DOCSLIB.ORG

Meadows in the Sierra Nevada of California: State of Knowledge. Gen

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Meadows in the Sierra Nevada of California: State of Knowledge. Gen United States Department of Agriculture Meadows in the Sierra Forest Service Pacific Southwest Nevada of California: Forest and Range Experiment Station state of knowledge General Technical Report PSW-84 Raymond D. Ratliff The Author: RAYMOND D. RATLIFF, a range scientist, is assigned to the Station's range man­ agement research in California unit, headquartered at the Forestry Sciences Labora­ tory, Fresno, Calif. He earned bachelor of science (1959) and master of science (1961) degrees in range management at the University of California, and a doctorate (1979) at New Mexico State University. He joined the Station staff in 1961. Acknowledgments: I thank the following persons for their interest and help in defining goals and objectives for management of meadow resources, or for their review of the manuscript, or both: Leonard Topping, Madera County; John T. Stanley, Harvey & Stanley Associates Inc.; Jerry L. Neal, Robert Hall, and Rex Quinn, Sierra Club; Lewis E. Carpenter, Henry A. Doddridge, Ray Marxmiller, and Claude L. Brown, Fresno County Sportsmen's Club; Gordon C. Ashcraft and Ronald C. Bertram, California Department of Fish and Game; David J. Parsons and Steven H. DeBenedetti, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks; Richard Riegelhuth, Yosemite National Park; Gordon C. Heebner and James R. Shevock, Sequoia National Forest; and John (Ken) Stithem and Jerome DeGraff, Sierra National Forest. Also, I thank Stanley E. Westfall who since 1965 has been involved in meadow research. Publisher: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station P.O. Box 245, Berkeley, California 94701 September 1985 Meadows in the Sierra Nevada of California: state of knowledge Raymond D. Ratliff CONTENTS In Brief.................................................................................. ii Introduction ........................................................................ 1 Brief History ........................................................................ 1 Grazing by Livestock ...................................................... 1 Damage to Resources ...................................................... 2 Classification of Meadows .................................................. 2 Subformations .................................................................. 3 Series ............................................................................... 3 Associations .................................................................... 5 Meadow Soils .................................................................. 6 Series Descriptions .......................................................... 9 Productivity of Meadows ................................................. 16 Elevation ........................................................................ 17 Vegetation ...................................................................... 17 Range Condition ............................................................ 23 Fertilization .................................................................... 24 Utilization ...................................................................... 26 Management Problems .................................................... 26 Animal Activities .......................................................... 26 Lodgepole Pine .............................................................. 33 Fire ................................................................................ 36 Gully Erosion ................................................................ 38 Evaluating Range Conditions .......................................... 41 Established Methods ..................................................... 42 Condition Standards ...................................................... 43 Management Concepts ..................................................... 47 References ......................................................................... 48 i grazing were mostly fruitless. Effective control in the Forest Reserves began when grazing permits were required IN BRIEF ... by the Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Meadows have improved, but local abuse can still be found. Recent concern over the conditions of meadows has resulted in studies by the Forest Service, U.S. Department Ratliff, Raymond D. Meadows in the Sierra Nevada of of Agriculture; the National Park Service, U.S. Depart­ California: state of knowledge. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW- ment of the Interior; and colleges and universities. Al­ 84. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range though much is yet to be learned, a body of technical Experiment Station, U.S. Department of Agriculture; knowledge focused on meadows of the Sierra Nevada is 1985. 