DOCSLIB.ORG

Evaluation of Desert Bighorn Reintroductions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evaluation of Desert Bighorn Reintroductions EVALUATION OF ,-:,lot -~-·~ ' , ~.ci . DESERT BIGHORN REINTRODUCTIONS HARLEY G. SHAW / /I A FINAL REPORT Research Branch Arizona Game and Fish Department -=~t1eral Aid in Wildlife Restoration ject W-78-R GF 7.2: ~UST, 1986 F 45 E 81 Research Branch Arizona Game and Fish Department I ! EVALUATION OF DESERT BIGHORN SHEEP REINTRODUCTIONS A Final Report -OCT 2 q 1.QR7 L1BRARY Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Project W-78-R ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENl Work Plan 2, Job 26 2222 WEST GREENWAY ROAD July 1, 1981 to June 30, 1985 PHO ENIX, ARIZONA 85023 ) Prepared by: Harley G. Shaw, Research Biologist January, 1986 ABSTRACT The movements, production and mortalities of desert bighorn sheep released in Goat Mountain and the Virgin Mountains were monitored. Some erratic movements of long distances were noted for individual sheep of both sexes in both release areas. However the majority of the sheep remained in the general release areas confining their movements to less than 8 miles. Reproduction was good at all release sites, thereby providing promise that each of the releases would be successful in establishing a new population. There was a known mortality of 26% of the Goat Mountain sheep 3 years following the initial release, and of 24% of the Virgin Mountain sheep within 1- 1/2 years of release. However, annual reproduction exceeded mortalities. There did not appear to be any discernable difference between the movements, production or mortality in the sheep that were captured and directly released into the wild and those that were held in an enclosure prior to release. OBJECTIVES 1. Determine the location and seasonal movements of radio-collared desert bighorn sheep in the Virgin Mountains, Goat Mountain and Aravaipa Canyon study areas. 2. Determine the desert bighorn sheep population size and composition (sex and age) in the above study areas. 3. Determine the characteristics of sites preferred by bighorns within the above study areas. 4. Determine the seasonal diets of desert bighorns and livestock on the Aravaipa study area. This objective will be addressed in a separate report. 5. Determine the cause of death of bighorns on all study areas. BACKGROUND Bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) populations in North America have declined in numbers and in their distribution since the mid-19th century coincident with the settlement and development in the western United States by man. The decline of the desert bighorn (0. c. mexicana) over the past 40 years has been particularly dramatic. Buechner (1960) documented the widespread early distribution of bighorn in western Arizona, and to some extent in the southeastern part of the state. He described the gradual decline of sheep from major mountain ranges, particularly, from those near the population centers of Flagstaff, Prescott, Phoenix and Tucson. Estimates by Russo (1956) placed the desert bighorn population at about 3,500. Since that time, bighorns have disappeared from such mountain ranges as the Superstitions, Gila Bends, Tucsons, Sierritas, White Tanks and Baboquivari­ Coyotes; more recent estimates place the numbers at approximately 3,000 animals. Because of their disappearance from certain mountain ranges, the desert bighorn currently appears as a Group III species in the "Threatened and Unique Wildlife in Arizona" list. This listing was approved by the Game and Fish Commission on October 21, 1978 . Group III of that listing identified those species whose status in Arizona may be in jeopardy in the foreseeable future. The reintroduction of desert sheep into histori c ranges is regarded by many who are knowledgeable with this species as a technically feasible and biologically sound means of establishing new populations. With this in mind the Aravaipa restoration project began in 1957 . A 112-acre enclosure was constructed in Horse Camp Canyon , a tributary of Aravaipa Canyon. The objective was to use the enclosure for holding and protecting s heep transplanted there from .diverse sites, and to develop a nucleus herd for later release. Through 197 3, about 16 sheep were brought t o the enclosure from .sites in western Arizona . Range utilization estimates collected in 1969 showed that the enclosure's carrying capacity was about 15 adults and 15 yearlings. This population level was reached in 1972. Early in 1973, a portion of the fence was opened and the sheep gradually left the enclosure. By the summer of 1975 , about 22 adults and yearlings and 12 lambs had moved into the surrounding habitat. A second reintroduction of desert bighorns was started with the release of 12 sheep into a 700 acre enclosure in the Virgin Mountains in November 1979. This area is in Game Management Unit 13B in the northwestern corner of Arizona . This sheep population increased to 25 animals within 2 years . During November .1981, 41 . bighorn .sheep were captured in the Black Mountains and released (Nov . 