DOCSLIB.ORG

Mangels 2020 Lake Quonnipaug Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mangels 2020 Lake Quonnipaug Report Report on a 2020 survey for State-listed plant species at Quonnipaug Lake, Guilford, Connecticut Christopher R. Mangels Botanical - Ecological Consultant New Fairfield, Connecticut Submitted to the Town of Guilford 27 December 2020 Survey background, objectives and methods This report details a brief botanical survey of Quonnipaug Lake (henceforth QL) conducted independently by the author in late August of 2020. The survey was commenced at the request of Kevin Magee, Environmental Planner for Town of Guilford (henceforth TOG), by whom I was contacted to provide outside expertise pertaining to rare species and plant surveys. Need for this survey arose in the context of review by Natural Diversity Database of CT-DEEP (hereafter NDDB) for continued authorization of aquatic herbicide application (NDDB Determination No.: 202000699, dated May 29, 2020). The survey’s primary objective was to investigate the status of two plant species, Capillary pondweed and Water-marigold, both previously known to occur at QL and currently listed as Threatened and Special Concern category species, respectively, by State of Connecticut (CT DEEP, 2015). Assuming one or both species were found, the survey further entailed fully documenting the population(s), including mapping and evaluation of size and viability. Three unaccompanied visits, each lasting 3-5 hours (total field time of 10.5 hours), were made on 26 August, 28 August and 30 August 2020. The aim on the first date was general site reconnaissance, e.g., checking access points and probing near-shore portions of the lake accessible by land. On the two later dates the survey followed a meandering route through the outer littoral zone, a purely visualized area extending roughly 10 meters inward from water’s edge, utilizing a 10-foot single-person kayak with very low draft that allowed access into minimal depths, as necessitated by shallow, mucky conditions at the southern end. A short rake (~1-meter long) was used for retrieving submersed plants. In a few places where it was feasible to disembark, closer scrutiny was achieved by wading. In practical terms, however, the kayak’s small size and instability made it unsuited for use with a longer rake and for onboard examination of more than a few specimens, thereby precluding more systematic collection of plant material, as is conventional practice in aquatic vegetation studies. Along with plants, photos and GPS points were also taken for identification purposes as well as for future reference. Due to initial uncertainty about how much time might be required to inspect the entire lake, the survey area was divided into northern and southern sectors, one of which was covered on each of the latter two dates. On both occasions the survey originated from the western side (town beach). In attempt to contain time and cost a small section near the middle of the eastern shoreline, within which neither species had been reported, was excluded per project proposal (see Fig. 1.). Along with site visits, the survey demanded considerable pre- and post-fieldwork review of maps and reports, aerial imagery and relevant scientific literature. Site description QL is situated in the northeastern corner of the town of Guilford (USGS Durham Quadrangle), which lies at the convergence of the state’s “South Central Lowlands” and “Southeast Hills” sub-ecoregions (Dowan and Craig, 1976). The surrounding area has an evident history of mixed agricultural and lakeshore recreational land uses, and at the present time QL is characterizable as a moderately dense residential lakeshore settlement. Major landowners and features include a state boat launch, town beach, and Choate Rosemary Hall club house on the western side, opposed by numerous terraced yards, small docks, and some bulk headed frontage along the eastern side. The southern end is largely undeveloped, with a near continuously vegetated shoreline and coves buffered by natural areas (formal or informal) owned by TOG and Guilford Land Conservation Trust. The lake main body covers an area of nearly 99 acres, with a maximum depth exceeding 42 feet and surface elevation of approximately 210 feet a.s.l. (CT DEEP, 2011). There is uncertainty surrounding ownership of open water portions, as is shown by the lack of attribution on town-level GIS, although jurisdiction of the lake bed is assumed by TOG to belong to the State of Connecticut (K. Magee, pers. com.). Fuller knowledge of title and the settlement history of the lake, while relevant and perhaps a matter of record, would have required research beyond the scope of this report. Judging from a combination of aerial imagery, maps and descriptions in earlier reports and first-hand observation, the lake and its margins encompass an array of vegetation or habitat types, from open water with sparse to dense aquatic beds to fringing forest, and from highly modified to comparatively natural. The transition between these types is in places abrupt, such as along bedrock exposures on the eastern side, while at the southern end, where a small dam and road culvert create impoundment, far more gradual. Much of the vegetation corresponds to lacustrine and palustrine communities described by Metzler and Tiner (1992). Focal species descriptions Both focal species are strictly aquatic, naturally submersed, fine-leaved perennial or vegetative annual herbs (see below). While their relative contributions to the diverse macrophyte assemblage that exemplifies the native aquatic