the British flag at a ceremony on the shores of Gulf St Vincent. Prior to this date there had been a flurry of activity which had commenced on 27 July the same year when the advance party of settlers and surveyors had arrived on the "Duke of York" to lay the foundations for a Province of free settlers to be developed in accordance with the novel Wakefield Colonization Plan (Price, 1924). Apart from recounting the story of the earliest navigators, Flinders and Baudin, many historians make no mention of European involvement in South Australia prior to 1836 (e.g. Dutton, 1846; Sinnett, 1862; Pascoe, 1901). Passing references are sometimes made to the earlier presence of sealers and others on the off-shore islands but as they are not considered to have any direct bearing on the official settlement of the colony, they are dismissed as being of little importance in South Australian history.
    [Show full text]