52 p. now available, serving as a source for guides to meadow Retrieval Terms: meadow classification, meadow produc­ management. tivity, meadow management problems, meadow condi­ The basic unit for meadow classification is meadow tions and trends, mountain meadows, Sierra Nevada, site―an area of homogeneous species composition having California a general species composition different from that of adja­ cent areas. Meadow sites are grouped by physiographic Management of mountain meadows in the Sierra Nev­ properties; hydrologic or major floristic properties, or ada of California to maintain or restore geologic and bio­ both; and close floristic similarity into meadow subforma­ logic stability, while providing amenities, is a common goal tions, meadow series, and meadow site associations. of managers and users. Meadows are wetlands or semiwet­ Conditions favorable to accumulating fine-textured lands supporting a cover of emergent hydrophytes and materials and establishing a shallow water table are pre- mesophytes and dry herblands of the subalpine and alpine requisite to meadow development. A characteristic condi­ zones. These meadows are concentrated use points which, tion is a favorable drainage area-to-slope relationship: once destroyed, are not quickly replaced. large drainage areas with steep stream gradients do not American Indians had little adverse effect on meadows contain meadows. of the Sierra Nevada. Moderate to light grazing by native True pedogenic soil horizons are rarely found in soils of animals was probably common. Ranching―the first in­ Sierra Nevadan meadows. Four main depositional units dustry in California―expanded as the Spanish missions are present: pre-Holocene alluvium; a buried soil; stratified became established. Cattle were valued for their hides and sand; and interstratified layers of grus, peat, and sandy tallow. Sheep numbers remained low during the Spanish loam. Layers of known age in the fourth unit indicate a soil and Mexican periods. Then, the gold rush of 1849 ushered accumulation rate of about 1.8 inches (4.7 cm) per century. in a shift toward beef production, and large numbers of Herbage produced on Sierra Nevadan meadows in Cali­ sheep as well as cattle were used for meat. As mining fornia ranges from less than 300 lb per acre (336 kg/ ha) to decreased, sheep ranching for wool increased; by the over 4,000 lb per acre (4,484 kg/ha). High-elevation mea­ 1870's, California led the nation in wool production. dows in poor condition generally produce less herbage Summer grazing in the mountains began during than low-elevation meadows in better condition. Mesic droughts in the 1860's and 1870's. Sheep grazing soon meadows are usually more productive―although produc­ became the dominant use of the meadows. Today, how- tion varies more from year-to-year―than meadows at the ever, cattle have all but replaced sheep in the National extremes of the moisture gradient. Forests. Meadows respond to fertilization. Nitrogen can increase Overgrazing of meadows in the late 1800's and early yields dramatically. Phosphorus, however, has been more 1900's resulted in widespread deterioration. Early attempts consistent in increasing yields. Usually, nitrogen favors by the National Parks and Forest Reserves to regulate grasses and grasslikes and phosphorus favors legumes. ii Poor sites respond proportionally more to fertilization than • Rodent activities. Although rodent activities can good sites. markedly affect species composition and may induce ero­ Carbohydrate storage cycles of meadow species appear sion by channeling water, cultivation of the soil by rodents to follow the natural pattern: gradual decline in winter, is beneficial. Overgrazing emphasizes the negative effects sharp decline at the start of spring growth, and buildup of rodents, but rodents inflict little harm to meadows in during maturation. Defoliation in early spring or at flower­ good condition. ing is detrimental to many meadow species. Late defolia­ • Invasion by lodgepole pine. This autogenic process is tion, preventing carbohydrate accumulation in developing both aided and hindered by livestock disturbance. A min­ shoots, may damage some species. eral seedbed in a well-lit, warm, moist environment favors The need to leave some herbage ungrazed has long been lodgepole pine seed germination. Early snowmelt and long recognized. For meadow sites in the Sierra Nevada, the rule snow-free periods favor seedling establishment. Deep, of "graze half, leave half" is unsafe. Use of very wet or dry long-lasting snowpacks favor young trees. meadow sites should not exceed 35 percent; 45 percent use • Fire. A critical element of meadow history and main­ of more mesic sites is satisfactory. tenance is fire. Major fires in their watersheds affect Sierra Some of the more common conditions that can adversely Nevadan
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Incident Management Situation Report Friday, August 29, 2003 - 0530 Mdt National Preparedness Level 5
    INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SITUATION REPORT FRIDAY, AUGUST 29, 2003 - 0530 MDT NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS LEVEL 5 CURRENT SITUATION: Initial attack activity was light in all Areas. Nationally, 103 new fires were reported. Five new large fires were reported, four in the Northern Rockies Area and one in the Rocky Mountain Area. Five large fires were contained, three in the Northern Rockies Area and one each in the Rocky Mountain and Southern Areas. Very high to extreme fire indices were reported in Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. NORTHERN ROCKIES AREA LARGE FIRES: An Area Command Team (Mann) is assigned to manage Blackfoot Lake Complex, Wedge Canyon, Robert, Middle Fork Complex, Trapper Creek Complex, Crazy Horse, Rampage Complex, High and Little Salmon Creek Complex. An Area Command Team (Rounsaville) is assigned to manage Lincoln Complex, Winslow, East Complex, Rough Draw Complex, Cathedral Peak Complex, Rathbone and Burnt Ridge/Sheep Camp Complex. An Area Command Team (Ribar) is assigned to manage Cherry Creek Complex, Mineral-Primm/Boles Meadow, Fish Creek Complex, Black Mountain 2, Cooney Ridge and Gold 1. An Area Command Team (Greenhoe) is assigned to manage Sapp, Slim’s Complex, Fiddle, Beaver Lake, Cayuse Lake Complex, and Clear/Nez Fire Use Complex. BLACKFOOT LAKE COMPLEX, Flathead National Forest. A Type 1 Incident Management Team (Mortier) is assigned. This incident, comprised of the Beta Lake, Doris Mountain, Lost Johnny, Ball Creek, Wounded Buck, Doe, Dead Buck, and Blackfoot Lake fires, is in timber 19 miles east of Kalispell, MT.
