DOCSLIB.ORG

Rapid Ecological Assessment for the St. Louis Planning Group

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rapid Ecological Assessment for the St. Louis Planning Group Rapid Ecological Assessment for the St. Louis River Planning Group A Rapid Ecological Assessment Focusing on Rare Plants, Selected Rare Animals, and High-quality Natural Communities Properties included in this report are: Douglas County • St. Louis and Red Rivers Streambank Protection Area (including Clough Island) • Pokegama Carnegie Wetlands State Natural Area Wisconsin’s Natural Heritage Inventory Program Bureau of Natural Heritage Conservation Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 June 2014 PUB-NH-848 2014 Acknowledgments We extend special thanks to Dave Lindsley, Paul Piszczek, Fred Strand, Cheri Hagen, Nancy Larson, Dale Rochon, Greg Kessler, Ryan Magana, and Steve LaValley of the Wisconsin DNR, Paul Hlina of Leaning Pine Natives, Christine Ostern of Douglas County Land Conservation Department, Nick Danz and Andy Breckenridge of University of Wisconsin-Superior, Valerie Brady of the Natural Resources Research Institute, University of Minnesota-Duluth, and Erika Washburn, Shon Schooler, and Sue O'Halloran of the National Estuarine Research Reserve for their assistance in compiling this report and assisting with property access, field surveys, data contribution, and project review. We are also grateful for support from the Ecosystem Management Planning Team, Kate Fitzgerald, Erin Crain, Timothy Reneau-Major, and Owen Boyle. Funding for this project was provided in part by the Wisconsin DNR Bureau of Facilities and Lands and by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program, grant number C-15-L-1, F05AP00014. Funding was also provided by the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management under the Coastal Zone Management Act, Grant #4NA12NOS4190091 and Grant #1NA13NOS4190043. Primary Authors: Richard Staffen and Ryan O'Connor Contributors: · Nicholas Anich – migratory bird surveys · Paula Spaeth Anich – small mammal surveys · Julie Bleser – data management · Andy Clark – plant and natural community surveys · Kevin Doyle – data processing, plant and natural community surveys · Ashley Hannah – data entry, report resources · Randy Hoffman – bird and natural community surveys · Terrell Hyde – data processing · Ryan O’Connor – inventory coordination, data processing · Julia Schilling – data entry, report resources · William Smith – inventory coordination, aquatic invertebrates · Lindsay Sperber – data entry, report resources · Amy Staffen – data processing, report contributions, natural community and bird surveys · Richard Staffen – inventory coordination, data processing, bird, herptile surveys Cover Photos: Top: Submergent and Emergent Marsh at Fond du Lac Islands, by Andy Clark. Middle left: Boreal Forest at Red River Breaks, by Andy Clark. Middle right: Northern Sedge Meadow, Alder Thicket, and Boreal Forest at Pokegama Carnegie Wetlands, by Eric Epstein. Bottom, left to right: Blue- winged Teal, by Jack Bartholmai; Leopard Frog, by WDNR Staff; Wood Thrush, by Steve Maslowski; Yellow lady’s-slipper, by Eric Epstein. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources provides equal opportunity in its employment, programs, services, and functions under an Affirmative Action Plan. If you have any questions, please write to Equal Opportunity Office, Department of Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240. This publication is available in alternative format (large print, Braille, audio tape. etc.) upon request. Please call (608-264-6271) for more information. 2 Rapid Ecological Assessment Table of Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... 4 Appendices ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 5 St. Louis River Planning Group At a Glance .................................................................................. 5 Purpose and Objectives.................................................................................................................... 6 Overview of Methods ...................................................................................................................... 6 Background on Past Efforts ............................................................................................................. 9 Regional Ecological Context ......................................................................................................... 13 Overview of Regional Natural Resources ..................................................................................... 13 Rare Species of the Superior Coastal Plain Ecological Landscape ............................................... 14 Description of the Study Area .................................................................................... 15 Location and Size .......................................................................................................................... 15 Physical Environment .................................................................................................................... 15 Vegetation ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Rare Species and High-Quality Natural Communities of Superior Township .............................. 25 Management Considerations and Opportunities for Biodiversity Conservation ... 27 Hydrology and Water Quality ........................................................................................................ 