DOCSLIB.ORG

Upper Salinas Headwaters Conservation Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Upper Salinas Headwaters Conservation Plan UPPER SALINAS HEADWATERS CONSERVATION PLAN A Professional Project Presented to the Faculty of California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of City and Regional Planning By Justin T. Saydell October 2011 © 2011 Justin T. Saydell ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Cover photo courtesy of B.K. Richard ii COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP Title: Upper Salinas Headwaters Conservation Plan Author: Justin T. Saydell Prepared for the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County Date Submitted: September X, 2011 COMMITTEE CHAIR: Chris Clark, Lecturer, Cal Poly COMMITTEE MEMBER: Adrienne Greve, Associate Professor, Cal Poly COMMITTEE MEMBER: Robert Hill, Executive Director, Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County iii Upper Salinas Headwaters Conservation Plan Executive Summary By Justin T. Saydell The Upper Salinas Headwaters Conservation Plan is an effort to understand the cultural and ecosystem resources in the region, develop tools for conservation planning, and suggest a strategy and plan of action for implementation of those strategies. The plan covers a 218 square mile area between the Santa Lucia and the La Panza mountain ranges, south of Atascadero and east of the City of San Luis Obispo. The Conservation Area consists of rugged terrain made up of vast-relatively untouched open space. The area consists of several different vegetative communities including oak savannah grasslands, mixed hardwood and oak stands, shrubland, wetland and riparian corridors. The region is host to a number of land uses predominantly agriculture (mainly cattle ranching), some urban development, outdoor recreation, and a few mining operations. Approximately fifty-five percent of the acreage within the Conservation Area is designated public land (federal, state, and county), while the remaining acreages are dominantly private lands with Rural or Agriculture designations. Places of interest within the Conservation Area include the Upper Salinas River, Santa Margarita Reservoir, the historic Santa Margarita Ranch, and the town of Pozo. The region that contains the Conservation Area has been identified as having significant ecological resources (migratory corridors, important/rare vegetation communities, and a system of tributaries critical to Salinas River water quality and supply downstream.) The recognition of this important area has come from the California Rangeland Conservation Coalition statewide landscape priorities, The Nature Conservancy, the South Coast Wildlands Program, and a countywide report completed for The Conservancy by Catherine Lambert in 2007, which utilized Geographic information Systems (GIS) to assess ecosystem attributes and growth pressure parameters. The region containing the Conservation Area received a moderate to high combined score as a result of the assessment, suggesting a need for conservation efforts and resources from the Conservancy. The Conservation Area is based roughly on the shape of the subwatersheds that make up part of the larger Upper Salinas watershed. Several headwater tributaries flow into the Salinas River; a river utilized by several municipalities and agricultural operations as it flows north to Monterey Bay. Land use changes in the region can negatively affect water quality and supply downstream as well as degrade important habitat for fish and wildlife. Projected urban develop pressures from the City of Atascadero and an increase in more intensive agricultural production places increasing pressure on both local ranching operations and the regional ecosystem. The large amount of contiguous public land presents an opportunity for a conservation strategy aimed at creating expansive public-private protected lands that will ensure long-term protection of agricultural, hydrological, and wildlife resources. iv This conservation plan was developed primarily using GIS information from The Conservancy and data used with permission from the County of San Luis Obispo. GIS maps were created and utilized along with aerial photos from Google Earth to analyze the landscape for the following: vegetation communities geology stream flow direction and order existing protected areas types of development conservation potential land ownership/parcel data potential project sites for agricultural soils restoration/enhancement The GIS maps, aerial photo analysis, and information collected from interviews with several family ranchers are intended to be used as decision-support tools for future conservation projects in the region. However, for this plan, strategic and implementation recommendations are suggested in the form of long-term conservation agreements, land use management and restoration/enhancement techniques based on analysis of the information that was collected. The conservation strategy of this plan emphasizes the utilization of existing protected landscapes, primarily public land, along with the establishment of partnerships with private landowners within the Conservation Area to develop large contiguous tracts of protected land in the headwaters region of the Salinas River. The ranching heritage in the region, diversity of habitat and wildlife, sensitivity of hydrological resources, moderate to high levels of development potential from urban development, and more intensive agricultural production makes the Conservation Area in the Upper Salinas Watershed an essential target for conservation efforts. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I’d like to give a sincere thank you to my committee members, Chris Clark, Adrienne Greve, and Bob Hill who lent me their expertise, wisdom, support, and friendship throughout the process. I very much appreciate everything they have done to help me along the way. I would also like to thank the ranchers who took time out of their busy schedules to share their stories and provide some insight into the goals and challenges of running a family ranching operation. A special thank you goes out to my dedicated friends Ari and Kyle for voluntarily undertaking the tumultuous task of editing this document. Most importantly, I’d like to thank my friends and family near and far for their unwavering support, understanding, and compassion throughout this process. They were there through the thick and thin and provided the external motivation and friendship I needed to complete this project. vi Table of Contents List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xi 1.0 Purpose of the plan ................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 Assessment Tools .................................................................................................................. 7 2.1 GIS analysis ........................................................................................................................ 7 2.2 Aerial Photography ............................................................................................................. 9 2.3 Interviews ............................................................................................................................. 9 3.0 Background ........................................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Geographic Setting ........................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Pre-History ......................................................................................................................... 13 3.3 European History .............................................................................................................. 14 3.4 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................... 15 3.5 Climate ............................................................................................................................... 15 3.6 Geology .............................................................................................................................. 16 3.7 Soils .................................................................................................................................... 18 3.8 Hydrology ........................................................................................................................... 21 3.8.1 Subwatersheds .......................................................................................................... 21 3.8.2 Rivers and Streams .................................................................................................. 24 3.8.3 Ground water ............................................................................................................. 32 3.9 Vegetation .......................................................................................................................... 32 3.9.1 Mesomorphic Tree Vegetation ................................................................................ 34 3.9.2 Mesomorphic shrub vegetation ............................................................................... 39 3.9.3 Mesomorphic Herbaceous Vegetation ................................................................... 42 soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus) .........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Saccharum Ravennae (L.) L
    TAXON: Saccharum ravennae (L.) L. SCORE: 12.0 RATING: High Risk Taxon: Saccharum ravennae (L.) L. Family: Poaceae Common Name(s): Italian sugarcane Synonym(s): Erianthus elephantinus Hook. f. plume grass Erianthus purpurascens Andersson ravenna grass Erianthus ravennae (L.) P. Beauv. Ripidium ravennae (L.) Trin. Assessor: Chuck Chimera Status: Assessor Approved End Date: 8 Feb 2018 WRA Score: 12.0 Designation: H(HPWRA) Rating: High Risk Keywords: Ornamental Grass, Naturalized, Dense Stands, Wind-Dispersed, Riparian Qsn # Question Answer Option Answer 101 Is the species highly domesticated? y=-3, n=0 n 102 Has the species become naturalized where grown? 103 Does the species have weedy races? Species suited to tropical or subtropical climate(s) - If 201 island is primarily wet habitat, then substitute "wet (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) (See Appendix 2) Intermediate tropical" for "tropical or subtropical" 202 Quality of climate match data (0-low; 1-intermediate; 2-high) (See Appendix 2) High 203 Broad climate suitability (environmental versatility) y=1, n=0 y Native or naturalized in regions with tropical or 204 y=1, n=0 y subtropical climates Does the species have a history of repeated introductions 205 y=-2, ?=-1, n=0 y outside its natural range? 301 Naturalized beyond native range y = 1*multiplier (see Appendix 2), n= question 205 y 302 Garden/amenity/disturbance weed n=0, y = 1*multiplier (see Appendix 2) y 303 Agricultural/forestry/horticultural weed n=0, y = 2*multiplier (see Appendix 2) n 304 Environmental weed 305 Congeneric weed n=0, y = 1*multiplier (see Appendix 2) y 401 Produces spines, thorns or burrs y=1, n=0 n 402 Allelopathic 403 Parasitic y=1, n=0 n 404 Unpalatable to grazing animals 405 Toxic to animals y=1, n=0 n 406 Host for recognized pests and pathogens 407 Causes allergies or is otherwise toxic to humans y=1, n=0 n 408 Creates a fire hazard in natural ecosystems Creation Date: 8 Feb 2018 (Saccharum ravennae (L.) Page 1 of 17 L.) TAXON: Saccharum ravennae (L.) L.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Checklist of the Vascular Plant Flora of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument Phase II Report
