DOCSLIB.ORG

Santa Rosa Plains Endangered Plant Protection Program Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Santa Rosa Plains Endangered Plant Protection Program Report SANTA ROSA PLAINS ENDANGERED PLANT PROTECTION PROGRAM REPORT Prepared for Sonoma County Planning Department and California Department of Fish and G.-_ Endangered Plant Project Section A: Marco Waaland, Author and Field Investigator Section B: Joan Vilme, Author Project Manager and Editor: Rocky Thompson April, 1989 Revised April, 1990 TAB[_ OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................... /NTROOUCTION ....................................................................... ii EXECUTIVE SUM}tARY ................................................................... iii SECTION A. RARR PLJh_ITECOLOGY ..................................................... l I. BACKGROUND .................................................................... [ A. Ecology of Vernal Pools in the Santa Rosa Plains ......................... i B. Endangerment of Plants Associated With Vernal Pools In Santa Rosa Plains i C. Species of Concern ....................................................... 2 II. SCOPE OF PROJECT ............................................................ 6 Ill. NEED FOR THE PROJECT ................................................... 8 IV. METHODS ............................................................... l[ V. RESULTS ............................................................... [[ A. Field Survey Forms ............................................... 12 B. =iological Quality Rating ......................................... [6 C. hadangerment ...................................................... 20 D. Species of Concern ................................................... 24 [. Lasthenia burkei (LABU) .......................................... 24 2. Limnanthes vinculans (LIVI) ...................................... 27 3. Blennosperma bakeri (BLBA) ....................................... 30 4. Navarretia plie_a (NAPL) ...................................... 33 5. Po_ogyne Dou_lasii ssp. parviflora (PODOP) ...................... 36 E. Ensemble Sites ....................................................... 38 F. Preservation Priority .................................................. &0 G. Protected Locations .................................................... 44 H. Confirmed Locations of Listed CNDDB Occurrences ...................... 45 F. Eztirpation of Listed CNDDB Occurrences ................................ 45 G. New Rare Plant Locations Not Listed by CNDDB ........................... 45 VI. DISCUSSION .................................................................... 46 A. Implications for Rare and Endangered Plants in the Vernal Pools of Santa Rosa Plains ......................................... 46 B. Site Quality .............................................................. 49 C. Endangerment ............................................................ 51 [. Effluent Irrigation ................................................ 52 2. Urbanization ....................................................... 53 3. Intensive Agriculture .............................................. 54 D. Preservation of Endangered Species and Their Habitat .................... 55 i. Prioritization of Study Sites for Preservation ...................... 55 2, Biological Considerations in Oevelopin_ Santa Rosa Plains Endangered Plant Protection Program ................................. 57 3. Practical Considerations in Establishing Rare Plant Preserves ....... 58 4. Problems Establishing Rare Plants Using Artificial Pool Creation .... 59 5. Management Considerations in Conserving Endangered Species .......... 61 6. Management Reco_endatione .......................................... 6l 7, A conceptual Plan for a Rare Plant Preserve System in the Santa Rosa Plains ................................................. 63 VII. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................... 65 i I Page SECTION B: MECRAHISMS OF PROTECTION ............................................... $8 I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 68 [I • VERNAL POOLS - A DESCRIPTION llo••,•_o,el,o,e•,t•t,t,e•, e_,•••o, oe,, •,e•o• 68 Ill. THE IMPORTANCE OF SONOMA COUNTY'S VERNAL POOLS ........................... 68 _V POLICYFOR ENDANGEREDSPECIESPROTECTION 69 V. PHASE i: INTERIM PLAN ................................................... 69 A. Program Goals ........................................................ 69 8. Program Objectives ................................................... 69 C. Implementation Policies .............................................. 70 C-- i • Regulatory _Qo,oo,•leeo_•e•teolet_,eo•i•*•oole_oo_oQ._ooaoejo,to_t_to 70 "_ C-2. Voluntary ........................................................... 70 D. Implementation Procedures ................................................. 70 D-I. Regulatory ......................................................... 70 D-l-a. Project Design .............................................. 71 D-l-b. Mitigation Policy .......................................... 