DOCSLIB.ORG

Field Manual for Applying Eias in Upland Ecosystems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Field Manual for Applying Eias in Upland Ecosystems PROGRAM HERITAGE NATURAL Field Manual for Applying Rapid Ecological Integrity Assessments in Upland Plant Communities of Washington State (Version 1.1) WASHINGTON Prepared by F. Joseph Rocchio, Tynan Ramm-Granberg, and Rex C. Crawford December 20, 2018 Natural Heritage Report 2020-05 Field Manual for Applying Rapid Ecological Integrity Assessments in Upland Plant Communities of Washington State (Version 1.1) Washington Natural Heritage Program Report Number: 2020-05 October 29, 2020 Prepared by: F. Joseph Rocchio Tynan Ramm-Granberg & Rex C. Crawford Washington Natural Heritage Program Washington Department of Natural Resources Olympia, Washington 98504-7014 ON THE COVER: An occurrence of Pseudotsuga menziesii - Tsuga heterophylla / Gaultheria shallon / Polystichum munitum Forest (G4G5/S4) in excellent condition near Lake Crescent, at Olympic National Park (Photograph by Tynan Ramm-Granberg). Level 2 EIA Field Manual for Washington Upland Plant Communities ver. 1.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... III ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 2 1.1 GLOSSARY OF FREQUENTLY USED TERMS ............................................................................ 3 2.0 APPLYING LEVEL 2 ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY ASSESSMENTS ............................ 5 2.1 MATERIALS ............................................................................................................................ 5 2.2 PROCEDURE .......................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 ASSESSMENT AREA ............................................................................................................... 7 2.3.1 Point-Based Assessment Area ..................................................................................... 10 2.3.2 Polygon-Based Assessment Area ................................................................................. 11 2.3.3 Combined Point/Polygon-Based Assessment Areas for Large-Patch and Matrix Ecological Systems ................................................................................................................ 13 2.3.4 Nested Polygon-Based Assessment Areas for Use with Sub-AAs ................................ 15 2.4 DETERMINE THE ASSESSMENT AREA BOUNDARIES ........................................................... 16 2.5 DETERMINE WHICH METRICS TO APPLY ............................................................................. 19 3.0 LEVEL 2 EIA PROTOCOL ................................................................................ 24 3.1 SITE / CLASSIFICATION INFORMATION ............................................................................... 24 3.2 ASSESSMENT AREA INFORMATION .................................................................................... 25 3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ............................................................................................................... 26 3.4 VEGETATION ....................................................................................................................... 28 3.5 EIA METRIC RATINGS AND SCORES ..................................................................................... 30 3.6 LANDSCAPE CONTEXT METRICS .......................................................................................... 31 LAN1 Contiguous Natural Land Cover................................................................................... 31 LAN2 Land Use Index (0-500 m) ............................................................................................ 34 3.7 EDGE .................................................................................................................................... 38 EDG1 Perimeter with Natural Edge ...................................................................................... 38 EDG2 Width of Natural Edge................................................................................................. 40 EDG3 Condition of Natural Edge ........................................................................................... 45 3.8 VEGETATION ....................................................................................................................... 46 VEG1 Native Plant Species Cover .......................................................................................... 46 VEG2 Invasive Nonnative Plant Species Cover ..................................................................... 48 VEG3 Native Plant Species Composition............................................................................... 49 VEG4 Vegetation Structure ................................................................................................... 51 VEG5 Woody Regeneration .................................................................................................. 59 VEG6 Coarse Woody Debris, Snags, and Litter ..................................................................... 61 3. 9 SOIL / SUBSTRATE .............................................................................................................. 70 SOI1 Soil Condition ................................................................................................................ 70 3.10 SIZE .................................................................................................................................... 72 iii Level 2 EIA Field Manual for Washington Upland Plant Communities ver. 1.1 SIZ1 Comparative Size (Patch Type) ...................................................................................... 