DOCSLIB.ORG

Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Region Inventory and Monitoring Initiative

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Region Inventory and Monitoring Initiative Identification of Priority Resources of Concern For Tetlin NWR: Methods & Results March 2017 Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Region Inventory and Monitoring Initiative Identification of Priority Resources of Concern for Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge: Methods and Results Prepared by: Carol J. Damberg, Kristin DuBour, and Michael Cunanan U. S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Region Inventory and Monitoring Initiative 1101 E. Tudor Rd Anchorage, AK 99503 March 2017 1 Identification of Priority Resources of Concern For Tetlin NWR: Methods & Results March 2017 Suggested Citation: U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. Identification of Priority Resources of Concern for Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge: Methods and Results. National Wildlife Refuge System, Inventory and Monitoring Initiative, Anchorage, Alaska. 215 pp. ServCat Record: 70577 2 Identification of Priority Resources of Concern For Tetlin NWR: Methods & Results March 2017 Contents List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................. 4 List of Tables .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Abbreviations .............................................................................................................................................. 5 Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 1 - Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 7 Refuge Description ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Refuge Conservation Planning: Past and Present ..................................................................................... 10 Chapter 2 – Methods ................................................................................................................................. 11 Project Team ............................................................................................................................................. 11 Step 1: Identify Refuge Purposes .............................................................................................................. 12 Step 2: Identify Refuge System Resources of Concern ............................................................................ 30 Step 3: Address Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health ............................................ 31 Step 4: Compile Comprehensive List of Refuge Resources of Concern .................................................. 32 Step 5: Identify Priority Refuge Resources of Concern............................................................................ 34 Step 5.1: Define filters, criteria, and weights for ROC ranking ........................................................... 35 Step 5.2: Select the final subset of priority ROCs ................................................................................ 42 Chapter 3 - Results and Discussion .......................................................................................................... 44 Rational for Final Selection of priority ROCs .......................................................................................... 44 Next Steps For Tetlin NWR ...................................................................................................................... 51 Discussion of Overall Process .................................................................................................................. 52 References ................................................................................................................................................. 55 Appendix A. List of conservation and invasive species lists and plans used and/or evaluated to identify Resources of Concern (ROCs) for Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge, Tok, Alaska (2016). ...................... 59 Appendix B. Comprehensive list of Resources of Concern (ROCs) for Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge with conservation plan scores. .................................................................................................................. 70 Appendix C. Comprehensive list of Resources of Concern (ROCs) for Tetlin NWR with assigned criteria scores and final overall total ranking scores. ................................................................................ 80 Appendix D. Project team and other experts identified for assistance to inform selection of priority resources of concern for Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge, 2016. Shaded boxes indicate core team. ... 209 3 Identification of Priority Resources of Concern For Tetlin NWR: Methods & Results March 2017 List of Figures Figure 1 Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) is identified by green shaded region and is located near the U.S. - Canada border. Figure taken from Tetlin NWR Comprehensive Conservation Plan (2008). ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 2. Initial Resources of Concern (ROC) considered as potential priorities for Tetlin NWR after applying criteria and scores to calculate final rankings. Numbers indicate scores for each ROC relative to the others. Green boxes are ecological communities and ovals represent individual species. ............. 46 Figure 3 Initial priority Resources of Concern selected by Tetlin NWR staff after considering all potential ROCs and their relative ranking values. Green boxes represent ecological communities and ovals indicate specific species or species groups with possible nested ROCs. ........................................ 47 Figure 4. Final selection of priority ROCs selected by Tetlin NWR. Green boxes represent the priority ecological communities that resulted from lumping nested ecological communities. Ovals indicate specific species or species groups with possible nested ROCs................................................................. 48 List of Tables Table 1. Core planning team to identify Priority Resources of Concern for the Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge, Tok, Alaska. ................................................................................................................................ 