DOCSLIB.ORG

Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Kings Mountain National Military Park Natural Resource Report NPS/ KIMO/NRR—2012/522

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Kings Mountain National Military Park Natural Resource Report NPS/ KIMO/NRR—2012/522 National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Kings Mountain National Military Park Natural Resource Report NPS/ KIMO/NRR—2012/522 ON THE COVER U.S. Monument on Battleground Ridge in Kings Mountain National Military Park Photograph by: L. Worsham Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Kings Mountain National Military Park Natural Resource Report NPS/ KIMO/NRR—2012/522 Sundin, G., Luke Worsham, Nathan P. Nibbelink, Michael T. Mengak, Gary Grossman Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources University of Georgia 180 E. Green St. Athens, GA 30602 May 2012 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. Printed copies of reports in these series may be produced in a limited quantity and they are only available as long as the supply lasts. This report is also available from the Integrated Resource Management Applications website (http://irma.nps.gov) and the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/nrpm/). Please cite this publication as: Sundin, G., L. Worsham, N. P. Nibbelink, G. Grossman, and M. T. Mengak. 2012. Natural Resource Condition Assessment for Kings Mountain National Military Park. Natural Resource Report NPS/KIMO/NRR—2012/522. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 335/114150, May 2012 ii Contents Page Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... xiii Prologue ....................................................................................................................................... xiii Acronyms and Abbreviations: ...................................................................................................... xv Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... xvii Purpose ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Ranking Methodology .................................................................................................................... 3 Data Description ............................................................................................................................. 7 Park Resources and Introduction .................................................................................................. 11 Park Location and Significance ............................................................................................. 11 Park Objectives ...................................................................................................................... 11 Climate, Geology, and Soils .................................................................................................. 13 Hydrology .............................................................................................................................. 13 History and Park Significance ............................................................................................... 14 Natural Resources and NPS Vital Signs ................................................................................ 15 Natural Resource Conditions ........................................................................................................ 17 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................. 17 Ozone ................................................................................................................................ 17 Foliar Injury ...................................................................................................................... 20 Hydrology .............................................................................................................................. 24 Water Chemistry ............................................................................................................... 24 Microorganisms ..................................................................................................................... 30 Water Quantity .................................................................................................................. 32 Invasive Species ..................................................................................................................... 40 iii Contents (continued) Page Forest Pests ............................................................................................................................ 44 Southern Pine Beetle ......................................................................................................... 44 Ips Beetle .......................................................................................................................... 45 Gypsy Moth ...................................................................................................................... 45 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 45 Vegetation Communities ....................................................................................................... 49 Forest Communities .......................................................................................................... 49 Wetland Communities ...................................................................................................... 50 Fish Communities .................................................................................................................. 55 Bird Communities .................................................................................................................. 60 Mammal Communities .......................................................................................................... 63 Herpetofaunal Community .................................................................................................... 67 At-risk Biota .......................................................................................................................... 71 Landscape Dynamics ............................................................................................................. 76 CRMS ............................................................................................................................... 76 TNC................................................................................................................................... 77 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 79 Summary ................................................................................................................................ 79 Natural Resource Conditions ................................................................................................. 79 Ozone: ............................................................................................................................... 79 Foliar injury: ..................................................................................................................... 80 Hydrology: ........................................................................................................................ 80 Invasive Plants: ................................................................................................................. 81 iv Contents (continued) Page Insect Pests: ....................................................................................................................... 81 Vegetation Communities: ................................................................................................. 81 Fish Communities: ............................................................................................................ 82 Bird Communities: ...........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the Mary K. Oxley Nature Center, Tulsa County, Oklahoma
    Oklahoma Native Plant Record 29 Volume 13, December 2013 A CHECKLIST OF THE VASCULAR FLORA OF THE MARY K. OXLEY NATURE CENTER, TULSA COUNTY, OKLAHOMA Amy K. Buthod Oklahoma Biological Survey Oklahoma Natural Heritage Inventory Robert Bebb Herbarium University of Oklahoma Norman, OK 73019-0575 (405) 325-4034 Email: [email protected] Keywords: flora, exotics, inventory ABSTRACT This paper reports the results of an inventory of the vascular flora of the Mary K. Oxley Nature Center in Tulsa, Oklahoma. A total of 342 taxa from 75 families and 237 genera were collected from four main vegetation types. The families Asteraceae and Poaceae were the largest, with 49 and 42 taxa, respectively. Fifty-eight exotic taxa were found, representing 17% of the total flora. Twelve taxa tracked by the Oklahoma Natural Heritage Inventory were present. INTRODUCTION clayey sediment (USDA Soil Conservation Service 1977). Climate is Subtropical The objective of this study was to Humid, and summers are humid and warm inventory the vascular plants of the Mary K. with a mean July temperature of 27.5° C Oxley Nature Center (ONC) and to prepare (81.5° F). Winters are mild and short with a a list and voucher specimens for Oxley mean January temperature of 1.5° C personnel to use in education and outreach. (34.7° F) (Trewartha 1968). Mean annual Located within the 1,165.0 ha (2878 ac) precipitation is 106.5 cm (41.929 in), with Mohawk Park in northwestern Tulsa most occurring in the spring and fall County (ONC headquarters located at (Oklahoma Climatological Survey 2013).