27 Boreal Forest .................................................................................................................................. 28 Wetlands of the SLRPG ................................................................................................................. 29 Migratory Bird Conservation ......................................................................................................... 32 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation and the SLRPG .................................................................. 34 Wisconsin’s Statewide Forest Strategy and the SLRPG ............................................................... 35 Non-Native Invasive Species ......................................................................................................... 36 Game Species ................................................................................................................................. 41 Primary Sites: Site-specific Opportunities for Biodiversity Conservation .................................... 42 Future Needs ............................................................................................................... 44 Glossary ....................................................................................................................... 45 Species List ................................................................................................................. 46 Literature Cited ............................................................................................................ 49 Additional Resources ................................................................................................. 53 St. Louis River Planning Group 3 List of Tables Table 1. Surveys Conducted on the SLRPG. ................................................................................................ 8 Table 2. Existing Conservation Planning Designations for properties in the SLRPG. ................................ 9 Table 3. Listing Status for rare species in the Superior Coastal Plain Ecological Landscape as of January 2014. ........................................................................................................................................................... 14 Table 4. Documented rare species and high-quality natural communities of Superior Township ............. 25 Table 5. Species of Greatest Conservation Need Strongly Associated with Boreal Forest ....................... 29 Table 6. Wetlands of the St. Louis River Planning Group ......................................................................... 30 Table 7. Major and Important Natural Community Management Opportunities in the Superior Coastal Plain Ecological Landscape that occur in the SLRPG (WDNR 2006a). .................................................... 35 Table 8. Selection of Wisconsin Statewide Forest Strategies Relevant to the SLRPG. ............................. 35 Table 9. Non-native invasive species currently known at St. Louis River Planning Group. ..................... 37 Table 10. Watch Species for the St. Louis River Planning Group ............................................................. 39 Table 11. St. Louis River Planning Group Primary Sites. .......................................................................... 42 Appendices A. Natural Heritage Inventory Methods Overview B. Map of Conservation Opportunity Areas for the Superior Coastal Plan Ecological Landscape C. Documented Rare Species and High Quality Natural Communities of SLRPG Region* D. Descriptions of Rare Species and High Quality Natural Communities Documented within SLRPG E. Species of Greatest Conservation Need of the SLRPG F. Wisconsin Natural Heritage Working
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Eastern Belted Kingfisher in the Maritime 1?
    BULLETIN NO. 97 The Eastern Belted Kingfisher - in the Maritime 1?rovinces BY H. C. WHITE Atlantic Biological Station PUBLISHED BY THE FISHERIES RESEARCH BOARD OF CANADA UNDER THE CONTROL OF TH E HON. THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES fTAWA, 1953 II BULLETIN NO. 97 The Eastern Belted I(ingfisher in the Maritime Provinces BY H. C. WHITE Atlantic Biological Station PUBLISHED BY THE FISHERIES RESEARCH BOARD OF CANADA UND ER THE CONTROL OF THE HON. THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES OTTAWA, 1953 Printed by THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PREss . for the FISHERIES REsEARCH BOARD OF CANADA CO N TENTS INTRODUCTION 1 Hand-rearing young kingfishers 2 LIFE HISTORY 4 Migration, flights and dispersal 4 Distribution 5 Nesting sites 5 Making the burrow 9 Nest cavity and nest 10 Incubation and nestlings 11 Activities in nest 13 Sanitation 14 Enemies 16 Night roosts 19 Feeding 19 ANALYSES OF PELLETS AND STOMACH CONTENTS 21 Analyses 22 FOOD 25 Trout-rearing streams 27 Small salmon-rearing streams 29 Medium and large salmon rivers 33 Marginal salmon waters 37 Lakes and ponds 38 Sea shore 40 ECONOMIC STATUS 41 REFERENCES 43 INTROD UCTION THIS STUDY of the life history and food of the kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon alcyon L. ) in the "Maritimes", i.e. the provinces of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, is part of a general study of the relation of fish­ eating birds to the production of salmon and trout and is based on observations and material colleoted over a period of many years. We have received help from many of our co-workers and others and we wish to express special gratitude to A.
