DOCSLIB.ORG

Oregon Natural Areas Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oregon Natural Areas Plan Oregon Natural Areas Plan 2010 Natural Heritage Advisory Council to the State Land Board State Land Board Kate Brown Ted Kulongoski Ted Wheeler Secretary of State Governor State Treasurer Natural Heritage Advisory Council Voting Members Richard Brown Robert Chandler Stuart Garrett Charles Carter Alan Dickman Cathy Macdonald Ex-Officio Members Agriculture Director: Katy Coba, represented by Rebecca Currin Fish and Wildlife Director: Roy Elicker, represented by Holly Michaels Forestry Director: Marvin Brown, represented by Andrew Yost Higher Education Chancellor: George Pernsteiner, represented by Scott Heppell Parks and Recreation Director: Tim Wood, represented by Noel Bacheller State Lands Director: Louise Solliday, represented by Cyndi Wickham Transportation Director: Matt Garrett, represented by Bill Warncke This is the first Oregon Natural Areas Plan It is based on the Oregon Natural Heritage Plan, first published in 1981 and revised in 1988, 1993, 1998 and 2003 by the Natural Heritage Advisory Council and by the staff of the Oregon Biodiversity Information Center: Jimmy Kagan - Director/Ecologist Lindsey Koepke Wise – Data Manager Sue Vrilakas – Botanist and Data Manager Eleanor Gaines – Zoology Projects Manager John Christy – Wetlands Ecologist / Bryologist Chapters 4-7 from the 2009 Interagency Strategy for the Pacific Northwest Natural Areas Network, by Todd M. Wilson, Reid Schuller, Russ Holmes, Curt Pavola, Robert A. Fimbel, Cynthia N. McCain, John G. Gamon, Pene Speaks, Joan I. Seevers, Thomas E. DeMeo, and Steve Gibbons Cover Photograph: Starvation Creek, by Miles Hemstrom. State Ecoregion Maps by John Bauer, Chapter Ecoregional Maps by Melissa Whitman Cite this document as: Oregon Natural Heritage Advisory Council. 2010. Oregon Natural Areas Plan. Oregon Biodiversity Information Center, Institute for Natural Resources – Portland, Portland State University, Portland, OR. 198pp. State Land Board 775 Summer Street NE Salem, Oregon 97310 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 2. Designing A Natural Area Network ........................................................................................ 5 Element Approach ................................................................................................................................. 5 Ecoregional Approach ........................................................................................................................... 6 Ecological Elements and Plant Associations ........................................................................................ 7 Terrestrial Ecosystem Types ................................................................................................................. 9 Aquatic and Wetland Ecosystem Types ................................................................................................ 9 Marine and Estuarine Ecosystem Types ............................................................................................. 10 Geologic Formations or Features ........................................................................................................ 11 Special Species .................................................................................................................................... 13 Chapter 3. Natural Area Conservation .................................................................................................... 14 Oregon State Agency Natural Area Establishment and Designation .................................................. 15 Federal Agency Natural Area Establishment and Designation ........................................................... 15 Natural Area Protection on Private Lands in Oregon ......................................................................... 16 Natural Area Designations Included in the Plan ................................................................................. 17 Chapter 4. Management and Stewardship ............................................................................................... 24 Management Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 24 Chapter 5. Monitoring and Data Management ........................................................................................ 26 Monitoring Goals and Objectives ....................................................................................................... 26 Chapter 6. Research ................................................................................................................................. 28 Research Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................................... 28 Chapter 7. Education and Communication ............................................................................................. 30 Education and Communication Goals and Objectives ........................................................................ 30 Chapter 8. Ecoregional Lists and Definitions ......................................................................................... 32 Chapter 9. Marine and Estuarine Ecoregion ........................................................................................... 38 Chapter 10. Coast Range Ecoregion ....................................................................................................... 49 Chapter 11. Willamette Valley Ecoregion .............................................................................................. 