flora of QL might be minor, in terms of area—though this has never actually been quantified—generally speaking, such macrophyte assemblages carry high ecological value (Hotchkiss, 1964; Sculthorpe, 1967). Depending on individual size and phenological stage, plants of both species can be difficult to differentiate from many outwardly similar co-occurring species, particularly underwater. Altogether, these points underscore both the potential challenges and the importance of surveying for them. Capillary pondweed (Potamogeton gemmiparus), also known as Budding pondweed, is a rare species endemic to New England and neighboring Quebec. Within Connecticut there are six known extant populations currently, all from the coastal and eastern sub-regions (CT DEEP, 2015; CT NDDB, unpublished data). Across New England as a whole the species has been reported from just 30 sites in three states, of which as many as 20 may be historical only (Native Plant Trust, unpublished data; NHESP, 2015). Owing to this narrow geographic range and presumably other factors such as the number of historical-only sites, Capillary pondweed is recognized as a species of conservation concern at regional and national levels, with a rank of R3, defined as “Vulnerable”, meaning at moderate risk of extinction or decline (NatureServe, 2017). However, it has received less research attention than other regional rarities such as Ogden’s pondweed and Straight-leaved pondweed, both of which were subjects of conservation plans (Hellquist & Pike, 2004; Hellquist & Mertinooke-Jongkind, 2003). Consequently, many aspects of its ecology have not been fully elucidated. What is known its reproductive modus and life history has been summarized by Kaplan & Stepanek (2003) and Les (2020): Plants lack rhizomes but reproduce vegetatively by means of reduced, axillary, bud-like shoots (turions), which are formed near the end of one growing season and begin growth early (May) the following year. These are thought to be the main means of reproduction, with flowering occurring seldomly, especially in deep shaded or turbulent water, and seed recruitment being rare or non-existent. The importance of turions toward annual recruitment has possibly been underestimated due to the similarity of germinated turions to seedlings. Water marigold (Bidens beckii) is an odd aquatic member of the large, mostly terrestrial Aster family, as evidenced by heads with yellow ray flowers, which are born singly on aerial flowering stems. This species is heterophyllous, i.e., possessing two leaf types, those underwater being larger and finely dissected, with smaller, entire and merely toothed leaves on aerial flowering stems. Its growth habit varies from partly emergent in shallow depths to fully submergent in deeper water, the latter reportedly being more typical. The insect pollinated flowers and fruits are produced in late summer (July-Sept), sometimes in the first year (Strother & Weedon, 2006). Seed set is typically low, and in parts of the range only a small percentage of populations reportedly flower with regularity (Les, 2018; Scribailo & Alix, 2002). Although its geographic range is wide, extending across Canada and southward to MD and MO, it is considered rare in many of the states where it occurs (NatureServe, 2020; USDA, 2020). Taxonomic and identification issues The uniqueness of Water-marigold as a species is shown by its former segregation into the monotypic genus Megalodonta, still used in some references. When flowers are present the plants are virtually unmistakable, although in purely vegetative condition it can surely be overlooked, especially in mixed growths of other fine- leaved plants such as Cabomba and bladderworts (Utricularia species). Similarly, Capillary pondweed can be cryptic, but adding to this is considerable haziness surrounding its classification, due to its nesting within a species complex (Sect. Pusilli) regarded as the most taxonomically difficult in the genus and the Pondweed family (Haynes, 1974; Kaplan & Stepanek, 2003; Les et al., 2009). Over the past several
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Red Names=Invasive Species Green Names=Native Species
    CURLY-LEAF PONDWEED EURASIAN WATERMIL- FANWORT CHARA (Potamogeton crispus) FOIL (Cabomba caroliniana) (Chara spp.) This undesirable exotic, also known (Myriophyllum spicatum) This submerged exotic Chara is typically found growing in species is not common as Crisp Pondweed, bears a waxy An aggressive plant, this exotic clear, hard water. Lacking true but management tools are cuticle on its upper leaves making milfoil can grow nearly 10 feet stems and leaves, Chara is actually a limited. Very similar to them stiff and somewhat brittle. in length forming dense mats form of algae. It’s stems are hollow aquarium species. Leaves The leaves have been described as at the waters surface. Grow- with leaf-like structures in a whorled are divided into fine resembling lasagna noodles, but ing in muck, sand, or rock, it pattern. It may be found growing branches in a fan-like ap- upon close inspection a row of has become a nuisance plant with tiny, orange fruiting bodies on pearance, opposite struc- “teeth” can be seen to line the mar- in many lakes and ponds by the branches called akinetes. Thick ture, spanning 2 inches. gins. Growing in dense mats near quickly outcompeting native masses of Chara can form in some Floating leaves are small, the water’s surface, it outcompetes species. Identifying features areas. Often confused with Starry diamond shape with a native plants for sun and space very include a pattern of 4 leaves stonewort, Coontail or Milfoils, it emergent white/pinkish early in spring. By midsummer, whorled around a hollow can be identified by a gritty texture flower.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Nova Scotia Provincial Status Report Spotted Pondweed