    [Show full text]
  • Identification of Milkweeds (Asclepias, Family Apocynaceae) in Texas
    Identification of Milkweeds (Asclepias, Family Apocynaceae) in Texas Texas milkweed (Asclepias texana), courtesy Bill Carr Compiled by Jason Singhurst and Ben Hutchins [email protected] [email protected] Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Austin, Texas and Walter C. Holmes [email protected] Department of Biology Baylor University Waco, Texas Identification of Milkweeds (Asclepias, Family Apocynaceae) in Texas Created in partnership with the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center Design and layout by Elishea Smith Compiled by Jason Singhurst and Ben Hutchins [email protected] [email protected] Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Austin, Texas and Walter C. Holmes [email protected] Department of Biology Baylor University Waco, Texas Introduction This document has been produced to serve as a quick guide to the identification of milkweeds (Asclepias spp.) in Texas. For the species listed in Table 1 below, basic information such as range (in this case county distribution), habitat, and key identification characteristics accompany a photograph of each species. This information comes from a variety of sources that includes the Manual of the Vascular Flora of Texas, Biota of North America Project, knowledge of the authors, and various other publications (cited in the text). All photographs are used with permission and are fully credited to the copyright holder and/or originator. Other items, but in particular scientific publications, traditionally do not require permissions, but only citations to the author(s) if used for scientific and/or nonprofit purposes. Names, both common and scientific, follow those in USDA NRCS (2015). When identifying milkweeds in the field, attention should be focused on the distinguishing characteristics listed for each species.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnobotanical Uses of Alien and Native Plant Species of Yeşilırmak Delta, Samsun, Turkey
    Ethnobotanical uses of alien and native plant species of Yeşilırmak Delta, Samsun, Turkey Ümmügülsüm MUMCU1*, Hasan KORKMAZ2 1Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Kurupelit, Samsun, Turkey. 2Department of Biology, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Ondokuz Mayıs University, 55139 Kurupelit, Samsun, Turkey. *Corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract: Plants produce chemicals, known as secondary metabolites, have a variety of ecophysiological functions e.g. defense against herbivory/pathogen attacks and competitor plants, attracting pollinators and symbionts, protection against abiotic stresses, etc. These metabolites also have potential medicinal effects on humans. The Yeşilırmak Delta, Samsun, Turkey, is the second largest delta plain of Turkey. Among the plants distributed in different habitats of the delta, medically important species and their usage were investigated based on the literature. It has been determined 160 species and infraspecific taxa belonging 61 families and 141 genera which can be used for medicinal purposes in the research area. Our aim is to provide a database in relation to medicinal plants distributed naturally in such a region that 65.4% of which is assigned as agricultural area. Keywords: Ethnomedicine, Toxic effect, Yeşilırmak Delta. Introduction identification (Briskin, 2000). Food and medicines are integral part of human life (Datir While primary metabolites (such as carbohydrates, and Bhore, 2017) and the plants we have consumed are lipids, proteins, heme, chlorophyll,
    [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]
  • Italy: First Steps to Be Taken
    The National Crop Wild Relative Strategy for Italy: First Steps To Be Taken PGR Secure The National Crop Wild Relative Strategy for Italy: First Steps To Be Taken * Panella L. 1, Landucci S. 12, Torricelli R. 1, Gigante D. 13, Donnini D. 1, Venanzoni R.13 and V. Negri1 1 Department of Agricultural, Nutritional and Environmental Sciences, University of Perugia, Borgo XX Giugno 74, 06121 Perugia, Italy 2 Department of Botany and Zoology, Masaryk University, Kotlárská 2, Brno 61137 (present address) 3 Department of Chemistry, Biology and Biotechnology, University of Perugia, via Elce di Sotto 8, 06123 Perugia, Italy (present address) * Largely based on Landucci et al. (2014). A prioritized inventory of crop wild relatives and harvested plants of Italy. Crop Science. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2013.05.0355. Index 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 4 1.1 DEFINITION OF A CROP WILD RELATIVE ....................................................................................................... 4 1.2 CROP WILD RELATIVE CONSERVATION AND INTERNATIONAL TREATIES .............................................. 