    [Show full text]
  • Element Occurrence Data Standard
    ELEMENT OCCURRENCE DATA STANDARD February 6, 2002 NatureServe in cooperation with the Network of Natural Heritage Programs and Conservation Data Centers iii Table of Contents PREFACE.....................................................................................................................................currently under revision ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.....................................................................................................currently under revision ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................................currently under revision 1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................currently under revision 2 EO DEFINITION .................................................................................................................................................10 2.1 Principal EOs........................................................................................................................................................10 2.2 Sub-EOs.................................................................................................................................................................12 2.3 Feature Labels.......................................................................................................................................................13 2.4 Location Use Class..............................................................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018
    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
    [Show full text]
  • Carex and Scleria
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies Nebraska Academy of Sciences 1997 Keys and Distributional Maps for Nebraska Cyperaceae, Part 2: Carex and Scleria Steven B. Rolfsmeier Barbara Wilson Oregon State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas Part of the Life Sciences Commons Rolfsmeier, Steven B. and Wilson, Barbara, "Keys and Distributional Maps for Nebraska Cyperaceae, Part 2: Carex and Scleria" (1997). Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies. 73. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas/73 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Nebraska Academy of Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societiesy b an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. 1997. Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences, 24: 5-26 KEYS AND DISTRIBUTIONAL MAPS FOR NEBRASKA CYPERACEAE, PART 2: CAREX AND SCLERIA Steven B. Rolfsmeier and Barbara Wilson* 2293 Superior Road Department of Biology Milford, Nebraska 68405-8420 University of Nebraska at Omaha Omaha, Nebraska 68182-0040 *Present address: Department of Botany, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon ABSTRACT Flora GP are deleted based on misidentifications: Carex Keys and distributional maps are provided for the 71 species and one hybrid of Carex and single species of Scleria festucacea, C. haydenii, C. muehlenbergii var. enervis, documented for Nebraska. Six species-Carex albursina, C. C. normalis, C. siccata (reported as C. foenea), C. stricta, melanostachya, C.
    [Show full text]
  • Carex of New England
    Field Guide to Carex of New England Lisa A. Standley A Special Publication of the New England Botanical Club About the Author: Lisa A. Standley is an environmental consultant. She obtained a B.S, and M.S. from Cornell University and Ph.D. from the University of Washington. She has published several articles on the systematics of Carex, particularly Section Phacocystis, and was the author of several section treatments in the Flora of North America. Cover Illustrations: Pictured are Carex pensylvanica and Carex intumescens. Field Guide to Carex of New England Lisa A. Standley Special Publication of the New England Botanical Club Copyright © 2011 Lisa A. Standley Acknowledgements This book is dedicated to Robert Reed, who first urged me to write a user-friendly guide to Carex; to the memory of Melinda F. Denton, my mentor and inspiration; and to Tony Reznicek, for always sharing his expertise. I would like to thank all of the people who helped with this book in so many ways, particularly Karen Searcy and Robert Bertin for their careful editing; Paul Somers, Bruce Sorrie, Alice Schori, Pam Weatherbee, and others who helped search for sedges; Arthur Gilman, Melissa Dow Cullina, and Patricia Swain, who carefully read early drafts of the book; and to Emily Wood, Karen Searcy, and Ray Angelo, who provided access to the herbaria at Harvard University, the University of Massachusetts, and the New England Botanical Club. CONTENTS Introduction .......................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Habitat and Fish Report Baseline Conditions
    Interprovincial Crossings Environmental Assessment Study Aquatic Habitat and Fish Report Baseline Conditions Final Report November 18, 2008 AQUATIC HABITAT AND FISH REPORT BASELINE CONDITIONS REPORT NOVEMBER 2008 F INAL REPORT AQUATIC HABITAT AND FISH (BASELINE CONDITIONS) Table of Contents GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS..................... 1-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................... 1-1 1.1 Methodology ........................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1 Baseline Environmental Conditions ........................... 1-1 1.1.2 Study Area .................................................................. 1-4 1.1.3 Assessment of Environmental Constraints ................. 1-4 2.0 OTTAWA RIVER GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS..................................... 2-1 2.1 Hydrography – General Description ....................................... 2-1 2.2 Natural environment, recreation and tourism.......................... 2-2 2.3 Water quality........................................................................... 2-3 2.4 Variations between corridors................................................... 2-3 3.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF FISH SPECIES ...... 3-1 3.1 Fish species found in the Ottawa River................................... 3-1 3.2 Characterization of spawning sites.......................................... 3-8 4.0 SPECIES WITH SPECIAL STATUS ................. 4-1 4.1 The Channel Darter ................................................................. 4-2 4.2 The River Redhorse................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cutlip Minnow,Exoglossum Maxillingua
    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Cutlip Minnow Exoglossum maxillingua in Canada SPECIAL CONCERN 2013 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2013. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Cutlip Minnow Exoglossum maxillingua in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. x + 35 pp. (www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm). Previous report(s): Crossman, E.J.1994. COSEWIC status report on the Cutlip Minnow Exoglossum maxillingua in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 32 pp. Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge Dr. Nicholas Mandrak, Lynn D. Bouvier, Mary Burridge and Erling Holm for writing the status report on the Cutlip Minnow, Exoglossum maxillingue, in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada. This report was overseen and edited by Dr. Eric Taylor, Co- chair of the COSEWIC Freshwater Fishes Specialist Subcommittee. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-953-3215 Fax: 819-994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur le Bec-de-lièvre (Exoglossum maxillingua) au Canada. Cover illustration/photo: Cutlip Minnow — Reproduced with permission by Bureau of Fisheries, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2014. Catalogue No. CW69-14/683-2014E-PDF ISBN 978-1-100-23553-0 Recycled paper COSEWIC Assessment Summary Assessment Summary – November 2013 Common name Cutlip Minnow Scientific name Exoglossum maxillingua Status Special Concern Reason for designation This small-bodied freshwater fish occurs across a relatively small area in eastern Ontario and Quebec where it has been lost from two watersheds over the last 10 years.
