DOCSLIB.ORG

Laurie Guichon Memorial Grasslands Interpretive Site: a Baseline Inventory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Laurie Guichon Memorial Grasslands Interpretive Site: A Baseline Inventory April 2019 Laurie Guichon Memorial Grassland Interpretive Site, Baseline Inventory Report, 2019 Laurie Guichon Memorial Grassland Interpretive Site Baseline Inventory Prepared by The Grasslands Conservation Council of British Columbia In partnership with Iverson & MacKenzie Biological Consulting Ltd. PO Box 511, Lac la Hache, BC, V0K 1T0 Grasslands Conservation Council of British Columbia P.O. Box 3341, Kamloops, BC Canada, V2C 6B9 Email: [email protected] Website: www.bcgrasslands.org Cover photos by Dennis Lloyd Grasslands Conservation Council of British Columbia ii Laurie Guichon Memorial Grassland Interpretive Site, Baseline Inventory Report, 2019 Acknowledgements Funding Partners The Laurie Guichon memorial grassland interpretive site baseline inventory has been made possible through the generous contribution and support of several funders. The Grasslands Conservation Council of British Columbia recognizes the following organizations as instrumental to the success of this project. Thank you. We are also grateful for the in-kind support received from our project partners, the Nicola Watershed Community Round Table, Thompson Rivers University, and the Ministry of Forests Lands Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. Baseline inventory team The baseline inventory fieldwork was done by Dennis Lloyd, Kristi Iverson, and Ken Mackenzie. Mapping and reporting results about ecosystems, seral stage conditions, Spotted Knapweed density classes and the overall range condition of the grasslands was completed by Kristi Iverson and Dennis Lloyd. Ken MacKenzie participated in the field survey, completed the wildlife assessment and written descriptions. Ken also provided GIS support to generate map products and associated area summary statistics. Heather Richardson provided administrative support, digitized initial ecosystem maps and completed an editorial review of this manuscript. Liis Jeffries from the Merritt Naturalist club and Kristi Iverson also provided and editorial review. All Photographs were provided by Dennis Lloyd. Grasslands Conservation Council of British Columbia iii Laurie Guichon Memorial Grassland Interpretive Site, Baseline Inventory Report, 2019 Executive Summary The Laurie Guichon Memorial Grassland Interpretive Site (LGMGIS) was established in 2001 to honour a local rancher who brought people together to share knowledge and responsibility for the land. The objective of this document is to characterize the ecological conditions of the LGMGIS. It’s hoped that the resulting maps and descriptions will serve as a basis for developing weed and range management plans, contribute to education and outreach opportunities and highlight the cultural, historic, economic and ecological importance of local grasslands. The 102 hectare LGMGIS is ecologically diverse for such a small area. Fifteen ecological types have been observed, characterized and mapped including; four grassland, five forest, four wetland, one rock outcrop and one shrubland ecosystem types. Four successional stages of the grassland types have also been, identified, characterized and mapped based upon four seral stages (early, mid, late and potential natural climax conditions). Knapweed is the dominant weed species of concern on the grasslands and 5 cover classes have been recognized, mapped and displayed. The overall range condition of the grasslands has been assessed and mapped. Wildlife capability and suitability has been assessed and mapped for the nine most likely species at risk that may occur on the LGMGIS. The appendices include a check list of potential and observed fauna and flora anticipated to occur on the site. This document is considered to be the start of a living document that can be added to through time. Some sections are still incomplete and fauna and flora lists for the site are expected to be revised as more people visit the site. This document will be stored on the GCC and NWCRT web sites, with annual updates as new information becomes available. Grasslands Conservation Council of British Columbia iv Laurie Guichon Memorial Grassland Interpretive Site, Baseline Inventory Report, 2019 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................................... iii Funding Partners .................................................................................................................................................. iii Baseline inventory team ....................................................................................................................................... iii Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... iv Table of Contents........................................................................................................................................................... v List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................................. vii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................................. x Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Baseline Inventory ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Objectives .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 General Area Description ......................................................................................................................................... 2 Ecosystem Mapping .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Methods ................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Results ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Ecosystem Mapping results ................................................................................................................................ 19 Seral stage mapping ................................................................................................................................................ 20 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................... 22 Methods .............................................................................................................................................................. 22 Results ................................................................................................................................................................. 23 Weed Inventory ........................................................................................................................................................ 25 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................... 25 Knapweed and its biology ................................................................................................................................... 25 Methods .............................................................................................................................................................. 26 Results ................................................................................................................................................................. 28 Range Condition ...................................................................................................................................................... 30 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................... 31 Methods .............................................................................................................................................................. 31 Results ................................................................................................................................................................. 33 Wildlife Habitat Attributes ...................................................................................................................................... 34 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................... 34 Methods .............................................................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Upper Elk Meadows Research Natural Area: Guidebook Supplement 43

