DOCSLIB.ORG

Camp Shelby Field Office the Nature Conservancy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Camp Shelby Field Office the Nature Conservancy Camp Shelby Field Office The Nature Conservancy 2005 Annual Report Lisa Yager James Lee Matt Hinderliter Steve Leonard 1 Acknowledgements The Mississippi Army National Guard and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory provided funding for the Camp Shelby Field Office in 2005. We thank Col. Robert Piazza (MSARNG), Cpt. Robert Lemire (MSARNG), Marshall Adams (ORNL) and Mark Peterson (ORNL) for working with us and providing funding for the projects that are summarized in this document. We appreciate the long hours in field, data maintenance, and other assistance provided by the CSFO technicians: CJ Sabette, TG Jackson, Melissa Olsen, and John Rhine. We thank the U.S. Forest Service (DeSoto Ranger District) for allowing us to work in DeSoto National Forest and for sharing ideas with us. Tom Mann with the Mississippi Museum of Natural Science has been invaluable in providing information necessary for some projects. We would also like to thank Dr. Sam Rosso for information and access to the Camp Shelby herbarium. We look forward to continuing with these projects and starting new projects in 2006. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 GOPHER TORTOISE RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT ................................................. 4 1.1 Effects of Military Training and Habitat Quality on Gopher Tortoises ............................... 4 1.2 Gopher Tortoise Burrow Marking and Database ................................................................. 6 1.3 Intrinsic Causes of Low Hatching Success in Eggs of Threatened Gopher Tortoises in South Mississippi ........................................................................................................................ 6 3.0 CAMP SHELBY BURROWING CRAYFISH ...................................................................... 12 3.1 Colony Delineation and Habitat Quality at the Landscape-Scale in the Cypress Creek and Beaumont Watersheds .............................................................................................................. 12 3.2 Habitat/CSBC Density Monitoring .................................................................................... 12 4.0 COGONGRASS RESEARCH AND CONTROL .................................................................. 16 4.1 Cogongrass Control and Prevention of Spread ................................................................... 16 4.2 Comparison of Plant Species Diversity in Cogongrass Patches Compared to Adjacent Habitat ....................................................................................................................................... 22 5.0 BLACK PINESNAKE ............................................................................................................ 23 5.1 General Captures ................................................................................................................ 23 5.2 Radio-telemetry.................................................................................................................. 26 5.3 Food Items ......................................................................................................................... 28 5.4 Parasitology........................................................................................................................ 29 5.4 Seasonal Activity ............................................................................................................... 31 6.0 PLANT INVENTORY .......................................................................................................... 34 7.0 ANIMAL INVENTORY ....................................................................................................... 35 7.1 Amphibian and Reptile Captures ....................................................................................... 35 7.2 Mussels .............................................................................................................................. 37 7.3 Field Guides ....................................................................................................................... 38 8.0 SURVEYS .............................................................................................................................. 38 9.0 PRESENTATIONS, POSTERS, AND PUBLICATIONS ..................................................... 39 10.0 WORKSHOPS/FIELD TRIPS/ETC. .................................................................................... 40 11.0 REFERENCES CITED ......................................................................................................... 41 3 1.0 GOPHER TORTOISE RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT 1.1 Effects of Military Training and Habitat Quality on Gopher Tortoises In 2005 we initiated a collaborative project with the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL) to work with gopher tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus) on the Camp Shelby Training Site (CSTS). Year one of this project involved project design, acquisition of research materials, field testing of research equipment, and site selection. Sites were selected based on various combinations of different military activity levels and gopher tortoise habitat quality, and also if they supported a population of at least 5-10 tortoises. The site selection process included: 1. Analyses of Camp Shelby Range Control’s Annual Ammunition Reports and Range Facility Management Support System (RFMSS) Utilization Detail Reports to determine troop activity and type/amount of ammunition fired from firing points and ranges over the last 5 years. 