Gap Analysis of Conserved Genetic Resources for Forest Trees

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Gap Analysis of Conserved Genetic Resources for Forest Trees Gap Analysis of Conserved Genetic Resources for Forest Trees SARA R. LIPOW,∗†† KENNETH VANCE-BORLAND,∗ J. BRADLEY ST. CLAIR,† JAN HENDERSON,‡ AND CINDY MCCAIN§ ∗Department of Forest Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, U.S.A. †U.S. Forest Service, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Corvallis, OR 97331, U.S.A. ‡U.S. Forest Service, Supervisor’s Office, Mt. Baker–Snoqualmie National Forest, Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043, U.S.A. §U.S. Forest Service, Siuslaw National Forest, Corvallis, OR 97339, U.S.A. Abstract: We developed a gap analysis approach to evaluate whether the genetic resources conserved in situ in protected areas are adequate for conifers in western Oregon and Washington (U.S.A.). We developed geographic information system layers that detail the location of protected areas and the distribution and abundance of each tree species (noble fir [Abies procera Rehd.] and Douglas-fir [Pseudotsuga menzeisii Mirb.]). Distribution and abundance were inferred from available spatial data showing modeled potential and actual vegetation. We stratified the distribution of each species into units for genetic analysis using seed and breeding zones and ecoregions. Most strata contained at least 5000 reproductive-age individuals in protected areas, indicating that genetic resources were well protected in situ throughout most of the study region. Strict in situ protection was limited, however, for noble fir in the Willapa Hills of southwestern Washington. An in situ genetic resource gap arguably occurred for Douglas-fir in the southern Puget lowlands, but this gap was filled by extensive ex situ genetic resources from the same region. The gap analysis method was an effective tool for evaluating the genetic resources of forest trees across a large region. An´alisis de Claros de Recursos Gen´eticos Conservados para Arboles´ de Bosque Resumen: Desarrollamos un m´etodo de analisis´ de claros para evaluar si los recursos gen´eticos conservados in situ en areas´ protegidas son adecuados para con´ıferas en el oeste de Oregon y Washington (E. U. A.). Desarrollamos capas de sistema de informacion´ geografica´ que detallan la localizacion´ de areas´ protegidas y la distribucion´ y abundancia de cada especie de arbol´ (Abies procera Rehd. y Pseudotsuga menzeisii Mirb). La distribucion´ y abundancia fueron inferidas a partir de datos espaciales disponibles que muestran la vegetacion´ potencial modelada y la vegetacion´ existente. Estratificamos la distribucion´ de cada especie en unidades para el analisis´ gen´etico utilizando zonas de semillas y reproduccion´ y ecoregiones. La mayor´ıa de los estratos conten´ıan por los menos 5000 individuos en edad reproductiva en areas´ protegidas, lo que indica que los recursos gen´eticos estaban bien protegidos in situ en casi toda la region´ de estudio. Sin embargo, la proteccion´ in situ estricta estaba limitada para A. procera en las Colinas Willapa del suroeste de Washington. Se podr´ıa decir que ocurrio´ un claro de recursos gen´eticos in situ para P. menzeisii en las tierras bajas del sur de Puget, pero este claro fue llenado por recursos gen´eticos extensivos ex situ de la misma region.´ Encontramos que el m´etodo de analisis´ de claros es una herramienta valiosa para evaluar los recursos gen´eticos de arboles ´ de bosque en una region´ amplia. ††Current address: 2600 State Street, Oregon Department of Forestry, Salem, OR 97310, U.S.A., email [email protected] Paper submitted February 19, 2002; revised manuscript accepted July 29, 2003. 412 Conservation Biology, Pages 412–423 Volume 18, No. 2, April 2004 Lipow et al. Genetic Gap Analysis for Forest Trees 413 Introduction fir and Douglas-fir, respectively. These ex situ collections are a valuable component of the total available genetic Biological diversity refers to the variety and abundance of resources for the species. species and the communities in which they occur and to The goal of our in situ analysis was to identify places the genetic composition of individual species. Land-use where large populations of each species are protected changes, disease conditions, and climatic change directly in reserves and places where few or no trees are pro­ threaten forest species and communities. They also jeop­ tected (gaps). We did this by performing a gap analysis ardize the genetic variation that enables tree species to in a geographic information system (GIS). Gap analysis evolve and thrive under changing environmental condi­ typically refers to a scientific process that identifies the tions. Threats to tree species can affect the long-term sur­ degree to which native species and natural communities vival of the associated flora and fauna. Genetic variation are represented in present-day conservation lands (Scott of forest trees is also essential for sustainable production & Jennings 1997). Those species and communities not ad­ of forest products and therefore has important social and equately represented in the existing network of conserva­ economic