    [Show full text]
  • The Blackside Dace (Chrosomus Cumberlandensis) and the Cumberland Arrow Darter (Etheostoma Sagitta) in Northeast Tennessee
    WATER QUALITY’S INFLUENCE ON THE OCCUPANCY OF TWO JEOPARDIZED FISHES: THE BLACKSIDE DACE (CHROSOMUS CUMBERLANDENSIS) AND THE CUMBERLAND ARROW DARTER (ETHEOSTOMA SAGITTA) IN NORTHEAST TENNESSEE __________________________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the College of Science Morehead State University _________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science _________________________ by Brandon L. Yates July 5, 2017 ProQuest Number:10605069 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. ProQuest 10605069 Published by ProQuest LLC ( 2017). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346 Accepted by the faculty of the College of Science, Morehead State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science degree. ______________________________ David J. Eisenhour Director of Thesis Master’s Committee: ________________________________, Chair David J. Eisenhour _________________________________ Brian C. Reeder _________________________________ David P. Smith _________________________________ Michael C. Compton ________________________ Date WATER QUALITY’S INFLUENCE ON THE OCCUPANCY OF TWO JEOPARDIZED FISHES: THE BLACKSIDE DACE (CHROSOMUS CUMBERLANDENSIS) AND THE CUMBERLAND ARROW DARTER (ETHEOSTOMA SAGITTA) IN NORTHEAST TENNESSEE Brandon L. Yates Morehead State University, 2017 Director of Thesis: __________________________________________________ David J.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyperaceae of Alberta
    AN ILLUSTRATED KEY TO THE CYPERACEAE OF ALBERTA Compiled and writen by Linda Kershaw and Lorna Allen April 2019 © Linda J. Kershaw & Lorna Allen This key was compiled using information primarily from and the Flora North America Association (2008), Douglas et al. (1998), and Packer and Gould (2017). Taxonomy follows VASCAN (Brouillet, 2015). The main references are listed at the end of the key. Please try the key this summer and let us know if there are ways in which it can be improved. Over the winter, we hope to add illustrations for most of the entries. The 2015 S-ranks of rare species (S1; S1S2; S2; S2S3; SU, according to ACIMS, 2015) are noted in superscript ( S1; S2;SU) after the species names. For more details go to the ACIMS web site. Similarly, exotic species are followed by a superscript X, XX if noxious and XXX if prohibited noxious (X; XX; XXX) according to the Alberta Weed Control Act (2016). CYPERACEAE SedgeFamily Key to Genera 1b 01a Flowers either ♂ or ♀; ovaries/achenes enclosed in a sac-like or scale-like structure 1a (perigynium) .....................Carex 01b Flowers with both ♂ and ♀ parts (sometimes some either ♂ or ♀); ovaries/achenes not in a perigynium .........................02 02a Spikelets somewhat fattened, with keeled scales in 2 vertical rows, grouped in ± umbrella- shaped clusters; fower bristles (perianth) 2a absent ....................... Cyperus 02b Spikelets round to cylindrical, with scales 2b spirally attached, variously arranged; fower bristles usually present . 03 03a Achenes tipped with a rounded protuberance (enlarged style-base; tubercle) . 04 03b Achenes without a tubercle (achenes 3a 3b often beaked, but without an enlarged protuberence) .......................05 04a Spikelets single; stems leafess .