2. Analysis of survey data (Wester 2005, unpublished report) to determine location, number, and activity status of gopher tortoise burrows at sites all across the Training Site 3. Initial visual analysis of sites to determine whether they could be categorized as good ruderal habitat, good forested habitat, or poor habitat (see below for descriptions of habitat data collected at each site). A summary of study locations and treatment categories is presented in Figure 1.1.1. Habitat and vegetative sampling was performed for every burrow at each of the selected sites, and included measurements of: canopy cover, burrow bearing, burrow activity status, fire ant mound density, basal area of pines and hardwoods, vegetative species composition, and percent cover of bareground, litter, and vegetation by growth form categories. Each site was also sampled to get a thorough characterization of the energetic residues in the soil. Data collection on gopher tortoise physiological indicators, health, and reproductive status and additional habitat characterization at each study site will begin in the spring of 2006. Prior to trapping tortoises for data collection/transmitter attachment, each site will be re-surveyed for gopher tortoise burrows. Background for ORNL Research Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) species on military installations can potentially be impacted by environmental factors from military and non-military sources. Therefore, sensitive and ecologically-relevant bioassessment tools are needed by environmental managers to determine 1) if the health of organisms is being impaired by these activities; 2) if observed effects are due to military activities; and 3) if so, can such effects be related to the type and magnitude of specific military activities. To address these issues, a suite of biomarkers representing a range of sensitivities, specificities, and ecological relevance to environmental stressors will be measured on gopher tortoises at Camp Shelby, MS. Some of the primary habitat of the federally-threatened gopher tortoise at CSTS are firing points that are characterized by different levels of noise, explosive residuals, and habitat disturbance resulting from tracked vehicle firing, maneuvering, and troop activity. To assess the potential impact of chemicals, noise, and habitat disturbance on the health of the gopher tortoise living on these firing points, 4 the sampling design includes 6 treatment levels with 3 replicated sites for each treatment. Main treatment effects are level of activity (high, low, none) and type of habitat (good, poor). Study Sites for ORNL Gopher Tortoise Study SITE 2 SITE 1 FP 121 FP 140 STATE LAND FP 136 FP 68 SITE 8 SITE 3 FP 72 SITE 5 FP 507 SITE 4 OP6 T44 EAST T44 WEST SITE 6 FP 64 SITE 7 • Legend Gopher Tortoise Burrows CSTS Lisa Yager 0 3,600 7,200 14,400 Meters 22 December 2005 No warranty is made by the State/Territory/National Guard Bureau as to the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of these data for the individual use or aggregate use with other data. The map is a living document, in that it is intended to change as new data becomes available and is incorporated into the Enterprise GIS database. Military Activity Level High Low None Habitat Quality Forested Habitat Good n/a T44 E, T44 W, State Land n/a Poor n/a Site 3, Site 4, Site 5 Site 6, Site 7, Site 8 Ruderal Habitat Good FP 121, FP 140, FP 68, OP6* FP 136, FP 72, FP 64 Site 1, Site 2, FP 507 Poor n/a n/a n/a *OP 6 selected due to presence of energetic residues in the soil. Figure 1.1.1. Summary of study sites for gopher tortoise bioindicator study by location and Background treatment categories. for CERL Research 5 The overall technical objective of this proposed multiyear study is to determine the effects of military training activities and associated sound levels on the activity patterns and movement rates of gopher tortoises. Detailed objectives of this study are: 1) record and characterize training maneuver
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Vascular Flora of the Lake Thoreau Environmental Center
    THE VASCULAR FLORA OF THE LAKE THOREAU ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER, FORREST AND LAMAR COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI, WITH COMMENTS ON COMPOSITIONAL CHANGE AFTER A DECADE OF PRESCRIBED FIRE William J. McFarland, Danielle Cotton, Mac H. Alford, Micheal A. Davis 118 College Dr., Box 5018 School of Biological, Environmental, and Earth Sciences The University of Southern Mississippi Hattiesburg, Mississippi 39406, U.S.A. [email protected] ABSTRACT Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) ecosystems exhibit high species diversity and are major contributors to the extraordinary levels of regional biodiversity and endemism found in the North American Coastal Plain Province. These forests require frequent fire return inter- vals (every 2–3 years) to maintain this rich diversity. In 2009, a floristic inventory was conducted at the Lake Thoreau Environmental Center owned by the University of Southern Mississippi in Hattiesburg, Mississippi. The Center is located on 106 ha with approximately half cov- ered by a 100+ year old longleaf pine forest. When the 2009 survey was conducted, fire had been excluded for over 20 years resulting in a dense understory dominated by woody species throughout most of the forest. The 2009 survey recorded 282 vascular plant species. Prescribed fire was reintroduced in 2009 and reapplied again in 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018. A new survey was conducted in 2019 to assess the effects of prescribed fire on floristic diversity. The new survey found an additional 268 species bringing the total number of plants species to 550. This study highlights the changes in species diversity that occurs when fire is reintroduced into a previously fire-suppressed system and the need to monitor sensitive areas for changes in species composition.