72 SIZ2 Change in Size (optional) ............................................................................................... 74 4.0 CALCULATE EIA SCORE AND DETERMINE ELEMENT OCCURRENCE STATUS. 76 4.1 ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT SCORECARD ........................................................... 76 4.2 CALCULATE MAJOR ECOLOGICAL FACTOR (MEF) SCORES AND RATINGS .......................... 77 4.2.1 Landscape Context MEF Score/Rating ......................................................................... 77 4.2.2 Edge MEF Score/Rating ................................................................................................ 77 4.2.3 Vegetation MEF Score/Rating ...................................................................................... 77 4.2.4 Soils MEF Score/Rating ................................................................................................ 77 4.2.5 Size MEF Score/Rating ................................................................................................. 77 4.3 CALCULATE PRIMARY FACTOR SCORES ............................................................................... 77 4.3.1 Landscape Context Primary Factor Score/Rating ........................................................ 78 4.3.2 Condition Primary Factor Score/Rating ....................................................................... 78 4.3.3 Size Primary Factor Score/Rating ................................................................................. 78 4.4 CALCULATE OVERALL ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT SCORE/RATING ................... 78 4.5 CALCULATE THE ELEMENT OCCURRENCE RANK ................................................................. 79 4.6 DETERMINE ELEMENT OCCURRENCE STATUS .................................................................... 81 5.0 STRESSOR CHECKLIST .................................................................................. 82 RELEASE NOTES................................................................................................. 85 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 85 APPENDIX A. DIAGNOSTIC SPECIES AND COMMON INCREASERS, DECREASERS, AND INVASIVE PLANTS OF WASHINGTON’S ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS (DRAFT - IN PROGRESS) ....................................................................................................... 93 iv Level 2 EIA Field Manual for Washington Upland Plant Communities ver. 1.1 Figures Figure 1. Example of Assessment Area (AA) v. Occurrence ........................................................................... 8 Figure 2. Decision Tree for Selection of Assessment Area Approach and Sampling Strategy ........................ 9 Figure 3. Point-based Assessment Areas ..................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4. Polygon-based Assessment Area .................................................................................................. 13 Figure 5. Combined Point/Polygon-Based Assessment Area ....................................................................... 14 Figure 6. Nested Polygon-Based Assessment Area ...................................................................................... 16 Figure 7. Soil Texture Flow Chart. ................................................................................................................ 27 Figure 8. Contiguous Natural Land Cover Evaluation .................................................................................. 33 Figure 9. Demonstration of Using Remote Sensing Methods for Scoring the Land Use Index metric ......... 36 Figure 10. Edge Perimeter Example ...........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Predicting Foundation Bunchgrass Species Abundances: Model-Assisted Decision-Making in Protected-Area Sagebrush Steppe 1, 2 3 3 4 THOMAS J
    #825 Predicting foundation bunchgrass species abundances: model-assisted decision-making in protected-area sagebrush steppe 1, 2 3 3 4 THOMAS J. RODHOUSE, KATHRYN M. IRVINE, ROGER L. SHELEY, BRENDA S. SMITH, SHIRLEY HOH, 5 5 DANIEL M. ESPOSITO, AND RICARDO MATA-GONZALEZ 1Upper Columbia Basin Network, National Park Service, 63095 Deschutes Market Road, Bend, Oregon 97701 USA 2Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center, United States Geological Survey, 2327 University Way, Suite 2, Bozeman, Montana 59715 USA 3Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, 67826-A, Highway 205, Burns, Oregon 97720 USA 4John Day Fossil Beds National Monument, National Park Service, 32651 Highway 19, Kimberly, Oregon 97848 USA 5Department of Animal and Rangeland Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331 USA Citation: Rodhouse, T. J., K. M. Irvine, R. L. Sheley, B. S. Smith, S. Hoh, D. M. Esposito, and R. Mata-Gonzalez. 2014. Predicting foundation bunchgrass species abundances: model-assisted decision-making in protected-area sagebrush steppe. Ecosphere 5(9):108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES14-00169.1 Abstract. Foundation species are structurally dominant members of ecological communities that can stabilize ecological processes and influence resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasion. Being common, they are often overlooked for conservation but are increasingly threatened from land use change, biological invasions, and over-exploitation. The pattern of foundation species abundances over space and time may be used to guide decision-making, particularly in protected areas for which they are iconic. We used ordinal logistic regression to identify the important environmental influences on the abundance patterns of bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Thurber’s needlegrass (Achnatherum thurber- ianum), and Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda) in protected-area sagebrush steppe.