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 Draft Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan
    DRAFT Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan Derek W. Stinson Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program 600 Capitol Way N Olympia, Washington January 2013 In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted procedures for listing and de-listing species as endangered, threatened, or sensitive and for writing recovery and management plans for listed species (WAC 232-12-297, Appendix A). The procedures, developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies, require preparation of recovery plans for species listed as threatened or endangered. Recovery, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the process by which the decline of an endangered or threatened species is arrested or reversed, and threats to its survival are neutralized, so that its long-term survival in nature can be ensured. This is the Draft Washington State Status Update and Recovery Plan for the Mazama Pocket Gopher. It summarizes what is known of the historical and current distribution and abundance of the Mazama pocket gopher in Washington and describes factors affecting known populations and its habitat. It prescribes strategies to recover the species, such as protecting populations and existing habitat, evaluating and restoring habitat, and initiating research and cooperative programs. Target population objectives and other criteria for down-listing to state Sensitive are identified. As part of the State’s listing and recovery procedures, the draft recovery plan is available for a 90-day public comment period. Please submit written comments on this report by 19 April 2013 via e-mail to: [email protected], or by mail to: Endangered Species Section Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 This report should be cited as: Stinson, D.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. EPA, Pesticide Product Label, 0.5% STRYCHNINE MILO for HAND
    Jl.l!l€' 23, 1997 Dr. Alan V. Tasker Acting Leader, rata Support Teaill Tec.'mical and Sciemtific Services USDA/AHflS/BBEP Unit ISO ) 4700 River Foad Rivcreale, ND 20737 Dear Dr. Tasker, Subject: 0.5% Str.fclmine Mlo rex Ha.'ld Baiting fucket C,ophers EPA Registratirn No. 56228-19 Your Slil;;nissions of Septemb€r 23, 19%, and June 2, 1997 ~Je nave reviewed ,YOUr sl.ibmi~sicn of Sept€T."'~r 19, 1996:. ThE' cnongp--s in tl"le inert ingredients a'ld t..'1e revised basic and alte..."7late Confidential StatC1"~nts of Forl'1Ula (CSFs) ;;.r8 acceptable. He 1=1<: fort-l;;.rd to receiving the product chemistry data on the nc-w formulation. Your letter of SepteJl'J::>er 23, 19%, imicates thClt some of these studies ~Jere underway at that tire. The proposed revis20 label stibIcJ tted 00 June 2, 1997, is J:-.asically ) acceptC!ble, but the change identified l.-elow must be made. 1. In the "NOI'E TO PHYSICIAN", change "CI\UrION," to "NOrrcp.:" so as not to conflict with the label's required signal Nord "I'i"lNGFR". 8u.1:'mit one r:::q:y of the fin.-J.l printed label before releasing this prcrluct for shipment. :;;~x¥~~ COP~ E William H. JacObs BEST AVA'LAB\.. i\cting Product 1<1a.'l8.ger 14 Insecticide-Rodenticide Branch Reo.istration Division (7505C) :::::, ~.. ..w·-1······ _.. ._-j.. ......w. ··1· "~'~"·Tm--I··· ·1· ............ ·····1· _............. DATE ~ •......••.•....... .........•..••.• ....... ~ ..•....... ..........................................................................................- ....... EPA Form 1320-102-70) OFFICIAL FILE COpy r.. PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS 0.5% STRYCHNINE r~1.0 HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND FOR HAND BAITING STORAGE AND DISPOSAL I -, DOMESTIC ANIMALS Do not contaminate water, food, or POCKET GOPHERS feed by storage or disposal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Fossorial Mammals on Alpine Treeline