    [Show full text]
  • Panflora Site Plant List Apalachicola Bluffs and Ravines Preserve (TNC) Generated: 7 June 2005 Copyright: Gil Nelson 186 Records
    PanFlora Site Plant List Apalachicola Bluffs and Ravines Preserve (TNC) Generated: 7 June 2005 Copyright: Gil Nelson 186 Records Acer negundo (BOXELDER) Acer rubrum (RED MAPLE) Aesculus pavia (RED BUCKEYE) Agalinis divaricata (PINELAND FALSE FOXGLOVE) Albizia julibrissin (MIMOSA) Amelanchier arborea (COMMON SERVICEBERRY) Arenaria lanuginosa (SPREADING SANDWORT) Arenaria serpyllifolia (THYMELEAF SANDWORT) Arisaema dracontium (GREENDRAGON) Arisaema quinatum (PESTER-JOHN) Arisaema triphyllum (JACK-IN-THE-PULPIT) Aristida stricta beyrichiana (WIREGRASS) Aristolochia serpentaria (VIRGINIA SNAKEROOT) Aristolochia tomentosa (WOOLLY DUTCHMAN'S-PIPE; PIPEVINE) Arundinaria gigantea (SWITCHCANE) Asarum arifolium (WILD GINGER; LITTLE BROWN JUG; HEARTLEAF WILD GINGER) Asimina parviflora (SMALLFLOWER PAWPAW) Asplenium platyneuron (EBONY SPLEENWORT) Athyrium filix-femina asplenioides (SOUTHERN LADY FERN) Aureolaria flava (SMOOTH YELLOW FALSE FOXGLOVE) Baptisia lanceolata (GOPHERWEED) Berlandiera pumila (SOFT GREENEYES) Betula nigra (RIVER BIRCH) Bignonia capreolata (CROSSVINE) Boechera canadensis (SICKLEPOD) Calamintha dentata (FLORIDA CALAMINT; TOOTHED SAVORY) Callicarpa americana (AMERICAN BEAUTYBERRY) Calycanthus floridus (EASTERN SWEETSHRUB; CAROLINA ALLSPICE) Calycocarpum lyonii (CUPSEED) Carex baltzellii (BALTZELL'S SEDGE) Carex digitalis (SLENDER WOODLAND SEDGE) Carex nigromarginata floridana (BLACKEDGE SEDGE) Carpinus caroliniana (AMERICAN HORNBEAM; BLUEBEECH) Carya glabra (PIGNUT HICKORY) Carya pallida (SAND HICKORY) Ceanothus microphyllus (LITTLELEAF
    [Show full text]
  • Understory Plant Community Response to Season of Burn in Natural Longleaf Pine Forests
    UNDERSTORY PLANT COMMUNITY RESPONSE TO SEASON OF BURN IN NATURAL LONGLEAF PINE FORESTS John S. Kush and Ralph S. Meldahl School of Forestry, 108 M. White Smith Hall, Auburn University, AL 36849 William D. Boyer U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 520 Devall Street, Auburn, AL 36849 ABSTRACT A season of burn study· was initiated in 1973 on the EscambiaExperimental Forest, near Brewton, Alabama. All study plots were established in l4-year-old longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) stands. Treatments conSisted of biennial burns in winter, spring, and summer, plus a no-burn check. Objectives of the current study were to determine composition and structure of understory plant communities after 22 years of seasonal burning, identify changes since last sampling in 1982, arid assess the structure of the communities that stabilized under each treatment regime. There were 114 species on biennial winter~burned plots, compared to 104 on spring- and summer-burned and 84 with no burning. The woody understory biomass «1 centimeter diameter at breast height) increased with all treatments compared with 1982. Grass and legume biomass increased with winter and spring burning. Forb biomass decreased across treatments. keywords: biomass, longleaf pine, Pinus palustris, plant response, prescribed fire, south Alabama, understory. Citation: Kush, 1.S., R$. Meldahl, and W.D. Boyer. 2000. Understory plant community response to season of burn in natural longleaf pine forests. Pages 32-39 inW Keith Moser and Cynthia F. Moser (eds.). Fire and forest ecology: innovative silviculture and vegetation management. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference Proceedings, No. 21. Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, FL.