    [Show full text]
  • For the Love of Grass IX
    For the Love of Grass IX Botanizing the Snake River Plains and Bonneville Lakebeds and Shorelines Jack Carlson, Wendall Oaks, Larry Holzworth, Dan Ogle, and Wendell Hassell May 10-15, 2016 Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 3 Day 1 – Monday, May 10 .................................................................................................... 5 Inventory Site 1 – Forage and Range Reseach Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Logan, Logan County, Utah ............................................................................. 5 Inventory Site 2 – Curlew National Grassland, Oneida County, Idaho ................................ 8 Day 2 – Tuesday, May 11 .................................................................................................. 13 Inventory Site 3 – Aberdeen Plant Materials Center (PMC), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Bingham County, Idaho ...................................................... 13 Inventory Site 4 – Coffee Point, Bingham County, Idaho .................................................... 17 Day 3 – Wednesday, May 12 ............................................................................................ 21 Inventory Site 4A – Big Lost River Rest Area, Butte County, Idaho .................................. 21 Inventory Site 4B – Craters of the Moon National Monument, Butte County, Idaho ....... 22 Inventory Site 5 – Camas Prairie Centennial Marsh Wildlife
    [Show full text]
  • International Ecological Classification Standard
    INTERNATIONAL ECOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION STANDARD: TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATIONS Groups and Macrogroups of Washington June 26, 2015 by NatureServe (modified by Washington Natural Heritage Program on January 16, 2016) 600 North Fairfax Drive, 7th Floor Arlington, VA 22203 2108 55th Street, Suite 220 Boulder, CO 80301 This subset of the International Ecological Classification Standard covers vegetation groups and macrogroups attributed to Washington. This classification has been developed in consultation with many individuals and agencies and incorporates information from a variety of publications and other classifications. Comments and suggestions regarding the contents of this subset should be directed to Mary J. Russo, Central Ecology Data Manager, NC <[email protected]> and Marion Reid, Senior Regional Ecologist, Boulder, CO <[email protected]>. Copyright © 2015 NatureServe, 4600 North Fairfax Drive, 7th floor Arlington, VA 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Citations: The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference ecological system and/or International Vegetation Classification (IVC hierarchy) and association data: NatureServe. 2015. International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications. NatureServe Central Databases. Arlington, VA. U.S.A. Data current as of 26 June 2015. Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute these data is hereby granted under the following conditions: 1. The above copyright notice must appear in all documents and reports; 2. Any use must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes; 3. Some data may be altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report USDA Ecological Site Description State-And-Transition Models Major Land Resource Area 28A and 28B Nevada February 2015
    Final Report USDA Ecological Site Description State-and-Transition Models Major Land Resource Area 28A and 28B Nevada February 2015 Tamzen K. Stringham1 Patti Novak-Echenique2 Paul Blackburn3 Cody Coombs4 Devon Snyder5 Amanda Wartgow6 Authors are 1Professor, 5,6Rangeland Ecologists, Dept. of Agriculture, Nutrition and Veterinary Sciences University of Nevada, Reno, NV, 2State Rangeland Management Specialist, USDA-NRCS Reno, NV, 3MLRA Soil Survey Leader, USDA-NRCS Elko, NV, and 4Hazardous Fuels Program Manager, BLM, Ely, NV Cite as: Stringham, T.K., P. Novak-Echenique, P. Blackburn, C. Coombs, D. Snyder, and A. Wartgow. 2015. Final Report for USDA Ecological Site Description State-and-Transition Models, Major Land Resource Area 28A and 28B Nevada. University of Nevada Reno, Nevada Agricultural džƉĞƌŝŵĞŶƚ^ƚĂƚŝŽŶ Research Report 2015-01. p. 1524. Cooperators: USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, USDA Agricultural Research Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management and Eureka County, NV. Final Report submitted to USDA Agricultural Research Service as fulfillment of Agreement # 58-5370-2-211 Disturbance Response Group 4B Contents Page DRG 4B – Modal Site Claypan 12-14” 028BY037NV Ecological sites within DRG 4 Ϯϲϰ Narrative Ϯϲϱ Modal State-and-Transition model Ϯϴϭ References Ϯϴϯ Additional STMs within DRG 4 Ϯϴϲ 263 Ecological Sites within Disturbance Response Group 4B: Modal Site: Claypan 12-14” 028BY037NV Group Name Site ID Claypan 12-14"P.Z. 028BY037NV Claypan 14+" P.Z. 028BY036NV 4B Calcareous Claypan 14-16" P.Z. 028BY092NV Gravelly Claypan 14+" P.Z. 028BY035NV Cobbly Claypan 12-14" P.Z. 028BY039NV 264 MLRA 28B Group 4B Disturbance Response Group (DRG) 4B consists of five ecological sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Kamiak Butte