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Species Mapping in North Carolina Using Maxent
    Aquatic Species Mapping in North Carolina Using Maxent Mark Endries U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Office, Asheville North Carolina INTRODUCTION The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is to work with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service is the lead governmental agency involved in the recovery of federally endangered and threatened species in freshwater and terrestrial habitats. To meet its recovery and protection goals, the Service: (1) works with other federal agencies to minimize or eliminate impacts to fish, wildlife, and plants from projects they authorize, fund, or carry out; (2) supports the improvement of fish and wildlife habitat on private land through technical and financial assistance; and (3) provides scientific knowledge and analyses to help guide the conservation, development, and management of the Nation’s fish and wildlife resources. Freshwater ecosystems present unique management challenges due to their linear spatial orientation and their association with upland habitat variables. On broad scales, the movement of aquatic species within the stream environment is limited to upstream and downstream migration. The inability of aquatic species to circumnavigate man-made obstacles causes them to be particularly vulnerable to habitat fragmentation. Habitat fragmentation has a major influence on species distribution and complicates distribution mapping. To better understand the spatial distributions of freshwater aquatic species in North Carolina, the Service created predictive habitat maps for 226 different aquatic species using geographic information systems (GIS) and maximum entropy (Maxent) modeling. These maps were derived by comparing known species occurrences with a suite of stream- or land-cover-derived environmental variables.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution Changes of Small Fishes in Streams of Missouri from The
    Distribution Changes of Small Fishes in Streams of Missouri from the 1940s to the 1990s by MATTHEW R. WINSTON Missouri Department of Conservation, Columbia, MO 65201 February 2003 CONTENTS Page Abstract……………………………………………………………………………….. 8 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………… 10 Methods……………………………………………………………………………….. 17 The Data Used………………………………………………………………… 17 General Patterns in Species Change…………………………………………... 23 Conservation Status of Species……………………………………………….. 26 Results………………………………………………………………………………… 34 General Patterns in Species Change………………………………………….. 30 Conservation Status of Species……………………………………………….. 46 Discussion…………………………………………………………………………….. 63 General Patterns in Species Change………………………………………….. 53 Conservation Status of Species………………………………………………. 63 Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………………. 66 Literature Cited……………………………………………………………………….. 66 Appendix……………………………………………………………………………… 72 FIGURES 1. Distribution of samples by principal investigator…………………………. 20 2. Areas of greatest average decline…………………………………………. 33 3. Areas of greatest average expansion………………………………………. 34 4. The relationship between number of basins and ……………………….. 39 5. The distribution of for each reproductive group………………………... 40 2 6. The distribution of for each family……………………………………… 41 7. The distribution of for each trophic group……………...………………. 42 8. The distribution of for each faunal region………………………………. 43 9. The distribution of for each stream type………………………………… 44 10. The distribution of for each range edge…………………………………. 45 11. Modified
    [Show full text]
  • Woman Lake Sensitive Lakeshore Survey Final Report
    Final Report Sensitive Lakeshore Survey Woman Lake (11-0201) Cass County, MN July 2008 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES COPYRIGHT 2008, MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES A Product of the Intra-Lake Zoning to Protect Sensitive Lakeshore Areas Project Application of Minnesota’s Sensitive Lakeshore Identification Manual: A Conservation Strategy for Minnesota’s Lakeshores Prepared by Kristin Thompson, Nongame Wildlife Biologist Donna Perleberg, Aquatic Plant Ecologist Surveys conducted by Donna Perleberg, Aquatic Plant Ecologist Paul Radomski, Project Manager Kevin Woizeschke, Nongame Wildlife Technician Pam Perry, Nongame Wildlife Biologist Josh Knopik, Aquatic Biologist Andrea Lee Lambrecht, Bird Survey Specialist Ken Perry, Bird Survey Specialist Rachel Bulman, Intern Stephanie Loso, Intern Brent Vacinek, Intern Lucas Wandrie, Intern Emergent Plant Bed Mapping (2003): Calub Shavlik, Fisheries Specialist GIS Analysis and Figures by Kevin Woizeschke, Nongame Wildlife Technician Woman Lake Page 2 of 71 Funding Support: Funding for this project was provided by the State Wildlife Grants Program, Game and Fish Funds, Heritage Enhancement Funds, and by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund as recommended by the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCCMR). How to cite this document: Thompson, K., and D. Perleberg. 2008. Final report on the sensitive lakeshore survey for Woman Lake (11-0201), Cass County, MN. Division of Ecological Resources, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 71 pp. Woman Lake Page 3 of 71 Executive Summary Plant surveys revealed a rich, diverse plant community. A total of 41 native aquatic plant taxa were recorded, making Woman Lake among the richest lake plant communities in the state.
    [Show full text]