DOCSLIB.ORG

Ecological Response Units of the Southwestern United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ecological Response Units of the Southwestern United States United States Department Ecological Response Units of Agriculture of the Southwestern United States Forest Service Southwestern Region Maximilian Wahlberg F. Jack Triepke DRAFT 2014 Wayne Robbie Steve H. Stringer FR-R3-XX-XX Don Vandendriesche Esteban Muldavin Jim Malusa Summary Wahlberg, M.M., F.J. Triepke, W.A. Robbie, S.H. Strenger, D. Vandendriesche, E.H. Muldavin, and J.R Malusa. 2013. Ecological Response Units of the Southwestern United States. USDA Forest Service Forestry Report FR-R3-XX-XX. Southwestern Region, Regional Office, Albuquerque, NM. 201 pp. In the Southwest, the US Forest Service has developed a framework of ecosystem types, or “Ecological Response Units”, to facilitate landscape analysis and strategic planning. The framework represents all major ecosystem types of the region, and a coarse stratification of biophysical themes. Ecological Response Units (ERUs) are map unit constructs, technical groupings of finer vegetation classes of the National Vegetation Classification. The suite of vegetation classes that make up any given ERU share similar disturbance dynamics, plant species dominants, and theoretical succession sequence (potential vegetation). The ERU framework includes 31 terrestrial units, and 8 associated subclasses (additionally, 12 provisional subclasses are proposed), along with 21 riparian units. Key Words Ecosystem stratification, ecosystem unit, reference condition, landscape analysis, strategic planning, southwestern ecology. The Authors Acknowledgements Max Wahlberg is acting Regional Analyst for the USDA The authors gratefully acknowledge the work Forest Service Southwestern Region in Albuquerque, New of the many individuals who have worked to Mexico, and Forest Ecologist for the Prescott National classify vegetation of the southwest including, Forest. David E. Brown, Charles H. Lowe, Charles P. Pase, Robert DeVelice, John Ludwig, Will Moir, Jack Triepke is Regional Ecologist for the Forest Service Frank Ronco, and several other pioneering Southwestern Region, also conducting research at the phytosociologists of the region. University of New Mexico. Special thanks and recognition are extended to Wayne Robbie is Regional Soil Scientist and Inventory and Bob Davis, Director & Robert Trujillo, Assistant Monitoring Coordinator for the Forest Service Southwestern Director of Ecosystem Assessment and Region.Steve Strenger is New Mexico Team Leader for the Planning for the USDA Forest Service Terrestrial Ecological Unit Inventory Coordinator for the Southwestern Region along with Reuben Forest Service Southwestern Region Don Vandendriesche is Weisz, George Robertson, Matt Turner, & Vegetation Application Program Manager for the Forest Michelle Aldridge for their contributions and Service Southwestern Region. support in the preparation of this document. Esteban Muldavin is Research Associate Professor at the University of New Mexico, and Ecology Coordinator with Natural Heritage New Mexico. Jim Malusa is Research Specialist with the School of Natural Resources and the Environment at the University of Arizona. i Cover Photos by Maximillian Wahlberg: Upper Left: Juniper Grass ERU with understory fire, Coronado National Forest. Upper Right: Montane / Subalpine Grassland ERU on the Smokey Bear Ranger District of the Lincoln National Forest. Center: Open characteristic Ponderosa Pine-Bunchgrass ERU in the Gila Wilderness, Gila National Forest. Lower Left: Fall foliage in the Mixed Conifer with Aspen ERU on the San Francisco Peaks, Coconino National Forest. Lower Right: Chihuahuan Desert Scrub ERU at the base of the Chirihcaua Mountains near Rodeo, NM. ii Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Ecological Response Unit Concepts .............................................................................................................. 4 Relationship of Ecological Response Units to other Ecosystem Stratifications ............................................ 5 Biotic Communities of the Southwest ...................................................................................................... 5 LANDFIRE Biophysical Settings and NatureServe Ecological Systems ...................................................... 8 Terrestrial Ecological Unit Inventory ........................................................................................................ 8 National Vegetation Classification ............................................................................................................ 9 Descriptions for Upland Ecological Response Units ................................................................................... 11 Forest Ecological Response Units: ................................................................................................. 14 Spruce-Fir Ecological Response Unit ................................................................................. 