67 Chapter 12. Klamath Mountains Ecoregion ............................................................................................ 78 Chapter 13. West Cascades Ecoregion .................................................................................................... 94 Chapter 14. East Cascades Ecoregion ................................................................................................... 113 Chapter 15. Columbia Basin Ecoregion ................................................................................................ 128 Chapter 16. Blue Mountains Ecoregion ................................................................................................ 136 Chapter 17. Northern Basin & Range Ecoregion .................................................................................. 155 Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................. 172 References ............................................................................................................................................. 173 Appendix 1. Forms and Procedures used in the Natural Area Program ............................................... 177 Comparative Analysis Format for Natural Area Designation ........................................................... 177 Model Dedication Agreement Form for State Natural Areas............................................................ 177 Model Procedures for State Agency Dedication of Natural Areas ................................................... 178 Summary Form for Sites included in the Register of Natural Heritage Resources ........................... 179 Appendix 2. Oregon State Register of Natural Heritage Resources as of 30 June 2010 ...................... 180 Appendix 2a. Oregon’s Natural Areas .................................................................................................. 182 Appendix 2b. Other Designated Areas Conserving Plan Elements ...................................................... 189 Appendix 3. Former Ecosystem Process Element Methodology and Elements ................................... 195 i CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION The rich diversity of ecosystems and native The Oregon Natural Areas Program plants and animals is one of Oregon's most History distinctive and valued qualities. Our state contains rain forests, dry forests, oak The Oregon Natural Areas Program in its woodlands, alpine meadows, prairies, deserts, present form was established by the 1979 marshes, estuaries, dunes, rocky headlands, Legislature in the Natural Heritage Act (ORS lakes and streams. There are a number of 273.561-.591 [SB 448]), to among other things reasons it is so diverse. First are the extremes reinvigorate the natural areas program in of climate, with rainfall ranging from over 200 Oregon. This legislation was built upon a inches a year along Oregon’s north coast, to tradition of natural area inventory and less than 7 inches a year in the Alvord Desert, conservation in Oregon. In 1973, the and temperatures from the very mild banana Legislature passed the first natural areas law, belt along the coast near the California border the Natural Area Preserves Act, which was the to the extremes of the high alpine areas of the first attempt to engage the state in natural areas Wallowa Mountains. Secondly, Oregon is conservation. In 1975, scientific professionals diverse geographically and geologically, having and conservationists led by Jerry Franklin of ancient serpentine landscapes in the Siskiyou the U.S. Forest Service’s PNW Research Mountains and recent volcanics in the Cascades Station developed the first Research Natural and the deepest gorge in North America at Area Needs in the Pacific Northwest. This 1975 Hells Canyon. Lastly, Oregon is a floristic publication served
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ecosystem Use by Indigenous People in an Oregon Coastal Landscape
    3220 Donald B. Zobel, Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331- 2902 e-mail: [email protected] Ecosystem Use by Indigenous People in an Oregon Coastal Landscape Abstract Data regarding probable uses of biological materials by the indigenous people of the Salmon River-Cascade Head area of the Oregon coast were used to estimate the peoples use of various ecosystems near villages. Of 308 uses identified, 256 were attributable to a given species; 124 species were identified. All local ecosystems were important sources of organisms for the people, with no apparent concentration of highly used species in any particular ecosystem. One species was cultivated, one domesticated, and five acquired by trade. Four major plant resources, camas, yew, hazel, and beargrass, are not known from the Cascade Head landscape, but may have been available from elsewhere in village territory. House construction without use of cedar planks, as indicated by ethnographic records, may have resulted from the paucity of western redcedar in the Salmon River lowlands. The scarcity of several widely used taxa near coastal village sites, especially western redcedar, may have limited the wealth of this indigenous population, even on the resource-rich Oregon coast. Introduction Tillamook, who resided near Cascade Head on the north-central Oregon Coast, in an area where Indigenous people used resources primarily from information about historic and modern plant and the landscape in which they resided. The natural animal species distribution is unusually complete. distribution of resources governed the pattern and The list of taxa used was compared to historic richness of their lives.
