DOCSLIB.ORG

A Planner's Guide for Oak Woodlands

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Planner's Guide for Oak Woodlands A Planner’s Guide for Oak Woodlands Second Edition Edited by Gregory A. Giusti Douglas D. McCreary Richard B. Standiford Publication 3491 A Planner’s Guide for Oak Woodlands Second Edition Edited by Gregory A. Giusti Douglas D. McCreary Richard B. Standiford Publication 3491 To order or obtain ANR publications and other products, visit the ANR Communication Services online catalog at http://anrcatalog.ucanr.edu/ or phone 1-800-994-8849. Direct inquiries to University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources Communication Services 2801 Second Street Davis, CA 95618 Telephone 1-800-994-8849 E-mail: [email protected] Telephone 1-800-994-8849 510-665-2195 FAX 510-665-3427 E-mail: [email protected] Visit the ANR Communication Services Web site at http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu Publication 3491E ISBN-13: 978-1-62711-086-0 Library of Congress Control Number: 2005927787 ©1993, 2005 by the Regents of the University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources The Regents of the University of California. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA. Cover photo by Gregory A Giusti. Design by Valerie Griffith. Photo credits are given on page iv. This publication has been anonymously peer reviewed for accuracy by qualified professionals. This review process was managed by the ANR Associate Editor for Natural Resources. The University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources (UC ANR) prohibits discrimination against or harassment of any person in any of its programs or activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender, gender expression, gender identity, pregnancy (which includes pregnancy, childbirth, and medical conditions related to pregnancy or childbirth), physical or mental disability, medical condition (cancer-related or genetic characteristics), genetic information (including family medical history), ancestry, marital status, age, sexual orientation, citizenship, status as a protected veteran or service in the uniformed services (as defined by the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 [USERRA]), as well as state military and naval service. UC ANR policy prohibits retaliation against any employee or person in any of its programs or activities for bringing a complaint of discrimination or harassment. UC ANR policy also prohibits retaliation against a person who assists someone with a complaint of discrimination or harassment, or participates in any manner in an investigation or resolution of a complaint of discrimination or harassment. Retaliation includes threats, intimidation, reprisals, and/or adverse actions related to any of its programs or activities. UC ANR is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment and/ or participation in any of its programs or activities without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, age or protected veteran status. University policy is intended to be consistent with the provisions of applicable State and Federal laws. Inquiries regarding the University’s equal employment opportunity policies may be directed to: Affirmative Action Contact and Title IX Officer, University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources, 2801 Second Street, Davis, CA 95618, (530) 750-1397. Email: [email protected]. Website: http://ucanr.edu/sites/anrstaff/Diversity/Affirmative_Action/. web-11/18-SB/WS iii Contents Contributing Authors ................................................................................................ iv Preface ...................................................................................................................... v Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ vi 1. Planning’s Role in Oak Woodland Conservation ................................................... 1 Gregory A. Giusti, Douglas D. McCreary, and Richard B. Standiford 2. The Biology of Oak Resources ............................................................................... 8 Douglas D. McCreary and Brice A. McPherson 3. Oak Woodlands as Wildlife Habitat ...................................................................... 15 William Tietje, Kathryn Purcell, and Sabrina Drill 4. Watershed Management in Oak Woodlands .......................................................... 32 Royce Larsen, David Lewis, and Yana Valachovic 5. Regional Planning as a Strategy to Address Conservation Goals ............................ 39 Thomas Scott and Gregory A. Giusti 6. Planning Options for Oak Conservation ............................................................... 47 Gregory A. Giusti, Abe Leider, Joan Vilms, and Julia Fetherstone 7. Mapping Resources and Modeling Risk for Improved Land-use Planning ............. 78 Adina Merenlender, Colin Brooks, Bob Johnston, Shawn Saving, Greg Greenwood, Andrea Mackenzie, and Gregory A. Giusti 8. Oak and Oak Woodland Ordinances .................................................................... 88 Ted Swiecki and Douglas D. McCreary 9. California’s Hardwood Rangelands: Production and Conservation Values ............. 98 Richard B. Standiford and Sheila Barry Glossary .................................................................................................................... 