14 Bristlecone Pine Ecological Response Unit ....................................................................... 21 Mixed Conifer with Aspen Ecological Response Unit ....................................................... 23 Mixed Conifer—Frequent Fire Ecological Response Unit ................................................. 28 Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecological Response Unit ............................................................. 33 Ponderosa Pine—Evergreen Oak Ecological Response Unit ............................................. 39 Woodland Ecological Response Units: .............................................................................. 44 Juniper Grass Ecological Response Unit............................................................................ 44 PJ Sagebrush Ecological Response Unit ............................................................................ 48 PJ Evergreen Shrub Ecological Response Unit .................................................................. 51 PJ Woodland Ecological Response Unit ............................................................................ 55 PJ Grass Ecological Response Unit .................................................................................... 58 Madrean Encinal Woodland Ecological Response Unit .................................................... 62 Madrean Pinyon-Oak Woodland Ecological Response Unit ............................................. 65 Grassland Ecological Response Units: ............................................................................................ 69 Montane / Subalpine Grassland Ecological Response Unit .............................................. 69 Colorado Plateau / Great Basin Grassland Ecological Response Unit .............................. 71 Semi-Desert Grassland Ecological Response Unit ............................................................ 74 Shrubland Ecological Response Units: ........................................................................................... 79 Alpine and Tundra Ecological Response Unit ................................................................... 79 Gambel Oak Shrubland Ecological Response Unit ............................................................ 81 iii Mountain Mahogany Mixed Shrubland Ecological Response Unit ................................... 83 Interior Chaparral Ecological Response Unit .................................................................... 85 Sagebrush Shrubland Ecological Response Unit ............................................................... 87 Intermountain Salt Scrub Ecological Response Unit ......................................................... 89 Sandsheet Shrubland Ecological Response Unit ............................................................... 91 Chihuahuan Desert Scrub Ecological Response Unit ........................................................ 93 Chihuahuan Salt Desert Scrub Ecological Response Unit ................................................. 96 Mojave-Sonoran Desert Scrub Ecological Response Unit ................................................. 98 Sonora-Mojave Mixed Salt Desert Scrub Ecological Response Unit ............................... 101 Great Plains Ecological Response Units: ...................................................................................... 103 Shortgrass Prairie Ecological Response Unit ................................................................... 103 Mixed-Grass Prairie Ecological Response Unit ............................................................... 106 Shinnery Oak Ecological Response Unit .......................................................................... 109 Sandsage Ecological Response Unit ................................................................................ 111 Riparian Ecological Response Units: ............................................................................................ 113 References ................................................................................................................................................ 115 Appendix A—ERU-Biophysical Setting / Ecolgocial System ...................................................................... 120 Appendix B – Crosswalk between ERUs and National Vegetation Classification Groups ......................... 127 Appendix C – Development of Computed Values for Forest and Woodland ERUs .................................. 132 Appendix D – Ecological Response Units across Soutwestern Climate Gradients:..................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chemical Analysis of Mountain Sheep Forage in the Virgin Mountains, Arizona
