DOCSLIB.ORG

DEIS Reasonable Alternatives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DEIS Reasonable Alternatives 1 DEIS Reasonable Alternatives 2 Biological Resources Technical Report 3 SH 68 from I-2/US 83 to I-69C/US 281 4 CSJs: 3629-01-001, -002, -003 5 Hidalgo County, Texas 6 Texas Department of Transportation - Pharr District 7 February 2018 The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried-out by TxDOT pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327 and a Memorandum of Understanding dated December 16, 2014, and executed by FHWA and TxDOT. DEIS REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES SH 68 FROM I-2/US 83 TO I-69C/US 281 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Table of Contents 2 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 3 Project Description .................................................................................................... 1 4 2014 Modified 2 Alternative ..................................................................... 2 5 2014 PSM Alternative ............................................................................... 3 6 FM 1423 PSM Alternative ......................................................................... 3 7 No-Build Alternative ................................................................................... 4 8 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 4 9 Applicable Regulations, Executive Orders (EOs), and Memoranda of 10 Understanding (MOU) ............................................................................................... 4 11 Endangered Species Act (ESA) .................................................................. 4 12 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) ............................................... 5 13 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) .............................................................. 5 14 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) ....................................... 5 15 State Endangered Species Regulations ................................................... 6 16 Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) .................................................. 6 17 Magnuson Stevens Fisheries Conservation Management Act (MSFCA) 7 18 Executive Order (EO) 13112 on Invasive Species and Executive 19 Memorandum (EM) on Environmentally and Economically Beneficial 20 Landscaping ............................................................................................... 7 21 TxDOT-Texas Parks and Wildlife Department MOU ................................. 7 22 Description of Review Methods ............................................................................... 8 23 Description of Habitat Assessment Methods .......................................................... 8 24 RESOURCES IN THE STUDY AREA ...................................................................................... 8 25 Terrestrial and Aquatic Habitats .............................................................................. 9 26 Vegetation and Land Use ....................................................................................... 10 27 EMST Types .............................................................................................. 10 28 Land Use/Land Cover Types ................................................................... 12 29 ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES ..................................................................................... 13 30 Impacts to Vegetation ............................................................................................. 13 31 2014 Modified 2 Alternative ................................................................... 13 32 2014 PSM Alternative ............................................................................. 16 33 FM 1423 PSM Alternative ....................................................................... 17 34 No-Build Alternative ................................................................................. 17 35 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) ............................................................ 18 36 Invasive Species and Beneficial Landscaping ...................................................... 18 37 Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) .................................................................. 19 38 Threatened, Endangered, and Other Protected Species...................................... 20 CSJS: 3629-01-001, -002, and -003 i February 2018 DEIS REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES SH 68 FROM I-2/US 83 TO I-69C/US 281 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT 1 Federally listed Threatened and Endangered Species of Potential 2 Occurrence in the Three Reasonable Alternatives from IPaC ............... 26 3 Federal-listed Threatened and Endangered Species of Potential 4 Occurrence in the Three Reasonable Alternatives from Texas Parks and 5 Wildlife Department’s Hidalgo County List of Rare Species ................. 32 6 State of Texas Threatened and Endangered Species and Species of 7 Greatest Conservation Need ................................................................... 34 8 Conservation Areas ................................................................................................. 66 9 Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) ............................................................... 67 10 Magnuson Stevens Fisheries Conservation Management Act (MSFCA) ............. 67 11 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) ........................................................................... 67 12 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) .................................................... 