    Upper Elk Meadows Research Natural Area: Guidebook Supplement 43

    United States Department of Agriculture Upper Elk Meadows Forest Service Research Natural Area: Pacific Northwest Research Station Guidebook Supplement 43 General Technical Report PNW-GTR-874 Reid Schuller and Cheshire Mayrsohn April 2013 D E E P R A U R T LT MENT OF AGRICU The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the National Forests and National Grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, status as a parent (in education and training programs and activities), because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program, or retaliation. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs or activities.) If you require this information in alternative format (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.), contact the USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (Voice or TDD). If you require information about this program, activity, or facility in a language other than English, contact the agency office responsible for the program or activity, or any USDA office. To file a complaint alleging discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C.
  • South American Cacti in Time and Space: Studies on the Diversification of the Tribe Cereeae, with Particular Focus on Subtribe Trichocereinae (Cactaceae)

    South American Cacti in Time and Space: Studies on the Diversification of the Tribe Cereeae, with Particular Focus on Subtribe Trichocereinae (Cactaceae)

    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2013 South American Cacti in time and space: studies on the diversification of the tribe Cereeae, with particular focus on subtribe Trichocereinae (Cactaceae) Lendel, Anita Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-93287 Dissertation Published Version Originally published at: Lendel, Anita. South American Cacti in time and space: studies on the diversification of the tribe Cereeae, with particular focus on subtribe Trichocereinae (Cactaceae). 2013, University of Zurich, Faculty of Science. South American Cacti in Time and Space: Studies on the Diversification of the Tribe Cereeae, with Particular Focus on Subtribe Trichocereinae (Cactaceae) _________________________________________________________________________________ Dissertation zur Erlangung der naturwissenschaftlichen Doktorwürde (Dr.sc.nat.) vorgelegt der Mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Universität Zürich von Anita Lendel aus Kroatien Promotionskomitee: Prof. Dr. H. Peter Linder (Vorsitz) PD. Dr. Reto Nyffeler Prof. Dr. Elena Conti Zürich, 2013 Table of Contents Acknowledgments 1 Introduction 3 Chapter 1. Phylogenetics and taxonomy of the tribe Cereeae s.l., with particular focus 15 on the subtribe Trichocereinae (Cactaceae – Cactoideae) Chapter 2. Floral evolution in the South American tribe Cereeae s.l. (Cactaceae: 53 Cactoideae): Pollination syndromes in a comparative phylogenetic context Chapter 3. Contemporaneous and recent radiations of the world’s major succulent 86 plant lineages Chapter 4. Tackling the molecular dating paradox: underestimated pitfalls and best 121 strategies when fossils are scarce Outlook and Future Research 207 Curriculum Vitae 209 Summary 211 Zusammenfassung 213 Acknowledgments I really believe that no one can go through the process of doing a PhD and come out without being changed at a very profound level.
  • Applying the Concept of Stewardship Responsibility in British Columbia

    Applying the Concept of Stewardship Responsibility in British Columbia

    technical subcommittee component report Applying the Concept of Stewardship Responsibility in British Columbia PREPARED BY: FRED L. BUNNELL, L. KREMSATER AND I. HOUDE FOR: THE BIODIVERSITY BC TECHNICAL SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THE REPORT ON THE STATUS OF BIODIVERSITY IN BC DECEMBER 2006 Applying the Concept of Stewardship Responsibility in British Columbia By: Fred L. Bunnell L. Kremsater I. Houde Prepared for: The Biodiversity BC Technical Sub Committee For the Report on the Status on Biodiversity in BC December 2006 Summary Lists of species at risk are designed primarily to provide an easily understood estimate of risk and extinction. The lists have become linked to decision-making processes, often in unhelpful ways. Unhelpful guidance can be reduced through the concept of responsibility. The broad concept of stewardship responsibility is simple: within a jurisdiction we should allocate greater effort to conserve species for which we have a greater proportion of the global population or range (responsibility). That is, other things being equal, a species having 70% of its population or range within British Columbia should receive greater conservation effort than a species having 2% of its range within the province. The concept is widely applied in international conservation efforts and can be adapted readily to a particular jurisdiction. For most species, responsibility is estimated from the proportion of occupied range occurring within British Columbia. The task is simple but tedious because a variety of sources are required for the vast majority of species. Estimating responsibility for ecosystems confronts a major challenge: there is far less agreement on what is the same ecosystem than on what is the same species.
  • Halophytum Ameghinoi Belongs to This Monotypic Succulent Herbaceous Family, Which Is Endemic to the Argentine Monte Eco-Region, in Arid and Semi-Arid Scrubland

    Halophytum Ameghinoi Belongs to This Monotypic Succulent Herbaceous Family, Which Is Endemic to the Argentine Monte Eco-Region, in Arid and Semi-Arid Scrubland