11 Table 2. Summary of the establishment legislation for Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge, Tok, Alaska. 14 Table 3 Summary of species and supporting ecosystems identified in Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge’s purpose or establishing legislation. ........................................................................................................... 19 Table 4. Summary of biological integrity, diversity and environmental health (BIDEH) for Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge. The following ecological communities were added to the Tetlin ROC list for evaluation to be considered as potential priority ROCs: Forest Conifer, Forest Deciduous, Mixed Forest, Needleleaf Woodland, Lakes, Rivers, Riparian, Shrubland, Wetland, Tundra, Barren Ground, Steppe Bluff Community, and Glacial Dunes. ..................................................................................................... 23 Table 5. Criteria and filters for ranking Resources of Concern (ROCs) for Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge, Tok, Alaska (2016). ..................................................................................................................... 36 Table 6. Priority Resources of Concern identified for Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge, Tok, Alaska, that will be the focus for future management and monitoring actions. Priorities were identified by Tetlin NWR staff and Alaska Region I&M staff in 2016. .................................................................................. 45 Table 7. Products created during the process of identifying Tetlin NWR priority resources of concern, October 2016. ............................................................................................................................................ 53 Table 8. List of conservation and invasive species lists and plans used and/or evaluated to identify Resources of Concern (ROCs) for Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge, Tok, Alaska (2016). The below plans were used to provide rankings for the ‘Best science and professional judgment’ criteria and determine invasive species that should be filtered from consideration as a priority ROC. ...................... 59 Table 9. List of sources of species occurrence data used to populate the Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge, Tok, Alaska, comprehensive Resource of Concern (ROC) table. ............................................................ 68 4 Identification of Priority Resources of Concern For Tetlin NWR: Methods & Results March 2017 Table 10. List of Resources of Concern (ROCs) for Tetlin NWR that were identified in conservation plans as high priority. Table indicates sum total of plans for each ROC. The sum total was used to determine Score values for the ‘best science and professional judgment’ criteria in the overall ROC prioritization process. Only ROCs identified in one or more plans are included in this table. ............... 70 Abbreviations ANILCA Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Willows of Interior Alaska
    1 Willows of Interior Alaska Dominique M. Collet US Fish and Wildlife Service 2004 2 Willows of Interior Alaska Acknowledgements The development of this willow guide has been made possible thanks to funding from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge - order 70181-12-M692. Funding for printing was made available through a collaborative partnership of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Alaska, Department of Defense; Pacific North- west Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Department of Agriculture; National Park Service, and Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior; and Bonanza Creek Long Term Ecological Research Program, University of Alaska Fairbanks. The data for the distribution maps were provided by George Argus, Al Batten, Garry Davies, Rob deVelice, and Carolyn Parker. Carol Griswold, George Argus, Les Viereck and Delia Person provided much improvement to the manuscript by their careful editing and suggestions. I want to thank Delia Person, of the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, for initiating and following through with the development and printing of this guide. Most of all, I am especially grateful to Pamela Houston whose support made the writing of this guide possible. Any errors or omissions are solely the responsibility of the author. Disclaimer This publication is designed to provide accurate information on willows from interior Alaska. If expert knowledge is required, services of an experienced botanist should be sought. Contents
    [Show full text]
  • Efficacy and Host Specificity Compared Between Two Populations of The
    Biological Control 65 (2013) 53–62 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Biological Control journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ybcon Efficacy and host specificity compared between two populations of the psyllid Aphalara itadori, candidates for biological control of invasive knotweeds in North America ⇑ Fritzi Grevstad a, , Richard Shaw b, Robert Bourchier c, Paolo Sanguankeo d, Ghislaine Cortat e, Richard C. Reardon f a Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA b CABI, Bakeham Lane, Egham, Surrey TW20 9TY, United Kingdom c Agriculture and AgriFood Canada-Lethbridge Research Centre, Lethbridge, AB, Canada T1J 4B1 d Olympic Natural Resources Center, University of Washington, Forks, WA 98331, USA e CABI, CH 2800 Delemont, Switzerland f USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA highlights graphical abstract " Two populations of the psyllid Aphalara itadori are effective at reducing knotweed growth and biomass. " The two populations differ in their performance among different knotweed species. " Development of A. itadori occurred infrequently on several non-target plant species. " The psyllid exhibited non-preference and an inability to persist on non- target plants. article info abstract Article history: Invasive knotweeds are large perennial herbs in the Polygonaceae in the genus Fallopia that are native to Received 2 February 2012 Asia and invasive in North America. They include Fallopia japonica (Japanese knotweed), F. sachalinensis Accepted 4 January 2013 (giant knotweed), and a hybrid species F. x bohemica (Bohemian knotweed). Widespread throughout Available online 12 January 2013 the continent and difficult to control by mechanical or chemical methods, these plants are good targets for classical biological control.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to the Identification of Salix (Willows) in Alberta