67 13 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................ 67 14 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 68 15 Attachments 16 Attachment A Exhibits 17 Exhibit 1. Project Location on County Map 18 Exhibit 2. Project Location on USGS Topographic Map 19 Exhibit 3. Waters of the U.S. on Aerial Map Base 20 Exhibits 4.0 through 4.13. Ecological Mapping System of Texas (EMST) 21 Exhibits 5.0 through 5.13. Land Use/Land Cover Vegetation Data 22 Exhibit 6. NRCS Soils within Study Area 23 Attachment B Biological Resources Supporting Documentation 24 Representative Photographs 25 Best Management Practices (BMPs) 26 USFWS IPaC List for Hidalgo County 27 TPWD Species List for Hidalgo County 28 NRCS-CPA-106 form 29 List of Tables 30 Table 1. EMST Vegetation Mapped Within the Three Reasonable Alternatives ...................... 14 31 Table 2. Land Use/Land Cover Data Mapped Within the Three Reasonable Alternatives ..... 15 32 Table 3. Water Resources Within the Three Reasonable Alternatives ..................................... 18 33 Table 4. Prime Farmland and NRCS-CPA-106 Score by Alternative ......................................... 19 34 Table 5. TXNDD Search Results for Element Occurrence Records and Tracked Managed 35 Areas ..................................................................................................................................... 20 36 Table 6. Federal and State-Listed Threatened and Endangered Species and Species of 37 Greatest Conservation Need in Hidalgo County ................................................................. 21 38 CSJS: 3629-01-001, -002, and -003 ii February 2018 DEIS REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES SH 68 FROM I-2/US 83 TO I-69C/US 281 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT 1 INTRODUCTION 2 The Pharr District of the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) proposes to construct 3 State Highway (SH) 68, a new highway facility from Interstate Highway (I) 2/U.S. Highway (US) 4 83 to I-69C/US 281, located in eastern Hidalgo County. The proposed project corridor would 5 begin at I-2/US 83 and travel north then west to connect to I-69C/US 281. The total length of 6 the proposed project is approximately 22 miles. 7 The purpose of this technical report is to provide descriptions of biological resources and 8 assess potential impacts for the three reasonable alternatives and the No-Build Alternative 9 identified for the proposed project. This document would serve as support for Section 4, the 10 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences of the SH 68 Draft Environmental 11 Impact Statement (DEIS). 12 Project Description 13 SH 68, as currently described in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and the 14 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), is a proposed four-lane divided rural 15 highway facility with future mainlanes and overpasses. 16 SH 68 would be constructed in several phases, as funding becomes available. Funding has 17 been secured for Phase I of the project. Funding for future phases has not yet been 18 determined. 19 Phase I would construct a new four-lane divided rural highway facility from I-2/US 83 to Farm- 20 to-Market (FM) 1925, which is also known as Monte Cristo Road. The four-lane divided facility 21 would serve as frontage roads for the ultimate facility and consist of two lanes in each 22 direction with shoulders, separated by a grassy median. Future phases would extend the four- 23 lane divided rural highway from FM 1925/Monte Cristo Road to I-69C/US 281, and eventually 24 would complete the ultimate facility by constructing the mainlanes and overpasses. The 25 proposed project is being developed as a non-tolled facility. 26 The ultimate, controlled-access facility would be contained within a 350-foot typical right-of- 27
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Herpetological Information Service No
    Type Descriptions and Type Publications OF HoBART M. Smith, 1933 through June 1999 Ernest A. Liner Houma, Louisiana smithsonian herpetological information service no. 127 2000 SMITHSONIAN HERPETOLOGICAL INFORMATION SERVICE The SHIS series publishes and distributes translations, bibliographies, indices, and similar items judged useful to individuals interested in the biology of amphibians and reptiles, but unlikely to be published in the normal technical journals. Single copies are distributed free to interested individuals. Libraries, herpetological associations, and research laboratories are invited to exchange their publications with the Division of Amphibians and Reptiles. We wish to encourage individuals to share their bibliographies, translations, etc. with other herpetologists through the SHIS series. If you have such items please contact George Zug for instructions on preparation and submission. Contributors receive 50 free copies. Please address all requests for copies and inquiries to George Zug, Division of Amphibians and Reptiles, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC 20560 USA. Please include a self-addressed mailing label with requests. Introduction Hobart M. Smith is one of herpetology's most prolific autiiors. As of 30 June 1999, he authored or co-authored 1367 publications covering a range of scholarly and popular papers dealing with such diverse subjects as taxonomy, life history, geographical distribution, checklists, nomenclatural problems, bibliographies, herpetological coins, anatomy, comparative anatomy textbooks, pet books, book reviews, abstracts, encyclopedia entries, prefaces and forwords as well as updating volumes being repnnted. The checklists of the herpetofauna of Mexico authored with Dr. Edward H. Taylor are legendary as is the Synopsis of the Herpetofalhva of Mexico coauthored with his late wife, Rozella B.