    Nova Scotia Provincial Status Report on Spotted Pondweed (Potamogeton pulcher Tuckerm.) prepared for Nova Scotia Species at Risk Working Group by David Mazerolle and Sean Blaney Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Centre P.O. Box 6416, Sackville, NB E4L 1C6 DRAFT Funding provided by Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources Submitted December 2010 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................i WILDLIFE SPECIES DESCRIPTION AND SIGNIFICANCE...........................................1 Name and Classification............................................................................................1 Morphological Description ........................................................................................2 Field identification......................................................................................................3 Designatable Units .....................................................................................................4 Special Significance...................................................................................................5 DISTRIBUTION ...............................................................................................................7 Global Range ..............................................................................................................7 Canadian Range .........................................................................................................8
    [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]
  • The Ecology of Fleabane (Conyza Spp.)
    The ecology of fleabane (Conyza spp.) Todd Douglas Green B.LandMgmt(Ecological Agriculture) University of Sydney B.Sc (Hons) University of Newcastle A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of New England School of Environmental and Rural Science Faculty of Arts and Sciences University of New England October 2010 DECLARATION I certify that the substance of this thesis has not already been submitted for any degree and is not currently being submitted for any other degree or qualification. I certify that any help received in preparing this thesis, and all sources used, have been acknowledged in this thesis. Todd Douglas Green i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge the Cotton Research Development Corporation (CRDC) and the Cotton Catchment Communities Co-operative Research Centre (Cotton CRC) for funding this research (Project #1.01.54) and thank these entities for offering me an opportunity to undertake a PhD. My supervisory team of Professor Brian Sindel, Dr Jeff Werth and Mr Graham Charles all played a role in getting my research completed and thesis submitted. I thank them all for supporting my journey over the past three years. I am grateful for the detailed reviews and editing by Professor Sindel, his encouragement, knowledge and understanding. I would like to thank Dr Jeff Werth for his promptness in feedback, knowledge and his encouragement. To Mr Graham Charles, I am fortunate to have access to his practical knowledge and thank him for his thorough reviews and encouragement. I would also like to thank general staff members of the University of New England who provided assistance to me personally and for practical elements of my research, namely, Dan Alter, Greg (‘Tractor’) Chamberlain, Mick Faint, George Henderson, Dave Edmonds and Elizabeth Davies.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Common Native & Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska
    Introduction to Common Native & Potential Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska Cover photographs by (top to bottom, left to right): Tara Chestnut/Hannah E. Anderson, Jamie Fenneman, Vanessa Morgan, Dana Visalli, Jamie Fenneman, Lynda K. Moore and Denny Lassuy. Introduction to Common Native & Potential Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska This document is based on An Aquatic Plant Identification Manual for Washington’s Freshwater Plants, which was modified with permission from the Washington State Department of Ecology, by the Center for Lakes and Reservoirs at Portland State University for Alaska Department of Fish and Game US Fish & Wildlife Service - Coastal Program US Fish & Wildlife Service - Aquatic Invasive Species Program December 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments ............................................................................ x Introduction Overview ............................................................................. xvi How to Use This Manual .................................................... xvi Categories of Special Interest Imperiled, Rare and Uncommon Aquatic Species ..................... xx Indigenous Peoples Use of Aquatic Plants .............................. xxi Invasive Aquatic Plants Impacts ................................................................................. xxi Vectors ................................................................................. xxii Prevention Tips .................................................... xxii Early Detection and Reporting
    [Show full text]
  • Resilient Plants for the Beach Communities