    THE EFFECTS OF FOSSORIAL MAMMALS ON ALPINE TREELINE DYNAMICS IN THE AMERICAN WEST DISSERTATION Presented to the Graduate Council of Texas State University-San Marcos in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of PHILOSOPHY by Clayton J. Whitesides, B.S., M.S. San Marcos, Texas August 2012 THE EFFECTS OF FOSSORIAL MAMMALS ON ALPINE TREELINE DYNAMICS IN THE AMERICAN WEST Committee Members Approved: ______________________________ David R. Butler, Chair ______________________________ Nathan A. Currit ______________________________ Richard W. Dixon ______________________________ George P. Malanson Approved: _______________________________________ J. Michael Willoughby Dean of the Graduate College COPYRIGHT by Clayton James Whitesides 2012 FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgment. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, Clayton J. Whitesides, refuse permission to copy in excess of the “Fair Use” exemption without my written permission. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The culmination of this project has taken place over several years and has been, at times, a source of joy and at others, a source of consternation. During these times, I have received much support from a variety of people who deserve acknowledgement. First, I would like to recognize my committee members. Occasionally, they were the source of my consternation , but more often than not, they provided sound advice that enabled me to complete my degree.
    [Show full text]
  • Across the Western Landscape: Priority Issues and Strategies for Western Forests
    Across the Western Landscape: Priority Issues and Strategies for Western Forests EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The forests of the West contain an incredible assemblage of resources. They cover approximately 365 million acres, 49 percent of the nation’s total forested area, and are managed by a diverse set of owners. Threats facing western forests affect all lands and all people, compromising the basic assets we need and often take for granted such as: clean air, abundant water, safe communities, open spaces, and economic opportunities. Cooperation and coordination across jurisdictional boundaries are needed to address these threats. The Western Forestry Leadership Coalition (WFLC) represents a unique partnership between state and federal government forestry leaders and supports a collaborative approach to sustainable forest management. All U.S. states and Affiliated Islands have completed assessments of their forest resources and developed strategies for the conservation, protection, About the Western Forestry and enhancement of those resources. These Statewide Forest Resource Leadership Coalition Assessments and Strategies (Forest Action Plans) provide a long-term roadmap The Western Forestry Leadership for forest restoration and management. Across the Western Landscape: Priority Coalition (WFLC) is a State and Issues and Strategies for Western Forests is a 23-page publication providing the Federal government partnership. highlights from a synthesis of the western states’ and Pacific Islands’ Forest The members of the coalition Action Plans. These highlights — summarized here — include priority issues, include: the 23 State and Pacific strategies to address them, and a Six-Point Plan for the future. Island Foresters of the West and the 7 western Regional Foresters, Wildland Fire and the Wildland-Urban Interface: reduce 3 western Research Station Directors, wildfire risk to communities and mitigate wildfire impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • Botany Biological Evaluation
    APPENDIX I Botany Biological Evaluation Biological Evaluation for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plants and Fungi Page 1 of 35 for the Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Restoration Project November 2009 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE – FOREST SERVICE LAKE TAHOE BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Restoration Project El Dorado County, CA Biological Evaluation for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plants and Fungi PREPARED BY: ENTRIX, Inc. DATE: November 2009 APPROVED BY: DATE: _____________ Name, Forest Botanist, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit SUMMARY OF EFFECTS DETERMINATION AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS AND/OR REQUIREMENTS One population of a special-status bryophyte, three-ranked hump-moss (Meesia triquetra), was observed in the survey area during surveys on June 30, 2008 and August 28, 2008. The proposed action will not affect the moss because the population is located outside the project area where no action is planned. The following species of invasive or noxious weeds were identified during surveys of the Project area: cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum); bullthistle (Cirsium vulgare); Klamathweed (Hypericum perforatum); oxe-eye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare); and common mullein (Verbascum Thapsus). The threat posed by these weed populations would not increase if the proposed action is implemented. An inventory and assessment of invasive and noxious weeds in the survey area is presented in the Noxious Weed Risk Assessment for the Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Restoration Project (ENTRIX 2009). Based on the description of the proposed action and the evaluation contained herein, we have determined the following: There would be no significant effect to plant species listed as threatened, endangered, proposed for listing, or candidates under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA), administered by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Listing of All EMS Agencies with Their Agency Codes
    Agency Name (D1.2) A.B. Shaw Fire Department (1099) A.E. Crandall Hook and Ladder Co., Inc. (0212) Ace Ambulance Service, LLC (Hunter Ambulance) (0884) Adams Fire Company, Inc. (3199) Addison Volunteer Fire Department Ambulance Corps (5015) Afton Emergency Squad (0811) Air Methods Corp. Rocky Mountain Holdings (LifeNet New York; Albany Med Flight; Stat Flight) (0767) Akron Fire Company, Inc. (1426) Akwesasne Mohawk Ambulance (4498) Alabama Fire Department (1899) Alamo Ambulance Service, Inc. (1311) Albany County Sheriff's Department Advanced Life Support (0184) Albany County Sheriff's Office EMS Unit (6229) Albany Department of Fire & Emergency Services, City of (0142) Albany-Schenectady-Greene Co. Ag. Societies, Inc. (Altamont Fair Ambulance) (0139) Albertson Fire Department (2998) Albion Fire Department Emergency Squad (3619) Alden EMS Department (1437) Alert Engine, Hook, Ladder & Hose Co., No. 1, Inc. (0253) Alexander Fire Department, Inc. (1818) Alexandria Bay Volunteer Fire Department (2212) Allegany Fire District, Town of (0775) Allegany Indian Reservation Vol. Fire Department (Seneca Nation Rescue) (0433) Allegany Rescue and EMS, Inc. (0982) Almond Volunteer Fire Department (0225) Alplaus Fire Department (4693) ALS Services, Inc. (7199) Altamont Rescue Squad, Inc. (0117) Altmar Fire Department (3799) Alton Fire Company of Alton, New York, Inc. (5813) Altona Volunteer Fire Department Rescue Squad (0930) Amagansett Fire Department Ambulance (8139) Amber Ambulance Inc. (3313) Amber Fire Department, Inc.(1083) Ambulance Committee of the Moriches, Inc. (East Moriches Community Ambulance) (5158) Ambulance Service of Fulton County, Inc. (1712) AmCare Ambulance Service, Inc. (3217) Amenia Rescue Squad (1320) Amity Rescue Squad, Inc. (0213) Amityville Fire Department (5137) Amsterdam Fire Department (0554) Andes Fire Department, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • © 2020 Theodore Payne Foundation for Wild Flowers & Native Plants. No Reproduction of Any Kind Without Written Permission
    April 3, 2020 Theodore Payne Foundation’s Wild Flower Hotline is made possible by donations, memberships and sponsors. You can support TPF by shopping the online gift store as well. A new, pay by phone, contactless plant pickup system is now available. Details here. It is important to note that driving to a wild flower viewing site is now very difficult. There are strict closures of entry roads, parking lots, restrooms, picnic areas and some trails in addition to Visitor Centers and campgrounds at National, State and County parks and reserves. In most cases you need to be a local resident to enter trails that are still accessible to foot or bicycle visitors. If you are out on trails, please practice social distancing precautions. Situations change quickly, so it is advised that you check on websites before venturing out. A list of some web links appears at the end of the report. That said, the weather has been cool so the blooms of last week are still mostly intact. In the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, parking lots and other amenities at trailheads are closed, but the park remains accessible to local day-use walkers, hikers and bicyclists. The National Park Service urges all visitors to follow social distancing protocols. Please avoid crowding or gathering on trails. Speaking of access to locals, a resident of the Santa Monica Mountains who lives on Stunt Rd. near the Stunt Ranch, was able to walk across the street and enter one of the small trails that eventually leads to the popular Backbone Trail.