12- 14) at· two sites in the Virgin Mountains: Sullivan's Canyon and Buck Springs, north and south of the enclosure, respectively. Twenty of these animals were . instrumented with radio collars . On January 18, 1982, 21 of the 25 enclosure (Hedricks Canyon) sheep were released and 10 of these were fitted with radio collars. This resulted in a total release of 62 sheep of which 30 had radio collars. A third release was carried out on the Goat Mountain area north of Apache Lake on the Tonto National Forest and a part of the Three Bar Wildlife Area . No enclosure was used for holding these sheep prior to release. On November 12, 1980, 20 bighorn sheep ( 7 males and 13 females) were released in Indian Springs Canyon on the edge of Apache Lake. On November 25, 1981, 11 additional bighorn sheep (3 males and 8 females ) were released at the Painted Cliffs 2 miles west of the original transplant . One disabled female ( 1129) was recaptured shortly following release, so the actual release consisted of 10 animals. Figure 1 depicts the three study areas. Additional sheep releases were made at the Muleshoe Ranch and Redfield Canyon in the Galiuro Mountains. It was originally intended that these releases be included in the evaluation which was to be conducted at Aravaipa Canyon, Goat Mountain and the Virgin Mountains; however, it was soon realized that manpower and equipment capabilities were being overcommitted. Therefore, it was necessary to exclude the Galiuro evaluation from this work plan . .VIRGIN MTS. • FLAGSTAFF * GOAT MT. PHOEN IX e ARAVAIPA CAN.* •TUCSON Figure 1. Locations of Aravaipa Canyon , Goat Mounta in, and Virgin Mountain release sites. In view of the emphasis the state has placed on bighorn sheep reintroductions it became apparent that it was essential to conduct post release investigations to find out how the releases fared. This report deals with those job objectives and release areas where the monito~ing of movements, annual reproduction and mortality were emphasized. PROCEDURES (Job Objectives 1, 2, 3 and 5) Prior to translocation captured sheep were fitted with a mortality sensitive radio-transmitter collar or a non- transmitter cloth collar. The sheep were also ear tagged with numbered vinyl Ritchy tags. Helicopter, fixed wing airplane, and ground surveys were utilized to locate the sheep and monitor them. When a mortality signal was received the animal was located on the ground to verify death . If found dead, every effort was made to determine the cause. Aside from radio monitoring, visual searching was also used as an aid in documenting sheep locations, reproduction and mortalities. FINDINGS ARAVAIPA CAHYOH SE~ This segment will be covered in a separate final report. GOAT MOUNTAIN SEGMENT The Goat Mountain release site is located in a remote portion of the Three Bar Wildlife Area, inaccessible by road, qnd bordering Apache Lake. The immediate area of the release site has been free of cattle since 1947. Goat Mountain is a butte in rugged terrain, surrounded on all but the north side by cliffs. Elevations of the general area range from about 2,000 feet at .Apache Lake to about 7,600 feet atop Four Peaks. The vegetation of the area is a rich mixture of Sonoran desert scrub characterized by jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis), deciduous thorn shrubs, and desert grasslands. Fingers of riparian vegetation occupy the drainages of Ash and Alder Creeks. Chaparral species occur at about the 3,500 foot level, finally changing to stands of pine and oak at the high~r elevations. Mule deer occur at the lower elevational zones; white-tailed deer at the higher elevations are most common from the chaparral zone upwards. Approximately 11 of the 15 inches of average annual precipitation occurs from October to March. Information concerning sex, age, tags and collars of these sheep is presented in Table 1. -3- Table 1. Goat Mountain bighorn sheep release data . No . Sex Age