    [Show full text]
  • Innocence (Houstonia Procumbens)
    Innocence (Houstonia procumbens) For definitions of botanical terms, visit en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_botanical_terms. Although often overlooked, the diminutive white flowers and verdurous leaves of Innocence are a welcome sight for anyone with the winter blues. This low-growing perennial creeps along the floors of many open habitats such as pine flatwoods, sandhills, scrub and ruderal areas throughout Florida. Photo by Mary Keim Innocence goes largely unnoticed until late winter and early spring when it blooms with lovely white four-lobed flowers on a tidy carpet of green ovate leaves. Although its solitary flowers are only 4–6 mm in diameter, the plant can form a miniature wildflower garden. The leaves are oppositely arranged. Stems are prostrate. Seeds are born in tiny capsules. The species epithet procumbens is from the Latin procumbo, meaning “to lie down.” Family: Rubiaceae (Madder or coffee family) Native range: Throughout Florida To see where natural populations of Innocence have been vouchered, visit www.florida.plantatlas.usf.edu. Hardiness: Zones 8–10 Soil: Moderately moist soils Exposure: Sunny, open areas to light shade Growth habit: 1” tall, spreading up to 12” Propagation: Seed Garden tips: Innocence is rarely for sale in nurseries, but is easy to grow and can be used as a slow-spreading winter groundcover in a lightly mulched or open area. Although dormant in summer, it co-exists well with sparse grasses and seems to reseed or be long-lived. Florida Wildflower Foundation • 225 S. Swoope Ave., Suite 110, Maitland, FL 32751 • 407-622-1606 • www.FlaWildflowers.org.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A. Plant Species Known to Occur at Canaveral National Seashore
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Vegetation Community Monitoring at Canaveral National Seashore, 2009 Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2012/256 ON THE COVER Pitted stripeseed (Piriqueta cistoides ssp. caroliniana) Photograph by Sarah L. Corbett. Vegetation Community Monitoring at Canaveral National Seashore, 2009 Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRDS—2012/256 Michael W. Byrne and Sarah L. Corbett USDI National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network Cumberland Island National Seashore 101 Wheeler Street Saint Marys, Georgia, 31558 and Joseph C. DeVivo USDI National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network University of Georgia 160 Phoenix Road, Phillips Lab Athens, Georgia, 30605 March 2012 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Data Series is intended for the timely release of basic data sets and data summaries. Care has been taken to assure accuracy of raw data values, but a thorough analysis and interpretation of the data has not been completed. Consequently, the initial analyses of data in this report are provisional and subject to change. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Floristic Studies of Georgian Sandhill Ecosystems Reveals a Dynamic Composition of Endemics and Generalists James M
    Georgia Southern University Digital Commons@Georgia Southern University Honors Program Theses 2017 Comparative Floristic Studies of Georgian Sandhill Ecosystems Reveals a Dynamic Composition of Endemics and Generalists James M. Long Honors College John Schenk Georgia Southern University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/honors-theses Part of the Biology Commons, and the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Long, James M. and Schenk, John, "Comparative Floristic Studies of Georgian Sandhill Ecosystems Reveals a Dynamic Composition of Endemics and Generalists" (2017). University Honors Program Theses. 247. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/honors-theses/247 This thesis (open access) is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. It has been accepted for inclusion in University Honors Program Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Comparative Floristic Studies of Georgian Sandhill Ecosystems Reveals a Dynamic Composition of Endemics and Generalists By James M. Long Under the mentorship of Dr. John Schenk ABSTRACT Sandhill habitats are characterized by sandy, xeric soils that contain a unique assemblage of plants and animals. Similar to the broader long-leaf pine (Pinus palustris) and wire grass (Aristida stricta) ecosystem that sandhills are a subset of, agriculture, development, and habitat modifications have caused sandhill ecosystems to become degraded, putting many species at risk of extinction. Previous studies have focused on diversity within individual sandhills, leaving us with an incomplete understanding of how these communities form, what species are endemic, whether endemics are widespread across sandhills, and how species have adapted to these communities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vascular Flora of the Red Hills Forever Wild Tract, Monroe County, Alabama