109 Bibliography ............................................................................................................. 113 iv Contributing Authors Sheila Barry, University of California Cooperative Extension, San Francisco Bay Area Counties Colin Brooks, University of California Cooperative Extension, Integrated Hardwood Range Management Program (IHRMP) Sabrina Drill, University of California Cooperative Extension, Los Angeles and Ventura Counties Julia Fetherstone, University of California Cooperative Extension, IHRMP Gregory A. Giusti, University of California Cooperative Extension, IHRMP Greg Greenwood, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Bob Johnston, University of California, Davis, Information Center for the Environment Royce Larsen, University of California Cooperative Extension, IHRMP David Lewis, University of California Cooperative Extension, Sonoma County Abe Leider, County of Santa Barbara Planning and Development Andrea Mackenzie, Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District Adina Merenlender, University of California Cooperative Extension, IHRMP Douglas D. McCreary, University of California Cooperative Extension, IHRMP Brice A. McPherson, University of California Cooperative Extension, IHRMP Kathryn Purcell, USDA Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station Shawn Saving, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Thomas Scott,University of California Cooperative Extension, IHRMP Richard B. Standiford, University of California Cooperative Extension, IHRMP Ted Swiecki, Phytosphere Research William Tietje, University of California Cooperative Extension, IHRMP Yana Valachovic, University of California Cooperative Extension, Humboldt and Del Norte Counties Joan Vilms, Consulting Planner, Sonoma County Photo Credits Jack Kelly Clark: page vi; 1; 13; 27; 29; 32; 34; 36; 44; 47; 49; 51; 66; 73; 85; 89; 93. E. Lee Fitzhugh: 19. Gregory A. Giusti: cover; 24; 57; 63; 90; 95. W. Paul Gorenzel:15. Las Pilitas Nursery (used with permission of laspilitas.com): 1; 8; 39; 67; 88; 98. Douglas D. McCreary: 6. Ron Mumme: 69. Ted Swieki: 74; 78. v Preface Visitors and residents alike identify California’s natural diversity by the majestic views of the seashore, the cathedral-like stands of redwoods, the vastness of the deserts, and the expanse and beauty of its native oak woodlands. It is these oak woodlands that have attracted settlers prior to, and since, European colonization. Even today, as urban centers expand, people are attracted to live amongst the oaks. It is this continued encroachment into California’s oak woodlands that has given rise to this document. The words we wrote in the first edition of A Planner’s Guide to Oak Woodlands in 1992 still ring true today. The encroachment into oak woodlands addressed at the time of the first edition has not stopped, and in some cases it has continued at an alarming rate. As more development occurs in the oak woodlands, planners, consultants, landscape architects, and the concerned public are asking questions that must be answered with some degree of scientific certainty. Oak woodlands are as much a natural ecotype as are the redwoods, the deserts, and the ocean. This expansive forest type covers hundreds of square miles of California and is home to hundreds of resident and migratory species of plants, insects, amphibians, reptiles, fish, birds, and mammals. As concern grows over continued and future listings of species under the Endangered Species Act, professional planners must have access to science-based information from which to make their decisions. The second edition of A Planner’s Guide for Oak Woodlands is designed for the professional planner or consultant who has a working knowledge of the planning process. This publication cannot replace experience, wisdom (applied knowledge), or common sense. It can only provide information that can be useful in making a judgment
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Eastern Africa Coastal Forests Ecoregion
    The Eastern Africa Coastal Forests Ecoregion Strategic Framework for Conservation 2005 – 2025 Strategic Framework for Conservation (2005–2025) The Eastern Afrca Coastal Forests Ecoregon Strategc Framework for Conservaton 2005–2025 The Eastern Africa Coastal Forests Ecoregion Publshed August 2006 Editor: Kimunya Mugo Design and layout: Anthony Mwangi Cover design: Kimunya Mugo Front cover main photo: WWF-EARPO / John SALEHE Front cover other photos: WWF-UK / Brent STIRTON / Getty Images Back cover photo: WWF-EARPO / John SALEHE Photos: John Salehe, David Maingi and Neil Burgess or as credited. © Graphics (2006) WWF-EARPO. All rights reserved. The material and geographic designations in this report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WWF concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers and boundaries. WWF Eastern Africa Regional Programme Office ACS Plaza, Lenana Road P.O. Box 62440-00200 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 3877355, 3872630/1 Fax: +254 20 3877389 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.panda.org/earpo Strategic Framework for Conservation (2005–2025) Contents Acknowledgements......................................................................................................... iv Foreword........................................................................................................................... v Lst of abbrevatons and acronyms.............................................................................. v A new approach to