    Checklist of Plants from Kamiak Butte (List alphabetical by genera within major groups) Ferns Cheilanthes gracillima lace lip-fern Cystopteris fragilis brittle bladder-fern Polypodium hesperium polypody Polystichum munitum swordfern Pteridium aquilinum bracken fern; brake fern Conifers Abies grandis grand fir Larix occidentalis western larch Pinus ponderosa ponderosa pine Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir Flowering plants Acer negundo box elder Achillea millefolium yarrow Agoseris heterophylla false dandelion Alyssum alyssoides alyssum Amelanchier alnifolia serviceberry Anaphalis margaritacea pearly-everlasting Anemone piperi windflower Antennaria luzuloides woodrush pussytoes Antennaria microphylla rosy pussytoes Antennaria racemosa raceme pussytoes Anthemis cotula mayweed, chamomile Apocynum androsaemifolium spreading dogbane Arabis sparsiflora sicklepod rockcress Arctostaphylos uva-ursi bearberry, kinnikinnik Arenaria congesta ballhead sandwort Arenaria microphylla bigleaf sandwort Arnica cordifolia heart-leaf arnica Artemisia absinthium wormwood Aster conspicuus showy aster Aster occidentalis western mountain aster Astragalus arrectus Palouse milkvetch Astragalus canadensis Canadian milkvetch Athysanus pusillus sandweed Balsamorhiza sagittata arrowleaf balsamroot Barbarea orthoceras American watercress Berberis repens creeping Oregon grape Besseya rubra red besseya Bromus brizaeformis rattlesnake grass Bromus carinatus California brome Bromus japonicus Japanese brome Bromus tectorum downy cheatgrass Bromus vulgaris Columbia brome
    [Show full text]
  • Abundances of Coplanted Native Bunchgrasses and Crested Wheatgrass After 13 Years, Author(S): Aleta M
    #843 Abundances of Coplanted Native Bunchgrasses and Crested Wheatgrass after 13 Years, Author(s): Aleta M. Nafus, Tony J. Svejcar, David C. Ganskopp and Kirk W. Davies Source: Rangeland Ecology & Management, 68(2):211-214. Published By: Society for Range Management URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1016/j.rama.2015.01.011 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. #843 Rangeland Ecology & Management 68 (2015) 211–214 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Rangeland Ecology & Management journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rama Abundances of Coplanted Native Bunchgrasses and Crested Wheatgrass after 13 Years☆,☆☆ Aleta M. Nafus a,⁎, Tony J. Svejcar b,DavidC.Ganskoppc,KirkW.Daviesd a Graduate Student, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97330, USA b Research Leader, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Burns, OR 97720, USA c Emeritus Rangeland Scientist, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Flora ID Specifications and Post-Fire Effects
    Students Investigating Burns FIRE EFFECTS ON MONTANA FLORA Identification tools and forest fire effects on forbs, shrubs, trees and weeds found in Montana’s Rocky Mountain Region Beth Neely Amy Cilimburg Avian Science Center University of Montana October 18, 2004 www.avainscience.org 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Primrose Family (Primulaceae)……………..…………...21 Shooting Star; Dodecatheon pulchellum Tall mountain shooting star (D. jeffreyi) Forbs (Wildflowers) & Shrubs Aster Family (Asteraceae)……………………………... ….5 Purslane Family (Portulaceae)…………………...………22 Arrowleaf Balsamroot; Balsamorhiza sagittata Miner’s Lettuce; Claytonia perfoliata Hawkweed; Hieracium albertinum,Hieracium albiflorum Heartleaf Arnica; Arnica cordifolia Rose Family (Rosaceae)…………..………………… ... ...23 Yarrow; Achillea millefolium Birch-Leaved Spiraea; Spiraea betulifolia Ninebark (Mallow Ninebark); Physocarpus malvaceus Barberry Family (Berberidaceae)…………………...… … 9 Serviceberry; Amelanchier alnifolia Oregon-grape; Mahonia repens Strawberry; Fragaria virginiana Buckthorn family(Rhamnaceae)………..………... … .. ..10 Saxifrage Family (Saxifragaceae)……..…………………27 Redstemmed buckbrush; Ceanothus sanguineus Starflower (Woodland Star); Lithophragma parviflorum Evening Primrose Family(Onagraceae)…………………11 Fireweed; Epilobium angustifolium Trees Pine Family (Pinaceae)………...…………………...…… 29 Figwort Family (Scrophulariaceae)……………………...12 Douglas Fir; Pseudotsuga menziesii Blue-eyed Mary; Collinsia parviflora Lodgepole Pine; Pinus contorta Ponderosa Pine; Pinus ponderosa Geranium Family(Geraniaceae)………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Influence of Water Temperature and Beaver Ponds on Lahontan Cutthroat Trout in a High-Desert Stream, Southeastern Oregon