    The Vascular Flora of the Red Hills Forever Wild Tract, Monroe County, Alabama T. Wayne Barger1* and Brian D. Holt1 1Alabama State Lands Division, Natural Heritage Section, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Montgomery, AL 36130 *Correspondence: wayne [email protected] Abstract provides public lands for recreational use along with con- servation of vital habitat. Since its inception, the Forever The Red Hills Forever Wild Tract (RHFWT) is a 1785 ha Wild Program, managed by the Alabama Department of property that was acquired in two purchases by the State of Conservation and Natural Resources (AL-DCNR), has pur- Alabama Forever Wild Program in February and Septem- chased approximately 97 500 ha (241 000 acres) of land for ber 2010. The RHFWT is characterized by undulating general recreation, nature preserves, additions to wildlife terrain with steep slopes, loblolly pine plantations, and management areas and state parks. For each Forever Wild mixed hardwood floodplain forests. The property lies tract purchased, a management plan providing guidelines 125 km southwest of Montgomery, AL and is managed by and recommendations for the tract must be in place within the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural a year of acquisition. The 1785 ha (4412 acre) Red Hills Resources with an emphasis on recreational use and habi- Forever Wild Tract (RHFWT) was acquired in two sepa- tat management. An intensive floristic study of this area rate purchases in February and September 2010, in part was conducted from January 2011 through June 2015. A to provide protected habitat for the federally listed Red total of 533 taxa (527 species) from 323 genera and 120 Hills Salamander (Phaeognathus hubrichti Highton).
    [Show full text]
  • AMERICAN MUSEUM Novitates PUBLISHED by the AMERICAN MUSEUM of NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST at 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y
    AMERICAN MUSEUM Novitates PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST AT 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10024 Number 2920, pp. 1-14, figs. 1, 2, tables 1, 2 June 30, 1988 Checklist of the Vascular Flora of St. Catherines Island, Georgia NANCY C. COILE1 AND SAMUEL B. JONES, JR.2 ABSTRACT From 1983 to 1986, a survey was made of vas- cultivation of Sea Island cotton by the European cular plants on St. Catherines Island (2916 ha) in settlers and the 20th century use of the island for Liberty County along the Georgia coast. A total cattle production. When these factors are com- of 373 species was collected and identified. The bined with the presence of feral pigs and over- floristic diversity of St. Catherines Island is low population of deer, the low diversity is under- compared with that of several similar barrier is- standable. lands. This may be due in part to the extensive INTRODUCTION A reasonably complete and documented list of the vascular plants of St. Catherines NATURAL HISTORY Island was needed to support various scien- The natural history ofSt. Catherines Island tific programs of the St. Catherines Island has been discussed by Thomas et al. (1978) Foundation and other activities. Therefore, and is not repeated in detail here. Physio- we conducted a floristic survey from 1983 to graphically and culturally, St. Catherines is the end of 1986, collecting at various times typical of barrier islands of Georgia. Devel- throughout several growing seasons. At the oped along a low-energy coastline, St. Cath- time ofeach visit, we examined selected hab- erines is composed ofdistinct Pleistocene and itats for vascular plant species in addition to Holocene coastal deposits dating back 40,000 collecting the general flora.