    [Show full text]
  • Xenosaurus Tzacualtipantecus. the Zacualtipán Knob-Scaled Lizard Is Endemic to the Sierra Madre Oriental of Eastern Mexico
    Xenosaurus tzacualtipantecus. The Zacualtipán knob-scaled lizard is endemic to the Sierra Madre Oriental of eastern Mexico. This medium-large lizard (female holotype measures 188 mm in total length) is known only from the vicinity of the type locality in eastern Hidalgo, at an elevation of 1,900 m in pine-oak forest, and a nearby locality at 2,000 m in northern Veracruz (Woolrich- Piña and Smith 2012). Xenosaurus tzacualtipantecus is thought to belong to the northern clade of the genus, which also contains X. newmanorum and X. platyceps (Bhullar 2011). As with its congeners, X. tzacualtipantecus is an inhabitant of crevices in limestone rocks. This species consumes beetles and lepidopteran larvae and gives birth to living young. The habitat of this lizard in the vicinity of the type locality is being deforested, and people in nearby towns have created an open garbage dump in this area. We determined its EVS as 17, in the middle of the high vulnerability category (see text for explanation), and its status by the IUCN and SEMAR- NAT presently are undetermined. This newly described endemic species is one of nine known species in the monogeneric family Xenosauridae, which is endemic to northern Mesoamerica (Mexico from Tamaulipas to Chiapas and into the montane portions of Alta Verapaz, Guatemala). All but one of these nine species is endemic to Mexico. Photo by Christian Berriozabal-Islas. amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 01 June 2013 | Volume 7 | Number 1 | e61 Copyright: © 2013 Wilson et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Com- mons Attribution–NonCommercial–NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License, which permits unrestricted use for non-com- Amphibian & Reptile Conservation 7(1): 1–47.
    [Show full text]
  • Herpetological Journal FULL PAPER
    Volume 26 (January 2017), 73–80 Herpetological Journal FULL PAPER Published by the British Herpetological Society Reproductive biology of the nest building vizcacheras frog Leptodactylus bufonius (Amphibia, Anura, Leptodactylidae), including a description of unusual courtship behaviour Gabriel Faggioni1, Franco Souza1, Masao Uetanabaro1, Paulo Landgref-Filho2, Joe Furman3 & Cynthia Prado1,4 1Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, Brasil 2Campo Grande, Brasil 3Houston, USA 4Departamento de Morfologia e Fisiologia Animal, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Jaboticabal, Brasil We describe the reproductive biology and sexual size dimorphism of a population of the vizcacheras frog Leptodactylus bufonius in the Brazilian Chaco. Reproduction takes place during the rainy months (September–March). During courtship, females emit reciprocal calls and both sexes perform vibratory movements of the body; the latter is described for the first time in anurans. Amplexus and oviposition occurred inside subterranean chambers. The temperature in closed chambers was lower than outside chambers, which may aid in reducing desiccation risks of eggs and tadpoles. Females were larger than males, but males had longer heads and shorter tibias, which may be related to digging. The study reinforces the importance of ongoing discoveries on anuran natural history. Keywords: Chaco, natural history, sexual size dimorphism, subterranean chamber, vibratory movements INTRODUCTION 1988; Haddad & Giaretta, 1999; Haddad & Sawaya, 2000; Lucas et al., 2008; Kokubum et al., 2009). he genus Leptodactylus Fitzinger, 1826, comprises 74 Species in the L. fuscus group reproduce in sub- species distributed from southern Texas to Argentina, terranean chambers which may vary in size, shape, includingT Caribbean islands (Frost, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Maintaining and Improving Habitat for Hummingbirds in Oklahoma and Texas
    United States Department of Agriculture Maintaining and Improving Habitat for Hummingbirds in Oklahoma and Texas A Land Manager’s Guide Forest Service National Headquarters Introduction Hummingbirds play an important role in the food web, pollinating a variety of flowering plants, some of which are specifically adapted to pollination by hummingbirds. Some hummingbirds are at risk, like other pollinators, due to habitat loss, changes in the distribution and abundance of nectar plants (which are affected by climate change), the spread of invasive Anna’s Hummingbird Nest plants, and pesticide use. This guide is intended to Courtesy of Steve Berardi Wikimedia Commons help you provide and improve habitat for humming- birds, as well as other pollinators, in Oklahoma and Texas. While