Ear Tag Collar Color Remarks Indian Springs Canyon, November 12, 1980 1 F 4 yellow yellow 2 F 7+ yellow red collar lost in holding pen, blind in right eye 3 M 8 yellow black & white radio frequency 148.140 4 F 5+ red light blue 5 M 1 yellow green 6 F 4-5 red white slight lung injury 7 F 4 red tan w/black stripes 8 F 1 yellow white w/triangle radio frequency 148.170 9 M 7 red olive green-light blue largest of rams 10 M 2 blue white w/black triangle radio frequency 148.150 11 M 2-1/2 green gold w/black dots 12* M 5 none none died after capture, hypothermia shock 13 F 4 red white dash-dash radio frequency 148.180 bloated 14 F 2 blue radio only radio frequency 148.100 15 F 7 green N design radio frequency 148.200 16 M 4 yellow no collar right horn tip split 17 F 3 red ·- design radio frequency 148.130 18 M 4(?) blue no collar 19 F 4 green - design radio frequency 148.210 20 F 1 yellow radio only radio frequency 148.120 21 F 5-6 red " design radio frequency 148.110 Painted Cliffs, Nov.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chemical Analysis of Mountain Sheep Forage in the Virgin Mountains, Arizona
    Chemical Analysis of Mountain Sheep Forage in the Virgin Mountains, Arizona Item Type text; Book Authors Morgart, John R.; Krausman, Paul R.; Brown, William H.; Whiting, Frank M. Publisher College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ) Rights Copyright © Arizona Board of Regents. The University of Arizona. Download date 01/10/2021 12:00:30 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/310778 Chemical Analysis of Mountain Sheep Forage in the Virgin Mountains, Arizona John R. Morgart and Paul R. Krausman School of Renewable Natural Resources William H. Brown and Frank M. Whiting Department of Animal Sciences University of Arizona College of Agriculture Technical Bulletin 257 July 1986 Chemical Analysis of Mountain Sheep Forage in the Virgin Mountains, Arizona By John R. Morgart and Paul R. Krausman School of Renewable Natural Resources, University of of Arizona and William H. Brown and Frank M. Whiting Department of Animal Sciences, University of Arizona Abstract. Eighteen forage species used by mountain sheep (Ovis cana- densis) were collected monthly in 1981 and analyzed for dry matter, pro- tein, acid detergent fiber, neutral detergent fiber, lignin, ether extract, ash, calcium, phosphorus, carotene, and combustible energy. Baseline data on plant nutrition are presented in tabular form as a reference source for wildlife biologists, range managers, and scientists in related fields. Introduction Mountain sheep diets have been studied in Texas (Hailey 1968), New Mexico (Howard and DeLorenzo 1975), Arizona (Halloran and Crandell 1953, Seegmiller and Ohmart 1982), California (Dunaway 1970, Ginnett and Douglas 1982), Nevada (Barrett 1964, Deming 1964, Yoakum 1966, Brown et al. 1976, Brown et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Classification and Map Accuracy Assessment of the Proposed Tehachapi Pass High-Speed Rail Corridor Vegetation Map
    Vegetation Classification and Map Accuracy Assessment of the Proposed Tehachapi Pass High-Speed Rail Corridor Vegetation Map Kern County, California Prepared for the Strategic Growth Council by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program September 2015 ABSTRACT The Geographical Information Center (GIC) at California State University, Chico, completed a vegetation map of the Proposed Tehachapi Pass High-Speed Rail Corridor (HSRC), covering 199,493 acres. The project was funded by the Strategic Growth Council to support routing and mitigation planning for the high-speed rail system. The map was produced using heads-up digitizing based on 2012 National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) imagery. The minimum mapping unit (MMU) is one acre for most vegetation types, with a smaller MMU for wetlands. Although the primary purpose of the map is to document vegetation communities, it provides additional structural data such as herbaceous, shrub, and tree cover, and information about the level of disturbance within the vegetation stand. This report describes the tasks performed by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program (VegCAMP), specifically, the creation of a vegetation classification for the project area and the accuracy assessment of the map. The overall accuracy of the map exceeded the state standard of 80%. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Funding for this project was provided by the Strategic Growth Council, California Wildlife Conservation Board and