    Botanical Sciences 92 (3): 351-361, 2014 TAXONOMY AND FLORISTIC EVALUATING THE PHYLOGENETIC POSITION OF THE MONOTYPIC FAMILY HALOPHYTACEAE (PORTULACINAE, CARYOPHYLLALES) BASED ON PLASTID AND NUCLEAR MOLECULAR DATA SETS ANA M. ANTON1, TANIA HERNÁNDEZ-HERNÁNDEZ2, J. ARTURO DE-NOVA3 AND VICTORIA SOSA2,4 1Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal, CONICET-Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Córdoba, Argentina 2Biología Evolutiva, Instituto de Ecología A.C., Xalapa, Veracruz, Mexico 3Instituto de Investigación de Zonas Desérticas y Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, San Luis Potosí, Mexico 4Author for correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: In spite of numerous phylogenetic studies to determine relationships in Order Caryophyllales and particularly in the suborder Portulacinae, the position of Halophytaceae remains controversial. Halophytum ameghinoi belongs to this monotypic succulent herbaceous family, which is endemic to the Argentine Monte eco-region, in arid and semi-arid scrubland. Some have suggested a relationship with Chenopodiaceae and others a close relationship with Basellaceae and/or Portulacaceae. We performed detailed phylogenetic analyses using the nuclear (18S, ITS, and 26S) and plastid regions (atpB, trnK/matK, ndhF, rbcL, and rpl16) of previous and newly obtained DNA sequences in the suborder Portulacinae to clarify Halophytum’s relationships and to identify the DNA markers with the strongest phylogenetic signal. Phylogenetic analyses performed with the total evidence data matrix confi rmed a close relationship between Halophytum and Basellaceae and a close relationship of both with Didiereaceae. The DNA marker with the most parsimony informative sites was the plastid trnK/matK, followed by ndhF. When the proportion of variable to informative sites is considered, the nuclear ITS region retrieved the most informative sites.
  • Wen Mt Endemics-Cover-2012

    Wen Mt Endemics-Cover-2012

    NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM HERITAGE NATURAL Review of Endemic Plants of the Wenatchee Mountains and Adjacent Areas Prepared for WASHINGTON WASHINGTON U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 1 Prepared by Joseph Arnett September10, 2012 Natural Heritage Report 2012-06 Review of Endemic Plants of the Wenatchee Mountains and Adjacent Areas September 10, 2012 E2 Segment 67 Prepared for The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office Through Section 6 funding, Region 1 by Joseph Arnett Washington Natural Heritage Program Washington Department of Natural Resources PO Box 47014 Olympia, WA 98504-7014 ii Acknowledgements I am especially grateful to the Rare Care program at the University of Washington, including staff Wendy Gibble and Jennifer Youngman, and the many volunteers who participated in rare plant inventory and monitoring in the Wenatchee Mountains. I also want to thank Lauri Malmquist, botanist for the Leavenworth District of the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest, for logistical support, review, and participating in field monitoring. iii iv Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods ................................................................................................................................................. 2 Endemic Species Distribution Maps.................................................................................................... 2 Discussion and Conservation
  • Phylogeny, Biogeography and Evolution of Perennation Structures

    Phylogeny, Biogeography and Evolution of Perennation Structures

    PHYLOGENY, BIOGEOGRAPHY AND EVOLUTION OF PERENNATION STRUCTURES IN MONTIEAE (PORTULACACEAE) By ROBIN LEA O’QUINN A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY School of Biological Sciences MAY 2005 To the Faculty of Washington State University: The members of the Committee appointed to examine the dissertation of ROBIN LEA O’QUINN find it satisfactory and recommend that it be accepted. ______________________________ Chair _ _____________________________ ______________________________ ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Institutions that loaned herbarium material, individuals who contributed collected specimens and funding sources that facilitated the work of this dissertation are duly acknowledged in each chapter. Therefore, I wish to take this opportunity to thank the very many individuals who have contributed to this work in less direct ways and in the process have made my time here so much better. Chief among them are the members of my thesis committee: Larry Hufford, Vince Franceschi, Steve Brunsfeld, and Gerry Allen. They shared their valuable time and expertise when I needed it and otherwise left me alone. I consider Mike Webster an honorary committee member. Mike graciously opened his lab to the Huffordettes for molecular work and has been an outstanding mentor, especially in regard to teaching. Several members of the staff deserve my special thanks. Patty Brandt, Nancy Lira and Pam Black made travel planning, grant submissions and getting paid straightforward and easy. Dennis Cartwright and Deb Short made teaching at WSU a particular joy. Matt King is most sincerely appreciated for his computer savy. I thank Chris Davitt and Valerie Lynch-Holm in the Electron Microscopy Center for cheerfully repeating lessons I should have learned the first time they taught me, and most especially I thank Chuck Cody for letting me drive the ‘Bot Mobile’ for three summers in a row! Here at WSU I found a crew of exceptional quality.