hummingbirds, like all birds, have the basic habitat needs of food, water, shelter, and space, this guide is focused on providing food—the plants that provide nectar for hummingbirds. Because climate, geology, and vegetation vary widely in different areas, specific recommenda- tions are presented for each ecoregion in Oklahoma and Texas. (See the Ecoregions in Oklahoma and Texas section, below.) This guide also provides brief descriptions of the species that visit Oklahoma and Texas, as well as some basic information about hummingbird habitat needs. Whether you’re involved in managing public or private lands, large acreages or small areas, you can make them attractive to our native hummingbirds. Even long, narrow pieces of habitat, like utility corridors, field edges, and roadsides, can provide important connections among larger habitat areas. Hummingbird Basics Some of the hummingbird species of Okla- homa and Texas are migratory, generally wintering in Mexico and southern Texas and pushing northward through Nevada and California for summer breeding.
    [Show full text]
  • The Disastrous Impacts of Trump's Border Wall on Wildlife
    a Wall in the Wild The Disastrous Impacts of Trump’s Border Wall on Wildlife Noah Greenwald, Brian Segee, Tierra Curry and Curt Bradley Center for Biological Diversity, May 2017 Saving Life on Earth Executive Summary rump’s border wall will be a deathblow to already endangered animals on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border. This report examines the impacts of construction of that wall on threatened and endangered species along the entirety of the nearly 2,000 miles of the border between the United States and Mexico. TThe wall and concurrent border-enforcement activities are a serious human-rights disaster, but the wall will also have severe impacts on wildlife and the environment, leading to direct and indirect habitat destruction. A wall will block movement of many wildlife species, precluding genetic exchange, population rescue and movement of species in response to climate change. This may very well lead to the extinction of the jaguar, ocelot, cactus ferruginous pygmy owl and other species in the United States. To assess the impacts of the wall on imperiled species, we identified all species protected as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act, or under consideration for such protection by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“candidates”), that have ranges near or crossing the border. We also determined whether any of these species have designated “critical habitat” on the border in the United States. Finally, we reviewed available literature on the impacts of the existing border wall. We found that the border wall will have disastrous impacts on our most vulnerable wildlife, including: 93 threatened, endangered and candidate species would potentially be affected by construction of a wall and related infrastructure spanning the entirety of the border, including jaguars, Mexican gray wolves and Quino checkerspot butterflies.
    [Show full text]
  • Chec List a Checklist of the Amphibians and Reptiles of San
    Check List 10(4): 870–877, 2014 © 2014 Check List and Authors Chec List ISSN 1809-127X (available at www.checklist.org.br) Journal of species lists and distribution PECIES S OF A checklist * of the amphibians and reptiles of San Isidro de ISTS L Dota, Reserva Forestal Los Santos, Costa Rica Erick Arias and Federico Bolaños [email protected] Universidad de Costa Rica, Escuela de Biología, Museo de Zoología. San Pedro, 11501-2060, San José, Costa Rica. * Corresponding author. E-mail: Abstract: We present an inventory of amphibians and reptiles of San Isidro de Dota, northwest of the Cordillera de Talamanca in the Central Pacific of Costa Rica.Leptodactylus The study was insularum conduced from January to August 2012 in premontane wet Coloptychonforest from 689 rhombifer m to 800 m elevation. We found a total of 56 species, including 30 species of amphibians and 26 of reptiles. It results striking the presence of the frog , uncommon above 400 m elevation, and the lizard , a very uncommon species. DOI: 10.15560/10.4.870 Introduction datum, from 689 m to 800 N, 83°58′32.41″ W, WGS84et al. Lower Central America represents one of the regions m elevation). The region is dominated by premontane with the highest numberet al of amphibianset describedal. in the wet forest (Bolaños 1999) with several sites used Neotropics in relation to the area it represent (Savage for agriculture and pastures. The region presents the 2002; Boza-Oviedo . 2012; Hertz 2012). Much climate of the pacific slope of the Cordillera de Talamanca, of this richness of species iset associated al.