71 D-2. Voluntary Implementation Procedures ............................... 74 D-2-a. Grants of Conservation Easements ............................ 74 D-2-b. Grants of Land in Fee ....................................... 76 D-2-c. Rare Plant Registry ......................................... 77 E. Acquisition Techniques .................................................... 79 E-l. Mechanics .......................................................... 79 E-l-a Market Sale le,•leeoeooeooeoooiiooe_e_ee_ee_ee,,m,_•,_eoe 79 E-l-b. Bargain Sale ................................................ 79 E-l-c. Gift ........................................................ 79 E-2. Types of Real Estate Interests Acquired ........................... 80 E-2-a. Fee Title - Full Ownership .................................. 80 E-2-b. Conservation Easement - Partial Interest .................... 80 E-2-c. Remainder - Future Interest--Reserved Life Estate ........... 81 J t f- SECTION B. MECHANISMS OF PROTECTION (cont.) Page VI. PHASE 2: SENSITIVE AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN ...................................... 82 A. Introduction ............................................................. 82 B. Immediate Problems ......... _ ............................................. 82 i. Lead Agency .......................................................... 82 2. Project Leader ....................................................... 82 3. Comprehensive Inventory, Evaluation and Mapping Needed ............... 82 4, Fragmented Jurisdiction .............................................. 83 C. Collaborative Process .................................................... 83 -_ D. Participants ............................................................. 83 I. Federal Regulators & Resource Agencies .............................. 83 2. State Regulators & Resource Agencies ................................ 83 3. County Regulators ................................................... 83 A. City Regulators ..................................................... 83 5. Private Sector Representatives ...................................... 84 E. Producing Results ........................................................ 84 F. Updating of Information .................................................. 84 SECTION C: FINAL REPORT RECOMI_ND&TIONS ........................................... 85 PgREONS AND AGENCIES CONTACTED ..................................................... 86 APPENDICES .......................................................................... 87 Appendix I -- Laws Pertaining to Rare and Endangered Plants .................... 87 Appendix 2 -- Santa Rosa Plains Vernal Pool Survey Form ........................ 87 Appendix 3 -- Completed Rare Plan= Survey Forms ................................ 87 Appendix _ -- Parcel Specific Occurrence Maps .................................. 87 Appendix 5 -- List of California Natural Diversity Data Base Occurances and Corresponding Report Locations .................... 91 REFERENCES For Section A .................................................................. 95 For Section B .................................................................. 98 INTEODUCTIOM Because extinction can be avoided only by preventing habitat fragmentation, a regional approach is needed to protect vernal pool wetlands systems. That it was needed yesterday must not deter us from taking steps today that will safeguard species diversity for tomorrow. At issue is the survival of a unique and irreplaceable natural resource. As the rapid decline of rare plant populations in the Santa Rosa Plains continues, three of these species of concern will be on a collision course with extinction. We have already lost one species, showy Indian clover. The threat of extinction brings with it the likelihood of listing not only by the State but also by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Should federal listing occur, the control over that species and its habitat falls under the stringent regulatory authority of this federal agency, potentially removing local jurisdiction over land use decisions in those areas considered to be critical habitat. This report consists of two sections. Section A, Rare Plant Ecology, with accompanying data from Appendices I-4, is presented in a scientific study format. Field work performed in the first half of 1988 provided the biological data upon which the body of this 3ection rests. Section B, Mechanisms of Protection, picks up where the scientific section leaves off. A
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 118/Monday, June 20, 2016/Notices