    Chemical Analysis of Mountain Sheep Forage in the Virgin Mountains, Arizona Item Type text; Book Authors Morgart, John R.; Krausman, Paul R.; Brown, William H.; Whiting, Frank M. Publisher College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ) Rights Copyright © Arizona Board of Regents. The University of Arizona. Download date 01/10/2021 12:00:30 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/310778 Chemical Analysis of Mountain Sheep Forage in the Virgin Mountains, Arizona John R. Morgart and Paul R. Krausman School of Renewable Natural Resources William H. Brown and Frank M. Whiting Department of Animal Sciences University of Arizona College of Agriculture Technical Bulletin 257 July 1986 Chemical Analysis of Mountain Sheep Forage in the Virgin Mountains, Arizona By John R. Morgart and Paul R. Krausman School of Renewable Natural Resources, University of of Arizona and William H. Brown and Frank M. Whiting Department of Animal Sciences, University of Arizona Abstract. Eighteen forage species used by mountain sheep (Ovis cana- densis) were collected monthly in 1981 and analyzed for dry matter, pro- tein, acid detergent fiber, neutral detergent fiber, lignin, ether extract, ash, calcium, phosphorus, carotene, and combustible energy. Baseline data on plant nutrition are presented in tabular form as a reference source for wildlife biologists, range managers, and scientists in related fields. Introduction Mountain sheep diets have been studied in Texas (Hailey 1968), New Mexico (Howard and DeLorenzo 1975), Arizona (Halloran and Crandell 1953, Seegmiller and Ohmart 1982), California (Dunaway 1970, Ginnett and Douglas 1982), Nevada (Barrett 1964, Deming 1964, Yoakum 1966, Brown et al. 1976, Brown et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Pima County Plant List (2020) Common Name Exotic? Source
    Pima County Plant List (2020) Common Name Exotic? Source McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abies concolor var. concolor White fir Devender, T. R. (2005) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abies lasiocarpa var. arizonica Corkbark fir Devender, T. R. (2005) Abronia villosa Hariy sand verbena McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abutilon abutiloides Shrubby Indian mallow Devender, T. R. (2005) Abutilon berlandieri Berlandier Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) Abutilon incanum Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Abutilon malacum Yellow Indian mallow Devender, T. R. (2005) Abutilon mollicomum Sonoran Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) Abutilon palmeri Palmer Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) Abutilon parishii Pima Indian mallow McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Abutilon parvulum Dwarf Indian mallow Herbarium; ASU Vascular Plant Herbarium Abutilon pringlei McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Abutilon reventum Yellow flower Indian mallow Herbarium; ASU Vascular Plant Herbarium McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia angustissima Whiteball acacia Devender, T. R. (2005); DBGH McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia constricta Whitethorn acacia Devender, T. R. (2005) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia greggii Catclaw acacia Devender, T. R. (2005) Acacia millefolia Santa Rita acacia McLaughlin, S. (1992) McLaughlin, S. (1992); Van Acacia neovernicosa Chihuahuan whitethorn acacia Devender, T. R. (2005) McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Acalypha lindheimeri Shrubby copperleaf Herbarium Acalypha neomexicana New Mexico copperleaf McLaughlin, S. (1992); DBGH Acalypha ostryaefolia McLaughlin, S. (1992) Acalypha pringlei McLaughlin, S. (1992) Acamptopappus McLaughlin, S. (1992); UA Rayless goldenhead sphaerocephalus Herbarium Acer glabrum Douglas maple McLaughlin, S. (1992); DBGH Acer grandidentatum Sugar maple McLaughlin, S. (1992); DBGH Acer negundo Ashleaf maple McLaughlin, S.
    [Show full text]
  • US Fish and Wildlife Service
    BARNEBY REED-MUSTARD (S. barnebyi ) CLAY REED-MUSTARD SHRUBBY REED-MUSTARD (S,arguillacea) (S. suffrutescens) .-~ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UTAH REED—MUSTARDS: CLAY REED-MUSTARD (SCHOENOCRAMBE ARGILLACEA) BARNEBY REED—MUSTARD (SCHOENOCRAMBE BARNEBYI) SI-IRUBBY REED-MUSTARD (SCHOENOCRAMBE SUFFRUTESCENS) RECOVERY PLAN Prepared by Region 6, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Approved: Date: (~19~- Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or protect the species. Plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Objectives will only be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other budgetary constraints. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views or the official positions or approvals of any individuals or agencies, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, involved in the plan formulation. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as an~roved Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature Citation should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Utah reed—mustards: clay reed—mustard (Schoenocrambe argillacea), Barneby reed-mustard (Schoenocrambe barnebyl), shrubby reed—mustard (Schoenacranibe suffrutescens) recovery plan. Denver, Colorado. 22 pp. Additional copies may be purchased from: Fish and Wildlife Reference Service 5430 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Telephone: 301/492—6403 or 1—800—582—3421 The fee for the plan varies depending on the number of pages of the plan.