implications. tion lands constitute conservation “gaps.” The methods Concerns for biological diversity and the genetic as­ of gap analysis were originally developed for application pects of sustainable forest management prompted a group to vertebrate species and land-cover types (Scott & Jen­ of public and private organizations in western Oregon and nings 1998), but they are relevant to a wide range of taxa Washington to form the Pacific Northwest Forest Tree and hierarchies of biodiversity. We applied them to de­ Gene Conservation Group. One objective of this group is termine whether the genetic variation within species is to identify whether areas in the region exist where addi­ adequately represented. Gap analysis involves intersect­ tional conservation measures are necessary to ensure that ing digital maps displaying protected areas with those the adaptation and evolutionary potential of important showing species occurrences and, in this case, patterns tree species are maintained. To identify possible areas, of genetic variation. we have compiled data on genetic resources conserved both at their original location (in situ) and at some other location (ex situ). Methods We developed a gap analysis approach to investigate ge­ netic resources conserved in situ in protected areas. We Study Area present results for Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii The study area included a wide region extending from [Mirb.] Franco var. menziesii) and noble fir (Abies pro­ the coast of Oregon and Washington through the eastern cera Rehd.). Results for six other tree species are reported slopes and foothills of the Cascades (Fig. 1). Douglas-fir separately: Tsuga heterophylla (Raf.) Sarg., Thuja plicata occurs throughout much of the study area. Noble fir is Donn ex D. Don, Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex Laws, Picea found from the Cascades of northern Washington to the sitchensis (Bong.) Carr., Pinus monticola Dougl. ex D. McKenzie River Valley in Oregon and at high peaks in Don, and Pinus lambertiana Dougl. (S.R.L., K.V.-B., J.B.S., the Coast Range and Willapa Hills (Fig. 2a). South of the J.A.H., & C.M., unpublished data). These species are com­ McKenzie River, noble fir overlaps the range and intro­ mon in western Oregon and Washington (U.S.A.) and are gresses with Shasta red fir (Abies magnifica shastensis commercially important. Lemm.) (Sorenson et al. 1990). The in situ genetic resources we evaluated are only one component of an overall gene conservation strat­ Protected Areas egy (Yanchuk & Lester 1996; Lipow et al. 2001). The tree species also have extensive genetic resources in ex We projected all GIS coverages and grids (Table 1) in Uni­ situ collections, including progeny tests, seed orchards, versal Transverse Mercator Projection, Zone 10. Analyses and seed stores (Lipow et al. 2001; S.R.L., K.V.-B., J.B.S., were done with ARC/INFO and Arcview software (Envi­ J.A.H., & C.M., unpublished data). In Oregon and Wash­ ronmental Systems Research Institute 1999, 2000). ington, progeny from >1679 noble fir selections from A protected-areas coverage was developed following natural populations are maintained in genetic tests or conventions employed by the National Gap Analysis Pro­ in 1 of 14 seed orchards. The tested selections span gram (GAP). This program assigns land to four status levels the species’ range, excluding the Willapa Hills of south­ (Scott et al. 1993). We considered all status 1 and 2 lands western Washington. Hundreds of additional selections protected. Management plans for status 1 lands call for are maintained in Europe. For Douglas-fir, over 1 million maintaining a natural state and allowing natural distur­ progeny from >29,000 selections are maintained in re­ bance events to proceed; examples include wilderness gional first-generation progeny tests. Second-generation areas, national parks, and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) re­ tests will contain >2000 of the selections evaluated in search natural areas. Status 2 lands are generally managed the first-generation tests. Regional seed stores include for natural values but may be used in ways that degrade >1460 and >20,000 seed lots stored by family for noble the quality of existing natural communities; examples Conservation Biology Volume 18, No. 2, April 2004 414 Genetic Gap Analysis for Forest Trees Lipow et al. The protected-areas coverage combined data from sev­ eral available coverages (Table 1; Fig. 3). In Oregon most status 1 and 2 lands were identified on the land manage­ ment and stewardship coverage (Oregon GAP). Most pro­ tected areas in Washington were identified on the major public lands coverage (Washington Department of Nat­ ural Resources) or the natural areas coverage (Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project). We fol­ lowed the Oregon GAP land designations when assign­ ing reserve status to these lands. For example, because the Oregon GAP designated wilderness areas as status 1, we assigned them to status 1 in Washington. Preserves of The Nature Conservancy and natural-area preserves and natural-resource conservation areas of the Wash­ ington Department of Natural Resources were also in­ cluded as status 1 lands.