    [Show full text]
  • (Rubiaceae), a Uniquely Distylous, Cleistogamous Species Eric (Eric Hunter) Jones
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2012 Floral Morphology and Development in Houstonia Procumbens (Rubiaceae), a Uniquely Distylous, Cleistogamous Species Eric (Eric Hunter) Jones Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES FLORAL MORPHOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT IN HOUSTONIA PROCUMBENS (RUBIACEAE), A UNIQUELY DISTYLOUS, CLEISTOGAMOUS SPECIES By ERIC JONES A dissertation submitted to the Department of Biological Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Summer Semester, 2012 Eric Jones defended this dissertation on June 11, 2012. The members of the supervisory committee were: Austin Mast Professor Directing Dissertation Matthew Day University Representative Hank W. Bass Committee Member Wu-Min Deng Committee Member Alice A. Winn Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii I hereby dedicate this work and the effort it represents to my parents Leroy E. Jones and Helen M. Jones for their love and support throughout my entire life. I have had the pleasure of working with my father as a collaborator on this project and his support and help have been invaluable in that regard. Unfortunately my mother did not live to see me accomplish this goal and I can only hope that somehow she knows how grateful I am for all she’s done. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge the members of my committee for their guidance and support, in particular Austin Mast for his patience and dedication to my success in this endeavor, Hank W.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of Native Versus Old-Field Vegetation in Upland Pinelands Managed with Frequent Fire, South Georgia, Usa
    A COMPARISON OF NATIVE VERSUS OLD-FIELD VEGETATION IN UPLAND PINELANDS MANAGED WITH FREQUENT FIRE, SOUTH GEORGIA, USA Thomas E. Ostertag1 and Kevin M. Robertson2 Tall Timbers Research Station, 13093 Henry Beadel Drive, Tallahassee, FL 32312, USA ABSTRACT Fire-maintained, herb-dominated upland pinelands of the southeastern U.S. Coastal Plain may be broadly divided into those that have arisen through secondary succession following abandonment of agriculture (old-field pinelands) and those that have never been plowed (native pinelands). The ability to distinguish these habitat types is important for setting conservation priorities by identifying natural areas for conservation and appropriate management and for assessing the ecological value and restoration potential for old-field pine forests managed with frequent fire. However, differences in species composition have rarely been quantified. The goals of this study were to characterize the species composition of native and old-field pineland ground cover, test the ability to distinguish communities of previously unknown disturbance history, and suggest indicator species for native versus old-field pinelands. Plant composition was surveyed in areas known to be native ground cover, those known to be old fields, and those with an uncertain disturbance history. Twelve permanent plots were established in each cover type and sampled in spring (April–May) and fall (October–November) in 2004 and 2005. Of the 232 species identified in the plots, 56 species were present only in native ground-cover plots, of which 17 species occurred in a sufficient number of plots to have a statistically significant binomial probability of occurring in native ground cover and might be considered indicator species.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Community Monitoring at Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve and Fort Caroline National Memorial, 2009
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Vegetation Community Monitoring at Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve and Fort Caroline National Memorial, 2009 Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2012/249 ON THE COVER Partridge berry or squawvine (Mitchella repens) Photograph by Sarah L. Corbett at Theodore Roosevelt Area of Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve, June 2009. Vegetation Community Monitoring at Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve and Fort Caroline National Memorial, 2009 Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2012/249 Michael W. Byrne and Sarah L. Corbett USDI National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network Cumberland Island National Seashore 101 Wheeler Street Saint Marys, Georgia, 31558 and Joseph C. DeVivo USDI National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network University of Georgia 160 Phoenix Road, Phillips Lab Athens, Georgia, 30605 February 2012 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Data Series is intended for the timely release of basic data sets and data summaries. Care has been taken to assure accuracy of raw data values, but a thorough analysis and interpretation of the data has not been completed. Consequently, the initial analyses of data in this report are provisional and subject to change.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2021 Volume 38, Number 2
    February 2021 Volume 38, Number 2 This is an online meeting. We will send you a link the day before the meeting. We will be back with in-person meetings as soon as our venues are open and safe. February 17, 7:00 pm Program Lessons Learned By Troy Springer Traditional landscape methods have proved to cause many environmental, social, and economic problems in our society. Loss of habitat, loss of regional historical characteristics, water quality decline, health concerns, and negative economic impacts are all in some way tied to how Americans develop and maintain outdoor spaces. To solve some of these social issues, more Americans are turning to native plants for use in outdoor spaces. However, the use of native plants alone will not solve all of our landscaping problems. To reap the full benefits of using native plants in our landscapes, one must rethink the entire approach to designing, developing, and maintaining outdoor spaces. Troy Springer has spent many years designing, developing, and maintaining outdoor spaces using native plants. He will share what he has learned over the years and introduce new concepts to get the most out of your landscape. 1 Febuary Field Trip Saturday, February 27 Contact Tina Patterson for time and meeting location and to register.. The trip is restricted to 10 FNPS members and we will be social distancing. Masks are required. This month’s field trip will be to Town ‘N Country Preserve. The preserve is a forested oasis surrounded by the Town ‘N Country community. Expect a 2 mile walk. Plant Swap – Bring One, Take One Saturday, March 20 FNPS Members Only, Masks and Social Distancing Required No money is involved, just potting up some plants and bringing them to share.
    [Show full text]