    A Guide to the identification of Salix (willows) in Alberta George W. Argus 2008 Devonian Botanical Garden Workshop on willow identification Jasper National Park, Alberta 2 Available from: George W. Argus 310 Haskins Rd, Merrickville R3, Ontario, Canada K0G 1N0 email: [email protected] http://aknhp.uaa.alaska.edu/willow/index.html 3 CONTENTS Preface............................................................................................................................... 5 Salicaceae ...........…………………...........……........................................……..........…. 8 Classification ..........……………….…..….................................................….............…. 9 Some Useful Morphological Characters .......................................................….............. 11 Key to the Species.............................................................................................................13 Taxonomic Treatment .........................................................…..……….………............ 18 Glossary .....………………………………………....…..................………...........….... 61 Cited and Selected References ......................................................................................... 64 Salix Web Sites ...................……..................................……..................……............…. 68 Distribution Maps ............................................................................................................ 69 TABLES Table 1. Comparison of Salix athabascensis and Salix pedicellaris ..............................
    [Show full text]
  • Polygonaceae of Alberta
    AN ILLUSTRATED KEY TO THE POLYGONACEAE OF ALBERTA Compiled and writen by Lorna Allen & Linda Kershaw April 2019 © Linda J. Kershaw & Lorna Allen This key was compiled using informaton primarily from Moss (1983), Douglas et. al. (1999) and the Flora North America Associaton (2005). Taxonomy follows VAS- CAN (Brouillet, 2015). The main references are listed at the end of the key. Please let us know if there are ways in which the kay can be improved. The 2015 S-ranks of rare species (S1; S1S2; S2; S2S3; SU, according to ACIMS, 2015) are noted in superscript (S1;S2;SU) afer the species names. For more details go to the ACIMS web site. Similarly, exotc species are followed by a superscript X, XX if noxious and XXX if prohibited noxious (X; XX; XXX) according to the Alberta Weed Control Act (2016). POLYGONACEAE Buckwheat Family 1a Key to Genera 01a Dwarf annual plants 1-4(10) cm tall; leaves paired or nearly so; tepals 3(4); stamens (1)3(5) .............Koenigia islandica S2 01b Plants not as above; tepals 4-5; stamens 3-8 ..................................02 02a Plants large, exotic, perennial herbs spreading by creeping rootstocks; fowering stems erect, hollow, 0.5-2(3) m tall; fowers with both ♂ and ♀ parts ............................03 02b Plants smaller, native or exotic, perennial or annual herbs, with or without creeping rootstocks; fowering stems usually <1 m tall; fowers either ♂ or ♀ (unisexual) or with both ♂ and ♀ parts .......................04 3a 03a Flowering stems forming dense colonies and with distinct joints (like bamboo
    [Show full text]
  • The Radiation of Satyrini Butterflies (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae): A
    Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2011, 161, 64–87. With 8 figures The radiation of Satyrini butterflies (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae): a challenge for phylogenetic methods CARLOS PEÑA1,2*, SÖREN NYLIN1 and NIKLAS WAHLBERG1,3 1Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden 2Museo de Historia Natural, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Av. Arenales 1256, Apartado 14-0434, Lima-14, Peru 3Laboratory of Genetics, Department of Biology, University of Turku, 20014 Turku, Finland Received 24 February 2009; accepted for publication 1 September 2009 We have inferred the most comprehensive phylogenetic hypothesis to date of butterflies in the tribe Satyrini. In order to obtain a hypothesis of relationships, we used maximum parsimony and model-based methods with 4435 bp of DNA sequences from mitochondrial and nuclear genes for 179 taxa (130 genera and eight out-groups). We estimated dates of origin and diversification for major clades, and performed a biogeographic analysis using a dispersal–vicariance framework, in order to infer a scenario of the biogeographical history of the group. We found long-branch taxa that affected the accuracy of all three methods. Moreover, different methods produced incongruent phylogenies. We found that Satyrini appeared around 42 Mya in either the Neotropical or the Eastern Palaearctic, Oriental, and/or Indo-Australian regions, and underwent a quick radiation between 32 and 24 Mya, during which time most of its component subtribes originated. Several factors might have been important for the diversification of Satyrini: the ability to feed on grasses; early habitat shift into open, non-forest habitats; and geographic bridges, which permitted dispersal over marine barriers, enabling the geographic expansions of ancestors to new environ- ments that provided opportunities for geographic differentiation, and diversification.