Recommended publications
  • Lakes Basin Bibliography
    Lakes Basin Bibliography OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES Lakes Basin Bibliography Bonnie E. Avery 4/2/2010 The Lakes Basin Bibliography consists of over 600 references relating to the natural resources of Oregon‘s Lakes Basin. Forty percent of the items listed are available to anyone online though not all links are persistent. The remaining sixty percent are held in at least one library either in print or via subscriptions to e-journal content. This set is organized in groups related issues associated with digitization and contribution to an institutional repository such as the ScholarsArchive@OSU which provide for persistent URLs. Also identified are ―key‖ documents as identified by Lakes Basin Explorer project partners and topical websites. i Lakes Basin Bibliography Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 I-a: Resources available online: Documents .............................................................................. 2 I-b: Resources available online: Streaming Video .................................................................... 30 II-a. Candidates for digitization: Print-only OSU Theses and Dissertations ............................. 33 II-b. Candidates for digitization: Government and other reports ............................................... 39 II-c: Candidates for digitization: Local archive collections ........................................................ 53 II-d. Candidates for digitization: Maps
    [Show full text]
  • Botany, Invasive Plants, Native Plants, Genetics
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest FY-16 Region Program Accomplishments Calochortus umpquaensis, Umpqua mariposa lily, is found only in the Umpqua River watershed of Botany southwestern OR. A big "anthophorid" bee is tucked into the flower. Invasive Plants Native Plants Genetics U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
    [Show full text]
  • A Bill to Designate Certain National Forest System Lands in the State of Oregon for Inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and for Other Purposes
    97 H.R.7340 Title: A bill to designate certain National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Weaver, James H. [OR-4] (introduced 12/1/1982) Cosponsors (2) Latest Major Action: 12/15/1982 Failed of passage/not agreed to in House. Status: Failed to Receive 2/3's Vote to Suspend and Pass by Yea-Nay Vote: 247 - 141 (Record Vote No: 454). SUMMARY AS OF: 12/9/1982--Reported to House amended, Part I. (There is 1 other summary) (Reported to House from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs with amendment, H.Rept. 97-951 (Part I)) Oregon Wilderness Act of 1982 - Designates as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System the following lands in the State of Oregon: (1) the Columbia Gorge Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (2) the Salmon-Huckleberry Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (3) the Badger Creek Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (4) the Hidden Wilderness in the Mount Hood and Willamette National Forests; (5) the Middle Santiam Wilderness in the Willamette National Forest; (6) the Rock Creek Wilderness in the Siuslaw National Forest; (7) the Cummins Creek Wilderness in the Siuslaw National Forest; (8) the Boulder Creek Wilderness in the Umpqua National Forest; (9) the Rogue-Umpqua Divide Wilderness in the Umpqua and Rogue River National Forests; (10) the Grassy Knob Wilderness in and adjacent to the Siskiyou National Forest; (11) the Red Buttes Wilderness in and adjacent to the Siskiyou
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Sycan Watershed Analysis
    Lower Sycan Watershed Analysis Fremont-Winema National Forest 2005 Lower Sycan River T33S,R12E,S23 Lower Sycan Watershed Analysis Table of Contents INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................... 1 General Watershed Area.....................................................................................................................................2 Geology and Soils.................................................................................................................................................5 Climate..................................................................................................................................................................6 STEP 1. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE WATERSHED ................................................................... 7 I. Watershed and Aquatics.................................................................................................................................7 Soils And Geomorphology...............................................................................................................................................10 Aquatic Habitat ................................................................................................................................................................10 II. Vegetation.....................................................................................................................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter Newsletter of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Retirees — Fall 2011