    [Show full text]
  • Wallowa County Community Sensitivity and Resilience
    Wallowa County Community Sensitivity and Resilience This section documents the community’s sensitivity factors, or those community assets and characteristics that may be impacted by natural hazards, (e.g., special populations, economic factors, and historic and cultural resources). It also identifies the community’s resilience factors, or the community’s ability to manage risk and adapt to hazard event impacts (e.g., governmental structure, agency missions and directives, and plans, policies, and programs). The information in this section represents a snapshot in time of the current sensitivity and resilience factors in the community when the plan was developed. The information documented below, along with the findings of the risk assessment, should be used as the local level rationale for the risk reduction actions identified in Section 4 – Mission, Goals, and Action Items. The identification of actions that reduce a community’s sensitivity and increase its resilience assist in reducing the community’s overall risk, or the area of overlap in Figure G.1 below. Figure G.1 Understanding Risk Source: Oregon Natural Hazards Workgroup, 2006. Deleted: _________ County Deleted: Month Year Deleted: 2 Northeast Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Page G-1 Community Sensitivity Factors The following table documents the key community sensitivity factors in Wallowa County. Population • Wallowa County has negative population growth (-1.3% change from 2000-2005) and an increasing number of persons aged 65 and above. In 2005, 20% of the population was 65 years or older; in 2025, 25% of the population is expected to be 65 years or older. Elderly individuals require special consideration due to their sensitivities to heat and cold, their reliance upon transportation for medications, and their comparative difficulty in making home modifications that reduce risk to hazards.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the Third Conference on Fossil Resources in the National Park Service
    ^^ ;&J Proceedings of the Third Conference on Fossil Resources in the National Park Service Rachel Benton and Ann Elder, Editors Natural Resources Report NPS/NRFOBU/NRR-94/14 °>%HIL M©^m United States Department of the Interior • National Park Service Rocky Mountain Region • Fossil Butte National Monument The National Park Service disseminates reports on high priority, current resource management information, with application for managers, through the Natural Resources Report Series. Technologies and resource management methods; how to resource management papers; popular articles through the yearly highlights report; proceedings on resource management workshops or conferences; and natural resources program recommendations and descriptions and resource action plans are also disseminated through this series. Documents in this series usually contain information of a preliminary nature and are prepared primarily for internal use within the National Park Service. This information is not intended for use in the open literature. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommenda- tion for use by the National Park Service. Copies of this report are available from the following: Publications Coordinator National Park Service Natural Resources Publication Office P.O. Box 25287 (WASO-NRPO) Denver, CO 80225-0287 CfO Printed on Recycled Paper Proceedings of the Third Conference on Fossil Resources in the National Park Service 14-17 September 1992 Fossil Butte National Monument, Wyoming Editors: Rachel Benton
    [Show full text]
  • West-Side Prairies & Woodlands
    Washington State Natural Regions Beyond the Treeline: Beyond the Forested Ecosystems: Prairies, Alpine & Drylands WA Dept. of Natural Resources 1998 West-side Prairies & Woodlands Oak Woodland & Prairie Ecosystems West-side Oak Woodland & Prairie Ecosystems in Grey San Juan Island Prairies 1. South Puget Sound prairies & oak woodlands 2. Island / Peninsula coastal prairies & woodlands Olympic Peninsula 3. Rocky balds Prairies South Puget Prairies WA GAP Analysis project 1996 Oak Woodland & Prairie Ecosystems San Juan West-side Island South Puget Sound Prairie Ecosystems Oak Woodland & Prairie Prairies Ecosystems in Grey Grasslands dominated by Olympic • Grasses Peninsula Herbs Prairies • • Bracken fern South • Mosses & lichens Puget Prairies With scattered shrubs Camas (Camassia quamash) WA GAP Analysis project 1996 •1 South Puget Sound Prairie Ecosystems South Puget Sound Prairie Ecosystems Mounded prairie Some of these are “mounded” prairies Mima Mounds Research Natural Area South Puget Sound Prairie Ecosystems South Puget Sound Prairie Ecosystems Scattered shrubs Lichen mats in the prairie Serviceberry Cascara South Puget Sound Prairie Ecosystems South Puget Sound Prairie Ecosystems As unique ecosystems they provide habitat for unique plants As unique ecosystems they provide habitat for unique critters Camas (Camassia quamash) Mazama Pocket Gopher Golden paintbrush Many unique species of butterflies (Castilleja levisecta) (this is an Anise Swallowtail) Photos from Dunn & Ewing (1997) •2 South Puget Sound Prairie Ecosystems Fire is
    [Show full text]
  • O R E G O N North Pacific Ocean
    412 ¢ U.S. Coast Pilot 7, Chapter 9 31 MAY 2020 Chart Coverage in Coast Pilot 7—Chapter 9 124° 123° NOAA’s Online Interactive Chart Catalog has complete chart coverage 18520 C O L http://www.charts.noaa.gov/InteractiveCatalog/nrnc.shtml U M B I A 126° 125° 18521 R Astoria I V E R 46° Seaside Tillamook Head NEHALEM RIVER 18556 Vancouver 18558 TILLAMOOK BAY Portland Cape Lookout Cascade Head 45° SILETZ RIVER YAQUINA RIVER ALSEA RIVER 18581 18561 NORTH PA CIFIC OCEAN OREGON Heceta Head 44° 18583 SIUSLAW RIVER 18584 UMPQUA RIVER 18587 Coos Bay Cape Arago 18588 COQUILLE RIVER 43° 18589 Cape Blanco 18600 18580 Port Orford ROUGE RIVER 18601 CHETCO RIVER 42° 18602 CALIFORNIA 31 MAY 2020 U.S. Coast Pilot 7, Chapter 9 ¢ 413 Chetco River to Columbia River, Oregon (1) This chapter describes 200 miles of the Oregon coast rare clear skies; it is more likely in early winter. Winter from the mouth of the Chetco River to the mouth of the and spring winds are moderately strong, particularly south Columbia River. Also described are the Chetco and Rogue of Newport. From North Bend southward, winds reach 17 Rivers, Port Orford, Coquille River, Coos Bay, Umpqua knots or more about 5 to 15 percent of the time and 28 and Siuslaw Rivers, Yaquina Bay and River, Nehalem knots or more about 1 to 3 percent of the time. Extreme River and Tillamook Bay. The cities of Coos Bay and wind speeds usually occur in either winter or early spring North Bend on Coos Bay and Newport on Yaquina Bay and have climbed to around 50 knots.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Monophyly and Biogeography of Cryptantha (Boraginaceae)
    Systematic Botany (2018), 43(1): pp. 53–76 © Copyright 2018 by the American Society of Plant Taxonomists DOI 10.1600/036364418X696978 Date of publication April 18, 2018 Evaluating the Monophyly and Biogeography of Cryptantha (Boraginaceae) Makenzie E. Mabry1,2 and Michael G. Simpson1 1Department of Biology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California 92182, U. S. A. 2Current address: Division of Biological Sciences and Bond Life Sciences Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211, U. S. A. Authors for correspondence ([email protected]; [email protected]) Abstract—Cryptantha, an herbaceous plant genus of the Boraginaceae, subtribe Amsinckiinae, has an American amphitropical disjunct distri- bution, found in western North America and western South America, but not in the intervening tropics. In a previous study, Cryptantha was found to be polyphyletic and was split into five genera, including a weakly supported, potentially non-monophyletic Cryptantha s. s. In this and subsequent studies of the Amsinckiinae, interrelationships within Cryptantha were generally not strongly supported and sample size was generally low. Here we analyze a greatly increased sampling of Cryptantha taxa using high-throughput, genome skimming data, in which we obtained the complete ribosomal cistron, the nearly complete chloroplast genome, and twenty-three mitochondrial genes. Our analyses have allowed for inference of clades within this complex with strong support. The occurrence of a non-monophyletic Cryptantha is confirmed, with three major clades obtained, termed here the Johnstonella/Albidae clade, the Maritimae clade, and a large Cryptantha core clade, each strongly supported as monophyletic. From these phylogenomic analyses, we assess the classification, character evolution, and phylogeographic history that elucidates the current amphitropical distribution of the group.