    [Show full text]
  • Ours to Save: the Distribution, Status & Conservation Needs of Canada's Endemic Species
    Ours to Save The distribution, status & conservation needs of Canada’s endemic species June 4, 2020 Version 1.0 Ours to Save: The distribution, status & conservation needs of Canada’s endemic species Additional information and updates to the report can be found at the project website: natureconservancy.ca/ourstosave Suggested citation: Enns, Amie, Dan Kraus and Andrea Hebb. 2020. Ours to save: the distribution, status and conservation needs of Canada’s endemic species. NatureServe Canada and Nature Conservancy of Canada. Report prepared by Amie Enns (NatureServe Canada) and Dan Kraus (Nature Conservancy of Canada). Mapping and analysis by Andrea Hebb (Nature Conservancy of Canada). Cover photo credits (l-r): Wood Bison, canadianosprey, iNaturalist; Yukon Draba, Sean Blaney, iNaturalist; Salt Marsh Copper, Colin Jones, iNaturalist About NatureServe Canada A registered Canadian charity, NatureServe Canada and its network of Canadian Conservation Data Centres (CDCs) work together and with other government and non-government organizations to develop, manage, and distribute authoritative knowledge regarding Canada’s plants, animals, and ecosystems. NatureServe Canada and the Canadian CDCs are members of the international NatureServe Network, spanning over 80 CDCs in the Americas. NatureServe Canada is the Canadian affiliate of NatureServe, based in Arlington, Virginia, which provides scientific and technical support to the international network. About the Nature Conservancy of Canada The Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) works to protect our country’s most precious natural places. Proudly Canadian, we empower people to safeguard the lands and waters that sustain life. Since 1962, NCC and its partners have helped to protect 14 million hectares (35 million acres), coast to coast to coast.
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan Botanical Club State Newsletter
    Volume 24, Issue 1 • April 2018 Michigan Botanical Club State Newsletter http://michbotclub.org/ Corresponding Secretary’s Report n this issue, we have the information you will need to Spring Foray and Fall Meeting Schedule Iregister for the 2018 Foray. The White Pine Chapter has put together a wide range schedule of field trips, workshops and YEAR SPRING FALL speakers. 2018 White Pine Chapter Huron Valley Chapter Awards, remembrances of members who have passed this 2019 State Board White Pine Chapter year and the Michigan Botanical Foundation, as well as the 2020 Southeast Chapter State Board President’s report round out the issue. 2021 Southwestern Chapter Southeast Chapter As MBC President, Garrett Crow mentions in his report, the Big Tree Program has been revived. It is time to start looking Appreciation: for the big trees out there and reporting them. hank you to HVC members Andrea Matthies and Jim Enjoy and see you at the Foray! TOdell for transporting and setting up the display panels Respectfully Submitted, at the Wildflower Association Conference. We appreciate your efforts and enthusiasm. Sheila Bourgoin Ariseaema Editor and Corresponding Secretary Contents Announcements Corresponding Secretary’s Report 1 Fall Meeting: The MBC Fall meeting, hosted by the Announcements 1 Huron Valley Chapter will take place on Saturday, President’s Report 2 September 29, 2018 at the Discovery Center, DNR 2018 Spring Foray - May 25-27 3 Waterloo State Recreation Area. Spring Foray 2018 Schedule 5 The MBC Treasurer Position Is Still Open Spring
    [Show full text]
  • Response of Cypripedium and Goodyera to Disturbance in the Thunder Bay Area