    [Show full text]
  • The Plant Press the ARIZONA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY
    The Plant Press THE ARIZONA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY Volume 36, Number 1 Summer 2013 In this Issue: Plants of the Madrean Archipelago 1-4 Floras in the Madrean Archipelago Conference 5-8 Abstracts of Botanical Papers Presented in the Madrean Archipelago Conference Southwest Coralbean (Erythrina flabelliformis). Plus 11-19 Conservation Priority Floras in the Madrean Archipelago Setting for Arizona G1 Conference and G2 Plant Species: A Regional Assessment by Thomas R. Van Devender1. Photos courtesy the author. & Our Regular Features Today the term ‘bioblitz’ is popular, meaning an intensive effort in a short period to document the diversity of animals and plants in an area. The first bioblitz in the southwestern 2 President’s Note United States was the 1848-1855 survey of the new boundary between the United States and Mexico after the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848 ended the Mexican-American War. 8 Who’s Who at AZNPS The border between El Paso, Texas and the Colorado River in Arizona was surveyed in 1855- 9 & 17 Book Reviews 1856, following the Gadsden Purchase in 1853. Besides surveying and marking the border with monuments, these were expeditions that made extensive animal and plant collections, 10 Spotlight on a Native often by U.S. Army physicians. Botanists John M. Bigelow (Charphochaete bigelovii), Charles Plant C. Parry (Agave parryi), Arthur C. V. Schott (Stephanomeria schotti), Edmund K. Smith (Rhamnus smithii), George Thurber (Stenocereus thurberi), and Charles Wright (Cheilanthes wrightii) made the first systematic plant collection in the Arizona-Sonora borderlands. ©2013 Arizona Native Plant In 1892-94, Edgar A. Mearns collected 30,000 animal and plant specimens on the second Society.
    [Show full text]
  • A Vegetation Map of Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico 1
    ______________________________________________________________________________ A Vegetation Map of Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico ______________________________________________________________________________ 2003 A Vegetation Map of Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico 1 Esteban Muldavin, Paul Neville, Paul Arbetan, Yvonne Chauvin, Amanda Browder, and Teri Neville2 ABSTRACT A vegetation classification and high resolution vegetation map was developed for Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico to support natural resources management, particularly fire management and rare species habitat analysis. The classification and map were based on 400 field plots collected between 1999 and 2002. The vegetation communities of Carlsbad Caverns NP are diverse. They range from desert shrublands and semi-grasslands of the lowland basins and foothills up through montane grasslands, shrublands, and woodlands of the highest elevations. Using various multivariate statistical tools, we identified 85 plant associations for the park, many of them unique in the Southwest. The vegetation map was developed using a combination of automated digital processing (supervised classifications) and direct image interpretation of high-resolution satellite imagery (Landsat Thematic Mapper and IKONOS). The map is composed of 34 map units derived from the vegetation classification, and is designed to facilitate ecologically based natural resources management at a 1:24,000 scale with 0.5 ha minimum map unit size (NPS national standard). Along with an overview of the vegetation ecology of the park in the context of the classification, descriptions of the composition and distribution of each map unit are provided. The map was delivered both in hard copy and in digital form as part of a geographic information system (GIS) compatible with that used in the park.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Classification and Map Accuracy Assessment of the Proposed Tehachapi Pass High-Speed Rail Corridor Vegetation Map
    Vegetation Classification and Map Accuracy Assessment of the Proposed Tehachapi Pass High-Speed Rail Corridor Vegetation Map Kern County, California Prepared for the Strategic Growth Council by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program September 2015 ABSTRACT The Geographical Information Center (GIC) at California State University, Chico, completed a vegetation map of the Proposed Tehachapi Pass High-Speed Rail Corridor (HSRC), covering 199,493 acres. The project was funded by the Strategic Growth Council to support routing and mitigation planning for the high-speed rail system. The map was produced using heads-up digitizing based on 2012 National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) imagery. The minimum mapping unit (MMU) is one acre for most vegetation types, with a smaller MMU for wetlands. Although the primary purpose of the map is to document vegetation communities, it provides additional structural data such as herbaceous, shrub, and tree cover, and information about the level of disturbance within the vegetation stand. This report describes the tasks performed by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program (VegCAMP), specifically, the creation of a vegetation classification for the project area and the accuracy assessment of the map. The overall accuracy of the map exceeded the state standard of 80%. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Funding for this project was provided by the Strategic Growth Council, California Wildlife Conservation Board and