    Resilient Plants for the Beach Communities 1 | Page Table of Contents Native Plants for Costal Dunes............................................................................................ 4 Grasses and Grass like Plants .......................................................................................... 5 Ammophila breviligulata ............................................................................................. 6 Panicum amarum ‘var. arnaruium’ ............................................................................. 7 Panicum virgatum ....................................................................................................... 8 Spartina patens ........................................................................................................... 9 Herbaceous Plants ........................................................................................................ 10 Baptisia tinctoria ....................................................................................................... 11 Liatris pilosa v. pilosa (graminifolia) ......................................................................... 12 Nuttallanthus canadensis.......................................................................................... 13 Oenothera biennis .................................................................................................... 14 Opuntia compressa ................................................................................................... 15 Solidago sempervirens .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited
    Literature Cited Robert W. Kiger, Editor This is a consolidated list of all works cited in volumes 19, 20, and 21, whether as selected references, in text, or in nomenclatural contexts. In citations of articles, both here and in the taxonomic treatments, and also in nomenclatural citations, the titles of serials are rendered in the forms recommended in G. D. R. Bridson and E. R. Smith (1991). When those forms are abbre- viated, as most are, cross references to the corresponding full serial titles are interpolated here alphabetically by abbreviated form. In nomenclatural citations (only), book titles are rendered in the abbreviated forms recommended in F. A. Stafleu and R. S. Cowan (1976–1988) and F. A. Stafleu and E. A. Mennega (1992+). Here, those abbreviated forms are indicated parenthetically following the full citations of the corresponding works, and cross references to the full citations are interpolated in the list alphabetically by abbreviated form. Two or more works published in the same year by the same author or group of coauthors will be distinguished uniquely and consistently throughout all volumes of Flora of North America by lower-case letters (b, c, d, ...) suffixed to the date for the second and subsequent works in the set. The suffixes are assigned in order of editorial encounter and do not reflect chronological sequence of publication. The first work by any particular author or group from any given year carries the implicit date suffix “a”; thus, the sequence of explicit suffixes begins with “b”. Works missing from any suffixed sequence here are ones cited elsewhere in the Flora that are not pertinent in these volumes.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM LIST OF THE RARE PLANTS OF NORTH CAROLINA 2012 Edition Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist and John Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org Table of Contents LIST FORMAT ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 NORTH CAROLINA RARE PLANT LIST ......................................................................................................................... 10 NORTH CAROLINA PLANT WATCH LIST ..................................................................................................................... 71 Watch Category
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on the Occurrence of Erigeron Sumatrensis (Asteraceae) in Georgia
    Nesom, G.L. 2018. Notes on the occurrence of Erigeron sumatrensis (Asteraceae) in Georgia. Phytoneuron 2018-66: 1–5. Published 1 October 2018. ISSN 2153 733X NOTES ON THE OCCURRENCE OF ERIGERON SUMATRENSIS (ASTERACEAE) IN GEORGIA GUY L. NESOM 2925 Hartwood Drive Fort Worth, Texas 76109 [email protected] ABSTRACT A survey for Erigeron sumatrensis in central Georgia indicates that it is densely distributed on the the coastal plain there, suggesting that its occurrence may be similar from South Carolina to Louisiana. Vouchers and a distribution map for the Georgia records are provided. A recent study (Nesom 2018) documented the occurrence of Erigeron sumatrensis Retz. across the southeastern USA (Fig. 1). Current herbarium collections suggest that it is common in coastal counties but sporadic in more inland areas. The present report indicates that the species probably is more densely distributed through the coastal plain from South Carolina to Louisiana. On 9-10 September, 2018, I surveyed a broad loop in central Georgia and added 14 county records to the distribution of Erigeron sumatrensis . Figure 2 shows the more geographically saturated distribution the species has attained there. The tall columnar habit (characteristically 4-6 feet tall) of Erigeron sumatrensis makes it conspicuous (Figs. 3-5). In central Georgia I found it along roadsides and fencerows and at edges of cultivated and fallow fields. It is local in occurrence, usually as only 1 or a few plants (but sometimes up to 10-15 in a cluster), often growing with more abundant and continuously distributed E. canadensis . Erigeron sumatrensis in September is at the end of its growing season and mostly in fruit, while many plants of E.