    [Show full text]
  • Biogenic Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Desert Vegetation of the Southwestern US
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Atmospheric Environment 40 (2006) 1645–1660 www.elsevier.com/locate/atmosenv Biogenic volatile organic compound emissions from desert vegetation of the southwestern US Chris Gerona,Ã, Alex Guentherb, Jim Greenbergb, Thomas Karlb, Rei Rasmussenc aUnited States Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA bNational Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80303, USA cOregon Graduate Institute, Portland, OR 97291, USA Received 27 July 2005; received in revised form 25 October 2005; accepted 25 October 2005 Abstract Thirteen common plant species in the Mojave and Sonoran Desert regions of the western US were tested for emissions of biogenic non-methane volatile organic compounds (BVOCs). Only two of the species examined emitted isoprene at rates of 10 mgCgÀ1 hÀ1or greater. These species accounted for o10% of the estimated vegetative biomass in these arid regions of low biomass density, indicating that these ecosystems are not likely a strong source of isoprene. However, isoprene emissions from these species continued to increase at much higher leaf temperatures than is observed from species in other ecosystems. Five species, including members of the Ambrosia genus, emitted monoterpenes at rates exceeding 2 mgCgÀ1 hÀ1. Emissions of oxygenated compounds, such as methanol, ethanol, acetone/propanal, and hexanol, from cut branches of several species exceeded 10 mgCgÀ1 hÀ1, warranting further investigation in these ecosystems. Model extrapolation of isoprene emission measurements verifies recently published observations that desert vegetation is a small source of isoprene relative to forests. Annual and daily total model isoprene emission estimates from an eastern US mixed forest landscape were 10–30 times greater than isoprene emissions estimated from the Mojave site.
    [Show full text]
  • Southwestern Rare and Endangered Plants: Proceedings of the Fourth Conference
    Southwestern Rare and Endangered Plants : UnitedUnited States States DepartmentDepartment ofof Agriculture Agriculture ForestForest Service Service Proceedings of the Fourth RockyRocky Mountain Mountain ResearchResearch Station Station Conference ProceedingsProceedings RMRS-P-48CD RMRS-P-48CD JulyJuly 2007 2007 March 22-26, 2004 Las Cruces, New Mexico Barlow-Irick, P., J.J. AndersonAnderson andand C.C. McDonald,McDonald, techtech eds.eds. 2007.2006. SouthwesternSouthwestern rarerare andand endangered plants: Proceedings of the fourth conference; March 22-26, 2004; Las Cruces, New Mexico. Proceedings RMRS-P-XX.RMRS-P-48CD. Fort Fort Collins, Collins, CO: CO: U.S. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,Service, Rocky Mountain ResearchResearch Station.Station. 135 pp.p. Abstract These contributed papers review the current status of plant conservation in the southwestern U.S. Key Words: plant conservation, conservation partnerships, endangered plants, plant taxonomy, genetics, demography, reproductive biology, biogeography, plant surveys, plant monitoring These manuscripts received technical and statistical review. Views expressed in each paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the sponsoring organizations or the USDA Forest Service. Cover illustration: Have Plant Press, Will Travel by Patricia Barlow-Irick You may order additional copies of this publication by sending your mailing information in label form through one of the following media. Please specify the publication title and series number. Fort Collins Service Center Telephone (970) 498-1392 FAX (970) 498-1122 E-mail [email protected] Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/rmrs Mailing address Publications Distribution Rocky Mountain Research Station 240 West Prospect Road Fort Collins, CO 80526 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-XXRMRS-P-48CD Southwestern Rare and Endangered Plants: Proceedings of the Fourth Conference March 22-26, 2004 Las Cruces, New Mexico Technical Coordinators: Patricia Barlow-Irick Largo Canyon School Counselor, NM John Anderson U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Pinal AMA Low Water Use/Drought Tolerant Plant List