    OldSmokeys Newsletter Newsletter of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Retirees — Fall 2011 President’s Message—John Berry It was good to see and talk with so many of you at the Summer Picnic. Some I had not seen for years and I wished there had been more time to catch up. And it was a pleasure to see the great attendance by Regional Office and Mt. Hood National Forest leaders. It means a lot to have Regional Forester and OldSmokey Kent Connaughton and Forest Supervisor Chris Worth attend our functions. Both are very approachable and great listeners. It’s good to see the Region is in good hands. A big thanks to Mike Ash for donating one of his beautiful wood bowls for the raffle to support the PNWFSA Emergency Relief Fund. And, no, I did not bribe Kent Connaughton to draw my wife’s ticket! Thanks to Rick Larson for reserving the picnic area. Thanks to Bev Pratt, Mary Moyer, and Deb Warren for welcoming and doing the name tags. Of course, Dave Dalton and his crew did a great job of catering. Also, check out Paul Enberg’s and John Poppino’s photos on our website at <www.oldsmokeys.org>. The picnic reminds me what it means to be a member of the “Forest Service Family.” Next to my own family, the Forest Service has been the single most important factor in my life. The Forest Service offered me incredible career opportunities as it p rovided outstanding education and training, good pay, and a retirement annuity that allows my wife and me to live comfortably.
    [Show full text]
  • THE Easrsrne Group
    Group One: THE NORTHERN IU Alaska ~ <, 1 Port Houghton-Cape Fanshaw 2 East Kuiu 3 Cleveland Peninsula 4 Upper Tenakee Inlet British Columbia 5 Great Bear Rainforest 6 Randy Stoltmann Wilderness Group Two: THE OwL REGION Washington 7 Pompey 8 Paradise Creek 9 Little Huckleberry Mountain Oregon 10 Salmon-Huckleberry 11 Hardesty Mountain 12 Smith-Umpqua Divide 13 Mount Bailey 14 Copper /North Fork Elk River California 15 Dillon Creek/Siskiyou 16 Orleans Mountain Group Three: THE EAsrsrnE Washington 17 Long Draw/Long Swamp 18 Devil's Gulch Oregon 19 Aldrich Mountain/Dry Cabin 20 North Fork John Day/Elkhorn/Greenhorn 21 Sky Lakes/Pelican Butte 22 Deadhorse Rim/Coleman Rim Northern Great Basin Oregon 23 High Steens/Little Blitzen Gorge 24 Trout Creek Mountains Oregon-Idaho 25 Owyhee Canyon Group Four: NORTHERN RocK1Es Idaho 26 Deadwood 27 French Creek/Patrick Butte 28 North Lochsa Slope 29 Cove-Mallard 30 Mount Jefferson Montana 31 Great Burn 32 Ninemile Valley ROADLESS AREAS AT RISK A Ca~cadia Sampler project, which would have built 93 miles of chum salmon. Goose Flats River, on the inlet's What's at stake: The Stoltmann har• road and cut 123 million board feet of timber south side, harbors brown bear, mink, marten bors the southern limit of North America's from the area, was withdrawn as the result of and Sitka black-tailed deer and draws large coas ta I grizzly bear population. a lawsuit. A new draft EIS is in the early plan• numbers of migrating waterfowl. Beautiful Status: Only 20 percent of this wilderness is ning stages.
    [Show full text]
  • OR Wild -Backmatter V2
    208 OREGON WILD Afterword JIM CALLAHAN One final paragraph of advice: do not burn yourselves out. Be as I am — a reluctant enthusiast.... a part-time crusader, a half-hearted fanatic. Save the other half of your- selves and your lives for pleasure and adventure. It is not enough to fight for the land; it is even more important to enjoy it. While you can. While it is still here. So get out there and hunt and fish and mess around with your friends, ramble out yonder and explore the forests, climb the mountains, bag the peaks, run the rivers, breathe deep of that yet sweet and lucid air, sit quietly for awhile and contemplate the precious still- ness, the lovely mysterious and awesome space. Enjoy yourselves, keep your brain in your head and your head firmly attached to the body, the body active and alive and I promise you this much: I promise you this one sweet victory over our enemies, over those desk-bound men with their hearts in a safe-deposit box and their eyes hypnotized by desk calculators. I promise you this: you will outlive the bastards. —Edward Abbey1 Edward Abbey. Ed, take it from another Ed, not only can wilderness lovers outlive wilderness opponents, we can also defeat them. The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men (sic) UNIVERSITY, SHREVEPORT UNIVERSITY, to do nothing. MES SMITH NOEL COLLECTION, NOEL SMITH MES NOEL COLLECTION, MEMORIAL LIBRARY, LOUISIANA STATE LOUISIANA LIBRARY, MEMORIAL —Edmund Burke2 JA Edmund Burke. 1 Van matre, Steve and Bill Weiler.