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Andrew G. Talabere for the degree of Master of Science in Fisheries Science presented on November 21. 2002. Title: Influence of Water Temperature and Beaver Ponds on Lahontan Cutthroat Trout in a High-Desert Stream, Southeastern Oregon Abstract approved Redacted for Privacy Redacted for Privacy The distribution of Lahontan cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi was assessed in a high-desert stream in southeastern Oregon where beaver Castor canadensis are abundant. Longitudinal patterns of beaver ponds, habitat, temperature, and Lahontan cutthroat trout age group distribution were identified throughout Willow Creek. Three distinct stream segments were classified based on geomorphological characteristics. Four beaver-pond and four free-flowing sample sections were randomly located in each of the three stream segments. Beavers substantially altered the physical habitat of Willow Creek increasing the depth and width of available habitat. In contrast, there was no measurable effect on water temperature. The total number of Lahontan cutthroat trout per meter was significantly higher in beaver ponds than free-flowing sections. Although density (fish! m2) showed no statistically significant (P < 0.05) increase, values in beaver pondswere two-fold those of free-flowing sections. Age- 1 and young-of-the-year trout were absent or in very low numbers in lower Willow Creek because of elevated temperatures, but high numbers of age-2 and 3 (adults) Lahontan cutthroat trout were found in beaver ponds where water temperatures reached lethal levels (>24°C). Apparently survival is greater in beaver ponds than free-flowing sections as temperatures approach lethal limits. Influence of Water Temperature and Beaver Ponds on Lahontan Cutthroat Trout in a High- Desert Stream, Southeastern Oregon by Andrew G.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Release of the Hoverfly Cheilosia Urbana (Diptera: Syrphidae)
    USDA iiillllllllll United States Department of Field release of the hoverfly Agriculture Cheilosia urbana (Diptera: Marketing and Regulatory Syrphidae) for biological Programs control of invasive Pilosella species hawkweeds (Asteraceae) in the contiguous United States. Environmental Assessment, July 2019 Field release of the hoverfly Cheilosia urbana (Diptera: Syrphidae) for biological control of invasive Pilosella species hawkweeds (Asteraceae) in the contiguous United States. Environmental Assessment, July 2019 Agency Contact: Colin D. Stewart, Assistant Director Pests, Pathogens, and Biocontrol Permits Plant Protection and Quarantine Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service U.S. Department of Agriculture 4700 River Rd., Unit 133 Riverdale, MD 20737 Non-Discrimination Policy The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.) To File an Employment Complaint If you wish to file an employment complaint, you must contact your agency's EEO Counselor (PDF) within 45 days of the date of the alleged discriminatory act, event, or in the case of a personnel action. Additional information can be found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_file.html. To File a Program Complaint If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form (PDF), found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form.
    [Show full text]
  • Abundances of Coplanted Native Bunchgrasses and Crested Wheatgrass After 13 Years☆,☆☆
    Rangeland Ecology & Management 68 (2015) 211–214 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Rangeland Ecology & Management journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rama Abundances of Coplanted Native Bunchgrasses and Crested Wheatgrass after 13 Years☆,☆☆ Aleta M. Nafus a,⁎, Tony J. Svejcar b,DavidC.Ganskoppc,KirkW.Daviesd a Graduate Student, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97330, USA b Research Leader, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Burns, OR 97720, USA c Emeritus Rangeland Scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Burns, OR 97720, USA d Rangeland Scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Burns, OR 97720, USA article info abstract Keywords: Crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum [L] Gaertm) has been seeded on more than 5 million hectares in Agropyron cristatum western North America because it establishes more readily than native bunchgrasses. Currently, there is restoration substantial interest in reestablishing native species in sagebrush steppe, but efforts to reintroduce native revegetation grasses into crested wheatgrass stands have been largely unsuccessful, and little is known about the sagebrush steppe long-term dynamics of crested wheatgrass/native species mixes. We examined the abundance of crested wheatgrass and seven native sagebrush steppe bunchgrasses planted concurrently at equal low densities in nongrazed and unburned plots. Thirteen years post establishment, crested wheatgrass was the dominant bunchgrass, with a 10-fold increase in density. Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis Elmer), Thurber’s needlegrass (Achnatherum thurberianum (Piper) Barkworth), basin wildrye (Leymus cinereus [Scribn. & Merr.] A. Löve), and Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda J. Presl) maintained their low planting density, whereas bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata [Pursh] A.