    [Show full text]
  • Seed Germination Characteristics of Selected Native Plants of the Lower Rio Grande Valley, Texas
    Seed germination characteristics of selected native plants of the lower Rio Grande Valley, Texas ROBINS. VORA Experhnents were conducted to identity treatments that increased 58% with 45 minutes acid treatment of huisachillo (Acacia schaf- emergence of seeds of 24 woody plant species native to the lower fwri) seeds, and 87% with acid treatment for 15 to 90 minutes of Rio Grande Valley of southern Texas. Sulfuric acid (18.4M retama (Purkinsoniu uculeutu) seeds. Similarly, germination of H&04) scarification significantly hnxeased emergence of buisachc rattlebush (Sesbania drummondii) seeds was improved by soaking (A cud& smul&i), bui~ebillo (A. scwm?ri), Texas ebony (Pithecel- in acid for up to 4 hours (Easton 1984). Acid scarification for 60 to lobiumflexicmde), tenam (P.palkns), tepeguaje (Leucaenapuhv- 90 minutes followed by cold scarification for 90 days produced best r&da), retama (porkinson& rrcrrlcou),and western soapberry results with western soapberry (Sapindus drummondii) seeds (Munson 1984). Seeds of other species, such as sugarberry (Celtis (Sapiudus &wnmlo II@); treatments such as soakhrg in disHBed water, gibberellic acid (0.3 or 1.4 mMol), or other scari5cation luevigata), might undergo periods of dormancy that can be broken techniques were not as effective as add. Fresh guajillo (A. be&n- by prechilling (Bonner 1974,1984). Fulbright et al. (1986a, b) used died’) seedr required no treatment, but g-month-old seeds had a combination of mechanical scarification, gibberellic acid, and heat/ chill treatments to obtain 62% germination of granjeno (Cel- higher emergence with add scarification. Texas ebony emergence was higher from lO-month-old seed treated with acid than from tis p&da) seeds; and gibberellic acid, moist prechilling for 2 fresh seeds.
    [Show full text]
  • Valley Native Plants for Birds
    Quinta Mazatlan WBC 1/19/17 SB 1 TOP VALLEY NATIVE FRUITING PLANTS FOR BIRDS TALL TREES, 30 FT OR GREATER: Common Name Botanical Name Height Width Full Shade/ Full Evergreen Bloom Bloom Fruit Notes (ft) (ft) Sun Sun Shade Color Period Color Anacua, Ehretia anacua 20-50 40-60 X X X White Summer- Yellow- Leaves feel like sandpaper; Sandpaper Tree, Fall Orange fragrant flowers. Mature trunk has Sugarberry characteristic outgrowth which resembles cylinders put together to form it. Edible fruit. Butterfly nectar plant. Sugar Hackberry, Celtis laevigata 30-50 50 X X X Greenish, Spring Red Fast-growing, short-lived tree, with Palo Blanco tiny an ornamental grey, warty bark. Shallow rooted and prone to fungus; should be planted away from structures. Caterpillar host plant. SMALL TREES (LESS THAN 30 FT): Common Name Botanical Name Height Width Full Shade/ Full Evergreen Bloom Bloom Fruit Notes (ft) (ft) Sun Sun Shade Color Period Color Brasil, Condalia hookeri 12-15 15 X X X Greenish- Spring- Black Branches end in thorns; shiny Capul Negro, yellow, Summer leaves. Capulín, Bluewood small Condalia Coma, Sideroxylon 15-30 15 X X X White Summer- Blue- Very fragrant flowers; sticky, edible Chicle, celastrinum Fall, after black fruit; thorny; glossy leaves. Saffron Plum rain Granjeno, Celtis pallida 10-20 12 X X X X Greenish, Spring Orange Edible fruit; spiny; bark is mottled Spiny tiny grey. Can be small tree or shrub. Hackberry Texas Diospyros 15-30 15 X X X X White Spring Black Mottled, peeling ornamental bark; Persimmon, texana great native choice instead of the Chapote Crape Myrtle.