    Lakehead University Knowledge Commons,http://knowledgecommons.lakeheadu.ca Electronic Theses and Dissertations Undergraduate theses 2018 Response of Cypripedium and Goodyera to disturbance in the Thunder Bay area Davis, Danielle http://knowledgecommons.lakeheadu.ca/handle/2453/4426 Downloaded from Lakehead University, KnowledgeCommons 5(63216(2)&<35,3(',80$1'*22'<(5$72',6785%$1&(,1 7+(7+81'(5%$<$5($ E\ 'DQLHOOH'DYLV )$&8/7<2)1$785$/5(6285&(60$1$*(0(17 /$.(+($'81,9(56,7< 7+81'(5%$<217$5,2 0D\ RESPONSE OF CYPRIPEDIUM AND GOODYERA TO DISTURBANCE IN THE THUNDER BAY AREA by Danielle Davis An Undergraduate Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Honours Bachelor of Environmental Management Faculty of Natural Resources Management Lakehead University May 2018 Major Advisor Second Reader ii LIBRARY RIGHTS STATEMENT In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the HBEM degree at Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, I agree that the University will make it freely available for inspection. This thesis is made available by my authority solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part (except as permitted by the Copyright Laws) without my written authority. Signature: Date: iii A CAUTION TO THE READER This HBEM thesis has been through a semi-formal process of review and comment by at least two faculty members. It is made available for loan by the Faculty of Natural Resources Management for the purpose of advancing the practice of professional and scientific forestry.
    [Show full text]
  • Alberta Wild Species General Status Listing 2010
    Fish & Wildlife Division Sustainable Resource Development Alberta Wild Species General Status Listing - 2010 Species at Risk ELCODE Group ID Scientific Name Common Name Status 2010 Status 2005 Status 2000 Background Lichens Cladonia cenotea Powdered Funnel Lichen Secure Cladonia cervicornis Lichens Ladder Lichen Secure verticillata Lichens Cladonia chlorophaea Mealy Pixie-cup Lichen Secure Lichens Cladonia coccifera Eastern Boreal Pixie-cup Lichen Undetermined Lichens Cladonia coniocraea Common Pixie Powderhorn Secure Lichens Cladonia cornuta Bighorn Pixie Lichen Secure Lichens Cladonia cornuta cornuta Bighorn Pixie Lichen Secure Lichens Cladonia crispata Organpipe Lichen Secure Lichens Cladonia cristatella British Soldiers Lichen Secure Cladonia Lichens Mealy Pixie-cup Lichen Undetermined cryptochlorophaea Lichens Cladonia cyanipes Blue-footed Pixie Lichen Sensitive Lichens Cladonia deformis Lesser Sulphur-cup Lichen Secure Lichens Cladonia digitata Fingered Pixie-cup Lichen May Be At Risk Lichens Cladonia ecmocyna Orange-footed Pixie Lichen Secure Lichens Cladonia fimbriata Trumpeting Lichen Secure Lichens Cladonia furcata Forking Lichen Sensitive Lichens Cladonia glauca Glaucous Pixie Lichen May Be At Risk Lichens Cladonia gracilis gracilis Gracile Lichen May Be At Risk Lichens Cladonia gracilis turbinata Bronzed Lichen Secure Lichens Cladonia grayi Gray's Pixie-cup Lichen May Be At Risk Lichens Cladonia humilis Humble Pixie-cup Lichen Undetermined Lichens Cladonia macilenta Lipstick Powderhorn Lichen Secure Cladonia macilenta Lichens
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology of Woody Riparian Vegetation in Tributaries of the Upper Grande Ronde River Basin, Oregon
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Danna J. Lytjen for the degree of Master of Science in Fisheries Science presented on June 10, 1998. Title: Ecology of Woody Riparian Vegetation in Tributaries of the Upper Grande Ronde River Basin, Oregon. Abstract approvedRedacted for Privacy J. Boone Kauffman Two studies on Catherine Creek and Meadow Creek of the Upper Grande Ronde River basin, quantified several physical and biotic influences on woody riparian community composition and structure. The Catherine Creek study examined the association of woody riparian species with elevational and geomorphic gradients. The Meadow Creek study examined the influence of mammal herbivory on composition and abundance of woody riparian species. At Catherine Creek, twenty nine plots were established at 50 m intervals of elevation from near the stream origin at 2207 m in the Wallowa Mountains to the foothills of the Grande Ronde Valley at 988 m. Woody plant community composition was associated with the dominant environmental variable, elevation. Distribution of dominant riparian species was strongly associated with fluvial surfaces. Black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) was associated with gravel and cobble bars proximal to the stream channel, and along with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) was also associated with elevated boulder bars. Alders (A. incana and A. viridis) and willows (Salix bebbiana, S. boothii, S. exigua, S. lucida, S. melanopsis, S. prolixa, and S. sitchensis) were associated with annual floodplains. At Meadow Creek, grazing by cattle was ended in 1991 on the entire study reach and three deer and elk exclosures were built within the reach adjacent to the creek. Inside deer/elk exclosures from 1991 to 1995, mean heights of tagged cottonwoods, willows, and alders increased by 86% to 180%.