    Annotated Checklist of the Vascular Plant Flora of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument Phase II Report By Dr. Terri Hildebrand Southern Utah University, Cedar City, UT and Dr. Walter Fertig Moenave Botanical Consulting, Kanab, UT Colorado Plateau Cooperative Ecosystems Studies Unit Agreement # H1200-09-0005 1 May 2012 Prepared for Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument Southern Utah University National Park Service Mojave Network TABLE OF CONTENTS Page # Introduction . 4 Study Area . 6 History and Setting . 6 Geology and Associated Ecoregions . 6 Soils and Climate . 7 Vegetation . 10 Previous Botanical Studies . 11 Methods . 17 Results . 21 Discussion . 28 Conclusions . 32 Acknowledgments . 33 Literature Cited . 34 Figures Figure 1. Location of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 5 Figure 2. Ecoregions and 2010-2011 collection sites in Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 8 Figure 3. Soil types and 2010-2011 collection sites in Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 9 Figure 4. Increase in the number of plant taxa confirmed as present in Grand Canyon- Parashant National Monument by decade, 1900-2011 . 13 Figure 5. Southern Utah University students enrolled in the 2010 Plant Anatomy and Diversity course that collected during the 30 August 2010 experiential learning event . 18 Figure 6. 2010-2011 collection sites and transportation routes in Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in northern Arizona . 22 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page # Tables Table 1. Chronology of plant-collecting efforts at Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument . 14 Table 2. Data fields in the annotated checklist of the flora of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument (Appendices A, B, C, and D) .
    [Show full text]
  • Sugarcane 1 Sugarcane
    Sugarcane 1 Sugarcane Sugarcane Cut sugar cane Scientific classification Kingdom: Plantae (unranked): Monocots (unranked): Commelinids Order: Poales Family: Poaceae Subfamily: Panicoideae Tribe: Andropogoneae Genus: Saccharum L. Selected species Sugarcane 2 Saccharum arundinaceum Saccharum barberi Saccharum bengalense Saccharum edule Saccharum munja Saccharum officinarum Saccharum procerum Saccharum ravennae Saccharum robustum Saccharum sinense Saccharum spontaneum Sugarcane, or Sugar cane, is any of six to 37 species (depending on which taxonomic system is used) of tall perennial true grasses of the genus Saccharum, tribe Andropogoneae. Native to the warm temperate to tropical regions of South Asia, they have stout jointed fibrous stalks that are rich in sugar, and measure two to six metres (6 to 19 feet) tall. All sugar cane species interbreed, and the major commercial cultivars are complex hybrids. Sugarcane belongs to the grass family (Poaceae), an economically important seed plant family that includes maize, wheat, rice, and sorghum and many forage crops. The main product of sugarcane is sucrose, which accumulates in the stalk internodes. Sucrose, extracted and purified in specialized mill factories, is used as raw material in human food industries or is fermented to produce ethanol. Ethanol is produced on a large scale by the Brazilian sugarcane industry. Sugarcane is the world's largest crop.[1] In 2010, FAO estimates it was cultivated on about 23.8 million hectares, in more than 90 countries, with a worldwide harvest of 1.69 billion tonnes. Brazil was the largest producer of sugar cane in the world. The next five major producers, in decreasing amounts of production, were India, China, Thailand, Pakistan and Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Ravenna Grass Saccharum Ravennae Other Common Names: Hardy Pampas
    Ravenna Grass Other common names: Hardy Pampas USDA symbol: SARA3 Saccharum ravennae grass, Plume grass, ODA rating: A Introduction: Ravenna grass is a large perennial bunchgrass with flowering stems, and is nearly 12 feet tall at maturity. It is native to the Mediterranean region of Africa and Eurasia. The plant has been sold in the U.S. for 90 years as a cold hardy ornamental grass with striking size. In spite of this history it is a relatively recent addition to the list of invasive plants in the Western U.S. Distribution: In Oregon, the only confirmed site of Ravenna grass is in Umatilla County. It is known to have escaped cultivation in several areas of Benton, Franklin and Yakima Counties in Washington and is invading riparian areas in California. More sites are likely to be found in Oregon due to the plants long presence in the ornamental industry. Description: Ravenna grass is easy to tell from most other grasses due to its size, it is similar to two other large perennial bunchgrasses that also have been used as ornamentals. Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana) and jubata grass (Cortaderia jubata) roughly resemble Ravenna grass. Ravenna grass can be distinguished by having leaf blade bases that are very densely covered with fuzzy hairs that typically hide the ligule and the upper surface of the blade base (Center photo above). There are rarely hairs on the leaves of Pampas or Jubata grass. Ravenna grass can also be distinguished from the other two species because they both have sharply serrated leaves that can cut hands, while Ravenna is weakly serrated and doesn’t cut.