    [Show full text]
  • A Vegetation Map of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, New
    ______________________________________________________________________________ A Vegetation Map of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, New Mexico ______________________________________________________________________________ A Vegetation Map of Valles Caldera National Preserve, New Mexico 1 Esteban Muldavin, Paul Neville, Charlie Jackson, and Teri Neville2 2006 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY To support the management and sustainability of the ecosystems of the Valles Caldera National Preserve (VCNP), a map of current vegetation was developed. The map was based on aerial photography from 2000 and Landsat satellite imagery from 1999 and 2001, and was designed to serve natural resources management planning activities at an operational scale of 1:24,000. There are 20 map units distributed among forest, shrubland, grassland, and wetland ecosystems. Each map unit is defined in terms of a vegetation classification that was developed for the preserve based on 348 ground plots. An annotated legend is provided with details of vegetation composition, environment, and distribution of each unit in the preserve. Map sheets at 1:32,000 scale were produced, and a stand-alone geographic information system was constructed to house the digital version of the map. In addition, all supporting field data was compiled into a relational database for use by preserve managers. Cerro La Jarra in Valle Grande of the Valles Caldera National Preserve (Photo: E. Muldavin) 1 Final report submitted in April 4, 2006 in partial fulfillment of National Prak Service Award No. 1443-CA-1248- 01-001 and Valles Caldrea Trust Contract No. VCT-TO 0401. 2 Esteban Muldavin (Senior Ecologist), Charlie Jackson (Mapping Specialist), and Teri Neville (GIS Specialist) are with Natural Heritage New Mexico of the Museum of Southwestern Biology at the University of New Mexico (UNM); Paul Neville is with the Earth Data Analysis Center (EDAC) at UNM.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Bio 308-Course Guide
    COURSE GUIDE BIO 308 BIOGEOGRAPHY Course Team Dr. Kelechi L. Njoku (Course Developer/Writer) Professor A. Adebanjo (Programme Leader)- NOUN Abiodun E. Adams (Course Coordinator)-NOUN NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA BIO 308 COURSE GUIDE National Open University of Nigeria Headquarters 14/16 Ahmadu Bello Way Victoria Island Lagos Abuja Office No. 5 Dar es Salaam Street Off Aminu Kano Crescent Wuse II, Abuja e-mail: [email protected] URL: www.nou.edu.ng Published by National Open University of Nigeria Printed 2013 ISBN: 978-058-434-X All Rights Reserved Printed by: ii BIO 308 COURSE GUIDE CONTENTS PAGE Introduction ……………………………………......................... iv What you will Learn from this Course …………………............ iv Course Aims ……………………………………………............ iv Course Objectives …………………………………………....... iv Working through this Course …………………………….......... v Course Materials ………………………………………….......... v Study Units ………………………………………………......... v Textbooks and References ………………………………........... vi Assessment ……………………………………………….......... vi End of Course Examination and Grading..................................... vi Course Marking Scheme................................................................ vii Presentation Schedule.................................................................... vii Tutor-Marked Assignment ……………………………….......... vii Tutors and Tutorials....................................................................... viii iii BIO 308 COURSE GUIDE INTRODUCTION BIO 308: Biogeography is a one-semester, 2 credit- hour course in Biology. It is a 300 level, second semester undergraduate course offered to students admitted in the School of Science and Technology, School of Education who are offering Biology or related programmes. The course guide tells you briefly what the course is all about, what course materials you will be using and how you can work your way through these materials. It gives you some guidance on your Tutor- Marked Assignments. There are Self-Assessment Exercises within the body of a unit and/or at the end of each unit.