4 1.3 ITALIAN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLANT CONSERVATION STRATEGIES .............................................. 5 1.4 GENETIC RESOURCES OF THE MEDITERRANEAN BASIN AND OF ITALY .................................................. 6 1.5 ITALIAN PROTECTED AREAS AND SPECIES .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 115 Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0 October 1997 Seattle, Washington noaa NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION National Ocean Service Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce The Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment (ORCA) provides decisionmakers comprehensive, scientific information on characteristics of the oceans, coastal areas, and estuaries of the United States of America. The information ranges from strategic, national assessments of coastal and estuarine environmental quality to real-time information for navigation or hazardous materials spill response. Through its National Status and Trends (NS&T) Program, ORCA uses uniform techniques to monitor toxic chemical contamination of bottom-feeding fish, mussels and oysters, and sediments at about 300 locations throughout the United States. A related NS&T Program of directed research examines the relationships between contaminant exposure and indicators of biological responses in fish and shellfish. Through the Hazardous Materials Response and Assessment Division (HAZMAT) Scientific Support Coordination program, ORCA provides critical scientific support for planning and responding to spills of oil or hazardous materials into coastal environments. Technical guidance includes spill trajectory predictions, chemical hazard analyses, and assessments of the sensitivity of marine and estuarine environments to spills. To fulfill the responsibilities of the Secretary of Commerce as a trustee for living marine resources, HAZMAT’s Coastal Resource Coordination program provides technical support to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during all phases of the remedial process to protect the environment and restore natural resources at hundreds of waste sites each year.
    [Show full text]
  • New Distribution Records for Flowering Plants in Antigonish County, Nova Scotia
    PROC. N.S. INST. SCI. (2008) Volume 44, Part 2, pp. 109-123 NEW DISTRIBUTION RECORDS FOR FLOWERING PLANTS IN ANTIGONISH COUNTY, NOVA SCOTIA BARRY R. TAYLOR, JONATHAN FERRIER, RANDOLPH LAUFF, DAVID J. GARBARY* Department of Biology St. Francis Xavier University P.O. Box 5000 Antigonish, Nova Scotia B2G 2W5 Distributions of over 50 species of flowering plants from Antigonish County, Nova Scotia are presented based on collections made primarily over the last ten years. Some of these are new county records representing range extensions from the western and central parts of the province. Many are new records for the eastern mainland and north shores of the province. Rare species discussed are Asclepias incarnata, Comandra umbellata and Triosteum aurantiacum. Several species, including Asparagus officinalis, Centaurea cyanus, Lathyrus latifolius, Lysimachia nummularia, and Origanum vulgare, likely represent recent or older garden escapes. Sedum ochroleucum is reported outside of cultivation for the first time from Nova Scotia, based on a single population that has been established for at least two years. On décrit la répartition de plus de 50 espèces d’angiospermes dans le comté d’Antigonish (Nouvelle-Écosse), d’après des collectes effectuées essentiellement les dix dernières années. Il s’agit parfois de nouveaux cas signalés dans le comté, représentant des prolongements de l’aire de répartition depuis l’ouest et le centre de la province et, dans bien d’autres cas, de nouveaux signalements pour l’est de la péninsule et les côtes nord de la province. Les espèces rares présentées sont Asclepias incarnata, Comandra umbellata et Triosteum aurantiacum. Plusieurs espèces comme Asparagus officinalis, Centaurea cyanus, Lathyrus latifolius, Lysimachia nummularia et Origanum vulgare sont vraisemblablement des plantes échappées de cultures.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM LIST OF THE RARE PLANTS OF NORTH CAROLINA 2012 Edition Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist and John Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org Table of Contents LIST FORMAT ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 NORTH CAROLINA RARE PLANT LIST ......................................................................................................................... 10 NORTH CAROLINA PLANT WATCH LIST ..................................................................................................................... 71 Watch Category
    [Show full text]
  • Fuller’S Leadership and Over- Vincent of the Refuge Staff Are Notable for Having Sight Were Invaluable