    39944 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2016 / Notices information collection described in Type of Request: Extension. programs and projects that increase the Section A. Form Number: N/A. supply of affordable housing units, Description of the need for the prevent and reduce homelessness, A. Overview of Information Collection information and proposed use: improve data collection and reporting, Title of Information Collection: Application information is needed to and use coordinated neighborhood and OneCPD Technical Assistance Needs determine competition winners, i.e., the community development strategies to Assessment. technical assistance providers best able revitalize and strengthen their OMB Approval Number: 2506–0198. to develop efficient and effective communities. Number of Frequency of Responses Burden hour Annual burden Hourly cost Information collection respondents response per annum per response hours per response Annual cost Application .................... 52 1 52 100 5,200 $0 $0 Work Plans ................... 23 10 230 18 4,140 40 165,600 Reports ......................... 23 4 72 6 432 40 17,280 Recordkeeping ............. 23 12 276 6 1,656 40 66,240 Total ...................... ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 11,248 ........................ 249,120 B. Solicitation of Public Comment DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND or telephone (202) 708–2290. This is not URBAN DEVELOPMENT a toll-free number. Persons with hearing This notice is soliciting comments or speech impairments may access this [Docket No. FR–5910–N–10] from members of the public and affected number through TTY by calling the toll- parties concerning the collection of 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877– information described in Section A on Collection: Veterans Home 8339.
    [Show full text]
  • An Investigation of the Reproductive Ecology and Seed Bank
    California Department of Fish & Game U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Endangered Species Act (Section-6) Grant-in-Aid Program FINAL PROJECT REPORT E-2-P-35 An Investigation of the Reproductive Ecology and Seed Bank Dynamics of Burke’s Goldfields (Lasthenia burkei), Sonoma Sunshine (Blennosperma bakeri), and Sebastopol Meadowfoam (Limnanthes vinculans) in Natural and Constructed Vernal Pools Christina M. Sloop1, 2, Kandis Gilmore1, Hattie Brown3, Nathan E. Rank1 1Department of Biology, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA 2San Francisco Bay Joint Venture, Fairfax, CA 3Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation, Santa Rosa, CA Prepared for Cherilyn Burton ([email protected]) California Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Division 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1280, Sacramento, CA 95814 March 1, 2012 1 1. Location of work: Santa Rosa Plain, Sonoma County, California 2. Background: Burke’s goldfield (Lasthenia burkei), a small, slender annual herb in the sunflower family (Asteraceae), is known only from southern portions of Lake and Mendocino counties and from northeastern Sonoma County. Historically, 39 populations were known from the Santa Rosa Plain, two sites in Lake County, and one site in Mendocino County. The occurrence in Mendocino County is most likely extirpated. From north to south on the Santa Rosa Plain, the species ranges from north of the community of Windsor to east of the city of Sebastopol. The long-term viability of many populations of Burke’s goldfields is particularly problematic due to population decline. There are currently 20 known extant populations, a subset of which were inoculated into pools at constructed sites to mitigate the loss of natural populations in the context of development.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine) Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields) Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam) California tiger salamander Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment (Ambystoma californiense) Lasthenia burkei Blennosperma bakeri Limnanthes vinculans Jo-Ann Ordano J. E. (Jed) and Bonnie McClellan Jo-Ann Ordano © 2004 California Academy of Sciences © 1999 California Academy of Sciences © 2005 California Academy of Sciences Sonoma County California Tiger Salamander Gerald Corsi and Buff Corsi © 1999 California Academy of Sciences Disclaimer Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, publish recovery plans, sometimes preparing them with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies, Tribal agencies, and other affected and interested parties. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Costs indicated for action implementation and time of recovery are estimates and subject to change. Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific actions, and may not represent the views or the official positions of any individuals or agencies involved in recovery plan formulation, other than the Service. Recovery plans represent our official position only after they have been signed by the Director or Regional Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery actions. LITERATURE CITATION SHOULD READ AS FOLLOWS: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Pollinators in Peril: a Systematic Status Review of North American