    [Show full text]
  • Threatened, Endangered, Candidate & Proposed Plant Species of Utah
    TECHNICAL NOTE USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service Boise, Idaho and Salt Lake City, Utah TN PLANT MATERIALS NO. 52 MARCH 2011 THREATENED, ENDANGERED, CANDIDATE & PROPOSED PLANT SPECIES OF UTAH Derek Tilley, Agronomist, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Loren St. John, PMC Team Leader, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Dan Ogle, Plant Materials Specialist, NRCS, Boise, Idaho Casey Burns, State Biologist, NRCS, Salt Lake City, Utah Last Chance Townsendia (Townsendia aprica). Photo by Megan Robinson. This technical note identifies the current threatened, endangered, candidate and proposed plant species listed by the U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service (USDI FWS) in Utah. Review your county list of threatened and endangered species and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Conservation Data Center (CDC) GIS T&E database to see if any of these species have been identified in your area of work. Additional information on these listed species can be found on the USDI FWS web site under “endangered species”. Consideration of these species during the planning process and determination of potential impacts related to scheduled work will help in the conservation of these rare plants. Contact your Plant Material Specialist, Plant Materials Center, State Biologist and Area Biologist for additional guidance on identification of these plants and NRCS responsibilities related to the Endangered Species Act. 2 Table of Contents Map of Utah Threatened, Endangered and Candidate Plant Species 4 Threatened & Endangered Species Profiles Arctomecon humilis Dwarf Bear-poppy ARHU3 6 Asclepias welshii Welsh’s Milkweed ASWE3 8 Astragalus ampullarioides Shivwits Milkvetch ASAM14 10 Astragalus desereticus Deseret Milkvetch ASDE2 12 Astragalus holmgreniorum Holmgren Milkvetch ASHO5 14 Astragalus limnocharis var.
    [Show full text]
  • Responses of Plant Communities to Grazing in the Southwestern United States Department of Agriculture United States Forest Service
    Responses of Plant Communities to Grazing in the Southwestern United States Department of Agriculture United States Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station Daniel G. Milchunas General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-169 April 2006 Milchunas, Daniel G. 2006. Responses of plant communities to grazing in the southwestern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-169. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 126 p. Abstract Grazing by wild and domestic mammals can have small to large effects on plant communities, depend- ing on characteristics of the particular community and of the type and intensity of grazing. The broad objective of this report was to extensively review literature on the effects of grazing on 25 plant commu- nities of the southwestern U.S. in terms of plant species composition, aboveground primary productiv- ity, and root and soil attributes. Livestock grazing management and grazing systems are assessed, as are effects of small and large native mammals and feral species, when data are available. Emphasis is placed on the evolutionary history of grazing and productivity of the particular communities as deter- minants of response. After reviewing available studies for each community type, we compare changes in species composition with grazing among community types. Comparisons are also made between southwestern communities with a relatively short history of grazing and communities of the adjacent Great Plains with a long evolutionary history of grazing. Evidence for grazing as a factor in shifts from grasslands to shrublands is considered. An appendix outlines a new community classification system, which is followed in describing grazing impacts in prior sections.
    [Show full text]
  • Jocks, Ianto Thorvald (2020) Scribonius Largus' Compounding of Drugs (Compositiones Medicamentorum): Introduction, Translation, and Medico- Historical Comments
    Jocks, Ianto Thorvald (2020) Scribonius Largus' Compounding of Drugs (Compositiones medicamentorum): introduction, translation, and medico- historical comments. PhD thesis. Vol. I: Introduction, medicine and pharmacy in contemporary context; reception http://theses.gla.ac.uk/82178/ Copyright and moral rights for this work are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge This work cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Enlighten: Theses https://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] Scribonius Largus' Compounding of Drugs (Compositiones medicamentorum) Introduction, Translation, and Medico-Historical Comments Vol I: Introduction, Medicine and Pharmacy in Contemporary Context, Reception Vol II: Translation with Explanatory and Medico-Historical Comments Ianto Thorvald Jocks Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Classics) School of Humanities, Subject Area Classics College of Arts University of Glasgow June 2020 © Ianto Thorvald Jocks, 2020 ii Abstract Scribonius Largus’ Compounding of Drugs or Recipes for Remedies (Compositiones medicamentorum) is an important
    [Show full text]