    [Show full text]
  • Taylor's Checkerspot (Euphydryas Editha Taylori) Oviposition Habitat Selection and Larval Hostplant Use in Washington State
    TAYLOR'S CHECKERSPOT (EUPHYDRYAS EDITHA TAYLORI) OVIPOSITION HABITAT SELECTION AND LARVAL HOSTPLANT USE IN WASHINGTON STATE By Daniel Nelson Grosboll A Thesis Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Environmental Studies The Evergreen State College June 2011 © 2011 by Daniel Nelson Grosboll. All rights reserved. This Thesis for the Master of Environmental Study Degree by Daniel Nelson Grosboll has been approved for The Evergreen State College by ________________________ Judy Cushing, Ph.D. Member of the Faculty ______________ Date Abstract Taylor's checkerspot (Euphydryas editha taylori) oviposition habitat selection and larval hostplant use in Washington State Taylor’s checkerspot (Euphydryas editha taylori (W.H. Edwards 1888)), a Federal Endangered Species Act candidate species, is found in remnant colonies between extreme southwestern British Columbia and the southern Willamette Valley in Oregon. This butterfly and its habitat have declined precipitously largely due to anthropogenic impacts. However, this butterfly appears to benefit from some land management activities and some populations are dependent on an exotic hostplant. Oviposition sites determine what resources are available for larvae after they hatch. Larval survival and growth on three reported hostplants (Castilleja hispida, Plantago lanceolata, and P. major) were measured in captivity to determine the suitability of hostplant species and to develop captive rearing methods. Larvae successfully developed on C. hispida and P. lanceolata. Parameters of oviposition sites were measured within occupied habitat at four sites in Western Washington. Sampling occurred at two spatial scales with either complete site censuses or stratified systematic sampling on larger sites. Within the sampled or censused areas, oviposition sites were randomly selected for paired oviposition/adjacent non-oviposition microhabitat measurements.
    [Show full text]
  • COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Tiny Cryptantha Cryptantha Minima in Canada
    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Tiny Cryptantha Cryptantha minima in Canada THREATENED 2012 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2012. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Tiny Cryptantha Cryptantha minima in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. x + 37 pp. (www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm). Previous report(s): COSEWIC. 2000. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the tiny cryptanthe Cryptantha minima in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 18 pp. Smith, B. 1998. COSEWIC status report on the tiny cryptanthe Cryptantha minima in Canada, in COSEWIC assessment and status report on the tiny cryptanthe Cryptantha minima in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 1-18 pp. Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge Sue Michalsky for writing the status report on the Tiny Cryptantha Cryptantha minima in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada. This report was overseen and edited by Bruce Bennett and Erich Haber, Co-chairs of the COSEWIC Vascular Plants Specialist Subcommittee. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-953-3215 Fax: 819-994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur la Cryptanthe minuscule (Cryptantha minima) au Canada. Cover illustration/photo: Tiny Cryptantha — Source: Environment Canada 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • South Fork Coquille Watershed Analysis
    DOCUMENT A 13.66/2: COQUILLE fiVE, LOWER S.F. 17 10 03 00* I C 66x 1 COQUILLE RIVER, UPPER S.F 17 1:-03 01* ' United States Q, '0) Departimnt of Agriculture THIS PUBLICATION Forest Serilce CMN FE CHECKED OUT Pacific Northwest Region 1995 JA* fSouth Fork Coquille Wate1hed Analysis Iteration 1.0 Powers Ranger Distric, Slsklyou National Forest September 1995 SOUTHERN OREGON UNWVERSiTY LIBRARY ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 United Stat. Depaenent of Agnculure Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region 1995 SOUTH FORK COQUILLE WATERSHED ANALYSIS ITERATION 1.0 I have read this analysis and it meets the Standards and Guidelines for watershed analysis required by an amendment to the Forest Plan (Record of Decision dated April 1994). Any additional evidence needed to make a decision will be gathered site-specifically as part of a NEPA document or as an update to this document. SIGNED CoQ 4 DATE q 1T2 letE District Ranger Powers Ranger District Siskiyou National Forest South Fork Coquille Watershed Analysis - September 1995 Developed by Interdisciplinary Team Members: Steve Harbert Team leader Betsy Howell Wildlife Biologist Dave Shea Botantist, Wildlife Biologist Ruth Sisko Forester Cindy Ricks Geologist Chris Parks Hydrologist Max Yager Fish Biologist Kathy Helm Writer-Editor (March-April 1995), BLM Tina Harbert Writer-Editor (May-July 1995), Powers R.D. Joe Hallett Cultural Resource Key Support: Joel King Forest Planner, Siskiyou National Forest Sue Olson Acting District Ranger, Powers R.D. (Jan-May 1995) Carl Linderman District Ranger, Powers R.D. Marshall Foster GIS, Powers R.D. Jodi Shorb Computer Assistant Linda Spencer Computer Support For Further Information, contact: Powers Ranger District Powers, OR 97466 (503) 439-3011 The policy of the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, religion, sex, or disability, familial status, or political affiliation.