    Acknowledgments Acknowledgments Many people have contributed to this plan over many detailed and technical requirements of sub- the last seven years. Several key staff positions, missions to the Service, the Environmental Protec- including mine, have been filled by different people tion Agency, and the Federal Register. Jon during the planning period. Tom Palmer and Neil Kauffeld’s and Nita Fuller’s leadership and over- Vincent of the Refuge staff are notable for having sight were invaluable. We benefited from close col- been active in the planning for the entire extent. laboration and cooperation with staff of the Illinois Tom and Neil kept the details straight and the rest Department of Natural Resources. Their staff par- of us on track throughout. Mike Brown joined the ticipated from the early days of scoping through staff in the midst of the process and contributed new reviews and re-writes. We appreciate their persis- insights, analysis, and enthusiasm that kept us mov- tence, professional expertise, and commitment to ing forward. Beth Kerley and John Magera pro- our natural resources. Finally, we value the tremen- vided valuable input on the industrial and public use dous involvement of citizens throughout the plan- aspects of the plan. Although this is a refuge plan, ning process. We heard from visitors to the Refuge we received notable support from our regional office and from people who care about the Refuge without planning staff. John Schomaker provided excep- ever having visited. Their input demonstrated a tional service coordinating among the multiple level of caring and thought that constantly interests and requirements within the Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Haas Halo Hydrangea
    Out in the Garden Rockport Garden Club, May 2021 What alternatives to harmful insecticides and The Garden Diary: pesticides are available to us? What’s Bugging Stop bugs BEFORE they become a problem: You? 1. Clean up weeds and standing water in your yard which host insects. Did you know there are 200,000,000 insects for every man, woman, and child on earth? Yes, 2. Keep your plants healthy. A healthy plant that is 200 million for each of us! Insects will has its own defenses against many predators. always outnumber us. That is the bad news. 3. Don’t over-fertilize. Too much fertilizer cre- ates weak growth which attracts insects. The good news is that most bugs are either bene- ficial or benign, having no noticeable impact on 4. Be sure plants receive adequate water. Too our lives. We rarely give the good bugs credit little water stresses plants and attracts in- for the work they do. Bees and butterflies polle- sects. nate our plants. Tiny parasitic wasps lay eggs on 5. If bugs are large enough to hand pick, squish larger in- sects and them or put them in a jar of soapy water. kill them 6. Use a garden hose to spray off other insects. in the pro- 7. Create an oasis for birds and butterflies cess. Pray- ing mantis- since birds and other bugs are the worst ene- es kill bee- mies of bad bugs. tles and spiders in Ultimately you may need to use a pesticide. Opt large num- for an organic product whenever possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Retail Plant List by Scientific Name
    1404 Citico Rd. Vonore, TN 37885 423.295.2288 office 423.295.2252 fax www.overhillgardens.com 423-295-5003 Avi 423-836-8242 Eileen [email protected] Retail Plant List by Scientific Name Latin Name Common Name Size Price Acer leucoderme Chalk Maple 10 gal $95.00 Acer negundo Boxelder Maple qt+ $16.00 Acer pensylvanicum Striped Maple 2 gal $30.00 Achillea millefolium White Yarrow qt $10.00 Achillea millefolium 'Paprika' Paprika Yarrow qt+ $12.00 Acmella oppositifolia Oppositeleaf Spotflower gal $12.00 Acorus americanus American Sweet Flag qt+ $11.00 Adiantum pedatum Maidenhair Fern gal+ $18.00 Aesculus flava Yellow Buckeye 2 gal $25.00 Aesculus parviflora Bottlebrush Buckeye 3 gal $28.00 Aesculus pavia Red Buckeye gal $18.00 Agarista populifolia (syn. Leucothoe populifolia) Florida Leucothoe 2 gal $25.00 Agastache rupestris Threadleaf Giant Hyssop qt+ $15.00 Aletris farinosa Colic Root qt+ $16.00 Alisma subcordatum American Water Plantain gal+ $16.00 Allium cernuum Nodding Onion qt $10.00 Allium tricoccum Ramps qt $14.00 Alnus incana Speckled Alder 3 gal $28.00 Alnus serrulata Tag Alder 3 gal $25.00 Amelanchier arborea Downy Serviceberry 25/band $15.00 Amelanchier laevis Allegheny Serviceberry 2 gal $25.00 Amelanchier sanguinea Roundleaf Serviceberry 2 gal $30.00 Amelanchier x grandiflora Serviceberry gal $18.00 Amorpha canescens Downy False Indigo gal $16.00 Amorpha fruticosa False Indigo 3 gal $25.00 Amorpha herbacea Hairy False Indigo gal+ $20.00 Amorpha nana Dwarf False Indigo gal $16.00 Amorpha ouachitensis Ouachita False Indigo gal+ $20.00 Ampelaster carolinianus (syn.
    [Show full text]