    [Show full text]
  • John Allen: Bringing Stakeholders Together to Restore the Forest and Protect Communities
    John Allen: Bringing Stakeholders Together to Restore the Forest and Protect Communities By Chris McGowan If there is one phrase that best summarizes John Allen’s career philosophy, it might be “shared stewardship.” In his supervision of forest restoration, collaborative programs, and friends’ groups, he has repeatedly taken the initiative to bring stakeholders together to implement projects. This is necessary in part because there is no one answer when it comes to reducing devastating wildfires, saving old-growth forest, protecting watershed, extracting resources, or managing recreational use of the land. A holistic approach must be used that brings all the interested parties together. A Legislative Tour of the Deschutes National Forest on October 22, 2014: (left to right) Oregon Rep. Brad Witt; Deschutes National Forest Supervisor John Allen; U.S. Forest Service Regional Forester Jim Peña; Oregon Rep. Gene Whisnant; Oregon Sen. Michael Dembrow; Oregon Sen. Herman Baertschiger (front); Oregon State Forester Doug Decker; Natural Resources Policy Advisor to Governor Kitzhaber, Brett Brownscombe. (source: Oregon Dept. of Forestry). “Our culture is reevaluating and redefining its relationship with our natural resources. And people are starting to better understand that you can’t just solve the water issue by itself, the recreation issue by itself, or the timber issue by itself. It’s all connected, it’s all integrated. You can’t just solve your particular piece of the forest that you’re interested in, and that’s the challenge for land management agencies. That’s our mission, to integrate all of the resources into a long-term sustainable solution,” says Allen, the Supervisor of the Deschutes National Forest, who is retiring after four decades of working for the USFS.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law 98-328-June 26, 1984
    98 STAT. 272 PUBLIC LAW 98-328-JUNE 26, 1984 Public Law 98-328 98th Congress An Act June 26, 1984 To designate certain national forest system and other lands in the State of Oregon for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System, and for other purposes. [H.R. 1149] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Oregon United States ofAmerica in Congress assembled, That this Act may Wilderness Act be referred to as the "Oregon Wilderness Act of 1984". of 1984. National SEc. 2. (a) The Congress finds that- Wilderness (1) many areas of undeveloped National Forest System land in Preservation the State of Oregon possess outstanding natural characteristics System. which give them high value as wilderness and will, if properly National Forest preserved, contribute as an enduring resource of wilderness for System. the ben~fit of the American people; (2) the Department of Agriculture's second roadless area review and evaluation (RARE II) of National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon and the related congressional review of such lands have identified areas which, on the basis of their landform, ecosystem, associated wildlife, and location, will help to fulfill the National Forest System's share of a quality National Wilderness Preservation System; and (3) the Department of Agriculture's second roadless area review and evaluation of National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon and the related congressional review of such lands have also identified areas which do not possess outstand­ ing wilderness attributes or which possess outstanding energy, mineral, timber, grazing, dispersed recreation and other values and which should not now be designated as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System but should be avail­ able for nonwilderness multiple uses under the land manage­ ment planning process and other applicable laws.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Oregon Big Game Hunting Outlook Conditions for Big Game and Hunters Are Looking Much Better Than They Were a Year Ago
    2016 Oregon Big Game Hunting Outlook Conditions for big game and hunters are looking much better than they were a year ago. Back in August of last year, 100 percent of Oregon was in severe drought and 50 percent in the even worse category of “extreme drought.” While parts of NE and SE Oregon are still experiencing a severe drought, conditions have improved across the state. “We had normal winter precipitation and a wet spring,” says Autumn Larkins, ODFW Assistant District Wildlife Biologist for Harney County. “Water availability is much better this year.” It’s a similar story in northeast Oregon. “The weather is much better suited to deer and elk production as opposed to last year’s record drought,” said Mark Kirsch, ODFW District Wildlife Biologist in Umatilla County. The increased water also better distribute animals during hunting season, rather than cluster them around fewer water sources. It should help distribute early season hunters, too— especially those pronghorn and bowhunters who crowded around the few water holes to set hunting blinds in recent years. The conflict between hunters over blind placement has gotten so bad that ODFW and BLM recently put together a flyer reminding hunters of the rules and good etiquette Now wildlife biologists are crossing their fingers for rains in September. These early fall rains green up forage and help big game put on weight, so animals head into breeding season in good body condition and fit to reproduce. Despite the increased moisture, fire is still a threat throughout Oregon. Most forestlands will have restrictions (such as no campfires) during fire season, and some private lands will be closed to public access entirely.