    Arizona Department of Water Resources Pinal Active Management Area Low-Water-Use/Drought-Tolerant Plant List Official Regulatory List for the Pinal Active Management Area Fourth Management Plan Arizona Department of Water Resources 1110 West Washington St. Ste. 310 Phoenix, AZ 85007 www.azwater.gov 602-771-8585 Pinal Active Management Area Low-Water-Use/Drought-Tolerant Plant List Acknowledgements The Pinal Active Management Area (AMA) Low-Water-Use/Drought-Tolerant Plants List is an adoption of the Phoenix AMA Low-Water-Use/Drought-Tolerant Plants List (Phoenix List). The Phoenix List was prepared in 2004 by the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) in cooperation with the Landscape Technical Advisory Committee of the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association, comprised of experts from the Desert Botanical Garden, the Arizona Department of Transporation and various municipal, nursery and landscape specialists. ADWR extends its gratitude to the following members of the Plant List Advisory Committee for their generous contribution of time and expertise: Rita Jo Anthony, Wild Seed Judy Mielke, Logan Simpson Design John Augustine, Desert Tree Farm Terry Mikel, U of A Cooperative Extension Robyn Baker, City of Scottsdale Jo Miller, City of Glendale Louisa Ballard, ASU Arboritum Ron Moody, Dixileta Gardens Mike Barry, City of Chandler Ed Mulrean, Arid Zone Trees Richard Bond, City of Tempe Kent Newland, City of Phoenix Donna Difrancesco, City of Mesa Steve Priebe, City of Phornix Joe Ewan, Arizona State University Janet Rademacher, Mountain States Nursery Judy Gausman, AZ Landscape Contractors Assn. Rick Templeton, City of Phoenix Glenn Fahringer, Earth Care Cathy Rymer, Town of Gilbert Cheryl Goar, Arizona Nurssery Assn.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Desert Bighorn Sheep Overpass Effectiveness: U.S
    SPR-710 MAY 2017 Evaluation of Desert Bighorn Sheep Overpass Effectiveness: U.S. Route 93 Long-Term Monitoring Arizona Department of Transportation Research Center Evaluation of Desert Bighorn Sheep Overpass Effectiveness: U.S. Route 93 Long-Term Monitoring SPR-710 May 2017 Prepared by: Jeffrey W. Gagnon, Chad D. Loberger, Kari S. Ogren, Scott C. Sprague, Susan R. Boe, and Raymond E. Schweinsburg Arizona Game and Fish Department Wildlife Contracts Branch 5000 W. Carefree Highway Phoenix, AZ 85068 Published by: Arizona Department of Transportation 206 S. 17th Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85007 in cooperation with Federal Highway Administration U.S. Department of Transportation Disclaimer This report was funded in part through grants from the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data, and for the use or adaptation of previously published material, presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Arizona Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Trade or manufacturers’ names that may appear herein are cited only because they are considered essential to the objectives of the report. The U.S. government and the State of Arizona do not endorse products or manufacturers. This report is subject to the provisions of 23 USC § 409.
    [Show full text]
  • Phenology of Desert Shrubs in Southern Nye County, Nevada T
    Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs Volume 4 Soil–Plant–Animal Relationships Bearing on Revegetation and Land Reclamation in Nevada Article 2 Deserts 10-1-1980 Phenology of desert shrubs in southern Nye County, Nevada T. L. Ackerman Laboratory of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024 E. M. Romney Laboratory of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024 A. Wallace Laboratory of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024 J. E. Kinnear Laboratory of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024 Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbnm Recommended Citation Ackerman, T. L.; Romney, E. M.; Wallace, A.; and Kinnear, J. E. (1980) "Phenology of desert shrubs in southern Nye County, Nevada," Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs: Vol. 4 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbnm/vol4/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. PHENOLOGY OF DESERT SHRUBS IN SOUTHERN NYE COUNTY, NEVADA E. Kinnear 1 T. L. Ackerman', E. M. Romney . V Wallace', and J. Abstract.- This study was done to document the variability in time of phenological events at different locations temperature data on the Nevada Test Site. Phenological events for desert shrubs were recorded, and rainfall and southern were gathered for four to six years at eight sites that are located within the northern Mojave Desert, the Great Basin Desert, and the transitional zone between them.