    [Show full text]
  • El Dorado County Oak Woodland Management Plan
    El Dorado County Oak Woodland Management Plan April 2008 Planning Commission Recommended Version El Dorado County Development Services Department – Planning Services 2850 Fairlane Court, Placerville, CA 95667 OAK WOODLAND MANAGEMENT PLAN Table of Contents 1. Introduction.....................................................................................................................1 A. Purpose ....................................................................................................................1 B. Goals and Objectives of Plan...................................................................................2 C. Oak Woodland Habitat in El Dorado County..........................................................3 D. Economic Activity, Land, and Ecosystem Values of Oak Woodlands ...................4 E. California Oak Woodlands Conservation Act .........................................................4 2. Policy 7.4.4.4.................................................................................................................5 A. Applicability and Exemptions.................................................................................5 B. Replacement Objectives ..........................................................................................7 C. Mitigation Option A ................................................................................................7 D. On-Site Mitigation...................................................................................................8 E. Mitigation Option B.................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Grasslands 4/16/03 3:46 PM
    Ecoregion: Grasslands 4/16/03 3:46 PM Grasslands INTRODUCTION About 25% of Earth’s land surface is covered by temperate grassland. These large expanses of flat or hilly country cover much of North America, as well as large areas of Europe, Asia, and South America. Most grasslands are found in the interiors of continents, where there is too little rainfall for a forest but too much rain for a desert. Art Explosion Art Explosion Rolling hills covered with grasses and very few trees A few scattered trees are found on savannas, are typical of North American grassland prairies. tropical grasslands of Africa. Temperate grasslands have subtle differences and different names throughout the world. Prairies and plains of North America are grasslands with tall grasses, while the steppes of Russia are grasslands with short grasses. Veldts are found in South Africa, the puszta in Hungary, and the pampas in Argentina and Uruguay. Savannas are tropical grasslands that support scattered trees and shrubs. They often form a transitional biome file:///Ecoregion/grass/content.html Page 1 of 6 Ecoregion: Grasslands 4/16/03 3:46 PM between deserts and rain forests. Some temperate grasslands are also called savannas. The word savanna comes from the Spanish word zavanna, meaning “treeless plain.” Savannas cover almost half of Africa (mostly central Africa) and large areas of Australia and South America. ABIOTIC DATA The grassland climate is rather dry, averaging about 20 to 100 centimeters (8–40 inches) of precipitation a year. Summers are very hot and may reach 45°C (113°F). Winter temperatures often fall below freezing, which is 0°C (32°F).
    [Show full text]
  • Fact Sheet- Central California Coast Ecoregion
    California State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) 2015 Central California Coast Region Annual and Perennial Grassland Habitat About Our Region and the Grassland Habitat Annual grassland habitats are open grasslands composed primarily of annual plant species such as introduced annual grasses and forbs. Annual grasslands also occur as understory plants in Valley Oak Woodland and other habitats. Perennial grassland habitats occur as coastal prairie and interspersed within annual grasslands. Vernal pools also are an important habitat component of many grassland systems. The structure of grasslands depends upon prevailing weather patterns and grazing. A number of wildlife species spend their entire life within grasslands while others use grasslands for foraging and breeding. What are the sensitive species found in the grassland habitat? The following 32 grassland dependent species from this region are found to be sensitive: Amphibian [3] CALIFORNIA TIGER SALAMANDER WESTERN SPADEFOOT RED-LEGGED FROG Reptile [1] BLUNT-NOSED LEOPARD LIZARD Bird [15] BURROWING OWL NORTHERN HARRIER CALIFORNIA CONDOR OREGON VESPER SPARROW GIANT KANGAROO RAT PURPLE MARTIN GRASSHOPPER SPARROW SAND-HILL CRANE GOLDEN EAGLE SHORT-EARED OWL LOGGERHEAD SHRIKE SWAINSON’S HAWK LONG-BILLED CURLEW TRICOLORED BLACKBIRD MOUNTAIN PLOVER Mammal [13] BIG FREE-TAILED BAT PALLID SAN DIEGO POCKET MOUSE CALIFORNIA LEAF-NOSED BAT POCKETED FREE-TAILED BATRINGTAIL HOARY BAT SOUTHERN GRASSHOPPER MOUSE JACUMBA POCKET MOUSE SAN JOAQUIN KIT FOX LONG-EARED MYOTIS TOWNSEND BIG- EARED BAT MAINLAND
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Ecoregions of Idaho