    [Show full text]
  • State Abbreviations
    State Abbreviations Postal Abbreviations for States/Territories On July 1, 1963, the Post Office Department introduced the five-digit ZIP Code. At the time, 10/1963– 1831 1874 1943 6/1963 present most addressing equipment could accommodate only 23 characters (including spaces) in the Alabama Al. Ala. Ala. ALA AL Alaska -- Alaska Alaska ALSK AK bottom line of the address. To make room for Arizona -- Ariz. Ariz. ARIZ AZ the ZIP Code, state names needed to be Arkansas Ar. T. Ark. Ark. ARK AR abbreviated. The Department provided an initial California -- Cal. Calif. CALIF CA list of abbreviations in June 1963, but many had Colorado -- Colo. Colo. COL CO three or four letters, which was still too long. In Connecticut Ct. Conn. Conn. CONN CT Delaware De. Del. Del. DEL DE October 1963, the Department settled on the District of D. C. D. C. D. C. DC DC current two-letter abbreviations. Since that time, Columbia only one change has been made: in 1969, at the Florida Fl. T. Fla. Fla. FLA FL request of the Canadian postal administration, Georgia Ga. Ga. Ga. GA GA Hawaii -- -- Hawaii HAW HI the abbreviation for Nebraska, originally NB, Idaho -- Idaho Idaho IDA ID was changed to NE, to avoid confusion with Illinois Il. Ill. Ill. ILL IL New Brunswick in Canada. Indiana Ia. Ind. Ind. IND IN Iowa -- Iowa Iowa IOWA IA Kansas -- Kans. Kans. KANS KS A list of state abbreviations since 1831 is Kentucky Ky. Ky. Ky. KY KY provided at right. A more complete list of current Louisiana La. La.
    [Show full text]
  • EPA Progress Report 2002: Pacific Southwest Region
    EPA Progress Report 2002 Pacific Southwest Region U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Pacific Southwest / Region 9 EPA–909–R–02–001 Dear Readers, Growing up in Southern California, I learned early in life about the human cost of an unhealthy environment. The brown cloud that covered the Los Angeles Basin for too many days each summer affected everyone who worked and played there. But over the years I’ve also watched the skies grow clearer and smog alerts become a thing of the past. In 2001, the Los Angeles area met national health standards nine out of every ten days — the cleanest year since smog measurements began over 40 years ago. While there is much more work to be done, we’ve come a long way. I am honored to introduce this EPA Progress Report, the first that we have issued since I joined EPA as Regional Administrator in October 2001. The past year’s accomplishments are full of promise for meeting the public health and environmental chal­ lenges we face in the Pacific Southwest, and I am eager to to continue our progress in this important mission. EPA’s Pacific Southwest Region is truly diverse, encompassing the states of Arizona, California, Hawaii and Nevada; 147 tribal nations and communities; and Pacific islands such as American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. The problems we confront here are complex, interconnected, and resistant to traditional solutions. As we move to meet these challenges, we are fortunate both in our own strengths and in the capacity and will of our partners — the states, tribes, industry and the environmental advocacy communities.
    [Show full text]
  • KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PROJECT: Rare Plants and Rare Ecological
    KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PROJECT Rare Plants and Rare Ecological Communities (Condition 8) KXL1399-STCE-EN-RP-0002 Rev C January 2019 Prepared for: TransCanada Keystone Pipeline Limited Partnership A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of TransCanada PipeLines Limited Calgary, Alberta Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. Calgary, Alberta KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PROJECT RARE PLANTS AND RARE ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES (CONDITION 8) Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... I ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................................... III 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1.1 2.0 SURVEY METHODS ..................................................................................................... 2.1 2.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS SURVEYS ......................................................................... 2.1 2.1.1 Previous Rare Plants .................................................................................... 2.1 2.1.2 Previous Rare Ecological Communities ....................................................... 2.2 2.1.3 Other Data Sources ...................................................................................... 2.2 2.2 2017 SURVEYS ............................................................................................................. 2.2 2.2.1 Rare Plants ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]