    [Show full text]
  • P/P Photoweek: Hidden Lake, Morning Light (IX.15.08)
    P/P Photoweek: Hidden Lake, Morning Light (IX.15.08) Hidden Lake, Eagle Cap Wilderness—Alpine Lake at ± 2200 meters (7173 feet). A high cirque located at the far Northwest end of the East Eagle Valley, file:///Users/cliffcrego/Documents/picture-poems.com/photoweek/hidden-lake_9-5-08_text.html (1 of 5)10/17/08 11:57 AM P/P Photoweek: Hidden Lake, Morning Light (IX.15.08) Hidden Lake, Eagle Cap Wilderness—Alpine Lake at ± 2200 meters (7173 feet). A high cirque located at the far Northwest end of the East Eagle Valley, file:///Users/cliffcrego/Documents/picture-poems.com/photoweek/hidden-lake_9-5-08.html (1 of 5)10/17/08 9:09 AM P/P Photoweek: Hidden Lake, Morning Light (IX.15.08) Hidden Lake is one the most beautiful jewels of the South Wallowas and the Eagle Cap Wilderness. East facing, strikingly peaceful and feminine in character, it is one of finest examples of an intact alpine watershed I've ever seen. Hidden Lake TOPO On the road in the Northwest of America. SUNSIGHT! —for Mark Simmons Sunrise. No! Sunsight. Yes! Fuller was right. Each morning, the Earth turns to greet the Sun. We are all turning. The Muslim turns. The Christian turns. Even I turn, with my religion without a name. file:///Users/cliffcrego/Documents/picture-poems.com/photoweek/hidden-lake_9-5-08.html (2 of 5)10/17/08 9:09 AM P/P Photoweek: Hidden Lake, Morning Light (IX.15.08) Hidden Lake, Eagle Cap Wilderness, Oregon, IX.5.2008 SUNSIGHT!— 6:56 AM Streamside Fieldwork— VII.30.08 Eagle Cap, view from Hidden Lake file:///Users/cliffcrego/Documents/picture-poems.com/photoweek/hidden-lake_9-5-08.html (3 of 5)10/17/08 9:09 AM P/P Photoweek: Hidden Lake, Morning Light (IX.15.08) Last Light on Granite Mountain & PILGRIM Flowform & Destructive Movements Frazier Butte & SCIENCE.
    [Show full text]
  • A Field Guide for Collecting Native Seeds in Nevada
    A Field Guide for Collecting Native Seeds in Nevada Jay Davison University of Nevada Cooperative Extension This field guide was made possible by a grant from the Nevada State office of The Bureau of Land Management The University of Nevada, Reno is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer and does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, creed, national origin, veteran status, physical or mental disability, or sexual orientation, in any program or activity it operates. The University of Nevada, Reno employs only United States citizens and aliens lawfully authorized to work in the United States. A Field Guide For Collecting Native Seeds In Nevada Table of Contents Chapter 1: Dominant Vegetation in the Great Basin (graphic) Introduction Chapter 2: Priority Plant List for Nevada Native Seed Collections and Production (graphic) List of Priority Species for Collecting in Nevada Chapter 3: Graphic Identification Guides for Priority Species Chapter 4: Graphic Recommended Collection Sites by BLM Field Offices in Nevada Chapter 5: Graphic BLM Permit Fees, and Regulations for Native Seed Collections Chapter 6: Graphic Nevada State Regulations for Native Seed Collections Chapter 7: Graphic Native Seed Source Identification/Certification Procedures Chapter 8: Graphic Collecting and Preserving Voucher Plant Specimens Chapter 9: Graphic Native Seed Collecting, Handling and Storage Tips Chapter 10: Graphic Native Seed Marketing Possibilities Chapter 11: Appendix A: BLM Form 5450-1 Contract for the Sale of Vegetative
    [Show full text]