    1 0 . C o l u m b i a P l a t e a u 1 3 . C e n t r a l B a s i n a n d R a n g e Ecoregion 10 is an arid grassland and sagebrush steppe that is surrounded by moister, predominantly forested, mountainous ecoregions. It is Ecoregion 13 is internally-drained and composed of north-trending, fault-block ranges and intervening, drier basins. It is vast and includes parts underlain by thick basalt. In the east, where precipitation is greater, deep loess soils have been extensively cultivated for wheat. of Nevada, Utah, California, and Idaho. In Idaho, sagebrush grassland, saltbush–greasewood, mountain brush, and woodland occur; forests are absent unlike in the cooler, wetter, more rugged Ecoregion 19. Grazing is widespread. Cropland is less common than in Ecoregions 12 and 80. Ecoregions of Idaho The unforested hills and plateaus of the Dissected Loess Uplands ecoregion are cut by the canyons of Ecoregion 10l and are disjunct. 10f Pure grasslands dominate lower elevations. Mountain brush grows on higher, moister sites. Grazing and farming have eliminated The arid Shadscale-Dominated Saline Basins ecoregion is nearly flat, internally-drained, and has light-colored alkaline soils that are Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 52 regions Literature Cited: much of the original plant cover. Nevertheless, Ecoregion 10f is not as suited to farming as Ecoregions 10h and 10j because it has thinner soils.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Determining Significance and Report Format and Content Requirements
    COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE AND REPORT FORMAT AND CONTENT REQUIREMENTS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENT GROUP Department of Planning and Land Use Department of Public Works Fourth Revision September 15, 2010 APPROVAL I hereby certify that these Guidelines for Determining Significance for Biological Resources, Report Format and Content Requirements for Biological Resources, and Report Format and Content Requirements for Resource Management Plans are a part of the County of San Diego, Land Use and Environment Group's Guidelines for Determining Significance and Technical Report Format and Content Requirements and were considered by the Director of Planning and Land Use, in coordination with the Director of Public Works on September 15, 2O1O. ERIC GIBSON Director of Planning and Land Use SNYDER I hereby certify that these Guidelines for Determining Significance for Biological Resources, Report Format and Content Requirements for Biological Resources, and Report Format and Content Requirements for Resource Management Plans are a part of the County of San Diego, Land Use and Environment Group's Guidelines for Determining Significance and Technical Report Format and Content Requirements and have hereby been approved by the Deputy Chief Administrative Officer (DCAO) of the Land Use and Environment Group on the fifteenth day of September, 2010. The Director of Planning and Land Use is authorized to approve revisions to these Guidelines for Determining Significance for Biological Resources and Report Format and Content Requirements for Biological Resources and Resource Management Plans except any revisions to the Guidelines for Determining Significance presented in Section 4.0 must be approved by the Deputy CAO.
    [Show full text]
  • Taiga Plains
    ECOLOGICAL REGIONS OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES Taiga Plains Ecosystem Classification Group Department of Environment and Natural Resources Government of the Northwest Territories Revised 2009 ECOLOGICAL REGIONS OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES TAIGA PLAINS This report may be cited as: Ecosystem Classification Group. 2007 (rev. 2009). Ecological Regions of the Northwest Territories – Taiga Plains. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife, NT, Canada. viii + 173 pp. + folded insert map. ISBN 0-7708-0161-7 Web Site: http://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/index.html For more information contact: Department of Environment and Natural Resources P.O. Box 1320 Yellowknife, NT X1A 2L9 Phone: (867) 920-8064 Fax: (867) 873-0293 About the cover: The small photographs in the inset boxes are enlarged with captions on pages 22 (Taiga Plains High Subarctic (HS) Ecoregion), 52 (Taiga Plains Low Subarctic (LS) Ecoregion), 82 (Taiga Plains High Boreal (HB) Ecoregion), and 96 (Taiga Plains Mid-Boreal (MB) Ecoregion). Aerial photographs: Dave Downing (Timberline Natural Resource Group). Ground photographs and photograph of cloudberry: Bob Decker (Government of the Northwest Territories). Other plant photographs: Christian Bucher. Members of the Ecosystem Classification Group Dave Downing Ecologist, Timberline Natural Resource Group, Edmonton, Alberta. Bob Decker Forest Ecologist, Forest Management Division, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Hay River, Northwest Territories. Bas Oosenbrug Habitat Conservation Biologist, Wildlife Division, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. Charles Tarnocai Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. Tom Chowns Environmental Consultant, Powassan, Ontario. Chris Hampel Geographic Information System Specialist/Resource Analyst, Timberline Natural Resource Group, Edmonton, Alberta.