    POLLINATORS in Peril A systematic status review of North American and Hawaiian native bees Kelsey Kopec & Lori Ann Burd • Center for Biological Diversity • February 2017 Executive Summary hile the decline of European honeybees in the United States and beyond has been well publicized in recent years, the more than 4,000 species of native bees in North W America and Hawaii have been much less documented. Although these native bees are not as well known as honeybees, they play a vital role in functioning ecosystems and also provide more than $3 billion dollars in fruit-pollination services each year just in the United States. For this first-of-its-kind analysis, the Center for Biological Diversity conducted a systematic review of the status of all 4,337 North American and Hawaiian native bees. Our key findings: • Among native bee species with sufficient data to assess (1,437), more than half (749) are declining. • Nearly 1 in 4 (347 native bee species) is imperiled and at increasing risk of extinction. • For many of the bee species lacking sufficient population data, it’s likely they are also declining or at risk of extinction. Additional research is urgently needed to protect them. • A primary driver of these declines is agricultural intensification, which includes habitat destruction and pesticide use. Other major threats are climate change and urbanization. These troubling findings come as a growing body of research has revealed that more than 40 percent of insect pollinators globally are highly threatened, including many of the native bees critical to unprompted crop and wildflower pollination across the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Cramvernal Pool Endemics-Final.Pdf
    Vernal Pool Systems and Individual Vernal Pools Version 6.1 APPENDIX 1 Vernal Pool Endemic Plant List Use this list to determine if a species is a vernal pool endemic Bsed on Appendix C from: T. Keeler-Wolf, D.R. Elam, K. Lewis, S.A. Flint. 1998. California Vernal Pool Assessment Preliminary Report. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game. 161 pp. www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/wetlands/pdfs/VernalPoolAssessmentPreliminaryReport.pdf May 2013 ! CRAM%Vernal%Pool%Endemic%Plants%List May%2013 Scientific%Name Family Genus Species infraspecific_rank %infraspecific_epithet Agrostis(elliottiana POACEAE Agrostis elliottiana Agrostis(hendersonii POACEAE Agrostis hendersonii Agrostis(microphylla POACEAE Agrostis microphylla Alopecurus(carolinianus POACEAE Alopecurus carolinianus Alopecurus(saccatus POACEAE Alopecurus saccatus Anagallis(minima MYRSINACEAE Anagallis minima Astragalus(tener(var.(ferrisiae FABACEAE Astragalus tener var. ferrisiae Astragalus(tener(var.(tener FABACEAE Astragalus tener var. tener Atriplex(cordulata CHENOPODIACEAE Atriplex cordulata Atriplex(cordulata(var.(cordulata CHENOPODIACEAE Atriplex cordulata var. cordulata Atriplex(cordulata(var.(erecticaulis CHENOPODIACEAE Atriplex cordulata var. erecticaulis Atriplex(depressa CHENOPODIACEAE Atriplex depressa Atriplex(minuscula CHENOPODIACEAE Atriplex minuscula Atriplex(parishii CHENOPODIACEAE Atriplex parishii Atriplex(persistens CHENOPODIACEAE Atriplex persistens Atriplex(subtilis CHENOPODIACEAE Atriplex subtilis Blennosperma(bakeri ASTERACEAE Blennosperma
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Assessment
    CHARLES M. SCHULZ SONOMA COUNTY AIRPORT BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Submitted to: Federal Aviation Administration Western-Pacific Region 15000 Aviation Blvd. Hawthorne, California 90250 Submitted by: Sonoma County Department of Transportation and Public Works 2300 County Center Drive, Suite B-100 Santa Rosa, California 95403 Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. 157 Park Place Point Richmond, California 94801 (510) 236-6810 LSA Project No. MHN530 March 24, 2006 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CHARLES M. SCHULZ SONOMA COUNTY AIRPORT MARCH 2006 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT...........................................................1 1.2 SITE LOCATION AND PROJECT AREA..........................................................................1 1.3 NOMENCLATURE..............................................................................................................6 2.0 SPECIES ADDRESSED .................................................................................................................7 2.1 LISTED SPECIES ................................................................................................................7 2.2 OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES .............................................................................10 2.3 CRITICAL HABITAT STATUS........................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Fws–R8–Es–2016–N071; Fxes11130000–156 E
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 06/20/2016 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2016-14456, and on FDsys.gov Billing Code 4333–15 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS–R8–ES–2016–N071; FXES11130000–156–FF08E00000] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Recovery Plan for Four Species of the Santa Rosa Plain AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce the availability of the Recovery Plan for four plant species of the Santa Rosa Plain: the Sonoma sunshine, Burke’s goldfields, the Sebastopol meadowfoam, and the Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment of the California Tiger Salamander. The recovery plan includes recovery objectives and criteria, and specific actions necessary to achieve removal of the species from the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. 