    [Show full text]
  • New to Newport Guide
    New to Newport Guide Welcome! We’re happy to have you join the Hatfield student community! To help you settle in and answer some burning questions, we’ve prepared a brief explainer on the slightly-quirky town of Newport and the people that live here. By HSO grad students Updated 9/2020 Yaquina Head Lighthouse (Image courtesy of Hillary Thalmann) Table of Contents Getting Settled In at HMSC ................................................................................................................... 3 Grad School in the time of COVID-19 ................................................................................................. 6 Hatfield Student Organization ........................................................................................................... 6 Guin Library Resources ......................................................................................................................... 7 Racial Justice Resources at HMSC ...................................................................................................... 9 HMSC Green Team, Recycling, and Fresh Food Options ............................................................ 10 Commuting from Newport ................................................................................................................. 13 Housing .................................................................................................................................................... 14 Healthcare on the Coast .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 10024-0018 (Oct. 1990) United States Department of the Interior j ., •-, National Park Service 1 j J /;: - National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NATiGi-i.M This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name Cape Blanco Lighthouse other names/site number 2. Location street & number Sixes vicinity; westernmost part of Cape Blanco for publication city or town ____Sixes______________________________ S vicinity state_______Oregon code OR county Curry_______ code zip code 97476 3. State/Federal Agency Certification" As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this 52 nomination D request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property (Xl meets D does not meet the National Register criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant nationally S statewide D locally.
    [Show full text]
  • Sagebrush Identification Guide
    Sagebrush Identification Table For Use With Black Light For Use in the Inter-Great Basin Area Fluoresces Under Ultraviolet Branching Mature Plant Plant Nomenclature Light Leaf shape and size Plant Growth Form Environment Comments Pattern Height Water Alcohol Leaves 3/4 ‐1 1/4 in. Uneven topped; Main stem is undivided and trunk‐like at base;. Located long; long narrow; Leaf Uneven normally in drainage bottoms; Small concave areas and valley floors, but will normally be 4 times Colorless to Very topped; always on deep Non‐saline Non‐calcareous soils. Vegetative leader is greater Brownish to longer than it is at its "V"ed Mesic to Frigid 3.5 ft. to Very Pale blue Floral stems than 1/2 the length of the flower stalk from the same single branch. In Basin Basin Big Sagebrush Artemisia Reddish‐Brown widest point; Leaf branching/ Xeric to Ustic greater than 8 tridentata subsp. tridentata (ARTRT) Rarely pale growing there are two growth forms: One the Typical tall form (Diploid); Two a shorter to colorless margins not extending upright 4000 to 8000 ft. ft. Brownish‐red throughout form that looks similar to Wyoming sagebrush if you do not look for the trunk outward; Crushed leaves the crown (around 1 inch or so); the branching pattern; and the seedhead to vegetative have a strong turpentine leader characteristics (Tetraploid). smell Uneven Leaves 1/2 ‐ 3/4 inches topped; Uneven topped; Main stem is usually divided at ground level. Plants will often Mesic to Frigid Wyoming Big Sagebrush Colorless to Very Colorless to pale long; Leaf margins curved Floral stems Spreading/ keep the last years seed stalks into the following fall.
    [Show full text]