    [Show full text]
  • Quercus ×Coutinhoi Samp. Discovered in Australia Charlie Buttigieg
    XXX International Oaks The Journal of the International Oak Society …the hybrid oak that time forgot, oak-rod baskets, pros and cons of grafting… Issue No. 25/ 2014 / ISSN 1941-2061 1 International Oaks The Journal of the International Oak Society … the hybrid oak that time forgot, oak-rod baskets, pros and cons of grafting… Issue No. 25/ 2014 / ISSN 1941-2061 International Oak Society Officers and Board of Directors 2012-2015 Officers President Béatrice Chassé (France) Vice-President Charles Snyers d’Attenhoven (Belgium) Secretary Gert Fortgens (The Netherlands) Treasurer James E. Hitz (USA) Board of Directors Editorial Committee Membership Director Chairman Emily Griswold (USA) Béatrice Chassé Tour Director Members Shaun Haddock (France) Roderick Cameron International Oaks Allen Coombes Editor Béatrice Chassé Shaun Haddock Co-Editor Allen Coombes (Mexico) Eike Jablonski (Luxemburg) Oak News & Notes Ryan Russell Editor Ryan Russell (USA) Charles Snyers d’Attenhoven International Editor Roderick Cameron (Uruguay) Website Administrator Charles Snyers d’Attenhoven For contributions to International Oaks contact Béatrice Chassé [email protected] or [email protected] 0033553621353 Les Pouyouleix 24800 St.-Jory-de-Chalais France Author’s guidelines for submissions can be found at http://www.internationaloaksociety.org/content/author-guidelines-journal-ios © 2014 International Oak Society Text, figures, and photographs © of individual authors and photographers. Graphic design: Marie-Paule Thuaud / www.lecentrecreatifducoin.com Photos. Cover: Charles Snyers d’Attenhoven (Quercus macrocalyx Hickel & A. Camus); p. 6: Charles Snyers d’Attenhoven (Q. oxyodon Miq.); p. 7: Béatrice Chassé (Q. acerifolia (E.J. Palmer) Stoynoff & W. J. Hess); p. 9: Eike Jablonski (Q. ithaburensis subsp.
    [Show full text]
  • And Engelmann Oak (Q. Engelmannii) at the Acorn and Seedling Stage1
    Insect-oak Interactions with Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) and Engelmann Oak (Q. engelmannii) at the Acorn and Seedling Stage1 Connell E. Dunning,2 Timothy D. Paine,3 and Richard A. Redak3 Abstract We determined the impact of insects on both acorns and seedlings of coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia Nee) and Engelmann oak (Quercus engelmannii E. Greene). Our goals were to (1) identify insects feeding on acorns and levels of insect damage, and (2) measure performance and preference of a generalist leaf-feeding insect herbivore, the migratory grasshopper (Melanoplus sanguinipes [Fabricus] Orthoptera: Acrididae), on both species of oak seedlings. Acorn collections and insect emergence traps under mature Q. agrifolia and Q. engelmannii revealed that 62 percent of all ground-collected acorns had some level of insect damage, with Q. engelmannii receiving significantly more damage. However, the amount of insect damage to individual acorns of both species was slight (<20 percent damage per acorn). Curculio occidentis (Casey) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), Cydia latiferreana (Walsingham) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), and Valentinia glandulella Riley (Lepidoptera: Blastobasidae) were found feeding on both species of acorns. No-choice and choice seedling feeding trials were performed to determine grasshopper performance on the two species of oak seedlings. Quercus agrifolia seedlings and leaves received more damage than those of Q. engelmannii and provided a better diet, resulting in higher grasshopper biomass. Introduction The amount of oak habitat in many regions of North America is decreasing due to increased urban and agricultural development (Pavlik and others 1991). In addition, some oak species are exhibiting low natural regeneration. Although the status of Engelmann oak (Quercus engelmannii E.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Evaluation: Guidance for the Review of Environmental Impact Assessment Documents