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Effects of Climate Change on the Geographic Distribution of The
    Article Potential Effects of Climate Change on the Geographic Distribution of the Endangered Plant Species Manihot walkerae Gisel Garza 1, Armida Rivera 1, Crystian Sadiel Venegas Barrera 2 , José Guadalupe Martinez-Ávalos 3, Jon Dale 4 and Teresa Patricia Feria Arroyo 1,* 1 Department of Biology, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, 1201 W University Drive, Edinburg, TX 78539, USA; [email protected] (G.G.); [email protected] (A.R.) 2 Instituto Tecnológico de Ciudad Victoria, Boulevard Emilio Portes Gil 1301, Ciudad Victoria 87010, Mexico; [email protected] 3 Instituto de Ecología Aplicada, Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas, División del Golfo 356, Col. Libertad, Ciudad Victoria 87019, Mexico; [email protected] 4 American Forests, 1220 L St NW #750, Washington, DC 20005, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 20 May 2020; Accepted: 16 June 2020; Published: 18 June 2020 Abstract: Walker’s Manihot, Manihot walkerae, is an endangered plant that is endemic to the Tamaulipan thornscrub ecoregion of extreme southern Texas and northeastern Mexico. M. walkerae populations are highly fragmented and are found on both protected public lands and private property. Habitat loss and competition by invasive species are the most detrimental threats for M. walkerae; however, the effect of climate change on M. walkerae’s geographic distribution remains unexplored and could result in further range restrictions. Our objectives are to evaluate the potential effects of climate change on the distribution of M. walkerae and assess the usefulness of natural protected areas in future conservation. We predict current and future geographic distribution for M.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Big Tree Registry a List of the Largest Trees in Texas Sponsored by Texas a & M Forest Service
    Texas Big Tree Registry A list of the largest trees in Texas Sponsored by Texas A & M Forest Service Native and Naturalized Species of Texas: 320 ( D indicates species naturalized to Texas) Common Name (also known as) Latin Name Remarks Cir. Threshold acacia, Berlandier (guajillo) Senegalia berlandieri Considered a shrub by B. Simpson 18'' or 1.5 ' acacia, blackbrush Vachellia rigidula Considered a shrub by Simpson 12'' or 1.0 ' acacia, Gregg (catclaw acacia, Gregg catclaw) Senegalia greggii var. greggii Was named A. greggii 55'' or 4.6 ' acacia, Roemer (roundflower catclaw) Senegalia roemeriana 18'' or 1.5 ' acacia, sweet (huisache) Vachellia farnesiana 100'' or 8.3 ' acacia, twisted (huisachillo) Vachellia bravoensis Was named 'A. tortuosa' 9'' or 0.8 ' acacia, Wright (Wright catclaw) Senegalia greggii var. wrightii Was named 'A. wrightii' 70'' or 5.8 ' D ailanthus (tree-of-heaven) Ailanthus altissima 120'' or 10.0 ' alder, hazel Alnus serrulata 18'' or 1.5 ' allthorn (crown-of-thorns) Koeberlinia spinosa Considered a shrub by Simpson 18'' or 1.5 ' anacahuita (anacahuite, Mexican olive) Cordia boissieri 60'' or 5.0 ' anacua (anaqua, knockaway) Ehretia anacua 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, Carolina Fraxinus caroliniana 90'' or 7.5 ' ash, Chihuahuan Fraxinus papillosa 12'' or 1.0 ' ash, fragrant Fraxinus cuspidata 18'' or 1.5 ' ash, green Fraxinus pennsylvanica 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, Gregg (littleleaf ash) Fraxinus greggii 12'' or 1.0 ' ash, Mexican (Berlandier ash) Fraxinus berlandieriana Was named 'F. berlandierana' 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, Texas Fraxinus texensis 60'' or 5.0 ' ash, velvet (Arizona ash) Fraxinus velutina 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, white Fraxinus americana 100'' or 8.3 ' aspen, quaking Populus tremuloides 25'' or 2.1 ' baccharis, eastern (groundseltree) Baccharis halimifolia Considered a shrub by Simpson 12'' or 1.0 ' baldcypress (bald cypress) Taxodium distichum Was named 'T.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 3/Monday, January 6, 2014
    Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2014 / Notices 661 Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing utility, and clarity of the information to through applications, semi-annual and Urban Development, 451 7th Street be collected and (4) Minimize the reports, and close out reports. The SW., Washington, DC 20410; email burden of collection of information on information that is collected is used to Colette Pollard at Colette.Pollard@ those who are to respond; including the assess performance. Grantees are units hud.gov or telephone 202–402–3400. use of appropriate automated collection of state and local government, This is not a toll-free number. Persons techniques or other forms of technology, nonprofits and Indian tribes. with hearing or speech impairments e.g., permitting electronic submission of Respondents are initially identified by may access this number through TTY by responses. congress and generally fall into two calling the toll-free Federal Relay This Notice also lists the following categories: Economic Development Service at (800) 877–8339. information: Initiative—Special Project (EDI–SP) Copies of available documents A. Overview of Information Collection grantees and Neighborhood Initiative submitted to OMB may be obtained (NI) grantees. The agency has used the from Ms. Pollard. Title of Information Collection: application, semi-annual reports and Congressional Earmark Grants. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This close out reports to track grantee OMB Approval Number: 2506–0179. performance in the implementation of notice informs the public that HUD is Type of Request (i.e. new, revision or approved projects. seeking approval from OMB for the extension of currently approved information collection described in collection): extension of a currently Respondents (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Factsheet - Panicum Maximum
    Factsheet - Panicum maximum http://www.tropicalforages.info/key/Forages/Media/Html/Panicum_m... Panicum maximum Scientific name Panicum maximum Jacq. Synonyms Megathyrsus maximus (Jacq.) B.K. Simon & S.W.L. Jacobs Urochloa maxima (Jacq.) R.D.Webster Panicum hirsutissimum Steud. Panicum maximum Jacq. var. hirsutissimum (Steud.) Oliv. Megathyrsus maximus var. coloratus (C.T. White) B.K. Simon & S.W.L. Jacobs Panicum maximum var. coloratum C.T. White Megathyrsus maximus var. pubiglumis (K. Schum.) B.K. Simon & S.W.L. Jacobs Panicum maximum Jacq. var. pubiglume K. Schum. Panicum maximum Jacq. var. trichoglume Robyns Urochloa maxima var. trichoglumis (Robyns) R.D. Webster Family/tribe Family: Poaceae (alt. Gramineae) subfamily: Panicoideae tribe: Paniceae. Common names General: Guinea grass, Tanganyika grass , buffalograss (English speaking countries); hhash el gînâ (Arab countries); pasto guinea, mijo de guinea (Argentina); capim guine, capim-colonião, capim de Angola, capim de feixe, erva da Guine' (Brazil); ratatana, giniopilli (Ceylon); da shu, yang cao (China); talapi, tinikarati (Cook Islands); suur hirss (Estonia); capime guiné, fataque, herbe de guinée, panic élevé (French speaking countries); guineagras (German speaking countries), giiniigaas, gini ghaus gini hullu (India); rumput banggala, rumput gajah, suket londo (Indonesia); erba di guinea (Italian speaking countries); ginea kibi (Japan); rebha luh-buluhan, rumput benggala, rumput sarang sesak (Malaysia), gini ghans (Nepalese); zaina, pasto guinea (Peru); gramalote (Puerto Rico); gewone buffelsgras (South Africa); ya-kinni (Thailand); saafa (Tonga), güyana otu (Turkey); vao kini (Samoa); hierba de india (Venezuela); co kê to (Vietnam). Short types: Panic, green panic, (Australia), slender guinea grass (Kenya); castilla (Peru). Morphological description An extremely variable species, loosely to densely tufted, shortly rhizomatous, erect or geniculately ascending, rooting at the lower nodes.
    [Show full text]