    [Show full text]
  • Fremont – Winema National Forests
    FREMONT – WINEMA NATIONAL FORESTS TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE REPORT FY 2002 by Brent D. Frazier Forest Biologist March 6, 2003 TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE REPORT FY2002 OBJECTIVE The objective of this report is to provide biologists and managers of the Fremont – Winema National Forests a tool to document terrestrial wildlife budgets and accomplishments, including various activity reports, over time. BUDGET The NFWF Working Budget plus carry over was: $1,200,000 Fire suppression “borrowed: 200,000 The unobligated balance was: 133,000 Total expenditures for NFWF in FY2002 were: $ 867,000 Terrestrial Wildlife was planned at approximately 40% of the total allocation. Of this, 30% of the total was planned for terrestrial non-TES wildlife and 10% for terrestrial TES wildlife. Of the remaining NFWF funds, approximately 10% was planned for botany, 40% for fisheries, and 10% for TES fish. SUMMARY OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS Table 1. Accomplishment Accomplishment Fremont Winema Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species Structures 0 0 Acres 2 3 Other Wildlife Structures 0 0 Acres 708 2,515 ACTIVITIES SPOTTED OWL DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY The southern Cascades spotted owl demographic study conducted by Oregon State University continued in 2002. The study collects information on adult and juvenile survival rate, reproductive rates, annual rate of population change, and other characteristics of spotted owl in the southern Cascades, including the Klamath Ranger District. For 2002 on the Klamath District, forty-seven nest sites were visited (Anthony, R. and others, 2002). Twenty-six nests were occupied by spotted owl and thirteen of the sites produced twenty- five young. Of the forty-seven sites, fourteen were occupied by barred owl pairs or barred owl males.
    [Show full text]
  • (USDA) Forest Service Working with Partners for Bird Conservation
    U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service Appendix A Working with Partners for Bird Conservation Bird Conservation Accomplishments Published 2004 This appendix lists the bird conservation accomplishment projects by USDA Forest Service Deputy Areas: National Forest Systems, Research and Development, State and Private and International Programs. This is not a complete set of the many bird conservation actions that have been or are currently being implemented across Forest Service Deputy Areas. It represents bird conservation accomplishment projects from the administrative units that replied at the time of the request. Projects started before fiscal year 2000 that are ongoing or conducted annually (beyond 2002) are reported as “ongoing” or “annually”, with the date of inception included (when known). I. National Forest Systems Region 1 (R-1): Northern Region Regionwide Accomplishments Partnership Enhancement • Partners in Flight (PIF) and Bird Conservation Region (BCR) Plans. Forest Service biologists throughout the Northern Region participated in the development of PIF and BCR plans for Montana, Idaho, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Active participation is ongoing with PIF working groups, BCR coordinators, joint venture meetings, and other activities that promote bird conservation. Partners in these efforts include the American Bird Conservancy (ABC), Montana Fish, Wildlife, & Parks (MFWP), Idaho Department of Fish and Game 1 (Idaho Fish & Game), U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Potlatch Corp., Plum Creek Timber Co., local Audubon Society Chapters, and the Universities of Montana and Idaho. Ongoing since FY1993. • Montana Sage Grouse and Sagebrush Conservation Strategy. The Northern Region participated in the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks-led effort to develop a statewide sage grouse and sagebrush conservation strategy.
    [Show full text]