    [Show full text]
  • Ravenna Grass in the Bosque
    Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species Collaborative Program Science Symposium – Dec 4, 2019 Presentation - Dealing With Ravenna Grass in the Bosque Michael Scialdone, “Scial” Bosque Project Manager Pueblo of Sandia Ravenna grass (Saccharum ravennae) is a relatively new invasive in the Middle Rio Grande Valley • There is a story out there that it was brought in by the zoo for the elephants, but it is likely it was cultivated in local gardens (ornamental). That is the source listed for other states. • It is a bunchgrass that can get over 10 feet around. The culm (seed stalk) can rise up over 10 feet from the ground. • It is a prolific seed producer. It also has rhizomes, but these seem to be more a method for individual plants to grow outward? The rhizomes / roots can resprout if using mechanical methods of removal. • Looks similar to Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana). Both are in the family Poaceae, but are not in the same genus. Leaf edges of Pampas grass can cut skin; Ravenna is friendlier. Dakota Dominguez RMYC Fortunately, we have both… Pampas grass along Riverside Drain, Pampas grass and Ravenna south of AMAFCA outlet grass, bluffs at Rio Rancho And phragmites! Phragmites and Ravenna grass on island across from Valle de Oro NWF More on Ravenna grass • Native to the Mediterranean region • Has been sold in the US for over 90 years as a cold- hardy ornamental grass (Oregon Dep’t of Agriculture info sheet) • Most of the west / SW, like NM, are only recently seeing it as a problematic invasive • In the MRGV, it is at least as far south as T or C.
    [Show full text]
  • Tripidium Ravennae (L.) H
    A WEED REPORT from the book Weed Control in Natural Areas in the Western United States This WEED REPORT does not constitute a formal recommendation. When using herbicides always read the label, and when in doubt consult your farm advisor or county agent. This WEED REPORT is an excerpt from the book Weed Control in Natural Areas in the Western United States and is available wholesale through the UC Weed Research & Information Center (wric.ucdavis.edu) or retail through the Western Society of Weed Science (wsweedscience.org) or the California Invasive Species Council (cal-ipc.org). Tripidium ravennae (L.) H. Scholz (= Saccharum ravennae (L.) L., Erianthus ravennae (L.) Beauv.) Ravennagrass Family: Poaceae Range: Southwestern states, including California, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Colorado. Habitat: Wetlands and river channels, as well as ditches and other riparian areas. It has become a problem in the Grand Canyon. Origin: Native to Eurasia. Introduced as a large ornamental perennial grass. Impacts: Ravennagrass can form impenetrable stands that originate from under other vegetation. It reduces native plant diversity, including rare and endangered species in these sites. California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) Inventory: Moderate Invasiveness Ravennagrass is a large, tufted perennial with flowering stems to 12 ft tall and leaves that are distributed on the stem, up to the base of the inflorescence. It is similar in appearance to pampasgrass and jubatagrass. Ravennagrass is distinguished by having blade bases that are very densely covered with long, fuzzy, tawny hairs that typically hide the ligule and upper blade base surface. The feather-like plumes or inflorescences are in a panicle up to 2 ft long and often purplish-bronze turning to silver-gray in fall.