    [Show full text]
  • Potamogeton Hillii Morong Hill's Pondweed
    Potamogeton hillii Morong Hill’sHill’s pondweed pondweed, Page 1 State Distribution Best Survey Period Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Status: State threatened 1980’s. The type locality for this species, in Manistee County, has been destroyed. Global and state rank: G3/S2 Recognition: The stem of this pondweed is slender Other common names: pondweed and much branched, reaching up to 1 m in length. The alternate leaves are all submersed, and very narrow Family: Potamogetonaceae (pondweed family) (0.6-2.5 mm), ranging from 2-6 cm in length. The leaves are characterized by having three parallel veins Synonyms: Potamogeton porteri Fern. and a short bristle tip. The stipules are relatively coarse and fibrous (shredding when old) and are free Taxonomy: An extensive molecular analysis of the from each other and the leaf stalk bases. Short Potamogetonaceae, which largely corroborates the (5‑15 cm), curved fruiting stalks (peduncles) are separation of broad-leaved versus narrow-leaved terminated by globose flower/fruit clusters that pondweed species, is provided by Lindqvist et al. arise from leaf axils or stem tips. The tiny (2-4 mm) (2006). fruits have ridges along the backside. Other narrow- leaved species that lack floating leaves have either Range: This aquatic plant is rare throughout much of narrower leaves ( less than 0.5 mm in width, such as its range, which extends from Vermont to Michigan, and P. confervoides and P. bicupulatus), stipules that are south to Pennsylvania. Centers of distribution appear attached near their bases (P. foliosus, P. pusillus), to be in western New England and the north central longer peduncles (1.5-4 mm) (P.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plant List
    UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plants Below is the most recently updated plant list for UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve. * non-native taxon ? presence in question Listed Species Information: CNPS Listed - as designated by the California Rare Plant Ranks (formerly known as CNPS Lists). More information at http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/ranking.php Cal IPC Listed - an inventory that categorizes exotic and invasive plants as High, Moderate, or Limited, reflecting the level of each species' negative ecological impact in California. More information at http://www.cal-ipc.org More information about Federal and State threatened and endangered species listings can be found at https://www.fws.gov/endangered/ (US) and http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/ t_e_spp/ (CA). FAMILY NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME LISTED Ferns AZOLLACEAE - Mosquito Fern American water fern, mosquito fern, Family Azolla filiculoides ? Mosquito fern, Pacific mosquitofern DENNSTAEDTIACEAE - Bracken Hairy brackenfern, Western bracken Family Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens fern DRYOPTERIDACEAE - Shield or California wood fern, Coastal wood wood fern family Dryopteris arguta fern, Shield fern Common horsetail rush, Common horsetail, field horsetail, Field EQUISETACEAE - Horsetail Family Equisetum arvense horsetail Equisetum telmateia ssp. braunii Giant horse tail, Giant horsetail Pentagramma triangularis ssp. PTERIDACEAE - Brake Family triangularis Gold back fern Gymnosperms CUPRESSACEAE - Cypress Family Hesperocyparis macrocarpa Monterey cypress CNPS - 1B.2, Cal IPC
    [Show full text]