    [Show full text]
  • Ungulate Diets in the Lower Grand Canyon
    Table 1. Average yield (mg) of plants per pot this study appear to warrant continued method is based on microscopic counts of grown on under, between, and garden soils. study into the effects of fertilizer on cutinized epidermal fragments and ligni- Weights are for the aboveground portions of saltbush establishment. Field studies in fied cell walls remaining after digestion the plants only. which different rates and types of fertil- (Ward, 1969; Free et al., 1970; Stewart izer are applied should provide more Soil’ and Stewart, 1970; Hansen, 1972). If the conclusive evidence as to the practicality quantification method of Sparks and Treatment Between Under Garden of facilitating large scale saltbush estab- Malechek (1967) is used, the percentage lishment with fertilization. Fertilized 174.8 a 149.3 a 135.2 a of relative density of plant fragments Unfertilized 72.5 b 85.8 b 138.6 a discerned in the dung of herbivores is Literature Cited considered to be similar to the percentage ‘Yield values followed by the same letter in any column or row were not significantly Anderson, B. L. 1972. Growth response and of dry weights for the ingested plants. different (P = 0.05). Significance was deter- deer utilization of fertilized browse. MS Even if the discernibility of plant frag- mined using the student t test. Thesis, New Mexico State University. ments is changed by digestion, the magni- Cable, D. R. 1972. Fourwing saltbush revegeta- tude is not generally great enough to tion trials in southern Arizona. J. Range destroy the identifying characteristics. Manage. 25: 150-153. unfertilized soils, whereas the garden soil Cook, C.
    [Show full text]
  • Scientific Section
    SCIENTIFICSECTION A STUDY OF EPHEDRA NgVADENSIS.* BY RALPH E. TERRY. CHAPTERI. INTRODUCTION. Purpose of the Study.-From time to time, specimens of Epkedra ‘mvadensis, known as “Mexican Tea,” have been submitted for analysis. A study of the available literature indicates that there is some question as to the active constitu- ents of this drug. This research was undertaken to determine the constituents and the therapeutic properties of the plant Ephedra nevadensis, so that they might be more clearly understood and made available. Botanical Classification of Ephedra.-The genus Eplzedra, Family Gtzetacece, may be divided into three geographical groups as follows: 1. The A siafic Croup.--This group consists of Ephedra vuZguris and its varieties, and Ephedra distachyn. 2. The European Plant.-This is chiefly the variety helvetica of Ephedra vulgaris. 3. The American Group.-Some six species of Ephedra have been described as native of North America: five of these are mentioned as found in the California area (1). The six species are : (a) I?. calijorornica, Watson (“Proc. Am. Acad.,” 14, 300, (1879)). Localities, Mohave Desert (Lone Willow Spring) and in Panamint Valley, Whitewater (Riverside County), Campo and Jacumba Hot Springs, San Diego County, Tia Juana. (b) E. nevadenszs, Watson (Ibd., 298). Localities, general in the Mohavc Desert in the Juniper helt, near Acton, Jacumba Hot Springs. (c) E. trifurca, Torrey in Emory (“Pas. R. R. Rep.,”152 (1848)). Localities, said to bc abundant along the Mohave River around Daggett. (d) E. uiridis, Coville (“Centr. Nat. Herb.,” 4, 220 (1893)). Localities, Mt. Pines, Sespe Creek, Bear Valley, Cushenherry Springs, San Bernardino Mts.