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plants of Humboldt Bay's Dunes and Wetlands Published by U.S
    Vascular Plants of Humboldt Bay's Dunes and Wetlands Published by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service G. Leppig and A. Pickart and California Department of Fish Game Release 4.0 June 2014* www.fws.gov/refuge/humboldt_bay/ Habitat- Habitat - Occurs on Species Status Occurs within Synonyms Common name specific broad Lanphere- Jepson Manual (2012) (see codes at end) refuge (see codes at end) (see codes at end) Ma-le'l Units UD PW EW Adoxaceae Sambucus racemosa L. red elderberry RF, CDF, FS X X N X X Aizoaceae Carpobrotus chilensis (Molina) sea fig DM X E X X N.E. Br. Carpobrotus edulis ( L.) N.E. Br. Iceplant DM X E, I X Alismataceae lanceleaf water Alisma lanceolatum With. FM X E plantain northern water Alisma triviale Pursh FM X N plantain Alliaceae three-cornered Allium triquetrum L. FS, FM, DM X X E leek Allium unifolium Kellogg one-leaf onion CDF X N X X Amaryllidaceae Amaryllis belladonna L. belladonna lily DS, AW X X E Narcissus pseudonarcissus L. daffodil AW, DS, SW X X E X Anacardiaceae Toxicodendron diversilobum Torrey poison oak CDF, RF X X N X X & A. Gray (E. Greene) Apiaceae Angelica lucida L. seacoast angelica BM X X N, C X X Anthriscus caucalis M. Bieb bur chevril DM X E Cicuta douglasii (DC.) J. Coulter & western water FM X N Rose hemlock Conium maculatum L. poison hemlock RF, AW X I X Daucus carota L. Queen Anne's lace AW, DM X X I X American wild Daucus pusillus Michaux DM, SW X X N X X carrot Foeniculum vulgare Miller sweet fennel AW, FM, SW X X I X Glehnia littoralis (A.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Willows of Shoshone National Forest
    United States Department of Agriculture Guide to the Willows Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station of Shoshone National General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-83 Forest October 2001 Walter Fertig Stuart Markow Natural Resources Conservation Service Cody Conservation District Abstract Fertig, Walter; Markow, Stuart. 2001. Guide to the willows of Shoshone National Forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-83. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 79 p. Correct identification of willow species is an important part of land management. This guide describes the 29 willows that are known to occur on the Shoshone National Forest, Wyoming. Keys to pistillate catkins and leaf morphology are included with illustrations and plant descriptions. Key words: Salix, willows, Shoshone National Forest, identification The Authors Walter Fertig has been Heritage Botanist with the University of Wyoming’s Natural Diversity Database (WYNDD) since 1992. He has conducted rare plant surveys and natural areas inventories throughout Wyoming, with an emphasis on the desert basins of southwest Wyoming and the montane and alpine regions of the Wind River and Absaroka ranges. Fertig is the author of the Wyoming Rare Plant Field Guide, and has written over 100 technical reports on rare plants of the State. Stuart Markow received his Masters Degree in botany from the University of Wyoming in 1993 for his floristic survey of the Targhee National Forest in Idaho and Wyoming. He is currently a Botanical Consultant with a research emphasis on the montane flora of the Greater Yellowstone area and the taxonomy of grasses. Acknowledgments Sincere thanks are extended to Kent Houston and Dave Henry of the Shoshone National Forest for providing Forest Service funding for this project.
    [Show full text]