    HABITAT EVALUATION: GUIDANCE FOR THE REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTS EPA Contract No. 68-C0-0070 work Assignments B-21, 1-12 January 1993 Submitted to: Jim Serfis U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Federal Activities 401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460 Submitted by: Mark Southerland Dynamac Corporation The Dynamac Building 2275 Research Boulevard Rockville, MD 20850 CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION ... ...... .... ... ................................................. 1 Habitat Conservation .......................................... 2 Habitat Evaluation Methodology ................................... 2 Habitats of Concern ........................................... 3 Definition of Habitat ..................................... 4 General Habitat Types .................................... 5 Values and Services of Habitats ................................... 5 Species Values ......................................... 5 Biological diversity ...................................... 6 Ecosystem Services.. .................................... 7 Activities Impacting Habitats ..................................... 8 Land Conversion ....................................... 9 Land Conversion to Industrial and Residential Uses ............. 9 Land Conversion to Agricultural Uses ...................... 10 Land Conversion to Transportation Uses .................... 10 Timber Harvesting ...................................... 11 Grazing ............................................. 12 Mining .............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Description--Blue Oak Woodland (BOW)
    California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System California Department of Fish and Game California Interagency Wildlife Task Group Blue Oak Woodland Lyman V. Ritter Vegetation Structure-- Generally these woodlands have an overstory of scattered trees, although the canopy can be nearly closed on better quality sites (Pillsbury and De Lasaux 1983). The density of blue oaks on slopes with shallow soils is directly related to water stress (Griffin 1973). The canopy is dominated by broad-leaved trees 5 to 15 m (16 to 50 ft) tall, commonly forming open savanna-like stands on dry ridges and gentle slopes. Blue oaks may reach 25 m (82 ft) in height (McDonald 1985); the tallest tree, found in Alameda County, measured 28.7 m (94 ft) high and had a crown spread of 14.6 m (48 ft) (Pardo 1978). Shrubs are often present but rarely extensive, often occurring on rock outcrops. Typical understory is composed of an extension of Annual Grassland vegetation. Composition-- Blue oak is the dominant species, comprising 85 to 100 percent of the trees present. Common associates in the canopy are coast live oak in the Coast Range, interior live oak in the Sierra Nevada, valley oak where deep soil has formed, and western juniper in the Cascade Range. In the Tehachapi and Paiute Ranges in Kern County, this habitat mixes with species from east of the mountains California juniper and single-leaf pinyon. In interior sections of the southern Coast Range, as in San Luis Obispo County, it mixes with California juniper (V. L. Holland, pers. comm.). Associated shrub species include poison-oak, California coffeeberry, buckbrush, redberry, California buckeye, and manzanita spp.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Oak Woodland Resources in BLM's Eugene District
    Assessment of Oak Woodland Resources in BLM’s Eugene District Lane County, Oregon Technical Note 406 June 2000 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management December 1999 Assessment of Oak Woodland Resources in BLM’s Eugene District Lane County, Oregon Technical Note 406 By: David G. Chiller Research Biologist, Pacific Wildlife Research Inc. David G. Vesely Senior Forest Ecologist, Pacific Wildlife Research Inc. William I. Dean Wildlife Biologist, Bureau of Land Management, Eugene District Eugene District Office 2890 Chad Drive Eugene, OR 97440-2226 June 2000 BLM/OR/WA/PL-00/052+6635 ABSTRACTABSTRACT Because of the significant loss of oak (Quercus were delineated; and the topographic features, spp.) habitat and the subsequent increased value vegetation structure, and composition of the placed on oak woodlands for wildlife habitat, the sites were characterized. Current conditions preservation and restoration of native oak wood- were then compared with conditions docu- lands has become a priority for land man- mented in historical records. In addition, the agers and conservationists in the Western wildlife species most likely occurring on the United States. In 1998, reconnaissance sur- sites were identified. Literature from oak wood- veys were conducted on 13 oak woodland sites land studies was then reviewed to determine managed by the Bureau of Land Management’s whether certain management and restoration (BLM’s) Eugene District in Lane County, methods, such as eliminating conifer encroach- Oregon. The sites were classified as either ment and thinning closed-canopy stands, would meadow-type communities or woodland-type be effective in addressing conditions observed at communities; oak patches within the sites the BLM sites.
    [Show full text]