    [Show full text]
  • Tall-Statured Grasses: a Useful Functional Group for Invasion Science
    Biol Invasions https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-018-1815-z (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV) REVIEW Tall-statured grasses: a useful functional group for invasion science Susan Canavan . Laura A. Meyerson . Jasmin G. Packer . Petr Pysˇek . Noe¨lie Maurel . Vanessa Lozano . David M. Richardson . Giuseppe Brundu . Kim Canavan . Angela Cicatelli . Jan Cˇ uda . Wayne Dawson . Franz Essl . Francesco Guarino . Wen-Yong Guo . Mark van Kleunen . Holger Kreft . Carla Lambertini . Jan Pergl . Hana Ska´lova´ . Robert J. Soreng . Vernon Visser . Maria S. Vorontsova . Patrick Weigelt . Marten Winter . John R. U. Wilson Received: 13 March 2018 / Accepted: 9 August 2018 Ó Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018 Abstract Species in the grass family (Poaceae) have statured grasses (TSGs; defined as grass species that caused some of the most damaging invasions in natural maintain a self-supporting height of 2 m or greater) to ecosystems, but plants in this family are also among the non-TSGs using the Global Naturalised Alien Flora most widely used by humans. Therefore, it is important database. We review the competitive traits of TSGs and to be able to predict their likelihood of naturalisation and collate risk assessments conducted on TSGs. Of the c. impact. We explore whether plant height is of particular 11,000 grass species globally, 929 qualify (c. 8.6%) as importance in determining naturalisation success and TSGs. 80.6% of TSGs are woody bamboos, with the impact in Poaceae by comparing naturalisation of tall- remaining species scattered among 21 tribes in seven subfamilies. When all grass species were analysed, TSGs and non-TSGs did not differ significantly in the Electronic supplementary material The online version of probability of naturalisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Ornamental Grasses for Cold Climates North Central Regional Extension P Ublication 573
    \ Ornamental Grasses for Cold Climates North Central Regional Extension P ublication 573 ....._:; I • • I M. Hockenberry Meyer is an assistant professor and extension horticulturist who specializes in research on ornamental and native grasses. D. B. White is a professor of turfgrass science. H. Pellett is a professor who has done extensive research on cold hardiness. All authors are in the Department of Horticultural Science. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Extension SE R VICE The Minnesota Experiment Station provided financial support for this research under project number 21-55. Additional funding was provided by the College of Agricultural, Food, and Environmental Sciences. Editor/Product Manager: Richard Sherman Graphic Designer: Deb Thayer Photographers: Dave Hansen, Mary Meyer Illustrators: Kristine Kirkeby, John Molstad ~ CD< ~ ll> ~ ~ 3 ;;;· C') ll> :, ~ Cen ~ ~ CD s:: s· :, enCD 0 5j" r ll> :, a. en C') ll> -0 CD a-)> ro0 C: 3 Introduction Desirable Traits Culture and Maintenance 2 Research in Minnesota 2 USDA Hardiness Map 3 Research Results 4 Snow Cover and Minimum Temperatures for the Six-Year Trial 4 Group 1. Recommended for Cold Climates Including USDA Zone 4a 5 Group 2. Marginally Hardy in USDA Zone 4a 16 Group 3. Not Recommended as Perennials for USDA Zone 4a 19 Miscanthus for Cold Climates 20 What About Pampasgrass? 21 Grasses for Different Landscape Needs 22 22 Water Gardens and Standing Water Miscanthus sinensis 'Malepartus' Shady Locations 22 Erosion Control/Invasive Rhizomes 23 Perennial Grasses That Can Be Grown as Annuals 23 The ruler symbol appears Fall Color and Winter Interest 24 25 throughout this Alternative Lawns bulletin as a Native Ornamental Grasses 26 height reference for illustrations.
    [Show full text]
  • PB1626-Ornamental Grasses in the Landscape
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Home Garden, Lawn, and Landscape UT Extension Publications 6-1999 PB1626-Ornamental Grasses in the Landscape The University of Tennessee Agricultural Extension Service Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_agexgard Part of the Plant Sciences Commons Recommended Citation "PB1626-Ornamental Grasses in the Landscape," The University of Tennessee Agricultural Extension Service, PB1626-3M-6/99 E12-2015-00-206-99, https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_agexgard/62 The publications in this collection represent the historical publishing record of the UT Agricultural Experiment Station and do not necessarily reflect current scientific knowledge or ecommendations.r Current information about UT Ag Research can be found at the UT Ag Research website. This Landscaping - Planting is brought to you for free and open access by the UT Extension Publications at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Home Garden, Lawn, and Landscape by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Agricultural Extension Service The University of Tennessee PB1626 Warm- versus Cool-Season Grasses.............................................3 Landscaping with Ornamental Grasses.......................................3 Screens.............................................................................................4 Ground Covers...............................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Department of Agriculture Noxious Weed Pest Risk Assessment for Ravennagrass Saccharum Ravennae Poaceae January 2015