1 ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the recovery plan from our website at http://www.fws.gov/endangered/species/recovery-plans.html. Alternatively, you may contact the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W–2605, Sacramento, CA 95825 (telephone 916–414–6700). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Norris, Field Supervisor, at the above street address by telephone (see ADDRESSES). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We announce the availability of the Recovery Plan for the following four species of the Santa Rosa Plain: Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine) Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields) Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam) Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment of the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense) The recovery plan includes recovery objectives and criteria, and specific actions necessary to achieve removal of the species from the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Study Tolay Creek Ranch Sonoma County, California
    BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES STUDY TOLAY CREEK RANCH SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Submitted to: Sonoma Land Trust 2300 County Center Drive #120A Santa Rosa, California 95403 Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. 157 Park Place Point Richmond, California 94801 (510) 236-6810 LSA Project No. SOZ0801 May 2o, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1 1.1 PURPOSE.............................................................................................................................1 1.2 LOCATION ..........................................................................................................................1 1.3 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................1 1.4 LAND USE AND HISTORY...............................................................................................2 1.5 REGULATORY CONTEXT................................................................................................3 1.5.1 Federal Endangered Species Act .............................................................................3 1.5.2 Clean Water Act ......................................................................................................4 1.5.3 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act.............................................................5 1.5.4 Migratory Bird Treaty Act.......................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Bio Review Letter with Attachments
    April 30, 2020 Betty Lou Hudson 17715 State Route 1 Marshall, California [email protected] RE: Biological Constraints Analysis of Residential Reconstruction Permitting Support Services, Marshall, Marin County, California (APN 106-270-05) Ms. Hudson, This letter provides a brief biological review and discussion of the methods and results of a September 12, 2019 site visit conducted by WRA, Inc. (WRA) to a private residence located at 17715 State Route 1, Marshall, Marin County (APN: 106-270-05; Study Area). In this letter we assess the protected species and sensitive habitats present at this property. Based on a review of the Study Area, there are no sensitive terrestrial (land) habitats; however, ornamental trees and shrubs may provide nesting bird habitat. Rocky to sandy intertidal aquatic habitat and eelgrass beds are present below the building structure. Special-status fish and marine mammals occur within the waters of Tomales Bay; however, due to the marginal habitat quality locally, incorporation of avoidance and minimization measures, and modifications of the Project design, any temporary project impacts will be minimal and are not expected to result in a significant change to the habitat’s existing condition. There are no wetland, stream, or riparian habitats, and there are no special-status plants that occur in the Study Area. SITE ASSESSMENT METHODS On September 12, 2019, a WRA biologist visited the Study Area (Attachment A, Figure 1) to determine (1) habitats present, (2) if existing conditions provide suitable habitat for any special- status plant or wildlife species, (3) the presence and extent of eelgrass habitat, which is subject to regulation under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) and Section 404(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act (and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act), and (4) the location and extent of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs), including wetlands, streams, and riparian areas, which may be subject to regulation under the California Coastal Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed Plants on the Santa Rosa Plain
    Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed Plants on the Santa Rosa Plain (modified from the September 23, 1996 Service Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed and Candidate Plants) These guidelines describe protocols for conducting botanical surveys for federally listed plant species on the Santa Rosa Plain. They also describe minimum standards for reporting results of the surveys. The federally listed plant species occurring on the Santa Rosa Plain are Sonoma sunshine (Blennosperma bakeri), Burke’s goldfields (Lasthenia burkei), Sebastopol meadowfoam (Limnanthes vinculans), and many-flowered navarretia (Navarretia leucocephala ssp. plieantha). The Service will use, in part, the information outlined below in determining whether the project under consideration may affect these plants, and in determining the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects. Field inventories should be conducted by a qualified botanist in a manner that will locate listed species that may be present. With the exception of developed agricultural lands, the entire project area should be surveyed. Acceptable survey protocols are as follows: 1. A minimum of three visits must be made to the project site during the growing season. Site visits must correspond to times when at least one of the four Santa Rosa Plain listed plant species is accurately identifiable on a local reference site. Reference sites used must be acceptable to the Service. Site visits must span a period during which all four of the listed plants have been observed (not necessarily at the same time) and are identifiable on reference sites during a specific growing season. More visits to the site or the adjacent area may be needed to determine when each species is blooming in a given year.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendices I Through VIII
    APPENDIX I: Standards for Ecological Classification A given terrestrial ecological system is defined as a group of plant community types that tend to co-occur within landscapes with similar ecological processes, substrates, and/or environmental gradients. A given terrestrial ecological system will typically manifest itself in a landscape at intermediate geographic scales of 10s to 1,000s of hectares and persist for 50 or more years. Ecological processes include natural disturbances such as fire and flooding. Substrates may include a variety of soil surface and bedrock features, such as shallow soils, alkaline parent materials, sandy/gravelling soils, or peatlands. Finally, environmental gradients include hydrologically defined patterns in coastal zones, arid grassland or desert areas, or montane, alpine or subalpine zones defined by climate. By plant community type, we mean a vegetation classification unit at the association or alliance level of the US National Vegetation Classification (US-NVC) (Grossman et al. 1998, Jennings et al. 2003, NatureServe 2004), or, if these are not available, other comparable vegetation units. US-NVC associations are used wherever possible to describe the component biotic communities of each terrestrial system. Ecological systems are defined using both spatial and temporal criteria that influence the grouping of associations. Associations that consistently co-occur on the landscape therefore define biotic components of each ecological system type. Our approach to ecological systems definition using US-NVC associations is similar to the biotope or habitat approach used, for example, by the EUNIS habitat classification, which explicitly links meso-scale habitat units to European Vegetation Survey alliance units (Rodwell et al. 2002).
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Draft Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine) Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields) Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam) Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment of the California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) Lasthenia burkei Blennosperma bakeri Limnanthes vinculans Jo-Ann Ordano J. E. (Jed) and Bonnie McClellan Jo-Ann Ordano © 2004 California Academy of Sciences © 1999 California Academy of Sciences © 2005 California Academy of Sciences Sonoma County California Tiger Salamander Gerald Corsi and Buff Corsi © 1999 California Academy of Sciences Draft Recovery Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain Blennosperma bakeri (Sonoma sunshine) Lasthenia burkei (Burke’s goldfields) Limnanthes vinculans (Sebastopol meadowfoam) California tiger salamander Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment (Ambystoma californiense) 2014 Region 8 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sacramento, California Approved: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region, Region 8, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Disclaimer Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, publish recovery plans, sometimes preparing them with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies, Tribal agencies, and other affected and interested parties. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Costs indicated for action implementation and time of recovery are estimates and subject to change. Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific actions, and may not represent the views or the official positions of any individuals or agencies involved in recovery plan formulation, other than the Service.
    [Show full text]