    [Show full text]
  • Desert Plants of Utah
    DESERT PLANTS OF UTAH Original booklet and drawings by Berniece A. Andersen Revised May 1996 HG 505 FOREWORD The original Desert Plants of Utah by Berniece A. Andersen has been a remarkably popular book, serving as a tribute to both her botanical knowledge of the region and to her enthusiastic manner. For these reasons, we have tried to retain as much of the original work, in both content and style, as possible. Some modifications were necessary. We have updated scientific names in accordance with changes that have occurred since the time of the first publication and we have also incorporated new geographic distributional data that have accrued with additional years of botanical exploration. The most obvious difference pertains to the organization of species. In the original version, species were organized phylogenetically, reflecting the predominant concepts of evolutionary relationships among plant families at that time. In an effort to make this version more user-friendly for the beginner, we have chosen to arrange the plants primarily by flower color. We hope that these changes will not diminish the enjoyment gained by anyone familiar with the original. We would also like to thank Larry A. Rupp, Extension Horticulture Specialist, for critical review of the draft and for the cover photo. Linda Allen, Assistant Curator, Intermountain Herbarium Donna H. Falkenborg, Extension Editor TABLE OF CONTENTS The Nature of Deserts ........................................................1 Utah’s Deserts ........................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Sego Lily Newsletter
    Sego Lily Summer 2015 38 (2) Summer 2015 (volume 38 number 2) In this issue: Unidentified Flowering Object. 2 Bulletin Board . 3 2015 Penstemon Festival . 4 Utah Plant Families: The Mormon Teas (Ephedraceae). 5 Grow This: Grasses . 8 Fountain Grass (Pennisetum setaceum), an Invasive Weed Heading for Southern Utah . 10 Green joint-fir (Ephedra viridis) is one of five species or varieties of Ephedra native to Utah. The pioneers steeped the green, leafless branches in hot water to make a revivifying (but foul-tasting) tea, earning the plant its alternate common names of Mormon tea or Brigham tea. Joint-firs and their relatives in the Ephedraceae have a mix of characteristics typical of both gymnosperms (naked seeds) and angiosperms (comparable wood anatomy and reproductive features), leading some authorities to suggest that the family might be the “missing link” in the origin of the flowering plants. More recent evidence, however, suggests the joint-firs are distant cousins rather than actual ancestors. Steve Hegji took this photo of flower-like staminate (“male”) cones of E. viridis. For more information, see the article on page 5 of this issue. Copyright 2015 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Committees Website: For late-breaking news, the Conservation: Bill King & Tony Frates UNPS store, the Sego Lily archives, Chap- Education: Ty Harrison ter events, sources of native plants, Horticulture: Maggie Wolf the digital Utah Rare Plant Field Guide, Important Plant Areas: Mindy Wheeler and more, go to unps.org. Many thanks Invasive Weeds: Susan Fitts to Xmission for sponsoring our web- Publications: Larry Meyer & W.
    [Show full text]
  • SNRPC Regional Plant List
    1 Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition Regional Plant List Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition RegionalRegional PlantPlant ListList ApprovedApproved JuneJune 28,28, 20112011 1 Acknowledgements This Regional Plant List has been the effort of literally countless hours of work from members of the Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition’s (SNRPC) Regional Urban Forestry Work Group and local arboriculture and horticulture experts. Special thanks go to the following individuals for their contributions: Shane Ammerman, Clark County Paul Andricopulos, Chair, City of Henderson Cleto Arceo, NV Energy Andréa Baker, Southern Nevada Water Authority Dave Cornoyer, City of Las Vegas Adria DeCorte, Nevada Division of Forestry Greg Deuley, TruGreen Landcare Paula Garrett, University of Nevada Las Vegas Steve Glimp, Schilling Horticulture Group, Inc. Bob Hoyes, City of North Las Vegas Jon Jainga, City of North Las Vegas Michael Johnson, City of Henderson John Jones, City of North Las Vegas Teri Knight, United States Department of Agriculture Matt Koepnick, Nevada Division of Forestry Paul Noe, Star Nursery Lisa Ortega, City of Henderson Craig Palmer, University of Nevada Las Vegas Alan Paulson, Clark County School District Lynn Phelps, professional arborist M.L. Robinson, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension Norm Schilling, Schilling Horticulture Group, Inc. Daniel Sinagra, Clark County Dennis Swartzell, Horticultural Consultants, Inc. Russ Thompson, Clark County Amie Wojtech, City of Henderson On the cover: Acacia Demonstration
    [Show full text]