    Oregon Department of Agriculture Noxious Weed Pest Risk Assessment for Ravennagrass Saccharum ravennae Poaceae January 2015 Findings of Review and Assessment: Ravennagrass is native to the Mediterranean region of Africa and Eurasia. The plant has been sold for more than 90 years as a cold hardy ornamental grass with striking size. In spite of this history, it is a relatively recent addition to the list of invasive plants in the Western US. There are few known invaded sites to evaluate so evaluating biological potential and ecologic and economic risk are challenging. With the available information, Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) evaluated the risk of this plant to Oregon’s resources using ODA’s Qualitative Risk Assessment and the Noxious Weed Rating System. It scored 63 and 16 respectively for an A-rating. Introduction: Ravennagrass is a large perennial grass with flowering stems near to 12 ft. tall at maturity and leaves that are distributed on the stem up to the base of the inflorescence. It forms clumps of basal leaves called tussocks (WSDA, 2014). Ravennagrass is similar in appearance to pampas grass and jubata grass. Ravennagrass is distinguished by having blade bases that are very densely covered with long, fuzzy, tawny hairs that typically hide the ligule and upper blade base surface. The feather-like plumes or inflorescences are in a panicle up to 2 ft. long and often purplish-bronze turning to silver-gray in fall. Stems can be reddish or other colors as flowers mature. The tiny seeds are dispersed long distances by both wind and water. It is not known how long the seeds can survive in the soil, but because of their small size it is expected that they don’t survive much more than 1-year (DiTomaso et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Response to the World Heritage Committee Decision 38 Com 7B.65
    State of Conservation Report of Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (India) (N 338) RESPONSE TO THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE DECISION 38 COM 7B.65 Submitted by State Party: India to UNESCO World Heritage Centre, Paris January, 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1. Background 3 2. PARA 3. Welcomes the information provided by the State Party that 3 the delay in fund release has been addressed, and recommends that the State Party provide updates of the financial situation of the property in future reports to the Committee; 3. PARA 4 Notes with appreciation the positive results achieved up to 6 2013 with the reintroduction of Greater One-horned Rhinoceros, as well as the development of a comprehensive Eastern Swamp Deer Translocation Protocol, the implementation of which is anticipated to commence in 2014; 4. PARA 5: Notes with serious concern the reported recent poaching of 9 nearly one third of the recovering rhino population, which is a sharp reminder of the fragility of the property‟s recovering Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), and urges the State Party to ensure that forest guards are adequately equipped and trained to protect the property against poachers and maintain effective patrolling, in order to secure the recovering populations of rhino and other wildlife, and to ensure that the anticipated translocation of Eastern Swamp Deer can be carried out effectively; 5. PARA 6: Requests the State Party to take urgent measures to 10 address the reported new encroachment at Bhuyanpara Range within the property, and rehabilitate degraded area; 6 PARA 7: Also notes with utmost concern the reported deterioration 14 of the security situation in the property, and considers that a further deterioration of the security situation, associated with the reported surge in poaching and concerns regarding encroachment could create the conditions to re-inscribe the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger; 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Plants in Wetland Restoration
    Weedy Grasses Why and how we need to deal with them Sarah Spear Cooke Seattle, Washington www.Cookescientific.com Why do we care? Weedy grasses reduce crop yields because they invade pastures and rangeland at the detriment of crops. Some are “bad” for livestock. They can be hosts for diseases- fungiii and viruses They take over natural areas and habitat restorations and stop natural succession The worst In Wetlands: Reed canarygrass- Phalaris arundinaceae Common reed- Phragmites australis, Class B Spartina- Spartina alterniflora, S.densiflora, S. anglica- covered another time In uplands: Ravenna grass- Saccharum ravennae, Class Pampas grass- Cortaderia selloana, Class C Jubata grass- Cortaderia jubata, Class C Giant reed- Arundo donax (none found in Wa yet) A bit about ID’s Vegetative- can be very helpful for the 5 big species that all look VERY similar. I will go through a few characteristics that may help you figure out what you have Flowering- Don’t always have the flowers and 5 of the problem species have “plume-like” inflorescences But here goes………. Grass Sedge Rush Stem (culm) cross section (but be careful that you don’t squash stem when checking!) Annual Perennial, rhizomatous Perennial, stoloniferous Perennial, caespitose Perennial, bulbous or tuberous Parts of a Grass Leaf Leaf blade tips Leaf blade width Sheath opening Open sheath Open sheath Closed sheath Be careful not to rip while checking! Closed sheath Hairy sheath Hairy blade Hairy node Hairy collar Hairy throat Let’s talk ligules No ligule at all Ligule: fringe of hairs
    [Show full text]